SUS Performance Funding

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Re-engineering your approach to the beginning college experience should include an acknowledgement of what is working well and only needs to be maintained,
Advertisements

ACE-Achieving Classroom Excellence.  2005: Achieving Classroom Excellence Act (SB 982) ◦ Established the ACE Task Force and guiding principles  2006:
What is FINANCIAL AID? NEED BASEDNON NEED BASED INCLUDING MERIT GIFT AIDSELF-HELP AID SCHOLARSHIPS GRANTS WORK-STUDY LOANS HIGHER EDUCATION TAX CREDITS.
1 Accountability in P-16 Systems & Database Issues: Florida Perspective August 13, 2004 Jay Pfeiffer, Director K20 Education Information and Accountability.
Transforming the MUSC Financial Management System.
Overview of Performance Funding Model for Ohio’s Community Colleges
Leading the Way : Access. Success. Impact. Board of Governors Summit August 9, 2013.
Florida Bright Futures Scholarship Presentation G. Holmes Braddock Sr. High School Mrs. Gomez, Counselor.
Student Financial Aid: A State and National Perspective September 29, 2011.
2014 Education Law Changes Jason Hancock Deputy Chief of Staff.
1 PRESENTATION TO OHIO SSI STUDY GROUP OVERVIEW OF FUNDING PRACTICES AND STATE EXAMPLES Brenda N. Albright September 29, 2005.
Florida Atlantic University Overview of Operating Budget Process Presentation to the Florida Atlantic University Foundation, Inc. Board of Directors February.
PERFORMANCE FUNDS. New Performance Funding Allocation Criteria Each university metric is evaluated based on Excellence or Improvement and has five benchmarks.
B OARD of G OVERNORS State University System of Florida 1 B OARD of G OVERNORS State University System of Florida Performance Based Funding.
University of Central Missouri Strategic Resource Allocation Model Board of Governors’ Meeting June 18, 2015.
A & S SRI Presentation Spring 2015 Thomas Nenon. A&S SRI Basic Facts The implementation of the SRI at the University of Memphis will not involve any automatic.
Manoa Budget Committee Update Kathy CutshawFebruary 18, 2015.
Illinois Higher Education FY15 Performance Funding Recommendations IBHE Board Presentation February 4, 2014 Dr. Alan Phillips.
Analysis of States’ Use of Student Enrollments and Performance Criteria in Higher Education Funding May 2012 R EPORT FOR THE N EVADA L EGISLATURE ’ S C.
Student Success Task Force Draft Recommendations Things We Need To Consider Board Report October 25, 2011.
IBHE Presentation 1 Performance Funding Discussion Topics Performance Funding Steering Committee Meeting September 28, 2011.
High School Scholarship Programs (HSSP) April 2011.
The New Performance Agreement Model June 13, 2012 KBOR Data Conference.
Right-Sizing Academic Affairs The New Normal at Appalachian State University Board of Trustees Retreat March 22, 2012.
90-Day Goal Performance Funding Presented to the Illinois Board of Higher Education April 12, 2011.
PROVIDED BY THE IDAHO STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 2014 Education Law Changes.
IBHE Presentation 1 Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model IBHE Board Meeting February 7, 2012 Dr. Alan Phillips.
1 New College of Florida October 21, 2004 Steve Uhlfelder, Chair 1 Florida Board of Governors Performance & Accountability Committee.
B OARD of G OVERNORS State University System of Florida 1 B OARD of G OVERNORS State University System of Florida Performance Based Funding.
2009 MUSC Excellence Faculty/Staff Survey Leadership Development Institute September 25, 2009.
Presentation to the Chancellor’s Cabinet October 14, 2013 Inspiration. Innovation. Graduation. Presented by Mr. Roy Stutzman, RvStutzman Consulting.
MUSC Excellence University Excellence 101 Getting Connected.
What are Pillar Goals? What are the goals and metrics for the university? How do our unit level goals fit in? What happens next? 11/19/2015 University.
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems 3035 Center Green Drive, Suite 150 Boulder, Colorado A Starting Point for Developing a Performance.
SUS Performance Funding Institute for Academic Leadership Joe Glover October 2015.
Freshman Faculty Welcome August 22, Mission The University of Missouri-Rolla, UMR, has a major responsibility for meeting Missouri’s needs for engineering.
Pillar Goal Progress Leadership Development Institute July 23, 2010.
Collective Bargaining Contracts with Performance Metrics A “Success Pool” and ”Faculty Excellence Awards” Kent State University NCSCBHEP 39 th Annual National.
Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation in Texas Higher Education Progress Update October 25, 2012 THECB Quarterly Board Meeting Gerry Griffin,
FHS Awards for Junior Faculty and Post- graduate Student Research.
Educational Excellence – Phase One Lisa Blazer & Dan Gelo Presenting.
One System…One Mission Edison State College Randy Hanna Chancellor Florida College System.
Council for Education Policy, Research and Improvement Council for Education Policy, Research and Improvement Changing Directions Project Lumina Foundation.
Non-Educator Merit Pay Plan
Performance Incentive Funding
3-5 Year Priorities October 27, 2016
AAU Membership Metrics
Today’s Agenda The importance of a conversation
Deans and Chairs Academic Affairs Update
Draft Dashboard Styles
RECOGNIZING educator EXCELLENCE
Performance Funding Model University of North Florida
AASFAA Financial Aid Legislative Update
AASFAA Financial Aid Legislative Update
FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY
Texas Association of Community Colleges
FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY
Budget Development Process
Performance-Based Funding
Taxonomy of higher education governance structures
$164 million K12 Strong Workforce Program and Funding Overview
Florida College System Performance Based Funding
Areas of Programmatic Strategic Emphasis
Performance Funding Metrics used to evaluate both Excellence and Improvement are tied to the goals outlined in each university work plan: STANDARD METRICS:
Strategy Implementation: Internal Control and Performance
Consideration of Core Outcomes for Strategic Plan
RACE TO THE TOP: An Overview
D-III.
BOARD of GOVERNORS State University System of Florida
Vision for Success Local Goal Setting Part 1
Presentation transcript:

