INTEGRATED PLANNING AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION HANDBOOK
2012-2013 San Jose City College
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT ....................................................................................................... 2
MESSAGE FROM STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS ............................................. 3
I. LAYING THE FOUNDATION: INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW ................................................ 4
HISTORICAL CONTEXT ........................................................................................................... 4
EDUCATIONAL MASTER PLAN ............................................................................................... 6
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN ....................................................................................................... 7
II. BUILDING THE STRUCTURE: ................................................................................................ 8
WHAT IS INTEGRATED PLANNING AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT? .................................. 8
HOW IS PLANNING ORGANIZED - WHO IS INVOLVED? ................................................ 8
III. STRATEGIC PLAN ............................................................................................................. 10
MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS ........................................................................ 10
Performance Indicators Aligned with Strategic Goals ..................................................... 11
Strategic Planning Model .................................................................................................... 12
IV. RESOURCE ALLOCATION MODEL .................................................................................. 14
V. NUTS AND BOLTS: INTEGRATED PLANNING ................................................................. 18
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: Basic Steps ............................................................ 18
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: Departmental Planning & Program Review ...... 20
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: Timeline for Planning & Program Review ......... 22
THE NECESSARY FORMS ..................................................................................................... 22
VI. NUTS AND BOLTS: RESOURCE ALLOCATION ................................................................ 24
BUDGET CYCLE..................................................................................................................... 24
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT .................................................................................................... 24
BUDGET HEARING PROCESS ............................................................................................. 24
APPROVAL PROCESS .......................................................................................................... 26
APPEAL PROCESS ................................................................................................................. 26
CONTINGENCY PLANS ....................................................................................................... 27
VI. EVALUATING EFFECTIVENESS ........................................................................................ 29
Evaluation of College Standing Committees ..................................................................... 30
Evaluation of Strategic Planning Committee ..................................................................... 30
Evaluation of Resource Allocation Process ......................................................................... 30
ADDENDUM ............................................................................................................................ 32
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 2
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation
Handbook
S A N J O S E C I T Y C O L L E G E
MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT
Since 1921, San Jose City College has been meeting the educational
needs of its community. Programs and services have evolved over
the years in response to changes in the environment; however, the
one constant has been our focus on access through an open door
mission. Our Vision at SJCC is “To Inspire Success. . . One Student at a
Time.” And the mission of SJCC is to promote social justice by
providing open and equitable access to quality education and
programs that both challenge and prepare individuals for successful
careers and active participation in a diverse, global society. To
accomplish our mission, and to move the institution into the future, we
have developed a comprehensive strategic plan. Within this plan
are all the elements that help us fulfill our mission, which include the
establishment of strategic goals and performance indicators, environmental scanning, resource
allocation, evaluation processes, etc.
This Integrated Strategic Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook introduces all the processes
associated with our strategic plan and resource allocation models. We have divided the handbook
into seven main sections. Section One, “Laying the Foundation,” provides the reader with historical
information on the college and introduces information related to long-term planning. Section Two
“Building the Structure” defines strategic planning and provides information about participants,
timelines, organization, etc. Sections Three and Four introduce the reader to our Integrated Planning
and Resource Allocation Models. Section Five, “Nuts and Bolts: Integrated Planning,” provides an
overview of our integrated planning processes while Section Six, “Nuts and Bolts: Resource
Allocation,” provides an overview of how resources are allocated and aligned with planning. Finally,
Section Seven, “Evaluating Effectiveness” highlights all evaluation processes associated with planning.
We hope that you will find this Handbook useful in answering all your questions and providing
guidance for “how to” engage in strategic planning at SJCC.
Best regards,
Barbara R. Kavalier, Ph.D.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 3
MESSAGE FROM STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS
The process of integrated planning and resource allocation is among the most important activity that occurs at San José City College. As we envision what our college will be in the future, strategic planning is the process we use to guarantee that our current and future students receive
the best education our college can offer. Our planning efforts are available for the world to see on our college website. This handbook is a blueprint to effectively realize our progress to institutional effectiveness. With this handbook guiding our deliberative
efforts, we are well on the way to a philosophy of making college decisions based on mindful intentionality in service to student success. As Co-Chairs of the campus Strategic Planning Committee, we represent a participatory group of individuals from the faculty, classified, student and administrative ranks who have dedicated
themselves to evaluate and recommend improvements to our integrated planning and resource allocation process. While our charge has kept us focused on the task at hand, we have enjoyed the rewarding work associated with our committee. We wish to thank all our members, past and present, who have
contributed their time and effort to insure the success of our committee and for providing a valuable resource to our college. All who were and continue to be participants in this journey have our deepest appreciation.
Charles and Romero
Charles Heimler
Academic Senate President
Dr. Romero Jalomo
Dean of Research, Planning
and Development
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 4
I. LAYING THE FOUNDATION: INSTITUTIONAL OVERVIEW
HISTORICAL CONTEXT
The 91-year history of the San Jose City College makes the institution the tenth oldest community college
in California. Opening its classes in September 1921, it is among the earliest of the “junior” colleges
started in the 20th century.
San Jose Junior College acted as a
department within State Teachers
College that would later become
San Jose State University. The
college stayed in this role until
1953 when the oversight of the
college was transferred to the San
Jose Unified School District. During
this transfer the school district
purchased property from the
Southern Pacific railroad and
relocated the campus to its current
Moorpark Avenue location along
with the San Jose Technical High
School. In 1958 the college was renamed San Jose City College. In 1963, due largely to faculty-led
effort, the San Jose Community College District was formed. In 1986, the district was renamed the San
Jose/Evergreen Community College District to incorporate the name of its sister college Evergreen Valley
College, which opened in 1975.
In 1999, 2004, and 2010, voters within the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District passed bond
measures to help rebuild the campus and provide modern technology and facilities for the students at San
Jose City College. Some of the buildings completed as part of these bond proceeds are the Cesar Chavez
Library, Student Center, Science Complex, Parking Garage, Career Technology Building, Technology
Center, Multi-Disciplinary Building, and Carmen Castellano Fine Arts Center. Major renovations were
made to the Business, Cosmetology, and Reprographics buildings. Developments of the new
Kinesiology/Wellness & Athletics Building and a new Theatre /Drama Building are currently underway, to
be completed within the next two to three years.
Located in California’s famed Silicon Valley, the College offers all the benefits of being a part of the
world’s hub of technological innovation and entrepreneurship. San Jose City College currently serves the
Milpitas, San Jose, and other surrounding communities, and serves approximately 10,000 students per
semester.
Throughout its history, the growth and development of San Jose City College has been driven by strategic
planning. As the College moved into the 21st century, it embraced the following mission statement:
The mission of San José City College is to prepare and empower students for success in a global
multicultural society. The college, as its primary charge, provides continuous access to a wide range
of comprehensive and flexible post secondary academic and occupational programs that prepare
Silicon Valley residents of all ages for balanced and productive lives and successful careers. To reach
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 5
these educational goals, the college provides the appropriate support services to meet the needs of
an increasingly diverse student population. In fulfilling this mission, the college assists students:
• in achieving their education,
• employment goals including, but not limited to,
• lower-division transfer, and general education,
• certificates,
• distance learning opportunities,
• basic skills instruction,
• English as a Second Language,
• economic development,
• adult non-credit courses, targeted career training,
• two-year college degrees, and
• community services courses
Strategic Planning was also aligned with the college philosophy:
We believe our student body reflects a wide range of individual interests, achievements and
potential; we further believe that growth toward full recognition and use of individual abilities is the
right of every citizen and is enhanced by the professional counseling and guidance of the faculty and
staff. We believe that learning occurs in many ways and in many places and that it is not limited to
the classroom; that abroad range of experiences can be related to learning and may be used to gain
knowledge and appreciation. We believe that high quality instruction must be offered in all courses
and programs and that a faculty guarantees such standards, continuously critical of its personal
teaching standards and of its instructional programs, imbued with intellectual tolerance and a respect
for learning.
We believe a wide variety of curricula must be available to provide students with different interests
and the opportunity and motivation to succeed at a high scholarship level. We believe that we must
stimulate students to think critically and creatively, to recognize and accept personal capabilities, and
to participate effectively in a dynamic society.
We believe that we have an obligation to respond to the academic and cultural needs of our
community; to maintain a leadership role in defining and clarifying the needs and aspirations of the
community; to provide for their realization through services within the functions of this college as an
educational institution; and to warrant community support through dedication to excellence in
learning.
