City College of San Francisco - California Competes

THEME IV
Finance/Accounting, and Admissions and Records. This intent was reflected in the Strategic Plan
2003–2008. Of those four areas mentioned, it was felt that Admissions and Records (A&R) would be
the best place to start a pilot effort because its effectiveness so directly impacted the quality of service
to students.
Various issues needed to be addressed. There were long lines at most campuses during registration times,
even after telephone registration was implemented for credit classes. Student complaints still abounded
about “being given the runaround,” as did problems in areas such as grading and transcripts. Time-consuming,
inefficient processes which relied too heavily on manual paperwork were seen as sources of many
delays. In an attempt to begin to address these issues, the Strategic Plan 2003-2008 included ambitious
objectives and plans for making improvements in A&R. Those plans, originating in various sections of the
Strategic Plan, called for a re-organization and re-engineering of the unit, with a streamlining of processes.
Paper-based systems were to be converted to electronic systems at all campuses, and more efficient systems
were to be implemented for both credit and noncredit. Transcript, transfer, and degree audit issues were to
be addressed. In Spring 2003 the effort began to re-engineer A&R.
The word “re-engineer” should not be taken lightly in this context. “Re-engineering a process” is often
understood as a total re-design. 1 The sweeping, assume-nothing nature of a re-engineering initiative is probably
the most challenging aspect of it, while the fact that ideal or optimal results are at least envisioned
is also one of the main benefits of the process. The A&R Re-engineering initiative was typical in that it
was a creative endeavor to stimulate out-of-the-box solutions.
The Chancellor first discussed with administration the idea of doing a re-engineering study of A&R to
see how to eliminate student frustration and complaints. The study process was set up, with consultants
working with two CCSF teams assembled from teaching and counseling faculty and classified and
administrative staff. Separate teams were established for credit and for noncredit. While steps toward
re-engineering had begun prior to the study, the study advanced current steps and expanded into new
developments. For example, the credit team identified various problems such as: lack of sufficient student
service computers, multiple forms of storage used for records, Banner problems that delayed registration,
late student payments, and occasional unacceptable delays in mailing transcripts. Examples of problems
pointed out by the noncredit team included: paper intensive processes that did not make use of available
technology, duplicate student records, enrollment and attendance that sometimes preceded admission,
use of forms that varied by campus, and students enrolling in classes that were already full. The Dean
of Admissions and Records sums it up: “The issue was to get rid of bottlenecks. How could we get students
through this maze in a seamless fashion” All information provided by the teams was carefully documented
and flow-charted by the facilitators. Both teams suggested changes and solutions. Dozens of
recommended solutions ranged from a one-stop student services facility at Ocean Avenue Campus,
to electronic mailing of transcripts, better enforcement of payment policies, and use of a smart card
for automated noncredit attendance reporting. The final report was then followed up by a list of ten
Top Priorities for Implementation.
1 Re-engineering typically involves engaging direct participatory input from the field; describing problems with the current
process; analyzing the functions which are to be retained, assuming absolutely nothing based on past practice; determining the
role that new technologies might play in improving the efficiency, cost, and effectiveness; designing a new process or
flow which is optimally streamlined and better serves the organizational mission; implementing the re-engineered process;
evaluating the functioning of the process; and adjusting the process in a cycle of continuing improvement. (Hammer, 1993)
CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO
297