A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

The Emergence of Tech-Prep at the State and Local Levels - 1995

Consortium Resources

Most consortia need resources--funding and staff--to facilitate communication and coordination among consortium members, encourage staff development, pursue articulation agreements and development of new curriculum, and promote the program to students, teachers, and parents. In fact, research suggests that a lack of resources can be a significant barrier to full implementation of Tech-Prep (Layton and Bragg 1991).

The national survey solicited several kinds of information about consortium resources. It included questions to determine whether the consortia had staff dedicated to consortium-wide activities and, if so, how many. It also asked for data on Title IIIE grant amounts, total funding for Tech-Prep, and types of expenditures for FY 1993.

Almost one-third of consortia reported operating without designated consortium staff

A total of 203 consortia (30 percent) reported having no professional staff dedicated either full- or part-time to consortium-wide Tech-Prep activities (Table IV.1). Not unexpectedly, smaller consortia (those with the fewest number of schools) were most likely to report having no consortium staff. These consortia may not believe it necessary to define certain positions as consortium staff, and may instead incorporate responsibilities relating to Tech-Prep in the functions of current district or postsecondary staff. In such situations, local respondents may not report that they have consortium staff. Smaller consortia also tend to receive smaller Title IIIE grant amounts and may be unable to support staff for general consortium coordination with these funds.

The number of central staff supported by a consortium is related to its size

Consortia with more members--secondary districts, schools, vocational centers, and postsecondary institutions--employ a larger number of professional staff to handle consortium-wide planning and implementation (Table IV.1). On average, consortia with fewer than five schools have 0.8 full-time equivalent (FTE) consortium staff, whereas those with more than 50 schools have 2.0 FTE consortium staff.5

Most consortia had received funds for Tech-Prep development for at least one year

Most consortia that responded to the fall 1993 survey were already past the initial start-up phase of consortium development. About 75 percent of the survey respondents were awarded a Title IIIE grant for FY 1992--the first year for which these Perkins grants were available--and had therefore been through a second year of funding at the time of the fall 1993 survey. Only one-fourth of the sample members received their first Title IIIE grant for FY 1993.

TABLE IV.1
Consortium Staff, By Consortium Size
(Number of Consortia)
Total Number of Secondary Schools and Postsecondary
Institutions in Consortiuma
Total FTE
Professional Staff		 2-5 6-10 11-25 26-49 >50 Total
0 84 59 49 10 1 203
.01-.99 25 40 33 4 3 105
1.0-1.99 36 54 135 37 4 266
2.0-2.99 3 12 29 16 8 68
3.0-3.99 3 5 13 5 2 28
4.0-4.99 0 5 3 2 1 11
5.0-7.99 4 3 2 0 1 10
5.0-7.99 3 2 2 0 0 7
Missing 1 0 0 1
Mean FTE 0.8 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.9 1.1
SOURCE: Inventory of Local Tech-Prep Planning and Implemetation, fall 1993.

aIncludes secondary schools and vocational centers involved in Tech-Prep, as well as community and technical colleges, four-year colleges and universities, proprietary schools, and registered apprenticeship programs.

Title IIIE is the main source of support for Tech-Prep

Consortia relied primarily on Title IIIE grants to fund consortium-wide activities in FY 1993, although some reported receiving funds from multiple sources. All consortia in the sample were Title IIIE grantees, by definition. Nineteen percent of the consortia also reported receiving funds from other titles of the Perkins Act to be used specifically for Tech-Prep reforms. About 13 percent reported receiving other state funds for Tech-Prep.6

Consortia spend most of their funds on administration, staff development, and equipment

About three-fourths of consortium expenditures are for general administration, staff development, and equipment for secondary or postsecondary programs (Table IV.2). The relatively substantial allocation to administration probably reflects, in part, the use of Tech-Prep grants by many consortia to fund staff to oversee consortium-wide activities--staff whose role is likely to be coordination among consortium members. Both staff development and equipment usually entail purchasing goods and services. For staff development, consortia often hire consultants to conduct training and expend funds on travel and conference registration fees. Equipment expenditures are likely to include the costs of outfitting new applied academics laboratories and upgrading career centers.

Other categories of expenditure may more likely be supported through in-kind contributions. Although curriculum development is generally reported as a major activity in the early years of Tech-Prep planning and implementation, outright consortium expenditures may be less necessary for this activity. Teachers may use common planning periods--regularly paid for out of district budgets--or their personal time to prepare or revise curricula. Similarly, marketing and promotion of Tech-Prep in many consortia may fall under the normal responsibilities of school counselors, and therefore not require extra funding.

TABLE IV.2
Use Of Consortium Funds, FY 1993
(Percentage of Total Expenditures)
Mean Minimum Maximum
General Administration 24.2 0.0 100.0
Staff Development 23.0 0.0 100.0
Curriculum Development 14.7 0.0 95.0
Equipment for Secondary/Postsecondary Programs 23.6 0.0 100.00
Marketing/Promotion 5.7 0.0 55.0
Evaluation 2.0 0.0 20.0
Allocations to Consortium Members 5.6 0.0 95.0
Other 1.2 0.0 100.0
SOURCE: Inventory of Local Tech-Prep Planning and Implementation, fall 1993.

5 The reporting of more than four FTE staff by some consortia may be the result of misunderstanding our definition of consortium staff. Although the question stressed that staff counted in this item be involved in "consortium-wide" activities, discussions with state Tech-Prep staff indicate that some coordinators may have included teachers at a particular high school in the estimates. This confusion is particularily understandable in consortia with one district and high school, where teachers invovled in Tech-Prep may actually work with the entire consortium Tech-Prep student population.

6 These estimates may not fully reflect all sources of funding for Tech-Prep. Discussions with both consortium and state Tech-Prep coordinators are not completely aware of the sources of their funding; they are unable to distinguish between federal funds(Title IIIE and other Perkins) awarded by the state and funds allocated out of state appropriations.
-###-

[Consortium Leadership] [Table of Contents] [V. Defining Tech-Prep]