Making Opportunity Affordable Opportunity Grant Academy

1. Making Opportunity AffordableOpportunity Grant Academy Presentation by William E. Kirwan Chancellor, University System of Maryland

2. Effectiveness & EfficiencyContext In 2003-2004, USM facing unprecedented challenges: • Declining State Aid • FY 2000: $8,488 per student • FY 2005: $7,497 per student • Surging Enrollment • More than 10,000 additional FTE students since FY02 • Rising demands on higher education • “knowledge economy” • Escalating “mandatory” costs • ~$100M annual increase in healthcare, energy, etc.

3. Effectiveness & EfficiencyParticipants • Collaborative effort for systemic change: • Members of the Board of Regents • Chancellor and vice chancellors • Institutional presidents, provosts, and vice presidents • Senior campus officials • Result of the Collaboration: • Buy-in, Participation and Input from EVERY stakeholder within the USM

4. Effectiveness & Efficiency “Administrative Action Items” Internal and External Policy Changes to Reduce Costs • Support and Administration: • Centralization of “shared services” such as Audit, Construction Management, Real Estate Development, etc. • Procurement: - Leverage the USM’s buying power for “strategic sourcing” • Enrollment Management Services: - Streamline student services to eliminate duplication • Review Organizational Structure of Special Purpose Institutions

5. Effectiveness & Efficiency “Academic Action Items” Internal Policy Changes to Build Capacity • Faculty Workload - 10% increase in teaching contact hours loads (on average) across the USM • Time to Degree - Degree programs limited to 120 credits • On-line and out-of-classroom learning - 12 credits completed outside traditional classroom experience • Enrollment management - Maximize utilization of “comprehensive” institutions

6. Effectiveness & Efficiency Fiscal Impact • Reengineering of administrative processes: • $94 million in direct cost savings since inception • Additional savings through cost avoidance • Reengineering of academic processes: • Accommodated 25% of enrollment growth over the past three years at no additional costs; state funding rest • State/Public response overwhelming positive • FLAT tuition for ’06, ’07 & ’08 academic years; State support up cumulative 30%

7. Effectiveness & Efficiency Other Areas of Improvement • Time-to-degree across the USM at its best level • Reduced by half a semester to 4.5 years over past three years • Community college transfer rate at all-time high • Represents the largest component of enrollment growth • Average faculty classroom contact hours at research universities up 20% • 4-year and 6-year graduation rates well above national averages for public universities

8. E & E Phase II Transforming the Academic Model • On-Line Education Strategies • Enrollment Strategies • Two-year/Four-year Dual Admission • Guaranteed Spring Admission/Fall Credit Alternatives • Early College Access • Course Redesign / Curriculum Transformation • Based upon the NCAT model, reduce cost structure for large enrollment courses while maintaining quality • Voluntary System of Accountability/ Dashboard indicators

9. Overall E&E Summary • Continuous system-wide reengineering • To accommodate rapid enrollment growth • To mitigate tuition increases and enhance financial aid • Especially need-based aid • To protect and enhance quality • Ensuring accountability through established, easily accessible “dashboard” indicators • Transparent data points on student learning and success • Time to degree, graduation rates, transfer rates, etc. • E&E Phases I and II enable USM to expand capacity, promote affordability and enhance quality