Transcript July 2010 AHECB Meeting Presentation

Agenda Item No. 7
Arkansas State University – Jonesboro
Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Leadership
Existing EdD in Educational Leadership
Emphasis Areas
School Leadership
College Leadership
New PhD in Educational Leadership
Agenda Item No. 8
Arkansas State University-Newport
Technical Certificate in Surgical Technology

The Surgical Technology program will prepare students to
work in operating rooms and various other surgical settings
under the supervision of surgeons, anesthesiologists,
registered nurses, and other surgical personnel.

Jobs in surgical technology are expected to increase through
2016 with the average wage of $12 per hour for a new
graduate.
Agenda Item No. 9
South Arkansas Community College
Associate of Arts by Distance Technology

The Associate of Arts is an existing program that will be
offered by distance technology to provide access for students
who cannot attend many classes on-campus.

At least 50 percent of the program will be offered by distance
technology.
Agenda Item No. 10
University of Arkansas–Fort Smith
Bachelor of Arts in Media Communication

The Media Communication program is designed to provide students
with communication skills in new media writing, convergence
journalism, and digital literacy.

The degree emphasizes writing research, presentation, reporting,
and new media skills within the fields of mass communications,
speech, rhetoric, and new journalism.

Job opportunities for program graduates in Arkansas range from
company spokespersons, communication directors, reporters to
corporate public relations with average salaries of $28-60,000
annually.
Agenda Item No. 11
Institutional Certification Advisory Committee
Report and Resolutions


31 Initial Program Certifications
3 New Institutions - Distance Technology Delivery




Anthem College – Phoenix, Arizona
Ashford University – Clinton, Ohio
Bethel University – McKenzie, Tennessee
1 New Institution on an Arkansas Campus

Montana State University–Northern – Havre, Montana
Offering bachelor’s degree completion at Mid-South Community College


32 Program Recertifications
4 Program Decertifications
Agenda Item No. 12
Faculty Performance Review Report

Arkansas Code Annotated §6-63-104 and AHECB policy 5.5
require each college and university to conduct an annual
performance review of faculty members.

ADHE staff is required to monitor faculty evaluation
processes adopted at Arkansas public institutions and report
annually to the AHECB and Legislative Council.

Faculty performance was assessed using a variety of
methods including assessment by students, classroom visits
by administrators, peer review, and self-evaluation activities.
Agenda Item No. 13
Report on Distance Technology Programs

For Fall 2009, 27 percent (37,909) of the 140,403 students
enrolled at Arkansas colleges and universities were enrolled in
at least one distance technology course.

The majority of distance courses are offered through a blended
delivery system- a combination of traditional (student and
instructor in the classroom) and online delivery.

More than 3,500 individual courses and 117 certificate and
degree programs are offered via distance technology by
Arkansas institutions.
Agenda Item No. 14
Letters of Notification
Programs included in the Letters of Notification have been approved by Dr. Purcell
and must be included on the Coordinating Board agenda prior to program initiation.
These programs are reasonable and moderate extensions of existing curricular.
Agenda Item No. 15
Letters of Intent
A Letter of Intent informs the Coordinating Board of institutions that plan to offer new
programs or organizational units that require a proposal and Coordinating Board approval.
Chief academic and chief executive officers can comment on the proposed programs and
organizational units before the proposals are considered by the Board.
Agenda Item No.16
Operating Recommendations for
2011-13

Multiple Step Process

Preliminary recommendations

Changes in the Base Funding for 2011 will require changes to the
distributions. When the new forecasts for RSA, EETF, and/or WF2000
funds are released the need for new funds will change.
• WF2000 funds for two-year institutions were increased last week (after
the recommendations were completed) by 11.3%.

Recommendations change when the Governor’s Balanced Budget is
presented with the funds available for Higher Education and with new
enrollment data.

