NCA Self Study Report, January 2002

              NCA Self-Study Report, January 2002
•••
••••
•••••
••
•••••• ••• •••••
•••••••
•••••
.••••. , . ', ••
•••• ••• •·•4•1••.•. 'SPt'\'
L))
(;:';01
.c;5::1
•••••••
••••••
•••••
••
••
•••••
••••••
••••
••••
••
Chapter Two--Responses to Interim Advisory Visit 7
Interim Advisory Visit, May 2000 7
Chapter Three--Responses to 1992 Report and Significant Developments 9
1992 Accreditation Visit and Significant Developments 9
Chapter Five--Criterion One 19
MCCCD Vision and Mission 19
GCC Vision and Mission Statements 20
'l'cL < "'2-
TABLE OFCONTENTS FE 2405
Spec LD 6501 .G55 G58 2002
NCA self st"d~ report
I '1 n 11 n I' v 2 0 0 ?
Glendale Community ColloKe
(Maricopa Count:v. Ariz.)
LIBRARY/MEDIA. CENTER
GLENDALE CGMfVJUN, .:OLLEGE
6000 \VEST OUVE iWENUE
GLENDALE, ARIZONA 85302
Chapter Six--Criterion Two 23
Organizational Structure 23
Governance 28
Human Resources--Student Demographics 34
Human Resources--Staff Demographics 36
Human Resources--Staffing 39
Human Resources--Planning 41
Human Resources--Compensation and Benefits 43
Human Resources--Professional and Staff Development 45
Human Resources--Performance Evaluation 50
Financial Resources--Sources of Funding 52
Financial Resources--Grants Development 58
Financial Resources--Financial Management 59
Financial Resources--Accounting and Purchasing Services 60
Financial Resources--Planning 61
Physical Resources--Facilities 66
Physical Resources--Maintenance 72
Physical Resources--Planning 73
Physical Resources--Information Systems & Services 75
Chapter One--Introduction 1
Glendale Community College Self Study Report 1
Overview of the Self-Study Process 1
Chapter Four--General Institutional Requirements and Federal Compliance
Program 13
General Institutional Requirements 13
Federal Compliance Program 17
••
••
••
•••••
••
••
••
••••••
••••••
••••
•••••••
•••
••
••••••••••
•••••
••••
•••••
••
•••
••••••
•••
••
•
•••
•••
••••
••
••
••••••••
•••••
•••
•••
••••••
••••
Chapter Seven--Criterion Three 79
Educational Programs--Curricula 79
Educational Programs--General Education and Transfer Education 82
Educational Programs--Occupational Programs 84
Educational Programs--Developmental Education 86
Educational Programs--Support for Special Populations 89
Assessment and Program Review 95
Educational Support--Teaching Resources for Faculty 100
Educational Support--Learning Resources for Students 103
Educational Support--Enrollment Services 107
Educational Support--Student Life 111
Additional Programs--Collaborative Initiatives 116
Additional Programs--Community Partnerships 119
Additional Programs--Non-Credit Offerings 123
Chapter Eight--Criterion Four 125
Organizational Effectiveness--Institutional Planning 125
Organizational Effectiveness--Institutional Research 127
Organizational Effectiveness--Institutional Performance 129
Organizational Effectiveness--Process Review 134
Chapter Nine--Criterion Five 137
Commitment--Diversity 137
Commitment--Integrity 138
Integrity--District and College Publications 143
Integrity--Academic Standards 146
NCA/HLC Third-Party Comment 148
Chapter Ten--Conclusion 151
Chapter Eleven--Resource Room 155
BID Forms End of document
••••••
••••••
•••••
••
••���•••
•••••
•••
•••
••••
••
•
•••
•••••
••••
•••••••
••••
••••
••••
��••
••
•���••• ••
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Glendale Community College Self-Study Report
Introduction
Glendale Community College (Gcq is one of 10 public colleges in the :Maricopa
County Community College District (MCCm). The photo at the end of this
chapter shows GeC's campus while it was still under construction in 1965.
While only a few might have predicted the phenomenal growth the College and
surrounding area would experience in the following 35 years, the proof is in the
number of students we have and continue to educate and serve.
2002 Team Visit
On :March 4-6, 2002, Higher Learning Commission consultant evaluators will
conduct an on-site visit. With the submission of this report, Glendale
Community College formally requests continuing accreditation. Expecting the
next 10 years to be equally as challenging and rewarding as the last 10, we pledge
to examine our institution on a continual basis, assessing courses, programs, and
practices to improve our ability to serve the needs of our students and
community in the twenty-first century.
Accreditation History
GCC opened at its extension site in 1965 and received initial North Central
Association accreditation in 1967, along with Mesa and Phoenix Colleges, with
the advice to continue to address "significant and persistent problems which
exist in terms of the relationship among the Governing Board, District
Administrators, and the three Colleges." This original accreditation to the multi­campus
district in August 1967 occurred 4 years after voters approved the
establishment of a community-college district. The College received renewed
accreditation in 1977, 1983, and 1992 and celebrated its 35th anniversary in 2000.
OveIView of the Self-Study Process
In Summer 1999, GCC began the task of conducting a comprehensive self­study.
President Pollack appointed a Steering Team Committee, who in tum
created Tri-Chairs. The Team's charge was to research self-study models,
organize the study into manageable stages, and select 7 criterion chairs to lead 15
employee teams from across the College. To involve as manypeople as possible
in the self-study process, the Steering Team developed the concept of
"expanding teams." During the analytical phase of the self-study, teams
increased to include "content experts" for each topic area.
1
PUlpose of Self-Study
The Steering Team developed three goals for the self-study process:
• Improvement: To access and evaluate processes, systems, and outcomes
directed at teaching, learning, and service to students and the community
• Resources: To provide students access to resources, including
participation in the Federal Financial Aid Program and articulation with
other colleges and universities
• Accreditation: To maintain accreditation by the Higher Learning
Commission
Organization of the Self-Study Process
The Steering Team wanted a self-study process that would link to the College's
strategic planning process. Mter researching a variety of models, the Team
designed a process adapted from Sinclair Community College. This self­reflective
model was action-oriented and supported efforts for continuous
improvement. In this spirit of expanding gro'Wlh and success in a new century
and millennium, the Steering Team agreed to maintain the theme of the 1992
Self-Study Report. Adelante, a Spanish word meaning "forward," "charge," or
"come in," conveys our intention to use the knowledge gained from the 2000
self-study experience as the basis for the internal review portion of the current
strategic planning process and as a constant reminder that our focus must be on
moving forward and attracting students to our quality programs.
Je8J'l An n Abel, Regis Della-Calee, PSJ.I1 De Pi ppo, John Gr{igs} Linda.
Hawba.ker, Da.vid RaifaeUe, AlbertoSanchez, Jennette Jones Willis.ms
•••
••••••• ••••••
•••
••••••••••••
••••
••
••
��•••
I
I
Mriam Pack
I
Te.. t4
- Public«ions 8<
Advertising
I
Te.. t5
-AeleJ:ict'lships
Do we demonstrate integrity
in our practices and
reJa.tict'lships?
CoordinatingiEditing Team
Carmela Amoldt, John Griggs,
Char M:mtSJ'lus} Connie
Greenwell
Crierion Five
IE Office
Arnb er DejnesJ Linda Hawb ekey
StandardsTesm
Charlotte M:mt8l'll,lsJ PaUette
Schnyder, Karen R\.Isso
I
Te.. 6
·FiscsJR~
Allocation Processes
Te-."
·Humen Resource
Allocation Processes
~
·PhysicalResource
Allocation Processes
Th!!L!1
·Planning Processes
Te.... 12
·Institutonal Effectiveness
So Assessmert Processes
OieriM Four
Bob Hubbw, Pam Jorunstad
Do we have the resources to
continue accanplishing our
pu,?oses 8fld strengthen our
eJtectivenes:s:?
Te... l0
.Profes:s:~
Development
Te.. l1
·Service to Community
Te.. S
-Educallo;;r­Progr&.
ms &. Curricula
-Assessment of
Student Academic
Achie\E:mel'lt
·General Education
-Developmental
Educ«ion
Te... 9
·Student Sel'"Yices
Jim Daugherty, Susan High
crt.rionTIve.
How are we using our
resoU/ce:s: to acco~lish
our educational and other
purposes?
I President, TessaMertinez: Pollack
NCAS...ringT....
Role: Set up il'ltrastn.:cture to conduct self-study&monjtor project plan
Te.. 7
•Institutional S~port
Sentces
Te... 6
-FiscsJ Resources
Te... '"
·Human Re sources
TeamS
• Phys~sJ Resol.ft:es
Team 3
·Policies 8< Procedu~s
Team 2
·Govemance &
Decision l'v1eking
·OrgMizational
Structure
Peu IDe Pippo
,)e::mrl(:S:::·Jt'lt-/'.r'·I(d,r
crterion T",o
What hum811, financial, SlId
physieal reSQUlces do we have
to aecomplish our purposes?
li:!!!!!..1
-College History,
Mssion & Purposes
·Commitment to
Excelle'lce in
Teaching &. Learning
Deanette Devereaux
crt.rionOn.
Do we hQV'i!: clear Md
publidy stQted plIposes
theJ: ere cot'lsistert with
our mission?
GCC Self-Study Teams 11812002
I
Site Visit Planners
Je8llette Stewart, JudyBlake
(Te.... Leads) 1...- ;::::::=:::========;1 ConsJJtSJ'lt, ..byce Elsner ,
,;. Gray.d out 17arrE: demtes cha17if! in TeamLwi
2
•••
••
•••••••
••••
••••
••••••••
••
••••••
•••••••
The self-study process was organized into five major phases:
Phase Description
Study Area Planning The 15 teams were assigned study areas under the five criteria.
Phase Teams were asked to review the related patterns of evidence
and to identify one or more topics to study that would
demonstrate a pattern of evidence for the criterion
Descriptive Phase For each topic studied, teams prepared a summary report
describing the topic's current status. This phase established a
common understanding and starting point for phase three--to
evaluate what works well and!or areas for improvement. The
Descriptive Phase covered the following areas:
1. Current status (description of programs, services, activities)
2. Accomplishments since 1992
3. Response to concerns from 1992 NCA study (as needed)
4. New initiatives, planning objectives, long-range plans
5. Current issues to be considered
Evaluation Phase For each topic, teams identified the best Measures of Success
(Analytical) and the most significant influences on those Measures. The
Evaluation Phase covered the following areas:
1. Measures of Success
2. SWOT Analyses
• Internal Strengths/Weaknesses
• External Opportunities/Threats
3. Brief discussions of the most significant SWOT findings
and their influence(s) on the Measures of Success
Planning Phase For each topic studied, teams generated responses to the most
(Analytical) significant SWOT findings and their influences on the
Measures of Success. The Planning Phase covered the
following area:
1. Recommendations
Validation Phase For each topic studied, content experts responded to team
(Analytical) findings
Using the Self-Study Process for Improvement
This past September, members of the President's Advisory CDInmittee (PAG
reviewed over 360 team recommendations that came out of the self-study
process. Committee members worked in small groups to categorize each of the
recommendations as strategic or operational. Recommendations deemed
operational were forwarded to the President and/or Deans with the request that
the appropriate planning area consider them while planning for fiscal year 2002­03.
Recommendations deemed strategic will be forwarded to the Futures
Committee (Strategic Planning).
Linking the Self-Study Process to Strategic Planning
During Fall 2001, an ad hex work group reviewed and recommended a revised
strategic planning process that was "outside-in" driven. The process was
designed to determine the gap between public needs and expectations, external
3
forces and environmental trends, and the College's current capabilities and
performance as identified through the self-study process. Anned with this
important information, the College will be able to position itself more
appropriately for the future to continue its long tradition of quality education
the community.
GCC 5-Year Planning Cycle
Conduct Self-Study l. Conduct internal review to evaluate the College's
FY 2000-01 (done) current capabilities and performance using one of the
FY 2005-06 following methods:
• Most recent self-study process (Sinclair model)
• Traditional self-study process
• AQIP model (Academic Quality Improvement
Project from Higher Learning Commission)
2. Categorize proposed planning ideas into operational
and!or strategic issues. Forward operational ideas to
the President, Deans, and Futures Comrninee
Perform Strategic l. Determine what external information is needed to
Planning conduct planning (environmental scan):
FY 2001-02 (in progress) • Needs - Public Perspective
FY 2006-07 • Forces - Competitors & Collaborators
• Trends - Political, Technological, Educational,
Economic, Societal
2. Agree on planning assumptions
3. Determine the gap between needs/forces/trends and
the College's current capabilities and performance
(Self-Study Report)
4. Identify strategic choices
5. Consider impact of strategic choices:
• Internal Processes (planning, budgeting,
assessing, developing curriculum, etc.)
