Print 🖨

The Texas Commission on Community College Finance met on September 12 to discuss draft recommendations to the legislature based on expert input and statewide research on community college needs and attitudes. Their draft recommendations can be found here. At the end of the hearing members noted they would be amending these recommendations before their next meeting October 18.

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Opening Comments

  • Chair Hunt – Received lots of input from state and national experts since first commission meeting in November 2021
  • Chair Hunt – Looking forward to reviewing recommendations and getting public input

 

Dr. Harrison Keller, Commissioner THECB

  • Link to presentation
  • Results from statewide service on public perception on community college, reviewed in slides
  • Overwhelming number of participants reported positive attitudes toward community colleges
  • Participants mainly concerned with issues about affordability and access; majority of participants support basing funding on student outcomes
  • When talking about assured services, needs will vary by college, so think of it as the menu of options that should be available for colleges

 

Ashley Bliss Lima, JFF

  • Link to presentation
  • Presenting on research findings collected over past 5 months on challenges and opportunities Texas community colleges face
  • College leaders placed significant emphasis on fiscal challenges
  • Primary areas of need
    • Expand high-quality, high-demand workforce education and training programs; with a focus on industry-aligned credentials
    • Upgrading and maintaining facilities and equipment
    • Expanded student services, particularly metal health services, counseling and tutoring
    • Attracting, supporting, and retaining qualified faculty and staff talent; especially in rural areas
  • Suggest the need for a ‘hub’ that acts as a support for proposed services

 

Presentation and Discussion of Draft Recommendations

Presiding Officer Woody Hunt

  • One of commissions most important goals is for Texans to have access to education and training necessary for them to be competitive in the workplace
  • Post-secondary credentials are concentrated heavily within 10 counties
  • Students need financial aid support and colleges need proper resources to provide education and training programs that keep up with changing workforce demands
  • First rec would transform the current system from an allocation model to a dynamic one
  • Second rec would ensure smaller and rural college districts have the proper foundational funding to continue to provide educational access to communities

 

Dr. Harrison Keller, THECB

  • Shift to a dynamic funding model would be a fundamental shift meant to keep up with college outcomes
  • A lot of work will need to be done with colleges to refine the schedule of outcomes; may need to be a phased-in approach as additional data becomes available

 

Dr. Brenda Hellyer, Chancellor, San Jacinto College

  • These recs are designed to provide support for economically disadvantaged students
  • TEOG is projected to serve only 20% of students this year
  • Rec 2.1 is to establish a state goal so at least 70% of students at 2-year institutions would have the opportunity for TEOG and create more flexibility within TEOG
  • Approx 200k dual credit students in Texas
  • Fiscal year 2020 community colleges provided $191.7 mil in exemptions and waivers for tuition
  • Rec 2.2 is a financial aid program for dual credit students for colleges to cover waived fees
  • Goal is to make it more equitable for disadvantaged students
  • Program would be administered by THECB and supported by TEA
  • Uniform tuition rate set by THECB for dual credit courses

 

Dr. Mark Escamilla, President, Del Mar College

  • Rec 2.3 expands work-based learning opportunities
  • Would allow students to have financial support while getting workplace experience
  • Using federal funds and targeted state support
  • Will catalyze opportunities for students and small businesses
  • Rec 3.3 providing high quality non-credit credential programs that are convertible and stackable
  • Consider ways to award credit for students prior work experience
  • This is a way to include non-credit or continuing students

 

Dr. Stephen Head, Chancellor, Lone Star College

  • Rec 3.1 provides one time seed money for programs in high demand fields
  • Grants administered by coordinating board
  • Priority given to short-term workforce programs
  • Rec 3.2 expands shared services
  • Possibility for common ERP system that you could opt in/out of

 