Change during the 2011 Session when Legislature and Governor set
Higher Education funding and appropriation levels
Funding is by SSCH (student semester
credit hours) and not by FTE Students

Comparison by funds per FTE:





Ignores the difference in the costs among the
academic disciplines
Ignores the different costs by level of instruction
(Lower & Upper Level Undergraduate, Masters,
Specialist, First Professional, & Doctoral Level)
Ignores the fact that facilities are funded by square
footage and not by FTE
Ignores the differences in the missions of institutions
Ignores the fact that the law requires an economy-ofscale to be include in every formula
A
B
A
B
B
The Three Sources of State
Funding for Higher Education
Forecast For 2010-11



General Revenues as allocated in the Revenue
Stabilization Act - $725.5 million
Educational Excellence Trust Fund - $60.4 million
Work Force 2000 Funds - $22.9million
Basis for Operating
Recommendations

The base recommendations for new funding is $25 Million for 2012 and
$35 million for 2013.

For the first time a “B” Category of new funding is recommended for
three Non-Formula Entities that were given appropriations by the
legislature during the 2009 Legislative session for their economic
development potential. The “B” Category new funding recommendation
for 2012 is $6.6 million with a continuing level increase for 2013.

Total funding recommendations which include Category “B” funding are:
• Fiscal 2012 $32.4 million
• Fiscal 2013 $35.3 million

The $25 million increase in new funding for
2012 was distributed based upon the formula
determined and/or staff determined need for
the non-formula entities. An additional
$825,698 was added to UAPB’s non-formula
Land Grant matching funds to avoid the loss of
federal funds.
2011-12
2012-13
Agenda Item No.17
Distribution of Mineral Lease Funds

It is recommended that $1.0 million be allocated to
the University of Arkansas, Fayetteville for
expenses associated with the connection and
expansion of ARE-ON to all public universities in the
state.

$5,103,726 has been distributed since April of 2007.
Agenda Item No. 18
Personal Services Recommendations
for the 2011-13 biennium
Summary of Recommendations

No exceptional line-item maximum salary increases
were considered this biennium, but all line-item
maximums were adjusted by 3% per year.

Salary recommendations for new positions were
based on salaries for similar positions previously
established at comparable institutions.
Summary of Recommendations

Faculty/Staff to student ratios were used to compare
similar institutions when considering requests for
additional positions.

Based on these criteria an increase of 469 nonclassified positions is recommended for a total of
27,792 non-classified positions.
Agenda Item No. 19
Capital Funding Recommendations
for the 2011-13 biennium
Current Condition of Institutional Facilities
As reported in the 2010 Facilities Audit Program:

$4.6 billion is the current replacement value of all
E&G buildings

46 percent of the useful life of these facilities has
been expended

$2.1 billion is the current deferred maintenance
of all E&G buildings
Capital Funding Recommendations
A total of $1.4 billion was requested for all
projects.
$134.2 million is recommended as follows:

$68.72 million is recommended for renovation, new
construction and technology infrastructure

$43.7 million is recommended for deferred maintenance

$21.9 million is recommended for replacement equipment
Agenda Item No. 20
Certification of Intercollegiate Athletic
Revenues and Expenditures for
2010-11
Athletic Fees Per SSCH
Institution
2009-10 Athletic Fee
2010-11 Budgeted
Athletic Fee
ASUJ
$12.00
$12.00
ATU
11.50
12.50
HSU
11.50
11.50
SAUM
12.00
13.00
UAF
0
0
UAFS
12.00
13.00
UALR
14.00
15.00
UAM
11.00
12.00
UAPB
14.25
14.25
UCA
14.00
17.00
Budgeted Athletic Revenues by
Funding Source
Percentages of funds supporting athletic budgets
excluding UAF:

