HARTNELL COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Board of Trustees – Study Session
No Closed Session – No Action will be taken
June 6, 2011, 5:30 – 7:30 p.m.
TIME/PLACE
411 Central Avenue, Salinas
CALL Building, 2nd Floor, Room 208
Members of the Board
Erica Padilla-Chavez, President
Kevin Healy, Vice President
Candi DePauw, Patricia Donohue, Bill Freeman,
Elia Gonzalez-Castro, Ray Montemayor
Shaundra B. Taylor, Student Trustee
I.
CALL TO ORDER
II.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III.
ROLL CALL
IV.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS WILL FOLLOW PRESENTATIONS
V.
PRESENTATION – Auto Collision
Dr. Suzanne Flannigan, Vice President of Academic Affairs/Accreditation
Dr. Esteban Soriano, Research Consultant/Workforce Expert
1. Questions and comments from the Trustees on Auto Collision
2. Public Comments on Auto Collision
VI.
PRESENTATION – Tentative Budget for Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Kent Stephens, Vice President of Support Operations
1. Questions and comments from the Trustees on the Tentative Budget
2. Public Comments on the Tentative Budget
VII.
ADJOURNMENT
MISSION STATEMENT: Hartnell College provides the leadership and resources to ensure that all students shall have equal access to a quality education
and the opportunity to pursue and achieve their goals. We are responsive to the learning needs of our community and dedicated to a diverse educational
and cultural campus environment that prepares our students for productive participation in a changing world.
ACCOMMODATIONS: All meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. The following services are available when requests are made by 4:00 p.m. of the
Friday before the Board meeting: American Sign Language interpreters or use of a reader during a meeting; large print agenda or minutes; assistive
listening devices. Please contact, the Office of the President at (831) 755-6900, if you need assistance in order to participate in a public meeting or if you
need the agenda and public documents modified as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
H.C.C.D – BOARD OF TRUSTEES RETREAT – JUNE 6, 2011
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA ITEM FOR BOARD MEETING OF:
Title
June 7, 2011
Number
Approve to Discontinue Auto Collision
Program
III. C.
Area
Status
Superintendent/President
Prepared by: Dr. Phoebe K. Helm
Action
Recommendation
The administration recommends that the Board of Trustees approve the discontinuance of the
Automotive Collision Program at Hartnell College, based on the findings of the committee and
for the reasons specified in the Summary section of this item. Copies of the reports and the
discontinuance process are included as appendices.
Background
A Discontinuance Committee at Hartnell College was formed in Fall 2010 to review the
Automotive Collision (AUC) Program (sometimes called Auto Body repair). The committee
was comprised of one student, two faculty, and two administrators, one of which was the Vice
President of Academic Affairs and Accreditation who chaired the committee. The composition
of the committee, the review process, the data and the criteria considered are in compliance
with the requirements of the Statewide Discontinuance Process adopted by the Hartnell College
Board of Trustees in April, 2001. This very same process was used in determining the need to
discontinue the Electronics Program and the Animal Health Technology Program in 2009.
Data sources utilized by the committee included:
1. Labor Market Report, prepared by the Chancellors Office Center for Excellence, August 2010.
2. A Quantitative Review of Students enrolled in AUC since 2007, including telephone interviews
with 63 students. Hartnell College Student Records provided the source data for this in depth
analysis of AUC course, certificate, and degree completions 2007-2010. This study was
conducted February 2011 by Esteban Soriano, who holds a Ph.D. in research from Stanford
University. Dr. Soriano’s experience in a labor market and workforce issues is documented at
the end of this item (see page 3).
Findings were as follows:
1. Labor Market:
A. Jobs – There are 169 Automotive Body and Related Repairers jobs in Monterey
County today and it is anticipated that there will be 31 job openings in the next five
years (Table 3, Page 7). Eighteen of the 31 job openings anticipated in the next five
years are in the Hartnell College Service Area (Table 2, Page 7).
B. Wages – Hourly wages for Auto Collision and Related Repairers in Monterey
County range from $14.95 (entry) to $47.85 (90th percentile) see Table 4, Page 8.
The median hourly wage is $26.85 (Table 3, Page 8).
2. Quantitative Review of Students enrolled in AUC since 2007:
A. Course Completion and Persistence – Of the 449 different students who enrolled in
the AUC program in the past five years, 207 finished only one AUC course. Fewer
than 16% of these students finished more than four of the 15 required AUC courses.
B. Degrees and Certificates Awarded – In the past five years, six students have
completed the program. Three of these completers earned an Associates Degree
and three earned a Certificate of Achievement.
C. Employment Placement Rate –Seven attendees were already working in AUC when
they entered the program and three of them are working in AUC today (see Table
VIII, Page 10). These are the only three of the 63 students interviewed who stated
that they were employed in AUC (Table VI, Page 8). None of the three graduates or
the three near completer students interviewed is working in AUC today, nor did
either of them ever hold an AUC job.
D. Reasons Stated for Non- AUC Employment – The majority of reasons stated were a lack
of jobs in AUC and/or lack of training sufficient to qualify for AUC positions (Table VII,
Page 9). Indeed, local collision centers licensed to do insurance repairs report fewer jobs
and verified that the training at Hartnell does not meet current technician requirements in
their shops (see page 12).
E. Of the 63 students interviewed, 47 (75%) said they never intended to complete a degree or
certificate. Thirty six (57%) stated that they wanted to work on their personal cars and/or
saw AUC as a hobby (Table I, Page 4 and Table II, Page 5). Note that each percent
reflects the number of respondents who gave that reason, with most respondents giving
two or more reasons.
3. Other Relevant Information:
A. Mission Trails Regional Occupational Program contracted with Hartnell College for
many years to train up to 28 students a year. In 2008-2009 the ROP discontinued its
AUC program and stopped sending its students to Hartnell.
B. Regulations and Standards for Spray Booths have changed. The spray booths in the old
Vo-tech building did not meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
requirements, nor were they approved by the Division of State Architects (DSA) and
were demolished with the building in compliance with State regulations. It is estimated
that the installation of one paint booth would cost at least $250,000. Furthermore,
based on the environmental impacts of the paint and fumes and the requirements of the
Air Quality Control Board (AQCB) the paint booths would need to be in a standalone
building.
C. The AUC Program is an Open Admissions Program. The courses were placed in an
inactive status in 2010 and 17 students who had completed enough AUC courses to
suggest that they might consider AUC as their major were identified. These students
were offered the opportunity to finish the program by completing AUC courses in 2010
and other specified courses. Eight students enrolled in the Summer AUC courses and
four are on track to complete a Certificate of Achievement – one in June 2011 and three
in December 2011.
Summary
The Discontinuance Committee took its work seriously and did a thorough job of reviewing all
relevant information, both quantitative and qualitative. Their recommendation to the
Superintendent/President to discontinue the Auto Collision Program was unanimous. Their
primary reasons were lack of labor market demand, low numbers completing degrees or
certificates, and costs of building and equipping an appropriate facility to comply with ADA,
DSA and AQCB requirements and attaining ASE and I CAR Certifications for the program and
the faculty.
In addition, it should be noted that courses and programs in Automotive Repair Technician
(mechanics), Automotive Shop Management, Diesel Technicians, Welding, and Hazardous
Materials Management courses and programs will continue and training for technicians to
repair electric vehicles is planned. These programs provide viable options for students.
Budget Implications
Budget reductions in the General Fund for discontinuing the AUC program are estimated at
$65,000 based on records of actual expenditures in 2009-10.
Attachments
Labor Market Report
A Quantitative Review of Students Who Enrolled in Hartnell College Auto Collision Program
(AUC) Since 2007
Statewide Discontinuance Process adopted by the Hartnell Board of Trustees, April, 2001.
Note
Dr. Soriano’s research, business, and economic development and labor market expertise and
experience includes:
1. Designated as "high level expert" by Department of Labor and Department of Education
when representing U.S. business and workforce interests before the European Union.
2. Served as President Clinton's appointee to the National Skill Standards Board, charged
with looking at how we educate for technical and vocational careers and how they
connect with labor market and workforce needs, here and internationally.
3. Served as Governor Schwarzenegger's appointee to the California Small Business Board,
charged with advancing small business and workforce issues and needs throughout
California government.
LABOR MARKET REPORT
AUTO COLLISION OCCUP ATIONS
HARTNELL COLLEGE
AUGUST, 2010
C ENTER OF E XCELLENCE
Central Valley Region
Modesto Junior College
435 College Avenue
Modesto, CA 95350
(209) 575-6908
marquez@mjc.edu
www.coeccc.net
An Initiative of
Mission: The Centers of Excellence, in partnership with business and industry, deliver regional workforce
research customized for community college decision making and resource development.
Vision: We aspire to be the premier source of regional economic and workforce information and insight for
community colleges.
© 2008 Chancellor’s Office, California Community Colleges
Centers of Excellence, Economic and Workforce Development Program
Please consider the environment before printing. This document is designed for double-sided printing.
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Table of Contents:
Report Scope .................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Report Overview ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Industry Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Occupation Summary...................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Wage Data ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
References......................................................................................................................................................................................... 9
Appendix A: How to Use this Report .......................................................................................................................................... 10
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
3
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Auto collision repair occupations in Monterey County are projected to increase by 18%
over the next five years.
– Source: EMSI Complete Data and Info USA
Report Scope
This report provides labor market information for automobile collision occupations. Based on existing labor
market information, the following occupation titles are included in this report:


Automotive body and related repairers (SOC 49-3021)
Automotive glass installers and repairers (SOC 49-3022)
In order to extract complete labor market data for the identified occupations, six industries were identified
provide employment for the above mentioned occupations:






Automotive body, paint and interior repair and maintenance (NAICS 811121)
General automotive repair (NAICS 811111)
Automotive glass replacement shops (NAICS 811122)
All other automotive repair and maintenance (NAICS 81198)
New car dealers (NAICS 441110)
Used car dealers (NAICS 441120)
Labor market data for this report covers the period of 2009-2015, and covers the geographical area of
Monterey County and the Hartnell College service area. The Hartnell College service area used in this
report is listed in the table below:
Table 1 –Hartnell College Service Area by Zip Code
Zip Code
95012
95039
93907
95076
93905 93907
93906 93901
93962
93925
93926
93927
93928
93930
93932
93450
93954
93960
93902
93903
93912
93915
City
Castroville
Moss Landing
Prunedale
Watsonville1
Salinas
Spreckels
Chualar
Gonzales
Greenfield
Jolon
King City
Lockwood
San Ardo
San Lucas
Soledad
Note: This customized report contains data from various publicly and privately available secondary
sources. Unlike Centers of Excellence Environmental Scans, the information contained in customized reports
has not been independently validated by employers, nor does it contain information on other community
college and external programs. Please see Appendix A for further information on how to use this report.
