May 2007 1

Priority 6 Review

Team 6: Planning Subcommittee

R. Hall-Allen, A. Cohen, D. Cohen, M. DesVignes, M. Hong, D. Kinney,

S. Maradian, J. Ireland, J. Moore, D. Kinney, J. Moore, M. Reisch, M. Siegel,

R. Tillberg,  L. Yamaoka

Increase the resources available to the college through state and district allocation process and through extramural development efforts.  

May 2007 2

3 Areas of Review

1. Identify what has been accomplished using vital signs and other key indicators

2. Identify gap between strategic goals and outcome

3. Recommendations

May 2007 3

Vital Signs Used as Measures of Success for Priority 6

• Degree to which faculty, staff, and administrators believe the college is increasing available resources (Campus Climate Survey).

• Number and total amount of annual grants received by the college (LACC Annual Grants Report).

• Percent of the Los Angeles Community College District budget that is allocated to Los Angeles City College (LACC Budget Office).

• Size of the Los Angeles City College Foundation endowment and number of scholarships awarded (Los Angeles City College Foundation Annual Report).

May 2007 4

Strategic Priority 6.1

Develop and execute a comprehensive resource development plan for the college that includes the Foundation, grants, and business partnerships .

May 2007 5

Background Strategic Priority 6.1 Develop and execute a comprehensive resource development plan for the college that includes the Foundation, grants, and business partnerships. Pres. Office – President, Vice President Academic Affairs

As part of the Title V “Closing the Funding Gap” cooperative grant that the college (as was as ELAC, Trade-Tech, and Southwest) received in 2001, a consulting firm has been hired to develop a comprehensive resource development plan. The Clements Group is working with Senior Staff and the LACC Foundation. The execution of the plan will fall to Institutional Effectiveness (the grant’s project manager) and the Executive Director of the Foundation. 2002

Givens and Ireland (Revised 2004). As a part of the Title V “Closing the Funding Gap” cooperative grant that the college (as well as ELAC, Trade, and Southwest) received in 2001, a consulting firm was hired to assist in developing a comprehensive resource development plan. The Clements Group provided two documents: A Business Partnership Assessment and A Development Audit. Senior Staff is currently reviewing these documents to determine the next steps that need to be taken in developing a comprehensive development plan for the college.*

Execution of the plan will be determined as a part of the administrative program review and assessment of administrative alignment/organization that is currently in process of development. The LACC Foundation Director currently working with Title V staff to develop a comprehensive development plan for the Foundation. A draft of this plan will be available for review in December 2004.* 2007 The Clements Group reports have not been located and may no longer be relevant.

May 2007 6

Recommendations Priority 6.1

1. Provide a centralized Grants Office within Administrative Services (or reporting directly to the President’s Office) that serves Academic Affairs and Student Services

2. Provide annual and quarterly Foundation reports that include endowments and scholarships

May 2007 7

Strategic Priority 6.2

Develop and execute an enrollment management plan that focuses on both broad types (e.g., full-time, part-time, basic skills, upper division) as well as specific disciplines (e.g., dental tech, psychology, chemistry) and aligns with the state and district’s allocation models.

May 2007 8

Background Strategic Priority 6.2 Develop and execute an enrollment management plan that focuses on both broad types (e.g., full-time, part-time, basic skills, upper division) as well as specific disciplines (e.g., dental tech, psychology, chemistry) and aligns with the state and district’s allocation models.

2002 Pres. Office, President, Vice Pres.Academic Affairs.EMT has been focused on tactical issues and making quick adjustments to class schedules and enrollments. This strategy effectively extends EMT’s charge to include the strategic issue of developing target enrollments, building the class schedule to reflect those enrollment goals, and ensuring that operational budgets for hourly instruction are both developed in conjunction with the Budget Committee and are adhered to.

We will have two one-half day meetings each year: one in January and one in June. The meetings will be a joint Senior Staff / EMT meeting in which goals are set based upon looking at past performance and new budget information. The output of this meeting is input into the class schedule process and EMT.

Ireland (revised 2004). This process has been implemented. Department chairs and other campus leaders provide regular input, and the EMT has successfully met targets for growth and other enrollment goals.

May 2007 9

To what extent do you agree that during the period 2003-2005 LACC has been successful in achieving these priorities? Percent of faculty, staff, and administrators who agree with the

following statements:*

0.601

0.572

0.739

0.575

0.57

0.572

0.488

0.66

0.454

0.432

0.5

0.537

0.563

0.502

0.453

0.59

0.490421456

0.423664122

0.460076046

0.52851711

0.576335878

0.365019011

0.418867925

0.666666667

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

8. Data driv en decision making

7. Resource allocation

6. Resource dev elopment

5. Visibility and a reputation for quality

4. Student-centered learning env ironment

3. Partnerships

2. Campus env ironment

1. Academic ex cellence

Fall 2001 Fall 2003 Fall 2005

Priority

*Source: Campus Climate Surveys, Fall 2001, Fall 2003, and Fall 2005

Degree to which faculty, staff, and administrators believe the college is increasing available resources (Campus Climate Survey).

May 2007 10

3. Percent of the LACCD college budget that is allocated to Los Angeles City College

0.146

0.147

0.152

0.144

0.15

0.155

0.156

0.148

0.138

0.05 0.07 0.09 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.17 0.19

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

May 2007 11

2 and 4. Amount of Annual Grants and Size of Foundation Endowment

$1,406,000

$680,000

$2,400,000

$0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000

Grants (Foundation andWorkforce Development) - 2005

Grants (Foundation andWorkforce Development) - 2006

Foundation Endowment

May 2007 12

Foundation Scholarships and Endowment Report David Ambroz, Foundation Director

April 13, 2007

Year

Number of

Scholarships

Number of

Recipients

Total Amount

Awarded Endowment

2002 73 196 $ 63,583 $1,223,108

2003 47 80 41,625 1,636,550

2004 65 165 93,104 1,786,000

2005 72 260 100,572 1,930,000

2006 66 233 143,390 3,090,973

May 2007 13

Recommendations Priority 6.2 Continue current practices including the following:

1. Regular Enrollment Management Team meetings

2. Closely monitor enrollment

May 2007 14

Priority

SummaryBelow

Expectation Good Exemplary Recommendations

Priority 6.1

X

X

1. Provide a centralized Grants Office within Administrative Services (or reporting directly to the President’s Office) that serves Academic Affairs and Student Services

2. Provide annual and quarterly Foundation reports that include endowments and scholarships

Priority 6.2

X Continue current practices including the

following:

1. Regular Enrollment Management Team meetings

2. Closely monitor enrollment