• Learning & Growth (employee capabilities,
motivation, empowerment, alignment, and
information systems' capabilities)
• Resources (physical, human, financial)
6. Formulate a list of strategic goals and prioritize them;
choose three goals to address
7. Review the College's Vision and Mission and Purposes
Statements and align them to changing environments
as needed; submit for Governing Board approval
8. Update Institutional Effectiveness Plan to include
strategic goals
Implement Strategic l. Develop action plans
Plan 2. Implement action plans
FY 2002-03 to 2006-07 3. Monitor and report progress in A 11llJft11 Report;
FY 2007-08 to 2011-12 as strategic goals are addressed, select another strategic
goal from the list
A Readers Guide
The Self-Study Report is organized according to the Higher Learning
Commission's Criteria for Accreditation. Fifteen (15) teams involving over 1
employees gathered information for each chapter's topics, "Wrote "Team
Analysis" paragraphs using the Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threat
4
to
50
••••
•���
••••• •••
•••••
•••••
•••••
•••••
••
•••••
••
••••••••••••
••••
•••••
••••
••
•••
••
••••••
•••••
(SWQ1) Analysis and Measures of Success model, and generated lists of "Areas
for Improvement" and "Recommendations." Content sections conclude with a
"Validation" paragraph written bythe area manager, supervisor, appropriate
dean, or the President.
Echoes ofthe Past
Long-time faculty members comment on GCC
Paul DePippo--Social Science Faculty
"As a former student and long-term instructor at GCe, I have watched,
at close quarters, GCC's evolution from a small liberal arts transfer
institution into a comprehensive community college. I have also come to
appreciate GCC's role as one of the most fundamental and important
institutions which have been instrumental in the development of the
northwest valley and in shaping the lives of many thousands of its
people."
Marilyn Hoffs--Retired Communication Faculty
"Life is about opportunities and about learning, and Glendale College
offered me twenty-five wonderful years of opportunities. I thoroughly
enjoyed teaching the excitingly diverse students. Because theycame from
a variety of ethnic backgrounds, various places on our earth, and had a
variety of ways of communicating their worldviews, I also enjoyed
learning from them. Even at their age they have much to share. I also
greatly appreciated mycolleagues in the teaching profession and the
administrators at Glendale College. Sharing, challenging, encouraging,
and enlightening are just a few words that describe those relationships.
I.'m.pro.ud.to say that Glendale College is one of the best educational " illstitutlons ill our state.
Robert Hubbard--Philosophy Faculty
"The Owl of Minerva has not yet taken to flight. A political mist
conceals the essence of GCe. The essence resides in the ability to
conduct a dialog with the past, to foster the contest of ideas, and to
contemplate a better future. GCC is like a Banyan tree whose roots
extend well beyond the College."
Richard Rees--Psychology Faculty
"Thirty-seven year ago, I was hired to teach psychology at the Maryland
branch of the new Glendale Community College. I have been privileged
to attend every graduation ceremony at GCC except three: two while
working on a doctorate and one while on sabbatical. GCC has been
good to me, and I have been honored to be here so manyyears. It has
gone by so fast, but the memories are wonderful."
5
A erial Phoro ({G1miale Comnunit:y~Construction Sire
From the South locking to the North (Phoroftom GCC1965 Yearbxk)
6
••••••
••••••••••
••••
••
•••
••••
••••
•••
•••••••
•��
••••
•••••
•••
••
•••••••••
••
••••••
••
••••••••
CHAPTER TWO
RESPONSES TO INTERIM ADVISORY VISIT
Interim Advisory Visit, May 2000
In January 2000, a letter from the GCC Faculty Senate informed Interim
Chancellor RaUl cardenas of ongoing communication difficulties between
President Pollack and some faculty. Upon Dr. Pollack's recommendation, Dr.
cardenas requested an NCA Advisory Visit to address these issues.
As a result of this request, an NCA Advisory Visit occurred on May 8-9,2000.
Initial faculty resistance to these dates (spring semester-finals week) was
withdrawn because of the necessity to complete the Advisory Visit prior to the
end of the semester. More importantly, the College hoped to resolve real or
perceived communication difficulties between the Administration (specifically
President Pollack) and faculty and staff.
NCAAdvisory Team Members
• Chair: Dr. Charles J. Carlsen, President, Johnson County Community
College, Overland Park, KS 66210
• Board Member: Ms. Linda Bebout, Business Manager, Columbia Health
Care, Riverton, WY 82501
• Member: Dr. Commodore Oaft, Instructor of English, South Suburban
College of Cook County, South Holland, IL 60473
• Member: Dr. B. Diane Davis, Professor of Psychology, Oakton
Community College, Des Plaines, IL 60016
Advisory Team Report
The NCA Advisory Visit Report received on July 11,2000, concluded "GCC has
had an excellent reputation for academic excellence. It is the team's view that is
a very fine institution and although it has serious problems these problems can
be solved internally. To place the institution on probation at this time or take
other drastic actions would damage the institution far more than solve the
problems." The team determined that within the institution rests the good will
and shared leadership to identify and work toward common goals.
Findings and Responses
Finding
Board Memhers should adhere to their Code of Conduct.
On December 12, 2000, the Board reaffirmed its Code of Conduct.
7
8
Finding
At a Board meeting to be held on campus) Board Members should clarify
their expectations of the role of Gec's President.
The Governing Board held a meeting at GCC on September 18, 2000. The
Chancellor clarified his expectations of a president by referencing the job
description. A videotape of this meeting is available in the Resource Room.
Finding
A campus climate survey to identify problem areas should be conducted;
collected data should identify problem areas to be mediated by an outside
consultant.
At the October 13, 2000 President's Advisory Committee (pAC) meeting, the ad
hoc Campus Climate Subcommittee was established. Dr. Pollack requested
several PAC members, along with several other faculty and staff employees,
serve on the subcommittee. Meeting over the spring and summer, with the
guidance of Shapard Wolf of the ASU Research Lab, the Subcommittee created a
survey instrument to assess the campus climate at the beginning of Fall 2001.
The survey was written during this time and mailed to all full-time, Board­approved
employees at the end of September 2001. Survey results were
tabulated and shared with College employees in December 2001. Dr. Pollack
created an ad hoc consultation selection committee, and a consultant was hired in
mid-January 2002.
Finding
A Code of Conduct for employees should be developed) including guidelines
for dealing with violations of the Code of Ethics (Criterion Five, NCA
Handbook).
Also at the October 13, 2000 PAC meeting, a second ad hoc committee, Ethics
and Campus Code of Conduct Subcommittee, was established. Dr. Pollack
asked PAC members to serve on the subcommittee. The Subcommittee wrote
The Glendale Community College Standards of Conduct and Informal Conflict
Resolution Process, and recommended its approval to Dr. Pollack. PAC
adopted the document on September 14,2001; a copy is available in the
Resource Room.
Finding
The President and Faculty Senate leaders should meet regularly to discuss
issues of mutual concern.
The College President and the Senate President established a standing meeting
time to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern. Administrators also meet
with the Senate several times during each semester. In addition to encouraging
faculty to attend regular Senate meetings, Faculty Senate leadership established a
monthly Campus Forum/Coffee Hour to foster communication as a continuing
priority among faculty.
••••
••
•••••••
•••
••
•��
••••
•••
••••••
•••
••••
•••
••••••••
•••
•���••••
•••
•••
••••
••
••••
•••••••
•• •
CHAPTER THREE
RESPONSES TO 1992 REpORT AND
SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS
1992 Accreditation Visit and Significant Developments
Many physical and organizational changes have occurred at Glendale Community
College since 1992, a good number of these resulting in a strong emphasis on
continuous assessment activities. This emphasis has helped create a way of
thinking that focuses on the improvement necessary to sustain the College's
long-standing record of student academic achievement and success.
1992 Accreditation Visit
Gee had its last comprehensive accreditation visit in 1992. The NCA. Team
recommended ten years of accreditation.
Responses to the 1992 Concerns
The 1992 NCA. Team Report stated, "that although the College is to be highly
commended for meeting NCA. criteria in student assessment, some concerns
need to be addressed."
Concem
Even though the College meets NCA General Institutional Requirements,
there is evidence that the current mission statement needs to be refined to
facilitate the development ofa U'ell-conceived, comprehensive plan that
measures institutional effectiveness. One of the components of the
Institutional Effectiveness Plan should be a specific plan to assess student
academic achievement. (See attached NCA memorandum dated 9/9/92:
/Iinstitutions scheduled for comprehensive visits commencing in 91- 92 are
required to include as a part of the ewluation review plan in uhich the
institution documents academic achievement as a part of the fulfillment of
criterion three. '')
The College-Wide Academic Achievement Committee (CWAAq was formed to
develop college-wide assessment measures. The Institutional Effectiveness Plan
was submitted and approved in Spring 1993. Facultymembers have put in place
the Student Academic Achievement Plan at the course, academic program, and
college-wide general education levels, and assessment results are being included
in the planning and budgeting process.
Concem
A concern identified in the 1983 team report on the number of occupational
programs with very few completions has not yet been fully addressed.
9
Although the number of two-year diplomas awarded has increased by
152% and the number of certificates awarded has increased by 625%
over the last ten years, to address this concern fully, the College re­examined
its definition of completions in relation to its vision and
mission and purposes statements. The completion of a formal
program is not necessarily the intended goal for all students. While the
College tracks completion of formal programs, the College also
recognizes many students attend classes to learn enough to get a job,
keep a job, and/or advance on the job. The College defines a
completer as one who finishes a course, certificate, and/or a degree, or
transfers to a university. Recognizing that certain occupational
programs have low completion rates, the College has implemented a
program reVIew process.
Concem
The residential faculty (only 16%) does not appear to be sufficiently inwlwd
in the ewning program
Per the Board-adopted Residential Faculty Policies (RFP), while full-time faculty
are not required to teach in the evening program, they may elect to teach their
"load" in the evening. However, faculty involvement in the evening program is
direct in that residential faculty provide evening supervision, recommend
employment of all adjunct faculty, and orient these faculty to the curriculum and
College processes. In this way, they are actively involved in ensuring the quality
of the evening program. In Fall 2001, residential faculty generated 31% of the
evening teaching load and 30% of evening FTSE.
Concem
The current academic advising system should be redesigned to increase its
effectiwness and to ensure a high lewl of continuity.
Since the last visit, the addition of 8 full-time Academic Advisors has increased
the total number to 10. In addition, 5 Athletic Specialists contribute one-half of
their time to academic advisement. Advisors participate in weekly updates and
training and have greater access to advising resources such as transfer guides,
curriculum check sheets, and course equivalency guides. The previous reliance
on residential faculty for general advising was examined and their role in this area
was reduced. Advisors now go out to the high schools, Gee North, and other
community sites. The system has been redesigned to serve our students better.
Concem
Students intervieued had the perception that they uere not alw:zys adequately
and completely informed of activities and ewnts that take place on campus.
Bulletin boards, sandwich boards, neVJSletters, and articles in the student
neVJSpaper were initiated to address this concern. Students can also access
announcements on the student server and the College calendar on the web at
10
••
•••
••••••••
•••
••
••••••
•••
•••••
••••••
•••••
••••••
••••••
•••••
••••
••
••
•••••
••
•••
•••
•••••
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/calendar
Concem
Students intervieued do not fully understand the process to access needed
funds for their organizations and clubs.
The College has instituted an annual training program for club members and
faculty advisors. In addition, a Student Life staff member now works with clubs,
organizations, and the two student governments to explain the required policies
and to assist them with the procedures. Additional club funds have been made
available through the Office of Student Life. Gear criteria, along with a formal
application process, are in place.
Concem
The Library book budget has remained static for many years and appears to
be inadequate to support both the core curricula and new programs.
Increases in the book budget have occurred since the last visit. Specifically, in
2001-02, the Library was allocated $100,000 in capital dollars for books, over
$18,000 for supplies, $43,000 for subscriptions, and $14,000 for electronic
subscriptions. Also important, the Gce Library Media Center (LMq is fully
networked with the District, the 9 otherMeem colleges, and the state
universities and public libraries. In addition to the monies that have been added
to the print materials budget, the College has also realized the need to focus
some of its resources on its non-print materials budget and must address the
issue of funding additional databases. Should the Governing Board adopt
National Association Standards of the League of Innovations, the College will
attempt to increase the number of databases to comply with this national
standard. As books are important to the College and students, book-sharing
processes have been improved and expanded. In addition, the amount of money
allocated to the College from the District library bond funds increased the
number of electronic library resources, and all Gcestudents have free access to
the Internet.
11
Significant Developments since 1992 NCAVisit
Over the past thirty-five years, Gec has demonstrated its commitment to life­long
learning and excellence in manyways. Changes implemented since 1992
have improved the College's ability to operate more effectively as employees
provide improved and more inclusive services to students and the community.
• Created a GCCweb page, with links to all campus information and
accessible by anyone connected to the Internet, including a centralized
coursebank with course descriptions and outlines
• Opened University-College Center (Ueq in Fall 1997, partnering with
ASUWest
• Opened Gce North in Fall 2000, offering university-transfer courses,
job-related programs, opportunities for career advancement, and high­school-
to-university bridge programs through a partnership comprised of
the Deer Valley Union High School District # 97 and ASUWest
• Established a comprehensive International Students Program in 1994
• Since the 1994 bond election, Gce has expanded and improved its
facilities: new Humanities, Music, and Physical Sciences buildings, an
addition to and remodel of the Math building, opened GCC's newly
renovated LMC in Fall 2000. Additional construction included the new
16,000 square-foot One-Stop Enrollment Center and remodeling of three
additional buildings, all providing updated facilities for student services
and administrative offices, new entrances, and more parking
• Added 57 full-time faculty positions (245 budgeted faculty positions of
which 232 are RFP and 13 OYO/OSO, plus 16 OYO/OSOunbudgeted,
for a total of 261)
• Created an Office of Institutional Effectiveness, reporting to the
President, with a Director and research staff
• Revised programs, courses, degrees, and certificates in response to
advances in technology and changing needs of the community, business,
industry, and local educational institutions
• Participated in District-wide establishment of Arizona General Education
Curriculum (AGEq
• Developed a General Education Philosophy Statement during Spring
2001 (General Education Degree Subcommittee [GEDS] along with the
District Curriculum Committee)
12
•••••
•••• •••
••••
•••••
••••
•••
••
•••
•••
••
••��••
•••
•••••••••••
•••
•••
•••
••
••••••
.'••••
••••• ••
CHAPTER FOUR
GENERAL INSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
AND FEDERAL CoMPLIANCE PROGRAM
Glendale Community College fulfills all of the General Institutional
Requirements for continued membership and complies -with all Department of
Education's mandates and policies and procedures recently approved by the
Commission.