1
Note: Only a small portion of southern Watsonville is included in the Hartnell service area.
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
4
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Report Overview
This report was prepared to provide data related to the Auto Collision Repair program at Hartnell.
According to the 2010/2011 Hartnell College Catalog, the program prepares students for work in entrylevel auto collision repair occupations. In order to provide information to the college regarding the auto
collision repair program, labor market data was complied for industries where an auto collision repair (or
closely related position) may work. According to labor market data2, in 2010 there were a total of 108
jobs in these occupations in the Hartnell service area and 159 total jobs in Monterey County. Most of the
jobs (92%) are for automotive body and related repairers. Figure 1 below indicates the percentage of
jobs in each of the occupations for Monterey County.
Figure 1 – Percentage of Jobs for Automotive Collision Repair Occupations, Monterey County 2010
8%
Automotive body and
related repairers
Automotive glass installers
and repairers
92%
Industry Summary
Automobile collision repair workers primarily work in six industries: Automotive body, paint, and interior
repair and maintenance (NAICS 811121), general automotive repair (NAICS 811111), automotive glass
replacement shops (NAICS 811122), new car dealers (NAICS 441110), used car dealers (NAICS
441120), or all other automotive repair and maintenance (NAICS 822298). Automotive body, paint, and
interior repair and maintenance establishments primarily engaged in repairing or customizing automotive
vehicles, such as passenger cars, trucks, and vans, and all trailer bodies and interiors; and/or painting
automotive vehicles and trailer bodies. General automotive repair refers to businesses primarily engaged
in establishments primarily engaged in providing (1) a wide range of mechanical and electrical repair and
maintenance services for automotive vehicles, such as passenger cars, trucks, and vans, and all trailers or
(2) engine repair and replacement3. Automotive glass replacement shops refers to establishments primarily
engaged in replacing, repairing, and/or tinting automotive vehicle, such as passenger car, truck, and van,
glass. New car dealers refers to establishments primarily engaged in retailing new automobiles and light
trucks, such as sport utility vehicles, and passenger and cargo vans, or retailing these new vehicles in
combination with activities, such as repair services, retailing used cars, and selling replacement parts and
accessories. Used car dealers refers to establishments primarily engaged in retailing used automobiles and
light trucks, such as sport utility vehicles, and passenger and cargo vans. All other automotive repair and
maintenance refers to establishments primarily engaged in providing automotive repair and maintenance
services (except mechanical and electrical repair and maintenance; body, paint, interior, and glass repair;
2
3
Source: EMSI Complete Data
Source: North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
5
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
motor oil change and lubrication; and car washing) for automotive vehicles, such as passenger cars, trucks,
and vans, and all trailers. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 56% of auto collision repair workers
are employed in the automotive body, paint, interior repair and maintenance industry4.
In order to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the auto collision repair industry in Monterey
County, an analysis was conducted using a geographic information system (GIS)5. The analysis indicated
there are a total of 335 employers providing services within the six industries identified for this study. The
majority of the employers are within the general automotive repair industry. An interesting finding from the
analysis is that many of the employers are located in close proximity to Hartnell College in the northern
portion of Monterey County. Figure 2 below is a GIS map which displays the distribution of auto collision
repair employers in Monterey County.
Figure 2 – Auto Collision Repair Employers, Monterey County6
Occupation Summary
The auto collision repair program at Hartnell College prepares students to repair damaged vehicles using
the Inter-Industry Conference on Auto Collision Repair (ICAR) certification standards. There are two
occupations classified in the Standard Occupation Code (SOC) system which students completing (or
enrolled in) the auto collision repair program could become employed in: (1) automotive body and related
repairs; or (2) automotive glass installers and repairers
Source: EMSI Complete Data, 2010
Source: Info USA
6 Source: ESRI Business Analyst Software
4
5
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
6
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Automotive Body and Related Repairs
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), automotive body and related repair workers7:
Straighten bent bodies, remove dents, and replace crumpled parts of automobiles that
cannot be fixed. Workers repair all types of vehicles, and although some work on large
trucks, buses or tractor-trailers, most work on cars and small trucks.
In Monterey County, job projections indicate an increase of 1% in job openings (2 positions) in the next five
years. Additionally, there is a need to fill 29 replacement positions due to retirements or attrition. Within
the Hartnell service area, there is 1 new job projected and 17 replacement positions8.
Automotive Glass Installers and Repairers
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), automotive glass installers and repairers9:
Automotive glass installers and repairers remove broken, cracked, or pitted windshields
and window glass. Glass installers apply compound along the edges of the glass, place
the glass in the vehicle, and install rubber strips around the sides of the windshield or
window to make it secure and weatherproof.
In Monterey County, job projections indicate an increase of 18% in job openings in the next five years for
these two occupations combined. This projection factors in the need to fill replacement positions due to
retirements or attrition. In the Hartnell College service area, there is an 18% increase, or 20 positions
projected. Tables 2 and 3 below illustrate job projection data for the Hartnell College and Monterey
County service areas:
Table 2 – Auto Collision Repair Occupations, Hartnell College Service Area
5 year new
2009 Median
Replacement % Change (5
job
Hourly
jobs
year job need)
openings
Earnings
101
1
17
18%
$26.85
2009
Jobs
SOC Code
SOC Description
49-3021
Automotive body and related repairers
49-3022
Automotive glass installers and repairers
9
0
3
33%
$25.79
Totals
110
1
20
18%
$26.32
Table 3 –Auto Collision Repair Occupations, Monterey County
2009 5 year job Replacement % Change (5
Jobs openings jobs (5 years) year job need)
2009 Median
Hourly
Earnings
SOC Code
SOC Description
49-3021
Automotive body and related repairers
169
2
29
18%
$26.85
49-3022
Automotive glass installers and repairers
13
1
1
15%
$25.29
Totals
182
3
30
18%
$26.32
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/oco/pdf/ocos180.pdf
Source: EMSI Complete Data 2010
9 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/oco/pdf/ocos180.pdf
7
8
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
7
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Wage Data
According to research conducted by Pennsylvania State University10, in order to earn a living wage in
Monterey County an individual must earn $25.55 an hour for a family of three11. Wages for the
occupations included vary between entry level and more experienced trained workers. Based on wage
data provided through EMSI, the occupations studied in this report can provide a living wage for employees.
Wages earned in this occupation could sustain a single adult, or a household for more experienced
employees. Tables 4 and 5 provide wage information for the occupations studied in this report.
Table 4 – Auto Collision Repair Occupation Wages, Monterey County
Average hourly
10 percentile wages 25 percentile 75 percentile 90 percentile
earnings
(entry level, no training)
wages
wages
wages
Occupation
Automotive body and related repairs
$29.30
$14.95
$20.71
$35.40
$47.85
Automotive glass installers and repairers $28.58
$13.01
$17.97
$35.60
$48.46
Totals (Average)
$13.98
$19.34
$35.50
$48.16
$28.94
Table 5 – Living Wage Calculations10, Monterey County
Hourly Wages
One Adult
One Adult, One Child
Two Adults
Two Adults, One
Child
Two Adults, Two
Children
Living Wage
$11.49
$20.42
$16.60
$25.55
$32.66
Poverty Wage
$5.04
$6.68
$6.49
$7.81
$9.83
Minimum Wage
$8.00
$8.00
$8.00
$8.00
$8.00
10
11
Source: The Living Wage Calculator, Pennsylvania State University, http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/counties/06053
A family of three includes 2 adults and 1 child
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
8
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
References
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Economic Modeling Specialists, Inc
Environmental Systems Research Institute
Info USA
North American Classification System
The Living Wage Calculator, Pennsylvania State University
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
9
Labor Market Report: Auto Collision Repair Occupations
Appendix A: How to Use this Report
About the Centers of Excellence
The Centers of Excellence (COE), in partnership with business and industry, deliver regional workforce
research customized for community college decision making and resource development. This information
has proven valuable to colleges in beginning, revising, or updating economic development and Career
Technical Education (CTE) programs, strengthening grant applications, assisting in the accreditation process,
and in supporting strategic planning efforts.
The Centers of Excellence Initiative is funded in part by the Chancellor’s Office, California Community
Colleges, Economic and Workforce Development Program. The Centers aspire to be the premier source of
regional economic and workforce information and insight for California’s community colleges.
More information about the Centers of Excellence is available at www.coeccc.net.
How to Use This Report
This report is designed to provide current industry data specific to your college for:
 Defining potential strategic opportunities relative to an industry’s emerging trends and workforce
needs
 Influencing and informing local college program planning and resource development
 Promoting a future-oriented and market responsive way of thinking among college and community
stakeholders
 Assisting college faculty, Economic Development and CTE administrators, and Community and
Contract Education programs in connecting with industry partners.
The information in this report has been generated using software customized for the Centers of Excellence,
including Environmental System Research Institute’s (ESRI) GIS Business Analyst application and Economic
Modeling Specialists, Inc (EMSI) economic modeling system. In some instances, the labor market information
and industry validation will suggest that colleges might not want to begin or add programs, thereby
avoiding needless replication and low enrollments.
Important Disclaimer
All representations included in this report have been produced from a secondary review of publicly
and/or privately available data. Efforts have been made to confirm the accuracy of the data and the
reported findings; however, neither the Centers of Excellence, COE Host College, or California Community
Colleges Chancellor’s Office are responsible for applications or decisions made by recipient community
colleges or their representatives based upon this report.
Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges
10
1
A
U
C
A Quantitative Review of
Students Who Enrolled in
Hartnell College Auto
Collision Program (AUC)
Courses Since 2007:
Completion, Non-Completion, Satisfaction,
Employment Placement, Job-Outs, and
Industry Utilization of Program Participants
and Graduates
February 2011
Revised May 2011
Prepared By:
Esteban Soriano, Ph.D.