To strengthen its strategic planning processes, from 2007-2009, the College was engaged in developing,
implementing, and evaluating its “Commitments to Action” (CTA) plan. In this plan, work focused on the
following three areas: 1) Student needs and retention, 2) Curriculum and schedule, and 3) Image and
outreach.
Five college wide goals were identified:
1. Program improvement 2. Student Success
2. Student success 3. Budget Planning
4. Facilities infrastructure 5. Organizational Structures
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 6
Additionally, specific objectives were identified for each goal. All departments and divisions were asked
to align their plans and program reviews to these key areas and during Fall 2009, the CTA plan was
evaluated. The results were used to identify three new areas of focus:
1. Matriculation
2. Course scheduling
3. Equity and student success
With a comprehensive short-term strategic plan in place, the College moved to develop long-term goals,
and during the spring and summer of 2010, produced the Educational/Facilities Master Plan, which was
approved by the Board during the Fall 2010 semester.
During the 2009-10 academic year, the following new mission statement was adopted:
The mission of San Jose City College is to effect social justice by providing open and equitable access
to quality education and programs that both challenge and prepare individuals for successful careers
and active participation in a diverse, global society.
To fulfill our commitment to student learning and to assist students of all ages and backgrounds in
achieving their education, employment, and life-long learning goals, we offer the following:
• Two year college degrees and certificates
• Lower-division transfer and general educationcourses
• Basic skills and English as a Second Languageinstruction
• Career and technology training
To further align with the accreditation requirements associated with integrated planning, during the 2011-12 academic year, a new strategic plan was adopted. Although the institution has kept the mission and vision statements, in 2009-10, new strategic goals and performance indicators were identified. This information is captured in the section II: Building the Structure.
EDUCATIONAL MASTER PLAN
The San José City College Educational Plan: 2010-2025 is a comprehensive plan highlighting the future
educational needs of the College. This Plan was developed in response to the San José City College
Strategic College Initiatives and to provide specific direction and parameters for the implementation of
programs, along with activities relating to the educational and support service programs of the College.
Furthermore, the current and future financial projections for the College and the District were also taken
into consideration when developing the recommendations included in the Plan. The overarching objective
of this master plan was to develop a document that establishes a framework for the College to project the
instructional programs and support services that will be needed to meet the needs of students through the
year 2025. As part of the process, the master plan also provides direction for providing these programs
and services within the anticipated financial parameters projected through the year 2025. It is a dynamic
document, flexible enough to adjust to new issues and needs that may arise, yet with regular monitoring
and updating, provides a solid, quantifiable data base for future decision-making by the College and
District. The San José City College Educational Plan: 2010-2025 has its roots in the assessment and
evaluation of both qualitative and quantitative data relative to the educational, support service, and
facility needs of the College, as well as population demographics and employment information from the
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 7
college service area. This information serves as basis for explanations to changes that have occurred in
the past and to forecast the future needs of the College.
The Educational Master Plan serves as the sole source document that develops the needs for the Facilities
Master Planning document of the College. Both plans intertwine with each other. should a new facility be
built, the instructional programs identified for that building must be approved in the Educational Master
Plan prior to being able to proceed with such planning.
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
The 2025 Facilities Master Plan for San José City College was created to serve as a guide for future
campus development. It includes a graphic and narrative description of the College’s strategy to support
the initiatives identified in the Educational Master Plan: 2010–2025. It supports the identified growth
projections, translates educational program needs to facilities recommendations, and positions the College
to maximize funding sources.
Currently the 2025 Facilities Master Plan helps to inform the allocation of resources within any bond
measure that the College receives from the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District. The master
plan includes, but is not limited to: renovations, demolishing of buildings, new construction, and major
improvements to existing buildings, infrastructure, or landscaping.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 8
II. BUILDING THE STRUCTURE:
Introduction to Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation
WHAT IS INTEGRATED PLANNING AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?
Today’s community colleges must respond to an ever-
changing and complex environment that holds such
challenges as reduced funding, changing student
demographics, competition from for-profit colleges, and
increased accountability at both the state and national
level. Perhaps the most significant challenge is the
changing needs of the students and communities. For
example, today’s new generation of learners is proficient
in navigating technology and exploring information in a
virtual world. Within our communities, demand for highly
trained employees continues to grow and more and more
businesses are seeking employees who hold at least an
associate degree and who possess skills and abilities
commensurate with the new and emerging job markets.
With such challenges looming at our open doors, today’s community college must shift from a traditional
method of operating to designing organizational practices that transform the way we keep up with the
needs of the 21st Century learner. At San Jose City College, Integrated Planning serves as a roadmap
that provides direction for meeting these challenges. More importantly, planning allows the college an
opportunity to identify goals and resources needed to address the evolving needs of our students and our
community.
According to the Society for College and University Planning:
Integrated planning is the linking of vision, priorities, people, and the physical institution in a flexible system
of evaluation, decision-making and action. It shapes and guides the entire organization as it evolves over time
and within its community.
Aligned with this definition of planning, SJCC has identified an Integrated Planning process that captures
all the critical elements needed to ensure effective programs and services and to move the institution
forward in accomplishing its mission.
HOW IS PLANNING ORGANIZED - WHO IS INVOLVED?
Ultimately, everyone at San Jose City College has a role to play in Integrated Planning. However, the
College recognizes that a formal committee was needed to provide oversight of all planning activities.
During the 2011-12 academic year, the College created a Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) to
oversee all the key functions associated with integrated planning. The SPC is co-chaired by the Academic
Senate President and the Dean of Research, Planning and Development. The SPC consists of two
administrators, four faculty, two classified staff, and one student. Supporting the work of the committee
and serving as resources at each meeting include:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 9
College President
Executive Director of Research and Institutional Effectiveness
Accreditation Faculty Coordinators
Vice President of Academic Affairs
Faculty Coordinator of Program Review
Student Alternate
The purpose of the SPC is to ensure that the College’s strategic planning process is sound, collaborative,
evidence-based, and sustainable, and that the Strategic Plan guides decision-making and activities that
support improvement of institutional effectiveness and student learning in the long term. This purpose is
consistent with the Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement level in the Accrediting Commission’s
planning rubric, which includes the following criteria:
• The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and
improve student learning.
• There is dialogue about institutional effectiveness that is ongoing, robust and pervasive; data and
analyses are widely distributed and used throughout the institution.
• There is ongoing review and adaptation of evaluation and planning processes.
• There is consistent and continuous commitment to improving student learning; and educational
effectiveness is a demonstrable priority in all planning structures and processes.
The charge of the committee is to oversee the following tasks:
Evaluate progress on the College Goals annually, based on the Strategic Planning Performance
Indicators, results of program reviews and student learning outcomes assessments, and other
sources of quantitative and qualitative data.
Based on the evaluation findings, recommend improvements in policies, procedures, or operations
that will promote progress on the College Goals.
Monitor alignment of other plans and planning processes with the Strategic Plan, and recommend
corrective action as needed.
Promote the engagement of the campus community in strategic planning, and widespread ongoing
dialogue about institutional effectiveness.
Disseminate information about strategic planning to the campus community.
Evaluate all components of the Strategic Plan and the strategic planning process annually, and
recommend revisions as needed.
The SPC meets weekly throughout the fall, spring, and summer months. Their work is guided by the
Integrated Planning Timeline that is highlighted later in this report.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 10
III. STRATEGIC PLAN
MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS
Mission
The San Jose City College 2011-2016 Strategic Planning is guided by the College’s mission, vision, values, and
goals, indicated below:
The mission of San Jose City College is to effect social justice by providing open and equitable access
to quality education and programs that both challenge and prepare individuals for successful careers
and active participation in a diverse, global society.
To fulfill our commitment to student learning and to assist students of all ages and backgrounds in
achieving their education, employment, and life-long learning goals, we offer the following:
• Two year college degrees and certificates
• Lower-division transfer and general education courses
• Basic skills and English as a Second Language instruction
• Career and technology training
Vision
Inspiring Success…One Student at a Time
Values
Student Driven
Priority Driven
Collaborative
Goals
The College has identified the following six strategic goals:
Goal 1: Promote Student Success
Goal 2: Expand Partnerships with Our External Communities
Goal 3: Enhance Employee Development
Goal 4: Foster Cultural Competence
Goal 5: Increase Campus Safety
Goal 6: Expand Resource Development
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 11
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ALIGNED WITH STRATEGIC GOALS
The Performance Indicators identify College wide measures of effectiveness that help us to assess progress in
meeting the strategic goals and in fulfilling the mission.
