Program Reviews For Students in

(1)

OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH AND ACCOUNTABILITY Z:RS/2014-2015 RPT/PROGREVRPT 1415-YR CRIMINALJUSTICE 4/16/2015

1

EPCC does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, gender, age, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

The Best Place to Start

2014-2015 PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

The

Program Review Report

assesses the viability and quality of credit and non-credit instructional programs to support program improvement through Area Improvement Plans,

as established by College Procedure 2.03.01.18:

Program Review

. The Office of Institutional Research provides the data, which are by academic year as of August 31, 2014; the Office of

Institutional Effectiveness produces the report, which presents the data by program. Standards are marked as “Met” or “Not Met” based on

DISTRICT (“D”)

, not site, performance. Data

by site are shown where available (if unavailable, boxes are blank). Standards after slashes denote critical thresholds, which identify especially unacceptable performance (and if not met,

are marked "Not Met-Critical"). Results are color-coded, as follows:

STANDARD MET STANDARD NOT MET STANDARD NOT MET - CRITICAL

Overall

Viability

Indicator score 50% or lower or unmet Graduation and Student Success prompts formal review by the Program Review Committee. The Committee's authority

concerning program continuation is limited to recommending that the senior instructional administrators review the program's capacity to improve its service to students and the

community. The final decision on program continuation rests with the President.

Program Type: Career & Technical Program Report’s Recommendation Last Year: No Formal Review Program Review Committee Action required this year: No Formal Review - Viability above 50%, Chair informs VP of Unmet Student Success

Mandatory Accreditation: No Fully Accredited? (Y/N): Reason Why Not Fully Accredited:

THE PROGRAM’S RECENT PERFORMANCE

SCORES (

Citation of a year such as "1415" or "2015" refers to the 2014-2015 academic year.)

VIABILITY

11-12 12-13 13-14 2014-2015 QUALITY

11-12 12-13 13-14 2014-2015 75% 87.50% 87.50% 75% 87.50% 88.24% 82.35% 94.12% RECENT RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PROGRAM REVIEW COMMITTEE

2011-2012 None

2012-2013 None

2013-2014 None

SOURCES 1. State Annual Data Profile, Mainframe, 2. Annual Data Profile and/or Automated Student and Adult Learner Follow-up System, 3. Mainframe/State Lonestar, EMSI proprietary database, 4. Program Review Status Form completed by Dean of District Discipline Coordinator/CE Dean/Director, 5. Master Class Schedule (Mainframe), 6. Banner, 7. Master Class Schedule (Mainframe), Fac. Employment Status (Mainframe), 8. SLO Assessment Task Force; TracDat database (All fields must have data for applicable cycle—no blank fields), 9. Credit Student Faculty Evaluation, 10. Graduate Survey, 11. Employer Survey, 12. Advisory Committee Survey & Minutes, 13. THECB Statewide Annual Licensure Report, 14. Faculty Development Records, 15. Non-Credit Faculty Evaluation, 16. Course Syllabus (Curriculum Office), 17. Advisory Committee Survey & Minutes, Program Review Status Form completed by Dean of District Discipline Coordinator/CE Dean/Director, 18. DACUM Audit (Curriculum Office), 19. Curriculum Office, 20. Advisory Committee Survey & Minutes, Employer Survey, 21. Student Banner Files, Budget Office, Public Community/Junior & Technical College Basis of Legislative Appropriations, 22. Credit Academic History.

(2)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

2

VIABILITY

(Overall viability score 50% or lower or unmet Graduation and Student Success prompts formal review by the Program Review Committee)

INDICATOR

1112 _Rpt 1213 _Rpt 1314 _Rpt

1415 Rpt (District Data as of Aug. 31,

2014)

ASC FT.

