Transcript Slide 1

Illinois Higher Education
Performance Funding Model
IBHE Board Meeting
February 5, 2013
Dr. Alan Phillips
IBHE Presentation
1
Purpose
The purpose of this presentation is to propose a
performance funding model that will allocate funding
based on performance as a part of the FY 2014 IBHE
Higher Education budget submission, in accordance
with the intent of Public Act 97-320 (HB 1503), the
Performance Funding legislation, and that supports
the goals of the Illinois Public Agenda.
IBHE Presentation
2
Topics to be Covered
• Performance Funding Brief Overview
• Refinement Committee Effort
• Performance Funding Model Refinements
• Performance Funding Model (FY14)
• FY14 Budget Recommendations
IBHE Presentation
3
Brief Overview
IBHE Presentation
4
Performance Funding Objective
• To develop performance funding models for public
universities and community colleges that are…
– Linked directly to the Goals of the Illinois Public Agenda
and the principles of Public Act 97-320
– Equipped to recognize and account for each university’s
mission and set of circumstances
– Adjustable to account for changes in policy and priorities
– Not prescriptive in how to achieve excellence and success
IBHE Presentation
5
Public Act 97-320 (HB 1503)
• Performance Metrics Shall:
– Reward performance of institutions in advancing the
success of students who are:
•
•
•
•
Academically or financially at risk.
First generation students.
Low-income students.
Students traditionally underrepresented in higher education.
– Recognize and account for the differentiated missions of
institutions of higher education.
– Focus on the fundamental goal of increasing completion.
– Maintain the quality of degrees, certificates, courses, and
programs.
– Recognize the unique and broad mission of public
community colleges.
IBHE Presentation
6
Performance Funding Model
Community Colleges
IBHE Presentation
7
Performance Funding Model
(Community Colleges)
• There are thirty-nine community college districts.
• The community college model contains six separate measures.
• Each measure is allocated an equal portion of the total
performance funding amount.
• Each college competes for a portion of the funding for each
measure.
• Those colleges that show a decrease in performance receive no
funds based on performance.
• Those colleges that show an increase in performance receive a
pro-rata share of the funding allocation for that measure based
on the increase in their performance.
IBHE Presentation
8
Performance Funding Measures
(Community Colleges)
1. Degree and Certificate Completion.
2. Degree and Certificate Completion of “At Risk”
students.
3. Transfer to a four year institution.
4. Remedial and Adult Education Advancement.
5. Momentum Points.
6. Transfer to a community college.
IBHE Presentation
9
Performance Funding Model
4-Year Public Universities
IBHE Presentation
10
Performance Funding Model
(4-Year Universities)
• All steps are identical at each university
• The model accounts for each institution’s unique mission by
adding a weight to each measure.
• Each institution’s formula calculation is independent.
• The formula calculation for each institution will change each
year based on annually updated data.
• The funding allocation is competitive.
• Funds are distributed on a pro rata basis according to each
institution’s formula calculation.
• The model is not prescriptive in how to achieve excellence
and success (what, not how).
IBHE Presentation
11
Refinement Effort
IBHE Presentation
12
Four Refinement Goals
• Refine the existing measures and sub-categories to the extent
possible or find replacement measures that capture what we
are trying to measure in a better way (i.e. Research
Expenditures, Low Income Students, Cost per FTE, etc.).
1. Identify additional measures and sub-categories to add to
the model.
2. Identify better and more current sources of data.
3. See if there is a better way to scale (normalize) the data.
4. Discuss ways to account for other factors (i.e. Hospitals,
Medical Schools, Dental Schools, etc.)
IBHE Presentation
13
Measures
• Deleted: Education and General Spending per
Completion (RAMP)
• Added:
– Cost per Credit Hour. (Cost Study)
– Cost per Completion. (Cost Study)
– Credit Hour Accumulation. (Institutional Data)
– Time to Degree. (Institutional Data)
IBHE Presentation
14
Sub-Categories
• Did not change the sub-categories.
• Sub-Categories are:
–
–
–
–
–
IBHE Presentation
Low Income (Pell/MAP Eligible) – Institutional Data
Adult (Age 25 and Older) – CCA/ILDS
Hispanic - IPEDS
Black, non-Hispanic - IPEDS
STEM & Health Care (By CIP Code) – HLS + CIP 51
15
General Refinement Issues
• Data continues to be an issue.
– Although we have received our first ILDS submission, the
quality of the data is not sufficient to use at this time.
– The timeliness of data also continues to be a problem.
– Some of the data we had to request from the universities
• Quality
– We still have significant challenges addressing the issue of
“maintaining” quality of degrees, certificates, courses, and
programs.
