Advancing the System of Higher Education in Virginia The 1999 Virginia Plan for Higher Education

Advancing the System of Higher Education in Virginia

The 1999 Virginia Plan for Higher Education

Background:

SCHEV is assigned responsibility - “To prepare plans under which the several state-supported institutions of higher education shall constitute a coordinating system . . . The Council shall revise such plans biennially in each odd-numbered year. . .” (The Code of Virginia - §23-9.6:1)

Overview of the Plan:

Preface and Introduction Vision Changing Needs and Expectations

– The Education Contract; Access; Quality; Affordability; Accountability

Planning Assumptions Goals and Recommendations

Preface and Introduction:

Continue and calibrate the balance of excellent faculty & students, strong institutional governance, and effective, statewide planning

Focus on changes in the public policy framework in order to . . .

. . . Enhance each institution’s ability to achieve a system-wide vision by advancing its own distinct mission

Preface and Introduction: (continued)

Reaffirms long-standing aims of access, quality, affordability, and accountability

Recommend changes in how we do business, rather than in what our business is

Plan to plan continuously and systematically

Preface and Introduction: (continued)

Messages from Constituents:– Pride in excellence of VA’s public and private

colleges and universities, especially with regard to mission distinction;

– Responsibility of leaders to build on past successes and to guarantee continued excellence, access, and affordability; and

– College education is more important than ever

Vision:

A system of results, framed by a shared vision to offer every citizen in Virginia full opportunity to attain a baccalaureate degree

A diverse set of institutions self-tailored to meet needs and choices of students

The public good of higher education

Changing Needs and Expectations:

Complex, interrelated forces are driving change:– Demographic and social trends

– Economic conditions

– Technological development

– Shifting attitudes and values

– And many more

The Education Contract:

Origins of the public commitment to universal access to higher education

Investing in the education of individual citizens promotes the well-being of society

Complex, wide-ranging benefits to many constituents

Outcomes of higher education:

Educated citizens Skilled workers Life-long learners Economic

development Public service - land-

grant, health care, etc.

Advances in Knowledge & Culture

Research Primary & secondary

education Flourishing

communities

Access:

Central to our vision Considerations include number and location

of institutions, academic programs, etc. Managing enrollment growth Opportunity to succeed, not just to enroll

Quality:

Focus on outcomes, not inputs A value-added approach Emphasis on institution’s own efforts to

assess quality Council’s role in approving and auditing

assessment processes

Affordability:

Controlling costs -- restructuring, tuition freezes, general fund support

A new approach to funding

Accountability:

A new approach to accountability Change from pre-approval, regulatory

approach to post-audit, outcome approach Strong institutional governance Accountable to students and families

Planning Assumptions: High quality at an affordable cost for all Diverse institutional missions are valued Enrollment growth and fiscal planning Decentralization combined with accountability Research and economic development Impact of SOLs Collaboration Distance education

Goals:

1. Improved opportunities for strategic decision-making by institutions

2. Assessment of value-added outcomes 3. Improved system-wide planning 4. Increased collaboration 5. System approach to capital infrastructure

Goal 1:

To improve the opportunities for strategic decision-making at all public colleges and universities by promoting decentralization within a context of continuous quality assessment

Goal 1 - Recommendations:

1.1-1.5 Implement the new Performance Funding

Model 1.6 Decentralize appropriate

administrative activities 1.7 Minimize bureaucratic regulations

while assuring accountability

Goal 2:

To strengthen the ongoing assessment of the programs and units at Virginia’s colleges and universities by focussing on outcomes and value-added analysis


2.1 Revise the assessment guidelines 2.2 Modify the process to initiate

academic programs 2.3 Develop alternatives to evaluate

retention, graduation, and other indicators of student

outcomes


2.4 New mechanism for reporting on progress in institutional strategic plans and assessment of outcomes

2.5 Ensure that approval of private and and out-of-state institutions is consistent with highest quality

Goal 3:

To anticipate the future needs of all constituents of higher education through improved system-wide planning


3.1 Fund cost of undergraduate education beyond what families can afford

3.2 Improve information for students in choosing a college

3.3 Review coverage of higher education institutions across Virginia

Goal 3 - Recommendations (continued)

3.4 Plan enrollment based on capacity of public and private institutions

3.5 Innovative ways to extend coverage 3.6 Minimize barriers that delay student

progress 3.7 Improve linkages between campus

and statewide planning


3.8 Enhance Boards of Visitors training 3.9 Continue Council’s campus-liaison

program 3.10 Continue and enhance dialog

between the Council and

Virginia faculty 3.11 Consider formalizing the

Council of Visitors

Goal 4:

To encourage collaborative programming across institutions


4.1 Policy changes to facilitate collaboration

4.2 Target development of new consortia

4.3 Intellectual property policies to support collaboration

4.4 Support for Statewide Workforce Training Council

Goal 5:

To evaluate capital infrastructure at public and private campuses for the purpose of assessing system capacities and options for delivering academic programs


5.1 Improve capital planning process 5.2 Funding for maintenance reserve 5.3 Reduce deferred maintenance

backlog 5.4 Use of technology for access 5.5 Support Higher Education

Equipment Trust Fund 5.6 Shared funding of research

SCHEV’s Performance Grant Funding Model

State Council of Higher Education

May 1999

Council Action

revised performance funding guidelines will reflect a decentralized or “block grant” approach;

Be It Resolved that the Council of Higher Education adopts the following funding model components:

Council Action

the performance grant will comprise all Educational and General appropriations (E&G), all fund sources and, in addition, maintenance reserve funding;


