LBCCD Special Board Meeting – August 27, 2019


– [Vivian Malauulu]
Good afternoon everyone. Welcome. I’d like to call the August 27th Board of Trustees special meeting budget study session to order. It is, it was 4:30 when I hit the gavel. It is 4:31 now. At this time, we’d like to
start the Pledge of Allegiance. If I could get, Mr. Jeff Wood, would you please join us in the leading the flag
salute this afternoon? – [Group] I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty
and justice for all. – Thank you. Madam secretary, could
you please take roll? – [Secretary] Virginia Baxter. – [Virginia] Here. – [Secretary] Vivian Malauulu. – Here. – [Secretary] Uduak-Joe Ntuk, will be late. And Doug Otto. – [Doug] Here. – At this time, we will
hear public comments on any agenda items. Madam Secretary, did anyone
submit a speaking card? – [Secretary] There are no speaking cards. – There are no speakers at this time, so we’re gonna move on to item 1.5, the annual budget development overview. And at this time, I’d like to turn the floor over
to Vice President Drinkwine. – Thank you so much, President Malauulu. It’s my pleasure this afternoon to lead the board of trustees through an in depth review of our proposed adopted
budget for 2019-20. Before I get started on the presentation, I want to note a couple of things. One is that we just recently
completed year end closing, and the final determination
of some of these numbers. So there may be small differences between what we discuss today and what’s presented to
you for your approval and September 11th. They are not material
differences, however. And it’s just a couple
of last minute items that came through right at
the end of closing the books. And the other this that the effort of my team
to put together a budget in any year is phenomenal. I really want to acknowledge their efforts and their expertise in being able to
bring a budget to you today for your review. You have attached to your agenda was the presentation as well as the unrestricted general fund, a list of all funds. We also provided some other
supplementary materials that as we get to them, I’ll share with you what they are. You have them all at your areas, as well as they are
available for the public. This evening we’re going to talk about the budget development cycle, what goes into the budget development, what are the goals, the plans, the priorities that the budget has to be aligned with. We’ll discuss the assumptions for the development of the budget. We’ll focus on the
unrestricted general fund. That is the fund that contains all the primary operations
for the district. And we’ll also touch on some other funds. Please feel free to
interrupt me at any time with any questions. There are three major separate
budget development cycles. The first is the development
of the state budget. You’ll see in a future slide that the primary source of our revenue is state apportionment dollars. And that’s dependent entirely on the state’s budget. In January of each year, the governor will release his proposal for the budget for the following year. In May, the governor
releases the May revision. The May revision will reflect any negotiations on the elements
contained in the budget, as well as more accurate
state revenue numbers. Property taxes will have been collected. The cost of living adjustment, which is statutorily set, will be known and will have
a lot more information. The state enacts their budget in June, but it’s important to also note that trailer legislation
that contains the policy often determines exactly how much our district
gets out of the revenues is not released until
sometime later July or August. That’s important because we first present our tentative budget to you in June, before the state’s budget is even enacted. So there’s a lot of moving parts. And the budget, you can
consider as living document, that it is always being
adjusted to reflect the most current and the best data. The second cycle relates to our district’s actual data. That for instance, in January, when the governor’s releasing the budget, that’s when we’re getting some preliminary spring
enrollment numbers. So we’re halfway through the year, and we forecast our enrollment. But really by then, we know,
okay, what happened in fall, what’s enrolled for spring. It gives us an opportunity to update it. And the we update it
quarterly throughout the year. So as we’re moving forward, and we get better enrollment numbers, that we’re always revisiting it. Simultaneously, we have
efforts on the department and VP planning. So the district wide planning process is hopefully concluding by May so that we can include those priorities in the following year’s budget. It gives us a very short
timeframe to respond to those resource requests
and those priorities. But May, obviously, is
a very busy time for us. And then we’re right back in the summer looking at the new year. So we’re always adjusting
for actual numbers. And then the third cycle is what the state requires us to do, what’s contained in the Ed code. So that means our
tentative budget in June, our adopted budget in September. And the we have quarterly
reports throughout. We have a first quarter
update in November, a second quarter update in February, and a third quarter update in May. So that throughout the year, we’re able to provide
you with a status update on what those budgets were, what changes did we have to make, and what do we project
we’re gonna end up with at the end of the year. And so looking at that cycle, it would be my recommendation that as we look at the
budget for next year that we come back together again in April to look at the budget development for the year 2020-21. I mentioned that the budget considers board goals, strategic plan goals, and institutional priorities. Our accreditation
standards actually require that our budget be aligned
with institutional planning. And so that explains why in
every single budget presentation we’ll have several slides dedicated to showing
how those expenditures, and how those specific activities are tied to the institutional planning. Obviously, the Board of Trustees goals are also considered in the
development of this budget. I believe that the last Board of Trustee goals were adopted in August of 2017. So we do our best to align with those goals. And of course, our strategic plan with the goals of innovation for equitable student success, accelerating college readiness, et cetera are also a focus. And I know that we had
a recent presentation that talked about how those goals are aligned with the Chancellor’s office vision for success, as well as the institutional priorities. So we have alignment all the way from the Chancellor’s Office through our planning. And all of that is reflected
in the resulting budget. And so we do identify a combination of major
programs and new programs, and how they align with
those various goals. For instance, College Promise 2.0 aligns with our strategic plan and several other areas. While it’s obviously higher enrollment will help fiscal health, since it’s not a specifically
serving fiscal health, you can see that’s a good example of how we do identify which goals it actually serves, and we don’t just plug them in there. You’ll also see efforts
to increase completions reflected in there. Student centered scheduling improvements, all of these activities that
were identified in planning as being necessary to better serve our students and serve our vision and our missions. On slide 10, you can
see that this is where we’re reflecting our incredibly successful Viking summer voyage, our welcome centers, our starfish early alerts, that this is where you can see where we’ve captured those initiatives and those activities. Another primary purpose of the budget is to identify a reserve. Our board policy, 6010, requires specifically a
minimum of 5.5% reserve. The Chancellor’s Office institutional effectiveness goal is 9.5%. So that means that our total
goal for reserves is 15%. 15%. – [Woman] Vice President Drinkwine? – [Vice President Drinkwine] Yes? – When was this institutional
effective goal set, because I never remember
hearing about it before? – The institutional effectiveness goal, I believe, was set about four years ago. I can come back to you
with the formal plan. But the Chancellor’s Office
convened a working group on institutional effectiveness. And it was during that process that they established
the 9.5% requirement. – Do they require it to be cumulative, or they just 9.9, or 9.5? – The 9.5 is intended to be
an additive to our reserve. It is separately calculated
with each budget year. And the calculation is
unrestricted expenditures, so 15% of that is our
goal for the minimum. So our goal is 5.5%, the Chancellor’s Office
goal is an additional 3.5%. – [Man] So the cumulative should be 9.5. – Correct. It would be 15. It’s additive on. – I understand. I guess the institutional
effectiveness recommendation, 9.5%, this recommendation is 9.5%, not 15%. – [Drinkwater] Correct. Correct. – So we’re above and beyond
the effectiveness goal. – My understanding is that
it was an additional 9.5%, plus our goal. The 9.5%, I will say, is not statutorily required. – [Trustee Ntuk] It’s
just a recommendation. – Correct. We do have a budget advisory committee. It is a shared governance committee. And in that committee, we develop our assumptions, and we have participation from groups throughout the district. Not all those assumptions are developed within the committee, however, and a very good example
of this is our FTES goal, which is developed by academic affairs in conjunction with the deans,
department, and faculty. And so annually, they take
on this very large task of looking at what our
current enrollment classes and staffing are, and any new additional
curriculum that’s coming online, and any opportunities for expansion. I’ll go into some depth about
the student centered formula in a few slides, funding formula. But it is important that by time we exit the hold harmless funding in 2022-23, that we reach 20,000 FTES in order to be eligible for
the large college funding. It’s worth about $1.3 million to us. And so that is one of the goals. We have several goals
connected to the formula, but this is one of the goals. And it is something that we
are making steady progress at and we’ll be able to
share with you some data in just a little bit. – Can you tell us just a little bit about the large college threshold? When it came to be? How we’ve done with that over the last half a dozen years? I know it wasn’t an issue, then it kind of became an issue. And we obviously want
to be a large college. And the threshold is
20,000, I think, FTES. – Correct. So the threshold is 20,000 FTES. That moves you from being in the mid-range into the upper range. And for our, for us in 18-19, the difference between the large and the medium college status is $1.3 million. But I’m going to ask Dr. Scott to address the evolution of that. – Okay, historically going back, we have hit the large college status many years, going back
to 2005 and 06 we hit it. Just barely over 2006, we did, 2007, we did, 2008. We did all the way up until 2012-13 where we missed it by not too much. We were at 19,641. And then we missed it in 13-14 again. We had gone down below that to 19,189. And 14-15, we went back up and did hit the large college status. We hit it again in 15-16. And we hit it in 16-17, but we hit it that year
by bringing in FTES from both of the summers. And you know how you can do that. So we wouldn’t have done that well, but we pulled in the summers. And that was actually a good decision, because it
did give us money that year, but it also set that as the hold harmless. So we were held harmless at a point that would have been higher than it would have been otherwise. – And with the new funding formula, didn’t they initially say something about the summer shifts, and they were gonna
eliminate them, I think, that you couldn’t do it. But I think they backed away from that. – The initial proposal
for the funding formula would have eliminated the
opportunity to do summer shifts. So we can so do summer shifts, but under the new funding formula, we’re not funded on a single year’s FTES. We are rather funded on a
three year rolling average. So when you’re averaging three years, the impact of the summer shift is far less. And you have to have a much more complex projection to determine how when
you’re shifting the summer, how does that impact you, not
just this year but next year. And it does become more complex and less valuable. But if I may, I would
like to allow Dr. Scott to talk a little bit about
the success we’re having with meeting our goals. As the slide shows you for 19-20, the goal for resident FTES is 19,375. But as we are starting school this week, we have some good news. – Okay, we’re doing reasonably well. And it’s possible we could
hit large college status before the year that we
have a goal projected. Yeah, 2022. In summer, we were up about 10%. So that gives us a good start. And then for fall, we’re currently up about 5.5%. It’s too early to know
whether that’s gonna hold through census. We have late start classes. We have positive attendance
that come in non-credit, and some of our credit classes. But we did determine earlier today that if we, if we look at where we were with summer, our projection for summer, which is pretty close at this point, our projection for fall, and if we stick with
where we were last winter, and where we were last spring, we’re only gonna be about 200 off the large college status this year. And so if we can maintain and hold on to the students,
the new students that we got and do a really good job
of retaining students, we have a chance at getting very close this year. So a lot of it really
relies on our ability to maintain those students. And that is gonna be
a collaborative effort for all of us. And something I’ll be talking
to the academic senate about on Friday. Yeah, it’s gonna be a
collaborative goal for all of us to retain these students, especially the new ones that have come in. – I will say too that Dr. Munoz deserves a great deal of credit. The summer Viking voyage that really helped walk
our high school students through the enrollment processes has also been incredibly successful. And I pointed out that
it was on the list of new activities, new initiatives that we highlighted. And it is an example of
a dedication of resources that is paying off. And I don’t know if you
wanted to share, Dr. Munoz, about the number that you identified that went through the
summer Viking voyage. – So as you know, we implemented some new high school outreach strategies last year. And they definitely paid quite well in terms of the increase
in our enrollment. So when we look at the
year of year increase from our high schools
from Fall 18 to Fall 19, that we see about a 43% increase. So there’s about a thousand more full time high school students registered this year than the previous year. So we deployed staff
out to the high schools, did onsite applications, onsite orientation, onsite educational planning. So our counselors went out, did the full wrap around services, and that’s something that
the councilors used to do but we moved away from over the years. Now, it’s not anything new, it’s just returning to some of the high impact practices that the college used to always have. We also realize that your
onboarding new students, so what are we gonna do to really provide some intensive services. So we implemented a Viking summer voyage for over 600 students. For an inaugural summer voyage, that’s a very high number. I can tell you most of
the schools around here average about 500 students, so we’re above schools
that have been doing this for several years. And so it’s a two week
summer intensive bridge that focuses on math skill development, counseling, career planning, educational planning, as well as student affairs,
student life component. And then we also implement
