SHEEO is monitoring the evolving situation pertaining to COVID-19 (coronavirus) and will share guidance and updates from federal agencies and national health authorities as we receive them. The following guidance has been issued to the higher education community thus far:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released interim guidance for administrators of colleges and universities in planning and preparing for COVID-19, along with recommended response measures for those with the virus in their community.
The CDC has also released guidance for institutions of higher education (IHEs) related to foreign travel. The CDC has asked IHEs to consider postponing or canceling upcoming student foreign exchange programs and recommends IHEs consider asking current program participants to return to their home country, as well as asking students participating in study abroad programs to return to the United States. The CDC recommends that IHEs consult with state and local health authorities on the best approach for when and how study abroad students might return.
The U.S. Department of Education has issued guidance related to compliance with Title IV of the Higher Education Act (HEA) for those that are impacted by COVID-19. The Department’s guidance offers flexibility under its existing authority to help IHEs continue to serve students.
Other resources include:
The U.S. Department of Education has a website with information related to COVID-19.
The American College Health Association has issued a document on what campuses need to know about COVID-19, as well as guidelines for campus health staff and administrators preparing for COVID-19.
As the U.S. Department of Education has offered flexibility to IHEs, we encourage our members to consider whether they may need to offer similar flexibility related to their own statutory and regulatory requirements so that their IHEs can remain compliant and continue to serve students.
Lastly, if there are federal policy challenges your state or institutions are encountering about COVID-19 (such as authorization and distance education), please contact Tom Harnisch, vice president for government relations, at email@example.com. Congress is currently exploring legislative responses to meet immediate and longer-term needs.
If you have any other questions or concerns related to COVID-19 and higher education, please feel free to contact Rob Anderson, president, at firstname.lastname@example.org.
A recent report from the American
Council of Education, Tools in a Toolbox: Leading Change in Community Colleges,
notes that “data provide an entry point, even an excuse, to bring individuals
together to cognitively engage in a learning process to identify new
institutional practices for improvement” (Lester, 2020 p. iii)
Of course, this is easier said than done. Each step in the process of transforming
data into meaningful, actionable information has potential roadblocks. For
example, campus administrators may question the validity of the data, or the
way data are analyzed. Faculty may have additional concerns that the data are
being used for critical evaluations of their teaching methods and abilities. For
transformative data use to be successful, college staff must believe that
leadership values the data, understand and accept the validity of the data, and
be able to and want to act on the data.
The Postsecondary Data Partnership (PDP) is a response to a call to action for the higher education community to improve the use of data to increase student success and helps address many of the concerns listed above that hinder data use on college campuses. The PDP, managed by the National Student Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse), is a nationwide effort to help individual institutions and state systems gain a fuller picture of student progress and outcomes, meet various reporting requirements, and identify where to focus their resources. The partnership is dedicated to the idea that easier access to better data helps higher education professionals develop actionable insights and make informed decisions to support student success. The PDP helps institutions and states be transformative in their data use in four key areas: (1) It empowers the use of data at the campus and state-level; (2) It helps create a uniform language and understanding of higher education data; (3) It includes data on all students; and (4) It gives senior leaders the information needed to more accurately tackle significant state-level issues, such as educational attainment and equity gaps. These four areas are explained in more detailed below.
the PDP empowers institutions with better data and access to analytics through
online Tableau dashboards (see
Figure 1) and an easy-to-access downloadable analysis file. The Clearinghouse
currently has nearly a dozen Key Performance Indicator dashboards that include
visualizations for enrollment, gateway course completion, credit accumulation
rate, outcomes, retention/persistence, transfer, and time to credential data.
