Office of the President
PRESIDENT’S CABINET NOTES
December 8, 2014
In attendance: Dr. Maria Sheehan, Elena Bubnova, Dr. Kyle Dalpe, Estela Gutierrez, Ron Marston, Dr. Jane Nichols, Dr.
Barbara Sanders, Gretchen Sawyer, and Dr. Rachel Solemsaas. Excused: Michele Meador. Guests: Lee Raubolt and Shanna
Rahming.
1.
Introduction of Gretchen Sawyer, Executive Director of Institutional Advancement/Foundation – Dr.
Sheehan
2.
Mobile App Presentation (Ref #2) – Shanna Rahming
Shanna made a Power Point presentation on the future mobile application for TMCC students. IT is currently testing
the application and will “go live” Spring 2015. (See Ref #2 for the presentation)
3.
Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Software Presentation (Ref #3) – Lee Raubolt, Estela
Gutierrez, and Dr. Rachel Solemsaas
CRM is a tool to assist with recruitment and retention. (See Ref #3 for the presentation)
4.
Early Closure – Christmas Eve (Dec 24) -- All
Unless a state or system directive is presented, managers may release staff no earlier than 3 pm if they maintain
coverage to keep the office open until 5 pm. Follow up Note: Dr. Jane Nichols checked with scheduling and there
are no events scheduled on any college site after 5 pm on Dec. 24.
5.
Enrollment (Ref #5) – Elena Bubnova and Dr. Kyle Dalpe
Latest Enrollment Report: 1% down in enrollment for spring. Wintermester shows the full web-based classes are
full with Core Humanities sections all full. Art, biology and general education classes are nearly full for spring.
EM Process: please see reference #5 for presentation.
6.
2014 IPEDS Data Feedback Report (Ref #6) – Elena Bubnova
This item was moved to President’s Advisory Council agenda.
7.
Student Services Forum Update – Estela Gutierrez
The Student Services Forum is scheduled during Professional Development Days, January 16. The Forum will
cover the following items:
•
New programs (Jump Start, Suicide Prevention, etc.)
•
Unveiling new Steps to Enroll with guidelines
8.
Government Relations Action Plan (Ref #8) – Dr. Kyle Dalpe
The Action Plan is an awareness campaign on the college and it is supported by the System Office. Kyle is the
designated liaison. Kyle asked Cabinet contact him should they or their direct reports meet with any politicians
so we are not double-teaming or appearing as being disconnected.
9.
Board of Regents Meeting Update – President Sheehan
Moved to President’s Advisory Council meeting.
10.
Institutional Advisory Council Update – President Sheehan
Moved to President’s Advisory Council meeting.
Page 1 of 1; President’s Cabinet Notes
TMCC is an EEO/AA institution. See http://eeo.tmcc.edu for more information.
Created: 1/6/2015; Rev: 1/6/2015
Mobile App
CampusEAI
CampusEAI Consortium, Cleveland Ohio
Features, Status, Implementation
Shanna Rahming, Thomas Dobbert
12/08/2014
President's Cabinet Ref #2
Why and what is it?
• Use of mobile devices by students challenges us to offer access to
PeopleSoft, CANVAS, etc. via their mobile platform(s)
• CampusEAI allows for PS access and is designed for
• iOS (Apple devices, iPad, iPhone, etc.)
• Android devices
• Windows Mobile devices
• UNR uses “Dublab”
• CSN, NSC use CampusEAI, WNC will go live with CampusEAI (using TMCC’s
work in the spirit of shared services), GBC: no response
• NSHE Software License Council: “every campus is on their own”
President's Cabinet Ref #2
What does it allow me to do?
• Public facing side (for non-students)
• Internal side, requires login to PeopleSoft
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Enroll into classes
Check my grades
Fin/Aid
Holds
To Do List
My schedule
How much do I owe?
Etc.
President's Cabinet Ref #2
TMCC Internal Discussions and Testing
• SGA: students tested the app and gave input on features
• Financial Aid
• Admissions and Records
• Campus Solutions group
• Marketing (at the time “PIO”)
President's Cabinet Ref #2
Current Status
CampusEAI
(receives data
from PS)
Test
Production
(we are currently
in Test)
Public
(no login
required)
Go live: Spring 2015
Internal
(login required)
President's Cabinet Ref #2
Work with Marketing,
SGA, Student News
Letter, Fin/Aid, A&R
CRM for TMCC
December 8, 2014
Challenges








TMCC has had a declining or flat enrollment for several years
Decentralized way of building relationships with students
Managing data by Excel spreadsheets and Google Docs
Hard to transmit data and information across TMCC departments
Advising has seen growth in scheduled appointments, group
advising sessions and student orientations, yet we are still unable to
touch all students
Application conversion rate is historically low
While we are increasing our graduation rate by approximately 2%
per year, it will take us 7 years to reach the 40% goal
Seeing greater competition with certain types of student enrollment
President's Cabinet Ref #3
President's Cabinet Ref #3
 Coordination
is imperative
 Data and information tools has to be
effective




Real Time
Accessible
Relevant
Reliable
President's Cabinet Ref #3
TMCC Application Challenges
 Application
is 13 years old
 Non-Mobile Friendly
 Not Dynamic



Cannot target different market segments
Application has logic that is hard for a
student to follow
Cannot track the type of student they are
and what they are trying to achieve
President's Cabinet Ref #3
What is CRM
A “CRM” is a Customer Relations Management
tool to proactively manage in real time the
data, communication and information sharing
of a student’s total life-cycle, from initial
contact to graduation and alumni
development. CRM is a tool to help us reach
targets set by TMCC.
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Central Point of Contact
Admissions
& Records
Recruitment
(high school
and adult)
Faculty
CRM
Information
Technology
Academic
Advisement
Institutional
Research
Financial
Aid
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Features of CRM
 Unlimited
number
of users
 Engage student
from first point of
contact
 Marketing
 Recruitment
 Application
 Enrollment
 Academic
Advisement
 Graduation
 Alumni (additional
package, 3rd year)
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Features
Benefits
Marketing
• Automated Communications
• Personalized/Targeted Messages
• Measures Effectiveness of the message
Recruitment
• Build relationships with students from initial contact
• Multiple Target Audiences
Application
• Mobile friendly – with 5 billion smart phones by 2017
• Dynamic Application – Can target International,
Tech Prep, Transfer, Veteran, Adult and Business
Sector
Enrollment
• Data is current for target messaging
• Ability to better manage application to Enrollment
Academic
Advisement
• Target Low Yield Programs
• Provides Holistic View of Student to Faculty and Staff
Alumni
• Can have data from total life-cycle of a student
• Targeted message to increase capital campaign
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Recruitment
Current Process
With CRM
Paper Interest Cards for Prospect
Data (back fill data into PS once
student applies)
Electronic Forms to gather
Prospect data
Tracking done with Excel
Spreadsheets
Tracking done with relational
database, can query data easier
than PeopleSoft
PeopleSoft Tracking disabled
because of duplicate records
and shared instance issues
Duplicate records kept outside of
PS, have duplicate reports built
into CRM
Communication with prospects
done on limited basis
Communicate with Prospects on
a schedule and with target
messaging
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Sample Process of CRM for
Recruitment Cycle
Initial
Contact is
made
(Including
Lists like from
WCSD)
Recruiter or
Student fills
out Prospect
Electronic
Form
Communica
tions are
personalized
as we learn
more about
a student
Student feels
connected
with TMCC
and wants to
learn more
Staff is able
to see all
communicat
ions and talk
to the
student in a
more
personalized
way
Student
Applies to
TMCC and
starts
Enrollment
Cycle
President's
Cabinet Ref #3
Please see handouts for sample Enrollment cycles
and
Academic Advising for CRM
Benefits to Students, Staff and
Faculty
 Students


