Restructuring Higher Education to Help Create
the Next Great American State for Economic
Opportunity and Business Investment
Discussion document for Postsecondary Education Review Commission
August 10, 2009
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Higher education plays a central role in Louisiana’s economic development efforts
• However, our state’s higher education system is not structured to meet the current
or future workforce and economic needs of our state
• Compared to higher education systems in leading states like Georgia, North
Carolina, and Texas, Louisiana’s higher education system currently is heavily
skewed toward 4-year degree programs, yet most current and future job
opportunities here and elsewhere require more education / training than high
school and less than a traditional 4-year degree
• The result: poor fit between higher education programs and workforce needs;
hampered business development efforts; lowest graduation rates in the South;
and a suboptimal return on investment of taxpayer dollars
• A restructured system would be more affordable while ensuring a better alignment
of enrollments and programs with the state’s regional workforce needs, and it
would provide many benefits, including: reduced skilled labor gaps, increased
graduation and completion rates, enhanced ROI for state taxpayer dollars,
strengthened state business climate, and significantly increased job creation
1
HIGHER EDUCATION PLAYS A CENTRAL ROLE IN STATE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS . . .
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Providing skilled workers at all levels to meet current and
future workforce demands in the private and public sectors
• Providing training, general education, and upward mobility
opportunities for our citizens
• Attracting federal and corporate research grants
• Conducting research and catalyzing innovation of importance
to the state, its people, and its industries
• Improving our state’s image as an attractive location for
business investment and highly mobile professionals
• Enhancing quality of life
2
. . . AND IT DIRECTLY IMPACTS THE MOST IMPORTANT SITE-SELECTION
FACTOR FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS: WORKFORCE
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
Primary selection factors*
Secondary selection factors**
• Quality, availability, and cost of target
workforce
• Level of state-and-community support
(fast-track permitting, etc.)
• Tax and regulatory climate
• Availability and quality of customized
training
• Proximity to key customers and suppliers
• Transportation infrastructure and logistics
• Operating costs (electricity, insurance,
workers comp, etc.)
• Statutory financial incentives
• Customized incentives
• Quality-of-life factors (public education
options, crime, etc.)
• Availability of target real-estate solution
(size, cost, control, water/sewer/rail
connectivity, etc.)
* Priority of selection factors varies from project to project; however, quality and availability of workforce almost
always is one of the top three considerations
** Typically these factors come into play when multiple locations offer relatively comparable characteristics relative to
primary site-selection criteria
Source: LED analysis
3
LOUISIANA’S EMPLOYMENT LEVELS HAVE OUTPACED THE SOUTH SINCE
THE BEGINNING OF THE NATIONAL RECESSION . . .
Total nonfarm, seasonally-adjusted employment* (100=January 2008)
105
100
Louisiana
South*
95
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
2008
2009
* Based on aggregate of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source: BLS; LED analysis
4
. . . HOWEVER, EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IN LOUISIANA LAGGED THAT OF
THE SOUTH IN MOST OF THE LAST DECADE
Total nonfarm employment (100=1990)
140
South*
130
Louisiana
120
110
100
90
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
* Based on aggregate of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source: BLS; LED analysis
5
UNTIL VERY RECENTLY, LOUISIANA EXPERIENCED CONSISTENT NET
OUTMIGRATION IN CONTRAST TO THE REST OF THE SOUTH
Annual net migration as percentage of base population (%)
2.5
1.5
South*
Louisiana
0.5
1991
-0.5
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
-1.5
-2.5
Katrina effect
(-6.31)
* Based on total population of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland,
Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source: U.S. Census; LED analysis
6
MANY OF LOUISIANA’S KEY INDUSTRY SECTORS HAVE BEEN LOSING
JOBS FOR MANY YEARS . . .
