Agenda Item No. 15

1
Agenda Item No. 15

• Economic Feasibility of Bond Issue for Arkansas
  Tech University

2
Relevant Information

• 5.12 million for 30 years _at_ 5.25
• Educational General Purposes
• Proceeds will be used to expand the engineering
  building, purchase academic facilities, expand
  the science facility, and various other capital
  improvements

3
Relevant Financial Information

• Net Budgeted 2008-09 Tuition and Fee Revenues
  (30,310,403 - 9,829,085) . . . . .
• Maximum Allowable Debt Service
• (20,481,318 x 25) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . .
• Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  .
• Estimated Debt Service for Proposed
• Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . . . .
• Tuition and Fee Revenue Remaining for
• Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . . .

20,481,318
5,120,329
2,418,690
337,127
2,364,512
4
Agenda Item No. 16

• Economic Feasibility of Bond Issue for Southern
  Arkansas University

5
Relevant Information

• 2.0 million for 30 years _at_ 5.50
• Educational General Purposes
• Proceeds will be used for the renovation and
  updating of current academic and administrative
  facilities.

6
Relevant Financial Information

• Net Budgeted 2008-09 Tuition and Fee
• Revenues (16,592,017 - 5,814,092) . . . . . .
  . .
• Maximum Allowable Debt Service
• (10,777,925 X 25) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . . .
• Existing Debt Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . .
• Estimated Debt Service for
• Proposed Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . . . .
• Tuition and Fee Revenue Remaining for
• Additional Debt Service. . . . . . . . . . . .
  . . . . .

10,777,925
2,694,481
1,600,861
148,533
945,087
7
Agenda Item No. 17
Proposed Changes to Higher Education Bond
Projects for Black River Technical College

• Delete the Renovation of Classroom Facilities
  project in the amount of 220,000 and apply the
  funds to the Academic Complex
• Academic Complex allocation is now 2.220 million

8
Agenda Items No.18
Distribution of Mineral Lease Funds

• It is recommended that up to 1.5 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.
• 3,055,554 has been distributed since April of
  2007

9
Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Agenda Item 2 Retention and Graduation
Rates April 24, 2009
Presented byRick Jenkins, Associate
DirectorPlanning and Accountability
10
What is Retention?

• A student is retained if they enrolled in one
  fall term and returned to enroll in the next fall
  term.
• ADHEs methodology uses cohorts consisting of
  students that are
• first-time entering students,
• full-time enrolled students, and
• are seeking a degree or certificate

11
Statewide Retention Rates

• Both the native and total retention rate for all
  Arkansas public colleges and universities has
  decreased slightly for the past five cohort years.

12
Retention Rates by Gender

• Females come back to college more frequently than
  males, but this gender gap is decreasing.

13
Retention Rates by Race
14
How Are Graduation Rates Calculated

• ADHEs methodology uses cohorts consisting of
  students that are
• first-time entering students,
• full-time enrolled students, and
• are seeking a degree or certificate
• This number becomes the denominator
• Did the student in the above cohort graduate
  within six years (for universities) or within
  three years (for colleges)? This number becomes
  the numerator.

15
National Graduation Rates

• According to The National Center for Higher
  Education Management Systems (NCHEMS at
  www.higheredinfo.org), the latest nationwide
  NCES/IPEDS native graduation rates are for Cohort
  Year 2007 and are
• For Bachelors degrees 56.1
• For Associates degrees 27.8

16
University Graduation Rates
Graduation Rates at Universities is down slightly.
17
University Graduation Rates
The University of Arkansas Fayetteville has the
highest graduation rate among the universities,
followed by the University of Central Arkansas.
18
College Graduation Rates
College graduation rates have been increasing
since Cohort Year 2002.
19
College Native Graduation Rates
SAUT has the highest native graduation rates
followed by ASUB and UACCH.
20
College Cumulative Graduation Rates
SAUT has the highest cumulative graduation rates
followed by ASUB and UACCH.
21
What is Success Rate?

• Success Rate is the sum of the retention rate and
  the graduation rate (including both native and
  cumulative).
• If a student has not yet graduated within the
  desired time period, but they are still enrolled,
  they are considered a success as they have not
  dropped out!