Applied Development Resources
California
2
A Quantitative Review of Students Who Enrolled in Hartnell College Auto Collision
Program (AUC) Courses Since 2007
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 2
Methodology .......................................................................................................................................................... 2
Findings................................................................................................................................................................... 3
General Trends, Profiles, and Indicators ................................................................................................................ 4
Why Students Took AUC Courses at Hartnell College .................................................................................. 4
Intent to Get an AUC Degree or Certificate .................................................................................................. 5
Why AUC Graduates Pursued the AUC Program .......................................................................................... 5
Why AUC Students Stopped Taking AUC Courses ........................................................................................ 6
Full Review-Specific Measures ............................................................................................................................... 7
Enrollment Data ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Number of Degrees and Certificates Awarded ............................................................................................. 7
Enrollment Placement Rates ........................................................................................................................ 8
Information on Job Outs ............................................................................................................................. 11
AUC Labor Market Demand in the Salinas Valley ....................................................................................... 12
Employer Satisfaction ................................................................................................................................. 13
Student Satisfaction.................................................................................................................................... 14
End of Report........................................................................................................................................................ 14
Table of Tables
T I:
T II:
T III:
T IV:
T V:
T VI:
T VII:
T VIII:
T IX:
T X:
Main Reasons for Taking AUC Courses ....................................................................................................... 4
Did Student Ever Formally Declare Intent to Pursue AUC Degree or Certificate?...................................... 5
Main reasons Completers (Degree or Certificate Holders) Pursued an AUC Degree ................................. 6
Main Reasons Students (Non Completers) Stopped Taking AUC Courses ................................................. 6
Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Upon Entering AUC Program ................................... 8
Employment in AUC Field Within 3 Months of Completing AUC Courses .................................................. 8
Reasons for Not Securing Employment in AUC within 3 months of Completing AUC Courses .................. 9
Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Employment in AUC Field ...................................... 10
Employment of All AUC Students as of January 2011 and Reasons for No AUC Employment ................. 11
Grade that Students Give to AUC Program at Hartnell College ................................................................ 14
Revision Note:
The original February 2011 report based its findings on personal interviews conducted in January
from a sample of a database run listing 492 enrollees who had taken at least one AUC course.
When the database was rerun, duplicate names, duplicate social security numbers, and duplicate
files were corrected, with the result being a final, unduplicated database of 449 course enrollees.
The report narrative has been revised only to reflect this corrected count as well as the improved
response rates. All findings remain correct and true and did not require any revision.
3
A Quantitative Review of Students Who Enrolled in Hartnell College Auto
Collision Program (AUC) Courses Since 2007
Executive Summary
In the past five years six students have earned an Associates Degree or Certificate in Auto
Collision (AUC) at Hartnell College. Three of these completers earned a degree and three a
certificate. One of the three who earned a certificate, completed it in Summer 2006 and was
the only completer in the first two years of the five year period. The five other graduates did
so during the last 3.6 years (since January 2007).
In eleven terms (3.6 years) including summers since 2007, 449 different students (unduplicated
headcount) completed at least one AUC course. During the period January 8-12, 2011 two
professionals from the research firm, Applied Development Resources, attempted to reach 317
students. Of these, 162 appeared to have non-working numbers. Of the 155 remaining, 63
completed telephone interviews with the researchers in English and/or Spanish. Three of the
six program graduates were included in the 63 students interviewed as were three of the eight
students classified as near completers.
Primary findings from the 63 completed interviews include:
1. None of the three graduates or the three near completer students interviewed is working in
AUC today, nor did they ever hold an AUC job.
2. Seven attendees were working in AUC when they entered the program and three of these
attendees are working in AUC today (see Table VIII). These are the only three of the 63
interviewed who stated that they were employed in AUC.
3. The majority of reasons stated for non-AUC employment were a lack of jobs in AUC and/or
lack of training sufficient to qualify for AUC positions. (Indeed, local collision centers
licensed to do insurance repairs report fewer jobs and verified that the training at Hartnell
does not meet current technician requirements in their shops).
4. When asked why they did not complete the AUC program students gave multiple responses
including: a) 47 never declared a certificate or degree in AUC as their intent; b)12 saw it as
a hobby or as a way to fix their cars; and, c)16 changed to another field at Hartnell or
decided AUC was not for them and stopped attending.
Despite the fact that the vast majority of students did not secure a career in AUC, students
interviewed spoke highly of the program and its teachers and gave it a Grade Point Average of
3.6 or a B+.
4
A Quantitative Review of Students Who Enrolled in Hartnell College
Auto Collision Program (AUC) Courses Since 2007
1. Introduction
In mid 2010, the Automotive Collision (AUC) program at Hartnell College began the process of
review under the District’s Program Discontinuance procedures. The Program Discontinuance
process was developed by the California Community College’s Statewide Academic Senate and
was implemented by Hartnell College beginning 2001.
The formal process includes several stages and, by late 2010, the process for the AUC program
had progressed to “full review” status. As part of full review, the Discontinuance Committee
conducts a review that includes specific data, satisfaction, demand, persistence, outcomes and
other measures. Some of the measures to be considered by the Committee rely on information
generated from students who enrolled in AUC offerings and completed one or more courses.
To that end, a sample of students who completed one or more AUC courses, who actually
graduated with an AUC degree or certificate, and students who had nearly completed all course
requirements, were interviewed and those data are presented in this report.
2. Methodology
In November 2010, Dr. Esteban Soriano (Applied Development Resources) was engaged to help
develop and conduct a survey of students who had completed one or more AUC courses since
the end of 2006. Under the direction of Dr. Suzanne Flannigan, Vice President of Academic
Affairs and Accreditation, the consultant and Committee members created an instrument
designed to capture data generated through personal telephone interviews with AUC students.
The survey project targeted three student cohorts: (1) completers (2) near completers, and (3)
attendees. Completers are defined as those students who were awarded a degree or certificate
in AUC from Hartnell College. Since the 2005-06 academic year, there were six (6) AUC
program graduates; three (3) receiving an AS degree in AUC and three (3) receiving a certificate
in auto collision. Near completers are defined as those students who were deemed close
enough in courses taken and credits earned in AUC to be able to complete the remaining AUC
courses required for a degree or certificate. (These students may or may not have completed
their general education requirements). There were eight (8) such students in this cohort who
participated in accelerated courses in summer 2010 in an effort to complete AUC requirements.
Attendees are defined as students who took one or more AUC courses but had not made
sufficient progress over the years to be completers nor had they taken enough courses to be
considered near completers. There were 435 students in this category.
The Office of Student Affairs generated separate listings of attendees, completers, and near
completers. Two separate data sets were compiled: (1) a listing of the six AUC degree and
5
certificate graduates from the 2005-06 academic year through August 2010. This represented
the most recent five-year time period, and (2) a listing of students who successfully completed
at least one AUC course during the most recent three-year period of summer 2007 through
summer 2010. There were 449 students on this list and it included all 435 attendees, all eight
near completers, and the six program graduates (those graduates who were enrolled in at least
one course during the 2007-2010 time period). One of the six graduates in the past five years
was awarded an AUC certificate in 2006 and that student’s contact information was added to
the 2007-2010 listing of students.
During the period of January 8 – 12, 2011, telephone interviews were conducted (in English
and/or Spanish) with as many students as possible from this master roster. The team worked
on site at Hartnell College, from Hartnell College telephone numbers. The survey time period
included Saturday and Sunday in order to reach those who worked during the week. Weekday
calling continued until 7 pm to reach those who were returning home from a full work day. In
addition to random sampling techniques, purposive sampling was used in order to ensure that
students were contacted who resided in cities other than Salinas and that some of the few
female student attendees were interviewed.
Of the 449 persons on the master list, call attempts were made to 317 students. Of these
attempts, 162 were bad numbers (disconnects, wrong numbers, fax numbers, fast busy/no
answer, dead line, etc). The survey team experienced four hang ups and documented eight
other calls indicating that the former attendee had moved out of state/country, was
incarcerated, or insisted that they had not taken an AUC class. Messages were left at 80
households, either on voice mail or with a live person who answered and who was not the
intended student. A total of 381 calls were made (including callbacks) during the survey period.
Of the students in the reachable universe (those with working numbers), this survey project
interviewed 63 students.
During the calling phase, we learned that of the six AUC graduates since 2006, two numbers
were no longer working. This left four reachable graduates. Three graduates (75% of
reachable) were interviewed. Of the eight near completers, two numbers no longer worked
and this left six reachable near completers. Three near completers (50% of reachable) provided
interviews. Some 57 other attendees were interviewed to achieve 63 completed surveys.
3. Findings
This narrative has been constructed to provide some general statistics and attendee
information as well as to provide data to benefit specific measures being considered by the
Discontinuance Committee. Of course, there are other substantive data requirements that
were not part of this survey component and this volume is only part of the materials that
comprise the full review process.
6
3.1 General Trends, Profiles, and Indicators
Why Students Took AUC Courses at Hartnell College
Students were asked to give up to three reasons for taking AUC courses at Hartnell College. As
noted in Table I below, of the many reasons students enrolled in one or more AUC courses,
three primary reasons were mentioned most often.
1. Explore the field of AUC (mentioned by 74% of all students)
2. Prepare for a job in AUC (mentioned by 51% of all students)
3. Fix their personal car (mentioned by 38% of all students)
Because most students mentioned several reasons, the percentages will not add to 100%.
Instead, the percentages indicate how many students cited that specific reason, in addition to
other reasons, for taking AUC classes.
Nearly 3-in-4 students indicated that they wanted to explore what AUC was about. One-in-two
said that they took classes to improve their chances of getting a job in the AUC field. One-inthree said they took classes to do body work on their personal vehicles.
Table I
Main Reasons for Taking AUC Courses
Percentage by How Respondents Answered
(N=63 Respondents)
(Each % number reflects the number of respondents who mentioned that reason,
with most respondents indicating two or more reasons)
%
#
74%
51%
38%
25%
19%
11%
10%
5%
5%
2%
47
32
24
16
12
7
6
3
3
1
Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent
Exploring what AUC was all about
Get or prepare for a job in AUC field
Work on personal vehicle that needed body work
Get a degree or certificate in AUC
Interested in AUC only as a hobby or personal enrichment
Training in order to undertake AUC tasks at work (a mechanic or handyman)
Other (For step increase at work, retirement activity, as an elective, etc.)