Presiding Officer Woody Hunt

  • Floor open for discussion
  • Feels that recs are transformational and can lead to a better credential and competitiveness outcome for workforce
  • Seems like a win/win opportunity for the state
  • Report will be due October 18th, hopefully followed by successful implementation in next legislative session
  • Scott – important preface around calculations for foundational level discussed in rec 1.2. Is there any framework you are thinking about how levels will be calculated?
    • Keller – In preliminary modeling at least half the colleges would be able to benefit. Will need further discussion from legislatures
  • Head – Brenda did you all talk about financial aid for students who don’t belong to a system but are paying out of district fees?
    • Hellyer – The TEOG will help address that; the dual credit portion will keep a standard rate. Didn’t go deeper as far as service area
  • Head – Referring mainly to financial aid piece if students are paying high out of district fees
    • Hellyer – Varies significantly by district, but TEOG expansion should help address that
    • Keller – Felt most acutely that costs are put on students. Community college students with higher debt are skewed toward those who are out of district
  • Hellyer – Students often come carrying the debt they have from another institution; need to look at how we understand and handle that component
  • Hellyer – Using seed funds for potential facility items, what are the discussions going on around this?
    • Keller – Debt will impact the discussions on what the lending impact will be
    • Keller – On facilities issue, the strongest point of consensus has been building on lessons learned from legislation. Less consensus on how to address facilities that are out of the taxing district
  • Kays – Will continuing education tuition also be included with 2.2 dual credit financial aid? Foresee a different level of tuition rate?
    • Keller – Have not seen much growth in dual credit workforce programs; is an area to include in the financial aid, outcome, discussion
    • Keller – Rate in financial aid is set, is important to get students on those pathways
  • Hellyer – New terminology to capture outcomes to measure student success points; overview of next steps on defining these points?
    • Keller – Will have a final draft report for discussion on October 18; final report due November 1
    • Keller – Need to define schedule of outcomes and dial it in on data collected now; may need to be additional data collection or think about phase-ins
    • Keller – A lot of work to be done determining what is in statute and what is in appropriations bill; will then do rulemaking and will need to look at areas to be flexible
    • Keller – Are working on fundamental changes to community college funding

 

Renzo Soto, Texas 2036

  • Excited about draft recommendations and the effect it could have as a full package
  • Encourage commission to prioritize the alignment of outcomes meeting statewide and regional needs; and focus on outcomes-based formula
  • Supportive move in the direction of incentivization of completion in high demand/target fields
    • Should consider eventually using the tri-agency’s self-sufficient wage calculation instead of state median wage
  • Transition from education to the workforce could be improved by adding successful transitions into the outcomes-based formula
    • Could link persistence at the university level to the transfer success
  • Are using online financing simulator to map this commission’s final recommendations
  • Hellyer – Asks about linking persistence; would need to deal with other policy issues?
    • ACC and Blinn have partnered with universities to look at data in terms of success points
    • Can take a look at the co-enrollment model
  • Taylor – Concern is we have people sending off to a four year who are not ready; may be a one-year persistency metric
  • Hellyer – Not arguing, but would have to be putting in place transfer articulation agreements
  • Escamilla – Successful transfer can mean a lot of different things; have an opportunity to look at that
  • Scott – Could look at persistence as a diagnostic tool initially before tying incentive to it
  • Scott – Appreciate emphasis on tying alignment to state/regional goals
  • Hunt and Soto discuss 2036’s wage calculation tool
  • Kays – Notes transfer students typically perform better than native students
  • Creighton – Self-sufficient wage
    • When identifying target careers is those with the highest movement in demand and pay above state median wage
    • Could have flexibility in rulemaking to move from state median wage to self-sufficient wage when they have settled

 

