1. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY COLLEGE SUPPORT FUND
Support Fund Distribution Formula and Implementation
Support Fund Request and Implications
Options
Impact of Budget Reductions on Community Colleges              
April 17, 2003
Presented to Ways & Means Education Subcommittee
By: Cam Preus-Braly

2. Community College Mission Statutory ORS 341.009 (1)
The community college is an educational institution which is intended to fill the institutional gap in education by offering broad, comprehensive programs in academic as well as professional technical subjects.
It is primarily designed to provide associate or certificate degree programs for some, serve a transitional purpose for others who will continue baccalaureate or other college work, provide the ability to enter the workforce immediately and serve to determine future educational needs for other students.
It can provide means for continuation of academic education, professional technical training or the attainment of entirely new skills as demands for old skills and old occupations are supplanted by new technologies.
It may also provide the means to coordinate courses and programs with high schools to enhance the Certificate of Advanced Mastery and to accommodate successful transition to college degree programs.

3. State Board of Education Policies
The State Board of Education has statutory authority to govern Oregon’s community college districts
As part of that responsibility, the State Board has the authority to develop and implement a formula for the distribution of state resources to fund community colleges
The State Board develops the formula within the policy framework of access and equity

4. State Board of Education Policies
Access – All Oregonians should have access to community college services regardless of where they live
Equity – Each college should receive the same funding per student
Quality – In January of 2003 adopted a freeze on enrollments to stop the erosion of the dollar value of an FTE

5. Funding Formula
The passage Ballot Measure 5 in 1991 fundamentally changed the funding of community colleges
Over time, state resources have grown to be the largest share of revenue for local community college districts

6. Community College Primary Sources of Revenue

7. Funding Formula
As the State Board and CCWD staff looked to the future, it became apparent that a new formula would need to be adopted
In , a temporary formula was enacted in which community colleges received a proportional share of state funds based on past allocations
Early versions of the current funding formula were first adopted in the biennium

8. Funding Formula Principles
The overarching principles of the new formula were:
Provide equity in the distribution of resources
Provide a base for infrastructure and school size
Equalize property tax revenues per student
Funding follows the student
These principles continue to be reflected in the current funding formula

9. Funding Formula Implementation
Individual elements within the funding formula have stayed relatively unchanged since its adoption in
50% of local property taxes are included
A base factor is included to reflect the differences in college size
Full-time equivalent enrollments (FTE) are the basis for distribution following students

10. Basic Formula Equation
plus
State Appropriation
50% of Imposed Property Taxes
Equals:
Total Formula Funds
Minus:
Base Funding
Divided by:
Enrollments
Equals:
Funds per FTE

11. Future of Funding Formula
In January of 2003 the State Board of Education directed CCWD to work with the Community College Presidents Council to review and recommend a new formula for
Members include:
Wes Channell, Klamath CC, Chair
Mary Spilde, Lane CC
Jess Carreon, Portland CC
Bob Barber, Central Oregon CC
Joe Johnson, Clackamas CC
Travis Kirkland, Blue Mountain CC

12. Property Taxes Imposed
College
Actual RFTE
Rate per Thousand
Property Taxes Imposed
Taxes per FTE
Blue Mountain
2,349.28
$0.6611
3,008,881
$ 1,281
Central Oregon
3,988.99
$0.6204
7,173,672
$ 1,798
Chemeketa
11,637.35
$0.6259
11,298,620 $
Clackamas
7,792.56
$0.5582
9,004,227
$ 1,155
Clatsop
1,715.84
$0.7785
2,517,860
$ 1,467
Columbia Gorge
845.05
$0.2703
317,708 $
Klamath
1,193.83
$0.4117
1,183,902 $
Lane
12,746.88
$0.6191
10,982,571 $
Linn-Benton
6,765.55
$0.5019
4,631,609 $
Mt. Hood
9,467.29
$0.4416
7,378,789 $
Oregon Coast
461.09
$0.1757
716,742
$ 1,554
Portland
24,851.77
$0.2828
18,640,144 $
Rogue
4,939.67
$0.5128
7,031,022
$ 1,423
Southwestern Oregon
3,029.86
$0.7017
3,391,497
$ 1,119
Tillamook Bay
426.20
$0.2636
653,693
$ 1,534
Treasure Valley
1,797.43
$1.2235
1,407,800 $
Umpqua
3,541.33
$0.4551
2,053,736 $
Totals/Averages
97,549.97
$0.5433
91,392,473 $

13. Impact of Property Taxes on Distribution of State Resources
No property tax revenues actually leave districts
Including one-half of local property taxes in the formula does affect the amount of state funds that a community college receives
The following chart indicates which colleges gain or lose state funds as a result of property taxes being included in the formula

