Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by All Faculty of a College
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Survey participation: 43(41%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of 43
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
42
4.38
5
5
2
0.95
0.15
43
4.14
5
5
1
1.27
0.19
42
4.17
5
5
1
1.11
0.17
43
4.12
5
5
1
1.32
0.20
43
4.19
5
5
1
1.33
0.20
43
3.93
5
4
1
1.39
0.21
43
4.30
5
5
1
1.15
0.18
28
4.14
5
5
1
1.33
0.25
42
4.24
5
5
1
1.11
0.17
43
4.09
5
5
1
1.36
0.21
38
4.16
5
5
1
1.25
0.20
43
3.91
5
4
1
1.22
0.19
39
4.31
5
5
2
0.91
0.15
43
3.88
5
4
1
1.38
0.21
41
4.56
5
5
2
0.77
0.12
41
4.05
5
5
1
1.32
0.21
657
4.16
5
5
1
1.20
0.05
1
2%
0
0%
1
2%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
15
35%
1
2%
0
0%
5
12%
0
0%
4
9%
0
0%
2
5%
2
5%
31
5%
0
4
2
10
26
42
3
4
2
9
25
43
1
4
5
9
23
42
4
3
2
9
25
43
5
1
2
8
27
43
6
1
4
11
21
43
2
4
0
10
27
43
3
1
2
5
17
28
1
4
4
8
25
42
6
0
2
11
24
43
3
2
3
8
22
38
3
3
7
12
18
43
0
3
3
12
21
39
5
3
5
9
21
43
0
1
4
7
29
41
4
2
5
7
23
41
46
40
52
145
374
657
0.0%
9.5%
4.8%
23.8%
61.9%
100%
7.0%
9.3%
4.7%
20.9%
58.1%
100%
2.4%
9.5%
11.9%
21.4%
54.8%
100%
9.3%
7.0%
4.7%
20.9%
58.1%
100%
11.6%
2.3%
4.7%
18.6%
62.8%
100%
14.0%
2.3%
9.3%
25.6%
48.8%
100%
4.7%
9.3%
0.0%
23.3%
62.8%
100%
10.7%
3.6%
7.1%
17.9%
60.7%
100%
2.4%
9.5%
9.5%
19.0%
59.5%
100%
14.0%
0.0%
4.7%
25.6%
55.8%
100%
7.9%
5.3%
7.9%
21.1%
57.9%
100%
7.0%
7.0%
16.3%
27.9%
41.9%
100%
0.0%
7.7%
7.7%
30.8%
53.8%
100%
11.6%
7.0%
11.6%
20.9%
48.8%
100%
0.0%
2.4%
9.8%
17.1%
70.7%
100%
9.8%
4.9%
12.2%
17.1%
56.1%
100%
7.0%
6.1%
7.9%
22.1%
56.9%
100%
9.0
4.9
6.4
4.9
5.8
4.6
6.2
5.5
6.6
5.8
6.0
5.0
11.0
3.8
36.0
5.0
6.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Accounting
Chair: Robert C. Ricketts
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 5 (23.8%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.00
5
4
3
0.63
0.28
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
4
4.25
5
4.5
3
0.83
0.41
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.40
5
4
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
4
4.25
5
4.5
3
0.83
0.41
5
3.60
5
3
2
1.20
0.54
5
4.20
5
4
3
0.75
0.33
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
78
4.43
5
5
2
0.63
0.07
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
3%
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
3
1
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
1
2
4
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
3
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
1
1
2
4
0
1
2
0
2
5
0
0
1
2
2
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
1
9
23
45
78
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
60.0%
20.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
60.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
25.0%
25.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
0.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
40.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
1.3%
11.5%
29.5%
57.7%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
2.0
No low ratings
No low
ratings
68.0
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Finance
Chair: Jeffrey M. Mercer
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 5 (50%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.60
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.40
5
5
3
0.80
0.36
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
4
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
4.80
5
5
4
0.40
0.18
5
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.22
5
5.00
5
5
5
0.00
0.00
4
4.50
5
4.5
4
0.50
0.25
78
4.76
5
5
3
0.39
0.04
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
20%
2
3%
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
0
4
5
0
0
1
1
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
0
4
4
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
1
4
5
0
0
0
2
3
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
0
0
2
2
4
0
0
2
15
61
78
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
20.0%
80.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
2.6%
19.2%
78.2%
100%
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
No low ratings
No low
ratings
No low
ratings
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
ISQS
Chair: Glenn J. Browne
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 7 (43.8%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
7
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
7
4.00
5
5
2
1.20
0.45
7
3.57
5
5
1
1.76
0.67
7
3.57
5
4
1
1.50
0.57
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
3.57
5
5
1
1.68
0.63
6
3.17
5
3.5
1
1.86
0.76
7
3.57
5
3
2
1.29
0.49
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
6
3.17
5
3.5
1
1.86
0.76
7
3.43
5
5
1
1.84
0.70
7
4.00
5
5
2
1.20
0.45
7
3.29
5
5
1
1.98
0.75
7
4.14
5
5
2
1.12
0.43
7
3.43
5
5
1
1.84
0.70
110
3.50
5
5
1
1.69
0.16
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
1
14%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
2
2%
0
1
2
0
4
7
2
0
1
0
4
7
1
1
1
1
3
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
1
2
0
0
4
7
2
1
0
0
3
6
0
2
2
0
3
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
2
1
0
0
3
6
2
1
0
0
4
7
0
1
2
0
4
7
3
0
0
0
4
7
0
1
1
1
4
7
2
1
0
0
4
7
27
12
9
2
60
110
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
28.6%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
33.3%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
