Board of Trustees - Baltimore City Community College

Transcription

Board of Trustees
Special Open Session
Monday, May 16, 2016
3- 4 P.M.
Mini Conference Center
Liberty Campus
BALTIMORE CITY COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Board of Trustees
Dr. S. Todd Yeary, Chair
Dr. Rosemary Gillett-Karam, Vice Chair
Dr. Donald A. Gabriel
Mr. Jay Hutchins
Ms. Pamela Paulk
Dr. Mary E. Owens Southall
Ms. Maria Harris Tildon
Mr. Moses Wamalwa, Student Trustee
TAB 1
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
UNAPPROVED
SPECIAL OPEN SESSION AGENDA
Monday, May 16, 2016, 3 p.m.
Liberty Campus
I.
CALL TO ORDER (Dr. S. Todd Yeary, Chair)
II.
ADOPTION OF AGENDA
III.
BOARD ACTIONS/CONSENT AGENDA (All actions requiring a vote).
A. Approval of the April 26, 2016 Agenda …………………………………………TAB 1
Approval of the March 22, 2016 Minutes (that pertain to this subject matter)
B. FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. TAB 2
(Information / Action)
• FY2017 Elimination of BCCC Application Fees and
Increase of BCCC Registration Fee
• FY 2017 In-State and Out-of-State Tuition Increase
IV.
MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT
THE CLOSED SESSION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES IS DESIGNED TO
DISCUSS PERSONNEL ISSUES; PENDING PURCHASE OF PROPERTY FOR THE
FUTURE NEEDS OF THE COLLEGE; AND, TO OBTAIN LEGAL ADVICE.
**There will not be a closed session for this meeting.
V.
NEXT MEETING:
Tuesday, May 24, 2016, Liberty Campus in the Mini Conference Center
Page 1 of 1
Back to Top
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
UNAPPROVED
OPEN SESSION MINUTES
(That pertain to this subject matter)
Tuesday, March 22, 2016, 4 p.m.
Business and Continuing Education Division
Corporate Training Room # 30
Board Members Present: Dr. S. Todd Yeary, presiding, Dr. Rosemary Gillett-Karam,
vice chair, Dr. Donald Gabriel (via conference call), Mr. Jay Hutchins (via conference
call), Dr. Mary Owens Southall, Ms. Maria Harris Tildon, and Mr. Moses Wamalwa
Board Members Absent: Ms. Pamela Paulk
I.
PUBLIC PRESENTATIONS
None
II.
BOARD ACTIONS/CONSENT AGENDA (All Actions requiring a vote.)
VP Harris resubmitted his recommendation for the elimination of the BCCC Application
Fees and the increase of the BCCC Registration Fees, citing that this difference would
not impact enrollment. The Board had various concerns and questions that VP Harris’s
recommendation did not address.
The Board requested that VP Harris, et.al, respond clearly and simply to the specific
questions and concerns the Board relayed regarding his recommendations to tuition and
fees.
FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATONS
• FY2017 Elimination of BCCC Application Fees and
Increase of BCCC Registration Fee
• FY 2017 In-State and Out-of-State Tuition Increase
Action: The Board tabled the vote of the tuition and fees recommendations
CLOSED SESSION
The Board voted unanimously, under the Open Meeting Act, State Government Article,
Section 10-508, to convene in Closed Session on March 22, 2016, in the President’s
Conference Room to discuss real estate, personnel and to obtain legal advice.
*Full report on file in the President’s Office
Respectfully submitted,
Gordon F. May, PhD
President/CEO
Back to Top
TAB 2
BOARD AGENDA
Information /Action
May 9, 2016
Tuition and Fees Update and Recommendations
Vice President Calvin Harris Jr.
Business and Finance Division
Please allow me to review the tuition and fees status of the College. This report includes
an update from March and April 2016 reports to the Board of Trustees and its Finance
Committee.
To summarize the report herein, the Vice President of Business and Finance (VPBF) is
recommending eliminating the Application Fee, which an ERP Task Force identified as
a potential barrier and provided five (5) possible options for review and consideration of
the Budget Council. This adjustment should increase the number of applications and
positively affect enrollment levels. Further, to mitigate lost revenue of approximately
$80,000, that same Task Force included an option to increase the Registration Fee.
As part of the overall financial projection of the College and to help minimize the funding
reductions needed throughout the College for FY 2017, the VPBF is also recommending
a tuition and fee increase. Although this increase is insufficient to avoid budget
reductions altogether (and would only begin with the Winter 2017 session), it would
ease the extent of the budget reductions, minimize disruptions of student-related
services and help maintain assurances made to stakeholders and officials.
Tuition and Fees Revenue
The College charges considerably less per student than peer community colleges in the
State of Maryland. Reduced enrollment over the years is unquestionably a key part of
the tuition and fees revenue equation. Yet there is another key factor that has also
contributed to the current status of the College-–several years of low tuition and fee
rates without gradual, incremental increases. When lower-than-peers’ tuition and fee
rates meet with reduced enrollment, the resulting revenue cannot adequately support its
part of the overall budget, which creates challenges for sustaining and improving current
programs and services.
Fees Charged at BCCC
Currently, the College has a total of four (4) student fees:
• Pre-enrollment (one-time)
o Application Fee = $10
•
•
Per semester (recurring)
o Registration Fee = $20
o Facilities Capital Fee = $11
Per billable hour (recurring)
o Consolidated Services Fee = $18
Once enrolled, the amount a student would pay in fees varies based on the credit hours
enrolled. For example, a student would pay $193 for nine (9) credit hours and $247 for
12 or more credit hours. (See Exhibit 1—Fee Comparison.)
In comparing this fee structure to other Maryland community colleges, the application
fee was noted as an outlier, where only four (4) other institutions charged this fee, and
at a higher rate than $10. This was identified through the work of an ERP Workflow
Process Team that identified the Application Fee as a potential barrier in the enrollment
process and proposed five (5) options to address the concern. Please see the attached
Appendix B: Removal of the Application Fee, the written report of that ERP Workflow
Process Team, which includes their detailed analysis and recommendations.
It is important to note that while this internal, multi-divisional team completed their work
from a processing perspective, their charge and focus was to identify potential barriers
in the enrollment process. The application fee was identified, and further confirmed
since other colleges did not charge such a fee. However, in formulating their five options
and recommendations to address this barrier, the Team also considered how that fee
could be eliminated while not reducing revenue.
The effect of the Application Fee, and other fees charged by BCCC are noted in Exhibit
1—Fee Comparison below. This information was gathered from the publicly-available
information from each institution’s catalog and/or website. Please note amounts focus
on “in-state, out-of-service area”, essentially the amount a Baltimore City resident
student would have to pay in fees for any of the Maryland community colleges.
Exhibit 1 – Fee Comparison
Maryland Community Colleges - Credit Fee Comparison (revised 5-4-2016)
(Fees shown are those that apply to all in-State, out-of-service area students. Information is sorted by "Total Fees per 9 credit hours" from smallest to largest.)
One-time
fee
IN-STATE, OUT-OFSERVICE area
Application Registration