College Strategic Goal #1: Promote Student Success
Key Performance Indicator: 1A: Increase the persistence rate of first-time students each year
1B: Increase the successful course completion rate of both full-time and
part-time students each year
1C: Increase the successful course completion rate in basic skills courses
each year
1D: Increase the improvement rate of students in basic skills
College Strategic Goal #2: Expand Partnerships with Our External Communities
Key Performance Indicator: 2A: Increase the number of partnerships with business and industry each
year
2B: Enhance partnership with neighborhood associations
College Strategic Goal #3: Enhance Employee Development
Key Performance Indicator: 3A: 25% of all full-time faculty and staff will participate in training
offered by the Professional Development Center each year.
3B: 85% of participating faculty and staff will indicate satisfaction with
the workshop(s) they attended through the Professional Development
Center.
College Strategic Goal #4: Foster Cultural Competence
Key Performance Indicator:
4A. 85% of the students who participate in multi-cultural
programs/events will indicate increased understanding and awareness
of cultural diversity
4B. Increase the number of international students by 5%
4C. 85% of faculty and staff who participate in workshops intended to
foster cultural competence will indicate increased understanding and
awareness of cultural diversity.
College Strategic Goal #5: Increase Campus Safety
Key Performance Indicator: 5A. 85% of the participating faculty and staff will be satisfied with
emergency preparedness safety training received.
5B. Increase use of technology to enhance campus safety
College Strategic Goal #6: Expand Resource Development
Key Performance Indicator: 6A. Apply for at least two new grants annually
6B. Obtain at least one new grant of at least $100,000 annually
6C. Increase the ending balance of SJCC’s Foundation Account each
year
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 12
STRATEGIC PLANNING MODEL
Beginning with an alignment to the College’s mission and vision, the Strategic Planning Model identifies all
the components associated with the integrated planning activities and the relationship of each function.
The Model represents a continuous improvement system whereby all planning activities direct back to the
mission of the College.
The following provides an introduction of each part of the planning model:
Mission, Vision and Values:
The College’s mission statement articulates who we are; the College’s vision focuses on who we
want to become, and the values communicate what we believe in. After a thorough review of the
mission, vision, and values, the College has elected not to make any changes.
Performance Indicators:
Performance Indicators were developed to assess how the College as a whole is performing.
Specifically, the Indicators are related to access, retention, persistence, and success. As well,
Performance Indicators are identified to measure progress toward goal achievement. The
expectation is that the Indicators will be measurable, aligned with state and national data for
comparison, and tracked over time.
Strategic Planning Model
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 13
College Goals:
The College’s strategic goals identify the primary areas of focus or the objective that must
accomplished to fulfill its mission. The goals were developed in Fall 2010 and will be evaluated
and reviewed on an annual basis.
Integration/Review of Planning Documents:
Each fall semester, the groups overseeing various planning documents (technology plan,
educational master plan, etc.) will perform a review of the goals and objectives of each plan and
make recommendations for improvements. So too will the plans be reviewed to ensure alignment
with college wide goals and indicators.
Alignment of Planning to Resource Allocation:
The SPT has developed a Resource Allocation Model to highlight the steps associated with aligning
resources to planning. A detailed description of this model is provided on the following pages.
Evaluation of Planning:
To ensure continuous improvement, each year, the SPT will evaluate the effectiveness of the
College’s planning process and will review performance indicator data to determine the extent to
which the College has accomplished its goals.
Environmental Scan:
The environmental scan will consist of a periodic review of external and internal data needed to
assess the needs of the communities. This evaluation process allows the College to consider the
factors that influence the direction of the College. The scan is conducted every three years.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 14
IV. RESOURCE ALLOCATION MODEL
The purpose of the Resource Allocation Model (RAM) is to allocate funds to support the College’s mission,
values, vision, and its strategic goals, to ensure that allocations are linked to strategic planning and
program review, and to utilize correct and effective data in budget decision-making. Resources are all
assets of the College, including its human resources, physical resources, technology resources, and financial
resources. Following is SJCC’s Resource Allocation Model:
Each component of the San Jose City College Resource Allocation Model is defined below.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 15
Integrated Strategic Plan:
The Integrated Strategic Plan was developed based on input from State and District strategic
initiatives and input from the College community. The mission, values, and vision of the institution
were then established, followed by the development of the College’s strategic goals. The San
Jose City College Strategic Planning Model represents a continuous improvement cycle where we
1) evaluate our environment, 2) establish college-level performance indicators, 3) identify annual
goals, 4) develop program reviews and SLOs, 5) integrate all planning documents, 6) align
planning to resource allocation, and 7) evaluate planning processes.
Educational & Facilities Master Plans:
The Educational and Facilities Master Plans chart the College’s long-term course. The Educational
Master Plan is the foundation document for the Facilities Master Plan. Both focus on institutional
change, analysis, and improvement of existing conditions; both anticipate changes in the
community, growth of the College as a whole, and changes in programs and services, as well as
include institutional strategic goals and opportunities for input from all College constituencies.
Technology Plan:
The Technology Plan, in alignment with the District Technology Plan, guides the implementation of
technology at the College, responds to the strategic goals, and incorporates technology
requirements defined in the Educational and Facilities Master Plan. It encompasses the evaluation
and development of the technology infrastructure, management information systems, operations
support, and management of web resources.
Student Success Action Plan:
The Student Success Action Plan, aligned with the College mission, values, vision, and strategic
goals, will lead the College toward the development and expansion of innovative pedagogy and
instructional delivery, programs and services, and other strategies and practices that increase
student course completion, persistence, retention, graduation, certificate completion, transfer
readiness and enrollment into a university as well as employment opportunities and job placement.
These strategies will incorporate exemplary practices from programs such as Achieving the Dream
(AtD), the Basic Skills Initiatives, the Student Success Act, and more.
Program Review Committee:
The Program Review Committee (PRvC) is responsible for providing guidance to the College in the
use of program review materials and the process of program review, evaluating and provide
feedback on the quality of program review documents submitted by the units undergoing a self-
study, validating completed program review documents and forwarding the documents to the
Strategic Planning Process. The full committee breaks up into PRvC subgroups to work closely with
the constituency units undergoing program studies.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 16
Department/Program/Service Program Reviews:
Program review is either annual or comprehensive depending upon where the department,
program, or service falls on the program review cycle. Program Review allows for analyzing the
College’s instructional, instructional support, student services, and administrative services areas to
identify the following: strengths and weaknesses, solutions to weaknesses, how each has achieved
or is aligned with college strategic goals, and the equipment, staff, and facilities needs for budget
requests. In addition, the program review includes the status on the development and assessment
of student and program learning outcomes.
Requests for Discretionary Funds:
Based on prior year allocations, Administrative Services prepares a report on preliminary budget
allocations. These reports are sent to the Vice President and each College division. Each division,
department, program and service discusses and completes a budget augmentation request based
on its review of its budget report.
Resource Needs by Department/Program/Service:
Requests for discretionary funds must be aligned with the College mission and strategic goals and
based upon analysis of each department, program, or service’s program review and standards
for budgeting decisions. In turn, Division deans and program directors communicate their
discretionary budget needs to their respective Vice President.
Academic Senate:
Each department program review can be used to identify needed personnel. Recommendations
for new faculty positions are presented to the Academic Senate. The Senate reads and analyzes
each program review and submits its recommendations, a prioritized list for new faculty hires, to
the President.
Prioritization by Vice Presidents:
The Vice Presidents review each department, program, or service augmentation request
documents with the deans and directors, prioritize requests, and then submit the requests to the
Finance Committee in preparation for the budget hearings.
Budget Hearings by Finance Committee:
The Finance Committee lead by the Vice President for Administrative Services comprises the
Budget Hearing Committee. This Committee is equipped with a binder containing department,
program, or service budget requests, annual or comprehensive program reviews, and any other
pertinent documentation. Each Vice President accompanied by individual division deans and/or
program directors are scheduled to present their prioritized budget requests to the Budget
Hearing Committee. The Committee reviews and analyzes all documents and testimony given,
then prepares budget augmentation recommendations for submission to the College Planning
Council.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 17
College Planning Council (CPC) Recommendations:
The College Planning Council reviews and analyzes budget recommendations from the Finance
Committee, then approves, amends, notes reasons for amendments, and submits its
recommendations to the President.