Streamlined/Coordinated Communication
Easier to understand process and where they
are at in the process
 Faculty




Target Market Segments (Low Yield Programs)
See and send communications
Build Relationships
Better Connections
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Please see handouts for staffing needs for CRM
Oregon Tech Headcount
Focus on Out-of-State
Term
Headcount
Non-Oregon
High Schools
Fall 2008
3525
NA
Fall 2009
3927
NA
Fall 2010
3797
35
Fall 2011
3911
49
Fall 2012
4001
91
Fall 2013
4414
82
Notes
CRM (EMAS) Old Version
CRM New Version
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Source: http://www.ous.edu/facts-reports/enrollment-watch/current-enrollment
The College of Southern Maryland


Open Enrollment Public Community College
Implemented CRM 5 years ago (Ellucian)

10,000 credit students of this they had:




12,000 – Non-Credit (Job training or Personal
Enrichment)


700 – Special/Early Admits
5,600 – Traditional Age Students
3,700 – Adult Learners
Target Non-Credit students to take Credit
Classes
Continued Sustained Growth
President's Cabinet Ref #3
https://aacrao-web.s3.amazonaws.com/files/LaL2bMVjQduq07nmBkeF_Monopoly%20CRM%20Presentation%20Final%2010-26-12.pdf
The College of Southern Maryland
President's Cabinet Ref #3
http://www.csmd.edu/pier/pdf/fact_book/fact_book_2012-2013.pdf
NSHE Experience

UNR after Target X
implementation






55,000 logged Phone calls
50,000 emails
8,000 Student Visitors
52% increase in
Preview Day Attendees
Increase Diversity
30% more Freshmen
Fall 2010 - 3556
 Fall 2014 - 4629




UNLV – Using an old
version of Hobsons, RFP
out for new system
Nevada State College Started Implementing
Hobsons December
2013
College of Southern
Nevada - About to
start RFP
President's Cabinet Ref #3
CSN journey to
evidence-based SEP
Review of Data
pts. (27-40)
Institutional SWOT
analysis
KPIs identified
Target Set
Strategies (9) and
objectives/actions
for each one
Maintenance = Capitalizing
technology for accessible and
timely data and information
sharing
President's Cabinet Ref #3
RFP Timeline





Partner with CSN with an RFP, Dec
Demos & application selection Feb - Mar
Recommendation April 15
Modular Implementation (3 years)
Module 1 starts in May15 for Spring 2016 class




Build
Test
Training
Go Live
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Return on Investment (ROI)
With the investment of the Enrollment Management Team, a CRM
will help us determine if we are on track to hit targets and if we need
to invest more resources to hit targets. Instead of TMCC reacting to
the data, TMCC can be proactive in Enrollment Management.
Life-Cycle
With CRM
Recruit
• Better Application Conversion Rate
• Target populations like Diversity to increase HSI
designation
Enroll
• Target Low Yield Programs
• Free staff time creating Excel documents to
automation of communication
• Measure communications for effectiveness
Retain
• More graduates from the College (Certificates and
Degrees)
• With a CRM we can grow at 5%
for graduation
President's Cabinet Ref #3
rate, cutting the goal of 40% to within 3 years
Cost, TBD with RFP
Sample Costs
Product Subscriptions - AgileGrad
& Radius
(With Radius Connections) :
$80,000/yr (expires 12/31/2014)
Professional Services - AgileGrad
and Radius Implementation:
$40,000 (expires 12/31/2014)
3 year Total: $280,000
Annual Cost: $93,333.33
 Sources


