Tag Archives: accountability

Obama Administration Releases College Ranking Framework

Posted on by
Reply

Today the U.S. Department of Education released the much anticipated framework for a college ranking system.  The framework summarizes the basic categories, institutional groupings, data, metrics, and tools that the Department is currently weighing in designing the ratings system.

The purposes of the rating system are to: (1) help students and families make informed choices when searching for and selecting a college; (2) help colleges measure, benchmark, and continue to improve across the principles of access, affordability, and outcomes; and (3) enable the incentives and accountability structure in the federal student aid program to be properly aligned to these key principles

The first version of the rating system will include four-year institutions and two-year institutions and only take into account undergraduate students.  Graduate-degree only and non-degree granting institutions will not be included.

The rating system will use broad categories to highlight significant success and challenges of institutions. This will not be a numerical ranking of institutions. The ratings will be limited to three performance categories: (1) high-performing, (2) low-performing, and (3) those falling in the middle. The Department argues that this system will allow the identification of institutions that are performing well and those that are facing challenges without suggesting more than the data can support. The Department is currently conducting data analyses to determine the thresholds.

The Department is also interested in the issue of improvement over time. The Department is considering inclusion of some form of recognition that an institution is demonstrating meaningful improvement in partnership with the institution’s ranking.

With regard to institutional groupings, the Department is conducting additional analysis to determine what specific groupings will be used. To date the Department has determined that groupings will differentiate between four-year and two-year and is considering accounting for differences in institutional characteristics such as degree, program mix and selectivity.

The rating system will use existing sources of data for the first version of the rating, including IPEDS and NSLDS as well as individual data such as the FAFSA. The data will inform several metrics used in the rating system. Efforts to measure performance over multiple years and offer intermediate measures are also being considered. Metrics under discussion by the Department include:

  • Percent Pell: The percentage of a college’s enrolled students who receive federal Pell grants
  • Expected Family Contribution (EFC) Gap: The average difference between some focal EFC level and each student’s individual EFC.
  • Family Income Quintiles
  • First-Generation College Status
  • Average Net Price: The cost of attendance after accounting for all federal, state and institutional grant aid
  • Net Price by Quintile
  • Completion Rates
  • Transfer Rates
  • Labor Market Success:  Discussing the use of a combination of a short-term indicator  of “substantial employment” with a longer-term more specific earnings measure such as the mean or median earnings of former students ten years or more after entering the institution. A threshold measure for substantial employment would be a way to express an institution’s share of graduates who earned above a specific level, such as a percentage of former students earning above 200 percent of the federal poverty line for a family of one or a multiple of the full-time minimum wage earned over one year.
  • Graduate School Attendance
  • Loan Performance Outcomes

Finally the Department is also taking into consideration a series of additional issues and how to respond, including how to present the information, account for student and institutional characteristics, make the system consumer friendly, and provide the opportunity for institutions to share additional information.

In the months ahead, the Department will arrange and participate in many structured discussions about the ratings system to continue and focus on identifying, assessing, and refining the best ways to improve access, affordability, and outcomes in higher education. Sessions will be announced by early January.

The agency expects to publish the college ratings system before the 2015-16 school year and will continue to refine the ratings system over time based on user and institutional experience, input from the field, and the availability of additional data.

Institutions Present on Incentive Funding in the Senate

Posted on by
Reply

Performance funding also known as incentive funding was the focus of the Senate Higher Education Committee this afternoon. The Committee held a work session on efforts in the two-year and public, four-year sectors and a public hearing on legislation that would implement a framework for the public baccalaureate sector.

Work Session

This afternoon Evergreen presented before the Senate Higher Education Committee. In a focused presentation before the Committee, John Carmichael, Deputy to the President and member of the Technical Incentive Funding Model Task Force and Laura Coghlan, Director of Institutional Research and Assessment addressed the question posed by the Committee –  How will each institution respond to the goals identified in the public baccalaureate incentive funding model proposal?

In December the Office of Financial Management released a report from the Technical Incentive Funding  Model Task Force. The Task Force was established in the 2013-15 biennial budget to propose an incentive funding model for the four-year institutions of higher education.

The Task Force identified three statewide goals for the public baccalaureate institutions in the report: (1) Increase overall degree production, (2) Increase degree production in STEM/high demand areas, and (3) Increase degree production for students from underrepresented groups.

In the presentation Evergreen spoke to how the College and its mission would strive to play a role in moving the public baccalaureate sector forward within the context of these three goals.  Evergreen highlighted the College’s strengths recognizing that the institution make a strong contribution to the state in the areas of efficient degree production, STEM/High Demand degrees, and degree attainment for underrepresented students.

