Coordinating Board for Higher Education Meeting Minutes 04-01

April 12, 2001

The Coordinating Board for Higher Education met at 1:30 p.m. on Thursday, April 12, 2001 in the Administration Center at Logan University. Members present were:

Marie Carmichael, Vice Chair
John Bass, Secretary
Dudley R. Grove
Ray Henry
Sandra Kauffman
Jim Summers, Jr.
Mary Joan Wood

Mary Findley was absent from the meeting.

Also attending were:

Kala M. Stroup, Commissioner of Higher Education
John Wittstruck, Deputy Commissioner
Robert Stein, Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs and Planning
Terry Barnes, Asst. Commissioner for Community Colleges & Technical Education
Lynn Hearnes, Assistant Commissioner for MOSTARS
Dan Peterson, Deputy Director for Student Assistance and Services
Becky Carron, Interim Analyst for Fiscal and Legislative Affairs
Amy Haller, Administrative Assistant for MOSTARS' Deputy Director
Jim Matchefts, General Counsel
Brenda Miner, Administrative Assistant for the Deputy Commissioner
Blake Naughton, Research Associate for Proprietary School Certification
Kathy Quick, Administrative Asst. for Student Assistance and Services
Richard Presberry, MOSTARS Senior Associate (Early Awareness & Outreach)
Cheryl Schroeder, Public Information Officer
Leroy Wade, Director for Proprietary School Certification
Erin Williams, Administrative Intern

There being a quorum present, Vice Chair Carmichael called the meeting to order. A list of guests attending the meeting is attached. (Attachment A)

Opening Comments

Vice Chair Carmichael thanked Dr. George Goodman, President of Logan University, for his hospitality in hosting the CBHE meetings. Mrs. Carmichael called the board's attention to a proclamation honoring Mr. Lynn Ewing, Jr. who passed away in February. The proclamation cited Mr. Ewing's exceptional dedication and statesmanship in the execution of his office as chairman of the Coordinating Board for Higher Education and his commitment to excellence in Missouri's system of higher education. (Attachment B)

Minutes of the February 8, 2001 CBHE MeetingDr. Henry moved that the minutes be approved as submitted. Mr. Bass seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Report of the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee

In the absence of Dr. Manuel Pacheco, Dr. Henry Shannon conducted the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee meeting. The advisory committee met earlier in the day and considered the following items:

• 2001 Report on Progress Toward the Statewide Public Policy Initiatives and Goals for Missouri Higher Education
• Status of Mission Review
• Second Draft of The Coordinated Plan for Missouri Higher Education

The following discussion is from the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee meeting and relates to specific board items.

2001 Report on Progress Toward the Statewide Public Policy Initiatives and Goals for Missouri Higher Education

Dr. Wittstruck summarized the 2001 Report on Progress Toward the Statewide Public Policy Initiatives and Goals for Missouri Higher Education. The 2001 report describes the progress the state's system of higher education has made in implementing the board's Blueprint for Missouri Higher Education and provides a baseline of information for transitioning the state conversation from the Blueprint to the new THE COORDINATE PLAN FOR MISSOURI HIGHER EDUCATION. The report is being presented in the context of Measuring Up 2000: The State-by-State Report Card for Higher Education that was released in December 2000 by The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Missouri will compare itself to other states in terms of the improvements needed in the areas of preparation, participation, and accessibility.

The report indicates that while access to higher education for African-Americans and other minorities continues to be a high priority of the Coordinating Board and the state, the need to ensure access to higher education from Missouri's low-income families is also becoming increasingly important, as emphasized by the Missouri Commission on the Affordability of Higher Education.

Some of the findings of the report include the following.

According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau's Current Population Survey, 67.9 percent of Missourians aged 18 to 21 had at least a high school diploma or GED, compared to 69.9 percent nationwide.

In 2000, Missouri was above the national average, 60.3 percent compared to 55 percent, in terms of persons aged 21-64 who have some college experience. Missourians were slightly above the national average, 35.2 percent compared to 35 percent, in persons having completed at least 14 years of education.

The number of undergraduate students enrolled in degree-credit courses in the state's public and independent institutions has increased by 6,071 since 1992. The number of degrees conferred by Missouri's institutions increased by 14 percent from FY 1992 to FY 2000.

The number of students meeting the board's 16-unit high school core curriculum as a standard for admission to public four-year institutions has increased from 46 percent in fall 1992 to 92 percent in fall 2000. One institution has achieved the board's targeted goal of 100 percent.

Between the fall of 1993 and the fall of 2000, the state's public and independent colleges and universities increased the proportion of full-time minority faculty from 9.3 percent to 11.6 percent and increased the proportion of minority administrative staff from 9.3 percent to 11.8 percent. When considering only African-Americans, however, the percentages are much lower. During the same period, African-American faculty increased only slightly, from 3.0 percent to 3.4 percent, while African-American administrative staff decreased from 7.1 percent to 6.4 percent.

The overall six-year graduation rate for the state's public four-year institutions is 52 percent. The University of Missouri-Columbia has met the 65 percent graduation rate goal for institutions with selective admissions, and Truman State University, with a graduation rate of 71 percent is approaching the goal of 75 percent for highly selective admissions institutions.

Missouri's system of higher education also has worked to improve its efficiency and quality through mission differentiation and the use of technology. Technology-related initiatives to advance access to and quality in the state's system of higher education include the Missouri Research and Education Network (MOREnet), the Missouri Bibliographic Information Use System (MOBIUS) and the Missouri Learner's Network.

