![Page 1: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report
A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board
October 30, 2009
![Page 2: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Summary• The purchasing power of state funding per
student continues to decline• The real $ funding per FTE student from all
unrestricted E&G sources is less than it was a decade ago
• E&G facilities deferred maintenance is $1.9 billion which includes $190 million in needs that are critical
• E&G and Auxiliary operating margins are in general very small
• Fund balances at most institutions are below the recommended levels
![Page 3: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
• Inequities in funding are becoming more extreme
• There are undesirable shifts in expenditures among NACUBO expenditure functions
• Many institutions have held tuition & mandatory fee increases to a minimum for 2009-10
• Arkansas Higher Education is faced with three “MUSTS” prescribed in the Higher Education Subcommittee
• Institutions are experiencing unprecedented enrollment growth for the fall of 2009 (Those alone increase need a minimum of $23 million in new funds for 2009-10)
![Page 4: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Declining Purchasing Power of State Funding
![Page 5: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Change in Purchasing Power of State Funding per FTE Student
1984-85 to 2008-09
$1,400
$1,500
$1,600
$1,700
$1,800
$1,900
$2,000
$2,100
$2,200
$2,30019
84-8
5
1985
-86
1986
-87
1987
-88
1988
-89
1989
-90
1990
-91
1991
-92
1992
-93
1993
-94
1994
-95
1995
-96
1996
-97
1997
-98
1998
-99
1999
-00
2000
-01
2001
-02
2002
-03
2003
-04
2004
-05
2005
-06
2006
-07
2007
-08
2008
-09
$2,207
$1,453
34% decline
per student
$1,322$1,322
![Page 6: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Where the Money Came From in FY ’99 and FY ’09
(Unrestricted Educational and General Current Fund Revenue)
![Page 7: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
University Income per FTE Student by Source1998 to 2008-09
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
1998-99 2008-09 Adjusted
State Funds
Other Local Income
Tuition and Fee Income
$8,924
$12,862
$8,705
$5,215
$5,966
$4,038
A 22.4% loss in purchasing power per FTE
58.4%
46.4%
![Page 8: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Two- Year CollegesRevenue per FTE Student by Source1998-99 to 2008-09
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
$9,000
1998-99 2008-09 Adjusted
State Funds
Other Local
Tuition & Fee$6,424
$7,686
$5,202
$4,680
$4,295
$2,907
A 37.9% loss in the purchasing power per FTE student
72.9%
55.9%
![Page 9: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Where the Money Went
(Unrestricted Educational and General Expenditures for 2008-09)
![Page 10: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
$4,951$3,180
$1,366
$1,386
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
Colleges Universities
Other
Scholarships
Physical Plant
Institutional Support
Student Services
Academic Support
Public Service
Research
Instruction
$11,810
$6,957
19.6%
11.7%
Where the money went in FY 2009
![Page 11: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Two-Year Expenditures per FTE by Function
$2,741 $3,180
$82$74$499
$586$535$617$1,049
$1,366$656
$849
$105
$234
$21
$50
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
1998-99 2008-09
Other
Scholarships
Physical Plant
Institutional Support
Student Services
Academic Support
Public Service
Instruction
$5,688
$6,957
48.2% 45.7%
Where the money went - Colleges
![Page 12: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
![Page 13: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Fund Balances
![Page 15: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
University E&G Fund Balances as a Percent of Revenues FY 2006 - FY 2009
-10.0%
-5.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%A
SU
J
AT
U
HS
U
SA
UM
UA
F
UA
FS
UA
LR
UA
M
UA
PB
UC
AAs a
Per
cen
t o
f R
even
ue
2005-062006-07
2007-082008-09
![Page 16: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
One-Year Change in Expendable Fund BalancesFY 2008 to FY 2009
($10,000,000)
($5,000,000)
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
ASUJ* ATU HSU SAUM UAF** UAFS UALR UAM UAPB UCA
2007-08
2008-09
Expendable Fund Balances should not be interpreted as an indication of an institution's cash funds or that an institution has difficulty in meeting
payroll or accounts payable.
