SPECIAL MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
HOUSTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE
March 23 and March 24, 2012
Minutes
The Board of Trustees of Houston Community College held a Special Meeting (Board
Retreat) on Friday, March 23 and Saturday, March 24, 2012 at The Houstonian, 111
North Post Oak Lane, Forest III Room, 1st Floor and Saturday, March 24, 2012 in Elm
Room, 3rd Floor, Houston, Texas.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Mary Ann Perez, Chair
Bruce Austin, Vice Chair
Eva Loredo
Sandie Mullins
Christopher W. Oliver
Richard Schechter
ADMINISTRATION
Mary Spangler, Chancellor
Art Tyler, Deputy Chancellor/COO
Shantay Grays, Interim Executive Officer to the Chancellor
OTHERS PRESENT
Jarvis Hollingsworth, System Counsel, Bracewell & Giuliani
Todd Gentzel, Strategic Plan Facilitator, Yaffe|Deutser
CALL TO ORDER
Ms. Perez, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:36 p.m. and declared the Board
convened to consider matters pertaining to Houston Community College as listed on the
duly posted Meeting Notice.
(Mr. Oliver stepped out at 2:38 p.m.)
The meeting recessed at 2:38 p.m. due to the loss of a quorum.
(Mr. Oliver returned out at 2:40 p.m.)
The meeting reconvened at 2:40 p.m.
STRATEGIC PLAN 2012-2015
Motion – Mr. Oliver moved and Ms. Loredo seconded.
Dr. Spangler recommended establishing an over-arching plan.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 2
Mr. Oliver inquired if there was a general discussion of the strategic plan. Dr. Spangler
informed that there were several presentations regarding the strategic plan.
Ms. Perez informed that Dr. Seymour was heading the strategic plan process and
informed that a meeting was held to get community input. She informed that the retreat
is to provide the Board the opportunity to give feedback regarding the plan.
Dr. Spangler noted that there was not a strategic plan in place when she arrived in
2007. She noted that along with several of the Trustees, the vision and goals were
identified. Dr. Spangler provided an overview of the goals that were identified under the
strategic plan adopted in 2007.
Dr. Spangler apprised that the college needs to identify the next phase of the strategic
plan. She presented the process that had been initiated which involved reviewing the
goals/values and establishing goals. Dr. Spangler noted that the process only allowed
for presentations to the Board but did not allow the Board to provide input.
Mr. Austin informed that his concern was that given the demographics, there was not
clarity as to what is being done to advance productivity, career clusters, and workforce
development. He noted that workforce development and economic development were
added to the vision but there needs to be attention given to the career transition
program. He referenced the Department of Labor’s sixteen clusters and noted that the
college is actually doing approximately eight of the clusters. Mr. Austin referenced
material by Michael Porter regarding the means to advance and apprised that there are
often CEU units to allow for penetration of the market. He asked what the college is
reviewing in efforts of penetrating the markets.
Mr. Oliver noted that his inquiry is similar to that of Mr. Austin and inquired how student
success is measured. He noted that the last discussion led to an inquiry of how many
students are moving to four-year institutions and noted that the discussion was
somewhat stagnated at that point.
Dr. Spangler noted that the first goal on the current plan is Student Learning; however,
under the draft plan for 2012-2015, the goal is student completion, transfer and
employment. She noted that the effective communication is now institution resilience.
Mr. Austin noted that the Board was not allowed the opportunity to elaborate on the plan
previously and noted that when a strategic plan is developed it should be completed in
concert with the Board.
Dr. Spangler acknowledged that Todd Gentzel was present to assist with the strategic
plan.
Mr. Gentzel noted that he was not present to influence the ideas presented but to
provide guidance to identifying the best product. He referenced the draft plan and noted
that when discussing strategy under planning logic, there is reasonability to the ability to
execute the vision. He referenced that the six imperatives on page 10 on the draft plan.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 3
Mr. Oliver noted that it appears that the Board and administration is saying the same
thing; however, there is some form of difference.
Mr. Austin noted that there must be an effort to learn to operate as a team.
