House Higher Education Finance and Policy Committee
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
Supplemental Material – Packet Two
S.19
Biennial budget consultation and outreach
S.20
Differential tuition authorization and policy history
S.21
Characteristics of borrowing by graduates
S.22
“Closing the Achievement Gap” presentation
S.23
Representative Gruenhagen’s request
S-2 - 1
S‐19: Biennial Budget Outreach to Faculty and Students Minnesota State Colleges and Universities 2014‐15 Biennial Budget Preparation In preparation of 2014‐2015 biennial budget request we listened to:  Faculty, students, staff and families  Workforce listening sessions in collaboration with DEED and the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce: o Nine industry sectors o 1,540 participants o 700 business representatives  State agency partners including the Department of Education, Minnesota Management and Budget, and the Department of Administration  Itasca Project  Governor’s office and legislators  The Board of Trustees 2014‐2015 Biennial Budget Discussions with Stakeholders  May – September, 2012 Reviewed reports submitted as a follow up to faculty conversations conducted February through May Inter Faculty Organization (IFO), Meet & Confer  September 7, 2012  September 7, 2012 Chancellor’s Meeting with Statewide Student Associations  September 21, 2012 IFO Board of Directors Meeting  September 27, 2012 Chancellor/ Am. Federation for State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)  September 9‐10, 2013 Leadership Council discussion  September 28, 2012 Chancellor/ MN University Association of Administrative Service Faculty (MSUAASF)  October 5, 2012 Minnesota State College Faculty (MSCF), Meet & Confer  October 5, 2012 Chancellor/ Minnesota Association of Professional Employees (MAPE)  October 5, 2012 Chancellor’s Meeting with Statewide Student Associations S-2 - 2
2014‐2015 Biennial Budget Discussions with Stakeholders (continued)  October 2013 Board of Trustees Meeting (1st Reading)  October 22, 2012 Chancellor/MSUAASF  October 24, 2012 Minnesota State University Student Association (MSUSA)  October 26, 2012 AFSCME Meet & Confer  November 2, 2012 MAPE Meet & Confer  November 2, 2012 Chancellor’s Meeting with Statewide Student Associations  November 8, 2012 Chancellor/MSCF Chancellor/AFSCME  November 8, 2012  November 8, 2012 Chancellor/MSCSA  November 8, 2012 Chancellor/MSUSA  November 8, 2012 Chancellor/MAPE  November 8, 2012 Chancellor/MSUAASF  November 2013 Board of Trustees Meeting (2nd Reading)  November 21, 2012 Minnesota State College Student Association (MSCSA)  November 29, 2012 IFO Government Relations Committee on biennial budget  November 30, 2012 MSUAASF Meet & Confer  December 18, 2012 MSCSA Leadership  December 19, 2012 Student and bargaining unit government relations staff S-2 - 3
S-20: Differential Tuition Authorization and Policy History
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
Our research has found that some form differential (or variable) tuition has been permitted in law since 1983. The information below summarizes that history.
Permission for variable tuition rates first introduced and passed into law in 1983:
Laws of Minnesota 1983
CHAPTER 258--H.F.No. 1283
Sec. 32. [135A.04] [VARIABLE TUITION.]
The board of regents of the University of Minnesota, state university board, state board for community colleges, and state board for vocational education shall
establish tuition. Tuition may vary by program, level of instruction, cost of instruction, or other classifications determined by each board.
Most recent version (amended in 1995) that exists in Minnesota Statute:
135A.04 VARIABLE TUITION.
The Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota and the Board of Trustees of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities shall each establish tuition.
Tuition may vary by program, level of instruction, cost of instruction, or other classifications determined by each board. Tuition may be set at any percentage of
instructional cost established by the respective boards.
Pre-Merger Policies Regarding Variable (Differential) Tuition
STATE UNIVERSITIES
TECHNICAL COLLEGES
COMMUNITY COLLEGES
5.1 TUITION AND FEES
3.2.1.0 TUITION
V.01.02 RESOURCES
This system policy authorizes the collection, the
All students shall pay the tuition rates established
FEES
administration and the refunding of tuition, fees,
by the State Board unless exempt from tuition as
Special fees for credit courses, in addition to the
and other assessments.
permitted by statute or policy. Each technical
general fee for a given course, may be charged
college board shall establish methods for
according to the following provisions:
Tuition, fees and assessments shall be approved by calculating tuition rates for hour-based courses.
