End of Year Report - Richland College
End of Year Report - Richland College
End of Year Report - Richland College
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong><br />
<strong>Report</strong><br />
Academic <strong>Year</strong> 2010-11<br />
Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness Team:<br />
Kay Eggleston, Interim President<br />
Fonda Vera, Executive Dean<br />
Mary Jo Dondlinger, Director <strong>of</strong> Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Bao Huynh, Director <strong>of</strong> Institutional Research<br />
Tracy Stegmair, Senior Research Analyst<br />
Babs King, Coordinator <strong>of</strong> Institutional Research
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11<br />
Table <strong>of</strong> Contents<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11................................................................................................. 1<br />
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................2<br />
Thunion <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> Card..................................................................................................5<br />
Strategic Planning Process..........................................................................................................12<br />
Measurement System...................................................................................................................14<br />
Organizational Action Plan Emphasis...........................................................................................16<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #1: Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs...............18<br />
KPI 1.1 Initiate relationships for sustainable community building..........................................20<br />
KPI 1.2 Increase market share <strong>of</strong> key student segments......................................................22<br />
KPI 1.3 Provide business and industry workforce training....................................................33<br />
KPI 1.4 Respond to community educational needs...............................................................37<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #2: Empower All Students to Succeed......................................41<br />
KPI 2.3 Promote student engagement and satisfaction........................................................86<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #3: Empower All Employees to Succeed...................................90<br />
KPI 3.2 Provide excellence in job satisfaction and engagement...........................................96<br />
KPI 3.3 Provide comprehensive pr<strong>of</strong>essional development for all employee groups..........102<br />
KPI 3.4 Proactively manage turnover and diversity.............................................................104<br />
KPI 3.5 Provide a safe and healthy working environment...................................................109<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #4: Ensure Institutional Effectiveness......................................117<br />
KPI 4.1 Remain fiscally responsible and sound..................................................................119<br />
KPI 4.2 Meet and exceed internal and external standards and requirements.....................133<br />
KPI 4.3 Operate the college using environmentally sustainable practices..........................139<br />
Appendix.....................................................................................................................................A-1<br />
ThunderDocuments..............................................................................................................A-2<br />
Performance Excellence Model............................................................................................A-7<br />
Cycles <strong>of</strong> Improvement to Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness..............A-10<br />
2010-11 Core Competencies..............................................................................................A-14<br />
2010-11 Strategic Challenges and Advantages..................................................................A-15<br />
Strategic Planning Process Map.........................................................................................A-17<br />
Organizational Action Plan Matrix.......................................................................................A-18
2<br />
Executive Summary<br />
Annual<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
Academic <strong>Year</strong> 2010-11<br />
September 1, 2010 – August 31, 2011<br />
Executive Summary<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Following is a summary <strong>of</strong> significant outcomes from <strong>Richland</strong>’s 2010-11 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong>. Significant<br />
positive outcomes meet or exceed the target range or demonstrate beneficial trends. Significant areas for<br />
improvement are those with performance below the target range or demonstrate non-beneficial trends.<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #1: Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs<br />
Significant Positive Outcomes include:<br />
●●<br />
exceeding the target range for enrollment <strong>of</strong> local<br />
service area high school recent graduates<br />
●●<br />
continued growth in contact hours generated by<br />
dual credit students, exceeding the performance <strong>of</strong><br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
all 6 peers<br />
exceeding the target range for enrollment <strong>of</strong> local<br />
service area African-American and Hispanic students<br />
positive trends for<br />
♦♦<br />
enrollment <strong>of</strong> local service area non-high school<br />
graduates (3 years)<br />
♦♦<br />
enrollments from Dallas County outside the local<br />
service area (5 years)<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by Corporate<br />
Services (3 years)<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> online contact hours generated (5<br />
years)<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by flex enrollments<br />
(4 years)<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by transfer<br />
course enrollments (5 years )<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by developmental<br />
course enrollments (5 years)<br />
performance that surpasses all 6 Dallas County<br />
Community <strong>College</strong> District (DCCCD) peers in<br />
♦♦<br />
amount donated through the State Employee<br />
Charitable Campaign<br />
♦♦<br />
dual credit contact hours<br />
♦♦<br />
online contact hours with a market share <strong>of</strong> 23%<br />
♦♦<br />
flex course contact hours with a market share <strong>of</strong><br />
29%<br />
♦♦<br />
transfer courses with a market share <strong>of</strong> 29%<br />
♦♦<br />
developmental courses with a market share <strong>of</strong><br />
28%<br />
Significant Improvement needed in:<br />
●●<br />
the percentage <strong>of</strong> local service area market enrolled<br />
as students at <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
●●<br />
the percentage <strong>of</strong> economically disadvantaged<br />
students in the local service area that enroll as students<br />
at <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
●●<br />
the number <strong>of</strong> technical-occupational contact hours<br />
●●<br />
the number <strong>of</strong> continuing education contact hours<br />
see pages 18-40 in the 2010-11 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 3<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
Executive Summary<br />
Academic <strong>Year</strong> 2010-11<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #2: Empower All Students to Succeed<br />
Significant Positive Outcomes include:<br />
●●<br />
surpassing all 6 DCCCD peers for % A,B,C grades for<br />
all students and historically underserved students in<br />
♦♦<br />
all credit classes<br />
♦♦<br />
core curriculum classes<br />
♦♦<br />
online classes<br />
♦♦<br />
developmental classes for reading, writing, and<br />
mathematics<br />
♦♦<br />
gatekeeper classes<br />
♦♦<br />
core curriculum completion<br />
●●<br />
surpassing all 6 DCCCD peers for all students in<br />
♦♦<br />
in-class retention for all credit classes<br />
♦♦<br />
in-class retention for core curriculum classes<br />
♦♦<br />
in-class retention for online classes<br />
♦♦<br />
number <strong>of</strong> associate degrees awarded<br />
Significant Improvement needed in:<br />
● ● % A, B, C success in gatekeeper courses for all<br />
students and historically underserved<br />
●●<br />
the number <strong>of</strong> certificates awarded<br />
●●<br />
the number <strong>of</strong> students completing the core curriculum<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #3: Empower All Employees to Succeed<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
Significant Positive Outcomes include:<br />
●●<br />
meeting and exceeding targets for numbers <strong>of</strong> employees<br />
who complete degrees and receive educational<br />
stipends and/or reclassification<br />
●●<br />
exceeding target range for percentage <strong>of</strong> credit sections<br />
taught by full-time faculty from diverse backgrounds<br />
replacement <strong>of</strong> 100% <strong>of</strong> exterior lights targeted for<br />
the academic year<br />
3-year beneficial trend for the percentage <strong>of</strong> employees<br />
who lose vacation days 2 years in a row<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #4: Ensure Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Significant Positive Outcomes include:<br />
●●<br />
good levels <strong>of</strong> income generated by Corporate<br />
Services<br />
●●<br />
positive financial performance<br />
●●<br />
reimbursable contact hours that exceed all 6 peers<br />
and represent a positive 5-year trend<br />
●●<br />
positive performance for utility costs at <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
main campus<br />
●●<br />
good levels <strong>of</strong> compliance with external requirements<br />
and emergency preparedness<br />
●●<br />
good levels <strong>of</strong> performance with the Energy Intensity<br />
Index, waste minimization, and annual greenhouse<br />
emissions<br />
see pages 41-89 in the 2010-11 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
see pages 90-116 in the 2010-11 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
see pages 117-142 in the 2010-11 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
Significant Improvement needed in:<br />
●●<br />
percentage <strong>of</strong> employees who meet pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development requirements<br />
●●<br />
hiring diversity<br />
●●<br />
reducing on-the-job injuries resulting in 7 or more<br />
lost work days<br />
●●<br />
college campus safety in number <strong>of</strong> crimes reported<br />
and number <strong>of</strong> serious workplace accidents<br />
Significant Improvement needed in:<br />
●●<br />
natural gas utility costs at the Garland Campus<br />
●●<br />
the number <strong>of</strong> classes canceled<br />
●●<br />
deployment <strong>of</strong> the Performance Excellence<br />
Model<br />
●●<br />
water conservation<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
4<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
Executive Summary<br />
2010-11<br />
Progress since 2009-10<br />
At the end <strong>of</strong> 2009-10, 5 <strong>of</strong> the 16 KPIs had performance below the desired range <strong>of</strong> 9.00 – 10.00.<br />
These performance gaps are listed below with comparative performance-to-target for 2010-11. Three <strong>of</strong><br />
the KPIs showed improvement during 2010-11 and 2 showed decline.<br />
2010-11 Compared to 2009-10<br />
Target Score Change<br />
2009-10 KPI Performance<br />
Gaps Issues<br />
1.3 Increase enrollment in<br />
service area historically<br />
underserved populations<br />
3.3 Provide comprehensive<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional development for<br />
all employee groups<br />
3.5 Provide a safe and<br />
healthy work environment<br />
4.2 Meet and exceed<br />
internal and external<br />
requirements<br />
4.3 Monitor and reduce<br />
greenhouse emissions<br />
2009-10 2010-11 2009-10 2009-10 to 2010-11<br />
9.00 - 10.00 9.14 8.72 0.42<br />
9.00 - 10.00 8.47 8.96 0.49<br />
9.00 - 10.00 5.00 5.73 0.73<br />
9.00 - 10.00 9.31 8.49 0.82<br />
9.00 - 10.00 8.87 8.44 0.43<br />
See pages 5 - 11 for a quick review <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s 2010-11 performance report card.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
Thunion <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> Card<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 5<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
Key Indicator Performance<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> (EOY) 2010-11<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Monthly Key Performance<br />
Index Score<br />
8.9<br />
Overall Score<br />
Strategic Priorities for Student Learning<br />
Key Performance Indices (Weighting Factors)<br />
EOY<br />
Score<br />
Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs (20%) 9.5<br />
Empower All Students to Succeed (35%) 9.4<br />
Empower All Employees to Succeed (20%) 7.4<br />
Ensure Institutional Effectiveness (25%) 8.9<br />
All scores based on a scale <strong>of</strong> 10. Green = Within target range, Yellow = 89.99% - 85.00% <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> target range, Red =<br />
Less than 85% <strong>of</strong> target range<br />
Page 1<br />
Prepared by the OPRIE<br />
flv u:\excel\kpi\kpi1011\July_August11.xls<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
6<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Components <strong>of</strong> Key Performance Indices for Strategic Priorities<br />
1. Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs<br />
Four Key Performance Indicators<br />
EOY Score<br />
1.1 Initiate relationships for sustainable community building (5%) 9.15<br />
1.2 Increase market share <strong>of</strong> key student segments (30%) 9.14<br />
1.3 Provide business and industry work force training (15%) 9.18<br />
1.4 Respond to community educational needs (50%) 9.93<br />
2. Empower All Students to Succeed<br />
Three Key Performance Indicators<br />
EOY Score<br />
2.1 Monitor and improve student success (40%) 9.47<br />
2.2 Monitor and improve success for historically under-served student<br />
groups (40%)<br />
2.3 Promote student engagement and satisfaction with instructional<br />
practices and services to support student learning (20%)<br />
9.17<br />
9.64<br />
3. Empower All Employees to Succeed<br />
Five Key Performance Indicators<br />
EOY Score<br />
3.1 Promote excellence in job performance (15%) 10.00<br />
3.2 Provide excellence in job satisfaction & engagement (10%) 9.96<br />
3.3 Provide comprehensive pr<strong>of</strong>essional development for all employee<br />
groups (25%)<br />
8.47<br />
3.4 Proactively manage turnover and diversity (25%) 5.98<br />
3.5 Provide a safe and healthy working environment (25%) 5.00<br />
4. Ensure Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Three Key Performance Indicators<br />
EOY Score<br />
4.1 Remain fiscally responsible and sound (35%) 8.38<br />
4.2 Meet and exceed internal and external standards and requirements<br />
(35%)<br />
4.3 Operate the college using environmentally sustainable practices<br />
(30%)<br />
9.31<br />
8.87<br />
All scores based on a scale <strong>of</strong> 10. Green = Within target range Yellow = 89.99% - 85% <strong>of</strong> target range<br />
Red = Less than 85% <strong>of</strong> target range<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11<br />
Prepared by the OPRIE Page 2 flv u:\excel\kpi\kpi1011\July_August11.xls
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 7<br />
LAYER 3<br />
Institutional Measure Performance Snapshot<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
RICHLAND COLLEGE<br />
<strong>College</strong> Objectives, Organizational 2010-11 Strategies, KPIs, Measures, Targets<br />
As <strong>of</strong> 6/30/11<br />
Institutional Measures for KPIs under Strategic Planning Priority<br />
1. Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs<br />
Strategic or<br />
Operational*<br />
Performance<br />
Level<br />
1.1<br />
Initiate relationships for sustainable community building<br />
1.1.1 # <strong>of</strong> service hours in Service Learning<br />
S<br />
1.1.2 Annual RLC SECC contributions<br />
O<br />
1.2 Increase market share <strong>of</strong> key student segments<br />
1.2.1 % <strong>of</strong> local service area public high school graduates within one-year enrolled as credit students S<br />
1.2.2 Contact hours from dual credit and concurrent enrollments<br />
S<br />
1.2.3 % <strong>of</strong> local service area (lsa) market enrolled as students<br />
S<br />
1.2.4 % <strong>of</strong> Dallas County market enrolled as students (outside lsa)<br />
S<br />
1.2.5 % <strong>of</strong> unduplicated credit enrollments outside <strong>of</strong> Dallas County<br />
S<br />
1.2.6 % <strong>of</strong> local service area historically underserved population enrolled as students<br />
S<br />
1.2.7 % <strong>of</strong> local service area economically disadvantaged enrolled as students(CR)<br />
S<br />
1.2.8 % <strong>of</strong> non-HS graduate market share in local service area<br />
S<br />
1.2.9 % <strong>of</strong> Dallas County historically underserved market (Af-Am, Hisp) outside the local service area S<br />
1.3<br />
Provide business and industry work force training<br />
1.3.1 # <strong>of</strong> reimbursable credit tech-occ contact hours<br />
S<br />
1.3.2 # <strong>of</strong> reimbursable non-credit contact hours<br />
S<br />
1.3.3 # <strong>of</strong> contact hours from Corporate Services<br />
S<br />
1.4<br />
Respond to community educational needs<br />
1.4.1 # <strong>of</strong> on-line contact hours<br />
S<br />
1.4.2 # contact hours for classes that are other than semester length<br />
S<br />
1.4.3 # <strong>of</strong> transfer contact hours<br />
S<br />
1.4.4 # <strong>of</strong> developmental contact hours (DMAT, DREA, DWRI, ESOL)<br />
S<br />
S = Strategic, O = Operational<br />
Blue = Exceeds Target Range, Green = Met Target Range, Yellow = Below Target Range by 5% or less, Red = Below Target<br />
Range by more than 5%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
8<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
LAYER 3<br />
Institutional Measure Performance Snapshot<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
RICHLAND COLLEGE<br />
2010-11<br />
<strong>College</strong> Objectives, Organizational Strategies, KPIs, Measures, Targets<br />
As <strong>of</strong> 6/30/11<br />
Institutional Measures for KPIs under Strategic Planning Priority<br />
1. 2. Identify Empower and All Meet Students Community to Succeed Educational Needs<br />
Strategic or<br />
Operational*<br />
Performance<br />
Level<br />
2.1<br />
Monitor and improve student success<br />
2.1.1 % C or better in all credit classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.2 % C or better in core curriculum courses<br />
S<br />
2.1.3 % C or better in all on-line classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.4 % C or better Dev. Ed. Classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.5 % C or better ESOL classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.6 % C or better in gatekeeper courses<br />
S<br />
2.1.7 % <strong>of</strong> dual credit students making a grade <strong>of</strong> C or better in credit courses<br />
S<br />
2.1.8 % C or better in college-level classes after dev. edu<br />
S<br />
2.1.9 % retained through semester in credit classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.10 % retained through semester in core curriculum courses<br />
S<br />
2.1.11 % <strong>of</strong> dual credit students retained through semester in credit classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.12 % retained in all on-line classes<br />
S<br />
2.1.13 # associate degrees awarded<br />
S<br />
2.1.14 # credit certificates awarded<br />
S<br />
2.1.15 % <strong>of</strong> students in cohort who transfer to a university or are still pursuing their intended goal<br />
S<br />
2.1.16 # <strong>of</strong> students completing core curriculum<br />
S<br />
2.2<br />
Monitor and improve success for historically under-served (Af-Am,Hisp) student groups<br />
2.2.1 % C or better in all credit classes for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.2 % C or better in core curriculum courses for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.3 % C or better in all on-line classes for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.4 % C or better in Developmental Education classes for historically under-served student groups S<br />
2.2.5 % C or better in ESOL classes for historically under-served students<br />
S<br />
2.2.6 % C or better in gatekeeper courses<br />
S<br />
% <strong>of</strong> historically under-served dual credit students earning a grade <strong>of</strong> C or better in credit<br />
2.2.7 S<br />
courses<br />
% C or better in college-level classes after developmental ed for historically under-served<br />
2.2.8 S<br />
student groups<br />
S = Strategic, O = Operational<br />
Blue = Exceeds Target Range, Green = Met Target Range, Yellow = Below Target Range by 5% or less, Red = Below Target<br />
Range by more than 5%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 9<br />
LAYER 3<br />
Institutional Measure Performance Snapshot<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
RICHLAND COLLEGE<br />
2010-11<br />
<strong>College</strong> Objectives, Organizational Strategies, KPIs, Measures, Targets<br />
As <strong>of</strong> 6/30/11<br />
Institutional Measures for KPIs under Strategic Planning Priority<br />
2. 1. Empower Identify and All Meet Students Community to Succeed, Educational cont. Needs<br />
Strategic or<br />
Operational*<br />
Performance<br />
Level<br />
2.2<br />
Monitor and improve success for historically under-served (Af-Am,Hisp) student groups,<br />
cont.<br />
2.2.9 % retained through semester in credit classes for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.10 % <strong>of</strong> students in core curriculum courses retained for historically under-served student groups S<br />
2.2.11 % <strong>of</strong> historically under-served dual credit students retained through semester in credit classes S<br />
2.2.12 % retained in all on-line classes for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.13 # associate degrees awarded for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.14 # credit certificates awarded for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.2.15<br />
% <strong>of</strong> historically underserved students in cohort who transfer to a university or are still pursuing<br />
their intended goal<br />
S<br />
2.2.16 # <strong>of</strong> students completing core curriculum for historically under-served student groups<br />
S<br />
2.3<br />
Promote student engagement and satisfaction with instructional practices and services<br />
to support student learning<br />
2.3.1 Overall level <strong>of</strong> satisfaction with student services to support learning (NLSSI 7-point scale)<br />
O<br />
% exceeding target score on CCSSE average benchmark scores (50) <strong>of</strong> student success (5<br />
2.3.2 O<br />
submeasures)<br />
2.3.3 % <strong>of</strong> classes incorporating e-campus in curriculum<br />
O<br />
S = Strategic, O = Operational<br />
Blue = Exceeds Target Range, Green = Met Target Range, Yellow = Below Target Range by 5% or less, Red = Below Target<br />
Range by more than 5%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
10<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
LAYER 3<br />
Institutional Measure Performance Snapshot<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
RICHLAND COLLEGE<br />
2010-11<br />
<strong>College</strong> Objectives, Organizational Strategies, KPIs, Measures, Targets<br />
As <strong>of</strong> 6/30/11<br />
Institutional Measures for KPIs under Strategic Planning Priority<br />
3. 1. Empower Identify and All Meet Employees Community to Succeed Educational Needs<br />
Strategic or<br />
Operational*<br />
Performance<br />
Level<br />
3.1<br />
Promote excellence in job performance<br />
3.1.1 Cumulative number <strong>of</strong> decision-making days mandated annually to non-contractual employees. S<br />
3.1.2<br />
% <strong>of</strong> current employees who are eligible for continued employment at the conclusion <strong>of</strong> the<br />
academic year. (excludes grant terminations & RIFs)<br />
S<br />
3.1.3 # <strong>of</strong> internal <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> promotions<br />
S<br />
3.1.4<br />
% <strong>of</strong> PSS employees who use the tuition reimbursement waiver with successful class<br />
completion<br />
S<br />
3.2<br />
Provide excellence in job satisfaction and engagement<br />
3.2.1 % <strong>of</strong> employees satisfied with employment at RLC (CQS)<br />
O<br />
3.2.2<br />
% <strong>of</strong> employees satisfied with deployment <strong>of</strong> ThunderValues (segmented by leadership level<br />
and employee group) scale <strong>of</strong> 1-5 (low to high)<br />
O<br />
3.2.3 Employees satisfied with RLC recognition programs (CQS 5-pt.scale)<br />
O<br />
3.2.4 # <strong>of</strong> Administrative & Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Support Staff receiving educational stipends<br />
S<br />
3.2.5 # <strong>of</strong> Faculty completing requirements for reclassification or advanced degree<br />
S<br />
3.3<br />
Provide comprehensive pr<strong>of</strong>essional development for all employee groups<br />
3.3.1 % <strong>of</strong> ft employees exceeding required staff development<br />
O<br />
3.3.2 % <strong>of</strong> ft employees meeting staff development requirements<br />
O<br />
3.4<br />
Proactively manage turnover and diversify the workforce<br />
3.4.1 % employee turnover rate (sub-measure segment by reason)<br />
O<br />
3.4.2 Employee diversity matches Dallas County<br />
S<br />
3.4.3 % <strong>of</strong> ft employees hired within the academic year as % <strong>of</strong> target by emp. group and ethnicity O<br />
3.4.4 % diversity for credit adjunct faculty matches Dallas Co. as % <strong>of</strong> target with parameters<br />
O<br />
3.5 Provide a safe and healthy working environment<br />
3.5.1 # <strong>of</strong> on-the-job injury reports processed<br />
S<br />
3.5.2 # <strong>of</strong> on-the-job accidents where employees lost more than 7 consecutive work days<br />
S<br />
3.5.3 % <strong>of</strong> emergency call boxes in working order<br />
S<br />
3.5.4 % <strong>of</strong> MSDS documentation up to date<br />
S<br />
3.5.5 % exterior lights targeted for replacement that have been replaced<br />
S<br />
3.5.6 % <strong>of</strong> employees who lost vacation days two years in a row<br />
S<br />
3.5.7 # <strong>of</strong> crimes (based on CLERY Act reporting)<br />
S<br />
S = Strategic, O = Operational<br />
Blue = Exceeds Target Range, Green = Met Target Range, Yellow = Below Target Range by 5% or less, Red = Below Target<br />
Range by more than 5%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 11<br />
LAYER 3<br />
Institutional Measure Performance Snapshot<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
RICHLAND COLLEGE<br />
2010-11<br />
<strong>College</strong> Objectives, Organizational Strategies, KPIs, Measures, Targets<br />
As <strong>of</strong> 6/30/11<br />
Institutional Measures for KPIs under Strategic Planning Priority<br />
4. 1. Ensure Identify Institutional and Meet Community Effectiveness Educational Needs<br />
Strategic or<br />
Operational*<br />
Performance<br />
Level<br />
4.1<br />
Remain fiscally responsible and sound<br />
4.1.1 Corporate & Workforce Development Income<br />
O<br />
4.1.2 % <strong>of</strong> annual budget spent on salaries and benefits<br />
O<br />
4.1.3 % <strong>of</strong> annual budget spent on instruction<br />
S<br />
4.1.4 Amount <strong>of</strong> fund balance<br />
O<br />
4.1.5 % Performance to budget<br />
O<br />
4.1.6 # <strong>of</strong> reimbursable contact hour composite (academic, tech-occ,non-credit)<br />
O<br />
4.1.7 Reimbursable contact hour $ amount difference between current year and previous year<br />
O<br />
4.1.8 Annual utility costs per facilities square foot <strong>of</strong> the Main Campus (electricity)<br />
O<br />
4.1.9 Annual utility costs per facilities square foot for the Garland Campus (electricity)<br />
O<br />
4.1.10 Annual utility costs per facilities square foot <strong>of</strong> the Main Campus (natural gas)<br />
O<br />
4.1.11 Annual utility costs per facilities square foot <strong>of</strong> the Main Campus (natural gas)<br />
O<br />
4.1.12 % <strong>of</strong> eligible students using e-connect for credit registration<br />
O<br />
4.1.13 Credit class schedule optimization index<br />
O<br />
4.2<br />
Meet and exceed internal and external standards and requirements<br />
4.2.1 % compliance with external requirements (submeasures)<br />
S<br />
4.2.2 % meeting standard on emergency preparedness<br />
S<br />
4.2.3 % compliance with internal requirements<br />
O<br />
4.2.4 Difference between % <strong>of</strong> net fulltime faculty increase & the credit contact hour increase %<br />
O<br />
4.2.5 % deployment <strong>of</strong> the Performance Excellence Model<br />
O<br />
4.2.6 % <strong>of</strong> faculty with appropriate credentials on file in COLLEAGUE<br />
O<br />
4.3 Operate the college using environmentally sustainable practices<br />
4.3.1 Energy Intensity Index<br />
O<br />
4.3.2 Water Conservation<br />
O<br />
4.3.3 Waste minimization and diversion<br />
O<br />
4.3.4 Annual greenhouse emissions<br />
O<br />
S = Strategic, O = Operational<br />
Blue = Exceeds Target Range, Green = Met Target Range, Yellow = Below Target Range by 5% or less, Red = Below Target<br />
Range by more than 5%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
12<br />
Strategic Planning Process<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
Results from the Strategic Plan for Academic <strong>Year</strong> 2010-11<br />
September 1, 2010 – August 31, 2011<br />
“Perfection belongs to the gods; the most that we can hope for is excellence.”<br />
Carl Jung<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> demonstrates commitment to its vision to be the best place we can be to learn,<br />
teach, and build sustainable local and world community through a discipline <strong>of</strong> continuous improvement<br />
defined as Approach-Deploy-Learn-Integrate (ADLI).<br />
Strategic Planning Process<br />
Approach to Strategic Planning<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership develops the institutional strategic plan during 2 day-long planning retreat<br />
sessions.<br />
Retreat Session 1<br />
The new planning cycle begins in May with session 1 <strong>of</strong> the college strategic planning retreat (see<br />
page A-17). During this retreat the college leadership drafts the Strategic Organizational Action<br />
Plan (see pages A-18 and A-19), reviews progress on continuous improvement plans, updates<br />
the ThunderDocuments, reviews information from the Environmental Scan and the college-wide<br />
SWOT, reviews the monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong>, and aligns the Strategic Organizational Action Plan<br />
to the college budget. Each planning retreat member prepares for session 1 through review and<br />
discussion <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional readings and data posted on a wiki. During the summer months each<br />
ThunderTeam member collaborates with their direct reports to draft and align new departmental<br />
continuous improvement plans to the Strategic Organizational Action Plan.<br />
Retreat Session 2<br />
In September the college leadership assembles for session 2 <strong>of</strong> the strategic planning retreat.<br />
During this session ThunderTeam analyzes and learns from end <strong>of</strong> year data and updates the<br />
institutional measurement system including the strategic planning priorities, key performance<br />
indicators, measures, and targets for the current year, three years, and five years out. Leadership<br />
ensures that continuous improvement plans align with the strategic organizational actions and that<br />
critical resource needs are in place to successfully execute the strategic plan. These resources<br />
include human resource capability and capacity, technology, facilities, and budget allocation.<br />
Leadership also ensures that the organizational action plan addresses each <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s identified<br />
strategic challenges. Planning retreat members prepare for session 2 <strong>of</strong> the retreat through<br />
discussions on the wiki and pre-work on the institutional measurement system for which they<br />
obtain input from their respective college councils for suggested changes.<br />
Deployment <strong>of</strong> the Strategic Plan<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s president <strong>of</strong>ficially launches the Strategic Organizational Action Plan during the annual<br />
all-college Fall Convocation. ThunderTeam members discuss the Organizational Action Plan during<br />
the summer months with their direct reports who in turn draft and execute departmental continuous<br />
improvement plans as appropriate. ThunderTeam deploys the measurement system at the<br />
conclusion <strong>of</strong> the September strategic planning retreat through posting on the Office <strong>of</strong> Planning<br />
and Research for Institutional Effectiveness (OPRIE) website, monthly report card reviews by the<br />
college leadership, quarterly report card reviews by a 35-member college leadership team, and<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional development workshops conducted by OPRIE and other departments as appropriate,<br />
and sharing <strong>of</strong> strategic organizational plan outcomes with the Dallas County Community <strong>College</strong><br />
District (DCCCD) Chancellor and Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees at the conclusion <strong>of</strong> the academic year.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 13<br />
Learning from and Continuous Improvement <strong>of</strong> Strategic Planning<br />
Each year, the staff <strong>of</strong> the Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness (OPRIE)<br />
recommends improvements to the strategic planning process by using a plus/delta exercise from<br />
the previous year’s retreat, benchmarking <strong>of</strong> other strategic planning processes from high-performing<br />
organizations, and post-retreat OPRIE staff discussions and analysis. Two recent improvements<br />
include revisions to the timing <strong>of</strong> planning retreat session 2, moving it from August to<br />
September to allow for more complete data collection and the addition <strong>of</strong> an Organizational Action<br />
Plan which aligns needed resources with the strategic organizational actions. A complete listing<br />
<strong>of</strong> all enhancements to the strategic planning process is located in the Appendix (pages A10-A13).<br />
In addition to enhancing the planning process each year, leadership also evaluates and improves<br />
the college’s institutional measurement system.<br />
Integration <strong>of</strong> the Strategic Planning Process<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> depicts integration <strong>of</strong> the strategic planning process graphically in its Performance<br />
