1. South Carolina Commission on Higher Education Overview of Major Issues

2. South Carolina Commission on Higher Education Division of Planning, Assessment and Performance Funding WHAT’S NEW IN THE DIVISION?

3. MEASURING UP State Report Card South Carolina 2002 ► PreparationD+ ► ParticipationD+ ► AffordabilityD+ ► CompletionB ► BenefitsC ► LEARNING INCOMPLETE

4. GOAL 6: NATIONAL EDUCATION GOALS … “to increase the proportion of college graduates who can communicate effectively, think critically, and solve problems.” To increase learning you have to measure where you are – States govern education – therefore comparative data up to now has been difficult to obtain

5. FIVE STATES BEGIN SOUTH CAROLINA NEW MEXICO KENTUCKY ILLINOIS OKLAHOMA Working with the National Forum on College Level Learning these states are charged with creating a national model to measure student learning at the STATE level

6. MEASURES USED IN PROJECT Collect data from existing sources ► GRE scores ► Licensure scores ► National Assessment of Adult Literacy Test students on multiple measures ►National Survey of Student Engagement ►Work Keys ►Tasks in Critical Thinking ► Peterson’s On-Line Alumni Survey

7. CHARGE FOR SC INSTITUTIONS No more than 2 hours of testing time per campus: FALL 2003 Students must be near degree completion 1200-1500 students from 2-year public colleges take 2 Work Keys Tests (Oversampling possible at project price) 1200-1500 students from 4-year private and public colleges take Tasks of Critical Thinking and NSSE 1500 Alumni state-wide (4-yr colleges) to take 15 minute on-line Peterson’s Alumni Survey (Spring 2003)

8. CHARGE FOR OUR DIVISION Report required licensure scores Serve as State Liaison to institutions Work with National Forum to obtain GRE scores Serve as central data source and control Lead national conversations on what instruments can appropriately be used to measure student learning at the state level

9. WHAT DO WE GET FROM THIS? S.C. Colleges get free instruments S.C. Colleges have a chance to critique the instruments and process at its most changeable point – the pilot More years to improve before non-project states’ data is reported The ability to wrap the outcomes into the FIPSE project

10. FIPSE II PROJECT SOUTH CAROLINA OKLAHOMA CALIFORNIA CONNECTICUT ARKANSAS Defining best practices in accountability that contain college costs, measure student achievement, and re-new public trust in higher education

11. FIPSE PROGRESS TO DATE State Team – Reforming under Governor Sanford Recruitment of American Association of State Colleges and Universities as partner in project State Directors meeting for April in Oklahoma to structure state timelines, communication plans, share goal ideas Proposals to be presented for conferences Grant Pre-Proposal submitted to Lumina

12. CONFERENCES/Presentations Denver Colorado Jan. 9 -12 Measuring UP Project Directors Clear Point, Alabama Feb. 6 -9 AASCU – Annual National Academic Affairs Conf. Louisville, KY Feb12 -15 Measuring UP: State Leaders hosted by Gov. Patton Myrtle Beach SC: Feb.22 -23 SC Association of Institutional Researchers FIPSE Project Directors: Oklahoma City, April World Future Conference, San Diego CA July 18-20

13. SC WILL BECOME HIGHLY VISIBLE IN THE NATIONAL SCENE State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO) National Council of State Legislatures (NCLS) National Governors Association (NGA) American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) Education Commission of the States (ECS)

14. COMMUNICATION Division of Planning, Assessment and Performance Funding

15. Division of Academic Affairs and Licensing Update on Endowed Chairs Program New Initiatives in Teacher Education  NCATE Continuing Accreditation Visits  No Child Left Behind  Improving Teacher Quality State Grants Program

16. Division of Academic Affairs and Licensing  Centers of Excellence  Teacher Transfer Track Subcommittee  Professional Review Committee

17. South Carolina Commission on Higher Education Student Services Division

18. Palmetto Fellows Scholarship Program: Established in 1988 to retain the “best and brightest” in South Carolina. Palmetto Fellows may receive up to $6,700 per academic year towards the cost-of-attendance at a participating senior institution within the State.

19. Need-based Grants Program: Established in 1996 to provide additional financial assistance to the State’s neediest residents. South Carolina was one of the last states in the nation to implement a need-based grants program at the state level. Full-time students may receive up to $2,500 per year and part-time students may receive up to $1,250 per year towards the cost-of- attendance at participating two- and four-year institutions.

20. LIFE Scholarship Program: Established in 1998 to increase access to higher education. Recipients may receive up to $5,000 towards the cost-of-attendance at a four-year institution. LIFE Scholarship recipients may receive up to the cost-of-tuition at a two-year public or technical institution. For the two-year independent institution in the state, recipients may receive up to $3,380.