Thousands of jobs
U.S. employment
Louisiana employment
Chemical Manufacturing
30
Paper Manufacturing
1030
28
13
660
12
980
26
590
11
24
10
930
22
520
9
20
880
8
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
Farming
47
450
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
Oil & Gas
3200
30
425
28
44
3100
41
400
26
24
3000
375
22
38
2900
20
350
35
18
32
2800
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
Source: BEA; LED analysis
16
325
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
7
. . . IN CONTRAST TO GROWING INDUSTRY SECTORS THAT
HAVE BEEN CULTIVATED BY OTHER STATES
Thousands of jobs
EXAMPLES
U.S. employment (historical)
U.S. employment (forecast)
Computer Systems Design and Services
Scientific Research & Design Services
1800
700
1600
650
1400
600
1200
1000
550
800
500
2007-16 growth
forecast: 30%
600
Pharmaceuticals and Medicine Manufacturing
400
4
6
'1
'1
2
'1
0
'1
8
'0
4
6
'0
'0
2
'0
0
'0
8
'9
4
6
'9
'9
2
'9
0
'9
4
6
'1
'1
2
'1
8
0
'1
'0
6
'0
2
4
'0
0
'0
'0
8
'9
4
6
'9
'9
2
450
'9
'9
0
400
2007-16 growth
forecast: 8%
Software Publishers
350
375
300
350
325
250
300
200
275
250
150
2007-16 growth
forecast: 22%
225
Source: BLS; LED analysis
6
'1
4
'1
2
'1
0
'1
8
'0
6
'0
4
'0
2
'0
0
'0
8
'9
6
'9
4
'9
2
'9
0
'9
6
'1
4
'1
2
'1
0
'1
8
'0
4
6
'0
'0
2
'0
0
'0
6
4
8
'9
'9
'9
2
100
'9
'9
0
200
2007-16 growth
forecast: 27%
8
LOUISIANA HAS BEGUN AN AGGRESSIVE EFFORT TO CULTIVATE
NEW GROWTH INDUSTRIES
EXAMPLES – NOT COMPREHENSIVE
Nuclear energy
manufacturing
Example project win
Significance
• Shaw Modular Solutions will manufacture • Opportunity for Louisiana to participate in
modules for nuclear power plants in L.C.
global nuclear power renaissance with
• After manufacturing and assembly,
exponential growth potential
modules will be shipped globally
• Industry manufacturing jobs average $5090k; design jobs average ~$200k
Digital
interactive media
• Electronic Arts (EA) has launched global
quality assurance center in Baton Rouge
• Partnership between EA, Louisiana
Economic Development, and LSU
• Opportunity to establish competitive
advantage in rapidly growing market
• Industry jobs average $60-80k
Advanced
manufacturing
• V-Vehicle announced plans to build a
high-quality, fuel-efficient car in Monroe
• Plans to expand existing facility formerly
owned by Guide Corp.
• Opportunity to participate in next
generation of the U.S. auto industry
• Opportunity to build relationships with
top-tier venture capital firms, including
Kleiner Perkins and Google Ventures
Value-added
agribusiness
Source: LED analysis
• ConAgra Foods will construct world’s first • Opportunity to add value to Louisianalarge-scale, LEED-certified sweet-potato
grown crops right here at home
processing facility near Delhi
• Opportunity to establish credibility with
other Fortune 500 agribusiness firms
• Average wage is 44 percent higher than
per-capita average in Richland Parish
9
LOUISIANA’S WORKFORCE PIPELINE IS DRAMATICALLY OUT OF LINE
WITH MARKET DEMANDS
Supply trend
100%
Enter 4-yr public or
private universities
35
Enter 2-yr colleges, etc.
