Los Angeles Harbor CollegeInstitutional Effectiveness

Reportpresented to the

LACCD Board of Trustees

July 24, 2013

Mr. Farley Herzek College PresidentMr. Luis Rosas Vice President Academic AffairsDr. Kristi V. Blackburn Dean of Institutional EffectivenessDr. Bobbi Villalobos Dean of Academic Affairs

College Strategic Plan: Priorities & OutcomesLAHC Educational Master Plan 2013-17

• FTES growth plan• 4%+ • Deans/Faculty developed plan

to reach 7300 FTEs• Increase retention/persistence/

transfer/degree and certificate completion

• Student Success (implementation of SB1456)

• Continue Infrastructure Support• 3 years of balanced budget

(including surplus 2013)• SLOs and Accreditation

District Strategic Plan: 2011-12 Baseline DataPercentage of eligible students receiving financial aid

City East Harbor Mission Pierce Southwes

t Trade-Tech Valley West DISTRICT

Pell Grant (comes w/ BOGG) 7,754 12,764 4,327 4,073 8,392 3,380 6,257 7,478 4,121 58,546

BOGG Only 5,269 10,642 2,324 2,613 4,127 2,347 6,345 5,764 4,039 43,470

Est. % of eligible students receiving any Financial Aid [Pell Grant (comes with BOGG) or BOGG Only]      

79% 94% 93% 84% 91% 97% 83% 92% 94% 89%

Percentage of new students completing assessment in English

YEAR C E H M P S T V W Total2009 59.4% 61.2% 74.5% 73.7% 64.7% 77.2% 51.4% 73.4% 60.8% 64.8%

2010 63.1% 63.9% 74.3% 72.5% 69.4% 76.4% 37.4% 70.7% 61.0% 64.7%

2011 58.1% 61.9% 71.4% 76.0% 73.9% 78.2% 28.8% 72.7% 62.7% 63.6%

Percentage of new students completing assessment in MATH

YEAR C E H M P S T V W Total2009 60.1% 81.5% 71.7% 75.3% 66.1% 76.6% 54.5% 73.4% 61.0% 69.6%

2010 64.2% 84.1% 71.7% 73.8% 70.6% 76.0% 39.7% 74.9% 62.1% 69.8%

2011 60.8% 85.6% 69.2% 77.2% 74.6% 77.6% 33.5% 75.0% 63.6% 70.0%

Percentage of new students successfully completing at least one math & English class in first year

YEAR C E H M P S T V W Total2009 14.8% 21.6% 21.4% 14.9% 17.9% 22.2% 13.1% 8.2% 20.8% 15.5%

2010 14.9% 23.1% 16.3% 24.8% 19.5% 27.3% 13.5% 9.8% 20.8% 14.6%

2011 14.7% 15.8% 12.6% 20.9% 15.1% 23.0% 10.4% 7.2% 19.9% 17.1%

YEAR C E H M P S T V W Total

09 FA-10SP 84.4 88.3 88.1 83.8 86.6 80.5 80.8 84.8 82.7 85.4

10FA- 11SP 86.2 91.1 88.2 83.3 88.3 79.1 79.4 85.0 81.2 86.2

11FA-12SP 86.9 91.0 89.0 83.8 90.2 83.2 79.2 85.6 83.3 87.2

09FA- 10FA 68.1 77.4 73.7 73.2 75.8 61.3 60.6 73.6 65.0 72.1

10FA-11FA 70.0 80.8 75.4 70.5 77.9 55.5 64.5 76.1 63.2 73.6

11FA-12FA 72.3 80.0 74.6 74.6 79.1 68.8 65.3 75.8 68.4 75.2

Persistence: Fall to Spring & Fall to Fall

1. New students completing 30 units within 6 years (%)2. New students completing 60 units within 6 years (%)3. Complete Engl 101 & Math 125 (or above) within 6 years4. Completion rate (cert., degree, transfer) within 6 years