Fee
Fee
(one time) (per semester)
Allegany College of
Maryland
Hagerstown Community
College
Cecil College
WOR-WIC Community
College
Baltimore City Community
College
Howard Community College
Consolidated/
Combined/
Instructional
Services Fee
Facilities
Capital
$35
$30
Student Fee
Technology
Fee
$3/semester
hour (Min $5;
Max $36)
$4/credit hour
(Max $48)
$8/credit hour
$15/credit hour
$10
$20
$18/credit
Frederick Community
College
$22.88/credit
hour
$11/semester
$2.24 (10 credit
max)
$1 (athletic),
$21
(educational
services), $2
(student
activity)/credit
hour
$25
Garrett College
$25
$32/credit hour
$10/registration
$35/credit hour
transaction
Chesapeake College
$30/registration
transaction
$38.40/ billable
hour
Carroll Community College
($50 for
selective
admissions
only)
$22/billable
hour
$55
College of Southern
Maryland
Montgomery College
$2/credit hour
$22.11/credit
hour
$25
Anne Arundel Community
College
Per
Transportation
Per semester Fees billable
Fee
hour fees
$12/credit hour
$24.80/credit
hour
Prince George's Community
College
Student
College Service
Capital
Student
Development
Fee
Improvement Fee Activities Fee
Fee
$75
Harford Community College
Community College of
Baltimore County
Totals
(not including application
fee)
Fees that apply to all students
$11/billable
hour
$10
$25
$25
$5/billable hour
$119
$119
$30
$12
$138
$174
$210
$75
$8
$147
$171
$195
$0
$17
$153
$204
$255
$31
$18
$193
$247
$247
$0
$22.11
$199
$265
$332
$0
$24.80
$223
$298
$372
$0
$25.12
$226
$296.96
$365.60
$25
$24
$241
$313
$385
$25
$32
$313
$409
$505
$35
$355
$460
$565
$0
$40.40
$363.60
$484.80
$606
$3/billable hour
(max $36)
$65
$36
$389
$497
$596
$428.49
$571.32
$714
23% of tuition
($207/credit inservice area)
$5/billable hour
$98
$40
$45/credit hour
20% of total
tuition
($50 min)
$7
Total Fees Total Fees Total Fees
per 9
per 12
per 15
credit
credit
credit
hours *
hours *
hours *
$2/ billiable
hour
23% of tuition
$25
$35
Total per selected credit hours
$7/billable hour
$25
$45
$430
$565
$700
$0
$17 +
20% of
tuition
$601.20
$801.60
$1,002
* Note: Assumes 1 registration
transaction.
Once Application Fees are excluded, the three (3) fees charged at BCCC are consistent
with or lower than other institutions. However, the amount charged to students is lower
than others except for Wor-Wic, Western Maryland schools, and Cecil County, areas
from which the College has limited recruiting.
The ERP Workflow Team submitted their report to the Budget Council to consider the
financial implications of the various recommendations. The Budget Council ultimately
supported “Option 1”: the elimination of the Application Fee and a corresponding
increase to the Registration Fee from $20 to $26 (to minimize the revenue reduction
from this elimination).
This adjustment creates a few outcomes which we believe will be positive for the
College enrollment process. First, this eliminates a fee—the Application Fee—which is
viewed as a potential barrier to entry. Second, the Registration Fee, unlike the
Application Fee, can be funded through non-direct payment options such as financial
aid (which is received by nearly 65% of students) or deferred payment plans. Therefore,
this adjustment removes a potential barrier while reducing direct out-of-pocket costs for
the overwhelming majority of students.
Therefore, the recommendation was made to adjust the Application and Registration
Fees, as noted herein and at the end of this report. However, since the March and April
Board meetings, early registration for the fall 2016 semester began on April 25. As
such, the recommendation has been adjusted to be effective beginning with the Winter
2017 session:
• the elimination of the $10 BCCC Application Fee, noted as a potential barrier to
student enrollment, and
• an increase from $20 to $26 of the BCCC Registration Fee.
As noted herein, the Consolidated Fee will be one of the three remaining fees if the
VPBF recommendation is approved. This fee was first approved by the Board of
Trustees in 2006, and greatly simplified the fee structure of the College at that time. The
Consolidated Fee creation merged the following fees into one:
•
•
•
•
•
Dedicated Fee (in 2006 - $2 per credit for instructional materials & supplies)
Allied Health Fee (in 2006 - $35 per semester max.)
Technology Fee (in 2006 - $25 per semester for technology improvements)
Instructional Lab Fee (in 2006 - $10-20 if lab is part of course)
Student Activity Fee (in 2006 - $2.50 per credit up to $35 per semester)
Without the Consolidated Fee, the College would go from this one (1) fee to five (5)
fees. This would greatly complicate the fee structure and is considerably more than peer
institutions as noted in Exhibit 1 herein. However, given the various areas the fee
supports (e.g., Student Government Association), the Consolidated Fee, like all other
fees, should be consistently reviewed for adequacy.
With this history in mind, the VPBF recommends continuing the Consolidated Fee, with
continuous reviews, as part of the annual budgetary process, of its adequacy. The
rationale that existed in 2006 remains effective in 2016.
Tuition Levels at BCCC
A recommendation was made to increase the tuition levels in prior fiscal 2016 Board
discussions, with action tabled at those times. Currently, as noted herein, the tuition
adjustment is proposed to begin with the Winter 2017 session.
While there have been concerns noted with enrollment gaps, especially with the
possibility of such gaps expanding with a tuition adjustment, please note that this has
been considered. To attack enrollment gaps, the College has a multi-pronged strategy
such as enhanced focus on the conversion of applications to enrollment. Applications
have seen a positive spike this year, representing an opportunity for increased
enrollment. Public Relations efforts have increased in fiscal 2016, especially programspecific outreach (such as cyber security month, national robotics week, national math
month, dental hygiene clinics and oral cancer awareness month) as well as social
media and community engagement. However, those efforts and paid advertising are
greatly affected by funding availability.
As noted in prior reports, the College’s multi-year financial projections analyze
enrollment trends and other revenue areas, while also considering expenditures needed
to meet the goals of the Strategic Plan and the component institutional plans. From that
analysis, a multi-year Budgetary Projection for the College was completed through fiscal
2020. The overall projection (noted as Exhibit 2), and revenue-specific projection
(Exhibit 3) are conservative in nature. Despite the efforts to attack enrollment gaps, the
financial projections assume slow growth in most areas.
However, from the time of the original fiscal 2017 budget submission to the State in
summer 2015 and the approval of the budget by the Governor and Legislature in March
2016, the College lowered its projected 2017 enrollment levels. At those revised
amounts, due to a corresponding reduction in tuition and fee revenue, the College
would begin fiscal year 2017 with a potential deficit of at least $2.3 million.
FY 2017
Projected
FTES FOR TUITION & FEES:
CREDIT
OUT-OF-STATE CREDIT
UNRESTRICTED REVENUE
IN-STATE CREDIT TUITION RATE
OUT-OF-STATE CREDIT TUITION RATE
TOTAL Tuition & Fees
est
FY 2017
In-Process
2,592.00
204.00
3,072.00
204.00
FY 2017
Projected
$
99
$
260
$ 10,600,000
FY 2017
In-Process
$
99
$
260
$ 12,897,761
Exhibit 2 – Budgetary Projections 2015-2017
2017 (Proposed - In Process)
Total
Unrestricted
Restricted
2016 (Approved Budget)
Total
Restricted
