Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Florida Blue Ribbon Task Force
on State Higher Education Reform
      WORKING DRAFT 2.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS


Letter from the Chair ...................................................................................
LETTER FROM THE CHAIR



I   nsert text here.




                                           3
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Upcoming SlideShare
Working draft brtf4dot1
Working draft brtf4dot1
Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 31 Ad

More Related Content

Similar to Oct24 workingdraft brtf2dot0 (20)

More from Florida Blue Ribbon Task Force on State Higher Education Reform (20)

Advertisement

Oct24 workingdraft brtf2dot0

  1. 1. Florida Blue Ribbon Task Force on State Higher Education Reform WORKING DRAFT 2.0
  2. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter from the Chair ............................................................................................ 3 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 6 State University System Strengths and Weaknesses Summary ........................... 9 Accountability Recommendations ....................................................................... 11 Funding Recommendations ................................................................................... Governance Recommendations ............................................................................ Appendices A. Executive Order ...................................................................................... B. Task Force Member Roster .................................................................... C. Historical Consolidation of Higher Ed Recommendations ..................... D. Forthcoming reports from Board of Governors Task Forces ................. E. Key Resources for Action (Provided as attached files in digital version.) (1) Complete College America: Common College Completion Metrics Technical Guide (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 2
  3. 3. LETTER FROM THE CHAIR I nsert text here. 3
  4. 4. 4
  5. 5. Dale A. Brill, Ph.D. Chair 5
  6. 6. INTRODUCTION 6
  7. 7. 7
  8. 8. 8
  9. 9. SYSTEM STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES SUMMARY Introductory text here. [Below please find Dr. Fuller's draft submission for this section.] Strengths Weaknesses  Effective, efficient, professional staff  Need to increase predictive analytics capacity  Local control distributed to  Crisis of control resulting in move to individual institutions centralization  Organized to serve as transforming  Operating as transactional  Structured to merge multiple state  Operating under narrow range of variables variables  Organized to balance key metrics  Operating with production matrix as primary driver  Organized for vision/transformation  Working in turbulent field environment (multiple expectations/limited resources)  Organized for high task/low  Operating as high relationship/low task relationship  Young organization capable of  Reactionary posture blocking migration migrating to global prominence 9
  10. 10. RECOMMENDATIONS The following pages present the unanimous recommendations of the seven-member Blue Ribbon Task Force on State Higher Education Reform. More (but brief) introductory comments inserted here....
  11. 11. D ifficult fiscal conditions intensify the pressure on those making budget decisions to choose wisely in the allocation of funds among competing alternatives. Measures of performance and return on investment inform the necessary deliberations at all levels of higher education management. Faculty, staff, administrators and boards must increasingly understand how resources are being used to progress toward stated goals leveraging the creation and transfer of knowledge to the public's benefit. When clearly articulated, metrics communicate priorities and guide the actions of Florida's State University System's stakeholders. With a system of clear goals, performance measures and transparent reporting, the full spectrum of stakeholders can assess progress, identify best practices and base future decisions on data-driven analysis. Executive Order 12-104 called for recommendations to improve accountability and transparency on the part of state universities to the Board of Governors and the Board of Governors to the Legislature and Governor. The recommendations that follow underscore the role of clear goal setting and connecting measurement to management as a path to accelerating the success of Florida's state higher education system. RECOMMENDATION 1: The Board of Governors should continue to enhance its metrics-based accountability framework as a management and decision-making tool to ensure maximum return on investment for its students and the State of Florida. Specifically, data collection and reporting should focus on outcome-based performance metrics consistent with Governor Scott's emphasis bulleted below, as well as those developed by Complete College America and embraced by the National Governors' Association (See Key Resources below): a. Percentage of graduates employed or continuing education. b. Bachelor's degrees in areas of strategic emphasis. c. Cost per graduate. d. Salary of graduates. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 11
  12. 12. Accountability Recommendation 1 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(1): Complete College America: Common College Completion Metrics Technical Guide http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28697036/Metrics-Technical-Guide-2-3-2012.pdf Appendix E(_): Improving Measurement of Productivity in Higher Education http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13417 Appendix E(_): 12