Viking welcome days. We recognize not all of these students could attend two weeks to make that kind of commitment. So we did one day extended orientations that last about five hours to give students kind of just uptick in their start here at
Long Beach City College. And we had another 600
students go through that. So we’re really focusing in on the first year supports and all the transition
activities to Dr. Scott’s point, to make sure that we hold
on to these students. We don’t want to add all
these students into the queue and then lose them after one semester. So we’re working really hard to partner with academic affairs to make sure that we retain the students that we just put all this effort into recruiting. – And I would just add, it’s all the more remarkable because of what we’ve done
and what we’ve accomplished because of the fact that enrollments everywhere are going down. And therefore, you’re not saying oh, we want to stay where we are, because if we do that, we wouldn’t have slipped. And not only that, but our good friends at Long Beach Unified are working really hard
to send their students to four year schools. That means that we get fewer of them, not that it’s wrong, but for them to want to do that. So there’s all kinds of forces that are in our way of achieving, I don’t even want to talk about large college stuff, but just our enrollments. So these are real, real amazing
accomplishments, really. – Okay, I’d also like to
add a couple other things, if I may. We’ve had a three year
enrollment management plan that I think we’ve done a very good job at meeting most of the objectives. The work that’s been done by the faculty with curriculum has been amazing. As I reported on college day, over 600 items were approved through the curriculum
process this last year. And I failed to mention on college day, and I should have, is all the work done by
institutional effectiveness and tableau. We are now able to push out
targeted emails to students telling them what classes they need. These are available. Which has been a really big help to us. And also lastly, and not least, is the growth of adult ed and non-credit. We’ve increased it really about 100%. And it’s an area where
we’re not currently serving the community in ways that we could. And we want to continue to grow that. So that’s another area
where it’s helping us with our FTES. Thank you. – And so when we look at our assumptions, and on slide 16, you’ll note that I do have
a corrected slide for you, our resident target, as we just discussed, was 19,375, with our non-resident of 345. Our total target is just over 19,700. We do every year, anticipate
a 0.5% deficit state. When I use deficit here, I’m talking about when the state has not enough money to fully fund all community
college districts, and so they essentially prorate the, the apportionment to each of us. There have been years when
it’s been as high as 5%. And so half percent is rather less conservative than I’m
entirely comfortable with. But what that means, and
I’ll be showing this to you as we look at how we
improved our year end, that represents about $600,000 to us. And we do employ a total cost of ownership approach to budgeting. That means that we look at operation of an entire program. We recognize that when
you’re adding a person, you’re adding an office, you’re adding a computer, you’re adding a program. We also consider all vacant positions to be filled. Unless we say we are
not filing a position, which is a very, it is a very important consideration
to determine if we are not filling a position. It does not happen often. We instead say that if we have a position, we budget it for the full year. So, say we have a few vacancies and it takes us six months
to recruit and fill. We essentially save half a year. Or in the case of reorganization, if we know that we have
to leave a position vacant while we organize, we will naturally have some savings. And you’ll see the result of that as well. We do have some STRS and PERS increases. We have a total of just over $1.5 million in STRS and PERS increases. And this is despite the relief that we see from the state, which
we’ll discuss in a moment. We do have a health and
welfare premium increase. This is exceptional. I have to say that our health benefit plan is very well managed, and we’ve been able to hold the growth in the cost of that program. The 2019-20 cost of living adjustment. – Vice President Drinkwine,
I’m sorry to interrupt. I have a question, but I am not sure if my question is appropriate for this slide, or a future slide. So maybe you can tell me it’s coming, or it would fit. Actually, I have two questions. One, and correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s my understanding
that the SURP savings from the SURP that we offered last year would be reflected in this year’s budget. Is that correct? – The SURP savings are
reflected in two ways. So we have the ongoing SURP savings simply by having a person with more experience at the higher level of step and column being replaced with a
newer person with less. So that’s an ongoing until
they essentially grow up. So you typically have savings over a three to five year
period after the SURP because you’re still experiencing that difference as that person advances. But what we were really able to do with the SURP last year is because of the timing, we were able to achieve a few million dollars in savings through the use of adjunct faculty. The fund did not require
us to use full time faculty to replace them until the 1920 year. So that allowed us to
have one time savings. So you’re right, every year we’ll reflect the ongoing savings from the SURP, but we did capture
quite a few more savings in 18-19 in one time savings. – Okay, thank you for clarifying that. And I may have, I may have misunderstood at a previous board meeting, and I don’t remember who reported it, if it was you or Dr. Romali, but I know that it was recorded that the SURP savings that we had in the 2018-2019 academic year, it was actually reported
as savings in that year. The SURPs that were offered, they were reported in that year. But that was incorrect, right. There shouldn’t have been, we were offered the SURPs last year, and there shouldn’t have been
any SURPs savings reflected in last year’s budget. It would have been for this
year’s budget, correct. – So the SURPs was effective July 1, 2018. And so– – I’m sorry, I misspoke, 2017-2018 SURP would have been reflected
in the 2018-2019. – Correct. Correct, that’s absolutely correct. That initial big chunk of savings is reflected in 2018-19. And I’m actually going
to be able to show you what that immediate impact was. But it was about $3 million, being able to replace them with adjunct. But then again, we do have an ongoing, just natural savings because we as we fill those positions, they are folks who are lower
on the salary schedule. – Okay, because I do distinctly remember that those SURP savings were reported in the 2017, I’m sorry. What year are we? – [Drinkwine] It would have been 18. – 2017-2018 school year when we offered the SURP, that that’s when those
savings were reported as saying we’ve saved this much. But it shouldn’t have been, right. It would have started, it would have gone into effect 2018-2019, correct. – My recollection, because I actually joined the district right when we offered the SURP, that it was a very short timeframe. And so before we had offered the SURP, the tentative budget had already basically gone to press. And then when we did the adopted budget, that’s when you really saw the swing in the 2018-19 adopted budget. So I’m not sure about whether it had attempted
to be captured in 2017-18, but I can assure you that the 18-19 change was definitely reflected
in the 18-19 budget. – Okay, got it. Thank you. I have one additional question. And again, if this is
not the appropriate place in your presentation, redirect me and I’ll wait. But it has to do with, so one of the things that I have been looking into is hiring person, hiring of personnel
coming in at top pay. And the reason why that
kind of caught my attention is because I’m familiar
with the step and the tier, and the way the breakdown in district personnel budget goes. But I’m concerned because I have noticed that we are hiring deans and we’re hiring, I think it’s really just
been deans actually, that have come in at top pay. But then there’s no wiggle
room for them later. And then I know certain
departments in our district have had extreme turnover very quickly. But then we hire somebody else
at top pay to replace them. So I’m just concerned
where that is in the budget and the impact that that has on our budget in terms of retention, first of all, if we do retain them, what’s the next step after that if they come in at higher pay. And then when we have
issues in that department, which causes some of those deans, and I think we had four deans in one particular department within eight months, and then they were being
hired at high pay each time. And you know, there were
just different issues. And I know that as a trustee, it’s not my job to micromanage or get in the weed, or you know, go in there and
find out what’s going on. When you see things like that, and you’re discussing a budget, I’d like to know what the process is and what goes into
consideration with that. – Certainly. I’ll address the budget question, and then perhaps I can hand it
over to Vice President Durand to discuss the negotiations that may result in somebody coming in at a higher step. When we budget, we
budget for the mid-range. So if you have, for instance, a position that would have five steps, we would budget at three. That is done from a conservative standpoint. We are always conservative
as we approach our budgets. And because we do know that some positions are
come in at a higher step, we budget at the mid-range. And so that protects us
and protects our budget because it averages out. But if I may ask Vice
President Durand to address how that comes about. – Sure. What I think you may be referring to is some recent hires
in enrollment services. It’s a very technical job. It requires a high level of experience. And individuals from that area command to of the market. So there was a dean that was
brought in a at higher rate in that area. At the same time, there was another dean brought in student services who was brought in at
the first or second step. And we also had some
academic associate deans who were brought in at
the second or third step. It’s an 11 step salary schedule. So I’m not sure if those are the positions you were referring to. When we do look at
bringing individuals in, there’s a combination of you know, being competitive, making sure we’re looking
at a level of skills, not only that we’re needing, but what’s out in the marketplace, and other tangible
things that we can judge. We also do look to ensure that as they are placed with
their other colleagues, that it’s as fair as possible. But there are gonna be areas
where we are gonna have to bring in people higher just to bring in the talent that we need to address the concerns and the work that needs to be done. I can, I’m happy to provide, I
don’t have it in front of me, a list of where academic administrators have been placed. Perhaps on a scattergram
of the salary schedule. I can provide that for the board if that will be helpful to you, just so visually you can see exactly where the most recent, and say the last year, or whatever time period you wish, have been placed and we can look at that. – I appreciate that. Thank you. And I am specifically
referring to A and R, and also, so, and again, if I’m not
articulating my concerns properly, perhaps you can anticipate
where I’m trying to get, and you can help me get there. But it’s been put on my radar, and I want to make sure that we are being prudent
in terms of our hiring, particularly when a few
years ago we separated the department where we had A
and R became one department, and I think was it financial services, or enrollment services. So A and R was split up, and so you know, work
was done to hire people and to fill staff. But then now it’s going back to the model that we had before. Is that correct? We’re returning to what we did before? So, Dr. Munoz, before you respond, I just want to know how
that impacts the budget. So what we had before, we had enrollment services and admissions and
records that were separate and worked together, and we combined the two, and we’re really familiar
with a lot of the problems that happen. In fact, we talked about it
at board meetings before. We’ve had a lot of personnel changes. We’ve had, I mean people that were hired that were just not very
familiar with the system they were brought in. But then now, we’re going back to the model that we had before. So what impact do all of those
changes have on the budget? – Sure. So, and again, I’m fairly new, so I don’t want to speak with full understanding
of what might happen six or seven years ago. So I’m gonna share what I kind of, my fact finding, and what
I’ve been able to assess, and then kind of where we’re at right now. So there was a decision several years ago to consolidate into this
one department model called enrollment services. So historically, admissions and records and financial aid, which are both very highly regulatory, but different regs, right, environments got blended
into one service model. But the number of administrators, I don’t know back then, but looking at right now from what we had with this blended model to the separation, we haven’t changed the
number of administrators. We’ve just basically focused the supervisors’ responsibilities
to focus on a key area. So whereas before you had an enrollment services director that was overseeing both financial aid and admissions with this
blended responsibilities, we’re separating those responsibilities so that one director is focusing solely on admissions and records, and really being that competent content expert serving as the registrar for the college. And now we have a
director of financial aid who’s really focusing on getting us through our audit findings, and getting those corrective
action measures put in place, and all the other issues that
we’ve had in financial aid. And then we have still the
dean over both those areas along with other components
like scholarship, international students,
other areas as well. So the actual net number of
administrators in the area has not changed. What’s changed is the focus
of the job descriptions and how they’re working. And so we’re running two departments now, not the blended supervisor responsibility cause what I saw on my assessment is that a supervisor tended to be more expert in one area or the other, so they had this
additional responsibility. So let’s say, my whole crew, I was admissions and records. And now I’m responsible for
supervising financial aid. I may not have the
knowledge or that expertise to fully guide the staff
with their work processes, workflows, et cetera, so then that area kind of suffered because this person in this role who had blended responsibilities was stronger in this area and not on that. And so all we’ve done
is separated the areas so that there’s a stronger focus, and the folks that we’ve been hiring, we’ve been hiring, and like I said, that director
of enrollment services, we’re hiring them as director
of admissions and records, or directors of financial aid so that it’s a very focused set of responsibilities. I don’t know if I explained that well. – And if I might add, if you recall that, what Dr. Munoz is referring to, the position was an executive dean, which is at a higher level. So that was downgraded to a dean so that those savings
could then be put into subject matter experts in financial aid, and the other area as a director level
higher, more technical, more skilled managers. – That’s outstanding. And I remember that. I remember downgrading that position, and I remember the Dr.
