Coordinating Board for Higher Education Meeting Minutes 06-05
COORDINATING BOARD FOR HIGHER EDUCATION
Minutes of Meeting
June 9, 2005
The Coordinating Board for Higher Education met at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 9, 2005 at Missouri Western State College in St. Joseph:
Members present were:
Lowell C. Kruse, Chair
Diana Bourisaw
Duane E. Schreimann
Kathryn Swan
Earl Wilson, Jr.
Presidents or their representatives attending the meeting were:
Bobby Patton, Central Missouri State University
Henry Givens, Jr., Harris-Stowe State College
Joe Simmons for Carolyn Mahoney, Lincoln University
Julio León, Missouri Southern State University-Joplin
James Scanlon, Missouri Western State College
Kichoon Yang for Dean Hubbard, Northwest Missouri State University
Kenneth Dobbins, Southeast Missouri State University
John Strong for John Keiser, Southwest Missouri State University
Barbara Dixon, Truman State University
Elson Floyd, University of Missouri System
Brady Deaton, University of Missouri-Columbia
Stephen Lehmkuhle, University of Missouri-Kansas City
Y.T. Shah, University of Missouri-Rolla
Glenn Cope for Tom George, University of Missouri-St. Louis
Steven Gates, Crowder College
Jackie Snyder, Metropolitan Community Colleges
Gil Kennon for Terry Barnes, Mineral Area College
Evelyn Jorgenson, Moberly Area Community College
Norman Myers, Ozarks Technical Community College
Henry Shannon, St. Louis Community College
Donald Claycomb, Linn State Technical College
CBHE Chair Kruse called the Coordinating Board for Higher Education (CBHE) meeting to order. A list of others attending the meeting is included as Attachment A.
The presence of a quorum was established with a roll call vote.
Mr. Earl Wilson, Jr. moved that
the minutes from the April 14, 2005 CBHE meeting be approved as printed. Dr. Diana Bourisaw seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously.
Report of the CBHE Nominating Committee and Election of Officers
Mr. Wilson, member of the CBHE Nominating Committee, along with Ms. Marie Carmichael, proposed and moved for the adoption of the following slate of officers to serve in said capacity beginning July 1 for a term of one year:
Lowell C. Kruse, Chair
Diana M. Bourisaw, Vice Chair
Kathryn F. Swan, Secretary
Mr. Duane Schreimann seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Establishment of Student Loan/Financial Aid Committee
CBHE Chair Kruse noted that during the April 14 CBHE meeting, the board voted to establish two standing committees, an executive committee and an audit committee. Since April, a suggestion has been made to establish a third committee that would focus on financial aid and student loan related issues. The audit committee and the proposed student loan/financial aid committee will be composed of three CBHE members, with the executive committee composed of the three CBHE officers, as well as the chairs of the Audit Committee and Student Loan/Financial Aid Committee.
Commissioner Fitch said that as a result of the discussion regarding fiduciary responsibilities at the April board meeting, Jim Matchefts, General Counsel and Assistant Commissioner, developed a memorandum (which was distributed to all board members) defining fiduciary and highlighting board members' fiduciary duties as established in Missouri revised statutes and through the agency's agreement with the U.S. Department of Education to operate as the state's designated guaranty agency. Should the board choose to establish this third committee, committee members would become quite familiar with the operation of the loan program and the state grant program, while working to ensure the programs continue to operate in such a manner that allows the department to serve as many students as possible. Committee members will be the direct voice of the full board in matters relating to student loans and grants and scholarships.
Dr. Bourisaw moved that the CBHE create a Financial Aid/Student Loan Committee as a standing committee of the board. Ms. Swan seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Recognition of Departing Presidents and Chancellors and Former CBHE Members
CBHE Chair Kruse recognized Wayne Giles, Metropolitan Community Colleges; Karen Herzog, East Central College; John Keiser, Southwest Missouri State University; and Bobby Patton, Central Missouri State University for their service and dedication to their institutions and the state system of higher education during their tenures as leaders of their respective institutions. Their hard work and perseverance has benefited the students, institutions, and communities they have served. CBHE Chair Kruse and those attending the meeting offered their hearty congratulations and best wishes to the departing presidents.
CBHE Chair Kruse also recognized Dudley Grove, Sandra Kauffman, and Mary Joan Wood for their service on the Coordinating Board for Higher Education. Their stewardship and thoughtful leadership helped shape the current state system of higher education. CBHE Chair Kruse and those attending the meeting offered their appreciation for the departing members of the CBHE.