Open up own auto body repair shop someday
Already working in AUC and needed more training for job
Continuing an AUC education started elsewhere before Hartnell College
One-in-four students first began taking AUC classes because they wanted to get a degree or
certificate in the discipline. One-in-five enrolled primarily to take AUC courses as a hobby and
not a career.
7
Intent to Get an AUC Degree or Certificate
Of the universe of 449 AUC attendees, our sample of 63 students identified the issues
surrounding AUC student intent and practices regarding officially declaring their preference to
pursue an AUC degree or certificate.
Table II
Did Student Ever Formally Declare Intent to Pursue
Degree or Certificate in AUC?
(N=63 Respondents)
#
14
2
47
25%
17%
17%
15%
13%
10%
4%
Response
Yes to certificate and/or degree
Did not recall
Did not declare intent for AUC degree or certificate

Why Not?
(N=47)
Interested in AUC as a hobby, personal enrichment, not career
Tried AUC course(s) then switched to another field of study
Determined that AUC was not for them and stopped taking any classes
Other: (still in H.S., lived long distance, needed 1 class for work, etc.)
Did not seek out program info regarding degree/certificate options
Remained undecided if AUC was right career for me
Could not devote sufficient time for degree or certificate program
Some 47 of surveyed students say that they never declared AUC as their formal degree or
certificate program. One-in-four said that they did not declare because AUC was always
considered to be a hobby, being taken for personal enrichment, as a single elective course, or
not taken as a career option. One-in-six tried a course or two and then permanently switched
to another field of study. Another one-in-six took a course or two and then determined that
AUC was not a field for them, and they simply stopped taking AUC classes.
For those who recall indicating that they did declare AUC as a degree or certificate, some of this
recollection may be in error, for only six students graduated with an AUC degree or certificate
during this time period, and some of those graduates had taken substantial AUC coursework
prior to 2007.
Why AUC Graduates Pursued the AUC Program at Hartnell College
Of the total of six AUC graduates since 2006, the three interviewed graduates cited the
following primary reasons for enrolling and graduating from an AUC program at Hartnell
College.
8
Table III
Main Reasons Completers (Degree or Certificate Holders)
Pursued an AUC Degree
(N=3 Completers)
%
33%
33%
33%
All Reasons Mentioned
To get or prepare for a job in AUC and knew degree/cert. would help
Wanted AUC degree/cert as a “fall back” career to current career
Wanted AUC degree/certificate as way to leave farm work/fieldwork
Unfortunately, as described in a later section, none of these three graduates got a job in the
AUC field upon graduation and none of them work in AUC today.
Why AUC Students Stopped Taking AUC Courses At Hartnell College
Some 60 students interviewed in our sample of 63 attendees did not complete a formal AUC
program. In fact, the majority of AUC students enrolled in 2007-2010 took a maximum of one
or two AUC classes total during this multi-year period.
Table IV
Main Reasons Students (Non-Completers) Stopped Taking AUC Courses
Percentage by How Respondents Answered
(N=60 Respondents)
%
41%
31%
17%
5%
14%
8%
3%
3%
2%
12%
8%
17%
12%
5%
5%
2%
Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent
Barriers:
Scheduling or course availability
Work time conflict
Financial aid
Transportation
Personal:
Personal/life issues/other (family, legal, etc.)
AUC not for me so switched to another field/program
Moved out of the area
Could not devote the time to finish formal program
Received training/education needed for work or career
Hobby:
Finished car project
AUC was always a hobby, personal enrichment, one elective course
AUC not for me:
Decided that AUC was not field for me
Informed AUC was ending so switched to another program or stopped
Other:
Got a job (not in AUC field)
Already working in AUC and needed more training for job
Lost AUC field job so stopped taking AUC courses
9
Most students provided two or more reasons for not continuing their AUC studies. Table II
indicates the percentage of students who indicated that reason, among several reasons
mentioned by them, for concluding their AUC program. When asked about the main reasons
for not taking more automotive collision courses or for having stopped taking more AUC
classes, surveyed students provided a variety of answers. The most often mentioned (by 41%)
reason was scheduling and course availability. They cited two aspects of this barrier. First,
some students indicated that they could only take one course a term, at best, and that the
relatively small offering of AUC courses was not always offered in the sequence they needed, in
the semester they needed, or at time/days most convenient to them.
Second, some students cited that learning of the program’s “closure” had the effect of
preventing them from taking courses or ended their motivation to take any more courses.
While this may be the case for a strong number of students who responded with this “reason,”
it is difficult to reconcile other data that suggest that most students in the past three full years
took only one or two AUC classes, that the vast majority (77%) of these very AUC students
never declared their intent to pursue an AUC degree or certificate, and that so few of the “near
completers” actually accepted the college’s offer to take accelerated courses during the final
terms and months in order to complete their course requirements. The perennial conflict of
work versus school was mentioned by 31% of those interviewed. One-in-six attendees say that
they stopped taking AUC courses when then determined that the field was “not for them.”
3.2 Full Review-Specific Measures
Enrollment Data
For the three year period of summer 2007 – summer 2010, ten sessions of classes were offered
(fall, spring, and summer session). During this period 449 distinct, unique students enrolled in
one or more AUC program courses.
Number of Degrees and Certificates Awarded
For the five period of academic year 2005-06 through August 2010 the AUC program at Hartnell
graduated six students. Three students earned 2-year AA degrees and three students earned
AUC certificates.
Student “1” received an AUC certificate in August 2006
Student “2” received an AS degree in AUC in June 2008
Student “3” received an AUC certificate in August 2008
Student “4” received an AS degree in June 2009
Student “5” received an AS degree in December 2009
Student “6” received an AUC certificate in June 2010
10
Employment Placement Rates
The following series of tables provide detailed information regarding the employment status of
students when they first began taking AUC courses, their ability to find employment in the AUC
field upon completion of their courses or graduation, and their employment status today.
Table V
Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Upon Entering AUC Program
(N=63 Respondents)
#
24
39
Category
Not employed
Employed →
If Employed, What Employment Field:
AUC Field
Non AUC Field
FT PT
FT PT
----4
3 (= 7)
18 14 (= 32)
Earnings of Employed Students Upon Entering AUC Program (N=39)
Hourly wage
$ 7-9/hr
$ 10-19/hr
$ 20-30/hr
$ 31+/hr
Did Not Answer
Number of students earning this hourly wage
20 students earned this hourly wage
7 students
6 students
1 student
4 students would not provide salary information
As indicated in Table V above, seven (7) of the 63 students in the interview sample were
employed at least part time in an AUC job when they first began taking AUC classes at Hartnell
College. This represents 11% of those interviewed. Some 32 students were employed in non
AUC jobs, for a total 37 employed students. Of the seven students employed in the AUC field
upon entering the AUC program, four were working full time and three had part time AUC
positions. For students employed in positions other than in AUC, 18 held full time and 14 held
part time positions. On average, students earned $7-$9/hr when first entering the AUC
program. Several students held substantial full time public sector jobs or owned their own
businesses and their hourly income surpassed $20+/hr.
Table VI demonstrates that within the first few months of finishing their AUC courses, only
three (3) of the 63 students interviewed were employed in an AUC job.
Table VI
Employment in AUC Field Within 3 Months of Completing AUC Courses
(N=63 Respondents)
#
3
60
Students Who Secured AUC job Within 3 Months of Completing Courses
Employed in AUC job after completing courses
Not employed in AUC job after completing courses
11
Comparing Table VI with Table V indicates that while seven students had AUC jobs when they
started taking AUC courses, only three of the 63 students were working in AUC jobs within
months of finishing their AUC classes. Thus, substantially fewer students were employed in an
AUC job after completing AUC classes than were employed in the field when students began
taking their first AUC classes.
Table VII highlights the reasons students provided for not securing employment in the AUC field
within three months of completing their AUC courses.
Table VII
Reasons for Not Securing Employment in AUC Within 3 Months of Completing AUC Courses
(N=60 Respondents Not Employed in AUC Job…Provided 65 Reasons)
(Each % reflects the number of respondents who mentioned that reason, with some
respondents indicating more than one reason, and, thus, will not add up to 100%)
%
#
34%
20%
15%
8%
6%
6%
5%
3%
2%
2%
22
13
10
5
4
4
3
2
1
1
Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent
Did not take enough AUC courses to be qualified for an AUC job
Already had a good job/career and stayed with it
Not interested in an AUC career or job
Looked, but no AUC jobs were available/my AUC shop closed
AUC was always a hobby and not intended as career
Changed to another major and continued schooling
Was still a full-time student and not in job market
Have remained unemployed for various reasons
Got a job in another field not related to AUC
Personal reasons
Why did so many AUC students not find an AUC job after finishing their classes? Table VII
above notes that 34% of surveyed students shared that they had not taken enough AUC classes,
or gained sufficient skills, to be able to compete successfully for a job in the AUC field. Another
8% indicated that they had looked for an AUC job but none were available. One student who
was working in an AUC field when he began taking AUC classes at Hartnell College was unable
to continue in that job because the shop went out of business. Some 20% of students said that
they already had full time jobs or careers and stayed with those positions instead of looking for
AUC work. Another 15% completed their course or courses and concluded that they were not
interested in an AUC career or employment. As noted in Table IX, these reasons continue at
about the same level as the reasons cited by so many AUC attendees are not working in the
AUC field today.
Table VIII displays the employment and earnings history of all AUC students who had or found
AUC employment upon entering the AUC program at Hartnell College, within three months of
completing their courses, and as of January 2011.
12
Table VIII
Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Employed in AUC Field
Number of Students Employed in AUC Field
Student type
Attendee
Near completer
Completer
Upon entering
AUC program
7
0
0
Within 3 months after
completing courses
3
0
0
Today
(1/2011)
3
0
0
Earnings of Students Employed in AUC Field After Completing Courses and Today
Employment category/position
Collision technician
Shop owner
Self-employed (welder)
Within 3 months after
completing courses
(N=3)
$ 12/hr
$30/hr
$40+/hr
Today
(1/2011)
(N=3)
$ 17/hr
$30-40+/hr
$40+/hr
Of substantial note, none of the three surveyed AUC program graduates secured AUC
employment within months after graduating and none of those AUC degree or certificate
holders works in the AUC field today. Today, these graduates are employed as a:
o Supervisor for a mushroom grower in the Salinas Valley
o Maintenance worker at a well-known golf resort in the County
o Specialist in a law enforcement type of department for a Salinas Valley City
Similarly, none of the three interviewed AUC near completers secured AUC employment after
they completed their AUC classes and none of these near completers has a job in the AUC field
today. These are their occupations today:
o Laid off, unemployed K-12 school teacher
o Current high school student
o In home health aide
These graduates and near completers did not have AUC employment when they entered the
AUC program, when they completed their studies, when they graduated, or at any time at in
between.