• Sub-Categories
– First Generation (Definition/Data issues)
– Geographic Area
IBHE Presentation
16
Performance Funding Model (FY14)
4-Year Public Universities
IBHE Presentation
17
Performance Funding Model Steps
(4-Year Public University)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Step 1 – Identify the performance measures or metrics that support the
achievement of the state goals.
Step 2 – Collect the data on the selected performance measures
Step 3 – Award an additional premium (i.e. 40%) for the production of certain
desired outcomes such as completions by underserved or underrepresented
populations
Step 4 – Normalize (scale) the data, if necessary, so it is comparable across
variables.
Step 5 – Weight each of the Performance Measures that reflects the priority of the
Measure and the mission of the institution.
Step 6 – Multiply and sum the Scaled Data times the Weight to produce the
Weighted results.
Step 7 – Add an adjustment factor for high cost entities (i.e. Hospitals, Medical,
Dental, and Veterinary Schools).
Step 8 – Use the final Weighted results (or Total Performance Value) to distribute
performance funding.
IBHE Presentation
18
Performance Measures
Step 1 – Identify the performance measures or metrics that support
the achievement of the state goals.
Step 2 – Collect the data on the selected performance measures
(3-year averages)
Measure
• Bachelors Degrees (FY09-11)
• Masters Degrees (FY09-11)
• Doctoral and Professional Degrees (FY09-11)
• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE (FY09-11)
• Education and General Spending per Completion (FY09-11)
• Research and Public Service Expenditures (FY10-12)
• Grad Rates 100%/150%/200% of Time (Fall 02-04 Cohort)
• Retention (Completed 24/48/72 Semester Hours) (FY07-09)
• Cost per Credit Hour (FY09-11)
• Cost per Completion (FY09-11)
IBHE Presentation
Source
IPEDS
IPEDS
IPEDS
IPEDS
RAMP
RAMP
Institutional Data
Institutional Data
Cost Study
Cost Study
19
Sub-Categories
Step 3 – Award an additional premium for the production
of certain desired outcomes such as completions by
underserved or underrepresented populations
Sub-Category
Weight
• Low Income (Pell/Map Eligible)
40% - Institutional Data
• Adult (Age 25 and Older)
40%
• Hispanic
40%
• Black, non-Hispanic
40%
• STEM & Health Care (by CIP Code) 40% - HLS + CIP 51
IBHE Presentation
20
Scaling Factors
Step 4 – Normalize (scale) the data, if necessary, so it is
comparable across variables.
• Averaged the measures across all of the institutions.
• The average number of bachelors degrees will serve as the
base value.
• Determine a scaling factor that will normalize the rest of the
averages to the average number of bachelors degrees.
• Adjust the scaling factors as appropriate (i.e. Masters &
Doctorates).
• Multiply all of the initial data by the scaling factor to
normalize the data.
IBHE Presentation
21
Scaling Factors
Step 4 – Normalize (scale) the data, if necessary, so it is
comparable across variables.
Measure
Universities 1-12 (Avg)
2,822
• Bachelors Degrees (FY09-11)
1,042
• Masters Degrees (FY09-11)
227
• Doctoral and Professional Degrees (FY09-11)
25
• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE (FY09-11)
27
• Grad Rates 100% of Time (Fall 02-04 Cohort)
46
• Grad Rates 150% of Time (Fall 02-04 Cohort)
50
• Grad Rates 200% of Time (Fall 02-04 Cohort)
1,644
• Retention (Completed 24 Semester Hours) (FY07-09)
1,453
• Retention (Completed 48 Semester Hours) (FY07-09)
1,350
• Retention (Completed 72 Semester Hours) (FY07-09)
346
• Cost per Credit Hour (FY09-11) (Cost Study)
36,566
• Cost per Completion (FY09-11) (Cost Study)
• Research and Public Service Expenditures (FY09-11) 112,914,667
IBHE Presentation
Scaling Factor Adjusted Scaling Factor
1.0
1
2.7
1
12.4
2
112.6
200
104.4
50
60.9
50
57.0
50
1.7
2
1.9
2
2.1
2
8.1
-8
.1
-.050
.00002
.00005
22
Performance Measure Weights
Step 5 – Weight each of the Performance Measures that reflects
the priority of the Measure and the mission of the institution.
