Fiscal Year 2013
Enterprise Financial Health Compendium
2013 Financial Health Compendium
Metrics by UW Risk Category
Risk: Changing Revenue Streams
Risk: Changing Demographics
G R A N T S G R A N T S S T U D E N T S S T U D E N T S S T U D E N T S S T U D E N T S S T U D E N T S E N T E R P R I S E S T U D E N T S S T U D E N T S 89% 88% 100% 91% 94% 92% 92% 94% 84% 89% 94% 99% 104% Expense Ratio Good 42% 40% 38% 37% 34% 36% 38% 40% 42% 2010 2011 2012 2013 Freshman Admission Yield Good 0 500 Salaries for UW Students Graduating with Bachelor's 2007 2009 2011 Good 20% 21% 20% 20% 19% 18% 18% 17% 13% 18% 23% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % of Unrestricted Endowed Assets Good 13% 14% 17% 18% 18% 19% 19% 20% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% Tuition / Total Revenue Good 26% 26% 28% 24% 25% 24% 24% 24% 20% 25% 30% Federal Grant Revenue / Total Revenue Good 13% 22% 17% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% -3% 3% 9% 15% 21% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % Change in Undergraduate Resident Tuition Good 58.4% 60.2% 61.1% 57.8% 56.0% 58.0% 60.0% 62.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013 Undergraduate Admission Selectivity Ratio Good $13,950 $15,450 $16,750 $17,950 $12,000 $17,000 $22,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 Avg Financial Aid per Undergrad Recipient Good 9.20% 9.15% 9.38% 9.46% 8.50% 9.00% 9.50% 10.00% 2010 2011 2012 2013 Faculty to Student Ratio Good
2013 Financial Health Compendium Metrics by UW Risk Category
Risk: Aging Infrastructure and Operational Systems
E N T E R P R I S E S P A C E S P A C E S P A C E 74% 72% 68% 67% 67% 66% 65% 66% 60% 65% 70% 75% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Equity Ratio Good 2010 2011 2012 2013 Moody's Bond Rating Good Aaa Aa1 Aa2 6% 5% 4% 6% 7% 8% 9% 11% 0% 5% 10% 15% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Interest Expense / Instruction Expense Good 75% 75% 92% 87% 91% 97% 98% 94% 70% 90% 110% Net Capital Assets / Total Revenue Good
UW Expense Ratio Operating Expenses / Total Revenues
The expense ratio indicates the financial stability of the University and represents the ability of the UW to cover expenses with cash inflows.
At or below the median of our peer group (Lower is better)
96% (Note: 2013 Median of 13 peer schools with similar characteristics to UW)
IMPORTANCE
This ratio represents fiscal flexibility. As ratio values dip below 100%, the size of UW reserves are increasing. Excessive reserves allows opportunity to strategically allocate additional expenses across the enterprise to eliminate risk and promote mission critical investments.
ANALYSIS
The significant decrease in the equity ratio from 2012 to 2013 is due to a $300 million increase in investment income and increases in capital appropriations and gifts. Modeled projections of expenses and revenues show a modest increase in the expense ratio in FY2014 holding at a steady rate through FY2017.
SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Data Source
Risk Register
Enterprise Dimension
Metric Partners
FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - SRECNP Lines 72, 44, 86, 133
Changing Revenue Streams
Student, Healthcare, Faculty, Grants and Gifts, Space and Assets, Technology Treasury and Financial Accounting
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Operating Expense 3,492,655 3,769,518 3,911,025 4,121,149 4,294,222 4,413,767 4,587,790 4,781,425 Operating Revenue 3,124,075 3,390,281 3,522,370 3,782,920 3,984,473 4,126,950 4,266,305 4,439,986 Non-operating Revenue 703,237 766,633 317,059 629,904 479,930 522,043 512,779 506,170 Other Revenue 92,487 147,299 84,839 131,768 118,345 130,494 190,219 137,786 Total Revenue 3,919,799 4,304,213 3,924,268 4,544,592 4,582,747 4,779,487 4,969,303 5,083,941 Expense Ratio 89.1% 87.6% 99.7% 90.7% 93.7% 92.3% 92.3% 94.0%
89% 88% 100% 91% 94% 92% 92% 94% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96% 98% 100% 102% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Expense Ratio Good
UW Equity Ratio Net Assets / Total Assets
The equity ratio measures the strength of the University's balance sheet, where strength is indicated by more assets (especially cash) and less liabilities.