22
University Success Rates
University success rates are very similar to
university graduation rates.
23
College Success Rates
Two-year college success rates are down over 2
percentage points since Cohort Year 2001.
24
Summary

• Statewide Retention Rates have decreased over the
  last 1 year and 5 years.
• University Graduation Rates have decreased over
  the past 2 years, but have increased over the
  past 5 years.
• College Graduation Rates have increased over the
  past 2 years, but have decreased over the past 5
  years.
• University Success Rates have decreased over the
  past 2 years, but have increased over the past 5
  years.
• College Success Rates have decreased over the
  past 1 year and have decreased over the past 5
  years.
• Overall, there seems to be no consistent trend.

25
Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Agenda Item 3 Athletes Retention and Graduation
Rates April 24, 2009
Presented byRick Jenkins, Associate
DirectorPlanning and Accountability
26
One Year Retention Rates
Athletes, especially athletes on scholarship,
have higher retention rates than all Arkansas
public college students.
27
Six-Year Graduation Rates

• Athletes, especially athletes on scholarship,
  have higher graduation rates than all Arkansas
  public college students.

28
Big Three Sports v. Other Sports

• Students participating in Womens Basketball have
  the highest 6-year graduation rate followed by
  Other Sports, All Students at Arkansas public
  colleges, Mens Basketball and Football.

29
Summary

• The athletic experience in Arkansas has a
  positive academic effect on athletes as, in most
  cases, they demonstrate higher retention and
  graduation rates than the overall student body.
• The sports having the poorest retention and
  graduation rates are Football and Mens
  Basketball.

30
Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Agenda Item 4 New Program Productivity April
24, 2009
Presented byRick Jenkins, Associate
DirectorPlanning and Accountability
31
Current Productivity Standards

• Productivity for certificate and associate
  programs (Degree Levels 1-4) are measured after
  three years.
• Certificates of Proficiency programs 3
  awards per year
• Technical Certificate programs 3 awards per
  year
• Associate degree programs 3 awards per year
• Advanced Certificate programs 3 awards per
  year
• Baccalaureate and higher programs (Degree Levels
  5-12) are measured after five years.
• Baccalaureate degree programs - 3 awards per
  year
• Post-Baccalaureate degree programs 3 awards
  per year
• Masters degree programs 2 awards per year
• Specialist degree programs 2 awards per year
• Doctoral degree programs 1 award per year
• First Professional / Post-First Professional
  programs 1 award per year
• The new AHECB standards for productivity begin in
  2010.

32
Degree Levels 1 - 4

• 44 new Certificate of Proficiency programs
  (Degree Level 1) started in AY 2005 (2004-2005)
  41 remain active
• 68 new Technical Certificate programs (Degree
  Level 2) began in in AY 2005 (2004-2005) 53
  remain active
• 18 new Associate degree programs (Degree Level 3)
  began in in AY 2005 (2004-2005) 16 remain
  active
• 2 new Advanced Certificate programs (Degree Level
  4) began in in AY 2005 (2004-2005) 2 remain
  active

33
Degree Levels 1 - 4
34
Degree Levels 5 - 12

• 10 new Baccalaureate degree programs (Degree
  Level 5) started in AY 2003 (2002-2003) 9
  remain active
• 5 new Post-Baccalaureate degree programs (Degree
  Level 6) began in in AY 2003 (2002-2003) 5
  remain active
• 13 new Masters degree programs (Degree Level 7)
  began in in AY 2003 (2002-2003) 13 remain
  active
• 2 new Specialist degree programs (Degree Level 8)
  began in in AY 2003 (2002-2003) 2 remain active
• There were no new Doctoral degree programs
  (Degree Level 9), First Professional degree
  programs (Degree Level 10), or other new programs
  that began in in AY 2003 (2002-2003)

