Northeast Higher Education District

The Governance ModelA Primer for Strategic Planning

November, 2009

• Board of Trustees created NHED in 1999 following dialogue, public hearings and constituent involvement in the process

• Founding President, Joe Sertich (1999-2008)

• Strong legislative delegation support for the model• District was formed as a cost saving initiative to

create economies of scale

• District was also formed to promote regionalism

• The model was principle-based, and different from Arrowhead Community College Region

NHED model – five independent colleges (separate accreditation)

ACCR – One accreditation, one president, campuses of ACCR

History and Background

Chancellor’s Guiding Principles for Regional Arrangement:

Ensuring measures of institutional autonomy

Assuring student and community access to quality educational programs

Assuring meaningful institutional cooperation

History and Background Cont’d.

Ensuring institutional stability

Promoting effective relationships with the community, including advocacy and service to business and industry and connections to regional and statewide economic development initiatives

The alignment, NHED, brought five institutions with long-standing track records of serving their respective communities (some for over 90-100 years) together under one umbrella.

History and Background Cont’d.

Vision – The NHED will enhance student access and learning options throughout the region and will focus on each member college’s connection to the community.

Mission and Goals – The NHED will provide quality higher education to the communities throughout northeastern Minnesota by developing a regional structure that will preserve college autonomy but will also align programs and services to better prepare residents for learning, employment, citizenship, and life.

NHED Vision, Mission and Goals

Founding Tenets

Independence Interdependence

Autonomy

Independence : Different colleges, different cultures, different parts of the region

Interdependence : Sharing and collaboration

Autonomy : Self-determination, control over destiny

The District model is based upon the tenets of independence, interdependence and autonomy.

The model honors interdependence without homogenization.

Autonomous, small colleges can self-manage. They can make decisions that impact them and yet, take advantage of a “system” that creates efficiencies.

Colleges are not restricted to move on innovations. They are nimble and can respond directly to community needs.

Underlying Philosophy

Colleges are competitive as a collection of colleges – too small to stand alone.

Tremendous opportunity to take advantage of shared services.

In this model, the President, as Chief Executive Officer: focuses on regional initiatives external priorities and initiatives legislative relations MnSCU relations/interface regional partnerships connections with business/industry, etc.

Advantages of the District

Provosts, as Chief Operating Officers, focus on internal, college priorities and initiatives as well as day-to-day operations and management.

Promotes regionalism while honoring individual communities and their connections to their colleges.

The District model advantages the colleges through a multi-college allocation which is close to $1 million.

Advantages of the District Cont’d.

The regional, district alignment provides opportunity for collaboration/cooperation and reduces competition between colleges.

The District model provides for academic mission independence.

The District model also provides for shared programming to meet regional programming needs.

Advantages of the District Cont’d.

The District model provides a single voice to the legislature and a coordinated legislative agenda.

The five colleges “consortium” arrangement positions the colleges for regionally focused grant acquisitions (i.e. TRIO)

Provides a built-in referee to keep collaboration at the center of what we do.

Advantages of the District Cont’d.

In 2008, a group of college constituents endorsed the District model going forward.

They had these recommendations for District Leadership:

Futures Task Force

Capitalize on potential for economic growth in NE MN designing programs/services that respond to needs of diverse rural population and challenged regional industries seeking highly trained workforce.

Promote enhanced educational service through collaboration among District colleges and preserving college autonomy by encouraging institutional initiative.

Futures Task Force Cont’d.

Ensure strong advocacy for District in the regional community with civic, business and governmental leaders within MnSCU, national and international partners.

Lead in securing both public and private resources necessary to support growth and positioning of District colleges.

Futures Task Force Cont’d.

Strengthen the presence and visibility of District colleges as important educational and economic resources for their host communities.

Pursue ways to use technology for effective delivery of educational services in a large rural region, not always supported by broadband internet service.

Futures Task Force Cont’d.

Northeast Higher Education District

The Governance ModelA Primer for Strategic Planning

November, 2009