2004 C E H I M P S T V W DISTRICT

1. 64.3% 69.2% 61.8% 54.3% 61.3% 68.4% 50.1% 58.6% 65.6% 55.7% 64.4%

2. 41.6% 46.0% 40.3% 28.6% 36.0% 44.7% 27.1% 35.9% 41.9% 31.3% 41.0%

3. 27.6% 33.5% 24.1% 25.7% 29.6% 38.9% 16.4% 15.7% 36.7% 21.8% 30.6%

4. 32.3% 35.5% 35.0% 40.0% 30.3% 45.3% 21.0% 27.7% 39.0% 30.9% 35.9%

Goal 2 continued: 6 YEAR OUTCOMES

2006 C E H I M P S T V W DISTRICT

1. 63.5% 69.3% 63.9% 52.2% 62.1% 72.6% 46.2% 62.6% 66.1% 56.1% 65.9%

2. 41.7% 45.8% 38.8% 34.8% 37.9% 48.4% 26.1% 38.7% 41.4% 30.4% 42.1%

3. 29.7% 35.7% 24.2% 43.5% 31.4% 44.4% 15.3% 17.8% 36.1% 20.3% 32.9%

4. 29.2% 33.2% 34.5% 47.8% 26.3% 44.3% 18.4% 28.7% 35.2% 28.5% 34.0%

2005 C E H I M P S T V W DISTRICT

1. 63.8% 69.4% 64.8% 57.6% 65.0% 71.5% 42.3% 56.8% 66.6% 49.2% 65.1%

2. 38.7% 45.5% 39.1% 24.2% 37.6% 47.5% 22.1% 37.3% 41.1% 27.4% 40.9%

3. 27.7% 31.9% 23.3% 39.4% 32.5% 39.6% 10.9% 13.1% 35.6% 17.0% 30.1%

4. 30.4% 33.3% 33.9% 51.5% 29.6% 45.9% 16.3% 29.4% 38.6% 27.6% 35.1%

1. New students completing 30 units within 3 years (%)2. New students completing 60 units within 3 years (%)3. Complete Engl 101 & Math 125 (or above) within 3 years4. Completion rate (cert., degree, transfer) within 3 years

2007 C E H I M P S T V W DISTRICT

1. 60.7% 62.8% 53.5% 66.7% 55.8% 66.2% 38.0% 54.1% 60.5% 49.6% 59.5%

2. 30.8% 32.2% 19.5% 29.4% 24.7% 32.9% 15.9% 25.8% 29.7% 21.2% 28.6%

3. 22.2% 25.5% 11.5% 25.5% 22.0% 33.1% 11.1% 10.0% 29.9% 12.7% 23.9%

4. 12.4% 14.8% 12.2% 23.5% 15.1% 22.5% 9.8% 13.2% 18.2% 15.9% 16.4%

Goal 2 continued: 3 YEAR OUTCOMES

2009 C E H I M P S T V W DISTRICT

1. 58.7% 65.8% 59.9% 54.9% 55.1% 67.7% 46.2% 53.4% 61.3% 53.2% 61.0%

2. 26.1% 31.7% 20.6% 29.6% 23.1% 34.3% 17.2% 22.7% 29.9% 16.9% 27.8%

3. 17.2% 26.4% 10.4% 28.8% 20.7% 34.5% 14.3% 10.7% 27.9% 14.0% 23.4%

4. 5.3% 11.2% 9.5% 21.1% 8.9% 17.3% 7.4% 9.4% 12.7% 11.8% 11.5%

2008 C E H I M P S T V WDISTRICT

1. 60.4% 61.4% 57.9% 68.1% 55.3% 65.6% 38.5% 50.1% 58.4% 50.8% 58.6%

2. 26.2% 30.1% 24.1% 31.9% 23.8% 34.2% 13.5% 22.2% 27.4% 18.4% 27.3%

3. 20.1% 23.3% 15.4% 29.8% 23.4% 31.5% 9.7% 10.4% 26.6% 13.1% 22.5%

4. 10.8% 13.9% 13.8% 27.7% 12.2% 21.9% 8.5% 13.1% 14.2% 15.1% 15.0%

ACCJC Student Success Targets Set ACCJC Annual Report 2013 Joint meeting of Assessment

Committee and Achieving the Dream Data Team

• Std for course completion: 70%• Std for retention: 53%• Std for degree completion (#): 539• Std for transfer to 4-year (#): 350• Std for certificate completion (#): 102

You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.

--Buckminster Fuller

Alignment of College Plan to the DSPGoal 1. Access and

Preparation for Success: Improve equitable access; help students attain important early educational momentum points.

