Diversity | GCTC

Diversity

Gateway Community & Technical College is committed to creating a campus environment that values the exploration, appreciation, and celebration of diversity while promoting inclusiveness, multiculturalism, and global awareness. 

The college defines diversity as recognizing, appreciating, valuing, and utilizing the unique talents and contributions of all individuals, regardless of differences such as race/ethnicity, religion, gender identity, nationality, physical/mental ability, socio-economic status, education, age, and sexual orientation. 

Gateway's Diversity & Inclusion Plan

Opportunity

Develop and implement strategic marketing and recruitment activities for the 5 targeted Kentucky schools. The expected outcome from this strategy was to assist with raising the total underrepresented student (URS) enrollment by 14.2% in Fall 2019 and 14.0% in Spring of 2020.  

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity? 

Gateway Community & Technical College Diversity Equity, and Inclusion partnered with two recruiters from the Admissions Office, as well as the Dual Enrollment Coordinator and the Assistant Director of Marketing and Communications, to implement this strategy. The college was able to use these internal partnerships to accomplish the following results: 

  • Create marketing materials for Kentucky schools and organizations to increase total URS enrollment for Fall 2019 and Spring 2020.
  • Targeted communications to more than 400 students during the 2019-20 academic year.
  • Completed a presentation to a group of 50 students at the local STEM school each semester Fall 2019 and Spring 2020 about support services available at the college.  

We participated in events in Northern Kentucky that assisted students with recruitment and application processes at our targeted schools. These schools include Boone County HS, Dixie Heights HS, Holmes HS (Covington District), Lloyd HS, and Newport HS (Newport District). We also served Northern Kentucky (NKY) schools in the “River Cities,” which included. Covington, Dayton, Bellevue, Fort Thomas, and Ludlow Schools. Please note schools in the “River City” district are located along the Ohio River, close to the Ohio/ Kentucky state lines. The districts were chosen because, according to Census data, they contain a large population of underrepresented NKY students. The geographic area covered Florence, Newport, and Covington. Events in which we participated: 

  • Representation on the Holmes High School Advisory Board.
  • Back-2- School Fair with Northern Kentucky Community Action Partnership.
  • Boys and Girls Club Covington recruiting event. 
  • Regional College Fair at Thomas Moore University. 
  • Latino College Fair at Northern Kentucky University.
  • Gateway's Annual Super Someday Event showcasing our campus locations. The event regularly attracts more than 200 students in attendance with over 30 faculty and staff volunteers across campus.
  • River Cities Project collaboration with Gateway’s supply chain and Computer Information Technology (CIT) cyber security.
  • Collaboration with Gateway Massage Therapy program hosting 15 Cincinnati Public School students who toured the campus culminating with a demonstration from the Massage program director.  

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy? 

The overall number of spring graduates from targeted Northern Kentucky high schools enrolling at Gateway, as credential-seeking students, within the year following high school graduation has remained steady the past 3 years with 105 students during the 2017/2018 Gateway academic year, 101 in 2018/2019, and 104 in 2019/2020. Whereas the overall matriculation of recent high school graduates has been steady, the matriculation of recent high school graduates from underrepresented populations to Gateway, increased by 82.61% from 2018/2019, with 23 students, to 2019/2020, with 42 students. This number involves an increase of underrepresented population graduates from Boone County High School from 6 in 2018/2019 to 11 in 2019/2020 and Dixie Heights High School with 3 in 2018/2019 to 12 in 2019/2020.  

Similarly, the overall number of spring graduates from River City high schools enrolling at Gateway as credential-seeking students within the year following high school graduation has remained steady the past 3 years with 50 students in the 2017/2018 Gateway academic year, 50 in 2018/2019, and 51 in 2019/2020. The matriculation of recent high school graduates from underrepresented populations to Gateway from River City high schools, though, has increased by 57.14% with 14 students from 2018/2019 to 22 students from 2019/2020. This number involved augmentation of underrepresented population graduates from Lloyd Memorial High School from 5 in 2018/2019 to 7 in 2019/2020. 

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy and what are your next steps? 