SUS Performance Funding Institute for Academic Leadership Joe Glover October 2016

The Performance Funding Model includes 10 metrics that evaluate the institutions on a range of issues. Two of the 10 metrics are Choice metrics; one picked by the Board of Governors and one by the university boards of trustees. These metrics were chosen after reviewing over 40 metrics identified in the University Work Plans. The model has four guiding principles: 1) use metrics that align with SUS Strategic Plan goals, 2) reward Excellence or Improvement, 3) have a few clear, simple metrics, and 4) acknowledge the unique mission of the different institutions. Key components of the model: Institutions will be evaluated on either Excellence or Improvement for each metric. Data is based on one-year data. The benchmarks for Excellence were based on the Board of Governors 2025 System Strategic Plan goals and analysis of relevant data trends, whereas the benchmarks for Improvement were determined after reviewing data trends for each metric. The Florida Legislature and Governor determine the amount of new state funding and a proportional amount of institutional funding that would come from each university’s recurring state base appropriation.

Metrics Common to all Institutions: Seven metrics apply to all eleven institutions. The eighth metric, graduate degrees awarded in areas of strategic emphasis (8a), applies to all institutions except New College. The alternative metric for New College (8b) is “freshman in the top 10% of graduating high school class.”

How will the funding component of the model work? To ensure each university is striving to excel and improve on key metrics, there must be a financial incentive. That financial incentive will not only be new state funding, but an equal reallocation of a portion of the base state funding.

New Funding versus Base Funding: The amount of new state funding appropriated by the Legislature and Governor for performance funding will be matched by an equal amount reallocated from the university system base budget. These “base” funds are the cumulative recurring state appropriations the Legislature has appropriated to each institution. Any new funding appropriated would be allocated as follows: State New Funding Allocation Each university metric is evaluated based on Excellence or Improvement and has five benchmarks ranging from low to high. The lowest benchmark receives one point, while the highest receives five points. The highest points for Excellence or Improvement are counted in the university’s total score. New funding will be allocated based on points earned, with a maximum of 50 points possible. A university must earn more than 25 points in order to be eligible to receive new funds. A university scoring 25 points or less or the three lowest scoring universities would not receive any new funds. A university earning more than 25 points would receive new funds proportional to their existing base funds with the highest scoring universities eligible for additional new funds. The Board’s practice is to address all ties to the benefit, not the detriment, of the institutions in question. No matter where the tie takes place in the score rankings, the practice is the same.

Institutional Base Funding Allocation A prorated amount would be deducted from each university’s base recurring state appropriation. A university earning more than 50 points will have their base funding restored. A university scoring 50 points or less will have to submit an improvement plan to the Board of Governors and show improvement according to that approved plan in order to have their base funding restored.