8
Demand trend
100%
100%
16
21
Require 4-yr college
degree or higher
55
Require 2-yr
degree, certificate,
or adv. training
26
24
Require high school
diploma or less w/
no specific training
Profile of jobs in
LA (2004)
Profile of jobs in
LA (2014) **
58
Directly enter job market
after graduation
20
Drop out or leave the
state before graduation
37
High school
matriculation *
* Based on Louisiana high school class of 2004
** Based on 2014 projections from Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source: Louisiana Workforce Commission; LED analysis
10
LOUISIANA’S FTE ENROLLMENT MIX IS HEAVILY SKEWED TOWARD
4-YEAR INSTITUTIONS COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE SOUTH
FTE enrollments (%)*
2-year institutions**
4-year institutions
North Carolina
Florida
Texas
Mississippi
Maryland
South Carolina
Oklahoma
Southern average
Georgia
Arkansas
Virginia
Tennessee
Alabama
Kentucky
Delaware
Louisiana
West Virginia
55
54
49
48
44
44
43
40
39
38
36
36
35
32
31
26
22
45
46
51
52
56
56
57
60
61
62
64
64
65
68
69
74
78
* 2007-2008 FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding
number of hours for full-time students
** 2-year institutions include both community and technical colleges
Source: SREB; LED analysis
11
UNLIKE LOUISIANA, TOP PERFORMING STATES MAINTAIN AN
ENROLLMENT MIX THAT IS BALANCED WITH WORKFORCE NEEDS
2-year institutions
4-year+ institutions
Workforce needs by
required education* (%)
FTE enrollments by
type of institution (%)
26
Louisiana
47
53
74
Top-performing
states**
45
55
52
48
* PRELIMINARY ROUGH ESTIMATES based on 2006-2016 projections; total workforce needs include only jobs that
require at least some postsecondary vocational training/education
** Top-performing states include Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas
Source: Louisiana Occupational Outlook; BLS; SREB; LED analysis
12
CURRENTLY, LOUISIANA GENERATES A SURPLUS OF 4-YEAR (OR
HIGHER) DEGREES COMPARED TO RELATED JOB OPENINGS
Workforce supply measure
Workforce demand measure
~30,000
Gap of ~17,000 per
year = out-migration
pipeline
~13,000
4-year+ degrees
granted (2006-07)*
Annual job openings
requiring 4-year+ degree**
* Includes both public and private institutions; public institutions alone grant ~23K degrees per year
** Includes net growth and replacements from job attrition based on 2006 to 2016 Louisiana occupational projections
Source: Louisiana Occupational Outlook; SREB; LED analysis
13
MANY OF LOUISIANA’S TOP GROWTH OCCUPATIONS REQUIRE
EDUCATION BEYOND HIGH SCHOOL BUT LESS THAN A 4-YEAR DEGREE
TOP 15 GROWTH OCCUPATIONS*
Annual openings projected by occupation*
Vocational /
2-year
690
910
340
Elementary school teachers
520
540
Bookkeeping / accounting clerks
570
440
510
1,010
Mfg. and wholesale sales representatives
380
460
840
Truck drivers
380
450
830
390
900
570
830
350
Executive secretaries
320
250
Accountants and auditors
310
230 540
Restaurant cooks
260 270 520
740
570
Institution and cafeteria cooks
190 310 500
Correctional officers and jailers
260 230 500
4-year




1,060
390
260
1,530
1,990
1,250
Licensed practical / vocational nurses
Welders, cutters, solderers, and brazers
Due to attrition loss
640
840
Customer service representatives
Secretaries (excl. legal, medical and exec.)
Education / training required
1,350
Registered nurses
General and operations managers
Due to net growth











* Number of job openings based on employment projections for 2006-2016; analysis limited to occupations that
require some postsecondary education
Source: Louisiana Occupational Outlook; LED analysis
14
ALIGNING LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM WITH WORKFORCE
NEEDS WOULD GENERATE SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS
ROUGH ESTIMATES FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
2-yr FTEs
(%)
4-yr FTEs
(%)
Est. savings*
($MM/year)
2007-08 (recent baseline)
26
74
--
50% towards SREB average
33
67
20-40
SREB average
40
60
50-75
Top-performing states’ avg.**
48
52
80-110
Aligned w/ workforce needs***
53
47
100-130
Scenario
Additional savings can be generated via other system-wide efficiency
mechanisms (e.g., reduced duplication of programs and facilities,
classification shifts, and performance-based funding)
* Equals the difference between FY08 funding scenario and the required state funding calculated for each scenario
** Assumes that Louisiana meets 2-year / 4-year FTE enrollment mix of GA, NC, and TX
*** Louisiana achieves a 2-year / 4-year FTE enrollment mix that is equal to estimated workforce needs
Source: SREB; LED analysis
15
LOUISIANA STEADILY INCREASED TOTAL STATE FUNDING EFFORTS FOR
HIGHER EDUCATION AND SURPASSED THE SOUTHERN AVERAGE . . .
