This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Success Factors-Performance Measures and Standards
FTCC End-of-Year Report on NCCCS Critical
Success Factors Performance Measures and
Standards Reported July 2011 for (2009-2010)
FTCC End-of-Year Report on NCCCS Critical
Success Factors Performance Measures and
Standards Reported June 2008 for (2006-2007)
FTCC End-of-Year Report on NCCCS Critical
Success Factors Performance Measures and
Standards Reported June 2009 for
(2007-2008)
FTCC End-of-Year Report on NCCCS Critical
Success Factors Performance Measures and
Standards Reported July 2010 for
(2008-2009)
FTCC End-of-Year report on NCCCS Critical
Success Factors Performance Measures and
Standards Reported June 2007 for
(2005-2006)
MEASURES forSTUDENT SUCCESS
2015 PERFORMANCE
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT “BLANK”
2015 PERFORMANCE MEASURES for STUDENT SUCCESS June 2015 NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM Dr. R Scott Ralls, President Jennifer Haygood, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer RESEARCH & PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT Bill Schneider, Associate Vice President Courtney Burns, National Reporting Coordinator Dr. Kristen Corbell, Program Evaluation Director Alexis Lockett, Research Assistant Christina Oxendine, Education Research Analyst
6/2/15
CONTENTS
Introduction 2
June 2015 Performance Summary 3A. Basic Skills Student Progress 5
B. GED Diploma Passing Rate 6
TABLE A. BASIC SKILLS STUDENT PROGRESS, 2013‐2014 7
TABLE B. GED DIPLOMA PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014
C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses 9
D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses 10
TABLE C. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2013‐2014
11TABLE D. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATH COURSES, 2013‐2014
E. First Year Progression 12
TABLE E. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2013 COHORT 13
F. Curriculum Student Completion 14
TABLE F. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2008 COHORT 15
G. Licensure and Certification Passing Rate 16
TABLE G. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014 17
H. College Transfer Performance 18
TABLE H. COLLEGE TRANSFER PERFORMANCE, 2012‐2013 COMMUNITY COLLEGESTUDENTS
TABLE C1. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2013‐2014 ‐ GRADE DISTRIBUTION
26
TABLE C2. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISHCOURSES, 2013‐2014 ‐ BY AGE
27
TABLE D1. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATHCOURSES, 2013‐2014 ‐ GRADE DISTRIBUTION
28
TABLE D2. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATHCOURSES, 2013‐2014 ‐ BY CREDIT MATH COURSE
29
TABLE E1. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2013 COHORT ‐ BY ETHNICITY ANDGENDER
31
TABLE F1‐F2. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2008 COHORT ‐ BYPROGRAM AREA
32
TABLE F3. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2008 COHORT ‐ BY ENROLLMENT TYPE 34
TABLE F4. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2008 COHORT ‐ BY ETHNICITY AND GENDER 35
TABLE G1. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014 ‐ BY EXAM(AVIATION, BLET)
36
TABLE G2. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014 ‐ BY EXAM(DENTAL HYGIENE, MASSAGE & BODY WORK, NUC. MED. TECH.) 37
TABLE G3. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014 ‐ BY EXAM(OPTICIANRY, RADIATION THERAPY, RADIOGRAPHY, REAL ESTATE SALES)
38
TABLE G4. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2014 ‐ BY EXAM(COSMETIC ARTS)
39
TABLE G5. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2014 ‐ BY EXAM (DETENTION OFFICER, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P)
40
TABLE G6. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2014 ‐ BY EXAM (PHYSICAL THERAPIST ASST., NURSING, VET. MED.TECH.)
41
1
Introduction The Performance Measures for Student Success Report is the North Carolina Community College System’s major accountability document. This annual performance report is based on data compiled from the previous year and serves to inform colleges and the public on the performance of our 58 community colleges.
In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures to ensure public accountability for programs and services. In 1998, the General Assembly directed the State Board to review past performance measures and define standards to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality.
In 2010, President Scott Ralls established a Performance Measures Committee to develop new performance‐based student success measures to go into effect in 2013. The Committee was led by two community college presidents, Dr. Dennis Massey of Pitt Community College and Dr. Molly Parkhill of Blue Ridge Community College. The Committee was comprised of college presidents, vice‐presidents, faculty, and directors from a diverse group of colleges representing various areas of expertise.
After a year of researching, drafting, and soliciting feedback from college faculty and staff on potential measures, the Committee formally presented the following eight measures to the State Board:
Basic Skills Student Progress Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses
First Year Progression Licensure and Certification Passing Rate
GED Diploma Passing Rate
Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses
Curriculum Student Completion
College Transfer Performance
In November 2011, the State Board formally approved the Performance Measures. These measures were then submitted to the General Assembly in March 2012 and later adopted in June 2012 through Section 8.5 of S.L. 2012‐142.
As the revised performance measures were being finalized, attention was turned to developing recommendations for incorporating performance into colleges’ regular formula budget allocations. In May 2012, President Ralls appointed a team of college presidents to a Performance Funding Committee to develop a performance funding model. This committee was led by State Board Chairman K. Ray Bailey and Garret Hinshaw, President of Catawba Valley Community College.
One of the outcomes of this committee was the establishment of system‐wide baseline and excellence levels for each measure. The committee recommended using consistent, statistically‐defined levels to promote transparency, simplicity, and objectivity. This utilization of the levels is a departure from the System’s historical use of “standards.”
Based on three years of historical data (if available) for each measure, the baseline levels were set two standard deviations below the system mean, and the excellence levels were set one standard deviation above the system mean. These levels remain static for three years and will be reset in the 2016 Report.
The performance summary on the following page provides each college with an overview of its results as compared to its peers. Color indicators represent various levels of performance within each measure:
Met or exceeded the excellence level Above the baseline level, but below the college avg
Above the college avg, but below the excellence level Below the baseline level
Wilson CC 51.2% 77.3% 59.3% 62.5% 68.3% 43.0% 86.7% 88.4% 1 3 4 0
Note: Color indicators are based on the precise percentages and not the rounded percentages as displayed
Met or Exceed
ed
Excellence Level
Below Baselin
e Level
Below College
Average,
Above Baselin
e Level
Below Excellence Level,
Above College
Average
3
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT “BLANK”
4
A. Basic Skills Student Progress Purpose
To ensure adults with low literacy skills are progressing academically toward basic skill attainment necessary for employment and self‐sufficiency
Description
Percentage of students who progress as defined by an educational functioning level.
Methodology
Denominator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year. Excludes High Adult Secondary Education initial placements.
Numerator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year, who complete the program year at a higher educational functioning level. Excludes high adult secondary education initial placements.
Note: Initial placement is set by the first NRS approved test(s) taken during the program year. The initial placement is the lowest Educational Functioning Level of the tests given within 3 days of the first test of the program year. A pre‐test is considered if it occurs up to 90 days prior to the program year and the test code and component match the test code and component of the one having the lowest EFL of the first test(s) in the program year.
Source
LEIS annual data file
Details
To be included in this measure student had to have been enrolled in a class during the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30), have accumulated 60 or more total contact hours across all classes enrolled, and not have an initial placement of High Adult Secondary Education. Initial placement is based upon the National Reporting System (NRS) guidelines of being the lowest Educational Functioning Level of the first NRS approved test(s) taken during the program year. Colleges received credit for all students who tested at a higher Educational Functioning Level at any point of the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30) in the same test and component that set the initial placement. Colleges are also given credit for students who test at Adult Secondary Education Low, are an Adult High School student, and meet the federal and state assessment policy guidelines for moving up an educational functioning level to Adult Secondary Education High.
Excellence level: 51.2%
Baseline level: 20.6%
5
B. GED Diploma Passing Rate Purpose
To ensure quality GED preparation and high levels of GED attainment
Description
Percentage of students taking at least one GED test during a program year who receive a GED diploma during the program year.
Methodology
Denominator: GED students with an Initial placement of Low Adult Secondary Education or High Adult Secondary Education who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30) and have 12 or more total contact hours.
Numerator: GED students with an Initial placement of Low Adult Secondary Education or High Adult Secondary Education who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30), and have 12 or more total contact hours, and receive a GED diploma
Source
LEIS Annual Data file Oklahoma Scoring GED test files
Details
Denominator: Students must meet the following criteria:
Included in the LEIS annual file
Have an initial placement of Adult Secondary Education Low (ASEL) or Adult Secondary Education High (ASEH)
Have accumulated at least 12 total contact hours during the program year
Taken at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30)
Numerator: All students from the denominator who receive a GED diploma during the program year (July 1 – June 30). Credit is given to the college where the student received the 12 or more contact hours and not the location the GED test was taken.
Excellence level: 82.0%
Baseline level: 49.3%
6
TABLE A. BASIC SKILLS STUDENT PROGRESS, 2013‐2014 TABLE B. GED DIPLOMA PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014
Excellence: 51.2% Excellence: 82.0%
Baseline: 20.6% Baseline: 49.3%
13‐14 12‐13 11‐12 13‐14 12‐13 11‐12
System Totals 44,230 19,821 44.8% 42% 41% System Totals 6,241 4,881 78.2% 72% 70%
Alamance CC 939 349 37.2% 25% 31% Alamance CC 81 58 71.6% 81% 73%
Mitchell CC 450 194 43.1% 41% 41% Mitchell CC 53 46 86.8% 91% 90%
Montgomery CC 200 100 50.0% 41% 43% Montgomery CC 34 32 94.1% 77% 73%
Nash CC 336 130 38.7% 26% 34% Nash CC 55 32 58.2% 66% 70%
Pamlico CC 119 57 47.9% 39% 28% Pamlico CC 16 14 87.5% 83% 53%
Piedmont CC 380 145 38.2% 38% 40% Piedmont CC 92 73 79.3% 73% 72%
Pitt CC 867 355 40.9% 43% 44% Pitt CC 98 67 68.4% 69% 68%
Randolph CC 661 175 26.5% 42% 35% Randolph CC 44 32 72.7% 69% 76%
Richmond CC 880 426 48.4% 47% 47% Richmond CC 119 95 79.8% 66% 63%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 137 25 18.2% 14% 13% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 18 10 55.6% 63% 72%
Robeson CC 1,148 520 45.3% 42% 35% Robeson CC 37 35 94.6% 96% 81%
Rockingham CC 230 92 40.0% 45% 56% Rockingham CC 58 52 89.7% 68% 77%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,115 367 32.9% 32% 37% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 120 95 79.2% 71% 64%
Sampson CC 663 302 45.6% 50% 49% Sampson CC 33 29 87.9% 90% 82%
Sandhills CC 648 199 30.7% 27% 26% Sandhills CC 83 57 68.7% 63% 61%
South Piedmont CC 947 451 47.6% 47% 48% South Piedmont CC 159 115 72.3% 72% 75%
Southeastern CC 593 304 51.3% 45% 45% Southeastern CC 224 147 65.6% 74% 84%
Southwestern CC 278 163 58.6% 49% 51% Southwestern CC 102 84 82.4% 75% 81%
Stanly CC 362 179 49.4% 50% 43% Stanly CC 37 31 83.8% 76% 72%
Surry CC 518 218 42.1% 42% 37% Surry CC 98 91 92.9% 88% 95%
Tri‐County CC 117 37 31.6% 24% 27% Tri‐County CC 40 33 82.5% 76% 79%
Vance‐Granville CC 812 281 34.6% 44% 40% Vance‐Granville CC 196 153 78.1% 76% 74%
Wake TCC 4,206 2,063 49.0% 35% 38% Wake TCC 550 414 75.3% 68% 60%
Wayne CC 963 650 67.5% 70% 67% Wayne CC 168 135 80.4% 74% 72%
Western Piedmont CC 661 118 17.9% 23% 21% Western Piedmont CC 86 69 80.2% 76% 67%
Wilkes CC 590 280 47.5% 47% 45% Wilkes CC 64 59 92.2% 95% 91%
Wilson CC 441 226 51.2% 44% 58% Wilson CC 75 58 77.3% 71% 74%
STUDENTSCOMPLETING
LEVELSTUDENTS PASSING
% PASSING% COMPLETING
7
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT “BLANK”
8
C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses Purpose
To ensure remedial English and reading coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing English courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental English and/or reading students who successfully complete a credit English course with a grade of “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit English course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a grade of “C” or better in their first credit English course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria: Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental English or Reading course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit English course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental English course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “C” or better in their first credit English course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit English course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit English course is based on any course with prefix “ENG” and course number greater than 099. When multiple English courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Excellence level: 74.9%
Baseline level: 45.2%
9
D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses Purpose
To ensure remedial math coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing math courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental math students who successfully complete a credit math course with a “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit math course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental math course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a “C” or better in their first credit math course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental math course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
Enrolled in their first credit Math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental Math course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit Math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental Math course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental Math course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit Math course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental Math course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “C” or better in their first credit Math course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit Math course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit Math course is based on any course with prefix “MAT” and course number greater than 099. When multiple Math courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Mitchell CC 241 149 61.8% 66% 65% 63% 63% Mitchell CC 197 125 63.5% 66% 60% 55% 63%
Montgomery CC 48 35 72.9% 73% 79% 75% 86% Montgomery CC 36 13 36.1% 36% 32% 36% 43%
Nash CC 231 131 56.7% 56% 53% 54% 51% Nash CC 343 249 72.6% 74% 72% 76% 76%
Pamlico CC 12 6 50.0% 60% 50% 73% 64% Pamlico CC 19 14 73.7% 79% 91% 75% 58%
Piedmont CC 131 83 63.4% 71% 62% 63% 69% Piedmont CC 163 102 62.6% 68% 71% 64% 73%
Pitt CC 755 484 64.1% 65% 71% 63% 61% Pitt CC 422 243 57.6% 53% 44% 53% 60%
Randolph CC 153 115 75.2% 72% 76% 75% 80% Randolph CC 297 202 68.0% 75% 66% 77% 62%
Richmond CC 220 155 70.5% 62% 66% 71% 66% Richmond CC 252 175 69.4% 64% 64% 68% 58%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 77 39 50.6% 58% 60% 50% 55% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 54 45 83.3% 80% 90% 74% 86%
Robeson CC 241 123 51.0% 53% 53% 54% 62% Robeson CC 171 93 54.4% 51% 56% 61% 65%
Rockingham CC 126 70 55.6% 57% 56% 59% 60% Rockingham CC 193 117 60.6% 65% 71% 74% 75%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 446 282 63.2% 68% 69% 64% 71% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 339 197 58.1% 68% 67% 67% 73%
Sampson CC 113 46 40.7% 37% 50% 51% 59% Sampson CC 97 45 46.4% 41% 66% 55% 51%
Sandhills CC 338 206 60.9% 63% 62% 57% 62% Sandhills CC 246 155 63.0% 59% 55% 59% 59%
South Piedmont CC 203 113 55.7% 59% 63% 61% 67% South Piedmont CC 98 65 66.3% 61% 51% 62% 56%
Southeastern CC 90 60 66.7% 51% 55% 38% 46% Southeastern CC 54 37 68.5% 88% 75% 69% 79%
Southwestern CC 134 84 62.7% 56% 63% 63% 67% Southwestern CC 170 106 62.4% 71% 67% 59% 64%
Stanly CC 155 114 73.5% 70% 67% 75% 68% Stanly CC 271 217 80.1% 80% 72% 72% 73%
Surry CC 231 167 72.3% 66% 65% 66% 75% Surry CC 187 130 69.5% 72% 65% 66% 62%
Tri‐County CC 33 24 72.7% 73% 76% 75% 71% Tri‐County CC 67 32 47.8% 43% 39% 53% 68%
Vance‐Granville CC 260 162 62.3% 59% 59% 54% 59% Vance‐Granville CC 108 69 63.9% 55% 54% 60% 58%
Wake TCC 1,003 496 49.5% 52% 55% 55% 54% Wake TCC 1,368 829 60.6% 64% 64% 57% 62%
Wayne CC 247 157 63.6% 65% 63% 67% 63% Wayne CC 245 153 62.4% 60% 66% 65% 57%
Western Piedmont CC 189 124 65.6% 61% 66% 67% 70% Western Piedmont CC 147 106 72.1% 70% 70% 80% 76%
Wilkes CC 241 158 65.6% 70% 56% 65% 61% Wilkes CC 193 136 70.5% 76% 76% 66% 78%
Wilson CC 108 64 59.3% 63% 46% 41% 54% Wilson CC 224 140 62.5% 74% 72% 72% 72%
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
TABLE C. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2013‐2014
TABLE D. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATH COURSES, 2013‐2014
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
11
E. First Year Progression Purpose
To ensure first‐year students reach an academic momentum point that helps predict future credential completion
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students attempting at least twelve hours within their first academic year who successfully complete (“P”, “C” or better) at least twelve of those hours
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Must attempt at least twelve hours (including developmental and withdraw) within the first year fall, spring, and summer semesters. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who complete at least twelve hours (including developmental) with a “P”, “C” or better within the first year.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam”, “Transfer”, “NA”, or “NS”.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation from the same college they were Dual enrolled.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam” , “Transfer” , “NA”, or “NS”.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who successfully complete with a grade of ‘P’,‘C’ or better at least twelve hours within the first year.
Excellence level: 74.6%
Baseline level: 53.2%
12
TABLE E. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2013 COHORT
Excellence: 74.6%
Baseline: 53.2%
13‐14 12‐13 11‐12 10‐11 09‐10
System Totals 38,260 31,488 21,119 67.1% 68% 68% 67% 67%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,175 988 600 60.7% 60% 62% 60% 65%
Sampson CC 206 180 127 70.6% 81% 69% 74% 76%
Sandhills CC 720 597 418 70.0% 69% 66% 70% 64%
South Piedmont CC 420 283 170 60.1% 64% 61% 65% 74%
Southeastern CC 258 228 111 48.7% 53% 60% 56% 61%
Southwestern CC 279 214 144 67.3% 73% 74% 67% 61%
Stanly CC 406 350 234 66.9% 75% 68% 64% 69%
Surry CC 553 490 375 76.5% 66% 71% 73% 73%
Tri‐County CC 141 128 92 71.9% 67% 77% 65% 68%
Vance‐Granville CC 662 485 304 62.7% 70% 64% 62% 67%
Wake TCC 3,592 2,977 2,020 67.9% 72% 67% 67% 50%
Wayne CC 708 603 422 70.0% 72% 73% 72% 71%
Western Piedmont CC 432 373 265 71.0% 75% 72% 76% 76%
Wilkes CC 504 462 350 75.8% 75% 74% 72% 69%
Wilson CC 224 208 142 68.3% 69% 66% 67% 55%
% SUCCESSFULCOHORT
12 HOURS
ATTEMPTED
12 HOURS
SUCCESSFULLY
COMPLETED
13
F. Curriculum Completion Purpose
To ensure student completion and persistence toward a post‐secondary credential
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students who graduate, transfer, or are still enrolled with 36 hours after six years
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who by the fall that occurs six years after original cohort designation either graduate (A, D, or C), transfer to a four year institution, or are still enrolled during that seventh fall semester previously completing 36 non‐developmental hours.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Numerator: All students from the denominator who achieve at least one of the following:
Graduation‐ Graduated from a North Carolina community college credential program (A, D, C) at any point from the start of their first fall term and up till 6th fall term afterward.
OR
Transfer‐ Transferred into a 4‐year college as archived in the National Student Clearinghouse database on or before the 6th fall after original cohort term.
OR
Persistence‐ Still enrolled during the 6th fall term and successfully completing at least 36 non‐developmental credits prior to the 6th fall term. Successful credit completion is based on grades of C or better.
G. Licensure and Certification Passing Rate Purpose
To ensure programmatic coursework prepares students to competently practice in their chosen profession
Description
Aggregate institutional passing rate of first time test‐takers on licensure and certification exams. Exams included in this measure are state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Methodology
Denominator: All licensure and certification exams taken for the first time during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year. Only includes state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Numerator: Licensure and certification exams passed on first attempt during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year.
Source
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists Nuclear Medicine Technology Exam Radiation Therapy Exam Radiography Exam
Council of Interstate Testing Dental Hygiene Exam
Federal Aviation Administration Airframe Exam General Exam Power Plant Exam
NC Board of Cosmetic Art Examiners Apprentice Exam Cosmetology Exam Cosmetology Instructor Exam Esthetician Exam Manicurist Exam
NC Board of Massage & Bodywork TherapyMassage & Body Work Therapist
NC Board of Nursing Practical Nursing Exam Registered Nursing Exam
NC Board of Opticians Opticianry Exam
NC Board of Physical Therapy Examiners Physical Therapist Assistant Exam
NC Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Standards Division Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) Exam
NC Department of Justice Sheriff’s Standards Division Detention Officer
NC Office of Emergency Medical Services EMT Exam EMTI‐I Exam EMT‐P Exam
NC Real Estate Commission Provisional Real Estate Broker
NC Veterinary Medical Board Veterinary Medicine Technology Exam
Details
The number of first‐time test‐takers and the number passing were provided to the System Office by agencies issuing the license or certification and validated by the colleges. Depending on the exam, data may be provided on a fiscal or calendar year. Exams include Aviation‐General, Aviation‐Airframe, Aviation ‐ Power Plant, BLET, Real Estate Sales, Cosmetic Arts‐Apprentice, Cosmetology, Esthetician, Cosmetic Arts‐Instructor, Manicurist, Dental Hygiene, Opticianry, Nuclear Medical Technician, Radiation Therapy, Radiography, Physical Therapist Assistant,
Practical Nursing, Registered Nursing, Veterinary Medical Technician, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P, Massage & Body Work Therapist, and Detention Officer.
Excellence level: 91.7%
Baseline level: 71.0%
16
TABLE G. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013‐2014
College of The Albema 131 119 90.8% 89% 83% 89% 74%
Craven CC 256 192 75.0% 80% 86% 90% 88%
Davidson County CC 192 167 87.0% 89% 92% 88% 92%
Durham TCC 295 260 88.1% 87% 91% 96% 89%
Edgecombe CC 117 102 87.2% 78% 86% 90% 86%
Fayetteville TCC 554 481 86.8% 88% 91% 92% 96%
Forsyth TCC 358 320 89.4% 93% 93% 94% 92%
Gaston College 312 289 92.6% 91% 93% 93% 88%
Guilford TCC 512 440 85.9% 87% 88% 92% 94%
Halifax CC 88 70 79.5% 83% 86% 78% 76%
Haywood CC 113 78 69.0% 79% 77% 86% 79%
Isothermal CC 175 152 86.9% 81% 76% 77% 77%
James Sprunt CC 88 71 80.7% 84% 81% 79% 88%
Johnston CC 261 215 82.4% 82% 84% 88% 81%
Lenoir CC 480 373 77.7% 77% 80% 78% 84%
Martin CC 42 29 69.0% 64% 69% 74% 71%
Mayland CC 109 84 77.1% 77% 81% 83% 85%
McDowell TCC 114 102 89.5% 90% 90% 88% 92%
Mitchell CC 159 129 81.1% 87% 90% 85% 84%
Montgomery CC 8 8 100.0% 89% 94% 85% 83%
Nash CC 202 157 77.7% 73% 75% 83% 77%
Pamlico CC 13 12 92.3% 81% 100% 90% 46%
Piedmont CC 68 45 66.2% 73% 75% 78% 76%
Pitt CC 300 256 85.3% 87% 91% 90% 85%
Randolph CC 176 142 80.7% 82% 86% 83% 87%
Richmond CC 65 47 72.3% 67% 83% 91% 97%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 76 57 75.0% 74% 75% 86% 72%
Robeson CC 151 124 82.1% 90% 78% 78% 72%
Rockingham CC 133 99 74.4% 68% 79% 82% 84%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 380 314 82.6% 84% 79% 82% 85%
Sampson CC 92 81 88.0% 85% 80% 79% 85%
Sandhills CC 246 216 87.8% 87% 93% 84% 89%
South Piedmont CC 132 103 78.0% 85% 83% 86% 86%
Southeastern CC 114 89 78.1% 75% 75% 80% 82%
Southwestern CC 133 118 88.7% 92% 92% 95% 95%
Stanly CC 184 148 80.4% 88% 87% 86% 89%
Surry CC 172 154 89.5% 92% 97% 92% 93%
Tri‐County CC 81 55 67.9% 80% 88% 87% 70%
Vance‐Granville CC 182 147 80.8% 88% 92% 90% 87%
Wake TCC 451 414 91.8% 91% 92% 94% 91%
Wayne CC 246 214 87.0% 83% 80% 80% 74%
Western Piedmont CC 103 89 86.4% 94% 95% 92% 84%
Wilkes CC 188 161 85.6% 86% 81% 86% 85%
Wilson CC 113 98 86.7% 72% 82% 75% 89%
NUMBER OF TEST
TAKERSNUMBER PASSING
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE
17
H. College Transfer Performance Purpose
To ensure the academic success of community college students at a four‐year university or college
Description
Among community college associate degree completers and those who have completed 30 or more credit hours who transfer to a four‐year university or college, the percentage who earn a GPA of 2.00 or better after two consecutive semesters within the academic year at the transfer institution.
Methodology
Denominator: Students with an associate degree or at least 30 articulated transfer credits enrolled during the fall and spring semesters at a four‐year institution who were enrolled at a community college during the previous academic year. Only includes North Carolina based four‐year institutions and four‐year institutions which the individual community college has an articulated transfer agreement.
Numerator: Students included in the denominator who have earned a GPA of 2.00 or better aggregated over the fall and spring semesters at the transfer institution.
Note: Community colleges are allowed to supplement data with results from out of state institutions which they have articulation agreements.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse UNC‐General Administration Participating NC independent colleges and universities including Barton College, Belmont Abbey College, Brevard College, Campbell University, Catawba College, Chowan University, Elon University, Gardner‐Webb University, Greensboro College, Guilford College, Mars Hill College, Meredith College, Methodist University, Montreat College, N.C. Wesleyan College, Pfeiffer University, Queens University of Charlotte, Salem College, and Shaw University
Details
UNC‐GA matched the records of community college students receiving an associate degree during the academic year or accumulating at least 30 articulated college transfer credit hours against subsequent fall and spring UNC system student records to determine transfer enrollment at a North Carolina public university and first year academic performance. UNCGA provided aggregate totals of transfer students who did or did not attain GPAs equal or greater than 2.00 in their first academic year.
Additional lists of students based on National Student Clearinghouse matches were sent to participating independent colleges and universities. These colleges and universities returned files identifying whether or not students attained GPAs equal or greater than 2.00 in their first academic year.
Data from these sources were combined to determine the overall percentage of transfers with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters.
Excellence level: 93.8%
Baseline level: 71.2%
18
TABLE H. COLLEGE TRANSFER PERFORMANCE, 2012‐2013 COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS
Excellence: 93.8%
Baseline: 71.2%Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 Students # ≥ 2.00 % ≥ 2.00 11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
TABLE C1. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2012‐2013 ‐ GRADE DISTRIBUTION
26
TABLE C2. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISHCOURSES, 2012‐2013 ‐ BY AGE
27
TABLE D1. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATHCOURSES, 2012‐2013 ‐ GRADE DISTRIBUTION
28
TABLE D2. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATHCOURSES, 2012‐2013 ‐ BY CREDIT MATH COURSE
29
TABLE E1. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2012 COHORT ‐ BY ETHNICITY ANDGENDER
31
TABLE F1‐F2. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2007 COHORT ‐ BYPROGRAM AREA
32
TABLE F3. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2007 COHORT ‐ BY ENROLLMENT TYPE 34
TABLE F4. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2007 COHORT ‐ BY ETHNICITY AND GENDER 35
TABLE G1. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2012‐2013 ‐ BY EXAM(AVIATION, BLET)
36
TABLE G2. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2012‐2013 ‐ BY EXAM(DENTAL HYGIENE, MASSAGE & BODY WORK, NUC. MED. TECH.) 37
TABLE G3. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2012‐2013 ‐ BY EXAM(OPTICIANRY, RADIATION THERAPY, RADIOGRAPHY, REAL ESTATE SALES)
38
TABLE G4. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013 ‐ BY EXAM(COSMETIC ARTS)
39
TABLE G5. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013 ‐ BY EXAM (DETENTION OFFICER, EMD, EMT)
40
TABLE G6. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2013 ‐ BY EXAM (PHYSICAL THERAPIST ASST., NURSING, VET. MED.TECH.)
41
1
Introduction
The Performance Measures for Student Success Report is the North Carolina Community College System’s major accountability document. This annual performance report is based on data compiled from the previous year and serves to inform colleges and the public on the performance of our 58 community colleges.
In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures to ensure public accountability for programs and services. In 1998, the General Assembly directed the State Board to review past performance measures and define standards to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality.
In 2010, President Scott Ralls established a Performance Measures Committee to develop new performance‐based student success measures to go into effect in 2013. The Committee was led by two community college presidents, Dr. Dennis Massey of Pitt Community College and Dr. Molly Parkhill of Blue Ridge Community College. The Committee was comprised of college presidents, vice‐presidents, faculty, and directors from a diverse group of colleges representing various areas of expertise.
After a year of researching, drafting, and soliciting feedback from college faculty and staff on potential measures, the Committee formally presented the following eight measures to the State Board:
Basic Skills Student Progress
Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐LevelEnglish Courses
First Year Progression
Licensure and Certification Passing Rate
GED Diploma Passing Rate
Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐LevelMath Courses
Curriculum Student Completion
College Transfer Performance
In November 2011, the State Board formally approved the Performance Measures. These measures were then submitted to the General Assembly in March 2012 and later adopted in June 2012 through Section 8.5 of S.L. 2012‐142.
As the revised performance measures were being finalized, attention was turned to developing recommendations for incorporating performance into colleges’ regular formula budget allocations. In May 2012, President Ralls appointed a team of college presidents to a Performance Funding Committee to develop a performance funding model. This committee was led by State Board Chairman K. Ray Bailey and Garret Hinshaw, President of Catawba Valley Community College.
One of the outcomes of this committee was the establishment of system‐wide “baselines” and “goals” for each measure. The committee recommended using consistent, statistically‐defined baselines and goals to promote transparency, simplicity, and objectivity. This utilization of baselines and goals is a departure from the System’s historical use of “standards.”
Based on three years of historical data (if available) for each measure, baselines were set two standard deviations below the system mean, and the goals were set one standard deviation above the system mean. These baselines and goals remain static for three years and will be reset in the 2016 Report.
The performance summary on the following page provides each college with an overview of its results as compared to its peers. Color indicators represent various levels of performance within each measure:
Met or exceeded the goal Above the baseline, but below the college average
Above the college average, but below the goal Below the baseline
2
April 2014 Performance Summary
Met or Exceeded Goal
Above College Avg, Below Goal
Above Baseline, Below Avg
Below Baseline
A. BASIC
SKILLS
PROGRESS
B. GED
PASS RATE
C. DEV ENG
SUBSEQ
SUCCESS
D. DEV MATH
SUBSEQ
SUCCESS
E. YEAR
ONE
PROGRESS
F. CURR
COMPLET‐
ION RATE
G.
LICENSURE
PASS RATE
H.
TRANSFER
PERFORM
System Goal 51.2% 82.0% 74.9% 75.4% 74.6% 45.6% 91.7% 93.8%
System Baseline 20.6% 49.3% 45.2% 47.5% 53.2% 28.6% 71.0% 71.2%
Average College Percentage 41.3% 73.6% 64.4% 64.4% 68.3% 43.6% 83.3% 87.8%
Wilson CC 43.6% 71.3% 62.8% 73.5% 69.4% 41.1% 72.3% 97.1% 1 3 4 0
Note: Color indicators are based on the precise percentages and not the rounded percentages as displayed
Met or Exceed
ed Goal
Below Baselin
e
Below College
Average,
Above Baselin
e
Below Goal,
Above College
Average
3
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT “BLANK”
4
A. Basic Skills Student Progress
Purpose
To ensure adults with low literacy skills are progressing academically toward basic skill attainment necessary for employment and self‐sufficiency
Description
Percentage of students who progress as defined by an educational functioning level.
Methodology
Denominator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year. Excludes High Adult Secondary Education initial placements.
Numerator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year, who complete the program year at a higher educational functioning level. Excludes high adult secondary education initial placements.
Note: Initial placement is set by the first NRS approved test(s) taken during the program year. The initial placement is the lowest Educational Functioning Level of the tests given within 3 days of the first test of the program year. A pre‐test is considered if it occurs up to 90 days prior to the program year and the test code and component match the test code and component of the one having the lowest EFL of the first test(s) in the program year.
Source
LEIS annual data file
Details
To be included in this measure student had to have been enrolled in a class during the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30), have accumulated 60 or more total contact hours across all classes enrolled, and not have an initial placement of High Adult Secondary Education. Initial placement is based upon the National Reporting System (NRS) guidelines of being the lowest Educational Functioning Level of the first NRS approved test(s) taken during the program year. Colleges received credit for all students who tested at a higher Educational Functioning Level at any point of the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30) in the same test and component that set the initial placement. Colleges are also given credit for students who test at Adult Secondary Education Low, are an Adult High School student, and meet the federal and state assessment policy guidelines for moving up an educational functioning level to Adult Secondary Education High.
Goal: 51.2%
Baseline: 20.6%
5
B. GED Diploma Passing Rate
Purpose
To ensure quality GED preparation and high levels of GED attainment
Description
Percentage of students taking at least one GED test during a program year who receive a GED diploma during the program year.
Methodology
Denominator: GED students with an Initial placement of Low Adult Secondary Education or High Adult Secondary Education who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30) and have 12 or more total contact hours.
Numerator: GED students with an Initial placement of Low Adult Secondary Education or High Adult Secondary Education who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30), and have 12 or more total contact hours, and receive a GED diploma
Source
LEIS Annual Data file Oklahoma Scoring GED test files
Details
Denominator: Students must meet the following criteria:
Included in the LEIS annual file
Have an initial placement of Adult Secondary Education Low (ASEL) or Adult Secondary Education High (ASEH)
Have accumulated at least 12 total contact hours during the program year
Taken at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30)
Numerator: All students from the denominator who receive a GED diploma during the program year (July 1 – June 30). Credit is given to the college where the student received the 12 or more contact hours and not the location the GED test was taken.
Goal: 82.0%
Baseline: 49.3%
6
TABLE A. BASIC SKILLS STUDENT PROGRESS, 2012‐2013 TABLE B. GED DIPLOMA PASSING RATE, 2012‐2013
Goal: 51.2% Goal: 82.0%
Baseline: 20.6% Baseline: 49.3%
12‐13 11‐12 12‐13 11‐12
System Totals 56,629 23,781 42.0% 41% System Totals 8,641 6,199 71.7% 70%
Alamance CC 1,261 309 24.5% 31% Alamance CC 195 157 80.5% 73%
Mitchell CC 635 263 41.4% 41% Mitchell CC 131 119 90.8% 90%
Montgomery CC 258 106 41.1% 43% Montgomery CC 53 41 77.4% 73%
Nash CC 373 96 25.7% 34% Nash CC 68 45 66.2% 70%
Pamlico CC 147 57 38.8% 28% Pamlico CC 23 19 82.6% 53%
Piedmont CC 503 191 38.0% 40% Piedmont CC 120 88 73.3% 72%
Pitt CC 1,127 482 42.8% 44% Pitt CC 153 106 69.3% 68%
Randolph CC 1,058 444 42.0% 35% Randolph CC 62 43 69.4% 76%
Richmond CC 980 464 47.3% 47% Richmond CC 206 135 65.5% 63%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 230 33 14.3% 13% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 30 19 63.3% 72%
Robeson CC 1,227 513 41.8% 35% Robeson CC 46 44 95.7% 81%
Rockingham CC 369 166 45.0% 56% Rockingham CC 111 75 67.6% 77%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,184 376 31.8% 37% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 363 256 70.5% 64%
Sampson CC 652 329 50.5% 49% Sampson CC 51 46 90.2% 82%
Sandhills CC 713 190 26.6% 26% Sandhills CC 118 74 62.7% 61%
South Piedmont CC 1,079 507 47.0% 48% South Piedmont CC 176 127 72.2% 75%
Southeastern CC 911 409 44.9% 45% Southeastern CC 125 92 73.6% 84%
Southwestern CC 386 189 49.0% 51% Southwestern CC 179 135 75.4% 81%
Stanly CC 486 245 50.4% 43% Stanly CC 88 67 76.1% 72%
Surry CC 696 293 42.1% 37% Surry CC 96 84 87.5% 95%
Tri‐County CC 120 29 24.2% 27% Tri‐County CC 41 31 75.6% 79%
Vance‐Granville CC 1,272 555 43.6% 40% Vance‐Granville CC 247 188 76.1% 74%
Wake TCC 4,863 1,706 35.1% 38% Wake TCC 835 570 68.3% 60%
Wayne CC 1,328 927 69.8% 67% Wayne CC 169 125 74.0% 72%
Western Piedmont CC 838 193 23.0% 21% Western Piedmont CC 178 136 76.4% 67%
Wilkes CC 743 350 47.1% 45% Wilkes CC 94 89 94.7% 91%
Wilson CC 658 287 43.6% 58% Wilson CC 108 77 71.3% 74%
STUDENTSCOMPLETING
LEVELSTUDENTS PASSING
% PASSING% COMPLETING
7
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT “BLANK”
8
C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses
Purpose
To ensure remedial English and reading coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing English courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental English and/or reading students who successfully complete a credit English course with a grade of “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit English course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a grade of “C” or better in their first credit English course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria: Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental English or Reading course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit English course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental English course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “C” or better in their first credit English course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit English course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit English course is based on any course with prefix “ENG” and course number greater than 099. When multiple English courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Goal: 74.9%
Baseline: 45.2%
9
D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses
Purpose
To ensure remedial math coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing math courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental math students who successfully complete a credit math course with a “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit math course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental math course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a “C” or better in their first credit math course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental math course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
Enrolled in their first credit Math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental Math course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit Math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental Math course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental Math course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit Math course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental Math course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “C” or better in their first credit Math course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit Math course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit Math course is based on any course with prefix “MAT” and course number greater than 099. When multiple Math courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Mitchell CC 338 222 65.7% 65% 63% 63% 55% Mitchell CC 270 179 66.3% 60% 55% 63% 60%
Montgomery CC 41 30 73.2% 79% 75% 86% 87% Montgomery CC 47 17 36.2% 32% 36% 43% 52%
Nash CC 192 108 56.3% 53% 54% 51% 48% Nash CC 258 190 73.6% 72% 76% 76% 74%
Pamlico CC 5 3 60.0% 50% 73% 64% 67% Pamlico CC 19 15 78.9% 91% 75% 58% 63%
Piedmont CC 136 97 71.3% 62% 63% 69% 73% Piedmont CC 133 91 68.4% 71% 64% 73% 77%
Pitt CC 791 514 65.0% 71% 63% 61% 62% Pitt CC 460 244 53.0% 44% 53% 60% 57%
Randolph CC 216 155 71.8% 76% 75% 80% 74% Randolph CC 253 190 75.1% 66% 77% 62% 81%
Richmond CC 266 166 62.4% 66% 71% 66% 69% Richmond CC 235 150 63.8% 64% 68% 58% 69%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 72 42 58.3% 60% 50% 55% 29% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 65 52 80.0% 90% 74% 86% 87%
Robeson CC 246 131 53.3% 53% 54% 62% 71% Robeson CC 205 105 51.2% 56% 61% 65% 69%
Rockingham CC 160 91 56.9% 56% 59% 60% 64% Rockingham CC 243 159 65.4% 71% 74% 75% 73%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 656 445 67.8% 69% 64% 71% 65% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 436 296 67.9% 67% 67% 73% 66%
Sampson CC 147 54 36.7% 50% 51% 59% 60% Sampson CC 114 47 41.2% 66% 55% 51% 60%
Sandhills CC 354 222 62.7% 62% 57% 62% 65% Sandhills CC 201 118 58.7% 55% 59% 59% 52%
South Piedmont CC 148 88 59.5% 63% 61% 67% 61% South Piedmont CC 113 69 61.1% 51% 62% 56% 58%
Southeastern CC 116 59 50.9% 55% 38% 46% 69% Southeastern CC 69 61 88.4% 75% 69% 79% 71%
Southwestern CC 151 84 55.6% 63% 63% 67% 67% Southwestern CC 184 130 70.7% 67% 59% 64% 59%
Stanly CC 192 135 70.3% 67% 75% 68% 65% Stanly CC 275 220 80.0% 72% 72% 73% 68%
Surry CC 199 131 65.8% 65% 66% 75% 73% Surry CC 153 110 71.9% 65% 66% 62% 69%
Tri‐County CC 59 43 72.9% 76% 75% 71% 76% Tri‐County CC 61 26 42.6% 39% 53% 68% 67%
Vance‐Granville CC 251 148 59.0% 59% 54% 59% 61% Vance‐Granville CC 136 75 55.1% 54% 60% 58% 58%
Wake TCC 921 476 51.7% 55% 55% 54% 50% Wake TCC 1,342 854 63.6% 64% 57% 62% 64%
Wayne CC 323 209 64.7% 63% 67% 63% 63% Wayne CC 239 144 60.3% 66% 65% 57% 53%
Western Piedmont CC 210 129 61.4% 66% 67% 70% 79% Western Piedmont CC 210 147 70.0% 70% 80% 76% 75%
Wilkes CC 233 163 70.0% 56% 65% 61% 65% Wilkes CC 143 109 76.2% 76% 66% 78% 69%
Wilson CC 129 81 62.8% 46% 41% 54% 49% Wilson CC 189 139 73.5% 72% 72% 72% 70%
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
TABLE C. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2012‐2013
TABLE D. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATH COURSES, 2012‐2013
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
11
E. First Year Progression
Purpose
To ensure first‐year students reach an academic momentum point that helps predict future credential completion
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students attempting at least twelve hours within their first academic year who successfully complete (“P”, “C” or better) at least twelve of those hours
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Must attempt at least twelve hours (including developmental and withdraw) within the first year fall, spring, and summer semesters. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who complete at least twelve hours (including developmental) with a “P”, “C” or better within the first year.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam”, “Transfer”, “NA”, or “NS”.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation from the same college they were Dual enrolled.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam” , “Transfer” , “NA”, or “NS”.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who successfully complete with a grade of ‘P’,‘C’ or better at least twelve hours within the first year.
Goal: 74.6%
Baseline: 53.2%
12
TABLE E. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2012 COHORT
Goal: 74.6%
Baseline: 53.2%
12‐13 11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
System Totals 38,812 32,826 22,425 68.3% 68% 67% 67% 68%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 143 116 78 67.2% 67% 70% 58% 70%
Robeson CC 549 469 222 47.3% 49% 54% 60% 63%
Rockingham CC 430 348 251 72.1% 69% 65% 64% 67%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,133 961 579 60.2% 62% 60% 65% 66%
Sampson CC 203 179 145 81.0% 69% 74% 76% 78%
Sandhills CC 746 643 443 68.9% 66% 70% 64% 65%
South Piedmont CC 360 253 162 64.0% 61% 65% 74% 69%
Southeastern CC 278 251 132 52.6% 60% 56% 61% 68%
Southwestern CC 307 261 191 73.2% 74% 67% 61% 63%
Stanly CC 426 362 271 74.9% 68% 64% 69% 68%
Surry CC 368 317 210 66.2% 71% 73% 73% 76%
Tri‐County CC 172 153 102 66.7% 77% 65% 68% 76%
Vance‐Granville CC 693 568 399 70.2% 64% 62% 67% 67%
Wake TCC 3,339 2,815 2,016 71.6% 67% 67% 50% 64%
Wayne CC 676 572 411 71.9% 73% 72% 71% 69%
Western Piedmont CC 447 387 292 75.5% 72% 76% 76% 78%
Wilkes CC 522 496 370 74.6% 74% 72% 69% 67%
Wilson CC 244 219 152 69.4% 66% 67% 55% 73%
% SUCCESSFULCOHORT
12 HOURS
ATTEMPTED
12 HOURS
SUCCESSFULLY
COMPLETED
13
F. Curriculum Completion
Purpose
To ensure student completion and persistence toward a post‐secondary credential
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students who graduate, transfer, or are still enrolled with 36 hours after six years
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who by the fall that occurs six years after original cohort designation either graduate (A, D, or C), transfer to a four year institution, or are still enrolled during that seventh fall semester previously completing 36 non‐developmental hours.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Numerator: All students from the denominator who achieve at least one of the following:
Graduation‐ Graduated from a North Carolina community college credential program (A, D, C) at any point from the start of their first fall term and up till 6th fall term afterward.
OR
Transfer‐ Transferred into a 4‐year college as archived in the National Student Clearinghouse database on or before the 6th fall after original cohort term.
OR
Persistence‐ Still enrolled during the 6th fall term and successfully completing at least 36 non‐developmental credits prior to the 6th fall term. Successful credit completion is based on grades of C or better.
To ensure programmatic coursework prepares students to competently practice in their chosen profession
Description
Aggregate institutional passing rate of first time test‐takers on licensure and certification exams. Exams included in this measure are state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Methodology
Denominator: All licensure and certification exams taken for the first time during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year. Only includes state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Numerator: Licensure and certification exams passed on first attempt during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year.
Source
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists Nuclear Medicine Technology Exam Radiation Therapy Exam Radiography Exam
Council of Interstate Testing Dental Hygiene Exam
Federal Aviation Administration Airframe Exam General Exam Power Plant Exam
NC Board of Cosmetic Art Examiners Apprentice Exam Cosmetology Exam Cosmetology Instructor Exam Esthetician Exam Manicurist Exam
NC Board of Massage & Bodywork TherapyMassage & Body Work Therapist
NC Board of Nursing Practical Nursing Exam Registered Nursing Exam
NC Board of Occupational Therapy Occupational Therapist Assistant*
NC Board of Opticians Opticianry Exam
NC Board of Physical Therapy Examiners Physical Therapist Assistant Exam
NC Department of Justice, Criminal Justice Standards Division Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) Exam
NC Department of Justice Sheriff’s Standards Division Detention Officer
NC Office of Emergency Medical Services EMD Exam EMT Exam EMTI‐I Exam EMT‐P Exam
NC Real Estate Commission Provisional Real Estate Broker
NC Veterinary Medical Board Veterinary Medicine Technology Exam
* Based on availability, results are not included in this year’s report
Details
The number of first‐time test‐takers and the number passing were provided to the System Office by agencies issuing the license or certification and validated by the colleges. Depending on the exam, data may be provided on a fiscal or calendar year. Exams include Aviation‐General, Aviation‐Airframe, Aviation ‐ Power Plant, BLET, Real Estate Sales, Cosmetic Arts‐Apprentice, Cosmetology, Esthetician, Cosmetic Arts‐Instructor, Manicurist, Dental Hygiene, Opticianry, Nuclear Medical Technician, Radiation Therapy, Radiography, Physical Therapist Assistant,
Practical Nursing, Registered Nursing, Veterinary Medical Technician, EMD, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P, Occupational Therapist Assistant, Massage & Body Work Therapist, and Detention Officer.
Goal: 91.7%
Baseline: 71.0%
16
TABLE G. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2012‐2013
College of The Albema 183 163 89.1% 83% 89% 74% 84%
Craven CC 236 188 79.7% 86% 90% 88% 83%
Davidson County CC 268 238 88.8% 92% 88% 92% 88%
Durham TCC 295 258 87.5% 91% 96% 89% 85%
Edgecombe CC 108 84 77.8% 86% 90% 86% 88%
Fayetteville TCC 530 467 88.1% 91% 92% 96% 94%
Forsyth TCC 340 317 93.2% 93% 94% 92% 89%
Gaston College 328 299 91.2% 93% 93% 88% 89%
Guilford TCC 490 424 86.5% 88% 92% 94% 89%
Halifax CC 66 55 83.3% 86% 78% 76% 70%
Haywood CC 110 87 79.1% 77% 86% 79% 86%
Isothermal CC 134 109 81.3% 76% 77% 77% 79%
James Sprunt CC 76 64 84.2% 81% 79% 88% 88%
Johnston CC 262 214 81.7% 84% 88% 81% 92%
Lenoir CC 511 395 77.3% 80% 78% 84% 87%
Martin CC 87 56 64.4% 69% 74% 71% 87%
Mayland CC 107 82 76.6% 81% 83% 85% 84%
McDowell TCC 117 105 89.7% 90% 88% 92% 88%
Mitchell CC 159 138 86.8% 90% 85% 84% 84%
Montgomery CC 36 32 88.9% 94% 85% 83% 84%
Nash CC 171 125 73.1% 75% 83% 77% 86%
Pamlico CC 21 17 81.0% 100% 90% 46% 75%
Piedmont CC 55 40 72.7% 75% 78% 76% 89%
Pitt CC 292 255 87.3% 91% 90% 85% 86%
Randolph CC 144 118 81.9% 86% 83% 87% 88%
Richmond CC 89 60 67.4% 83% 91% 97% 86%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 42 31 73.8% 75% 86% 72% 83%
Robeson CC 145 130 89.7% 78% 78% 72% 77%
Rockingham CC 125 85 68.0% 79% 82% 84% 92%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 409 342 83.6% 79% 82% 85% 81%
Sampson CC 88 75 85.2% 80% 79% 85% 87%
Sandhills CC 224 194 86.6% 93% 84% 89% 87%
South Piedmont CC 151 128 84.8% 83% 86% 86% 69%
Southeastern CC 135 101 74.8% 75% 80% 82% 78%
Southwestern CC 122 112 91.8% 92% 95% 95% 88%
Stanly CC 171 151 88.3% 87% 86% 89% 79%
Surry CC 200 183 91.5% 97% 92% 93% 92%
Tri‐County CC 88 70 79.5% 88% 87% 70% 72%
Vance‐Granville CC 214 189 88.3% 92% 90% 87% 84%
Wake TCC 466 422 90.6% 92% 94% 91% 92%
Wayne CC 172 143 83.1% 80% 80% 74% 90%
Western Piedmont CC 108 102 94.4% 95% 92% 84% 91%
Wilkes CC 169 146 86.4% 81% 86% 85% 82%
Wilson CC 119 86 72.3% 82% 75% 89% 81%
NUMBER OF TEST
TAKERSNUMBER PASSING
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE
17
H. College Transfer Performance
Purpose
To ensure the academic success of community college students at a four‐year university or college
Description
Among community college associate degree completers and those who have completed 30 or more credit hours who transfer to a four‐year university or college, the percentage who earn a GPA of 2.00 or better after two consecutive semesters within the academic year at the transfer institution.
Methodology
Denominator: Students with an associate degree or at least 30 articulated transfer credits enrolled during the fall and spring semesters at a four‐year institution who were enrolled at a community college during the previous academic year. Only includes North Carolina based four‐year institutions and four‐year institutions which the individual community college has an articulated transfer agreement.
Numerator: Students included in the denominator who have earned a GPA of 2.00 or better aggregated over the fall and spring semesters at the transfer institution.
Note: Community colleges are allowed to supplement data with results from out of state institutions which they have articulation agreements.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse UNC‐General Administration Participating NC independent colleges and universities including Barton College, Belmont Abbey College, Brevard College, Campbell University, Catawba College, Chowan University, Davidson College, Elon University, Gardner‐Webb University, Guilford College, Mars Hill College, Meredith College, Methodist University, Mount Olive College, Montreat College, N.C. Wesleyan College, Pfeiffer University, Queens University of Charlotte, Salem College, and Shaw University
Details
Lists of students enrolled receiving an associate degree during that academic year and those who had accumulated at least 30 articulated college transfer credit hours data were sent to UNCGA. These lists were matched against subsequent fall and spring UNC system student records to determine transfer enrollment at a North Carolina public university and first year academic performance. UNCGA provided aggregate totals of transfer students who did or did not attain GPAs equal or greater than 2.00 in their first academic year. Detailed reports containing the data associated with this measure can be accessed at http://www.northcarolina.edu/ira/ir/analytics/tsp.htm. The relative reports are First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of YEAR Community College Associate Degree Recipients and First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of YEAR Community College Students with at Least 30 Semester Hours of Community College Coursework. Note: As of 4/9/14, the publically accessible reports have not been updated with the most recent data.
Additional lists of students based on National Student Clearinghouse matches were sent to participating independent colleges and universities. These colleges and universities returned files identifying whether or not students attained GPAs equal or greater than 2.00 in their first academic year.
Data from these sources were combined to determine the overall percentage of transfers with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters.
Goal: 93.8%
Baseline: 71.2%
18
TABLE H. COLLEGE TRANSFER PERFORMANCE, 2011‐2012 COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS
Goal: 93.8%
Baseline: 71.2%Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 Students # ≥ 2.00 % ≥ 2.00 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
Dr. Sharon Morrissey, Executive VP for Programs & Chief Academic Officer
RESEARCH & PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Bill Schneider, Associate VP
Dr. Kristen Corbell, Research Projects Coordinator
Joann Ingoglia, Compliance Coordinator
Dr. Kinge Mbella, Education Research Analyst
CONTENTS
Introduction 2
July 2013 Performance Summary 3
A. Basic Skills Student Progress 5
B. GED Diploma Passing Rate 6
TABLE A. BASIC SKILLS STUDENT PROGRESS, 2011‐2012 TABLE B. GED DIPLOMA PASSING RATE, 2011‐2012
7
C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses 9
D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses 10
TABLE C. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2011‐2012 TABLE D. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATH COURSES, 2011‐2012
11
E. First Year Progression 12
TABLE E. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2011 COHORT 13
F. Curriculum Student Completion 14
TABLE F. CURRICULUM STUDENT COMPLETION, FALL 2006 COHORT 15
G. Licensure and Certification Passing Rate 16
TABLE G. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2011‐2012 17
H. College Transfer Performance 18
TABLE H. COLLEGE TRANSFER PERFORMANCE, 2010‐11 COMMUNITY COLLEGESTUDENTS
The Performance Measures for Student Success Report is the North Carolina Community College System’s major accountability document. This annual performance report is based on data compiled from the previous year and serves to inform colleges and the public on the performance of our 58 community colleges.
In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures to ensure public accountability for programs and services. In 1998, the General Assembly directed the State Board to review past performance measures and define standards to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality.
In 2010, President Scott Ralls established a Performance Measures Committee to develop new performance‐based student success measures to go into effect in 2013. The Committee was led by two community college presidents, Dr. Dennis Massey of Pitt Community College and Dr. Molly Parkhill of Blue Ridge Community College. The Committee was comprised of college presidents, vice‐presidents, faculty, and directors from a diverse group of colleges representing various areas of expertise.
After a year of researching, drafting, and soliciting feedback from college faculty and staff on potential measures, the Committee formally presented the following eight measures to the State Board.
Basic Skills Student Progress*
Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐LevelEnglish Courses
First Year Progression
Licensure and Certification Passing Rate
GED Diploma Passing Rate*
Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐LevelMath Courses
Curriculum Student Completion
College Transfer Performance
In November 2011, the State Board formally approved the Performance Measures. These measures were then submitted to the General Assembly in March 2012 and later adopted in June 2012 through Section 8.5 of S.L. 2012‐142.
As the revised performance measures were being finalized, attention was turned to developing recommendations for incorporating performance into colleges’ regular formula budget allocations. In May 2012, President Ralls appointed a team of college presidents to a Performance Funding Committee to develop a performance funding model. This committee was led by State Board Chairman K. Ray Bailey and Garret Hinshaw, President of Catawba Valley Community College.
One of the outcomes of this committee was the establishment of system‐wide “baselines” and “goals” for each measure. The committee recommended using consistent, statistically‐defined baselines and goals to promote transparency, simplicity, and objectivity. This utilization of baselines and goals is a departure from the System’s historical use of “standards.”
Based on three years of historical data (if available) for each measure, baselines were set two standard deviations below the system mean, and the goals were set one standard deviation above the system mean. These baselines and goals remain static for three years and will be reset in the 2016 Report.
This 2013 edition is the inaugural report utilizing the new measures, goals, and baselines.
The performance summary on the following page provides each college with an overview of its results as compared to its peers. Color indicators represent various levels of performance within each measure:
Met or exceeded the goal Above the baseline, but below the college average
Above the college average, but below the goal Below the baseline
*Basic Skills Student Progress and GED Diploma Pass Rates are not performance funding components this year
Wilson CC 58.2% 74.5% 46.2% 72.2% 65.8% 39.5% 81.7% 90.2% 1 3 4 0
Note: Basic Skills Student Progress and GED Diploma Pass Rates are not performance funding components this yearNote: Color indicators are based on the precise percentages and not the rounded percentages as displayed* Less than 5 students
3
4
A. Basic Skills Student Progress
Purpose
To ensure adults with low literacy skills are progressing academically toward basic skill attainment necessary for employment and self‐sufficiency
Description
Percentage of students who progress as defined by an educational functioning level.
Methodology
Denominator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year. Excludes ASEH initial placements.
Numerator: Basic skills students attempting 60 or more contact hours during program year, who complete the program year at a higher educational functioning level. Excludes high adult secondary education initial placements.
Note: Pre‐test is considered if it occurs up to 90 days prior to program year.
Source
LEIS annual data file
Details
To be included in this measure, students have to be enrolled in a class during the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30), have accumulated 60 or more total contact hours across all classes enrolled, and not have an initial placement of High Adult Secondary Education. Initial placement is based upon the National Reporting System (NRS) guidelines of being the lowest Educational Functioning Level of the first NRS approved test(s) taken during the program year. Colleges received credit for all students who tested at a higher Educational Functioning Level at the end of the Basic Skills/College and Career Readiness program year (July 1 – June 30) in the same test and component that set the initial placement. Colleges are also given credit for students who test at Adult Secondary Education Low, are an Adult High School student, and meet the federal and state assessment policy guidelines for moving up an educational functioning level to Adult Secondary Education High.
Goal: 51.2%
Baseline: 20.6%
Note: This measure is not a performance funding component this year
5
B. GED Diploma Passing Rate
Purpose
To ensure quality GED preparation and high levels of GED attainment
Description
Percentage of students taking at least one GED test during a program year who receive a GED diploma during the program year.
Methodology
Denominator: GED students with an entering Educational Functioning Level of ASEL or ASEH who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30) and have 12 or more total contact hours.
Numerator: GED students with an entering Educational Functioning Level of ASEL or ASEH who take at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30), and have 12 or more total contact hours, and receive a GED diploma.
Source
LEIS Annual Data file Oklahoma Scoring GED test files
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
Included in the LEIS annual file
Have an initial placement of Adult Secondary Education Low (ASEL) or Adult Secondary Education High (ASEH)
Have accumulated at least 12 total contact hours during the program year (July 1 – June 30)
Taken at least one GED test during the program year (July 1 – June 30)
Numerator: All students from the denominator who receive a GED diploma during the program year (July 1 – June 30). Credit is given to the college where the student received the 12 or more contact hours and not the location the GED test was taken.
Goal: 82.0%
Baseline: 49.3%
Note: This measure is not a performance funding component this year
Mitchell CC 492 202 41.1% Mitchell CC 103 93 90.3%
Montgomery CC 272 116 42.6% Montgomery CC 44 32 72.7%
Nash CC 265 89 33.6% Nash CC 87 61 70.1%
Pamlico CC 135 38 28.1% Pamlico CC 15 8 53.3%
Piedmont CC 447 180 40.3% Piedmont CC 99 71 71.7%
Pitt CC 1,088 480 44.1% Pitt CC 160 109 68.1%
Randolph CC 817 283 34.6% Randolph CC 66 50 75.8%
Richmond CC 921 431 46.8% Richmond CC 258 163 63.2%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 222 29 13.1% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 18 13 72.2%
Robeson CC 1,471 516 35.1% Robeson CC 36 29 80.6%
Rockingham CC 350 196 56.0% Rockingham CC 150 115 76.7%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,053 392 37.2% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 368 235 63.9%
Sampson CC 645 316 49.0% Sampson CC 56 46 82.1%
Sandhills CC 654 170 26.0% Sandhills CC 137 83 60.6%
South Piedmont CC 909 437 48.1% South Piedmont CC 191 143 74.9%
Southeastern CC 813 366 45.0% Southeastern CC 120 101 84.2%
Southwestern CC 423 215 50.8% Southwestern CC 135 110 81.5%
Stanly CC 568 243 42.8% Stanly CC 78 56 71.8%
Surry CC 499 185 37.1% Surry CC 110 104 94.5%
Tri‐County CC 128 35 27.3% Tri‐County CC 43 34 79.1%
Vance‐Granville CC 1,302 524 40.2% Vance‐Granville CC 212 156 73.6%
Wake TCC 4,308 1,658 38.5% Wake TCC 707 425 60.1%
Wayne CC 1,221 812 66.5% Wayne CC 196 141 71.9%
Western Piedmont CC 903 188 20.8% Western Piedmont CC 233 156 67.0%
Wilkes CC 708 316 44.6% Wilkes CC 69 63 91.3%
Wilson CC 474 276 58.2% Wilson CC 98 73 74.5%
Note: Basic Skills Student Progress and GED Diploma Pass Rates are not performance funding components this year
TABLE A. BASIC SKILLS STUDENT PROGRESS, 2011‐2012 TABLE B. GED DIPLOMA PASSING RATE, 2011‐2012
STUDENTSCOMPLETING
LEVELSTUDENTS PASSING
7
8
C. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level English Courses
Purpose
To ensure remedial English and reading coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing English courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental English and/or reading students who successfully complete a credit English course with a grade of “P”, “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit English course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a grade of “P”, “C or better in their first credit English course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental English and/or reading course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria: Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit English course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental English or Reading course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental English or Reading course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit English course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental English course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “P”, “C”, or better in their first credit English course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit English course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit English course is based on any course with prefix “ENG” and course number greater than 099. When multiple English courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Goal: 74.9%
Baseline: 45.2%
9
D. Developmental Student Success Rate in College‐Level Math Courses
Purpose
To ensure remedial math coursework prepares students to succeed in credit‐bearing math courses
Description
Percentage of previous developmental math students who successfully complete a credit math course with a “C” or better upon the first attempt.
Methodology
Denominator: All students enrolling in their first credit math course during an academic year who also enrolled in a developmental math course during the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: All students earning a “P”, “C”, or better in their first credit math course during an academic year who enrolled in a developmental math course in the same or previous academic year. Does not include students who do not attend the class (ie transfer credit, credit by exam, etc).
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
Enrolled in their first credit math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental math course during the previous reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college.
OR
Enrolled in their first credit math course during the reporting year and enrolled in a developmental math course during the same reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer) at the same college. The student’s developmental math course semester must be equal to or precede their first credit math course.
Not eligible for this measure are students who complete developmental Math course by exam, placement or transfer.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who earned a grade of “P”, “C” or better in their first credit math course during the reporting year (Fall/Spring/Summer). The first credit math course evaluated cannot be a lab section. First credit math course is based on any course with prefix “MAT” and course number greater than 099. When multiple math courses are enrolled in during the same semester, the lowest numbered course will be evaluated.
Goal: 75.4%
Baseline: 47.5%
10
Goal: 74.9% Goal: 75.4%
Baseline: 45.2% Baseline: 47.5%
11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09 11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
System Totals 18,511 11,942 64.5% 65% 66% 66% System Totals 16,974 10,888 64.1% 66% 66% 65%
Alamance CC 411 275 66.9% 69% 71% 72% Alamance CC 480 302 62.9% 63% 66% 69%
Mitchell CC 381 248 65.1% 63% 63% 55% Mitchell CC 246 148 60.2% 55% 63% 60%
Montgomery CC 58 46 79.3% 75% 86% 87% Montgomery CC 63 20 31.7% 36% 43% 52%
Nash CC 190 100 52.6% 54% 51% 48% Nash CC 297 215 72.4% 76% 76% 74%
Pamlico CC 14 7 50.0% 73% 64% 67% Pamlico CC 23 21 91.3% 75% 58% 63%
Piedmont CC 157 98 62.4% 63% 69% 73% Piedmont CC 180 128 71.1% 64% 73% 77%
Pitt CC 627 444 70.8% 63% 61% 62% Pitt CC 558 246 44.1% 53% 60% 57%
Randolph CC 207 158 76.3% 75% 80% 74% Randolph CC 244 161 66.0% 77% 62% 81%
Richmond CC 325 214 65.8% 71% 66% 69% Richmond CC 207 133 64.3% 68% 58% 69%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 108 65 60.2% 50% 55% 29% Roanoke‐Chowan CC 70 63 90.0% 74% 86% 87%
Robeson CC 293 155 52.9% 54% 62% 71% Robeson CC 190 107 56.3% 61% 65% 69%
Rockingham CC 156 88 56.4% 59% 60% 64% Rockingham CC 235 166 70.6% 74% 75% 73%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 581 403 69.4% 64% 71% 65% Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 460 308 67.0% 67% 73% 66%
Sampson CC 146 73 50.0% 51% 59% 60% Sampson CC 95 63 66.3% 55% 51% 60%
Sandhills CC 430 265 61.6% 57% 62% 65% Sandhills CC 262 143 54.6% 59% 59% 52%
South Piedmont CC 168 105 62.5% 61% 67% 61% South Piedmont CC 144 74 51.4% 62% 56% 58%
Southeastern CC 101 56 55.4% 38% 46% 69% Southeastern CC 93 70 75.3% 69% 79% 71%
Southwestern CC 173 109 63.0% 63% 67% 67% Southwestern CC 187 125 66.8% 59% 64% 59%
Stanly CC 212 143 67.5% 75% 68% 65% Stanly CC 210 152 72.4% 72% 73% 68%
Surry CC 204 133 65.2% 66% 75% 73% Surry CC 196 127 64.8% 66% 62% 69%
Tri‐County CC 72 55 76.4% 75% 71% 76% Tri‐County CC 70 27 38.6% 53% 68% 67%
Vance‐Granville CC 261 153 58.6% 54% 59% 61% Vance‐Granville CC 147 80 54.4% 60% 58% 58%
Wake TCC 795 435 54.7% 55% 54% 50% Wake TCC 1,335 853 63.9% 57% 62% 64%
Wayne CC 316 200 63.3% 67% 63% 63% Wayne CC 277 184 66.4% 65% 57% 53%
Western Piedmont CC 258 171 66.3% 67% 70% 79% Western Piedmont CC 258 180 69.8% 80% 76% 75%
Wilkes CC 244 137 56.1% 65% 61% 65% Wilkes CC 136 103 75.7% 66% 78% 69%
Wilson CC 130 60 46.2% 41% 54% 49% Wilson CC 205 148 72.2% 72% 72% 70%
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
TABLE C. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL ENGLISH COURSES, 2011‐2012
TABLE D. DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENT SUCCESS RATE IN
COLLEGE‐LEVEL MATH COURSES, 2011‐2012
STUDENTS SUCCESSES% SUCCESSFUL
11
E. First Year Progression Purpose
To ensure first‐year students reach an academic momentum point that helps predict future credential completion
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students attempting at least twelve hours within their first academic year who successfully complete (“P”, “C” or better) at least twelve of those hours.
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Must attempt at least twelve hours (including developmental and withdraw) within the first year fall, spring, and summer semesters. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college. Does not include students who do not attend the class i.e. transfer credits, credit by exam or reported grades of ‘NA’ and ‘NS’.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who complete at least twelve hours (including developmental) with a “P”, “C” or better within the first year.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam”, “Transfer”, “NA”, and “NS”.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation from the same college they were Dual enrolled.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Attempt at least twelve hours during the first academic year (Fall, Spring, and Summer). Hours attempted include developmental hours and any class in which the student earns a standard letter grade, except for “Credit by Exam”, “Transfer”, “NA”, and “NS”.
Numerator: All students from the denominator who successfully complete with a grade of ‘P’,‘C’ or better at least twelve hours within the first year.
Goal: 74.6% Baseline: 53.2%
12
TABLE E. FIRST YEAR PROGRESSION, FALL 2011 COHORT
Goal: 74.6%
Baseline: 53.2%
11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
System Totals 40,003 34,174 23,143 67.7% 67% 67% 68%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 1,210 1,052 651 61.9% 60% 65% 66%
Sampson CC 244 221 152 68.8% 74% 76% 78%
Sandhills CC 741 632 416 65.8% 70% 64% 65%
South Piedmont CC 374 240 146 60.8% 65% 74% 69%
Southeastern CC 357 314 189 60.2% 56% 61% 68%
Southwestern CC 316 278 206 74.1% 67% 61% 63%
Stanly CC 509 450 308 68.4% 64% 69% 68%
Surry CC 454 403 287 71.2% 73% 73% 76%
Tri‐County CC 229 204 158 77.5% 65% 68% 76%
Vance‐Granville CC 795 699 446 63.8% 62% 67% 67%
Wake TCC 3,191 2,565 1,727 67.3% 67% 50% 64%
Wayne CC 706 626 459 73.3% 72% 71% 69%
Western Piedmont CC 457 415 298 71.8% 76% 76% 78%
Wilkes CC 522 497 366 73.6% 72% 69% 67%
Wilson CC 268 243 160 65.8% 67% 55% 73%
% SUCCESSFULCOHORT
12 HOURS
ATTEMPTED
12 HOURS
SUCCESSFULLY
COMPLETED
13
F. Curriculum {ǘdzŘŜƴǘ CompƭŜǘƛƻƴ Purpose
To ensure student completion and persistence toward a post‐secondary credential
Description
Percentage of first‐time fall credential‐seeking students who graduate, transfer, or are still enrolled with 36 hours after six years.
Methodology
Denominator: A fall cohort of credential‐seeking students (program code A, D, C) enrolled in curriculum courses at a college for the first time after high school graduation. Includes those dually enrolled previously at the same institution and excludes students previously enrolled at another college.
Numerator: Those within the cohort above who by the fall that occurs six years after original cohort designation either graduate (A, D, or C), transfer to a four year institution, or are still enrolled during that sixth fall semester previously completing 36 non‐developmental hours.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse
Details
Denominator: Students must meet one of the following criteria:
The fall semester is first enrollment term dating back to fall of 2001 and no previous post‐secondary enrollment as verified from the National Student Clearinghouse before the start date of the fall semester.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Graduated from high school before the beginning of the fall semester.
OR
Previous dual enrollment student
The fall semester is first post‐secondary enrollment term following high school graduation.
Academic program code begins with A, D, or C
Numerator: All students from the denominator who achieve at least one of the following:
Graduation‐ Graduated from a North Carolina community college credential program (A, D, C) at any point from the start of their first fall term and up till 6th fall term afterward.
OR
Transfer‐ Transferred into a 4‐year college as archived in the National Student Clearinghouse database on or before the 6th fall after original cohort term.
OR
Persistence‐ Still enrolled during the 6th fall term and successfully completing at least 36 non‐developmental credits prior to the 6th fall term. Successful credit completion is based on grades of C or better.
Goal: 45.6% Baseline: 28.6%
14
TABLE F. CURRICULUM {¢¦59b¢ /OMPLETION, FA[[ нллс /hIhw¢
Wilson CC 205 27% 25% 24% 22% 10% 10% 11% 11% 3% 2% 2% 3% 81 39.5% 37% 37% 36%
% TRANSFER, NOT
GRADUATE
% GRADUATE, TRANSFER, OR
RETAINED
COHORT
% GRADUATE% RETAINED, NOT
GRADUATE OR TRANSFERGRAD
TRAN
RET
15
G. Licensure and Certification Passing Rate Purpose
To ensure programmatic coursework prepares students to competently practice in their chosen profession
Description
Aggregate institutional passing rate of first time test‐takers on licensure and certification exams. Exams included in this measure are state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Methodology
Denominator: All licensure and certification exams taken for the first time during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year. Only includes state mandated exams which candidates must pass before becoming active practitioners.
Numerator: Licensure and certification exams passed on first attempt during the licensure agency’s most recent reporting year.
Note: Passing rates for individual exams will be provided for informational purposes only.
Source
American Board of Occupational Therapy Association, Inc.
Occupational Therapist Assistant
American Registry of Radiologic Technologists
Nuclear Medicine Technology Exam
Radiation Therapy Exam
Radiography Exam
Council of Interstate Testing
Dental Hygiene Exam
DL Roope Administrators
Apprentice Exam
Cosmetology Exam
Cosmetology Instructor Exam
Esthetician Exam
Manicurist Exam
Federal Aviation Administration
Airframe Exam (Starting in 2014)
General Exam (Starting in 2014)
Power Plant Exam (Starting in 2014)
Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards
Massage & Body Work Therapist
NC Board of Opticians
Opticianry Exam
NC Board of Physical Therapy Examiners
Physical Therapist Assistant Exam
NC Board of Nursing
Practical Nursing Exam
Registered Nursing Exam
NC Dept of Justice, Criminal Justice Standards Division
Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) Exam
NC Dept of Justice Sheriff’s Standards Division
Detention Officer (Starting in 2014)
NC Office of Emergency Medical Services
EMD Exam
EMT Exam
EMTI‐I Exam
EMT‐P Exam
NC Real Estate Commission
Provisional Real Estate Broker
NC Veterinary Medical Board
Veterinary Medicine Technology Exam
Details
The number of first‐time test‐takers and the number passing were provided to the System Office by agencies issuing the license or certification and validated by the colleges. Depending on the exam, data may be provided on a fiscal or calendar year. Exams include Aviation‐General, Aviation‐Airframe, Aviation ‐ Power Plant, BLET, ,
Cosmetic Arts‐Apprentice, Cosmetic Arts‐Instructor, Cosmetology, Dental Hygiene, Detention Officer, EMD, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P, Esthetician, Manicurist, Massage & Body Work Therapist, Nuclear Medical Technician, Occupational Therapist Assistant, Opticianry, Physical Therapist Assistant, Practical Nursing, Radiation Therapy, Radiography, Real Estate Broker, Registered Nursing, and Veterinary Medical Technician.
Goal: 91.7% Baseline: 71.0%
16
TABLE G. LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION PASSING RATE, 2011‐2012
Goal: 91.7%
Baseline: 71.0%11‐12 10‐11 09‐10 08‐09
System Totals 10,815 9,349 86.4% 87% 86% 86%
Alamance CC 215 173 80.5% 76% 88% 86%
Asheville‐Buncombe TC 427 383 89.7% 95% 89% 93%
Beaufort County CC 128 99 77.3% 71% 86% 85%
Bladen CC 93 67 72.0% 76% 81% 83%
Blue Ridge CC 122 112 91.8% 91% 81% 82%
Brunswick CC 131 112 85.5% 83% 91% 85%
Caldwell CC & TI 220 182 82.7% 82% 85% 84%
Cape Fear CC 408 368 90.2% 91% 96% 95%
Carteret CC 151 118 78.1% 80% 83% 79%
Catawba Valley CC 225 191 84.9% 83% 77% 71%
Central Carolina CC 284 240 84.5% 85% 83% 86%
Central Piedmont CC 428 395 92.3% 84% 92% 91%
Cleveland CC 177 155 87.6% 87% 80% 78%
Coastal Carolina CC 245 231 94.3% 92% 94% 88%
College of The Albema 160 132 82.5% 89% 74% 84%
Craven CC 221 190 86.0% 90% 88% 83%
Davidson County CC 225 208 92.4% 88% 92% 88%
Durham TCC 348 317 91.1% 96% 89% 85%
Edgecombe CC 85 73 85.9% 90% 86% 88%
Fayetteville TCC 400 365 91.3% 92% 96% 94%
Forsyth TCC 308 286 92.9% 94% 92% 89%
Gaston College 319 298 93.4% 93% 88% 89%
Guilford TCC 404 357 88.4% 92% 94% 89%
Halifax CC 72 62 86.1% 78% 76% 70%
Haywood CC 92 71 77.2% 86% 79% 86%
Isothermal CC 147 112 76.2% 77% 77% 79%
James Sprunt CC 68 55 80.9% 79% 88% 88%
Johnston CC 273 228 83.5% 88% 81% 92%
Lenoir CC 439 352 80.2% 78% 84% 87%
Martin CC 49 34 69.4% 74% 71% 87%
Mayland CC 107 87 81.3% 83% 85% 84%
McDowell TCC 123 111 90.2% 88% 92% 88%
Mitchell CC 165 149 90.3% 85% 84% 84%
Montgomery CC 34 32 94.1% 85% 83% 84%
Nash CC 184 138 75.0% 83% 77% 86%
Pamlico CC 5 5 100.0% 90% 46% 75%
Piedmont CC 67 50 74.6% 78% 76% 89%
Pitt CC 245 224 91.4% 90% 85% 86%
Randolph CC 123 106 86.2% 83% 87% 88%
Richmond CC 78 65 83.3% 91% 97% 86%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 55 41 74.5% 86% 72% 83%
Robeson CC 136 106 77.9% 78% 72% 77%
Rockingham CC 112 89 79.5% 82% 84% 92%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 366 290 79.2% 82% 85% 81%
Sampson CC 82 66 80.5% 79% 85% 87%
Sandhills CC 189 175 92.6% 84% 89% 87%
South Piedmont CC 151 125 82.8% 86% 86% 69%
Southeastern CC 157 118 75.2% 80% 82% 78%
Southwestern CC 145 134 92.4% 95% 95% 88%
Stanly CC 179 156 87.2% 86% 89% 79%
Surry CC 165 160 97.0% 92% 93% 92%
Tri‐County CC 57 50 87.7% 87% 70% 72%
Vance‐Granville CC 188 173 92.0% 90% 87% 84%
Wake TCC 403 369 91.6% 94% 91% 92%
Wayne CC 142 113 79.6% 80% 74% 90%
Western Piedmont CC 87 83 95.4% 92% 84% 91%
Wilkes CC 102 83 81.4% 86% 85% 82%
Wilson CC 104 85 81.7% 75% 89% 81%
NUMBER OF TEST
TAKERSNUMBER PASSING
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE
17
H. College Transfer Performance Purpose
To ensure the academic success of community college students at a four‐year university or college
Description
Among community college associate degree completers and those who have completed 30 or more credit hours who transfer to a four‐year university or college, the percentage who earn a GPA of 2.00 or better after two consecutive semesters within the academic year at the transfer institution.
Methodology
Denominator: Students with an associate degree or at least 30 articulated transfer credits enrolled during the fall and spring semesters at a four‐year institution who were enrolled at a community college during the previous academic year. Only includes North Carolina based four‐year institutions and four‐year institutions which the individual community college has an articulated transfer agreement.
Numerator: Students included in the denominator who have earned a GPA of 2.00 or better aggregated over the fall and spring semesters at the transfer institution.
Note: The System Office will work with private colleges to collect performance data and community colleges will have to supplement data with results from out of state institutions which they have articulation agreements.
Source
Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file National Student Clearinghouse UNC‐General Administration Participating NC Independent Colleges and Universities including Barton College, Campbell University, Catawba College, Chowan University, Gardner‐Webb University, Mars Hill College, Meredith College, Methodist University, and Mount Olive College Note: This list will expand in the 2014 report
Details
Lists of community college students enrolled during the academic year who received an associate degree during that year and those who had accumulated at least 30 articulated college transfer credit hours data were sent to UNCGA. These lists were matched against subsequent fall and spring UNC system student records to determine transfer enrollment at a North Carolina public university and first year academic performance. UNC‐GA uses this data to generate detailed reports by community college, which can be accessed at http://www.northcarolina.edu/ira/ir/analytics/tsp.htm. The First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of YEAR Community College Associate Degree Recipients and First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of YEAR Community College Students with at Least 30 Semester Hours of Community College Coursework were used for this measure. Data from D.4. Percent of Students with End‐of‐Year GPA=>2.00 in these reports were combined to determine the overall percentage of transfers with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university.
Goal: 93.8% Baseline: 71.2%
18
TABLE H. COLLEGE TRANSFER PERFORMANCE, 2010‐11 COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS
Goal: 93.8%
Baseline: 71.2%Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 Students # ≥ 2.00 % ≥ 2.00 09‐10 08‐09
B: PASSING RATES ON LICENSURE & CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
CHART B1. AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASS RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASS RATE < 70%
CHART B2. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (AVIATION – GENERAL, AVIATION – AIRFRAME, AVIATION ‐ POWER PLANT, BLET, REAL ESTATE SALES)
CHART B3. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS(COSMETIC ARTS – APPRENTICE, COSMETOLOGY, ESTHETICIAN, INSTRUCTOR, MANICURIST)
CHART B4. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (DENTAL HYGIENE, OPTICIANRY, NUC. MED. TECH., RADIATION THERAPY, RADIOGRAPHY)
CHART B5. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (PHYSICAL THERAPIST ASST., PRACTICAL NURSING, REGISTERED NURSING, VET. MED. TECH.)
CHART B6. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS(EMD, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P)
C: PERFORMANCE OF COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS
CHART C. PERCENT OF COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH A GPA OF > = 2.0 AFTER TWO SEMESTERS AT A UNC INSTITUTION
D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
CHART D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
E. SUCCESS RATES OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENTCOLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES
CHART E. PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES
F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS
CHART F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS
G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION, AND TRANSFER
CHART G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION AND TRANSFER
H. CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING
CHART H. CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING
2012 Critical Success Factors Report
July 2012
North Carolina Community College System
Dr. R Scott Ralls, President
Kennon Briggs, Executive VP & Chief of Staff
Research & Performance Management
Bill Schneider, Associate VP
Kristen Corbell, Research Projects Coordinator
Joann Ingoglia, Compliance Coordinator
INTRODUCTION The Critical Success Factors Report is the North Carolina Community College System’s major accountability document. This annual performance report is based on data compiled from the previous year and serves to inform colleges and the public on the performance of our 58 community colleges. In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures to ensure public accountability for programs and services. In 1998, the General Assembly directed the State Board to review past performance measures and define standards to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality. The State Board of Community Colleges and the General Assembly approved twelve performance measures for accountability in 1999. Later in 2007, the General Assembly approved the reduction of performance measures to the following eight:
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students (Measure not included this year, as authorized by Section 8.6 of S.L. 2012‐142) B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations C. Performance of College Transfer Students D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses E. Success Rates of Developmental Students in Subsequent College‐Level Courses F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non‐Completers G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training Colleges receive Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance if they meet or exceed all performance measures, have no licensure exams with a passing rate of less than 70%, and college transfer students perform at a level equal to or above native UNC system students. The chart below shows by year the number of colleges who have met the standard for the individual performance measures, the number of colleges who have met all performance standards, and the number of colleges receiving Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance.
In 2010, President Scott Ralls appointed members of a Performance Measures Committee to review the current performance measures and recommend changes to the State Board of Community Colleges. These changes were approved by the State Board in 2011 and the General Assembly in 2012. The new measures and associated data will be reported in the 2013 report.
45 4448
57 56 5753
26
11
47
37
47
58 58 5856
24
11
45 46 47
52
57
52
58
26
12
4743
4853
58
48
58
27
16
PM B PM C PM D PM E PM F PM G PM H Meeting All Standards
Western Piedmont CC 96% 0 87% 96% 97% 97% 73% 95% 7/7
Wilkes CC 84% 0 87% 84% 93% 97% 70% 97% 7/7
Wilson CC 77% 0 80% 72% 85% 97% 68% 98% 4/7
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance *** Less than 10 studentsNote: Measure A (Basic Skills Student Progress) has been removed this year due to reporting innacuracies
B: PASSING RATES ON LICENSURE & CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
Description The percentage of first‐time test takers passing an examination required for North Carolina licensure or certification prior to practicing the profession. A licensure requirement for an occupation is one that is required by state statute for an individual to work in that occupation. Certification is generally voluntary but may be required by employers or an outside accrediting agency. Purely voluntary examinations are not reported.
Source The number of first‐time test‐takers and the number passing were provided to the System Office by agencies issuing the license or certification and validated by the colleges. Depending on the exam, data may be provided on a fiscal or calendar year. The institutional passing rate was calculated by dividing the total number of first‐time test takers passing for all reported examinations by the total number of persons who sat for the exam for the first time. For privacy and statistical validity, no examination data are reported when the number of first‐time test takers was fewer than 10.
System Standard 80% of first‐time test takers will pass examinations required for North Carolina licensure or certification.
Exceptional Institutional Performance Standard The college will have no exam with a passing rate less than 70%
Results For 2010‐11, 47 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 70% to a high of 96%. The aggregate result for the system was 87%. In addition, there were 36 colleges with no exam with a passing rate less than 70%.
86% 86% 86% 87%
2007‐08
2008‐09
2009‐10
2010‐11
Aggregate Exam Results
STANDARD (80%)
90%
89%
83%
94%
95%
94%
90%
85%
65%
75%
96%
92%
85%
92% 97%
96%
89%
83%
64%
71%
96%
95%
84%
91%
99%
97%
87%
85%
67%
80%
96%
94% 96%
84%
96%
94%
90%
82%
66%
90%
COS ARTS ‐
APPREN
TICE
COS ARTS ‐
COSM
ETOLO
GY
COS ARTS ‐
ESTH
ETICIAN
DEN
TAL
HYG
IENE
RADIOGRAPHY
PRACTICAL
NURSING
REG
ISTERED
NURSING
EMT
EMT‐I
EMT‐P
Individual Exam Results with at least 100 Test‐Takers
2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11
B1. 2010‐2011 AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASSING RATE < 70%
Description Of students transferring to a university with an associate degree or 24 articulated college transfer credit hours, the percentage who have a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university.
Source Lists of students enrolled in 2009‐2010 receiving an associate degree during that academic year and those who had accumulated at least 24 articulated college transfer credit hours data were sent to UNCGA. These lists were matched against fall 2010 and spring 2011 UNC system student records to determine transfer enrollment at a North Carolina public university and first year academic performance. Detailed reports by community college can be accessed at http://www.northcarolina.edu/ira/ir/analytics/tsp.htm. Two reports for each college were accessed from this site for this measure: First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of 2009‐10 Community College Associate Degree Recipients and First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of 2009‐10 Community College Students with at Least 24 Semester Hours of Community College Coursework. Data from D.4. Percent of Students with End‐of‐Year GPA=>2.00 in these reports were combined to determine the overall percentage of transfers with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university. Community colleges are allowed to supplement this data with acquired performance data from private and out‐of‐state institutions that is consistent with the methodology employed by the UNCGA in calculating the data for transfer to public universities.
System Standard 83% of students transferring to a university with an associate degree or 24 articulated college transfer credit hours will have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university.
Exceptional Institutional Performance Standard Meet or exceed the aggregate performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors, which is 88% for this year.
Results For 2010‐11, 43 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 71% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 88%. In addition, there were 28 colleges whose percentage equaled or exceeded the percentage of native UNC sophomores and juniors with a GPA greater than 2.00 (88%).
90% 90%
85% 86%88% 87%88% 88%
83%85% 85% 86%
90% 90%86% 86% 87% 87%
89%91%
87% 87% 88% 88%
ASSOCIATE DEGREE RECIPIENTS
NATIVEUNC JUNIORS
24 OR MORE TRANSFER CREDITS
AT CC
NATIVE UNC SOPHOMORES
COMMUNITY COLLEGE
AGGREGATE
NATIVEUNC AGGREGATE
University Students with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00
2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 2010‐11 STANDARD (83%)
C. PERCENT OF 2009‐10 COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH A GPA OF ≥ 2.0 AFTER TWO SEMESTERS AT A UNC INSTITUTION
Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 08‐09 07‐08* 06‐07*
Western Piedmont CC ** 148 86% 63 90% 211 87% 89% 88% 89%
Wilkes CC ** 104 87% 35 89% 139 87% 86% 92% 89%
Wilson CC 13 77% 12 83% 25 80% 84% 75% 53%
* Did not include AAS students prior to 2008‐09
** Includes data from private colleges and universities.
***Less than 10 students
2009‐2010 TOTALASSOCIATE DEGREE RECIPENT24 OR MORE SEMESTER HOURS % ≥ 2.00
D: PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
Description The percentage of developmental course completers in English, reading or mathematics completing with a grade of "C" or better.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Grade data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Course Prefix” equal to “ENG;MAT;RED”, “Course Number” less than “100”, and Reporting Term equal to “201003;201101;201102” and analyzed based on data in the fields “Letter Grade” and “College Letter Grade”. While all grades were extracted for analysis, only grades that equated to “A”,”B”,”C”,”D”, or “F” were counted as completers. Since colleges use different letter grades with multiple meanings, it was imperative to make sure all of the other, withdrawal, and incomplete grades were meaning the same thing across colleges for adequate comparisons. Thus, a survey was sent to colleges asking them to define the grades we have questions about. Additionally, the student handbook at each college was used to further help in the definitions when needed. Then each college letter grade was mapped to a consistent definition of letter grades. Other grades include those that equate to withdraw, incomplete, audit, transfer credit, etc. Results were shared and verified with institutions to ensure proper grade mapping.
Standard 75% of developmental course completers in English, reading or mathematics will complete with a grade "C" or better.
Results For 2010‐11, 48 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 61% to a high of 97%. The aggregate result for the system was 80%.
84% 83% 83% 86%79% 83% 81% 83%
74% 77% 74% 76% 77% 80% 78% 80%
Reading
2007‐08
Reading
2008‐09
Reading
2009‐10
Reading
2010‐11
English
2007‐08
English
2008‐09
English
2009‐10
English
2010‐11
Math
2007‐08
Math
2008‐09
Math
2009‐10
Math
2010‐11
Total
2007‐08
Total
2008‐09
Total
2009‐10
Total
2010‐11
Developmental Course Grades
C or BETTER FAIL OTHER GRADES STANDARD (75%)
D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES, 2010‐2011
E: SUCCESS RATE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES
Description Among developmental completers subsequently completing a college level English or mathematics course, the percentage passing the college level English or mathematics course with a grade of "D" or better. Specifically, the performance of those who took developmental English and/or reading courses and subsequently took college‐level English courses was assessed. Likewise, the performance of those who took developmental math courses and then took college‐level math courses was also assessed.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Grade data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Course Prefix” equal to “ENG;MAT”, “Course Number” greater than or equal to “100”, and Reporting Term equal to “201003;201101;201102” and analyzed based on data in the fields “Letter Grade” and “College Letter Grade”. Any students who had taken a credit course in the same subject area in “200803;200901;200902;200903;201001;201002” were removed from the file to leave only first time credit course students. While all grades were extracted for analysis, only grades that equated to “A”,”B”,”C”,”D”, or “F” were counted as completers. These grades were matched to students who had previously taken developmental English, Reading, and/or Math courses for the terms “200803; 200901; 200902; 200903; 201001; 201002; 201003; 201101; 201102”. The same survey used in Performance Measure D was used to create a standardized grading system across all colleges using the college letter grade, survey responses, and student
handbook as needed. The standardized grades were then used in the final analysis. Results were shared and verified with institutions to ensure proper grade mapping.
Standard 80% of college level English or mathematics course completers with previous developmental coursework will complete the college level English or mathematics course with a grade of "D" or better.
Results For 2010‐11, 53 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 75% to a high of 98%. The aggregate result for the system was 87%.
89% 86% 87% 85% 90% 88% 88% 88% 89% 87% 88% 87%
English
2007‐08
English
2008‐09
English
2009‐10
English
2010‐11
Math
2007‐08
Math
2008‐09
Math
2009‐10
Math
2010‐11
Total
2007‐08
Total
2008‐09
Total
2009‐10
Total
2010‐11
Previous Developmental Student Grades in College‐Level CoursesD or BETTER FAIL OTHER GRADES STANDARD (80%)
E. PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES, 2010‐2011
Wilson CC 186 127 76% 83% 84% 82% 280 245 89% 87% 90% 92% 466 372 85% 85% 88% 87%
% COMPLETERS PASSING
ENGLISH MATH TOTAL
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
% COMPLETERS PASSING
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
% COMPLETERS PASSING
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
F: SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS
Description The percentage of graduates and early‐leavers “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall quality of the college.
Source Data was collected from a Completer Survey and a Non‐Completer Survey that were developed and administered at the individual colleges. Many of the questions included on the surveys are required by the System Office, including a question on the “Overall quality of the college” with satisfaction options of “very satisfied”, “satisfied”, “dissatisfied”, and “very dissatisfied”. Completer Surveys were administered to students graduating in the 2010‐2011 academic year. Non‐Completer Surveys were administered to credential‐seeking students in Fall 2010 who were not enrolled in Fall 2011 and had not graduated. Colleges are required to report a statistically valid response rate. The overall satisfaction rates were calculated by dividing the total number of respondents “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the “Overall quality of the college” by the total number of question responses.
Performance Standard 90% of exiting students will be “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall quality of the college.
Results For 2010‐11, all 58 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 91% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 96%.
97% 97% 95% 94% 96% 96%
52% 50%
40% 41%49% 48%
45% 47%
54% 52%
48% 48%
Completers
2007‐08
Completers
2008‐09
Completers
2009‐10
Completers
2010‐11
Non‐Completers
2007‐08
Non‐Completers
2008‐09
Non‐Completers
2009‐10
Non‐Completers
2010‐11
Total
2007‐08
Total
2008‐09
Total
2009‐10
Total
2010‐11
Completer and Non‐Completer Satisfaction
VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED STANDARD (90%)
F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS, 2010‐2011
G: CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION, AND TRANSFER Description The percentage of fall credential‐seeking students who have graduated or are still enrolled at the same college, a university, or another community college one year later.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Student enrollment data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Degree Type Desc” equal to “Associate;Certificate;Diploma” and “Reporting Term” equal to “201003”. This fall 2010 list of students was matched against those with a “Date Graduated in Curriculum” between “07/01/2010” and “12/31/2011” to determine those graduating. The fall 2010 list was also matched against those with “Reporting Term” equal to “201103” in either the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II or Con‐Ed Universe (with “Funding Code Area” equal to “03” or ”04”)to determine fall 2011 enrollments in either curriculum or occupational extension programs. Finally, the fall 2010 list was sent to the National Student Clearinghouse to identify those who transferred to a college or university outside of the NC community College System. The combined data set was analyzed to determine which students from the fall 2010 list had “graduated”, “returned but did not graduate”, “transferred but did not graduate or return”, or “did not graduate, return, or transfer”.
Performance Standard 65% of fall credential‐seeking students will graduate, remain enrolled at the same college, or transfer to a university or another community college one year later.
Results For 2010‐11, 48 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 61% to a high of 75%. The aggregate result for the system was 67%.
13% 14% 12%16%
49%51%
49%45%
7%7%
7% 6%
2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010‐2011
Students Graduating, Returning, or Transferring
TRANSFERRED, DID NOT GRADUATE OR RETURN
RETURNED, DID NOT GRADUATE
GRADUATED
STANDARD (65%)
G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATON AND TRANSFER, 2010‐2011
Wilson CC 1,754 18% 14% 16% 16% 41% 47% 49% 47% 9% 5% 6% 5% 68% 66% 71% 68%
% TRANSFER% GRADUATE% GRADUATE, TRANSFER, OR
RETURNENROLLED% RETURN
H: CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING Description Percentage of clients receiving specialized training programs and services through Customized Training and Small Business Centers satisfied with training. Source Surveys administered to clients receiving services through Customized Training Program projects and Business & Industry Support training activities, and from Small Business Centers were administered by colleges to determine level of satisfaction with training. The data is submitted annually to the System Office at the end of the fiscal year. Satisfaction for each of these surveys are based on a five point scale with satisfaction being based on the highest two points. Performance Standard 90% of clients receiving specialized training programs and services through Customized Training and Small Business Centers will be satisfied with training. Results For 2010‐11, all 58 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 90% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 95%.
94% 94% 95% 95%
2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010‐2011
Clients Satisfied with Training
STANDARD (90%)
H. CLIENT SATISFIED WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING PROGRAM 2010‐2011
College of The Albema 1,086 91% 7 100% 91% 92% 92% 90%
Craven CC 775 99% 6 100% 99% 97% 96% 100%
Davidson County CC 152 89% 30 100% 91% 93% 93% 91%
Durham TCC 672 97% 12 100% 97% 94% 93% 90%
Edgecombe CC 211 96% 7 86% 96% 96% 95% 98%
Fayetteville TCC 1,164 95% 8 100% 95% 92% 93% 96%
Forsyth TCC 1,195 97% 23 100% 97% 95% 96% 96%
Gaston College 554 90% 24 100% 91% 97% 93% 98%
Guilford TCC 593 93% 11 100% 93% 94% 95% 80%
Halifax CC 880 95% 4 75% 95% 100% 94% 96%
Haywood CC 498 93% 6 100% 93% 93% 95% 93%
Isothermal CC 392 91% 20 100% 91% 95% 96% 86%
James Sprunt CC 1,064 100% 9 100% 100% 100% 100% 99%
Johnston CC 1,058 96% 22 100% 96% 94% 95% 98%
Lenoir CC 375 96% 5 80% 96% 95% 94% 95%
Martin CC 480 94% 4 100% 94% 94% 95% 93%
Mayland CC 389 95% 9 78% 94% 95% 96% 96%
McDowell TCC 206 100% 9 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Mitchell CC 465 94% 15 100% 95% 96% 93% 93%
Montgomery CC 465 95% 7 100% 96% 97% 93% 93%
Nash CC 927 95% 19 100% 95% 96% 92% 96%
Pamlico CC ** 147 99% 99% 99% 92% 87%
Piedmont CC 481 94% 3 100% 94% 93% 92% 93%
Pitt CC 883 94% 32 97% 94% 95% 90% 92%
Randolph CC 410 94% 41 100% 95% 92% 94% 97%
Richmond CC 645 94% 45 100% 94% 100% 96% 89%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 524 96% 3 100% 96% 95% 95% 93%
Robeson CC 942 98% 31 100% 98% 94% 95% 96%
Rockingham CC 248 95% 12 100% 95% 94% 91% 92%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 537 90% 29 100% 91% 92% 90% 93%
Sampson CC 253 95% 9 100% 95% 93% 83% 96%
Sandhills CC 1,059 95% 13 100% 95% 93% 96% 94%
South Piedmont CC 285 93% 11 100% 93% 94% 93% 94%
Southeastern CC 1,177 96% 1 100% 96% 93% 91% 92%
Southwestern CC 85 99% 6 100% 99% 94% 100% 100%
Stanly CC 359 96% 16 100% 96% 93% 92% 95%
Surry CC 545 97% 17 100% 97% 99% 98% 97%
Tri‐County CC 84 94% 18 100% 95% 94% 98% 94%
Vance‐Granville CC 713 96% 32 100% 96% 94% 93% 98%
Wake TCC 2,278 96% 14 100% 96% 96% 97% 97%
Wayne CC 500 98% 19 100% 98% 95% 95% 92%
Western Piedmont CC 313 95% 30 100% 95% 99% 97% 94%
Wilkes CC 354 97% 13 85% 97% 90% 96% 98%
Wilson CC 314 98% 12 100% 98% 97% 95% 95%
* Did not include Customized Training and Business & Industry Support prior to 2009‐10
** For customized training, Pamlico is in consortium with Craven CC
AGGREGATE % EXCELLENT & VERY GOOD*CUSTOMIZED TRAINING PROJ AND
BUSINESS & INDUSTRY SUPPORT SMALL BUSINESS CENTERS
Critical Success Factors
2011
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
2010‐2011 PERFORMANCE SUMMARY
A: PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS
CHART A. PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS
B: PASSING RATES ON LICENSURE & CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
CHART B1. AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASS RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASS RATE < 70%
CHART B2. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (AVIATION – GENERAL, AVIATION – AIRFRAME, AVIATION ‐ POWER PLANT, BLET, REAL ESTATE SALES)
CHART B3. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (COSMETIC ARTS – APPRENTICE, COSMETOLOGY, ESTHETICIAN, INSTRUCTOR, MANICURIST)
CHART B4. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (DENTAL HYGIENE, OPTICIANRY, NUC. MED. TECH., RADIATION THERAPY, RADIOGRAPHY)
CHART B5. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (PHYSICAL THERAPIST ASST., PRACTICAL NURSING, REGISTERED NURSING, VET. MED. TECH.)
CHART B6. FIRST‐TIME PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS (EMD, EMT, EMT‐I, EMT‐P)
C: PERFORMANCE OF COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS
CHART C. PERCENT OF COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH A GPA OF > = 2.0 AFTER TWO SEMESTERS AT A UNIVERSITY
D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
CHART D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
E. SUCCESS RATES OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVELCOURSES
CHART E. PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES
F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS
CHART F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS,
G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION, AND TRANSFER
CHART G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION AND TRANSFER
H. CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING
CHART H. CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING
2011 Critical Success Factors Report
June 2011
North Carolina Community College System
Dr. R Scott Ralls, President
Kennon Briggs, Executive VP & Chief of Staff
Research & Performance Management
Bill Schneider, Associate VP
Jon Brasfield, Coordinator
Vivian Barrett, Office Assistant
INTRODUCTION The Critical Success Factors Report is the North Carolina Community College System’s major accountability document. This annual performance report serves to inform colleges and the public on the performance of our 58 community colleges. In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures to ensure public accountability for programs and services. In 1998, the General Assembly directed the State Board to review past performance measures and define standards to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality. The State Board of Community Colleges and the General Assembly approved twelve performance measures for accountability in 1999. Later in 2007, the General Assembly approved the reduction of performance measures to the current eight: A. Progress of Basic Skills Students B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations C. Performance of College Transfer Students D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses E. Success Rates of Developmental Students in Subsequent College‐Level Courses F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non‐Completers G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training Colleges receive Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance if they meet or exceed all eight performance measures, have no licensure exams with a passing rate of less than 70%, and college transfer students perform at a level equal to or above native UNC system students. The chart below shows by year the number of colleges who have met the standard for the individual performance measures, the number of colleges who have met all eight performance standards, and the number of colleges receiving Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance.
In 2010, President Scott Ralls appointed members of a Performance Measures Committee to review the current performance measures and recommend changes to the State Board of Community Colleges. Once approved by the State Board and the General Assembly, these changes will be reflected in the 2013 report.
56
45 4448
57 56 5753
26
11
55
47
37
47
58 58 58 56
24
11
53
45 46 4752
5752
58
26
12
PM A PM B PM C PM D PM E PM F PM G PM H Meeting All Eight
Western Piedmont CC 77% 84% 0 89% 93% 95% 99% 72% 99% 8*
Wilkes CC 83% 85% 0 86% 81% 90% 95% 69% 90% 8
Wilson TCC 81% 89% 0 84% 77% 85% 97% 66% 97% 8
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance
STANDARDS
MET
A. BASIC
SKILLS
B. LICENSURE
EXAMSC. TRANSFER
PERFORM
D. DEV
GRADES
E. DEV IN
CREDIT
F. STUDENT
SATISFACTION
G. STUDENT
PERSISTENCE
H. TRAINING
SATISFACTION
A: PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS Description The aggregate percentage of adult literacy students completing a level of literacy, progressing within a level of literacy, or completing a predetermined goal. Source Data is submitted on an annual basis from each college into the Literacy Education Information System which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. This data is extracted from the Data Warehouse’s Literacy‐College Universe using “Reporting Year” = “2010” and analyzed at the individual student level using the fields “Mover Higher (Y/N)”, Level Completed (Y/N)”, “Progressing (Y/N)”, and “Goal Completed (Y/N)” to determine student progression. System Standard 75 % of adult literacy students will complete a level, progress within a level, or complete a predetermined goal. Results For 2009‐10, 56 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 69% to a high of 95%. The aggregate result for the system was 81%.
A ‐ Based on analysis of student progress data in the data warehouse B ‐ Based on automated reports provided to colleges following data submission
COMPOSITE PROGRESS MEASURETOTAL
SERVED
IN
LITERACY
PROGRESSED
BUT DID NOT
COMPLETE
LEVEL
MET GOAL
BUT DID NOT
PROGRESS
MOVED
TO NEXT
LEVEL
DID NOT
MEET
GOAL
COMPLETED
LEVEL BUT
DID NOT GO
TO NEXT
B: PASSING RATES ON LICENSURE & CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
Description The percentage of first‐time test takers passing an examination required for North Carolina licensure or certification prior to practicing the profession. A licensure requirement for an occupation is one that is required by state statute for an individual to work in that occupation. Certification is generally voluntary but may be required by employers or an outside accrediting agency. Purely voluntary examinations are not reported.
Source The number of first‐time test‐takers and the number passing were provided to the System Office by agencies issuing the license or certification and validated by the colleges. Depending on the exam, data may be provided on a fiscal or calendar year. The institutional passing rate was calculated by dividing the total number of first‐time test takers for all reported examinations by the total number of persons who sat for the exam for the first time. For privacy and statistical validity, no examination data are reported when the number of first‐time test takers was fewer than 10.
System Standard 80% of first‐time test takers will pass examinations required for North Carolina licensure or certification.
Exceptional Institutional Performance Standard The college will have no exam with a passing rate less than 70%
Results For 2009‐10, 45 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 46% to a high of 97%. The aggregate result for the system was 86%. In addition, there were 34 colleges with no exam with a passing rate less than 70%.
86% 86% 86%
2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010
Aggregate Exam Results
STANDARD (80%)
90%
89%
83%
94%
95%
94%
90%
85%
65%
75%
96%
92%
85%
92% 97%
96%
89%
83%
64%
71%
96%
95%
84%
91%
99%
97%
87%
85%
67%
80%
COS ARTS ‐
APPREN
TICE
COS ARTS ‐
COSM
ETOLO
GY
COS ARTS ‐
ESTH
ETICIAN
DEN
TAL
HYG
IENE
RADIOGRAPHY
PRACTICAL
NURSING
REG
ISTERED
NURSING
EMT
EMT‐I
EMT‐P
Individual Exam Results with at least 100 Test‐Takers
2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10
B1. 2009‐2010 AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASS RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASS RATE < 70%
Western Piedmont CC 38 84% * 86% 14 79% 95% 100% *
Wilkes CC 24 75% 81% 72% 11 82% * *
Wilson CC 47 87% 71% 86% * 3 * *
*Less than 10 test takers
EMD EMT EMT‐I EMT‐P
% PASSING % PASSING % PASSING % PASSING
C: PERFORMANCE OF COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS
Description Of students transferring to a university with an associate degree or 24 articulated college transfer credit hours, the percentage who have a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university.
Source Lists of students enrolled in 2008‐2009 receiving an associate degree during that academic year and those who had accumulated at least 24 articulated college transfer credit hours data were sent to UNCGA. These lists were matched against fall 2009 and spring 2010 UNC system student records to determine transfer enrollment at a North Carolina public university and first year academic performance. Detailed reports by community college can be accessed at http://www.northcarolina.edu/ira/ir/analytics/tsp.htm. Two reports for each college were accessed from this site for this measure: First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of 2008‐09 Community College Associate Degree Recipients and First‐Year UNC Academic Performance of 2008‐09 Community College Students with at Least 24 Semester Hours of Community College Coursework. Data from D.4. Percent of Students with End‐of‐Year GPA=>2.00 in these reports were combined to determine the overall percentage of transfers with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university. Community colleges are allowed to supplement this data with acquired performance data from private and out‐of‐state institutions that is consistent with the methodology employed by the UNCGA in calculating the data for transfer to public universities.
System Standard 83% of students transferring to a university with an associate degree or 24 articulated college transfer credit hours will have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at the university.
Exceptional Institutional Performance Standard Meet or exceed the aggregate performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors, which is 87% for this year.
Results For 2009‐10, 46 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 66% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 87%. In addition, there were 33 colleges meeting or exceeding the aggregate performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors (87%).
90% 90%
85% 86%88% 87%88% 88%
83%85% 85% 86%
90% 90%86% 86% 87% 87%
ASSOCIATE DEGREE RECIPIENTS
NATIVEUNC JUNIORS
24 OR MORE TRANSFER CREDITS AT CC
NATIVE UNC SOPHOMORES
COMMUNITY COLLEGE AGGREGATE
NATIVEUNC AGGREGATE
University Students with a GPA equal or greater than 2.00
2007‐08 2008‐09 2009‐10 STANDARD (83%)
C. PERCENT OF 2009‐10 COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH A GPA OF > = 2.0 AFTER TWO SEMESTERS AT A UNIVERSITY
Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 Students % ≥ 2.00 2008‐2009* 2007‐2008*
Montgomery CC 5 *** 0 *** <10 Students *** *** ***
Nash CC ** 52 94% 19 89% 71 93% 84% 93%
Pamlico CC <5 Students *** <5 Students *** <10 Students *** *** ***
Piedmont CC 36 69% 17 59% 53 66% 90% 84%
Pitt CC 225 84% 67 88% 292 85% 87% 87%
Randolph CC 41 88% 21 95% 62 90% 90% 93%
Richmond CC 51 90% 36 97% 87 93% 87% 74%
Roanoke‐Chowan CC 5 *** 5 *** 10 100% *** 83%
Robeson CC 48 75% 35 83% 83 78% 76% 85%
Rockingham CC ** 46 89% 30 90% 76 89% 95% 85%
Rowan‐Cabarrus CC 148 75% 63 79% 211 76% 84% 86%
Sampson CC ** 18 100% 9 *** 27 96% 77% 74%
Sandhills CC 124 81% 44 93% 168 85% 79% 83%
South Piedmont CC 24 88% 7 *** 31 90% 92% 56%
Southeastern CC 84 73% 22 73% 106 73% 93% 86%
Southwestern CC 71 93% 50 96% 121 94% 96% 95%
Stanly CC ** 46 89% 29 90% 75 89% 75% 84%
Surry CC ** 116 89% 80 95% 196 91% 90% 87%
Tri‐County CC 33 85% 17 88% 50 86% 94% 94%
Vance‐Granville CC 57 88% 26 85% 83 87% 89% 86%
Wake TCC 571 90% 166 94% 737 91% 84% 89%
Wayne CC ** 103 87% 72 88% 175 87% 87% 92%
Western Piedmont CC ** 89 87% 79 92% 168 89% 88% 89%
Wilkes CC 80 85% 34 88% 114 86% 92% 89%
Wilson CC 12 83% 7 *** 19 84% 75% 53%
* Did not include AAS students prior to 2008‐09
** Includes data from private colleges and universities.
***Less than 10 students
2009‐2010 TOTALASSOCIATE DEGREE RECIPENT24 OR MORE SEMESTER HOURS % ≥ 2.00
D: PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES
Description The percentage of developmental course completers in English, reading or mathematics completing with a grade of "C" or better.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Grade data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Course Prefix” equal to “ENG;MAT;RED”, “Course Number” less than “100”, and Reporting Term equal to “200903;201001;201002” and analyzed based on data in the fields “Letter Grade” and “College Letter Grade”. While all grades were extracted for analysis, only grades that equated to “A”,”B”,”C”,”D”, or “F” were counted as completers. Other grades include those that equate to withdraw, incomplete, audit, transfer credit, etc. Results were shared and verified with institutions to ensure proper grade mapping.
Standard 75% of developmental course completers in English, reading or mathematics will complete with a grade "C" or better.
Results For 2009‐10, 47 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 62% to a high of 97%. The aggregate result for the system was 78%.
84% 83% 83% 79% 83% 81%74% 77% 74% 77% 80% 78%
Reading
2007‐2008
Reading
2008‐2009
Reading
2009‐2010
English
2007‐2008
English
2008‐2009
English
2009‐2010
Math
2007‐2008
Math
2008‐2009
Math
2009‐2010
Total
2007‐2008
Total
2008‐2009
Total
2009‐2010
Developmental Course Grades
C or BETTER FAIL OTHER GRADES STANDARD (75%)
D. PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES, 2009‐2010
E: SUCCESS RATE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES
Description Among developmental completers subsequently completing a college level English or mathematics course, the percentage passing the college level English or mathematics course with a grade of "D" or better. Specifically, the performance of those who took developmental English and/or reading courses and subsequently took college‐level English courses was assessed. Likewise, the performance of those who took developmental math courses and then took college‐level math courses was also assessed.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Grade data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Course Prefix” equal to “ENG;MAT”, “Course Number” less than or equal to “100”, and Reporting Term equal to “200903;201001;201002” and analyzed based on data in the fields “Letter Grade” and “College Letter Grade”. While all grades were extracted for analysis, only grades that equated to “A”,”B”,”C”,”D”, or “F” were counted as completers. These grades were matched to students who had previously taken developmental English, Reading, and/or Math courses.
Standard 80% of college level English or mathematics course completers with previous developmental coursework will complete the college level English or mathematics course with a grade of "D" or better.
Results For 2009‐10, 52 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 67% to a high of 96%. The aggregate result for the system was 88%.
89% 86% 87% 90% 88% 88% 89% 87% 88%
English
2007‐2008
English
2008‐2009
English
2009‐2010
Math
2007‐2008
Math
2008‐2009
Math
2009‐2010
Total
2007‐2008
Total
2008‐2009
Total
2009‐2010
Previous Developmental Student Grades in College‐Level Courses
D or BETTER FAIL OTHER GRADES STANDARD (80%)
E. PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE‐LEVEL COURSES, 2009‐2010
Wilson CC 312 263 83% 84% 82% 204 189 87% 90% 92% 516 452 85% 88% 87%
% COMPLETERS
PASSING
ENGLISH MATH TOTAL
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
% COMPLETERS
PASSING
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
% COMPLETERS
PASSING
ATTEM
PT
COMPLET
F: SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS
Description The percentage of graduates and early‐leavers “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall quality of the college.
Source Data was collected from a Completer Survey and a Non‐Completer Survey that were developed and administered at the individual colleges. Many of the questions included on the surveys are required by the System Office, including a question on the “Overall quality of the college” with satisfaction options of “very satisfied”, “satisfied”, “dissatisfied”, and “very dissatisfied”. Completer Surveys were administered to students graduating in the 2009‐2010 academic year. Non‐Completer Surveys were administered to credential‐seeking students in Fall 2009 who were not enrolled in Fall 2010 and had not graduated. Colleges are required to report a statistically valid response rate. The overall satisfaction rates were calculated by dividing the total number of respondents “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the “Overall quality of the college” by the total number of question responses.
Performance Standard 90% of exiting students will be “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall quality of the college.
Results For 2009‐10, 57 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 87% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 96%.
97% 97% 95% 94% 96% 96%
52%
40%
49%
45%
54%
48%
Completers
2007‐2008
Completers
2008‐2009
Completers
2009‐2010
Non‐
Completers
2007‐2008
Non‐
Completers
2008‐2009
Non‐
Completers
2009‐2010
Total
2007‐2008
Total
2008‐2009
Total
2009‐2010
Completer and Non‐Completer Satisfaction
VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED STANDARD (90%)
F. SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON‐COMPLETERS, 2009‐2010
G: CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATION, AND TRANSFER
Description The percentage of fall credential‐seeking students who have graduated or are still enrolled at the same college, a university, or another community college one year later.
Source At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file which is uploaded to the NCCCS Data Warehouse. Student enrollment data in the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II Universe was extracted by filtering “Curriculum Type Desc” equal to “Associate;Certificate;Diploma” and “Reporting Term” equal to “200903”. This fall 2009 list of students was matched against those with a “Date Graduated in Curriculum” between “07/01/2009” and “12/31/2010” to determine those graduating. The fall 2009 list was also matched against those with “Reporting Term” equal to “201003” in either the Data Warehouse’s Curriculum Student Info II or Con‐Ed Universe (with “Funding Code Area” equal to “03” or ”04”)to determine fall 2010 enrollments in either curriculum or occupational extension programs. Finally, the fall 2009 list was sent to the National Student Clearinghouse to identify those who transferred to a college or university outside of the NC community College System. The combined data set was analyzed to determine which students from the fall 2009 list had had “graduated”, “returned but did not graduate”, “transferred but did not graduate or return”, or “did not graduate, return, or transfer”.
Performance Standard 65% of fall credential‐seeking students will graduate, remain enrolled at the same college, or transfer to a university or another community college one year later.
Results For 2009‐10, 52 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 62% to a high of 73%. The aggregate result for the system was 68%.
13% 14% 12%
49%51%
49%
7%7%
7%
2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010
Students Graduating, Returning, or Transferring
TRANSFERRED, DID NOT GRADUATE OR RETURN
RETURNED, DID NOT GRADUATE
GRADUATED
STANDARD (65%)
G. CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATON AND TRANSFER, 2009‐2010
Wilson CC 1,690 14% 16% 16% 47% 49% 47% 5% 6% 5% 66% 71% 68%
% TRANSFER% GRADUATE% GRADUATE, TRANSFER,
OR RETURNENROLLED% RETURN
H: CLIENT SATISFACTION WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING
Description Percentage of clients receiving specialized training programs and services through Customized Training and Small Business Centers satisfied with training.
Source Surveys administered to clients receiving services through Customized Training Program projects and Business & Industry Support training activities, and from Small Business Centers were administered by colleges to determine level of satisfaction with training. The data is submitted annually to the System Office at the end of the fiscal year. Satisfaction for each of these surveys are based on a five point scale with satisfaction being based on the highest two points.
Performance Standard 90% of clients receiving specialized training programs and services through Customized Training and Small Business Centers will be satisfied with training.
Results For 2009‐10, all 58 community colleges met this standard. The college results ranged from a low of 90% to a high of 100%. The aggregate result for the system was 95%.
94% 94% 95%
2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010
Clients Satisfied with Training
STANDARD (90%)
H. CLIENT SATISFIED WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING, 2009‐2010
Core Indicators of Success .............................................................................................................................. 1
System Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................................... 1
FACTOR I: CORE INDICATORS OF STUDENT SUCCESS ................................................................ 5
Measure A: Progress of Basic Skills Students ................................................................................................ 6
Measure B: Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations ....................................................... 8
Measure C: Performance of College Transfer Students ................................................................................ 20
Measure D: Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses ............................................................... 22
Measure E: Success Rate of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses...................... 24
Measure F: Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers ........................................................ 26
Measure G: Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation and Transfer .......................................................... 28
Measure H: Client Satisfaction with Customized Training…………………………………………………30
Summary of Core Indicators of Success ....................................................................................................... 32
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS ............................................................................................................... 37
FACTOR II: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................... 39
Measure A: Percentage of Employers Satisfied With NCCCS Training Programs ...................................... 40
Measure B: Percentage of College Tech Prep Students Enrolling in a Community College ........................ 44
Measure C: Number of Employers and Trainees Served by Customized Training ………………………...46
Measure D: Employment Status of Graduates ……………………………………………………………..48
Measure E: Employer Satisfaction with Graduates ………………………………………………………...51
iv
FACTOR III: DIVERSE POPULATIONS’ LEARNING NEEDS.........................................................53
Measure A: Number and Percentage of Dropouts Annually Served by Basic Skills Programs ....................54
Measure B: Number of GEDs and AHSDs Awarded Compared to the Number of Dropouts Statewide .......................................................................................................................................................56
Measure C: Percentage of Basic Skills Students and Recent High School Graduates Enrolling in a Community College .......................................................................................................................................58
Measure D: Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second Language (ESL) ...........................................60
Measure E: Number of Under-Represented Students Enrolled Per Category ...............................................62
Measure F: Percentage of Students Receiving Financial Aid and Amount of Aid Compared With Cost of Attendance ........................................................................................................................................63
Measure G: Percentage of Adult Population in Service Area Enrolled ........................................................65
Measure H: Goal Completion for Completers ……………………………………………………………..67
Measure A: Percentage of College Libraries Meeting the ALA Standards ...................................................70
Measure B: Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between Program Areas Made by Community Colleges......................................................................................................................................71
Measure C: Average Nine-Month Faculty Salaries as a Percentage of SREB Average ................................72
Measure D: Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty With Less than Five Years of Experience .....................74
Measure E: Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in Professional Development Activities .................75
Measure F: Percentage of Facilities Meeting the “Satisfactory” Building Condition ...................................77
Measure G: Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar Allotment to Curriculum FTE Dollar Allotment .......................................................................................................................................................78
Measure A: Curriculum Unduplicated Headcount by Course Method of Instruction ...................................80
Measure B: Number of Colleges Connected to the North Carolina Information Highway ...........................81
Measure C: Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC License for Wireless Cable Systems ........................82
Measure D: Number of Courses and Programs Offered Via Telecourse, Wireless Cable, the Internet, Two-Way Video, etc. .....................................................................................................................................83
Measure E: Number of Courses Offered Through the NC Virtual Learning Community .............................84
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS FOR THE
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
Twenty First Annual Report
INTRODUCTION
First mandated by the North Carolina General Assembly in 1989 (S.L. 1989; C. 752; S. 80), the Critical Success Factors report has evolved into the major accountability document for the North Carolina Community College System. This twenty first annual report on the critical success factors is the result of a process undertaken to streamline and simplify accountability reporting by the community college system. The purpose of this report is twofold. First, this document is the means by which the community college system reports on performance measures, referred to as core indicators of success, for purposes of accountability and performance funding. Second, this document serves as an evaluation instrument for the System Strategic Plan.
Core Indicators of Success
In February 1999, the North Carolina State Board of Community Colleges adopted 12 performance measures for accountability. This action was taken in response to a mandate from the North Carolina General Assembly to review past performance measures and define standards of performance to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in North Carolina were of sufficient quality. In the 2007 Session, the General Assembly approved modification to the North Carolina Performance Measures and Standards as adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges on March 16, 2007. As a result, the number of performance measures was reduced to 8.
System Strategic Plan
Under the leadership of former President H. Martin Lancaster, the North Carolina Community College System embarked on a strategic planning process in January 1998. The purpose of the process was to develop a strategic plan that would focus the efforts of the system on a set of strategic initiatives. The strategic plan is the vehicle that sets the strategic direction for the System and guides the development of the biennial budget requests.
The purpose of factors two through five of the Critical Success Factors is to monitor the progress of the system in achieving the objectives in the strategic plan and to report those achievements. The measures that comprise these factors are the evaluation of the strategic
2
plan objectives. Unlike the measures comprising factor one, the measures included in factors two through five will change more frequently as new strategic plan objectives are developed. In addition, the measures in factors two through five are meant to be System measures, rather than individual college measures. When available, individual college data will be presented, but the intended focus of these measures is the success of the System in achieving some predefined level of achievement.
A matrix showing the factors and measures contained in the Critical Success Factors can be found on page 3.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS AND MEASURES, 2008-2009
3
Factor I: Core Indicatorsof StudentSuccess
A. Progress ofbasic skillsstudents
B. Passing rateson licensure &certificationexams
C. Performance ofcollege transferstudents
D. Developmentalcourse passingrates
E. Success ofdevelopmentalstudents incollege-levelcourses
F. Satisfaction ofprogram completers andnon-completers
G. Curriculumstudent retention,graduation andtransfer
H. Clientsatisfacton withcustomizedtraining
Factor II:WorkforceDevelopment
A. Percentage ofemployerssatisfied withNCCCS trainingprograms
B. Percentage ofCollege Tech Prepstudents enrollingin a communitycollege
C. Number ofemployers &trainees servedby variousCustomizedTraining programs
D. Employmentstatus of graduates
E. Employersatisfaction withgraduates
Factor III:DiversePopulations'Learning Needs
A. Number andpercentage ofdropoutsannually servedby basic skillsprograms
B. Number ofGEDs andAHSDs awardedcompared to thenumber ofdropoutsstatewide
C. Percentage ofbasic skillsstudents andrecent highschool graduatesenrolling in acommunitycollege
D. Unduplicatedheadcount inEnglish as aSecond Language(ESL)
E. Number ofunder-representedstudents enrolledper category
F. Percentage ofstudents receivingfinancial aid andamount of aidcompared withcost of attendance
G. Percentage ofadult population inservice areaenrolled
H. Goalcompletion forcompleters
Factor IV:Resources
A. Percentage ofcollege librariesmeeting ALAstandards
B. Total dollaramount of budgettransfers betweenprogram areasmade bycommunitycolleges
C. Averagefaculty salaries asa percentage ofSREBaverage
D. Retention ratefor full-timefaculty with lessthan five years ofexperience
E. Number offaculty and staffparticipating inprofessionaldevelopmentactivities
F. Percentage offacilities meetingsatisfactorybuildingcondition
G. Ratio ofoccupationalextension FTEdollar allotmentto curriculumFTE dollarallotment
Factor V:Technology
A. Curriculumunduplicatedheadcount by course method ofinstruction
B. Number ofcollegesconnected to theNorth CarolinaInformationHighway
C. Number ofcollegespossessing theFCC license forwireless cablesystems
D. Number ofcourses andprograms offeredvia telecourse,wireless cable,the Internet,two-way video,etc.
E. Number ofcourses offeredthrough the NCVirtual LearningCommunity
5
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR I: CORE INDICATORS OF STUDENT SUCCESS
In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on specific measures identified in the Critical Success Factors report and in the Annual Program Review report. Standards of performance were established for measures that were identified as being critical to ensure public accountability for programs and services.
In 1998, the North Carolina General Assembly directed the State Board of Community Colleges to undertake a review of all performance measures and standards with the intent of ensuring stronger public accountability. Concurrently, the General Assembly directed the State Board of Community Colleges to develop a plan for the implementation of performance funding.
As a result of efforts undertaken by the community college system, a set of 12 performance measures of accountability was adopted in February 1999. Recognizing the importance of these measures in the System’s public accountability efforts, the System Planning Council decided to designate the 12 measures as the core indicators of student success and include them as the first factor of the Critical Success Factors report. In the 2007 Session, the North Carolina General Assembly approved modifications to the North Carolina Community College Performance Measures as adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges on March 16, 2007. As a result, the number of performance measures was reduced to eight (8).
System summary data on each measure are presented in the report along with individual college’s performance data. A table is presented at the end of the text section that summarizes, by measure, whether or not colleges met the performance standard. Any college not meeting a standard is required to submit to the State Board of Community Colleges an action plan for improving performance.
The Core Indicators of Student Success are:
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations
C. Performance of College Transfer Students
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses
E. Success Rates of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training
6
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE A:
Progress of Basic Skills Students
Description/Definition—Basic skills students include all adult literacy students. Progress of basic skills students is a composite measure that includes the percent of students progressing within a level of literacy, the percent of students completing a level entered or a predetermined goal, and the percent of students completing the level entered and advancing to a higher level.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on basic skills students were collected by the college providing the instruction and entered into the Literacy Education Information System (LEIS). Data on the progression of basic skills students were submitted to the North Carolina Community College System Office annually. The data are compiled at the system office, and the composite measure and adjustment for each college were calculated.
Performance Standard—Standard for the progress of basic skills students is 75 percent for the composite measure. This measure is a required performance funding measure.
Results: For the year 2008-09, 55 community colleges met the required standard. The average composite measure for the system was 84 percent. The range in the composite progress measure was from a low of 73 percent to a high of 97 percent.
SYSTEM SUMMARY OF PERCENTAGES IN PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS
YEAR EXIT, NON-
COMPLETER PROGRESSING SAME LEVEL
COMPLETED A LEVEL
MOVED TO NEXT LEVEL
COMPOSITE MEASURE
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
19%
18%
20%
18%
16%
49%
52%
50%
50%
49%
9%
6%
6%
6%
6%
23%
24%
25%
27%
29%
81%
82%
80%
82%
84%
PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS, 2008-2009
Alamance CC 4,297 2,835 11% 55% 23% 11% 89%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 3,577 4% 42% 34% 20% 80%Beaufort County CC 1,905 1,007 4% 42% 30% 24% 76%Bladen CC 1,537 618 6% 51% 32% 11% 89%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 1,684 7% 37% 31% 25% 75%Brunswick CC 1,752 1,127 6% 68% 23% 3% 97%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 2,416 6% 49% 31% 14% 86%Cape Fear CC 7,862 3,619 4% 51% 24% 20% 80%Carteret CC 1,835 852 18% 43% 20% 18% 82%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 3,152 8% 42% 29% 20% 80%Central Carolina CC 5,340 4,827 7% 42% 33% 18% 82%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 14,037 2% 66% 27% 5% 95%Cleveland CC 3,203 976 8% 33% 36% 23% 77%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 4,315 4% 31% 42% 23% 77%College of The Albemarle 2,448 2,506 8% 43% 23% 27% 73%Craven CC 2,891 1,514 7% 51% 29% 13% 87%Davidson County CC 4,067 3,304 5% 50% 42% 3% 97%Durham TCC 4,860 4,814 4% 48% 27% 21% 79%Edgecombe CC 2,439 1,823 6% 38% 31% 25% 75%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 5,970 3% 68% 23% 7% 93%Forsyth TCC 7,466 6,576 3% 61% 26% 10% 90%Gaston College 5,240 3,297 7% 38% 40% 15% 85%Guilford TCC 10,908 6,855 3% 58% 23% 16% 84%Halifax CC 1,650 1,276 9% 46% 24% 21% 79%Haywood CC 1,947 842 4% 52% 25% 19% 81%Isothermal CC 2,386 1,790 7% 52% 27% 14% 86%James Sprunt CC 1,399 724 10% 34% 38% 19% 81%Johnston CC 4,391 1,873 6% 43% 27% 24% 76%Lenoir CC 3,655 2,213 2% 45% 30% 23% 77%Martin CC 893 886 5% 48% 27% 20% 80%Mayland CC 1,942 1,188 14% 44% 29% 13% 87%McDowell TCC 1,481 820 22% 36% 24% 18% 82%Mitchell CC 2,696 2,324 10% 48% 23% 19% 81%Montgomery CC 1,002 530 8% 44% 21% 26% 74%Nash CC 2,652 1,427 8% 45% 23% 24% 76%Pamlico CC 633 282 7% 46% 27% 20% 80%Piedmont CC 2,762 1,137 8% 56% 27% 8% 92%Pitt CC 6,459 2,277 6% 51% 26% 17% 83%Randolph CC 2,581 1,938 13% 40% 25% 22% 78%Richmond CC 2,171 2,186 8% 38% 34% 19% 81%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 615 8% 47% 20% 25% 75%Robeson CC 3,742 2,875 1% 50% 32% 16% 84%Rockingham CC 2,158 1,330 8% 37% 36% 19% 81%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 3,652 15% 49% 16% 19% 81%Sampson CC 1,927 1,124 8% 39% 40% 13% 87%Sandhills CC 3,928 1,640 14% 42% 24% 20% 80%South Piedmont CC 2,528 2,647 9% 56% 31% 3% 97%Southeastern CC 2,575 1,174 3% 41% 32% 24% 76%Southwestern CC 2,462 1,734 2% 37% 39% 22% 78%Stanly CC 2,683 1,710 7% 38% 29% 26% 74%Surry CC 3,495 1,736 6% 52% 29% 13% 87%Tri-County CC 1,158 472 18% 42% 19% 20% 80%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 2,890 14% 37% 31% 17% 83%Wake TCC 13,650 8,751 6% 47% 34% 13% 87%Wayne CC 3,615 2,915 5% 39% 36% 19% 81%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 2,731 15% 50% 11% 24% 76%Wilkes CC 3,042 1,635 6% 49% 33% 12% 88%Wilson TCC 2,144 1,829 3% 43% 36% 17% 83%
System Totals 221,096 146,870 6% 49% 29% 16% 84%
MOVED TO A HIGHER LEVEL
EXIT NON-COMPLETER
COMPOSITE PROGRESS MEASURE
INSTITUTION TOTAL SERVED IN LITERACY
COMPLETED A LEVEL
PROGRESSING SAME LEVEL
SYSTEMFTE
Source: LEIS, Data Warehouse 7
8
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE B:
Passing Rates on Licensure & Certification Examinations
Description/Definition—The percentage of first-time test takers from community colleges passing an examination required for North Carolina licensure or certification prior to practicing the profession. A licensure requirement for an occupation is one that is required by state statute for an individual to work in that occupation. Certification is generally voluntary but may be required by employers or an outside accrediting agency. Purely voluntary examinations are not reported.
Methodology and Data Source—Data were collected by the Research and Performance Management section in the President’s Office of the North Carolina Community College System Office from the agencies issuing the license or certification. Examination data were reported only for those licensure/certification exams for which data were available from the licensure/certification agencies. The data for most examinations were reported on a fiscal year. However, the data on nursing, emergency medical technician, physical therapy assistant, and veterinary medicine technology were reported on a calendar year.
Passing rates were calculated by dividing the number of persons who successfully pass an examination the first time they take the exam by the number of persons who sat for the exam for the first time. An aggregate institutional passing rate was calculated by dividing the total number of first-time test takers for all reported examinations by the total number of persons who sat for the exam for the first time. For privacy and statistical validity, no examination data are reported when the number of first-time test takers was fewer than 10.
Performance Standard— Performance standard for the aggregate institutional passing rate is 80 percent. To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), a college cannot have any licensure/certification exams for which the college controls who was eligible to sit for the exam with a passing rate less than 70%.
Results— For the year 2008-09, 47 community colleges met or exceeded the aggregate institutional passing rate of 80 percent; 36 community colleges had no exam for which they controlled who took the exam with a passing rate less than 70%. System average of aggregate institutional passing rate was eighty-six percent (86%).
9
PERCENTAGE OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS PASSING LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
(FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS ONLY)
FIELD NUMBER OF STUDENTS
TAKING EXAM % PASSING EXAM
Aviation Maintenance General 46 98% Airframe 49 100% Power Plant 32 100%
*Number too small to report without violating students’ privacy.
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASSING RATE < 70%
*Excludes Real Estate exam, for the colleges do not control who sits for the exam. 10
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTE
TOTAL NUMBER OF
TEST TAKERS
TOTAL NUMBER PASSING
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE
NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A
PASSING RATE < 70% *
Alamance CC 4,297 244 209 86% 1Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 362 337 93%Beaufort County CC 1,905 144 123 85% 1Bladen CC 1,537 46 38 83%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 137 112 82%Brunswick CC 1,752 114 97 85%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 219 183 84%Cape Fear CC 7,862 364 344 95%Carteret CC 1,835 163 129 79% 1Catawba Valley CC 4,751 245 173 71% 3Central Carolina CC 5,340 315 272 86% 1Central Piedmont CC 15,324 382 349 91%Cleveland CC 3,203 205 160 78% 2Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 262 231 88%College of The Albemarle 2,448 236 199 84% 1Craven CC 2,891 232 192 83%Davidson County CC 4,067 246 216 88% 1Durham TCC 4,860 393 334 85% 1Edgecombe CC 2,439 42 37 88%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 314 294 94%Forsyth TCC 7,466 324 287 89%Gaston College 5,240 280 248 89%Guilford TCC 10,908 541 480 89%Halifax CC 1,650 119 83 70% 2Haywood CC 1,947 84 72 86%Isothermal CC 2,386 116 92 79% 2James Sprunt CC 1,399 78 69 88% 1Johnston CC 4,391 284 262 92%Lenoir CC 3,655 225 196 87%Martin CC 893 60 52 87%Mayland CC 1,942 87 73 84%McDowell TCC 1,481 92 81 88%Mitchell CC 2,696 218 184 84% 1Montgomery CC 1,002 45 38 84%Nash CC 2,652 98 84 86% 1Pamlico CC 633 16 12 75%Piedmont CC 2,762 37 33 89%Pitt CC 6,459 207 179 86% 1Randolph CC 2,581 137 120 88%Richmond CC 2,171 79 68 86% 1Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 118 98 83%Robeson CC 3,742 185 143 77% 2Rockingham CC 2,158 98 90 92%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 516 420 81% 1Sampson CC 1,927 107 93 87%Sandhills CC 3,928 218 190 87%South Piedmont CC 2,528 124 85 69% 2Southeastern CC 2,575 147 114 78% 1Southwestern CC 2,462 139 122 88%Stanly CC 2,683 153 121 79%Surry CC 3,495 169 156 92%Tri-County CC 1,158 69 50 72%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 202 170 84% 1Wake TCC 13,650 367 338 92%Wayne CC 3,615 168 152 90%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 123 112 91%Wilkes CC 3,042 112 92 82% 1Wilson CC 2,144 127 103 81%
System Total 221,096 10,934 9,391 86%
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2008-2009--AVIATION--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 11
GENERAL AIRFRAME POWER PLANTFTE # TESTED % PASSED # TESTED % PASSED # TESTED % PASSED
Alamance CC 4,297Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483Beaufort County CC 1,905Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275Brunswick CC 1,752Caldwell CC & TI 4,212Cape Fear CC 7,862Carteret CC 1,835Catawba Valley CC 4,751Central Carolina CC 5,340Central Piedmont CC 15,324Cleveland CC 3,203Coastal Carolina CC 4,595College of The Albemarle 2,448Craven CC 2,891 16 100% 16 100% * *Davidson County CC 4,067Durham TCC 4,860Edgecombe CC 2,439Fayetteville TCC 11,018Forsyth TCC 7,466Gaston College 5,240Guilford TCC 10,908 24 96% 28 100% 20 100%Halifax CC 1,650Haywood CC 1,947Isothermal CC 2,386James Sprunt CC 1,399Johnston CC 4,391Lenoir CC 3,655Martin CC 893Mayland CC 1,942McDowell TCC 1,481Mitchell CC 2,696Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459Randolph CC 2,581Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742Rockingham CC 2,158Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760Sampson CC 1,927Sandhills CC 3,928South Piedmont CC 2,528Southeastern CC 2,575Southwestern CC 2,462Stanly CC 2,683Surry CC 3,495Tri-County CC 1,158Vance-Granville CC 4,543Wake TCC 13,650Wayne CC 3,615 * * * * * *Western Piedmont CC 3,334Wilkes CC 3,042Wilson CC 2,144
System Total 221,096 46 98% 49 100% 32 100%
INSTITUTION
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2008-2009--BASIC LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 12
BLETINSTITUTION FTE # TESTED % PASSED
Alamance CC 4,297 32 81%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 53 98%Beaufort County CC 1,905 16 88%Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275 28 86%Brunswick CC 1,752 10 80%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 27 86%Cape Fear CC 7,862 52 85%Carteret CC 1,835 24 76%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 29 67%Central Carolina CC 5,340 64 91%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 19 95%Cleveland CC 3,203 24 63%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 27 74%College of The Albemarle 2,448 33 96%Craven CC 2,891 28 87%Davidson County CC 4,067 36 83%Durham TCC 4,860 48 88%Edgecombe CC 2,439Fayetteville TCC 11,018 16 100%Forsyth TCC 7,466 22 87%Gaston College 5,240 45 87%Guilford TCC 10,908 47 93%Halifax CC 1,650 27 67%Haywood CC 1,947 27 85%Isothermal CC 2,386 20 96%James Sprunt CC 1,399 21 94%Johnston CC 4,391 26 94%Lenoir CC 3,655 17 89%Martin CC 893 * *Mayland CC 1,942 13 92%McDowell TCC 1,481 14 93%Mitchell CC 2,696 63 88%Montgomery CC 1,002 17 71%Nash CC 2,652 20 100%Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459 59 90%Randolph CC 2,581 32 87%Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742 48 85%Rockingham CC 2,158 19 95%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 19 95%Sampson CC 1,927 32 91%Sandhills CC 3,928 40 88%South Piedmont CC 2,528 18 89%Southeastern CC 2,575 11 82%Southwestern CC 2,462 33 94%Stanly CC 2,683 22 82%Surry CC 3,495 39 90%Tri-County CC 1,158Vance-Granville CC 4,543 21 95%Wake TCC 13,650 56 88%Wayne CC 3,615 31 94%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 53 98%Wilkes CC 3,042 50 94%Wilson CC 2,144 19 89%
System Total 221,096 1,552 87%
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2008-2009--COSMETIC ARTS--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 13
Alamance CC 4,297Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 17 94%Beaufort County CC 1,905Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275Brunswick CC 1,752Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 12 100%Cape Fear CC 7,862 12 100%Carteret CC 1,835Catawba Valley CC 4,751 22 95%Central Carolina CC 5,340 10 100%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 20 85% 11 82%Cleveland CC 3,203Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 20 90%College of The Albemarle 2,448Craven CC 2,891Davidson County CC 4,067Durham TCC 4,860Edgecombe CC 2,439Fayetteville TCC 11,018 19 89% 12 75%Forsyth TCC 7,466 * *Gaston College 5,240Guilford TCC 10,908 28 89% 16 100%Halifax CC 1,650 15 93%Haywood CC 1,947Isothermal CC 2,386James Sprunt CC 1,399Johnston CC 4,391Lenoir CC 3,655Martin CC 893 * *Mayland CC 1,942McDowell TCC 1,481Mitchell CC 2,696Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652 15 100%Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459Randolph CC 2,581Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742Rockingham CC 2,158Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760Sampson CC 1,927Sandhills CC 3,928South Piedmont CC 2,528Southeastern CC 2,575Southwestern CC 2,462 10 100%Stanly CC 2,683Surry CC 3,495Tri-County CC 1,158Vance-Granville CC 4,543Wake TCC 13,650 12 100%Wayne CC 3,615 22 95%Western Piedmont CC 3,334Wilkes CC 3,042Wilson CC 2,144
System Total 221,096 206 92% 84 89%
INSTITUTION
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2009--EMERGENCY MEDICAL TECHNICIAN (EMT)--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 15
Alamance CC 4,297 87 93% 22 73% 10 50%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 94 95% 26 84% * *Beaufort County CC 1,905 34 88% 12 42%Bladen CC 1,537 * * * * * *Blue Ridge CC 2,275 52 75% * * * *Brunswick CC 1,752 25 84% 15 80% * *Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 105 81% * * 13 77%Cape Fear CC 7,862 121 94% * * 18 89%Carteret CC 1,835 42 81% 15 53% * *Catawba Valley CC 4,751 90 60% 22 55%Central Carolina CC 5,340 38 76% * * 11 36%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 173 94%Cleveland CC 3,203 80 71% 32 59% 26 100%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 129 91% * * * *College of The Albemarle 2,448 114 79% 26 62%Craven CC 2,891 63 75% * * * *Davidson County CC 4,067 74 99% * * 12 50%Durham TCC 4,860 214 87% 16 94% 27 67%Edgecombe CC 2,439 14 93%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 93 90% * * 17 100%Forsyth TCC 7,466 76 95%Gaston College 5,240 100 85% * * 10 70%Guilford TCC 10,908 189 88% 10 80%Halifax CC 1,650 61 69% * * * *Haywood CC 1,947 17 82%Isothermal CC 2,386 25 64% 17 53% * *James Sprunt CC 1,399 16 69% * * * *Johnston CC 4,391 86 81% 29 93%Lenoir CC 3,655 74 93% 53 77% 25 72%Martin CC 893 44 93%Mayland CC 1,942 11 82% * *McDowell TCC 1,481 18 83% * * * *Mitchell CC 2,696 62 69%Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652 43 81% * * 14 64%Pamlico CC 633 14 71%Piedmont CC 2,762 * *Pitt CC 6,459 19 47% * *Randolph CC 2,581 57 84% * *Richmond CC 2,171 15 80% 11 64%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 60 73% * *Robeson CC 3,742 51 78% 20 65% * *Rockingham CC 2,158 25 88% * *Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 162 70% 17 65% 46 72%Sampson CC 1,927 13 85% * *Sandhills CC 3,928 65 80% * * * *South Piedmont CC 2,528 61 66% * *Southeastern CC 2,575 52 60% * * * *Southwestern CC 2,462 28 89% * *Stanly CC 2,683 29 76%Surry CC 3,495 21 95% 10 100%Tri-County CC 1,158 28 71% * * * *Vance-Granville CC 4,543 52 83% 13 31% 10 70%Wake TCC 13,650 141 96% 19 79%Wayne CC 3,615 41 83% * *Western Piedmont CC 3,334 * * 22 95% * *Wilkes CC 3,042 16 81% * * * *Wilson CC 2,144 42 71% * * * *
System Total 221,096 * * 3,492 83% 482 64% 370 71%
INSTITUTION EMD
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2009--NURSING--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Less than 10**Region A Nursing Consortium includes Haywood CC, Southwestern CC, and Tri-County CC.***NEWH Nursing Consortium includes Nash, Edgecomb, Wilson, and Halifax CC. 16
Alamance CC 4,297Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 * *Beaufort County CC 1,905Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275Brunswick CC 1,752Caldwell CC & TI 4,212Cape Fear CC 7,862Carteret CC 1,835Catawba Valley CC 4,751Central Carolina CC 5,340 25 100%Central Piedmont CC 15,324Cleveland CC 3,203Coastal Carolina CC 4,595College of The Albemarle 2,448Craven CC 2,891Davidson County CC 4,067Durham TCC 4,860 * *Edgecombe CC 2,439Fayetteville TCC 11,018Forsyth TCC 7,466Gaston College 5,240 11 100%Guilford TCC 10,908Halifax CC 1,650Haywood CC 1,947Isothermal CC 2,386James Sprunt CC 1,399Johnston CC 4,391Lenoir CC 3,655Martin CC 893Mayland CC 1,942McDowell TCC 1,481Mitchell CC 2,696Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459Randolph CC 2,581Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742Rockingham CC 2,158Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760Sampson CC 1,927Sandhills CC 3,928South Piedmont CC 2,528Southeastern CC 2,575Southwestern CC 2,462Stanly CC 2,683Surry CC 3,495Tri-County CC 1,158Vance-Granville CC 4,543Wake TCC 13,650Wayne CC 3,615Western Piedmont CC 3,334Wilkes CC 3,042Wilson CC 2,144
System Total 221,096 * * 40 100%
INSTITUTION
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2008-2009RADIOGRAPHY--NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY--
RADIATION THERAPY TECHNOLOGYFIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 18
Alamance CC 4,297Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 17 100%Beaufort County CC 1,905Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275Brunswick CC 1,752Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 * * 12 83%Cape Fear CC 7,862 27 93%Carteret CC 1,835 18 100%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 * *Central Carolina CC 5,340Central Piedmont CC 15,324Cleveland CC 3,203 13 100%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595College of The Albemarle 2,448Craven CC 2,891Davidson County CC 4,067Durham TCC 4,860Edgecombe CC 2,439 13 100%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 28 100% * *Forsyth TCC 7,466 22 100% * *Gaston College 5,240Guilford TCC 10,908Halifax CC 1,650Haywood CC 1,947Isothermal CC 2,386James Sprunt CC 1,399Johnston CC 4,391 25 100% * *Lenoir CC 3,655 * *Martin CC 893Mayland CC 1,942McDowell TCC 1,481Mitchell CC 2,696Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459 21 100% * * 25 100%Randolph CC 2,581 18 89%Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742 * *Rockingham CC 2,158Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 17 94%Sampson CC 1,927Sandhills CC 3,928 16 100%South Piedmont CC 2,528 * *Southeastern CC 2,575Southwestern CC 2,462 * *Stanly CC 2,683 21 86%Surry CC 3,495Tri-County CC 1,158Vance-Granville CC 4,543 21 100%Wake TCC 13,650 26 100%Wayne CC 3,615Western Piedmont CC 3,334Wilkes CC 3,042Wilson CC 2,144
System Total 221,096 341 97% 27 85% 40 97%
INSTITUTION
PASSING RATES OF LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2008-2009--REAL ESTATE--
FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS
*Number too small to report without violating students' privacy. 19
SALESFTE # TESTED % PASSED
Alamance CC 4,297 * *Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 20 85%Beaufort County CC 1,905 * *Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275 * *Brunswick CC 1,752 19 74%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212Cape Fear CC 7,862 * *Carteret CC 1,835 13 46%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 * *Central Carolina CC 5,340 * *Central Piedmont CC 15,324 80 90%Cleveland CC 3,203 * *Coastal Carolina CC 4,595College of The Albemarle 2,448 * *Craven CC 2,891 11 45%Davidson County CC 4,067 * *Durham TCC 4,860 37 73%Edgecombe CC 2,439 * *Fayetteville TCC 11,018Forsyth TCC 7,466 * *Gaston College 5,240 * *Guilford TCC 10,908 52 71%Halifax CC 1,650 * *Haywood CC 1,947Isothermal CC 2,386 * *James Sprunt CC 1,399Johnston CC 4,391 * *Lenoir CC 3,655 * *Martin CC 893Mayland CC 1,942McDowell TCC 1,481Mitchell CC 2,696 21 81%Montgomery CC 1,002Nash CC 2,652 * *Pamlico CC 633Piedmont CC 2,762Pitt CC 6,459 * *Randolph CC 2,581 * *Richmond CC 2,171Roanoke-Chowan CC 946Robeson CC 3,742 * *Rockingham CC 2,158Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 * *Sampson CC 1,927Sandhills CC 3,928South Piedmont CC 2,528Southeastern CC 2,575 * *Southwestern CC 2,462 * *Stanly CC 2,683 * *Surry CC 3,495 * *Tri-County CC 1,158 * *Vance-Granville CC 4,543Wake TCC 13,650 * *Wayne CC 3,615 * *Western Piedmont CC 3,334Wilkes CC 3,042 * *Wilson CC 2,144
System Total 221,096 375 72%
INSTITUTION
20
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE C:
Performance of College Transfer Students
Description/Definition—College transfer programs provide educational experiences that will enable transfer students to make the transition to a baccalaureate program and perform as well as the students who enroll as first-time freshmen at universities. The purpose of this measure is to compare the performance of community college associate degree students (Associate in Arts, Associate in Science, and Associate in Fine Arts) who transfer to public North Carolina universities with students native to the four-year institutions.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on two cohorts of college transfer students entering the public universities each year were analyzed. One cohort analysis compared the performance of college transfer degree recipients (AA, AS, AFA) at the end of two semesters at the public university to the performance of native juniors. The second cohort analysis compared the performance of college transfer students completing at least 24 hours or more of college transfer courses at a community college but not completing the degree to the performance of native sophomores. A cell size of at least 10 students was required for reporting this measure.
Community colleges may elect to work with private colleges and universities in collecting data on students who transfer to those institutions. The data must be consistent with the methodology employed by the UNC GA in calculating the data for transfer to public universities. If colleges submitted data from private or out-of-state institutions, then the System Office would include the data with the public university data. When the total number of students is less than 10, the total number of students in three year and the respective percentage were reported.
Performance Standard— 83% of students in both associate degree recipients and the students who transferred with 24 or more semester hours at community colleges had GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. To be identified as EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), performance of community college transfer students was to be equivalent to the performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors: 86% for this year.
Results— For students who completed an AA, AS or AFA degree in 2007-08 and transferred to a UNC institution or a private institution within a year, 89 percent had a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. For those students who completed 24 or more semester hours in community colleges and transferred to a UNC institution or a private institution, 83 percent had a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. When the data for both groups were combined, 85 percent of the transfers had a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a UNC institution or a private institution. Thirty-seven (37) community colleges met the 83 percent performance standard.
PERCENT OF 2007-08COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS WITH A
GPA OF > = 2.0 AFTER TWO SEMESTERS AT A UNC INSTITUTION
* Includes data from private colleges and universities.** Number too small to report due to privacy protection.
21
Number Percent >=2.0 Number Percent >=2.0 NumberPercent >=2.0
System Total 221,096 2,859 83% 1,943 89% 4,802 85%
INSTITUTION
24 or More Semester Hours Associate Degree Recipient Total
TOTAL FTE
22
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE D:
Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses
Description/Definition — Percent of students who complete developmental English, mathematics, or reading courses with a grade of "C" or better.
Methodology and Data Source — At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file to the North Carolina Community College System Office. These student unit record files were loaded into the System data warehouse and were the official data of record for state level reporting. In the CRPFAR file, the number and percent of students completing developmental courses with a grade of "C" or better would be calculated.
Performance Standard—Seventy-five percent (75%) of students who complete a developmental course in English, reading or mathematics will have a grade of "C" or better for that course.
Results—Eighty percent (80%) of the students who completed a developmental course(s) had a grade of “C” or better in 2008-09. Forty-seven (47) colleges met the performance standard.
PASSING RATES OF STUDENTS IN DEVELOPMENTAL COURSES, 2008-2009
System Total 221,096 31,956 83% 63,291 77% 19,866 83% 115,113 80%
ENGLISH TOTALINSTITUTIONFTE
MATH READING
24
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE E:
Success Rate of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses
Description/Definition—Performance of developmental students in subsequent college level courses will be measured. Specifically, performance of who took developmental English courses and subsequently took college-level English courses was assessed. Likewise, the performance of who took developmental math courses and then took college-level math courses was tracked.
The purpose of this measure is to provide evidence that developmental courses equip students with the skills and knowledge necessary for success in their college studies. Once students have successfully completed the developmental courses, they should be able to pass curriculum courses.
Methodology and Data Source— At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file to the North Carolina Community College System Office. These student unit record files were loaded into the System data warehouse and were the official data of record for state level reporting. In the CRPFA data file, identify students who took developmental level English, Reading, and Math courses. Then their records were matched with subsequent performance in college-level English and Math courses.
Performance Standard— Eighty percent (80%) of students who completed a developmental course in 2007-08 and completed subsequent college level course in 2008-09 will have a passing grade for the college level course.
Results— In 2008-09, eighty-seven percent (87%) of the students who completed a developmental English and/or Math course(s) had a grade of “D” or better in subsequent college-level English and/or Math courses. Fifty-eight (58) colleges met the standard in 2008-09.
PERFORMANCE OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS IN SUBSEQUENT COLLEGE-LEVEL COURSES, 2008-2009
Alamance CC 4,297 233 97% 263 96% 496 96%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 217 72% 224 88% 441 80%Beaufort County CC 1,905 66 85% 49 90% 115 87%Bladen CC 1,537 107 93% 121 98% 228 96%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 100 86% 108 87% 208 87%Brunswick CC 1,752 57 77% 101 85% 158 82%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 214 92% 208 92% 422 92%Cape Fear CC 7,862 525 79% 366 83% 891 81%Carteret CC 1,835 46 87% 75 92% 121 90%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 307 88% 386 89% 693 89%Central Carolina CC 5,340 143 90% 90 92% 233 91%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 1,394 89% 1,042 86% 2,436 88%Cleveland CC 3,203 145 83% 191 97% 336 91%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 189 92% 391 88% 580 89%College of The Albemarle 2,448 127 93% 139 99% 266 96%Craven CC 2,891 94 85% 211 93% 305 91%Davidson County CC 4,067 140 83% 196 85% 336 84%Durham TCC 4,860 213 95% 201 94% 414 95%Edgecombe CC 2,439 133 83% 91 81% 224 82%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 639 79% 414 88% 1,053 83%Forsyth TCC 7,466 428 86% 355 80% 783 83%Gaston College 5,240 371 83% 402 89% 773 86%Guilford TCC 10,908 688 83% 732 81% 1,420 82%Halifax CC 1,650 65 88% 31 84% 96 87%Haywood CC 1,947 36 86% 36 83% 72 85%Isothermal CC 2,386 130 82% 157 92% 287 87%James Sprunt CC 1,399 74 89% 69 93% 143 91%Johnston CC 4,391 229 92% 147 79% 376 87%Lenoir CC 3,655 150 87% 113 87% 263 87%Martin CC 893 43 80% 22 91% 65 84%Mayland CC 1,942 39 87% 32 91% 71 89%McDowell TCC 1,481 57 96% 75 93% 132 94%Mitchell CC 2,696 221 81% 131 86% 352 83%Montgomery CC 1,002 66 88% 60 95% 126 91%Nash CC 2,652 134 87% 215 92% 349 90%Pamlico CC 633 * * * * 14 86%Piedmont CC 2,762 142 86% 200 86% 342 86%Pitt CC 6,459 331 93% 394 89% 725 91%Randolph CC 2,581 156 86% 189 93% 345 90%Richmond CC 2,171 146 92% 107 91% 253 92%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 55 75% 34 91% 89 81%Robeson CC 3,742 237 95% 149 92% 386 94%Rockingham CC 2,158 79 86% 192 97% 271 94%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 388 83% 300 91% 688 86%Sampson CC 1,927 106 94% 92 96% 198 95%Sandhills CC 3,928 292 87% 169 76% 461 83%South Piedmont CC 2,528 169 83% 111 86% 280 84%Southeastern CC 2,575 179 90% 71 94% 250 91%Southwestern CC 2,462 145 83% 105 79% 250 81%Stanly CC 2,683 101 96% 91 97% 192 96%Surry CC 3,495 177 90% 208 93% 385 92%Tri-County CC 1,158 64 86% 46 87% 110 86%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 188 86% 139 94% 327 89%Wake TCC 13,650 512 78% 658 89% 1,170 84%Wayne CC 3,615 283 89% 216 86% 499 88%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 235 87% 163 93% 398 89%Wilkes CC 3,042 166 89% 165 96% 331 92%Wilson CC 2,144 121 84% 177 90% 298 88%
System Total 221,096 12,098 86% 11,428 88% 23,526 87%
ENGLISH TOTALINSTITUTIONFTE
MATH
26
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE F:
Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers
Description/Definition—This indicator reports the proportion of graduates and early-leavers who indicate that the quality of the college programs and services meet or exceed their expectations.
Methodology and Data Source—Data were collected by survey, with each college using a standard set of questions. For colleges with fewer than 250 non-returning students, a minimum of 25 valid surveys must be obtained. For the colleges with more than 250 non-returning students, a response rate equal to 10% of the total non-returning students or a statistically valid sample size must be obtained.
Performance Standard—Ninety percent (90%) of the combined respondents will report to be satisfied with the quality of the college's programs and services.
Results—Ninety-seven percent (97%) of program completers responded that they were satisfied with the academic programs of community colleges, while ninety-four percent (94%) of program non-completers responded that they were satisfied. The total percentage of satisfied (completers and non-completers combined) was ninety-six percent (96%). Fifty-eight (58) community colleges met the performance standard in 2008-09, with three (3) colleges having the response rate for non-completer survey to be too low (statistically invalid sample size).
SATISFACTION OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS AND NON-COMPLETERS, 2008-2009
*Response rate too low (statistically invalid sample size); not eligible for performance funding. 27
NUMBERPERCENT SATISFIED NUMBER
PERCENT SATISFIED NUMBER
PERCENT SATISFIED
Alamance CC 4,297 213 100% 110 93% 323 98%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 349 97% 207 95% 556 96%Beaufort County CC 1,905 152 100% 28 93% 180 99%Bladen CC 1,537 73 97% 63 95% 136 96%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 103 99% 28 89% 131 97%Brunswick CC 1,752 83 94% 51 85% 134 91%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 280 97% 84 95% 364 97%Cape Fear CC 7,862 850 99% 219 96% 1,069 98%Carteret CC 1,835 140 100% 56 96% 196 99%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 641 97% 75 94% 716 97%Central Carolina CC 5,340 387 97% 128 98% 515 97%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 453 98% 353 96% 806 97%Cleveland CC 3,203 71 96% 77 96% 148 96%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 600 98% 262 97% 862 98%College of The Albemarle 2,448 218 96% 63 95% 281 96%Craven CC* 2,891 46 93% 136 91% 182 92%Davidson County CC 4,067 270 98% 86 90% 356 96%Durham TCC 4,860 218 97% 269 88% 487 92%Edgecombe CC 2,439 200 97% 73 97% 273 97%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 626 99% 182 92% 808 97%Forsyth TCC 7,466 360 95% 240 95% 600 95%Gaston College* 5,240 618 97% 154 95% 772 97%Guilford TCC 10,908 992 96% 254 93% 1,246 95%Halifax CC 1,650 135 97% 81 100% 216 98%Haywood CC 1,947 225 96% 53 96% 278 96%Isothermal CC 2,386 150 99% 52 98% 202 99%James Sprunt CC 1,399 66 95% 42 95% 108 95%Johnston CC 4,391 338 99% 80 91% 418 97%Lenoir CC 3,655 199 96% 144 100% 343 98%Martin CC 893 45 98% 30 78% 75 90%Mayland CC 1,942 267 97% 29 100% 296 97%McDowell TCC 1,481 194 97% 39 100% 233 98%Mitchell CC 2,696 157 98% 85 91% 242 96%Montgomery CC 1,002 61 100% 25 92% 86 98%Nash CC 2,652 180 97% 137 96% 317 97%Pamlico CC* 633 48 96% 11 90% 59 95%Piedmont CC 2,762 167 98% 58 100% 225 99%Pitt CC 6,459 655 98% 262 98% 917 98%Randolph CC 2,581 139 98% 70 84% 209 93%Richmond CC 2,171 220 96% 62 90% 282 95%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 110 96% 37 100% 147 97%Robeson CC 3,742 209 95% 77 95% 286 95%Rockingham CC 2,158 208 100% 56 90% 264 98%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 216 97% 97 92% 313 95%Sampson CC 1,927 141 99% 52 100% 193 99%Sandhills CC 3,928 310 99% 112 94% 422 98%South Piedmont 2,528 186 93% 50 86% 236 92%Southeastern CC 2,575 197 96% 49 94% 246 96%Southwestern CC 2,462 144 99% 76 97% 220 98%Stanly CC 2,683 187 98% 94 96% 281 97%Surry CC 3,495 197 97% 126 98% 323 97%Tri-County CC 1,158 107 99% 34 88% 141 96%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 234 100% 102 92% 336 98%Wake TCC 13,650 535 94% 343 93% 878 94%Wayne CC 3,615 408 100% 98 100% 506 100%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 293 97% 47 91% 340 96%Wilkes CC 3,042 188 98% 63 92% 251 96%Wilson CC 2,144 157 98% 50 98% 207 98%
System Totals 221,096 15,216 97% 6,021 94% 21,237 96%
COMPLETERS NON-COMPLETERS TOTAL
INSTITUTION TOTAL FTE
28
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE G:
Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer
Description/Definition—This composite indicator consists of
1. Number of individuals completing a curriculum program with a certificate,diploma, or degree;
2. Number of individuals who have not completed a program but who are continuingenrollments in either curriculum or occupational extension programs;
3. Number of individuals who transferred to a university or another communitycollege.
This composite indicator will consist of the above three measures, each reported separately for each college. Sum of the three will be divided by the total number of curriculum students in the cohort to compute an indicator of curriculum student progress and success.
Methodology and Data Source: Cohorts would be defined each fall based upon number of students enrolled in degree granting curriculum programs (associate degree, certificate, and diploma). At the end of each semester, colleges submitted a Curriculum Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file to the North Carolina Community College System Office. These student unit record files were loaded into the System data warehouse and were the official data of record for state level reporting. Each college has a minimum of two trained Skilled Knowledge Workers (SKW) with complete access to their data in the data warehouse. Each SKW has the ability to verify the accuracy of the data once loaded into the data warehouse. The cohort was tracked from fall to fall using data from the data warehouse to determine those who have graduated and those who have continued to be enrolled. This number, divided by the initial cohort, is the percentage reported. Transfer rates were calculated using the National Student Clearinghouse data.
Performance Standard—Performance standard for this measure is 65 percent of the fall cohort will have completed their program, still be enrolled the following fall at the community college, or transferred to another community college or university.
Results—Seventy-two percent (72%) of the fall 2008 cohort had graduated, returned to enroll, or transferred by fall 2009. All fifty-eight (58) community colleges met the performance standard.
CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATON AND TRANSFER, 2008-2009
29
College FTETotal
CohortPERCENT
GRADUATEPERCENT RETURN
PERCENT TRANSFER
PERCENT GRADUATE, RETURN OR TRANSFER
Alamance CC 4,297 3,744 15% 53% 6% 74%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 4,196 17% 50% 5% 72%Beaufort County CC 1,905 1,400 16% 54% 5% 75%Bladen CC 1,537 1,275 11% 57% 6% 74%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 1,600 12% 51% 6% 69%Brunswick CC 1,752 1,088 15% 48% 8% 71%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 3,292 14% 54% 8% 76%Cape Fear CC 7,862 6,914 15% 52% 8% 75%Carteret CC 1,835 1,421 14% 49% 5% 68%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 3,987 15% 52% 5% 72%Central Carolina CC 5,340 3,551 21% 44% 5% 70%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 15,801 8% 49% 10% 67%Cleveland CC 3,203 2,494 16% 46% 6% 68%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 4,233 16% 46% 9% 71%College of The Albemarle 2,448 2,014 15% 48% 7% 70%Craven CC 2,891 2,653 12% 48% 8% 68%Davidson County CC 4,067 2,819 16% 52% 5% 73%Durham TCC 4,860 4,002 9% 49% 10% 68%Edgecombe CC 2,439 1,906 13% 57% 4% 74%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 8,465 11% 52% 8% 71%Forsyth TCC 7,466 6,810 14% 51% 7% 72%Gaston College 5,240 4,663 13% 52% 5% 70%Guilford TCC 10,908 10,413 11% 52% 9% 72%Halifax CC 1,650 1,218 20% 47% 5% 72%Haywood CC 1,947 1,463 17% 48% 5% 70%Isothermal CC 2,386 1,625 14% 50% 7% 71%James Sprunt CC 1,399 945 24% 47% 4% 75%Johnston CC 4,391 3,007 16% 52% 7% 75%Lenoir CC 3,655 2,219 14% 53% 7% 74%Martin CC 893 521 16% 51% 6% 73%Mayland CC 1,942 995 27% 41% 4% 72%McDowell TCC 1,481 981 19% 44% 4% 67%Mitchell CC 2,696 2,320 13% 53% 5% 71%Montgomery CC 1,002 794 25% 44% 3% 72%Nash CC 2,652 2,171 12% 53% 7% 72%Pamlico CC 633 364 32% 38% 5% 75%Piedmont CC 2,762 1,804 23% 43% 5% 71%Pitt CC 6,459 5,750 14% 53% 8% 75%Randolph CC 2,581 1,896 13% 54% 5% 72%Richmond CC 2,171 1,534 12% 54% 6% 72%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 647 20% 47% 7% 74%Robeson CC 3,742 2,146 16% 51% 6% 73%Rockingham CC 2,158 1,859 14% 53% 5% 72%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 5,201 13% 51% 6% 70%Sampson CC 1,927 1,144 21% 52% 4% 77%Sandhills CC 3,928 3,094 15% 50% 7% 72%South Piedmont CC 2,528 1,920 16% 51% 7% 74%Southeastern CC 2,575 1,629 14% 52% 8% 74%Southwestern CC 2,462 1,736 17% 49% 5% 71%Stanly CC 2,683 2,235 17% 47% 4% 68%Surry CC 3,495 2,400 15% 53% 6% 74%Tri-County CC 1,158 825 17% 46% 8% 71%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 3,758 15% 47% 5% 67%Wake TCC 13,650 13,277 8% 52% 10% 70%Wayne CC 3,615 2,886 15% 50% 7% 72%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 2,370 16% 56% 5% 77%Wilkes CC 3,042 2,037 15% 54% 6% 75%Wilson CC 2,144 1,519 16% 49% 6% 71%
System Total 221,096 179,031 14% 51% 7% 72%
30
CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS MEASURE H:
Client Satisfaction With Customized Training
Description/Definition— Percentage of businesses/industries who have received services from a community college indicating that their expectations have been met. This measure is intended primarily to determine the satisfaction of organizations that received services from a community college.
Methodology and Data Source—A survey for businesses/industries receiving services from the Small Business Centers was administered by colleges to determine level of satisfaction with their customized training. The data were submitted annually to the System Office at the end of the fiscal year.
Performance Standard—Ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report satisfaction with the services provided by community colleges.
Results—Total number of survey respondents was 44,116 in 2008-09. Ninety-four percent (94%) responded that the customized training provided by community colleges was excellent, or very good. Fifty-six (56) colleges met the performance standard.
CLIENT SATISFIED WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING, 2008-2009
31
Institution FTENumber of Survey
Respondents% Excellent &
Very Good
Alamance CC 4,297 647 94%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 856 93%Beaufort County CC 1,905 379 96%Bladen CC 1,537 144 99%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 1,755 93%Brunswick CC 1,752 436 95%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 744 92%Cape Fear CC 7,862 1,648 93%Carteret CC 1,835 971 87%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 675 92%Central Carolina CC 5,340 1,047 96%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 839 93%Cleveland CC 3,203 457 94%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 817 94%College of The Albemarle 2,448 1,138 92%Craven CC 2,891 1,091 96%Davidson County CC 4,067 234 93%Durham TCC 4,860 539 93%Edgecombe CC 2,439 2,619 95%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 1,153 93%Forsyth TCC 7,466 1,073 96%Gaston College 5,240 713 93%Guilford TCC 10,908 1,047 95%Halifax CC 1,650 1,148 94%Haywood CC 1,947 320 95%Isothermal CC 2,386 251 96%James Sprunt CC 1,399 1,211 100%Johnston CC 4,391 1,102 95%Lenoir CC 3,655 1,187 94%Martin CC 893 564 95%Mayland CC 1,942 477 96%McDowell TCC 1,481 123 100%Mitchell CC 2,696 468 93%Montgomery CC 1,002 475 93%Nash CC 2,652 932 92%Pamlico CC 633 62 92%Piedmont CC 2,762 527 92%Pitt CC 6,459 1,063 90%Randolph CC 2,581 1,047 94%Richmond CC 2,171 394 96%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 284 95%Robeson CC 3,742 1,015 95%Rockingham CC 2,158 357 91%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 238 90%Sampson CC 1,927 535 83%Sandhills CC 3,928 860 96%South Piedmont CC 2,528 512 93%Southeastern CC 2,575 2,167 91%Southwestern CC 2,462 150 100%Stanly CC 2,683 623 92%Surry CC 3,495 371 98%Tri-County CC 1,158 60 98%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 657 93%Wake TCC 13,650 2,183 97%Wayne CC 3,615 454 95%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 321 97%Wilkes CC 3,042 310 96%Wilson CC 2,144 646 95%
System Total 221,096 44,116 94%
32
SUMMARY OF CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS
A summary of the System's performance on the measures and the number of colleges meeting each standard are presented on the next page.
Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance (EIP) is based upon a college meeting or exceeding all performance measures, having no exams for which the college controls who sits for the exam with a passing rate of less than 70%, and college transfer students performing at a level equal to or above native UNC system students.
33
SUMMARY REPORT ON PERFORMANCE MEASURES, 2008-2009 NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
MEASURE STANDARD SYSTEM AVERAGE
# COLLEGES MEETING
STANDARD
Progress of Basic Skills Students 75% 84% 55
Passing Rates on Licensure/ Certification Exams for First-Time Test Takers
Aggregate = 80% 86% 47*
Performance of College Transfer Students 83% 85% 37**
Passing Rates in Developmental Courses
75% 80% 47
Success Rate of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses
80% 87% 58
Student Satisfaction of Completers and Non-Completers
90% 96% 58***
Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation & Transfer
65% 72% 58
Client Satisfaction with Customized Training
90% 94% 56
* 47 colleges met t he 80% standard; 36 colleges h ad no ex am for which they controlled who took theexam with a passing rate < 70%.
** 3 7 colleges met t he 83% s tandard; 28 colleges met o r ex ceeded t he p erformance of n ative U NCsophomores and juniors (86%).
*** 3 colleges have statistically invalid sample size for the non-completer survey.
STATUS OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGES MEETING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, 2008-2009(M = Met Standard)
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance.**Not eligible for performance funding due to a low response rate (statistically invalid sample size).
CollegeProgress of Basic Skills Students
Passing Rates on Licensure
Certif. Exams
Performance of College
Transfer StudentsPassing Rates in Develop. Courses
Success Rate of Develop.
Students in College Level
Courses
Student Satisfaction of
Completers & NonComp.
Curriculum Student Retention,
Graduation & Transfer
Client Satisfaction with Customized
TrainingTotal Standards
Met
Recognition of Exceptional Institutional
Performance*
Alamance CC M M M M M M M 7Asheville-Buncombe TCC M M M M M M M M 8 YesBeaufort County CC M M M M M M M M 8Bladen CC M M M M M M M 7Blue Ridge CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesBrunswick CC M M M M M M M 7Caldwell CC & TI M M M M M M M M 8Cape Fear CC M M M M M M M M 8Carteret CC M M M M M M 6Catawba Valley CC M M M M M M M 7Central Carolina CC M M M M M M M M 8Central Piedmont CC M M M M M M M 7Cleveland CC M M M M M M 6Coastal Carolina CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesCollege of The Albemarle M M M M M M M 7Craven CC M M M M M** M M 7Davidson County CC M M M M M M M M 8Durham TCC M M M M M M M 7Edgecombe CC M M M M M M 6Fayetteville TCC M M M M M M 6Forsyth TCC M M M M M M M M 8 YesGaston College M M M M M M** M M 8Guilford TCC M M M M M M M 7Halifax CC M M M M M M 6Haywood CC M M M M M M M 7Isothermal CC M M M M M M M 7James Sprunt CC M M M M M M M M 8Johnston CC M M M M M M 6Lenoir CC M M M M M M M M 8Martin CC M M M M M M M 7Mayland CC M M M M M M 6McDowell TCC M M M M M M M 7
STATUS OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGES MEETING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, 2008-2009(M = Met Standard)
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance.**Not eligible for performance funding due to a low response rate (statistically invalid sample size).
CollegeProgress of Basic Skills Students
Passing Rates on Licensure
Certif. Exams
Performance of College
Transfer StudentsPassing Rates in Develop. Courses
Success Rate of Develop.
Students in College Level
Courses
Student Satisfaction of
Completers & NonComp.
Curriculum Student Retention,
Graduation & Transfer
Client Satisfaction with Customized
TrainingTotal Standards
Met
Recognition of Exceptional Institutional
Performance*
Mitchell CC M M M M M M M 7Montgomery CC M M M M M M 6Nash CC M M M M M M M 7Pamlico CC M M M** M M 5Piedmont CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesPitt CC M M M M M M M M 8Randolph CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesRichmond CC M M M M M M M M 8Roanoke-Chowan CC M M M M M M M 7Robeson CC M M M M M M 6Rockingham CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesRowan-Cabarrus CC M M M M M M M M 8Sampson CC M M M M M M 6Sandhills CC M M M M M M M 7South Piedmont CC M M M M M M M 7Southeastern CC M M M M M M M 7Southwestern CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesStanly CC M M M M M 5Surry CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesTri-County CC M M M M M M M 7Vance-Granville CC M M M M M M M M 8Wake TCC M M M M M M M 7Wayne CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesWestern Piedmont CC M M M M M M M M 8 YesWilkes CC M M M M M M M M 8Wilson CC M M M M M M M 7
37
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
STRATEGIC PLAN, 2009-2011
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS
The Critical Success Factors report is the mechanism employed for assessing the progress of the System in achieving measurable objectives identified in the System's strategic plan. Factors two through five provide measures that monitor the success of the System in meeting its target levels of success.
Most of the data presented in this section of the report are System level data, and where appropriate, college level data are presented for information. These data are to determine the degree to which the System has met its target levels.
The factors that comprise this section of the report are:
Factor II: Workforce Development
Factor III: Diverse Populations' Learning Needs
Factor IV: Resources
Factor V: Technology
39
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR II: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Supporting North Carolina's economic development has been an important part of the mission of the Community College System since its beginning. The System is a major tool for providing the state's citizens with the education and skills they need to be productive in the workforce. The System's institutions have traditionally worked closely with the businesses in their areas to insure that the programs offered by the colleges prepare citizens to take the jobs that are available. They have also provided citizens with the skills to be self-employed. North Carolina originated customized training programs for new industries that agreed to come into the state, and its approach has been copied widely. This program remains a strong part of the state's economic development arsenal, along with other categorically funded programs for existing industries and small businesses. Along with these specialized programs, the System's ability to stay current with the job market protects the state from skill shortages and protects its citizens from finding their skills outdated by changing technology and market forces. Measures of the success of the System in staying on the cutting edge are difficult to determine, but important. The State Board of Community Colleges has placed renewed emphasis on the role of North Carolina community colleges for workforce development in recent years. The 1999-2001 Strategic Plan established a new mission statement for the System and a new set of System goals have been adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges which emphasize education, training and retraining for the workforce, including basic skills/literacy, occupational and pre-baccalaureate programs. The measures that have been identified for the success of the System in its economic development role are: A. Percentage of Businesses and Industry Satisfied With NCCCS Training Programs B. Percentage of College Tech Prep Students Enrolling in a Community College C. Number of Employers and Trainees Served by Customized Training for Job Growth
(formerly NEIT), Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT), Small Business Center Network, and Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (FIT)
D. Employment Status of Graduates E. Employer Satisfaction with Graduates
40
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT MEASURE A:
Percentage of Businesses and Industries Satisfied With NCCCS Training Programs
Description/Definition—The percentage of businesses/industries who have received specialized training programs and services through Customized Training for Job Growth (formerly NEIT), Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT), Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT), and the Small Business Centers indicating that their expectations have been met. This measure is intended primarily to determine the satisfaction of organizations that received specialized services from a community college.
Methodology and Data Source—A survey of businesses/industries receiving services from the Customized Training for Job Growth, Customized Training for Technology Investment, Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement, and the Small Business Centers was administered by the colleges to determine the degree to which the customized training meet their needs. The data were submitted annually to the System Office at the end of the fiscal year.
Performance Target— A performance target for this measure has not been established. As the data are collected and analyzed, a target will be determined.
Results— In 2008-2009, 671 companies and 19,861 trainees were served by the Customized Training Program. Average ratings of company’s expectation met, training impact, and training effectiveness were 4.58, 4.56, and 4.54 respectively, when 5 being excellent, no improvement necessary and 1 being unacceptable, needs generally not satisfied.
An analysis for the total response of 42,204 on satisfaction with services provided by the Small Business Center Network (SBCN) indicated that services provided were excellent. Ninety-nine percent (99%) of the respondents rated the services as “Good, Very Good,” or “Excellent.”
Customized Training ProgramNumber of Companies and Trainees Served, 2008-09
*Consortium with Craven CC 41
Nunber of Companies
Served
Number of Trainees Served
Nunber of Companies
Served
Number of Trainees Served
Total Nunber of Companies
Served
Total Number of Trainees
Served
Alamance CC 4,297 1 9 14 148 15 157Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 7 369 18 384 25 753Beaufort County CC 1,905 1 52 7 54 8 106Bladen CC 1,537 3 59 4 37 7 96Blue Ridge CC 2,275 4 137 7 256 11 393Brunswick CC 1,752 1 258 6 34 7 292Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 1 9 7 62 8 71Cape Fear CC 7,862 4 141 5 174 9 315Carteret CC 1,835 0 0 18 47 18 47Catawba Valley CC 4,751 10 813 17 211 27 1,024Central Carolina CC 5,340 8 240 10 264 18 504Central Piedmont CC 15,324 5 256 18 88 23 344Cleveland CC 3,203 4 211 7 44 11 255Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 1 5 3 19 4 24College of The Albemarle 2,448 3 76 6 63 9 139Craven CC 2,891 2 0 5 170 7 170Davidson County CC 4,067 3 20 16 240 19 260Durham TCC 4,860 8 1,149 11 218 19 1,367Edgecombe CC 2,439 5 120 6 147 11 267Fayetteville TCC 11,018 1 46 14 141 15 187Forsyth TCC 7,466 3 368 9 792 12 1,160Gaston College 5,240 6 258 13 166 19 424Guilford TCC 10,908 10 1,318 3 135 13 1,453Halifax CC 1,650 1 7 6 26 7 33Haywood CC 1,947 0 0 6 65 6 65Isothermal CC 2,386 7 268 9 36 16 304James Sprunt CC 1,399 0 0 7 127 7 127Johnston CC 4,391 5 349 6 127 11 476Lenoir CC 3,655 3 65 8 56 11 121Martin CC 893 1 95 1 6 2 101Mayland CC 1,942 1 34 0 0 1 34McDowell TCC 1,481 3 66 11 398 14 464Mitchell CC 2,696 3 533 11 210 14 743Montgomery CC 1,002 3 58 5 31 8 89Nash CC 2,652 4 213 3 104 7 317Pamlico CC* 633 0 0 0 0 0 0Piedmont CC 2,762 3 30 3 159 6 189Pitt CC 6,459 2 45 9 180 11 225Randolph CC 2,581 3 272 36 206 39 478Richmond CC 2,171 3 160 11 136 14 296Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 0 0 1 56 1 56Robeson CC 3,742 0 0 11 82 11 82Rockingham CC 2,158 3 97 5 56 8 153Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 5 792 9 196 14 988Sampson CC 1,927 0 0 6 125 6 125Sandhills CC 3,928 6 123 6 33 12 156South Piedmont 2,528 2 169 15 74 17 243Southeastern CC 2,575 1 17 2 6 3 23Southwestern CC 2,462 1 22 3 125 4 147Stanly CC 2,683 1 19 5 28 6 47Surry CC 3,495 4 209 12 340 16 549Tri-County CC 1,158 4 227 2 38 6 265Vance-Granville CC 4,543 1 98 11 313 12 411Wake TCC 13,650 13 1,456 8 99 21 1,555Wayne CC 3,615 2 137 7 84 9 221Western Piedmont CC 3,334 1 69 10 211 11 280Wilkes CC 3,042 4 69 6 50 10 119Wilson CC 2,144 5 245 10 326 15 571
System Totals 221,096 186 11,858 485 8,003 671 19,861
Customized Training Projects
Business & Industriy Support Funds System Totals
INSTITUTION TOTAL FTE
Customized Training ProgramClent Satisfaction Evaluation, 2008-09
42
INSTITUTION Total FTECompany's Expectation Met
(Average Rating)Training Impact (Average Rating)
Training Effectiveness (Average Rating)
Alamance CC 4,297 N/A N/A N/AAsheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 5 5 5Beaufort County CC 1,905 5 5 5Bladen CC 1,537 5 5 5Blue Ridge CC 2,275 4 4 4Brunswick CC 1,752 5 5 5Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 N/A N/A N/ACape Fear CC 7,862 5 5 5Carteret CC 1,835 N/A N/A N/ACatawba Valley CC 4,751 5 5 5Central Carolina CC 5,340 5 5 5Central Piedmont CC 15,324 4 4 4Cleveland CC 3,203 5 5 5Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 5 5 5College of The Albemarle 2,448 5 5 5Craven CC 2,891 4 4 3Davidson County CC 4,067 4 4 4Durham TCC 4,860 5 5 5Edgecombe CC 2,439 4 4 4Fayetteville TCC 11,018 5 4 4Forsyth TCC 7,466 5 5 5Gaston College 5,240 5 5 5Guilford TCC 10,908 4 5 5Halifax CC 1,650 3 2 2Haywood CC 1,947 N/A N/A N/AIsothermal CC 2,386 4 4 4James Sprunt CC 1,399 N/A N/A N/AJohnston CC 4,391 4 4 4Lenoir CC 3,655 5 5 5Martin CC 893 5 5 5Mayland CC 1,942 5 4 5McDowell TCC 1,481 5 5 5Mitchell CC 2,696 4 4 4Montgomery CC 1,002 5 5 5Nash CC 2,652 5 5 5Pamlico CC 633 N/A N/A N/APiedmont CC 2,762 4 4 4Pitt CC 6,459 N/A N/A N/ARandolph CC 2,581 5 5 5Richmond CC 2,171 5 5 5Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 N/A N/A N/ARobeson CC 3,742 N/A N/A N/ARockingham CC 2,158 5 5 5Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 5 5 5Sampson CC 1,927 N/A N/A N/ASandhills CC 3,928 5 4 4South Piedmont CC 2,528 4 5 4Southeastern CC 2,575 4 4 4Southwestern CC 2,462 N/A N/A N/AStanly CC 2,683 5 5 4Surry CC 3,495 5 5 5Tri-County CC 1,158 5 5 5Vance-Granville CC 4,543 5 5 5Wake TCC 13,650 5 5 5Wayne CC 3,615 5 5 5Western Piedmont CC 3,334 5 5 5Wilkes CC 3,042 5 5 5Wilson CC 2,144 4 4 4
System Average 221,096 4.58 4.56 4.54
Small Business Center Network (SBCN) - Client Satisfaction Evaluations, 2008-2009
43
INSTITUTION Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor % excellent, very good and good Total Responses
Alamance CC 432 173 36 4 2 99% 647Asheville-Buncombe TCC 564 232 54 6 0 99% 856Beaufort County CC 263 100 15 1 0 100% 379Bladen CC 110 33 1 0 0 100% 144Blue Ridge CC 1055 585 103 11 1 99% 1,755Brunswick CC 285 129 21 1 0 100% 436Caldwell CC & TI 484 200 51 9 0 99% 744Cape Fear CC 1062 477 100 9 0 99% 1,648Carteret CC 526 323 100 21 1 98% 971Catawba Valley CC 429 195 39 6 6 98% 675Central Carolina CC 847 163 34 3 0 100% 1,047Central Piedmont CC 514 269 31 7 18 97% 839Cleveland CC 315 113 25 3 1 99% 457Coastal Carolina CC 567 203 38 8 1 99% 817College of The Albemarle 730 319 82 7 0 99% 1,138Craven CC 872 176 43 0 0 100% 1,091Davidson County CC 164 54 13 3 0 99% 234Durham TCC 354 146 37 1 1 100% 539Edgecombe CC 1825 656 131 7 0 100% 2,619Fayetteville TCC 828 243 66 13 3 99% 1,153Forsyth TCC 829 203 40 1 0 100% 1,073Gaston College 346 357 0 98 0 88% 801Guilford TCC 911 79 53 3 1 100% 1,047Halifax CC 804 277 56 9 2 99% 1,148Haywood CC 194 110 13 2 1 99% 320Isothermal CC 182 60 9 0 0 100% 251James Sprunt CC 1139 72 0 0 0 100% 1,211Johnston CC 816 226 53 6 1 99% 1,102Lenoir CC 812 307 63 4 1 100% 1,187Martin CC 364 172 22 6 0 99% 564Mayland CC 345 111 17 4 0 99% 477McDowell TCC 96 27 0 0 0 100% 123Mitchell CC 320 114 30 4 0 99% 468Montgomery CC 337 103 29 5 1 99% 475Nash CC 612 244 66 8 2 99% 932Pamlico CC 47 10 4 1 0 98% 62Piedmont CC 341 143 38 5 0 99% 527Pitt CC 645 316 82 18 2 98% 1,063Randolph CC 705 280 56 6 0 99% 1,047Richmond CC 294 86 12 1 1 99% 394Roanoke-Chowan CC 189 82 12 1 0 100% 284Robeson CC 766 199 49 1 0 100% 1,015Rockingham CC 256 70 27 4 0 99% 357Rowan-Cabarrus CC 150 65 20 3 0 99% 238Sampson CC 77 369 88 0 1 100% 535Sandhills CC 623 202 27 8 0 99% 860South Piedmont CC 346 132 32 2 0 100% 512Southeastern CC 1478 502 158 23 6 99% 2,167Southwestern CC 125 25 0 0 0 100% 150Stanly CC 427 149 38 6 3 99% 623Surry CC 265 99 7 0 0 100% 371Tri-County CC 46 13 1 0 0 100% 60Vance-Granville CC 491 123 33 8 2 98% 657Wake TCC 1597 518 52 13 3 99% 2,183Wayne CC 308 124 19 3 0 99% 454Western Piedmont CC 233 77 10 1 0 100% 321Wilkes CC 218 81 8 3 0 99% 310Wilson CC 428 188 29 1 0 100% 646
System Total 30,388 11,104 2,273 378 61 99% 44,204
Overall Rating
44
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT MEASURE B:
Percentage of College Tech Prep Students Enrolling in a Community College
Description/Definition—Percentage of high school graduates who are in a College Tech Prep program in high school and enroll the following year in a community college. This measure is dependent on the ability of the high schools to identify graduates of a College Tech Prep course of study.
Methodology and Data Source— The data on the number of high school graduates who complete the College Tech Prep requirements will be gathered from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. The number and percentage of those students who enroll in a community college the year following graduation is determined from the curriculum registration files submitted by the colleges to the System Office.
Performance Target—Performance target for this measure has not been established. As the data are accurately collected and analyzed, a target level will be determined.
Results— In 2008-2009, 30 percent of the 2008 high school graduates who enrolled in a community college had successfully completed the requirements of the College Tech Prep course of study, which was the same as previous year’s figure. The ABCs of public education, as specified in the high school accountability model, require year-to-year comparison of percentages of students completing the college tech prep course of study.
NUMBER OF 2008 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES WHO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED TECH PREPAND ENROLLED IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGE IN 2008-2009
45
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTE
2008 HIGH SCHOOLGRADUATES ENROLLED
TECH PREPSENROLLED PERCENTAGE
Alamance CC 4,297 703 210 30%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 916 238 26%Beaufort County CC 1,905 229 89 39%Bladen CC 1,537 168 27 16%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 394 191 48%Brunswick CC 1,752 276 120 43%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 484 181 37%Cape Fear CC 7,862 1,304 276 21%Carteret CC 1,835 238 74 31%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 832 386 46%Central Carolina CC 5,340 488 142 29%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 2,774 453 16%Cleveland CC 3,203 367 105 29%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 705 275 39%College of the Albemarle 2,448 374 158 42%Craven CC 2,891 459 140 31%Davidson County CC 4,067 607 204 34%Durham TCC 4,860 483 9 2%Edgecombe CC 2,439 277 84 30%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 1,193 461 39%Forsyth TCC 7,466 1,230 316 26%Gaston College 5,240 886 323 36%Guilford TCC 10,908 1,893 681 36%Halifax CC 1,650 250 96 38%Haywood CC 1,947 273 59 22%Isothermal CC 2,386 437 114 26%James Sprunt CC 1,399 111 53 48%Johnston CC 4,391 595 165 28%Lenoir CC 3,655 458 202 44%Martin CC 893 83 38 46%Mayland CC 1,942 153 58 38%McDowell TCC 1,481 179 51 28%Mitchell CC 2,696 548 275 50%Montgomery CC 1,002 113 44 39%Nash CC 2,652 414 109 26%Pamlico CC 633 17 16 94%Piedmont CC 2,762 272 98 36%Pitt CC 6,459 1,624 439 27%Randolph CC 2,581 412 34 8%Richmond CC 2,171 253 128 51%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 95 46 48%Robeson CC 3,742 337 128 38%Rockingham CC 2,158 351 160 46%Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,760 922 281 30%Sampson CC 1,927 196 78 40%Sandhills CC 3,928 693 295 43%South Piedmont CC 2,528 337 86 26%Southeastern CC 2,575 340 116 34%Southwestern CC 2,462 297 101 34%Stanly CC 2,683 382 81 21%Surry CC 3,495 543 139 26%Tri-County CC 1,158 171 61 36%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 621 162 26%Wake TCC 13,650 2,487 407 16%Wayne CC 3,615 559 211 38%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 473 196 41%Wilkes CC 3,042 466 219 47%Wilson CC 2,144 230 58 25%
System Total 221,096 32,972 9,947 30%
46
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT MEASURE C:
Number of Employers and Trainees Served by Small Business Centers, and Customized Training Program
Description/Definition—Number of employers and individuals served by categorical programs created specifically to address employers’ needs. This measure is designed to provide information on specific activities of community colleges that promote the economic development of the state.
Methodology and Data Source—Information on the number of trainees, projects, businesses, and individuals served through the categorical programs are collected annually by the Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office.
Performance Target— The programs were designed to provide specialized services and were not intended to be "numbers driven." Fluctuations in numbers from year to year reflect various factors such as funding availability, scope of the projects, and local demand.
Results—In 2008-09, Customized Training for Job Growth (formerly NEIT), Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT), and Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT) were consolidated to Customized Training Program. The number of trainees served by the program increased by 16.2%, and number of companies served by the program was 671 thanks to the consolidation.
For Small Business Center Network, number of seminar participants slightly increased by 1.4 percent, and number of counsels increased by 26.3 percent in 2008-09. However, the number of continuing education and curriculum course participants decreased by 7.4 percent during the same period of time.
47
CUSTOMIZED TRAINING (*Consolidated in 2008-09)
YEAR TRAINEES COMPANIES
2004-05 12,398 164
2005-06 23,799 197
2006-07 19,380 208
2007-08 17,087 187
2008-09* 19,861* 671*
SMALL BUSINESS CENTER NETWORK
YEAR # OF
CENTERS PARTICIPANTS COUNSEL REFERRAL
EXT./CURR. COURSE
PARTICIPANT
2004-05 58 44,993 7,205 5,310 15,806
2005-06 58 51,312 6,117 4,873 14,591
2006-07 58 55,526 5,333 4,365 14,922
2007-08
2008-09
58
58
55,151
55,929
4,744
5,990
N/A*
N/A*
11,388
10,548
* Information not available.
48
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT MEASURE D: Employment Status of Graduates
Description/Definition— Proportion of identified community college completers who are employed within one year of last attendance.
Methodology and Data Sources—The North Carolina Common Follow-up System (CFS) tracks students’ employment status after they leave the colleges. The Common Follow-up System (CFS) is a cooperative venture of participating state agencies under the auspices of the North Carolina State Occupational Information Coordinating Committee (NC SOICC). The CFS provides a highly efficient and cost effective method for collecting follow-up information for education, employment, and training program participants statewide. The CFS is maintained by the Employment Security Commission (ESC).
Each year the agencies involved in the CFS submit unit record data on participants to the ESC. Among the agencies included in this process are the public high schools, community colleges, and the four-year public universities. Each agency's data are matched against the Unemployment Insurance (UI) files and the other participating agencies' files. A database containing information on employment, employer, quarterly wages, receipt of unemployment benefits, and participation in other agencies' programs is returned to each submitting agency. The database each agency receives is limited to the participants that the agency submits for the data match. This is to say, the database received by community colleges has information only on community college students.
Once the CFS database is received, it is matched against the CRPFAR (Curriculum Registration, Progress, and Financial Aid Report) database and the following year curriculum student registration data. This matching is conducted to determine demographic characteristics of the participants, such as students' completion status at the end of the academic year and whether they re-enroll the following year. Students who obtain an associate degree, certificate, or diploma in the year given and do not re-enroll in any of the colleges the following year are defined as "exit completers."
Students who have wages in any quarter during the year are considered employed. Those who are found both in registration records and UI records but have no quarterly wages during the year and have applied for unemployment insurance benefits or job services of the Employment Security Council are considered unemployed. Individuals who are not found in the UI records are omitted from the analysis. This would include individuals who are working out-of-state, who are enrolled in a four-year college or university and not working, who never entered the labor market, etc.
Performance Standard— The standard is 95 percent of completers are to be employed.
49
Results—Data on 17,046 graduates of the 2007-08 academic year were collected. System average employment rate was 99.22 percent. All 58 community colleges met the standard.
PERCENT OF 2007-08 GRADUATES EMPLOYED WITHIN ONE YEAR OF COMPLETION
50
College FTE
Number of Graduates
(minus inmates and missing
students)
Percent of 2007-08Graduates Employed Within One Year of
Graduating
Alamance CC 4,297 423 99.05%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 558 99.10%Beaufort County CC 1,905 146 99.32%Bladen CC 1,537 103 98.06%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 122 100.00%Brunswick CC 1,752 126 100.00%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 274 98.91%Cape Fear CC 7,862 767 98.70%Carteret CC 1,835 143 99.30%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 423 98.82%Central Carolina CC 5,340 432 99.77%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 932 99.25%Cleveland CC 3,203 242 98.35%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 398 98.74%College of The Albemarle 2,448 206 99.50%Craven CC 2,891 187 98.93%Davidson County CC 4,067 485 100.00%Durham TCC 4,860 244 99.59%Edgecombe CC 2,439 201 100.00%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 538 98.88%Forsyth TCC 7,466 734 98.90%Gaston College 5,240 379 99.47%Guilford TCC 10,908 783 98.60%Halifax CC 1,650 148 100.00%Haywood CC 1,947 176 98.86%Isothermal CC 2,386 187 98.93%James Sprunt CC 1,399 193 98.45%Johnston CC 4,391 333 99.70%Lenoir CC 3,655 251 99.20%Martin CC 893 48 100.00%Mayland CC 1,942 166 99.40%McDowell TCC 1,481 127 100.00%Mitchell CC 2,696 149 100.00%Montgomery CC 1,002 123 100.00%Nash CC 2,652 222 99.10%Pamlico CC 633 42 100.00%Piedmont CC 2,762 278 99.64%Pitt CC 6,459 641 99.53%Randolph CC 2,581 180 98.33%Richmond CC 2,171 154 98.70%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 67 100.00%Robeson CC 3,742 230 98.70%Rockingham CC 2,158 206 100.00%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 384 98.96%Sampson CC 1,927 174 98.85%Sandhills CC 3,928 237 99.16%South Piedmont CC 2,528 229 98.25%Southeastern CC 2,575 105 99.05%Southwestern CC 2,462 234 98.72%Stanly CC 2,683 286 99.65%Surry CC 3,495 297 99.66%Tri-County CC 1,158 61 95.08%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 282 99.65%Wake TCC 13,650 901 99.56%Wayne CC 3,615 328 99.70%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 285 100.00%Wilkes CC 3,042 256 99.22%Wilson CC 2,144 220 100.00%
System Total 221,096 17,046 99.22%
51
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT MEASURE E:
Employer Satisfaction With Graduates
Description/Definition—Percentage of a sample of businesses who employ individuals trained or educated by a community college indicating that they are satisfied with the quality of those employees as it relates to the community college training and education. This measure is intended primarily to determine the satisfaction of organizations whose employees have been trained through a community college.
Methodology and Data Source — Data were collected by a survey developed by System Office, Research and Performance Management section (President’s Office), with each college using a standard set of questions.
Performance Standard — Eighty-five percent (85%) of employers surveyed will report satisfaction with the skills of employees trained or educated by community colleges.
Results— In 2008-2009, 10,707 employers of community college graduates were surveyed. A total of 2,667 surveys were completed and returned by employers, for a 25 percent response rate. Overall, 97 percent of those employers who responded to the survey indicated that they were satisfied with the job preparation of community college graduates. All fifty-eight (58) colleges met the performance standard for this measure.
PERCENT OF EMPLOYERS SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS, 2008-09
52
INSTITUTION FTE
NUMBER OF EMPLOYERS SURVEYED
RESPONSE RATE
PERCENT SATISFIED
Alamance CC 4,297 99 36% 97%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 81 63% 100%Beaufort County CC 1,905 241 55% 97%Bladen CC 1,537 26 50% 100%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 101 23% 91%Brunswick CC 1,752 196 15% 100%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 1,206 7% 98%Cape Fear CC 7,862 235 8% 100%Carteret CC 1,835 96 21% 95%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 75 51% 97%Central Carolina CC 5,340 144 29% 98%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 457 39% 100%Cleveland CC 3,203 227 16% 86%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 181 61% 98%College of The Albemarle 2,448 60 73% 100%Craven CC 2,891 120 13% 100%Davidson County CC 4,067 65 60% 100%Durham TCC 4,860 74 42% 100%Edgecombe CC 2,439 101 75% 96%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 472 32% 97%Forsyth TCC 7,466 743 5% 97%Gaston College 5,240 1,935 9% 98%Guilford TCC 10,908 354 22% 94%Halifax CC 1,650 70 84% 100%Haywood CC 1,947 35 71% 100%Isothermal CC 2,386 54 15% 100%James Sprunt CC 1,399 104 21% 95%Johnston CC 4,391 49 71% 100%Lenoir CC 3,655 63 57% 100%Martin CC 893 21 43% 89%Mayland CC 1,942 64 59% 91%McDowell TCC 1,481 66 30% 100%Mitchell CC 2,696 44 23% 100%Montgomery CC 1,002 20 20% 100%Nash CC 2,652 35 100% 100%Pamlico CC 633 10 100% 100%Piedmont CC 2,762 60 23% 100%Pitt CC 6,459 287 54% 96%Randolph CC 2,581 40 43% 94%Richmond CC 2,171 119 24% 96%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 15 60% 100%Robeson CC 3,742 100 26% 92%Rockingham CC 2,158 37 95% 100%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 210 26% 100%Sampson CC 1,927 49 71% 90%Sandhills CC 3,928 89 90% 95%South Piedmont CC 2,528 261 14% 97%Southeastern CC 2,575 146 8% 90%Southwestern CC 2,462 114 50% 91%Stanly CC 2,683 173 56% 97%Surry CC 3,495 122 17% 95%Tri-County CC 1,158 30 90% 96%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 180 37% 100%Wake TCC 13,650 125 24% 100%Wayne CC 3,615 341 24% 97%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 129 27% 100%Wilkes CC 3,042 125 8% 88%Wilson CC 2,144 31 42% 92%
System Totals 221,096 10,707 25% 97%
53
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR III: DIVERSE POPULATIONS’ LEARNING NEEDS
At the core of the Community College System's mission is its open door policy. Community colleges, in the words of founding father Dallas Herring, "take people from where they are to where they want to be." The special mission of the community colleges is to serve those who did not have opportunities to learn or who missed out on those opportunities, and to serve people who have special problems to overcome. Thus, there is an emphasis on reaching out to the under-served: dropouts, handicapped, economically or educationally disadvantaged and other groups who are not traditionally included in higher education.
There are many issues facing community colleges today, but perhaps none strike at the core of our mission as hard as does the reality of limited resources in this time of economic uncertainty. How long can the "open door" remain open when personnel, services, and facilities are strained to their limits? As the demands on community colleges continue to rise without a corresponding increase in resources, the "open door" that is the path to opportunity for so many closes just a bit more.
The state needs to raise the productivity of its citizens, and these are times in which people have a harder time being self-sufficient and raising families unless they have an education. Providing access to education, a constitutional duty of the state, is increasingly important to individuals and society. A successful community college system will reach out to under-served groups.
The measures identified as indicators of the System's success in meeting the learning needs of diverse populations are:
A. Number and Percentage of Dropouts Annually Served by Basic Skills Programs
B. Number of GEDs and AHSDs Awarded Compared to the Number of Dropouts Statewide
C. Percentage of Basic Skills Students and Recent High School Graduates Enrolling in aCommunity College
D. Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second Language (ESL)
E. Number of Under-Represented Students Enrolled Per Category
F. Percentage of Students Receiving Financial Aid and Amount of Aid Compared With Costof Attendance
G. Percentage of Population of Service Area Enrolled
H. Goal Completion for Completers
54
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE A:
Number and Percentage of Dropouts Annually Served by Basic Skills Programs
Description/Definition—The number and percentage of high school dropouts who enroll in a basic skills program at a community college. Basic skills programs include Adult Basic Education, Adult High School, General Educational Development (GED), Compensatory Education, and English as a Second Language.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on last year of high school attendance and number of years of high school completed are gathered at the time a student registers for classes. The last year of high school attendance data is matched against initial enrollment year to determine the number of students who enroll in a community college basic skills program within one year of dropping out of high school.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been established for this measure.
Results—In 2008-2009, community colleges enrolled 16,403 high school dropouts who dropped out of school during 2008-2009, which was a 4.8 percent increase in enrollment for the academic year 2008-2009. This "safety net" feature continues to be an important role played by community colleges.
NUMBER OF RECENT HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS WHO ENROLLED IN A BASIC SKILLS PROGRAM
YEAR DROPPED OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL
YEAR ENROLLED IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGE
NUMBER ENROLLED
1/1/04-6/30/05
1/1/05-6/30/06
2004-05
2005-06
12,903
13,359
1/1/06-6/30/07
1/1/07-6/30/08
1/1/08-6/30/09
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
15,064
15,652
16,403
NUMBER OF HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS WHO ENROLLED IN A BASIC SKILLS PROGRAM AT A COMMUNITY COLLEGE DURING 2008-2009
55
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTENUMBER
ENROLLED
Alamance CC 4,297 267Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 417Beaufort County CC 1,905 100Bladen CC 1,537 106Blue Ridge CC 2,275 236Brunswick CC 1,752 146Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 373Cape Fear CC 7,862 597Carteret CC 1,835 140Catawba Valley CC 4,751 247Central Carolina CC 5,340 415Central Piedmont CC 15,324 1,608Cleveland CC 3,203 123Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 805College of The Albemarle 2,448 313Craven CC 2,891 198Davidson County CC 4,067 452Durham TCC 4,860 136Edgecombe CC 2,439 192Fayetteville TCC 11,018 425Forsyth TCC 7,466 1,028Gaston College 5,240 303Guilford TCC 10,908 512Halifax CC 1,650 194Haywood CC 1,947 142Isothermal CC 2,386 271James Sprunt CC 1,399 84Johnston CC 4,391 160Lenoir CC 3,655 272Martin CC 893 103Mayland CC 1,942 81McDowell TCC 1,481 69Mitchell CC 2,696 229Montgomery CC 1,002 27Nash CC 2,652 186Pamlico CC 633 20Piedmont CC 2,762 169Pitt CC 6,459 371Randolph CC 2,581 303Richmond CC 2,171 225Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 25Robeson CC 3,742 224Rockingham CC 2,158 174Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 332Sampson CC 1,927 310Sandhills CC 3,928 234South Piedmont CC 2,528 221Southeastern CC 2,575 95Southwestern CC 2,462 369Stanly CC 2,683 283Surry CC 3,495 185Tri-County CC 1,158 49Vance-Granville CC 4,543 415Wake TCC 13,650 578Wayne CC 3,615 322Western Piedmont CC 3,334 206Wilkes CC 3,042 149Wilson CC 2,144 187
System Total 221,096 16,403
56
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE B:
Number of GEDs and AHSDs Awarded Compared to the Number of Dropouts Statewide
Description/Definition—Number of GEDs and Adult High School Diplomas (AHSDs) awarded by community colleges annually compared to the number of public school dropouts. This measure serves as an indicator of the degree to which community colleges reduce the total pool of people in North Carolina with less than a high school education.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on the number of GEDs and AHSDs awarded are gathered and reported annually by the North Carolina Community College System Office. Data on the number of dropouts is provided by the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
Performance Target—By 2001, an increase by 10 percent the number of individuals enrolled in the GED and AHSD programs that complete the program has been set.
Results—Number of GEDs and AHSDs awarded in 2008-09 were 16,705 which was a 9.1 percent increase from the previous year. Number of students added in the dropout pool decreased by 65.2% (4,648) in 2008-09.
NUMBER OF GEDs AND AHSDs AWARDED COMPARED TO THE NUMBER OF DROPOUTS STATEWIDE
YEAR NEW DROPOUTS ADDED
TO DROPOUT POOL GED/AHS DIPLOMAS
AWARDED INCREASE IN
DROPOUT POOL
2004-05
2005-06
20,175
22,180
15,910
14,922
4,265
7,258
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
23,550
22,434
19,184
15,144
15,307
16,705
8,406
7,127
2,479
NUMBER OF GEDs/AHSDs AWARDED, 2008-2009
57
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTE AHS GED
Alamance CC 4,297 33 307Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 499Beaufort County CC 1,905 151Bladen CC 1,537 14 42Blue Ridge CC 2,275 225Brunswick CC 1,752 23 78Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 111 192Cape Fear CC 7,862 142 223Carteret CC 1,835 24 186Catawba Valley CC 4,751 374Central Carolina CC 5,340 103 452Central Piedmont CC 15,324 249 728Cleveland CC 3,203 79 61Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 29 243College of the Albemarle 2,448 71 301Craven CC 2,891 22 122Davidson County CC 4,067 92 343Durham TCC 4,860 37 267Edgecombe CC 2,439 8 271Fayetteville TCC 11,018 53 180Forsyth TCC 7,466 142 516Gaston College 5,240 156 439Guilford TCC 10,908 35 313Halifax CC 1,650 140Haywood CC 1,947 14 52Isothermal CC 2,386 48 229James Sprunt CC 1,399 7 81Johnston CC 4,391 27 146Lenoir CC 3,655 15 241Martin CC 893 5 89Mayland CC 1,942 237McDowell TCC 1,481 221Mitchell CC 2,696 309Montgomery CC 1,002 6 53Nash CC 2,652 19 148Pamlico CC 633 31Piedmont CC 2,762 172Pitt CC 6,459 57 157Randolph CC 2,581 37 379Richmond CC 2,171 15 328Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 112Robeson CC 3,742 73 62Rockingham CC 2,158 211Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,760 557Sampson CC 1,927 233Sandhills CC 3,928 18 285South Piedmont CC 2,528 28 359Southeastern CC 2,575 96Southwestern CC 2,462 4 325Stanly CC 2,683 120 90Surry CC 3,495 207Tri-County CC 1,158 116Vance-Granville CC 4,543 104 555Wake TCC 13,650 87 747Wayne CC 3,615 85 228Western Piedmont CC 3,334 92 407Wilkes CC 3,042 45 164Wilson CC 2,144 12 84
System Total 221,096 2,341 14,364
58
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE C:
Number of Basic Skills Students and Recent High School Graduates Enrolling in a Community College
Description/Definition—Number and percentage increase of basic skills students and recent high school graduates who enroll in a community college. The measure is designed to determine the number and percentage that move directly from basic skills programs into a community college curriculum or occupational extension program, as well as the number and percentage of high school students who directly go to a curriculum program in a community college. The tracking of basic skills students into curriculum or occupational extension is important for determining the success of community colleges in encouraging students to get the necessary skills for today's marketplace.
Methodology and Data Source—The number of recent high school graduates enrolling in a community college is reported annually by the Information Services Section of the North Carolina Community College System Office. The number of basic skills students enrolling in a curriculum or occupational extension course are determined by tracking basic skills students from one year to the next utilizing the registration files submitted by the colleges. This analysis is done by the Research and Performance Management section in the President’s Office, North Carolina Community College System Office.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the percentage of each target group that enroll in a community college by 10 percent.
Results—Number of basic skills students enrolling in curriculum or occupational extension courses increased by 6.3 percent, from 11,260 in 2007-08 to 11,969 in 2008-09. The enrollment of the 2007-08 high school graduates in community colleges in the academic year of 2008-09 (32,423) represented a 9.5 percent increase from the previous year’s enrollment.
59
TRANSITION OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS TO OCCUPATIONAL EXTENSION/ CURRICULUM PROGRAMS AND HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES TO CURRICULUM
PROGRAMS
YEAR ENROLLED
BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES
NUMBER PERCENT INCREASE NUMBER
PERCENT INCREASE
2004-05
2005-06
12,503
12,039
1.4 %
- 3.7 %
24,323
24,058
6.4 %
- 1.1 %
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
11,549
11,260
11,969
- 4 %
-2.5%
6.3%
25,804
29,603
32,423
7.3 %
14.7%
9.5%
60
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE D:
Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second Language (ESL)
Description/Definition—The number of individuals enrolled in English as a Second Language (ESL) programs in North Carolina Community Colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Enrollment data on English as a Second Language are collected and reported annually by the North Carolina Community College System Office. Source of the data is the Data Warehouse.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the enrollment in English as a Second Language programs by 10 percent.
Results—Total number of students served by ESL program was 35,191, which increased by 0.1 percent from 2007-08 to 2008-09.
UNDUPLICATED HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENT IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (ESL)
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
YEAR UNDUPLICATED ENROLLMENT % INCREASE
2004-05
2005-06
36,883
35,258
0.4%
-4.4%
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
37,272
35,154
35,191
5.7%
-5.7%
0.1%
UNDUPLICATED ENROLLMENT IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE, 2008-2009
Source: Data Warehouse 61
Alamance CC 4,297 81 160 112 94 157 118 722Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 66 111 135 180 174 153 819Beaufort County CC 1,905 2 19 35 42 37 24 159Bladen CC 1,537 3 3 9 22 6 10 53Blue Ridge CC 2,275 41 167 116 100 98 122 644Brunswick CC 1,752 10 18 34 54 15 27 158Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 19 41 34 78 48 92 312Cape Fear CC 7,862 62 55 167 198 131 150 763Carteret CC 1,835 4 43 25 17 21 7 117Catawba Valley CC 4,751 57 97 148 233 146 200 881Central Carolina CC 5,340 113 226 461 455 270 295 1,820Central Piedmont CC 15,324 199 313 898 1,295 1,023 1,057 4,785Cleveland CC 3,203 7 10 25 29 34 44 149Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 11 60 42 24 41 42 220College of The Albemarle 2,448 28 55 64 66 23 34 270Craven CC 2,891 26 43 56 87 49 67 328Davidson County CC 4,067 8 34 46 71 75 126 360Durham TCC 4,860 80 564 419 326 471 675 2,535Edgecombe CC 2,439 5 6 16 17 10 8 62Fayetteville TCC 11,018 28 71 133 159 165 231 787Forsyth TCC 7,466 151 163 319 582 273 527 2,015Gaston College 5,240 39 35 95 117 120 182 588Guilford TCC 10,908 461 228 473 502 388 769 2,821Halifax CC 1,650 5 5 4 5 2 2 23Haywood CC 1,947 7 19 29 15 11 9 90Isothermal CC 2,386 9 13 42 67 44 60 235James Sprunt CC 1,399 16 20 37 64 7 12 156Johnston CC 4,391 29 59 75 91 66 77 397Lenoir CC 3,655 45 46 77 116 43 45 372Martin CC 893 5 10 14 28 7 5 69Mayland CC 1,942 10 26 35 27 18 46 162McDowell TCC 1,481 2 9 26 34 18 38 127Mitchell CC 2,696 38 92 132 129 114 177 682Montgomery CC 1,002 3 16 29 36 29 38 151Nash CC 2,652 14 21 23 42 37 67 204Pamlico CC 633 1 1 4 10 7 23Piedmont CC 2,762 9 13 31 37 19 5 114Pitt CC 6,459 43 45 84 91 66 52 381Randolph CC 2,581 8 31 46 97 99 132 413Richmond CC 2,171 9 19 72 107 43 78 328Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 16 5 5 5 3 3 37Robeson CC 3,742 32 36 111 151 29 16 375Rockingham CC 2,158 3 13 23 51 10 10 110Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 105 132 173 178 112 68 768Sampson CC 1,927 5 9 48 34 25 29 150Sandhills CC 3,928 11 24 79 69 56 77 316South Piedmont CC 2,528 32 83 191 306 223 188 1,023Southeastern CC 2,575 7 9 17 12 1 14 60Southwestern CC 2,462 28 49 112 145 60 42 436Stanly CC 2,683 8 11 53 64 18 10 164Surry CC 3,495 25 54 78 111 50 63 381Tri-County CC 1,158 2 10 9 3 15 39Vance-Granville CC 4,543 23 52 33 39 29 15 191Wake TCC 13,650 1,609 596 555 566 620 481 4,427Wayne CC 3,615 33 29 77 140 48 95 422Western Piedmont CC 3,334 55 70 65 64 30 32 316Wilkes CC 3,042 18 34 51 56 44 49 252Wilson TCC 2,144 22 83 101 115 60 48 429
System Totals 221,096 3,788 4,255 6,401 7,853 5,829 7,065 35,191
HIGH BEGINNINGINSTITUTION
SYSTEM FTE
ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGEBEGINNING LITERACY
LOW BEGINNING
INTERMEDIATE LOW
INTERMEDIATE HIGH ADVANCED TOTAL
62
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE E:
Number of Under-Represented Students Enrolled Per Category
Definition/Description— This measure is intended to examine the enrollment of under-represented students in community college programs. Methodology and Data Source—Source of the data for this measure is the Curriculum, Registration, Progress, Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) files maintained by the System Office. For 2008-09, percentage of each ethnicity group in the total North Carolina population was analyzed based on American Community Survey (Table, B02001), American Fact Finder (U.S. Census Bureau) and 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates: Data Profile Highlights. Performance Target— Identify populations under-represented in community college programs and increase their enrollment by 10 percent. Results— In 2008-2009, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity group was consistently under-represented in the Curriculum programs as well as Occupational Extension programs, except in the Basic Skills programs, where Hispanics were disproportionately over-represented (23.1%). Asian/Pacific Islander was also over-represented in the Basic Skills program. African-Americans were over-represented in the Basic Skills and HRD programs, while Whites were under-represented in the both programs. Overall pattern of ethnic representation in each category was by and large the same as last year’s.
PERCENT ENROLLMENT OF EACH ETHNICITY GROUP PER CATEGORY
ETHNICITY GROUP
ASIAN/ PACIFIC
ISLANDER
BLACK
HISPANIC/
LATINO
AMERICAN
INDIAN
OTHER
WHITE
% of NC Population*** 1.9% 21.6% 7.4% 1.3% 3.9% 70.3%
*Under-represented compared to the percentage of its ethnic group in NC total population. **Over-represented compared to the percentage of its ethnic group in NC total population. *** Total percentage of each race/ethnic group exceeds 100% due to the categorization of Hispanic/Latino, which includes two or more races.
63
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE F:
Percentage of Students Receiving Financial Aid and Amount of Aid Compared With Cost of Attendance
Description/Definition—The percentage of curriculum students enrolled in award granting programs who receive some type of financial aid and the average amount of that aid compared with the cost of attendance. For purposes of this measure, cost of attendance includes tuition and fees, books and supplies, and other expenses.
Methodology and Data Source—Beginning 2002-03, data were collected by the System Office and stored in Data Warehouse. Thus the number of curriculum students receiving financial aid and the average amount received were based on the information from the Data Warehouse.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results—Number of students receiving financial aid in 2008-09 increased by 15,527 (15.4%) over last year’s figure. The average amount of aid received also increased by $335.
64
NUMBER AND PERCENT OF CURRICULUM STUDENTS RECEIVING FINANCIAL AID NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
YEAR NUMBER OF CURRICULUM STUDENTS RECEIVING
FINANCIAL AID*
PERCENT OF CURRICULUM STUDENTS RECEIVING
FINANCIAL AID*
AVERAGE DOLLAR VALUE
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
154,922
128,429
108,065
56.5%
47.8%
51.2%
$1,726
$2,044
$2,372
2007-08
2008-09
100,683
116,210
45.4%
47.4%
$2,955
$3,290
* Number and percent based on number of curriculum students enrolled in associate degree, diplomaand certificate granting programs. Students enrolled in transitional programs (special credit, dualenrollment and Huskins Bill) are not eligible for financial aid.
65
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE G:
Percentage of the Adult Population in Service Area Enrolled
Description/Definition—Percentage of the adult population in each college's service area enrolled in either curriculum or continuing education.
Methodology and Data Source— An unduplicated headcount for each college is determined from the curriculum and continuing education registration data files. The service area population data are derived from population statistics available from the State Demographers office. The population data are for individuals 18 years or older.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results—Percentage of adult population served slightly increased from 12.14 percent in 2007-08 to 12.19 percent in 2008-09. The enrollment figure in 2008-09 increased by 30,273 (3.65 %) over 2007-08.
PERCENT OF ADULT POPULATION IN SERVICE AREA ENROLLED PER COLLEGE (STATE AVERAGE)
YEAR % OF SERVICE AREA
POPULATION ENROLLED (SYSTEM AVERAGE)
2004-05
2005-06
12.34%
12.18%
2006-07 12.05%
2007-08
2008-09
12.14%
12.19%
PERCENT OF ADULT POPULATION IN SERVICE AREA ENROLLED, 2008-2009
66
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTEANNUAL
ENROLLMENTSERVICE AREA
18 & UP PERCENTAGE
Alamance CC 4,297 16,394 111,791 14.66%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 27,080 195,998 13.82%Beaufort County CC 1,905 7,490 53,839 13.91%Bladen CC 1,537 4,892 24,334 20.10%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 15,386 107,160 14.36%Brunswick CC 1,752 7,970 81,716 9.75%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 15,733 100,647 15.63%Cape Fear CC 7,862 27,909 192,429 14.50%Carteret CC 1,835 8,288 51,587 16.07%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 21,087 146,690 14.38%Central Carolina CC 5,340 20,578 171,447 12.00%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 62,522 648,801 9.64%Cleveland CC 3,203 11,708 74,768 15.66%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 24,046 125,691 19.13%College of the Albemarle 2,448 10,669 116,143 9.19%Craven CC 2,891 16,733 71,804 23.30%Davidson County CC 4,067 17,179 154,314 11.13%Durham TCC 4,860 25,810 299,534 8.62%Edgecombe CC 2,439 10,095 38,583 26.16%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 38,468 226,270 17.00%Forsyth TCC 7,466 33,805 296,462 11.40%Gaston College 5,240 23,718 213,090 11.13%Guilford TCC 10,908 41,524 358,083 11.60%Halifax CC 1,650 7,766 58,669 13.24%Haywood CC 1,947 7,564 45,975 16.45%Isothermal CC 2,386 10,923 64,405 16.96%James Sprunt CC 1,399 8,759 39,568 22.14%Johnston CC 4,391 17,616 120,530 14.62%Lenoir CC 3,655 14,737 68,033 21.66%Martin CC 893 4,258 43,637 9.76%Mayland CC 1,942 6,698 42,894 15.62%McDowell TCC 1,481 7,911 34,847 22.70%Mitchell CC 2,696 13,217 116,776 11.32%Montgomery CC 1,002 4,832 20,830 23.20%Nash CC 2,652 11,488 71,252 16.12%Pamlico CC 633 1,843 10,626 17.34%Piedmont CC 2,762 9,142 47,680 19.17%Pitt CC 6,459 20,222 118,764 17.03%Randolph CC 2,581 12,320 107,548 11.46%Richmond CC 2,171 7,868 62,627 12.56%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 3,742 50,412 7.42%Robeson CC 3,742 13,492 93,649 14.41%Rockingham CC 2,158 10,027 71,240 14.07%Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,760 22,914 233,570 9.81%Sampson CC 1,927 7,944 48,848 16.26%Sandhills CC 3,928 12,916 98,451 13.12%South Piedmont CC 2,528 12,338 160,557 7.68%Southeastern CC 2,575 10,177 41,363 24.60%Southwestern CC 2,462 9,051 68,183 13.27%Stanly CC 2,683 9,705 46,025 21.09%Surry CC 3,495 12,632 85,830 14.72%Tri-County CC 1,158 4,677 36,785 12.71%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 16,598 135,833 12.22%Wake TCC 13,650 61,276 647,729 9.46%Wayne CC 3,615 13,790 86,106 16.02%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 13,638 69,489 19.63%Wilkes CC 3,042 12,502 82,648 15.13%Wilson CC 2,144 10,874 59,383 18.31%
System Total 221,096 859,419 7,051,943 12.19%
67
DIVERSE POPULATIONS LEARNING NEEDS MEASURE H:
Goal Completion for Completers
Description/Definition—The proportion of graduates of certificate, diploma, and degree programs who report that their primary goal in attending has been met.
Methodology and Data Source—Data are collected by a survey, with each college using a standard set of questions. A response rate of 50% is suggested, and a minimum of 15 respondents will be required to report the data at the institutional level.
Performance Standard—Performance standard for percent of completers who achieve their goal is 95 percent.
Results—In 2008-2009, 56 community colleges met the performance standard. The system average of percent achieving their goal was 99 percent.
PERCENT OF COMPLETERS WHO REPORT MEETING THEIR GOAL FOR ATTENDING A COMMUNITY COLLEGE, 2008-2009
68
INSTITUTION TOTAL FTENUMBER OF RESPONSES
PERCENT ACHIEVED
GOAL
Alamance CC 4,297 209 100%Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483 347 100%Beaufort County CC 1,905 157 100%Bladen CC 1,537 73 100%Blue Ridge CC 2,275 105 100%Brunswick CC 1,752 81 99%Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 278 98%Cape Fear CC 7,862 969 99%Carteret CC 1,835 144 100%Catawba Valley CC 4,751 642 100%Central Carolina CC 5,340 375 99%Central Piedmont CC 15,324 448 100%Cleveland CC 3,203 70 100%Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 597 100%College of The Albemarle 2,448 223 97%Craven CC 2,891 49 100%Davidson County CC 4,067 270 100%Durham TCC 4,860 222 100%Edgecombe CC 2,439 321 99%Fayetteville TCC 11,018 626 100%Forsyth TCC 7,466 361 99%Gaston College 5,240 608 100%Guilford TCC 10,908 980 100%Halifax CC 1,650 136 99%Haywood CC 1,947 225 100%Isothermal CC 2,386 150 100%James Sprunt CC 1,399 73 93%Johnston CC 4,391 345 99%Lenoir CC 3,655 199 95%Martin CC 893 45 98%Mayland CC 1,942 261 100%McDowell TCC 1,481 192 100%Mitchell CC 2,696 159 100%Montgomery CC 1,002 61 100%Nash CC 2,652 172 100%Pamlico CC 633 49 100%Piedmont CC 2,762 179 99%Pitt CC 6,459 650 99%Randolph CC 2,581 139 99%Richmond CC 2,171 220 99%Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 109 98%Robeson CC 3,742 218 100%Rockingham CC 2,158 208 100%Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,760 221 99%Sampson CC 1,927 143 100%Sandhills CC 3,928 313 100%South Piedmont CC 2,528 181 99%Southeastern CC 2,575 193 100%Southwestern CC 2,462 144 100%Stanly CC 2,683 73 92%Surry CC 3,495 197 100%Tri-County CC 1,158 115 100%Vance-Granville CC 4,543 236 100%Wake TCC 13,650 535 100%Wayne CC 3,615 419 100%Western Piedmont CC 3,334 292 100%Wilkes CC 3,042 189 100%Wilson CC 2,144 157 100%
System Total 221,096 15,353 99%
69
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR IV: RESOURCES
For any institution, educational or industrial, there is a critical mass of resources necessary for the organization to perform at an optimal level. When resources fall below this critical mass level, or when increased demand outstrips available resources, performance declines and quality suffers. The level of resources can be thought of as an indicator of the health of an organization.
An examination of the colleges' resources will indicate the capability of the institutions in providing quality educational programs. Whereas resources alone do not guarantee that a quality education will be delivered, without appropriate resources, a college cannot provide students with an adequate learning experience.
The measures selected as indicators of the health of the System and the colleges as determined by resources are:
A. Percentage of College Libraries Meeting ALA Standards
B. Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between Program Areas Made by CommunityColleges
C. Average Nine-Month Faculty Salaries as a Percentage of the SREB Average
D. Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty With Less Than Five Years of Experience
E. Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in Professional Development Activities
F. Percentage of Facilities Meeting the "Satisfactory" Building Condition
G. Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar Allotment to Curriculum FTE DollarAllotment
70
RESOURCES MEASURE A: Percentage of College Libraries Meeting the ALA Standards
Description/Definition— The percentage of colleges meeting the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) standards for community, junior and technical colleges. Specifically, this measure looks at percentage meeting the standards for number of book titles, serial subscriptions, expenditure minus salaries per FTE, library staff, and square footage.
Methodology and Data Source—Library data have been collected by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in odd numbered year. The data were published in the Statistical Abstract of Higher Education in North Carolina, an annual publication of the UNC-General Administration. Data available from this publication were then compared with the standards set by the ACRL to determine which colleges meet the standards. It should be noted that the ACRL standards vary based on FTE of the college.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results— Library data for 2008-09 were not available at the time of 2010 CSF publication. However, historical data showed that most colleges didn’t meet the measures and a handful of colleges met only minimum level of ACRL standard in the past. This raises serious concerns about under-funding of the community college libraries in North Carolina, and its conditions.
LEARNING RESOURCE CENTERS: COMPLIANCE WITH ACRL STANDARDS, 2006-07
MEASURE BELOW STANDARD
MINIMUM LEVEL
EXCELLENT LEVEL
# % # % # %
# of Books (Paper Volumes)
48 83% 7 12% 3 5%
Serial Subscriptions 53 91% 4 7% 1 2%
Expenditure Minus Salaries per FTE 54 93% 4 7% 0 0%
Library Staff 55 95% 3 5% 0 0%
Square Footage 58 100% 0 0% 0 0%
71
RESOURCES MEASURE B: Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between Program Areas Made by Community Colleges
Description/Definition—Purpose of this measure is to serve as an indicator of the effectiveness of the resource allocation model being used by the North Carolina Community College System. The measure is simply the total dollar amount of budget transfers across program areas made by the community colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the data were the budget accounting records maintained by the Business and Finance Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office. The total dollar amount transferred was calculated by the Business and Finance Division by comparing the initial allocation of funds with final expenditures.
Performance Target—No performance target was set for this measure.
Results—In 2008-09, a total of $3,122,911 were transferred into instructional funds. This transfer figure reflects an amount equal to 0.5 percent of the total curriculum and continuing education instructional salaries and fringe benefits that transferred from other programs.
YEAR TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT
OF TRANSFER BETWEEN PROGRAM AREAS
2004-05
2005-06
$3,590,801
$11,028
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
$9,813
$1,754,355
$3,122,911
72
RESOURCES MEASURE C: Average Nine-Month Faculty Salary as a Percentage of the SREB Average
Description/Definition— The nine-month average faculty salary for full-time curriculum faculty compared with the nine-month average faculty salary for full-time curriculum faculty at public, two-year institutions in the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states. To allow comparisons across states, a nine-month salary figure is calculated for full-time curriculum faculty based on a computed nine-month salary.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the North Carolina community college faculty salaries was the fall staff data file submitted annually by each college. Total monthly salary for each full-time curriculum faculty was selected from the college data files. A nine-month salary for each full-time faculty was then calculated by multiplying the total monthly salary by 9. An average nine-month salary was then calculated for the college and the System. The SREB nine-month average salary was obtained from an annual publication titled SREB (Southern Regional Education Board) Data Exchange. The average nine-month faculty salary was presented by state and an overall SREB average was calculated and presented.
This measure also presents data on the ranking of North Carolina among the 16 SREB states in faculty salaries and calculates the percentage of North Carolina faculty salaries as a function of the SREB average nine-month faculty salary.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the average nine-month salaries of full-time curriculum faculty and staff to 83.3 percent of the SREB average.
Results—In 2008-09, the average nine-month salary of full-time curriculum faculty was $47,594 as compared to the SREB average of $51,452. It was 92.5 percent of the SREB average. The performance target of 83.3 percent of SREB average was achieved, and the SREB rank improved to be 11th in 2008-09.
73
AVERAGE 9-MONTH SALARY OF FULL-TIME CURRICULUM FACULTY AT TWO-YEAR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS: A COMPARISON OF NORTH CAROLINA
TO THE SREB AVERAGE, FROM 2004-05 TO 2008-2009
ACADEMIC YEAR
NC 9-MONTH SREB
AVERAGE SREB
AVERAGE SREB RANK % of SREB AVERAGE
2004-05
2005-06
$40,162
$41,517
$45,248
$46,732
15*
15*
88.8%
88.8%
2006-07 $44,008 $48,440 15* 90.9%
2007-08
2008-09
$46,253
$47,594
$50,191
$51,452
12*
11*
92.2%
92.5%
* Ranking of 16 Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states.Delaware became the 16th state to join SREB.
74
RESOURCES MEASURE D: Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty With Less Than
Five Years of Experience
Definition/Description— The number and percentage of full-time faculty with less than five years of experience who are retained the following year. Methodology and Data Source— Source of data for this measure was the fall staff data file submitted annually by each college. A subset of the data file was created which contained data on all full-time faculty members with less than five years of experience. This data file was then compared with the fall staff data file for the following year to determine the number and percentage of full-time faculty with less than five years of experience that were retained. Performance Target— By 2001, increase by 5 percent the year-to-year retention of full-time faculty with less than five years of experience. Results—The retention rate of faculty with less than five years of experience increased by 1.1% from 90.6% in 2007-2008 to 91.7% in 2008-2009.
RETENTION RATE FOR FULL-TIME FACULTY WITH LESS THAN FIVE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
YEAR
TOTAL NUMBER OF FACULTY WITH LESS THAN FIVE YEARS EXPERIENCE
NUMBER WHO ARE RETAINED
PERCENT
RETAINED
2004-2005
2005-2006
1,674
2,319
1,531
2,101
91.5%
90.6%
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2,286
1,931
1,773
2,102
1,750
1,626
91.9%
90.6%
91.7%
75
RESOURCES MEASURE E: Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in Professional Development Activities
Definition/Description— The number of faculty and staff who participate in TIER A funded professional development activities.
Methodology and Data Source— The data were collected annually by the Academic and Student Services Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office. The data were submitted annually by the colleges to the System Office as a requirement for receiving TIER A professional development funds.
Performance Target— By 2001, to increase the participation of faculty and staff in professional development programs by 10%.
Results—In 2008-2009, 1,902 faculty and staff participated in TIER A sponsored professional development activities, which was an 14.7 percent increase from last year’s figure.
NUMBER OF FACULTY & STAFF PARTICIPATING IN TIER A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
YEAR # OF FACULTY & STAFF PARTICIPATING
% INCREASE
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2,383
2,692
2,568
1,658
1,902
- 2.6 %
13 %
-4.6%
-35.4%
14.7%
NUMBER OF FACULTY AND STAFF PARTICIPATING IN TIER A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2008-2009
76
INSTITUTIONTOTAL
FTENUMBER OF
FACULTY & STAFF
Alamance CC 4,297 260Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,483Beaufort County CC 1,905Bladen CC 1,537Blue Ridge CC 2,275Brunswick CC 1,752 6Caldwell CC & TI 4,212 7Cape Fear CC 7,862Carteret CC 1,835 12Catawba Valley CC 4,751 16Central Carolina CC 5,340Central Piedmont CC 15,324 20Cleveland CC 3,203 5Coastal Carolina CC 4,595 6College of the Albemarle 2,448 6Craven CC 2,891 207Davidson County CC 4,067 12Durham TCC 4,860 6Edgecombe CC 2,439 12Fayetteville TCC 11,018 455Forsyth TCC 7,466 26Gaston College 5,240 4Guilford TCC 10,908 64Halifax CC 1,650 7Haywood CC 1,947 10Isothermal CC 2,386 6James Sprunt CC 1,399 6Johnston CC 4,391 96Lenoir CC 3,655 50Martin CC 893Mayland CC 1,942 21McDowell TCC 1,481 74Mitchell CC 2,696 27Montgomery CC 1,002 19Nash CC 2,652 12Pamlico CC 633 16Piedmont CC 2,762 19Pitt CC 6,459 1Randolph CC 2,581 15Richmond CC 2,171 4Roanoke-Chowan CC 946 103Robeson CC 3,742 1Rockingham CC 2,158 36Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,760 24Sampson CC 1,927 14Sandhills CC 3,928 21South Piedmont CC 2,528 38Southeastern CC 2,575 24Southwestern CC 2,462 5Stanly CC 2,683 12Surry CC 3,495 12Tri-County CC 1,158 22Vance-Granville CC 4,543 9Wake TCC 13,650 0Wayne CC 3,615 47Western Piedmont CC 3,334 2Wilkes CC 3,042 21Wilson CC 2,144 4
System Total 221,096 1,902
77
RESOURCES MEASURE F: Percentage of Facilities Meeting the "Satisfactory" Building Condition
Definition/Description—Percentage of community college facilities that meet "satisfactory" building conditions as measured in the Annual Facilities Inventory and Utilization Study. "Satisfactory" is defined as the facility is suitable for continued use with normal maintenance.
Methodology and Data Source—Data were collected from the colleges and analyzed annually by the Higher Education Facilities Commission housed at UNC-General Administration. The rating of facilities as "satisfactory" was done by the individual colleges. The measure was the percentage of all facilities that meet the satisfactory building condition.
Performance Target—By 2001, improve by 10 percent the statewide percentage of facilities meeting "satisfactory" building conditions, as measured in the Annual Facilities Inventory and Utilization Study.
Results— In 2008-09, 88.1 percent of statewide facilities met the "satisfactory" building conditions, which was 0.8 percent decrease from last year’s figure.
PERCENT OF STATEWIDE FACILITIES MEETING “SATISFACTORY” BUILDING CONDITIONS
YEAR % MEETING “SATISFACTORY”
% INCREASE
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
89.0 %
89.5 %
88.1%
0.3 %
0.5 %
-1.4%
2007-08
2008-09
88.9%
88.1%
0.8%
-0.8%
78
RESOURCES MEASURE G: Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar Allotment to Curriculum FTE Dollar Allotment
Description/Definition—Ratio of dollars allocated per occupational extension FTE to dollars allocated per curriculum FTE generated by community colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the data was the Business and Finance Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office. The measure was simply a ratio comparing the dollar value of an occupational extension FTE to the dollar value of a curriculum FTE.
Performance Target—By the year 2000, to increase the funding level of occupational extension offerings to that of curriculum programs.
Results—In 2008-2009, the ratio of the occupational extension FTE dollar allotment (total requirement) to the curriculum FTE dollar allotment was 1 to 1.147 (1:1.147), meaning that for every dollar generated by an occupational extension FTE, $1.15 was generated by a curriculum FTE.
79
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR V: TECHNOLOGY
The application of technology to education represents a critical factor in the success of community colleges meeting the education and training needs of the citizens of North Carolina. Whether it is to meet the demands of employers for workers with the latest high-tech skills or to meet the growing demand for education and training from people throughout the state, the community colleges must continue to integrate technology into the way programs are delivered and upgrade faculty on the uses of the new technology.
In order to meet the challenges of the technological challenges of the future, the community college system must focus on three areas. First, the technological infrastructure that supports the delivery of instruction must be fully developed. Second, faculty must be trained in the use of the new technologies. Third, courses and programs that can be delivered by way of these new technologies must be developed and made available.
The measures comprising the critical success factor of technology are:
A. Curriculum Unduplicated Headcount by Course Method of Instruction
B. Number of Colleges Connected to the North Carolina Information Highway
C. Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC License for Wireless Cable Systems
D. Number of Courses and Programs Offered via Tele-course, Wireless Cable Systems, theInternet, Two-Way Video, etc.
E. Number of Courses Offered Through the NC Virtual Learning Community
80
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE A: Curriculum Unduplicated Headcounts by
Course Method of Instruction
Description/Definition— Unduplicated curriculum headcount of students taking only distance learning courses, taking a combination of distance learning and traditional methods of instruction courses, taking only traditional courses, and unknown. The numbers are curriculum courses only, for this type of information on continuing education doesn’t exist. Methodology and Data Source—Data were maintained by the Data Warehouse at the System Office utilizing curriculum student registration files submitted by colleges each year. The analysis was done by Research and Performance Management section, President’s Office at the North Carolina Community College System Office. Performance Target—No specific performance target for number of curriculum students taking distance education or traditional courses has been set. Results— In 2008-09, 43,811 students enrolled in one or more distance learning courses, which represented 24% increase over 2007-08 figure. The same trend was shown in the courses of a combination of distance and traditional education; 120,538 students enrolled in a combination of the two types of courses, which was a 24% increase over last year. Enrollment in the traditional courses only has decreased by 4.6% in 2008-09: 143,227.
CURRICULUM UNDUPLICATED HEADCOUNT BY COURSE METHOD OF INSTRUCTION, FROM 2004-05 TO 2008-09
Academic Year
Distance Learning
Only
Distance and Traditional
Traditional
Only
Unknown
2004-05
2005-06
22,795
31,769
74,543
82,726
169,584 146,690
7,501
7,236
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
27,268
35,299
43,811
76,137
97,017
120,538
156,249 150,125 143,227
36,875
4,774
3,413
81
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE B: Number of Colleges Connected to the North Carolina Information Highway
Description/Definition— This measure provides information on the number of community colleges connected to the North Carolina Information Highway.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on the number of colleges connected to the North Carolina Information Highway were maintained by Learning Technology Systems section in the Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results—In 2008-09, all community colleges now have an access to video conference services and/or participate in North Carolina Information Highway (NCIH) – either as full video service sites, per event subscribers, or via a local NCREN site: A total of 115 sites across the state.
82
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE C: Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC License for Wireless Cable Systems
Description/Definition— This measure is a count of the number of colleges that have been granted a license for wireless cable systems. The measure supports objectives in the 1999-2001 Strategic Plan to increase by 10 percent the number of education and training opportunities available through alternate delivery systems.
Community colleges have applied to the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) for wireless cable or ITFS (Instructional Television Fixed Service) licenses. ITFS is now called EBS (Educational Broadband Service).
Methodology and Data Source— The Learning Technology Systems section in the Technology and Workforce Development Division at the North Carolina Community College System Office maintained the data on the number of colleges who have been granted a license for wireless cable systems.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results— In 2008-2009, 34 colleges have FCC Educational Broadband Service (EBS) licenses.
83
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE D: Number of Courses and Programs Offered via
Tele-course, Wireless Cable, the Internet, Two-Way Video, etc.
Description/Definition—Number of courses and programs offered and enrollment in courses and programs offered through tele-courses, wireless cable, the Internet, two-way video, and other alternate delivery systems. The measure supports the objective in the 1999-2001 Strategic Plan to increase by 10 percent the number of education and training opportunities available through alternate delivery systems. Methodology and Data Source— Data were maintained by the Data Warehouse at the System Office utilizing ICR (Institution Class Reporting)/FTE files submitted by colleges each year. The analysis was done by Research and Performance Management section, President’s Office. Performance Target—By 2001, an increase by 10 percent the number of education and training opportunities available through alternate delivery systems. Results— In 2008-2009, enrollment in the curriculum and con-ed distance education courses totaled 356,046 students, which was a 16.6 percent decrease from last year. The table below gives the enrollment figure by method of delivery.
ENROLLMENT IN DISTANCE LEARNING COURSES, 2008-2009 NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
DELIVERY MODE
CURRICULUM
CONTINUING EDUCATION
Telecourses & Teleweb courses 4,691 361 Internet Courses 131,688 57,254 Two-Way Video Courses (NC Information Highway)
7,472 1
Hybrid Courses (Blendid online and face-to-face)
59,061 12,511
Web Supported or Web-Assisted Digital Media
71,706
370
5,683
19
Other Courses 236 4,993 Total 275,224 80,822
84
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE E: Number of Courses Offered Through the NC Virtual Learning Community
Description/Definition—Number of courses offered through the NC Virtual Learning Community. These are courses that have been developed by and accepted for use in the NC Virtual Learning Community.
Methodology and Data Source—The Learning Technology Systems section in the Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office maintained data on the courses offered through the NC Virtual Learning Community.
Performance Target—No specific performance target level for number of courses offered by NC Virtual Learning Community has been set.
Results— In 2008-2009, 248 curriculum and 38 continuing education courses had been offered through the NC Virtual Learning Community.
Published July 2010North Carolina Community College System
120 Copies of this document were printed at a cost of $142.80 or $1.19 per copy
Equal Opportunity Employer
North Carolina Community College SystemResearch and Performance Management
June 2009
2009
CRITICAL
SUCCESS
FACTORS
FOR THE
NORTH CAROLINACOMMUNITY COLLEGESYSTEM
Twentieth Annual Report
2009 CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
FOR THE
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
Twentieth Annual Report
June 2009
Published by
North Carolina Community College System
Dr. R. Scott Ralls, President
Kennon D. Briggs
Executive Vice President & Chief of Staff
Research and Performance Management
J. Keith Brown
Associate Vice President
Dr. Soyoung C. Yim
Research Projects Coordinator
Vivian Barrett
Office Assistant
NC Community College System • Caswell Building • 200 W. Jones Street • Raleigh, NC
Core Indicators of Success .............................................................................................................................. 1
System Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................................... 1
Measure C: Percentage of Basic Skills Students and Recent High School Graduates Enrolling in a
Community College .......................................................................................................................................60
Measure D: Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second Language (ESL) ...........................................62
Measure E: Number of Under-Represented Students Enrolled per Category ...............................................64
Measure F: Percentage of Students Receiving Financial Aid and Amount of Aid Compared with
Cost of Attendance ........................................................................................................................................65
Measure G: Percentage of Adult Population in Service Area Enrolled ........................................................67
Measure H: Goal Completion for Completers ……………………………………………………………..69
Measure A: Percentage of College Libraries Meeting the ALA Standards ...................................................72
Measure B: Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between Program Areas Made by
Community Colleges......................................................................................................................................73
Measure C: Average Nine-Month Faculty Salaries as a Percentage of SREB Average ................................74
Measure D: Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty with less than Five Years of Experience ........................76
Measure E: Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in Professional Development Activities .................77
Measure F: Percentage of Facilities Meeting the “Satisfactory” Building Condition ...................................79
Measure G: Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar Allotment to Curriculum FTE Dollar
Measure A: Curriculum Unduplicated Headcount by Course Method of Instruction ...................................82
Measure B: Number of Colleges Connected to the North Carolina Information Highway ...........................83
Measure C: Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC License for Wireless Cable Systems ........................84
Measure D: Number of Courses and Programs Offered Via Telecourse, Wireless Cable, the Internet,
Two-Way Video, etc. .....................................................................................................................................85
Measure E: Number of Courses Offered through the NC Virtual Learning Community ..............................86
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS FOR THE
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
Twentieth Annual Report
INTRODUCTION
First mandated by the North Carolina General Assembly in 1989 (S.L. 1989; C. 752; S. 80),
the Critical Success Factors report has evolved into the major accountability document for
the North Carolina Community College System. This twentieth annual report on the critical
success factors is the result of a process undertaken to streamline and simplify accountability
reporting by the community college system. The purpose of this report is twofold. First, this
document is the means by which the community college system reports on performance
measures, referred to as core indicators of success, for purposes of accountability and
performance funding. Second, this document serves as an evaluation instrument for the
System Strategic Plan.
Core Indicators of Success
In February 1999, the North Carolina State Board of Community Colleges adopted 12
performance measures for accountability. This action was taken in response to a mandate
from the North Carolina General Assembly to review past performance measures and define
standards of performance to ensure programs and services offered by community colleges in
North Carolina were of sufficient quality. In the 2007 Session, the General Assembly
approved modification to the North Carolina Performance Measures and Standards as
adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges on March 16, 2007. As a result, the
number of performance measures was reduced to 8.
System Strategic Plan
Under the leadership of former President H. Martin Lancaster, the North Carolina
Community College System embarked on a strategic planning process in January 1998. The
purpose of the process was to develop a strategic plan that would focus the efforts of the
system on a set of strategic initiatives. The strategic plan is the vehicle that sets the strategic
direction for the System and guides the development of the biennial budget requests.
The purpose of factors two through five of the Critical Success Factors is to monitor the
progress of the system in achieving the objectives in the strategic plan and to report those
achievements. The measures that comprise these factors are the evaluation of the strategic
2
plan objectives. Unlike the measures comprising factor one, the measures included in factors
two through five will change more frequently as new strategic plan objectives are developed.
In addition, the measures in factors two through five are meant to be System measures, rather
than individual college measures. When available, individual college data will be presented,
but the intended focus of these measures is the success of the System in achieving some
predefined level of achievement.
A matrix showing the factors and measures contained in the Critical Success Factors can be
found on page 3.
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS AND MEASURES, 2007-2008
Factor I:
Core Indicators
of Student
Success
A. Progress of
basic skills
students
B. Passing rates
on licensure &
certification
exams
C. Performance of
college transfer
students
D. Developmental
course passing
rates
E. Success of
developmental
students in
college-level
courses
F. Satisfaction of
program
completers and
non-completers
G. Curriculum
student retention,
graduation and
transfer
H. Client
satisfacton with
customized
training
Factor II:
Workforce
Development
A. Percentage of
employers
satisfied with
NCCCS training
programs
B. Percentage of
College Tech Prep
students enrolling
in a community
college
C. Number of
employers &
trainees served
by various
Customized
Training programs
D. Employment
status of graduates
E. Employer
satisfaction with
graduates
Factor III:
Diverse
Populations'
Learning Needs
A. Number and
percentage of
dropouts
annually served
by basic skills
programs
B. Number of
GEDs and
AHSDs awarded
compared to the
number of
dropouts
statewide
C. Percentage of
basic skills
students and
recent high
school graduates
enrolling in a
community
college
D. Unduplicated
headcount in
English as a
Second Language
(ESL)
E. Number of
under-represented
students enrolled
per category
F. Percentage of
students receiving
financial aid and
amount of aid
compared with
cost of attendance
G. Percentage of
adult population in
service area
enrolled
H. Goal
completion for
completers
Factor IV:
Resources
A. Percentage of
college libraries
meeting ALA
standards
B. Total dollar
amount of budget
transfers between
program areas
made by
community
colleges
C. Average
faculty salaries as
a percentage of
SREB
average
D. Retention rate
for full-time
faculty with less
than five years of
experience
E. Number of
faculty and staff
participating in
professional
development
activities
F. Percentage of
facilities meeting
satisfactory
building
condition
G. Ratio of
occupational
extension FTE
dollar allotment
to curriculum
FTE dollar
allotment
Factor V:
Technology
A. Curriculum
unduplicated
headcount by
course method of
instruction
B. Number of
colleges
connected to the
North Carolina
Information
Highway
C. Number of
colleges
possessing the
FCC license for
wireless cable
systems
D. Number of
courses and
programs offered
via telecourse,
wireless cable,
the Internet,
two-way video,
etc.
E. Number of
courses offered
through the NC
Virtual Learning
Community
3
5
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR I: CORE INDICATORS OF STUDENT SUCCESS
In 1993, the State Board of Community Colleges began monitoring performance data on
specific measures identified in the Critical Success Factors report and in the Annual Program
Review report. Standards of performance were established for measures that were identified
as being critical to ensure public accountability for programs and services.
In 1998, the North Carolina General Assembly directed the State Board of Community
Colleges to undertake a review of all performance measures and standards with the intent of
ensuring stronger public accountability. Concurrently, the General Assembly directed the
State Board of Community Colleges to develop a plan for the implementation of performance
funding.
As a result of efforts undertaken by the community college system, a set of 12 performance
measures of accountability was adopted in February 1999. Recognizing the importance of
these measures in the System’s public accountability efforts, the System Planning Council
decided to designate the 12 measures as the core indicators of student success and include
them as the first factor of the Critical Success Factors report. In the 2007 Session, the North
Carolina General Assembly approved modifications to the North Carolina Community
College Performance Measures as adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges on
March 16, 2007. As a result, the number of performance measures was reduced to eight (8).
System summary data on each measure are presented in the report along with individual
college’s performance data. A table is presented at the end of the text section that
summarizes, by measure, whether or not colleges met the performance standard. Any college
not meeting a standard is required to submit to the State Board of Community Colleges an
action plan for improving performance.
The Core Indicators of Student Success are:
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations
C. Performance of College Transfer Students
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses
E. Success Rates of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training
6
CORE INDICATORS OF
SUCCESS MEASURE A:
Progress of Basic Skills Students
Description/Definition—Basic skills students include all adult literacy students. Progress of
basic skills students is a composite measure that includes the percent of students progressing
within a level of literacy, the percent of students completing a level entered or a
predetermined goal, and the percent of students completing the level entered and advancing
to a higher level.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on basic skills students are collected by the college
providing the instruction and entered into the Literacy Education Information System (LEIS).
Data on the progression of basic skills students are submitted to the North Carolina
Community College System Office annually. The data are compiled at the system office, and
the composite measure and adjustment for each college were calculated.
Performance Standard—Standard for the progress of basic skills students is 75 percent for
the composite measure. This measure is a required performance funding measure.
Results: For the year 2007-08, 56 community colleges met the required standard. The
average composite measure for the system was 82 percent. The range in the composite
progress measure was from a low of 71 percent to a high of 95 percent.
SYSTEM SUMMARY OF PERCENTAGES IN PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS
YEAR
EXIT, NON-
COMPLETER
PROGRESSING
SAME LEVEL
COMPLETED
A LEVEL
MOVED TO
NEXT LEVEL
COMPOSITE
MEASURE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
20%
19%
18%
20%
18%
49%
49%
52%
50%
50%
9%
9%
6%
6%
6%
22%
23%
24%
25%
27%
80%
81%
82%
80%
82%
PROGRESS OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS, 2007-2008
Alamance CC 2,647 10% 58% 22% 10% 90%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 3,489 4% 43% 35% 19% 81%
Beaufort County CC 1,133 2% 40% 32% 25% 75%
Bladen CC 615 7% 40% 29% 24% 76%
Blue Ridge CC 1,612 7% 48% 28% 17% 83%
Brunswick CC 1,073 8% 67% 15% 10% 90%
Caldwell CC & TI 2,301 8% 42% 30% 20% 80%
Cape Fear CC 3,180 4% 53% 19% 23% 77%
Carteret CC 928 11% 46% 20% 22% 78%
Catawba Valley CC 2,860 9% 59% 19% 13% 87%
Central Carolina CC 4,263 7% 50% 28% 15% 85%
Central Piedmont CC 13,289 2% 50% 26% 21% 79%
Cleveland CC 715 7% 43% 22% 29% 71%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,169 5% 36% 37% 22% 78%
College of The Albemarle 2,543 7% 67% 17% 9% 91%
Craven CC 1,430 5% 54% 29% 12% 88%
Davidson County CC 2,959 4% 49% 42% 5% 95%
Durham TCC 4,724 4% 46% 29% 21% 79%
Edgecombe CC 1,773 2% 40% 34% 24% 76%
Fayetteville TCC 4,552 2% 66% 24% 9% 91%
Forsyth TCC 5,601 2% 60% 23% 15% 85%
Gaston College 2,951 6% 37% 34% 24% 76%
Guilford TCC 5,722 2% 51% 24% 23% 77%
Halifax CC 1,228 9% 51% 19% 21% 79%
Haywood CC 764 6% 48% 25% 21% 79%
Isothermal CC 1,508 6% 59% 29% 7% 93%
James Sprunt CC 717 7% 44% 26% 24% 76%
Johnston CC 1,752 7% 42% 27% 24% 76%
Lenoir CC 1,978 2% 47% 27% 24% 76%
Martin CC 918 5% 60% 24% 12% 88%
Mayland CC 1,154 12% 46% 27% 14% 86%
McDowell TCC 689 9% 47% 27% 17% 83%
Mitchell CC 2,121 7% 52% 26% 15% 85%
Montgomery CC 565 7% 41% 28% 25% 75%
Nash CC 1,635 5% 52% 20% 23% 77%
Pamlico CC 272 6% 48% 22% 24% 76%
Piedmont CC 1,004 7% 47% 31% 16% 84%
Pitt CC 2,397 8% 48% 20% 25% 75%
Randolph CC 1,761 8% 42% 29% 21% 79%
Richmond CC 2,342 4% 39% 33% 24% 76%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 654 11% 50% 12% 27% 73%
Robeson CC 2,577 2% 46% 35% 18% 82%
Rockingham CC 1,263 10% 47% 22% 22% 78%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 2,986 15% 49% 15% 21% 79%
Sampson CC 1,277 9% 47% 24% 19% 81%
Sandhills CC 1,532 15% 42% 26% 18% 82%
South Piedmont CC 2,462 8% 48% 34% 10% 90%
Southeastern CC 1,202 5% 48% 23% 25% 75%
Southwestern CC 1,433 5% 37% 38% 21% 79%
Stanly CC 1,494 9% 45% 29% 17% 83%
Surry CC 1,575 5% 48% 32% 15% 85%
Tri-County CC 480 12% 43% 24% 21% 79%
Vance-Granville CC 2,654 14% 42% 27% 17% 83%
Wake TCC 7,984 5% 54% 26% 15% 85%
Wayne CC 2,615 1% 45% 37% 18% 82%
Western Piedmont CC 2,426 14% 56% 12% 18% 82%
Wilkes CC 1,398 3% 48% 35% 13% 87%
Wilson TCC 1,774 6% 52% 21% 22% 78%
System Totals 135,120 6% 50% 27% 18% 82%
MOVED TO A
HIGHER LEVEL
EXIT NON-
COMPLETER
COMPOSITE
PROGRESS
MEASURE
INSTITUTIONTOTAL SERVED
IN LITERACY
COMPLETED A
LEVEL
PROGRESSING
SAME LEVEL
SYSTEM
FTE
Source: LEIS, Data Warehouse, 02/09. 7
8
CORE INDICATORS OF
SUCCESS MEASURE B: Passing Rates on Licensure & Certification
Examinations
Description/Definition—The percentage of first-time test takers from community colleges
passing an examination required for North Carolina licensure or certification prior to
practicing the profession. A licensure requirement for an occupation is one that is required
by state statute for an individual to work in that occupation. Certification is generally
voluntary but may be required by employers or an outside accrediting agency. Purely
voluntary examinations are not reported.
Methodology and Data Source—Data are collected by the Research and Performance
Management section in the President’s Office of the North Carolina Community College
System Office from the agencies issuing the license or certification. Examination data are
reported only for those licensure/certification exams for which data are available from the
licensure/certification agencies. The data for most examinations are reported on a fiscal year.
However, the data on nursing, emergency medical technician, physical therapy assistant, and
veterinary medicine technology are reported on a calendar year.
Passing rates are calculated by dividing the number of persons who successfully pass an
examination the first time they take the exam by the number of persons who sat for the exam
for the first time. An aggregate institutional passing rate is calculated by dividing the total
number of first-time test takers for all reported examinations by the total number of persons
who sat for the exam for the first time. For privacy and statistical validity, no examination
data are reported when the number of first-time test takers was fewer than 10.
Performance Standard— Performance standard for the aggregate institutional passing rate is
80 percent. To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), a college must meet the
80 percent standard and cannot have any licensure/certification exams for which the college
controls who was eligible to sit for the exam with a passing rate less than 70%.
Results— For the year 2007-08, 45 community colleges met or exceeded the aggregate
institutional passing rate of 80 percent; 28 community colleges achieved the EIP level of
performance. The System average of aggregate institutional passing rate was 86 percent.
9
PERCENTAGE OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS PASSING
LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS
(FIRST-TIME TEST TAKERS ONLY)
FIELD
NUMBER OF STUDENTS
TAKING EXAM % PASSING EXAM
Aviation Maintenance
General 22 100%
Airframe 25 100%
Power Plant 25 100%
Basic Law Enforcement Training 1,567 86%
Cosmetic Arts
Apprentice 250 90%
Cosmetology 354 89%
Cosmetology Instructor 29 50%
Manicurist
Esthetics
77
144
84%
83%
Dental Hygiene 161 94%
Emergency Medical Technician (EMT)
EMD
EMT
49
3,097
81%
85%
EMT-I 462 65%
EMT-P 422 75%
Nursing
RN 2,108 90%
PN 833 94%
Opticianry * *
Physical Therapist Assistant 96 83%
Radiologic Technology
Nuclear Medicine Technology 24 92%
Radiation Therapy Technology 36 83%
Radiography 352 95%
Real Estate
Sales 569 71%
Veterinary Medical Technology 44 98%
*Number too small to report without violating students’ privacy.
AGGREGATE INSTITUTIONAL PASSING RATE AND NUMBER OF EXAMS WITH A PASSING RATE < 70%
INSTITUTION
TOTAL
FTE
TOTAL
NUMBER OF
TEST TAKERS
TOTAL
NUMBER
PASSING
AGGREGATE
INSTITUTIONAL
PASSING RATE
NUMBER OF
EXAMS WITH A
PASSING RATE <
70% *
Alamance CC 3,871 108 86 80% 0
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 389 369 95% 0*
Beaufort County CC 1,821 117 90 77% 1
Bladen CC 1,399 67 60 90% 0
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 174 156 90% 0
Brunswick CC 1,548 188 140 74% 3*
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 195 154 79% 2
Cape Fear CC 7,259 348 322 93% 0
Carteret CC 1,751 151 127 84% 1
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 201 168 84% 1
Central Carolina CC 5,118 290 241 83% 1*
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 376 351 93% 0
Cleveland CC 2,944 189 139 74% 3
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 257 232 90% 0
College of The Albemarle 2,351 219 175 80% 2
Craven CC 2,751 182 165 91% 0
Davidson County CC 3,663 253 211 83% 0
Durham TCC 4,622 386 339 88% 1
Edgecombe CC 2,122 46 37 80% 1
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 424 382 90% 0
Forsyth TCC 6,661 309 286 93% 0
Gaston College 4,691 276 244 88% 1
Guilford TCC 9,882 486 424 87% 0
Halifax CC 1,557 72 48 67% 1
Haywood CC 1,903 97 77 79% 1
Isothermal CC 2,094 84 69 82% 1
James Sprunt CC 1,348 71 60 85% 1
Johnston CC 4,158 233 214 92% 0
Lenoir CC 3,335 220 198 90% 0
Martin CC 899 58 38 66% 1
Mayland CC 1,925 120 94 78% 1
McDowell TCC 1,176 90 84 93% 0
Mitchell CC 2,367 176 150 85% 0
Montgomery CC 1,027 45 38 84% 1
Nash CC 2,655 120 93 78% 0
Pamlico CC 543 15 8 53% 1
Piedmont CC 2,714 46 44 96% 0
Pitt CC 5,876 234 201 86% 0
Randolph CC 2,468 102 88 86% 0
Richmond CC 2,110 73 64 88% 0
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 39 37 95% 0
Robeson CC 3,693 152 118 78% 0
Rockingham CC 2,043 117 104 89% 0
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 374 298 80% 2
Sampson CC 1,696 99 90 91% 1
Sandhills CC 3,732 233 206 88% 0
South Piedmont CC 2,220 149 122 82% 0
Southeastern CC 2,373 99 77 78% 1
Southwestern CC 2,248 177 157 89% 1
Stanly CC 2,435 181 146 81% 1
Surry CC 3,281 252 191 76% 1
Tri-County CC 1,168 74 59 80% 1
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 202 180 89% 1
Wake TCC 12,296 417 374 90% 0*
Wayne CC 3,517 154 133 86% 1
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 117 108 92% 0
Wilkes CC 2,831 90 73 81% 0
Wilson CC 2,082 77 68 88% 0
System Total 205,803 10,490 9,007 86%
*Excludes Real Estate exam, for the colleges do not control who sits for the exam.
10
PASSING RATES ON LICENSING AND CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS, 2007-2008
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 576 98% 356 97% 932 98%
Cleveland CC 2,944 226 97% 129 99% 355 98%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 725 98% 239 95% 964 97%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 202 98% 63 97% 265 98%
Craven CC* 2,751 182 97% 92 94% 274 96%
Davidson County CC 3,663 248 98% 88 96% 336 97%
Durham TCC 4,622 165 99% 143 95% 308 97%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 200 97% 107 100% 307 98%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 617 97% 167 88% 784 95%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 344 94% 254 92% 598 93%
Gaston College 4,691 666 98% 158 92% 824 97%
Guilford TCC 9,882 772 97% 165 88% 937 95%
Halifax CC 1,557 144 99% 69 91% 213 96%
Haywood CC 1,903 113 96% 70 98% 183 97%
Isothermal CC 2,094 149 99% 63 95% 212 98%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 99 97% 52 92% 151 95%
Johnston CC 4,158 208 99% 92 96% 300 98%
Lenoir CC 3,335 195 95% 143 97% 338 96%
Martin CC 899 37 92% 47 91% 84 91%
Mayland CC 1,925 241 98% 44 100% 285 98%
McDowell TCC 1,176 184 94% 31 81% 215 92%
Mitchell CC 2,367 146 99% 90 91% 236 96%
Montgomery CC 1,027 79 99% 22 100% 101 99%
Nash CC 2,655 138 100% 218 100% 356 100%
Pamlico CC 543 44 95% 26 92% 70 94%
Piedmont CC 2,714 173 95% 72 94% 245 95%
Pitt CC 5,876 408 99% 268 100% 676 99%
Randolph CC 2,468 153 98% 207 98% 360 98%
Richmond CC 2,110 157 100% 58 100% 215 100%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 126 77% 128 89% 254 83%
Robeson CC 3,693 193 97% 86 95% 279 96%
Rockingham CC 2,043 207 99% 64 89% 271 97%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 207 96% 149 95% 356 96%
Sampson CC 1,696 126 97% 35 83% 161 94%
Sandhills CC 3,732 280 100% 151 97% 431 99%
South Piedmont 2,220 238 90% 57 72% 295 87%
Southeastern CC 2,373 151 98% 49 100% 200 98%
Southwestern CC 2,248 173 98% 82 98% 255 98%
Stanly CC 2,435 225 99% 82 98% 307 99%
Surry CC 3,281 262 97% 120 97% 382 97%
Tri-County CC 1,168 80 97% 35 97% 115 97%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 234 98% 151 92% 385 96%
Wake TCC 12,296 289 95% 231 96% 520 95%
Wayne CC 3,517 377 99% 96 100% 473 99%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 268 98% 35 94% 303 98%
Wilkes CC 2,831 202 97% 80 98% 282 97%
Wilson CC 2,082 178 99% 72 99% 250 99%
System Totals 205,803 14,533 97% 6,301 95% 20,834 96%
COMPLETERS NON-COMPLETERS TOTAL
INSTITUTION TOTAL FTE
*Response rate too low (statistically invalid sample size); not eligible for performance funding.
27
28
CORE INDICATORS OF
SUCCESS MEASURE G: Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and
Transfer
Description/Definition—This composite indicator consists of
1. Number of individuals completing a curriculum program with a certificate,
diploma, or associate degree;
2. Number of individuals who have not completed a program but who are continuing
enrollments in either curriculum or occupational extension programs;
3. Number of individuals who transferred to a university or another community
college.
This composite indicator will consist of the above three measures, each reported separately
for each college. Sum of the three will be divided by the total number of curriculum students
in the cohort to compute an indicator of curriculum student progress and success.
Methodology and Data Source: Cohorts are defined each fall based upon the number of
students enrolled in award granting curriculum programs (associate degree, certificate, and
diploma). At the end of each semester, colleges submit a Curriculum Registration, Progress,
Financial Aid Report (CRPFAR) data file to the North Carolina Community College System
Office. These student unit record files are loaded into the System data warehouse and are the
official data of record for state level reporting. The cohort is tracked from fall to fall using
data from the data warehouse to determine those who have graduated and those who have
continued to be enrolled. Transfer rates are determined by matching the students who do not
graduate and who do not re-enroll with data at the National Student Clearinghouse. A
composite success measure is calculated by adding the number of graduates, returning
students and transfers and then dividing that sum by the number of students in the original
cohort.
Performance Standard—Performance standard for this measure is 65 percent of the fall
cohort will have completed their program, still be enrolled the following fall at the
community college, or transferred to another community college or university.
Results—Sixty-nine percent (69%) of the fall 2007 cohort had graduated, returned to enroll,
or transferred by fall 2008. Fifty-seven (57) community colleges met the performance
standard.
CURRICULUM STUDENT RETENTION, GRADUATON AND TRANSFER, 2007-2008
College FTE
TOTAL
COHORT
PERCENT
GRADUATE
PERCENT
RETURN
PERCENT
TRANSFER
PERCENT
GRADUATE,
RETURN OR
TRANSFER
Alamance CC 3,871 3,547 14% 52% 5% 71%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 3,975 17% 49% 5% 71%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 1,294 16% 52% 5% 73%
Bladen CC 1,399 1,135 11% 57% 7% 75%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 1,447 11% 49% 7% 67%
Brunswick CC 1,548 1,027 16% 45% 6% 67%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 3,113 11% 53% 9% 73%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 6,484 14% 50% 9% 73%
Carteret CC 1,751 1,350 14% 53% 6% 73%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 4,123 13% 51% 6% 70%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 3,451 20% 45% 4% 69%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 14,597 8% 49% 9% 66%
Cleveland CC 2,944 2,358 14% 46% 6% 66%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 3,780 17% 45% 9% 71%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 1,785 16% 47% 7% 70%
Craven CC 2,751 2,611 10% 48% 8% 66%
Davidson County CC 3,663 2,805 20% 45% 5% 70%
Durham TCC 4,622 3,661 10% 49% 8% 67%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 1,651 15% 53% 4% 72%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 7,931 9% 51% 7% 67%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 6,265 13% 50% 7% 70%
Gaston College 4,691 4,400 11% 51% 5% 67%
Guilford TCC 9,882 9,738 10% 50% 8% 68%
Halifax CC 1,557 1,161 22% 43% 5% 70%
Haywood CC 1,903 1,405 17% 46% 6% 69%
Isothermal CC 2,094 1,564 15% 46% 6% 67%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 941 25% 44% 5% 74%
Johnston CC 4,158 2,781 17% 49% 7% 73%
Lenoir CC 3,335 2,079 17% 49% 7% 73%
Martin CC 899 545 11% 51% 6% 68%
Mayland CC 1,925 987 32% 38% 3% 73%
McDowell TCC 1,176 877 20% 42% 4% 66%
Mitchell CC 2,367 2,084 9% 52% 8% 69%
Montgomery CC 1,027 820 23% 46% 3% 72%
Nash CC 2,655 2,143 12% 51% 6% 69%
Pamlico CC 543 315 31% 40% 3% 74%
Piedmont CC 2,714 1,754 24% 43% 5% 72%
Pitt CC 5,876 5,170 15% 52% 8% 75%
Randolph CC 2,468 1,805 13% 53% 5% 71%
Richmond CC 2,110 1,495 13% 53% 5% 71%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 778 14% 42% 5% 61%
Robeson CC 3,693 2,088 14% 49% 5% 68%
Rockingham CC 2,043 1,839 14% 50% 5% 69%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 4,900 10% 50% 6% 66%
Sampson CC 1,696 1,065 22% 48% 5% 75%
Sandhills CC 3,732 2,880 10% 51% 7% 68%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 1,750 17% 47% 6% 70%
Southeastern CC 2,373 1,584 11% 52% 6% 69%
Southwestern CC 2,248 1,647 18% 46% 6% 70%
Stanly CC 2,435 2,021 19% 47% 4% 70%
Surry CC 3,281 2,500 14% 52% 6% 72%
Tri-County CC 1,168 748 13% 47% 6% 66%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 3,508 11% 52% 5% 68%
Wake TCC 12,296 11,691 9% 51% 9% 69%
Wayne CC 3,517 2,822 14% 50% 9% 73%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 2,244 17% 53% 5% 75%
Wilkes CC 2,831 1,956 15% 51% 6% 72%
Wilson CC 2,082 1,500 16% 47% 5% 68%
System Total 205,803 167,975 13% 49% 7% 69%
29
30
CORE INDICATORS OF
SUCCESS MEASURE H: Client Satisfaction With Customized Training
Description/Definition— Percentage of individuals who have received Small Business Center
services from a community college indicating that their expectations have been met.
Methodology and Data Source—A survey individuals receiving services from the Small
Business Centers is administered by colleges to determine level of satisfaction with their training
and services. The data are submitted annually to the System Office at the end of the fiscal year.
Performance Standard—Ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report
satisfaction with the services provided by community colleges.
Results—Total number of survey respondents was 41,752 in 2007-08. Ninety-four percent
(94%) responded that the customized training provided by community colleges was excellent, or
very good. Fifty-three (53) colleges met the performance standard.
CLIENT SATISFIED WITH CUSTOMIZED TRAINING, 2007-2008
Institution FTE
Number of Survey
Respondents
% Excellent &
Very Good
Alamance CC 3,871 482 95%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 1,259 94%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 334 96%
Bladen CC 1,399 131 99%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 715 93%
Brunswick CC 1,548 231 92%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 945 95%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 489 94%
Carteret CC 1,751 354 88%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 1,094 95%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 1,191 96%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 607 93%
Cleveland CC 2,944 723 96%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 852 93%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 1,463 90%
Craven CC 2,751 757 100%
Davidson County CC 3,663 377 91%
Durham TCC 4,622 502 90%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 1,805 98%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 1,261 96%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 1,120 96%
Gaston College 4,691 860 98%
Guilford TCC 9,882 1,210 80%
Halifax CC 1,557 1,561 96%
Haywood CC 1,903 491 93%
Isothermal CC 2,094 281 86%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 990 99%
Johnston CC 4,158 642 98%
Lenoir CC 3,335 837 95%
Martin CC 899 803 93%
Mayland CC 1,925 371 96%
McDowell TCC 1,176 135 100%
Mitchell CC 2,367 521 93%
Montgomery CC 1,027 444 93%
Nash CC 2,655 506 96%
Pamlico CC 543 126 87%
Piedmont CC 2,714 526 93%
Pitt CC 5,876 703 92%
Randolph CC 2,468 1,113 97%
Richmond CC 2,110 756 89%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 276 93%
Robeson CC 3,693 1,339 96%
Rockingham CC 2,043 418 92%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 135 93%
Sampson CC 1,696 474 96%
Sandhills CC 3,732 983 94%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 437 94%
Southeastern CC 2,373 2,685 92%
Southwestern CC 2,248 222 100%
Stanly CC 2,435 317 95%
Surry CC 3,281 362 97%
Tri-County CC 1,168 390 94%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 668 98%
Wake TCC 12,296 1,916 97%
Wayne CC 3,517 651 92%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 219 94%
Wilkes CC 2,831 284 98%
Wilson CC 2,082 408 95%
System Total 205,803 41,752 94%
31
32
SUMMARY OF CORE INDICATORS OF SUCCESS
A summary of the System's performance on the measures and the number of colleges meeting
each standard are presented on the next page.
Recognition of Exceptional Institutional Performance (EIP) is based upon a college meeting or
exceeding all performance measures, having no exams for which the college controls who sits
for the exam with a passing rate of less than 70%, and college transfer students performing at a
level equal to or above native UNC system students.
33
SUMMARY REPORT ON PERFORMANCE MEASURES, 2007-2008
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
MEASURE
STANDARD
SYSTEM
AVERAGE
# COLLEGES
MEETING
STANDARD
Progress of Basic Skills Students
75%
82%
56
Passing Rates on Licensure/
Certification Exams for First-
Time Test Takers
Aggregate = 80%
86%
45*
Performance of College Transfer
Students
83%
88%
44**
Passing Rates in Developmental
Courses
75%
77%
48
Success Rate of Developmental
Students in Subsequent College-
Level Courses
80%
89%
57
Student Satisfaction of
Completers and Non-Completers
90%
96%
56
Curriculum Student Retention,
Graduation & Transfer
65%
69%
57
Client Satisfaction with
Customized Training
90%
94%
53
* 45 colleges met the 80% standard; 30 colleges had no exam for which they controlled who took the
exam with a passing rate < 70; 28 colleges met the Exceptional Institutional Performance level.
** 44 colleges met the 83% standard; 30 colleges met or exceeded the performance of native UNC
sophomores and juniors (87%).
STATUS OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGES MEETING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, 2007-2008
(M = Met Standard)
College
Progress of Basic
Skills Students
Passing Rates on
Licensure
Certif. Exams
Performance of
College
Transfer Students
Passing Rates in
Develop. Courses
Success Rate of
Develop.
Students in College
Level
Courses
Student Satisfaction
of
Completers &
NonComp.
Curriculum Student
Retention,
Graduation &
Transfer
Client Satisfaction
with Customized
Training
Total Standards
Met
Recognition of
Exceptional
Institutional
Performance*
Alamance CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Asheville-Buncombe TCC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Beaufort County CC M M M M M M 6
Bladen CC M M M M M M M 7
Blue Ridge CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Brunswick CC M M M M M M M 7
Caldwell CC & TI M M M M M M M 7
Cape Fear CC M M M M M M M M 8
Carteret CC M M M M M M M 7
Catawba Valley CC M M M M M M** M M 8
Central Carolina CC M M M M M M M M 8
Central Piedmont CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Cleveland CC M M M M M 5
Coastal Carolina CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
College of The Albemarle M M M M M M M M 8
Craven CC M M M M M** M M 7
Davidson County CC M M M M M M M 7
Durham TCC M M M M M M M 7
Edgecombe CC M M M M M M M 7
Fayetteville TCC M M M M M M M 7
Forsyth TCC M M M M M M M 7
Gaston College M M M M M M M M 8
Guilford TCC M M M M M M M 7
Halifax CC M M M M M 5
Haywood CC M M M M M M 6
Isothermal CC M M M M M M M 7
James Sprunt CC M M M M M M M 7
Johnston CC M M M M M M M 7
Lenoir CC M M M M M M M M 8
Martin CC M M M M M 5
Mayland CC M M M M M M M 7
McDowell TCC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance.**Not eligible for performance funding due to the response rate to be too low (statistically invalid sample size).
STATUS OF NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGES MEETING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, 2007-2008
(M = Met Standard)
College
Progress of Basic
Skills Students
Passing Rates on
Licensure
Certif. Exams
Performance of
College
Transfer Students
Passing Rates in
Develop. Courses
Success Rate of
Develop.
Students in College
Level
Courses
Student Satisfaction
of
Completers &
NonComp.
Curriculum Student
Retention,
Graduation &
Transfer
Client Satisfaction
with Customized
Training
Total Standards
Met
Recognition of
Exceptional
Institutional
Performance*
Mitchell CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Montgomery CC M M M M M M M 7
Nash CC M M M M M M M 7
Pamlico CC M M M M M 5
Piedmont CC M M M M M M M M 8
Pitt CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Randolph CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Richmond CC M M M M M M 6
Roanoke-Chowan CC M M M M 4
Robeson CC M M M M M M 6
Rockingham CC M M M M M M M M 8
Rowan-Cabarrus CC M M M M M M M M 8
Sampson CC M M M M M M M 7
Sandhills CC M M M M M M M M 8
South Piedmont CC M M M M M M 6
Southeastern CC M M M M M M M 7
Southwestern CC M M M M M M M M 8
Stanly CC M M M M M M M M 8
Surry CC M M M M M M M 7
Tri-County CC M M M M M M M M 8
Vance-Granville CC M M M M M M M M 8
Wake TCC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Wayne CC M M M M M M M M 8
Western Piedmont CC M M M M M M M 7
Wilkes CC M M M M M M M M 8 Yes
Wilson CC M M M M M M M 7
*Met all measures and exceptional standard on licensure exams and transfer student performance.**Not eligible for performance funding due to the response rate to be too low (statistically invalid sample size).
37
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
STRATEGIC PLAN, 2007-2009
EVALUATION OF PROGRESS
The Critical Success Factors report is the mechanism employed for assessing the progress
of the System in achieving measurable objectives identified in the System's strategic plan.
Factors two through five provide measures that monitor the success of the System in
meeting its target levels of success.
Most of the data presented in this section of the report are System level data, and where
appropriate, college level data are presented for information. These data are to determine
the degree to which the System has met its target levels.
The factors that comprise this section of the report are:
Factor II: Workforce Development
Factor III: Diverse Populations' Learning Needs
Factor IV: Resources
Factor V: Technology
39
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR II: WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
Supporting North Carolina's economic development has been an important part of the
mission of the Community College System since its beginning. The System is a major
tool for providing the state's citizens with the education and skills they need to be
productive in the workforce. The System's institutions have traditionally worked closely
with the businesses in their areas to insure that the programs offered by the colleges
prepare citizens to take the jobs that are available. They have also provided citizens with
the skills to be self-employed.
North Carolina originated customized training programs for new industries that agreed to
come into the state, and its approach has been copied widely. This program remains a
strong part of the state's economic development arsenal, along with other categorically
funded programs for existing industries and small businesses.
Along with these specialized programs, the System's ability to stay current with the job
market protects the state from skill shortages and protects its citizens from finding their
skills outdated by changing technology and market forces. Measures of the success of
the System in staying on the cutting edge are difficult to determine, but important.
The State Board of Community Colleges has placed renewed emphasis on the role of
North Carolina community colleges for workforce development. The 1999-2001
Strategic Plan established a new mission statement for the System and a new set of
System goals have been adopted by the State Board of Community Colleges which
emphasize education, training and retraining for the workforce, including basic
skills/literacy, occupational and pre-baccalaureate programs.
The measures that have been identified for the success of the System in its economic
development role are:
A. Percentage of Businesses and Industry Satisfied With NCCCS Training Programs
B. Percentage of College Tech Prep Students Enrolling in a Community College
C. Number of Employers and Trainees Served by Small Business Centers and
Customized Training Programs (NEIT, FIT, and CIT)
D. Employment Status of Graduates
E. Employer Satisfaction with Graduates
40
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
MEASURE A:
Percentage of Businesses and Industries
Satisfied With NCCCS Training Programs
Description/Definition—The percentage of businesses/industries who have received
specialized training programs and services through Customized Training for Job Growth
(formerly NEIT), Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT),
Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT), and the Small
Business Centers indicating that their expectations have been met. This measure is
intended primarily to determine the satisfaction of organizations that received specialized
services from a community college.
Methodology and Data Source—A survey of businesses/industries receiving services
from the Customized Training for Job Growth, Customized Training for Technology
Investment, Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement, and the Small Business
Centers is administered by the colleges to determine the degree to which the customized
training meets their needs. The data are submitted annually to the System Office at the
end of the fiscal year.
Performance Target— A performance target for this measure has not been established.
As the data are collected and analyzed, a target will be determined.
Results— In 2007-2008, the average ratings of 77 respondents from Customized Training
for Job Growth program (formerly NEIT) on “Company’s Expectations Met”, “Training
Impact”, and “Training Effectiveness” exceeded the “Very Good” level with average
ratings of 4.60, 4.61 and, 4.61, respectively on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = Unacceptable,
company’s need not satisfied; 5 = Excellent, no improvement necessary, exceeds highest
expectations).
The average ratings of 18 respondents from Customized Training for Technology
Investment (formerly CIT) were 4.61, 4.56, and 4.39, respectively for the same
questionnaire items and on the same scales as in the Customized Training for Job Growth
program.
Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT) program provided
training to 465 industries. Satisfaction with services provided averaged 4.5 on a scale of
1 to 5. The data indicated that the companies’ needs were met at a highly acceptable
level.
An analysis for the total response of 41,753 on satisfaction with services provided by the
Small Business Center Network (SBCN) indicated that services provided were excellent.
Ninety-nine percent (99%) of the respondents rated the services as “Very Good” or
“Excellent.”
Customized Training for Job Growth (formerly NEIT),
Clent Satisfaction Evaluation, 2007-08
INSTITUTION Total FTE Company's Expectation Met Training Impact Training Effectiveness
Alamance CC 3,871 5 4 4
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 5 5 5
Beaufort County CC 1,821
Bladen CC 1,399 4 4 4
Blue Ridge CC 2,105
Brunswick CC 1,548
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135
Cape Fear CC 7,259 5 4 4
Carteret CC 1,751
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 5 5 5
Central Carolina CC 5,118 4 5 5
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 5 5 5
Cleveland CC 2,944 5 5 5
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 5 5 5
College of The Albemarle 2,351
Craven CC 2,751 4 4 4
Davidson County CC 3,663 4 4 4
Durham TCC 4,622 4 5 3
Edgecombe CC 2,122 5 5 5
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 5 5 5
Forsyth TCC 6,661 5 5 5
Gaston College 4,691 5 5 5
Guilford TCC 9,882 5 5 5
Halifax CC 1,557 4 4 4
Haywood CC 1,903
Isothermal CC 2,094
James Sprunt CC 1,348
Johnston CC 4,158 5 5 5
Lenoir CC 3,335 5 4 5
Martin CC 899
Mayland CC 1,925 4 4 4
McDowell TCC 1,176 4 4 4
Mitchell CC 2,367 5 5 5
Montgomery CC 1,027
Nash CC 2,655 5 5 5
Pamlico CC 543
Piedmont CC 2,714 5 5 5
Pitt CC 5,876 5 5 5
Randolph CC 2,468 5 5 5
Richmond CC 2,110 4 4 4
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876
Robeson CC 3,693 5 5 5
Rockingham CC 2,043 5 5 5
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 4 5 4
Sampson CC 1,696
Sandhills CC 3,732 4 4 4
South Piedmont CC 2,220
Southeastern CC 2,373
Southwestern CC 2,248
Stanly CC 2,435 5 5 5
Surry CC 3,281 4 4 5
Tri-County CC 1,168 5 5 5
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 4 4 4
Wake TCC 12,296 5 5 5
Wayne CC 3,517 5 5 5
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 5 5 5
Wilkes CC 2,831 5 5 5
Wilson CC 2,082 4 5 5
System Total 205,803 4.60 4.61 4.61
41
Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT),
Clent Satisfaction Evaluation, 2007-08
INSTITUTION Total FTE Company's Expectation Met Training Impact Training Effectiveness
Alamance CC 3,871 4 4 5
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186
Beaufort County CC 1,821
Bladen CC 1,399
Blue Ridge CC 2,105
Brunswick CC 1,548
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135
Cape Fear CC 7,259
Carteret CC 1,751
Catawba Valley CC 4,733
Central Carolina CC 5,118
Central Piedmont CC 14,459
Cleveland CC 2,944
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348
College of The Albemarle 2,351
Craven CC 2,751
Davidson County CC 3,663
Durham TCC 4,622
Edgecombe CC 2,122
Fayetteville TCC 10,252
Forsyth TCC 6,661
Gaston College 4,691 4 4 3
Guilford TCC 9,882
Halifax CC 1,557
Haywood CC 1,903
Isothermal CC 2,094 5 5 5
James Sprunt CC 1,348 5 5 5
Johnston CC 4,158
Lenoir CC 3,335 5 5 5
Martin CC 899
Mayland CC 1,925
McDowell TCC 1,176
Mitchell CC 2,367
Montgomery CC 1,027
Nash CC 2,655
Pamlico CC 543
Piedmont CC 2,714 4 4 4
Pitt CC 5,876 5 5 4
Randolph CC 2,468
Richmond CC 2,110 5 5 5
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876
Robeson CC 3,693 5 5 5
Rockingham CC 2,043
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 5 5 5
Sampson CC 1,696
Sandhills CC 3,732 5 5 5
South Piedmont CC 2,220
Southeastern CC 2,373
Southwestern CC 2,248
Stanly CC 2,435
Surry CC 3,281
Tri-County CC 1,168 4 4 3
Vance-Granville CC 4,237
Wake TCC 12,296
Wayne CC 3,517 5 5 4
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 4 4 4
Wilkes CC 2,831
Wilson CC 2,082
System Total 205,803 4.61 4.56 4.39
42
Customized Training for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT), Client Satisfaction Evaluation, 2007-08
INSTITUTION Number of Industries Served Industry Evaluation Summation
Alamance CC 15 4.5
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 11 4.5
Bladen/Brunswick/Southeastern CC 8 4.5
Blue Ridge CC 13 4.5
Caldwell CC & TI 7 4.5
Cape Fear CC 15 4.5
Catawba Valley CC 20 4.5
Central Carolina CC 10 4.5
Central Piedmont CC 10 4.5
Cleveland CC 5 4.5
Coastal Carolina CC 4 4.5
College of The Albemarle/Roanoke-Chowan CC 29 4.5
Craven/Beaufort/Carteret/Pamlico CC 21 4.5
Davidson County CC 18 4.5
Durham TCC 8 4.5
Edgecombe/Martin CC 4 4.5
Fayetteville TCC 11 4.5
Forsyth TCC 10 4.5
Gaston College 10 4.5
Guilford TCC 10 4.5
Halifax CC 4 4.5
Haywood/Southwestern/Tri-county CC 4 4.5
Isothermal CC 15 4.5
Johnston /Wayne CC 6 4.5
Lenoir CC 9 4.5
McDowell TCC/ Mayland CC 5 4.5
Mitchell CC 15 4.5
Nash CC 4 4.5
Piedmont CC 5 4.5
Pitt CC 7 4.5
Randolph CC 36 4.5
Richmond CC 10 4.5
Robeson CC 3 4.5
Rockingham CC 8 4.5
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 9 4.5
Sampson/James Sprunt CC 10 4.5
Sandhills CC 4 4.5
South Piedmont CC 3 4.5
Stanly/Montgomery CC 11 4.5
Surry CC 9 4.5
Vance-Granville CC 17 4.5
Wake TCC 14 4.5
Western Piedmont CC 5 4.5
Wilkes CC 5 4.5
Wilson CC 8 4.5
System Total 465 4.5
43
Small Business Center Network (SBCN) - Client Satisfaction Evaluations, 2007-2008
INSTITUTION Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor % excellent, very good and good Total Responses
Alamance CC 343 116 23 0 0 100% 483
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 886 295 60 15 3 99% 1,260
Beaufort County CC 216 104 14 0 0 100% 335
Bladen CC 110 20 1 0 0 100% 132
Blue Ridge CC 441 223 43 8 0 99% 716
Brunswick CC 158 55 17 1 0 100% 232
Caldwell CC & TI 721 178 41 5 0 99% 946
Cape Fear CC 344 114 26 5 0 99% 490
Carteret CC 236 75 20 20 3 94% 355
Catawba Valley CC 721 313 58 2 0 100% 1,095
Central Carolina CC 884 259 43 5 0 100% 1,192
Central Piedmont CC 381 185 14 3 24 96% 608
Cleveland CC 573 119 28 2 1 100% 724
Coastal Carolina CC 634 156 56 4 2 99% 853
College of The Albemarle 722 601 121 19 0 99% 1,464
Craven CC 458 299 0 0 0 100% 758
Davidson County CC 243 99 28 6 1 98% 378
Durham TCC 328 125 39 9 1 98% 503
Edgecombe CC 1,513 248 41 3 0 100% 1,806
Fayetteville TCC 933 280 47 1 0 100% 1,262
Forsyth TCC 812 265 38 4 1 100% 1,121
Gaston College 667 179 11 2 1 100% 861
Guilford TCC 627 341 164 78 0 94% 1,211
Halifax CC 1,110 385 52 14 0 99% 1,562
Haywood CC 318 139 32 2 0 100% 492
Isothermal CC 166 75 24 11 5 94% 282
James Sprunt CC 912 72 6 0 0 100% 991
Johnston CC 511 115 14 2 0 100% 643
Lenoir CC 533 261 41 2 0 100% 838
Martin CC 512 234 49 8 0 99% 804
Mayland CC 259 97 15 0 0 100% 372
McDowell TCC 113 22 0 0 0 100% 136
Mitchell CC 342 141 36 2 0 100% 522
Montgomery CC 319 96 24 4 1 99% 445
Nash CC 335 151 18 2 0 100% 507
Pamlico CC 79 31 13 2 1 98% 127
Piedmont CC 329 162 31 3 1 99% 527
Pitt CC 457 193 47 5 1 99% 704
Randolph CC 852 224 35 2 0 100% 1,114
Richmond CC 471 204 67 14 0 98% 757
Roanoke-Chowan CC 186 71 16 3 0 99% 277
Robeson CC 963 318 52 5 1 100% 1,340
Rockingham CC 287 98 27 5 1 99% 419
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 104 21 10 0 0 100% 136
Sampson CC 269 185 19 1 0 100% 475
Sandhills CC 706 222 41 9 5 99% 984
South Piedmont CC 318 92 22 4 1 99% 438
Southeastern CC 1,756 706 201 20 2 99% 2,686
Southwestern CC 182 39 1 0 0 100% 223
Stanly CC 223 79 13 2 0 99% 318
Surry CC 262 88 11 1 0 100% 363
Tri-County CC 271 95 17 6 1 98% 391
Vance-Granville CC 528 126 9 5 0 99% 669
Wake TCC 1,444 406 52 8 6 99% 1,917
Wayne CC 425 175 40 11 0 98% 652
Western Piedmont CC 123 82 12 2 0 99% 220
Wilkes CC 227 52 5 0 0 100% 285
Wilson CC 279 109 19 1 0 100% 409
System Total 29,122 10,215 2,004 348 63 99% 41,753
Overall Rating
44
45
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
MEASURE B:
Percentage of College Tech Prep Students
Enrolling in a Community College
Description/Definition—Percentage of high school graduates who are in a College Tech
Prep program in high school and enroll the following year in a community college. This
measure is dependent on the ability of the high schools to identify graduates of a College
Tech Prep course of study.
Methodology and Data Source— The data on the number of high school graduates who
complete the College Tech Prep requirements are gathered from the North Carolina
Department of Public Instruction. The number and percentage of those students who
enroll in a community college the year following graduation is determined from the
curriculum registration files submitted by the colleges to the System Office.
Performance Target—Performance target for this measure has not been established. As
the data are accurately collected and analyzed, a target level will be determined.
Results— In 2007-2008, 30 percent of the 2007 high school graduates who enrolled in a
community college had successfully completed the requirements of the College Tech
Prep course of study, which was a 0.06 percent decrease over previous year’s figure. The
ABCs of public education, as specified in the high school accountability model, require
year-to-year comparison of percentages of students completing the college tech prep
course of study.
NUMBER OF 2007 HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES WHO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED TECH PREP
AND ENROLLED IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGE IN 2007-2008
INSTITUTION
TOTAL
FTE
2007 HIGH SCHOOL
GRADUATES
ENROLLED
TECH PREPS
ENROLLED PERCENTAGE
Alamance CC 3,871 671 263 39%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 857 211 25%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 214 94 44%
Bladen CC 1,399 150 29 19%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 401 190 47%
Brunswick CC 1,548 257 61 24%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 523 172 33%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 1,138 260 23%
Carteret CC 1,751 260 74 28%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 844 342 41%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 494 200 40%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 2,650 445 17%
Cleveland CC 2,944 218 67 31%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 622 215 35%
College of the Albemarle 2,351 360 145 40%
Craven CC 2,751 445 84 19%
Davidson County CC 3,663 461 137 30%
Durham TCC 4,622 424 32 8%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 220 57 26%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 1,194 478 40%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 1,093 284 26%
Gaston College 4,691 802 296 37%
Guilford TCC 9,882 1,780 599 34%
Halifax CC 1,557 175 66 38%
Haywood CC 1,903 261 121 46%
Isothermal CC 2,094 366 151 41%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 118 37 31%
Johnston CC 4,158 343 89 26%
Lenoir CC 3,335 435 172 40%
Martin CC 899 119 43 36%
Mayland CC 1,925 146 74 51%
McDowell TCC 1,176 136 48 35%
Mitchell CC 2,367 489 282 58%
Montgomery CC 1,027 117 30 26%
Nash CC 2,655 466 152 33%
Pamlico CC 543 17 12 71%
Piedmont CC 2,714 250 74 30%
Pitt CC 5,876 1,357 412 30%
Randolph CC 2,468 399 39 10%
Richmond CC 2,110 224 132 59%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 73 48 66%
Robeson CC 3,693 294 105 36%
Rockingham CC 2,043 392 109 28%
Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,137 874 226 26%
Sampson CC 1,696 165 55 33%
Sandhills CC 3,732 606 244 40%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 289 71 25%
Southeastern CC 2,373 319 102 32%
Southwestern CC 2,248 258 70 27%
Stanly CC 2,435 348 54 16%
Surry CC 3,281 583 198 34%
Tri-County CC 1,168 167 68 41%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 529 135 26%
Wake TCC 12,296 2,122 216 10%
Wayne CC 3,517 610 225 37%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 429 173 40%
Wilkes CC 2,831 448 236 53%
Wilson CC 2,082 263 72 27%
System Total 205,803 30,265 9,076 30%
46
47
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
MEASURE C:
Number of Employers and Trainees Served by
Small Business Centers and Customized
Training Programs (NEIT, FIT, and CIT)
Description/Definition—Number of employers and individuals served by categorical
programs created specifically to address employers’ needs. This measure is designed to
provide information on specific activities of community colleges that promote the
economic development of the state.
Methodology and Data Source—Information on the number of trainees, projects,
businesses, and individuals served through the categorical programs are collected
annually by the Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina
Community College System Office.
Performance Target— The programs were designed to provide specialized services and
were not intended to be "numbers driven." Fluctuations in numbers from year to year
reflect various factors such as funding availability, scope of the projects, and local
demand.
Results—In 2007-08, number of trainees in Customized Training for Job Growth
(formerly NEIT) decreased by 11.8 percent over last year’s figure, while the number of
trainees in Customized Training for Technology Investment (formerly CIT) increased by
19.6 percent during the same period of time. Number of trainees in Customized Training
for Productivity Enhancement (formerly FIT) significantly decreased by 42.5 percent in
the fiscal year of 2007-08.
For Small Business Center Network, number of seminar participants slightly decreased
by 0.7 percent in 2007-08. Number of counsels and number of continuing education and
curriculum course participants also decreased by 11 percent and 23.7 percent,
respectively. However, number of projects in Customized Training for Technology
Investment (formerly CIT) grew by 79 percent in 2007-08.
48
CUSTOMIZED TRAINING FOR JOB GROWTH (formerly NEIT)
YEAR
TRAINEES
PROJECTS
2003-04 10,117 121
2004-05
12,398
164
2005-06 23,799 197
2006-07 19,380 208
2007-08
17,087
187
CUSTOMIZED TRAINING FOR PRODUCTIVITY ENHANCEMENT (formerly FIT)
YEAR TRAINEES INDUSTRIES
2003-04 10,559 701
2004-05
11,159
797
2005-06 10,557 623
2006-07
2007-08
10,728
6,170
563
465
49
SMALL BUSINESS CENTER NETWORK
YEAR
# OF
CENTERS
PARTICIPANTS
COUNSEL
REFERRAL
EXT./CURR.
COURSE
PARTICIPANT
2003-04 58 44,475 6,517 5,831 12,561
2004-05
58
44,993
7,205
5,310
15,806
2005-06 58 51,312 6,117 4,873 14,591
2006-07 58 55,526 5,333 4,365 14,922
2007-08
58
55,151
4,744
N/A*
11,388
* Information not available.
CUSTOMIZED TRAINING FOR TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT (formerly CIT)
YEAR
TRAINEES
PROJECTS
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
297
1,253
1,498
12
19
34
50
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
MEASURE D:
Employment Status of Graduates
Description/Definition— Proportion of identified community college completers who are
employed within one year of last attendance.
Methodology and Data Sources—The North Carolina Common Follow-up System
(CFS) tracks students’ employment status after they leave the colleges. The Common
Follow-up System (CFS) is a cooperative venture of participating state agencies under the
auspices of the North Carolina State Occupational Information Coordinating Committee
(NC SOICC). The CFS provides a highly efficient and cost effective method for
collecting follow-up information for education, employment, and training program
participants statewide. The CFS is maintained by the Employment Security Commission
(ESC).
Each year the agencies involved in the CFS submit unit record data on participants to the
ESC. Among the agencies included in this process are the public high schools,
community colleges, and the four-year public universities. Each agency's data are
matched against the Unemployment Insurance (UI) files and the other participating
agencies' files. A database containing information on employment, employer, quarterly
wages, receipt of unemployment benefits, and participation in other agencies' programs is
returned to each submitting agency. The database each agency receives is limited to the
participants that the agency submits for the data match. This is to say, the database
received by community colleges has information only on community college students.
Once the CFS database is received, it is matched against the CRPFAR (Curriculum
Registration, Progress, and Financial Aid Report) database and the following year
curriculum student registration data. This matching is conducted to determine
demographic characteristics of the participants, such as students' completion status at the
end of the academic year and whether they re-enroll the following year. Students who
obtain an associate degree, certificate, or diploma in the year given and do not re-enroll in
any of the colleges the following year are defined as "exit completers."
Students who have wages in any quarter during the year are considered employed. Those
who are found both in registration records and UI records but have no quarterly wages
during the year and have applied for unemployment insurance benefits or job services of
the Employment Security Council are considered unemployed. Individuals who are not
found in the UI records are omitted from the analysis. This would include individuals
who are working out-of-state, who are enrolled in a four-year college or university and
not working, who never entered the labor market, etc.
Performance Target— The performance target is 95 percent of completers are to be
employed.
51
Results—Data on 18,021 graduates of the 2006-07 academic year were collected.
System average employment rate was 99.69 percent. All 58 community colleges met the
performance target.
PERCENT OF 2006-07 GRADUATES EMPLOYED WITHIN ONE YEAR OF COMPLETION
College FTE
Number of
Graduates
(minus inmates
and missing
students)
Percent of 2006-07
Graduates Employed
Within One Year of
Graduating
Alamance CC 3,871 539 99.44%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 608 99.84%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 141 99.29%
Bladen CC 1,399 95 100.00%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 127 100.00%
Brunswick CC 1,548 157 100.00%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 392 99.74%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 718 99.58%
Carteret CC 1,751 140 98.57%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 484 100.00%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 390 100.00%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 753 99.60%
Cleveland CC 2,944 293 99.32%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 352 98.86%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 199 99.50%
Craven CC 2,751 230 99.57%
Davidson County CC 3,663 492 99.59%
Durham TCC 4,622 340 99.71%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 189 99.47%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 684 99.71%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 731 99.86%
Gaston College 4,691 432 100.00%
Guilford TCC 9,882 791 99.62%
Halifax CC 1,557 199 100.00%
Haywood CC 1,903 193 100.00%
Isothermal CC 2,094 200 99.50%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 202 99.50%
Johnston CC 4,158 366 99.73%
Lenoir CC 3,335 273 100.00%
Martin CC 899 85 100.00%
Mayland CC 1,925 109 100.00%
McDowell TCC 1,176 142 99.30%
Mitchell CC 2,367 190 99.47%
Montgomery CC 1,027 155 100.00%
Nash CC 2,655 215 99.53%
Pamlico CC 543 71 100.00%
Piedmont CC 2,714 269 99.63%
Pitt CC 5,876 650 99.38%
Randolph CC 2,468 202 100.00%
Richmond CC 2,110 155 100.00%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 79 100.00%
Robeson CC 3,693 182 100.00%
Rockingham CC 2,043 232 99.57%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 432 100.00%
Sampson CC 1,696 154 100.00%
Sandhills CC 3,732 302 100.00%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 174 99.43%
Southeastern CC 2,373 164 100.00%
Southwestern CC 2,248 252 99.60%
Stanly CC 2,435 262 100.00%
Surry CC 3,281 354 99.72%
Tri-County CC 1,168 92 97.83%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 349 99.43%
Wake TCC 12,296 909 99.78%
Wayne CC 3,517 303 99.67%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 321 99.69%
Wilkes CC 2,831 281 100.00%
Wilson CC 2,082 226 99.56%
System Total 205,803 18,021 99.69%
52
53
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
MEASURE E:
Employer Satisfaction With Graduates
Description/Definition—Percentage of a sample of businesses who employ individuals
trained or educated by a community college indicating that they are satisfied with the
quality of those employees as it relates to the community college training and education.
This measure is intended primarily to determine the satisfaction of organizations whose
employees have been trained through a community college.
Methodology and Data Source — Data are collected through a college administered
survey, with each college using a standard set of questions. The results of the surveys are
submitted to the Research and Performance Management section of the System Office
annually
Performance Target — Eighty-five percent (85%) of employers surveyed will report
satisfaction with the skills of employees trained or educated by community colleges.
Results— In 2007-2008, 9,251 employers of community college graduates were
surveyed. A total of 2,405 surveys were completed and returned by employers, for a 26
percent response rate. Overall, 94 percent of those employers who responded to the
survey indicated that they were satisfied with the job preparation of community college
graduates. Fifty-seven (57) colleges met the performance target for this measure.
PERCENT OF EMPLOYERS SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF PROGRAM COMPLETERS, 2007-08
INSTITUTION FTE
NUMBER OF
EMPLOYERS
SURVEYED
RESPONSE
RATE
PERCENT
SATISFIED
Alamance CC 3,871 65 35% 90%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 73 64% 98%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 179 42% 98%
Bladen CC 1,399 30 27% 100%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 100 25% 95%
Brunswick CC 1,548 96 14% 100%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 1,161 17% 91%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 140 24% 97%
Carteret CC 1,751 50 30% 93%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 115 46% 96%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 142 20% 93%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 249 45% 98%
Cleveland CC 2,944 428 6% 88%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 175 49% 97%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 54 57% 100%
Craven CC 2,751 189 10% 95%
Davidson County CC 3,663 64 58% 97%
Durham TCC 4,622 102 36% 97%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 94 70% 100%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 99 49% 94%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 652 7% 100%
Gaston College 4,691 1,311 4% 86%
Guilford TCC 9,882 343 15% 100%
Halifax CC 1,557 35 40% 100%
Haywood CC 1,903 54 93% 100%
Isothermal CC 2,094 56 20% 100%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 250 6% 100%
Johnston CC 4,158 71 61% 95%
Lenoir CC 3,335 61 57% 94%
Martin CC 899 15 100% 93%
Mayland CC 1,925 61 54% 100%
McDowell TCC 1,176 63 16% 100%
Mitchell CC 2,367 60 20% 100%
Montgomery CC 1,027 33 27% 100%
Nash CC 2,655 31 100% 100%
Pamlico CC 543 15 67% 100%
Piedmont CC 2,714 45 24% 100%
Pitt CC 5,876 133 86% 98%
Randolph CC 2,468 225 34% 94%
Richmond CC 2,110 101 26% 100%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 20 50% 100%
Robeson CC 3,693 100 33% 100%
Rockingham CC 2,043 33 100% 100%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 164 35% 96%
Sampson CC 1,696 28 54% 100%
Sandhills CC 3,732 100 73% 100%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 296 20% 88%
Southeastern CC 2,373 202 6% 92%
Southwestern CC 2,248 130 62% 99%
Stanly CC 2,435 65 74% 94%
Surry CC 3,281 60 53% 94%
Tri-County CC 1,168 117 13% 93%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 98 98% 99%
Wake TCC 12,296 121 20% 100%
Wayne CC 3,517 125 63% 97%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 136 24% 100%
Wilkes CC 2,831 169 7% 83%
Wilson CC 2,082 67 48% 97%
System Totals 205,803 9,251 26% 94%
54
55
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR III: DIVERSE POPULATIONS’ LEARNING NEEDS
At the core of the Community College System's mission is its open door policy. Community
colleges, in the words of founding father Dallas Herring, "take people from where they are to
where they want to be." The special mission of the community colleges is to serve those who
did not have opportunities to learn or who missed out on those opportunities, and to serve
people who have special problems to overcome. Thus, there is an emphasis on reaching out
to the under-served: dropouts, handicapped, economically or educationally disadvantaged
and other groups who are not traditionally included in higher education.
There are many issues facing community colleges today, but perhaps none strike at the core
of our mission as hard as does the reality of limited resources in this time of economic
uncertainty. How long can the "open door" remain open when personnel, services, and
facilities are strained to their limits? As the demands on community colleges continue to rise
without a corresponding increase in resources, the "open door" that is the path to opportunity
for so many closes just a bit more.
The state needs to raise the productivity of its citizens, and these are times in which people
have a harder time being self-sufficient and raising families unless they have an education.
Providing access to education, a constitutional duty of the state, is increasingly important to
individuals and society. A successful community college system will reach out to under-
served groups.
The measures identified as indicators of the System's success in meeting the learning needs
of diverse populations are:
A. Number and Percentage of Dropouts Annually Served by Basic Skills Programs
B. Number of GEDs and AHSDs Awarded Compared to the Number of Dropouts Statewide
C. Percentage of Basic Skills Students and Recent High School Graduates Enrolling in a
Community College
D. Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second Language (ESL)
E. Number of Under-Represented Students Enrolled Per Category
F. Percentage of Students Receiving Financial Aid and Amount of Aid Compared With Cost
of Attendance
G. Percentage of Population of Service Area Enrolled
H. Goal Completion for Completers
56
DIVERSE POPULATIONS
LEARNING NEEDS
MEASURE A:
Number and Percentage of Dropouts Annually Served
by Basic Skills Programs
Description/Definition—The number and percentage of high school dropouts who enroll in a
basic skills program at a community college. Basic skills programs include Adult Basic
Education, Adult High School, General Educational Development (GED), Compensatory
Education, and English as a Second Language.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on last year of high school attendance and number of
years of high school completed are gathered at the time a student registers for classes. The
last year of high school attendance data is matched against initial enrollment year to
determine the number of students who enroll in a community college basic skills program
within one year of dropping out of high school.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been established for this measure.
Results—In 2007-2008, community colleges enrolled 15,652 high school dropouts who
dropped out of school during 2007-08, which was a 3.9 percent increase in enrollment for the
academic year 2007-08. This "safety net" feature continues to be an important role played by
community colleges.
NUMBER OF RECENT HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS WHO
ENROLLED IN A BASIC SKILLS PROGRAM
YEAR DROPPED
OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL
YEAR ENROLLED IN A
COMMUNITY COLLEGE
NUMBER
ENROLLED
1/1/03-6/30/04
1/1/04-6/30/05
1/1/05-6/30/06
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
12,346
12,903
13,359
1/1/06-6/30/07
1/1/07-6/30/08
2006-07
2007-08
15,064
15,652
NUMBER OF HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS WHO ENROLLED
IN A BASIC SKILLS PROGRAM AT A COMMUNITY COLLEGE DURING 2007-2008
INSTITUTION
TOTAL
FTE
NUMBER
ENROLLED
Alamance CC 3,871 257
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 494
Beaufort County CC 1,821 101
Bladen CC 1,399 126
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 307
Brunswick CC 1,548 123
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 326
Cape Fear CC 7,259 556
Carteret CC 1,751 173
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 213
Central Carolina CC 5,118 465
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 1,217
Cleveland CC 2,944 84
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 880
College of The Albemarle 2,351 358
Craven CC 2,751 197
Davidson County CC 3,663 434
Durham TCC 4,622 186
Edgecombe CC 2,122 192
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 344
Forsyth TCC 6,661 811
Gaston College 4,691 315
Guilford TCC 9,882 415
Halifax CC 1,557 193
Haywood CC 1,903 127
Isothermal CC 2,094 232
James Sprunt CC 1,348 103
Johnston CC 4,158 175
Lenoir CC 3,335 224
Martin CC 899 93
Mayland CC 1,925 95
McDowell TCC 1,176 70
Mitchell CC 2,367 228
Montgomery CC 1,027 31
Nash CC 2,655 190
Pamlico CC 543 20
Piedmont CC 2,714 138
Pitt CC 5,876 410
Randolph CC 2,468 286
Richmond CC 2,110 292
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 22
Robeson CC 3,693 162
Rockingham CC 2,043 125
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 183
Sampson CC 1,696 367
Sandhills CC 3,732 244
South Piedmont CC 2,220 199
Southeastern CC 2,373 126
Southwestern CC 2,248 349
Stanly CC 2,435 312
Surry CC 3,281 187
Tri-County CC 1,168 75
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 406
Wake TCC 12,296 527
Wayne CC 3,517 280
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 208
Wilkes CC 2,831 156
Wilson CC 2,082 243
System Total 205,803 15,652
57
58
DIVERSE POPULATIONS
LEARNING NEEDS
MEASURE B:
Number of GEDs and AHSDs Awarded Compared to
the Number of Dropouts Statewide
Description/Definition—Number of GEDs and Adult High School Diplomas (AHSDs)
awarded by community colleges annually compared to the number of public school dropouts.
This measure serves as an indicator of the degree to which community colleges reduce the
total pool of people in North Carolina with less than a high school education.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on the number of GEDs and AHSDs awarded are
gathered and reported annually by the North Carolina Community College System Office.
Data on the number of dropouts is provided by the North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction.
Performance Target—By 2001, an increase by 10 percent the number of individuals
enrolled in the GED and AHSD programs that complete the program has been set.
Results—Number of GEDs and AHSDs awarded in 2007-08 was 15,307 which was a 1.1
percent increase from the previous year. Number of students added in the dropout pool
decreased by 15.2% (1,279) in 2007-08.
NUMBER OF GEDs AND AHSDs AWARDED COMPARED TO THE
NUMBER OF DROPOUTS STATEWIDE
YEAR
NEW DROPOUTS ADDED
TO DROPOUT POOL
GED/AHS DIPLOMAS
AWARDED
INCREASE IN
DROPOUT POOL
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
20,035
20,175
22,180
14,419
15,910
14,922
5,616
4,265
7,258
2006-07
2007-08
23,550
22,434
15,144
15,307
8,406
7,127
NUMBER OF GEDs/AHSDs AWARDED, 2007-2008
INSTITUTION
TOTAL
FTE AHS GED
Alamance CC 3,871 44 285
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 4 527
Beaufort County CC 1,821 156
Bladen CC 1,399 13 74
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 2 230
Brunswick CC 1,548 27 87
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 92 184
Cape Fear CC 7,259 157 184
Carteret CC 1,751 34 155
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 341
Central Carolina CC 5,118 121 423
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 276 644
Cleveland CC 2,944 51 71
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 21 269
College of the Albemarle 2,351 55 309
Craven CC 2,751 26 134
Davidson County CC 3,663 49 250
Durham TCC 4,622 42 227
Edgecombe CC 2,122 5 185
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 32 114
Forsyth TCC 6,661 94 380
Gaston College 4,691 155 337
Guilford TCC 9,882 32 230
Halifax CC 1,557 143
Haywood CC 1,903 12 73
Isothermal CC 2,094 72 172
James Sprunt CC 1,348 7 50
Johnston CC 4,158 36 137
Lenoir CC 3,335 11 204
Martin CC 899 6 71
Mayland CC 1,925 228
McDowell TCC 1,176 107
Mitchell CC 2,367 255
Montgomery CC 1,027 3 84
Nash CC 2,655 20 139
Pamlico CC 543 32
Piedmont CC 2,714 162
Pitt CC 5,876 67 183
Randolph CC 2,468 27 282
Richmond CC 2,110 21 293
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 166
Robeson CC 3,693 93 59
Rockingham CC 2,043 207
Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,137 538
Sampson CC 1,696 245
Sandhills CC 3,732 14 294
South Piedmont CC 2,220 26 285
Southeastern CC 2,373 104
Southwestern CC 2,248 13 349
Stanly CC 2,435 120 69
Surry CC 3,281 206
Tri-County CC 1,168 115
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 121 480
Wake TCC 12,296 57 629
Wayne CC 3,517 95 227
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 62 408
Wilkes CC 2,831 35 134
Wilson CC 2,082 29 102
System Total 205,803 2,279 13,028
59
60
DIVERSE POPULATIONS
LEARNING NEEDS
MEASURE C:
Number of Basic Skills Students and Recent High
School Graduates Enrolling in a Community College
Description/Definition—Number and percentage increase of basic skills students and recent
high school graduates who enroll in a community college. The measure is designed to
determine the number and percentage that move directly from basic skills programs into a
community college curriculum or occupational extension program, as well as the number and
percentage of high school students who directly go to a curriculum program in a community
college. The tracking of basic skills students into curriculum or occupational extension is
important for determining the success of community colleges in encouraging students to get
the necessary skills for today's marketplace.
Methodology and Data Source—The number of recent high school graduates enrolling in a
community college is reported annually by the Information Services Section of the North
Carolina Community College System Office. The number of basic skills students enrolling
in a curriculum or occupational extension course are determined by tracking basic skills
students from one year to the next utilizing the registration files submitted by the colleges.
This analysis is done by the Research and Performance Management section in the
President’s Office, North Carolina Community College System Office.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the percentage of each target group that enroll in a
community college by 10 percent.
Results—Number of basic skills students enrolling in curriculum or occupational extension
courses decreased by 2.5 percent, from 11,549 in 2006-07 to 11,260 in 2007-08. The
enrollment of the 2006-07 high school graduates in community colleges in the academic year
of 2007-08 (29,603) represented a 14.7 percent increase from the previous year’s enrollment.
61
TRANSITION OF BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS TO OCCUPATIONAL EXTENSION/
CURRICULUM PROGRAMS AND HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES TO CURRICULUM
PROGRAMS
YEAR ENROLLED
BASIC SKILLS STUDENTS
HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES
NUMBER
PERCENT
INCREASE
NUMBER
PERCENT
INCREASE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
12,333
12,503
12,039
11.3 %
1.4 %
- 3.7 %
22,858
24,323
24,058
2.5 %
6.4 %
- 1.1 %
2006-07
2007-08
11,549
11,260
- 4 %
-2.5%
25,804
29,603
7.3 %
14.7%
62
DIVERSE POPULATIONS
LEARNING NEEDS
MEASURE D:
Unduplicated Headcount in English as a Second
Language (ESL)
Description/Definition—The number of individuals enrolled in English as a Second
Language (ESL) programs in North Carolina Community Colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Enrollment data on English as a Second Language are
collected and reported annually by the North Carolina Community College System Office.
Source of the data is the Data Warehouse.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the enrollment in English as a Second Language
programs by 10 percent.
Results—Total number of students served by ESL program was 35,154, which decreased by
5.7 percent from 2006-07 to 2007-08.
UNDUPLICATED HEADCOUNT ENROLLMENT IN
ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (ESL)
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
YEAR
UNDUPLICATED
ENROLLMENT
% INCREASE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
36,740
36,883
35,258
-1.9%
0.4%
-4.4%
2006-07
2007-08
37,272
35,154
5.7%
-5.7%
UNDUPLICATED ENROLLMENT IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE, 2007-2008
College of the Albemarle 2,351 10,855 114,775 9.46%
Craven CC 2,751 16,337 73,870 22.12%
Davidson County CC 3,663 16,893 149,755 11.28%
Durham TCC 4,622 25,509 294,936 8.65%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 9,263 38,774 23.89%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 33,976 230,012 14.77%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 30,337 290,788 10.43%
Gaston College 4,691 22,517 208,681 10.79%
Guilford TCC 9,882 40,595 350,156 11.59%
Halifax CC 1,557 7,475 58,580 12.76%
Haywood CC 1,903 6,772 45,631 14.84%
Isothermal CC 2,094 10,734 63,854 16.81%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 8,263 39,303 21.02%
Johnston CC 4,158 16,167 115,213 14.03%
Lenoir CC 3,335 14,113 67,494 20.91%
Martin CC 899 4,339 43,501 9.97%
Mayland CC 1,925 6,859 42,649 16.08%
McDowell TCC 1,176 8,239 34,202 24.09%
Mitchell CC 2,367 11,696 112,066 10.44%
Montgomery CC 1,027 4,227 20,862 20.26%
Nash CC 2,655 12,464 70,088 17.78%
Pamlico CC 543 1,735 10,566 16.42%
Piedmont CC 2,714 8,906 47,314 18.82%
Pitt CC 5,876 19,762 115,941 17.04%
Randolph CC 2,468 11,762 105,246 11.18%
Richmond CC 2,110 7,689 61,922 12.42%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 3,616 50,166 7.21%
Robeson CC 3,693 13,491 92,885 14.52%
Rockingham CC 2,043 10,187 71,100 14.33%
Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,137 20,559 224,147 9.17%
Sampson CC 1,696 7,552 47,676 15.84%
Sandhills CC 3,732 12,121 96,139 12.61%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 10,932 149,966 7.29%
Southeastern CC 2,373 10,528 41,160 25.58%
Southwestern CC 2,248 8,685 67,621 12.84%
Stanly CC 2,435 9,102 44,982 20.23%
Surry CC 3,281 12,839 84,637 15.17%
Tri-County CC 1,168 4,815 36,640 13.14%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 17,294 47,402 36.48%
Wake TCC 12,296 58,915 617,035 9.55%
Wayne CC 3,517 13,527 85,700 15.78%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 13,873 67,953 20.42%
Wilkes CC 2,831 13,248 81,996 16.16%
Wilson CC 2,082 11,013 58,321 18.88%
System Total 205,803 829,146 6,831,422 12.14%
68
69
DIVERSE POPULATIONS
LEARNING NEEDS
MEASURE H:
Goal Completion for Completers
Description/Definition—The proportion of graduates of certificate, diploma, and degree
programs who report that their primary goal in attending has been met.
Methodology and Data Source—Data are collected by a survey, with each college using a
standard set of questions. A response rate of 50% is suggested, and a minimum of 15
respondents will be required to report the data at the institutional level.
Performance Target—Performance target for percent of completers who achieve their goal
is 95 percent.
Results—In 2007-2008, 57 community colleges met the performance target. The system
average of percent achieving their goal was 99 percent.
PERCENT OF COMPLETERS WHO REPORT MEETING THEIR GOAL FOR ATTENDING A COMMUNITY COLLEGE, 2007-2008
INSTITUTION TOTAL FTE
NUMBER OF
RESPONSES
PERCENT
ACHIEVED
GOAL
Alamance CC 3,871 231 100%
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 365 100%
Beaufort County CC 1,821 108 98%
Bladen CC 1,399 81 94%
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 121 100%
Brunswick CC 1,548 102 97%
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 290 99%
Cape Fear CC 7,259 851 99%
Carteret CC 1,751 144 100%
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 659 100%
Central Carolina CC 5,118 363 100%
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 575 100%
Cleveland CC 2,944 220 100%
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 722 100%
College of The Albemarle 2,351 204 99%
Craven CC 2,751 179 98%
Davidson County CC 3,663 242 98%
Durham TCC 4,622 170 99%
Edgecombe CC 2,122 222 99%
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 617 100%
Forsyth TCC 6,661 345 98%
Gaston College 4,691 647 100%
Guilford TCC 9,882 770 100%
Halifax CC 1,557 146 100%
Haywood CC 1,903 139 99%
Isothermal CC 2,094 150 99%
James Sprunt CC 1,348 99 99%
Johnston CC 4,158 217 100%
Lenoir CC 3,335 193 99%
Martin CC 899 37 97%
Mayland CC 1,925 255 99%
McDowell TCC 1,176 190 100%
Mitchell CC 2,367 148 100%
Montgomery CC 1,027 80 99%
Nash CC 2,655 143 99%
Pamlico CC 543 49 100%
Piedmont CC 2,714 175 99%
Pitt CC 5,876 404 99%
Randolph CC 2,468 153 98%
Richmond CC 2,110 161 100%
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 126 98%
Robeson CC 3,693 197 98%
Rockingham CC 2,043 207 99%
Rowan-Cabarrus CC 5,137 214 99%
Sampson CC 1,696 124 100%
Sandhills CC 3,732 280 99%
South Piedmont CC 2,220 237 99%
Southeastern CC 2,373 151 100%
Southwestern CC 2,248 171 99%
Stanly CC 2,435 225 100%
Surry CC 3,281 261 100%
Tri-County CC 1,168 80 100%
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 236 100%
Wake TCC 12,296 439 100%
Wayne CC 3,517 393 100%
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 279 99%
Wilkes CC 2,831 202 97%
Wilson CC 2,082 175 99%
System Total 205,803 14,964 99%
70
71
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR IV: RESOURCES
For any institution, educational or industrial, there is a critical mass of resources necessary
for the organization to perform at an optimal level. When resources fall below this critical
mass level, or when increased demand outstrips available resources, performance declines
and quality suffers. The level of resources can be thought of as an indicator of the health of
an organization.
An examination of the colleges' resources will indicate the capability of the institutions in
providing quality educational programs. Whereas resources alone do not guarantee that a
quality education will be delivered, without appropriate resources, a college cannot provide
students with an adequate learning experience.
The measures selected as indicators of the health of the System and the colleges as
determined by resources are:
A. Percentage of College Libraries Meeting ALA Standards
B. Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between Program Areas Made by Community
Colleges
C. Average Nine-Month Faculty Salaries as a Percentage of the SREB Average
D. Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty With Less Than Five Years of Experience
E. Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in Professional Development Activities
F. Percentage of Facilities Meeting the "Satisfactory" Building Condition
G. Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar Allotment to Curriculum FTE Dollar
Allotment
72
RESOURCES MEASURE A: Percentage of College Libraries Meeting the ALA
Standards
Description/Definition— The percentage of colleges meeting the Association of College and
Research Libraries (ACRL) standards for community, junior and technical colleges.
Specifically, this measure looks at percentage meeting the standards for number of book
titles, serial subscriptions, expenditure minus salaries per FTE, library staff, and square
footage.
Methodology and Data Source—Library data have been collected by the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES) in odd numbered year. The data are published in the Statistical
Abstract of Higher Education in North Carolina, an annual publication of the UNC-General
Administration. Data available from this publication are then compared with the standards
set by the ACRL to determine which colleges meet the standards. It should be noted that the
ACRL standards vary based on FTE of the college.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results— Library data for 2007-08 were not available at the time of 2009 CSF publication.
However, historical data showed that most colleges didn’t meet the measures and a handful
of colleges met only minimum level of ACRL standard in the past. This raises serious
concerns about under-funding of the community college libraries in North Carolina, and its
conditions.
LEARNING RESOURCE CENTERS: COMPLIANCE WITH ACRL STANDARDS, 2006-07
MEASURE BELOW
STANDARD
MINIMUM
LEVEL
EXCELLENT
LEVEL
# % # % # %
# of Books (Paper
Volumes)
48 83% 7 12% 3 5%
Serial Subscriptions 53 91% 4 7% 1 2%
Expenditure Minus
Salaries per FTE 54 93% 4 7% 0 0%
Library Staff 55 95% 3 5% 0 0%
Square Footage 58 100% 0 0% 0 0%
73
RESOURCES MEASURE B: Total Dollar Amount of Budget Transfers Between
Program Areas Made by Community Colleges
Description/Definition—Purpose of this measure is to serve as an indicator of the
effectiveness of the resource allocation model being used by the North Carolina Community
College System. The measure is simply the total dollar amount of budget transfers across
program areas made by the community colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the data were the budget accounting records
maintained by the Business and Finance Division of the North Carolina Community College
System Office. The total dollar amount transferred was calculated by the Business and
Finance Division by comparing the initial allocation of funds with final expenditures.
Performance Target—No performance target was set for this measure.
Results—In 2007-08, a total of $1,754,355 of instructional funds were transferred from
personnel to other costs and other program areas by community colleges. This represents 0.3
percent of the total initial allocation.
YEAR
TOTAL DOLLAR AMOUNT
OF TRANSFER
BETWEEN PROGRAM AREAS
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
$7,710,690
$3,590,801
$11,028
2006-07
2007-08
$9,813
$1,754,355
74
RESOURCES MEASURE C: Average Nine-Month Faculty Salary as a Percentage
of the SREB Average
Description/Definition— The nine-month average faculty salary for full-time curriculum
faculty compared with the nine-month average faculty salary for full-time curriculum faculty
at public, two-year institutions in the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states. To
allow comparisons across states, a nine-month salary figure is calculated for full-time
curriculum faculty based on a computed nine-month salary.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the North Carolina community college faculty
salaries is the fall staff data file submitted annually by each college. Total monthly salary for
each full-time curriculum faculty is selected from the college data files. A nine-month salary
for each full-time faculty is then calculated by multiplying the total monthly salary by 9. An
average nine-month salary is then calculated for the college and the System. The SREB
nine-month average salary is obtained from an annual publication titled SREB (Southern
Regional Education Board) Data Exchange. The average nine-month faculty salary is
presented by state and an overall SREB average is calculated and presented.
This measure also presents data on the ranking of North Carolina among the 16 SREB states
in faculty salaries and calculates the percentage of North Carolina faculty salaries as a
function of the SREB average nine-month faculty salary.
Performance Target—By 2001, increase the average nine-month salaries of full-time
curriculum faculty and staff to 83.3 percent of the SREB average.
Results—In 2007-08, the average nine-month salary of full-time curriculum faculty was
$46,253 as compared to the SREB average of $50,191. It was 92.2 percent of the SREB
average. The performance target of 83.3 percent of SREB average was achieved, and the
SREB rank improved to be 12th
in 2007-08.
75
AVERAGE 9-MONTH SALARY OF FULL-TIME CURRICULUM FACULTY AT
TWO-YEAR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS: A COMPARISON OF NORTH CAROLINA
TO THE SREB AVERAGE, FROM 2003-04 TO 2007-2008
ACADEMIC
YEAR
NC 9-MONTH
SREB
AVERAGE
SREB
AVERAGE
SREB RANK
% of SREB
AVERAGE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
$37,584
$40,162
$41,517
$43,843
$45,248
$46,732
16*
15*
15*
85.7%
88.8%
88.8%
2006-07 $44,008 $48,440 15* 90.9%
2007-08 $46,253 $50,191 12* 92.2%
* Ranking of 16 Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states.
Delaware became the 16th state to join SREB.
76
RESOURCES MEASURE D: Retention Rate for Full-Time Faculty With Less Than
Five Years of Experience
Definition/Description— The number and percentage of full-time faculty with less than five
years of experience who are retained the following year.
Methodology and Data Source— Source of data for this measure is the fall staff data file
submitted annually by each college. A subset of the data file is created which contains data
on all full-time faculty members with less than five years of experience. This data file is then
compared with the fall staff data file for the following year to determine the number and
percentage of full-time faculty with less than five years of experience that are retained.
Performance Target— By 2001, increase by 5 percent the year-to-year retention of full-time
faculty with less than five years of experience.
Results—The retention rate of faculty with less than five years of experience decreased by
1.3% from 91.9% in 2006-2007 to 90.6% in 2007-2008.
RETENTION RATE FOR FULL-TIME FACULTY
WITH LESS THAN FIVE YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
YEAR
TOTAL NUMBER OF
FACULTY WITH LESS THAN
FIVE YEARS EXPERIENCE
NUMBER WHO
ARE RETAINED
PERCENT
RETAINED
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2,051
1,674
2,319
1,851
1,531
2,101
90.3%
91.5%
90.6%
2006-2007
2007-2008
2,286
1,931
2,102
1,750
91.9%
90.6%
77
RESOURCES MEASURE E: Number of Faculty and Staff Participating in
Professional Development Activities
Definition/Description— The number of faculty and staff who participate in TIER A funded
professional development activities.
Methodology and Data Source— The data are collected annually by the Academic and
Student Services Division of the North Carolina Community College System Office. The
data are submitted annually by the colleges to the System Office as a requirement for
receiving TIER A professional development funds.
Performance Target— By 2001, to increase the participation of faculty and staff in
professional development programs by 10%.
Results—In 2007-2008, 1,658 faculty and staff participated in TIER A sponsored
professional development activities, which was an 35.4 percent decrease from last year’s
figure.
NUMBER OF FACULTY & STAFF PARTICIPATING
IN TIER A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
YEAR # OF FACULTY & STAFF
PARTICIPATING
% INCREASE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2,447
2,383
2,692
- 11.7 %
- 2.6 %
13 %
2006-07
2007-08
2,568
1,658
- 4.6 %
-35.4%
NUMBER OF FACULTY AND STAFF PARTICIPATING
IN TIER A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2007-2008
INSTITUTION
TOTAL
FTE
NUMBER OF
FACULTY & STAFF
Alamance CC 3,871 20
Asheville-Buncombe TCC 6,186 14
Beaufort County CC 1,821 26
Bladen CC 1,399 10
Blue Ridge CC 2,105 16
Brunswick CC 1,548 14
Caldwell CC & TI 4,135 20
Cape Fear CC 7,259 21
Carteret CC 1,751 13
Catawba Valley CC 4,733 39
Central Carolina CC 5,118 45
Central Piedmont CC 14,459 18
Cleveland CC 2,944 18
Coastal Carolina CC 4,348 18
College of the Albemarle 2,351 14
Craven CC 2,751 19
Davidson County CC 3,663 25
Durham TCC 4,622 28
Edgecombe CC 2,122 12
Fayetteville TCC 10,252 128
Forsyth TCC 6,661 18
Gaston College 4,691 41
Guilford TCC 9,882 23
Halifax CC 1,557 16
Haywood CC 1,903 8
Isothermal CC 2,094 10
James Sprunt CC 1,348 16
Johnston CC 4,158 26
Lenoir CC 3,335 31
Martin CC 899 35
Mayland CC 1,925 29
McDowell TCC 1,176 23
Mitchell CC 2,367 14
Montgomery CC 1,027 50
Nash CC 2,655 15
Pamlico CC 543 13
Piedmont CC 2,714 18
Pitt CC 5,876 11
Randolph CC 2,468 29
Richmond CC 2,110 71
Roanoke-Chowan CC 876 36
Robeson CC 3,693 9
Rockingham CC 2,043 68
Rowan Cabarrus CC 5,137 43
Sampson CC 1,696 33
Sandhills CC 3,732 22
South Piedmont CC 2,220 218
Southeastern CC 2,373 11
Southwestern CC 2,248 12
Stanly CC 2,435 9
Surry CC 3,281 19
Tri-County CC 1,168 24
Vance-Granville CC 4,237 7
Wake TCC 12,296 65
Wayne CC 3,517 20
Western Piedmont CC 3,118 16
Wilkes CC 2,831 17
Wilson CC 2,082 14
System Total 205,803 1,658
78
79
RESOURCES MEASURE F: Percentage of Facilities Meeting the "Satisfactory"
Building Condition
Definition/Description—Percentage of community college facilities that meet "satisfactory"
building conditions as measured in the Annual Facilities Inventory and Utilization Study.
"Satisfactory" is defined as the facility is suitable for continued use with normal
maintenance.
Methodology and Data Source—Data are collected from the colleges and analyzed annually
by the Higher Education Facilities Commission housed at UNC-General Administration.
The rating of facilities as "satisfactory" is done by the individual colleges. The measure is
the percentage of all facilities that meet the satisfactory building condition.
Performance Target—By 2001, improve by 10 percent the statewide percentage of facilities
meeting "satisfactory" building conditions, as measured in the Annual Facilities Inventory
and Utilization Study.
Results— In 2007-08, 88.9 percent of statewide facilities met the "satisfactory" building
conditions, which was 0.8 percent increase from last year’s figure.
PERCENT OF STATEWIDE FACILITIES
MEETING “SATISFACTORY” BUILDING CONDITIONS
YEAR % MEETING
“SATISFACTORY”
% INCREASE
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
88.7 %
89.0 %
89.5 %
88.1%
-1.0 %
0.3 %
0.5 %
-1.4%
2007-08 88.9% 0.8%
80
RESOURCES MEASURE G: Ratio of Occupational Extension FTE Dollar
Allotment to Curriculum FTE Dollar Allotment
Description/Definition—Ratio of dollars allocated per occupational extension FTE to dollars
allocated per curriculum FTE generated by community colleges.
Methodology and Data Source—Source of the data is the Business and Finance Division of
the North Carolina Community College System Office. The measure is simply a ratio
comparing the dollar value of an occupational extension FTE to the dollar value of a
curriculum FTE.
Performance Target—By the year 2000, to increase the funding level of occupational
extension offerings to that of curriculum programs.
Results—In 2007-2008, the ratio of the occupational extension FTE dollar allotment to the
curriculum FTE dollar allotment was 1 to 1.047 (1:1.047), meaning that for every dollar
generated by an occupational extension FTE, $1.047 was generated by a curriculum FTE.
81
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR V: TECHNOLOGY
The application of technology to education represents a critical factor in the success of
community colleges meeting the education and training needs of the citizens of North
Carolina. Whether it is to meet the demands of employers for workers with the latest high-
tech skills or to meet the growing demand for education and training from people throughout
the state, the community colleges must continue to integrate technology into the way
programs are delivered and upgrade faculty on the uses of the new technology.
In order to meet the challenges of the technological challenges of the future, the community
college system must focus on three areas. First, the technological infrastructure that supports
the delivery of instruction must be fully developed. Second, faculty must be trained in the
use of the new technologies. Third, courses and programs that can be delivered by way of
these new technologies must be developed and made available.
The measures comprising the critical success factor of technology are:
A. Curriculum Unduplicated Headcount by Course Method of Instruction
B. Number of Colleges Connected to the North Carolina Information Highway
C. Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC License for Wireless Cable Systems
D. Number of Courses and Programs Offered via Tele-course, Wireless Cable Systems, the
Internet, Two-Way Video, etc.
E. Number of Courses Offered Through the NC Virtual Learning Community
82
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE A: Curriculum Unduplicated Headcounts by
Course Method of Instruction
Description/Definition— Unduplicated curriculum headcount of students taking only
distance learning courses, taking a combination of distance learning and traditional methods
of instruction courses, taking only traditional courses, and unknown. The numbers are
curriculum courses only, for this type of information on continuing education doesn’t exist.
Methodology and Data Source—Data are maintained by the Data Warehouse at the System
Office utilizing curriculum student registration files submitted by colleges each year. The
analysis is done by Research and Performance Management section, President’s Office at the
North Carolina Community College System Office.
Performance Target—No specific performance target for number of curriculum students
taking distance education or traditional courses has been set.
Results— In 2007-08, 35,299 students enrolled in one or more distance learning courses,
which represented 29.5% increase over 2006-07 figure. The same trend was shown in the
courses of a combination of distance and traditional education; 97,017 students enrolled in a
combination of the two types of courses, which was a 27.4% increase over last year.
Enrollment in the traditional courses only has decreased by 3.9% in 2007-08: 150,125.
CURRICULUM UNDUPLICATED HEADCOUNT BY COURSE METHOD OF
INSTRUCTION, FROM 2003-04 TO 2007-08
Academic Year
Distance
Learning
Only
Distance and
Traditional
Traditional
Only
Unknown
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
14,086
22,795
31,769
57,122
74,543
82,726
192,565
169,584
146,690
10,756
7,501
7,236
2006-07
2007-08
27,268
35,299
76,137
97,017
156,249
150,125
36,875
4,774
83
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE B: Number of Colleges Connected to the North
Carolina Information Highway
Description/Definition— This measure provides information on the number of community
colleges connected to the North Carolina Information Highway.
Methodology and Data Source—Data on the number of colleges connected to the North
Carolina Information Highway are maintained by Learning Technology Systems section in
the Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina Community
College System Office.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results—In 2007-08, all community colleges now have access to video conference services
and/or participate in North Carolina Information Highway (NCIH) – either as full video
service sites, per event subscribers, or via a local NCREN site: A total of 97 sites across the
state.
84
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE C: Number of Colleges Possessing the FCC
License for Wireless Cable Systems
Description/Definition— This measure is a count of the number of colleges that have been
granted a license for wireless cable systems. The measure supports objectives in the 1999-
2001 Strategic Plan to increase by 10 percent the number of education and training
opportunities available through alternate delivery systems.
Community colleges have applied to the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) for
wireless cable or ITFS (Instructional Television Fixed Service) licenses. ITFS is now called
EBS (Educational Broadband Service).
Methodology and Data Source— The Learning Technology Systems section in the
Technology and Workforce Development Division at the North Carolina Community College
System Office maintains the data on the number of colleges who have been granted a license
for wireless cable systems.
Performance Target—No performance target level has been set for this measure.
Results— In 2007-2008, 34 colleges have FCC Educational Broadband Service (EBS)
licenses.
85
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE D: Number of Courses and Programs Offered via
Tele-course, Wireless Cable, the Internet, Two-
Way Video, etc.
Description/Definition—Number of courses and programs offered and enrollment in courses
and programs offered through tele-courses, wireless cable, the Internet, two-way video, and
other alternate delivery systems. The measure supports the objective in the 1999-2001
Strategic Plan to increase by 10 percent the number of education and training opportunities
available through alternate delivery systems.
Methodology and Data Source— Data are maintained by the Data Warehouse at the System
Office utilizing ICR (Institution Class Reporting)/FTE files submitted by colleges each year.
The analysis wi done by Research and Performance Management section, President’s Office.
Performance Target—By 2001, an increase by 10 percent the number of education and
training opportunities available through alternate delivery systems.
Results— In 2007-2008, enrollment in the curriculum and con-ed distance education courses
totaled 426,928 students, which was a 14.2 percent increase from last year. Thus the
performance target was achieved. The table below gives the enrollment figure by method of
delivery.
ENROLLMENT IN DISTANCE LEARNING COURSES, 2007-2008
NORTH CAROLINA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM
DELIVERY MODE CURRICULUM
CONTINUING
EDUCATION
Telecourses & Teleweb courses 6,138 318
Internet Courses 201,448 45,432
Two-Way Video Courses
(NC Information Highway)
7,802 67
Hybrid Courses
(Blendid online and face-to-face)
57,500 10,375
Web Supported or Web-Assisted
Digital Media
89,332
366
3,558
2
Other Courses 934 3,656
Total 363,520 63,408
86
TECHNOLOGY MEASURE E: Number of Courses Offered Through the NC
Virtual Learning Community
Description/Definition—Number of courses offered through the NC Virtual Learning
Community. These are courses that have been developed by and accepted for use in the NC
Virtual Learning Community.
Methodology and Data Source—The Learning Technology Systems section in the
Technology and Workforce Development Division of the North Carolina Community
College System Office maintains data on the courses offered through the NC Virtual
Learning Community.
Performance Target—No specific performance target level for number of courses offered by
NC Virtual Learning Community has been set.
Results— In 2007-2008, 256 curriculum and 38 continuing education courses had been
offered through the NC Virtual Learning Community.
Published June 2009North Carolina Community College System
110 Copies of this document were printed at a cost of $134.20 or $1.22 per copy
Equal Opportunity Employer
1 November 8, 2007
Performance Measures and Standards North Carolina Community College System
Measure Standard Special Notes
Progress of Basic Skills Students
75% demonstrating progress
Passing Rates on Licensure/Certification Exams
80% aggregate institutional passing rate for first time test takers
To qualify for Exceptional Institutional Performance, no exam for which the college has control over who sits for the exam can have a passing rate of less than 70% (Note: Any exam with less than 10 students will not be subject to the 70% rule)
Performance of College Transfer Students
83% of students who transfer to a 4-year institution will have a GPA of 2.0 or higher after two semesters
Students who transfer with less than 24 semester hours of transfer credit will not be included in the analysis. Community colleges can submit data gathered from private 4-year colleges and universities to be included with the UNC System data. To qualify for Exceptional Institutional Performance, the performance of the community college transfer students must equal or exceed the performance of the native UNC System sophomores and juniors for that time period.
Passing Rates in Developmental Courses
75% of students who take a developmental English, mathematics, and/or reading course will pass the course with a grade of “C” or better
Students who withdraw from the course during the year will not be included in the analysis. Course record data submitted by the college to the data warehouse as part of the CRPFAR collection will be used to calculate this measure.
2 November 8, 2007
Success Rate of Developmental Students in Subsequent College-Level Courses
80% of students who took developmental courses will pass the “gatekeeper” English and/or mathematics course for which the developmental course serves as a prerequisite
To be included in the analysis, a student must take the “gatekeeper” course within one academic year of completing the developmental course that served as the pre-requisite. Course record data submitted by the college to the data warehouse as part of the CRPFAR collection will be used to calculate this measure.
Student Satisfaction of Completers and Non-completers
90% of survey respondents satisfied with college programs and services
To be considered for performance funding, the following conditions must be met: 1. Completer Survey: A 50% return rate or a statistically valid sample size2. Non-Completer Survey: For colleges with fewer than 250 non-returning students, a
minimum of 25 valid surveys must be obtained. For colleges with more than 250non-returning students, a response rate equal to 10% of the total non-returningstudents or a statistically valid sample size must be obtained.
Curriculum Student Retention, Transfer and Graduation
65% of Fall degree seeking students will either re-enroll, transfer or graduate by the subsequent Fall.
The National Student Clearinghouse database will be used to determine student transfer.
Business/Industry Satisfaction with Services Provided
90% or respondents will rate services provided as “Very Good” or “Excellent”
(a) Creation of Accountability Measures and Performance Standards. – The State Board of Community Collegesshall create new accountability measures and performance standards for the Community College System. Survey results shall be used as a performance standard only if the survey is statistically valid. The State Board of Community Colleges shall review annually the accountability measures and performance standards to ensure that they are appropriate for use in recognition of successful institutional performance.
(b) through (d) Repealed by Session Laws 2000-67, s. 9.7, effective July 1, 2000.(e) Mandatory Performance Measures. – The State Board of Community Colleges shall evaluate each college on the
following 8 performance standards: (1) Progress of basic skills students,(2) Passing rate for licensure and certification examinations,(3) Performance of students who transfer to a four year institution,(4) Passing rates in developmental courses,(5) Success rates of developmental students in subsequent college-level courses,(6) The level of satisfaction of students who complete programs and those who do not complete programs,(7) Curriculum student retention and graduation, and(8) Client satisfaction with customized training.
The State Board may add measures to those identified in section (e), but may not decrease the number. (f) Publication of Performance Ratings. – Each college shall publish its performance on the 8 measures set out in
subsection (e) of this section (i) annually in its electronic catalog or on the Internet and (ii) in its printed catalog each time the catalog is reprinted.
The Community Colleges System Office shall publish the performance of all colleges on all 8. (g) Recognition for Successful Institutional Performance. –
For the purpose of recognition for successful institutional performance, the State Board of Community Colleges shall evaluate each college on the 8 performance measures. For each of these eight performance measures on which a college performs successfully the college may retain and carry forward into the next fiscal year one-fourth of one percent (1/4 of
4 November 8, 2007
1%) of its final fiscal year General Fund appropriations. If a college demonstrates significant improvement on a measure that has been in use for three years or less, then the college would be eligible to carry-forward one-fourth of one percent (1/4 of 1%) of its final fiscal year General Fund appropriations for that measure.
(h) Recognition for Exceptional Institutional Performance. – Funds not allocated to colleges in accordance withsubsection (g) of this section shall be used to reward exceptional institutional performance. After all State aid budget obligations have been met, the State Board of Community Colleges shall distribute the remainder of these funds equally to colleges that perform successfully on eight performance measures and meet the following criteria:
(1) The passing rate on all reported licensure /certification exams for which the colleges have authority over who sits forthe exam must meet or exceed 70% for first-time test taker, and.
(2) The percent of college transfer students with a 2.0 gpa after two semesters at a four-year institution must equal orexceed the performance of students who began at the four-year institution (native students).
The State Board may withhold the portion of funds for which a college may qualify as an exceptional institution while the college is under investigation by a federal or state agency, or if its performance does not meet the standards established by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, State Auditors Office, or State Board of Community Colleges. At such time as the investigations are complete and the issues resolved, the State Board may release the exceptional performance funds to the college.
(i) Permissible Uses of Funds. – Funds retained by colleges or distributed to colleges pursuant to this section shall beused for the purchase of equipment, initial program start-up costs including faculty salaries for the first year of a program, and one-time faculty and staff bonuses. These funds shall not be used for continuing salary increases or for other obligations beyond the fiscal year into which they were carried forward. These funds shall be encumbered within 12 months of the fiscal year into which they were carried forward.
(j) Use of funds in low-wealth counties. – Funds retained by colleges or distributed to colleges pursuant to thissection may be used to supplement local funding for maintenance of plant if the college does not receive maintenance of plant funds pursuant to G.S. 115D-31.2, and if the county in which the main campus of the community college is located:
(1) Is designated as a Tier 1 or Tier 2 county in accordance with G.S. 105-129.3;(2) Had an unemployment rate of at least two percent (2%) above the State average or greater than seven
percent (7%), whichever is higher, in the prior calendar year; and
5 November 8, 2007
(3) Is a county whose wealth, as calculated under the formula for distributing supplemental funding forschools in low-wealth counties, is eighty percent (80%) or less of the State average.
Funds may be used for this purpose only after all local funds appropriated for maintenance of plant have been expended. (1999-237, s. 9.2(a); 2000-67, s. 9.7; 2001-186, s. 1; 2006-66, s. 8.9(a).)
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five percent (75%) of adult literacy students will complete a level, progress within a level, or complete apredetermined goal. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: The composite measure of Basic Skills students show that a total of eighty-nine percent (89%) of students have accomplished these requirements. Data shows that thirty-three percent (33%) progressed but did not complete level; also that twenty-nine percent (29%) met their goal but did not progress. One percent (1%) has completed the level but did not go to next, and twenty-four percent (24%) have completed a level and have advanced to a higher level.
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations FTCC MET this standard
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of first-time test takers will pass examinations required for North Carolina licensure or certification.To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance); the college will have no exam with a passing rate less than 70%. (Curriculum Programs and Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: FTCC showed an aggregate passing rate of ninety-six percent (96%) for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams. All programs showed at least a seventy percent (70%) pass rate.
C. Performance of College Transfer Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty-three percent (83%) of students transferring to a university with an associate degree or 24 articulated collegetransfer credit hours will have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.00 after two semesters at a university. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Eighty-five percent (85%) of FTCC students who transferred to a UNC institution with an associate degree or 24 hours of credit had a 2.0 or higher average after one academic year.
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses FTCC did not meet this standard
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five (75%) of developmental course completers in English, reading or mathematics will complete with a grade of“C” or better. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: The aggregate passing rate for all courses coded as developmental was seventy-four percent (74%).
E. Success of Developmental Students in Subsequent College Level Courses FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of college level English or mathematics course completers with previous developmental courseworkwill complete the college level English or mathematics course with a grade of “D” or better. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: Eighty-five percent (85%) of developmental students had a passing grade for the subsequent college level courses.
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Ninety percent (90%) of exiting students will be “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the overall quality of the college. (Curriculum Programs and Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment)
FTCC Results: Ninety-six percent (96%) of completers and eighty-four (84%) of non-completers were satisfied with the quality of the College’s programs and services, with an aggregate average of ninety-three percent (93%).
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Sixty-five percent (65%) of fall credential-seeking students will graduate, remain enrolled at the college, or transfer to auniversity or another community college one year later. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Sixty-six percent (66%) graduated, returned, or transferred. en percent (10%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the previous fall graduated with a degree, diploma, or certificate, forty-nine percent (49%) enrolled the next fall in a curriculum or extension program; and seven percent (7%) transferred to another community college or university.
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Ninety percent (90%) of clients receiving specialized training programs and services through Customized Training andSmall Business Centers will be satisfied with training. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: Ninety-two percent (92%) of businesses/industries reported satisfaction with customized training received by FTCC students.
Prepared by Carl Mitchell, July 26, 2011 Source: North Carolina Community College System Report Critical Success Factors Report July 2011
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least seventy-five percent (75%) of all students will have either, (1) progressed within a level of literacy, (2) completed a level or a predetermined goal, and (3) completed a level and advanced to a higher level. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: The composite measure of Basic Skills students shows that a total of ninety-three percent (93%) of students have accomplished these requirements. Data show that sixty-eight percent (68%) are progressing within the same level, three percent (3%) have completed the level entered, and twenty-three percent (23%) have completed a level and have advanced to a higher level.
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations FTCC MET this standard
NCCCS Standard: The aggregate institutional passing rate for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams will be at least eighty percent (80%). To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), exams (for which the college controlled) will be at least seventy percent (70%) or greater. (Curriculum Programs and Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: FTCC showed an aggregate passing rate of ninety-four percent (94%) for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams. All programs showed at least a seventy percent (70%) pass rate.
C. Performance of College Transfer Students FTCC did not meet this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty-three percent (83%) of students in both associate degrees and students who transferred with 24 or more semester hours must have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), the performance of FTCC transfer students must be equivalent to the performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors which was eighty-six percent (86%). (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Eighty-two percent (82%) of FTCC students who transferred to a UNC institution with an associate degree or 24 hours of credit had a 2.0 or higher average after one academic year.
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses FTCC did not meet this standard
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five (75%) of students who complete a developmental course in English, Reading or Math will have a grade of “C” or better. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: The aggregate passing rate for all courses coded as developmental was seventy percent (70%).
E. Success of Developmental Students in Subsequent College Level Courses FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of students who completed a developmental course in 2007-2008 and completed subsequent college level course in 2008-2009 will have a passing grade for the college level courses. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: Eighty-three percent (83%) of developmental students had passing grade for the college level course.
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of responding completers (graduates) and non-completers will indicate satisfaction with the quality of college programs and services. (Curriculum Programs and Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment)
FTCC Results: Ninety-nine percent (99%) of completers and ninety-two (92%) of non-completers were satisfied with the quality of the College’s programs and services, with an aggregate average of ninety-seven percent (97%).
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least sixty-five percent (65%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the fall of a given year will have completed their program, still be enrolled the following fall, or transferred to another community college or university. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Seventy-one percent (71%) graduated, returned, or transferred. (eleven percent (11%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the previous fall graduated with a degree, diploma, or certificate, fifty-two percent (52%) enrolled the next fall in a curriculum or extension program, and eight percent (8%) transferred to another community college or university.)
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report satisfaction with customized training. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: Ninety-three percent (93%) of businesses/industries reported satisfaction with customized training received by FTCC students.
Prepared by Carl Mitchell, July 6, 2010, Source: North Carolina Community College System Report Critical Success Factors Report July 2010
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least seventy-five percent (75%) of all students will have either (1) progressed within a level of literacy, (2) completed a level or a predetermined goal, and (3) completed a level and advanced to a higher level. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: The composite measure of Basic Skills students shows that a total of ninety-one percent (91%) of students have accomplished these requirements. Data show that sixty-six percent (66%) are progressing within the same level, two percent (2%) have completed the level entered, and twenty-four percent (24%) have completed a level and have advanced to a higher level.
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations FTCC MET this standard
NCCCS Standard: The aggregate institutional passing rate for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams will be at least eighty percent (80%). To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), exams (for which the college controlled) will be at least seventy percent (70%) or greater. (Curriculum Programs and Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: FTCC showed an aggregate passing rate of ninety percent (90%) for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams. All programs showed at least a seventy percent (70%) pass rate.
C. Performance of College Transfer Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty-three percent (83%) of students in both associate degrees and students who transferred with 24 or more semester hours must have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. To be rated EIP (Exceptional Institutional Performance), the performance of FTCC transfer students must be equivalent to the performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors which was eighty-seven percent (87%). (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Eighty-eight percent (88%) of FTCC students who transferred to a UNC institution with an associate degree or 24 hours of credit had a 2.0 or higher average after one academic year.
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses FTCC did not meet this standard
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five (75%) of students who complete a developmental course in English, Reading or Math will have a grade of “C” or better. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: The aggregate passing rate for all courses coded as developmental was sixty-six percent (66%).
E. Success of Developmental Students in Subsequent College Level Courses FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of students who completed a developmental course in 2006-2007 and completed subsequent college level course in 2007-2008 will have a passing grade for the college level courses. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: Eighty-one percent (81%) of developmental students had passing grade for the college level course.
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of responding completers (graduates) and non-completers will indicate satisfaction with the quality of college programs and services. (Curriculum Programs and Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment)
FTCC Results: Ninety-seven percent (97%) of completers and eighty-eight (88%) of non-completers were satisfied with the quality of the College’s programs and services, with an aggregate average of ninety-five percent (95%).
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least sixty-five percent (65%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the fall of a given year will have completed their program, still be enrolled the following fall, or transferred to another community college or university. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Sixty-seven percent (67%) graduated, returned, or transferred. (nine percent (9%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the previous fall graduated with a degree, diploma, or certificate, fifty-one percent (51%) enrolled the next fall in a curriculum or extension program, and seven percent (7%) transferred to another community college or university.)
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report satisfaction with customized training. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: Ninety-six percent (96%) of businesses/industries reported satisfaction with customized training received by FTCC students.
Prepared by Carl Mitchell, July 15, 2009, Source: North Carolina Community College System Report Critical Success Factors Report June 2009
1
End-of-Year Report
NCCCS Critical Success Factors – Performance Measures and Standards
Reported June 2008 (for 2006-2007)
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least seventy-five percent (75%) of all students will have either (1) progressed within a level of literacy, (2) completed a level or a
predetermined goal, and (3) completed a level and advanced to a higher level. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: The composite measure of Basic Skills Students shows that a total of eighty-one percent (81%) of students have accomplished these
requirements. Data show that fifty-six percent (56%) are progressing within the same level, two percent (2%) have completed the level entered, and twenty-
three percent (23%) have completed a level and have advanced to a higher level.
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations FTCC MET this standard (See Note Below)
NCCCS Standard: The aggregate institutional passing rate for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams will be at least eighty percent
(80%). To be rated Superior, ALL exams (for which the college controlled) will be at least seventy percent (70%) or greater. (Curriculum Programs and
Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: FTCC showed an aggregate passing rate of eighty-seven percent (87%) for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams.
All programs showed at least a seventy percent (70%) pass rate, with the exception of EMT-Intermediate which had a fifty-three percent (53%) pass rate.
(FTCC did not meet the Superior performance standard.)
C. Performance of College Transfer Students FTCC MET this standard. (See Note Below)
NCCCS Standard: Eighty-three percent (83%) of students in both associate degrees and students who transferred with 24 or more semester hours must have a
GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. To be rated Superior, the performance of FTCC transfer students must be equivalent to the
performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors which was eighty-seven percent (87%) in 2006-2007. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Eighty-six percent (86%) of FTCC students who transferred to a UNC institution with an associate degree or 24 hours of credit had a 2.0
or higher average after one academic year. (FTCC did not meet the Exceptional Institutional Performance standard.)
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses (Not applicable due to collection problem with CIS implementation.)
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five (75%) of students who complete a developmental course in English, Reading or Math will have a grade of “C” or better.
(Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: N/A – Data not available due to collection problem with CIS implementation. (CIS problem has been corrected and data will be available
next year.)
2
End-of-Year Report
NCCCS Critical Success Factors – Performance Measures and Standards
Reported June 2008 (for 2006-2007)
E. Success of Developmental Students in Subsequent College Level Courses (Not applicable due to collection problem with CIS implementation.)
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of students who completed a developmental course in 2005-2006 and completed subsequent college level course in
2006-2007 will have a passing grade for the college level courses. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: N/A – Data not available due to collection problem with CIS implementation. (CIS problem has been corrected and data will be available
next year.)
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of responding completers (graduates) and non-completers will indicate satisfaction with the quality of
college programs and services. (Curriculum Programs and Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment)
FTCC Results: Ninety-seven percent (97%) of completers and eighty-nine (89%) of non-completers were satisfied with the quality of the College’s
programs and services, with an aggregate average of ninety-five percent (95%).
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least sixty-five percent (65%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the fall of a given year will have completed their
program, still be enrolled the following fall, or transferred to another community college or university. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Sixty-eight percent (68%) graduated, returned, or transferred. (Twelve percent (12%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum
program in the previous fall graduated with a degree, diploma, or certificate, fifty-one percent (51%) enrolled the next fall in a curriculum or extension
program, and five percent (5%) transferred to another community college or university.)
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report satisfaction with customized training. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: Ninety-six percent (96%) of businesses/industries reported satisfaction with customized training received by FTCC students.
Prepared by Carl Mitchell, June 26, 2008, Source: North Carolina Community College System Report Critical Success Factors Report June 2008
A. Progress of Basic Skills Students FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least seventy-five percent (75%) of all students will have either (1) progressed within a level of literacy, (2) completed a level or a predetermined goal, and (3) completed a level and advanced to a higher level. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: The composite measure of Basic Skills Students shows that a total of eighty-one percent (81%) of students have accomplished these requirements. Data show that fifty-six percent (56%) are progressing within the same level, two percent (2%) have completed the level entered, and twenty-three percent (23%) have completed a level and have advanced to a higher level.
B. Passing Rates on Licensure and Certification Examinations FTCC MET this standard (See Note Below)
NCCCS Standard: The aggregate institutional passing rate for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams will be at least eighty percent (80%). To be rated Superior, ALL exams (for which the college controlled) will be at least seventy percent (70%) or greater. (Curriculum Programs and Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: FTCC showed an aggregate passing rate of eighty-seven percent (87%) for first-time test takers on all licensure and certification exams. All programs showed at least a seventy percent (70%) pass rate, with the exception of EMT-Intermediate which had a fifty-three percent (53%) pass rate. (FTCC did not meet the Superior performance standard.)
C. Performance of College Transfer Students FTCC MET this standard. (See Note Below)
NCCCS Standard: Eighty-three percent (83%) of students in both associate degrees and students who transferred with 24 or more semester hours must have a GPA equal to or greater than 2.0 after two semesters at a university. To be rated Superior, the performance of FTCC transfer students must be equivalent to the performance of native UNC sophomores and juniors which was eighty-seven percent (87%) in 2006-2007. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Eighty-six percent (86%) of FTCC students who transferred to a UNC institution with an associate degree or 24 hours of credit had a 2.0 or higher average after one academic year. (FTCC did not meet the Exceptional Institutional Performance standard.)
D. Passing Rates of Students in Developmental Courses (Not applicable due to collection problem with CIS implementation.)
NCCCS Standard: Seventy-five (75%) of students who complete a developmental course in English, Reading or Math will have a grade of “C” or better. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: N/A – Data not available due to collection problem with CIS implementation. (CIS problem has been corrected and data will be available next year.)
E. Success of Developmental Students in Subsequent College Level Courses (Not applicable due to collection problem with CIS implementation.)
NCCCS Standard: Eighty percent (80%) of students who completed a developmental course in 2005-2006 and completed subsequent college level course in 2006-2007 will have a passing grade for the college level courses. (Curriculum Programs and Student Services)
FTCC Results: N/A – Data not available due to collection problem with CIS implementation. (CIS problem has been corrected and data will be available next year.)
F. Satisfaction of Program Completers and Non-Completers FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of responding completers (graduates) and non-completers will indicate satisfaction with the quality of college programs and services. (Curriculum Programs and Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment)
FTCC Results: Ninety-seven percent (97%) of completers and eighty-nine (89%) of non-completers were satisfied with the quality of the College’s programs and services, with an aggregate average of ninety-five percent (95%).
G. Curriculum Student Retention, Graduation, and Transfer FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least sixty-five percent (65%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the fall of a given year will have completed their program, still be enrolled the following fall, or transferred to another community college or university. (Curriculum Programs)
FTCC Results: Sixty-eight percent (68%) graduated, returned, or transferred. (Twelve percent (12%) of the students who enrolled in a curriculum program in the previous fall graduated with a degree, diploma, or certificate, fifty-one percent (51%) enrolled the next fall in a curriculum or extension program, and five percent (5%) transferred to another community college or university.)
H. Client Satisfaction with Customized Training FTCC MET this standard.
NCCCS Standard: At least ninety percent (90%) of businesses/industries surveyed will report satisfaction with customized training. (Continuing Education)
FTCC Results: Ninety-six percent (96%) of businesses/industries reported satisfaction with customized training received by FTCC students.
• Prepared by Carl Mitchell, June 26, 2008, Source: North Carolina Community College System Report Critical Success Factors Report June 2008