board of trustees – study session no closed session – no ... · v. presentation – auto...

H.C.C.D – BOARD OF TRUSTEES RETREAT – JUNE 6, 2011 of 1

H A R T N E L L C O M M U N I T Y C O L L E G E D I S T R I C T

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.

AGENDA ITEM FOR BOARD MEETING OF: June 7, 2011 Title Approve to Discontinue Auto Collision Program

Number III. C.

Area Superintendent/President Prepared by: Dr. Phoebe K. Helm

Status 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.

L A B OR MA R K E T R EP OR T

AUTO COLLISION OCCUPATIONS

HARTNELL COLLEGE

A U GU S T , 2 0 1 0

CENTER OF EXCELLENCE

Central Valley Region

Modesto Junior College

435 College Avenue

Modesto, CA 95350

(209) 575-6908

[email protected]

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

Real-time data to advance California Community Colleges 3

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



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 City

95012 Castroville

95039 Moss Landing

93907 Prunedale

95076 Watsonville1

93905

93906

93907

93901

93902

93903

93912

93915

Salinas

93962 Spreckels

93925 Chualar

93926 Gonzales

93927 Greenfield

93928 Jolon

93930 King City

93932 Lockwood

93450 San Ardo

93954 San Lucas

93960 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.



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 entry-level 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

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 Source: EMSI Complete Data 3 Source: North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/sssd/naics/naicsrch

92%

8%

Automotive body and related repairers

Automotive glass installers and repairers



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

4 Source: EMSI Complete Data, 2010 5 Source: Info USA 6 Source: ESRI Business Analyst Software



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

Table 3 –Auto Collision Repair Occupations, Monterey County

SOC Code SOC Description 2009

Jobs

5 year job

openings

Replacement

jobs (5 years)

% Change (5

year job need)

2009 Median

Hourly

Earnings

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

7 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/oco/pdf/ocos180.pdf 8 Source: EMSI Complete Data 2010 9 Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, http://www.bls.gov/oco/pdf/ocos180.pdf

SOC Code SOC Description 2009

Jobs

5 year new

job

openings

Replacement

jobs

% Change (5

year job need)

2009 Median

Hourly

Earnings

49-3021 Automotive body and related repairers 101 1 17 18% $26.85

49-3022 Automotive glass installers and repairers 9 0 3 33% $25.79

Totals 110 1 20 18% $26.32



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

Table 5 – Living Wage Calculations10

, Monterey County

10 Source: The Living Wage Calculator, Pennsylvania State University, http://www.livingwage.geog.psu.edu/counties/06053 11 A family of three includes 2 adults and 1 child

Occupation Average hourly

earnings

10 percentile wages

(entry level, no training)

25 percentile

wages

75 percentile

wages

90 percentile

wages

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) $28.94 $13.98 $19.34 $35.50 $48.16

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



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



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.

http://www.coeccc.net/

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

Prepared By: Esteban Soriano, Ph.D. Applied Development Resources California

Revised May 2011

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: Main Reasons for Taking AUC Courses ....................................................................................................... 4 T II: Did Student Ever Formally Declare Intent to Pursue AUC Degree or Certificate? ...................................... 5 T III: Main reasons Completers (Degree or Certificate Holders) Pursued an AUC Degree ................................. 6 T IV: Main Reasons Students (Non Completers) Stopped Taking AUC Courses ................................................. 6 T V: Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Upon Entering AUC Program ................................... 8 T VI: Employment in AUC Field Within 3 Months of Completing AUC Courses .................................................. 8 T VII: Reasons for Not Securing Employment in AUC within 3 months of Completing AUC Courses .................. 9 T VIII: Employment and Earnings History of AUC Students Employment in AUC Field ...................................... 10 T IX: Employment of All AUC Students as of January 2011 and Reasons for No AUC Employment ................. 11 T X: 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


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


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-in-three 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)

% # Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent

74% 47 Exploring what AUC was all about 51% 32 Get or prepare for a job in AUC field 38% 24 Work on personal vehicle that needed body work 25% 16 Get a degree or certificate in AUC 19% 12 Interested in AUC only as a hobby or personal enrichment 11% 7 Training in order to undertake AUC tasks at work (a mechanic or handyman) 10% 6 Other (For step increase at work, retirement activity, as an elective, etc.) 5% 3 Open up own auto body repair shop someday 5% 3 Already working in AUC and needed more training for job 2% 1 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)

