[PPT] - South Dakota Technical Institutes Developing Technically Skilled PowerPoint Presentation

SLIDE 1

South Dakota Technical Institutes

Developing Technically Skilled Professionals

Joint Appropriations Committee February 7, 2017

SLIDE 2

Nam ed 20 16’s Best State Com m unity College System

Cost & Financing, Education Outcomes, & Career Outcomes

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2

SLIDE 3

S O U T H D A K O T A T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3

President Mike Cartney President Mark Wilson President Robert Griggs President Ann Bolman

Technical Institute Presidents

SLIDE 4

Strengthening & Increasing South Dakota’s Workforce

Educate 6,500 students each

year

Provide technically skilled

degrees (AAS degrees, diplomas, certificates)

Offer a cost effective &

timely route to successful, fulfilling employment

SLIDE 5

Strengthening & Increasing South Dakota’s Workforce

SD employers count on a fresh

infusion of talent each year – 2,500 graduates

More than 1,200 industry

experts help guide curriculum & programs

82% of responding graduates

remain in South Dakota to fill high-tech, high-need careers or continue their education

98% of responding grads are

employed, continuing education,

r in Armed Forces

SLIDE 6

S tra te gic P la n Ove ra rc h in g Go a l: Provide quality postsecondary education and training to enable South Dakota’s workforce and economy to grow.

SLIDE 7

S tra te gic P la n

Th r e e Ar e a s o f Fo c u s :
Product: Grow a technically skilled

workforce prepared to meet the challenges of industry and continuing education.

People: Lead a system with the

appropriate quality and quantity of instructors, staff and administrators.

Plant: Ensure facilities are adequate,

safe and capable of meeting evolving industry demands and are conducive to learning.

SLIDE 8

Current Relationship

State with Board of Education

Technical Institutes

with local boards

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 8

Tuition and state fees
Distribute state funding
New construction – facilities bonding
Program approval & review
Strategic data
Promulgate rules as authorized
Coordination with state agencies
Federal Perkins grant & state grants
1.4 FTE
Hire president/ leadership
Strategic advisement &

partnerships with industry

Local policies & procedures
Daily operations & fiscal
versight
Personnel
Curriculum & Instruction
Accreditation

System Priorities, Efficiencies, & Im provem ents

SLIDE 9

Proposed Relationship – SB65

SD Board of Technical Education

Technical Institutes

with local boards

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 9

Tuition and state fees
State funding recommendations,

distribution & oversight

Overall policies & goals for system
New construction & major renovations
Program approval & review
Strategic data
Monitor accreditation
Promulgate rules, as authorized
Coordination with state agencies
2 FTE
Hire president/ leadership
Strategic advisement &

partnerships with industry

Local policies & procedures
Daily operations & fiscal
versight
Personnel
Curriculum & Instruction
Accreditation

System Priorities, Efficiencies, & Im provem ents

SLIDE 10

SB65 – Board of Technical Education Proposed Fiscal Im pact for FY18

No additional funding required in

FY18

No additional FTE required in FY18
Executive Director: Access a vacant FTE at
Dept. of Education
Director of Academic & Student Success

Programs: Move 1 FTE currently tasked with postsecondary tech ed to the Board of Technical Education

Dept. of Education staff provide finance, legal, and

contract services and board/administrative support

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 0

SLIDE 11

Product

Grow a technically skilled workforce prepared to meet the challenges of industry and continuing education.

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 1

SLIDE 12

SD Technical Institute Graduate Outcom es

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 2

90.00% 92.00% 94.00% 96.00% 98.00% 100.00% 2012 2013 2014 2015 98.12% 97.52% 98.10% 97.83%

Respondents, 6 m onths following graduation Em ployed, Continuing Education, or Arm ed Forces

SLIDE 13

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 3

SD Technical Institute Graduate Outcom es

1783 327 5 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 Total Employed Total Continuing Education Total in Armed Forces 2012 2013 2014 2015

2015 Technical Institute Responding Graduates – 90.8% response rate

SLIDE 14

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 4

SD Technical Institute Graduate Outcom es

97.8 3% 8 1.90 % 63.75% 67.11% 58 .8 9% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% Total Placement of 2015 Graduates Total Employed Total Employed in Field Total Employed in SD Total Employed in Field, in SD