These dashboards can be easily filtered by metrics such as enrollment
intensity, academic preparedness, race/ethnicity, gender, first-generation
status, Pell grant status, and other important variables. A Tableau
administrator for each institution has the ability to add dashboard users so
that this important data can be shared across the entire campus and different
functional offices. These dashboards are available online and do not require an
institution to purchase Tableau software. The Clearinghouse is also developing
the ability to benchmark within the dashboards. In addition to the dashboards,
institutions also receive data through an Analysis-Ready File, an excel file
report where each student’s data are included on a single row, allowing users
to create descriptive statistics, pivot tables easily, or utilize the data for
more extensive analysis. For example, institutions can use PDP data for
predictive analytics or create their own cohorts for tracking students based on
local institutional initiatives.
Figure 1: Example Executive Summary PDP Tableau Dashboard
PDP data definitions are based on the Institute for Higher Education
Policy’s (IHEP) Postsecondary Metrics Framework. IHEP
staff reviewed a decade’s worth of data elements and their definitions
collected by national, state, and voluntary data collections in an attempt to
bring consensus to the field regarding common data elements. The Postsecondary
Metrics Framework is part of a larger effort for a more inclusive national data
infrastructure that enables researchers and policymakers to understand equity and
student success better. This work also helps support the validity of data
elements and their importance in helping to understand barriers and improve
the PDP includes data on all students at your institution. Unlike other data
collections that only include first-time, full-time students or students
entering in the fall, the PDP collects information on every student at your
institution, regardless of when they started in the year, their enrollment
intensity (full or part-time), or if they are a first-time student in higher
education or a transfer. This allows institutions to get a full picture of
student progress and success, rather than only a partial view.
like many institution-wide initiatives, it takes senior leadership advocating
for the project to be successful. With early-momentum metrics measuring
first-year progression through gateway course completion and credit
accumulation, the PDP allows senior executives to more accurately understand
the impact of the first year of college and is invaluable to both institutions
and state systems as they look to increase educational rates and close equity
gaps. State leaders should find this information incredibly useful as they seek
to better understand and find ways to improve the success of their students.
Tools in a Toolbox: Leading Change in Community Colleges provides four key takeaways for leading change at community colleges that is also applicable to four-year institutions and other higher education sectors. First, leaders should have an explicit change theory and plan that is clear and provides goals. Implementing the PDP to support data-informed decision making can be one aspect of this plan. Second, leadership should be developed to assist in engaging the entire community. This leadership team can also serve as advocates to the PDP work, promoting its use around campus. Third, data and information should be communicated with the community, an aspect where the PDP excels because it allows anyone (with access) to view data. Finally, the vision for change should be communicated in everyday decisions. The PDP can be this vehicle for data-informed decision making that impacts all areas of campus culture and student support.
Webinar Overview: This webinar will profile ongoing statewide efforts to advance educational equity in higher education throughout Minnesota. The state legislature and the Office of Higher Education have outlined broad attainment goals across all demographic groups in Minnesota. In June 2019, Minnesota State launched Equity 2030 with the goal to close all educational equity gaps at all 37 colleges and universities. Prioritizing partnerships across stakeholder groups and leading with an equity-minded strategy, the system has focused attention on academic equity strategies, target setting, and data-informed decision making to support this work. As capacity is an essential component in advancing equity strategy, this webinar will focus on the strategic efforts of the Office of Higher Education and Minnesota State to undertake this work.
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) has released our 2020 SHEEO Membership Report (previously named the SHEEO Salary Survey).
The 2020 SHEEO Membership Report marks the reinvention of the Salary Survey to reflect the organization’s strategic plan by providing new insight into SHEEO agency characteristics and functions. The report brings together SHEEO agency budget information, full-time equivalent staff numbers and demographics, and key agency functions to provide a comprehensive perspective of the scope of work SHEEO agencies perform and how SHEEO agencies operate.
SHEEO Agency Characteristics
The median full-time equivalent staff (FTE) for SHEEO agencies is 60 FTE, with the median for coordinating boards at 55.8 FTE, and governing boards at 65 FTE. The median operating budget for SHEEO agencies is $9,622,300; coordinating boards have a median operating budget of $7,626,400 compared to the median governing board operating budget of $12,616,910. Other key takeaways from the Membership Report are that SHEEO agencies are predominately white (57%), a majority of SHEEO agency employees identify as women (51.78%), 36.02% identify as male, and 12.2% of SHEEO agency staff’s gender was noted as unknown/unreported.
