Homepage | Ohio Higher Ed



-129540-4064000righttop00 Cleveland State University (CSU) – Submission 8.1.162016 Efficiency Reporting GuidanceIn the early part of 2015, Gov. John R. Kasich created the Ohio Task Force on Affordability and Efficiency to make recommendations to Ohio’s institutions of higher education based on three simultaneous principles 1) to be more efficient both in expense management and revenue generation 2) while offering an education of equal or higher quality and 3) decreasing costs to students and their families. The Task Force met several times during the course of 2015. In October the Task Force issued a report with ten recommendations to advise institutions on efficiency and academic practices which will improve both the quality of education and lower costs for students. Furthermore, House Bill 64 (Section 369.550) requires each institution’s board of trustees to complete an efficiency review, based on the Task Force’s recommendations, by July 1, 2016, and submit their findings and implementation plans to the chancellor within 30 days, or by August 1, 2016. For additional information on each category and recommendation, please review the Action Steps to Reduce College Costs report, issued by the Ohio Task Force on Affordability and Efficiency.This document is intended to provide guidance for institutions’ reports to the chancellor, based on the legislation – please modify and add additional detail as necessary. The institutional efficiency review and the implementation plans captured by this template will serve as the data for 2016 Efficiency Advisory Committee Report. These reports are due August 1, 2016. In 2017 and moving forward, ODHE will issue a survey to the institutions, based on the Task Force Report, as a status update to the implementation plans and will serve as the Efficiency Advisory Committee report. Campuses will want to review the template to familiarize themselves with the format and content before beginning. The template is structured into four sections: Section 1: Efficiencies – The first section captures practices likely to yield significant savings for institutions that can then be passed on to students. This includes Procurement, Administrative and Operational, and Energy. Section 2: Academic Practices – This section covers areas such as textbooks, time to degree incentives, and academic course and program reviews. While improvements to academic processes and policies may not convey immediate cost savings, there will likely be tangible benefits that improve the quality of education for students. Section 3: Policy Reforms – This section captures additional policy reforms recommended by the Task Force.Section 4: Cost Savings, Redeployment of Savings & Tangible Benefits to Students – The last section will ask institutions to provide, if applicable, cost savings to the institution in actual dollars saved for each of the recommendations. Furthermore, the institution must advise if the institutional savings has been redeployed as a cost savings to students or offered a benefit to the quality of education for students. Any questions can be directed to Sara Molski, Assistant Policy Director at the Ohio Department of Higher Education, at 614-728-8335 or by email at smolski@highered.. Cleveland State University Section I: Efficiency Practices A. Strategic Procurement Recommendation 3: ContractsRecommendation 3A: Campus Contracts – E ach institution must require that its employees use existing contracts for purchasing goods and services, starting with the areas with the largest opportunities for savings. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes.Response:Cleveland State University (CSU) has for many years been burdened with an inefficient paper-based procurement system. To address this deficiency, an e-procurement system was purchased from SciQuest and implemented in December 2015. This system – operationalized as “Magnus Mart”- directs and requires users to use State of Ohio, Inter-University Council and Educational & Institutional Services (E&I) contracts. CSU’s Purchasing Department will be analyzing the data to determine similar spend across campus and departments to establish additional contracts and further negotiate established contracts to realize cost savings. The University’s purchasing policy is being updated to give the Purchasing Department authority to redirect spend to existing contracts.The e-procurement system will provide the following benefits, as noted briefly in Chapter I.Cost Reduction – Costs will be reduced by leveraging volume, having structured supplier relationships and by using system improvements to reduce external spend while improving quality and supplier performance. E-procurement will eliminate paperwork, rework and errors.Visibility of Spend – Centralized tracking of transactions will enable full reporting of requisitions, items purchased, order processes and payments made. E-Procurement advantages will extend to ensuring compliance with existing and established contracts.Productivity – Campus buyers can obtain the items they want from a catalogue of approved items through an on-line requisition and ordering system. Purchasing staff can be released from processing orders and handling low value transactions to concentrate on strategic sourcing and improving supplier relationships.Controls – Standardized approval processes and formal workflows ensure that the correct level of authorization is applied to each transaction and that spend is directed to draw off existing contracts. Compliance to policy is improved as users can quickly locate products and services from preferred suppliers and are unable to create maverick purchases.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.25879165052Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 3B: Collaborative Contracts – Ohio’s colleges and universities must pursue new and/or strengthened joint purchasing agreements in the following categories: copier/printer services, computer hardware, travel services, outbound shipping, scientific supplies and equipment, office supplies and equipment.Response:CSU has been an active and full participant in the work of the Inter-University Council’s Purchasing Group (IUC-PG) which addressed each of the listed six areas in Recommendation 3B. CSU’s response is summarized in the following chart: B. Assets and Operations Recommendation 4: Assets and OperationsRecommendation 4A: Asset Review – Each institution must conduct an assessment of its noncore assets to determine their market value if sold, leased or otherwise repurposed. Where opportunities exist, colleges and universities must consider coordinating these efforts with other Ohio institutions to reap larger benefits of scale.Please provide an overview of the process used for the institution’s asset review and the key outcomes below or on additional pages.Response:As detailed in Chapter II of CSU’s Report to the Chancellor, a review of asset monetization and the use of public-private partnerships (P3) is one of the University’s Path to 2020 projects. The project’s objectives are to:Determine funding strategies for projects included in CSU’s 2014 Master Plan, andDevelop a road map showing how the University can initiate multi-purpose P3 relationships with developers, matching assets with opportunities.Since January 2016, CSU has been in the process of reviewing its asset base with the firm of Jones, Lang, LaSalle (JLL) who was retained after a competitive bidding process. JLL is assisting on issues related to asset monetization, leveraging of assets with P3 partnerships, identifying non-essential assets and analyzing alternative financing methods to reduce operating costs. The project is focusing on student housing and parking monetization. An RFQ has been issued for both the housing project and the parking monetization project in June 2016. Responses to the RFQ are due in July 2016, with a formal RFP process to follow.Recommendation 4B: Operations Review – Each institution must conduct an assessment of non-academic operations that might be run more efficiently by a regional cooperative, private operator or other entity. These opportunities must then be evaluated to determine whether collaboration across institutions would increase efficiencies, improve service or otherwise add value. Please provide an overview of the process used for the institution’s operations review and the key outcomes below or on additional pages. Response:Operations and OutsourcingCleveland State University has long made a practice of assessing the merits of outsourcing non-academic operations and moving aggressively when the efficiencies and quality of service point to that solution. As a result, today the following operations are currently in partnership with outside companies:University Bookstore (Viking Outfitters) – Follett Incorporated.University Dining – Chartwells Higher Education Dining ServicesHousing and Residence Hall Management – American Campus Communities through Euclid Avenue Housing CorporationRecreation Center – Centers LLCWolstein Center –Selected booking and ticketing provided by the Cavaliers Operating CompanyAs mentioned in Recommendation 3B above, the University also has actions underway to monetize Parking Services (at the RFQ stage) and to construct and operate (at the RFQ phase) our next wave of housing expansion, estimated to be in the range of 500-700 beds.In addition, the University currently outsources in the following areas:Custodial Staff (17 % of total staffing) – Quick Employment ServiceExterior Window Washing – Window Cleaning Specialists Inc.Pest Control – RentokillOverhead Garage Door Maintenance – J & L Door ServiceElevator Maintenance – Schindler Elevator (IUC contract)Irrigation System – Davey TreeWindow Repairs – SandgloBiohazard Lab Cleaning – Bio CleanBuilding Automation System – Johnson Controls & Building IntegratorsCarpet Replacement – Interfinish (IUC Contract)Painting – Allan Painting Inc.Outdoor Pole Lighting – Ruff NeonConcrete Replacement – Competitive BidsSignage – Competitive BidsRoof repairs – Arkra RoofingTrash service – RepublicChilled and Hot Water Chemical Treatment – GE Water ServiceAutomatic Door Repair and Maintenance – Allied DoorBi-Annual Inflation Indoor Soccer Dome (air supported structure ) – Competitive BidsAll A/E Contracts for Design – Request for Qualification (RFQ)In addition, to ensure that our internal services are run efficiently CSU maintains a formal Facilities Management Evaluation Program (FMEP) to ensure that our internal services are run efficiently. In 2015, we contracted with The Association of Physical Plant Administrators (APPA) to review Facilities Management at CSU over a four-day period. The FMEP provides a customized evaluation conducted by a team of institutional peers and based on a comprehensive set of criteria. The institution receives a written report with feedback on current performance and recommended actions designed to help transform participating educational facilities programs into those worthy of international recognition. The review team found that the CSU team performs services very well with the resources they currently have. The review team stated “Although Facilities Management has managed to achieve a high level of campus appearance, the organization’s ability to sustain existing levels will be a challenge. Workloads expressed by gross square feet for building maintenance and custodial services, and by acres for grounds maintenance are substantially above the current averages of other institutions” In the report, the APPA review team made recommendations within each of the seven criteria categories above, which CSU Facilities Management is either correcting or implementing.Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) SystemsWith individual university IT systems replacement efforts being assessed across the state, the university community finds itself with a unique opportunity to make a collaborative decision that will standardize our systems and allow the implementation of common processes across the state. In the spirit of the Task Force recommendations on efficiency and in an effort to prioritize the use of revenue sources and cost savings from existing operations, CSU and several public 4-year universities and the Inter-University Council (IUC) are proposing the move to a standardized, cloud-based (internet) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platform. This initiative is in the exploratory phase (June 2016) but represents an opportunity for regional if not statewide collaboration.Our goal is to develop an environment where multiple universities can (1) leverage their purchasing power to negotiate lower system costs, and (2) transfer existing systems to common platforms, thereby leading to standardized processes and reduced operating and system maintenance costs. Current State of University ERP SystemsMajority of Ohio universities are operating on 15-20 year old legacy ERP systems (PeopleSoft, Banner, etc.) that we will be forced to abandon in 3-5 years.Current systems are all on premise in University managed data centers.Systems cannot keep pace with current business demands.As additional student and business system demands have arisen over time, various applications have been integrated (“bolt-ons”) to ERP systems, creating an overly complex and expensive environment.This is a multi-year undertaking that will require a significant level of funding whose benefits will arise from lower IT system operations costs and re-engineered business processes. The major contributor to operations efficiency will be the re-engineered business practices that will lead to standardization.Recommendation 4C: Affinity Partnerships and Sponsorships – Institutions must, on determining assets and operations that are to be retained, evaluate opportunities or affinity relationships and sponsorships that can support students, faculty and staff. Colleges and universities can use these types of partnerships to generate new resources by identifying “win-win” opportunities with private entities that are interested in connecting with students, faculty, staff, alumni or other members of their communities.Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. 2587935272Response:Yes, CSU has entered into a 10-year financial services and licensing agreement with Huntington National Bank (HNB) which became operational in 2013. Under this agreement, CSU designates HNB as “the sole CSU endorsed and preferred financial services provider” to CSU, CSU students, faculty and other employees, as well as the community in general. CSUervices provider” to CSU, CSU students, faculty and other employees, as well as the community in general. CSU has agreed to00Response:Yes, CSU has entered into a 10-year financial services and licensing agreement with Huntington National Bank (HNB) which became operational in 2013. Under this agreement, CSU designates HNB as “the sole CSU endorsed and preferred financial services provider” to CSU, CSU students, faculty and other employees, as well as the community in general. CSUervices provider” to CSU, CSU students, faculty and other employees, as well as the community in general. CSU has agreed tohas agreed to designate HNB as the “official bank” of CSU. In exchange, HNB has paid CSU a licensing fee totaling $1.15 million and the University receives rental income for the space it leases HNB for the campus branch banking location. In addition, CSU receives rental income for HNB ATM’s located on campus and participates in an incentive revenue-sharing program based on the number of new checking accounts opened at the CSU branch and by CSU students and employees at other HNB branches. Huntington also participates in the sponsorship of the Allen Theater – Playhouse Square project which provides instructional theater space CSU’s performing arts and theater students as well as student internships. To generate a variety of athletics-related income opportunities, CSU retains Learfield Sports Marketing, working with CSU under the Viking Sports Properties umbrella. Estimated revenue to the University in Fiscal Year 2016 is approximately $300,000. CSU is considering support from an outside consulting firm to assist in developing a broader sponsorship marketing and advertising program.Please identify partnerships and sponsorships in effect for FY2016: Partnerships/SponsorshipsDescriptionHuntington National BankSee above paragraphLearfield Sports MarketingSee above paragraphIf the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.6038544091Response:NA00Response:NA C. Administrative OperationsRecommendation 5: Administrative Cost ReformsRecommendation 5A: Cost Diagnostic – Each institution must produce a diagnostic to identify its cost drivers, along with priority areas that offer the best opportunities for efficiencies. This diagnostic must identify, over at least a 10-year period: Key drivers of costs and revenue by administrative function and academic program;Distribution of employee costs — both among types of compensation and among units;Revenue sources connected to cost increases — whether students are paying for these through tuition and fees, or whether they are externally funded;Span of control for managers across the institution — how many employees managers typically oversee, by the manager’s function; andPriority steps that would reduce overhead while maintaining quality — which recommendations would have the most benefit?Has the institution produced a cost diagnostic? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. Response:Yes, Cleveland State University has produced a cost diagnosis process within its Path to 2020 initiative, unique to CSU. CSU’s Trustees, President, and senior leadership recognized that in order to effectively meet the challenges of the changing landscape of higher education, the University needed to examine its policies, practices, and cost structure across the entire University – for both its administrative operations and its academic/instructional mission. The Path to 2020 initiative commenced in July 2015 along with the formation of the University’s Office of Performance Management whose function is the development and assistance in implementing practices to ensure the near and long-term viability and efficiency of the University. The five supporting objectives of the Path to 2020 initiative are as follows:Ensure student successProvide accessible and engaged learningMaintain the economic stability of the institutionContribute to the Community and RegionFoster a collaborative cultureThe efficient use of resources is integral to all of the objectives, especially 3. Maintain the economic stability of the institution.As the most resource intensive effort in the Path to 2020 Program, the Administrative /Institutional Support Cost Management Project has dissected expenditures of approximately $114 million. The methodology of the project – described in Chapter II of CSU’s expanded report to the Chancellor – has included in depth diagnosis of all cost and revenue drivers and the organization structures of some 45 individual administrative and support departments in the University.Similar in depth analyses have been carried out in two other major 2020 initiatives: College Budgeting and Strategic Enrollment Management. Taken together, these three projects are on track to generate proposals for reducing operating costs, increasing revenues, and improving the overall operational efficiency of the University.Administrative /Institutional Support Cost Management Project - commenced in October 2015 with a pilot initiative in the Student Affairs Division to construct a CSU-tailored method based upon private and public sector experiences in cost review and efficiency analysis. Each unit within the division participated in a disciplined process of identifying its “mission and activities” baseline budget as well as generating cost efficiency and revenue enhancement ideas. Based upon the experience in the pilot, several modifications were made for the Phase I portion of the administrative/institutional support cost project which consisted of 18 areas. More rigor was built into the process, with six structured meetings for each unit spanning a ten week period. The project is structured into Phase I, II, III, and IV.Cost Reduction: The project created a significant base of ideas to balance the FY17 Budget and re- deploy resources. Through Phase II, units generated over 600 ideas for analysis.Quality Enhancement: The project has developed an efficiency methodology tailored to CSU. While similar bottom-up efficiency processes have proven effective in the commercial world, they are comparatively rare in higher education. Efficiencies are identified at the unit or departmental level; assessed for impact on other University operations; and synthesized into a total University plan. The University has constructed a solid foundation for an activity-based budgeting approach.College Budgeting - Early in the Path to 2020 Program, CSU’s senior administrative and academic leadership team readily agreed that the annual process for budgeting the revenues and expenditures in the University’s 8 individual colleges required an overhaul. Historically, college budgets were developed on an incremental basis with adjustments made for increases in contractual labor costs. College budgets were seldom tied to an academic program strategy and attendant capacity to generate tuition revenue, nor were they segregated by the main activities of a college, e.g. undergraduate instruction, graduate instruction, research, etc. making it difficult to allocate resources across these primary missions. The efficiency benefits are:Cost Reduction: Expenditure savings were not an objective of this project for FY16 and FY17, but a number of approaches were developed that will aid in reducing administrative overhead costs in the FY18 Budget and beyond.Quality Enhancement: The project provided the basis for a more coherent activity-based planning approach to the building of the FY17 Budget and will continue for future budgets.Strategic Enrollment Management - The Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Task Force completed its work in July, 2015. One of its 52 recommendations the creation of an Enrollment Management working group chaired by the Vice President – Enrollment Services. The group includes those with senior operating responsibilities for Academic Planning, Academic Programs, Admissions, Budgeting, Financial Aid, Marketing, International, Registration, and Student Affairs. The Path to 2020 SEM project in this area was responsible for getting the group operational and to develop and start executing a comprehensive implementation plan for the recruitment and retention of each of the student segments identified in the Task Force report – all aimed at achieving total CSU enrollment of at least 18,000 by 2020. The working group was established January, 2016 and finalized its planning effort with a comprehensive written document. The SEM group continues regular meetings that focus on achieving current enrollment targets. Its ongoing operational and strategic work will likely have the following impact on CSU’s overall efficiency.Cost Reduction: To execute CSU’s new student segment strategies, the SEM group has recommended 17 individual investments totaling $775,000 annually. The payback from these investments is relatively quick and substantial with additional revenue generated by more enrolled students. Quality Enhancement: The implementation plans include a variety of steps to improve the focus and impact of CSU’s countless recruitment and retention efforts in each student segment, under the umbrella of effective cross-functional coordination for the first time in CSU’s history. If the targets for each segment are met, the University’s enrollment efforts will generate substantially more students in a competitive environment, with only modest additional investment. The quality enhancement will significantly increase productivity. Please provide details on the result of the assessment. What are the cost drivers, based on the categories above? Please discuss the institution’s priority areas that offer the best opportunities for recommendation.CSU is examining the areas listed in the preceding chart for administrative cost savings through its Path to 2020 initiative. These areas of the University represent the most potential for cost savings in terms of non-instructional overhead. If the institution has not produced a cost diagnostic, is there a plan to? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not completed a cost diagnostic and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.5080106045Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 5B: Productivity Measure - The Department of Higher Education developed a common measurement of administrative productivity that can be adopted across Ohio’s public colleges and universities. While the measure should be consistent, each institution should have latitude to develop its own standards for the proper level of productivity in its units. This will allow, for instance, for appropriate differences between productivity in high-volume environments vs. high-touch ones.What steps has the institution taken to improve the productivity measure score or what are the institution’s plans to improve the score? Response:In the ODHE’s April 2016 published administrative productivity measures (APM), CSU ranked 3rd out of 13 institutions in the two productivity ratios of Course Completion and Degree Completion. It ranked 10th out of 13 in the efficiency ratio of Administrative Headcount/Total Headcount and 7th out of 13 in Administrative Expenditures/Total Expenditures. (Refer to the following charts). The productivity measure uses the # of Administrative Employees as the base, while the efficiency ratios use #Total Employees as the base for one metric and Total $ Expenditures for the other metric.One of the main objectives of the University’s Path to 2020 initiative is improvement in efficiency, especially in the area of administrative costs and processes. In constructing its FY17 Operating Budget, CSU was able to employ $3.5 million in permanent operating expenditure reductions which will have a positive impact on its efficiency ratios proposed by the state.CSU supports the development of administrative productivity metric for 4-year universities in Ohio, but feels the present proposals do not provide an appropriate basis when comparing results among Ohio’s universities. CSU has found it helpful to assess productivity by considering the metric of total degrees awarded per $1MM of operating expenditures (E&G Expenditures) – refer to the following chart. CSU is not suggesting that this metric is superior to the ones that have been proposed – it is another approach to consider. The data employed is from the HEI System and represents an average of the three fiscal years FY13, FY14 and FY15. It should be noted that this attempt at measuring productivity by degrees awarded takes into consideration ALL operating costs, not just administrative costs. There are a variety of ways to approach the measurement of administrative productivity but the task of developing metrics that can be applied fairly across the various sizes and missions of Ohio’s four-year universities requires more consideration. CSU has begun the process of vetting the data assumptions in the proposed ODHE administrative productivity metrics to determine exactly what is included in “administrative” headcount, “administrative” expenditures, etc. Has the institution implemented or considered utilizing Lean Six Sigma methodology as a tool to evaluate the institution’s processes?1725366219Response:CSU is not employing Lean Six Sigma, however principles of lean operations are a part of our University-wide Path to 2020 evaluation of our processes to achieve cost efficiencies and improve productivity.00Response:CSU is not employing Lean Six Sigma, however principles of lean operations are a part of our University-wide Path to 2020 evaluation of our processes to achieve cost efficiencies and improve productivity.Recommendation 5C: Organizational Structure – Each institution should, as part or as a consequence of its cost diagnostic, review its organizational structure in line with best practices to identify opportunities to streamline and reduce costs. The institutional reviews also should consider shared business services — among units or between institutions, when appropriate — for fiscal services, human resources and information technology.Has the institution reviewed its organizational structure? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. 1725390230Response:Yes, through its Path to 2020 initiative, CSU is examining the administrative structure and accompanying overhead expense over the next five year period. The administrative structure includes both the University administration and the academic support administrative functions. The organization and size of the academic instructional sector has been in progress for 3 years under the Academic Program Prioritization process.00Response:Yes, through its Path to 2020 initiative, CSU is examining the administrative structure and accompanying overhead expense over the next five year period. The administrative structure includes both the University administration and the academic support administrative functions. The organization and size of the academic instructional sector has been in progress for 3 years under the Academic Program Prioritization process.If the institution has not reviewed the organizational structure, is there a plan to? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution not completed a review and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale17253151513Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 5D: Health Care Costs – Like other employers, colleges and universities have experienced rapid growth in health-care costs. To drive down costs and take advantage of economies of scale, the Department of Higher Education has convened a working group to identify opportunities to collaborate. While no information on healthcare costs is required in this year’s survey, please feel free to share ideas that the institution believes may be helpful for the working group to consider. (Optional) Has the institution identified any healthcare reforms that the working group should consider? Please describe. 4313223926Response:NA00Response:NA(Optional) Has the institution achieved any expected annual cost savings through health-care efficiencies? Please explain how cost savings were estimated.-25879134967Response:CSU will have achieved approximately $4 million in health care benefit savings at the conclusion of FY 2017 through a series of plan design changes for medical and prescription drugs. The measurement period is FY15, FY16 and FY17. For FY 2017, CSU’s total projected health care benefit cost is $15.6 million. The University expects to save $839,000, or 5.4% in FY17 alone.Medication Plan Changes$202,000Cost SavingsMedication Step Therapy$156,000Cost SavingsSpecialty Drug Solutions$152,000Cost SavingsAdopt New Telemedicine Provider$ 10,000Cost SavingsDental Program$ 91,000Cost SavingsVision Program $ 5,000Cost SavingsEmployee Plan Contributions$128,000Increase in Employee ShareTobacco Use Surcharge$ 44,000Surcharge on Employees Using TobaccoLife Insurance Program$ 51,000Cost SavingsTotal$839,00000Response:CSU will have achieved approximately $4 million in health care benefit savings at the conclusion of FY 2017 through a series of plan design changes for medical and prescription drugs. The measurement period is FY15, FY16 and FY17. For FY 2017, CSU’s total projected health care benefit cost is $15.6 million. The University expects to save $839,000, or 5.4% in FY17 alone.Medication Plan Changes$202,000Cost SavingsMedication Step Therapy$156,000Cost SavingsSpecialty Drug Solutions$152,000Cost SavingsAdopt New Telemedicine Provider$ 10,000Cost SavingsDental Program$ 91,000Cost SavingsVision Program $ 5,000Cost SavingsEmployee Plan Contributions$128,000Increase in Employee ShareTobacco Use Surcharge$ 44,000Surcharge on Employees Using TobaccoLife Insurance Program$ 51,000Cost SavingsTotal$839,000Recommendation 5E: Data Centers: Institutions must develop a plan to move their primary or disaster recovery data centers to the State of Ohio Computer Center (SOCC).Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. -4762558420Response:No.00Response:No.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.862623015Response:Yes, CSU has pursued three options for the co-location of computer equipment for disaster recovery purposes.Contract with the State of Ohio Computer Center. The University was unsuccessful in its efforts to acquire information in regard to services and pricing offered by the State of Ohio Computer Center. Repeated requests for details were made and no response was ever received.Renew the contract with the current private sector provider. Presently, the University has a contract for data center floor space with a provider in the private sector. The cost for this contract is approximately $45,000 per year which only provides floor space. Power and network connections are additional expenses when equipment is located in the space.Enter into a memorandum of understanding for shared data center space with Youngstown State and/or the University of Akron. The three institutions met in April, 2016 to discuss a possible reciprocity agreement. All have available data center capacity that would enable each institution to co-locate equipment to another’s data center at little to no cost.Given the three alternatives, Cleveland State is working with Youngstown State and the University of Akron on a memorandum of understanding to share available data center space. In conjunction with little to no expense, the physical proximity of the institutions provides reasonable travel distance to perform equipment maintenance or respond to an actual event. We intend to have an agreement in place by September, 2016.00Response:Yes, CSU has pursued three options for the co-location of computer equipment for disaster recovery purposes.Contract with the State of Ohio Computer Center. The University was unsuccessful in its efforts to acquire information in regard to services and pricing offered by the State of Ohio Computer Center. Repeated requests for details were made and no response was ever received.Renew the contract with the current private sector provider. Presently, the University has a contract for data center floor space with a provider in the private sector. The cost for this contract is approximately $45,000 per year which only provides floor space. Power and network connections are additional expenses when equipment is located in the space.Enter into a memorandum of understanding for shared data center space with Youngstown State and/or the University of Akron. The three institutions met in April, 2016 to discuss a possible reciprocity agreement. All have available data center capacity that would enable each institution to co-locate equipment to another’s data center at little to no cost.Given the three alternatives, Cleveland State is working with Youngstown State and the University of Akron on a memorandum of understanding to share available data center space. In conjunction with little to no expense, the physical proximity of the institutions provides reasonable travel distance to perform equipment maintenance or respond to an actual event. We intend to have an agreement in place by September, 2016.Recommendation 5F: Space Utilization – Each Ohio institution must study the utilization of its campus and employ a system that encourages optimization of physical spaces.Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. Please provide details on the results of the assessment below or on additional pages:-889095885Response:No.00Response:No.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.431329717Response:CSU is in the early stages of a comprehensive approach to space utilization, a constant challenge echoed by peer institutions across Ohio and complicated by its many challenges including:Space availabilityRegistrar’s schedule of classes and eventsIndividual Academic Departments’ internal control of spaces (“off the radar” from the Registrar)Energy costs (i.e. reducing set points and lighting when not in use)Operation and maintenance costsSecurity concerns (i.e. locking buildings when not in use)As CSU continues to grow its campus with new spaces, we will first review how existing space is utilized and how those spaces are scheduled, controlled, and allocated – in order to reduce and minimize new square footage which reduces capital cost, operational cost, and the campus’ overall footprint. This has the potential to reduce capital and operational costs. With this in mind the Facilities Management Team has proposed 7 ground rules to guide space utilization. Some are currently in place, other require more planning.Spaces should not be “owned” by departments but scheduled through one central area (The University Registrar’s office) to provide overall control of availability and promote collaboration across campus – e.g. rooms become available across disciplines that may have not been open for use before. 00Response:CSU is in the early stages of a comprehensive approach to space utilization, a constant challenge echoed by peer institutions across Ohio and complicated by its many challenges including:Space availabilityRegistrar’s schedule of classes and eventsIndividual Academic Departments’ internal control of spaces (“off the radar” from the Registrar)Energy costs (i.e. reducing set points and lighting when not in use)Operation and maintenance costsSecurity concerns (i.e. locking buildings when not in use)As CSU continues to grow its campus with new spaces, we will first review how existing space is utilized and how those spaces are scheduled, controlled, and allocated – in order to reduce and minimize new square footage which reduces capital cost, operational cost, and the campus’ overall footprint. This has the potential to reduce capital and operational costs. With this in mind the Facilities Management Team has proposed 7 ground rules to guide space utilization. Some are currently in place, other require more planning.Spaces should not be “owned” by departments but scheduled through one central area (The University Registrar’s office) to provide overall control of availability and promote collaboration across campus – e.g. rooms become available across disciplines that may have not been open for use before. 42545201295Class schedules should be reviewed relative to the overall University schedule as a percentage of use within any given day/week.A goal for the percentage of use should be defined and adhered for general classrooms, teaching labs, and research labsBenchmarking of other institutions or organizations should be researched and provided to support new methods of space usage (AASHE, GSA, SCUP, etc.Permanence of a department in a particular space should be reviewed and transitioned if appropriate.Square footage standards for offices should be published and adhered to as a University -wide policy.More aggressive scheduling should be evaluated to enable earlier start times or Friday afternoons and defer the need for new space in using what we already have.Offices on campus should be limited to one (1) per full time employee.Offices for part time faculty and staff should be reviewed and shared when possible to conserve resources – e.g. to encourage hoteling and desk sharing where applicable (for example, Graduate Students, and student workers)Offices for part time faculty and staff should be reviewed and shared when possible to conserve resources – e.g. to encourage hoteling and desk sharing where applicable (for example, Graduate Students, and student workers)More aggressive scheduling should be evaluated to enable earlier start times or Friday afternoons and defer the need for new space in using what we already have.Offices on campus should be limited to one (1) per full time employee.00Class schedules should be reviewed relative to the overall University schedule as a percentage of use within any given day/week.A goal for the percentage of use should be defined and adhered for general classrooms, teaching labs, and research labsBenchmarking of other institutions or organizations should be researched and provided to support new methods of space usage (AASHE, GSA, SCUP, etc.Permanence of a department in a particular space should be reviewed and transitioned if appropriate.Square footage standards for offices should be published and adhered to as a University -wide policy.More aggressive scheduling should be evaluated to enable earlier start times or Friday afternoons and defer the need for new space in using what we already have.Offices on campus should be limited to one (1) per full time employee.Offices for part time faculty and staff should be reviewed and shared when possible to conserve resources – e.g. to encourage hoteling and desk sharing where applicable (for example, Graduate Students, and student workers)Offices for part time faculty and staff should be reviewed and shared when possible to conserve resources – e.g. to encourage hoteling and desk sharing where applicable (for example, Graduate Students, and student workers)More aggressive scheduling should be evaluated to enable earlier start times or Friday afternoons and defer the need for new space in using what we already have.Offices on campus should be limited to one (1) per full time employee.EnergyEnergy Efficiencies – seek to refine sustainable methods utilized by institutions to procure and use energy (resulting in more efficient use of energy), including, but not limited to lighting systems, heating & cooling systems, electricity, natural gas, and utility monitoring.What energy efficiency projects has the institution implemented or enhanced within fiscal year 2016?-156210-89535Response:Ohio House Bill 251/Advanced Energy Law was passed by the Ohio General Assembly on December 16, 2004 and signed into law by Governor Taft. Over the period 2004-2015, CSU’s campus square footage grew by approximately 1.1 million square feet, or 27%, the University has aggressively pursued the intent of that legislation through a number of action steps. Results have been substantial. The following chart shows CSU’s normalized energy consumption has declined by a total of 24.8% percent, exceeding HB 251’s standard of 20 percent over a ten year period. A 2016 study by a CSU experienced Executive MBA Team demonstrated that once the energy efficiency program was fully up implemented, the program has saved approximately $3 million annually over the last several years and over $11.5 million in total.Systems installed through project-based work are performing as designed. CSU has also decided that all newly constructed buildings are to be at a minimum of LEED Silver rating, to comply with HB 251 and potentially achieve greater efficiency of systems in conjunction with building envelopes. As of early 2016, all projects that involve major construction are required to perform a life cycle cost analysis by the design Architect and Engineer to determine the best solution for a given project design and installation.CSU is on the threshold of issuing an RFP in FY17 addressing electric and steam-related energy source efficiencies and new contractual arrangements. Additional information concerning qualified bidders and proposals will be forthcoming.00Response:Ohio House Bill 251/Advanced Energy Law was passed by the Ohio General Assembly on December 16, 2004 and signed into law by Governor Taft. Over the period 2004-2015, CSU’s campus square footage grew by approximately 1.1 million square feet, or 27%, the University has aggressively pursued the intent of that legislation through a number of action steps. Results have been substantial. The following chart shows CSU’s normalized energy consumption has declined by a total of 24.8% percent, exceeding HB 251’s standard of 20 percent over a ten year period. A 2016 study by a CSU experienced Executive MBA Team demonstrated that once the energy efficiency program was fully up implemented, the program has saved approximately $3 million annually over the last several years and over $11.5 million in total.Systems installed through project-based work are performing as designed. CSU has also decided that all newly constructed buildings are to be at a minimum of LEED Silver rating, to comply with HB 251 and potentially achieve greater efficiency of systems in conjunction with building envelopes. As of early 2016, all projects that involve major construction are required to perform a life cycle cost analysis by the design Architect and Engineer to determine the best solution for a given project design and installation.CSU is on the threshold of issuing an RFP in FY17 addressing electric and steam-related energy source efficiencies and new contractual arrangements. Additional information concerning qualified bidders and proposals will be forthcoming. Section II: Academic PracticesRecommendation 6: Textbook AffordabilityRecommendation 6A: Negotiate Cost – Professional negotiators must be assigned to help faculty obtain the best deals for students on textbooks and instructional materials, starting with high-volume, high-cost courses. Faculty must consider both cost and quality in the selection of course materials.Recommendation 6B : Standardize Materials – Institutions must encourage departments to choose common materials, including digital elements, for courses that serve a large enrollment of students.Recommendation 6C: Develop Digital Capabilities – Institutions must be part of a consortium to develop digital tools and materials, including open educational resources, that provide students with high-quality, low-cost materials. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. -25400100330Response:CSU has not assigned professional negotiators to assist faculty obtain the best deals for students on textbooks and instructional materials.00Response:CSU has not assigned professional negotiators to assist faculty obtain the best deals for students on textbooks and instructional materials.