State Board Meeting 5 November 2004

Chancellors Report. Preparing for 2005-2007 budget. Don’t know what the governor will propose. Framed within a very dire state financial situation. Current estimates show revenues will fall short of essential budget level by 800mil-1bil. Significant budget hole. Know that will be some very difficult choices that have to be made. Continuing to try to advance board’s agenda approved at July meeting - regardless of budget level will in fact continue to pursue goals for higher education for all Oregonians who are seeking it.

You enunciated 4 basic goals. Affordability - partly with price (tuition) and partly with financial aid. Governor support additional grant aid. Access - deals not just with growth and there was growth anticipated as number of high school student graduates increases - 21st century economy - provide services to as many Oregonians as possible - also deals with efficiency - transfer between institutions - you have focused a lot of attention and we hope to focus on. Also said focus on undeserved populations and regions - that will continue to be areas we will try to push forward - given what ever budget level. Also focused on excellence - excellent faculty energize and incent students - collaborative discovers fuel the economy in the future. Attempt to continue to increase compensation for faculty to recruit and retain. Mindful of need to keep Oregon and Oregonians prosperous. What I am saying - the goals we enunciated in July will continue to animate discussion with legislature given what ever the governor will propose. Will be able to move to forward with whatever he proposes. We are in this for the long term - neither you nor I can redirect and reinvest in just one biennium. Seek multi biennial plans so we don’t have to start from scratch every time. How sustained investments over time can improve state. Will know more December 1 when Governor releases his budget. We continue to be energized by goals of board.

A few items need to mention. At your September or August meeting Director Blair asked we work with various faculty groups to craft legislation with ORP that met some of their issues. Happy to say that Lisa has met with various faculty groups and have concluded that the approach they would like to take is to make technical changes. Taking this under advisement and will talk to Governor and staff about decoupling. Depends on whether or not a lawsuit by AOF is settled and that may help in recommendation to the governor.

Call on Bob Kiernern to provide some official 4th week enrollment numbers. Bob: Slowed enrollment growth down from past 5 years we did top 80,000 first time. 80,066 is up .6% Non admit grads are down 2.1%. Largest graduation classes in our history for past 2 years -- over 18000 degrees and certificates. Pipeline is empty - filling it up with new students is task. High school graduation rate is not going to grow as rapidly. Started growing in 1999 fairly substantially. Lot of enrollment is based on perception of state of education - immediate growth then - echo in baby boom. Historical records -1960’s enrollment was at 24,000. In 1970 it was 53,800. Now looking at echo. Last 5-6 years and seen much stronger than usual growth.

Some of decline in enrollment was to decline of non-resident aliens. From 3-10% down in that category. Important not only for tuition but also for diversity bring to campus. Reduction in rate of enrollment is likely to increasing rate of tuition. Carrying load will be down a little but up in part time students - probably full time students are becoming part time students caused this. Reach a dynamic between carrying load and cost - students have to keep 12 hours or more - if have to work more hours in a week - 65 hours work to pay for degree - if reach that dynamic - if fall below level to collect financial aid. Almost 2/3 funds come from other share. Doesn’t include resource fee and other costs. There is money that comes in from other sources. Doesn’t include indirect costs for example. Students and state together pay on average about 80% of the undergraduate cost. Will release more detailed data in Mid November. General tuition increases lead to a reduction in carrying load for 1-2 years -- more of a shock factor. Traditional students are not all the ones we count. Hard to sort out Cascade as they take courses from UO, OSU, and Cascade all at the same time. Most immigration is in the form of Latin population - and they will be challenging to serve. When look at number of degrees at 26% may be challenge to maintain that. Need to develop a robust long term plan stretching out 10-15 years in future.

Wou. When other data come out - dropped 260 - those are part time students. When look at new Freshman and transfers are down 94. Looking at marketing efforts. Feel economy in Wilamette valley is major impact. All 4 of us looking to have solid enrollment. We are concerned. Working to stabilize that. Financial implications - lot of those are part time students - not as severe as first feared. Half of student body is from first generation College - come from low income families - employment of Parents is major impact on us - so economy.