Redirect licensing
costs $3K
Application fee,
possibly increase in
admin fee from $5
to $15 (like WNC)
This plan assumes a 3 year agreement. If
agreement is signed before December 31 we
would receive 10% discount which would result
in the cost being $84,000/yr.
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Bottom Line
100 estimated additional FTE x $3,705 =
$370,500
Cost of Hobsons:
$280,000
Pays for itself within three years
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Conclusion
Challenges
Solution
TMCC has had a declining or flat
enrollment for several years
With a CRM and Enrollment Management we can
be proactive, redirect resources and be nimble to
the community needs
Decentralized way of building
relationships with students
Centralized tool for all staff and faculty to use to
build relationships with students
Managing data by Excel spreadsheets
and Google Docs
Using a database with real time to track phone
calls, emails, letters, postcards and visits
Hard to transmit data and information
across TMCC departments
With unlimited users staff & faculty can input
interactions with students to build relationships
Advising has seen growth in scheduled
appointments, group advising sessions
and student orientations, yet we are still
unable to touch all students
Having a total student life-cycle, advising will have
better connections with students and students will
have better access to advising through
scheduling software
Application conversion rate is historically
low
With Enrollment Management a CRM can help
target applicants for a better conversion rate
While we are increasing our graduation
rate by approximately 2% per year, it will
take us 7 years to reach the 40% goal
A CRM can target students and also has a tool to
show a student a “best way out” towards
graduation
We compete with UNR for the same
students
President's
CRM is a tool that is used
at theCabinet
flagshipRef #3
institutions, and having a CRM will help us be
competitive
Next Slides are Handouts
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Enrollment
Current Process
With CRM
Demographic Information is
shared across NSHE
Proprietary data is kept outside of
PeopleSoft
PeopleSoft Query is difficult to
design
Easier to query the data since
CRM connects the data for the
user
Emails Open Rate and Click
Through managed with
PeopleSoft or by Web Services
All communications are kept in
one database, can query on
click through and open rates,
can target messaging on click
through
Multiple departments
communicating multiple ways to
the same student
Unlimited users so all can enter
data and communications into
CRM
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Academic Advisement-Retention
Current Process
With CRM
Using Hairdresser Program to
schedule appointments, group or
orientation advisement in
different system
Can track appointments with one
solution
Outgrown the system,
appointments per month
increased 240%
System is integrated with Gmail
calendars
Another scheduling system would
cost $30,000
Cost is incorporated in the total
student life-cycle CRM
CRM is not just a scheduling
software
CRM is a total life-cycle for a
student, not just one part of a
solution
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Sample Process of CRM for
Enrollment Cycle
Student feels
comfortable
to apply,
Application
Received
and student
is admitted
Auto
Communica
te until
student
Enrolls,
TMCC builds
relationship
with student
Enrolled
student gets
communica
tion about
important
updates,
like
registration
cycles
Advising
can
communica
te to target
populations
like certain
majors
about
workshops
Student
Graduates
on-time
saving them
money
Data is
available
about student
through the
whole lifecycle so
Alumni can
target them
properly
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Staffing Needs
Department
Resources
Staff Needed
(New Staff TBD)
Information
Technology
• Web Forms, HTML Emails,
• Cal Anderson
• John Molt
Integration into website
• Current Application, Data
• Bill Garand
Transferring, CRM to PS format
• Data Management
Marketing
• Messaging (Emails, letters,
postcards, phone call scripts)
• Look of CRM – Graphic
Design, HTML email graphics
• Photography
• Kate Kirkpatrick
• Brandie Davis
• Student Interns
President's Cabinet Ref #3
Staffing Needs
Department
Resources
Recruitment
•
•
•
•
•
Admissions
and Records
Staff has extensive knowledge
of CRM products
• Lee Raubolt
• Andy Hughes
• Cynthia Olivo
Advisement
Staff has CRM experience
• Natalie Brown
• Humberto
Hernandez
Financial Aid
Outreach for Financial Aid
• Echo Lynch
All AOR staff will be trained
Implementation Team
Communication
Enter Lead Cards
Relationship Building
Staff (New Staff TBD)
• Chris Dudash – Lead
• Patty Porter
• New Recruitment
Staff Needed to
Achieve Enrollment
Targets
President's Cabinet Ref #3
TMCC Enrollment Management
Update to Cabinet
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Enrollment Management
“Enrollment management is an
organizational concept and a systematic
set of activities designed to enable
educational institutions to exert more
influence over their student enrollments.”
Hossler, D., & Bean, J. (1990). The Strategic Management of College
Enrollments. Jossey-Bass.
President's Cabinet Ref #5
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Enrollment Management
5
Recruit
Enroll
Retain
Prospects
Enrollments
Student
Success
Alumni
# of
Applications
Conversions
WSCH
FTE
Completions
(WSCH, FTE)
Persistence
Ws, FNs
Performance
Pool Measures
Grad Rate
Degrees
Certificates
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Graduate
Stakeholders
• Internal
– Shared Governance
– Support
– Doers
– Faculty, staff,
students
• External
– Business
– Community
– Elected officials
– Students
Strategic Enrollment Management
• The President’s Office has oversight of
enrollment management
• Enrollment activities involve all college
departments
• Enrollment team facilitates
– solve issues that affect enrollment
– develops strategies to support goals
Enrollment Management Goals
• Predictable and Stable Enrollment
– Overall
– Financial model
– Barriers/FTE Impact
• Access/Service Area Demographics
–
–
–
–
Ethnicity
Socio-economic
Age
Workforce needs
EM Trends
• EM emerging as integrated approach
• Facilitated from the highest level
– TMCC has tried in various areas
• Shared responsibility
– Not owned by one area
President's Cabinet Ref #5
TMCC Enrollment Management Governance Structure
President's Cabinet Ref #5
TMCC Enrollment Management Governance Structure
President's Cabinet Ref #5
TMCC Enrollment Management Governance Structure
President's Cabinet Ref #5
TMCC Enrollment Management Governance Structure
President's Cabinet Ref #5
TMCC Enrollment Management Governance Structure
President's Cabinet Ref #5
CSN EM Process
Noel Levitz
Two-year process
Enrollment Management Council (30)
Action Committee (6; decision making;
president approved)
• TMCC mirrors this structure now
•
•
•
•
– Need to move to process outline/SEP
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Successes to Date
• EM Discussion
– Integrated approach
– Culture shift
– Structure
• Outcomes
– Performance Pool
– Graduation Rate
– Ws
• Process
– Enrollment Steps
– Improved Winter/7week search
– CRM Lite
– Enrollment Dashboard
• Policy Updates
– Audit date
– No application deadline
– Stop 9-credit restriction
for underprepared
President's Cabinet Ref #5
EM Next Steps
• Continue to build integrated EM culture
– Gain collegewide support
• Develop Strategic Enrollment Plan
–
–
–
–
Conduct SWOT analysis
Link to Strategic Master Plan
Timelines
Consider consultant support
• Address process gaps
– Admit type/enrollment steps
– Data integrity group
President's Cabinet Ref #5
EM Next Steps
• Optimize Institutional Operations
– Processes (all)
– Offerings
– Programs
• Common Strategic Direction
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Questions?
President's Cabinet Ref #5
Image description. Cover Image End of image description.
NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS
What Is IPEDS?
The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data
System (IPEDS) is a system of survey components
that collects data from about 7,500 institutions that
provide postsecondary education across the United
States. IPEDS collects institution-level data on
student enrollment, graduation rates, student
charges, program completions, faculty, staff, and
finances.
These data are used at the federal and state level for
policy analysis and development; at the institutional
level for benchmarking and peer analysis; and by
students and parents, through the College Navigator
(http://collegenavigator.ed.gov), an online tool to aid
in the college search process. For more information
about IPEDS, see http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds.
What Is the Purpose of This Report?
The Data Feedback Report is intended to provide
institutions a context for examining the data they
submitted to IPEDS. The purpose of this report is to
provide institutional executives a useful resource and
to help improve the quality and comparability of
IPEDS data.
What Is in This Report?
As suggested by the IPEDS Technical Review Panel,
the figures in this report provide selected indicators
for your institution and a comparison group of
institutions. The figures are based on data collected
during the 2013-14 IPEDS collection cycle and are
the most recent data available. This report provides a
list of pre-selected comparison group institutions and
the criteria used for their selection. Additional
information about these indicators and the preselected comparison group are provided in the
Methodological Notes at the end of the report.