Mr. Gentzel noted that possibly some thought has to be given to active listening. He
noted that in a strategic plan process, everyone has a view but the product resulting
from the collective discussion should be for the better. He entered a discussion with the
Board regarding the following six initiatives of the 2012-2015 Strategic Plan as
followings:
1. Increase Student Completion and Transition to Jobs and Advanced Educational
Opportunities
2. Improve Skill, Knowledge, and Academic Development for 21st Century Learners
3. Improve Institutional Capacity for Faculty and Leadership Development
4. Enhance and Leverage Local and International Partnership
5. Innovate to Improve Institutional Resilience
6. Inspire an Entrepreneurial Culture
Increase Student Completion and Transition to Jobs and Advanced Educational
Opportunities
The Board discussed the priorities of the goals and the consensus was that Increase
Student Completion (Student Success) should be the number one priority.
Dr. Spangler noted that each goal will have actions for accomplishing the goal. She
noted that one of the actions could be the career clusters that Mr. Austin referenced
earlier.
Improve Skill, Knowledge, and Academic Development for 21st Century Learners
It was the consensus of the Board that the goal was acceptable.
Improve Institutional Capacity for Faculty and Leadership Development
Ms. Loredo noted that another word should probably be used for “improve”.
Mr. Gentzel noted that there should always be an effort to improve but words with vague
messaging should be avoided such as “enhance” or “maintain”.
The Board concluded that administration should review the wordsmith and identify
another word as suggested.
Enhance and Leverage Local and International Partnerships
Ms. Mullins voiced concerns regarding international activities and inquired of the reason
for doing the international efforts. She noted that the reason and priorities for the
international efforts must be identified and noted that the efforts should be for revenue
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 4
generating purposes to benefit the community and recommended moving it down as the
last goal.
Mr. Austin noted that as local students are educated there must be an effort to prepare
individuals for more opportunities in the global market.
Mr. Oliver noted that the views of Mr. Austin and Ms. Mullins are meaningful and
inquired if there is an opportunity to focus on the international piece from both
perspectives.
Mr. Austin suggested that administration provide a benchmark overview that displays
how other institutions are adding value to their students by international ventures. He
noted that the efforts should add value to the students and apprised that the college is
an academic entity that does business functions but should not be viewed as a
business.
Mr. Oliver informed that he does not have a problem with profit centers and noted that
no international effort should supersede the local efforts. He noted that there should not
be an immediate divorce from international efforts but there must be consideration
regarding local students first.
Ms. Mullins associated with Mr. Oliver and noted that the international efforts should
have a focus on the local students.
Innovate to Improve Institutional Resilience
Mr. Gentzel noted that the issue regarding resilience is based on funding and delivering
a skilled workforce. He noted that given the continued possibility of losing funding and
requirement of the responsibility to educate is a tough balancing act. He noted that
Boards often note that the international partnership must be associated with an effort for
institutional resilience.
The meeting recessed at 3:36 p.m. and reconvened at 3:38 p.m.
Mr. Gentzel noted that institutional resilience often requires that the question be asked
as to what is the test regarding the international partnership relating to how it will
become a revenue generating benefit to the institution.
Mr. Oliver also noted that there must be a determination as to when do you pull out of
the agreements as it relates to international partnerships. Mr. Austin noted that there
must be completion of partnership projects because we do not need to give the
impression of a quitter.
Inspire an Entrepreneurial Culture
Mr. Gentzel informed that the goal on entrepreneurial culture is tied with the
international partnership and institution resilience.
The Board entered a discussion of the proposed actions for each of the identified goals.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 5
Mr. Austin noted that there must be a discussion regarding facts. He noted that Texas
ranks forty-eighth in literacy and informed that he has information to disseminate
regarding the facts.
Ms. Perez noted that Mr. Austin’s information would be the first discussion at the retreat
session for Saturday.
Mr. Austin recommended reviewing entrepreneurial efforts from a different prospective.
Ms. Loredo inquired if the Board was in consensus with the six initiatives.