SOU - look at 2-3 things. No question that sticker price (-344) has had some impact. Growth in private funding is up 43% - greater scholarship needs. Also have wonderful partner in Rogue growing rapidly - impact of that growth is becoming more challenging - students swirl in and out of places. Our Freshmen are down more than other students who return to school at upper division level. More of a reduction in students that are 26 and up. Although are offering many more courses in the Medford area - hard to keep tract of who they are. Will have an enormous impact on enrollment in the future. As study historical trends - every 4 years is softening and then starts to grow again. This is that year. Well on our way to developing a 3 year plan for enrollment. See more growth from Portland area than from immediate counties around. Celebrate multicultural environment improvements. Full time/partime are down more in partime than full time.

Provosts Council report. Lorraine Davis. The Provosts council is a new entity with reorganization of Chancellor’s office. We are feeling our way. Make sure the essential functions of the academic affairs area are being accomplished. System web page contains all the documents. Since our inception put topics we have dealt with are (a) performance indicators - very important for the system - work with Susan Weeks to discuss and look at those performance indicators. Engagement with MBF working group. Spent a lot of time in last 3-4 months making sure are fully engaged with community college endeavors - have collaborative effort with topics put forward and improved by the board. Not just about the legislative session - make sure collaborative efforts continue. Another area we have spent time on and always will is program approval process. Consent item on board docket after lots of time and energy has gone into development of programs and then with Provost’s council. Description of how proposal approval process goes is included in your packet. Many interdisciplinary programs - repackaging of things. Academic program proposals have come forward and been approved. Gives steps. Factors considered for program review. Outline of what program proposal contains when it comes forward. Use a 100+ page proposal looking at. Consider quality of program - individual mission - duplication - meets needs of state - resource issues - appropriate from a resource perspective - viable from that point. Everyone on campuses - distribute it respective faculty within the area for comment - bring comments to Provost council. Ensure have strongest proposal possible - one useful for institution and for the state. Want to be sure don’t lose any momentum in terms of mission. Doing what needs to be done to make the process work. Question. Director Blair. How evaluate question of need? Answer - each proposal talks about what process they went through to evaluate whether program has interest by students, support by business and industry - survey data - professionals in the area - student interest. Many of the programs have been certificate programs or sub programs of another major - need to be stand alone program. Employers and students want - current market is. Do survey research to see is significant need within the state. Support from external entities - will provide dollars or space or so forth for the initiation. Question. Director Blair. What proposals have come before the council and how have decided. Which is proportion not getting through screen. Answer - by time proposals come to you have gone through process within campuses to say that yes these are important - come to provosts council. Some have come to Provost’s council and we said not sure is time yet, have not developed appropriate need, some go back to campuses to be reworked - questions about faculty support - questions need to have additional components - for graduate programs - external review groups review all programs - relate to quality - can cause rewriting. Sometimes can take 3-4 meetings before are sure meets standards put forward. Don’t turn down a lot at official time. Question did turn down any. Answer. One program has been withdrawn after discussion in Provosts Council. Currently have 4 under process. Had a backlog to deal with because of the change in process. Since March have entertained 18 proposals. One we reviewed 6 times and some others we reviewed twice. Question. Resources - external review - for graduate programs - is something already in process. If have graduate program for approval - submit 3-6 names of what you think are appropriate names - we in conjunction with Chancellor’s office select 3 names to come to campus and make full review. Strength and weakness of program, faculty, resource base, etc. Take a look at that before it comes to board. Once get graduate council up and running, they will take a much bigger role. Those graduate programs have to look even more carefully about duplication and cost. Not sure steps have outline here give as much power to graduate council as we thought they were going to. Answer. The process involved in review is not spelled out yet. Question. Worried that you have total responsibilities as gate keeper. Unique mission for each University. Don’t want us all to be same cookie stamp. Worry about duplication. Tremendous problem for Provost’s council to be gatekeeper. Constantly faced with people trying to upgrade courses. Can you keep the lid on. You will be asked about this at legislature. Answer. Many of programs are repackaging of courses that are already there to meet needs of academy. Sometimes duplicated entities have very different focus - to meet the mission of the individual institutions. That is real clear. Creating interdisciplinary programs to meet the needs of the industry. We are not seeing new programs that have come that are a totally new entity. We don’t have any of those. An outgrowth. Distinction between courses and programs - we are not doing course approval - those are done on individual campuses.

Reports from the Presidents.