At or above the median of our peer group (Higher is better)
64% (Note: 2013 Median of 13 peer schools with similar characteristics to UW)
IMPORTANCE ANALYSIS
On a gross basis, two thirds of UW assets are unencumbered by obligations. The significant drop in UW's equity ratio since 2010 represents the high levels of external borrowing used to meet capital needs during that time. This number is projected to stabilize through FY2017 as UW slows its rate of borrowing. The debt obligations are closely managed, including active oversight by the BoR.
SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Data Source
Risk Register
Enterprise Dimension
FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - SNP Lines 83, 44
Aging Infrastructure & Operational Systems Space and Assets
Metric Partners Treasury and Financial Accounting
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Net assets 5,193,669 5,767,257 5,741,608 6,165,051 6,453,577 6,819,297 7,200,810 7,503,326 Total assets 7,000,315 8,012,725 8,403,443 9,167,181 9,602,324 10,377,316 11,010,420 11,301,718 Asset Ratio 74.2% 72.0% 68.3% 67.3% 67.2% 65.7% 65.4% 66.4%
74% 72% 68% 67% 67% 66% 65% 66% 60% 62% 64% 66% 68% 70% 72% 74% 76% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Equity Ratio Good
UW Admissions Yield Enrolled Freshman Students / Accepted Freshman Students
Admissions yield is the percentage of admitted students who accept the offer of admission and enroll. Yield is one measure of a university's value to its applicants, with a higher yield rate suggesting a university holds more value among its admission pool.
40% - (Note: Need to confirm UW target with Phil Ballinger)
National average for both public and private is 40%
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk of loosing its status as a "top-ranked institution", if admissions yield declines in an environment where the cost of attracting students is rising. Yield is an indicator of how desirable prospective college students consider the University. Yield rates affect how universities stack up in college rankings and indicate how well the University is distinguishing itself from peers on factors like tuition and financial aid.
ANALYSIS
As the academic profile of UW applicants has increased (indicating a more competitive cohorts), there has been an expected decrease in Yield. Nonetheless, the UW's resident yield rate has remained close to the national average of 40%. (Note: look at other schools that are highly selective - Harvard @75%the higher number of applicants likely leads to a lower rate of matriculation due to increase in quality of admitted students that might be competitive for other offers (drivers = # of admitted students). This is a metric that can be influenced by academic admittance standards, (including in-state / out-state mix), and the total number of applicants (Note: look into cost of instruction which has increased 25% since 2009 / what influences this?)
SOURCE DATA
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Accepted 14,753 16,527 18,152 19,560 Enrolled 6,122 6,546 6,931 7,233 Admission Yield 41.5% 39.6% 38.2% 37.0% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Student, Faculty Student Life, Admissions, OPB, Treasury
iSNAP - Annual Census Data (OPB - Institutional Research)
42% 40% 38% 37% 34% 35% 36% 37% 38% 39% 40% 41% 42% 2010 2011 2012 2013 Freshman Admission Yield Good
Reported Salaries for UW Students Graduating with a Bachelor's Degree Bi-Annual Survey Results
Salaries earned, as reported by responding students to the Office of Educational Assessment's bi-annual survey of UW students graduating with a Bachelor's degree.
Positive trend for each categorical salary bin over time
This metric should be analyzed in context with annual economic conditions
Reported
for UW Students Graduating with Bachelor's
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk of loosing its status as a "top-ranked institution", if median salaries for graduates have been flat over a number of years. Median salary potential upon graduation is an important factor that may influence prospective freshmen and admission yield rates. Current collection methods do not allow us to calculate median salaries, however trends in categorical bins allow us to monitor whether salaries are increasing.
ANALYSIS
Overall graduate annual salaries dipped in 2009 during the financial crisis, but were above pre-crisis levels by 2011 and demonstrate positive trends. Talk with metric partners (OEA) to determine comparisons, benchmarks, and discuss regional reporting impacts - what is the profile / demographics of the respondents. Focus on the directional trends, not the values reported.