The only students who had AUC jobs after course completion and have those jobs today are
attendees who did not formally pursue an AUC degree or certificate. Of the three attendees
who secured jobs within three months of completing one or more courses and who have AUC
jobs today, one owns a body/suspension shop that he operated before taking AUC courses. A
13
second student became a self-employed welder who provides welding services to the auto
body and collision industry. The third AUC job holder works for a collision repair facility. This is
the only person of 63 AUC students surveyed who actually works as a technician for an AUC
employer.
As noted in Table VIII above, the collision technician earns $17/hr and the shop owner and selfemployed welder earn substantially more as owners of their own businesses.
Table IX indicates the current (as of January 2011) employment status of all AUC students and
lists reasons cited by those students who are not working in an AUC job.
Table IX
Employment of All AUC Students as of January 2011
And Reasons for Current Non Employment in AUC Field
(N=63 Respondents)
%
#
41%
59%
26
37
Employment Status as of January 2011
Not employed
Employed

If employed, is employment in AUC field? (N=37)
92%
34
No
If not, reasons for not having employment today in AUC field
(N=34 respondents who provided 36 reasons)
39%
31%
14%
8%
6%
3%
14
11
5
3
2
1
Got a non AUC job
Did not take enough AUC courses to be qualified for an AUC job
Already had a good non AUC job/career and stayed with it
Still in school/training for different field or career
AUC was always a hobby, not for me, no intentions to enter field, etc.
Looked, but no AUC jobs were available

While Table V reported that 24 students were unemployed when they began taking AUC
courses, the above Table IX notes that 26 students who completed one or more AUC courses
are unemployed today. Of the 37 students who are working today, 34 are not employed in the
AUC field (only three are). Of the major reasons cited for not being employed in an AUC job
today, 39% (or 14 students) reported that they secured a job not in the AUC field. Some 31%
stated that they did not take sufficient coursework to be qualified for an AUC job. Another 14%
said that they already had a good non AUC job or career while taking AUC courses and decided
to stay in those jobs instead of looking for work in the AUC field. A small number of students
noted that they were still in school or that AUC was intended as a hobby and not a career.
Information on Job Outs
One aspect of this survey project was to capture any instances of students “jobbing out” of the
AUC program. Of the 63 AUC students interviewed:
14



None got a job in the AUC field and therefore had to job out
Three got a job in a non-AUC field and did have to job out
One lost his job in the AUC field and had to withdraw because of no job
Stopping their AUC program and not being able to continue taking AUC courses because of job
outs was mentioned 4 times among the 109 different reasons cited by interviewed students for
stopping or not completing a full AUC program.
AUC Labor Market Demand in the Salinas Valley
Tables V - IX in the above section describe the AUC employment and job seeking outcomes for
surveyed students. One-in-three students feel that they do not have sufficient skills to get an
AUC job. Another 8% tried to get a job upon finishing their AUC classes but found no jobs
available in the AUC sector. (Indeed, local collision centers licensed to do insurance repairs
report fewer jobs and verified that the training at Hartnell College does not meet current
technician requirements).
The researcher for this report interviewed a senior member of the largest collision center in the
Salinas Valley and the Central Coast region to learn firsthand about program and market
demand. That collision industry senior employee indicated that the market for collision work in
the Salinas Valley has been on a downward trend for the past three years. Fewer people have
comprehensive coverage vehicle insurance, fewer people can pay their collision deductible, and
fewer clients have their vehicle’s body work repaired. The “Cash for Clunkers” program took
thousands of older cars off the road and served to additionally depress the collision repair
market. A consequence of this economic reality is a reduced need for new collision repair
technicians to fill new collision repair positions, because those new positions are not being
generated by market conditions. At best, most current-day collision repair technician job
searches are to replace a retiring or separated employee.
This local perspective mirrors the Auto Collision Occupations labor market report prepared for
Hartnell College in August 2010 by the Central Valley Region Center of Excellence. In Table 2 (p.
7) of that report, the document presents the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) projections of:


1 new job opening in the next five years for an auto body technician
17 potential replacement openings over the next five years
This totals 18 prospective auto collision technician jobs in the Salinas Valley over the next five
years. Indeed, this is an optimistic projection for two reasons. First, BLS projections generally
are based on samples of data that are 1-3 years old and, in this case, do not adequately capture
the Salinas Valley’s current economic downturn nor the change in materials used in today’s
automobiles. Second, the employer/employee universe assembled for these projections
include some categories of automobile mechanics, windshield installers, welders, and other
ancillary professions and industries for which AUC classes and expertise may not be needed and
15
may not be considered by some AUC industry representatives to be full “AUC positions.”
Therefore, it may be reasonable to reduce the replacement projections by several positions
over the 5-year time period.
By any measure, the report indicates that, at best, for the next five years, most years will have
no new auto collision technician jobs created in the Salinas Valley. At best, 2-3 replacement
jobs may be created annually. However, according to the senior collision industry
representative interviewed, these replacement searches almost always hire seasoned,
experienced, certificated technicians directly from another larger collision center. The
prospects of a local, new degree or certificate AUC graduate successfully competing for a
replacement position requiring years of experience are virtually nil.
Employer Satisfaction
The actual number of AUC program attendees who work in an AUC job is too low for statistical
analysis. Of the three students out of 63 interviewed who have a job in AUC, one is selfemployed as a welder who does auto body welding work as part of his work portfolio, and one
has long owned his own body work and suspension shop. He owned the shop long before he
began taking AUC courses at Hartnell. He had specialized in suspension work and took a limited
number of AUC courses to become more familiar with the body work side of his business. Only
one of the 63 interviewed actually worked for an AUC employer.
To learn of employer satisfaction, in general, regarding AUC technicians with small shop
experience in Hartnell College’s service area, we interviewed an executive for the largest
collision center in Salinas Valley and the Central Coast region. According to the interviewed
representative, her company will rarely, if ever, consider hiring a local collision repair technician
whose principle base of experience is having worked in small, “mom and pop” auto body repair
shops that dot the landscape of the Salinas Valley. Those auto body technicians, says this
industry source and employer, tend to work with tools and machinery not used in larger
collision centers and tend to use and mix materials not to the standards of larger collision
centers that are approved by insurance carriers to undertake insurance repairs. Insurance
repairs must be guaranteed by the collision center for the life of the vehicle and this may not be
the standard followed by all smaller shops in Hartnell College’s service area. This large collision
center has hired auto body technicians from the region’s smaller body shops and was not
satisfied with their performance. Thus, they tend to now hire only more experienced, seasoned
technicians who have worked in insurance company-approved facilities.
In addition, most California insurance firms require collision centers approved to provide
insurance repairs to be “I-CAR” certified. This acronym stands for the “Inter-Industry
Conference on Auto Collision Repair,” the international auto collision industry training and
certification organization. To continue to be eligible to do insurance repairs, a collision center
must become I-CAR certified. To be so certified, all of the auto collision technicians working in
the facility must have their own I-CAR certifications. These certifications are based on
experience, proficiency in the field, and successfully passing I-CAR exams. A certificate from the
16
Hartnell College AUC program is no longer enough to successfully compete for a new or
replacement position in a major collision center. And, it is these employers who pay
journeyman wages, offer benefits, and provide job security to AUC technicians. Sample area
collision centers that are I-CAR certified, that can only employ I-CAR certified auto collision
technicians and can provide some of the wages and benefits described above include GunterMadsen Auto Body (Monterey), DelCas Auto Collision (Salinas), Robert’s Auto Repair
(Monterey), Pestana’s Auto Center Auto Body (Seaside), Salinas Collision Repair (Salinas), and
A1 Auto Body Quality Repair and Painting (Salinas), among others. These auto body repair
centers represent some of the service area’s major collision industry employers.
Student Satisfaction
All categories of surveyed students (completers, near completers, attendees) give high grades
to the AUC program for the quality of its instructors, teaching content, and facilities.
Table X
Grade That Students Give to AUC Program at Hartnell College
(N=63 Respondents)
%
65%
32%
2%
2%
3.6
Grade
A
B
C
D
Overall GPA for AUC Program
Nearly two-in-three students gave the program an “A” grade. Only one student rated the
program as a “C” and only one student gave the program a “D” grade. Overall, students
combined to give the Hartnell College AUC program a 3.6 GPA (B+). Students commented on
the experience and supportive style of the two adjunct instructors who have been with the AUC
for years. They complimented the range of equipment used in the program. A small handful
(less than 10 students) indicated that they would continue to take courses if the program was
to be reactivated. Only a very few observed that, from time to time, there were material and
supply shortages, or there were not enough tools to go around. Just a few students remarked
that in some classes new and totally unskilled students were mixed in with experienced
students and the instructors often had to slow down the process to ensure that the new
students kept pace. Overall, however, students had positive remarks and expressed
considerable satisfaction with the AUC program.
Statewide Discontinuance Process
Purpose:
To critically review a program or discipline for possible discontinuance or to recommend
remediation that will result in a viable program or discipline. The Discontinuance Process is
separate from the Program and Services Review Process. The Program and Services Review
process is formative, providing evaluation that leads to continual improvement. The
Discontinuance Process provides a summative evaluation of a program or discipline’s viability
and may lead to the termination of a program or discipline.
Process:
1. Identification: An at-risk instructional program is identified, on the basis of the criteria
listed below, by the Vice President for Instruction, the Vice President for Student Services,
the Area Dean, a member of the discipline, or the Academic Senate.
