institutional decision-making tactics (fy2007) elaine novak, ed. d. dean – career & technical...
TRANSCRIPT
Institutional Decision-Making Tactics
(FY2007)
Elaine Novak, Ed. D.Dean – Career & Technical Programs
Illinois Valley Community CollegeOglesby, Illinois
OR
How Community Colleges Can Be Pro-Active
When the Flow of State Funds
Is Reduced
3
Survey Pre-Test20 community college Presidents were selected to assist with the development of the survey instrument.
Represented a variety of:Geographic locations
Enrollment sizes
Campus configuration
College Age
NACUBO Membership
4
Background
National Study – FY2007 focus of survey and responsesAmerican Association of Community Colleges (AACC) 2007 membership
Polled 1,024 public community college AACC membershipsNO: Tribal AACC Community CollegesNO: State AACC Agency membershipsNO: Private AACC Community Colleges
5
On-Line Survey Sourcewww.hostedsurvey.comHosted Survey provides educational sources a discount (must use “.edu” on e-mail)
Only charged based on the quantity of responses to the survey (47cents/CC)
No mailout paperwork; No postage; No return paperwork; No return postageNo Monthly fee to access data
Data results available for 18 monthsUpload prepared email addresses to Hosted SurveyElectronic survey responses uploaded into Excel by Hosted Survey; I uploaded to SPSS
No manual data entry when results received
6
On-Line Survey Source (cont.)
2,048 e-mails sent out to CFO and CEO for 1,024 AACC member community colleges
Survey sent in March-April 2008321 responses of 1,024 CCs; 31.3% return
Of the 321 respondents, 81 stopped responding at the same point of the survey
Hosted Survey denied any responsibility in this problem; they claimed survey fatigue.
7
Survey Question 1
Position title of individual completing this survey:
264 = Chief Financial Officers
36 = Chief Executive Officers
8 = academic officers
2 = student services
11 = other administrative titles 321 responses (1 per community college FICE)
See handout file titled “Slides 7-14 – Survey Instrument.doc”
8
Survey Question 2
The “chief executive officer” at YOUR LOCATION reports directly to the:
Local Board of Trustees ………….. 202Local-district/system-level chief executive officer……………………. 54State-level chief executive officer. 44State-level Board of Trustees……. 11Other………………………………... 10
321
9
Survey Question 3Select ONE organizational structure that best
describes the college/system YOUR LOCATION represents:
19 College within Multi-College District
64 Multi-college District
114 Multi-Campus College
18 Campus of Multi-Campus College
5 University Branch Campus
101 Single Institution (321)
10
Survey Question 4
What was your primary budget goal in FY 2006-2007?
56 Achieving a financial surplus
204 Balancing the budget
25 Handling a distressed situation
36 Enhancing revenue
0 Other
321
11
Survey Question 5
What was your budget situation during FY 2006-2007?
257 Stable
64 Distressed
321
12
(Skipping Survey Question 6 temporarily )
13
Survey Question 7
Did your college/system’s choice of fiscal management tactics in question #6 fulfill your overall budget goals?
91 Our budget has improved
87 Our budget has become stable
53 Our budget is still distressed, but less so
9 Our budget is still distressed, and even
more so
81 (no response; Hosted Survey technicality)
321
14
Survey Question 644 tactics grouped into 5 categories:
Tuition/state funding/taxes/revenue sourcesStaffing/PersonnelClass ScheduleFacilitiesGrants, Marketing, Philanthropy
Survey respondents were asked to share additional effective tactics they used at the end of each of the above 5 categories
Received 88 additional tactics (reported; not ranked) [handout available later today]
15
Asked survey respondents to select 1 of the following 5 choices for each of the 44 survey tactics:
Not applicable/not used
Not Effective
Somewhat Effective
Effective
Very Effective
16
Only calculated responses rated Not Effective
Somewhat Effective
Effective
Very Effective
“Not applicable/not used” responses were not included in calculations
Research Question 1How are fiscal management tactics, used in FY 2006-2007, rated in terms of effectiveness by public two-year colleges?
Means calculation of 44 tactics for 321 survey respondents (see handout: Master Tactic List):
0 tactics ranked as “Very Effective” (range = 3.5 – 4.0)
23 tactics ranked as “Effective” (range = 2.5 – 3.49)
Mean = 2.5 – 2.98
20 tactics ranked as “Somewhat Effective” (range = 1.5 – 2.49)
Mean = 1.54 – 2.48
1 tactic ranked as “Not Effective” (range = 0.0 – 1.49)
Mean = 1.43
See handout file titled “Slides 17-21 – National Table Results.xls”
17
18
Research Question 1(cont.)
