Report 2017-102 Recommendation 7 Responses

Report 2017-102: California Community Colleges: The Colleges Reviewed Are Not Adequately Monitoring Services for Technology Accessibility, and Districts and Colleges Should Formalize Procedures for Upgrading Technology (Release Date: December 2017)

Recommendation #7 To: Community Colleges Chancellor's Office

To assist all community colleges in increasing transparency of their shared governance decision-making processes, by September 2018, the Chancellor's Office should issue guidance to the community colleges on establishing procedures to document the attendees, input received, and agreements reached during department meetings, including those to consider technology equipment requests.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2020

see response provided for June 2018 update.

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Will Not Implement

As we previously stated in our response to the Chancellor's Office response from June 2018: We did not recommend that the Chancellor's Office dictate details of the local shared governance policies and procedures as the Chancellor's Office response states. Instead, our recommendation is for the Chancellor's Office to issue guidance to the community colleges on establishing procedures to document the attendees, input received, and agreements reached during department meetings, including those to consider technology equipment requests. We believe the guidance is important; as we state on page 39 of our report, because the community colleges have not established procedures for instructional department staff to follow to consistently document the input received, the colleges cannot always demonstrate to stakeholders that their processes are transparent. We therefore stand behind our recommendation.

1-Year Agency Response

see response provided June 2018.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 1-Year Status: Will Not Implement

As we previously stated in our response to the Chancellor's Office response from June 2018: We did not recommend that the Chancellor's Office dictate details of the local shared governance policies and procedures as the Chancellor's Office response states. Instead, our recommendation is for the Chancellor's Office to issue guidance to the community colleges on establishing procedures to document the attendees, input received, and agreements reached during department meetings, including those to consider technology equipment requests. We believe the guidance is important; as we state on page 39 of our report, because the community colleges have not established procedures for instructional department staff to follow to consistently document the input received, the colleges cannot always demonstrate to stakeholders that their processes are transparent. We therefore stand behind our recommendation.

6-Month Agency Response

The Board of Governors has established, by legislation, minimum standards for local shared-governance decision making processes consistent with Education Code Section 70901(b)(1)(E). The practical details of local shared governance processes, including procedures to document attendee input and agreements reached at department meetings, are a matter of local authority and control in the community college system. It would not be appropriate or practicable for the Chancellor's Office to dictate the details of the local shared governance policies and procedures. Accordingly, the Chancellor's Office declines the invitation to issue general guidance to the community colleges on the transparency of local shared governance decision-making processes.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 6-Month Status: Will Not Implement

We did not recommend that the Chancellor's Office dictate details of the local shared governance policies and procedures as the Chancellor's Office response states. Instead, our recommendation is for the Chancellor's Office to issue guidance to the community colleges on establishing procedures to document the attendees, input received, and agreements reached during department meetings, including those to consider technology equipment requests. We believe the guidance is important; as we state on page 39 of our report, because the community colleges have not established procedures for instructional department staff to follow to consistently document the input received, the colleges cannot always demonstrate to stakeholders that their processes are transparent. We therefore stand behind our recommendation.

60-Day Agency Response

To implement this recommendation the Chancellor's Office will consider engaging an ad hoc workgroup comprised of Consultation Council members to develop a set of guidelines that would be adopted by the Board of Governors and distributed to colleges. These guidelines would explained in a series of webinars and conference presentations as well as being posted on the Chancellor's Office website. This recommendation needs to be vetted in the Chancellor's Cabinet and implemented at the executive level.

California State Auditor's Assessment of 60-Day Status: Pending

All Recommendations in 2017-102

Agency responses received are posted verbatim.