restructuring higher education to help create the next great american state for economic opportunity...
TRANSCRIPT
Restructuring Higher Education to Help Create the Next Great American State for Economic Opportunity and Business Investment
Discussion document for Postsecondary Education Review Commission
August 10, 2009
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Higher education plays a central role in Louisiana’s economic development efforts
• However, our state’s higher education system is not structured to meet the current or future workforce and economic needs of our state
• Compared to higher education systems in leading states like Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas, Louisiana’s higher education system currently is heavily skewed toward 4-year degree programs, yet most current and future job opportunities here and elsewhere require more education / training than high school and less than a traditional 4-year degree
• The result: poor fit between higher education programs and workforce needs; hampered business development efforts; lowest graduation rates in the South; and a suboptimal return on investment of taxpayer dollars
• A restructured system would be more affordable while ensuring a better alignment of enrollments and programs with the state’s regional workforce needs, and it would provide many benefits, including: reduced skilled labor gaps, increased graduation and completion rates, enhanced ROI for state taxpayer dollars, strengthened state business climate, and significantly increased job creation
3
HIGHER EDUCATION PLAYS A CENTRAL ROLE IN STATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS . . .
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Providing skilled workers at all levels to meet current and future workforce demands in the private and public sectors
• Providing training, general education, and upward mobility opportunities for our citizens
• Attracting federal and corporate research grants
• Conducting research and catalyzing innovation of importance to the state, its people, and its industries
• Improving our state’s image as an attractive location for business investment and highly mobile professionals
• Enhancing quality of life
4
. . . AND IT DIRECTLY IMPACTS THE MOST IMPORTANT SITE-SELECTION FACTOR FOR BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS: WORKFORCE
*Priority of selection factors varies from project to project; however, quality and availability of workforce almost always is one of the top three considerations
**Typically these factors come into play when multiple locations offer relatively comparable characteristics relative to primary site-selection criteria
Source: LED analysis
Primary selection factors*
• Quality, availability, and cost of target workforce
• Tax and regulatory climate
• Proximity to key customers and suppliers
• Transportation infrastructure and logistics
• Operating costs (electricity, insurance, workers comp, etc.)
• Quality-of-life factors (public education options, crime, etc.)
• Availability of target real-estate solution (size, cost, control, water/sewer/rail connectivity, etc.)
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
Secondary selection factors**
• Level of state-and-community support (fast-track permitting, etc.)
• Availability and quality of customized training
• Statutory financial incentives
• Customized incentives
5
95
100
105
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Louisiana
South*
LOUISIANA’S EMPLOYMENT LEVELS HAVE OUTPACED THE SOUTH SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE NATIONAL RECESSION . . . Total nonfarm, seasonally-adjusted employment* (100=January 2008)
*Based on aggregate of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source:BLS; LED analysis
2008 2009
6
90
100
110
120
130
140
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
Louisiana
South*
. . . HOWEVER, EMPLOYMENT GROWTH IN LOUISIANA LAGGED THAT OF THE SOUTH IN MOST OF THE LAST DECADE
*Based on aggregate of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source:BLS; LED analysis
Total nonfarm employment (100=1990)
7
-2.5
-1.5
-0.5
0.5
1.5
2.5
1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
LouisianaSouth*
UNTIL VERY RECENTLY, LOUISIANA EXPERIENCED CONSISTENT NET OUTMIGRATION IN CONTRAST TO THE REST OF THE SOUTHAnnual net migration as percentage of base population (%)
*Based on total population of SREB states (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia)
Source:U.S. Census; LED analysis
Katrina effect (-6.31)
8
MANY OF LOUISIANA’S KEY INDUSTRY SECTORS HAVE BEEN LOSING JOBS FOR MANY YEARS . . .