SHEEO Agency Functions
SHEEO membership agencies perform a variety of functions. On average, they perform 21 functions, with coordinating boards performing 18.5 functions and governing boards performing 25. The main functions performed by both coordinating and governing boards are maintaining, collecting, and reporting data; research and policy evaluation; and coordinating with departments of labor, workforce, and/or economic development. The report contains a full listing of SHEEO agency functions and the number and percentage of SHEEO agencies performing each function broken down by coordinating boards and governing boards.
Importance of these Data
SHEEO agencies will be able to use these data to understand their resources, staffing, and functions relative to their peer agencies. These data are also critical to SHEEO’s mission and strategic plan and will help SHEEO in supporting and guiding SHEEO agencies. SHEEO will use the data to understand SHEEO agencies better and to study other topics relevant to our membership. Finally, these data provide a clearer picture of the racial equity and diversity challenges agencies face and highlight the need for SHEEO to support our membership in the essential work of meeting those challenges.
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) serves the chief executives of statewide governing, policy, and coordinating boards of postsecondary education and their staffs. Founded in 1954, SHEEO promotes an environment that values higher education and its role in ensuring the equitable education of all Americans, regardless of race/ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic factors. Together with its members, SHEEO aims to achieve this vision by equipping state higher education executive officers and their staffs with the tools to effectively advance the value of higher education, promoting public policies and academic practices that enable all Americans to achieve success in the 21st century, and serving as an advocate for state higher education leadership.
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
(SHEEO) welcomes Molly Hall-Martin as our next summer intern.
As SHEEO’s summer intern, Hall-Martin will work on research
projects meant to help state policymakers improve student outcomes and advance
equity and income mobility. She will also assist SHEEO in our efforts to better
translate research for a policy audience.
Molly Hall-Martin (Lower Brule Sioux) is a second year Ph.D.
student at the University of Iowa. Her research focuses on the interplay
between state and federal governments as well as relationships between state
higher education agencies, tribal colleges & universities (TCUs), and
tribal governments. Before enrolling at the University of Iowa, Hall-Martin
served as the director of student preparation and success for the South Dakota
Board of Regents, where she worked with campus and community partners to
increase the number of American Indian and underrepresented students enrolling
in postsecondary education. She was the state program coordinator for South
Dakota College Application Week and served on numerous statewide committees.
She also previously worked for Lower Brule Community College (LBCC), a tribal
college located in South Dakota. There she coordinated the tribe’s Higher
Education and Adult Vocational Technical grant programs and LBCC’s GED program.
She holds a bachelor’s degree in American Indian studies from the University of
North Carolina and a master’s degree in adult and higher education from the
University of Oklahoma. Upon completion of her Ph.D., she hopes to work with
state higher education agencies in some capacity, either as a staff member or
with an organization that interacts with state agencies.
ABOUT THE STATE HIGHER EDUCATION EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
(SHEEO) is the national association of the chief executives of statewide
governing, policy, and coordinating boards of postsecondary education. Founded
in 1954, SHEEO serves its members as an advocate for state policy leadership, a
liaison between states and the federal government, and a vehicle for learning
from and collaborating with peers. SHEEO also serves as a manager of multistate
teams and as a source of information and analysis on education and public
policy issues. Together with its members, SHEEO advances public policies and
academic practices that enable Americans to attain education beyond high school
and achieve success in the 21st century economy.
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
(SHEEO) welcomes Dr. Tom Harnisch as our new vice president for government
As vice president for government relations, Dr. Harnisch
will be located in Washington, D.C., and his primary leadership responsibility will
be for planning, implementing, and coordinating SHEEO’s portfolio of federal
relations, policy, communication, and advocacy work. This position will monitor
new and potential federal action (legislation, rules, and other policies and
actions) that have relevance to our membership. The vice president for
government relations will also be responsible for bringing these issues to the
attention of SHEEO staff and SHEEO’s membership and for articulating their
potential impact on our members and the institutions and students they serve.