Within this context, Evergreen recognizes that the College could make additional contributions to the statewide goals identified in the report with additional resources.

In particular, Evergreen identified improvement in the areas of general degree production through investments in retention initiatives; STEM/High Demand degree production through investments in faculty and financial aid; and attainment of underrepresented students through investments in targeted outreach and support for underrepresented minority, non-traditional age, and veterans.

Public Hearing

The Committee also held a public hearing on legislation that would place into statute a performance funding framework for Washington’s public baccalaureate institutions.

Senate Bill 6042 would create an incentive funding structure to encourage student success in Washington’s public baccalaureate institutions and provide a funding enhancement of $25 million each fiscal year based on institutional performance towards three statewide goals: (1) the number of degrees produced, (2) number of high demand degrees produced, and (3) number of degrees awarded to underrepresented students.

The Council of Presidents testified in support of a performance funding framework and in the general framework put forward in the bill. However the Council indicated additional conversations were necessary about the specific implementation of the framework.

Movement in Washington D.C. on Higher Education

Posted on by
Reply

Last week marked some movement for higher education in Washington D.C.

Higher Education Act

The U.S. Senate committee on education formally began the process to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. The Higher Education Act is the primary federal legislation which governs federal student aid and higher education.

Senator Harkin – Chairman of the Committee – identified his plan for reauthorization. The Committee will hold a total of twelve hearings – eleven more to come – focused on fact-finding over the next several months with the intention of producing draft legislation by early 2014.

On Thursday of last week the Committee held the first of the twelve hearings. The hearing focused on the complex system oversight for higher education in the United States which consists of regulations from the U.S. Department of Education, state regulators, and accrediting bodies.

The plan to produce draft legislation by early 2014 is optimistic given that it took five years longer to complete the last reauthorization in 2008. In addition Senator Alexander – the senior Republican on the Committee – has asked staff to consider drafting a new Act from the beginning potentially complicating the proposed timeline.

U.S. Department of Education Begins Process for Additional Accountability for Institutions

Last week the Department announced it had begun the process for gathering feedback and input on how to develop metrics for the institutional rating system announced by the Obama Administration earlier this year.

The Department is expected to produce a draft rating system by mid-2014 with a final version out by December of the same year. The long-term goal is to develop a rating system by the 2015 academic year and persuade Congress to link that system to federal student aid dollars by 2018.

The head of the Department – Arne Duncan- provided a small preview into what the rating system may look like.  Duncan promised that the system would take a holistic approach to judging institutions on areas of access, affordability and student performance. With the broad goal being to determine “how many students at an institution graduate, at a reasonable cost, without a lot of debt, and get a job that enables them to support themselves and their families.”

Potential metrics that may be considered include the percentage of students receiving Pell grants, the average amount of tuition, scholarships and loan debt; graduation and transfer rates; the salaries of graduates; and the extent to which graduates pursue advanced degrees.

Duncan also shared that the Department will begin with metrics that have data that already exists.

The Department has already begun the feedback process meeting with student advocacy groups last week which kick-off what the Department refers to as a series of discussions with higher education stakeholders in the coming year.

New Leader at the U.S. Department of Education

Late last week the U.S. Department of Education announced that Jamienne Studley will join the Department as a deputy under secretary of education.

Studley will oversee the Department’s second-term higher education agenda.  She is expected to focus on a range of issues including accreditation and college pricing and play a key role in the Obama Administration’s proposed rating system.

Studley is the former president of Skidmore College and a one-time Education Department general counsel. She comes to the Department from Public Advocates Inc a consumer law and advocacy group. She has served since 2010 on the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity which advises the education secretary on accreditation issues.

Governor Inslee Launches New Statewide Performance Framework

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday Governor Inslee announced a new statewide,  state-agency centered performance initiative that identifies key goals of his administration and measures the progress towards these goals.

According to the Governor’s Office, Results Washington aims to make state government more effective, efficient, accountable and transparent. Governor Inslee’s goals for Results Washington reflect what the Inslee Administration believes matters most to Washingtonians.  As stated by the Administration, by routinely measuring and monitoring each goal and implementing improvement plans, the state will drive towards producing results in five goal areas:

  • World-Class Education
  • Prosperous Economy
  • Sustainable Energy & a Clean Environment
  • Healthy & Safe Communities
  • Efficient, Effective & Accountable Government

Higher Education

Results Washington identifies the goal of a World-class education through outcome measures that increase access to education to provide students with 21st century skills to succeed from early learning to higher education.