The data and other information presented in the 2001 Progress Report demonstrate that much has been accomplished, and substantial progress has been made in improving the state's system of higher education under the Blueprint for Missouri Higher Education. However, there are new challenges ahead. Some of these challenges include the following:

• Students entering the state's public four-year colleges and universities as first-time, full-time, degree-seeking freshmen are better prepared and access to the state's system of higher education has improved for African-American and other minority groups. More effort is required to ensure that all Missouri high school students are prepared to succeed in work or further education after high school.
• Financial access to higher education has increased. There is evidence to suggest, however, that many low-income students still find higher education is not affordable.
• The quality of higher education has improved over time and institutions are closer to meeting their respective mission-related goals. There is emerging evidence however, that the commitment made to quality and institutional mission-related goals demands constant vigilance and review to ensure that the quality of the state's system of higher education continues to improve rather than regress. Sustaining and improving the system of differentiated missions and focus on quality are important elements to continue and reinforce by policy.

The report generated discussion over the drop in the educational attainment level of persons aged 21-62 between 1995 and 1997, increased student financial aid, and the low percentage of full-time African American faculty.

Status of Mission Review

Dr. Wittstruck stated that this item described the status of the board's statutory responsibility to conduct five-year mission reviews for the state's public colleges and universities. A summary was provided which identified what reviews have been completed, those that are continuing, and those being initiated during calendar year 2001. On April 15, 1999, the board identified seven items that were essential for the second cycle of five-year mission reviews. They are:

1. A needs assessment of institutional actions and initiatives necessary to meet their agreed-upon mission as part of their strategic planning process;
2. An assessment of the degree to which original goals and results were accomplished;
3. An assessment of the institution's agreed-upon mission statement;
4. An evaluation and assessment of the institution's strategic plan;
5. An evaluation of the institution's statistical profile;
Financial analysis of the institution's fiscal condition and adequacy of its funding level; and
6. An assessment of the condition of the institution's physical plant.

The second cycle of mission review began for the first group of institutions in calendar year 2000. Southwest Missouri State University, Linn State Technical College, and the public two-year colleges completed their respective five-year mission review process and were recommended for additional mission-related funding on December 7, 2000 as part of the board's FY 2002 budget request.

Missouri Southern State College and Missouri Western State College are still undergoing their second five-year mission review. A strategic plan for the institution has not been received from Missouri Southern. A strategic plan and a physical plant master plan have yet to be received from Missouri Western. As a result of the presidential transition, Missouri Western is determining whether these documents are ready for submission to the CBHE or if additional time is needed by the new president before they are submitted.

The second group of institutions (Central Missouri State University, Northwest Missouri State University, and Southeast Missouri State University) are scheduled to complete the mission review process during calendar year 2001.

The schedule and process established for the purpose of completing the second five-year mission reviews involve the institution and the CBHE exchanging necessary documents by May 15, 2001. The mission review conversations with the institutions are scheduled for the months of May and June 2001. Any major proposed changes in the institutions' mission will be reviewed by the board in June.

Mrs. Grove expressed concern about the process and format used for setting the mission accountability measures. The desired results need to be concrete and specific, with tangible objectives to ensure the institutions are on target with their mission and goals.

Second Draft of THE COORDINATED PLAN FOR MISSOURI HIGHER EDUCATION

Dr. Wittstruck commented that the CBHE staff has received many thoughtful and candid concerns over the last several weeks in reaction to the first draft of THE COORDINATED PLAN FOR MISSOURI HIGHER EDUCATION. Every effort has been made to incorporate those comments and concerns into the current draft of the plan. Dr. Wittstruck pointed out specific changes that have been made to "The Coordinated Plan at a Glance" section presented for the advisory committee's review and discussion. These changes are a direct result of comments received from individual institutions and discussions held collectively at various sector meetings over the past several weeks. Dr. Wittstruck encouraged further comment on the revisions to ensure the appropriate goals are reflected in the plan.

Dr. Wittstruck noted that staff is currently working on the Key Outcome Measures to define the measures for which the Missouri system of higher education will be accountable, for which each sector will be accountable, and for which the individual institutions will be accountable. Dr. Kent Farnsworth inquired as to the timeline for public comment as he would like to see additional time allowed for comment beyond the current meetings, especially for the two-year sector. The two-year institutions are specifically concerned with the Key Outcome Measures and potential inconsistencies with the draft document.

Dr. Wittstruck reported that another draft of THE COORDINATED PLAN will be shared with the institutions before the June Board meeting. Written comments received by May 15 will be incorporated into the working draft.

Other Business

Dr. John Strong, acting director of the Missouri Campus Compact, addressed the committee and provided background information on the compact. The Missouri Compact was charted on December 7, 2000 at the Governor's Conference on Higher Education and Missouri became the 23rd state to have such a compact. Dr. Strong thanked the board for its recommended funding of $216,800 in the FY 2002 budget request. The request was not funded, however, Dr. Strong urged the CBHE to consider recommending the funding again in FY 2003. The compact received a $100,000 unrestricted grant from the Kauffman Foundation. The majority of the grant will be used to fund small grants which will be given to directors of service learning programs, individual faculty, and some student initiated projects.

(End of the report of the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee meeting.)

2001 Report on Progress Toward the Statewide Public Policy Initiatives and Goals for Missouri Higher Education

(For board discussion with the presidents/chancellors see this section of the minutes of the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee meeting - Attachment C.)

Vice Chair Carmichael expressed her dismay that in all but one case Missouri's cut-scores for teachers are set below the national medium which is the 50th percentile. Cut-scores and the use of additional Praxis II exams are currently under review by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Mrs. Carmichael encouraged DESE to raise their cut-scores. Mrs. Wood suggested the possibility of making certain scores a graduation requirement and each institution could have a different cut-score tied to graduation depending on their admission category, e.g. selective, moderately selective. Dr. Stein commented that it would be appropriate to raise this question at the educational summit that will occur on May 21, as the presidents/chancellors will be talking specifically about teacher education at the summit. He noted that it is his understanding that institutions have the right to set higher cut-scores than the state's minimum and they could link those scores to graduation.

