SHEEO--- all about finance

State Higher Education Executive Officers – SHEEO

By Lloyd Smith

            Excellence in higher education systems nationwide is the goal of SHEEO. They serve the highest levels of a state’s coordinating and governing boards, such as THEC, TBR and the UT System in Tennessee. Their focus is in development and sustainment of higher education organizations throughout the United States. SHEEO researches and compiles useful links and data for the assessment of financial systems within higher education, and provide needed analysis of the current trends in financing postsecondary institutions.

            SHEEO answers critical questions for developing and sustaining the financial health of colleges and universities state and nationwide. Some of the key questions SHEEO addresses are: how much financial support is necessary and adequate to meet each state’s goals for higher education; how to distribute equally available state resource allocations for higher education among institutions’ purposes and priorities, current and emerging, fairly; what is an equitable formula for the amount a student must pay (sticker price) and the amount the state must provide (true cost) to keep the institution solvent, and what are the qualifications needed and amounts available to students from the state for their higher education. These are tough questions to answer, especially in today’s economy, and in the future. The complexity of these problems are exacerbated by the endless issues that arise when managing a college or university with limited state resources, and the need to increase productivity and efficiency at the institutional level.

            There are many projects SHEEO is currently involved in, and all are finance based projects. One project is the State Higher Education Finance (SHEF) Report, which is used as a tool to assist educators and policymakers with addressing public policy in higher education and the questions that arise with the policies. Another project is the “Survey of State Tuition, Fees, and Financial Assistance Policies”, which began in 1988. This project has been updated several times, and has recently published their 2010-2011 report this year. This report is a valuable tool not only for policymakers and educators, but for students involved in research initiatives within their educational programs. The last most current project SHEEO is working on is “Changing Direction: Integrating Higher Education Financial Aid and Financing Policy”. This project’s focus is in the examination of current financial aid structure and the financing policies and practices that will determine how students will participate in, have access to, and succeed in higher education. SHEEO’s mission is a leader in higher education finance and financial policy.

Information for SHEEO is retrieved from: www.sheeo.org/finance

The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education - UK

The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education (LFHE)

By Lloyd Smith

The education process in the United Kingdom (UK) and Europe have always been interesting to me. I lived in France many moons ago for a year as an exchange student, and being in the French school system I noticed markedly differences. The UK is similar. Both have stringent testing qualification requirements students must meet to move on to college. Not everyone has the chances as we Americans enjoy, but the UK has issues that require help, assistance, and research from entities like LFHE.

LFHE focuses their energies in the higher education college and university system of the empire as a dedication to the support and research-based information. This energy infusion helps to develop better leadership, management and governance within the higher education system. Like our nonprofit system in the US, the LFHE has to be approved, or “guaranteed”, and registered in the areas they serve. The LFHE is registered as a limited guaranteed company by the Parliament in England and Wales. A not-for-profit in the UK has to complete their nonprofit status by registration as a legitimate charity within their service area, and be approved. Their system is a little more intense that ours, but the nonprofit establishment rules and regulation in the US are nothing to laugh about. After all approvals were accepted and registered the LFHE now enjoys a lofty status as a leader in higher education.

They have a unique structure within their organization and scope of work. The LFHE operates under the direct guidance of a board of trustees. These trustees are responsible for all major issues in higher education, such as strategy, finance, and employment. The board members are appointed to the post, which I would think would make them very political post. The appointments are facilitated through direct, open competition. Once appointed the trustees represent the higher education sector in their registered area. This is a unique approach to higher education governance, but not unlike our TBR and UT systems; including the oversight of THEC.

LFHE has set up within its organization a Higher Education Academy, set up to support the increased quality of teaching, management and leader skills, and student experience, which enhances the system as a whole. It is interesting that the foundation uses “student experience” as an identifier of the varied services to the students, like remediation, articulation, graduation, retention, and financial issues. It sets a tone of refinement in their quest to improve the higher education system as a whole in England and Wales. The registered countries in the consortia within the UK are supported little by the government; a mere 20 percent. The other 80 percent of their funding comes from programs, events and membership fees.

Along with differing funding mechanisms, the Leadership Foundation (LFHE) does not have a brick-and-mortar headquarters. The foundation goes to the source of all issues, and sets up camp until there is some resolution. Their hiring practices are stringent and highly selective, which affords them well experienced, credentialed staff and associates. This controls their overhead and reduces costs, which leaves the government with little funding responsibilities. I think a profound look into their system could shed light on the costs disease in the US.