Romali shared with us the budget savings. Thank you for the clarification. One additional question with that. So and, I don’t know
if it’s four or eight. I can’t remember. I printed up a couple of the, so I’ve got the executive dean of enrollment services contract. I pulled it from December of 2017 that we had hired. And then that position
is the one that was, you know, kind of collapsed maybe. I don’t know what a good
word to describe it is. And then I’ve got the other, I pulled the other contracts. One of the reasons why I’m
following up with this is because I’m really concerned that we’re hiring from the outside, which is not a problem. We want qualified, we want, as it’s been said, the yodas of A and R, and the yodas of enrollment services. But then when they get here, we do want them to produce, and we do want them productive. So if they fail to do that. I’m just wondering what
impact that has on the morale of the existing managers and directors who perhaps are not considered
for those positions. ‘Cause I know that we’ve
hired several deans from the outside, but then we haven’t hired from within, or we haven’t taken care of our own staff who’s been in the trenches, who’s been in the work, is familiar with the system
and the work processes. So that concerns me, especially
when it has a fiscal impact. So if we’re hiring people,
bringing people in at top pay for dean positions, but then we’ve got our own staff who is there
in a manager position, or a director position, and we start dividing things up, that, that does have an impact on morale and that does have an
impact on the budget. So I just, perhaps this is a discussion that should be a little more
thorough at another time with different parties involved, but it is something that I would like the administration to just
be a little bit more aware of because the optics are bad. When you see such a high turn around in one particular department, actually one of the most
important critical departments on campus, enrollment services, admissions and records. We wouldn’t be in business
if those departments didn’t do their job. So the optics are bad when there’s been such a
high turnover in personnel, when people are being
brought in at top pay and they don’t last, and then we’ve got our own staff who’s been
here perhaps for a long time. So I, you know, I just want more of a concerted effort that the college would put in into developing the managers
and the deans that we have, excuse me, the managers,
directors that we have in place into positions as deans without having to in essence stress the budget. I hope that makes sense too. I’m trying to understand
what you guys are saying, and I know you’re making an effort to understand what I’m saying. – No, that’s very well said. I don’t know if we mentioned
this at college day, President Malauulu and the
board might be very interested in the improved results. Can you speak to the
improved results in the area? – Sure. So as you know, financial aid
has had a lot of challenges. We had a lot of work that needed to do. We are some significant
audit findings in the area that were directed attributed to the, to, I’m not positive on comments for that, but there’s a lot of
challenges in the area. So bringing in new leadership, what we’ve been able to
see in just one year, we went from these are real hard numbers. So in the 18-19 year at
the first disbursement, we distributed about $2.4 million to 2,169 students. This coming Friday, we are on track to disperse $6.2 million to 5,200 plus students. So part of that is to bring in folks that have the ability
to move the institution forward with these types of outcomes. I can tell you as a new
vice president coming in, what I was seeing in enrollment services really frightened me. And for a school this size to be dispersing that
little amount of money, I was very proud to say, you know, I’m kind of competitive, and I have a college at
Pasadena City College that I keep an eye on social media. So I posted my figures, and she posted her figures today, and she said Pasadena City College dispersed the exact same
amount of money we did. And that’s where we should be. We should be at the
same level as El Camino, Santa Monica, Pasadena because those are colleges that are similar in size to us, and need, right, in
terms of who they serve. So part of it is, you know, like I said, we had to look at the area and what we could do
to improve the systems. Because like I said, it’s a huge jump to go from
$2 million to $6 million in one year in the first disbursement. And that was a full team effort. That was not just a dean. That is everyone. At college day, I
acknowledged Maggie Huerta, I acknowledge Farsi, a lot of classified staff
that really helped get us to that point. But that was a huge
leadership change in that area to be able to move in that direction. – I appreciate that. And I remember that. And Dr. Romali, you and I, we had a very specific meeting about that. So I remember when that was happening. And I share in your
spirit of competitiveness, especially with other colleges. So thank you. I know, okay, Trustee Otto, and I know that you
wanted to respond to that, or you were, Dr. Romali, did you want to comment? Okay. Yes, Trustee Otto. – Just a couple points about that. I watched from a distance all the enrollments management stuff that was going on. The first thing that we need to remember is when we hire people, we don’t just say oh, we gotta get somebody good. We go through a process that makes people from the outside compete with people from the inside, and then decisions are
made based on the quality of the individuals. And a lot of places, that’s not the way it works. It’s like let’s get this guy. So there’s a very stylized process. And that’s all for the better. Eventually, you are trusting that you’re gonna make
good decisions that way. Always, we want to be both efficient, meaning that we pay the right amount of money, not no more than we have to. But we also want to be effective. And effectiveness is, is very, very important. And then the question is how do you know whether you’re being efficient and effective. Well one of the ways is you figure out how much money you’re dispersing, and why are you doing that. And when you think about what
we’re really trying to do here is to educate our students, and if you’re a student, and you don’t get your financial aid, do you think you’re gonna stay? Do you think you’re gonna drop out? I mean it’s, it so undermines what we’re all about that that’s job one. We have sat on this
dias any number of times that people want to come
to Long Beach City College. One of our main goals is keeping them, and getting them to complete. And if we set up these barriers, those things don’t happen. I read a, and op ed I think last week. I think I shared it with Uduak from David Kirp from Berkeley
about two little things that they did that helped
students stay in school. One was in financial aid stuff, they made sure that they
got their money on time and on schedule. And that was very, very important. And one of the ways that they did that was to make sure that everybody was filling
out their forms correctly, and they did that by making it shorter. Mike and I talked about this, too. And the other thing was
in acceptance letters, they made those shorter, but they told people that congratulations, you got here. We’re so proud to have you here, and encouraged them. And as a result of that, something like, I don’t
remember the exact number, but 20% more students enrolled
than the previous year when they didn’t take
those affirming steps. So there’s a whole toolkit of things that can be done. And we’re just filling up our toolkit. And the things that I’m hearing here are the kinds of things that
we’ve made decisions to do. We’re implementing. And we’re seeing results. So. – Thank you. So the cost of living adjustment is one of the primary assumptions we made when we’re looking at our budget. This year, I mentioned
that we have a 3.26% COLA. What’s interesting is that when
we have economic downturns, and when we’re in the recession, the state can choose not to fund the COLA. And they’ve done this recently, and they’ve not repaid us. And so we have to really exercise caution. And I think this goes to the
conversation we had earlier about setting expectations
for reserve levels. The intent of the reserve is to have sufficient
reserves that allow you to weather up and downs
in our revenue structure because of the economy. And I know that we’ve all been hearing about the bond markets and the, they call it an
inverted year yield curve, but it’s an indicator of
an upcoming recession. UCLA’s Anderson School of Business recently released their economic forecast. They’re pretty good,
although in this environment, no economic forecast is as
good as it was five years ago. But they are anticipating
eventual downturns. What’s interesting about that to me is I’ve been saying that
for about three years. We’ve had a record setting economic growth period. But when we have a downturn, it hits hard in California. We typically lag recovery
from the rest of the nation. The next slide I want to share with you does show the history of those COLAs. And specifically, when we look at fiscal year 2008-09, so that was the start
of the last recession. And going through fiscal year 2012-13, you can see that there is a statutory COLA in each of those years. 10-11 actually got a negative one, that tells you something
about the economy back then. But the state did not fund any of them. If the state were going to pay us back, they would actually have to give us a COLA greater than the statutory COLA. And you see that in 2001. So in that year, the state was repaying us for a previous withholding of COLA. And we don’t see that
pattern repeated at all. And in addition, when we
are in a good economy, and you would think we would
have sufficient state revenues to fund all community college districts, that is not true for 2018-19, as I’ll discuss when I talk about the student centered funding formula. So that is a great caution that I think downturns in the economy are
a double edged sword for us. Our enrollment tends to go up. But we will not likely
receive the same funding per FTES as we do now. So when we look at what the state did do with their enacted 2019-20 budget. It was really interesting. The governor put a lot of money into paying down some liabilities and strengthening the
state’s rainy day fund. Part of that was specifically
for the public school system, which is for K14. When that account is fully funded, it will only be enough for one year of additional funding for us. The intent there is if we do have a year in which the state can’t afford the COLA, that they would draw from this fund to ensure full funding. Those funds aren’t projected
to last for very long. But the state is also strengthening their own financial position. That includes with a
substantial amount of money going to CalSTRS and CalPERS. The primary amount of that money that’s going directly to those funds does not benefit us. A small piece, however, does benefit us. So when we look at the
second major bullet here, and it is complicated. I know it’s complex, and I wish it weren’t complex. The PERS rate is set
annually by the board. The STRS rate is set in statute. And a couple of years ago, in 2013-14, the state recognized
that both of those funds were upside down. And so they passed a law
that said the STRS rate was going to increase by a
certain amount each year, and that the PERS rate, the PERS board would take care of it. This year, they’re
dedicating additional fund to soften that increase. We still have an increase, it is just softened. And so you can see the STRS
rate would have been increased from 16.11% to 18.1%. They’ve held the line at 17.1%. The PERS rate was expected to go up to 20.7, and now it’s to 19.7. Those are still substantial increases over the prior year. And for 2021, again we
see a softening of that. And the reason I wanted to highlight that is quite often, when I see the budget summary, that was put out by the administration, or another analytical report, it’ll say that they, it doesn’t talk about
softening an increase. It’ll say reduced the rate, which is not exactly accurate. – [Trustee Otto] Can I? – Absolutely. – But it’s, I think it’s
really important to note that in times of declining enrollments, and therefore theoretically, or not even theoretically, less money will might become available, the rate at which we are expected to pay CalSTRS, CalPERS and STRS, is still going from, I don’t know whether we started at 8% and we’re gonna wind up at 20, 21 or 22%. They’re trying to buy this
down a little bit, but what it means is that we’re gonna wind up with a higher percentage of our monies going to pay those expenses. And the question is is that sustainable, and how long is that gonna go on? And what does that do to the education that we’re trying to provide the students. – It’s a very good point. I will have a slide that shows what those dollar amounts are. But I will say that for
our full time positions, we are at over 40% benefits rate due largely to STRS and PERS. That’s STRS and PERS
are an actual percentage of that labor cost, a direct percentage. And it does reflect a
significant diversion of revenues to support STRS and PERS. The COLA was applied to
most categorical programs, which is good. It’s difficult to manage those programs if they don’t get the
cost of living adjustment. Unfortunately, deferred maintenance was once again minimally funded. If you recall last year, in 2018-19, we originally anticipated that the state would give
us about two million. By time they finished with
the enacted state budget, we only got about $400,000. And we dedicated all of that $400,000 to instructional equipment because the needs for
instructional equipment were so great. And with our facilities renovations, were were able to do that. And unfortunately, this year,
we’re getting even less. We are anticipated to only receive a little bit more than $200,000 for deferred maintenance
slash instructional equipment. And obviously at that level, and with the size of our campus, that doesn’t even come near to meeting our deferred maintenance needs. We did have good news. There is good news in this budget. And some of that great good
news is that we did have two of our projects approved by the state. This is significant
because there was a lot of back and forth during budget
development at the state. As we all know, Governor Brown was not a supporter of the state bond program. And he slowed the release of those funds to all community colleges. And even though we had two
programs that were in the queue, we had one that was approved. And so it takes several
years to fund these. We have planning funds and then we have construction funds. But we had two projects
that were in the queue. And fully expected them to appear on the list of funded projects. And they weren’t there at the May revise. And then they weren’t there at the versions of the
budgets at both houses. Luckily, during conference
committee, they reappeared. That’s important because for the, and these two buildings
are the construction trades phase one and the music theater complex, that’s buildings G and H. The money’s substantial. We are receiving $7 million for the construction phase one, construction trades phase one. $7 million. That means that frees up bond funds to use for another project. And then for building G and H, $17 million. And just a reminder, we are getting $27 million
for building M and N. So it’s significant and we’re incredibly pleased
to see those projects place back in the budget. So this is a very short summary of the unrestricted general fund. You did have attached to the agenda the more in depth reflection of the unrestricted general fund. And then separately, you
have provided for you each of the restricted funds, each of the other restricted funds. And we can go in those at
a little bit more depth. But I highlighted the best news here. That in 2017-18, if you go back in time a little bit, the tentative budget reflected a $10.7 million deficit. The adopted budget was able to reduce it to $8.8 million. By time we ended 2017-18, the deficit was just under $300,000. That was a phenomenal success. I can’t take any credit for it. I joined the district that May. But it reflects a lot of hard work over the course of that year. And fortunately, when I did come in, we were looking at 21018-19, we again saw the reappearance of an ongoing operational deficit. And what that means is we do have an ongoing operational deficit. We are not in balance with our budget. Between– – [President Malauulu]
Excuse me, Vice President, what do you attribute that to? The ongoing operational deficit. Is that attributed to one factor over another? – STRS and PERS has a lot to do with it. When we get to that slide, you’ll see the dollar amount that we paid extra. And you’ll see a corelation
between that dollar amount and our deficit. When the STRS rate goes
up by 3% in a year, that’s equivalent to providing faculty with a 3% raise. It’s exactly the same
impact on our budget. So it is critical. And when we have salaries and benefits that hover around 90%, that’s significant. And so, and then layering in on top of that, that the STRS and PERS increases were more than the cost
of living adjustment. It’s automatically deficit spending. That when you combine our ongoing step and column increases, plus the STRS and PERS, you’ve already used up more than the COLA, you’re deficit spending. So we recognize that problem, and we dealt with it head on. The first step was exactly
what you mentioned, the SURP. The next step was to take a lot of actions to continue to reduce it. So I’m giving you the punchline before I tell you the full story. The punchline is that
when we close this year, we have a surplus of nearly $6 million. Significant improvement. And for 19-20, we have again a deficit
projected of 2.9 million, of that, one million is one time. So it’s not an operational deficit. So our operational deficit is under three million for 2019-20. Yes? – So, I got it turned off. Slide 24, on the 5.9 million surplus
we’re talking about, so does that all go into the reserve? Or does that get rolled over into, you know, encumbered
spending that didn’t happen that could happen again next year that already allocated? What happens with that extra? – It all rolls into the ending balance. So in this case, our 18-19 ending balance
is now $36.2 million. And that’s where we start 19-20. So when we look at the
19-20 adopted budget, and we run the calculations, the state apportionment dollars, very easy to calculate since
we’re in hold harmless. We know pretty much what
our federal revenues are going to be. The salaries and benefits reflect some additional faculty, but really just ongoing
at the current levels as well as the other expenses. So what you see is the impact of that $36.2 million absorbing that projected deficit with the remainder flowing
through to the reserves. So the reserves now become 23.08% in 19-20 because the reserves are