Total state funding per capita ($ per resident)
$300
Louisiana*
$250
Southern
average**
$200
$150
$100
1999-00
Percent of southern
average (%)
89
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
88
96
105
108
109
107
110
120
Total state funding as a percentage of personal income (%)
0.8
Louisiana*
Southern
average**
0.6
0.4
1999-00
Percent of southern
average (%)
99
2000-01
96
2001-02
103
2002-03
112
* Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
** Average is not weighted based on state population
Source: SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
116
134
107
108
116
16
. . . AND TOTAL STATE HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING LEVELS HERE
RECENTLY WERE ABOVE THOSE IN MANY LEADING STATES (FY08)
Total state funding per capita* ($ per resident)
Total state funding as a percentage of personal income* (%)
308
North Carolina
294
Alabama
North Carolina
0.9
Alabama
Louisiana**
261
Mississippi
Delaware
259
Arkansas
Mississippi
244
Louisiana**
Arkansas
241
Kentucky
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
Oklahoma
219
Delaware
0.6
Southern average
218
Georgia
0.6
Georgia
215
Southern average
0.6
207
Kentucky
198
Maryland
0.6
Oklahoma
0.5
West Virginia
Virginia
189
Tennessee
Florida
188
Florida
0.5
South Carolina
0.5
Texas
0.5
Texas
Tennessee
West Virginia
South Carolina
176
171
164
151
Virginia
Maryland
0.5
0.4
0.4
* Funding levels based on 2007-08 state appropriations and 2008 personal income
** For comparison purposes, Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding; TOPS funding for 2007-2008
adds $26 on a per capita basis and 0.07% on a percentage of personal income basis
Source: SREB; U.S. Census; Bureau of Economic Analysis; LED analysis
17
LA’S HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING FROM STATE SOURCES RECENTLY
WAS FOURTH-HIGHEST IN THE SOUTH ON A PER-FTE BASIS (FY08) . . .
Total state-provided higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
Alabama
7.5
Delaware
7.1
North Carolina
7.0
Louisiana**
6.9
Georgia
6.9
Maryland
6.7
Arkansas
6.6
Florida
6.2
Kentucky
6.2
Southern average
6.2
Mississippi
6.1
Oklahoma
6.0
Tennessee
5.9
Virginia
5.3
Texas
5.2
South Carolina
West Virginia
4.6
4.2
* Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and
dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students
** Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
Source: SREB; LED analysis
18
. . . HOWEVER, LA’S TOTAL PER-FTE HIGHER ED FUNDING FROM ALL
SOURCES RECENTLY WAS BELOW THE SOUTHERN AVERAGE (FY08) . . .
Total higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
Delaware
18.7
Maryland
13.6
Kentucky
12.8
Alabama
12.5
South Carolina
12.1
Southern average
11.4
Virginia
11.3
Arkansas
10.8
Oklahoma
10.7
Tennessee
10.6
Mississippi
10.5
Georgia
10.4
Louisiana**
10.4
West Virginia
10.0
Texas
North Carolina
Florida
9.8
9.6
9.1
* Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations and tuition and fees; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total
credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students
** Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
19
Source: SREB; LED analysis
. . . BECAUSE LA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM GENERATES LESS
FUNDING FROM TUITION AND FEES THAN THE REST OF THE SOUTH
Total self-generated higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
Delaware
11.5
South Carolina
7.6
Maryland
6.9
Kentucky
6.6
Virginia
6.0
West Virginia
5.8
Southern average
5.3
Alabama
5.0
Tennessee
4.7
Oklahoma
4.6
Texas
4.6
Mississippi
4.4
Arkansas
4.2
Georgia
3.5
Louisiana
3.5
Florida
North Carolina
2.9
2.6
* Funding level based on 2007-08 tuition and fee revenue; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and
dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students
20
Source: SREB; LED analysis
LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION GRADUATION RATE IS LAST AMONG
THE SOUTHERN STATES FOR FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS
Six-year graduation rates* at four-year institutions (%)
Delaware
71.0
Virginia
67.3
Maryland
61.7
South Carolina
59.4
North Carolina
58.8
Florida
57.9
Southern average
52.2
Georgia
49.2
Texas
48.8
Mississippi
48.5
Kentucky
48.3
Oklahoma
47.5
Alabama
46.8
West Virginia
46.1
Tennessee
Arkansas
Louisiana
45.4
40.2
37.4
* Six-year graduation rate based on first-time, full-time students seeking bachelor’s degrees that enrolled in public
four-year institutions in 2001