Information on the LFHE is retrieved from: http://www. lfhe.ac.uk  

NIH: NIH LRP Evaluation: Extramural Loan Repayment Programs, Fiscal Years 2003-2007

            The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services which is the nation’s medical research agency (NIH.gov, 2011).  The foundation for the NIH originated in 1887 in a laboratory in the Marine Hospital Service (NIH.org, 2011).  The NIH provides the largest source of funding for medicine in the world by funding scientists in higher education and research institutions in the U.S. and globe (NIH.org, 2011).  The NIH is composed of 27 institutes and centers which receive their funding from Congress (NIH.org, 2011).

            In 2009, the NIH produced a report entitled “NIH LRP Evaluation: Extramural Loan Repayment Programs, Fiscal Years 2003-2007,” which reviews programs aimed at attracting and retaining health professionals in research careers.  To help relieve the debt burden from student loans, the NIH offers an Extramural Loan Repayment Program (LRP) which provides individuals the opportunity to repay up to $35,000 per year of eligible educational debt in exchange for a two-year commitment (NIH, 2009).  Since 2001, the NIH has awarded more than $347 million in the LRP (NIH, 2009).  The report evaluates three areas: are LRPs attracting new researchers with high debt, do the LRPs positively affect career outcomes for participants, and how do LRPs compare to other NIH career development award programs (NIH, 2009)?

            Since 2003, the results show that new applicants (about 1,900) apply every year.  Programs from Pediatric and Clinical Research fund over 80% of new applicants (NIH, 2009).  Based on demographics of new PhD and MD classes, LRPs attracts more woman and minorities, however there is no gender difference in success rate.  The report indicates that LRPs are attracting early career researchers with 72% of applicants applying within six years of receiving their degree (NIH, 2009).  When it comes to retention, LRPs are losing women awardees (NIH, 2009).   Overall, the LRPs are attracting newer (earlier in research careers) applicants than the career program (K) for postdoctoral fellows (NIH, 2009).  Woman awardees from the K program were more likely to apply for subsequent NIH grant support and continue to be a part of the NIH extramural workforce than the LRPs (NIH, 2009).  Overall, the evaluation deemed the LRPs to be a successful model for attaining the program goals (NIH, 2009). 

            The report did not make any claims towards higher education debt accumulation.  It recognized the burden placed on career researchers in the field of health, but made no political statements.  The results showed that LRP awardees had more debt than recent doctoral graduates (NIH, 2009).   

National Institutes of Health (NIH). (2009). NIH LRP evaluation: Extramural loan repayment programs, fiscal years 2003-2007. Retrieved from http://www.lrp.nih.gov/pdf/LRP_Evaluation_Report_508final06082009.pdf

NIH.gov. (2011). About NIH. Retrieved from http://www.nih.gov/about/

Lumina Foundation

The Lumina Foundation

The Lumina Foundation for Education By. Lloyd Smith

Investing over $1 billion for education, especially higher education, the Lumina Foundation shares a ranking of one of the 40 most prestigious private philanthropic foundations in the nation with foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Founded by Jamie Merisotis, Lumina is an independent private foundation dedicated to increasing college completion rates to 60% by 2025, aka "The Big Goal". Holding the post of our country's largest private nonprofit foundation, Lumina was started in Indianapolis in August 2000. From their inception the foundation has focused on access to and success in higher education for the populace. From the general population of Americans the "Big Goal" concentrates their efforts towards socio-economically challenged, adult and minority students, and first-generation college students. The goal will increase the percentage of those holding postsecondary credentials and degrees of the highest quality.

Quality is the driving force behind founder, president, and CEO Meritosis' endless pursuit for the attainment of the "Big Goal". In order to reach this goal, the 46 staff members at Lumina pinpoint the necessary achievement of following critical outcomes: 1) preparing students academically, financially, and socially to become adept and succeed beyond high school or a GED; 2) attainment rates of students in higher education institutions that exceed the current statistics through improving the students' performance in order to obtain the skills and knowledge needed to meet the demands of a 21st century work-place, and 3) equipping postsecondary education administrators and faculty to become more efficient, effective, and productive. These critical outcomes can be met, according to Lumina, by the identification and support of practioners in higher education, effecting public policy intensely and positively, and using all their resources and assets to build the public will needed to effect change. This work is done through grants to colleges, universities, "peer" foundations, associations and organizations that actively improve student access and outcomes.