BLISS MdP NW RG TM VV

STATE-MANDATED

1. No. of Graduates Within latest 5-year period (Fall, Spring, Summer) provided by the State (State counts graduates with more than 1 award more than once) (For info. only, after the score: Latest 5-yr award total known to EPCC, if not the State) Source: 1 Standard: 25/<15

331. For inf. Only, EPCC Data: 372

329. For inf. Only, EPCC Data: 418 589. For inf. Only, EPCC Data: 728*

723. For inf. only, EPCC Data: 883* 2. Student Success Percent of students employed/transfer/enter military w/in

1 yr of grad., for last 3 years provided by the State. Source: 2 Standard: 90%/<50%

84.9% 83.3% 85% 89.4%

INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT

1. Workforce Demand Whether the no. of new and replacement jobs in the field forecast for El Paso, Hudspeth, Dona Ana, Luna, & Otero counties during the 5 years following this report’s publication meets/exceeds the no. of graduates during the 5 years preceding this report’s publication. (See end of report for data) Source: 3 Standard: Yes

Yes, for 601 graduates in last 5 years.

Yes, for 721 graduates in last 5 years.

2. Contact/Credit Hours per FT Faculty Sufficient contact/credit hours for all discipline courses, District-wide, disregarding lecturers, for FT faculty workload for last 3 years (F/Sp). (Excluding C.E. courses) (Unduplicated) (Cred. Tran. & Career & Tech. versions of programs share the same results) Source: 4

Standard: Yes/No

Yes Yes Yes Yes

3. Class Fill Rate Percent of classes 75% full (Including C.E. students), based on optimum and no. of students in each section for last 3 years on census date, excluding MILS (UTEP ROTC), MUAP (independent Music study), MUSR (recitals), Independent Study, Virtual College of Texas, classes whose instructors are not paid by EPCC; if room capacity is below optimum, score reflects room capacity. (For info. only, after score the measure is also calculated w/o concurrent students.) (For info. only, District average fill rate appears after foregoing data (No. of seats filled divided by no. of seats available)) Source: 5 Standard: 80%/<50%

D: 79% Dist. Seat Count: 86.6% D: 84% Dist. Seat Count: 89.9% D: 83% Dist. Seat Count: 88.9%** D: 74.7% Dist. Seat Count: 85.1%** Lacks 3 yrs of data †

75% 61.6% 39.5% 93.4% 79.2%

4. Enrollment Trends Seat count (including C.E. students) is increasing, level or decreasing no more than 5% from the benchmark year (1st yr. of last 3 yrs.), based on program-specific courses. (For info. only, after the score measure calculated w/o C.E. students.) (For info. only, appears the unduplicated no. of students by year) Source: 6 Standard: Yes/>10% decrease

D: Yes, 53%, Undupl. 2009: 1,194, 2011: 1,812 D: Yes, 18%, Undupl. 2010: 1,557, 2012: 1,879 Yes, 4%, Undupl. 2011: 1,810, 2013: 1,936 ** Yes, 2.3%, Undupl. 2012: 1,879, 2014: 1,854 ** Lacks 3 yrs of data †

No, -27.3% Yes, -.5% Yes, 83.5% No, -5.4% Yes, -.5%

5. Full-Time Faculty in Discipline There is at least 1 FT instructor with primary teaching load in the discipline. (Sept. 1-May 1 of latest year) (Cred. Tran. & Career & Tech. versions of programs share the same results) Source: 7

Standard: Yes/No

Yes Yes Yes Yes

6. Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) For each 2-year cycle, has the program documented & implemented the recommendations for its active SLOs and completed its assessment process for its active SLOs? Source: 8

Standard: Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

*2013-2014 revisions to the Program Review procedure increased the period of years covered from 3 to 5 and changed the standard from 15/<10 to 25/<15.

**2013-2014 revisions to the Program Review procedure required that C.E. students be included in the scored calculation. For information only, a second calculation was required to be made without including C.E. students; the change may affect Advanced Technology Industrial Manufacturing, Electrical Technology, HVAC, and Machining Technology.