Research-Very High
Measure
• Bachelors Degrees
• Masters Degrees
• Doctoral and Professional Degrees
• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE
• Grad Rates 100% of Time
• Grad Rates 150% of Time
• Grad Rates 200% of Time
• Retention (Completed 24 Semester Hours)
• Retention (Completed 48 Semester Hours)
• Retention (Completed 72 Semester Hours)
• Cost per Credit Hour
• Cost per Completion
• Research and Public Service Expenditures
IBHE Presentation
UIUC
17.0%
14.0%
13.0%
4.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
45.0%
100.0%
UIC
18.0%
15.0%
14.0%
4.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
42.0%
100.0%
Doctoral/
Research
Research-High
NIU
28.0%
15.0%
10.0%
11.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
1.0%
1.0%
28.0%
100.0%
SIUC
28.0%
14.0%
8.0%
13.0%
1.5%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
30.0%
100.0%
ISU
33.0%
23.0%
6.0%
12.0%
2.0%
1.5%
0.5%
0.5%
1.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.5%
15.0%
100.0%
23
Performance Measure Weights
Step 5 – Weight each of the Performance Measures that reflects
the priority of the Measure and the mission of the institution.
Masters Colleges & Universities (Large)
Measure
• Bachelors Degrees
• Masters Degrees
• Doctoral and Professional Degrees
• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE
• Grad Rates 100% of Time
• Grad Rates 150% of Time
• Grad Rates 200% of Time
• Retention (Completed 24 Semester Hours)
• Retention (Completed 48 Semester Hours)
• Retention (Completed 72 Semester Hours)
• Cost per Credit Hour
• Cost per Completion
• Research & Public Svc Expenditures
IBHE Presentation
SIUE
WIU
EIU
NEIU
CSU
42.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0%
28.0% 25.0% 26.0% 26.0% 25.0%
2.5%
1.0%
0.0%
0.0%
1.0%
12.0% 13.0% 13.0% 13.0% 13.0%
2.0%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
1.5%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
2.5%
1.5%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
1.5%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
3.5%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
2.0%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
GSU
UIS
45.0% 43.0%
27.0% 27.0%
1.0%
1.0%
5.0%
8.0%
0.0%
2.5%
0.0%
2.0%
0.0%
1.0%
5.0%
1.0%
7.0%
2.0%
0.0%
2.5%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
4.0%
2.0%
2.0%
100.0% 100.0%
24
Performance Value Calculation
Step 6 – Multiply and Sum the Scaled Data times the Weight to
produce the Performance Value for each institution.
Data
Measure
2,822
• Bachelors Degrees
1,042
• Masters Degrees
227
• Doctoral and Professional Degrees
25
• Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE
27
• Grad Rates 100% of Time
46
• Grad Rates 150% of Time
50
• Grad Rates 200% of Time
1,644
• Retention (Completed 24 Semester Hours)
1,453
• Retention (Completed 48 Semester Hours)
1,350
• Retention (Completed 72 Semester Hours)
346
• Cost per Credit Hour
36,566
• Cost per Completion
$112,914,667
• Research & Public Svc Expenditures
IBHE Presentation
(Data+Premium)
Total Performance
Data + Premium Scale x Scale xWeight = Value
3,522
1
3,522
30.0%
1,057
1,454
1
1,454
25.0%
364
240
2
480
5.0%
24
25
200
5,000
10.0%
500
27
50
1,350
1.5%
20
46
50
2,300
1.0%
23
50
50
2,500
0.5%
13
1,644
2
3,288
1.0%
33
1,453
2
2,906
1.5%
44
1,350
2
2,700
2.0%
54
345
-8
-2,760
1.5%
-41
36,566 -.050
-1,828
1.0%
-18
$112,914,667 .00005
5,646
20.0%
1,129
100.0%
3,200
25
Performance Value Calculation
Step 7 – Add an adjustment factor for high cost entities
(i.e. Hospitals, Medical, Dental, and Veterinary Schools)
• Divide the amount of the university GRF appropriation allocated to fund
the high cost entity by the total university GRF appropriation.
• Multiply this factor by the university performance value and add the result
back to the performance value.
• This give you a total performance value for institutions with these high
cost entities.
• Example:
$20M/$200M = .10
.10 X 3200 (PV) = 320
320 + 3200 = 3520 = Total Performance Value
IBHE Presentation
26
Funding Allocation
Based on Performance
Step 8 – Use the Weighted results (or Total Performance Value) to
distribute funding based on a Pro Rata Share of the total
amount of funds set aside for performance funding.
Percentages for Distribution
Total Performance Value
Percentage of Total
Distribution: Pro Rata
IBHE Presentation
University 1
University 2
University 3
Total
10,840
58.7%
4,435
24.0%
3,200
17.3%
17,302
100%
$240,000
$173,000
$1,000,000
$587,000
27
Results for FY14
• Performance funding values increased for all 12 of the
four-year public universities from FY13 to FY14.