Dr. Stein stated that each state sets its own cut-scores. The State Board of Education has acknowledged that it chose very low cut-scores and will be reviewing those scores. He observed that Missouri should be able to move its cut-scores closer to the national median. Dr. Stein indicted that data on the national and Missouri's median scores on Praxis examinations and Missouri's cut-scores for Praxis will be provided at the Educational Summit on May 21. Dr. Henry cautioned against taking an average of a group of average scores. He said if the national average of cut scores is higher than Missouri's then he sees the concern that the board is talking about.

Central Missouri State University: Results of State Investments in the First Cycle of Mission Review and Enhancement

On October 10, 1996, the Coordinating Board for Higher Education designated Central Missouri State University as a master's-level institution with moderately selective admissions and a statewide mission in professional applied science and technology programs. Central's mission enhancement goals are to: (1) strengthen its "academic technology" infrastructure; (2) add and enhance degree programs in advanced applied science and technology; (3) strengthen the state's corps of vocational/technical education instructors; and (4) enhance its telecommunications network and public television station. The board agreed to recommend a state investment of $7,500,000 between FY 1998 and FY 2001 in Central's approved mission implementation plan. Central submitted a report on its progress in achieving its mission and the success it has had in meeting its mission implementation plans.

Dr. Bobby Patton reported that since the report in the board book was submitted (Attachment D) that Commissioner Stroup has recommended approval for their Crisis and Disaster Management Bachelors of Science Degree. They have also received official notification of accreditation by the Council on Aviation Accreditation of their aviation technology program.

Dr. Patton addressed the board and summarized the report contained in the board book. He said that Central is a much different university than it was just four years ago. He reviewed some of the changes that have occurred in Central's technology capabilities, in degree programs in applied science and technology, and in partnerships and cooperative arrangements.

Dr. Patton concluded by saying he believes that through the infusion of funds made possible through the CBHE mission enhancement program, Central is accountable in terms of the four goals that were established. They believe that the four years of mission enhancement have provided a firm foundation and that they are demonstrating a capacity to respond to the technology needs of the state. Central has expanded its technical capabilities, added vital new academic programs, improved faculty knowledge and skills, educated more students in critical vocational and technical fields, and enhanced the lives of countless Missourians and they have only begun.

Dr. Henry commented that several years ago when the CHBE met with Central's board there seemed to be some resistance to moving in the direction of training teachers in vocational technical education and asked Dr. Patton if that is a thing of the past. Dr. Patton responded that they have clearly identified and articulated that technology is the cornerstone of their campus. Central wants to continue to have strong liberal arts emphases, but that is important for every student. They want to be particularly strong in teacher training in technical areas. They now have the framework in place and want to be accountable in that regard.

Mrs. Grove observed that Dr. Patton's report was excellent and that it was exciting to see all of the kinds of things that Central has done, but as she mentioned earlier in the day, she did not really know what the institution's goals were. Therefore, it was difficult for her to tell if Central had actually met its goals. She encouraged the staff to be very specific on the outcomes expected. At the request of Mrs. Grove, Dr. Patton and Dr. Kyle Carter discussed directions that they would like to move in the future. Some of those areas include strengthening their partnerships with community colleges in providing a seamless transition and reaching down to the vocational/technical schools. They are planning to reorganize the College of Applied Sciences and Technology as a part of their plan to achieve this goal.

Other matters discussed were: if Central is enrolling enough students in the applied technology fields and the number of articulation agreements with the community colleges. Dr. Carter pointed out that because of today's economy many students who receive a two-year degree can get a job and do very well. The issue was raised if Central's graduates are prepared to be productive workers in business and industry. Dr. Patton responded that Central has job fairs and other sorts of things on campus and employers come and speak positively about the graduates they are hiring from Central and want more of Central's graduates. They have also done a survey that showed within the first year that 96 percent of their graduates had been placed in positions within their professional expertise. They also receive feedback from advisory boards for their programs in the College of Applied Sciences and Technology. Their advisory boards include representatives from specific industries. Other items discussed were the direction of technology in the future and the extent Central receives financial contributions for specific purposes based on its applied technology mission from public and private sectors.

Northwest Missouri State University: Results of State Investments in the First Cycle of Mission Review and Enhancement

On October 10, 1996, the Coordinating Board for Higher Education designated Northwest Missouri State University as a master's-level, moderately selective admissions institution serving northwest Missouri through the extended electronic campus. Northwest's mission goals are to: (1) develop a Center for Application of Information Technology in enhancing learning; (2) develop modularized courses and make them available statewide; (3) continue to apply quality concepts to the educational process using Baldrige criteria; (4) operate the Northwest Missouri Educational Consortium, and (5) establish a mathematics and science academy for high school juniors and seniors. The Coordinating Board agreed to recommend a state investment of $5,700,000 between FY 1998 and FY 2001 in the university's approved mission implementation plan.

Dr. Dean Hubbard expressed appreciation to the board for support of the mission enhancement program and said that in his 27 years in higher education it has been the most effective program that he has ever participated in. It has made a significant difference in Northwest's campus and they are proud of their accomplishments. Dr. Hubbard submitted a report on Northwest's progress in achieving its mission and the success it has had in meeting its implementation goals which is contained in the board book. (Attachment E)

Dr. Hubbard believes that Northwest has made the case that it has a unique capacity to capitalize on opportunities such as those presented by mission enhancement. While they will continue to move forward in those areas, they are ready for new challenges and suggest the following as possibilities: (1) pilot student aid program to increase access; (2) new degree programs; (3) teacher education; (4) academy expansion; and (5) CITE augmentation.