Source: SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
21
LSU’S OPERATIONAL FUNDING LAGS TOP
PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES
COST NUMBERS BASED ON 2005/2006 DATA
State appropriations
Tuition and fees
Endowment income 2
Operational funding per FTE student 1
($ thousands)
U. of Michigan
15.3
9.6
Texas A&M
13.6
U. of Cal. - Berkeley
13.5
U. of Maryland
U. of Virginia
UNC - Chapel Hill
10.5
7.1
9.8
13.8
8.4
LSU (2007) 3
11.7
11.1
6.3
5.7
3.7
15.5
26
64
21
53
2.5 21.6
N/A
6.1 21.6
23
2.6 19.5
30
19.4
58
4.9
9.3
11.4
U. of Florida
8.3
5.0
Georgia Tech
2.2 24.2
10.8 22.9
10.9
U. of Georgia
U. of Texas at Austin
8.5
11.7
Top peer avg.
4.7 25.4
7.1
5.8 30.7
U.S. News “Best
Colleges” ranking
(out of 130)
18.8
18.3
17.9
47
35
130
49
1 Operational funding estimates for universities in SREB states are calculated from 2005-06 SREB state general purpose, state educational purpose, and operating tuition &
fees excluding university medical schools; U. of Michigan tuition & fee estimates derived from IPEDS estimates minus UM-reported medical school-related tuition & fees,
UM state appropriations derived from IPEDS assuming 40 percent of total campus appropriations dedicated to medical school; University of California – Berkeley data
extracted from IPEDS data system; figures may not sum exactly due to rounding
2 Endowment income estimates based on The Center for Measuring University Performance’s 2005 estimates in all cases except LSU, which was reported by the LSU
Foundation; all income estimates assume that four percent of endowment asset market value is applied to operations each year
3 LSU A&M, LSU AgCenter, and LSU Law Center
Source: SREB; IPEDS; University of Michigan; The Center for Measuring University Performance; BRAC analysis
22
KEY ELEMENTS FOR ALIGNING LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION
SYSTEM WITH ITS WORKFORCE NEEDS
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
Key elements
Benefits
Implications
LCTCS with appropriate
enrollments, adequate facilities,
and regional integration
• Strong alignment with current and
• Funding increases for rapid
future workforce needs
• Clear career pathways with high
completion and placement rates
• Economies of scale at the
regional level (e.g., class size)
• Improved business climate for
many industry sectors
LCTCS enrollment growth
• Targeted investments in facilities,
especially technical colleges
• Mechanisms to add/delete
programs based on regional
workforce needs
• Marketing / guidance counseling
Regional universities with focus
on student success and regional
workforce needs
• Dramatically increased completion
• Increased admissions standards
• Optimized enrollments and
LSU with national-caliber
operations and facilities
• Attraction, cultivation, and
• Need for a credible 10-15 year
retention of world-class talent
• Nationally-competitive R&D (e.g.,
federal/corporate research grants)
• Improved state image and PR
strategy to achieve national
prominence
• Funding and enrollment model to
achieve strategic plan
Strong system-wide efficiency
and accountability mechanisms
• Increased responsiveness to
• Increased emphasis on
market needs
• Improved collaboration/articulation
between 2-yr and 4-yr institutions
performance-based funding
• Funding follows the student (i.e.,
less emphasis on “base” funding)
• Potential facility sharing among 2yr and 4-yr regional institutions
Source: LED analysis
rates and student success
• Greater alignment with current
and future regional workforce
needs
programs, incl. graduate level
• Reduced duplication of programs
and institutions
23
THERE ARE MANY BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING A
BETTER ALIGNED HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Reduced skilled labor gaps (top business concern)
• Increased graduation and completion rates
• Improved in-state job placement rates
• Enhanced ROI for taxpayer dollars
• Strengthened state business climate
• Improved industry/university innovation and collaboration
• Enhanced state image
• Reduced brain drain
• Significantly increased job-creation success
• Stable or improved funding per FTE at most institutions
Source: LED analysis
24
SELECTED QUESTIONS PERC MAY WANT TO CONSIDER
EXAMPLES – NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Given current/future workforce needs and the State’s fiscal situation, what is the
appropriate enrollment mix between two-year and four-year institutions?
