********************************************* DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM CITATION. ********************************************* January 19, 2021 Study Session.... >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Let's go ahead and get started. Good afternoon, and welcome to the January 19, 2021 Governing Board study session. I'd like to call this meeting to order. Our first item of business is an action item, 2.1, intergovernmental agreement with Pima County related to the administration of COVID-19 vaccinations. Mr. Silvyn, could you read the recommendation? >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The chancellor recommends that the Governing Board authorize the chancellor or designee to execute an intergovernmental agreement with Pima County for Pima College nursing program students to support county health department administration of COVID-19 vaccines. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Is there someone who would like to move the recommendation? >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Motion. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Is there a second? Okay. I'll go ahead -- >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Second. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Is there any discussion? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I have a question. If the students get COVID because of doing this job, are they covered in any way? Insurance-wise or medical cost? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Chancellor Lambert? >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: So the way we have structured this agreement is that the county would be responsible for any nonintentional acts on the part of our students and the college. So if you take that by extension, and correct me if I'm wrong, Jeff, then something like this that happens, then we would argue that this would fall under the county's purview. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Okay. You know, I'm just concerned that I'd like to make sure that they are covered, because it just seems from experiences recently the numbers are so high and it just seems that people are taking care of themselves and they are still getting it. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Absolutely. I think, Maria, that's a very good point. I would hope as we work with the county that they would inoculate the students who are participating in the program, meaning let them get the vaccination, because they would fall under the healthcare piece. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Right. Okay. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: We will do our best to make sure -- just so all of you are aware, how did this come about was I got contacted by the county administrator, Chuck Huckelberry, asking if we could do something in partnership with them. And also keep in mind, we already have an IGA with them to do more general things. This was intended to be more specific. And, oh, by the way, the general one will need to be re-upped later as we go into next month. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: All right. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Are there any other questions or concerns? You know, just to sort of reiterate, Ms. Garcia, we can double-check and make sure, confirm, I think both of those things, one, that the students can get the vaccine as part of this process, but that the county truly is the responsible party per the agreement. If you're confirming that that's the case, I certainly feel comfortable. Then thank you, Ms. Garcia, for bringing that to everybody's attention. If there is no more discussion, Mr. Silvyn, because we are missing a member, we'd like to do a roll call vote. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Sure, be glad to. Ms. Garcia? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Yes. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Dr. Hay? >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Yes. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Mr. Gonzales? >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Yes. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Mr. Clinco? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Yes. Okay. The motion passes 4-0 with Ms. Ripley absent. Next is our discussions. First is 3.1, the future of PCC. Chancellor Lambert, I will hand it to you. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: So, Demion, we are excited about the planning work that's been underway at the college as we move to a more integrated planning model. We are also looking to how we anticipate the future as part of that work, and so really wanted Nic to be able to share with all of you and engage you all in the process. That's what we are going to be taking you through this afternoon. Dr. Richmond, I turn it over to you. >> DR. RICHMOND: Great. Thank you, Chancellor Lambert. Chair Clinco, members of the board, I'm pleased to be with you this afternoon to load a conversation with you on the future of Pima Community College. I will share my screen. Give me just a moment. Hopefully, do you all see my screen at the moment? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Yes. >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Yes. >> DR. RICHMOND: Unfortunately, I can't see any of you while I'm sharing my screen, but please, of course, ask questions as we proceed. So in terms of an outline for today, the topics we're going to talk about is a brief introduction to the planning process of Pima. This is a strategic planning year for the institution, and so I'm going to share a little background with you on the things we are looking at. We are going to talk in some degree of detail about the Achieve60 Pima County. I will share with you the statewide picture on that, mention how this got started at Pima, and seek your input on this particular initiative. Then we will move on and talk about the foresight methods we are leveraging at the institution as part of a planning process. That's what will lead us into our discussion about the future of the institution. In terms of the planning process of Pima, as mentioned, this is a strategic planning year for us. The new plan will go into effect on July 1 of this year. We are in the process of wrapping up the final year of our four-year current strategic plan. Now, the overall planning process of course is guided by the mission of the institution. The mission is currently under review. That will be coming forward to the board likely in February for discussion and then later in the spring for adoption. A couple of notes about the mission. There is a number of different topics that will be captured within there. Of course we provide so many services to so many different people. You will find when the draft comes forward to you that it does include open admissions which we recognize as an institutional priority, very important for the community we serve. And also we will have language that speaks to the variety of offerings that we provide. This will include adult education, developmental education, the different awards we offer, workforce and training, transfer, pathways. You will see that language and it will come to you for discussion first and then for your adoption later in the semester. The mission guides the planning initiatives. But there is a number of planning activities we engage in within this. The first box on here is current status. These are elements of traditional planning. So institutional context. Strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis, and other things that help us understand the current institution, who we are today, and some of the things happening in the world around us. We are also building in this time a discussion about the possible future environment of the institution, and that's really what the second half of our discussion today is going to focus on. Also we need to weave in some of the institutional priorities over the next four to five years. Institutionally, this has been the case for a little while because so much change had to happen five or six years ago, we have a number of different plan documents and we are working to streamline our planning process, integrate across these different planning channels so we have a clear, consistent integrated approach. For that reason, as we think about the strategic plan, we need to think about institutional priorities, the education master plan and facilities master plan, and Achieve60 Pima County. Now, Achieve60 was approved in our previous strategic plan, and I want to spend a few minutes reviewing some of the data related to Achieve60AZ, the statewide effort, and also share some local information that speaks to the institution's performance for progress and outcomes for our students that impact this particular initiative. When the time of the strategic plan, there is key steps that we need to address to support the progress on this initiative if this continues as an institutional priority. As you likely all know, Achieve60AZ is a statewide effort which has the goal that by 2030 60% of Arizona adults aged 25 through 64 will hold a postsecondary credential or degree. Now, statewide, if we look at the percentage of Arizona residents within that age range, it's currently 46% who have completed a two- or four-year degree or credential. We are not at that 60% mark. We're a fair way from that 60% mark. In terms of total numbers within Arizona, we need 1 million degrees or certifications or credentials by 2030. There are a few different opportunity areas we can look to. Within Arizona, 600,000 adults do not have a high school diploma and we have 1.2 million individuals with some college but no degree. Both of these are important potential populations that we might consider as we think about Achieve60. In particular, adults with some college but no degree may be individuals who could be quite close to completing an award or certificate, so they are a key group to think about. Now, one important factor behind Achieve60AZ, which also needs to be reflected locally, is that this isn't just reaching 60% across the total community regardless of who is earning those awards. As it says here, 60% means 60% for everyone. Now, the chart you see here shows statewide information, but you will notice that while one of the populations, race ethnicity populations, has an attainment rate of 67%, all of the other groups are below that 60% threshold. Some of them are more below that threshold than others. So, for example, our White population is 48%. Hispanic Latinx is 22%. 36% for our Black or African American population. 18% for Native American. So through Achieve60, they are clear the goal is to raise the attainment level for our diverse population so all of our community members across the different groups we may desegregate across reach that 60% level of the population holding a degree or certificate. So this is really two goals wrapped up into one. It's about college completion and educational attainment but weaving in the equity priority to ensure that all of our community members are benefiting through this initiative. Achieve60AZ has a real transformative potential. This covers a number of different levels. So there is a positive impact on individuals as they develop new skills, earn college credentials, and progress within their careers. The door will open to them for different professions. It will, we know, statistically it's likely to improve their lifetime earnings. It promotes equity in Arizona, as I was just talking about in terms of the outcomes. It helps us build out a skilled workforce which in turn supports economic growth because the higher education level within our community, the better opportunities to attract businesses to our community. So really from the individual to the community level there is a lot of potential for positive impact through this initiative. So as mentioned, as part of our current strategic plan, 2017 through '21 plan, the institutional goal was approved of Achieve60 Pima County. It essentially mirrors the statewide effort, but this is localized on the community that we serve. So I want to review some of the local data that relates to this initiative. So we're going to take a look first at some county data, and then we're going to look at our student data institutionally to take a look at where we currently stand, what our current performance is like in some of these key metrics to think about what needs to happen next for us to make progress. What you see here is some county data looking at educational attainment. We are looking at the education among people aged 25 years and older, so this is not specifically on the age range through to 64, which would include the retirees in this particular set of information. There are two sets of numbers. So the bars correspond to Pima County. The lines above