Focused PreK-20 Agenda
The Coordinating Board and the State Board of Education (SBE) will meet jointly on Thursday, June 23 in Jefferson City. The two boards meet periodically to discuss common concerns, initiatives, and goals. The agenda for the June 23 meeting is composed of two key items: high school reform efforts and the role of the CBHE in the teacher education re-approval process.
The Missouri High School Task Force report was presented to the SBE on April 22, 2005. Three major policy recommendations contained in the report include:
- Increase high school graduation requirements from 22 units to 24 units by reducing the number of electives and increasing the number of core courses required for graduation.
- Implement a non-high stakes graduation assessment to high school juniors.
- Implement a two-tiered diploma program.
Concern was expressed that the higher education community has had limited opportunities to provide feedback regarding the recommendations of the High School Task Force. The joint meeting will be an opportunity for the CBHE to formally comment on the recommendations made by the Task Force and discuss the implications the recommendations will have on the state system of higher education. The Coordinating Board encouraged presidents and chancellors to contact Commissioner Fitch prior to the June 23 joint meeting to share any concerns they may have regarding the recommendations of the High School Task Force. The comments and concerns will be shared with the SBE during the meeting.
State-approved teacher education programs are required to undergo review by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) every seven years. The Missouri Standards for Teacher Education Programs (MoSTEP), established by DESE, are used as a basis for the re-approval review. In the past, the CBHE/MDHE has had limited representation on MoSTEP review teams. The MDHE and DESE staffs have identified several changes in the MoSTEP cyclical review process that will support a more engaged role for CBHE/MDHE in the re-approval of teacher education programs.
In advance of the June 9 CBHE meeting, the MDHE provided an opportunity for presidents and chancellors to submit their comments regarding the proposed changes to the teacher education re-approval process. One concern that was raised related to the complexity of the current process and possible additional hurdles institutions may encounter with the proposed changes. Commissioner Fitch assured the board and the presidents and chancellors that these changes will not add layers to the re-approval process for the institutions, rather the changes will allow for CBHE/MDHE to have a more active voice during the re-approval process. Nor will these proposed changes affect the NCATE process which the institutions also undergo.
Future of Higher Education: Governance, Accountability, Financial Aid, and Economic Impact
Presidential Advisory Committee (PAC) Chair Jim Scanlon opened the discussion on the future of higher education. Given the work currently underway with the State Government Review Commission, as well as other formal and informal conversations, the topic of higher education reform is coming to the forefront in Missouri. The intent with this agenda item is to begin an ongoing discussion between CBHE, PAC, MDHE staff, on issues that clearly affect the future of higher education in Missouri. One of the most immediate concerns relates to governance and is a concern we all share. PAC Chair Scanlon asked CBHE Chair Kruse to discuss a meeting the CBHE had with Governor Matt Blunt, as well as a meeting at the board's work session on Wednesday, June 8 with Senator Charlie Shields.
CBHE Chair Kruse reported that the Coordinating Board had the opportunity to meet with Governor Blunt on May 19. Discussion during the meeting focused on the funding and staffing reductions sustained by the MDHE over the last several years, the obligations the department has to the citizens of the state, and the challenges in meeting those obligations with reduced resources. The Governor expressed his concern about the future of Missouri. He is eager for the recommendations of the State Government Review Commission. The Commission's recommendations will provide the basis for restructuring and shaping the structure of state government.
CBHE Chair Kruse also provided a summary of the board's meeting with Senator Shields. Senator Shields briefed the CBHE on the work of the 14 member joint education committee, which he co-chairs with Representative Brian Baker. Much of the committee's recent work has focused on revisions to the school foundation formula. As Senator Shields and the committee look ahead, several issues have emerged:
- Integrating early childhood education with K-12 education
- Funding early childhood education more adequately
- Securing additional resources
- Increasing awareness of the importance of early childhood education and the positive impact early childhood education has on children
- Aligning K-12 and higher education by increasing collaborative efforts, removing silos, and increasing resource sharing
- Addressing governance issues
- Explore feasibility/advantages of combining boards
- Explore strengthening the authority of the CBHE
- Explore ways to increase communication between the boards
Senator Shields believes that the joint education committee will complement the work of the Missouri State Government Review Commission (MSGRC). The Review Commission is looking broadly at state government and will make recommendations aimed at increasing efficiency, strengthening communication, and eliminating barriers within state government. The joint education committee will focus its attention on education issues and improving the state's education system for all Missourians.