Achieving the Dream year 2 interventions. Discussed further in presentation

Goal 2. Teaching & Learning for Success: Strengthen effective teaching and learning by providing a learner-centered educational environment; help students attain their goals of certificate and degree completion, transfer, and job training and career placement; increase equity in the achievement of these outcomes.

Career Technical Education: Certificate development and completion

SLO Assessment: Complete integration of SLOs with Planning

Curriculum Development: TMC AA-T degrees

LAHC Technology Annual Plan Distance Ed Plan: Expand offerings and

increase degree pathways

Goal 3. Organizational Effectiveness: Improve organizational effectiveness through data-informed planning and decision-making, process assessment, and professional development.

Analysis and development of FTES growth plan:– Improve college funding base

while growing efficiency in order to develop additional funding to improve student success.

Planning Process– Educational Master Plan as a

guiding document in the planning process

SLOs (next slide)

Goal 4. Resources and Collaboration: Increase and diversify sources of revenue in order to achieve and maintain fiscal stability and to support District initiatives. Enhance and maintain mutually beneficial external partnerships with business, labor, and industry and other community and civic organizations in the greater Los Angeles area.

Financial Sustainability – The college has now embarked on a path to

invest the new reserves in program growth so we can become self sustaining while fulfilling accreditation and district requirements.

EWD– Increase grant funding sources– Increase industry partnerships in community

Human Resources Plan– Use data to determine staffing needs of all

constituencies of the campus– Very positive feedback on the 2 plans

completed thus far from ACCJC visiting teams, citing it as a “best practice”

Alignment of College Plan to the DSP

Student Learning Outcomes UpdateFall 2012 Spring 2013

• Course 81% 85%• Program 55% 55%• Institutional 60% 60%• SAOs 100% 100%

• ISLOs are up to date within 5 year assessment plan– 3 of the college’s 5 ISLOs have been measured; 4th in progress. Final ISLO planned for 2013-

14 – ISLOs will be at 100% in 2013-14

• By spring of 2014 :– Course level SLOs have been written (defined)– The college MUST have completed 100% of course level SLOs complete a full cycle:

defined/measured/results used and refined definitions– Program level SLOs must also be 100% assessed – SLO Coordinator working with Deans, VP Academic Affairs to accomplish SLO plan in effect

for 2013-14 to achieve goal of 100%• The knowledge accumulated from these assessments must be incorporated in

2013-14 Program Reviews & results be reflected in Unit plans for 2014-2015 planning cycle

Accreditation Update

Accreditation UpdateCollege Recommendation 1: As previously stated in Recommendation 2 by the 2006 Comprehensive Evaluation

Team and in order to meet Standards, the planning process needs to reflect an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation that uses data as the central focus to inform decisions. The process needs to be made clear to the college constituencies so they understand the steps, as well as which plan informs which plan. In addition, human resource planning for classified personnel and administrators needs to be evidence- based and integrated with institutional planning and program review. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the planning process as well as the effectiveness of programs and services needs to be included. (I.B.2, I.B.3, I.B.6, I.B.7, III.A.6).

Feedback provided from the Visiting Team:Number of actions taken to address the recommendation. Most notably, breaking down the recommendation

into the workable pieces, the college was able to address each facet thoroughly.– Infrastructure creation (shared governance calendar, planning documents calendar) has streamlined

planning activities to the betterment of college planning.– Evidence included qualitative and quantitative methods in the evaluation of planning (process and

product)– Data present and used in planning and budgeting activities.– College more closely following the Planning Policy and Procedure Manual; encouraged to reflect on

Program Review Manual and adhere to it more closely.– HR Plan 2012-13 reflected planning and budgeting activities was very data driven and tied to planning

documents (unit plans and program reviews). Transparency of the data and process was noted in its role for helping the college employees understand decision making at the college regarding “staffing”.

“As a result of various policy and procedural improvements implemented since the 2012 visit, the college’s planning processes for program review and resource allocation were dramatically improved and are now considered examples of good practices.”

College Recommendation 2: In order to meet the Standard, and to adequately monitor salary and benefit expenditures and insure the institution practices effective oversight of finances, the team recommends that salary actions should first be reviewed for available and adequate funding prior to initiating the employment process. (III.D.2.d).