General Institutional Requirements
The General Institutional Requirements (GIRs) describe the primary
requirements for affiliation with the Higher Learning Commission (HLq of
Colleges and Schools. They establish a foundation within the accreditation
process. The 24 GIRs are divided into 7 major areas: Mssion, Authorization,
Governance, Faculty, Educational Program, Finances, and Public Information.
An institution affiliated -with the Commission by either accreditation or
candidacy meets the following requirements:
MISSION
1 It has a mission statement, Glendale Community College has a mission statement,
formally adopted by the most recently modified in 1994. Approval of the
Governing Board and statement by the Governing Board occurred on
made public, declaring that 10/23/2001 (General C:ztalog, p. 4). The 2001-02
it is an institution of higher Strategic Planning Process includes a review and
education. potential revision of the mission and purposes
statements.
2 It is a degree-granting The College confers the following degrees: Associate in
institution. Arts, Associate in Transfer Partnership, Associate in
Business, Associate in Science, Associate in Applied
Science, Associate in General Studies, and Certificates of
Completion (General C:ztalog, p. 6).
AUTHORIZATION
3 It has legal authorization to The College has legal authority to confer degrees and
grant its degrees, and it certificates. The College complies with all District, State
meets all the legal Board, and Arizona Revised Statutes requirements.
requirements to operate as
an institution of higher
education wherever it
conducts its activities.
4 It has legal documents to The Maricopa County Community College District,
confirm its status: not-for- including Glendale Community College, has
profit, for-profit, or public. authorization through the Arizona State Legislature to
operate as a public, countywide, community-college
system
13
14
GOVERNANCE
5 It has a governing board The Governing Board possesses and exercises necessary
that possesses and exercises legal power to establish and review basic policies that
necessary legal power to govern the Maricopa County Community Colleges. Its
establish and review basic authority is derived from the Arizona Revised Statutes
policies that govern the under Title 15, Chapter 12. Specific duties are detailed
institution. in Statutes Title 15-1444 and the Board's administrative
regulations. The Governing Board is also subject to
provisions of the state constitution and the regulations
of the Arizona State Board of Directors for Community
Colleges. Roles and responsibilities of Governing Board
Members are outlined at
http:// www.dist.maricopa.edulgvpolic;y/policies/govpr
ocess.html
6 Its governing board The Governing Board has 5 members who are elected
includes public members by the public in staggered six-year terms and who
and is sufficiently represent geographical precincts of the 9,226 square-autonomous
from the mile county. Members serve without compensation and
administration and remain autonomous from the institution.
ownership to assure the
integrity of the institution.
7 It has an executive officer The chief executive officer of the District, Chancellor
designated by the Dr. Fred Gaskin, has served since July 2000. The GCC
governing board to provide President, Dr. Tessa Martinez Pollack, has served since
administrative leadership January 1996.
for the institution.
S Its governing board In August 1967, the Executive Board of the
authorizes the institution's Commission on Higher Education approved the transfer
affiliation with the of accreditation from Phoenix College to the Maricopa
Commission. County Community College District (Mccm) and also
voted to accredit the colleges as operationally separate
institutions, including GCC
FACULTY
9 It employs a faculty that The College employs a faculty who are credentialed by
has earned from accredited the Arizona State Board of Directors for Community
institutions the degrees Colleges, who meet the hiring qualifications of the
appropriate to the level of Maricopa District, and who have earned degrees and/or
instruction offered by the occupational experience appropriate to the discipline(s)
institution. that they teach. The names and degrees of full-time
faculty appear in the GerFral CaJalog.
10 A sufficient number of the In Fall 2001, GCC employed 245 budgeted faculty
faculty is full-time positions of which 232 are RFP and 13 OYO/OSO,
employees of the plus 16 OYO/OSO unbudgeted, for a total of 261.
institution.
11 I ts faculty has a significant Faculty at the College have a significant role in
role in developing and developing and evaluating all of Gees educational
evaluating all of the programs. Faculty participate on College and District
institution's educational curriculum committees and District-wide discipline-programs.
based Instructional Councils.
•••••••���••• ••••
••
•••••
•••
••••
••'. •••
•••••
•••
••••
••••••••
••
••••
••
••••
••••
•••
•••••
•••
••••
EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
12 It confers degrees. During fiscal year 2000-01, 1,572 degrees and certificates
were awarded.
13 It has degree programs in As of Fall 2001, there are 104 degree programs at the
operation, with students College, each of which has students enrolled.
enrolled in them
14 Its degree programs are All degree programs at the College are appropriate to an
compatible with the institution of higher education with a mission
institution's mission and are committed to general education, career education, basic
based on recognized fields skills education, and transfer education.
of study at the higher-education
level
15 Its degrees are Degrees offered are appropriate for each program, and
appropriately named, each has met the length and content approved by the
following practices College Gmiculum Committee, the District Gmiculum
common to institutions of Committee, the Governing Board and State Board,
higher education in terms following practices common to institutions of higher
of both length and content education. The content areas are consistent with the
of the programs. College's mission and purposes.
16 Its undergraduate degree All Maricopa County Community College District
.programs indude a degree programs include a coherent general education
coherent general education requirement consistent with the institution's mission.
requirement consistent General Education requirements are outlined in the
with the institution's College General Catalog (pp. 47-70) and include the skills
mission and designed to and knowledge necessary for a literate citizenship.
ensure breadth of
knowledge and to promote
intellectual inquiry.
17 It has admission policies Open admissions policies and practices are consistent
and practices that are with the institution's mission and committed to
consistent with the providing instructional programs accessible to all
institution's mission and Admissions criteria adopted bythe Arizona State Board
appropriate to its of Directors for Community Colleges are published in
educational programs. the College's General Catalog (pp. 14-19).
18 It provides its students The College provides students access to all teaching and
access to those learning learning resources. Support services to enhance each
resources and support student's academic, social, and career success are also
services requisite for its available.
degree programs.
15
16
FINANCES
19 It has an external financial The State of Arizona Office of the Auditor General
audit by a certified public conducts an annual, independent audit of the District's
accountant or a public audit financial statements. In 1996, NCA and the Maricopa
agency at least every two District created a "Memorandum of Understanding"
years. (MOll). Because of a ruling by the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board based on their Generally
Accepted Accounting principles, the state's Auditor
General is not pennitted to issue individual audit
reports for the Maricopa Colleges.
20 Its financial documents In the 2001-02 budget, 64% of the operational funds
demonstrate the (Fund 1) are dedicated to instruction; 20% for academic
appropriate allocation and and student support; 5% for administration; and 11%
use of resources to support for physical plant and general institutional expenses.
its educational programs. Additional student-services funds are provided from
student fees from Fund 2. The 2001-02 capital
allocations for instruction totaled 92%.
21 Its financial practices, The College receives the majority of its funding from
records, and reports the Maricopa County Community College District's
demonstrate fiscal viability. own allocation processes. District and College practices
reflect frnancial prudence allowing the College to
operate within budget, with carryover reserves. The
fiscal reliability of the District is available in the
Comprehensive Annual Report.
PUBLICINFORMATION
22 Its catalog and/or other The College publishes these elements in all pertinent
official published publications: GerK:ral Catalog, Oass Schedules, and on
documents include its the web at
mission statement along
with accurate descriptions http:!/ www.gc.maricopa.edu
of its academic calendars;
its educational programs
and degree requirements;
its learning resources; its
admissions policies and
practices; its academic and
non-academic policies and
procedures directly
affecting students; its
charges and refund policies;
and the academic
credentials of its faculty
and administrators.
23 It accurately discloses its The College discloses its standing by the Higher
standing with accrediting Learning Commission and includes the Commission's
bodies with which it is web site and phone numbers in its GerK:ral Cara1rYg (p. 4),
affiliated. Oass Schedules (Spring 2002, p. 8), and other relevant
publications.
24 It makes available upon Each year, the College reports sumrnarydata on its
request information that financial condition in the A nnual Report. In addition,
accurately describes its oversight of budget matters is provided via annual
financial condition. public budget hearings held by the Governing Board.
After State Board approval, the District budget report
is published and available as a matter of public record.
••
••••
•••••••••
••
•••
••
••••
••••
••••
•••••••
••
••••••
••••
••••
•��•
•••
••••••
••
•••••••
••••
••••
Federal Compliance Program
Credits~ Program Length~ and Tuition
As a member of the l\1aricopa County O:>mmunity Colleges, Glendale
Community O:>llege uses standard semester credit hours as the basic measure of
its learning experiences and charges tuition for each credit hour.
Institutional Compliance with the HigherEducation Reauthorization Act
The physical year 1999 cohort default rate released officially bythe Department
of Education in September 2001 was 9%. The physical year 2000 cohort default
rate -will be published officially in September 2002. Documents relating to
compliance with Title IV are available in the College Financial Aid Office.
Financial Aid and Admissions and Records are audited annually by external
entities to determine if current practice is consistent with federal and state
regulations.
Crime Statistics Reporting
Although the College Safetyweb site does cover lost and found questions and
offers information about campus parking, its primary concern is with disclosure
of safety policies and annual crime statistics, established by United States Code
section 1092(~.
Institution's Advertising andRecmitmentMaterials
College advertising and recruitment materials are available in the Resource
Room The statement of accreditation in O:>llege publications includes the
Higher Learning o:>mmission's phone numbers and web site.
PolicyIV.BA InstitutionalRecords ofStudent Complaint
In compliance with policy, formal complaints that cannot be resolved before
reaching the administrative level are tracked and categorized in a database
maintained bythe Associate Dean of Student Life and the Associate Deans of
Instruction.
ProfessionalAccreditation/Certification
• Nursing Program--accredited by National League of Nursing
• Administration of Justice/Police Reserve Academy--certified by Arizona
Peace Officer Standards and Training Board
• Automotive Programs--certified by National Automotive Technicians
Education Foundation
• EmergencyMedical Technology--certified byArizona Department of
Health Services
• Fire Academy--certified by the Arizona Fire l\1arshall
• Microsoft Academic Training Program--certified byMicrosoft Corp.
• OSCO Networking Academy Program--certified byOSCO Systems,
Inc.
• MOUS (Microsoft Office User Specialist)--certified byMicrosoft Corp.
17
18
••
••
•••
••••••
••••
•••••
••��
••••
••••
••••••
••••
•••
••••••••••
•••••••
•••
••••••
••
•••
•••
••• •••
CHAPTER FIVE
CRITERION ONE
The institution has clear and publicly stated putposes consistent with
its mission and appropriate to an institution of higher education
Glendale Community College fulfills Criterion One. This section reviews
District and College Missions and examines their relationships to institutional
and community understanding of GCC's sincere intention to keep abreast of the
changing needs of its students and public to provide the most effective programs
possible.
MCCCD Vision and Mission
The mission of the ten-college/two Skill Centers 11aricopa County Community
College District (MCCCD) was first adopted January 28, 1997, after a process
that included District-wide discussions through Strategic Conversations held by
the Governing Board.
MCCCD Vision
"The 11aricopa County Community Colleges strive to serve the changing needs
of our many communities for effective, innovative, student-centered, flexible,
and lifelong educational opportunities. Our employees are committed to
respecting diversity, continuous quality improvement, and the efficient use of
resources. We are a learning organization guided by our shared values"
(amended July 22, 1997).
MCCCD Mission
"The 11aricopa County Community Colleges create and continuously provide
affordable,accessible, effective, and safe learning environments for the lifelong
educational needs of the diverse communities we serve. Our colleges fulfill their
mission through: University Transfer Education, General Education,
Developmental Education, Workforce Development, Student Development
Services, Continuing Education, and Community Education" (amended July 27,
1999). The complete listing of the District's vision, mission, and values is
available on the web at
http://www.dist.maricopa.edu/gypolicylpolicies/vismisval.pdf
19
GCC Vision and Mission Statements
The College Vision and Mission and Purposes Statements have guided the
College for manyyears.
GeC Vision Statement
"Glendale Community College will be an innovative educational provider of
quality lifelong learning experiences for all members of the community."
GeC Mission and Purposes Statement
"The mission of Glendale Community College (Gcq is to address the higher
education needs of its community. Through its diverse programs and services,
GCC assists students in meeting their educational goals.
"We fulfill this mission as an institution of higher education by preparing
students:
• To participate responsibly in a culturally diverse, technological and global
society
• To successfully transfer to colleges and universities
• To secure employment and advancement within chosen careers (General
Ca~ 2001-02, p. 4)."