Target External Benchmark Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners 117 75 1542 155 375 394 244 182 67 1391 142 352 351 212 131 49 65 151 1302 86 350 356 297 84 Changing Demographics Student Office of Educational Assessment, Undergraduate Academic Affairs Under $12,000 $12,000 - $23,999 $24,000 -$35,999 $36,000 - $47,999 A - Expense Ratio $60,000 - $71,999 iSNAP - OEA 2011 Graduate Survey Results
$72,000 (+) Total number of survey respondents 2007 2009 2011
(http://www.washington.edu/oea/pdfs/grad1year/2011/G1UW.PDF)
SOURCE DATA
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Under $12,000 $12,000 - $23,999 $24,000 -$35,999 $36,000 - $47,999 $48,000 - $59,999 $60,000 - $71,999 $72,000 (+)
2007 2009 2011 Good
Salaries
UW Unrestricted Endowment % Unrestricted Endowed Assets / Total Endowed Assets
The unrestricted endowment percentage reflects the amount of unrestricted assets within the University endowment allowing potential discretionary flexibility in fund allocations.
50 largest public university endowments - how do we compare?
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk of loosing its status as a "top-ranked institution", if their endowment is in the millions not billions, and a large percentage is restricted. When your endowment is unrestricted you have maximum flexibility to respond to changes in revenue streams. A high percentage of restriction suggests that you have opportunity to diversify your revenue and to target more unrestricted gifts to further increase your flexibility.
ANALYSIS
The UW shows relative strength in this area with an endowment of nearly 2.5 billion dollars with steady growth projections. The amount of unrestricted endowed assets rests around 20% allowing reasonable flexibility in potential discretionary fund allocations.
SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Total Endowed Assets 1,829,869 2,154,494 2,111,335 2,346,693 2,462,169 2,575,564 2,730,605 2,885,278 Unrestricted 365,974 447,353 422,861 468,000 472,058 475,306 478,470 481,619 Restricted Percentage 20.0% 20.8% 20.0% 19.9% 19.2% 18.5% 17.5% 16.7% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Grants and Gifts Advancement and Treasury
FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - Investments Lines 193, 194
20%
20% 21% 20% 20% 19% 18% 18% 17% 13% 15% 17% 19% 21% 23% 25% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 % of Unrestricted Endowed Assets Good
UW Interest Expense / Instruction Expense
This ratio compares the expenses related to debt issuance to the expenses of student instruction. 6% (??)- At or below Median for schools with similar characteristics to UW Have not been able to determine instructional expense for peers.
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if their financial statements reflect conditions in which debt (interest) expense has been increasing far more rapidly than instruction expense. If interest expense is growing faster than other expenses (in isolation) - what does it show?
ANALYSIS
Current projections indicate risk in this area, but certain factors might indicate that the risk factor is overstated. The increase in interest expense compared to instruction expense is due to issuing debt for auxiliaries over the past several years. At least for now instruction is not a significant source of debt service. We carefully manage debt capacity with BoR oversight and we have, compared to small public liberal arts universities, a much more diverse revenue base and adequate liquidity. Interest expense is being funded by auxiliaries, so the degree by which instruction expense is impacted is limited due to this factor. This does raise the question however, as to the role that tuition should play in future debt capacity considerations? Note: Unclear on source for Instruction Exp Proj. SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Interest Expense 46,735 42,726 41,182 57,200 75,719 80,213 100,803 123,742 Instruction Expense 836,142 902,423 936,299 986,603 1,028,037 1,056,656 1,098,317 1,144,673 5.6% 4.7% 4.4% 5.8% 7.4% 7.6% 9.2% 10.8% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Aging Infrastructure and Operational Systems Space and Assets, Faculty OPB and Treasury
FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - SCRENP Line 107 (Inst Exp - TrialBalance)
6% 5% 4% 6% 7% 8% 9% 11% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Interest Expense / Instruction Expense Good
Net Capital Assets / Total Revenue
This ratio reflects net capital assets (property, plant, and equipment) as a % of total revenue
80 % (??) - At or below peer median (lower is better)
2013 Peer Median for schools with similar characteristics to UW.
Net Capital Assets / Total Revenue
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if their financial statements reflect conditions in which PP&E assets (net capital assets) is increasing faster than revenue. As the capital assets to revenue ratio increases, it suggests that you are investing in permanent assets and limiting your ability to develop contingencies.
