ACCJC Task Force
for District
Recommendations
Agenda

Review purpose of the Task Force

Clarify and agree to the scope of the process

Collectively agree to goals of the Task Force

Review Progress on Recommendation #1 & 4

Review Progress on Recommendation #2

Review Progress on Recommendation #3

Next Steps
Scope

Scope is limited to:
 ACCJC
District Recommendations;
 Addressing
specific concerns/recommendations
made by the visiting teams

Scope does not cover:
 College
 District
team;

recommendations;
concerns not raised by the ACCJC/visiting
Items out of scope will go to a parking lot
Goal

Develop a tactical plan that will enable us to completely satisfy the ACCJC
District Recommendations with evidence to support our addressing the
recommendations and satisfying the standards;

Develop a tactical plan that “WE ALL” believe can satisfy the ACCJC
District Recommendations;

Work as a team to communicate the work that has and will be done to reinstill confidence in our colleges’ and district’s ability to serve our
community;

Develop a monitoring process that “WE ALL” believe is accurate, timely,
meaningful, and transparent.
District Recommendation #1 & 4
District Recommendation #1

In order to meet the standards, the team recommends that
the Board of Trustees examine its role in the development
of policies and ensure that it acts in a manner consistent
with its approved policies and bylaws. The team further
recommends that the Board of Trustees take steps to
ensure that all policies are developed or revised within the
framework of the established input and participation
process.
District Recommendation #4

In order to improve effectiveness, the team
recommends that the District develop a local
Board orientation program to ensure that all
members of the Board are adequately prepared
to provide leadership appropriate to their role as
Board members
1.1 What Triggered the Findings?

Lack of systematic and ongoing review of Board
Policies/Administrative Procedures within specified timeline;
 No
policy review in place for at least 4 years;
 Last
minute rush to do all BP/AP means that reviews could not
be done in a meaningful way;
 AP6610
did not go through the agreed to process. It was
rushed through based on “business necessity;”
 Chancellor’s
evaluation process – Used a different process
than was in BP/AP and then approved new process after the
fact
1.1 What needs to be done?

Need to define timeline and systematic process for BP/AP review
(timing should be specific and achievable)
 Monitor
and track progress
 Clearly
defined and communicated
 Subject
expert review and tracking
 Overall
tracking via checklist
 Track
rationale for any changes
 Watch
 Need
for conflict with other BP/AP
to make sure “current” policies available online
 Should
be included in Board self-evaluation
1.1 Status

Define timeline and systematic process for BP/AP review
 6 year review cycle done by chapter;
 Designated chapter owners;
 Track
 When
last approved, subject experts necessary, check for
conflicts with other BP/APs, and rationale for changes
 Executive Secretary oversees tracking and posting on web
 BP/AP updated to codify process changes

Going through collegial consultation process via District Assembly
Tracking Tool
Chapter Owners

Responsibility for the review process is as follows:

Chapter 1: Chancellor and Board of Trustees

Chapter 2: Chancellor and Board of Trustees

Chapter 3: Chancellor and Chancellor’s Cabinet

Chapter 4: Vice-Presidents of Instruction, Student Services, and
Academic Senate Presidents

Chapter 5: Vice-Presidents of Instruction, Student Services, and
Academic Senate Presidents

Chapter 6: Vice-Chancellor of Fiscal Services and Vice-Presidents of
Administrative Services

Chapter 7: Vice-Chancellor of Human Resources
1.1 What evidence will be provided?

Use Collegial Consultation process to develop BP/AP on BP/AP
development/review process to develop/review/monitor

Minutes

Draft/Completed BP/AP

Checklist

Comment form for BP/AP

Campus Awareness

Show that we have gone through/starting process
1.2 What triggered the findngs?

Currently, no locally structured training or orientation.
Every trustee needs to know and follow their Board
BP/APs. Need to know time sensitive BP/APs; No
evidence of local, structured, and/or comprehensive
training.

President of Board of Trustees should make sure the
Board is following BP/APs. There is no specific Board
President training.
1.2 What needs to be done?

