AGENDA ITEM BACKGROUND TO: GOVERNING BOARD DATE FROM: PRESIDENT March 5, 2012 SUBJECT: 2012-13 Budget Reduction Plans REASON FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION ENCLOSURE(S) ITEM NUMBER Page 1 of 4 INFORMATION BACKGROUND: The structural deficit for Cabrillo for 2012-13 is currently projected at $5.6 million. One of the major components of the structural deficit is the built in increases in expenses that the college must budget each year. The college is planning to utilize $2.3 in operating funds to bridge the 2012-13 deficit leaving a deficit balance of $3.2 for 2012-13. The college has set a budget reduction target of $2.5 million for the 2012-13 Preliminary Budget. The first phase of budget planning, including 2.5 million in reductions will be complete by May. All permanent reductions identified in the first phase will be included in the 2012-13 Preliminary Budget approved by the Governing Board in June 2012. Phase I reduction plans were presented and discussed with individuals impacted, department meetings, Cabinet, Administrative Council, Managers and College Planning Council meetings. The Services Program Review and Advisory Committee (SPRAC) has received all plans included in the attachments. SPRAC feedback will be presented to the College Planning Council as soon as possible. The budget reduction plans attached will come to the Governing Board for approval on April 6. Phase I Unrestricted General Fund Reductions $938,864 Restricted Fund Reductions $128,731 Children’s Center Fund $98,340 Administrator Initiating Item: Victoria Lewis Academic and Professional Matter If yes, Faculty Senate Agreement Senate President Signature Yes No Yes No Final Disposition Governing Board March 5, 2012 Phase I Budget Criteria III.B II.E III.C III.C II.E III.C III.C III.C III.C III.C III.C 2012-13 Budget Reductions Description Impact PCN # If Lottery funds reduce from the Move DE-Blackboard fees off GF state, then the DE-CMS costs to Instructional Lottery funds. would revert to the general fund. None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Program Spec - CEED budget None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Program Spec - CEED budget None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Office Specialist CEED budget Requires faculty director; reassign Public Safety Director 1 FT CJ faculty to 50% faculty PS management: $140,885 (incl director: adjunct backfill $25,500 bene) @ $1700/TU Children Center Director Reassign 1 ECE FT faculty to management: $93,019; state faculty director @ 100% backfill; funded, moves fulltime faculty off $51,000 adjunct backfill. Savings general fund into state funds. depends upon which FT faculty serves as faculty director. Computer lab LIA from 10 mo None: computer lab is closed in 100% to 9 mo 100% summer Division Offices will reduce from 2 IDAs to 1 IDA with 1 centralized IDA; reducing from 10 to 6. 3 IDA - Division Offices positions are vacant. IDA - Division Offices same as above IDA - Division Offices same as above same as above; unknown which PCN will be eliminated depending IDA - Division Offices upon seniority unknown Total FTE % of Contract Total GF Savings $18,840 713503 0.5 50% $36,175 713502 0.5 50% $27,844 713504 0.0565 6% $9,404 426005 1 100% $117,518 441519 402506 $40,000 0.08 450505 420505 460507 O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhaseI_Instructionp2.xlsx $5,776 $79,982 $64,943 $58,449 $67,283 $507,374 Governing Board March 5, 2012 2012-13 Budget Reductions Phase I Budget Criteria III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C Description Impact IT Computer Systems Maint. Tech Eliminate 2 IT coordinators/ Add a SQL Database Admin@ range 53 (net) UPS Reduce Postage Budget M & O Operating Reductions IT Operating budget reduction Renegotiated Audit Contract PCN # 401205 321002/321024 FTE 0.5 1 Total CMP Goal E $212,727 Renegotiate Cell Tower Leases- generate new revenue $30,000 Reduction of 2012-13 Deficit III. C III. C III. C III. C Student Services Eliminate Outreach Coordinator Eliminate 2 Admissions and Records Assistant II Eliminate 1 Financial Aid Program Specialists (FA Program Specialist will become a Financial Aid Advisor position) % of Contract Total Savings 50% $40,577 100% $112,650 $7,500 $30,000 $10,000 $5,000 $7,000 $242,727 801503 821008/821020/821022 813116 0.46 2 1 50% $41,642 100% $140,178 100% $6,943 (net @ unfilled rate) Total $188,763 Total Unrestricted General Fund Reductions $938,864 O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhase IAdminSvcsp3-4.xlsx Governing Board March 5, 2012 2012-13 Budget Reductions Phase I Restricted General Fund- Categorical Student Services- Matriculation/Stroke Center III. B Eliminate Director of Student Health Center III. B Reduce Stroke Center Counselor 861002 448003 1 0.25 100% 25% Total Children's Center Fund Instruction- Children's Center III. C Eliminate Children's Center management position $101,567 $27,164 $128,731 441519 1 Total O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhase IAdminSvcsp3-4.xlsx 100% $98,340 $98,340 AGENDA ITEM BACKGROUND TO: GOVERNING BOARD DATE FROM: PRESIDENT February 14, 2011 SUBJECT: 2011-12 through 2013-14 Budget Reduction Process Commitments, Criteria and Strategies REASON FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION ACTION ITEM NUMBER ENCLOSURE(S) Page 1 of 4 B.1 BACKGROUND: The College is moving forward with budget planning for the 2011-12 fiscal year. In October of 2010, the College Planning Council reviewed and revised the Budget Reduction Process Commitments, Criteria and Strategies that will be used for budget planning for 2011-12 through 2013-14. The attached document was reviewed by the Governing Board in November, 2010 as a part of the 2010-11 and 2011-12 Budget Planning Parameter Update. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Governing Board approve the budget reduction process, commitments, criteria and strategies for fiscal years 2011-12 through 2013-14 Administrator Initiating Item: Victoria Lewis Academic and Professional Matter If yes, Faculty Senate Agreement Senate President Signature Yes No Yes No Final Disposition Approved CPC October 6, 2010 2011-12 through 2013-14 Budget Reduction Process Commitments, Criteria and Strategies The economic crisis affecting the state budget is conservatively projected to last at least three years. At the current time, our best efforts at projecting the fiscal impact on Cabrillo indicate that our state funding may continue to decline. The intent of the following process commitments, criteria and strategies is to enable Cabrillo to move from being a college that is organized and staffed to operate on a $60 million budget to an organization and staffing level that can deliver sustainable services to the community with a smaller budget. I. Process Commitments A. Link Budget planning, including program and service reductions and redesign efficiencies, to long range planning, including the evaluation of the impact on student success. B. Utilize the appropriate forums to dialogue about the restructuring, consolidation, reductions, and/or elimination of programs and services resulting from a reduction in resources. C. In the event that program and workforce reductions are necessary, the college will work to preserve faculty, staff and management positions when possible and, if not possible, will assist with employment-related transitional issues. D. The process will be characterized by openness, respect, sensitivity, and inclusiveness. The College Master Plan provided the general framework for the following criteria: II. Criteria A. Compliance Requirements 1. Maintain accreditation standards of the college and academic programs 2. Maintain state and federal compliance requirements (CMP Goal B) e.g.: 50% law Full-Time faculty obligation number (FON) Accessibility B. Preserve transfer, basic skills, and Career Technical Education so students are able to complete their academic goals (CMP Goal B) Core courses toward an AA/AS General education breadth Labor market C. Minimize negative impact on student success (CMP Goals B & C) e.g. ARCC D. Optimize enrollment to achieve maximum state revenues. III. E. Minimize impact of non-base budget programs on General Fund (CMP Goal E) Ancillary/Auxiliary operations Categorical and grant-funded programs F. Maximize efficiency of programs and services (CMP Goal A and Technology Plan) Are college programs and services efficient? WSCH/FTEF Non-redundant G. Minimize the negative impact on the operational needs of new and existing facilities (CMP Goal D and Facilities Master Plan) H. Optimize effective utilization of college facilities (CMP Goal E) I. Maximize flexibility and opportunities for employees (Process Commitment C) Strategies A. Design and implement Strategic Enrollment Management Plan and determine the FTES targets for 2011-12 through 2013-14. B. Review all auxiliary and categorical program budgets with the appropriate budget administrator to identify reductions. C. Evaluate college-wide