Recommendations of the Shared Leadership Steering Committees

Shared Leadership for a Stronger Montana Economy began in September 2003 when the Montana Board of Regents committed to find new ways for the Montana University System to take a more direct leadership role in the state’s economic development.

(Many thanks to the Montana Chamber of Commerce for passing this along- Russ)

Recommendations From the Distance Learning Steering Committee

Montana is too small and too poor to continue down its current path with distance education.

Sally Johnstone -Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications

Opportunities to improve distance learning in Montana

The committee agreed on the following description of the issues facing Montana’s distance learning programs:

The current method of providing distance and distributed courses and programs in Montana is decentralized. The Montana University System provides an electronic catalogue of distance education courses offered by system campuses, but that catalogue is essentially an electronic link to each campus and its own, individual description of distance opportunities available at that campus. Every institution within the Montana University System decides which programs and courses will be offered in a distance format. Each institution also decides where those programs will be offered and how those programs will be offered, with only modest consultation with other educational institutions throughout the State. Most of the institutions in the Montana University System also handle their own support service programs, like admissions, registration, tuition, financial aid, and advising. Disparities are confusing and costly for students, especially students who use the offerings of more than one campus to earn their degree or to supplement their already-acquired credentials.

There is no common approach among distance education providers to address the crucial issues affecting affordability and quality – tuition, duplication, articulation agreements between programs or institutions, transfer of coursework and best practices in teaching, assessment, and support services. There is very little consistency in services or support for distance students, who often do their coursework in an isolated setting far from the institution providing the classes.

Individual institutions within the Montana University System have occasionally established links with K-12 education or other providers of distance learning opportunities. There is, however, no consistent system-wide, on-going evaluation of the educational needs of business and industry, K-12 students or the average citizen. As a consequence, the State has no way to determine the unmet needs of employers, the missing skills of workers, the overlooked opportunities for additional K-12 coursework, or the unfulfilled educational aspirations of its citizens. There is little incentive to focus on learner populations that are different from, and not in direct competition with, traditional “bricks and mortar” instructional providers.

All units of the Montana University System have developed distance learning programs in the State, in a variety of different formats and for a number of different regions throughout Montana. Some of the units have made a significant and impressive commitment to distance learning. Some institutions have developed collaborative programs. Individual units of the Montana University System have also developed good relationships with private sector partners, particularly the rural cooperatives, to deliver coursework to remote parts of Montana. Those efforts should be commended. Unfortunately, most of the activity is sporadic and individualistic.

As a consequence, there is no single, coordinating entity with the responsibility and authority to:
• Increase the efficiency of distance education offerings in the State;
• Facilitate and fund pilot programs;
• Examine new business models for delivering and evaluating distance education programs;
• Determine the need for distance education programs or training in Montana;
• Evaluate the infrastructure opportunities and barriers that may exist in the State; and
• Serve as the advocate and arbitrator for a more efficient and collaborative model for all distance education programs in Montana.

Sally Johnstone, director of the Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications (WCET) in Boulder, Colorado, succinctly described the situation in Montana in November 2004, when she said that the State is too small and too poor to continue down its current path with distance education.

Recommendations for Montana
The steering committee makes the following recommendations to significantly improve distance learning opportunities and delivery in Montana.

Recommendation One: Develop a coordinated structure for distance learning in Montana, with the following characteristics and objectives:
• Create the position of a director, in the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education, charged with designing and implementing a statewide approach to distance learning.
• Establish a coordinating or advisory committee, with broad representation from both the users and providers of distance education programs, to assist the director in the development of the statewide program. The advisory committee should include a representative from the K-12 Montana Schools E-Learning Consortium. Members of the Distance Learning Steering Committee are also interested in continuing their commitment to this project by serving on the advisory committee.
• Develop a program that emphasizes the planning and coordination of distance learning opportunities in the State, including as much collaboration as possible with programs and organizations outside the Montana University System.
• Focus efforts, initially, on the following critical areas:
 Education and training needed by Montana’s workers and employers.
 Training needs of distance learning faculty, the learning needs of students, and the quality of distance programs in the State.
 Assessment of current and future distance delivery programs in the State (what is done well and what could be done differently).
 Infrastructure needs in the State, and the possible development of common or compatible standards for that infrastructure and the software and hardware that is utilized in distance programs.
 Creation of a program that is described, integrated and accessed through the Montana Distance Learning Gateway, an information website essential to the development of a successful distance learning program in the state. The Gateway is described more completely in Priority No. 2.