Athletic generated revenues – 20.2%

Other Auxiliary profits – 13.0%

Educational and General transfer – 17.2%

Student Athletic fees – 43.3%

Other Athletic income – 6.3%
Intercollegiate Budgeted Athletic
Report for 2010-11
Inst
ASUJ
Athletic
% of
Other
% of
Generated
Total
Auxiliary
Total
Revenues
Inst Rev
Profits
Inst Rev
% of
Student
% of
Other
% of
Total
Total
Athletic
E&G
Total
Athletic
Total
Athletic
Total
Expected
Budgeted
Fee Per
Transfer
Inst Rev
Fee
Inst Rev
Income
Inst Rev
Inst Rev
Expenditure
SSCH
$5,057,341
44.6%
$1,365,235
12.0%
$1,124,400
9.9%
$2,965,492
26.1%
$830,362
7.3%
$11,342,830
$11,342,830
$12.00
ATU
191,570
5.2%
0
0.0%
1,124,400
30.6%
2,327,162
63.3%
30,609
0.8%
3,673,741
3,673,741
12.50
HSU
24,000
0.7%
1,055,884
31.5%
1,142,715
34.1%
1,126,149
33.6%
0
0.0%
3,348,748
3,348,748
11.50
SAUM
62,000
2.5%
170,481
7.0%
1,124,720
45.9%
1,091,272
44.6%
0
0.0%
2,448,473
2,448,473
13.00
UAFS
251,200
8.3%
381,788
12.5%
0
0.0%
2,411,568
79.2%
0
0.0%
3,044,556
3,044,556
13.00
UALR
968,148
15.4%
0
0.0%
949,106
15.1%
3,880,862
61.7%
494,655
7.9%
6,292,771
6,292,771
15.00
UAM
34,500
1.3%
1,531,124
56.5%
436,500
16.1%
705,444
26.1%
0
0.0%
2,707,568
2,707,568
12.00
2,208,000
35.8%
375,117
6.1%
1,078,234
17.5%
1,226,029
19.9%
1,273,622
20.7%
6,161,002
6,161,002
14.25
UCA
864,500
10.1%
1,200,000
14.0%
1,142,715
13.3%
5,016,000
58.5%
353,000
4.1%
8,576,215
8,576,215
17.00
NAC
3,200
1.0%
169,622
51.8%
129,000
39.4%
0
0.0%
25,612
7.8%
327,434
310,556
0.00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
75,000
75.0%
0
0.0%
25,000
25.0%
100,000
100,000
0.00
Subtotal
$9,664,459
20.1%
$6,249,251
13.0%
$8,326,790
17.3%
$20,749,978
43.2%
$3,032,860
6.3%
$48,023,338
$48,006,460
UAF
57,828,725
91.3%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
5,500,000
8.7%
63,328,725
63,328,725
Total
$67,493,184
60.6%
$6,249,251
5.6%
$8,326,790
7.5%
$20,749,978
18.6%
$8,532,860
7.7%
$111,352,063
$111,335,185
UAPB
MSCC
NOTE: Sources of Other Athletic Income are foundations/clubs and other private gifts, miscellaneous income, work study program, etc.
0.00
Agenda Item No. 21
Economic Feasibility of Bond Issue
for Mid-South Community College
Relevant Information

$5.18 million for 30 years @ 5.0%

Educational & General purposes

Proceeds will be used for the construction
of a Bio-Diesel Technology Building
Relevant Financial
Information

Estimated 2009-10 Local Tax Revenue ……………… $2,445,584

Maximum Allowable Debt Service
($2,445,584/120%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,037,987

Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$904,664

Estimated Debt Service for Proposed Issue . . . . . .
$300,000

Local Tax Revenue Remaining for
Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$833,323
Agenda Item No. 22
Economic Feasibility of Bond Issue
for University of Central Arkansas
Relevant Information

$42.0 million for 30 years @ 5.25%

Educational and General and Auxiliary purposes

Proceeds will be used to refund $19.615 million in both
E&G and Auxiliary debt

Proceeds will also be used to issue bonds up to $22.0
million for the construction of a new residence hall
Relevant Financial Information
Educational and General
Refunding amount $15,575,000