• Are undergraduate program enrollments at two-year and four-year institutions in each
region well aligned with current and future workforce needs in the region? Do programs
overlap?
• Would the current funding formula enable a rapid shift to an alternative enrollment mix if
necessary? If not, which mechanisms should be implemented to optimize enrollment
mix?
• Are admissions standards at four-year universities comparable with their SREB peers?
If not, which mechanisms should be used to set appropriate admissions standards?
• Are current facilities adequate to support high quality services, optimal enrollment mix,
and necessary growth? If not, how should we modify use of existing facilities and/or
fund new ones?
• Does the current funding formula sufficiently emphasize key performance metrics (e.g.,
completion rates, workforce placement, sponsored research)?
• What are the plausible state budget scenarios for the next 2-5 years and how should our
higher education system be structured to respond to each of them?
Source: LED analysis
25
ADDITIONAL CHARTS
26
LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM SHOULD PROMOTE:
KEY OBJECTIVES - NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Student success in school (e.g., completion) and life
(e.g., employment)
• Quality programs and facilities at all levels
• Alignment with current and future workforce needs
• Attraction, retention, and cultivation of world-class
talent & R&D capacity
• Access for economically-disadvantaged students
• Efficient use of financial resources within State fiscal
means
Source: LED analysis
27
CURRENTLY, LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM
FALLS SHORT ON SEVERAL KEY OBJECTIVES
INCOMPLETE DRAFT
Objective
Preliminary evaluation
• Student success in school (e.g., completion)
and life (e.g., employment)
• College/university graduation rates are last in South
• Many graduates finish in programs that are not well
aligned with current or future workforce needs
• Quality programs and facilities at all levels
• General improvement opportunities exist in most areas
• Some technical college programs, equipment, and
facilities lag significantly
• Alignment with current and future workforce
needs
• Enrollments are significantly out of line with current and
• Attraction, retention, and cultivation of worldclass talent & R&D capacity
• LSU has momentum but significantly lags top public
• Access for economically-disadvantaged
students
• TOPS and overall enrollments suggest Louisiana
• Efficient use of financial resources within State
fiscal means
• Funding mechanisms provide insufficient incentives
Source: LED analysis
future workforce needs in Louisiana and rest of South
research universities
• Other campuses (e.g., La Tech) have niche strengths
performs relatively well
and accountability
• Institutions are not well integrated at regional level
28
ADJUSTING FOR OLDER STATE RESIDENTS, LOUISIANA’S PER-CAPITA
FUNDING LEVEL RANKING IS RELATIVELY STABLE
Total state funding per capita* ($ per resident)
Total state funding per resident under age 65* ($ per resident)
308
North Carolina
294
Alabama
North Carolina
352
Alabama
341
Louisiana**
261
Delaware
300
Delaware
259
Louisiana**
297
Mississippi
244
Arkansas
281
Arkansas
241
Mississippi
279
Oklahoma
219
Oklahoma
253
Southern average
218
Southern average
251
Georgia
215
Georgia
239
Kentucky
238
207
Kentucky
198
Maryland
Florida
228
225
Virginia
189
Maryland
Florida
188
Virginia
Texas
Tennessee
West Virginia
South Carolina
176
171
164
151
* Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations
** Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
Source: SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
215
Tennessee
197
Texas
196
West Virginia
195
South Carolina
174
29