2. Convening: The Vice President for Instruction convenes the Discontinuance Committee.
This is not a standing committee, but rather is convened as needed with the following
membership:
• Vice President for Instruction
• 2 Deans (neither of which is dean of the program in question)
• 2 faculty appointed by the Academic Senate (neither from the program in question)
• 1 student appointed by the Student Senate
3. Initial Review: The Discontinuance Committee conducts an initial review to determine
whether full review is warranted. Full review is necessary if:
any two of the Primary Criteria are met, or
any three of the Secondary Criteria plus one of the Primary Criteria are met
•
Primary Criteria (any 2)
Declining market/industry demand
•
•
Advisory Committee recommendation
•
Insufficient frequency of course offerings to
assure reasonable opportunity for completion
of the program
•
Decreasing numbers of students
enrolled*
Low or decreasing WSCH/FTEF*
•
Lack of available resources
•
Poor retention within courses*
Poor rate for student achievement of
program goals (e. g. completion rate,
numbers of degrees and certificates,
job placement)
•
Unavailability of the transfer major
•
•
•
Secondary Criteria (any 3 plus 1 primary)
Declining university transfer trends*
Decline in importance of service to
• Poor term-to-term persistence for students in
related disciplines (applies only when
the major*
discipline does not offer degree or
certificate).
*as compared to statewide norms for the discipline and local data over the last three to five years.
Statewide Discontinuance Process
Page 2
The Discontinuance Committee will issue a brief narrative report recommending to the
Superintendent/President whether a full review is warranted or not. The report will include the
reasoning for the decision. The report will be submitted to the Superintendent/President, filed
with the Office of Instruction and sent to the party initiating the review, the Academic Senate,
the Dean responsible for the program, and the Hartnell College Faculty Association.
4. Full Review: If the Discontinuance Committee determines that a full review is warranted,
the review is conducted by the committee. Data used should be based on trends over time
(typically three to five years) and should relate to program goals as well as the mission of the
college. The criteria to be examined include uniform measures that must be applied to all
programs, specific measures required for different categories of program, and other measures
that may also be considered.
Measures applied to all programs
Qualitative
Quantitative (3-5 year trend)
•
•
Balance of college curriculum
Match of program with Hartnell Mission and Vision
•
•
•
Student satisfaction
•
•
Previous steps taken to strengthen program
•
•
•
Enrollment
Retention within course (successful course
completion)
Retention within major (semester-to-semester
persistence)
Number of degrees and certificates awarded
Scheduling/course offering trends
Resources available
Measures applied to Occupational Education programs
Qualitative
Quantitative (3-5 year trend)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Duplication/uniqueness of training programs
Employer satisfaction
Advisory committee recommendation
Information about “job-outs”
Labor demand
Employment placement rate
Measures applied to transfer programs
Qualitative
Quantitative (3-5 year trend)
•
•
•
Transfer program availability
Number of transfers (UC, CSU, private)
Number of transfer ready students
Measures applied to lab/studio/shop/clinical-based programs
Qualitative
Quantitative (3-5 year trend)
•
•
Constraints that may limit enrollment and
productivity measures
Enrollment as a percent of available seats
Measures that may also be considered
Qualitative
Quantitative
•
•
•
Regional needs for the program
Impact of program on underrepresented and female
students
Industry/ market demand (non-vocational programs)
Statewide Discontinuance Process
Page 3
5. Recommendation: The committee will issue a written recommendation to the
Superintendent/President based on the analysis of the data. The recommendation will consist
of:
a) recommendations for strengthening the program, including specific goals developed
jointly with discipline faculty and a schedule is set for periodic review of progress
toward the goals, or
b) recommendation for program or discipline discontinuance.
With few exceptions, a recommendation for discontinuance would not be made without
first recommending actions to strengthen the program. In most cases, a recommendation
to discontinue would only follow failed attempts at reviving/improving the program or
compelling evidence to indicate that this is not the best use of the college resources.
6. Actions:
If a recommendation is made for discontinuance, and the recommendation is accepted by the
Superintendent/ President and the Board, provisions will be made for adequate notification of
affected faculty, and retraining or transfer of faculty to another area.
7. Impact on students: If a recommendation is made for discontinuance, and the
recommendation is accepted by the Superintendent/President and the Board, opportunities
will be provided for students to finish the program or transfer to a related program.
The discontinuance process will be reviewed by the Academic Senate and the administration
during the spring semester of odd numbered years in order to keep the process current.
During the first five years after this process is adopted, no program can be recommended for an
initial review that has not had the opportunity for review and improvement through the current
Program and Services Review Process. The Vice President for Instruction has the authority to
schedule a discipline on the Program and Services Review calendar.
Adopted by Hartnell College Board of Trustees: April 2001
Hartnell Community College Tentative Budget Fiscal Year 2011‐2012 June 7, 2011 Hartnell Community College
Tentative Budget
Fiscal Year 2011‐2012
Executive Summary
Table of Contents
Contents
Page
Introduction 1‐2 General Fund Unrestricted Restricted 3 4‐6 Other Funds Special Revenue Fund Capital Projects Fund Enterprise Fund Internal Service Fund Trust and Agency Fund 7‐8 9‐11 12 13‐14 15‐16 Fiscal Year 2011-12
Budget
Executive Summary
2011-12 Tentative Budget
Introduction
The Board of Trustees is required to hold a public hearing prior to September 16th to adopt a final
budget for the fiscal year. The public hearing and budget adoption is scheduled for September 13,
2011.
Below is a summary of all District funds. It includes unaudited beginning fund balances, as of July 1,
2011, revenues and expenditures, and estimated ending fund balances for each separate fund.
Funds
General
Unrestricted
Restricted
Total
Special Revenue
Bookstore
Child Development
Total
Capital Projects
Capital Outlay
State Capital Match
Property Acquisition
Bond Projects
Total
Enterprise
Cafeteria
Total
Internal Service
Self Insured
Retiree Health Benefits
Total
Trust and Agency
Associated Students
Scholarships, Loan & Trust
Intercollegiate Athletics
Total
All Funds Total
Budget
Unaudited
Beginning
Fund Balance
July 1, 2011
$
Budgets 2011-2012
Revenue
$
8,609,107 $
883,900
9,493,007 $
$
1,190,361
262,162
1,452,523
$
4,262,695
24,741
3,254,691
42,516,269
50,058,396
$
311,392
311,392
$
1,018,039
3,764,186
4,782,225
$
Expense
Ending
Fund Balance
June 30, 2012
32,835,138 $
19,269,335
52,104,473 $
33,979,899 $
19,269,335
53,249,234 $
7,464,940
883,900
8,348,840
175,000
643,750
818,750
115,000
643,750
758,750
$
1,250,361
262,162
1,512,523
$
3,879,695
24,741
3,494,691
34,710,069
42,109,196
$
314,592
314,592
$
886,239
3,854,486
4,740,725
$
29,000
412,000
$
300,000
220,000
549,000
$
60,000
8,026,200
8,498,200
$
322,600
322,600
$
319,400
319,400
$
8,200
465,300
473,500
$
140,000
375,000
515,000
$
580,507
106,598
122,606
809,711
$
90,000
800
35,000
125,800
$
120,050
5,000
42,000
167,050
$
550,457
102,398
115,606
768,461
$
66,907,254
$
54,394,123
$
63,507,634
$
57,794,337
Page 1
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Budget
Each District fund is projected to have a positive balance at the beginning and end of the fiscal year.
State revenue for the budget is based on the most recent forecasts from state education and legislative
officials. The Governor originally proposed to bridge a projected $26.6 billion state deficit by reducing
spending by approximately $12 billion and increasing revenues by extending temporary taxes. Since it
appears the proposed tax extension will not be considered by voters, the budget must be balanced only
through expenditure reductions. The community college system’s share of this reduction is estimated at
approximately $900 million. Consequently, the District projects a 14 percent decrease in state funding
levels from the 2010-11 fiscal year. Revenue figures will be adjusted as more information is released by
the state Chancellor’s Office.
Due to the continued economic downturn, state fiscal officers indicate that apportionment payment
deferrals will become even more significant in 2011-12. It’s now estimated that over 25% of state funds
will be received after the close of the fiscal year, June 30, 2012. Late payments create cash
management challenges that may once again require the District to borrow short-term funds to meet
obligations. State revenue forecasts do not currently include any cost of living adjustment or funds to
accommodate student growth. Consequently, the District must absorb all normal inflationary increases
and costs of additional students by making reductions to current service levels.
The budget is built to be flexible. The District will prioritize new initiatives, program restoration or
contractions as state revenue adjustments are made.
Hartnell College Apportionment History
$40,000,000
$35,000,000
$31,810,232
$33,526,858
$35,471,168 $34,692,917 $35,210,778
$31,074,179
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11*
2011-12**
* P-2 Estimate
**Advanced Estimate
Budget
Page 2
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Budget
General Fund $53,249,249 Requirement
The General Fund is the primary operating fund of the District. It includes resources that are
unrestricted as well as funds with restricted spending requirements.
Unrestricted Funds
Nearly all day-to-day
operating expenses are
charged to the unrestricted
General Fund. Unrestricted
revenue is budgeted at
$32,835,138, with a beginning
balance of $8.6 million (based
on pre-audit estimates).
Beginning reserves are onetime resources and may be
used strategically to fund onetime investments and
requirements.
Other
1%
Student Fees
6%
State General
Fund
38%
Property Tax
53%
Other State
2%
General Fund Unrestricted Resources
State apportionment, funded by local property tax, student fees, and the state general fund, is the
largest source of revenue and represents 97% of all unrestricted income. The principal apportionment
or “entitlement” is calculated by the state Chancellor’s office and is based on in-state enrollments
referred to as full time equivalent students (FTES) at the District. Based on guidance received from the
state Chancellor’s Office, the District assumes that any reduction in apportionment funding will result in
an equivalent reduction in funded
Capital
FTES workload. The budget
Operating
1%
16%
includes funded workload of 6,020
FTES.
The largest expenditure portion of
the budget is allocated for
employee salaries, associated
payroll costs, and benefits (82%).
The remaining budget (18%) is
appropriated for operating costs,
facility maintenance, supplies,
contracted services, and
equipment.
Supplies
1%
Academic
Salaries
39%
Benefits
21%
Classified
Salaries
22%
General Fund Unrestricted Requirements
Budget
Page 3
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Budget
Restricted Funds
Funds used for the operation of educational programs that are specifically restricted by law, regulations,
or donors are recorded separately in the Restricted General Fund. The majority of these funds must be
expended in the fiscal year or be returned to the funding source. Budgets for state funded programs are
based on current state projections. Total restricted funds amount to approximately $19.3 million.
