fy 2016-17 uc berkeley budget and financial outlook

Finance Literacy Self Supporting Graduate

Professional Degree Programs and Professional Degree

Supplemental Tuition - A Roadmap and Resources to

Guide You

Presenters: Hugh Graham, Noam Manor, Scott Shireman, Linda Song

Hearst Memorial Mining 6/14/18, 2:00 - 3:00pm

1

Table of Contents

2

• Definitions and Examples of Existing Programs

• Academic Proposal Approval Process • Market Study: Approaches and Methodologies • UCOP Fee Approval Process and Financial Modeling • Q&A with DFL Panel

3

Two types of professional graduate programs:

• Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition (PDST) • Full time program leading to a masters or doctoral degree in a

professional discipline. • PDST revenue is spent on the program that charges the fee and has

return to aid requirements. • PDST cannot be charged to a masters degree en route to a PhD.

• Self-Supporting Graduate Professional Degree Program (SSGPDP) • Terminal masters and professional doctoral programs only. • Cannot use State General Funds or tuition and fees paid by students to

attend state-supported programs. • Surplus revenue is unrestricted. • No minimum Financial Aid requirement.

Program Definitions

4

College PDST SSGPDP

Chemistry • Master of Science, Chem Eng (Product Development)

• Master of Molecular Sci and Software Engineering

Engineering • Master of Engineering • Master of Translational

Medicine

• Master of Engineering (part-time) • Master of Advanced Study in

Integrated Circuits

Environmental Design • Master of Architecture • Master of City Planning • Master of Landscape

Architecture • Master of Urban Design

• Master of Real Estate Development & Design

Letters & Science • MA, Statistics

Natural Resources • Master of Development Practice

Existing Programs: Colleges

5

School PDST SSGPDP

Business • Master of Business Administration • MBA for Executives • Evening & Weekend MBA • Master of Financial Engineering

Education • MA, Educational Leadership • MA, Teacher Education

Information • Master of Information Management and Systems

• Master of Information and Cyber Security • Master of Information and Data Science

Journalism • Master of Journalism

Optometry • Doctor of Optometry

Law • Juris Doctor • Master of Laws LLM

Public Health • Master of Public Health • Doctor of Public Health • Master of Science, Health &

Medical Sciences

• Master of Public Health (On-Campus/Online MPH)

Public Policy • Master of Public Policy • Master of Public Affairs

Social Welfare • Master of Social Welfare

Existing Programs: Schools

Table of Contents

6



7

SSGPDP Proposal Approval Process1

8

SSGPDP Estimated Timeline

Total time: 1.5 -2 years (approximate)

• Market study: 3-6 months*

• Budget: 2-3 months (simultaneous w/market study and proposal)*

• COD discussion: present 1-page summary for 10-15 minute discussion*

• Graduate Division review of academic proposal: approximately 2+ months (includes multiple revisions)*

• Campus Academic Senate review: 4 months

• WSCUC screening form (simultaneous w/Senate review)

• Review by the Vice Provost for the Faculty: 1 month

• Systemwide Academic Senate review: can take 7 - 9 months

• UCOP administrative review: can take 1-2 months

• Open application and address other administrative matters

* There will be some overlap in these steps.

9

Proposal Format Requirements • For SSGPDPs, see:

http://grad.berkeley.edu/program-proposals/self-supported/self-supported-masters/

• For PDSTs, see:

http://grad.berkeley.edu/program-proposals/state-supported/state-supported-masters/

• SSGPDP proposals require the following (unlike PDST proposals):

– market study,

– budget template,

– discussion at COD meeting,

– Senate faculty salaries and other expenses (including non-Senate faculty, staff, space) cannot use State funds; new policy no longer requires similar ratio of Senate-to-non-Senate faculty as in state-supported programs offered by department, and

– estimate of impact on state-supported programs and how that will be mitigated.



















Table of Contents

10



11

New Academic Ventures at Berkeley

(NAV-B): Market Research Process

12

Market Research Process: 3-6 Months Total Depending on Complexity

6 weeks

Focuses on developing concept and inputs to guide research team Deliverables include strategy session, research brief and statement of work

3 weeks

Assesses broad factors such as labor market and competitors Deliverables include historical and future job growth, comparables, and most in-demand skills

8 weeks

If decision is to proceed, surveys prospective students to identify optimal features such as concentrations, format and price Deliverables include demand curves with tuition recommendation and ideal program design

13

What Happens in the Final Report?