Feedback provided from the Visiting Team:Provided an increase of infrastructure necessary for oversight and monitoring:

creation of forms which are derived from planning documents. Change to Centralized model increased the oversight and monitoring.

Quarterly budget meetings resulting in better alignment of units to the budget requests to spending/priorities. Better oversight.

“The college is commended for its extensive use of integrated, data driven, and decision-making planning resulting in a multiple voices representation for each Cluster.”

The visiting team believed that the college has fully met the accreditation standard recommendations listed above. It is anticipated at the June 2013 convening of the ACCJC for the college’s probationary sanction to be removed and the college be “fully accredited”.

Accreditation Update

Achieving the Dream

• 3 Interventions– Front Door--FYE– Math Progression– Cultural Equity and Awareness

• Outcomes measurements are still in progress. – Spring 2013 grades will be included in

analysis.• All interventions are being leveraged with

grant activities such as Title V, STEM grant, Bank of America financial literacy grant, Learning Works grant.

FRONT DOOR INTERVENTION: First Year Experience

• Orientation• Summer Bridge

Retreat• Small Learning

Communities• Learning Coaches• Sophomore year

guidance • Student Success

Society• Service Learning

Fall 2012 FYE Retention and Completion

OUTCOMES DATA FALL 2012 nCourse

RetentionCourse Successful

Completion GPAAvg Units Attempted

Avg Units Completed

FYE Cohort Art 103 104 99.0% 93.3% 2.74 10.44 10.70

  English 28 72 98.6% 81.9% 2.70 10.57 11.06

  PD 17 73 100.0% 97.3% 2.70 10.49 10.97

  ServLrn 100 67 98.5% 85.1% 2.74 10.42 11.00

  Total 316 99.1% 89.9% 2.72 10.48 10.91

Comparison Art 103 38 76.3% 63.2% 2.38 8.58 6.87

  English 28 75 82.7% 61.3% 2.18 9.12 8.03

  PD 17 27 96.3% 96.3% 2.77 8.44 7.41

  ServLrn 100 25 84.0% 72.0% 3.23 8.00 8.80

  Total 165 83.6% 69.1% 2.46 8.72 7.78

All Courses Art 103 192 77.6% 60.9% 2.50 8.14 6.98(Includes Comparison Group) English 28 590 84.4% 67.6% 2.35 9.02 8.00

PD 17 167 94.0% 89.2% 2.58 8.99 8.43

ServLrn 100 25 84.0% 72.0% 3.23 7.98 8.78

Total 974 84.7% 70.1% 2.44 8.82 7.89

FYE End of Semester Survey/Results n=62

Close to 80% indicated using faculty office hours. 85% interacted with Counselors. 30% seeing them once/week or more 40% experience interference from work in meeting academic deadlines 98% indicated that feedback from instructors helps them determine

their status in the class 96% felt the contributions they make in class are valued 55% took advantage of Study Skills Enhancement workshops 77% use the Math Learning Center 58% never use the Writing Center (area for further exploration) 46% use the Learning Assistance Center 65% indicate it has been hard to learn to manage time effectively 90% had volunteered in community 85% have asked an instructor for assistance after class 98% have social interactions with someone of a different race/ethnicity

Math Progression

Curriculum Re-Design• California Acceleration Project (3CSN) 2012-13• STEM Pathway

– Summer Bootcamp prep for students– 4 semester sequence Pre-Algebra to Calculus– Imbedded tutoring

• Non-Stem Pathway– Pre-req of Pre-Algebra leading into Math 227 Stats

Fast Track– Began before joining Achieving the Dream in 2011– Increased with Achieving the Dream momentum– Housed in the Learning Assistance Center

Curriculum Re-Design: STEM

A BC or

PD

F or NP W

Retained

Completed

STEM Section

14 7 7 1 2 4 88.6% 80.0%

ALL Math 123A

71 65 78 33 59 75 80.3% 56.2%

ALL Math (excl. Math 100 – lab)

371

383

502198

257404

80.9% 59.4%

• All STEM students (28) who successfully completed the course in Fall 2012 enrolled the following semester.