To achieve this goal the framework identifies two outcome measures for higher education that identify the results the Inslee Administration wants to achieve.

  • Increase the percentage of population enrolled in certificate, credential, apprenticeship, and degree programs.
  • Increase the attainment of certificates, credentials, apprenticeships, and degrees.

The progress on each of these outcome measures will be determined by a set of specific, detailed, quantifiable indicators. For higher education these include to date:

  • Increase the number of students enrolled in STEM and identified high-demand employment programs
  • Increase the percentage of students entering public higher education who access and complete high-quality online learning
  • Increase the percentage of eligible students who sign-up for the College Bound program
  • Increase the percentage of eligible students who receive the State Need Grant
  • Increase the number of families saving for postsecondary education training expenses using the GET from 152,000 in 2012 to 182,000 in 2017.
  • Increase project-based, career workplace, community learning opportunities that provide STEM and 21st century skills
  • Increase number of STEM graduates in 4-year colleges
  • Increase the number of STEM graduates in community and technical colleges
  • Increase the percentage of adult basic education and English-as-a-second language students who transition to precollege or college level within one-year from 10% to 13% by 2017.

Specific percentage increases and by what date for the majority of these indicators have yet to be determined. Data is expected to be included within the next six months as the Governor’s Office and higher education stakeholders continue discussions.

Next Steps

In the coming weeks the Inslee Administration will continue outreach efforts to collect feedback. For example, two events are scheduled in the near future.

  • On September 12 at 10:00 a.m. Governor Inslee  will host a Town Hall providing a Q&A session on Twitter.
  • Between September 17 and October 1 the Governor’s Office will host an interactive, moderated website where users can share, comment and vote on feedback and ideas submitted by other users.

The next iteration of this work, scheduled to be released in mid to late October, will reflect the feedback provided from stakeholders, state employees and the public.

Funding Model Task Force To Meet Next Week

Posted on by
Reply

The Technical Incentive Funding Model Task Force established by the Legislature in the 2013-15 biennial operating budget will begin its work next week in Seattle.

Focused on the four-year, public higher education sector the Task Force will focus on developing an incentive funding model to provide new incentives for Washington’s public baccalaureate sector that demonstrate improvement in existing performance measures and control resident undergraduate tuition growth.

The focus of the first of five meetings will be to set the context for this discussion. Among the key questions that will drive the conversation are:

  • What’s the role for public four-year institutions in Washington?
  • What are the changes facing these institutions?
  • What is the role of performance funding within this context?

Governor Announces New Accountability Framework for All of State Government

Posted on by
Reply

Last week Governor Inslee announced the preview of a new accountability framework for state government in Washington.  The new approach “Results Washington” is based in the Lean method pioneered by Toyota car factories and used by Boeing.

The mission statement in progress states that the intention of the new framework is “To build a thriving Washington by fostering the spirit of continuous improvement, enhancing the conditions for job creation, preparing students for the future and valuing our environment, our health and our people.”

Results Washington is still a month away from a formal roll out, but a preview of the framework was provided by Inslee’s Chief of Staff Mary Alice Heuschel at an event on government management and efficiency.

Though similar to Governor Gregoire’s Government Management Accountability Program (GMAP) which also was based on the Lean method, Results Washington is expected to be broader encompassing all of state government.

The framework will focus on five goals:

  • A world class education system from preschool through college
  • A prosperous economy
  • Making Washington a national leader in sustainable energy and a clean environment
  • Health and safe communities
  • Efficient, effective and accountable government. This is an overarching goal over the four goals previously listed.

Each goal will be organized as SMART- Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-bound.

In the next month the Governor’s Office will be working to finalize the main goals and develop targets that agencies will aim to reach. There is expected to be three phases and a system of “leading indicators” to show progress. The indicators will cut across agency boundaries and results will be made public on a single website.

House Higher Education Committee Meets to Discuss Range of Issues

Posted on by

This afternoon the House Higher Education Committee met for both a public hearing and a work session.

Public Hearing – HB 2158

The Committee heard the first bill of the special session – House Bill 2158. The bill adds Project Lead-the-Way examinations to the examinations that may be taken in high school to demonstrate college-level skills and for the purpose of meeting certain lower division general education or postsecondary professional technical education requirements.

Project Lead The Way (PLTW) is a non-profit organization that offers Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) education curricular programs used in middle and high schools across the U.S. The PLTW programs engage students in activities, projects, and problembased learning which provides hands-on classroom experiences and allows students to create, discover, collaborate and solve problems and apply what they learn in math and science.