that correspond to Arizona. We are looking at the various educational levels here. You'll notice the largest proportion of residents fall in the some college/no degree category. We have about 18% with Bachelor's degrees, about 9% with Associate degrees, and I will share the total proportion of people within this specific age range of interest in a couple slides' time. You can see there is clear opportunity across our high school graduates and those individuals with some college for us to be able to shift some of this population into some of these higher education level categories. Here we are looking at college graduates by race. Now, in this case, it's specific to a Bachelor's degree or higher. We're looking at information by race/ethnicity and also by gender. So females in pink, males in blue, and again, we have Arizona as lines and Pima County in the bars. Now, the goal across individuals, across categories, race/ ethnicity and gender is to reach 60% education attainment. Now, this is Bachelor's degree, so it's a little bit misleading because it doesn't include Associate degrees. But you can see the same kinds of differences across race/ethnicity categories that we saw at the statewide level a few minutes ago. So our Asian population has the highest Bachelor's degree attainment rate followed by our White/non-Hispanic population, but our other subpopulations, including in this case presented here, Black and Hispanic, are not seeing the same levels of education attainment that we see for other populations. When we look across all Pima County residents, and in this case we look at the specific age range of interest of 25 to 64, we find that 43% of our residents hold an Associate degree or higher based Census Bureau one-year estimates. To reach 60% within our community, this means we need an additional 86,500 credentialed residents by 2030. Now, if we assume for today's purposes, just to run some numbers, that we're responsible for half of that number within Pima County, it means we need to graduate approximately 43,000 students between now and 2030 to attain this goal, except it's not quite as simple as that. Now, the table you see here, this presents completers and completions for Pima for the last five years. Now, a completer is a unique student. A completion could be if a student earns two awards they will be counted in here twice. That's why that number is slightly higher. For our purposes -- let me go back. We are looking at completers, because we're looking at individuals receiving an award. Now, they could earn a certificate and an Associate degree. That's great. But they only count once regardless. Now, if we continue graduating around about 3,800 students a year, by 2030 we will have produced 38,000 graduates. That sounds quite close to the 43,000 I just mentioned except there is a detail that we need to make sure we take into account. Because we are looking at this very specific age range as defined through Achieve60AZ, if we graduate that number over the next 10 years, we will basically maintain the status quo, because every year we graduate students we lose adults out of the upper end of that category as they become 65 and kind of progress out of this category. So essentially if we continue graduating students at the rate we currently are, we will maintain the status quo. To make significant progress on Achieve60 Pima County, our completion numbers each year need to increase quite substantially. So that gives some of the county picture, so it hopefully gives you a sense of what education attainment looks like within our community, how it varies by race/ethnicity, by gender, and the scale of the challenge that we are talking about. Let me highlight a few student metrics to give you a sense of institutional performance in terms of student progress, student outcomes, but to kind of frame where we currently are at institutionally for these areas. Now, there is a lot of information on here. I'm not going to talk about all of the lines on this chart. So we're looking at data from the Voluntary Framework of Accountability. This is a system that Pima has participated in for a number of years now, and these measures and others form part of our mission fulfillment framework and some of the key guiding metrics for the institution. We are looking in this case at two-year progress and the labels across the bottom gives you the year that the cohort started. So, for example, for 2010 we traced students from 2010 forwards for two years and observe what happens to them. Now, a number of these lines you'll notice are gradually trending upwards, a few examples, for example, towards the top of this chart. The purple line is the first-term completed credit success. The light blue line is two-year completed credit success. So this is indicating that over time a higher proportion of students in a given semester or a given two-year period are successfully completing the classes, which is great to see. There are other numbers which I'd also like to highlight which are also increasing. For example, the pink line at the bottom, fall 2010 it was 3.8. The most recent year included here for the cohort starting in fall 2018 is 11%. This is a fairly sizeable increase over eight years. This is a proportion of those students that started in that semester who completed a certificate or degree within two years, and it's really encouraging to see that level of improvement over this period of time, because it indicates the changes the institution has made is moving us in the right direction and we are seeing higher levels of success for our students. A line worth noting -- >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I believe Ms. Garcia has a question. >> DR. RICHMOND: Please. Go ahead. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: My question is from 2010, our enrollment was a lot higher, probably around 61K, okay, so at the present time, our enrollment is less than 33. You know, I guess I'm having a hard time reading this chart, because, you know, 11.1%, is that based on the total enrollment of who was attending class? And also, I guess I'm asking for too much, but what's the age group in here? Is it from 25 to 65? You know, I don't know. >> DR. RICHMOND: Those are great questions. So for the cohort we are tracking here, we identify all new students to the institution in a given fall semester. There are some criteria that we apply to select those students based on the VFA's definitions, but they are entirely external definitions. Essentially we are looking at all new students starting at Pima Community College in a given fall. So the cohort size is different from fall 2010 through to fall 2018, exactly as you say because we have experienced drops in enrollment. There is no limit on the age of the student. So if they are new to the institution and they are 18, we would count them in this cohort. If they are new to the institution and they are 55, we would include them within this cohort. So this includes kind of all new students. The key thing is because we identify that cohort of students in the given fall semester when they started, then we follow that cohort of students forward over time. So, for example, it means that 11% of the students who started new in fall 2018 had earned a degree or certificate by the end of their first two years. Compared with the first cohort for 2010, a little under 4% of them had completed a degree or certificate within that first two-year period. So what the data is showing that shift where we are seeing a higher proportion of students successfully completing an award in that two-year time frame, but you're absolutely right that the overall numbers against which these percentages run has dropped over time as the enrollment of the institution has dropped. So those are great questions. Did that clarify? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I'm fine. >> DR. RICHMOND: All right. Good. So we can drill into these data in a little more detail. The VFA has us report information to them for five different demographic groups. So, for example, here I've just included -- >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Dr. Richmond, for the future, I think it would be helpful if we had the aggregate number of students maybe in parentheses so we sort of knew what 11% means. Because we have seen this shift, I mean, you know, in some ways we have been able to invest resources more aggressively and to less students, right? But we have been very strategic about all of this during this period of time so we see this increase, but I think seeing the actual aggregate number would be helpful in better understanding sort of where we are. >> DR. RICHMOND: Absolutely. I'd be happy to provide that. And we have those numbers, so I will follow up and see that they are sent to the board so you can see those. When we disaggregate across different populations, and this is relevant to the equity aspect within Achieve60, we can look to see different outcomes across different populations. So for the two-year progress measures, I have selected gender as a category that we look at but we can look at gender, race/ethnicity, Pell status, whether they are part time or full time in their first term, and also the age range within which the students fall. While I'm only showing a subset of information today, so the board is aware, on the employee side we have a report portal, Pima Reports, that enables all employees have access to interact with these data and look at the results across different subpopulations. Just for this one you can see there are some notable differences. So fall to next term retention rate, so this is a proportion of students from their first fall who continue with the institution in the following spring. You'll see the results are quite different for our female students compared to our male students. If, however, we skip across the table to completed certificate or degree rate, you'll see the higher proportion of the male students have completed an award compared to the female students. Now, this may speak to the subject areas within which we have certificates or awards that have less credit hours associated with them. Perhaps they are in areas that are of more interest to our male students, but this is where we can start drilling into the data to understand what's happening for different populations. But we can then look at the institution and go, well, what do we need to do? How do we shift the needle on these numbers for these particular populations? Now, this is tracking students at the two-year mark. We can track students for longer. As part of the VFA standard we report on the cohorts at the six-year mark. So just to take a look at what those figures look like, so here we are looking at cohorts for 2010 through 2013, again looking at the new students in each of those semesters and tracking them forward for six years and then looking at what the trend looks like in terms of the changes. Now, for this dark blue line running through the middle, we can look at the proportion of that cohort who complete a degree or a certificate with us within that six-year period. Now, that's increased a little bit between fall 2010 and 2013, or the starting cohorts in those falls. We anticipate it will likely increase further, because as you have just seen, the two-year completion rate is steadily increasing. So over time we will see more of an impact on the six-year outcome numbers and the changes that have been made. Other numbers are holding relatively steady. They fluctuate a bit term to term, but this top one is individuals who leave the institution with less than 30 credit hours. This is, depending on the goals of this population, this could be concerning. If they were starting with the institution aiming to get a certificate or a degree of transfer, then for those goals these are unsuccessful students. Of course we know we have students who want to take one class, and they complete that class and that's all they want from the institution. Of course they would successfully leave the institution with less than 30 credit hours. But these are some of the big-picture metrics we can look to to try and understand what's happening. In the same way we can drill down into the two-year metrics, we can do the same thing for six-year outcomes. In this case, I have included race/ethnicity across these different populations. Now, the (indiscernible) categories in here excluding Asian-Pacific Islander are generally kind of two or more races (indiscernible), so these small categories where you have anomalous readings in these categories, don't worry about those. But if we look, for example, at total Associate degrees and certificates and look down this column we see some variations for some of our demographic roots. Around about 18% for our White students. Similar for our Hispanic students. It's lower for some of our other minority students. However, in