Race and Ethnicity Reporting Changes and Their Impact Mary M. Sapp University of Miami Carol Yoakum Illinois Board of Higher Education Hans P. L'Orange SHEEO

Presentation Outline Upcoming changes Impact at Institution Level Impact at State Level Discussion of challenges and questions

Current IPEDS Reporting Categories (5 + 2) 1.Black, non-Hispanic 2.American Indian or Alaskan Native 3.Asian or Pacific Islander 4.Hispanic 5.White, non-Hispanic 6.Race/ethnicity unknown 7.Non-resident alien

Current R/E Collection & Storage Approach Most use reporting categories for collection May have more detail for some; add “Other,” “None of above,” “2 or more races” Store as a single field in the database IPEDS Surveys:  Current year: Fall Enrollment (EF), Human Resources (HR)  Prior year: Completions (C), 12-month Enrollment (12E)  1 st -time cohorts from earlier years: Graduation Rate Survey (GRS)

New Collection—Two-Question Format Required 1.Hispanic/Latino?  Yes  No 2.Select one or more of following racial categories:  American Indian or Alaska Native  Asian  Black or African American  Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander  White

New IPEDS Reporting (7 + 2) 1.Hispanics of any race For non-Hispanics only: 2.American Indian or Alaska Native 3.Asian 4.Black or African American 5.Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 6.White 7.2 or more races 8.Race and ethnicity unknown (for U.S. only) 9.Nonresident alien (NRA) NRA trumps all; Hispanic trumps all races

Other Information about Changes Optional starting this fall Mandatory for EF & HR in 2010 and for all in 2011 Self identification Encourages re-surveying

Impact at Institutional Level Planning & Communication Start NOW Involve everyone: IR, IT (ERP), Admissions (all levels), Registrar (all levels), Financial Aid, Athletics, Alumni, HR, Affirmative Action, General Counsel, etc. Identify all sources of r/e data: internal (including schools/departments, non-credit) & outside feeds (e.g., Common App, ETS)  Applications/inquiries (students & employees)  Bio updates from continuing students/employees (e.g., portal)  Paper & online  Determine lead time for each (e.g., 1.5 years in advance for paper-based admissions forms) (Continued)

Planning & Communication Identify other non-institutional organizations that impact timing (ERP, state, report requesters) Start identifying reports/exports affected (IPEDS, state, other outside, internal—LOTS) Decide if map from existing to new (not doing so means all “Unknown” unless resurvey) Decide if resurvey (not resurveying means under- reporting of H/PI & multiple races) but may increase costs; resurvey “stop-outs” in future? resurvey alumni? Understand distinction between collection, storage, & reporting Monitor resources Decide when to migrate institution (may be driven by outside organizations)

Examples of Non-Institutional Organizations that Impact Timing State collection/reporting (all in state at same time?) Sources of applications (need to be in place by June of the year before the transition):  Undergraduate applications: Common App, Universal College Application, CollegeNET, etc.  Graduate/professional applications: CollegeNET, LSAC, MCAS, etc. Financial Aid system (often stand-alone system) Inquiry for job applicants: Hodes iQ, etc. Organizations that collect data on r/e: CDS, guidebooks & U.S. News, professional accrediting organizations, grad/professional organizations, Student Clearinghouse, recruiters

Collection Issues for Institutions Chance to re-engineer (e.g., online, new process to update continuing, mouseover/link to definitions) Collection point (application &/or enrollment) & method (online &/or paper) Whether to resurvey continuing students &/or employees Whether to pre-populate by mapping from old to new categories Level of detail (sub-categories or just binary) Whether to collect r/e from international Timelines for non-institutional organizations (will need to map values for those migrating before or after institution) How/when to modify online forms (e.g., applications, bio updates)

Storage Issues If use ERP, determine how & when new r/e will be supported Add new r/e fields in database to handle at least 64 r/e combinations (probably 6 fields) plus NRA Decide if store as binary vs. detailed codes, format logical vs. alpha Keep current field for old data (NCES requires keeping 3+ years) Mapping strategy if used to pre-populate new codes Consistency of values & timing across systems, especially if different vendors

Cross-walk to Map Current to New (Reduces “Unknown”) CurrentNew “Hispanic” “American Indian or Alaskan Native” “Black, non-Hispanic”“Black or African American” “White, non-Hispanic”“White” “Asian or Pacific Islander”*“Asian” “Unknown” *“Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander” incorrectly assumed to be “Asian”

