Download
1 / 27
270 likes | 460 Views
The Future of Perkins Funding. Presentation to The Michigan Community College Association July 21, 2005. Introduction. Presenters: Robert Ferrentino MODAC, President Vice President for Academic Affairs, Muskegon Community College Patti Henning
E N D
The Future of Perkins Funding Presentation to The Michigan Community College Association July 21, 2005
Introduction • Presenters: • Robert Ferrentino • MODAC, President • Vice President for Academic Affairs, Muskegon Community College • Patti Henning • Vice President for Instruction and Student Learning, Bay College
Objectives • Express appreciation to MCCA for past support of Perkins funding to Michigan Community Colleges • Update MCCA on what Perkins funding means to Michigan Community Colleges in light of current financial challenges • Request continued support for Perkins funding through advocacy efforts directed at AACC and state and federal legislators
Perkins at Risk • The Bush administration has not been a friend to Perkins legislation For example………. • In the 2005/2006 fiscal year, the Bush administration proposed $0 in federal budget appropriations for the Perkins grant • The Bush administration views career and technical education as a “relic of the 1950s” and “ineffective.” Bottom line… • Elimination of the Perkins grant would be a devastating blow for career and technical education across the nation and especially in Michigan.
Purpose of Perkins • The Perkins grant provides funding that: • Sustains, improves, develops, and creates occupational programs • Helps students gain academic, occupational, and technical skills necessary to obtain and keep successful employment • More Simply Put . . .
Dollars & Sense • In the 2003/2004 fiscal year, the State of Michigan received $13,580,779 in Perkins grant funding to support postsecondary occupational education . . . • 28 community colleges • three 4-year universities, and • one tribal college • 281 programs • 176,619 students • Of the 22,589 certificates and degrees conferred by Michigan Community Colleges, 60% or approximately 13,500, were in occupational programs.
How Perkins Funding is Used • In the 2003/2004 fiscal year, $5,986,327 of federal Perkins grant funding was expended on services to Special Populations students, including: • Students with disabilities – 3,434 served • Academically disadvantaged students – 12,670 served • Economically disadvantaged students – 17,858 served • Students with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) – 1,245 served • Single parents and single pregnant women – 2,101 served • Displaced homemakers – 440 served • Students in programs non-traditional for their gender – 2,048 served
How Perkins Funding is Used • Special Populations services, including: • Assessment • Outreach • Attendance costs grants • Counseling and academic advising • Tutoring • Interpreter services • Special instructional assistance (e.g. note takers for the blind, signers for the deaf) • Developmental instruction
How Perkins Funding is Used • In the 2003/2004 fiscal year, federal Perkins expenditures included: • Career guidance, planning, and placement $ 610,057 • Program planning and evaluation $ 789,951 • Professional development $ 354,259 • Developmental instruction $ 163,683 • Instructional equipment $ 4,581,281 • Secondary linkages (Tech Prep) $ 138,073 • Economic development $ 458,738 • Curriculum integration $ 1,798 • Grant administration $ 198,152
What Difference Does It Make? • John is an older, African American student who was involved in a serious automobile accident in 1992, which left him physically challenged. Encouraged by his family, John enrolled at Oakland Community college. Through the Perkins-funded PASS program, John received services in career planning, academic assistance, and life style changes that enabled him to complete a associate’s degree in Liberal Arts. Currently, John is pursuing his bachelor’s degree at University of Michigan – Dearborn. Upon completion of his bachelor’s degree, John plans to attend law school.
What Difference Does It Make? • Four years ago, Irina was a single mother of two with $20 in her pocket and no plans for the future. She knew she had to do something to improve her future and the futures of her children. Irina visited the Women’s Resource Center at Lansing Community College for help. In addition to counseling, advising, and emotional support and encouragement, Irina was provided Perkins-funded assistance with tuition, parking, textbooks, and child care and was able to complete LCC’s nursing program. Today, Irina is a nurse and a great role model for her children with a bright future.
What Difference Does It Make? • In 2004, Kofi Ogoe, a 2003 graduate of the Manufacturing Productivity Systems program at Henry Ford Community College, teamed up with another HFCC graduate and purchased Haas CNC equipment to start a manufacturing company. This new manufacturing venture is proving to be a great success. These young entrepreneurs credit their success, in part, to their exposure to state-of-the-art CNC equipment during their studies at HFCC. Purchase of state-of-the-art equipment would not be possible without Perkins grant funding.
Perkins & The Cherry Report • There are many parallels between the mission of the Perkins grant and the Cherry Commission recommendations. • Perkins Core Indicators, the performance measures used to determine the effectiveness of the Perkins grant, focus on: • academic success • occupational skill attainment • program completion • job placement and retention • continued education.
Perkins & The Cherry Report • Key Commission Recommendations • Make Higher Education Universal • Set high expectations for high school students through rigorous standards and curriculum • Create a Culture of Entrepreneurship • Implement New Strategies for High School Success • Create Community Compacts for Educational Attainment • Improve Institutional Completion Measures • Target Adults Seeking to Complete Postsecondary Credentials • Align Postsecondary Education with Economic Needs and Opportunities
Impact of Loss of Perkins Funding • Direct loss of critical funding to community colleges • Indirect, but significant, negative impact to community colleges of loss of Perkins funding to secondary institutions • Increased under-preparedness of students • Decreased enrollment due to increased high school dropout rates • Decreased performance • Decreased retention • Elimination of career and technical programs • Fewer graduates • Fewer nurses, respiratory therapists, physical therapy assistants, automotive mechanics, computer systems professionals, drafting, CAD, and architectural construction professionals, child care workers, etc., etc., to meet Michigan’s workforce needs.
Impact of Loss of Perkins Funding • Transferring the cost of Perkins-funded equipment and student services to students would make many occupational programs cost prohibitive to run. • For example, in the 2004/2005 fiscal year Bay College expended $86,000 in Perkins funds to replace outdated computers in their CAD lab. If this cost were to be transferred to the students in the CAD program, their tuition and fees would need to be increased by 66% just to cover the cost of the new equipment! • If Perkins funding were lost, high-tech, high-demand programs that are vital to economic recovery and growth in Michigan would begin to close as equipment and curriculum became outdated.
How MCCA Can Help • Help us get the message out about the value and necessity of Perkins funding to community colleges in Michigan and across the country. • Share this information and your own “Perkins stories” with . . . • Students and parents • Faculty and staff • Community leaders • Board of Trustees • State and federal legislators • AACC
Credits This presentation was prepared with the cooperation and contributions of all MODAC members, especially . . . • Bob Ferrentino, Muskegon Community College • Patti Henning, Bay College • Leslie Kellogg, Henry Ford Community College • Denise Sigworth, Schoolcraft College • Mary Smith, Wayne County Community College District
