University of Hawaii Community Colleges
Instructional Annual Report of Program Data (ARPD)

Select the desired review year, college, and program from the drop down menus. Once a program has been selected, the results will be displayed.

Review Year: College: Program:

College: Honolulu Community College
Program: Human Services

Printer Friendly


The last comprehensive review for this program was on 2013, and can be viewed at:

Program Description

College Mission Statement

Honolulu Community College’s mission is to:


Program Mission Statement

The Human Services Program's mission is to prepare individuals for employment as human services workers and to support those who wish to transfer to baccalaureate human services and social work programs.


Program SLOs

Upon successful completion of the HSER program, students will be able to:


Program Description

The Human Services Program is designed for people interested in working as human service workers in diverse settings such as group homes, developmental disabilities and community health centers; family, child, and youth service agencies; and programs concerned with addiction treatment, family violence, and aging. Field experience, or Work Practicum, is an important feature of this program in which students have supervised work experiences in a community setting.


The program prepares students for immediate employment as paraprofessionals in the human and social services field.  For students who are continuing their education, the program facilitates their transfer by maintaining a SW 200 course articulation agreement with the University of Hawaii at Manoa - School of Social Work.  The program is currently working to renew an articulation agreement with Hawaii Pacific University’s BSW Program.  This agreement is scheduled for approval in Fall 2013. `


Practicum or internship provides students the opportunity to apply theory to practice in a supervised learning experience in their area of interest.  The program has developed and maintained numerous practicum site agreements to support student learning.  Practicum sites are also potential future employment opportunities for our students and graduates.


Service learning provides students, particularly nonmajors, with hands-on experience in a human or social services agency.  Service learning has been expanded to two other courses (FAMR 296 and KLS 195) to promote civic engagement among students.


The program has partnered with a wide range of community, human, and social service agencies.  It is an essential function of the program, in order to meet student-learning needs and to maintain the program’s currency in the helping field.


The Human Services Program continues to meet the State’s need for human services workers and for social workers.  The program also meets the need for continuing education for community and state agencies.  During 2011-12, the program successfully completed its implementation of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the Department of Public Safety.  Based on this success and available of grant funds, the agreement was extended to AY 2012-13.  The program worked collaboratively with the Noncredit Coordinator on a training contract with Department of Public Safety to provide statewide noncredit training in motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral training, and level of service inventory training for professional staff employed at several state agencies dealing with criminal justice.

The program’s occupational code is SOC Code 21-1093 Social Service and Human Services Assistants and has the following occupational description:  Assist professionals from a wide variety of fields such as psychology, rehabilitation, or social work, to provide client services, as well as support for families.  May assist clients in identifying available benefits and social and community services and help clients obtain them?  May assist social workers with developing, organizing, and conducting programs to prevent and resolve problems relevant to substance abuse, human relationships, rehabilitation, or adult day care.

Part I. Quantitative Indicators

Overall Program Health: Cautionary

Majors Included: HSER     Program CIP: 44.0000

Demand Indicators Program Year Demand Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
1 New & Replacement Positions (State) 123 184 170 Cautionary
2 *New & Replacement Positions (County Prorated) 70 111 118
3 *Number of Majors 71.5 68.5 71
3a     Number of Majors Native Hawaiian 28 28 26
3b     Fall Full-Time 32% 41% 45%
3c     Fall Part-Time 68% 59% 55%
3d     Fall Part-Time who are Full-Time in System 0% 0% 0%
3e     Spring Full-Time 36% 34% 39%
3f     Spring Part-Time 64% 66% 61%
3g     Spring Part-Time who are Full-Time in System 0% 1% 1%
4 SSH Program Majors in Program Classes 494 647 624
5 SSH Non-Majors in Program Classes 1,179 995 1,047
6 SSH in All Program Classes 1,673 1,642 1,671
7 FTE Enrollment in Program Classes 56 55 56
8 Total Number of Classes Taught 34 31 32

