Complete College America: How states are utilizing the Common Completion Metrics in performance funding formulas and other state policy initiatives.

SHEEO Higher Education Policy Conference August 10, 2012

Complete College America

Founded in 2009 with a single focus on working with states to:

 Significantly increase the number of students successfully earning degrees and credentials of value in the labor market, and  Close attainment gaps for traditionally underrepresented populations, including minority and low-income young adults.

Goal: By 2020, six out of ten young adults in the U.S. will have a college degree or certificate of value.

The Alliance of States

•

COMMITMENT TO STATE AND CAMPUS GOALS

Commit to set state and campus numerical goals to increase completion and close attainment gaps by 2020 •

COMMITMENT TO MEASURING PROGRESS & SUCCESS

State and campus leaders pledge to measure and publicly report annual progress on key progression and completion metrics • • • • •

COMMITMENT TO BOLD ACTION

Ensure all students are ready to start and succeed in freshman credit courses Redesign remediation strategies to substantially improve success Reduce time to degree and increase the number of students completing on time Provide financial incentives to students and colleges for progress Develop new, shorter and faster pathways to degrees and certificates of value

Arkansas Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Minnesota

CCA Alliance States

Mississippi Missouri Nevada New Mexico Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont West Virginia

CCA Modus Operandi

• • • • • • •

N

ational Convening Completion Academies Institutes In-State Completion Academies Completion Innovation Challenge Grant Publications In-State Technical Assistance

COMMON METRICS UNDERLIE EVERY CCA ACTIVITY

Purpose of CCA/NGA Common College Completion Metrics



I NFORM

: To help policymakers and the public understand how students, colleges, and the state are doing on college completion 

A NALYZE

: To help policymakers and colleges identify specific challenges and opportunities for improvement 

S HOW

time

P ROGRESS

: To establish a fair baseline and show progress over 

H OLD A CCOUNTABLE

: To hold students, colleges, and the state accountable to the public and to policymakers investing taxpayer dollars in higher education

7

Disaggregations

Gender Race/Ethnicity Income (Pell Grant recipients) Age Group (where applicable) Full-time/Part-time /Transfer Entry Status Discipline/Degree-type Remedial Status

*

= NOT Collected in IPEDS

* * * * *

8

Progress Metrics

REMEDIATION: ENTRY and SUCCESS SUCCESS in FIRST-YEAR COLLEGE COURSES (1st yr. math and English) CREDIT ACCUMULATION RETENTION RATES COURSE COMPLETION

*

= NOT Collected in IPEDS

* * * *

9

Outcome Metrics

DEGREES AWARDED ANNUALLY (# and change over time) GRADUATION RATES TRANSFER RATES CREDITS AND TIME TO DEGREE

*

= NOT Collected in IPEDS

*

REMEDIATION Higher Education’s Bridge to Nowhere

Data in Use: Completion

S TUDENTS E NROLLING IN

Academies

R EMEDIAL E DUCATION (of all entering students)

Math Only English Only Both Math & English

All Students Hispanic Students African American Students White Students Other Races Directly from HS (Age 17-19) Age 25 and over Age 20-24 Pell Grant Recipients (at entry)

Any Remedial (Total)

S TUDENTS C OMPLETING C OLLEGE LEVEL G ATEKEEPER M ATH /E NGLISH C OURSES

F IRST -T IME E NTRY BOTH S TUDENTS C OMPLETING M ATH A ND E NGLISH G ATEWAY C OURSES IN F IRST T WO A CADEMIC Y EARS S TUDENTS E NROLLED IN W ITHIN T WO R EMEDIAL E DUCATION C OMPLETING R C ORRESPONDING G ATEWAY EMEDIAL A ND C OURSE ( S ) Y EARS

All Students Hispanic Students African American Students White Students Other Races Directly from HS (Age 17-19) Age 25 and over Age 20-24 Pell Grant Recipients (at entry)

NP*

Data in Use: Institutes and Outreach

IBHE Presentation

Complete College America: How Illinois is Utilizing the Common Completion Metrics in Performance Funding & Other Policy Initiatives

