1 / 33

Patrick Kelly National Center for Higher Education Management Systems

Productivity and the Impact of Shifting Enrollments and Resources. Patrick Kelly National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. Presentation to the Louisiana Postsecondary Education Review Commission September 29, 2009. Different Approaches to Analyzing Productivity.

priscilla-mays
Télécharger la présentation

Patrick Kelly National Center for Higher Education Management Systems

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Productivity and the Impact of Shifting Enrollments and Resources Patrick KellyNational Center for Higher Education Management Systems Presentation to the Louisiana Postsecondary Education Review Commission September 29, 2009

  2. Different Approaches to Analyzing Productivity Public Investment vs. Performance Institutional Spending vs. Performance Cost Savings and Efficiency General Revenues State and Local Appropriations Tuition and Fees Endowment Income Government Grants and Contracts Private Gifts, Grants and Contracts Other E&G Revenue Outcomes and Performance Degree Production Retention and Graduation Rates External Research General Expenditures Internal Operations Instruction Student Services Academic Support Institutional Support Plant Operation and Maintenance Research Public Service Scholarships and Fellowships Programmatic Costs Student/Faculty Ratios Faculty Workload Faculty and Staff Attrition Administrative Staffing Patterns Academic Program Mix Course Delivery Modes Space Utilization

  3. Different Approaches to Analyzing Productivity Public Investment vs. Performance Institutional Spending vs. Performance Cost Savings and Efficiency NCHEMS Approach General Revenues State and Local Appropriations Tuition and Fees Endowment Income Government Grants and Contracts Private Gifts, Grants and Contracts Other E&G Revenue Total Unrestricted Revenues Outcomes and Performance Degree Production Retention and Graduation Rates External Research General Expenditures Internal Operations Instruction Student Services Academic Support Institutional Support Plant Operation and Maintenance Research Public Service Scholarships and Fellowships Programmatic Costs Student/Faculty Ratios Faculty Workload Faculty and Staff Attrition Administrative Staffing Patterns Academic Program Mix Course Delivery Modes Space Utilization

  4. Different Approaches to Analyzing Productivity Public Investment vs. Performance Institutional Spending vs. Performance Cost Savings and Efficiency Delta Approach General Revenues State and Local Appropriations Tuition and Fees Endowment Income Government Grants and Contracts Private Gifts, Grants and Contracts Other E&G Revenue Outcomes and Performance Degree Production Retention and Graduation Rates External Research General Expenditures Internal Operations Instruction Student Services Academic Support Institutional Support Plant Operation and Maintenance Research Public Service Scholarships and Fellowships Programmatic Costs Student/Faculty Ratios Faculty Workload Faculty and Staff Attrition Administrative Staffing Patterns Academic Program Mix Course Delivery Modes Space Utilization Education Related Expenses

  5. Different Approaches to Analyzing Productivity Public Investment vs. Performance Institutional Spending vs. Performance Cost Savings and Efficiency General Revenues State and Local Appropriations Tuition and Fees Endowment Income Government Grants and Contracts Private Gifts, Grants and Contracts Other E&G Revenue Outcomes and Performance Degree Production Retention and Graduation Rates External Research General Expenditures Internal Operations Instruction Student Services Academic Support Institutional Support Plant Operation and Maintenance Research Public Service Scholarships and Fellowships Programmatic Costs Student/Faculty Ratios Faculty Workload Faculty and Staff Attrition Administrative Staffing Patterns Academic Program Mix Course Delivery Modes Space Utilization

  6. A New Look at the Institutional Component of Higher Education Finance: A Guide for Evaluating Performance Relative to Financial Resources (2005) NCHEMS Reports on Higher Education Productivity The Dreaded “P” Work: An Examination of Productivity in Public Postsecondary Education (2009) Available at www.nchems.org

  7. The Dreaded “P’ Word: An Examination of Productivity in Public Postsecondary Education

  8. Public Investment from State and Students Focus of this Report Production of Degrees – and Value to Students and the State Postsecondary Education Institutions Costs of Producing Degrees Internal External Policy Focus

  9. Calculating Public Higher Education Productivity (Using Alabama as an Example) = 1. Total State and Local Appropriations and Tuition Revenues for Public Higher Education = $2,394,572,347 Total Funding = 2. Annual Degrees and Certificates Awarded in Public Colleges and Universities (Weighted for Market Value) = 42,548 Certificates and Degrees Awarded * Degrees Weighted by Value to the State and Individuals: Median Earnings in the State Employment Market Note: STEM includes credentials awarded in computer science and technology, architecture and engineering, mathematics and statistics, and biological and life sciences. * “Some college, but no degree” was used as a proxy for median earnings of certificate degree-holders. = 3. Productivity Total Funding per Certificate and Degree Produced = $56,280

  10. Total Funding per FTE Student (2007-08) Source: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008

  11. Total Funding per FTE Student by State and Student Share (2007-08) Tuition and Fees State and Local Source: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008