The Governing Board formally approved GCC's mission and purposes
statement on October 23, 2001. Prior to the change in Higher Learning
Commission requirements, the Board did not formally approve individual college
mission statements.
Decision Making and the Mission
The Mission and Purposes Statement has been adhered to in a methodical
fashion. Over the past ten years, the College has reviewed and developed
programs and services responsive to key words in the Mission and Purposes
Statement.
KeyWord(s) Examples of Programs or Services Direcdy Responsive to Mission
"higher education needs" • UCC at ASU West
• GCCNonh
• Dual-Enrollment Programs with feeder high schools
• Aniculation agreements with surrounding colleges and universities
• Continuing/credit education for registered nurses
• Honors programs and organizations
• University Transfer Center
• AZTEC Program (for education majors)
"assists students" • Advisement Center
• Testing Center
• Disability Resources and Services · Veterans Services
• Student Life Programs/Oubs and Activities
• Math Solution; Physics Assist; Chemistty Assist; Accounting Assist (specialized
faculty-led tutorial services)
20
•••
•••
••• ••••
••••
•••
•••••
••••
•���••••
•••••
•••
••
••••
•••••
•••
••
•••••••••
•••••••
•••
••
••••••
KevWord(s) Examples of Programs or Services Directly Responsive to Mission
• Center for Learning (tutorial center)
"assists students" cont'd • Life 101 Program!GJUnseling Department
• Developmental Education courses and services · Financial Aid, wans, and Scholarship programs
• ACE Plus (Achieve a College Education: high school, GCC and universities
partnership)
• Children's Center
• Gee 101 "New Student Orientation" / Advisement Program
• Mentoring Program
"culturally diverse" • Multicultural Affairs Services
• International Students Program
• International Festival
• Black History Month
• Hispanic History Month
• Native American Program
"technological society" • No cost "universal access" to technology for all credit students
• Instructional Palette (word processing, spreadsheet, presentation software, e-mail,
storage on server) · Over 1,000 student computer workstations
• High Tech Centers open 110 hours per week
• Suppon for faculty and students using technology for learning
• Staff development/training opponunities, including the Desktop Project
"global society" • Creation of the International Students Program
• Faculty participation in teaching/trips to Southern China, Costa Rica, Mexico,
and Australia
• International!technology- based courses with partners in Australia, Hong Kong,
and mainland China
• GCC faculty- led international student study trips
"successfullytransfer" • Arizona General Education Curriculum agreements
• Statewide Aniculation Task Forces
• Transfer data obtained from state universities via ASSIST data warehouse
• Transfer Center Services (ASD, DofA, NAU)
• Course Equivalency Guide
• AzCAS
"employment and • Career Services and Placement Center
advancement" • The Maricopa Recruiter
• The Insti1ute (workshops and non-credit programs)
• Ford ASSET/GM ASEP, Daimler Chrysler, GM Training Centers
• John Deere training partnership
• Extensive IT training programs, cenificate, and degree options
• Fire Academy
• Police Academy
Understanding of GCC's Vision and Mission and Purposes
The Vision and Mission and Purposes Statements appear in the General Catalag,
the FaadtyStaffHandlxxle, and 1heStudentHandlxxle. These statements guide the
work of various College committees and councils and are taken into
consideration as new programs and services emerge and as assessment processes
apply to continued student learning and institutional effectiveness.
The key concepts of the District and College missions are also integral to GCC's
planning and budgeting processes, evidenced in the software the College
developed and now uses in its reallocation and budget-request processes. GCC
Budget Development Committee, Planning and Budget 2002-03 workbooks are
available in the Resource Room
21
Community Understanding of GeC's Vision and Mission and PUtposes
Community members can visit the GCC web site or pick up a catalog or
schedule to read its mission, but the most visible evidence of understanding the
mission is the support the community shows at the polls. In 1994, 62% of the
voters approved a $398 million bond issue, a repeat of the successful 1984 bond
vote. The Governing Board is planning another bond initiative for Fall 2004.
Team Analysis
Team 1 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationship to the measures of success, concluding that
the current mission has guided College operations well for manyyears. GCC's
strategic planning process is underway and will use the findings of this Self-Study
to develop a "Futures Plan." A possible outcome of the self-study and strategic
planning processes may be a revision of the College Vision and Mission and
PUlposes Statements. In accordance with current College practices,
recommended revisions will be forwarded to the Governing Board for approval.
Areas for Improvement
• Ensuring that the strategic planning process currently underway
addresses the vision, mission, and purposes in the context of the District
statements
• Strengthening the use of the vision, mission, and purposes in the ongoing
planning and budgeting processes
�� Evaluating the institutional performance processes that reflect the
College's vision and mission and purposes
Recommendations
• Strengthen the dissemination of GCC's vision and mission and purposes
to the general community, to business and industry, and to government
entities through the newly created Office of Community and Public
Relations
• Expand communication mechanisms to the various stakeholders,
including print, web, and other appropriate media
• Forge strong linkages with the District strategic-planning efforts, linking
to their Vision and Mission and Purposes Statements
Content Area Validation
Processes are in place to ensure that the College's vision, mission, and purposes
remain responsive to community needs and are appropriate for an institution of
higher education. On-going support of those statements is made apparent
through increased enrollment and public approval of College initiatives.
"~imte ~~e~oo
22
••
••••
••••• •••
••••••••
••••
••••
••
•••
••••
••••
•••••
••••••
••••••
•���••••••
••••
••
•••••••
••
•• •
CHAPTER SIX
CRITERION Two
The institution organizes its human, financial, and physical
resources effectively
Glendale Community College fulfills Criterion Two. This section reviews the
Organizational Structures and Governance policies necessary to manage all of
the resources that GCC utilizes to accomplish its mission effectively. As a
steward of public trust and monies, Human Resources (including students),
Financial Resources, and Physical Resources are each treated with the utmost
care and consideration.
Organizational Structure
Much of GCC's organizational structure and rnanyof its policies governing its
processes are mandated bythe District Administration, consisting of a
OJ.ancellor, 5 Vice-OJ.ancellors, management, and support personnel. The
"Policy Governance Model" was adopted bythe Governing Board as an
overarching approach to Board actions.
Maricopa County Community Colleges
Organizational Chart
2001-02
State Board of Directors for
Community Colleges of Arizona
Governing Board
Chancellor
V.C., Academic and Student Development
V.C., Business Services
V.C., External Affairs
V.C., Human Resources
V.C., Information Technologies
23
MCCCD Governing Board
The Governing Board consists of 5 members, each of whom is elected in
staggered years from geographical districts. Governing Board members serve a
six-year term. Board members meet on the second and fourth Tuesdays of every
month (except ]ulyand December, when they meet once). They direct the
activities of the District under powers given to them according to Arizona
Revised Statutes Section 115-1444. It should be noted that for legal purposes,
the official name of the District is Maricopa County Community College District;
however,Mcm is commonly used.
Distric t-Wide Councils and Groups
Executive/Advisory Councils assist the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellors in the
management and operation of the District. Three key Councils are listed below:
Executive/Advisory Charge
Councils
The Chancellor's Executive Composed of the Chancellor, College Presidents, Vice-Chancellors, a
Council (CEq Skill Center Director, and the Faculty Association President. CEC
receives recommendations from the Advisory Councils and other
District advisory organizations for consideration and action with
recommendations forwarded to the Chancellor
Capital Development Composed of the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellors, four college
Advisory Council (CDAq Presidents, a Skill Center Director, and two Governing Board
members. CDAC approves matters relating to the planning, design,
equipping, and construction of projects, including capital bond
projects, remodeling, major maintenance, and acquisition of real
propeny
Financial Advisory Council Composed of the Chancellor, Vice- Chancellors, two college
(FAq Presidents, a Skill Center Director, 4 faculty, 2 MAT, 2 PSA, 1 M&O,
and 1 Crafts. FAC is responsible for the supervision and coordination
of all District-wide budgeting processes. The Council also makes
recommendations to CEC regarding budget-related matters
Source: Mana:;pa Dzstrut Support Serua.s Center ueb site
Other District groups and task forces play important roles in shaping District
operations and procedures. Some, not mentioned here, such as the Faculty
Development Committee and Instructional Councils, are advisory and mayserve
as District resources.
District Groups Chaq1;e
Deans of Instruction Coordinate instruction, address concerns, respond to CEC requests and
advise V.C, Academic and Student Development
Deans of Students Provide District-wide coordination of student services, address concerns
referred by CEC and District Director of Student Services
Administrative Coordinate fiscal, human resources, facilities planning, budgeting, and policy
Services Group analysis District-wide, respond to requests from CEC, V.C, Business
Services, V.C, Information Technologies, V.C, Human Resources
Diversity Task Force Develop a Diversity Orientation for all new employees and facilitate ongoing
diversity training for all Maricopa employees
Admissions and Address District-wide concerns and processes in admissions and records
Records Council
Strategic Planning Position the District for the future
Ocotillo Convene faculty roundtables that focus on instructional technologies
Technology Work with V.C, Information Technologies
Leadership Council
Source: Mana:;pa Dzstrut Support Serua.s Center ueb site
24
•••
•••
••• ••••
���•
••••
••
••••••
••••
•••
••••••
•••
•••••••••••
•••
•••••••
•••••
•••••
•••••
••
••
•••
College Administration
Administrative and governance structures of the College use several well-defined
organizational entities. Gee has a solid organizational structure, modified in
1999, designed to assist the College Administration in carrying out its decision­making
responsibilities.
The President is responsible for the operation of the College under the policies
set forth by the Governing Board and/or the OJ.ancellor. In January 1996, Dr.
Tessa Martinez Pollack assumed the position of President, following the twenty­year
tenure of Dr. John Waltrip. After a period of review, reflection, and
extensive employee input, the Gce organizational structure evolved to include
the following Administrative positions:
The Dean of Instruction plans, organizes, administers, and promotes the
development and implementation of the instructional programs and related
activities of the College and oversees the assessment of student academic
achievement.
The Dean of Educational Services plans, organizes, and directs student
services, and plans and directs educational partnerships, athletics, grants
development, Gce North, the Dec, and dual enrollment.
The Dean of Administrative Services plans, organizes, and directs the general
administrative operations of the College, including the budget, policies, and
procedures of the physical facilities, College safety, computer operations,
grounds, utilities, and personnel services of the College.
Two Associate Deans of Instruction report to the Dean of Instruction,
sharing responsibility for the management of academic programs.
The Associate Dean of Student Life reports to the Dean of Educational
Services and administers student-life programs, programs for special populations,
and services to students, such as career placement, childcare, and learning
assIStance.
The Associate Dean of Enrollment Services reports to the Dean of
Educational Services and administers admissions and records, catalog and course
schedules, recruitment and outreach, advisement, testing, student financial aid,
and programs for special populations, such as the International Student Program,
Native American Program, Multicultural Affairs, and Veteran Services.
25
26
Team 2 conducted an initial analysis of areas likely influencing organizational and
structure and their relationship to the measures of success, which included a
periodic review of organizational structure, College support of student academic
achievement, and a structure that supports timely decision making and
implementation. A lack of understanding of this structure, a lack of trust and
agreement on representation on committees, and the perception that Chairs look
I Gove rn in g Board I Glendale Commll'1iiy
I Chancellor I
Co liege FuncTion a I
Fred Gaskin Ed D.
OoganizaTi>n CharT,
12/14/2001
Inst it ut ional Effect iveness Presi:ienT
PhD. I Commun it y & Pub Iic Re lat ions Tessa Mart inez Po lIack
I
I
I Dean, InsTrucTion II Dean, AdminisTraTive Services II Dean, EducaTi>nal Services J"ean Ann Abet M A. J"oyce K. Elsner, Ed D. Albert 0 Sanchez, MA. I
Auxi liary Se rv ices
Ath let ics
Academic Areas Dual En r 0 Ilment
Curriculum Development Bookstore Educat ional Partnersh ips
Facu It yI Staff Deve10 pment Copy S e rv ices Grant s
GM Training Center Food Serv ices GCC North
Honors Program Budget Development Student Services
The Inst itute Bus iness Serv ices Univers ity-College Center
Special Interest Program Mail Room
- College Safety - Assoc. Dean Assoc. Dean Facilit ies Enrollment Services
InSTrU cTion Leasing Mary Lou Massal. MEd .
Charles F. J"effery. MA. Maste r Plan
New Con st ruct ion Academic Advisement
Academic Areas: Remodeling
Admissions, Records, Regist rat i
Art IPh 0 tograph y Informat ion Services Class Sched uIe/G ene ral Cat alog
Bio logy Campus Software
Commencement
Business & IT In novat ion Cente r Facu It ylStaff Hand book
Healt hIPE/Rec re at ion Inst ruct ional Comput ing Financ ial Aid
Mathemat ics/Computer Science Network Services
Int e rnat ional St ud ent s Prog ram
Nursing Training & Employee
Mu It Icu It ural Affai rs
Performing Arts Rec ru itment and Out reach Deve lop ment
Psychology Maint en ance & Ope rat ions Test ing Cent e r
Personnel Veterans Serv ices
- Assoc. De an Assoc. Dean InSTrU cTion L- STudent Life
Rand y Kimmens, M.A. Donna Wh ite, MA.
