1 / 20

Tennessee Higher Education Commission

Tennessee Higher Education Commission. Higher Education Outcomes Based Formula 2010. Higher Education Revenues. Tennessee Higher Education Commission. Tennessee Higher Education Commission. Higher Education Revenues. Tennessee Higher Education Commission. Existing Funding Formula.

tatyana-ruiz
Download Presentation

Tennessee Higher Education Commission

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

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

  2. Higher Education Revenues Tennessee Higher Education Commission

  3. Tennessee Higher Education Commission Higher Education Revenues

  4. Tennessee Higher Education Commission Existing Funding Formula • Linked to 2005-10 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. Existing Funding Formula Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. Interpreting the Existing Funding Formula Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. Complete College ActOutcomes-Based Model Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. Formula Design Concepts Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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 institution’s mission by utilizing Carnegie Classifications and mission statements.

  10. Formula Design Concepts Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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 institution’s mission

  11. Formula Design Concept Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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 institution’s mission.

  12. University Formula Design Concept Tennessee Higher Education Commission 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. University Formula Design Concept Tennessee Higher Education Commission • Weights will vary depending on institutional mission. • For example: • A Master’s 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. Outcomes Based Model Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. Outcomes Based Model Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. Outcomes Based Model Advantages Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. From the Perspective of State Government…. Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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. From the Perspective of State Government…. Tennessee Higher Education Commission • 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 – Comptroller’s staff • Tre Hargett – Secretary of State • Jack Murrah – THEC Chairman • Cathy Pierce – F&A • Paul Robertson – Treasurer’s 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

More Related