Date of Graduation


Document Type



The purpose of this study was to determine what specifically West Virginia's 11 community and technical colleges had done to meet the mandates of Senate Bill 547 to be involved in economic development. Eleven key factors that define the institutional response to economic development goals were identified through an analysis of annual reports filed with the Vice-Chancellor for Community and Technical Colleges from 1995 through 1999, and an analysis of interviews conducted with community and technical college CEOs or their designees. The 11 key factors included (1) how the CEO defines economic development; (2) how the CEO defines the institution's mission and role in economic development; (3) the CEO's perception and use of resources; (4) the CEOs use or adaptation of the district consortium committee concept; (5) the CEO's own role in economic and work force development; (6) the CEO's perception of the legislation; (7) personnel at the institution dedicated to economic development; (8) a history of economic development; (9) openness to alternative delivery of instruction; (10) support from the four-year institution; and (11) the institution's role as a broker for work force development services. Three types of institutional response to economic development goals were developed from the key factors, which were organized into a typology of institutional response. These three types included proactive, emergent, and reactive. Each of the 11 institutions was labeled according to the factors it exhibited. The typology then guided the creation of three case studies strative of the particular types of institutional response, using pertinent data from the annual reports and the interviews. This study was designed to determine what specifically had been done to respond to the economic development goals of Senate Bill 547. Both key factors and a typology of responses were the results. Recommendations for practice focused on institutional self-study, evaluation of institutional success using key factors, and the role of the CEO. Recommendations for further research included the longevity of the CEO and economic development initiatives, the degree of the key factors, and the balance between local and centralized control in public policy legislation.