Excellence Model (Appendix, page A-7). The planning process aligns the foundation <strong>of</strong> the<br />
college mission, vision, and values to the Baldrige in Education Criteria as the framework.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
14<br />
Measurement System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Measurement System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
“Excellence comes from inside ourselves, it is our mastery <strong>of</strong> the particular field we have<br />
chosen. It is investing our efforts at our personal maximum level in pursuit <strong>of</strong> our best self,<br />
holding our own selves to the highest standard.”<br />
Mina Samuels<br />
The <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 2010-11 measurement system is composed <strong>of</strong><br />
1) four broad and encompassing Strategic Planning Priority Goals (SPPs) weighted for importance<br />
2) fifteen weighted and organizationally critical Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)<br />
3) ninety-eight weighted and actionable measures, the number <strong>of</strong> which varies per KPI (from<br />
2 to 16)<br />
4) target ranges for each measure for 1-year, 3-years, and 5-years out<br />
KPIs serve as <strong>Richland</strong>’s vital signs. Each month the expanded college leadership group reviews<br />
the institutional report card, the Thunion (Thunder + Onion) designed to monitor performance to<br />
target for each KPI and measure. Four times each year the entire President’s Cabinet participates<br />
in the formal report card review. If performance falls short <strong>of</strong> target, leadership ‘peels the<br />
onion’ to examine beyond the surface, turning to wonder why rather than rushing to judgment <strong>of</strong>,<br />
reflecting on each layer as it is exposed to find the deeper underlying cause. Those closest to the<br />
issue determine subsequent corrective actions. At the most detailed level, the college evaluates<br />
institutional performance against the target yielding a score for each measure. The scoring scale<br />
is 0 to 10. Leadership adjusts scores that fall outside the scale to either extreme <strong>of</strong> the scale (0<br />
to 10) so as not to mask underperformance in the aggregate. The system is interlocking and rolls<br />
up to an overall monthly score in Figure 1, shown below. Leadership adheres to the discipline <strong>of</strong><br />
the annual planning retreat and monthly monitoring <strong>of</strong> performance to keep the college agile and<br />
responsive to the community and students <strong>Richland</strong> serves. By steadfastly monitoring progress<br />
each month, the college leadership has the opportunity to demonstrate agility by influencing institutional<br />
outcomes through timely and corrective action instead <strong>of</strong> waiting until the end <strong>of</strong> the semester<br />
or year to discover that performance was less than expected. This adherence to discipline<br />
is even more important as <strong>Richland</strong> faces continued declines in state funding and a reduced local<br />
property tax base. Additionally, the loss <strong>of</strong> investment income and the slow economic recovery<br />
also impact <strong>Richland</strong>’s and the DCCCD’s budgets.<br />
(Performance<br />
/Target) x 10 =<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI<br />
Measure<br />
Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI<br />
Measure<br />
Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI<br />
Measure<br />
Score<br />
=<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
KPI Score<br />
=<br />
Weighted<br />
SPP Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
SPP Score<br />
+<br />
Weighted<br />
SPP Score<br />
=<br />
Overall<br />
<strong>College</strong><br />
Score<br />
Scores <strong>of</strong>: 98 Measures 15 KPIs 4 SPPs 1 Overall<br />
Figure 1<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 15<br />
At the conclusion <strong>of</strong> each academic year, the cumulative monthly tracking culminates in an <strong>End</strong><br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> containing an analysis <strong>of</strong> performance-to-target for each institutional measure and<br />
KPI. <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> results serve as input to the next planning cycle and the impetus for continuous<br />
improvement plans. KPIs with scores below 9.0 trigger organizational actions designed to<br />
improve performance over the next year. At the end <strong>of</strong> 2010-11, five KPIs had a score below 90%<br />
<strong>of</strong> the target. Leadership developed Strategic Organizational Action Plan emphases (see pages<br />
16-17) for execution in 2011-12 to address each gap in performance. Departmental improvement<br />
plans support each organizational action plan emphasis.<br />
This <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> presents an analysis <strong>of</strong> performance on each <strong>of</strong> the Key Performance<br />
Indicators and related measures for the latest complete academic year, September 2010 – August<br />
2011. To provide context, <strong>Richland</strong> compares its performance to six peer DCCCD colleges and<br />
to national best-in-class community colleges against whom the college benchmarks in specific<br />
areas. Leadership summarizes performance for each KPI and measures with a stoplight color.<br />
Blue<br />
Green<br />
Yellow<br />
Red<br />
exceeded expected performance<br />
target range.<br />
performed as projected within the<br />
target range.<br />
fell below expectations by five<br />
percent or less.<br />
more than five percent below<br />
minimum target range.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
16<br />
Organizational Action Plan Emphasis<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Organizational Action Plan Emphasis for 2010-11<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #1<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong>’s Organizational Action Plan emphasis for identifying and meeting community educational<br />
needs for 2010-11 was to increase overall growth and market share for all reimbursable contact<br />
hours, dual credit identifying and meeting community educational needs for contact hours, online contact<br />
hours, and for African-American and Hispanic population segments.<br />
The Outreach department conducted targeted activities including<br />
●●<br />
application day at 3 service area public high schools<br />
●●<br />
college fair participation in Garland, Dallas, Mesquite, Richardson, and Plano independent school<br />
districts<br />
●●<br />
Family Awareness Conference Tours<br />
●●<br />
Minds in Motion college readiness seminars<br />
●●<br />
<strong>College</strong> Connection workshops<br />
●●<br />
Girls, Inc. program with participants spending 1 week at <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> learning about program<br />
options and college success tools<br />
●●<br />
Hispanic-focused outreach participation such as Dia de la Familia program, Hispanic <strong>College</strong> Fair,<br />
Las Llaves del Exito, and Hispanic Women’s Network – Education Series<br />
The dual credit department conducted aggressive outreach and activities including<br />
●●<br />
increased enrollments for service area high schools <strong>of</strong> Lake Highlands, North Garland, Sachse,<br />
Harmony Science Academy, Garland, Pearce, Naaman Forest, Berkner, Brighter Horizons, Highland<br />
Park, Lakeview Centennial, North Garland, Richardson, Rowlett, South Garland, and Townview<br />
Magnet<br />
●●<br />
healthy on-campus dual credit participation<br />
●●<br />
healthy home-school enrollments <strong>of</strong> 122 students<br />
The <strong>Richland</strong> Collegiate High School (RCHS)<br />
●●<br />
added a visual, performing and digital arts emphasis increasing non-STEM enrollments<br />
●●<br />
developed and implemented an aggressive marketing campaign to showcase RCHS graduate<br />
scholarship <strong>of</strong>fers as well as the caliber <strong>of</strong> universities that RCHS graduates attend<br />
The Vice President for Teaching and Learning, the Associate Vice President <strong>of</strong> Enrollment Management,<br />
and Academic Council continues to<br />
●●<br />
ensure that the college <strong>of</strong>fers an aggressive schedule <strong>of</strong> classes that meets the needs <strong>of</strong> the community<br />
including online classes, flex classes, classes during the day and the evening, classes that<br />
transfer for university credit, technical-occupational classes, and classes at the developmental education<br />
level for reading, writing, mathematics, and English as a Second Language<br />
●●<br />
monitor and ensure that schedule modalities meet <strong>Richland</strong>’s standards <strong>of</strong> quality<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 17<br />
Organizational Action Plan Emphasis for 2010-11<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #2<br />
This academic year’s primary Organizational Action Plan emphases for student success were <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
●●<br />
continued participation in the national Achieving the Dream (AtD) initiative<br />
♦♦<br />
first full year <strong>of</strong> focused improvement activities for the identified 9 gatekeeper courses and the<br />
EDUC-1300 mandatory course for students who are new to college (EDUC-1300)<br />
♦♦<br />
funding <strong>of</strong> the major AtD improvement activities through the $1.4M 5-year Asian-American Native<br />
American Pacific Islander Serving Institution Grant (AANAPISI)<br />
●●<br />
implementation <strong>of</strong> the new 3-tiered CORE curriculum including a mandatory EDUC-1300 course to<br />
prepare students for success<br />
●●<br />
preparation and training <strong>of</strong> faculty for the Statistics Pathway Collaboratory <strong>of</strong> Community <strong>College</strong>s<br />
(Statway) pilot with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement <strong>of</strong> Teaching<br />
●●<br />
curriculum redesign in developmental writing and college algebra<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #3<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
Leadership’s organizational action plan emphasis for employee success for 2010-11 included improving<br />
the college hiring processes, enhancing employee capabilities, improving communication at all levels,<br />
and improving employee satisfaction.<br />
●●<br />
Employee Services staff mapped 7 key processes to improve consistency in process execution<br />
●●<br />
Senior leadership, in collaboration with TOLI staff, revised the pr<strong>of</strong>essional development requirements<br />
to enhance employee development and capability<br />
Senior leadership committed to enhanced communication with timely sharing <strong>of</strong> council minutes,<br />
college forums to enhance communication, and use <strong>of</strong> employee suggestions during budget forums.<br />
Senior leadership expanded employee recognition during the annual all-college convocation to enhance<br />
employee satisfaction<br />
Strategic Planning Priority #4<br />
Leadership’s organizational action plan emphasis for institutional effectiveness for 2010-11 included a<br />
focus on<br />
●●<br />
emergency preparedness as the college renewed a focus on emergency drills for building evacuation,<br />
shelter in place, and revamped the emergency response team<br />
●●<br />
campus safety with the college facilities director, working with senior leadership, set up a schedule<br />
for the replacement <strong>of</strong> all exterior lighting to enhance the safety <strong>of</strong> campus parking lots in the evening<br />
●●<br />
meeting infrastructure needs with Wichita Hall completely remodeled and brought up to standard<br />
●●<br />
conservative utility usage as new exterior doors were installed throughout the campus that aren’t<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
easily blown open by the wind and therefore improve the efficiency <strong>of</strong> utility usage<br />
adhering to financial targets as leadership thoughtfully reviewed all position vacancies during the<br />
academic year and where possible did not refill positions<br />
procuring additional funding through grants as the college was awarded a $1.4M AANAPISI grant to<br />
fund the majority <strong>of</strong> AtD initiatives<br />
successful SACSCOC 2013 reaffirmation as leadership named and funded 2 QEP teams and supports<br />
other activities to comply with SACSCOC requirements<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #1: Identify and Meet Community Educational Need<br />
18<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #1:<br />
Identify and Meet Community Educational Needs<br />
Score = 9.5<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks 4 key performance indicators with 1 operational* and 17 strategic*<br />
measures to determine how well the college identifies and meets our community’s educational needs.<br />
The four areas <strong>of</strong> focus include building sustainable community relationships through dual credit<br />
arrangements with service area high schools, participation <strong>of</strong> students in service learning projects,<br />
and faculty and staff donations to the State Employee Charitable Campaign (SECC). <strong>Richland</strong> regularly<br />
communicates with community stakeholders through outreach to service area high schools and<br />
various community organizations. Although the college does not conduct outreach activities outside<br />
the defined service area, <strong>Richland</strong> serves and communicates with all the residents <strong>of</strong> Dallas County<br />
and outside Dallas County on a limited basis. <strong>Richland</strong> is dedicated to increasing market share for<br />
key student segments. This group includes African-American and Hispanic students, economically<br />
disadvantaged students, and non-high school graduates. <strong>Richland</strong> provides business and industry<br />
workforce training through our technical-occupational <strong>of</strong>ferings and our Garland Campus dedicated to<br />
workforce training. Finally <strong>Richland</strong> responds to the community’s diverse educational needs through<br />
a variety <strong>of</strong> course types and delivery options. These include: face-to-face instruction; online instruction;<br />
courses that range from 4 to 16 weeks in duration; courses that prepare students for transfer to a<br />
university; developmental courses that prepare students for college-level work and to communicate in<br />
the English language. In a cycle <strong>of</strong> improvement this year, <strong>Richland</strong> eliminated the previous 2009-10<br />
KPIs 1.2 and 1.3 and created a new KPI 1.2 with a focus on increasing the market share <strong>of</strong> key student<br />
segments. This new KPI incorporated all the measures from the previous 2 KPIs and relocated a<br />
dual credit measure for a total <strong>of</strong> 9 measures under the newly created KPI 1.2 Increase market share<br />
<strong>of</strong> key student segments. Following is a summary <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s performance on 4 KPIs for Identifying<br />
and Meeting Community Educational Needs.<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
1.1 Score = 9.15<br />
Initiate Relationships for Sustainable Community Building reflects a score within the range<br />
<strong>of</strong> tolerance although the score is a decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.32 compared to 2009-10. One strategic* measure<br />
exceeds the target range and 1 operational* measure falls below the target range. This KPI<br />
aligns with the college’s core competency <strong>of</strong> sustainable community building and the strategic<br />
advantages <strong>of</strong> an excellent reputation in the community we serve and strong community relationships.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
s<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 19<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
1.2 Score = 9.14<br />
Increase Market Share <strong>of</strong> Key Student Segments reflects a score within the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance.<br />
Since this is a new KPI for 2010-11 there is no available comparison with 2009-10. Of the<br />
nine strategic* measures, 3 exceed the target range <strong>of</strong> 9 to 10, 4 meet the target range, and 2<br />
measures fall below the target range. This KPI leverages the college’s strategic advantages <strong>of</strong><br />
an excellent community reputation, agility in response to students’ needs, and size as the largest<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Dallas County community colleges. This KPI also addresses the strategic challenge to<br />
maintain our market share.<br />
1.3 Score = 9.18<br />
Provide Business and Industry Work Force Training reflects a score within the range <strong>of</strong><br />
tolerance and is a decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.63 compared to 2009-10. One <strong>of</strong> the 3 strategic* measures<br />
exceeds the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance and 2 strategic* measures fall approximately 5% below our<br />
range <strong>of</strong> tolerance. This KPI aligns with the college’s core competencies <strong>of</strong> seamless transitions<br />
for lifelong learning and sustainable community building for economic viability. Providing business<br />
and industry work force training also addresses a strategic challenge to maintain <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
county market share.<br />
1.4 Score = 9.93<br />
Respond to Community Educational Needs reflects a score within the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance and<br />
an increase <strong>of</strong> 0.01 compared to 2009-10. Two <strong>of</strong> the 4 strategic* measures exceed the range<br />
<strong>of</strong> tolerance and 2 fall within the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance. This KPI aligns with <strong>Richland</strong>’s core competencies<br />
<strong>of</strong> agility and innovation, seamless transitions for lifelong learning, and sustainable community<br />
building. This KPI also addresses our strategic challenges to Close the Gaps in access<br />
and to maintain market share.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
20<br />
KPI 1.1 Initiate relationships for sustainable community building<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Measures:<br />
1.1.1 # <strong>of</strong> service hours in Service Learning<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 20,169 – 22,410<br />
= 23,857<br />
= 106.50%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s Collegiate High School (RCHS) service learning program and the participation <strong>of</strong><br />
other <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> credit students combined to surpass<br />
●●<br />
the target range by 6.5 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
the performance <strong>of</strong> Peer 1<br />
●●<br />
performance in 2009-10 by 5,087 hours (see Figure 1.1.1)<br />
Significant actions to improve service learning include the full implementation <strong>of</strong> an automated<br />
database for tracking service learning hours. This database allows segmentation <strong>of</strong> the hours<br />
by RCHS and all other college students. The RCHS staff tracked progress on service learning<br />
hours throughout the year to ensure that students were on track to meet end <strong>of</strong> year requirements.<br />
Due to a complete reorganization <strong>of</strong> the department that handles service learning and<br />
the assignment to another administrator, leadership raised the target modestly to 24,000 hours<br />
for 2011-12 to allow time for process evaluation and improvement.<br />
33<br />
30<br />
27<br />
Service Learning Hours<br />
Total Service Learning Regular Service Learning RCHS Service Learning<br />
Peer 1 Service Learning 90 % <strong>of</strong> Target 100 % <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Thousands<br />
24<br />
21<br />
18<br />
15<br />
12<br />
9<br />
6<br />
3<br />
0<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.1.1<br />
Source: Program Director Databases<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 21<br />
1.1.2 Annual <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> State Employee Charitable Campaign<br />
(SECC) contributions<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ $103,500 – $115,000<br />
= $87,042<br />
= 75.70%<br />
Leadership tracks annual SECC contributions as our primary community support initiative and<br />
as an operational* measure <strong>of</strong> sustainable community relationship building. Performance for<br />
this measure<br />
●●<br />
reflects a decline <strong>of</strong> 27% over the previous year<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the target range by 14.3 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a negative 3-year trend<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the total amount donated for each <strong>of</strong> our 6 peers (see Figure 1.1.2)<br />
Several factors contributed to the decline in SECC donations. A significant reduction in the<br />
number <strong>of</strong> fulltime employees, lack <strong>of</strong> raises in salary for two consecutive years, and the poor<br />
Dallas County economy with high unemployment resulted in fewer employees making donations<br />
and smaller donations per capita. Despite the continuation <strong>of</strong> these factors, leadership<br />
remains committed to sustainable community building and left the existing target intact for<br />
2011-12.<br />
$160<br />
$140<br />
State Employee Charitable Campaign<br />
RLC Peer1 Peer2<br />
Peer3 Peer4 Peer5<br />
Peer6 100 % <strong>of</strong> Target 90 % <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
$120<br />
Thousands<br />
$100<br />
$80<br />
$60<br />
Good<br />
$40<br />
$20<br />
$0<br />
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010<br />
Figure 1.1.2<br />
Source: SECC Campaign Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
22<br />
KPI 1.2 Increase market share <strong>of</strong> key student segments<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.1 % <strong>of</strong> local service area public high school graduates who attend<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> within one year <strong>of</strong> graduation<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 26.10 – 29.00<br />
= 30.64<br />
= 105.70%<br />
Each year leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> our service area high school graduates who enroll<br />
at <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> the first year immediately following graduation. The service area public<br />
high schools represent <strong>Richland</strong>’s most significant marketing opportunity. Performance for this<br />
measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 5.7 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the 2009-10 performance by 3.8 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
falls above the 75th percentile ranking for all community colleges participating in the National<br />
Community <strong>College</strong> Benchmark Project (see Figure 1.2.1)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s performance for this measure is due to the actions detailed in the organizational<br />
action plan emphasis. Leadership increased the target for 2011-12 to 31.00% in anticipation <strong>of</strong><br />
continued growth in enrollments for this market segment and continued expansion <strong>of</strong> outreach<br />
efforts by <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> staff.<br />
34.0<br />
32.0<br />
30.0<br />
28.0<br />
26.0<br />
24.0<br />
22.0<br />
20.0<br />
18.0<br />
16.0<br />
14.0<br />
12.0<br />
10.0<br />
Figure 1.2.1<br />
RLC<br />
% Service Area HS Graduates Enrolled<br />
Within One <strong>Year</strong> <strong>of</strong> Graduation<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> target NCCBP (75% ranking)<br />
Good<br />
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010<br />
Source: Colleague, Service Area HS Data<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 23<br />
1.2.2 # <strong>of</strong> contact hours from dual credit and concurrent programs<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 563,028 – 625,587<br />
= 592,296<br />
= 94.70%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated from the enrollment <strong>of</strong> dual credit students.<br />
Dual credit students represent a major market segment in <strong>Richland</strong>’s service area. Service<br />
area high schools, home school associations, and <strong>Richland</strong>’s Collegiate High School are keys to<br />
addressing our strategic challenge <strong>of</strong> maintaining and growing our Dallas County market share.<br />
RCHS and home schooled dual credit students represent a market share <strong>of</strong> students who do not<br />
desire a traditional high school experience. Dual credit students from service area high schools<br />
represent strong community relationships based on trust, integrity and mutual respect since these<br />
are shared students. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all peers<br />
●●<br />
more than doubles the contact hours <strong>of</strong> all but peer 2<br />
●●<br />
has grown 322% over the past 6 years<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 2% from 2009-10 (see Figure 1.2.2)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s positive performance for this measure is the result <strong>of</strong> numerous significant actions during<br />
the academic year detailed in the Organizational Action Plan emphasis. Despite strong performance<br />
for dual credit contact hours during 2010-11, leadership’s environmental scan indicates an<br />
uncertain funding future for dual credit students and therefore raised the target only modestly to<br />
647,707 for 2011-12.<br />
Hours<br />
800<br />
700<br />
600<br />
Dual Credit Contact Hours<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
Thousands<br />
500<br />
400<br />
300<br />
200<br />
100<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.2.2<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
24<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.3 % <strong>of</strong> local service area market enrolled as students for either<br />
credit or continuing education classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 4.50 – 5.00<br />
= 3.58<br />
= 71.60%<br />
While the service area <strong>of</strong> the Dallas County Community <strong>College</strong> District is Dallas County<br />
(DCCCD), the Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees assigns each college a portion <strong>of</strong> the county as their local<br />
service area. <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> our adult local service area residents<br />
who enroll in at least one credit or continuing education class during the academic year<br />
as a key measure <strong>of</strong> market penetration. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range by 18.4 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 1.13 percentage points over the 2009-10 performance (see Figures<br />
1.2.3A,B)<br />
Although growth is occurring among African-American, Hispanic, and Asian student segments,<br />
there is a decline in the enrollment <strong>of</strong> Anglo students and continuing education market segments.<br />
Leadership reevaluated our target for service area enrollment and lowered the target<br />
to 4.00 for 2011-12, a number we believe to be more realistic due to performance trends particularly<br />
in continuing education.<br />
(%) Market Share <strong>of</strong> Service Area by Ethnicity<br />
12<br />
11<br />
10<br />
9<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09<br />
2009-10 2010-11 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
5<br />
Good<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
Total Anglo Afr-American Hispanic Asian<br />
Figure 1.2.3A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 25<br />
36<br />
Enrollment Trends for Credit and Continuing Education<br />
Inside and Outside RLC Service Area<br />
33<br />
30<br />
Thousands<br />
27<br />
24<br />
21<br />
18<br />
Credit SA<br />
CE SA<br />
Credit All<br />
CE All<br />
15<br />
12<br />
9<br />
6<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Note: CE #s include reimbursable and non-reimbursable headcounts<br />
Figure 1.2.3B Source: Colleague, US Census 2000<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
26<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.4 % <strong>of</strong> Dallas County market (excluding local service area) enrolled<br />
as students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 0.73 – 0.81<br />
= 0.80<br />
= 98.80%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership monitors the percentage <strong>of</strong> enrollment that comes from Dallas County<br />
outside <strong>of</strong> the college’s designated local service area. While <strong>Richland</strong> is prohibited from<br />
recruiting or advertising outside the local service area, a third <strong>of</strong> the annual enrollment comes<br />
from this market segment. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
reflects a slight decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.01 over 2009-10 (see Figure 1.2.4)<br />
Community activities listed in the Organizational Action Plan emphasis draws participants from<br />
all across Dallas County and contribute to positive performance. Leadership left the target<br />
intact this year based on trend data.<br />
%<br />
0.90<br />
0.80<br />
Dallas County Market Share (outside local service area)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0.70<br />
0.60<br />
0.50<br />
0.40<br />
0.30<br />
0.20<br />
Good<br />
0.10<br />
0.00<br />
Figure 1.2.4<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 27<br />
1.2.5 % <strong>of</strong> unduplicated credit enrollments outside <strong>of</strong> Dallas County<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 19.08 – 21.20<br />
= 20.61<br />
= 97.20%<br />
While the charge <strong>of</strong> the Dallas County Community <strong>College</strong> District is to serve the educational<br />
needs <strong>of</strong> the citizens <strong>of</strong> Dallas County, <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership understands that a certain percentage<br />
<strong>of</strong> credit enrollments should come from outside Dallas County. Students from this<br />
market segment pay higher tuition rates than do county residents. Leadership believes that<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s healthy enrollment mix for outside <strong>of</strong> Dallas County is between 19.08% and 21.20%<br />
<strong>of</strong> the total unduplicated credit headcount. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance<br />
●●<br />
remains consistent over the past 3 academic years<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all but Peers 1 and 3 (see Figure 1.2.5)<br />
Leadership left this target intact for 2011-12 to remain within the defined healthy range.<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Unduplicated Credit Enrollments Outside <strong>of</strong> Dallas County<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
25.0<br />
20.0<br />
15.0<br />
10.0<br />
5.0<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 1.2.5<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
28<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.6 % <strong>of</strong> local service area historically underserved population enrolled<br />
as students (African-American and Hispanic)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 5.40 – 6.00<br />
= 6.33<br />
= 105.50%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership monitors the percentage <strong>of</strong> the service area historically underserved market<br />
that enrolls in at least one credit or continuing education class during the academic year as<br />
an indication <strong>of</strong> market penetration for these important student segments. Performance for this<br />
measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 5.5 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
reflects a 4-year positive trend overall and for African-American and Hispanic segments individually<br />
(Figure 1.2.6A)<br />
●●<br />
addresses the state mandate to Close the Gaps in access to higher education<br />
●●<br />
reflects a positive 5-year trend in African-American and Hispanic credit student enrollment<br />
●●<br />
(Figures 1.2.6B,C)<br />
reflects a positive 3-year trend in African-American and Hispanic continuing education student<br />
enrollment (Figures 1.2.6D,E)<br />
The college’s Organizational Action Plan emphasis includes significant actions to increase<br />
enrollments for historically underserved students. Leadership increased the target to 7.00 for<br />
2011-12 in anticipation <strong>of</strong> increased outreach efforts in order to address the state mandate to<br />
Close the Gaps.<br />
(%) Market Share <strong>of</strong> Service Area<br />
10.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10<br />
9.0<br />
2010-11 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
8.0<br />
7.0<br />
6.0<br />
Good<br />
5.0<br />
4.0<br />
3.0<br />
2.0<br />
1.0<br />
0.0<br />
Total Afr-Amer/Hispanic Afr-American Hispanic<br />
Figure 1.2.6A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 29<br />
Trends in Credit African-Amer Student Enrollment<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
Trends in Credit Hispanic Student Enrollment<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
Thousands<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
Thousands<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
2<br />
1<br />
All Afr-Am Students<br />
Service Area Afr-Am Only<br />
1<br />
All Hisp Students<br />
Service Area Hisp Only<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.2.6B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Figure 1.2.6C<br />
Hundreds<br />
24<br />
21<br />
18<br />
15<br />
12<br />
9<br />
6<br />
3<br />
0<br />
Trends in Continuing Education African-American Enrollment<br />
All Afr-Am Students<br />
Service Area Afr-Am Only<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.2.6D<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Hundreds<br />
45<br />
40<br />
35<br />
30<br />
25<br />
20<br />
15<br />
10<br />
5<br />
0<br />
Trends in Continuing Education Hispanic Enrollment<br />
All Hispanic Students<br />
Service Area Hispanic Only<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.2.6E<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
30<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.7 % <strong>of</strong> local service area economically disadvantaged enrolled as<br />
credit students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 9.00 – 10.00<br />
= 6.35<br />
= 63.50%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> the college’s service area identified as economically disadvantaged<br />
who enroll in credit classes during an academic year. Focus on this market segment<br />
aligns with the college’s core competency <strong>of</strong> social equity, justice and economic viability.<br />
Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5.2 percentage point decline over the 2009-10 performance (see Figure 1.2.7)<br />
