1 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Outcomes Based Formula 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Successful strategies for improving outcomes through quality assessment and evaluation of programs Leadership Conference Winston Salem, NC June
Advertisements

[Imagine School at North Port] Oral Exit Report Quality Assurance Review Team School Accreditation.
ARIN Public Policy Meeting
Designing and Building a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System: A Tool for Public Sector Management.
The University of Texas at El Paso Building a National Reputation By Successfully Serving its Region The University of Texas at El Paso Building a National.
Classroom Factors PISA/PIRLS Task Force International Reading Association January 2005.
International guidelines: Similarities and Criticisms
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
Jeopardy Q 1 Q 6 Q 11 Q 16 Q 21 Q 2 Q 7 Q 12 Q 17 Q 22 Q 3 Q 8 Q 13
1 Establishing Performance Indicators in Support of The Illinois Commitment Presented to the Illinois Board of Higher Education December 11, 2001.
1 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Tennessees Outcomes-Based Funding Formula.
Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Recommendations & Finance Overview November 15, 2012.
Council for Education Policy, Research and Improvement CEPRI Projects Presentation to State Board of Education February 17, 2004.
1 R-2 Report: Graduation A presentation to the Board of Education by Brad Stam, Chief Academic Officer Instructional Services Staff Research and Assessment.
0 - 0.
MULTIPLYING MONOMIALS TIMES POLYNOMIALS (DISTRIBUTIVE PROPERTY)
ADDING INTEGERS 1. POS. + POS. = POS. 2. NEG. + NEG. = NEG. 3. POS. + NEG. OR NEG. + POS. SUBTRACT TAKE SIGN OF BIGGER ABSOLUTE VALUE.
SUBTRACTING INTEGERS 1. CHANGE THE SUBTRACTION SIGN TO ADDITION
MULT. INTEGERS 1. IF THE SIGNS ARE THE SAME THE ANSWER IS POSITIVE 2. IF THE SIGNS ARE DIFFERENT THE ANSWER IS NEGATIVE.
Addition Facts
Glenn DuBois Chancellor A Student-First Focus The Case for Change at Virginias Community Colleges.
Mobility, Time to Degree, and Institutional Practices: Towards a New Conceptual Model of Undergraduate Retention for Underrepresented Students Lucy Arellano,
The Federal Reserve System Chapter 14 Copyright © 2010 by the McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
© S Haughton more than 3?
Accuracy of Capital Project Cost Estimates Proposed Final Report Joint Legislative Audit & Review Committee September 23, 2009 Mark Fleming, JLARC Staff.
Session 9: Per-Capita Financing of Education and Equity Issues C ONFERENCE O N I NCLUSIVE E DUCATION F OR C HILDREN W ITH D ISABILITIES Organized by: UNICEF.
1 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Tennessee’s Outcomes-Based Funding Formula AASCU – December 1, 2011.
Strategic Financial Management 9 February 2012
Hillary Arnold Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario Canadian Association of Graduate Studies November 5, 2013 Increases in federal financial support.
Introduction to Program Budgeting Katherine Barraclough Consultant, World Bank Fiscal Management Reform Workshop, Istanbul, Turkey, June 6-8, 2005.
1 Exploring the Impact of Social Funds on Decentralization and Local Governance.
Addition 1’s to 20.
25 seconds left…...
GETTING IT RIGHT. Today we will - review or refresh your approach to making funding bids by: Not sure? Ask! And this is to remind me and you please to.
Test B, 100 Subtraction Facts
Week 1.
We will resume in: 25 Minutes.
GETTING TO 30 Ohio’s One-Year Option Stakeholders Meeting.
