MOVING TOWARDS MISSION FULFILLMENT: MEASURING KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR SUCCESS. Operational Plan Mid-Year Monitoring Report

MOVING TOWARDS MISSION FULFILLMENT: MEASURING KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR SUCCESS Operational Plan Mid-Year Monitoring Report 2016-17

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 3 Key Performance Indicator Scorecard..5 Core Theme 1: Student Success.8 Core Theme 2: Workforce Education..15 Core Theme 3: Basic Skills Education..22 Core Theme 4: Institutional Sustainability..26 Conclusion and Recommendations..32 2 P age

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Operational Plan Mid-Year Monitoring Report is an annual report that is distributed campus-wide and shared with Executive Cabinet and the Board of Trustees. This report provides readers with an overview of Renton Technical College s (RTC) progress toward mission fulfillment. This report includes final 2015-16 data and preliminary 2016-17 data, where available. Due to the timing of the State Board for Community and Technical College s (SBCTC) release of data files, in some instances, preliminary data is not provided if it will have a dramatic impact on accurately assessing progress for an indicator. In fulfillment of the Standards of Accreditation set forth by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU), RTC has four core themes that support and align with the mission of the College. The mission of Renton Technical College is to prepare a diverse student population for work, fulfilling the employment needs of individuals, business, and industry. The core themes that support and align with our mission are as follows: Core Theme 1: Student Success Core Theme 2: Workforce Education Core Theme 3: Basic Skills Education Core Theme 4: Institutional Sustainability The impetus for which this report was created is to provide the campus community with an overview of the College s outcomes and key indicators for measuring success. Each core theme includes objectives and key performance indicators (KPIs) for monitoring the operational activities that ultimately support each core theme. Twenty-two KPIs serve as overarching measures for which the College measures success. These indicators are meant to evolve as the College evolves, and can be revised when and where applicable. Each KPI is assigned a point outcome value of 0, 1 or 2 (with 0 being the lowest level of performance and 2 being the highest level of performance) based on an analysis of results as compared to appropriate benchmarks or standards. Although the College has identified 22 KPIs, there are several other indicators for which faculty, staff, administrators, and the Institutional Research (IR) Office use to measure and monitor progress. In December of 2016, the College Council reviewed and approved changes to several KPI s and their associated measures and/or benchmarks. This report reflects those recent changes, and therefore, this report cannot be compared to the 2015-16 reports. Starting in the 2017-18 year, the College will only provide this report once per year in the fall, based on final data for the prior academic year. At that time, the College Council will review the data from the prior year and set targets for the next year. This new target system will replace the current scoring system outlined in this report. The main findings of this report include: The College s total mission fulfillment score is 50%, at mid-year. The Basic Skills Education Core Theme had the highest score of 75%, followed by Workforce Education at 56%, Institutional Sustainability at 43%, and Student Success at 38%. The high Basic Skills Education score reflects progress in student gains, retention, and transition, as well as narrowing of achievement gaps. On 3 P age

the other hand, the low Student Success score reflects decreases in retention and persistence and slow progress in our program review and systematic assessment efforts. Retention and persistence rates have continued to decrease since the 2013-14 year. However, retention does not account for students in shorter programs (1-2 quarters) that may have graduated and do not return to the College. Therefore, examining persistence (completion and/or retention), can provide a clearer picture of student success. For example, one-quarter programs have a 1 st to 2 nd quarter retention rate of 27.3%, 1 st to 3 rd quarter retention rate of 10.2%, but a 79.6% one-year persistence rate. Over the past five years, on average, 27% of students were enrolled in one-quarter programs. The achievement gap between White students and minority students (Asian/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, African-American, Native American, and Hispanic/Latino) in 2015-16 was widest for Basic Studies student s transition rates, 1 st to 2 nd quarter retention rates (9.4%), 1 st to 3 rd quarter retention rates (4.5%), and degree completion rates (4.5%). Although this report only examines achievement gaps between White students and all minority students, additional analysis has revealed achievement gaps for other groups. The average oneyear persistence rate for the past five years was 69.9%. The following seven groups of students experienced persistence rates much lower than the average: disabled students (52.7%), WorkFirst students (54.7%), African-American students (58.2%), single parents (61%), part-time students (61%), Hispanic/Latino students (65.4%), and students starting in the spring quarter (65.8%). The total completion rate only decreased by 1.6%, while the achievement gap remained fairly stable at 4.5%. As completions are checked within a three-year period, the most recent data reflects the completion rate for students who started in the 2012-13 year. Therefore, the recent decreases in retention and persistence will not be reflected in the College s completion rates for at least another two years. 4 P age