Academic Areas:
App lied Sc ie nces
Chemist ry
Communic at ionl Fo re ign Languages
Counseling
Eng Iish IRead ingl J"ou rnal ism
Ph i1osoph y/Re Iig ious St ud ies
Social Science
Engineering & Technology
Se rv ice Learn ing
Team Analysis
on
ACE Plus
ADA Compliance
Caree r I J"ob Place ment I
Ad uIt Re-Ent ry Serv ices
Cant e r for Learn ing
Ch ild rens Center
Disab Ility Services & Resources
St ud ent Cond uct
Student Life
••
••
••
••• •• ••••
•••••
••••
•••
•••••
••
••••
••
•••
••••••
•••••••
••••••••
•••
•••
•••••
••
••
••••
•••
after Department needs and not College-wide needs were seen as weaknesses.
The team concluded that a periodic review of structure is valuable and necessary.
Areas for Improvement
• Need for greater employee understanding of the College organizational
structure
• Need for greater employee understanding of the College decision-making
model
Recommendations
• Define structure/roles for decision-making
• Review structure/role of PAC, Budget Committees, and Department
Chairs
• Hold open forums on organizational structure
• Conduct open discussions on trust and betrayal in the organization
• Inform the College community of positive plans and actions, attributing
each to the responsible individual(s) or committee(s)
Content Area Validation
The current organizational structure fulfills its obligation regarding accountability
for the leadership of instruction and educational support services. Review is
ongoing, and modifications are made as needed--for example, adjustments have
been made recently in community and public relations. Changes in
organizational structure are communicated to all employees. The role and
makeup of PAC has created controversy among some faculty and is currently
under review. The President's Office is presently documenting the ways in
which decision-making occurs at Gee.
-··~antc
~fff,oo
27
Governance
Governance policies of the State Board of Directors for Community Colleges of
Arizona and those ofMccm and of GCC are followed. Administrative
governance at GCC is carried out through the Executive Tearn, comprised of the
President and Deans. For certain matters, this team is expanded to an
Administrative Team, which may include the Associate Deans, the Director of
Community and Public Relations, and the Director of Institutional Effectiveness.
GCCs governance model is participatory in nature and is facilitated by the PAC
and an extensive network of faculty and staff committees.
State/District/College Roles
GCC s operations are governed by Arizona State statutes and policies and
procedures determined bythe State Board. The table on the following pages
outlines the major roles and responsibilities of the various State, District, and
College governing bodies, and the specific functions associated with each. The
State Board maintains a web site at
hup:// www.stbd.cc.az.us/
Participatory Governance
The Governing Board has established overall policies and procedures for all
employee groups responsible for carrying out the role(s) of governance and
decision-making. While each group shares characteristics of a bargaining unit, it
is not part of a union in Arizona, a right-to-work state. Therefore, employees
negotiate working conditions and compensation packages through their
individual professional organization's elected representatives, who also
participate in policy development at the College and District levels.
Governing Board
Governing Board members have contact with the colleges on a regular basis.
Theyvisit campuses, attend local and national workshops, seminars, and
meetings, and serve on District and College task forces and committees.
Resumes of Board Members are available on the web at
hup:// www.dist.maricopa.edu/gvpolicy/
The Governing Board meetings alternate between Strategic Conversations and
Business Meetings, attended by students, employees, and community members.
Minutes are available on the web at
hup:// www.dist.maricopa.edu/gybd/
28
••
••••
••••••••••
•••••
••
••
••
••
••••
••••
•••
•••
•••••
••
•••••
••
••••••
•••••
•••••
••••••
���•••• ••
Functional
Major Roles and Responsibilities
State Board of Directors for
Area Cormnunity Colleges of MCCQ) Governing Board Glendale Cormnunity College
Arizona
General Enact ordinances for the Visit and examine college Oversee institutional
governance of the colleges management, conditions, and activities and exercise
under its jurisdiction needs appropriate responsibility
Set standards for the Maintain colleges at least eight to manage resources to
establishment, development, months per ~ar meet the College mission
administration, operation, and and purposes
accreditation of colleges
Approve intergovernmental Position College for growth
agreements for providing
service to unorganized
counties
File an Annual Report with the
Governor
Approve petitions to form a
district
Academic Establish curricula and courses Enforce the courses of study Offer higher-education
and Student
Set qualifications for student
prescribed bythe State Board programs to meet the needs of
Services
admission Exclude partisan, sectarian,
students and the cormnunity
Fix student tuition and fees
and denominational materials Provide services that enable
students to succeed
Approve offerings in
Award degrees, certificates,
unorganized counties
and diplomas Manage enrollment
With the State Board of
Evaluate vocational education
programs evety five ~ars, in
Vocational and Technological the manner prescribed by the
Education, oversee vocational State Board
standards, planning, and
funding priorities
Determine open-entty/open-exit
academic classes
Adopt rules regarding the
offering of credit courses
outside a college district,
including distance-learning
courses
Personnel Certify college faculty Determine salaries, and employ Recornmend qualified faculty
or remove staff when and staff to Governing Board
warranted for employment
May participate in district Manage and evaluate
health insurance plans emplo~es
May enter into multi-~ar
employment contracts with
chancellors, vice-chancellors,
and presidents, not to exceed
five ~ars
Finance With the Auditor General, Lease or sell personal property Manage financial resources to
establish a uniform accounting
Maydelegate to chancellor/
maximize the College's ability
system to achieve its mission and
president all or any part of its purposes
Contract with any person and authority to lease property
establish regulations and under $100,000 per ~ar Appropriately expend financial
limitations for contracting by
Contract, subject to regulations
resources for effective teaching
districts
and limitations prescribed by
and learning
Authorize district General the State Board
Obligation bond elections
29
Functional
Major Roles and Responsibilities
Area State Board of Directors for
Community Colleges of MCCCD Governing Board Glendale Community College
Arizona
Finance, Authorize revenue bonds Adopt annual budgets and
cont'd
Submit estimated number of
direct respective Boards of
full-time equivalent students to
Supervisors to levy required
the economic estimates
propertytaxes
commission annually
Allocate state aid to districts
pursuant to law
Accept grants and donations
Facilities Determine location of college Insure college buildings Establish and ensure a safe and
campuses
Accomplish minor
healthy environment for
Purchase, receive, hold, lease, construction or remodeling
students and staff
or sell real property projects ($50,000 or less - Provide resources and
Adopt rules regarding minor
adjusted annually for inflation) equipment to support College
construction and repair Lease-purchase real property
operations
projects by districts without upon authorization of the State
prior approval of the State Board
Board
Adopt rules for the control of
Approve major construction, parking and vehicles, subject to
remodeling, and repair projects State Board approval
Approve district rules
concerning parking and
control of vehicles
Source: State BQ:lrd ifDzroctor.; far 0Jmmnity 0:iJes:s ifA nzona 7.i.£b szte
College Governance
The College is subject to the authority and policies ofMccm and adheres to all
necessary entities as it fulfills its responsibilities to internal and external
communities. The College Administration endeavors to be inclusive through the
activities of several well-defined organizational decision-making groups.
Administration
Overall administration of the College is facilitated by the College President and
the Dean of Instruction, Dean of Educational Services, and Dean of
Administrative Services. The Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Office of
Community and Public Relations also works "With the administrative team on
planning issues.
President's Advisory Committee (PAC)
The PAC is made up of individuals representing each of the campus employee
groups. The PAC usually meets every other week during the fall and spring
semesters to advise the President on issues. To reflect its responsibilities more
accurately, this committee's name was changed from President's Executive
Committee (PEG at the beginning of Fall 2001. Minutes are distributed college­"
Wide and are available on the web at
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/executive/pec.htm
30
••
••
••
•••••••
••
•••
••
••••
•••••
••
•••
••
••
••
•••
•••
•••••••
•••••••
•••
•••••
••
••••••
••
••���••
•• •
Employee Governance
Each employee group has its own governance and decision-making structures,
including policies and procedures, which are established at the District level and
put into practice at each site. Elected representatives from each college's
governance bodies usually meet at the District on a regular basis to discuss and
act on concerns common to all, i.e., Meet and Confer, Collaborative Policy
Development, Benefits, etc.
Faculty Governance/Senate
In April, residential faculty members elect Senators for staggered three-year
terms to the Faculty Senate. The President and Vice-President are elected to
two-year terms; the Senate elects the Treasurer and Secretary. The primary
functions of the Senate are to serve as the exclusive representative of the faculty
to the College and!or District Administrations and to the Governing Board, to
discuss academic and professional matters, to select representatives to serve on
administrative councils, to coordinate college committees, and to participate in
the formation and implementation of educational policies for the College and
District. Additional information regarding GCC's Faculty Senate, including its
Constitution and minutes, is available on the web at
hnp:// www.gc.maricopa.edulsenate/
Department Chairs
The governance and decision-making on the department level is directed bythe
Department Chair, who is elected by a majority of faculty in each department on
a three-year cycle. Chairs are responsible for all department-related duties,
including hut not limited to, staffing, scheduling, evaluations, budgets, student
complaints and issues, and curriculum. These quasi-administrators are the major
link between the faculty and the Administration and report to the Dean of
Instruction.
College Committees
The College continually uses assessment/evaluation processes to improve its
decision-making structures and maximize input into governance, planning, and
implementation.
Gmunittee Name Committee Purpose
Budget Development Committee To make budget recommendations to the
President
College Curriculum Committee To make recommendations to District
Curriculum Committee regarding creation,
revision, or deletion of curricula
College Faculty Staffing Advisory Committee To rank and recommend budgeted, full-time
faculty positions to the President
Department Chairs CotUlcil To discuss issues that are common to the Chairs
Operational Planning Team To link operational planning and budgeting
efforts to strategic issues; review past fiscal year's
progress and provide feedback on progress to the
College; select strategic issues to be targeted for
upcoming planning/budgeting cycle; and every 3
years, report back to the Strategic Planning
0mmittee on progress made addressing strategic
ISSueS
31
32
Team Analysis
Team 2 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationship to the measures of success, which included a
common definition of governance, effective communication, and general
acceptance of the decision-making processes. A willingness to discuss processes
was seen as a strength, but the climate of fear that was noted in the 2000
Advisory Visit and a decline in the number of faculty members serving on
committees were seen as weaknesses. The District's diversion of resources away
from the College, as well as its sometimes going beyond its support role, were
determined to be threats, hindering effective campus communication and also
reducing GCC's acceptance of the decision-making processes.
Areas for Improvement
• Shared governance at GCC is often hindered by a lack of understanding
of roles and responsibilities
• Hiring and promotion procedures have not always been clear to the
campus commuruty
• Representation on committees is not in proportion to the numbers of
members of the various employee groups
• Some employees believe permanent seats granted to the Business and
Technology Departments on the Capital Review Committee created the
perception of unfairness in the allocation of resources
••••••
•••••••
•••
••••
•••••
••••••••••
••••••••
O:>mmittee Purpose
To serve as an advisory group to the President
To advise the President about Fund 2 allocations,
additions, and changes. To work with College
fiscal agent in these matters
To define and monitor GCCs relationship to its
environment; reaffinn and/or adjust the Strategic
Plan; review and revise the College Mission
Statement; and review progress made addressing
strategic issues over the previous three years
O:>mmittee Name
President's Fund 2 Advisory Committee
Achievements since 1992
• The roles, pmposes, and other pertinent information regarding
committees were formalized and included in the Faadty and Staff
Handlxxie
• The College Plan was revised and approved in Fall 2001
• Instructional departments were consolidated under the Dean of
Instruction, and all student services under the Dean of Educational
Services
• The budget development process has matured and expanded to include
three subcommittees (Instruction, Student Services, and College-wide
Services)
• A formalized strategic planning process was implemented in 1997 and
has been evaluated and improved for 2002
Sourr:e 2001·2002 FaadtyardStaffHanil:x:x:k
President's Advisory Committee
Strategic Planning Committee
••••••
••
••••
••••••••
•••
••••
••
••••
••••
••••��•
• Members of the President's Advisory Committee do not always
communicate sufficiently or effectively with their constituents
• Some faculty feel that Department Chairs are treated as representatives
of the faculty as a whole when they are not elected at-large
• Resolving significant disagreement about what Administration considers
the legitimate role of the Faculty Senate to be in the governance process
• Re-evaluating the continued existence and composition of the Budget
Process Review Committee
Recommendations
• Establish a common definition of "governance" across employee groups
• Define/describe spheres of decision-making influence
• Review practices on a periodic basis to ensure congruence with
governance principles
• Provide workshops on governance structure and practices to all
employees
• Provide appropriate information to each employee group's members to
help reduce fear
• Advise District of the perception that it oversteps its support role
Content Area Validation
As Arizona is a right-to-work state, varying governance models are appropriate
and applied as needed. Department Chairs are compensated for their
management responsibilities under the Dean of Instruction. The Department
Chairs' Council is convened monthly to discuss general issues of educational
processes, including instruction, budgeting, staffing, academic calendars, and
campus policies and procedures. Regarding committee composition,
membership on each varies according to the purpose of the committee.
33
Human Resources--Student Demographics
GCC has the second largest enrollment of all the Maricopa County Community
Colleges. In Fall 2001, 19,775 students were enrolled on the official census date
(45th da;?, with a full-time student equivalent (FTSE) of 8,668. At Maricopa,
FTSE is defined as one student taking 30 credits during an academic year.