28.6%
28.6%
0.0%
42.9%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
33.3%
16.7%
0.0%
0.0%
50.0%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
28.6%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
42.9%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
14.3%
14.3%
57.1%
100%
28.6%
14.3%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
100%
24.5%
10.9%
8.2%
1.8%
54.5%
100%
4.0
2.0
2.0
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.0
1.5
1.3
1.0
1.3
4.0
1.3
5.0
1.3
1.6
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Management
Yitzhak I. Fried
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 9 (42.9%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
9
4.22
5
4
2
0.92
0.31
9
4.33
5
5
2
0.94
0.31
9
4.00
5
4
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.33
5
5
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.11
5
4
1
1.20
0.40
9
4.44
5
5
2
0.96
0.32
1
4.00
4
4
4
0.00
0.00
9
4.33
5
5
1
1.25
0.42
9
4.22
5
5
1
1.23
0.41
7
4.43
5
4
4
0.49
0.19
9
3.56
5
4
2
0.83
0.28
7
4.00
5
4
2
0.93
0.35
9
4.00
5
4
1
1.25
0.42
8
4.75
5
5
3
0.66
0.23
8
3.88
5
4
1
1.27
0.45
130
4.19
5
4
1
0.96
0.08
No-Response out of 9
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
8
89%
0
0%
0
0%
2
22%
0
0%
2
22%
0
0%
1
11%
1
11%
14
10%
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
1
0
4
4
9
0
1
0
3
5
9
1
0
1
3
4
9
1
0
0
2
6
9
1
0
0
4
4
9
0
1
0
2
6
9
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
6
9
1
0
0
3
5
9
0
0
0
4
3
7
0
1
3
4
1
9
0
1
0
4
2
7
1
0
1
3
4
9
0
0
1
0
7
8
1
0
1
3
3
8
7
6
7
44
66
130
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
33.3%
55.6%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
44.4%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
0.0%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
22.2%
66.7%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
55.6%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
57.1%
42.9%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
11.1%
100%
0.0%
14.3%
0.0%
57.1%
28.6%
100%
11.1%
0.0%
11.1%
33.3%
44.4%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
12.5%
0.0%
87.5%
100%
12.5%
0.0%
12.5%
37.5%
37.5%
100%
5.4%
4.6%
5.4%
33.8%
50.8%
100%
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
No low
ratings
8.0
8.0
No low ratings
5.0
6.0
7.0
No low ratings
6.0
8.5
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1
Administrator Evaluation Surveys 2015
Rawls College of Business
Marketing
Chair: Dennis B. Arnett
Chairs and Other Mid-Level Administrators as Evaluated by all Faculty of a Department
Survey participation: 10 (71.4%)
1
2
Actively
Actively
promotes
promotes
research and
teaching
scholarly
excellence
excellence
3
Actively
promotes
excellence in
institutional
and public
service
4
5
6
Seeks
Effectively Is responsive
faculty input
represents the
to faculty
in decision
department
interests
making
7
Supports
faculty
development
8
9
Conducts fair Actively
and rigorous promotes
tenure and
diversity
promotion
within the
processes
department
10
Overall, this
leader inspires
confidence
11
12
Has a clear
Conducts fair and
strategic plan
rigorous processes
and allocates
to hire new faculty
resources
members in the
consistently
department
with that plan
13
Effectively
manages
financial
resources
14
15
Administers
Has an effective
in an open
and competent
and
administrative
transparent
staff
manner
16
Promotes
cooperation
between
disciplines
within the
department
ALL
Statistics
Count
Average
Maximum
Median
Minimum
Standard Deviation
Standard Error (±)
No-Response out of
10
Ratings Distribution:
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
1=Strongly Disagree
2=Disagree
3=Neutral
4=Agree
5=Strongly Agree
Ratio of high ratings to
low ratings
(4+5)/(1+2)[all
agreements divided by all
disagreements)
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
3.80
5
4.5
1
1.47
0.46
10
3.90
5
4.5
2
1.22
0.39
10
4.10
5
5
2
1.22
0.39
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.00
0.32
10
4.30
5
5
2
1.00
0.32
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
4.20
5
5
1
1.25
0.39
10
4.10
5
4.5
2
1.14
0.36
10
4.10
5
4.5
1
1.22
0.39
9
4.44
5
5
2
1.07
0.36
10
3.90
5
4.5
1
1.37
0.43
10
4.40
5
5
2
0.92
0.29
10
4.30
5
5
1
1.19
0.38
10
4.60
5
5
4
0.49
0.15
10
4.00
5
5
1
1.41
0.45
159
4.20
5
5
1
1.11
0.09
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
10%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
1
1%
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
2
0
2
5
10
0
2
2
1
5
10
0
2
1
1
6
10
0
1
1
2
6
10
0
1
1
2
6
10
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
0
1
2
6
10
0
2
0
3
5
10
1
0
1
3
5
10
0
1
1
0
7
9
1
1
1
2
5
10
0
1
0
3
6
10
1
0
0
3
6
10
0
0
0
4
6
10
1
1
1
1
6
10
6
16
10
35
92
159
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
20.0%
0.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
20.0%
0.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
10.0%
30.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
11.1%
11.1%
0.0%
77.8%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
20.0%
50.0%
100%
0.0%
10.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
30.0%
60.0%
100%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
40.0%
60.0%
100%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
10.0%
60.0%
100%
3.8%
10.1%
6.3%
22.0%
57.9%
100%
9.0
2.3
3.0
3.5
8.0
8.0
9.0
8.0
4.0
8.0
7.0
3.5
9.0
9.0
No low ratings
3.5
5.8
Institutional Research, 1/25/2016, page 1 of 1