STANDARD TEN Governance and Administration

 

The institution has a governing board responsible for the quality and integrity of the institution. The institution has an administrative staff of appropriate size to enable the institution to achieve its goals and is organized to provide appropriate administrative services. Governance structures and systems ensure appropriate roles for the board, administration, faculty, staff, and students and facilitate effective communication among the institution's constituencies.

 

A. Governing Board

A.1 The governing board is an independent policy-making board capable of reflecting the public interest in board activities and decisions. It has a mechanism for providing for continuity of board membership and staggered terms of office.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Board of Trustees of the South Orange County Community College District governs Irvine Valley College. Seven voting members are elected to staggered 4-year terms of office (10.1, Board Policy 103). A non-voting student trustee is elected to a one-year term by district students (10.1, Board Policy 104). Four board members are elected in a given year and three board members are elected two years later and the cycle repeats in this manner. The qualifications, election, terms of office, and compensation of board members are governed by California Education Code Section 72425.

 

Board Policy 101 (10.1) authorizes the board to "establish the educational goals of the colleges and supervise the colleges' educational programs designed to meet those goals." Board Policy 102, "Functions of the Governing Board," (10.1) empowers the board to adopt by majority vote "bylaws and policies...for determining it's own government and the organization and operation of the district (Calif. Ed. Code Section 70902)."

 

Board Policy 106, "Meetings of the Governing Board," (10.1) states: "The board welcomes open discussion and provides opportunities for members of the staff and the public..." This policy also requires the advance posting of agendas, establishes a protocol for public comment on agendized and non agendized items, and requires the keeping and preservation of minutes of all board meetings.

 

Names of board members and agendas of board meetings are also posted on the district Worldwide Web Site at www.socccd.edu.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The above mechanisms insure that the board is an independent policy-making board capable of reflecting the public interest in its activities and decisions, with continuity in membership and staggered terms of office.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

A.2 The governing board ensures that the educational program is of high quality, is responsible for overseeing the financial health and integrity of the institution, and confirms that institutional practices are consistent with the Board-approved institutional mission statement and policies.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

Board Policy 102 (10.1) requires the board to "appraise the effectiveness of the educational program and its progress toward meeting the district's goals" by evaluating "the conduct of the colleges' educational program and the operation of the business of the district."

 

The board "is responsible for the control of all funds of the district and accepts the responsibility to direct the use of these funds in a prudent manner" (10.1, Board Policy 3100). The chancellor directs the staff in the development of the budget, and submits it to the board for publication, public hearing, and adoption (10.1, Board Policy 3100).

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The board routinely reviews and approves all instructional programs, curriculum, hiring, and expenditures of funds. Each year since 1992, the district has ended its budget year with a surplus. The board receives and discusses quarterly and annual reports, and has adopted the goal of "fiscal solvency" (10.2).

 

Nonetheless, a majority of respondents to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey (10.3) said they did not agree that the board "confirms that college and district practices are consistent with the board-approved mission statement and policies," "ensures the financial soundness of the district and its two colleges," or "ensures that the educational program is of high quality" (10.3, Items 156-158, Section Three, pages 54-55). These responses reflect the dissatisfaction of some with the 1996 board elections and the current board, as explained in C.3 below, and with its decisions relating to the above matters. The Institutional Effectiveness Survey (10.3) was distributed to approximately 525 IVC faculty and staff members. Of these, 176 actually completed the survey, including 11 administrators; 67 full-time and 47 part-time faculty; 32 full-time and nine part-time classified; and 10 participants who did not indicate their staff affiliation but whose responses were included in the survey results.

 

The board has operated within the structural constraints of the law, if not to the satisfaction of all, in overseeing the educational and financial activities of the district, and in implementing its view of the mission statement. Disagreements with the board's exercise of its discretion must be resolved at the ballot box.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

A.3 The governing board establishes broad institutional policies and appropriately delegates responsibility to implement these policies. The governing board regularly evaluates its policies and practices and revises them as necessary.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Board Policy 102 (10.1) authorizes the board to establish policy for the operation of the district. Board Policy 2001 (10.1) directs the chancellor to implement board policies "within an approved organizational structure," in which the chancellor organizes all standing and ad hoc committees for the district, and the college president for the college. Under Board Policy 102, the board regularly reviews its policies every three years, and revises them as necessary.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The board has established a wide range of institutional policies covering Bylaws (100 series), Community Relations (1000 series), Administration (2000 series), Business (3000 series), Personnel (4000 series), Students (5000 series), Instruction (6000 series), (10.4). These policies are posted on the district's web site at www.socccd.edu. The vice chancellor of educational services is currently updating the board policies to reflect the district's recent name change.

 

Despite these policies, 75% of the 132 respondents to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey did not agree that the board "establishes broad institutional policies and appropriately delegates responsibility to implement these policies" (10.3, Item 159, Section Three, page 55).