services and systems; explore alternative models across components; reduce costs, reduce duplication of function, and increase efficiencies throughout the college. D. Management of personnel budget. Process Overview Utilize salary savings for vacant positions to reduce the overall budget reduction target. Salary savings may be used to fund replacements for vacant positions based on demonstrated need and the approval of the Vice President/President. Salary savings may not be used to cover other operating expenses or equipment purchases. Cabinet may approve the recruitment of vacant positions based on demonstrated need. Human Resources will provide a list of vacant positions and the status of recruitments on a weekly basis. Administrative Services will provide a report of cumulative salary savings on a monthly basis. E. Evaluate facility use for efficiency and effectiveness. Watsonville Scotts Valley Energy Use Reduction F. Discuss compensation and benefit programs with all employee groups. IV. Historical Data Available A. Internal Data Cost Center Actual 06-07 Expenditures, number of full-time equivalent faculty, staff and administrators (FTE) and FTES Actual 07-08 Expenditures, FTE and FTES Budget 08-09 Expenditures, FTE Staffing levels by department and bargaining unit from accreditation self-study FACT Books http://pro.cabrillo.edu/pro/factbook/index.html Space Planning project database Suggestion box for anonymous input Budget reduction website Accreditation Self-Study http://www.cabrillo.edu/services/pro/accred/index.html Program Planning Pages http://pro.cabrillo.edu/pro/factbook/programPlanningTables.html B. External Data Fiscal Data Abstract 06-07 Current Cost of Education 06-07 WASC Accreditation Standards http://www.cabrillo.edu/services/pro/accred/pdf/ACCJC%20NEW%20STANDARDS.pdf AGENDA ITEM BACKGROUND TO: GOVERNING BOARD DATE FROM: PRESIDENT March 5, 2012 SUBJECT: 2012-13 Budget Reduction Plans REASON FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION ENCLOSURE(S) ITEM NUMBER Page 1 of 4 INFORMATION BACKGROUND: The structural deficit for Cabrillo for 2012-13 is currently projected at $5.6 million. One of the major components of the structural deficit is the built in increases in expenses that the college must budget each year. The college is planning to utilize $2.3 in operating funds to bridge the 2012-13 deficit leaving a deficit balance of $3.2 for 2012-13. The college has set a budget reduction target of $2.5 million for the 2012-13 Preliminary Budget. The first phase of budget planning, including 2.5 million in reductions will be complete by May. All permanent reductions identified in the first phase will be included in the 2012-13 Preliminary Budget approved by the Governing Board in June 2012. Phase I reduction plans were presented and discussed with individuals impacted, department meetings, Cabinet, Administrative Council, Managers and College Planning Council meetings. The Services Program Review and Advisory Committee (SPRAC) has received all plans included in the attachments. SPRAC feedback will be presented to the College Planning Council as soon as possible. The budget reduction plans attached will come to the Governing Board for approval on April 6. Phase I Unrestricted General Fund Reductions $938,864 Restricted Fund Reductions $128,731 Children’s Center Fund $98,340 Administrator Initiating Item: Victoria Lewis Academic and Professional Matter If yes, Faculty Senate Agreement Senate President Signature Yes No Yes No Final Disposition Governing Board March 5, 2012 Phase I Budget Criteria III.B II.E III.C III.C II.E III.C III.C III.C III.C III.C III.C 2012-13 Budget Reductions Description Impact PCN # If Lottery funds reduce from the Move DE-Blackboard fees off GF state, then the DE-CMS costs to Instructional Lottery funds. would revert to the general fund. None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Program Spec - CEED budget None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Program Spec - CEED budget None: Moves the GF portion of these two employees off the GF and onto the CEED contract/cont ed Office Specialist CEED budget Requires faculty director; reassign Public Safety Director 1 FT CJ faculty to 50% faculty PS management: $140,885 (incl director: adjunct backfill $25,500 bene) @ $1700/TU Children Center Director Reassign 1 ECE FT faculty to management: $93,019; state faculty director @ 100% backfill; funded, moves fulltime faculty off $51,000 adjunct backfill. Savings general fund into state funds. depends upon which FT faculty serves as faculty director. Computer lab LIA from 10 mo None: computer lab is closed in 100% to 9 mo 100% summer Division Offices will reduce from 2 IDAs to 1 IDA with 1 centralized IDA; reducing from 10 to 6. 