1. Presented by David Armstrong November 2, 2017
SCWI Financials
Presented by David Armstrong
November 2, 2017

2. Financials Approved vs actuals expenditures: 96.1% in 2016-17

3. Under-spending by Category
% Expended vs Approved Provincial Average
Category of Expenditure
Amount
Under-spent
15-16
16-17
100%
99%
RPTs
$7,726
94%
Activities and Forums
$279,235
96%
Dual Credits
$1,329,213
RPT Admin was overspent last year.
Activities and Forum funding needs to be better monitored by some RPTs (2, 4, 6, 7, 9 were the most underspent – each over $10K)
Dual Credits (2, 7, 13, 14 all underspent by more than $95K)
Through contract change, funding can be moved from Activities and Forums to dual credits.

4. Dual Credit Approved Funding vs Actual Expenditures
: 91% to 100% ($1.3 million unspent)
All RPTs over 90%
: 85% to 100% ($1.9 million unspent)
13 RPTs over 90% (3 at 100%)
: 88% to 100% ($1.9 million unspent)
12 RPTs over 90%

5. Funding – Dual Credit Programs Under-Spending
money for programs that were approved, not cancelled and that show $0 expenditures In
$181,876 (8 programs – 4 summer) In
$119,098 (7 programs – 4 summer) In
$82,167 (6 programs – 2 summer) In
$1.01M

6. 2016-17 Expenditures % Expended vs Approved – Prov. Average
Category of Expenditure
Range of % Expended by RPT
98%
College Benchmark
93% to 100%
all RPTs over 90%
94%
Board Benchmark
82% to 100%
14 RPTs over 90%
Miscellaneous
87% to 140%
13 RPTs over 90%
1 RPT no requests
91%
Transportation
62% to 100%
8 RPTs over 90%
5% increase in transportation over last year
Misc up by 3% -- in part because Misc spent where none approved. ($29K spent where none requested and approved – only RPT 1).
In total, $143,815 in Misc spent and reported that wasn’t approved in EDCS (RPTs 1, 2, 9, 13, 14, 15)
$309,921 in college benchmarks spent over approved (RPTs 16, 14, 13, 11, 10, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9) – 1 overspent in Misc instead.

7. 2016-17 Approved vs Actual Benchmarks Expenditures by Approach
Dual Credit Approach (Approved vs Actual Students)
% Board Benchmark
% College Benchmark
Team-Taught at a Secondary School (95%)
95%
101%
Team-Taught at a College (95%)
97%
98%
College Delivered at a Secondary School (93%)
College Delivered at a College (95%)
Level 1 College Delivered at a College (89%)
82%
124%

8. 2016-17 Approved vs Actual Benchmarks Expenditures by Approach
SWAC Programs
Approved vs Actual Students: 93%
Approved vs Actual Expenditures
Board Benchmark: 94%
College Benchmark 97%
Miscellaneous: 98%
Transportation: 83%
New slide
Transportation underspending $250K.

9. Under-spending by Category 2016-17
% Expended vs Approved Provincial Average
Category of Expenditure
Amount
Under-spent
13-14
14-15
15-16
16-17
94%
97%
96%
98%
College Benchmark
$482,585
91%
95%
Board Benchmark
$312,189
College benchmark underspent by $730,342
Board benchmark underspent by $23,200
A number of programs where college benchmark fully expended (regardless of % students served) and board benchmark expended in proportion to students served RPTs 2 (Cent, Humb), 8, 9 (Algonquin, St. L, Loyalist), RPT 13, RPT 14 Mohawk. Many of these examples are Level 1 program; interesting since the college benchmarks are very low.
The following RPTs had programs with more than 105% approved vs actual college benchmarks: RPT 2 (Humber, Cent, Sene, Sher, Georgian), RPT 4, 7, 8, 9 (all colleges), 10 (Lambton and Fanshawe), 13, 14 (Mohawk)