  12. Annual FTE Enrollment by Public Sector (2006-07) Source: NCES, IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey

  13. Degrees and Certificates Awarded* per 100 FTE Students (2006-07) * Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree type and level) Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Samples)

  14. Degrees and Certificates Awarded* by Level (2006-07) * Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree type and level) Sources: NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Samples)

  15. Percentage of Degrees and Certificates Awarded in STEM Fields (2006-07) Sources: NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey

  16. Productivity: Degrees Awarded per FTE vs. Total Funding per FTE 32 Low Resources, High Production High Resources, High Production CO 29 UT OK KY FL WA NH IA KS 26 WI MN Performance: Degrees Awarded per 100 FTE SD AZ ND GA CT VT WV MI MT IL ID IN VA PA HI LA DE OH AL 23 SC MD ME NJ US MA NE OR AR WY TX TN NY MO MS AK NM NC 20 RI NV 17 CA Low Resources, Low Production High Resources, Low Production 14 5,000 8,000 11,000 14,000 17,000 20,000 Resources: Total Funding per FTE

  17. Productivity: Total Funding per Degree* Tuition and Fees State and Local * Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree type and level) Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Samples)

  18. Annual Certificates and Degrees Awarded by Control/Sector (2006-07) Source: NCES, IPEDS Copmpletions Survey

  19. Productivity vs. Educational Attainment of the Adult Population 55 High Productivity, High Attainment Low Productivity, High Attainment MA 48 CT MD MN CO VT NH NJ HI NY ND VA WA 41 RI NE IL Percent of Adults (25 to 64) with Associate Degrees or Higher (2006) UT KS MT IA SD CA OR WI US ME DE PA FL NC GA AK AZ MI NM 34 WY MO ID OH SC TX IN OK AL TN KY NV MS 27 LA AR WV High Productivity, Low Attainment Low Productivity, Low Attainment 20 25,000 35,000 45,000 55,000 65,000 75,000 85,000 95,000 Productivity: Total Funding per Degree (2006-07) Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Samples)

  20. Productivity: Total Funding per Degree (Two-Year Institutions) * Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree level) Source: Louisiana Board of Regents

  21. Productivity: Total Funding per Degree (Four-Year Institutions) * Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree level) Source: Louisiana Board of Regents

  22. The Impact of Shifting Enrollment and Resources

  23. Louisiana Public Sector – First-Time Undergraduates Directly Out of HighSchool as a Percent of High School Graduates, 2006-08 Annual Average Public 4Yr Public 2Yr, CC LTC Louisiana = 56.5 Sources: Louisiana Board of Regents. Louisiana Dept. of Education. Note: High school graduates not available for 2008. High school graduates for Orleans Parish for 2007 only (2006 affected by hurricane).

  24. Louisiana Public 4-Year Sector – First-Time Undergraduates Directly Out ofHigh School as a Percent of High School Graduates, 2006-08 Annual Average Louisiana = 42.1 Sources: Louisiana Board of Regents. Louisiana Dept. of Education. Note: High school graduates not available for 2008. High school graduates for Orleans Parish for 2007 only (2006 affected by hurricane).

  25. Louisiana Public 2-Year/CC Sector – First-Time Undergraduates Directly Out of High School as a Percent of High School Graduates, 2006-08 Annual Average Louisiana = 12.1 Sources: Louisiana Board of Regents. Louisiana Dept. of Education. Note: High school graduates not available for 2008. High school graduates for Orleans Parish for 2007 only (2006 affected by hurricane).

  26. Louisiana Technical College Sector – First-Time Undergraduates Directly Out of High School as a Percent of High School Graduates, 2006-08 Annual Average Louisiana = 2.3 Sources: Louisiana Board of Regents. Louisiana Dept. of Education. Note: High school graduates not available for 2008. High school graduates for Orleans Parish for 2007 only (2006 affected by hurricane).

  27. What Some States are Doing to Address Cost Efficiency an Productivity • Funding Completions – OK, OH, IN, TN, and TX • Re-Designing Coursework – Particularly Remedial Education (TN, MS) • Major Structural Delivery Changes– AZ, LA • Establish Effectiveness and Efficiency Commissions – OH, MD • Reaching Out to Adults with College Credit – KY, TN, NM, CO, IN, and OK • Stackable Certificates – OH, OR, KY

  28. Ohio and Maryland • Ohio’s Effectiveness and Efficiency Commission • Identified five major areas of focus for cost savings – healthcare, IT-education, energy, procurement, and academic • Workgroup in place to work with institutions on best practices and establishing metrics to track progress in the five areas • Maryland’s Strategies • Recognition that higher education system is growing faster than the state budget • Agreed to pay for three-quarters of the growth and institutions pay for one-quarter through cost-saving • Mandated that each institution increase student credit hours per FTE faculty by 10 percent

  29. Patrick Kelly NCHEMS patrick@nchems.org

More Related