35
Degree Levels 5 - 12
36
Degree Levels 1 - 4
37
Degree Levels 5 - 12
38
SUMMARY

• Of the 132 new programs for Degree Levels 1-4
  created in AY 2005, 20 programs (15.2) percent
  were discontinued in some manner.
• Of the 132 new programs for Degree Levels 1-4
  created in AY 2005, 65 programs (49.2 percent)
  met the productivity standards.
• For Degree Levels 1-4, these institutions had
  success rates of 75.0 percent or higher -- UAFS,
  ASUB, ASUMH, ASUN, BRTC, CCCUA, OZC, RMCC, and
  SACC.
• Of the 30 new programs for Degree Levels 5-12
  created in AY 2003, 1 program (3.3 percent) was
  discontinued in some manner.
• Of the 30 new programs for Degree Levels 5-12
  created in AY 2003, 23 programs (76.7 percent)
  met the productivity standards.
• For Degree Levels 5-12, these institutions had
  success rates of 75.0 percent or higher -- ASUJ,
  ATU, HSU, UALR, UAMS, UAPB, and UCA.

39
New Program Viability Standards

• The new Program Viability Standards as passed by
  the AHECB in 2008 will begin in 2010. If the new
  standards were in effect today, the impact would
  be
• 2 less Technical Certificates meeting standard
  (38 successful instead of 40 or 55.9 percent
  successful instead of 58.8 percent)
• 1 fewer Baccalaureate degree meeting standard (6
  successful instead of 7 or 60.0 percent
  successful instead of 70.0 percent)
• 2 less Masters degrees meeting standard (11
  successful instead of 13 or 84.6 percent
  successful instead of 100.0 percent)
• 1 fewer Specialist degree meeting standard (1
  successful instead of 2 or 50.0 percent
  successful instead of 100.0 percent)

40
Agency Update
41

• RMCC
• Legislative Postscript
• Changes for Higher Education
• Budget
• Stimulus
• Concurrent Task Force
• Program Viability
• Say Go College Campaign

42
Rich Mountain Community College
April 9, 2009
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
(No Transcript)
48
(No Transcript)
49
(No Transcript)
50
(No Transcript)
51
(No Transcript)
52
(No Transcript)
53
(No Transcript)
54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
Rich Mountain Community College

• Classes at the Mena campus resumed at Rich
  Mountain Community College this past Monday,
  April 20, 2009.
• 70 of classes could be held on campus. Rich
  Mountain is using two separate locations for the
  other thirty percent of classes.
• Chancellor Wayne Hatcher reported that the
  Arkansas Disaster Insurance was providing
  excellent coverage with up to eighty percent or
  more coverage of expenses for damage.
• ADHE has requesting additional funds through the
  Federal Stimulus program.
• AATYC member colleges have helped the campus with
  its immediate classroom/computers needs and
  related staff support.
• The biggest concern at the present time is for
  the faculty/staff and students that suffered due
  to the tornado. Eight (8) faculty/staff members
  lost their homes and belongings. We are not sure
  of the total number of students that suffered a
  loss.
• Rich Mountain is committed to providing
  counseling to those faculty/staff and students in
  need.
• Rich Mountain has set-up a task force of four (4)
  to five (5) individuals to coordinate the efforts
  to collect furniture and other necessary supplies
  for those faculty/staff and students that lost
  everything in the storm.

57
Legislative Postscript
58
Additional Accountability

• Title/Subject Act Bill Sponsor
• Enhanced Reporting
• Arkansas Lottery 606/605 HB1002/SB26 Smith/Will
  s
• Roger Phillips Transfer Act 182 HB1357 M.
  Burris
• Comprehensive Report Act 416 HB1589 Roebuck
• Expand Reporting of Remediation
  970 HB1764 Hutchison
• Salary Transparency for Higher Ed Administrators
  321 SB55 G. Baker
• Disclosure of Contracts Between IHEs and
  Employees 735 HB2014 M. Burris
• with Financial Interest
• Cost of Higher Education
• Allow Reduced Tuition for Concurrent Courses
  1451 HB1993 Abernathy
• Limit EG Tuition and Fee Scholarships 323 SB316
  G. Baker
• Interim Study Affordability of Higher Education
  964 SB885 J. Jeffress