Unrestricted
Unrestricted
2015 (Actual)
Restricted
Total
REVENUE
Student Tuition and Fees
Credit
Non-credit
Total Student Tuition and fees
12,358,840
538,921
12,897,761
-
12,358,840
538,921
12,897,761
12,596,959
528,354
13,125,313
17,786,141
42,295,330
3,784,250
63,865,721
40,775,643
400,000
41,175,643
4,000,000
4,000,000
-
12,596,959
528,354
13,125,313
10,939,853
598,840
11,538,693
18,181,748
42,518,971
3,231,869
63,932,588
36,136,643
297,075
36,433,718
4,000,000
3,448,158
-
10,939,853
598,840
11,538,693
Governmental
Federal
State
Local
Total Governmental
40,814,442
600,000
41,414,442
4,000,000
Sales & Services Auxiliary
17,786,141
1,480,888
3,184,250
22,451,279
-
18,181,748
1,743,328
2,831,869
22,756,945
-
18,193,342
1,625,796
1,665,369
21,484,507
-
18,193,342
37,762,439
1,962,444
57,918,225
3,448,158
Other
Total Other
Gifts
Miscellaneous
Transfer (to) from fund balance
Total REVENUE
EXPENDITURES
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Operation & Maint of Plant
Scholarship & Fellowship
Auxiliary Enterprises
Transfers & deductions
Total EXPENDITURES
3,505,587
3,505,587
1,550,000
1,550,000
5,055,587
5,055,587
3,424,847
3,424,847
1,551,005
1,551,005
4,975,852
4,975,852
3,061,227
3,061,227
1,573,318
1,573,318
4,634,545
4,634,545
5,223,994
67,041,784
24,001,279
5,223,994
91,043,063
5,228,995
66,954,798
24,307,950
5,228,995
91,262,748
5,841,725
60,323,521
23,057,825
5,841,725
83,381,346
Unrestricted
20,725,749
5,158,474
7,669,891
19,049,538
10,100,037
92,000
4,246,094
67,041,783
Restricted
5,515,488
1,525,000
16,960,791
24,001,279
Total
26,241,237
1,525,000
5,158,474
7,669,891
19,049,538
10,100,037
17,052,791
4,246,094
91,043,062
Unrestricted
22,474,376
5,281,260
7,741,079
17,252,169
9,875,075
92,000
4,238,839
66,954,798
Restricted
3,674,912
1,477,925
19,155,113
24,307,950
Total
26,149,288
1,477,925
5,281,260
7,741,079
17,252,169
9,875,075
19,247,113
4,238,839
91,262,748
Unrestricted
20,084,677
4,560,190
6,326,707
16,353,530
8,748,256
118,430
4,131,731
60,323,521
Restricted
6,183,796
1,359,509
15,514,520
23,057,825
Total
26,268,473
1,359,509
4,560,190
6,326,707
16,353,530
8,748,256
15,632,950
4,131,731
83,381,346
Exhibit 2 – Budgetary Projections 2018-2020
Unrestricted
2020 (Projected)
Restricted
Total
Unrestricted
2019 (Projected)
Restricted
Total
Unrestricted
2018 (Projected)
Restricted
Total
REVENUE
Student Tuition and Fees
Credit
Non-credit
Total Student Tuition and fees
13,270,305
551,539
13,821,844
-
13,270,305
551,539
13,821,844
13,188,041
548,674
13,736,715
13,927,574
41,884,055
3,632,250
59,443,879
40,691,494
600,000
41,291,494
2,860,625
2,857,175
-
13,188,041
548,674
13,736,715
11,965,000
546,047
12,511,047
13,827,538
41,868,237
3,596,848
59,292,623
40,682,641
600,000
41,282,641
2,857,175
2,865,225
-
11,965,000
546,047
12,511,047
Governmental
Federal
State
Local
Total Governmental
Sales & Services Auxiliary
40,700,436
600,000
41,300,436
2,860,625
13,927,574
1,183,619
3,032,250
18,143,443
-
13,827,538
1,176,743
2,996,848
18,001,129
-
13,786,417
1,169,563
2,961,648
17,917,628
-
13,786,417
41,852,204
3,561,648
59,200,269
2,865,225
Other
Total Other
Gifts
Miscellaneous
Transfer (to) from fund balance
Total REVENUE
EXPENDITURES
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Operation & Maint of Plant
Scholarship & Fellowship
Auxiliary Enterprises
Transfers & deductions
Total EXPENDITURES
3,478,463
3,478,463
1,595,000
1,595,000
5,073,463
5,073,463
3,434,969
3,434,969
1,580,000
1,580,000
5,014,969
5,014,969
3,397,668
3,397,668
1,565,000
1,565,000
4,962,668
4,962,668
920,957
62,382,325
19,738,443
920,957
82,120,767
1,392,192
62,712,544
19,581,129
1,392,192
82,293,673
3,926,836
63,983,418
19,482,628
3,926,836
83,466,046
Unrestricted
21,109,739
5,253,994
7,297,213
14,629,332
11,139,421
92,000
2,860,625
62,382,324
Restricted
4,324,696
1,570,000
13,843,747
19,738,443
Total
25,434,435
1,570,000
5,253,994
7,297,213
14,629,332
11,139,421
13,935,747
2,860,625
82,120,767
Unrestricted
21,154,017
5,253,994
7,297,213
15,018,272
11,039,873
92,000
2,857,175
62,712,544
Restricted
4,277,417
1,555,000
13,748,712
19,581,129
Total
25,431,434
1,555,000
5,253,994
7,297,213
15,018,272
11,039,873
13,840,712
2,857,175
82,293,673
Unrestricted
20,743,159
5,125,939
7,144,427
17,199,952
10,812,716
92,000
2,865,225
63,983,418
Restricted
4,229,804
1,540,000
13,712,824
19,482,628
Total
24,972,963
1,540,000
5,125,939
7,144,427
17,199,952
10,812,716
13,804,824
2,865,225
83,466,046
Exhibit 3 – Budgetary Projected Revenue
FY 2020
Projected
FTES FOR TUITION & FEES:
CREDIT
OUT-OF-STATE CREDIT
OUT-OF-STATE NON-CREDIT
NON-CREDIT
TOTAL
IN-STATE CREDIT TUITION RATE
OUT-OF-STATE CREDIT TUITION RATE
CREDIT TUITION - IN-STATE
CREDIT TUITION - OUT-OF-STATE
NON CREDIT TUITION
CONSOLIDATED FEE
REGISTRATION FEE
FACILITIES CAPITAL FEE
TRANSCRIPT FEE
DENTAL CLINIC LAB FEE
MISC FEES
APPLICATION FEE
LIBRARY FINES - dedicated Library
DEFERRED & LATE PAYMENT FEES
TOTAL TUITION AND FEES
FY 2019
Projected
FY 2018
Projected
FY 2017
In-Process
FY 2016
Approved
2,499.00
166.00
205.00
2,105.00
4,975.00
2,505.00
166.00
204.00
2,094.00
4,969.00
2,528.00
168.00
203.00
2,084.00
4,983.00
3,072.00
204.00
229.00
2,278.00
5,783.00
3,448.00
254.00
224.00
2,267.00
6,193.00
FY 2020
Projected
$
135
$
355
$ 9,719,818
1,677,994
551,539
1,367,145
288,292
103,166
39,731
15,000
40,000
13,500
5,659
$ 13,821,844
FY 2019
Projected
$
134
$
351
$ 9,646,688
1,661,381
548,674
1,370,223
293,292
103,423
38,882
15,000
40,000
13,500
5,652
$ 13,736,715
FY 2018
Projected
$
118
$
309
$ 8,577,322
1,481,407
546,047
1,383,048
305,449
104,360
39,246
15,000
40,000
13,500
5,668
$ 12,511,047
FY 2017
In-Process
$
99
$
260
$ 8,758,886
1,511,640
538,921
1,462,406
287,361
142,928
51,522
15,000
40,637
69,960
13,500
5,000
$ 12,897,761
FY 2016
Approved
$
88
$
230
$ 9,102,720
1,752,600
528,354
1,055,070
337,724
165,216
53,890
15,000
14,515
81,724
13,500
5,000
$ 13,125,313
FY 2015
Actual
2,990.23
198.67
119.36
2,388.75
5,697.01
FY 2015
Actual
$
88
$
225
$ 8,021,856
1,341,023
598,840
978,767
279,721
139,128
50,152
12,725
39,453
68,100
8,888
40
$ 11,538,693
Exhibit 3 – Budgetary Projected Revenue
FY 2020
Projected
FY 2019
Projected
FY 2018
Projected
39,797,307
903,129
40,700,436
39,797,307
894,187
40,691,494
39,797,307
885,334
40,682,641
39,797,307
1,017,135
40,814,442
$ 40,700,436
$ 40,691,494
$ 40,682,641
$ 40,814,442
$
106,634
462,120
25,000
111,427
355,875
8,000
85,622
102,471
600,000
242,000
2,099,149
$
106,505
458,040
25,000
109,242
355,875
8,000
81,463
102,471
600,000
235,000
2,081,596
$
106,805
454,000
25,000
107,100
360,750
8,000
77,728
102,471
600,000
228,000
2,069,853
$
55,000
250,000
282,289
105,000
440,000
10,000
132,613
80,807
600,000
221,417
2,177,126
$
2,860,625
1,979,314
4,839,939
$
2,857,175
1,953,373
4,810,548
$
2,865,225
1,927,815
4,793,040
$
4,000,000
1,928,461
5,928,461
STATE APPROPRIATION
GENERAL FTEs
ESOL FTEs
STATE APPROPRIATION
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
TOTAL STATE APPROPRIATION
FY 2017
In-Process
FY 2016
Approved
FY 2015
Actual
41,206,388
987,483
42,193,871
(1,418,228)
$ 40,775,643
40,917,285
914,336
41,831,621
(5,694,978)
$ 36,136,643
Increase over prior year
OTHER REVENUES
INDIRECT COST RECOVERY-Financial Aid
INDIRECT COST RECOVERY-Other
MISCELLANEOUS INCOME
TOWER RENTAL INCOME
INVESTMENT INCOME
CAFETERIA/VENDING MACHINE/ATM
PARKING & TRANSPORTATION: FEES/FINES
CLARENCE BLOUNT CHILD DEVELOPMENT CNTR
BALTIMORE CITY
WBJC ASSET AGREEMENT
Total Other Revenues
$
90,000
80,000
397,250
100,000
400,000
35,000
132,613
67,800
400,000
214,968
1,917,631
$
4,000,000
1,907,216
5,907,216
$
122,109
18,573
6,104
107,550