3 IDA - Division Offices positions are vacant. IDA - Division Offices same as above IDA - Division Offices same as above same as above; unknown which PCN will be eliminated depending IDA - Division Offices upon seniority unknown Total FTE % of Contract Total GF Savings $18,840 713503 0.5 50% $36,175 713502 0.5 50% $27,844 713504 0.0565 6% $9,404 426005 1 100% $117,518 441519 402506 $40,000 0.08 450505 420505 460507 O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhaseI_Instructionp2.xlsx $5,776 $79,982 $64,943 $58,449 $67,283 $507,374 Governing Board March 5, 2012 2012-13 Budget Reductions Phase I Budget Criteria III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C III. C Description Impact IT Computer Systems Maint. Tech Eliminate 2 IT coordinators/ Add a SQL Database Admin@ range 53 (net) UPS Reduce Postage Budget M & O Operating Reductions IT Operating budget reduction Renegotiated Audit Contract PCN # 401205 321002/321024 FTE 0.5 1 Total CMP Goal E $212,727 Renegotiate Cell Tower Leases- generate new revenue $30,000 Reduction of 2012-13 Deficit III. C III. C III. C III. C Student Services Eliminate Outreach Coordinator Eliminate 2 Admissions and Records Assistant II Eliminate 1 Financial Aid Program Specialists (FA Program Specialist will become a Financial Aid Advisor position) % of Contract Total Savings 50% $40,577 100% $112,650 $7,500 $30,000 $10,000 $5,000 $7,000 $242,727 801503 821008/821020/821022 813116 0.46 2 1 50% $41,642 100% $140,178 100% $6,943 (net @ unfilled rate) Total $188,763 Total Unrestricted General Fund Reductions $938,864 O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhase IAdminSvcsp3-4.xlsx Governing Board March 5, 2012 2012-13 Budget Reductions Phase I Restricted General Fund- Categorical Student Services- Matriculation/Stroke Center III. B Eliminate Director of Student Health Center III. B Reduce Stroke Center Counselor 861002 448003 1 0.25 100% 25% Total Children's Center Fund Instruction- Children's Center III. C Eliminate Children's Center management position $101,567 $27,164 $128,731 441519 1 Total O:\Board Items VP Admin folder\2012 Board Items\3_March 2012\2012-13 Budget Reductions\2012-13BudgetReductionsPhase IAdminSvcsp3-4.xlsx 100% $98,340 $98,340 State of California LITTLE HOOVER COMMISSION FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 28, 2012 Daniel W. Hancock Chairman Eugene "Mitch" Mitchell Vice Chairman Katcho Achadjian Assemblymember For Additional Information Contact: Stuart Drown Executive Director (916) 445-2125 Commission Calls for Focus on Student Outcomes at Community Colleges Marilyn C. Brewer Virginia Ellis Alyson Huber Assemblymember Loren Kaye Tom Quinn Michael J. Rubio Senator David A. Schwarz Jonathan Shapiro Mark Vargas Mark Wyland Senator Stuart Drown Executive Director The Little Hoover Commission on Tuesday urged the Governor and the Legislature to refocus the mission of the community colleges to align policies and resources around fostering student achievement in three core areas: basic skills education, career technical education and preparation for transfer to four-year universities. The Commission also called for the state to consolidate responsibility and funding for California’s adult education programs within the community college system to maintain educational options for all levels of adult learners. In its report, Serving Students, Serving California: Updating the California Community Colleges to Meet Evolving Demands, the Commission found that the community colleges have opened doors to people who want to improve the quality of their lives by earning more income, building skills to run a business, excelling in careers, being better parents, or taking another chance to realize their dreams and fulfill their potential. Yet, the Commission found that in trying to be all things to everyone, community colleges are coming up short for many. In this study, the Commission found that the state lacks a clear, uniform set of goals for its community college system and campuses. Too many students leave without accomplishing what they set out to achieve, whether learning new job skills or completing a certificate or degree program. Too many are unprepared for college-level work and do not receive adequate guidance to help them make up