59
Academic and Student Affairs
Title/Subject Act Bill Sponsor Academics Ex
it Standards for Remedial Courses 971 HB1990 Roebu
ck Birth Pre K Teaching Credential 187 HB1132 B
lount Exit Standards for Remedial
Courses 971 HB1990 Roebuck Allow AAS Degrees to
Change the Math 1197 HB2261 Cole Requirement
to an Applicable Non-remedial Math
Course Student Affairs Clean Air Campus
Act 734 HB2007 Hyde Campus Security Enhancement
Act 1400 HB2135 Williams Common Spring Break for
Public Schools 424 SB226 Broadway
60
Financing Higher Education
Title/Subject Act Bill Sponsor Scholarship
s Arkansas Lottery 606/605 HB1002/SB26
Smith/Wills Amend the National Guard
214 SB268 G. Baker Tuition Incentive
Program Scholarships Acts 1213-1219SB
850,852-857 Broadway Supplemental Appropriation
Act 753 SB744 Broadway Funding Pay
Plan 688 SB437 Faris ADHE Appropriation
Act 1416 SB205 JBC
61
Arkansas 87th General Assembly

• Funding for Higher Education
• Stanley Williams

62
Surplus Funds Used to Fund the Revenue
Stabilization ACT
63

• RSA A Category 4,498,749,112
• Revenue Forecast 4,437,700,000
• Deficit/Surplus Funds 61,049,112
• RSA B 1 6,996,770
• (All Surplus/ Deficit)

64
Forecast to be down
65
Composition of Fiscal 2010 Funding

• Continuing Level (Permanent Funding) in A
  712,363,763
• Surplus Funding (One-Time In A)
  16,695,547
• Surplus Funding (One-Time In B - 1)
  6,996,770
• EETF Funding 65,650,528
• Workforce 2000 Funding 19,862,492
• TOTAL
  821,569,100
• Stimulus Recover Funds (One-Time)
  11,333,726
• 832,902,826
• One-Time/Soft Money in FY 2010 35,026,043

66

• Stable Funding for 2010 712,363,726
• Funding for 2009 703,710,767
• New Funds 8,652,959
• Special Funding UAMS 9,350,000
• New Stable Funding ( 697,041)

67
RSA Analysis
68
New Classified Pay Plan Costs
69
The Dilemma

• Implement the pay plan and increase tuition and
  fees significantly
• Or
• Do not implement the pay plan and hold
• tuition increases to a minimum!
• Remember this cost is only the cost of the
  EG classified pay plan and does not include
  auxiliary staff or non-classified faculty and
  staff

70
General Improvement Funding for 2009-11

• Total Legislative Funding 23,492,000
• 75 of this funding is to be distributed in FY
  2010
• The remaining 25 will be distributed in 2011
  contingent on the economy and state revenue
  collections

71
Economic Stimulus and Recovery Act
72
General Provisions
73

• Period of Availability All funds appropriated
  under this Act shall remain available for
  obligation until September 30, 2010, unless
  expressly provided otherwise in this Act.
• Buy American No funds may be used for
  construction, alteration, maintenance, repair of
  a public building or public work unless all of
  the iron, steel, and manufactured goods in the
  project are produced in the U.S. There are
  exemptions

74

• Wage Requirements All laborers and mechanics
  employed by contractors and subcontractors on
  projects funded directly by or assisted in whole
  or in part by and through the Federal government
  pursuant to this Act shall not be paid less than
  the wages prevailing in the locality for similar
  projects as determined by the Secretary of Labor,
  in accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act.
• Special contracting provisions To the maximum
  extent possible, contracts funded under this Act
  shall be awarded as fixed price contracts through
  the use of competitive procedures.

75

• Any contract awarded with such funds that is not
  fixed-price and not awarded using competitive
  procedures shall be posted in a special section
  of the website established in section 1526. There
  can be no sole source contracts.

76
Stabilization Funds

• There are two (2) Pots Of Money
• 81.8 for restoration of funding for FY2009 that
  is below the funding level for FY 2008 from all
  state sources
• 18.2 is at the discretion of the Governor

77
Stabilization Funds How Funds are Distributed

• Stabilization, the 81.8 (Arkansas 363,053,000)
• The restoration funds are distributed among the
  shortfalls in K-12 and higher education.
• The K-12 funds go to restore, through the states
  primary elementary and secondary funding
  formulas, the level of support provided to the
  greater of the state FY 2008 or 09 level, and

78
Stabilization the 81.8

• For higher education,
• - for each fiscal year 2009, 2010, and 2011
• the amount of funds to public IHE to
• restore state support (excluding
  tuition and
• fees paid by students) to the greater of the
• fiscal year 2008 or fiscal year 2009.

