Winter Symposium Presentation

400 views

Published on

2011 Winter Symposium. Presented with Provost Koch and Kevin Reynolds.

Objective: Clarify the need for proactive actions in response to financial realities. Create understanding of enrollment management and curricular effectiveness & efficiency as viable strategies. Provide overview of the strategies.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Winter Symposium Presentation

  1. 1. Winter Symposium<br />January 20, 2011<br />
  2. 2. Why are we here today?<br /><ul><li>To discuss ways that we can take control of our future and make the outcomes we desire more likely</li></li></ul><li>What do we hope to accomplish today?<br /><ul><li>A common understanding of our situation, especially the external forces
  3. 3. A sense that we can control our future
  4. 4. Some strategies by which that can occur
  5. 5. Specific activities that can lead to better control (and a better University)
  6. 6. What environment is necessary so everyone can commit to the strategies and be confident of the outcomes</li></li></ul><li>Plan for the day<br /><ul><li>Brief presentations
  7. 7. Current and expected future conditions
  8. 8. Strategies and activities to change that situation
  9. 9. Discussion of the implications of those actions
  10. 10. Discussion of specific actions and what is required to undertake those actions
  11. 11. Discussion of how we can articulate a collective understanding and accountability – an agreement - for the future</li></li></ul><li>A few comments about today’s work<br /><ul><li>This is a conversation about how we ACHIEVE the future vision we all share
  12. 12. We have the 5 guiding themes
  13. 13. Initiatives underway supporting those themes
  14. 14. This is a discussion about how to accomplish our goals
  15. 15. Builds on the work of LTIFS
  16. 16. Based on preliminary meetings with faculty</li></li></ul><li>What do we want to achieve as an institution?<br />Some specific indicators of our success<br /><ul><li>Improved student success
  17. 17. Expanded research and scholarship
  18. 18. Enhanced engagement with the community
  19. 19. Improved academic reputation
  20. 20. Greater faculty and staff satisfaction</li></li></ul><li>What investments do we need to make?<br />Enhance the effectiveness of academic programs<br /><ul><li>Increase full time and tenure line faculty
  21. 21. Improve faculty and staff compensation
  22. 22. Strategically invest in selected programs</li></ul>Enhance students, academic and administrative support<br /><ul><li>Improve student advising
  23. 23. Strategically increase student financial support
  24. 24. Improve research infrastructure
  25. 25. Improve academic and administrative support</li></li></ul><li>Current trends in public higher education<br /><ul><li>Funding for public higher education is decreasing nationally
  26. 26. Funding for higher education in Oregon has decreased significantly, is at a low level nationally and is not expected to increase
  27. 27. Funding per student at Portland State is low, nationally and in comparison to OSU and UO
  28. 28. Tuition is the largest (and growing) portion of funding</li></li></ul><li>Revenue per student FTE- Oregon is almost at the bottom of 50 states <br />Minnesota $21,426 (44%)<br />Average $14,058 (51%)<br />Tuition<br />State Support<br />Source: The Delta Project on Postsecondary Education Costs, Productivity, and Accountability. www.deltacostproject.org<br />Oregon $10,891 (74%26%)<br />
  29. 29. PSU Revenue ($9,591 in 2008) is more the $2,000 less per student FTE than UO<br />Data taken from deltacostproject.org 1987-2008 database<br />
  30. 30. Portland State University Funding Sources 2009-2010<br />(In Millions)<br />
  31. 31. Summarizing our current situation<br />
  32. 32. How do we acquire the additional financial resources we need?<br />LTIFS made recommendations that can be categorized in several fiscal strategy clusters:<br /><ul><li>Enrollment Management
  33. 33. Curricular Efficiency and Effectiveness
  34. 34. Research and Strategic Partnerships
  35. 35. Administrative Organization and Operation</li></li></ul><li>How do we acquire the additional financial resources we need?<br />LTIFS made recommendations that can be categorized in several fiscal strategy clusters:<br /><ul><li>Enrollment Management
  36. 36. Curricular Efficiency and Effectiveness
  37. 37. Research and Strategic Partnerships
  38. 38. Administrative Organization and Operation</li></li></ul><li>OAA Strategies for an Academically and Fiscally Sound Organization<br />
  39. 39. The important “take away” messages<br /><ul><li>We need additional financial resources to accomplish our goals of improved student and faculty success and expanded institutional impact
  40. 40. Tuition is the largest single source of revenue to support core activities - and it is growing
  41. 41. We have substantial control over how much tuition we generate and how we use that revenue</li></li></ul><li>Strategic Enrollment Management [SEM]<br />What is it? <br /> “a crucial element of planning for new growth at a university or college as it concerns both academic program growth and facilities needs. SEM focuses on what is best for students' success while increasing enrollment numbers and stabilizing institutional revenues.”<br />Source – Wikipedia<br />
  42. 42. Strategic Enrollment Management [SEM]<br />What is it not? <br /><ul><li>a quick fix
  43. 43. an organizational structure or a financial drain on the institution
  44. 44. an enhanced admissions and marketing operation
  45. 45. an administrative function separate from the academic plan and mission of the institution</li></li></ul><li>Recent SEM steps in OAA<br /><ul><li>Student Success
  46. 46. Begun an analysis of fiscal impact of enrollment scenarios over a 5 year period using a tool generated in OIRP.
  47. 47. Overall Growth
  48. 48. Student Mix
  49. 49. Student Retention</li></li></ul><li>Representative Examples –Orientation <br /><ul><li>Presented in 2010 dollars
  50. 50. Model shows revenue only
  51. 51. Assumption of flat level of state appropriation </li></li></ul><li>Metrics<br /><ul><li>$/Student FTE. Historically low at PSU.
  52. 52. Total increase in dollars per year associated with growth.
  53. 53. Case can be made to increase both </li></li></ul><li>Retention Target in this scenario is a 3% increase for resident students/5% for non-residents<br />
  54. 54. Retention Target is a 3% increase for resident students/5% for non-residents<br />
  55. 55.
  56. 56. The scenarios all lead to an increase in Total $/Year<br />Scenarios where we can generate $25 -50 million in yearly revenue - with associated costs <br /><ul><li>Growth in resident students (strategic)
  57. 57. Retention rates for resident and non resident students </li></li></ul><li>We can increase $/Student FTE <br /><ul><li>Increase in state appropriations
  58. 58. Tuition increases
  59. 59. Increase in % of non resident students. </li></ul>SOBERING perspective – increase < $1,000<br />Need to maximize benefit of overall gain in yearly revenue (examine costs and efficiencies)<br />
  60. 60. Costs - Strategies to maximize net gain from an increase in Total $/Year <br />University Efficiencies<br /><ul><li>Space (office, research, classrooms)
  61. 61. Structure and organization
  62. 62. Curricular efficiencies</li></li></ul><li>

×