● We share our final analysis in presentation form for discussion and then ultimately

write a memo to the Graduate Council with the NAV-B recommendation.

● The memo reflects the discussion along with input from the NAV-B Dean (Diana Wu),

Executive Director (Scott Shireman) and Marketing Director (Chris Van Nostrand).

● If we recommend approving the degree, the presentation and memo are appended

to the degree proposal and specific findings are incorporated into the marketing and

recruiting section.

14

Phase 1 Deliverables: Secondary

Research

15

To Provide Context, Jobs from Proposed Degree are Compared to those Entered from Parent Degree

For instance, in this case we were comparing openings for software engineers and architects to those graduating with a proposed masters in emerging technology or social practice.

16

Historical Trend Provides a Sense for Recent Demand and Scope

Positions are aggregated from the job listings provided by the department

17

Future Growth is Identified for Specific Jobs and Also Standard Benchmark

18

Most In-Demand Skills Are Broken Out to Guide Curriculum

Green = increasing demand

Yellow = stable demand

Red = decreasing demand

19

Tuition and Program Length Provides Overall Market Lens

20

Phase 2 Deliverables: Primary Research

21

First Survey Section: Motivators and Demographics

You may view the entire sample survey here: https://berkeley.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_2sFbINRyXhnjdB3

22

Traditional Self-

Maximizers

Main Output: Segments to Target International

Youth

Social

Impacters

Seasoned

Pros

High

Flyers

MEAN GMAT: 690

PREFERRED PROGRAM

FORMAT(S): Campus / Hybrid

MEAN AGE: 29.5

MEAN EXPERIENCE: 7 years

INCOME: $$

MEAN GMAT: 670

PREFERRED PROGRAM

FORMAT(S): Campus / Hybrid

MEAN AGE: 29

MEAN EXPERIENCE: 6 years

INCOME: $

MEAN GMAT: 665

PREFERRED PROGRAM

FORMAT(S): Hybrid / Online

MEAN AGE: 35

MEAN EXPERIENCE: 9.5 years INCOME: $

MEAN GMAT: 673

PREFERRED PROGRAM

FORMAT(S): Online / Hybrid

MEAN AGE: 38+

MEAN EXPERIENCE: 12+ years

INCOME: $$$

MEAN GMAT: 673

PREFERRED PROGRAM

FORMAT(S): Online

MEAN AGE: 30

MEAN EXPERIENCE: 6.5 years INCOME: $$$

23

Second Survey Section: Discrete Choice Modeling

School, duration and format inputs are customized for each study. Each respondent chooses their ideal preference 16 times, with each set of options adapted to their prior answers. This method allows us to identify the ideal program for each respondent, and then group together all the respondents to see in total the preference for say, online versus on-campus programs.

24

Main Output: Monetize the Cost of Different Features

25

Demand Curves Provide Optimal Tuition

Table of Contents

26



27

Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition

Self-Supporting Degree Fee

Fees Assessed May vary for

residents/nonresidents Same for all students

Approval UC Regents (multi-year) UC President (annual)

UC President (annual)

Program Type Full-time residency Part-time or full-time;

may be weekend, evening, in residence, online

Return-to-Aid Minimum of 33% Program’s discretion

Revenue sharing UC tuition: 100% campus

PDST: 100% programs (there are some pilot alternative models)

SSGPDP: 85% programs Campus: 15% assessment

Graduate Fees Comparison

28

Revenue Generation from PDST and SSGPDP fees

Source: Ca lRptg data as of 5/24/18

$67.0M $70.0M $78.5M $84.2M

$68.9M$82.6M

$83.0M

$101.6M$136.0M

$152.7M$161.5M

$185.8M

FY16Actual

FY17Actual

FY18Actual YTD

FY19Budget

SSGPDP

PDST

+$3.0M +$8.4M

+$13.7M+$0.3M

+$16.7M+$8.8M

+$5.7M

+$18.6M

+$24.3M

29

• Regents amended PDST policy in March 2017

• Under previous policy, PDSTs were approved year-by-year; either President or Regents would approve depending on % increase