ESTIMATED COST: $200,000 for each year of the biennium.

Recommendation Two: Develop a Montana Distance Learning Gateway that will be the most immediate and important project for the director, and should have the following characteristics:
• Provides a gateway, built on the “one stop shop” model, where Montanans could learn about the distance delivery courses and programs available in the State via the internet.
• Links information sources on all distance delivery efforts in the State, including the Montana University System, other postsecondary institutions, the K-12 community, proprietary institutions, business and industry and other providers.
• Offers as many services as possible to support distance learners and providers in Montana. Initially, the gateway will have to rely on those services that are already in place at the various institutions and providers.
• Includes information on as many distance learning opportunities as possible in Montana, and how they fit together to provide educational credentials for the State’s citizens.

ESTIMATED COST: $100,000 for each year of the biennium.

Recommendation Three: Develop a needs assessment to determine the types of distance programs most needed by Montana citizens and employers. Once these needs are identified, new programs will need to be developed by institutions within the Montana University System, or other educational providers throughout the State. These programs should:
• Focus initially on the educational and training needs of Montana’s workers and employers.
• Concentrate on non-credit-bearing, workforce training programs.
• Address the needs of high demand occupations in critical areas of Montana’s economy, such as health care, energy, agriculture, natural resources, tourism and computing.
• Collaborate with as many providers as possible. To assist with that collaborative effort, an educational entity should be identified for each program, to oversee its delivery, coordinate its programming and services, and eliminate the proliferation of duplicated program offerings.
• Develop workforce training programs that are available to as many Montanans as possible, regardless of where they live.
• Serve as the model for all distance education programs in the State, including all current and future credit-bearing efforts.

ESTIMATED COST: $25,000 in the first year of the biennium. $350,000 – $375,000 for development of programs in each year of the biennium, based on the results of the needs assessment.

Recommendations from the Access to Postsecondary Education Steering Committee

Our future well being doesn’t rest solely on whether we increase postsecondary participation. But if we don’t, our chances for increased prosperity are greatly diminished. Access to affordable and high-quality education and training beyond high school is fundamental to our social and economic development, both as individuals and as a society.
Ted Sanders
Past President, Education Commission of the States

Opportunities to improve access to postsecondary education in Montana
The committee agreed on the following description of the barriers that affect many Montanans’ access to postsecondary education:

In Montana, and the entire United States, the global economy has made at least some postsecondary education “the price of admission” to the middle class and increasing wages over time. For instance, 31% of manufacturing jobs — traditionally the foundation of our middle class in America — now require education beyond a high school diploma compared with only 8% thirty years ago. In virtually all industries, jobs that do not require high skill levels are moving to low-wage economies and those that remain increasingly require advanced training. During the next 15 years, this country is projected to have a shortage of 21 million workers and two-thirds of these shortages will be in jobs requiring some postsecondary education. Demographic projections make it likely this shortage will be more pronounced, not less, in Montana relative to the rest of the country.
Education is undeniably linked to economic prosperity. Several studies have calculated that increasing a country’s average level of schooling by one year correlates to increased economic growth of between 5-15%. Education is also highly correlated with earning potential for individuals. As a group, workers who have at least some postsecondary education earn 62% more on average than those with only a high school education and the gap is widening. According to Tom Mortenson of the Pell Institute, postsecondary education “has become the dominant factor in the growth of personal incomes and the living standards of people, families, cities and states.”
Despite the increasing importance of education to the individual and the state, Montana is facing some concerning trends. Montana’s public high school graduation rates peaked at 86.7% in 1993 and had dropped to 77% in 2001, the lowest at any time in the past two decades. 7.6% of teenagers between the ages of 16 and 19 are considered ‘dropouts’ – neither a high school graduate nor enrolled in school nor looking for work. Montana also faces low college matriculation rates: For every 100 Montana students who enter 9th grade only 42 are likely to graduate high school four years later and enroll in college within a year. While Montana still ranks in the top 10 states for high school graduation rates, it ranks in the bottom third for the rate our students continue on to postsecondary education. Completion rates also lag behind the rest of the nation. Only 39.7% of students who enter a Montana four-year institution actually graduate, compared to a national average rate of 48.2%, and students from our least affluent counties have dramatically lower graduation and participation rates than the state’s average.