Jared Fitzpatrick, Dallas Regional Chamber

  • Highly supportive of the work of the commission; if recommendations are fully funded by the legislature, will be an important step in the right direction
  • Support the prioritization of state funding for outcomes aligning with urgent student needs
  • Support state support of paid work-base learning and additional funding for students from disadvantaged populations
  • Community colleges are set to fill the gap between job needs and those who do not earn a postsecondary credential within 6 years of enrollment
  • Recommend streamlining employer partnerships and establish dedicated oversight for community colleges within the coordinating board
  • Head – Asks about recommendations for employer partnerships?
    • Are high-need instructors; incentives with partners and employers to lend industry experts to be part-time to be instructors
  • Escamilla – Asks to expand on that
    • Members met with commissioners to deep dive in work of Dallas College; employers are looking for a better user experience with educational entities
    • Potential for those who have already secured grants/funds to be given expedited grants/funds in following years

 

Libby McCabe, Commit Partnership

  • Representing a number of businesses and educational entities who aim to focus on community college finance this upcoming session
  • Draft recommendations are strong, have focused efforts on supporting these recommendations
  • Have a middle skills gap of 1.4 jobs; 1-4 competing a postsecondary credential by 24
  • Support the following: new outcomes funding framework that will incentivize work alignment, transferability, affordability, increased opportunity for work-based learning, and seed funding
  • Only flaw is there are no dollar amounts attached yet, recommend 88th legislature adequately fund these recommendations
  • The Aim Higher Policy Coalition will reconvene in order to provide guidance to the commission
  • Escamilla and Hunt express thanks for their support

 

Mike Maroney, Texas Association of Manufacturers

  • Are encouraged by focus on outcomes-based funding
    • Recommend job-placement metric be added/considered
  • Supportive of federal dollars to supplement industry investments and of seed grants
  • Notes not every community college is as “good” as colleges like San Jacinto
  • Would like to see some community colleges partner with Texas State Technical College to help them with their workforce development
  • Support non-credit convertible stackable alongside credit bearing programs
  • Scott – Pleased about your recommendation on job placement
  • Williams – Likens HB 3 to this metric of successful transition to transitioning to a job; not sure how we could include this metric, but would be appreciated
    • Students may take a class or two and then enter the workforce; need is there
    • Will be able to determine where the best talent pipelines exist; can then jettison those that are not good pipelines
  • Creighton – Manufacturers feel recommendations fall short? Have additional recommendations to facilitate those inter institutional partnerships
    • Are encouraged by recommendations; TSTC is not mentioned in the recommendations
  • Creighton – Would prefer they are mentioned? Are thinking
    • Would be appropriate as they are the model for workforce training in the state
  • Taylor – Would not be opposed to adding language about best practices with TSTC
  • Escamilla – Job placement metric is an option I support; hopeful is still time/place for that
  • Escamilla – TSTC practices are woven throughout this initial version and will be in the final
  • Taylor – Supports job placement metric as well; would limit to high demand placements/jobs
  • Hunt – Would like to get Commissioner’s comments on that metric
  • Keller – Do not have in our unemployment wage data to know specific occupation; TWC is working on, but will have better data in a couple years
  • Keller – Can look into how to fill that gap with other data sets; can include flexibility to include upcoming
  • Taylor – Should include in the recommendations that this data will be upcoming
  • Williams – Notes a similar phase-in technique was built into HB 3
    • Employers are happy to engage with TWC to provide useful data
  • Kays – Do your members note a need for soft skills?
    • Yes; soft skills are equally essential to technical skills
  • Hellyer – Notes there are data gaps for that job placement metric, but if could resolve, would like to include the metric
  • Hellyer – Support leverage of state funding for work-based learning?
    • Yes; have supported the Skills Development Fund and JET funds
    • Recommend legislature use additional funds to update equipment in the JET program
    • Should put more money into industry-recognized apprenticeship programs

 

Isabel Torres, Student Advisory Council

  • Recommend making dual credit accessible to all students by allowing financial aid to be used for student who already qualify
  • Need to make community college more important for all students; need to ensure same percentage of community college students are served as native four-year students
  • Recommend increased TEOG funding and investments in the college work study program
  • Recommend incentivizing all colleges to adopt a field of study curricula under the Texas transfer framework
  • Scott – What are the obstacles in adopting the TTF? Need incentives?
    • Keller – TTF is essentially an associate’s degree for transfer; rules are already on the books
    • Keller – Issue is capacity for colleges to offer all pathways; would need a statutory change to ensure direct transfer degree has been completed; need to put more teeth into the statute to ensure compliance

