SCC
new employee welcome
CONVOCATION FALL 2009
CLASSIFIED STAFF
Robert Burks
Food Service Manager
City Café
Tami Conger
Cosmetology Services Assistant
Advanced Technology
Kimberly Cortijo
Financial Aid Supervisor
Enrollment and Student Services
Cady Daly
Instructional Assistant – Microcomputer Lab
Learning Resources Division
Margaret D’Cruz
Clerk III
Business Division
Lauri Drennan
Library Media Technical Assistant
Learning Resource Division
Dora Franco
Food Service Assistant II
City Café
Leland Hunter
Instructional Assistant – Microcomputer Lab
West Sacramento Center
Joan Kudin
Clerk III - EOP&S
Enrollment and Student Services
David Lazzarone
Maintenance Technician I
Operations
Phuong Le
Clerk II - Financial Aid
Enrollment and Student Services
Amy Martinez
Custodian
Operations
Ruben Martinez
Clerk II – Dental
Science & Allied Health
Valerie Moore
Student Personnel Assistant – Counseling (Rise)
Enrollment and Student Services
Dimitry Proshak
Student Personnel Assistant / Financial Aid Clerk II
Enrollment and Student Services
Deborah Rocco
Child Development Center Lead Teacher
Behavioral And Social Sciences
Nina Sholomytska
Instructional Assistant – Mathematics
Math, Statistics and Engineering
Fong Vang
Student Personnel Assistant –
Disabled Students Programs and Services
Enrollment and Student Services
Sarah Wright
Administrative Assistant I
Business Division
Liliya Yakimuchuk
Financial Aid Clerk II
Enrollment and Student Services
FACULTY
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
Name
Position
Division
MANAGERS
Debra Knowles
Interim Dean of Counseling
David Rasul
Interim Dean of Counseling
John Ruden
Interim Vice President of Instruction
UPDATES
PLANNING
SCC Strategic Planning
• Revised planning system
implemented Sep 2007
• Many component parts and
revised processes
– Mission, Goals and continuous
process improvement
• Data driven, outcomeoriented system
– Annual Cycle
• Campus wide involvement
and understanding is
essential
• Training and information
game plan includes
– Flex Activities & Workshops
– Planning Brochure
– www.INSIDESCC Web Site
SCC Family of Plans
Strategic Master Plan
Institutional
Plans
Educational
Plan
Program
Plans
Resource Management
& Capital Outlay Plan
Staff Development
Education Centers
Information Tech
Operational
Unit Plans
Resource
Plans
Unit
Financial
Facilities
Safety, Security &
Environmental
Distance Education
Matriculation
Student Support
Services Plan
Student
Equity
Other Program Plans
Plans
Faculty
Classified
Staff
Information
Technology
Planning Cycle
Overview, Timelines and Key Components
DATA EVAL
- OUTCOMES
- SLOs/GELOs
- Environmental
Scans
- Student Surveys
- LRCCD Strategic
Plan
- Accreditation
Standards
- Effectiveness
Reports
- Metrics
- Program Review
Aug/Sep
Strategic
Master Plan
Family of
Plans
Strategic Goals
& Directions Set
Objectives Set
Resource Needs
Defined
Resource
Allocation
Plan
Implementation
1 Jul 20XX
FEEDBACK
Sep/Oct
Oct-Apr
May/June
SCC Annual College Plan
Mission
Data / Outcomes
College Goals
Unit Plans
Annual
College
Plan
Objectives
Outcomes
Program Plans
Objectives
Resource Allocation
Decisions
Execution
Budget Update
&
Modernization Projects
Fall 2009 Convocation
Bob Martinelli, VPA
21 August 2009
2009-10 College Budget
‘A Changing Picture’
• Feb ’09: CA Enacted Budget
– Two year deal—2008-2010
– correct $40B shortfall?
• May ’09: Governor’s ‘May Revise’
– Reveals $24B shortfall for 2009
– Cuts to CA Community Colleges severe
– Including reductions in FY 2008-09
• July ’09: CA Enacts Budget for 2009-10
–
–
–
–
–
Improved situation for CCC, but….
Reliance on Federal stimulus not clear
Significant changes by Governor before signing
Final numbers still pending; additional shortfalls?
Three-year problem at least—plan accordingly
Governor’s May Revise for
California Community Colleges
08-09
General Apportionment
Property tax shortfall
Apportionment reduction
Categorical Programs
TOTALS
-$42.1
-85.0*
09-10
-$116.0
-120.0
-354.2
-$127.1 -$697.2
*LRCCD Bill to pay = ~$4M
NOTE: May Revise numbers serve as basis for LRCCD
and SCC 2009-10 Budget Plan
- Updates pending and being worked
What it means for Los Rios
in 2009 - 2010
General Purpose Reduction $11,200,000
(July Update: $7.6M/+$3.6M)
Categorical Reduction
$13,922,000
(July Update: $9.5M/+$4.4M)
Relies on Federal Stimulus
Total
$25,122,000
Additional Increased Costs
Step & Column Increases
Medical Premiums
$2,300,000
2,700,000
Utilities Increase
290,000
Total
$5,290,000
Three Year Outlook
09-10: $30.4M
10-11: $36.1M
11-12: $43M