Cost of Postsecondary Education is Increasingly a Barrier
Montana faces increasingly high postsecondary education costs relative to income levels. In 1994 Montana’s average tuition was $27 below the 15 western states’ average; in 2004 it was $703 above the average. Montanans must now pay a 40% higher share of their incomes for resident tuition and fees than residents of the other western states. The average student debt for a Montana university graduate is $20,000 and rising. With these trends, it is no surprise that in 2000-01 the college participation rate for Montana students from low-income families was 27.9% compared to 42% for the general population. According to Measuring Up 2000, the state of Montana received a grade of “D-“ for affordability. In 2002, the affordability grade sank to “F.”

High tuition does not create as much of a barrier to education if it is coupled with relatively high tuition assistance. Virtually every state in the US has a substantial need-based aid program, but Montana is far behind every other state in the region in the amount of aid provided our students. Montana appropriations for need-based aid are just $62 per student as compared to $238 per student for the other 15 western states. Even in Montana’s two-year colleges – in most states a low-cost point of entry for many students – cost is increasingly a barrier. Our Colleges of Technology have the highest tuition rates in the country and as a whole, the average Montana family pays 25% of its income at two-year colleges compared to 16% nationally.

Federal loan limits no longer provide many Montana students and families with sufficient lending capacity to satisfy the cost of education. For the first time, the cost of education (including room and board) now exceeds the amount of borrowing available to many Montanans. There simply isn’t enough need-based aid to serve our Montana residents and this lack of aid impacts enrollment, persistence, and success in postsecondary environments.

To compound the problem, Montana doesn’t take full advantage of potential partners with respect to improving need-based aid. For example, there are few partnerships with private business for matching funds (grants or scholarships), coordinated efforts with counselors and mentors to navigate the financial aid maze, or partnerships with the State to create incentives for individuals or businesses to increase support.

Most existing aid also primarily benefits only traditional, full-time students. This is of great concern in a changing economy that increasingly requires citizens to use the postsecondary education system to upgrade skills or certifications. Presently, only students enrolled at least half time in degree-seeking programs qualify for state or federal aid. Montana needs to provide financial resources to ensure that all residents are provided the opportunity to pursue postsecondary education for life-long learning. This will require aid designed to support part-time, non-traditional students who may only need specific skills to improve their employability — skills that might be obtained with just one or two courses.

Other barriers to postsecondary education
Many Montana students and families need additional support and assistance in order to aspire to, prepare for, and successfully complete postsecondary education. Considering how critical postsecondary attainment is for our economic future, policies to promote access must focus on ways to provide students, particularly underserved students, the information and guidance they need. According to The Education Resources Institute, individuals from families with limited postsecondary experience are less likely to have the personal or institutional connections through which students typically receive encouragement and guidance. School counselors attempt to meet these needs for all students, but are often unable to do so as a result of limited time and resources.

Montanans also often lack adequate information of available financial resources or are intimidated by the process. The investment required for postsecondary education is often perceived to be too costly, or the benefit not sufficient to warrant the expense and commitment required. As a result, some Montana families do not accept the financial obligation of funding a student’s education due to a lack of information on how to receive assistance.

Montanans enrolling in postsecondary education sometimes also lack adequate preparation. The numbers of students taking college remedial courses is evidence of this problem. The issue is particularly pronounced for non-traditional students who have been out of high school for an extended period of time and typically require considerable remedial coursework to succeed in postsecondary education.

Lack of consistent data impedes progress
Good policy begins with good information. Policymakers need to start with reliable data that will tell the story about performance and conditions in their state. Access to education is a complex issue and Montana’s residents and students experience a variety of interrelated barriers. Without comprehensive, Montana-specific data it is difficult to determine which citizens are being precluded from a postsecondary education and why.