  13. 13. RECOMMENDATION 2: The Board of Governor's should articulate goals and expected contributions of each university, consistent with its unique mission, toward overall system goals identified in its 2012-2025 Strategic Plan. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 13
  14. 14. Accountability Recommendation 2 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 14
  15. 15. RECOMMENDATION 3: Universities should align their annual and strategic plans with the Board of Governors' 2012-2025 Strategic Plan and report individual progress annually or more frequently through its normal reporting cadence. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 15
  16. 16. Accountability Recommendation 3 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 16
  17. 17. G overnor Scott's strategic goals for the state universities should inform the specific metrics by which the universities are measured, held accountable and rewarded. These goals include: a. Increasing the bachelor’s degrees awarded in strategic areas of emphasis. b. Increasing the percentage of graduates who become employed upon graduation or who continue their education. c. For those seeking employment upon graduation, increasing the number of graduates who attain employment at higher salary rate. d. Continuing to identify and implement institutional efficiencies and strategies that lower the cost to graduate. Tuition and funding strategies need to address a variety of challenges and goals, which are often in conflict with respect to the direction of tuition levels. The pressure to increase tuition comes from the desire to achieve institutional excellence and to increase national reputation, which in turn, increases the value of degrees to both graduates and their employers, translating to higher starting salaries for graduates. Pressure to increase tuition certainly results from significant reductions in base funding support from the state. The competing pressure to lower tuition results as universities strive to maintain access and affordability for Florida taxpayers, and as a strategy to incentivize student choices and outcomes that will not only keep current employers fully staffed, but also to attract new business and industry to Florida with a talented and prepared workforce. These objectives argue for differentiated tuition by degree or program, and perhaps even lowering tuition in certain strategic areas. To address the multiple tensions on tuition and funding, the ____ recommendations are put forward for consideration by the full Task Force. RECOMMENDATION 1: The State of Florida should be committed to moving toward the national average of a system that increases investments in funding per student for the state universities tied to initiating and sustaining progress toward or achievement of clear goals tailored to the respective missions of each institution. Specifically, the recommended metrics include those articulated by Governor Scott, as well as the published set developed by Complete College America and embraced by the National Governor's Association (See Accountability section above and Appendix E1). In the absence of state support, the Legislature and Board of Governors, working together, should evaluate tuition strategies to compensate for state funding based on the same performance metrics. 17
  18. 18. Funding Recommendation 1 (continued) BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Complete College America: Performance Funding: From Idea to Action http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28697036/Performance%20Funding%20Think%20This.pdf Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 18
  19. 19. RECOMMENDATION 2: Implement differentiated tuition structure to support degree programs in strategic areas of emphasis. The Legislature and Board of Governors should move away from uniform tuition rates among the universities and among all degree programs within a university. A differentiated tuition model should be built on the establishment of specific degree programs identified by the Legislature as degrees in strategic areas of emphasis. Measuring their progress (outcomes) would be jointly determined by the Board of Governors. For the next 3 years (a time period associated with expected national and state economic stability), no tuition increases for high-skill, high-demand (market demand) or- high-wage bachelor and master's degrees with the state buying down the tuition difference between the Board of Governor's approved tuition increase for the university and the fixed tuition of the high-skill, high-demand, high-wage degrees (market determined). If the state cannot provide the necessary support for the programs identified as strategic programs, the universities may pursue differentiated tuition subject to Board of Governor’s approval. When an established percentage, as determined by the Board of Governors, of a university’s total number of degree offerings (or an alternative measure, such as percentage of total number of yearly graduates completing one of these programs) is attained, that university may assign an annual differentiated tuition by program with the program in the strategic area of emphasis remaining at a level below the other (nonstrategic) programs. The assumption would be that state support will remain at a sufficient base level to allow for the tuition to remain lower by comparison. A university with more than 25% of its degree programs (or 25% of its total undergraduate degree recipients) in strategic areas of emphasis will be authorized to adopt a base tuition rate equal to the average base rate of the Association of American Universities. 19