enriched by the surplus in the prior year. – [Trustee Ntuk] So what
was that percent again? – It’s a 23.08 for 19-20. – [President Malauulu]
Vice president Drinkwine, I’m sorry Trustee Ntuk, are you done? Sorry. – [Trustee Ntuk] Yeah, I’m just, following my eyes with the audio of where the number is. So thank you. – If you need me to come back, let me know. I have a question. So that $6 million reserve for 2018-2019, will that be applied to offset the entire 2019-2020 budget, or just certain
categorical portions of it. How does that work? Does it impact the bottom line? Or does it have to be
used for specific areas? – So when we look at our
unrestricted general fund, those dollars are the
most flexible dollars. They’re not open to any use, obviously. They have some restrictions. We have to use them to
educate the students, or for things that benefit
the education of the students. – [President Malauulu] Could
they be used for salary? – Yes, they are used for salary. That is the primary use of
these funds is for salaries. – Could they be used for adjunct faculty office hours? So how would we budget that? Because I know we’ve talked about it, but we’ve been told that we can’t. Or we were told before that
we couldn’t, how about that. So how, because if contractually, if we have and
existing bargaining agreement with our part time faculty, can we take excess budget from one year and apply it to, you know, because we have a contract. So how would that work? – I’ll speak to that, and then VP Drinkwine and VP Durand, if you have anything different, you can spend your money
on adjunct office hours if you decided to go there. You would do that as a part of the collective
bargaining process with CHI. And if the board’s
pleasure was to offer that it would be calculated in the cost that we presented to you as a total cost. And we would generally detail out what the various costs are, but it would be included in the cost that you would then approve as a contract in labor negotiations. – So for example, hypothetically speaking, we have the $6 million that was remaining. If we were to use that money in 2019-2020, even though we’ve got the
contract already with CHI, would we be able to disperse
those funds this year and make it a one time amendment
to the existing contract, or would that be considered, I don’t know if bonus
is an appropriate word, but how would that work
if we were to compensate adjuncts, if we were
to give every adjunct. We have how many? 700 adjuncts. 800. – So technically, by contract, every way that we pay an
adjunct is under the contract and included in the contract. That would be my answer to you. I’m not sure if that
answers your question. I think it’s important
that when we are working with a bargaining unit, that we honor the deal we have. And I hope I’m not overstepping, but we respect the processes that we have for determining what that bargain is. – I’m 100% in agreement. And I respect that. I completely agree. That’s why I’m asking how would we, you know, when I asked
Vice President Drinkwine if we could use it for salary, and then if we could use
it for adjunct hours, who could we do that in such a way that obviously we would not
undermine the integrity of the collective bargaining process or the contract that’s in place. But at the same time,
we’d have to use them in 2019-2020, right, or we’d lose them, we wouldn’t be able to apply them to a future contract. – I think what’s important to remember is we currently are under negotiations with the adjunct faculty bargaining unit. Our next meeting will be on the 25th. We hae not really received
any proposals that have a great deal of fiscal impact. Usually those things are grouped together as far as what’s offered
to the other side though. We can talk about that. – Can I make a quick point? And that is if we change, if we, if we try and take something that’s negotiated and change it during
the course of the year, then the message that we send to both sides is we really don’t have collective bargaining agreements, we’re just gonna change them every month or every six months,
or whenever we want to. And it undermines the
integrity and the philosophy of collective bargaining. There are many, many, many
community college districts that do not have collective
bargaining at all. When we tried to put a collective bargaining session at the national ACCT meeting last year, what we were met with was now community colleges
don’t really do that much collective bargaining, so we don’t want to do that. Fortunately, we were able to because of our relationships to say to Noah Brown, hey, you know, enough of them do and they need to know how to do it and how to do it right. And Long Beach City College was very involved in presenting the things
that community colleges who do collectively bargain need to take into consideration because in the end, all of this stuff is
stylized to some extent. There are ways to do it, better ways to do it than other ways. And it can’t just be this is a good idea, let’s fund it. And other, we have trouble getting everything done every year that we want to do anyway. And so it’s just like
Marlene started off and said, here’s the process, here’s the way we go through it. Here’s what we come up with. That’s a too long winded way of saying that it’s really important
that we do what we say we’re gonna do and we keep doing that. We can always make adjustments, but we make them at the appropriate times. – That’s, I concur. It’s noted. I agree. I don’t think, I understand negotiations
with unions very well. So having said all that, yes, Dr. Romali, what can be done? What can we do? What creative way of utilizing
that $6 million surplus where we could actually provide for one
of the most under served in terms of payroll, constituent groups on campus because you know the plight of adjuncts. I know it very well. Freeway flyers, they’re teaching at varies, I mean we have adjunct faculty here on campus who teach at multiple colleges and have to patch together enough salary to make their house payment. They have to teach at
four or five colleges. So if we’ve got $6 million, the first thing I’m gonna, I know that we could use that six million in multiple other areas of the district. I get that. But one of the things that
we have been asking for, well I have been asking for, and I’ve been trying to get is to have at least
office hours for adjuncts because adjuncts don’t have that. And it turned out to be
not cost effective, so I know we can’t reopen the contract in the middle of a contract term. But what can we do? – I think that’s very well said. I was an adjunct for 13 years, so I just love what you’re saying. From a financial perspective, the $6 million, the fund
balance is kind of like a checking account. So that’s kind of like
you’re ending balance in your checking account at the end. It then rolls to the next year. So as it rolls into 19-20, and we add the costs in 19-20, it then leaves you with still, still a deficit at 3.5 million that includes the six million. Now as you can see, we’ve been doing very well every year at chipping away at that and whittling away at that. But I think as the board considers it’s current, I believe,
negotiations with CHI, that it’s absolutely
something you can consider. If you think that it’s important to you, by all means, you can, you can tell each other and vote in the contract that’s something that is perhaps your number one priority as you negotiate with CHI. And there, perhaps some things
we can do in the meantime. Perhaps, you know, Gene, I don’t
know if you have any ideas. Perhaps we hear from
the adjuncts themselves, and maybe there’s other
non-cost ideas they have that might be helpful. – President Malauulu, I was an hourly faculty
member for five years. So I know what you’re talking about. I hate to tell you, when I started, I got $8.98 a hour. And that was big pay, big pay in 1970. But anyway, I’m showing my age. I’m glad President Malauulu that you said that that six million went, it isn’t like it’s sitting
here in the periphery and we can just take it off a tree. So I am concerned about that. What I would want to know, and maybe this isn’t our business, but I was a freeway flyer. This was my income. But I wonder the percentage of people who are hourly who this is, you know, they want to do it because
they want to do it. And how much is their, based on their need. I’d be very curious to hear what that percentage is. Is it 60/40, is it 70/30? Because I have a feeling that people that I’ve
talked to who teach hourly, and I know it’s not everybody, so I mean I shouldn’t make
broad based statements. But there’s a lot of people who just love teaching. They particularly maybe
don’t like their job. And so they, I love going to the classroom because it was wonderful. So I would be curious about that kind of a thing. But I agree with President Romali, you know, we have to
whittle away at the deficit. – [Trustee Otto] So are you saying we should ask the teachers to pay us for the privilege? – [Trustee Baxter] Yes, I am. I am. – Please strike Trustee Otto’s
comment from the record. (laughs) Trustee Baxter, I completely agree. It actually cost me money to teach because I worked nights, and I taught in the afternoon. And every time that I taught, I flopped, which is long shore terminology for I missed an opportunity to work. So I flopped twice a
week every time I taught, and it cost me money. So long shore workers don’t get, we don’t have salary. We get paid when we work. If we don’t work, we don’t get paid. So my husband, when I was so excited to be teaching ’cause I loved teaching, and I wanted to be in the classroom, and I’d come home. He’d look and he’d go, you’re making less money teaching than you would. He’s like don’t teach and just go to work. By you know, you’re right. So I wasn’t one of the freeway flyers. I didn’t have to teach. But I’m very acutely, acutely aware of how many freeway flyers there are. And in fact, we had adjunct
faculty demonstrations here on campus actually. And I think it’s very
important to acknowledge it. Part time faculty members teach under the same conditions that full time faculty members do. But they’re not afforded the same grace in terms of having office hours, and often some of the resources too. So just, you know, I would like to see something happen. And I think it would be great if we did bring it CHI at some point. But you know, $6 million
is not that much money when you’re considering salary either. It’s enough. It’s a chunk of money, but it’s not enough. So I get that. But anyway, I’m sure Dr. Romali, did you want to add to that? – Yeah, I’ve got something that I think you might enjoy. Last year we did something quite special for the adjuncts. And we created adjunct
workrooms in every department where we gave them office space, and a coffee maker, and supplies. And that really went a long way, and computers and printers. So any little thing that we can do to make them feel
comfortable and welcome here, we’re open to any suggestions
that come our way. – And that was a huge hit by the way. That was a huge hit. Yes, Trustee Ntuk. – Just on the topic of reserves, I know last year we discussed it, but didn’t necessarily take action on creating a rainy day fund. It seems like right now is the right time that we have funds available that we could put in a rainy day fund. That might be interesting to reevaluate should we put our board policy
at the recommended level that the curriculum
folks recommend at 99.5% and above and beyond that, we put into a rainy day fund that we can actually say and point to offsetting potential. It’s clear to see what’s in the bank above and beyond that risk tolerance. I don’t know what people’s thoughts are. – Absolutely outstanding idea. We could certainly do it with this budget. It also, when I spoke to CEOs around the STRS and PERS increases, they said oh, we’re really not hit by it because we’re using our rainy day fund. Hey, well you guys should
think about the rainy day fund. So this could, we could absolutely do that
with this adopted budget. I think that’s a wonderful
idea that you brought up. – And I guess the question I had too was I think the state created
it three years ago, or four years ago. I don’t know, I know it was
under the Brown administration, but I don’t know like how
often they put into it, how did they reassess it every year. What is the criteria they use it, you know, a recession, does that mean we’re gonna get a 1% COLA from the state rainy day fund, and that offsets. – So the answer to the first statement, I wanted to point out that these are what we call one time dollars. That because they are
savings from one year, you can only use them once, unlike an ongoing dollar, and dedicating them to
something like a rainy day fund is an excellent idea. On the issue of pay, we can only pay what we have as board approved or
as gift of public funds and so that’s why it is important to have the bargaining process. There was another statement that did we have to use it or lose it. The state’s unrestricted funding model, unlike the federal funds, we can choose not to spend them in the year they’re generated. There is a balance between wanting to spend money on students that generated the fund versus really getting to a really safe and secure reserve level, so there is that. And finally, your question
about the rainy day fund, the state created it anticipating that at some point, they’re going to have not excess revenues, but revenues are going to be greater than what the demand is. And so they would take a piece of that and deposit it into the rainy day fund. They were not able to do that for the first three years, I believe, after they created it. It also had a couple
really interesting things for the K12 world. Once they did that, then the K12 world had to not exceed their minimum reserve requirement. That requirement was not applicable to us at the community college level. But this is the first year
that they have a deposit. It is the first year they have a deposit. It’s a big deal that
they’re making the deposit into the rainy day fund. And the question of whether
it would be sufficient to fund what portion of our need depends entirely on
when we have that need, and how many deposits they’ve made between now and when we have that need. But at maximum, they don’t believe that it would last any more than one year. But the they in that statement is economists who are looking forward and looking at what could
be the potential need and what could this fund grow to. But it is a unique concept, and it is a new concept. But you can choose to establish either a committed reserve, or a set aside for a specific purpose. And that is up to your discretion. – I think that’s a great idea. And I know we can’t make any motions here because it is a study session. But is that something that we could direct when we come back for the September budget to have the implementation? Are you good with that Trustee Ntuk, Trustee Otto? – [Trustee Otto] I’m
sorry, what did you say? – To have staff come back at the September budget meeting with a rainy day line item in the budget. – [Trustee Otto] As an action item? – No. This is a, what I said was we can’t really have an action item because this is a study session. But we can direct staff
to come back in September and implement that as a
line item in the budget when we adopt the budget. Trustee Baxter? You guys all okay with that? – [Trustee Otto] I’d love to see a report. – You want a report, or you want it to just be
a line item in the budget? – I’m not ready to say
that that’s the right way to spend that money until I look at it in context. And I keep looking at this thing here and see that yeah, we’ve got $6 million, but at the end of next year, we’ll be $3.5 million under water. And so it’s not, it’s not, it’s not one time money, it’s part of an ongoing budgeting process. And so I think the correct
questions to ask are how do we be fiscally responsible and accomplish the things that our goals tell us we should be doing. And rainy day fund could be part of that, but you have to ask it in the context of the big picture of how, how we carry out our mission, how do we do the things that we’re supposed to do. – Sure, no, I don understand that. And I agree with you. I just want to know if
there’s any objection to having that, because the rainy day fund
could be zero forever, but when we do have a surplus, that it would allocated
to that so we’ll have it. Cause right now, our budget doesn’t have a rainy day line item. – What we could do, if it pleasures the board, we could create the line item at zero for the adopted budget, bring back a report, and then perhaps during the discussion of the budget, then you determine
if you want to fund it and if so, how much. Would that be pleasurable? – [Trustee Otto] Sure. – And I agree with Trustee Otto, that I think it needs more study, but I’m not objecting to a zero balance on that line item. – Yeah, I don’t object either. But I also agree of the policy making process should be information requests, look at the more options, figure out which policy
does it actually line up in, make sure we know our options, and then put something up for a vote. I think that’s the right way to go about it. – And if I may, the
establishment of that fund does not need to happen prior to your adoption of the budget. Since the budget is a living document, you can choose to take action
at some point in the future and establish it then. And then at that point,
move whatever portion of the reserves you’d
like to do into that fund so you can have, it doesn’t have be, or doesn’t have to be, rather, at the September meeting. It could be at some point in the future. – Okay, I think we’re all in agreement that a rainy day fund is a good idea, and to have staff come back with a report with information for us to consider pros and cons, and how it would work. And then to have the September budget have a line item at zero, and then we can determine
where to go from there once we have information and opportunity for discussion. Okay, sounds good. Everybody in agreement? All right, I know we can’t vote, but you know, thank you. All right, Vice President Drinkwine, I know you’re eager to continue. – Thank you so much. I want to talk next about the specifics in our deficit reduction plan because after talking
about that big swing, I want to be able to show you exactly how we got there. So you have an additional handout called the deficit plan update. And in that document, I talk about the different
methods that we use to achieve savings. And it was very, very purposeful. What I’d like to do is
bring up the waterfall chart that’s associated with the handout because I really think it illustrates those different actions. All right. And so the chart is behind you, but it’s also within your handouts. And so if I could direct
you to the last page of the deficit reduction plan. And there we go, now it’s on the screen. This chart shows the deficit starting
with the tentative budget of $6 million. The deficit is reflected
in the yellow bars. Any positive improvements to the deficit are in the green. So the green means more money, that we have saved money. The red means that costs