10. Transportation
Ranges from 62% to 100% (11% to 100% in ) $541,713 unspent
40% of dual credit underspending is transportation
For most RPTs, transportation is at least 1/3 of under-spending on dual credits
Continue to monitor closely
Transportation amounts can be changed through the contract change process and can be used to fund additional dual credits
Spending considered as part of approvals, if over or under, please provide rationales
Transportation funding model should not be a barrier to student participation
In , underspending in transportation was $750K – a significant improvement year over year
Clearly RPTs are using savings from elsewhere to offset transportation costs above approved amounts
Internal note: The $541K isn’t a good number to use – as there are 5 RPTs that overspent

11. Miscellaneous 2016-17 Improved use of Miscellaneous funds
12 RPTs within 10% of approved amounts
Can contract change Miscellaneous funds to support dual credits
4 RPTs over spent on Miscellaneous
Request reallocation to support additional Miscellaneous costs, if needed
Fewer RPTs overspent than last year. Only RPT 1 significantly overspent $42K

12. 2018-21 Request For Proposals
Focus of dual credit programs continues to be on primary target audience, including SWAC programs
Benchmarks for Dual Credits, Activities and Forums continue
If benchmark does not meet estimated expenditures – use Miscellaneous section and provide details

13. 2018-21 Request For Proposals
Includes details on proposals for
Adult Dual Credits pilot programs funded through the Highly Skilled Workforce Initiative
Expanded activities and forums funded through the Equitable Access to Postsecondary Education Initiative, including:
After SWAC pilot activities
After ADC pilot activities
RPTs expected to provide After SWAC for all their SWAC students and After ADC for all of their ADC students

14. 2018-21 RFP Apprenticeship Level 1 In-School Dual Credits
Required to work with OYAP coordinators, MAESD Field Office staff, College Apprenticeship Leads in the determination of Level 1 In-School Dual Credits
Students must have Registered Training Agreements to be eligible for MAESD Seat Purchase
Only students in the primary target group eligible for SCWI Seat Purchase. OYAP participants are not eligible for SCWI Seat Purchase.

15. 2018-21 RFP Apprenticeship Level 1 In-School Dual Credits
MAESD Level 1 Dual Credit Seat Purchase (Confirmation of MAESD Seat Purchase Approvals for OYAP Dual Credits)
Form includes instructions to Regional Office to discuss previous year’s results in order to determine appropriate number of seats to approve

16. 2018-21 RFP Apprenticeship Level 1 In-School Dual Credits
SCWI Level 1 Dual Credit Seat Purchase (Confirmation by college and board partners of request for SCWI Seat Purchase only for students in the Primary Target Group)
Attestation of Training Facility for College Oversight for OYAP Dual Credit Program
Proposals will only be considered if forms received on time

17. 2018-21 RFP Night School Summer Dual Credits and Summer SWAC
only previously delivered approved programs will be re-considered for the primary target group.
Summer Dual Credits and Summer SWAC
Please apply as part of your proposal or during the year
Use summer 2016 data when considering student numbers

18. 2017-20 RFP Specialist High Skills Majors – As last year,
While maintaining previous participant numbers, new programs can be proposed to replace current dual credits for SHSM students.
Responds to local changes to SHSM programs
RPTs will need to identify one related sector for each program designed for SHSM students. If more than one, then please list others in the Notes section of your proposal.

19. 2018-21 RFP Decisions will be made based on the rubrics
Most of the data is included in the SMART Goal Reports
% students in the group for whom the program was designed, number of participants – approved vs actual, retention, success, age
Important to include explanation, where necessary, in the Notes section of the proposal
Webinars – details sent by
English – November 14 (pm), November 15 (am)
French – November 17 (am)

20. RFP
CODE memo and Requirements documents will be distributed
All other resources will be posted to

21. Questions and Answers

22. Contact Us
David Armstrong Phil Hedges Sonja Vandermeer