their educational deficits. At the same time, many students are hobbled in their progress by system policies that encourage campuses to increase enrollment at the expense of the services and supports that can help students move through the system and on with their lives. The result is that community colleges are rationing access, but not in a rational way, putting students on waiting lists who are prepared to succeed at college-level work. In making its recommendations, the Commission envisions a system that asks more of students, but asks more of colleges as well in supporting students and helping them move up and out of the system. “California’s community colleges hold so much promise, but are limited by the way the system is funded, by the design of the leadership structure, by outdated practices for setting policy and goals,” Little Hoover Commission Chairman Daniel Hancock said. “The colleges are in an ideal position to help those who want to improve their lives, and through their success, better meet the state’s workforce needs – now and in the future.” “Making strategic changes to the leadership and funding of California’s community colleges, as well as to the measures used to guide students, can position the colleges to help close this gap and help ensure the system continues to provide an open door for those who want to better their lives,” Chairman Hancock said. Milton Marks Commission on California State Government Organization and Economy http://www.lhc.ca.gov/ 925 L Street, Suite 805 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-445-2125 fax 916-322-7709 e-mail littlehoover@lhc.ca.gov In the report, the Commission’s recommendations align with those made recently by the Student Success Task Force, but go further in certain areas: The state should make student success in three areas its primary goal for community colleges. These areas are: basic skills education, career technical education and preparation for transfer to four-year institutions. The system should build policies around supporting these goals by requiring students to participate in activities that have be shown to bolster student success, such as required orientation and skills assessment. Students should be given enrollment priority based on whether they have completed an education plan, whether that plan is built around learning a single focused skill need to advance in their career, or to earn a certificate or degree. Priority also should be given to returning students who demonstrate progress toward their goals and those returning to school to renew job skills. Colleges should encourage students to stay committed to their goals by capping the number of credits that can be taken at state-subsidized tuition rates, by linking eligibility for fee waivers to maintaining a minimum grade point average, and by charging the full cost of a course to students who enroll solely for personal enrichment. The state should update the community college system governance structure by giving more authority and independence to the Office of the Chancellor to develop strategies and incentives that can drive student and college performance. The chancellor’s office should be moved out of the executive branch of state government and established as a separate entity that can establish policy directives, create accountability measures, direct funding, oversee community college districts, and, when necessary, intervene in district affairs. Districts should be given more flexibility in how they deploy resources, while being held accountable for results, and given more freedom to coordinate regionally. The state should allocate funding in predictable and appropriate ways to encourage student success, and focus spending in ways that facilitate students’ success, such as creating incentives for improved student outcomes. The state must amend the funding formula so that it rewards student progress and achievement. The formula must reward colleges whose students attain milestones known to lead to success, or whose students achieve certain basic skills goals or earn certificates or degrees. Further, colleges should be given more flexibility in spending, so they may allocate more money to the kinds of counseling services that help students develop educational plans and make progress. The state should shift all adult basic education programs and related funding to community colleges. Responsibility for Adult School programs currently operated by K-12 school districts should be shifted to the community college