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR SCORECARD This scorecard represents RTC s progress towards mission fulfillment. Each Core Theme has associated objectives and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are measured each year. The data is reviewed by the IR Office and College Council. Each KPI receives a score based on objective, quantifiable measures. Measure Core Theme Objective KPI 1 st to 2 nd Quarter Retention Overall 1 st to 2 nd Quarter Retention by Race 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention Overall 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention by Race One-Year Persistence Overall One-Year Persistence by Race Course Success Rates Overall Course Success Rates by Race Student Satisfaction with Programs and Services (CCSSE) Course and Program Learning Outcomes Systematic Assessment Plan and Timeline Program Review Implemented According to Timeline TOTAL SCORE CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Student Success 1.1 1 Student Success 1.1 1 Student Success 1.1 2 Student Success 1.1 2 Student Success 1.1 3 Student Success 1.1 3 Student Success 1.2 4 Student Success 1.2 4 Student Success 1.3 5 Student Success 1.4 6 Student Success 1.4 6 Student Success 1.4 6 Completion Rates Overall Workforce Education 2.1 7 Completion Rates by Race Workforce Education 2.1 7 Mid-Year Score 9/24 (38%) Year-End Score DTA Student Transition/ Completion Rate Workforce Education 2.1 8 N/A* 5 P age

Licensure and Certification Pass Rates Workforce Education 2.2 9 Advisory Committee Satisfaction with RTC Workforce Education 2.2 10 N/A* Students Advisory Committee Survey Response Rate Workforce Education 2.2 10 Placement Rates Workforce Education 2.3 11 Related-Employment Rates Workforce Education 2.3 11 Course and Program Learning Formats (# of distance education courses) Course and Program Learning Formats (# of evening courses) Workforce Education 2.4 12 Workforce Education 2.4 12 TOTAL SCORE CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Gains Made Basic Skills Education 3.1 13 9/16* (56%) Gains Made by Race Basic Skills Education 3.1 13 Retention Rates Basic Studies Retention Rates Basic Studies by Race Basic Skills Education 3.2 14 Basic Skills Education 3.2 14 Transition Rates Basic Skills Education 3.3 15 Transition Rates by Race Basic Skills Education 3.3 15 TOTAL SCORE CORE THEME 3: BASIC SKILLS EDUCATION Employee Demographics Institutional Sustainability 4.1 16 9/12 (75%) Budget to Actual Variance Institutional Sustainability 4.2 17 Technology Replacement Cycle/Enhance Technology Services Institutional Sustainability 4.2 18 FTE Enrollment Institutional Sustainability 4.3 19 FTE Enrollment by Institutional Intent Institutional Sustainability 4.3 20 Donations and Partnerships Institutional Sustainability 4.4 21 6 P age

Grants and Contracts Funding Institutional Sustainability 4.5 22 TOTAL SCORE CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY 6/14 (43%) TOTAL MISSION FULFILLMENT SCORE 33/66* (50%) AVERAGE CORE THEME SCORE 53% *These KPI s are excluded from the total scores as they do not have enough data yet to score. For this report, the total possible score for the Workforce Education Core Theme is 16 and for Total Mission Fulfillment is 66. SCORING KEY KPI Progress Toward Goal Average Rating Action Goal Met 2 Use model, best practice; continue to support practice Progress Towards Goal 1 Meets benchmark; look to continue improvement Goal Not Met 0 Develop action plan; take action and commit additional resources Mission Fulfillment Threshold: 75% SCORECARD SUMMARY The 2016-17 mid-year total mission fulfillment score is 50%, below the threshold of 75%. Due to increases in significant gains made and transition rates, the Basic Skills Education Core Theme met its mission fulfillment threshold, with a score of 75%. Due to recent decreases in retention and slow progress in our program review and assessment efforts, the Student Success Core Theme received the lowest score of 38%. The College continues to experience many strengths, specifically in course success rates, licensure/certification exam pass rates, placement rates, basic skills education measures, budget to actual variance, and FTE enrollment. 7 P age

CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Renton Technical College provides student access that reflects the diverse demographic makeup of its community. Equity is achieved by high success and completion rates of all students, data-informed decision making, and student-centered policies and practices throughout the institution. Key Performance Indicators #1: 1st to 2nd Quarter Retention Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity) #2: 1st to 3rd Quarter Retention Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity) #3: One-Year Persistence Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity) #4: Course Success Rates #5: Student Satisfaction with Programs and Services #6: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment 8 P age

CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.1: Attract and retain a student population reflective of the diverse community we serve. Key Performance Indicator #1: 1st to 2 nd Quarter Retention Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity). Benchmarks: 1) Retention rates are at least 2% higher than the previous year. RTC has exceptionally high retention rates, making substantial increases over time difficult to attain. 2) The retention rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the retention rates for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: 1 st to 2 nd Quarter Retention Rate, Overall 1 st to 2 nd Quarter Retention 67.6% 76.5% 63.3% 61.5% Benchmark Met No Yes No No Score = 0. Retention rates have continued to decrease, following the large increase in the 2013-14 year. The 2015-16 rate is the lowest of the four years represented here. Measure: 1 st to 2 nd Quarter Retention Rate, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Group Minority 60.6% 71.9% 60.4% 56.3% White 74.3% 78.9% 65.3% 65.7% Benchmark Met No No No No Score = 0. The retention rate for White students increased by 0.4% in 2015-16; however, the rate for minority students decreased by 4.1%. The gap between White students and minority students widened to 9.4%. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database, PEP Cohorts. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. 1st to 2nd Quarter Retention Rates All Students Minority Students White Students 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 9 P age

CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.1: Attract and retain a student population reflective of the diverse community we serve. Key Performance Indicator #2: 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity). Benchmarks: 1) Retention rates are at least 2% higher than the previous year. RTC has exceptionally high retention rates, making substantial increases over time difficult to attain. 2) The retention rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the retention rates for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention Rate, Overall 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention 56% 59.4% 53.8% 50.5% Benchmark Met No Yes No No Score = 0. Retention rates have continued to decrease, following the large increase in the 2013-14 year. The 2015-16 rate is the lowest of the four years represented here. Measure: 1 st to 3 rd Quarter Retention Rate, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Group Minority 49% 54.6% 49.3% 48.6% White 62.6% 61.4% 57.2% 53.1% Benchmark Met No No No Yes Score = 1. Retention rates have continued to decrease for both groups, although the decrease was greater for White students- 4.1% compared to 0.7% for minority students. The gap between White students and minority students decreased from 7.9% in 2014-15 to 4.5% in 2015-16. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database, PEP Cohorts. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. 1st to 3rd Quarter Retention Rates All Students Minority Students White Students 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% 10 P age

CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.1: Attract and retain a student population reflective of the diverse community we serve. Key Performance Indicator #3: One-Year Persistence Rates (disaggregated by race/ethnicity). Benchmarks: 1) Persistence rates are at least 2% higher than the previous year. RTC has exceptionally high persistence rates, making substantial increases over time difficult to attain. 2) The persistence rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the retention rates for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: One-Year Persistence Rate, Overall 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 One-Year Persistence 70.1% 71.1% 69.2% 68.5% Benchmark Met No No No No Score = 0. Persistence rates have continued to decrease after a slight increase for the 2012-13 cohorts. The persistence rate for the 2014-15 cohorts is the lowest of all cohorts represented here. Measure: One-Year Persistence Rate, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Group 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 Minority 64.8% 69.7% 68.4% 67.2% White 74.4% 73.2% 68.5% 68.7% Benchmark Met No Yes Yes Yes Score = 1. The persistence rate for White students increased by only 0.2%, while the persistence rate for minority students decreased by 1.2%. The gap between White and minority students increased slightly to 1.5%. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database, PEP Cohorts. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American One-Year Persistence Rates 80% All Students Minority Students White Students 75% 70% 65% 60% 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 11 P age

CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.2: Achieve equitable success rates of all students. Key Performance Indicator #4: Course Success Rates. Benchmarks: 1) Couse success rates are 80% or higher. 2) The course success rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the course success rates for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: Course Success Rates (Pass or 2.0 or higher) Course Success Rate 86.2% 85.2% 85% 85.6% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. Course success rates are consistently above 80%, averaging closer to 85% each year. Measure: Course Success Rates (Pass or 2.0 or higher), Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Group Minority 83.1% 82.7% 83.8% 83.3% White 87.7% 86.5% 86.6% 87.6% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. Course success rates for minority students decreased slightly, while the rate for White students increased by 1%. The gap between White students and minority students increased from 2.8% to 4.3%. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Transcript Database as of January 2017. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% Course Success Rates All Students Minority Students White Students 80% CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.3: Provide effective support services from enrollment to completion. Key Performance Indicator #5: Student Satisfaction with Programs and Services. 12 P age

Benchmark: CCSSE benchmark scores are equal to or higher than the national cohort. Measure: CCSSE Benchmark Scores, RTC vs. National Cohort Benchmark 2012 Scores 2015 Scores RTC US RTC US Active & Collaborative Learning 55.8 50 54.9 50 Student Effort 49.9 50 53.5 50 Academic Challenge 51.6 50 52.5 50 Student-Faculty Interaction 51.6 50 50.1 50 Support for Learners 48.2 50 52.3 50 Benchmark Met No Yes Score = 2. In 2012, the College scored higher than the national cohort on 3/5 benchmarks, and substantially higher on the Active and Collaborative Learning benchmark. In 2015, the College scored higher than the national average on all 5 benchmarks. CCSSE Benchmark Scores 2015 RTC US 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 54.9 53.5 52.5 50.1 52.3 50 50 50 50 50 Active & Collaborative Learning Student Effort Academic Challenge Student-Faculty Interaction Support for Learners Note: The CCSSE is only conducted once every three years. The next administration will be in spring 2018. CORE THEME 1: STUDENT SUCCESS Objective 1.4: Identify and communicate learning outcomes to students, and use the assessment of student learning outcomes to enhance teaching, learning, and continuous improvement. Key Performance Indicator #6: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment. Benchmarks: 1) All course and program learning outcomes are published on the applicable program page on the website, as well as in the syllabi. 13 P age