14. Impact of Property Taxes on Distribution
*Projections based on funding included in Governor’s Budget

15. Projected State & Property Taxes per FTE – Property Taxes Included in Formula

16. Projected State & Property Taxes per FTE – Property Taxes Excluded from Formula

17. Comparisons with OUS and K-12
Property Taxes
Community Colleges: 50% of property taxes imposed included in formula
OUS: No property tax support for public universities
K-12: 100% of property taxes included in formula
State Aid
Significant source of revenues for all three education sectors
Tuition
Community Colleges: Provides about 1/3 of local revenues
OUS: Large source of revenue
K-12: Not a source of revenue for public schools
Enrollments
Community colleges: Used in the formula as basis for distribution of state funds
OUS: Used in the RAM as basis for distribution of state funds
K-12: ADMw used as basis for distribution of state funds

18. State Support for Community Colleges—Historically
Current service plus inflation=biennial allocation
Not reflective of increases in student enrollment
No connection to the actual average cost of serving a student

19. New Approach to Community College Funding in 2001
Budget request based on:
conservative projection of student enrollment
statewide average cost to serve a student
Average cost per student derived from national reporting (IPEDS) and college revenue and expenditure reports

20. 2001 Community College Support Fund Appropriation
appropriated $464 million for student enrollment of 192,005
legislature funded 45.9% of projected cost of community college full-time equivalent students
$32 million, of the $45 million community college enrollment growth appropriation, was lost to state budget reductions

21. Agency Request
$2, state share of average cost per student (45% of projected cost)
208,905 multiplied by students (derived from 3% increase in reimbursable FTE per year)
$ million .

22. Enrollment Scenarios

23. State Funding Assumptions

24. Enrollment Scenarios Including Agency Request

25. Budget Numbers

26. Community Colleges CC Students by County
Columbia
2,884
6.5%
Community Colleges
Clatsop
5,894
16.3%
Multnomah
73, %
Hood R.
2,373
11.6%
Umatilla
7,008
10.0%
Wash.
44,531
9.6%
Wallowa
305
4.3%
Tillamook
3,813
15.5%
Sherman
137
7.4%
Morrow
815
7.2%
Yamhill
6,469
7.4%
Gilliam 98
5.2%
Union
582
2.4%
Clackamas
33,438
9.5%
Wasco
2,974
12.5%
Polk
5,962
9.4%
Marion
35, %
Wheeler 78
5.0%
Baker
755
4.5%
Lincoln
4,427
9.9%
Benton
11,918
14.9%
Linn
14,396
13.8%
Jefferson
1,631
8.2%
Grant
374
4.8%
Crook
1,283
6.4%
Lane
37,054
11.3%
Deschutes
13,468
10.6%
Harney
212
2.8%
Malheur
3,859
12.1%
Coos
10,655
17.0%
Douglas
16,233
16.0%
Lake
639
8.6%
CC Students by County
Total Students Enrolled,
% of Population Enrolled
Curry
2,330
11.0%
Josephine
5,379
3.8%
Jackson
7,220
3.8%
Klamath
2,836
4.4%

27. All Students

28. Community Colleges Served 406,434 Students in 2001-02

29. Increased Student Demand Over the Last Decade

30. Increased Demand for Highly Skilled Workforce
“Oregon’s future will depend on having a critical mass of highly skilled technology workers and researchers.”
“We need to immediately retrain existing workers for today’s high demand jobs.”
Oregon Council for Knowledge and Economic Development Report, 2002
“The current supply of graduates produced by Oregon’s community colleges and universities falls short of the demand created by new positions and vacancies in these critical shortage fields.”
Final Report of the Interim Task Force on Health Care Personnel, 2002

31. The Capacity Gap
Nursing and Allied Health Programs are full but colleges do not have funds to expand to meet market demand.
Waiting lists for ESL classes
Funding cuts = fewer programs, classes, seats statewide
Physical plants in need of repair or expansion to meet the need for classroom and lab space.

32. But in 2001-2003 the gap in PT programs grew:
The Capacity Gap
Professional Technical Programs are the training ground for a highly skilled workforce.
But in the gap in PT programs grew:
15 AAS Programs were suspended
12 Certificate Programs were suspended
17 AAS Programs were deleted
8 Certificate Programs were deleted

33. What are the Options?
The “cap”…freezing funding allocations to last year’s levels.
More $$$!
Differentiated Funding
Greater reliance on grant and “other” funds
Cost savings: cut staff, cut programs, cut courses
Tuition Strategies
Raising Tuition
Differentiated Tuition

34. Tuition/Fees Tuition increased 12% this year
rates are set by local college boards.
state average yearly tuition and fees for
a full-time in-district student = $2,337
tuition for ranges from $40-$55
per credit
Projected average increase next year of 8% or $6.35 per credit for a range of $45 to $60

35. Community College Tuition
02-03 increase 12% projected 8%
Student share of their education for the decade 1992 to 2002 increased from 22% to 33%

36. 2002-03 Annual Tuition and Fees: Cost to Students

37. Socio-Economic Benefits
Return on investment (source: CC Benefits Inc. Study, March 2002)
17% ROI in Oregon’s Community Colleges.
The state of Oregon benefits from improved health, reduced welfare, unemployment and crime saving the public $61.5 million per year.
Benefits of a community college education (Bureau of Labor Statistics publication)
Increase wages $100 to $400 per week
Decreases likelihood of unemployment by 50%