Where Can I Do More with IPEDS Data?
Institutions have the opportunity to create its
comparison group instead of using the IPEDS preselected comparison group through the Customize
Data Feedback Report functionality located in the
IPEDS Data Center. Customized comparison groups
allow institutional executives to quickly produce
customizable reports using different comparison
groups and accessing a wider range of IPEDS
variables. The Data Center can be accessed at
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter.
Truckee Meadows Community College
Reno, NV
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
COMPARISON GROUP
Comparison group data are included to provide a context for interpreting your institution’s statistics. If your institution did not define a Custom
Comparison Group for this report by July 15, NCES selected a comparison group for you. (In this case, the characteristics used to define the
comparison group appears below.) The Customize Data Feedback Report functionality on the IPEDS Data Center
(http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/) can be used to reproduce the figures in this report using different peer groups.
Using some of your institution's characteristics, a group of comparison institutions was selected for you. The characteristics include large,
public, 2-year colleges, in the western states and enrollment of a similar size. This comparison group includes the following 34 institutions:
Allan Hancock College (Santa Maria, CA)
Amarillo College (Amarillo, TX)
Arapahoe Community College (Littleton, CO)
Brookhaven College (Farmers Branch, TX)
Cabrillo College (Aptos, CA)
Central Oregon Community College (Bend, OR)
Chabot College (Hayward, CA)
Chandler-Gilbert Community College (Chandler, AZ)
Cochise College (Douglas, AZ)
College of the Sequoias (Visalia, CA)
College of Western Idaho (Nampa, ID)
Community College of Denver (Denver, CO)
Cuesta College (San Luis Obispo, CA)
Edmonds Community College (Lynnwood, WA)
Golden West College (Huntington Beach, CA)
Green River Community College (Auburn, WA)
Irvine Valley College (Irvine, CA)
Lane Community College (Eugene, OR)
Los Angeles Trade Technical College (Los Angeles, CA)
McLennan Community College (Waco, TX)
Merced College (Merced, CA)
Navarro College (Corsicana, TX)
North Central Texas College (Gainesville, TX)
North Lake College (Irving, TX)
Phoenix College (Phoenix, AZ)
Red Rocks Community College (Lakewood, CO)
Reedley College (Reedley, CA)
San Bernardino Valley College (San Bernardino, CA)
San Diego City College (San Diego, CA)
South Plains College (Levelland, TX)
Spokane Community College (Spokane, WA)
Tacoma Community College (Tacoma, WA)
Tyler Junior College (Tyler, TX)
Victor Valley College (Victorville, CA)
Truckee Meadows Community College 2
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
Figure 1.
Percent of all students enrolled, by race/ethnicity and percent of students who are women: Fall 2013
Image description.
Bar
chart
withPercent.
10 groups with 2 items per group.
Y
scale
titled
Group
American
Indian
or Alaska
Native.
Item
1,1,
Your
institution
1, hover
text(N=34)
on
image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
1, hover text on image.
Group
Asian.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
5, hover
text(N=34)
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
4, hover text on image.
Group
Black
or African
American.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
2, hover
text(N=34)
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
5, hover text on image.
Group
Hispanic/Latino.
Item 2,
1,4,
Your
institution
23, hover
text
on image.
Item
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34)
29, hover text on image.
Group
Native
Hawaiian
or
other text
Pacific
Islander.
Item
1,5,
Your
institution
0.01,
hover
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34)
0.01, hover text on image.
Group
6,
White.
Item
institution
62, hover
text
on image.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34)
49, hover text on image.
Group
Twoinstitution
or more
races.
Item
1,7,
Your
3, hover
text(N=34)
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
3, hover text on image.
Group
Race/ethnicity
Item
1,8,
Your
institution
2,unknown.
hover
text(N=34)
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
2, hover text on image.
Group
9,
Nonresident
alien.
Item 2,
1, Comparison
Your institution
0.01,Median
hover text
on image.
Item
Group
(N=34)
1, hover text on image.
Group
Women.
Item
1,10,
Your
institution
55, hover
text
on image.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34)
55, hover text on image.
Race/ethnicity
or
gender
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
100
90
80
Percent
70
62
55
60
55
49
50
40
29
30
23
20
10
1
5
1
4
2
5
0
3
0
3
2
2
0
1
0
American Indian or
Alaska Native
Asian
Black or
African American
Hispanic/Latino
Native Hawaiian
or other
Pacific Islander
White
Two or more races
Race/ethnicity
unknown
Nonresident alien
Women
Race/ethnicity or gender
Your institution
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: For more information about disaggregation of data by race and ethnicity, see the Methodological Notes. Median values for the comparison group will not add to 100%. See "Use of
Median Values for Comparison Group" for how median values are determined. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Spring 2014, Fall Enrollment component.
Figure 2.
Unduplicated 12-month headcount (2012-13), total FTE
enrollment (2012-13), and full- and part-time fall
enrollment (Fall 2013)
Figure 3.
Number of subbaccalaureate degrees and certificates
awarded, by level: 2012-13
Image description.
Level of award
Horizontal
BarNumber
chart with
4 groups with 2 items per group.
X scale1,titled
of awards.
Group
Associate's.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
950.Median (N=34) 933.
Item
2,
Group
Group
Certificates
of0.01.
at least 2 but less than 4 years.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34)
0.01.2 years.
Group
Certificates
of149.
at least
1 but
less than
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Certificates
of534.
lessMedian
than 1 (N=34)
year. 262.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) 248.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
EnrollmentBar
measure
Horizontal
chart with
4 groups with 2 items per group.
X scale1,titled
Number
ofheadcount
students.
Group
Unduplicated
- total.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
16722.
Item
2,
Group
Median (N=34) 15354.
Group
Total
FTE enrollment.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
6919.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) 7004.
Group
Full-time
fall
enrollment.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
2905.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) 3985.
Group
Part-time
fall
enrollment.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
8299.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) 7009.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Enrollment measure
Level of award
16,722
Unduplicated
headcount - total
950
Associate's
15,354
933
6,919
Total FTE
enrollment
Certificates of at least 2 0
but less than 4 years 0
7,004
2,905
Full-time
fall enrollment
8,299
Part-time
fall enrollment
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
534
200
400
600
800
1,000
Number of awards
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: For details on calculating full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment, see Calculating
FTE in the Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Fall 2013, 12-month
Enrollment component and Spring 2014, Fall Enrollment component.
248
0
Number of students
Your institution
262
Certificates of less
than 1 year
7,009
0
149
Certificates of at least 1
but less than 2 years
3,985
Your institution
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Fall 2013, Completions
component.
Truckee Meadows Community College 3
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
Figure 4.
Academic year tuition and required fees for full-time,
first-time degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates:
2010-11 to 2013-14
Figure 5.
Average net price of attendance for full-time, first-time
degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students
receiving grant or scholarship aid: 2010-11 to 2012-13
Image description.
Academic year
Horizontal
BarNet
chart
with 3 groups with 2 items per group.
X
scale1,titled
price.
Group
2012-13.
Item
institution
$8492.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $7278.
Group
2011-12.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
$9264.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $6992.
Group
2010-11.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
$8312.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $6854.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Academic year
Horizontal
BarTuition
chart with
groups with 2 items per group.
X
scale1,titled
and 4
fees.
Group
2013-14.
Item
institution
$2700.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $1727.
Group
2012-13.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
$2700.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $1671.
Group
2011-12.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
$2513.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $1612.
Group
2010-11.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
$2243.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $1487.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Academic year
Academic year
$2,700
$8,492
2013-14
$1,727
2012-13
$7,278
$2,700
2012-13
$1,671
$9,264
2011-12
