LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Michigan Office of the
Auditor General
Thomas H. McTavish, C.P.A.
Auditor General

EXECUTIVE DIGEST #3224001
LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

INTRODUCTION
This report, issued in December 2001, contains the results of our performance audit of Lansing Community College.

AUDIT PURPOSE
This performance audit was conducted under the authority of Section 212(2), Act 272, P.A. 2000 (a section of the community college appropriations act), which mandates that the Auditor General conduct not less than three performance audits of community colleges each year.

BACKGROUND
Lansing Community College is a public, two-year institution of higher education offering academic, vocational-technical, and continuing education programs. The College district is composed of the region that lies within a 30-mile radius of the City of Lansing and includes the following public school districts: Bath, Dansville, DeWitt, East Lansing, Grand Ledge, Haslett, Holt, Lansing, Leslie, Mason, Okemos, Stockbridge, Waverly, Webberville, and Williamston.

The College's vision statement is "Serving the learning needs of a changing community" and its mission states that the College exists so that all people have educational and enrichment opportunities to improve their quality of life and standard of living.

For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000, the College reported current fund revenues (general, designated, auxiliary activities, and restricted funds) of $92,555,727; expenditures and transfers of $91,615,362; and enrollment of 9,365 fiscal year equated students. As of spring semester 2001, the College employed 211 full-time faculty, 1,020 part-time faculty, and 797 full-time and part-time administrative and support personnel.

AUDIT OBJECTIVES, CONCLUSIONS, AND NOTEWORTHY ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's admission and monitoring practices to help students successfully complete their classes and programs.

Conclusion: The College's admission and monitoring practices were generally effective in helping students successfully complete their classes and programs. However, our assessment disclosed reportable conditions related to student registration permits and the academic standing policy (Findings 1 and 2).

Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs.

Conclusion: The College was generally effective in its efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs. However, our assessment disclosed a reportable condition related to faculty credentials and evaluations (Finding 3).

Noteworthy Accomplishments: The College was first accredited in 1964 by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools' (NCA's) Commission of Institutions of Higher Education and has retained its accreditation without interruption to the present. Also, the College has applied for participation in the NCA's Academic Quality Improvement Project (AQIP), a continuous quality self-improvement process. AQIP participation would tie the College's commitment to continuous quality improvement to its external accreditation process.

The College's methods for evaluating the quality of its education include Program Effectiveness Self Study (PESS), a self-evaluation process designed and implemented by the College. PESS involves surveys of students, former students, faculty, staff, and employers as well as research into student performance and goal achievement. PESS operates on a continuous four-year cycle during which program staff perform the initial surveys and research, prepare a standardized report and action plan, implement the action plan goals, monitor their progress, and submit various reports at specified intervals summarizing their achievements in moving toward their action plan goals. All instructional programs, as well as support services, are included in the process.

Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's efforts to use its educational program resources effectively and efficiently.

Conclusion: The College was generally effective and efficient in its use of resources for educational programs. However, our assessment disclosed reportable conditions related to repetitive course enrollments and minimum class enrollment (Findings 4 and 5).

Noteworthy Accomplishments: The College implemented a data-driven review system for instructional programs, instructional support services, and College services that resulted in cost savings and process improvements. The process includes a review of a program's cost-benefit analysis, completion rate, average class size for program sections, and program enrollment. The College used this information to identify programs that should undergo a community needs/impact study to determine how the program related to the College's mission and strategic plan. The College's most recent review resulted in several programs requiring the completion of a community needs/impact study.

Audit Objective: To evaluate the relevancy and accuracy of recent capital outlay requests and related five-year comprehensive planning documents submitted to the Department of Management and Budget.

Conclusion: The College's recent capital outlay request and related five-year comprehensive planning documents were relevant and accurate.

Audit Objective: To determine whether the College's methods for allocating operating and service costs from the general fund for various self-liquidating and auxiliary activities and programs are equitable.

Conclusion: We determined that the College's methods for allocating operating and service costs from the general fund for various self-liquidating and auxiliary activities and programs were not equitable. Our assessment disclosed a reportable condition related to cost allocations for auxiliary activities (Finding 6).

AUDIT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
Our audit scope was to examine the program and other records of Lansing Community College. Our audit was conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and, accordingly, included such tests of the records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.

The financial statements of Lansing Community College are audited annually by a public accounting firm engaged by the College.

Our review and testing of the College's records and procedures were for the period May 1, 1998 through May 31, 2001.

We reviewed the College's admission process and evaluated the methods used by the College for enrolling students in developmental courses and for monitoring student progress. Also, we assessed the College's efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs. In addition, we reviewed the College's processes to determine stakeholder satisfaction and its methods to periodically assess the job training needs of the community's employers. Further, we assessed the College's efforts to verify faculty credentials and its processes for evaluations of faculty.

We evaluated the effectiveness of the College's efforts to use its educational program resources effectively and efficiently. We extracted student academic record information from the College's database for use in examining repetitive course enrollments and minimum class enrollments. Also, we analyzed the College's use of classrooms and faculty.

We reviewed the College's most recent request for capital outlay funding and related five-year comprehensive planning documents. We also reviewed the College's allocation of operating and service costs paid by the general fund for various auxiliary activities.

AGENCY RESPONSES
Our audit report contains 6 findings and 8 corresponding recommendations. The College's preliminary response indicated that it agreed with all 8 recommendations.

