2011 AAU Performance Update by Travis Thompson

A Performance Update:

Advancing USF’s Strategic Plan

Prepared by Office of Decision Support, Planning & Analysis October 2011

Table of Contents President’s Message............................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary................................................................................................................................ 2 A Performance Update: Advancing USF’s Strategic Plan......................................................................11 University Leadership............................................................................................................................12 University of South Florida (USF)...........................................................................................................13 USF Strategic Plan.................................................................................................................................13 Association of American Universities (AAU)..........................................................................................14 AAU Eligibility Criteria............................................................................................................................14 Performance Data:

Infrastructure Measures

Total University Expenditures.................................................................................................16

Total University Expenditures per Student FTE......................................................................17

Tuition & Fees: In-State, Undergraduate............................................................................... 18

Tuition & Fees: Out-of-State, Undergraduate.........................................................................19

Tuition & Fees: In-State, Graduate......................................................................................... 20

Tuition & Fees: Out-of-State, Graduate................................................................................. 21

Total Revenues per Student FTE........................................................................................... 22

State Appropriations.............................................................................................................. 23

State Appropriations per Student FTE................................................................................... 24

Annual Giving......................................................................................................................... 25

Endowment........................................................................................................................... 26

Endowment per Total Student FTE........................................................................................ 27

Total Library Expenditures..................................................................................................... 28

Total Library Materials Expenditures..................................................................................... 29

Total Library Professional + Support Staff (FTE).................................................................... 30 ..

Library Professional Salaries & Wages.................................................................................. 31

Moody’s Rating...................................................................................................................... 32

Student Measures

Total Student Headcount....................................................................................................... 33

Total Student FTE................................................................................................................... 34

Graduate Student Headcount................................................................................................ 35

Percent Graduate Student Headcount................................................................................... 36

Doctorates Awarded **......................................................................................................... 37

First Time in College (FTIC) Student Headcount................................................................... 38

Median SAT Score................................................................................................................. 39

FTICs in Top 10% of High School Class................................................................................. 40

National Merit Scholars.......................................................................................................... 41

Percent Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid................................................................ 42

Percent of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students................................................................. 43

Percent of Classes with 50 or More Students...................................................................... 44

Freshman Retention Rate...................................................................................................... 45

Six-Year Graduation Rate for First Time in College (FTIC) Students...................................... 46

International Student Headcount........................................................................................... 47

Percent International Student Headcount............................................................................. 48

Students Studying Abroad..................................................................................................... 49

Percent Students Studying Abroad........................................................................................ 50

Student-to-Faculty Ratio........................................................................................................ 51

USF E-Profile: Fall 2011, Drop-Add......................................................................................... 52

Faculty Measures

Tenured / Tenure-Track Faculty............................................................................................... 53

Full-Time Instructional Staff................................................................................................... 54

Faculty Awards *.................................................................................................................... 55

National Academy Members *.............................................................................................. 56

Citation Impact *.................................................................................................................... 57

Total Research Expenditures per Tenured / Tenure-Track Faculty.......................................... 58

Full Professor Average Salaries.............................................................................................. 59

Associate Professor Average Salaries................................................................................... 60

Assistant Professor Average Salaries.................................................................................... 61

Research Measures

NSF Total Research Expenditures.......................................................................................... 62

AAU Federal Research Expenditures *.................................................................................. 63

NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures............................................................................. 64

Research Performance Index (RPI)........................................................................................ 65

Postdoctoral Appointees **................................................................................................... 66

Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates............................................................................ 67

Invention Disclosures Received............................................................................................. 68

Total Patents Issued............................................................................................................... 69

Total Licenses / Options Executed........................................................................................ 70

Cumulative Active Licenses................................................................................................... 71

License Income Received..................................................................................................... 72

Start-ups Initiated................................................................................................................... 73

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

President’s Message

I am pleased to share the 2011 Annual Performance Report for Transforming Higher Education for Global Innovation, USF’s Strategic Plan for 2007-2012. Since the Plan was approved by the USF System Board of Trustees, on May 31, 2007, we have witnessed some major worldwide economic shifts along with changes at USF, the most significant of which have been a rapid loss of base state funding and the emergence of the multicampus USF System. This is the second phase of strategic planning during my presidency, with the first guiding us to become a Top 50 Public Research University during the period 2001-2006. Earlier this year, USF climbed to 27th among public universities ranked by the Top American Research Universities (TARU). Our ambitious vision continues and we have made remarkable gains while enduring the most challenging economic climate in the history of USF. Judy Genshaft President

Our vision is to become a premier research university with state, national, and global impact, and positioned for membership in the Association of American Universities. Our strategic plan has become the focus of USF and is embraced by the doctoral granting, research intensive campus in Tampa that includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science. Other members of the USF System will present their own performance updates consistent with their distinctive strategic plans. As you know, USF has emerged as a national leader in higher education strategic planning and performance accountability. Many of our “best practices” have been adopted by universities and statewide systems of higher education across the nation and beyond. Our earlier interactive electronic platform has been replicated by institutions around the world to track institutional performance. This report, also available online, provides a fresh, exciting and new look which aligns institutional planning and performance assessment in a focused and disciplined manner. In the following pages, you will be able to easily track USF’s performance over time and compare our accomplishments with Florida’s public and private research universities and prospective AAU member institutions, as well as all public AAU universities. I invite you to reflect on our university’s remarkable growth as a high impact global research university dedicated to student success as you navigate this report and I thank you for your continuing support of the University of South Florida.

Judy Genshaft President September 2011

Executive Summary

The University of South Florida’s rapid emergence as a high impact global research university, over the past decade, is perhaps unprecedented in the history of American higher education. Just 50 years after the first students enrolled at the university, USF is proud to take its place alongside many of the nation’s most esteemed public research universities, but we are not yet satisfied. At the outset, I want to acknowledge the hard work and valued contributions of a remarkably talented group of data and policy analysts, in the Office of Decision Support, who prepared this report and whose important efforts continue to inform strategic and budget decision- making at USF. Guided by the prior strategic plan (2001-2006), institutional gains over the past decade have been nothing short of dramatic. Student headcount across the USF System has grown by one third, from 35,728 during the 2000-2001 academic year to 47,214 in Fall 2011 (with managed growth of 28% at USF, from 31,042 to 39,629), while the average Ralph wilcox freshman SAT score has increased by 144 points (from 1,059 in Fall 1999 to an all-time Provost & Executive Vice President high of 1,203 this Fall) while the mean high school grade point average climbed from 3.36 to 3.91. During the same period, USF witnessed a significant decline in state appropriated funds (i.e. general revenue and lottery) per fulltime equivalent student (FTE), while undergraduate tuition for a full-time Florida resident student has more than doubled. Last year, USF received $10,447 in educational and general funding per full-time equivalent student, significantly less than the University of Florida, Florida State University, and other member campuses/institutions of the USF System. Since the 2006-07 academic year, a student’s share of the cost of education at USF has increased from 27.6% to 41%. It is important to note that available revenue per FTE, derived from state appropriations plus student tuition, barely increased over the past decade, challenging the university to diversify its revenue base. Although USF’s endowment climbed above $400 Million in early 2007, before the worldwide collapse of the financial markets, gains from $203 Million in 1999-2000 to $360 Million in 2008-2009 amounted to a 56 percent growth. With an all-time high of $111.6 Million raised through private giving in the past year (following $34.0 Million in FY 2009 and $36.4 Million in FY 2010), USF’s endowment has climbed to $344 Million, the third largest in the State University System. Most important, through careful alignment of strategic and budget planning, USF has been able to avoid academic program closures, furloughs and the layoff of tenured and tenure-earning faculty, while maintaining considerable progress toward its bold strategic destination. That USF holds a position among the third tier of Moody’s rating of AAU institutions (at Aa2 the same as the University of Florida and Florida State University) is testimony to the sound fiscal management policies adopted by institutional leadership. Throughout these most challenging of times, USF has emerged as one of the nation’s most rapidly growing research universities, with total research expenditures more than doubling to $331 Million (for FY 2010) in the past decade and federal expenditures jumping from $51 Million to $220 Million. During the same period, the number of degrees awarded climbed 67 percent, from 6,803 in academic year 2000-2001 to 11,381 across the USF System (with 9,637 degrees awarded at USF alone) in 2010-2011. As the USF Board of Trustees approved the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan, Transforming Higher Education for Global Innovation, in May 2007, they acknowledged the bold vision yet could not have anticipated the impact of the worldwide economic recession on the life of the University. Since July 1, 2007, the USF System has seen a loss of more than $100 Million in state appropriations from its base budget. While the budget gap was, in part, filled with $23.0 Million in non-recurring federal economic stimulus funds (for each of FY 2009-2010 and FY 2010-2011) and increasing tuition revenues, the university has had to count on the implementation of efficiencies (including but not limited to reductions in administrative costs, restrictions on enrollment growth, reduced course offerings and increased class sizes, consolidated purchasing, shared services, and energy efficiencies), as well as the judicious spending down of nonrecurring reserves to offset budget deficits. “Staying the course” through a laser-like focus and discipline has

become a hallmark of collective decision-making across the University, over the past four years, for though it is recognized that the destination might now be more distant than once envisioned, there remains a strong commitment to the path that is being navigated. This annual performance update centers only on USF, the doctoral granting, research intensive campus of the USF System. With USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, and USF Polytechnic each pursuing a differentiated mission and distinctive vision for the future, as separately (or aspiring) accredited institutions, their individual reporting to the US Department of Education through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), has led to their differential classification by the Carnegie Foundation, and separate rankings by US News and World Report.

Transforming Higher Education for Global Innovation The most recent report of the Top American Research Universities (2010), saw USF tied at 27th among the nation’s premier public research universities, while US News and World Report recently placed USF, tied for 8th, among a group of “up and coming” universities that included Arizona State, the Ohio State, Purdue, the University of Maryland College Park, and the University of Southern California. Having earlier achieved its strategic goal of climbing into the nation’s Top 50 public research universities, as measured by the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) ranking of institutions’ total and federal research and development expenditures, USF embarked upon an even more ambitious path for its 2007-2012 phase of strategic planning. Striving to become “a premier research university with state, national, and global impact, and positioned for membership in the Association of American Universities (AAU)”, the University has focused its future on performance benchmarking of the 34 public AAU member institutions. Classified by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching as a Research University with Very High Activity (RU/VH: a classification reserved for just 73 public research universities nationwide), USF has also tracked its performance against Florida’s other four top-tier research universities, the University of Florida, the University of Miami, Florida State University, and the University of Central Florida. Annual performance data are also collected for Florida International University and Florida Atlantic University. Moreover, USF’s national peers (carefully selected based upon similarity of institutional characteristics), include four AAU members, Rutgers University, Stony Brook University, the University at Buffalo, and the University of California, Irvine, along with four non-AAU institutions, North Carolina State University, the University of Alabama at Birmingham, the University of Cincinnati, and the University of Illinois, Chicago. Finally, we track the performance of the following prospective AAU member institutions, Arizona State University, Colorado State University, the University of Utah, Virginia Tech and the University of Georgia. Collectively, these performance analyses and comparisons inform USF’s annual planning activities. Strengthening USF’s position in the Carnegie Foundation’s top tier (RU/VH) of research universities remains our top priority as we track progress toward meeting AAU’s primary and secondary performance indices. Concurrently, we carefully gauge institutional progress in the NSF’s ranking of research universities; the National Research Council’s ratings of graduate programs; the Top American Research Universities (TARU) annual report, along with higher education institutional rankings provided by US News and World Report and other commercial and academic/professional sources. Guided by its mission, vision, values and goals, USF’s upward trajectory as a high impact global research university dedicated to student success is carefully tracked through a set of prioritized strategic metrics. This report includes inputs, throughputs, outputs and outcomes for the latest reported year (as well as a decade of trend data), and is framed around USF’s infrastructure, students, faculty and research. As we seek to benchmark USF’s resource base and performance against prior years, and a wide range of referential universities (public AAUs, Florida’s research universities, national peers, and AAU prospects), we utilize national data sources, thus, the most recent reporting period often lags one or two years behind the current year). Definitions and data sources are also included.