During the mid-1990's GCCs enrollment declined slightly, a trend that was seen
across the District. Since Fall 1998, College enrollment has increased a
cumulative 15%. With the growth of the west and north valley, it is anticipated
GCCs enrollment will continue to grow. The College is currently working on
enrollment projections based on 2000 Census data.
Since 1991, GCCs student body has become increasingly diverse. In Fall 2001,
29% of the students were minorities compared to 17% in Fall 1991. This
increasingly diverse population complements and adds to the College's transfer
mission. In Fall 2001, 46% of the students indicated they wanted to transferto a
four-year institution while 27% wanted to improve/learn skills, change careers,
or gain employment. A variety of demographic trend data is available on the
web at
http://www.dist.maricopa.eduleddev/ir/trends/index.html
Age of Students
Fall 1995 Fall 1998 Fall 2001
15-19 3,808 21% 4,216 23% 5,590 28%
20-24 4,604 26% 4,743 26% 5,060 26%
25-29 2,357 13% 2,375 13% 2,187 11%
30-39 3,414 19% 3,065 17% 3,008 15%
40-49 2,104 12% 2,079 12% 2,052 10%
50-59 810 5% 848 5% 904 5%
60+ 394 2% 326 2% 254 1%
Undeclared 240 2% 436 2% 720 4%
Total 17,731 100% 18,088 100% 19,775 100%
Sarra?: Marza;pa Trerds amMarza;pa's Institutional Resea:rr:h Data Wanh0u5e (IRDW]
Ethnicityof Students
Fall 1995 Fall 1998 Fall 2001
American Indian 277 1.5% 317 1.8% 351 1.8%
Asian 674 3.8% 746 4.1% 943 4.7%
Black 667 3.8% 740 4.1% 892 4.5%
Hispanic 2,223 12.5% 2,801 15.5% 3,567 17.8%
White 13,294 75.0% 12,628 69.8% 12,838 64.0%
Other 596 3.4% 856 4.7% 1,447 7.2%
Total 17,731 100% 18,088 100% 19,775 100%
Sarra?: Marza;pa Trerds amMarza;pa's Institutional ResearriJ Data Wanh0u5e (IRDw;!
34
•••••
•••••••��
•••
••
••
••
•••
••••
•••••
•••
•••
•••
••
••
•••••••••
•••••
•••••••••••
••••
••
•••
•••• •
Full-Time and Part-Time Headcount
Fall 1995 Fall 1998 Fall 2001
Full-Time 4,515 26% 4,783 26% 5,718 29%
Part-Time 13,216 74% 13,305 74% 14,057 71%
Total 17,731 100% 18,088 100.0% 19,775 100%
Sourre: Manropa Trmls andManropa's In;titutional Researrh Data Wam':700se (IRD lf1
Day I Evening Headcount
Fall 1995 Fall 1998 Fall 2001
Day 9,952 56% 10,204 56% 11,786 60%
Evening 7,779 44% 7,884 44% 7,989 40%
Total 17,731 100.0% 18,088 100% 19,775 100%
Sourre: Marimpa Trmls andMarimpa's In;titutional Researrh Data Wam':700se (IRDw)
For the past 3 fall semesters, GCC has administered Faces iftheFu:t:ure, a national
survey developed by American College Testing (ACT) in collaboration with the
American Association of Community Colleges (AACq to profile community­college
students across the country. In Fall 2000, 392 credit students completed
the survey. Several of the findings include:
• In general, GCC students' parents have more education than the national
sample. 60.1% of GCC students' mothers and 59% of fathers have
completed some college, compared to about 50% nationally for each
• 23.1% of GCC students' mothers and 25.1% of fathers have a bachelor's
or higher degree, compared to 17.6% and 20.9% nationally
• 77.2% of GCC students work at least 21 hours per week compared to
66.3% of students in the national sample
• GCC students are more likely to be employed full-time (38.8%) as
compared to 28.6% nationally
• GCCstudents are less likely to be unemployed (8.7%) than their national
counterparts (10.0%)
• In general, the annual incomes of GCC students are higher than the
national sample
Achievements since 1992
• The College has significantly increased knowledge of its students through
data and analysis generated by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness
• The IE Office created web pages that allow faculty and staff to monitor
changes in student demographics
Team Analysis
Team 2 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationship to the measures of success, which included
drawing adequate numbers of recent high-school graduates from feeder schools
to GCC each fall, effective recruitment of a diverse student body (including at­risk,
honors, athletics, disabled, and minority students), and that student
35
demographics mirror our service-area demographics. Since ASUWest began
offering a full four-year degree in Fall 2001, GCCfaces the potential loss of
students, primarily recent high-school graduates. One apparent weakness is that
GCC has no "branding" for marketing purposes, such as a common,
immediately identifiable logo or image. The College does provide universal
access to technology with no student fee and extensive advising for students,
both of which help to attract and serve students.
Areas for Improvement
• Develop a strategic marketing plan related to student demographics
Recommendations
• Adopt one identifiable logo as part of an overall marketing plan
• Increase parity of staff demographics to student demographics
• Have advisors visit feeder schools year-round on a regular basis to
increase the number of recent high-school graduates who enroll
Content Area Validation
Although GCC's student body continues to become increasingly diverse, there is
a disparity between the sectors of GCC's service area. The older, more
established service areas central to and south of the College represent the closest
in proximity and largest population with incomes well below the county's average
income. Those areas north, northwest, and northeast of the College are growing,
are primarily white, and have incomes above the county's average. It will be a
. challenge for GCC to meet the varying needs of these different service areas.
The branding strategy should focus on GCC's record of academic performance.
Human Resources--StaffDemographics
During Fall 2001, GCC employed over 550 full-time employees and over 650
adjunct faculty. Employees belong to one of the following groups: Residential
Faculty (RFP), Professional Staff (PSA), Management, Administrative and
Technological (MAT), Maintenance and Operations (M:&O), Crafts, College
Safety, SpeciallyFunded, Athletic Specialist, Chancellor's Executive Council
(CEq, Adjunct Faculty, and student workers. The employees of the College
work under the policies of their respective employee groups. Information is
available on the web at
http://www.dist.maricopa.edulhrweb/emplreVpolhtmVindex.html
Each policy manual outlines compensation, benefits, working conditions,
avenues for grievance, evaluation requirements, professional growth options and
resources, and other policies of importance to each group. In addition, there are
policies that apply to all employee groups found in the "Common Pages."
Additional information is available on the web at
http://www.disLmaricopa.edu/hrweb/emplreVpolhtmVpol0002/allempol.html
36
••
••••
•••• •••
••
•••
••
•••
••
••••
•••••
••••••
•••
•••
••••
•••
•••••
•••
••
•••••••
��•••••
••••••
••• •
Employees by Gender and Ethnicity (10/26/2001)
Employee Male Female White Black Hispanic Asian Native Not Total
Group American Identified
Residential 131 130 218 12 16 5 6 4 26P-Faculty
CEC 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
(president)
MAT 21 27 40 0 7 1 0 0 48
PSA 45 123 112 13 38 2 2 1 168
M&O 27 9 16 0 18 1 1 0 36
Crafts 8 0 5 1 2 0 0 0 8
College 2 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 3
Safety
Specially 6 5 11 0 0 0 0 0 11
Funded
Athletic 2 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 5
Specialist
Shan-term 5 8 9 0 3 0 0 1 13
Non-Faculty
Totals 247 307 418 26 85 10 9 6 554
Sourr:e: DlStnaHR Cjfice
::- 245 bud~faadtypaitians if WJich 232 areRFPam 13 Oyo/osq plus 16 OYO/OSOunbudfFtd,
far a total if 261
Faculty
All instructional faculty are certified bythe State Board of Directors for
G>mmunityG>lleges of Arizona (State Board). Faculty teaching academic
courses must have a Master's degree or higher from an accredited
college/university, with at least 24 semester/36 quarter hours of upper-division
and/or graduate-level credit in the discipline taught. Faculty teaching
occupational courses must have a Bachelor's degree from an accredited
college/university, with 3 or more years of directly- related occupational
experience in the discipline being taught, or an Associate's Degree/64 semester
hours from an accredited college/university with 5 or more years of directly­related
occupational experience in the discipline taught. Presently, faculty must
complete "The G>mmunity G>llege G>urse" (EDU250) before the Lifetime or
Regular teaching certificate can be issued bythe State Board. In several
disciplines, such as G>mputer Science, G>unseling, Electronics, Library,
Mathematics, Nursing, and Religious Studies, the Maricopa G>unty G>mmunity
G>llege District Governing Board has approved additional requirements based
on the recommendations of their respective Instructional G>uncils. The State
Board certification requirements can be viewed in detail at
http://www.stbd.cc.az.us/aztchcert.htm
37
The educational level of residential faculty is concentrated at the :Master's (64%)
and Doctoral (26%) degree levels. 58% of permanent, residential faculty have
been employed byMCCCD for 10 or more years. The majority of faculty
positions are designated as instructional (95%), with the rest classified as service
faculty, primarily librarians and counselors. Over the past 10 years, the number
of budgeted faculty has increased by 20%, from 204 to 245, plus an additional 16
OYO!OSO faculty in 2001-02. During Fall 2001, full-time faculty generated
70% of daytime FTSE (full-time student equivalent) and 30% of evening FTSE.
Educational background data are also available for non-teaching staff.
Residential Faculty by Age (10/26/2001)
Age Number of Faculty Percent
20's 7 3%
30's 45 17%
40's 64 25%
50's 109 42%
60's 35 13%
70's 1 0%
Total 261 100%
Source: DlStrut HR Cffice
Achievements since 1992
• Increased the number of faculty by 20% from 204 (1991-92) to 245
budgeted positions in 2001-02
Tearn Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationship to the measures of success, which included
faculty and staff demographics that reflect the diversity of our community and
students, student satisfaction with faculty and staff, and faculty and staff
satisfaction with their working environment. The inflexibility of salary and
classification schedules and District's time-consuming and cumbersome staffing
processes were seen as weaknesses. Even though salary for adjunct faculty is
increasing, the team agreed that non-competitive salaries for adjunct faculty pose
a threat, while the dedication of faculty and staff is a definite strength. A
potential opportunity is represented by the wealth of knowledge of retired
persons living in the West Valley, perhaps to contribute in ways such as tutors,
guest lecturers, or as adjunct faculty.
Areas for Improvement
• Increase diversity of faculty and staff
38
••
••
•••••••••
••
••
•••��•
••
•••
••
••
•••
•••
•••
•••
••
••••
•••
•••••••
••
••••
••••••
•••
•••
••••••
•••
Recommendations
• Encourage the Governing Board to increase adjunct salaries, provide
medical benefits for adjuncts (not family), and recruit more diverse
adjunct faculty
• Request District evaluate salary schedules and job descriptions for all
employee groups
Content Area Validation
GCC has an experienced, qualified faculty Vv'ith the credentials and certification
mandated by the State Board to teach in their respective disciplines. The College
Vv'ill need to set targets for diversity of faculty and staff based on one or more of
these reference points: community diversity, current student diversity, projected
student diversity, or others to be considered.
Human Resources--Staffing
Each department and unit requests funding for new positions through the annual
budget process. The College Faculty Staffing Advisory Committee considers the
specific faculty staffing requests from each department and recommends priority
order to the President. The Budget Development Committee (BDq and its
subcommittees recommend the number of faculty to hire, along Vv'ith all other
staffing requests, to the President. Among the criteria considered in this process
is the relationship of each request to the mission and strategic planning goals of
the College.
Faculty positions are also considered in relation to the ratio of department FTSE
to full-time faculty (FTTE). According to RFP policy, the day program (sections
starting on or before 4:30 p.m) must be staffed by residential faculty at 90% of
the average enrollment for the fall and spring terms. GeC's faculty ratios for
Spring 2001 and Fall 2001 exceeded the 90:10 requirement. Of the 245 budgeted
faculty, 215 faculty positions were required to meet the 90% staffing level.
The College is committed to provide equal opportunity for qualified employees
and applicants for employment. In addition to the District's diversity hiring
practices, the College advertises for full-time positions in a variety of publications
and formats to attract "the best and the brightest."
The District's Office of Employee Services facilitates the process for full-time
employees, while screening committees are formed at the College and are usually
chaired by the hiring manager. Information is available on the web at
http://www.dist.maricopa.edu/hrweb/index.html
39
GCC endorses and adheres to the District's principles of Equal Employment
Opportunity (EEO) that encompass both the letter and spirit of the laws that
prohibit discrimination in employment. Information is available about
Maricopa's EEO program (including procedures for filing a complaint of
discrimination), and its commitment to affirmative action in hiring at
http://www.dist.maricopa.edu/legal/eeo.html
The College puts forth a variety of efforts to reach its affirmative-action hiring
goals. The efforts are multidimensional and address both the internal and
external communities. Part-time and adjunct positions are advertised locally as
needed. In addition, an online recruitment page for adjunct faculty positions at
the College can be found on the web at
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/hiring/
Adjunct faculty positions are filled from a pool of applications maintained by
Human Resources and/or each department in which the applicant is seeking
employment. Practices related to recruitment, selection, and hiring of non­faculty
employees are consistently applied. Residential faculty personnel files are
maintained at the District HR Office and adjunct faculty files are maintained at
the College HR Office.