ANALYSIS
This metric indicates a trend that should be monitored. We are in the process of establishing proper targets based on peer group medians, however the projected trend indicates continual increases over the next three years. What is causing this? - Look at 2011-2013
Data Source
Risk Register
Enterprise Dimension
Metric Partners
Aging Infrastructure and Operational Systems
Space and Assets
OPB, Financial Accounting, and Treasury
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Net Capital Assets 2,957,777 3,246,486 3,618,409 3,975,957 4,185,199 4,651,200 4,893,086 4,789,117 Total Revenue 3,919,799 4,304,213 3,924,268 4,544,592 4,582,747 4,779,487 4,969,303 5,083,941 75.5% 75.4% 92.2% 87.5% 91.3% 97.3% 98.5% 94.2%
SOURCE DATA (in thousands) FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - SNP Line 25, SRECNP (Sum 44, 86, 133)
75% 75% 92% 87% 91% 97% 98% 94% 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 105% 110% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Good
Net Tuition / Total Revenue
This ratio represents net tuition (tuition & fees less scholarship allowance) as % of total revenue. As tuition reaches 20% of total revenue, revenue sources should be analyzed 2013 Peer Median for schools with similar characteristics to UW.
Tuition / Total Revenue
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if their financial statements reflect conditions where net tuition is declining and / or tuition represents an increasingly greater percentage of total revenue. Steady increases in tuition indicates that this revenue is likely keeping up with increasing costs. Increases in tuition as a percentage of overall revenue however, indicates a need to monitor the other major revenue streams that support the institution.
ANALYSIS
Net tuition is steadily increasing (see source data below) which is positive, however the percentage of total revenue that is comprised of tuition is increasing. Net tuition revenue is expected to grow in the coming years, ranging from 2%-4%, generally staying even with both inflation and CPI rates, but providing little flexibility for other investments and initiatives. While an upward trend in the ratio of tuition to total revenue is seen as negative, 17% (as compared to other revenue sources at the UW) is not of concern at this time. It does however indicate a continued focus on the other significant revenue streams coming from the clinical enterprise and federal sources (Medicare/Medicaid, federal grants and contracts, and federal student aid). Note: total federal revenue % is approximately 46%.
SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Net Tuition and Fees 527,958 594,915 681,227 808,053 839,057 886,470 946,755 1,012,057 Total Revenue 3,919,799 4,304,213 3,924,268 4,544,592 4,582,747 4,779,487 4,969,303 5,083,941 13.5% 13.8% 17.4% 17.8% 18.3% 18.5% 19.1% 19.9% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Students OPB
FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - SNP Line 5, SRECNP (Sum 44, 86, 133)
13% 14% 17% 18% 18% 19% 19% 20% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 22% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Good
Federal Grant Revenue / Total Revenue (Includes Federal Pell Grants)
This ratio represents federal grant revenue (including Pell grants) as % of total revenue
As federal sources dip below 25% of total revenue, analysis is warranted
2013 Peer Median for schools with similar characteristics to UW.
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if their financial statements reflect conditions where access to consistent levels of government funding is becoming problematic. Access to federal grant revenue depends on significant internal and external factors. Any significant decrease in the percentage of federal grant revenue should be closely monitored. Increases in the ratio of federal funding indicates success in competiveness for top faculty, however proper diversification of revenue streams should be monitored for over dependence.
ANALYSIS
Even with the challenges faced by the federal government, the University has continued to receive federal funding. Federal grants & contracts are expected to grow 2-2.5% each year. Overall, federal research funding at the UW has increased by 300% in 20 years. Currently the UW receives more federal research funding than any other public university in the US, enjoying this status for most years since 1974. However, the federal sequestration and other measures have resulted in research awards becoming increasingly competitive and, in particular for more junior faculty. Nonetheless, the market share for the UW is projected to remain stable or slightly increase, thus maintaining stability in the near term for this critical source of revenue.
