Program evaluation: continuing education and customized training programs, Department of Technical and Adult Education

G-~ ~<600 I~IPI
C5~ 19C,Q
State Of Georgia
Program Evaluation

April
1999

CONTINUING EDUCATION AND CUSTOMIZED
TRAINING PROGRAMS

Department of Technical and Adult Education .

Prepared for The Budgetary Responsibility
Oversight Committee

Prepared by

.

Office of Planning and Budget

Department of Audits


~'."

OFFICE OF PLANNING AND BUDGET

ROY E. BARNES
GOVERNOR

April 1, 1999

TIM BURGESS
DIRECTOR

Honorable George Hooks, Chairman Members of the Budgetary Responsibility
Oversight Committee
Dear Senator Hooks:
Under the provisions of O.C.G.A. 45-12-178, which requires periodic evaluations of all state programs, we have conducted a program evaluation of the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs in the Department of Technical and Adult Education. Staff from the Office of Planning and Budget conducted this evaluation.
The results of our evaluation are summarized in the executive summary and presented in detail in the report. We would like to express our appreciation to the staff of the Department of Technical and Adult Education who assisted in this evaluation.
We are available to meet with the Budgetary Responsibility Oversight Committee at your convenience to discuss the contents of this report and address any questions from the committee.
Sincerely,
~Burt:~or Office of Planning and Budget
TB/CLV/bp

OFFICE: (404) 6563820

FAX: (404) 656-3828

AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

270 WASHINGTON ST.,S.W. ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30334-8500

The purpose of these Programs is to provide training to Georgians through a network of technical institutes. The Continuing Education Program typically serves individuals, while the Customized Training Program serves businesses and industry.

The findings from this evaluation are best summarized in two areas: effectiveness and program management and oversight. In assessing the Programs' effectiveness, the team found that:

.

.

The majority of employers in Georgia who participated in a statewide survey for

the program evaluation was very or mostly satisfied with the quality of the

continuing education and customized training services provided by the technical

institutes. No companies indicated dissatisfaction with services received. (page

24)

Continuing education participants surveyed by the evaluation team expressed overall satisfaction with the content and quality of instruction they receive at the technical institutes. (page 25)

In general, the technical institutes offer continuing education and customized training services that address the needs expressed by business and industry. However, the technical institutes should determine if more continuing education courses are needed in areas frequently cited by business and industry as weaknesses in the job preparation of applicants and new employees, such as work ethics and basic writing skills. (page 26)

There are a large number of public and private entities that provide similar training services in Georgia, and most companies use two or more providers to meet their training needs. (page 27).

The customized training offered by the technical institutes is within the scope of DTAE's mission of workforce development; however, a small percentage of the continuing education courses seems to be more within the scope of the Board of Regents' mission than DTAE's mission. (page 29)

. With regard to program management and oversight, the team found that:

Lack ofa'dequate financial information at the central office' prevents' the

Department fromrnonitoring the Continuing Education and Customized Trai~ing

Programs.; (page 31)

"

B~cause of inaccurate information maintained by the institutes regarding the programs' expenditures and revenues, the Department cannot determine if the programs are operating on a "cost-recovery" basis as required by State Board Policy. (page 32)

The Department and technical institutes should continue to improve'the Continuing EduCation and Customized Training Programs' goals, objectives; and performance measures. The Department should establish overall goals for the Continuing Education Program and link Results-Based Budgeting, the' Institutional Effectivemess System, and course evaluations to more adequately monitor performance and effectiveness of both programs. (page 35)

DTAE should replace or redesign its student information system for hon-credit

programs in order to improve management of the Continuing Education and

Customized Traini~g Programs. (page 38)"

.

DTAE should improve data accuracy and consistency. (page 39).

AlthoughDTAE and the University System of Georgia have taken. steps to encourage collaboration between the technical institutes and the Regents' institutions, little collaboration has ~ctually occurred. (pag.e 42)

I,

'~'; ~~ ".'
,... \.

TransmittaI Letter

_

.

Executive Summary

. iii

Purpose of the Programs

1

Agency Mission _..................................................................................................................................................................... 1

purpose and Goals....................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Issues Addressed

2

Organization and Staffing

3

Central Office

3

Technical Institutes

5

Background _:.....

_................................................................................................... 6

Description of Continuing Education

7

Description of Customized Training Services

13

Continuing Education and Customized Training Enrollment...................... 16

Survey of Georgia Businesses

_.............................................. 17

Financial Information

17

Comparison with Other States

_ _...... 19

Continuing Education

"...................................................................... 19

Customized Training................................................................................................................................................................ 21

Evaluation Methodology

_

_ _ _...... 22

Find ing s

_ ~ :..

__

~

_.. 23

Effectiveness

23

The majority of employers in Georgia who participated in a

statewide survey for the program evaluation were very or

mostly satisfied with the quality of continuing education

and customized training services provided by the

technical institutes. .

-;-

_

, - 24

Continuing education participants surveyed by the

evaluation team were overall satisfied with the

content and quality of instruction they receive at the

technical institutes. . _

__

25

In general, the technical institutes offer continuing

education and customized training services that

address the needs expressed by business and .

industry. However, the technical institutes should

determine if more continuing education courses

are needed in areas frequently cited by business

and industry as weaknesses in the job preparation.

of applicants and new employees, such as work ethics

basic writing skills

- _.~

_

~: :........................................ 26',

There are a large number of public and private entities that

provide similar training services in Georgia, and most

companies use two or more providers to meet their

training needs

:.......................................................................................................................... 27

The customized training offered by the technical institutes

is within the scope of DTAE's mission of workforce

development;,however, a small percentage ofthe continuing

education courses seems to be more within the, scope of the

Board of Regents' mission than DTAE's mission _

29

Program Management and Oversight

_.............................................................. 31

Lack of adequate financial information at the' central

office prevents the Department from adequately

monitoring the Continuing Education Program

and the Customized Training Program

;..; :- 31

Because of inaccurate information maintained by the

institutes on expenditures and revenues for both

programs, the Department cannot determine ifthe

programs are operating on a "cost-recovery" basis

as required by State Board policy. _

:

32

The Department and technical institutes should. .

continue to improve' the Customized Training Program's

goals, objectives, and performance Measures

: :..:................ 35

DTAE should replace or redesign its student information

system for non-credit programs in order to improve

management of the Continuing Education .and

Customized Training Programs. ._

_

: :................ 38

," ,~,'

... ~.~.

,~~ .,

.:;;

DTAE should improve data accuracy and consistency.

39

Although DTAE and the University System of Georgia

have taken steps to encourage collaboration between the

technical institutes and the Regents' institutions,

little collaboration has actually occurred.

42

Appendices _

_...................................................................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A: Technical Institute Locations

_...................................................... 47

Appendix B: Continuing Education and Customized Training Sites ._

_ _............................................ 49

Appendix C: Survey of Technical Institutes -

Continuing Education Program

55

Appendix D: Survey of Continuing Education Course Participants _ _ _.................................................................................... 65

Appendix E: Survey of Technical Institutes Customized Training Program _.........._......._..................................................... 77

Appendix F: Survey of Georgia Businesses

91

Appendix G: Survey of Other States - Continuing

Education Program

_._

_

Appendix H: Survey of Other States - Customized

Training Program

_

_

Appendix I: IES Measures for Continuing Education And Customized Training __ _ __

; _..m 109

119

:

133

Purpose of the Programs
The Continuing Education Program and the Customized Training Program (also referred to as Existing Industry Training) are both administered by the Department of Technical and Adult Education (DTAE). All of Georgia's technical institutes provide continuing education and customized training services.
Agency Mission
According to the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, the State Board of Technical and Adult Education is to provide for a comprehensive program of literacy, career, occupational, and technical education. The comprehensive proQ.ram is to include programs, services, and activities that are "easily accessible to all segments of the adult population who need or can benefit from training, retraining, or upgrade training for employment." (O.C.G.A. 20-4-11)
The following miSSion statement has been adopted by DTAE to reflect this statutory mandate.
The mission of the Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education is to contribute to the economic, educational, and community development of Georgia by providing quality technical education, public library services, adult literacy education, continuing education, and customized business and industry training.
Purpose and Goals
According to the Budget Report Fiscal Year 2000, the purpose of the Programs is to:
Promote job growth and economic development by providing customer-driven training to new, expanding and existing businesses through technical institutes .. ..
The goals of these programs are to:
1

Identify and meet employers' workforce training needs.
Identify and meet individuals' workforce training needs.
Issues Addressed
Continuing education and customized training services are delivered statewide through DTAE's system of 33 technical institutes and in collaboration with the University System of Georgia's four colleges with technical divisions. This program evaluation addresses only the delivery of these services at the 33 technical institutes. The four colleges with technical divisions were reviewed as part of a separate program evaluation of continuing education in the University System of Georgia. In addition, the evaluation of. the Customized Training Program includes only the portion of traininQ delivered directly by the technical institutes and not training provided through DTAE's Quick Start Program.
This program evaluation addresses the following issues:
.i
To what extent does DTAE have a. mission, goals, and objectives to guide con~inuing education and customized training?
Are participants and employers satisfied with the content and quality of instruction received. in continuing education courses at the technical institutes?
Is customized training meeting the needs of the employees for whom it is intended and for the sponsoring businesses or. industry?
Are the Programs adequately coordinated, monitored, and evaluated by the Department of Technical and Adult Education and the technical institutes?
What is the role of the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs .as compared to other workforce development efforts in Georgia?
2

How do DTAE's continuing education and customized training efforts compare to those by similar agencies in other states?
Are the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs financially self-supporting?
Organization and Staffing
The State Board of Postsecondary Vocational Education, now known as the Department of Technical and Adult Education, was created to administer state postsecondary education and technical training at less than the baccalaureate degree level. DTAE is governed by the State Board of Technical and Adult Education. In FY 1999, the system was made up of 32 state-governed technical institutes and one locally governed technical institute.
Four colleges with technical divisions also provide occupational programs through an agreement between the Department and the University System of Georgia. The map included as Exhibit 1 shows the locations of the 33 technical institutes, the four colleges with technical divisions, and the other colleges and universities of the University System of Georgia.
Appendix A provides more information about each technical institute and college with a technical division, including its location, the year each location opened, and the year each institute came under state governance (if applicable).
Central Office
The Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Economic Development Programs has administrative responsibility for both Programs at the state level. No central office staff is assigned to the Programs full-time. However, in addition to their other duties, a few of the central office staff handle tasks related to the Programs, such as collecting and compiling enrollment data.
3

Exhibit 1 Location of DTAE's Technical Institutes and Regents' Colleges and Universities
* Technicallnstitute College with Technical Division ~ College or University
Source: DTAE and Board of Regents' Records
4

Technical Institutes
The Continuing Education Program and Customized Training Program are offered at each of the 33 technical institutes. At most technical institutes, the Vice President of Business and Industry . Services/Economic Development administers the Programs. The following paragraphs briefly describe the organization at the technical institutes.
Instructional Staff - The technical institutes utilize a combination of full-time and part-time instructors. During FY 1997 the Continuing Education Program had seven full-time and 545 parttime instructors statewide each quarter. On average this is less than one full-time instructor and about 17 part-time instructors per institute. Although detailed staffing information is not available for the Customized Training Program, it also reported using full-time and part-time staff.
Non-Instructional Staff - The technical institutes reported that about 80 non-instructional staff work at least part-time on each of the Programs. The staff is divided about equally between administrative, managerial, or professional positions and clerical or support positions. Since many of the non-instructional staff work on both Programs, this figure includes some duplication. However, it should also be noted that some of the technical institutes did not count all staff members who spent at least part of their time working on the Programs, such as the Vice Presidents of Business and Industry Services/Economic Development.
Number of Training Sites - The State Board assigns a service area to each technical institute and college with a technical division. The service area "defines the counties, or portions thereof, for which each iflstitute has responsibility and accountability for delivery of training services to business and industry via on-campus or in-plant training." The Board requires each institution to "... maintain an active non-credit instructional program throughout its respective service area." The State Board considers both continuing education and customized training part of a non-credit
5
--- .._------ --- - - -

instructional program. Appendix A provides a detailed list of the counties or portions of counties included in each service area,
According to a survey of the technical' institutes, continuing education is offered at each of the main campuses of the 33 technical institutes, and customized training is provided at 30 of the 33 main campuses. While the other three institutes do not serve customized training customers at their main campuses, they do offer training at other off-campus facilities or sites, provided by customers.
During our evaluation,one or both services were provided at 105 other sites (excluding main. campuses) around the state, including on-site at customers' facilities. From these sites, ,the technical institutes offered continuing education and/or customized training in 87 (55%) of Georgia's 159 counties.
Appendix B provides a listing of the sites at which each technical institute reported offering continuing education and/or customized t~aining services.
Background
According to' various publications, business, education, and government leaders all recognize that there is a critical need to train a workforce that can compete in the global economy. For businesses to successfully compete in this environment, their workers must be able to think critically, learn quickly, make decisions, and work in teams. As companies seek to succeed in this competitive environment, they are investing in training to improve employee performance, productivity, product quality, and company profitability.
Employers are somewhat reluctant to establish and maintain their own large-scale training programs due to high costs, the fear of losing trained employees to competitors, and continued reliance on established operating systems and processes. Due to these cost
6'

":
and competition factors, employers are now placing more pressure on the traditional education system to address increasing workforce-training needs.
However, the needs of adult workers for enhanced skills are not always effectively addressed by the traditional educational system, since that system is primarily focused on preparing individuals for initial entry into the workforce. To respond to employers' demands, educational institutions have developed numerous workforcetraining programs in recent years. These programs are intended to prepare adults to enter or reenter the workforce with new or additional skills, help others upgrade their skills, and provide continuing education opportunities for those already in the workforce.
Description of Continuing Education
According to the International Association for Continuing Education and Training (IACET), continuing education is a structured educational and training experience for professional or personal development in which the participants are assumed to have previously attained a basic level of .education, training, or experience and for which no academic credit is awarded. IACET is a membership association for organizations that wish to award Continuing Education Units and individuals interested in continuing education,
Types of Continuing Education Courses
The continuing education courses offered by the technical institutes can be divided into two main categories: Continuing Education Unit and personal enrichment and professional development.
The types of courses offered within these two categories generally fall in the areas of agriculture and natural resources; business; engineering and science; health; industrial technologies; personal enrichment; personal and public services; and recreation. Roughly 40 percent of .the courses offered during the fall 1996 and spring
7

19~7 quarters were concentrated.in computer.:related instruction. Business and personal enrichment and recreation were the next largest areas of course offerings-.
Continuing Education Unit (CEU) Courses - The State Board allows the technical institutes to award Continuing Education Units ., . (CEUs) in accordance with the guidelines established by IACET. CEUs are awarded for learning activities that are typically short in duration and not part of an academic degree program. According to IACET, one CEU is "[t]en. contact hours of participation in an. organized continuing education experience under responsible sponsorship, capable direction, and qualified instruction."
Exhibit 2 provides examples of CEU courses offered at the technical institutes during the fall 1996 and the spring 1997
quarters~
Advanced: Manicure/Pedicure Continuing Education for Master and Journeyman Plumbers Electrical Contractors License Renewal HVAC Certification . Medical Terminology Pharmacy Calculations . Real Estate Continuing Education "Risk and You" Revisions to the 1996 National Electrical Code
"'liaR
According .to DTAE enrollment reports, 11 (one-third) of the technical institutes awarded continuing education units during FY 1996. In that year, about 73,600 CEUs were awarded to about 20,100 participants. According to DTAE, most, but not all, CEUs were awarded to participants in continuing education courses (the remainder were awarded to participants in eligible customized training courses).
8

Professional Development and Personal Enrichment Courses Professional development courses are designed for individuals who wish to develop new competencies or improve existing occupational skills. No academic or CEU credit is given for either type of course. Personal enrichment courses provide individuals with the opportunity to explore interests and hobbies. Exhibit 3 provides examples of personal enrichment and professional development courses offered at the technical institutes during the Fall Quarter of 1996 and the Spring Quarter of 1997.
DTAE does not require the technical institutes to report enro"lIment in the Continuing Education Program separately from enrollment in the Customized Training Program. Since personal enrichment and professional development courses are offered as part of the Continuing Education" Program, the evaluation team could not determine how many participants were enrolled specifically in these two types of courses.
9

Inventory of Continuing Education Courses
For this evaluation, staff compiled an inventory of continuing education courses from the catalogs for the Fall 1996 Quarter and the Spring 1997 Quarter. The evaluation team received information from 31 of 33 institutes for the Fall 1996 Quarter and from all 33 institutes for the Spring 1997 Quarter.
The .number of continuing education courses offered varied significantly by technical institute. In the Spring 1997 Quarter, the number of course offerings ranged from less than 15 at four institutes to more than 240 course offerings at DeKalb and Gwinnett Technical Institutes. - More than 2,300 courses were offered statewide by the technical institutes during the spring 1997 Quarter.
Additionally, based on the survey of institutes, the courses offered varied in length and standardization. The average continuing education course length varied from
"one day to under one week" to "one month to under five months."
Some of the continuing education-courses had standardized curricula while other courses did not: depending on the subject matter. For example, the curriculum for an introductory computer course in Excel may be standardized, while a management course in how to manage difficult employees may not be standardized.
Continuing Education Participants
'. With the' assistance of the. technical institutes, staff conducted a survey of a sample of participants completing continuing education counses. During the spring and Summer Quarters of 1997, participants at 14 of the 33 technical institutes completed 1,273 surveys. The surveys were designed to identify a profile of continuing education' participants and the reasons why the participants were taking the courses.
10

Exhibits 4, 5, and 6 present a synopsis of information gleaned from the surveys. A copy of the questionnaire and a summary of the responses are provided in Appendix D.

GED/High School Diploma

475

Technical Certificate of

Credit 1 or College Diploma

218

Associate Degree

153

Bachelor Degree

267

Post Graduate Degree

101

39%
18% 13% 22% 8%

11

Full:':time

77% (of 1,273)

Part-time

9% (of 1,273)

Unemployed

8% (of 1,273)

Full or part-time student or

retired,

174 14% (of 1,273)

~!r:~U:k1l1FH1MJilK#t#ff11:1iji"l~~ln'~l;:wg'Ulfrmr:leHn*t)frrl~mfnEtmk,"" Manufacturing/Production,

Industry

200 18%(of1,101)

Professional (medical, legal,

engineering, or journalism)

143 13% (of 1,101)

Finance, Insurance, & Real

Estate Sectors

112 10% (of 1,101)

fff!~#~lmi1t.i~f"!ff~~~1~J~1lEN~a~tiuliitNet~~e'f~2iE(i~'tfhFtl(lXlUr'-OrPn.e<it'ti~('i~"l'.(~~:1JfJf"a81'mh~rkf1frMrets~~u''o1Pr.illtdiie.'en~t~iS!)"'tiill~ltp~l?'f,l~~nimf!tltJtlMit:.tilfil~l~~iJ!11i'n

Clerical/Administrative

297 27% (of 1,018)

Technical or skilled trades

286 26% (of 1,081)

Executive; 'Managerial, or

supervisory

2~9.

22% (of 1,081)

Additional information provided by the participants included:
Reasons for Taking Course - One of the reasons given by participants for taking continuing education was to help them do their current jobs better (44%), while others indicated that the reason was to make them better qualified for their jobs (23%). Another 25 percent of the participants took the course for their person'al development.
12

Source of Payment for Course - The participants were almost
evenly divided regarding who paid for the course. Forty-seven percent (597 of 1,263) indicated that they paid for the course on their own, and 50 percent (629) responded that their organization paid up front for the course, would reimburse the employee for the t course, or would share the cost of the course with the employee.
Description of Customized Training Services
Unlike continuing education where the employer rarely has any input into the design or development of curriculum, customized training is a desirable option to employers because the training specifically addresses the training needs of the employer. An employer can choose to pay for its employees to attend a previously developed training course or work with a technical institute to develop a new training course. The training can be delivered either at the technical institute, on-site at the company, or at another available location.
State Board Policies
The State Board requires that each technical institute deliver the following customized training services within its designated service area:
1. Training consultation and [assistance to] business and industry with training needs assessments and analysis.
2. Conducting supplementary, retraining, and upgrading training for existing businesses and industries.
3. Conducting appropriate training for new and expanding businesses and industries.
4. Development and maintenance of a system for aggressively
pursuing contacts with businesses and industries within the assigned service area in order to identify their current and future training needs.
.13

5. Development 'and "maintenance 'of an,' annual plan for meeting the voeational,;.technical traininfF";. needs of the Businesses and, industries within the assigned service area utilizing shorl-termfunding, tuition monies, resources of the companies served, and other available means.
Type and Amount of Training Provided According to DTAE reports, training in computers, safety, ',environment, health related areas, a'nd technical areas were the most. popular customized training 'courses during FY 1997. Computer training represented 34 percent of all"courses offered, while techniealcourses accounted for 22 percent: As shown 'in Exhibit 7, on the next page; there was a significant increase in the' number of employees trained by~technical institutes from FY 1994 toFY 1997. In ,FY1'994,' DTAE~reported that the technical institutes provided 724,726 hours ,of 'training to 37,744 ~mployees. In FY 1997, 945,234 hours of training were provided to 55,503 employees; a 30 percenta-nd 47 percent increase, respectively, in the number of training hours and number of employees trained.' :,
....
-'':'
14,

Basic Skills Computer Customer Service Employee Involvement Leadership Licensing/Certification Maintenance Assessment Medical Skills and Personal Services Productivity Enhancement Professional Development Safety, Environment, Health Technical

245 1,381
15 42 59 14 46

291 1,555
43 82 117 18 120

3,278 5,657
673 1,245
472 637 258

5,707 10,999
445 2,102
901 18
406

141

115

150

149

2,976

1,889

63

93

36

85

1,757 1,969

193

233 427

275

3,460 3,855

639

917

976

869 13,037 10,897

708 851

8,620

3,647 15,047
206 885 714 236 618

4,683 15,715
1,221 1,517 .2,049
80 1,739

2,395 1,701 109,508 73,372 57,740 26,456

876

771 21,006 23,836 10,543 8,763

5,657 4,419 79,264 52,217 53,235 53,933

13,025 10,883 102,341 80,094 92,971 77,617

Bl231t2-6 " 9,188 10,725 128,291 319,339 273,039 321,172
2j,.~~,;.;"9,.~_~ ;S~@,~.><f'"~:5,,5,,;~"'"5;b0<;3(:w.=; ,:::~.-~:'...........r,.,,~ ~~~~~"8":'~Z'5''*;'9~8~~i..'...";.~ !~\%.W,~8-8.9~~"'~<,8~,0~ ~~.\9.!1;,.5fl4b.l:.S;J"2~"a'_~A!

15

Location of Training/Facilities and Equipment
Exhibit 9 shows, the number of companies that were served at various': types of locations in FY 1997. The customized training programs' ;most often utilized on-campus facilities and equipment (serving 522 companies) that were' also used by the academic program~.' - On.:.camp~~ 'facilities dedicated for use by the customized training programs were used to serve 306 companies in FY 1997, .:

On-campus facility designed for

306

customized training.

Other <:m-campus facility sha~ed by

522

academic programs.

Off-campus facility belong,ing to" ! institute (satellite, etc.). '

126

Facility provided by customized training client.

366

Continuing Education and CustOJ:llized Training Enrollment

(

The non-credit enrollment figures reported by DTAE in their annual.

reports include I enrollment in several activities unrelated to

continuing education. and customized training. For instance,

reporting procedures require the technical' institutes to report

enrollment in such ac~ivities as Adult Literacy and New Connections

to Work as part of non-credit enrollmen~.

.

Because DTAE has not historically required the technical institutes to report enrollment in Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs separately from each other and other non-credit programs, and due to other conditions discussed in the Findings

16

'.,
section of this report, accurate enrollment figures cannot be' provided for the evaluation period.
Survey of Georgia Businesses
The Office of Planning and Budget contracted with the University of Georgia Survey Research Center to conduct a telephone survey of businesses in Georgia to determine their training needs and how effectively the technical institutes are meeting those needs through their Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs. The Survey Research Center randomly contacted 510 businesses and received responses from 401 businesses for a response rate of about 79 percent. A summary of survey responses is included as Appendix F. The survey of businesses is discussed in more detail in the Findings section of this report.
Financial Information
State Board policy requires that each technical institute establish a consistent basis for its fee structure for non-credit instructional programs, and that the fee structure for the participants or companies is to be calculated on the basis of cost recovery plus. The implications of, this policy are that the Board expects the Continuing ,Education and Customized Training Programs to be at least self-supporting.
The following information was provided by the institutes regarding how fees are established.
Establishing Course Fees for Continuing Education - All 33 technical institutes include the instructors', salary when establishing course fees. All but one technical institute indicated that the costs of the materials and equipment are included when setting fees. Only 13 of the technical institutes include the costs associated with the use of institute facilities and/or the institute's or program's administrative overhead when establishing fees.
17

Establishing Fees for Customized Training - All 33 technical institutes include instructor salaries and costs' of materials and equipment when establishing fees. Less than half of the institutes indicated that they considered the costs associated with the use of facilities or administrative overhead when setting fees. The technical institutes also offered some general training consultation without charge as a service to local businesses and industry.
. . .
As shown in Exhibit 10, fees collected by the Continuing Education a.~d Customized Training Programs' have increased over the last three fiscal years. .Fee revenue for the Continuing Education Program increased 14 percent from approximately $4.26 million in
FY 1995 to $4.85 million in Fy"1997 (most recent aV~ilable data).
In the same time period, revenue for the Customized Training Program increased 33 percent from about $4.04 million in FY 1995 to $5.36 million in FY 1997.

Exhibit 10

Fee Revenue for Continuing Education al'ld Customized Training

..... Fiscals Years 1995 - 97

.

FY1997

FY1~96

FY 1995

CContinuing Education Customized Training
Source: Staff analysis of information provided ~y the technical institutes.
18

", ,.',
The issue of cost recovery will be discussed in more depth in the Findings section of this report. Revenue and expenditure information had to be obtained from each technical institute by the evaluation team through the survey. As a result, problems (such as consistent reporting) were encountered with the accuracy of the data. This problem, along with the lack of central office monitoring of expenditure/revenue for the Programs, is also discussed in the Findings section of this report.
Comparison with Other States
As part of the evaluation, staff mailed two surveys to the 49 other states. Twenty-five (51%) of the 49 states completed the survey regarding the Continuing Education Program, while 29 states (59%) responded to the Customized Training Program survey. Appendices G & H provide copies of the questionnaire, summaries of responses, and listings of the responding states.
It should be noted that unlike Georgia most states utilize a community college system where the colleges provide both prebaccalaureate and technical education, instead of having separate technical institutes and two-year colleges. Besides Georgia, only three other states, Maine, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin, have their postsecondary technical institutes under an independent statewide governing board.
Continuing Education
Like Georgia, 23 states indicated that more than one type of postsecondary institution offers continuing education in their state. Of these 23 states, the most commonly named types of postsecondary institutions to offer continuing education were community colleges, four-year comprehensive universities, and four-year research universities.
Types of Courses Offered - Much like Georgia, the majority of other states indicated their institutions offered a full range of
19

continuing education courses. The types of courses offered included personal growth/general interest, professional/ occupational, professional licensure/certification, and continuing education units.
Standards and Evaluation - Twelve other states responded that their agencies had statewide standards or policies regarding continuing education. The most common topics were financing and the types of courses to be offered or excluded. In Georgia, DTAE has developed guidelines related to continuing education.
As shown in Exhibit 11, other states and Georgia's technical institutes use a variety of methods to review and evaluate continuing education.

Student evaluation of courses Needs assessment of service area Surveys of general public Surveys of businesses and industries
Focus groups Institutional peer review by other faculty and administrators
limbe' 's"orf .....

19 (90%) 18 (86%) 11 (52%)
19(90%) 13 (62%)

. 32 (97%) 27 (82%) 17 (52%)
28 (85%) 13 (39%)

Funding - Eighteen states indicated that state funds were used to cover some part of continuing education program costs. As shown in Exhibit 12, state funds were most often used at the institute level . ~or administrators/directors, support staff, and instructors. Similarly, Georgia's technical institutes used state funds at the institute level for salaries for administrators/directors (19 institutes), indirect operating expenses (14 institutes), and salaries for support staff (10 institutes).
20

-r~ t , .... ' 1"

8 (44%) 8 (44%) 4 (22%) 7 (39%)

10 (31%) 2 (6%) 4 (13%) 2 (6%)
14 (44%)

Customized Training
Post-secondary institutions in all other states responding (29) offer customized training directly to businesses and industries. Twentysix states reported that postsecondary institutions 'in their states would provide customized training services to any existing business, and 25 states indicated that institutions would provide training to new businesses.
Like Georgia, 20 states (69%) indicated thatmore than one type of postsecondary institution offers customized training services in their states. The types of postsecondary institutions that other states named most often as offering customized training were: community colleges, four-year comprehensive universities, and technical institutes.
Training Topics and Methods of Training - Post-secondary institutions in other states and Georgia's technical institutes provide customized training in a variety of subject areas. As in Georgia, the most common topics offered include: supervisory/management training; training in total quality improvement/continuous improvement; computer literacy; software or hardware training; and job-specific technical training.

21

State.Standards and Policies - Only seven states respondeq on the survey that they had statewide standards or policies regarding customized training. The most common topics covered by statewide standards or policies were financing and the types of training tc? be offered or excluded. DTAE has also developed guidelines related to customized training.
Funding - As shown in Exhibit 13, 18 states used state appropriations and employers' fees to fund customized training at their post-secondary institutions. For Georgia's technical institutes, employers' fees are the primary 'source of funding "for the Customized Training Pr.ogram.
State appropriations State grants & contracts Federal grants & contracts Other fe eral funds Institution revenue from other activities besides customized training Employers
Evaluation Methodology
The methodology used for this evaluation included a review of all applicable state laws, as well as department~1 policies and guidelines regarding the Continuing Education Program and Customized.Training Program. The evaluation team also: Reviewed the literature on continuing education and customized
training and these Programs' relationship to workforce preparedness..
Interviewed staff at DTAE's central office, and visited 14 of the 33 technical institutes and interviewed staff of the Programs.

.' 1;.-',.
Surveyed: technical institute staff about the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs (Appendices C and D respectively, summarize the institutes' responses.); a sample of participants completing continuing education courses and seminars; and, the 49 other states to obtain information for comparison with DTAE's Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs.
Contracted with the University of Georgia Survey Research Center to complete a telephone survey of Georgia businesses to determine training needs and how effectively the technical institutes are meeting those needs through their Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs.
Compiled and analyzed: an inventory of all Continuing Education courses offered by the technical institutes in Fall Quarter 1996 and Spring Quarter 1997; data from reports submitted to DTAE by the technical institutes on Customized Training; financial information received from DTAE and the technical institutes.
23

Findings

.

..,.

~."

The findings for this program ,.ev~luation' have be!3n diyided into two main

areas: .

'\: '

".

Effectiveness, and

,





ji

..

Program Management and Ov'~rsight

Effectiveness I ,;
The majority of employers in Georgia who participated in a statewide survey for the program evaluation was very or mostly satisfied with the quality of the continuing education and customized training .services provided by the technical institutes~
As part' of t~~ Survey of ~eorgia Businesses,. employers were
asked how satisfied they were with the quality of both th.e continuing education and customized training, services their employees received at the technical institutes. A summary of responses is included in Appendix F.
Eighty-eight percent (68 of 77) .of the companies responded that they were very satisfied or' mostly satisfied with t~e content of the continuing education courses their employees had attended at the technical institutes. None indicated they were dissatisfied with the courses' content. In addition, 84 percent (67 of 80) of the companies were very satisfied or mostly satisfied with their employees' improvement in performance following completion of continuing education courses at the technical institutes. Again, no companies indicated they were dissatisfied.
The survey produced similar results when companies were asked about customized training services at the technical institutes. Over 90 percent of the companies were very satisfied or mostly satisfied with the content of the training their employees received at the technical institutes (42 of 46) and with the quality of the instruction (43 of 46). Eighty percent (36 of 45) of the companies surveyed, which had used the technical institutes for customized

24

., .
training, were very satisfied or mostly satisfied with the performance improvement of their employees following the training. No companies indicated they were dissatisfied with the customized training services they received at the technical institutes.
Overall, employers appear to be satisfied with both the continuing education and customized training services they receive at Georgia's technical institutes. The technical institutes should be commended for their efforts to satisfy the employers they serve through these Programs.
Continuing education participants surveyed by the evaluation team expressed overall satisfied with the content and quality of instruction they receive at the technical institutes.
Nearly 88 percent (1,104 of 1,257) of respondents to the evaluation team's Survey of Continuing Education Participants said that their overall opinion of the courses they completed was either "excellent" or "very good". Only 13 respondents (1 %) indicated that their opinion of the course was "fair" or "poor". In addition, 1,235 respondents (98%) agreed with the statement "I would recommend this course to friends or co-workers".
Participants were also pleased with the content and quality of instruction. Ninety-:six percent (1,205 of 1,256) agreed that the courses provided them with what they had expected in terms of content and instruction. In addition, 98 percent (1,221 of 1,243) of the participants agreed that the course they had taken had provided them with instruction and information which would benefit them professionally now and in the future.
Furthermore, 41 percent (522 of 1,273) of respondents also indicated that they had previously taken a continuing education course at a technical institute. Therefore,. it appears many participants, who were satisfied by their previous experiences, returned to the technical institutes to take additional continuing education courses. The technical institutes should be commended for providing continuing education courses that satisfy their customers.
25

In general, the technical institutes offer continuing education and customized training services that address the needs expressed by business and industry. However, the technical institutes should determine if more continuing education courses are needed in areas frequently cited by business and industry as weaknesses in the job preparation of applicants and new employees, such as Work ethics and basic writing skills.
In the Survey of Georgia Businesses, companies were asked to provide their four most immediate workforce training needs. As shown in Exhibit 14, companies indicated thattheir most immediate training needs were in the areas of interpersonal skills, computer skills, technical skills and management skills.
43% (171) 22% (87) 20% (80) 14% (56) 13% (53)
In general, 'the Programs are offering training that add,resses much of the needs expressed by business and industry. All technical institutes offered computer, management, and technical continuing education courses. Based on the inventory of courses offered during Spring Quarter 1997, computer and business/management courses comprised 60 percent (1,478 courses) of the total continuing education courses offered.
Companies' also . identified work ethics, interpersonal skills, technical skills, basic writing skills, and computer literacy/skills as the most common weaknesses in job preparation among applicants and new' employees (shown in Exhibit 14). While the institutes offered thousands of courses in the computer area and several
26

, h!':."" ," . :'~r;
Mi
hundred in basic skills, only a few stand-alone courses were offered in work ethics. According to the Department, many work ethics/basic skills courses are offered to students as part of credit program curricula. Also, many other work ethics/basic skills courses are offered to companies through the Customized Training Program, not as stand-alone Continuing Education courses.
The technical institutes should periodically survey companies and continue to offer courses in the areas where companies express that they have immediate training needs. In addition, the technical institutes should determine if more continuing education courses should be offer~d in those areas that companies have identified that their applicants and new employees have weaknesses, such as work ethics and basic writing skills.
The Department's response to the evaluation indicted that the "typical sign up for courses like this is the realm of credit programs or company sponsored courses and this is where DTAE offers [work ethics and basic writing skills]." The Department feels they are "very responsive to both companies and the community and provides courses based on their needs." The evaluation team feels that the Department could be even more responsive if these courses were also offered through continuing education.
There are a large number of public and private entities that provide similar training services in Georgia, and most companies us~ two or more providers to meet their training needs.
Companies were asked on the Survey of Georgia Businesses which external. providers they had used for continuing education and customized training services in the past two years. Survey results indicate that a substantial portion of businesses go outside DTAE to obtain continuing education. Of the 401 companies surveyed, 387 (97%) indicated that their companies utilized inhouse training for their employees. Also, 234 companies (58%) indicated that they used a combination of in-house training and two or more external providers to train their employees.
27

As shown in Exhibit 15, the most frequently named provider for continuing education . in the past two years was colleges and universities (32%).. Roughly the same percentage of companies indicated that they had used equipment manufacturers/vendors (23%), technical institutes (23%), and consultants (20%) for continliing education in the last two years.

Exhib.it 15 Where Companies Sent Employees for Continuing Education
& Customized Training in the Last2 Years

40%

35%

I!!
C'll

30%

->Ql
N 25%
Ul

C'll
...J

20%

.E

'C 15%

Ql

Ul

:::l
0~

10%

5%

0%

Tech.lnst.

Colleges

Consultant Equip. Manf.

Other

I .. I Continuing Education CCustomized Training

I

!

Source: Staff Analysis of the Survey of Georgia Businesses

In contrast, companies used equipment manufacturers/vendors (35%) and consultants (31%) to meet their customized training' needs more often in the last two years than either technical institutes (13%) or colleges and universities (12%).
Furthermore, approximately 30 perc~nt of companies indicated they had used more than one type of provider for either continuing education (112 of 390) or customized training services (118 of 392) in the past two years.

28

i-\, :1'
The evaluation team concluded that most companies have access to and are using a variety of providers to meet their training needs. The Department should explore the' reasons (such as cost and quality) why companies selected particular providers for services. Consideration should be given to determining how DTAE, along with colleges and universities, as well as other public providers, can add value in meeting the needs of the citizens and businesses of the state, without engaging in unnecessary competition with other public and private providers.
The customized training offered by the technical institutes is within the scope of DTAE's mission of workforce development; however, a small percentage of the continuing education courses seems to be more within the scope of the Board of RegentS' mission than DTAE's mission.
Customized training at the technical institutes focuses directly on providing training that meets the needs of business and industry. This training has a direct impact on workforce development in Georgia, because the training has been requested by employers to address identified needs in their workforces. Thus, it benefits people in need of training, retraining, or upgrade training for employment, as specified in DTAE's enabling legislation.
Most continuing education courses offered by the technical institutes also have a workforce or occupational application. However, 336 (14%) of 2,338 courses offered by the institutes ,during the Spring 1997 Quarter were categorized by the evaluation team as either personal enrichment, or recreation and hobbies. Furthermore, 147 of the 336 courses (44%) of the continuing education courses that staff categorized as personal enrichment, or recreation and hobbies, have very limited' or no occupational application. Examples of these types of courses are included in Exhibit 16 (on the following page).
As part of its continuing education Program, the University System of Georgia also offers personal enrichment and recreation courses. In 1994, DTAE and the University 'System entered into the StudentCentered Collaboration for Public Post-Secondary Education in
29

Georgi~. In this agreement, Georgia's two post-secondary systems ~greed that each system would continue to. offer continuing education focused on areas. appropriate to its distinctive mission.

Financial Strategies for Successful Retirement
Defensive Tactics for Females Working with Your Teenage Child Basic Car Care Learn to Draw Like a Pro in Four
Sessions Butterfly Gardening

Fundamentals of Golf Creative Memories - Photo
Preservation and Albums Kudalini Yoga Beginning Line Dancing Beginning Canine Obedience Stargazing Travel to Europe

The University System's mission is as follows:
... to contribute to the cultural, economic, and social advancement of Georgia by providing first-rate collegiate general education and academic programs, .. .by contributing to leading-edge basic and applied research; scholarship, and arts; and by bringing these resources to bear on committed. public service.
. As can be seen, this mission is broader in scope than the mission of DTAE (see page 1). Therefore, it seems more appropriate that the University System rather than DTAE should deliver personal enrichment and recreation courses with no occupational skills. Consequently, as provided for in the agreement, DTAE should continue to focus the .Iargemajority of its continuing education efforts on courses consistent with its workforce development mission.
The Department disagrees with this finding. In DTAE's opinion, the institutions are focusing the' large majority of its .courses to areas that address its workforce development mission. The emphasis of the finding, however, is that DTAE should continue to do this and . not offer more courses outside their core mission:

30

Program Management and Oversight
Lack of adequate financial information at the central office prevents the Department from adequately monitoring the Continuing Education Program and Customized Training Program.
In attempting to determine whether or not the Programs were operating on a "cost-recovery plus" basis as required by Board policy (as discussed in the next finding), the evaluation team had difficulty obtaining complete financial information on the Programs from DTAE's Central Office. Overall, the evaluation team could not reconcile any of the information obtained. Problems encountered included the following:
Information from the Fiscal Accounting and Control System (FACS) is only maintained for one year at the central office. In addition, the line items included in the FACS reports are not consistent from institute to institute. Not all institutes have separate fund sources/categories for continuing education and customized education. In addition, only revenue generated by the programs is reported on FACS. Expenditures for the two programs are not maintained separately on any formal report.
The Department does not require the institutes to separate revenue and expenditures for the two programs from other programs. Therefore, the institutes. cannot readily provide information on the two programs. As a result, there is no way for the institutes, or the Department, to determine if the programs are operating on a cost-recovery basis.
The financial information collected and maintained by the Department on the Programs should be improved so that the Central Office and the technical institutes can better assess whether or not the Programs are operating on a "cost-recovery plus" basis. To improve current accounting and reporting practices, the Department should:
Establish a standard and process whereby. both Programs will be accounted for separately from all other DTAE programs.
31

Require all technical institutes to account for and report nonstate revenues and expenditures for each program in a consistent manner.
Identify a method by which the technical institutes can account for and report the amount of state funds used for each Program.
Maintain' historical information on the Programs' revenues and expenditures for each institute.
,. The Department disagrees with this finding. 'According to DTAE, "each technical institute, where the courses are being held, monitors the programs. It would be cost and time prohibitive for the central office to monitor the financial information of these programs .of which, when combined and without looking at any revenue they
, produce, 'makes up for .002 of the total DTAE budget." It should be noted that while continuing education and customized training are 'fee-b~sed programs (and not state funded), they generate approximately $10 ,million annually (about 3.7% of DTAE's total appropriation).
Because of inaccuratelincomplete information' maintained by institutes on expenditures and revenues for both programs, the Department cannot determine if the programs are operating on a "cost-recovery" basis as required by State Board Policy.
State Board Policy 04-02-10 states that the "pricing structure for the charge to the participant or the company should be calculated on the basis of cost recovery plus" for these programs. Therefore, reventle from participant fees should exceed the expenditures for ' both the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs. However, due to lack of adequate information as discussed in the previous' finding, the Department cannot determine if the programs are operating on a "cost-recovery" basis. Because of the difficulties with the information available from the Central Office, the evaluation team had to separately request financial information from each of the technical institutes. This information also proved to be inadequate and inconsistently reported. As a result, there
32

was no way for the evaluation team to determine if the Programs were operating on a cost recovery plus basis.
When examining the FY 1997 self-reported data provided by the institutes, the following were noted:
For the Continuing Education Program:
Ten institutes (30%) reported identical revenues and expenditures;
Ten institutes (30%) reported revenues exceeded expenditures, ranging from $2, to $152,033; and
Thirteen institutes (39%) reported expenditures exceeded revenues, ranging from $270 to $161,000.
For the Customized Training Program:
Fourteen institutes (42%) reported identical revenues and expenditures;
Fourteen institutes (42%) reported revenues exceeded expenditures, ranging from $63 to $80,414; and
Four institutes (12%) reported expenditures exceeded revenues, ranging from $1,236 to $51,229.
For the three-year period FY 1995 through FY 1997 for the Continuing Education Program, 11 institutes (33%) reported expenditures exceeded revenue all three years, while eight institutes (24%) reported that revenues equaled expenditures for each of the three years. For the Customized Training Program, three institutes (9%) reported expenditures exceeded revenue all three years, while 11 institutes (33%) reported revenues equaled expenditures for each of the three years.
Whether reviewing the data in aggregate or on an institute by institute basis, the result is the same. When fee-generated revenue does not cover expenditures, the technical institutes use state funds. For the Continuing Education Program, the institutes indicated that they used state funds for administrators' salaries, support staff salaries, and indirect operating expenses such as rent
33

and utilities. Some of the technical institutes also used state funds to pay the salaries of Program staff. For those instances in which expenditures exceeded revenue for the Customized Training Program, the state is subsidizing training to private companies.
The situation is exacerbated because, while some of the institutes may be recouping direct costs through their fee revenue, most of the institutes are not recouping indirect costs for the programs. Less than half of the institutes are including indirect costs such as use of a facility and administrative overhead when they calculate fees. - The types of costs the ,institutes, reported including when calculating fees for bo~h programs are shown in Exhibit 17.
To account for all costs when establishing fees, the technical institutes are supposed to follow DTAE's Guidelines for Non-Credit Courses, Seminars, and Workshops: Continuing Education,

Salary of Instructor Cost of materials/supplies Use of Institute Facilities Use of Other Facilities Cost of Institute's Administrative Overhead Other

13 (39%) 9 (27%) ,

11 (33%) 12 (36%)

Business and Industry Services, and Community Services. According to these guidelines, the technical institutes should do the following when establishing a fee structure:
Determine overhead costs for non-credit instruction.
Overhead expenses are expenses, which, occur whether or
'.not revenue is produced. Examples include salaries,
34

telecommunications and utilities expenses, postage, advertising, etc. Estimate number of courses to be offered
. and calculate cost per course.
Determine direct costs for each course. Factor in indirect costs and profit margin to determine fee for the course.
From this information, the institution can identify a program
break even point or how many participants are needed to cover program expenses.
The State Board is to be commended for its adoption of a costrecovery policy. Furthermore, DTAE's guidelines appear appropriate for implementation. However, the Department should ensure that all technical institutes adhere to these guidelines and require accurate reporting of actual revenue and expenditures in order that they can assess whether or not the Programs are truly operating on a cost-recovery basis. In discussions with the evaluation team, the Department stated a concern that with present reporting practices and systems, this level of accountability would be cost-prohibitive compared to the benefits to be achieved. To address this concern, the Department should consider developing or enhancing systems that would facilitate accounting for continuing education and customized training in a manner that is not cost prohibitive.
The Department and technical institutes should continue to improve the Customized Training Programs' goals, objectives, and performance measures. The Department should establish objectives and performance measures for the Continuing Education Program. The Department should also link Results-Based Budgeting, the Institutional Effectiveness System, and course evaluations to more adequately monitor performance and effectiveness of both Programs.
As mentioned on page 1 of this report, continuing education and customized training are specifically mentioned in the Department's mission. For FY 2000, DTAE identified an overall programmatic goal with several results measures to determine the Customized
35

Training Program's effectiveness as part. of the Results-Based BUl;fgeting (RBB) process. However, the Department has no reporting mechanism in place. to determine if these results measures are obtained at any institute or on a system-wide basis. 'In addition, a~though the Department has established results-based budgeting goals and measures for the Customized Training Program, it has not established goals and measures for the Continuing Education Program.
DTAE does have two mechanisms in place that could potentially assist the Central Office and the technical institutes in determining the overall effectiveness of the' Programs: the Institutional Effectiveness System (IES) and an evaluation process for noncredit instructional programs. These two systems are discussed below."
Institutional Effectiveness System - Both Programs
The . Department established the Institutional Effectiveness System to measure the performance of programs' at each institute. However, the current IES measures for the Continuing Education and Customized Training' Programs " do not assist in measuring effectiveness for several reasons. In addition,the RBB measures which have been established are'not reflected in IES.
The evaluation team identified 29 specific measures that DTAE applies tothe Programs. These measures can be found in Appendix I. Few of these measures can be used to determine whether the Programs are effectively meeting the' needs of customers. Also, other measures could be used to determine effectiveness, but lack quantification. Measure 1-0-3 states that "the institution meets customer needs by maintaining or increasing community outreach programs' inCluding continuing education." One method to determine effectiveness with
a this measure would be to incorporate percentage of .
36

customers indicating satisfaction with the program's courses.
Institute Evaluation Process - Continuing Education
State Board policy requires that each institute develop an evaluation process for its non-credit .instructional programs. The evaluation team reviewed evaluation forms that are completed by participants for continuing education courses from 30 technical institutes. The forms primarily focus on rating the instructor and course, but do not obtain information that might help determine if the courses provide the types of training necessary to improve participants' employability.
Technical institutes would benefit from determining, for example, what motivated participants to take continuing education courses (whether for their work or their own personal development), or if participants have taken similar courses from other institutions and how those courses compared in terms of content and value. The forms presented to the evaluation team do not routinely ask these types of questions.
The Department should be commended for developing IES and requiring ~n evaluation process at t~e institute level. In order for this system to be effective, overall measures are needed on each program operated by the Department and the systems already in place should be linked together to gather data, and monitor and track program performance.
By linking RBB, IES, and the institutes' evaluation processes, the Department could establish a network that includes the customer at
. the course level, the institute through .IES, and the entire
Department through RBB with each level feeding the other. For example, DTAE could use standardized course evaluations or require certain questions statewide that would collect the data at each technical institute necessary to track the RBB outcome measures. The IES cOl,Jld be used to collect this information and
37

monitor the desired goals. In order to establish this network, the Department would need to establish RBB program goals, input the RBB program goals into the IES system and track the measures for these goals to the institute and even individual student or customer level.
The Department disagrees with this finding. DTAE states that , based on employers' overall satisfaction with these programs, it is their opinion that estab,!shing goals and performance measures is not cost beneficial.

DTAE should re'place or redesign its student information system for non-credit progr~ms in, order to improve management of the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs.

, The technJ'calinstitutes are required to report enrollment to DTAE ,~ quarterly on a course by course basis using a student information
,system (BANNER). Rather than track courses as continuing
. educ~tion or custp'mized training, the technical institutes categorize
and. report enrollment as either continuing education unit (CEU) or non-credit. .. Participants in courses that do not award CEUs are counted in non-credit enrollment, whereas participants in courses that award CEUs are counted as part of CEU enrollment.

The student information system has a number of limitations, which

precludes DTAE from being able to report accurate, aggregate

enrollment information about either' the Continu'ing Education

Program or' the Customized Training Program... The following

paragraphs dis'cuss some of these limitations.

.

Because the technical institutes do not separate enrollment in the Continuing Education Program from enrollment in the
, Customized Training Program, DTAE can not identify how many ifldividuals were enrolled in each of these programs.'"

Since all courses are c1a.ssified as CEUor non-credit, each type of enrollment is reported separately at the institute level and the state level. Because participants may take both CEU and non-

38 '

, '."
credit courses in the same year, these two totals must be combined to eliminate duplication.
Participation in Adult Literacy, developmental studies, and DTAE's Quick Start Program are reported as part of non-credit enrollment even though State Board policy does not consider them to be non-credit instructional activities.
The inclusion of unrelated activities, such as Adult Literacy, limits the usefulness of these enrollment reports. The system does not allow DTAE staff to easily back out enrollment in these unrelated categories in order to isolate enrollment in continuing education and customized training.
The Customized Training, New Connections to Work, and Adult Literacy programs also maintain separate reporting mechanisms which are used to generate the official enrollment reports for those programs. This causes duplication of efforts, and the enrollment data from the student information system and the other systems can not be reconciled.
DTAE's student information system should be replaced or redesigned in order to improve reporting accuracy and program management. Regardless of which option is chosen, the system should at least isolate enrollment in the various programs (i.~., separate enrollment in the Continuing Education Program from enrollment in the Customized Training Program and other noncredit programs in a non-duplicated form). In addition, each of the various programs should be required to input all enrollment data into the student information system. The enrollment data from the system should be the "official" information and programs should discontinue maintaining separate enrollment reports. This will eliminate duplication of effort and inconsistencies between the various data sources for the non-credit programs.
39

DTAE should improve data accuracy and consistency.
During this evaluation, staff found some of the data supplied by DTAE officials to be of questionable accuracy' and lacking consistency. This was true for both of the primary reporting mechanisms for the Programs, the student information system and the existing industry reports.
Student Information System Enrollment:
As discussed in the previous finding, the technical institutes are required to report enrollment to DTAE using a student information system. The following are examples of the types of inconsistencies the evaluation team found on these enrollment reports: One technical institute did not report any enrollment in the "Non-
Credit, Occupational" category that is the primary reporting category for enrollment in the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs.
(
Despite reporting guidelines from DTAE outlining how demographic information should be reported, the institutes did not collect demographic information in a consistent manner.
DTAE's guidelines provide for'seven racial/ethnic categories. Yet, the institutes' registration forms vary fromcapturing only two categories to capturing all of the required categories. For example, one institute provides only three categories for race (black, white, and other). For this institute, the "Other" category has the largest enrollment.
The guidelines instruct the institutes to report the highest educational level achieved and assign each level a number. The choices different institutes provided to the participants for selection varied widely.
Customized Training Enrollment:
The evaluation team also identified numerous inconsistencies and inaccuracies in the existing industry reports submitted quarterly to
40

I ~. .
the Office of Economic Development Programs by the technical institutes for the Customized Training Program.
The technical institutes were not consistent in how they categorized training courses. For example, a course on telephone skills was categorized as productivity enhancement, professional development, and customer service, respectively, by three different institutes. Similarly, one institute categorized Math Fundamentals and English Fundamentals courses as employee involvement rather than basic skills.
Information from other programs were inappropriately included on reports:
One technical institute included Quick Start courses.
Two technical institutes included Continuing Education courses.
Annual Report Enrollment
Adult Literacy and Customized Training enrollments are reported in various sections of the annual report. Elsewhere in the annual .report is a section on total non-credit enrollment, which is composed of Adult Literacy and Customized Training enrollment, as well as Continuing Education enrollment. However, there is no explanation (footnote) which indicates which programs are included in the non-credit enrollment figure. Therefore, the reader could be misled to think that non-credit enrollment is a separate program. This inflates the total enrollment figure for the Department.
Data inaccuracy and inconsistencies should be addressed by DTAE. With regard to the student information system, DTAE should require that institutes report the data in a consistent manner, and it should monitor the data submitted by the institutes to identify inaccuracies and inconsistencies. Data included in the annual report should be accurately defined and specific elements denoted as appropriate to eliminate overstating enrollment. As discussed in the previous finding, multiple reporting systems should be
41

eliminated. Customized training information should/be incorporated into the student information reporting system and this information considered as "official" for the program. This would help to eliminate duplication of effort and problems with reconciling various reporting figures.

Although DTAE and the UniversitY System' of Georgia have taken steps to encourage collaboration between the technical institutes and the Regents'institutions, little collaboration has actually occurred.
As previously discussed, DTAE and the University System entered into an agreement in 1994 which was intended to encourage collaboration between the two agencies, and their respective institutions. This agreement also specifies that:

Institutions generally serving the same population should jointly develop collaborative efforts to meet the education am;l training needs of the area utilizing the strengths of each institution.

However, the evaluation teams working on this evaluation and the evaluation of the Continuing Education Program in the University System of Georgia found there was a substantial lack of collaborative effqrt betvieen the institutions of the two agencies with regard to these agencies' continuing education and customized training functions. Several"University System colleges located in the same counties, as DTAE institutes indicated that they did not coordinate, at all with the DTAE institutes and several others provided little or no examples of coordinated efforts.

.There.

are '

16

University .~

System

colleges

(two-year .

and

four-year

colleges) located in the same counties as 14 technical institutes.

A~ong these co~located University System colleges and DTAE

technical institutes, the Department of Audits found that:

- Nine of the 16 colleges (56%) indicated that they did not . coordinate their continuing education activities with the DTAE
institute in the same county. ,Explanations of why there was no

42

coordination included comments such as, "we- compete for the training dollar to support our offices," and "we do our own thing, they do theirs."
The other seven colleges did indicate that they coordinated their activities with the DTAE institute. However, the examples of the coordination efforts provided by the colleges were guite limited in scope. Examples of coordinated efforts include: referring employers looking for technical training to DTAE institutes, working on one project together, and sharing a staff member.
Sir:nilarly, only a small percentage of technical institutes reported that they had partnered with colleges and universities to provide customized training. Of the 33 institutes, four (12%) reported they had partnered with a two-year college to provide training and eight (24%) had partnered with a four-year college or university. In contrast, 22 (66%) of the 33 technical institutes indicated they had partnered with another technical institute to provide customized training, 21 (64%) with state agencies, and 17 (52%) with private training firms.
Although it appears the administrators of both of Georgia's postsecondary education systems have recognized the need for more effective coordination, little collaboration is actually being done at the institution level between the two systems in the areas of continuing education and customized training. Better collaboration is needed between the post-secondary institutions to:
Ensure serVices are not unnecessarily duplicated;
Facilitate other economies such as use of distance learning technologies;
Meet labor market demands; and
Ensure access to quality workforce development training for all Georgians.
DTAE should strongly encourage the institute staff working in the Continuing Education and Customized Training Programs to
43

'estal:>lish,'collaborative' 'relationships withr'their~, counterparts at .,nearbyRegentsI-:institutions. .,.

In their response to this firiding,

Df?partf!'1nt." c{?pf!borates with., ttlt;

appropriate,..

,.

.'~.

'/

.. ';

DTA'E > indicates that the

University System where

.~.
.,

.. r . ~

I~

44

Appendix A

Location of the Technical Institutes and the Counties Included in Each Institute's Service Area

Technical Institution and Location (City, County)

Opening Date

Year Came Under DTAE Governance

Counties Included in Service Area

Albany Technical Institute Albany, Dougherty County

1961

1989(1)

Baker, Calhoun, Clay, Dougherty, Early, Lee, Randolph, and Terrell

Altamaha Technical Institute Jesup, Wayne County

1989

1989(1)

Appling, Jeff Davis, Long, and Wayne

Clarke, Elbert,. Franklin, Greene,

Athens Area Technical Institute Athens, Clarke County

1958

1986

Hart, Madison, Morgan, Oconee, Oglethorpe, Taliaferro, Walton, and

Wilkes

Atlanta Area Technical Institute Atlanta, Fulton County

1945

1997

Fulton (South of the Chattahoochee River)

Augusta Technical Institute Augusta, Richmond County

1961

1987

Burke, Columbia, Lincoln, McDuffie, and Richmond

Bainbridge College Bainbridge, Decatur County

1973

Governed by Regents

Decatur, Miller, and Seminole

Carroll Technical Institute Carrollton, Carroll County

1968

1987

Carroll, Coweta, Douglas, and Haralson

Chattahoochee Technical Institute Marietta, Cobb County

1962

1988

Cobb (South of Hwy. 41 to Barrett Parkway to 1-575 and 1-575 up into
Cherokee) and Paulding.

Clayton College & State University Morrow, Clayton County

1969

Governed by Regents

Clayton and Henry

Coastal Georgia Community College Brunswick, Glynn County

1964

Governed by Regents

Camden, Glynn, and Mcintosh

Columbus Technical Institute Columbus, Muscogee County

1961

1987

Chattahoochee, Marion, Muscogee, Quitman, and Stewart

Coosa Valley Technical Institute Rome, Floyd County

1962

1987

Floyd, Gordon, and Polk

Dalton College Dalton, Whitfield County

1967

Governed by Regents

Murray and Whitfield

DeKalb Technical Institute Clarkston, DeKalb County

1961

1996

DeKalb, Newton, and -Rockdale

East Central Technical Institute Fitzgerald, Ben Hill County

1970

1990

Ben-Hill, Coffee, Irwin, Telfair, Turner, and Wilcox

Flint River Technical Institute Thomaston, Upson County

1963

1988

Crawford, Talbot, Taylor, and Upson

Griffin Technical Institute Griffin, Spalding County

1963

1987

Butts, Fayette, Jasper, Lamar, Pike, and Spalding

Gwinnett Technical Institute Lawrenceville, Gwinnett County

1983 Locally Governed

Barrow, Fulton (North of the Chattahoochee River), and
Gwinnett

Heart of Georgia Technical Institute Dublin, Laurens County

1984

1984

Bleckley, Dodge, Laurens, Wheeler, and Wilkinson

Lanier Technical Institute Oakwood, Hall County

1966

1989(1)

Banks, Dawson, Forsyth, Hall, Jackson, and Lumpkin

47

Appendix A

Locationofthe Technical Institutes and the Counties Included in Each Institute's Service Area

Technical Institution and Location (City, County)

Opening Date

Year Came. Under DTAE Governance

Counties Included"in Service Area

Macon Technical Institute Macon, Bibb County

1966

1989

Baldwin, Bibb, Jones, Monroe, Putnam, and Twiggs

Middle Georgia Technical Instit~te Warner Robins, Houston County

1974

1986

Dooly, Houston, Peach, and Pulaski

Moultrie Area Technical Institute Moultrie, Colquitt County

1964

1988

Colquitt, Tift, and Worth

North Georgia Technical Institute Clarkesville, Habersham County

1944

1944

Habersham, Rabun, Stephens, Towns, Union, and White

North Metro Technical Institute Acworth, Bartow County

1969

1989

Bartow and Cobb (North of Hwy. 41 to Barrett Pkwy. to 1-575, 1-575 up
to Cherokee County)

Ogeechee Technical Institute Statesboro, Bulloch County

1989

1989

Bulloch, Evans, and Screven

Okefenokee Technical Institute Waycross, Ware County

1965

1989

Atkinson, Bacon, Brantley, Charlton, Clinch, Pierce, and Ware

Pickens Technical Institute Jasper, Pickens County

1967

1987

.Cherokee, Fannin, Gilmer, and Pickens

Sandersville Regional Technical Institute Sandersville, Washington County

1995

1995(1)

Glascock, Hancock, Jefferson, Warren, and Washington

Savannah Technical Institute Savannah, Chatham County

1929

1997

Bryan, Chatham, Effingham, and Liberty

South Georgia Technical Institute Americus, Sumter County

1948

1948

Crisp, Macon, Schley, Sumter, and Webster

Southeastern Technical Institute Vidalia, Toombs County

1990

1990

Montgomery, Tattnall, and Toombs

Swainsboro Technical Institute Swainsboro, Emanuel County

1963

1987

Candler, Emanuel, Jenkins, Johnson, and Treutlen

Thomas Technical Institute Thomasville, Thomas County

1947

1987

Grady, Mitchell, and Thomas

Valdosta Technical Institute Valdosta, Lowndes County

1963

1988

Berrien, Brooks, Cook, Echols, Lanier, and Lowdnes

Walker Technical Institute Rock Spring, Walker County

1966

1988

Catoosa, Chattooga, Dade, and Walker

West Georgia Technical Institute LaGrange, Troup County

1966

1988(1)

Harris, Heard, Meriwether, and Troup

Source: DTAE Records

(1) These dates are fiscal year dates. All other dates are calendar year dates.

48

Albany

Albany Tech - Main Campus

Albany

Doughtery

Yes

Yes

Albany

Blakely Satellite Campus

Blakely

Early

Yes

Yes

Altamaha

Altamaha Tech - Main Campus

Jesup

Wayne

Yes

Yes

Altamaha

Appling County Community School

Baxley

Appling

Yes

Yes

Altamaha

Jeff Davis Community School

Hazlehurst

Jeff Davis

Yes

Yes

Altamaha

Long County Center

Not Reported

Long

Yes

No

Athens

Athens Tech - Main Campus

Athens

Clarke

Yes

Yes

Athens

Walton County Center

Monroe

Walton

Yes

Yes

Athens

Elbert County Campus

Elberton

Elbert

Yes

No

Atlanta

Atlanta Tech - Main Campus

Altanta

Fulton

Yes

No

Augusta

Augusta Tech - Main Campus

Augusta

Richmond

Yes

Yes

Augusta

Burke County High School

Not Reported

Burke

Yes

No

Augusta

Thomason High School

Not Reported

McDuffie

Yes

No

Augusta

Quick Start Training Center

Augusta

Richmond

No

Yes

~:3

Carroll

Carroll Tech - Main Campus

Carrollton

Carroll

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Douglas County Satellite Center

Douglasville

Douglas

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Douglas County School System - High School

Not Reported

Douglas

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Douglas County School System - High School

Not Reported

Douglas

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Floyd College- Harelson Site

Waco

Harelson

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Harelson Co. High School

Not Reported

Harelson

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Coweta Co. School System - High School

Not Reported

Coweta

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Coweta Co. School System -High School.

Not Reported

Coweta

Yes

Yes

Carroll

Carroll Co. Technical High School

Not Reported

Carroll

Yes

Yes

Chattahoochee Chattahoochee Tech - Main Campus

Marietta

Cobb

Yes

Yes

Chattahoochee Paulding Campus

Dallas

Paulding

Yes

Yes

Chattahoochee South Cobb Technology Center

Austell

Cobb

Yes

Yes

Columbus

Columbus Tech - Main Campus

Columbus

Muscogee

Yes

Yes

Coosa Valley

Coosa Valley Tech - Main Campus

Rome

Floyd

Yes

Yes

Coosa Valley

Calhoun/Gordon County Campus

Calhoun

Gordon

Yes

Yes

Coosa Valley

Polk County Adult Learning Center

Cedartown

Polk

Yes

No

49

DeKalb

DeKalb Tech - Main Campus

DeKalb

Covington/Newton Campus

DeKalb

Dunwoody Campus

East Central

East Central - Main Campus

East Central

Douglas/Coffee County Campus

East Central

Telfair Learning Center

East Central

Wilcox Learning Center

East Central

Ashburn, Turner County Campus

East Central

Pine Street

Flint River

Flint River Tech - Main Campus _

Flint River

- Roberta Center

Flint River

Talbotton Center

Flint River

Butler Center

Griffin

Griffin Tech - Main Campus

Gwirinett

Gwinnett Tech - Main Campus

Gwinnett

Roswell

Heart of Georgia Heart of Georgia Tech - Main Campus

Heart of Georgia Eastman Center

Heart of Georgia Dublin High School

Lanier

Lanier Tech - Main Campus

Macon

Macon Tech - Main Campus

Macon

Milledgeville Campus

Middle Georgia Middle Georgia Tech - Main Campus

Middle Georgia The Flint Building

Moultrie Area

Moultrie Area Tech - Main Campus

MOUltrie Area

Tift County High School

MOUltrie Area

Colquitt County

Moultrie Area

Worth County High School

North Georgia North Georgia Tech - Main Campus

North Georgia Tocca Center (at Big A Center)

Clarkston Covington Dunwoody Fitzgerald Douglas Helena Rochelle Ashburn Fitzgerald Thomaston Roberta Talbotton Butler Griffin Lawrenceville Roswell Dublin Eastman Dublin Oakwood Macon Milledgeville Warner Robins Warner Robins Moultrie Tifton
Not Reported
Sylvester Clarkesville Tocca

DeKalb Newton DeKalb Ben Hill Coffee Telfair Wilcox Turner Ben Hill Upson Crawford . Talbot Taylor Spalding Gwinnett Fulton Laurens Dodge Laurens Hall Bibb Baldwin Houston Houston Colquitt Tift Colquitt Worth Habersham Stephens

Yes YesYes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

50

Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes . Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes No .No No No Yes

North Georgia

Stephens Co. High School

Tocca

Stephens

Yes

No

North Georgia

Union Co. High School

Blairsville

Union

Yes

No

North Georgia

Towns Co. High School

Hiawassee

Towns

Yes

No

North Georgia

Shirley Miller Building

Blairsville

Union

No

Yes

North Georgia Cross Roads Adult Education

Eastanollee

Stephens

No

Yes

North Georgia

White Co. High School

Not Reported

White

No

No

North Metro

North Metro Tech - Main Campus

Acworth

Bartow

Yes

Yes

North Metro

Cartersville CampuslTechnology Center

Cartersville

Bartow

Yes

No

Ogeechee

Ogeechee Tech - Main Campus

Statesboro

Bulloch

Yes

Yes

Ogeechee

Screven Center/Sylvania Campus

Sylvania

Screven

Yes

Yes

Ogeechee

Evans Center/Claxton Campus

Claxton

Evans

Yes

Yes

Okefenokee

Okefenokee Tech - Main Campus

Waycross

Ware

Yes

Yes

Okefenokee

Alma - Alma Adult Ed. Center

Alma

Bacon

Yes

No

Okefenokee

Folkston - CCHS Computer Lab

Folkston

Charlton

Yes

No

Pickens

Pickens Tech - Main Campus

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

Yes

.... '4

Pickens

Cherokee Co. - Adult Literacy

Canton

Cherokee

Yes

No

Pickens

Gilmer Co. - Adult Literacy

Ellijay

Gilmer

Yes

No

Pickens

Fannin Co. - Adult Literacy

Mineral Bluff

Fannin

Yes

No

Pickens

Pickens Co. Jail

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

No

Pickens

Cherokee Co. Jail

Canton

Cherokee

Yes

No

Pickens

Pregnancy Crisis Center

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

No

Pickens

Pregnancy Crisis Center

Canton

Cherokee

Yes

No

Pickens

Child Abuse Council

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

No

Pickens

Head Start

Canton

Cherokee

Yes

No

Pickens

Head Start

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

No

Pickens

Head Start

Blue Ridge

Fannin

Yes

No

Pickens

DFACS

Canton

Cherokee

Yes

No

Pickens

DFACS

Ellijay

Gilmer

Yes

No

Pickens

DFACS

Blue Ridge

Fannin

Yes

No

Pickens

DFACS

Jasper

Pickens

Yes

No

51

Sandersville Sandersville Savannah Savannah . Savannah Southeastern Southeastern
Southeastern
Southeastern South Georgia South Georgia Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Swainsboro Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas Thomas

Sandersville Tech - Main Campus Kaolin Road Building Savannah Tech - Main Campus Liberty County/Hinesville Campus West Chatham Technology Center at Pooler Southeastern Tech - Main Campus Glennville Tech. Ed. Center
Literacy Center
CDL Test Site South Georgia Tech - Main Campus Crisp County Center/Cordele Campus Swainsboro Tech - Main Campus Johnson Co. Adult Ed. CenterlWrightsville Johnson Co. DFACS Jenkins Co. Adult Learning Center/Millen Jenkins Co. DFACS Jenkins Co. High School Careerfare Training Center Treutlen Co. DFACS Swainsboro Tech Welding School Thomas Tech ~ Main Campus Chamber of Commerce . Mitchell Co. Hosptial - Comm. Room Rural Development Camilla/Mitchell Co -Baker High School Pelham High School Pelham Middle School Cairo High School Chamber of Commerce

Sandersville

Washington

Yes

Sandersville

Washington

No

Savannah

Chatham

Yes

Hinesville

Liberty -

Yes

Pooler/Savannah Chatham

Yes

Vidalia

Toombs

Yes

Glennville

Tattnall

Yes

Mt. Veron

Montgomery

Yes

Reidsville

Tattnall

Yes

Americus

Sumter

Yes

Cordele

Crisp

Yes

Swainsboro

Emanuel

Yes

Wrightsville

Johnson

Yes

Wrightsville

Johnson

Yes

Millen

Jenkins

Yes

Millen

Jenkins

Yes

Millen

Jenkins

No

Soperton

Treutlen

Yes

Soperton

Treutlen

Yes

Swainsboro

Emanuel

No

Thomasville

Thomas

Yes

Cairo

Grady

Yes

Camilla

Mitchell

Yes

Camilla

Mitchell

Yes

Camilla

Mitchell

Yes

Pelham

Mitchell

Yes

Pelham

Mitchell

Yes

Cairo

Grady

Yes

Camilla

Mitchell

Yes

52

Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes
No
No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes . No
Yes No No Yes No Yes Yes

Thomas

City of Cairo

Cairo

Grady

No

Yes

Thomas

Mitchell DFACS

Camilla

Mitchell

No

Yes

Thomas

Mitchell Co. EMC

Camilla

Mitchell

No

Yes

Thomas

Pelham School System

Pelham

Mitchell

No

Yes

Valdosta

Valdosta Tech - Main Campus

Valdosta

Lowndes

Yes

Yes

Valdosta

Valdosta Tech.- East Campus

Valdosta

Lowndes

Yes

No

Valdosta

Cook Co. Chamber of Commerce

Adel

Cook

Yes

No

Valdosta

Brooks Co. Chamber of Commerce

Quitman

Brooks

Yes

No

Valdosta

Brooks Co. High School

Quitman

Brooks

Yes

No

Valdosta

Echols Co. High School

Statenville

Echols

Yes

No

Valdosta

Lanier Co. High School

Lakeland

Lanier

Yes

No

Valdosta

Berrien Co. High School

Nashville

Berrien

Yes

No

Valdosta

Berrien Co. Middle School

Nashville

Berrien

Yes

No

Walker

Walker Tech - Main Campus

Rock Spring

Walker

Yes

Yes

Walker

Ringgold High School

Ringgold

Catoosa

Yes

No

Walker

Chattooga Co. High School

Summerville

Chattooga

Yes

No

West Georgia West Georgia Tech - Main Campus

LaGrange

Troup

Yes

Yes

West Georgia Chatt.-Flint River RDC

Franklin

Heard

Yes

Yes

West Georgia West Point Recreation Facility

West Point

Troup

Yes

Yes

$.q~!J!l.~l~f(;~n~!*~.irQf!.Hlf[Jfmi!~!QijrR~Q,iit~~i,~I?Y;~t~t~I!1ni[al~Oltlt:Y1~~rc{~ajmil1~~t~!9.g~ngt~$:[tni;ij~1i~g:ij!lt~;~~~4f~11;%~~1!'iJ~

53

Appendix C Survey of Technical Institutes Continuing Education Program

Response Rate=100% (~3 of 33 Technical Institutes)

Part I: Continuing Education Program

Organization and Staffing 1. At your institution, to whom does your Continuing Education Director
directly report? (33 of 33 responding) (A) President (B) Vice President for Business and Industry Services (C) Vice President for Instructional Services (D) Vice President for Administrative Services (E) Vice President for Student Development (F) Other - please specify.

valla Total

t-'resloem
VP for Business and Industry Services/Economic Development
VP for Instructional Services
Director, Economic Development Programs Division
Both VP for Business and VP for Instruction
Don't have that position
Total

Frequency
1U
13
7
1
1 1 33 33

Percent
3U.;;S
39.4
21.2
3.0
3.0 3.0 100.0 100.0

Valid
Percent -30.3

Cumulative Percent 30:-3

39.4

69.7

21.2

90.9

3.0

93.9

3.0
3.0 100.0

97.0 100.0

2. Please provide the total number of staff devoted to continuing education at your institute and indicate the source of their salaries by percentage.

Example: c~

40

lOS

90S

SUMMARY STAFF INFORMATION INCLUDED ON PAGE 4.

55

OS

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

3. On average, how many instructors does your continuing education program use each quarter?

Number full-time instructors (33 of 33 responding) Average: 0.2121 Minimum: 0
. Maximum: 2 '

Number part-time instructors (32 of 33 responding) Average: ,17.03 Minimum: 2 , Maximum:, 43

4. Does your institute's continuing education program op~rate out of facilities

devoted primarily to continuing education? This may include warehouse,

classroom,

and :

office

fa. cilities

for

continuing

education.

(33

of 33

responding)

Yes ; - , No~ Please si.'ip to Question 6.

valla Total

~es
No Total

Frequency
~
30 33 33

Percent
l:I,l
90.9 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
9.1
90.9
100.0

Cumulative Percent
l:I.l
100,0

5. ' Where are your continuing education, program's facilities located? (33 of 33

responding) ,

'

,

(A) 'On-campus near the institute's academic programs

(8) At an institute satellite location

(C) Off-campus at another site

',

(0)' Some on-campus and some off-campus

valla
Missing Total

un-campus near institute's academic programs
At an institute satellite location
Total
Not 'Applicable
Total

Frequency
2
1 3 30 30 33

56

Percent 6.1

Valid " Cumulative

-Pe.rcent .

Percent ,

. 66.7

66.7

3.0

33.3

9.1 90.9,
90~9
100.0

100.0

100.0

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

6. With which other institute programs does your continuing education program

share facilities and/or equipment? Please indicate all that apply. (33 of 33

responding)

.

(A) Credit academic programs

(8) Other non-credit and continuing education programs

(C) New Connections to Work

(D) Quick Start

(E) Job Training Partnership Act

(F) Other

Other non-credit and continuing education programs New Connections to Work Quick Start Job Training Partnership Act Other

19 (58%)
13 (39%) 14 (42%) 9 (27%) 11 (33%)

7. If continuing education is provided at off-campus sites belonging to or leased by the institute, (such as satellite centers) please provide the names and locations of these sites.

j:\1::~{J;r;'ljR9ff~mp'lJj;sltlj:;:r:!:;\'\f;\; iij:r;iir~'(~itY:,:~~~fii.Y,k~}J;':;:\\;:\~;;ij:'(qlFi~\~r~j; ["iM:,':; Owned I Leased

INFORMATION PRESENTED AS APPENDIX B.

Owned I Leased Owned I Leased

Owned 1 Leased

Owned I Leased

Owned I Leased

8. Please indicate all that apply regarding the equipment and facilities used in

continuing education at your institute? (33 of 33 responding)

(A) The equipment and facilities used in continuing education is

all owned by the program or institute.

(8) A portion of the equipment and facilities used in continuing

education is owned by other institute programs and is

borrowed.

(C) Some equipment and facilities used in continuing education

is donated to the program.

.

14 (42%) 11 (33%)
57

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

.Financial Information
9. How are state funds used in the continuing education programs? Please mark all that apply. (32 of 33 responding) . (A) Administrators/Directors salaries and fringes at institution level (8) Administrators/Directors salaries and fring~~ at program level (C) Support staff salaries and fringes at institution level (D) Support staff salaries and fringes at program level (E) . Instructors (F) Capital Outlay for Facilities (G) Direct Operating' Expenses - instructional materials, supplies, etc. (H) .Indirect Operating Expenses - rent, utilities, etc. (I) No direct or indirect state funds used in program (J) Other

Administrators/directors salarieslfringes (institution level) Administrators/directors salaries/fringes . (program level) Support staff salarieslfringes (institution level) . Support staff salarieslfringes (program level) InstructorS Capital outlay for facilities Direct operating expenses (Instructional materials, supplies, etc.) Indirect operating expenses (Rent, utilities, etc.) No direct or indirect funds used in program Other- Please specify.

5 (16%)
10 (31%)
4 (13%) 2 (6%) 4 (13%) 2 (6%)
14 (44%)
4 (13%) 1 (3%)

10. Please provide total revenues (separating internally generated funds from .state funds) and, expenditures (including salaries and all operating expens'es) for your continuing education program for the past three fiscal years.

FY 1995

~wl~j~~~tr~1~~j~P:[~l~~'ijilt@m!B!i!n,~~!::~~~:fnM.j~Ji!~ i1fJ':'i~!ie.~1JE"'ri~!ij;j;;mi ;:i,t;j~;L~~1JKu~.~jjii:'i

FY 1996 FY 1997

INFORMATION PRESENTED IN EXHIBIT 10.

58

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

11. Does your institute require that continuing education programs at the institute break-even (at minimum, revenue must pay for the direct and indirect costs of the program) or make a profit? (33 of 33 responding) (A) Institute requires continuing education program break-even. (8) - Institute requires continuing education program make a profit to help fund their continued operations and/or other institution activities. (C) Institute allows continuing education to be subsidized by other institute funds.

valla Total

Institute requires CE break-even
Institute requires CE make a profit to help fund other programs
Institute allows CE to be subsidized by other funds
Total

Frequency 23
8
2 33 33

Percent 69.7
24.2
6.1 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
69.7
24.2
6.1 100.0

Cumulative Percent 69.7
93.9
100.0

12. What percentage of your program's continuing education is provided under formal, written contract? Choose the one best response. (33 of 33 responding) (A) Less than 10% (8) 11 % to less than 50% (C) 51 % to less than 75% (D) 76% to less than 100% (E) 100%

59

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

valla Total

ess than 10%
11% to less than 50%
51%to less than 75%
76% to less than 100%
Total

Frequency 25 5
2
1 33 33

Percent 75.8
15.2

6.1

"

3.0

100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
75.8 : 15.2
6.1
3.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent 75.8 90.9
97.0
100.0

13. . Which of the following costs does your program include when establishing fees for continuing education courses? Indicate all that apply. (33 of 33 responding) (A) Salary of instructor (B) Cost of materials and equipment (curricula, supplies, copies, computers, equipment, etc.) (C) Use of institute facilities (0) Use of other facilities (E) Cost of institute's and/or program's administrative overhead (President's Office, OTAE Central Office, etc.) (F) Other

Cost of materials and equipment (curricula, supplies, copies, computers, equipment, etc.) Use for institute facilities Use of other facilities Cost of institute's and/or program's administrative overhead (president's office, DTAE central office, etc.) Other, please specify

, 13(39%) 10 (30%) 13 (39%)
9 (27%)

Program Activities 14. What is the average'length of a continuing education course at your institute? (32
of 33 responding) . (A) 1 day to under a week (B) 1 week to under 2 weeks (C) 2 weeks to under 1 month (0) 1 month to under 5 months (E) More than 5 months

,60

-.:r ...:' .~.~ . -... ~. ~. .

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

valla
Missing Total

1 aay to under 1 week
1 week to under 2 weeks
2 weeks to under 1 month
1 month to under 5 months
Total
-1.00
Total

Frequency 12
2
7
11 32
1 1 33

Percent 36.4
6.1
21.2
33.3 97.0
3.0 3.0 100.0

Valid Percent
37.5
6.3
21.9
34.4 100.0

Cumulative Percent 37.5
43.8
65.6
100.0

15. Do continuing education courses have standardized curricula? Please mark best response. (33 of 33 responding) (A) All courses' curricula are standardized. (8) Some courses' curricula are standardized, depends on subject area. (Ex: computer courses are standardized while management courses are not) (C) None of the courses' curricula are standardized.

valla Total

Jo\II courses are standardized
Some courses are standardized. depends on . subject area
None of the courses' curricula are standardized
Total

Frequency 1
31
1 33 33

Percent 3.0
93.9
3.0 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
3.0
93.9
3.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent 3.0
97.0
100.0

61

Appendix G

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

16. How does your institute review and evaluate continuing education courses and the continuing education program? Please mark all that apply. (33 of 33 responding)
(A) Student evaluations of courses (content and instructor) (B) Needs assessment of service area (C) Surveys of general public (D) Surveys of businesses and industries (E) Personal follow':'ups (F) Focus groups (G) . Institutional peer review by other faculty and administrators (H) . Other

27 (82%) 17 (52%) 28 (85%) 24 (73%) 13 (39%) 10 (30%)
5 (15%)

17. How many continuing educationcQursesof each catego,y did you offer during FY 19967

Non-Credit: Occupational (29 of 33 responding)

Recreational/Personal Enrichment:

Average:

Minimum:

Maximum:

24.2
0 97

Engineering/Science Technologies

Average: 3.2
Minimum: 0
Maximum: 12

Industrial Technologies

Average: Minimum: Maximum:

15.6
0
73

Business Technologies

Average: Minimum: Maximum:

44.8
0
142

62: .,

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

Health Technologies Agriculture/Natural Resources Personal/Public Service Technologies

Average: 11.9 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 71
Average: 1.2 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 10
Average: 11.7 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 71

CEU: Occupational (9 of 33 responding)
Recreational/Personal Enrichment
Engineering/Science Technologies
Industrial Technologies

Average: 6.7
Minimum: o
Maximum: 51
. Average: 2.7
Minimum: o
Maximum: 12
Average: 24.7
Minimum: o
Maximum: 98

Business Technologies Health Technologies Agriculture/Natural Resources Personal/Public Service Technologies

Average: 25.6 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 94
Average: 4.3 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 10
Average: 0 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 0
Average: 7.0 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 47

63

Appendix C

Survey of Institutes - Continuing Education

Marketing of Continuing Education
18. Please indicate which of the following types of marketing your continuing education program has used. Indicate all that apply. (33 of 33 responding) ,(A) Radio advertisements (B) Newspaper advertisements (C) Television advertisements (0) Brochures and other publications (E) Recruiting by program personnel (F) InternetIWorld Wide Web site (G) Mass mailings to general public (H) Mass mailings to target business and industry (I) Other

Radio advertisements Newspaper advertisements Television advertisements Brochures and other pUblications Recruiting by program personnel IntemetIWorld Wide Web site Mass mailings to general public Mass mailings to target business and industry Other- Please specify.

33 (100%) 10 (30%) 33 (100%) 28 (85%) 10 (30%) 26 (79%) 28 (85%)
11 (33%)

Part II: Information Request
Participant Course Evaluation Form Participant Registration Form Schedule of classes for continuing education for:
Fall 96, Winter 97, Spring 97, Summer 97, and Fall 97 (if available)

64

',I .. ' ~ ',.)'..1 r;1
Appendix D Survey of Continuing Education Course Participants

In some 'instances totals will not equal 100% due to rounding considerations. Responses are considered "system missing" if a participant skipped or failed to answer a question.

1. How did you hear about this course?
_ _ School catalog _ _ Newspaper supplement _ _ Referred by employer _ _ Referred by friend or relative - - - Radiorrv advertisement
- - - Internet search
_ _ Other, please specify.

valla
Missing Total

::icnOOI Catalog Newspaper Supplement Employer
Friend or Relative RadiofTV Advertisement Internet Search Other (Open-Ended Responses)
Total System Missing
Total

Frequency 330 142 374 250
6
3
142
1247 26 26
1273

Percent 25.9
11.2 29.4 19.6
.5
.2
11.2
98.0 2.0 2.0 100.0

Valid Percent
26.5

Cumulative Percent
26.5

11.4

37.9

30.0

67.8

20.0

87.9

.5

8,8.4

.2

88.6

11.4 100.0

100.0

2. For what reason are you taking this course? Mark the one response that best describes your interest in this courSe.
_ _ To help me do my current job better. _ _ To make me better qualified for another job. ___ For personal development.
65

Appendix D

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

_ _ As preparation for credit coursework. _ _ Other, please specify.

valla
Missing Total

Helpwltn current job Make better qualified for job Personal development
Prep. for credit course work
Other (specify)
Total
System Missing
Total

Frequency Percent

546

42.9

Valid Percent
44.1

280

22.0

22.6

307

24.1

24.8

37

2.9

3.0

67 1237
36 36 1273

5.3 '97.2
2.8 2.8 . 100.0

5.4 100.0

Cumulative Percent 44.1
66.8
91.6
94.6
100.0

3. Did a supervisor recommend or instruct you to take this course or are you taking it on your own initiative?
_ _ Supervisor instructed me to take the course. ~_ Supervisor recommended that I take the course. ___ I'm taking it on my own initiative. _ _ Other, please explain.

valla
Missing Total

s ~upervlsor Instructions
Supervisor's Recommendation On Own Initiative
other (Open-Ended Responses) Total System Missing Total

Frequency 84
168 989
20
1261 12 12
1273

Percent 6.6
13.2 77.7
1.6
99.1 .9 .9
100.0

Valid Percent
6.7

Cumulative percent
6.7

13.3

20.0

78.4

98.4

1.6

100.0

100.0

66

Appendix 0

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

4. Please indicate who is paying for this course. Mark the one best answer.

_ _ I am paying for the course in full. _ _ My organization is paying in full up front. ___ My organization will reimburse me upon completion. _ _ My organization will share the cost of the course. _ _ Other, please explain.

valla
Missing Total

I ne stuaent Org.-in full up front Org.-reimburse Org.-share cost Other (explain) Total System Missing Total

Frequency 597
557
51 21 37 1263 10 10 1273

.
Percent 46.9
43.8
4.0 1.6 2.9 99.2 .8 .8 100.0

Valid Percent
47.3
44.1
4.0 1.7 2.9 100.0

Cumulative Percent 47.3
91.4
95.4 97.1 100.0

5. Why did you select this technical institute to take this course? Mark the
one bestresponse.
- - - Cost of the course.
___ The location is convenient to my work or home. _ _ The only location offering the course in my area. ,---- Better than other institutions' courses. _ _ Other, please explain.

vOSI or me course Location convenient to home or work. Only location for course. Better than other institutions' courses. Other (Open-Ended Responses) Total System Missing Total Total

Frequency 99
646 320 112 72 1249 24 24 1273

Valid

Percent Percent

f.1S .

7.9

50.7

51.7

25.1

25.6

8.8

9.0

5.7

5.8

98.1 100.0

1.9

1.9

. 100.0

Cumulative Percent 7.9 59.6 85.3 94.2 100.0

67

Appendix 0:

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

6. What is your overall opinion of this course? Mark the most appropriate response.

1 Excellent

2 Very Good

3 Good

4

Fair

5 Poor

valla
Missing Total

excellent Very good Good Fair/Poor Total System Missing Total

Frequency
ol;J
491 140
13 1257
16
16 1273

Percent
4/S.2
38.6 11.0
1.0 .. 98.7
1.3
1.3 100.0

Valid Percent
4/S./S
39.1 11.1
1.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent
4/S./S
87.8 99.0 100.0

7. How would you rate your instructor's knowledge and interest in the course material?

1 Excellent 2 Very Good 3 Good 4 Fair 5 Poor

valla
Missing Total

excellent Very good Good Fair/Poor Total System Missing Total

Frequency
~4f
236 68 9
1260
13
13 1273

Percent
f4.4
18.5 5.3 .7
99.0
1.0
1.0 100.0

Valid Percent
fo.L.
18.7 5.4 .7
100.0

Cumulative Percent
fo.L.
93.9 99.3 100.0

68

Appendix D

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

8. Answer the following statement by circling the most appropriate response for you. "I would recommend this course to friends or co-workers."

1 Agree Completely 2 Agree Somewhat 3 Disagree Somewhat 4 Disagree Completely

valla
Missing Total

Agree Completely
Agree somewhat Disagree somewhat
Disagree completely
Total
System Missing
Total

Frequency 1013
222
21
2 1258
15 15 1273

Percent 79.6
17.4
1.6
.2 98.8
1.2 1.2 100.0

Valid Percent
80.5
17.6
1.7
.2 100.0

Cumulative Percent 80.5
98.2
99.8
100.0

9. Do you agree or disagree that this course provided what you had expected in terms of course content and instruction?
1 Agree Completely 2 Agree Somewhat 3 Disagree Somewhat 4 Disagree Completely

valla
Missing Total

Agree completelY Agree somewhat Disagree somewhat Disagree completely Total System Missing Total

Frequency 892 313 45 6
1256 17 17
1273

Percent 70.1 24.6 3.5 .5 98.7 1.3 1.3
100.0

Valid Percent
Tr:U 24.9
3.6 .5 100.0

Cumulative Percent
~
95.9
99.5 100.0

69
- - - ~--- ~-~--~- - -

Appendix D.

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

10. Please briefly explain why you agree or disagree that the course provided what you had expected in terms of course content and instruction.

Open-Ended Responses

11. Do you agree or disagree that this course provided you with instruction and information, which will benefit you professionally currently or in the future?

1 Agree Completely

2 Ag ree Somewhat

3 Disagree Somewhat

4

Disagree Completely

Agree c~mpletelY Agree somewhat Disagree someVlihat Disagree completely Total System Missing Total Total

Frequency 973 248 18 4
1243 30 30
1273

Percent 76.4 19.5 1.4 .3. 97.6 2.4 2.4
100.0

, Valid Percent
1l:!.3
20.0 1.4 .3
100.0

Cumulative Percent IlS.3 98.2 99.7 100.0

.12. Please briefly explain why you agree or disagree that the course provided you with instruction and information, which will benefit you professionally.
Open-Ended Responses
13. What is your highest level of education?

Mlgn ;:)cnOOIlI..:lt:u Certificate/Diploma Associate Degree Bachelor Degree Master Degree Doctoral Degree Total System Missing Total

Frequency 4(0 218 153 267 89 12
1214 59
1273

Percent
3(.3
17.1 12.0 21.0 7.0
.9 95.4.
4.6 100.0

Valid Percent 39.1 18.0 12.6 22.0 7.3 1.0
100.0

Cumulative Percent 39.1 57.1 69.7 91.7 99.0
100.0

70

Appendix D

" Survey of Continuing Education Participants

14. Have you ever taken a credit course at this or any other technical institution?

valla
Missing Total

yes no Total System Missing

Frequency 636 604
1240
33
1273

Percent 50.0 47.4 97.4
2.6
100.0

Valid Percent
:>1.;J
48.7 100.0

Cumulative Percent
:> 1 .;J
100.0

15. Have you obtained or are you working toward obtaining a technical certificate, diploma or degree from this or another technical institution?
Mark the one response that most applies.
A. Yes, I have completed a:
- - - CertificaterrCC
_ _ Diploma _ _ Degree

B. No, but I am working toward a: _ _ CertificaterrCC _ _ Diploma _ _ Degree

C. Neither, skip to Question 17.

L;ompletea certlTlcate/l L;L; Completed diploma Completed degree Working toward a certificaterrCC Working toward a diploma Working toward a degree Total System Missing Total

Frequency 165 75 97
131
33 51 552 721 1273

Percent 13.0 5.9 7.6
10.3
2.6 4.0 43.4 56.6 100.0

Valid Percent
L~:U::f
13.6 17.6
23.7
6.0 9.2 100.0

Cumulative Percent
Ll:U:f
43.5 61.1
84.8
90.8 100.0

71

Appendix 0

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

16., From which institution did you receive or are you working toward obtaining this certificate, diploma, or degree?
Name of Institution Open-Ended Responses City, State Open-Ended Responses
17. What is the zip code where you reside?
Open-Ended Responses

18. What is your current employment status (check all that apply)?

_ _ Employed Full-Time

Employed Part-Time

_ _ Not Employed

Full-Time Student

- - Part-Time Student

Retired

Employment Status Employed Full-Time Employed Part-Time Not Employed Full-Time Student Part-Time Student Retired

Responses (%) 976 (77%) 115 (9%) 101 (8%) 59 (5%) 61 (5%), 54 (4%)

19. What is your age?

- - Under 25
__ 25to35 __ 36to45 _ _ 46 to 55 _ _ Over 55

valla
Missing Total

unoer~o
25-35 36-45 46-55 Over 55 Total System Missing Total

Frequency 152 376 365 249' 103
1245
28
28 1273

Percent 11.9 29.5 28.7 19.6 8.1 97.8
2.2
2.2 100.0

Valid Percent
l~.~
30.2 29.3 20.0
8.3 100.0

Cumulative Percent
l~.~
42.4 71.7 91.7 100.0

72

Appendix 0

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

20. Before taking this course, have you previously taken a continuing education course at this or any oth~r public technical institution, college or university, or private. for-profit institution (either in Georgia or in other states)? Mark all that apply.

_ _ At a technical institution. _ _ At a college/university. _ _ At a private, for-profit institution. _ _ No previous continuing education coursework. skip to Question 23.

Previous Continuing Education Coursework Technical Institution College/University Private, For-Profit Institution No previous continuing education coursework

Responses (%) 522 (41%) 344 (27%) 85 (7%) 422 (33%)

21. At what institution did you take your last continuing education course?
Name of Institution Open-Ended Responses City, State Open-Ended Responses Name of Course Open-Ended Responses
22. Why did you take the previous course at that institution and not the technical institute in which you have just completed a course?
_ _ I have since relocated to this area. _ _ Only available at the other institution. _ _ Other course was of a higher quality. _ _ The price was better there. _ _ Other, please explain.

Kelocatea to tnlS area Since Only available at other inst. Other course was of higher quality Better price Other (explain) Total System Missing Total

Frequency 99
128 12 17 146 402 871 1273

Percent 7a10.1 .9 1.3 11.5 31.6 68.4
100.0

Valid Percent
24.6 31.8
3.0 4.2 36.3 100.0

Cumulative Percent 24.6 56.5 59.5 63.7 100.0

73

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

23. Please indicate the employment area in which you are currently employed. Check the one best r~sponse.

_ _ Agriculture and natural resources

_ _ Construction/building industry

_ _ Education

_ _ Entertainment/leisure industry (hospitality, restaurant, recreation)

___ Finance, insurance and real estate

_ _ Government (excluding education)

_ _ Manufacturing and production industry

_ _ Professional (medical, legal, engineering, journalism)

- - - Retail/wholesale trade
_ _ Utilities/communications/transportation (rail/pubiic transit, trucking,

~

water, electric,gas utilities)

_ _ Other, please specify.

valla
Missing Total

AgnculIure~NatUralHesources
Construction/Building Industry Education Entertainment/Leisure Industry
~" .,
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Government (excludes education) Manufacturing & Production Industries Professional RetaillWholesale Trade Utilities/Communication/ Transportation Other (Open-Ended Responses) Total System Missing Total

Frequency 18

.....

83

98

31

112

73

200

Percent 1.4 6.5 7.7 2.4 8.8 5.7
15.7

Valid Percent
l.tl
7.5 8.9 2.8 10.2
6...6 .'
18.2

Cumulative Percent . 1.6 9.2 18.1 20.9 31.1 37.7
55.9

143

11.2

13.0

68.8

78

6.1'

7.1

75.9

74

'5.8

6.7

82.7

191 1101.
172 172 1273

. ' 15.0 86.5 13.5 13.5 100.0

17.3 100.0

100.0

24. Please indicate which job category best des.cribes the type of work you do. Check the one best response.



I

,

_ _ Production/manufacturing

_ _'Technical and skilled trades

_~ Clerical/administrative support

74

Appendix D

Survey of Continuing Education Participants

_ _ Executive/managerial/supervisory _ _ Professional (such as medical doctor o~ lawyer)

valla
Missing Total

t-'roauctlon/Manutactunng Technical/Skilled Trades Clerical/Administrative Support Executive/Managerial/ Supervisory Professional Total System Missing Total

Frequency
ll~
286
297

Percent
~.;;S
22.5
23.3

Valid Percent
1l.U
26.5
27.5

Cumulative Percent
1l.U
37.5
64.9

239
140 1081
192 192 1273

18.8
11.0 84.9 15.1 15.1 100.0

22.1
13.0 100.0

87.0 100.0

75

.'

Appendix E Survey of Technical Institutes
Customized Training .

Response Rate=100% (33 of 33 Technical Institutes)

1. Does your institute offer customized training for employees of existing business and industry?

33 (100%) Yes, please continue.

0(0%)

No, please skip to Question 28.

2. Does your institute offer customized training for employees of new or expanding industry?

33 (100%) Yes, please continue.

0(0%)

No, please skip to Question 28.

3. How are customized training contracts generally initiated at your institute? Choose the one response that best represents the most frequent form of contact.

Companies contact institute Institute and program staff contact companies Other organizations or agencies refer clients Institute faculty Advisory committees Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

valla Total

company contacts institute institute/program contact company other orgs or agencies refer dklna Total

Frequency 13
15
1 4 33 33

Percent 39.4
45.5
3.0 12.1 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
39.4
45.5
3.0 12.1 100.0

Cumulative Percent 39.4
84.8
87.9 100.0

4. Please provide the total number of staff devoted to customized training at your institute and indicate the source of their salaries in percents.
Summary staff information included on Page .~ of the report.

77

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

5.. Please briefly indicate the duties of each of the positions listed above.
Open-Ended Responses
6. Does your institute's customized training program. operate out of facilities devoted primarily or completely to customized business and industry training? This may include an open area, classroom, and office facilities for customized training.
We use a space primarily devoted to customized training. We use a space completely devoted to customized training. No, please skip to Question 10.

valla space primarily"
..devoted to customized no dklna Total
Total

FrElquency
8
24 1
33 "33

Percent
24.2
72.7 3.0
100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
24.2
72.7 3.0
100.0

Cumulative Percent
24.2
97.0 100.0

.
7. What is the size in square feet of the space your program uses for customized training? If you use only part of a building, indicate the amount your program uses.

10,901 Average Square Feet (8 of 33 responding)

8. Where are your customized training program's facilities located?

. On-campus near the institute's academic programs. Off-campus at another site.

vallo
..
,.'
Total

""

on

campus

near

programs'

off

..

campus

on and off campus

dklna

Total

Frequency 7
2
3 21 33 33

Percent 21.2
6.1
9.1 63.6 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
21.2
6.1
9.1 63.6 100.0

Cumulative Percent 21.2
27.3 36.4 100.0

78 .

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

9. Does your program use equipment and supplies owned t>y the institute for
use in customized training?
Yes, we own our own equipment. No, we have no equipment of our own.

valla Total

yes, program owns no, own no equipment dklna Total.

Frequency 11
1 21 33 33

Percent 33.3
3.0 63.6 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
33.3
3.0 63.6 100.0

Cumulative Percent 33.3
36.4 100.0

10. With which other institute programs does your customized training program share facilities and/or equipment? Please indicate all that apply.
Credit academic programs Other non-credit and continuing education programs New Connections to Work Quick Start Job Training Partnership Act Participants Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

Other non-credit & continuing ed. programs. New Connection to Work Quick Start Job Training Partnership Act Participants Other, please specify

28 (85%)
12 (36%) 24 (73%) 14 (42%)
10 (30%)

2 (6%)
10 (30%) 5 (15%) 8 (24%)
9 (27%)

79

----------------~-----~~~----===~-----

.Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

11. Please provide the number of companies served from each of the following

locations in Fiscal Year 1997.

.,

:;,'j't.~t%~:~i~~~~;~~~:ii~~~~~~i~,~~:.',.;

On-campus facilities designed for customized training.

306

Other on-campus facilities also used by academic programs.

522

Off-campus facilities belonging to the institute (satellite or off-campus site)

126

Facilities provided by a customized training client.

366

Other, please specify. 64

15.3 18.6 6.0 12.6 6.0

".'.',l" ,., .' :0,. :;"'"""

12.lf training is provided. at off-campus sites belonging to or leased by the institute (such as satellite centers). please provide the names and locations of these sites.

INFORMATION PRESENTED AS APPENDIX B.

Owned I Leased Owned I Leased Owned I Leased Owned I Leased Owned I Leased Owned I Leased

13. Please provide total revenues and expenditures (including salaries and all operating expenses) for your customized business and industry training program for the past three fiscal years.
Information for each institute presented in Exhibit ',1:~.

80

Appendix E

~.

'1

'Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

14. What percent of your program's customized training isprovided under formal, written contract? Choose the one best response.

Less than 10% 10% to less than 50% 51% to less than 75% 76% to less than 100% 100%

valla Total

less man 10%
10% to less than 50%
51% to less than 75%
76% to less than 100%
100%
Total

Frequency 3
3
5
15 7 33 33

Percent 9.1
9.1
15.2
45.5 21.2 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
9.1
9.1
15.2
45.5 21.2 100.0

Cumulative Percent 9.1
18.2
33.3
78.8 100.0

15. What was the average value of formal, written training contracts in your program in Fiscal Year 1997?

Less than $5,000 $10,001 to $25,000 $50,001 to $75,000 Greater than $100,000 .

$5,000 to $10,000 $25,001 to $50,000 $75,001 to $100,000

valla Total

less man $5k
$5kto $10K $25,001 to $50K
$75,001 to $100K greater than $100K
Total

Frequency 22 5 2 2
2 33 33

Percent 66.7 15.2 6.1 6.1
6.1 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
66.7 15.2 6.1 6.1
6.1 100.0

Cumulative Percent 66.7
81.8
87.9
I
93.9
100.0

81

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

16. Which of the following costs does your program include when establishing a cost to clients for providing customized training? Indicate all that apply.
Salary of instructor Cost of materials and equipment (curricula, supplies, copies, Computers, equipment, etc.) Use of institute facilities Use of other facilities Cost of institute's administrative overhead (President's Office, DTAE, etc.) Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

Cost of materials and. equipment Use of institute facilities Use of other facilities Cost of Institute's administrative overhead Other, please specify

33 (100%) 14 (42%) 12 (36%) 11 (33%) 12 (36%)

0 (0%) 8 (24%) 7 (21%) 8 (24%) 7 (21%)

17. Please indicate which of the following services your program may routinely offer clients and for which of these services clients are routinely. charged. Indicate all that apply.

Service Provided
o
o
o o o
o o o o
o o
'0

Client Charged
o Assessment services (skills testing, etc.)
o Workplace literacy (basic reading, writing, and math)
o English as a second language o Supervisory, management training o Management science training (TOM, etc.) o Communications skills, interpersonal relations, etc. o Computer literacy, software or hardware training, etc. o . Job-specific technical training o . Courses leading to licensure
. 0 . Courses leading to credential
o Program consultation with business and industry o . Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

82

Appendix E

,'-;0:: :l ~

..

. Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

.'" ._ .... "'il' .. , .. : >i.~..,. I"'; "X' ://,'i''!:\'" .\,. f ..... "i:L.:,:;Nijtrlber.'of\Rel:ipQ.l1s~s..." . '" . :'.'; .....,.. ':.: ,,\.~;:~2::'
;;::.~;::,.:.!j.~.'~ffi!~dS,.,::;;..::,.::';.~.,~~~~~'2h~;Jt:~.::; ;:~~~Cj(:~e;~~~~.I;: .s~;:1t~~~t~t~~~rd~~,:] [iri~~i~~i~a\

Assessment Services Workplace Literacy

24 (73%) 20 (61%)

2 (6%) 2 (6%)

3 (9%) 4 (12%)

4 (12%) 7 (21%)

English as a second language Supervisory, management training Management Science Communication/ Interpersonal Skills Computer Literacy Job-Specific Technical Training Courses Leading to Licensure Courses Leading to Credential Program Consultation

10 (30%)
27 (82%) 23 (70%) 26 (79%) 27 (82%) 27.(82%)
22 (67%)
18 (55%) 13 (39%)

4 (12%)
o o o
1 (3%)
o
1 (3%)
o
14 (42%)

1 (3%)
6 (18%) 4 (12%) 5 (15%) 5 (15%) 5 (15%)
5 (15%)
5 (15%) 1 (3%)

18 (55%)
o
6 (18%) 2 (6%)
o
1 (3%)
5 (15%)
10 (30%) 5 (15%)

18. What is the av.erage length of a training job for your program's clients?

1 day to under 1 week 2 weeks to under 1 month more than 5 months

1 week to under 2 weeks 1 month to under 5 months

valla Total

1 oay to under 1 week
1 week to under 2 weeks
2 weeks to under 1 month
1 month to under 5 months
Total

Frequency 10
2
10
11 33 33

Percent 30.3
6.1
30.3
33.3 100.0 100.0

Valid . Cumulative

Percent

Percent

30.3

30.3

6.1

36.4

30.3

66.7

33.3 100.0

100.0

83

Appendix E

. Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

19. Please indicate by size of company (its number of employees) the numberof employees trained in each of the industry type categories below for Fiscal Year 1997. For example: You may have trained 25 employees from the Manufacturing sector who worked for companies of 100 to 249 employees in size and 5 in manufacturing for companies with 1 to 4 employees" "
See Exhibit E-1.

20. Please provide the total number of employees your program tra-ined in ,Fiscal Year 1997. Please make sure this is an unduplicated count if possible.

35,538 1,077

Total Number of Employees (33 of 33 responding) Average Number of Employees per Institute

"

, ,.

21.Which of the types of industries listed in Question 19 was the single largest

source of your program's revenue in Fiscal Y~ar 1997?

"

valla Total

manuracIunng

public adminstration

.and government

-'

transportation ....(aeros pace)

finance, insiJrance. real estate

mining

dklna

Total

.

."

Frequency 24 2
1
2 1 3 33 33

Percent 72.7 6.1
3.0
6.1 3.0 ",- 9.1 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
72.7
'6.1

Cumulative Percent 72.7
'.78.8

3.,0
..
- 6.1
3.0 9.1. 100.0

81.8 ..
87.9
90.9 100.0

22. Please provide the total number of companies served in each of the following categories for Fiscal Years 1997. For example: You may have trained employees from 10 companies with 50 to 99 employees in the Government.
See Exhibit E-2.
23. Please provide the total number of companies your program served in Fiscal Year 1997 (unduplicated). '
Total Number of Companies (32 of 33 responding) Average Number of Companies per Institute

84 .

"~,:?~,,~,,,:,\;;_~f&i~N~~J~i;l~lil~~i'I._llili~'rj~,irl~~~~~la~s;~f;Lr;'~;~i1},~~~~r~f*~'
;~~f:~~~,~~8:!:}\~1'~i~%~~~,;jjrf~c;i:~'~);;;'!~f;~rt~j~tf;~~~~i~~]I:?C'~P;!LY~~~;"'i::;,,\' \;"~~6,I";': i~i~iflf~)~

,,' ",INDUSTRY/; '. jJ()4 51b 910'to 19, ,20 to 4950.t099 ::100to'249,:250t0499 500,t6999;. 1\000+: Sp~Cified ;,';,:i;;;:;;;"':';,/,:,

..... ,

. .".

.

, . e',',

,

,.

.. . . '

, .' . .,

,' ..',

, ..'.". " .. ,' '.,,,.' .:" ".,.

'. , . . , " . ' , ' . . . . . .

., , . ,

,.,

,. ,.",.t

",

'." '''' , ,', .,., ..'" ", ;, ; .. , ..

Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing

o

2

5

7

13

84

64

36 117

104

432

Mining

1 22

4

5

7

31

240

o 599

12

921

Construction/ Contracting Manufacturing Wholesale Trade

26

1

121

181

178

305

o 13 oo

57

149

709

4,441

8

7

o

181

Retail Trade

7

9

63

14

6

354

Finance, Insurance, and

Real Estate

4

9

103

183

316

513

110

oo

4

5,775

4,373 3,829

741

o

2

o

o

214

o

3

o

340

50

18

71

926
20,087 198 670
1,607

Professional Services

4 22

116

96

254

538

162

102 605

32

1,931

Public Administration/ Government

o 17

213

582 1,219

956

672

411 4,628

161

8,859

Business Services,

Hospitality and

44 85

86

275

45

39

106

29 205

o

914

Recreation

Transportation, Communications, Electric, Gas, arid

230 181

165

137

273

545

201

192 252

924

3,100

Sanitary Services

.. ~\.; j1,\::;', i./:;:;:"" .