From 2007 to 2019, Dr. Harnisch worked in a series of roles
at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU),
including as director of state relations and policy analysis. In his role at
AASCU, his roles included policy research, analysis, and communication to the
AASCU membership and other external stakeholder groups. He helped craft the
AASCU Public Policy Agenda and planned the Higher Education Government
Relations Conference. His research interests and commentary on higher education
finance, access, affordability, and other topics have been cited in over 200
articles, including in The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time magazine, Politico, Inside
Higher Ed, and The Chronicle of Higher Education. He is also an
adjunct faculty member at Georgetown University and The George Washington
“We are excited to have Tom join us at SHEEO,” said Rob Anderson, SHEEO president. “His vast experience will serve our states by amplifying their voice and ensuring greater coordination between federal and state policies, which will allow us to meet the needs of our students in the most effective manner possible.”
ABOUT THE STATE HIGHER EDUCATION EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
(SHEEO) is the national association of the chief executives of statewide governing,
policy, and coordinating boards of postsecondary education. Founded in 1954,
SHEEO serves its members as an advocate for state policy leadership, a liaison
between states and the federal government, and a vehicle for learning from and
collaborating with peers. SHEEO also serves as a manager of multistate teams
and as a source of information and analysis on educational and public policy
issues. Together with its members, SHEEO advances public policies and academic
practices that enable Americans to attain education beyond high school and
achieve success in the 21st century economy.
A project of the Center for the Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University and the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO)
Contact: Jim Palmer, Editor, Grapevine Center for the Study of Education Policy, Illinois State University
(309) 438-2041; email@example.com
Data reported by the states in the latest Grapevine survey (Tables 1 and 2, attached) indicate that initially-approved state fiscal support for higher education in fiscal year 2019-2020 (FY20) totaled approximately $96.6 billion, a 5.0% increase nationwide from fiscal year 2018-2019 (FY19). This is the highest annual increase since Fiscal Year 2014-15 (FY15) and continues a trend of annual increases over the past six years (see chart at right).
In contrast to the relatively
high number of states reporting annual reductions in funding from FY15 through
FY18, only three states reported funding declines between FY19 and FY20. Alaska sustained an 11.2% decrease, the
result of a gubernatorial decision to substantially reduce funding to the
University of Alaska system over the next three years. Hawaii and New York reported much smaller
declines of 2.2% and 0.3%, respectively. Each of these states had previously met
or exceeded their pre-recession (FY08) levels of state support.
Of the remaining 47 states, 24 reported increases from FY19 to FY20 ranging from 0.7% (Kentucky and North Carolina) to 4.8% (Georgia and Massachusetts), and 23 reported increases ranging from 5.0% (South Dakota) to 11.4% (Colorado). Increases in five states—California, Texas, Illinois, New Jersey, and Tennessee—accounted for approximately half (49.8%) of the total national increase in state funding for higher education between FY19 and FY20. Funding increases in each of these five states ranged from $189.2 million in Tennessee to $1.06 billion in California. Together, these five states increased funding for their higher education systems by 7.3%, while the remaining 42 states collectively increased funding by 4.4%.
Two-Year and Five-Year Trends
Over the longer term, total FY20 appropriations to higher education nationwide are 9.5% higher than funding made available two years ago in FY18. Sixteen states reported two-year gains of 10% or more, ranging from 10.0% in Kansas to 23.7% in Colorado. In addition, another 32 states registered two-year increases ranging from 2.7% in Vermont to 9.4% in New Mexico. Only two states reported that they were operating with levels of state fiscal support in FY20 that are lower than the fiscal support available two years ago in FY18: Alaska, which reported a 9.1% decline from FY18 to FY20, and Kentucky, which reported a two-year decline of 1.7%. Note that the Grapevine data are not adjusted for inflation.