1. The Chancellor or designee shall act on a
the State University Board. All fee schedules shall
request to charge a special fee for a course that
be published and made readily available to students Each technical college board shall have, and shall
is a required component of an occupational
and the public. The schedules shall state the
publish in the college's student handbook, a tuition
program where the authority of the college to
purpose of all mandatory fees and the related
policy that specifies timelines for collection,
offer the program has been granted by the
refund policies. "Optional" and "nonrefundable"
methods of payment, reasons for deferment of
Board, and where the fee is therefore a
charges shall be clearly identified. Tuition and fees tuition, and penalties for non-payment.
modification of the financial obligation that the
related to specific programs or courses and the
student in the program has anticipated.
policy for refunding such charges shall be explained
2. The Chancellor or designee shall act on a
in the appropriate university publications including
request to charge a special fee for a regularlycatalogs, class schedules, and promotion materials.
offered course where the course is not
specifically required for completion of a given
S-2 - 4
5.4 SUPPLEMENTAL FEES
Subd. 2. Course and Program Fees
(a) Each university may charge special course or
program fees as required to meet the full costs of
services and materials provided students in
classes utilizing nonmaintenance and equipment
account facilities or students participating in
noncredit continuing education programs. The
tuition portion of this fee shall be refundable on
the same basis as tuition.
(b) Each university may charge special fees to
recover costs for course supplies or services
beyond those necessary for normal instruction.
The fees may include, but not be limited to, the
following: consumable items, services, payment
for use of off-campus facilities, and materials or
other items which may become the personal
property of the student. The charge shall not
exceed the full cost of the materials or services
provided.
(c) Each university shall submit a complete listing
of all supplemental course fees to the Chancellor
for transmittal to the State University Board at its
annual meeting.
3.2.2.0 PROCEDURES FOR FEES
SURCHARGE FEE:
1. A surcharge must be justified by one or more of
the following:
a. small class size;
b. distance delivery;
c. curriculum modification;
d. time of day/week; or
e. course development
2. Justification of the surcharge fee must be kept
on file.
3. This fee may be included in credit-based
courses offered on-or off-campus in a
customized service delivery.
4. The surcharge fee must be identified separately
on the fee statement.
program of study.
3. The President may set a special fee for a course
which is a first-time offering.
4. The President may set a special fee for each offcampus course, and off-campus components of
regularly-offered courses, in such a manner that
enough money can be placed in the state
collection account to pay for extra expenses
incurred because the course or component is
offered off campus.
5. The President may set a special fee for certain
courses with closed enrollments which benefit a
particular group, with the amount of the fee
sufficient to pay all costs, including instructor's
salary, travel, if necessary, and supplies.
6. The Chancellor or designee shall issue a
procedure for the proper recording of each of
the above categories of special fees for credit
courses, which shall include an end-of-year
audit provision for the regularly-offered
categories. The audit shall confirm that the
special fees were expended for course related
costs.
The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system Board of Trustees approved differential tuition rates in FY1999 and FY2000 as authorized in law. The
board adopted the tuition and fee policy below in June 2000.
MnSCU Policy 5.11. TUITION AND FEES.
Adopted June 21, 2000
Part 1. Policy Statement. Mandatory tuition and fees shall be charged by all colleges and universities. All tuition and fees must be identified separately on the
fee statement. An annual report will be provided to the Board of Trustees.
There shall be three categories of fees to be charged to student by Minnesota State Colleges and Universities. College and university optional fees shall be
those fees established by the Board of Trustees and adopted at campus discretion. Personal property and service charges shall include items and services that
are retained by the student or are services on the student's behalf. No fee shall be charged unless authorized by the Board of Trustees.
S-2 - 5
Part 2. Responsibilities.