While <strong>Richland</strong>’s two Upward Bound and SOAR programs are designed to serve economically<br />
disadvantaged student populations, the continued poor economy has made it difficult for the<br />
local service area economically disadvantaged student segment to pay tuition, buy books, and<br />
maintain living expenses. Leadership left the target intact as a demonstration <strong>of</strong> commitment<br />
to a core competency <strong>of</strong> social justice and equity.<br />
12.0<br />
% Enrollment <strong>of</strong> Service Area Economically Disadvantaged<br />
11.0<br />
10.0<br />
9.0<br />
8.0<br />
7.0<br />
6.0<br />
5.0<br />
4.0<br />
3.0<br />
2.0<br />
1.0<br />
<strong>Richland</strong><br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 1.2.7<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: 2000 US Census Data, DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 31<br />
1.2.8 % <strong>of</strong> local service area non-high school graduate population<br />
enrolled as credit students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 2.84 – 3.15<br />
= 3.26<br />
= 103.50%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s service area non-high school graduate population<br />
who enroll in at least one credit class during the academic year. Consistent with tracking<br />
<strong>of</strong> economically disadvantaged students, focus on this market segment aligns with the college’s<br />
core competency <strong>of</strong> social equity and justice and economic viability. Performance for<br />
this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 3.50 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a positive 3-year trend (see Figure 1.2.8)<br />
Leadership raised the target to 3.75 for 2011-12 based on trends over the last 3 years.<br />
3.5<br />
3.0<br />
% Enrollment <strong>of</strong> Non-HS Graduates from the Local Service Area<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
Good<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.2.8<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
32<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.2.9 % <strong>of</strong> Dallas County historically underserved market (outside the<br />
local service area) enrolled as students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 0.81 – 0.90<br />
= 0.88<br />
= 97.80%<br />
Consistent with measure 1.2.4, leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> Dallas County historically<br />
underserved market that enrolls in at least one <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> credit or continuing education<br />
class during the academic year. This market segment does not include students from inside<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s local service area. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the range <strong>of</strong> tolerance<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year positive trend (see Figure 1.2.9)<br />
Leadership raised the target to 0.95 for 2011-12 based on the 5-year positive performance trend.<br />
%<br />
1.0<br />
0.9<br />
Dallas County Historically Underserved Market<br />
(outside local service area)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0.8<br />
0.7<br />
0.6<br />
0.5<br />
0.4<br />
0.3<br />
Good<br />
0.2<br />
0.1<br />
0.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.2.9<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 1.3 Provide business and industry workforce training<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 33<br />
1.3.1 # <strong>of</strong> technical-occupational credit contact hours<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 603,000 – 670,000<br />
= 576,512<br />
= 86.00%<br />
A key part <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s contribution to the economic sustainability <strong>of</strong> our community is the<br />
array <strong>of</strong> credit technical-occupational programs that empower students to obtain employment<br />
or advancement in employment. Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> reimbursable credit contact<br />
hours generated by technical-occupational programs in an academic year. Performance for<br />
this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls 4% below the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 14% over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
falls below that <strong>of</strong> 4 peers, all <strong>of</strong> which have successful technical programs that <strong>Richland</strong><br />
does not <strong>of</strong>fer<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> 2 peers (see Figure 1.3.1A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease in market share from 11% in 2009-10 to 9% for 2010-11 (see Figure<br />
1.3.1B)<br />
The decline <strong>of</strong> technical-occupational contact hours is due to three factors: (1) the elimination<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Real Estate program as the college completed the final year deactivation teach-out<br />
during 2010-11, (2) the leadership’s decision to deactivate and close the Educational Para-Pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
program due to a sharp decline in the availability <strong>of</strong> jobs for graduates which negatively<br />
effected enrollments in this program, and (3) the closure <strong>of</strong> the Environmental Systems<br />
Technology program without deactivation teach-out since there are no degree majors in this<br />
program. Given the closure <strong>of</strong> these three programs the leadership lowered the target for this<br />
measure to 632,400 for the 2011-12 academic year.<br />
2,800<br />
2,600<br />
2,400<br />
2,200<br />
Technical-Occupational Credit Contact Hours<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
2,000<br />
Thousands<br />
1,800<br />
1,600<br />
1,400<br />
1,200<br />
Good<br />
1,000<br />
800<br />
600<br />
400<br />
200<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.3.1A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
34<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
<strong>Richland</strong>'s Market Share <strong>of</strong> Technical-<br />
Occupational Credit Contact Hours<br />
RLC<br />
9%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
91%<br />
Figure 1.3.1B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 35<br />
1.3.2 # <strong>of</strong> continuing education reimbursable contact hours<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 721,800 – 802,000<br />
= 710,791<br />
= 88.60%<br />
Contact hours generated as a result <strong>of</strong> continuing education enrollments leverage <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
strategic advantage <strong>of</strong> agility in response to students’ need for non-degree workforce related<br />
instructional delivery and scheduling. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the target range by 1.4 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year negative trend<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> 5 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a 22% market share, a 4% increase over 2009-10 (Figures 1.3.2A,B)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s market share increase is due primarily to Peer 5’s decline in continuing education<br />
contact hours compared to 2009-10. With the exception <strong>of</strong> Peer 2, continuing education contact<br />
hours declined across the DCCCD. Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s 5-year trend data and the performance <strong>of</strong> all peer colleges.<br />
2,000<br />
1,800<br />
1,600<br />
Reimbursable Continuing Education Contact Hours<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Thousands<br />
1,400<br />
1,200<br />
1,000<br />
800<br />
Good<br />
600<br />
400<br />
200<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.3.2A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>'s Market Share <strong>of</strong> Reimbursable<br />
Continuing Education Contact Hours<br />
RLC<br />
22%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
78%<br />
Figure 1.3.2B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
36<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.3.3 # <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by Corporate Services<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 32,580 – 36,200<br />
= 43,638<br />
= 120.50%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks the contact hours produced by corporate services training as an<br />
important separate segment within continuing education and as an indicator <strong>of</strong> performance for<br />
our entrepreneurial activities. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 20.50<br />
●●<br />
represents a positive 3-year trend (see Figure 1.3.3)<br />
Leadership raised the target modestly to 44,000 for 2011-12 due to a continued uncertain economic<br />
picture for Dallas County.<br />
110<br />
Corporate Services Contact Hours<br />
100<br />
90<br />
80<br />
<strong>Richland</strong><br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Thousands<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
0<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.3.3<br />
Source: Program Director Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 1.4 Respond to community educational needs<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 37<br />
1.4.1 # <strong>of</strong> online credit contact hours<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 1,620,000 – 1,800,000<br />
= 1,825,680<br />
= 101.40%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s online course <strong>of</strong>ferings are instrumental for the college’s agile response to students’<br />
need for alternative modes <strong>of</strong> instructional delivery and scheduling. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 1.40 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year positive trend (see Figure 1.4.1A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a 23% market share<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline in online market share <strong>of</strong> 2 percentage points since 2009-10 (see Figure<br />
1.4.1B)<br />
While <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> continues to <strong>of</strong>fer an aggressive online schedule, peers 1, 2, and 3, are<br />
now also <strong>of</strong>fering more online classes in their schedules. Leadership is aware <strong>of</strong> the need for the<br />
college to maintain an edge for this important market segment while not sacrificing quality. Many<br />
<strong>of</strong> the significant activities during 2010-11 and continuing into 2011-12 involve pr<strong>of</strong>essional development<br />
for teaching online and also peer review <strong>of</strong> online instruction. Leadership raised the target<br />
to 2,000,000 contact hours for 2011-12 based on trend data.<br />
2,400<br />
2,100<br />
1,800<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Online Contact Hours<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Thousands<br />
1,500<br />
1,200<br />
900<br />
600<br />
300<br />
Good<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.4.1A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
% <strong>of</strong> growth since 05/06 RLC=196%, Peer 1=75%, Peer 2=163%, Peer 3=129%<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>'s % <strong>of</strong> Online Contact Hours<br />
Market Share for AY10-11<br />
RLC<br />
23%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
77%<br />
Figure 1.4.1B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
38<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.4.2 # <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by flex courses<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 2,205,000 – 2,450,000<br />
= 2,408,336<br />
= 98.30%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> credit contact hours generated by classes that are<br />
less than the traditional 16-week semester length. These classes address students’ need for<br />
alternative scheduling modes to fit their busy lifestyles. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents an overall positive 4-year trend that has leveled since 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 1.4.2A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a 29% market share consistent with 2009-10 performance (see Figure 1.4.2B)<br />
Leadership increased the target to 2,500,000 based on trend data.<br />
3,200<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Contact Hours for Flex Classes (12 weeks or less)<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Thousands<br />
2,800<br />
2,400<br />
2,000<br />
1,600<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
1,200<br />
800<br />
400<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.4.2A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>'s Market Share <strong>of</strong> Flex<br />
(12 weeks or less) Contact Hours<br />
RLC<br />
29%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
71%<br />
Figure 1.4.2B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 39<br />
1.4.3 # <strong>of</strong> transfer credit contact hours<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 4,725,000 – 5,250,000<br />
= 5,288,041<br />
= 100.70%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> contact hours generated by courses that are transferable to a<br />
university as a key measure <strong>of</strong> success in meeting the needs <strong>of</strong> a major market segment in the<br />
college service area. Approximately 75% <strong>of</strong> all <strong>Richland</strong>’s credit students attend in preparation<br />
for successful transfer to a university. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 0.70 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year positive trend (see Figure 1.4.3A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a 28% market share, the same as 2009-10 (see Figure 1.4.3B)<br />
Significant actions during 2010-11 include aggressive scheduling during the year which ensured<br />
seat availability in popular and required courses as well as variety in instructional modality and<br />
flexible schedules. Leadership raised the target modestly to 5,500,00 for 2011-12 based on<br />
trend data and continued budgetary constraints.<br />
7,000<br />
6,300<br />
5,600<br />
4,900<br />
RLC Credit Transfer Contact Hours<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
Thousands<br />
4,200<br />
3,500<br />
2,800<br />
2,100<br />
1,400<br />
700<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.4.3A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>'s % <strong>of</strong> Transfer Contact Hours<br />
Market Share for AY10-11<br />
RLC<br />
28%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
72%<br />
Figure 1.4.3B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
40<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1.4.4 # <strong>of</strong> developmental contact hours (non-college level)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 1,170,000 – 1,300,000<br />
= 1,236,656<br />
= 95.10%<br />
An important market segment in <strong>Richland</strong>’s service area is students who are not yet ready for<br />
college-level coursework. <strong>Richland</strong>’s core competency <strong>of</strong> building sustainable community for<br />
social justice and equity compels leadership to track the contact hours the college generates by<br />
<strong>of</strong>fering developmental-level classes. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
reflects a positive 5-year trend (see Figure 1.4.4A)<br />
●●<br />
reflects a 28% DCCCD market share, a 1 percentage point decrease from 2009-10 (see Figure<br />
1.4.4B)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s slight decline in market share is due primarily to Peer 2’s revival <strong>of</strong> their ESOL credit<br />
program which had been on hiatus for several years. Leadership left the target intact based on<br />
trend data.<br />
Thousands<br />
1,650<br />
1,500<br />
1,350<br />
1,200<br />
1,050<br />
900<br />
750<br />
600<br />
450<br />
300<br />
150<br />
0<br />
Figure 1.4.4A<br />
RLC Credit Developmental Contact Hours<br />
(Developmental Reading, Writing, Mathematics and ESOL)<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Good<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> % <strong>of</strong> Developmental Contact Hours<br />
Market Share for AY10-11<br />
RLC<br />
28%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
72%<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11<br />
Figure 1.4.4B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #2: Empower All Students to Suc<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 41<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #2:<br />
Empower All Students to Succeed<br />
Score = 9.4<br />
Introduction<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> tracks 3 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) with a combined total <strong>of</strong> 35 measures.<br />
Sixteen strategic* measures focus on the performance <strong>of</strong> all credit students. Another 16 strategic*<br />
measures focus on the same performance metrics but with a specific focus on African-American<br />
and Hispanic students which represent the Closing the Gaps student population. Three operational*<br />
measures focus on student satisfaction with college practices and services to support student learning.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> groups its student performance metrics into 3 categories (1) % A, B, C grades, (2) %<br />
in-class retention, (3) goal completion. Leadership tracks these measures because student success<br />
is <strong>Richland</strong>’s reason for being and environmental scanning indicates that the Texas Legislature is<br />
moving ever closer to performance-based funding for higher education. Following is a summary <strong>of</strong><br />
performance to target for each <strong>of</strong> the 3 KPIs that serve to indicate how well <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Empowers<br />
All Students to Succeed.<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
2.1 Score = 9.47<br />
Monitor and Improve Student Success reflects a score decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.05 points compared to<br />
2009-10. Four <strong>of</strong> 16 measures scored above the target range while 9 measures scored within<br />
the target range. Two measures scored within 5 percentage points <strong>of</strong> the target range and 1<br />
measure scored well below. This KPI leverages the core competencies <strong>of</strong> strategic performance<br />
improvement and seamless transitions for lifelong learning to address our strategic challenges <strong>of</strong><br />
improving student success with a student population that is increasingly underprepared for college<br />
work and Closing the Gaps in student success.<br />
2.2 Score = 9.17<br />
Monitor and Improve Student Success for Historically Underserved Student Groups<br />
reflects a score decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.34 points compared to 2009-10. Measures <strong>of</strong> student success<br />
are identical to those mentioned in KPI 2.1 but are segmented to include a focus on African-<br />
American and Hispanic student groups, consistent with the Texas Higher Education Coordinating<br />
Board’s Closing the Gaps mandate. Two <strong>of</strong> the sixteen measures exceed the target range, 11<br />
measures score within the target range, and 1 measure scores within 5 points <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
and 2 measures fall well below the target range. This KPI leverages the core competencies <strong>of</strong><br />
strategic performance improvement, seamless transitions for lifelong learning, and sustainable<br />
community building for social equity and justice to address our strategic challenges <strong>of</strong> improving<br />
student success with a student population that is increasingly underprepared for college work<br />
and Closing the Gaps in student success.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
42<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
2.3 Score = 9.64<br />
Promote Student Engagement and Satisfaction with Instructional Practices and Services<br />
to Support Student Learning reflects a score increase <strong>of</strong> 0.12 points over 2009-10. Three<br />
operational* measures all fall within the target range. This KPI aligns with the college’s strategic<br />
advantage <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff who commit to performance excellence and addresses the challenge<br />
to continue to provide exceptional services despite the impending retirement <strong>of</strong> experienced<br />
employees.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 43<br />
Measures:<br />
2.1.1 % “C” or better grades in all credit classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 66.15 – 73.50<br />
= 72.32<br />
= 98.40%<br />
2.2.1 % “C” grades or better in all credit classes for historically underserved<br />
student groups (African-American and Hispanic)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 64.35 – 71.50<br />
= 67.31<br />
= 94.10%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> A, B and C grades earned by all credit students and historically<br />
underserved student segments. Performance for this overall student success measure<br />
2.1.1<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
reflects a slight decline <strong>of</strong> 0.25 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
falls 8.45 points below the best in class performance as indicated in the National Community<br />
<strong>College</strong> Benchmark Project (see Figure 2.1.1)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students measue 2.2.1<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
declined slightly (1.07 percentage points) over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.1A,B)<br />
Since <strong>Richland</strong> will continue participation in Achieving the Dream, leadership raised the target<br />
for both measures to 74.00 for 2011-12.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
44<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
Good<br />
% <strong>of</strong> "A, B, C" Grades in Credit Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 Best Practice 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
Figure 2.1.1<br />
80.0<br />
77.0<br />
74.0<br />
71.0<br />
68.0<br />
65.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
% "A, B, C" Grades in Credit Classes for<br />
Historically Underserved Student Group<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
Good<br />
62.0<br />
59.0<br />
56.0<br />
53.0<br />
50.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.1A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 45<br />
78.0<br />
Closing the Gap in % "A, B, C" Grades for<br />
Historically Underserved Students<br />
76.0<br />
74.0<br />
72.0<br />
70.0<br />
68.0<br />
66.0<br />
64.0<br />
62.0<br />
60.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.1B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
46<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.2 % C or better in core curriculum courses<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 67.05 – 74.50<br />
= 73.53<br />
= 98.70%<br />
2.2.2 % C or better in core curriculum courses for African-American<br />
and Hispanic students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 64.80 – 72.00<br />
= 68.90<br />
= 95.70%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> A, B, C grades awarded in core curriculum<br />
classes for all credit students and for historically underserved student segments. Performance<br />
for this overall student success measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a slight decline <strong>of</strong> 0.52 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below the best in class performance by 7.83 percentage points (see Figure 2.1.2)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students 2.2.2<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a slight decline <strong>of</strong> 0.07 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.2A,B)<br />
Since <strong>Richland</strong> will continue participation in Achieving the Dream, leadership raised the target<br />
for both measures to 74.50 for 2011-12.<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
% <strong>of</strong> "A, B, C" Grades in Core Curriculum Courses<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Best Practice<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
Figure 2.1.2<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 47<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
% Historically Underserved Students with<br />
"A, B, or C" Grades in Core Curriculum Courses<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
Good<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.2A<br />
80.0<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Closing the Gap in Student Success in Core Curriculum Courses<br />
78.0<br />
76.0<br />
74.0<br />
72.0<br />
70.0<br />
68.0<br />
66.0<br />
64.0<br />
62.0<br />
AfAm & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
60.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.2B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
48<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.3 % C or better in online courses<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 64.35 – 71.50<br />
= 68.79<br />
= 96.20%<br />
2.2.3 % C or better in online courses for African-American and<br />
Hispanic students<br />
StrategicMeasure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 58.05 – 64.50<br />
= 62.90<br />
= 97.50%<br />
Leadership tracks student performance in online classes to ensure that different schedule<br />
modalities and modes <strong>of</strong> instruction result in similar student success rates. Performance for<br />
all credit students in online classes<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a slight decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.26 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below the national best-in-class performance by 4.26 percentage points (see Figure<br />
2.1.3)<br />
Performance in online classes for historically underserved students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a small increase <strong>of</strong> 0.46 over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.3A,B)<br />
Several <strong>of</strong> the Achieving the Dream gatekeeper course action plans have a focus on improving<br />
student performance in online classes. History 1301 faculty based their online course redesign<br />
on a successful University <strong>of</strong> North Texas project that includes gaming and a free text<br />
embedded in the course. Accounting 2301 faculty introduced interactive learning modules<br />
and a new textbook for online classes. Since <strong>Richland</strong> will continue participation in Achieving<br />
the Dream, leadership raised the target for both measures to 71.50 for 2011-12.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 49<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
Good<br />
% <strong>of</strong> "A, B, C" Grades in Online Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Best Practice<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.1.3<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
% "A, B, or C" Grades in Online Classes for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.3A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
50<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
80.0<br />
Closing the Gap in Historically Underserved Student Success<br />
for Online Courses (% "A, B or C" Grades)<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
45.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.3B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 51<br />
2.1.4 % <strong>of</strong> students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in developmental<br />
coursework<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 56.70 – 63.00<br />
= 59.81<br />
= 94.90%<br />
2.2.4 % <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic students who receive a<br />
grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in developmental coursework<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 54.90 – 61.00<br />
= 57.29<br />
= 93.90%<br />
Leadership tracks student performance in developmental mathematics, reading, and writing<br />
since successful completion <strong>of</strong> these course sequences are the gateway to college-level<br />
coursework. Performance for all students in developmental courses<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a 1.65 percentage point decline over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 2.1.4A)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students in developmental courses<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a 1.84 decline over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figures 2.2.4A,B)<br />
Leadership lowered the overall target to 61.00 and left the historically underserved target intact<br />
for 2011-12 based on trend data and consistent expectations for both groups.<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
% "A, B, C" Grades in Developmental Education Courses<br />
Good<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
Figure 2.1.4A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
52<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
% "A, B or C" Grades in Developmental Education Courses<br />
for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.4A<br />
70.0<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved Students<br />
in Developmental Education Course Success<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.4B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 53<br />
2.1.5 % <strong>of</strong> students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in ESOL<br />
coursework<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 65.70 – 73.00<br />
= 72.79<br />
= 99.70%<br />
2.2.5 % <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic students who receive a<br />
grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in ESOL coursework<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 67.50 – 75.00<br />
= 71.42<br />
= 95.20%<br />
Leadership tracks student performance in credit English as a Second Language (ESOL) courses<br />
since success in these courses are the gateway to college-level coursework for non-native<br />
English speakers. Performance for all students in ESOL courses<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
falls below the performance <strong>of</strong> peers 2 and 3<br />
●●<br />
represents a 1.55 increase over 2009-10 (see Figure 2.1.5)<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> Peers 1, 5, and 6<br />
Performance for historically underserved student segments<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
falls below the performance <strong>of</strong> peers 2 and 3<br />
●●<br />
represents a 3.14 decline over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.5A,B)<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> Peers 1, 5, and 6<br />
Leadership increased the target to 73.50 overall and decreased the target for historically underserved<br />
students to 73.50 for 2011-12 based on trend data and consistent expectations for<br />
both groups.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
54<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
Figure 2.1.5<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
% "A, B or C" Grades in ESOL Courses<br />
for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
% "A, B, C" Grades in ESOL Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3<br />
Peer 5 Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Good<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
Figure 2.2.5<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 55<br />
2.1.6 % <strong>of</strong> students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in gatekeeper<br />
coursework (Developmental Math, Reading, Accounting 2301,<br />
Biology 1406, English 1301, Government 2301, History 1301,<br />
Math 1414, Psychology 2301)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 66.15 – 73.50<br />
= 64.66<br />
= 88.00%<br />
2.2.6 % <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic students who receive a<br />
grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in gatekeeper coursework (Developmental<br />
Math, Reading, Accounting 2301, Biology 1406, English 1301,<br />
Government 2301, History 1301, Math 1414, Psychology 2301)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 64.35 – 71.50<br />
= 59.28<br />
= 82.90%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in courses<br />
that are defined as gatekeepers. These courses represent high enrollments and low percentages<br />
<strong>of</strong> successful students. Performance for all students enrolled in gatekeeper courses<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the target range by 2 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a small increase <strong>of</strong> 0.47 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 2.1.6)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students enrolled in gatekeeper courses<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the target range by 7.1 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease <strong>of</strong> 1.18 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure 2.2.6A,B)<br />
In addition to participation in Achieving the Dream, three developmental mathematics faculty<br />
members will pilot a new method for teaching developmental mathematics called Statway<br />
which was developed in collaboration with the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement<br />
<strong>of</strong> Teaching. Since <strong>Richland</strong> will continue participation in Achieving the Dream and will pilot<br />
Statway in 3 sections <strong>of</strong> developmental mathematics, leadership raised the target for measure<br />
2.2.6 to 73.50 and left measure 2.1.6 intact at 73.50 for 2011-12.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
56<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
Figure 2.1.6<br />
% <strong>of</strong> "A, B, C" Grades in Gatekeeper Courses<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
% "A, B or C" Grades in Gatekeeper Courses<br />
for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.6A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 57<br />
80.0<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved Students<br />
in Gatekeeper Course Success<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
50.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.6B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
58<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.7 % <strong>of</strong> dual credit students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in<br />
credit classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 90.93<br />
= 101.10%<br />
2.2.7 % <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic dual credit students who<br />
receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in credit classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 89.35<br />
= 99.30%<br />
Leadership tracks the credit course success <strong>of</strong> dual credit students; a key segment <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
community. Performance for all dual credit students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 4 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below the performance <strong>of</strong> peers 2 and 3<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase in performance <strong>of</strong> 1.96 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure<br />