Strengthening USF’s Infrastructure The data on pages 16 to 32 paint the picture of a university that is significantly undercapitalized compared to the nation’s top public research universities. Falling short of all 34 AAU public universities in Total Expenditures per Student FTE explains, in large part, the extremely poor student-to-faculty ratio which, incidentally, characterizes most public universities in the State of Florida. This, in turn, presents widespread challenges for improving student success and continuing growth in research productivity at USF. It is notable that the level of investment also falls short of eight of the nine AAU prospects seemingly placing USF at a comparative disadvantage in pursuing its vision. While the relative share of state appropriations to USF (and other Florida universities) remains quite high compared to public universities in other states, we recognize that such levels of public investment are rapidly diminishing resulting in an increased burden on other fund sources to ensure continued access, quality and productivity. The resulting budget shortfall will, in part, be offset with enhanced tuition revenues (from both increases to undergraduate resident tuition and the enrollment of more full-fee paying out-of-state students); increases in available endowments and other private gifts; growth in research expenditures and other revenues streams, including but not limited to auxiliaries and licensing revenues. The Total Revenues per Student FTE underscores the weak position that USF finds itself in compared to AAU members and prospects, as well as national peer institutions. Significant improvements in annual giving and successful completion of the current Comprehensive Campaign (with an emphasis on the endowment of student scholarships) will be essential to undergirding USF’s fragile infrastructure. Future Considerations: • Recognizing the fragility of USF’s infrastructure, the University must reduce its dependency on diminishing state resources in seeking to diversify its sources of revenue. Building a more robust base of recurring funding will be essential to providing students and faculty alike with the educational and research support essential to realizing their success. This will include increased funding for the USF Library that, between FY 2009 and FY 2010, saw expenditures decrease from $16.6 Million to $14.6 Million. • USF’s Board of Trustees must carefully consider annual increases to undergraduate resident tuition (consistent with Florida Statute), to help offset losses in General Revenue while maintaining academic access and quality. Primary investments must contribute to reducing student-to-faculty and student-to-advisor ratios with a mind to enhancing student learning and success. It will be imperative that USF grow sources of need-based financial aid (including university funded and Foundation scholarships) to offset tuition increases for those who qualify for need-based funding and in anticipation of reductions in Pell Grant awards – with a mind to maintaining access and improving the academic success (i.e., retention, persistence and graduation rates) of limited income students. • As USF seeks to reshape its enrollment profile to grow both graduate student headcount and FTE to 25 percent of the University’s enrollment, consideration must be given to moderating graduate student tuition increases. At the same time, USF must continue to increase its investment in graduate education through awarding nationally competitive stipends (and benefits) for graduate assistants. • The USF Board of Trustees must be careful to control out-of-state tuition increases (at both the undergraduate and graduate levels), to ensure that USF remains nationally and internationally competitive in attracting intellectual talent from outside of Florida. At current rates, undergraduate non-resident and graduate non-resident tuition ensures that non-residents are covering more than the full cost of instruction (without Florida taxpayer subsidy). Extending the geographical diversity of students enrolled at USF is considered important to enhancing the quality and relevance of education as non-resident students bring different experiences and perspectives to the classroom. • At the same time, it will be essential to effectively manage enrollment growth, limiting student headcount to approximately 40,000 students (25 percent at the graduate level) at USF while increasing the FTE yield (i.e., more

• full-time research graduate students). Such initiatives as the Take 15 campaign are essential to ensuring that undergraduate students enroll full-time and accelerate toward graduation. • USF must continue its recent success in annual giving and build a more robust endowment, with a particular focus on strategic fundraising (to support student scholarships and fellowships, as well as endowed chairs and professorships), if it is to strengthen its position for membership in the AAU.

USF’s Students Florida is home to five of the 20 largest public universities (by headcount) in the nation. The product of population growth, increasing demand for access to higher education, historically low tuition, a pattern of funding enrollment growth, and a reluctance to build new institutions on the part of state government, USF’s infrastructure (from investment in additional faculty members and advisors, to adequacy of instructional space and need-based financial aid) has failed to keep pace with the rapidly expanding student enrollment. Moreover, a tendency toward part-time enrollment has placed an additional burden on institutional infrastructure, has reduced operational efficiencies, and has stifled improvements in student success (i.e., retention and graduation rates). The data on pages 33 to 52 further speak to the comparatively large student enrollment at USF along with the less than optimal headcount to FTE relationship. While gains in both the academic quality (SAT/ACT, and HSGPA) and diversity (including both socioeconomic profile as demonstrated by a very high percentage of Pell recipients at 35 percent, second only to Florida International University in the state, and UC San Diego and UC Davis among AAU institutions; and racial/ethnic representation) of First-Time-in-College (FTIC) students are impressive, the number and percentage of students enrolled in education abroad (695/2% in AY 2009/10, an increase of 30% over the prior year), and the number and percentage of international students (1,690/4% in Fall 2011, an increase of 20% over the prior year) remains very low, particularly for an institution that claims “Global Literacy and Impact” as a strategic priority. It is anticipated that the recent launch of USF World combined with such initiatives as INTO USF, the Confucius Institute, the Center for India Studies, the Institute for the Study of Latin America and the Caribbean, the Center for the Study of International Languages and Culture, and the Global Academic Partners (GAP) program, will stimulate growth in international student enrollment and Education Abroad. Moreover, the establishment of the Genshaft/ Greenbaum Passport Scholarship Fund, with a $1.0 Million endowment, promises to significantly expand USF student participation in global experiences. The number and percentage of graduate students enrolled at USF are nearing the institutional goal of 25 percent of headcount, although the graduate student share of total student FTE lags significantly, suggesting too few full-time research graduate students. This is, perhaps, manifested in the relatively low level of PhD degree production as the doctoral student pipeline appears to empty too slowly (with just 288 doctorates awarded in the 2008-2009 academic year). The recent approval of new PhD programs has increased doctoral student capacity and is expected to increase the number of research doctorates awarded on an annual basis. In summary, 39,629 students are enrolled at USF in Fall 2011 (84% of total USF System enrollment), with more than 9,500 at the graduate level. The Fall freshman student class is the most academically talented ever, based upon an average SAT score of 1,203 (with an interquartile range of 1,130-1,280), an average ACT of 27 (with an interquartile range of 25-29), and an average High School Grade Point Average of 3.91. Moreover, 53% of freshmen were in the top 20% of their high school class and 94% are recipients of Bright Futures scholarships. USF continues to enroll a steady flow of National Merit, National Achievement, and National Hispanic Scholars and 459 students (with an average SAT score of 1,350) were enrolled in the USF Honors College. In Fall 2011, USF enrolled its first class of 24 Provost’s Scholars who are expected to graduate within three years. The relationship of student enrollment to faculty cohort results in too few small classes (24% with <20 students) which are characteristic of AAU institutions, particularly at the undergraduate upper level and graduate level, as well

as too few large classes (15% with >50 students, due to a limited number of classrooms able to accommodate larger numbers of students) that support greater instructional efficiency at the undergraduate lower level. Once again, the most compelling data point is the student-to-faculty ratio which has fallen further to 28:1 and lags all AAU members and prospects, most Carnegie RU/VH institutions, and all but one of Florida’s research universities. With a national average of 18:1 among public AAU institutions, the University of Florida (at 21:1) and Florida State University (at 26:1) represent reasonable interim goals for USF to strive for. Equally important is the low six year graduation rate for FTIC students. While the 2004 cohort showed an impressive 3% increase, to 51% of freshmen graduating within six years, USF falls short of all public AAU institutions, most AAU prospects, and statewide peers. While gains in Freshman Retention (to 89%) are impressive, persistence and time-to-graduation must continue to show marked improvement if USF is to join the ranks of the nation’s very best public research universities in the future. To this end, USF has implemented a wide range of strategies, beginning in 2005, to improve Student Success, with the most significant results anticipated with the Summer/Fall 2006 freshman class. These initiatives have included improving the academic preparedness/selectivity of incoming students, implementing “intrusive” advising and early interventions by reducing the student-to-advisor ratio, (from 600:1 in 2004-2005 to 381:1 in 2009-2010), enhancing financial aid through marketing FAFSA, designing a searchable scholarship database, earlier packaging of financial aid offers, and converting to a direct loan program, developing and implementing the “Don’t Stop, Don’t Drop” program, designing and implementing a required Life Skills for Collegiate Success program (financial literacy, Alcohol EDU, academic integrity, and public safety), implementing Summer Stampede access programs, enhancing instructional and learning strategies (e.g. large sections + recitation breakouts), implementing mandatory residential living for the freshman year, consolidating the Student Success Center in the Library, revising the class schedule to offer more sections and to better utilize classroom space especially in high demand courses and those with large enrollments, implementing Blackboard and Eluminate enhancements along with investing $1.3 M in classroom instructional technology enhancements that allow for the digital capture of classroom/ lecture content, effecting academic policy changes including a declaration of major upon admission, maintaining affordable tuition, improving financial aid and scholarship services, enhancing Student Orientation, increasing student engagement (e.g. REU, Volunteer USF etc), expanding cooperation between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs with expanded living and learning communities, construction of new and renovation of existing instructional and learning facilities, a WDF initiative and course re-design, implementation of Degree Works, a degree audit system, and extending Library investments through capital investments, enhancements of collections and 24/5 service. Overall, there has been a renewed focus on Institutional Effectiveness and quality assurance which is essential to meeting the principles associated with continued regional accreditation by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Future Considerations: • The USF Student Success Council will continue the work of the USF-wide Student Success Task Force, driving stronger collaboration between Academic Affairs and Student Affairs, with a focus on

o Institutionalizing student success as a permanent priority, o Integrating student success into the institutional culture, and o Building an institutional research capacity to support student success initiatives.

Future outcomes will include higher student retention and graduation rates, lower student debt, higher student satisfaction, enhanced learning outcomes and employment rates of graduates, and greater progression to graduate and professional school.

Planned initiatives include establishing a Strategic Enrollment Management Policy Council (to integrate enrollment planning and management across all university units), designing and implementing a model for Financial Aid Leveraging, continuing to expand capacity for Education Abroad and funded global experiences through USF World, developing a plan for The Learning Center (TLC), further developing USF’s newly branded online application, and fully implementing Degree Works, an electronic degree audit system. 6

• With the growth of the Florida State College System (offering four year degrees), and the arrival of more higher education providers (including proprietary and online institutions) in Florida, USF will need to carefully plan and manage future enrollment – particularly with regard to a projected decline in qualified undergraduate transfer students. Working in close collaboration with other USF System institutions, and Hillsborough Community College in particular, continuing student headcount is not expected to exceed approximately 40,000 (25 percent at the graduate level), with expectations of driving the headcount to FTE ratio toward the 0.90 level. That is, USF must generate more full-time undergraduate and graduate enrollment, so accelerating students’ time to graduation. • As graduation rates improve, USF must be prepared to replenish the pipeline of well-prepared undergraduate and graduate students, and to grow the PhD pipeline. This will require new investments, especially privately funded scholarships and fellowships, to attract and retain world class doctoral level talent to USF. • USF expects to increase the geographical diversity of its student talent base, so bringing different experiences and perspectives to the classroom, by increasing the number of full fee-paying out-of-state and international students at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. • USF World will significantly enhance student participation in Education Abroad opportunities. • USF must continue to expand the utility of emerging technologies (including classroom capture) to enhance academic delivery and student learning.

USF’s Faculty USF’s faculty members continue to represent the institution’s most precious asset. The data on pages 53 to 61 paint a picture of a rather small (for the size of the institution’s enrollment) yet highly accomplished faculty cohort. At 1,167 tenured and tenure earning faculty, and 1,118 full-time instructional staff, the resulting student-to-faculty ratio of 28:1 positions USF dead last among prospective and current public AAU universities. While significantly disadvantaging USF in the area of student success and overall research productivity, the university’s professors are respectably positioned with public AAU institutions in regard to prestigious national and international Faculty Awards (second only to UF in Florida), Citation Impact (second only to the University of Miami in Florida), and Total Research Expenditures Per Tenured/Tenure Earning Faculty. USF’s tenured/tenure earning faculty exceeded the performance of their colleagues at all Florida public and private research universities in averaging $242,000 in total research expenditures. The recruitment and retention of faculty talent, which represents the foundation of any great university, will be challenging as USF’s average salary levels for the rank of Professor ($109 K), Associate Professor ($77 K), and Assistant Professor ($67 K) all fall short of AAU means of the $129 K, $87 K, and $76 K. Even within the Florida market, USF currently ranks fifth among the seven research universities across all ranks. Suffice it to say, there remains considerable room for improvement to USF faculty salaries and benefits if we are to be successful in recruiting and retaining more world class talent. Finally, the relatively small number of faculty (3) who hold membership in the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, or the Institute of Medicine represents a dilemma for USF. Preferring to invest limited institutional resources in the retention and “cultivation” of our own cohort of prospective members of the national academies, rather than “buying” them from other universities, suggests that strategic progress in this important area will be limited. Future Considerations: • Growing the tenured/tenure earning (and other full-time) faculty cohort while managing student enrollment (at 40,000 headcount) will be essential to USF’s success in progressing along its strategic path, and improving the student-to-faculty ratio. We must develop strategies to reduce instructional dependence on adjunct faculty.

• Equally important will be increasing the University’s investment in faculty talent by raising salary levels (and maintaining or improving the benefits package, as well as considering faculty housing) to that of public AAU institutions. Without improvement, the recruitment and retention of the best, brightest and most productive faculty members will continue to be a challenge for USF. • The slow economic recovery (and diminishing public investment in the State University System of Florida) and relatively low resident tuition rates, significantly limit available resources to enhance faculty recruitment, support and retention. Significant growth in the number of privately funded (endowed) Chairs and Professorships will be essential to building USF faculty base. • USF must carefully plan for capital investments to provide adequate research space, equipment and library resources to support new faculty members, particularly in the field of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). With an apparent reluctance to fully fund PECO requests, USF will need to explore new paradigms for funding such capital development. • Careful consideration must be given to awarding competitive start-up packages for new faculty members (which presently fall well below market in most disciplines), while exploring creative opportunities for hiring members of the national academies and IOM.