 

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

A.4 In keeping with its mission, the governing board selects and evaluates the chief executive officer and confirms the appointment of other major academic and administrative officers.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The governing board selects the college president under the Employment Procedures for Executive Positions (10.5), and delegates the evaluation of the president to the district chancellor. The board approves the appointment of all academic and administrative officers (10.1, Board Policy 4001).

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The board selected the current college president after it interviewed all qualified candidates (10.6). The chancellor will evaluate the president semiannually during his first two years of service (10.7, page 26).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

A.5 The size, duties, responsibilities, ethical conduct requirements, structure and operating procedures, and processes for assessing the performance of the governing board are clearly defined and published in board policies or by-laws. The board acts in a manner consistent with them.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Board Policies (10.1) define the board's code of ethics (1400), size (103), duties and responsibilities (102), and its structure and operating procedures. Since board members are elected, the voters of the district ultimately assess their performance. The board has identified and published the following goals for the 1997-98 year: ensure fiscal solvency, implement demand-driven scheduling, strengthen communication, focus on setting policies, and develop a data base for evaluation (10.2).

 

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

While the board's operational duties and ethical responsibilities are clearly set forth in writing, 80% of the 147 individuals responding to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey indicated that they did not believe that the board "follows its defined duties, responsibilities, and by-laws" and 74.8% of the 119 responding did not agree that the Board "has an ethical conduct code and a process for assessing its performance" (10.3, Items 160 and 161, Section Three, page 56). Faculty and staff were deeply divided over the 1996 board elections, and many remain dissatisfied with the results, and with some of the board's subsequent actions, including the appointment of a new college president and the elimination of the school chair governance system. Some faculty and staff insist that the board took these actions in violation of the state's open meeting laws (10.3, comments) though the board acted on its legal advice and any purported violations were subsequently corrected by the board of trustees upon the recommendation of the chancellor.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time since the elected board's actual performance is the responsibility of the voters of the district, not of the institution.

 

A.6 The governing board has a program for new member orientation and governing board development.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Chancellor's Office has produced a "Board of Trustees Orientation Manual" (10.8) and distributes it to new board members. This manual includes operating procedures for board members on topics such as meeting dates, information requests, travel and mileage, trustee salary and benefits, and media relations. It also contains reference information, such as the faculty and classified labor contracts and salary schedules, hiring policies, parliamentary procedure, the Ralph M. Brown Act, and the district telephone directory.

 

Board members participate in various organizations at the state level, such as the California Community College League, and receive reports from staff and consultants on new laws and policies affecting them.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The board held a special meeting on December 16, 1996, following the November 1996 election. The district vice chancellor of educational services conducted a "Governing Board Orientation" and distributed copies of the orientation manual to all board members (10.9).

 

The board held a retreat on July 18, 1997, with the stated objective of "develop[ing] perspectives and tools for becoming a more effective and influential board of trustees" (10.10).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

A.7 The board is informed about and involved in the accreditation process.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The board of trustees is informed about the accreditation process and the opportunity is available to board members to participate, as desired, in accreditation activities. The board is kept up-to-date on the self-study progress through presentations made at board meetings by the faculty accreditation chair. The board approves the accreditation's self-study and the midterm reports before they are sent to the Accrediting Commission.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The board is informed about and involved in the accreditation process. Trustees reviewed and approved the self-study process used in 1996-97. A draft version of the self-study report was presented to the board for review and comment at its April 20 and May 18 1998 meetings (10.11, 10.12), and comments received from board members have been incorporated into the final report.

 

In addition, annual and midterm reports on 1992 self-study plans and team recommendations have been presented to the board.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B. Institutional Administration and Governance

B.1. The institutional chief executive officer provides effective leadership to define goals, develop plans, and establish priorities for the institution.

 

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The college president's job description (10.13) includes the duty to provide "leadership for the educational programs of the college," "leadership to ensure that campus facilities are well planned and well maintained," "leadership for the development of the college's long-range plans, annual goals, and short-term objectives."

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The college president confers biweekly with the President's Council (10.14, page 6), a representative body that collaboratively defines goals, develops plans, and establishes priorities for the college. The president also meets as needed with the representatives of the Academic Senate, Classified Senate, Classified Management, Associated Students of IVC, the California Teachers Association, and the California State Employees' Association. The president has offered to meet with all governance groups each week, all governance executive committees each week, and to provide a president's report and be available to answer questions at each governance group's regular meeting (10.15). Collaborating with the governance groups, the college president has prepared a Strategic Plan for the college (10.16).

 

The college president has proposed that the college build on the existing Strategic Plan process for the identification of additional focus areas and the development of action plans for implementation during the 1998-99 academic year. Faculty, staff and administrators were asked to complete a written survey on strategies to strengthen student access, success and quality of educational programs and services at each of the following levels at IVC: discipline; school; unit as defined by the total assignment of a dean; and four areas of the college, namely, Instruction, Student Services, Business Services, and Office of the President; and collegewide. Associated Students of IVC (ASIVC) were also asked to participate in this process under the leadership of the director of student affairs. All participants were asked to provide input on implementation strategies as well (10.17).