Discussion was held on how well the Missouri Academy for Science, Mathematics, and Computing is doing and on the funding sources for the academy. Another topic discussed was the use of the courseware for the modularized courses by other institutions. Other items discussed were the freshman success rate and the reasons for that success, tracking students once they transfer, and providing teacher education students with clinical experiences in several diverse urban schools, primarily with the Kansas City School District.

Southeast Missouri State University: Results of State Investments in the First Cycle of Mission Review and Enhancement

On October 10, 1996, the Coordinating Board for Higher Education designated Southeast Missouri State University as a master's level, moderately selective admissions institution serving southeast Missouri through extended partnerships. Southeast's mission goals are to: (1) emphasize experiential learning in the curriculum; (2) provide distance learning opportunities through SEE-NET and the Southeast Missouri Educational Consortium; (3) improve access for nontraditional and transfer students; and (4) establish a center for excellence in advanced manufacturing.

Dr. Ken Dobbins noted that Southeast is the only four-year institution, public or private in a 25 county area. They work very closely with community colleges. Southeast is very concerned about access to higher education by under-represented, non-traditional, and transfer students. The institution is providing distance learning opportunities for place bound students through SEE-NET and area higher education centers, in cooperation with institutions of the Southeast Missouri Educational Consortium. Dr. Dobbins submitted a report that was in the board book (Attachment F) containing achievements at Southeast resulting from mission enhancement efforts:

Mrs. Grove asked Dr. Dobbins what issues Southeast will be facing in the future with their mission enhancement plans. Dr. Dobbins responded that the faculty does applied research, especially in their agriculture and science programs and because of that they would like to be involved with research in the life sciences. Southeast would like to provide some of the technicians to help assist the life sciences professors with research at Washington University or the Danforth Center for Life Sciences. He said another issue for the future is access to higher education as they still have access issues. Some of those issues are unmet financial need and trying to get students to graduate from high school and then go on to obtain associates or bachelors' degrees.

Results of the State Plan for Postsecondary Technical Education

Dr. Terry Barnes reported that this item contains a progress report on the results and accomplishments from the state's investments in postsecondary technical education since the implementation of The State Plan for Postsecondary Technical Education in July 1996. At the April 1999 CBHE meeting, the board approved a set of performance measures for monitoring the role of the state's community colleges and Linn State Technical College in meeting the board's goals for The State Plan for Postsecondary Technical Education initiatives. Those measures collectively assess the extent the investment of state aid in targeted new and expanded postsecondary technical programs are making a significant difference in the workforce development system of Missouri. Targeted technical programs are related to computer information systems technologies, engineering-related technologies, advanced health technologies, mechanic and repairer technologies, precision production trades, and science technologies, all which lead to certificate, AAS/AS, and technology bachelor's degrees. The following questions provided a context for assessing the progress being made in postsecondary technical education:

• Has geographic and programmatic access to Missouri's targeted technical education programs increased?
• Has targeted technical program productivity improved through increases in student participation, graduation, and job placement?
• Have targeted program graduates achieved financially rewarding job placement and wages?
• Has the quality of targeted technical programs improved?

Each year the chairman of the community colleges presidents/chancellors council provides the board with results on the state's investment in postsecondary technical education that show improvements in access to targeted technical programs, student participation, employment and wages, and program quality. This year Dr. John McGuire, president, St. Charles County Community College, represented this group as chairman of the MCCA Presidents/Chancellors Council.

Since FY 1996, 100 new targeted certificate and AAS/AS technical degree programs; 12 baccalaureate degree programs; 11 master's degree programs; and one doctoral degree program have been developed in targeted technical fields. The number of Missouri communities serving as face-to-face classroom access points increased from 17 in 1996 to 67 by the end of FY 2000. From relatively few instructional partnerships in FY 1997, all 57 AVTSs now have 525 articulation agreements between AVTS secondary and adult programs, and two- and four-year institutions that deliver targeted postsecondary technical programs. Missouri communities serving as two-year college ITV connectivity points have increased from approximately a dozen in FY 1997 to a total of 81 AVTSs, comprehensive high schools, and four-year locations.

The number of Missouri public high school graduates enrolling in targeted technical programs increased 22 percent between FY 1996 and FY 2000. Enrollment in computer information systems increased 63 percent, in engineering-related technologies 18 percent, in mechanics and repair technologies 263 percent, and in precision production trades 35 percent since FY 1995. Also, since the FY 1995 baseline year, a cumulative total of 1,448 students have graduated from targeted one- and two-year technical certificates; and 3,700 from targeted AAS/AS degree programs.

Of a sample of 1,341 students graduating during FY 1999 from targeted technical certificate, AS and AAS degree programs, 74.6 percent reported that they found employment or pursued additional education in fields directly relating to their technical training. In addition, FY 1998 graduates from targeted technical certificate, AS, AAS and baccalaureate degree programs generally earned average wages that were higher than the average wages of non-technical graduates from Missouri's public institutions. For example, technical AAS degree graduates earned $26,802 on average, compared to $22,448 for non-technical associate degree graduates. Those receiving technology-related baccalaureate degrees earned $36,831 on average, compared to $24,476 for graduates in non-technical fields.

In FY 1997 only two two-year institutions had working partnerships with union and non-union apprenticeship training programs. As of FY 2000 twelve two- and four-year public institutions have working partnerships with 204 different labor union apprenticeship training schools in Missouri. Using FY 1966 data, 55 of 858 graduates from targeted AAS/AS degree programs subsequently transferred to Missouri's four-year public institutions. By spring 2000 38 of the original 55 had also graduated from baccalaureate technology programs at Missouri's public four-year institutions.