USF’s Research Enterprise USF’s impressive research trajectory is reinforced on pages 62 to 73, with a solid placement among long-established AAU institutions for both Total Research Expenditures and Federal Research Expenditures as reported by the National Science Foundation. The Chronicle of Higher Education’s Almanac of Higher Education (2011) recently reported that, with a 252% increase in federal research expenditures, USF was the nation’s fifth fastest growing research university between 1999-2009. Based upon NSF-reported Total Research Expenditures, USF ranked 65th nationally among all universities (in FY 2009, and 44th among public universities), compared to UF (23rd/16th) and FSU (95th/67th). For Federal Research Expenditures in FY 2009, USF ranked 57th among all universities nationally (and 34th among public universities only), compared to UF (46th/24th) and FSU (90th/58th). Supported by a growing base of Postdoctoral Fellows (261 in FY 2009, placing USF 2nd in Florida) and Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates (164 and 2nd in Florida), the most recent reported citation impact of USF faculty research publications, places USF at #110 among the World’s 500 High Impact Universities (2010), and second among Florida institutions. In the broad realm of innovation, commercialization and technology transfer, as measured by Invention Disclosures Received, Total Patents Issued, Total License/Options Executed, Cumulative Active Licenses, Startups Initiated and License Income Received, USF fares exceedingly well when compared with the 34 public AAU institutions. Licensing revenues are expected to climb as more faculty and student inventions (such as the recent licensing of the TC-5214 antidepressant drug) are commercialized. Most notable was an announcement in the Chronicle of Higher Education (June 14, 2011), that placed US at #9 among 14 universities on a list of 300 organizations awarded the highest number of U.S. patents last year. One of only two Florida-based organizations on the list, USF was the only university statewide and found itself in good company with 12 public and private AAU members (and ahead of Columbia, Michigan, Penn, Cornell, and Washington) along with Tsinghua University in China. Guided by the Senior Vice President for Research, Innovation and Global Initiatives, USF’s signature interdisciplinary research programs exploit the discovery of new knowledge at the interface of discrete disciplines, and include integrated neurosciences, diabetes and autoimmune disorders, sustainable healthy communities (including clean energy, water, public health, oceanography and the build environment), veterans’ reintegration, along with drug discovery and development.

Future Considerations: • Further expansion of USF’s research enterprise will in large part be dependent upon the availability of expanded, cutting-edge research laboratories. Additional space build out in the Interdisciplinary Research Building, and the Interdisciplinary Teaching and Research Facility will not accommodate a significantly enlarged cohort of scientists and engineers. • Equally important, as USF seeks to grow its competitive federal research portfolio, it will be ensuring the availability of state-of-the-art equipment (for many through shared use research cores) along with a robust pre-award and post-award management system to ensure institutional compliance and to ease the administrative burden on principal investigators. • USF’s location in the Tampa Bay Region represents a major asset second only, perhaps, to the intellectual capital of the University community. Partnerships with other universities, industry, public and private sector research organizations (such as SRI, Draper, and Mote Marine Research Institute), and community-based organizations (such as hospitals and school districts) will be essential to expanding USF’s research enterprise in the future. • USF must develop strategies to significantly increase its share of business and industry investment in faculty research agendas, a fundamental gap between the total research expenditures of USF and more highly ranked research universities. • Promoting and rewarding internal collaboration (for external competition) across colleges, departments and disciplines will continue to be an important priority. Not only will this better position USF faculty to compete successfully for federal research awards but the greater synergies help establish a critical mass of scholars in what are, for the most part, comparatively small departments at USF. • A characteristic of comprehensive public research universities (represented by the vast majority of public AAU members) is the breadth and diversity of scholarly, scientific and creative inquiry across the university community. While the STEM field will likely witness growing prominence globally, nationally and in the context of New Florida, the arts, humanities and social sciences must continue to be supported with an emphasis on research relevance and impact. • Finally, providing enhanced investment in faculty and student inventions and discoveries along with expanded support for commercialization, through the USF Research Foundation and the Division of Patents and Licensing, will be essential to maturing the university’s research enterprise in the future.

The USF Community While the empirical data presented in this report is helpful in assessing progress, setting priorities and informing decisions, it cannot capture the breadth of accomplishments at a comprehensive public research university. For instance, USF’s well-regarded Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) is realizing great success in connecting the benefits and relevance of pursuing a baccalaureate degree at one of the nation’s top research universities. While not for everyone, the distinctive opportunities are recognized as a value-addition for those contemplating a path to graduate school or progress to a first professional degree (including medical and law school). Not surprisingly, today we are witnessing increasing success in the number of USF undergraduate students being awarded prestigious national awards, including Freeman, Fulbright, Gilman, Goldwater and Hollings scholarships. Meanwhile, USF continues to build its institutional base in pursuit of membership in the Association of Research Libraries, and toward sheltering a chapter of Phi Beta Kappa, the nation’s oldest and most prestigious honor society in the liberal arts and sciences. To this end, the College of Arts and Sciences, in collaboration with the Office of the Provost, the Tampa Mayor’s Office, and PBK Faculty Alumni collectively sponsor and support the Frontier Lecture 9

Series, bringing notable scholars and intellectuals to share their thoughts with members of the university and broader communities. Building upon the Carnegie Foundation’s classification of USF as an “Engaged University”, and recognizing the incomparable strength of asset represented by our community, the university took a major step forward in establishing the USF Office of Community Engagement. Seeking to expand local and global initiatives that strengthen and sustain healthy communities and improve the quality of life for all, the office carries out its mission by building mutually beneficial and reciprocal university-community partnerships founded on engaged scholarship and service-learning models. Furthermore, led by the Patel School for Global Sustainability, and supported by the USF Office of Sustainability, USF has established itself as a leader in interdisciplinary educational and research collaboration, has witnessed its national sustainability rankings rise, and has been named a “Cool School” by the Sierra Club. In spite of the broader financial slowdown, capital construction continues at USF providing a significant economic boost and jobs for the community. In the past year, the University has opened the Dr. Kiran C. Patel Center for Global Solutions ($23.8 M), the All Steinway Music Teaching and Performance Building ($46.6 M), the Campus Recreation Center Expansion and Southeast Student Dining Facility (the Wellness and Nutrition Center, $14.9 M), the Interdisciplinary Science Teaching and Research Facility ($92.8 M), and new USF Athletic facilities ($30.0 M). Together, these new investments in the lives of USF students, faculty and staff are a symbol of the University’s commitment to growth even in the most challenging of times. Meanwhile, the state-of-the-art Center for Advanced Medical Learning and Simulation (CAMLS) in the heart of downtown Tampa, along with renovations to the Sun Dome, are expected to be completed in early 2012.

Future Priorities As we contemplate the final year of the current strategic plan, and begin to shape a vision for the next phase, USF appears to be faced with five big challenges: • The worst student-to-faculty-ratio among its national peers – that stifles student success and research productivity, • An unacceptably low graduation rate for FTIC students (in spite of a 3% increase in the most recent cohort and marked improvements in the student selectivity profile and retention), • A less than robust institutional infrastructure (particularly in instructional and research support, as well as library resources), • Marginal funding from business and industry to support USF’s research enterprise, and • A limited endowment compared to older statewide and national peer institutions. Compounded by a slow economic recovery and a radical shift in the funding model for Florida’s public universities (from high appropriation/low tuition enrollment growth funding, to diminishing appropriation/rising tuition performance-based funding), USF’s innovative and entrepreneurial spirit will be tested as together we confront these challenges while balancing affordability, access, quality, accountability as well as strengthening our competitive position locally and in both national and global contexts. As we continue the University’s expected strategic progress in the coming years, we must redouble our collective efforts to recruit, reward and retain more talented full-time faculty members, embrace, “own” and celebrate our students’ success, continue to invest in graduate education, make enhancements to our support personnel, policies, space, equipment, and library, and creatively confront the competition (from the state colleges to private and for-profit providers) as they seek to grow their share of the higher education market in Florida, through exploiting technology-based delivery of academic programs and like strategies. Above all, USF’s greatest relevance will be found in solidifying its position as a high impact, global research powerhouse and an engine for producing talented graduates, creating new jobs, and economic growth across the region, the state and nation.

A Performance Update: Advancing USF’s Strategic Plan

Overview An examination of the University of South Florida juxtaposed with peer institutions, including public AAU institutions, AAU prospects, and Florida research institutions, provides the university community and decision makers with relevant data aligned with the vision and goals of the institution, as delineated in the USF 2007-2012 Strategic Plan1.

USF System The University of South Florida System is a young and emerging system formed to bring its member institutions together to collectively serve the Tampa Bay region and beyond, resulting in “a stronger presence and a distinctiveness that provides an unstoppable competitive differentiation” (USF System 2010-2015 Strategic Plan). The USF System is tasked with finding ways to capitalize on synergies and economies of scales among its institutions that are of benefit to students, faculty, staff, alumni, and communities. As a solution for a metropolitan region of multiple major cities, the USF System is comprised of four members embodying distinct and differentiated missions.

Hernando

Pasco

75 4

Pinellas 275

S T. P E T E R S B U R G

LAKELAND

TA M PA

Polk

Hillsborough Manatee Hardee

USF, which is comprised of the campus located in Tampa, S A R A S OTA Highlands USF Health, the College of Marine Science, and the USF 75 Sarasota Desoto Downtown Center, is the doctoral granting, research intensive member of the system. Along with USF, the three master’s level institutions, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, and USF Polytechnic, true to their differentiated missions, collectively provide educational services across the state of Florida and beyond. The first three institutions are separately accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS); USF Polytechnic is in the process of becoming separately accredited.

The 2007-2012 Strategic Plan reflects the immediate goals and objectives of the University of South Florida, the Tampa member institution of the USF System; the USF System 2010-2015 Strategic Plan differs from the USF 2007-2012 Strategic Plan.

University Leadership USF System Board of Trustees John B. Ramil, Chair Harold W. Mullis, Vice Chair Elizabeth Bird, Ph.D. Matthew A. Diaz Gene Engle Stephanie E. Goforth Brian D. Lamb Rhea F. Law, Esq. Stephen J. Mitchell, Esq. Louis S. Saco, M.D. Debbie Nye Sembler Byron E. Shinn Jordan B. Zimmerman

USF Leadership Judy Genshaft, President Ralph Wilcox, Provost and Executive Vice President Karen Holbrook, Senior Vice President for Research, Innovation and Global Affairs John Long, Chief Operating Officer Stephen Klasko, Senior Vice President for USF Health Joel Momberg, Senior Vice President for University Advancement Nick Trivunovich, Vice President for Business and Finance Jennifer Capeheart-Meningall, Vice President for Student Affairs Michael Hoad, Vice President for Communications and Marketing Michael Pearce, Vice President for Information Technologies Sandy Lovins, Vice President for Administrative Services

University of South Florida About The University of South Florida, located in Tampa, Florida, is one of the nation’s top public research universities and one of only 41 public research universities nationwide with very high research activity that is designated as community engaged by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. As a member of the USF System, USF is comprised of the campus located in Tampa, USF Health, the College of Marine Science, and the USF Downtown Center. Prior to the recent development of a USF System Strategic Plan, the USF 2007-2012 Strategic Plan served as an initial guide for the young and emerging system. With an inherently differentiated mission and characteristics, USF continues its course guided by a strategic plan crafted for a metropolitan research institution.

USF Strategic Plan Mission As Florida’s leading metropolitan research university, USF is dedicated to excellence in: • Student access and success in an engaged, and interdisciplinary, learner-centered environment; • Research and scientific discovery, including the generation, dissemination, and translation of new knowledge across disciplines; to strengthen the economy; to promote civic culture and the arts; and to design and build sustainable, healthy communities; and • Embracing innovation, and supporting scholarly and artistic engagement to build a community of learners together with significant and sustainable university-community partnerships and collaborations.

Vision The University of South Florida envisions itself as a pre-eminent research university with state, national, and global impact, and positioned for membership in the Association of American Universities (AAU).

Goals I.

Expanding world-class interdisciplinary research, creative, and scholarly endeavors.

II. Promoting globally competitive undergraduate, graduate and professional programs that support interdisciplinary inquiry, intellectual development, knowledge and skill acquisition, and student success through a diverse, fullyengaged, learner-centered campus environment. III. Expanding local and global engagement initiatives to strengthen and sustain healthy communities and to improve the quality of life. IV. Enhancing all sources of revenue, and maximizing effectiveness in business practices and financial management to establish a strong and sustainable economic base in support of USF’s growth.

Association of American Universities (AAU) Overview The Association of American Universities (AAU) is a nonprofit organization of 61leading public and private research universities in the United States and Canada. Founded in 1900 to advance the international standing of U.S. research universities, AAU today focuses on issues that are important to research-intensive universities, such as funding for research, research policy issues, and graduate and undergraduate education. AAU member universities are on the leading edge of innovation, scholarship, and solutions that contribute to the nation’s economy, security, and well-being. The 59 AAU universities in the United States award more than one-half of all U.S. doctoral degrees and 55 percent of those in the sciences and engineering. AAU programs and projects address institutional issues facing its member universities, as well as government actions that affect these and other universities. AAU works to maintain the productive partnership between the nation’s research universities and the federal government. The major activities of the association include federal government relations, policy studies, and public affairs. Membership in the association is by invitation.

Eligibility Criteria A standing Membership Committee, charged with periodically evaluating non-member universities for invitation to membership, is guided by a set of Membership Principles and Membership Indicators. The Membership Indicators are a two-phase set of quantitative measures used to “assess the breadth and quality of university programs of research and graduate education” (AAU Membership Policy, revised April 20, 2010). Phase I 1. Competitively funded federal research support: These data are collected by the National Science Foundation. The Membership Committee has been using obligations, which are the only measures that break down federal support by agency. The committee has recently switched to using NSF research expenditure data, which are more accurate, with a correction factor to subtract the estimated proportion of university expenditures drawn from USDA. Most USDA funding is not allocated competitively, and USDA support accordingly is included as a Phase II indicator. 2. Membership in the National Academies (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine): The National Academies’ membership database maintains the current institutional affiliation of its members. 3. National Research Council (NRC)faculty quality ratings: These ratings are drawn from the decennial national assessment of research-doctorate programs conducted by the NRC. Though the data become dated between surveys, the committee believes that they continue to provide a valuable peer-assessment of faculty quality. The last NRC report was published in 1995 based on 1993 data; preparation for the next NRC assessment is currently underway.