Once all the input is received, deans will facilitate discussion and prioritization of strategies with concerned faculty, staff and administrators at discipline, school and unit levels. Likewise, the college president will facilitate discussion and prioritization of strategies by the vice presidents, deans and classified leadership at the Offices of Instruction, Student Services, Business Services, and the President, as well as at collegewide levels. Upon conclusion of administrative group's deliberations and production of a prioritized list of strategies to strengthen student access, success and quality of educational programs and services, the list will be submitted to faculty, staff and administrators for their collective prioritization, revision and validation. Subsequently, focus areas will be identified and the concerned parties at the discipline, school, unit, area and collegewide levels will develop action plans for implementation. Every effort will be made to connect the planned outcomes with the available institutional resources.

 

This planning process commenced in the latter part of spring semester, 1998 with the distribution of surveys and will continue into the in-service week during fall semester, 1998. The process is designed to provide sufficient opportunities for participation by all full-time faculty, classified staff, administrators, and student leadership in the development of institutional plans to strengthen student access, success and quality of educational programs and services through a grassroots approach (10.17).

 

Despite these efforts, 62% of the 141 responding to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey said they disagreed with the statement that "[t]he College President provides effective leadership to define goals, develops plans, and establishes priorities for the college" (10.3, Item 162, Section Three, page 56). The survey took place on October 21, 1997, less than one and one half months after the September 9, 1997 appointment of the current president, and six months prior to commencement of the updated Strategic Planning process. As reflected in A.5 above, some faculty and staff disagree with the board's selection of the current president, the selection process, or both, and thus view the president in the same light as the board (10.3, comments).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.2 The institutional chief executive officer efficiently manages resources, implements priorities controlling budget and expenditures, and ensures the implementation of statutes, regulations, and board policies.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The college president's job description (10.13) includes directing "the development and management of annual college budgets, in accordance with accepted governance and accountability standards," and discharging "responsibilities in accordance with the policies, procedures, and approved plans of the district and the board of trustees, as well as state and national organizations."

 

To manage financial resources, all college general fund accounts are centralized in the Office of College Operations. Through that office and under the responsibility of the vice president of college operations, financial status reports and forecasts are routinely generated and distributed to all financial centers within the college. Corrective actions, account adjustments and redistribution of funds are made as needed and in conjunction with methods of shared governance, including the President's Council, the Administrative Council's weekly meetings, and other governance groups (10.14).

 

To ensure regulatory compliance, major audits are conducted yearly related to financial safeguards and program performance. The president is consistently involved in reviewing the results of such audits with the assistance of vice presidents, the deans and other college personnel as needed. In addition to audits, the president is updated through the district Chancellor's Cabinet, guidelines from the state chancellor's office, professional associations and legal counsel retained by the district.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

As authorized by Board Policy 2100.1 (10.1), the board delegates to the college Academic Senates' responsibility for and authority over academic and professional matters. Under this authorization, the Academic Senate provides advice and judgment regarding processes for institutional planning and budget development as well as other matters.

 

A joint Academic Senate policy proposal was developed in January 1996 that resulted in three budget locations: each of the two colleges and district services. Under district services, three subcategories are identified as 1) administrative offices, 2) allocated reserve fund, and 3) contingency fund. Thus, with each college identified as a budget location plus the three district entities, there are a total of five budget units within the district.

 

The IVC committee on budget and operations meets regularly, recommends use of available funds, and reports to the college president (10.14, page 2). The president is well informed of state allocations and other income projections early in the budget development cycle. Budget forecast data is provided to the president routinely through a number of sources, including communications from the state chancellor's office, projections from the district vice chancellor, fiscal services, and other sources.

 

Each budget center within the college has responsibility to manage its own budget. However, internal controls, which include monthly distribution of budget analyses from the district office of fiscal services and regular review of budget activities by the vice president of college operations, ensure budget allocations are not exceeded.

 

To fulfill the responsibilities of the Office of the President related to regulatory issues, a host of support staff work collectively at the direction of the president to facilitate compliance with federal, state, and local policies and regulations.

 

Despite these structural features, 63% of the 142 respondents to Item 164 to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey did not agree that the "College president efficiently manages resources and implements budget priorities in accordance with statutes, regulations and board policy." Nor did 57% of the 111 responding to Item 65 agree that the "College president ensures the implementation of affirmative action, shared governance, and other statutes, regulations, and board policies" (10.3, Items 164-165, Section Three, page 57). The survey took place less than one and one half months after the September 9, 1997 appointment of the current president. As reflected in A.5 above, some faculty and staff disagree with the board's selection of the current president, the selection process, or both, and thus view the president in the same light as the board (10.3, comments).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.3 The institution is administratively organized and staffed to reflect the institution's purposes, size, and complexity. The administration provides effective and efficient leadership and management which makes possible an effective teaching and learning environment.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The organization of the college consists of four operational units that are the Offices of the President, Business Services, Instruction, and Student Services. With the exception of the Office of the President, each unit is under the administrative leadership of a vice president who in turn reports directly to the president (10.18).