2.1.7)<br />
Performance for historically underserved dual credit students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 3 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below the performance <strong>of</strong> peers 3, 5, and 6<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase in performance <strong>of</strong> 3.18 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure<br />
2.2.7A,B)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Collegiate High School (RCHS) staff continue to work with RCHS students providing<br />
support services to enhance high school student success. Regular dual credit students who<br />
enroll in college classes on <strong>Richland</strong>’s campus benefit from continuous improvement activities<br />
initiated through Achieving the Dream. <strong>Richland</strong> ensures that dual credit classes held at service<br />
area high schools meet the same assessment standards as required for classes held on<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s campus. Leadership raised both targets to 95.00 for 2011-12 based on a continuation<br />
<strong>of</strong> well-established improvement activities.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 59<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
Good<br />
% <strong>of</strong> "A, B, C" Grades for Dual Credit Students in Credit Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
Figure 2.1.7<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
% "A, B or C" Grades for Dual Credit<br />
Historically Underserved Students in Credit Classes<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
Good<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.7A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
60<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved Students<br />
in Dual Credit Success<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
70.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.7B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 61<br />
2.1.8 % <strong>of</strong> students who receive a grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in collegelevel<br />
coursework after successful completion <strong>of</strong> developmental<br />
work<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 68.40 – 76.00<br />
= 72.03<br />
= 94.80%<br />
2.2.8 % <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic students who receive a<br />
grade <strong>of</strong> “C” or better in college-level coursework after successful<br />
completion <strong>of</strong> developmental work<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 65.70 – 73.00<br />
= 67.04<br />
= 91.80%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> tracks students who successfully complete capstone courses in developmental<br />
education to determine their performance in related college-level courses. Performance for all<br />
students in this cohort<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range (see Figure 2.1.8A)<br />
●●<br />
is above the national 75th percentile for success in English 1301 after completion <strong>of</strong> developmental<br />
coursework for both course completers (excludes “W” grades) and enrollees<br />
(includes “W” grades) (see Table 2.1.8B)<br />
●●<br />
is above the 70th percentile for success in college-level mathematics after completion <strong>of</strong><br />
developmental mathematics for course enrollees (see Table 2.1.8B)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students in this cohort<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 4 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers (see Figures 2.2.8A,B)<br />
Based on continued improvement initiatives such as the Achieving the Dream focus on developmental<br />
mathematics and reading, the Statway pilot in developmental mathematics, and the<br />
continuation <strong>of</strong> the successful course redesign in developmental writing, leadership raised the<br />
target for underserved students to 74.00.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
62<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
% "A, B, C" Grades in <strong>College</strong>-Level Courses<br />
After Developmental Education<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
40.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.1.8A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Success after Developmental Completion for Fall 2009 Cohort<br />
Grade <strong>of</strong> "C" or better<br />
RLC<br />
NCCBP<br />
Course Completers (Ws excluded) Actual % % Rank Median 90th %<br />
<strong>College</strong> Level Math 83.83 69.00 80.24 89.82<br />
English 1301 87.45 78.00 80.94 90.48<br />
Course Enrollees (Ws included) Actual % % Rank Median 90th %<br />
<strong>College</strong> Level Math 80.34 88.00 68.58 81.23<br />
English 1301 82.11 86.00 72.22 83.33<br />
Table 2.1.8B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
100.0<br />
90.0<br />
80.0<br />
% "A, B, C" Grades in <strong>College</strong>-Level Classes After Completion <strong>of</strong><br />
Developmental Education for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
70.0<br />
Good<br />
60.0<br />
50.0<br />
40.0<br />
30.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.8A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 63<br />
90.0<br />
Closing the Gaps for Historically Underserved Students<br />
in <strong>College</strong>-Level Success after Developmental Completion for Fall Cohort<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.8B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
64<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.9 % in-class retention in credit classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 88.94<br />
= 98.80%<br />
2.2.9 % in-class retention for African-American and Hispanic students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 87.52<br />
= 97.20%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> students retained in class as one indicator <strong>of</strong> students’<br />
potential for success. Performance for all credit classes<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
ranks at the 66th national percentile on the Community <strong>College</strong> Benchmark Project for inclass<br />
retention<br />
●●<br />
represents a slight decline <strong>of</strong> 0.48 percentage points over 2009-10, breaking an 8-year positive<br />
trend (see Figure 2.1.9)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 3 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below that <strong>of</strong> peers 2, 4, and 5<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 1.04 percentage points over 2009-10, breaking a 5-year positive<br />
trend (see Figures 2.2.9A,B)<br />
Based on continued improvement activities with Achieving the Dream, leadership raised the<br />
target for both measures to 90.50 for 2011-12.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 65<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
% In-Class Retention in Credit Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Best Practice<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
85.0<br />
Good<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
Figure 2.1.9<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
% Retention in Credit Classes for Historically Underserved Students<br />
Good<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.9A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
66<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
92.0<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved<br />
Students % In-Class Retention<br />
91.0<br />
90.0<br />
89.0<br />
88.0<br />
87.0<br />
86.0<br />
85.0<br />
84.0<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
83.0<br />
82.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.9B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 67<br />
2.1.10 % in-class retention in core curriculum courses<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 88.48<br />
= 98.30%<br />
2.2.10 % in-class retention in core curriculum courses for African-<br />
American and Hispanic students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 91.00<br />
= 86.93<br />
= 96.60%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> students who are retained in core classes since core classes<br />
represent a substantial segment <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s market. Performance for in-class retention for all<br />
students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below the best in class performance by 5.66 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a slight decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.18 over 2009-10 (see Figure 2.1.10)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> 5 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.87 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.10A,B)<br />
Based on continued improvement activities with Achieving the Dream, leadership raised the target<br />
for both measures to 90.50 for 2011-12.<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
% Retention in Core Curriculum Courses<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Best Practice<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.1.10<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
68<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
97.0<br />
94.0<br />
91.0<br />
88.0<br />
85.0<br />
Good<br />
% Historically Underserved Student Retention<br />
in Core Courses<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
82.0<br />
79.0<br />
76.0<br />
73.0<br />
70.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.10A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
92.00<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved Students<br />
in Retention for Core Courses<br />
90.00<br />
88.00<br />
86.00<br />
84.00<br />
82.00<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
80.00<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.10B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 69<br />
2.1.11 % in-class retention for dual credit students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 85.50 – 95.00<br />
= 96.99<br />
= 102.10%<br />
2.2.11 % <strong>of</strong> in-class retention for African-American and Hispanic dual<br />
credit students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 85.50 – 95.00<br />
= 97.31<br />
= 102.40%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> dual credit students retained in class. Performance for all<br />
dual credit students<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 2.10 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 3 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below peers 1, 5, 6<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 1.25 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.1.11)<br />
Performance for historically underserved dual credit students<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 2.40 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds Peer 2<br />
●●<br />
falls below Peers 1, 3, 4, 5, 6<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 2.21 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.11A,B)<br />
Leadership raised the target to 98.00 for both measures for 2011-12 based on continued participation<br />
in Achieving the Dream improvement activities.<br />
100.0<br />
98.0<br />
96.0<br />
94.0<br />
Good<br />
% In-class Retention for Dual Credit Students<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
92.0<br />
90.0<br />
88.0<br />
86.0<br />
84.0<br />
Figure 2.1.11<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
70<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
98.0<br />
96.0<br />
94.0<br />
92.0<br />
90.0<br />
88.0<br />
86.0<br />
84.0<br />
82.0<br />
80.0<br />
% In-class Retention for Historically Underserved<br />
Dual Credit Students<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Good<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Figure 2.2.11A<br />
100.00<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
Closing the Gap for Historically Underserved Dual Credit<br />
Students for In-class Retention<br />
98.00<br />
96.00<br />
94.00<br />
92.00<br />
90.00<br />
88.00<br />
86.00<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
84.00<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.11B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 71<br />
2.1.12 % in-class retention in all online classes<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 85.70<br />
= 95.20%<br />
2.2.12 % <strong>of</strong> in-class retention in online classes for African-American<br />
and Hispanic students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 81.00 – 90.00<br />
= 83.70<br />
= 93.00%<br />
Leadership tracks student performance in online classes to ensure that different schedule modalities<br />
and modes <strong>of</strong> instruction result in similar student in-class retention rates. In-class retention<br />
performance for all credit students in online classes<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
represents a small decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.95 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
falls below the national best-in-class performance by 6.4 percentage points (see Figure<br />
2.1.12)<br />
In-class retention performance for historically underserved credit students in online classes<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 5 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below Peer 2<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease <strong>of</strong> 1.03 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.12A,B)<br />
Leadership left both targets intact based on performance trends.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
72<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
% Retention in Online Classes<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5 Peer 6 Best Practice<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
Good<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
Figure 2.1.12<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
% Retention in Online Classes for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.12A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 73<br />
95.0<br />
Closing the Gap in Online In-Class Retention<br />
for Historically Underserved Students<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
70.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.12B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
74<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.13 # <strong>of</strong> associate degrees awarded<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 900 – 1,000<br />
= 1,069<br />
= 106.90%<br />
2.2.13 # <strong>of</strong> associate degrees awarded to African-American and Hispanic<br />
students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 360 – 400<br />
= 364<br />
= 91.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> associate degrees awarded each year as a key component <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s accountability to the state <strong>of</strong> Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Performance<br />
for all students regarding associate degree completion<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 6.90 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year positive trend<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 2.1.13A)<br />
●●<br />
reflects a 22% DCCCD market share, a decline from 25% in 2009-10 due to the growth in<br />
associate degrees from Peer 3 (See Figure 2.1.13B)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students regarding associate degree completion<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
reflects a positive 6-year trend<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 5 <strong>of</strong> 6 peers<br />
●●<br />
falls below Peer 6<br />
●●<br />
represents an 18% market share, a decrease <strong>of</strong> 4 percentage points over 2009-10 (See<br />
Figure 2.2.13A,B)<br />
Due to continued activities to increase the number <strong>of</strong> students who complete with an associate<br />
degree, leadership increase the target to 1,250 overall and 450 for historically underserved<br />
students.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 75<br />
1350<br />
1200<br />
1050<br />
Associate Degrees Awarded<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
900<br />
750<br />
600<br />
Good<br />
450<br />
300<br />
150<br />
0<br />
Figure 2.13A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share <strong>of</strong><br />
Associate Degrees 2010-11<br />
RLC<br />
22%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
78%<br />
Figure 2.1.13B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
76<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
600<br />
550<br />
500<br />
450<br />
Associate Degrees for Historically Underserved Students Groups<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
400<br />
350<br />
300<br />
Good<br />
250<br />
200<br />
150<br />
100<br />
50<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.2.13A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share <strong>of</strong><br />
Associate Degrees 2010-11 for<br />
Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC<br />
18%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
82%<br />
Figure 2.2.13B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 77<br />
2.1.14 # <strong>of</strong> certificates awarded<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 225 – 250<br />
= 151<br />
= 60.40%<br />
2.2.14 # <strong>of</strong> certificates awarded to African-American and Hispanic<br />
students<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 113 – 125<br />
= 63<br />
= 50.40%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> certificates awarded each year as a component <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
accountability to the state <strong>of</strong> Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Performance for all<br />
students regarding certificate completion<br />
●●<br />
falls well below the target range by 29.6 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 59 certificates over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
represents a DCCCD market share <strong>of</strong> 7%, a decline <strong>of</strong> 5 percentage points over 2009-10.<br />
(see Figures 2.1.14A,B)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students regarding certificate completion<br />
●●<br />
falls well below the target range by 39.6 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 12 certificates over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5 percent market share, a decline <strong>of</strong> 3 percentage points over 2009-10 (see<br />
Figures 2.2.14A,B)<br />
Leadership lowered the targets for both groups in 2011-12 following closure <strong>of</strong> the Real Estate<br />
Program, Educational Para-Pr<strong>of</strong>essional, and Environmental Systems Technology Programs.<br />
For all students the new target is 200 and for historically underserved students the target is<br />
100.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
78<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
750<br />
675<br />
600<br />
525<br />
450<br />
375<br />
300<br />
225<br />
150<br />
75<br />
Good<br />
Certificates Awarded<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.1.14A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share <strong>of</strong><br />
Certificates 2010-11<br />
RLC<br />
7%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
93%<br />
Figure 2.1.14B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 79<br />
450<br />
420<br />
390<br />
360<br />
330<br />
300<br />
270<br />
240<br />
210<br />
180<br />
150<br />
120<br />
90<br />
60<br />
30<br />
0<br />
Certificates for Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10<br />
Good<br />
Figure 2.2.14A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share <strong>of</strong><br />
Certificates 2010-11 for<br />
Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC<br />
5%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
95%<br />
Figure 2.2.14B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
80<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.1.15 % <strong>of</strong> fall 2007 cohort who met their intended goal to transfer or<br />
are still enrolled<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 54.00 – 60.00<br />
= 72.90<br />
= 121.50%<br />
2.2.15 % <strong>of</strong> fall 2007 African-American and Hispanic student cohort<br />
who met their intended goal to transfer or are still enrolled<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 52.20 – 58.00<br />
= 68.00<br />
= 117.20%<br />
Leadership tracks the transfer rates <strong>of</strong> student fall cohorts since preparation for transfer is<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s hedgehog, or what the college does best. Performance for the percentage <strong>of</strong> all fall<br />
cohort students who continue to persist or have transferred to a university<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 21.50 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 20.11 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure 2.1.15)<br />
Performance for the percentage <strong>of</strong> historically underserved fall cohort students who continue to<br />
persist or have transferred to a university<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 17.20 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 17.26 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figures 2.2.15A,B)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s increase in transfer rates is due in part to the college’s ability to more accurately<br />
track transfers using the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC). In past years one <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s<br />
primary transfer destinations did not participate in the NSC. All <strong>Richland</strong>’s primary<br />
transfer universities now participate in the clearinghouse program enabling the college to more<br />
accurately determine transfer rates. Based on 2010-12 performance and <strong>Richland</strong>’s continued<br />
emphasis on student successful milestone completion, leadership raised the target to 75.00 for<br />
2011-12 for both measures.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 81<br />
(%)<br />
75<br />
70<br />
65<br />
60<br />
% <strong>Richland</strong> Students Transferred to 4-<strong>Year</strong> Institutions<br />
or Continued at Community <strong>College</strong><br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
55<br />
50<br />
45<br />
40<br />
35<br />
Source: THECB Automated Student Follow-up System<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10<br />
Figure 2.1.15<br />
Source: National Student Clearinghouse<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
Transfer % <strong>of</strong> Historically Underserved Students<br />
to 4-<strong>Year</strong> Institutions<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
Good<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10<br />
Figure 2.2.15A<br />
Source: National Student Clearinghouse System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
82<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
85.0<br />
Closing the Gap in University Transfer for<br />
Historically Underserved Students<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
projected<br />
Af-Am & Hispanic<br />
All Credit Students<br />
2012-13<br />
projected<br />
2014-15<br />
projected<br />
Figure 2.2.15A<br />
Source: National Student Clearinghouse System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 83<br />
2.1.16 # <strong>of</strong> students completing the core curriculum<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 1,305 – 1,450<br />
= 1,294<br />
= 89.20%<br />
2.2.16 # <strong>of</strong> African-American and Hispanic students who complete the<br />
core curriculum<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 495 – 550<br />
= 468<br />
= 85.10%<br />
Leadership tracks student completion <strong>of</strong> the core curriculum as a key indicator <strong>of</strong> our students’<br />
abilities to obtain an associate degree and/or to successfully transfer to a university. Performance<br />
for all students who complete the core curriculum<br />
●●<br />
falls just below the target range by 0.80 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease <strong>of</strong> 118 core completers over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 2.1.16A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a 30% DCCCD market share, a decline <strong>of</strong> 2 percentage points over 2009-10<br />
due primarily to growth in completers by Peers 3 and 6 (See Figure 2.1.16B)<br />
Performance for historically underserved students who complete the core curriculum<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range by 4.9 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> decline <strong>of</strong> 57 core completers over 2009-10<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 2.2.16A)<br />
●●<br />
represents a market share <strong>of</strong> 24%, a 2 percent decline over 2009-10 primarily due to<br />
growth in core completers by Peers 2, 4, and 5 (See Figure 2.2.16B)<br />
Leadership left the overall target intact for 2011-12 since it is unclear if or how the institution <strong>of</strong> a<br />
new core curriculum may have affected overall core completion but raised the target for historically<br />
underserved students to 650 based on Achieving the Dream initiative and the state’s Closing the<br />
Gaps mandate.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
84<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
1500<br />
1350<br />
1200<br />
1050<br />
900<br />
750<br />
600<br />
450<br />
300<br />
150<br />
Core Curriculum Completers<br />
RLC Peer 1<br />
Peer 2 Peer 3<br />
Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 2.1.16A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share<br />
Core Curriculum Completers<br />
RLC<br />
30%<br />
Rest <strong>of</strong><br />
DCCCD<br />
70%<br />
Figure 2.1.16B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 85<br />
800<br />
700<br />
600<br />
Core Completion by Historically Underserved Students<br />
RLC Afr-American RLC Hispanic RLC Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 1 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 2 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 3 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
Peer 4 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 5 Afr-Am & Hisp Peer 6 Afr-Am & Hisp<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
500<br />
400<br />
300<br />
Good<br />
200<br />
100<br />
0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
RLC produces 24% <strong>of</strong> the DCCCD's Closing The Gaps (CTG) Core Completers<br />
Figure 2.2.16A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
DCCCD Market Share <strong>of</strong> Core<br />
Completers for Historically<br />
Underserved Students<br />
RLC<br />
24%<br />
DCCCD<br />
76%<br />
Figure 2.2.16B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
86<br />
KPI 2.3 Promote student engagement and satisfaction<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
2.3.1 % <strong>of</strong> students who indicate satisfaction with the services to<br />
support student learning as measured by the Noel-Levitz Student<br />
Satisfaction Inventory on a 7-point scale<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 5.40 – 6.00<br />
= 5.40<br />
= 90.00%<br />
Leadership tracks student satisfaction with services to support learning as measured by the<br />
biennial administration <strong>of</strong> the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory conducted since 1998.<br />
The student satisfaction is measured on a 7-point scale and was last administered during fall<br />
2010. Performance for the fall 2010 survey administration<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 0.07 percentage points over fall 2008<br />
●●<br />
represents performance below the national best-in-class performance (See figure 2.3.1)<br />
Performance declined for this measure in fall 2010 due to primarily two factors. The financial<br />
aid <strong>of</strong>fice experienced an unexpected turnover in leadership during Fall 2010 losing both the<br />
director and assistant director. The increases in the number <strong>of</strong> financial aid applicants and<br />
veteran aid applicants overwhelmed an already under-staffed financial aid <strong>of</strong>fice. Despite<br />
these factors, <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership remains committed to providing exceptional service and<br />
left the ambitious target <strong>of</strong> 6.00 intact for 2011-12.<br />
7.0<br />
Level <strong>of</strong> Satisfaction with Student Services (NLSSI)<br />
6.7<br />
6.4<br />
6.1<br />
5.8<br />
5.5<br />
5.2<br />
4.9<br />
4.6<br />
4.3<br />
<strong>Richland</strong><br />
Best in Class<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
4.0<br />
Figure 2.3.1<br />
2004 2006 2008 2009 2010<br />
Sig. above the mean in 1998 at the .01 level, in 2000 at the .05 level, in 2002 at the .001 level<br />
Source: Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction 02, 04, 06, 08, 10<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 87<br />
2.3.2 % <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s five Community <strong>College</strong> Survey <strong>of</strong> Student Engagement<br />
(CCSSE) benchmarks <strong>of</strong> student success exceeding<br />
a score <strong>of</strong> 50<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 72.00 – 80.00<br />
= 80.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks how well the college performs on the CCSSE’s 5 benchmarks <strong>of</strong><br />
student success. The last CCSSE administration was in Spring 2010 and another will not occur<br />
until spring 2012. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range (see Figure 2.3.2A)<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the CCSSE benchmark average on 4 <strong>of</strong> 5 benchmarks <strong>of</strong> student success (see<br />
Figure 2.3.2B)<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all extra-large community colleges on all 5 benchmarks<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> urban community colleges on 2 <strong>of</strong> 5 benchmarks<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all other Achieving the Dream colleges on 4 <strong>of</strong> 5 benchmarks<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all other SACS colleges on 3 <strong>of</strong> 5 benchmarks<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the performance <strong>of</strong> all other DCCCD colleges on 4 <strong>of</strong> 5 benchmarks<br />
●●<br />
falls below all best performers (see Figure 2.3.2B)<br />
Leadership raised the target to 100.00 for 2011-12 based on continued improvement efforts.<br />
7<br />
6<br />
Trends for # <strong>of</strong> CCSSE Benchmarks Exceeded<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Benchmarks Exceeding 50<br />
Total # <strong>of</strong> Benchmarks<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
Figure 2.3.2A<br />
2006 2008 2010<br />
Source: CCSSE 2010<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
88<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
Good<br />
Active/Collaborative<br />
Learning<br />
Student Effort<br />
Benchmark Comparisons<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> CCSSE average Ex. Large <strong>College</strong>s<br />
Urban <strong>College</strong>s AtD Consortium SACS <strong>College</strong>s<br />
DCCCD <strong>College</strong>s Best CCSSE Cohort Best Ex. Large <strong>College</strong>s<br />
Best Urban <strong>College</strong>s<br />
Academic<br />
Challenge<br />
Student/Faculty<br />
Interaction<br />
Support for<br />
Learners<br />
Figure 2.3.2B<br />
Source: CCSSE 2010<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 89<br />
2.3.3 % <strong>of</strong> credit classes incorporating eCampus in the curriculum<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 99.83<br />
= 99.80%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> credit classes that include eCampus in the curriculum<br />
since this has been a major improvement initiative over the past several years. Performance<br />
for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
meets or exceeds all 6 peers (see Figure 2.3.3)<br />
Since use <strong>of</strong> eCampus is now required <strong>of</strong> all faculty in all credit classes, leadership discontinued<br />
tracking <strong>of</strong> this measure.<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
45.0<br />
40.0<br />
35.0<br />
30.0<br />
Good<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Classes Incorporating eCampus in Curriculum<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Peer 1 Peer 2 Peer 3 Peer 4<br />
Peer 5 Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Figure 2.3.3<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
90<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #3: Empower All Employees to Succe<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #3:<br />
Empower All Employees to Succeed<br />
Score = 7.4<br />
Introduction<br />
The leadership <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Empowers All Employees to Succeed by focusing on 5 key indicators<br />
<strong>of</strong> performance. Senior leadership engages in strategic actions to promote excellence in job<br />
performance by employing right-fit hiring practices and providing opportunities for internal promotion.<br />
Leadership provides excellence in job satisfaction and engagement through regular employee feedback<br />
opportunities via satisfaction surveys, open forums, college-wide SWOTs, numerous employee<br />
recognition opportunities, stipends for degree attainment, and faculty reclassification for advanced<br />
degrees. Leadership supports and provides a comprehensive pr<strong>of</strong>essional development plan for all<br />
employee groups through the funding <strong>of</strong> the college’s Thunder Water Organizational Learning Institute<br />
(TOLI). Senior leadership proactively manages and tracks employee turnover and demonstrates<br />
a focus on workforce diversity through monthly tracking <strong>of</strong> the full-time employee turnover rate and<br />
employee diversity <strong>of</strong> the 4 major employee groups <strong>of</strong> administrators, pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff, fulltime<br />
faculty, and adjunct faculty. Finally, leadership provides a safe and healthy working environment<br />
by monitoring workplace accidents and determining root causes, ensuring that emergency notification<br />
systems are in working order, providing appropriate and safe lighting for the campus, tracking <strong>of</strong><br />
CLERY Act crimes, and by ensuring that all employees have ample opportunity to use vacation leave.<br />
Following is a summary <strong>of</strong> performance for 5 KPIs indicating how well <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Empowers<br />
All Employees to Succeed.<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
3.1 Score = 10.00<br />
Promote Excellence in Job Performance reflects a perfect score <strong>of</strong> 10.00, an increase <strong>of</strong><br />
0.66 points over 2009-10. Performance meets the top <strong>of</strong> the target range for 1 <strong>of</strong> 4 strategic*<br />
measures and exceeds the target range for the remaining 3 measures. This KPI aligns with<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s strategic advantages <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff who demonstrate loyalty to <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
