43
IBHE Presentation 1 Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model Performance Funding Steering Committee Meeting January 6, 2012 Dr. Alan Phillips

Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model. Performance Funding Steering Committee Meeting January 6, 2012 Dr. Alan Phillips. Purpose. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

IBHE Presentation 1

Illinois Higher EducationPerformance Funding Model

Performance FundingSteering Committee Meeting

January 6, 2012

Dr. Alan Phillips

Page 2: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Purpose

The purpose of this presentation is to propose a performance

funding model that will be incorporated in the FY 2013 budget

recommendations that meet the intent of Public Act 97-320

(HB 1503), the Performance Funding legislation, and that

support the goals of the Illinois Public Agenda.

IBHE Presentation 2

Page 3: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Topics to be Covered

• The status of higher education in the State of Illinois– The current situation– How we are doing– What we are doing to improve the situation

• Performance Funding– What we have accomplished– The recommended four-year model– The recommended two-year model– Performance funding results

• Budgetary considerations and preliminary recommendations

IBHE Presentation 3

Page 4: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

The Status of Higher Education in the State of Illinois

IBHE Presentation 4

Page 5: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

The Illinois Public Agenda for College and Career Success

• A tale of two Illinois– One Illinois is well educated and prosperous– The other is vastly underserved educationally and struggling economically,

with severely constricted opportunities.

• Between these two states of Illinois is a “prosperity gap” that relates directly to disparities in educational attainment, by race/ethnicity, by income, and by region.

• The bottom line is that “Illinois needs effective and quality education for all people”.

• Our vision is the pathway to one Illinois, where all residents have affordable access to high-quality educational opportunities that prepare them for the jobs of the present and future.

IBHE Presentation 5

Page 6: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Public Agenda Goals

1. Increase Educational Attainment.

2. Ensure college affordability for students, families, and taxpayers.

3. Increase the number of high-quality post-secondary credentials.

4. Better integrate Illinois’ education, research, and innovation assets to meet economic needs of the state.

IBHE Presentation 6

Page 7: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

The Challenge• According to the Higher Education Finance Study

Commission :– Colleges and Universities are starving for dollars.– Illinois’ student financial aid system has been eroded at a

time when low-income families have less ability to pay for college.

– Unfunded state mandates and regulatory requirements undermine efficiency and productivity.

– Institutions often squeeze cost savings out of instruction and student support services.

– The burden of financing a college education has increasingly fallen on students and families.

IBHE Presentation 7

Page 8: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

The Challenge

• State funding for higher education has declined steadily over the last 15 years.

• The State is currently experiencing a debt crisis.• Pensions costs are exceeding the rate of state revenue growth.• The State funding situation has created a cash flow problem for

colleges and universities.• Over the past few years there has been very little funding for

capital projects, to include renovation and remodeling.• The State is facing potential decreases in financial aid funding for

both MAP and Pell.

IBHE Presentation 8

Page 9: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

How Are We Doing?

Measure Range* US Average* Illinois*• College-Going Rates of HS Graduates (45.7%-77.4%) 63.3%

57.4%• Transition & Completion Rates HS to College/100 Students (6.6-30.2) 20.5 20.4• % of 18-24 Year Olds Enrolled in College (18.6%-52.8%) 36.2% 34.9%• Credentials and Degrees Awarded/100 FTE (2 Yr) (8.6-31.8) 14.5 12.9• Credentials Awarded /$100K of Ed and Related Exp (1.01-2.69) 1.78 1.75• Average Loan Amount Students Borrow Each Year ($4,122-$5427) $4,608 $4,698• Bachelors Degrees Awarded/100 Undergraduates (5-14.7) 9.7 9.6• State and Local Spt for Higher Ed Operational Exp/Capita ($104-$710) $294 $293• Undergrad Credentials/100 FTE Students (Race/Ethnic Gap) (-0.1%-7.4%) 3.5% 3.6%• 6 Yr Grad Rates at 4 Yr Institutions (Race/Ethnic Gap) (-13.7%-27.6%) 11.1% 19.1%• % of Adults w/Assoc Degree or Higher (Race/Ethnic Gap) (-5.75%-26.12%) 13.74% 15.84%

IBHE Presentation 9

Below Average – But Not By Much

*Data is from the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (www.higheredinfo.org).

Page 10: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

How Are We Doing?