us a little bit more. So when we walk through this chart, and we start at the far left, our deficit was $6 million. And so you can see that that
goes down to the negative $6 million mark. It goes below that center line. So know that the center of
this chart is your zero. The first thing we did was save $3 million through the SURP and the hiring of adjunct. $3 million out the door. The next thing we did, significant because it was necessary, not significant because
of the dollar amount were the best practices
that we put in place related to travel,
hospitality, and supplies. And you can see when I get to the end that it was great that those saved us those little bumps at the beginning, we saved some big dollars
near the end of this process. We also looked at our contracts and paid a lot of
attention to the contracts. So the first swipe at the deficit, we were able to reduce it to about $3 million. So you can see that’s labeled
adopted budget deficit. It’s the second yellow bar. Then again, right out the bat, we did some more reorganization. That the SURP retirees
weren’t just faculty. It represented management
as well as classified. And we took the opportunity with each vacancy to take a hard look at our structure in each work unit and say is this how it
should be organized. Is this the position as it should be? Many of these positions
had been held by our folks for a couple of decades. People love working for
Long Beach City College. But that means we didn’t
have an opportunity to revisit them. And so every opportunity we took, we looked at what are we trying to do. Is it the same thing
as what we did before? And what are the different
tools we use now? So we spent money on systems. Financial aid is a really good example. We spent money on
systems in financial aid, but we spent money across the board on systems to help support leaner and more efficient workforce. Then we get to the first quarter, and we still had some
improvement at the first quarter. So now at the first quarter, it’s about, I believe it was about $400,000. And then again, we had more improvement. So we really wanted to
capture all the savings as we went along. And then we fast forward
to this last quarter. So this reflects closing year. So when we closed the year, we, I certainly didn’t
anticipate such a swing. But we made incredible strides. Particularly in contract services. We had a huge amount of savings there. We always have savings there because you typically don’t
use up your entire contract, but we had far more than we
thought we were going to have. We did an in depth review of every single contract
we have in this district to see if we still needed it. And if we did, was that
the right vendor to use. We had savings from our BPRs. It was not purposeful. We couldn’t implement everything
we wanted to implement in one year, so we had a roll over. So I will say that not all the savings were purposeful. We didn’t put into systems
what we expected to put because it took us longer to identify what systems we were purchasing. So we expect to see more in the next year. But overall, I think
this tells you the story that we took very deliberate, very purposeful actions
over the course of the year to get savings. And a lot of the reorganization, beyond the very first one, which we’re large one time, those represent ongoing savings. Some of it is we didn’t
fill positions yet, but we did a significant
work with reorganization and that continues forward. So when we look at what
we’re going to do next, we’re continuing to implement systems. We’re going to continue
to do reorganization. But we are also looking at other areas. One is we’re looking at implementing a position control system. Position control is used to control the budgeting for your vacancies. Right now, we do not have a system. It’s really unusual for an
organization of our size not to have position control. It essentially gives
our position a number. You can’t hire it unless you have budget. It controls it. The second is we’re looking at efficiency measures and academic affairs. And I when I say we, I’m really saying Dr. Scott’s looking at efficiency measures along with her entire team. And I would like Dr. Scott, if I may, to explain a little bit
more about her efforts there and what we can expect to achieve
in savings moving forward. – Thank you. Yes, we look at various
efficiency measures for our scheduling. The three that we look at
primarily are fill rate, and FTES over FTEF, that ratio, and also average class size. And we have goals for
the first two of those, fill rate and the ratio. We are not where we need to be quite yet, but it’s important to look back and see what has happened over the last few years. Prior to me arriving here, we adhere very strictly
to the contract and administration at that time, and canceled a lot of classes, many of, the contracts
says anything 20 or under is potentially could be canceled. And we canceled a lot of those classes. This was before the entire team was here. And that had a really adverse impact on our students, and our faculty, on our community. And when I got here, I heard about it a lot. And so we opted to go a different route. And that does have an impact on the budget when you’re allowed to go that are 16 or 17, and we did that because we really needed to rebuild our enrollment, and we needed to rebuild
our reputation, frankly. So that’s one, it’s not an excuse, but it’s the reality of what happened. So we’ve been allowing as
we’re trying to grow back and grow programs, we’ve
been allowing things to go perhaps a little bit lower than they have, than we had previously. We haven’t lost ground on efficiency, but we have not gained. So I do recognize that we
have a budge issue with this, and we have to look at it, but it’s a balance. And as we go forward, and as you may recall, we implemented the large classes and allowed stipends to be paid to faculty who reached a certain level. We work with the FAA
and Mr. Durand on this so that the way the large classes worked is that students didn’t get, and faculty didn’t get another 23 or whatever it was students, they got nothing. So if they got to 22,
they got no compensation for taking those extra 22 students. So we did implement the new
process for large classes to give stipends in
the intermittent steps, which I think is also encouraged faculty to be in a position to add more students. So as we look at a time
now, like this fall, where we are up, we can, and we’re not struggling
continually for enrollment, we need to bring this back in and talk to the faculty
again about efficiency and the importance of it because efficiency does
a number of things. It shows that we’re using our
resources wisely as possible. And it also provides for the
greatest access for students. Because if you’ve only got
15 students in a class, what classes are you not adding that students really need
where there’s wait lists. So it’s incumbent on us to make sure that we’re doing everything that we can to ensure that students
get the classes they need. That’s not always a popular decision, and it is a required balance. And I work with the deans and sometimes we just
agonize over these classes that are at 13 or 14. And we have to look, are
they capstone classes. Have we not offered that class
for two or three semesters? And students been waiting for it. We need to look at that. And we’ve also been talking
with enrollment management about creating a guaranteed schedule of classes that we absolutely will offer every two years no matter what. Even if there’s one student in there so that they can be assured that they can finish that program. So we’re looking at a lot of these things but we know that we have efficiency issues that we have to deal with. We do recognize we have
budget considerations within academic affairs also. – Can I ask you a question? There’s something that I don’t understand and I’m sure there’s a
good explanation for it. When you say that $1 million of the deficit is the result of the use of one time funds designated for business process reviews, it was my understanding
that those monies were designated for that, but you can borrow from that. Is that what happened? I just don’t, and I looked at the business
process reviews update that was just, I don’t
understand how that works. – So we, in a previous year, in our unrestricted general fund, received several million
dollars from the state to pay down their debt to us for many to cost claims. They gave it to us as
unrestricted dollars, but it really reduced their debt. So we really got a big chunk of money. And it’s sitting in the restricted, or excuse me, sitting in the unrestricted general fund. And the decision was made then that we were gonna use that pot of money to support
system implementation ’cause that can be expensive and it’s hard to find the money. And that money’s been
used every year gradually. So when we use that money, it’s like using your savings, which looks like deficit spending ’cause you’re spending money
you didn’t receive that year. We received it a previous year. But it’s one time money. So there’s a very distinct
difference between one time money, got it one time, and once we spend it, it’s gone. It’s not coming back. Versus ongoing money, which represents what the
state gives us every year on a regular basis. And so that’s what that is. And so when we look at that little bit more about
3.4, $3.5 million deficit in the 2019-20 year, one million of it is budgeted for BPRs, is coming from what’s
left of that pot of money. So really what we have
is an ongoing problem is 2.5 million. If I were coming to you and saying that our deficit spending was just $1 million, and it’s because we’re
spending one time monies, that’s not a negative thing. It’s money we saved from a previous year for a specific purpose, and now we’re doing it. Another example could be for instance, if we didn’t have a bond program and we knew we had to put
a new roof on a building. So we would set aside
money every year for that, and the year we use it, that’s not a bad thing, but it does represent deficit spending. And that’s what these BPRs are. – I guess what, and I understand it better now, but my, it was always my understanding that the business process review money, I think it started off
pretty close to $6 million. And we had a program as to what we would do and
how we were gonna do spend it. It started off with design thinking, and there were, I never thought we really
embraced that completely as much as we should in order to make that successful. But I see that we’re gonna
spend quite a bit of money next year, but I didn’t know whether we’re
putting money back into it to do that, or whether it’s still there. It’s just an accounting
question I suppose. – We are using the same pot
of money that was there. We have not augmented that pot of money for the BPRs in any shape or form. I will say that not all
system implementations comes from that pot of money. So for this example, if we have a department that is largely funded by a restricted program, whether it’s a grant or
a categorical program, it could be appropriated to use that restricted source of funding to pay for that system. And we try and use our
restricted dollars first because they have very few expenditures. If we can use it there, we do, because it allows us to
have more flexibility. But we’ve done that as well too. Part of the deficit reduction plan is leveraging those restricted dollars. And I can say, you see
a lot of examples in student support services that we’ve really dedicated the use of those restricted resources in a very thoughtful manner to make sure that we’re getting the most bang for our buck out of them. – [Trustee Otto] Okay, great, thanks. – A couple of examples of that that Mike did a wonderful
job of implementing was the Queueless system, which has taken our lines from three hours down to about 10, 15 minutes. You get, like you get a
beeper in a restaurant, you get beeped and it says you’re up in 15 minutes. And they can come from home
so they don’t have to stand in a three hour line. The other one is the
implementation of Campus Logic, which is taken the
packaging of financial aid from 30 days down to
approximately three days. So those are just a couple of examples. – We’ve also implemented Nelnet, which allowed our students for
the first time this past year to make payments on their fees. And so that was a really
critical areas as well. So system implementation is a tremendous amount of work. We have an incredible ITS team that works very closely
with each of the departments to make sure that we’re
meeting their needs. But as busy as this past year was, I can say that next year, this next year’s going to be even busier with system implementation. Absolutely. – Great thank you, Vice President Drinkwine. Thank you so much for this great data visualization. I know we talked about it six months, nine months ago, about trying to put things in a way that’s easy to see
all the different steps and what it takes us from. And that was a question that I think I heard a lot last year of oh, we always say we have this deficit, then we don’t have a deficit. What happened? Where did the money go? It’s all magic. And so it’s good to see in itemized and colors, and you know, this is a good process. And I hope this is something
we can put in our regular budget slides when we do
our quarterly reports, or semiannual so that people can see the difference. I just question, a couple
questions on the red. It goes up but it’s red, is that good or bad? There wasn’t a legend on it. I wasn’t sure what the reds meant. – The red is actually an
increase in expenditures. I did not want to misrepresent
the course of our budget, but there are areas that
we increased expenditures. Very interestingly, between the first, excuse me, between the
second and third quarter, we actually had an
increase in our staffing. So our approach starting this year is to have our budget updated quarterly to reflect where we actually
think we’re going to end up. We are not holding on to these savings and squirreling them away for the end of the year
when they magically appear. It’s really important to be transparent and to share as we have improvements. And because of that, when we have a negative, when we had an increase in expenditure over where we thought, that’s also reflected. And so after the second quarter, we projected savings,
because at that time, you have half the year gone. And you can look at your salaries. You can say well, I’ve
budgeted for the whole year, let me capture the savings for that now. We captured a little bit too many, too much savings. And so we hand to increase
the budget a little bit. Another area was contract services. We had reduced the budget in
contract services too much. We needed to put a
little bit more back in. And that’s what that reflects. And I will also say thank you very much, Trustee Uduak. Your request for a waterfall chart, so those of you who aren’t
into charts like I am, this is a waterfall chart and it’s really a great tool
to use to show the progression of our budget. So thank you. – And a few other questions. I like the sound of the
business improvement, or the BPRs. But I’ve never seen an itemized list of. So we spent six million, we’re down to one million. What, which programs did we spend it on and what was the, is it in there. All right. All right. I didn’t read the special. – We actually have it as a separate item. – [Trustee Ntuk] Okay. – It does effect the budget. It is related to the budget. But I wanted to have
this as a separate item so that we can distinctly say
here is the status of these. I will also say that
when we first received those one time funds, and there was a general agreement to use them for BPRs, the needs back then are
not the needs today. So this list has definitely evolved in a major way. And right now, we are
focusing on making sure that all of our systems are integrated. We’re looking at trying
to reduce the number of new systems that we bring in. ITS has released the Viking portal, which gives us single sign on options, which is great, which means you don’t have to remember your username and password for 10 different software packages. So we are recognizing that
there are additional challenges to having system
implementation at this level. But we believe we are managing it well, and I have to give a shout out
to Sylvia Lynch and her team. They are phenomenal. – Last two questions. On the position control system, when do we plan to get a system and what will it be? – So position control systems, because it hits every position, and it hits our budget, are very complicated systems. We have PeopleSoft as
our financial system. I know PeopleSoft has a
position control module. If we made a decision tomorrow, we couldn’t start
implementation until next year. We have to make sure that
the data is very clean before we rolled over. Simultaneously, the LA County Office of Education is implementing their
new financial system. And they serve over 500
agencies county wide. We are what they call, we are not integrated into their system. We run our own payroll, but they do issue our commercial warrants. So we have a connection to their system, and we need to get through that process before we can layer this on top. So the plan is this year, we investigate. We’re going to look at different systems, PeopleSoft first because
it’s already there. But what other systems are out there, determine how that meets our need, and then have a very thoughtful
implementation process ’cause this is a big deal. My desire, the soonest we could do it if we moved super fast would be next year. Most likely, it would be the year after. – All right. And then for Dr. Scott, on the academic affairs kind of key metrics and efficiencies, would we be able to see those twice a year after the end of each semester with the fill rate, and what our tactics we used to make sure we increased enrollment. ‘Cause I didn’t, maybe I missed the document. I don’t remember seeing the
fill rates and ratios before. And I thought you, I think it’s a great information to share, and understand how we’re doing. – Sure. We have three year metrics and the slide was at the college day, but it went really fast because I was a little
bit behind schedule. But we do have three year metrics. And two of them have efficiency in there. And so we are going to
continue to look at it. Now it’s critically important because it’s a big budget item to the salaries of the
faculty and adjunct faculty, it’s big. So yeah, we will continue to report on it. For example, our fill rate is, our goal is 85%, which
may be a little low. We’re about 83% right now. Our average class size is about 29.5. Our goal was about 33. But we have a lot of CTE programs, which lower, which have lower sizes. And we’ve opted to do
that as an institution but it comes at a cost because the courses that
are the most efficient are the survey courses. But when you have a lot of CTE programs, you know nursing, it isn’t gonna be like that. – [Trustee Ntuk] You can
always look at it as a– – A balance.