Lessons Learned: 
  • We need to do a better job with investigating the specific needs of students we are serving. Without this information, we are creating programs without a concrete goal and with results that may not serve students.
  • We have gaps in our strategy to serve students at targeted schools and districts because we do not have enough information to serve students with intention. We realized that we need to solicit additional input via focus group and/or surveys to better inform our program/service creation, implementation, and effectiveness.  
Next Steps 
  • Going forward we will create student profiles for each school to strategically target programming and marketing strategies that will, in turn, assist us with allocating the college’s limited resources efficiently to those populations.
  • Conversations are underway to develop a mentoring pipeline focused on Black and Latino men in targeted schools. This developmental program will identify potential students who would benefit from mentoring while also positioning Gateway to be the preferred destination as students begin thinking about post-secondary education. 
  • We will create micro goals for each school so the diversity recruiter can ensure we are developing partnerships with organizations who share our commitment to support underrepresented students.  

Develop and implement strategic marketing and recruitment activities for the 5 targeted Cincinnati schools. The expected outcome from this strategy was to assist with raising the total underrepresented student (URS) enrollment by 14.2% in Fall 2019 and 14.0% in Spring of 2020. 

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity? 

  • Cincinnati, Ohio targeted high schools include Aiken, Hughes, Shroder, Western Hills, and Woodward.  We selected these 5 schools because the programming focus of each aligned with those offered at Gateway.
  • Because many students in the (Cincinnati) targeted schools are affiliated with one or more community programs in the metropolitan area, the college worked to engage with these community programs and enhance our relationships/partnerships.
  • The Diversity Recruiter is a member of Cincinnati Public Schools College Consortium, which is a group of college recruiters, college access professionals, and school counseling partners who set strategy and consider issues students may encounter while determining their educational pathway.
  • The diversity recruiter attended 9 meetings (in person and virtual) and led 4 campus tours and presentations for more than 150 students. We are working with Cincinnati Public Schools to determine the number of students who successfully matriculated from these efforts.  

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy? 

  • Gateway received 14 applications by students from the specified Cincinnati high schools in fall 2019. 3 of the applicants enrolled at Gateway in 2019/2020. Of the fall 2019 applicants, 4 were spring 2019 high school graduates, and none of the recent high school graduates enrolled at Gateway in the 2019/2020 academic year.

  • Spring 2020, 5 applications were received by students graduating from the specified Cincinnati high schools prior to spring 2019. 1 of the applicants enrolled in spring 2020. 

  • Because of competition of community /programs and district partnerships, Gateway was unable to secure the interest of students who live across the river in Cincinnati and surrounding communities. We found it difficult to reach those students despite programming, student visits, and recruitment visits with students and families.

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy and what are your next steps? 

Lessons Learned:  
  • Although we attempted to meet the goals to engage students from Ohio, we learned we need to shift our efforts as we work to identify external stakeholder and partnerships. Students are not enrolling at Gateway and are instead focusing on programs offered in Cincinnati. We will work with the https://destinationcincinnati.iamcps.org/ to identify academic and programmatic support for their students.

  • Cincinnati Public Schools have longstanding partnerships with Ohio community colleges that often result in students receiving enough scholarships and federal aid to completely cover tuition at those institutions. With no such agreement, recruitment efforts are more challenging for Gateway, making it difficult to attract students who reside across the bridge.

  • Utilizing the same strategy for the 5 target schools in Kentucky   is not as effective when engaging Ohio school students. We discovered we did a disservice to our goals by selecting specific schools and will change our direction in the upcoming year by focusing on broad partnerships to attract our prospective student base.

  • We have gaps in our strategy because we did not assess what these students needed from us. We learned to ask the question: what services/ programs do we offer that are unique and/or better performing than those higher education institutions within our region, in Ohio??Making this determination will allow us to focus our efforts on those areas students will find most useful and appealing. Having an answer to this question will assist us with determining the tactics employed to serve students in Ohio.  

Next Steps:  
  • We know we must shift our focus to create broader partnerships to serve the southwestern Ohio geographic area.

  • We are in the planning stages of restructuring Ohio efforts. We plan to use broader strokes when identifying how we will engage SW Ohio stakeholders. Lower than expected enrollment from Ohio high schools confirms targeting specific schools was not effective. We will survey Ohio partners to determine past support services rendered and future need.  