Efficiency Indicators Program Year Efficiency Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
9 Average Class Size 18 19.9 18.9 Healthy
10 *Fill Rate 88.6% 96.2% 93.2%
11 FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 2 2 2
12 *Majors to FTE BOR Appointed Faculty 35.7 34.2 35.5
13 Majors to Analytic FTE Faculty 23.0 24.0 24.6
13a Analytic FTE Faculty 3.1 2.9 2.9
14 Overall Program Budget Allocation $150,585 $9,021 $154,529
14a General Funded Budget Allocation $150,585 $0 $147,628
14b Special/Federal Budget Allocation $0 $0 $0
14c Tuition and Fees $0 $9,021 $6,901
15 Cost per SSH $90 $5 $92
16 Number of Low-Enrolled (<10) Classes 8 0 8
*Data element used in health call calculation Last Updated: January 27, 2014

Effectiveness Indicators Program Year Effectiveness Health Call
10-11 11-12 12-13
17 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) 85% 85% 84% Cautionary
18 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 16 9 22
19 *Persistence Fall to Spring 53% 69.1% 74.6%
19a Persistence Fall to Fall     45.4%
20 *Unduplicated Degrees/Certificates Awarded 15 8 19
20a Degrees Awarded 9 4 9
20b Certificates of Achievement Awarded 1 1 3
20c Advanced Professional Certificates Awarded 0 0 0
20d Other Certificates Awarded 5 5 8
21 External Licensing Exams Passed   Not Reported Not Reported
22 Transfers to UH 4-yr 12 7 10
22a Transfers with credential from program 2 0 3
22b Transfers without credential from program 10 7 7

Distance Education:
Completely On-line Classes
Program Year  
10-11 11-12 12-13
23 Number of Distance Education Classes Taught 0 0 0  
24 Enrollments Distance Education Classes N/A N/A N/A
25 Fill Rate N/A N/A N/A
26 Successful Completion (Equivalent C or Higher) N/A N/A N/A
27 Withdrawals (Grade = W) N/A N/A N/A
28 Persistence (Fall to Spring Not Limited to Distance Education) N/A N/A N/A

Perkins IV Core Indicators
Goal Actual Met  
29 1P1 Technical Skills Attainment 90.00 100.00 Met  
30 2P1 Completion 50.00 37.50 Not Met
31 3P1 Student Retention or Transfer 74.25 85.37 Met
32 4P1 Student Placement 60.00 54.84 Not Met
33 5P1 Nontraditional Participation N/A N/A N/A
34 5P2 Nontraditional Completion N/A N/A N/A

Performance Funding Program Year  
10-11 11-12 12-13
35 Number of Degrees and Certificates     12  
36 Number of Degrees and Certificates Native Hawaiian     4
37 Number of Degrees and Certificates STEM     Not STEM
38 Number of Pell Recipients     55
39 Number of Transfers to UH 4-yr     10
*Data element used in health call calculation Last Updated: January 27, 2014
Glossary | Health Call Scoring Rubric

Part II. Analysis of the Program

For 2013-14, the overall program health for Human Services is deemed “Cautionary”.  The demand and efficiency indicators are rated as “Cautionary” and the efficiency indicator is rated as “Healthy”.  A discussion of these ratings is as follows:


Demand – Cautionary


Demand is calculated by the number of majors (#3) that is divided by the new and replacement positions (county prorated) (#2) for the SOC Code 21-1093*. According to the county prorated employment data, there was a 100% increase from 35 (2008-2009 and 2009-10) to 70 (2010-11), to 111 (2011-12), and then to 118 in this program year 2012-13 (over 300% from 2008-2009).


The program has requested an explanation of how the county prorated data is determined.   The college’s Institutional Researcher was not able to provide an explanation since the campus does not have access to the actual data or to the methodology used to apportion the county jobs to the various programs. The CC system office through its privately contracted data source, EMSI, provides the data.  This lack of access to the actual data by the campus Institutional Researcher and the lack of transparency related to the data source are serious concerns that need to be addressed.


The number of program declared majors (71) appears to be more than the actual majors as reflected by the course enrollments, which is probably due to two factors. Firstly, students are counted as majors even though they have not taken a major-specific course.   As there is no “pre-major” category, it is suggested that students be counted as majors when they complete one of the major-specific course such as SOSE 21 (Family Dynamics and the Social Work Interview) in the Fall semesters and SOSE 55 (Individual Counseling) in the Spring semesters. It should be noted that when the former Program Health Indicators were used for program reviews, those who completed SOSE 21 in the Fall semester were counted as majors.