– True ratio, and take the classes out and see how those non-CTE classes. – What I’m hoping with a large class, classes that we’ve put in, that will help. Because if you have a class, you know, as survey class at 80 students, and then it kind of balances out, the CTE class at maybe 18 or whatever. So and that hasn’t really fully got going. So I’m hoping that people
will start to understand that that’s what really
actually a good strategy. – And the large classes are in the GE, English one, English three. – Not English because there’s a big writing component. And we don’t consider that
really a survey class. Lecture, it’s typically a lecture classes. It’s history, poly-sci, political science. – [Trustee Ntuk] Low importance. – It’s the same thing actually. Sociology, psych. Yeah, it’s, the typical lecture classes. And I didn’t mention before when I was talking that in regards to– (Trustee Ntuk speaking offscreen) Sorry. In regards to PCC, we’re also trying to make
sure that we don’t cancel too many classes out there because there’s a greater ratio of
canceled classes at PCC. And so that’s another issue
with the 20 and canceling is we really have to support that campus. – [Trustee Ntuk] Great, thank you. – Vice President Scott, a couple things. First of all, my classes were never in
danger of being canceled. They were always full. And I just feel it’s important for me to just get that out there, that, (laughs) as soon as the schedule for enrollment was for registration was released, my classes were full. I feel better now having said that. About PeopleSoft, so I was, I was teaching here when we
transitioned to PeopleSoft. And while it is better than the system we had before, because it is and the system we had before was very, this might be a new word, but dinosauric, it’s just very, I don’t even want to say prehistoric. It was just dinosauric. PeopleSoft is better. Now, today, I registered
my son for classes and I was, the only reason
why I was able to successfully navigate PeopleSoft, and I did, was because I had been
on PeopleSoft before as an instructor. So if I had not had the experience of having used it as an instructor, I probably would have kicked the computer and thrown it out the window because it is not intuitive. It is not, it is user friendly in a sense where you know, you can figure out what click and you can go back. But it’s not and intuitive process. So definitely PeopleSoft. And then the other one that I just want to mention is Campus Logic. Where does Campus Logic fit into your waterfall presentation? Because I have not heard one good thing about Campus Logic. And maybe there are good things, but I just haven’t heard them. What I keep hearing is that Campus Logic moves students into queues. And they sit there and they need to be verified. It’s almost like work is done twice. I don’t know if that’s accurate or not. But you know, please
respond to that because that’s the feedback that we’re getting. You know, if you could
explain for the public what Campus Logic is. – Sure. So, excuse me. So Campus Logic is essentially
a technology platform that allows students to move through the student verification
process electronically. So think about it in two stages. There’s the student interface piece and then there’s kind of what happens behind the scenes as staff
move through and verify. Now one of the things I want to say in the spirit of transparency is whenever you’re
implementing new technologies, there’s always gonna be bugs. There’s always gonna be transition. So is it a magic bullet that
solves all our problems? No. But what I can tell you
when we look at our numbers, and I wanna give you some numbers that I just got from financial aid today. So just to give you some context, last year, and I’m gonna just estimate, we had about 10,000, a little over 10,000 students unduplicated received Pell. This year, and we’re not even, we’re only on day two, we’re at 9,000 for the entire. So if you think 10,000
from last school year, 9,000 on the second day of school, and some change. So those are huge astronom, I can’t even speak, astronomic, you know what
I’m trying to say, leaps. (laughs) – Big. – They’re big leaps. And so essentially, the technology is what’s
allowing that to happen. Because what’s happening is students now don’t have
to stand in a long line. A lot of students, about roughly over 30% are
selected for verification. Many of them will see that line or see all the papers
they have to print out from the PeopleSoft or from the website and like um, I don’t want to do this. This is too much work. I’ll just keep my BOG fee waiver and never complete my Pell. And so now they can take pictures of their parents’ taxes. They can hand their phone and their parent can sign with their fingertips so they don’t have to
get an actual signature, upload and never even step foot in the financial aid office. Now on the back end, there are some issues that
staff have brought forward to my attention, as well as the director where, and I’ll give you a case in point. The technology is sensitive. What I mean by that is let’s say I’m selected for verification. I upload all my forms. My staff number goes through and updates and verifies
everything’s there, and completes the package. Let’s say a student goes in,
updates their phone number. It makes us go back and have to check because you don’t know exactly
what feature it updates. So they’re are feeling like things that wouldn’t
trigger another review, like updating an address or a phone number is triggering in this software because these are federal documents and you want to be very audit proof in the way you set things up. Any kind of change a
student makes in the system triggers another secondary
review of the file. So that’s some of the
things that we’re working. And just so you know, we are being very responsive. I directed our dean to reach to the vendor and have that conversation
specifically with a vendor and saying some of these things like an updated cell phone that are triggering a secondary review, can we take that off so
it’s not so sensitive to these triggers. So like I said, it’s new technology. We’re working through it. But in mass, like what
we’re seeing in mass, this is amazing what it’s doing. Another point, and I’m gonna use the story ’cause I think it’s some
education standpoint. I had a student I was walking with today out in the front. He tells me I hate Queueless. And I said, oh, okay. I said why do you hate it. He’s like because I have
to wait three hours. And I said, oh, okay. I said you know, last
year, the lines were about, the reason we got Queueless were three to four to five hour waits at financial aid. And but the difference
was you had to stand in a physical line in the sun. Students, and I said you know, Queueless doesn’t necessarily
reduce the wait times. What it does is it means that
you can go do other things for three hours. You can sit in the library. You can go watch TV in the student lounge. You can go do your shopping
at Whole Foods up the street, and then come back and
walk right into the office and not have to be physically in a line. So these technologies are not
gonna solve all our problems, but they’re definitely dealing
with some of the issues that we’ve had that have
made the student experience not as great as it should be in the past. – And I don’t mean to be
critical of the technology. I’m in favor of the technology. And I know that students
really appreciate that. So I don’t want you to think that. The criticisms that I have heard are exactly what you just described. That it causes staff to have
to redo something twice. But it could be resolved with the vendor perhaps sending out when the student changes the phone number, and it gets back into the queue, maybe have something say
just the phone number. That way you go directly to that and you’re not reviewing
the entire application. Or if the student updates two items, you can, you know, it’ll
flag those two items. And also, you know, Dr. Scott, the actual
enrollment process today was, it was good. I don’t want you to think that it wasn’t. So it didn’t take me very long. And I actually was able to
do it in about 10 minutes. And that was a lot of forms and a lot of registration. And yesterday, when I went
through the enrollment, that was, now that’s different because that has changed a lot. And it’s very efficient. And you’ve streamlined the process. As a parent enrolling a
student who is a minor, it was a really good process. I can say that. Bu it think I would have
struggled with PeopleSoft. I don’t think I would have
struggled with the actual, what is the initial portal, the very first thing I did yesterday? What is that called? – [Mr. Munoz] LBCC Apply. – Yeah. I don’t think I would
have struggled with that. That was really intuitive. But I think if I hadn’t
used PeopleSoft before, I definitely would have struggled today. So that was, just you know, keep that in mind. – I appreciate the feedback. And one of the things
that we will be doing over the next several months, is especially after the PeopleSoft upgrade that’s gonna be happening is looking at the student user experience. Also trying to put as
many of our functions that require our students to stand in line in admissions and records to move as many of those functions to self service will also be something
that we want to be able to work towards. So I know that Marlene
has been very supportive, our VP Drinkwine’s been
very supportive of us. Once we get through the PeopleSoft upgrade to start to have those conversations about what can we do around enhancements to increase the student experience. – Can I make one cultural point, and that is you know, I think we got PeopleSoft so long ago and made the commitment to PeopleSoft. And periodically it comes up, why don’t we change PeopleSoft. And the answer is because it would be
prohibitively expensive, and we’re not sure what
we would wind up with. And we’d have to break everything in. So when we started this business process, business processes review thing, the decision was made to work with PeopleSoft to do all this stuff. And it’s, and I believe that instead of going the way that they might have gone, which would have been very complicated and maybe not very successful, they said we’re gonna just
keep fine tuning PeopleSoft. We’re gonna keep working
with PeopleSoft to do this. And I, there’s a price
you can pay for that, but there’s also rewards
that you get from that. And it’s, it BOGgles the mind to think what we would do to yank everything out and start something else. When, when the idea of business
process review came in, the sexy part of it was, it’s business processes from
the student perspective. It’s how are they experiencing what’s going on here. And we had people come in
and talk to us about it. Now there are a lot of
faculty that didn’t like it, and were very, very vocal about that and thought it was money that was not, not well spent. And I think we’ve actually moved away to a certain extent from that, for better or for worse. And as you’ll see, we’ve got you know,
we’re planning to spend $2.5 million this year on trying to do some other things. It’s always a series of choices. I mean when, when I came on this board a long time ago, our big problem was we couldn’t get data from Long Beach Unified. And that was ’cause we
didn’t know how to get it. They didn’t know how to give it to us. And now, (snaps) it’s done. And that enables us to do
all kinds of things that, it made things possible that made our educational
experiences better, it gives us more data and all that. That happens every year. You know, there’s
something new that we get that we keep improving. We just wanna keep our heads down and make sure we’re making good decisions. I really like the way that, that Mike is approaching this and saying okay, let’s try this, let’s figure it out. If there’s a problem, let’s see how we can do this because it’ll make us
serve our students better if we do these things. And if you have to go back to the venders, or whatever. I’m, and especially looking at this business process review stuff, am concerned that what we’re trying to do is really ambitious this next year. And I don’t know if
we’ve got the bandwidth to accomplish all that. And I don’t know what
the fallback plans are if we don’t because often on next year, I mean I just, when we get to that part of
the discussion we can do it. But it’s all good that
we’re trying these things and that we’re trying to get them. One’s a question of what should we do. The next question of course is how are we doing it and is it successful. Yeah, yeah. How about those surplus funds? (laughs) (woman speaking off screen) – Okay, we’re gonna return
back to the presentation. I think you’ll find we’ll
go a little bit faster from this point,
especially once we get past the student centered
funding formula portion. I want to talk a little bit more about the specific expenditures, or excuse me, specific revenues. You can see that the primary source of our unrestricted revenues is the state principal apportionment, primarily the student
centered funding formula. That when we look at that, we are getting a $4
million increase this year for the COLA. When we talk about
expenditures in a moment, you’ll see that a large portion of that is used to support STRS and PERS. So when we look at the student
centered funding formula, we’re still only in, this is year two. 2019-20 is year two of the student centered funding formula. And it’s really changed dramatically the entire structure of revenue for us moving forward. That we have our base allocation, very similar to how we were funded before. But now we get a pot of money based on the number of students who we can identify as low income. And it’s really only in specific ways what we can identify them as low income. We don’t get to just say are you low income. At the K12 level, for instance, they do this with the free and reduced price meal applications. They’ll use that to establish low income. Here, our only opportunities
are through eligibility for Pell grants or other
formal identifications. So our ability to get students to actually go through that process. It’s not just about how many students do we have that we know of, we have to get them to
go through that process to be identified. And then for the student
success allocation, those are the completion rates primarily. And what we found was that 18-19 was a year of lessons for the Chancellor’s Office. I mentioned before that they were unprepared with
their revenue projections to fully fund districts at the level that districts performed. They told us this is how
you’re gonna get funded now. Complete students, identify
low income students, enroll them. And what we did was we completed students. And we identified them as low income, and statewide, it broke the bank. Statewide, there are only 26 districts at
the hold harmless level meaning that under the new formula, they would get less money. We’re one of 26. The remaining 45 are above
the hold harmless level. And the Chancellor’s Office, when they realized they
didn’t have enough money, put it all on the backs of those districts above the hold harmless level. They were limited to an 8% increase. They’re not happy with us, the rest of those community colleges because we were protected. We didn’t have any piece of
the reduction in funding. Only those districts that
are above the hold harmless, and they are all limited
to an 8% increase. But I think that signifies
that the state’s, the Chancellor’s Office was
committed to that promise to fund all community college districts no lower than the hold harmless, which is the 2017-18
level increase by COLA. – [Trustee Ntuk] We were
in the 26 or the 45 bucket? – [VP Drinkwine] We’re in the 26. – [Trustee Ntuk] 26.