4. Faculty arts and humanities awards, fellowships, and memberships: For its last research doctorate assessment, NRC compiled a list of awards, fellowships, and memberships signifying faculty achievement primarily in arts and humanities fields. The Membership Committee has expanded this list and will use it as an additional assessment of the distinction of an institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s faculty, focusing on the arts and humanities faculty (Attachment 1). Additional appropriate awards, fellowships, and memberships will be added to this list as they are identified. 5. Citations: The U.S. University Science Indicators citations database provides an annually updated measure of both research volume and quality and will provide a valuable complement to the first four indicators listed above. Phase II 1. USDA, state, and industrial research funding: Though these three sources of academic research support fund important, high-quality research, they will be treated as Phase II indicators since they are generally not allocated through competitive, merit-review processes. Competitively funded USDA research programs that can be separately identified in reported data will be included in phase I data. 2. Doctoral education: The committee will use number of Ph.D.s granted annually as well as tabulate the distribution of Ph.D.s across broad disciplinary categories (e.g., engineering but not aerospace engineering), using Department of Education IPEDS (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System) data. These data will be treated as Phase II indicators to de-emphasize the quantitative dimensions of Ph.D. programs and avoid sending an unintended signal to institutions to increase Ph.D. output at a time when many institutions are or are considering scaling back their Ph.D. programs. 3. Number of postdoctoral appointees: The committee will use NSF-compiled data from institutions on postdoctoral appointees, most of whom are in the health sciences, physical sciences, and engineering. Postdoctoral education is an increasingly important component of university research and education activities that the committee believes should be tracked in AAU membership indicators. However, because postdoctoral activity is highly correlated with university research and because self-reported postdoctoral data are less uniform than data on federally funded research, postdoctoral appointees will be treated as a Phase II indicator. 4. Undergraduate education: The committee will assess the institutionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s undergraduate programs to determine that the institution is meeting its commitment to undergraduate education. Recognizing that differing institutional missions among research universities dictate different ways of providing undergraduate education, the committee will be flexible in this assessment. A number of measures have been suggested, including some that focus on input and others that look primarily at output variables. These are at this time imperfect, but may provide some guidance to the committee in making its judgments on this topic.

TOTAL UNIVERSITY EXPENDITURES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects total university expenditures as a sum of the operating and non-operating expenses and deductions of the institution as reported in the IPEDS Finance component.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

• Total University Expenditures • Total Expenditures per FTE • Tuition & Fees • Total Revenues per FTE • State Appropriations • State Appropriations per FTE • Annual Giving • Endowment • Endowment per FTE • Total Library Expenditures • Total Library Materials Expenditures • Total Library Professional + Support Staff (FTE) • Library Professional Salaries & Wages • Moody’s Rating

IPEDS

Type: IPEDS

USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Expenditures, FY 2010 Michigan

Student Measures

UCLA

• Total Student Headcount • Total Student FTE • Graduate Student Headcount • % Graduate Student Headcount • Doctorates Awarded ** • FTIC Student Headcount • Median SAT Score • FTICs in Top 10% of High School Class • National Merit Scholars • % Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid • % of Classes with fewer than 20 Students • % of Classes with 50 or more Students • Freshman Retention Rate • Six-Year Graduation Rate for FTICs • International Headcount • % International Students • Students Studying Abroad • % Students Studying Abroad • Student-to-Faculty Ratio

Ohio State Washington UC Davis UC San Diego Minnesota UNC Chapel Hill Wisconsin-Madison UT Austin Florida Virginia Iowa Illinois, Urb-Ch Texas A&M UC Berkeley

Faculty Measures

Stony Brook

• Tenured / Tenure-Track Faculty • Full-time Instructional Staff • Faculty Awards * • National Academy Members * • Citation Impact * • Total Research Expenditures per Tenured / Tenure-Track Faculty • Full Professor Salaries • Associate Professor Salaries • Assistant Professor Salaries

UC Irvine Michigan State Rutgers Missouri Purdue Arizona

Research Measures

Maryland, College Park

• NSF Total Research Expenditures • AAU Federal Research Expenditures * • NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures • Research Performance Index (RPI) • Postdoctoral Appointees ** • Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates • Invention Disclosures Received • Total Patents Issued • Total Licenses / Options Executed • Cumulative Active Licenses • License Income Received • Start-ups Initiated

Indiana Georgia Tech Kansas Colorado

$970,866

USF Iowa State Buffalo UC Santa Barbara Oregon $0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000 Dollars in Thousands

Note: Penn State U. and U. Pitt data not available/reported.

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Expenditures, FY 2002 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

Georgia Institute of Technology Indiana University-Bloomington Iowa State University Michigan State University The Ohio State University Pennsylvania State University Purdue University Rutgers University Stony Brook University Texas A&M University University at Buffalo University of Arizona University of California, Berkeley University of California, Davis University of California, Irvine University of California, Los Angeles University of California, San Diego University of California, Santa Barbara University of Colorado at Boulder University of Florida University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign University of Iowa University of Kansas University of Maryland, College Park University of Michigan University of Minnesota, Twin Cities University of Missouri, Columbia University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of Oregon University of Pittsburgh University of Texas, Austin University of Virginia University of Washington University of Wisconsin-Madison

FLORIDA RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES Florida Atlantic University Florida International University Florida State University University of Central Florida University of Florida* University of Miami University of South Florida

$2,500,000,000 UF

$2,000,000,000 $1,500,000,000 Mean

USF

$1,000,000,000

FSU UCF FIU

$500,000,000 $0

FAU

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Note: U. Miami data not available/reported.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Expenditures, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $7,000,000,000 $6,000,000,000 AAU High

$5,000,000,000 $4,000,000,000 $3,000,000,000

Public AAU 75%

$2,000,000,000

Mean

$1,000,000,000

USF

Public AAU 25%

AAU Low

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

Arizona State University Colorado State University North Carolina State University University of Alabama, Birmingham University of Cincinnati University of Georgia University of Illinois, Chicago University of Utah Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

NATIONAL PEERS

North Carolina State University Rutgers University* Stony Brook University* University at Buffalo* University of Alabama, Birmingham University of California, Irvine* University of Cincinnati University of Illinois, Chicago *AAU member

USF & AAU Prospects Total Expenditures, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $3,000,000,000 Utah

$2,500,000,000

UAB Illinois, Chicago

$2,000,000,000 $1,500,000,000

ASU Mean

$1,000,000,000

VA Tech

NC State Georgia

USF

Cincinnati Colorado State

$500,000,000 $0

2002

2003

$7,000,000,000

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TOTAL UNIVERSITY EXPENDITURES PER STUDENT FTE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects total expenses as a sum of the operating and non-operating expenses and deductions of the institution as reported in the IPEDS Finance component by total student FTE as reported in the IPEDS Enrollment survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: IPEDS

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Expenditures per FTE, FY 2010 UCLA

Student Measures

UC San Diego

Virginia UC Davis UNC Chapel Hill Stony Brook Washington Ohio State Iowa UC Irvine Minnesota Missouri Wisconsin-Madison Georgia Tech UC Berkeley Rutgers

Faculty Measures

Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida UT Austin Texas A&M Maryland, College Park Michigan State Arizona

Research Measures

Purdue Kansas Iowa State Buffalo UC Santa Barbara Colorado Indiana Oregon

$30,106

USF $0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

Note: Penn State U. and U. Pitt data not available/reported.

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Expenditures per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

$60,000 $50,000

$40,000 USF

$30,000

Mean FSU FAU FIU UCF

$20,000 $10,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Note: U. Miami data not available/reported.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Expenditures per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $160,000 $140,000

AAU High

$120,000 $100,000

Public AAU 75%

$80,000

Mean

$60,000

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

$40,000

USF

$20,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Total Expenditures per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $180,000

UAB

$160,000 $140,000 $120,000

Utah

$100,000

Illinois, Chicago

$80,000

Mean NC State Cincinnati Georgia VA Tech Colorado State

$60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0

USF ASU

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TUITION & FEES: IN-STATE, UNDERGRADUATE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

Charges to full-time undergraduate students for the full academic year, specifically the tuition charge IPEDS by the institution to those students who meet the state’s or institution’s residency requirements; as Type: reported in the IPEDS Institutional Characteristics component. IPEDS, NSF USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions In-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2010 - 2011 Penn State Pittsburgh Illinois, Urb-Ch Rutgers Minnesota UC Davis Michigan UC Santa Barbara UC San Diego UC Irvine Michigan State UC Berkeley Virginia UCLA Ohio State UT Austin Purdue Indiana Wisconsin-Madison Kansas Georgia Tech Washington Colorado Missouri Maryland, College Park Texas A&M Arizona Oregon Iowa Buffalo Iowa State UNC Chapel Hill Stony Brook USF Florida

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Tuition & Fees In-State, Undergraduate 2011 - 2012: $5,800

$5,198 $0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers In-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$40,000

Miami

$35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000

Mean

$10,000

FSU USF UCF FIU UF FAU

$5,000 $0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions In-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

2010

AAU High

$14,000 $12,000

Public AAU 75%

$10,000

Mean Public AAU 25%

$8,000 $6,000

USF

AAU Low

$4,000 $2,000 $0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

USF & AAU Prospects In-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$14,000

Illinois, Chic.

$12,000

Cincinnati

$10,000

VA Tech Georgia Mean Arizona State Colorado State

NATIONAL PEERS

$8,000

NC State Utah UAB

$6,000

USF

$4,000 $2,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TUITION & FEES: OUT-OF-STATE, UNDERGRADUATE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

USF & Public AAU Institutions Out-of-State Undergradate Tuition & Fees, 2010 - 2011 Michigan UC Davis UC Santa Barbara UC San Diego UC Irvine UC Berkeley Virginia UCLA UT Austin Colorado Michigan State Indiana Florida Illinois, Urb-Ch Penn State Georgia Tech Purdue Oregon Washington UNC Chapel Hill Maryland, College Park Arizona Pittsburgh Wisconsin-Madison Rutgers Iowa Ohio State Texas A&M Kansas Missouri Iowa State Minnesota USF Buffalo Stony Brook

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Tuition & Fees Out-of-State, Undergraduate

$16,007

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

2011 - 2012: $14,994

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

USF & Florida Research University Peers Out-of-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$40,000

Miami

$35,000 $30,000

$25,000

Mean UCF FSU FIU

$20,000

USF

$15,000

FAU

$10,000 $5,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Out-of-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11 $35,000

AAU High

$30,000

Public AAU 75% Mean

$25,000

Public AAU 25%

$20,000 USF

$15,000

AAU Low

$10,000 $5,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Out-of-State Undergraduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$30,000

U. of Georgia U of Illinois, Chic. U of Cincinnati Colorado State VA Tech Mean Arizona State U of Utah NC State

$25,000

$20,000

USF

$15,000

UAB

$10,000

$5,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TUITION & FEES: IN-STATE, GRADUATE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Charges to full-time graduate students for the full academic year, specifically the tuition charge by the institution to those students who meet the state’s or institution’s residency requirements; as reported in the IPEDS Institutional Characteristics component.

Source: IPEDS

Type:

IPEDS, NSF

USF & Public AAU Institutions In-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2010 - 2011 Pittsburgh Michigan Penn State Rutgers Illinois, Urb-Ch Minnesota Virginia Oregon Michigan State Washington Ohio State UC Davis UC Irvine UC Santa Barbara Wisconsin-Madison Florida UC Berkeley UC San Diego UCLA Colorado Maryland, College Park Georgia Tech UT Austin Buffalo Stony Brook Purdue Arizona USF Iowa Missouri UNC Chapel Hill Texas A&M Iowa State Kansas Indiana

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$8,851

USF Tuition & Fees In-State, Graduate 2011 - 2012: $9,640

$2,000 $4,000

$6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000 $16,000 $18,000 $20,000

USF & Florida Research University Peers In-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$30,000

Miami

$25,000 $20,000 $15,000

Mean

$10,000

UF FIU

$5,000

UCF FSU FAU

USF

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions In-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$20,000 $18,000

AAU High

$16,000 $14,000 $12,000

Public AAU 75% Mean

$10,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

$8,000

AAU Low

$6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects In-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$16,000

Illinois, Chic.

$14,000

Cincinnati

$12,000

VA Tech Mean Colorado State Arizona State

$10,000

USF

$8,000

Georgia

NC State

$6,000

Utah UAB

$4,000 $2,000 $0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TUITION & FEES: OUT-OF-STATE, GRADUATE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Charges to full-time graduate students for the full academic year, specifically the tuition charge by the institution to those students who do not meet the state’s or institution’s residency requirements; as reported in the IPEDS Institutional Characteristics component.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type:

IPEDS, NSF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Out-of-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2010 - 2011 Michigan Pittsburgh Penn State Florida Georgia Tech Illinois, Urb-Ch Ohio State Purdue UC Davis UC Irvine UC Santa Barbara UC Berkeley UC San Diego UCLA Colorado Wisconsin-Madison Michigan State Arizona Washington Rutgers Virginia Iowa UNC Chapel Hill Minnesota Indiana Maryland, College Park Missouri Iowa State Oregon UT Austin USF Kansas Buffalo Texas A&M Stony Brook

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$18,691

USF Tuition & Fees Out-of-State, Graduate 2011 - 2012: $19,760

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

USF & Florida Research University Peers Out-of-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$30,000

UF Miami UCF

$28,000 $26,000

Mean

$24,000

FSU

$22,000

FIU

$20,000

USF

$18,000

FAU

$16,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2010

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions Out-of-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$35,000

AAU High

$30,000

Public AAU 75%

$25,000

Mean Public AAU 25%

$20,000

USF

$15,000

AAU Low

$10,000 $5,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Out-of-State Graduate Tuition & Fees, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$30,000

Cincinnati Georgia Arizona State Illinois, Chic. Colorado State Mean VA Tech NC State

$25,000 $20,000

USF

Utah

$15,000

UAB

$10,000 $5,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TOTAL REVENUES PER STUDENT FTE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects the total revenues and other additions to net assets as reported in the IPEDS Finance component per total student FTE as reported in the IPEDS fall enrollment survey. Financial figures reported by fiscal year (FY).