†If a program has moved, or expanded, to another campus, during the three-year period specified by the indicator, the District score is calculated, but the finding for an individual campus offering the program is “Lacks 3 years of data” if the campus has hosted the program fewer than three years.

(3)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

3

QUALITY

INDICATOR

1112 _Rpt 1213 _Rpt 1314 _Rpt

2014)

ASC FT.

BLISS MdP NW RG TM VV

STAKEHOLDER SATISFACTION/PROGRESS

1. Student Satisfaction with Program Based on fall/spring percent of students satisfied with labs & technology averaged for the last 3 years. (Surveys scored 1 or 0 based on combined on averaged of responses: “Excellent”: 1, “Good”: 1, “Acceptable”: 1, “Weak”: 0, “Unacceptable” = 0. Average of 1=Satisfaction) Source: 9 Standard: 80%

D: 92% D: 94% D: 93% D: 94.2% Lacks 3 yrs of data †

97.8% 96% 95.2% 98.2% 93.5%

2. Student Evaluation of Faculty Percent of satisfaction in fall/spring averaged for last 3 years, based on question: "Would you recommend instructor?" Source: 9 Standard 80%

D: 98% D: 98% D: 97% D: 97.3% Lacks 3 yrs of data †

99% 98.7% 99% 98.7% 97%

3. Graduate Satisfaction with Program Based on percent of cumulative graduates satisfied with “usefulness of my major courses w/ respect to my job,” “availability of courses in my major,” & “level of technology in my major.” (Combined average of all 3 responses) for previous 3 years. Source: 10 Standard: 80%

Deferred pending review

96% 96% 96%

4. Employer Satisfaction Percent of surveyed employers satisfied with graduates for last 3 years. Names of employers surveyed provided by the Dean/District-wide Coordinator. (Surveys scored 1 or 0 based on the combined average of the 8 responses: “Excellent” = 1, “Good” = 1, “Acceptable” = 1, “Weak” = 0, “Unacceptable" = 0. An average of 1 indicates satisfaction) Source: 11 Standard: 80%

99.3% 98.6% 98.6% 98.6%

5. Advisory Committee Satisfaction with Program Percent of surveyed members satisfied, based on averaged percent of satisfaction for the last 3 years. (Surveys scored 1 or 0 based on the combined average of the eleven responses: “Excellent” = 1, “Good” = 1, “Acceptable” = 1, “Weak” = 0, “Unacceptable" = 0. An average of 1 indicates satisfaction.) Source: 12

Standard: 80%

99% 99% 98.6% 98.6%

6. Student Licensure/Certification, As Applicable Percent of

graduates/completers receiving licensure/certification, based on annual pass rate for the most recent year. Source: 13 Standard: 90%

N/A N/A N/A N/A

INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT

1. Full-Time Faculty Development For most recent year, percent of FT teaching Faculty at 2 prof. development activities during the fall semester (1st day of fall Faculty Development Week (FDW) through last day of final exams) and percent of FT teaching Faculty at 2 such activities during spring semester (1st day of spring FDW through last day of final exams). If FT faculty teach in 2 or more programs, their attendance is credited to all the programs. Source: 14 Standard: 100%

100% 100% 80% 100%

(4)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

4 INDICATOR

1112 _Rpt 1213 _Rpt 1314 _Rpt

2014)

ASC FT.