Net Budgeted 2010-11 Tuition and Fee Revenues
($66,830,470 - $19,590,160) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$47,240,310

Maximum Allowable Debt Service
($47,240,310 x 25%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$11,810,078

Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 3,293,899

Existing E&G Debt Service refunded . . . . . . . . . . . .
($ 1,618,121)

Estimated Debt Service for Proposed Issue . . . . . . .
$ 1,161,026

Tuition and Fee Revenue Remaining for
Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 8,973,274
($11,810,078 – 3,293,899 + 1,618,121 -1,161,026 = 8,973,274)
Relevant Financial Information
Auxiliary
Refunding amount $4,040,000 and Residence Hall $22.0 million

Budgeted 2010-11 Net Auxiliary Revenue . . . . . . . $6,779,148

Maximum Allowable Debt Service
($6,779,148/120%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$5,649,290

Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$4,508,940

Existing Auxiliary Debt Service refunded . . . . . . . .
($ 927,834)

Estimated Debt Service for Refunding Portion . . . .
$ 399,258

Estimated Debt Service for New Construction. . . . .
$1,036,685

Auxiliary Revenue Remaining for
Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$ 632,241
Agenda Item No. 23
Economic Feasibility of Bond Issue
for NorthWest Arkansas
Community College
Relevant Information

$15.0 million for 25 years @ 6.6%

Educational & General purposes

Proceeds will be used for the construction of
a Health Professions Building
Relevant Financial
Information

Estimated 2009-10 Local Tax Revenue . . . . . . . . . . .
$7,818,619

Maximum Allowable Debt Service
($7,818,619/120%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$6,515,516

Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,583,456

Proposed Maximum Annual Debt Service . . . . . . . . .
$2,444,080

Local Tax Revenue Remaining for
Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$2,487,980
Agenda Item No. 24
Economic Feasibility of Loan for
University of Arkansas Community
College at Morrilton
Relevant Information

College Savings Bond Revolving Loan Fund

$800,000 for 10 years @ 0.38%

Proceeds will be used for ADA and safety
issues as well as infrastructure improvements
Relevant Financial
Information

Net Budgeted 2009-10 Tuition and Fee Revenues
($5,000,000 - $425,000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$4,575,000

Maximum Allowable Debt Service
($5,000,000 x 25%) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$1,143,750

Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$412,317

Estimated Debt Service for Proposed Issue . . . . . .
$81,682

Tuition and Fee Revenue Remaining for
Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
$649,751
Director’s Report
July 30, 2010
Three Items:
•
•
•
Complete College America
Update on implementing Act 182 Seamless Transfer
Academic Challenge Scholarship Update
Overview



An initiative aimed at increasing college completion.
CCA’s goal is to double the number of college
graduates by 2020 and have asked multiple states to
collaborate with each other in doing so.
The following Arkansas representatives attended the
May 4, 2010 Alliance of States meeting:
 Rep. David Rainey (Arkansas General Assembly)
 Angela Kremers (Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation)
 Jim Purcell (ADHE)
 Karen Wheeler (ADHE)
 Brooks Harrington (ADHE)
July 27, 2010


Dr. Jim Purcell, Senator Shane Broadway
and Dr. Stan Jones
23 states participating in the
Complete College America
Alliance.
These states are
participating because:
 They face similar
challenges.
 Goals are aligned with the
strategies of Complete
College America.
Complete College America is an
initiative aimed at increasing college
completion.
 CCA’s goal is to double the number of
college graduates by 2020 and have
asked multiple states to collaborate
with each other in doing so.