through service above and beyond basic job requirements and a commitment to performance<br />
excellence.<br />
3.2 Score = 9.96<br />
Provide Excellence in Job Satisfaction and Engagement reflects a score within the target<br />
range and remains the same as the previous year. Two strategic* and three operational* measures<br />
comprise this KPI. Three <strong>of</strong> 5 measures scored above the target range, 1 measure scored<br />
at the top <strong>of</strong> the target range, and 1 measure scored within the target range. This KPI aligns<br />
with <strong>Richland</strong>’s core competency <strong>of</strong> development and engagement <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
ed<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 91<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
3.3 Score = 8.47<br />
Provide Comprehensive Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Development for all Employee Groups falls below<br />
the target range by more than 5 percentage points and represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 0.49 percentage<br />
points over 2009-10. Two operational* measures comprise this KPI. One measure scores within<br />
the target range and one scores below the target range. The KPI aligns with <strong>Richland</strong>’s core<br />
competency <strong>of</strong> development and engagement <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff. See pages A18 and A19 for<br />
an organizational action plan emphasis to address this performance gap.<br />
3.4 Score = 5.98<br />
Proactively Manage Turnover and Diversity reflects a score below the target range and a 3.61<br />
point decrease from the college’s 2009-10 performance. This KPI aligns with <strong>Richland</strong>’s value<br />
and encouragement <strong>of</strong> diversity in its many dimensions and the college’s reputation for a strong<br />
and continuous commitment to diversity. Four measures track KPI progress, 1 strategic* and 3<br />
operational*. One operational* measure scores above the target range, one strategic* measure<br />
scores within the target range, and 2 operational* measures fall below the target range. See<br />
pages A18 and A19 for an organizational action plan emphasis to address this performance gap.<br />
3.5 Score = 5.00<br />
Provide a Safe and Healthy Working Environment reflects a score well below the target<br />
range as well as a small decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.73 points over performance in 2009-10. Seven strategic*<br />
measures comprise this KPI with two scoring above the target range, 3 measures scoring at the<br />
top <strong>of</strong> the target range, and 2 measures well below the target range. This KPI aligns with the<br />
college’s strategic challenge to secure sufficient budget reserves to handle aging infrastructure<br />
needs. See pages A18 and A19 for an organizational action plan emphasis to address this performance<br />
gap.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
92<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Measures:<br />
3.1.1 # <strong>of</strong> cumulative decision-making days that <strong>Richland</strong> mandates<br />
annually to non-contractual employees<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 4.40 – 4.00<br />
= 1.00<br />
= 175.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> decision-making days accumulated each year by pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
support staff as an indication <strong>of</strong> compliance with job requirements and responsibilities. The<br />
target is to accumulate few decision-making days. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 75 percentage points (positive direction)<br />
●●<br />
reflects an improvement in performance over 2009-10 where pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff accumulated<br />
5 decision-making days (see Table 3.1.1)<br />
Leadership increased the rigor <strong>of</strong> this target by decreasing the target number <strong>of</strong> accumulated<br />
days to 3 for 2011-12 based on continued right-fit hiring strategies.<br />
Table 3.1.1<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Decision-making Days for<br />
Non-Contractual Employees<br />
Performance<br />
2006-07 2<br />
Target<br />
2007-08 1 3.30 - 3.00<br />
2008-09 4 3.30 - 3.00<br />
2009-10 5 4.40 - 4.00<br />
2010-11 1 4.40 - 4.00<br />
Source: RLC Employee Services Dept.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 93<br />
3.1.2 % <strong>of</strong> current employees who are eligible for continued employment<br />
at the conclusion <strong>of</strong> the academic year<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> contractual employees who are eligible for continued employment<br />
at the end <strong>of</strong> the academic year as an indication <strong>of</strong> compliance with job requirements<br />
and responsibilities. This number does not include grant terminations or reductions in force.<br />
Performance for this new measure<br />
●●<br />
achieves the top <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a 3-year positive trend (see Figure 3.1.2)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on the continued use <strong>of</strong> right-fit hiring strategies.<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Contracts Eligible for Renewal<br />
Performance Target<br />
2006-07 100.00<br />
2007-08 100.00<br />
2008-09 99.59<br />
2009-10 100.00<br />
2010-11 100.00 90.00 - 100.00<br />
Table 3.1.2 Source: RLC Employee Services Dept.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
94<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.1.3 # <strong>of</strong> internal promotions for <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> fulltime employees<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 18 – 20<br />
= 28<br />
= 140.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> administrators and pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff employees who<br />
are promoted internally each academic year. A promotion is defined as receiving a 7% or<br />
greater salary increase in keeping with our human resources guidelines and policies. Performance<br />
for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 40 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline <strong>of</strong> 6 promotions over 2009-10 (see Figure 3.1.3)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on continued budgetary restrictions.<br />
45<br />
40<br />
35<br />
30<br />
25<br />
20<br />
15<br />
10<br />
5<br />
0<br />
# <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Internal Promotions<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Good<br />
Figure 3.1.3<br />
Source: <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> Employee Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 95<br />
3.1.4 % <strong>of</strong> PSS employees who use the tuition reimbursement waiver<br />
with successful class completion<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 9.00 – 10.00<br />
= 10.33<br />
= 103.30%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff (PSS) who take advantage <strong>of</strong><br />
the tuition reimbursement waiver benefit and successfully complete the class. This academic<br />
year, 34 PSS employees took this opportunity. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 3.3 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the 2009-10 percentage <strong>of</strong> participating employees by 3% (see Figure 3.1.4)<br />
Leadership raised the target modestly based on the 2010-11 performance.<br />
12<br />
11<br />
10<br />
9<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
Figure 3.1.4<br />
% <strong>of</strong> PSS Employees Using Tuition Reimbursement Waiver<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Good<br />
Source: <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> Employee Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
96<br />
KPI 3.2 Provide excellence in job satisfaction and engagement<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.2.1 % <strong>of</strong> employees satisfied with employment at RLC<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 76.50 – 85.00<br />
= 85.35<br />
= 100.40%<br />
Leadership has tracked employee satisfaction since 2000 using the Campus Quality Survey<br />
provided by Performance Horizons. Due to an inability <strong>of</strong> Performance Horizons to provide<br />
national percentile rankings or best performance data, leadership made the decision to discontinue<br />
the administration <strong>of</strong> this survey. The data represented above come from the last<br />
administration in fall 2009. Senior leadership is researching other employee climate survey<br />
options that are affordable and provide appropriate comparisons, therefore the measure was<br />
eliminated for 2011-12 until leadership decides on a replacement survey instrument.<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
Employee Satisfaction with RLC Employment<br />
by Employee Type<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Support Faculty Administrator<br />
All Staff 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
2002 2005 2007 2009<br />
Figure 3.2.1<br />
Source: Campus Quality Survey 00, 02, 05, 07, 09<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 97<br />
3.2.2 % <strong>of</strong> employees who are satisfied with the deployment <strong>of</strong> our<br />
college’s ThunderValues<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 3.65 – 4.05<br />
= 4.00<br />
= 98.80%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership chose to not to re-administer the ThunderValues survey due to other<br />
pressing issues concerning severe college budget shortfalls caused by decreases in state and<br />
local tax funding, massive staff turnover due to reductions in force and retirements, and used<br />
other survey methods and focus groups to obtain employee input concerning all <strong>of</strong> these issues.<br />
Leadership decided not to overburden employees with an excessive amount <strong>of</strong> surveys;<br />
therefore there is no new data to report for 2010-11, and this measure was discontinued for<br />
2011-12. <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> continues to measure deployment <strong>of</strong> ThunderValues through the<br />
administrative upward evaluation process conducted in the spring <strong>of</strong> each academic year.<br />
5.0<br />
4.5<br />
Assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> ThunderValues Deployment<br />
2006 2008 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Scale: 5='Strongly Agree' 1='Strongly Disagree'<br />
4.0<br />
3.5<br />
3.0<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
Good<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
All Full and Limited Fulltime<br />
Employees<br />
Full-time Faculty Full-time Administrators Full-time Pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
Support Staff<br />
Figure 3.2.2<br />
Source: 06, 08 Assessment <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> ThunderValues<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
98<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.2.3 % <strong>of</strong> employees satisfied with RLC recognition programs<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 3.15 – 3.50<br />
= 3.52<br />
= 100.60%<br />
Due to an inability <strong>of</strong> Performance Horizons to provide national percentile rankings or best<br />
performance data, leadership made the decision to discontinue the administration <strong>of</strong> the Performance<br />
Horizons Campus Quality Survey. The data represented above come from the last<br />
administration in fall 2009. Senior leadership is researching other employee climate survey<br />
options that are affordable and appropriate. Since <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership has not yet identified<br />
a replacement survey, the measure is discontinued for 2011-12.<br />
5.00<br />
4.60<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Employees are rewarded for<br />
job performance<br />
2002 2005<br />
2007 2009 RLC<br />
5.00<br />
4.60<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Administrators recognize<br />
employees<br />
2002 2005<br />
2007 2009 RLC<br />
4.20<br />
3.80<br />
3.40<br />
3.00<br />
2009 Nat Norm 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
4.20<br />
3.80<br />
3.40<br />
3.00<br />
2009 Nat Norm 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
2.60<br />
2.60<br />
2.20<br />
2.20<br />
1.80<br />
1.80<br />
1.40<br />
1.40<br />
1.00<br />
1.00<br />
Figure 3.2.3A<br />
Source: Campus Quality Survey 00, 02, 05, 07, 09<br />
Figure 3.2.3B<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 99<br />
5.00<br />
4.60<br />
4.20<br />
3.80<br />
3.40<br />
3.00<br />
2.60<br />
2.20<br />
1.80<br />
1.40<br />
1.00<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Employees are Rewarded for Job Performance<br />
2002 2005 2007<br />
2009 90% <strong>of</strong> Target 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
PSS Faculty Administrators<br />
Figure 3.2.3C<br />
Source: Campus Quality Survey 00, 02, 05, 07, 09<br />
5.00<br />
4.60<br />
4.20<br />
3.80<br />
3.40<br />
3.00<br />
2.60<br />
2.20<br />
1.80<br />
1.40<br />
1.00<br />
Figure 3.2.3D<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Administrators Recognize Employees<br />
2002 2005 2007<br />
2009 90% <strong>of</strong> Target 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
PSS Faculty Administrators<br />
Source: Campus Quality Survey 00, 02, 05, 07, 09<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
100<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.2.4 # <strong>of</strong> Administrative and Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Support Staff receiving<br />
educational stipends<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 5 – 6<br />
= 7<br />
= 116.70%<br />
New this year, leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> educational stipends awarded to pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
support staff and administrators for completion <strong>of</strong> an advanced degree. Performance for this<br />
measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 16.70 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a decrease <strong>of</strong> 5 stipends over 2009-10 (see Figure 3.2.4)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on significant reduction in the number <strong>of</strong><br />
employees.<br />
14<br />
12<br />
10<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Educational Stipends Awarded for Advanced Degree Completion<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
8<br />
6<br />
Good<br />
4<br />
2<br />
0<br />
Figure 3.2.4<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> Employee Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 101<br />
3.2.5 # <strong>of</strong> faculty completing requirements for reclassification or<br />
advanced degrees<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 3.00 – 4.00<br />
= 4.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
New this year, leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> faculty who complete DCCCD requirements for<br />
reclassification on the faculty salary schedule. This reclassification results in an increase in<br />
compensation. Reclassification may occur through completion <strong>of</strong> required numbers <strong>of</strong> graduate<br />
hours or by finishing an advanced degree. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the top <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds 2009-10 by 1 (see Figure 3.2.5)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 due to large numbers <strong>of</strong> faculty retirements.<br />
5.0<br />
4.5<br />
4.0<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Faculty Completing Reclassification Requirements<br />
Due to Advanced Degree Attainment<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
3.5<br />
3.0<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
1.5<br />
Good<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 3.2.5<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Office <strong>of</strong> Employee Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 3.3 Provide comprehensive pr<strong>of</strong>essional development for all employee groups<br />
102<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.3.1 % <strong>of</strong> fulltime employees who exceed pr<strong>of</strong>essional development<br />
expectations<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 85.50 – 95.00<br />
= 75.00<br />
= 78.90%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> fulltime employees who go beyond the required number <strong>of</strong><br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional development hours. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range by 11.1 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
reflects a negative 5-year trend (see Figure 3.3.1)<br />
As <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership turned to wonder about the root causes <strong>of</strong> poor performance for this<br />
measure, it was determined that due to the record number <strong>of</strong> positions that the college is unable<br />
to fill due to budget constraints, many faculty and staff do not have sufficient time to go above<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional development requirements. Further, leadership determined that data from this<br />
measure was nice to know but not actionable and therefore discontinued tracking for 2011-12.<br />
100.0<br />
% Fulltime Employees Who Exceed<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Development Requirements<br />
95.0<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
Good<br />
60.0<br />
06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Figure 3.3.1<br />
DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 103<br />
3.3.2 % <strong>of</strong> fulltime employees meeting pr<strong>of</strong>essional development expectations<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 90.42<br />
= 90.40%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> fulltime employees who meet the required number <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development hours. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the 2009-10 performance by 4.71 percentage points (see Figure 3.3.2)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership, in collaboration with the Assistant Dean <strong>of</strong> TOLI, modified the pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development requirements for 2010-11 in an effort to improve the relevance and applicability<br />
<strong>of</strong> training. Leadership left the target intact at maximum performance due to continued<br />
strategic emphasis in this area and additional modifications to the pr<strong>of</strong>essional development<br />
program.<br />
100.0<br />
95.0<br />
% Fulltime Employees Who Meet Annual Pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
Development Requirements<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90.0<br />
85.0<br />
80.0<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
Good<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
Figure 3.3.2<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
104<br />
KPI 3.4 Proactively manage turnover and diversity<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.4.1 % <strong>of</strong> fulltime employee turnover for the academic year<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 12.10 – 11.00<br />
= 20.45<br />
= 14.10%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> fulltime employee turnover to ensure that <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
has the employee capacity to achieve the college’s mission. Due to several factors, the magnitude<br />
<strong>of</strong> which could not be anticipated, <strong>Richland</strong> experienced the largest employee turnover<br />
in its history with 134 employees. Significant cuts in state funding and local tax base funding<br />
to the DCCCD caused the college to employ a reduction in force among administrative and<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff. The DCCCD also <strong>of</strong>fered an aggressive retirement incentive which<br />
resulted in the loss <strong>of</strong> 27 long-serving faculty, 9 administrators, and 32 pr<strong>of</strong>essional support<br />
staff. Additionally, five faculty left to pursue other opportunities as did 15 administrators and 46<br />
pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls well below the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a non-beneficial increase over 2009-10 (see Figure 3.4.1)<br />
●●<br />
represents <strong>of</strong>f the chart retirements (n=68) compared to the 2009-10 National Community<br />
<strong>College</strong> Benchmark figures<br />
●●<br />
represents a high percentage <strong>of</strong> non-retiree (n=66) departures compared to the 2009-10<br />
National Community <strong>College</strong> Benchmark figures (see Table 3.4.1)<br />
Leadership decreased the rigor for 2011-12 by increasing the target to 13.00 based on expectations<br />
<strong>of</strong> additional mid-year retirements due to the second phase <strong>of</strong> the DCCCD voluntary retirement<br />
incentive option.<br />
Turnover Rate (%)<br />
22.0<br />
20.0<br />
18.0<br />
16.0<br />
14.0<br />
12.0<br />
10.0<br />
8.0<br />
6.0<br />
4.0<br />
2.0<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 3.4.1<br />
RLC 90% <strong>of</strong> Target 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
Employee Turnover for Full-time Staff<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11<br />
NCCBP Benchmark Group<br />
AY2009-2010<br />
10th<br />
Percentile<br />
25th<br />
Percentile<br />
Median<br />
75th<br />
Percentile<br />
90th<br />
Percentile<br />
% <strong>Year</strong> Retirements 0.56% 1.27% 2.13% 0.03% 0.04%<br />
% <strong>Year</strong> Departures 1.86% 3.05% 4.86% 0.07% 0.11%<br />
Table 3.4.1<br />
Source: NCCBP 2009, 2010 <strong>Report</strong>s, RLC EOY <strong>Report</strong>s 2008-09, 2009-10
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 105<br />
3.4.2 % <strong>of</strong> employee diversity for full-time employees<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 88.20 – 98.00<br />
= 89.86<br />
= 91.70%<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership monitors the diversity <strong>of</strong> the fulltime workforce reviewing ethnic representation<br />
for each employee group. Leadership sets diversity targets based on pool availability<br />
as reflected in the United States Census for Dallas County. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the overall target range<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the Dallas County population segments for African-American, Hispanic, and Asian<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
●●<br />
(see Figure 3.4.2)<br />
achieves the 90th percentile in the National Community <strong>College</strong> Benchmark for percentage<br />
<strong>of</strong> minority employees (see Table 3.4.2A)<br />
meets the target range for faculty and pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff employee groups (see<br />
Table 3.4.2B)<br />
falls below the target range for administrators (see Table 3.4.2B)<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s diversity falls short <strong>of</strong> target for administrators due to the loss <strong>of</strong> 24 administrators<br />
during the academic year and leadership’s ability to replace only 2 <strong>of</strong> those positions. Leadership<br />
left the target intact for 2011-12 based on continued emphasis on diversity in hiring.<br />
80.0<br />
70.0<br />
Faculty/Staff Diversity Matched to Dallas County<br />
75%<br />
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
60.0<br />
50.0<br />
40.0<br />
Dallas County<br />
% <strong>of</strong> population<br />
30.0<br />
20.0<br />
10.0<br />
10%<br />
9% 6%<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 3.4.2B<br />
Anglo African American Hispanic Asian<br />
Source: 2000 Census Data, DCCCD Colleague System<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Employees Who are Minority<br />
10th<br />
Percentile<br />
25th<br />
Percentile<br />
Median<br />
75th<br />
Percentile<br />
90th<br />
Percentile<br />
National Benchmark Cohort 2.09 4.64 9.75 18.36 35.89<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 36.19<br />
Best Practice Range<br />
Table 3.4.2A<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System, NCCBP data<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
106<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Classification (score weight%)<br />
Faculty (45%)<br />
Masters Degrees or<br />
higher by ethnic group<br />
Overall Diversity<br />
Score<br />
89.86<br />
Ethnic Group<br />
Target for<br />
2010-11<br />
Performance for<br />
2010-11<br />
County State USA Adjusted Maximum<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Total % % % % % Score Score Score<br />
African-American 10.00 13.70 9.82 6.52 5.92 13.70 10.00 10<br />
Hispanic-American 11.00 13.70 6.22 9.93 4.29 12.45 10.00 10<br />
Asian-American 9.00 11.64 8.84 7.41 7.16 12.93 10.00 10<br />
Other (non-Anglo) 1.00 0.68 2.27 2.54 1.47 6.80 6.80 10 Avg. Score<br />
Classification (score weight%)<br />
Administrators (35%)<br />
Bachelor Degrees or<br />
higher by ethnic group<br />
Weighted Avg. Score<br />
4.14 Faculty 9.20<br />
Ethnic Group<br />
Target for<br />
2010-11<br />
Performance for<br />
2010-11<br />
County State USA Adjusted Maximum<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Total % % % % % Score Score Score<br />
African-American 13.00 17.05 11.92 7.03 6.37 13.12 10.00 10<br />
Hispanic-American 11.00 6.82 6.03 10.11 4.29 6.20 6.20 10<br />
Asian-American 7.00 4.55 7.00 5.64 6.58 6.50 6.50 10<br />
Other (non-Anglo) 0.05 4.55 2.34 2.92 1.66 0.00 10.00 10 Avg. Score<br />
Classification (score weight%)<br />
PSS (20%)<br />
HS Diplomas or GED,<br />
Some <strong>College</strong> but no<br />
degree, Associates<br />
Weighted Avg. Score<br />
2.86 Admin. 8.18<br />
Ethnic Group<br />
Target for<br />
2010-11<br />
Performance for<br />
2010-11<br />
County Adjusted Maximum<br />
% to Total % % Score Score Score<br />
African-American 22.00 23.23 23.11 10.56 10.00 10<br />
Hispanic-American 10.00 13.55 14.31 13.55 10.00 10<br />
Asian-American 6.00 7.10 2.77 11.83 10.00 10<br />
Other (non-Anglo) 1.00 0.97 7.00 9.70 9.70 10 Avg. Score<br />
Weighted Avg. Score<br />
1.99 PSS 9.93<br />
Table 3.4.2B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 107<br />
3.4.3 % <strong>of</strong> employees hired within the academic year that are diverse<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 45.75<br />
= 45.80%<br />
In order to meet the college’s overall hiring diversity goals, leadership tracks diversity in hiring<br />
during the academic year. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the overall target range<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range for pr<strong>of</strong>essional support staff hiring<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range for administrative and faculty hiring<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline over 2009-10 (see Figure 3.4.3)<br />
Although leadership does not anticipate the opportunity to hire many administrative or pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
support staff positions in 2011-12, there is an expectation that several new fulltime<br />
faculty may be hired therefore the target was left intact.<br />
% Diversity in Fulltime Hiring<br />
for 2010-11<br />
Employee Type<br />
Weight<br />
Actual<br />
(rounded %)<br />
Target<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Diverse<br />
Hires<br />
Total #<br />
<strong>of</strong> Hires<br />
Faculty 45% 45% 60% 6 11<br />
Administrator 35% 25% 35% 1 4<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
Support Staff<br />
Employee Type<br />
20% 37% 40% 24 27<br />
Weight<br />
% Diversity in Fulltime Hiring<br />
for 2009-10<br />
Actual<br />
(rounded %)<br />
Target<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Diverse<br />
Hires<br />
Total #<br />
<strong>of</strong> Hires<br />
Faculty 45% 60% 55% 6 10<br />
Administrator 35% 50% 33% 4 8<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
Support Staff<br />
Table 3.4.3<br />
20% 44% 39% 24 54<br />
DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
108<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.4.4 % <strong>of</strong> credit adjunct faculty from diverse ethnic backgrounds<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 21.83 – 24.25<br />
= 24.55<br />
= 101.20%<br />
Leadership tracks the diversity <strong>of</strong> adjunct faculty who teach credit classes during the academic<br />
year. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 1.20<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 3.53 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure 3.4.4)<br />
Leadership increased the target to 25.00 for 2011-12 based on anticipated opportunities to hire<br />
adjunct faculty.<br />
30.0<br />
27.0<br />
% Diversity <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> Adjunct Faculty<br />
RLC 90% <strong>of</strong> Target 100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
24.0<br />
21.0<br />
18.0<br />
15.0<br />
12.0<br />
9.0<br />
6.0<br />
Good<br />
3.0<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 3.4.4<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 3.5 Provide a safe and healthy working environment<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 109<br />
3.5.1 # <strong>of</strong> on-the-job injury reports processed<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 48.40 - 44<br />
= 25<br />
= 143.20%<br />
New this year, leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> on-the-job injury reports as one measure <strong>of</strong><br />
campus safety. Performance for this measure exceeds the target range by 43.20 percentage<br />
points (see Figure 3.5.1)<br />
Since <strong>Richland</strong> has not tracked these data previously there are no trends to report except performance<br />
throughout the academic year. Based on performance during 2010-11, leadership<br />
increased the rigor <strong>of</strong> this measure by lowering the target to 33 reports for 2011-12.<br />
10<br />
# <strong>of</strong> On-the-job Injury <strong>Report</strong>s Processed 2010-11<br />
9<br />
8<br />
7<br />
6<br />
Good<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
Figure 3.5.2<br />
Sep/Oct Nov/Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul/Aug<br />
Figure 3.5.1<br />
Source: Employee Services Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
110<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.5.2 # <strong>of</strong> on-the-job accidents where employees lost more than 7<br />
consecutive work days<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 2.20 - 2<br />
= 6<br />
= 0.00%<br />
New this year, leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> on-the-job accidents that result in more than 7<br />
consecutive lost work days. Accidents in this category tend to be more serious in nature. Performance<br />
for this measure falls well below the target range with 6 accidents resulting in more<br />
than 7 consecutive lost work days (see Figure 3.5.2)<br />
Two <strong>of</strong> the accidents resulted from falls on the Segway used by the <strong>Richland</strong> Police Department.<br />
The chief <strong>of</strong> police grounded use <strong>of</strong> the Segways until the college can locate appropriate<br />
training. The college chief <strong>of</strong> police is working with the City <strong>of</strong> Dallas Police Department<br />
to obtain training. Since <strong>Richland</strong> has not tracked these data previously there are no trends<br />
to report except performance throughout the year. Based on performance during 2010-11,<br />
leadership decreased the rigor for this measure by increasing the number <strong>of</strong> accidents from 2<br />
to 4 for 2011-12.<br />
3.0<br />
# <strong>of</strong> Employees Losing 7+ Consecutive Work Days<br />
Due to Workplace Injury 2010-11<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
Good<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0.0<br />
Sep/Oct Nov/Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul/Aug<br />
Figure 3.5.2<br />
Source: Employee Services Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 111<br />
3.5.3 % <strong>of</strong> emergency call boxes in working order<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 - 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> call boxes that remain in working order throughout the<br />
academic year. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
achieved the top <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents an improvement over 2009-10 <strong>of</strong> 5 percentage points (see Figure 3.5.3A)<br />
While the last 5 months <strong>of</strong> the academic year reflect 100% <strong>of</strong> the college’s emergency call<br />
boxes working, during several other months the percentage working was below 90% (see Figure<br />
3.5.3B). Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on 2010-11 performance and<br />
the expectation <strong>of</strong> continued 100% performance.<br />
100.0<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Emergency Call Boxes in Working Order<br />
90.0<br />
80.0<br />
70.0<br />
60.0<br />
50.0<br />
40.0<br />
Figure 3.5.3A<br />
Good<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: RLC Police Department<br />
100.0<br />
90.0<br />
80.0<br />
% <strong>of</strong> Emergency Call Boxes in Working Order<br />
Good<br />
70.0<br />
60.0<br />
50.0<br />
40.0<br />
Figure 3.5.3B<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Source: RLC Police Department<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
112<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.5.4 % <strong>of</strong> Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) documentation up to date<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 - 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
New this year, leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> MSDS documentation that is current. Performance<br />
for this measure achieved the top <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
Since this is the first year tracking this measure, no trend data are available. Leadership determined<br />
that this measure is more appropriately tracked at the department level and therefore it<br />
is discontinued for 2011-12.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 113<br />
3.5.5 % exterior lights targeted for replacement that have been replaced<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 - 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
New this year, leadership tracked the scheduled replacement <strong>of</strong> exterior lights since the sufficiency<br />
<strong>of</strong> parking lot lighting has been a concern raised by employees and students. Performance<br />
for this measure achieved maximum performance (See Figure 3.5.5)<br />
Since leadership has not tracked these data previously there are no trends to report other<br />
than progress for the academic year. The target remains intact for 2011-12 since leadership<br />
expects continued maximum performance.<br />
120.0<br />
Progress for Exterior Light Replacement for AY2010-11<br />
105.0<br />
90.0<br />
75.0<br />
60.0<br />
45.0<br />
30.0<br />
Good<br />
15.0<br />
0.0<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Figure 3.5.5<br />
Source: RLC Police Department<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