– We are in the 26, meaning that when we
calculate our revenues using just the student
centered funding formula, we would lose about $2 million. That’s in addition to the
$1.3 million we would lose for not being a large college. So if we didn’t have hold harmless, we would be funded at a level that’s about $3.5
million less than we are. – So, I, initially I was
introduced to year one, I say we had a projected
$10 million deficit. Does that say that we’re doing four times better almost? Five times better? – When it was introduced, we were anticipated to
lose approximately 10.7. We lobbied very, very hard
for changes in the formula along with several other CEOs statewide. There’ve been a number
of changes implemented as a result of not only our lobbying, but some of that other lobbying. So the reduction is less. – One of the primary changes
was the ongoing COLA. The initial proposal
just said hold harmless at that level, no increases for COLA. A following amendment to the formula allowed us to get COLA in each year, and it increases our hold harmless. So that was critical ’cause otherwise we had stagnate funding and wouldn’t be able
to afford any increase. – We also lost a
potential amount of money. We increased approximately
29-30% this year in terms of graduation. But because everybody did so well, we’re not paid at it. They kept it either eight or 10% now. – Right, so as a result, they implemented some
changes to the formula so that they could just restrict our ability to increase. And it was all done at the
student success allocation. The first thing they did was they said, okay, I know that you can
have a student who gets an associate’s degree and a certificate. We’re only gonna fund the
highest earning award, just one award per student per year. If you had a student who subsequent years gets completion, you can fund that. But in one year, only the highest award. The second thing they did was they look at the transfers. So the highest earning completion was an associate’s degree with transfers. So yay, you know. And I know that my 21 year
old son has taken classes here and taken classes at Cerrito. So when he transfers, we would have both gotten credit for that. They said no. They’re closing that loophole. To get credit for a student who transfers, a student will have had to
complete at least 12 units in your district, and they would have had to done that the year prior to the transfer. So if you have a student
who’s attending a lot, potentially they could generate the transfer for both community colleges, but it’s unlikely. They also looked at ways
to cap the overall growth. Right now, they are basing
it on a three year average. So you can’t spike your formula. I would anticipate there’s
going to be continued significant reform. But because of the level of
these reforms they’ve made, they gave us an additional
year of hold harmless. The hold harmless period was intended to allow us to
transition to the new formula. These are significant changes. They’ve really changed
the rules of the game so we have an extra year. – And it just happened almost moment ago after we’d already achieved
the completion growth. So it was discouraging. But that’s not gonna stop us from completing students. – And I think that says
something about the role making, that with the May revise, the Chancellor’s Office
had their proposals. They didn’t have a lot of transparency about the proposals when they came out. And they continue to evolve. They continued to evolve until the, the budget that was
presented to both houses. They continued to evolve through
the conference committee. And it wasn’t until after it was passed and we saw the trailer legislation, because it’s contained in
the trailer legislation that we knew where we ended up. – [Trustee Ntuk] I guess my question of the things that we did, the change, the trying to adapt to the rules as they were given to
us in the first place, how do we measure up ourselves to, if we didn’t get capped, and if the– – We definitely, and when I say we, I mean collectively came
together and determined this is where we have to end up when we exit hold harmless to not lose funding. What’s feasible to increase in each year? And I think we had some really aggressive goals. And I think with some of them, we exceeded our expectations, and other ones, we didn’t. And I think that was to be
expected in the first year. But as we look back, we
did some things great, other things didn’t move as quickly as we wanted them. For instance, Dr. Munoz can talk about the increase in Pell grant identifications that as a revenue generating stream, identifying students low income benefits us both on
the low income portion, but also with student success because those completions get
a bump up for those students. – And can I say one other thing about it and that is I think what everybody realizes is that student centered funding formula is really complicated. If it’s complicated, it creates incentives to game it. And everybody is figuring out how to get to where they need to get to in order to get the
maximum amount of money that they possibly can. And it creates what I call
disingenuous behavior. If what you’re trying to do is, is just do it, but you’re
not really doing it, but you found a way to do it, it’s, if it was simpler,
it would be easier. But having gone this way and performance funding
is kind of this way, you know, there’s no question it’s broken. The real question is can it be fixed. And I’m not sure. So. – So one of the things that
we spent a lot of time doing on the first year in student services is looking at the student
centered funding formula, and identifying those opportunities to set really concrete goals that would help generate
and increase on the funding. So we set a goal out to
increase 20% awards in Pell. So for example, when we look
at the BOG fee waiver number, we look at the Pell fee waiver number, essentially, well now it’s
the California Promise, but there’s little under 20,000 students getting the California BOG. And there’s about 10,000
students getting the Pell. You would want to see closer parity between those two numbers. And so we’re really
targeting those students. And we saw that so many students were not completing the
verification process, hence, why we brought
Campus Logic in, right. And so really monitoring those numbers. And so last year, we only
had a very modest increase of about 2% in Pell identification. But that was in part
because we were coming out of the cyber attack, and much of those things
had to be rebuilt. And so we’re on track this year, as I mentioned in the early indications, that we’re gonna have a
banner year in financial aid. We expect to hit or exceed that 20% because we’re being very diligent. So it’s what I call key
performance indicators. So we have a key performance indicator for direct high school matriculation, which we saw that 46% year over
year increase in enrollment. We have a key performance indicator at the number of units
attempted in your first term. So we set it at 12. We went from 11.4 up to 12.6 now. So those are all things
that contribute to FTFS. And then the other indicator that we have within student services, and obviously these are shared metrics. They don’t just live in student services. They’re shared with academic affairs, is around completion. So the year over year
increase for ADT’s award to Pell students went up 34%, and for Promise students went up 29% from the previous year. And so we did very targeted things where we downloaded data and identified Pell eligible students who were between 45 and 60 units. It was about 1,500 students. And the counselors reached out and called them in and met with them, and helped them apply for graduation. So we did these very targeted things that would all translate to more, more funding in the new funding formula. So whether it’s, I want
to think all these things are really positive even though
it might seem disingenuous because you can say we’re
chasing the funding. But we’re not. These are good things for students. And so we’re really happy about the things that we’ve been able to support. And so pretty much four of
my five VP area priorities that were identified in my plan are directly tied to the
student centered funding. There’s only one metric that, and that’s the mental health metric, that’s not necessarily tied
to the funding formula. – [Trustee Ntuk] And one question. Where do you find this data? Is it in Npad? Is it reported to the
student success report card? – [VP Munoz] You mean the
data I just mentioned? – [Trustee Ntuk] Yes. – So, in my VP plan, what I’ve done is I’ve set up dashboards with
institutional effectiveness. So they’re actually public dashboards. You can go and see the direct
high school matriculation dashboard any time you want. And so these dashboards are set up for our area to be able to
monitor our ongoing progress towards these goals. So they come from
institutional effectiveness. And so they’re the ones that
kind of set up these numbers. I also have, obviously like the mental health isn’t a public dashboard, so we have to use like internal SARS data, and that’s reported form the clinicians. But for the most part, these are all, these are all numbers that come directly from institutional effectiveness. And we have tableau dashboards
that help us monitor some of, at least for my area, some of the goals that we’re looking at. And I’m sure Dr. Scott has tableau dashboards as well set up. – Yeah, Trustee Ntuk, I wanted to tell you on our three year metrics, these came out of
institutional effectiveness. And they go into our VP plans. So the four of us have a VP AA, or whatever plan, and so we look, we close the loop. We look at what happened last year. We look at how we performed
up against the goal. We create new goals. This year, we decided
to do three year metrics in my area. So we’ve reached some of them. We haven’t reached other ones. But yeah, it’s all part of our plan, our planning process. It’s required for accreditation. And we have large committees and they come and they sit and they listen to our presentations. And it’s part of what we do on an annual basis. – [President Malauulu] What is the, where is the student receivables tracked? Where does that fall in the metric for that? – So we’re talking about the debt students potentially
owe us for their fees. That falls in my area. I will tell you we write
off about $400,000 a year in uncollectible debt. We are hoping that with Nelnet, and the ability to make payments, students are less likely to get behind because it does impair
students ability to return to us in the future, future semester. We are working collaboratively to look at
when we drop for non-payment, what threshold should we drop. We want to make it one that makes sense, that that student is
meaningfully enrolled, but one that does not allow
them to encourage debt. But there is a certain level of that. And so when we have a
student who doesn’t pay, it does appear as debt. And if it goes long enough, we eventually will write it off. – And before I leave the
student centered formula, I wanna just point out one
very interesting dynamic as we’re in this process. So we’re working hard
to increase enrollment. We’re working hard to support completions. And as you heard Dr. Scott say earlier, sometimes that means having classes with not as much fill rate as we want because we wanna have the capstone. You heard Dr. Munoz talk a lot
about the additional services we’re providing these students. Remember, until we exit hold harmless, we don’t really have any
increase in funding except COLA. So that’s really an interesting dynamic. Before the formula, we had more students, we get more money. Yay. We don’t right now. We only get the COLA. And so that’s part of our decision making, we have to allocate resources
to these improvements, but it does mean that you will
be seeing higher costs for systems, you’re gonna see higher costs for labor in some cases. Those all represent
our efforts to bring in more students and to better serve them. – [President Malauulu] And
of course they’re, you know, economists are predicting a recession, which will also impact us. And hopefully our enrollment
will increase with that because when the, you know, when the economy is bad, everybody goes back to
school for retraining. Earlier in the meeting,
you quoted information from Anderson School of Management. Was that COLA related? It was, you’d mentioned something. Four year. – Yeah, they were talking
about the economy. They do project some inflation rates. But they were as concerned
as everybody else is, including the fed, about
the treasury market, which is typically a big indicator of when we’re entering a recession. But greater than that, our economic predictors
have been unpredictable. – [President Malauulu] No, that’s true. – It is an oxymoron, but we have unpredictable predictors. And so it is very difficult to anticipate what’s going to happen. Our stock market has been very emotional. And we see some longer lasting impacts from some global economic issues, including Brexit, including
the tariff issues. And so there is just a lot of concern. And the greater concern we have, the more it effects our stock market. And so I think we can anticipate just from a natural cycle, we eventually have to end economic growth period. It can’t last forever. But the question is when is that and how do we prepare. And I think your discussion
about our rainy day fund is completely appropriate. – I’m curious to know if that’s just information
that you cited from Anderson. Just, did that come across your desk? Or if we have a partnership with them? Or if they were just
sending out information to all the colleges? – They’re recognized expert, and I think my fellow CBOs
probably catch their releases as frequently as I do. It’s one of the areas we track. – [President Malauulu] Sure. I’m a graduate of one of
the Anderson programs. – I’m happy to share them with you. Let me, I’m happy to share
them with all of you. Yes. – [President Malauulu]
Thank you, thank you. – You’re very welcome. And so next, we’re gonna
look at our expenditures, and it’s not surprise that we are a service agency. We are salaries and benefits. That’s where we spend our money. Far and above every other unit, and you can see that our biggest change is in salaries and benefits that we are projecting
increases in audited actuals. Again, I believe that
we’ll be able to achieve savings here because we are
continuing our reorganization. But we can’t save everything. We do have to bring on 14 new faculty because of our faculty obligation number. So that’s one of the
challenges on the cost side that we get from the funding formula. We’re not getting more funding
for these extra students, but as we increase enrollment, we are required to hire
new full time faculty. And I will also tell you once we’re under the funding formula, I see a big problem ’cause we’re funded on a three year average. But the font is based on one year. So if you’re growing, your growth is gold by three year average. But for the font, it is not. So there’s a natural imbalance, and I’m hoping in the next three years, we find a solution. We also had negotiated increases in our collective bargaining agreement. Full time faculty had
negotiated 8.5% increase. The classified union had an
amount equal to the COLA. And then we see the
impact of STRS and PERS, 2.6 million buck with those alone. Very significant. We do show an increase
in contract services and operating expenses. I mentioned we had a big
savings at the end of the year. We conservatively budget for these. We know we will not spend every, but every contract to its max, but when you create a contract, you have to have room in there so that you can move. So we will always have savings. But we also are expanding services. We are forging ahead with new things. We can see increases there. And then lastly, we do have
some one time expenditures to support a lot of the things we’ve been talking about systems wide. So when we look at our seven year trend, and particularly with
salaries and benefits, you can see it’s been a rocky road. And I think the chart
shows it even better. Truly, anything above 85% in our industry is a danger zone for us. And we’ve been focusing
on salaries and benefits, however, it’s going to
continue to be a challenge while we’re implementing the student centered funding formula because of those things I just mentioned. So it just means we have to
be very tightly controlling with our salaries cost in order to not let them get away from us. And I’m happy to report
that we are projecting, even with the deficit, salaries below the 90% range, which is a big deal for us. And the STRS and PERS, we’ve been previewing it and giving it all kinds of trailers. And here we are, it’s finally hitting. When we look at our change over 18-19, it’s not as bad as it was. And when I talk about a $2 million hit and say that’s not as bad as it was, that’s saying a lot. We are gonna get some relief. It should cap out at 22-23. and I say should because if the funds continue to not perform, and if they’re still upside down, we’ll have to find another solution. But when we look at the total, this cumulative total at the very bottom, that $12 million, that means today we spend $12 million more in STRS and PERS than we did nine years ago. $12 million today. The benefit is to the funds. And by extension to our employees because they have more secure retirement. But that’s solution, which wasn’t created by educational agencies, has been solved by them. And that goes to your question earlier, President Malauulu, about what’s causing, what’s driving that deficit spending. And it is this, and you’ll
see the same pattern at many other institutional agencies. And then when we look out, we always project out two years. The further out you project, the less accurate you are. You’re making some