2) The College has developed a systematic assessment plan and timeline for using assessment data to drive changes in the classroom. 3) The program review process is implemented in all programs according to the published timeline/cycle. Measure: Course and Program Outcomes 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Outcomes Created In progress, not 100% In progress, not 100% Not completed and on Syllabi completed completed Benchmark Met No No No Score = 0. Most learning outcomes have been published on the applicable website pages and should be completed soon with the purchase of our new course catalog software. At this time, it is expected that all syllabi contain course learning outcomes. The Curriculum Committee will ensure all programs meet this expectation by the end of 2016-17. Measure: Systematic Assessment Plan and Timeline 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Assessment Plan Created N/A N/A Not completed Benchmark Met N/A N/A No Score = 0. Program review includes assessment as part of the three-year process, but the College has not developed an assessment plan outside of the program review process. Some work is being done in general education and discussions will occur in instruction group meetings about how assessment might occur outside of the program review process. Measure: Program Review Implementation and Timeline 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Program Review on Program review not Program review not Piloted Year 1 in 5 Schedule implemented implemented programs. Benchmark Met N/A N/A No Score = 1. In the summer of 2016, five programs piloted the Year 1 process for program review. All programs were expected to complete their review team meetings by November 2016, with 4/5 programs meeting this deadline. The final program completed its review team meeting in March 2017. The next group of programs starting the program review progress are expected to complete their review team meetings by June 2017. 14 P age

CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Renton Technical College delivers workforce education programs that fulfill student and industry needs through preparation for viable career pathways. Industry needs are met through competency and outcomes based teaching, learning, and hands-on training facilities that reflect workplace best practices. Students become resilient workers by completing innovative educational programs that incorporate current industry trends. Key Performance Indicators #7: Completion Rates #8: DTA Student Transition/Completion Rate #9: Licensure and Certification Pass Rates #10: Advisory Committee Satisfaction with RTC Graduates #11: Placement Rates #12: Course and Program Learning Formats 15 P age

CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Objective 2.1: Achieve high rates of student progress and degree or certificate completion. Key Performance Indicator #7: Completion Rates. Benchmarks: 1) Completion rates are at least 2% higher than the previous year. RTC has exceptionally high completion rates, making substantial increases over time difficult to attain. 2) The completion rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the completion rates for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: 3-Year Completion Rates 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Cert Degree Total Cert Degree Total Cert Degree Total Completion Rate 54.1% 11.3% 65.4% 50% 16.4% 66.4% 50.1% 14.7% 64.8% Benchmark Met Yes No No No Yes No No No No Score = 0. Total completion rates and degree completion rates decreased for the 2012-13 cohorts, while the certificate completion rate remained stable. However, these decreases are fairly small, and may reflect natural fluctuations over time. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database, PEP Cohorts, and Completion Tables. Completion rates are checked within three years of entry for each cohort. Therefore, the 2015-16 data reflects completion rates for the 2012-13 cohorts. Measure: 3-Year Completion Rates, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Cert Degree Total Cert Degree Total Cert Degree Total Minority 55% 9.8% 64.9% 47.7% 14% 61.6% 51.3% 12.8% 64.1% White 53.9% 11.6% 65.5% 51.8% 18.7% 70.5% 48.7% 17.3% 65.9% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Score = 1. Although completion rates have decreased overall, the achievement gap has decreased for all completion categories. For example, minority students earned certificates at a rate 2.6% higher than White students. The gap for total completions decreased from 8.9% to 1.8%, but remained fairly stable for degree completions. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database, PEP Cohorts, and Completion Tables. Completion rates are checked within three years of entry for each cohort. Therefore, the 2015-16 data reflects completion rates for the 2012-13 cohorts. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American 16 P age

3-Year Completion Rates Certificates Degrees Total 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 3-Year Completion Rates (Total) Minority Students White Students 80% 70% 60% 50% 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 3-Year Completion Rates (Degrees) Minority Students White Students 20% 10% 0% 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 17 P age

CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Objective 2.1: Achieve high rates of student progress and degree or certificate completion. Key Performance Indicator #8: DTA Student Transition and/or Completion Rate. Benchmark: Transition and/or completion rates are at least 2% higher than the previous year. Measure: DTA Student Transition and/or Completion Rate Transition/Completion Rate N/A N/A N/A 12.6% Benchmark Met N/A N/A N/A N/A Score = N/A. The majority of DTA students are enrolled part-time (72%), therefore, transfer and/or completion rates are checked within a three-year period, to allow sufficient time for this to occur. The only available data at this time is for the 2012-13 cohorts, which form the baseline for this measure. Enrollment in the DTA program has increased from 127 in 2012-13 to around 300 in recent years, which may or may not impact the trends over time. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Student Achievement Database and Completion Tables. Completion rates are checked within three years of entry for each cohort. Therefore, the 2015-16 data reflects completion rates for the 2012-13 cohorts. DTA s were not offered until the 2012-13 year, therefore, the 2015-16 rates reported above reflect the baseline data for this measure. CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Objective 2.2: Deliver workforce programs that meet current industry demand and standards. Key Performance Indicator #9: Licensure and Certification Pass Rates. Key Performance Indicator #10: Advisory Committee Satisfaction with RTC Students. Key Performance Indicator #11: Advisory Committee Survey Response Rate. Benchmarks: 1) Average pass rates are 85% or higher, with no programs falling below 67%. 2) Overall scores are equal to or higher than the previous year. 3) The survey response rate is at least 67%. Measure: Licensure/Certification Pass Rates 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 Pass Rate 91% 88% 88% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. For the three years represented here, the licensure/certification pass rates have exceeded the 85% benchmark. However, in 2013-14 and 2015-16, one program s pass rate was below 67%. Note: Programs do not have a consistent timeframe for reporting pass rate data. The numbers above are a best estimate based on available data, mostly from Allied Health programs. 18 P age