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-25879-67550Response:The cost of textbooks is a high profile issue at CSU and has sparked a number of actions that have resulted in substantial – sometimes dramatic savings – for a substantial number of students. For example:Several of our departments with large multi-section courses use older editions of textbooks instead of the most recent one from the publisher.Most of our courses also use the same edition of the same book for a number of terms, which reduces leverage on the publisher’s side, enables students sell back their books to students coming in future terms, and allows the bookstore to purchase books in bulk to last several terms.Several of our faculty also use Open Access textbooks, which is free to our students but can be “hit or miss” with respect to quality. (It takes time for a textbook to “mature”, and open access texts may not have the time to complete this maturation process)The Michael Schwartz Library has online digital, subscriptions to a number of publishers which are currently used by 24 courses.Gateway course material is now standardized for a growing number of courses.To build on and systematize these initiatives, a Textbook Affordability Task Force was staffed and launched in April 2016. This cross disciplinary group is heavily weighted with senior faculty members, and has set a number of stretch options, which are to:Conduct a ”deep dive” analysis of textbook purchases by students, including the spread of publishers, with the goal of identifying approaches to negotiating prices of books across disciplines.Exploring direct-bill options that would enable students to use financial aid to purchase textbooks.Collaborating with the University library to help faculty match the texts they currently use with existing electronic resources that CSU currently pays for.Incorporate current practices into a more systematic plan for textbook cost reduction.00Response:The cost of textbooks is a high profile issue at CSU and has sparked a number of actions that have resulted in substantial – sometimes dramatic savings – for a substantial number of students. For example:Several of our departments with large multi-section courses use older editions of textbooks instead of the most recent one from the publisher.Most of our courses also use the same edition of the same book for a number of terms, which reduces leverage on the publisher’s side, enables students sell back their books to students coming in future terms, and allows the bookstore to purchase books in bulk to last several terms.Several of our faculty also use Open Access textbooks, which is free to our students but can be “hit or miss” with respect to quality. (It takes time for a textbook to “mature”, and open access texts may not have the time to complete this maturation process)The Michael Schwartz Library has online digital, subscriptions to a number of publishers which are currently used by 24 courses.Gateway course material is now standardized for a growing number of courses.To build on and systematize these initiatives, a Textbook Affordability Task Force was staffed and launched in April 2016. This cross disciplinary group is heavily weighted with senior faculty members, and has set a number of stretch options, which are to:Conduct a ”deep dive” analysis of textbook purchases by students, including the spread of publishers, with the goal of identifying approaches to negotiating prices of books across disciplines.Exploring direct-bill options that would enable students to use financial aid to purchase textbooks.Collaborating with the University library to help faculty match the texts they currently use with existing electronic resources that CSU currently pays for.Incorporate current practices into a more systematic plan for textbook cost reduction.Recommendation 7: Time to Degree-25879125766Background:CSU’s 2014-2016 College Completion Plan contained 6 major goals and 10 major supporting completion strategies– all aimed at some aspect of Time to Degree performance. Over those two years some of the goals have been met and others not, but all of the completion strategies have been implemented. As noted in Chapter I, in recognition of the breadth of its initiatives, and the measurable success that has resulted, in Fall 2015 Cleveland State received an Excellence and Innovation Award in the Student Success and College Completion from the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. In the finalized 2016-2018 Completion Plan for, CSU has sharpened the measurement goals and have designed and committed to 9 enhanced completion strategies to increase student success and speed progress toward degree completion.Implement Degree Maps with MilestonesEstablish Graduation Plan Requirements for all students Identify pedagogical methods that improve student success in high enrollment, “Gatekeeper” courses. Incentivize faculty innovation in those courses to reduce D/F/W rates.Provide support (financial and academic) to students nearing completion through Last Mile completion program.Participate in AASCU’s “reimagining the first year” 3-year project to create a more energizing experience for entering freshmenStrengthen transfer pathways between CSU and the Community Colleges through collaborative advising facilitated by dataLeverage the Key Bank Scholars program to improve retention and graduation rates of students from the Cleveland Municipal School District who attend CSUDevelop targeted interventions with the data and prescriptive analytics developed in CSU’s relationship with Civitas LearningStrengthen CSU’s wrap-around services that address non-academic obstacles to persistence and completionEach of the above is a “story in itself” with clear objectives and multi-faceted action plans, as are set out in Appendix C. CSU includes this list to illustrate that its “Time to Degree” initiatives are the product of comprehensive study and effort in this area begun several years ago.00Background:CSU’s 2014-2016 College Completion Plan contained 6 major goals and 10 major supporting completion strategies– all aimed at some aspect of Time to Degree performance. Over those two years some of the goals have been met and others not, but all of the completion strategies have been implemented. As noted in Chapter I, in recognition of the breadth of its initiatives, and the measurable success that has resulted, in Fall 2015 Cleveland State received an Excellence and Innovation Award in the Student Success and College Completion from the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. In the finalized 2016-2018 Completion Plan for, CSU has sharpened the measurement goals and have designed and committed to 9 enhanced completion strategies to increase student success and speed progress toward degree completion.Implement Degree Maps with MilestonesEstablish Graduation Plan Requirements for all students Identify pedagogical methods that improve student success in high enrollment, “Gatekeeper” courses. Incentivize faculty innovation in those courses to reduce D/F/W rates.Provide support (financial and academic) to students nearing completion through Last Mile completion program.Participate in AASCU’s “reimagining the first year” 3-year project to create a more energizing experience for entering freshmenStrengthen transfer pathways between CSU and the Community Colleges through collaborative advising facilitated by dataLeverage the Key Bank Scholars program to improve retention and graduation rates of students from the Cleveland Municipal School District who attend CSUDevelop targeted interventions with the data and prescriptive analytics developed in CSU’s relationship with Civitas LearningStrengthen CSU’s wrap-around services that address non-academic obstacles to persistence and completionEach of the above is a “story in itself” with clear objectives and multi-faceted action plans, as are set out in Appendix C. CSU includes this list to illustrate that its “Time to Degree” initiatives are the product of comprehensive study and effort in this area begun several years ago.Recommendation 7A: Education Campaign – Each institution must develop a coordinated campaign to educate its full-time undergraduates about the course loads needed to graduate on time (two years for most associate degrees and four years for most bachelor’s degrees).Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes.-1725349805Response:The core of CSU’s education campaign is personal contact with students by well-trained advisors. To date, intrusive advising has been in place for students enrolled in developmental programs for two academic years and for the entire freshman class for one academic year. Seven freshman advisors are now employed in the Division of Academic Programs for this purpose. These advisors have reduced caseloads, enabling them to monitor students more closely and to intervene in the event that they experience academic difficulty. They are equipped with communication tools to promote easy communication, are provided with guidance as to which courses students should take to stay “on-track” and to increase the likelihood of academic success (Freshman Foundations advising protocols). They are supported by a student retention software system (Starfish) that allows students to make appointments with advisors on-line, that promotes communication among advisors, professors and students, and that provides a place for the easy storage and communication of notes about student progress. Starfish was purchased approximately two years ago and is now used by all advising offices on campus. Over the past year, more aggressive efforts have been made to encourage faculty to make use of the system’s early warning capability and to develop effective protocols to guide advisors responding to flags. The system has additional capabilities, including the ability to implement “success plans” for students in difficulty and, to monitor student progress/completion of degree plansIn addition, Academic Programs and Marketing & Communications regularly collaborate to run educational campaigns at key times in the school calendar when students are making decisions about registration. In AY 2015- 2016, for example, a concerted effort was made to encourage students to register for at least 15 hours per semester to stay on track for four-year graduation. This resulted in an increase in the number of hours attempted by full-time students during the academic year.00Response:The core of CSU’s education campaign is personal contact with students by well-trained advisors. To date, intrusive advising has been in place for students enrolled in developmental programs for two academic years and for the entire freshman class for one academic year. Seven freshman advisors are now employed in the Division of Academic Programs for this purpose. These advisors have reduced caseloads, enabling them to monitor students more closely and to intervene in the event that they experience academic difficulty. They are equipped with communication tools to promote easy communication, are provided with guidance as to which courses students should take to stay “on-track” and to increase the likelihood of academic success (Freshman Foundations advising protocols). They are supported by a student retention software system (Starfish) that allows students to make appointments with advisors on-line, that promotes communication among advisors, professors and students, and that provides a place for the easy storage and communication of notes about student progress. Starfish was purchased approximately two years ago and is now used by all advising offices on campus. Over the past year, more aggressive efforts have been made to encourage faculty to make use of the system’s early warning capability and to develop effective protocols to guide advisors responding to flags. The system has additional capabilities, including the ability to implement “success plans” for students in difficulty and, to monitor student progress/completion of degree plansIn addition, Academic Programs and Marketing & Communications regularly collaborate to run educational campaigns at key times in the school calendar when students are making decisions about registration. In AY 2015- 2016, for example, a concerted effort was made to encourage students to register for at least 15 hours per semester to stay on track for four-year graduation. This resulted in an increase in the number of hours attempted by full-time students during the academic year.