20 15 Technical Institute Graduate Outcom es

2015 Technical Institute Responding Graduates – 90.8% response rate

SLIDE 15

SD Technical Institute Enrollm ents, FTE & Graduates

5951 6179 6073 6250 6463 6305 6323 6569 1930 2289 2312 2228 2522 2210 2398 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

SD Technical Institute Enrollm ents, FTE & Graduates

Fall Enrollments Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Graduates

SLIDE 16

0 %

4%
7%
10 %

0 %

2%
2%

2%

12.0 0 %
10 .0 0 %
8 .0 0 %
6.0 0 %
4.0 0 %
2.0 0 %

0 .0 0 % 2.0 0 % 4.0 0 %

20 13 20 14 20 15 20 16

Com parison of Percentage Changes in Fall Enrollm ent since 20 13 2-Year Institutions National vs SD

National 2-Yr Public SD TI

SD Techs vs. National Enrollm ent Trends

SLIDE 17

1956 18 78 20 0 1 20 59

4.0 %

6.5% 2.9%

6 .0 %
4.0 %
2.0 %

0 .0 % 2.0 % 4 .0 % 6 .0 % 8 .0 %

150 0 160 0 170 0 18 0 0 190 0 20 0 0 210 0

20 13 20 14 20 15 20 16 SD TI Enrollm ent Before BD vs With BDS

(excludes program s that were not BDS in Cohort 1)

Pre-BDS With BDS % change Linear (Pre-BDS) Linear (With BDS)

Growth in Build Dakota Program s

SLIDE 18

Corporate Education

20 12-13 20 13-14 20 14-15 20 15-16 Com panies

612 961 537 805

Unduplicated companies the TIs provided corporate education to in the year prior Individuals

9785 8772 7965 8120

Unduplicated individuals the TIs provided corporate education to in the year prior

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 1 8

SLIDE 19

SLIDE 20

SLIDE 21

Build Dakota Scholarship

Growing South Dakota’s workforce in the highest

demand technical fields.

Full scholarships for students completing eligible

1- and 2-year programs.

Skilled Scholars commit to working in SD, in field
f study, for 3 years.
Collaboration between scholarship, industry &

technical institutes

First cohort started Fall 2015

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 1

SLIDE 22

Build Dakota Scholarship

Eligible Programs in

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 2

Healthcare Energy Engineering Agriculture Automotive Building Trades/ Construction Precision Manufacturing Information Technology/ Computer Information Systems Welding

SLIDE 23

Cohort 1: 298 Scholars
24 industry partner scholarships
190 working toward completion
29 employed
9 employment deferments
7 probation or self-pay
63 non-completers
Cohort 2: 295 Scholars
54 industry partner scholarships
289 working toward completion
6 non-completers

Build Dakota Scholarship

S O U T H D A K O T A T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 3

SLIDE 24

People

Lead a system with the appropriate quality and quantity of instructors, staff and administrators.

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 4

SLIDE 25

Workforce

Adm in. Faculty (FTE) Staff

Full-tim e Adjuncts (FTE) Overloads (FTE) Professional/ Technical Civil Service Perm anent, Part-Tim e

LATI 8 109 12.9 3 28 58 11.63% MTI 4 77 1.7 1.1 31 18 6.12% STI 8 82 19.6 11.8 35 53 0% WDT 5 44 22 .84 11 30 0%

SUBTOTAL 25 312 56.2 16.74 10 5 159 4.92%

TOTAL 25 38 4.94 264 4.92%

SLIDE 26

Workforce

Age 25 & Under 3% Ages 26-35 19% Ages 36-45 22% Ages 46-55 31% Ages 56-61 15% Age 62+ 10%

Technical Institute Em ployees, by Age

0.00% 2.00% 4.00% 6.00% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00% 14.00% 16.00% 18.00% 20.00%

LATI MTI STI WDT

13.79% 13.49% 19.55% 10.64% 10.84% 8.73% 8.38% 11.70%

% of Em ployees, Age 56 and Older

Ages 56-61 Age 62+

SLIDE 27

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Funds from 2016’s HB 1182
3% of new funding from sales tax revenues

each year

“…shall be dedicated to increasing instructor

salaries to competitive levels at postsecondary technical institutes”

TH AN K YOU ! Th e y’ve b e e n life c h a n gin g.