  20. 20. Funding Recommendation 2 (continued) BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: With the authority to differentiate tuition among degree programs, within specified limits and pursuant to meeting specific metrics, each university is in the best position to determine the tuition rates designed to produce outcomes consistent with the state’s goals. The Board of Governors has previously identified undergraduate degree programs in strategic areas of emphasis. This currently includes 111 programs in STEM, 28 programs in Globalization, 21 in Health Professions, 19 in Education-critical (math, science) and 9 programs in Security and Emergency Services. Currently, 37% of all SUS baccalaureate degrees are in one of these strategic areas, with a 21% increase in the last 4 years. Growth in STEM programs is outpacing the growth in non-STEM areas. The Board is using each university’s performance in this area as a basis for decisions on allocating additional funding, whether performance funding or differential tuition requests. 20
  21. 21. Funding Recommendation 2 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 21
  22. 22. RECOMMENDATION 3: Create a funding structure that supports the creation and success of Preeminent Universities. The Legislature and Board of Governors should work together to reward Preeminent Universities meeting specific goals tailored for preeminence among the metrics identified in an expanded set of performance measures established by the Board of Governors (See Accountability section) by incentivizing alignment and performance through flexibility in tuition and decreased regulation. These metrics shall include cost efficiencies and strategic alignment as articulated elsewhere in this report. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 22
  23. 23. Funding Recommendation 3 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 23
  24. 24. P revious sections of this report addressed the relationship between accountability and funding as necessary to improve the ability of stakeholders at every level of the Florida State University System to contribute to its accelerated rate of achievement. The Governor and Legislature will be better positioned to evaluate investments in higher education with an expanded set of performance metrics providing the expectations and means to measure and reward improved return on investment, efficiencies and productivity. Faculty, staff and administrators are to strengthen the connection between knowledge creation and knowledge transfer to the economic goals that have emerged as the "Third Stream" of societal benefit derived from public investments in higher education. What remains is an examination of strategies to encourage cooperation between institutions leading to reduced duplication and improved efficiencies as directed by Governor Scott's Executive Order 12-104. The recommendations below seek to address the implementation of incentive systems and governance improvements to encourage long-term and systematic adjustments. RECOMMENDATION 1: In order to demonstrate accountability, efficiencies and return on investment, the Board of Governors’ 2012-25 Strategic Plan should specify implications of achieving strategic outcomes, such as decreased regulation, recognition (e.g., national ranking) and tuition flexibility. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 24
  25. 25. Governance Recommendation 1 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 25
  26. 26. RECOMMENDATION 2: Provide for expanded funding and/or budgetary control to the Board of Governors to tie university funding to the State University System 2012-2025 Strategic Plan as modified to reflect expected individual institutional contributions to system-wide targets. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 26
  27. 27. Governance Recommendation 2 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 27
  28. 28. RECOMMENDATION 3: Refinement in mission statements must be emphasized to derive clarity in each institution’s roles and responsibilities as contributors to system-wide goals and implemented through funding and accountability recommendations stated elsewhere. BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for .... 28
  29. 29. Governance Recommendation 3 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 29
  30. 30. RECOMMENDATION 4: Provide Board of Governors with substantial involvement in the appointment or re-appointment of university presidents. [TABLED for Wednesday’s discussion; review other state best practices.] BUSINESS CASE: [250 - 1,250 words]: Here is where the business case is made for the need/problem the recommendation seeks to address and how it will do it. Footnotes can be used to give appropriate attribution to the source(s) supporting the argumentation. The rest of this is text is place holder for.... 30
  31. 31. Governance Recommendation 4 (continued) The business case text is expected to spill over to one or two pages as necessary to communicate the essence of the recommendation. This text is a placeholder to reserve space for now. KEY RESOURCES FOR ACTION: [Insert URLs/citations here.] Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): Appendix E(_): 31

×