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-2032025400Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 7B: Graduation Incentive – Institutions should consider establishing financial incentives to encourage full-time students to take at least 15 credits per semester.Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes.-1725349806Response:CSU adopted a graduation incentive plan for freshmen who have entered the University in the Fall 2015, Fall 2014 and Fall 2013 that provides a rebate of tuition increases, plus $100 per semester in textbook expenses, to students who complete a full academic year in good standing. Students must maintain at least a 2.0GPA and complete 30 credit hours within the academic year defined as Summer, Fall Spring, or Fall Spring, Summer. In FY17, the benefit to qualifying students is expected to be approximately $900,000. In FY 2016, CSU extended the undergraduate tuition band by one credit hour from 12-17 credit hours per semester to 12-18 credit hours per semester. Students are able to enroll in 18 credit hours per semester (6 courses) for the cost of 12 credit hours. Under the previous credit band arrangement, an academic load of 18 credit hours in a semester would have added the full cost of an extra credit hour ($401.50) to a student’s cost. The credit hour band change is estimated to benefit students in total by approximately $800,000 annually.00Response:CSU adopted a graduation incentive plan for freshmen who have entered the University in the Fall 2015, Fall 2014 and Fall 2013 that provides a rebate of tuition increases, plus $100 per semester in textbook expenses, to students who complete a full academic year in good standing. Students must maintain at least a 2.0GPA and complete 30 credit hours within the academic year defined as Summer, Fall Spring, or Fall Spring, Summer. In FY17, the benefit to qualifying students is expected to be approximately $900,000. In FY 2016, CSU extended the undergraduate tuition band by one credit hour from 12-17 credit hours per semester to 12-18 credit hours per semester. Students are able to enroll in 18 credit hours per semester (6 courses) for the cost of 12 credit hours. Under the previous credit band arrangement, an academic load of 18 credit hours in a semester would have added the full cost of an extra credit hour ($401.50) to a student’s cost. The credit hour band change is estimated to benefit students in total by approximately $800,000 annually.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-20320125730Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 7C: Standardize Credits for Degree – Institutions should streamline graduation requirements so that most bachelor’s degree programs can be completed within 126 credit hours or less and an associate degree programs can be completed within 65 credit hours or less. Exceptions are allowed for accreditation requirements.Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. -1714556515Response:Yes, CSU has implemented this recommendation. In Fall 2014, CSU converted general education courses from a 4 to 3 hour credit standard, and reduced minimum degree requirements to 120 hours – which was not possible with predominantly 4 credit hour courses. While easy to summarize, implementation was arduous for all in the University community. Degree maps have been developed for all programs showing students how to complete them in 8 full-time semesters. In addition, CSU was the first university in Ohio to implement multi-term registration. This allows students to plan ahead by posting the course offerings and enabling degree seeking students to register for an entire academic year at one time.00Response:Yes, CSU has implemented this recommendation. In Fall 2014, CSU converted general education courses from a 4 to 3 hour credit standard, and reduced minimum degree requirements to 120 hours – which was not possible with predominantly 4 credit hour courses. While easy to summarize, implementation was arduous for all in the University community. Degree maps have been developed for all programs showing students how to complete them in 8 full-time semesters. In addition, CSU was the first university in Ohio to implement multi-term registration. This allows students to plan ahead by posting the course offerings and enabling degree seeking students to register for an entire academic year at one time.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale. -1714573827Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 7D: Data-driven advising – Institutions should enhance academic advising services so that students benefit from both high-impact, personalized consultations and data systems that proactively identify risk factors that hinder student success.Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. -1725352549Response:CCSU is utilizing data on the undergraduate student population generated by CSU Institutional Research and the student-data platform Civitas Illume (acquired in 2015) to isolate the characteristics of students who are “at risk” of not persisting to graduation. Preliminary analysis of the data confirm that students who transfer with low credit hour totals, part-time students, students who enroll late, and students whose cumulative GPA at CSU is below 2.5 are significantly more likely to leave the University than students not possessing these profiles.. The goal of this strategy is to identify clearly these and other less obvious “subgroups” at high risk, to develop an understanding of why they are at risk, and to design interventions that will reduce the numbers of students in these categories who leave the university. CSU’s plan is in place to designate two or three target student populations in Summer 2016 and design interventions to be implemented in Fall 2016.00Response:CCSU is utilizing data on the undergraduate student population generated by CSU Institutional Research and the student-data platform Civitas Illume (acquired in 2015) to isolate the characteristics of students who are “at risk” of not persisting to graduation. Preliminary analysis of the data confirm that students who transfer with low credit hour totals, part-time students, students who enroll late, and students whose cumulative GPA at CSU is below 2.5 are significantly more likely to leave the University than students not possessing these profiles.. The goal of this strategy is to identify clearly these and other less obvious “subgroups” at high risk, to develop an understanding of why they are at risk, and to design interventions that will reduce the numbers of students in these categories who leave the university. CSU’s plan is in place to designate two or three target student populations in Summer 2016 and design interventions to be implemented in Fall 2016.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.2856381124Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 7E: Summer Programs – Each campus must develop plans to evaluate utilization rates for summer session and consider opportunities to increase productive activity. In particular, institutions should consider adding summer-session options for high-demand classes and bottleneck courses that are required for degree completion.Please provide details on the results of the assessment. In particular, please address whether the campus added summer session options for high-demand and bottleneck classes.-862692926Response:Confronted by steadily declining Summer semester enrollment (Summer 2011 – 49,379 credit hours vs. Summer 15 – 41,018 credit hours) CSU conducted a summer session strategy project involving the Colleges, the Provost’s Office, Enrollment Services, and Marketing in the Spring 2015 semester. From that work a number of actions were taken to add courses, change class hours, and alter marketing tactics for Summer 2016. These actions stemmed the annual decline, with Summer 16 enrollment expected to equal Summer 2015’s. Further changes have been made for Summer 2017 based on additional recommendations by the newly established Strategic Enrollment Management Working Group under the leadership of the Vice President – Enrollment Services and composed of a wide range of individuals involved in summer session planning and execution across the University. We also are expanding summer programming for incoming freshman students. Starting in summer 2016, students who qualify can take remedial or credit-bearing courses through the STEP program at very low cost ($100), giving them a head start on their first year at CSU.00Response:Confronted by steadily declining Summer semester enrollment (Summer 2011 – 49,379 credit hours vs. Summer 15 – 41,018 credit hours) CSU conducted a summer session strategy project involving the Colleges, the Provost’s Office, Enrollment Services, and Marketing in the Spring 2015 semester. From that work a number of actions were taken to add courses, change class hours, and alter marketing tactics for Summer 2016. These actions stemmed the annual decline, with Summer 16 enrollment expected to equal Summer 2015’s. Further changes have been made for Summer 2017 based on additional recommendations by the newly established Strategic Enrollment Management Working Group under the leadership of the Vice President – Enrollment Services and composed of a wide range of individuals involved in summer session planning and execution across the University. We also are expanding summer programming for incoming freshman students. Starting in summer 2016, students who qualify can take remedial or credit-bearing courses through the STEP program at very low cost ($100), giving them a head start on their first year at CSU.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-1079556251Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 7F: Pathway Agreements – Ohio institutions should continue to develop agreements that create seamless pathways for students who begin their educations at community or technical colleges and complete them at universities. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. -25879108106Response:CSU has been actively collaborating with community colleges in the region to develop efficient pathways for transfer students. CSU offers several BA and BS programs on site at Lakeland Community College and Lorain County Community College, eliminating the need for students to commute to the CSU’s downtown campus. In addition, CSU is engaged in a two-year project to align our degree maps with those used in Associate degree programs. The goal is to develop joint degree maps showing students how they can complete an Associate’s and Bachelor’s degree in eight full-time semesters (thereby reducing excess credit hours taken by transfer students). Ten aligned degree maps have been developed for Cuyahoga Community College/CSU programs and more than a dozen others are in process with completion on track for Summer 2017. Work has also begun on several degree map alignments with Lorain County Community, and will be completed by Summer 2018. This is an ongoing project that will be augmented in the next biennium.00Response:CSU has been actively collaborating with community colleges in the region to develop efficient pathways for transfer students. CSU offers several BA and BS programs on site at Lakeland Community College and Lorain County Community College, eliminating the need for students to commute to the CSU’s downtown campus. In addition, CSU is engaged in a two-year project to align our degree maps with those used in Associate degree programs. The goal is to develop joint degree maps showing students how they can complete an Associate’s and Bachelor’s degree in eight full-time semesters (thereby reducing excess credit hours taken by transfer students). Ten aligned degree maps have been developed for Cuyahoga Community College/CSU programs and more than a dozen others are in process with completion on track for Summer 2017. Work has also begun on several degree map alignments with Lorain County Community, and will be completed by Summer 2018. This is an ongoing project that will be augmented in the next biennium.Please provide details. In particular, how many articulation agreements does the institution have with other Ohio colleges and universities (either 2+2 or 3+1)?A listing of CSU’s articulation agreements is being compiled and will be forwarded shortly.