Subpart A. Mandatory Tuition and Fees
The Board of Trustees shall approve the tuition structure (per credit rates, programmatic rates, market driven rates, banded tuition, pilots) for all colleges and
universities. All mandatory fee maximums must be approved by the Board of Trustees. There shall be four mandatory fees: student application fee, senior
citizen fee in lieu of tuition, parking fees, and statewide student association fees. All colleges and universities shall charge these tuition and fees consistent with
Minnesota Statutes, Board policies, and system procedures. The chancellor is authorized to make any necessary technical adjustments to the rates.
Subpart B. Personal Property and Service Charges
Colleges and universities may charge students the actual cost of property and services. The fee shall be for services or for items that become the personal
property of a student and have an educational or personal value beyond the classroom. The actual cost shall be the allowable maximum charge.
Subpart C. College and University Optional Fees
The Board of Trustees approves the optional fee maximums. Colleges and universities may establish policies to charge fees not to exceed the maximum
amount approved by the Board of Trustees.
The following fees are authorized:
1.
Registration and Career Services fees which include:
1. Late Fees
2. Drop Fees
3. Experiential Learning Assessment Fee
4. Placement Fees
2.
Student Life fees which include:
1. Student Life/Activity Fee
2. Athletics Fee
3. Health Services Fee
4. Special Events
5. Residential Learning Community Fee
3.
Technology Fee
Subpart C. Market Driven Tuition
Colleges and universities may set and charge market driven tuition for customized training, continuing education, distance learning and contract post-secondary
enrollment programs.
Part 3. Accountability/Reporting
The Board of Trustees will be periodically updated on tuition and fees and room and board rates.
Note: Current tuition and fee policy and procedures are included as Exhibits 10-4 and 10-5 in the financial and demographic data book.
S-2 - 6
S-21: Characteristics and Borrowing by Graduates
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
Fiscal Year 2012
Purpose
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities graduates were studied to identify the characteristics that are associated with differences in their
student loan borrowing and the amount they borrowed. The analysis focused on students who earned undergraduate certificates, diplomas,
associate degrees or bachelor’s degrees in fiscal year 2012.
Findings
The analysis examined differences whether graduates borrowed and how much they borrowed on the basis of several characteristics. The
following characteristics were found to be significant in explaining differences in whether graduate borrowed or not and most also were
significant in explaining differences in the amount borrowed.
•
All Graduates – Sixty-four percent of the 2012 graduates borrowed and the median student loan debt for all certificate, diploma, associate
and bachelor’s graduates was $8,326.
•
Award Level – Graduates at higher award levels were more likely to borrow and to borrow more.
o Forty-one percent of certificate graduates borrowed, 66 percent of associate degree graduates borrowed and 73 percent of
bachelor’s degree graduates borrowed.
o The median debt for all associate degree graduates was $8,536 and the median for all bachelor’s degree graduates was $18,123.
•
Full-Time vs. Part-Time Enrollment – Graduates that enrolled on a full-time basis were more likely to borrow and to borrow more than
graduates that enrolled on a part-time basis.
o Seventy percent of graduates that enrolled full-time borrowed compared to 58 percent for graduates that enrolled part-time.
o The median debt for all graduates enrolled full-time was $10,552 while the median for all graduates enrolled part-time was $5,329.
•
Dependency Status – Graduates that were independent students when they first enrolled were just as likely to borrow as those that were
dependent students, but the independent students borrowed more.
o Sixty-four percent of both independent and dependent graduates borrowed.
o The median debt for all independent graduates was $9,548 while the median for all dependent graduates was $7,742.
S-2 - 7
•
Pell Grant Eligibility – Graduates that were eligible for a Pell Grant were less likely to borrow than graduates that were not eligible.
o Eighty-one percent of Pell eligible graduates borrowed compared to 87 percent for graduates that were not eligible and 18 percent
for graduates that did not apply for financial aid.
•
Students of Color – Graduates that were students of color were slightly more likely to borrow and borrowed less than graduates that were
not students of color.
o Sixty-eight percent of graduates that were students of color borrowed compared to 65 percent for graduates that were not students
of color.
o The median debt for all graduates of color was $8,022 while the median for all graduates who were not students of color was
$8,753.
•
Gender – Female graduates were more likely to borrow and borrowed more than male graduates.
o Sixty-seven percent of female graduates borrowed compared to 62 percent for male graduates.
o The median debt for all female graduates was $9,500 while the median for all male graduates was $7,178.