$6,992
$2,513
2011-12
$1,612
$8,312
2010-11
$2,243
2010-11
$6,854
$1,487
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$0
$2,000
$4,000
Tuition and fees
Your institution
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
Net price
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Your institution
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: The tuition and required fees shown here are the lowest reported from the
categories of in-district, in-state, and out-of-state. N is the number of institutions in the
comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Fall 2013, Institutional
Characteristics component.
NOTE: Average net price is for full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking
undergraduate students and is generated by subtracting the average amount of federal,
state/local government, and institutional grant and scholarship aid from the total cost of
attendance. Total cost of attendance is the sum of published tuition and required fees,
books and supplies, and the average room and board and other expenses. For details,
see the Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Fall 2013, Institutional
Characteristics component; Winter 2013-14, Student Financial Aid component.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Percent of full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking
undergraduate students who received grant or
scholarship aid from the federal government, state/local
government, or the institution, or loans, by type of aid:
2012-13
Image description.
Type of aidBar chart with 8 groups with 2 items per group.
Horizontal
X scale1,titled
Percent
of students.
Group
Anyinstitution
grant aid.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
73. Median (N=34) 71.
Item
2,
Group
Group
Federal
grants.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
57. Median (N=34) 57.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Pellinstitution
grants.Group
Item
1,3,
Your
53. Median (N=34) 57.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
State/local
grants.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
41. Median (N=34) 35.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Institutional
grants.
Item 2,
1,5,
Your
institution
16. Median (N=34) 12.
Item
Comparison
Group
Anyinstitution
loans. Group
Item
1,6,
Your
12. Median (N=34) 16.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
7,
Federal
loans.
Item
institution
12. Median (N=34) 15.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Group
Other
loans.
Item
1,8,
Your
institution
1. Median (N=34) 0.01.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Type of aidBar chart with 8 groups with 2 items per group.
Horizontal
X scale1,titled
Aid
dollars.
Group
Anyinstitution
grant
aid $3869.
(N=34).
Item
1, Comparison
Your
Item
2,
Group
Median $4694.
Group
Federal
grants
(N=34).
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
$3941.
Item
2,
Comparison
Median $4359.
Group
Pellinstitution
grants Group
(N=34).
Item
1,3,
Your
$4168.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
Group
State/local
grants
(N=32). $4344.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
$991.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
Group
Institutional
grants
(N=27).$1459.
Item 2,
1,5,
Your
institution
$1138.
Item
Comparison
Median $1421.
Group
Anyinstitution
loans Group
(N=30).
Item
1,6,
Your
$5757.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $5036.
Group
7,
Federal
loans
(N=30).
Item
institution
$5691.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Median $5029.
Group
Other
loansGroup
(N=4).
Item
1,8,
Your
institution
$7171.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $6534.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Type of aid
Type of aid
Any grant
aid
Any grant
aid (N=34)
73
71
Federal
grants
Pell
grants
53
State/local
grants
12
Any loans
12
Federal
loans
12
$4,694
Federal
grants (N=34)
$3,941
$4,359
57
Pell
grants (N=34)
$4,168
$4,344
41
Institutional
grants
$3,869
57
57
State/local
grants (N=32)
35
$991
$1,459
16
Institutional
grants (N=27)
16
Any loans
(N=30)
$5,036
Federal
loans (N=30)
$5,029
15
$1,138
$1,421
$5,757
$5,691
Other loans
(N=4)
Other loans 01
0
Average amounts of grant or scholarship aid from the
federal government, state/local government, or the
institution, or loans received, by full-time, first-time
degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students, by
type of aid: 2012-13
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
$6,534
$0
Percent of students
Your institution
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
Aid dollars
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: Any grant aid above includes grant or scholarship aid from the federal government,
state/local government, or the institution. Federal grants includes Pell grants and other
federal grants. Any loans includes federal loans and other loans to students. For details on
how students are counted for financial aid reporting, see Cohort Determination in the
Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, Student
Financial Aid component.
$2,000
$7,171
Your institution
Comparison Group Median
NOTE: Any grant aid above includes grant or scholarship aid from the federal government,
state/local government, or the institution. Federal grants includes Pell grants and other
federal grants. Any loans includes federal loans and other loans to students. Average
amounts of aid were calculated by dividing the total aid awarded by the total number of
recipients in each institution. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, Student
Financial Aid component.
Truckee Meadows Community College 4
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
Figure 8.
Percent of all undergraduates receiving aid by type of
aid: 2012-13
Figure 9.
Average amount of aid received by all undergraduates,
by type of aid: 2012-13
Image description.
Type of aidBar chart with 3 groups with 2 items per group.
Horizontal
X
scale1,titled
Aid
dollars.
Group
Anyinstitution
grant
aid $3122.
(N=34).
Item
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Median $3140.
Group
Pellinstitution
grants Group
(N=34).
Item
1,2,
Your
$3333.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $3662.
Group
Federal
loans
(N=30).
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
$6172.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $5774.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Type of aidBar chart with 3 groups with 2 items per group.
Horizontal
X
scale1,titled
Percent
of students.
Group
Anyinstitution
grant aid.
Item
42. Median (N=34) 54.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Pellinstitution
grants.Group
Item
1,2,
Your
32. Median (N=34) 34.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Federal
loans.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
14. Median (N=34) 13.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Type of aid
Type of aid
42
$3,122
Any grant aid
Any grant aid (N=34)
54
$3,140
32
$3,333
Pell grants
Pell grants (N=34)
34
$3,662
14
Federal
loans
0
10
$6,172
Federal
loans (N=30)
13
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
$5,774
$0
$2,000
$4,000
Percent of students
Your institution
$6,000
$8,000
Aid dollars
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Your institution
Comparison Group Median
NOTE: Any grant aid above includes grant or scholarship aid from the federal government,
state/local government, the institution, or other sources. Federal loans includes only
federal loans to students. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, Student
Financial Aid component.
NOTE: Any grant aid above includes grant or scholarship aid from the federal government,
state/local government, the institution, or other sources. Federal loans includes federal
loans to students. Average amounts of aid were calculated by dividing the total aid
awarded by the total number of recipients in each institution. N is the number of
institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, Student
Financial Aid component.
Figure 10. Graduation rate and transfer-out rate (2010 cohort);
graduation rate cohort as a percent of total entering
students, and retention rates of first-time students (Fall
2013)
Figure 11. Graduation rates of full-time, first-time degree/
certificate-seeking undergraduates within
normal time, and 150% and 200% of normal time to
completion: 2009 cohort
Image description.
Measure Bar chart with 5 groups with 2 items per group.
Horizontal
X scale1,titled
Percent.rate, Overall.
Group
Graduation
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
21. Median (N=34) 18.
Item
2,
Group
Group
Transfer-out
rate.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
14. Median (N=34) 18.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Graduation
rate
as a percent of total entering students.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
28.cohort
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
Group
Full-time
retention
rate. (N=34) 27.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
66. Median
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Part-time
retention
rate. (N=34) 62.
Item 2,
1,5,
Your
institution
47. Median
Item
Comparison
Group
(N=34) 43.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Time to program
completion
Horizontal
BarGraduation
chart
with 3 groups with 2 items per group.
X scale1,titled
Group
Normal
time. 5. rate.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
Item
2,
Grouptime.
Median (N=34) 8.
Group
150%
of normal
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
16. Median (N=34) 18.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