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-28575154005Response:NA00Response:NA7G: Competency-Based Education – Institutions should consider developing or expanding programs that measure student success based on demonstrated competencies instead of through the amount of time students spend studying a subject. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes.If applicable, please provide additional details. In particular, how many students does the institution estimate the competency-based education programs will serve? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-3810093345Response:Cleveland State is in the midst of a major assessment of whether to expand our academic offerings in both or one of Competency – Based Education (CBE) or Prior Learning Assessment (PLA). (As will be noted in Chapter III, development of a white paper on these approaches to adult learners has been a first step in the plan of the ELearning/Adult Education Project in the Path to 2020 Program).The work so far indicates that CBE at CSU would involve creating an entirely new program, as this is something we are not currently doing and is substantially different from traditional on line course delivery. The Education Advisory Board provides a self-evaluation on line for institutions considering CBE, and CSU scores in the lower tier of the “readiness” matrix. We have identified at least 12 major issues to be addressed, and have concluded that – were we to go forward – CBE would take at least two years to implement.By contrast, Cleveland State already offers a variety of ways for students to earn credit for prior life experience. These could be expanded in a variety of ways into a substantial PLA offering that would be more attractive and accessible to prospective students, notwithstanding the easier implementation and lower cost of a beefed up PLA offering, there are a number of important strategic and operational questions to be asked – starting with documenting the size and segmentation of market demand.00Response:Cleveland State is in the midst of a major assessment of whether to expand our academic offerings in both or one of Competency – Based Education (CBE) or Prior Learning Assessment (PLA). (As will be noted in Chapter III, development of a white paper on these approaches to adult learners has been a first step in the plan of the ELearning/Adult Education Project in the Path to 2020 Program).The work so far indicates that CBE at CSU would involve creating an entirely new program, as this is something we are not currently doing and is substantially different from traditional on line course delivery. The Education Advisory Board provides a self-evaluation on line for institutions considering CBE, and CSU scores in the lower tier of the “readiness” matrix. We have identified at least 12 major issues to be addressed, and have concluded that – were we to go forward – CBE would take at least two years to implement.By contrast, Cleveland State already offers a variety of ways for students to earn credit for prior life experience. These could be expanded in a variety of ways into a substantial PLA offering that would be more attractive and accessible to prospective students, notwithstanding the easier implementation and lower cost of a beefed up PLA offering, there are a number of important strategic and operational questions to be asked – starting with documenting the size and segmentation of market demand.Recommendation 8: Course and Program Evaluation Recommendation 8A: Duplicative Programs – Institutions should consider consolidating courses and/or programs that are duplicated at other colleges and universities in their geographic area. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. 3450625195Response:Cleveland State University has been collaborating with partner universities to optimize efficiency by offering course that enroll students from multiple institutions. These include:Northeast Ohio Master of Fine Arts (MFA) in Creative Writing – a consortium program involving Cleveland State University, Kent State University, University of Akron and Youngstown State University.Master of Public Health – a consortium program involving Cleveland State University, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Ohio University, University of Akron and Youngstown State University.Ph.D. in Adult Development and Aging – a joint program of Cleveland State University and University of AkronMaster of Science in Health Sciences with a track in Physician Assistant Science – a joint program with Cuyahoga Community College.In addition, CSU participates in the Northeast Ohio Council on Higher Education (NOCHE) Cross Registration Network, which allows full-time CSU undergraduate students in good academic standing to register for one course each semester on a no-fee basis at 14 other colleges and universities, further reducing the need for CSU to offer low enrollment courses. There is a similar cross registration arrangement for graduate students that allows them to cross register graduate level courses at 5 other local universities.00Response:Cleveland State University has been collaborating with partner universities to optimize efficiency by offering course that enroll students from multiple institutions. These include:Northeast Ohio Master of Fine Arts (MFA) in Creative Writing – a consortium program involving Cleveland State University, Kent State University, University of Akron and Youngstown State University.Master of Public Health – a consortium program involving Cleveland State University, Northeast Ohio Medical University, Ohio University, University of Akron and Youngstown State University.Ph.D. in Adult Development and Aging – a joint program of Cleveland State University and University of AkronMaster of Science in Health Sciences with a track in Physician Assistant Science – a joint program with Cuyahoga Community College.In addition, CSU participates in the Northeast Ohio Council on Higher Education (NOCHE) Cross Registration Network, which allows full-time CSU undergraduate students in good academic standing to register for one course each semester on a no-fee basis at 14 other colleges and universities, further reducing the need for CSU to offer low enrollment courses. There is a similar cross registration arrangement for graduate students that allows them to cross register graduate level courses at 5 other local universities.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-6604093980Response:NA00Response:NASection III: Policy ReformsRecommendation 10: Policy ReformsRecommendation 10A: Financial advising – Ohio’s colleges and universities should make financial literacy a standard part of students’ education. Has the institution implemented this recommendation? If yes, please provide an overview of the process used and the key outcomes. 4313236411Response:Money Smarts is CSU’s successful financial literacy program. It brings together cost of attendance data with information about credit, budgeting, and student loans. It is a hub of powerful information. When students are on the site they are invited to engage deeper with links to the helpful tools and learning in Money Smarts.??? Financial Literacy – Freshman Initiative: All Freshmen while attending their ‘Introduction to university life’ the course that welcomes students to college life, received a Money Smarts in-person presentation or instruction to access the Money Smarts on-line curriculum. Fall semester success: 71% of our freshman created an account and accessed the budget module in Money Smarts.CSU’s results earned attention. North Star Education Services profiled our freshman literacy program on a national platform and called CSU a ‘hero’ for our success. CSU believes students who are exposed to the right financial literacy tools gain the knowledge and skills to make good decisions related to budgeting, borrowing and repayment strategies. We believe that teaching students to budget today means we're reducing future cohort default rates.The reasons for CSU’s success is due to building the right team: Student Success Committee, University senior leadership, academic programming, University bookstore, North Star Educational Services, Great Lakes Higher Education Services, and the Enrollment Services Division. The Student Success Committee comprised of faculty and administrators’ who truly care about students holistically and understand the benefits of financial literacy. Senior leadership, understanding our student population, came together and supported incorporating Money Smarts into ‘Introduction to University Life’. In the course, students are introduced to Money Smarts by creating an account, receiving a financial literacy overview and creating a personalized budget. The E-learning center embedded Money Smarts in the Blackboard course room so students can easily 00Response:Money Smarts is CSU’s successful financial literacy program. It brings together cost of attendance data with information about credit, budgeting, and student loans. It is a hub of powerful information. When students are on the site they are invited to engage deeper with links to the helpful tools and learning in Money Smarts.??? Financial Literacy – Freshman Initiative: All Freshmen while attending their ‘Introduction to university life’ the course that welcomes students to college life, received a Money Smarts in-person presentation or instruction to access the Money Smarts on-line curriculum. Fall semester success: 71% of our freshman created an account and accessed the budget module in Money Smarts.CSU’s results earned attention. North Star Education Services profiled our freshman literacy program on a national platform and called CSU a ‘hero’ for our success. CSU believes students who are exposed to the right financial literacy tools gain the knowledge and skills to make good decisions related to budgeting, borrowing and repayment strategies. We believe that teaching students to budget today means we're reducing future cohort default rates.The reasons for CSU’s success is due to building the right team: Student Success Committee, University senior leadership, academic programming, University bookstore, North Star Educational Services, Great Lakes Higher Education Services, and the Enrollment Services Division. The Student Success Committee comprised of faculty and administrators’ who truly care about students holistically and understand the benefits of financial literacy. Senior leadership, understanding our student population, came together and supported incorporating Money Smarts into ‘Introduction to University Life’. In the course, students are introduced to Money Smarts by creating an account, receiving a financial literacy overview and creating a personalized budget. The E-learning center embedded Money Smarts in the Blackboard course room so students can easily 77638133578jump to the site from the e-learning management system. The CSU’s bookstore generously donated a $50 gift card for each ‘Introduction to University Life’ class. Students who completed the budget portion of Money Smarts were entered into a drawing. One winner is drawn from each class. Money Smarts is not just for freshman: during fall and the beginning of spring semester we engaged our students with the following:Borrowing Smart – 4,731 students were sent an Eblast encouraging them to review their federal aggregate loan borrowing history. Graduate Money Smart – 783 graduating students’, who borrowed while at CSU, were sent an Eblast encouraging them to review the federal loan repayment options our students need to begin successful federal loan repayments.Statistically Smart – 10,159 enrolled students received a statically relevant Eblast, encouraging them to be credit smart with helpful statistical information and links to understanding credit. Financial literacy is an important component of engaging our students in a pathway to a successful life. CSU is encouraged with the growth and enthusiasm we’ve seen in the program in less than a year and look forward to continuing to offer financial education to our students. 