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: IPEDS

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Revenues per FTE, FY 2010 Michigan

Student Measures

UCLA

Virginia UC San Diego UC Davis UNC Chapel Hill Washington Ohio State Iowa Stony Brook UC Irvine Missouri Minnesota Wisconsin-Madison UC Berkeley Georgia Tech

Faculty Measures

UT Austin

Rutgers Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida Texas A&M Michigan State Purdue

Research Measures

Maryland, College Park

Arizona Kansas Iowa State UC Santa Barbara Colorado Oregon Indiana Buffalo

$31,700

USF $0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

Note: Penn State U. and U. Pitt data not available/reported.

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Revenues per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

$60,000 $50,000

$40,000

USF

Mean

$30,000

FSU FIU FAU UCF

$20,000 $10,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Note: U. Miami data not available/reported.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Revenues per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $160,000 AAU High

$140,000 $120,000 $100,000

Public AAU 75%

$80,000

Mean

$60,000

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

$40,000

USF

$20,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

$200,000

NATIONAL PEERS

$120,000

USF & AAU Prospects Total Revenues per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010 UAB

$180,000 $160,000 $140,000

Utah

$100,000

Illinois, Chicago

$80,000

Mean NC State Georgia VA Tech Cincinnati Colorado State

$60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $0

USF ASU

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

STATE APPROPRIATIONS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects amounts received by the institution through acts of a state legislative body, except grants and contracts and capital appropriations. Funds reported in this category are for meeting current operation expenses, not for specific projects or programs; as reported in the IPEDS Finance Component.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: IPEDS

USF & Public AAU Institutions State Appropriations, FY 2010 UCLA

Student Measures

Minnesota

Florida UNC Chapel Hill UC Berkeley Texas A&M Stony Brook UC Davis Rutgers Ohio State Buffalo Wisconsin-Madison Michigan State Maryland, College Park Arizona UT Austin

Faculty Measures

Michigan Purdue Washington UC San Diego

$277,770,526

USF Iowa Illinois, Urb-Ch

Research Measures

Missouri UC Irvine Kansas Iowa State Indiana Georgia Tech UC Santa Barbara Virginia Oregon $0

$200,000,000

$400,000,000

Note: Penn State U., U.Colorado-Boulder, and U.Pitt data not available/reported.

$600,000,000

$800,000,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers State Appropriations, FY 2002 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

$800,000,000 $700,000,000 $600,000,000

$500,000,000 $400,000,000

FSU

Mean

$300,000,000

USF UCF FIU FAU

$200,000,000 $100,000,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Note: U. Miami data not available/reported.

USF & Public AAU Institutions State Appropriations, FY 2002 - FY 2010

$800,000,000 $700,000,000

AAU High

$600,000,000 $500,000,000

Public AAU 75%

$400,000,000

Mean

$300,000,000

USF

Public AAU 25%

$200,000,000 $100,000,000 $0

AAU Low

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects State Appropriations, FY 2002 - FY 2010

$500,000,000

NC State

$450,000,000 $400,000,000 $350,000,000

Arizona State Georgia

$300,000,000

USF

Mean UAB Utah Illinois, Chicago VA Tech Cincinnati

$250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $50,000,000 $0

Colorado State

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

STATE APPROPRIATIONS PER STUDENT FTE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects amonts received by the institution through acts of a state legislative body, except grants and contracts and capital appropriations per total student FTE. Funds reported in this category are for meeting current operation expenses, not for specific projects or programs; as reported in the IPEDS Finance Component.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: IPEDS

USF & Public AAU Institutions State Appropriations per FTE, FY 2010 Stony Brook

Student Measures

UNC Chapel Hill

UCLA Buffalo UC Davis UC Berkeley Minnesota Rutgers Florida Georgia Tech UC San Diego Maryland, College Park Iowa Wisconsin-Madison Texas A&M Arizona

Faculty Measures

Kansas UC Irvine Iowa State Missouri UC Santa Barbara

$8,614

USF Ohio State

Research Measures

Michigan State Purdue Michigan Washington UT Austin Virginia Illinois, Urb-Ch Indiana Oregon $0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

Note: Penn State U., U.Colorado-Boulder, and U.Pitt data not available/reported.

$20,000

$25,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers State Appropriations per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

$16,000 $14,000 $12,000

$10,000

USF

FSU FAU Mean FIU UCF

$8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Note: U. Miami data not available/reported.

USF & Public AAU Institutions State Appropriations per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010 $25,000 AAU High

$20,000 $15,000

Public AAU 75% Mean

$10,000

USF

Public AAU 25%

$5,000 $0

AAU Low

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

USF & AAU Prospects State Appropriations per FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2010

$30,000 $25,000 $20,000

UAB

NATIONAL PEERS

NC State

$15,000

Georgia Utah Illinois, Chicago Mean

$10,000

USF

VA State ASU Cincinnati

$5,000 $0

Colorado State

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

ANNUAL GIVING

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

These data are collected by the Top American Research Universities (TARU) as reported by institutions TARU on the Council for Aid to Education’s Voluntary Support of Education (VSE) Survey. Figures reported Type: by fiscal year (FY). These data include all contributions actually received during the institution’s fiscal AAU, NSF year in the form of cash, securities, company products, and other property from alumni, non-alumni individuals, corporations, foundations, religious organizations, and other groups. Not included are public funds, earnings on investments held by the institution, and unfulfilled pledges. USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Annual Giving, FY 2009 UCLA Wisconsin-Madison Washington UNC Chapel Hill Michigan Minnesota UC Berkeley UT Austin Ohio State Virginia Florida Texas A&M Purdue Penn State Illinois, Urb-Ch Arizona Michigan State Indiana Iowa Georgia Tech Missouri UC San Diego Pittsburgh Oregon Rutgers Maryland, College Park UC Davis Kansas UC Irvine Colorado Iowa State Stony Brook UC Santa Barbara USF Buffalo

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System Annual Giving FY 2010: $36.4 million

$34,011 $0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

Dollars in Thousands

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Annual Giving, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$250,000,000

$200,000,000

Miami

$150,000,000 $100,000,000

Mean FSU

$50,000,000 $0

USF FIU UCF FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Annual Giving, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$700,000,000 $600,000,000 $500,000,000 $400,000,000

AAU High

$300,000,000

Public AAU 75%

$200,000,000

Mean

$100,000,000 $0

Public AAU 25%

USF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

AAU Low

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Annual Giving, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$250,000,000

$200,000,000 ASU

$150,000,000

Utah Cincinnati NC State Mean UAB VA Tech Georgia Illinois, Chicago Colorado State

$100,000,000

$50,000,000

USF $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

ENDOWMENT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The market value of an institution’s endowment assets as of June 30 as reported to the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) Endowment Study and as reported by The Center in Top American Research Universities (TARU).

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

NACUBO

Type: TARU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Endowment, FY 2009 Michigan UT Austin Texas A&M Virginia UC Berkeley Minnesota UNC Chapel Hill UCLA Pittsburgh Ohio State Washington Wisconsin-Madison Purdue Michigan State Georgia Tech Florida Penn State Illinois, Urb-Ch Iowa Kansas Indiana UC Davis Rutgers Iowa State Missouri Arizona UC San Diego Buffalo Oregon Colorado Maryland, College Park USF UC Irvine UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System Endowment FY 2010: $296,000,000

$275,398,000

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Endowment, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

FLORIDA RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES

$1,400,000

Dollars in Thousands

$1,200,000 UF

$1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000

Miami

$400,000

FSU Mean

USF

$200,000 $0

UCF FIU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Note: FAU data not available/reported USF System & Public AAU Institutions Endowment, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 Dollars in Thousands

AAU High

$5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000

Florida Atlantic University Florida International University Florida State University University of Central Florida University of Florida* University of Miami University of South Florida

Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25%

$1,000,000 $0

USF

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

$1,400,000 $1,200,000

Dollars in Thousands

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Endowment, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$1,000,000 Cincinnati

$800,000

Georgia Utah NC State VATech Mean ASU UAB

$600,000 $400,000

USF

Illinois, Chicago Colorado State

$200,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

ENDOWMENT PER TOTAL STUDENT FTE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

A ratio of the total student FTE of an institution (as reported to the IPEDS fall enrollment survey) and the market value of an institution’s endowment assets as of June 30 (as reported to the National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) Endowment Study).

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS, NACUBO

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Endowment per Total Student FTE, FY 2009 Virginia Michigan UT Austin Texas A&M UNC Chapel Hill Pittsburgh UC Berkeley Georgia Tech UCLA Minnesota Washington Wisconsin-Madison Purdue Ohio State Michigan State Iowa Kansas Florida Penn State Illinois, Urb-Ch Indiana Oregon Iowa State UC Davis Missouri Buffalo UC San Diego Rutgers Arizona Colorado Maryland, College Park UC Irvine USF UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System Endowment per Student FTE FY 2010: $9,000 (est.)

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

Dollars in Thousands

$120

$140

$160

$180

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Endowment per Total Student FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$60,000 $50,000 $40,000

Miami

$30,000 UF

$20,000

Mean FSU

$10,000 $0

USF FIU UCF

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Note: FAU data not available/reported. USF System & Public AAU Institutions Endowment per Total Student FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2009 $250,000 $200,000 AAU High

$150,000 $100,000

Public AAU 75% Mean

$50,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

$50,000

NATIONAL PEERS

$30,000

USF System & AAU Prospects Endowment per Total Student FTE, FY 2002 - FY 2009 $45,000 $40,000 $35,000

Cincinnati

$25,000

Utah UAB Georgia Mean & NC State VA Tech

$20,000 $15,000

USF

$10,000

ASU Illinois, Chicago Colorado State

$5,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

TOTAL LIBRARY EXPENDITURES

Definition:

Total library expenditures for the USF Library System, including materials, salaries, and operational expenditures. This is one of four variables used to calculate the ARL Investment Index which is in turn one of the primary means for judging membership potential. For the period 2000 to 2006 the system was defined as the Tampa Library, the Poynter Library, the FMHI Library, the Shimberg Health Sciences Library, the Polytechnic Library, and the Cook Library). Beginning in 2006-07, values for the Poynter Library were no longer included in the total at the instructions of the ARL Councilor assigned to USF. The Cook Library (NCF) declined to submit statistics beginning 2009-10.

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Source:

For institutions other than USF, the ARL Statistics Interactive (http://interactive. arlstatistics.org/login.aspx) and ACRL Metrics (http://www.acrlmetrics.com/). For the USF Library System, the source was the Annual Statistical Summary. Type: AAU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Library Expenditures, FY 2009 Michigan UC Berkeley UCLA Penn State Texas - Austin Washington Wisconsin-Madison Illinois, Urb-Ch Minnesota UNC Chapel Hill Ohio State Texas A&M Virginia Rutgers Indiana Arizona Pittsburgh UC San Diego Iowa Florida Michigan State Maryland, College Park Kansas Purdue Iowa State Colorado UC Irvine Buffalo UC Davis UC Santa Barbara Missouri USF Oregon Stony Brook Georgia Tech

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF USF System System Library Expenditures Total Library Expenditures FY 2010: $14,585,972 FY 2010: $14,585,972

$16,608,842

$10,000,000

$20,000,000

$30,000,000

$40,000,000

$50,000,000

$60,000,000

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Total Library Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$35,000,000 $30,000,000

UF Miami

$25,000,000 $20,000,000

Mean

USF

$15,000,000

FIU UCF

$10,000,000

FAU

$5,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Library Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $60,000,000 AAU High

$50,000,000

Public AAU 75%

$40,000,000

Mean

$30,000,000

Public AAU 25%

$20,000,000

USF AAU Low

$10,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Total Library Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $30,000,000

NC State

$25,000,000

ASU Utah Georgia

Mean

$20,000,000

Illinois, Chicago Cincinnati

USF

$15,000,000

Colorado State VA Tech

$10,000,000

UAB

$5,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

TOTAL LIBRARY MATERIALS EXPENDITURES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Source:

Definition:

Total library expenditures for all material formats for the USF Library System including monographs, serials, media, data, etc. This is one of four variables used to calculate the ARL Investment Index which is in turn one of the primary means for judging membership potential. For the period 2000 to 2006 the system was defined as the Tampa Library, the Poynter Library, the FMHI Library, the Shimberg Health Sciences Library, the Polytechnic Library, and the Cook Library). Beginning in 2006-07, values for the Poynter Library were no longer included in the total at the instructions of the ARL Councilor assigned to USF. The Cook Library (NCF) declined to submit statistics beginning 2009-10.