114<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
3.5.6 % <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s employees who lose vacation days for two<br />
years in a row<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 2 – 1.75<br />
= 1.66 (8 employees)<br />
= 105.10%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> employees who lose vacation days 2 academic years in<br />
a row to ensure that all employees have sufficient opportunity to use vacation hours. Performance<br />
for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 5.10 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a 3-year positive trend (see Figure 3.5.6)<br />
Although this year’s performance exceeds the target range, leadership decreased the rigor for<br />
next year and set the target at 2.00 for 2011-12. Next year’s target is based on the loss <strong>of</strong> significant<br />
numbers <strong>of</strong> employees that the college was unable to replace, potentially causing more<br />
employees to decline use <strong>of</strong> vacation hours.<br />
22.0<br />
20.0<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> RLC Employees Losing Vacation Two <strong>Year</strong>s in a Row<br />
# <strong>of</strong> employees<br />
18.0<br />
16.0<br />
14.0<br />
12.0<br />
10.0<br />
8.0<br />
6.0<br />
4.0<br />
2.0<br />
Good<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 3.5.6<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 115<br />
3.5.7 # <strong>of</strong> crimes (based on Clery Act reporting)<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 1 - 0<br />
= 9<br />
= 0.00%<br />
New for this year, <strong>Richland</strong>’s leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> crimes committed on the campus<br />
that fall under the Clery Act guidelines. The Clery Act includes criminal homicide, sexual<br />
<strong>of</strong>fenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, arson, motor vehicle theft, arrests for liquor or<br />
drug law violations, and possession <strong>of</strong> illegal weapons. Tracking <strong>of</strong> this measure is particularly<br />
important since <strong>Richland</strong>’s campus is located in the 2nd highest crime precinct in the city <strong>of</strong><br />
Dallas according to recent statistics from the City <strong>of</strong> Dallas. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls well short <strong>of</strong> the performance target due to a number <strong>of</strong> drug and liquor-law violations<br />
●●<br />
by students and visitors to the college campus (see Figure 3.5.7A)<br />
represents a decline over the number <strong>of</strong> criminal incidents in 2008-09 and 2009-10 (see<br />
Figure 3.5.7B)<br />
All <strong>of</strong> the nine crimes reported in 2010-11 fall into the categories <strong>of</strong> burglary, motor vehicle theft,<br />
and arrests for drug and liquor violations. Leadership left the aggressive target intact for 2011-<br />
12.<br />
3.5<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Clery Act Crimes by Month<br />
for AY2010-11<br />
3.0<br />
2.5<br />
2.0<br />
Good<br />
1.5<br />
1.0<br />
0.5<br />
0.0<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Figure 3.5.7A<br />
Source: RLC Police Department Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
116<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
20<br />
# Crimes that Fall Under the Clery Act<br />
18<br />
16<br />
14<br />
Good<br />
12<br />
10<br />
8<br />
6<br />
4<br />
2<br />
0<br />
Figure 3.5.7B<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: RLC Police Department Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #4: Ensure Institutional Effectiveness<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 117<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goal #4:<br />
Ensure Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Score = 8.9<br />
Introduction<br />
The leadership <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Ensures Institutional Effectiveness by tracking 3 key indicators<br />
<strong>of</strong> performance. Senior leadership engages in strategic actions to remain fiscally responsible and<br />
sound by carefully monitoring college income and expenditures. Leadership ensures that the college<br />
meets and exceeds internal and external standards by monitoring adherence to requirements and<br />
performance excellence standards. Finally leadership operates the college using environmentally<br />
sustainable practices by tracking indices for energy intensity, water conservation, waste minimization,<br />
and through efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions. Following is a summary <strong>of</strong> performance for<br />
each <strong>of</strong> the 3 KPIs that Ensure Institutional Effectiveness.<br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
4.1 Score = 8.38<br />
Remain fiscally responsible and sound reflects a score that is below the target range and 1<br />
full percentage point below the 2009-10 performance. One strategic* and twelve operational*<br />
measures comprise this KPI. Six measures, including one strategic* exceed the target range,<br />
3 measures fall within the target range, and 4 measures fall below the target range. This KPI<br />
aligns with the ThunderValue <strong>of</strong> integrity as the college leadership manages the college finances<br />
in a way that is transparent to the college community and stakeholders. See pages A18 and A19<br />
for an organizational action plan emphasis to address this performance gap.<br />
4.2 Score = 9.31<br />
Meet and exceed internal and external standards and requirements reflects a score within<br />
the target range and represents an increase <strong>of</strong> 0.82 percentage points over 2009-10. Two<br />
strategic* and 4 operational* measures comprise this KPI. Both strategic* measures fall within<br />
the target range as do 2 operational* measures. Two other operational* measures fall below the<br />
target range. This KPI aligns with the college’s strategic advantages <strong>of</strong> commitment to performance<br />
excellence and a community reputation for high quality and standards.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
118<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Organizational Objectives/KPIs Performance Summary<br />
4.3 Score = 8.87<br />
Operate the college using environmentally sustainable practices reflects a score below the<br />
target range and a decrease <strong>of</strong> 0.43 percentage points over 2009-10. Four operational* measures<br />
comprise this KPI. One measure has a score above the target range, 2 measures reflect<br />
scores within the target range, and 1 measure has a score well below the target range. The<br />
KPI aligns with <strong>Richland</strong>’s core competency <strong>of</strong> sustainable community building and its strategic<br />
advantage <strong>of</strong> a commitment to sustainable practices. See pages A18 and A19 for an organizational<br />
action plan emphasis to address this performance gap.<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 4.1 Remain fiscally responsible and sound<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 119<br />
Measures:<br />
4.1.1 Amount <strong>of</strong> income generated from Corporate and Workforce<br />
Development sources<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
> $1,485,000 – $1,650,000<br />
= $1,785,134<br />
= 108.32%<br />
Leadership tracks the amount <strong>of</strong> income generated through corporate and workforce development<br />
which occurs primarily from the college’s Garland Campus location. Performance for this<br />
measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 8.32 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a small decline <strong>of</strong> $45,490 over 2009-10 (see Figure 4.1.1)<br />
Leadership raised the target to $1,800,000 for 2011-12 based on continued training opportunities<br />
that will occur next year.<br />
$2,200<br />
$2,000<br />
Corporate & Workforce Development Income<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
$1,800<br />
$1,600<br />
Thousands<br />
$1,400<br />
$1,200<br />
$1,000<br />
$800<br />
Good<br />
$600<br />
$400<br />
$200<br />
$0<br />
Figure 4.1.1<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
120<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.2 % <strong>of</strong> annual budget spent on salaries and benefits<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 82.50 – 75.00<br />
= 75.03<br />
= 100.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> the college budget that is spent on employee salaries and<br />
benefits as a key to remaining fiscally responsible. The goal is to remain as close to 75% as<br />
possible. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
achieves the maximum <strong>of</strong> the desired target range<br />
●●<br />
represents improved performance <strong>of</strong> 2.46 percentage points compared to 2009-10 (see<br />
Figure 4.1.2)<br />
Despite the funding cuts from the state, <strong>Richland</strong> maintained fiscal responsibility by not filling a<br />
number <strong>of</strong> vacated positions and re-positioning existing employees when possible. Leadership<br />
left the target intact for 2011-12 since it is an industry standard.<br />
85.0<br />
Payroll Budget Performance<br />
80.0<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
% Budget Spent<br />
75.0<br />
70.0<br />
65.0<br />
60.0<br />
Good<br />
55.0<br />
50.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 4.1.2<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 121<br />
4.1.3 % <strong>of</strong> annual budget spent on instruction<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 43.20 – 48.00<br />
= 50.88<br />
= 106.00%<br />
Leadership monitors the amount <strong>of</strong> the college budget that is spent on instruction to ensure<br />
that sufficient resources are dedicated to the college mission. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 6 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a small decline <strong>of</strong> 3.76 percentage points over 2009-10 (see Figure 4.1.3)<br />
Expenditures on instruction declined somewhat over 2009-10 due to efficiencies in class<br />
scheduling. Leadership left the target intact since it represents an industry standard.<br />
60.0<br />
57.0<br />
54.0<br />
Budget Performance for Instructional Costs<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
51.0<br />
% Budget Spent<br />
48.0<br />
45.0<br />
42.0<br />
39.0<br />
36.0<br />
33.0<br />
30.0<br />
Figure 4.1.3<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
122<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.4 Dollar amount <strong>of</strong> the college fund balance<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ $900,000 – $1,000,000<br />
= $5,008,985<br />
= 500.90%<br />
Leadership tracks the funds the college amasses in the fund balance to ensure that sufficient<br />
resources exist in the event <strong>of</strong> an emergency. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 400.90 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents an increase <strong>of</strong> $452,463 over 2009-10 (see Figure 4.1.4)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on college needs, standards, and past performance.<br />
$9<br />
Operating Fund Balance<br />
$8<br />
$7<br />
Good<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
<strong>Year</strong> <strong>End</strong> Fund (Millions)<br />
$6<br />
$5<br />
$4<br />
$3<br />
$2<br />
$1<br />
$0<br />
Figure 4.1.4<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 123<br />
4.1.5 % <strong>of</strong> budget spent compared to the amount budgeted<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 94.00<br />
= 94.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> expenditures to the available budget as a key indicator <strong>of</strong><br />
fiscal responsibility. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a small increase <strong>of</strong> 1.00 percentage point over 2009-10 (see Figure 4.1.5)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 since it represents maximum performance.<br />
100.0<br />
97.0<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Performance to Budget<br />
Actual vs. Budgeted<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
94.0<br />
91.0<br />
88.0<br />
85.0<br />
82.0<br />
79.0<br />
Good<br />
76.0<br />
73.0<br />
70.0<br />
Figure 4.1.5<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
124<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.6 # <strong>of</strong> reimbursable contact hours generated by credit and continuing<br />
education courses<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 7,219,800 – 8,022,000<br />
= 7,812,000<br />
= 97.40%<br />
Leadership tracks the number <strong>of</strong> reimbursable contact hours generated since this represents<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s major source <strong>of</strong> funding. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a 5-year positive trend<br />
●●<br />
exceeds that <strong>of</strong> all 6 peers (see Figure 4.1.6A)<br />
●●<br />
reflects a decline in technical-occupational contact hours due to program closures<br />
●●<br />
reflects a decline in continuing education (see Figure 4.1.6B)<br />
Leadership increased the target conservatively to 8,234,400 for 2011-12 based on state<br />
imposed restrictions that may negatively influence enrollment and the college’s ability to <strong>of</strong>fer<br />
significantly more classes than currently <strong>of</strong>fered.<br />
10.0<br />
9.0<br />
8.0<br />
7.0<br />
Reimbursable Contact Hours<br />
Transfer, Technical, Continuing Education<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Good<br />
Millions<br />
6.0<br />
5.0<br />
4.0<br />
3.0<br />
2.0<br />
1.0<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 4.1.6A<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 125<br />
RLC Reimbursable Contact Hours<br />
2.20<br />
6.6<br />
2.00<br />
Tech-Occ<br />
Develop.<br />
6.0<br />
1.80<br />
CE Reimb.<br />
Transfer<br />
5.4<br />
Non-transfer (Millions)<br />
1.60<br />
1.40<br />
1.20<br />
1.00<br />
0.80<br />
4.8<br />
4.2<br />
3.6<br />
3.0<br />
2.4<br />
Transfer (Millions)<br />
0.60<br />
0.40<br />
Signficant National/Local<br />
Economic Decline<br />
1.8<br />
1.2<br />
0.20<br />
RCHS<br />
6-drop Rule<br />
DCCCD Centralization<br />
<strong>of</strong> Financial Aid<br />
0.6<br />
0.00<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12<br />
projected<br />
2013-14<br />
projected<br />
2015-16<br />
projected<br />
0.0<br />
Figure 4.1.6B<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
126<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.7 Reimbursable contact hour dollar amount difference between<br />
current year and previous year<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ $1,732,439 – $1,924,932<br />
= $196,702<br />
= 10.20%<br />
Leadership tracks the increases and decreases in reimbursement dollars received from one<br />
year to the next to anticipate potential budgetary impacts. Performance for this measure falls<br />
well below the target range (see Figure 4.1.7)<br />
While senior leadership believes this metric is an important one to continually monitor, after<br />
several years <strong>of</strong> tracking it has been difficult to set meaningful targets due to the myriad factors<br />
that influence this measure. While tracking <strong>of</strong> the measure will continue, it will not continue to<br />
be included in the college report card.<br />
2.50<br />
2.25<br />
2.00<br />
1.75<br />
Trends in Reimbursable $ Amount Difference<br />
$ Amount Diff.<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
Millions<br />
1.50<br />
1.25<br />
1.00<br />
0.75<br />
0.50<br />
Good<br />
0.25<br />
0.00<br />
Figure 4.1.7<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 127<br />
4.1.8 Annual electric utility costs per facilities square foot for the<br />
Main Campus<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 1.342 to 1.220<br />
= 1.214<br />
= 100.50%<br />
Leadership tracks the annual cost <strong>of</strong> electricity to the college as a major factor affecting the<br />
institution’s financial well-being. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a beneficial 5-year trend (see Figure 4.1.8)<br />
Leadership increased the rigor for this measure by decreasing the target to 1.21 for 2011-12.<br />
$4.00<br />
Annual Electric Cost Per Facilities Square Foot<br />
for the Main Campus<br />
$3.50<br />
$3.00<br />
Good<br />
RLC 100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
$2.50<br />
$2.00<br />
$1.50<br />
$1.00<br />
$0.50<br />
$0.00<br />
Figure 4.1.8<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: <strong>Report</strong> from RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Facilities Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
128<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.9 Annual electric utility costs per facilities square foot for the<br />
Garland Campus<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 1.342 to 1.220<br />
= 1.143<br />
= 106.30%<br />
Leadership tracks the annual cost <strong>of</strong> electricity to the college as a major factor affecting the<br />
institution’s financial well-being. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 6.30 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
remained within the target range throughout the academic year (see Figure 4.1.9)<br />
Leadership increased the rigor for this measure by decreasing the target to 1.21 for 2011-12<br />
based on performance.<br />
0.200<br />
Electric Cost Per Facilities Square Foot by Month<br />
for the Garland Campus for AY 2010-11<br />
0.175<br />
0.150<br />
0.125<br />
Good<br />
0.100<br />
0.075<br />
0.050<br />
0.025<br />
0.000<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Figure 4.1.9<br />
Source: <strong>Report</strong> from RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Facilities Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 129<br />
4.1.10 Annual natural gas utility costs per facilities square foot for<br />
Main Campus<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 0.162 to 0.147<br />
= 0.130<br />
= 111.60%<br />
Leadership tracks the annual cost <strong>of</strong> electricity to the college as a major factor affecting the<br />
institution’s financial well-being. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds the target range by 11.6 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents an improvement in performance over 2009-10 (see Figure 4.1.10)<br />
Leadership increased the rigor for this measure by lowering the target to 0.131 for 2011-12.<br />
0.18<br />
0.16<br />
0.14<br />
Annual Natural Gas Cost Per Facilities Square Foot<br />
for the Main Campus<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0.12<br />
0.10<br />
0.08<br />
0.06<br />
Good<br />
0.04<br />
0.02<br />
0.00<br />
Figure 4.1.10<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: <strong>Report</strong> from RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Facilities Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
130<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.11 Annual natural gas utility costs per facilities square foot for<br />
Garland Campus<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 0.162 to 0.147<br />
= 0.297<br />
= 0.00%<br />
Leadership tracks the annual cost <strong>of</strong> electricity to the college as a major factor affecting the<br />
institution’s financial well-being. Performance for this measure falls well below the target<br />
range (see Figure 4.1.11)<br />
Originally leadership set the targets for natural gas utility costs to be the same per square<br />
foot for both the main campus and the Garland campus. The two campuses, however, are<br />
not the same since the Garland campus is heated primarily by natural gas and the main<br />
campus is not. Taking this factor into consideration, leadership adjusted Garland’s target to<br />
0.315 for 2011-12.<br />
0.10<br />
Natural Gas Cost Per Facilities Square Foot by Month<br />
for the Garland Campus for AY 2010-11<br />
0.09<br />
0.08<br />
0.07<br />
Good<br />
0.06<br />
0.05<br />
0.04<br />
0.03<br />
0.02<br />
0.01<br />
0.00<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Figure 4.1.11<br />
Source: <strong>Report</strong> from RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Facilities Services<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 131<br />
4.1.12 % <strong>of</strong> eligible students who use eConnect for credit registration<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
≥ 65.70 – 73.00<br />
= 59.56<br />
= 81.60%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> students who are eligible to use eConnect for registration and<br />
do so. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls well below the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline in performance over 2009-10 (See Figure 4.1.12)<br />
Although more students are now eligible to register using eConnect, so many <strong>of</strong> the DCCCD’s<br />
processes have migrated to eConnect that the system becomes sluggish during peak registration<br />
which in turn discourages usage. The DCCCD information technology staff is working to correct this<br />
problem by increasing eConnect’s capacity. Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12.<br />
90.0<br />
80.0<br />
% <strong>of</strong> eConnect Eligible Registrations<br />
RLC Peer 1 Peer 2<br />
Peer 3 Peer 4 Peer 5<br />
Peer 6 100% <strong>of</strong> target 90% <strong>of</strong> target<br />
70.0<br />
60.0<br />
Good<br />
50.0<br />
40.0<br />
30.0<br />
20.0<br />
2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
Figure 4.1.12<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
132<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.1.13 Credit class schedule optimization index<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 79.20<br />
= 79.20%<br />
Leadership tracks an index <strong>of</strong> credit class scheduling efficiency to ensure the best usage <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s existing resources. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range by 10.8 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
represents a 3-year negative trend (See Table 4.1.13)<br />
Higher than expected class cancellations in summer 2011 caused performance to exceed<br />
the maximum percentage desired. Due to the continued poor economy and lack <strong>of</strong> available<br />
financial aid, fewer students than anticipated enrolled in the summer term. Leadership left the<br />
target intact for 2011-12.<br />
Index Scores and Performance<br />
Trends for…<br />
What percentage <strong>of</strong> classes were<br />
cancelled?<br />
What percentage <strong>of</strong> classes are within<br />
at least 80% <strong>of</strong> the room capacity?<br />
What percentage <strong>of</strong> classes have actual<br />
enrollments within at least 70% <strong>of</strong> the<br />
desired enrollment?<br />
Performance Trends<br />
Targets<br />
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 90% 100%<br />
8.28 9.78 12.81 8.80 8.00<br />
68.00 68.00 68.31 63.00 70.00<br />
72.91 86.42 82.27 72.00 80.00<br />
Total Index Score 9.61 9.16 7.92 9.00 10.00<br />
Table 4.1.13<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 4.2 Meet and exceed internal and external standards and requirements<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 133<br />
4.2.1 % compliance with external requirements index<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 97.50<br />
= 97.50%<br />
Leadership tracks an index <strong>of</strong> external requirements to ensure that <strong>Richland</strong> is in compliance.<br />
This index is composed <strong>of</strong> environmental compliance (HazCom, AASHE), city food service<br />
requirements, compliance with the college’s accrediting body (SACS-COC), requirements for<br />
state and national agencies (THECB, US Department <strong>of</strong> Education), and external audit requirements.<br />
Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
reflects a 3-year positive trend (see Table 4.2.1)<br />
Since leadership expects maximum performance for all external requirements, the target remains<br />
intact for 2011-12.<br />
Compliance with external<br />
requirements<br />
sub-measures<br />
Target<br />
Range<br />
Actual<br />
Perf.<br />
Item Score Trends<br />
2010-11 2010-11 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
HazCom rating = 90 - 100 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00<br />
City <strong>of</strong> Dallas Health Dept.<br />
Food Service Inspection<br />
≥ 81 - 90 91.00 92.20 100.00 100.00 100.00 101.00<br />
SACS-COC (as <strong>of</strong> 7-13-2009) = 90 - 100 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00<br />
THECB requirements = 90 - 100 95.65 100.00 100.00 95.70 95.70 95.70<br />
Loan Default % ≤ 13.2 - 12 14.60 87.90 96.00 96.00 96.00 96.00<br />
AASHE STARS score ≥ 36 - 40 36.75 n/a n/a 78.20 78.20 91.90<br />
Audits = 90 - 100 100.00 n/a n/a n/a 100.00 100.00<br />
Total Index Score = 90 - 100 97.50 96.02 99.20 94.98 96.10 97.50<br />
Table 4.2.1<br />
Source: External evaluations and reports<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
134<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.2.2 % meeting standard on emergency preparedness<br />
Strategic Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
New for 2010-11, leadership tracks an index to ensure that the college is meeting standards for<br />
emergency preparedness. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the top <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents increased numbers <strong>of</strong> successful drills over 2009-10 (See Tables 4.2.2A,B)<br />
Leadership left the targets for the index intact for 2011-12 with a continued focus on campus<br />
safety and preparedness.<br />
Emergency Preparedness Index Target Actual Score<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for building evacuation 8 8 10<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for building lock-down 1 1 10<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for shelter in place 1 1 10<br />
Total Index Score 100.00<br />
Table 4.2.2A<br />
<strong>Report</strong> from the Office <strong>of</strong> Emergency Management<br />
Emergency Preparedness Index<br />
Performance Trends<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for building evacuation 1 8<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for building lock-down 1 1<br />
# <strong>of</strong> successful drills for shelter in place 1 1<br />
Table 4.2.2B<br />
<strong>Report</strong> from the Office <strong>of</strong> Emergency Management<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 135<br />
4.2.3 % compliance with internal requirements<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 – 100.00<br />
= 90.60<br />
= 90.60%<br />
Leadership tracks compliance with <strong>Richland</strong>’s internal requirements to ensure the college is<br />
meeting important standards <strong>of</strong> excellence. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the target range<br />
●●<br />
represents a decline for the percentage <strong>of</strong> disciplines meeting program review standard<br />
(see Figure 4.2.3)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 since it is at maximum performance expectations.<br />
% compliance with internal<br />
requirements<br />
% <strong>of</strong> programs<br />
meeting/exceeding 70% on the<br />
program review<br />
Loan Default - extended<br />
payment on tuition<br />
Total Index Score (multiplied<br />
by 10)<br />
Table 4.2.3<br />
Target Range<br />
Actual<br />
Performance<br />
Score Trends<br />
2010-11 2010-11 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11<br />
> 90.00 - 100.00 81.13% 8.50 8.50 9.43 9.47 8.11<br />
< 8.80 - 8.00 6.24% 4.83 8.31 10.00 10.00 10.00<br />
= 90.00 - 100.00 66.70 84.05 97.20 97.40 90.60<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System, RLC Business Office Database<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
136<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.2.4 Difference between the percentage fulltime faculty increase<br />
compared to the percentage annual contact hour increase<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 8.36 - 9.29<br />
= -13.64<br />
= 0.00%<br />
Leadership monitors the percentage change in contact hours compared to the percentage<br />
change in fulltime faculty for the purpose <strong>of</strong> ensuring sufficient fulltime faculty to address the<br />
college’s mission. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls well below the target<br />
●●<br />
represents a 3-year negative trend (see Figure 4.2.4)<br />
The large turnover <strong>of</strong> fulltime faculty in 2010-11 was due primarily to the aggressive retirement<br />
incentive <strong>of</strong>fered by the DCCCD. At the same time the college lost large numbers <strong>of</strong> experienced<br />
faculty, the reduced state funding makes it difficult to replace all departing faculty,<br />
much less add additional faculty. After much thought and deliberation, leadership made the<br />
decision to discontinue this measure and to replace it with another measure related to balance<br />
in workforce composition that should be more actionable.<br />
12.0<br />
Change in Reimbursable Credit Contact Hours vs. Change<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> Full-time Faculty<br />
10.0<br />
8.0<br />
6.0<br />
4.0<br />
2.0<br />
0.0<br />
-2.0<br />
-4.0<br />
-6.0<br />
-8.0<br />
-10.0<br />
-12.0<br />
% Cont. Hour Growth<br />
% FT Faculty Growth<br />
Good<br />
-14.0<br />
05-06 to 06-07 06-07 to 07-08 07-08 to 08-09 08-09 to 09-10 09-10 to 10-11<br />
Figure 4.2.4<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 137<br />
4.2.5 % deployment <strong>of</strong> the Performance Excellence Model<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 to 100.00<br />
= 71.43<br />
= 71.43%<br />
Leadership monitors how well the college completes improvement activities in a timely fashion,<br />
addresses performance gaps, conducts quality assessments, uses assessment results<br />
to improve, maps key processes, and completes improvement plans carried forward from the<br />
previous year. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls below the target range<br />
●●<br />
falls below target on closing performance gaps, assessments meeting minimum standard,<br />
and completing carry forward activities (see Table 4.2.5)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 since maximum performance is an expectation.<br />
Performance Excellence Model Deployment Index Target Actual Score<br />
% <strong>of</strong>…<br />
completion <strong>of</strong> improvement by projected completion date 90-100% 93.00 9.30<br />
EOY <strong>Report</strong> target gap areas improved 90-100% 0.00 0.00<br />
% <strong>of</strong> slos or service area assessments meeting minimum<br />
standard<br />
90-100% 73.56 7.36<br />
% Discipline/departments initiating an improvement activity to<br />
address results <strong>of</strong> prior year's assessments<br />
90-100% 93.00 9.30<br />
RLC key institutional processes mapped 90-100% 100.00 10.00<br />
RLC improvement activities (DAP, PIIP, BP) carried forward from<br />
previous year that were completed<br />
90-100% 69.00 6.90<br />
Total Index Score 71.43 7.14<br />
Table 4.2.5<br />
Source: RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Institutional Effectiveness<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
138<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.2.6 % <strong>of</strong> faculty with appropriate credentials on file in COLLEAGUE<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 to 100.00<br />
= 98.86<br />
= 98.86%<br />
Leadership tracks the percentage <strong>of</strong> active faculty with credentials recorded in Colleague as a<br />
major factor in SACS-COC compliance. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls within the target range<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the 100% requirement by SACS-COC (see Figure 4.2.6)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 since 100% performance is the expectation. An<br />
enhanced credentialing process should make 100% a reality for 2011-12.<br />
100.0<br />
% Faculty with Credentials in COLLEAGUE<br />
97.0<br />
94.0<br />
91.0<br />
88.0<br />
Good<br />
85.0<br />
82.0<br />
79.0<br />
76.0<br />
73.0<br />
70.0<br />
Figure 4.2.6<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: DCCCD Colleague System<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
KPI 4.3 Operate the college using environmentally sustainable practices<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 139<br />
4.3.1 Energy Intensity Index<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 to 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
Leadership tracks an index <strong>of</strong> energy intensity measures to ensure the college follows sustainable<br />
practices in operations. Performance for this measure<br />
●●<br />
meets the maximum <strong>of</strong> the target range<br />
●●<br />
met the target range during each month <strong>of</strong> the academic year (see Figure 4.3.1)<br />
Leadership left the overall target intact at 100% achievement but increased the rigor <strong>of</strong> the<br />
sub-measures by location to 54.00 for the main campus and 47.00 for the Garland campus<br />
based on the 2010-11 performance.<br />
8.0<br />
Monthly Electric kBtus per Facilities Square Foot<br />
2010-11 by Location<br />
7.0<br />
6.0<br />
5.0<br />
Good<br />
4.0<br />
3.0<br />
2.0<br />
1.0<br />
Good<br />
Main Campus<br />
Garland Campus<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target 90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
0.0<br />
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug<br />
Figure 4.3.1<br />
Source: RLC Facilities Department Monthly <strong>Report</strong><br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
140<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.3.2 Water conservation index<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 to 100.00<br />
= 62.50<br />
= 62.50%<br />
●●<br />
Leadership tracks an index to determine how well the college conserves water resources. The<br />
index includes total gallons <strong>of</strong> water used at the main campus and at the Garland campus,<br />
as well as the percentage <strong>of</strong> irrigation needs <strong>Richland</strong> meets with non-potable water. Performance<br />
for this measure<br />
●●<br />
falls well short <strong>of</strong> the target range overall<br />
●●<br />
falls short <strong>of</strong> the target range for the main campus and for irrigation needs met by nonpotable<br />
water<br />
exceeds the target range for gallons <strong>of</strong> water used by the Garland campus (see Figure<br />
4.3.2)<br />
Leadership left the target intact overall for 2011-12 but increased the rigor <strong>of</strong> the Garland Campus<br />
target to 2,500,000 based on the 2010-11 performance. Leadership eliminated tracking <strong>of</strong><br />
the percentage <strong>of</strong> irrigation needs met with non-potable water for two reasons: (1) the meter<br />
for the cistern did not differentiate between use <strong>of</strong> rain water and city water and (2) data from<br />
this measure is not actionable since <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> has no control over rainfall.<br />
Water Conservation Index<br />
Total gallons <strong>of</strong> water used at<br />
the main campus<br />
Total gallons <strong>of</strong> water used at<br />
the Garland campus<br />