Achievements since 1992
• Established in 1996, the Commission on Diversity's goal is to effect
additional improvements. Consisting of students, faculty, staff, and
community members, the recommendations of this commission have
been evaluated and, where appropriate, implemented
• Instead of the District Office, GCC now conducts its own advertising for
all faculty and staff positions
• The College implemented a bi-annual Adjunct FacultyJob Fair to recruit
adjunct faculty
Team Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationships to the measures of success and determined
that the College's new hiring procedures, complicated by District practices and
reorganization over the last several years, affected the quality, quantity, and
availability of diverse applicants. An inadequate district-wide pay rate for
adjuncts and a lengthy and cumbersome hiring process were seen as weaknesses.
Pay issues in general seem to generate much discussion and some negative
comment. The College is hampered by its lack of control over these issues.
Areas for Improvement
• Improve quality/quantity of applicant pools
• Increase employee diversity and retention
40
••
••
••••••••
••••••••••
•••••••
••
•••••••••
•••
••
••
••••••
•••
••••
••
••••
•••••
••••
•••••
••••••
• Improve working conditions and pay for adjunct faculty
• O:>mpensate employees for committee work (where appropriate)
• Encourage managers to allow support staff to participate in hiring
processes
Recommendations
• Encourage the Governing Board to increase adjunct salaries, resources,
offices, and benefits
• Expedite the District Office's hiring processes
• Increase recruitment efforts for all job categories
• Request timely hiring processes at District and O:>llege
• Develop "Grow our own" faculty and staff programs
Content Area Validation
Gec is proportionately understaffed compared to other colleges its size. A
combination of strategies to increase budgeted amount per FTSE in order to add
new employees and to relieve overworked personnel needs to be pursued.
Human Resources--Planning
At present, human resources planning is tied to the annual planning and
budgeting cycle of the District. Each year, O:>llege departments review their
accomplishments from the prior year, examine the plans for the current year, and
project needs and strategies for the upcoming year. Requests that clearly and
concisely meet the mission of the O:>llege are funded, taking into account the
budget constraints placed on the campus.
Currently, however, many department chairs and managers think in multi-year
tenns to better anticipate new needs. Department chairs know, for example, that
when they go before the O:>llege Faculty Staffing Advisory O:>mmittee that they
must report not only enrollment shifts over the past several years, but they must
also outline what they see in the way of program needs for the future that will
require full-time faculty leadership. Unfortunately, they must often build a
program with adjunct faculty in order to eventually justify the need for full-time
faculty.
As new buildings have been added to the campus, new operational dollars were
added to the O:>llege budget as well ($3.13 per remodeled square foot and $12.50
per new construction square foot). In many instances, these dollars have helped
to fund additional grounds and custodial personnel, have helped to pay for the
increased supervisory responsibilities of the department chairs (per RFP
formula), and have helped to pay for the adjunct faculty to staff many of the
classes. The formula was not designed, however, to fund the full-time, non­teaching
personnel often needed to support the added capacity. Despite funding
41
increases, the resources allocated to the College bythe District budget formulas
do not provide the staffing ratios the College prefers. This will remain an
important strategic item, moving the College and the District into a planning
process that spans multiple years.
Achievements since 1992
• The College has experienced tremendous growth, adding 41 RFP faculty
and 63 non-faculty employees
• Compensation for all employee groups, including adjunct faculty, has
improved. Salaries and benefits are among the best in the state's and
nation's community-college districts
• Bi-annual Adjunct FacultyJob Fair to recruit new faculty
Team Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationships to the measures of success, identifying the
adequately-trained support staff and the high percentage of courses taught by
full-time faculty during the calendar year as strengths. The team also noted that
the number of unfilled PSA, Crafts, M&O, MAT, and Safety positions could
provide infonnation to assist in human-resource planning. Threats include the
College's uncompetitive salaries in several employee groups and its inability to
increase resources to fulfill desired community expectations. These are
important, especially when making budget decisions regarding human and
financial resources. The team agreed that the quality of the staff and its
continued development were addressed adequately in the current budget
processes and funding. The area of training and professional development does
offer opportunities.
Areas for Improvement
• The current one-year planning cycle does not meet personnel planning
needs
�� Unbudgeted salaries and those for additional adjunct faculty deplete the
majority of the College's carry-forward funds, limiting other projects
• Continued growth in the West Valley, operation of the uec at ASU
West, and opening GCC North have raised issues about continued
staffing and support for new sites and programs
• Adjunct faculty members in many disciplines (e.g., Computer Science,
Mathematics, and English) have lucrative opportunities in education,
business, and industry. Retention demands market-based salaries to
attract and retain competent adjuncts
• A balance of personnel functions performed bythe College and/or the
District must be achieved. Since GCe is one of the lowest budgeted per­FTSE
colleges in the District, it demands more from its employees.
Continued emphasis must be placed on appropriate staffing,
compensation, and use of technology to improve efficiency and maintain
a capable workforce
42
••••••
••• •••••
••••••••
••
•••••
•••••••
•••
••••
•���
••••
••••
•••
•••••••
•••
••
•••••
••••
••
••
•••• •
Reco111111endations
• Lobby District through Meet and O:mfer to improve adjunct-faculty
retention, e.g., competitive salaries, a step increase every fourth semester
• Encourage and extend employee service by extending the Active
Retirement Program
• Consider longer planning cycles
Content Area Validation
The College will continue to offer employee development opportunities and seek
adequate staffing ratios. The College needs to consider a much more formal
structure in adjunct faculty recruitment, orientation, and long-term employment.
Human Resources--Compensation and Benefits
Compensation and Benefits are administered at the District level for all full-time
and permanent part-time personnel, with annual input through the Meet and
Confer/Collaborative Policy Development processes of all Employee Policy
Groups. See PolicyManuals on the web at
http://WVIW.dist.maricopa.edu/hrweb/
The 0JJUnide ifHigxrEducatian recently identified Gee as having the highest
average faculty salary in the state of Arizona, due in part to the large number of
faculty who are at the top of the salary schedule and also to the comparatively
high salaries paid to faculty.
Adjunct faculty, part-time/temporary staff, and student workers do not receive
any health!absence benefits from either the College or the District. Their
compensation rates are basically determined at the District level, with the
flexibility on campus to pay higher minimum rates depending on departmental
and/or unit needs for budgeted wages.
The District has, over the years, provided consistent increases in salary for its
employees. A history of negotiated increases and the impact on the District
budget is available on the web at
http://WVIW.dist.maricopa.edu/business/budget/Meet&Confer/data/History.pdf
In addition, a comparison of salaries with inflation can be found on the web at
http://WVIW.dist.maricopa.edu/business/budget/Meet&Confer/data/lOy!" chart.pdf
A classification study will be conducted for all District MAT employees to assess
current salary and grade levels and titles during 2001-02, resulting in possible
changes in compensation. The contract should be issued early Spring 2002.
43
Mccm offers a comprehensive Flex Benefit Program, developed bythe
Employee Benefits Advisory Committee (EBAq. This committee is comprised
of representatives from all colleges and employee groups and works closely with
Human Resources to design the benefits packages and to select the insurance
providers. EBAC has to make difficult decisions regarding costs, polling the
various employee groups on many occasions to gather feedback to make its
recommendations to the Governing Board.
The Flex Benefits Program allows employees to select "cafeteria style" from an
array of coverage options. Each employee has a fixed flex dollar amount and the
cost of each service is deducted from that amount. The balance is allocated to
the employee through payroll as a flex cash-out addition. Over the years, the
amount of benefits and percent of the cash-out have been adjusted to meet the
rising costs of insurance. More difficult decisions regarding health benefits are
on the horizon. Some of the newerMccm benefits include family leave and
benefits for unmarried partners. The Flex Program has been a positive factor in
recruiting new employees.
Achievements since 1992
• Implementation of variable salary scales for student and temporary
employees allows supervisors to pay workers appropriately
• GCC piloted and is currently the only college using Kronos, an
automated timekeeping system that reduces use of manual time cards for
many of our larger departments
• The Flex Benefits Program provides for a Compassionate Leave bank,
allowing employees to donate up to two hours of vacation or sick time to
assist employees in need
• In 1999, the District implemented PeopleSoft--a human resources
relational database software application
Team Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationships to the measures of success, which included
increasing the size and diversity of applicant pools for positions, reducing the
number of one-year-only (OYO) and one-semester-only (OSO) hires, and
providing competitive pay rates for adjunct faculty. Major factors identified as
affecting the measures of success include the threat of competition for hiring
teachers, technical experts, and certified safety officers. The continued provision
of numerous paid holidays and accrued vacation hours and the
mechanism!process for determining increases to salaries and benefits were
viewed as strengths. Decreased medical coverage and increased costs were seen
as definite weaknesses. Wherever possible, the College will have to address these
key factors to improve equitable compensation and benefits for all employees.
44
•••
••
•••• •••••••••••••
••
•••••
••••
••••••••••
••
•••
••••••••
•••••••••
•••••
•••••
••
•••••••••
Areas for Improvement
• Addressing reduced numbers of qualified and diverse applicants
• Adapting PeopleSoft HR system to educational setting
• Competitive pay discrepancies on the Westside, primarily for adjunct
faculty
• Mechanisms to pay adjuncts a higher rate than residential faculty for
overloads
Recommendations
• Create partnerships with industry to help fill OYO and OSO positions
• Aid in recruitment and retention of faculty through partnerships and
other exchanges
Content Area Validation
Compensation and Benefits, as administered by the District, have provided salary
increases, inflation adjustments, and a competitive benefits package to all board­approved
employees. GCC must provide creative planning and recruitment
efforts to compete in an increasingly competitive higher-education market.
Human Resources--Professional and Staff Development
Staff Development--New Employees
The Employee and Organizational Learning Team provides "New Employee
Orientations" monthly at the District Office. All new MCCCD employees are
invited to the orientation following their board approval date. These workshops
are designed to familiarize employees with MCCCD practices and policies and to
acquaint them with their benefits package.
The College offers a number of training opportunities throughout the year to
support staff development. The GCC Training and Employee Development
Department (fED) offers monthly Desktop Project Orientation sessions for
new and existing employees who need an office computer or an upgrade. These
sessions explain the processes, as well as acquaint employees with the technology
network. New employees also attend phone and MEMO (e-mail) training,
computer software applications training, and compliance and diversity training.
The GCC Faculty Development Committee hosts a "New Faculty Orientation"
workshop during the first week of accountability in August for new residential
and OYO and OSO faculty. Additional workshops are scheduled throughout
the year to acquaint new residential faculty and staff with College policies to
assist them in their assigned responsibilities.
45
Staff Deve1opment--All Employees
GCC's professional development programs include workshops, seminars,
publications, projects, and networking opportunities that provide the means to
help all college employees excel to achieve career growth, thereby improving the
instructional process.
Professional development activities are designed and supported by College
departments (TED, Innovation Center), committees (Faculty Development), and
District-wide initiatives (employee-groups' Professional Growth, Faculty
Development, Visions Project, Creative Pathways, and Employee Renewal).
Each employee group at the College has professional-growth opportunities
funded through District committees made up of individuals from the respective
employee groups.
Each employee policy group encourages continued professional development
and education through tuition assistance, support to attend seminars and
workshops, paid education leave or sabbaticals, and funding for professional­growth
projects. To distribute District-wide professional-growth funds, each
policy group has an application process (described in the group policy manuals)
and a committee made up of the colleges' representatives who evaluate the
applications and award or deny funding. These are largely on a first come, first
served basis. The following chart shows the actual professional-growth
expenditures by GCC employees in 2000-01.
District Maximum GCC Total
Employee Group Funds Award/Year Employees Funds
Available per person Awarded Spent by
GCC
Faculty
Campus Travel $275,600 $2,500/3 yr 80 $54,184
Registration!Summer Projects $259,400 vanes 62 $30,461
Sabbaticals $725,000 $57,192 2 $9,520
Adjunct Faculty $64,000 $500 20 $8,569
MAT $465,000 $1,200 20 $16,454
PSA $185,209 $1,000 25 $10,419
Crafts $85,000 n!a 9 $6,548
M&O $68,000 $2,000/event 31 $8,419
Safety $13,000 $1,200 0 $0
Sourre: GCCBuszrm qjia; Tram Rea:mis
ProfessionalDeve1opment--ResidentialFaculty
The MCCCD Faculty Professional Growth committee has 2 GCC
representatives, each with specific responsibilities. One representative assists
faculty in advancing on the salary scale through a variety of academic and non­academic
efforts (graduate courses, attendance at conferences, workshops, and
seminars, and work-related experiences) and provides assistance in preparing
sabbatical proposals. The second representative assists in preparing and
submitting conference and workshop applications for payment of registration
fees and also assists with applications for summer projects. These activities are
part of the "Registration/Summer Projects" portion of District faculty funds.
46
•••
•••
••••••
••
••
•••
••
•••
••••••••
••••
••••
•••
•••
•••••••
••••
••••••
•••
••
•••
••
•••
•••••
•••••
The District allocates the College faculty travel funds on a formula basis that are
administered by a campus Faculty Travel Corrunittee. This corrunittee evaluates
applications for travel costs associated with workshops, conferences, seminars,
and other projects. GCC allocates a maximum of $2,500 in travel funds over a
three-year cycle for each faculty member, pending availability in any given year.