SHEEO Higher Education Policy Conference August 10, 2012

Karen Helland, Senior Associate Director Illinois Board of Higher Education 1 4

CCA Alliance State:

Illinois

C OMMITMENT TO S TATE AND C AMPUS G OALS

• Goal of 60 x 2025

C OMMITMENT TO M EASURING P ROGRESS

•

& S UCCESS

Illinois Public Agenda for College and Career Readiness

• Illinois Longitudinal Data System (ILDS)

C OMMITMENT TO B OLD A CTION

• Performance Funding IBHE Presentation 15

Illinois Commitment to College Completion

• • • September 24, 2010 Governor Pat Quinn Goal of 60 x 2025 – 60% of adults (25-64) with a postsecondary credential by the year 2025 IBHE Presentation 16

Goal of 60 x 2025

Requires > 4,000 Additional Graduates per Year (or 40% increase from 2011 to 2025)

200 000 CCA Goal Current Production 175 000 182 646 150 000 125 000 100 000 130 906 * Includes certificates of 1 year or greater, associates degrees, & baccalaureate degrees IBHE Presentation 17

Public Agenda for College & Career Success

Goal 1

Master Plan for Education

• Increase educational attainment Goal 2 Goal 3 • Ensure college affordability • Increase number of credentials Goal 4 • Better integrate assets IBHE Presentation 18

Public Agenda for College & Career Success

Goal 1: Increase educational attainment to match best performing U.S. states and world countries

• Performance Measures – – – – – – Education Level of Adult Population Goal of 60 x 2025 Ethnic/Racial Groups: High School Graduates Ethnic/Racial Groups: College Graduates Students with Disabilities: College Graduates Remedial Courses • State Accountability Report IBHE Presentation 19

Illinois Longitudinal Data System (ILDS)

• • • Commitment to a statewide P-20 data system Collect student data, facilitate evaluation of education programs, and facilitate education research Illinois Higher Education Consortium (IHEC) – Public universities, community colleges, proprietary and not-for-profit institutions – Standing Committee for Data Elements IBHE Presentation 20

Illinois Longitudinal Data System (ILDS)

Source of data for future performance funding measures For example:

• • • • • • • Articulation and retention of transfer students Progress of students requiring remediation (math/language arts) Credit hour accumulation (e.g., 24/48/72) Time to completion (e.g., 100%, 150%, 200%) Students defined as first generation Students by age Students by geographical location IBHE Presentation 21

Higher Education Performance Funding

• • • • • Rewards institutions that meet state goals Focuses on outputs, not inputs – Course completion instead of course enrollment – Degree recipients instead of degree candidates Encourages at-risk students Maintains quality Increases funding with meeting more goals IBHE Presentation 22

Illinois’ Principles for Performance Funding

1) Focus on the fundamental goal of increasing completion 2) 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 IBHE Presentation 23

Illinois’ Principles for Performance Funding

3) Recognize and account for the differentiated missions of institutions of higher education 4) Recognize the unique and broad mission of public community colleges 5) Maintain the quality of degrees, certificates, courses, and programs IBHE Presentation 24

IBHE Presentation

Illinois Performance Funding Model

(4-Year Public Universities)

Step 1: Identify Performance Metrics Step 2: Collect Best Available Data Step 3: Award Premium for Student Success Step 4: Normalize Data (or Scale) Step 5: Weight by Mission (Carnegie) Step 6: Calculate Weighted Results Step 7: Use Weighted Results to Distribute Funds 25

Illinois Performance Funding

(4-Year Public Universities) Performance Measures

Bachelors Degrees Masters Degrees Doctoral & Professional Degrees Undergraduate Degrees per 100 FTE Education & General Spending per Completion Research & Public Service Expenditures

Premiums for Degrees Awarded

Low Income (Pell Eligible/MAP Recipient) Adult (Age 25 and Older) Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic STEM & Health Care (by CIP Code) 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%

3-Year Average

2007-09 2007-09 2007-09 2007-09 2009-11 2009-11 IBHE Presentation 26

Illinois Performance Funding

Retention (by Cohort) Time to Completion Student Accumulation of Credit Hours Student Transfers

