Successful and Sustainable Program Development

1. Successful and Sustainable Program Development Renee Kuharski, Ph.D. ~ Colorado Mountain College Chi-Chung Keung ~ Interact Communications League for Innovation March 2012, Philadelphia, PA

2. Session Outcomes • Learn how Colorado Mountain College revitalized their New Program process. • Hear how Colorado Mountain College partnered and strategized with Interact Communications for their front-end program development. • Think about how your college can benefit from faster and more reliable program planning for program design and launch

3. The Need

4. Colorado Mountain College • Serves 9 counties & 12,000 square miles in the Colorado Rockies • 7 campuses that include 3 residential campuses, 11 learning centers, plus online learning • 23,000 students (unduplicated headcount) • An Awakening that Innovation was Key Put Simply….

5. The future of our college depends on how quickly and effectively we identify community needs and develop or update programs to meet those needs.

6. The Issue(s)

7. Beginning of Downturn (2007) • Solicited Program Ideas Internally • Difficult to Evaluate • Forms but not Clarity of Process in how to answer • Difficult to clearly gauge market needs • Process could be politicized between campuses and programs

8. Real Needs Impact • New Bachelor’s Degrees Could Be Slow to Launch • Morale Issues Follow Program Concepting • Political Ramifications of Saying No to Local Industries • Not Responding Quickly Enough to Community Needs • Responding Too Quickly to Non-Vetted Internal Ideas

9. How It Started

10. A Mix of Brainstormed Programs • AAS - Film and Digital Design • AAS & Certificate - Video Game Developer • Certificate - Forestry Technician • AAS & Certificate – Medical Assistant • Restaurant Management • New Media

11. Had • Faculty/staff completed forms • Program ideas • Lobbying for favorites

12. Did NOT Have • A Process to Generate and Verify Real Market Trends • Staff to Do the Needed Leg-Work • A Fair Way to compare Markets between Programs • A Fair Way to Compare Markets between Campuses • Enough Hours in the Day

13. Approached Interact Communications • Full-Service Marketing and Research Firm • Two-Year College Exclusive Focus • All Staff have two-year experience • A Research-Based Process to Program Decision Making

14. Interact’s Phased-In Review Process

15. Phase One – Environmental Scan • TRENDS • Review and Cost Reference 5 National Job and Trend Databases across ALL RELATED JOB TYPES • Review and Cost Reference State and Professional Trend Databases • Review Job and Salary Potential • COMPETITION • Review All Public and Private Colleges for Program Competition • Cross-Reference District population with Program Availability and Create Travel/Online Matrix • EMPLOYER • Identify all potential Employer Types for Possible Phase 2

16. Phase One Phase One – Environmental Scan

17. Phase 2 – B&I Scan • Review of All Job Categories and Create Employer List • Integrate Local Advisory and Employer List • Develop Custom Survey of Needs/Study Area/Job Availability and Salary Ranges • Develop Sampling Strategy (Or Reach the Entire Population) • Phone Survey of Employers • Report with Go or No-Go Recommendation • Ideas for Market Expansion • Salary and Training Trends • Training Focus Areas

18. Phase 2 – B&I Scan

19. Phase 3 – Potential Student Survey • Core Population Location • Hidden Underemployed Population • Working Population for Skill Upgrade • Develop Custom Survey (Phone/Web) around: • Marketing Language • Training Needs • Delivery of Message • Time to Decision • Report that Recommends: • Marketing Lead Time • Outreach Hot Spots • Messaging Factors

20. Phase 3 – Potential Student Survey

21. First Time Through with CMC

22. How It Strengthened CMC

23. CMC Used the Research for: • Decision making ~ based on the unbiased recommendations provided in the study to move a program forward or not • Program sustainability ~ trendy vs. long term job focused • Long term strategic perspective ~ Incorporated a formal and strategic look at local, state and national data • CRITICAL: This helped drive internal changes to our Review Approach

24. CMC Clarified their Internal Processes

25. Advantages of Process • Strengthened external involvement on the front end • Impacts on the college as a whole looked at upfront i.e., costs for human (faculty & staff) and physical resources (new and/or remodeled facilities, equipment, etc. , risk management (safety) • Reduce the Number of Phase One Research Projects • Program concept more thoroughly defined • Going to a Phase One is a College-Wide Process

26. Impact on Organization • There are Real-Time Checks to the System • Provides leadership and direction in the development of new programs • Assists in generating and refining new program ideas • Maintains a transparent, active and results-oriented attitude • Does not slow new program development but demands reliability

27. Phase 2- (Employer Study) Defines the Program Clearly

28. Phase 3- (Student Potential) Prepares the Program for Launch

29. The Ah-Ha’s

30. Internal Ah-ha’s • Increased awareness of programs being developed by the college in the community, region, etc. • B & I scan helped shape programs or add areas not previously considered. • Provided the program with new and passionate additional advisory committee members • Ah-ha moments – A campus team could be engaged and passionate about their program – but not correct • Data vs. Emotion • Clarity vs. Trendy • The B & I Scan highlights employment and economy

31. External Ah-ha’s • Credibility with Business Community that there is Data-Driven Decision Making • Realistic Responsiveness • Reduce Campus Conflict due to Data-Focus • Focus on Lasting Programs – Not Trendy Ones

32. Could this have been done Internally? No, for a number of reasons… • Responsiveness in terms of other “things” on plate • Allocation of staff time • Lack of enough staff to be able to dedicate time • Consistency of reports for each program • Clear reporting ~ quantitative data provided with the Qualitative Narrative • A Complete Absence of Program/Campus Bias

33. Leadership Perspective • College leadership has Real Data • Approved the Two-phase CMC new program process as well as the requirement for a feasibility study • Accreditation is Streamlined: • HLC (North Central Accreditation) & DOE (Gainful Employment), CCCS all require that the college can answer the question ~ “how do you know this will provide students with employment or transfer opportunities” • The impact on program and college resources for planning is clear and upfront • Begins the process of the program’s five-year plan

34. Stronger New Programs • Medical Assistant • New Media • Restaurant/Culinary Management • Renewal Energy Why are they Stronger for the Process? • College was able to make choices using data-driven decision making • Community engaged ~ partnerships strengthened • Provided college with “outside the box” ideas for future expansion • Tied to College strategic plan

35. At CMC Pre-Development is our Stage 0 • Interact’s Phase 1 – A Low Cost Vetting and Proof of Clarity • Interact’s Phase 2 – Focus on Local Needs • Integrate Wider Findings • Details on Program Courses • Real Learning Outcomes Needed • A Stronger Assessment • Pathways • Interacts Phase 3 – When There is a Program Need – But it is not widely known in Community • Faster start up

36. At CMC We leverage our Internal and External Resources to Clarify and Streamline the Process

37. The Results • 11 Total Programs Vetted over 5 years • Resulting in 5 Total New Program and 1 SWOT analysis • 1 study currently underway CMC learned how to better leverage our resources internally and externally, use the data and not just our passion

38. A Strong Part of our Strategic Planning Process Strong Part of our Strategic Planning Process

39. Continuing Relationship • Low Cost • High Quality • Fast and Responsive • Reviewing the data upfront, before the college invests resources, provides long term cost savings…

40. Successful and Sustainable Program Development League for Innovation ~ March 2012 /interactcom /interact interactcom.com @InnovationsConf #INN12 Chichung.keung@interactcom.com ~ Chi-Chung Keung Interact Communications rkuharski@coloradomtn.edu ~ Renee Kuharski, Ph.D. Colorado Mountain College