Measure: Advisory Committee Satisfaction with RTC Students 2014-2015 2015-2016 Satisfaction Score N/A 3.29 Benchmark Met N/A No Score = N/A. The Advisory Committee Survey was updated in the 2015-16 year and is conducted annually in the spring quarter. The score provided here is the average satisfaction rating on a scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 4 (very satisfied) on RTC graduates technical and soft skills. We received 64 responses in 2015-16, representing 21 programs, and 45% indicated they had hired an RTC graduate. Technical skills received an overall score of 3.31 and soft skills received an overall score of 3.26. The soft skill receiving the lowest average score of 3.11 was troubleshooting/problem solving skills. Measure: Advisory Committee Survey Response Rate 2014-2015 2015-2016 Response Rate N/A 19.3% Benchmark Met N/A No Score = 0. The Advisory Committee Survey was updated in the 2015-16 year and is conducted annually in the spring quarter. Due to the revisions made to the survey, it was administered later than originally planned, which may have impacted the response rate. CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Objective 2.3: Achieve high rates of employment placement in training-specific industries for workforce completers. Key Performance Indicator #12: Placement Rates. Benchmark: Placement/employment rates are equal to or higher than the previous year. Measure: Estimated Placement Rates (DLOA Database) 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 Cert Degree Cert Degree Cert Degree Cert Degree Placement Rate 77% 77% 76% 83% 82% 89% 82% 92% Benchmark Met Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. The estimated placement rate for certificate completers remained stable for those who left RTC in 2014-15. However, the estimated placement rate for degree completers increased by 3%. The overall rate for all completers was 85% in 2013-14 and in 2014-15. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse, Data Linking for Outcomes Assessment database. Estimated placement rates include an adjustment factor of 1.1 to account for students who are employed, but are not in the Unemployment Insurance (UI) database. 19 P age

Estimated Placement Rates Certificates Degrees 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% 70% 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 Measure: Related Employment Rates (Exit Survey Data) 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* Related Employment Rate N/A 66% 67%* Benchmark Met N/A N/A Score = 2. The Exit Survey was piloted in the summer of 2016. However, students who had left the college previously were sent e-mail invitations to complete the survey. We received 98 responses from students who left RTC in 2015-16, and have received 94 responses thus far for students who left during 2016-17. For 2016-17, related employment rates are 67% for all completers, and 75% for those employed full-time. 70% Related Employment Rates 65% 60% 55% 50% 2015-2016 2016-2017* *Preliminary data through March 1, 2017. 20 P age

CORE THEME 2: WORKFORCE EDUCATION Objective 2.4: Deliver instruction in a variety of suitable formats that expand opportunities for learning. Key Performance Indicator #13: Course and Program Learning Formats. Benchmark: Maintain or increase the number of evening and/or online/hybrid course offerings. Measure: Number of Hybrid/Online (Distance Education) Courses (Total for Academic Year) 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* # Hybrid/Online Courses 660 1,388 1,645 699* Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes No Score = 1. The number provided for 2016-17 is preliminary at this time. However, if we examine the number of online/hybrid courses offered each year in the same time frame (summer and fall only), fewer distance education courses were offered compared to the prior year (699 in 2016-17 vs. 1,100 in 2015-16). Measure: Number of Evening Courses (Total for Academic Year) 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* # Evening Courses 915 796 789 319* Benchmark Met No No No Yes Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Class Tables. Score = 1. The number provided for 2016-17 is preliminary at this time. However, if we examine the number of evening courses offered each year in the same time frame (summer and fall only), the number is the same for 2015-16 and 2016-17. Course Learning Formats Online/Hybrid Course Evening Course 1,750 1,500 1,250 1,000 750 500 250 0 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* *Preliminary data. 21 P age

CORE THEME 3: BASIC SKILLS EDUCATION Renton Technical College offers basic skills courses that support the transition of students to college level study and career pathways. Student progression is supported through ESL instruction, high-school completion options, college-readiness instruction, and integration of basic skills instruction into workforce programs. Key Performance Indicators #13: Gains Made #14: Retention Rates Basic Studies #15: Transition Rates 22 P age

