Self-Study Issues

PAGE 8 OF 10

Standard Eight

Committee Membership

Dr. Tom Kimberling, Co-Chair, Vice President of College Services
Dr. Robert Renger, Co-Chair, Dean of Arts and Sciences
Vic Belinski, Associate Vice Chancellor of Information Technology
Kathryn Schoenrock, Professor of Reading
Lester Tong, Computer Specialist, Arts and Sciences Division
Dusty Tubbs, Instructor, Cisco Academy

Standard Eight: Physical Resources

The institution has sufficient and appropriate physical resources to support its purposes and goals.

A. From the 1996 Self-Study Report

Issue 1: Buildings are not well maintained.

Discussion Summary:
This continues to be an issue. Although the College has invested nearly $2.0 million in Scheduled Maintenance, Block Grant, Foreign Student Surcharge, Instructional Equipment, RDA, grant and contract and operational resources in building maintenance projects over the past two years, the age of the College’s facilities and the limited staffing of the Maintenance & Operations (M&O) crew have made it difficult to adequately maintain the buildings. The passage of Measure “S” in March 2002 will provide significant resources for modernizing many of the aging facilities and replacing several others. However, the continued maintenance of the buildings will remain an issue until M&O staffing can be increased to provide adequate support.

Issue 2: Limited energy conservation practices.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. For the past two years the College has made a conscious effort to implement an energy management system, replace obsolete HVAC technology and lighting systems with energy efficient state-of-the-art systems. Implementation of the “Performance Contract” with Siemen’s will continue to address energy conservation.

Issue 3: Inadequate instructional spaces.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. The college currently has adequate space although the age of the facilities and the extensive use of portable buildings make the space less than ideal. Again, Measure “S” bond funds will address these issues over the next several years, as buildings are modernized and portable use reduced by permanent facilities.

Issue 4: No new construction since 1974.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. The Child Development Center opened in 1991. The College completed construction of the Math Science building in 1997, is currently in progress of construction of a new Library and Learning Resource Center and has many projects planned with the Measure “S” bond funds.

Issue 5: Campus lacks an updated facilities master plan.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. During the past two years the College has completed extensive facilities master planning which resulted in an intermediate plan to support the bond measure (S 8.1) and subsequent issuance of bonds. The College continues to work with its master plan architect to finalize the facilities plan that will result in redesign of the campus through implementation of the bond projects. A Facilities Oversight Committee (FOG) has been appointed and meets bi-weekly to oversee the planning process and train project teams relative to their individual involvement in design of their specific projects. Results of their efforts are included in S 8.2.

Issue 6: Need for more custodians and re-staffing the Grounds Supervisor position.

Discussion Summary:
This continues to be an issue. The Grounds Supervisor position has not been replaced and the custodial crew remains understaffed. Although the College continues to prioritize the M&O staffing needs as high, the limited resources over the past several years have precluded its ability to enlarge the size of the staff. Continued emphasis will be placed on resolving this matter, however, the short-term likelihood of any resolution is doubtful.

Issue 7: Need for more fiscal support for M&O.

Discussion Summary:
This continues to be an issue. Although operating resources for non-labor aspects of M&O have been enhanced through the use of RDA, Foreign Student Surcharge and other sources the overall budgetary support for M&O, particularly staffing (see 6. above) remains an on-going concern.

Issue 8: Need for new initiatives in the areas of safety, security and disaster planning.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. The District has employed a full-time Risk Manager who works closely with the colleges in identification and mitigation of safety issues. The College safety committee is active, a Workers Compensation Reduction and Improvement Task Force has been recently formed to work with the District’s insurance administrators in implementing a plan to reduce workers compensation incidents, ergonomic station evaluators have been appointed and trained and actively investigate and recommend solutions to ergonomic issues, and the College has undergone extensive Standard Emergency Management Systems (SEMS) training and practices during the past two years (S 8.3). Although the College is far from ideal in safety practices the emphasis placed on these matters the past several years has addressed the earlier concerns.

Issue 9: Inadequate instructional equipment and lack of systematic replacement program.

Discussion Summary:
The Instructional Equipment and Block Grant allocations provided through the State budget in 2000-01 and the Instructional Equipment allocation in 2002-03 have allowed the College the opportunity to address many of its equipment needs. The loss of TTIP-TCO funding has impacted its ability to continue adequately addressing technology issues. However, overall the issue of inadequate instructional equipment has been reasonably resolved in the short-term. The College has yet to develop a systematic replacement plan, although goals have been established through the draft Technology Planning Framework, the reliance on State funding mechanisms to provide the resources to implement the plan has been sporadic and has impeded progress in full implementation.