Ms. Perez requested to add “Matching Curriculum with Industry Needs” as the seventh
goal. Mr. Gentzel noted that he agrees that it should be added as a goal. The Board
concluded that the recommended goal should be added as the second goal.
Mr. Oliver noted that it is imperative to hold a discussion regarding the alarming
concerns such as the literacy rate as noted by Mr. Austin.
Mr. Austin noted that there has to be a focus on the change in the economy.
Mr. Gentzel encouraged the Board to remember that the effort is to build the best
possible outcome for all in the room. He noted that the strategy must be compelling
enough that not only the community buys into it but also allows those who are
contributing through funding buy-in as well.
(Mr. Oliver left at 4:06 p.m.)
Ms. Perez recessed the meeting at 4:06 p.m. due to the loss of a quorum.
Ms. Perez resumed the meeting at 9:52 a.m. on Saturday, March 24, 2012.
(Trustees present: Austin, Loredo, Mullins, Perez, and Schechter)
Ms. Perez provided a recap of the meeting from Friday, March 23, 2012 regarding the
Strategic Plan as follows:
•
•
Move initiative #4 regarding international partnership to #7
Add additional goal “Match Curriculum with Industry Needs” as #2
Motion - Mr. Austin moved and Ms. Loredo seconded.
Ms. Loredo noted that one of the suggestions was to change the wording regarding
improve and noted that Mr. Gentzel recommended using continue or continuous.
Dr. Spangler noted that Mr. Austin suggested adding CCTI and noted that it could
possibly be added under goal two.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 6
Mr. Austin noted that he requested to review information regarding success. Ms. Perez
yielded the floor to Mr. Austin to present the information.
Mr. Austin noted that data was researched regarding literacy and noted the following:
•
3.8 million people in Texas need the services of an adult education program but
only 100,000 are being served
•
Out of 93 million adults in the U.S. functioning at or below basic levels, 30 million
are parents
•
Social economic issues impact everyone
•
More than 60 percent of all stated and federal corrections inmates can barely
read and write
•
Better educated citizens pay more in taxes
•
Raise in literacy leads to rise in productivity
Mr. Austin noted that the data should be utilized in factoring into the college’s strategic
plan. He noted that the purpose of the presentation of the data is to see where the
college is in comparison.
(Mr. Oliver arrived at 10:07 a.m.)
Mr. Austin corrected the statement regarding Texas literacy and noted that Texas is
actually ranked 47th regarding literacy. He noted that the vision, mission, and guiding
principles should fit together. He apprised that in viewing community colleges
throughout the country, there is a blending of partnerships, career clusters, and industry
needs. Mr. Austin noted that the sixteen career clusters represent more than 79
occupations and recommended reviewing the industry cluster initiative.
Ms. Perez noted that the strategic initiatives need minor wordsmithing and the initiative
regarding matching curriculum with industry needs should be added. The Board entered
a review and discussion regarding the actions for each initiative outlined.
Ms. Loredo inquired what will be done to improve outcomes for students. Dr. Spangler
noted that one thing is to simplify the pathway for students so that they are able to
complete. She noted that the Houston Endowment grant will provide an avenue for such
action.
Mr. Oliver noted that one measure for student success would be how many students
leave and continue to a four-year institution.
Mr. Schechter noted that he has concern regarding all the actions relating to the goals.
He apprised that the actions are not really strategies and noted that they are too vague.
He identified efforts that would address the goals such as working with ISDs to convey
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 7
the skills that will be needed before enrolling in the college. He apprised that once they
enroll, there are three categories of students: college ready, coachable and remedial
students (will need an alternative pathway).
Mr. Schechter informed that he wants to see the steps that will be used to make certain
the goals are accomplished. He requested more specifics as the action.
Mr. Austin noted that Mr. Schechter is referencing a battle plan for success and noted
that this is a different way of thinking. He informed that individual tactics must be
identified and apprised that these tactics cannot be done around the Board table but
must be done by the administration.
Dr. Spangler noted that the actions entailed are not the tactics but are what will be
presented to the public from the broader standpoint.