SOURCE DATA (in thousands)
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Federal Grants/Contracts 982,413 1,092,973 1,070,901 1,057,829 1,102,244 1,124,289 1,152,396 1,181,206 Federal Pell Grants 37,356 44,044 47,387 45,655 45,883 46,113 46,343 46,575 Total Federal Grant Revenue 1,020,000 1,137,000 1,118,000 1,103,000 1,148,000 1,170,000 1,199,000 1,228,000 Total Revenue 3,919,799 4,304,213 3,924,268 4,544,592 4,582,747 4,779,487 4,969,303 5,083,941 26.0% 26.4% 28.5% 24.3% 25.1% 24.5% 24.1% 24.2% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Demographics, Changing Revenue Streams Grants and Gifts OPB, Treasury, Office of research
FuturePerfect
Forecasting) - SRECNP (Sum
21 and 110) and (Sum
44, 86, 133)
(
lines
lines
26% 26% 28% 24% 25% 24% 24% 24% 21% 22% 23% 24% 25% 26% 27% 28% 29% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Federal Grant Revenue / Total Revenue Good
Moody's Bond Rating
The Moody's Bond Rating reflects the overall credit worthiness or "risk of default" of the University when borrowing funds.
Target
External Benchmark
Aa2 is the minimum for debt capacity, but policy minimum is to maintain "A". 2013 Peer Median for schools with similar characteristics to UW.
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if their financial statements reflect conditions where bond ratings have been lowered. A stronger bond rating means lower cost of borrowing and less impact on expense lines.
ANALYSIS
Moody's raised the University's bond rating in 2011 to Aaa, its highest rating. UW is also AA+ with a positive outlook from S&P.
SOURCE DATA
Data Source
Risk Register
Enterprise Dimension
Metric Partners
iSNAP - Annual Census Data (UW Treasury)
Aging Infrastructure and Operational Systems
Student, Healthcare, Faculty, Grants and Gifts, Space and Assets, Technology (ALL) Treasury
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Aa1 Aaa Aaa Aaa
2010 2011 2012 2013 Moody's Bond Rating Good Aaa Aa1 Aa2
Change in Undergraduate Resident Tuition
This metric tracks the actual and projected change in annual tuition for a single undergraduate resident at full-time equivalency.
7% - 5year average median range of Global Challenge State Peer Institutions
Median range of combined Global Challenge State Peer Institutions
% Change in Undergraduate Resident Tuition
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if drastic measures have been employed such as hiking tuition to the top end of the range for comparable institutions. Regular modest increases are needed to keep up with inflation, make program investments, and serve to maintain access through financial aid support. Excessive changes in the tuition rate indicates potential risk in the maintenance strategy for institutional expenses.
ANALYSIS
Average tuition increases between 2010 and 2013 were 13% per year. After 2013, the average tuition increase is expected to be 3% per year. Without cost containment or increased state allocations, funding for program investment or other enhancement to the student experience will likely be minimal. The total tuition (amount per student) should be monitored as we move beyond peer averages / medians, to better understand the limits of our own elasticity.
iSNAP - Annual Census Data (OPB - Institutional Research) / Projections from FuturePerfect http://opb.washington.edu/content/peer-comparisons
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Resident Tuition Rate 8,701 10,574 12,383 12,397 12,397 12,769 13,152 13,547 Global Challenge % Change 10.5% 10.4% 2.6% 2.3% UW % Change 13.1% 21.5% 17.1% 0.1% 0.0% 2.9% 2.9% 2.9% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Students OPB
DATA
SOURCE
13% 22% 17% 0% 0% 3% 3% 3% -3% 0% 3% 6% 9% 12% 15% 18% 21% 24% 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Good
UW Admission Selectivity Ratio Undergraduate Students Admitted / Undergraduate Students Applied
The selectivity ratio measures the percentage of admitted freshman undergraduate students from the total freshman undergraduate application pool
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if drastic measures have been employed such as lowering admission standards. Lowering admission standards can often lead to a higher percentage of admissions from a given applicant pool. Selectivity is an important factor in college rankings where a lower percentage indicates a more selective school. More selective schools often have an abundance of qualified applicants competing for available spots in the admitting class.
ANALYSIS
Applications over the period 2010 to 2013 increased with a corresponding increase in students admitted. In absolute numbers, the enrollment increased by nearly 8%. From 2012 to 2013, the number of applicants increased from 29723 to 33857, or 14%, as compared to the prior 3 year increases of about 8%. Data suggests an increasing number of high school seniors are applying to more schools. This could be one factor contributing to the increase in selectivity for 2013. This is a measure of your demand particularly if enrollment and admission numbers are fixed. Over time, if the number of applicants increase (as they have at the UW), then the quality of your freshman class will have a corresponding increase.