 

Armin Cantini, Community College Association

Dr. Nan McRaven, Austin Community District

  • Appreciate the commission’s leadership and
  • Board trustees are pleased to see increase funding for community colleges, especially for a reliable fixed-rate formula, sufficiently funded outcomes-based model
  • Appreciate recapture of local tax dollars is not included
  • Encouraged by the opportunity for shared services and that recommendations do not seem to have restrictive mandates
  • Board members were concerned about draft language about uniform tuition rate for dual credit that may be set by the coordinating board
  • Appreciate sentiment, but trustees are responsible for setting tuition rates for their institutions; seeking clarity on how this would be implemented
    • Concerned this would incentivize annexation elections
  • Notes there is inequity with the 60 counties that are voluntarily taxed for community colleges while the rest of the state enjoys their benefits
  • Investments in college capacity will empower more colleges to collaborate
  • Appreciate the acknowledgement that colleges will need time to adjust to this new structure
  • Scott – ACC has used dual credit tuition rates to incentivize students into the district?
    • McRaven – Yes, waive the fee for dual credit; has been helpful in getting students started; had 123 high schoolers last May who graduated with associates degrees
    • McRaven – If was a uniform rate, would like to help with that clarification
  • Keller – THECB approves tuition rates for certain students in certain circumstances, concern here would be certainty about costs for state-funded financial aid; would recommend rate is a condition to being able to receive financial aid so you would have predictability
  • Cantini – Appreciates opening comments on community college experience
  • Keller – Important for people to understand that community colleges and credentials aren’t valued, but that there are other considerations like jobs, wages, etc.

 

Dr. Brent Wallace, North Central Texas College, Texas Association of Community Colleges

  • Recommendations will reform finance system & uplift the entire state
  • Highlights community college stats; community colleges reach large & diverse population
  • TACC is encouraged by draft recommendations, see broad alignment between these and TACC’s recommendations from June
  • One of TACC’s recommendations was need for funding to address higher CTE costs; appreciate draft recommendations to fund
  • Also glad fixed funding structure is in recommendations; outcomes-based fixed funding will give needed incentive
  • TACC also appreciates language changing local funding to an outcomes model; urge further consideration for an additional outcome metric on dual-credit
  • Also appreciate new state college formulas expanding capacity for student financial aid
  • TACC has concerns on lack of shared services and opt-in approach, support THECB exploring areas where agency can serve as hub for shared services
  • Rural colleges like recommendation on foundational guaranteed yield, however volatility of taxable valuations urge further consideration of level up process
  • Greater specificity is needed on proposal that THECB would set a uniform tuition for dual credit; colleges have arrangements with ISDs on dual credit & uniform tuition would complicate
  • Commission has provided blueprint for bold, ambitious, and potentially transformational change
  • Head – Can you talk more about the shared services issues and concerns some members have had?
  • Members largely support, e.g. NCTC has invested large amounts in new systems at cost; no objection to sharing systems, but concerns over whether fix will be long-term, short-term, etc.
  • Head – Weren’t discussing mandating, more a discussion of THECB or state helping you move to a new system
  • No opposition to that, T3 is a good example, others are sharing services & have had conversations with other colleges
  • Mandates make it concern
  • Head – On dual credit, some TACC want a common charge and others don’t?
  • TACC is a diverse group; NCTC can’t have a uniform dual credit rate and support staffing costs
  • Head – Not sure if we’re talking about floor or cap
  • Goes back to data, want to be part of conversation with THECB
  • Williams – Part I’m struggling with is if you do this as financial aid, allotment, etc.; question is marginal cost to present a class & whether it is out of district, in district, etc. matters
  • There are further pieces to that at the local level, e.g. if you can’t fund a local dual credit offering, could need to travel to serve the dual credit site
  • Question becomes how we get at costs of delivering dual credit courses, varies based on what is expected by each ISD
  • Not saying we’re not aligned with a uniform rate, but wondering if there is flexibility
  • Hellyer – Hearing you need more clarification and more understanding; shared services are not mandated but you want to understand “would be expected”
  • Yes, TACC is concerned about what will be in the final recommendation
  • Taylor – A lot of issues still on dual credit, we understand partnerships are formed on their own accord; will not force partnerships, want to incentivize different model for new partnerships
  • Saw evidence of this in the TRUE initiative
  • Head – Seeing an interest in online dual credit? Opportunities for sharing there
  • Growing trend for online has been skewed due to COVID pandemic; NCTC is seeing increased face-to-face desire now
  • Accreditation standards impacted, can talk about this where online standards exist
  • Head – There are areas where students could take online classes and pay a much lower price
  • Delivery method is the big piece for accreditation bodies