200%
of normal
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
21.time.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) 23.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Measure
Time to program completion
21
Graduation rate,
Overall
5
18
Normal time
8
14
Transfer-out rate
18
Graduation rate cohort
as a percent of total
entering students
16
28
150% of normal time
27
18
66
Full-time retention
rate
62
21
200% of normal time
47
Part-time retention
rate
23
43
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0
Percent
Your institution
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Graduation rate
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: Graduation rate cohort includes all full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking
undergraduate students. Entering class includes all students coming to the institution for
the first time. Graduation and transfer-out rates are the Student Right-to-Know rates. Only
institutions with a mission to prepare students to transfer are required to report transfers
out. Retention rates are measured from the fall of first enrollment to the following fall. For
details, see the Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison
group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, Graduation
Rates component and Spring 2014, Fall Enrollment component.
10
Your institution
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: The 150% graduation rate is the Student Right-to-Know (SRK) rates; the Normal
time and 200% rates are calculated using the same methodology. For details, see the
Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Winter 2013-14, 200%
Graduation Rates component.
Truckee Meadows Community College 5
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
Figure 12. Full-time equivalent staff, by occupational category: Fall
2013
Figure 13. Average salaries of full-time instructional non-medical
staff equated to 9-month contracts, by academic rank:
Academic year 2013-14
Image description.
Staff category
Horizontal
BarNumber
chart with
8 groups with 2 items per group.
X
scale1,titled
of staff.
Group
Postsecondary
Teachers and staff.
Item
institution
284.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Median
(N=34) 264.
Group
Instructional
support
occupations.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
23. Median
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
(N=34) 23.
Group
Management.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
59. Median (N=34) 37.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Business
and
financial operations.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
10.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34)
16.
Group
Computer,
engineering,
science.
Item
1,5,
Your
institution
18. Medianand
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
16.media.
Group
Community
service,
legal,(N=34)
arts, and
Item 2,
1,6,
Your
institution
8. Median
Item
Comparison
Group
(N=34) 20.
Group
Healthcare.
Item
1,7,
Your
institution
0.01.Median (N=34) 0.01.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Other.
Item
1,8,
Your
institution
182.Median (N=34) 123.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label:
Comparison
Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Academic rank
Horizontal
BarAverage
chart with
7 groups with 2 items per group.
X
scale1,titled
salary.
Group
All ranks
(N=34).
Item
institution
$57222.
Item 1,
2, Your
Comparison
Group
Median $59742.
Group
Professor
(N=8).
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
$61389.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
$59427.
Group
Associate
professor
(N=6).
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
No data.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median
Group
Assistant
professor
(N=7).$55170.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
No data.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $48258.
Group
Instructor
(N=20).
Item
1,5,
Your
institution
$47097.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $65340.
Group
Lecturer
(N=0).
Item 2,
1,6,
Your
institution
No data.
Item
Comparison
Group
Median
No data.
Group
No institution
academic
rankdata.
(N=13).
Item
1,7,
Your
No
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median $57069.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Staff category
Academic rank
Postsecondary Teachers
and staff
264
Instructional support
occupations
284
23
23
Management
10
16
Computer, engineering,
and science
18
16
Community service, legal,
arts, and media
8
$61,389
$59,427
Professor (N=8)
59
37
Business and financial
operations
$57,222
$59,742
All ranks
(N=34)
Associate professor
(N=6)
$55,170
Assistant professor
(N=7)
$48,258
$47,097
Instructor
(N=20)
$65,340
20
Lecturer
(N=0)
0
Healthcare 0
Other
0
50
100
No academic rank
(N=13)
182
123
150
200
250
300
$57,069
$0
$20,000
$40,000
Number of staff
Your institution
$60,000
$80,000
Average salary
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Your institution
Comparison Group Median
NOTE: Graduate assistants are not included. For calculation details, see the
Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Spring 2014, Human
Resources component.
NOTE: Average salaries of full-time instructional non-medical staff equated to 9-month
contracts was calculated by multiplying the average monthly salary by 9. The average
monthly salary was calculated by dividing the total salary outlays by the total number of
months covered by staff on 9, 10, 11 and 12-month contracts. Medians are not reported
for comparison groups with less than three values.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Spring 2014, Human
Resources component.
Figure 14. Percent distribution of core revenues, by source: Fiscal
year 2013
Figure 15. Core expenses per FTE enrollment, by function: Fiscal
year 2013
Image description.
Revenue source
Horizontal
BarPercent.
chart with 7 groups with 2 items per group.
X scale1,titled
Group
Tuition
and fees.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
22. Median (N=34) 15.
Item
2,
Group
Group
State
appropriations.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
46. Median (N=34) 24.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Local
appropriations.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
0.01.Median (N=34) 22.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Group
Government
grants
and contracts.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
28. Median
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
(N=34) 31.
Group
Private
gifts,
grants,
and contracts.
Item 2,
1,5,
Your
institution
1. Median
Item
Comparison
Group
(N=34) 0.01.
Group
Investment
return.
Item
1,6,
Your
institution
2. Median (N=34) 0.01.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
7,
Other
core Group
revenues.
Item
1,
Your
institution
2. Median (N=34) 4.
Item 2, Comparison Group
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Image description.
Expense function
Horizontal
BarDollars
chart with
7 groups with 2 items per group.
X scale1,titled
per FTE.
Group
Instruction.
Item
1, Comparison
Your
institution
$4511.
Item
2,
Group
Median (N=34) $4512.
Group
Research.
Item
1,2,
Your
institution
$0.01.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $0.01.
Group
Public
service.
Item
1,3,
Your
institution
$0.01.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $67.
Group
Academic
support.
Item
1,4,
Your
institution
$1121.
Item
2,
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $730.
Group
Institutional
support.
Item 2,
1,5,
Your
institution
$1542.
Item
Comparison
Group
Median (N=34) $1144.
Group
Student
services.
Item
1,6,
Your
institution
$1070.
Item
2,
Comparison
Median (N=34) $994.
Group
7,
Other
core Group
expenses.
Item
1,
Your
institution
$1332.
Item 2, Comparison Group Median (N=34) $2048.
Shape
line,
Label:
Shape
InstitutionLegend,
Label: Your institution
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegend,
Label: Comparison Group Median (N=34)
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine1,
Label:
Shape
ComparisonGroupLegendLine2,
Label:
End of image description.
Revenue source
Tuition and fees
Expense function
22
15
State
appropriations
46
24
Local 0
appropriations
Research
Public service
22
Government grants
and contracts
28
Institutional support
Investment return 0 2
Student services
2
0
$0
$0
$0
$67
$1,121
Academic support
31
Private gifts, grants, 1
and contracts 0
Other core
revenues
$730
$1,542
$1,144
$1,070
$994
$1,332
Other core
expenses
4
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
$2,048
$0
Percent
Your institution
$4,511
$4,512
Instruction
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
Dollars per FTE
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: The comparison group median is based on those members of the comparison
group that report finance data using the same accounting standards as the comparison
institution. For a detailed definition of core revenues, see the Methodological Notes. N is
the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Spring 2014, Finance
component.
$1,000
Your institution
Comparison Group Median (N=34)
NOTE: Expenses per full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment, particularly instruction, may be
inflated because finance data includes all core expenses while FTE reflects credit activity
only. For details on calculating FTE enrollment and a detailed definition of core expenses,
see the Methodological Notes. N is the number of institutions in the comparison group.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics,
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS): Fall 2013, 12-month