Current information about Montana’s postsecondary education “pipeline” is not readily available or routinely reported. Montana also lacks a student unit record system to track students throughout their educational careers. Currently, data is not collected or analyzed in a comprehensive manner that allows monitoring and analysis of student movement throughout Montana’s educational system, P-20.

Access-related data is not consistently disaggregated to allow an analysis of the participation and performance of sub-groups such as low-income or minority students. This makes targeting high-need segments of the Montana population difficult. Qualitative data related to access (e.g. student/family “college knowledge,” student aspirations, or parental/family support for postsecondary education) is based on anecdotal evidence, sporadic surveys, and random sampling.

Montana also has little information about potential students who do not enroll or apply for financial aid. Investigating and reporting reasons for these “left out students” would determine what combination of additional information, encouragement, or financial assistance would be most effective in increasing college matriculation and completion rates. Clearly, the State needs information in a number of key access-related areas in order to make well-informed decisions.

Recommendations for Montana
The steering committee makes the following recommendations to significantly improve access to postsecondary education for all Montanans:

Recommendation One: Provide additional need-based aid for both traditional and non-traditional students that will significantly help Montanans participate in and complete formal education beyond high school.

• Expand state funding to match the national average for need-based aid. The committee recommends that the legislature take a stepped approach over the next four years to increase the per student contribution of $62 up to the national average (currently $316). The committee estimates that increasing Montana need-based aid to the national average will cost approximately $9 million in each year. The committee understands the financial implications of this recommendation and proposes a 3-year transition to this target funding level.

• As part of the expansion of need-based aid, create a program that will serve students enrolled less than half-time or in programs that are not Title IV eligible.

• Establish a broad-based advisory group to determine policies and best practices for need-based aid. This group would be responsible for making recommendations to align state policies and funding practices with the needs and desires of the state, as well as determining best practices in the administration of need-based aid programs.

• Develop a state based alternative loan program. The State of Montana should create a ‘last stop” loan program for those who have received all other sources of available aid and have utilized all federal borrowing for which they are eligible. Such a loan program should involve risk sharing by the lender, state government, and schools (both public and private) in Montana. It should be developed in partnership with the State’s private lending community and those presently involved in federal loan programs. The cost of this program will depend on the level of risk sharing by all parties. The state costs of a $20 million annual loan volume program could range from $1-2 million per year.

ESTIMATED COST: $4.5 million for need-based aid per year in the next biennium. $9 million per year for the subsequent biennium. The alternative loan program mid-range cost estimate is $1.5 million per year, $3 million per biennium.

Recommendation Two: Develop a method to identify, collect, analyze and share existing data and prioritize the need for additional data/research.

• Develop a comprehensive matrix/road-map of data to define and describe critical aspects of access to postsecondary education for Montana citizens.
 Identify what information related to postsecondary access and success is already being collected.
 Determine how best to share and use this existing data to develop strategies for improving access to postsecondary education.
 Determine the need for, and priority of, additional data needed to make targeted policy decisions to expand access to, and success in, the state’s postsecondary system.
 Determine what, if any, research needs to be done to collect missing or incomplete data.

• Develop a system/infrastructure that supports on-going identification, collection, analyzation and reporting of access data and research.
 Provide dedicated staff and resources for the purposes of determining what data exists, who controls various data, and how best to compile, analyze, and manage necessary data.
 Share comprehensive data with appropriate parties (e.g. agencies, school districts, colleges and universities, legislature) on at least an annual basis.
 Assemble an advisory group to review data collection efforts, analysis and reporting.

• Develop a research agenda that will identify critical aspects of access-to-postsecondary education problems and solutions.

ESTIMATED COST: $140,000 per year.

Recommendation Three: Develop and provide resources for a Montana Access-to-Education Coordinating & Advisory Council. This council should consist of public and private sector partners that are committed to enhancing Montana citizens’ efforts to succeed in postsecondary education and the workforce beyond high school.