BLISS MdP NW RG TM VV 2. Part-Time Faculty Development For most recent year, percent of PT

teaching Faculty at 1 prof. development activity during fall semester (1st day of fall Faculty Development Week (FDW) through last day of final exams) and percent of PT teaching Faculty at 1 such activity during spring semester (1st day of spring FDW through last day of final exams). If PT faculty teach in 2 or more programs, their attendance is credited to all the programs. Source: 14 Standard: 75%

57% 70% 67% 72%

3. Sections taught by Full-Time Faculty Percent of sections taught by FT Faculty for last 3 years, excluding MILS (UTEP ROTC), MUAP

(independent Music study), MUSR (recitals), Independent Study, Virtual College of Texas, classes whose instructors are not paid by EPCC. Source: 7 Standard: 50%

D: 35% D: 34% D: 30%*** D: 50.4%*** Lacks 3 yrs of data †

68.8% 23.1% 21.1% 20% 56.1%

4. Course Syllabus Reviewed/revised within the last 3 years, based on no. of course syllabi in the program and the revision date of each syllabus. Source: 16 Standard: Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

5. Advisory Committee Meetings Held at least once annually, based on the meeting date(s) of each program advisory committee for the last 3 years. Source: 17 Standard: Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

6. DACUM Completion within last 5 years, based on completion date of

each program DACUM. Source: 18 Standard: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

7. DACUM Findings Incorporated, as appropriate, into curriculum, based on most recent DACUM Audit for each program. Source: 18 Standard: Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

8. Secondary Articulation Agreements, as appropriate Percent of ISD requests for articulation addressed through analysis of EPCC course objectives for last 3 years. Source: 19 Standard: 100%

100% 100% 100% 100%

9. Post-Secondary Articulation Agreements, as appropriate Written evidence of attempted/revised articulation within the last 3 years. Source: 4

Standard: Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes

10. Program Accreditation, As Applicable Maintains/actively seeking voluntary accreditation, based on documentation of accreditation or application for accreditation for last 3 years. Source: 4 Standard: Yes

N/A N/A N/A N/A

11. Community Benefit/Service Percent of surveyed advisory committee members acknowledging program meets community needs for each of the last 3 years. Source: 12 Standard: 85%

100% 100% 93% 93.3%

12. Program Need Percent of surveyed employers acknowledging program is needed for each of the last 3 years. Names of surveyed employers identical to those used by Employer Satisfaction indicator. Source: 11 Standard: 85%

100% 100% 100% 100%

13. Competitive Advantage: Quality Percent of surveyed respondents acknowledging EPCC meets/exceeds quality of proprietary schools for each of the last 3 years. (Combined average of responses on both the Advisory Committee Survey and the Employer Survey) Source: 20 Standard: 85%

100% 100% 100% 100%

***2013-2014 revisions to the Program Review procedure reduced the standard from 60% to 50%.

(5)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

5 VIABILITY INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT INDICATOR 1 - WORKFORCE DEMAND

Measure: Whether the sum of new and replacement jobs in the field forecast for El Paso and Hudspeth Counties and the New Mexico counties of Dona Ana, Luna and Otero

during the 5 years following the publication of the

Program Review Report

meets or exceeds the number of graduates during the 5 years preceding the publication of the report. To ensure

that the data include career paths addressed by the program, each program shall provide the IE Office with a list of jobs for which it prepares graduates.

The listings are from the EMSI database, which was created in 2001, in consultation with the Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT), to track occupational demand and

wages nationally, by state and by region, drawing on some 91 databases, which include those of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The number preceding each occupational title is the

unique Bureau of Labor Statistics SOC (Standard Occupational Classification) number assigned to each job title. Job titles were specified by the disciplines. Numerical anomalies may be

due to rounding.

SOC

Code Occupation

TOTAL NUMBER OF JOBS PER YEAR Total New/Re-placement

Jobs

Average Hourly

Wage (2013)

Education Required 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

11-9131 Postmasters and Mail Superintendents

42 41 41 40 40 4 $27.37 High school diploma or equivalent

11-9141 Property, Real Estate, and Community Association Managers

11-9151 Social and Community Service Managers

206 209 213 216 219 31 $27.01 Bachelor's degree

11-9161 Emergency Management Directors

11-9199 Managers, All Other 1414 1431 1447 1462 1473 187 $44.75 High school diploma or equivalent