Full Audit Report - #3224001 - LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Documents prefaced by require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®, a free application available on the Adobe homepage.

This page was created on December 19, 2001.


INTRODUCTION This report, issued in December 2001, contains the results of our performance audit of Lansing Community College.

AUDIT PURPOSE This performance audit was conducted under the authority of Section 212(2), Act 272, P.A. 2000 (a section of the community college appropriations act), which mandates that the Auditor General conduct not less than three performance audits of community colleges each year.

BACKGROUND Lansing Community College is a public, two-year institution of higher education offering academic, vocational-technical, and continuing education programs. The College district is composed of the region that lies within a 30-mile radius of the City of Lansing and includes the following public school districts: Bath, Dansville, DeWitt, East Lansing, Grand Ledge, Haslett, Holt, Lansing, Leslie, Mason, Okemos, Stockbridge, Waverly, Webberville, and Williamston. The College's vision statement is "Serving the learning needs of a changing community" and its mission states that the College exists so that all people have educational and enrichment opportunities to improve their quality of life and standard of living. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2000, the College reported current fund revenues (general, designated, auxiliary activities, and restricted funds) of $92,555,727; expenditures and transfers of $91,615,362; and enrollment of 9,365 fiscal year equated students. As of spring semester 2001, the College employed 211 full-time faculty, 1,020 part-time faculty, and 797 full-time and part-time administrative and support personnel.

AUDIT OBJECTIVES, CONCLUSIONS, AND NOTEWORTHY ACCOMPLISHMENTS Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's admission and monitoring practices to help students successfully complete their classes and programs. Conclusion: The College's admission and monitoring practices were generally effective in helping students successfully complete their classes and programs. However, our assessment disclosed reportable conditions related to student registration permits and the academic standing policy (Findings 1 and 2). Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs. Conclusion: The College was generally effective in its efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs. However, our assessment disclosed a reportable condition related to faculty credentials and evaluations (Finding 3). Noteworthy Accomplishments: The College was first accredited in 1964 by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools' (NCA's) Commission of Institutions of Higher Education and has retained its accreditation without interruption to the present. Also, the College has applied for participation in the NCA's Academic Quality Improvement Project (AQIP), a continuous quality self-improvement process. AQIP participation would tie the College's commitment to continuous quality improvement to its external accreditation process. The College's methods for evaluating the quality of its education include Program Effectiveness Self Study (PESS), a self-evaluation process designed and implemented by the College. PESS involves surveys of students, former students, faculty, staff, and employers as well as research into student performance and goal achievement. PESS operates on a continuous four-year cycle during which program staff perform the initial surveys and research, prepare a standardized report and action plan, implement the action plan goals, monitor their progress, and submit various reports at specified intervals summarizing their achievements in moving toward their action plan goals. All instructional programs, as well as support services, are included in the process. Audit Objective: To assess the effectiveness of the College's efforts to use its educational program resources effectively and efficiently. Conclusion: The College was generally effective and efficient in its use of resources for educational programs. However, our assessment disclosed reportable conditions related to repetitive course enrollments and minimum class enrollment (Findings 4 and 5). Noteworthy Accomplishments: The College implemented a data-driven review system for instructional programs, instructional support services, and College services that resulted in cost savings and process improvements. The process includes a review of a program's cost-benefit analysis, completion rate, average class size for program sections, and program enrollment. The College used this information to identify programs that should undergo a community needs/impact study to determine how the program related to the College's mission and strategic plan. The College's most recent review resulted in several programs requiring the completion of a community needs/impact study. Audit Objective: To evaluate the relevancy and accuracy of recent capital outlay requests and related five-year comprehensive planning documents submitted to the Department of Management and Budget. Conclusion: The College's recent capital outlay request and related five-year comprehensive planning documents were relevant and accurate. Audit Objective: To determine whether the College's methods for allocating operating and service costs from the general fund for various self-liquidating and auxiliary activities and programs are equitable. Conclusion: We determined that the College's methods for allocating operating and service costs from the general fund for various self-liquidating and auxiliary activities and programs were not equitable. Our assessment disclosed a reportable condition related to cost allocations for auxiliary activities (Finding 6).

AUDIT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY Our audit scope was to examine the program and other records of Lansing Community College. Our audit was conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and, accordingly, included such tests of the records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. The financial statements of Lansing Community College are audited annually by a public accounting firm engaged by the College. Our review and testing of the College's records and procedures were for the period May 1, 1998 through May 31, 2001. We reviewed the College's admission process and evaluated the methods used by the College for enrolling students in developmental courses and for monitoring student progress. Also, we assessed the College's efforts to evaluate the quality of its educational programs. In addition, we reviewed the College's processes to determine stakeholder satisfaction and its methods to periodically assess the job training needs of the community's employers. Further, we assessed the College's efforts to verify faculty credentials and its processes for evaluations of faculty. We evaluated the effectiveness of the College's efforts to use its educational program resources effectively and efficiently. We extracted student academic record information from the College's database for use in examining repetitive course enrollments and minimum class enrollments. Also, we analyzed the College's use of classrooms and faculty. We reviewed the College's most recent request for capital outlay funding and related five-year comprehensive planning documents. We also reviewed the College's allocation of operating and service costs paid by the general fund for various auxiliary activities.

AGENCY RESPONSES Our audit report contains 6 findings and 8 corresponding recommendations. The College's preliminary response indicated that it agreed with all 8 recommendations.