Finding a Balanced Solution
• Priorities: students and employees
• Focus on ‘Teaching and Learning’
• Available Resources
– Enterprise Funds, Bond Program (Type II)
– Carryover strategy to prepare for the next year
• Potential Savings
– Look for efficiencies in all processes
– Reduce where possible (temp help/travel)
• District Reserves
– May Revise will require substantial use
– Federal stimulus dollars a significant unknown
Sacramento City College Approach
• Utilize Strategic Planning System
• Feb ’09 Enacted Budget provided 2009-10 baseline budget
plan (President’s memo, March 2009)
• Adjustments based on ‘May Revise’ changes
– President’s memo, July 2009 (for 2009-10)
– Seek balanced reductions/savings based on mission/goal impacts
– Prepares for a three-year solution
• Categorical Programs: district working (-57% vs 32/16%)
– Federal stimulus dollars pending
– District Reserves will be needed
• Consider inter-related impacts
– Bond projects will continue
– Budget committee reserves
Source of Funds—Spread the Shortfall
24 June Update
Plan 09-10
CDF (-10%)
Instructionally
Related (-15%)
Out-of-state
Tuition
State Instr
Equip/LM (12)
State Lottery
Non-Instr
Equipment (12)
PFE (-10%)
Total
Categorical
Integration
Bookstore
Carryover
Previous Year
Unallocated
B/C Reserve
Total
Grand Total
Change to 0910 Plan
ADJ 09-10
10-11
11-12
2,709,689
2,559,800
2,303,820
2,303,820
200,000
170,000
170,000
170,000
189,800
63,300
63300
63300
183,927
323,850
0
323,850
0
300,000
0
300,000
181,027
323,246
4,111,539
60,343
290,921
3,468,214
60,342
290,921
3,188,383
60,342
290,921
3,188,383
254,832
125,000
150,000
200,000
100,000
100,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
26,365
0
556,197
26,365
0
426,365
0
0
300,000
0
0
300,000
4,667,736
3,894,579
3,488,383
3,488,383
-773,157
-1,179,353
-1,179,353
Spread the shortfall over three years
Commitments & Expenditures
With ‘spread’ & ATL Reductions & -20% Base/24 June Update
Plan 09-10
ADJ 09-10
10-11
11-12
Funds Available
4,667,736
3,894,579
3,488,383
3,488,383
spread
Base Allocations
CDF
IR
Lottery
Total
2,217,796
200,000
175,000
2,592,796
1,774,237
170,000
140,000
2,084,237
1,774,237
170,000
140,000
2,084,237
1,774,237
170,000
140,000
2,084,237
20%
380,217
342,217
340,217
354,698
223,000
672,937
4,223,648
343,998
213,000
600,700
3,584,152
324,698
190,000
572,937
3,512,089
444,088
310,427
-23,706
-23,706
200,000
31,000
31,000
Institutional
Expenses
Instructionally
Related
Students
Program Plans
Total
Budget Committee
BC Adjust
15%
20%
340,217 <38,40,40>
324,698 <11,30,30>
190,000 <10,30,30>
572,937 <66,100,100>
3,512,089
Summary & Conclusions
• Challenging fiscal climate dictates that we cannot
conduct ‘business as usual’
• Focus on the mission: students and learning!
• Reductions are essential to be able to work through
this period
• All must be involved with working the challenges
that are ahead of us
• 2009-10 budget allocations have been completed
– Working with DO on categorical program budgets
• Updates at least quarterly and/or whenever new
data is received
SCC Modernization Program
Leads to Better Student Access
• State and Local Bond Funds Utilized
– State Bond Funding: some uncertainty; FPPs drive schedule
(one/campus/year)
– Local Bonds: district discretion/plan
• Measure A / 2002 / $265M: Through Mohr Hall
• Measure M / 2008 / $475M: 2010 = First Sale
• LRCCD Fast Track Projects (SCC=Hughes)
– Assist with local economic recovery
• Facilities Master Plan—Update in 2009
– Focus on standards/themes (e.g. bike/ped friendly)
– Campus Development Committee Involved
• Some schedule challenges—’Work Together’
– ‘Swing Space’ impacts
– Cafeteria, Cosmetology, Technology, North Gym already
completed
Building Modernization Schedule
Education Centers
August 2009 Update
PROJECT
West Sacramento, Phase I
New construction 10,500 ASF
+ Third Floor
Davis Center, Phase I
West Village Site/ 14,000 ASF
Ground Breaking Occurred 10 August ‘09
CONSTRUCTION TIMING
June 08 - January 2010
(Grand Opening for Spring 2010)
February 2010 – August 2011
(Occupy October 2011)
West Sacramento Center
- Phase II
- Phase III
May 2014 – Dec 2015
April 2016 – Dec 2017
Davis Center
- Phase II
- Phase III
May 2014 – Dec 2015
May 2017 – Dec 2018
Working Together
Pursuing Excellence
Inspiring Achievement
Unit Plan Analysis
2009
Sacramento City College
Office of Planning, Research, & Institutional
Effectiveness (PRIE)
Marybeth Buechner, Jay Cull, Anne Danenberg, Rose Fassett, Alan Keys
2008-09 and 2009-10 Unit Plan Objectives
Overview