The joint education committee will begin its work in the fall, likely beginning with a meeting that will include staff from the Missouri Department of Higher Education, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Senator Shields, Representative Baker, along with members of their staff.
As the joint committee moves forward, they will look to CBHE/MDHE as a resource for research and data to will help inform the committee's work.
CBHE Chair Kruse reiterated the importance of the work of the Missouri State Government Review Commission and the joint committee on education. The CBHE and the state system of higher education must work collaboratively as this reform movement evolves. Change is in the air, we are being given an opportunity to participate in the process. It is imperative that we embrace this opportunity, keeping in mind the best interests of the state, students, and families. CBHE Chair Kruse asked other board members who participated in these meetings to provide their perspectives to the presidents and chancellors.
Ms. Swan said that during the meeting with the Governor, he and the board shared some common frustrations including the increase in the need for remedial course work at the collegiate level, the numerous task forces and reports that have been commissioned with little implementation of numerous recommendations, and an overarching concern that the CBHE lacks the statutory authority necessary to implement the recommendations, as well as affect change in areas such as remedial coursework. The Governor and the board discussed the crucial partnership that must continue to evolve between higher education and the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education and the Department of Economic Development. During the meeting the board members established with the Governor and his staff, that the CBHE, the MDHE, and the state system of higher education are extremely willing to work with his office and staff to provide the information needed, take direction from the Governor's office, and assist in any way in making this a better state for higher education and the economy as a whole. As a follow-up to the meeting the MDHE provided the Governor's office with copies of the Business Education Roundtable report, as well as the report of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education.
PAC Chair Scanlon asked Carla Chance, president of the MCCA Presidents/Chancellors Council and Barbara Dixon, President of the Council on Public Higher Education to provide an overview of the testimony they recently provided during one of the ongoing public hearings of the State Government Review Commission.
Ms. Chance expressed that in speaking to a committee focused on structure, MCCA attempted to set a tone with the committee that any structural decisions about higher education, and state government in general, should be based on resolving core issues and enhancing outcomes. It is common to focus on change for change sake. As Missouri examine ways in which to bring higher education to the forefront, how to enhance affordability, how to improve participation for citizens, structural decisions need to be made in the context of those three considerations.
MCCA testimony focused on the role of MDHE, DESE, and DED. From the perspective of the community colleges' there are not structural barriers to the three departments working collaboratively and effectively together. There is nothing structurally in state government keeping these entities from developing common agendas, or creating a better environment for higher education. MCCA expressed support to the Commission for the Coordinating Board and support for the Commissioner of Higher Education and believes that in a coordinating role there is an opportunity for the CBHE to be very powerful and guide higher education in the state to establish and enforce policy and to enhance the outcomes on the Missouri report card. Issues about policies that guide higher education in Missouri need to be taking place among the CBHE and the presidents and chancellors rather than in the General Assembly. MCCA's frustration is that too many issues affecting the long-term future of higher education arise in special interest legislation and preclude the opportunity for local governing boards and the CBHE to provide appropriate input.
Dr. Dixon commented that the testimony she provided to the Commission focused on the key issue of student outcomes. No evidence exists that changing the system's higher education structure will give the state additional ability to better educate students. A substantial portion of Dr. Dixon's testimony on behalf of COPHE focused on positive things that have happened under the current structure of the CBHE such as mission differentiation. COPHE is in favor of keeping the current structure with a strong coordinating board. In the testimony, Dr. Dixon communicated the following key characteristics that convey the ideal approach to governance: recognize the regional and mission differences among institutions, provide clear expectations for each institution, measure progress toward results (none of the institutions are afraid of performance indicators and being held accountable), adequately fund and support the institutions using the appropriate performance incentives. COPHE also believes changing the structure would entail many hidden costs both at an administrative level and to the institutions.
Dr. Elson Floyd commended those who have had an opportunity to testify before the Missouri State Government Review Commission. Commissioner Fitch did a good job educating the Commission relative to the work of the CBHE and the work of the higher education institutions. One of the fundamental issues that should be addressed is what is truly broken. Higher education needs to continue to educate the members of the Missouri State Government Review Commission as well as members of the General Assembly regarding the many collaborative, ongoing initiatives and activities between higher education and K-12, as well as the existing, and growing, network of communication between K-12 and higher education.
PAC Chair Scanlon noted that not only is it important to address the issues that may lead some to conclude that higher education is broken, it is crucial to articulate what is right with higher education in Missouri. Higher education leaders need to engage public policy makers in order to proactively demonstrate the valuable return on investment that higher education provides to Missouri.
