Affordability, Access, Aid, and Tuition

Oregon Changing Direction Roundtable

Nancy P. GoldschmidtProject Director, Oregon Changing Direction

Associate Vice Chancellor, Planning and AccountabilityOregon University System

Portland, OR

SHEEO Professional Development Conference August 14-16, 2003

Lake Tahoe, CA

Oregon Story

1. Explaining Oregon’s policy

context

2. Creating valued policy outcomes

3. Using Changing Direction to

explore options and build support

Oregon’s Policy Environment

Horrid state revenue picture across

the country– only more so in Oregon

Turbulent –The Perfect Storm

Changes in state leadership• Chancellor Jarvis (Aug 2003)• Presidents (4 of 7 OUS and 9 of 17 CCs in last 3 years) • Governor (Jan 2003)• Legislators (Term limits)

Financial Assistance to OUS Students

One-Year Change (2000-01 compared to 2001-02• State need-based aid 13%

• Subsidized loans 18%

• Unsubsidized loans 733%

• Grants & scholarships -34%

• Federal college work study -70%

• Institutional grants

• 529 College Savings Plan initiated in 2001

Financial Assistance to OUS StudentsUnexplored Territory

• No state merit-based aid

• No college savings plan match

• No state-supported college work study

• Potentially untapped community-based philanthropic efforts

Public Policy Development and Outcomes

Some Oregon Examples

Funding K-12 quality

Competing for water access

Balancing competing priorities

Source: Gary Trudeau, Doonesbury, All contents copyright 2003 Gary Trudeau

Broadening tax-payer support for K-12

Source: Gary Trudeau, Doonesbury, All contents copyright 2003 Gary Trudeau

Resolving competition over water rights

Developing coherent public policy

in the midst of competing priorities

Save Salmon…Eat Children

WICHE’s Invitation to Reflect on Alignment of Fiscal Policies

State Appropriations

Student Tuition and Fees and Total Cost

Student Financial Assistance

Appoint inclusive group (15 members)

Build on recent past efforts and unfinished business

Deal with different perspectives and values

Build common ground

Stalled by biennial budgetary process

Oregon Changing Direction Roundtable

Myth and Reality: College Access in Oregon

• Does not Measure Up – Affordability (F) or Participation (D) but Benefits High (B-)

• Relatively low median household income (family of 4)

– $58,315 compared to $66,624 (CO) to $46,142 (MT)

• Median household income qualifying for need grant – $43,736 (75%) in 2002 down to $32,703 (55%) in 2003

• High relative tuition for lowest-cost PSE choices

• Policy pays for choice (differential grant), but does not cover all who qualify—

• More students qualify but do not receive state grant– Extra $8.9 million this session gets back some fed funds

Paradox of Merit and Need Which is the best thing to happen to higher education

in the 20th century?

Car and condominium sales boosted by parents cutting college bills by luring their children to Georgia colleges in exchange for new wheels and new digs.

2003 Legislative Session Finishing Up

• Changes related to Efficiency Act (SB 437) – Retain interest earnings on OUS funds, primarily tuition and

student fees.

- Greater flexibility in dealing with legal services tech transfer, intellectual property transactions, start-ups, etc.

– Requires report on impact of changing Opportunity Grant to flat grant

• By the numbers…– 13.7% reduction GF and Lottery ($90 M)

• Raised spending limitation to accommodate increases in tuition and fees passed by Board in July 2003 (frozen)– New Fund Split: E &G 35% and 64% Other Funds

Conceptualizing 2nd Year of Roundtable

Link to Governor’s agenda Access Scholarships for Education Trust (ASET)

• Need-based aid• Places financial aid into the Constitution (requires Yes

note in 2004)• Students could use grant at Oregon non-profit public or

private colleges• Packaging four fund sources:

• Interest on tuition (OUS)• Interest on state-support fund (CCs)• Non-profit private/independent colleges would have to buy in to

play• Dedicated portion of Capital Gains Tax revenue (2-4%)

• Whether earnings from tuition paid by OUS students

should be used to support students who do not attend

OUS?

• Whether the initiative would move Oregon closer to a

voucher-like program?

• Would a flat grant better serve the public interest by

providing access, but not choice?

• Who would administer program?

After-session Issues

In sum, go into year two with

Governor’s proposal and need to clarify and develop broad-based support

Potential revenue sources

Study on proposed flat grant

Moving toward principles

Consider other options

Thank You

Nancy Goldschmidtnancy_goldschmidt @ous.edu

503-725-5750