Participation Forecast May 9, 2006 The CB started doing enrollment forecasts in 1979. This year we decided to add a success forecast to the process. THECB 5/2006

Participation Forecast Designed to be conservative Based on five years of historical enrollment by age, race/ethnicity, and county Uses latest available population projections by age, race/ethnicity, and county Considers non-resident participation factors Solicit institutional input on local conditions The participation forecast methodology has remained fairly constant. We look at 5 years of historical participation by age/ethnicity/county for each institution and apply those ratios to the projected population of a county by age and race/ethnicity. After that we apply a non-resident factor to take into account the out-of-state and foreign students. At that point we send the draft forecast out to each institution and solicit input on any local conditions (new campuses coming online, new dorms opening up, etc.) We take into account what the institutions tell us and make adjustments to the draft and that becomes the forecast. THECB 5/2006

Public Higher Education Participation The projections for this year follow a trend that started in the early 90’s with more students enrolling the community and technical colleges than at the universities. THECB 5/2006

Caveats Forecast is based on historical in-state participation patterns by county. If institutions recruit students from different areas, rates will change The economy affects participation. It usually expands during times of increasing unemployment. THECB 5/2006

Timing Issues 5 Years of History Current Year 1 Year After 2 Years After 5 Years Out 10 Years Out   Even Biennial report in December of even years before Legislature meets in January “Current year” refers to that even-numbered year with focus on fall semester Forecast uses as historical data five prior years Projections are for the two years following “current year” and five and 10 years out In Texas, Fall enrollments are due November 1, but the certification and verification of the data are often not completed in time to be used in report. If certified Fall semester current year enrollments are available, they are used; if not preliminary institutional projections used. THECB 5/2006

Enrollment Forecast Development Process Institutions’ 5 prior years’ historical enrollment by county/age/ ethnicity Current preliminary in-state institution Compare 3-forecasts with current preliminary and select “best fit” rate for each Historical ratio between in-state and non-resident Adjustment for institutions’ policies and local conditions 3-in-state enrollment rates by institution/ Adjust in-state Forecast by Institution for prior, current, next 2 yrs, +5 and +10 yrs Use “best fit” rate & pop to forecast prior, current, next 2 yrs, + 5 & + 10 yrs in-state enrollment by Draft total enrollment forecast by Enrollment Forecast Texas pop. By county/age/ethnicity 5 prior yrs current yr next 2 yrs, + 5 yrs, +10 yrs forecasts for current yr for each THECB 5/2006

Three Alternatives Participation Rates Percentage county/age/racial enrollment rate for prior year Two regression racial/ethnic rate Each rate has attendance rates for 254 counties by institution by six age groups (15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40+) and four racial/ethnic groups (White, African-American, Hispanic, Other) THECB 5/2006

In-State Participation by Age and Race/Ethnicity-Universities 2002 Age 15- 19 Age 20-24 Age 25-29 Age 30-34 Age 35-39 Age 40-Up All Ages White 92,430 76,569 27,803 18,175 13,016 29,825 257,893 African American 12,561 15,062 8,242 6,427 4,657 7,469 54,429 Hispanic 44,219 50,384 21,046 12,131 7,652 11,401 146,870 Other 8,037 8,523 3,369 2,165 1,483 2,476 26,093 Total 157,247 150,538 60,460 38,898 26,808 51,171 485,285 2003 94,208 80,227 29,298 19,151 12,931 29,424 265,297 13,293 16,067 8,957 7,106 4,933 7,928 58,291 49,365 54,994 22,384 13,371 8,133 12,230 160,519 8,322 10,191 3,834 2,572 1,715 2,740 29,399 165,188 161,479 64,473 42,200 27,712 52,322 513,506 Example of how statewide age and ethnicity/race data is produced for each year and sector. It is produced for each county and institution. THECB 5/2006

Percentage Rate Total number of students in each age and racial/ethnic group from each county attending each institution Divided by total population by age and racial/ethnic group in county Gives each county’s age and race/ ethnicity attendance rate per institution THECB 5/2006

Regression Racial/Ethnic Rates Used to develop two straight line arithmetic trend participation rates The previous five-year trend line extended to the following year The previous five-year trend line extended to two years hence THECB 5/2006

Yc= a + bx Yc = predicted trend participation for each age and racial/ethnic group divided by the total population on specific age and racial/ethnic in the county by year a = mean participation over the five-year period b = deviation from center year multiplied by observed participation, summed and divided by sum of squares of deviations Think about restating definition of b THECB 5/2006

Yc= a + bx x = +2 for five year trend extended to the following year x = +3 for five year trend extended to the year after that THECB 5/2006

Application of Rates All three rate applications are used to produce current year’s forecast “Best fit” rate becomes selected in-state participation rate Selected rate must be closest to historical participation pattern: if pattern is increasing, selection should be greater than preliminary current year’s participation If pattern is stable, select nearest alternative Why greater than preliminary current year’s participation: this would seem not to be a conservative selection? THECB 5/2006

Comparison with Current Year’s Actual/Preliminary Enrollment If historical enrollment increasing or decreasing, rate chosen must be within 3% of the preliminary/actual current year enrollment If historical enrollment is stable, alternative must be within 1% of the preliminary/ actual current year enrollment Produce estimates for next 2 years and 5 and 10 year estimates These are the guidelines used to make selection of “best fit” rate. Must be +3% if increasing and -3% if decreasing? If not, how does statement on previous page work? THECB 5/2006

Nonresident Participation Rates 5 years of historical data used to determine “nonresidential percentage factor” Current year’s estimate compared with preliminary/actual enrollment Percentage applied to estimated enrollments THECB 5/2006

Adjustments Knowledge of local issues and changes considered when reviewing projections Projected enrollments at capped institutions are redistributed to others Draft sent to institutions for comment and potential alteration THECB 5/2006

2002 and 2004 Forecasts for 2005 and Actual Difference 2002 2004 Actual Univs 479,442 491,387 485,071 -1.17% 1.29% CTCs 568,195 570,164 564,682 0.6% 1.0% Total 1,047,638 1,061,551 1,049,753 -0.2% 1.1% The 2002 Forecast for 2005 was more accurate for all sectors than the 2004 forecast. The reason: 2005 enrollment especially in the Rio Grande Valley was lower than anticipated. Individual institutions as much as plus and minus 25 percent off. THECB 5/2006

FAQs Economic issues and unemployment: can’t get regional forecasts variations. Asians not included as separate racial/ethnic group because of small numbers in many counties. Yes, even if only one person from a county a rate is developed. Institutions with substantial nonresidents (e.g., those on border) harder to forecast. THECB 5/2006

Conclusions Forecast is better statewide than per institution. Multiplier and institutional adjustments are fudge factors for influences that are harder to quantify. State’s goal is for more students than forecasts predict. Hope forecast is wrong. THECB 5/2006

Texas public higher education enrollment growth is not forecast to achieve target 604,000 335,000 118,460 This is the public university and CTC only version of the Closing the Gaps targets compared with the enrollment forecast from 2004. This is growth only 564,682 CTCs for F 2005 485,071 universities for Fall 2005 1,049,753 Total Source: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board THECB 5/2006