13-1031 Claims Adjusters, Examiners, and Investigators

13-1041 Compliance Officers 1981 2022 2057 2078 2094 266 $29.15 Bachelor's degree

19-3041 Sociologists <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 -- $0.00 Master's degree

19-3094 Political Scientists 23 24 25 26 27 5 $43.58 Master's degree

19-3099 Social Scientists and Related Workers, All Other

19-4061 Social Science Research Assistants

23 24 25 26 27 7 $22.94 Associate's degree

19-4092 Forensic Science Technicians

21-1021 Child, Family, and School Social Workers

21-1022 Healthcare Social Workers

573 593 612 628 640 120 $26.30 Master's degree

21-1023 Mental Health and Substance Abuse Social Workers

21-1029 Social Workers, All Other

21-1092 Probation Officers and Correctional Treatment Specialists

21-1093 Social and Human Service Assistants

(6)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

6

SOC

Jobs

Wage (2013)

Service Specialists, All Other

23-1011 Lawyers 1074 1095 1115 1135 1152 151 $57.22 Doctoral or professional degree

23-1021 Administrative Law Judges, Adjudicators, and Hearing Officers

39 40 40 40 41 4 $30.78 Doctoral or professional degree

23-1022 Arbitrators, Mediators, and Conciliators

<10 <10 10 10 10 -- $0.00 Bachelor's degree

23-1023 Judges, Magistrate Judges, and Magistrates

110 112 113 114 115 12 $43.16 Doctoral or professional degree

23-2011 Paralegals and Legal Assistants

482 491 500 508 516 68 $17.05 Associate's degree

23-2091 Court Reporters 122 126 129 132 134 20 $25.33 Postsecondary non-degree award

23-2093 Title Examiners, Abstractors, and Searchers

25-9031 Instructional Coordinators

358 369 378 388 396 52 $32.07 Master's degree

27-3042 Technical Writers 50 51 53 54 55 12 $25.57 Bachelor's degree

33-1011 First-Line Supervisors of Correctional Officers

33-1012 First-Line Supervisors of Police and Detectives

33-1021 First-Line Supervisors of Fire Fighting and Prevention Workers

361 366 371 376 380 83 $32.60 Postsecondary non-degree award

33-1099 First-Line Supervisors of Protective Service Workers, All Other

33-2021 Fire Inspectors and Investigators

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 -- $0.00 High school diploma or equivalent

33-3011 Bailiffs 59 60 61 62 62 10 $26.76 High school diploma or equivalent

33-3012 Correctional Officers and Jailers

33-3021 Detectives and Criminal Investigators

33-3031 Fish and Game Wardens 10 10 10 10 11 2 $21.20 High school diploma or equivalent

33-3041 Parking Enforcement Workers

<10 <10 <10 10 10 -- $0.00 High school diploma or equivalent

33-3051 Police and Sheriff's Patrol Officers

33-3052 Transit and Railroad Police

<10 <10 <10 <10 <10 -- $0.00 High school diploma or equivalent

33-9011 Animal Control Workers 56 57 58 59 59 8 $12.38 High school diploma or equivalent

33-9021 Private Detectives and Investigators

33-9031 Gaming Surveillance Officers and Gaming Investigators

33-9032 Security Guards 4039 4102 4161 4218 4271 489 $11.24 High school diploma or equivalent

33-9093 Transportation Security Screeners

(7)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

7

SOC

Jobs

Wage (2013)

Workers, All Other 43-4031 Court, Municipal, and

License Clerks

43-5031 Police, Fire, and Ambulance Dispatchers

43-5032 Dispatchers, Except Police, Fire, and Ambulance

43-6012 Legal Secretaries 327 327 328 329 330 25 $15.41 High school diploma or equivalent

45-2011 Agricultural Inspectors 45 45 45 45 46 7 $22.72 Bachelor's degree

55-9999 Military occupations 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0.00 N/A