UWF Tuition Task Force Findings

UWF Board of Trustees

June 2nd, 2009

Tuition Task Force Members:Chula KingRick HarperRon BushKim Bryan

Amanda ClontsPete Metarko

The Tuition Task Force was created by President Bense to gather information concerning likely impacts of possible tuition increases and provide it to the BOT at the June 2 meeting.

President Bense requested that Provost King coordinate activities of the Tuition Task Force. It met for the first time on April 28th and the membership consisted of:•Chula King (UWF Provost), Task Force Coordinator•Rick Harper (Economics/Haas Center), Task Force Chair•Ron Bush (Distinguished University Professor/Marketing)•Amanda Clonts (UWF Student Body President)•Kim Bryan (Director, Office of Admissions)•Pete Metarko (AVP Enrollment Services)

The Tuition Task Force compiled information over the next several weeks in anticipation of the June 2 meeting.

Basic findings of the Tuition Task Force include the following:

•Florida has lower tuition per credit hour than all but two of the 50 states•UWF in-state tuition is 14th lowest among 15 selected institutions•UWF out-of-state tuition is 10th lowest among 15 selected institutions•UWF’s in-state 2-year tuition increase is the lowest among the 15 institutions•UWF’s out-of-state 2-year tuition increase is 12th lowest among the 15.

The relevant literature suggests that enrollment is not price-sensitive. The consensus is that enrollment declines by about 1% for every $100 increase in tuition cost.

Assuming no change in enrollment, a 15% tuition increase will yield about $2.16 million in new revenue in the 1st year, after accounting for increased financial aid, prepaid tuition, and pre-July ‘07 enrollees.

However:•Target population in our core market area is projected to shrink over time.•Target population statewide will also shrink, but much more slowly.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

full-

time

unde

rgra

duat

e tu

ition

and

fees

per

yea

r2006-2007 in-state undergraduate tuition and required fees

Only Nevada and Wyoming had lower

tuition and fees than FL

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

dolla

rs p

er y

ear

In-state 2008-2009 Tuition at Selected Universities

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

dolla

rs p

er y

ear

Out-of-state 2008-2009 Tuition at Selected Universities

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

cum

ulati

ve p

erce

nt ch

ange

In-state Tuition Increases at Selected Universities, 2007 - 2009 cumulative

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

cum

ulati

ve p

erce

nt ch

ange

Out-of-state Tuition Increases at Selected Universities, 2007 - 2009

U.S. Freshmen Applications - Fall Semesters

Characteristics of UWF Enrolled Freshman – Fall Semesters

• HS Mean Grade Point Average 3.5% < 3.0 % < 2.5

2008 15 1.92007 17 2.42006 18 3.5

• SAT Mean 1070

• ACT Composite Mean 23

• % Needing College Prep CoursesReading Writing Math

2008 3 2 122007 4 3.5 122006 6 5 16

UWF Headcount Enrollment, Fall Semesters

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

4,200

4,400

4,600

4,800

5,000

5,200

5,400

5,600

5,800

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Num

ber o

f 17

year

old

s res

iden

t in

area

source: Haas Center projections

Number of 17 year olds in 3-County Region

The number of 17 year olds resident in Escambia, Santa Rosa and Okaloosa Counties is projected to fall by 16.1% between 2007 and 2016. This is after accounting for the BRAC realignments. This is slightly greater than the fall in HS grads projected by FL DOE, at 15.4% over the same period and geography. Over the same period, the number of HS grads for the state of FL will fall by 3.6%.

Total Freshman Applications to UWF by Region

Previous Research on Price Elasticity of University Tuition

The Price Elasticity of Demand (commonly known as price sensitivity) measures the rate of response of quantity demanded due to a price change.

The formula for the Price Elasticity of Demand is:(% Change in Quantity Demanded)/(% Change in Price)

Enrollment Percentage Changes per $100 Tuition Increase

• Between -.05 and -1.46% (Jackson & Weathersby, 1975)• Between -.06 to -.8% (Leslie and Brinkman, 1987)• Between -.5 to -1.0% (Heller, 1997)• Under -.5% (Heller, 1996; Kane, 1995)• Just over -.25% (Hernelt and Marcotte, 2008)

Overall, the research consensus suggests that a $100 increase in tuition will result in slight (about 1% decrease in enrollment, other things equal.

