1. Declaring Impaction Sacramento State
Lori Varlotta, Vice President for Student Affairs
Ed Mills, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs,
Enrollment and Student Support
April 2010

2. Impaction Proposal
Student Affairs and Academic Affairs jointly propose that the University pursue campus-level impaction starting Fall Impaction will help us:
Prioritize student success by aligning enrollment with state allocations – this alignment will allow us to better support and more effectively teach the students we enroll
Avoid the use of more drastic enrollment management tools (i.e. unit caps, spring admission closures, etc.)
Support the graduation initiative by allowing students to enroll in the number of courses they desire without being restricted by unit caps
11/11/2018

3. Variation from Target = 0.0%
Target Outcome
Resident FTES target for : 22,970
Annualized Resident FTES: 22,973
Variation from Target = 0.0%
11/11/2018

4. Moving Forward
As we move forward with the mandated reduction (2,488 FTES), we must consider the following:
admission applications are increasing
current student continuation rates are increasing
average unit load is increasing
non-graduation attrition is decreasing
Unchecked, these trends will bring us in over the allowable 0 – 2% variant range for target.

5. Assumptions that Undergird the 2010 Reduction Plan
The enrollment reduction plan (-2488 FTES) is based on these assumptions:
We will not generate resident FTES in Summer 2010 (other than Ed.D.)
We will be over-enrolled in Fall 2010 due to the large, qualified application pool; higher continuation and retention rates; and lower non-graduation attrition
We will continue unit caps for both Fall 2010 and Spring 2011 to ensure that we do not exceed the CY FTES target by more than 2% (this is the primary reduction strategy employed by non-impacted CSUs)
Unit caps are more restrictive during early registration to help ensure that all students have the opportunity to enroll in a full schedule. Caps could then be adjusted during late registration as course availability and enrollment allows
We will restrict Spring 2011 admission applications for both undergraduate and graduate programs
11/11/2018

6. Initial Projection of AY 2010-11 Enrollment
Semester and AY Projections:
Fall ,526 Spring 2011 (assumes restricted enrollment) 19,941
Annualized Academic Year (AY) 21,234
Resident FTES Target 20,482
Projected Overage in FTES
% Variance (initial projection) %
11/11/2018

7. Revised Projection of 2010-11 CY Resident Target
To mitigate the projected 4% overage we, as a non-impacted campus, can implement the following reductionist strategies:
Use unit caps to reduce even further Average Unit Load (from fall 2009 to or lower for fall 2010)
Reduce carefully the number and type of available course sections for spring 2011 so that the average unit load moderates by extension
Invoke new student application restrictions for spring 2011 to decrease undergraduate and graduate program headcount (e.g. use a very short app date period, allow apps for specific programs only, or close admission completely)
Resident FTES target for : 20,482
Revised Resident FTES Projection: 20,772
Revised Projected Variation from Target = 1.4%
11/11/2018

8. Anticipated Impact of Utilizing Aforementioned Strategies
Resident FTES target for : 20,482
Projected Resident FTES: 20,772
Revised Projected Variation from Target = 1.4%
Resident FTES Projections by Semester:
(revised for drop in unit load)
Fall ,803 Spring 2011 (assumes restricted enrollment) 19,741
Annualized Academic Year (AY) 20,772
11/11/2018

9. 2011 Through 2021
Incoming student demand will continue to outpace budgeted capacity in the foreseeable future. Over the next ten years:
The number of high school seniors will gradually start to decrease for the next few years
Pent up demand from transfer students will continue to be almost double our budgeted enrollment capacity through and then gradually start to subside
Graduating high school seniors will begin to increase again starting
As a non-impacted campus, we will be forced to continue our use of draconian-like controls to reduce enrollment.
11/11/2018

10. Impaction Proposal
Student Affairs and Academic Affairs jointly propose that the University pursue campus-level impaction starting Fall Impaction will help us:
Prioritize student success by aligning enrollment with state allocations – this alignment will allow us to better support and more effectively teach the students we enroll
Avoid the use of more drastic enrollment management tools (i.e. unit caps, spring admission closures, etc.)
Support the graduation initiative by allowing students to enroll in the number of courses they desire without being restricted by unit caps
11/11/2018

11. The Pros and Cons of Declaring Impaction
Allows the campus to better support and more effectively teach currently enrolled students
Increases ability to manage enrollment to target without using draconian methods
Allows for flexibility to grow or reduce enrollment while maintaining or increasing diversity
Requires the use of drastic, reductionist enrollment strategies
Decreases the ability to manage enrollment to target given large, qualified applicant pools
Increases—especially in the short term—administrative and faculty work
11/11/2018

12. Impaction Criteria that “Must”* Be Met
Typically, a campus will be designated as impacted campus-wide only if it demonstrates that it has exhausted existing capacity by implementing some (or all) of the following approaches:
Program impaction–utilizing/declaring program impaction for overenrolled areas
Scheduling and year round operations
Expanding distance learning and use of technology
Increasing the capacity of any off-campus centers
Establishing new off-campus centers
Using facilities imaginatively (but not at the expense of regular campus maintenance and capital outlay needs)
*Due to forced enrollment reductions, the CO has not strictly enforced these requirements for impaction proposals
11/11/2018

13. Supplemental Criteria
Requests for campus-wide impaction must include a list of the supplemental criteria that will be used to admit non-local applicants including:
Dates of the Priority Filing Period
Any Specific Pre-Admission Course Requirements
Academic Criteria that will be used to evaluate applicants (e.g. GPA, SAT/ACT Scores, etc.)
Other Supplemental Criteria (if any)
A study of Fall 2009 admits is currently underway to help establish supplemental criteria and project possible outcomes of different impaction criteria (assuming the applicant pools would be similar)
11/11/2018

14. Specific Recommendation
For the following reasons, declare by June 1, 2010 a campus-wide impaction that will be effective Fall 2011:
Enrollment demands for Sacramento State’s CY year exceeds required enrollment targets by at least 4% without allowing any new students to attend for spring 2011.
Enrollment restrictions at CSU and UC are causing significant demand to build up in community colleges.
Unit load restriction is currently the most effective reduction strategy to which we have access (as a non-impacted campus). This strategy negatively impacts certain academic program requirements and may increase time to graduation (reducing 6 and 4 year graduation rates)
Impaction provides flexibility to restrict or grow enrollment, hit target, and ensure diversity
11/11/2018

15. Steps for Declaring Impaction
To develop an Impaction Request for Fall 2011, we should accomplish each of the following by April 30, 2010:
Meet with cabinet and obtain Presidential approval to continue the process
Meet and consult with
Faculty Senate and Executive Committee
College Deans and Chairs
APC / GSPC
ASI
UEI, Self-Support Departments, etc.
Meet with and inform enrollment related committees and partners
Campus Committees
Los Rios Task Force
Community Partners
Meet and present to various campus entities
Administrative Council
Strategic Planning Council
Others
Meet with Public Affairs to begin formulating a multifaceted awareness campaign

16. Questions and Comments
Thoughts and Ideas
Questions and Comments
11/11/2018