College President Approval:
The College President, along with the College Executive Team, receives the budget request
recommendations from the College Planning Council (CPC), and then reviews the augmentation
budget request documents along with the Finance Committee’s and the College Planning Council’s
recommendations. Together they decide on funding priorities. If the priorities differ from the
CPC’s recommendations, rationale is provided in writing. However, the ultimate decision of
approval or approval with amendments/revisions, is the President’s.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 18
V. NUTS AND BOLTS: INTEGRATED PLANNING
Previous sections of this Handbook have outlined in general terms
the planning processes undertaken by each unit in integrating
activities with our College mission, strategic goals, key
performance indicators, individual program outcomes, and the
resource allocation process. The processes were designed to
evaluate and support the improvement of institutional
effectiveness and student learning at each step and continually in
the future.
This section of the Handbook will outline:
Basic steps in the strategic planning process
Planning at the program level
Timeline associated with planning and program review
Forms/templates associated with planning and program review
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: BASIC STEPS
As highlighted in Section II, the SJCC Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) is charged with the oversight of
all strategic planning processes, including:
Recommending improvements in policies, procedures, or operations that will promote progress on
the College Goals
Monitoring alignment of other plans and planning processes with the Strategic Plan
Promoting the engagement of the campus community in strategic planning
Disseminating information about strategic planning to the campus community
Evaluating strategic planning processes
Each year, the SPC will create an Action Plan that outlines all the processes associated with planning
activities. For the 2012-13 academic year, the following Action Plan has been developed:
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE – ACTION PLAN
WHAT WHO BY WHEN Status
Establish a Strategic Planning Shared
Governance Group.
President/VPAA/Academic
Senate
March 1, 2012 Completed
Finalize plan/meeting dates for SP Group. President/VPAA/VPSA March 1, 2012 Completed
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 19
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE – ACTION PLAN
WHAT WHO BY WHEN Status
Increase employee
awareness/understanding of strategic
planning.
President/Staff Dev
Committee Meeting/Fac Dev
Center/Managers
Ongoing Presentation at PDD –
March 23
Presentation at
Administrator Meeting –
March 28
Increase employee
awareness/understanding of strategic
planning.
President/Staff Dev
Committee Meeting/Fac Dev
Center/Managers
Ongoing Presentation at PDD –
March 23
Presentation at
Administrator Meeting –
March 28
Review and Revise Strategic Goals. President/Strategic Planning
Committee/Dr. Lee
April 13, 2012 Review and Finalize at
4/12 SPC meeting
Review and Revise Performance Indicators:
Simplify and align with Strategic Goals.
President/VPAA/VPSA/SP
Committee/ PUG/Dr. Lee
April 13, 2012 Review and Finalize at
4/12 SPC meeting –
Forward to Academic
Senate (4-17) and CPC (?)
for approval
Develop work plan for gathering, analyzing,
and using PI data for evaluation of progress
on Strategic Goals.
SP Committee/Dr. Hawley/Dr.
Lee/PUG
April 26, 2012 Determine data sources
for all PIs.
Establish timeline for data
gathering.
Assess the level of understanding of current
Strategic Goals and integrated planning in
the campus community.
SP Committee/Dr. Lee/Dr.
Hawley
May 18, 2012 Develop a suitable
assessment process.
Implement the first
iteration of that process to
establish baseline data.
Disseminate findings.
Complete analysis of PI data and other
information as needed, and write evaluation
of progress on Strategic Goals.
Dr. Hawley/Dr. Lee/PUG June 1, 2012 Determine best analysis
methods and presentation
format well ahead of time.
Review evaluation results, make
recommendations for operational
improvements and Strategic Plan
improvements, and draft revised Strategic
Plan accordingly.
President/SP Committee/Dr.
Lee
June 12, 2012 Hold Strategic Planning
Retreat to complete work.
Disseminate revised Strategic Plan (including
Strategic Goals and PIs) to campus
community.
President/VPs/SP
Committee/CPC/Academic
Senate
Aug. 9, 2012 Utilize venues such as:
Public Forums
Newsletter
Brown bag
Website
Create flyer to announce
plan is in progress.
Announce at March and
April PDDs.
Begin implementation of recommended
operational improvements.
President/VPs/Groups and
departments as appropriate
Aug. 1, 2012
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 20
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE – ACTION PLAN
WHAT WHO BY WHEN Status
Hold workshop or working session on issues
and practices related to program review
and/or SLO processes.
Program Review Committee
and/or SLOAC, with Dr. Lee
May 4, 2012 Determine nature and
content of workshop or
working session, and then
schedule accordingly.
Analyze findings and make
recommendations for improvements in
program review, SLO, and budget allocation
processes.
Chair, Finance
Committee/Chair, Program
Review/Chairs,
SLOAC/PUG/Dr. Hawley/Dr.
Lee/SP Committee
May 18, 2012 Improvements must be
approved and in place for
the beginning of the
2012-13 cycles.
Conduct an evaluation of Campus
Technology Plan; make recommendations for
improvements.
IT Chair/VPAS/SP Committee May 4, 2012
SP Committee to review
alignment of process with
strategic planning
elements
Evaluate Facilities Committee’s processes;
make recommendations for improvements.
VPAA/VPAS/Facilities
Committee/SP Committee
May 4, 2012
Create Research/Planning Website. Celia/Barbara/Greg/Edwin/
PUG/ Dr. Hawley
April 20, 2012
Update and post current and accurate
improvements made by each area on
College’s website & web pages with current
postings.
President, VPAS, Web Master,
CTS
Begin Feb
2012 and
ongoing
Develop the oversight to
ensure that this is done at
least six times annually, if
not monthly.
Document meetings held by each area by
keeping minutes of activities, decisions,
actions, and recommendations of
subcommittees and posting of the actions
and recommendations on Infostore
repository.
All VPs / Deans/Team Chairs Begin Feb
2012 and
ongoing
Use the same template,
which includes: Committee
Name, Recommendation,
Action Taken and by
Whom.
Disseminate resource allocation decision to
campus.
President/VPs End of May
2012
Map out planning activities for 2012-13. SP Committee June 12, 2012 Environmental scanning;
activities for fall; etc.
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: Departmental Planning & Program Review
It is through the Program Review process that the links to SLO assessments and Resource Allocation are
established and documented. As mentioned previously, each Program or Unit must submit a
Comprehensive Program Review every four years, and an Annual Program Review that summarizes
changes and resource requests in the intervening years.
Following is the schedule for the submission of Comprehensive Program Reviews for the years 2011-2015
as of July 2012.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 21
2011-2012
Fine Arts-Art/Multimedia/Ceramics
Communication Studies
Construction Technology
Dance
Journalism
Laser Technology
Mathematics
Photography
Theatre Arts
Career/Transfer Center
Financial Aid
Health Services
Avanzamos
Puente
Student Life and Activities
Business Services
2012-2013
Accounting/Business
Administration of Justice
Alcohol & Drug Studies
Biological Sciences
Dental Assisting
Early Childhood Education
English
Health Sciences
Labor Studies
Reading
Real Estate
Admissions & Records
Assessment
CARR
Open Computer Lab
PLTL
Reading & Writing Center
Tutoring Center
UMOJA
Academic Support
Campus Tech
2013-2014
Athletics
Chemistry
Computer Applications/ Computer Information Systems
English as a Second Language
Music/Humanities
Physical Education, includes Adaptive PE
Economics
Global Studies
History
Psychology
Counseling & Matriculation/Orientation
International Students
Academic Affairs
Service Learning
2014-2015
Air Conditioning & FMT
Anthropology
Cosmetology
Ethnic Studies
Foreign Language & Sign Language
Geography
Machine Technology
Medical Assisting
Philosophy
Physical Science
Physics
Political Science
Sociology
DSP&S
EOP&S/CARE
Library
WIN/CALWorks
Veterans Program
Grounds & Custodial
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 22
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESSES: Timeline for Planning & Program Review
The suggested annual cycle to be completed within each program/unit is reflected in the following table:
Month of Academic Year Task Responsible Parties
September/October Comprehensive Program Review self-study team
formed
Review templates
Gather data
Meet with Program Review Committee (PRvC) for
clarification
Managers/Deans
Unit leads
Oct through Nov Draft Comprehensive Program Review
Meet with PRvC as needed
Confer with unit colleagues
Unit leads
December Final drafts of Program Reviews are due to
Deans/Managers
Drafts forwarded to PRvC
Unit leads
Deans/Managers
Prog Rev Committee
Dec through Feb PRvC vets Comp Prog Reviews
After revisions, Comp Prog Rev are forwarded to
Finance Committee if requests being made
Prog Rev Committee
Deans/Managers/
Finance Committee
January Annual Program Review self-study team formed
Managers/Deans and Unit
leads
Feb through Mar Data and information reviewed for Annual Prog Rev
PRvC available as resource
Finance Committee holds Budget Hearings
Unit leads
Prog Rev Committee
Finance Committee
Deans/Managers
May Annual Program Reviews due to Deans/Managers
Evaluations of the processes by the pertinent standing
committees
Unit leads
Deans/Managers
Prog Rev Committee
Strategic Planning,
Finance, SLO, PRvC, and
CPC
Summer PRvC reviews Annual Prog Reviews and sends
comments
Prepare for next academic year
PRvC, Unit leads,
Deans/Managers
THE NECESSARY FORMS
As reflected in the Comprehensive Program Review form, the process involves four major components:
1) Program Description, which includes its goals, main components/courses, student learning outcomes,
alignment with College mission and ISLOs, five year enrollment/service data, and student success data.
