Investing in Universities: Lessons from the “Double Cohort” in Ontario

CIRPA-ACPRI 2003CIRPA-ACPRI 2003

Navigating New Waters in Institutional ResearchNavigating New Waters in Institutional Research

Halifax, Nova ScotiaHalifax, Nova Scotia

Ken Snowdonksnowdon@sympatico.cawww.SnowdonandAssociates.ca

Overview

• Setting the Context

• In the beginning….

• The challenge

• The planning approach

• The ‘analytics’

• Politics & People

• Lessons

Setting the Context

• Cut-backs in government funding in early to mid-90’s

• Large government deficits

• Imposition of “Social Contract”

• Election of new “Common Sense” gov’t

• Cut of $400 million in PSE 1996

• Some tuition offset & student aid

In the beginning….

“Ontario is the only province that still has a five-year secondary school program. Reducing this to four years would save an estimated $350 million a year. This program would have to be phased in, to allow time for curriculum schedules to be changed and to make sure current secondary school students are not affected.”

The Common Sense Revolution, May, 1994.

Secondary School Reform

Old curriculum• 1998/09 Gr. 9• 1999/00 Gr. 10• 2000/01 Gr. 11• 2001/02 Gr. 12• 2002/03 OAC Gr. 13

Ready for PSEFall 2003

New curriculum

• 1999/00 Gr. 9• 2000/01 Gr.10• 2001/02 Gr.11• 2002/03 Gr.12

Ready for PSEFall 2003

Double Cohort

The Challenge

• From universities perspective… how to prepare for the greatest expansion in universities since the 1960’s? And use the opportunity to restore funding levels and secure as much $ as possible.

• From government perspective… how to deal with the “double cohort” in the context of increased enrolment demand, keep costs contained and bring some ‘reform’ to the higher education sector?

Differing Perspectives (Two Solitudes)

(MANY) GOVERNMENTS

• prepare for employment

• efficiency & technology

• applicable research

• partner with business

• more competition and sources of degrees

• cost control, responsible compensation

(MUCH OF) ACADEME

• cultivate the mind

• teaching needs contact

• seek knowledge

• speak ‘truth’ to power

• quality = the universities

• recognize increasing relative price of “brains”

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015

18-2

4 P

opu

lati

on (

000'

s)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

FT

En

rolm

ent

(000

's);

FT Enrolment Participation Rate

DemographicsDemographics, Participation and EnrolmentRevised MTCU Projection (2002)

14.8%

21.7%

26.6%

8.5% 18-24 Population

Projected

“ Boomers”

“Echo”

Actual Projected

The Planning Approach - Chronology

• 1995: Ministry of Education & Training, school board and university representatives initiate planning – curriculum focused

• 1997-98: COU presses Ministers with “comparison charts” with little success

Making the ‘case’ Pre-98

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

Operating Grants per capita (population)

Ontario’s grants cut by over 15% 1995-1997 compared to significant increases in the US

-15.3%

Projected Full-time University Enrolment in Ontario from Demographics,Participation Rate Increases, Workplace Changes and Secondary School Reform

Source: COU, MET.

Potential for 88,900 More Students by 2010

200,000

220,000

240,000

260,000

280,000

300,000

320,000

98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11

Due to SecondarySchool Reform

Due to SecondarySchool Reform

Due toDemographics

Due toDemographics

Due toWorkplace

Due toWorkplace

Due toParticipation Rate

Increase

Due toParticipation Rate

Increase

PriceWaterhouseCoopers Will There be Room for Me?

1. Public advocacy based on the work of 3rd partiesAngus-Reid and PriceWaterhouseCoopers

The Planning Approach

The Planning Approach

2. Joint Government-University Working Group on University Capacity– Charged with developing a proposal for

Minister to accommodate the expansion and double cohort

• establishing enrolment projection(s)

• costing the increase (operating, capital, student assistance)

• exploring cost efficiencies

The “Analytics”

• KISS principle - easily understood AND to establish the general level of funding that would be required

• Low, Medium, High projections • Operating and Capital $ based on joint gov’t/COU

estimates – derived from existing formulas• Efficiencies built in on the capital side -

approximately 40% of space to be found from more efficient use of space

Budget ‘99

• SuperBuild - $742 million in new capital• ‘provide a space for every willing and qualified

student’ • Some additional funding but…No reference to

operating funds for the “Double Cohort”• Election Budget…..Common Sense gov’t re-

elected AND new separate Ministry of Training, Colleges, Universities established

• New players – Minister, DM

Hindsight…..

• “Those elected in 1995 to deliver major change and re-elected in 1999 to continue the revolution do not view themselves as “government.” They believe that they are the people who came to fix the government, and that the job is only just beginning.”

Speech from the Throne, October 21, 1999

October ‘99 Press Conference

University Perspective• Enhancing public awareness and

broad political support

Government Perspective• Public confrontation• “Blackmail”

6.6% Increase1 st Yr

• Joint input to refine projection

• Agreement on (minimum!) capital expansion needs

• Review of higher-than-projected 1st yr. enrolments

• Staff papers on Productivity, Funding Formula, Costs

• Universities’ proposal for budget transfer

Projected Full-time University Enrolment in Ontario from Demographics,Participation Rate Increases, Workplace Changes and Secondary School Reform

Source: COU, MET.