Several members expressed that in many instances concerns raised about higher education falling short or not meeting the needs of business and industry is communicated in the form of anecdotal information, rather than empirical data.
Discussion resulted in an agreement to form a leadership committee made up of representatives from the CBHE, COPHE, and MCCA that will work to develop a message aimed at educating legislators and members of the Missouri State Government Review Commission about the economic and social benefits of higher education. While certainly there are improvement opportunities in higher education, the group agreed that the system needs to collectively communicate higher education's successes. PAC Chair Jim Scanlon agreed to help coordinate the committee with Commissioner Fitch.
Consent Calendar
Items placed on the consent calendar are recurring issues or are a routine part of the CBHE's and the MDHE's operation. Any or all items may be withdrawn from the consent calendar by any member of the board, if further discussion is necessary.
Mr. Wilson moved that items found behind Tabs B, C, and D on the consent calendar be approved as printed. Ms. Swan seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Distribution of Community College Funds
The distribution formula has been revised for the last six months of the FY 2005 fiscal year pursuant to the recommendations of the MCCA, the CBHE, and the Senate Appropriations Committee. The revised distributions are reflected in the amounts printed behind Tab E of the board book. This same methodology will be followed as the funds are distributed in FY 2006, beginning on July 1.
Update on State Aid Program Task Force
The first meeting of the task force was held on Thursday, May 26, 2005. The Task Force has set a very aggressive schedule and will be meeting throughout the summer in order to provide a set of recommendations for the board's consideration at the October CBHE meeting.
Dr. Bourisaw made a motion to adopt the reports as presented from Tabs D and E on the consent calendar. Mr. Schreimann seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
Annual Report of the MDHE Proprietary School Program
Mr. Leroy Wade, Director, Proprietary School Certification Program introduced Ms. Karen Finkenkeller who is president of ITT Technical Institute in Earth City and Chair of the CBHE Proprietary School Advisory Committee (PSAC) and Ms. Michelle Holland, regional president for National American University and member of the PSAC. The PSAC provides a tremendous amount of support and guidance to the MDHE proprietary school certification staff. Mr. Wade's presentation is included with these minutes as Attachment B.
Mr. Wade offered background information on the proprietary school certification program, the statutory framework that created the proprietary school certification program and the administrative regulations that set forth the certification process. Missouri was one of the last states that passed legislation to provide regulation, oversight and consumer protection in the arena of proprietary school operation. One of the primary functions of the proprietary school certification program is to oversee the establishment of most new non-public postsecondary education institutions.
Over the past year, the proprietary school certification program has issued 190 certificates of approval to a wide range of postsecondary institutions. Accreditation is not a prerequisite for a license to operate a proprietary school in Missouri. Often receiving a license to operate is the first step toward accreditation. Of the proprietary institutions certified to operate, 53 percent are accredited, with 65-70 percent of enrolled students attending institutions which are accredited.
On an annual basis, the proprietary school certification program receives an average of 35 applications to establish new schools. Proprietary schools have a strong and increasing economic impact on the state's economy. While additional data is needed to confirm estimates, proprietary institutions expended approximately $270 million into the state's economy in 2004, an increase of 35 percent since 2002. Students attending proprietary institutions receive $232 million in student financial assistance, most of which is federal student aid.
Proprietary institutions graduate approximately 22,000 students annually. Statewide employment rates for these graduates exceed 70 percent.
Ms. Karen Finkenkeller provided demographic information on the types of students attending and graduating from proprietary schools. Mr. Wade noted that enrollment trends continue to reveal increasing numbers of students attending proprietary institutions. Since 2000, when enrollment at proprietary institutions was approximately 57,000 students, enrollment in 2003 reached approximately 63,000 students. This continued enrollment growth demonstrates that proprietary institutions fill a need within the educational framework of the state system of higher education.
The board offered its appreciation for the important work performed by the proprietary school advisory committee and staff.
FY 2005/2006 Budget Update
Mr. Joe Martin provided an overview of the FY 2006 higher education budget. The MDHE has been notified by the state budget office that $100 million in previously deferred FY 2005 state aid payments to six of the public four-year institutions should be released to the affected institutions no later than June 27.
The FY 2006 budget passed by the General Assembly has been sent to the Governor. While the Governor has signed several budget bills, he has yet to sign the higher education budget. It is not known whether there will be any vetoes to any of the higher education appropriations.