• Based on their performance, public universities
earned back most or all of their performance funding
set-aside.
IBHE Presentation
28
Refinement Issues for FY15
• What is the best way to account for the difficulty of getting
underrepresented students through to completion throughout
the model?
• What is the best way to account for less prepared students in
the model?
• Are there differences in the cost per completion for different
sub-categories of students (i.e. is cost for completion for an
adult student different than that of a STEM student)? Should
that be integrated in the model?
• What is the best way to address the issue of transfer students
and part-time students?
IBHE Presentation
29
Refinement Issues for FY15
• Are there other high value degrees and programs, in addition to
the STEM programs, that we should add to the model?
• Are we giving enough priority to measures of efficiency?
• What is the best way to account for high cost entities (i.e.
Hospitals and Medical, Dental, and Veterinary schools)?
• Are we adequately accounting for institutional improvement
from year to year?
IBHE Presentation
30
FY14 Budget Recommendations
IBHE Presentation
31
Performance Funding
Budget Recommendations
• Performance funding should be implemented slowly starting
with small funding amounts
• Additional funding should be allocated to performance if
there are increases in higher education appropriations.
• If there is no additional funding available to be allocated
based on performance, the amount reallocated from the base
level of funding should be small.
• The amount allocated to performance should increase over
time, but only when better data is available and only when
the performance model is stable and to a point where it can
be locked in for a period of time (i.e. 3-5 years).
IBHE Presentation
32
Recommendation
• If additional funding for performance is not available,
0.5% of the FY 2014 Higher Education appropriation
for the 4-year public universities should be allocated
based on performance (approximately $6.1M at
current levels of funding).
• For the Community Colleges, the amount of $360K
be allocated based on performance.
• Both of these recommendations are consistent with
the IBHE performance funding recommendation for
FY2013.
IBHE Presentation
33
Questions/Comments?
IBHE Presentation
34
Back-Up Charts
IBHE Presentation
35
Performance Funding Model (FY13)
Community Colleges
IBHE Presentation
36
Performance Funding Model
(Community College Example)
• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate
• Model (Part 1) = Percentage change in number of associate degrees
awarded from FY08-FY09.
FY 2008 Number of
Associate Degrees
Awarded
District1
District 2
District 3
District 4
….
District 39
•
•
575
1,803
270
1,484
…..
329
25,130
FY 2009 Number of
Associate Degrees
Awarded
533
2,361
243
1,630
….
350
26,460
%
Change
-7.3%
30.9%
-10.0%
9.8%
….
6.4%
Greater
than
Zero
-.309
-.098
….
.064
2.585
Allocation
-$9,579
-$3.045
….
$1,976
$80,000
Pro Rata Share = $80,000/2.585 = $30,951
Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
–
(i.e. .309 X 30,951 = $9,579)
IBHE Presentation
37
Degree & Certificate Completion
• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate
• Model (Part 1) = Percentage change in number of associate degrees
awarded from FY08-FY09.
• Range of Results = - 14.3% to +30.9%
• Number of districts receiving funding – 26
• Range of Increase = (.2%-30.9%) or (.002 to .309)
• Funding Allocation = $80,000
• Total of increase for all 26 schools = 2.585
• Pro Rata Share = $80,000/2.585 = $30,951 (i.e. 1 share = $30,951)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .002 X $30,951 = $74)
• Range of Allocation = $74 to $9,579
IBHE Presentation
38
Degree & Certificate Completion
• Measure 1 – Students who completed a degree or certificate
• Model (Part 2) = Percentage change in number of certificates awarded from
FY08-FY09.
• Range of Results = - 49.6% to +103.8%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 24
• Range of Increase = (.9%-103.8%) or (.009 to 1.038)
• Funding Allocation = $40,000
• Total of increase for all 24 schools = 5.324
• Pro Rata Share = $40,000/5.324 = $7,512 (i.e. 1 share = $7,512)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .009 X $7,512 = $64)
• Range of Allocation = $64 to $7,797
Measure 1
IBHE Presentation
•
•
•
Total Allocation for Measure 1 = $120,000
Total Number of colleges receiving funding = 35
Range of Allocation = $331 to $9,579
39
Degree Production of At-Risk Students
• Measure 2 – At-risk students who completed a degree or certificate (i.e.
students with Pell or taking remedial courses)
• Model = Percentage change (number of Pell recipients + number of
students who have taken remedial courses) from FY08-FY09.