Restricted Funds
Federal
VTEA Title II Tech Prep
Tech Prep California Dept Ed
SEOG
Foster and Kinship Care Education
National Institute of Health
Child Develop. Training
NASA SEMAA
TRIO
Future Teacher Transfer Program
Workability III
NSF TULE
Student Support Services (TRIO)
Gear Up Soledad
Gear Up Salinas
HS Equivalance Program
Child Care Access
First 5 Contract
America Reads
Child Care Food Program
TANF
Pell Grants
Title V Gavilan/Hartnell
CCRAA-CSUMB
Title V STEM
CCRAA-Math and Science
Federal Work Study
SBDC UC Merced
NSF Student Success
Nat'l Serv Awards Scholars
Dept. of Social & Empl. Services
YESS - ILP
Probation Dept Contract
Probation
CSUMB Seamless Agri. Mgmt
NSF-STEM
NSF Women/Latino STEP
NSF MBRACE
NSF CCLI
Academic Competiveness Grant
B.T.O.P.
VTEA
Workforce Investment Grant
Renovation & Repair Grant
Agri. Tech Training (WIB)
Clean Energy
ARRA Allocation
Direct Loans
TOTAL FEDERAL
Budget
2008-09
Actual
$
2009-10
Actual
81,405 $
130,830
140,341
11,811
10,000
2010-11
Revised
67,750 $
118,335
147,632
13,476
10,029
134,918
137,716
10,970
224,535
130,997
912,248
400,909
34,087
11,130
8,126
45,010
5,516,418
794,565
18,259
737,649
116,571
30,427
5,025
82,272
325,260
2010-11
Forecast
69,708 $
100,000
161,884
147,173
12,000
11,221
2011-12
Tentative
69,708 $
100,000
161,884
141,102
12,000
10,000
69,708
138,831
141,102
12,000
10,000
125,000
201,190
271,526
723,382
328,109
13,665
9,895
201,347
259,771
1,863,995
665,053
60,279
10,000
130,000
194,047
203,521
1,079,556
358,762
32,000
10,000
1,183,583
203,204
36,972
89,834
8,479
69,339
7,772,909
726,530
70,904
346,828
926,624
166,898
21,194
55,532
9,779,084
978,803
130,837
803,172
143,175
138,929
11,000
55,532
10,234,837
675,000
90,042
525,000
143,175
138,929
44,125
408,029
50,000
404,220
22,500
35,000
404,220
15,728
25,000
402,108
140,000
171,843
4,668
47,519
74,965
659,246
294,932
75,000
121,843
25,000
20,000
104,000
466,136
262,217
140,000
50,000
20,000
10,000
631,126
24,841
243,543
18,402,560
631,125
24,841
297,523
16,665,207
45,561
10,000,000
713,000
575,000
140,035
25,775
31,300
30,699
224,136
37,650
23,750
177,735
35,690
2,481
101,227
272,927
48,345
262,217
5,655
132,889
368,736
218,747
$
10,665,236
$
13,831,856
$
$
50,000
193,110
219,932
$
250,000
15,017,501
Page 4
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Restricted Funds
State
Matriculation Program
EOPS
Financial Aid Administration
CARE
Cal Grants
DSP&S
Foster and Kinship Care Education
CA Articulation Number (CAN)
Lottery Prop 20
TTIP Telecommunications
MESA
Nursing Enrollment Growth
CTE Nursing Equipment
CTE Nursing Enrollment
CTE Nursing Remediation
CTE Linking After School
IDRC Sustainable Construction
IDRC Food Safety Tech
CTE Community Collaborative #1
CTE Community Collaborative #2
CTE Community Collaborative #3
CTE ROP Supplemental
IDRC Sustainable Design
IDRC Media & Entertainment
CALWORKS
Equal Employment Opportunity
Small Business Development
EWD Career Pathways
Coding Specialist Grant
YESS-ILP
Faculty/Staff Development
Faculty/Staff Diversity
Block Grant
Basic Skills
2008-09
Actual
$
$
TOTAL FEDERAL, STATE, and LOCAL
Budget
2009-10
Audited
2010-11
Revised
543,579 $
737,390
290,520
163,772
439,661
576,978
46,780
3,481
69,704
64,547
73,033
236,803 $
540,401
301,435
102,321
451,411
320,380
49,211
519
201,141
7,001
50,568
53,817
195,631
40,333
69,809
147,935
78,026
164,461
38,910
18,871
155,733
225,368
103,215
101,520
205,239
88,510
6,299
280,298
183,213
116,056
232
70,083
74,393
49,768
4,521,970
$
185,559
160,415
345,974
$
15,533,180
$
3,940,336
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
309,135 $
485,958
293,106
109,449
471,100
360,910
37,963
309,134 $
481,885
293,106
109,449
471,000
360,910
47,034
241,300
457,791
288,427
95,376
400,000
307,608
47,034
150,000
168,341
120,000
50,500
89,687
40,031
50,500
89,687
78,811
75,099
78,811
75,098
40,031
272,580
303,701
210,000
272,580
135,000
160,000
181,259
500
183,600
205,000
181,259
47,023
22,482
3,988
6,556
364,836
69,154
5,591
4,868
108,164
138,311
TOTAL STATE
Local
Health Occupations Donations
SVMHCS
California Endowment
Lumina
Planetarium Foundation
Song Brown
SBDC Greenfield RDA
Agri. Tech Foundation
Parking Lot Improvement
TOTAL LOCAL
Budget
400,000
166,400
205,000
183,213
5,000
22,500
8,145
158,361
$
3,911,418
71,361
$
3,605,686
176,067
$
3,115,716
390,119
409,881
409,881
24,667
4,117
40,129
40,128
400,000
107,550
33,622
62,479
32,000
50,000
$
315,000
291,822
1,088,831
$
269,946
275,000
1,136,118
$
21,359,724
$
19,269,335
$
278,355
53,057
750,315
$
653,585
375,000
1,541,074
$
18,522,507
$
23,855,052
Page 5
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
2010-11
Revised
Budget
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
General Fund
Unrestricted (11)
Resources
Federal
13,629
17,483
17,000
17,000
17,000
State
15,217,145
15,925,614
15,159,366
16,668,213
12,799,853
Local
22,603,330
20,815,919
19,517,854
19,859,551
19,558,285
Transfers In
435,997
379,251
470,000
470,000
460,000
Total Resources
$ 38,270,101 $ 37,138,267 $ 35,164,220 $ 37,014,764 $ 32,835,138
Requirements
Academic Salaries
13,700,149
11,991,663
12,427,736
11,994,563
13,236,725
Classified Salaries
7,249,762
6,263,450
6,939,907
6,894,260
7,286,808
Payroll Costs/Benefits 7,328,482
6,282,525
7,080,834
6,265,333
6,925,891
Supplies and Materials 346,252
393,480
509,069
498,767
504,050
Operating Expenses
8,881,502
4,973,195
7,143,494
6,317,197
5,288,125
Capital Outlay
111,236
177,681
263,180
193,234
238,500
Transfers Out
49,904
6,047,501
800,000
800,000
499,800
Total Requirements
$ 37,667,287 $ 36,129,495
35,164,220
32,963,354
33,979,899
Restricted (12)
Resources
Federal
10,695,669
13,147,444
18,405,560
16,403,000
14,977,701
State
4,742,976
5,105,368
3,911,418
3,867,903
3,115,716
Local
160,991
169,218
1,541,074
1,088,831
1,136,118
Transfers In
39,800
Total Resources
$ 15,599,636 $ 18,422,030 $ 23,858,052 $ 21,359,734 $ 19,269,335
Requirements
Academic Salaries
1,765,301
1,980,129
2,371,672
1,635,919
1,469,965
Classified Salaries
2,066,610
2,096,590
2,503,129
2,020,772
1,815,778
Payroll Costs/Benefits 1,083,329
1,041,681
1,225,273
828,569
744,516
Supplies and Materials 309,608
444,352
605,726
280,255
251,823
Operating Expenses
2,067,820
2,522,762
3,481,111
1,880,215
1,738,365
Capital Outlay
1,090,986
1,103,114
1,715,895
990,851
890,335
Financial Aid Outgo
6,799,368
8,987,127
11,391,039
13,353,145
11,998,553
Transfers Out
365,476
346,751
561,207
370,000
360,000
Total Requirements
$ 15,548,498 $ 18,522,506 $ 23,855,052 $ 21,359,726 $ 19,269,335
Total General Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$ 53,869,737 $ 55,560,297 $ 59,022,272 $ 58,374,498 $ 52,104,473
$ 53,215,785 $ 54,652,001 $ 59,019,272 $ 54,323,080 $ 53,249,234
Page 6
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Budget
Other Funds
Special Revenue Fund
$758,750 Requirement
Special Revenue Funds are used to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources whose
expenditures are legally restricted. Activities in these funds may or may not be self-supporting and are
generally not related to direct educational services.
The Bookstore Fund is used to account for the lease of the college bookstore. The District contracts with
a third-party vendor, Follett Higher Education Group, to manage the day-to-day operations of the store.
The vendor pays all operational expenses but shares revenue with the College. The District is projecting
approximately $175,000 in shared revenue. A total of $115,000 will then be transferred to the General
Fund ($100,000) and Associated Student Body Fund ($15,000).
The College operates a full-service child development center on campus. The Child Development Fund
is designated to account for child care and development services, including revenue generated by
student fees and direct cost expenses. This program has traditionally been self-supporting.