ProfessionalDevelopment--AdjunctFaculty
Certified adjunct faculty currently employed by the College are eligible to apply
for professional-growth funds in the semester they are teaching. All funds are on
a reimbursement basis only. Current adjunct faculty are also eligible for tuition
waivers at anyMccm site, up to 6 credit hours per semester.
StaffDeve1opment--Management, Administration and Technology (MAT)
MAT employees are eligible to apply for tuition and book reimbursement,
workshops, conferences, seminars, sabbatical leaves up to 6 months in duration,
and degree stipends-at the rate of 1 horizontal step, or a one-time stipend
equivalent of a step, for those at the top of the horizontal scale.
StaffDevelopment--Professional Services Staff(PSA)
PSA employees have access to Professional Development to provide an
incentive to encourage the employee to maximize his/her knowledge. Individual
financial assistance may be given to eligible employees taking upper-division
courses at accredited institutions.
Paid Educational Leave: The pUlpose of the Paid Educational Leave Program is
to provide employees the possibility to further their career and employment
opportunities through the completion of a Bachelor's, Master's, or Doctoral
Degree. An employee maytake a maximum of a one-year leave and will receive
full (100%) salary from the District during that leave. The District will provide a
pre-determined allocation to the College for personnel replacement costs.
Internships: The Professional Staff Internship Program is offered for employees
who are interested in professional development or technical training that will be
helpful in preparing them for administrative, management, and support
opportunities within the Mccm. In the Internship Program, an employee
identifies areas of interest and designs his/her own work plan under a mentor or
mentor group where the program will be directed and monitored in order to
receive varied experiences and to integrate community-college processes with
practical experiences. An internship program mayvary in length but may not
exceed 12 months. An intern is not guaranteed a new position in the
College/District byvirtue of program completion, but will be better prepared to
compete for available positions. The Professional Staff Internship Program was
funded at $139,500 to cover financial assistance to employees in 2000-01.
Summer Conferences: Each summer a conference that focuses on teaching
tangible skills and tools that can be brought back to the workplace is held for all
District PSA employees. Conference topics motivate employees, and the
District-wide meeting provides additional opportunities to network
47
StaffDeveJopment--M&O, Crafts, Safety
Professional-growth opportunities forM&O personnel include tuition waivers
and funding for seminars. Employees also have salary increase incentives for
continuing-education units. In-house training on special topics (safety, etc.) is
sometimes offered. Flexible work schedules are available for employees who
wish to attend GCC classes. Cross training is available for employees wishing to
expand their job skills.
Achievements since 1992
• A major emphasis has been in the areas of training, including technology
training and support and web-based information systems. Additional
information can be found at the following web sites:
TED http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/-TED/mission.htm
District http://www.dist.maricopa.edultraining/welcome.htm
"In the Loop" http://www.gc.maricopa.edultech-adiunct/
Web-based Testing http://gecko.gc.maricopa.edu/Paletteltesting.html
Palette http://gecko.gc.rnaricopa.edu/Palette/voffice.htm
• An overall increase in professional-growth funds for all employee groups
• Professional-Growth funds made available to adjunct faculty in 1994
• Change in the focus of the PSA summer conference, from a primarily
social event to a focus on professional development, offering the
attendees job-related and personal-development skills
• The Faculty Development web page, which can be found on the web at
http://www.gc.maricopa.edu/facdev/
• Added Employee and Training and Development Department (TED) to
provide more learning opportunities; TED offered 163 training
workshops that were attended by 727 employees; 160 employees
benefited from TED2U training in 2000-01
• Initiated the Desktop Project in 1996 as a wayto improve employees'
technology skills
• All adjunct faculty given access to an Instructional Palette account and
Virtual Office, providing access to Microsoft Office Suite and e-mail
Tearn Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationships to the measures of success, which included
staff and professional development programs, the number of participants, and
employee satisfaction. Occasions for employee participation in meetings and
other work-related events, including wellness and fitness activities, are strengths
and positively impact longevity, career development, and promotion. The lack of
time to participate on committees, a lack of opportunities for non-faculty and
adjuncts, and insufficient funding were seen as weaknesses. Inadequate time to
do necessary work is another weakness and impacts longevity, career
48
•••••
••••••���
•••••
•••
••
••••••
•••••••••
•••
•••
••
••••••
••
•••••
••
•••
••••
•••
•••••
••••••••
•••
development, and promotion negatively. Employees suffer burnout and do not
have time to participate in career-enhancing activities. A lack of accountability
and benefit for serving on committees were also seen as weaknesses, but linking
staff development with student learning offers an opportunity.
Areas for Improvement
• Insufficient allocated to all professional-gwwth and development
activities, especially considering that all colleges compete for these funds;
District has been quite flexible in allowing the transfer of unused funds
to areas with higher needs
• Cumbersome application process, with some employees not always
knowing procedures or how to follow them
• More autonomyfor faculty developing individual professional growth
plans; in part necessary due to the increased costs of travel, registration
fees, and increased opportunities to enhance professional development
through distance learning
• Filling adjunct faculty positions with high-quality instructors and keeping
them is a challenge because of limited development funds
• Currently, the District recognizes "specially-funded" in its own policy
manual. They are not provided professional-growth funding. MAT has
taken this issue to the Governing Board on several occasions, without
resolution
• Although seminars are advertised on bulletin boards in the M&O office
and in the shop, only a small number of these employees take advantage
of seminar offerings and tuition waivers. W'ith the exception of Crafts,
funds available for professional growth are under-utilized. The
perception among employees may be that getting release time for
seminars is difficult
Recommendations
• Offer online training with facilitators
• Increase funding and offer training incentives for all groups
• Streamline professional-growth application processes
• Bring training to campus to minimize travel
• Fund a dedicated professional development day and time
• Identify and make available opportunities for professional growth
• Provide focused training for new staff, faculty, and adjunct faculty
• Increase the number of faculty mentors
• Encourage sharing professional-growth materials from conferences and
workshops with others
• Create flexible delivery/off-campus training opportunities
• Use assessment results of professional-growth activities to apply new
skills to increase student learning
• Encourage more use of Creative Pathways to cross-train staff
49
Content Area Validation
A wide range of professional development programs and opportunities is
available to all employee groups. The formal professional-growth application
process and lack of time to attend activities can be limiting factors in
participation. The competition for the District-wide allocations per policy group
can also limit funding opportunities. To address some of these issues, GCC has
developed an active training and development department that provides a wide
variety of on-campus programs for those employees with limited time and funds.
Human Resources--Performance Evaluations
In accordance with employee group policies, performance evaluations for each
employee are completed on a regular cycle, according to the employee group
policies. Employee groups include: RFP Faculty (each year for the first 5 years,
then every 3 years); Professional Staff (annually); Management, Administrative,
and Technological (annually); M&O and Crafts (annually). Faculty conduct
annual Student Evaluations of Faculty Performance. These are maintained in the
department by individual faculty. Various employee evaluation processes and
forms are available on the web at
http://\vww.dist.maricopa.edu/hrweb / emplre1/polhtml /index.html
Achievements since 1992
• Implemented new Faculty Evaluation Plan (FEP) process, allowing full­time
faculty to create their own evaluation plan after the first 2 years
• Developed and implemented a new PSA evaluation process
• Revised the staff evaluation process to provide ample opportunity for
setting goals and enhancing performance
Team Analysis
Team 4 conducted an initial analysis of factors likely influencing areas of
improvement and their relationships to the measures of success, which included
the percentage of evaluations completed per employee group and the low
number of evaluation appeals or challenges provide indications of a successful
performance-evaluation process. The value of evaluations is sometimes
questioned and viewed as a weakness. Consideration should be given to allow
other individuals to participate in the evaluation process of all employee groups.
This would provide further valuable information for the individual being
evaluated.
Areas for Improvement
• Ensure that employees understand the evaluation process--a training
session is needed to review the importance and processes of evaluation
• Develop systems to make sure employees are evaluated regularly
50
•••
••••••• •••••
•••
••••••••••
•••••••
••••••
••
��•
••
••
•••••
••••
•••
••
••••••••
••
•••
••••
•••
•• •
• Lack of Chair supervision of faculty evaluations after the first 2 years of
employment. (After that time, each faculty member creates his/her o'WIl
evaluation plan, focusing on areas for improvement. The Department
Chair verifies the FEP has been completed and copies are sent to the
Dean of Instruction.)
Recommendations
• Conduct research to discover where and how evaluations are effective
• Utilize multiple methods of evaluation (forms or formats, individuals and
teams)
• Consider Department Chair input in the follow-up evaluation process
• .As employee evaluations can and do enhance performance and support
College goals, they should be an integral part of the College's assessment
efforts
Content Area Validation
The College should consider linking part of its strategic planning processes to
employee evaluations. This would encourage employees to set goals based on
past performance evaluations and may enhance all areas of performance and
quality.
GLENDALE COMMUNITY COLL.EGE LIBRARY
51
The College budget is only one component of the total District budget
supported bythe following sources of revenue: property taxes; state
appropriations; student tuition and fees; and grants and gifts from public and
private sources. The Governing Board, with the adoption of the fiscal-year
budget, sets the property tax rate.
Current Unrestricted Funds 2000-01
Revenues
Property Taxes $26,182,058
State Appropriations $8,414,151
Tuition, Registration, and Student Fees $13,507,134
IPrivate Gifts, Grants, and Contracts $19,277
Other $885,617 rrotai Revenues $49,008,237
Financial Resources--Sources of Funding
GeC's 2001-02 specific sources of funding amounts follow:
Sourr:e MCCCD CornprdJertsZ7.£ AnnualFznancial Report
Other
2%
Tuition,
Registration, and
Student Fees
28%
Private Gifts,
Grants, and ------. Contracts
0.4%
s"w J Appropriations
17%
52
Property Taxes
53%
••••••
••
•••••
•••
•••
••••••••
•••••
•••••••••••
••••••
••••••••
••• ~t •~. •t•.
•4. •••••
•••
c. ••
•• ft •4.
f~t.
•••
The State Board of Directors for Community Colleges adopts the tuition and fee
recommendations from the Governing Board. The state legislature appropriates
moneyto the State Board who allocates it to the community-college districts.
On occasion, the District may receive an earmarked allocation. Grants and gifts
reflect the income generated bythe Maricopa Foundation and/or the individual
colleges.
The District receives less than 15% of its funding from the state. Other districts
in the state receive up to 50% of their funds from state funding sources. The
Arizona State Legislature has traditionally favored the state's universities with the
bulk of higher-education dollars, leaving the community colleges to lobby
intensely to maintain their presence and receive adequate funding consideration.
When major land acquisitions, construction, remodeling, maintenance and/or
equipment are needed, the District has the option of going to the county voters
for approval of general obligation bonds to raise revenue. Setting up (and
winning) a bond election entails considerable planning and public relations'
efforts by all colleges and the District Office, including all faculty and staff
groups. Bond elections provide a fine opportunity for Gceto become more
visible in the community and generate the special funds needed to maintain and
grow the programs to better serve the community. The Governing Board has
indicated a willingness to take a new bond initiative to the voters in Fall 2004.
Fund 1 (Operational ddlars) represents the College's base allocation, the amount of
funds the institution received the prior year, plus any raises granted employees,
additional FTSE Incentive Funds, and any other supplements granted bythe
Governing Board. The College can reallocate these funds in anyway it deems
necessary. The total Fund 1 budget for 2001-02 is $ 44,816,167.
The following table illustrates GCC's operational expenditures for the most
recent year for which data is available, fiscal year ending June 30, 2001.
Expenditure Analysis by Function 2000-01
nstruction $28,047,750
Public Service $172
Academic Support $4,444,666
Student Services $3,311,300
General Institutional $1,236,810
IAdministration $2,556,554
IPhysical Plant $3,450,632 rrotal Operational $43,047,888
Sourr:e: MCCCD CarrprehensneA 'l7llJJal Fznancial Report
Oearly, the vast majority of the College's expenditures are for instruction and
student-oriented support services. The following chart demonstrates the types
53
of expenditures and sho'WS that the majority of expenditures are related to
salaries and benefits, leaving little flexibility to address other operational needs.
Expenditure Analysis by Object 2000-01
Personal Services $32,829,283
Employee Benefits $5,090,557
Contractual Services $1,636,804
Supplies, Materials, and Parts $931,487
Gment Fixed Charges $221,275
Communications and Utilities $1,641,712
Travel $168,066
Student Aid, Miscellaneous, and Transfers $528,702
trotal Operational $43,047,888
Sourr:e: MCCCD O:JrrpnherlsZ7£ AnnualFznandal Report
•••
•••
••• ••••
•41
41
41••
•••••••
••
•••
••••••
41
41
41••
•
Instruction
65%
Physical Plant
8%
Public Service
0.2%
General
Institutional
3%
Administration
6%
Academic
Support
10%
Student
Services
8%
54
The formulas to allocate new permanent dollars to the bond remodeling efforts
and new construction were created--for each square foot of remodeled space,
$3.13 is added to the College base budget and $12.50 is added for each square
foot of new construction. These dollars help ensure that the structures can open
on schedule and be properly maintained.
For the 2000-01 year, the FTSE Incentive Program amount was reduced from
the prior year $2,200 per FTSE to $1,625. The 2001-02 FTSE Incentive amount
is $1,685. This reduction has undennined one of the most successful-ever
District-sponsored growth-supporting strategies, limiting College enrollment
growth to classes taught by adjunct faculty. This does not