WORKFORCE INNOVATION THROUGH TECHNICAL EDUCATION SD Technical - - PDF document

2B - Presentation - Technical Institutes FY17

WORKFORCE INNOVATION

THROUGH TECHNICAL EDUCATION

SD Technical Institutes

Presentation to Joint Appropriations I February 4, 2016

LA

A

STRENGTHENING & INCREASING SOUTH DAKOTA'S WORKFORCE

• Educate 6,300 students each

year

• Provide technically skilled

degrees (AAS, diploma, certificates)

• Offer a cost effective & timely

route to successful, fulfilling employment

S~UTHEAST

TECH

STRENGTHENING & INCREASING SOUTH DAKOTA'S WORKFORCE

• SD employers count on a fresh

infusion of talent each year - 2,500 graduates

• More tho

n 1,200 industry experts help guide curriculum & programs

• 85% of responding graduates

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

NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED

TECHNICAL INSTITUTE'S STRATEGIC PLAN

• Overarching Goal: Provide quality

postsecondary education and training to enable South Dakota's workforce and economy to grow.

• Product: Grow a technically skilled

workforce prepared to meet the c hallenges of industry and

continuing education. <:~I~

• 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.

PRODUCT

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

r-::-- ~ 1 ~

ENROLLMENTS, FTE & GRADUATES

• E

• Full-iime Equivo en IFTEJ
• Graduates

National 2-year institution retention

is 59%. SD technical

institutes averaged

73% in 2014.

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

RETENTION

Technical Institute Retention

• f First-time, Full-time Students

2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014

~ ational, 2-Year Public Institutions ~ LAT I ..,.MTI + S T I

• wor

In 2010, SD technical institutes led the nation in retention at 65.5% as a system_ NY came in 2nd at 60-7%.

RETENTION

·~

• --?.

..

National 2-year public graduation rate is 19%. SD technical institutes ranged from 37-73% in

2014 (2011 cohort).

GRADUATION

Technical Institute Graduation, 150% Expected Time

100.00% ~------------ 90.00% -+---- 80.00% -+------------- 70.00% +-- 60.00% +----- 50.00% +-------------- 40.00% - 30.00% ~--~~-------- 20.00% ~ ..

• •----.----

10.00% +-------------- 0.00% --~---------- 2007 2008 2009 20 l O 201 1 Cohort Cohort Cohort Cohort Cohort

.. National 2-Year

Public Institutions

...,LAT

I ~ MTI

• s11

WDT

As a system, the

technical institutes are working to educate 3,000 graduates per year by 2021 . High demand programs are those eligible for the Build Dakota Scholarship.

GRADUATION

Technical Institute Graduates 3250 -,-~ 3000 2750 - 2500

: ~

• -·

2250 L-

.,,--.....

• . ~

2000

• ---------~

1750 1500 1250 +---~

• 1

·;

15~;;::1

:

• 1-1

:s::~ m ~ s3

~-

11iiiii

9 3

;.;;;;:

1

• tt

1000

• 750 -+-~

• Graduates
• Hfgh Demand

Program Graduates

• •2021 GOAL -

T

• tal

Graduates

In 2013, 51.2%

• f technical

institute students graduated in 150% of expected time

• highest in the

country.

Graduation rates

by state

• ar colleges

• ..~

GRADUATION

The national average was

19.4%. ND came in 2nd

behind SD at 40.9%.

South Dakota

s

50'• um"

GRADUATION

• Compare sta e a,erages for 21

2000

1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200

PLACEMENT

Placement of Technical Institute Graduates

Survey Respondenfs, 6 Months Following Graduation

100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00%

• 2012

40.00% 201 4

30.00% 20.00% 10.00%

~-----!- 0.00%

• Tota l Placement of

201 4 R esondents, 6 mon hs following graduation

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

• Provides increased support:
• Postsecondary State Aid - $1, 188,045
• Per Student Allocation (PSA) - $1,026,956
• 2.7% Inflationary Increase
• Full-time E

quivalent (FTE} Growth

• National Guard Tuition Assistance -

$161 ,088

• Tuition Buy-Down - $915,900

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

Per Student Allocation (PSA) - $1,026,956

• Part l: 2.7% Inflationary Increase - $528,260
• Part 2: Full-time E

quivalent (FTE) Growth - $498,696

Inflationary Proposal:

F Y17tst.FTE = 5,905 FY16 P SA

=$3,395.71

FY17 PropPSA=$3,487.39 PSA lncrease = $ 91.68

• fYl 6Est.FTE

=5,762 Xlnflationlnc.