Reporting Issues GRS: Need to map old r/e codes for prior-year cohorts (if don’t map, all those not re-surveyed will be “Unknown,” & resurveyed codes will have 100% graduation rates) Problems with Trends  Hispanic apt to go up  American Indian/Alaska Native, Black, Asian, & White apt to go down  Move into “2 or more” & “Hispanic” Non-comparable peer data during transition (from re- surveying, mapping, creative interpretation of regs) Consider using “maximum” approach for some lists/reports (e.g., mailings to “black students,” data for recruiters): count # selecting each category regardless of other categories selected (causes duplicated counts)

Timing: Possible Timeline for Transition in Meetings, planning, & initial IT work 2009 Paper applications for 2010 printed (1.5 years in advance; alternatively use old form & re-survey new students) Collect new r/e for continuing students during pre- registration (if not re-surveying in summer/fall) Modify online application & bio update systems & forms Modify programs that read data from outside sources (may also need temporary mappings) Modify database (in time to store new r/e in applications) (Continued)

Timing: Possible Timeline for Transition in Modify programs that generate reports and exports Map from old to new codes for all students, employees, and alumni Re-survey students & employees, starting July 1 (alternatively resurvey prior spring); plan to resurvey “stop outs” in future terms; resurvey alumni Start reporting EF & HR with new r/e codes (current fall data); submit other IPEDS surveys with old r/e codes Map r/e for entering GRS cohort & report with new codes Start reporting C & 12E with new codes (prior year students) May determine timeline after outside systems announce theirs to minimize cross walks

STATE AGENCIES: HOW WILL WE DEAL WITH NEW RACE/ETHNICITY?

How does each state work? As a State agency, many of us are very different in many ways. Some of us only view the IPEDS data; some of us upload the IPEDS data; and some of us actually download and use all IPEDS data.

How many State? Let’s take a quick look at institutions within each state. I can tell you that over 70% of states have less than 100 institutions within their state. You might not coordinate all the institutions listed. Some states have two coordinators.

Table 256, Degree Granting Institutions by State, 2007 Digest of Education  Alabama 65  Alaska 8  Arizona 77  Arkansas 49  California412  Colorado 80  Connecticut 45  Delaware 10  District of Columbia 15  Florida174  Georgia134  Hawaii 23  Idaho 14  Illinois175

Table 256, Degree Granting Institutions by State, 2007 Digest of Education  Indiana105  Iowa 65  Kansas 59  Kentucky 71  Louisiana 86  Maine 30  Maryland 58  Massachusetts122  Michigan105  Minnesota109  Mississippi 41  Missouri129  Montana 23  Nebraska 42  Nevada 23

Table 256, Degree Granting Institutions by State, 2007 Digest of Education  New Hampshire 28  New Jersey 59  New Mexico 42  New York307  North Carolina130  North Dakota 22  Ohio205  Oklahoma 57  Oregon 61  Pennsylvania263  Rhode Island 14  South Carolina 65  South Dakota 24  Tennessee 99  Texas214

Table 256, Degree Granting Institutions by State, 2007 Digest of Education  Utah 34  Vermont 25  Virginia110  Washington 79  West Virginia 42  Wisconsin 70  Wyoming 10  U.S. Service Schools 5  United States Total 4,314

What will Illinois Do? As for IL, we will use the same categories as IPEDS. We will need to reformat ALL databases -- Completions, Enrollment, GRS, and Human Resources with new categories for Fall Some small private institutions will use the new format this fall. You need to be ready.

What is needed for New Categories New categories will require you to breakout Asian & Pacific Islander into four columns and add Mixed Race Men & Mixed Race Women. Remember, we receive aggregate data only – no unit records. Some of you receive unit records from institutions. You will have more challenges.

Do you need Duplicated data? Illinois will ask our institutions to give us the duplicated data to go with mixed race along with how many Hispanic students have more than one race listed. Our intention will be to give legislators a % of each race that is mixed along with gender information.

How will we publish the data? All categories will appear, some will be blank and some with data. Tables that list institutions will have flags for those using the new format. Tables with racial categories will include mixed race. Many footnotes will be used in all reporting.

What Challenges will occur? Most importantly - How will policy- makers use the data? Will mixed race be used in minority grants or minority counts, etc? How will trend data be done; or will trend data start over in 2010? How accurate will the data be?

Discussion of challenges and questions