There are still issues that need further discussion and monitoring. They include:

• Too few Regional Technical Education Councils are meeting regularly and involving their employers directly in regional needs assessment and evaluating targeted program effectiveness;
• Regional Technical Education Councils should intensify efforts to promote postsecondary technical education, and increase the college preparation rates of recent high school graduates into targeted certificate or AAS degree programs;
• There appears to be evidence that a few institutions may be reallocating RTEC appropriations planned for targeted technical program infrastructure and delivery, but actually support off-campus AA degree lower division general education expansion;
• The state auditor is concerned that in some incidences, Regional Technical Education Councils are not spending all their planned annual appropriation on postsecondary technical education initiatives, and therefore dollars are carried forward into the next fiscal year; and
• Instructional television (ITV) networks and equipment, that were purchased with technical education appropriations, appear to be used for the distribution of dual credit and lower division general education coursework rather than primarily for the delivery of technical program coursework.

Mr. Bass requested that future annual reports include a student demographic profile. Mrs. Wood commented that she appreciated seeing the issues that need further attention and asked what is being done about them. Dr. Barnes responded that he meets monthly with the presidents and chancellors and these topics are discussed in their meetings. There also is an annual meeting of the chief academic officers and the RTEC directors and coordinators. He also, personally, visits as many campuses as possible and discusses many of these issues one-on-one with individual presidents and their staff. These matters are also discussed in the Department of Higher Education senior staff meetings. Mrs. Wood inquired if these discussions were leading to any specific plans to correct some of these issues such as spending money that is appropriated for one thing on something else. Dr. Barnes said that the discussions on this issue will receive additional attention and that there are some options being discussed to try to address some of these issues. Dr. McGuire noted that the community college presidents might not share the concern in regard to the presumption that some RTEC appropriations are being used for off-campus, AA degree lower division general education. He cited that AAS degree technical programs have a general education requirement. That requirement is also a North Central Accreditation Association stipulation.

Status of Mission Review

(For board discussion with the president/chancellors see this section of the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee minutes - Attachment C.)

Dr. Henry moved that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education reaffirm the principle that all items identified in the board's April 1999 second cycle five-year mission review guidelines are required to complete the mission review process. Those seven items are:

1. A needs assessment of institutional actions and initiatives necessary to meet their agreed upon mission as part of their strategic planning process;
2. An assessment of the degree to which original goals and results were accomplished;
3. An assessment of the institution's agreed upon mission statement;
4. An evaluation and assessment of the institution's strategic plan;
5. An evaluation of the institution's statistical profile;
6. Financial analysis of the institution's fiscal condition and adequacy of its funding level; and
7. An assessment of the condition of the institution's physical plant.

Dr. Henry further moved that mission review must be completed before related funding recommendations are made. Mrs. Grove seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Vice Chair Carmichael commented that these seven items are essential to mission review and the board takes them very seriously. She urged the two institutions that have not fulfilled all seven items to do so quickly as that is the only way the board can really evaluate whether or not the institution is where it needs to be and how things are going.

Notification of the Establishment of a Steering Committee for a Lake of the Ozarks Community College District

Dr. Wittstruck reported that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education has statutory responsibility for the state's procedures related to the establishment of new community college taxing districts. The procedures implementing these statutes are contained in the Administrative Rule, 6 CSR 10-6.010. The board has been informed that a steering committee has been formed to begin the process of establishing a new community college taxing district in the Lake of the Ozarks region of the state. The steering committee would like for this issue to be on the April 2003 ballot. As part of the process, the CBHE will review the petition drive and feasibility study to be conducted by the steering committee. Pending the results, a referendum on the question of establishing a new community college taxing district would go to the voters of the participating school districts in April 2003. There currently are three school districts involved in the proposal.

Dr. Don Shook, former president of several Missouri community colleges, has been mutually agreed upon by the CBHE staff and the Steering Committee as a consultant for the needs assessment and to oversee supervision of the related work. If the election is held the CBHE would finance it. Mrs. Nickie Foster, chairman of the steering committee, stated in a letter that the steering committee requests that the CBHE cease to grant any future approval of 1456 sites in the Lake of the Ozarks area. They also requested that the CBHE not permit State Fair Community College to expand its services in the Lake area until such time at the proposal is resolved. Dr. Wittstruck noted that State Fair Community College has ceased their efforts to lease a building in the Camdenton School District.

Dr. Henry moved that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education notify the Lake of the Ozarks Community College Steering Committee that it will comply with the committee's request that the board will cease to grant any future approval of 1456 sites in the Lake of the Ozarks area, and that State Fair Community College not be allowed to expand its services in the Lake area until resolution of the steering committee's proposal. Mr. Bass seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Second Draft of The Coordinated Plan for Missouri Higher Education

(For board discussion of this item with the presidents/chancellors see this section of the CBHE Presidential Advisory Committee - Attachment C.)

Dr. Wittstruck stated that as a result of the discussion with the advisory committee the staff knows what to do next.

Discussion of Funding for Results for FY 2003 and Beyond

Dr. Stein reported that this item reviews the board's approach to Funding for Results (FFR) and identifies key issues to consider in shaping FFR for FY 2003 and beyond. FFR serves as a funding strategy both to promote and acknowledge continuous quality improvement in Missouri's public colleges and universities. FFR is used to demonstrate willingness by higher education to be accountable to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public for its goals and objectives. By FY 2001, public institutions received over $66 million in their core budgets from FFR. Dr. Stein pointed out that Missouri is one of the few states that has taken pride in doing performance funding without a legislative mandate. Fiscal stresses on the state's budget have made it unlikely that there will be new FFR dollars appropriated in the FY 2002 budget. Despite the state's fiscal situation, a commitment to the concept of FFR as a strategy to promote systemic change and continuous improvement remains strong.