IBHE Presentation 10

Measure Range* US Average* Illinois*• 1st Time Freshmen to Sophomore Retention Rates (4-Yr) (64.6%-85.4%) 76.9% 80.0%• % of Adults 25-64 with an Associates Degree or Higher (26.4%-50.2%) 38.11% 41.4%• Degrees and Credentials Awarded/100 Enrolled (2-Yr) (3.6-32.7) 14.0 14.4• Associate Degrees Awarded/100 Graduates 3 Yrs Earlier (10.8-53.8) 23.8 25.3• % of Adults 25-64 with a Bachelors Degree or Higher (19.34%-41.76%) 29.76% 33.24%• Credentials & Degrees Awarded/100 FTE Students (4 Yr) (15.2-25.3) 20.8 24.3• Bachelors Degrees Awarded/100 Graduates 6 Yrs Earlier (21.4-97.7) 53.5 55.4• Six Yr Graduation Rates of Bachelor’s Students (26.9%-69.2%) 55.5% 58.6%• Credentials & Degrees Awarded/$100K Total Revenues (.90-2.96) 1.84 1.86• Total Education Revenues/Full-Time Equivalent Student ($8,580-$19,523) $11,026 $10,779• Family Share of Public Higher Ed Operating Expenses (11.5%-79.3%) 36.2% 28.9%• Grant Aid to Low-Income Families as a % of Pell Grant (0.0-108.4) 45.9 82.3• State and Local Support Per FTE Student ($3,167-$15,151) $7,059 $7,585

Above Average

*Data is from the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (www.higheredinfo.org).

Page 11: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Degrees & Certificates awarded per FTE vs. Total Funding per FTE (2006-2007)

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

FL

GA

HIIDIL IN

IAKS

KY

LAME MD

MA

MI

MN

MS MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TNTX

UT

VTVA

WA

WV

WI

WY

US

14

17

20

23

26

29

32

5,000 8,000 11,000 14,000 17,000 20,000

Low Resources, High Production

Low Resources, Low Production

High Resources, High Production

High Resources, Low Production

Performance:Degrees

Awarded per 100 FTE

Resources: Total Funding per FTE

Source: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008: NCES IPEDS Completions Survey

IBHE Presentation 11

We are in the quadrant where we want to be.

Page 12: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

State Initiatives To Achieve the Goals of the Public Agenda

IBHE Presentation 12

• The development of a K-12 college and career curriculum (Common Core) and improved teacher and school leader standards.

• The implementation of the Illinois Articulation Initiative to align curriculum from high schools through community colleges to four year universities.

• Establishment of a Statewide P-20 Longitudinal Data System.• The implementation of Performance Funding for colleges and

universities in the State of Illinois.

Plus all of the programs and initiatives implemented by the colleges and universities to further the achievement of the Public Agenda

Page 13: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding

IBHE Presentation 13

Page 14: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Objective

• To develop a performance funding model for public universities that is…

– Linked directly to the Goals of the Illinois Public Agenda and the principles of Public Act 97-320

– Equipped to recognize and account for each university’s mission and set of circumstances

– Adjustable to account for changes in policy and priorities

– Not prescriptive in how to achieve excellence and success

14IBHE Presentation

Page 15: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

• Performance Metrics Shall:– Reward performance of institutions in advancing the success of

students who are:• Academically or financially at risk.• First generation students.• Low-income students.• Students traditionally underrepresented in higher education.

– Recognize and account for the differentiated missions of institutions of higher education.

– Focus on the fundamental goal of increasing completion.– Recognize the unique and broad mission of public community

colleges.– Maintain the quality of degrees, certificates, courses, and programs.

IBHE Presentation 15

Public Act 97-320 (HB 1503)

Page 16: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

What We Have Accomplished

• Identified the key issues.• Developed performance funding principles.• Identified appropriate performance measures and sub-categories.• Developed performance funding models for both 2-year and 4-year

colleges and universities.• Acquired initial data.• Received input from steering committee members, colleges and

universities, other groups, and individuals.• Finalized the performance funding model for both four-year and

two-year colleges and universities.

IBHE Presentation 16

Page 17: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

IBHE Presentation 17

Performance Funding Model

4-Year Public Universities

Page 18: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Model Steps(4-Year Public University)

• Step 1 – Identify the performance measures or metrics that support the achievement of the state goals.

• Step 2 – Collect the data on the selected performance measures• Step 3 – Award an additional premium (i.e. 40%) for the production of

certain desired outcomes such as completions by underserved or underrepresented populations

• Step 4 – Normalize (scale) the data, if necessary, so it is comparable across variables.

• Step 5 – Weight each of the Performance Measures that reflects the priority of the Measure and the mission of the institution.

• Step 6 – Multiply and sum the Scaled Data times the Weight to produce the Weighted results.