Potential for 88,900 More Students by 2010

200,000

220,000

240,000

260,000

280,000

300,000

320,000

98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 02-03 03-04 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08 08-09 09-10 10-11

Due to SecondarySchool Reform

Due to SecondarySchool Reform

Due toDemographics

Due toDemographics

Due toWorkplace

Due toWorkplace

Due toParticipation Rate

Increase

Due toParticipation Rate

Increase

WORKING GROUP Activities

March 14, 2000 AnnouncementDETAILS

• 0% for inflation• 5-year tuition caps• 1% Performance Fund• 1% Accessibility Fund

COU RESPONSE• “does not respond to the

enrolment growth …in recent years, nor the need to prepare for the significant increase in demand”

• “will reinforce the problems of large class size”

• “disappointed with the announcement”

Understatementof the semester!

Budget 2000

SuperBuild II

New Research funds

AGAIN … NO REFERENCE TO OPERATING

Politics & People

• The bureaucracy– inside the Ministry– inside government (Finance, Mgt Board)

• Politicians

• University Presidents

• Government advisors

Modifications to the Approach• Shortcomings on the ‘politics’• Good ‘analytics’ are not enough• province faced with pressures from every

sector - health, municipalities, education• need to increase the profile with MPP’s,

Ministers and Premier and key staff• need to think about ‘partnership’ rather than

advocacy

Retreat (2000)• Pursue “productive working relationship”

• Engage Tom Trbovich as GR Consultant

• “Access to Excellence” campaign– booklet (September)– meetings with each of “70 top influencers” including

government MPPs, “external advisors”– Caucus reception (November 2000)

• Re-instate Working Group – new DM

• Economic impact study - tax contribution

Fall- Winter 2000/01

• Gov’t Relations increased markedly• Less “public” advocacy more “partnership”• Vocal advocates (faculty OCUFA, students OUSA)• Gov’t announces Investing in Students’ Task Force to look

at efficiency / effectiveness• COU/universities engaged in “demonstrating

administrative operating efficiencies” • Universities given “clean bill of health” and Task Force

indicates the need for more investment• Finally on parents “radar screen” (Gr. 10 students thinking

about Grade 11 prereq’s for Gr. 12 and the PSE)

Budget Speech 2001

• “We are committing funding for colleges and universities that will reflect the number of students entering the post-secondary system.”

• “An increase in operating grants… of an estimated $293 million by 2003-04 will address anticipated enrolment increases resulting from secondary school reform, demographic factors and a rising participation rate.”

Budget 2002• Full grants for additional enrolment based on revised

projection• SuperBuild III – more capital• Commitment to additional research investment

– Additional $250 million to ORDCF program bringing total to $750 million

– Additional $350 million to OIT bringing total to $1,050 million– Additional $2 million to ORPF to $32 million to meet target of

providing up to 40% of the indirect costs of Ontario Funded Research

• Commitment to an enhanced Ontario Student Opportunity Trust Fund (OSOTF)

Budget 2003

• Full grants for additional enrolment – even higher numbers

• Commitment to additional research investment

• Quality Assurance Fund - $ 200 million• Re-Commitment to an enhanced Ontario

Student Opportunity Trust Fund (OSOTF)

Capital• SuperBuild – 100,000 new

‘spaces’ in Coll/Univ plus commitment to find 36,000 more in ‘efficiencies’

• Gov’t funding ~$1.2 Billion – leveraging ~$2.6 Billion in construction and renovation.

Operating• Increased enrolment funded

at ‘average’

• $443 million ‘growth’ commitment

• $200 million Quality Assurance Fund

• Plus other targetted funding commitments

Major Research $

Double Cohort Results

More to come…

• The ‘double cohort’ will influence gov’t univ relations for the next decade as students progress to professional programs and graduate school

• There are still unresolved # problems and likely to be more!

• “Devil in the details” - implementation issues have created continuing tension between universities and Ministry

Observations…• Analytics are good… but not nearly enough• Interpretation of analysis MUST be CLEAR • Partnership requires free exchange of information in both

directions• Politics are of key importance• The bureaucracy can be very helpful AND very unhelpful• People and personalities play a key role• Partnership is rewarding but leads some to believe ‘in the

pocket of government’ • Perseverance and ‘patience’ – process, process, process• Serendipity helps!

1. Know what the government’s agenda is.

2. Focus on issues that align with its agenda.

3. Be as precise as possible about language and numbers – good analytics

4. Carefully consider the potential impact of actions – No surprises!

5. Make sure ALL of the key people in government are aware of the issues.

Lessons

Summing up….

• The ‘double cohort will influence PSE for the next decade – so stay-tuned!

• The role of good analytics, politics, people and perseverance cannot be overstated.

• A good “case” by itself is seldom enough• Political influence, by itself, is seldom enough• Need for a full integrated strategy.• IR can play a key role in “telling the story”

Final thoughts

A consultant is ... • someone who takes the watch off your wrist and

tells you the time. • a man who knows 99 ways to make love, but

doesn't know any women. • someone who is called in at the last moment and

paid enormous amounts of money to assign the blame

• See you in Montreal!