448,015
7,915
70,733
73,462
297,075
155,000
1,306,536
$
3,448,158
2,051,766
5,499,924
AUXILIARY ENTERPRISE
BOOKSTORE
Lease Income (Ground Leases)
TOTAL SALES AND SERVICES - AUXILIARY
5,841,725
Fund Balance Transfer
TOTAL UNRESTRICTED REVENUE
920,957
$ 62,382,325
1,392,192
$ 62,712,544
3,926,836
$ 63,983,418
5,223,994
$ 67,041,784
5,228,995
$ 66,954,798
$ 60,323,521
TOTAL RESTRICTED REVENUE
$ 19,738,443
$ 19,581,129
$ 19,482,628
$ 24,001,279
$ 24,307,950
$ 23,057,825
TOTAL REVENUE
$ 82,120,767
$ 82,293,673
$ 83,466,046
$ 91,043,063
$ 91,262,748
$ 83,381,346
The recommended adjustment is to increase In-State tuition by $10 from $96 to $106,
and increase Out-of-State tuition by $25 from $245 to $270. This adjustment would be
effective beginning with the Winter 2017 session.
Despite this adjustment, the College would remain the most affordable community
college for Maryland residents and second most affordable in Maryland for out-of-state
residents. As noted from data below, these increases (even if other colleges maintained
flat tuition) would not change the College’s standing as most affordable in the State.
Exhibit 4 - Tuition and Fee Rates of Maryland Community Colleges
Source: Maryland Association of Community Colleges “2016 Databook,” March 2016
With the majority of students receiving financial aid as an in-state student, any increase
can generally be absorbed within that aid. Therefore, the recommendation is as follows:
Recommendations:
The Vice President for Business and Finance recommends the following fee
adjustments starting with the Winter 2107 session (i.e., fiscal 2017):
• The elimination of the $10 BCCC Application Fee, and
• An increase from $20 to $26 of the BCCC Registration Fee.
The President agrees and recommends these fees increases for fiscal 2017.
The Vice President for Business and Finance recommends the following tuition
adjustments starting with the Winter 2017 session (i.e., fiscal 2017):
• An increase from $96 to $106 in the BCCC In-State tuition rate ($10 or
approximately 10%), and
• An increase from $245 to $270 in the BCCC out-of-state tuition rate ($25 or
approximately 10%),
The President agrees and recommends these tuition increases for fiscal 2017.
December 23, 2015
BCCC Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Document Imaging and Workflow
Enrollment Workflow Report
December 23, 2015
1
Baltimore City Community College - 2901 Liberty Heights Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21215 - phone: 410-462-8300 - www.bccc.edu
December 23, 2015
Contents
Enrollment Workflow Report....................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 3
Background ............................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 4
Sub-Committee Goals and Scope .......................................................................................... 6
Quick Wins ............................................................................................................................. 7
Quantifying Enrollment Data ................................................................................................... 7
Potential Improvement Opportunities ...................................................................................... 9
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................11
Appendix A: Ad hoc Sub-Committee for Enrollment Workflow...................................................12
Appendix B: Removal of the Application Fee ............................................................................16
Appendix C: Targeted Data Clean-up Effort on SIMS Course Catalog ......................................21
Appendix D: Spring 2016 Navigator Management Partners Grant.............................................25
Appendix E: Recommendations to Improve Enrollment.............................................................26
Appendix F: Definitions .............................................................................................................27
Appendix G: Registration Blocks on Accounts Sent to CCU ......................................................28
2
December 23, 2015
Enrollment Workflow Report
Executive Summary
In advance of the planned Enterprise Research Planning (ERP) upgrade to Baltimore City
Community College’s IT infrastructure, ERP Project Management Office (PMO) established the
Workflow Process Improvement initiative to pursue and deliver near-term improvements to
current operations leveraging existing technology. Enrollment was prioritized as one of the most
pressing areas for improvement and the Vice President of Academic Affairs sponsored the
process review and established an Enrollment Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee is pleased
to present this report of recommendations for actions that can be taken to improve the
Enrollment process for BCCC staff and students.
Key observations on Enrollment Workflow process include:
 There is opportunity to improve enrollment at BCCC by focusing on retention of
returning, continuing and stop-out students.
 BCCC has defined many situations that block students from registering. Students
generally do not know how to resolve blocks until they call or visit the College.
Background
To determine which processes should be considered for in-depth improvement analysis, the
ERP Working Group prioritized key processes for improvement based on an analysis of process
efficiency, reliability, and priority. Of these, the Enrollment process was prioritized as one of the
most pressing. Vice President of Academic Affairs and Interim Vice President of Student
Affairs, Dr. Tonja Ringgold agreed to sponsor the Enrollment review and established a SubCommittee led by Robin Washington-Scott, the Dean of Enrollment Management and facilitated
by Pamela O’Connor (ERP PMO Lean Six Sigma Black Belt). The Sub-Committee has
completed the Define, Measure, and Analyze phases of the DMAIC methodology (see Figure 1
below), while the Improve and Control phases will be completed by the College’s content
experts. The Sub-committee is pleased to present this report with recommendations to improve
Enrollment for BCCC staff and students, leveraging the existing systems.
3
December 23, 2015
Figure 1: DMAIC Phases
Introduction
The volume of students in the College’s pipeline can be characterized by a funnel. The
population of Prospects is very large, Applicants is significant, Admits is smaller, Enrollees is
moderate, and a relatively small number of students who earn degrees, certifications or transfer
to a four-year college. Because of the continually decreasing magnitudes, the team considered
where the most significant percentages of the population are lost, therefore the largest
opportunity.
BCCC losses the largest percentages of students within two areas:
1. Applicant to first-time Enrollee
2. Enrollee to Continuing
4
December 23, 2015
Figure 2: Relative Volume of Student Population
Previous Workflows were able to scope to smaller areas that relate both directly and indirectly to
enrollment. The Admissions Workflow was scoped to begin when a student fills out an
application, and end when the student is able to register for their first semester. The Billing &
Paying Workflow and the Class Attendance Workflows focused on the students who are in
billing and/or in retention.
5
December 23, 2015
Figure 3: Relative Volume of Student Population and Previous Workflows
The previous Workflows were integrated to inform the goals and scope of this Enrollment
Workflow.
Sub-Committee Goals and Scope
The Sub-Committee defined these goals:



Increase enrollment
Turn around downward trend
Focus on what BCCC controls
The Sub-Committee defined this scope:


Prospect to Alumni
Credit and non-credit
6
December 23, 2015
Quick Wins
Quick Wins are improvements that the members of the committee have the authorization and
ability to implement relatively easily. These were identified as a result of investigations
completed to support this sub-committee.
1. The ERP Data Standards Working Group recently corrected the top 10 courses requiring
manual overrides due to missing or incorrect prerequisites. The anticipated results may
reduce overrides by the Registration Office by 50% enabling a much more robust online
registration. See Appendix C.
2. Navigator Management Partners Charitable Committee donated $1,000 to BCCC
foundation to benefit Spring 2016 enrollment. The intent is to help a wide population of
students who each have a small pre-existing financial block that is prohibiting them from
registering for upcoming classes. See Appendix D.
3. Orientation codes will be batch-uploaded daily to remove registration blocks until a more
automated functionality exists. Based on the Summer 2014 to Fall 2015 applicants this
could remove a hard block to help up to approximately 1,800 students.
4. To further reduce unnecessary registration blocks, efforts have begun to enable the
system to recognize criteria of individuals who are not required to complete Pre 100.
Quantifying Enrollment Data
Enrollment in Fall of 2015 continued to decrease relative to the previous year. The goal of this
Enrollment Workflow is to change the trajectory of this trend based on available data.
Figure 4: Fall Credit Enrollment by Entry Status
7
December 23, 2015
BCCC loses largest percentages of students in two areas:
1. Between Application and first-time Enrollment
 Fall 2015 Applications processed 5,970 (as of 10/23)
 2,038 A159 Applicants Enrolled (34% yield)
2. Between Enrollment and Continuation
 Fall to Fall matriculating students is about 50%
 Fall to Spring matriculating students is about 67%
Registration Blocks:
The Sub-committee identified the blocks that impede student’s ability to register. For first-time
Enrollees these blocks include completion of orientation, submission of residency, and/or
completion of placement testing. For continuing students this includes a block for academic
reasons, failure of the system to recognize pre-requisite course equivalencies and/or completion
of a PRE-100 course. These disable the self-service capability of online registration. Students
generally do not know how to resolve their block until they call or visit the College.
The following illustration are the criteria that first-time Enrollees must satisfy prior to registration:
1. Pay
Application
Fee
2. Complete
Orientation
3. Submit
Proof of
Residency
4. Complete
Placement
Testing
5. See an
advisor
1. A registration block exists for any student who has not paid their application fee. In
recent history, 60-70% of the students who fill out an application never pay this fee.
2. A registration block exists for all new students who have not completed in person or
online orientation. The table below quantifies the students who failed to complete this
step.
3. A registration block exists for all new students who have not submitted proof of
residency. The table below quantifies students who failed to complete this step.
4. A registration block exists for all new students who have not completed ACCUPLACER
testing, or submitted transcripts or other proof of exemption. The table below quantifies
students who failed to complete this step.
5. No registration block exists for students who have not seen an advisor, but registration
at the window requires an advisor code. Students with no other registration blocks are
(unintentionally) able to register online prior to meeting with an advisor.
For continuing, returning and stop-out students, a subset of this criteria must be met.
8
December 23, 2015
Figure 5: Registration Block Counts, Applicant from Summer 2014 through Fall 2015
Students with registration blocks
Students with no detectable registration block
Orientation, Residency and Testing all needed
Only Testing block on account
Orientation and Testing blocks on account
Orientation and Residency blocks on account
Residency and Testing blocks on account
Only Orientation block on account
Only Residency block on account
Grand Total of students
Count
1989
1356
1025
399
197
188
127
97
5378
Percentage
37%
25%
19%
7%
4%
3%
2%
2%
100%
Potential Improvement Opportunities
Recommendation of Fee Structure Change
The Enrollment Workflow Sub-committee supports the efforts to identify a new fee structure that
eliminates the application fee while consolidating it into another institutional fee. This will benefit
to enrollment. See Appendix B for full report and analysis.
Recommendation to Improve Reporting
Recently at BCCC an “applicant” was an individual who filled out an application. In order to
better quantify BCCC applicants, the team recommends that the definition of applicant be
updated to include those who have paid the application fee, in addition to completing the
application.
Recommendations to Most Benefit Enrollment
The Enrollment Workflow sub-committee endorses the following list of recommendations to
have the greatest benefit for the College. The original list of all recommendations compiled
during the Deep Dives can be found in Appendix E. With limited resources to execute
improvements, the Team Lead and Core Team Members focused the original list of twenty-four
recommendations to the list of eight below for targeted implementation. This was decided by
first grouping all recommendations, targeting those expected to have the highest benefit to
Enrollment, scheduling (1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8) and improving the how COCO is used (3). In
addition to these, near-term improvements could be implemented by updating communications
on the website (4).
9
December 23, 2015
No. Targeted Improvement Opportunities
1.
The team recommends that the College build out schedule of the full academic year,
which will increase capability for course look-up to include 2 semesters.
Update: Academic Affairs recently announced their intent to create full year program
calendars.
2.
Action: Dean of Enrollment Management will work with the Academic Calendar
Committee to create a three-year academic calendar.
The team recommends that the College computerize degree audit and education plans.
Update: The Data Standards Working Group previously prioritized this to follow the
current SIMS Catalog Clean-up efforts to update prerequisites, co-requisites and most
importantly course equivalencies.
3.
Because the importance of this to retention of continuing and stop-gap students,
Student Affairs will be requesting resources to complete this effort.
The team recommends that the College automate the upload of passing orientation
scores.
Near-term Improvement: Student Affairs will begin a manual daily upload until
automation is available.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Long-term Improvement: I.T.S. has begun an investigation to estimate the level of
effort to upload from Canvas to SIMS. If this is not feasible, Student Affairs has opened
up the question: what tool other than Canvas could house Orientation and upload
completion to SIMS in near-real-time?
The team recommends that the website communications are reviewed and improved to
flow smoother from the perspective of the students (e.g. clarify options to remotely
submit residency verification).
Actions: Students Affairs plans to review during Summer 2016, and all content owners
insure their information leads the student to the next steps of the 5 Steps to Enrollment
Success.
The team recommends that the College create career pathway based schedules to
reinforce alignment with education goals, which could be a degree, certificate or transfer
to a four-year university.
The team recommends that the College designs a block schedule friendly model around
part-time students.
Long-term Improvement: The approach to complete this goal needs to be further
defined.
The team recommends that the College have a centralized scheduling office.
10
December 23, 2015
Near-term Improvement: Confirm which office will hold this responsibility and provide
support to implement Enrollment Workflow recommendations.
8.
The team recommends that the College review Valencia Community College’s best
practices, and model off of these as applicable.
Conclusion
Enrollment is affected by a long list of complexities, spanning from 1) the current system
limitations and functionalities, 2) availability of financial support for students, 3) the manual
steps necessary to complete administrative functions, 4) interpretation of enrollment definitions.
In the past, much attention has been given to increase counts of prospects; yet, there is a
significant opportunity to improve enrollment at BCCC by focusing on retention of continuing
students and increasing their capability to self-service on-site or remote.
11
December 23, 2015
Appendix A: Ad hoc Sub-Committee for Enrollment Workflow
Document Imaging and Workflow Sub-project Background:
In an effort to upgrade Baltimore City Community College’s IT infrastructure in conjunction with
the future ERP system, the Document Imaging and Workflow sub-project was implemented. The
workflow sub-committees, similar to the other recent workflow efforts in Admissions, Class
Attendance, and Billing & Paying of student accounts, are focused on process improvement
using BCCC current systems.
Workflow Process Improvement will focus on analyzing current processes for improvements
using BCCC current systems prior to implementing a new Document Imaging/Document
Management system. BCCC’s ERP Working Group and other key stakeholders rated more than
180 BCCC processes in Fall 2014 for importance and effectiveness. In Spring 2015 the ERP
Working Group looked at the results of those ratings and determined which processes would
benefit the most from an in-depth analysis, using the methods of Lean Six Sigma (LSS). The
next process selected to be examined is Enrollment.
For this effort to be successful, those most knowledgeable about Enrollment need to be
involved. Therefore, an Enrollment Sub-Committee has been established and is sponsored by
Dr. Ringgold, the Vice President of Academic Affairs and the Interim Vice President of Student
Affairs.
Document Imaging is a near-term effort to focus on BCCC developing a strategy in selecting
and acquiring a Document Imaging/Document Management solution. This solution will help to
streamline some of BCCC’s business processes, by improving document accessibility, security,
and reducing speed between transactions.
Document Imaging: Creation of an electronic image of paper or system generated
documents. This will involve identifying, scanning and/or converting existing documents
into a secure, accessible storage solution with search and retrieval functionality. This will
happen after a vendor is selected, and before the ERP is implemented.
Document Management: Utilization of a centrally managed, community storage and
retrieval system for information assets including desktop documents, images, and other
digital objects. This functionality will connect with the future ERP system and should
provide automated ERP workflow processes.
Enrollment Sub-Committee Purpose:
The purpose of the Enrollment Ad hoc Sub-Committee is to review the current processes from
prospect to alumni and to make recommendations for long-term improvement based on the LSS
methodologies as part of the Enrollment Workflow. This sub-committee will complement the
current efforts of the President’s Taskforce on Enrollment which is focused on the upcoming
12
December 23, 2015
spring semester. Coordination between these groups will be required to ensure that efforts are
supplementary and not duplicated.
Committee Duration:
The duration of the Ad-hoc Sub-Committee will be determined after our initial team meeting.
See the Time Commitment section below.
Committee Members and Roles:
Roles:
The role of Sponsor is filled by Dr. Ringgold and in that role she provides support, leadership
and vision for the effort. In addition, she needs to be informed of key issues or decisions and
ultimately the Sub-committee will report back to her with recommendations for
changing/improving the Enrollment process. She will be the key decision maker for what is
implemented or changed.
The champion of these Workflow projects is Dr. Tom Wamalwa who has provided the PMO
Leads as integrated members of the ERP team. He will attend the opening session, review
deliverables, and approve the scope.
The Lead/Facilitator is Pamela O’Connor, who is a certified LSS Black Belt process
improvement expert. Her role will be to lead the effort, schedule and conduct deep dive
sessions, document all aspects of the effort and help guide the team to a report that outlines
prioritized process improvement recommendations.
In addition, there are two other key roles: Core Team Member and Subject Matter Expert.