$700,000
$643,750
$643,750
Revenue
Expense
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$175,000
$115,000
$100,000
$-
Revenue
Expense
Bookstore
Budget
Child Development
Page 7
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
Budget
2010-11
Revised
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Special Revenue Fund
Bookstore
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
Child Development
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
165,523
159,043
180,000
170,000
175,000
165,523 $
159,043 $
180,000 $
170,000 $
175,000
113,891
114,041 $
111,965
111,965
115,000
115,000
115,000
115,000
115,000
115,000
639,191
28,781
692,721
21,087
696,273
5,000
594,604
49,152
595,000
48,750
667,972 $
713,808 $
701,273 $
643,756 $
643,750
477,362
150,000
19,710
14,900
6,000
9,569
384,969
128,694
17,430
7,364
1,215
498,929
161,984
19,010
16,850
4,500
667,972 $
549,241 $
701,273 $
643,756 $
643,750
833,495 $
782,013 $
872,851 $
661,206 $
881,273 $
816,273 $
813,756 $
758,756 $
818,750
758,750
150
477,575
145,006
10,000
11,175
477,575
145,000
10,000
11,175
-
Total Special Revenue Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$
$
Page 8
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Capital Projects Fund
Budget
$8,498,200 Requirement
This group of funds is used to account for financial resources to be used for the acquisition or
construction of major capital facilities and other capital outlay projects. This includes land acquisition,
scheduled maintenance, significant equipment, and furnishings for new buildings. The Bond Projects
Fund, financed with voter-approved Measure H bond proceeds, is the largest fund in the group.
Construction projects at the Alisal campus and the Classroom and Administrative Building (CAB) on the
main campus will continue during 2011-12. A new science building has also being planned,
programmed, and designed.
$450,000
$412,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$60,000
$29,000
$50,000
$-
Revenue
Expense
Capital Outlay
Revenue
Expense
Property
$9,000,000
$8,026,200
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$220,000
$-
Revenue
Expense
State Capital Match
Budget
Revenue
Expense
Bond Projects
Page 9
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
Budget
2010-11
Revised
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Capital Projects Fund
Capital Outlay
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
Property Acquisition
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
Budget
22,677
93,506
3,820,000
22,677 $ 3,913,506 $
26,000
550,000
576,000 $
28,500
550,000
578,500 $
29,000
29,000
12,129
220,078
10,543
10,964
42,305
38,137
11,290
62,900
175,810
11,290
55,750
175,810
12,000
100,000
300,000
242,750 $
91,406
250,000
242,850
412,000
182,406
368,365
270,000
295,000
300,000
182,406 $
368,365 $
270,000 $
295,000 $
300,000
29,113
29,113
43,080
38,940
82,020
58,425
51,575
58,000
20,000
50,000
10,000
110,000
78,000
60,000
Page 10
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
Budget
2009-10
Actual
2010-11
Revised
2,717,185
19,152
7,694,542
20,000
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Capital Projects Fund, continued
State Capital Match
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
Bond Projects
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
10,171,263
1,500,000
8,600
$ 10,171,263 $ 2,736,337 $ 7,714,542 $ 1,508,600 $
-
83,820
10,087,443
2,717,185
7,709,542
1,500,000
3,011
6,000
$ 10,171,263 $ 2,720,196 $ 7,715,542 $ 1,500,000
-
11,761,955
49,270,681
$ 11,761,955 $ 49,270,681 $
23,686
32
9,719
13,891,330
480,000
220,000
220,000
480,000 $
220,000 $
220,000
56,390
17,413
20,466,681
18,500
6,699
18,500
6,699
18,500
7,700
19,980,700
19,980,700
8,000,000
$ 13,924,767 $ 20,540,484 $ 20,005,899 $ 20,005,899 $ 8,026,200
Total Capital Projects Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$ 22,138,301 $ 56,288,889 $ 9,040,542 $ 2,602,100 $ 549,000
$ 24,367,893 $ 23,434,106 $ 28,081,441 $ 21,826,749 $ 8,498,200
Page 11
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Enterprise Fund
Budget
$319,400 Requirement
Enterprise Funds are intended to operate as a business and be self-supporting. Such costs are financed
or recovered primarily through user charges. The Cafeteria Fund is currently the only District enterprise
fund. It is used to account for the sale of food from café sales and vending machines. This fund has
historically been self-supporting; however revenues have not kept pace with expenditures in recent
years, causing a decline in the fund balance reserve.
$350,000
$322,600
$319,400
Revenue
Expense
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$-
Cafeteria
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
2010-11
Revised
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Enterprise Fund
Cafeteria
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
355,569
307,193
291,700
245,000
322,600
355,569 $
307,193 $
291,700 $
245,000 $
322,600
189,091
144,897
24,886
10,065
159,684
109,066
25,850
13,000
158,500
105,000
25,850
4,800
179,062
104,000
24,000
12,338
408,122
368,939
307,600
294,150
319,400
355,569 $
408,122 $
307,193 $
368,939 $
291,700 $
307,600 $
245,000 $
294,150 $
322,600
319,400
210,511
145,909
29,275
21,443
984
Total Enterprise Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$
$
Page 12
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Internal Service Fund
Budget
$515,000 Requirement
Internal Service Funds are used to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one
department to other departments on a cost-reimbursement.
In 2003, the District joined a statewide workers’ compensation purchasing pool, the Protected Insurance
Program for Schools (PIPS). This program has reduced premium for the District. Prior to 2003, the
District participated in a Monterey County workers’ compensation consortium. The District established
a self-insured fund to account for outstanding claims which occurred prior to 2003 (which would not be
covered by PIPS). It also uses this fund to pay for property loss and liability deductibles.
A Retiree Health Benefits Fund has also been established to account for future benefit liabilities as
required by the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB Statement No. 43 and 45). The
actuarial value for these future commitments is approximately $4.9 million. Although GASB allows up to
30 years to fully fund this liability, the District has already designated over $3.7 million.
$500,000
$465,300
$450,000
$375,000
$400,000
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$140,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$8,200
$-
Revenue
Self Insured
Budget
Expense
Revenue
Expense
Retiree Health
Page 13
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
Budget
2010-11
Revised
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Internal Service Fund
Self Insured
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
Retiree Health Benefits
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
(57,172)
180,000
122,828 $
92,037
20,000
8,200
8,200
92,037 $
20,000 $
8,200 $
8,200
57,353
49,385
70,000
115,000
120,000
18,000
22,086
20,000
18,000
20,000
75,353 $
71,471
90,000
133,000
140,000
18,000
710,000
728,000 $
5,300
250,000
255,300 $
5,300
460,000
465,300
350,000
350,000
375,000
$
350,000 $
350,000 $
375,000
131,765 $ 2,250,911 $
75,353 $
71,471 $
748,000 $
440,000 $
263,500 $
483,000 $
473,500
515,000
8,937
18,874
2,140,000
8,937 $ 2,158,874 $
-
$
-
Total Internal Service Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$
$
Page 14
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Trust and Agency Fund
Budget
$167,050 Requirement
This fund is used to account for assets held by the District in a trustee or agency capacity for individuals,
private organizations, or other governmental units. The District has a fiduciary responsibility for such
funds, with some degree of discretionary authority. Operations of these funds are measured and
reported in the District’s financial statements. Funds in this group include assets held for the Associated
Student Body, scholarships, and intercollegiate athletics.
$140,000
$120,050
$120,000
$100,000
$90,000
$80,000
$60,000
$42,000
$35,000
$40,000
$20,000
$800
$5,000
$-
Revenue
Expense
Associated Students
Fund Type
Revenue
Expense
Revenue
Scholarships Loan/Trust
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
2010-11
Revised
Expense
Athletics
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
Trust and Agency Fund
gecy
Budget
Associated Students
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
72,940
13,741
86,681 $
69,157
11,965
81,122 $
77,000
15,000
92,000 $
73,000
15,000
88,000 $
75,000
15,000
90,000
158
3
1,265
19,865
2,809
7,702
742
34,000
5,008
47,452
37,482
10,834
8,500
48,860
5,000
37,482
10,625
8,500
45,860
3,000
23,850
10,700
5,000
75,500
5,000
110,676
105,467
120,050
24,100
Page 15
Fiscal Year 2011-12
Fund Type
Budget
2008-09
Actual
2009-10
Actual
2010-11
Revised
2010-11
Forecast
2011-12
Tentative
(2,524)
4,738
4,000
2,100
800
(2,524) $
4,738 $
4,000 $
2,100 $
800
Trust and Agency Fund
Scholarships/Loan Trust
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
Athletics
Resources
Federal
State
Local
Transfers In
Total Resources
$
Requirements
Academic Salaries
Classified Salaries
Payroll Costs/Benefits
Supplies and Materials
Operating Expenses
Capital Outlay
Transfers Out
Total Requirements
$
61,220
1,840
4,000
17,500
5,000
61,220 $
1,840 $
4,000 $
17,500 $
5,000
13,410
21,533
100,000
121,533 $
13,410 $
3,291
51,162
54,453
$
22,000
35,000
35,000
22,000 $
35,000 $
35,000
5,007
42,766
7,000
38,000
5,096
34,137
7,000
35,000
47,773 $
45,000 $
39,233 $
42,000
207,393 $
97,065 $
118,000 $
159,676 $
125,100 $
162,200 $
125,800
167,050
Total Trust and Agency Fund
Resources
Requirements
Budget
$
$
97,567 $
139,773 $
Page 16
AGENDA ITEM FOR BOARD MEETING OF:
Title
June 7, 2011
Number
Approve Tentative Budget for 2011-2012, Set
Date and Time for Public Hearing, and Set
Date to Adopt Final Budget for 2011-2012
III. E.
Area
Status
Office of Support Operations
Prepared by: Kent G. Stephens
Action
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Board of Trustees:
1. Approves the attached 2011-2012 tentative budget required on or before July 1 of each
year.
2. Sets September 13, 2011 at 5:00 p.m. as the date and time to conduct a public hearing
on the 2011-2012 budget.
3. Sets September 13, 2011 as the date to adopt the 2011-2012 budget.
Summary
California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 58305, requires the District to develop a
tentative budget and forward an information copy to the Monterey County Office of Education
on or before July 1 of each year.
Further budget actions required and included in the budget calendar are:
September 1, 2011
September 13, 2011
September 30, 2011
October 10, 2011
2011-12 budget available for public inspection
On or before the September 15, the Board of Trustees shall
hold a public hearing and adopt a Final Budget (Title 5,
Section 58305 (d)).
On or before September 30, two copies of the Adopted Budget
are submitted to the California Community Colleges
Chancellor’s Office (Title 5, Section 58305 (d)).
In accordance with the California Code of Regulations,
Section 58305(d), on or before October 10, the Annual
Financial and Budget Report is submitted to the Chancellor’s
Office
The attached 2011-2012 Tentative Budget is presented to the Board of Trustees for approval.
Budget Implications
Approval of the tentative budget is necessary to provide a mechanism for expenditure of funds
starting July 1 until the final budget is adopted.