particular, I would highlight our Black or African-American population for whom it's 11%. We can also look to students who did not receive an award from us but went on to transfer. Now, these are students who are successfully continuing with their education experience, but they left us without earning an award, which is arguably an area that would merit from institutional focus because we know those students (indiscernible) at the university. And so we need to think carefully about the offerings that we have here to help more students earn a completion from us before they transfer. But you'll notice down this list there are significant variability. Our Hispanic population, for example, and our American Indian or Alaska Native population. Only around about one in four of those students will go on to transfer with no award. One in three for other populations such as our White population. And these are differences again that we need to look to and understand why do some groups transfer at a lower rate? What are their experiences? What's leading them in that direction and how can we help ensure that all of our students see positive outcomes, though, with the caveat that if this column drops, no award and transferred, and instead we have increases in certificate and transfer or Associate and transfer, that's all the better, because that means those students were earning an award and they will always have that award with us regardless of how successful they are when they get to the university. And we know not all of those students will succeed. So that gives you hopefully a little bit of a feel for how some of the college's data looks. As mentioned, I will follow up and send additional information including the overall cohort numbers so you have those. But as we think about Achieve60 Pima County and as we think about the future of the institution, there are a few things we need to reflect on. These are topics we may come back to later. How do we substantially increase Pima's completion rate? How do we close the achievement gap? Now, these questions will help inform the conversation we have a little bit later as we think about the future of the institution. For right now, I'm wanting to open up a different question for input from the board. The membership of the Governing Board has changed significantly since the Achieve60 Pima County goal was approved as part of the last strategic plan. As we work on the development of the next strategic plan, I would really appreciate the input and the insights from the current board in terms of the prioritization and whether you see this as a priority area for the institution to focus on. When we have this conversation, I will stop sharing my screen so I can see you. Are there comments from the board? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Yes, Ms. Garcia? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: One of the things that I would like to see, and I don't know if it makes that much of a difference, but when we had the international students, I know that our numbers have gone down quite a bit, but you're counting them I believe as well as the completion and the transfers. As a community member, you know, if we have people like from Mexico as international students coming down here and they are completing and they are transferring, they are putting in as the number for Pima. I mean, it's good for Pima to show that, but it doesn't give us, the board members that are responsible for our communities, to see the, you know, to really measure the number of colored people that are not graduating or are completing. I would like to see that number, a different number for that. I don't know if you can do that. >> DR. RICHMOND: Absolutely. So if we would separate this out based on the residency and the status of the students? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Yes. Thank you. >> DR. RICHMOND: Absolutely, we can do that. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Dr. Richmond, to your question, I would say, for me, you know, the Pima 60 initiative really provides a guide star of where we need to go. I mean, we all know the rates are inadequate to serve both the individuals and attract the types of businesses that our community is aggressively competing for. So being able to use this as sort of the aspirational goal, my concern is how do we revolutionalize what we are doing to be able to achieve that? I mean, we only have 10 years and we are already almost two months into the first, really the first of what's left of that, within that goal framework. You know, I fully support the intent, but I just want to see us be more aggressive in how we get there and revolutionalize. We had an opportunity a few years ago, we talked about the types of cuts that the institution needed, and we talked about a revolutionalized model, a redesign model, and a do-nothing model, and we went with the middle option. Then I really felt we should be thinking more about how do we revolutionalize to achieve this? Because as you see us, we are making these small incremental improvements, and that's to everybody's credit. I mean, seeing that move to 11% over that period of time is because of all of the work, not just everyone on this call but the institution as a whole. So how do we push, you know, to be much more aggressive in seeing those numbers just dramatically increase? I would be really curious what the other members of the board think on that. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: On my view, I believe that in order for us to achieve that, we have to be out aggressively recruiting people, you know, recruiting students. I still don't see us doing that as well. I come from a different view, because I think, for those of you guys, for those of you that, you know, advertisement and bulletin boards and all that stuff, maybe for the noncolored people, that may be okay, but it isn't for the Hispanic and it isn't for the Native American. You have to reach them in a different way. I sincerely mean that. I don't have the answer, but I think that more on-the-ground kind of people, they can go into the classroom and talk to the students and go to the, you know, the gatherings that they have with their parents, you have to do more than that because they are not really aware. I mean, you know, I'm just -- you know, it's kind of like -- I'm going to tell you that when I went to school, I didn't think twice, I didn't even think about going to college, taking any classes. I still think that exists. We have a lot of immigrants coming over, and they are here and they are taking classes or whatever, but they still don't have the information that they need. So I really do believe that we need to do more groundwork to reach these students. We need to reach them, you know, in K-12. Maybe not so much K-12 but at least from sixth to eighth grade before they get into high school so they can have a track as to where they need to go for those students. And then reaching out to the businesses, as well. What do the employers need? What's lacking in the businesses? And then going out to the business and talking to their employees, giving -- there is other ways of doing things besides just media. And that's just my -- I don't know, if anybody else has anything else, please -- I want us to succeed. I want my community to excel. I want them to achieve this. It's very important for us. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Dr. Hay? >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Yeah, so thanks, Maria, for that. I think there is a comprehensive advertising plan, though. It's not just billboards. I think Chancellor Lambert and his team can give us a full detail of all the different ways they reach out to all the different communities in different ways, and so it's fairly comprehensive from what I understand. Is that correct, Lee and Dolores? >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: So our strategy has been very comprehensive. So take, for example, just that whole working adult population, we interact with more companies today than we ever have, and we have been working with the companies who really wanted to structure things that were unique to their employees. For example, Geico, we have a very strong customizable program in the business area for Geico employees. We have been doing that for a lot of small, medium-sized business. SAMP is an example, Southern Arizona Manufacturing Partnership. And so then on the high school things of the equation we have, at one point in time, before my time and before any member of the board's time, the college eliminated its high school recruitment efforts. We reinstated that, and then we also have now added a dual enrollment team. So we have put a lot more emphasis on that ground game now than we ever have. So we're doing all those pieces, but I think to your point, Maria, that there is more we can do, but some of it is resource and allocation of the resource. Some of it is do we have relevant programs? I'll give you an example. Our cybersecurity program, we just brought that online just a few years back. I believe someone, correct me if I'm wrong, but the enrollment is up over 146%. So some of the solution isn't just about the ground game or the -- it's about having programs that are attractive to the learners and that will ultimately generate the outcomes too. So I want us not to lose sight that it's a comprehensive approach. It's not just one piece versus another. Very good question, Meredith. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Because it's also not just getting people into the pipeline. It's also helping them succeed once they are there. 11%, which is significantly better, is a dismal two-year outcome. I mean, we have to do better. I mean, 11% is -- it's almost a statistical rounding error, like we need to really shift and move to the 20, 30, 40%. I mean, again, we know all of the reasons why it is complicated and difficult. We talked about it at length, but, you know, people are each person has their own challenges, whether it's their family or their work and taking one class and not fully enrolled, but what can we do as an institution within our limited scope to push that number even higher. Clearly what we are doing is working, I'm hoping. That's one of the things by I think to Maria's question earlier, to Ms. Garcia's question, when we don't see the actual number like how much is the number increasing, or are we seeing, you know, a basic flat line and we are just seeing our enrollment teetering, which is changing that percentage, but moving that, I think, is really, really, really key. You know, how do we do it? Where do we make the investments? How do we make the revolutionalized goal to really aggressively do it now. Because if not now, when? >> DR. RICHMOND: Thank you. Are there any other comments from the board on Achieve60 Pima County? I heard support for the board members who spoke. Is that accurate for the other board members, as well? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Mr. Gonzales? Okay. Mr. Gonzales? Okay. >> DR. RICHMOND: All right. So I will proceed if it works for the board. Let's move on to kind of the second topic. The second topic is directly related to the first. Talk more about some of the methods the college has been using to think through the future of the institution. It starts to speak to some of the topics that we just mentioned and also the discussion from the board meeting last week where there was talk about different priorities, how do we focus on everyone, where do we drive change, and how do we make significant change and improvement of the institution? So let me share my screen again. All right. Let me give you a little bit of detail about the planning process of the institution and share with you some of the new things that we are starting to do. So when we engaged in planning last time around, we leveraged the planning process from the Society of College and University Planning, SCUP. This is a fairly widely used off-the-shelf planning template, and it includes a number of different elements to the planning process, including those listed here. So through the assessing-the-landscape phase which is really where action items are developed through this planning model, there is some prep work that's done, thinking about readiness for change, developing a strategic planning team, and identifying the stakeholders. As a note, the membership of the planning team is fairly diverse. We identified a key group of stakeholders and we selected, actually invited volunteers from each of those stakeholder groups. In addition, I didn't mention this before for mission, it's accurate for mission and the strategic plan, both of those will be components in the 2021 Futures Conference, so we can build in community input for both of those processes. But it includes fairly standard elements. The environmental scan, institutional context, competitor analysis, and the SWOT analysis, as I mentioned earlier. Now, none of these things are bad processes to do. Indeed we are doing all of them as part of the planning process. But it's not really a process that is really responsive enough for the rapidly changing world in which we live, and for that reason we have branched out. We are expanding our planning process to use new methods. Now, this is a visual, just to give you a little bit of a sense of the pace of change. It used to be, go back a few years now, the change was like this S-shaped curve. There would be a change, there would be a period of transition, and then there would be a period of stability for a while, a number of years oftentimes. These days, in part, large part, driven by changes in technology, the increasingly global world in which we live, which is in part again fueled by the technology, what we are seeing now is a fairly rapid series of improvements. We don't really get that change and then period of stability. Change is pretty well constant, and there is always something new going on that we need to respond to. It's really because of that that the traditional old-school strategic planning doesn't really quite get us to where we need to be anymore. This is a quote from a Forbes article. This is from a number of months ago now, earlier in the fall. I won't read through all of us, but with challenges to the cost of college, public support for higher education, doubts about the work readiness of students, and a ton of college alternatives cropping up each day, it's incumbent upon university leaders, or community college leaders in our case, to shift their priorities, time, resources, and incentives toward scaling the experiences that matter the most. This relates to some of the items that I mentioned at the board meeting last week when we talked about increases in competition, the declining value of a college education. These are all factors that are working against us. And within that competitive landscape of other institutions being able to offer their educational products to students within our community, it creates this very complex landscape in which we need to live. So traditional planning, as I was just talking about with this SCUP model, tends to look at the current situation and looks backwards to try and determine the route forwards. For a time, that went fine for higher education planning, but because of this pace of change, we can't really rely on those methods anymore. There is a suite of approaches under the umbrella of foresight methods. These look forward. So they take the current situation today, but rather than using that to go, oh, well, we need to have a strategy on fill-in-the-blank thing, it's a suite of tools you can use to take today's current situation and try and think through possible future states and then build a series of these possible future possibilities and leverage those to try and think through the decisions that we need to make today. So things like the SCUP model, it (indiscernible) as we think about planning, because we have that traditional deep understanding that we develop through traditional planning, and then we have these forward-looking methods that we can look to think through how different changes may play out so we can think about what that means for our community, and then use that to drive our decisions. They focus really on building compelling visions of the future environment. Now, this isn't about predicting the future, and it isn't the case where there is one vision of the future that you build through these processes. You build several. You can use those possible end states to make the decisions that will move us towards our future state that we ideally want to be able to see. Very important to note, the scenarios developed through these methods are rooted in today's reality. This is not about just making things up. We use a method from the Institute for the Future, and when they talk about this, they'll say there is no aliens, no magical fix to problems. It's all things that are in place today, might be little tiny clues how they may play out going forwards. And then, as noted here, these possible futures are brought to life through, they talk about artifacts, objects or things that might exist, and stories of people's experiences in those futures to help people connect with them. As a species, we are really not very good about thinking about the future, be it for ourselves or where we work. They have a suite of ways to help people connect with the future, and stories is one of the ways in which they do that. I'm going to stop showing my screen. I will stop slides. I will continue to share my screen. What I'm going to do is play a five-minute video for you. This will give you the sense of how these methods work and kind of an example of an end case. The video was developed by IFTF working with Blue Cross Blue Shield thinking about the future of work and what that might mean for healthcare. Hopefully the volume and everything works. If there is any issues with the sound, please let me know. Otherwise, we will watch this. (Video begins.) >> I'm Vanessa. I'm 26 years old and I'm currently a student, trying to be a student at Highland Park Community College digital campus. I'm studying digital care coordination and I'm a mom, too. This is Leo. He's three years old, adorable and a handful. He's actually learned our routine, so he helps me put the things aside and move the seats down. Sometimes he just is, like, waiting, mommy, brush your teeth. It's brush your teeth time and he's waiting with all the things. I'm definitely proud of everything he has seen mommy do. He sees me work. He comes to work with me. What do I do for work? I am a waitress, and I also work the night shift at a 24-hour day care here in town. And I am in college. Let me see. Last time I used my vehicle for transportation, I guess maybe seven or eight years ago? I own a 2015 Jeep. I haven't driven in years, because I have a great spot at Golden State Safe Parking Lot near the freeway. You know where that is, right? Currently we just pay about $10 a night, so I can't really complain about the cost. Some of the kids stay all night, but most of the kids arrive between 3:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m. We call them our night babies. They all love it. Their parents have long commutes and early shifts, so they drop them off really early. At the place where I work, we get the kids ready for school. Then we pick them up, too. I mean, I don't work that shift but some of the kids do get picked up after school and they even eat dinner there. So, yeah, those parents, they, like, never see their kids out of pajamas. I think most of the the people whose kids go to our day care live in fixed homes. I still feel lucky because Leo comes to work with me. The manager wasn't always cool with that, but after it was so hard for immigrants to get work, they couldn't really find enough workers so they had to become very flexible and allow us to bring our kids to work. One of my co-workers brings all of his three kids to work with him. Why do I want to live here? I mean, I have 100% embraced the home-is-where-you-park mentality. I think I have created a nice vehicular home for Leo and me. He's getting older, so I want him to be a part of a community, you know. I love the community aspect at the Evergreen Car Park Cooperative. I love that there is WiFi and I don't have to go to the park or the library and go and be able to do my schoolwork. But the major reason that I want to live at the co-op is because you're pro family, all kinds. There is no shame on having a vehicular residency. I want my son to be part of his family, and I don't need anyone's judgment on my choice of where and how I choose to raise him. (End of video.) >> DR. RICHMOND: I'm going to pause that. That gives you an example of one of the scenarios in this case built through IFTF. I'm going to transition back to the slides but I was curious to hear from the board if you have any reactions. What do you think about this as a way to think about the future through these kinds of stories? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I have actually seen that in California where people were trying to find parking spots in the residential neighborhoods because they could not afford housing. It's very sad that we have that kind of, here in America that we have to do that. And a lot of them were professionals. They just could not afford to pay for their housing. I believe that here in Tucson we have a lot of that with people that could do, that could do more if they could afford to go to school. Yeah, it breaks my heart. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: So you find it an effective tool to be able to, you know, elicit conversation through this type of sort of visioning? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Yeah. Because, you know, you have to give them a vision. If they are in a bad situation, if they can't afford to -- they don't have a livable wage, and there is a lot of people -- I think I had mentioned before that in South Tucson 70% of the residents are that way. You know, so I believe we have to do more outreach, but you also have to -- they don't know any other way of living. They don't know of any other opportunities. So I still will stress that we need to show them that and educate them on that, knowing, letting them know that there is the availability and what it will mean to them if they go to school and they get a skill. So, yeah, it's effective. >> DR. RICHMOND: Thank you for those comments. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Nic, what are you getting at? Are you asking how we deliver content to a diverse student population? What are you looking for here? I'm not sure what your question was really, quite frankly. >> DR. RICHMOND: Well, this was just an example of some of the way the scenarios can go together. And there is more content I'm going to talk to you about the background for this. I was just curious if there were any reactions based on the video in terms of they took some data points as you perhaps noticed, they talked about some of the current statistics on people in particular circumstances and then projected them forward to 2030 to see -- I was just curious about whether using stories in this way resonate with the board, if you think that is an interesting direction. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: I think it's interesting, but I think what's more important is getting the demographics of our student population, how many are homeless, how many have children, how many have homes, and what are the different ways of delivering content so they can finish their degrees or certificates in ways best for them. I think showing a video is interesting. I don't think it's necessarily helpful about how we actually think about delivering content, being as flexible as we possibly can for our different diverse student populations no matter where they live. So it's one way to talk about I think our student population but not certainly the only way. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Dr. Richmond, but this is really part of like what you are proposing is part of a visioning strategy, so if we were to think about it in terms of our community we know that our extreme climate conditions are going to impact the future of our institution. So we would provide some sort of template or tool, video tool, to talk about how that could theoretically -- is that sort of -- you're talking about this not really as a marketing tool but really a discussion sort of a point of departure as part of a planning exercise? >> DR. RICHMOND: Uh-huh. Absolutely, yeah, definitely. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: So can I add, because I think what this is really showing us, these are the individuals in our community, look at the challenges they face. So if we want them to be able to come to Pima, we're going to have to change how we do our work in order to be attractive to that individual, how do we fit into their lives. So the video allows our folks to understand the lives of our students better. Because I think we still are too much a one-size-fit-all. Everybody has to go through the same process and to get what they need. Instead of maybe we need to conform to their lives a little better and make it easier to come to Pima. That means changing up what we do. And PLA, prior learning assessment, is an example of that. Acknowledging people's lives, allowing them to get credit for their lived experience, provided that they can demonstrate that through our different assessment strategies is an example of, you know, adapting to the learner versus making the learner adapt to us. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Oh, sure, absolutely. But I don't think I have ever seen demographics of how many of our students are homeless. I guess that's the wrong term, because obviously choosing to live in your vehicle is a choice for that particular video we just saw. But that's an interesting point, because I don't remember ever seeing that demographic. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: We can try to get better data on that. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Or if it matters. I don't know if it matters other than what do our students need in terms of getting the content? If the student still wants to be a nurse, they still have to go to a physical facility. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Ultimately they will have to, yes. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: But if they want a certificate in early childhood education, that can certainly be done online, I think. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: And at a workplace. So that's the other piece of this. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Yes. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Work-based learning becomes an important part of that. That's why we've been trying to scale work-base learning. That will require us to go to the workplace instead of having them come to us, and that means more faculty going out to the workplaces or connecting with the workplaces as an example. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Right. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: But I think one of the things that's interesting in this and sort of for this discussion, I have talked to our colleagues on boards in California and they are dealing with this, and this is a stark issue that's going on. And it may not be an issue in Tucson today, but housing continues to, cost of housing continues to outpace wages. I mean, we know all of these different factors are at play, and we may see this in, you know, in the coming decade. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: There is no question, Demion. There is no question. But it's not like 50% of our students are living in their cars. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: No, but -- >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: I think we need to know the data. We don't have any data. We are speculating. The second thing I would ask would be to Bruce is what are the guardrails that the Higher Learning Commission puts on us in terms of the different ways we can deliver content and still test that they have learned the content. That's really going to be really, really important as we go forward, as I understand it. >> DR. RICHMOND: Absolutely. All right. These are great points. I'm going to go back and share my screen and move through the rest of my materials and get into our last discussion. I'm going to try and change the settings so I can see you this time. Here we go. I can see you all now. That's great. So I'm going to explain a few of the background terms. These are terms you will hear us using at the institution as we move forward with the foresight work that we're doing, and then we will switch over into Mural and have a conversation about one particular futures topic that has been emerging as a priority from a number of different groups. I want to mention four basic foresight terms. There are drivers and signals that are used to develop forecasts and scenarios. Now, a driver, this is a large, long-term direction of change. This is something where there is abundant evidence that a given change is playing out. There is really no debate about whether it's a thing or a change or not. The impact may be unclear, but it's kind of an unarguable fact, that is that change is going on in society. They can be really diverse, they can be many of them, and so oftentimes this STEEP system is used, so looking at social, technological, economic, et cetera, categories. Now, one that I would single out as the driver that we need to think about is the growth in online. Now, we are looking at course enrollment, so this is duplicated by students across classes, and we are just looking from fall 2016 through to fall 2020. Fall 2020, as we know, is an anomalous year, because we had the pandemic going on. But you'll notice even prepandemic over the previous fall, fall semesters, we have seen this gradual ongoing increase in online enrollment. This is, I would say, a fairly clear trend that we are experiencing institutionally, and it's certainly not unique to us. This is a trend that's impacting other institutions, as well. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean that these are not local students taking classes, but be it for convenience, for scheduling reasons, there is a popularity to online classes that we need to be aware of moving forward. And I'd identify this as a driver. Now, a signal is a little bit different. A signal is a little small clue. It might be a data point. It might be a new practice that a particular institution is trying out. It's a little sign of a potential change. Now, it's early in the life of this small local innovation. It may fizzle out. It may turn into nothing. It could turn into a big major trend impacting education or impacting our community. So these are harder to spot, and again, there can be many of these, as well. The challenge is thinking through which of these possible signs of change is actually going to become something that's significant, or which of them are things where, you know what? Maybe not. It's really by looking comprehensively across the drivers, across the signals. The articles that Chancellor Lambert sends out is directly relevant to this, because many of those are examples of little kind of innovative changes in particular areas that may become full-blown items we need to consider. At the Wednesday board meeting I mentioned the course numbers for MOOCs. Early in the day people thought MOOCs might just be this temporary thing that wouldn't catch on and wouldn't become this large enrollment engines. Of course they are. They're hugely popular through the various different platforms. That's something that back in 2012 that might have been, oh, there are these platforms starting these courses, and we have seen how, in a fairly short space of time, they become really significant. Now, the driver -- >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Can I ask a question on that? As they become more popular, though, and students come in and take these small focused courses or whatever, does that make our completion numbers even worse? Because they are just taking a course and not actually a degree program or a certificate program? >> DR. RICHMOND: The challenge I would say, when I think about MOOCs from the point of view from Pima, is through these platforms students can go take very focused education on a particular topic. The assessment is arguably sometimes a little weak, but they are not beholden to the same standards as us. They are contact hours. Some of them I think you can get financial aid through them, but you can sign up and in four weeks you can complete training on a particular topic. So this could be the case where we may lose students completely because they don't come to Pima at all, and they go to one of the online MOOC providers and get the education they need that way. Also, moving forward, we all know this, work changes all the time. People constantly need to reskill, and it could be that we have people who complete, say, an IT degree with us, and then they go get their refresher training in new tools and techniques through Udemy or Coursera and they don't come back to us for that updated skills training. So there is a few different ways I can see that these platforms can impact us where we could lose people completely or we miss that lifelong learning opportunity, reskilling opportunity that we would otherwise have. So using the drivers and the signals, there are techniques that can be used, templates and methods, that we can use to build forecasts, which is a statement about possible future. These forecasts need to be plausible and internally consistent. IFTF, Institute for the Future, often says the forecast should be provocative. They should raise questions. It's not really about having a forecast of the future so you can go, oh, we can predict the future, this is going to happen. It's really to drive conversation and drive creativity and idea generation about what we might do. I have mentioned this before but these things have to be grounded in present-day facts, so this isn't just about making stuff up. It's who we are today, what are these drivers, what are these signals, what do these changes maybe mean? It's essentially a qualitative statement about a likely change in direction. Then we get to scenarios. A scenario is a full-blown description of a future state that builds in lots of complex series of changes, so it involves many drivers, many signals, many forecasts. As we know, things don't happen in isolation. All these different challenges are all interconnected. The scenario is where you try and build all these different forecasts and think what is the world likely to look like 10, 15, 20 years down the road? As noted here, they often come in multiples of three or four. There are a number of different types of scenario that you can build. Some are transformational, and this is where a new way of doing business emerges and the whole industry kind of shifts. They can also be collapse scenarios where something changes and fundamental changes in not necessarily a positive direction. There is a suite that might be prepared around these. But the whole point is to give people a way to think through possible future states and then think about what does this mean for our institution, what does it mean for our students, and what do we need to do today to be ready for that possible future state? The way we are using these methods at the college, so we are embedding them in the strategic planning process. We have had a number of conversations with the strategic planning team already identifying drivers, signals, and talking through possible implications of those things. Through those conversations, a common topic that's emerged is the future of competition in higher education. That's actually the topic that we will come back to a little bit later. Competition in higher education is really interesting because it touches the degrees we offer, the different awards we offer, how we offer them. It raises questions about how we more fully engage with dual enrollment. Is there potential for people to complete an award as part of their dual enrollment time so that goes further forward in their college career. That's an interesting topic that's been looked at quite a bit. We have also had a half-day session with the Executive Leadership Team, and there has been a session with the joint leadership team over academics and student affairs. And of course we are introducing these topics to the board today as to raise your awareness of these methods so when we come forward as part of the strategic planning process, you're aware of how we have engaged in this work. So we have at this point a catalog of drivers and signals where we are constantly building that out because there are new things all the time, and we have been working to identify questions of interest to think about as we consider the future. One example I would share that came up through the work with the Executive Leadership Team is thinking about the future of education if the requirement for accreditation goes away. And if there is a change in that regulatory requirement and expectation, what would that mean for the institution moving forward? As noted here, we have been working in a collaborative tool called Mural for this work. In an ideal world we'd be together in a room. We'd have the flip charts out and be doing that kind of thing, but because we can't in this situation, we have shifted to online platform that gives us the same kind of capabilities. This is just an example from the session from the Executive Leadership Team where they have been identifying drivers, signals, identifying questions, drafting a scenario. I realize this is small, you don't need to read this, but the one thing I would highlight, I put to the Executive Leadership Team this statement. In 15 years, the community will still value Associate's degrees and have them chime in on whether they agree or disagree with that statement. There is a cluster towards the disagree end of that spectrum. As a community college, this is a very real question we have to ask ourselves. As we move forward, in this case I was asking them about Pima in 2035, what educational product was going to bring value to our students. Do they need an Associate's degree? Do they need to learn key skills and competencies for a particular work direction that they wish to go? What does this look like? This is of course a very fundamental question for an