• Of the 28 STEM students who successfully completed the course in Fall 2012, 92.9% enrolled in Math 123B the following semester. Grades in this course will be tracked.

n=35Successful

Completion of STEM

Successful Completion of

STEM and Enrolled in Spring 2013

Successful Completion of STEM and Enrolled in Math

123B in Spring 2013

STEM cohort 80%28/35

100% 28/28

92.9%26/28

Fall 2012 STEM: Math 123A

The STEM cohort had a higher retention rate (88.6%) compared to all Math 123A and all other Math students.

The STEM cohort also had a significantly higher completion rate (80.0%) compared to all Math 123A (56.2%) and all other Math students (59.4%).

Course alignment with Math 227

n=381 Successful Completion of Math 123A

Successful Completion of Math 123A and Enrolled in Spring 2013

Successful Completion of STEM and Enrolled in Math 123B in Spring 2013

ALL Math 123A 56.2% 214/381

93%199/214

82.7%177/214

Math Fast Track

N= 1215• 37.6% took first math

class before Fast Track– Higher retention rate

after FT: 84.3% (compared to 77.7%)

• 22.1% after or concurrent with FT– Higher completion

rate after FT: 57.8% (compared to 52.7%)

• 40.3% no math enrmt

Math Persistence

N CohortMath Enrollment 1

semester after2 semesters

after3 semesters

after4 semesters after

137Winter 2011 43.1% 24.1% 19.7% 14.6%

131Summer 2011 33.6% 25.2% 29.8% 

244Fall 2011 28.3% 15.6%   

201Winter 2012 42.8% 20.9%   

121Spring 2012 14.9%     

380Summer 2012 37.1%     

Overall Persistence

N CohortLAHC Enrollment 1 semester after

2 semesters after

3 semesters after

4 semesters after

137Winter 2011 70.1% 56.2% 71.5% 43.8%

131Summer 2011 84.7% 71.0% 62.6% 

244Fall 2011 77.9% 48.4%   

201Winter 2012 91.5% 67.7%   

121Spring 2012 73.6%     

380Summer 2012 86.3%     

Cultural Equity and Awareness

Addressing Poverty– Financial Literacy– Bank of America grant and Title V grant– CGCA (Counseling Guidance Career Assistant) role– Outreach to high schools and continuation schools– Martin Luther King, Jr. “Days of Service”

Multicultural Center – Cultural Literacy– Planning, implementation, and evaluation in years

2, 3,and 4, respectively Grant opportunities

– Seed money to establish Multicultural Center– $40,000 Learning Works grant

• Culturally responsive training for faculty, staff, students

Martin Luther King, Jr. Days of Service

Pre-Test/Post-Test Survey Designn= 60

Students reflected improvement in knowledge of financial literacy.

No answer

I feel more prepared to manage my money.

I will use/continue to use a money management system.

2%

49%

49%

After learning about financial literacy, how will you manage your money now?

I understand budgeting, but probably won't do it.

I feel somewhat prepared to handle my budget.

I am confident and will use/continue to use at least one budgeting technique.

17%

26%

43%

How much have you learned about budgeting techniques and utilizing the money that you re-

ceive?

No answer

I will wait to get a credit card until I know I will be responsible using it.

I can pay minimum, low payment and I'll be fine.

I know that it's hard to get out of debt, so I should pay a little more than requested each month.

I know how credit and interest works, so I will use techniques to help me manage and decrease my debt.

2%

24%

2%

20%

53%

What do you now know about using credit and getting out of debt?

I still don't understand the connection

I don't believe it affects me.

There is some relation, but I don't fully understand it.

I understand that my family/cultural background determines my values and behaviours toward money.

3%

22%

15%

59%

To what extent do you now understand how your family/cultural background affects your relationship with money?

No answer

A little knowledgeable.

Very knowledgeable.

2%

39%

59%

What do you now know about Martin Luther King Jr's commitment to service?

Year 3: Scaling Up & Institutionalizing

• Including initiatives in the College Educational Master Plan and College Annual Plan

• Integrating Achieving the Dream work into existing shared governance committees on the campus

• Creating and implementing Face-to-Face Orientation involving the campus community

• Continuing data examination and discussion– ACCJC Data Reporting changes

expected to include disaggregation of data and how we are attempting to overcome inequities