This council should be charged to:
• Provide guidance and make recommendations on critical access issues to state policymakers, education professionals, and citizens.
• Help design and coordinate a comprehensive outreach and empowerment network that motivates citizens to value, enroll in, and successfully complete postsecondary education in Montana.
• Coordinate a sustained public communication and outreach campaign to create better awareness of the value and accessibility of postsecondary education for all Montanans.
• Work with current providers to improve, enhance, and expand awareness and career counseling services to include a “career store.” The career store will serve as a single point of contact that provides comprehensive career planning information and other resources to Montanans interested in postsecondary education or training.
• Develop a statewide initiative that involves businesses, organizations and individuals in mentoring and encouraging Montana students and families to aspire to, and prepare for, successful postsecondary education and career success.
• Provide support to organizations and other interested parties as they implement programs that support the council’s objectives and help ensure the efforts of involved organizations are coordinated in a way that optimizes limited resources.
• Coordinate efforts with the Board of Education’s Indian Education for All and P-20 Committees that are working to align and improve student transitions between education systems and increase student success at all levels.

ESTIMATED COST: $200,000 for council operations, travel, and supporting activities such as disseminating reports, convening meetings of key stakeholders, sponsoring an annual “Access” conference, and other activities related to the council’s charge.

Recommendations from the Partnership for Workforce Training Steering Committee

It has been said that the 21st century economy offers a choice between "working smart" or "working cheap." I would argue that this is not a choice. If the United States does not make a conscious decision to "work smart" in terms of having a world-class workforce development system to close the skills gap and facilitate life-long learning for the workforce – it will wind up working cheap.

David A. Sampson
Assistant Secretary
U.S. Department of Commerce

Opportunities to improve workforce training in Montana
The committee agreed upon the following problems Montana faces in producing enough skilled workers to meet the needs of our state:

Connections with Montana businesses are lacking
The business community often does not know how to tap the resources and expertise of the Montana University System (MUS). Lack of programs, people and information are not always the problem. Connecting business and industry to the right resources at the right time is the problem. The MUS does not have a clear picture of the needs of business and industry, especially those most critical to the future economic well being of the state. Each unit of the system has its own process for connecting with their local business community, but this does not occur in a coordinated fashion across the state. This lack of coordination makes it very difficult to aggregate workforce needs for the state as a whole.

The Montana University System cannot ensure existing and potential Montana industries that they will have a workforce prepared and credentialed to meet their business demands if it does not partner with the private sector to make sure there is a continuous loop of information exchanged. Whether Montanans are preparing for work, adding value to their current work, or changing their line of work, they need access to higher education programs that efficiently and consistently develop the proficiencies required in the workplace.

Value of two-year education is not well understood
The committee agreed that, in Montana, there is too little awareness of the benefits and value of two-year education as a pathway to high-skill, high-wage employment and as a viable option for incumbent worker retraining and upgrading. Also, it is not widely recognized that two-year colleges can be the first step toward a four-year degree and can be accessed close to home at a lower total cost. There is a need to improve the image of these colleges among the business community, prospective students, teachers, counselors and parents.

Dual enrollment programs are not fully utilized
Montana’s dual enrollment programs are not offered in a consistent manner across the educational system. They are few in number and inconsistent in nomenclature, prerequisites, cost and application. Also, Montana has not benchmarked the number of courses offered or the number of students earning credit through a dual enrollment course. During the 2001 legislative session, HB 265 was passed to provide dual enrollment courses through interlocal agreements between high schools and higher educational institutions. This legislation did not, however, provide sufficient guidance on the structure of that agreement which has exacerbated the inconsistency. As a result, Montana does not have statewide criteria for programs, which are developed almost exclusively on an individual-institution basis.

According to the Community College Research Center (CCRC): “When no policy exists, decisions about dual enrollment are left up to individual institutions. Therefore, when states choose not to provide extensive dual enrollment policy, they may be promoting institutional flexibility and creativity. However, they also run the risk of creating a system in which students’ access to dual enrollment is dependent upon where they live or go to school.”

Dual enrollment programs serve to promote more educational options, save students time and money on a college degree, provide greater academic opportunities for students in small rural schools, and increase student aspirations to go to college at the two- or four-year level. The committee has identified the middle 50%, by grade average, of high school students as the population most likely to benefit from additional dual enrollment programs. Since dual enrollment programs should do more than merely permit students to enroll in college courses, services such as additional counseling and social support should be provided. Consideration should also be given to balancing offerings between academically-oriented students and technically-oriented students.