Council Action

staff will conduct an analysis of base funding adequacy;


Council Action

the performance grant model will not provide for enrollment growth funding per se, but marginal enrollment growth may be accommodated through incentive funding recurring in the base and also through periodic re-evaluation of base budget adequacy;

Be It Resolved that the Council of HigherEducation adopts the following funding model components:

Council Action

revised performance funding guidelines will include an incentive budgeting component;

institutions will be freed from unnecessary regulatory constraints, thereby allowing them to pursue their missions with greater efficiency and creativity;

Be It Resolved that the Council of HigherEducation adopts the following funding model components:

Council Action

institutions would remain accountable to law and, as a minimum requirement of the block grant, would have to meet internal and external audit standards;


Council Action

the state will provide general best practice guidelines/principles from which institutions would establish their own internal policies and procedures;


Council Action

institutions that fail to manage their human, fiscal, and capital resources appropriately would fall into receivership, and if corrective action were not taken, would be closed;


Council Action

annually adjust the block grant to account for such technical issues as one-time expenditures, annualization of salaries, lease payments for the Higher Education Equipment Trust Fund and to protect equal opportunity and Unique Military Activities funding.


Council Action

use a Virginia-specific version of the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI) to calculate inflationary growth in the block grant, the specific version to be approved by the Council; and,


Council Action

include maintenance reserve in the block grant and separately calculate future resource needs on the basis of general programmatic criteria.


Council Action

propose specific thresholds as “triggers” for base budget adequacy review with respect to significant changes in institutional mission, programs, enrollments, and new construction;

Be It Further Resolved that the Council of Higher Education directs the staff to…

Council Action

devise procedures and methods to review base budget adequacy for subsequent adoption by Council; and,

develop specific performance measures consistent with the general provisions adopted by Council.

Be It Further Resolved that the Council of Higher Education directs the staff to…

Underlying Premise

Encourage innovation and efficiency by freeing our public colleges and universities from regulatory micro-management.

Hold our public colleges and universities accountable for the results they achieve with the public funds entrusted to them.

How the Model Works

Performance based block grant to all institutions with deregulation

PLUS

Incentive funding for performance exceeding expectations

The Performance Grant

Prior Year’s E & G Funding

+/- Technical Adjustments

+/- Inflationary Growth Factor

+/- Base Budget Adequacy Adjustment

E&G Funding equals


The performance grant deregulates institutions at the front end of the process while holding them accountable at the back end.

After initial determination of base budget adequacy, subsequent growth in institutional budgets would be largely held to the rate of inflation.


SCHEV would evaluate institutions performance on a variety of measures for early warning signals of potential problems.

Incentive Funding

Performance measures outcome focused.

Incentive funding above performance grant drawn from pool of funds established for that purpose.

Incentive Funding

Incentive funding, when awarded, becomes a recurring allocation in the institution’s base budget.

Staff have been directed to develop specific performance measures consistent with the general provisions adopted by Council.

The Next Steps

The Council will use this model to make operating budget recommendations to the Governor and General Assembly this fall.

In this effort, Council staff will work this summer on a base adequacy analysis which will be incorporated into Council recommendations.

The Next Steps

The Council will recommend legislation for the 2000 General Assembly Session to allow for the decentralization and deregulation called for in the model.

Staff will develop legislation to be submitted this fall to be submitted to the Governor and General Assembly for their action.

Base Adequacy Analysis

In working with finance staffs of the colleges and universities, SCHEV will seek input on drafting the necessary legislation for deregulation and for examining a variety of options for assessing adequacy.

The Next Steps

Over the next twelve months, staff will work on development of the predicted retention and graduation rates and development of transition rates for the VCCS.

Staff will also begin work on development of other outcome measures such as passage rates on exit exams, measures of post graduate placement, and faculty productivity.

Institutional Involvement

As SCHEV staff proceeds in its assessment of base budget adequacy, drafting of legislation, and development of performance measures, SCHEV must recognize and encourage the involvement and input of campuses.

Performance Measures

Working with Academic officers and institutional research, SCHEV seeks to improve upon already existing predictive measures for graduation and retention.

Working with this same group, SCHEV seeks to refine current transfer measures for the VCCS and to incorporate other transition variables into one single measure.

The Challenge

Control over own resources

Predictable funding

Reward for excellence

Through this collaborative effort, the Council seeks to deliver on the basic elements for funding which colleges and universities have long sought:

Join Us in This Challenge

WinterOdd #Years

VA Plan Released

SpringOdd # Years

Draft Institutional Strategic

Plans Submitted

SummerOdd # Years

SCHEV Begins Scan for New VA

PlanFall

Odd # Years Final Institutional

StrategicPlans Submitted

SpringEven # YearsDrafting ofNew VA

Plan begins

Fall Even # Years

Institutional Reports on Progress in Achieving

Strategic Plan Goals

FallEven # Years

Drafts of New VA Plan

Circulated

Strategic Planning

Reporting Cycle

To Learn More...

1999 Virginia Plan for Higher Education - http://www.schev.edu

Virginia Higher Education Performance Funding Model -http://www.schev.edu

Measuring Virginia Education: Can SCHEV Make a Difference? (from the Virginia News Letter) - http://www.schev.edu/wumedia/nov98nl.pdf

Join the VaPlan List-Serve

In order to continue this important dialog about the Virginia Plan, the Funding Model, and their implementation, the Council has established a list-serve.

To subscribe to the moderated list-serve, please send the command “subscribe vaplan your name” in the body of the message to - [email protected]

Documents

Advancing the System of Higher Education in Virginia The 1999 Virginia Plan for Higher Education