Work Session

The Committee focused an hour long work session on two critical issues for higher education: (1) student outcomes and (2) state and federal work study programs.

Student Outcomes

Earlier in December the Washington Education Research & Data Center (ERDC), a part of the Office of Financial Management, launched a dashboard that focuses on student outcomes for Washington’s public baccalaureate institutions.

This afternoon the Committee received an overview of the dashboard from the authors including staff of the ERDC and Council of Presidents.

The Committee engaged with the authors of the dashboard in a conversation about the vision legislators have for the dashboard. Legislators commented to the need to be able to view data for education from a systematic point of view, the need for data that shows the connection between student choice and institutional markets, where are students employed after graduation, and financial-related data for students, state funding, and institutional expenses.

State and Federal Work Study Programs

For the second part of the work session the Committee focused on better understanding both state and fedeal work study programs.  The Higher Education Coordinating Board provided in-depth overview of the two programs and their impact on students.

Dashboard for WA Public Baccalaureate Institutions is Released

Posted on by

This week the Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) released a dashboard for Washington’s public baccalaureate institutions.

The dashboard is the result of passage of legislation (HB 1795)  in the 2011 regular session to provide the opportunity for Washingtonians to see outcome data for the public four-year institutions.

The dashboard shows aggregated data for the four-year sector and provides several metrics that focus on enrollment, retention, graduation, and degrees. Ultimately the dashboard will include data for each of the public baccalaureates in the new Complete to Compete accountability framework championed by Governor Gregoire.

The dashboard was developed by the OFM Forecasting and Research Division in conjunction with the six public baccalureate institutions, Council of Presidents, Higher Education Coordinating Board, and the Department of Enterprise Services.

The next version of the dashboard will be available Spring 2012.

Gregoire Introduces New Report at National Governors Association Meeting

Posted on by

In July the National Governors Association (NGA) met to dialogue on a variety of issues facing states, including the role of higher education in global competitiveness.

A key part of the conversation with regard to higher education focused on a report introduced by Governor Gregoire, as part of her NGA Chair’s initiative Complete to Compete,  that focuses on restructuring state higher education accountability systems. The report, From Information to Action: Revamping Higher Education Accountability Systems, makes the case that states should include efficiency and effectiveness metrics in their accountability systems to help answer for key policy questions.

  • What extent are public higher education institutions meeting the state’s need for an educated workforce and supporting progress toward longer term economic goals?
  • How many students at public institutions are graduating relative to total enrollment?
  • What is the return on states’ and students’ investment in public institutions in terms of completed certificates and degrees?
  • How can public institutions demonstrate that efficiency gains are being achieved without sacrificing student learning?

The report goes on to suggest that several policy options are available to make better use of accountability measures, including bugeting, funding, and regulation.

House Passes Key Higher Education Legislation

Posted on by

This afternoon the Washington House passed legislation that would alter current policies focused on tuition, accountability, and financial aid.  House Bill 1795 passed with a vote of 79-17.

The bill is a comprehensive piece of legislation that leaves little alone with regard to higher education policy. The key provision in the bill for many is the ability for four-year public baccalaureate institutions to set tuition for all students through 2014-2015 and modifies this authority based on a state funding baseline and funding for higher education institutions in the Global Challenge States through 2018-2019.

The ability for the four-year public baccalaureate institutions to set their own tuition levels is mitigated by strengthening current institutional financial aid requirements and funding the State Need Grant at the proposed increased tuition rates in the budget.  All institutions are required to remit at least 4% of operating fees back to students in the form of financial aid. This is an increase from 3.5%.

Institutions that exceed the tuition levels appropriated in the budget are required to remit 5% of operating fees back to students in the form of financial aid and provide financial assistance to students up to 125% of the Median Family Income (MFI) via a specific formula that is based on tuition price as a percentage of MFI in various income brackets up to 125% of MFI.  Finally all instititutions are required to make every effort to encourage eligible students to take advantage of federal tax credits.

The bill also requires higehr education institutions to report by December 1 on performance data that aligns with the National Governor’s Association Complete to Compete metrics with additions that include graduate and professional degrees;Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) participation; student debt load; and disaggregation of measures based on various student demographics, including socio-economic status and income levels. In addition institutions must develop a performance plan which must include a set of expected outcomes (i.e. time to degree, baccalureate degree production).

Finally the bills makes changes to dual enrollment policies, transfer and prior credit policies, and provides regulatory relief for institutions of higher education.

The bill now goes to the Senate for further consideration.