Success

Develop and/or expand non-academic support services to serve low-income populations. The expected outcome for this strategy was to eliminate academic and non-academic barriers that result in higher levels of persistence and success for underrepresented- and low-income students. Gateway eliminated academic and non-academic barriers for these students through its Success Coaching Program, Counseling Services, and Student Resources.

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity? 

  • Gateway Community & Technical College’s Student Success Coaching Program was designed to help students succeed in college by providing individual support and help students find and use resources to reach their goals. Subsequent data demonstrate how during the 2019-20 school year the Student Success Coaching Program promoted positive results.
  • Gateway Community & Technical College’s counseling services department assists all students and is comprised of three full-time and one part-time employees. The department’s mission is to provide support to students struggling with non-academic issues. The team empowers students in overcoming life barriers and supports academic retention at Gateway. 
  • Counseling provided many services to help support our low-income population. The Food for Thought Pantry is located at Gateway’s Urban Metro Campus and allows students in need the option for free food items. Students can submit a request of items they need, and the pantry will fulfill the order on demand (205 students utilized Food for Thought Pantry for emergency food assistance).
  • Students also can rely on counseling for housing and food support, as well as other services. Staff offer budgeting advice and coaching to students plus emergency funds to those in need.
  • In addition, Counseling offers support for students who do not have health insurance by building partnerships with free clinical mental health providers.
  • Students learn about the programs as a target audience through their academic and Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) standing. We reach students through a variety of sources, including KCTCS email, personal email, phone calls, and text messaging. Other scholars receive similar outreach via a variety of referral sources, including webpage form, email, and Starfish referrals. Staff and faculty are provided with training through departmental meetings, division training, and through a variety of marketing strategies. The coaching team also consists of cross departmental staff from various areas who report for their team.
  • Gateway offers three peer coaches and one full-time coach. Four additional college staff provide coaching as a supplemental role, including a coach from the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) office. The DEI staff member focuses exclusively on underrepresented students. Our full-time coach also supports a portion of our URS on longer term poor academic standing.
  • Coaches serve about 350 students per semester (about 100 are URS); however, as we expand Success Coaching, the service is available to all Gateway students.

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy?

In the 2019-20 school year the counseling department provided the following services to our 1,680 low-income students with an average 81% retention rate.:  

  • 23 students were approved for and funds were disbursed from the Student Emergency Fund. The Student Emergency Fund was developed to help pupils in immediate need, without viable resources to meet current barriers. This fund is to be used for true emergencies related to the following: housing, food, transportation, childcare (without vouchers), school supplies (without awarded financial aid), utilities (disconnection notices only), and documented medical need.
  • 102 students were provided with some individualized counseling service, whether referred to clinical mental health providers or offered therapeutic case management services.
  • 131 community referrals were made. Gateway Community and Technical College has partnered with these local agencies: Brighton Center, Community Action Agency, St. Vincent DePaul, Department for Community Based Services, Be Concerned, Legal Aid of the Bluegrass, Lincoln Grant Scholar House, Newport Scholar House, Boone County Housing Authority, Covington Housing Authority, and Welcome House (all agencies are in Northern Kentucky).
  • 48 students were referred to receive childcare assistance. Gateway has partnered with Learning Grove to offer childcare vouchers to eligible students.   
    • 10 students in fall 2019 utilized the center on campus.
    • 15 students in spring 2020 utilized the center on campus.
  • 54 students were assisted with housing. Students were offered placements in shelters, low-income housing, section 8 housing choice vouchers and scholar houses.
  • 45 students were assisted with health insurance via a Gateway Community and Technical College partnership with the Department for Community Based Services and the Northern Kentucky Community Action Agency. 
  • 34 students were assisted with transportation, such as utilization of the Tank Bus.  
  • 205 students utilized the Food for Thought Pantry for emergency food assistance. 
  • During the 2019-20 school year the Student Success Coaching Program provided the following services to our low-income populations:  
    • 130 active low-income students participated in the program. To be considered active, students must meet with their coach at least three times per semester and utilize necessary campus resources (individualized per student’s need).
    • The retention rate for active students was 22% higher than those who were non-active.
    • The persistence rate was 7% higher with students active in the program as compared to those who were not active. 
    • Student success rate (improvement in academic standing) was 5% higher with active students, than non-active students.  