2) Program Content, which outlines all courses/services, sequencing, and alignment between course and
program level SLOs.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 23
3) Program Improvement – Analysis and Assessment, which describes the process established in the
program to review and revise curriculum/services, to conduct SLO assessment, and to incorporate that
data into making changes to improve student learning.
4) Strategic Planning section, which describes changes made, current strengths of the program, and
planned future changes all linked to supporting the Program and College goals. These changes should
take into account staffing, facilities, library resources, equipment, and technology.
The Annual Program Review form reflects any changes and/or resource requests being made in the years
between the Comprehensive Program Review.
In the completion of both forms, pertinent student data such as student demographics, completion rates,
etc., is necessary for review and analysis. This data can be found via the newly established Research and
Planning Website: http://www.sjcc.edu/accreditation/html/collegeplanning.html
Detailed instructions for the completion of the Program Reviews are found in the SJCC Program Review
Handbook [insert link here]. Copies of all forms and templates are located in the Addendum.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 24
VI. NUTS AND BOLTS: RESOURCE ALLOCATION
BUDGET CYCLE
Within the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District, the budget cycle and timelines are defined at
the District level. Information pertaining to the District’s timeline is
contained in the Addendum.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT
The Finance Committee is a subcommittee of the College Planning Council. The Finance Committee is
charged with recommending the disbursement of discretionary funds as they relate to program reviews,
both annual and comprehensive, to ensure that the dollars are allocated based on the resource allocation
model adopted by the College. The Committee is a cross representational group of employees and
students as follows:
3 Administrators, appointed by Managers, Supervisors & Confidential (MSC)
3 Faculty, appointed by the Academic Senate
3 Classified Staff, appointed by the California School Employees Association (CSEA)
3 Students Representatives, appointed by Associated Student Government
The Vice President of Administrative Services serves as an Ex-Officio of the Committee
The Committee meets bi-monthly during the course of the academic semesters and a meeting is called by
the Chair when a quorum is reached. The Committee will meet outside the semester if the need arises
During the Fall Semester, the Committee reviews and learns the various documents needed to understand
the budget process and the intricacies of the instructional and non-instructional programs on campus.
During the Spring Semester, the Committee begins its work to prepare for and conduct its review of the
budget and the subsequent recommendations to the College Planning Council.
BUDGET HEARING PROCESS
During the course of the spring semester, the Finance Committee distributes instructions and a template
electronically, to all of the supervisors, deans, vice presidents, president, and other budget managers on
campus. The process of planning the needs of divisions and departments within the College also begins at
the beginning of spring semester. Once all source documentation is submitted based on the “Budget Cycle
Timeline Flow Chart,” the Finance Committee schedules hearings with all budget managers in the College.
See example:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 25
PRESENTATION TIME ADMINISTRATOR/DEPARTMENT
8:15-8:45 AM Student Life
8:45-9:15 AM Kinesiology/Wellness/Athletics
9:15-10:15 AM Multiple Student Affair Programs
10:15-10:45 AM Special Programs/Counseling/Health services
10:45-11:15 AM Language Arts
11:15-11:45 AM Custodial/Grounds
11:45 AM - 12:30 PM LUNCH
12:30-1:00 PM Business Services
1:00-1:30 PM Math & Science
1:30-2:00 PM Humanities & Social Sciences
2:00-2:30 PM Business/Technology/Applied Science
2:30-3:00 PM CalWorks
3:00-3:30 PM Academic Affairs
3:30-4:00 PM CTSS
4:00-4:30 PM Enrollment Services
For the budget hearings, academic programs are allocated 45 minutes and non-academic programs 30
minutes to allow deans with many large and/or complex programs time to adequately defend their needs
to the Committee.
A number of days prior to the hearings, all members of the Committee receive all of the source
documentation needed and reviewing these documents in advance. These documents usually translate to a
five-inch binder full of material for the entire college. Documents include, but are not limited to, program
reviews, budget requests, enrollment data, SJCC fact book, 3 years of financial history by cost center.
At the budget hearings, every presenter is asked to make his/her case. As documents are presented,
Committee members openly ask questions of the presenter at any time and do so to have a better
understanding of the needs of the budget in question. Many times, this is the first time for a member of the
Committee to learn anything about other areas of the College so many times, the most simple questions
are asked to better understand the various levels of needs throughout the College.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 26
APPROVAL PROCESS
A sequence of events must take place over the course of the spring semester for the allocation of
resources. Once the Finance Committee has had its budget hearings, the Committee sets aside another day
to review what they hear during the hearings and ask further questions if needed. We then begin the
process of making sure what is being recommended for the allocation is in line with the program reviews.
After the program reviews are reviewed, the Committee then looks at the delta between the revenue
anticipated for the College and what the requests currently amount to. If there is a difference, and usually
this happens, then the committee must make reductions based on established priorities for the year. Based
on priorities that vary from year to year, the committee makes the appropriate reductions to areas within
the college to balance the budget.
Upon the completion of the Committee deliberations, the Finance Committee then votes on its
recommendation as a whole for the annual budget. This recommendation is then forwarded to the College
Planning Council (CPC). This committee is a quadripartite committee and made up of 5 members from
each of the constituency groups on campus: staff, faculty, students, and administrators. The CPC then
reviews, as a first reading, the budget in its entirety, allowing time for questions and making sure that the
Finance Committee has allocated resources based on the established resource allocation model, program
reviews, and institutional priorities as needed. CPC then schedules the second meeting for action on the
budget itself. Once the CPC approves the recommendation from the Finance Committee and any
subsequent amendments, this becomes the recommendation of CPC to the College President. The President
of the College then receives the full documents from the Finance Committee and CPC to begin the review
of all pertinent materials. Once the College President has had the opportunity to review/amend/approve
the budget, the College Vice President of Administrative Services (VPAS) is notified of the approved final
document.
The VPAS then compiles all documentation for a final approved budget book for record keeping. The
VPAS also completes allocation letters to all budget managers outlining the budget from their request to
final approval. This tracking methodology allows managers to see where their specific line items were
changed throughout the process. These allocation letters are received by the administrators on campus in
a detailed format, allowing them to disseminate this information to the individual programs within their
departments for full disclosure.
APPEAL PROCESS
As a result of the 12/13 allocation process, the decision was made to allow for an appeal process for
departments to appeal the decision of the Finance Committee, College Planning Council, or the College
President based on the allocation they received. Many times this is a result of their initial allocation being
reduced based on the criteria established in the allocation process. The allocation they received may be
appealed to the following adhoc groups:
College President
Vice President of Administrative Services
Vice President of Academic Affairs (Also serves as CPC Chair)
Vice President of Student Affairs
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 27
Finance Committee Chair
This adhoc group will review appeals of the budget allocation based on the following criteria:
1. The program/department cannot meet essential requirements of accreditation or third party
accreditation based on the reductions made by one or multiple layers of approval.