 

The Office of the President is supported by the executive assistant to the president, the public information officer and the director of the IVC Foundation. The Office of Business Services is under the leadership of the vice president of business services, and is also supported by the bursar, the campus police chief, and the director of grounds and maintenance (10.18, pages 29-33).

 

The vice president of instruction is the chief instructional officer in the Office of Instruction and is supported by the dean of business, vocational education, and social sciences; the dean of fine arts, physical education, and athletics; the dean of humanities and languages; the dean of life sciences, mathematics, engineering, CIS, physical sciences and technologies; and the dean of library services and technology. The Office of Instruction is also supported by the director of community and contract education and the director of technology (10.18, pages 13-20).

 

The Office of Student Services is under the direction of the vice president of student services and is supported by the dean of guidance, counseling, and students; the director of admissions and records; the director of the child development center; the director of E.O.P.S. and D.S.P.S.; the director of financial aid; the director of the health and wellness center; and the director of student development (10.18, pages 21-28).

 

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Prior to August 1997, IVC operated under a "school chair model" which functioned with faculty performing administrative duties in addition to instructional assignments in ten schools. A total of five deans, four in the Office of Instruction and one in the Office of Students Services, were responsible for instructional programs, economic development, information services, community relations, and student affairs.

 

As of August 1997, the current administrative organization, referred to as the "dean model," has been implemented by transferring two IVC deans (dean of economic development and dean of community relations) to the district, as well as transferring four deans (dean of business, sciences, social sciences and vocational education, dean of fine arts, physical education and athletics, dean of humanities and languages, and dean of mathematics, sciences and engineering) from Saddleback College to IVC.

 

Clearly, there have been concerns regarding the effectiveness of the new dean model, as well as concerns regarding the process of the decision (10.3, comments). Nevertheless, 55% of the 132 responding to Item 166 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey agreed that "[t]he college's administrative structure reflects its purpose, size, and complexity" and 61.6% of the 138 responding to Item 170 agreed that there is "sufficient college administrative staff to provide economical and effective management" (10.3, Section Three, pages 58 -59). While it is far too early to determine the strengths or weaknesses of the current dean model, the entire college community is working to ensure students, faculty, and staff are supported in their efforts to receive and provide instruction.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

  1. The college will monitor the current administrative organization and, as needed, consider adjustments.
  2. The college will develop methods to ensure that the size and composition of the administrative staff, including classified leadership, is adequate to support the growth of the college.

 

B.4 Administrative officers are qualified by training and experience to perform their responsibilities and are evaluated systematically and regularly. The duties and responsibilities of institutional administrators are clearly defined and published.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Collectively, all educational administrators have, at minimum, a master's degree. Four have doctoral degrees, and one is currently in a doctoral program. The average administrative experience is over 18 years of service (10.19, pages 271-284). The administrative staff of IVC is also active in leadership roles on the national, state, and local levels.

 

As current or past officers and members, the educational administrators of IVC have served as presidents of statewide professional organizations such as the California Community College Admissions and Records Association, chair of the Chief Instructional Officers of the California Community Colleges, member of the National Council of Instructional Administrators, member of the City of Tustin Economic Development Council, Member of the City of Irvine Telecommunications Task Force and the state chancellor's Task Force 2005.

 

The process of administrative evaluations is clearly defined in the Administrative/Classified Leadership Handbook (10.7, page 26). In summary, in the first two years of service, administrative and classified leadership personnel are evaluated semiannually, annually during the third and fourth years of service, and biannually thereafter.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

In terms of education and experience, the administrative officers of IVC are very well qualified to discharge the functions and responsibilities of their offices. In addition to administrative experience, all administrators have had classroom experience, which provides a healthy appreciation for the instructional and service needs of students and faculty. Of the 136 responding to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, Item 167, 67% agreed that "[t]he college's administrative officers are qualified by training and experience" and 53% of the 119 responding to Item 171 agreed that "duties and responsibilities of college administrators are clearly defined and published" (10.3, Section Three, page 58-59). Similarly, 66% of the 148 respondents agreed that "[t]he leadership of college administrators encourages excellence in instruction and a positive learning environment" (10.3, Item 168, Section Three, page 58).

 

The duties of some educational administrators were inconsistent with the duties and responsibilities of their individual contract; however, the board has taken action to correct contract language.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.5 Administration has a substantive and clearly-defined role in institutional governance.

 

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The senior administrators (president and three vice-presidents) meet weekly as the Executive Council. They join the middle managers (school deans) in weekly meetings as the Administrative Council. All meet with representatives of other governance groups at the biweekly President's Council (10.14).