• Under new policy, PDSTs are approved by the Regents according to a multi-year plan that covers two to five years, no further approval needed unless fee levels requested higher than planned

• UCOP issues call in Jul-Aug, with forms due back in late Oct / early Nov

• PDST increases are generally capped at 5% per year; must provide comparable costs from public and private peer institutions

• Student demographics data (gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status) is closely scrutinized alongside diversity recruitment strategies

• Student consultant required for multi-year plans

Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition

30

• SSGPDPs required to submit annual program and cost templates, even if not requesting fee increase

• New programs have 3-year ramp-up period to demonstrate financial viability

• Total SSGPDP fees are usually inclusive of all other charges (program fee + campus-based fees + SHIP, etc.)

• UCOP issued call in Nov-Dec, templates are supposed to be due in March (but for 2018-19, UCOP pushed deadline up to January 31st)

• UCOP requires student consultation only every-other-year

Self Supporting Graduate Professional Degree Programs

31

• Ten-year prospective financial pro forma for revenue and expense

• Teaching Expenses: Curriculum Development, Ladder Faculty, Lecturers, GSIs

• Other Academic Expenses: Classroom Space, External Facilities

• Administration and Services Staff

• Marketing and Recruitment

• Online programs: payments to BRCOE or outside vendor

• Campus assessment 15%

SSGPDP Campus Financial Pro Forma Template

33


Considerations: • Online vs. Classroom

• What is Faculty vs. Lecturer vs.

GSI mix?

• Is there existing space available

for use, or will program need to build-out or rent space?

34


Considerations: • What are the step admin costs

(adding full or partial FTEs?) • Need to think through “hidden”

costs of student support and other services

• Program Director is considered staff expense (even if faculty)

• Marketing/Recruitment/ Advertising costs need to be realistic

35


Considerations: • For online programs, how will

vendor costs impact the bottom line?

• Campus Financial template

uses the 15% assessment

• UCOP cost analysis template uses IDC rates: o 25.3% for on-campus o 12.7% for off-campus/online

36

• Annual program template – narrative that summarizes academic program reviews, student charges, financial accessibility, consultation with faculty and students

• Cost analysis shows three-year revenue and expense (previous year actuals, projections for current and following year)

• Template for 2018-19 cycle used Indirect Cost rates (IDC) specific to each campus to demonstrate SSGPDP financial self-sufficiency (Berkeley: 25.3% for on-campus; 12.7% for off-campus & online)

• Because UCOP applies an IDC rate to demonstrate financial self-sufficiency, the 15% campus assessment is not included

SSGPDP Annual Submission to UCOP

38

Regents Policy 3103:

Policy on Professional Degree Supplemental Tuition

http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/governance/policies/3103.

html

UCOP Self-Supporting Graduate Prof. Degree Programs Policy

http://policy.ucop.edu/doc/2100601/SSGPDP

UC Berkeley SSGPDP policy (updated March 2018):

http://grad.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/SSGPDP-

policy_FINAL_Mar.2018_complete.pdf

SSGPDP and PDST Policies

http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/governance/policies/3103.html

http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/governance/policies/3103.html

http://grad.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/SSGPDP-policy_FINAL_Mar.2018_complete.pdf





Table of Contents

39


• Academic Proposal Approval Process • Market Study: Approaches and Methodologies • Financial Modeling • Q&A with DFL Panel

40

Questions and Answers with our

Divisional Finance Leaders

Dat Le (CoE) Jennifer Sang (CED)

Suzanne Sutton (CoC)

41

Visit cfo.berkeley.edu for more information on Finance Literacy

• Hugh Graham, Campus Finance Lead-Student Fees

Office of the Vice Chancellor of Finance

[email protected]

• Noam Manor, Institutional Research Analyst

Office of Planning & Analysis

[email protected]

• Scott Shireman, Executive Director

New Academic Ventures at Berkeley (NAV-B)

[email protected]

• Linda Song, Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs

Graduate Division

[email protected]

Thank You - And GO BEARS!

fy 2016-17 uc berkeley budget and financial outlook

Documents