79
Stabilization the 81.8

• Once the restoration is carried out, the Governor
  shall use any remaining funds to provide LEAs
  with sub grants based upon the relative shares of
  funding under part (a) Title I of ESEA for the
  most recent year for which data is available.

80
Stabilization, the 18.2

• 14002(a) is for restoration and (b) is the 18.2
  of the States allocation for (Arkansas
  80,777,000)
• - public safety and other government services,
  that
• may include
• - assistance for elementary secondary and
  public IHE
• - Modernization, renovation or repair (MRR) of
  public school facilities and IHE
• - MRR of public school facilities should be
  consistent with a recognized green building
  rating system

81
Section 14005, the Assurances

• MOE in each fiscal years 09, 10, and 11
  maintain state support for elementary secondary
  education and higher education at least the level
  of support in FY 06.
• The state will establish a K-16 Longitudinal Data
  Base according to the
• elements described in the America Competes Act
  (20 USC 9871)

82

• There will be extensive reporting requirements.

83
Stabilization Reporting

• States receiving Stabilization funds must submit
  reports to the Secretary describing
• - How the funds were used
• - How the funds were distributed
• - Estimated number of jobs saved or created
• using the stabilization funds
• - Tax increases averted
• - States progress in meeting the assurances
• - Increases in tuition and fees at public IHEs
• - Changes in enrollment in public IHE
• - Each MRR project funded

84
Facilities Modernization, Renovation and Repair
Guidelines

• Funds may not be used for maintenance
• Funds may not be used for new construction
• Funds may be used for modernization, renovation,
  or repair of facilities whose primary purpose is
  instruction, research, or student housing

85

• Funds must be segregated (do not co-mingle funds)
  from state funds and institutional funds
• DFA will have guidelines for reporting of
  expenditures and jobs created
• These funds should not be used to create
  continuing obligations for the state such as
  creating new positions in your institution with
  the expectation that the state will fund the
  position(s) when the Stimulus funds are expended
• Treat these funds as you would one-time, soft
  money

86
(No Transcript)
87
Works in Progress

• 1. Concurrent Enrollment
• Subject of 2 legislative audits within 1 year
• Task Force of Ps and Cs and VPs and VCs
• Purpose
• Develop a high quality concurrent enrollment
  program that is coherent, comprehensive,
  transparent and workable. 

88
Works in Progress

• 2. Program Viability (October 2008)
• ADHE staff, in collaboration with the Chief
  Academic Officers, developed the process and
  procedures for reviewing program viability and
  existing programs.
• March 2009 Program productivity reports were
  sent to the institutions for verification of
  program name, program status, and
  graduate/enrollment data. ADHE staff are
  reviewing institutional requests for revisions to
  the productivity report and will make revisions
  to the report as needed.
• May 2009 Institutions will submit their requests
  for programs to be identified as cognate/embedded
  and propose their 7-10 year review cycle for
  existing programs.
• August 2009 ADHE staff will notify the
  institutions of the approved cognate/embedded
  programs.
• September 2009 Institutions will be notified of
  programs not meeting viability standards.
• November 2009 Institutions will have until
  November 2009 to appeal a programs
  identification as non-viable based on data
  adjustments, centrality to the institutional
  mission, or its designation as high wage/high
  demand career and technical education program at
  a two-year institution.
• December 2009 Institutions will be notified of
  the status of their viability appeal..
• January 2010 ADHE staff will present the
  program viability report and existing program
  review schedule to the Board.
• January 2011 ADHE staff will present to the
  AHECB recommendations on program continuation or
  discontinuation for certificates and degrees not
  meeting viability thresholds.

89
Say Go College Week

• Participation in College Goal Sunday
• Increased 43
• Increase in FASFA Applications 41
• Video Contest