 

Pam Anglin, Paris Junior College, Texas Association of Community Colleges

  • Provides overview of Paris Junior College
  • Appreciates recommendations; have potential to be game-changing for community colleges
  • Many recommendations track with TACC recommendations, appreciate change from allocation based on contact hours to one that is dynamic and outcomes driven, will benefit colleges of all sizes across the state
  • Rural colleges face challenges like low property values, volatile values, declining residency, and insufficient resources; Paris is serving large area that is not all within the service area
  • No New Revenue Rate this year is .066 cents, Voter Approval Rate is 7.5 cents, looking at 7.49 cent rate this year; excited to see recommendations meeting many of these needs
  • Guaranteed yield should be predictable, should consider whether it will consider variance in property tax valuations
  • Increased funding for expanded workforce education training & non-credit CE will be critical to meet growing needs of business & industry
  • Paris Junior College received funding through 4 different TRUE grants this year, used to meet high demand
  • Growth of dual credit has been a success of state’s community colleges; financial aid for dual credit is an important recommendation
  • Attention should be given to idea of uniform tuition for dual credit and potential impact on business models of community colleges
  • Paris Junior College dual credit enrollment has grown to 43% for the Fall semester
  • Head – Recommendation over uniform dual credit? Cap, base?
  • Unsure, due to differences in community colleges uniform is difficult
  • Head – Is your competition universities or other community colleges?
  • Compete against local university who offers $150 in dual credit tuition, they pay more
  • In working with ISD, focuses on services we’re able to provide, but have lost some ISD because of the university’s offerings
  • VanDeaver – Would the set fee put you at a disadvantage to the regional university?
  • If the set fee did not apply to the universities
  • If the set fee was across the board, in Paris Junior College’s case it would be good
  • VanDeaver – And you also deal with differences paid to adjuncts
  • On CTE, we charge regular tuition due to high costs of supply
  • VanDeaver – Would report recommendations put Paris Junior College in a better place?
  • We would
  • Hellyer – If it was a uniform tuition rate to drive financial aid, if that didn’t lock you into what you could charge students would that change? Would still come down to university?
  • Yes
  • ISDs do shop to get the lowest price, presidents of colleges work together
  • Hunt – From the state standpoint, goal is to spend up to $50m/year on dual credit; to the degree community colleges can continue to set tuition and its set to levels where students can’t pay, it defeats the purpose
  • Hunt – Could say they wouldn’t do it, but might need to be $0 so a student would actually go; that is the dilemma and THECB needs to consider this
  • That is the dilemma, some students need to be in dual credit, do free and reduced lunch for some students in dual credit
  • Williams – I don’t see a problem with a cap, but struggle with how local revenues are determined on in-district & out-of-district

 