Bright Futures Scholarships

• Not addressed by any previous studies on elasticity• For this year, one-half of Florida’s university students received these scholarships• From 75% to 100% of tuition was covered based upon grades/entrance test scores• Formerly, these scholarships paid for tuition increases• This year, these scholarships will NOT cover the tuition increases• It is not certain how this policy (of not covering tuition increases) will impact UWF

enrollment

Our working assumptions:

• UWF enrollment will remain unchanged• Tuition is raised from $82.03/hr. to $94.33/hr.• Including fees – total cost per hour is raised from $123.30 to $140.34.

PROPOSALSUNDERGRADUATE TUITION & MANDATED FEES

FLORIDA RESIDENTSMay 12, 2009

TUITION Combined Mandated Fees TOTAL PER SH INCREASE PER

SH

TOTALS FOR: 15 SH 30

SH

INCREASE FOR: 15 SH

30 SH

CURRENT

$ 1,849.50

82.03 41.27 $ 123.30 $ 3,699.00

8% TUITION INCREASE + 5% TECH FEE

$ 2,019.00 $ 169.50

88.59 46.01 $ 134.60 $ 11.30 $ 4,038.00 $ 339.00

10% TUITION INCREASE + 5% TECH FEE

$ 2,043.60 $ 194.10

90.23 46.01 $ 136.24 $ 12.94 $ 4,087.20 $ 388.20

12% TUITION INCREASE + 5% TECH FEE

$ 2,068.20 $ 218.70

91.87 46.01 $ 137.88 $ 14.58 $ 4,136.40 $ 437.40

15% TUITION INCREASE + 5% TECH FEE

$ 2,105.10 $ 255.60

94.33 46.01 $ 140.34 $ 17.04 $ 4,210.20 $ 511.20

ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT UNDERGRADUATE TUITION & FEES PROPOSALS

May 12, 2009

% INCREASE TUITION

$ INCREASE TUITION

PROJECTED GROSS

REVENUE

DIFFERENTIAL TUITION

AMOUNTDIFFERENTIAL REDUCTIONS

NET DIFFERENTIAL TUITION

PROJECTED REVENUE INCREASE

8% 6.56 1,460,551 1,460,551

10% 8.20 1,825,689 365,138 165,773 199,365 1,659,916

12% 9.84 2,190,827 730,276 331,545 398,730 1,859,282

15% 12.30 2,738,534 1,277,982 580,204 697,778 2,158,330

Using UWF Data to Calculate ElasticityProblematic, as during the 11 years that data on enrollment and tuition are readily available there are

distortions due to: hurricanes; weak versus strong economy; and, a period of difficulty of International students obtaining visas.

These factors have influenced demand, in addition to price of tuition.

-6.0%

-4.0%

-2.0%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

UWF tuition changes and enrollment changes

Percent Change Tuition Percent Change Enrollment

UWF data show a significant (p=.023) negative correlation (-.674) between changes in tuition and changes in enrollment since 1998, suggesting that UWF is more price-sensitive than the average school considered in the academic literature on price sensitivity.

Conclusions

• Our conclusion is that UWF should implement the full allowable tuition increase.

• We do not support increases in graduate and out-of-state tuition. • The major reason in support of this increase is that the legislature has included the

full tuition increase in our base budget, and that even with the tuition increase in place, spending cuts at UWF are still envisioned.

• The College of Business chairs and Dean support the move as a necessary response to a changed state funding environment.

• Enrollment response to tuition increases are generally small, so that is it almost certain that higher tuition will lead to a net increase in revenue to UWF.

Reasons not to include a tuition increase include:

• -The UWF core market will likely be more tuition/price-sensitive than most of the other 10 SUS market areas in terms of family incomes and the negative effect on enrollment. This is due to a combination of lower family incomes in NW FL and the lower share of the student body that receives other sources of financial aid (i.e., Bright Futures) than at other SUS institutions.

• High school graduate numbers in our core market will shrink over the next 6 to 8 years by a cumulative 16 percent from the levels of last year.

• Community colleges in the region will offer increasing numbers of BA/BS programs at lower prices than SUS institutions.

Bottom Line:

• The sense of the task force is that we need the full tuition increase, but must pay increasing attention to recruitment, retention and the quality of our students and their university experience while at UWF.

• The implication of smaller numbers of HS graduates in our area combined with higher tuition is that UWF will need increasing penetration in markets outside NW FL in order to maintain enrollment, much less grow enrollment. Resources will need to be devoted to marketing/recruitment in parts of FL with greater numbers of HS grads. This will call for better communication of our best assets to a new student/family market downstate.

UWF Tuition Task Force Findings

UWF Board of Trustees

June 2nd, 2009

Tuition Task Force Members:Chula KingRick HarperRon BushKim Bryan

Amanda ClontsPete Metarko