Quick Jump to Sections: Budget, Accreditation, Strategic Collegewide Planning, Evaluation of College Council, Construction/Facilities, Other Things, Next Meetings.
The last of the budget forums was yesterday, March 22nd. If you attended one of the budget forums this past week, you've now heard all of the information that College Council has heard about the budget situation. We need to have a proposed plan for what courses will not be taught and cuts in maintenance + operations and cuts in administrative services ready by April 15th. Then the Executive Director of Administrative Services (LaMont Schiers) will figure out what do those cuts mean dollar-wise (translate proposed cuts in course offerings and services to dollar amounts) by April 30th. The proposed costed-out plan then goes to the district. The April 30th plan is not a specific budget but a plan for what we'll do in the best case ($3.2 million cut) and worst case ($6.4 million cut) scenarios. The great majority of our expenditures is labor. Labor for BC is about $47 million including benefits.
We'll use the same Budget Decision-Making Criteria used in the Annual Program Review for making the cuts. We're having to make decisions now that many other community colleges without reserves had to make one to two years ago. The reserves have given us some time to work through our decisions. At the budget forums this past week, you also got a list of the data metrics of programs that will used in the number-crunching: number of degrees + certificates awarded (see your program's APR), percentage of graduates employed, number of transfers, head count, number of sections, number of full-time faculty, number of adjunct faculty, adjunct/overload costs (note that we're cutting back on adjuncts and overload first, so there have been layoffs already with less sections being taught by adjuncts), FTEF, FTES, productivity number FTES/FTEF, final adjusted budget, cost/FTES (from Banner), success and retention numbers (see your program's APR). We'll also use an external scan from employers in our service area, and a facilities plan will be developed by Cambridge West Partnership (consultants) with expertise in this area.
Budget cut suggestions: www.bakersfieldcollege.edu/budget . Input is anonymous and you can peruse other suggestions in the "Budget Ideas" public folder on Exchange/Outlook Web. Select the link to go right to that public folder (you'll need to login into Outlook Web first and then you'll go right to the public folder). If you want to keep your suggestions anonymous, then use the budget suggestions website and do NOT use the "New post in this folder" link after you've logged into Outlook Web. Suggestions due by March 30th if you want your suggestions included in the initial analysis by the administration during spring break.
LaMont's staff will make two basic piles of suggestions: what BC can do and ideas for other district cuts that are beyond our scope of authority.
Two suggestions I put in the budget feedback form that I already had shared with President Jensen (so it's not anonymous): It would be helpful to the faculty to know what sorts of cuts are being planned at the administrative level. All the faculty have been hearing about are cuts to direct instruction to the students and student services which seem to belie the stated philosophy of keeping the cuts as far from the students as possible. Nothing has been said about cuts in areas not directly impacting students. In order to "keep the cuts as far from the students as possible", the cuts at administrative levels should be deeper than the cuts to direct instruction to students. Otherwise, it is just lip service.
Chancellor Serrano has asked her administrative team to compute the cost of outsourcing the various tasks they do—what it would cost the district if we did not do task X with our own personnel but hired an external agency/company/contractor to do that task. That that is not the question that needs to be asked. The question should be what administrative or compliance tasks can we survive withOUT doing? What administrative or compliance tasks can be set aside without financial harm to the direct instruction of students? Do we save more money by employing the administrator or compliance officer to do his/her particular tasks than if we didn't employ the person and took the financial hit from some sort of fine for non-compliance? Can we translate the idea of not offering as many types of classes as we've offered in the past to not doing as many administrative tasks as we've done in the past in order to save on costs?
The Academic Senate is holding a budget forum for just the faculty on Wednesday, March 28th from 3 to 4:30 PM in Forum West. The Academic Senate will need to provide recommendations to Interim President Jensen by March 30, so we need your input.
One plan being floated is to have a "dry run" of the accreditation visits by teams from each college in KCCD visiting one of the sister colleges (Cerro Coso and Porterville College) and asking the questions and examining the evidence that the real accreditation visiting team would ask. However, there's probably no time to do this in the time we have left this spring before the self-study reports have to be sent to the board of trustees (mid-May).
My previous report described the process that The Strategic Planning Work Group (StraPlWoG) will be using to develop the three-year strategic plan. After the regular College Council meeting was done, the group worked until about 1 PM on the college goals for the strategic plan and some possible action plans or objectives for each of the goals. The goals are now approved by College Council. The objectives are still being worked on so consider the following list as tentative and we need your feedback on them. The goals are broad umbrellas and the objectives are to be the measurable pieces. The devil will be in the details of how we measure things, so please help keep a close eye on things as we fine-tune The Plan. We'll be using the Actionable Improvement Plans (AIP) from the Accreditation self-study as objectives and others we develop along the way. Here is what we have so far:
Survey of College Council going out March 19th. The survey on Survey Monkey is at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3YQ8HK6. The survey takes less than ten minutes to do (I did it in five minutes but your mileage may vary).
You will have until March 30, 2012 to complete the survey. College Council plans to review the results on April 13 after which College Council will provide a summary of the results to the campus community.
For the SAM project: architecture people have now met with the dean and faculty of the departments affected by the SAM remodel to look at "value re-engineering" the project. We have developed a new set of specs for bids. Bidding will start in mid-June with construction starting in Fall 2012. The official projection is 18 months for the project but, of course, multiply that by 1.5 to get a more accurate completion time frame.
GET terminal on Panorama is supposed to be finished enough for a ribbon-cutting ceremony on April 2nd (during Spring Break). HOWEVER, the restrooms there will be ready sometime in May.
Some Campus Center construction will happen "soon" with funding coming only from Measure G (SRID) local bond money.
Student Services is on the docket again for remodeling and funding will be a combination of state bonds and the local Measure G bond.
First and third Fridays of the month at 8:30 to 10:30 AM (except finals and winter+summer break). Next meeting is April 13th.
Last updated: March 26, 2012
Document author: Nick Strobel