# Response

14 Yes to certificate and/or degree 2 Did not recall 47 Did not declare intent for AUC degree or certificate Why Not? (N=47)

25% Interested in AUC as a hobby, personal enrichment, not career 17% Tried AUC course(s) then switched to another field of study 17% Determined that AUC was not for them and stopped taking any classes 15% Other: (still in H.S., lived long distance, needed 1 class for work, etc.) 13% Did not seek out program info regarding degree/certificate options 10% Remained undecided if AUC was right career for me 4% 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)

% All Reasons Mentioned

33% To get or prepare for a job in AUC and knew degree/cert. would help 33% Wanted AUC degree/cert as a “fall back” career to current career 33% 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)

% Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent Barriers: 41% Scheduling or course availability 31% Work time conflict 17% Financial aid 5% Transportation Personal: 14% Personal/life issues/other (family, legal, etc.) 8% AUC not for me so switched to another field/program 3% Moved out of the area 3% Could not devote the time to finish formal program 2% Received training/education needed for work or career Hobby: 12% Finished car project 8% AUC was always a hobby, personal enrichment, one elective course AUC not for me: 17% Decided that AUC was not field for me 12% Informed AUC was ending so switched to another program or stopped Other: 5% Got a job (not in AUC field) 5% Already working in AUC and needed more training for job 2% 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)

# Category If Employed, What Employment Field: AUC Field Non AUC Field FT PT FT PT 24 Not employed -- -- -- -- 39 Employed → 4 3 (= 7) 18 14 (= 32)

Earnings of Employed Students Upon Entering AUC Program (N=39)

Hourly wage Number of students earning this hourly wage

$ 7-9/hr 20 students earned this hourly wage $ 10-19/hr 7 students $ 20-30/hr 6 students $ 31+/hr 1 student Did Not Answer 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)

# Students Who Secured AUC job Within 3 Months of Completing Courses

3 Employed in AUC job after completing courses 60 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%)

% # Reason Mentioned By Each Respondent

34% 22 Did not take enough AUC courses to be qualified for an AUC job 20% 13 Already had a good job/career and stayed with it 15% 10 Not interested in an AUC career or job 8% 5 Looked, but no AUC jobs were available/my AUC shop closed 6% 4 AUC was always a hobby and not intended as career 6% 4 Changed to another major and continued schooling 5% 3 Was still a full-time student and not in job market 3% 2 Have remained unemployed for various reasons 2% 1 Got a job in another field not related to AUC 2% 1 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

Upon entering Within 3 months after Today Student type AUC program completing courses (1/2011)

Attendee 7 3 3 Near completer 0 0 0 Completer 0 0 0

Earnings of Students Employed in AUC Field After Completing Courses and Today

Within 3 months after Today completing courses (1/2011) Employment category/position (N=3) (N=3)

Collision technician $ 12/hr $ 17/hr Shop owner $30/hr $30-40+/hr Self-employed (welder) $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 self-employed 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)

% # Employment Status as of January 2011

41% 26 Not employed 59% 37 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% 14 Got a non AUC job 31% 11 Did not take enough AUC courses to be qualified for an AUC job 14% 5 Already had a good non AUC job/career and stayed with it 8% 3 Still in school/training for different field or career 6% 2 AUC was always a hobby, not for me, no intentions to enter field, etc. 3% 1 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 self-employed 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 Gunter-Madsen 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)

% Grade

65% A 32% B 2% C 2% D

3.6 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) Secondary Criteria (any 3 plus 1 primary)

• Declining market/industry demand • Declining university transfer trends*

• Advisory Committee recommendation • Insufficient frequency of course offerings to assure reasonable opportunity for completion of the program

• Decreasing numbers of students

enrolled* • Lack of available resources

• Low or decreasing WSCH/FTEF* • 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

• Decline in importance of service to related disciplines (applies only when discipline does not offer degree or certificate).

• Poor term-to-term persistence for students in the major*

*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 • Enrollment • Match of program with Hartnell Mission and Vision • Retention within course (successful course

completion) • Student satisfaction • Retention within major (semester-to-semester

persistence) • Previous steps taken to strengthen program • 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 • Labor demand • Employer satisfaction • Employment placement rate • Advisory committee recommendation • Information about “job-outs”

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 • Industry/ market demand (non-vocational programs) • Impact of program on underrepresented and female

students

Statewide Discontinuance Process Page 3

Adopted by Hartnell College Board of Trustees: April 2001

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.

