Board of RegentsState of Iowa

Rising to the Next TIER –

a Transparent, Inclusive Efficiency Review

Program Overview

March, 2014

2

State Appropriations and Tuition Comparison

77.4%

67.8%

63.7%

58.9%

54.4%

50.1%48.9% 49.2% 48.0%

49.1% 48.3%

41.5%38.6%

35.5%35.3% 35.0%

20.8%

27.8%

30.6%

34.7%

39.2%

43.4%44.4% 44.2%

45.7%44.8% 46.0%

51.9%

55.0%

58.7% 59.3% 60.1%

1.8%4.4%

5.7% 6.4% 6.4% 6.5% 6.7% 6.6% 6.3% 6.1% 5.7% 6.6% 6.4%5.8% 5.4%

4.9%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

FY 1981 FY 1991 FY 2001FY 2002FY 2003FY 2004FY 2005FY 2006FY 2007FY 2008FY 2009FY 2010 FY 2011FY 2012FY 2013 FY 2014Budget

REGENT UNIVERSITY GENERAL EDUCATION FUNDING

Appropriations

Tuition

Other

Board of Regents, State of Iowa

The status quo is unsustainable if we are to maintain our high standard of quality and affordability

3

Emerging Trends in Higher Education

3

THE NEW STUDENT 21ST CENTURY CLASSROOM

• Changing demographics

• Adult learners

• Heightened focus on value

• Blended Learning

• Massive Open Online Courses

• Learning Management Systems

• Video-based learning

• Game-based Learning

• Analytics

• Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)

• Cloud Strategy

• Interdisciplinary collaboration

DIGITAL ADVANCES

4

The status quo is unsustainable if Iowa’s public universities are to maintain their high standards of quality

• Higher education systems are facing severe economic constraints.

• University leadership wants to help reduce student debt and ensure an affordable, high-quality public education for any Iowan who wants it.

• All stakeholders have a responsibility to maximize university resources, reduce costs, and operate as efficiently and effectively as possible.

5

This review will identify tangible opportunities to improve the efficiency of Iowa’s public universities

Objectives of the review include:

• Identify creative, new ideas for investing public resources so our universities can uphold their long tradition of academic excellence.

• Identify opportunities across administrative and academic programs to improve effectiveness and reduce costs at both the institutional and system level.

• Provide input into the universities’ strategic planning efforts.

The savings we identify will be invested back into the universities’ missions to ensure that they survive and thrive

6

The review process will be open, transparent and inclusive

• We want a high level of involvement and engagement.

• We encourage you to share your ideas – at campus forums and online.

• We are actively seeking input from all members of the campus community, including faculty, students and staff.

7

Faculty, staff, and student engagement will be critical to project success

We will use many mechanisms to engage with you throughout the program such as:

• Interviews

• Data collection

• Town Hall meetings

• Emails

• Websites

• Working sessions

• Surveys

8

Phase Objectives

Phase 1 • Identify key strengths and challenges• Identify strategic priorities• Identify opportunities to improve service delivery and reduce costs

Phase 2* • Determine a focused list of opportunities• Quantify the estimated impact and effort required to implement select opportunities

• Develop a detailed implementation roadmap

Phase 3* • Design, test, and launch improvements

The process will be objective and fact-based and will follow a phased approach

Diagnostics / Benchmarking

Phase1

Design / SolutionDevelopment

Phase2

Implementation Duration: Ongoing

Phase3

Program Management

Organizational Engagement

* Timing of Phase 2 and Phase 3 to be determined

Our schedule will be calibrated to support the high amount of input needed from faculty during the Academic review

9

Questions and Answers