system to stem the erosion of the state’s capacity to serve the adults who need these programs. Money previously allocated for these programs through categorical funding should be transferred as well to community college districts to support these programs. Community colleges have a direct stake in the success of these adult learners and, as the examples of the community collegedirected adult programs in San Francisco and San Diego have shown, many of these students can go on to success in college-level coursework. The Little Hoover Commission is a bipartisan and independent state agency charged with recommending ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of state programs. The Commission’s recommendations are submitted to the Governor and the Legislature for their consideration and action. For a copy of the report, visit the Commission’s Web site: www.lhc.ca.gov. 2012-2013 Services and Program Reduction Advisory Information Technology Department: Admin Services Component: Dan Borges Manager: Computer Systems Maintenance Technician Position Being Reviewed: Summary of Plan: Eliminate .5 Technician position. Move 1 Technician to Watsonville Center. In regard to the Plan submitted: Was the decision-making process inclusive? Comment: Yes No Is this Plan workable from an employee perspective? If not, what specifically has been overlooked? Yes No Subsequent issues that may need to be addressed: Moving 1 Technician to Watsonville to support growth in technology-reliant programs at the Watsonville Center will create a hole in instructional support in student computer classrooms and labs for the Aptos campus. Activity Date(s) Plan received by SPRAC SPRAC meets with affected unit as necessary SPRAC sends input to manager Manager responds to SPRAC concerns as necessary SPRAC Chair sends final summary to manager, Cabinet, and CPC (Dominique) 2/16/12 2/24/12 2/27/12 2/27/12 2/27/12 2012-2013 Services and Program Reduction Advisory Information Technology Department: Admin Services Component: Dan Borges Manager: Information Systems Coordinator Position Being Reviewed: Summary of Plan: Eliminate 2 Coordinators. Disseminate work to Information Systems Analysts/Programmers, IT Help Desk, and end user departments. Add a SQL DBA for growing needs in that area. In regard to the Plan submitted: Was the decision-making process inclusive? Comment: Yes No Is this Plan workable from an employee perspective? If not, what specifically has been overlooked? Yes No Subsequent issues that may need to be addressed: Impact on end user departments. Loss of a level of service. Loss in timeliness of service. Activity Date(s) Plan received by SPRAC SPRAC meets with affected unit as necessary SPRAC sends input to manager Manager responds to SPRAC concerns as necessary SPRAC Chair sends final summary to manager, Cabinet, and CPC (Dominique) 2/16/12 2/24/12 2/27/12 2/27/12 2/27/12 2012-2013 Services and Program Reduction Advisory Division Offices Department: Instruction Component: Renée Kilmer, VP of Instruction Manager: Instructional Division Assistant Position Being Reviewed: Summary of Plan: Eliminate 4 IDA positions (2 vacant, 1 retirement, 1 occupied). Currently there are 10 IDA positions, 2 for each division. In this plan, each division will have 1 IDA and the sixth IDA will become a central IDA who will do projects for all 5 divisions. In regard to the Plan submitted: Was the decision-making process inclusive? Comment: Yes No Yes No Is this Plan workable from an employee perspective? If not, what specifically has been overlooked? Although some staff did say they didn’t feel this Plan was workable, upon further discussion their doubts were centered on the implementation aspect of the Plan that has yet to be worked out. SPRAC did not hear of any aspect of the Plan that was overlooked by management. Subsequent issues that may need to be addressed: Centralized IDA may not be able to handle all of the projects in the Plan for all five divisions. Level of service to faculty and students will be affected. Vacations and 11-month contracts will affect functioning of division offices. Further issues of workload, service, and logistics may arise during the development of the implementation plan and implementation itself. Activity Date(s) Plan received by SPRAC SPRAC meets with affected unit as necessary SPRAC sends input to manager Manager responds to SPRAC concerns as necessary SPRAC Chair sends final summary to manager, Cabinet, and CPC (Dominique) 2/23/12 2/24/12 2/27/12 2/27/12 2/28/12