Montana lacks a cohesive two-year college system
Montana does not have a unified two-year system. A system is defined as a set or arrangement of things so related or connected as to form a unity or organic whole (Webster’s New World Dictionary). Two-year colleges in Montana include Community Colleges, Colleges of Technology and Tribal Colleges, and 2-year programs at some four-year units. Each type of institution has its own unique form of organizational structure, funding, governance, and history.

Three Community Colleges
Montana has three community colleges: Flathead Valley Community College in Kalispell/Libby, Miles Community College in Miles City, and Dawson Community College in Glendive. Each community college has its own Board of Trustees and the community college district is levied for the financial support of the college. Governance of the three community colleges in Montana derives from Article X of the Montana Constitution. Each community college has it’s own board of trustees but the Board of Regents also approves budgets and programs after being approved by each community colleges board of trustees. This creates, in effect, a joint governance structure that must balance the role of the college’s own board with that of the State Board of Regents. Community College presidents report directly to their locally elected governing boards and not through one of the state’s 4-year universities. Funding comes from a combination of state appropriation and local levies.

Seven Tribal Colleges
Tribal Colleges were created in response to the higher education needs of Native Americans, and generally serve geographically isolated populations that have no other means of accessing education beyond the high school level. Montana’s seven tribal colleges are controlled by their respective tribal governments.
Tribal Colleges are in a unique funding situation. They do not receive funding from state governments due to their status as trust territories, and tribal governments cannot levy property taxes. As a result, they rely heavily on federal funds for core operational funding. Most funding comes from the Tribally Controlled College and University Assistance Act of 1978 (TCCUAA), which is administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Funds, primarily from Title I, are allocated to 25 of the nation’s colleges based on the number of Indian students from federally recognized tribes that are enrolled.
Other sources of funding for tribal colleges include the 1996 White House Executive Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities (No. 13021), which elevated their status by requiring federal departments and agencies to develop specific strategies to support Tribal Colleges and Universities, and 1994 federal legislation providing land-grant status to tribal colleges. Status as a land-grant institution means that Tribal Colleges have access to resources that can be invested in additional faculty and equipment to conduct agricultural research and extension activities, independently and/or in collaboration with four-year institutions.
Five Colleges of Technology
In 1987 a restructuring of the state’s vocational-technical centers occurred. Each of the schools was moved from the K-12 system to the Montana University System and given “stand-alone” status as a College of Technology (COT). In 1994, Phase One of the Montana University System restructuring was completed and three of the COTs (Butte, Missoula, and Billings) became affiliated with the four-year campus in their respective community. Each COT, including the two remaining stand-alone institutions in Great Falls and Helena, are now affiliated with either Montana State University or the University of Montana. However, the COT in Great Falls and in Helena are distinct institutions, independently accredited and locally administered.

Where the Colleges of Technology are co-located with four-year units, they are merged with the respective campuses. As defined by the Montana Board of Regents Policy and Procedures Manual, merger “is the fusion or absorption of one institution into another with the result that the merged institution ceases to have an independent existence. A merged institution may retain, at the discretion of the Regents, certain elements of the unique role and mission that characterized it prior to merger.”

The merged Colleges of Technology are headed by a Dean who reports to the chief academic officer of the institution with which the college is merged. The Dean of the merged College of Technology is expected to perform the same functions typically performed by Deans of other schools and colleges within higher education institutions. The Deans of the “stand-alone” Colleges of Technology report directly to the Presidents of their respective universities and also report on academic matters to the chief academic officer. Unlike the deans at merged Colleges of Technology, the Deans of the Colleges of Technology in Great Falls and Helena function as CEOs of their respective campuses.

