System Level
Accountability Measures
June 14, 2005
The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System is an Equal Opportunity employer and educator.
ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATOR:
FINANCIAL RESOURCES AVAILABILITY
• Financial resources are available to foster student
access and success
– Core Measures
• Measure 2A – State and local appropriations per
FYE
• Measure 2B – Private gifts, grants and contracts
revenue relative to tuition and appropriations
– Context
• Core measures for similar public institutions
• Total revenue per FYE
• Revenue sources as percent of total revenue
Slide ‹#›
MEASURE 2A AND 2B
DATA SOURCES
• Operating and non-operating revenue by
source
– National Center for Education Statistics:
IPEDS Finance Survey
• FY 2003 is first year of reporting under new
GASB 34/35 standards
– National Center for Education Statistics:
IPEDS Enrollment Survey
• Credit hours generated
Slide ‹#›
MEASURE 2A:
STATE AND LOCAL APPROPRIATIONS
DEFINITIONS
• Numerator: Total state and local appropriations
– State appropriations: Amounts received through
acts of a state legislative body for current operating
expenses
– Local appropriations: Amounts received from
property or other taxes assessed by or for an
institution below the state level.
• Denominator: Total Full Year Equivalent
enrollment (FYE)
– Student credit hours divided by full-time load
Slide ‹#›
MEASURE 2B:
PRIVATE GIFTS, GRANTS & CONTRACTS
REVENUE - DEFINITIONS
• Numerator: Total revenue from private gifts, grants and
contracts
– Private gifts: Revenues from private donors for
which no legal consideration is provided.
– Grants and Contracts: Revenues from government
agencies and local/private organizations that are for
specific projects or programs and that are classified
as operating revenues.
• Denominator
– For Measure 2B-2: Revenue from tuition, fees and
state and local appropriations.
Slide ‹#›
Figure 2A
STATE AND LOCAL APPROPRIATIONS
PER FYE: FY 2003
$10,000
$9,000
$8,000
$7,000
$6,000
$5,000
$4,000
$3,000
$2,000
$1,000
$0
$4,399
$4,618
$5,359
$4,244
$4,906
$4,386*
Colleges
Universities
Total
System Institutions
Similar Public Institutions
* Appropriat ions t o cent ralized bodies f or inst it ut ions t hat are part of larger syst ems are not included in t he f inancial
report ing t o IPEDS. If appropriat ions t o t he Of f ice of t he Chancellor were included in t he Tot al, t he appropriat ions
per FYE would be $4,431.
Slide ‹#›
Figure 2B-2
PRIVATE GIFT, GRANT & CONTRACT
REVENUE PER $100 OF APPROPRIATIONS,
TUITION & FEES: FY 2003
$100
$90
$80
$70
$60
$50
$40
$30
$20
$10
$0
$35
$26
Colleges
System Institutions
Slide ‹#›
$33
$30
$23
$19
Universities
Total
Similar Public Institutions
CONTEXT: REVENUE SOURCES AS A
PERCENT OF TOTAL OPERATING AND
NON-OPERATING REVENUE
FY 2003
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
23%
30%
33%
16%
46%
51%
System
Similar
Public
Colleges
Slide ‹#›
26%
33%
36%
24%
25%
34%
32%
20%
40%
41%
44%
46%
System
Similar
Public
System
Similar
Public
Universities
Grants, Contracts, Gifts and Other Income
Tuition & Fees
State & Local Appropriations
Total
ACCOUNTABILITY INDICATOR:
PLANNING AND RESOURCE ALIGNMENT
• The system is engaged in effective planning,
collaboration, and resource decision-making
– Core Measure: Course Transfer
• Percentage of college-level credits earned at a
system institution that are accepted in transfer by a
receiving system institution.
– Context
• Percentage of credits accepted in transfer
reported in four studies from other states
Slide ‹#›
MEASURE 5B: COURSE TRANSFER
DEFINITIONS
• Percent Accepted: Credits accepted in transfer
divided by Sending Credits.
– Numerator: Credits Accepted: Total credits accepted
in transfer at the receiving institution.
– Denominator: Sending Credits: Total college-level
credits earned at the sending institution, including
credits from courses with “D” grade.
• Cohort: Undergraduate students enrolling and
transferring in one or more credits from a System
institution to another System institution during a fiscal
year.
• Timeframe: Reported for students transferring in to
System institutions during Fiscal Years 2002 & 2003.
Slide ‹#›
Figure 5B-1
PERCENT CREDITS ACCPETED IN
TRANSFER: SYSTEM SUMMARY
100%
80%
75.8%
75.4%
60%
40%
20%
0%
FY 2002
Slide ‹#›
FY 2003
Figure 5B-2
PERCENT CREDITS ACCPETED TRANSFER
BY RECEIVING SECTOR
100%
80%
88.6%
73.5%
89.4%
72.4%
62.2%
63.0%
60%
37.0%
40%
32.2%
20%
0%
Com m unity
Colleges
Com m unity &
Tech. Colleges
FY 2002
Slide ‹#›
Technical
Colleges
FY 2003
State
Universities
Figure 5B-1
PERCENT CREDITS ACCPETED IN
TRANSFER: CONTEXT
100%
89.4%
84.5%
87.00%
83.0%
90.0%
83.0%
New M exico
Orego n
P ennsylvania
Texas
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
State
Universities:
Dev Credits
Excluded
Slide ‹#›
State
Universities:
Dev Credits
Included
REASONS COURSES ARE NOT
ACCEPTED IN TRANSFER
• Courses that do not apply to the student’s
program or major at the receiving institution:
– Student changed program or major
– Student has more credits than are needed for
the program or major
• Courses with a grade of “D” are often not
accepted if the student’s GPA is below 2.0.
• Courses that were in progress or were taken
after the student submitted the transcript.
• Courses that were taken more than once.
Slide ‹#›
REASONS COURSES WERE NOT
ACCEPTED IN TRANSFER
Other
Reasons
5%
Repeat
Courses
2%
Courses with
"D" Grade
10%
Courses not
on Transcript
6%
Slide ‹#›
Source: Review of selected transcripts
Courses
Don't Apply
77%
DASHBOARD DEMONSTRATION
• System Data Warehouse - Oracle 8i
• Brio Intelligence
• Hyperion Dashboard Software
• Dashboard Demonstration
Slide ‹#›
NEXT STEPS
• Human resource measures
• Student engagement and satisfaction
measures
• Dashboard development
• Updating existing measures
Slide ‹#›