Mike Flores, Alamo Community College District

  • Provides overview of Alamo Community College District
  • Welcome recommendations in the Commission’s report; pleased to see added value for workforce, need definition of credentials of value and ensure “high demand” fields are not drawn too narrowly
  • Transfer rates and number of semester credit hours has been a focus of Alamo, have effectively reduced time to graduate and transfer large numbers of students
  • Agree that college affordability is critical to future of the state
  • Support concept of incentives and increased workforce learning opportunities
  • Dual credit is nuanced, all are committed to finding solutions; Alamo has 14k dual credit students, partners with 20 ISDs, 10 charters; waive $30m in tuition to provide access & resources in recommendations are welcome
  • Important to provide access to TEOG or other state-funded mechanisms like the Texas Grant
  • Support seed funding being proposed, prior seed funding allowed Alamo to stand up nursing program
  • Scott – On TEOG expansion, is that a statutory change, rule change? How does this get fixed?
  • Keller, THECB – Would need a statutory change
  • Scott – Small but significant area for students as community colleges move into limited baccalaureate programs
  • Taylor – Another side to this, some universities may have issues with giving up funding to Texas education Opportunity Grants; had some encroachment into 4 years when we did BSNs

 

John Fitzpatrick, Educate Texas

  • Commission recommendations are bold and transformative, will address workforce challenges and strengthen Texas economy
  • Suite of recommendations could change landscape for students, employers, and institutions
  • Educate Texas worked on early college and P-TECH, always recognizing the Texas economy runs on community colleges
  • Community colleges have been the gateway to equity
  • Important to consider end results and behaviors we want to incentivize, shifting to performance funding will have a tremendous effect
  • Linking of stackable credentials with credit courses would make a difference; need to build money in for data collection, data is needed to do this well
  • Work-based learning framework has not been done well in the past, employers will likely join with state and colleges to ramp up this recommendation
  • Everything learned & heard about community college finance applies to dual credit, very complex & will likely not be one fix for this; $50m is a tremendous step in the right direction, but will need data, etc.
  • Excited that shared services are mentioned, encourages expanded definition to incl. facilities, co-op models, etc.; one area where Commission likely wasn’t bold enough
  • Taylor – Have grants in the recommendations, does this not apply to shared services? Could be an incentive that state would provide some grant money to do these programs
  • Early college and P-TECH takes good leadership and significant resources to do
  • More you can incentivize this the better; many incentives aren’t well known, don’t have an overall strategy for shared services
  • Taylor – Dept. of Labor does provide money for internships, workforce learning, etc.; Tennessee just added teaching and is using federal money to reduce tuition costs

 

Closing Comments

  • Hunt – Would expect to see a draft of the full report within 2 weeks? Prior to Oct. meeting?
  • Keller – should be able to incorporate tweaks on the recommendations section, background report has been started and will have introductory comments
  • Hunt – Goal on Oct. 18th would be to have a report that is ready for approval, could have meeting virtually if it is a one item agenda
  • Hellyer – So working through changes, this will be through Commissioner Keller’s office? What do we know from today that should be considered?
  • There are a couple points that need clarification, will go through with Hunt on where we might need to make clarifications
  • Draft recommendations are also an excerpt, some of the comments related to the broader community college landscape & want to distill this into background & findings
  • Hellyer – Gotten all the studies in?
  • Some are still coming in, will continue over next few months
  • Workgroups had reports on preliminary findings that we want to incorporate, e.g. growth in dual credit among economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged students
  • Working on model and schedule of outcomes in other places as well
  • Scott – Post Nov 1st, Commission will dissolve, curious as to opportunity for continued work; is there a place in THECB that will continue discussions like Technical & Community College Leadership Council?
  • Institutional support, shared services, etc., will see more work, THECB work already underway; seems like there are two or three areas that are promising
  • Will need new governance around it & will be working with colleges to put some of this into action
  • Hunt – After Nov. 1st, Commission’s purpose is concluded, but still don’t have implementation; burden will fall more on myself & Commissioner Keller