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy and what are your next steps?    

The counseling department will continue to maintain and build strong relationships with local agencies. We also will continue to market available resources to students to ensure they are aware of available options. Our Food for Thought Pantry has an upcoming expansion that will allow for a pantry at all three of our campuses, making it easier for students to access.   

The Student Success Coaching Program will continue marketing its services to staff, faculty, and students to build awareness. The program will create relationships between departments, so all faculty and staff members are knowledgeable. We will build awareness by attending division meetings, holding professional development trainings, and updating individuals when students are in the program. The Student Success Coaching Program has begun to roll out a voluntary coaching option for students who may benefit from meeting with a coach, but who may not necessarily qualify. This new option will allow the program to reach more students and provide extra support to those in need.   

Evaluate and expand curriculum that emphasizes inclusion and appreciation of diversity and culture. The expected outcome for this strategy was to identify ways to incorporate and/or verify an emphasis on diversity and inclusion and make necessary revisions to classroom activities.  

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity? 

  • We offered Faculty members more than 10 workshops that dissect cultural competency and the implications that occur when the concept is not embedded in curriculum and classroom activities.
  • The Dean’s Council met monthly to implement a campus wide common reading program that will focus on diverse authors. The committee consists of faculty members who have worked to include a variety of authors who meet the criteria of underrepresented populations.

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy? 

  • The DEI team worked with academic affairs to offer faculty members suggestions on how to embed Cultural Competency and DEI lessons into the curriculum. We will measure this tactic by using end of the year performance reviews to ensure accountability.
  • 23 employees attended for a total of 34.5 hours training. The facilitator is a faculty member at a local university with over 25 years of experience in this area. 

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy and what are your next steps? 

Lessons Learned: 
  • We learned that there is a need to offer trainings and workshops facilitated by a credible researcher who has the rank of faculty member or higher, which will assist with buy-in from faculty members.
  • Because all employees have received a baseline introduction of cultural competence and implicit bias during their first 30 days (about 4 and a half weeks) of employment (112 employees attended for a total of 168 training hours), we found that the college is ready to move beyond foundational lessons and towards college-wide implementation that has support of college senior leadership. We had 10 employees attend for a total of 40 hours (about 1 and a half days) training.
  • Faculty and staff who have been with the college did this training during the 2018-2019 AY. All employees who began their tenure after this timeframe received this training within their first 30 days (about 4 and a half weeks) at the college.
  • We learned that the college needs to continue to encourage employees to participate in trainings and conversations to enhance cultural competency, antiracist training, and implicit bias training.  
Next Steps
  • Faculty and staff are making efforts to enhance the learning experiences of their students. Next steps include focusing on intentional delivery of instructional content and classroom activities.
  • The Dean’s Council is working to create a campus wide common reading program that will focus on a diverse authorship. The committee consists of faculty members who have worked to include a variety of authors who meet the criteria of underrepresented populations.
  • Assessing and enriching the diversity of instructional elements the college uses (which textbooks, representations, etc.)
  • We will move to the next phase of promoting continued learning and cultural competency by encouraging faculty and staff members to actively pursue opportunities outside of the college to facilitate expanding their knowledge base. We will assess this method by using the college’s end of the year evaluations to determine effectiveness. 

Impact

Develop infrastructure to provide sustainability of efforts around diversity, equity, and inclusion and ensure these efforts are strategically embedded into programs and services across the institution. The expected outcome for this strategy was to identify key personnel in student-facing areas and create programming and/or initiatives that supported the academic success of underrepresented students at Gateway.

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity? 