32
35
38
41
44
47
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
2800
2900
3000
3100
3200
U.S. employment
Louisiana employment
Farming
20
22
24
26
28
30
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
880
930
980
1030Chemical Manufacturing
8
9
10
11
12
13
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
450
520
590
660Paper Manufacturing
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07
325
350
375
400
425Oil & Gas
Source:BEA; LED analysis
Thousands of jobs
9
100
150
200
250
300
350
'90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08 '10 '12 '14 '16
200
225
250
275
300
325
350
375
400
'90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08 '10 '12 '14 '16
. . . IN CONTRAST TO GROWING INDUSTRY SECTORS THAT HAVE BEEN CULTIVATED BY OTHER STATES
U.S. employment (historical)
Pharmaceuticals and Medicine Manufacturing
Computer Systems Design and Services Scientific Research & Design Services
Software Publishers
Source:BLS; LED analysis
EXAMPLES
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
'90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08 '10 '12 '14 '16
450
500
550
600
650
700
'90 '92 '94 '96 '98 '00 '02 '04 '06 '08 '10 '12 '14 '16
2007-16 growth forecast: 22%
2007-16 growth forecast: 8%
2007-16 growth forecast: 30%
2007-16 growth forecast: 27%
U.S. employment (forecast)
Thousands of jobs
10
LOUISIANA HAS BEGUN AN AGGRESSIVE EFFORT TO CULTIVATE NEW GROWTH INDUSTRIES
Source:LED analysis
Nuclear energy manufacturing
Example project win Significance• Shaw Modular Solutions will
manufacture modules for nuclear power plants in L.C.
• After manufacturing and assembly, modules will be shipped globally
• Electronic Arts (EA) has launched global quality assurance center in Baton Rouge
• Partnership between EA, Louisiana Economic Development, and LSU
• V-Vehicle announced plans to build a high-quality, fuel-efficient car in Monroe
• Plans to expand existing facility formerly owned by Guide Corp.
• ConAgra Foods will construct world’s first large-scale, LEED-certified sweet-potato processing facility near Delhi
• Opportunity for Louisiana to participate in global nuclear power renaissance with exponential growth potential
• Industry manufacturing jobs average $50-90k; design jobs average ~$200k
• Opportunity to establish competitive advantage in rapidly growing market
• Industry jobs average $60-80k
• Opportunity to participate in next generation of the U.S. auto industry
• Opportunity to build relationships with top-tier venture capital firms, including Kleiner Perkins and Google Ventures
• Opportunity to add value to Louisiana-grown crops right here at home
• Opportunity to establish credibility with other Fortune 500 agribusiness firms
• Average wage is 44 percent higher than per-capita average in Richland Parish
Digital interactive media
Advanced manufacturing
Value-added agribusiness
EXAMPLES – NOT COMPREHENSIVE
11
LOUISIANA’S WORKFORCE PIPELINE IS DRAMATICALLY OUT OF LINE WITH MARKET DEMANDS
100% 100%
*Based on Louisiana high school class of 2004**Based on 2014 projections from Bureau of Labor Statistics
Source:Louisiana Workforce Commission; LED analysis
Profile of jobs in LA (2014) **
Enter 4-yr public or private universities
Enter 2-yr colleges, etc.