:~~lli~;~~1.~; ~:,;';;,"~;1j

::i!.:I;"j:,~~~: 10~~~~,m.qgg ~;'~:':"':':'i';~G~~~~Q,'t; :f,:;::;~;',~l~~;4;'L~:;;,';.~;1~ :::,:l~j~~,~;~~~:;~.,j;~Jg~~ :I;;:;J~Lj;~;~~~::~,~

..S,,oc.,.,,.u,r,cc." .,:,,,.,-e-.1.', .:.S..., c..,.t"'a.,ff,.,ac".,"...n.,'";...a'.I,'.v.1.".',s.,I..,,..S.......'.o.".f:...-,I&.n'I.,'o~:',.,,.r:.m," .":.,.a'....

"v""ld': . In'. '.f.."In""s,' . . , . .,.-. . "','" h"""""""i,j' "": ,.... e"~;,;..: '"

v . ' :..th:"~,,:.,..s,,u'rv:..".e"'. ,'.'.0
.:.-,-"oc,', ..",.,.". ,I"""'<':""""""""'~':''''''''''<h'

'''''. w, :

...i;.;,,'.-'.,' . .....: ..., ":'I:'"O";"''''::":,:,;'.:7..... , ".-......

'C

' , ' "", . .- " ,.-.,

.';.

',,"'.':'.'

85

I ',,', ."., ","i';':,'':,:: 0J~' .... lJlll,.er:Q.. 0l1'1paf1I~S, enr,~ ....Y,lze ,o:9mpany~n,.n,us.. fY-,'yp,e:

.......'; . ::;: .e'}' ,,';;.,; .

"'JYP~9 F\ ,'.'

.:,'<,',.' .. . .....,; ':

'-~.-' :':',,!.::;\::,I?E:,:()F,'.<;QI\II,P,~N.Y(tot~t,h urftl>~r:;of_~rl1~I,OY~~~F",'~<.,: .. :... ";: ,>,:':'_IHt~4,

I "., ..... '".,. ,.'INDU.STRY:;;".:;,,;::,,':tito<4, 5to9 1Jtt9-:1g,:;' ~91q4~:,,5QJ9:,~~; tQqt.p_:~4Q( g~9J(f-4~~r 9g;t9~~.~,1,QQ9::b}:L~E:g~SPj:,:

Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing

1 15

,5

6

4

2

1

2

5

41

Mining

0

0

0

0.111

3

3

0

2

119

Construction/Contracting

2 '5

10

17

10

4

5

3

1

57

Manufacturing1

2

6

19

65

173

152

124

28

570

Wholesale Trade

0

0

0

21

7

2

1

0

13

Retail Trade

4

6

11

2

1

5

2

3

2

36

Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate

2

3

7

14

6

7

3

0

0

42

Professional Services

0

8

14

11

20

13

9

4

3

82

Public Administration and Government

2

1

15

36

42

41

16

15

37

205

Business Services, Hospitality and Recreation

15 12

16

10

o

2

2

2

1

60

Transportation, Communications,

Electric, Gas, and Sanitary Services

206 51

26

10

21

19

12

10

11

366

,":..' ,'. :,. ',.':-":: ", "->'".;:".

-:I;,..~~~;;::.19'~ ~:,;;,,;:Jtg;,,;i. ,::J2l, 'L_",:::g811.::~1~1:, .:. :.gf;1

86

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

24. For which of the types of companies listed in Question 22 did your program train the most employees in Fiscal Year 1997?

valla Total

manufactUring public administration and government professional services tra nsportation...(aeros pace) finance, insurance, real estate mining dk/na Total

Frequency 23 4
1
1
1
1 2 33 33

Percent 69.7
12.1
3.0
3.0
3.0 3.0 6.1 100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
69.7
12.1
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0 6.1 100.0

Cumulative Percent 69.7 81.8 84.8 87.9
90.9 93.9 100.0

25. Please indicate which of the following types of marketing your program has used. Indicate all that apply.
Radio advertisements Newspaper advertisements Television advertisements Brochures and other publications Recruiting by program personnel InternetIWorld Wide Web site Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

Radio advertisements Newspaper advertisements Television advertisements Brochures & other publications Recruiting by program personnel InternetIWorld Wide Web site Other, please specify

12 (36%) 25 (76%) 9 (27%) 32 (97%) 33 (100%)
11 (33%) 9 (27%)

8 (24%) 2 (6%) 9 (27%) 1 (3%) 0(0%)
7 (21%) 9 (27%)

87

Appendix E

Survey ofTechnical Institutes - Customized Training

26. With-wt)ich of the following has your program partnered to provide customized training? Indicate all that apply.

Technical institutes Two year colleges Four year colleges or universities Private training firms Governmental agencies or programs Cooperative Extension Service Other, please specify. Open-Ended Responses. Program does not pa~ner to provide customized training.

':,'~i::?i:ibi;i~l:;;;;i!::;~;':)~~~,R~~;e,~;~t;{[;i
.'" .,,,~";!~~~~".(~J),t!;~;i}I; ;i\~~~:~~Vl~t,(:~i~l~~

Technical institutes Two year colleges .Four year colleges or universities Private training firms

22 (67%) 4 (12%) 8 (24%) 17(51%)

2 (6%) 12 (36%) 9 (27%) 5(15%)

Governmental agencies or programs 21 (64%)

7 (21 %)

Cooperative extension service Other, please specify Program does not partner to provide for customized training

1 (3%) . 6 (18%r
1 (3%)

12 (36%) 11 (33%) 11 (33%)

27.lf your area of Georgia also supports private firms or consultants that provide similar training as your program, please indicate the types of training these firms provide. Indicate all that apply. '

Assessment services Workplace literacy (basic reading, writing, and math) English as a second language Supervisory, management training __ .Management science training (TOM, etc.) Communications skills, interpersonal ~elations, etc. Computer literacy, software or hardware training, etc, Job-specific technical training Courses leading to licensure Courses leading to credential Other, please specify Open-Ended Responses

88

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

Assessment services Workplace literacy English as a second language Supervisory, management training Management science training (TQM, etc.) Communication skills, interpersonal relations, etc. Computer literacy, software or hardware training, etc. Job-specific technical training Courses leading to licensure Courses leading to credential Other, please specify.

16 (49%) 10 (30%) 9 (27%) 25 (76%) 21 (64%) 22 (67%)
25 (76%)
18 (55%) 19 (58%) 16 (49%)
3 (9%)

4 (12%) 8 (24%) 7 (21%) 3 (9%) 3 (9%) 3 (9%)
2 (6%)
3 (9%) 6 (18%) 6 (18%) 11 (33%)

28. Please indicate which of the following you consider an obstacle to customized training at your institute. Indicate all that apply. Opposition or lack of support from institute Inadequate program budget to support training activities Institute accounting and budgeting practices Inadequate facilities to meet training demand Inadequate equipment to meet training demand State budgeting laws or requirements Inability to compete with other institututes Inability to compete with other providers Too many training providers in area More clients than program can adequately serve Lack of training demand in area Lack of training expertise Others, please specify Open-Ended Responses.

89

Appendix E

Survey of Technical Institutes - Customized Training

s ,.1;~'j~~rl~1~;i;~f~[~~~~,iU1~,'iiJ:\r;;;,;!"r0~~'!iil!.i'i~~J,,;,~1\~J,\i!:

Opposition or lack of support from

institute

.'

Inadequate program budget to support

training activities

Institute accounting and budgeting

practices

Inadequate facilities to meet training

demand

Inadequate equipment to. meet

training demand.

State budgeting laws or requirements

Inability to compete with other

institutes

Inability to compete with other

providers

Too many training providers in area

More clients than programs can

adequately serve.

