EL CAMINO COLLEGE
Planning & Budgeting Committee
Minutes
Date: March 19, 2009
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Jones, Clarissa – ASO
Jackson, Tom – Academic Affairs
Reid, Dawn – Student & Community Adv.
Shenefield, Cheryl – Administrative Svcs.
Spor, Arvid – Chair
Taylor, Susan – ECCFT
Turner, Gary – ECCE
Tyler, Harold – Management/Supervisors
Widman, Lance – Academic Senate
OTHERS ATTENDING: Francisco Arce, Janice Ely, Jo Ann Higdon, Ken Key, Claudia Lee,
Barbara Perez, John Wagstaff
Handouts:
2009-2010 Planning & Budget Development Calendar
Program Review Timelines
Summarized 2009 Planning Summit Notes
The March 19, 2009 meeting was called to order at 1:02 p.m.
Approval of March 5, 2009 Meeting Minutes
Corrections:
1. Page 2, #7, second to the last sentence – change “legislature” to “legislation.”
2. Page 2, #8 – “ECC’s Board of Trustees’ code of ethics did not include what would happen…”
The March 5, 2009 meeting minutes were approved as amended.
Budget Update:
1. Email with percentage of budget spent on salaries and benefits sent to members. Thank you to G.
Turner for compiling data.
2. TRAN: cash flow projections from Chancellor’s office continue to change. Expect recertification soon. Does not appear we will need TRAN for current year, but almost certain will
need it for next year. Won’t know amount to request until re-certification. Re-certification is a
correction or best estimate based on changes in the budget legislation. ECC does not have cash
flow problems now nor will it in the upcoming year. The college will be able to qualify for a
TRAN which would take care of any 2009-10 cash flow issues.
3. Funds in the state’s PMI Account (where state funds are deposited and withdrawn) are almost
dried up. The state will try to float a bond in June for education. K-12 is claiming funding first
since it is mandatory education.
4. Please notify if anyone sees changes to PERS/STRS rates.
5. Resolution of the $42B state shortage depends the outcome of the special election. $5M deficit in
ECC’s budget could grow to $8M - $10M. Will know actual amount six months after books
closed. Obama’s stimulus package is being carefully reviewed by Chancellor’s Office staff.
Initial reading indicates not much for community colleges.
6. Do we need to set up irrevocable fund for GASB by June? Need specific rules in place. Heard
there is legal opinion that says you can borrow from irrevocable fund. Better for financial
statements if irrevocable fund were set up.
7. Don’t see preliminary revenue estimates on the Planning & Budget Development Calendar –
discussed around January-February timeframe. Will look back on prior year calendars.
1
Program Review Timelines:
1. PBC ongoing responsibilities include oversight and guidance of Program Review, as well as the
Comprehensive Master Plan and other planning components. Want to show Accrediting
Commission that Program Review is ongoing process. Program review recommendations are
embedded within recommendations from VPs for their areas.
2. Discussion about redoing cycles. Problematic for program reviews completed in spring term not
in current term. Instead of starting in fall 2010, start spring 2010 to have ready for following
year’s budget cycle – complete at same time as other Plan Builder prioritizations processes.
3. Authors’s of Recommendation 1 Response advocate completing annual updates and incorporate
with Plan Builder annual updates.
4. Plan Builder users are currently on a learning curve. Suggestion was made to survey Plan Builder
users to see what works and what doesn’t work.
5. Suggestion was made for Academic Affairs to start program review process in the fall of the fifth
year to be completed by spring.
6. Should post timeline and process on the web.
7. Comment was made that Administrative Services conducted a ‘low level’ satisfaction survey need to fine tune for more meaningful data. Administrative Services area prioritizations - vast
majority of priorities and objectives can be accomplished without expenditures. Thank
Administrative Services managers for their hard work and realizing large funds will not be
available for the next few years.
8. Academic Strategies in not under Learning Resources. There is no Academic Strategies
department?
2009-10 Planning & Budget Development Calendar:
1. Specific dates were added to the Planning & Budget Calendar.
2. Items not on calendar: 1) date for 2008-09 preliminary budget was February 6th, 2) 2008-09
budget assumptions by early March. According to one’s notes, the 2008-09 budget assumptions
were discussed after receiving the preliminary budget. Another believed they were developed in
tandem. Preliminary budget was not done for this year because amount we would get from state
for the balance of this year and next is still unknown.
3. October-December refers to 2008. Does December 11th refer to 2009 because it looks at plans for
2010-2011? The calendar is meant to be for 2009-10. A. Spor will re-verify dates.
4. Dates should be added to reflect the particular year if calendar is used as a template.
5. Enrollment target of 20,100 FTES for 2010 was determined a few weeks ago at an Enrollment
Management meeting.
6. March-April calendar activities do not involve PBC.
Planning Summit Feedback:
1. Information from each Planning Summit group’s flipcharts was synthesized and grouped into
three categories: awareness, change, and broad issues. Feedback is blend of comments from
Torrance and Compton locations.
2. Were potential short-term vs. long-term implementation applications incorporated into the
summit process? Participants were asked to determine what works well, doesn’t work well, and
what needs improvement when comparing our planning model to the highest level of the
Commission’s rubric. Some items are short-term, some long-term.
3. Awareness issues:
a. Communication – consistently get the word out how the planning process works, the
various steps and who is involved. Suggestion was made to include giving every
employee access to Plan Builder through managers or ITS. Give updates on
implementation and follow-through through area and division councils.
2
b. Use data (Chancellor’s office data mart, IR) to make realistic plans, not wish lists.
c. Non-budgetary items – many plans do not require new or additional funding.
d. Assign responsibility of each goal/objective – whoever creates plan is responsible.
e. Names added after each issue on list is responsible for follow-through.
4. Change issues:
a. Where is the budget piece? A. Spor will show how budget fits in Planning and Budgeting
calendar.
b. SLO and Curriculum not visible on Planning Model – will add more information to
planning processes and timelines.
c. Evaluation is more ad-hoc than systematic. Need to make stronger evaluation piece
without making too rigorous.
d. Termination/consolidation of programs: form collaborative group of constituents to
discuss development of document/rubric/better-defined process to determine if programs
need to be downsized or terminated. Should have priorities for expansion and contraction.
e. Communication piece in evaluation and assessment cycle needs improvement. Funding
notification doesn’t go out beyond PBC and some managers. Notification needs to go to
everyone on both campuses who are interested. Compton participants felt most feedback
is given after decisions are made. In campus-wide prioritization process, top choices do
not always qualify.
The next meeting is scheduled on April 2, 2009.
The meeting adjourned at 2:18 p.m.
Note taker: Lucy Nelson
3