Upload
vail
View
33
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education. Overview of Major Issues. South Carolina Commission on Higher Education. Division of Planning, Assessment and Performance Funding WHAT’S NEW IN THE DIVISION?. MEASURING UP. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education
Overview of Major Issues
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education
Division of Planning, Assessment and
Performance FundingWHAT’S NEW IN THE DIVISION?
MEASURING UP
State Report Card South Carolina 2002
► Preparation D+
► Participation D+
► Affordability D+
► Completion B
► Benefits C
► LEARNING INCOMPLETE
GOAL 6: NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS
… “to increase the proportion of college graduates who can communicate effectively, think critically, and solve problems.”
To increase learning you have to measure where you are –
States govern education – therefore comparative data up to now has been
difficult to obtain
FIVE STATES BEGIN
SOUTH CAROLINA NEW MEXICO KENTUCKY ILLINOIS OKLAHOMA
Working with the National Forumon College Level Learning these states are charged with creating a national model to measure student learning at the STATE level
MEASURES USED IN PROJECT
Collect data from existing sources ► GRE scores
► Licensure scores
► National Assessment of Adult Literacy
Test students on multiple measures
►National Survey of Student Engagement
►Work Keys
►Tasks in Critical Thinking
► Peterson’s On-Line Alumni Survey
CHARGE FOR SC INSTITUTIONS
No more than 2 hours of testing time per campus: FALL 2003
Students must be near degree completion
1200-1500 students from 2-year public colleges take 2 Work Keys Tests (Oversampling possible at project price)
1200-1500 students from 4-year private and public colleges take Tasks of Critical Thinking and NSSE
1500 Alumni state-wide (4-yr colleges) to take 15 minute on-line Peterson’s Alumni Survey (Spring 2003)
CHARGE FOR OUR DIVISION
Report required licensure scores
Serve as State Liaison to institutions
Work with National Forum to obtain GRE scores
Serve as central data source and control
Lead national conversations on what instruments can appropriately be used to measure student learning at the state level
WHAT DO WE GET FROM THIS?
S.C. Colleges get free instruments
S.C. Colleges have a chance to critique the instruments and process at its most changeable point – the pilot
More years to improve before non-project states’ data is reported
The ability to wrap the outcomes into the FIPSE project
FIPSE II PROJECT
SOUTH CAROLINAOKLAHOMACALIFORNIACONNECTICUTARKANSAS
Defining best practices in accountability that containcollege costs, measure student achievement, and re-new public trust in higher education
FIPSE PROGRESS TO DATE
State Team – Reforming under Governor Sanford
Recruitment of American Association of State Colleges and Universities as partner in project
State Directors meeting for April in Oklahoma to structure state timelines, communication plans, share goal ideas
Proposals to be presented for conferences
Grant Pre-Proposal submitted to Lumina
CONFERENCES/Presentations
Denver Colorado Jan. 9 -12Measuring UP Project Directors
Clear Point, Alabama Feb. 6 -9 AASCU – Annual National Academic Affairs Conf.
Louisville, KY Feb12 -15Measuring UP: State Leaders hosted by Gov. Patton
Myrtle Beach SC: Feb.22 -23SC Association of Institutional Researchers
FIPSE Project Directors: Oklahoma City, April
World Future Conference, San Diego CA July 18-20
SC WILL BECOME HIGHLY VISIBLE IN THE NATIONAL SCENE State Higher Education
Executive Officers (SHEEO)
National Council of State Legislatures (NCLS)
National Governors Association (NGA)
American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU)
Education Commission of the States (ECS)
COMMUNICATION
Division of Planning, Assessment and
Performance Funding
Division of Academic Affairs and Licensing
• Update on Endowed Chairs Program
• New Initiatives in Teacher Education
NCATE Continuing Accreditation Visits
No Child Left Behind
Improving Teacher Quality State Grants
Program
Division of Academic Affairs
and Licensing
Centers of Excellence
Teacher Transfer Track Subcommittee
Professional Review Committee
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education
Student Services Division
Palmetto Fellows Scholarship Program: Established in 1988 to retain the “best and brightest” in South Carolina. Palmetto Fellows may receive up to $6,700 per academic year towards the cost-of-attendance at a participating senior institution within the State.