Secondly, the HSER major count still includes HSER-ECE majors who have not changed their majors to ECE.  To prolong this problematic situation, there are still HSER-ECE students from the “old program” who are returning to college to obtain an academic credential as a condition of employment. Also, students who enter as HSER-ECE majors but leave as ECE graduates affect the program’s graduation rates as related to number of majors (#3).


It should be noted that sorting out the HSER-ECE majors from the HSER majors has been a very tedious, time-consuming, and on-going process. 


Lastly, with the dramatic increase (for a second consecutive year) in number of county jobs from 70 to 118, the program would need 167 majors, which is about 2.4 times more majors than the current questionable 69 majors to have a “healthy” demand (per IR).  An increase in majors is not feasible given the current limited personnel and physical resources of the program and historic and current student demand for the program.  As an example, the program only has one assigned classroom where all the classes are scheduled in.


In regards to the Total Number of Classes Taught (#8), non-general funded classes should not be included in the count.  These classes include four sections of FAMR 296 offered at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard for its apprenticeship program and two sections of FAMR 230 through the military program, SOCAD.  In spite of the program’s objections, these classes are included.


Efficiency – Healthy


The program will continue to responsibly offer and schedule courses to meet student needs and to maximize classroom use (all classes are scheduled in one classroom).


Effectiveness – Cautionary


Calculating the effectiveness also includes the use of the county prorated new and replacement positions data (118).  For measure #5, the number of unduplicated degrees/certificates awarded (19) is divided by the number of prorated positions (118). Although, this reflects a 100% increase of academic credential from 2011-12, it is still not sufficient to move from the cautionary to healthy status. Again, due to the dramatic and unexplained increase in new and replacement jobs and the assumption that HCC graduates are the only individuals who meet this labor need, the program was assigned an unhealthy rating. 


Prior to the use of the EMSI occupational data, the CC system used the Department of Labor occupational statistics.  The Hawaii DOL short-term occupational statewide projections 2011-2013 for the program’s SOC code 21-1093 projects 10 new jobs and 50 replacement jobs for a total of 60 for Hawaii. EMSI data indicates 118 new and replacement county, not statewide, positions.  The program is again concerned regarding the discrepancy in the figures.  Due to the lack of transparency regarding EMSI data sources, this discrepancy cannot be examined or explained by the college’s Institutional Researcher.


The effectiveness for measure #4 is calculated by dividing the unduplicated degrees and certificates awarded (#20) by the number of majors (#3).  Again, the number of majors is not accurate as it probably includes HSER-ECE majors that are still counted as HSER majors but graduate with ECE degrees and/or HSER majors who have not yet taken program courses.

Part III. Action Plan

Part IV. Resource Implications

Program Student Learning Outcomes

For the 2012-2013 program year, some or all of the following P-SLOs were reviewed by the program:

this year?
Program Student Learning Outcomes


• Work in the field of human services to serve clients and/or carry out other supportive human service agency functions.


• Obtain information and guidance to transfer to a baccalaureate human services or social work program if desired.

A) Evidence of Industry Validation

The Advisory Committee met on 6/28/13 to discuss the past program review, status of articulation of agreements, review of course offerings for 2013-14, employment trends for paraprofessionals and social workers in the public and private sectors, and possible social service and community practicum sites.  Announcements included one of the HCC 2012 Distinguished Alumni Awardees, a HSER graduate who is the Assistant Vice President of Resource Development for AUW and the Human Services YouTube Promotional Video June 2013. 

The committee members provided current information, useful feedback, and recommendations to strengthen the program.

B) Expected Level Achievement

All program and course SLOs should meet the established criteria.  Measurements

depend on the assessment methods.

C) Courses Assessed

C. Courses Assessed

All courses have assigned SLOS, Course SLOs have been mapped to Program SLOs to ensure adequate course SLOs are achieved in order for the student to achieve the desired Program SLOs.  The mapping diagrams are located at the following Web site:

It should be noted that codes are used to identify the type of comprehension achieved as well as codes to identify the type of assessment that is performed for each SLO.

Seven courses were assessed. See Section D below.

