The WTCS state office made public in late September its programmatic review of the applied technology centers at Gateway Technical College – BioCATT and CATI.

The BioCATT and CATI facilities were constructed pursuant to special statutory language that allows technical college districts to spend up to $5 million without going to referendum for the construction of an applied technology center – defined as a facility that provides services in partnership with business and industry that result in the expansion of high-wage, high-skill jobs.

The review – prompted in part by concerns raised by members of the Gateway Technical Education Association (GTEA) – provides extensive background on a number of operational, programmatic and financial aspects of Gateway’s applied technology centers. In addition, the review offers a series of recommendations to Gateway intended to bring the college into compliance with various state statutes and administrative policies.

WEAC, the United Technical College Council (UTCC) and the GTEA agree with several of the recommendations made in the report and have strongly encouraged Gateway officials to take the steps necessary to ensure swift implementation of the necessary changes.

However, WEAC, UTCC and GTEA feel the state office failed to address the most significant issues related to the creation, structure and ongoing operation of Gateway’s applied technology centers.

In a report sent to the WTCS State Board, WEAC, UTCC and GTEA wrote, “Many of the fundamental questions related to the applied technology centers continue to go unaddressed. An analysis of these issues is essential to any complete analysis of Gateway’s applied technology centers and related activities.”

Among the issues not addressed in the WTCS state office report are several questions related to two non-profit corporations – BioCATT, Inc. and CATI, Inc. – created to manage the operations of applied technology centers. These two non-profit corporations were newly created by Gateway officials or those close to Gateway for the express purpose of partnering with the college. In the case of BioCATT, Inc., the Gateway president created the “partner” precisely to use the entity as a sole source provider of services.

In addition, significant college resources have flowed into the coffers of the two non-profit corporations. However, the report does little to assess whether these expenditures were appropriate.

In their response to the report, WEAC, UTCC and GTEA wrote the review left readers “unable to assess which investments in the applied technology centers were appropriate and which business activities conducted in partnership with the non-profit corporations were warranted.”

The WTCS State Board has asked for additional information concerning the applied technology centers and the relationship between Gateway and the two non-profit corporations.

Please click the links to read the complete WTCS State Office review and the response from WEAC, UTCC and GTEA. Review of CATI and BioCATT | Response