In terms of five-year trends, state support for higher education increased nationwide by 18.8% from FY15 to FY20. Sixteen states reported five-year increases of 20% or more, ranging from 20.3% in New Jersey to 43.9% in Nevada. Another 29 registered five-year gains ranging from 0.5% in Iowa to 18.6% in Maryland. But five states reported five-year decreases ranging from 1.9% in Kentucky to 21.9% in Alaska.
These longer-term trends reflect
a more favorable picture than findings for previous years (see table to the
right). In FY18, higher education
systems in 16 states operated at levels of fiscal support that were below the
levels of support available two years earlier in FY16, and in 10 states, higher
education funding was less than the funding available five years previously in
FY13. In FY19, 12 states operated at levels of state funding that were below the
funding appropriated two years earlier in FY17, and nine states operated at
levels of funding that were below the monies available five years previously in
Overall, the results of the FY20 Grapevine survey document continued
increases, albeit at modest levels, in higher education funding across most
states. It is important to note that the Grapevine
data alone do not provide the contextual information needed to compare or rank
states in terms of the fiscal health of their higher education systems. For
example, although Illinois reported a relatively large (9.8%) funding increase between
FY19 and FY20, 66% of that increase represented monies appropriated to strengthen
the state’s badly underfunded college and university pension system and were not
used to fund instruction for students at higher education institutions directly.
Also, the increase reported by Illinois between FY19 and FY20 follows a period
of funding declines in previous years, as evidenced by the relatively low five-year
increase of 4.8% between FY15 and FY20. These are the sorts of nuances that Grapevine data do not capture.
FY20 marks the fourth year Grapevine has included Washington, D.C.,
in its survey. The data reported by the District of Columbia exclude federal
appropriations and reveal one-year, two-year, and five-year gains in local tax
support of 3.4%, 15.5%, and 22.9%, respectively.
Grapevine data are collected annually as a joint project of the Center for the Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University and the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO). Tables summarizing the results of the FY20 Grapevine survey—as well as annual Grapevine reports going back to fiscal year 1961—can be found at the Grapevine website: https://education.illinoisstate.edu/grapevine/.
In addition to data on state
fiscal support for higher education by state, Grapevine tables also detail regional variations in state fiscal
support and note trends in state fiscal support per capita and per $1,000 in
The FY20 data were collected by Sophia Laderman of SHEEO, employing an instrument that consolidates the Grapevine survey with the annual survey used by SHEEO in its State Higher Education Finance (SHEF) project. Data from the Grapevine component of this consolidated instrument were sent to Illinois State University for analysis.
The Grapevine report intends to provide a first, tentative look at
state higher education funding in the new fiscal year. The FY20 data represent
initial allocations and estimates that are subject to change. SHEEO’s annual
SHEF report focuses on the most recently completed fiscal year and offers a
more complete examination of trends in total state support for higher education,
factoring in enrollment, tuition, and inflation (among other variables). The SHEF
report for FY19 will be released this spring by SHEEO.
Grapevine data include both tax and nontax state support for the
operation of institutions of higher education as well as for other higher
education activities (before the survey for FY10, Grapevine surveys asked for data on state tax appropriations only).
States were asked to provide data for the new fiscal year (2020) as well as
revisions (if necessary) to data on file for previous fiscal years. In addition
to data on funding for four-year colleges and universities, instructions asked
states to include:
sums appropriated for state aid to local public community colleges, for the operation of state-supported community colleges, and for vocational-technical two-year colleges or institutes that are predominantly for high school graduates and adult students;
sums appropriated to statewide coordinating boards or governing boards, either for board expenses or for allocation by the board to other institutions or both;
sums appropriated for state scholarships or other student financial aid;
sums destined for higher education but appropriated to some other state agency (as in the case of funds intended for faculty fringe benefits that are appropriated to the state treasurer and disbursed by that office); and
appropriations directed to private institutions of higher education at all levels.
