AIRO MEETING April 26, 2017.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
March 14, 2013 KCTCS Board of Regents Efficiency, Effectiveness and Accountability Committee.
Advertisements

In Lampasas ISD.  AP stands for Advanced Placement  AP is a program developed and administered by the College Board  AP courses are college level courses.
A quick review of z-scores and how to understand them August 26, 2011
Missouri Higher Education Issues and Initiatives 2013.
The State, DHE, and CCHE Context. Colorado Context Colorado is a growth state- 8 th in the nation 47% of population (25-64) have at least an Associate.
Louisiana Public Postsecondary Education Budget & Performance Funding Formula Overview August 19, 2011.
Outcomes-Based Funding: Design Principles and State Examples Outcomes-Based Funding: The Indiana Experience Teresa Lubbers, Indiana Commissioner for Higher.
The Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education Allocation Process Regents Education Program Annual Conference September 27, 2006.
Reinvestment In California’s Higher Education System Educating our Workforce Keeping our Promise Orange County Business Council April 15, 2015.
UA Faculty Presentation April 16, 2014 Shane Broadway, Director.
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.
DRAFT The Cost of Education and Proposed UH Analytical Metrics to Promote Greater Efficiency and Productivity Presented to the Board of Regents March 21,
Faculty Leadership Conference Revenue Forecast Report and Budget Update Bernard M. Hannon Senior Assoc Commissioner & CFOApril 23, 2010.
Efficiency, Effectiveness and Accountability Committee.
The Future of Higher Education in Texas
Ivy Tech Community College Adjunct Faculty Conference March 26, 2011.
Dr. Christina Whitfield April 29, 2013 Big E Symposium KCTCS PERFORMANCE METRICS WHERE’S THE DATA?
TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION COORDINATING BOARD WEBINAR APRIL 9, 2014 Outcomes-Based Formula Funding for Universities.
University System of Ohio. Strategic Plan for Higher Education The State of Ohio increase its educational attainment to compete in a global economy that.
Using Delta Cost Study Data AASCU Annual Meeting November 2010 F. King Alexander California State University, Long Beach Sources: Delta Cost Project &
Outcomes-Based Funding: Design Principles and State Examples Outcomes-Based Funding: Implementation in Massachusetts Richard Freeland, Commissioner Massachusetts.
Student Success Scorecard PaRC Presentation April 17, 2013 FOOTHILL COLLEGE E. Kuo FH IR&P *Formerly known as the Accountability Reporting for Community.
IBHE Presentation 1 Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model IBHE Board Meeting February 7, 2012 Dr. Alan Phillips.
Cooperative Alliance Workshop. Complete College America A Plan for Increasing Postsecondary Credentials to Fuel a Strong Economy 1 FOCUS ON READINESS.
A Proposal (Revised on May 18, 2009) (Contingent upon Governor’s and BOG’s approval) TUITION & FEE PRICING academic year Presented to: USF Board.
$86,388,741.  Chancellor %  Academic Affairs 70.43%  Student Affairs %  Advancement and External Affairs- 3.08%  Administration and Finance.
AY 2006 Annual Program Review Data Delivery Plan Data Description Process – Timeline Rev
Provost Reports: Fall ‘ 05 Admissions & “ D-Rule ” Faculty Senate Meeting The University of Arkansas Fayetteville, AR February 15, 2006 Bob Smith Provost.
COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON FACULTY COMPENSATION COMMITTEE Report to Faculty Senate November 5, 2013.
CERRITOS COLLEGE I.E.P.I. REPORT (DUE JUNE 2015) STRATEGIC PLANNING RETREAT, MAY 8, 2015.
Math Placement Test Texas Tech University. Psychology Majors: Math Requirements Psychology majors must complete 6 hours of math. Students are required.
“Financial Aid Evolution: Change Agents” OASFAA Fall Conference 2015 State Higher Education Finance and Budgetary Overview Jim Bennett Vice Chancellor.
RCM BUDGET REVIEW George A. Smathers Libraries Brian Keith Cecilia Botero March 21, http://
The Future of Higher Education in Texas Dr. Larry R. Faulkner Vice-Chair, Higher Education Strategic Planning Committee Presentation to Texas Higher Education.
March 2014 Regents, Trustees, Coordinating Board Institutions Instructions, $ $ $ $ Suggestions, recommendations Texas Legislature.
March 2014 Regents, Trustees, Coordinating Board Institutions Instructions, $ $ $ $ Suggestions, recommendations Texas Legislature.
Development of Statewide Community College Value- Added Accountability Measures Michael J. Keller Director of Policy Analysis and Research Maryland Higher.
Summer Data Conference – June 6, (2008) National Completion Goals (Lumina’s Big Goal: 60% of those will have an Associate Degree or above.
Enrollment Formula Funding and Outcomes Funding
LOOKING BACK KCTCS Strategic Plan PERFORMANCE MEASURES.
Overview of Year One and Into Year Two November, 2016
Budget and Legislative Updates
classification and compensation Analysis Pilot Project
THE PATH FORWARD KCTCS Strategic Plan
Joshua Garrison Director of Policy and Legislation
Mott Community College Budget Update
KCTCS Strategic Plan Update
Operations and Performance of the Virginia Community College System
THEME 1: Fiscal Health – SB-6 Ratios
Strategic Planning Update
Performance Funding Model University of North Florida
Response to Prioritization Ranking April 8, 2016
FY 2014 Budget Review & FY 2015 Budget oUTlook
Productivity Funding Model
Texas Association of Community Colleges
Finance Committee April 2018.
Performance Funding Model Overview
Degree Map Assessment Momentum Year Full Transfer Post-Transfer
Florida College System Performance Based Funding
Framework for a Next-Generation Accountability System
Performance Funding Metrics used to evaluate both Excellence and Improvement are tied to the goals outlined in each university work plan: STANDARD METRICS:
At Elizabethtown Community and Technical College
At San Antonio College February 16, 2018
Student Success Metrics
Productivity Funding Model
Metrics Simplification Project
Tuition and Fees Period 1 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Period 5 Period 6
House Appropriations Committee Louisiana Board of Regents
MEASURE B PARCEL TAX.
Presentation transcript:

AIRO MEETING April 26, 2017

PRODUCTIVITY FUNDING FORMULA Productivity Measures ADJUSTMENT EFFICIENCY +/- 2% EFFECTIVENESS 80% AFFORDABILITY 20% METRICS METRICS METRICS METRICS Credentials Progression Transfer Success Gateway Course Success Non-Credit Workforce Training Post Completion Success Core Expense Ratio Faculty to Admin Salary Ratio Time to Degree Credits at Completion Research (4 Year Only) Diseconomies of Scale (2 Year Only) Please note that Post-Completion Success is still being considered as a possible metric under the effectiveness category.

CREDENTIALS 40% of Effectiveness (32% of Total) High Demand Please note that Non-Credit Workforce Hours will also be taken into consideration under the credentials metric

PROGRESSION 30% of Effectiveness (24% of Total)

GATEWAY COURSE SUCCESS 15% of Effectiveness (12% of Total)

TRANSFER STUDENTS 15% of Effectiveness (12% of Total)

TIME TO DEGREE 50% of Affordability (10% of Total)

CREDITS AT COMPLETION 50% of Affordability (10% of Total)

Four Year Institutions Only RESEARCH ADJUSTMENT Four Year Institutions Only

DISECONOMIES OF SCALE ADJUSTMENT Two Year Institutions Only Between AVERAGE and AVERAGE -15% Between AVERAGE -15.01% and AVERAGE -30% Less than Average -30.01%

Deviation from Peer Group Application to Effectiveness Score CORE EXPENSE RATIO 50% of Efficiency Deviation from Peer Group Application to Effectiveness Score Below -20.01% 0.98 -15.01% to -20% 0.985 -10.01% to -15% 0.99 -5.01% to -10% 0.995 -5% to 5% 1 5.01% to 10% 1.005 10.01% to 15% 1.01 15.01% to 20% 1.015 Above 20.01% 1.02

FACULTY TO ADMIN SALARY RATIO 50% of Efficiency Deviation from Peer Group Application to Effectiveness Score Below -20.01% 0.98 -15.01% to -20% 0.985 -10.01% to -15% 0.99 -5.01% to -10% 0.995 -5% to 5% 1 5.01% to 10% 1.005 10.01% to 15% 1.01 15.01% to 20% 1.015 Above 20.01% 1.02

METRICS TO BE DETERMINED

TOTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS TOTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATION + = PRIOR YEAR FUNDING NEW STATE FUNDING REALLOCATED FUNDING TOTAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATION + Change in Productivity is limited to a 2% increase or decrease annually.