2. The program/department is new to the college and thus does not have significant historical
references to make quantitative decisions based on what was presented.
3. The program/department was reduced so drastically, more than 50%, that it must address the
funding or risk the viability of the program/department.
The appeal made by the program/department must address why the need was not addressed in the
annual/comprehensive program review, must address the impact the funding level has on the
program/department, and must also address the impact the reduction has on total student served and
curriculum impact if any.
Once the above criteria are addressed in a formal appeal, the appeal must follow the signature
authority:
1. Signature of Author
2. Signature of supervising dean/ manager / vice president
3. Signature of divisional vice president
The divisional Vice President will present the appeal to the adhoc group and all appeals will be heard in
one meeting held annually. The recommendation will be forwarded to the President. Once a decision has
been made regarding the appeal, proper notification will be served through the Vice President of
Administration in the form of an approval or denial of the request. Shall an approval be received, an
amended allocation letter will be submitted to the budget manager over that program/department. Shall
an appeal be denied, the VPAS will write a letter to the budget manager outlining the denial of the
appeal. Upon the completion of the appeals process, there will be no other recourse to have a budget
reviewed or amended in the current budget year. Any needs that have not been met for a
program/department will have to be managed within the departmental budget as allocated.
CONTINGENCY PLANS
The College currently has a resource allocation process that manages how the College allocates resources
throughout its various areas. However, there are situations that arise that require the College to keep a
contingency of funds for reductions, emergencies, and other one-time needs. To manage, the College
currently holds a very conservative contingency to help mitigate these issues. Shall the College have any
of the above issues, and it cannot be absorbed into the departmental budget, the College will use the
contingency funds it has at its disposal to address the problem so as not to harm the operations of
individual departments. The following represents examples of the uses for contingency funds:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 28
1. Emergency – Unknowingly one of the boilers in the central plant in the College suddenly fails. This
would be an unplanned emergency as this equipment is very expensive but is needed to operate
the heating and air conditioning on campus.
2. Reductions- The State of California doesn’t meet its revenue estimate and the Governor calls for a
cut in the state budget mid-year. This would result in the colleges receiving FTES reductions, which
in turn require a reduction to the institution’s base funding. A contingency budget can offset the
reductions to minimize the impact to programs or positions.
3. One Time Funding – The College is allowed to carry forward any fund balance from the prior
year for one additional year. These funds can only be used for one-time items as the dollars will
not be there in subsequent years. Thus, the College must use these funds for items such as small
repairs, or improvements for grounds or other areas that will not require the funding to be
annualized in the next fiscal years.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 29
VI. EVALUATING EFFECTIVENESS
Institutional effectiveness encompasses the
implementation and evaluation of a mission-based
strategic plan that is aligned with the college
resource allocation model. It is the role of the
campus Strategic Planning Committee to serve as
the agent to ensure that the college’s strategic
planning process is sound, collaborative, evidence-
based, and sustainable. A standard that must be
adhered to when evaluating institutional
effectiveness is Sustainable Continuous Quality
Improvement. This standard was established by the
Accrediting Commission and requires the following:
The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and
improve student learning.
There is dialogue about institutional effectiveness that is ongoing, robust, and pervasive. Data and
analyses are widely distributed and used throughout the institution.
There is ongoing review and adaptation of evaluation and planning processes.
There is consistent and continuous commitment to improving student learning, and educational
effectiveness is a demonstrated priority in all planning structures and processes.
STEP 1: REVIEWING THE STRATEGIC GOALS USING KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
To begin the process of evaluating institutional effectiveness, the Strategic Planning Committee (SPC)
reviews and evaluates the college strategic goals. The goals are proposed by the College President
after consultation with the district Chancellor who in turn is provided direction from the Board of Trustees.
Upon receipt of the college goals, the Strategic Planning Committee attempts to identify and determine
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to measure whether or not and to what degree a strategic goal has
been met (or not). The SJCC Power Users Group, a resource to the campus SPC, is also enjoined to help
identify KPIs and do the same.
During 2011-12, a subcommittee of the SPC proposed a revision to the campus strategic goals. Next, the
Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) and the Power Users Group (PUG) worked to identify KPIs for each
indicator. Once all data were identified, the SPC proceeded to evaluate each performance indicator and
evaluated the extent to which each indicator advanced college strategic goals. The source documentation
used to identify the KPIs was diverse and included annual reports, bond reports, HR documentation, and
state reports. After receiving approval from the SPC, the revised goals and KPIs were submitted for
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 30
approval from the SJCC Academic Senate, College Planning Council, and Associated Student
Government.
STEP 2: EVALUATION OF COMMITTEES & PROCESSES
As part of the comprehensive assessment of planning processes, the College has established a number of
annual evaluations including that of:
Standing Committees associated with Planning and Resource Allocation
Strategic Planning Committee
Resource Allocation Processes
Strategic Planning Processes
The following information provides a summary of the evaluations conducted and overall use of results for
improvements.
Evaluation of College Standing Committees
The SPC developed a survey instrument that was administered to all standing committees (Technology,
Finance, Facilities, and College Planning) identified in SJCC’s Resource Allocation Model. This instrument
allowed each committee to assess its achievement of established goals and its alignment to the college
strategic plan.
In addition to the survey items listed above, the Committee evaluation included an assessment of goal
completion and recommendations for improvements based on survey findings. For example, the Facilities
Committee recommended that it set up subcommittee meetings to be more engaged in the process,
establish more clearly defined procedures for the budget hearings, and invite guest speakers who have
ideas on possible sources of alternative funding.
Evaluation of Strategic Planning Committee
The Strategic Planning Committee Self-Evaluation consists of three questions. The instrument uses a five-
point scale: 5=almost always, 4=often, 3=sometimes, 2=seldom, and 1=almost never. The questions deal
with the Committee’s processes, interactions, and outcomes during the 2011–12 academic year. The
evaluation is conducted during the annual retreat held in June. Results are used to improve planning
processes and committee performance.
Evaluation of Resource Allocation Process
Under the leadership of the Finance Committee, a survey related to the effectiveness of the resource
allocation process was developed. This survey is administered by the Chair of the Finance Committee
within 30 days of the completion of the scheduled budget hearings, usually in the month of June. Upon
completion of the survey, the results are compiled and submitted to the Finance Committee in the first
meeting of the fall semester for a review of the results. Based upon this review, the Finance Committee
begins to formulate ways to improve the resource allocation process for the purposes of planning the next
round of allocations.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 31
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 32
ADDENDUM
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 33
2012-2013 Annual Program Review ACADEMIC PROGRAMS-SAN JOSE CITY COLLEGE
PROGRAM:
ADMINISTRATOR:
EVALUATION YEAR (CHECK ONE): TWO THREE FOUR
Program description
SLOs and/or SLO
Assessment process
Curriculum Information
Staffing information
Technology information
Budget information
Other:
PROGRAM REVIEW SUBMISSION DATE:
PREPARED BY:
The Program Review Committee validates the review and forwards to the institution’s Integrated Planning
Process.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 34
2012-2013 Comprehensive Program Review
ACADEMIC PROGRAMS-SAN JOSE CITY COLLEGE
PROGRAM:
ADMINISTRATOR:
PART ONE: PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
1. Program Goals: Please provide a general statement on why the program exists.
2. Description of the Program Components.
3. Program Student Learning Outcomes (PSLOs).
4. How do the Program Student Learning Outcomes (PSLOs) align with and support San Jose City
College’s mission and Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLOs)?
5. Enrollment trends for the previous five years.
6. Student population served/demographics-age, gender, ethnicity, income, previous education, etc.
7. Student completion/ success data – retention, persistence, GPA, analysis by gender, ethnicity.
PART TWO: PROGRAM CONTENT
1. Course listing including dates of last revision, advisories, co and prerequisites, articulation with
four year colleges.
2. Include a list/diagram of courses reflecting course sequencing and how often how courses have been offered.
3. Course mapping illustrating how course Student Learning Outcomes’ offering align with the Program Student Learning Outcomes?
PART THREE: PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT/ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT
1. What process is used to review and revise the curriculum? Include information on Advisory committee and workforce data (if applicable).
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 35
2. Calendar indicating how Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) are assessed on a regular basis.
3. How are Student Learning Outcome (SLO) assessments and campus-based research data utilized to improve instruction?
4. How is data collected on student completion/success, retention and persistence used to inform
instructional practices?