SLIDE 28

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Long-Time Challenges:

Difficu lt to attr act

in str u ctor s fr om in d u str y becau se of d iffer en ce in pay

H ar d to keep

in str u ctor s em ployed wh en gr ad u ates r eceive

ffer s in in d u str y

sim ilar to in str u ctor s’ salar ies

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 8

SLIDE 29

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Positive Differences Immediately:

In cr eased # of ap p licat ion s
Mor e exp er ien ced

ap p lican t s

H ir in g back qu alit y

in st r u ct or s wh o h ad gon e t o in d u st r y for h igh er p ay

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 2 9

SLIDE 30

GOAL:

Bring salaries to equal levels between supervisors in industry and instructors at the technical institutes on a per-day basis

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 0

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

INDUSTRY INSTRUCTORS

SLIDE 31

Entry Rate Market Value Maximum Rate

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 1

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Wage Ranges

Move away from traditional education wage system:

Different at each tech school
Same for most program areas

at each school Establish industry-competitive wage ranges for each program. Achieve equitable market values across the entire technical institute system.

SLIDE 32

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 2

Entry Rate Market Value Maximum Rate

Wage Ranges

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Practical Nursing Machining Auto Technician Medical Lab Assistant Building Trades Engineering Technician Networking Diesel Technician Culinary Arts Precision Ag HVAC Powerline Dental Assisting Ultrasound Paramedic Robotics

SLIDE 33

ENTRY RATE
50th percentile wage for supervisor-level position in industry
Rate neither lags nor leads competition in market
Typically for beginning instructors
Fully qualified and well experienced as professionals in industry
ccupation
Little experience as an instructor, have licensure or certification

requirements to obtain, etc.

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 3

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Entry Rate Market Value Maximum Rate

Wage Ranges

SLIDE 34

MARKET VALUE
Target pay for fully trained, competent, and qualified instructors in both

field and as instructors

Possess all required licensures and/or certifications
Represents a skilled supervisor in a comparative industry
Meets performance expectations
Instructors with little experience or who have room for growth should

not be compensated at market value

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 4

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Entry Rate Market Value Maximum Rate

Wage Ranges

SLIDE 35

MAXIMUM RATE
Top wage in program; few instructors make it to max
Leaders in department and institution
Typically in industry and education for long time
Carry additional responsibility; bring added value to program
Talented at teaching, mentoring and as technicians in the field
Have the required licensures and/or certifications

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 5

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Entry Rate Market Value Maximum Rate

Wage Ranges

SLIDE 36

Distribution of funds to TIs based on

gaps from market value

Auto Tech Program Example:
Comparable industry position: First-line

Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers and Repairers

Entry Rate = $57,789
Market Value = $72,236
Maximum Rate = $90,295

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 6

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

SLIDE 37

Auto Tech Program Example:

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 7

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Market Value: = $72,236 (annual) = $299.73 (per day) Average Actual Daily Rate in Auto Tech Program : = $47,666 (annual) = $250.87 (per day)

Gap = $48.86 (per day, per instructor)

SLIDE 38

Auto Tech Program Example:

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 8

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Program Salary Gap: ($ gap per day * # contract days * # instructors) * 14.06% additional benefit cost

($48.86 * 190 * 4) * 14.06% = $42,354.8 4 Program Gap

Repeat across all program s at each technical institute to determ ine Institution Ga p

SLIDE 39

Calculated Gaps from Market Value (Summer 2016):

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 3 9

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

Technical Instructor Need Genera l Ed uca tion Instructor Need Total Calculated Need Genera l Ed uca tion Pro-Ra tion General Education Pro-Rated Funding Total FY17 Instructor Support Funding

LATI

$ 1,278,218.75 $ 95,547.81 $ 1,373,766.56 30.80% $ 82,178.19 $ 1,360 ,396.95

MTI

$ 865,219.01 $ 29,047.28 $ 894,266.29 9.36% $ 24,982.81 $ 8 90 ,20 1.8 2

STI

$ 100,450.16 $ 38,617.44 $ 139,067.61 12.45% $ 33,213.86 $ 133,664.0 2

WDT

$ 489,317.19 $ 146,987.36 $ 636,304.55 47.38% $ 126,420.02

$ 615,737.21

TOTAL

$ 2,733,20 5 $ 310 ,20 0 $ 3,0 43,40 5 $ 266,795

$ 3,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

Appropriated Funding $ 3,000,000.00 $ 3,000,000.00 Difference $ 266,794.88 $ (43,405.01)