States were asked to exclude
appropriations for capital outlays and debt service, as well as appropriations
of sums derived from federal sources (except for ARRA monies), student fees, and
Different practices among the 50
states make it impossible to eliminate all inconsistencies or to ensure absolute
comparability among states and institutions. In addition, the annual percent
changes recorded for each state do not necessarily reflect the annual percent
changes in funding for individual institutions within states.
SHEEO seeks to
fill the position of vice president of federal relations. SHEEO is the national
association of state higher education leaders who serve statewide coordinating
and governing boards and other state higher education agencies. SHEEO responds
to the changing needs of its members and the state higher education community
and regularly pursues new projects that meet our members’ needs and align with
the mission of the organization.
The vice president of federal relations
will report directly to the president and will hold primary leadership
responsibility for planning, implementing, and coordinating SHEEO’s portfolio
of federal relations, policy, communication, and advocacy work. This position
will monitor new and potential federal action (legislation, rules, and other
policies and actions) that have relevance to our membership. The vice president
of federal relations will be responsible for bringing these issues to the
attention of SHEEO staff and SHEEO’s membership and for articulating their potential
impact on our members and the institutions and students they serve. This is a
new position; SHEEO has not previously maintained a permanent presence in
Washington, D.C. The successful candidate will help develop SHEEO’s portfolio
of work in Washington.
Duties and Responsibilities:
SHEEO’s leadership aware of new and potential federal action and its impact on our
the interests of SHEEO’s members to federal policymakers.
monthly federal updates.
for, organize, and lead SHEEO leadership and/or membership visits to lawmakers’
and other policymakers’ offices.
for, organize, and lead any federal advocacy in which SHEEO decides to engage.
the president in developing and communicating SHEEO positions on new or
potential federal actions.
as liaison between SHEEO and the various Washington, D.C. higher education
associations, advocacy groups, think tanks, and foundations.
on a variety of leadership groups and teams within SHEEO.
and provide support to the SHEEO president, particularly about matters related
to federal policy.
and implement federal policy projects which support the SHEEO mission, strategic
priorities, and the needs of SHEEO members.
or direct research and policy analysis on federal higher education public
and maintain knowledge regarding current activities and future trends in public
a portfolio of grant-funded projects. Maintain relationships with funders and
seek diversified funding sources.
provide supervision or direction to other SHEEO staff.
duties as assigned.
earned doctoral degree plus at least seven years of progressively responsible leadership
experience in higher education may substitute for the doctoral degree.
in the federal policymaking process and ability to analyze and interpret
federal legislation and agency rules.
working in Washington, D.C. and evidence of existing relationships with federal
actors (House and Senate committee staff, U.S. Department of Education staff,
higher education association leadership, etc.).
and analytical expertise in one or more of the following areas related to
postsecondary education: academic affairs, data systems, equity, finance,
institutional research, and/or student success.
ability to obtain outside funding for special projects.
of or experience with SHEEO agencies.
of publication in state higher education policy, public policy, or social
in project management.
in supervisory practices and techniques.
in statistics, data visualization, or other specialized skills.
This position will
be in Washington, D.C. Periodic travel to SHEEO’s headquarters in Boulder, CO,
and other national travel will be required.
Salary will be
commensurate with successful candidate’s experience and demonstrated skill
level. SHEEO provides excellent staff benefits.
Please apply by
email to: Christina Whitfield at CWhitfield@sheeo.org and include the
describing how you meet the requirements of the position, addressed to
Christina Whitfield, SHEEO, 3035 Center Green Drive, Suite 100, Boulder, CO
and contact information of three academic or professional references
(References will not be contacted until you have given permission for us to do
will be accepted until the position is filled. However, priority will be given
to those applications received by November 29, 2019.
its members as an advocate for state policy leadership, as a liaison between
states and the federal government, as a vehicle for learning from and
collaborating with peers, and as a source of information and analysis on
educational and public policy issues. SHEEO seeks to advance public policies
and educational practices to achieve more widespread access and successful
participation in higher education, more new discoveries through research, and
more applications of knowledge that improve the quality of human lives.
particularly interested in providing equal employment opportunities and
employing a diverse staff. Read more about SHEEO on our website: www.sheeo.org.