• Step 7 – Use the Weighted results (or Total Performance Value) to distribute performance funding.

IBHE Presentation 18

Page 19: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Measures

IBHE Presentation 19

Measure Source• Bachelors Degrees (FY07-09) IPEDS• Masters Degrees (FY07-09) IPEDS• Doctoral and Professional Degrees (FY07-09) IPEDS• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE (FY07-09) IPEDS• Education and General Spending per Completion (FY09-11) RAMP• Research and Public Service Expenditures (FY09-11) RAMP• Graduate Degrees per 100 FTE (FY07-09) (?) IPEDS• Cost per FTE (FY09-11) (?) RAMP

Step 1 – Identify the performance measures or metrics that support the achievement of the state goals.

Step 2 – Collect the data on the selected performance measures (3-year averages)

Page 20: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Sub-Categories

IBHE Presentation 20

Sub-Category Weight• Low Income (Pell/Map Eligible) 40%• Adult (Age 25 and Older) 40%• Hispanic 40%• Black, non-Hispanic 40%• STEM & Health Care (by CIP Code) 40%

Step 3 – Award an additional premium for the production of certain desired outcomes such as completions by underserved or underrepresented populations

Page 21: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Scaling Factors

• Averaged the measures across all of the institutions.• The average number of bachelors degrees will serve as the base value.• Determine a scaling factor that will normalize the rest of the averages to the average number of bachelors degrees.• Adjust the scaling factors as appropriate (i.e. Masters & Doctorates).• Multiply all of the initial data by the scaling factor to normalize the data.

IBHE Presentation 21

Measure Universities 1-12 (Avg) Scaling Factor Adjusted Scaling Factor• Bachelors Degrees (FY07-09) 4,445 1.00 1.00• Masters Degrees (FY07-09) 1,152 3.86 1.00• Doctoral and Professional Degrees (FY07-09) 796 16.25 2.00• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE FY(07-09) 26 173.64 200.00• Education and General Spending per Completion (FY09-11) 4,639 -.96 -1.00• Research and Public Service Expenditures (FY09-11) 10,803,117 .0004115 .0005000

Step 4 – Normalize (scale) the data, if necessary, so it is comparable across variables.

Page 22: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Measure Weights

IBHE Presentation 22

Step 5 – Weight each of the Performance Measures that reflects the priority of the Measure and the mission of the institution.

UIUC UIC NIU SIUC ISU22.5% 22.5% 37.5% 37.5% 40.0%15.0% 15.0% 20.0% 20.0% 22.5%15.0% 15.0% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5%

5.0% 5.0% 10.0% 10.0% 12.5%2.5% 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 2.5%

40.0% 42.5% 20.0% 22.5% 15.0%100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Doctoral/ Research-Very High Research-High Research

Masters Colleges & Universities (Large)

SIUE WIU EIU NEIU CSU GSU UIS45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 45.0% 47.5% 50.0% 50.0%25.0% 25.0% 27.5% 27.5% 25.0% 37.5% 37.5%

5.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 2.5%15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 0.0% 0.0%

2.5% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 7.5% 10.0% 7.5%7.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Weights Based on Institutional MissionBachelors DegreesMasters Degrees Doctoral and Prof DegreesUndergrad Degrees per 100 FTEEducation Spending/CompletionResearch and Public Service Expenditures

Weights Based on Institutional MissionBachelors DegreesMasters Degrees Doctoral and Prof DegreesUndergrad Degrees per 100 FTEEducation Spending/CompletionResearch and Public Service Expenditures

Page 23: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Value Calculation

IBHE Presentation 23

Measure• Bachelors Degrees • Masters Degrees• Doctoral and Professional Degrees• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE• Education and General Spending per Completion• Research and Public Service Expenditures

3,9211,552

209 23.2

3,7885,486,590

6,8131,754

229 23.2

3,7885,486,590

Data Data + Premium Scale112

200-1

.0005

(Data+Premium)x Scale6,8131,754

4584,646

-3,7882,743

xWeight =

35.0%25.0%

5.0%10.0%

5.0%20.0%

100.0%

Total PerformanceValue2385

43823

464-189549

3580

Step 6 – Multiply and Sum the Scaled Data times the Weight to produce the Total Performance Value.

Page 24: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

IBHE Presentation 24

Percentages for Distribution

Total Performance Value 10,840 4,435 2,027 17,302Percentage of Total 62.7% 25.6% 11.7% 100%

Distribution: Pro Rata $627,000 $256,000 $117,000 $1,000,000

University 1 University 2 University 3 Total

Funding AllocationBased on Performance

Step 7 – Use the Weighted results (or Total Performance Value) to distribute funding based on a Pro Rata Share of the total amount of funds set aside for performance funding.

