1 / 13

Transforming The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education Through Performance Funding

Transforming The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education Through Performance Funding. Robert M. Smith Slippery Rock University. Performance Measures 2001 - 2011. Institutional Development Accreditation PRAXIS Aggregate Passing Rates* Fiscal Development Faculty Productivity #

ishi
Download Presentation

Transforming The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education Through Performance 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. Transforming The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education Through Performance Funding Robert M. SmithSlippery Rock University

  2. Performance Measures 2001 - 2011 Institutional Development Accreditation PRAXIS Aggregate Passing Rates* Fiscal Development Faculty Productivity # Degree Programs with Few Graduates Personnel Ratio Private Support # Instructional Cost Diversity Diversity of Entering Class Enrollment Diversity Employee Diversity # Faculty Terminal Degree # • Student Success • Degrees Awarded# • Second Year Persistence # • Graduation Rates* # • Enrollment • Distance Education • Internships • New Pennsylvania Community College Transfers # Performance Funded Measures *Outcome Measures

  3. Conceptual Overview for 2012-17 Plan Themes • Success of our students Aligning with national and state agenda for higher education • Access to opportunity Adding value for underserved populations Preparing students to enter a global work force • Stewardship Transforming physical, financial, and human resources

  4. Conceptual Overview for 2012-17 Plan Program Principles • Clear, understandable, replicable • Focus on results • Transparency and visibility of data • Universities may distinguish themselves • Reduce competition/foster collaboration • Align with System and University strategic directions and policies • Align with national accountability efforts

  5. Conceptual Overview for 2012-17 Plan Universities develop 0–2 indicators

  6. Performance Indicators: Success Group I: Mandatory • Increase the Number of Degrees Conferred Number of associate, baccalaureate, and graduate degrees conferred (.50) Baccalaureate degrees awarded per FTE undergraduate enrollment (.50) • Closing the Achievement Gaps Closing the Achievement Gap for Pell Recipients (.50) Closing the Achievement Gap for Underrepresented Minority (URM) Students (.50) Group II: Universities can select from the following • Deep Learning Scale Results—National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) • Senior Survey—National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) • Student Persistence—Third and fourth years • Value-Added—Senior CLA, CAAP, or ETS® Proficiency Profile Scores • STEM Degree Recipients—Includes health degrees

  7. Performance Indicators: Access Group I: Mandatory • Closing the Access Gaps Closing the Gap for Pell Recipients (.50) Closing the Gap for Underrepresented Minority (URM) Students (.50) • Faculty Diversity Percent of full-time tenure/tenure-track faculty who are nonmajority persons (.50) Percent of full-time tenured faculty who are female (.50) Group II: Universities can select from the following • Faculty Career Advancement • Employment (Nonfaculty) Diversity • Student Experience with Diversity and Inclusion—Average of the combined scores on applicable NSSE items • Student Diversity

  8. Performance Indicators: Stewardship Group I: Mandatory • Private Support—Three-year average of total dollars raised Group II: Universities must select at least one from the following • Facilities Investment—Composite measure of commitment to physical plant, as measured by the annual Sightlines’ Return on Physical Assets (ROPA) Study • Administrative Expenditures as Percent of Cost of Education • Credit-Hour Productivity—Student credit hours as ratio of total FTE faculty • Employee Productivity—FTE student/FTE employee (faculty and staff)

  9. Performance Indicators: University-Specific Optional; no more than two • Developed and proposed by University • Derived from University’s strategic plan • Element of risk • External comparative base from national data source • Quantifiable results • Approved by Chancellor

  10. The Slippery Rock University Story: 2002-2011 • December 2002 Declared “the worst performing university in the State System.” • 2011 Highest performing university in the State System (based on standards met).

  11. The Slippery Rock University Story: 2002-2011 • Key steps to success: Conscript the entire university to performance (embed in culture) Compel data driven decision-making Leverage budget allocations around performance results Implement internal incentives for recurring Implement one-time funding for outcome-based initiatives

  12. The Slippery Rock University Story: 2002-2011 • Benefits of success: Revenue based on performance(allowed us to shift to quality over quantity) Happy faculty and staff(know how to “grow” resources and can make own strategic decisions) Happy students(focused on quality of education and their success) Astonished accreditors(assessment and outcome measures)

  13. finis

More Related