University of West Florida

1. University of West Florida Key Performance Indicators Board of Trustees

2. Ground Rules • Focus on important issues – What is top of mind for the campus and its leadership? • Remember the audience – These indicators will be used primarily by the board and senior management. • Impact decision making – If you knew this data, would it lead you to make different decisions?

3. Ground Rules • Understandable – Each Key Performance Indicator should be quickly intuitive. • Come from available data – To the greatest extent possible, KPIs should be pulled from existing data and analysis sources. • Must have trend, benchmark, and target – Accountability requires that the institutional data be compared to the peer group and that the institution establish targets for each indicator. • Few in number – In selecting KPIs, less is more.

4. Peer Institutions • Indiana State University • East Tennessee State University • Rowan University • Stephen F Austin State University • University of Arkansas at Little Rock • University of Massachusetts-Lowell • University of South Dakota • University of West Georgia • Valdosta State University • Western Carolina University

5. Aspirant Institutions • Appalachian State University • Georgia Southern University • Indiana University of Pennsylvania • James Madison University • Montclair State University • Saint Cloud State University

6. UWF Organization – Scorecard Approach • Quality • Effectiveness and Efficiency • People • Resources

7. Parameters • UWF - 5 Year Trend Data • Majority of Benchmarks • Enrollment, People and Retention Data – Fall 2010 • Financial and Graduation Data – Fiscal Year 2009-2010 • Targets • 1 year – Fiscal Year 2012-2013 • 5 year – Fiscal Year 2015-2016 • Additional drill downs on each indicator will ultimately be available

8. Total Headcount and Full Time Equivalent (FTE) UWF is growing, but still smaller than the comparison groups

9. SAT and ACT Scores The quality of our students continues to increase, and approaches or exceeds the comparison groups

10. Average High School GPA Student success in high school is stable, but not as strong as the aspirant group

11. Applications Received More students are interested in attending UWF

12. Undergraduate Acceptance and Yield Rates Selectivity is increasing, but a declining percentage choose to come (though enrollment is increasing)

13. Undergraduate Retention Rates Retention rates exceed peer group levels, but need to improve

14. Undergraduate Graduation Rates Graduation rates need to improve

15. Degrees Awarded: Total and STEM Degree production is strong

16. Student Engagement Student engagement is stable or improving, but often falls below comparison groups

17. Median Starting Salary The median starting salary of UWF graduates is increasing but lags behind the comparison groups.

18. Faculty, Staff and Student Diversity Diversity is stable or increasing

19. Affordability A UWF education remains affordable

20. Ratio of FTE Students to FTE Faculty Instruction is being delivered more efficiently

21. Average Undergraduate Class Size As the University has grown, so have class sizes

22. Faculty and Staff Turnover Turnover of faculty and staff is stable or declining

23. Revenue by Source State funding is being replaced by other revenue sources

24. Revenue per Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Comparison groups have more resources to work with

25. Total Cost per Full Time Equivalent (FTE) UWF is more cost effective than the comparison groups

26. Total Giving 5 Year Cumulative arget = $21M * Total giving without gifts to the Maritime Museum Project ** FY2011 unaudited total; Peer & Aspirant not yet reported The economy has negatively impacted giving to the Institution

27. Faculty Salaries Faculty salaries are improving, but lag behind the comparison groups

28. Research Research activity continues to grow