1 / 25

A Performance Model for Enrollment Expansion and Funding

A Performance Model for Enrollment Expansion and Funding. November 4, 2010. Previous Steps Fostering Greater Accountability. Raised admission standards Established Academic Boot Camps All campuses participate in National Voluntary System of Accountability

isanne
Download Presentation

A Performance Model for Enrollment Expansion and Funding

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. A Performance Model for Enrollment Expansion and Funding November 4, 2010

  2. Previous Steps Fostering Greater Accountability • Raised admission standards • Established Academic Boot Camps • All campuses participate in National Voluntary System of Accountability • Established Five Years of Retention & Graduation Goals for each campus beginning 2008-09 • Funded additional counselors and advisors • Working jointly with the Community Colleges to project and plan enrollment and degree production

  3. Examples of Five-Years of Targets: Retention

  4. Examples of Five-Years of Targets: Six-year Graduation Rate

  5. Examples of Five-Years of Targets: AA/AS Transfer Four-Year Graduation Rate

  6. Performance Measures: Three Categories • Retention Rates: • Freshmen-to-sophomore • Graduation Rates: • First-time freshmen six-year rates • AA transfer rates • All-undergraduate graduation rates • Degree Production & Efficiency: • Targets for degree production (TBD) • Efficiency of degree production

  7. Comparisons in Each Category • Retention: • Compared to targets and to peers • Graduation: • Six-year compared to targets and peers • AA/AS CC transfer compared to targets • Efficiency: • Degrees produced compared to targets • Degrees per 100 FTE undergraduate enrollment compared to peers

  8. Degrees per 100 FTE Undergraduate Enrollment Compared to Peers

  9. Enrollment Expansion in Relation to Performance * Growth rates at different campuses vary, so this depends on past growth/change levels. The overall budgetary situation in the State may require redefinition of normal.

  10. Funding in Relation to Performance • Adjust Enrollment Expansion Funding Model to incorporate performance • Focus on Cost Factors

  11. Funding Model Template

  12. Current Cost Factors • Service to disadvantaged student population: More than one-third Pell Grant recipients (5%): • [ECSU, FSU, NCA&T, NCCU, UNCP, and WSSU] • Diseconomies of Scale (5%) • [ECSU and UNCA] • Public Liberal Arts Mission (10%) • [UNCA] • Non-Doctoral Mission (10%) • [ASU, ECSU, FSU, NCCU, UNCA, UNCP, UNCW, WCU, WSSU]

  13. Propose to Drop Two Cost Factors and Add Three Performance Factors • Drop: • Liberal arts • Non-doctoral mission • Add: • Retention performance factor • Graduation performance factor • Productivity and efficiency performance factor

  14. Summary of Proposed Cost and Performance Factors • Service to disadvantaged student population: • More than one-third Pell Grant recipients (5%) • [ECSU, FSU, NCA&T, NCCU, UNCP, and WSSU] • Diseconomies of scale (5%): • [ECSU and UNCA] • Retention performance factor (5%): • [Depends on performance] • Graduation performance factor (5%): • [Depends on performance] • Productivity and efficiency performance factor (5%): • [Depends on performance]

  15. High Performance • Seek a pool of funds that would reward high performance • Persistent high levels of performance • Significant Improvement • A fund of $1 million for this purpose will be sought from the General Assembly. If the General Assembly does not fund it, the President will pledge funds from the strategic initiatives reserve.

  16. Proposed Implementation of Performance Measures • 2011-13 Biennium • Retention • Efficiency • High Performance • 2013-15 Biennium • Graduation

  17. Enrollment Expansion Based on Retention Performance Data If retention performance is at or above 80%: No restriction If retention performance is less than 80%: If Performance either is more than 1 percentage point below target or is below peers: Restricted Growth If Performance both is more than 1 percentage point below target and is below peers: No growth Otherwise no restriction

  18. Impact on Campuses

  19. Funding Based onRetention Performance Data Criterion: Meets retention target and at or above public peers.

  20. Impact on Campuses

  21. Funding Based onEfficiency Performance Data Criterion: Efficiency performance must be at or above public peers.

  22. Impact on Campuses

  23. Summary of Impact * NA = not applicable.

  24. Performance Model • Discussion, Issues, and Questions • Next Steps

More Related