Transcript Campaign Planning Retreat Presentation Title Campaign

Greater Autonomy: 2010 State Actions
Higher Education Government
Relations Conference
Austin, Texas
December 2, 2010
Cristin Toutsi
Assistant for Policy Analysis
Ingram Center for Public Trusteeship
and Governance
1
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.
Shrinking state appropriations
• Deteriorating budget conditions = efforts to grant
more freedoms to public institutions and
university systems.
• Higher education sees deregulation and autonomy
as the means to achieve efficiency, and many state
leaders see stronger state oversight, cost control,
and centralization as the means. We might
categorize this as a tension between market forces
and central planning.
• Are states and public higher education “striking a
new bargain?” (Breneman, 2004).
2
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.
What are these “new bargains?”
• Foremost are proposals to grant greater flexibility
for tuition setting.
• Separate from, or in combination with tuition
flexibility, some states are granting greater
freedom regarding operational controls: budget
carry-over authority from year to year, employee
requirements, collective bargaining agreements,
procurement, purchasing, and public-private
partnerships.
• System initiatives on autonomy and flexibility are
percolating in some states.
3
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.
Some examples (excluding NY, NJ, and KS)
• Louisiana: HB 1171, Louisiana Granting Resources and
Autonomy for Diplomas Act (LA GRAD ACT).
• South Carolina: HB 2265, The Higher Education Efficiency
and Administrative Policies Act of 2010.
• Idaho: HB 688, Relates to procuring and purchasing
property by certain state institutions of higher education.
• Nevada: Gubernatorial proposals on system autonomy.
Governor Jim Gibbons and Governor-elect Brian Sandoval
• Oregon: “Considerations for Change.” Governance
proposal unanimously approved by the Oregon State
Board of Higher Education
4
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.
What are the terms of these new relationships?
• “Accountability for results”
• Performance measures. Including but not limited to:
Increases in enrollment, student scholarships for
need-based aid, and degree completion.
• Efficiency reports: cost-saving evaluations
• Pilot-programs (select group of institutions)
• Need effective boards and governance structures in place
to assure accountability and sound financial
management.
• As the nation strives to increase degree attainment, state
investments in higher education are critical.
5
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.
References and Resources
• Breneman, David. Are the States and Public Higher Education Striking a
New Bargain? Association of Governing Boards of Universities and
Colleges. Public Policy Brief. June 2004.
• Hurley, Daniel, Doreen Murner, and Alene Russell. Public College and
University Procurement. American Association of State Colleges and
Universities, National Association of Educational Procurement. 2010.
• McBain, Lesley. Tuition-Setting Authority and Deregulation at State
Colleges and Universities. American Association of State Colleges and
Universities. May 2010.
• Novak, Richard, and Cristin Toutsi. State Governance Action Reports.
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. March
2010 and November 2010.
• Toutsi, Cristin. 2010 Public Institution and University System Financial
Conditions Survey. Association of Governing Boards of Universities and
Colleges. October 2010.
6
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. All Rights Reserved.