Enrollment component and Spring 2014, Finance component.
Truckee Meadows Community College 6
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
METHODOLOGICAL NOTES
Description of Statistics Used in the Figures
Overview
Admissions and Test Score Data
Admissions and test score data are presented only for institutions that do
not have an open admission policy, and apply to first-time,
degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students only. Applicants include
only those students who fulfilled all requirements for consideration for
admission and who were notified of one of the following actions:
admission, non-admission, placement on a wait list, or application
withdrawn (by applicant or institution). Admitted applicants (admissions)
include wait-listed students who were subsequently offered admission.
Early decision, early action, and students who began studies during the
summer prior to the fall reporting period are included. Institutions report
test scores only if they are required for admission.
This report is based on data supplied by institutions to IPEDS during the
2013-14 data collection year. Response rates exceeded 99% for most
surveys. Detailed response tables are included in IPEDS First Look reports,
which can be found at
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/getpubcats.asp?sid=010.
Use of Median Values for Comparison Group
The value for the comparison institution is compared to the median value
for the comparison group for each statistic included in the figure. If more
than one statistic is presented in a figure, the median values are
determined separately for each indicator or statistic. Medians are not
reported for comparison groups with fewer than three values. Where
percentage distributions are presented, median values may not add to
100%. The IPEDS Data Center provides access to all of the data used to
create the figures included in this report.
Average Institutional Net Price
Average net price is calculated for full-time, first-time degree/certificateseeking undergraduates who were awarded grant or scholarship aid from
the federal government, state/local government, or the institution anytime
during the full aid year. For public institutions, this includes only students
who paid the in-state or in-district tuition rate. Other sources of grant aid
are excluded. Average net price is generated by subtracting the average
amount of federal, state/local government, and institutional grant and
scholarship aid from the total cost of attendance. Total cost of attendance
is the sum of published tuition and required fees, books and supplies, and
the average room and board and other expenses.
Missing Statistics
If a statistic is not reported for your institution, the omission indicates that
the statistic is not relevant to your institution and the data were not
collected. Not all notes may be applicable to your report.
For the purpose of the IPEDS reporting, aid received refers to financial aid
that was awarded to, and accepted by, a student. This amount may differ
from the aid amount that is disbursed to a student.
Use of Imputed Data
Core Revenues
All IPEDS data are subject to imputation for total (institutional) and partial
(item) nonresponse. If necessary, imputed values were used to prepare
your report.
Core revenues for public institutions reporting under GASB standards
include tuition and fees; state and local appropriations; government grants
and contracts; private gifts, grants, and contracts; sales and services of
educational activities; investment income; other operating and nonoperating sources; and other revenues and additions (federal and capital
appropriations and grants and additions to permanent endowments). Core
revenues for private, not-for-profit institutions (and a small number of public
institutions) reporting under FASB standards include tuition and fees;
government appropriations (federal, state, and local); government grants
and contracts; private gifts, grants, and contracts (including contributions
from affiliated entities); investment return; sales and services of
educational activities; and other sources. Core revenues for private, forprofit institutions reporting under FASB standards include tuition and fees;
government appropriations, grants, and contracts (federal, state, and
local); private grants and contracts; investment income; sales and services
of educational activities; and other sources. At degree-granting institutions,
core revenues exclude revenues from auxiliary enterprises (e.g.,
bookstores, dormitories), hospitals, and independent operations.
Nondegree-granting institutions do no report revenue from auxiliary
enterprises in a separate category. These amounts may be included in the
core revenues from other sources.
Data Confidentiality
IPEDS data are not collected under a pledge of confidentiality.
Disaggregation of Data by Race/Ethnicity
When applicable, some statistics are disaggregated by race/ethnicity. Data
disaggregated by race/ethnicity have been reported using the 1997 Office
of Management and Budget categories. Detailed information about the
race/ethnicity categories can be found at
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/reic/resource.asp.
Cohort Determination for Reporting Student Financial Aid and
Graduation Rates
Student cohorts for reporting Student Financial Aid and Graduation Rates
data are based on the reporting type of the institution. For institutions that
report based on an academic year (those operating on standard academic
terms), student counts and cohorts are based on fall term data. Student
counts and cohorts for program reporters (those that do not operate on
standard academic terms) are based on unduplicated counts of students
enrolled during a full 12-month period.
Core Expenses
Core expenses include expenses for instruction, research, public service,
academic support, institutional support, student services, scholarships and
fellowships (net of discounts and allowances), and other expenses.
Expenses for operation and maintenance of plant, depreciation, and
interest are allocated to each of the other functions. Core expenses at
degree-granting institutions exclude expenses for auxiliary enterprises
(e.g., bookstores, dormitories), hospitals, and independent operations.
Nondegree-granting institutions do not report expenses for auxiliary
enterprises in a separate category. These amounts may be included in the
core expenses as other expenses.
Truckee Meadows Community College 7
IPEDS DATA FEEDBACK REPORT
percentage of first-time degree/certificate-seeking students from the
previous fall who either re-enrolled or successfully completed their program
by the current fall. The full-time retention rate is calculated using the
percentage of full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking
undergraduates, while the part-time rate is calculated using the percentage
of part-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates.
Endowment Assets
Endowment assets, for public institutions under GASB standards, and
private, not-for-profit institutions under FASB standards, include gross
investments of endowment funds, term endowment funds, and funds
functioning as endowment for the institution and any of its foundations and
other affiliated organizations. Private, for-profit institutions under FASB do
not hold or report endowment assets.
Salaries, Wages, and Benefits
Salaries, wages, and benefits, for public institutions under GASB
standards, and private, not-for-profit institutions under FASB standards,
include amounts paid as compensation for services to all employees
regardless of the duration of service, and amounts made to or on behalf of
an individual over and above that received in the form of a salary or wage.
Frequently, benefits are associated with an insurance payment. Private, for
-profit institutions under FASB standards do not report salaries.
Equated Instructional Non-Medical Staff Salaries
Institutions reported total salary outlays by academic rank and gender, and
the number of staff by academic rank, contract length (9-, 10-, 11-, and 12month contracts), and gender. The total number of months covered by
salary outlays was calculated by multiplying the number of staff reported
for each contract length period by the number of months of the contract,
and summing across all contract length periods. The weighted average
monthly salary for each academic rank and gender was calculated by
dividing the total salary outlays by the total number of months covered. The
weighted average monthly salary was then multiplied by 9 to determine an
equated 9-month salary for each rank.
Student-to-Faculty Ratio
The full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment used in this report is the sum of
the institution’s FTE undergraduate enrollment and FTE graduate
enrollment (as calculated from or reported on the 12-month Enrollment
component). Undergraduate and graduate FTE are estimated using 12month instructional activity (credit and/or contact hours). See “Calculation
of FTE Students (using instructional activity)” in the IPEDS Glossary at
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/.
The guidance provided to institutions for calculating their student-to-faculty
ratio is as follows: the number of FTE students (using Fall Enrollment data)
divided by the total FTE instructional staff (using the total Primarily
instruction + Instruction/research/public service staff reported on the EAP
section of the Human Resources component and adding any not primarily
instructional staff that are teaching a credit course). For this calculation,
FTE for students is equal to the number of full-time students plus one-third