really broad assumptions. The good news here is
that I think this mirrors when you look, going
back to STRS and PERS, you see those increases
and costs decreasing and STRS actually having a reduction, you can see the impact
our on deficit spending. There’s a corelation there. It’s not because we’re
being irresponsible, it’s because we have
these external changes to the degree that it’s
difficult to manage. And the fact that we’re
taking this opportunity to get leaner, to get
reorganized or restructure. It’s great because not only
are we improving our budget, but we’re improving how we operate. And then I wanted to touch base on all the other funds. We talk a lot about the
unrestricted general fund because that’s our operations, that’s what we do. But these other funds are really critical. And if one of these funds got too upside down, it could endanger our fiscal solvency because it would be on the
unrestricted general fund to solve the problem. In your handouts that I gave you tonight are the most updated budgets we have for these different funds. An I just wanted to give you
a little bit more information about each one of them. The restricted general fund contains all of those restricted programs from financial aid to an itty bitty little grant. And so those funds, you either have to do
something specific to get it, once you get it, you have
to do something specific, federal funds, state funds, local funds. And so in that program, you’ll almost always see
expenditures very close to what the revenue is ’cause we anticipate spending it. The biggest challenge in that fund is to manage carryover funds. You mentioned earlier, President Malauulu, using it or losing it. A lot of these programs, if you don’t spend it within
a certain amount of time, you lose it. And a lot of these programs, the fiscal year is different than ours. So sometimes when you look
at the ending fund balance, it’s a little strange. ASB obviously, we
maintain that for our ASB. They control it. We have a lot of controls. We had a really successful
workshop last year with VICMAT coming in
and talking about it. We’ll bring them in again this year. Capital projects, that contains the state funding we get for our buildings, ’cause that funding
doesn’t go into bond funds. It sits in capital projects. But we also have money in there that we’re funding ourselves big programs that aren’t bond funds. Child adult development is primarily our child development centers. The community education fund, that’s when we’re doing some entrepreneurship type of programs. I really wanna hit the bond funds. The bond funds are unique, and I get questions every year, how can we budget it, you know, almost a billion dollars and
we didn’t spend very much. We budget the entire bond because in the 2041 master plan, we decided how much we were gonna dedicate to each of those projects. So that budget every year,
we budget all of them. We make adjustments throughout the year, and by the end of the year, you’ll see what we actually spent. So by the end of the year, it shows what we spent. And then the next year,
we budget it all again. That’s the process because we actually have budgets
for each of those. It looks odd, but it helps us
track each of those projects. The retiree health fund, a portion of that fund
is in a irrevocable trust because we have set aside monies to ensure that we have those post-employment retiree benefits for all of our retirees. We also do a little bit of a pay as you go to help support that. Financial aid, obviously is maintained in a separate fund, and that’s expressly for this purpose of servicing financial aid. And I wanted to last mention the stadium operations. This is in a separate fund. A lot of the revenues we make from our civic center act
facility use agreement, so think the antique swap meet, the motorcycle swap meet. Those funds help us maintain that stadium and all the parking lots, as well as the staff. That budget is perfectly balanced, very little surplus, very little deficit in each year. You will see an increase
in the expenditures in upcoming years because
we are adding to event staff because we are doing more, but again, it’s gonna be a wash. The idea from the civic center act is that we’re not making
money off of allowing the public to use our facilities. We’re sharing with them because they pay for it. And that’s why it’s necessary to charge because typically we’re recovering costs. We’re not making money. So when we look at our
cloudy crystal ball, and try to determine
where are we gonna hit, there’s a lot of things
that are concerning, but I think we’re doing a
lot of things that are great. That $3.6 million deficit, really only 2.6 million ongoing is far less than we’d projected in either of the last two years. And we do have specific plans in place to address that on an ongoing basis. We are concerned about the state’s ability to appropriate enough funds to fund community colleges. There was an effort this year to get a continuous appropriation so they wouldn’t fall short. It was not successful. So that is our hope going forward to get that change, but in the meantime, the ability of the state to fund all of us means we have to continue to budget at least minimally for
a potential deficit. And then of course for all of those students that our funding formula concerns we talked about that our work to improve, we’ve been very, very successful, but we won’t see the monetary results for a couple of years. So I hope you found that very helpful. I know it was a very deep dive. But if you have any other questions, I’d be more than happy to answer them. – This isn’t a question, it’s just a comment. And this is credit to the
entire team that’s here regarding the largest graduating class. The numbers that we were initially given were actually more conservative than what the numbers were. So we have the largest graduating class, and then it ended up being
even bigger than that because I think it went up
by a couple hundred more and the certificates that were awarded. And I think that we need to get that message
out into the community. So we were super happy and we were celebrating. I think, I took some notes, and I think that the numbers reported were 1925 and 316 for students eligible
with the associate degree and the certificate. But I think the actual numbers were actually 2173 and then 395. So we reported the largest class, but actually we really should be celebrating an even bigger
number than what was there. So I know that a lot of things
happened after the fact, and I know a lot of students picked up and paperwork happens, and classes and grade changes. I remember all that. But this team should really be commended. And I think that that
message should get out because I personally, and this is you know
really sad and unfortunate, but this is just the
culture that we live in. I personally had people say to me like that’s impossible. That’s not possible. No you didn’t. No you couldn’t have. And it’s so nice to be able to say, you know, actually it was even bigger than we originally said. So that’s fantastic. In terms of budgeting,
congratulations to the team because I know that that helps a lot. Dr. Romali, you wanted to respond? – Thank you very much. That really means a lot to us, everyone, the whole school
has been working so hard. You are correct. We purposely underestimated
to have a safety net for grade fails, or grade changes. The last thing we wanted
to do was oversell. We will be announcing the
final numbers tomorrow night. We are so excited. That’s okay, that’s okay. You deserve the announcement. – [President Malauulu] Surprise. – You deserve the announcement. – [President Malauulu] Jumped the gun. – It’s okay. We’re gonna have some slides tomorrow. It’s gonna be a real celebration. We were about 27% last year. So I love it when people
don’t believe in us because that gives us an
opportunity to prove them wrong. And I say come on with the disbelief. We’ll just prove you wrong every time. You are 100% right. Our students are awesome. There has been not one
piece of the organization that hasn’t been touched by our efforts. You’re seeing little things, dodads happening here,
there, and everywhere. We’ve looked at virtually every
piece of the organization. And the magic is when you do that, it starts to multiply and multiply, and it becomes a snowball. And so look out next year. (laughs) – [President Malauulu] I appreciate that. Any other questions or comments before we move on to the next item? Yes sir? – Just on closing up the budget. I recently part of the LA
County trustee association in conversations about preparing for the recession and what tools are out there, and I think about, you know, yeah, we are in this longest recovery. The 2009 stimulus act worked and we haven’t had another recession. But one of the things that happened was stress tests. It allowed the banks where required to say okay, if you were in this diminished state, how would you perform? And one of the tools came up
in our conversation is that VICMAT analysis that can be done where you can do an
analysis of your budget, and it gives you a percentage
that you can compare against other districts, or you compare against your strengths versus your weakness. And it kind of can tell you a pathway that maybe help that, maybe the rainy day fund, you know, boost our VICMAT score or not. But it would be a great assessment, or I don’t know what the
process is for us to do that as far as a financial tool that we
may be able to talk about when the budget comes back next month. Or has that already been done and we just didn’t talk about it today. – VICMAT has a 14 point, actually I think they’ve added more. It used to be a five point assessment and now they’ve added
a great amount to it. We can certainly do a self evaluation and bring it forward. It does show you some red flag areas. It shows you areas you can improve upon. But it can be very, very useful, yeah. – Is it a difficult assessment to do? Does it take a lot of time? Or is it just doing some calculations? – It’s a combination. Some of the questions are straightforward. Some of the questions require calculation. And some of the questions require a very frank look at how
our district operates. So the question there because budgets really are a reflection of the district at its core to ask questions that can be challenging to answer. – What’s the staffs
perspective on this timing and when would be helpful for us? After the budget? So would it take weeks to do? Or days to do? – I believe after the budget adoption, that it would be a good exercise
to go through perhaps with the financial data completed and bringing it forward for some of the other answers. But definitely sometime
prior to budget development for the following fiscal year. – Yeah, I agree with that. I actually used to do
some work for VICMAT. They’re absolutely outstanding and have some of these
before the 14 points, back in the days of the five point. And they are very, very helpful. They cause you to ask some
really good, strong questions. And I would say once we put
this budget to bed in September, and get it loaded in and everything for the new year, perhaps October, November
would be a great thing to do for next year. – Looking at the documents we have and as we get closer, is there gonna be a line item that we can see how much is for the office of basic needs
and homeless students? I know somewhat high level, but where do we see those type of line item budget allocations or expectations for next year? – Great question. When we approach budgeting, and what you get for your budgets is a summarized budget. So it’s summarize by fund and shows all the expenditures
and revenues sources for that fund. When you look at the restricted fund, you can see a lot of the specific funding for each individual purpose. That doesn’t always reflect
all the costs in that area. So we assign department codes to budget. So imagine hundreds of department codes and each one of those department codes, you’ll see expenditures and budgets. So for instance, my department code is not huge because it’s me, my salary, my executive assistant and our related and travel supplies. So if you looked at fiscal
services department code, then that contains all the
folks operating in there and all the related expenditures. And so you take that and you replicate it and you get a very, very large budget. Each program manager is
responsible for managing their department budget. And we do look at them
at that close level. And I’m always happy
to bring forward to you department budgets for those areas you’re really interested in. They don’t always align specifically with how we think about programs. Because sometimes we operate programs, cross functionally. So we might have funding
for this specific purpose for a program for guardian
scholars, for instance. And we might know that that would operate really closely, and forgive me, Dr. Munoz, I’m talking about your area of expertise. But from a budgetary standpoint, it operates very closely
to something else. They might not be distinctly identified in the budget, they might
have different sources. You can have one department
with more than one source, but if they can cohabitate, if they can share staff, you might be splitting one staff member 50% from this funding source, 50% from that. So sometimes how we think
of the program externally doesn’t always align
exactly with the budget ’cause the budget follows the dollars. But we can certainly bring forward to you those specific departments and then walk you through how they might look a little different on the budget side. – Especially the things we voted on, like what is our allocation
for transportation, for north Long Beach, for homeless housing just to get a better idea of, I know we have money. We talk about we’re gonna do things. But how much and what do we agree to? Because it’s somewhat in fine print. – Well we, and bus passes,
I’m glad you brought that up, is a really good example because it’s not a standalone program. It’s not a standalone department. And it actually represents funding from three different sources. So in that case, we’ll create for you a summary of what that
expenditure looks like. – [Trustee Ntuk] Especially
looking at our goals and priority pages. It was like 10, 11 or I guess, I’m sorry. Maybe slides eight through 12. You know, we haven’t checked
off it meets these categories, but how much are we actually spending to improve the website, or our early college program? It’d be good to have some numbers and a better understanding of positions. – [VP Drinkwine] Sure, absolutely. – [Trustee Ntuk] Connected
to that, so thank you. – [President Malauulu]
All right, anyone else? Okay, so moving on the agenda. I just wanna confirm that item 1.6 is a separate presentation. Or did you cover everything all at once? – We talked about item 1.6. It is a separate presentation. But my presentation’s going
to be very short for you. – [President Malauulu]
All right, let’s have it. – We were asked to bring forward a summary of what we were doing with the business process reviews because the $6 million pot of money’s been sitting out there. And I think in the early
years after we got it, we had a couple starts and stops as we were looking at
system implementation. It’s really ramped up. And we’ve become far more focused on what we need to do immediately. But as I said earlier, not nearly all of the
systems we’re implementing are reflected here because we are using
other sources of funding. So what you have in this
list on the front page are things we’ve already done. Some to greater success,
some to lesser success, but things we’ve already done. But when you go to page two, and this is the handout for the BPRs, you’ll see what we’re anticipating for 19-20 through 21-22. So these are the things that we anticipate spending money on. In 18-19, we didn’t spend a lot of money we thought we were gonna spend. We slowed down a little bit. We were making big changes, and the systems we were implementing were really effecting a lot of systems. And we knew that we had a big
PeopleSoft upgrade happening over Thanksgiving this year. And so we need to wait for that to happen and do some more system modifications. But I have to say, I have
phenomenal colleagues, and we spend a lot of time very productively talking the various needs for systems and identifying
which ones are priorities and setting out those steps. And so what you see here is the result of those conversations. And so we’re looking at catalog software. I think we’ve had a lot of conversations about catalog software over the past year. Degree planning, big deal. Benefit administration, we have a person doing everything manually like it was 1984. Position management, we talked about that contracts management. Again, that’s a largely manual process that if we had some just using a system and that person could
dedicate their time and energy into maybe improving our contracts, or making more lean contracts. So it’s really, it’s not about
reducing people with time, it’s about making better use of our time. And so we’re really excited
to bring this forward. You’ll also see that we are continuing to strengthen our network. That’s also a big focus. But we will have expenditures be on here, but I think to your point
earlier, Trustee Otto, capacity, we have a lot of
conversations about capacity. But I think we are well positioned to be, to meet these goals
over the next two years. – Thank you very much. Any other questions or
comments on item 1.6? Is there anything
additional on the budget? All right, we’re gonna
go to the adjournment. And we will see everyone
back here tomorrow night for our regularly scheduled monthly board meeting. It is 7:10 and this
meeting is now adjourned. Thank you all and thank you to staff. You did a great job, really good job. Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *