The University of New Orleans: Constraints and Opportunities

Analysis Framework

• What is mission critical?

d• Expenditures 

• Funding formula

• Self‐generated revenue

• Enrollment ManagementEnrollment Management

• Efficiencies

i• Program Mix

• Strategies for moving ahead

Take the activities of the institution from a list and post them inWhat is Mission Critical?

Take the activities of the institution from a list and post them in a circle. Closer to the bulls eye means more mission critical. Try to reach general agreement among the group.

UNO’s MissionMission: a comprehensive university  with a mission to educate undergraduate & graduate students in a variety of arts, sciences 

d f i l d t d t h i thand professional programs and to conduct research in these fields. Market:

Residents throughout the State, especially those of the greater New Orleans area who have excelled in high schoolTwo year college transfer studentsTwo‐year college transfer studentsEmployers (planning/environmental protection,  engineering, and health care)

d l dEconomic development interests and entrepreneursThe research communityCivic and cultural organizations of the regiong g

Expenditures By NACUBO Function: High’s/Low’s

Institutions of higher learning should spend the majority of their funds in this area.

Institution Instruction  ResearchPublic Service

Academic Support

Subtotal (IRPA)

Student Services

Institutional Services

Scholarships/ Fellowships

Plant Operations/ Maintenance

Transfers out of Agency

Athletics OtherTotal 

Expenditures

University of Louisiana – Lafayette 42.0% 14.5% 0.2% 9.3% 66.0% 3.4% 12.7% 3.7% 10.7% 0.1% 3.5% 0.0% 100.0%

University of Louisiana – Monroe 44.0% 5.1% 0.8% 7.6% 57.6% 6.0% 14.1% 6.4% 11.1% 0.0% 4.6% 0.2% 100.0%

Grambling State University 46 0% 0 2% 0 0% 7 4% 53 6% 6 0% 14 4% 7 9% 13 1% 0 0% 4 9% 0 0% 100 0%Grambling State University 46.0% 0.2% 0.0% 7.4% 53.6% 6.0% 14.4% 7.9% 13.1% 0.0% 4.9% 0.0% 100.0%

McNeese State University 43.8% 3.2% 0.0% 9.3% 56.3% 6.4% 11.9% 6.7% 10.0% 2.8% 5.2% 0.7% 100.0%

Nicholls State University 43.7% 0.9% 0.5% 10.8% 55.8% 5.6% 13.6% 6.6% 12.1% 0.0% 5.8% 0.4% 100.0%

Northwestern State University 43.0% 1.8% 0.3% 7.6% 52.7% 6.6% 13.5% 9.2% 12.5% 0.2% 5.2% 0.1% 100.0%

Southeastern Louisiana University 47.4% 0.6% 1.7% 9.2% 58.9% 5.5% 11.8% 7.2% 12.8% 0.0% 3.9% 0.0% 100.0%

Louisiana Tech 36.7% 11.4% 0.2% 10.3% 58.6% 4.0% 9.1% 11.7% 11.2% 0.0% 5.4% 0.0% 100.0%

University of New Orleans 41.1% 2.3% 2.7% 10.2% 56.3% 4.7% 15.4% 8.0% 15.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

Southern University A&M 43.3% 0.5% 0.4% 11.0% 55.2% 4.1% 16.6% 5.4% 14.7% 1.9% 1.6% 0.6% 100.0%

Southern University New Orleans 36.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.2% 45.3% 4.3% 30.7% 4.9% 10.0% 2.5% 2.3% 0.0% 100.0%

Louisiana State University A&M 41.7% 13.0% 1.9% 13.6% 70.2% 2.9% 5.1% 9.9% 12.0% ‐0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

LSU– Shreveport 45.9% 0.3% 0.0% 11.3% 57.5% 6.6% 16.4% 8.8% 9.7% 0.5% 0.4% 0.0% 100.0%

LSU – Alexandria 47.2% 0.0% 0.0% 6.9% 54.1% 8.8% 16.2% 2.7% 16.6% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

Overall 42.6% 7.2% 1.1% 10.7% 61.5% 4.4% 11.1% 7.9% 12.3% 0.3% 2.4% 0.1% 100.0%

Source: NACUBO, Expenditures by function

Expenditures per NACUBO CategoryActuals 2007‐2008 through 2011‐2012

Funding Formula Withdrawals=6.5% which is 

Losing enrollment

Avg. withdrawal rate within UL 

system

How can enrollment be  Can withdrawals beincreased (new markets)? How can SCH’s be increased (finish in 15)? 

Can withdrawals be decreased through policy changes? Which classes consistently have the 

W’ ?most W’s? 

Formula Funding Implementation:Cost Redistribution

The formula allocation indicates that UNO’s state funding should be 17.6% less than what it is.  UNO is currently funded at a much higher rate because the state formula holds institutions at a ‐4% stop loss.pAdjusted Formula Request = ‐$3.3M rather than ‐$5.5M

Tuition Comparison

Understanding Price Sensitivity: Increasing Tuition while Maintaining (or possibly increasing) Enrollment Levelsg ( p y g)

4 3425,000

Number of Students Receiving Gift Aid 

3,5613,978 3,906

4,317 4,342

3,2813,500

4,000

4,500

H i i i h i i d ?

2,000

2,500

3,000 Institutional

TOPS/GO

Federal

How price sensitive are the remaining students? Can tuition increases on those that are price insensitive be used to subsidize those that are more price sensitive?

892623 525

1,321 1,195 1,103

500

1,000

1,500 Other

02009 2010 2011

Over last three years, approximately 30%‐35% of UNO students attended UNO with a TOPS/GO scholarship‐making them somewhat insensitive to tuition increases. 

During the same time period, approximately 30%‐38% of UNO students received a PELL award making them somewhat insensitive to tuition increases.

Strategically Utilizing Institutional Aid

$7 000

$8,000

Institutional Aid Awarded to Students 

$2.3M$1.3M

$1.8M

$5,000

$6,000

$7,000

$$5.6M$3,000

$4,000Other

Need

Merit$4.8M $4.7M

$

$1,000

$2,000

$02009 2010 2011

Institutional aid has increased by 3.5% over the last three years, with need‐based aid i ll ivirtually non‐existent. 

Is institutional aid being directed to students that are price insensitive?What is merit aid being used for? Prestige? 

A Note on Documenting Institutional AidA Note on Documenting Institutional Aid

• Waiver vs. Exemptionp– Charges to students that are subsequently reversed are exemptions and should therefore be reported on both the revenue and cost side of BOR5both the revenue and cost side of BOR5

– Waivers are never officially charged to students and therefore should not be reported in BOR5Hardship ai ers altho gh called ai ers sho ld be– Hardship waivers, although called waivers, should be reported on BOR5 because they are charged to students and subsequently exempted

l h h h• Institutions, although not reporting them to BOR, should account internally for the cost of waivers to the institutionto the institution

UNO Retention Patternsh06‐09 Cohorts

2,500

1,7681,9242,000

1,535

9841,150

1,2781,500

Cohort

2nd Fall

3rd Fall984774

862 899

616 676 717

453 471500

1,0003rd Fall

4th Fall

5th Fall

272

0

500

06 07 cohort 07 08 cohort 08 09 cohort06‐07 cohort 07‐08 cohort 08‐09 cohort

1st to 3rd retention= 50%  1st to 3rd retention= 48%  1st to 3rd retention= 46% 

UNO Retention Patterns, 06‐09 Cohortsh l l dWithout Developmental Students

1 6441,800

1,315

1,483

1,644

1,400

1,600

834983

1,090

748 780800

1,000

1,200 Cohort

2nd Fall

3rd Fall

What’s lost and what’s gained?On average 262 less students in the incoming cohort A 1 percentage point increase in 1st to 3rd retention

6718

536 583 618

386 404400

600

800 3rd Fall

4th Fall

5th Fall

215

0

200

06 07 cohort 07 08 cohort 08 09 cohort06‐07 cohort 07‐08 cohort 08‐09 cohort

1st to 3rd retention= 51%  1st to 3rd retention= 50%  1st to 3rd retention= 47% 

UNO Enrollment by Classification(HS Student, FR, SO, JR, SR, Other UG, GR)(HS Student, FR, SO, JR, SR, Other UG, GR)

AY 09‐10 through AY 12‐13

ll b d l

2 778 2 8302,978 2,9313,000

3,500

Enrollment by Student Level

Very “grad heavy”

2,465

2,1112,031

2,747 2,778 2,8302,751

2,640

2,382

2 000

2,500

Prep. (HS Stud)Freshman

Sophomore

Junior1,7151,644 1,595

1,4861,360

1,657 1,706 1,714

1,534

1 000

1,500

2,000 Junior

Senior

Other Under GradGrad LevelWhy the backlog of

118 61 101 98115 94 101231

500

1,000 Why the backlog of seniors?

02009‐2010 2010‐2011 2011‐2012 2012‐2013

Finish in 15Finish in 1580%

Fall 2006‐07 Statewide Graduation Rate

69%

57%60%

70%

80%

46%48%

37% 37%

44%

37%

50%

57%

40%

50%

60%

37% 37%35%

37%

30% 31%33%

20%

30%

37%

28%25%

23%

18% 17% 18%21%

19% 19%20%

30%

40%15+ hrs

12‐15 hrs

11%

18% 17% 18%16%

7%

0%

10%

20%

0%LSU A&M La Tech ULL SLU NSU UNO ULM McNeese SU A&M Nicholls GSU LSU S SUNO LSU A

UNO’s Grade Information by CourseTop Twenty Courses with the largest Enrollments 

sorted by Course Grade Point Average Lowest to Highest

COURSECourse Grade 

Point  A B C D F W Total Course Count

sorted by Course Grade Point Average, Lowest to Highest

AverageCount

ACCT2100 1.84 12.5% 10.1% 20.9% 21.6% 13.2% 21.6% 287

CMAT1213 2.38 18.9% 22.0% 14.2% 15.5% 7.2% 22.2% 445

BIOS1073 2.44 12.5% 29.2% 41.0% 10.3% 1.1% 5.9% 271

BA  3010 2.44 11.6% 35.7% 25.3% 17.3% 0.8% 9.2% 249

CMAT1203 2.49 25.1% 22.1% 22.3% 9.6% 9.5% 11.4% 696

MATH1126 2.51 18.0% 18.8% 29.2% 9.2% 2.8% 22.0% 250

SOC 1051 2.53 23.3% 24.1% 25.9% 14.6% 3.8% 8.2% 390

CHEM1017 2 61 24 5% 20 9% 16 8% 12 4% 4 6% 20 9% 388CHEM1017 2.61 24.5% 20.9% 16.8% 12.4% 4.6% 20.9% 388

CENL1013 2.65 19.4% 34.5% 27.1% 7.4% 3.2% 8.4% 620

CENL1023 2.65 19.2% 29.4% 26.9% 5.1% 3.9% 15.5% 510

CMAT1303 2.67 25.2% 22.3% 18.6% 8.5% 5.4% 20.0% 516

ECON1203 2.73 22.4% 28.4% 24.0% 5.7% 3.3% 16.1% 366

PSYC1000 2.77 27.8% 33.5% 20.1% 11.2% 2.2% 5.2% 403

BIOS1083 2.81 33.7% 24.5% 17.7% 6.7% 6.4% 11.0% 282

EES 1000 2.85 26.8% 32.6% 22.1% 8.5% 0.5% 9.5% 399

BIOS1063 3.07 38.6% 32.1% 17.4% 5.7% 1.1% 5.1% 471

PSYC1520 3.07 46.7% 24.3% 14.5% 5.4% 5.0% 4.1% 317S C 5 0 3 0 6 % 3% 5% 5 % 5 0% % 3

UNIV1001 3.31 59.1% 17.8% 11.0% 3.0% 4.1% 4.9% 798

SPAN1001 3.33 51.6% 24.8% 9.9% 4.1% 1.0% 8.6% 314

FA  1010 3.48 58.4% 33.7% 3.0% 0.7% 2.2% 1.9% 267

UNO’s Grade Information by CourseTop Ten Courses with the Largest  Number of Withdrawals

COURSECourse Grade Point Average

A B C D F WPercent 

WTotal Course 

CountCMAT1303 2.67 130 115 96 44 28 103 20.0% 516CMAT1213 2 38 84 98 63 69 32 99 22 2% 445

p g

CMAT1213 2.38 84 98 63 69 32 99 22.2% 445CHEM1017 2.61 95 81 65 48 18 81 20.9% 388CMAT1203 2.49 175 154 155 67 66 79 11.4% 696CENL1023 2.65 98 150 137 26 20 79 15.5% 510ACCT2100 1.84 36 29 60 62 38 62 21.6% 287ECON1203 2 73 82 104 88 21 12 59 16 1% 366ECON1203 2.73 82 104 88 21 12 59 16.1% 366MATH1126 2.51 45 47 73 23 7 55 22.0% 250CENL1013 2.65 120 214 168 46 20 52 8.4% 620CHEM1018 2.41 34 31 48 27 6 42 22.3% 188

Top Ten Courses with the Largest Percentage of Withdrawals

COURSECourse Grade Point Average

A B C D F WPercent 

WTotal Course 

CountPHIL1100 2 94 6 4 5 1 0 15 48 4% 31

Top Ten Courses with the Largest Percentage of Withdrawals(Limited to Courses with Twenty or More Enrollment)

PHIL1100 2.94 6 4 5 1 0 15 48.4% 31ENEE3522 2.85 8 9 7 1 1 13 33.3% 39BIOS1301 2.77 11 20 12 2 2 21 30.9% 68PSYC2320 2.51 12 8 6 4 5 15 30.0% 50MATH2107 2.46 19 18 21 5 9 30 29.4% 102PSYC4320 2 44 5 2 8 2 1 7 28 0% 25PSYC4320 2.44 5 2 8 2 1 7 28.0% 25ENGL2378 2.81 3 12 5 1 0 8 27.6% 29MATH2109 2.22 3 15 4 6 4 12 27.3% 44MATH1032 2.88 12 7 12 2 0 12 26.7% 45CSCI2125 3.75 16 3 1 0 0 7 25.9% 27

Energize the Campus to Generate Enrollments, Graduates,

Course SchedulingRepack the Schedule – maximize peak times and avoidRepack the Schedule – maximize peak times and avoid scheduling conflicts

When are your students’ peak times? Morning? Evening?

Are pre‐requisites offered on a regular basis?

Course sequence – can one graduate in 4 years?

Block Scheduling – group courses so students can takeBlock Scheduling – group courses so students can take required courses in steady sequence

Learning Communities – link coursesProvide for interdisciplinary instructional opportunities and community building among students.

Expand internships and co‐op opportunities in the localExpand internships and co op opportunities in the local community. 

Where do Students Go to College?

Students in Louisiana attend their local community college or university  

Percent of Students Who Stay in the Region 

Applications and Yield RatesApplications and Yield Rates

Year # of Applications % Admitted % Enrolled

2012 3,237 49% 55%

2011 3,353 55% 59%

2010 3 467 55% 55%2010 3,467 55% 55%

2009 3,764 56% 59%

2008 3,615 55% 63%

Applications down 10% Admittance rate down from 55% to 49%% Enrolled down from 63% to 55%

Is UNO Recruiting in the right places? 

Source: UNO CDS Data

Louisiana College Application WeekLouisiana College Application Week

UNO’s Undergraduate EnrollmentEnrollment 

by Parish, 2012

Market Penetration – RecruitmentMarket Penetration  RecruitmentBy Parishes within Region 2, All Undergraduate, Fall 2012

Institution Jefferson Orleans Plaquemines St. Bernard St. Charles St. James St. John St. Tammany Grand TotalNumber % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %

Delgado Community College 5,943 45.5% 5,490 36.4% 262 32.3% 291 20.5% 578 26.3% 53 6.1% 343 18.7% 2,605 25.8% 15,565 34.3%L.S.U. and A&M College 1,091 8.4% 2,696 17.9% 107 13.2% 90 6.4% 235 10.7% 67 7.7% 172 9.4% 2,259 22.3% 6,717 14.8%

University of New Orleans 2,331 17.8% 2,364 15.7% 99 12.2% 193 13.6% 209 9.5% 12 1.4% 92 5.0% 663 6.6% 5,963 13.1%Southeastern Louisiana University 819 6.3% 580 3.8% 60 7.4% 74 5.2% 269 12.2% 105 12.0% 290 15.8% 2,741 27.1% 4,938 10.9%

Southern University in New Orleans 465 3.6% 1,469 9.7% 21 2.6% 18 1.3% 46 2.1% 6 0.7% 39 2.1% 29 0.3% 2,093 4.6%University of Louisiana-Lafayette 588 4.5% 370 2.5% 55 6.8% 49 3.5% 163 7.4% 29 3.3% 109 5.9% 471 4.7% 1,834 4.0%y y ,Elaine P. Nunez Community Coll. 154 1.2% 541 3.6% 62 7.7% 592 41.8% 5 0.2% 0.0% 3 0.2% 120 1.2% 1,477 3.3%

Nicholls State University 358 2.7% 164 1.1% 28 3.5% 31 2.2% 223 10.1% 174 19.9% 84 4.6% 102 1.0% 1,164 2.6%South Central LA Technical College 111 0.8% 27 0.2% 9 1.1% 4 0.3% 160 7.3% 121 13.9% 258 14.0% 25 0.2% 715 1.6%Southern University and A&M Coll. 90 0.7% 361 2.4% 9 1.1% 6 0.4% 23 1.0% 47 5.4% 64 3.5% 40 0.4% 640 1.4%L.S.U. Health Sciences Center-NO 271 2.1% 161 1.1% 11 1.4% 17 1.2% 35 1.6% 4 0.5% 9 0.5% 130 1.3% 638 1.4%Baton Rouge Community College 113 0.9% 137 0.9% 18 2.2% 8 0.6% 26 1.2% 35 4.0% 78 4.2% 138 1.4% 553 1.2%

Northshore Technical Community College 152 1.2% 58 0.4% 2 0.2% 11 0.8% 16 0.7% 0.0% 11 0.6% 251 2.5% 501 1.1%River Parishes Community Coll 39 0 3% 27 0 2% 5 0 6% 4 0 3% 27 1 2% 149 17 1% 147 8 0% 26 0 3% 424 0 9%River Parishes Community Coll. 39 0.3% 27 0.2% 5 0.6% 4 0.3% 27 1.2% 149 17.1% 147 8.0% 26 0.3% 424 0.9%

Louisiana Tech University 88 0.7% 27 0.2% 13 1.6% 4 0.3% 54 2.5% 8 0.9% 14 0.8% 163 1.6% 371 0.8%Northwestern State University 95 0.7% 108 0.7% 9 1.1% 4 0.3% 12 0.5% 6 0.7% 19 1.0% 106 1.0% 359 0.8%

University of Louisiana at Monroe 72 0.6% 59 0.4% 9 1.1% 1 0.1% 30 1.4% 13 1.5% 23 1.3% 55 0.5% 262 0.6%L.E. Fletcher Technical Comm. Coll. 68 0.5% 49 0.3% 7 0.9% 4 0.3% 39 1.8% 22 2.5% 24 1.3% 20 0.2% 233 0.5%

Grambling State University 37 0.3% 96 0.6% 5 0.6% 3 0.2% 7 0.3% 2 0.2% 19 1.0% 13 0.1% 182 0.4%South Louisiana Community Coll. 54 0.4% 45 0.3% 4 0.5% 3 0.2% 11 0.5% 6 0.7% 14 0.8% 45 0.4% 182 0.4%Southern University in Shreveport 34 0.3% 109 0.7% 1 0.1% 3 0.2% 3 0.1% 2 0.2% 4 0.2% 5 0.0% 161 0.4%

McNeese State University 20 0 2% 30 0 2% 1 0 1% 1 0 1% 14 0 6% 2 0 2% 12 0 7% 33 0 3% 113 0 2%McNeese State University 20 0.2% 30 0.2% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 14 0.6% 2 0.2% 12 0.7% 33 0.3% 113 0.2%Bossier Parish Community College 17 0.1% 28 0.2% 2 0.2% 0.0% 4 0.2% 5 0.6% 2 0.1% 10 0.1% 68 0.1%

L.S.U. at Eunice 15 0.1% 17 0.1% 2 0.2% 1 0.1% 1 0.0% 0.0% 2 0.1% 24 0.2% 62 0.1%Capital Area Technical College 11 0.1% 15 0.1% 3 0.4% 3 0.2% 2 0.1% 4 0.5% 2 0.1% 7 0.1% 47 0.1%

Central LA Tech Community College 12 0.1% 19 0.1% 1 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2 0.1% 6 0.1% 40 0.1%L.S.U. at Alexandria 7 0.1% 5 0.0% 4 0.5% 0.0% 2 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 7 0.1% 27 0.1%L.S.U. in Shreveport 6 0.0% 10 0.1% 1 0.1% 0.0% 3 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 7 0.1% 27 0.1%

Louisiana Delta Community Coll. 2 0.0% 6 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.1% 4 0.0% 15 0.0%S l T h i l C it C ll 1 0 0% 5 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 0% 0 0% 1 0 1% 3 0 0% 11 0 0%Sowela Technical Community Coll. 1 0.0% 5 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.1% 3 0.0% 11 0.0%

Northwest LA Technical College 1 0.0% 2 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5 0.0%L.S.U. Health Sciences Center-Shrv 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0.0%

Grand Total 13,065 100.0% 15,075 100.0% 810 100.0% 1,417 100.0% 2,200 100.0% 873 100.0% 1,839 100.0% 10,109 100.0% 45,388 100.0%

Market Penetration – RecruitmentMarket Penetration  RecruitmentBy Parishes within Region 2, Freshmen, Fall 2012

Institution Name Jefferson Orleans Plaquemines St. Bernard St. Charles St. James St. John St. Tammany Grand TotalNumber % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Number %

Delgado Community College 2,800 55.4% 2,902 49.5% 116 35.5% 124 21.3% 281 31.8% 28 8.2% 186 22.3% 1,342 36.5% 7,779 44.3%L.S.U. and A&M College 406 8.0% 887 15.1% 39 11.9% 32 5.5% 89 10.1% 20 5.9% 63 7.6% 661 18.0% 2,197 12.5%

Southeastern Louisiana University 251 5.0% 181 3.1% 21 6.4% 16 2.7% 86 9.7% 27 7.9% 95 11.4% 749 20.4% 1,426 8.1%

University of New Orleans 602 11.9% 452 7.7% 35 10.7% 34 5.8% 72 8.1% 3 0.9% 15 1.8% 160 4.4% 1,373 7.8%Elaine P. Nunez Community Coll. 80 1.6% 328 5.6% 31 9.5% 310 53.2% 2 0.2% 2 0.2% 63 1.7% 816 4.6%University of Louisiana-Lafayette 207 4.1% 166 2.8% 27 8.3% 18 3.1% 56 6.3% 5 1.5% 45 5.4% 176 4.8% 700 4.0%

South Central LA Technical College 77 1.5% 19 0.3% 8 2.4% 3 0.5% 103 11.6% 67 19.6% 169 20.3% 19 0.5% 465 2.6%Nicholls State University 145 2.9% 83 1.4% 9 2.8% 18 3.1% 71 8.0% 42 12.3% 37 4.4% 38 1.0% 443 2.5%

Southern University in New Orleans 79 1.6% 317 5.4% 5 1.5% 4 0.7% 9 1.0% 1 0.3% 4 0.5% 7 0.2% 426 2.4%Baton Rouge Community College 50 1.0% 80 1.4% 11 3.4% 6 1.0% 16 1.8% 24 7.0% 63 7.6% 84 2.3% 334 1.9%

Northshore Technical Community College 75 1.5% 24 0.4% 1 0.3% 3 0.5% 15 1.7% 9 1.1% 173 4.7% 300 1.7%River Parishes Community Coll. 12 0.2% 10 0.2% 2 0.6% 11 1.2% 91 26.7% 77 9.2% 4 0.1% 207 1.2%

Southern University and A&M Coll 20 0 4% 113 1 9% 3 0 9% 2 0 3% 4 0 5% 8 2 3% 19 2 3% 11 0 3% 180 1 0%Southern University and A&M Coll. 20 0.4% 113 1.9% 3 0.9% 2 0.3% 4 0.5% 8 2.3% 19 2.3% 11 0.3% 180 1.0%Southern University in Shreveport 34 0.7% 108 1.8% 1 0.3% 3 0.5% 3 0.3% 2 0.6% 4 0.5% 5 0.1% 160 0.9%

Northwestern State University 42 0.8% 25 0.4% 2 0.6% 3 0.5% 5 0.6% 1 0.3% 6 0.7% 41 1.1% 125 0.7%South Louisiana Community Coll. 37 0.7% 23 0.4% 2 0.6% 1 0.2% 8 0.9% 5 1.5% 8 1.0% 30 0.8% 114 0.6%

Louisiana Tech University 33 0.7% 4 0.1% 2 0.6% 2 0.3% 11 1.2% 3 0.9% 2 0.2% 37 1.0% 94 0.5%University of Louisiana at Monroe 26 0.5% 20 0.3% 1 0.2% 12 1.4% 3 0.9% 8 1.0% 14 0.4% 84 0.5%

Grambling State University 8 0.2% 44 0.8% 2 0.6% 1 0.2% 1 0.1% 1 0.3% 3 0.4% 6 0.2% 66 0.4%L.E. Fletcher Technical Comm. Coll. 16 0.3% 10 0.2% 3 0.9% 19 2.1% 3 0.9% 5 0.6% 8 0.2% 64 0.4%

Bossier Parish Community College 12 0.2% 16 0.3% 1 0.1% 4 1.2% 2 0.2% 5 0.1% 40 0.2%McNeese State University 6 0.1% 7 0.1% 1 0.3% 2 0.2% 6 0.7% 14 0.4% 36 0.2%

L.S.U. at Eunice 7 0.1% 8 0.1% 1 0.3% 1 0.2% 1 0.1% 2 0.2% 11 0.3% 31 0.2%Capital Area Technical College 5 0.1% 9 0.2% 3 0.9% 2 0.2% 2 0.6% 1 0.1% 7 0.2% 29 0.2%

Central LA Tech Community College 7 0.1% 11 0.2% 1 0.3% 1 0.1% 4 0.1% 24 0.1%L.S.U. at Alexandria 6 0.1% 2 0.0% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% 1 0.1% 2 0.1% 13 0.1%

Louisiana Delta Community Coll. 2 0.0% 5 0.1% 1 0.1% 3 0.1% 11 0.1%Sowela Technical Community Coll. 1 0.0% 4 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 2 0.1% 9 0.1%y

L.S.U. in Shreveport 3 0.1% 1 0.0% 2 0.2% 2 0.1% 8 0.0%Northwest LA Technical College 1 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0.2% 1 0.1% 4 0.0%

Grand Total 5,050 100.0% 5,860 100.0% 327 100.0% 583 100.0% 885 100.0% 341 100.0% 834 100.0% 3,678 100.0% 17,558 100.0%

Transfers into UNO

950

1000

The University of New Orleans has experienced a

834

873

850

900

950 The University of New Orleans has experienced a 22.3% decrease in transfers over the last ten years

804

722

773 777

750

800

722

691707

648650

700

611

550

600

In fall 2012, UNO admitted 54.2% of transfer applicants, with 66 4% of admitted students enrolling

5002003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

with 66.4% of admitted students enrolling

Undergraduate Enrollment by PT/FT2009‐2012

8,000

Part‐time students make up 24.33% of the undergraduate population at UNO. Part‐time 

6,722

6,3276,175

5 818

7,000

university undergraduate enrollment in the state, excluding UNO, is 22.3%

5,818

5,000

6,000

3,000

4,000 Full_Time

Part‐TimeHow does this compare with other urban institutions in the U.S.? 

2,024 2,018 2,0881,871

1,000

2,000

0

2009 2010 2011 2012

FACILITIES UTILIZATION

Classroom factor of 1.0 and 2.5 for Class Laboratories are the optimal numbers.

UNO is Here

10 2

Classroom Space Factor

Excess SpaceEfficient use of Space

May need Space

Class Laboratory Space Factor

UNO  is Here

2.50 4

Excess SpaceEfficient use of May need  pSpaceSpace

Space Utilization FactorSpace Utilization Factor

UNO’ S F t hUNO’s Space Factors show that both classrooms class labs have excess space.

Here is how much your classes and class labs are in excess.

38.7% of your classrooms are not used, Could they be classified differently and used by another 

unit?

Need a better fit between roomNeed a better fit between room capacity and course enrollment

Course Time/Room Usage: Fall 2012 Semester Use the whole day, 

Building Name

Room Number Course Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Total Course

EnrollmentRoom's Capacity

These rooms are not schedule before 9am

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 FIN 2302 0800-0915 0800-0915 061 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 ACCT2100 0900-0950 0900-0950 0900-0950 084 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 ACCT3161 0930-1045 0930-1045 018 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 ACCT2100 1000-1050 1000-1050 1000-1050 105 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 ACCT4152 1100-1215 1100-1215 035 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 BIOS1063 1800-1915 1800-1915 063 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 BA 6011 1800-2045 009 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 MANG6467 1800-2045 017 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0122 PADM6180 1800-2045 017 0160

Large Holes in KIRSCHMAN H 0129 BA 3010 0900-0950 0900-0950 0900-0950 065 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 ECON1203 0930-1045 0930-1045 163 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 BA 3010 1000-1050 1000-1050 1000-1050 063 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 ECON1204 1100-1215 1100-1215 064 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 ENMG6096 1800-2040 010 0160

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 ECON1203 1800-2045 063 0160Make a better match 

Scheduling

KIRSCHMAN H 0129 ECON1203 1800 2045 063 0160

JEFFERSON C 0216 SOC 2962 1630-1915 026 0063

JEFFERSON C 0216 MATH2785 1745-1900 1745-1900 021 0063

JEFFERSON C 0216 HRT 2000 1910-2155 024 0063

between course enrollment and room capacity

Only at night? 

Utilization of Classrooms and Laboratories by Time of Dayby Time of Day

ClassroomsClass Labs11% 19%

81%89% 81%

All other universities, excluding UNO:  92% Day‐Time  and 8% Night ‐Time

All other universities, excluding UNO:  89% Day‐Time  and 11% Night ‐Time

Day Time  (5:00am till 4:59pm)  Night Time (5:00pm till 4:59am)

Source: Louisiana Board of Regents Facilities Inventory Space Utilization, Table 3&4

Principles of Good Facilities Usage  

If a Classroom or Class Lab is not being scheduled on a l b h h hregular bases then repurpose the room to another 

unit and use. 

Right‐size the course to the classroom capacity

Have several rooms set aside for odd timed courses, Maximizing Have several rooms set aside for odd timed courses, less than 100% Internet

Fill‐up a room with courses throughout the week, 

gSpace!

Monday through Friday, Use MW and TTh patterns of scheduling

S h d l th h t th d t j t d iSchedule courses throughout the day not just during the peak hours of 8:00am to 2:00pm

FacultyAverage Faculty Salary by Rank 

(9‐10 month)Efficiencies are being realized with regards to student‐to‐faculty ratios. Are these ratios pedagogically ideal though?

Rank UNO (2011‐12)SREB Four‐Year 2 

Institutions (2011‐12)

Full Professor:   $88,316 $109,520

pedagogically ideal though?Could an increase in tuition or alternative revenue sources bring some needed relief?

Associate:   $64,572 $77,661

Assistant: $61,358 $66,084

Student‐to‐Faculty Ratio

UNO (2011)

SREB Four‐Year Median 

(2011)Assistant:   $61,358 $66,084

Instructor:   $39,041 $44,517

UNO (2011) (2011)

Student‐to‐Faculty Ratio:  20 18

Private sponsorships:Chairs and professorships sponsored by private sources. Whole academic divisions sponsored by businesses.p ySome businesses will pay a professor's whole salary in a research or workforce development arrangement.

U of Delaware Study: What Kind of Mileage are you Getting From your Participation?Getting From your Participation?

Consortium data sharing. Allows you to benchmark teaching workloads, instructional costs and productivity by academic discipline.

How do the teaching loads of tenured faculty in your academic programs compare‐ How do the teaching loads of tenured faculty in your academic programs compare with national benchmarks?

‐ What proportion of undergraduate teaching at your institution is done by regular faculty, and how does that compare with other colleges and universities?

‐ Does it cost more to deliver an SCH of instruction at your institution than it does at your peers?

‐ How do externally funded research and service within your academic departments measure up against your competitors?measure up against your competitors?

Program Strength and ViabilityProgram Strength and Viability

• All organizational ventures have a ‘life cycle”All organizational ventures have a  life cycle .

• Using the criteria defined on the next slide, place our activities within the organizationalplace our activities within the organizational life cycle. 

‘MODIFIED’BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP MATRIX

I.  Poor Performers• Start up initiatives that expend extensive resources with yet little proof 

of effectiveness Need revisions in order to be effective

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP MATRIX

of effectiveness. Need revisions in order to be effective.• Older programs that have lost effectiveness.  A program that may have 

garnered select support from significant folks, but no longer are as mission critical.

II.  Shows Promise• Programs that are central to the mission, have some public interest, but 

have yet shown enough effectiveness to come into their own. III SuccessfulIII. Successful • Programs that are central to the mission, very popular with the public 

and are very effective.IV. Older projectsp j• Effective, low visibility, but less popular activities that are not as related 

to the mission as they once were, but financially support the institution.

• Programs that may need to be redesigned to be more mission critical• Programs that may need to be redesigned to be more mission critical and to maintain effectiveness.

ExampleMODIFIED’

+1

MODIFIEDBOSTON CONSULTING GROUP MATRIX

Large budgets are visually bigger and more difficult

•Gov/Soc•English•MathF i L

bigger and more difficult to move

MissionCritical

•Biology•His/Geo •Pyschology

•Foreign Lang.

E /Fi

•Mus/Theatre•Chem.•Art

IIIII

•Mus Therapy

•Econ/Fin

•Early Ch Ed•Mid Gr Ed

•Marketing

•Management

•Spec. Ed/Admin.•Info/Sys IVI

1 1

•Accounting

•Fam. Health

•HPER

•Foundations Ed

•Healthcare Sys•Adult Health

-1 1Effectiveness

Example‘MODIFIED’

+1MODIFIED

BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP MATRIX

EfficientEfficient

Higher enrollments

Exciting

MissionCritical

•Early childhood and• Middle grades EducationIIIII

•Middle Grades educationInefficient

Low enrollments

IVI

1 1

•Early Childhood education

Low enrollments

Not exciting

-1 1Effectiveness

Example

+1

MODIFIED’BOSTON CONSULTING GROUP MATRIX

Mission

+1

SuccessfulShows Promise

MissionCritical IIIII

IVI

1 +1Poor Performers Older projects

-1 +1Effectiveness

University of New OrleansProgram Costs

Cost Revenue

Academic DepartmentTotal SCH (End of Term)

2011‐12 Salary/RB Other Direct Costs Indirect Costs* Total Cost 

State Appropriation (End of Term) Tuition & Fees

Total Revenue Net

Special Education and Habilitative Services 1 976 $919 222 $25 603 $176 413 $1 121 238 $296 196 $296 400 $592 596 ‐$528 642Special Education and Habilitative Services 1,976  $919,222 $25,603 $176,413 $1,121,238 $296,196 $296,400 $592,596 $528,642

School of Urban Planning and Regional Studies 2,837  $1,271,135 $59,567 $121,432 $1,452,134 $749,510 $425,550 $1,175,060 ‐$277,074

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering 1,098  $515,632 $15,457 $79,404 $610,493 $300,148 $164,700 $464,848 ‐$145,645

Electrical Engineering 2,487  $869,841 $31,684 $179,853 $1,081,378 $588,254 $373,050 $961,304 ‐$120,074

Marketing 3,805  $884,467 $10,176 $200,188 $1,094,831 $425,710 $570,750 $996,460 ‐$98,371

Engineering 1,374  $237,105 $43,242 $99,364 $379,711 $1,160,301 $206,100 $1,366,401 $986,690

Economics/Finance 13,611  $2,205,179 $68,105 $716,101 $2,989,385 $1,997,482 $2,041,650 $4,039,132 $1,049,747

Management 16,921  $2,006,641 $22,334 $890,246 $2,919,221 $2,045,024 $2,538,150 $4,583,174 $1,663,952

Biological Science 16,367  $1,967,614 $178,128 $958,129 $3,103,871 $2,391,237 $2,455,050 $4,846,287 $1,742,416

Math 21,347  $1,703,499 $115,247 $1,330,752 $3,149,498 $1,746,656 $3,202,050 $4,948,706 $1,799,207

Note: Sorted by Ascending Net RevenueNote: Sorted by Ascending Net Revenue,Displayed are the top five and bottom five net revenue Departments

University of New OrleansBCG MATRIX Programmatic Life Cycle

Sh P i

+1SuccessfulShows Promise

Note: Left2Right based on Size of Net Revenue

MissionCritical

Size of Oval based on Size of Total CostUp2Down based on Mission Alignment

Electrical Engineering

School of Urban Planning and Regional Studies

Engineering

IIIII

Engineering

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

IVI

MarketingSpecial Education and Habilitative Services

Management

Biological ScienceMarketing

Economics/Finance

Biological Science

-1 Effectiveness +1Poor Performers Older projects

Math

University of New OrleansBCG MATRIX Programmatic Life Cycle

SuccessfulShows Promise

+1 School of Urban Planning and Regional Studies

MathMissionCritical

g

Economics/Finance

Biological ScienceNaval Architecture and Marine Engineering

IIIIIElectrical Engineering

MarketingSpecial Education and Habilitative Services

Management

conomics/Finance

Engineering

IVI

Note: Left2Right based on Size of Net RevenueSize of Oval based on Size of Total CostUp2Down based on Mission Alignment

-1 Effectiveness +1Poor Performers Older projects

Up2Down based on Mission Alignment

Activity‐Based Budgeting – is a system in which individual units . . . keep most of the money they bring in, but must also pay whatever expenses they incur . . . the system will drive schools and colleges, as well as individual faculty members, to create. . .  programs that attract students, tuition revenue, and grants, which the schools will then get to keep and reinvest. 

It will drive them to better use space, grow class sizes where possible and advisable, and cut down on overhead, since savings on expenditures will be kept by the unit generating the savingskept by the unit generating the savings.

ArkansasEl Dorado Promise provides up to five years of funds for undergraduateEl Dorado Promise provides up to five years of funds for undergraduate post‐secondary education for students entering college immediately following high  school ‐ paid based on length of attendance in the El Dorado Public School District.

Arkadelphia Promise pays the difference between what the Arkansas Academic Challenge Scholarship pays toward college and mandatory tuition and fees at public Arkansas colleges and 

i itiuniversities 

Great River Promise The Great River Promise provides gap scholarship funding for graduates of high schools in Phillips County to attend Phillips Community College of the University of Arkansas (PCCUA)Community College of the University of Arkansas (PCCUA).  

LouisianaProgression Scholarship  At Southeastern Louisiana University the Progression Scholarship was created to promote retention and timely progression toward a four‐year degree. This scholarship will help students achieve their goal by funding a portion of their tuition and fees and enablingachieve their goal by funding a portion of their tuition and fees and enabling them to study more and work less. 

University of Warwick's commercial operations include 17 free‐standing businesses—among them are a print and d i i i W b i f idesign service; a recruitment Web site for careers in research, science, and academic roles; and a temporary‐work service for students. 

Create enterprise activities (auxiliaries) that provide services to community and provide training/work 

The context for funding higher education has changed

opportunities for students

The context for funding higher education has changed forever.

both received significant indirect investment from municipal governments and local residents. 

In the long term, the shift could … give municipalities and local residents, who have long derived significant economic benefit from the presence of a college p gcampus, a greater stake in institutional ownership.

Next Steps• Have a campus conversation• Decrease withdrawals

– Internal policy reviewInternal policy review– Review of classes with the most W’s

• Understand the Price Sensitivity of Your Students– Can tuition be increased if tuition authority is granted without major y g j

impacts on enrollment?– Can need‐based financial aid be used to boost enrollment?

• Increase enrollment– What type of students are drawn to UNO? What is your brand?– Increase applications and yield rates– Expand transfer market

New Markets? (stop outs out of state students etc )– New Markets? (stop outs, out‐of‐state students, etc.)• Increase SCH’s

– Finish in 15• ProgramMix• Program Mix

– Make promising programs successful