PART FOUR: STRATEGIC PLANNING
1. Date of last Comprehensive Program Review.
2. Describe any changes in the program that have occurred since the last Comprehensive Program
Review. (See intervening Annual Program Reviews.)
3. What are the current strengths of the program? Include faculty and staff training, projects and
other achievements.
4. What changes to the program do you plan to (would you like to) implement before the next Comprehensive Program Review?
5. How will these changes impact student success, instructional techniques, and course offerings?
6. What are the budgetary implications?
7. Please address projected needs in the following areas and indicate how each will support Program and College Goals. Include information on current status and projected needs.
STAFFING
FACILITIES
LIBRARY
EQUIPMENT
TECHNOLOGY
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 36
PROGRAM REVIEW SUBMISSION DATE:
PREPARED BY:
The Program Review Committee validates the review and forwards to the institution’s Integrated Planning
Process.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 37
2012-2013 Comprehensive Program Review Form and Instructions
STUDENT AFFAIRS: PROGRAMS & SERVICES
San Jose City College
2012-2013 Comprehensive Program Review
STUDENT AFFAIRS: PROGRAMS & SERVICES-SAN JOSE CITY COLLEGE
DEPARTMENT:
ADMINISTRATOR:
PART ONE: MISSION
8. Describe the department/program function and purpose (and how the function and purpose tie into college’s mission.)
9. List the department/program’s program learning outcomes.
10. Previous goals and objectives: List the department goals, objectives and activities for the last academic year. Discuss the attainment level of activity implementation and its relationship to meeting student or program need by ranking the activity implementation as needsmet, needs unmet, or needs partially met. Briefly explain why an activity was unmet or onlypartiallymet.
Goal:
Objective:
Person Responsible:
Timeline: ( ) Complete ( ) Incomplete ( ) On-going
Activities for Attainment of Objective:
Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes addressed:
Degree of Goal & Objective Attainment:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 38
Goal:
Objective:
Person Responsible:
Timeline: ( ) Complete ( ) Incomplete ( ) On-going
Activities for Attainment of Objective:
Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes addressed:
Degree of Goal & Objective Attainment:
Goal:
Objective:
Person Responsible:
Timeline: ( ) Complete ( ) Incomplete ( ) On-going
Activities for Attainment of Objective:
Student Learning Outcomes or Service Area Learning Outcomes addressed:
Degree of Goal & Objective Attainment:
3.1. Discuss in detail the barriers to completing the above goals.
11. Recent College and State Developments: List recent College and State developments that significantly impact the unit’s ability to provide services to students.
4.2. Describe the positive and negative impacts of these developments on the unit.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 39
12. Describe the unit’s active participation in the College’s mission
5.1. Discuss how the unit evaluates its effectiveness in participating in the College’s mission.
13. Describe how SJCC Institutional Learning Outcomes are integrated into the unit.
PART TWO: NEED
1. Describe Current and Needed Staffing: List the number of full-time (filled & unfilled positions) and part-time faculty, full-time (filled and unfilled positions) and part-time classified staff, unclassified (student workers) and managers in the program/department.
1.2 Identify the ratio of students to faculty/staff.
1.3 Faculty, staff and student survey results and their significance to the program.
1.4 Do you have any additional staffing needs? Please explain.
2. Describe the impact of the program’s service offerings on other departments
3. Course Outline and Syllabi (where applicable): Review all course outlines and syllabi to ensure
currency (no more than 1 year old) and relevance. The campus Curriculum Committee must approve
updated outlines.
4. Is the program information for the department consistent, current, accurate and accessible?
MIS ( ) Consistent ( ) Current ( ) Accurate ( ) Accessible
Class Schedule ( ) Consistent ( ) Current ( ) Accurate ( ) Accessible
Catalog ( ) Consistent ( ) Current ( ) Accurate ( ) Accessible
Brochures ( ) Consistent ( ) Current ( ) Accurate ( ) Accessible
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 40
Website ( ) Consistent ( ) Current ( ) Accurate ( ) Accessible
PART THREE: QUALITY
1. Improvement of Student Learning Outcomes and Delivery of Student Services (address all applicable topics): Departmental and individual activities toward improving services and contributing to professional community (list participation in staff development, conference attendance/participation, and academic preparation/training during the past 5 years).
1.2. Describe how these activities have enriched and been implemented into the department’s services and have resulted in campus, district or state enrichment.
1.3. Describe how the unit addresses the multicultural/diverse student body and disabled populations in the curriculum and/or services.
1.4. Describe active participation of flexible and alternative delivery systems (i.e., online applications/regulation, distance learning, web-based counseling):
1.5. Describe any outside classroom learning experiences for students (field trips, field work, community service, etc.):
1.6. List the results of the most current student satisfaction survey on your program:
2. Supportive Working Environment: Describe the involvement/inclusion of part-time faculty in departmental and college activities:
2.2. Describe the involvement/inclusion of departmental classified staff (if any) in departmental and college activities.
2.3. Describe intra- and inter-departmental activities and collaborations between faculty and staff.
2.4. Describe the methods used to promote respect for diversity and inclusion among faculty, staff and students.
2.5. Describe the department’s efforts to increase communication and collaboration between student services and instruction.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 41
2.6. List the results of the current surveys regarding the department staff’s availability and helpfulness.
3. Facilities Renewal: Adequacy and accessibility of departmental facilities with respect to size, layout and location.
3.2. Current condition of departmental facilities.
3.3. Identify any safety or hazardous conditions in your departmental facilities.
3.4. Describe recent significant facility changes and their effect on departmental operations, if applicable.
3.5. Identify proposed modifications to facilities (within the next 5 years) and rationale for those changes.
3.6. List the results of the student survey on the condition of the facilities.
4. Technology: Departmental utilization of technology (i.e., computers, equipment, etc.) in the delivery of instruction, in or outside of the classroom, and/or services in the department.
4.1.1. Types of technology used and where (i.e., labs, classroom, and offices).
4.1.2. Numbers of faculty, staff, and student users.
4.1.3. Provision of staff training in technology applications.
4.1.4. Appropriateness of technology to departmental mission/function.
4.1.5. Accessibility of computer workstations, hardware and software for individuals with disabilities.
4.2. Describe proposed technology-based instructional and services delivery in your
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 42
department/program, both hardware and software.
4.2.1. Identify required employee training to meet these plans.
4.2.2. Describe the campus upgrades required to achieve these plans.
4.3. List the results of the student survey on the quality and condition of department
technology (if students use department technology).
5. Equipment & Supplies: Current condition of the department’s major equipment inventory.
5.2. Need and rationale for any major new equipment (a cost must be included):
5.3. Need and rationale for any new supplies (a cost must be included):
5.4. List the results of the student survey on the department equipment (if students use department
equipment)
5.5. Describe any equipment/supply deficits (financial, A & I, etc.) hindering the functioning of the
department.
6. External Funding Sources: List and describe any state/federal grants received.
6.1.1. Describe the amount awarded and items purchased.
6.2. List and describe any private-sector grants and donations received
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 43
6.2.1. Describe the amount awarded and items purchased.
7. Community Interaction: List any current or proposed community outreach programs.
7.1.1. Describe these programs.
7.2. List any current or proposed industry and school partnerships.
7.2.1. Describe these partnerships.
8. Student Learning Outcomes: Describe how Program SLOs are assessed and what the responses to
the results have been, i.e., any program changes, improvements of student support services and
environment that have occurred based on the results, and analysis of these improvements. (Attach SLO
reporting forms.)
8.2 Discuss how the program ensures that the SLOs are assessed consistently.
8.3 Describe departmental engagement in the discussion, review, assessment and revision of program
SLOs.
PART FOUR: FEASIBILITY
1. Current Department (2012-2013)
1000 – Certificated Salary
2000 – Classified and MSC Salaries
3000 – Benefits
4000 – Supplies
5000 – Other
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 44
6000 – Equipment
TOTAL
2. Proposed Department Budget for the next fiscal Year (budget should remain stable with little
increase) – Level funding, no anticipated changes
1000 – Certificated Salary
2000 – Classified and MSC Salaries
3000 – Benefits
4000 – Supplies
5000 – Other
6000 – Equipment
TOTAL
3. Rationale and justification for augmentations, including staffing increases
PART FIVE: COMPLIANCE
1. List any current program-specific compliance requirements (if any), with state and/or national
agencies, and any other outside agencies.