2.7% - -Y l 6 P SA =$3,395.71 XFY16Est.FTE

5l62

Increase in RE

= 143

FY l 7 Prop PSA= $3,487.39 PSA Increase =$ 91 .68 FY 17 Inflation

= $528,260

FTE Growth:

FY17 Estimated RE

• FY16 Estimated H E

Increase in R E

=

5,905

=

5,762

= 143

FY16 PSA

= $3,395.71 X Infla tionary Increase 2.7% FYl 7 Proposed PSA = $3,487.39

FY 17 P

SA

X

Increase in R E FY17 Growth

=

$3,487.39 143

= $498,696

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

• National Guard Tuition Assistance - $161 ,088
• Pay for half the tuition of National Guard members
• Moved to Education from Department of Military

National Guard Tuition Assistance

FY l 7 Proposed PSA = $3,487.39

Appropriation

= $161,088 + National Guard Increase to P

SA

= $

27 .28

_I

=Es~

t. ~F

~Y~

l ~7

~Ff=

E

~-------=

• ~5~,

9=05

Total FYl 7 PSA for National Guard= $3,514.67 National Guard Increase to P SA

=

$ 27.28

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

• Tuition Buy-Down - $915,900
• Keep state tuition at $109 per c redit hour in FY

17

• Facility Fee = $35 per credit
• Maintenance & Repair F

ee = $5 per credit

• T

ect1nology Fee = $1 per credit

• Existing tuition buy down ($9 15,920) alleviates students paying

approximately $5 per credit in state tuition

• Proposed buy-down ($9 15,900) will fund approximately $10 per credit

hour

• Distributed each semester after drop/add deadline by credits enrolled

STATE AID -

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

• Distribution of state aid detailed in SD Administrative Rule 24:10:42:28
• 25% of total distributed to each institute for baseline operations
• 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

STATE AID -

FYl 7 BUDGET PROPOSAL

FYl 6 Example

$24,190,959 (FYI 6 State Appropriation)

• $2,708,957 (FYI

6 bond paymenj)

• $9 15,920 (tuition buy dow n)
• $Ul00,000 ISB55- Build Dakota capacity grants\

= $19,566,082 (total a vailable for distribution)

20.232 /FYJ6 Amendment\

= $19,586,314

Baseline state aid received by each school (25%) :

$-19,586,314 ".25 =

$4,896,578.50 I 4 =

$1,224,144.63 per technical institute

Program category payment (75%):

$19,586,3 14 - $4,896,578.50 = $14,089,735.50 Weighted Per Student Value = $t"t{689J35.50 I 1{5"' 7.6) + (3 * 1,760.36) +fl * 4,wO)] - $1,576.31 Program Category Payments in FYl o: LATI = $4,555,563.99 MTI = $2,968,534.14 S

WOT = $1,883,470.74

FYl 7 FORMULA FOR DISTRIBUTION

l 7 fro 15--16 credits)

Calcula ion of .eed for Formula Distribu ion {Under) or Over Need

$18,530,000

$3,487.39 5,905 $20,593,038

$602,962

• $370,628

$506,706 $26 1,524 $6,076,782 $4,408,180 $6,840,732 $3,267,345

f, 50 2,030 925

FYl 6 AMENDMENT

• FYl 6 General Bill Amendment - $20,232
• Fill the budget shortfa ll because of higher than projected Full-T

ime Equivalents (FTE} in 20 14-1 5:

ONE-TIME FUNDING

• One-Time Proposed Funding in FYl 6: $6,806,670
• Payoff Series 2007 Bonds: $5,262,972
• Payoff Series 2014A Bonds: $1 ,543,698
• Pay off higher interest bonds, resulting in a $386,

1 07 decrease in general funds for the state's portion of the bond payment

• Savings will be utilized to buy-down tuition
• $100,000 decrease in other fund authority due to no longer needing

the expenditure authority

• EC~
• te2021 ~i,~
• ·1

. ~-·

.

..

• .
• ·a

PEOPLE

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

WORKFORCE

Admin. Staff

Jul- Prafelllonaf'

Clvl Pad-11rne

/ Technlc:al

S4lrYfce

8

100

18

10

25 48

10

4

79 .7 .6

33 17 3 8 83 37.5 2 37 47 7.25

5 44

l l

5 12 26

22

TOTAL 25 306 67.2 17.6 107 138 42.25

G:" ~

Employees Age 53 & Older

• ec
• 53+ Years
• 62+ Years

• lder
• lder

WORKFORCE

Employees by Age

~.00

1 ~

WORKFORCE

2015 SALARY STUDY IN HIGH DEMAND PROGRAMS

.-

1-

1- _ , -

• Average Ins ructor

Salaries (Actual) Industry Salary - S udy 1

• Ind stry Salary -

Study 2

• Average Gap

All Tis Actual FYl 5 Revenues

17%

All Tis Budgeted FYl 6 Revenues

REVENUES

Sate

AD Tis Budgeted FYl 7

Revenues

State Aid vs Student Contributions - Actual FY15 State Aid vs Student Contributions - Budget FY16

REVENUES

Projected State Aid vs Student Contributions FYl 7

FYl 7 Budgeted Expenses for All Tis

• Salary and

• Professional

• Travel and

• Equipment
• M&R plus

EXPENDITURES

$7,000 $6,000

STUDENT AFFORDABILITY

Regional Competitiveness Public 2-Year Colleges, Tuition & Fees

$5,000

• Iowa

$4,000

• tviinnesota

$3,000 !=~=~=:=:===::;::::====~-

• Nebraska

$2,000 +-------------- - North Dakota $1,000 +-------------- - south Dakota $0 -+----,,-------,------ - Wyoming

System Efficiencies:

EXAMPLES OF CHANGES & EFFICIENCIES

• Programs are not duplicated unless the labor market demands increased capacity

and

training s ites in multiple locations.