Page 25: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Model

• All steps are identical at each university• The model accounts for each institution’s unique mission by

adding a weight to each measure.• Each institution’s formula calculation is independent.• The formula calculation for each institution will change each

year based on annually updated data.• The funding allocation is competitive.• Funds are distributed on a pro rata basis according to each

institution’s formula calculation.• The model is not prescriptive in how to achieve excellence

and success (what, not how).

IBHE Presentation 25

Page 26: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Model

Community Colleges

IBHE Presentation 26

Page 27: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

IBHE Presentation 27

Performance Funding Model(Community Colleges)

• There are thirty-nine community colleges.

• The community college model contains six separate measures.

• Each measure is allocated an equal portion of the total performance funding amount.

• Each college competes for a portion of the funding for each measure.

• Those colleges that show a decrease in performance receive no funds based on performance.

• Those colleges that show an increase in performance receive a pro-rata share of the funding allocation for that measure based on the increase in their performance.

Page 28: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

IBHE Presentation 28

Performance Funding Measures(Community Colleges)

• Degree and Certificate Completion.

• Degree and Certificate Completion of “At Risk” students.

• Transfer to a four year institution.

• Remedial and Adult Education Advancement.

• Momentum Points.

• Transfer to a community college.

Page 29: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Model (Community College Example)

• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate• Model (Part 1) = Percentage change in number of associate degrees awarded from FY08-FY09.

IBHE Presentation 29

College 1College 2College 3College 4….College 39

FY 2009 Number ofAssociate Degrees

Awarded%

Change

GreaterthanZero Allocation

5751,803

2701,484

…..329

25,130

5332,361

2431,630

….350

26,460

-7.3%30.9%

-10.0%9.8%

….6.4%

-- .309

--.098

…..064

2.585

--$9,579

--$3.045

….$1,976

$80,000

FY 2008 Number ofAssociate Degrees

Awarded

• Pro Rata Share = $80,000/2.585 = $30,951• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .309 X 30,951 = $9,579)

Page 30: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Degree & Certificate Completion

• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate• Model (Part 1) = Percentage change in number of associate degrees

awarded from FY08-FY09.• Range of Results = - 14.3% to +30.9%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 26 • Range of Increase = (.2%-30.9%) or (.002 to .309)• Funding Allocation = $80,000• Total of increase for all 26 schools = 2.585• Pro Rata Share = $80,000/2.585 = $30,951 (i.e. 1 share = $30,951)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .002 X $30,951 = $74)

• Range of Allocation = $74 to $9,579

IBHE Presentation 30

Page 31: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Degree & Certificate Completion• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate• Model (Part 2) = Percentage change in number of certificates awarded from

FY08-FY09.• Range of Results = - 49.6% to +103.8%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 24 • Range of Increase = (.9%-103.8%) or (.009 to 1.038)• Funding Allocation = $40,000• Total of increase for all 24 schools = 5.324• Pro Rata Share = $40,000/5.324 = $7,512 (i.e. 1 share = $7,512)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .009 X $7,512 = $64)

• Range of Allocation = $64 to $7,797

IBHE Presentation 31

• Total Allocation for Measure 1 = $120,000• Total Number of colleges receiving funding = 35• Range of Allocation = $331 to $9,579

Measure 1

Page 32: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Degree Production of At-Risk Students

• Measure 2 – At-risk students who completed a degree or certificate (i.e. students with Pell or taking remedial courses)

• Model = Percentage change (number of Pell recipients + number of students who have taken remedial courses) from FY08-FY09.

• Range of Results = - 28.1% to +26.5%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 20 • Range of Increase = (2.3%-26.5%) or (.023 to .265)• Funding Allocation = $120,000• Total of increase for all 20 schools = 2.913• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/2.913 = $41,201 (i.e. 1 share = $41,201)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .023 X $41,201 = $938)

• Range of Allocation = $938 to $10,936

IBHE Presentation 32

Page 33: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Transfer to a Four Year Institution

• Measure 3 – Students who transfer to a four year institution within 3 years• Model = Percentage of Fall 2006 entrants who transferred to 4-year

institutions by Fall 2010.• Range of Results = 12.3% to 35.8%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39 • Range of Increase = (12.3%-35.8%) or (.123 to .358)• Funding Allocation = $120,000• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 10.778• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/10.72 = $11,134 (i.e. 1 share = $11,134)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .123 X $11,134 = $1,375)

