Transcript University of California, Education Abroad Program

Presentation to the APLU Capacity Session
Development of a Capacity Efficient and
Financially Sufficient Business Model:
Reversing a Debt.
Gordon Schaeffer, UCEAP Sr. Research Analyst
University-wide Office of the Education Abroad Program
Presentation Overview
•
EAP Characteristics: Capacity, Access & Affordability
– Market & Participant Demographics/Attributes
•
Programmatic Designs
– Institutional Strategy/Strategies
– Programs & Intended Cohorts/Purposes
•
Pricing
– Fees
– Student Budgets
•
Other Resources
– Business Intelligence
– Market Intelligence
•
Business Models
– Recent Past
• Revenue (Appropriations/Fees)
• Expenses (Staff, Instruction, Physical Infrastructure, etc)
• Deficit
– Present Working:
• Revenue (Fees/Appropriations)
• Expenses (Staff, Instruction, Physical Infrastructure, etc)
EAP Characteristics: UC Systemwide
EAP Participating Campuses (Less UCSF: Health Sciences Campus): Indicators of Demand,
Upper Division
Population
n
% Male
Campus
Berkeley
Davis
Irvine
Los Angeles
Merced
Riverside
San Diego
Santa Barbara
Santa Cruz
Systemwide Total
% All Campus
Undergrads from
Traditional Under-Rep.
Ethnicity*
%
Undergrads
Pell Grant
% Upper
Division
Transfer
Students
17,026
13,797
12,895
18,375
945
6,939
14,514
10,141
7,360
101,992
48%
45%
49%
45%
53%
48%
50%
47%
47%
47%
63%
60%
72%
63%
73%
78%
68%
44%
45%
62%
33%
34%
27%
36%
42%
44%
35%
26%
27%
33%
31%
34%
30%
42%
37%
32%
37%
35%
31%
35%
4,413
32%
51%**
25%
18%
EAP Participation (Headcount)
** Single Selection: Restructured for Multiple Selection in 2009.
• Origin as single campus:
1962
• Participants remain UC
students when abroad
• All course credits & grades
assigned to transcript as UC
courses
• Full Funding Financial Aid
on EAP Student Budget
• Nine campuses with
considerable differences –
population size, academic
interest, financials, #
Transfer students, etc.
UC System & EAP Financial Aid Measures
70%
Academic Year
66%
Attributes of EAP Programs
60%
Percent
50%
60%
2008-09
2009-10
Total Number of Distinct Programs by
Partner & Option
355
311
Total Number of Programs by Partner
172
162
Total Number of Programs
119
121
Total Number of Partners
124
119
Total Number of Study Centers
50
48
Total Number of Countries
32
33
33%
40%
30%
20%
25%
10%
0%
Will Re c e ive Fina nc ia l Aid
P e ll G ra nt
Award
Undergraduates Systemwide
EAP Participants
Participation: GPA, Partner & Length
Headcount
EAP Participation by Program Length: Academic Years 1999/00 - 2008/09.
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2,413
858
1,155
3,148
3,317
1,170 1,143
1,001
799
200304
2005- 200606
07
3,730
3,740
1,638
1,276 1,255
1,217
199900
2001- 200202
03
200001
3,071 3,065
1,222
200405
799
597
200708
200809
Academic Year of Particiation
Academic Year
Short-Term
EAP Enrollment (Headcount & Full Time Equivalency).
Academic Year of Participation.
Measure
2001-02
2003-04
2005-06
2007-08
2008-09
Headcount
2,855
4,241
4,147
4,529
4,337
FTE
1,984
2,545
2,483
2,648
2,526
1.44
1.67
1.67
1.71
1.72
Headcount: FTE
Type & Focus: Expenses or Costs
Contractual relationship
as foundation of
capacity and student
opportunity.
•Location:
Language
• Length
•Academics/
Discipline
• Price
• Personal Network:
Friends, Family,
past participants
Exchange & Capacity: Fees
Transition: Mixed Revenue
•
•
Revenue is mixed
New fee was introduced for 2009-10 --Marine Biol., revenue/participant increased
(67%): $2,531
–
Retained length as 15 week program; cost to student increased 6.2%
Self Sustaining Entity Within a Public University: Non-Exchange Budget
• Return to Aid (RTA) Component
• UPF is a “benchmark”
• EAP must build up a
contingency/emergency reserve
Self Sustaining Entity Within a Public University: Non-Exchange Budget
•
•
Exchange (not “private provider” model for alien Americans) No Fee, Non-Degree
Balance/Parity – Capacity/Recruitment – year-to-year.
–
•
•
Contract specifics about $ for “over/under” balance: as a state entity we should never be under
Credits/Grades - Workload
Registration Fee, Campus Miscellaneous Fees
Business Models: Telling Truths or Lies?
Last Attempts
• Better use of Database (Business/Transaction) Intelligence
– Retention: Payment strategies
– Contracts: Negotiations, program line-up adjustments (E.g., Spring UK/I:
Argentina)
– Direct recruitment (20%)
• Construct a Network between the Campuses & Campus Recruiters
– Improved use of reports (trade allocated capacity between campuses,
or partners beyond UO)
– Employ Market Intelligence
• Surveys
• Data Analyses
– Underserved Markets (students who commute (25% of UCI campus)
– Males & Sciences (45% of EAP was male in mid-1970s)
» Identifying the Hubs of influence in their small scaled networks
• Two UC campuses have a target of 50% of all students abroad during
campus career
• Strategic Initiatives
– Alumni, NGO, Think Tanks, etc., as resources for students abroad, as
voices of value, of the UC & Study Abroad (which is otherwise difficult
to measure)