Lumina puts their money where their beliefs, and mouths, are. In 2010, the foundation approved around 100 grant proposals in amounts from $3,000 to $2.8 million. Their total grant commitment reached $43.4 million, proving that Lumina is a serious investor in the nation's economy, community, and future. The current workplace in the nation is ever-increasingly requiring high skill levels of their employees, and this will undoubtedly rise to 63 percent by 2018 as noted by labor economists. The rapidly growing divide in the have and have-nots, minority population expansion, and adult students returning to school to achieve greater skills and degrees all are telling signs that radical change is needed. Lumina wants to address these needs by achieving the "Big Goal" of 60 percent increases in matriculation, retention, articulation, and ultimately graduation rates by 2025.

Lumina Foundation fact sheet retrieved from: http://www.luminafoundation.org/about_us/

EPLC - The Education Policy and Leadership Center

Education Policy and Leadership Center – EPLC

by Lloyd Smith

            The EPLC is a Pennsylvania based; state-specific, nonprofit center dedicated to education policy and leadership initiatives. Through education policy advocacy, EPLC effects educational policy, while actively encouraging and supporting the development and implementation of improved student learning at the P-12 grades. Their objectives are to increase the effectiveness of school operations, as well as expand educational opportunities to Pennsylvanians of all age groups. These goals are enhanced by policy activities, which include: solidifying student academic success by reforming standards, assessments, and accountability; creating a Pennsylvanian statewide education financial system based on equity, predictability, and accountability in the most adequate and efficient means; build educational scaffolding to effect the learning capacity of every student, and secure a credentialed teacher in every classroom throughout the school day; training and recruiting the best leaders across the educational system in the state, who are responsible and effective in school management and governance; create policies within the state that ensures every child has access to quality pre-school and kindergarten instruction; guarantee all Pennsylvanians financial and physical access to higher education. The EPLC is uniquely dedicated to the education of all citizens in the state.

            This dedication is being achieved by three core strategies: 1) Information; 2) Leadership, and 3) Public advocacy. The commitment is a catalyst for education policy by initiating dialogue between the public and policymakers. The center acts as a source of comprehensive and reliable education research, and provides technical assistance, materials, and programs for policymakers and the general public. The center’s programs promote leadership activities, which build education awareness between the community leaders and policymakers. EPLC acts as a champion for education proliferation throughout the state. Bringing together over twenty organization’s representatives to facilitate education finance, the center supports a statewide system of financial governance affecting the 500 Pennsylvania school districts proactively.

            Because of their singular focus, the EPLC is able to effect education policy from a systematic and efficient position. Their standing in the state provides the center the opportunity to work with professional Pennsylvania education organizations, such as the Pennsylvania Association of School Administrators (PASA) and the Pennsylvania Association of School Business Officials (PASBO). Along with these organizations, the center is able to build bridges across the pre-, elementary, and secondary education to link them with statewide quality higher education institutions. EPLC’s advocates for the fluidity of educational attainment, and in the process effects state policy regarding education and higher education in the most positive way through many programs, like their Educational Finance Project and others.

EPLC – The Education Policy and Leadership Center information retrieved from: http://www.eplc.org/policy-programs-and-projects/policy-projects/education

SREB

The Southern Regional Education Board – SREB

by Lloyd Smith

“Nearly 3,000 students in the 16-state SREB region drop out of high school every school day.”                                                                                                                                        - SREB, 2011

            An estimated one in four high school students drops out of school every year without graduating; this is alarming. Another alarming fact is that those who do graduate are increasingly entering the job market or college bereft of adequate math, writing, and reading comprehension skills, even though our current economic state is extremely competitive for those holding these skills with degrees. Why do we need to know SREB? Who is SREB? What does SREB do? SREB is an educational organization committed to helping states solve these deficits in drop-out rates and lack of basic learning skills.  