Although the five Colleges of Technology (COT) are each affiliated with one of the two universities, the relationship with their respective affiliate differs:
• The stand-alone units – MSU Great Falls and UM Helena COT — have the same autonomy with regard to program development, planning, and accreditation as the four-year institutions in the university system.
• The stand-alone units are not required to go through a parent-institution faculty senate and university curriculum committee for program approval, as the merged campuses must.
• The CEOs of the two “stand-alone” COTs have the title of Dean, unlike their counterparts in the Community Colleges, who have the title of President. This creates confusion, particularly with counterparts in other states, and also does not truly define their function. The Deans of the merged COTS are not considered Chief Executive Officers of their respective campuses.
• On the administratively merged campuses, budget and resource allocation decisions are managed by each chancellor in consultation with the respective university president and the Commissioner. The chancellor provides campus leadership and coordination for fiscal affairs.

Complexity Has a Negative Impact
The committee concluded that Montana’s complex organizational and reporting structure makes it difficult to communicate, as a system, the importance of two-year colleges to the State. The structure also hinders statewide coordination. Directly or indirectly, the widely varying “lines of authority” of our two-year programs:
• Creates confusion regarding the function of the COT relative to the community colleges.
• Limits the merged COT campuses’ ability to be responsive to business needs due to the program/curriculum approval process that is not required by the stand-alone COTs in Helena and Great Falls.
• Impedes collaboration and coordination of services and programs, particularly life-long learning and customized training as a result of a funding mechanism based on FTE.
• Creates a misunderstanding of what two-year degrees (AA, AS, AAS) mean to employers and students.
• Impedes the ability at the state level to coordinate two-year specific policies and system-wide improvements.

Montana lacks the data needed to make system-wide decisions
Montana does not have a data management system that shares information across multiple workforce development programs. These programs include education, both K-12 and postsecondary education; Workforce Investment Act Title III and I-B; Adult Education and Family Literacy; Vocational Rehabilitation; Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; and Apprenticeship programs.

Information remains scattered in various program level Management Information Systems (MISs) and there is no mechanism for integrating the information from the multiple MISs to support performance measurement and reporting as a statewide system. With the fragmentation of workforce development programs in the state, there is no clear authority for any one entity to take a lead in developing a system that would result in increased accountability, improved planning, better research, efficiency, and a sense of shared-responsibility to achieve common system goals.

An Ad Hoc Statewide Council has Developed
A council, chaired by the Director of Workforce Development and Two-Year Education, Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education, has been meeting for about two years. The members of the council include the Presidents of our Community Colleges, Deans of the COTs, and their respective academic officers. Although Tribal College administrators have been invited, their participation has been minimal and this remains an issue to be addressed. The council evolved from an earlier ad hoc two-year committee that was chaired by the Deputy Commissioner for Academic Affairs. In 2003, this committee became the Two-Year Education Council, still ad hoc in nature. Although this group is cohesive in its vision for two-year education, it is not recognized as a formal body by the Board of Regents and is therefore limited in its ability to influence policy.

Recommendations for Montana
The steering committee makes the following recommendations to significantly improve workforce training opportunities and delivery in Montana:

Recommendation One: Improve the connection between Montana businesses and the states workforce training and education providers.

• Establish a fund to provide customized and specific training for Montana workers and businesses. A mechanism for accessing this fund should be established and should include joint business/college applications. Utilization of part of the Unemployment Insurance Trust could be considered as a potential long-term funding source.
• Designate the two-year programs, located at both two- and four-year campuses, as the point of entry for workforce training needed by businesses. Establish a point-of-contact at the state level to help coordinate customized training for businesses and to provide ongoing identification of needs.
• Develop a plan to communicate to businesses the training available in the state’s two-year programs.
• Establish authority and responsibility within the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education to work with businesses and two-year programs to prioritize and meet current and future business needs. The Commissioner’s Office needs to assure appropriate funding to meet the identified needs.

ESTIMATED COST: $2,200,000 per year, with most of these funds dedicated to new or expanded training programs.

Recommendation Two: Assess current perceptions of workforce training by businesses and economic development organizations and develop strategies to increase the awareness, by these groups, of the value of two-year education in Montana — both regionally and statewide. These strategies should:

• Communicate the distinction of different degree paths.
• Promote specific skill set training.
• Establish stronger local networks that will better connect the business community with the education community.
• Create a marketing plan that will highlight successes and examples of responsive 2-year programs in the state.
• Empower the two-year council to provide periodic reports on progress with the communications, marketing, and awareness campaign (see recommendation 3).
• Encourage additional partnerships between two-year colleges and businesses to attract new businesses to Montana.
• Develop an MOU with the Montana Department of Commerce to formalize a partnership with the state’s ten Small Business Development Centers (SBDC) across the state.