Mr. Schechter informed that he would prefer to include the plan that has been identified
with the actions. He noted that any idea that has already been identified should be
included. Dr. Spangler noted that there is not sufficient time to implement the actions
listed under the goals. She noted that they are not systematized and there must be
identification of who will complete it.
Ms. Mullins noted that the wordsmithing needs to be completed. She noted that the
Board agreed that the number one goal should be to get the students in and move them
out. She noted that the action should be how to complete. Ms. Mullins referenced the
action and apprised some of the actions can be combined and should only be specific to
what will lead to completion.
Mr. Austin associated with Mr. Oliver’s comments on Friday regarding the student
completion rate based on those who received certificates, moved to four-year
institutions, and career/workforce training. He noted that student success must be
measured according to the number of students that have moved on and where they
have moved.
Dr. Spangler noted that the expectations must be realistic and noted that it takes time to
move forward. Mr. Schechter informed that the Board is not asking for overnight
numbers but is asking that the actions be specific measures to accomplish the goal.
Mr. Oliver informed that the flowchart mentioned by Mr. Schechter is an outline that
should be used in developing the plan.
Ms. Loredo inquired if the actions will outline the “how to process”. Dr. Spangler
informed that each of the colleges outlined how they will identify the action to
accomplish the initiatives.
Ms. Perez reiterated that the Board is stating that there needs to be a simple but
specific strategy.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 8
Mr. Schechter noted that his goal is to make certain the plan is student centric and
centers around the success of students.
Dr. Spangler informed that the actions were not intended to be the final actions for
implementation. She noted that the next step was to identify the specifics that will need
to be done to complete each of the actions under the initiatives and the timeframe for
completing.
Mr. Oliver noted that the specifics should be presented to the Board.
Mr. Austin noted that Mr. Schechter is separating the actions into battle plans and
strategies. He apprised that Mr. Schechter is also noting that the objectives need to be
presented.
The meeting recessed at 11:25 p.m. and reconvened at 11:37 a.m.
(Present: Trustees Austin, Loredo, Mullins, Perez, Oliver, and Schechter)
Ms. Perez noted that the Board has expressed their concerns and noted that
administration needs to go back to the drawing board.
Ms. Mullins noted that the regulations from the state and federal levels should also be
taken into consideration.
Mr. Schechter noted that there are ideas under the action and inquired how long will it
take administration to revise the plan according to the input provided by the Board.
Mr. Oliver noted that the Board is stating that the ideas presented should be combined
with those identified by the administration and noted that a timeline should be
developed according to the specific actions. He also noted that a timeline for the action
plan be developed.
Dr. Spangler noted that the estimated time for presenting the plan to the Board is the
June 2012 meeting.
Mr. Schechter noted that he could adopt the broader plan if he had an opportunity to
review a more detailed plan and he apprised that he is especially interested in the
immediate year one items. Mr. Schechter reiterated that the budget should reflect the
emphasis of students and apprised that he would be more comfortable focusing on the
student success goal. He requested administration present the one-year tier of the
strategic plan.
Mr. Austin mentioned that the strategic plan is a living document and requested the
strategies and tactics for the first year goals and actions.
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 9
Ms. Mullins noted that the Board agreed on the six initiatives; however, the actions need
to be reviewed as some of them can be combined or eliminated altogether. She noted
that the measures should be identified and handled by administration.
Mr. Schechter noted that the Chancellors goals scheduled for review in June should be
tied to the year one of two Strategic Plan.
Dr. Spangler noted that seven strategic initiatives have been identified and advised that
the year one actions have been identified with an asterisk under actions accompanying
the goals. She presented each of the year-one actions for the initiatives.
Mr. Schechter associated with Ms. Mullins that some of the actions are repetitive and
could be streamlined to four themes.
Ms. Perez recommended that each Trustee forwarded their comments to the Chancellor
for review. She noted that the Board would not take action at this time since the plan will
be revamped and presented to the Board at the May meeting.