            SREB is the nation’s interstate consortium for education of all levels. Founded in 1948 by consortia of 16 member institutions, SREB is a nonprofit and non-partisan organization laboring to vastly improve pre-K-12 and postsecondary schools in these and other areas. Directly working with state policy makers, educators, and schools from Texas to Delaware to improve and enhance teaching acumen, effective learning, and developing greater student achievement. Their work touches every level of education within the region, and acts as a catalyst for education advancement. This advancement started with no pre-K programs existing, as well as slender numbers of adults holding college degrees. Remarkably, SREB can now boast that their member states have the best pre-K programs in the nation and one in four adults now hold bachelor degrees. SREB has and is continuing to make a difference in the lives of people, communities, and states within the consortium.

            SREB (or the “board”) has an as ambitious mission as the Lumina foundation. The board looks to lead the nation in education attainment and progress. They provide the research and information needed to assist state leaders in making sound policies and effective actions in education across the region. SREB also gives reports on member state progress and student success, which boosts morale and achievement. The reports include data collected and analyzed in pre-K through year 20 in education, and SREB is able to do this in the field by working directly with schools, administration, faculty, and students. Along with these feats, the board enhances and advances leadership within member states’ institutions, and trains many thousands of educators annually. SREB is devoted to the future of the southern region.

            In the region the board effects online learning in all levels of education, and increases students’ access to online learning. This new wave of educational delivery is directed at the adult learner as well as the young. The adult student initiatives increase education attainment throughout the area. SREB goes further providing extensive resources for all areas of online learning for both student and teacher. The board reaches out as far as the doctoral level with their SREB-AGEP (Alliances for Education and the Professoriate) Doctoral Scholars Program through a grant from the National Science Foundation. The Southern Regional Education Board has an extended reach into all areas of educational systems throughout the nation. They are making a difference in the region’s attainment of education, and develop, implement, and sustain cost guidelines for member state’s virtual classrooms and schools. They are truly an educational technology cooperative, whose goal is to positively affect online education and educational cost disease.

SREB information retrieved from:

 http://www.sreb.org/page/1068-1359/data_library_higher_ed_finance

SREB report, “Cost guidelines for state virtual schools: development, implementation and

            sustainability”, August 2006. Retrieved from: www.sreb.org

ECS: No Time To Waste: The Vital Role of College and University Leaders in Improving Science and Mathematics Education

           In 1965, the Education Commission of the States (ECS) was created to help improve public education policy design amongst states and territories as a nonprofit organization (Esc.org, 2011).  The ECS is an interstate compact to improve education from elementary to higher education institutions by facilitating the exchange of ideas, information, and experiences from education leaders and policy makers (Esc.org, 2011).  The ESC is divided into three fields: Information Management and ECS Clearinghouse, Programs and State Services, and Policy Studies (Ecs.org, 2011).  A mixture of state fees and contracts, grants, and sponsorships fund the ECS (Ecs.org, 2011). 

This report, “No Time To Waste: The Vital Role of College and University Leaders in Improving Science and Mathematics Education”, was presented to the U.S. Department of Education, which received funding under a National Science Foundation grant (Sanders, 2004).  The results indicate that higher education leaders should become active advocates for improving mathematics and science education at all levels including improving teacher education as an institutional agenda objective (Sanders, 2004).  Teacher education must be improved by clinical practice and disciplined learning (Sanders, 2004).  Higher education institutions need to start a comprehensive review of the quality of their teacher education programs (Sanders, 2004).  For example, it is recommended that teachers master academic content, pedagogical principles, and technology impact and application in the classroom (Sanders, 2004).  Institutions need to improve recruitment efforts and transfer admissions among higher education colleges and universities (Sanders, 2004).  Graduates need to be mentored, supported, and tracked over time to ensure success in the work field (Sanders, 2004). 

The ECS gathers, analyzes and disseminates research to policymakers about current and emerging trends, information, and innovations (Ecs.org, 2011).  The ECS operates as a nonprofit nonpartisan organization (Ecs.org, 2011), which can help prevent political and social bias.  To what extent private and public donations affect the organization is unforeseen.  The ECS does publish its annual tax return on its website for public viewing and monitoring (Ecs.org, 2011).

Esc.org. (2011). “Helping state leaders shape education policy.” Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org/ecsmain.asp?page=/html/sponsors/WebsiteForumSponsors.asp

Sanders, T. (2011). “No time to waste: The vital role of college and university leaders in improving science and mathematics education.” Retrieved from http://www.ecs.org/html/Document.asp?chouseid=5480