the number of part-time students; FTE for instructional staff is similarly
calculated. Students enrolled in "stand-alone" graduate or professional
programs (such as medicine, law, veterinary, dentistry, social work, or
public health) and instructional staff teaching in these programs are
excluded from the FTE calculations.
FTE Staff
Total Entering Undergraduate Students
The full-time-equivalent (FTE) of staff is calculated by summing the total
number of full-time staff and adding one-third of the total number of parttime staff. Graduate assistants are not included.
Total entering students are students at the undergraduate level, both fulland part-time, new to the institution in the fall term (or the prior summer
term who returned in the fall). This includes all first-time undergraduate
students, students transferring into the institution at the undergraduate
level, and non-degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates entering in the
fall. Only degree-granting, academic year reporting institutions provide total
entering student data.
FTE Enrollment
Graduation Rates and Transfer-out Rate
Graduation rates are those developed to satisfy the requirements of the
Student Right-to-Know Act and Higher Education Act, as amended, and
are defined as the total number of individuals from a given cohort of fulltime, first-time degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates who completed a
degree or certificate within a given percent of normal time to complete all
requirements of the degree or certificate program before the ending status
date of August 31, 2013; divided by the total number of students in the
cohort of full-time, first-time degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates
minus any allowable exclusions. Institutions are permitted to exclude from
the cohort students who died or were totally and permanently disabled;
those who left school to serve in the armed forces or were called up to
active duty; those who left to serve with a foreign aid service of the federal
government, such as the Peace Corps; and those who left to serve on an
official church mission. Transfer-out rate is the total number of students
from the cohort who are known to have transferred out of the reporting
institution (without earning a degree/award) and subsequently re-enrolled
at another institution within the same time period; divided by the same
adjusted cohort (initial cohort minus allowable exclusions) as described
above. Only institutions with a mission that includes providing substantial
preparation for students to enroll in another eligible institution are required
to report transfers out.
Tuition and Required Fees
Tuition is defined as the amount of money charged to students for
instructional services, and required fees are those fixed sum charges to
students for items not covered by tuition that are required of such a large
proportion of all students that the student who does not pay the charge is
an exception. The amounts used in this report are for full-time, first-time
degree/certificate-seeking undergraduates and are those used by the
financial aid office to determine need. For institutions that have differential
tuition rates for in-district or in-state students, the lowest tuition rate is used
in the figure. Only institutions that operate on standard academic terms will
have tuition figures included in their report.
Additional Methodological Information
Additional methodological information on the IPEDS components can be
found in the publications available at
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/getpubcats.asp?sid=010.
Additional definitions of variables used in this report can be found in the
IPEDS online glossary available at http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/.
Retention Rates
Full-time retention rates is a measure of the rate at which students persist
in their educational program at an institution, expressed as a percentage.
For four-year institutions, this is the percentage of first-time bachelors (or
equivalent) degree-seeking undergraduates from the previous fall who are
again enrolled in the current fall. For all other institutions this is the
Truckee Meadows Community College 8
IPEDS Data Feedback Report 2014: Highlights
Full-time
students (fig. 2)
Progress from
Last Year
Succeses
Challenges
Ave salaries of
FT instructional
Ave. Amount of
staff
Aid (fig. 9)
(fig. 13)
TMCC: 2,905
TMCC: $3,122
TMCC: $57,222
Peers: 3,985
Peers: $3,140
Peers: $59,742
Ave. # of Assoc. Ave. # of CT <1
Degrees Awarded year Awarded
(fig. 3)
(fig. 3)
Financial Aid any type (fig. 6)
Financial Aid - any
loan (fig. 6)
(% of FT, 1st time,
Degree-seekers)
(% of FT, 1st time, Degreeseekers)
Retention/
Persistence
of FT students
(fig. 10)
Retention/
Persistence
of PT students (fig.
10)
TMCC: 950
Peers: 933
TMCC: 534
Peers: 248
TMCC: 73%
Peers: 71%
TMCC: 12%
Peers: 16%
TMCC: 66%
Peers: 62%
TMCC: 47%
Peers: 43%
Diversity
(fig. 1)
Higher Tuituion
and Fees
(fig. 4)
Higher Student
Loans
(fig. 7)
Financial Aid
(% of all undergraduates)
Transfer-out Rate
(fig. 10)
Graduation Rate
(fig. 11)
TMCC: $2,700
Peers: $1,727
TMCC: $5,691
Peers: $5,029
TMCC: 42%
Peers: 54%
TMCC: 14%
Peers: 18%
TMCC: 16%
Peers: 18%
TMCC: 33%
Peers: 42%
Core expenses
per FTE
(Instruction)
(fig. 15)
TMCC: $4,511
Peers: $4,512
(fig. 8)
Notes:
1. source: NCES, IPEDS reports submitted by colleges
2. Nationally published data about our institution
3. Comparison against a peer group generated by IPEDS
a. Criteria: large, public, 2-yr colleges in the western states with similar enrollment
b. 34 institutions in the 2014 peer group
4. FA data for 2012-13
5. FTE: IPEDS use 12 or more semester credits to define FT student
TMCC Office of Institutional Research, Analysis and Effectiveness, 11/25/14
TMCC Government Relations Action Plan
Goal
Objectives
Build awareness and support for TMCC with local, state and federal elected
officials and their staff members
1. Build awareness and support of the college with elected officials to
support initiatives;
2. Inform college community on legislative issues and outcomes;
3. Participate in and support NSHE government relations activities;
4. Increase brand perception about TMCC and its specific programs.
Targets
Strategies by
Objectives
Elected Officials and Staff from:
• City of Reno
• City of Sparks
• Washoe County
• State
o Northern NV
o Leadership
o Committee chairs
o GOED
• Federal
o NV Delegation
o Committee chairs
(1) Build awareness and support of the college with elected officials to
support initiatives:
• Send congrats letter from President to elected officials
• Attend events
• Meet with elected officials one on one to provide college updates
and discuss issues
• Attend meetings based on agenda items
o Legislative
o Local
• Office visits during session as needed
• Participate in legislative session meetings
• Attend State of State during session years
• Identify opportunities to bring local, state and federal officials to
TMCC locations
• Develop an email database of elected officials and business leaders
and send regular, audience-specific messages and communications
(VIP email list)
• Conduct regular trips to Washington D.C. to meet with Nevada’s
congressional delegation and/or staff and other key members of
President’s Cabinet Ref #8
congress and representatives of key federal agencies.
(2) Inform college community on legislative issues and outcomes:
• Email messages
• Conduct informational meeting with TMCC faculty, students and
staff
(3) Participate in and support NSHE government relations activities,
including:
• Attend Board of Regents meetings
• Host BOR meeting (June 2015)
• Coordinate Advisory Board meetings (ad hoc CC committee)
• Support NSHE’s lobbying agenda
• Attend NSHE Government Affairs meeting
• Keep NSHE government affairs informed of TMCC activities by staff
and students
College
Support
Action Plan
Oversight
(4) Increase brand perception about TMCC and its specific programs:
• Educate target audiences on the programs TMCC offers to the
community and business partners
• Monitor the state’s political climate and landscape for opportunities
to interject TMCC’s key messages with legislators and leaders
• Provide speakers
Students, faculty and staff to assist with information and testimony as
needed and available.
J. Kyle Dalpe, Chief of Staff
Note on Internal Coordination:
As a professional courtesy to staff leading the college’s government relations’ activities, TMCC
employees will coordinate work-related visits to elected officials with the Office of the President (local,
state and federal). By coordinating efforts, the college can build awareness, reduce duplication and
maximize effectiveness, as well as inform appropriate NSHE staff.
Note on NSHE Coordination:
The Nevada System of Higher Education is committed to providing accurate and timely information
regarding public postsecondary education matters to State agencies and the public. To maintain this
commitment, all NSHE institutions shall coordinate for submission through the System Office any
President’s Cabinet Ref #8
request for information that is communicated to or transmitted to or from the Executive and Legislative
Branches of Government, whether initiated by the institution or the government entity, including but
not limited to, requests from or to individual legislators or the governor, standing committees of the
State Legislature, the Legislative Counsel Bureau, and the Budget Division within the Department of
Administration. (NSHE Procedures and Guidelines Manual, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3, approved as
amended by cabinet on July 18, 2012.)
President’s Cabinet Ref #8