Type: AAU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Library Materials Expenditures, FY 2009 Michigan Penn State UC Berkeley Texas A&M UT Austin Minnesota Washington UNC Chapel Hill Indiana Illinois, Urb-Ch UCLA Iowa Pittsburgh Virginia Arizona Ohio State Iowa State Florida Michigan State Wisconsin-Madison Rutgers Colorado Purdue UC San Diego Kansas Maryland, College Park UC Irvine Buffalo UC Davis USF Missouri Stony Brook Oregon Georgia Tech UC Santa Barbara

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$8,478,582

USF System USF System Library Materials Expenditures Total Library Materials FYExpenditures 2010: $7,517,954 FY 2010: $7,517,954

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Total Materials Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$16,000,000 $14,000,000

Miami

$12,000,000

$10,000,000

USF

Mean

$8,000,000

FSU FIU UCF

$6,000,000 $4,000,000

FAU

$2,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Materials Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$25,000,000

AAU High

$20,000,000

$15,000,000

Public AAU 75%

Mean

$10,000,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

$5,000,000

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Total Materials Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$14,000,000 $12,000,000

ASU Illinois, Chicago Georgia Cincinnati NC State

$10,000,000

Mean

USF

$8,000,000

Utah VA Tech Colorado State

$6,000,000 $4,000,000

UAB

$2,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

TOTAL LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL + SUPPORT STAFF (FTE)

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition: Total professional and staff FTE for the USF Library System. This includes individuals assigned to the administrative, faculty, and staff pay plans. This is one of four variables used to calculate the ARL Investment Index which is in turn one of the primary means for judging membership potential. For the period 2000 to 2006 the system was defined as the Tampa Library, the Poynter Library, the FMHI Library, the Shimberg Health Sciences Library, the Polytechnic Library, and the Cook Library. Beginning in 2006-07, values for the Poytner Library were no longer included in the total at the instructions of the ARL Councilor assigned to USF. The Cook Library (NCF) declided to submit statistics beginning 2009-10.

Source: For institutions other than USF. the ARL Statistics Interactive (http://interactive. arlstatistics.org/login.aspx) and the ACRL Metrics (http://wwwacrlmetrics.com/). For the USF Library System, the source was the Annual Statistical Summary. Type: AAU

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Professional + Support Staff (FTE), FY 2009 Penn State Michigan UC Berkeley UT Austin UCLA Wisconsin-Madison Washington Illinois, Urb-Ch UNC Chapel Hill Rutgers Ohio State Minnesota Virginia Indiana UC San Diego Pittsburgh Texas A&M Florida Iowa Maryland, College Park Kansas Arizona Michigan State UC Irvine UC Davis Colorado Buffalo Purdue UC Santa Barbara Missouri Oregon USF Iowa State Georgia Tech Stony Brook

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Total Professional + Support Staff (FTE)

138

100

FY 2010: 111

200

300

400

500

600

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Total Professional + Support Staff (FTE), FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

350 300

250 Miami

200

Mean FSU

150

USF FIU UCF FAU

100 50 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Professional + Support Staff (FTE), FY 2000 - FY 2009

600

AAU High

500 400

Public AAU 75%

300

Mean

200

Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

100 0

2009

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

USF System & AAU Prospects Total Professional + Support Staff (FTE), FY 2000 - FY 2009

350 300

ASU Georgia Utah NC State

250

NATIONAL PEERS

200 Mean Illinois, Chicago

150

USF

Cincinnati

VA Tech UAB Colorado State

100 50

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

LIBRARY PROFESSIONAL SALARIES & WAGES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS Source: For institutions other than USF, the ARL Statistics Interactive (http://interactive. arlstatistics.org/login.aspx) and ACRL Metrics (http://www.acrlmetrics.com/). For the USF Library System, the source was the Annual Statistical Summary. Type: AAU

Definition: Total professional salaries and wages for the USF Library System. This includes salaries and ages for individuals assigned to the administrative and faculty pay plans. This is one of four variables used to calculate the ARL Investment Index which is in turn one of the primary means for judging membership potential. For the period 2000 to 2006 the system was defined as the Tampa Library, the Poynter Library, the FMHI Library, the Shimberg Health Sciences Library, the Polytechnic Library, and the Cook Library). Beginning in 2006-2007, values for the Poynter Library were no longer included in the total at the instructions of the ARL Councilor assigned to USF. The Cook Library (NCF) declined to submit statistics beginning 2009-10. USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Professional Salaries & Wages, FY 2009 UC Berkeley Wisconsin-Madison UCLA Washington Michigan Illinois, Urbana UNC Chapel Hill Penn State Ohio State Texas - Austin Indiana Texas A&M Minnesota Maryland, College Park UC San Diego Rutgers SUNY-Buffalo Virginia Pittsburgh Iowa Florida Kansas Purdue Arizona Michigan State SUNY-Stony Brook UC Davis UC Irvine USF UC Santa Barbara Oregon Missouri Iowa State Colorado Georgia Tech

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System Total Professional Salaries & Wages

$4,260,965

FY 2010: $3,636,708

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 $16,000,000 $18,000,000

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Professional Salaries & Wages, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$7,000,000

$6,000,000

Miami

$5,000,000

Mean FIU

USF

$4,000,000

FSU FAU UCF

$3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Professional Salaries & Wages, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$20,000,000 $18,000,000

AAU High

$16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 Public AAU 75%

$10,000,000 $8,000,000

Mean

$6,000,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

$4,000,000

AAU Low

$2,000,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Professional Salaries & Wages, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$9,000,050 $8,000,050

NC State

$7,000,050 $6,000,050

ASU Cincinnati Utah

$5,000,050

Mean

USF

$4,000,050

Georgia Illinois, Chicago Colorado State VA Tech UAB

$3,000,050 $2,000,050 $1,000,050 $50

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

MOODY’S RATING

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition: This measure identifies the general credit ratings as calculated by Moody’s Investors Services. General credit factors include market position, relationship with supporting state, balance sheet strength (as measured by levels of financial resources), ability to accumulate financial resources, operating performance, debt position, strategy and management.

Source: Moody’s Investors Services - Annual U.S. Public University Medians Type: USF

Baa (1, 2, 3)......................Adequate Ba (1, 2, 3).......................Least Speculative B (1, 2, 3).........................Speculative Caa, Ca, C (1, 2, 3)......... Highly Speculative, Lowest Investment Grade

Credit Ratings: Aaa...................................Strongest Aa (1, 2, 3).......................Very Strong A (1, 2, 3)........................ Strong

USF & Public AAU Institutions Moody’s Ratings, FY 2010 Washington

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Virginia

UT Austin UNC Chapel Hill Texas A&M Purdue Michigan Indiana UCLA UC Santa Barbara UC San Diego UC Irvine UC Davis UC Berkeley Pittsburgh Penn State

Faculty Measures

Ohio State

Missouri Minnesota Michigan State Maryland, College Park Kansas Iowa

Research Measures

Aa2

USF

Stony Brook Rutgers Iowa State Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida Colorado Buffalo Arizona Georgia Tech A3

Aa3

Note: Data for Oregon and Wisconsin-Madison not reported/not available.

Aa2

Aa1

Aaa

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Moody’s Ratings, FY 2005 - FY 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

Aaa Aa1 USF, UF &

Aa2

FSU

Mean FAU & FIU

Aa3

UCF

A1 A2 A3 FY 2005

FY 2006

FY 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009

FY 2010

Note: Data for Miami not reported/not available. USF & Public AAU Institutions Moody’s Ratings, FY 2005 - FY 2010 Aaa AAU High

Aa1 Aa2

Public AAU 75% Mean

Aa3

USF& Public AAU 25% AAU Low

A1 A2 A3

FY 2005

FY 2006

FY 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009

FY 2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Moody’s Ratings, FY 2005 - FY 2010

Aaa

VA Tech NC State

Aa1

USF, Georgia, Illinois-Chicago , Utah & UAB Mean

Aa2 Aa3

Colorado State & ASU Cincinnati

A1 A2 A3 FY 2005

FY 2006

FY 2007

FY 2008

FY 2009

FY 2010

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

TOTAL STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the total men and women enrolled for credit in the fall of the academic year.

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Student Headcount, Fall 2010 Ohio State Minnesota UT Austin Florida Texas A&M Michigan State Penn State Illinois, Urb-Ch Indiana Washington Wisconsin-Madison Michigan Purdue USF Arizona Rutgers UCLA Maryland, College Park UC Berkeley Colorado Missouri UC Davis Iowa UNC Chapel Hill UC San Diego Buffalo Pittsburgh Kansas Iowa State UC Irvine Virginia Stony Brook Oregon UC Santa Barbara Georgia Tech

Student Measures

40,431

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Total Student Headcount Fall 2011: 39,629 (drop/add benchmark)

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

60,000

UCF

50,000

UF FSU FIU

USF

40,000

Mean

30,000

FAU

20,000 Miami

10,000

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 60,000

AAU High

50,000 Public AAU 75%

USF

40,000

Mean

30,000

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

20,000 10,000

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

USF & AAU Prospects Total Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 ASU

70,000 60,000 50,000

NATIONAL PEERS

USF

40,000

Georgia NC State Mean Cincinnati VA Tech Utah Colorado State Illinois, Chicago

30,000 20,000 10,000

UAB

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

TOTAL STUDENT FTE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable is derived from the enrollment by race/ethnicity section of the fall enrollment survey. The full-time equivalent of the institution’s part-time enrollment is estimated and then added to the full-time enrollment of the institution. This formula has been used to produce the full-time equivalent enrollment that is published annually in the Digest of Education Statistics. The full-time equivalent of part-time enrollment is estimated by multiplying the part-time enrollment by factors that vary by control and level of institution and level of student. It is important to note that while the federally-defined FTE calculation is used below for all institutions listed, there are instances in other reports where a formula for calculating student FTE, as defined by the state of Florida is used, resulting in a different FTE for Florida institutions.

Source: IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Student FTE, Fall 2010 Ohio State UT Austin Texas A&M Florida Penn State Minnesota Michigan State Illinois, Urb-Ch Michigan Wisconsin-Madison Indiana Washington Purdue UCLA Rutgers Arizona UC Berkeley Maryland, College Park USF UC Davis Missouri Colorado UC San Diego Iowa State UC Irvine Pittsburgh UNC Chapel Hill Iowa Kansas Buffalo Virginia Oregon UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook Georgia Tech

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

33,029

Research Measures

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Student FTE (Fall), 2002 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

50,000

UCF UF

40,000

FSU

USF

Mean FIU

30,000

FAU

20,000

Miami

10,000 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Student FTE (Fall), 2002 - 2010 60,000 AAU High

50,000

Public AAU 75%

40,000

Mean

USF

30,000

Public AAU 25%

20,000

AAU Low

10,000 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

60,000

NATIONAL PEERS

40,000

USF & AAU Prospects Total Student FTE (Fall), 2002 - 2010 ASU

50,000

USF

Georgia UAB Mean NC State VA Tech Cincinnati Colorado State Utah Illinois, Chicago

30,000 20,000 10,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

GRADUATE STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the headcount at the fall of an academic year of graduate students, defined as a student who holds a bachelor’s or first-professional dgeree (or equivalent), and is taking courses at the post-baccalaureate level; reported in the IPEDS Fall Enrollment Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Graduate Student Headcount, Fall 2010 Minnesota Florida Michigan Ohio State Washington UT Austin Illinois, Urb-Ch Wisconsin-Madison UCLA Michigan State UNC Chapel Hill Maryland, College Park Pittsburgh UC Berkeley Indiana Texas A&M Buffalo USF Purdue Virginia Rutgers Arizona Kansas Iowa Stony Brook Missouri Georgia Tech UC Davis Penn State Colorado Iowa State UC San Diego UC Irvine Oregon UC Santa Barbara

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

9,517

Research Measures

USF Graduate Student Headcount Fall 2011: 9,507 (drop/add benchmark)

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

20,000 18,000

16,000 14,000 12,000

USF

10,000

FSU Mean UCF FIU Miami FAU

8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 20,000

AAU High

18,000 16,000 14,000

Public AAU 75%

12,000

Mean

10,000

USF

8,000

Public AAU 25%

6,000 4,000

AAU Low

2,000 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 16,000 14,000

ASU

12,000

Illinois, Chicago Cincinnati

USF

10,000

NC State Mean Georgia Utah VA Tech Colorado State UAB

8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

PERCENT GRADUATE STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects percent of graduate students of the total student enrollment (headcount); based on fall enrollment data reported on the IPEDS Enrollment Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions % Graduate Student Headcount, Fall 2010 UNC Chapel Hill Pittsburgh Virginia Michigan Minnesota Florida Stony Brook Georgia Tech Buffalo UCLA Washington Kansas UC Berkeley Maryland, College Park Wisconsin-Madison Iowa Illinois, Urb-Ch UT Austin Ohio State Indiana USF Michigan State Missouri Rutgers Arizona Purdue UC Davis Texas A&M Iowa State UC San Diego UC Irvine Colorado Oregon Penn State UC Santa Barbara

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

24%

Research Measures

USF Percent Graduate Student Headcount Fall 2011: 24% (drop/add benchmark) 0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers % Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

40% UF Miami

35% 30% 25%

USF & Mean FSU

20%

FIU FAU

15%

UCF

10%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions % Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 40%

AAU High

35%

Public AAU 75%

30%

Mean

25%

USF

Public AAU 25%

20% 15%

AAU Low

10% 5% 0%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects % Graduate Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

45%

Illinois, Chicago

40%

UAB

35% 30%

Cincinnati Mean NC State

25%

USF, Utah,

20%

VA Tech, Colorado State ASU

Georgia

15% 10%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

DOCTORATES AWARDED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

AAU Phase I Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This data element reflects the actual unduplicated number of degrees awarded at the doctoral level.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

TARU

Type:

AAU, NSF, TARU USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Doctorates Awarded, 2008 - 2009 UC Berkeley Michigan Florida UT Austin Wisconsin-Madison Illinois, Urb-Ch UCLA Ohio State Washington Minnesota Purdue Penn State Texas A&M Maryland, College Park UC Davis Georgia Tech Michigan State UNC Chapel Hill Arizona Pittsburgh Indiana UC San Diego Rutgers Iowa UC Irvine Virginia UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook Iowa State Missouri Colorado USF Kansas Oregon Buffalo

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

288

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Doctorates Awarded, 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

900

800 700 600 500 400

FSU Mean

300

USF

UCF Miami FIU

200 100 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Note: FAU data not available/reported. USF & Public AAU Institutions Doctorates Awarded, 2000 - 2009

1000 900

AAU High

800 700

Public AAU 75%

600 500

Mean

400

Public AAU 25%

300

USF

200 100 0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Doctorates Awarded, 2000 - 2009

700 600

ASU

500

Georgia NC State VA Tech

400

Mean

Utah Illinois, Chicago

300

USF

Cincinnati

200

Colorado State UAB

100 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

FIRST TIME IN COLLEGE (FTIC) STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the number of first-time in college (FTIC) students enrolled for credit in the fall of the academic year.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions FTIC Student Headcount, Fall 2010 Texas A&M Penn State UT Austin Michigan State Indiana Illinois, Urb-Ch Arizona Ohio State Purdue Michigan Florida Rutgers Missouri Wisconsin-Madison Washington Minnesota Colorado UCLA Iowa State Iowa UC Davis UC Irvine USF UC Berkeley UNC Chapel Hill UC San Diego Maryland, College Park Oregon Pittsburgh UC Santa Barbara Kansas Buffalo Virginia Stony Brook Georgia Tech

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

4,392

Research Measures

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers FTIC Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

8,000 7,000

UF UCF FSU

6,000 5,000

Mean

USF

4,000

FIU

3,000

FAU

2,000

Miami

1,000 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions FTIC Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 9,000 8,000

AAU High

7,000

Public AAU 75%

6,000

Mean

5,000

USF

4,000

Public AAU 25%

3,000

AAU Low

2,000 1,000 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects FTIC Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 9,000 8,000

ASU

7,000 6,000

VA Tech NC State Georgia

5,000

USF

4,000

Colorado State Mean Cincinnati Illinois, Chicago Utah

3,000 2,000

UAB

1,000 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

MEDIAN SAT SCORE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the median SAT score. For institutions that only accept the ACT and not the Education Trust, College Results Online SAT, the estimated median ACT score is converted to an SAT equivalent using a concordance table. Type: USF USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Median SAT Scores, Fall 2009 Virginia UC Berkeley Georgia Tech UNC Chapel Hill Michigan UCLA Illinois, Urb-Ch Maryland, College Park Florida Wisconsin-Madison UC San Diego Pittsburgh Ohio State UT Austin Minnesota Washington Penn State Texas A&M UC Santa Barbara Rutgers Colorado Stony Brook UC Irvine Missouri Iowa UC Davis Purdue Indiana Buffalo Michigan State USF Kansas Iowa State Arizona Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

USF Median SAT Score Fall 2010: 1170 Fall 2011: 1200 (drop/add benchmark)

Research Measures

1,140

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Median SAT Scores (Fall), 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

1,400 1,350 1,300

Miami UF

1,250 1,200

FSU

Mean

1,150

USF

FIU

1,100 1,050

FAU

1,000 950

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions Median SAT Scores (Fall), 2000 - 2009 1,450 1,350

AAU High Public AAU 75%

1,250

Mean Public AAU 25%

1,150

USF

AAU Low

1,050 950

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Median SAT Scores (Fall), 2000 - 2009 1,300 1,250 Georgia VA Tech

1,200

NC State

1,150

USF Mean

Colorado State Illinois, Chicago ASU

1,100 1,050 1,000 950

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

FTICs IN TOP 10% OF HIGH SCHOOL CLASS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The proportion of enrolled freshmen who graduated in the top ten percent of their high school classes as reported in the U.S. News & World Report rankings.

U.S. News & World Report

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions FTIC’s in Top 10% of High School Class, Fall 2009 UC Davis

Student Measures

UC Berkeley

UCLA UC Santa Barbara UC Irvine Virginia Washington Georgia Tech Iowa UNC Chapel Hill Florida UT Austin Maryland, College Park Illinois, Urb-Ch Wisconsin-Madison Texas A&M Penn State

Faculty Measures

Ohio State Pittsburgh Minnesota Rutgers Stony Brook Purdue

35%

USF

Research Measures

Arizona

Indiana Michigan Michigan State

USF FTICs in Top 10% of High School Class

Iowa State Buffalo

Fall 2010: 24%

Oregon Kansas Missouri Colorado 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers FTIC’s in Top 10% of High School Class (Fall), 2001 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

90% 80%

70% Miami

60% 50%

Mean

40%

USF & UCF FSU

30% 20% 10%

FAU

FIU

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions FTIC’s in Top 10% of High School Class (Fall), 2001 - 2009

120% 100%

AAU High Public AAU 75%

80% 60%

Mean

40%

USF

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

20% 0%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects FTIC’s in Top 10% of High School Class (Fall), 2001 - 2009 55%

Georgia

50% 45%

VA Tech

40%

NC State

35%

USF

Mean ASU Illinois, Chicago UAB

30% 25%

Utah Cincinnati & Colorado State

20% 15% 10%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

“The number of students receiving either the National Merit Scholarship or the National Achievement Scholarship as reported by The Center in Top American Research Universities (TARU). The Center indicated that it intends to track the number of students receiving the National Hispanic Scholars Program should those data become available.”

TARU

Type:

TARU, USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions National Merit Scholars, 2009 UT Austin UNC Chapel Hill Texas A&M Florida Ohio State Georgia Tech Minnesota Illinois, Urb-Ch UC Berkeley Indiana Arizona Michigan Maryland, College Park Michigan State Kansas Iowa State Virginia Washington Pittsburgh UCLA Penn State Wisconsin-Madison Iowa USF Rutgers Missouri UC San Diego Oregon Purdue Colorado Stony Brook UC Santa Barbara UC Davis Buffalo UC Irvine

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF National Merit Scholars 2010: 17 (est.) 2011: 20 (est.)

100

150

200

250

300

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers National Merit Scholars, 2001 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

300 250 200

150 100

UCF Mean Miami FSU

50 0

USF

FAU, FIU

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions National Merit Scholars, 2001 - 2009 350 300 250

AAU High

200 150 100

Public AAU 75% Mean

50 0

USF 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

AAU PROSPECTS

USF System & AAU Prospects National Merit Scholars, 2001 - 2009 200 ASU

150

NATIONAL PEERS

100 Georgia Mean Cincinnati

USF

NC State Utah & UAB Colorado State VA Tech & Illinois, Chicago

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

PERCENT UNDERGRADUATES RECEIVING PELL GRANT AID

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects percent of undergraduate students receiving Pell grant aid; based on data provided in the IPEDS Student Financial Aid component. The Pell Grant program is a federal program which provides grant assistance to eligible undergraduate postsecondary students with demonstrated financial need to help meet education expenses. This variable has recently been added to the IPEDS database, one year is currently available.

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions % Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid, 2009 - 2010 UC San Diego UC Davis USF UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook UCLA UC Irvine Florida Rutgers UC Berkeley UT Austin Michigan State Buffalo Arizona Washington Texas A&M Oregon Iowa State Purdue Minnesota Kansas UNC Chapel Hill Ohio State Missouri Indiana Illinois, Urb-Ch Pittsburgh Michigan Iowa Colorado Penn State Georgia Tech Wisconsin-Madison Maryland, College Park Virginia

Student Measures

35%

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers % Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid, 2008/09 - 2009/10

PUBLIC AAUs

FIU USF FAU Mean UF UCF FSU Miami 0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

USF & Public AAU Institutions % Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid, 2008/09 - 2009/10 AAU High USF Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25% AAU Low 0%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Propsects % Undergraduates Receiving Pell Grant Aid, 2008/09 - 2009/10 Illinois, Chicago USF ASU UAB Cincinnati Mean NC State Colorado State Utah Georgia VA Tech

*AAU member

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

PERCENT OF CLASSES WITH FEWER THAN 20 STUDENTS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The proportion of undergraduate classes with fewer than twenty students as reported in the U.S. U.S. News & World Report News & World Report rankings. Type: USF USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions % of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students, 2009 UCLA

Student Measures

Virginia

Kansas

Arizona

Faculty Measures

Iowa UC Santa Barbara Colorado Michigan UC Irvine Missouri Wisconsin-Madison Rutgers UC San Diego Pittsburgh Minnesota Florida UNC Chapel Hill

Georgia Tech Purdue Illinois, Urb-Ch Buffalo Oregon UT Austin UC Davis

Research Measures

Maryland, College Park

Stony Brook Washington

USF Percent of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students

Iowa State Indiana Ohio State

2010: 23%

Penn State

24%

USF Michigan State Texas A&M 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers % of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students, 2001 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

55% Miami

50% 45% 40%

35%

FSU Mean

30%

FAU UCF

USF FIU

25% 20%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions % of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students, 2001 - 2009 70% AAU High

60% 50%

Public AAU 75%

40%

Mean Public AAU 25%

30%

USF

20%

AAU Low

10% 0%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Propsects % of Classes with Fewer than 20 Students, 2001 - 2009 55% 50% 45% 40%

Cincinnati ASU Georgia

35%

Mean

Colorado State U of Illinois, Chic. NC State

30% 25% 20%

*AAU member

U of Utah UAB

USF & VA Tech 2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

PERCENT OF CLASSES WITH 50 OR MORE STUDENTS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The proportion of undergraduate classes with fifty or more students as reported in the U.S. News & World Report rankings.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

U.S. News & World Report

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions % of Classes with 50 or More Students, 2009 UC San Diego UC Davis Georgia Tech UT Austin Stony Brook UCLA Texas A&M Michigan State Florida UC Irvine Ohio State Illinois, Urb-Ch Buffalo Wisconsin-Madison Rutgers Penn State Iowa State Indiana Washington UC Santa Barbara Pittsburgh Oregon Minnesota Michigan Purdue Virginia UC Berkeley Missouri Maryland, College Park USF Colorado UNC Chapel Hill Kansas Arizona Iowa

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Percent of Classes with 50 or More Students

15%

2010: 15%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers % of Classes with 50 or More Students, 2001 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

30% UCF

25%

UF FIU

20%

Mean FSU

15%

USF FAU

10% Miami

5% 0%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions % of Classes with 50 or More Students, 2001 - 2009 40% 35%

AAU High

30% 25%

Public AAU 75%

20%

Mean

15%

USF & Public AAU 25%

10%

AAU Low

5% 0%

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

25%

NATIONAL PEERS

15%

USF & AAU Prospects % of Classes with 50 or More Students, 2001 - 2009

20%

USF, UAB Utah

U of Georgia

10%

Cincinnati

5% 0%

*AAU member

VA Tech NC State Colorado State U of Illinois, Chic. ASU Mean

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

FRESHMAN RETENTION RATE

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the percent of the fall full-time cohort from the prior year that re-enrolled at the institution as either full- or part-time in the current year; as reported on the IPEDS Enrollment component. Data for 2003 are not consistent due to instiutitons completing this item voluntarily for all institutions.

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Freshman Retention Rate, Fall 2010 UCLA UC Berkeley Virginia UNC Chapel Hill Michigan Florida UC San Diego Wisconsin-Madison UC Irvine Maryland, College Park Illinois, Urb-Ch Georgia Tech Washington Ohio State Pittsburgh Penn State UT Austin UC Davis Texas A&M UC Santa Barbara Rutgers Michigan State Indiana Minnesota USF Buffalo Stony Brook Purdue Oregon Iowa State Iowa Colorado Missouri Kansas Arizona

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

88%

Research Measures

USF Freshman Retention Rate 2011: 89%

(drop/add benchmark)

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

USF & Florida Research University Peers Retention Rate (Fall), 2004 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

100% UF

95%

FSU Miami

90%

USF

Mean UCF

85%

FIU

80%

FAU

75% 70%

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Retention Rate (Fall), 2004 - 2009 100% AAU High

95%

Public AAU 75% Mean

90%

USF

Public AAU 25%

85% 80%

AAU Low

75% 70%

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

USF & AAU Prospects Retention Rate (Fall), 2004 - 2009 100% 95%

Georgia VA Tech

90%

USF & NC State

NATIONAL PEERS

Utah ASU & Cincinnati Colorado State Illinois, Chicago UAB

85% 80% 75% 70%

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

SIX-YEAR GRADUATION RATE FOR FIRST TIME IN COLLEGE (FTIC) STUDENTS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The six-year graduation rate for first-time-in-college students.

