National Study of Community College Finance, 1980-2001

BILLY C. ROESSLER, PH.D.Assoc. Dir. of Admissions and Records,

Tarrant County College DistrictFort Worth, Texas

Education Writers Association Regional Seminar

February 17, 2006

2

What We’ll Cover Today

Revenue trends for public community colleges from 1980 - 2001

What it all might mean

3

Katsinas, Lacey, and Hardy Classification Overview

Developed initially by Katsinas and Lacey in mid-1990s, updated in 2005 by David Hardy

KLH uses 2000 U.S. Census Data KLH uses 2000-01 & 2001-02 NCES IPEDS

Data Katsinas, Lacey & Hardy’s work is the basis

of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching’s first-ever classification of all two-year colleges (released in February, 2006).

4

Important Details to Understand as We Look at the Findings

Applied the 2005 Katsinas et al. Classification Schema retroactively over the 20-year time period

Only studied rural, suburban, and urban public community colleges

Used IPEDS and HEGIS publicly accessible data Any comparisons between enrollment and

finance data should be done with the understanding that finance data represent one full year while enrollment data cover only one semester (fall).

5

Important Details to Understand as We Look at the Findings (cont.)

Criteria for inclusion in study Report both finance and enrollment data for

each of the Fiscal Years 1981, 1986, 1991, 1996, & 2001

Imputed data are included AL, HI, KY, LA & SD had no colleges meeting

criteria Data for some states may be affected

by the percentage meeting the criteria; in general, about 70% of all colleges reported data for all time periods (good sample).

Community College Revenues as Percent of Total for All Public Community Colleges,

FY 1981 - 2001

0

5

1015

20

25

30

3540

45

50

Tuition andFees

StateApprop.

LocalApprop.

WorkforceDev.

Other

Revenue Type

Perc

en

t 1981

1991

2001

Community College Revenues as Percent of Total for Rural Serving Colleges, FY 1981 - 2001

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Tuitionand Fees

StateApprop.

LocalApprop.

WorkforceDev.

Other

Revenue type

Pe

rce

nt 1981

1991

2001

Community College Revenues as Percent of Total for Suburban Serving Colleges, FY 1981 - 2001

05

101520253035404550

Tuition andFees

StateApprop.

LocalApprop.

WorkforceDev.

Other

Revenue Type

Per

cen

t 1981

1991

2001

Community College Revenues as Percent of Total for Urban Serving Colleges, FY 1981 - 2001

05

101520253035404550

Tuition andFees

StateApprop.

LocalApprop.

WorkforceDev.

Other

Revenue Type

Perc

en

t 1981

1996

2001

10

STATE APPROPRIATIONS declined for community colleges, FY81 – FY01

FY 1981 – 47.1% 16 states above 60% (AL, CA, CT, DE, FL, MA,

ME, NC, NH, NV, OK, RI, TN, VA, WA, WV) FY 1991 – 39.4%

4 states above 60% (CT, DE, NC, NV) FY 2001 – 34.0%

0 states above 60% 7 states above 50% (AR, CT, DE, GA, MA, NV,

VA) 5 states below 20% (AZ, IL, NJ, VT, WI)

11

LOCAL Appropriations have decreased slightly for community colleges, FY81 – FY01

20 states with 0 or < 1% of total revenues from local appropriations

FY 1981 – 17.4% FY 1991 – 16.6% FY 2001 – 14.7%

12

TUITION and FEES as a percentage of total revenue have increased for community colleges

FY 1981 – 15.6% 2 states > 30% (IN, PA) 8 states < 10% (CA, DE, MT, NC, NM, WI, WV,

WY)

FY 1991 – 17.9% 4 states > 30% (MA, NH, PA, VT) 4 states < 10% (CA, NC, NM, WY)

FY 2001 – 19.2% 5 states > 30% (MN, NH, NJ, PA, VT) 2 states < 10% (CA, NM)

13

Workforce development dollars have increased, FY81 – FY01 Workforce development includes the

federal, state, local, and private grants and contracts revenue categories.

FY 1981 – 8.7% 5.7% Federal, 2.5% State

FY 1991 – 15.9% 10.0% Federal, 4.2% State

FY 2001 – 22.3% 12.4% Federal, 5.9% State

Community college Fall FTE enrollments have dramatically increased, Fall 1980 – Fall 2000

Fall 1980 Fall 1990 Fall 2000 20-yr % ChangeRural Serving 744,931 963,618 973,150 30.60%Suburban Serving 570,250 627,000 706,708 23.90%Urban Serving 660,914 748,125 848,335 28.40%All 1,976,095 2,338,743 2,528,193 27.90%

15

Public Community College Revenues as Percent of Total - Nationally vs. Texas, FY 1981 - 2001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Tuition andFees

StateApprop.

LocalApprop.

WorkforceDev.

Other

Revenue Type

Per

cen

t 1981-US

1981-TX

2001-US

2001-TX

16

The data show us…

Geography,Governance,

and Funded Missions MATTER!

17

If overall state dollars are increasing, how is there slippage?

Yes, state appropriations have increased in total dollars.

HOWEVER… Enrollment increased Expenditures are increasing Percent of tuition increases greatly

out-pace increases of state dollars

18

To come even close to injecting needed funding to supplant steep decline in state investments required tuition increases far above inflation. Thus, tuition rose..

As a percent of total revenues As a percent increase of $$ over 20

yrs As measured by dollars per fall FTE In constant 2001 dollars, the increase

in revenue dollars from tuition and fees revenue category was almost equal to that of state appropriations!

19

What about the dramatic increases in workforce development revenues?

They did not counter the combined decreases in state and local appropriations.

Most of increase was in the federal category These funds are often for specific purposes

(workforce training) at a time when transfer function needs investment (Tidal Wave II).

Institutional resources are used to write grants to obtain and maintain these funds.

20

What could the increased tuition mean for students? Increased financial burden for

students and their families Could the tuition increases…

Be a factor contributing to the increased part-time enrollment?

Negatively impact access? Lead to increased debt upon

graduation? What about those who do not complete the

degree?

21

Let’s look at Minnesota to see impact of high tuition policy Minnesota students pay $4,600 per

year in community college tuition. Minnesota ranked #1 among

states in % of HS graduates continuing in college in 1989.

Minnesota ranked #17 among states in % of HS graduates continuing in college in 2003.

22

What about at the colleges? They likely working harder to simply

maintain their relative budget positions

They must commit significant human resource investment to obtain… Increased local appropriations Increased tuition and fees Workforce training grants (writing,

evaluating, etc.)

23

Anticipating FY 2006 Results

Impact from economic slump Tuition deregulation at some 4-yr

institutions Tuition continues to increase Federal Pell Grant remains flat

QUESTIONS

FEEDBACK