D) Assessment Strategy/Instrument

Course SLOs

Seven courses were assessed using a knowledge survey. The survey questions, results, and analysis are found at the following site:


Each course is in the same workbook, tabbed worksheets allow you to navigate to the desired course.  The worksheet displays the Inventory sheet, the survey sheet used by the student, the spreadsheet matrix that allowed calculations and analysis of the survey data.  A column chart was created so the reader can easily see what SLOs are or are not meeting the established criteria.  Recommended action is included.

Program SLOs

The primary means of assessment is to have the employers of SOSE 91V practicum students evaluate student performance. The employers/site supervisors provide end-of-the semester ratings on the student meeting the learning outcomes and ratings on jobs performance.  These evaluations serve as a basis for the semester-end exit conference or interview for a prospective employer and basis for the evaluating attainment of the program SLOs.

Associate Professor Elliott Higa monitors the practicum students.  He maintains close contact with students throughout the semester.  He monitors weekly learning logs, via electronic mail, assist in developing and accomplishing learning objectives, and conduct evaluations at the end of the semester based on supervisor ratings and the critique of student’s practicum folders. The practicum folder is a documentation and reflection of the semester long practicum experience. It includes self-evaluations by students and evaluations by site supervisors, agency descriptions, weekly learning logs, learning agreement, time sheets, and a reflection of experience paper. New sites have been developed and existing ones have been maintained.  Participating agencies include Next Step H5 Homeless shelter, Mililani Community Center, Waikiki Health Center, Child and Family Services, Hale Kipa, Lighthouse Outreach and Homeless Shelter, Institute for Human Services, Child Welfare Services, Kokua Kalihi Valley, Salvation Army Adult Rehabilitation Center, Honolulu Community Action Program (HCAP), Ka Hale Ho‘Ala Hou No NA Wahine (aka T.J. Mahoney), Catholic Charities Hawaii, State Judiciary Drug Court, and Ke Ola Mamo.

Students work with a wide range of clients:  at-risk or high-risk youth, recovering drug and alcohol users, former prison inmates, homeless individuals and families, individuals with various disabilities, and individuals with health concerns.  To streamline and structure the practicum requirements, Associate Professor Higa has developed a practicum manual for students to use as a reference guide.

One of the evaluation forms the employers use to rate the student can be found in the complete program review.

E) Results of Program Assessment

Practicum supervisors, who are current employers or potential employers of our students have continually expressed high satisfaction with the program’s students as is evidenced by positive work practicum evaluation ratings and willingness to continue as practicum supervisors.

The Work Practicum Student Evaluation (2 ½ page form is completed by the supervisor at the end of the semester) provides evidence of employer satisfaction with the on site work performance of the human services student interns.  Students have been consistently rated at levels above average to outstanding in various aspects that include conduct, dependability, disposition, knowledge, and quality of work.  Most importantly, when employers were asked whether they would hire students for a position in this type of work, the large majority of responses were affirmative.

Another indication of employer satisfaction is the number who actually hire the practicum students either during or following graduation. . For example, Next Step Homeless Shelter currently employs four of its former practicum students.  Moiliilii Community Center offered employment opportunities to two former students who completed practicum with the agency. The Institute for Human Services (IHS), Safe Haven and the Boys and Girls Club also employ students who completed practicum at those sites. Through informal contacts, Professor Higa has confirmed graduate employment throughout the State.

The college tracks transfers to UHM, UHH, and UH West Oahu.  According to the 2012 ARPD, 10 transferred to a UH campus.  However, the college does not track transfers to non-UH campuses.  Students who transfer to a BSW program generally attend UH BSW program or HPU BSW program.   Therefore, the number of transfers to a baccalaureate program is under reported. Through informal contacts by the program faculty, the program’s students have successful at the transferred college. 

F) Other Comments

Ethical standards and conduct as outlined by the National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics are infused in the human services curriculum, in particular the following courses:  SW 200 Field of Social Work, SOSE 55 Individual Counseling, and SOSE 21 Family Dynamics and the Social Work Interview.  Case studies and ethical dilemmas are examples of methodology employed to insure ethics education in the program

G) Next Steps

G.  Next Steps

1.  Identify student learning outcomes with scores between 70-75%.

2.  Review curriculum/lesson plans to improve student learning related to these outcomes.