The board's draft Coordinated Plan continues to reinforce willingness by higher education leaders to be held accountable and to use results to drive budget recommendations. Changes in the board's FFR approach have been gradual, including both the elimination and addition of elements as well as the refinement of elements to utilize measurements that are more meaningful. With the board's development of a new strategic plan a review of FFR is appropriate. The board item contains suggestions for a number of approaches. There is a solid commitment to emphasis on results. Budget recommendations would include performance funding components as well as the continuation of core budgets and inflationary increases. In this context, approaches to determining thresholds for the continuation of core budgets and the justification for inflationary budget requests could be identified. In addition, a model that would highlight results for all new budget requests beyond an institution's core budget and associated inflationary increases could be explored more fully. At its March 2000 meeting, the Council on Public Higher Education discussed, and expressed support for, utilizing success in implementing institutional missions as a funding component that would emphasize results and that could be integrated into the state's FFR initiative.

Another issue that deserves further consideration involves an operational issue concerning data timeliness and the cut-off dates for data submission. Since its inception, FFR has utilized the most current data available, even though some performance data only become available weeks before the CBHE staff's budget recommendations are finalized for the board's consideration. With new FFR funding for FY 2002 unlikely, it will be possible to lag performance data one year, thereby increasing the data's reliability and validity and reducing the burden on institutional and CBHE staff.

Mrs. Kauffman moved that the board reaffirm its commitment to use performance funding as a strategy to bring about systemic change and continuous improvement within Missouri's public higher education system. She further moved that the staff work with institutional representatives to identify approaches to performance funding that will more fully highlight results for all new budget requests beyond an institution's core budget and associated inflationary increases. Issues and ideas described in this board item should be considered by institutional representatives as they work with staff to develop recommendations for conceptual changes to performance funding that could shape the board's budget recommendations for FY 2003 and beyond. Dr. Henry seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Annual MOSTARS Report

Commissioner Stroup introduced Allan Purdy, John Greer, and William Zielonko, members of the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority Board of Directors and the MOHELA staff who were in the audience.

Since time was limited, Ms. Lynn Hearnes referred the board to the annual MOSTARS report contained in the board book.

Overview of MOSTARS Activities

MOSTARS continues to work in partnership with all sectors of Missouri postsecondary education as staff reviews and refines the administrative structure of these programs for future processing of student financial aid applications and delivering funds to students. Through the state student aid programs, the dollar amount awarded to eligible students continues to increase. Between the actual awards made to students in FY 2000 and the Governor's recommendation for FY 2002, the general revenue funds have increased 20 percent. The federal student loan volume has also increased 11.2 percent from FFY 1999 to FFY 2000.

The ATOM (Automated Transfer of Money) program continues to be enhanced so that MOSTARS remains competitive in the student loan industry. As of January 23, 2001, ATOM had electronically disbursed nearly $910 million in student loan funds to participating institutions. Currently, 37 institutions are participating with MOSTARS in the electronic fund transfer process so that students may receive funding more efficiently and timely. To continue to develop ways to deliver program funds more efficiently, staff is in the planning stages of integrating the disbursement of funds for the federal loan program and all state student aid programs.

Missouri's postsecondary institutions continue to request MOSTARS to develop and provide Internet, web-based access to information on programs and services offered by the Department of Higher Education. In response, MOSTARS will be developing and implementing new Internet, web-based initiatives during the next 12 months.

In collaboration with a number of organizations and groups, MOSTARS continues to work to increase attendance rates and learning success at the postsecondary level, particularly among underrepresented and low-income student populations. The most significant development in the area of outreach and early awareness is the awarding of the state GEAR UP Missouri program from the U.S. Department of Education. The program will work in partnership with 20 middle schools in five different school districts where the greatest educational challenges exist. The mission of the GEAR UP program is to significantly increase the number of low-income students who are admitted, persist, and graduate from college. GEAR UP will be instrumental in assisting MOSTARS in identifying activities that are effective in preparing low-income students for postsecondary education and making their families aware of financial assistance and the application process.

The most recent official student loan default rate data released by the U.S. Department of Education indicates that the state of Missouri's default student loan rate continues to decline and that it will continue to drop for FFY 1999. Missouri's institutions must continue to address the impact of student loan defaults on their campuses. If an institution's annual default rate is greater than 25 percent for three consecutive years, the institution's eligibility to continue participating in the FFEL Program and other Federal Title IV Student Aid Programs is at risk. Staff has developed a work plan for default prevention and debt management. MOSTARS will offer and follow this plan with Missouri postsecondary institutions to provide consumer education to students, families, and at-risk borrowers regarding student loan borrowing and debt management.

Implementation Plan for the Reorganization and Management of MOSTARS

Ms. Hearnes presented the implementation plan for MOSTARS reorganization and management. The plan is guided by previous reports to, and actions by the CBHE to improve and strengthen the student assistance and services provided by MOSTARS to students, families, and institutions. This plan is also based on the KPMG consultants' report dated August 2000. The plan proposes a new direction and reorganization of MOSTARS based on the reduced funding level and number of new FTE positions recommended by the Governor from the board's request. Since the MOSTARS' request was reduced from 20 to 12 FTEs, adjustments to the planned reorganization were necessary.

In August 2000 KPMG Consulting Services released an organizational management review and study of MOSTARS based on its mission which is to incorporate a fully integrated set of student assistance services or a one stop shop for student assistance. KPMG's organizational model was the result of five analytic processes: (1) understanding the mission; (2) understanding of the current organization; (3) understanding of participants' vision for the organization; (4) understanding of industry influences in the next five years; and (5) understanding of organizational principles. KMPG identified the principles that should guide the future organization in fulfilling its mission as: (1) integration of core services; (2) loan as aid of last resort; (3) efficiency; (4) flexibility; (5) accountability; (6) expert communications; and (7) value of higher education. From these processes the staff has developed an organizational model for the future that contains these principles, an organizational hierarchy, a description of functions, and skill/education/experience profiles for management positions.