Universities
![Page 17: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Colleges E&G Fund balances as a Percent of Revenues FY 2006 - FY 2009
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
AN
C
AS
UB
AS
UM
H
AS
UN
BR
TC
CC
CU
A
EA
CC
MS
CC
NA
C
NP
CC
NW
AC
C
OTC
OZC
PC
CU
A
PTC
RM
CC
SA
CC
SA
UT
SE
AC
UA
CC
B
UA
CC
H
UA
CC
M
As
a P
erce
nt o
f Rev
enu
e 2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
![Page 18: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
One-Year Change in Fund BalancesFY 2008 to FY 2009
$0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
2007-08
2008-09
Two-Year Colleges
![Page 19: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
An Inequity
![Page 20: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Recommended Minimum $3,000
Estimated Cost $4.8 million
![Page 21: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Scholarships
![Page 22: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
![Page 23: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Three Imperatives for Higher Education
![Page 24: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Interim Legislative Study of Higher Education
• Three “Musts”:
1. We must make sure state government continues to do its part in funding higher education
2. We must limit the start up of new programs
3. We must ensure a net reduction in costs for students
![Page 25: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Recommendations and Observations
![Page 26: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
• Pursue an amendment to the two-year funding formula that would read as follows:
– The minimum funding per FTE student for a two-year college shall be $3,000/FTE which shall be increased by the annual rate of inflation as measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) (when funds are available) until an institution’s funding level per FTE determined by the two-year funding model is reached.
![Page 27: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
– The further dilution of funding for students by the addition of new Non-Formula entities seeking funding outside the formula must be curbed. ADHE staff recommendation is to place a moratorium on the addition of any Non-Formula entities until such time as the funding formula needs are fully funded.
![Page 28: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
– The public policy question of whether or not the citizens of Arkansas, specifically the students and their parents, should subsidize the education of non-Arkansas residents who enroll in distance delivered education outside the state of Arkansas should be addressed.
Although the numbers are currently relatively small, these enrollment represent a rapidly increasing portion of enrollment in some institutions which is likely to accelerate. (Many other states have addressed this public policy question over a decade ago.)
What do these programs do to increase the number of Arkansans with degrees?
![Page 29: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
– Distance Education Funding Policy Recommendation: Distance education whether delivered by online instruction or other multimedia methodologies shall be fundable when delivered to Arkansas residents within or outside Arkansas, or to non-Arkansas residents within Arkansas. Distance education delivered to non-Arkansas resident students outside the state of Arkansas shall not be fundable and the credit hours produced shall not be included in the funding formulas used to determine the funding needs of institutions.
![Page 30: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
– Other funding issues arise from the enrollment of non-resident students when institutions fail to collect out-of-state tuition from the students. Certainly, the boards of the institutions have the authority to set the tuition for non-resident students. However, it is the responsibility of this board and ADHE to determine whether or not those students should be included in the funding formula.
![Page 31: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
– At the end of each fiscal year Boards of Trustees of every institution should require their chief financial to report a side-by-side comparison of both the budgeted and actual revenue by source and expenditures by NACUBO function. Budgets tend to reflect hypothetical priorities while actual expenditures represent real priorities
![Page 32: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
• In order to better understand the financial situation of the institutions, it is recommended that certain essential statistics be reported each fall to this Board. A partial list of measures that would improve understanding of why costs change in higher education are listed below:
– Student credit hours generated per full-time equivalent
faculty member– Student/faculty ratios– Teaching loads per faculty member by course level (Lower
and upper level undergraduate, masters, specialist, first professional, and doctoral)
– Average class size by level– Student/staff ratios for non-instructional staff– Percent of As and Bs grades awarded by each institution
![Page 33: Arkansas Higher Education Financial Condition Report A Report to the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board October 30, 2009](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062516/56649d795503460f94a5c014/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
– The required data should include the average and the extremes for student semester credit hours generated, student-faculty ratios, teaching loads, and class size.