“I realize that,
without
improvement in
higher education,
our economic
development
efforts will face
enormous
barriers.”
-Gov. Mike Beebe
Postsecondary Certificates & Degrees
Six-Year Graduation Rates in 2008
for First-Time, Full-Time Freshmen Who Entered
Public Four-Year Colleges and Universities
in Fall 2002
Source: SREB-State Data Exchange
Current percentage of young
adults (25-34) with a college
degree3
“College degree” means an associate degree, bachelor’s degree, or higher. National Center for Higher Education Management Systems
(NCHEMS), 2008 (from U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample File.) http://www.higheredinfo.org
3
CCA Plan Template
Essential Steps for States
Set State and Campus Completion Goals
 Uniformly Measure Progress and Success
 Shift to Performance Funding
 Reduce Time to Degree and Accelerate
Success
 Transform Remediation
 Restructure Delivery for Today’s Students

Proposed Arkansas Higher Education
Strategic Plan
Six Goals
Degree Production
1.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Redesign programs to meet the criteria of “Speed to
Market—Close to Customer” in a modern global society
including accelerated degree programs, modular program
designs, and effective use of instructional technology.
Increase college-going rates in counties below the state
average.
Close the college achievement gap of minority students.
Increase number of adults attending/returning to college
Encourage the redesign of developmental education
statewide and provide state support for innovative
programs.
Program Quality and Viability
Two-Year Colleges and Workforce Training
Research
Teacher and School Administrator Effectiveness
Stewardship of Resources and Public Trust
Alignment of CCA Goals and
the State Strategic Plan
Complete College America
Proposed State Strategic Plan Goals
Set State and Campus Completion
Goals
Degree Production (Close college
achievement gap & increase number of
adults)
Uniformly Measure Progress and
Success
Stewardship of Resources and Public Trust
Shift to Performance Funding
Stewardship of Resources and Public Trust
Reduce Time to Degree and
Accelerate Success
Degree Production (Redesign Academic
Programs)
Transform Remediation
Degree Production (Redesign Developmental
Education)
Restructure Delivery for Today’s
Students
Degree Production (Redesign Academic
Programs and Developmental Education)

Goal: Arkansas will
reach the Southern
Regional Education
Board’s (SREB)
average for citizens
holding bachelor’s
degrees by 2015.