Percentage <strong>of</strong> irrigation needs<br />
met with non-potable water<br />
Total Index Score multiplied<br />
by 10<br />
Table 4.3.2<br />
Annual Target<br />
Range<br />
< 36,300,000 -<br />
33,000,000<br />
< 3,850,000 -<br />
3,500,000<br />
Note: Raw scores exceeding 10 are adjusted to 10.<br />
Actual<br />
Performance<br />
Raw<br />
Score<br />
Weight<br />
Final<br />
Score<br />
46,122,600 6.02 0.40 2.41<br />
1,834,340 14.76 0.35 3.50<br />
> 0.20 - 0.22 0.03 1.36 0.25 0.34<br />
62.50<br />
Source: RLC Facilities Department<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> 141<br />
4.3.3 Waste minimization and diversion index<br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
= 90.00 to 100.00<br />
= 100.00<br />
= 100.00%<br />
Leadership monitors the percentage <strong>of</strong> waste generated by the college in an effort to minimize<br />
the amount and to divert the waste that is generated so that it does not enter the landfill. Performance<br />
for this measure<br />
●●<br />
exceeds target range for the pounds <strong>of</strong> waste generated by 15.8 percentage points<br />
●●<br />
exceeds target range for waste diverted by 11.2 percentage points (see Table 4.3.3)<br />
Leadership increased the rigor <strong>of</strong> the index measures based on performance to 1,000,000 for<br />
weight <strong>of</strong> waste generated and 54.00 for waste diverted from the landfill for 2011-12.<br />
Waste Minimization &<br />
Diversion Index<br />
Weight (lbs.) <strong>of</strong> waste<br />
generated<br />
Percentage <strong>of</strong> waste diverted<br />
from the landfill<br />
Total Index Score multiplied<br />
by 10<br />
Table 4.3.3<br />
Annual Target<br />
Range<br />
< 1,437,480 -<br />
1,306,800<br />
Actual<br />
Performance<br />
Raw<br />
Score<br />
Weight<br />
Final<br />
Score<br />
1,099,790 11.58 0.50 5.00<br />
> 47.70 - 53.00 58.94 11.12 0.50 5.00<br />
100.00<br />
Source: RLC Facilities Department<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
142<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
4.3.4 Greenhouse emissions produced by <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Operational Measure*<br />
Target Range<br />
Performance<br />
% <strong>of</strong> max. target range<br />
< 32,734 - 29,758<br />
= 29,915<br />
= 99.50%<br />
Leadership tracks the amount <strong>of</strong> greenhouse emissions generated by <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> as<br />
part <strong>of</strong> the college’s participation in American Association <strong>of</strong> Sustainability in Higher Education.<br />
Performance for this measure falls within the target range (see Figure 4.3.4)<br />
Leadership left the target intact for 2011-12 based on performance.<br />
34,000<br />
Greenhouse emissions produced by RLC<br />
32,000<br />
30,000<br />
Good<br />
28,000<br />
26,000<br />
24,000<br />
22,000<br />
20,000<br />
Figure 4.3.4<br />
RLC<br />
100% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
90% <strong>of</strong> Target<br />
2009-10 2010-11<br />
Source: RLC Director <strong>of</strong> Institutional Effectiveness<br />
*Strategic measures are those identified for special emphasis by college leadership, the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees, the state or national government, or<br />
SACS accreditation agency. Operational measures are those key to the ongoing vitality <strong>of</strong> the organization but without strategic emphasis.<br />
<strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> 2010-11
Appendix<br />
Appendix<br />
Appendix.....................................................................................................................................A-1<br />
ThunderDocuments..............................................................................................................A-2<br />
Performance Excellence Model............................................................................................A-7<br />
Cycles <strong>of</strong> Improvement to Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness..............A-10<br />
2010-11 Core Competencies..............................................................................................A-14<br />
2010-11 Strategic Challenges and Advantages..................................................................A-15<br />
Strategic Planning Process Map.........................................................................................A-17<br />
Organizational Action Plan Matrix.......................................................................................A-18
A-2<br />
TEACHING, LEARNING, COMMUNITY BUILDING<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> ThunderDocuments<br />
ThunderDocuments
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> ThunderDocuments<br />
A-3<br />
Vision<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
will be the best place we can be<br />
to learn, teach, and build<br />
sustainable local and world community.<br />
Mission<br />
The mission <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> is teaching, learning, community building.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> identifies and meets the educational needs, primarily <strong>of</strong> adults, in our principal geographic service area <strong>of</strong> northeast Dallas, Richardson, and Garland,<br />
Texas. To this end, <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> <strong>of</strong>fers courses, programs, and services to empower students to achieve their educational goals and become lifelong learners and global<br />
citizens, building sustainable local and world community. We empower employees to model excellence in their service to students, colleagues, and community.<br />
ThunderValues<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> affirms these values for our learning and work together:<br />
Integrity: We speak and act truthfully, without hidden agendas. We admit our mistakes, say when we do not know, and honor our commitments. We avoid silence when<br />
it may mislead; we seek root causes and solve problems.<br />
Mutual Trust: We value students and employees as whole persons – sharing perspectives, valuing and accommodating both differences and commonalities, assuming<br />
our motives are trustworthy.<br />
Wholeness: We believe whole people best learn, teach, serve, lead, and build community. Thus, our programs, services, and facilities nurture our unified mind-spiritbody<br />
and the emotional and intellectual intelligence requisite for meaningful lives.<br />
Fairness: We treat students and employees justly and expect the same in return – applying rules with equity, giving all the benefit <strong>of</strong> the doubt, and providing both compassionate<br />
support and challenge for individual success.<br />
Considerate, Meaningful Communications: We share information, ideas, and feelings – listening carefully, speaking forthrightly, respecting diverse views, participating<br />
productively in dialogue and conversations. We welcome paradox and ambiguity as we move toward consensus.<br />
Mindfulness: We respect silence, using it for reflection and deeper understanding – not immediately filling silence with words after someone has spoken. We rush not<br />
to judgment but turn to wonder what was intended or being felt. Next, for clarity, we ask honest, open questions <strong>of</strong> ourselves and others.<br />
Cooperation: We work with students and employees to achieve common goals – looking beyond self-interests. We <strong>of</strong>fer both support and challenge, remain helpful<br />
and forgiving in difficult situations, help build consensus toward positive results, and help one another shape meaningful lives.<br />
Diversity: We value and encourage diversity in its many dimensions, intercultural competence, originality, and vision – appreciating and cultivating both local and world<br />
community.<br />
Responsible Risk-Taking: Inspiring students and employees to innovate, while expecting follow-through with creative ideas that work, we respond well to challenges,<br />
considering our actions carefully. Although uncertainties remain, we move forward despite possible criticism.<br />
Joy: We value laughter, play, love, kindness, celebration, and joy in our learning and work – taking our learning and work seriously and ourselves lightly.
A-4<br />
Philosophy<br />
We believe that whole people who are authentically engaged in mind-spirit-body best learn, teach, serve, and lead. In individually connecting soul to role in our valuesbased<br />
culture, each <strong>of</strong> us contributes in nurturing the whole organization, working together in the broader context <strong>of</strong> creating whole communities and a whole, healthy<br />
planet for future generations. These beliefs are at the core <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong>’s ongoing commitment to achieving exceptional performance results.<br />
Organizational Practices<br />
In the context <strong>of</strong> our organizational values, we provide the highest quality learning environment by practicing these behaviors:<br />
• Identifying the learning needs <strong>of</strong> the communities, students, and employees we serve and using that information to guide our teaching, programs,<br />
and services<br />
• Welcoming new opportunities for learning and pr<strong>of</strong>essional growth<br />
• Identifying and using benchmarks and best practices to improve our work as we focus on institutional purpose, vision, mission, and values<br />
• Holding and communicating high standards for ourselves, our students, and our colleagues<br />
• Practicing inclusive, learning-centered planning and decision-making, informed by data and our best judgment<br />
• Recognizing problems, collaborating to seek root causes, and implementing effective solutions<br />
• Empowering and freeing those closest to the work to make responsible decisions<br />
• Assuming personal and collective stewardship <strong>of</strong> college systems, processes, programs, facilities, and resources to keep them vital<br />
• Celebrating individual and group initiatives and achievement<br />
• Promoting, both individually and collectively, a positive image <strong>of</strong> the college and its collegiate high school to all segments <strong>of</strong> the communities we serve
A-5<br />
Core Competencies<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s Core Competencies are our areas <strong>of</strong> greatest expertise. Core Competencies are strategically important capabilities in our educational market, providing a sustainable<br />
advantage for our organization.<br />
Values-inspired culture<br />
Agility and innovation<br />
Strategic performance improvement<br />
Seamless transitions for lifelong learning<br />
Development and engagement <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff<br />
Sustainable community building<br />
• social equity and justice<br />
• economic viability<br />
• environmental vitality<br />
Emerging Core Competencies<br />
Student engagement<br />
Student retention and persistence<br />
Student success<br />
Service excellence<br />
Emerging Core Competencies are areas <strong>of</strong> continued focused effort toward<br />
reaching core competency designation.<br />
Strategic Planning Priority Goals for Student Learning<br />
Identify and meet community educational needs<br />
We respond to the learning needs <strong>of</strong> the diverse communities we serve by<br />
providing:<br />
• needs-based programs and curricula<br />
• student- and customer-based scheduling <strong>of</strong> classes and services<br />
• highly competent and compassionate faculty and staff<br />
• quality service<br />
Empower all students to succeed<br />
We provide a learning climate, including core and specialized curricula with<br />
identified learning outcomes, so students can:<br />
• meet their stated educational goals<br />
• complete courses successfully<br />
• gain college-level skills through remediation<br />
• gain lifelong learning skills<br />
• collaborate with others<br />
• function in technological environments<br />
• lead purposeful, meaningful lives in a diverse world community<br />
• build sustainable local and world community<br />
Empower all employees to succeed<br />
We provide an organizational culture conducive to high performance, employee<br />
engagement, and satisfaction by encouraging employees to:<br />
• use diversity to enrich student learning and organizational success<br />
• work in collaboration with others<br />
• maximize technology for student/employee learning and organizational<br />
effectiveness<br />
• be life-long learners<br />
• be whole persons<br />
Ensure institutional effectiveness<br />
We continuously improve our systems and processes through:<br />
• assessment <strong>of</strong> performance results<br />
• financial stewardship<br />
• productivity measures, such as energy efficiency and optimal facilities usage<br />
• optimal quality-cost balance in educational programs and services
A-6<br />
Statement <strong>of</strong> Purpose<br />
The purpose <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> is to prepare students for successful living and responsible citizenship to build sustainable local and world community. <strong>Richland</strong> does<br />
this by providing accessible, accredited, affordable, cost-effective, quality learning op por tunities for development <strong>of</strong> intellectual and emotional skills, job skills, personal<br />
growth, and/or transfer to a baccalaureate program. In fulfilling its purpose, <strong>Richland</strong> furthers cultural, economic, and workforce development in the communities it<br />
serves. In all its efforts, <strong>Richland</strong> strives to meet the needs and exceed the expectations <strong>of</strong> those it serves.<br />
Specifically, <strong>Richland</strong>’s purpose is to provide:<br />
• freshman and sophomore courses in arts and sciences<br />
• technical programs up to two years in length leading to associate degrees or<br />
certificates<br />
• vocational programs leading directly to employment in semi-skilled and skilled<br />
occupations<br />
• continuing adult<br />
education programs<br />
for maintaining<br />
needed workplace skills and com petencies<br />
• workforce development programs to meet local and statewide needs<br />
• compensatory education programs to fulfill the commitment <strong>of</strong> an admissions<br />
policy allowing the enrollment <strong>of</strong> disadvantaged students<br />
• continuing program <strong>of</strong> counseling and guidance to assist students in achieving<br />
their individual educational and career goals<br />
• adult literacy and other basic skills programs for adults<br />
• other programs and courses as may be prescribed by the Texas Higher Education<br />
Coordinating Board or the DCCCD Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees in the best interest <strong>of</strong> postsecondary<br />
education in Texas.<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>ile<br />
From Farmland to 21st Century<br />
When they arrived for classes in fall 1972, 3,500 <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> (RLC) credit students<br />
shared their campus with sheep grazing on the farmland and ducks<br />
swimming on the lakes that separate the campus buildings. Architects, winners<br />
<strong>of</strong> numerous awards for RLC’s design, had carefully protected the trees, the lakes–<br />
even the animals– as they planned the campus. The sheep graze elsewhere now,<br />
but students and staff still enjoy and protect those first campus ducks’ descendants,<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Thunderducks. In 2003 Thunderduck Hall opened as the college’s onestop<br />
student enrollment “front door.” Funds from the 2004 bond election added a<br />
new science building (2010), designed/constructed as a “LEED Platinum” green<br />
building, as well as the “LEED Gold”-designed/constructed <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Garland Campus (2009).<br />
Student Diversity<br />
Each semester, <strong>Richland</strong> serves some 20,000 credit and 4,800 non-credit students<br />
who come from more than 130 countries and speak 79 first languages.<br />
Female 55%<br />
Male 45%<br />
Anglo 35%<br />
Hispanic 23%<br />
African-American 20%<br />
Asian-American 16%<br />
Unknown 4%<br />
Pacific Islander 1%<br />
International 1%<br />
Native American .5%<br />
Average age 27<br />
University transfer 58%<br />
Educational Programs<br />
Academic programs with special emphases:<br />
• Mexican-American/Latino Studies<br />
• Studiy Abroad<br />
• African-American/Black Studies<br />
• Global Studies<br />
• Asian-American/Middle Eastern-American Studies • Honors <strong>College</strong><br />
• <strong>Richland</strong> Institute for Peace<br />
International Studies programs with global partners:<br />
• Central/South America • Middle East • Europe<br />
• Asia • Africa • North America<br />
Other Key Programs<br />
• Career and technical programs for immediate employment<br />
• Customized contract training for businesses through<br />
Corporate Services<br />
• Baby Boomer and Emeritus programs for the Plus 50 and<br />
senior segments<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> Collegiate High School (RCHS)<br />
RCHS was one <strong>of</strong> the first junior-senior dual credit charter schools administered<br />
by a community college. With focal areas in Mathematics, Science, and Engineering<br />
(2005) and Visual, Performing, and Digital Arts (2010), the TEA Exemplary-rated<br />
RCHS has capacity for up to 900 students who may simultaneously earn a high<br />
school diploma and an associate degree.
Performance Excellence Model<br />
A-7<br />
Performance Excellence Model<br />
Approach<br />
We approach our performance discipline systematically. We annually review and<br />
update our<br />
• Vision, Mission, Values, and Core Competencies<br />
• Strategic Planning Priority Goals for Student Learning<br />
• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Measures<br />
• One-, three-, and five-year Performance Targets<br />
• Organizational Action Plans<br />
• Budget projections, operating reserves, and fund balances<br />
Deploy<br />
We deploy approaches broadly and deeply to relevant work groups throughout<br />
the college through<br />
• Organizational Action Plans<br />
• Departmental Action Plans<br />
• Assessment Plans<br />
• Employee Action Plans (IAP/PD/SPMS)<br />
• Corrective actions to close performance gaps<br />
Learn<br />
We analyze and evaluate our success. We learn from<br />
• Monthly review <strong>of</strong> KPI Thunion <strong>Report</strong> Targets achieved<br />
• <strong>End</strong>-<strong>of</strong>-year results for KPI Measures<br />
• Results <strong>of</strong> Learning Outcomes and Services Assessments<br />
• SACSCOC Quality Enhancement Plan Cycles<br />
• Departmental Action Plan outcomes<br />
• In-depth review <strong>of</strong> Academic, Administrative, and Support Services programs<br />
• Benchmarking selected best in-class organizations<br />
Integrate<br />
We integrate what we have learned into the next cycle <strong>of</strong> improvement by sharing<br />
results and transfer <strong>of</strong> practices from<br />
• Process Implementation/Improvement Plans (PIIP)<br />
• Key learnings across the organization<br />
• Sustainable, innovative breakthroughs for ongoing organizational transformation<br />
• Employee training and development
A-8<br />
Process Implementation/Improvement Plan Steps<br />
(PIIP)<br />
Approach<br />
1. Identify improvement need<br />
2. Assign ownership<br />
3. Identify root cause<br />
4. Develop solution<br />
Deploy<br />
5. Implement/Pilot approach<br />
Learn<br />
6. Measure impact<br />
Integrate<br />
7. Disperse results<br />
8. Evaluate the process
A-9<br />
Our Path <strong>of</strong> Performance Excellence<br />
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (2005) – <strong>Richland</strong> is the first<br />
community college to receive the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, presented<br />
jointly by the President <strong>of</strong> the United States and the Secretary <strong>of</strong> Commerce.<br />
This award is the nation’s highest honor for performance excellence.<br />
Texas Award for Performance Excellence (2005) – <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> is the<br />
first accredited institution <strong>of</strong> higher education in Texas to receive the Texas Award<br />
for Performance Excellence, presented by the Governor <strong>of</strong> Texas and the Quality<br />
Texas Foundation. This award is Texas’ highest honor for performance excellence.<br />
Tech Titan <strong>of</strong> the Future Award (2005 and 2008) – In 2005 <strong>Richland</strong>’s articulated<br />
A.S. engineering degree received the first Metroplex Technology Business<br />
Council’s Tech Titan <strong>of</strong> the Future Award for its innovative approaches to promote<br />
tech-related knowledge transfer and to provide support for students choosing<br />
engineering and technology-related disciplines. In 2008 <strong>Richland</strong> received the Tech<br />
Titan <strong>of</strong> the Future Award in recognition <strong>of</strong> its innovative approach to “closing gaps<br />
in the K-16 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) student pipeline<br />
into our region’s engineering technology-related workforce” through its <strong>Richland</strong><br />
Collegiate High School <strong>of</strong> Mathematics, Science, and Engineering.<br />
Association <strong>of</strong> American <strong>College</strong>s and Universities (2007-Present) –<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> is one <strong>of</strong> only two community colleges featured in the AAC&U report,<br />
“<strong>College</strong> Learning for the New Global Century.” As a leading example <strong>of</strong> incorporating<br />
four “Essential Learning Outcomes” that form the core <strong>of</strong> a 21st-century<br />
education.<br />
Earl W. Eames Award (2008) – United Nations Association (UNA) Dallas Chapter<br />
in partnership with <strong>Richland</strong> and the LeCroy Center for Educational Telecommunications<br />
received the UNA/USA’s national Earl W. Eames Award for its progress and<br />
contributions in the use <strong>of</strong> electronic communication technology.<br />
National Association <strong>of</strong> Community <strong>College</strong> Teacher Education Programs<br />
and Phi Theta Kappa Honor Society (2007) – <strong>Richland</strong> is the recipient<br />
<strong>of</strong> the Exemplary Teacher Preparation Program Award for three decades <strong>of</strong> curricular<br />
leadership.<br />
WasteWise <strong>College</strong>/University Partner <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Year</strong> (2010) – The U.S. Environmental<br />
Protection Agency’s Office <strong>of</strong> Resource Conservation and Recovery<br />
named <strong>Richland</strong> as the winner in the country’s first national voluntary solid waste<br />
reduction program for its waste prevention activities, expanded recycling efforts,<br />
and policy <strong>of</strong> purchasing products with recycled content.<br />
RecycleMania (2010) – <strong>Richland</strong> ranked first in the state <strong>of</strong> Texas and seventh<br />
in the nation in the Grand Champion category <strong>of</strong> the 10-month national college<br />
and university RecycleMania competition for <strong>Richland</strong>'s efforts in recycling 81 tons<br />
<strong>of</strong> mixed paper, cardboard, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans, all spared from<br />
area landfills.<br />
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement <strong>of</strong> Teaching (2010) –<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> was one <strong>of</strong> 19 high-performing community colleges selected to become<br />
one <strong>of</strong> the Founding <strong>College</strong>s <strong>of</strong> the Carnegie Statistics Pathway (Statway) Network<br />
and into the Carnegie Collaboratory. This ambitious endeavor seeks to develop an<br />
accelerated pathway for developmental mathematics through transfer-level statistics<br />
in one year.<br />
Achieving the Dream (2009) – <strong>Richland</strong> was selected as one <strong>of</strong> 20 community<br />
colleges in seven states to join a national Lumina Foundation initiative to help more<br />
community college students succeed, particularly those students who traditionally<br />
face the most significant barriers to success, including students <strong>of</strong> color and lowincome<br />
students.<br />
Vanguard Learning <strong>College</strong> Project (2000-2005) – <strong>Richland</strong> was one <strong>of</strong> 12<br />
American and Canadian community colleges selected by the international League<br />
for Innovation in the Community <strong>College</strong> to develop institution-wide learning<br />
college models during a five-year project.<br />
American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC) (2000) – <strong>Richland</strong> was<br />
awarded one <strong>of</strong> five “Best Practice” U.S. institutions based on a national benchmarking<br />
study to identify best practices in developmental and ESOL education.<br />
National Conference Athletic Championships – <strong>Richland</strong>’s five non-scholarship<br />
athletic teams are the first in NJCAA or NCAA history to hold simultaneously<br />
three national titles (in men’s soccer, women’s soccer, and baseball) and have won<br />
more than a dozen national championships.<br />
Business and Industry Environmental Award (2009) – The Richardson<br />
Chamber <strong>of</strong> Commerce honored <strong>Richland</strong> for designing/constructing the college's<br />
118,000 sq. ft. science building adhering to Leadership in Energy and Environmental<br />
Design (LEED) Platinum-level Green Building Rating Criteria.<br />
2010 Topping Out Award (2010) – <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Garland Campus was<br />
named by the Metroplex architectural and construction community as one <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Top Ten Finalists for having the first public project built as part <strong>of</strong> the masterplanned<br />
redevelopment for downtown Garland and the first LEED Gold-certified<br />
project in Garland.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> is an equal opportunity institution.<br />
10/2010 PB
A-10<br />
Cycles <strong>of</strong> Improvement to Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Cycles <strong>of</strong> Improvement in Institutional Effectiveness<br />
Strategic Planning Matrix (August 2011)<br />
Senior leadership and OPRIE further enhanced the strategic planning matrix by adding columns for costs<br />
associated with organizational action emphases. These columns include direct costs to the college as<br />
well as grant funding and other external support.<br />
Draft <strong>of</strong> the Organizational Action Plan and Strategic Challenges and Advantages (May 2011)<br />
OPRIE wrote and made available draft copies <strong>of</strong> the coming year’s Organizational Action Plan and<br />
Strategic Challenges and Advantages documents several weeks prior to day 1 <strong>of</strong> the planning retreat and<br />
posted the drafts on the wiki for discussion. Discussions prior to day 1 allowed the senior leadership<br />
group to finalize these seminal documents more quickly for sharing college-wide during convocation and<br />
during summer council meetings and retreats.<br />
Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) Enhancements (Fall 2010)<br />
Beginning fall 2010, OPRIE with the approval <strong>of</strong> ThunderTeam revised the charge <strong>of</strong> the QAC team to<br />
include review and comment on the quality <strong>of</strong> assessments for the departments to which they are<br />
assigned.<br />
Strategic Planning Retreat: Change in meeting date for day 2 <strong>of</strong> the retreat (Fall 2010)<br />
As a result <strong>of</strong> the Plus/Delta exercise after the August 2010 retreat, ThunderTeam decided to hold day 2<br />
<strong>of</strong> the retreat during the first week <strong>of</strong> September for the 2011 year. The advantage <strong>of</strong> holding the retreat<br />
in September as opposed to August is the additional time it would provide OPRIE to process data. The<br />
data would be more complete and ThunderTeam could therefore make better initial decisions on targets<br />
and measures.<br />
Strategic Planning Matrix (August 2010)<br />
OPRIE created a Strategic Planning Matrix that integrates the college’s Strategic Objectives (KPIs) with<br />
supporting Organizational Actions, key measures, and HR, IT, and Facilities Strategic Plans. The<br />
planning matrix ensures that the college addresses all the identified Strategic Challenges and supports<br />
key initiatives with necessary resources.<br />
Organizational Action Plan Matrix (August 2010)<br />
In order to facilitate deployment <strong>of</strong> the Organizational Action Plan, OPRIE developed a matrix that aligns<br />
each Organizational Action with the responsible ThunderTeam member and Continuous Improvement<br />
Plan initiators. The matrix facilitates the ThunderTeam member’s identification <strong>of</strong> areas most directly<br />
responsible for support <strong>of</strong> an Organizational Action.<br />
Strategic Planning Retreat: Changes in Format (May-Aug 2010)<br />
This year the strategic planning retreat, typically held over 2 consecutive days in August, was split into a<br />
one-day retreat in late May followed by one day in August. Additionally, planning retreat pre-work was<br />
posted to an interactive wiki so rather than a static webpage, so that retreat participants could begin<br />
dialogue about retreat materials prior to the meeting. Beginning the strategic planning in May allowed the<br />
leadership team to digest and discuss findings from the environmental scan, SWOT analysis, and college<br />
surveys prior to working with their direct reports to set targets and strategic actions for the next years. The<br />
August meeting could then be devoted reviewing market share trends and finalizing targets and<br />
measures.<br />
Indicators <strong>of</strong> Market Share Health (July 2010)<br />
In order to better determine the overall health <strong>of</strong> a discipline within the district market, OPRIE developed<br />
additional indicators <strong>of</strong> market share health beyond the percent <strong>of</strong> DCCCD market. The five indicators<br />
now used to further illuminate the market share health <strong>of</strong> each discipline include<br />
percent <strong>of</strong> market share target for discipline type (developmental, transfer, tech-occ)<br />
contact hour trend over previous three years<br />
DCCCD market share percentage for discipline type (developmental, transfer, tech-occ)<br />
Percent <strong>of</strong> discipline contact hours that are distance learning<br />
DCCCD market share percentage for distance learning discipline type (developmental, transfer,<br />
tech-occ)
A-11<br />
Enhanced Environmental Scanning <strong>Report</strong> (May 2010)<br />
This year, OPRIE added maps depicting enrollment trends to it’s environmental scanning report. The<br />
maps included in the report represent Enrollment by Texas County, 3-<strong>Year</strong> Change Trends in Enrollment<br />
by Texas County, Enrollment by Zip Code, 3-<strong>Year</strong> Change Trends in Enrollment by Zip Code, Distance<br />
Learning Enrollment by Texas Count and by Zip Code, and International Enrollment by Country. The<br />
report also includes Anglo, African-American, Hispanic, and Asian Population Trends by <strong>Richland</strong> Service<br />
Area Zip Code.<br />
Institutional SWOT (April 2010)<br />
OPRIE scaled up the electronic SWOT piloted last year with the direct reports <strong>of</strong> the Vice Presidents and<br />
President. This year the whole college was invited to participate in the SWOT which brought a richer array<br />
<strong>of</strong> perspectives to the analysis. Sixty-six employees provided input which yielded 860 comments. The<br />
comments were coded into 58 themes, approximately 15 per category (14 strengths, 16 weaknesses, 15<br />
opportunities, 13 threats).<br />
Core Curriculum Map (April 2010)<br />
In preparation for assessing student learning outcomes at the program level, OPRIE led efforts to map<br />
the new core curriculum to the college’s Institutional/General Education student learning outcomes<br />
Curriculum mapping provides a strategy to visually capture the structure <strong>of</strong> program curriculum, allowing<br />
us to better see where and how we are teaching and assessing student learning outcomes. The Core<br />
Curriculum map will help us develop coherent and meaningful strategies for assisting our students to<br />
attain them and will also help streamline our assessment activities as we move toward reaffirmation.<br />
Revised Performance Excellence Model (March 2010)<br />
Based on feedback from participants following workshops on the Performance Excellence Model, OPRIE<br />
revised the model, simplifying overly complex directional arrows and aligning the model with our<br />
Approach, Deploy, Learn, Integrate cycles <strong>of</strong> improvement.<br />
Sustainability Notations for KPIs/Measures (Summer 2009)<br />
In order to better understand how well our KPIs and measures align with the triple bottom line <strong>of</strong><br />
sustainability, OPRIE proposed notations for Equity, Economy, and Environment to measures that<br />
indicate our commitment to these goals. Each applicable measure is tagged with an E and superscript<br />
letter(s) representing which <strong>of</strong> the triple bottom line goals the measure tracks.<br />
QEP Timeline (Summer 2009)<br />
In order to better communicate the goals <strong>of</strong> QEP over the last decade and to prepare employees for<br />
planning <strong>of</strong> future QEP efforts, OPRIE prepared a visual representation <strong>of</strong> past and upcoming QEP<br />
initiatives. This graphic will be used in presentations and other communications to employees, including<br />
all faculty convocation Fall 2009.<br />
Electronic SWOT (Summer 2009)<br />
OPRIE staff implemented data collection for an institutional SWOT electronically this summer. The<br />
electronic format allowed greater participation from VP direct reports whose summer schedules made<br />
face-to-face meeting difficult.<br />
Modifications to EOY <strong>Report</strong> (December 2008)<br />
In last year’s end <strong>of</strong> year report, OPRIE included trend-line charts for each institutional measure related to<br />
Closing the Gaps in order to more clearly depict college efforts on this initiative. The EOY also included<br />
explanations <strong>of</strong> Core Competencies and data related to each.<br />
Enhancements to Program Review (AY 08-09)<br />
OPRIE conducted more frequent meetings with Student Services and Administrative Support Program<br />
Review participants throughout this year, and also included Appreciative Inquiry and process mapping as<br />
part <strong>of</strong> the Program Review process. Additionally, OPRIE provided scheduling and student demographic<br />
data to those departments undergoing Academic Program Review.<br />
Inspirational Quotations for the Strategic Planning Retreat & Monthly KPI Meetings (Summer 2008)<br />
The OPRIE staff began compiling inspirational quotes for use during the 2008 Strategic Planning Retreat<br />
and to begin each monthly KPI report. The staff benchmarked this best practice from Sharp Healthcare, a<br />