Core Team Members are expected to attend the deep dive sessions (two, two-hour
working sessions) and to be highly engaged and involved in the review effort, attending
additional meetings as necessary and reviewing and providing input on documents and
the final report.
Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) serve in a support role and may be asked to attend key
meetings and occasionally will be requested to assist with specific domain knowledge.
Members:
Sponsor: Dr. Tonja Ringgold – VP Academic Affairs and Interim VP of Student Affairs
Champion: Dr. Tom Wamalwa – CITS, ERP Director
PMO Leads: Pamela O’Connor (Document Imaging Workflow) – Lead/Facilitator
supported by Fred Sosiah (PMO, Project Assistant)
Team Lead: Robin Washington-Scott – Student Affairs
13
December 23, 2015
Proposed Core Team members:
Deneen Dangerfield – Student Affairs, Director, Admissions
Nassim Ebrahimi – IAMR, Associate VP, Institutional Research, Effectiveness
and Planning
Richard Walsh – Business & Finance, Bursar
Wendy Harris – Student Affairs, Associate Director, Records and Registration
Anthony Morris – ITS, Programmer
Proposed SMEs:
Dr. Bob Iweha – Academic Affairs, Dean, BSTEM
Dr. Daphne Snowden – Academic Affairs, Dean, Academic Operations
Sylvia Rochester – Student Affairs, Records and Registration
Heidi Wilker – ITS, Systems Analyst
Sonja S. Wells – BCCC Foundation, Board of Directors
Virgie Williams - Alumni Association
Scott Olden – Academic Affairs, Dean, Nursing & Allied Health
Dr. Dennis Weeks – Academic Affairs, Dean, Arts and Social Science
Vera Brooks – Student Affairs, Financial Aid
Nana Gysie – Student Affairs, Director of Student Success (Advising)
Lesley Brown – Academic Affairs, Academic Operations, Academic Analytics
Andre Williams – Academic Affairs, Academic Operations, Student Analytics
Charles Wilson – IAMR, Research Analyst
Nicole Cameron – Student Affairs, Dean, Student Development
Time Commitment:
The time commitment will vary but core team members should expect to be available up to 20
percent during the duration of this effort. SMEs should expect to be called upon about 5 percent
of their time. Most of this will start at the first 2-hour deep dive, and decrease significantly about
2 weeks after the second deep dive session.
Kickoff & Training:
There will be a brief, 30-minute kickoff session to outline the project timeline and to set
expectations, as well as to answer any questions the group may have. This meeting will be
scheduled in early December.
Lean Six Sigma Awareness Training will be provided. As part of the project, committee
members will learn about the LSS framework, methodology, tools and facilitation techniques.
Those who attend both two-hour, deep-dive sessions, will be eligible for 4 hours of professional
development credits. Our facilitator is a professional in the LSS methodology of process
improvement. "Lean" simplifies processes to remove steps that do not matter to the customer.
"Six Sigma" reduces variation to increase process predictability. The combination of these
14
December 23, 2015
analytical tools results in a rigorous methodology to design a future process focused on the
student's experience. After defining the current process, inputs and outputs, there will be a
request for data. Analysis of this data helps the team better understand the current state, and
enables comparison to the future efficiency. Implementation of improvements and confirmation
that those changes are maintained is where the College will experience the long-term value of
this effort.
15
December 23, 2015
Appendix B: Removal of the Application Fee
Executive Summary
In advance of the planned ERP upgrade to Baltimore City Community College’s IT
infrastructure, ERP PMO established the Workflow Process Improvement initiative to pursue
and deliver near-term improvements to current operations leveraging existing technology.
Action Requested: The ERP Workflow teams recommend that the College consider elimination
of the $10 application fee while absorbing it into another institutional fee. The Workflow Teams
recommend elimination of the application fee, with an increase in the Registration Fee to $30.
This would reduce out of pocket expenses for students, as the Registration fee can be covered
by Financial Aid. This recommendation would be revenue neutral in the near-term and slightly
positive in the long-term. Removing this barrier in the application process also would reduce the
risk that returning students could not register until this is paid. Internal processing of this fee has
become a significant administrative drain on Admissions, Business and Finance, and ITS staff.
Increasing the Registration fee would also eliminate the potential to trigger request for write-off.
This will bring BCCC into alignment with the majority of Maryland community colleges, including
the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC). Please see details that follow.
Application Fee Analysis
New students applying to BCCC credit programs are required to pay a $10 Application Fee.
While this has recently produced between $70,000-75,000 in revenue per year, it presents a
challenge to potential students and a burden on staff in the following ways:
 Financial Aid cannot cover application fees, so it is an out of pocket expense.
 Students cannot register for classes when this fee is unpaid from a previous semester
per the College’s policies and procedures along with COMAR.
 The student population who do not receive Financial Aid would not be impacted until
after their first semester.
 The College’s most competitive community college (CCBC) has no application fee, and
a significantly higher registration fee.
 When students pay by credit card, the College pays processing fees reducing the
revenue that this fee is intended to create.
 Over 50% of students have household earnings <150% poverty level; out of pocket fees,
like this present a financial barrier to application.
 Many students do not have access to the formal banking sector and cannot pay by credit
card or personal check, requiring additional effort to send payment in the mail (check or
money orders) or make a trip to the Liberty Campus cashier.
16
December 23, 2015