Potential Future Performance Measures

Remediation Success Diversity of Staff and Faculty Quality

Potential Future Premiums for Degrees Awarded

Part-Time Students with Disabilities English Language Learners Residents of Underserved Counties Veterans First Generation Additional Ethnic Categories IBHE Presentation 27

Illinois Performance Funding

(Community Colleges) Performance Measures

Degree and Certificate Completion Degree and Certificate Completion of “At Risk” Students Transfer to a Four Year Institution Remedial and Adult Education Advancement Momentum Points Transfer to a Community College IBHE Presentation 28

What We Accomplished

• • • • • Developed a workable performance funding model Model and budget recommendations were approved by both the Steering Committee and the IBHE Board A performance funding component was included in the FY 2013 Higher Education Budget Submission by IBHE The IBHE funding recommendation was included in the Governor’s Budget without change The Illinois General Assembly allocated funding based on performance consistent with the IBHE performance funding recommendation 29

FY 2013 Performance Funding Results

• At Public Universities: – 0.5% of the base ($6.15M) was re-allocated based on the performance funding model • At Community Colleges: – $360K was re-allocated based on their model’s six  performance measures 30

• • •

Continually Improve & Refine Performance Funding

Fiscal Year 2013 performance funding model is the starting point Performance Funding Refinement Committee meets quarterly to consider performance measures, data collection and analyses, and new calculations Working on the Fiscal Year 2014 IBHE Presentation 31

IBHE Presentation

Questions/Comments?

Karen Helland [email protected]

Illinois Board of Higher Education www.ibhe.org

(217) 782-2551 32

PRESENTATION TO SHEEO CHICAGO, AUGUST 10 TH TONY HUTCHISON, VICE CHANCELLOR FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING & ANALYSIS AND WORKFORCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Complete College America

A Plan for Increasing Postsecondary Credentials to Fuel a Strong Economy

1 FOCUS ON READINESS 2 TRANSFORM REMEDIATION 3 BUILD BRIDGES TO CERTIFICATES & DEGREES

Higher education and K-12 will work together to develop and implement a strategy that seeks to identify students not on target to be college ready by graduation and targets activities in the 11 college. th and 12 th grades to reduce remediation demands in the transition from high school to Every Oklahoma institution will implement transformational models of remedial placement and support through a statewide phased implementation and refinement process. Develop and implement a "Program Equivalent Project" that bridges Career Tech credit hour completion to certificate and A.A.S. degree completion in the community colleges.

4 REACH HIGHER FOR ADULT COMPLETION

Further expand and develop Reach Higher as a degree and certificate completion effort that involves the entire system of postsecondary education.

5 TRACK & REWARD PROGRESS & COMPLETION

Reform Oklahoma’s successful Brain Gain Performance Funding Program to provide metrics and accountability for measuring state and campus progress toward completion goals. 34

HOW WE ARRIVED CONFLUENCE OF FACTORS State Question 744 Complete College America –  OSRHE  Oklahoma Secretary of Education Phyllis Hudecki  Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin Council of Presidents Desire for Funding Formula reform

MORE THAN A YEARS WORTH OF WORK BY THE OSRHE COUNCIL OF PRESIDENTS • • • Several factors needed to be addressed. They included: Dramatic Reform of the old cost base/peer institution model Replacement with performance metrics Addressing equity issues from the old model

NEW FORMULA BUILDS OFF OF OLD “BRAIN GAIN” Old Model  98% of funding flowed through a cost/peer model  2% performance from Brain Gain  Graduation Rates  First year Retention Rates  Degrees Conferred  Two unique campus measure

NEW FORMULA 100% of New Money goes through a CCA Performance Based Formula.

 % of Campus CCA target  Degrees and Certificates Conferred  System Graduation Rate for Four Year Campuses  Progression Rate (Grad Rate and Successful Transfers) for Two Year Colleges  First year Retention  First Year Retention of Pell Students  Successful Completion of 24 credit hours of college level credit in first year

PHASE IN First Two Years OSRHE acceptance of campus completion plan is weighted heavily.

By year three all the performance factors are implemented and weighted plan phased out.

OSRHE can withhold 10% of New Funds for Base adjustments.