Improving Data and Measures for Decision-Making about College Costs The Delta Cost Project Jane Wellman and Colleen Len

1. Improving Data and Measures for Decision-Making about College Costs The Delta Cost Project Jane Wellman and Colleen Lenihan NCES/AIR National Summer Data Policy Institute June 24, 2010

2. Topics to cover • Context for the work; focus and audience • Methodological challenges to measures of college costs • Developing a longitudinal data base • Focus on six metrics • Web-based data on TCS-online • State-level metrics

3. Estimating the gap -Nationwide

4. Methodological issues w/measuring college costs • Data Sources: consistency and reliability; granularity • Issues that need to be resolved in developing cost metrics for comparative/longitudinal analysis • Institutional typology • Separating inputs from outputs • Unit of analysis: Student (FTE/Headcount); Faculty/staff, other (research outputs) • Assigning costs to functions • Separating instruction and research

5. Methodological issues… continued • Distributing shared costs for academic and institutional support, operations and maintenance • Treatment of scholarships, tuition ‘discounts’ and unfunded aid • Isolating costs of instruction by level of instruction (LD, UD, Graduate, Professional) • Isolating costs by discipline • Adjusting for inflation • Accounting for capital costs • Treatment of revenues from endowments and investments.

6. Methodology determined by audience and data limitations • For aggregate data on national trends, IPEDS data provides consistent and reliable source – but still needs work • Following Bowen, NCHEMS, Jenny, and others – standard cost-per student methodology • Operating expenses only

7. Developing the database: data sources • IPEDS, Academic years 1987 – 2008 • Completions • Employees by Assigned Position • Enrollments • Faculty Salaries • Fall Staff • Finance • Institutional Characteristics • Student Financial Aid • FISAP 1998-2008

8. Developing the database: organizing the data • Reconciling revenue and expenditures across the various reporting standards • Carnegie classifications – Carnegie 2000 v. Carnegie 2005 • Consistency in grouped/ungrouped data • Inflation adjustor CPI-U • All reported on per FTE student basis

9. Developing the panels • For any N-year set (5, 10, 20, and Trends) an institution needed to report the following elements in each year: • Instruction expenditures (instruction01) • Enrollment (fte_count) • Completions awarded (total_completions) • Imputations for missing data • Outliers removed • U.S. only • Resulting panel size/different years

10. Composition of the panel • Public research universities- 152 institutions • Public master’s– 231 institutions • Public community colleges – 785 institutions • Private nonprofit research –100 institutions • Private nonprofit master’s – 317 institutions • Private nonprofit bachelor’s –471 institutions Collectively more than 90 percent of all two and four year public and private non-profit institutions

11. Primary focus on six metrics(all cost adjusted using CPI-U/FTE in 2008 $) 1. Where the money comes from: revenues per student by major source 2. Where the money goes • E&R, E&G, total operating • Within E&R 3. Relation between tuition and spending increases 4. Cost/price/subsidy 5. Cost per degree 6. Costs v. enrollments

12. Why these metrics? • Can be developed with existing data • Can be aggregated to national, state, or institutional level • Organized to be relevant to policy-decisions made by legislatures, governing boards • Revenues • Tuition • Subsidy • Production

13. 1. Where the money comes from Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS database, 1987-2008, 11-year matched set. Note: In private institutions, investment returns include unrealized gains/losses.

14. 2. Where the money goesHow much goes to core academic/educational programs? Education and related expenses (E&R) • Instruction, student services, and educational share of academic & institutional support and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Education and general expenses (E&G) • E&R plus sponsored research, public service, and net scholarships/fellowships Total operating expenses • All of the above plus auxiliary enterprises, independent operations, hospitals, and “other”

15. *Note: In 1998, public institutions reported gross scholarships and fellowships. Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS Database, 1987-2008, 11-year matched set.

16. 2b. Average education and related (E&R) spending per FTE student, by component, at public institutions, 1998-2008 (in 2008 $).

17. 2c. Average education and related (E&R) spending per FTE student, by component, at private nonprofit institutions, 1998-2008 (in 2008 $).

18. 3:Relationship between tuition and spending increases

19. 4. Cost/Price/Subsidy What proportion of E&R costs are paid by students, and what by the institution/state? • Cost: Average E&R spending per student • Price: Proportion of cost paid from net tuition revenues • Subsidy: Proportion of cost paid from institutional revenues (Cost less price)

21. Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS database, 1987-2008, 11-year matched set.

22. 5: Spending per Degree and Completion, AY1998-2008 (in 2008 $) Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS Database, 1987-2008, 11-year matched set.

23. 5a. Definitions: Degrees/Completions • Standard IPEDS category for many years • “Degrees” = all degrees, all levels and disciplines • “Completions” = all degrees plus any other ‘completion’ – diploma, certificate, etc. Most relevant for community colleges. Degrees and Completions per 100 FTE students: • Different than “cohort” – aggregate measure of all degree/completion output per enrolled student • Captures CC transfers and other students who do not start as full-time freshmen

24. 5b: Total degrees and completions per 100 FTE students, AY1998-2008 Source: Delta Cost Project IPEDS Database, 1987-2008, 11-year matched set.

26. Delta Cost Project TCS Online Trends in College Spending (TCS) Online is a free, user-friendly, online data system www.tcs-online.org TCS Online provides standardized reports for: • Focus and comparison institutions • Individual institution snapshots • U.S. Carnegie Group averages Using DCP finance and performance metrics: • User-defined year selections and inflation adjustors • Dollar amounts per FTE student • Group means/medians • Percent change • Also includes enrollment data (by status, level, and race/ethnicity) Various output options: • Single or multi-year • Tables and graphs (single year only) • Html, excel, and pdf

27. State Fact Sheets For public institutions only, state level data showing key DCP metrics from 2003-2008: • where the students are • cost/price/subsidy • student share of costs • instruction share of costs • completions per 100 FTE students • spending per completion • comparisons to national averages • Created to provide precise data at the institution and Carnegie classification level by untangling “parent-child” reported data, which is only possible in more recent years.

31. For more information, visit the Delta Project website, at: http://www.deltacostproject.org http://www.tcs-online.org