  • The DEI Director focused on identifying key student facing stakeholders, resources to assist students from recruitment to graduation. Those stakeholders were student engagement, student retention, and the admissions team.
  • The Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion focused on communicating 2-3 suggested programs per semester for executive leadership (the President’s Cabinet) to attend. These efforts assisted with demonstrating to students and staff that executive leadership supported the work being done.
  • The Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion worked with the Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Team to ensure ongoing communication and implementation of teams that worked seamlessly to assess recruitment efforts, training efforts, and academic and nonacademic barriers. The two teams held 1 SEM Leadership Team meeting and monthly/subcommittee meetings. The goal was to review tactics of both plans (DEI and SEM).
  • Under the leadership of the Director of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and the Director of Human Resources the college provided new employees with baseline cultural competency training intended to introduce them to situations that may occur as they interact with students.

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy?

  • The baseline DEI training mentioned was offered 3-4 times per year and was facilitated by members of the Human Resources Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee: 112 employees attended for a total of 168 training hours.
  • The College had 100 percent of employees participate in an Introduction to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. This presentation, conducted by the members of the Gateway Professional Development Team, was a 1.5-hour presentation that included a 15-minute safe colleges video, a 30-minute presentation on bias in the workplace, and a 30-minute Q&A session. 

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy? 

We learned that we need to reevaluate the way in which we will measure activities and trainings available to the campus community.

Next steps:

Human Resources and the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion teams will continue to collaborate as we develop the infrastructure that will ensure the sustainability of the programs and processes. We plan to embed inclusive practices in all that the college does.  

Develop and/or identify professional and personal development opportunities for faculty and staff focused on uncovering implicit biases and improving cultural competence. The expected outcome for this strategy included offering baseline and continued training for faculty and staff with Professional Development offered at least 3 times during the academic year.   

How did you implement this strategy with fidelity?

We offered several sessions across our campus locations at a variety of dates and times to allow our employees to meet their annual Performance Planning Evaluation (PPE) requirement. Due to COVID-19 we had to cancel some and replace with online modules that covered similar content. College leadership included this important PD as a mandatory item to show how vital these topics are to our college’s future success.  

  • Introduction to Diversity, Equity & Inclusion- A facilitated training session utilizing videos discussing what diversity, equity and inclusion are, and how to take steps towards an inclusive and welcoming environment. 
  • College Wide Presentation by Nick Jackson of Nick Jackson Speaks. During this session, Nick Jackson (known for Nick Jackson Speaks and Speak Love) provided a guided tour into working with and educating this diverse generation. The session focused on cultural competencies and identities, inclusive environments and the values and personalities of our faculty and staff.
  • Diversity Leadership Symposium This singular event brought together business and community executives for best practices in inclusion, an inspiring keynote, and an update on how we are making our region diverse by design and inclusive by intention.  
  • Understanding Cultural Competency: Creating Effective Educational Practices as a Campus Community, presented by Dr. David Childs, Ph.D., Consultants, LLC. Dr. Childs is a professor at Northern Kentucky University. The primary emphasis of the presentation was centered on recognizing and addressing our own biases. The primary focus of the talks centered around understanding other perspectives to more about ourselves and taking an honest look at our own biases, owning them, and then moving beyond them to be more culturally competent educators.
  • The following trainings were offered on the Safe Colleges Portal:
    • Diversity Awareness: Staff-to-Staff- The goal of this course is to provide staff with an awareness of how a diverse workforce strengthens an organization.
    • Implicit Bias and Microaggression Awareness- This course is designed to help course takers gain an understanding of what implicit bias and microaggressions are, the science behind these concepts and how to prevent imposing them on others. 

How would you describe the effectiveness of this strategy? 

  • The College had 100 percent of employees participate in an Introduction to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. This presentation, conducted by the members of the Gateway Professional Development Team, was a 1.5-hour presentation that included a 15-minute safe colleges video, a 30-minute presentation on bias in the workplace, and a 30-minute Q&A session.
  • The college faculty and staff members participated in more than 362 hours (about 2 weeks) of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion professional development training.  

What lessons were learned regarding this strategy and what are your next steps?

  • We learned that if we make information accessible and comprehendible, they will begin to assimilate it.
  • The college, and many other humans, require continuous conversation around the topics of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
  • We will use the data collected from surveys to inform future training and offerings.
Next steps
  • We will encourage faculty and staff to use the foundational knowledge they have learned to serve in the community.
  • The college will assist with encouraging staff members to broaden their knowledge base by providing them with a paid day off to continue building their understanding.   