• Range of Allocation = $1,375 to $3,988

IBHE Presentation 33

Page 34: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Remedial and Adult Education Advancement

• Measure 4 – Remedial students who advance to college level work.• Model = Percentage of FY 2009 remedial students who advanced to college

level courses.• Range of Results = 43.8% to 100%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39 • Range of Increase = (43.8%-100%) or (.438 to 1.0)• Funding Allocation = $120,000• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 23.82• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/23.82 = $5,039 (i.e. 1 share = $5,039)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .438 X $5,039 = $2,207)

• Range of Allocation = $2,207 to $5,039

IBHE Presentation 34

Page 35: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Momentum Points• Measure 5 – 1st time/PT students completing 12 credit hours w/in the first year,

1st time/PT students completing 24 credit hours w/in the first year, and Adult Education and Family Literacy level (AEFL) gains.

• Model = % change (number of students completing 12 CR + number of students completing 24 CR + number of students with an AEFL level gain) from FY08-FY09).

• Range of Results = -53.9% to 69.6%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 22 • Range of Increase = (.9% to 69.6%) or (.009 to .696)• Funding Allocation = $120,000• Total of increase for all 22 schools = 6.478• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/6.478 = $18,529 (i.e. 1 share = $18,529)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. ..009 X $18,529 = $171)

• Range of Allocation = $171 to $12,898

IBHE Presentation 35

Page 36: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Transfer to Another Community College

• Measure 6 – Community college students that transfer to other community colleges.

• Model = Percentage change (students transferring from one community college to another community college) from (FY06-FY09) to (FY07-FY10).

• Range of Results = 53.7% to 155.4%• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39 • Range of Increase = (53.7%-155.4%) or (.537 to 1.554)• Funding Allocation = $120,000• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 37.01• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/37.01 = $3,242 (i.e. 1 share = $3,242)• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share

– (i.e. .537 X $3,242 = $1,741)

• Range of Allocation = $1,741 to $5,038

IBHE Presentation 36

Page 37: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance Funding Model(Community Colleges)

• All steps are identical for each measure.• Each college competes independently for funding associated with each

measure.• Funds are distributed on a pro rata basis according to each institution’s

increase in performance.• No funds are allocated for a decrease in performance.• The formula calculation for each institution will change each year based

on annually updated data.• The model can be scaled relative to the amount of funds allocated to

performance funding.• The funds allocated to the community colleges based on this

performance funding model range from $30,587 to $8,914 based on a total performance funding allocation of $720K.

IBHE Presentation 37

Page 38: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Budgetary Considerationsand Recommendations

IBHE Presentation 38

Page 39: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Budgetary Considerations

• Declines in State funding for colleges and universities may continue.

• Colleges and universities continue to address unfunded state mandates and regulatory requirements.

• The availability of financial aid continues to be a problem.• The performance funding model needs to be more fully

developed in order to refine the measures and sub-categories.• Colleges and universities have not been able to impact their

performance as the current model is based on performance prior to the implementation of performance funding.

IBHE Presentation 39

Page 40: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Performance FundingBudget Recommendations

• Additional funding should be allocated to performance if possible.

• Performance funding should be implemented slowly starting with small funding amounts and then increasing the amount allocated to performance over time.

• There should be a stop-loss provision that can be increased over time.

IBHE Presentation 40

Page 41: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Proposed Performance FundingBudget Recommendation

• Step 1 – Flat or Level Budget from FY 12 Funding.– Flat budget with no more than .5% (stop-loss) of the budget set aside for Performance

Funding (approx $6M)

• Step 2 – Restoration of Budget to FY 11 Level.– Restoration of the 1.1% reduction in FY12 funding, with the 1.1% restoration allocated to

performance funding.

• Step 3 – Same as for Step 2 with regard to performance funding. Additional base funding will be requested for specific initiatives and programs

• A set-aside of $720K of which $120K will be allocated to each of the six performance measures.

IBHE Presentation 41

Step Budget Recommendation (4-Year Institutions)

Budget Recommendation (Community Colleges)

Page 42: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Way Ahead

• Present final performance funding model recommendations to the IBHE Board February 7th along with the FY2013 higher education budget submission, which will include our performance funding recommendation.

• Continue work to refine the performance funding model and acquire more accurate and comprehensive data in preparation for the FY 2014 budget submission and performance funding recommendation.

IBHE Presentation 42

This is a dynamic process. We will continually work to improve and refine the model.

Page 43: Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model

Questions/Comments?Questions/Comments?

IBHE Presentation 43