SLIDE 40

Funds distributed only for

programs with identified need

Applied to individuals’

salaries:

Experience (industry & teaching)
Qualifications (degrees &

credentials)

Performance

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 0

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes”

SLIDE 41

Application of State Funds to Instructor Salaries

(Actual FY17):

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 1

Instructor Salary Support Funding

“…sha ll be d ed ica ted to increa sing instructor sa la ries to com p etitiv e lev els a t p ostsecond a ry technica l institutes” Total State Funding for FY17 by Institution FINAL FY17 State Funding Applied Calculated Gaps (June 2016) LATI $ 1,228,387.86 $ 1,360,396.95 MTI $ 873,183.52 $ 890,201.82 STI $ 118,299.61 $ 133,664.02 WDT $ 615,737.21 $ 615,737.21 TOTAL $ 2,8 35,60 8 $ 3,0 0 0 ,0 0 0

78% of full-time

instructors qualified for salary support funding

Average salary increase

was 21.5% ($10,100)

Administrative Rule 24:10:49

SLIDE 42

Plant

Ensure facilities are adequate, safe & capable of meeting industry demands & are conducive to learning.

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 2

SLIDE 43

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 3

SLIDE 44

World-Class Facilities

Final phase near

completion

Multi-phase, decade-long

project

Upgrades on all campuses
Ensure facilities are safe,

attractive and industry- aligned

Funded with student fees

and state support

STI and WDT completing

the last projects

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 4

SLIDE 45

World-Class Facilities

2016 Completion of

115,000 sq. ft. facility

New Auto Tech Lab – DOUBLES capacity
New Diesel Lab – Program expansion for Ag/Construction
Campus food service
Administrative offices
Auditorium
2017 Renovation of the Ed Wood facility
Expands Collision Program and Refinishes Lab Space –

DOUBLES program capacity

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 5

SLIDE 46

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 6

SLIDE 47

Auto Lab

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 7

SLIDE 48

S O U T H D A K O T A T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 8

SLIDE 49

The Hub

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 4 9

SLIDE 50

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 0

SLIDE 51

World-Class Facilities

New construction and renovations
Diesel
Public Safety programs
Medical simulation labs
Cafeteria
Multi-purpose room
Moves all programs on one campus
Staggered completions through May 2017

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 1

SLIDE 52

Badlands Hall – Diesel

SLIDE 53

Public Safety Addition

SLIDE 54

Sim ulation Center

SLIDE 55

Event Center

SLIDE 56

Budget Proposal

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 6

SLIDE 57

Revenues

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 7

Tuition & Fees 47% PSA 30% Federal Revenue 11% State Grants & Other Local 12%

All TI's Budget FY16

Tuition & Fees 46% PSA 30% Federal Revenue 8% State Grants & Other Local 16%

All TI's Budget FY17

Tuition & Fees 50% PSA 31%

Federal Revenue 4% State Grants & Other Local 15%

All TI's Budget FY18

SLIDE 58

Revenues

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 8

Tuition & Fees 55% State Aid 45%

State Aid vs. Student Burden FY18 State Aid:

Per Student Allocation Facility Bonds Support Tuition Buy Down Instructor Salary Enhancement

Tuition & Fees:

per credit (FY17 Rates) Tuition = $109 Facility Fee = $35 M&R Fee = $5 Technology Fee = $1 Local &/ or Program Fees

SLIDE 59

Expenditures – FY18 :

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 5 9

Salary and Benefits 65%

Professional Services 12% Travel and Supplies 7% Equipment 4% M&R plus Improvements 5% Other 7%

FY18 Budgeted Expenses for All Technical Institutes

SLIDE 60

FY17 Am endm ent

FY17 General Bill Amendment - $(694,160)
Reduction due to lower than estimated enrollments
Projected FTE for FY17 distribution = 5,905 = $20,754,126
Actual FTE for FY17 distribution = 5,707.5 = $20,059,966
Difference = $694,160
All funding formula requirements are met for FY17