Lack of training demand in area

Lack of training expertise

Others, please specify

16 (49%)
2 (6%)
18 (55%)
17 (52%)
15 (46%)
2 (6%)
1 (3%)
2 (6%)
5 (15%)
5 (15%) 7 (21 %) 7 (21%)

~~~

11 (33%)

6 (18%)

20(61%) 11 (33%)

12 (3.6%)

3 (9%)

12 (36%)

4 (12%)

12 (36%) 21 (64%)

6 (18%) 10 (30%)

21 (64%) 11 (33%)

20 (61%)

11 (33%)

17 (52%) . 11 (33%)

.17 (52%) 18 (55%) 15 (46%)

11 (33%) 8 (24%) 11 (33%)

90

Appendix F Survey of GE!orgiii's Businesses

Response Rate = 78.6% (401 of 510 Eligible Businesses)
Hello. May I speak to [CONTACT NAME]. This is [INTERVIEWER] calling from the University of Georgia in Athens. In conjunction with the Georgia State Office of Planning and Budget, we are conducting a short study today about the training needs of Georgia Businesses, and we'd like to ask you some questions about training needs for employees at your work site. Do you have about 5 to 10 minutes right now to complete a short survey?
1. Yes [CONTINUE WITH CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT 2. No [WHEN IS A BEITER TIME FOR YOU TO COMPLETE THE INTERVIEW?]
Great. Before we begin, I want to let you know that all of the information that you provide will be kept strictly confidential. Neither your name nor the name of your company will be associated with the responses provided. Only summary data aggregated across all companies will be reported. The survey is voluntary and we can skip any question you do not want to answer. Finally, my Supervisor may listen to part of the interview to insure quality control.

In some instances, percent totals may not equal 100% due to rounding considerations.

01 - To begin, could you tell me how many employees there are in your entire company?

Number of Employees in Entire Company

valla Total

1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 49 50 to 99 100 to 249 250 to 499 500 to 999 1000 or more Refused Don't Know Not Ascertained Total

Frequency 44 34 31 24 22 63 32 23
74
1 47
6
401 401

Percent 1l.U 8.5 7.7 6.0 5.5 15.7 8.0 5.7
18.5
.2 11.7
1.5
100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
1l.U 8.5 7.7 6.0 5.5
15.7 8.0 5.7
18.5
.2
11.7
1.5
100.0

Cumulative Percent
11.U
19.5 27.2 33.2 38.7 54.4 62.3 68.1
86.5
86.8 98.5
100.0

91

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

02 - And how many employees are there at your work site?

Number of Employees at Site

Valid Total

1 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 to 49 50 to 99 100 to 249 250 to 499 500 to 999 1000 or more Refused Don't Know Total
,

Frequency OU 53 40 47 43

,

102

35

"
12

6
1
'.
2
401 401

Percent "f5:U 13.2 10.0 11.7 10.7 25.4
8.7
3.0
1.5 .2 .5
100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
15.0 13.2 10.0 11.7 10.7 25.4
8.7
3.0
1.5 .2 .5
100.0

Cumulative Percent
---rs:u
28.2 38.2 49.9 60.6 86.0
94.8
97.8
99.3 99.5 100.0

03 - To begin, what would you say are the three most common weaknesses in job preparation you find in applicants and new employees?

'....... : .': ..
,1.',
:... " , , ' :

"
'.'

>,. JOb>Preparatio:n;We~knesses

Type
Work Ethics Other Interpersonal Skills Technical Skills Basic Writing Skills Computer Literacy/Skills Education Level Basic Reading Skills Speaking Skills Team Skills Equipment Familiarization Math Skills Analytical Skills Supervisory Skills Listening Skills

Number Responding Yes
171 89 87 80 56 53 48 44 39 34 28 20 13 13 10

,. ~

"

:

"
.;.

,

,.:,.3

.... ,:

Percent

42.6% 22.2% 21.7% 20.0% 14.0% 13.2% 12.0% 11.0% 9.7% 8.5% 7.0% 5.0% 3.2% 3.2% 2.5%

92

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Q4 - In what three areas does your company have immediate training needs?

Immediate Training/Needs

Type
Interpersonal Skills Computer Skills Management Skills Technical Skills Safety Professional Skills Basic Skills

Number Responding Yes
146 123 98 92 59 36 22

Percent
36.4% 30.7% 24.4% 22.9% 14.7% 9.0% 5.5%

Q5 - In which of your company's positions do you foresee a need for hiring additional individuals or retraining current employees within the next three years? .
Open-Ended Responses

Q6 - How many employees with technical training are likely to be needed by your company in the next year?

Cumulative Cumulative Q6 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

NONE

83

1-4 EMPLOYEES

124

5-9 EMPLOYEES

57

10-19 EMPLOYEES

41

20-49 EMPLOYEES

31

50-99 EMPLOYEES

14

100+ EMPLOYEES

16

DON'T KNOW

24

NOT ASCERTAINED

11

20.7 30.9 14.2 10.2
7.7 3.5 4.0 6.0 2.7

83

20.7

207

51. 6

264

65.8

305

76.1

336

83.8

350

87.3

366

91. 3

390

97.3

401

100.0

Q7 - Roughly what percentage of your company's employees have a technical certificate, diploma, or associate degree?

Q7

F~equency

10% OR LESS

144

11-25%

70

26-50%

62

51-75%

29

MORE THAN 75%

48

Continued on Next Page

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

35.9 17.5 15.5
7.2 12.0

144

35.9

214

53.4

276

68.8

305

76.1

353

88.0

93

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Continued from Previous Page

Q7 Frequency

NONE

14

DON'T KNOW

28

NOT ASCERTAINED

6

Cumulative Cumulative Percent . Frequency Percent

3.5

367

91. 5 .

7.0

395

98.5

1.5

401

100.0

Q8 - Has your company ever hired an individual who attended one of Georgia's Technical Institutes?

,Q8 Frequency

YES

207

NO

116

NOT SURE/DON'T KNO~ 75

REFUSED

1

NOT ASCERTAINED

2

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

51. 6 28.9 18.7
0.2 0.5

207

51. 6

323

80.5

398

99.3 .

399

99.5

401

100.0

Q8x1 - Could you tell me why your company has never hired someone who attended a Georgia Technical Institute?
Open-Ended Responses

Q9 - Does your company currently have any employees who attended one of Georgia's Technical Institutes?

Cumulative Cumulative

Q9

Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

YES

184

88.9

184

NO

18

8.7

202

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW 5

2.4

207

Frequency Missing = 194

88.9 97.6 100.0

Q 10 - What is the main reason your company does not employ anyone who attended one of Georgia's Technical Institutes?

Cumulative Cumulative

Q10

Frequency P~rcent Frequency

Percent

USED IN-HOUSE TRAINING 2

NONE APPLIED FOR JOBS 4

OTHER

5

Continued on Next Page

11.1 22.2 27.8

2

11. 1

6

33.3

11

61. 1

94

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Continued from Previous Page

Cumulative Cumulative

Q10

Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

REFUSED

1

5.6

12

DON'T KNOW

1

5.6

13

NOT ASCERTAINED

5

27.8

18

Frequency Missing 383

66.7 72.2 100.0

Q 11 - How does the knowledge and performance of the individuals trained at Georgia's Technical Institutes compare to other employees at your company? Would you say Georgia's Technical Institute students do... ?

Cumulative Cumulative

Qll Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

BETTER THAN OTHER EMPLOYEES

103

49.8

ABOUT SAME AS OTHER EMPLOYEES

73

35.3

WORSE THAN OTHER EMPLOYEES

3

1.4

DON'T KNOW

16

7.7

NOT ASCERTAINED

12

5.8

Frequency Missing

103 176 179 195 207 194

49.8 85.0 86.5 94.2 100.0

Q12 - From which Georgia Technical Institutes have you hired employees?

'cc,' :,,~;;,,:,:>
Technical Institutes Albany Altamaha Athens Atlanta Augusta Carroll Chattahoochee Columbus Coosa Valley Dalton College, Tech. Division DeKalb East Central Flint River Griffin Gwinnett Heart of Georgia Lanier Macon
Continued on Next Page

13

5.08% Valdosta

o

0.00% Walker

9

3.52% West Georgia

7

2.73%

5

1.95% Sub-total for Technical Institutes

5

1.95%

9

3.52%

10

3.91% College/University

3

1.17% Albany State University

0.39% Columbus College

14

5.47% Dalton College

4

1.56% Darton College

2

0,78% Fort Valley State University

3

1.17% Georgia College & State University

20

7.81% Georgia Institute of Technology

4

1.56% Georgia Southern University

7

2.73% Kennesaw State University

9

3.52% Macon College

10

3.91%

0.39%

6

2.34%

200

78.13%

0.39%

0.39%

0.39%

0.39%

0.39%

0.39%

18

7.03%

0.39%

0.39%

0.39%

95

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia BUsinesses

Continued from Previous Page

Middle Georgia

5

Moultrie Area

3

North Georgia

7

North Metro

4

Ogeechee

5

Okefenokee

2

Pickens

2

Sandersville

0

Savannah

7

Southeastern

6

South G~orgia

.. 11

Swainsboro

4

Thomas

2

1.95% Medical College of GA 1.17% Middle Georgia College 2.73% Savannah State University 1.56% Southern Polytechnic State Univ. 1.95% State University of West Georgia 0.78% University of Georgia 0.78% Valdosta State University 0.00% Waycross College 2.73% 2.34% Sub-total for CollegeS/Universities 4.30%
1.56% 0.78% Total Hires

1

0.39%

1

0.39%

1

0.39%

18

7.03%

1

0.39%

5

1.95%

1

0.39%

1

0.39%

56 21.88%

256

100%

013 - How often' does your company hire individuals before they. receive a certificate, diploma, or ass'ociate degree from technical institutes? Would you say frequently, often, occasionally, rarely, or never?

Cumulative Cumulative

Q13 Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

FREQUENTLY

70

33.8

70

OFTEN

24

11. 6

94

OCCASIONALLY

52

25.1

146

RARELY

21

'10.1

167

NEVER DON'T KNOW

24

11. 6

191

. 4'

1.9

195

NOT ASCERTAINED

12

. -5.8

207

Frequency Missing 194

33.8 45.4 70.5 80.7 92.3 94.2 100.0-

014 - Does you company ever pay for individuals to complete a certificate, diploma, or associate degree program from technical institutes?

I Cumulati~e Cumulative

Q14

Frequency Percent .Frequency

Percent

YES

116

56.0

NO

88

42.5

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW

3

1.4

Frequency Missing

: 116 204 207
194

56.0 98.6 100.0

"m 015 - going to read a list to you of sources where ~mployees might receive training at

your company. For each one, please tell me if the source is used by your company to train

employees.

.

96

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Q15.1 - Does your company utilize in-house training for employees?

Q15Xl

Frequency

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

YES NO REFUSED

387

96.5

13

3.2

1

0.2

387

96.5

400

99.'8

401

100.0

Q15.2 -' Does your company utilize technical institutes for training of employees?

Q15X2 Frequency

YES

158

NO

236

DON'T KNOW

6

NOT ASCERTAINED

1

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

39.4 58.9
1.5 0.2

158

39.4

394

98.3

400

99.8

401

100.0

Q15.3 - Does your company utilize colleges or universities for training of employees?

Q15X3 Frequency

YES

174

NO

223

DON'T KNOW

3

NOT ASCERTAINED

1

Cumulative Cumulative

Percent Frequency

Percent

43.4 55.6
0.7 0.2

174

43.4

397

99.0

400

99.8

401

100.0

Q 15.4 - Does your company utilize consultants for training of employees?

Q15X4 Frequency

YES

165

NO

234

DON'T KNOW

1

NOT ASCERTAINED

1

Cumulative Cumulative

Percent Frequency

Percent

41.1 58.4
0.2 0.2

165

, 41.1

399

99.5

400

99.8

401

100.0

Q15.5 - Does your company utilize equipment manufacturers or vendors for training of employees?

Q15X5

Cumulative Cumulative

Frequency' Percent Frequency

Percent

YES

233

NO

164

DON'T KNOW

3

NOT ASCERTAINED

1

58.1 40.9
0.7 0.2

233

58.1

397

99.0

400

99.8

401

100.0

97

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Q15.6 - Is their any other source I haven't mentioned from which your employees receive

training?

.

Q15X6
YES NO DON'T KNOW

Frequency
62 337
2

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

15.5 84.0
0.5

62

15.5

399

99.5

401

100.0

Q 16 - In the past 2 years, has your company contracted with any of the following for customized training, training designed to meet your company's specific requirements and delivered exclusively to your organization' employees.

Q16.1 - Technical Institutes
Q16X1 Frequency

Cumulative Cumulative

Percent Frequency

Percent

YES NO DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

50

12.6

341

85.9

5

1.3

1

0.3

Frequency Missing

50 391 396 397 4

12.6 98.5 99.7 100.0

Q16.2 - Colleges 'or Universities

Qi6X2

Frequency

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percel').t

YES NO . DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

46

11.6

343

86.4

7

1.8

1

0.3 .

Frequency Missing

46 389 396 397 4

11. 6 98.0 99.7 100.0

Q16.3 - Consultants,

Q16X3

Frequency

Cumulative' Cumulative

Percent Frequency

Percent

YES, NO DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

123

31. 0

268

67.5

5

1.3

1

0.3

Frequency Missing

123 391 396 397 4

31. 0 98.5 99.7 100.0

98

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

016.4 - Equipment manufacturers or vendors

Q16X4

Cumulative Cumulative Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

YES NO DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

135

34.0

256

64.5

4

1.0

2

0.5

Frequency Missing

135 391 395 397 4

34.0 98.5 99.5 100.0

016.5 - Is there some other source I haven't mentioned that provides customized training to your company's employees?

Cumulative Cumulative Q16X5 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

YES NO DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

23

5.8

369

92.9

4

1.0

1

0.3

Frequency Missing

23 392 396 397
4

5.8 98.7 99.7 100.0

017 - What was the nature and purpose of the customized training you contracted for at.. ..
017.1 - Technical Institutes 017.2 - Colleges or Universities 017.3 - Consultants 017.4- Equipment ManufacturersNendors 017.5-0ther Source
Open-Ended Responses

99

I.

_

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

018 - Which technical institutes, colleges, or universities have you contracted with for customized training in the past 2 years, and please indicate if the training was at the main campus, a satellite campus, or at your company?

Coosa Valley -Company Dalton College, Tech. Division - Company Gwinnett - Company Thomas-Company Walker -Company Total at Company
Athens -Main Augusta - Main Carroll -Main Columbus - Main Gwinnett - Main Macon - Main North Georgia -Main North Metro -Main Ogeechee -Main South Georgia -Main Thomas -Main Valdosta -Main West Georgia -Main Total at Main Campus
Albany - Satellite Chattahoochee - Satellite DeKalb - Satellite East Central - Satellite Heart of Georgia - Satellite North Metro - Satellite Savannah - Satellite Total at Satellite
Continued on Next Page

1

1

1

2

1

7

19%

1

2

2

1

2

4

1

2

1

1

1

1

3

22

59%

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

8

22%

100

Appendix F
Continued from Previous Page
Georgia State University - Company Kennesaw State University - Company University of Georgia - Company Total at Company
Albany State University - Main Augusta State University - Main Bainbridge College - Main Clayton State College & Univ. - Main. Coastal GA Community College -Main Georgia College & State Univ. - Main Georgia Institute of Technology - Main Georgia Southern University - Main Georgia Southwestern Univ. - Main Georgia State University - Main Kennesaw State University - Main Southern Polytechnic State Univ. -Main University of Georgia - Main Valdosta State University - Main Total at Main Campus
Augusta State University - Satellite Darton College - Satellite University of Georgia - Satellite Total at Satellite
Columbus College Dalton College State University of West Georgia University of Georgia Total Non-Location Specific

Survey of Georgia Businesses

2

2

1

6

14%

1 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 1 3

2

6

3

30

71%

2

1

1

4

10%

o
o

1

1

2

5%

101

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Q19.1 - How satisfied was your company with the content of Technicallnstitute training received - was your company very satisfied, mostly satisfied, somewhat. satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied?

Very Satisfied Mostly Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Total

28

60.9

14

30.4

3

6.5

1

2.2

0

0.0

0

0.0

46

100

Q19.2 - How satisfied was your company with the quality of instruction of Technical Institute training received? .

Very Satisfied Mostly Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Total

28

60.9

15

32.6

3

6.5

0

0.0

0

0.0

0

0.0

46

100

Q19.3 - How satisfied was your company with performance improvement of employees following Technical Institute training received?

!iResponse";:';:.;~)Y/~~f.;i:,~;':~;B;i:{?i ~::i;\: :',h.,.:FreqlJencY;;i~t;j :i:c:!;:ii"~ll?eji:~nt:;:i>:'

Very Satisfied

19

42.2

Mostly Satisfied

17

37.8

Somewhat Satisfied

7

15.6

Neutral

2

4.4

Somewhat Dissatisfied

.0

0.0

Very Dissatisfied

0

0.0

Total

45

100

Q20.1 - In the past -2 years,' has your company sent any employees to continuing education courses offered by Georgia Technical Institutes? .

Q20X1

Frequency

Cumulativ~ Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

YES

83

NO

284

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW 32

NOT ASCERTAINED

2

20.7 70.8
8.0 0.5

83

20.7

367

91. 5

399

99.5

401

100.0

102

Appendix F

.. ".;'-.
Survey of Georgia Businesses

,020.2 - In the past 2 years, has your company sent any employees to continuing education courses offered by colleges or universities?

Cumulative Cumulative Q20X2 frequency Percent Frequency Percent

YES

123

NO

258

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW REFUSED

17, J..

NOT ASCERTAINED

2

30.7 64.3
4.2 0.2 0.5

123

30.7

381

95.0

398

99.3

399

99.5

401

100.0

020.3 - In the past 2 years, has your company sent any employees to continuing education courses offered by consultants?

Cumulative Cumulative Q20X3 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

YES

75

NO

305

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW 18

REFUSED

1

NOT ASCERTAINED

2

18.7 76.1
4.5 0.2 0.5

75

18.7

380

94.8

398

99.3

399

99.5

401

100.0

020.4 - In the past 2 years, has your company sent any employees to continuing education courses offered by equipment manufacturers or vendors?

Cumulative .Cumulative Q20X4 Frequency Percent Frequency Percent

YES

87

NO

295

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW 17

NOT ASCERTAINED

2

21. 7
73.6 4.2 0.5

87

21.7

382

95.3

399

99.5

401

100.0

020.5 - In the past 2 years, has your company sent any employees to continuing education courses by some other source I haven't mentioned?

Cumulative Cumulative Q20X5 Frequency Percent . Frequency Percent .

YES

29

NO

361

NOT SURE/DON'T KNOW 10

NOT ASCERTAINED

1

7.2 90.0
2.5 0.2

29

7.2

390

97.3

400

99.8

401

100.0

103

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

Q21 - Which technical institutes and colleges or universities have you sent employees to for continuing education courses in -the past 2 years, and please indicate if the courses were held at the main campus or a satellite campus?

Albany - Main

1

Athens -Main

3

Atlanta -Main

1

Augusta - Main

1

Carroll-Main

1

Chattahoochee - Main

4

Columbus - Main

3

Dalton College, Technical Division - Main'

1

DeKalb - Main

4

Griffin - Main

1

Gwinnett - Main

14

Heart of Georgia - Main

1

Lanier - Main

t

Middle Georgia - Main

1

North Georgia -Main

2

North Metro -Main

3

Ogeechee -Main

2

Savannah -:' Main

2

South Georgia -Main

3

Swainsboro - Main

1

Thomas -Main

1

Valdosta -Main

2

Walker - Main

2

West Georgia -Main

6

Total at Main Campus

61

Carroll- Satellite

1

Columbus - Satellite

1

DeKalb - Satellite

1

Gwinnett - Satellite

1

Middle Georgia - Satellite

1

North Metro - Satellite

1

Savannah - Satellite

1

Total at Satellite

7

tJ1Qtal.~ia,(;T;echr.~'al,ln$titutei),;;:~;!;:;;':(~?;:._j!;,::'Ft'.JW;;;''i!!il'n'(:;i5~;;;<;;,;',;:i'-,.

Continued on Next Page

90% 10%

104

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

QgM~~~lH[iJ.~~~~!y'),{;;i',~'l;;.,,:,~;t~':'I'~C\\~~'!r;;,fi;j!'<!V.'::;:';,'~\;i;P;'ji,:::.;~

Abraham Baldwin University - Main

Albany State University - Main

2

Armstrong Atlantic University - Main

2

1

Clayton State College & Univ, - Main

3

Coastal GA Community College -Main

5

Dalton College - Main

3

Darton College - Main

DeKalb College - Main

Gainesville College - Main

Georgia Institute of Technology - Main

9

Georgia Southern University - Main

6

Georgia Southwestern Univ. - Main

1

Georgia State University - Main

14

Kennesaw State .University - Main

7

Macon College - Main

4

Medical College of Georgia - Main

Middle Georgia College - Main

1

Southern Polytechnic State Univ, -Main

8

University of Georgia - Main

16

Valdosta State University - Main

5

Total at Main Campus

92

82%

Darton College - Satellite

1

DeKalb College - Satellite

2

Floyd College - Satellite

2

Georgia College & State Univ, - Satellite

2

Georgia Institute of Technology - Satellite

1

Georgia Southern University - Satellite

Georgia State University - Satellite

Kennesaw State University - Satellite

2

Medical College of Georgia - Satellite

University of Georgia - Satellite

4

Total at Satellite

17

15%

Augusta State University

2

Georgia State University

Total Non-Location Specific

.3

3%

T:o~I;~tp(jI,lege/Ur:'ivel"Sity;S~~"'':;",' :;1,\;--." ,;,-::.,,!;):;::, .',::';'0 .'(")" :;:':.~:;,~,,'.:'i'\\:'E~.1,12,,>:<,,:',;,,':~:i,'/~' ",<~;:::,';.7;;<1R9,%~

.c,:, ."::, :r,o~I,:~esponses

'(::',:f;,:N':~'{':'; ,:.'... '; .,', '" :;" .","".:" "",:,,;":,";;,: '~,.~'x.i',:rF;1~q ;::;:' ;'," ;"':.""', ,:'::<,(::;;,:~;~t,<!?

105

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses .

Q22.1 - How satisfied was your company with the content of continuing education training received at Technical Institutes?

Very Satisfied Mostly Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Total

44

57.1

24

31.2

8

10.4

1

1.3

0

0.0

0

0.0

77

100

022.2 - How satisfied was your company with performance improvement following continuing education training received at Technical Institutes?

;~Respon$e~;;)I!;;::;i;~(i'~;t!;;i:'?J~!llf;miiji~~!@J;l ;\.:?Fff~que~(;Y:;;:ri Ci'!A:n~~f,c:~nt7;~;"~;E

Very Satisfied

38

47.5

Mostly Satisfied

29

36.3

Somewhat Satisfied

11

13.8

Neutral

2

2.5

Somewhat Dissatisfied

0

0.0

Very Dissatisfied

0

0.0

Total

80

100

Q23 - Which of the following types of continuing education courses or workshpps will your company pay for your employees to attend?

Q23.1 - Will your company pay for all courses or workshops?

Q23X1 Frequency

YES

90

NO

286

REFUSED'

2

DON'T KNOW

11

NOT ASCERTAINED

12

Percent
22.4 71.3
O.~
2.7 3.0

Cumulative Cumulative Frequency Percent

90

. 22.4

376

93.8

378

94.3

389

97.0

401

100.0

106

Appendix F

Survey of Georgia Businesses

023.2 - Will your company pay for courses to meet professional or licensing requirements?

Q23X2

Frequency

Cumulative Cumulative Percent Frequency Percent

YES

273

NO

92

REFUSED

1

DON'T KNOW

15

NOT ASCERTAINED 20

68.1 22.9
0.2 3.7 5.0

273

68.1

365

91. 0

366

91. 3

381

95.0

401

100.0

023.3 - Will your company pay for courses that the company requests employees take?

Q23X3

Frequency

Cumulative Cumulative

Percent Frequency

Percent

YES

337

NO

41

DON'T KNOW

10

NOT ASCERTAINED

13

84.0 10.2
2.5 3.2

337

84.0

378

94.3

388

96.8

401

100.0

023.4 - Does your company pay for any continuing education courses or workshops for employees?

Q23X4

Cumulative Cumulative

Frequency Percent Frequency

Percent

YES NO DON'T KNOW NOT ASCERTAINED

129

39.7

177

54.5

11

3.4

8

2.5

Frequency Missing

129 306 317 325 76

39.7 94.2 97.5 100.0

107

Appendix G Survey of Other States Continuing Education Program

Response Rate=51% (25 of 49 states)

States Responding to the Survey:

Arizona

Montana

Colorado

Nebraska

Connecticut

Nevada

Florida

North Carolina

Idaho

Rhode Island

Illinois

South Carolina

Iowa

Tennessee

Massachusetts

Texas

Maryland

Virginia

Maine

Washington

Michigan

West Virginia

Missouri

Wisconsin

Mississippi

In some instances, totals will not equal 100% due to rounding considerations. Responses are considered "Missing" if a state is skipped or failed to answer a question.

Continuing Education Activities in State
1. For which type(s) of postsecondary institution does your agency oversee continuing education? Please mark all that apply. (24 of 25 states responded)
(A) Four-Year Research Universities (B) Four-Year Comprehensive Universities/Colleges (C) Two-Year Colleges (Pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) (0) Community Colleges (Both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and
technical education missions) (E) Technical Institutes (Technical education mission) (F) Other - Please specify.

Four-year comprehensive universities/colleges Two-year colleges (pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) Community colleges (both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and technical education mission) Technical institutes (technical education mission) Other

7 of 24 (29.2%) 4 of 24 (16.7%) 20 of 24 (83.3%)
7 of 24 (29.2%) 1 of 24 (4.2%)

109

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

2. Which of the following types of postsecondary institutions offer continuing

education courses in. your state? Please mark all that apply. (23 of 25 states

responded)

.

(A) Four-Year Research Ufliversities

(B) Four-Year Comprehensive Universities/Colleges

(C) Two-Year Colleges (Pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission)

(D) Community Colleges (Both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and

technical education missions)

(E) Technical Institutes (Technical education mission)

(F) Other - Please specify.



I

Four-year comprehensive universities/colleges Two-year colleges (pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) Community colleges (both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and technical education mission) Technical institutes (technical education mission) Other

22 of 23 (95.7%) 10 of 23 (43.5%)
22 of 23 (95.7%)
10 of 23 (43.5%) 1 of 23 (4.3%)

3. What is the mission or purpose of continuing education at your state's postsecondary institutions?
Open-ended Responses

Does the mission or purpose differ by type of postsecondary institution? (9 of 25 states responded)

valla Missing Total

yes Total -1.00 Total

Frequency
~
9 16 16 25

Percent
30.0
36.0 64.0 64.0 100.0

Valid Percent
1UU.0
100.0

Cumulative Percent
1UU.U

110

Appendix G

. Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

4. What categories of continuing education courses do eaGh of the following types of postsecondary institutions offer? Please mark all that apply.
(1) Personal Growth/General Interest Courses (2) Continuing Education Unit (CEU) Courses (3) Professional/Occupational Courses (Non-CEU) (4) Courses for Academic Credit (5) Courses for Professional Licensure/Certification (6) No continuing education courses offered. (7) Type of.institution does not exist in state.

(A) Four:"Year Research Universities (16 of 25 states responded)

~;f{l1c\'~r~~~~rfu:f~~~~1~;~:;&~~~~~~:~i~::,;.~\~r.;(1,~,~~~F~r~1~2r.:i{\~

Personal growth/general interest courses Continuing education unit (CEU) courses Professional/occupational courses (non-CEU) Courses for academic credit Courses for professional licensure/certification No continuing education courses offered

13 of 16 (81.3%) 15 of 16 (93.8%) 12 of 16 (75%) 15 of 16 (93.8%) 15 of 16 (93.8%)
0 of 16 (0%)

(B) Four-Year Comprehensive Universities/Colleges (17 of 25 states responded)

Continuing education unit (CEU) courses Professional/occupational courses (non-CEU) Courses for academic credit Courses for professional licensure/certification No continuing education courses offered Type of institution not present in this state

16 of 17 (94.1 %) 12 of 17 (70.6%) 14 of 17 (82.4%) 13 of 17 (76.5%)
0 of17 (0%) 1 of 17 (5.9%)

(C) Two-Year Colleges (Pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) (16 of 25 states responded)

Personal growth/general interest courses Continuing education unit (CEU) courses Professional/occupational courses (non-CEU) Courses for academic credit Courses for professional licensure/certification No continuing education courses offered Type of institution not present in this state

8 of 16 (50%) 9 of 16 (56.3%) 9 of 16 (56.3%) 8 of 16 (50%) 8 of 16 (50%)
oof 16 (0%)
7 of 16 (43.8%)

111

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

(D) Community Colleges. (Both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and technical missions) (22 of 25 states responded)

1;f{f~J~)+~f!~~~1~rtnr9.~fJf~~~~~~~~00;~~~;!':'~'
Personal growth/general interest courses Continuing education unit (CEU) courses . Professional/occupational courses (non-CEU) Courses for academic credit Courses for professional licensure/certification No continuing education courses offered Type of institution not present in this state

20 of 22 (90.9%)
21 of 22 (95.5%
17 of 22 (77.3%)
20 of 22 (90.9%)
o of 22 (0%)
1 of 22 (4.5%)

(E) Technical Institutes (Technical education mission) (17 of 25 states responded)

Personal growth/general interest courses Continuing education unit (CEU) courses Professional/occupational courses (non-CEU) Courses for academic credit Courses for professional licensure/certification No continuing education courses offered Type of institution not present in this state

11 of17 (64.7%)
10 of 17 (58.8%)
11 of17 (64.7%)
8 of 17 (47.1%)
11 of 17 (64.7%)
oof 17 (0%)
6 of 17 (35.3%)

Continuing Education at Community Colleges and Technical Institutions

5. Does your agency have any statewide standards or policies regarding continuing education? (22 of 25 states responded)

Yes No Please skip to Part III, Question 7.

vallo.
Missing Total

yes No Total -1.00 Total

Frequency
1
10 22
3 3 25

Percent
4l:S.U
40.0 88.0 12.0 12.0 100.0

Valid Percent
04.0
45.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent
04.0
100.0

*Note: One state skipped this question, but responded to question 6.

6. What topics are included in these statewide standards or policies? Please mark all that apply. (13 of 25 states responded)
(A) Types of courses to be offered/excluded (B) Financing (ex: must recover direct and indirect costs)

112

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

(C) Qualifications of instructors (D) Course Curriculum Review (E) Program Evaluation (F) Performance. Standards/Benchmarks
(G) Other - Please specify.

Type of courses to be offered/excluded Financing Qualifications of Instructors
Course curriculum review Program evaluation Performance standards/benchmarks Other

10 of 13(76.9%) 11 of 13 (84.6%) 7 of 13 (53.8%)
5 of 13 (38.5%) 5 of 13 (38.5%) 4 of 13 (30.8%) 2 of 13 (15.4%)

Note: One state skipped question 5, but did provide responses to this question.
7. Do continuing education courses have standardized curricula? Please mark best response. (20 of 25 states responded)
(A) All courses' curricula standardized. (B) Some courses' curricula standar.dized, depends on subject
area. (ex: computer courses are standardized whiIe management courses are not) (G) None of the courses' curricula are standardized. (D) Some institutions will use standardized curricula for at least some of their courses, while others will not.

Valla
Missing Total

::lome courses' curricula standardized. depends on subject
None of the courses' curricula are standardized
Some institutions use standardized curricula for some course
Total
-1.00
Total

Frequency 8
5
7
20 5 5
25

Percent 32.0
20.0
28.0
80.0 20.0 20.0 100.0

Valid Percent
40.0
25.0
35.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent 40.0
65.0
100.0

113

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

8. How do your institutions review and evaluate continqing education courses?
Please mark al/ that apply. (21 of 25 states responded) -
(A) Student evaluations of courses (content and instructor) (B) Needs assessment of service area (C) Surveys of general public (0) Surveys of businesses and industries (E) Focus groups (F) Institutional peer review by other faculty and administrators (G) _Other:- Please specify.

Student evaluation of courses

Needs assessment of service area

Surveys of general public

Surveys of businesses and industries

Focus groups

Institutional peer review by other faculty

and administrators

.

Other

19 of 21 (90.5%) 18 of21 (85.7%) 11 of 21 (52.4%) 190f21 (90.5%) 130f21(61.9%) 10 of21 (47..6%)
2 of 21(9.5%)

9. How is each -institution's continuing education program as a whole evaluated? Please attach list if any performance measures or benchmarks are used.
Open--ended Responses

10. Has your state's continuing education program as a whole (including all postsecondary institutions) ever been evaluated? (22 of 25 states responded)
YesO Please send a copy of this evaluation with your survey.
No

valla

yes , No

. Total

Missing . -1.00

Total

Total

Frequency 1
21 22
3 3 25

Percent 4.0
84.0 88.0 12.0 12.0 100.0

Valid Percent
4.5
95.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 4.5
100.0

114

Appendix G

s.yrvey of Other States - Continuing Education

11. Does your state provide any state funds for continuing education? (24 of 25 states responded)
Yes No

valla
Missing Total

yes No Total -1.00 Total

Frequency
1:$
11 24
1 1 25

Percent
02.U
44.0 96.0 4.0 4.0 100.0

Valid Percent
04.2
45.8 100.0

Cumulative Percent
04.2
100.0

12. Does your agency require that continuing education programs at the institutions break-even (at minimum revenue must pay for the direct and indirect costs of the program) or make a profit? (19 of 25 states responded)
(A) Agency requires continuing education programs break-even. (8) Agency requires continuing education programs make a
profit to help fund their continued operations and/or other institution activities. (C) Agency allows continuing education programs to be subsidized by other institution funds.

valla
Missing Total

Agency requires CE programs break-even
Agency requires CE programs make a profit to help fund
Agency allows CE programs to be subsidized
Total
-1.00
Not Applicable
Total

Frequency 7
1
11 19
5 1 6 25

Percent 28.0
4.0
44.0 76.0 20.0 4.0 24.0 100.0

Valid Percent
36.8
5.3
57.9 100.0

Cumulative Percent 36.8
42.1
100.0

115

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

13. How are state funds used in the continuing education programs? Please mark . all that apply. (18 of 25 states responded)

(A) Administrator/Director at state level

(8) Administrators/Directors at institution level

(C) Support staff at state level

(D) Support staff at institution level

(E) Instructors

(F) Capital Outlay for Facilities

(G) Direct Operating Expenses - instructional materials,

supplies, etc.

'(H) Indirect Operating Expenses~ rent, utilities, etc.

(H) Other - Ple8:se specify.

_

Administrator/director at state level Administrators/directors at institution level .Support staff at state level Support staff at institution level Instructors Capital outlay for facilities Direct operating expenses Indirect operating expenses Other

3 of 18 (16.7%) 9 of 18 (50%) 2of18(11.1%) 8 of 18 (44.4%) 8 of 18 (44.4%) 4 of 18 (22.2%) 7 of 18 (38.9%) 6 of 18 (33.3%) 4 of 18 (22.2%)

14. . How much in state funds has your state' expemded on continuing education in

your three most recently completed fiscal years?

FY

$

'--

FY

$~

_

FY

$

_

1995

3

$435,000

$20,783,979

$10,261,860

1996

4

$435,000, $22,275,971

$8,451,543

1997

2

$1,460,000 ' 23,565,293

$12,512,647

1998

$1,460,000

1,460,000

Not applicable

,\ I
".
116

Appendix G

Survey of Other States - Continuing Education

15. Do fees charged for continuing education courses recover .both the institution's direct and indirect costs? (23 of 25 states responded)

(A) Always (8) Usually (C) Often (D) Sometimes

(E) Rarely (F) Never
(G) Don't Know

valla
Missing Total

Always Usually Often Sometimes Don't Know Total -1.00 Total

Frequency
1
9 2 6 5 23 2 2 25

Percent 4.0
36.0 8.0
24.0 20.0 92.0
8.0 8.0 100.0

Valid Percent
4.3 39.1
8.7 26.1 21.7 100.0

Cumulative Percent 4.3 43.5 52.2 78.3 100.0

16. Please complete the following table based on data for your system of community colleges or technical institutions from your state's last completed fiscal year.

Number of Participants (Unduplicated Count)
Number of Participants (Duplicated Count)
Number of Instructional Hours

-No. of States Reporting 3

-Minimum

12,019

-Maximum

294,894

-Average

185,217

-No. of States Reporting 4

-Minimum

19,834

-Maximum

436,436

-Average

212,205

-No. of States Reporting 2

-Minimum

3,232,822

-Maximum

11,480,102

-Average

7,356,462

-No. of States Reporting

4

-Minimum

18,259

-Maximum

94,480

-Average

60,662 .

-No. of States Reporting

1

-Minimum

18,851

-Maximum

18,851

-Average

Not Applicable

No States Reporting,

CEUs Awarded

-No. of States Reporting 1

-Minimum'

299,395

-Maximum

299,395

-Average

Not Applicable

17. How does continuing education offered at your institutions relate to other workforce development efforts in your state? What are the roles of your state's educational institutions as compared to other state agencies in terms of workforce development?
Open-ended Responses

117

",
, .; ~ .
,',
. .~.

Appen~ix H Survey of Other States
Customized Training Program

Response Rate=59% (29 of 49 states)

States Responding to the Survey:

Arkansas

Montana

Arizona

North Carolina

Colorado

Nebraska

Connecticut

New Jersey

Florida

New Mexico

Iowa

Nevada

Idaho

Ohio

Illinois

Oklahoma

Louisiana

Rhode Island

Massachusetts

Texas

Maryland

Virginia

Maine

Washington

Michigan

Wisconsin

Missouri

West Virginia

Mississippi

In some instances, totals will not equal 100% due to rounding considerations. Responses are considered "missing" if a state skipped or failed to answer a question.

Statewide Program for Customized Training
1. Does your state have a statewide program that provides customized training directly to businesses, industry, labor organizations, or government? (27 of 29 states responded)
Yes No=> Please skip to Question 5.

valla
Missing
.
Total

yes No Total -1.00 Total

Frequency 17 10 27 2 2 29

Percent 58.6 34.5 93.1 6.9 6.9
100.0

Valid Percent
b;j.U
37.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent
b;j.U
100.0

119

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

2. What types of businesses does the statewide program serve? Please mark all that apply. (16-of 29 states responded)

(A) New businesses locating in state (8) Expanding businesses . (C) Any existing businesses (D) Other - Please specify.

&~~g!~~~~~~~2;:~~r0jf'~i~~~~~;'~S!" ?:.:;'~~~{o~diri:i;r~~a

New businesses locating in state

16 of 16 (100%)

Expanding Businesses

16 of 16 (100%)

Any existing businesses

9 of 16. (56.3%)

Other

6 of 16 (37.5%)

3. What role does the statewide program play in providing the customized training? (14 of 29 states responded)'
(A) Provides funds/grants to companies to do the training. (8) Directly provides the training. (C) Sometimes provides funds/grants for training and
sometimes directly provides the training. (D) Other - Please specify.

valla
Missing Total

t-'rovloes funds/grants for training
Sometimes provides funds/grants and sometimes training
Other' .
Total
-1.00
Not Applicable
Total

Frequency 6
6
2 14
5 10 15 29

Percent 20.7
20.7
6.9 48.3 17.2 34.5 51.7 100.0

Valid Percent
42.9
42.9
14.3 100.0

Cumulative Percent 42.9
85.7
100.0

4. Does your agency: oversee this statewide program for customized training? (17 of 29 states responded)
Yes No

120

Appendix H

Survey:prOther States - Customized Training

valla Missing Total

yes No Total -1.00 Not Applicable Total

Frequency
11
6 17 2
10
12 29

Percent
jf.l:I
20.7 58.6 6.9
34.5
41.4 100.0

Valid Percent
04.1
35.3 100.0

Cumulative Percent
04.1
100.0

Customized Training Delivered by the Institutions
When responding to the following questions, please consider only customized training delivered directly by the postsecondary institutions and not customized training delivered by any statewide program.

General Information
5. Do any of your state's postsecondary institutions provide customized training directly to businesses, industry, labor organizations, or government? (29 of 29 states responded)
Yes No=> Please skip to Question 25

valla Total

Yes Total

Frequency
Ll:I
29 29

Percent
1UU.U
100.0 100.0

Valid Percent
1UU.U
100.0

Cumulative Percent
1UU.U

6. What types of businesses do the postsecondary institutions serve through their customized training programs? Please mark all that apply. (28 of 29 states responded)
(A) New businesses (8) Expanding businesses (C) Any existing businesses (D) Varies by type of postsecondary institution (E) Other - Please specify.

121

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

7. Which of the following types of postsecondary institutions offer customized training at an institutional level in your state? Please mark all that apply.
(A) Four-Year Research Universities (28 of 29 states responded)
(B) Four-Year Comprehensive Universities/Colleges (28 of 29 states responded)
(C) Two-Year Colleges (Pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) (27 of 29 states responded)
(0) Community Colleges (Both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and technical education missions) (27 of 29 states responded)
(E) Technical Institutes (Technical education mission) (27 of 29 states responded)
(F) Other,. Please specify. (27 of 29 states responded)

Four-year research universities Four-year comprehensive universities/colleges Two-year colleges (pre-baccalaureate! transfer mission) Community colleges (both pre-baccalaureate! transfer and technical education missions) Technical institutes (technical education mission) Other

24 of 27(88.9%)
13 of 27 (48.1%) 1 of 27 (3.7%)

8. For which type(s) of postsecondary institutions that deliver customized training does your' agency have oversight responsibility? Please mark all that apply.
(A) Four-Year Research Universities (27 of' 29 states responded)
(B) Four-Year Comprehensive Universities/Colleges (27 of 29 states responded)
(C) Two-Year Colleges (Pre-baccalaureate/transfer mission) (27 of 29 states responded)
(0) Community Colleges (Both pre-baccalaureate/transfer and technical education missions) (27 of 29 states responded)

122

Appendix H (E) (F)

" Survey of Other States - Customized Training ',.;
Technical Institutes (Technical education mission) (27 of 29 states responded) Other - Please specify. (27 of 29 states responded)

Four-year research universities

Four-year comprehensive universities!colleges

Two-year colleges (pre-baccalaureate! transfer

mission)

,

Community colleges (both pre-baccalaureate!

transfer and technical education missions)

Technical institutes (technical education mission)

Other

5 of 27 (18.5%) 6 of 27 (22.2%) 5 of 27 (18.5%)
21 of 27 (77.8%)
9 of 27 (33.3%) 2 of 27 (7.4%)

9. Which of the following statements best describes how your institutions' customized training programs function? (26 of 29 states responded)

(A) The institutions provide training designed to meet the specific needs of employers on a variety of topics and using various delivery formats and arrangements.
(8) The institutions provide some training that is specifically designed to meet employers' needs, and regular college courses or programs are used for other training.
(C) Employees of local business and industry receive training in courses and programs available to all students, but' no training is specifically designed to meet employers' needs.
(0) Other - Please specify.

vallo
Missing Total

institutions deliver training designed for employer
Institution deliver some training, rely some on reg. courses
Total
-1.00
Total

Frequency 15
11
26 3 3
29

Percent 51.7
37.9
89.7 10.3 10.3 100.0

Valid Percent
57.7
42.3 100.0

Cumulative Percent ' 57.7
100.0

123

Appendix H -

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

11. Does this same office or unit also coordinate any of the following types of

activities .at each institution?

Please mark all that apply. (10 of 29

states responded)

'- (A)' (B) (C) (D) ,(E)

. Statewide Customized Training Program Continuing Education Economic Development Federal Training Program (ex: JTPA and JOBS) Other - Please specify.

, Statewide Customized Training Program Continuing education . Economic Development Federal training program
'. Other

124

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

Statewide PolicieslStandards
12. Does your agency have any statewide standards or policies regarding customized training delivered by the institutions? (26 of 29 states responded)
Yes No=> Please skip to Question 14.

valla
Missing Total

Yes No Total -1.00 Total

Frequency 7
19 26
3 3 29

Percent 24.1 65.5 89.7 10.3 10.3
100.0

Valid Percent
26.9
73.1
100.0

Cumulative Percent 26.9 100.0
-

13. What topics are included in these statewide standards or policies? Please mark all that apply. (7 of 29 states responded)

(A) Types of training to be offered/excluded (B) Financing (ex: recover costs/make profit) (C) Qualifications of instructors/trainers (D) CourselTraining Curriculum Review (E) Standardized Curricula or Programs (F) Program Evaluation (G) Performance Standards/Benchmarks (H) Other - Please specify.

\~~R~*:ftt~?f~'mi.;~WS~~~l:1t'~,j~?~:)~r.:'}':K,r .:::::,~~.':~r~~:~F:~~1~~0~~{:::~~i;

Types of training to be offered/excluded Financing Qualifications of Instructors/trainers Courseltraining curriculum review Standardized curricula or programs Program evaluation Performance standards/benchmarks Other

6 of 7(85.7%) 70f 7 (100%) 3 of 7 (42.9%) 2 of 7 (28.6%) 0 of 7 (0%) 4 of 7 (57.1 %) 4 of? (57.1 %) 1 of 7 (14.3%)

125

App.endix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

Level of Activity
/-
14.' How many employers (unduplicated count) did-your institutions serve through customized training programs during your state's most recently completed fiscal year?

Total number of employers served

_

Number of States Responding

12 of 29

Minimum Number of Employers Reported by a State;:-_ _-+~25~:__-__i

Maximum Number of Employers Reported by a Stat:::.e

t--T5,~60~0_ ___i

Average

1,541

15. Which industry accounted for the largest number of employers receiving customized training in your state's most recently completed fiscal year? (11 of 29 states responded)
(A) Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing (B) Mining (C) Construction (0) Manufacturing (E) Wholesale/Retail Sale (G) Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (H) Professional Service (I) Public Administration and Government (J) Business Services, Hospitality, and Recreation (K) Transportation, Communications, and Utilities (L) Other - Please specify.

valla Missing
Total

ManUfactUring Total -1.00 Don't Know/Not Available Total

Frequency
11
11 9
9
18 29

Percent
,j(.'d
37.9 31.0
31.0
62.1 100.0

Valid Percent
IUU.U
100.0

Cumulative Percent 100.0

126

Appendix H

','

.1

.!'-._,

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

16. How many employees (unduplicated count) did your institutions serve through customized training programs during your state's most recently completed fiscal year?

Total number of employees served

_

Number of States Reporting Minimum Number of Employees Reported by a State Maximum Number of Employees Reported by a State Average

13 of 29 1,292 222,772 50,711

17. Which industry accounted for the largest number of employees receiving customized training in your state's most recently completed fiscal year? (12 of 29 states responded)

(A) Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing

(B) Mining

(C) Construction

(D) Manufacturing

(E) Wholesale/Retail Sale

(G) Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate

(H) Professional Service

.

(I) Public Administration and Government

(J) Business Services, Hospitality, and Recreation

(K) Transportation, Communications, and Utilities

(L) Other - Please specify.

valla Missing Total

Manutacturlng Public Administration and Govt Total -1.00
Don't Know/Not Available Total

Frequency
11
1
12 8
9
17 29

Percent
J(.'d
3.4
41.4 27.6
31.0
58.6 100.0

Valid Percent
'd1.f
8.3
100.0

Cumulative Percent 91.7
100.0

18. What percentage of employees receiving customized training in your state's most recently completed fiscal year were employed by organizations of each size? Total should equal 100 percent. (6 of 29 states responded).

(A) - - %
(B) - - %

Less than 25 employees 26-99 employees

127

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

(C) - - %

(D) - - %

(E)

%

----:

100 %

100-499 employees . 500-999' employees More than 1000 employees