OIT. Enrollment is up. Concerned about affordability. Slight decline in FTE - not nearly what were afraid would have happened. Feeling very good - growth coming in health profession discipline. Managed to extend what capacity have left to take students. Had over 100 that could not get in. Had some growth in manufacturing - very encouraging that recovery in the economy. Had a small downturn in high tech/ software.

PSU. Had a good job fair yesterday. Bring in certified firms - go to with minority businesses. Good services increased a lot over past year. really paying off - hearing positive things from vendors in the area. Got 5.5 million grant for human services. PSU and Smithsonian environmental research to focus on aquatic species.

SOU. Giving a great deal of attention to budgeting for this year with 2,000,000 as an issue. Enrollment related. And reallocation to reinvest in some areas to build on strength. And part of that to deal with anticipated costs of PERS and deferred maintence. Made some hard decisions to invest in some new strategic initiatives to demonstrate to campus community are prepared to put resources behind most important developments to enhance institution. One is in advancement of theater arts.

WOU. Mention one other issued related to enrollment. We are atypical. Head count is down. We will not be down as much in FTE. Back to part time enrollment issue. Other public budgets impact us. Have had 100 school teachers from other school districts - their tuition paid by school district. Those students did not come us to us. Other state agencies are not able to assist other students getting advanced degrees. That impacts us - students who try to develop professionally. We are extremely proud of small but notable honors program. Celebrate 20th anniversary of honors program. Had very little specific support. Faculty look at 60 students. These are students who take special courses - take broad perspective - end up with undergraduate thesis. Celebrated 20 years of making a program work on limited resources. Headed by Professor of Biology. Dr. Bob Turner, vice President of the IFS.

UO. Four items. On Enrollment issues - up tick may look small but this is a record enrollment for the UO. Highest SAT scores every shown by entering class. Carrying load has not suffered by fact of plateau changes. Second building on international students - decline in graduate student application - 31% across nation across major institutions - major security issue for our country. Fierce competition from UK, Australia, and Canada. Long term problem for education. Third point. Did survive the Halloween weekend without major incident. Speaks highly of student affairs officers, student government, and vice presidents of administration. Final point, campaign goes public on 29 Jan 2005 and all board invited.

OHSU. Focused on planning budget - completing our student capitation project - cost of student project - results are very similar - numbers are larger - principles that lose money on every student - state pays declining percentage - subsidized by non residents - bring in extramural revenue to help make up difference - calculation on margin is a negative one - very complex hydraulic. Other thing wanted to underscore - incremental change. When reach a constraint like technical instrumentation - our equations that include depreciation do not include capital investment - understate costs even if don’t take into account deferred maintenance or underfunded faculty. Other number is differential between undergraduate and graduate in nursing is between 1.5 and 3 not 1.25. Because of 1-1 teaching time. High number. Great deal of focus on future planning. As anticipate demographics of aging population see enormous need for health care.

EOU. Only issue to share are enrollment numbers. Head count is up by 1.6% but two not so pleasant trends. Our FTE is down. High tuition cost and general trend to more part time students. Freshman enrollment is down - that will have 4 year impact. Not down by much, but it is down. Working on 10 year project to change recruitment in high schools both philosophically and strategically. Look at possibility to change recruiting efforts - concentrate primarily on college not eastern. Percentage of adults with college is half state average and declining.

OSU. Presidents reports at the end of the meeting. Always talk about resources and what needs are. What we are doing with existing resources. Reallocate resources in the university for targeted purposes. Enhance teaching and learning - academic success center - deal with not just recruitment but with retention through to graduation. Instructional equipment in the sciences - information technology system enhancements. Want to mention Wetherford hall is open this quarter. Research expansion is going forward. Bring students back from Washington State University to Corvallis. Having campus wide discussion of plateau. Number of meetings. Last large consequential discussion will be in OSU Senate. Will make decision by end of quarter. Where we will go with plateau charges.

Remarks from IFS President Gilkey: Gilkey-StateBoard-5Nov04.html

Motion to approve Chancellors Fund Balance Policy -- approved.

Motion (walk on item) to deal with UO Arena Project. Resolution to acquire property by purchase or condemnation. Passed.