The universal goal of MOSTARS is to ensure that all qualified Missouri citizens have access to affordable postsecondary education in an efficient manner for both parents and students. The mission for MOSTARS can be described as student financial services. The goals of accessibility, affordability, and efficiency for the student are added to student financial services. Support for this mission is provided by a foundation of student assistance and services through early awareness and financial planning. These five simple concepts will provide the accessible and affordable student services delivered in an efficient manner envisioned by the Coordinating Board when it established MOSTARS. These concepts will be implemented by a teamwork approach involving a senior management team supported by a middle management team responsible for MOSTARS functions and staff supervision.

Mr. Bass moved that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education endorse the management principles outlined in the MOSTARS reorganization and management plan described in the board book. Dr. Henry seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Amendments to the State Student Financial Assistance Program Administrative Rules

Ms. Hearnes noted that in June 2000 staff reported to the board that they would be reviewing the eligibility requirements and policies for all state student financial assistance programs that the CBHE has the statutory responsibility to administer. This process would allow all eligible students to have the opportunity to maximize the use of state program funding to access postsecondary education. For the state of Missouri to interpret and implement law or policy for any program, an administrative rule must be drafted and filed with the Secretary of State to be published in the Missouri Register. The administrative rules contain the policies and procedures for program administration. As state and federal issues evolve affecting the delivery of student financial assistance, and as other Missouri higher education policies are developed and implemented, the administrative rules periodically need to be amended so that they address the most recent policies for program administration. The staff has reviewed the existing state program administrative rules to determine if the rules should be amended to address the following areas:

• students with disabilities;
• students enrolled in multiple Missouri institutions;
• students enrolled in courses through distance education;
• federal student aid eligibility regulations related to students with drug convictions; and
• students who may be in default, or have defaulted on student loans.

Based on an unofficial legal opinion, the Coordinating Board would exceed its administrative authority if it issued administrative rules denying state financial assistance to students with drug convictions or students who may be in default on a student loan. Staff has determined that it would be premature to propose state rules for the delivery of state student assistance for students enrolled in courses through distance education because of activities occurring at the U.S. Department of Education in this area. As a result the staff developed proposed administrative rule amendments related to students with disabilities and students who may be enrolled in multiple approved Missouri postsecondary institutions. Staff further determined that other areas of the rules needed to be reviewed to enhance program administration. These areas related partially to initial student eligibility criteria and the delivery of program funds to institutions. The proposed amendments to these areas will allow consistency in student eligibility and funds will be delivered in a more timely fashion to institutions and student for all programs.

On November 8, 2000, staff met with a committee of student financial aid administrators to discuss the proposed amendments to the state program administrative rules. The committee endorsed the proposed amendments to the administrative rules. When the MOSTARS Advisory Board met in December 2000 the board endorsed the amended administrative rules and recommended that they be presented to the Coordinating Board for action.

Mr. Bass moved that the Coordinating Board authorize the commissioner of higher education, in the absence of significant comment from the Attorney General's Office, to file the proposed amended administrative rules with the Secretary of State to be published in the Missouri Register at the earliest possible date and to submit concurrently the proposed rules to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules. He further moved that the Coordinating Board authorize the commissioner of higher education to proceed, after the public comment period and in the absence of significant comment, to file Orders of Rulemaking with the Secretary of State for publishing in the Missouri Register on a schedule that the amended administrative rules shall become effective at the earliest possible date. Mrs. Grove seconded the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

Request for Subdistricting Committee for the Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City

Dr. Barnes commented that Section 178.820, RSMo provides that within 90 days following the publication of the decennial census figures, the boards of trustees of all junior (community) college districts containing over 450,000 residents shall adopt a resolution calling for the creation of a subdistricting committee. A subdistricting committee is to be comprised of six residents of the community college district, three appointed by the local board of trustees, and three by the Coordinating Board for Higher Education. Pursuant to the guidelines and procedures set forth in Section 178.820, RSMo, and through certified resolution, the Board of Trustees of the Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City has appointed three members of a six member subdistricting committee and has submitted the names and resumes of six residents of the district from which the Coordinating Board may select its three appointments to the subdistricting committee. Staff has reviewed the resumes of the six residents. Based upon the candidates' experience and qualifications, as well as to assure district-wide geographic representation, the staff has identified three candidates for the board's consideration who best seem to meet the needs of the subdistricting committee. Once these six members are approved, the subdistricting committee is to adopt a plan dividing the Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City into no fewer than four and no more than six subdistricts for the election of trustees in which population is to be apportioned so as to be substantially equal for each trustee elected. It is expected that the redistricting plan will be submitted to the Coordinating Board at its October 2001 meeting.

Dr. Barnes noted that five other community colleges will be reconfiguring their subdistricts and should be submitting requests for subdistricting committees at the June and October CBHE meetings.

Mrs. Kauffman asked Dr. Barnes to alert the community colleges that she would like to see those names being submitted to serve on the subdistricting committees more reflective of the district's population, especially female representatives. Dr. Barnes noted that he had already made that known to the community colleges. Mrs. Carmichael stated that when the community colleges present names for a subdistricting committee the Coordinating Board would like to see who the boards of trustees have appointed to the committee along with demographics of the district so that the CBHE can ensure that there is some diversity on the committee. Mrs. Grove commented that she would be uncomfortable accepting the recommendations before the board now and asked if this item could be delayed until the June meeting. Dr. Barnes pointed out that the Metropolitan Board of Trustees had named one woman and a minority to serve on the subdistricting committee. Mrs. Kauffman stated that she would be comfortable with proceeding with this item today as Metropolitan has already submitted their members but that she would like to make clear in the future what the board's expectations are. She does not want to interfere with the timeframe for the institution to develop its subdistricting plan but wants it absolutely clear in the future that the board wants diversity on the subdistricting committees.