Increase the current
production of
bachelor’s degrees by
64% (7,098 more
graduates per year)
each of the next six
years to reach the
SREB average.
Possible Institutional Goals
(Example @ 6%)
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
ASUJ
1414
1499
1589
1684
1785
1892
2006
2126
2254
2389
2532
2684
ATU
973
1031
1093
1159
1228
1302
1380
1463
1551
1644
1742
1847
HSU
463
491
520
551
585
620
657
696
738
782
829
879
SAUM
370
392
416
441
467
495
525
556
590
625
663
702
2494
2644
2802
2970
3149
3338
3538
3750
3975
4214
4466
4734
UAFS
396
420
445
472
500
530
562
595
631
669
709
752
UALR
1084
1149
1218
1291
1369
1451
1538
1630
1728
1831
1941
2058
UAM
265
281
298
316
335
355
376
398
422
448
475
503
UAMS
290
307
326
345
366
388
411
436
462
490
519
551
UAPB
401
425
451
478
506
537
569
603
639
677
718
761
UCA
1532
1624
1721
1825
1934
2050
2173
2304
2442
2588
2744
2908
Private
2228
2362
2503
2654
2813
2982
3160
3350
3551
3764
3990
4229
TOTAL
11910
12625
13382
14185
15036
15938
16895
17908
18983
20122
21329
22609
UAF
Additional Graduates Needed Each
Year (Example @ 6%)
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
ASUJ
85
90
95
101
107
114
120
128
135
143
152
ATU
58
62
66
70
74
78
83
88
93
99
105
HSU
28
29
31
33
35
37
39
42
44
47
50
SAUM
22
24
25
26
28
30
31
33
35
38
40
150
159
168
178
189
200
212
225
239
253
268
UAFS
24
25
27
28
30
32
34
36
38
40
43
UALR
65
69
73
77
82
87
92
98
104
110
116
UAM
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
27
28
UAMS
17
18
20
21
22
23
25
26
28
29
31
UAPB
24
26
27
29
30
32
34
36
38
41
43
UCA
92
97
103
109
116
123
130
138
147
155
165
Private
134
142
150
159
169
179
190
201
213
226
239
TOTAL
715
757
803
851
902
956
1014
1074
1139
1207
1280
UAF
Possible Institutional Goals
(Example @ 6%)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
ANC
268
284
301
319
338
359
380
403
427
453
480
509
ASUB
831
881
934
990
1049 1112 1179 1250 1324 1404 1488 1577
ASUMH
208
220
234
248
263
278
295
313
332
351
372
395
ASUN
275
292
309
328
347
368
390
413
438
465
492
522
BRTC
406
430
456
484
513
543
576
610
647
686
727
771
CCCUA
133
141
149
158
168
178
189
200
212
225
238
252
EACC
294
312
330
350
371
393
417
442
469
497
527
558
MSCC
76
81
85
91
96
102
108
114
121
128
136
144
NAC
319
338
358
380
403
427
453
480
508
539
571
606
NPCC
537
569
603
640
678
719
762
807
856
907
962
1019
NWACC
549
582
617
654
693
735
779
825
875
928
983
1042
Note: Calculations from ADHE SIS – Technical Certificates and Associate degrees awarded in 2009 (does not include Certificate of Proficiency)
Possible Institutional Goals
(Example @ 6%)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
OTC
252
267
283
300
318
337
357
379
402
426
451
478
OZC
192
204
216
229
242
257
272
289
306
324
344
364
PCCUA
199
211
224
237
251
266
282
299
317
336
356
378
PTC
1328 1408 1492 1582 1677 1777 1884 1997 2117 2244 2378 2521
RMCC
95
101
107
113
120
127
135
143
151
161
170
180
SACC
218
231
245
260
275
292
309
328
347
368
390
414
SAUT
451
478
507
537
569
604
640
678
719
762
808
856
SEAC
441
467
496
525
557
590
626
663
703
745
790
837
UACCB
226
240
254
269
285
302
321
340
360
382
405
429
UACCH
308
326
346
367
389
412
437
463
491
520
552
585
UACCM
379
402
426
451
478
507
538
570
604
640
679
719
TOTAL
7985
8464
8972
9510 10081 10686 11327 12006 12727 13490 14300 15158
Note: Calculations from ADHE SIS – Technical Certificates and Associate degrees awarded in 2009 (does not include Certificate of Proficiency)
Transfer (Act182)
--working with 4yr and 2yr CAOs
Issues that Compelled the
legislation
Lack of associate degrees
 Time to degree
 Student did not take the ‘right’ courses.
 Confusion over academic, general education
program requirements, college core, school
core, etc.

Solution
Specific AA/AS/AAT
Transfer degree programs –
fully transferable
Student graduates and
transfers
Every State University fully
accepts all
60-64 hours and cannot
require any additional lower
level general education unless
required for the major.
Any Other Associate
Programs:
AGS/ALS/ASAg/ASB/
AS-specific discipline
Student graduates or
transfers
University reviews courses and
approves based on each course’s
fit to bachelor’s degree or
articulation agreement as is
currently the case
Arkansas Totally Transferable Baccalaureate Degree
Education Requirements
Major Program
Requirements
Major Requirements:
Minimum of 30 hours
with 20 hours of upper
level coursework in the
major.
Upper level major courses
Minimum of 40 hours of
upper level courses are
required for a baccalaureate
Lower level major courses
Lower Level General Education Courses:
Required by major
Prerequisites for major courses
Required by an accrediting/licensure body
Institutional general education core requirements, 10 hrs
State
Core
35 hrs.
Institutional general education core requirements, 15-19 hrs
Science
English
Humanities/
Fine Arts
US History/
Gov’t
Math
AA/AS/AAT
Social
Science
The success of Act 182 is
dependent on:


Four-years: Provide degree plans to regional
community colleges to provide clarity for transfer
students.
Two-years: offer consistent advising to ensure
bachelor degree plan are followed.
Taskforce on Academic Advising
Catalog wording regarding transfer
Arkansas Department of Higher Education
Universal Financial Aid System
Financial Aid Applications
160000
125,170
120000
80000
40000
23,105
0
13,661
2007
13,755
2008
2009
2010
Academic Challenge Scholarship
2007
6,176
2008
7,080
2009
7,645
2010
53,533
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
Addressing the Volume of
Applications








ADHE redirected 5 FTE to work with the scholarship staff in
processing applications.
ADHE hired 3 temporary workers to assist with filing
transcripts.
ADHE contracted with Que Consulting to review transcripts.
Currently there are 48 fulltime people working under that
arrangement.
ADE has volunteered 9 staff to assist.
High school Students process worked rather well. Issues
are:
 Some student data from a few school districts did not
correctly populate the ADE database. Fixed in late July.
 Home school and private school transcripts are paper and
require manual review.
As of today:
10,135 accepted, 1,654 pending acceptance, 97 declined
5,114 eligibility pending
Addressing the Volume of Applications

Current Achiever process is the problem area.
 Nearly all transcripts are paper and institutions handle
grades differently and thus we are having to recalculate
GPA and hours attempted.
 Multiple transcripts
 2010 legislative changes session required extensive
edits to the software program.
 Have to be full-time in college since high school – Have
to look at every term to determine -At least 2.5 GPA
 Have to determine closeness to degree
 Incomplete applications
Addressing the Volume of Applications



Current Achiever:
 Limited funds and thus prioritization of applicants is required.
 70% is closeness to degree, 20 % is GPA, 10% is major.
Nontraditional
 The nontraditional and current achiever students are all mixed in
together.
• Applications were being taken for nontraditional students long
before current achiever category invented.
 Current achievers who did not meet the full CA criteria can be
considered for Nontraditional award. Ranking has to occur.
As of today:
 Current Achiever applications 36,697 Notified 0
 Current rate we believe we can complete everyone by early
August 10.
Best & Brightest: Arkansas Business
Presents the 2010 'Forty Under 40'
TARA SMITH
ADHE COORDINATOR OF FINANCIAL AID
From Fund Raiser to President: an Uncommon Path Pays Off
Leaders at U. of Arkansas and Randolph-Macon College use
development skills to move their institutions ahead
By Kathryn Masterson
Fayetteville, Ark.
Whether they're prepared for it or not,
college presidents know that asking
for money is a big part of the job.
As government financial support
declines and costs continue to rise,
colleges have grown more dependent
on generous donors to build new
facilities, attract star faculty members
and students, and start programs.
Many new presidents have little fundraising experience and feel
insufficiently
Agenda Item No.3
Report On Higher
Education Bond Projects
and Fund Balances
(At the end of Three Years)
Agenda Item No.4
Board Policy:
Moratorium on New Campuses
 April
2000 AHECB Meeting
At its April 27, 2000 meeting the Higher
Education Coordinating Board adopted a ten
(10) year moratorium on new campuses with
some caveats for some emerging sites. That
moratorium has expired but the concerns that
motivated the Coordinating Board to impose
that moratorium continue to exist in 2010.