Board Training
 Board
Handbook
 Develop

Board Board Learning Outcomes (BLOs)
Develop local Board President Training which should
be included in overall Board Handbook/Training
1.2 & 1.3 Status

Board Handbook
 Revised
to include linkage between Community
College League of California (CCLC) Board of
Trustees training and SBCCD specific training;
 Specific
topic list (BLOs) outlined and will be updated
regularly;
 Board
members sign off to verify they have received
training;
 Board
President and Chancellor specified as being
responsible for ensuring the training of new trustees;
Board Training Topics

Missions


Organizational Charts


San Bernardino Community College District


San Bernardino Valley College


Crafton Hills College


Board Imperatives & Goals


Board Imperatives


Board Goals


About the Board of Trustees


Board Membership

Election of Student Trustees


Board of Trustee Meetings
Communication Protocol
Campus Visits
Board Planning and Evaluation
Accreditation
Foundations
Collegial Consultation
Groups on Campus
Graduation
Board Policies & Procedures
Walking tours of the district, campuses, and
off-site locations
Board Training Topics








Institutional data review
College history and development, and
college catalogs
Lists and contact information for trustees,
college personnel, and student leaders
Structure and operations of board of
trustees
Structure of higher education at the state
level
Briefings on organization, programs,
budget, and facilities of the colleges and
sites
Collegial Consultation, inclusive of 10+1
Board handbook, meeting agendas, and
minutes

Affirmative action plans

Printed college materials

Opportunities to meet informally with
campus leaders and faculty, staff, students,
administrators, and fellow trustees

Email records disclosure responsibilities

Attendance at local, state and national
meetings, including the League’s New
Trustee Orientation Workshop and
Legislative Conference

Review of pertinent laws and board policy

Board Budget
1.2 What evidence will be provided?

Training plan
 New Board hand book
 New BP/AP
 Training plan
 Minutes
 Systematic vs one-time
 Develop list of base knowledge and include in policy
 No violations
 College surveys
 Board Self-Evaluation
District Recommendation #2
District Recommendation #2

In order to meet the standards, the team recommends that the Board of
Trustees, and the Chancellor, in consultation with the leadership of the
college campuses, develop a strategy for addressing significant issues to
improve the effectiveness of district human resource services that
support the colleges in their missions and functions. These issues include:
 Reliable
data from the Human Resources department to support
position control and other human resources functions;
 Timeliness
of employee evaluations
 Responsiveness
 Consistent
and improved timelines for employee hiring;
policy interpretation and guidance; and
 Completion
of the faculty evaluation instrument to include work on
Student Learning Outcomes.
District Recommendation #3
District Recommendation #3

In order to meet the standards, the team
recommends that the District follow their Resource
Allocation Model focusing on transparency and
inclusiveness, supported by a comprehensive districtwide Enrollment Management Plan and a Human
Resource/Staffing Plan integrated with other districtwide programs and financial plans, broadly
communicated to the colleges.
What Triggered the Findings?

Lack of communication as evidenced by raises being approved
before notifying colleges of budget impact (no details shows on
who got raises, retro pay, or impact on planning);

Lack of constituent understanding of new floating allocation model
vs. “70-30 split;”

Lack of communication prior to modification of budgets;
What Triggered the Findings?

Inconsistent use of numbers for Full Time Equivalent Student (FTES)
assumptions;

Lack of communication from budget committee members to the
college constituents they are representing;

Lack of leadership in implementing resource allocation model;

Lack of clarity in budget numbers provided and issues impacting
numbers.
What needs to be done?

Though Board AP2610 (Presentation of Initial Collective Bargaining Proposals)
as amended requires the Chancellor to provide advanced notice and
forecasts to the Board of Trustees, there is also a need to provide the colleges
with scenarios in advance, capitalizing on use of the campus budget
committees;

Need documented process, guidelines, and training on how to implement
resource allocation model, using “Guiding Principles” (e.g. SBVC must stay
above 10,000 FTE, CHC needs to become financially self-sufficient.) and there is
a need for the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor of Fiscal Services to promote
approved resource allocation model consistently and transparently;
What needs to be done?

Need to develop and use District Enrollment
Management Plan;

Quarterly Newsletter from District Budget Committee
and campus presentations;

Provide realistic scenarios in advance and adjust budget
calendar to facilitate forecasting for the colleges.
What evidence will be provided?

Administrative Procedure AP 2610

Minutes from various constituency groups of Chancellor and ViceChancellor promoting resource allocation model

District Budget Committee Recommendations

Agendas from College/District Business & Fiscal Services meetings

District Budget Committee Agenda with minutes
What evidence will be provided?

Enrollment Management Task Force - Recommendation to DBC for FY
15-16

2015-07-16 Tentative vs Final FTES Distribution Growth

May 28, 2015 Board Study Session - Preliminary Budget Presentation

Chancellor’s Chat Newsletter

Budget Book

September 8, 2015 Board Study Session – Final Budget Presentation
District Recommendation #4