•
Age – Graduates aged 25 to 34 were most likely to borrow and borrowed more than graduates in any other age group.
o Seventy-four percent of graduates aged 25 to 34 borrowed compared to 69 percent for graduates aged 21 to 24 and 67 percent for
graduates aged 35 to 44.
o The median debt for all graduates aged 25 to 34 was $12,312 compared to a median for all graduates aged 21 to 24 of $10,637 and
a median for all graduates aged 35 to 44 of $10,500.
Source: System Office Research, Planning and Policy
R:\Finanical Aid\Graduate Debt Analysis\Characteristics & Borrowing by FY 2012 Graduates-2013-03-08-Landscape
S-2 - 8
S-22: "Closing the Achievement Gap" Presentation
Achievement gap - definition
Closing the Achievement Gap
The achievement gap refers to the disparity between the
educational performance of groups of students, especially
groups defined by gender, race/ethnicity, and
socioeconomic status. The achievement gap can be
observed on a variety of measures including standardized
test scores, grade point average, participation, completion
and persistence rates.
Board of Trustees Study Session
January 16, 2013
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
2
The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system is an Equal Opportunity employer and educator.
Gaps in college readiness: students of color
have lower ACT and accuplacer scores than
white students
Participation at MnSCU has increased and the
participation gap for students of color
has narrowed
30
100
30%
Gap: 9.4
24.2%
Particpation Rate
22.0%
21.4%
19.8%
20%
17.1%
16.5%
17.0%
15.0%
13.7%
12.2%
8.9%
10%
Gap:
9.2%
Gap:
10.5%
Gap:
4.9%
Gap:
4.4%
Gap:
4.3%
Gap:
-1.1%
Gap:
12.5%
Gap:
7.2%
Gap:
6.4%
Gap:
2.2%
80.2
24
80
70.8
ACT Composite Score
Accuplacer Reading Score
25.3%
60
40
Gap: 2.1
21.8
19.7
18
12
6
20
0%
Am. Indian
2003
Asian
Black
Hispanic
2011
Students of
Color
White
0
0
Students of
Color
* MnSCU Minnesota resident students of as a percent of the state’s population aged 18 to 24.
Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
White Students
Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
3
4
S-2 - 9
Students of Color White Students
S-22: "Closing the Achievement Gap" Presentation
Gaps in college readiness: students of color
more likely to take developmental courses
than white students*
Gaps in persistence and completion: students of color
have lower second fall persistence rates and lower
completion rates than white students
Persistence Rate & Completion Rate
Percent Taking a Developmental Course
100%
100%
77.7%
80%
75.5%
68.4%
61.4%
60.4%
60%
Gap:
11.1%
Gap:
19.1%
Gap:
12.2%
Gap:
26.2%
Gap:
28.4%
49.3%
40%
29.9%
25.6%
20%
22.1%
23.9%
12.9%
12.5%
Gap:
-0.4%
Gap:
9.2%
Gap:
16.9%
Gap:
12.7%
Gap:
11.0%
Asian
Colleges
Black
Hispanic
Universities
Students of
Color
80%
60%
White
Gap:
7.1%
80.8%
70.2%
59.7%
54.0%
Gap:
12.7%
54.4%
Gap:
9.7%
44.7%
41.3%
40%
20%
0%
Persistence:
Colleges
0%
Am. Indian
87.9%
Gap:
10.5%
Persistence:
Universities
White Students
Completion:
Colleges
Completion:
Universities
Students of Color
Second fall persistence rate, third spring completion rate for colleges and sixth spring completion
rate for universities. Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
* Percent of first-time entering students who take one or more developmental courses in their
first two years. Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
5
6
Modest success in closing the achievement gap
Students of Color
Gaps in Preparation*
Challenges to achieving our goals
 Academic preparedness of students at time of admission
Students of Color
Gaps in Completion
 Student’s financial resources
Colleges:
19.1%
12.7%
 Institutional resources to support high impact practices
Universities:
11.1%
9.7%
 More diverse and culturally competent MnSCU faculty and
staff
 On-going collaboration with communities of color to
support the strategies
* As measured by need to take developmental education courses.
Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
7
8
S-2 - 10
S-22: "Closing the Achievement Gap" Presentation
What accounts for the achievement gap in
completion?
Colleges
Elements of the 2014-2015 legislative priorities
that will help address the achievement gap
 Scholarships, modest tuition increases
Universities
Gap in Preparation*
4.0%
4.4%
Gap in Financial Resources
4.9%
1.9%
 Access to the state grant programs for part-time
students with financial need
Other
3.8%
3.4%
 Student persistence and completion initiatives
12.7%
9.7%
Total Gap in Completion:
 Alignment of high school academic assessments
with measures of college readiness
* As measured by need to take developmental courses education courses.
Source: System Office Research and Planning analysis
9
10
S-2 - 11
S-23: Representative Gruenhagen’s Request
Minnesota State Colleges and Universities
1. Analysis of salary and benefit increases for administrators who were eligible to receive a bonus (performance pay)
•
•
•
Salaries and benefits for contract administrators who were eligible to receive performance pay increased by $1.5 million, from $7.1 million
in 2006 to $8.7 million in 2012.
This increase represented one percent of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and 2012.
The average salary and benefits increased from $192,944 to $239,408.
2. Analysis of salary and benefit increases for administrators who were not eligible to receive bonuses (performance pay)
•
•
•
Salaries and benefits for non-contract administrators who were not eligible to receive performance pay increased by $11.3 million, from
$56.5 million in 2006 to $67.8 million in 2012.
This increase represented 6.9% of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and 2012.
The average salary and benefits increased from $116,503 to $130,805.
3. Analysis of salary and benefit increases for faculty
•
•
•
Salaries and benefits for instructional faculty increased by $77.9 million, from $560.7 million in 2006 to $638.6 million in 2012.
This increase represented 47.6% of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and 2012.
The average salary and benefits increased from $70,094 to $75,747.
4. Analysis of salary and benefit increases for support personnel and rank and file employees
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Salaries and benefits for managers and supervisors increased by $8.9 million, from $32.6 million in 2006 to $41.5 million in 2012.
This increase for managers and supervisors represented 5.4% of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and
2012.
The average salary and benefits for managers and supervisors increased from $74,420 to $83,598.
Salaries and benefits for professionals increased by $50.2 million, from $142.3 million in 2006 to $192.5 million in 2012.
This increase for professionals represented 30.7% of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and 2012.
The average salary and benefits for professionals increased from $64,759 to $71,367.
Salaries and benefits for service and support staff increased by $13.7 million, from $159.3 million in 2006 to $172.9 million in 2012.
S-2 - 12
•
•
This increase for service and support staff represented 8.4% of the systemwide total increase in salary and benefits between 2006 and 2012.
The average salary and benefits for service and support staff increased from $47,332 to $52,217.
5. Average dollar amount and percent increase in tuition
FY 2006
Tuition
Colleges
Universities
$
3,620
$
4,791
FY 2012
Tuition
$4,644
$6,497
Dollar
Change
Percent
Change
Average
Annual Dollar
Change
Average
Annual
Percent
Change
$1,024
28.3%
$ 171
4.3%
$1,706
35.6%
$ 284
5.2%
6. The dollar amount and percent decrease in state subsidy
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Final Appropriation
600,694,000
602,194,000
665,883,000
662,417,000
614,169,000
605,494,000
545,366,000
545,822,000
Change from Prior Year
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Percent Change
1,500,000
63,689,000
(3,466,000)
(48,248,000)
(8,675,000)
(60,128,000)
456,000
0.2%
10.6%
-0.5%
-7.3%
-1.4%
-9.9%
0.1%
MnSCU’s annual state appropriation is $55 million (9 percent) lower in FY 2013 than it was it in FY 2006. In inflation adjusted dollars, MnSCU’s
state appropriation has fallen by 20% from 2006 funding levels, while enrollment grew 15% over the same period. To maintain the same buying
power in 2013 as in FY 2006, MnSCU’s current state appropriation would be $686 million.
7. The amount of additional funding from student growth in enrollment
MnSCU's tuition revenue from enrollment change increased $105 million from FY2006-FY 2012, a 20 percent increase.
S-2 - 13