*FTE = Full-Time Equivalent

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 0

SLIDE 61

State Aid – Distribution Form ula

Distribution of state aid detailed in SD Administrative Rule

24:10:42:28

25% of total distributed to each institute for baseline
perations
Remaining 75% distributed based on cost of programs by

weighted program factors

High cost, low density programs (Factor = 5)
High cost programs (Factor = 3)
Standard cost programs (Factor = 1)
Total state aid divided into four equal, quarterly payments
Payments are based on FTE from the prior fiscal year

SLIDE 62

FY17 Am endm ent

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 2

Distribution of Funds in FY17

TOTAL FY17 State Appropriation $27,908,796

State Bond Payment

$2,322,850 State share of lease paym ents on existing bonds.

Tuition Buy-Down Assistance

$1,831,820 Saves students approx. $10 per credit.

Instructor Salary Enhancement

$3,000,000 Brings instructor salaries to com petitive levels w ith industry. = $$ for Form ula Distribution - Est. 5,90 5 FTE $20 ,754,126 FTE Ca lcula tion LATI MTI STI W DT 2016 Tuition Collected $18,663,512.39 FTE Value/ Credit Hour 30 Tuition fee per credit (FY16) $109 Per Student Allocation (FY17) $3,514.67 Actual # of FTE Calculated (FY17 from 15-16 credits) 5,707.5 1880.29 1160.93 1903.34 762.94 Calculation of Need - Form ula Distribution $20 ,0 59,966 $6,296,578 $4,217,8 53 $6,215,619 $3,329,917 (Under) or Over Need $694,160

SLIDE 63

FY18 Proposal

State Aid Categories for Technical Institutes:
Per Student Allocation, including National Guard Tuition

Support

Facilities Bond Support
Tuition Buy Down
Instructor Salary Enhancement

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 3

SLIDE 64

FY18 BUDGET PROPOSAL

Provides changes in support for:
Postsecondary State Aid:
Per Student Allocation (PSA) -

$(395,908)

Bond Payment - $5,696

SLIDE 65

FY18 Proposal

Per Student Allocation (PSA) - $(395,908)

Part 1: 1% Inflationary Increase - $201,586
Part 2: Changes to Full-time Equivalent (FTE) - $(597,494)

Inflation: FTE Change:

FY17 Est. FTE = 5,905 ‐ FY18 Est. FTE = 5,735 Decrease in FTE = 170 FY17 PSA = $3,514.67 X Inflation Inc. 1% FY18 Prop PSA =$3,549.82 FY18 Prop PSA = $3,549.82 FY17 PSA = $ 3,514.67 PSA Increase = $ 35.15 PSA Increase = $ 35.15 X FY18 Est. FTE = 5,735 FY18 Inflation = $20 1,58 6 FY17 Estimated FTE = 5,905 ‐ FY18 Estimated FTE = 5,735 Decrease in FTE = 170 FY17 PSA = $3,514.67 X Decrease in FTE = 170 Cost of Change = $(597,494)

SLIDE 66

FY18 Proposal

Bond Payment, State Share - $5,696

State supports 27% of annual payments on bonds for

technical education facilities. 1-16A-96

Early state payoffs on two bonds following 2016

session decreased long term payments.

Total FY18 state bond support = $2,322,850

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 6

SLIDE 67

SD Technical Institute Funding Profile

Impacts of FY18 Proposal
Thank you for continued investments!
Funding to postsecondary technical education
= Educated, skilled workforce
= Quality employees
= Stronger state economy
= Strengthened South Dakota communities

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 7

SLIDE 68

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 8

SD Technical Institute Funding Profile

$0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 $1,800,000 $298,252 $643,000 $883,950 $324,090 $150,000 $150,000 $350,000

New Revenues Must Pays

1% Inflation 1% PSA $5/ Credit Increase Mandated Insurance Critical M&R* 158 More Students Priority Equipment $1,182,202 $1,617,090 $434,8 8 8 UNMET

*after shifting $500K of STI projects to out years

SLIDE 69

Thank You!

S O U T H D A K O TA T E C H N I C A L I N S T I T U T E S | 6 9