Directly enter job market after graduation
Drop out or leave the state before graduation
Profile of jobs in LA (2004)
High school matriculation *
100%
37
20
26 24
858
55
35
16 21
Supply trend Demand trend
Require 4-yr college degree or higher
Require 2-yr degree, certificate, or adv. training
Require high school diploma or less w/ no specific training
12
LOUISIANA’S FTE ENROLLMENT MIX IS HEAVILY SKEWED TOWARD 4-YEAR INSTITUTIONS COMPARED TO THE REST OF THE SOUTH
5554
49
48
44
44
43
39
38
36
36
35
32
31
22
4546
51
52
56
56
57
61
62
64
64
65
68
69
78
40
26
60
74
North Carolina
*2007-2008 FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students** 2-year institutions include both community and technical colleges
Source:SREB; LED analysis
Florida
Texas
Mississippi
Maryland
South Carolina
Oklahoma
Southern average
Georgia
Arkansas
Virginia
Tennessee
Alabama
Kentucky
Delaware
Louisiana
West Virginia
2-year institutions**
4-year institutions
FTE enrollments (%)*
13
UNLIKE LOUISIANA, TOP PERFORMING STATES MAINTAIN AN ENROLLMENT MIX THAT IS BALANCED WITH WORKFORCE NEEDS
26
74
4852
5347
4555
Louisiana
Top-performing states**
FTE enrollments by type of institution (%)
Workforce needs by required education* (%)
2-year institutions
4-year+ institutions
*PRELIMINARY ROUGH ESTIMATES based on 2006-2016 projections; total workforce needs include only jobs that require at least some postsecondary vocational training/education**Top-performing states include Georgia, North Carolina, and Texas
Source:Louisiana Occupational Outlook; BLS; SREB; LED analysis
14
CURRENTLY, LOUISIANA GENERATES A SURPLUS OF 4-YEAR (OR HIGHER) DEGREES COMPARED TO RELATED JOB OPENINGS
4-year+ degrees granted (2006-07)*
Annual job openings requiring 4-year+ degree**
*Includes both public and private institutions; public institutions alone grant ~23K degrees per year**Includes net growth and replacements from job attrition based on 2006 to 2016 Louisiana occupational projectionsSource:Louisiana Occupational Outlook; SREB; LED analysis
Workforce supply measure
Workforce demand measure
~30,000
~13,000
Gap of ~17,000 per year = out-migration pipeline
15
MANY OF LOUISIANA’S TOP GROWTH OCCUPATIONS REQUIRE EDUCATION BEYOND HIGH SCHOOL BUT LESS THAN A 4-YEAR DEGREE
1,350
840
340
520
570
390
380
380
260
390
320
310
260
190
260
640
690
910
540
440
510
460
450
570
350
250
230
270
310
230
Annual openings projected by occupation*
*Number of job openings based on employment projections for 2006-2016; analysis limited to occupations that require some postsecondary education
Source:Louisiana Occupational Outlook; LED analysis
Registered nurses
Customer service representatives
General and operations managers
Elementary school teachers
Bookkeeping / accounting clerks
Licensed practical / vocational nurses
Mfg. and wholesale sales representatives
Truck drivers
Secretaries (excl. legal, medical and exec.)
Welders, cutters, solderers, and brazers
Executive secretaries
Accountants and auditors
Restaurant cooks
Institution and cafeteria cooks
Correctional officers and jailers
Education / training required
Vocational / 2-year 4-year
1,990
1,530
1,250
1,060
1,010
900
840
830
830
740
570
540
520
500
500
Due to net growth
Due to attrition loss
TOP 15 GROWTH OCCUPATIONS*
16
ALIGNING LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM WITH WORKFORCE NEEDS WOULD GENERATE SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS
ScenarioEst. savings*
($MM/year)
2007-08 (recent baseline)
50% towards SREB average
SREB average
Top-performing states’ avg.**
Aligned w/ workforce needs***
--
20-40
50-75
80-110
100-130
2-yr FTEs (%)
4-yr FTEs (%)
26
33
40
48
53
74
67
60
52
47
*Equals the difference between FY08 funding scenario and the required state funding calculated for each scenario
**Assumes that Louisiana meets 2-year / 4-year FTE enrollment mix of GA, NC, and TX
*** Louisiana achieves a 2-year / 4-year FTE enrollment mix that is equal to estimated workforce needs
Source: SREB; LED analysis
Additional savings can be generated via other system-wide efficiency mechanisms (e.g., reduced duplication of programs and facilities, classification shifts, and performance-based funding)
Additional savings can be generated via other system-wide efficiency mechanisms (e.g., reduced duplication of programs and facilities, classification shifts, and performance-based funding)
ROUGH ESTIMATES FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES
17
LOUISIANA STEADILY INCREASED TOTAL STATE FUNDING EFFORTS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AND SURPASSED THE SOUTHERN AVERAGE . . .