Need-based Grants Program: Established in 1996 to provide additional financial assistance to the State’s neediest residents. South Carolina was one of the last states in the nation to implement a need-based grants program at the state level.
Full-time students may receive up to $2,500 per year and part-time students may receive up to $1,250 per year towards the cost-of-attendance at participating two- and four-year institutions.
LIFE Scholarship Program: Established in 1998 to increase access to higher education. Recipients may receive up to $5,000 towards the cost-of-attendance at a four-year institution.
LIFE Scholarship recipients may receive up to the cost-of-tuition at a two-year public or technical institution. For the two-year independent institution in the state, recipients may receive up to $3,380.
Lottery Tuition Assistance Program: Implemented in 2002 to provide tuition assistance for residents attending two-year public and independent institutions. For Spring 2003, full-time students may receive up to $1,044 per year and part-time students may receive up to $87 per credit hour towards the cost-of-tuition.
SC HOPE Scholarship Program: Established in 2001 to provide funding for first-time entering freshman attending a four-year public or independent institution who do not qualify for a LIFE or Palmetto Fellows Scholarship. Recipients may receive up to $2,650 towards the cost-of-attendance for the first year of attendance only.
Statistical History of the State Scholarship and Grant Programs
Academic Year
Palmetto Fellows Scholarship
S.C. Need-based Grant (Public Institutions Only) LIFE Scholarship
Lottery Tuition Assistance SC HOPE Scholarship
StudentsAward
Amount Students Award Amount StudentsAward
Amount StudentsAward
Amount StudentsAward
Amount
1996-97 623 $2,832,233 12,832 $14,698,611
1997-98 1,258 $5,686,573 13,495 $14,188,312
1998-99 1,719 $7,864,035 13,225 $13,342,281 14,757 $27,144,855
1999-00 2,243 $10,624,273 10,659 $10,221,756 16,579 $30,414,346
2000-01 2,643 $12,559,866 11,121 $11,212,295 17,269 $46,438,543
2001-02 2,641 $12,685,386 8,797 $9,492,300 20,340 $54,382,016
2002-03* 2,912 $18,745,909 9,166 $15,000,000 23,186 $106,128,537 15,278 $34,000,000 1,926 $5,787,600
* Estimates as of February 3, 2003.
2002-03 Palmetto Fellows Scholarship All Recipients by County of Origin
2002-03 Need-based GrantAll Recipients by County of Origin
Fall 2002 Total Reported LIFE Recipientsby County of Originas of February 3, 2003
2002-03 Lottery Tuition Assistance ProgramAll Recipients by County of Origin
Fall 2002 Total Reported SC HOPE Recipientsby County of Originas of February 3, 2003
South Carolina Commission on Higher Education
Finance, Facilities, and MIS
Tuition and Fees
Dollar Increase in Tuition and FeesTechnical Colleges
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2002-02 2002-03
Year
Tuition and Fees
Dollar Tuition IncreasesTechnical Colleges and Two-Year Branches of USC
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2002-02 2002-03
Years Two Year Branches
Technical Colleges
Tuition and Fees
Dollar Increase in TuitionTwo-Year Sectors and Teaching Sector
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
$4,500
$5,000
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2002-02 2002-03
Year
Teaching Sector
Two Year Branches
Technical Colleges
Tuition and Fees
Dollar Increase in Tuition All Sectors
$5,409
$4,622
$3,080
$2,113
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2002-02 2002-03
Year Research SectorTeaching SectorTwo Year BranchesTechnical Colleges
Tuition and Fees
Percent Changes in Two-Year Tuition
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
Year
Pe
rce
nt
Two-Year Fees
Tuition and Fees
Percent Chage in Four-Year Tuition
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
Years
Pe
rce
nt
Four-Year Fees
Tuition and Fees
Comparison of Percent Changes in Tuition and State Appropriations, All Institutions
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
Years
Pe
rce
nt
AppropriationsTwo-Year FeesFour-Year Fees
Tuition and Fees
Scholarship and Grant Funding
$-
$20.0
$40.0
$60.0
$80.0
$100.0
$120.0
$140.0
$160.0
$180.0
$200.0
1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03
Years
Mill
ion
s
Scholarship and Grant Funding
Tuition and Fees
FY 2000-01
FY 2001-02
FY 2002-03
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
SREB
S.C.