CORE THEME 3: BASIC SKILLS EDUCATION Objective 3.1: Achieve significant student progression toward achieving educational goals. Key Performance Indicator #14: Gains Made. Benchmarks: 1) The percentage of students earning significant gains is equal to or higher than the previous year. 2) The percentage of minority students earning a significant gain will be equal to or within +/-5% of the rate for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: Gains Made (Basic Studies Students) Gains Made Rate 49.6% 47.1% 47.4% 48.2% Benchmark Met No No Yes Yes Score = 2. In 2015-16, the percentage of students making a significant gain increased by 0.8%. With the increase in High School 21+ enrollments and completions, we are likely to continue to see increases in this measure. Measure: Gains Made, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Minority 48.8% 46.8% 47.9% 48.7% White 53% 48.5% 47.3% 47.2% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. In the two most recent years represented here, minority students earned significant gains at slightly higher rates than White students. However, if we remove students who identify as Asian, the achievement gap widens to 1-2% (still within the +/-5% benchmark). Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse, WABERS database. Significant gain = 3 or 5 point gain on the CASAS test or a GED completion. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. 60% Significant Gains Made All Students Minority Students White Students 50% 40% 23 P age

CORE THEME 3: BASIC SKILLS EDUCATION Objective 3.2: Achieve significant student progression toward achieving career goals. Key Performance Indicator #15: Retention Rates Basic Studies. Benchmarks: 1) Retention rates are equal to or higher than the previous year. 2) Retention rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the rate for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: Retention Rates (Basic Studies Students) Retention Rate 61.7% 58.2% 59.9% 58.6% Benchmark Met No No Yes No Score = 1. In 2014-15, the retention rate increased slightly. However, in 2015-16, this rate decreased again. These are small changes from year to year (1-2%), and may reflect natural fluctuations over time. Measure: Retention Rates, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Minority 61.2% 58.1% 60.9% 59.1% White 64.2% 59.1% 57.8% 57.9% Benchmark Met Yes Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. In the two most recent years represented here, minority students earned significant gains at slightly higher rates than White students. However, if we remove students who identify as Asian, the achievement gap widens to 3.4% in 2015-16 (still within the +/-5% benchmark). Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse, WABERS database. Retention = number of students post-tested after 45 hours of instruction. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. 70% Retention Rates All Students Minority Students White Students 60% 50% 24 P age

CORE THEME 3: BASIC SKILLS EDUCATION Objective 3.3: Transition students into college classes and programs. Key Performance Indicator #16: Transition Rates. Benchmarks: 1) Transition rates are equal to or higher than the previous year. 2) Transition rates for minority students will be equal to or within +/-5% of the rate for students identifying as White. A 5% difference is the minimum achievement gap that is considered acceptable and accounts for natural fluctuations over time. Measure: Transition Rates (Basic Studies Students) Transition Rate 13.7% 12.5% 12.3% 13.6% Benchmark Met Yes No No Yes Score = 2. In 2015-16, the transition rate increased by 1.3% for all Basic Studies students. This equates to an additional 64 students transitioning to college-level coursework. For ABE/GED students only, the transition rate increased from 27.5% in 2014-15 to 28.5% in 2015-16. Measure: Transition Rates, Disaggregated by Race/Ethnicity Minority 10.3% 9.2% 10.1% 11.5% White 25.8% 25.2% 22.3% 25.3% Benchmark Met No No No No Score = 0. The achievement gap between minority and White students ranges from 12-16% each year. For ABE/GED students only, the gap remains the same. For example, in 2015-16, White ABE/GED students transitioned at a rate of 40.2%, compared to 26.1% for minority students. Data Source: SBCTC Student Achievement Database. Transition = The percentage of students who earn at least one non-basic studies student achievement momentum point (excluding the retention point). - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. 30% Transition Rates All Students Minority Students White Students 20% 10% 0% 25 P age

CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Renton Technical College cultivates, manages and prioritizes its financial, human, and physical resources to advance the mission of the college. An optimal learning environment is created through a diverse and innovative faculty and staff, deployment of technologies that enhance teaching and student engagement, and financial planning that supports the college s strategic priorities. Key Performance Indicators #16: Employee Demographics #17: Budget to Actual Variance #18: Technology Replacement Cycle/Enhance Technology Services #19: FTE Enrollment #20: FTE Enrollment by #21: Donations and Partnerships #22: Grants and Contracts Funding 26 P age

CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Objective 4.1: Attract a diverse faculty and staff suited to prepare a diverse population for work. Key Performance Indicator #17: Employee Demographics. Benchmark: The percentage of RTC s faculty and staff who are minorities is within 5% (+/-) of the local population. This margin is considered to be an acceptable gap, while also controlling for population variances over time. Measure: Race/Ethnicity Breakdown for Faculty/Staff and Local Area Percent Minority 2013-2014* 2014-2015* 2015-2016 + 2016-2017 + RTC 25% 27% 27% 29% Local Area 35% 35% 38% 38% Benchmark Met -- No No No No Score = 0. Although the percent of RTC faculty and staff who identify as a minority increased in 2016-17, the percentage is still 9% below the local area. The data has shown a steady increase over time. When the data is disaggregated by employee type, there are stark differences. Seventeen percent of full-time faculty identify as minorities, compared to 24% for adjunct faculty and 38% for staff. Data Source: *2010 Census Data for King County and the SBCTC Employee Database. + 2015 Census Data for King County and the SBCTC Employee Database. - Minority = Asian/African-American/Hispanic/Native American. Percent of Minority RTC Employees vs. King County RTC King County 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% *Preliminary data. 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Objective 4.2: Manage and prioritize financial, technological, and physical resources to advance the mission of the college. Key Performance Indicator #18: Budget-to-Actual Variance. Key Performance Indicator #19: Technology Replacement Cycle/Enhance Technology Services 27 P age

Benchmark(s): 1) The budget to actual variance for revenue and expenditure is within 5% (+/-) of the budget. This margin is considered to be acceptable from an auditing perspective, with any variance greater than 10% (+/-) needing additional explanation. 2) The replacement cycle schedule is completed at 75% or higher. Measure: Budget to Actual Variance 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* Revenue -8.0% -3.0% -2.7% -1.6%* Expenditures -4.5% 1.1% 5.1% -1.8* Benchmark Met No Yes Yes Yes Score = 2. Based on preliminary 2016-17 data, the revenue and expenditure budget to actual variance is within the acceptable +/- 5% margin. Budget to Actual Variance Revenue Expenditures 10% 5% 0% -5% -10% 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 Measure: Technology Replacement Cycle 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* Replacements Planned vs. Actual 90.6% 77.8% 62.1% 19.7%* Benchmark Met Yes Yes No No *Preliminary data. Score = 0. For 2016-17, there are 269 planned technology replacements, with 53 completed thus far. However, instructional equipment is replaced in the summer when students are not around and available funds are dependent on tuition received. It is estimated that all 40 planned for administrative equipment will occur, while the deficit in tuition will impact the ability to replace all 229 planned for instruction. CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Objective 4.3: Align enrollment with FTE projections and state allocations. Key Performance Indicator #20: FTE Enrollment. Benchmarks: 1) The total FTE falls between the tolerance thresholds of 98-105% of the allocation. 28 P age

2) The percentage of career training FTE is equal to or higher than the previous year. Measure: FTE Allocation vs. FTE Actuals % of Allocation 94% 97% 99% 101% Benchmark Met No No Yes Yes Score = 2. In the last two years, the FTE actuals have met the tolerance thresholds of 98-105%. Data Source: SBCTC Allocation Monitoring Reports. 105% FTE Allocation vs. FTE Actuals 100% 100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 80% Measure: FTE by Institutional Intent Area General Education and Career Training 2,111.8 2,158.1 2,146.6 2,119.9 Basic Studies 1,306.5 1,392.9 1,465.8 1,433.2 Supplemental 471.9 454 528.7 623.2 Benchmark Met Yes Yes No No Score = 1. In 2013-14, career training and general education FTE increased slightly, but has since decreased each year. Total FTE remained stable, however, as FTE increased in supplemental courses. Data Source: SBCTC Data Warehouse Class Tables. CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Objective 4.4: Increase community partnerships to improve RTC s effectiveness and positive impact in the region. Key Performance Indicator #21: Donations and Partnerships Benchmark: The number of gifts and dollar values are equal to or higher than the previous year. 29 P age

Measure: Number and Dollar Value of Donor Gifts 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* Number of Gifts 1,841 1,795 1,843 1,344* Dollar Value $213,212.08 $149,047.37 $360,979.93 $190,386.66* Benchmark Met Yes No Yes No Score = 1. The Foundation has already received 1,344 gifts for the 2016-17 year (or 73% of what we received in 2015-16), and another $13,000 has been received via grants. The total dollar amount reflects 341 individual donors, with the majority donating under $100. Special events have brought in $98,190 - the 2017 Student Success Breakfast alone brought in $75,865. $400K $350K $300K $250K $200K $150K $100K $50K $K Number and Dollar Value of Donor Gifts # Gifts Dollar Value 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 *Preliminary data. CORE THEME 4: INSTITUTIONAL SUSTAINABILITY Objective 4.5: Pursue strategic funding opportunities to ensure fiscal sustainability. Key Performance Indicator #22: Grants and Contracts Funding Benchmark: The dollar amount of grants funded is at least $4,000,000 and indirect costs received are equal to or higher than the previous year. Measure: Number and Dollar Amount of Grants Funded 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* Number Funded 17 24 26 7* Dollar Value $3,202,928 $4,647,976 $4,502,781 $570,466* Indirect Costs $40,270 $172,490 $239,363 $0* Benchmark Met -- Yes Yes No Score = 0. At this time, 18 grants have been submitted in 2016-17 for a total of $2.28 million, with 7 funded, 2 denied, and 9 pending. We have requested 30 P age