Total state funding as a percentage of personal income (%)
*Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding**Average is not weighted based on state population
Source:SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Louisiana*
Total state funding per capita ($ per resident)
Southern average**
0.4
0.6
0.8
1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08
Louisiana*
Percent of southern average (%) 89 88 96 105 108 109 107 110 120
99 96 103 112 116 134 107 108 116
Southern average**
Percent of southern average (%)
18
. . . AND TOTAL STATE HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING LEVELS HERE RECENTLY WERE ABOVE THOSE IN MANY LEADING STATES (FY08)
308
294
259
244
241
219
215
207
198
189
188
176
171
164
151
218
261
Total state funding as a percentage of personal income* (%)
*Funding levels based on 2007-08 state appropriations and 2008 personal income**For comparison purposes, Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding; TOPS funding for 2007-2008 adds $26 on a per capita basis and 0.07% on a percentage of personal income basisSource:SREB; U.S. Census; Bureau of Economic Analysis; LED analysis
North Carolina
Alabama
Louisiana**
Delaware
Mississippi
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Southern average
Georgia
Kentucky
Maryland
Virginia
Florida
Texas
Tennessee
West Virginia
South Carolina
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.7
North Carolina
Alabama
Mississippi
Arkansas
Louisiana**
Kentucky
Delaware
Georgia
Southern average
Oklahoma
West Virginia
Tennessee
Florida
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia
Maryland
Total state funding per capita* ($ per resident)
19
LA’S HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING FROM STATE SOURCES RECENTLY WAS FOURTH-HIGHEST IN THE SOUTH ON A PER-FTE BASIS (FY08) . . .
7.5
7.1
7.0
6.9
6.7
6.6
6.2
6.2
6.1
6.0
5.9
5.3
5.2
4.6
4.2
6.2
6.9
Total state-provided higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
*Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students**Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
Source:SREB; LED analysis
Alabama
Delaware
North Carolina
Louisiana**
Georgia
Maryland
Arkansas
Florida
Kentucky
Southern average
Mississippi
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Virginia
Texas
South Carolina
West Virginia
20
. . . HOWEVER, LA’S TOTAL PER-FTE HIGHER ED FUNDING FROM ALL SOURCES RECENTLY WAS BELOW THE SOUTHERN AVERAGE (FY08) . . .
18.7
13.6
12.8
12.5
12.1
11.3
10.8
10.7
10.6
10.5
10.4
10.0
9.8
9.6
9.1
11.4
10.4
Total higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
*Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations and tuition and fees; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students**Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
Source:SREB; LED analysis
Delaware
Maryland
Kentucky
Alabama
South Carolina
Southern average
Virginia
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Tennessee
Mississippi
Georgia
Louisiana**
West Virginia
Texas
North Carolina
Florida
21
. . . BECAUSE LA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM GENERATES LESS FUNDING FROM TUITION AND FEES THAN THE REST OF THE SOUTH
11.5
7.6
6.9
6.6
6.0
5.8
5.0
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.2
3.5
2.9
2.6
5.3
3.5
Total self-generated higher education funding per FTE* ($000s)
*Funding level based on 2007-08 tuition and fee revenue; FTE enrollments are calculated by taking total credit-hours and dividing them by the corresponding number of hours for full-time students
Source:SREB; LED analysis
Delaware
South Carolina
Maryland
Kentucky
Virginia
West Virginia
Southern average
Alabama
Tennessee
Oklahoma
Texas
Mississippi
Arkansas
Georgia
Louisiana
Florida
North Carolina
22
LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION GRADUATION RATE IS LAST AMONG THE SOUTHERN STATES FOR FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS
71.0
67.3
61.7
59.4
58.8
57.9
49.2
48.8
48.5
48.3
47.5
46.8
46.1
45.4
40.2
52.2
37.4
Six-year graduation rates* at four-year institutions (%)
*Six-year graduation rate based on first-time, full-time students seeking bachelor’s degrees that enrolled in public four-year institutions in 2001
Source:SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
Delaware
Virginia
Maryland
South Carolina
North Carolina
Florida
Southern average
Georgia
Texas
Mississippi
Kentucky
Oklahoma
Alabama
West Virginia
Tennessee
Arkansas