 

The document "College Governance - Standing Committees" (10.14) specifies the roles of administrators on each of the college's standing governance committees. The vice-president of instruction chairs the instructional council, the vice-president of student services chairs the student services council, and the vice president of college operations chairs the college-wide budget, facilities, and safety committees.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Most of the 131 responding (60%) to Item 172 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey agreed that "[a]dministration has a substantive and clearly defined role in college governance" (10.3, Section Three, page 60).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.6 Faculty have a substantive and clearly defined role in institutional governance, exercise a substantial voice in matters of educational program and faculty personnel, and other institutional policies which relate to their areas of responsibility and expertise.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Faculty have a clearly defined role in institutional governance based on state regulations (Sections 53200-53205 of Title 5, California Code of Regulations and Board Policy 2100.1 (10.1)). Through Board Policy 2100.1 (10.1), the board has agreed to rely primarily on the advice and counsel of the faculty, represented by the Academic Senate, in ten specified areas: 1. Curriculum, including established prerequisites and placing courses within disciplines; 2. Degree and certificate requirements; 3. Grading policies; 4. Educational program development; 5. Standards or policies regarding student preparation and success; 6. District and college governance structures, as related to faculty roles; 7. Faculty roles and involvement in accreditation processes, including self-study and annual reports; 8. Policies for faculty professional development activities; 9. Processes for program review; and 10. Processes for institutional planning and budget development.

 

Appendix K of the faculty contract (10.20) requires of every full-time faculty member one hour of committee time per week. Faculty appointments to college and district committees are subject to approval by the Academic Senate, in accordance with Title 5 regulations. The published composition of the college's various standing committees (10.14) includes faculty representation. Through the Academic Senate's representative council and its two standing subcommittees on courses and academic affairs, faculty exercise a substantial voice in curricular and academic matters. In addition, the faculty hiring policy (10.21) prescribes a screening committee composed primarily of faculty.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Of the 147 responding to Item 173 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, 71% did not agree with the general statement that "[t]he faculty effectively shares in the governance of the college" or with the statement in Item 174 that "[t]here is adequate faculty participation in the hiring process and the development of educational programs and institutional policy" (10.3, Section Three, page 60). However, nearly 79% of those responding to Item 175 agreed that "the senate provides input for institutional governance" (10.3, Section Three, page 61).

 

These results stem in part from the concern over the elimination of reassigned time for faculty described below in section B.8 (10.3, comments). They also reflect an institution-wide disagreement over the practical meaning of "shared governance" and the appropriate implementation of Board Policy 2100.1 (10.1) (10.3, comments). This disagreement surfaced in the following illustrative situations described below: the appointment of a chair for the Committee on Courses; the appointment of an Accreditation Self-Study chair; and the abandonment of an application for a large grant.

 

The first of these situations developed when, during the fall semester of 1997, the Academic Senate failed to identify a chair for the Committee on Courses (10.22, p. 11). With the position vacant, necessary curriculum processing could not occur. Near the end of the fall semester of 1997, the administration invited applications from interested faculty members, indicating that 3 LHE of reassigned time would be provided for the position (10.23). One applicant responded, but the Senate refused to close nominations and fill the position, and voted not to fill the position "until the reassigned hours are restored to previous levels" (10.22, p. 14, 10.24). To deal with backlogged curriculum work, the president then appointed an administrator as interim facilitator of the Committee on Courses (10.24). The Academic Senate protested the appointment as a violation of Board Policy 2100.1, which delegates to the Senate authority over curriculum matters and faculty roles in governance matters (10.25). The president argued that he bears the final responsibility for required curriculum processing, and that he had acted on advice he had received from the president of the State Academic Senate (10.26). The president then invited all full-time faculty to apply for the position, received one application, and forwarded the name to the Senate for ratification (10.27, 10.28). After condemning the president's initiative as an invasion of faculty powers (10.29), the Senate then received the same name in nomination from Senate members, but again declined to close nominations (10.28). Finally, two weeks prior to the end of the spring semester, the Senate received a second name, closed nominations, and selected the second nominee as chair. The college president then confirmed the Senate's selection (10.30).

 

The second situation involved the submission to the State Chancellor of Community Colleges of an application for grant funds totaling approximately $300,000 (10.31). Although the grant proposals required months of staff time to prepare, involved two community colleges and several private companies, and were endorsed by the college president and district chancellor as required, they ultimately could not be submitted because the Academic Senate president refused to sign them prior to the deadline for submission (10.32, 10.33).

 

In the third situation, the college president moved to replace the chair for the Accreditation Self-Study following this faculty member's appointment as interim vice president of instruction (10.34). The president solicited interested candidates, interviewed the two who applied, and recommended one of them to the Senate for ratification (10.35). The Senate, however, voted to accept the other candidate (10.36). The president ultimately appointed his original recommendation to the post, saying that he had consulted with the Senate and that he considered this candidate more qualified (10.35). The Academic Senate condemned the appointment as a usurpation of the Senate's discretion over "[f]aculty roles and involvement in accreditation processes, including self-study and annual reports" under Board Policy 2100.1.

 

The first two situations highlight the serious difficulties arising when one party in the shared governance process refuses to act, or does not act, within a critical time frame. The third situation exemplifies the conflict over which party has the ultimate authority to decide a given matter when the parties cannot reach consensus.