Issue 10: Insufficient resources to maintain modern state-of-the-art equipment.

Discussion Summary:
This continues to be an issue. Although much progress has been made in refreshing critical computer classrooms and upgrading networks and technology in general over the past several years, the College’s ability to maintain currency in its equipment has been dependent on resources from the State, namely, Instructional Equipment, Block Grant and TTIP-TCO funds. Because these funding sources are subject to the legislative budgeting process there is no assurance or predictability of the level of funding. As such this will continue to be an issue until other more stable sources of support can be developed.

Issue 11: Inadequate maintenance of computer equipment.

Discussion Summary:
This continues to be an issue. The computer maintenance staff has been augmented through the hiring of a new maintenance technician, the increased service assignment of a computer specialist and the establishment of an assistive computer specialist. Although the support staff has increased, the general service level is still seriously deficient. To date the technical support positions have been primarily assigned to individual departments with only one position available to serve the overall campus. There is a growing need to expand the general support staff and provide some supervisory oversight to assist in the proper prioritization of service requests. The Technology Planning Framework includes a proposed technology staffing plan. The primary issue at this time is identifying financial resources in order to implement the plan.

Issue 12: Lack of adequate staff involvement in facilities planning.

Discussion Summary:
This is no longer an issue. As noted in Issue 5 above, the College has completed extensive facilities master planning efforts. An intermediate plan was developed through consultation with virtually every department on campus and several open forums for college-wide and public input. Although several individuals complained they were unaware of the process every possible effort was made to notify the campus of this activity. Since development of the intermediate plan and passage of Measure “S,” the College has organized a Facilities Oversight Group (FOG) which is comprised of representation from all of the College’s constituencies and charged with assisting the College in the best use of the bond funds to create a functional and beautiful campus (S 8.2). This group will control, to a great extent, the exterior design of the projects including structural configuration, color schemes, signage, landscape, access for handicapped students, walkways and general campus orientation. FOG is also responsible for training individual project teams in the agreed-upon planning assumptions and assist with the development of goals, objectives, criteria and descriptive narratives associated with their individual projects. FOG, working with the master plan architect, will finalize the master planning effort. All who are interested in participating have been invited to meet with FOG or involve themselves in the planning for their individual projects.

B. From the 1998 Mid-term Report

Issue 1: Assess the technology and information needs and develop a multi-year plan to acquire, install, maintain, and replace technology.

Discussion Summary
Although this is still an on-going concern, the committee addressing Recommendation Six from the team’s 2002 Accreditation Visit has developed a planning framework and draft plan for implementation. Please refer to that section of the College’s 2003 Progress Report, Response to Recommendation Six, for the current status.

Issue 2: Address the need for maintenance of existing equipment and the more timely installation of purchased equipment.

Discussion Summary
See Response to A.11 above.

C. From the 2002 Update Report

Issue 1: Necessity to modify technology planning procedures

Discussion Summary
See Response to B.1 above, and College’s 2003 Progress Report, Response to Recommendation Six.

Issue 2: Implement College Research Office to coordinate with District Information Technology Office

Discussion Summary
After reevaluation the College has decided it would be more economical and efficient to utilize the District’s Institutional Research Office rather than implement a somewhat duplicative effort on campus. It is important to note that this partnership (in part) was a result of fiscal necessity. Ventura College has always enjoyed an excellent relationship with the District Office of Institutional Research. However, due to the severe reductions for the 2002-003 fiscal year, VC was forced to eliminate hours for its Institutional Research staff. As such, there will definitely be a drastic reduction in IR services and studies germane to Ventura College. The District has agreed to make its researcher available to the colleges and share or develop information upon request. Since all utilize the same database and the District has far and away developed the expertise to interrogate, compile and organize the data in a meaningful way to address the bulk of the research issues that come from the colleges, the shared use of this central resource seems to be the best solution to this concern. The College has full access to the database as well and has developed significant expertise for compiling research information through its Office of Enrollment Management. The combined efforts of that office with the District’s centralized assistance should adequately address the College’s research requirements.

Issue 3: Shortage of computer maintenance and M&O support staff

Discussion Summary
See Responses to A.6 and A.11 above.

 

Standard Eight List of Documents

S 8.1	Intermediate Plan to Support Measure S
S 8.2	FOG Materials
S 8.3	SEMS Training Materials

 

---

PAGES: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10