Hartnell Community College

Tentative Budget

Fiscal Year 2011‐2012

June 7, 2011

Hartnell Community College

Fiscal Year 2011‐2012 Tentative Budget

Executive Summary Table of Contents

Contents Page Introduction 1‐2

General Fund Unrestricted 3 Restricted 4‐6

Other Funds Special Revenue Fund 7‐8 Capital Projects Fund 9‐11 Enterprise Fund 12 Internal Service Fund 13‐14 Trust and Agency Fund 15‐16

Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget

Budget Page 1

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.

Unaudited

Beginning Budgets 2011-2012 Ending

Funds Fund Balance Fund Balance

July 1, 2011 Revenue Expense June 30, 2012

General

Unrestricted 8,609,107$ 32,835,138$ 33,979,899$ 7,464,940$

Restricted 883,900 19,269,335 19,269,335 883,900

Total 9,493,007$ 52,104,473$ 53,249,234$ 8,348,840$

Special Revenue

Bookstore 1,190,361 175,000 115,000 1,250,361

Child Development 262,162 643,750 643,750 262,162

Total 1,452,523$ 818,750$ 758,750$ 1,512,523$

Capital Projects

Capital Outlay 4,262,695 29,000 412,000 3,879,695

State Capital Match 24,741 24,741

Property Acquisition 3,254,691 300,000 60,000 3,494,691

Bond Projects 42,516,269 220,000 8,026,200 34,710,069

Total 50,058,396$ 549,000$ 8,498,200$ 42,109,196$

Enterprise

Cafeteria 311,392 322,600 319,400 314,592

Total 311,392$ 322,600$ 319,400$ 314,592$

Internal Service

Self Insured 1,018,039 8,200 140,000 886,239

Retiree Health Benefits 3,764,186 465,300 375,000 3,854,486

Total 4,782,225$ 473,500$ 515,000$ 4,740,725$

Trust and Agency

Associated Students 580,507 90,000 120,050 550,457

Scholarships, Loan & Trust 106,598 800 5,000 102,398

Intercollegiate Athletics 122,606 35,000 42,000 115,606

Total 809,711$ 125,800$ 167,050$ 768,461$

All Funds Total 66,907,254$ 54,394,123$ 63,507,634$ 57,794,337$


Budget Page 2

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

* P-2 Estimate

**Advanced Estimate

$31,810,232 $33,526,858

$35,471,168 $34,692,917 $35,210,778

$31,074,179

$-

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

$30,000,000

$35,000,000

$40,000,000

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11* 2011-12**


Budget Page 3

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 one-time resources and may be used strategically to fund one-time investments and requirements.

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 FTES workload. The budget 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.

General Fund Unrestricted Requirements

Student Fees6%

State General Fund38%

Other State2%

Property Tax53%

Other 1%

Academic Salaries

39%

Classified Salaries

22%

Benefits21%

Supplies1%

Operating16%

Capital1%


Budget Page 4

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.