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Freshman Applied 25,269 27,469 29,723 33,857 Freshman Admitted 14,753 16,527 18,152 19,560 Selectivity 58.4% 60.2% 61.1% 57.8% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Students OPB, Undergraduate Admissions
iSNAP - Annual Census Data (OPB - Institutional Research) / CDS Reports by Campus Additional resources found at http://opb.washington.edu/content/external-reporting
SOURCE DATA
60 % - Confirm / Obtain Target from OPB or Admissions Obtain Moody's Benchmark 58.4% 60.2% 61.1% 57.8% 56.0% 57.0% 58.0% 59.0% 60.0% 61.0% 62.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013
Good
Undergraduate Admission Selectivity Ratio
Average Financial Aid per Undergraduate Recipient
This metric reflects the average amount of financial aid awarded per undergraduate student that applied and received financial aid.
Obtain from Megan Davis - Office of Financial Aid
Obtain from Megan Davis - Office of Financial Aid
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if drastic measures have been employed such as cutting back on the allocations of financial aid.
ANALYSIS
Undergraduate financial aid has increased an average of 7% per year, slightly below the average of undergraduate resident tuition increase over the same period. While a rising number suggests greater access to needy students, one must be diligent in monitoring the point at which the number of students and the amount of aid per student is unsustainable. The primary risk occurs if this metric decreases. A decreasing number suggests that resources are falling behind demand, which has implications for accessibility to economically disadvantaged students. Approximately 30% of UW undergraduates do not pay tuition, a measure that is great for accessibility, but could represent a risk for sustainable commitment. Note : Clarify these #s -with Megan (email sent 8/15) - what is financial aid, and is this total undergrad, resident undergrad, or undergrads receiving aid? Need to know what types of aid are included in this number. If it includes loans, it would be interesting to know the degree to which the increases were driven by loans versus grants, aid, husky promise, etc.
SOURCE DATA
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Undergrad Financial Aid Undergraduate Recipients Financial Aid per Undergrad 13,950 15,450 16,750 17,950 Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Revenue Streams Students OPB, Office of Financial Aid
iSNAP
CDS
- Annual Census Data (Megan Davis - Office of Student Financial Aid) /
Reports Additional resources found at http://opb.washington.edu/content/external-reporting
$13,950 $15,450 $16,750 $17,950 $12,000 $13,000 $14,000 $15,000 $16,000 $17,000 $18,000 $19,000 $20,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 Avg Financial Aid per Undergrad Recipient Good
Faculty / Student Ratio
UW Faculty Headcount per Student FTE
This metric tracks the headcount for core faculty (professorial, instructional, and research) across all three campuses of the UW compared to the total number of student FTE (undergraduate, graduate, and professional)
Faculty to Student Ratio
IMPORTANCE
Bain & Company warns that a University might be at risk if drastic measures have been employed such as a necessary reduction in faculty headcount. A reduction in faculty headcount is often seen in hiring freezes resulting from legislative budgetary actions. The most important aspect of measuring faculty headcount is maintaining an desired and appropriate faculty to student ratio.
The faculty to student ratio has held steady at about 9% over the last four years approaching an educational environment that offers one core faculty member for every ten students across the UW campuses. Despite the Washington State hiring freeze enacted by the state legislature after the economic stress of 2008, the University has been able to maintain a responsible ratio between faculty and students.
SOURCE
Target External Benchmark FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 Faculty Headcount 4235 4280 4356 4497 Undergraduate FTE 32,747 33,695 33,809 34,301 Grad / Professional FTE 13,275 13,066 12,624 13,221 Total Student FTE 46,022 46,761 46,433 47,522 Faculty Student Ratio 9.20% 9.15% 9.38% 9.46% Data Source Risk Register Enterprise Dimension Metric Partners Changing Demographics Students Academic Personnel
ANALYSIS
DATA iSNAP - Annual Census Data (Academic Personnel - SIM Facts) FuturePerfect (UW Treasury Financial Forecasting) - Students - Line 59, 70, 81
9% - Need to obtain / verify this target Need to obtain this bench mark 9.20% 9.15% 9.38% 9.46% 8.60% 8.80% 9.00% 9.20% 9.40% 9.60% 9.80% 10.00% 2010 2011 2012 2013
Good