 

Since neither state regulations nor Board Policy 2100.1 define "exceptional circumstances and compelling reasons," and since the parties may dispute whether a recommendation has been "formulated outside defined processes of college governance," such disputes over the practical implementation of Board Policy 2100.1, which implements state regulations nearly verbatim, will probably continue (10.1).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The college will work with the district to review and refine Board Policy 2100.1, consistent with state law and the advice of the state chancellor of community colleges and the state Academic Senate, in order to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the Academic Senate in institutional self-governance.

 

 

B.7 Faculty have established an academic senate or other appropriate organization for providing input regarding institutional governance.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The Academic Senate of IVC includes all full-time faculty at the college. A Representative Council, comprised of two delegates from each of the 10 schools and two representatives from the Associate Assembly, meets regularly; this representative structure ensures an equal voice of all schools regardless of size (10.36). According to the bylaws, this body is the appropriate mechanism for raising concerns, and for fulfilling the responsibilities outlined in Board Policy 2100.1.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Input for institutional governance is accorded the Academic Senate as its president sits on the Instructional Council, the President's Council, the Chancellor's Cabinet, and at board meetings. The Classified Senate President and ASIVC President also sit at the President's Council and board meetings and present their reports at each meeting. In addition, the senate president or designee sits on the District Resource Allocation Committee and the Financial Resources Allocation Committee, is present during docket setting, and meets regularly with the chancellor. Other senate officers meet with the college president and serve in an ex-officio capacity with the Academic Affairs Committee, the Committee on Courses, the Staff Development Committee, and the Technology Committee. The senate approves all faculty committee participation, including hiring committees for college faculty, college president and district chancellor (10.7, 10.21, 10.34).

 

Item 175 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey (10.3, Section Three, page 61) reflects that 78% of both full-time and part-time faculties agree that the Academic Senate represents their views.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.8 The institution has a written policy which identifies appropriate institutional support for faculty participation in governance and delineates the participation of faculty on appropriate policy, planning, and special purpose bodies.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Board Policy 2100 (10.1) "[r]ecognizes the college academic senates as the representative of the faculties," and delegates to the college academic senates responsibility for and authority over specified academic and professional matters, including curriculum, degree and certificate requirements, educational program development, faculty roles in district and college governance structures, professional development, program review, and processes for institutional planning and budget development.

 

Appendix K of the Faculty Contract (10.20) requires each full-time faculty member to serve one hour per week on an assigned committee.

 

The college's published "College Governance - Standing Committees" (10.14) sets forth the meeting times, voting membership, and scope of each college committee and governance body.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Institutional support includes office space and supplies, travel budget for conferences, clerical assistance, and reassigned time for senate officers and significant committee chairs. While the Senate has long worked with the president to establish the necessary support, past practice guided many of those decisions. In 1996, the former president supported a permanent part-time employee, working 10 hours per week, for the Senate.

Prior to July 1, 1998, some faculty, including officers of the Academic Senate and key committee chairs, were reassigned from teaching duties to allow them to participate in governance activities (10.37). In the spring of 1997, however, the board of trustees directed a reduction in faculty reassigned time in order to reduce student waiting lists by offering more classes (10.38, 10.39, 10.40). Then, a new faculty labor contract was approved, effective July 1, 1998, requiring every full-time faculty member to carry a full teaching load, with extra-contractual duties to be compensated by stipend (10.20). Some faculty argue that this abolition of reassigned time does not allow sufficient time for necessary governance activities, particularly for the Academic Senate president and chair of the Committee on Courses, and that faculty members will not step forward to assume governance responsibilities (10.3, comments, 10.41). In fact, nominations for senate president currently remain open (10.42). However, faculty members have come forward to assume the duties of Accreditation Self Study Chair, Staff Development/Flex Officer, and Chair of the Committee on Courses, all formerly carried out on reassigned time (10.35, 10.43, 10.28). Further, prior to the reductions, several faculty reassigned to non-teaching duties simultaneously carried the equivalent of a full teaching load on an overload basis (10.37).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The college will explore methods for strengthening faculty participation in governance consistent with the Academic Employee Master Agreement.

 

B.9 The institution clearly states and publicizes the role of staff in institutional governance.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Provision is made for staff participation in institutional governance in the designation of staff positions on various college governance committees. Staff's role in institutional governance is clearly defined, stated, and published.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Classified staff members hold seats on the college's budget and operations, hiring and planning, institutional technology, and staff diversity committees. A standing position is reserved for the classified senate president on the President's Council at IVC. The nature and availability of governance positions to "classified council representatives" is stated in the document "college governance - standing committees" (10.14, page 1) available at the president's office and distributed regularly to committee chairs. The Classified Senate President and ASIVC President also sit at board meetings and present their reports at each board meeting.

 

IVC has a standing classified senate with elected officers and representational authority. The president of the senate notifies annually the elections committee of the senate regarding the need to fill governance positions. The senate is responsible for publicizing openings in governance committees, seeking nominations, and conducting elections to designate representatives to governance committees.