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) has released two requests for proposals relating to state authorization. The first, Improving State Authorization Learning Community Request for Proposals,is for states, and the second, State Authorization Research Funding Request for Proposals, is geared toward researchers.
Improving State Authorization Learning Community Request
Due 5 p.m. on December
The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
(SHEEO) is pleased to announce the creation of a new project designed to help
states evaluate and strengthen their authorization processes to better protect
students and improve quality in higher education. This multifaceted project
will build on the recommendations provided in a recent SHEEO white
paper, produce original thinking on state authorization, and provide a
forum for states to work on solutions to common issues with state
The creation of a Learning Community for states seeking to
improve their role as the central actors in the higher education accountability
space will be a core component of this project. The goal of the Learning
Community is to support state efforts to evaluate and improve state
authorization policies and processes systematically. Through in-person and
web-based meetings, state teams will receive professional development,
technical assistance, financial support, and peer learning opportunities. SHEEO
is seeking letters of interest from states that are prepared to elevate state
authorization as a core quality assurance and student protection function.
Thanks to the generous support of Lumina Foundation, the Learning Community will include teams from up to eight states. The Learning Community will meet once in person and three times via webinar over 18 months. Each state will receive a $15,000 grant to help jump-start evaluation and reform efforts. The Learning Community will function as an ongoing network of the state teams, SHEEO staff, and subject-matter experts from other education organizations.
Improving State Authorization Learning Community Request for Proposal Webinar
Join SHEEO on Friday, November 22 at 1 p.m. MT for a webinar where we will present our motivation for the request for proposal, discuss potential projects, present and discuss potential data sources, and answer questions.View webinar recording here.
State Authorization Research Funding Request for
Due 5 p.m. on January 15, 2020
SHEEO’s primary mission is to promote an environment that
values higher education and its role in ensuring the equitable education of all
Americans, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic factors.
Central to that mission is equipping states with the skills and information to
act when and where necessary. One area that has recently required action is
state authorization of postsecondary institutions.
Following the recent surge in institutional and campus closures, the growth in online education programs and providers, and increased concerns about educational quality, SHEEO published a white paper exploring the state role in the postsecondary education regulatory triad that includes the federal government and accreditors. In the white paper, we argue that through the state authorization process, states are the central actors in the higher education public accountability space. To this end, states should evaluate and strengthen their authorization processes to better protect students and improve quality in higher education. While the paper reviews conventional approaches to state authorization and offers recommendations for state agencies to consider, we were unable to find any empirical research on the effectiveness or outcomes of different strategies for state authorization, the process of state authorization, or the experience of individuals involved in state authorization. Without an empirical base of evidence to guide our recommendations, they are not as strong or as specific as they could be.
With generous support from Arnold Ventures, SHEEO is issuing
for Proposals (RFP) to fund research projects that investigate state
authorization processes, policies, outcomes, and procedures. The immediate goal
of these research projects is to provide states with evidence-based
recommendations to improve state authorization.
SHEEO seeks to fund up to six research projects at $13,500
each through this RFP. Researchers requiring additional funds for specific
research costs, such as original data collection, significant travel, and data
access fees, may submit an additional funds request, including a budget
outlining these costs. Awardees will receive these dollars directly as an
honorarium, and they may seek funding from other sources to supplement the
funds. Each project will consist primarily of two elements:
an empirical research paper with an abstract and
an executive summary; and
a corresponding blog post that translates the
research for a more general policy audience.
Proposals will be reviewed by a committee consisting of SHEEO staff, state higher education leaders, and external researchers. Successful proposals will propose research that promises to have immediate relevance to improving state authorization of postsecondary education providers and that meets traditional academic standards for quality and rigor.
State Authorization Research Funding Request for Proposal Webinar
Join SHEEO on Friday, November 22 at 10 a.m. MT for a webinar where we will present our motivation for the request for proposal, discuss potential projects, present and discuss potential data sources, and answer questions. View webinar recording.