2008 Baldrige Award recipient Sharp. The quotes help focus staff in a positive direction.
A-12<br />
Updated Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness Web Site (Summer 2008)<br />
The Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness (OPRIE) shifted the location <strong>of</strong> nonrestricted<br />
information from the <strong>Richland</strong>’s intranet to the Faculty/Staff page on the internet for easier<br />
access to interested users in and outside the college. Additionally, the format was revamped so that<br />
navigation is more intuitive to the reader, OPRIE’s mission statement was honed to more accurately<br />
reflect its services, and contact requirements were added.<br />
Administrative and Student Support Services (A&SSS) Program Review Piloted (Fall 2007)<br />
Academic program review has been a fact <strong>of</strong> life at <strong>Richland</strong> for quite some time, and, in 2007-2008,<br />
ThunderTeam determined that all areas <strong>of</strong> the college could benefit from this type <strong>of</strong> continuous<br />
improvement through constructive self-examination. Each Vice President chose at least one workgroup to<br />
participate in the pilot. The first A&SSS Program reviews are due for submission in September 2008.<br />
WEAVEOnline Chosen to Deploy Quality Enhancement Plan (Fall 2007)<br />
ThunderTeam chose WEAVEOnline as the system to manage Quality Enhancement Plan outcomes and<br />
documentation. Training began in Fall 2007 to introduce QEP Teams to WEAVEOnline.<br />
Organizational Action Plan Format Revised (Fall 2007)<br />
The staff <strong>of</strong> the Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness (OPRIE) introduced a new<br />
format for the Organizational Action Plan in Fall 2007. The previous format was not user-friendly and<br />
tended toward actions at the departmental level rather than maintaining focus at the institutional level.<br />
ThunderTeam, with leadership from<br />
OPRIE staff, identified ten strategic areas <strong>of</strong> institutional emphasis and formulated organizational actions<br />
to support target attainment in those areas.<br />
2006-07 <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> Format Revised (Fall 2007)<br />
The staff <strong>of</strong> OPRIE identified a need to revise the <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> format to be more explanatory <strong>of</strong><br />
the Strategic Planning Process and readable by non-<strong>Richland</strong> audiences since the leadership distributes<br />
the report widely. The staff added additional graphics, tables and text to enhance readability.<br />
Database Designed for Trends in Performance-to-Target (Fall 2007)<br />
The OPRIE designed a database to house actual performance to target trends for institutional measures.<br />
Over the past six years, <strong>Richland</strong> leadership accumulated data on institutional measures which is now<br />
being tracked for the purpose <strong>of</strong> determining how successfully the leadership predicted performance for<br />
each measure over time, how well we challenge ourselves, and where the bar may have been too low.<br />
Update <strong>of</strong> Benchmark Process Form (Fall 2007)<br />
When best practices were approved and adopted by the ThunderTeam, there was no systematic way to<br />
track implementation or effectiveness. The OPRIE (Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional<br />
Effectiveness) updated the Benchmark Process Form to require submission <strong>of</strong> a PIIP or a Departmental<br />
Action Plan to document follow-up <strong>of</strong> adopted best practices.<br />
Strategic Planning Calendar (Fall 2007)<br />
In an effort to encourage a more timely completion <strong>of</strong> required action plans*, the OPRIE posted a<br />
“Strategic Planning Calendar” for 2007-08 on the <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> intranet. The calendar gives the<br />
ThunderTeam, division deans, and work groups advance notice <strong>of</strong> crucial deadlines.<br />
*Organizational Action Plans, Departmental Action Plans, Process Improvement/Implementation Plans<br />
and Benchmarking Plans<br />
PIIP Calendar Implemented to Improve Timely Completion <strong>of</strong> PIIPs (Summer 2007)<br />
In an effort to reduce the number <strong>of</strong> PIIPs still incomplete after their anticipated completion date, the<br />
OPRIE initiated the PIIP Calendar. The calendar records the halfway mark, three-fourths mark, and<br />
month preceding the anticipated completion date, and OPRIE sends a reminder to the responsible<br />
person(s) to encourage timely completion <strong>of</strong> the PIIP.<br />
Online Performance Excellence Model Updated with Links (March 2007)<br />
The Performance Excellence Model on <strong>Richland</strong>’s intranet was updated to include web links connecting<br />
each item with a web page that provides more information. These links help employees understand how<br />
elements <strong>of</strong> the Strategic Plan relate to each other.
A-13<br />
Strategic Planning Training PowerPoint (Spring 2007)<br />
The OPRIE, frustrated by the volume <strong>of</strong> re-work required for completed Departmental Action Plans,<br />
scheduled small group meetings with deans, vice presidents and work group leaders to review the<br />
purpose and effective composition <strong>of</strong> Departmental Action Plans. These meetings led the OPRIE staff to<br />
realize that general confusion existed about why and when Departmental Action Plans are needed. As a<br />
result, the Director <strong>of</strong> Institutional Effectiveness created a PowerPoint presentation containing a general<br />
overview <strong>of</strong> the Strategic Planning cycle, the reasons for Departmental Actions, PIIPs and Benchmark<br />
forms and instructions for completion <strong>of</strong> each form. Employees receive thirty minutes <strong>of</strong> pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development credit from TOLI after completing the PowerPoint slide show.<br />
Definitions, Trend Data and Source Code Added to Target and Measures Document (Fall 2006)<br />
The Office <strong>of</strong> Planning and Research for Institutional Effectiveness (OPRIE) updated the Targets and<br />
Measures document on the OPRIE web page to provide more detailed information for the viewer.<br />
Employees are now able to click on any measure to access a pop-up which provides a definition <strong>of</strong> the<br />
measure, trend data if it is available, and the Colleague script or the person and work group providing the<br />
data. The Targets and Measures document and the corresponding information are updated after the<br />
annual Strategic Planning Retreat each August.<br />
Refinement <strong>of</strong> the Annual <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> to Include Comparisons <strong>of</strong> Target Student<br />
Performance to All Credit Students (Fall 2006)<br />
The president <strong>of</strong> <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> regularly uses the data and analysis from the Annual <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong><br />
<strong>Report</strong> in reporting to the DCCCD Chancellor and Board <strong>of</strong> Trustees. Based on feedback from the college<br />
president, the OPRIE staff improved the utility <strong>of</strong> the EOY <strong>Report</strong> by providing direct comparisons <strong>of</strong><br />
target student group performance to the overall credit student body.<br />
OPRIE Assigns Strategic Planning Retreat Pre-work (August 2006)<br />
The OPRIE looked for ways to streamline the annual strategic planning retreat such that a maximum<br />
amount <strong>of</strong> quality work could be accomplished in a minimum amount <strong>of</strong> time. It was determined that by<br />
assigning pre-work to each ThunderTeam member, the discussions regarding target setting and<br />
organizational actions would flow much more smoothly. ThunderTeam members receive advance<br />
electronic copies <strong>of</strong> measures, targets and organizational actions related to their respective work groups.<br />
Doing this minimizes the amount <strong>of</strong> discussion required in the retreat and ThunderTeam members arrive<br />
more prepared.<br />
Stop Lights Added to Thunion <strong>Report</strong> (September 2005) and <strong>End</strong>-<strong>of</strong>-<strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong> (Fall 2006)<br />
The OPRIE incorporated the use <strong>of</strong> “stop lights’ to indicate performance to target for strategic planning<br />
goals, kpis, or measures. Stop lights provide information at a glance making these documents more userfriendly.<br />
Targets Amended to Include the 90% Range (Fall 2005)<br />
The Expanded ThunderTeam experienced some difficulty in communicating with faculty, staff and others<br />
outside the organization that leadership considered 90% <strong>of</strong> the target or better to be within the “range <strong>of</strong><br />
tolerance.” Many readers <strong>of</strong> our Thunion Monthly <strong>Report</strong> Card believed we were unsuccessful if we did<br />
not meet or exceed 100%. Establishing a “target range” made the Thunion <strong>Report</strong>s more user-friendly.
A-14<br />
2010-11 Core Competencies<br />
Riichlland Collllege’’s<br />
Core Competencies<br />
2010--2015<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s Core Competencies are our areas <strong>of</strong><br />
greatest expertise. Core Competencies are<br />
strategically important capabilities in our<br />
educational market, providing a sustainable<br />
advantage for our organization. Emerging Core<br />
Competencies are areas <strong>of</strong> continued focused<br />
effort toward reaching core competency<br />
designation.<br />
• Agility and Innovation<br />
• Values-inspired culture<br />
• Strategic performance improvement<br />
• Seamless transitions for lifelong learning<br />
• Development and engagement <strong>of</strong> faculty and staff<br />
• Sustainable community building<br />
o Social equity and justice<br />
o Economic viability<br />
o Environmental vitality<br />
Emergiing Core Competenciies<br />
• Student engagement<br />
• Student retention & persistence<br />
• Student success<br />
• Service excellence
2010-11 Strategic Challenges and Advantages<br />
A-15<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Strategic Challenges and Advantages<br />
Academic <strong>Year</strong> 2010-11<br />
Strategic Challenges* are those pressures that exert a decisive influence on a college’s<br />
likelihood <strong>of</strong> future success and are comparable to Threats in a SWOT analysis. These<br />
challenges frequently are driven by a college’s future competitive position relative to other<br />
providers <strong>of</strong> similar programs, <strong>of</strong>ferings, or services. Strategic challenges are usually, but<br />
not always, externally driven. However, in responding to externally driven strategic<br />
challenges, an organization may face internal strategic challenges. <strong>Richland</strong>’s senior<br />
leadership identified strategic challenges based on a 2010 environmental scan and the<br />
college-wide SWOT analysis.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s Strategic Challenges are to …<br />
• Improve student success with a student population that is increasingly under-prepared for<br />
college work<br />
• Close the Gaps in access and academic performance for historically under-served students<br />
despite decreasing state funding<br />
• Manage continued record enrollment in the face <strong>of</strong> significant funding cuts and a declining<br />
local tax base<br />
• Continue to provide exceptional services and preserve a values-inspired culture despite the<br />
impending retirement <strong>of</strong> experienced employees and external recruitment <strong>of</strong> talent<br />
• Recruit, hire, and retain right-fit candidates within the limits <strong>of</strong> our DCCCD compensation<br />
system<br />
• Secure sufficient budget reserves to handle aging infrastructure and growing technology<br />
needs<br />
• Maintain market share with increasing competition from other DCCCD colleges and other<br />
area colleges<br />
* Source: 2009-10 Baldrige National Quality Program Criteria (page 66)<br />
Prepared by the OPRIE
A-16<br />
Strategic Advantages* are those benefits that exert a decisive influence on a college’s<br />
likelihood <strong>of</strong> future success and are comparable to Strengths in a SWOT analysis. These<br />
advantages are frequently sources <strong>of</strong> current and future competitive success relative to<br />
other providers <strong>of</strong> similar educational programs, <strong>of</strong>ferings, and services. Strategic<br />
advantages generally arise from either or both <strong>of</strong> two sources:<br />
1. core competencies, through building and expanding on a college’s internal<br />
capabilities, and<br />
2. strategically important external resources, which are shaped and leveraged<br />
through key external relationships and partnerships.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s senior leadership identified strategic advantages based on a 2010 college-wide<br />
SWOT analysis, feedback obtained through surveys and data from the college’s <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>Year</strong> report.<br />
<strong>Richland</strong>’s Strategic Advantages are our…<br />
• Faculty and staff who:<br />
o Support students and their success<br />
o Practice innovation and agility<br />
o Commit to performance excellence through use <strong>of</strong> our Approach-Deploy-Learn-<br />
Integrate cycle <strong>of</strong> improvement<br />
o Demonstrate loyalty to <strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> through service above and beyond basic job<br />
requirements<br />
• Reputation in the community we serve:<br />
o For high quality and standards<br />
o Strong and continuous commitment to diversity<br />
• Strong relationships with service area city governments, chambers <strong>of</strong> commerce,<br />
independent school districts, private high schools and public universities<br />
• Agility in response to students’ need for alternative modes <strong>of</strong> instructional delivery and<br />
scheduling<br />
• Commitment to the discipline <strong>of</strong> life-long learning through employee pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development<br />
• Size and market share as the largest community college in Dallas County<br />
• Care in providing beautiful buildings and grounds to enhance teaching and learning<br />
• Commitment to sustainable practices<br />
* Source: 2009-10 Baldrige National Quality Program Criteria (page 66)<br />
Prepared by the OPRIE
Strategic Planning Process Map<br />
A-17<br />
Start Here<br />
MAY<br />
- Conduct Strategic Planning Retreat (day 1)<br />
review progress on Continuous Improvement<br />
Plans* (CIPs)<br />
update ThunderDocuments<br />
review Environmental Scan and SWOT Analysis<br />
review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Draft Strategic Organizational Action Plan<br />
and align to the proposed annual budget allocation<br />
APRIL<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Begin planning for next cycle<br />
- Complete college-wide SWOT<br />
JUNE – JULY<br />
- Draft and align new CIPs with the proposed 5-year Strategic Organizational Action Plan<br />
- Conduct Progress Discussions (PSS) and Annual Performance Reviews (Admin)<br />
and align to the SPPs<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- OPRIE sends pre-work to ThunderTeam<br />
AUGUST<br />
- Finalize and publish the Strategic Organizational Action Plan<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Finalize Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Services Assessments<br />
for the previous academic year<br />
- ThunderTeam sends council measure/target recommendations to OPRIE<br />
MARCH<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Initiate college-wide SWOT<br />
NOVEMBER<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Publish <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
FEBRUARY<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Conduct mid-year reviews for CIPs, process mapping<br />
JANUARY<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong><br />
Strategic Planning<br />
Process<br />
SEPTEMBER<br />
- Conduct Strategic Planning Retreat (day 2)<br />
analyze and integrate end <strong>of</strong> the year results<br />
analyze market share and program review data<br />
review and produce a draft <strong>of</strong> the institutional measurement system<br />
- ThunderTeam reviews draft <strong>of</strong> the institutional measurement system with councils<br />
- Finalize and publish updates to the institutional measurement system<br />
- Finalize SLOs and Services Assessment plans for the current academic year<br />
- Finalize CIPs for the current academic year<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Strategic Planning Process<br />
OCTOBER<br />
- Review monthly Thunion <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Review draft <strong>of</strong> the <strong>End</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Year</strong> <strong>Report</strong><br />
- Conduct faculty IAPs** and align to SPPs<br />
* Continuous Improvement Plans such as DAPs, PIIPs and Benchmarking<br />
** Individual Action Plans
A-18<br />
Organizational Action Plan Matrix<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Organizational Actions 2011-12<br />
*Each ThunderTeam member is responsible and accountable for execution<br />
SPP<br />
KPI<br />
Measures<br />
HR<br />
Capability<br />
HR<br />
Capacity<br />
Technology<br />
Facilities<br />
Budget<br />
Amount<br />
Grant /<br />
External<br />
Support $s<br />
Organizational Actions<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> will focus its<br />
organizational-level efforts to<br />
1. create an exceptional learning<br />
experience for students through:<br />
TT<br />
Member<br />
Continuous<br />
Improvement<br />
Plan Originator<br />
Alignment <strong>of</strong> Plans for Cost to the <strong>College</strong> $<br />
Strategic<br />
Challenge<br />
Addressed<br />
Implementation <strong>of</strong> AtD Initiatives ZB, TS<br />
Gatekeeper<br />
Course<br />
Champions, Zina<br />
Gardiner, Coor.<br />
Mentoring 2<br />
Participation in the Carnegie<br />
Collaboratory pilot ZB T. Georgiou 2<br />
Use <strong>of</strong> assessment results to improve<br />
student learning KE, ZB<br />
2.1,<br />
2.2 All<br />
2.1,<br />
2.2 All<br />
Mary Jo<br />
Dondlinger 4 4.2 All<br />
Renovation and upgrading <strong>of</strong> the<br />
infrastructure to ensure a safe,<br />
aesthetically pleasing, and ecologically<br />
responsible learning environment All TT* Ron Clark 4<br />
Collaboration with DCCCD leadership to<br />
ensure an effective and efficient college<br />
4.2,<br />
4.3<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required<br />
Faculty<br />
Release<br />
Time, TEDs<br />
Faculty<br />
Release<br />
Time, TEDs<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required Stipends<br />
4.2.1,<br />
All 4.3 None None None<br />
None unless we<br />
decide to add Learn<br />
Labs<br />
Classroom<br />
Computer Support<br />
Furniture for<br />
Tutoring<br />
Classroom<br />
Configuration<br />
Changes<br />
Use <strong>of</strong><br />
WeaveOnline Training rooms<br />
$35,000 if a<br />
learn lab is<br />
added.<br />
AANAPISI<br />
($292,340) C1-2, 9<br />
STATWAY<br />
($50,000) C1-2, 9<br />
QAC Team<br />
($25,675),<br />
DirIE Pos.<br />
salary 85%<br />
($46,339) C9 - 10<br />
Renovation,<br />
Upgrades $4,073,254 C7<br />
financial aid process TS Tony Summers 2 2.3 2.3.1 None None Student Kiosks None $59,520 C11<br />
2. effectively select, support, and<br />
engage employees through:<br />
Use <strong>of</strong> right-fit hiring strategies Gutierrez,All* Dan Gutierrez 3 3.3 3.3.1<br />
Effective on-boarding Gutierrez<br />
D. Gutierrez,<br />
N.Kammerer 3<br />
Effective and relevant pr<strong>of</strong>essional<br />
development Gutierrez N. Kammerer 3<br />
3.2,<br />
3.3 3.3.1<br />
Comprehensive and informative<br />
employee evaluation Gutierrez,All* Dan Gutierrez 3 3.1,2 All<br />
3.1,<br />
3.2<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required<br />
3.1.3,<br />
3.1.5,<br />
3.2.1,<br />
3.2.2 None None<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
required<br />
Benchmarking<br />
& Lit. Review None None 12,000 C5,6,8<br />
All<br />
Supervisors<br />
Use <strong>of</strong> YouTube &<br />
PowerPoints None $7,989.30 C5,6,8<br />
Use <strong>of</strong> YouTube &<br />
PowerPoints None<br />
TOLI<br />
($213,563),<br />
Conf.Travel<br />
($168,882) C5<br />
Contracted<br />
Services None None $10,000 C8-9
A-19<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> Organizational Actions 2011-12<br />
*Each ThunderTeam member is responsible and accountable for execution<br />
SPP<br />
KPI<br />
Measures<br />
HR<br />
Capability<br />
HR<br />
Capacity<br />
Technology<br />
Facilities<br />
Budget<br />
Amount<br />
Grant /<br />
External<br />
Support $s<br />
Organizational Actions<br />
<strong>Richland</strong> <strong>College</strong> will focus its<br />
organizational-level efforts to<br />
3. ensure a successful SACS 2013<br />
reaffirmation through:<br />
TT<br />
Member<br />
Continuous<br />
Improvement<br />
Plan Originator<br />
Alignment <strong>of</strong> Plans for Cost to the <strong>College</strong> $<br />
Strategic<br />
Challenge<br />
Addressed<br />
Compliance Certification JJ J.James 4 4.2<br />
Pilot <strong>of</strong> a transformational QEP KE, JJ, ZB MF Gibbons 4 4.2<br />
4.2.1,<br />
4.2.7<br />
4.2.1,<br />
4.2.7<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
& Travel<br />
req'd<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
req'd<br />
Study <strong>of</strong><br />
SACS<br />
Guidelines None None<br />
Extra Service<br />
/ Stipends None None<br />
Travel to<br />
SACS<br />
($7,000),<br />
Travel to<br />
Summer<br />
Institute<br />
($8.810),<br />
$25,000 for<br />
compliance<br />
costs, NTCCC<br />
SACSCOC<br />
Travel to<br />
SACS<br />
Baldrige&SA<br />
CS <strong>of</strong>fset<br />
($2,800) C10<br />
($650)<br />
QEP &<br />
Credentials<br />
Team<br />
($17,6912) C10<br />
Demonstration <strong>of</strong> institutional<br />
effectiveness KE, All*<br />
F.Vera, M.J.<br />
Dondlinger 4 2.6 All<br />
Pr<strong>of</strong>. Dev.<br />
req'd<br />
Additional<br />
facilitators<br />
Continued support<br />
<strong>of</strong> WeaveOnline<br />
contract None<br />
$7,000<br />
Weave<br />
Contract,<br />
$10,500<br />
CCSSE and<br />
$1,000<br />
NCCBP fees C3,4,9