BUDGET UPDATE
Dr. Tyler provided a budget presentation to inform the status and update on the budget.
He noted that the presentation would bring the Board up to date in regards to the
assumptions and the implementation of using resources. The update included the
following:
Update Economic Conditions
• State
• Taxation
• Enrollment
• Tuition
Revenues
• Year-to-Date Adjusted Budget versus Projected Actuals
Expenses
• Percentage of Budget Expensed Year-to-Date
• Cash Flow Analysis
Savings from Chill
• Cumulative Salary Savings by Month
• Approximately Benefits Savings – 24% Baseline
Composite Financial Index (CFI)
• Core Ratio Value Strength Factor Weight Score
o Return on Net Assets
o Operating Margin
o Primary Reserve
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 10
o Viability Ratio (Ability to pay off debt)
(Ms. Perez stepped out at 12:24 p.m. and returned at 12:26 p.m.)
(Mr. Oliver left at 12:26 p.m.)
Dr. Tyler informed that the college currently has approximately $8.5 million set aside as
recommended by the Board bringing the total reserve to $53 million.
Mr. Austin recommended identifying a strategic alliance. Dr. Tyler informed that there
are a number of strategies and noted that all the options reviewed assist with building
on institution resilience.
Dr. Tyler referred to page 29 of the financial statements and apprised that the numbers
show revenue and expenses regarding international initiatives.
Mr. Austin recommended numbering the column with A, B and C so everyone knows
what is being referred to.
Mr. Schechter inquired how much must be expended before the college is paid back
with international initiatives. Dr. Tyler informed that it is approximately $1 million. Mr.
Schechter clarified that the process includes expended funds that will be reimbursed
fully; therefore, the college is not out of any funds.
Dr. Tyler informed that the budget staff confirmed that the accounting numbers are
accurate at the close of the books.
Ms. Perez inquired if the funds expended on international are tax dollars. Dr. Tyler
informed that the funds are not tax dollars and noted that they come from vending
funds, Qatar funds, or student fees assessed (athletics and auxiliary).
Mr. Austin noted that there is nothing new about cost management contracts.
Dr. Tyler apprised that there was $1.12 million once all bills were paid. He noted that in
February, the funds were increased by approximately $500,000 and most were
produced by Qatar.
Dr. Tyler provided an overview of the following budget recommendations:
• Differential tuition – Health Sciences
• Step Increase for Full-time Employees on Step/Column Structure
(Faculty/Secretary/Clerical) - $1.7 million
• Pay increase for Professional Staff – % or $1.5 million
• Investment in Retention/Completion - $2.5 million (Fund 3)
Houston Community College
Special Meeting – March 23 and March 24, 2012 - Page 11
Ms. Loredo noted that there have been some complaints regarding the counselors and
inquired if the Chancellor could revisit the issue. She noted that there are concerns
regarding licensing.
Mr. Schechter noted that a decision has been made regarding the counselor situation
and noted that a process was provided. He noted that fair notice was given and a
program was setup to assist.
Ms. Loredo noted that a reminder might need to be reiterated regarding the situation.
Ms. Perez recessed the meeting at 1:09 p.m.
Ms. Perez reconvened the meeting at 1:34 p.m.
(Present: Trustees Austin, Loredo, Mullins, Perez, and Schechter)
ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION
Ms. Perez adjourned the meeting to Executive Session at 1:34 p.m., notice having
previously been given and reiterated in accordance with Sections 551.071, 551.072,
and/or 551.074 of the Open Meetings Law. Ms. Perez stated that any final action, vote
or decision on any item discussed in Executive Session would be taken up in Open
Session or in a subsequent Public Meeting.
Ms. Perez reconvened the meeting in Open Session at 3:36p.m. and entertained
motions on pending matters.
(Present: Trustees Austin, Loredo, Perez, Mullins, and Schechter)
ADJOURNMENT
With no further business coming before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 3:36 p.m.
Minutes recorded, transcribed & submitted by:
Sharon Wright, Manager, Board Services
Minutes Approved as Submitted:
April 19, 2012