 

Of the 109 responses to Item 176 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, 78.9% agree that the "responsibilities and functions of the Classified Senate include shared governance roles at the college" (10.3, Section Three, page 61).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

B.10 The institution clearly states and publicizes the role of students in institutional governance.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Provision is made for student participation in institutional governance by the designation of student positions on various college governance committees, including budget and operations, Committee on Courses, and Accreditation Self-Study Standard Committees.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

A standing position is reserved for the student body president on the President's Council at IVC. The nature and availability of governance positions to "representatives of ASIVC [Associated Students of IVC] is stated in the document "college governance: standing committees" (10.14, page 2) available at the president's office and distributed regularly to committee chairs. ASIVC always strives to exercise its right and responsibilities within the shared governance framework. In particular, during the 1997/98 academic year, ASIVC probed board decisions including, among other things, administrative changes, and as a result produced two resolutions, 1997-02 and 1997-03a, which expressed concerns relating to those specific issues (10.44).

 

The IVC catalog states at page 36: "Student representatives sit as members of all standing college committees" (10.19). Responsibility for notifying students of vacancies in governance positions starts with committee chairs. Each chair of a committee requiring student representation notifies the ASIVC Advisor and the president of ASIVC at the start of each semester. The ASIVC president then communicates this availability to the student body through the resources of student government.

 

The "IVC Student Handbook" (10.45), published and distributed by the office of the vice president of student services, also contains a section entitled "Student Government" which describes the role of students in institutional governance. The role of students in institutional governance is clearly defined, stated, and published.

 

Of the 130 responses received to Item 177 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, 62.3% agreed that "[s]tudents have a clear role in the governance of the college" (10.3, Section Three, page 61).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

C. Multi-College District

C.1 The district chief executive officer provides effective leadership to define goals, develop plans, and establish priorities for the institution.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The job description for the district chancellor (10.46) lists the following duties and responsibilities: "4. Provides long and short term planning involving all segments of the district through analysis of needs, identification of priorities, strategic planning, and effective action."

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

In consultation with the various district constituencies, the Chancellor's Office has produced comprehensive "Educational and Facilities Master Plans" (10.47) for the two colleges of the district. These plans assess the district's educational and facilities goals and needs through 2010 and the full build out of the colleges. The board formally approved these plans on May 13, 1996.

 

Nonetheless, 67% of the 138 faculty and staff responding to Item 178 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, said they did not believe the chancellor "provides effective leadership and direction for the overall district" (10.3, Section Three, page 62). The chancellor in office at the time of the survey retired in March 1998; an interim chancellor was appointed by the board effective January 2, 1998.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The chancellor will take steps to insure that all faculty and staff are informed about and support the goals, plans, and priorities established for the district.

 

C.2 The district chief executive officer efficiently manages resources, implements priorities controlling budget and expenditures, and ensures the implementation of statutes, regulations, and board policies.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Board policy charges the chancellor with organizing all district standing and ad hoc committees (10.1, No. 2001), and directing the staff in the development of a budget (10.1, No. 3100).

 

The chancellor's job description (10.46) lists the following example of duties and responsibilities: "6. Directs the development and management of the district budget in compliance with legal statutes."

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

The chancellor has established a district budget committee that includes representatives from both colleges. This committee implements the district "budget model," a detailed formula for allocating funds among the two colleges and the district, approved through the shared governance process.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

C.3 The district has a statement which clearly delineates the operational responsibilities and functions of the district and those of the college.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Board Policy 2001 (10.1) directs the chancellor to organize the necessary committees to assist in the operation of the district, and the college presidents to organize college committees as needed. All matters called to the board's attention "by district personnel or by students shall be presented through the chancellor."

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

As part of the district's administrative reorganization, two deans were reassigned from the college to the district: the dean of community relations and executive director of the foundation, and the dean of economic development. These individuals now have responsibilities to both the district and the colleges.

 

Also, a district administrator, the acting director of the district emeritus program, now administers the emeritus programs offered by both IVC and Saddleback. As an instructional program, emeritus operates under the accreditation authority of Saddleback College.

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The district will develop new job descriptions as needed to delineate how the two reassigned dean positions will serve the district and colleges, and how the emeritus program will be administered at the district and college levels.

 

C.4 The district provides effective services that support the mission and functions of the college.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

The district provides information management, human resources, and business services, including purchasing and receiving, to the college.

 

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Of the 127 respondents to Item 183 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey, 54% of those responding agreed that the district "provides effective services that support the college's mission and functions (10.3, Section Three, page 63)."

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

No changes are recommended at this time.

 

C.5 The district and the colleges have established and utilize effective methods of communication and exchange information in a timely and efficient manner.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Districtwide data network and telephone systems have been established for convenient communication between college and district employees. The data network provides for rapid exchange and storage of electronic mail and documents and connection to the Internet. Both the district and the college maintain sites on the Worldwide Web (www.socccd.edu and www.ivc.edu, respectively). The college web site provides access to information about the college, including the catalog and schedule of classes.

 

The district and college have provided ongoing instruction for all staff on the use of these communication systems (10.48).