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12

Actual Actual Revised Forecast Tentative

Federal

VTEA Title II Tech Prep 81,405$ 67,750$ 69,708$ 69,708$ 69,708$

Tech Prep California Dept Ed 100,000 100,000

SEOG 130,830 118,335 161,884 161,884 138,831

Foster and Kinship Care Education 140,341 147,632 147,173 141,102 141,102

National Institute of Health 11,811 13,476 12,000 12,000 12,000

Child Develop. Training 10,000 10,029 11,221 10,000 10,000

NASA SEMAA 125,000

TRIO

Future Teacher Transfer Program 134,918

Workability III 137,716 201,190 201,347 130,000

NSF TULE 10,970 - -

Student Support Services (TRIO) 224,535 271,526 259,771 194,047 203,521

Gear Up Soledad 130,997 - -

Gear Up Salinas 912,248 723,382 1,863,995 1,079,556 1,183,583

HS Equivalance Program 400,909 328,109 665,053 358,762 203,204

Child Care Access 34,087 13,665 60,279 32,000 36,972

First 5 Contract - 9,895 10,000 10,000 89,834

America Reads 11,130

Child Care Food Program 8,126 8,479 21,194 11,000

TANF 45,010 69,339 55,532 55,532 45,561

Pell Grants 5,516,418 7,772,909 9,779,084 10,234,837 10,000,000

Title V Gavilan/Hartnell 794,565 726,530 978,803 675,000 713,000

CCRAA-CSUMB 18,259 70,904 130,837 90,042

Title V STEM 346,828 803,172 525,000 575,000

CCRAA-Math and Science 737,649 926,624 143,175 143,175

Federal Work Study 116,571 166,898 138,929 138,929 140,035

SBDC UC Merced 30,427

NSF Student Success 5,025

Nat'l Serv Awards Scholars 82,272 44,125 50,000 35,000 25,000

Dept. of Social & Empl. Services 325,260 408,029 404,220 404,220 402,108

YESS - ILP 22,500 15,728

Probation Dept Contract 25,775

Probation 31,300

CSUMB Seamless Agri. Mgmt 30,699

NSF-STEM - 23,750 140,000 75,000 140,000

NSF Women/Latino STEP 224,136 177,735 171,843 121,843 50,000

NSF MBRACE 35,690 4,668 25,000

NSF CCLI 2,481 47,519 20,000

Academic Competiveness Grant 37,650 101,227 74,965 104,000 50,000

B.T.O.P. 659,246 466,136 193,110

VTEA 272,927 262,217 294,932 262,217 219,932

Workforce Investment Grant 48,345 5,655

Renovation & Repair Grant 20,000 10,000

Agri. Tech Training (WIB) 132,889

Clean Energy 368,736 631,126 631,125

ARRA Allocation 218,747 24,841 24,841

Direct Loans 243,543 297,523 250,000

TOTAL FEDERAL 10,665,236$ 13,831,856$ 18,402,560$ 16,665,207$ 15,017,501$

Restricted Funds


Budget Page 5

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12

Actual Audited Revised Forecast Tentative

State

Matriculation Program 543,579$ 236,803$ 309,135$ 309,134$ 241,300$

EOPS 737,390 540,401 485,958 481,885 457,791

Financial Aid Administration 290,520 301,435 293,106 293,106 288,427

CARE 163,772 102,321 109,449 109,449 95,376

Cal Grants 439,661 451,411 471,100 471,000 400,000

DSP&S 576,978 320,380 360,910 360,910 307,608

Foster and Kinship Care Education 46,780 49,211 37,963 47,034 47,034

CA Articulation Number (CAN) 3,481 519

Lottery Prop 20 69,704 201,141 150,000 168,341 120,000

TTIP Telecommunications 64,547 7,001

MESA 73,033 50,568 50,500 50,500

Nursing Enrollment Growth 89,687 89,687

CTE Nursing Equipment 53,817 18,871 -

CTE Nursing Enrollment 195,631 155,733 40,031 40,031

CTE Nursing Remediation 40,333

CTE Linking After School 69,809 225,368 78,811 78,811

IDRC Sustainable Construction 147,935 103,215 75,099 75,098

IDRC Food Safety Tech 78,026 101,520

CTE Community Collaborative #1 164,461 205,239

CTE Community Collaborative #2 38,910 88,510 272,580

CTE Community Collaborative #3 6,299 303,701 210,000 400,000

CTE ROP Supplemental 272,580

IDRC Sustainable Design 183,600 135,000 166,400

IDRC Media & Entertainment 205,000 160,000 205,000

CALWORKS 280,298 183,213 181,259 181,259 183,213

Equal Employment Opportunity 47,023 500 5,000

Small Business Development 116,056 74,393

EWD Career Pathways 232 49,768

Coding Specialist Grant 70,083

YESS-ILP 22,482 22,500

Faculty/Staff Development 5,591 3,988 8,145

Faculty/Staff Diversity 4,868 6,556

Block Grant 108,164 364,836

Basic Skills 138,311 69,154 158,361 71,361 176,067

TOTAL STATE 4,521,970$ 3,940,336$ 3,911,418$ 3,605,686$ 3,115,716$

Local

Health Occupations Donations

SVMHCS 390,119 409,881 409,881 400,000

California Endowment 107,550

Lumina 24,667 40,129 40,128 33,622

Planetarium Foundation 4,117

Song Brown 62,479 32,000 50,000

SBDC Greenfield RDA

Agri. Tech Foundation 185,559 278,355 653,585 315,000 269,946

Parking Lot Improvement 160,415 53,057 375,000 291,822 275,000

TOTAL LOCAL 345,974$ 750,315$ 1,541,074$ 1,088,831$ 1,136,118$

TOTAL FEDERAL, STATE, and LOCAL 15,533,180$ 18,522,507$ 23,855,052$ 21,359,724$ 19,269,335$

Restricted Funds


Budget Page 6

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


General FundUnrestricted (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


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 53,869,737$ 55,560,297$ 59,022,272$ 58,374,498$ 52,104,473$