Significant reductions in both general revenue appropriations and FTE authority will take effect in FY 2006 within the Coordination Administration budget. The impact of the reductions will be a general revenue appropriations reduction of 43 percent and a 47 percent reduction in FTE authority. Compared to FY 2001 when the department received an appropriation of $2 million and had approximately 35 FTE, in FY 2006, the department will have an appropriation of $695,000 and approximately 11 FTE, an approximately 67 percent reduction over the last five years. The MDHE has taken steps in the last several weeks, through the leadership of Commissioner Fitch, to realign and reposition itself in the wake of these fiscal and staff reductions in order to continue to meet the needs of the constituents and customers that the department serves. The department will begin July with a different and more streamlined organization, while continuing to provide the statutory and mandatory services the department is obligated to provide to the institutions and citizens of the state.
Funding for the public higher education institutions in FY 2006 will remain close to the FY 2005 appropriations level. The community colleges will receive approximately $131 million, with one time funding of approximately $1.2 million appropriated in FY 2005 rolled into the institutions' core budgets in FY 2006. Linn State Technical College will maintain the same level of funding in FY 2006 as in FY 2005. The four-year institutions gained nearly $2 million, with additional one time funding appropriated to the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Dentistry and Lincoln University.
In addition to department administrative reductions, there are additional reductions within University of Missouri-related programs. While not a direct appropriation to the institutions, these reductions will impact the institutions. Specifically, funding for the MOBIUS program has been eliminated. MOREnet, the internet backbone used by higher education institutions, K-12 schools, public libraries, state government, and several other public entities sustained an approximately $4 million reduction. In addition to state appropriations, both MOREnet and MOBIUS utilize user fees as a source of revenue. It is expected that membership fees to participate in both of these organizations will increase. Taken collectively, although institutions were held at the FY 2005 level, funding for higher education overall has seen a reduction of approximately $2 million.
Using FY 2002 appropriation levels as a bell weather, or high water mark, institutions remain $115 million below FY 2002 level (not adjusted for inflation).
Funding for the state's major financial aid programs (Bright Flight Program, Charles Gallagher Scholarship Program, and the Missouri College Guarantee Program) remain at the FY 2005 level, however, at current funding levels these programs only serve approximately 25 percent of the students qualifying for scholarships.
Final Summary of Legislation, 93RD General Assembly, 1st Regular Session
Mr. Martin provided a summary of bills introduced during the legislative session relating to higher education. Following the close of the legislative session, MDHE staff analyzed its legislative effectiveness relating to higher education legislation. Of the 69 total bills that included language relating to higher education, 12 bills were Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed. The MDHE was involved in some manner on 68 percent (47 bills) of higher education related legislation. Of language changes proposed by the MDHE, the department was 100 percent effective in achieving the revisions. MDHE staff completed 178 fiscal notes as of May 20, 2005, 98 percent of which were returned by the deadline imposed by the division of legislative oversight.
In accordance with the board's intent, the staff has become more active in the legislature during the past session. With Commissioner Fitch's personal involvement, the department has been able to forge good relationships with several key legislators. The credibility of the department and the board as an objective third party, able to provide legislators with data and information relating to the entire system of higher education is on the rise.
Report of the Commissioner
Commissioner Fitch provided a brief report of activities, issues, and ongoing projects within the department and within the system of higher education.
With respect to the ongoing issues between Three Rivers Community College (TRCC) and Southeast Missouri State University (SEMO), TRCC has responded that the MDHE proposal, already adopted by SEMO, is not acceptable. Commissioner Fitch thanked SEMO President Ken Dobbins and the SEMO Board of Regents for remaining engaged and willing to discuss possible solutions to these ongoing challenges. Commissioner Fitch has also requested from TRCC specific information relating to contracts, leases, bids, support for student services, etc., relating to higher education centers that TRCC is planning to open at various locations in southeast Missouri. To date, Commissioner Fitch has not received a response from TRCC relating to this request for information.
Commissioner Fitch mentioned a letter of engagement received on June 7 from the State Auditor's Office (SAO). The SAO intends to reopen an audit released in May 2003 on higher education tuition levels.
CBHE Chair Kruse thanked President Jim Scanlon and the staff at Missouri Western State College for their hospitality and tremendous efforts in hosting the CBHE and the presidents and chancellors during the last two days.