• All programs are reviewed annually on workforce demands. program enrollment.

retention, and placement to determine if there is value in continuing them ..

• Ne.w programs emerge or existing programs are revamped based on industry

guidance.

• The distribution of the state appropriation supports efficient operations and ensures

the most dollars go to high-demand and high-cost programs.

• F

unds have been pooled between the technical institutes to seed program development, fac1litres maintenance and secondary to postsecondary transitions.

• Schools have jointly applied for and operated grants.

Institutional Efficiencies:

EXAMPLES OF CHANGES & EFFICIENCIES

• Industry partners provide both funding and in-kind contributions.
• Student to facultv ratios are balanced to ensure safe and effective learning

environments without offering inefficiently staffed programs or courses.

• Technologv. and equipment upgrades have slowed except where supported w ith

federal or state grant dollars.

• Downsized or ended programs with lessened workforce needs
• Downsized instructors in programs
• Little to no equipment purchased outside of federal or state grants
• Little to no out-of-state travel unless required for grants or accreditation
• Replaced inefficient fixtures/appliances with energy efficient components
• Outsourced IT

and Custodial services for savings

Institutional Efficiencies:

EXAMPLES OF CHANGES & EFFICIENCIES

• Outsourced Food Services for savings
• F

roze adjunct and overload compensation

• Raised s

tandard class sizes for non-lab classes

• R

un multiple shifts of programs

• Heavier reliance online/hybrid options

PLANT

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

FACILITY EXPANSION ~~gJHEAST

v .....

~

.. ·

• New construction and

renovations to Ed Woods Center to house diesel, collision repair, and auto programs

• Allows program

capacities to double

• Opening Fall 20 l 6
• Supported through

state bonds, $20 Million

FACILITY EXPANSION S~UTHEAST TECH

FACILITY EXPANSION S~UTHEAST TECH

• New construction and

renovations for diesel and public safety programs, medical simulation labs, cafeteria, and multi- purpose room

• Moves all programs on - --
• ne campus
• Supported with state

bonds, $18.5 Million

• Staggered completions

through May 201 7

BUILD

DAKOTA

SCHOLARSHIP FUND Fall 2015 Awards by Workforce Trade

Automotive 72 16 71 Building Trades/Construction

23 67 49

15 19 6

8 Engineering Technician

10 14 51

8

Licensed Practical Nursin

60 0 16 0 16 14

Medica l Laboratory Technician

15 17

Precision Manufacturin

36 20 22

7 3 3 Welding

37 33 23

8

6 u

No Pro ram or Non-Approved Total

Industry Partnerships in 2015-16

• Lake Area Technical Institute -

"Stretch the Million"'

• Prairie Lakes Healthcare System-

$14,380

• Webster Scale-$4.309
• Watertown Community Foundation-

$7 .910.50

• Glacial Lakes E

nergy-$ 18.286

• Applied Engineering-$9.654
• Western Dakota Technical Institute:
• The John T. Vucurevich Foundation-

$28,000

BUILD

DAKOTA

SCHOLARSHIP FUND

• Mitchell Technical Institute -

"Double Edge"

• MASABA-$4,000
• T

rail King-$8,000

• Dakota Provisions-$24,000
• Molded Fiber Glass MFG-$1 6,000
• Renew Energy Maintenance-$8,000
• Southeast Tech - "Sponsor a

Scholar"

• 13 additional scholarships through

industry partnerships

BUILD

DAKOTA

SCHOLARSHIP FUND

• 201 5' s S

B 55 provided $1 Million in one-time funds to assist in expanding the scholarship's high-demand progra ms through:

• Equipment

Facility improvements

• Lab renovations
• Instructors
• THANK YOU!

• Applications for 2016-17 being accepted

through March 15th

• www.builddakotascholarships.com

BUILD

DAKOTA

SCHOLARSHIP FUND

AR EA

823

2015 FUTURE FUND EQUIPMENT GRANTS

• Equipment grants awarded in July 2015

for priority equipment needs in high-

demand workforce programs

• All equipment used in Build Dakota-

eligible programs $ L 126,513 $1,021,698 $1,026,300 $895,247 $4,069,758

THANK YOU