Goals 5 and 9 linked to the greatest number of
unit plan objectives in both years.


Goal 5: response to emerging community needs
Goal 9: learner-centered education

Unit plan objectives for both years include a wide
range of proposed activities.

Most 08-09 unit plan objectives were wholly or
partly achieved in that academic year.
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Number of objectives
SCC 09-10 Unit Plan Objectives: Distribution by
College Goal
9.
8.
7.
6.
5.
4.
3.
2.
1.
a
Le
-ce
d
re
y
uc
ed
it
rs
on
ati
tie
d
ee
s
n
ty
s
n
me
ve
ro
mp
ni
mu
i
us
uo
iv e
od
e
nt
t
se
on
er
rn
sp
Re
es
om
a li
od
/m
es
nt
me
ge
s
nt
de
tu
a
an
s it
oc
s
es
in
nt
co
c
ro
r
fo
fp
ta
Da
af
St
t
se
on
rs
tm
ls
e
tiv
il
sk
a
rn
sp
Re
te
Al
s ic
Ba
ea
ty
en
llm
ro
En
s
Fir
t
College goal
Unit plan objectives by activity
Student participation on campus
Professional development
Enrollment management
Student outcomes analysis
Collaboration across campus
Major curriculum actions
Outreach, response to community needs
Administrative process changes
Revised teaching methods
Student services processes
Data analysis
08-09
09-10
31
55
41
199
70
64
98
118
130
132
199
22
34
45
70
72
81
115
117
120
140
204
ud
en
En
tp
ro
ar
llm
tic
en
Pr
ip
at
of
tm
io
es
an
n
si
ag
on
em
M
al
aj
d
en
or
ev
t
Co
el
cu
op
lla
rr
ic
bo
m
ul
en
ra
um
t
tio
n
ac
ac
tio
ro
ns
Co
ss
m
ca
m
m
un
Ad
pu
i
t
s
m
y
i
o
n
ut
Re
is
re
tra
vi
ac
se
tiv
h
d
e
te
pr
ac
oc
hi
es
ng
s
m
St
et
ud
ho
en
ds
t
St
se
ud
rv
ic
en
es
to
ut
co
m
Da
es
ta
an
al
ys
is
St
Number of unit plan objectives
Number of 08-09 unit plan objectives achieved by type of activity
250
200
150
100
Yes
Partly
No
50
0
Type of Action
Working Together
Pursuing Excellence
Inspiring Achievement
Planning Data Highlights
2009
Sacramento City College
Office of Planning, Research, & Institutional
Effectiveness (PRIE)
Marybeth Buechner, Jay Cull, Anne Danenberg, Rose Fassett, Alan Keys
Sacramento City College Planning Data
Fall 2009
Institutional Effectiveness Report
 External Environment Data
 Enrollment Data*
 Course Offering Pattern Data
 Staff and Student Characteristic Data*
 Student Achievement Data*
 Institutional Process Data
*We will review some data from these areas today
SCC Enrollment Trends By
End of Semester Headcount
30,000
25,000
Fall 2004 to 2008
21,609
21,767
22,768
24,602
2004
2005
2006
2007
25,788
2008
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
Fall 2009: One week before classes start compared to last
fall at the same time
…unduplicated student enrollment is up 8.9
percent.
…total WSCH is up 4.1 percent.
Source: LRCCD EOS Research Data Files
Enrollment Data
SCC Students’ Primary Languages (Fall 2003
to Fall 2008)
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Spanish
Cantonese
Russian
Vietnamese
Fall 03
559
418
297
280
Fall 04
756
609
474
395
Fall 05
820
581
522
400
Fall 06
894
574
453
369
Fall 07
889
578
553
352
Fall 08
951
536
543
302
Source: End of Semester Profile
Student Characteristic Data
SCC Student Household Income
Level Fall 2008
Unable to
Determine
21%
Mid or Above
30%
Below
Poverty
30%
Low Income
19%
Student Characteristic Data
Note: This measure uses U.S. Department of Health and Human Services definitions for income levels.
Source: End of Semester Profile
SCC Successful Course Completion
Fall 2002 to Fall 2008
75
70
65
Percent
Successful
60
55
50
45
40
All Students
Source: LRCCD Research Website
Fall
2002
Fall
2003
Fall
2004
Fall
2005
Fall
2006
Fall
2007
Fall
2008
63.6
64.2
65.1
65.7
63.9
63.7
66.5
Student Achievement Data
Achievement Gaps
Course success rates 50-60% for
 Students in developmental Math courses
 Students in developmental Reading courses
 First-time college students
 African American students
Course success rates under 50% for
 First-time college students in DE classes
Student Achievement Data
Academic Expectations