educational institution, but the path we set ourselves on to the next strategic plan and as we think about Achieve60, there are key questions in there to think about what's valuable and what's important for our students. So I'm going to exit here and go in -- if I can get to it around a Zoom menu, go here and here. So as part of the board meeting materials, we shared a PDF and also within the agenda there is a link should people wish to use it to visit this Mural board. Now, the purpose today is not by any means to go through all the details. I wanted to share this so the board has access to the drivers, the signals, the questions to explore that the institution has identified as part of this process. If you have questions, if you have input on any of these topics, of course that's very welcomed. What I do want to do though is focus on this area here. As part of the work, as I mentioned, one of the themes that has emerged is the future of competition in higher education. And within these essentially Post-It notes within this area you can see a number of the topics that have stood out. These are combined from the strategic planning team and the Executive Leadership Team, we have pulled these together. Some of them you might have similar topics within them, but you will notice some of the different things in here. What if 75% of our enrollment comes from fully online courses, increasing alternatives to traditional higher education. Increase in industry-specific certifications through industry-specific examinations, what does that mean potentially for the institution in terms of again of what we offer? Now, as mentioned already, as a topic, thinking about competition in higher education raises a whole lot of questions. We have been covering all aspects of the student life cycle. How do we engage with our students in an increasingly competitive landscape? How do we ensure that we connect meaningful with those students to provide the support they need to be successful? And of course we need to remember, while our online offerings are available to anybody who wants to leverage them, the vast majority of our students are in Pima County. Through Achieve60 Pima County we have a strong local focus, and so how do we leverage our geographic co-existence with our students to ensure we are enhancing their experience and supporting their success at the institution? So you have access to these items through the board materials and you have the link. But what I wanted to open this up to is a discussion to hear from the board. So through these methods and through many different discussions, the future of competition is key. Some of the questions highlighted here are some of the things we need to think about. How do we offer classes in this (indiscernible) landscape. What would kind of awards do we need to offer. What do does this mean in termso of transfer, education and general education. I believe this was mentioned by possibly two of the board, Amazon University. It feels like it's just a question of time until some of these really big entities move into the education space. Transfer education is hugely important, but it's also easy to picture a future state where some of our general education classes which, I mean, they're (indiscernible) the same from college to college with uniqueness brought by the instructor, but it's easy to see those things being sucked up by a bigger institution, and of course partnerships with the community is key. All framed within the two questions I mentioned earlier in the session, how do we substantially increase Pima's completion rate? How do we close the achievement gap? Now, the planning team is having challenging conversations about this, thinking through these questions, thinking through how we make progress. But as we move forward into the planning process, which of course we will bring back to the board for discussion and approval, what are the thoughts of the board on this topic as we move forward? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I want to remind everyone, it's almost 5:20, we're going to take a pause at 5:30 for just a moment of silence. We do have another item, so we do need to wrap up the conversation, too. Ms. Garcia, please. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Okay. I guess, you know, one of the things that I think about is on how we offer classes. You know, a couple of things that come to my thoughts are that are the students going to want to be paying $84 a credit hour for online classes? That's No. 1. No. 2, what's available? And I think where we're more competitive is that Pima offers the student more of a one-to-one interaction than they would at a university or even some of the other schools. The thing the competition has that we don't do as well, I believe, this is just my opinion, is that they get them through quickly. So students would rather go pay for a nurse's aide certification from one of these institutions because it's quicker, and that's something that we need to consider, how do we develop our courses so that they get the same thing but in a shorter period of time? And then of course, like I said, again, it's the cost and it's the support. Those are my thoughts. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Those are great comments, Maria. I would add to ensure we maintain quality. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Yes. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Because facts without quality is not very useful. What do we mean by awards that we offer? What is an award? Are you talking about financial aid award, or -- >> DR. RICHMOND: That's a great question. In this context, what it's referring to is certificates, Associate degrees. I would expand this further, as we think through the future of the institution, we offer some industry credentials which have value to the students as they go seeking work. While we don't track them internally as formal awards currently, I see industry credentials as important, as well. There is also a possibility, and this would depend somewhat on the state level, implications of Achieve60, where there is discussion about potential for including noncredit completions within this, as well. So there is a lot of scope for us to think through what that means as we move forward. >> DR. MEREDITH HAY: Thank you. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I would say, I would just challenge us that it really ultimately, the board's role shouldn't be to say when and where we do this. The students should. The ones who actually need each and every one of these things should be telling us, and we need to figure out how to respond more rapidly to meet all of these needs. Ultimately if we go out and we really find, we do work through surveys or various works, we find out that 20% of, 5% of students want classes at 11:00 at night, we may or may not be able to do that, but if 90% are saying they need 5:00 classes, maybe that's where we should be shifting to. Same with each and every one of these. I think we're on the right track. It's the industry and better understanding what the students need. I'm not sure if we are engaging with students enough to really understand, and we're rapidly moving to those changes that we know or that we have heard need to be made, but that's what I would really challenge us is that it's not really us to define these things but really the marketplace. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I want to add one more thing, that Meredith had mentioned about the quality of what we're offering. Okay. I know that out there in industry when people get, like, say, for example, a nurse's aide training program or whatever, the people they go to work for, you know, they would rather have a Pima student than from some of these other schools. So if we could advertise that as well and put it out there so that people can see it, and then look at the businesses that take in the students for these different careers. They can talk about how Pima is turning out better students, I think that would be a really good selling point, and that would bring more students in. And then the potential for them making more money because they have better quality education. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Okay. Dr. Richmond and Mr. Gonzales, do you have any last comments? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Is he there? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Mr. Gonzales, you're on mute if you're... okay. Dr. Richmond? >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Demion, can I just kind of add -- >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Hello? >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Go ahead. >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Sorry about that. I'm on my phone, and it's not working as good as my computer, my laptop. I just wanted to say there is a lot of excellent information that we're sharing here, but one of the things I need to come back is not only the recruitment but also the retention of the students. In looking at the graphs and everything and in my experience that I have had, I think I also believe that we really need to promote the community, and by "the community "I also mean the students. The students, their own nuclear family, their family, how many siblings went and took Pima classes. That's what we also need to promote. Because I think -- I don't think, I know, that once we reach families, not only one student, but families, I think we can at least double or triple the amount of people that are interested that are engaged and have that sense of belonging in the community, within the community college. Because a sense of belonging for our people in the community, la raza, I think that's what they need. We need to tap into the families. Not necessarily one student by one student but families. Because as we all know, families are from seven to eight people. But I think that's one area that we need to look at but be more of a, for the families, to have a sense of belonging within the Pima College, as well. I like not only the recruitment and the advertising, but also we need to do more of the retention of all students, as well. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Thank you very much for that, Mr. Gonzales. Chancellor Lambert, would you want maybe one minute or do we want to move into this moment and return to this, or what do you want to... >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: We can move into the moment, and then I'll offer some parting comment. Now, Andrea sent us all a link to a candle? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I think we're going to do it a little bit differently. The provost is going to actually lead us in lighting a candle. Today marks a very grim milestone for our nation. Today over 400,000 people have died as a result of COVID, and to mark this with a moment of silence to acknowledge and recognize that loss, not just for the nation but for our city and our state and our college, frankly. This was an initiative that is being pushed and organized by the Biden Administration, and I'd like to hand it over to Dolores Duran-Cerda, our provost, who is going to light a candle and we will have a small moment of silence. >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA: Thank you, Chairperson Clinco. This is to commemorate and honor and remember those who have passed away from COVID. I think this is the first time we are actually acknowledging and honoring their passing and remembering them. I have a candle here, and I will light it. We will follow that with a moment of silence as we remember them. (Moment of silence.) >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Thank you very much. >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA: Thank you. >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: Thank you. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Chancellor Lambert? Do you want to wrap up our last conversation, and then we can.... >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Yes. Thank you, Dolores, and so if you get a chance, you may want to use some of the shots from Washington, D.C., where they have a U.S. flag for every fallen person as a result of COVID-19. Also, the college has lit all of its buildings and other lighting that is more of a yellowish lighting, so we're hoping to take photos of that and share with everyone if we're able to capture that. What I wanted to close on, Marina Gorbis, the executive director for the Institute for the Future, they finalized an ethnographic study of workers in California, low-wage workers in California. One of the things that they found was they don't really have time to go to school, because every day is a new day to go find a job. Every day is a new day to make a living. So where they are spending their time to remake themselves, they are going to places like TikTok to learn how to keep their selves relevant to get that job the next day. Now, how much of that is migrating over to Tucson and our region, I don't know yet. Just know that that's happening in places like California. So our challenges are huge, but I think the opportunities are huger. We will stay focused on being mindful of those opportunities and really learning to adapt. As our provost likes to say, we now need to adapt the college to the learner instead of requiring the learner to adapt to the college. I think ultimately that's where we are headed. With that, I think we're closed out for this session. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Thank you very much, Chancellor Lambert. The next item is the item 3.2, centralized procurement and board report processes. Chancellor Lambert? >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: So wanted to have Terry Robinson, who is our director over procurement to come in and just share a little bit about what we do from a procurement process so the board has just a little greater understanding of how we go about procuring services for the institution. So, Terry, I will turn it over to you? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Hello, good evening, everyone. Thank you, Chancellor Lambert. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with everyone, give a brief overview of our college's centralized procurement and board report process for acquisitions. So this won't be a very long presentation. I certainly encourage you to let me know if you have any questions as I go through this with you. Starting with this centralized procurement services that we offer here at the college, basically, as you all know, the board, we have adopted as a college the centralized procurement process, and what that involves is making sure that we are following our APs, the administrative procedures currently in place, as well as the federal code, as well, with regard to procedures for procurement. That code is CFR Part 200, and what that involves is the purchasing of all goods and services, which would include general goods services as well as construction for the college. Only purchases that are made through a purchase order process as well as the use of a college-approved P-Card are authorized purchases, other than additionally we can order or make purchases through the supply order office supply program that we have, and those are considered approved purchases, as well. One of the most important elements off our centralized process is the fact that we do have procurement thresholds in place that are based upon CFR Part 200, and those thresholds in this order. We have the micropurchases, as well as simplified acquisition threshold, and those purchases that are made that are above that simplified acquisition threshold amount. Then each of these categories determines what methodology we utilize in completing those purchases. In particular for micropurchases, those purchases that fall under $10,000, those purchases are the ones that do not exceed $10,000 and the primary focus there when making those purchases is making sure that we show the fair and reasonable pricing, that evidence a fair and reasonable pricing has been demonstrated for those purchases. Doesn't really matter how low that dollar amount might be. We obviously want to make sure that the pricing that we pay is fair and reasonable for those goods or services. If it is over 10,000 but less than 250,000, we want to make sure that those purchases are done through a competitive purchasing process. In particular, we might utilize informal purchasing. We might utilize quotes in order to show that a competitive process was utilized for those purchases, and we can utilize cooperative contracting, as well. For those purchases that are greater than $250,000, those purchases are obviously -- it is very important and crucial that we adhere to and be compliant with a formalized solicitation process for those types of purchases, and that also includes the use of cooperative contracts that fall into that category. One of the biggest elements that's involved to those types of purchases is the fact that we do require Governing Board approval for those purchases. So this is just a reminder about signature authority. One of the biggest things that I try to make sure that everyone is aware of within the college is we need to adhere with our administrative procedures with regard to signature authority and that the only individuals that are allowed to sign purchasing-related binding contracts are those who have the appropriate signature authority. For the most part, that resides with our centralized procurement office. As it states here, as well, depending on the level of the purchase, that might involve the chancellor signing or the chancellor granting the authority that's been granted to him through the board to other individuals such as Dave Bea or myself to be able to sign off on certain types of purchases that exceed that $250,000 level. The next area that I wanted to take a few minutes to just talk about is to make sure everyone is aware of and clear about the board report process. This is what involves those purchases that are over the $250,000 threshold and require board approval and what that actually looks like, how we go about taking, the process we go through to make sure you have the opportunity to review what is being requested for those purchases that exceed that $250,000 mark. First and foremost, these three bullets just indicate that the procurement department holds that authority and the responsibility of making sure that we handle those board reports appropriately, that we are the ones responsible for getting those board reports submitted, and as a part of that process, it's very important that we collaboratively work with various departments such as facilities or IT to work collaboratively on putting together those board reports that you ultimately end up seeing. This last slide here just kind of breaks down the process and gives you a quick overview of what that would look like. So on the left side of the screen, what you're seeing is at the very top on the left is a breakdown of what the board reports typically look like when we are asking for approvals for those purchases. You'll see that they have the recommendation. There is a justification for what is being purchased. We talk about the vendor selection process, what we went through in making a determination as to the compliant methodology used to choose the vendor who will be providing the goods or services that we are asking for. What the financial considerations look like and when necessary how the strategic plan or HLC accreditation criteria might be tied in with what is being actually purchased. Underneath that are some examples of the types of supporting documentation that would also be provided with that board report. Formal solicitation or a co-op contract, for example. Now, on the right side of the screen, this is just a representation of typically what happens in the submission process for the board report and to make sure our various customers keep in mind the due dates, when we have to get the report in and ready for presentation and to make sure that they keep that in mind as a part of the timing for their solicitation and what they would like to have awarded with regards to the contract for the goods and services that are in question. And then also we have here, as listed below, the timing with regard to when it's due and what should happen in the event that the department does not have, we don't have all the sort of ducks in a row necessary to present this to the board and the fact that then it needs to be considered for the next round or the next scheduled board meeting to be considered. With that being said, I will just open it up for questions. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Yes? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I'm so glad you make this presentation. Let me -- I do have some questions. One of them is I'd just like to know what the protocol for vendors and college employees is, when a vendor -- when a vendor approaches the college with an interest in doing business, what is the protocol? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Well, generally speaking, it depends on of course what it is that the vendor is offering, what it is that they are asking, asking to provide the cost of what those services are and that relationship to the thresholds for purchasing. But just generally speaking, we want to be fair, open, transparent. Generally what we do in our department is we will ask those vendors, depending on what it is that they are offering, to speak with the various departments about those goods or services that they are interested in offering in order for the vendor to make a direct connection with various departments. So, for example, with facilities, that's one of the more common areas that we have vendors who are interested in doing business with the college. If they are interested in providing a service, for example, we might, after initially screening and speaking with that vendor, we will then put them in touch with an appropriate individual in facilities to have them speak with them about those products and services that they are interested in offering. Another thing that we do is with those vendors who may be reaching out to us with interest in doing business with the college, we will let them know about current contracts that we have with other vendors and see if there are like products or services that they are interested in offering and try to get an understanding of what exactly they are offering and what kind of threshold or category they may fall into with regard to what they are offering. So, for example, if it's less than $10,000, they are simply calling because they are interested in providing a contract good or service that might cost, say, a thousand dollars for the purchase by a particular department, and the department might have an interest in actually making that purchase, the department can certainly do business with those individuals, and the only thing that would be primarily required in their wanting to work with them, it would simply be making sure that the pricing is fair and reasonable as to what it is that they are offering to purchase. However, if the contract that the vendor is offering has a total contract value, let's say, that exceeds $10,000, and is less than $250,000, as the previous slide that I showed before, have our threshold amounts, if it's between 10 and 250, now we have to make sure that we are utilizing a competitive process. It could be an informal process, but it must be competitive. And that is in accordance with not only our general AP but also to make sure that we are compliant with federal guidelines that we must adhere with. So that means that that vendor who is interested, we generally make sure that they understand that we will need to get quotes from other vendors who are interested or others that are out in that particular field of service in order to find out if they have competitive pricing, also to vet those vendors and make sure that they are qualified and able to provide the services that they are actually offering. Now, when we go into, when we are talking about a vendor who is interested in providing services for a contract that exceeds $250,000, that's where a formal solicitation process must be followed. At that point, we must look at doing formal solicitations where we bid and allow for greater opportunity for those vendors who are interested in providing those particular services. We go through a formal RFP, for example, or a request for qualifications, or a formal IFB or request for bids. Those vendors who are interested in providing, then they can actually respond to those formal solicitations that we then advertise on our website as well as through the news publications as required by state statute. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: So my next question is is it appropriate for a vendor to be involved with the college, with college employees, prior to the bid or the RFP process? >> TERRY ROBINSON: I think your question in the way you frame it very much depends upon the circumstances. So I really would have to have a clearer picture of a circumstance, for example. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Well, I can give you that. So I have been concerned about the Trane contract. I might as well just state it. So it is my understanding through information that I have gotten through e-mails that the Trane contract, that they were involved way before that bid was ever processed and they had an unfair advantage against other vendors. So, you know, I just find it unethical for that to have happened. So that's why I'm asking that question. So what was so special about that specific contract that that happened? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Well, that's where I would have to actually beg to differ. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Okay. >> TERRY ROBINSON: That contract was reviewed by independent sources who made sure that after reviewing our policies and procedures and what actually took place was a fair, open, and transparent competition for those services that Trane ultimately ended up winning. There was nothing that was done out of the ordinary with regard to them winning that award. I would go so far as to perhaps turn it over -- I believe Jeff is on our call, as well, who can talk about the independent lawyer that was brought in to actually do an assessment of how we went through that solicitation process. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Terry, before I turn it over, Jeff, can I respond? Because I think there is some context that probably many of you may not even be aware of. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Of course, Dr. Lambert. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: If that's okay, Demion. So since starting at the college, I have had various vendors, not just Trane, approach me about doing the very thing that we bid it out, which resulted in Trane being the successful bidder. So it wasn't Trane talking to the college. There were a number of vendors talking to the college, which is exactly why we went through an RFP process as opposed to a sole source process. Terry, you may want to talk a little bit more about what sole source is or cooperative contracting, because that is an option. But I didn't think that would be fair, so I said we need to go through this process. So I don't know if, Jeff, if you wanted to add anything. And by the way, I stayed out of that process once it was initiated. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: Well, so, thank you, Chancellor. One thing I would add, it more applies to lots of situations, there are many vendors who do business with the college multiple times over time, so that's why I think when Terry mentions, you know, it depends on the circumstances, it's true, because there are many vendors who have sold goods or services to the college so they have a standing relationship with the college and that at a future date they again sell additional goods or services to the college. So that's one reason why, when it's a large dollar amount involved, that you have the purchasing office involved, have an independent set of eyes looking at the transaction and that we have selection committees running through an RFP process where people who don't necessarily have that relationship with the vendor are part of the selection process and are rating this proposal submitted by the vendor so that we have some checks and balances in the system and we have a way to see that there is some independent sets of eyes looking at whatever the particular transaction is. That's why it's not necessarily uncommon that there is a vendor that's done business with the college on multiple occasions. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: You know, Jeff, I understand that, but I also am aware that Trane basically picked the steering committee. >> TERRY ROBINSON: That is not true. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: So hold on. What I would say is if you have information like that, then we should talk and you should provide that, because I'm not aware of that and we had independent outside counsel come and take a look at that, and there was no indication of any problem. If, however, you have evidence, then absolutely let's schedule a time and go through that and see whether we need to take another look. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Okay. >> TERRY ROBINSON: What the chancellor described, as well, is accurate with regard in general for many purchases or goods and services that come our way. Vendors contact us, as you can imagine, daily. My mailbox is filled with vendors who reach out to us and want to speak with us about the various services that they offer. Many times, and it is acceptable, for them to begin conversations with college members and staff, including the chancellor, but at the right and the appropriate moment in time, they must then, those departments, must go through the centralized procurement process as outlined here. So simply put, in the sense of the Trane solicitation, once they got to that point where we were aware of not only Trane but many other vendors who were interested in potentially providing the services that Trane ultimately ended up winning, they went through a formal solicitation RFP process with committee members who were chosen solely by our procurement staff and the departments that we work with to provide us with the evaluation of those RFPs in order to make that award. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Mr. Robinson, this again, this is based on the uniform federal code regulation procurement... >> TERRY ROBINSON: That's correct. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I'm looking at it on my screen. So we adopted this federal standard, and then can you tell me just ballpark how many micropurchases are in a given year, how many simplified acquisition threshold procurements and how many greater than the SAT amount there are? Do you have that? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Unfortunately, not off the top of my head, but I certainly would be able to get back with you after we pull some reports and give you accurate numbers as to what that would look like over a given period of time that you might be interested in. If you'd like to know if that was over the past year or over a number of years or even months, I can certainly have those numbers available to you. But I certainly can't tell you off the top of my head what those numbers might look like. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Okay. I think that would be useful. I just would be curious to know, because I suspect on the volume of greater-than-SAT amounts that we approve each month on our consent agenda or as independent items, I have a sense of how many of those there are, but the simplified acquisition and the micropurchase, I really have no way of sort of understanding the volume that we are moving through. So I'd appreciate that. Ms. Garcia, you'll get with Jeff over the next week and sit down with him and talk with him about -- >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Probably within the next two weeks. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Okay, next two weeks. Terrific. >> TERRY ROBINSON: Mr. Clinco, did you want that over a one-year time period, or what was the time element? >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Yeah, maybe you could give it over a single year and then maybe a five-year lookback if that's not too complicated? I mean, I don't want to create a whole amount of work -- if it's easy to generate, at least one year and then maybe just a five-year lookback. If you send that to the chancellor's office, they will make sure that it gets sent out to the board as a follow-up. >> TERRY ROBINSON: All right. Thank you. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: I really appreciate it. >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: Thank you. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: And I appreciate the insight as to how the process works. >> DR. LEE LAMBERT: Can we have Terry just mention about sole source? Because that comes up often, and what it is and then when one might consider that versus going through this more competitive open process. Terry? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Thank you, Chancellor. Well, sole source requests are fairly frequent. Now, from a federal guidelines perspective, we are very, very stringent with regard to sole source requests. Essentially a noncompetitive waiver must be submitted to substantiate and justify the need for a sole source request, because essentially what you're saying when you ask for a sole source is you're indicating that there is no other provider in the market that can provide the particular goods or services that are being requested or that there is something so specialized about that particular good or service it can only come from one source. That's where that noncompetitive justification form needs to be provided with substantial supporting evidence of that. That would come from the requester as well as procurement doing its due diligence in checking into whether or not what's been presented as supporting evidence is indeed factual with regard to that type of purchase. I would say we do not very often award sole source purchases because of the fact that it is difficult to raise the bar to that level and what's required, especially from a federal perspective, if federal funds are being utilized for that purchase. In those instances, the actual grant funder has to provide, the federal grant funder would need to provide the permissions to make that type of purchase. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: Okay. >> Do you want to mention how that differs from a cooperative contract, as well? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Thank you. So for cooperative contracting, what makes that very unique is that first and foremost we are able to utilize cooperative contracting compliantly, and not only is it able to be used compliantly, the federal government and federal regulations actually encourage the use of cooperatives, because of the fact that cooperative contracts have been vetted competitively. So a number of competitors have gone through the process, RFP process typically, or some type of formal solicitation process in order to receive the award. We then, as an entity, are able to take advantage of that cooperative process and the pricing that was achieved as well as the competitive process utilized through that cooperative in order to utilize that contract and not have to spend our time and resources to obtain those services through a formal solicitation process or through informal solicitation. A couple of examples of cooperatives, there are cooperative contracts that we use through other public entities. We have the ability and the right to utilize the U of A's contracts, for example. Generally speaking, they are available to us to go and utilize any contract that the U of A has already awarded, because they have cooperative language in those contracts for us to utilize. We can utilize and we frequently utilize the City of Tucson. We utilize Pima County contracts cooperatively on a routine basis. Now then there are other types of cooperatives that we also may utilize, such as E&I. That's an example of one cooperative. There are literally hundreds of various cooperative pools or associations that put together contracts for public entities and allow us to utilize those contracts cooperatively. They have been formally vetted and reviewed to make sure that they will meet our purposes. But those contracts, that's another opportunity for us to utilize those compliant contracts for our use, and they certainly are again encouraged for us to utilize by federal regulation. >> MR. JEFF SILVYN: If I could just explain one piece of that? The reason we use those is they are contracts that have been competitively selected by another public entity. So in other words, they went through a competitive process that looks similar to our own, so instead of duplicating the process we take advantage of the fact that they went through a competitive process for the same type of good or service. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: And we are just ending at our time. Mr. Robinson, I really appreciate you coming and presenting today. Because this is of so much interest to the board, maybe in six months we could have you come back and just give sort of an update on sort of what we are procuring, how the process is continuing to function, and, you know, perhaps look at improvements that you think we could make to the system maybe six months or eight months down the road from now in a formal -- to give sort of an overview of what we have done through the simplified acquisition threshold, greater-than, as a follow-up, is that... >> TERRY ROBINSON: Yes, that would be my pleasure. >> MR. DEMION CLINCO: What's the board's pleasure on that? Is that something we'd like to hear more of? >> MS. MARIA GARCIA: I will think about it. >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: One quick question with procurement, Mr. Robinson? >> TERRY ROBINSON: Yes, sir. >> MR. LUIS GONZALES: The procurement process, is it a three-bid system, correct? >> TERRY ROBINSON: The procurement process is based on what I have... (End of video.) (Adjournment.) ********************************************* DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM CITATION. *********************************************