Top 10 tactics had a mean rating
2.76 – 2.98
19
Research Question 1 (cont.)Top 10 tactics split as follows:
5 Revenue-Source Tactics:
(#1) Increase Tuition and/or fees to students
(#47) Increase marketing efforts for the College System
(#40) Increase number of online courses
(#46) Write grants
(#48) Solicit funds to the CC foundation from alumni, other donors, & philanthropic agencies
5 Cost-Cutting Tactics:(#30) Cancel course sections with low enrollment
(#31) Cancel programs with low enrollment
(#23) Adjust departmental budgets at mid-year
(#24) Reduce next year’s budget
(#44) Share high school facilities
20
Research Question 1(cont.)
Lowest 10 tactics had a mean rating 1.43 – 2.14
21
Research Question 1 (cont.)Lowest 10 tactics split as follows:
3 Revenue Source Tactics:
(#4) Design unique courses for delivery and sold to other colleges to generate revenue(#6) Lease college facilities to generate revenue(#8) Recruit more international students
7 Cost Cutting Tactics:(#15) Restrict faculty and staff leave and travel(#18) Reduce financial support for programs in workforce education, developmental skills, and/or community service sectors(#14) Curtail administration/ faculty/staff raises for at least a year(#27) Cap enrollment in courses (turned away students due to limited course sections offered)(#21) Reduce the financial commitment to athletic activities(#20) Reduce student support services (e.g., tutoring, counseling, and job placement)(#33) Cancel ALL summer sessions offered
22
Relationship between 44 fiscal management tactics and:
Community college FY2007 AgeCommunity college FY2007 EnrollmentCommunity college FY2007 Institutional ConfigurationCommunity college FY2007 Geographic DesignationCommunity college FY2007 NACUBO membership status
23
Research Question 2:Is the age of the public two-year colleges associated with effectiveness ratings?
One-way ANOVA
Categories:Community colleges established prior to 1960
Community colleges established 1960-1970
Community colleges established after 1970
24
Research Question 2 (cont.)
One tactic revealed significance at the .01 level
Tactic #7 – Shifted budget allocations in all departments so that all programs functioned with adjusted bugeted funds
CC established 1960-1970 rated this tactic more effective than CC established before 1960
25
Research Question 3:Is the Fall 2006 credit enrollment associated with effectiveness ratings?
One-way ANOVA
Categories (2006 Carnegie Classifications – IPEDS
based):Community college enrollment <500
Community college enrollment 500 - 1,999
Community college enrollment 2,000 - 4,999
Community college enrollment 5,000 - 9,999
Community college enrollment >10,000
26
Research Question 3 (cont.):
One tactic revealed significance at the .01 level
Tactic #13 – Provided professional development for faculty to enhance student retention and student recruitment
CC with enrollment of 2,000 – 4,999 rated this tactic more effective than community colleges with enrollment of 500 - 1,999.
27
Research Question 4:Do different organizational structures for public two-year colleges rate the effectiveness of fiscal management tactics differently?
One-way ANOVA
Categories (AACC defined):Multi-College District
College within Multi-College District
Multi-Campus College
Campus of Multi-Campus College
University Branch Campus
Single Campus Institution
No tactics revealed significance at the >.05 level
28
Research Question 5:Do rural, suburban, and urban public two-year colleges rate the effectiveness of fiscal management tactics differently?
One-way ANOVA
Categories (2006 Carnegie Classification):Rural
Suburban
Urban
29
Research Question 5 (cont.):
One tactic revealed significance at the .04 level
Tactic #25 – Downsized staff and faculty
CCs with a geographic category of Suburban rated this tactic more effective than community colleges with a Rural geographic location
30
Research Question 6:Do National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) members and non-members rate the effectiveness of fiscal management tactics differently?
t-Test
Categories (Source: NACUBO):Member
Non-Member
31
Research Question 6 (cont.):One tactic revealed significance at the .04 level for NACUBO members:
Tactic 23 – Adjusted departmental budgets at Mid-Year
Two tactics revealed significance at the .02 and .03 level respectively for Non-NACUBO members:
Tactic 39 – “Privatized” select curriculum programs
Tactic 32 – Reduced the number of summer sessions offered
32
“OTHER” Solicited Effective Tactics
88 responses (See handout)
Organized in these categories:Tuition/State funding/Taxes/Revenue
Staffing/Personnel
Class Schedule
Facilities
Grants, Marketing, Philanthropy & Other
See handout file titled “Slide 32 – 88 Other Solicited Effective Tactics”
33
Data has also been prepared to reveal individual ranked means lists of Top 10 and Bottom 10 tactics calculations for EACH sub-category of research questions #2 – 5 for FY 2006-2007.
See handout file titled “Slide 33 – Table of Contents – Top-Bottom 10 Tactics.docx”
See handout file titled “Slide 33 – Top-Bottom 10 Tactics all categories.xlsx”