00jump to the site from the e-learning management system. The CSU’s bookstore generously donated a $50 gift card for each ‘Introduction to University Life’ class. Students who completed the budget portion of Money Smarts were entered into a drawing. One winner is drawn from each class. Money Smarts is not just for freshman: during fall and the beginning of spring semester we engaged our students with the following:Borrowing Smart – 4,731 students were sent an Eblast encouraging them to review their federal aggregate loan borrowing history. Graduate Money Smart – 783 graduating students’, who borrowed while at CSU, were sent an Eblast encouraging them to review the federal loan repayment options our students need to begin successful federal loan repayments.Statistically Smart – 10,159 enrolled students received a statically relevant Eblast, encouraging them to be credit smart with helpful statistical information and links to understanding credit. Financial literacy is an important component of engaging our students in a pathway to a successful life. CSU is encouraged with the growth and enthusiasm we’ve seen in the program in less than a year and look forward to continuing to offer financial education to our students. -4313255940Accessing Money Smarts From CSU’s WebsiteMoney SmartsBecome money smart! Click here to create a free account where you can:Learn how to create a budgetLearn the basics of creditResearch potential income based on your majorUse the Debt-o-Meter to calculate how quickly you can pay off your student loan debt with your future career choice.00Accessing Money Smarts From CSU’s WebsiteMoney SmartsBecome money smart! Click here to create a free account where you can:Learn how to create a budgetLearn the basics of creditResearch potential income based on your majorUse the Debt-o-Meter to calculate how quickly you can pay off your student loan debt with your future career choice.If the institution has not implemented this recommendation, is there a plan to implement? If yes, what is the implementation plan? If the institution has not implemented this recommendation and does not plan to do so, please provide the rationale.-2875106117Response:NA00Response:NARecommendation 10B: Obstacles – The state Department of Higher Education and/or state legislature should seek to remove any obstacles in policy, rule or statute that inhibit the efficiencies envisioned in these recommendations. What legislative obstacles or policy roadblocks, if any, inhibit efficiencies and affordability practices at the institution?025652Response:NA00Response:NASection IV: Cost Savings, Redeployment of Savings & Tangible Benefits to Students103517-3200Response:To comply with) Master Recommendation #2, each board of trustees must:Direct its institution to track re-deployable dollars on an annual basis and report how those efficiency savings and new revenues are being used to lower student costs while maintaining or improving educational quality. Set 5-year goals for efficiency savings and new resource generation and track progress toward those goals on an annual basis. This data, including the use of these funds, should be part of the annual report to ODHE.” CSU’s Response begins with Fiscal Year 2017, starting on July 1, 2016. As reflected in our 2017 Budget, we will realize $4.3 million in cost savings and efficiencies. These savings are being re-deployed to reduce student costs and to enhance student success as shown below.Cleveland State UniversityFY 2017 Operating Budget – Administrative Cost SavingsSource of Re-deployable FundsAdministrative Cost Savings Through the Path to 2020 Project$ 3,500,000Use of Re-deployable FundsAdditional Undergraduate Scholarship Funding$ 1,900,000Civitas - Student Advising Support (Degree Maps & Predictive Analytics) 114,000Graduation Incentive Plan (Student Financial Incentives) 900,000Additional Part-time Instruction Funding 586,000Total$ 3,500,000 00Response:To comply with) Master Recommendation #2, each board of trustees must:Direct its institution to track re-deployable dollars on an annual basis and report how those efficiency savings and new revenues are being used to lower student costs while maintaining or improving educational quality. Set 5-year goals for efficiency savings and new resource generation and track progress toward those goals on an annual basis. This data, including the use of these funds, should be part of the annual report to ODHE.” CSU’s Response begins with Fiscal Year 2017, starting on July 1, 2016. As reflected in our 2017 Budget, we will realize $4.3 million in cost savings and efficiencies. These savings are being re-deployed to reduce student costs and to enhance student success as shown below.Cleveland State UniversityFY 2017 Operating Budget – Administrative Cost SavingsSource of Re-deployable FundsAdministrative Cost Savings Through the Path to 2020 Project$ 3,500,000Use of Re-deployable FundsAdditional Undergraduate Scholarship Funding$ 1,900,000Civitas - Student Advising Support (Degree Maps & Predictive Analytics) 114,000Graduation Incentive Plan (Student Financial Incentives) 900,000Additional Part-time Instruction Funding 586,000Total$ 3,500,000 -60385-24418Additional Undergraduate Scholarship Funding. Based upon an analysis of enrollment trends and retention patterns, Cleveland State University developed a scholarship strategy for undergraduate students who demonstrate an ability to remain on track for earning a baccalaureate degree, thereby shortening the student’s time and expense to earning a degree.Civitas. In an effort to improve student retention, course completions, and degree attainment the University is complementing its student success initiative with Civitas technology which provides advanced analytics to advisors and degree maps to students that provide clear and concise views of their progress to a degree.Graduation Incentive Plan – As an incentive to remaining on track to a degree, the University has adopted a plan that provides a student with a rebate of any increase in tuition, plus a $200 textbook rebate, for completing 30 credit hours in an academic year and be in good academic standing.Additional Part-time Instruction Funding. The University is supplementing the regular complement of funding for colleges to hire part-time instructors to meet the increases in demand for certain courses, enabling students to enroll in those for degree attainment.To establish re-deployable resource generation goals through FY 2021, CSU has analyzed its projected revenues and expenditures based on a range of assumptions concerning changes in enrollment and tuition revenue, SSI funding, other revenue sources and operating expenditures. From this analysis, CSU commits to:Generate re-deployable operating efficiencies of $11.5 million for the period FY 2017-FY2021. Given our $3.5 million cost savings from FY 2017 and the range of efficiency efforts underway, we have established a goal averaging $2 million annually in re-deployable funds for the next four fiscal years – just under 1% of CSU’s total E&G expenditure budgets. CSU’s first priority is to balance its operating budget, and in the current environment of an undergraduate tuition freeze and modest, if any, increases in SSI funding, will likely require up to several million dollars in cost savings each year.Balance the allocation of re-deployable savings between direct student savings and improvements in educational quality. A in FY 2017, CSU will annually determine the exact distribution of these resources. CSU estimates that approximately 50% of the savings will go to reducing student costs through a combination of increased scholarships, achievement incentives, reduced textbook costs, and a more timely path to graduation. The remaining 50% will be earmarked for reducing the proportion of courses taught by adjunct faculty and academic enhancements, such as strengthened general education curriculum.00Additional Undergraduate Scholarship Funding. Based upon an analysis of enrollment trends and retention patterns, Cleveland State University developed a scholarship strategy for undergraduate students who demonstrate an ability to remain on track for earning a baccalaureate degree, thereby shortening the student’s time and expense to earning a degree.Civitas. In an effort to improve student retention, course completions, and degree attainment the University is complementing its student success initiative with Civitas technology which provides advanced analytics to advisors and degree maps to students that provide clear and concise views of their progress to a degree.Graduation Incentive Plan – As an incentive to remaining on track to a degree, the University has adopted a plan that provides a student with a rebate of any increase in tuition, plus a $200 textbook rebate, for completing 30 credit hours in an academic year and be in good academic standing.Additional Part-time Instruction Funding. The University is supplementing the regular complement of funding for colleges to hire part-time instructors to meet the increases in demand for certain courses, enabling students to enroll in those for degree attainment.To establish re-deployable resource generation goals through FY 2021, CSU has analyzed its projected revenues and expenditures based on a range of assumptions concerning changes in enrollment and tuition revenue, SSI funding, other revenue sources and operating expenditures. From this analysis, CSU commits to:Generate re-deployable operating efficiencies of $11.5 million for the period FY 2017-FY2021. Given our $3.5 million cost savings from FY 2017 and the range of efficiency efforts underway, we have established a goal averaging $2 million annually in re-deployable funds for the next four fiscal years – just under 1% of CSU’s total E&G expenditure budgets. CSU’s first priority is to balance its operating budget, and in the current environment of an undergraduate tuition freeze and modest, if any, increases in SSI funding, will likely require up to several million dollars in cost savings each year.Balance the allocation of re-deployable savings between direct student savings and improvements in educational quality. A in FY 2017, CSU will annually determine the exact distribution of these resources. CSU estimates that approximately 50% of the savings will go to reducing student costs through a combination of increased scholarships, achievement incentives, reduced textbook costs, and a more timely path to graduation. The remaining 50% will be earmarked for reducing the proportion of courses taught by adjunct faculty and academic enhancements, such as strengthened general education curriculum. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download