There being no further business to come before the board, Dr. Bourisaw made a motion for adjournment, Mr. Wilson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. The Coordinating Board for Higher Education meeting adjourned at 11:55 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Brenda Miner
Executive Assistant to the Commissioner
Roster of Attendees
Coordinating Board for Higher Education
June 9, 2005
Name -- Affiliation
J. David Arnold -- Missouri Western State College
Constance Bowman - Harris-Stowe State College
Carla Chance -- St. Louis Community College
Scott Charton (?) -- University of Missouri
Jeanie Crain -- Missouri Western State College
Mary Larson Diaz -- University of Missouri-Kansas City
Don Doucette -- Metropolitan Community Colleges
Karen Finkenkeller, Missouri Association of Private Career
Colleges and Schools, -- ITT Technical Institute
Gregory G. Fitch -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
John Ganid -- St. Louis Community College
Charles T. Gooden -- Harris-Stowe State College
Michelle Holland -- National American University
Craig Klimezak -- St. Louis Community College
Brian Long -- Council on Public Higher Education
Joe Martin -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Jim Matchefts -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Michael McManis -- Truman State University
Brenda Miner -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Tu Men -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Jimmy Myers -- St. Joseph News-Press
Joe Moore-- University of Missouri
Marty Oetting -- University of Missouri
Ron Olinger -- Missouri Western State College
Ann Pearce -- Central Missouri State University
Marcia Pfeiffer -- St. Louis Community College-Florissant Valley
David R. Russell -- University of Missouri
Y.T. Shah -- University of Missouri-Rolla
Victoria "Y" Wacek -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Leroy Wade -- Missouri Department of Higher Education
Beth Wheeler -- Missouri Western State College
Attachment B
Proprietary School Certification
Annual Report to the Coordinating Board for Higher Education
June 9, 2005
Overview
- Introduction and Background
- Institutions
- Students
- Program Functions
- Strategies and Challenges
Background
- Statutory Mandate
- Effective 1985/Revised 1991
- Administrative Regulations
- Implement Statutory Framework
- Provide Flexibility to Meet Changing Needs
- Proprietary School Advisory Committee
- Annual report to the CBHE
- Guidance/Advisement in Program Operation
Institutions
- 190 Certificates of Approval Issued
- Main and Branch Campuses
- Offer Instruction and Recruit Students
- Accreditation
- 53% of All Certified Schools
- 32% of Missouri-based Schools
- 35 Applications to Establish New Schools
- 18190 Certificates of Approval Issued
- Main and Branch Campuses
- Offer Instruction and Recruit Students
- Accreditation
- 53% of All Certified Schools
- 32% of Missouri-based Schools
- Certification to Operate
- 17 Exemption
- 2,032 Instructional Programs
- 43% Degree Level Programs
- 820 Program Changes and Additions
Economic Impact
- Financial
- $270 Million in expenditures
- Increase of 35 percent since 2002
- Payroll of $116 Million
- $232 Million in student financial assistance
- Workforce
- Approximately 22,000 graduates annually
- Employment rate in excess 70%
Enrollment Trends by School Type
Demographic Data for 2003
- Preparation
- 77% High School Graduate
- 15% GED
- 53% Previous Postsecondary Ed
- 44% Degree Seeking
- 53% Female
- Age
- 31% over the age of 34
- 48% between 22 and 34
- Ethnicity
- 23% African-American
- 29% All Minority Groups
Completions by Level
Functions
- Oversee Establishment of Most New Non-public Postsecondary Education Institutions
- Annually Renew Certificates of Approval
- Monitor School Operations and Closures
- Consumer Protection
Authorization to Operate
- Standards based review of each institution
- Focus on primary institutional functions
- Goal of institutional improvement
- Range of institutions from short-term skill training through graduate level
- Issues- Maintaining responsiveness
- Enforcement resources/options
- Unapproved/Substandard schools
- Exemption
- Eleven Categories
- Primary Areas are Religious and Avocational
- Issues
- Documentation requirements
- Large number of schools with no oversight
- Substandard institutions
- Monitoring/Enforcement of criteri
Challenges
- Staffing/Resources
- Program activity requirements
- Maintaining service
- Increasing Complexity
- Transfer of Credit
- Competition/Cooperation
- Nontraditional Institutions
- Budget Implications
- On-site Visits
- Support/Professional Services
Strategies
- Program Improvement
- Track findings from annual recertification
- Customer satisfaction survey;
- Customer Service
- Refine Internet site information
- Continue development/deployment of e-resources
- Program Operation
- Focus on statutory requirements
- Reorganize/restructure program
