MINUTES
Monthly Work
Session - Board of Trustees
In
accordance with the terms and provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act,
Chapter 551 of Texas Government Code, the Board of Trustees of the Austin
Community College District convened in public session on Monday, May 20, 2002,
at 6:46 p.m. in the Main Theatre (Room 201) of the Rio Grande Campus located at
1212 Rio Grande Street, Austin, Texas, with the following members present:
Lillian Davis/Presiding Officer [arrived at 7:45 p.m.]; Beverly Silas, Vice
Chair; John Worley, Secretary [arrived at 7:55 p.m.]; Allen Kaplan, Barbara
Mink, Della May Moore and Rafael Quintanilla.
Trustees Beverly Watts Davis and Carol Nasworthy were absent from the
meeting.
It is
further found and determined that in accordance with the policies and orders of
this Board, the notice of this meeting has been posted and return thereof made
pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act, Chapter
551 of the Texas Government Code, and there has been full compliance with the
terms and provisions of said act, including the timely posting of the subjects
of this meeting.
Presidential
Evaluation Process
Ms.
Silas, Vice Chair, introduced the item and Trustee Barbara Mink provided
information concerning the requested revisions to the proposed Resolution on
Presidential Evaluation Process and to the proposed Presidential Evaluation
Worksheet 2. Ms. Silas called attention
to the Self-Assessment Exercise 1, Your Board’s Readiness for CEO Evaluation,
and Exercise 2, Evaluating Your Evaluating.
She reviewed the compilation of the scoring from all Trustees. Trustees discussed additional revisions
needed to the proposed Resolution on Presidential Evaluation Process and the
proposed Presidential Evaluation Worksheet 2.
Certified Assurances Forms for Texas Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund (TIF) Grants
Ms.
Silas, Vice Chair, introduced the item and Dr. Richard Smith, Dean,
Instructional Technology and Faculty Development, and Julie Todaro, Dean,
Library Services, provided information concerning the proposed submission of
two Certified Assurances forms for the TIF grants and responded to questions
from Trustees. Dr. Smith stated that
each TIF grant submitted by Austin Community College requires that the Board of
Trustees approve a resolution stating that the submitting institution will
follow TIP guidelines. This item will
be included on the June 3 Board agenda for action.
[Board
Chair Lillian Davis arrived at 7:45 p.m.]
[Trustee
John Worley, arrived at 7:55 p.m.]
Lease Excess Airtime for ACC Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) Channels
Dr.
Davis, Chair, introduced the item and Dr. Richard Smith distributed information
and stated that ACC holds the licenses to four Instructional Television Fixed
Service (ITFS) channels. A ten-year
lease with a six-month extension expires on June 30, 2002. During this time period, ACC’s channels were
used for video transmissions. However,
marked competition and technology advances will replace video with high-speed
wireless Internet service. The Request
for Proposals (RFP) and the proposed contract will use ACC’s bandwidth for
Internet service. The proposed contract
will meet all Federal Communications Commission licensing requirements,
including that ACC will use some of the Internet service for ACC receive
sites. This item will be on a future
agenda for action by the Board.
Out-of-District
Policy Review
Dr.
Davis introduced the item and Martha Oburn, Associate Vice President for Institutional
Effectiveness, provided background information. Dr. Oburn discussed a study to provide information to assist
Austin Community College in the determination of a rationale for setting of
out-of-district tuition rates. Dr.
Oburn introduced Mary McKeown-Moak, MGT of America consultant, who conducted
the study. Ms. McKeown-Moak provided
information concerning the analysis including and responded to questions from
Trustees regarding:
·
Analysis of the impact of current Board policies on
out-of-district enrollment;
·
Determination of the actual cost of instruction for
out-of-district students
·
Creation of a model for setting out-of-district tuition
·
Analysis of results of surveys of out-of-district
students on reasons why they no longer attend Austin Community College.
1. The
tuition rates for in-district college-credit students shall be set by the
Board. Except when the Board explicitly
directs otherwise, tuition rates for other students shall be set by the President
in accordance with this policy. To the
extent feasible, general charges shall be assessed as tuition.
2. In
order to maintain a tuition differential that is fair both to ACC taxpayers and
to Texas-resident ACC students who leve outside the taxing district, the
credit-hour differential for such students shall reflect the local tax effort
in support of in-district students. It
shall thus be the ratio of annual property-tax revenues to annual in-district
credit hours, except that any term-to-term increase in the differential shall
be no more than $3 per credit-hour. The
President is authorized and encouraged to use any available method to lessen
the impact of this tuition differential on economically-disadvantaged students.
·
ACC policy only policy based on a revenue model.
·
Policies of peers permit tuition differential as does
Texas law, and charge no less than $8 per semester credit hour for residents,
and no less than $200 for each semester for non-residents.