Louisiana
23
LSU’S OPERATIONAL FUNDING LAGS TOP PUBLIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES
Operational funding per FTE student 1 ($ thousands)
1Operational funding estimates for universities in SREB states are calculated from 2005-06 SREB state general purpose, state educational purpose, and operating tuition & fees excluding university medical schools; U. of Michigan tuition & fee estimates derived from IPEDS estimates minus UM-reported medical school-related tuition & fees, UM state appropriations derived from IPEDS assuming 40 percent of total campus appropriations dedicated to medical school; University of California – Berkeley data extracted from IPEDS data system; figures may not sum exactly due to rounding2Endowment income estimates based on The Center for Measuring University Performance’s 2005 estimates in all cases except LSU, which was reported by the LSU Foundation; all income estimates assume that four percent of endowment asset market value is applied to operations each year3LSU A&M, LSU AgCenter, and LSU Law Center
Source: SREB; IPEDS; University of Michigan; The Center for Measuring University Performance; BRAC analysis
30.7
25.4
24.2
22.9
21.6
21.6
19.5
19.4
18.8
18.3
17.9
15.5
9.6
13.6
13.5
11.7
10.9
5.0
9.8
13.8
9.3
11.4
11.7
11.1
Texas A&M
Georgia Tech
U. of Texas at Austin
U. of Cal. - Berkeley
U. of Florida
U. of Maryland
State appropriations
Tuition and fees
15.3
2.2
10.8
10.5
7.1
U. of Michigan
U. of Virginia
U. of Georgia
7.1 4.7
8.5
Top peer avg. 2.5
UNC - Chapel Hill
8.3
6.1
8.4
4.9
LSU (2007) 3
6.3
3.7
Endowment income 2
5.8
2.6
5.7
U.S. News “Best Colleges” ranking (out of 130)
26
64
21
53
N/A
23
30
58
47
35
130
49
COST NUMBERS BASED ON 2005/2006 DATA
24
KEY ELEMENTS FOR ALIGNING LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM WITH ITS WORKFORCE NEEDSKey elements Benefits
Source:LED analysis
Implications
LSU with national-caliber operations and facilities
• Attraction, cultivation, and retention of world-class talent
• Nationally-competitive R&D (e.g., federal/corporate research grants)
• Improved state image and PR
• Need for a credible 10-15 year strategy to achieve national prominence
• Funding and enrollment model to achieve strategic plan
Regional universities with focus on student success and regional workforce needs
• Dramatically increased completion rates and student success
• Greater alignment with current and future regional workforce needs
• Increased admissions standards• Optimized enrollments and
programs, incl. graduate level• Reduced duplication of programs
and institutions
LCTCS with appropriate enrollments, adequate facilities, and regional integration
• Strong alignment with current and future workforce needs
• Clear career pathways with high completion and placement rates
• Economies of scale at the regional level (e.g., class size)
• Improved business climate for many industry sectors
• Funding increases for rapid LCTCS enrollment growth
• Targeted investments in facilities, especially technical colleges
• Mechanisms to add/delete programs based on regional workforce needs
• Marketing / guidance counseling
Strong system-wide efficiency and accountability mechanisms
• Increased responsiveness to market needs
• Improved collaboration/articulation between 2-yr and 4-yr institutions
• Increased emphasis on performance-based funding
• Funding follows the student (i.e., less emphasis on “base” funding)
• Potential facility sharing among 2-yr and 4-yr regional institutions
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
25
THERE ARE MANY BENEFITS OF IMPLEMENTING A BETTER ALIGNED HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM
Source:LED analysis
NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Reduced skilled labor gaps (top business concern)
• Increased graduation and completion rates
• Improved in-state job placement rates
• Enhanced ROI for taxpayer dollars
• Strengthened state business climate
• Improved industry/university innovation and collaboration
• Enhanced state image
• Reduced brain drain
• Significantly increased job-creation success
• Stable or improved funding per FTE at most institutions
26
SELECTED QUESTIONS PERC MAY WANT TO CONSIDER
Source:LED analysis
EXAMPLES – NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Given current/future workforce needs and the State’s fiscal situation, what is the appropriate enrollment mix between two-year and four-year institutions?