Over two-thirds (68%) of students rated their
exams as moderately to extremely challenging
(score of 5-7).

Nearly half (49%) of students report that they
often or very often work harder than they
thought that they could.

Over one fifth (21%) of students responded that
they had never prepared two or more drafts of a
paper or assignment before turning it in.
Source: Fall 2008 CCSSE Data
Student Achievement Data
General Skills Outcomes
Experiences at the college helped quite a bit
or very much with…
 Acquiring broad general education = 65.9%
 Writing clearly and effectively = 55.2%
 Speaking clearly and effectively = 49.3%
 Thinking critically and analytically = 64.6%
 Solving numerical problems = 51.4%
Source: Fall 2008 CCSSE Data
Student Achievement Data
PRIE
Planning Research and Institutional Effectiveness
Sacramento City College
INSTRUCTION
BUDGET AND FACILITIES
SCC West
Sacramento Center
West Sacramento on the
Go!!!
Current Location
Ground Breaking May 29, 2008
Construction
August 2008
Construction
December 2008
Construction
February 2009
Construction
May 2009
Construction
August 2009
Art Classroom1st Floor
Transit Center
Yolo Bus
Architect Rendering
More to follow……
ACCREDITATION
Standard I
• Implemented a strategic planning system that
integrates planning and resource allocation
processes
• Annual review of College mission, goals, and
outcomes
• Renewed focus on student success data:
Ed Initiative project
Noel Levitz and CSSEE surveys
Broad data reviews and projects
Standard II
• Substantial progress in developing SLOs for courses,
programs, student services, and general education
SLO assessment activities across departments
and areas
• Increased course offerings at the Centers and
through Distance Education
• Enhanced student support and learning support
services to DE and to Center students
• Strong program review processes in instruction,
student services, and learning support services
Standard III
• Successfully hired a large number of new faculty
and staff during the past 6 years; smoothly
transitioned to an online application system
• College master plan for modernization and new
building construction that includes new centers in
West Sacramento and Davis
• Implemented a replacement cycle for IT; converted
to new Learning Management System
• District’s long-standing commitment to fiscal stability
is proving vitally important in current State budget
crisis
Standard IV
• Strong participatory decision-making processes:
Unique commitment to tri-chairs (faculty, classified,
manager) leadership structure for College activities
ASG and student participation
• Excellent leadership from the Board of Trustees
• Effective collaborative relationships between
District Office and the College