2. Describe the unit’s method or plans of complying with state and federal mandates and Title V
regulations.
PART SIX: FIVE-YEAR PLAN
1. Describe how the program will specifically address any weaknesses identified in the self-study.
2. Discuss how the program will build on existing strengths.
3. List measurable departmental goals and objectives for the next 5 years (based on the College’s mission statement and strategic plan). List the unit’s plan for completing these goals and objectives. Include proposed timelines, budget, if needed, and persons responsible.
Goal:
Objective: Budget:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 45
Person Responsible:
Timeline:
Goal:
Objective: Budget:
Person Responsible:
Timeline:
Goal:
Objective: Budget:
Person Responsible:
Timeline:
Goal:
Objective: Budget:
Person Responsible:
Timeline:
PROGRAM REVIEW SUBMISSION DATE:
PREPARED BY:
The Program Review Committee validates the review and forwards to the institution’s Integrated
Planning Process.
SIGNATURE: DATE:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 46
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 47
June 27, 2012
MEMORANDUM
To: Dr. Keiko Kimura, Acting Dean of Humanities & Social Sciences
From: Greg Nelson, Vice President for Administrative Services
Re: FY 2012-2013 Approved Budget
Dr. Kimura,
As a budget manager you provided the Finance Committee with a budget submission for the 2012-2013
Fiscal Year. As part of this submission dollars were requested for respective areas within the college that
were planned using the annual/comprehensive program reviews for each department.
In reviewing all requests and the subsequent budget hearings that were held on May 18, 2012, the
Finance Committee made a recommendation to the College Planning Council on May 25, 2012. The
College Planning Council then voted to on June 1, 2012 to recommend to the college President who
approved the budget on June 15, 2012.
Below represents an approved allocation summary for your respective areas:
Program Area General Fund Lottery Funds 2010 G -Bond Funds
Art $7,200 0 0
Music $1,450 0 0
Dance $5,700 0 0
Drama/Theatre $10,000 0 0
Multimedia $1,400 0 $45,319
Photography $700 0 0
ECE $1,200 0 0
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 48
Ethnic Studies $1,000 0 0
Social Sciences $3,470 0 0
Humanities $6,660 0 0
As a budget manager, the approved budgets for each department are attached for your review. The
approved budget line items will be entered into Datatel and you will have access to funds effective July
1, 2012 for all departments. All funding that is represented on each spreadsheet represents a tracking
sheet that shows the changes that were made as it progressed through the resource allocation model
from submission to final approval.
All funds represent Fund 10 (General Fund) dollars and should be spent in accordance with district
purchasing and accounting regulations. If you have a green highlighted field on your allocation then that
specific line item was moved out of your Fund 10 request and was funded using Lottery, Fund 17
proceeds. If you have a yellow highlighted field then on your allocation then that specific line item was
moved out of your Fund 10 request and was funded using Measure G 2010 Bond Fund 41 proceeds. All
dollars regardless of funding source will be entered into accounting system appropriately and will be
reflected in the Districts 2012-2013 Adopted Budget.
If you have questions regarding your departmental allocations please let me know and my office in
conjunction with the Finance Committee Chair, Takeo Kubo, will help you in any way we can to help you
understand the allocation process.
Thank you for making sure that we are planning our yearly expenses appropriately using program
reviews and ensuring compliance with the college’s integrated planning process. Your input, along with
that or your faculty and staff had a great impact upon the success of the resource allocation process of
the college.
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 49
Annual Self-Evaluation of Standing Committees
San Jose City College
FINAL SAMPLE TEMPLATE
This template is provided by the Strategic Planning Committee to assist your committee in its annual self-evaluation process.
Your committee as a whole may discuss and complete one form, or may choose to prepare a consolidated form from individual members’ responses.
If the committee chooses to use a different form entirely, please be sure to assess at a minimum a) progress on your goals, b) your overall effectiveness, and c) alignment and integration with the College’s Strategic Plan and strategic planning process.
Please send a copy of the consolidated committee form (or, if the committee chose to use a different form, a summary of results) to the Strategic Planning Committee.
Thank you for helping SJCC in the ongoing process of improving our effectiveness! Instructions: Committee Goals Section
Please enter each goal of your committee for this academic year in the space provided. (Space will expand as needed.)
For each goal, please mark with an “X” the box that best describes the alignment of that goal with SJCC’s Strategic Plan, and the box that best describes your committee’s achievement of that goal, using the scales shown.
Please explain in the Comments section at the bottom of the page if you mark Low Alignment or Made Little or No Progress for any Goal.
If you need space for additional goals, just copy and paste new lines into the table.
Standing Committee Name:
Academic Year:
Alignment of Goal with College
Strategic Plan Achievement of Goal
Committee Goals High
Alignment
Moderate
Alignment
Low
Alignment
Met
Completely
Met
Partially
Made
Little or
No
Progress
Enter Goal #1:
Enter Goal #2:
Enter Goal #3:
Enter Goal #4:
Enter Goal #5:
Enter Goal #6:
Instructions: Overall Committee Performance Section
In each listed area, please mark your committee’s performance using the scale shown. Please explain in the Comments section at the bottom of the page any mark in the Poor column.
Briefly answer the remaining questions, and add any other comments you wish. (Spaces will expand as needed.)
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 50
San José City College Strategic Planning Committee Self-Evaluation, 2011–12
Overall Directions: Please think about the internal processes, external interactions, and work products or
outcomes of this committee during 2011-12, and answer each of the following questions as objectively as you
can.
1. Please circle the numeral under the choice that best describes how often this committee’s processes,
interactions, and outcomes during 2011-12 reflected each of the following characteristics. If you have no
opinion for a characteristic, leave that line blank.
Characteristic Almost
always Often
Some-
times Seldom
Almost
never
A. Collaborative (Sharing, inclusive, open to input,
respectful of diverse opinions, characterized by
meaningful dialogue)
B. Transparent (Open, easy to understand, clearly
defined, characterized by effective and meaningful
communication with the College community)
C. Evidence-based (Reliant upon relevant, accurate,
complete, timely qualitative and/or quantitative
information; not based solely on assertion, speculation,
or anecdote)
D. Effective (Working properly and productively
toward the committee’s intended results)
E. Efficient (Performing well with the least waste of time
and effort; characterized by serving the committee’s
specified purposes in the best possible manner)
Sum of circled numbers in each column:
Add up the column sums and enter total at right:
Average: Divide the total of column sums by the number
of entries you circled, and enter at right:
2. Please circle the numeral under the choice that best describes your agreement or disagreement with
each of the following statements about your service on this committee overall this year:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 51
Statement Strongly
agree Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
A. I feel comfortable contributing ideas.
B. My ideas are treated with respect, whether or not
others agree with them.
C. I have had sufficient opportunities to provide
input into committee recommendations.
Sum of circled numbers in each column:
Add up the column sums and enter total at right:
Average: Divide the total of column sums by the
number of entries you circled, and enter at right:
3. For each listed aspect of committee work, please circle the numeral under the choice that best describes
your committee’s performance using the scale shown. Please explain in the Comments section at the
bottom of the survey any mark in the Poor column. If you have no opinion for or don’t know about an
aspect, leave that line blank.
Aspect Excellent Adequat
e Poor
A. Fulfillment of the committee’s charge
B. Completion of items listed in the committee’s Action Plan
B. Communication within the committee
C. Communication to and from constituency groups
D. Communication to and from the wider College community
E. Training or mentoring for you as a committee member or co-chair
F. Establishment of expectations, norms, or ground rules for
committee members and co-chairs
G. Adherence to expectations, norms, or ground rules by committee
members and co-chairs
I. Establishment of committee goals for next year
J. Alignment of the committee’s work with District-level strategic
planning
Sum of circled numbers in each column:
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 52
Add up the column sums and enter total at right:
Average: Divide the total of column sums by the number of entries you
circled, and enter at right:
4. Please write legibly this committee’s single most significant accomplishment this year:
5. Please write legibly up to three improvements most needed by this committee next year in its processes,
interactions, outcomes, or other aspect of its work:
6. If you would like to make any additional comments about this committee’s work or effectiveness, please
write them legibly in the space below. Attach another form if you need more space.
Thank you!
Integrated Planning and Resource Allocation Handbook
Page 53
Top Related