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

Despite the above efforts, 61% of the 124 respondents to the Institutional Effectiveness Survey expressed their disagreement with the statement that "[t]he district and college communicate and exchange information in a timely and effective manner" (10.3, Item 184, Section Three, page 64).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The chancellor will monitor the effectiveness of communications between the district and college and take corrective actions as necessary to improve the perceptions reflected in the survey.

 

C.6 The district has effective processes in place for the establishment and review of policy, planning, and financial management.

 

DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY

 

Both the State Education Code and the Chancellor of California Community Colleges mandate that the district prepare and submit regular financial reports, and an annual financial audit. Under Board Policy 102, the board regularly reviews its policies every three years, and revises them as necessary. In consultation with the various district constituencies, the Chancellor's Office has produced comprehensive "Educational and Facilities Master Plans" (10.47) for the two colleges of the district. These plans assess the district's educational and facilities goals and needs through 2010 and the full build-out of the colleges. The board formally approved these plans on May 13, 1996.

 

SELF-EVALUATION

 

From 1992 through 1997, the district employed a consultant, under the administrative direction of the vice chancellor of educational services, to review and update board policy and administrative regulations on a regular basis. Proposed revisions of district policy and regulations are also processed through the district's shared governance process, as identified in the Shared Governance Leadership Handbook (10.49).

 

While thorough and inclusive, the district's process for review of policy and regulations is very slow and 58.9% of the 103 responses to Item 185 of the Institutional Effectiveness Survey did not agree that the "district has effective processes in place for the establishment and review of policy, planning, and financial management" (10.3, Section Three, page 65).

 

PLANNING AGENDA

 

1. The district will develop a process to facilitate change in a more expedient manner, ensuring thorough and inclusive review.

 

 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

STANDARD TEN

 

    1. Policies of the Board Of Trustees of the South Orange County Community College District: 101, 102, 103, 104, 106, 1400, 2001, 2100, 2100.1, 3100, 4001
    2. SOCCCD Board Of Trustees 1997-98 Goals And Objectives
    3. Institutional Effectiveness Survey
    4. Index Of Board Policies
    5. SOCCCD Employment Procedures For Executive Positions
    6. IVC Presidential Search Process
    7. Administrative/Classified Leadership Handbook
    8. Board Of Trustees Orientation Manual (Excerpts), December 16, 1996
    9. Minutes of Board Meeting of December 16, 1996
    10. Organization Assessment For South Orange County Community College District
    11. Minutes of Board Meeting of April 20, 1998
    12. Minutes of Board Meeting of May 18, 1998
    13. Job Description For IVC President
    14. IVC College Governance - Standing Committees
    15. November 3, 1997 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty, Staff, And Administration
    16. IVC Strategic Plan 1996-2001
    17. April 27, 1998 Memorandum To All College Personnel From Interim Vice President Of Instruction And Dean Of Students, Guidance And Counseling
    18. Organizational Assessment (1995)
    19. 1997-98 IVC Catalog
    20. Academic Employee Master Agreement (Faculty Contract)
    21. Full-Time Academic Employee Hiring Policy
    22. IVC Academic Senate Official Record For Fall 1997
    23. December 1, 1997 Memorandum From Dean Of Instructional Programs To All Full-Time Faculty
    24. February 20, 1998 Memorandum From College President To President, Academic Senate
    25. March 2, 1999 Letter From State Academic Senate President To College President
    26. March 16, 1998 Letter From College President To State Academic Senate President
    27. April 17, 1998 Memorandum From College President To All Full-Time Faculty
    28. IVC Academic Senate Official Record For Spring 1998, April 30, 1998
    29. April 27, 1998 Memorandum From The Academic Senate Officers To All Full-Time Faculty
    30.  

       

      SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

      STANDARD TEN

       

    31. May 11, 1998 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty, Staff, And Administration
    32. Grant Agreements
    33. April 28, 1997 Memorandum From Joyce Arntson To Nick Kremer
    34. May 1, 1998 Memorandum From L. Joyce Arntson To Ray Chandos
    35. March 8, 1998 Memorandum From College President To Faculty, Staff, And Administrators
    36. March 23, 1998 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty, Staff, And Administrators
    37. IVC Academic Senate Official Record For Spring 1998, March 19, 1998
    38. Irvine Valley College Fall 1996 Academic Employee Workload
    39. June 4, 1997 Memorandum From Vice President Of Instruction To School Chairs
    40. July 7, 1997 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty, Staff, And Administration
    41. July 23, 1997 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty, Staff, And Administration
    42. Minutes of the Board Meeting of June 16, 1997
    43. IVC Academic Senate Official Record For Spring 1998, April 16, 1998
    44. April 8, 1998 Memorandum From College President To All Faculty Staff, And Administration
    45. ASIVC Resolutions 1997-02 And 1997-03A
    46. IVC Student Handbook
    47. Job Description For District Chancellor
    48. Saddleback Community College District 1996 Educational And Facilities Master Plan
    49. Technology Services Workshop Schedule for Faculty and Staff, Fall and Spring 1998
    50. Shared Governance Leadership Handbook