Diversity and Inclusion Measures 

NOTES:   

  • Gateway did not meet the percentage goal for enrollment of Underrepresented Students (URS) in fall 2019 even though enrollment of URS increased by 100 from fall 2018 (567) to fall 2019 (667). One reason Gateway did not meet the URS enrollment goal, even with a 17.64% increase: Gateway’s overall college enrollment grew from 4,095 in fall 2018 to 4,764 in fall 2019.  
  • Gateway, unofficially, is projected to exceed the URS enrollment goal of 14.4% for fall 2020. The final, official percentage will be published in the 2020/2021 report.  
  • Gateway has exceeded the 2019-20 goals for underrepresented students and low-income student credentials awarded: 310.  
  • Gateway has exceeded the target for URS graduation rate in 2019-20, which is 32.0%.  
  • Gateway also exceeded the targets for URS and low-income student retention from fall 2019 to fall 2020 at 63.3%.  
  • Gateway is not projected to meet the target for Underrepresented Population representation in full-time management positions for fall 2019.  
  • Preliminary indications are Gateway increased Underrepresented Population faculty full-time equivalency but is not projected to meet the goal for this measure in fall 2019.  

Definition: Fall enrollment of underrepresented students (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, or African American, Hispanic, or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races) as a percentage of total Fall undergraduate enrollment.   

Underrepresented Students (URS) Enrollment (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 Fall 2019 Fall 2019
13.1% 14.0% 14.2%

Definition: Fall enrollment of African American/Black people as a percentage of total Fall undergraduate enrollment.   

African American/Black Enrollment (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 Fall 2019 Fall 2019
7.9% 5.5% 9.3%

Definition: Fall enrollment of Hispanic/Latinos as a percentage of total Fall undergraduate enrollment.   

Hispanic/Latino Enrollment (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 Fall 2019 Fall 2019
2.6% 4.6% 3.6%

Definition: Awarded credentials to underrepresented students (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races) during an academic year (July 1 through June 30).   

Total Credentials - URS   
Baseline Actual Target
2015/2016 2019/2020 2019/2020
223 310 237
Definition: Credentials awarded to Pell Grant recipient students during any term since 2005.   
Total Credentials - Low Income   
Baseline Actual Target
2015/2016 2019/2020 2019/2020
1,014 1,350 1,025
Definition: Cohort of full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking UR students (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races) who complete their program within 150% of normal time (3-years) as reported to IPEDS.   
Graduation Rate - URS (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
2015/2016 2019/2020 2019/2020
33.3% 35.4% 32.0%
Definition: Cohort of first-time, full-time degree/certificate-seeking low-income students (Pell Grant recipient) who complete their program within 150% of normal time (3-years).   
Graduation Rate - Low Income (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
2015/2016 2019/2020 2019/2020
26.0% 43.3% 29.0%

Definition: Fall-to-fall retention rates of first-time, credential-seeking students by underrepresented students (URS) (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races).   

Retention Rate - URS (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 to Fall 2016 Fall 2019 to Fall 2020 Fall 2019 to Fall 2020
43.1% 63.3% 53.9%

Definition: Fall-to-fall retention rates of first-time, credential-seeking students as reported to IPEDS who are also identified as low income (Pell Grant recipient in cohort AY).   

Retention Rate - Low Income (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 to Fall 2016 Fall 2019 to Fall 2020 Fall 2019 to Fall 2020
54.3% 65.4%% 55.4%
Definition: UR full-time management staff (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black or African American, Hispanic, or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races) as a percentage of all full-time management staff.   

Full-time Management-URM (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 Fall 2019 Fall 2019
15.25 17.2% 19.6%

Definition: UR faculty (American Indian or Alaska Native, Black, or African American, Hispanic, or Latino, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Two or More Races) FTE as a percentage of all faculty FTE. FTE = full-time faculty + 1/3 part-time faculty.   

Faculty Full-time Equivalency (FTE) - URM (Percent)   
Baseline Actual Target
Fall 2015 Fall 2019 Fall 2019
7.4% 6.8% 9.0%