~~~&~ai~~~~;i~~i1I,,~YI i!1~!~~t~W~W~!i

Less than

0%

25 employees

36-99

0%

employees

100-499

0%

employees

500-999

0%

employees

More than 1000

0%

employees

"'I~~~~~Yr:!11;: !,{,I;('~),jij~~9!:

90%

25.5%

63%

24.7%

70%

32.5%

30%

12.3%

20%

4.3%

19. What were revenue and expenditures for customized training delivered by

the institutions during your state's last completed fiscal year? (4 of 29

states responded)

,

FY

Revenue

$------

Expenditures'

$------

Training Topics and Methods of Training

20. Which of the following types of training were provided by institutions to employers during your state's most recently completely fiscal year? Please mark all that apply. (21 of 29 states responded)

(A) Workplace Literacy (basic reading, writing, and math)

(8) English as a Second Language

(C) Supervisory/Management Training

(D) Total Quality Management/Continuous Improvement

(E) Interpersonal/Communication Skills,

(F) Computer Literacy/Software or Hardware Training

(G) Job Specific Technical Training

(H) Customer Service

'

(I) Courses leading to ,Licensure or Certification

(J) Courses leading to Academic Credit/Degree.

(K) Other - Please specify.

128

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

Workplace literacy (basic reading, writing, and math)
English as a second language Supervisory/management training Total quality management/ continuous improvement Interpersonal/communication skills Computer literacy/software or hardware training Job specific technical training Customer service Courses leading to licensure or certification Courses leading to academic credit/degree Other

19 of21 (90.5%)
16 of21 (76.2%) 21 of21 (100%) 21 of21 (100%) 19 of 21 (90.5%) 21 of21 (100%) 21 of 21 (100%) 19 of21 (90.5%) 17 of21 (81%) 16 of21 (76.2%) 1 of 21 (4.8%)

21. Which of the following types of staff provided the largest number of instructional hours of customized training? (9 of 29 states responded)

(A) Faculty as part of regular workload (8) Faculty on supplemental contracts (C) Trainers hired on a contract basis (0) Full-time trainers on staff (E) Part-time trainers on staff (F) Other - Please specify.

valla
Missing Total

r-acultY as pan of regular workload
Faculty on supplemental contract
Trainers hired on a contract basis
Part-time trainers on staff
Total
-1.00
Don't Know/Not Available
Total

Frequency 1
2
5
1 9 15 5 20 29

Percent 3.4
6.9
17.2
3.4 31.0 51.7 17.2 69.0 100.0

Valid Percent
11.1
22.2
55.6
11.1 100.0

Cumulative Percent 11.1
33.3
88.9
100.0

129

Appendix H

Survey of Other States - Customized Training

22. Which of the following types of facilities was used most otten by the institutions for customized training? (11 of 29 states ,responded)
(A) ,- On-campus facilities designed for workforce training (B) _.Regular on-campus facilities as they are available (C) Off.,campus facilities' provided by the institution' ,(0) FaCilities provided by the employers ' (E) Other - Please specify.

,ya~la.
Missing Total

,,
un-campu,s
facilities designed for training Regular on-campus facilities as they are available
,'
Facilities provided by employers Total -1.00 Don't Know/Not Available Total

Frequency
2
, .. '
2

,.",...

7

11 14

.4
~8 29

Percent 6.9

Valid Percent
, '.
18.2

'6.9

'18.2

-

24.1
37.9, 48.3
13.8
62.1 100.0

63.6 100.0

Cumulative Percent 18.2
36.4
100.0

Financial Information

23. Which of the following were used to fund customized training (actual cost of training and administrative overhead) at postsecondary institutions' in your state's last fiscal year? Please mark all that apply. (24 of 29 states responded)

(A) State Appropriations

(B) State Grants and Contracts

(C) Federal Grants and Contracts

(0) Other Federal Funds

(E) Institution revenue from other activities besides customized

training

i I

(F) Employers

I
I

(G) Other - Please specify.

130

Appendix H

Survey 9f Other States - Customized Training .

State grants & contracts Federal grants & contracts Other federal funds Institution revenue from other besides customized training Employers Other

activities

18 of 24 (75%)
15 of 24 (62.5%) 12 of 24 (50%) 20f 24 (8.3%) 9 of 24(37.5%)
18 of 24 (75%) 1 of 24 (4.2%)

24. Can institutions retain revenue from customized training and carry it forward from one fiscal year to the next fiscal year? (22 of 29 reporting)

Yes No

valla
Missing Total

yes No Total -1.00 Total

Frequency 15 7 22 7 7 29

Percent 51.7 24.1 75.9 24.1 24.1
100.0

Valid Percent
68.2
31.8 100.0

Cumulative Percent 68.2
100.0

131

Appendix I . 'IES Measures for Continuing Education and Customized Training

Measure Criteria for Success Indicator of Success
Number

Measures

Business arid Industry or Required or Continuing Education Not Required

Attractiveness to Customers

Competitiveness

Attractiveness to Customers

Opportunities for Lifelong Learning

1-8-1 1-0-1

Continuing education, customized training for business and industry, miscellaneous fees for credit programs, workshops, seminars, etc. are competitively priced compared with those of other providers. The institution meets customer needs for school-to-work linkages by providing a variety of opportunities for instruction such as: work-based diploma and degree programs, apprenticeships, internships, coop programs, tech prep, and mentorships..

8 and I, CE 8 and I

not required not required

Attractiveness to Customers

Opportunities for Lifelong Learning

1-0-2

The institution provides work to school linkages through training, retraining, workplace literacy and upgrade training for business and industry through Quick Start and/or customized business and industry training to meet customer needs.

8 and', CE

required

Attractiveness to Customers
Attractiveness to Customers

Opportunities for Lifelong Learning
Positive Reputation, Image

Attractiveness to Customers

Positive Reputation, Image

Comprehensive, High Quality Services

Effective Assessment, Program Placement, Enrollment, and Retention Process

Comprehensive, High Ability to Identify and

Quality Programs

Meet Market Needs

Accessibility and Quality

Comprehensive, High

Quality Programs

Delivery of Instruction

and Training

1-0-3 I-E-2 I-E-3

The institution meets customer needs by maintaining or

increasing community outreach programs including: continuing

education, literacy services.

'-

Feedback from employers indicates that students are actively

recruited from the technical institute.

Feedback from the community indicates that the institution has

been instrumental in attracting new business and industry,

retaining existing business and industry, and assisting

business and industry by retraining employees for changing

jobs.

II-S-6

The institution sets and achieves local goals for percentage of increase in enrollments/training hours/companies served' with customized training.

III-A-2 111-8-1

Annual advisory committee programs of work fully integrate input into program/adult literacy processes, operations, and activities, and progress is documented. Instructional programs, continuing education and customized business and industry training, are provided at locations convenient to the customer

8 and I, CE 8 and I 8 and I
B and I, CE B and I
8 and I, CE

not required not required
required
reqUired not required
reqUired

133

,Appendix I I,ES M~asures ,for Continuing Educ,ation and Customized ,Training ,

Criteria for Success

Indicator of Success

Measure Number

Measures

Business and Industry or Required or Continuing Education Not Required

Accessibility and Quality Comprehensive, High Delivery of Instruction Quality Programs
and Training

III-B-4

Economic development programs establish and achieve institutional improvement goals for project dev~lopment, instructional design and delivery, and training services.

Comprehensive, High Availability of

Quality Programs

Appropriate Resources

III-C-1

Customers indicate satisfaction with equipment and technology for programs. Include individual students and' companies.

Effective Human Competent Personnel Resource Planning and
Management

..

Sufficient personnel are I3rovided for effective programs and

IV-A-1

services, based on customer needs.

Effective Human

Implementation of annual professional development plans

Competent Personnel Resource Planning and IV-A-4 based on annual evaluations results in measurable personnel

Management

improvement.

Feedback obtained from the students indicates that staff Competent Personnel Personnel Improvement IV-B-2 members are routinely courteous and responsive.

Administrators, faculty, and staff are involved with the

Competent Personnel Personnel Improvement

IV-B-3 community through civic and professional organizations.

Personnel Performance Competent Personnel and Recognition

IV-C-1

Personnel indicate satisfaction that the performance evaluation and recognition system is based on contribution to the institution.

Personnel Performance Competent Personnel
and Recognition

IV-C-2 The institution evaluates its personnel performance assessment instruments and procedures

Competent-Personnel Personnel Satisfaction

The technical institute has a communication system that. IV-D-2 provides pertinent information and feedback to personnel.

The work environment promotes professional growth and

Competent Personnel Personnel Satisfaction IV-D-3

0,

positive morale among personnel.

Quality Improvement,

Internal and external customers indicate that the institution's

and Purposeful

Vision and Creativity

V-A-1 programs and activities are in keeping with the institutional

Innovation

philosophy, mission, and vision.

Band I
B and I, CE
B and I, CE
B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE

not required
not required
not required
not required not required not required not required not required not required not required not required

Quality Improvert:lent and Purposeful Innovation

Strategic and ' Operational Planning for Improvement

V-C-3

The strategic plan is supported by development and annual updating of appropriate. implementation plans for improvement and used for the development ofoperational plans.

B and I, CE

not reqUired

134

Appendix I
IES Measures for Continuing Educ::ation and Customized Training

Measure Criteria for Success Indicator of Success
Number

MeasLires

Business and Industry or Required or Continuing Education Not Required

Quality Improvement and Purposeful Innovation Quality Improvement and Purposeful Innovation Quality Improvement and Purposeful Innovation Quality Improvement and Purposeful Innovation

Innovative Projects
Innovative Use of Information Technology
Innovative Use of Information Technology
Innovative Use of Information Technology

Institutional projects are responsive to internal and external V-D-2
customer needs and ideas.

V-F-1 The institution plans/projects information technology necessary to fulfill the institutional mission and vision.

EqUipment and information and information technology is V-F-2
conducive to technology transfer to business and industry.

V-F-3

The institution develops and implements concepts, curricula and programs, networks, and personnel training to improve use of information technology.

B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE B and I, CE

not required not required
required not required

Resource Development and Fiscal Soundness

Financial Planning

Resource

Development and

Resource Assessment

Fiscal Soundness

Resource

Development and

Resource Assessment

Fiscal Soundness

Resource

Development and

Resource Assessment

Fiscal Soundness

Source: Information provided by DTAE:

VI-B-2

Financial analysis of new programs, program expansion, and program update including operating costs, equipment maintenance, support, and teaching personnel are conducted enabling accurate projection of costs for three years.

Resource development and grant activities address VI-C-1 institutional needs and meet institutional goals.
All programs have cost analysis performed at least annually to VI-C-4 include cost of personnel, number of students, tuition paid,
instructional supplies, and cost of classroom space.

VI-C-6 Auxiliary enterprises are, at least, financially self-sustaining.

B and I, CE
B and I, CE B and I
B and I, CE

required
..
" not required
not required
not required

135

"