1 / 23

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION REFORM IN LOUISIANA

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION REFORM IN LOUISIANA. Business Coalition on Higher Education, Initial Recommendations February 5, 2010. BUSINESS GROUPS ARE ACKNOWLEDGING HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM AS A KEY STATE PRIORITY FOR BUSINESSES.

breshears
Download Presentation

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION REFORM IN LOUISIANA

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. POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION REFORM IN LOUISIANA Business Coalition on Higher Education, Initial Recommendations February 5, 2010

  2. BUSINESS GROUPS ARE ACKNOWLEDGING HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM AS A KEY STATE PRIORITY FOR BUSINESSES • 25 business groups around the state have signed on to participate as a business and economic development coalition for higher education reform • Focusing on key outcomes

  3. LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM FACES NUMEROUS CHALLENGES • Funding crisis over next two years • Low graduation rates • Uncompetitive research universities • Workforce demands not met by system • Unproductive and duplicative programs

  4. LOUISIANA NEEDS TO ADOPT POLICIES FOCUSED ON FIVE OUTCOMES • Increasing graduation rates • Increasing 2 year enrollment to match the 2 year/4 year enrollment mix of SREB states • Financing higher education to increase competitiveness and sustain workforce-focused growth • Supporting the state’s research universities (LSU A&M, ULL, LA Tech, and UNO) at the appropriate level to make them competitive in their peer groups • Increasing quality and focus within LCTCS to prepare workers in high paying fields that are relevant to our regional economies

  5. LOUISIANA’S FOUR AND TWO-YEAR GRADUATION RATES ARE THE LOWEST IN THE SREB* Four-Year (percent) Two-Year (percent) ** * Four-year graduation rates are form the 2001 cohort. Two-year rates are from the 2004 cohort. ** LA’s LCTCS is not as easily measured by graduation rates on a comparable basis to other states’ two-year programs because of workforce programs without 2-year degree completions Source: SREB state-data exchange

  6. LOUISIANA’S TWO-YEAR/FOUR-YEAR ENROLLMENT MIX IS OUT OF LINE WITH OTHER SREB STATES* • The average 2yr/4yr distribution in the SREB is 48%-52% * 2008 data ** Top-performing states include Texas, Georgia and North Carolina Source: SREB state-data exchange Two-Year & Technical Four-Year

  7. CONSEQUENTLY, LOUISIANA’S WORKFORCE PIPELINE IS DRAMATICALLY OUT OF LINE WITH MARKET DEMANDS Supply trend Demand trend 100% 100% 100% Require 4-yr college degree or higher 16 21 Enter 4-yr public or private universities 35 Enter 2-yr colleges, etc. 8 Require 2-yr degree, certificate, or adv. training 58 55 Directly enter job market after graduation 20 Drop out or leave the state before graduation Require high school diploma or less w/ no specific training 37 26 24 High school matriculation * Profile of jobs in LA (2004) Profile of jobs in LA (2014) ** * Based on Louisiana high school class of 2004 ** Based on 2014 projections from Bureau of Labor Statistics Source: Louisiana Workforce Commission; LED analysis

  8. A MORE EVEN ENROLLMENT MIX RESULTS IN SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS TO THE STATE… Funding for 4yr and 2yr Institutions (FY10) $821,930,774* $741,616,130 $80,314,644 FY10 State Funding per FTE: Four-year: $5,351 Two-year: $3,639 Difference: $1,712/FTE Current Enrollment Mix (73%-27%) Top-Performing States Enrollment Mix (45%-55%) * Amount does not include state funding for specialized units or boards Source: Board of Regents; BRAC Analysis

  9. …BUT EVEN WITH A NEW ENROLLMENT MIX LOUISIANA STILL LACKS THE RESOURCES TO FUND HIGHER EDUCATION AT THE SREB AVERAGE (FY08) • FY10 State Funding per FTE: • Four-year: $5,351 • Two-year: $3,639 • FY08 SREB Funding per FTE • Four-year: $7,184 • Two-year: $4,751 • Current funding falls over • $160 million dollars short • of what would be needed • to fund a less expensive • distribution at SREB FY08 • levels $1,097,791,997 $983,212,295 $821,930,774 $161,281,521 * Amount does not include state funding for specialized units or boards Source: Board of Regents; BRAC Analysis