• Are undergraduate program enrollments at two-year and four-year institutions in each region well aligned with current and future workforce needs in the region? Do programs overlap?
• Would the current funding formula enable a rapid shift to an alternative enrollment mix if necessary? If not, which mechanisms should be implemented to optimize enrollment mix?
• Are admissions standards at four-year universities comparable with their SREB peers? If not, which mechanisms should be used to set appropriate admissions standards?
• Are current facilities adequate to support high quality services, optimal enrollment mix, and necessary growth? If not, how should we modify use of existing facilities and/or fund new ones?
• Does the current funding formula sufficiently emphasize key performance metrics (e.g., completion rates, workforce placement, sponsored research)?
• What are the plausible state budget scenarios for the next 2-5 years and how should our higher education system be structured to respond to each of them?
27
ADDITIONAL CHARTS
28
LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM SHOULD PROMOTE:
Source:LED analysis
KEY OBJECTIVES - NOT COMPREHENSIVE
• Student success in school (e.g., completion) and life (e.g., employment)
• Quality programs and facilities at all levels
• Alignment with current and future workforce needs
• Attraction, retention, and cultivation of world-class talent & R&D capacity
• Access for economically-disadvantaged students
• Efficient use of financial resources within State fiscal means
29
CURRENTLY, LOUISIANA’S HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM FALLS SHORT ON SEVERAL KEY OBJECTIVES
Source:LED analysis
Objective Preliminary evaluation
• Student success in school (e.g., completion) and life (e.g., employment)
• Quality programs and facilities at all levels
• Alignment with current and future workforce needs
• Attraction, retention, and cultivation of world-class talent & R&D capacity
• Access for economically-disadvantaged students
• Efficient use of financial resources within State fiscal means
• College/university graduation rates are last in South• Many graduates finish in programs that are not well
aligned with current or future workforce needs
• General improvement opportunities exist in most areas• Some technical college programs, equipment, and
facilities lag significantly
• Enrollments are significantly out of line with current and future workforce needs in Louisiana and rest of South
• LSU has momentum but significantly lags top public research universities
• Other campuses (e.g., La Tech) have niche strengths
• TOPS and overall enrollments suggest Louisiana performs relatively well
• Funding mechanisms provide insufficient incentives and accountability
• Institutions are not well integrated at regional level
INCOMPLETE DRAFT
30
ADJUSTING FOR OLDER STATE RESIDENTS, LOUISIANA’S PER-CAPITA FUNDING LEVEL RANKING IS RELATIVELY STABLE
Total state funding per resident under age 65* ($ per resident)
*Funding level based on 2007-08 state appropriations**Louisiana funding levels do not include TOPS funding
Source:SREB; U.S. Census; LED analysis
North Carolina
Alabama
Delaware
Louisiana**
Arkansas
Mississippi
Oklahoma
Southern average
Georgia
Kentucky
Florida
Maryland
Virginia
Tennessee
Texas
West Virginia
South Carolina
308
294
259
244
241
219
215
207
198
189
188
176
171
164
151
218
261
North Carolina
Alabama
Louisiana**
Delaware
Mississippi
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Southern average
Georgia
Kentucky
Maryland
Virginia
Florida
Texas
Tennessee
West Virginia
South Carolina
Total state funding per capita* ($ per resident)
352
341
300
281
279
253
239
238
228
225
215
197
196
195
174
297
251