Committee reports:

Access and affordability: Test public perceptions of support for higher education - increases in need based financial aid - for constitutional protected fund. We rated an F again in affordability. From analysis of that report - clear our under performance in need based financial aid is primary culprit. We have lower than average income and higher tuition. Lag in any comparator with western states is on state funded support for financial aid. In looking at net cost - cost of living - gave us some numbers - if we wanted to match effort of peers with regard to financial aid would take 147,000,000 per year compared with 22,500,000 per year. Peers are trending down. Other formulations looked at. Minnesota model. Revamped how they funded higher education system. Built on a component - individual effort - family effort - US government - and state comes to 64,000,000 per year. Heard from Oregon Student Assistance Commission they will try to go from 45 million to 160 million per biennium. Starts to match up with what different methodology says is target. All beyond our reach. Tested in focus groups - how average voters in Medford and Portland viewed proposals like those we developed for ASET (Oregon Trust) - concept of dedicated source of funding in constitution would be sufficient in earnings to match that sort of financial effort to get back to midpoint of peers. Initially a lot of support and then thought of costs and benefits. We have been talking about is opportunity. In focus group - responsibility and accountability. Use Pell grant formulation so more people will feel there is something to gain for me. If leap to is constitutional provision - sounds like unfunded mandate and people get put back. What made sense to use was modest revamping with Oregon Assistance Commission. Do more and better. If asking for that infusion of funds - next pitch is where we should get to over time and something can be in constitution to help us. Put that out somewhat farther without addressing present need - better Oregon Opportunity Grant. Bring recommendations for improving that program and not be unrealistic but be bold.

MBF. Express appreciation to the IFS for their leadership and moving us forward on the Transfer Module which is part of the MBF agenda. Have new members of the work group. Thank Lorraine Davis for all the work the Provosts have done on each and every element. Thank support of Dave McDonald and Connie Green. Had a lot of focus on Gen Ed Core. Are key meetings - summit - also give report to other state board on Dec 3. Come after articulation transfer conference. Docket board in February. May be role for joint boards as soon as we can sort out those elements. Shared goals and great committment each of elements of work plan. Continues to be great interest from legislative community. Mention lift every voice draft.

Dave McDonald. Busy time for work group. Lengthy list of recent meetings. Upcoming meeting next week, summit the following week, yesterday the CIA and Provost’s council met. Carried the 7 items as their agenda, my gratitude to the IFS for taking a leadership role in haveing the faculty of the OUS institutions involved this - their role has been critical in ensuring this goes forward - and in involving the community colleges as well. Also the Provosts have embraced and taken leadership roles in the 7 agenda items. The general education piece - the IFS and the Provosts have been active in this.

Lorraine Davis. A couple of comments. In terms of the 7 initiatives - have point person from community college and a Provost along with support staff. Some will come forward as policy packages and initiatives - some of the work will continue without resources. But some things can’t be acomplished without resources. But some of the contacts we have made with eachother will be useful for the future. Comment on Gen Ed Transfer Module - documented in IFS presentation - where we hope to go with that - more students can carry with from institution to institution - the AAOT is negotiated credit transfer that goes CC to OUS. The TM is also transferable among both CC and OUS. So that is a new phenomena. The faculty at each of the institutions will have to be involved in that process - some ideas and some resolution in the end. But that will not be an easy process. Most important piece is the major - and advising - articulation at the major level. You can complete the gen ed module or aaot and want to major and yes your gen ed will be done but you many not have background to major in chemistry. So advising and articulation are crucial for the major. At provost’s council - had list at each CC - top 10 majors as beginning point of seeking articulation amongst cc’s -- communication between advisors and cc and ous - that is probably the one piece that will assist students in completion on a timely manner. It isn’t that this course doesn’t count. It is - is it the one you will need to move to the next one of your major. That is the communication piece that is going to be very important.

President Schuette - have made progress in costing arena and how pieces fit together. As well as policy related to the transfer.

McDonald. Data system for transfer process That process is moving along quite well. OSU. Clarify. Worked on Ohio. Spent most of our time last time around was issue of majors and having credits count towards majors. To define what module might look like depending on what major would look to. LGD That will happen as a next step. Right now happens with the individual majors. Later go to pre major components.

Sustainability: Anticipate a report by the end of the month.

College Savings Plan. Identify first drop in bucket. Identify priorities - marketing.