Columbia, S.C.–The South Carolina Commission on Higher Education (CHE), in partnership with The Hunt Institute and the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO), will convene education, business and government leaders from across the state for the newly formed South Carolina Higher Education Advisory Committee. Under the new leadership of Dr. Rusty Monhollon, president and executive director of the CHE, the Committee will work to support efforts to drive change in the state’s higher education policy.
The Committee, led by former South Carolina Gov. Jim Hodges, includes a diverse group of stakeholders who will develop a set of recommendations that will build on the statewide higher education Public Agenda, which was developed by the CHE in 2017.
Meeting for the first time on October 24 in Columbia, S.C., the Committee will discuss strategies to increase dual enrollment opportunities for all students as well as efforts to help families understand and cover the cost of higher education. The Committee will meet for two additional in-person meetings over the next four months before final recommendations are made.
“The Hunt Institute is excited for this partnership with the Committee and the CHE to help South Carolina make progress toward statewide higher education goals,” said The Hunt Institute’s President & CEO Dr. Javaid Siddiqi. “With Gov. Hodges’ experience and leadership, this diverse group of state leaders can build consensus around the topics and policy issues most in need of immediate action.”
In addition to Gov. Hodges and Dr. Monhollon, the Advisory Committee will include Hunt-Kean Leadership Fellows Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, Attorney General Alan Wilson and Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey, as well as presidents and faculty of institutions of higher education, regional business leaders, student representatives and members of the K-12 education policy community.
“As we focus on strengthening postsecondary education in South Carolina, we must ensure that we are bringing together diverse perspectives to create meaningful change that supports our students in their postsecondary pathways,” said Dr. Monhollon. “I’m looking forward to working with The Hunt Institute and SHEEO in this collaborative effort.”
“South Carolina and its students benefit when leaders come together to discuss long-term higher education policy solutions,” said SHEEO President Rob Anderson. “We at SHEEO are pleased to support these efforts and join in this critical conversation. This broad-based group of state leaders, students and educators will assist in ensuring that quality postsecondary education opportunities that lead to workforce outcomes will exist for all students moving forward.”
The Hunt Institute has developed the Advisory Committee model to bring together diverse voices during periods of state leader transition and to build consensus around pressing education policy issues. The Institute has implemented the model in two states, including in Virginia, supporting the Virginia Superintendent of Public Instruction Dr. James Lane in establishing the Virginia is for Learners Advisory Committee. Additionally, through a partnership with Dr. Margie Vandeven, Missouri Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education, The Hunt Institute adapted this model to coordinate the Commissioner’s Education Policy Committee.
About The Hunt Institute An affiliate of the Duke University Sanford School of Public Policy, The Hunt Institute is a recognized leader in the movement to transform public education. Marshaling expertise from a nationwide partner network since it was established in 2001, The Institute brings together people and resources that help build and nurture visionary leadership and mobilize strategic action for greater educational outcomes and student success. For more information, please visit: http://www.hunt-institute.org/
About South Carolina Commission of Higher Education The CHE is committed to access, affordability, and quality in the state higher education system through coordination, regulation, advocacy and oversight, as directed by the South Carolina General Assembly. The CHE serves as the coordinating board for SC’s 33 public institutions of higher learning. It acts both as an oversight entity on behalf of the General Assembly and as an advocate for higher education. The Commission is responsible for assuring a balance between student and taxpayer interests and institutional policies, aspirations, and needs. For more information, please visit: http://www.che.sc.gov.
About State Higher Education Executive Officers Association The State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) is the national association of the chief executives of statewide governing, policy, and coordinating boards of postsecondary education. Founded in 1954, SHEEO serves its members as an advocate for state policy leadership, a liaison between states and the federal government, and a vehicle for learning from and collaborating with peers. SHEEO also serves as a manager of multistate teams and as a source of information and analysis on educational and public policy issues. Together with its members, SHEEO advances public policies and academic practices that enable Americans to attain education beyond high school and achieve success in the 21st century economy.