The major reason stated was concern for the
potential for the further dilution of funding to the
existing institutions.
“The Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board deems it in
the best interests of the state of Arkansas to consider the negative
consequences of further dividing the $560,000,000 presently being
sent to colleges and universities in the state of Arkansas; and
restricting new institutions for a five-year period will be in the best
interests of the state of Arkansas to the extent it will allow
appropriate time to examine the wise use and allocation of existing
resources, plus sufficient accountability and performance measures
on behalf of the existing institutions.”
Arkansas Higher Education
Coordinating Board
Agenda Item #5
Annual Report on College-Going Rate
July 30, 2010
Rick Jenkins
Associate Director for Planning and
Accountability
College-Going Rate
 Fall
2009 Cohort (AY 2010, Term 1)
 First-Time
 Full-Time
 On-Campus
 High School Diploma or GED
 Arkansas Public and Independent
Institutions
COLLEGE GOING RATES
Arkansas vs. National
75.0
68.6
College Going Rate (%)
70.0
68.7
65.0
63.4
60.0
55.0
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
81 983 985 987 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 000 001 002 003 004 005 006 007 008 009
19
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fall Term -Arkansas
National
College-Going Rate for Arkansas Institutions
70%
63.9%
62.0%
64.7%
68.7%
63.4%
60%
Percent
50%
64.1%
59.5%
59.4%
58.3%
35.7%
35.3%
23.7%
23.1%
36.5%
35.8%
22.9%
21.6%
4.5%
4.7%
5.3%
5.1%
4.5%
2005 Fall
2006 Fall
2007 Fall
2008 Fall
2009 Fall
40%
30%
57.4%
35.2%
28.9%
20%
10%
0%
Fall Term
Public Universities
Public Colleges
Independents
State Total
Public Total
College-Going Rate by GENDER
2008 Fall vs. 2009 Fall
80%
College-Going Rate
73.8%
70%
66.1%
63.6%
60.5%
60%
50%
2008 Fall
2009 Fall
Gender
Male
Female
College-Going Rate by Race
80%
71.7%
70.5%
63.9%
Percent
60%
61.0%
55.7%
38.7%
40%
20%
0%
2008 National
Arkansas 2009 Fall
National vs Arkansas Rates
White
Black
Hispanic
2009 Fall Arkansas College Going Rate
67.2% - 90.9%
46.3% - 67.1%
18.8% - 46.2%
Source: Arkansas Department of Higher Education, 2010.
Note: The above is based on 2009 Fall Term enrollment only including: First-Time Entering Students Only; Attending College Full-Time;
Taking On-Campus Courses; Is an In-State Student.
SUMMARY

College-going rates have remained close to the
national averages over the last several years.

College-going rates only focus on traditionalaged students at the beginning of the pipeline.

To achieve higher degree production, retention
and completion must also be considered for
traditional and nontraditional students.

Overall, Arkansas compares favorably with the
nation on the College-Going Rate, but not as
well with graduation or retention rates.
What is Arkansas Doing to
Improve College-Going Rates?
 College
& Career-Ready Policy
Institute
 Educational Renewal Zones
 Say Go College:
(http://www.saygocollege.com)
sponsored by Arkansas Department of
Higher Education
Arkansas Higher Education
Coordinating Board
Agenda Item #6
State Stacking Policy
July 30, 2010
Tara Smith
Coordinator of Financial Aid
Stacking


A postsecondary institution shall not award state
aid in a student aid package in excess of the
cost of attendance
When a student receives a student aid package
that includes state aid and the student’s aid
package exceeds the cost of attendance, the
institution shall repay state aid in the amount
exceeding cost of attendance, starting with state
aid received under the Academic Challenge
Scholarship
Stacking Definitions

Cost of Attendance - An estimate of a student’s educational
expenses and is designed to provide an accurate projection of the
reasonable costs for the period of enrollment. Allowable cost
include tuition and fees, room and board, books, supplies,
transportation, disability expenses, loan fees, dependent care, study
abroad expenses and miscellaneous expenses. Standard cost of
attendance will vary for different categories of students. Institutions
must maintain written documentation supporting the determined cost
of attendance.
Stacking Definitions

State Aid – scholarships or grants awarded to a student from public
funds, including without limitation the Academic Challenge
Scholarship, DHE scholarship and grant programs, state general
revenue, tuition, and local tax revenue.

Student aid package – federal aid, state aid, and other aid a student
receives for postsecondary education expenses


“Federal Aid” – scholarships or grants awarded to a student as a result of the FAFSA,
excluding the Pell Grant
“Other Aid” – scholarships, grants, tuition waivers, or housing waivers awarded to a
student from a postsecondary institution or private sources.