·
El Paso did not have out-of-district differential until
current fiscal year.
·
Peers do not adjust tuition each semester.
·
ACC policy only policy that requires differentials for
out-of-district Texas resident students.
·
Method used by ACC very volatile, cost related to
changes in in-district credit hours.
·
ACC out-of-district rate exceeded OUT-OF-STATE rate at
5 of other 8 large, urban Texas community colleges.
·
Out-of-district differential per credit hour at ACC was
$53 in 2001-02, compared to $21 at
peers.
·
Using tuition and fees because not all peers define
tuition the same way.
·
Out-of-district in 2001-02, $97.58 at ACC compared to
$56.06 at peers.
·
In district in 2001-02, $44.58 at ACC compared to
$35.05 at peers.
·
Annual cost for ACC out-of-district over $1,000 more
than at peers.
·
Between 1996 and 2000, ACC “lost” 11% of
out-of-district enrollments, from 15,800 in fall 1996, to 14,052 in 2000.
·
Peers gained 4.6% in out-of-district enrollments,
79,260 enrolled in fall 1996, and 82,873 in 2000.
·
Administered to 400 students enrolled in Fall 2000
·
Ten total questions
·
40% of out-of-district students reported ACC too
expensive, while only 6% of in-district students said tuition and fees too
high.
·
To make ACC better, 20.5% of out-of-district students
wanted reduced tuition and fees.
·
Price was major factor in decision of out-of-district
students not to continue enrollment, but not a factor in decisions of
in-district students.
·
Definitions vary:
1. Education
and general revenues per student
2. Education
and general expenditures per student
3. State
and local revenues per credit hour
4. Expenditures
in each discipline per credit hour
5. Current
education and general expenditures per student, excluding research and public service
and a prorated share of overhead
6. Average
state expenditure per student for the academic year, excluding capital
7. Average
instruction-related expenditures per student
·
Direct costs:
those derived from expenditures by academic departments
·
Indirect costs:
expenditures of administrative and support service units
·
Fixed costs:
expenditures that remain constant over the short run as volume changes
(president, offices)
·
Variable costs:
those that fluctuate in proportion to the volume, like faculty salaries
·
Average costs:
divide total costs by total units
·
Marginal costs:
those related to the change in total cost attributable to change in the
number of units
·
Three main methods of calculating marginal costs: regression; fixed and variable cost method;
and incremental cost method.
·
Calculated average and marginal costs of instruction
for ACC using five years of data in the regression method.
·
Regression method did not generate good model
·
Fixed and Variable cost method of calculating Marginal
Cost of instruction used total FY2001 unrestricted education and general
expenditures, excluding public service, and certain others, as on page 2-23 of
report. Marginal cost = $4,300 per FTES or $112.51 per credit hour;
Average cost = $7,097 per student, $186 per credit hour.
·
Incremental cost method of calculating Marginal Cost of
instruction used total FY2001 unrestricted education and general expenditures,
excluding public service, and is on page 2-24 of report. Marginal cost = $6,327 per FTES or $114 per
credit hour; Average cost = $6,544 per student, $171 per credit hour.
·
Change Board policy to set tuition once each fiscal
year so that students may plan.
·
Modify Board policy so that out-of-district tuition is
noted based on revenues. Rather, base
out-of-district and out-of-state tuition on the cost of education.
·
If tuition for out-of-district students is to be based
on some measure of the cost of instruction, then marginal or variable costs as
opposed to average costs should be considered for use in the method.,
·
Exclude from the calculation of the cost of education
or cost of instruction all expenditures classified as “Public Service” and all
expenditures for continuing education and adult basic education.
·
Modify Board policy so that out-of-district tuition is
based on the Cost of Education, as defined by one of these alternatives:
1. Calculate
out-of-district tuition as a percentage of the average cost of education, where
the cost of education is defined as total unrestricted educational and general
expenditures, less expenditures for public service, continuing education, and
adult basic education.
2. Calculate
out-of-district tution as a percentage of the average cost of education, where
thecost of education is defined as the marginal or variable cost for total
unrestricted educational and general expenditures, less expenditures for public
sservice (as calculated by the fixed- and variable-cost method.
Dr. Davis
and Trustees expressed appreciation for the information presented by Ms.
McKeown-Moak.
Resolution on
Revenue for FY03 Budget – Discussion of FY03 Revenue
Dr.
Davis stated this item was postponed until the June 3 Board meeting.
Executive
Session
There was no Executive
Session.
Announcements
There
were no announcements.
Meeting Review
There
were no comments.
Adjournment
Having
no motion before the Board, the May 20, 2002, monthly Work Session of the Austin
Community College Board of Trustees was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Approved By
John
B. Worley, Secretary