• Range of Results = - 28.1% to +26.5%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 20
• Range of Increase = (2.3%-26.5%) or (.023 to .265)
• Funding Allocation = $120,000
• Total of increase for all 20 schools = 2.913
• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/2.913 = $41,201 (i.e. 1 share = $41,201)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .023 X $41,201 = $938)
• Range of Allocation = $938 to $10,936
IBHE Presentation
40
Transfer to a Four Year Institution
• Measure 3 – Students who transfer to a four year institution within 3 years
• Model = Percentage of Fall 2006 entrants who transferred to 4-year
institutions by Fall 2010.
• Range of Results = 12.3% to 35.8%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39
• Range of Increase = (12.3%-35.8%) or (.123 to .358)
• Funding Allocation = $120,000
• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 10.778
• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/10.72 = $11,134 (i.e. 1 share = $11,134)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .123 X $11,134 = $1,375)
• Range of Allocation = $1,375 to $3,988
IBHE Presentation
41
Remedial and Adult Education Advancement
• Measure 4 – Remedial students who advance to college level work.
• Model = Percentage of FY 2009 remedial students who advanced to college
level courses.
• Range of Results = 43.8% to 100%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39
• Range of Increase = (43.8%-100%) or (.438 to 1.0)
• Funding Allocation = $120,000
• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 23.82
• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/23.82 = $5,039 (i.e. 1 share = $5,039)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .438 X $5,039 = $2,207)
• Range of Allocation = $2,207 to $5,039
IBHE Presentation
42
Momentum Points
• Measure 5 – 1st time/PT students completing 12 credit hours w/in the first year,
1st time/PT students completing 24 credit hours w/in the first year,
and Adult Education and Family Literacy level (AEFL) gains.
• Model = % change (number of students completing 12 CR + number of students
completing 24 CR + number of students with an AEFL level gain) from
FY08-FY09).
• Range of Results = -53.9% to 69.6%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 22
• Range of Increase = (.9% to 69.6%) or (.009 to .696)
• Funding Allocation = $120,000
• Total of increase for all 22 schools = 6.478
• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/6.478 = $18,529 (i.e. 1 share = $18,529)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. ..009 X $18,529 = $171)
• Range of Allocation = $171 to $12,898
IBHE Presentation
43
Transfer to Another Community College
• Measure 6 – Community college students that transfer to other community
colleges.
• Model = Percentage change (students transferring from one community
college to another community college) from (FY06-FY09) to (FY07-FY10).
• Range of Results = 53.7% to 155.4%
• Number of colleges receiving funding – 39
• Range of Increase = (53.7%-155.4%) or (.537 to 1.554)
• Funding Allocation = $120,000
• Total of increase for all 39 schools = 37.01
• Pro Rata Share = $120,000/37.01 = $3,242 (i.e. 1 share = $3,242)
• Funding Allocation = Amount of Increase X Pro Rata Share
– (i.e. .537 X $3,242 = $1,741)
• Range of Allocation = $1,741 to $5,038
IBHE Presentation
44
Proposed Performance Funding
Step Budget Recommendation
• Step 1 – Flat or Level Budget from FY 13 Funding.
– 4-Year Universities - Flat funding with no more than 0.5% of the
budget reallocated for Performance Funding (approx $6.15M).
– 2-Year Colleges – Flat funding with $360K reallocated based on the six
community college performance measures.
• Step 2 – Overall funding is a 2.5% increase over FY 13.
– 4-Year Universities – Total increase of $24.6M (2.0%). Of the total,
$12.3M (1.0%) is allocated for performance funding.
– 2-Year Colleges – Total increase of $5.8M (2.0%), including a one-time
$1.2M reallocation for legislative initiatives, with $360K reallocated
based on the six community college performance measures.
IBHE Presentation
45
Proposed Performance Funding
Step Budget Recommendation
• Step 3 – A 4.5 % increase above the FY 13 Funding Level
– 4-Year Universities – The total increase is $49.2M (4.0%), $24.6M (2.0%) to
Performance Funding, $24.6M (2.0%) to core institutional support.
– 2-Year Colleges – The total increase is $11.6M (4.0%), including $1.2M
reallocation, $360K to Performance Funding, $8.1M to Base Operating
Grants, and $3.8M to Equalization Grants.
• Step 4 – An 8.3% increase above the FY 13 Funding Level
(Restoration to roughly FY 12 funding levels).
– 4-Year Universities – The total increase is $79.6M (6.5%), $24.6M to
Performance Funding, $30.4M to Deferred Maintenance, and $24.6M to
Institutional support.
– 2-Year Colleges – The total increase is $20.8M (7.2%), including $1.2M
reallocation, $360K to Performance Funding, $13.0M to Base Operating
Grants, and $7.7M to Equalization Grants.
IBHE Presentation
46