Average In-State Undergraduate TuitionFor Two-Year Institutions
FY 2000-01
FY 2001-02
FY 2002-03
0 1 2 3 4 5
Thousands
SREBS.C.
Average In-State Undergraduate TuitionFor Four-Year Institutions
FY 2000-01
FY 2001-02
FY 2002-03
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Thousands
SREBSouth Carolina
State Appropriation Per FTE
Tuition and Fees - Challenges
Relationship between Tuition and Financial Aid
Possible Impact on Accessibility and Affordability
Capital Funding
Capital Improvement Bond Funding Since 1980
$844,757,151
CIB Funding
$89.0
$137.6
$96.3$65.6
$41.0$6.9
$75.8
$167.1 $165.5
$0.0$20.0$40.0$60.0$80.0
$100.0$120.0$140.0$160.0$180.0
CIB Funding
Capital Funding -Deferred Maintenance
Study conducted in 1994 identified approximately $173 million in E&G deferred maintenance
Study currently being updated; preliminary estimates indicate deferred maintenance has increased to more than $500 million in 9 years
Since 1994, Legislature has appropriated approximately $70 million for renovations, repairs, and deferred maintenance through Capital Improvement Bond Funding
Capital Funding
85 Projects Requested by 33 Institutions
20 of the requested projects have received partial funding
2003-04 Comprehensive Permanent Improvement Plan (CPIP) Requests
Capital Funding - 2003-2004 CPIP
(continued) Request included:
20 Completion of
Partially Funded Projects $201,381,947
42 Renov/Repair/Def. Maint $294,747,911
3 Replacement Bldgs. $ 61,643,000
15 New Buildings $102,562,053
5 Other (Land Improve.) $ 4,044,000
Total $664,378,911
Capital Funding - Challenges
Need for Consistent Stream of Funding
Backlog of Existing Need
Parity Funding
The Committee on Finance and Facilities adopted a position that Parity will be implemented when the General Assembly appropriates new funds, and should be a component of the allocation methodology.
The Committee charged the CHE staff and the institutions to work together to develop a plan.
Parity Funding- Historical Recap
Formula Allocations Hold Harmless Agreement Advent of Performance Funding “One Time” Adjustment Current Funding Status
Overall Average (based on MRR) – 52% Lowest funded institution – 38% Highest funded institution – 67%
Parity Funding
Current Funding Levels Total MRR $1.1 Billion State Appropriations $584 Million Overall Funding Level 52%
Parity Funding
Funding Levels by Sector Based on MRR
Research Universities 56% Teaching Universities 53% USC Regional Campuses 52% Technical Colleges 45% Overall 52%
Lowest funded institution 38% Highest funded institution 67%
Parity Funding
Funding Levels By Sector Considering
Based on Actual Fee MRR Revenues
Research Univ. 56% 75%Teaching Univ. 53% 79%USC-Regional 53% 68%Tech. Coll. 45% 65%Overall 52% 73%
Lowest Funded 38% 46%Highest Funded 67% 83%
Parity Funding
Parity Issue Review Commission Charge Study Group
Funding Advisory Committee CHE Staff
Series of Meetings - Next Meeting this afternoon Recommendation to be made to the Finance and
Facilities Committee on February 18th Recommendation to the full Commission on March
6th
Parity Funding - Challenges
Difficulty in Reallocating Resources
Lack of Increases in Funding