Mrs. Kauffman moved that the Coordinating Board for Higher Education accept the resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City calling for the formation of a decennial subdistricting committee. She further moved that the CBHE appoint the following three residents of the Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City to the subdistricting committee to develop a plan for dividing the junior college district into no fewer than four and no more than six subdistricts as set forth in Section 178.820, RSMo: Mr. Paul Gardner, Lee's Summit; Mr. Don Gregory, Gladstone; and Mr. Doug Hatridge, Independence. Mrs. Kauffman also moved that the board charge the subdistricting committee to proceed with the adoption of a subdistricting plan to be submitted to the Coordinating Board for Higher Education for its approval or disapproval in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section 178.820, RSMo. Mrs. Kauffman further moved that in the future requests for appointees to subdistricting committees should include a list of committee members appointed by the local college board of trustees, demographics of the district, and should be reflective of the diversity of that particular community college district. Dr. Henry seconded the motion.

Mrs. Grove stated that she was still opposed to acting on this request today. Dr. Henry called the question and Mr. Bass asked for a roll call vote:

John Bass - no
Marie Carmichael - yes
Dudley Grove - no
Ray Henry - yes
Sandra Kauffman - yes
Mary Joan Wood - yes

The motion was passed.

Mrs. Grove asked that in the future when the board makes appointments that are to be representative of a community, city, state, or population that these guidelines be followed. Commissioner Stroup responded that the staff would have to develop guidelines for the board's approval. Vice Chair Carmichael commented that perhaps these recommendations could be on the board's June agenda.

Update on the Missouri K-16 Coalition

Dr. Stein informed the board of an Educational Summit to be held in Columbia on May 21. The summit will be held in conjunction with the next meeting of the K-16 Task Force on Achievement Gap Elimination. The summit will provide an opportunity to receive updates on ongoing activities, to share perspectives, and to promote new initiatives. Dr. Barnett Barry, executive director, Southeast Center for Teaching Quality, will facilitate a discussion about quality improvement opportunities in Missouri's K-16 system. Mrs. Carmichael encouraged those in attendance to attend the summit.

Update on the CBHE Committee on Technology and Instruction

The CBHE Advisory Committee on Technology and Instruction (CTI) met on March 22, 2001 in conjunction with the Higher Education Learning and Information Exchange (HELIX) Conference in Osage Beach. Dr. Mary Beth Susman, chief executive officer of the Kentucky Commonwealth Virtual University, facilitated discussion with members of the committee. Dr. Susman emphasized the movement to student centered organizational structures supported by the creation of virtual libraries, virtual high schools, and virtual universities. Committee members received updates on ongoing Missouri activities involving technology and instruction. Funding for the FY 2002 Comprehensive Technology Investment Plan under review by the legislature is likely to be substantially less than what was recommended by the CBHE and will likely be one-time funding only. CTI members recommended that the plan should be resubmitted by the CBHE in its FY 2003 budget recommendations.

Update on the CBHE Committee on Transfer and Articulation

Dr. Jack Magruder stated that the Committee on Transfer and Articulation (COTA) continues to work with several advisory committees. The Teacher Education Articulation Advisory Committee (TEAAC) and the General Education Implementation Committee (GEIC) continue to work with institutions and advise COTA about implementation issues and new initiatives concerning transfer and articulation. TEAAC members designed a questionnaire and are collecting data from each institution regarding concerns with teacher education articulation. GEIC members have reviewed notes from the breakout sessions at the Statewide Transfer and Articulation Conference to identify concerns associated with the implementation of the board's revised Credit Transfer Policy. In general, most institutions appear to be working with the revised general education guidelines for transfer students. In preparation for a three-year review of the board's revised Dual Credit Policy, COTA and CBHE staff are beginning to design a survey instrument that will aid in determining the impact the revised policy is having on institutional behavior and student performance. COTA will design a process whereby all independent two- and four-year institutions will have the opportunity to officially become signatories to the board's credit transfer and dual credit policies.

Summary of Pending Higher Education Legislation

Commissioner Stroup called the board's attention to the Status of FY 2002 Appropriations Differences and the CBHE Internal Budget Request - FY 2002 that were in their handouts. There are a number of higher education items that will go to the budget conference committee. The most serious of these items is the lack of any continuing funding for MOBIUS. The Senate also removed funding for the Advantage Missouri Program. Many students are taking advantage of this loan forgiveness program and have not completed their academic program. Over 76 percent of the Advantage Missouri participants are in four-year degree programs and a significant number of them would be renewals. Dr. Stroup urged the board to contact members of the conference committee to urge the restoration of these funds. The commissioner reported that the MOST Program, (the college savings program) was cited by Money Magazine as one of the best in the nation.

Mrs. Carmichael suggested that the board should send a letter to members of the conference committee when they are announced seeking their support in restoring the MOBIUS and Advantage Missouri funding. She also asked that the committee's names and phone numbers be shared with all CBHE members so that may call them.

Appointment of a Nominating Committee for Selection of CBHE Officers

Vice Chair Carmichael appointed the following nominating committee to report to the board at its June meeting:

Ray Henry, Chairman
Mary Findley
Jim Summers

The board received the following information items:

• Missouri High School Graduates Performance Report: Outstanding Schools Act - Senate Bill 380
• Academic Program Actions
• Proprietary School Certification Actions and Reviews
• Revisions of the Proprietary School Program Administrative Rule: Implementation Initiatives
• Calendar for Planning and Budgeting, FY 2003
• Third State Aid and Technical Education Payments, and Capital Reimbursements to Community Colleges, FY 2001
• Report of the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority

Adjournment

There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting was adjourned at 4 p.m.

__________________________
Marie Carmichael, Vice Chair

______________________________
John Bass, Secretary