21. Lottery Tuition Assistance Program: Implemented in 2002 to provide tuition assistance for residents attending two-year public and independent institutions. For Spring 2003, full-time students may receive up to $1,044 per year and part-time students may receive up to $87 per credit hour towards the cost-of-tuition.

22. SC HOPE Scholarship Program: Established in 2001 to provide funding for first-time entering freshman attending a four-year public or independent institution who do not qualify for a LIFE or Palmetto Fellows Scholarship. Recipients may receive up to $2,650 towards the cost-of-attendance for the first year of attendance only.

23. Statistical History of the State Scholarship and Grant Programs Academic Year Palmetto Fellows Scholarship S.C. Need-based Grant (Public Institutions Only)LIFE Scholarship Lottery Tuition AssistanceSC HOPE Scholarship Students Award AmountStudentsAward AmountStudents Award AmountStudents Award AmountStudents Award Amount 1996-97623$2,832,23312,832$14,698,611 1997-981,258$5,686,57313,495$14,188,312 1998-991,719$7,864,03513,225$13,342,28114,757$27,144,855 1999-002,243$10,624,27310,659$10,221,75616,579$30,414,346 2000-012,643$12,559,86611,121$11,212,29517,269$46,438,543 2001-022,641$12,685,3868,797$9,492,30020,340$54,382,016 2002-03*2,912$18,745,9099,166$15,000,00023,186$106,128,53715,278$34,000,0001,926$5,787,600 * Estimates as of February 3, 2003.

24. 2002-03 Palmetto Fellows Scholarship All Recipients by County of Origin

25. 2002-03 Need-based Grant All Recipients by County of Origin

26. Fall 2002 Total Reported LIFE Recipients by County of Origin as of February 3, 2003

27. 2002-03 Lottery Tuition Assistance Program All Recipients by County of Origin

28. Fall 2002 Total Reported SC HOPE Recipients by County of Origin as of February 3, 2003

29. South Carolina Commission on Higher Education Finance, Facilities, and MIS

30. Tuition and Fees

39. Tuition and Fees - Challenges Relationship between Tuition and Financial Aid Possible Impact on Accessibility and Affordability

40. Capital Funding Capital Improvement Bond Funding Since 1980 $844,757,151

41. Capital Funding - Deferred Maintenance Study conducted in 1994 identified approximately $173 million in E&G deferred maintenance Study currently being updated; preliminary estimates indicate deferred maintenance has increased to more than $500 million in 9 years Since 1994, Legislature has appropriated approximately $70 million for renovations, repairs, and deferred maintenance through Capital Improvement Bond Funding

42. Capital Funding 85 Projects Requested by 33 Institutions 20 of the requested projects have received partial funding 2003-04 Comprehensive Permanent Improvement Plan (CPIP) Requests

43. Capital Funding - 2003-2004 CPIP (continued) Request included: 20 Completion of Partially Funded Projects $201,381,947 42 Renov/Repair/Def. Maint $294,747,911 3 Replacement Bldgs. $ 61,643,000 15 New Buildings $102,562,053 5 Other (Land Improve.) $ 4,044,000 Total $664,378,911

44. Capital Funding - Challenges Need for Consistent Stream of Funding Backlog of Existing Need

45. Parity Funding The Committee on Finance and Facilities adopted a position that Parity will be implemented when the General Assembly appropriates new funds, and should be a component of the allocation methodology. The Committee charged the CHE staff and the institutions to work together to develop a plan.

46. Parity Funding- Historical Recap Formula Allocations Hold Harmless Agreement Advent of Performance Funding “One Time” Adjustment Current Funding Status Overall Average (based on MRR) – 52% Lowest funded institution – 38% Highest funded institution – 67%

47. Parity Funding Current Funding Levels Total MRR$1.1 Billion State Appropriations$584 Million Overall Funding Level52%

48. Parity Funding Funding Levels by Sector Based on MRR Research Universities56% Teaching Universities53% USC Regional Campuses52% Technical Colleges45% Overall52% Lowest funded institution38% Highest funded institution67%

49. Parity Funding Funding Levels By Sector Considering Based on Actual Fee MRR Revenues Research Univ. 56%75% Teaching Univ. 53%79% USC-Regional 53%68% Tech. Coll. 45%65% Overall 52%73% Lowest Funded 38%46% Highest Funded 67%83%

50. Parity Funding Parity Issue Review Commission Charge Study Group Funding Advisory Committee CHE Staff Series of Meetings - Next Meeting this afternoon Recommendation to be made to the Finance and Facilities Committee on February 18th Recommendation to the full Commission on March 6th

51. Parity Funding - Challenges Difficulty in Reallocating Resources Lack of Increases in Funding