SCWI FinancialsPresented by David Armstrong

November 5, 2015

1

Approved vs actuals expenditures: 93.9% in 2014-1594.1% in 2013-1492.6% in 2012-1383.65% in 2011-1279% in 2010-1176% in 2009-10

2

Financials

% Expended vs

Approved Provincial Average

Category of Expenditure

Amount Under-spent

13-14 14-1597% 99% RPTs $16,18985% 87% Activities and Forums $251,46295% 94% Dual Credits $1,911,206

3

Under-spending by Category

Through contract change, funding can be moved from Activities and Forums to dual credits.

2014-15: 88% to 100% ($1.9 million unspent)◦12 RPTs over 90%

2013-14: 87% to 99% ($2 million unspent)◦12 RPTs over 90%

4

Dual Credit Approved Funding vs Actual Expenditures

money for programs that were approved, not cancelled and that show $0 expenditures

In 2014-15◦$82,167 (6 programs – 2 summer)

In 2013-14 ◦$16,155 (one summer SWAC program)

In 2011-12◦$1.01M

5

Funding – Dual Credit Programs Under-Spending

% Expended vs Approved – Prov. Average

Category of Expenditure

Range of % Expended by RPT

97% College Benchmark

•89% to 100%•15 RPTs over 90%

94% Board Benchmark

•81% to 100%•13 RPTs over 90%

95% Miscellaneous •0% to 100%•13 RPTs over 90%•1 RPT no requests

84% Transportation •58% to 100%•8 RPTs over 90%

6

2014-15 Expenditures

% Réelles vs approuvées – Moyenne prov.

Catégorie de dépenses

Écart en % -Dépenses des EPR

97 % Montants repères des collèges

•89 % à 100 %•15 % EPR au-delà de 90 %

94 % Montants repères des conseils

•81 % à 100 %•13 EPR au-delà de 90 %

95 % Divers •0 % à100 %•13 EPR au-delà de 90 %•1 EPR sans demande

84 % Transport •58 % à100 %•8 EPR au-delà de 90 %

7

Dépenses 2014-15

Dual Credit Approach (Approved vs Actual Students)

% Board Benchmark

% College Benchmark

Team-Taught at a Secondary School (95%) 94% 102%

Team-Taught at a College (98%) 100% 103%College Delivered at a Secondary School (95%) 95% 99%

College Delivered at a College (90%) 95% 95%Level 1 College Delivered at a College (89%) 86% 132%

8

2014-15 Approved vs Actual Benchmarks Expenditures by Approach

% Expended vs

Approved Provincial Average

Category of Expenditure

Amount Under-spent

13-14 14-1594% 97% College Benchmark $642,66391% 94% Board Benchmark $318,67490% 95% Miscellaneous $114,12481% 84% Transportation $796,024

9

Under-spending by Category 2014-15

Ranges from 58% to 100% (11% to 100% in 2011-12) $800,000 unspent

Continue to monitor closely Transportation amounts can be changed

through the contract change process and can be used to fund additional dual credits

Spending considered as part of approvals, if over or under, please provide rationales

Transportation funding model should not be a barrier to student participation

10

Transportation 2014-15

Focus continues to be on primary target audience, including SWAC programs

Benchmarks for Dual Credits, Activities and Forums continue◦ If benchmark does not meet estimated

expenditures – use Miscellaneous section

11

2016-19 Request For Proposals

Data-based decision making based on rubrics will continue

Most data is taken from SMART goal reports – ◦ % of students in the target group for whom the

program was designed, approved vs actual funding and student participants, retention, success, ages

◦ remember to include rationales, where necessary, in Notes section of proposals

Training – details to follow:◦ November 24 (afternoon) and November 25 (morning)

-English◦ French – Dec 1 (afternoon)

12

2016-19 RFP

Apprenticeship Level 1 In-School Dual Credits

Required to work with OYAP coordinators, TCU Field Office staff, College Apprenticeship Leads in the determination of Level 1 In-School Dual Credits

Students must have Registered Training Agreements to be eligible for TCU Seat Purchase

Only students in the primary target group eligible for SCWI Seat Purchase

13

2016-19 RFP

Apprenticeship Level 1 In-School Dual Credits◦ MTCU Level 1 Dual Credit Seat Purchase

(Confirmation of MTCU Seat Purchase Approvals for OYAP Dual Credits)

◦ SCWI Level 1 Dual Credit Seat Purchase (Confirmation by college and board partners of request for SCWI Seat Purchase for students in the Primary Target Group)

◦ Attestation of Training Facility for College Oversight for OYAP Dual Credit Program 2016-17

Proposals will only be considered if forms received on time

14

2016-19 RFP

Night School◦ only previously delivered approved programs will

be re-considered for the primary target group.

15

2016-19 RFP

Specialist High Skills Majors – New for 2015-16◦ While maintaining previous participant numbers,

new programs can be proposed to replace current dual credits for SHSM students.

◦ Responds to local changes to SHSM programs◦ RPTs will need to identify one related sector for

each program designed for SHSM students. If more than one, then please list others in the Notes section of your proposal.

16

2016-19 RFP

Questions and Answers

17