The College’s outdated technology presents a delay (previously 1,440 minutes, now 10
minutes) between online application creation and when the student can pay the fee.
Students are unaware of this delay which causes confusion.
BCCC Business and Finance, Student Accounting staff manually process high volumes
of $10 payments via mail or the walk-up cashier.
BCCC Business and Finance, General Accounting staff manually process high volumes
of $10 cash and money order payments.
BCCC systems have been ineffective at preventing all students from registering for
classes before paying this fee, which creates a collections issue for nonpayment.
Uncollectable application fees from those who apply but do not register require BCCC
staff to package and send to the State of Maryland Central Collection Unit (CCU) to
request abatement for write-off. In Fiscal Year 2015, almost 3,000 were sent to CCU for
abatement (2,915 total, equivalent to $29,150 of uncollectable application fees).
The $10 application fee is an out of pocket expense for the majority of our low-income students.
It is an administrative step that slows the admissions process, disallows registration in future
semester caused by a prior unpaid balance, adds manual work for BCCC staff in excess of the
revenue collected, and creates a logistical barrier for students. The team has identified options
for consideration.
Application Fee Analysis of Options
Options
Option 1
Eliminate the $10
Application Fee,
absorb it into the
Registration Fee
Pros
 Removes an out of pocket financial barrier
 Removes a step within the admission
process
 Reduces potential for registration block
when unpaid
 Reduces risk that unpaid Registration fee
alone would trigger request for write-off
 Reduces risk that unpaid Application fee
alone would trigger request for write-off
 Opportunity to increase admissions yield
 No loss of revenue
 Slight increase of long-term revenue
 Matches BCCC’s application fee to the
majority of Maryland community colleges
 Matches CCBC’s application fee
 Registration fee remains below CCBS’s fee
Cons
 Requires Board of
Trustees action
 Increases fees
covered by Financial
Aid by $10
 No guarantee of
increased enrollment
 Impacts continuing
students
17
December 23, 2015
Options
Option 2
Eliminate the $10
Application Fee
Option 3
Eliminate the $10
Application Fee,
absorb the fee into
tuition
Option 4
Keep the $10
Application Fee
unchanged
Pros
 Removes a process barrier from quickly
applying
would trigger request for write-off
 Brings BCCC in line with majority of
Maryland community colleges
 No impact to continuing students
 Removes a process barrier from quickly
applying
would trigger request for write-off
 No loss of revenue
 Matches BCCC’s application fee to the
majority of Maryland community colleges
 Status quo
Cons
Trustees action
 Loss of $70-75k in
revenue
 No guarantee of
Trustees action
 No guarantee of
 Impacts continuing
students
 Does not contribute
to growing
attendance
 Does not address
competition by other
community colleges
on admissions
student confusion
and frustration with
the admissions
process
 Staff effort expended
outweighs revenue
collected
18
December 23, 2015
Options
Option 5
Increase the
Application Fee
from $10 to $30
Pros
 Raises the fee above the COMAR threshold
for write-off to result in collections attempts
by the State CCU
Cons
Trustees action
 Does not contribute
to growing
attendance
competition by other
community colleges
on admissions
student confusion
and frustration with
the admissions
process
The Admissions and Billing & Paying and Enrollment Workflow Teams recommend
Option 1 - elimination of the application fee, with $10 increase in the Registration Fee - as
the best option for the students and the College. To benefit the student, shifting this amount
from prior to registration reduces out of pocket expenses for the majority of our students who
benefit from Financial Aid. Increasing the Registration fee keeps this fee competitive to similar
fees at other Maryland Community Colleges (see below). For the benefit of the College,
removing the application fee while absorbing the revenue into the Registration fee will prevent
immediate loss of revenue and prevent the current registration fee of $20 from triggering the
CCU abatement request for delinquent accounts with a balance under $30
(http://www.dsd.state.md.us/comar/comarhtml/17/17.01.01.05.htm). This increase keeps the
Colleges registration fee well below the similar first time credit student registration fee at CCBC,
which currently is $55. Additionally, any increase in enrollment yield and subsequent collected
tuition would mean immediate revenue for the College. Increased enrollment would also
provide a delayed financial benefit for the College because the FTE count influences the State’s
future appropriations to the College.
Maryland Community College Application Fees
A survey of the 16 Maryland community colleges shows that BCCC is one of four colleges that
currently charge an application fee. The College’s closest sister college, The Community
College of Baltimore County, does not charge an application fee and has a significantly higher
registration fee.
19
December 23, 2015
Maryland Community Colleges Application and Registration Fees
Maryland Community College
Application
Fee
Registration
Fee
Link to
Tuition & Fees
Montgomery College
$25
$50 min
(consolidation fee)
MC
Prince George's Community
College
$25
$25
PGCC
Howard Community College
$25
$22/credit hour
(consolidation fee)
HCC
Baltimore City Community
College
$10
$20
BCCC
The Community College of
Baltimore County
$0
$55
CCBC
Anne Arundel Community
College
$0
$25
AACC
College of Southern Maryland
$0
23% of tuition
(combined fee)
CSM
Harford Community College
$0
$23/credit hour
Harford CC
Frederick Community College
$0
$57
FCC
Hagerstown Community
College
$0
$27
Hagerstown
CC
Carroll Community College
$0
$25/ credit hour
(service fee)
CCC
Allegany College of Maryland
$0
$35
ACM
Wor-Wic Community College
$0
(none)
Wor-Wic CC
Chesapeake College
$0
$10
CC
Cecil College
$0
$75
Cecil
Conclusion
For the benefit of the students and the College, the Workflow Teams recommend that BCCC
Tuition and Fees committee identify a new fee structure to elimination of the application fee
while consolidating it into another institutional fee.
20
December 23, 2015
Appendix C: Targeted Data Clean-up Effort on SIMS Course
Catalog
Background:
The ERP Data Standards Working Group (DSWG) is charged with identifying and resolving
errors in SIMS data and other core BCCC data holdings to make the College’s data migrationready for the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. Recently, those efforts have
focused on devising an approach to clean up the College’s course catalog in SIMS.
The DSWG identified a quick win opportunity with the potential to make a demonstrable impact
on Spring enrollment. By correcting the top 10 courses requiring manual overrides due to
missing or incorrect prerequisites, the team believes it can cut those overrides by the Registrar
by 50% and enable a much more robust and successful Spring online registration. SIMS data
on courses causing manual registration overrides was provided to the team by ITS.
Outcome Achieved:
1. Fixed the top 10 courses causing enrollment overrides in SIMS
2. Documented the procedures for cleaning the Catalog_Master
Purpose and Approach:
In recognition that Spring registration begins on Monday, November 16th, the team approached
this rapid improvement event like a short kaizen to implement a quick win for the Data
Standards Working Group, which is also expected to positively impact enrollment.
From Lean Six Sigma methodologies, a kaizen event rapidly reduces waste, in this case for
both students and the College, to attain sustained results. This approach involves pre-event
preparation to identify specific targets and planning the event for concentrated results. The
highly facilitated event involved cross-functional team members from IAMR, Academic Affairs,
Student Affairs, and ITS to begin implementation. Follow-up actions will be assigned and
tracked, including verification that the changes made have significantly reduced the volume of
manual overrides necessary within Office of the Registrar and a report-out to leadership.
Phase
Define
Measure
Analyze
Improve
Control
Description of actions
Clearly define the objective and preparation: select team members, perform
logistics, notifications, data collections, and prepare training
Validate the current state of the process
Collect metrics to quantify recent overrides (non-value added steps)
Quickly validate root causes, brainstorm improvements to eliminate overrides
Create future design and action item list
Implement improvements, train employees, and begin testing
Fine-tune, and insure the process is capable and compare to goal
Create Standard Operating Procedures to sustain improvements
Stage
Prep
Event
Follow-up
21
December 23, 2015
Phase
Description of actions
Present results to leadership monitor results over time
Stage
Event Scope
The ERP PMO formally defined the opportunity and quantified the manual overrides for the
current semester (coded in SIMS as “A159” which means “2015, Fall”). The focused clean-up
effort was on the following list of 10 courses that have recently disabled the online registration
capability for students and caused the most manual intervention on the part of the College
based on prerequisites.
Courses with the Most Registration Overrides (Fall 2015)
Course
MAT 107
ENG 101
MAT 92
BUAD112
RENG 91
RENG 92
MAT 91
SOC 101
CHE 101
MAT 128
All other courses (153 Courses)
Count of Overrides
393
350
216
187
175
165
164
136
106
102
1,886
% of Overrides
10%
9%
6%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
3%
3%
49%
Cum %
10%
19%
25%
30%
34%
38%
43%
46%
49%
51%
100%
Leadership and Roles:



Sponsor - Dr. Ringgold, VP Academic Affairs and the Interim VP of Student Affairs
Champion - Dr. Wamalwa, ERP Director provided support from the ERP PMO
Team Leads - Dr. Iweha, Dean of BSTEM (Academic Affairs), and Dr. Ebrahimi,
Associate VP of Institutional Research, Effectiveness and Planning (IAMR)
Team members:





Facilitators – Steve Nugent, Adam Kutcher, Pam O’Connor, Amy Anderson
Content Approvers - Melvin Brooks, Scott Saunders, Cynthia Webb, Fabian Vega, Anil
Malaki
SIMS SME - Anthony Morris
SIMS Business Analysts - Ricky Pierce, Shalya Hunter
Testers - Sylvia Rochester, Wendy Harris
22
December 23, 2015
Duration:
The event was scheduled from 9 AM to 12 PM on Wednesday, November 11 in Harper Hall 105
with follow-up sessions on Thursday, 12 November and Friday, 13 November. Deans and
Associate Deans attended for the two hours of the Wednesday event to approve the content
changes and were consulted throughout the event if the team had questions.
Prep Work
The following is a list of activities that enabled this clean-up effort:
1. The team pulled “Active_Credit_Courses” to identify courses for each school and
department. This helped identify:
a. Duplicate courses due to slight format differences
b. Retired courses that might require a “stop code”
c. Missing general information
2. The team pulled manual overrides by the Office of the Registrar per course. The
courses with an “Override Message,” similar to “Missing Prerequisite…,” needed to have
the prerequisites, co-requisites, or course equivalency tables updated.
3. The testers identified students to act as test cases in DEMO who have the prerequisites
needed to test pass and fail scenarios for each class
Updating Procedure
1. Deans / Associate Deans approve content to be entered in to SIMS
2. Team Leads review approved document for compliance with College/MHEC standards
3. SIMS Business Analyst and Testers run before tests in DEMO SIMS. We recommended
changing the background color to remind the operator of the difference between DEMO
and Production if both are open.
a. Enroll a student that, based on current rules, should fail enrollment
b. Enroll a student that, based on current rules, should succeed
4. SIMS Business Analyst and Testers confirm test results in DEMO SIMS
5. SIMS Business Analyst enter approved data to DEMO SIMS
a. Course description, prerequisites, and course equivalencies entered
6. SIMS Business Analyst and Enrollment Verification run after tests in DEMO SIMS
a. Rerun student that failed in step 3, student enrollment should succeed
b. Run second test for student whose enrollment should not succeed
c. Run enrollment for student that should fail enrollment
7. SIMS Business Analyst and Enrollment Verification confirm test results
8. SIMS SME debugs as necessary – Repeats steps as necessary until tests meet
expected result. Often complications can happen because of:
a. Course equivalents: Be sure to consider the “-X” exemptions that are placed on
the student’s record to indicate their personal ACCUPLACER results.
23
December 23, 2015
b. Prerequisites and co-requisites: Consider the “OR” and ”RQ” logic in addition to
any minimum grade requirement (often “C” for passing results).
c. Prerequisites’ course equivalents
9. SIMS Business Analyst - Final configuration from DEMO documented on Comparison
Sheet.
10. Testers and Team Leads sign-off on data to be entered to SIMS Production
11. SIMS Business Analyst takes screenshot of as-is data in SIMS Production
12. SIMS Business Analyst enters revised data into SIMS Production
13. SIMS Business Analyst takes screenshot of revised data in SIMS Production
Follow-on Actions
1. ERP - Develop the procedural User Guide for this SIMS Course Catalog update activity
2. ITS - Pull override report and supply to Records and Registration for monitoring for the
next several weeks.
3. ITS - Investigate automating the upload of ACCUPLACER scores to SIMS to increase its
frequency
4. ITS - Pull full list of course equivalencies for team
5. ITS - Pull list of prerequisite/co-requisite list and provide to Pam to detect formatting
issues.
Parking Lot Issues
1. Registering for courses that were exempted by ACCUPLACER results (student will
receive error saying they have already taken the course)
2. Number of spaces for prereq/co-req, course equivalents, and active courses
3. Review of process from ACCUPLACER scores to pre-requisite exemption.
4. Verify all appropriate HP LAN Reports and Forms access are available to key users (e.g.
allowing Registrar to pull registration override report)
5. Messages received when the prerequisite/exemption is missing
6. Put “Stop Codes” on inactive courses (Note: Team is prepared to do this, waiting to
organize effort with Academic Affairs)
7. Math prerequisites for BSTEM students (specifically 87M).
8. Setting-up SIMS Degree Audit
24
December 23, 2015
Appendix D: Spring 2016 Navigator Management Partners
Grant
For Spring 2016, a total of $1,000 has been donated to the BCCC Foundation from Navigator
Management Partners. The intent is to help a wide population of students who each have a small
pre-existing financial block that is prohibiting them from registering for upcoming classes.
Recommended Candidate Criteria:
 For students registering for the next major session (Spring 2016), until funds are
exhausted.
 Students who applied before 12/15/15, and the financial block was established prior to
12/15/15.
 In Good Academic Standing (includes students who have not yet attempted any credits)
 Must have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0, unless new student with no GPA.
 BCCC financial block equal to or less than $30.
 No other registration blocks as of the date this support is requested (includes orientation,
MD residency, and testing).
 Students who never attended BCCC must have applied for a 2015 or 2016 semester.
 Possible criteria: exclude new foreign students because entrance process is complicated this criteria may be waived if all other entrance criteria have been met.
Recommended Follow-up:
After funds have been exhausted, we recommend that the list of students who received these
funds, and the amount per student be available for transparency within the College and to
provide limited feedback to Navigator Management Partners about the impact of their generosity.
25
December 23, 2015
Appendix E: Recommendations to Improve Enrollment
The following is a list of all team recommendations following the review of registration block
data.
























Create Pathway-based schedules
Increase capability for course look-up to include 2 semesters (Build out schedule of
full academic year)
Computerize degree audit and education plans
Create block schedule friendly model around part-time students
Have a centralized scheduling office
Review how Valencia Community College for best practices
Automate upload of orientation scores
Clarify options to submit residency verification
Review the website communication to improve from the student perspective
Academic coordinators utilize Canvas for program specific outreach
Discus next steps with students in the classroom (e.g. next class to take, or
certification exams)
Record in COCO that student saw an advisor. If we had good data, we could reach
out more proactively.
Remove the application fee
Admissions expand the Recent Graduate outreach to all 1st generation students
Centralize the scholarship offerings - have all Pay for College options available
Centralize the scholarship offerings - the electronic form only used in 1 of 4 entities
Improve branding for College (e.g. Workforce Development, or Nursing Program)
Create “Master Class” for students to master transition to college
Incentivize completion of registration
Market resources that are free to students (e.g. open license)
Market that BCCC students have free services, i.e., 50 copies in Library, and
reciprocal library borrowing privileges with the U of Baltimore.
Track with COCO why students are transferring out/withdrawing
Track within COCO where a transfer/transcript is going
Stop mass printing of the schedule booklet; many schools provide most online
26
December 23, 2015
Appendix F: Definitions
Prospect – submitted an inquiry about BCCC and requested info via phone or online
Applicant – Completed an application and submitted the application fee.
Admissions Status categories (New, Transfer, High School, Returning, non-degree seeking,
International)
Admit – Attended orientation, completed placement testing (when required), met with an
advisor (when required) for 1st semester’s course scheduling
Enrolled – Includes students in billing, and retention.
Students in billing - Recent applicants and continuing students who registered for classes and
made a payment.
Students in retention – continuing students who maintain registration, no registration block for
academic or financial reasons
Graduate – Met all program requirement and financial obligations for a degree or certificate
Completer – Completed course(s) for non-matriculation
These are not tracked and are many of our students
We lose many of these to other community colleges, but these should be transferring to 4-year
colleges (per National Student Clearing House)
The Nursing School has an Alumni tracking system
“Returning Students” and “Continuing Students” are different!
Continuing Students – maintain registration in consecutive major terms
Returning Student (per IAMR) – student that missed 1 major term
Stop Out – student that missed 1 major term
Returning Student (per Admissions Status) – student that missed 2 consecutive semesters,
excluding Summer.
Alumni (per AA) – Former student who graduated with degree or certificate
Alumni (per BCCC Alumni Association) – Former student
27
December 23, 2015
Appendix G: Registration Blocks on Accounts Sent to CCU
1.
"New Student" Admissions Status is the majority of these accounts that were sent to CCU.
"In City" State Status is the majority.
2.
The Application Fee is a large contributor to the counts of "Foreign" and "Out of State" students.
3.
28
December 23, 2015
The majority of the financial blocks are from the Application Fee alone.
The next most common contribution appears to be from the $20 Registration Fee.
Very few of financial blocs are for amounts over $30.
4.
The vast majority of the financial blocks are students "In Good Academic Standing"
5.
120 of these students applied for upcoming semesters.
Most applied during Fall 2014 or Fall 2015.
29
December 23, 2015
6.
The majority of these students never attended BCCC.
7.
The numbers (1,2,3,4) are the Counts of Registration Blocks for that individual.
All of the students within this data have a financial block, the other block types that are
identifiable by this data are Orientation, MD Residency, and Testing.
Not all students are required to have testing (e.g. transfer students can use equivalency)
30

Board of Trustees - Baltimore City Community College

Transcription

Similar documents

Mad Scientists On Wheels

STEP-1 >> GO TO https://www.onlinesbi.com

Blackadders uses FloSuite Legal

MC_Summer 2015.indd

Membership Privileges

Express Store!

VVtWu~ ~WV - Baltimore City Community College

Toronto,Canada Toronto,Canada - Toronto District School Board

Research PDF

Goderich Golf Tournament 2015

Winter 2015 - Quilt Basket