Requirements 53,215,785$ 54,652,001$ 59,019,272$ 54,323,080$ 53,249,234$


Budget Page 7

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.

$175,000

$115,000

$643,750 $643,750

$-

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

Revenue Expense Revenue Expense

Bookstore Child Development


Budget Page 8

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Special Revenue FundBookstore

Resources

Federal

State

Local 165,523 159,043 180,000 170,000 175,000

Transfers In

Total Resources 165,523$ 159,043$ 180,000$ 170,000$ 175,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries

Payroll Costs/Benefits

Supplies and Materials

Operating Expenses 150

Capital Outlay

Transfers Out 113,891 111,965 115,000 115,000 115,000

Total Requirements 114,041$ 111,965$ 115,000 115,000 115,000

Child Development

Resources

Federal

State 639,191 692,721 696,273 594,604 595,000

Local 28,781 21,087 5,000 49,152 48,750

Transfers In

Total Resources 667,972$ 713,808$ 701,273$ 643,756$ 643,750$

Requirements

Academic Salaries 9,569 -

Classified Salaries 477,362 384,969 498,929 477,575 477,575

Payroll Costs/Benefits 150,000 128,694 161,984 145,006 145,000


Operating Expenses 14,900 7,364 16,850 11,175 11,175

Capital Outlay 6,000 1,215 4,500 -

Transfers Out

Total Requirements 667,972$ 549,241$ 701,273$ 643,756$ 643,750$

Total Special Revenue Fund

Resources 833,495$ 872,851$ 881,273$ 813,756$ 818,750$

Requirements 782,013$ 661,206$ 816,273$ 758,756$ 758,750$


Budget Page 9

Capital Projects Fund $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.

$29,000

$412,000

$300,000

$60,000

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000


Capital Outlay Property

$220,000

$8,026,200

$-

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

$9,000,000


State Capital Match Bond Projects


Budget Page 10

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Capital Projects Fund Capital Outlay

Resources

Federal

State

Local 22,677 93,506 26,000 28,500 29,000

Transfers In 3,820,000 550,000 550,000

Total Resources 22,677$ 3,913,506$ 576,000$ 578,500$ 29,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries




Capital Outlay 10,543 38,137 175,810 175,810 300,000

Transfers Out


Property Acquisition

Resources

Federal

State

Local 182,406 368,365 270,000 295,000 300,000

Transfers In

Total Resources 182,406$ 368,365$ 270,000$ 295,000$ 300,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries -

Classified Salaries -

Payroll Costs/Benefits -



Capital Outlay 38,940 51,575 20,000 10,000

Transfers Out -

Total Requirements 29,113 82,020 110,000 78,000 60,000


Budget Page 11

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Capital Projects Fund, continuedState Capital Match

Resources

Federal

State 10,171,263 2,717,185 7,694,542 1,500,000

Local 19,152 20,000 8,600

Transfers In

Total Resources 10,171,263$ 2,736,337$ 7,714,542$ 1,508,600$ -$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries



Operating Expenses 83,820 -

Capital Outlay 10,087,443 2,717,185 7,709,542 1,500,000 -

Transfers Out - 3,011 6,000 - -

Total Requirements 10,171,263$ 2,720,196$ 7,715,542$ 1,500,000$

Bond Projects

Resources

Federal

State

Local 11,761,955 49,270,681 480,000 220,000 220,000

Transfers In

Total Resources 11,761,955$ 49,270,681$ 480,000$ 220,000$ 220,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries 23,686 56,390

Classified Salaries 32 18,500 18,500 18,500


Supplies and Materials -

Operating Expenses -

Capital Outlay 13,891,330 20,466,681 19,980,700 19,980,700 8,000,000

Transfers Out

Total Requirements 13,924,767$ 20,540,484$ 20,005,899$ 20,005,899$ 8,026,200$

Total Capital Projects Fund

Resources 22,138,301$ 56,288,889$ 9,040,542$ 2,602,100$ 549,000$

Requirements 24,367,893$ 23,434,106$ 28,081,441$ 21,826,749$ 8,498,200$


Budget Page 12

Enterprise Fund $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.