ESTIMATED COST: $200,000 per year.

Recommendation Three: Develop awareness about employment and educational opportunities offered by two-year colleges among students, counselors, teachers, parents, and working adults. The awareness effort should aim to create a fundamental mindset change and needs to:
• Define the “competitive advantage” of Montana’s two-year programs.
• Involve a media campaign targeted toward adults in Montana, including expansion of the Return to Learn program (a life-long learning promotion effort).
• Focus on the promotion of opportunities for career skill upgrading and/or retraining.

ESTIMATED COST: $100,000 per year.

Recommendation Four: Develop a partnership with the Department of Labor apprenticeship programs, organized labor, and the two-year programs — utilizing the “New Jersey” model as a benchmark – to improve the delivery of apprenticeship training and programs.

ESTIMATED COST: $200,000 per year.

Recommendation Five: Create a structure and/or mechanism to move two-year education in Montana toward a stronger system-wide approach.
• Request that the Board of Regents institutionalize the Two-Year Education Council as a formal and permanent body within the University structure. The Board of Regents should authorize the Two-Year Education Council to draft a statement of appropriate charter, with special attention as to how the Council should function with regard to workforce development in Montana. The Board of Regents should review and approve the statement of charter.
• Change the name of the Colleges of Technology to more accurately reflect the scope of educational offerings, considering the possibility of “community colleges” while recognizing the legislative mandates that would need to be addressed (e.g., the local tax support requirement for community colleges).
• Change the AAS/Certificate program & curricular approval process for the three merged COTs (Billings, Butte, Missoula) to parallel the stand-alone COTs (Great Falls & Helena) with the end result of making the process more flexible and responsive to industry needs.
• Standardize two-year degrees, especially the Associate of Applied Science (AAS), while still allowing for degrees to address unique local needs. Utilize the Two-Year Education Council to guide this standardization.
• Assess funding models and tuition costs and recommend changes that will improve 2-year program development and delivery, especially for part-time and non-traditional students.
• Earmark tuition funds resulting from new AAS and certificate programs for the use by the programs at the merged Colleges of Technology.

ESTIMATED COST: $0 per year.

Recommendation Six: Evaluate whether the current structure and/or combination of Community Colleges and Colleges of Technology is best suited to meet our state and local workforce needs. Specifically submit a request to Governor Schweitzer for permission to use existing authorized funds under contract (for FY 2005) with Regional Technology Strategy, Inc. to conduct an evaluation of two-year education in Montana. This study should make recommendations for the principle strategic role of the two-year system in Montana, considering a twenty-year planning horizon, and include input from business, government and education.

ESTIMATED COST: $0 per year.

Recommendation Seven: Increase the number and use of dual enrollment programs in Montana, especially targeting the middle 50%, by grade average, of high school students.
• Support the existing Board of Education Dual Enrollment Task Force and establish a standardized procedure for dual enrollment offerings within the state.
• Establish a database of students receiving dual enrollment credits, both academic and technical. This database will provide information to assess the effectiveness of existing programs and help target resources for the most critical new program development.

ESTIMATED COST: $0 per year.

Recommendation Eight: Improve data collection and use to provide better- targeted resources for workforce training.
• Appoint a consortium, reporting to the Board of Regents Workforce Development Committee, with representatives from: Commissioner of Higher Education, MT Dept. of Labor, tribal councils, private businesses, and the for-profit training industry.
• The consortium should assure that the state’s data collection takes advantage of existing data and then recommend funding for additional needed data collection and analysis.
• The consortium should coordinate system-wide data sharing and collection from, among others: the K-12 system, postsecondary education system, Workforce Investment Boards (state and local), adult education, family literacy, vocational rehabilitation, TANF and apprenticeship programs.

ESTIMATED COST: $0 per year (use federal Perkins funds).

For more information: http://www.sharedleadership.montana.edu/