$177,131 in indirect costs, but we have not received these funds yet, although $147,461 is pending. Number and Dollar Value of Grants Funded Dollar Value # Grants $5.0M $4.5M $4.0M $3.5M $3.0M $2.5M $2.0M $1.5M $1.0M $0.5M $0.0M *Preliminary data. 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017* 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 31 P age

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Currently, a total of 22 KPIs are used to measure success towards mission fulfillment. KPIs receive a score of 2 (green), 1 (yellow) or 0 (red). A score of 2 indicates that the goal has been met and serves as a model or best practice, and should continue to be supported by the College. A score of 1 indicates that progress towards meeting the goal has occurred. A score of 0 indicates that no progress has been made toward the goal, and an action plan should be developed to move these indicators from a score of 0 to 1. As outlined on pages 5-6, RTC s total mission fulfillment score (out of 66 possible points) is 33, or 50%, at mid-year. Core Theme 3: Basic Skills Education received the highest score of 75%, followed by Core Theme 2: Workforce Education at 56%, Core Theme 4: Institutional Sustainability at 43%, and Core Theme 1: Student Success at 38%. The current mid-year report is meant to provide the College with a snapshot of its progress thus far. It is expected that additional progress will occur before the year-end report, but the data presented here may provide additional areas of focus for 2016-17. The year-end report, which will be published in the fall of 2017, will provide finalized data for the 2016-17 year. The mid-year report will be compared to the yearend report to show additional progress towards mission fulfillment, areas where improvement occurred, and continued areas of focus. Data sources used in this report include: Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) King County 2010 and 2015 US Census Data RTC Advisory Committee Survey RTC Program Enhancement Plan (PEP) Cohorts RTC Student Exit Survey SBCTC Allocation Monitoring Reports SBCTC Data Warehouse, Class Table SBCTC Data Warehouse, Completion Table SBCTC Data Warehouse, Data Linking for Outcomes Assessment Database SBCTC Data Warehouse, Employee Database SBCTC Data Warehouse, Student Achievement Database SBCTC Data Warehouse, Transcript Database (as of January 2017) SBCTC Data Warehouse, WABERS Database At this time, changes to the KPI s are not being recommended. However, the IR Office has proposed a new scoring mechanism for future reports, which has been approved by the College Council. Rather than providing a score of 0, 1, or 2 for each KPI, the College Council will set targets each year based on previous years data. Overall mission fulfillment can then be measured by the percentage of targets that have been met, with a threshold determined by the College Council. Additionally, the College Council also determined that we will move to an annual report, rather than a bi-annual report, given the difficulty in scoring KPI s based on preliminary data. In order to reflect finalized completion and transcript data, the 32 P age

year-end reports will be published in November or December of each year. This new scoring procedure will be implemented for the 2017-18 year. Retention, persistence, and transition are considered to be leading indicators. These types of indicators are predictive, can be controlled, are proactive, and are formative in nature. Lagging indicators, such as completion and placement, are affected by what the College does to influence leading indicators. By the time data is available for lagging indicators, it is already too late to intervene and make changes. Therefore, in order to make impacts on student success, the College needs to focus its efforts on increasing leading indicators and reducing the achievement gaps for these indicators. Over the past few months, detailed data disaggregation has revealed additional groups that experience achievement gaps in retention and persistence. However, retention does not account for students who complete 1-2 quarter programs and then leave the College. Examining patterns in persistence trends (retention and/or completion) can provide better insights into student success and help to identify areas of focus. Students who start at RTC in the spring quarter have lower persistence rates than students who start in other quarters (average of 65.8% compared to 69.9% for all students). The 2014-15 cohort had the lowest persistence rate over the past five years (55.6%). Additional student groups experienced large achievement gaps in persistence, including disabled students (52.7%), WorkFirst students (54.7%), African-American students (58.2%), single parents (61%), part-time students (61%), Hispanic/Latino students (65.4%), and students starting in the spring quarter (65.8%). Although course success rates have been fairly stable over the past few years, the recent widening in the achievement gap may have important implications for persistence rate trends. For example, first quarter GPA predicts the student s likelihood of persisting within one year of entry. Students who persisted had a first quarter GPA of 3.39, compared to 2.33 for those who did not persist. The GPA gaps were even wider for students identifying as African-American (1.68 vs. 3.21), WorkFirst students (1.87 vs. 3.18), single parents (2.05 vs. 3.28), and spring start students (2.21 vs. 3.33). The basic studies student transition rate increased in the 2015-16 year. However, the achievement gap between White students and minority students is extraordinarily high at 13.8%. Hispanic/Latino students represent 25% of the basic studies population, but only transition at 8.5%. This group of students represents an opportunity for the department to focus its transition efforts. Based on a review of the data in this report, the IR Office recommends that the College develop a plan to address the decreases in retention, persistence, and transition rates, and their associated achievement gaps. If left unaddressed, the College will likely continue to experience decreases in retention, persistence, completion, and FTE, and will continue seeing achievement gaps widen. 33 P age