|
1
|
- University of Denver
- Forum on the Future of Colorado Higher Education
- March 2, 2007
- Denver, Colorado
- David Longanecker,
- Executive Director
- Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE)
|
|
2
|
- Affordable to students & their parents
- Affordable to the State of Colorado
- Affordable to the Institutions in Colorado
- You don’t have affordability if higher education isn’t affordable to all
three of these stakeholders
|
|
3
|
- What does affordable mean?
- On Price (Tuition)
- Olden days – inexpensive
- The egalitarian era - choice
- “self pay” – moderately expensive
- “state subsidized” – inexpensive (ala the olden days)
- “state subsidized” – cheap
- On Student Assistance -- A shift in philosophy, as well.
- From removing barriers and hindrances to attendance (need-based aid)
- To reducing the burden of attendance (merit aid, tax-credits, and loan
subsidies)
|
|
4
|
- Measuring Up 2006 gave Colorado on “F”
- But 42 other states also received an F
- ???
- Yet, important evidence presented
- Share of income required ( 2006) to pay average net cost is relatively
high in Colorado & increasing.
- 23% for community college
- 27% for public 4 year college/university
- 66% for private 4 year college/university
|
|
5
|
- Measuring Up 2006 – additional important evidence
- Coloradans rely more heavily on loans:
- Average loan amount in Co -- $3,654
- Average loan amount in top states -- $2,619
- State need-based aid is wanting:
- Colorado/Federal Investment:
34%
- Top States/Federal Investment: 89%
|
|
6
|
- Through 2004-2005 (last year for comparative data -- source (NASSGAP):
- Need-based aid:
- $48.7 million (21st nationally)
- 152% increase over ten years (19th nationally)
- $274 per FTE
- 3rd in the WICHE Region
- WICHE average: $386
- National average: $446
- Overall:
- Not an unusual story:
- 11 of 15 WICHE States have need-based initiatives
- At least two have surpassed Colorado since 04-05 (Oregon and Wyoming)
- CAVEAT: Financial aid is only
part of the story
|
|
7
|
- Not bad when comparing ratio of tuition and fees to median household
income
- Comm Col
B&M Col Doctoral Univ
- Colorado 3.4% 5.7% 7.3%
- (ten yrs ago) 3.3% 5.2% 6.7%
- WICHE 4.2% 7.2% 8.6%
- (ten yrs ago) 3.1% 5.3% 6.4%
- Not bad in absolute terms
- Not bad in comparative terms
- Not bad in temporal terms
|
|
8
|
- A mixed bag when comparing actual amounts (06-07)
- Comm Col
Public Four Year
- Colorado $2377 $4404
- (ten yr inc) 85% 76%
- WICHE $2237 $4351
- (ten yr inc) 85% 80%
- U.S. $2272 $5836
- (ten yr inc) 55% 96%
- Community Colleges about average
- Four year institutions about average in West and below national average
– and rate of growth in tuition below average
- But neither of these reflect actual advertised price (before COF
discount)
|
|
9
|
- One the One Hand
- U.S. spends as much as anyone else on higher education
- First in total spending as share of GDP – 2.6% (Nearest others are
Korea, Chile, and Israel)
- Eighth in public spending as share of GDP – 1.2% (Trailing Denmark,
Finland, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Israel, and Greece)
- Third in private spending as share of GDP – 1.4% (Trailing Korea and
Chile)
|
|
10
|
- One the Other Hand – We’re in Colorado
- Higher Education is very affordable to the State
|
|
11
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
14
|
- One the Other Hand – We’re in Colorado
- Higher Education is very affordable to the State
- Tax Effort (NCSL)
- CO tax revenue as % of Personal Income = 9.2% (rank: 44th)
- US tax revenue as % of Personal Income = 10.2%
- CO share from state versus local = 49.8% (rank: 48th)
- What A Deal Higher Education is for Colorado
|
|
15
|
- State Appropriation per FTE student
- Community Colleges (2004)
- Colorado: $7,622
- WICHE: $6,684
- Rank: 9th of 15
- But . . .
- Baccalaureate/Masters
- Colorado: $9,742
- WICHE: $12,865
- Rank: 14th of 15
- Research/Doctoral
- Colorado: $19,772
- WICHE: $32,736
- Rank: 14th of 15
|
|
16
|
- To students and their families
- Affordable to middle and upper income
- Not affordable to low income
- To the state
- More than affordable – very affordable
- To institutions
- Not affordable – jeopardizing both access and quality
|
|
17
|
- Life during the “C” change.
- Homeostasis at best
- Enrolment demand to roughly match funding growth
- Nature of the growth from most educationally challenged populations.
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
- Life after the “C” change.
- The Perfect storm
- Limited funding for growth, let alone catch up
- Rapid increase in demand.
- Nature of the growth from most educationally challenged populations.
|
|
20
|
|
|
21
|
- Consequence
- Access and quality at risk, unless:
- One is sacrificed for the other
- Resources are made available to sustain quality and accommodate
growth.
- The alternative – self satisfaction to non-competitiveness
|
|
22
|
- It’s our choice
- Change direction, or
- Enjoy slip sliding away.
|