  10. LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM IS FACING AN IMMINENT FUNDING CRISIS • Over $300 million cut in • 09-10 • Stimulus funds mask • the severity of the cuts • for two years • State funding expected • to continue to drop • proportional to the • state budget shortfall • This trend suggests • that in 11-12 funding • will be reduced to 57% • of its 07-08 level • The budget is projected • to be less, not • adjusting for • inflation, than it was • in FY00 when the • system served • 33,000 fewer students 1433.3 1425 1301 1,155 Millions 1,111.70 843.9 965.70 819 Funding with Stimulus State General Fund Source: Louisiana Board of Regents

  11. IN FY09 LOUISANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING FROM STATE SOURCES WAS THE THIRD HIGHEST IN THE SOUTH… Total state-provided higher education funding per FTE* ($000s) Delaware North Carolina Louisiana** Maryland Georgia Arkansas Kentucky Mississippi Southern Average 5.7 Alabama Florida Tennessee Virginia Oklahoma In FY10 Louisiana funding per FTE***: w/ stimulus: 5.8 w/o stimulus: 4.9 Texas West Virginia South Carolina * Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students ** Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding *** Funding calculated using FY09 enrollment data Source: SREB; BRAC analysis

  12. …BUT THE AMOUNT GENERATED FROM TUITION AND FEES WAS FOURTH LOWEST IN THE SOUTH… Total self-generated higher education funding per FTE* ($000s) Delaware South Carolina Kentucky Maryland West Virginia Virginia Southern average • $671 million was collected • in tuition and fees • $130 million, or 19%, is • state money that • passes through TOPS Alabama Tennessee Texas Arkansas Mississippi Oklahoma Louisiana Georgia Florida North Carolina * Funding level based on 2007-08 tuition and fee revenue; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students Source: SREB; BRAC analysis

  13. … AND WITH ALL SOURCES COMBINED, TOTAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING IN FY09 WAS BELOW THE SOUTHERN AVERAGE Total higher education funding per FTE* ($000s) Delaware Maryland • LA’s low tuition and • fees cause the state • to drop relative to our • southern peers when • all sources are taken • into account • LA’s funding per • FTE should be • higher than its • southern peers due • to LA’s enrollment • mix and the • additional cost of • educating students at • four-year schools Kentucky South Carolina Virginia Southernaverage Louisiana** Alabama Arkansas Mississippi Tennessee West Virginia Georgia North Carolina Texas Oklahoma Florida * Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations and tuition and fees; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students ** Louisiana funding levels include TOPS funding, as part of the amount referenced as tuition/fee revenues Source: SREB; BRAC analysis

  14. LOUISIANA AND FLORIDA ARE THE ONLY TWO STATES WHERE THE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS FINAL AUTHORITY OVER TUITION AND FEES

  15. LSU’S OPERATIONAL FUNDING LAGS TOP PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES State appropriations Tuition and fees Endowment income 2 COST NUMBERS BASED ON 2005/2006 DATA U.S. News “Best Colleges” ranking (out of 130) Operational funding per FTE student 1 ($ thousands) 26 U. of Michigan 15.3 5.8 64 Texas A&M 7.1 4.7 21 U. of Cal. - Berkeley 8.5 2.2 53 U. of Maryland 10.8 N/A Top peer avg. 8.3 2.5 23 U. of Virginia 6.1 10.5 30 UNC - Chapel Hill 7.1 2.6 58 U. of Georgia 4.9 47 U. of Texas at Austin 8.4 35 Georgia Tech 6.3 130 LSU (2007) 3 5.7 49 U. of Florida 3.7 1 Operational funding estimates for universities in SREB states are calculated from 2005-06 SREB state general purpose, state educational purpose, and operating tuition & fees excluding university medical schools; U. of Michigan tuition & fee estimates derived from IPEDS estimates minus UM-reported medical school-related tuition & fees, UM state appropriations derived from IPEDS assuming 40 percent of total campus appropriations dedicated to medical school; University of California – Berkeley data extracted from IPEDS data system; figures may not sum exactly due to rounding 2 Endowment income estimates based on The Center for Measuring University Performance’s 2005 estimates in all cases except LSU, which was reported by the LSU Foundation; all income estimates assume that four percent of endowment asset market value is applied to operations each year 3 LSU A&M, LSU AgCenter, and LSU Law Center Source: SREB; IPEDS; University of Michigan; The Center for Measuring University Performance; BRAC analysis

