Price of Persistence: A Conversation on Financing Student Success Strategies

1. Price of Persistence:A Conversation on Financing Student Success Strategies SkillUp Washington Seattle, Washington Thursday, August 11, 2011

2. Overview • Courses to Employment Demonstration’s investigation of Community College-Nonprofit partnerships • Findings on partnerships’ funding structures and funding sources • Examples of how funding sources “blend” • Implications for policy and practice

3. Courses to Employment • 3-year investigation of competitively selected partnerships • Automobile Career Pathways Project- Seattle, WA • Allied Health-Capital IDEA and Austin Community College- Austin, TX • Carreras en Salud- Chicago, IL • Flint Healthcare Career Pathways Project- Flint, MI • Logistics/Transportation Academy- Los Angeles, CA • Training Futures at Northern Virginia Family Service and Northern Virginia Community College- Fairfax County, VA • Investigating range of questions about how partnerships work and what they accomplish • Funded by the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation

4. Education Strategies Industry Strategy Supportive Services Why Collaboration?: The “Model” College Education Scale Community Nonprofit Organizations Tailored Services

5. Academic and Non-Academic Services Provided by CTE Partnerships • Pre-College “Bridging” (ESOL, ABE, GED, alternate Developmental Ed, Career Counseling) • Academic Support (tuition, books, materials, specialized tutoring) • Case Management / Coaching (examples: attendance monitoring, mentoring, tutoring, peer support groups, financial planning) • College Navigation (information/ counseling, financial aid, registration, act as student advocate) • Non-Academic Supports (transportation, childcare, food and clothing, housing and utilities, health, domestic violence) • Employment Navigation (networking, career advising, job placement/ job leads along education pathway, information and counseling)

6. Each CTE program has unique support model determined by… • Participant Characteristics • Target Industry Sector • Structure of Employment Opportunities and Job Requirements • Educational and Employment Goals • Opportunities • funding, partners, existing programs, etc.

7. Funding Structures

8. Types of Funding

9. Changes in Funding Over TimeExample: Capital IDEA, Austin TX

10. Funding is typically restricted by at least one of the following… • Client characteristics (youth, adult, formerly incarcerated, public assistance receipt) • Geography (political jurisdiction, special neighborhood focus) • Allowable uses (for ABE, for job training, for support services various) • Time period in which it must be spent • Number of people who must be served with funds

11. “Michelle” – LVN • Took six years • Started at pre-college level • Needs to suspend studies at times because of personal issues • Struggle with academic performance • Ultimately successful, supporting self and children

12. Michelle’s On-budget, direct expense at Capital IDEA Total expense of $15,692 over 6 years and spread across 9 funding streams—nearly half for tuition

13. “Kenneth”– Automotive Tech • Support through 9-month certificate program; 1st year of advanced program • Addressed basic skills and technical skills need • Coached in job search (limited previous work history) • Connected to employment and employer-supported training to advance

14. Support provided to Kenneth during certificate program Total support of $14,436 provided over 2-year period

15. Funding Reality #1 There are many pots of funding. This is unlikely to change. Implications: • Programs have opportunities to offer customized and flexible services by blending resources. • Fundraising from multiple sources is an ongoing programmatic activity and bears costs. • Programs must invest in personnel and information management technologies to support fiscal management of complex multi-source budgets and conduct data collection and tracking on service delivery and program outcomes.

16. Funding Reality #2 Most funding is slated for particular uses or targeted to specific groups of people. Implications: • Program managers need to be alert to how different sources fit within an overall funding structure. • It helps to separate ‘qualifying for service’ under funding guidelines from service provision.

17. Funding Reality #3 Various organizations in a region may have resources and capacity to provide particular services. Implications: • Working relationships among a variety of organizations are often necessary to provide participants with needed services. • Facilitating access to services provided by external organizations requires staff time/costs. • Programs must engage in strategic relationship building and allocate staff time towards related activities.

18. Funding Reality #4 The funding landscape is constantly changing. Funding pools can come and go over time. Implications: • Programs must invest time in staying abreast of changes and be able to adapt programs accordingly. • Fundraising activities must be ongoing.

19. Funding Reality #5 The funding landscape differs by state/region. Implications: • Program design typically reflects local context and resources. • State and local policy/funding can create important opportunities. • Advocacy at the state and local level can be an important activity for the partnerships. • National program models need adaptation from place to place.

20. Reflections for Policy • Combined services appears a good investment • Resources needed to provide social supports modest relative to cost of education • Social supports appear to improve likelihood of persistence and success • Organizational infrastructure (i.e. ‘administrative’ expenses) needs better funding • Knitting together services/funding requires time of program management • Since funding streams come and go, fund raising remains a critical on-going activity • Adequate IT infrastructure is critical • Staff time to develop strategic relationships and effectively leverage existing community capacity is essential

21. Contact Information Maureen Conway Executive Director, Economic Opportunities Program Director, Workforce Strategies Initiative The Aspen Institute maureen.conway@aspeninst.org www.aspenwsi.org