$322,600 $319,400

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

Revenue Expense

Cafeteria

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Enterprise FundCafeteria

Resources

Federal

State

Local 355,569 307,193 291,700 245,000 322,600

Transfers In

Total Resources 355,569$ 307,193$ 291,700$ 245,000$ 322,600$

Requirements

Academic Salaries -

Classified Salaries 210,511 189,091 159,684 158,500 179,062




Capital Outlay 984

Transfers Out -


Total Enterprise Fund

Resources 355,569$ 307,193$ 291,700$ 245,000$ 322,600$

Requirements 408,122$ 368,939$ 307,600$ 294,150$ 319,400$


Budget Page 13

Internal Service Fund $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.

$8,200

$140,000

$465,300

$375,000

$-

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

$500,000


Self Insured Retiree Health


Budget Page 14

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Internal Service FundSelf Insured

Resources

Federal

State

Local (57,172) 92,037 20,000 8,200 8,200

Transfers In 180,000

Total Resources 122,828$ 92,037$ 20,000$ 8,200$ 8,200$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries




Capital Outlay

Transfers Out


Retiree Health Benefits

Resources

Federal

State

Local 8,937 18,874 18,000 5,300 5,300

Transfers In 2,140,000 710,000 250,000 460,000

Total Resources 8,937$ 2,158,874$ 728,000$ 255,300$ 465,300$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries

Payroll Costs/Benefits 350,000 350,000 375,000


Operating Expenses

Capital Outlay

Transfers Out

Total Requirements -$ -$ 350,000$ 350,000$ 375,000$

Total Internal Service Fund

Resources 131,765$ 2,250,911$ 748,000$ 263,500$ 473,500$

Requirements 75,353$ 71,471$ 440,000$ 483,000$ 515,000$


Budget Page 15

Trust and Agency Fund $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.

$90,000

$120,050

$800 $5,000

$35,000 $42,000

$-

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

Revenue Expense Revenue Expense Revenue Expense

Associated Students Scholarships Loan/Trust Athletics

gecy

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Trust and Agency FundAssociated Students

Resources

Federal

State

Local 72,940 69,157 77,000 73,000 75,000

Transfers In 13,741 11,965 15,000 15,000 15,000

Total Resources 86,681$ 81,122$ 92,000$ 88,000$ 90,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries 158 7,702 37,482 37,482 23,850

Payroll Costs/Benefits 3 - 10,834 10,625 10,700

Supplies and Materials 1,265 742 8,500 8,500 5,000


Capital Outlay 2,809 5,008 5,000 3,000 5,000

Transfers Out -



Budget Page 16

Fund Type 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12


Trust and Agency FundScholarships/Loan Trust

Resources

Federal

State

Local (2,524) 4,738 4,000 2,100 800

Transfers In

Total Resources (2,524)$ 4,738$ 4,000$ 2,100$ 800$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries




Capital Outlay

Transfers Out


Athletics

Resources

Federal

State

Local 13,410 21,533 22,000 35,000 35,000

Transfers In 100,000

Total Resources 13,410$ 121,533$ 22,000$ 35,000$ 35,000$

Requirements

Academic Salaries

Classified Salaries




Capital Outlay

Transfers Out


Total Trust and Agency Fund

Resources 97,567$ 207,393$ 118,000$ 125,100$ 125,800$

Requirements 139,773$ 97,065$ 159,676$ 162,200$ 167,050$

AGENDA ITEM FOR BOARD MEETING OF: June 7, 2011

Title Approve Tentative Budget for 2011-2012, Set Date and Time for Public Hearing, and Set Date to Adopt Final Budget for 2011-2012

Number III. E.

Area Office of Support Operations Prepared by: Kent G. Stephens

Status 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 2011-12 budget available for public inspection September 13, 2011 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)).

September 30, 2011 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)).

October 10, 2011 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.

board of trustees – study session no closed session – no ... · v. presentation – auto...

Documents