  16. REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS’ OPERATIONAL FUNDING LAGS THEIR PEER GROUP, AS WELL (SELU EXAMPLE BELOW) Source: GNO Inc.

  17. LOUISIANA MUST TREAT THE QUESTION OF FUNDING FOR HIGHER EDUCATION WITH THE GRAVITY THAT IT DESERVES Demand Stresses Supply Stresses Higher education system dependent on state funding State funding is undergoing unprecedented cuts • LCTCS’s rapid two-year enrollment expansion and quality improvement • State’s need to develop competitive research universities

  18. BUSINESS COALITION PRIORITIZES FOUR STRATEGIC REFORMS TO HIGHER EDUCATION • Implement the performance-funding formula • Raise admission standards at four-year institutions • Grant sole authority to adjust self-generated revenue to the management boards • Establish “centers of excellence” at LCTCS and eliminate unproductive and duplicative programs

  19. EACH REFORM ADRESSES MORE THAN ONE PRIORITY OUTCOME

  20. RECOMMENDATION: SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF PERFORMANCE FUNDING FORMULA • Performance funding formula creates financial incentives that reward outcomes/quality over quantity • Implementation of performance formula has several positive effects • Rewards graduation/completion for both 2 year and 4 year programs • Prioritizes workforce demand occupations of the Workforce Investment Council • Acknowledges cost differences between programs • Rewards external research dollars secured by universities

  21. RECOMMENDATION: RAISE ADMISSION STANDARDS AT FOUR-YEAR SCHOOLS FOR FALL 2011 • Higher admission standards across all four-year campuses is expected to increase graduation rates • Encourages students who may not be prepared to excel at a four-year school to enroll in the LCTCS system. (Note: students taking this path will have the option to transfer to a four-year school after two years or enter the workforce with an associates degree after two years) • Increases the number of people who have access to programs for in-demand occupations • Ensures that students will be prepared for upper level courses when they transfer • Gives students more opportunities to choose a major that is right for them as opposed to opting for a general studies degree Note: Successful implementation of increased admission standards also requires finalizing reliable and straightforward articulation agreements between two-year and four-year institutions (RS, 2009; Act356)

  22. RECOMMENDATION: GRANT MANAGEMENT BOARDS FLEXIBILITY OVER SELF GENERATED REVENUES • Implement a solution for management boards to have full or partial autonomy over self-generated revenues, such as fees • Approval of self-generated revenues are typically managed by higher education boards, rather than Legislatures • Self generated revenues in Louisiana are among the lowest in the South and US • If fees increase, campuses should provide financial resources to students with greater financial challenges in order to address access to education for all families Note: Maintaining authority over self-generated revenues should be reliant on consistently meeting institutional performance goals. If an institution fails to meet performance goals after four years then authority over self-generated revenues should return to the legislature. Performance goals will be set relative to peer institutions in the South.

  23. RECOMMENDATION: ESTABLISH LCTCS “CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE” AND ELIMINATE UNPRODUCTIVE AND DUPLICATIVE PROGRAMS • BOR and LCTCS should create specialized centers at select locations to build best-in-class programs in fields that are relevant to regional economies • LCTCS has plans for several of these centers but lacks the funding to implement the programs • Many community and technical college campuses offer a variety of programs that do not graduate many students and do not align with the needs of the community • Strategic elimination of unproductive or duplicative programs • Regions should continue to build relationships with business and industry to develop programs for high demand occupations Note: Establishment of Centers of Excellence should be coupled with a strengthening of the relationship between LCTCS and local high schools so that students can be fully informed about the opportunities offered in the LCTCS system

More Related