DR. CHIALIN HSIEH DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, RESEARCH & INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS APRIL 20, 2010 ARCC 2010 Report Accountability Reporting for the Community.
DATA TRACKING AND EVALUATION 1. Goal of the STEP program: To increase the number of STEM graduates within the five-year period of the grant. You have.
Louisiana Public Postsecondary Education Budget & Performance Funding Formula Overview August 19, 2011.
Leading the Way : Access. Success. Impact. Board of Governors Summit August 9, 2013.
Louisiana Public Postsecondary Education Governance Commission Budget, Formula Funding, & Efficiencies September 28, 2011.
8 HB ELEMENTS FOR SETTING THE INITIAL FUNDING ALLOCATION OCTOBER 21, 2014 MODEL DESIGN Features/Mechanics.
Performance Based Funding Formula. SSI History SSI Overview University Formula Performance Changes OTC Funding Formula 2.
Program Review: The Foundation for Institutional Planning and Improvement.
Performance-Based Funding in Higher Education Presentation by Arthur M. Hauptman Financing Reforms for Tertiary Education in the Knowledge Economy Seoul,
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.
Tennessee’s Outcomes-Based Funding Formula
1. Continue to distinguish and clarify between Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Service Area Outcomes (SAOs) 2. Develop broad SLOs/SAOs in order to.
Opportunity Act: Targeted Economic and Innovation Incentives Funding Jim Alessio October 24,
California State University, Sacramento Increasing Opportunities for Student Success: Changing the “Rules of the Game” Nancy Shulock Institute for Higher.
IBHE Presentation 1 Proposed Four-Year University Performance Funding Model Performance Funding Steering Committee Meeting October 24, 2011 Dr. Alan Phillips.
IBHE Presentation 1 Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model IBHE Board Meeting February 5, 2013 Dr. Alan Phillips.
90-Day Goal Performance Funding Presented to the Illinois Board of Higher Education April 12, 2011.
IBHE Presentation 1 Illinois Higher Education Performance Funding Model IBHE Board Meeting February 7, 2012 Dr. Alan Phillips.
Presentation to the Chancellor’s Cabinet October 14, 2013 Inspiration. Innovation. Graduation. Presented by Mr. Roy Stutzman, RvStutzman Consulting.
Developing a Student Flow Model to Project Higher Education Degree Production: Technical and Policy Consideration Takeshi Yanagiura Research Director Tennessee.
WACTC 2014 Allocation and Accountability Recommendations - Briefing SBCTC October 2014.
1 Forward by Design : Strategic Initiatives for the Long-Term Master Plan Mark B. Rosenberg Chancellor September 27, 2007.
SUS Performance Funding Institute for Academic Leadership Joe Glover October 2015.
Monitoring and Oversight: College Completion and Attainment Dr. Kevin Reilly & Dr. Sheila Stearns AGB Consultants December 7th, 2015.
A Fundamentally New Approach to Accountability: Putting State Policy Issues First Nancy Shulock Director, Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy.
INCENTIVE FUNDING UNIVERSITY OF UTAH Created on 2/17/2016.
CHE Higher Education Budget Recommendation State Budget Committee Meeting December 14, 2010.
One System…One Mission Edison State College Randy Hanna Chancellor Florida College System.
Performance-Based Funding in Higher Education
Performance Funding Metrics used to evaluate both Excellence and Improvement are tied to the goals outlined in each university work plan: STANDARD METRICS:
The City University of New York Performance Management Process (PMP)
Presentation transcript:

1 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Outcomes Based Formula 2010

2 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Revenues

3 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Revenues

4 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Existing Funding Formula Linked to Tennessee Master Plan Enhanced focus on student retention Focus on adult enrollment of students age 25 and up at community colleges. Research calculation determined by Carnegie classification and Doctoral degree production. Enrollment base calculation using a three-year moving average of actual fall enrollments.

5 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Existing Funding Formula Existing formula is approximately 60% enrollment driven. Incentive structure is heavily focused on inputs. Existing Performance Funding program and imbedded performance incentives provide limited leverage for policy change.

6 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Interpreting the Existing Funding Formula Enrollment growth is privileged above all else. Little differentiation is made between different types of institutions. Limited acknowledgement of institutional mission and uniqueness. For the most part, success means bigger.

7 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Complete College Act Develop, after consultation with the board of regents and the University of Tennessee board of Trustees, policies and formulae or guidelines for fair and equitable distribution and use of public funds … that are consistent with and further the goals of the statewide master plan. The policies and formulae or guidelines shall result in an outcomes-based model.

8 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Complete College Act Outcomes-Based Model According to the legislation, the model must include: – end of term enrollment – student retention – degree production – timely progress towards a degree The model may also include: – student transfer activity – research – student success – compliance with transfer and articulation policy as enumerated further in the legislation

9 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Formula Design Concepts Alter the incentive structure to focus on outputs. Find broad agreement on the activities and outcomes higher education ought to pursue. Spread the financial incentives to a larger, more appropriate set of variables (not just enrollment). Calibrate it specifically to an institutions mission by utilizing Carnegie Classifications and mission statements.

10 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Formula Design Concepts Strengthen links to Master Plan Enhance incentives for student retention, research Introduce a focus on productivity, defined as degree production, transfer activity, student access, adult students, etc. Tailor the productivity emphasis to each institutions mission

11 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Formula Design Concept Identify an outcome (degree attainment, transfer activity, student retention, etc.) Compile actual data on those outcomes (Fact Book, Statutory Reports). Award points for those outcomes. Weight the outcome based on an institutions mission.

12 Tennessee Higher Education Commission University Formula Design Concept 1. Outcome data is taken from the THEC Fact Book and other readily available sources. Data is rescaled to account for large differences between the numbers (e.g. Research Expenditures and Time to Degree) 2. Points are awarded for each outcome by multiplying the rescaled data by the Points per Outcome. 3. Points are multiplied by outcome specific weights to determine the total points.

13 Tennessee Higher Education Commission University Formula Design Concept Weights will vary depending on institutional mission. For example: A Masters level institution would have a greater weight on bachelor degree production and a lesser weight on graduate degree production and research expenditures. Conversely, an institution with a greater research focus would have a lesser weight on bachelor degree production and a greater weight on graduate degree production and research expenditures.

14 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Outcomes Based Model Formula has never been and is not now an institutional budgeting tool. Outcomes based model does not have targets or goals; it is not large scale Performance Funding. Institutional excellence will no longer be overshadowed by enrollment growth.

15 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Outcomes Based Model Multiple measures of productivity, previously unaccounted for, will now be credited to the institution (transfer activity, R&D success, degree production, etc.) Formula is not prescriptive in how to achieve success and excellence. Does not penalize failure to achieve pre- determined goals.

16 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Outcomes Based Model Advantages Includes student successes/outcomes that hitherto have not been a factor in formula. Emphasizes unique institutional mission. More flexible and can accommodate future shifts in mission or desired outcomes. More transparent and simpler for state government. Along with new PF, the model will increase leverage for policy change and reinforce the Master Plan.

17 Tennessee Higher Education Commission From the Perspective of State Government…. Enrollment growth is no longer paramount. Access for the sake of access is not enough; a successful student outcome (however defined) is the goal. Institutions have different missions and that variance must be considered.

18 Tennessee Higher Education Commission From the Perspective of State Government…. What is the most effective means of allocating limited state resources among institutions? What macro-level information is crucial to making allocation decisions among institutions? What type of incentive structure can be created, with minimal operational interference but maximum leverage, to achieve state goals?

19 Tennessee Higher Education Commission THEC Formula Review Committee Jessica Gibson – Comptrollers staff Tre Hargett – Secretary of State Jack Murrah – THEC Chairman Cathy Pierce – F&A Paul Robertson – Treasurers staff Gary Rogers – UT Dale Sims – TBR David Thurman – Legislative Budget Office THEC staff

20 Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Outcomes Based Formula 2010