Common Data Set, IPEDS

Type:

U.S. News & World Report USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Six-Year Graduation Rate for First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, 2010 - 2011 (fall 2004 cohort)

Virginia UC Berkeley UCLA Michigan UNC Chapel Hill UC San Diego Penn State Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida Wisconsin-Madison UC Irvine UC Davis Maryland, College Park Washington UT Austin Texas A&M Georgia Tech UC Santa Barbara Pittsburgh Ohio State Rutgers Michigan State Indiana Minnesota Iowa State Iowa Missouri Purdue Oregon Colorado Buffalo Stony Brook Kansas Arizona USF

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

51% 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Six-Year Graduation Rates for First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

90% UF

80%

Miami FSU

70%

Mean UCF

60%

USF

50%

FIU FAU

40% 30%

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 (fall 95 cohort) (fall 96 cohort) (fall 97 cohort) (fall 98 cohort) (fall 99 cohort) (fall 00 cohort) (fall 01 cohort) (fall 02 cohort) (fall 03 cohort) (fall 04 cohort)

USF & Public AAU Institutions Six-Year Graduation Rates for First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, 2001/02 - 2010/11 100%

AAU High

90%

Public AAU 75%

80%

Mean

70%

Public AAU 25%

60%

AAU Low

50%

USF

40% 30%

AAU PROSPECTS

USF & AAU Prospects Six-Year Graduation Rates for First-Time-In-College (FTIC) Students, 2001/02 - 2010/11 90% 80% 70%

NATIONAL PEERS

60% 50% 40% 30%

Georgia VA Tech NC State Colorado State Mean ASU Utah Illinois, Chicago

USF

Cincinnati UAB 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 (fall 95 cohort) (fall 96 cohort) (fall 97 cohort) (fall 98 cohort) (fall 99 cohort) (fall 00 cohort) (fall 01 cohort) (fall 02 cohort) (fall 03 cohort) (fall 04 cohort)

INTERNATIONAL STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the headcount at the fall of an academic year of students who are classified as “nonresident aliens”and are not citizens or nationals of the United States and who are in this country on a visa or temporary basis and do not have the right to remain indefinitely; reported in the IPEDS Enrollment Survey

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions International Student Headcount, Fall 2010 Illinois, Urb-Ch Purdue Buffalo Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Ohio State Indiana UT Austin Penn State Texas A&M Wisconsin-Madison Florida Georgia Tech UC Berkeley Washington UCLA Iowa State Maryland, College Park Stony Brook Iowa Arizona Rutgers Kansas Pittsburgh UC San Diego Virginia Oregon Missouri UC Davis UC Irvine UNC Chapel Hill Colorado USF UC Santa Barbara

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF International Student Headcount Fall 2011: 1,690 (drop/add benchmark)

1,408 0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

4,500

4,000 3,500

FIU

3,000 2,500 2,000

Mean Miami

1,500

USF & UCF FSU

1,000

FAU

500 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

8,000

AAU High

7,000 6,000 5,000

Public AAU 75%

4,000

Mean

3,000

Public AAU 25%

2,000

USF

1,000 0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 4,500 4,000

ASU

3,500 3,000

NC State

2,500

VA Tech Cincinnati Mean Illinois, Chicago Utah

2,000 1,500

USF

Georgia Colorado State

1,000

UAB

500 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

PERCENT INTERNATIONAL STUDENT HEADCOUNT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects percent of international students (i.e., non-resident aliens) of the total student enrollment (headcount); based on fall enrollment data reported on the IPEDS Enrollment Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions % International Student Headcount, Fall 2010 Georgia Tech Buffalo Illinois, Urb-Ch Purdue Michigan Stony Brook Iowa State Michigan State Indiana Wisconsin-Madison UC Berkeley Penn State Minnesota Washington UT Austin UCLA Texas A&M Ohio State Iowa Virginia UC San Diego Pittsburgh Oregon Maryland, College Park Kansas Florida UC Irvine Rutgers Arizona UNC Chapel Hill UC Davis Missouri UC Santa Barbara Colorado USF 0%

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF Percent International Student Headcount Fall 2011: 4% (drop/add benchmark)

3% 2%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers % International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

14% Miami

12% 10%

FIU

Mean

USF, FSU, UCF

2% 0%

FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions % International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010 20% AAU High

18% 16% 14% 12%

Public AAU 75%

10%

Mean

Public AAU 25%

6% AAU Low

USF

2% 0%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects % International Student Headcount (Fall), 2000 - 2010

9% 8%

NC State & VA Tech

Illinois, Chicago

Mean, Utah, Cincinnati

ASU Colorado State , UAB, Georgia

USF

3% 2% 1% 0%

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

STUDENTS STUDYING ABROAD

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the number of students studying abroad as reported by the Institute of International Education (IIE), Open Doors Report on Internaitonal Educational Exchange.

IIE, Open Doors

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Number of Students Studying Abroad, 2008 -2009 Michigan State

Student Measures

UCLA

Washington Minnesota UT Austin Wisconsin-Madison Penn State Michigan Indiana Florida Illinois, Urb-Ch Arizona Ohio State Maryland, College Park Virginia Kansas UNC Chapel Hill

Faculty Measures

UC Davis Texas A&M Pittsburgh Iowa Colorado Purdue UC San Diego

Research Measures

Oregon

UC Santa Barbara Missouri Iowa State

USF System Students Studying Abroad

UC Irvine Georgia Tech

2009 - 2010: 695

Rutgers UC Berkeley

533

USF Buffalo 0

500

1,000

1,500

Note: Data for Stony Brook not reported/not available.

2,000

2,500

3,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Number of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09

PUBLIC AAUs

2,500 2,000

1,500

FSU

1,000

Mean Miami

USF

500

UCF

FAU 0

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

Note: FIU data not reported/not available.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Number of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09 3,500 3,000 AAU High

2,500

Public AAU 75%

2,000

Mean

1,500

Public AAU 25%

1,000

USF AAU Low

500 0

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

AAU PROSPECTS

2,500

NATIONAL PEERS

1,500

USF & AAU Prospects Number of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09

2,000

Georgia

ASU VA Tech NC State Cincinnati

1,000

Mean

Colorado State

USF

500 0

Utah

Illinois, Chicago UAB

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

PERCENT STUDENTS STUDYING ABROAD

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the percent of students enrolled in a study abroad program as reported by the Institute of International Education (IIE), Open Doors Report on Internaitonal Educational Exchange.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions % of Students Studying Abroad, 2008 - 2009 Virginia

Student Measures

UCLA

Washington Michigan State Wisconsin-Madison Arizona Michigan Indiana UNC Chapel Hill Kansas Penn State Oregon Georgia Tech Maryland, College Park Pittsburgh UC Santa Barbara Illinois, Urb-Ch

Faculty Measures

UC Davis Minnesota UT Austin Iowa UC San Diego Colorado Florida

Research Measures

Iowa State

UC Irvine Missouri Ohio State

USF Percent of Students Studying Abroad

Purdue Texas A&M Rutgers

2009 - 2010: 2% (est.)

UC Berkeley Buffalo

USF 0%

Note: Data for Stony Brook not reported/not available.

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Percent of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09

PUBLIC AAUs

5% Miami

FSU

Mean

2% USF 1% 0%

FAU UCF

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

Note: FIU data not reported/not available.

USF & Public AAU Institutions Percent of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09 10% 9% 8% 7%

AAU High

6% 5%

Public AAU 75% Mean

Public AAU 25%

3% 2%

AAU Low

USF

1% 0%

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Percent of Students Studying Abroad, 2000/01 - 2008/09 7% 6%

Georgia

5% VA Tech

NC State Cincinnati Mean Colorado State ASU Utah

3% 2%

USF

1% 0%

UAB Illinois, Chicago

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

STUDENT-TO-FACULTY RATIO

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The student-to-faculty ratio is the total FTE students not in graduate or professional programs divided by total FTE instructional staff not teaching in graduate or professional programs, as reported in the IPEDS Fall Enrollment survey.

IPEDS

Type:

IPEDS, USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Student-to-Faculty Ratio, Fall 2010 Washington Michigan UNC Chapel Hill Purdue Pittsburgh Rutgers Virginia UCLA UC Davis UC Berkeley Michigan State Iowa Buffalo UC Santa Barbara Penn State Iowa State UT Austin Stony Brook Maryland, College Park Colorado UC San Diego UC Irvine Ohio State Indiana Illinois, Urb-Ch Georgia Tech Texas A&M Missouri Kansas Minnesota Florida Arizona Wisconsin-Madison Oregon USF

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

28 0

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

PUBLIC AAUs

USF & Florida Research University Peers Student-to-Faculty Ratio, Fall 2008 - 2010

UCF

USF & FIU

FSU

Mean

FAU & UF

20 15

Miami

10 5

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Student-to-Faculty Ratio, Fall 2008 - 2010

USF 25 AAU High

Public AAU 75%

Mean

Public AAU 25%

AAU Low

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Student-to-Faculty Ratio, Fall 2008 - 2010

USF 25 ASU Georgia Mean

Colorado State NC State Illinois, Chicago VA Tech UAB Cincinnati

Utah

10 5

2008

2009

2010

USF E-PROFILE: FALL 2011, DROP-ADD

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Infrastructure USF’s eProfiles application displays select institutional metrics on new and all students by campus and for the total USF system at each enrollment benchmark for Measures • Total University Expenditures each term. Data are compared to comparable benchmarks in the previous like term. • Total Expenditures per FTE USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

• Tuition & Fees • Total Revenues per FTE • State Appropriations • State Appropriations per FTE • Annual Giving • Endowment • Endowment per FTE • Total Library Expenditures • Total Library Materials Expenditures • Total Library Professional + Support Staff (FTE) • Library Professional Salaries & Wages • Moody’s Rating

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF E-PROFILE: FALL 2011, DROP-ADD, continued

PUBLIC AAUs

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

TENURED / TENURE-TRACK FACULTY

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the number of total employees at an institution classified with the faculty status of tenure/tenure-track as reported in the IPEDS Human Resources survey; counts reflect fall reporting.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty, Fall 2010 Florida Ohio State Michigan Minnesota Wisconsin-Madison UT Austin Michigan State UNC Chapel Hill Illinois, Urb-Ch Purdue Texas A&M UCLA Penn State Arizona Pittsburgh Iowa Rutgers Washington Maryland, College Park Indiana Kansas UC Davis Virginia UC Berkeley Iowa State Missouri USF Colorado UC San Diego Buffalo UC Irvine Stony Brook Georgia Tech UC Santa Barbara Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

1,167

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty (Fall), 2002 - 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

3,500 3,000

2,500 2,000 1,500

Mean Miami

USF

1,000

FSU UCF FIU FAU

500 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty (Fall), 2002 - 2010

3,500 3,000

AAU High

2,500 2,000

Public AAU 75% Mean

1,500

Public AAU 25%

USF

1,000

AAU Low

500 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty (Fall), 2002 - 2010

2,000

ASU

1,800

Georgia Illinois, Chicago NC State Utah Mean VA Tech

1,600 1,400

UAB

1,200

USF Cincinnati

1,000 800

Colorado State

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

FULL-TIME INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the number of full-time employees at an institution categorized as instructional as reported in the IPEDS Human Resources survey; counts reflect fall reporting. Total includes tenured, on tenure track, non-tenure track and those without faculty status classification.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Full-Time Instructional Staff, Fall 2010 Michigan Texas A&M UT Austin Penn State Purdue Michigan State Florida Ohio State Illinois, Urb-Ch Washington Minnesota UCLA Indiana Pittsburgh Rutgers UNC Chapel Hill Wisconsin-Madison Maryland, College Park UC Berkeley Arizona UC Davis Colorado Missouri Iowa Iowa State Kansas Virginia USF Buffalo UC San Diego Georgia Tech UC Irvine Stony Brook UC Santa Barbara Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

1,118

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Total Full-TIme Instructional Staff (Fall), 2002 -2010

PUBLIC AAUs

2,500

2,000 1,500

FSU Mean

USF

UCF Miami FIU FAU

1,000 500 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Full-TIme Instructional Staff (Fall), 2002 -2010 3,500

AAU High

3,000 2,500 Public AAU 75%

2,000

Mean

1,500

Public AAU 25%

USF

1,000

AAU Low

500 0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF & AAU Prospects Total Full-TIme Instructional Staff (Fall), 2002 -2010 3,000 2,500 2,000

NC State Georgia Mean VA Tech Utah Cincinnati Illinois, Chicago Colorado State

1,500 1,000

USF UAB

500 0

*AAU member

ASU

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

FACULTY AWARDS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

AAU Phase I Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The number of institutional affiliated faculty members receiving awards from 24 prominent grant and fellowship programs in the arts, humanities, science, engineering, and health fields as reported by The Center’s Top American Research Universities (TARU). A list of these faculty awards is available in the TARU’s source notes. The number reported is for the academic year that preceded the reporting year.The number of faculty awards is also a membership eligibility requirement for the Association of American Universities (AAU). A list of the 27 awards considered by the AAU is available in the AAU’s Membership Policy.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

TARU

Type:

AAU, TARU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Faculty Awards, 2009 Washington Michigan UC Berkeley UC San Diego UCLA UNC Chapel Hill Pittsburgh Wisconsin-Madison Illinois, Urb-Ch UT Austin UC Irvine UC Davis Rutgers Colorado Minnesota Purdue Maryland, College Park Florida Virginia Penn State Georgia Tech Texas A&M Michigan State Arizona Stony Brook Indiana Ohio State Iowa Oregon USF Missouri Buffalo UC Santa Barbara Iowa State Kansas

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System Faculty Awards

2010: 12 (est.)

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Faculty Awards, 2001 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

30 25 UF

20 15

USF

Mean FSU FIU Miami UCF FAU

5 0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Faculty Awards, 2001 - 2009

AAU High

50 40 30

Public AAU 75% Mean

Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Faculty Awards, 2001 - 2009

10 5 0

*AAU member

Utah Arizona State NC State Illinois, Chicago Colorado State USF & Mean VA Tech & Cincinatti Georgia

U AB

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

NATIONAL ACADEMY MEMBERS

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

AAU Phase I Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

National Academy members reflects the number of USF faculty members who are members of a national academy as reported by TheCenter (Top American Research Universities). Membership in these organizations is reported annually: National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), or the Institute of Medicine (IOM). Academy memberships as reported by TheCenter are an eligibility measure for the Association of American Universities (AAU).

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

TARU

Type:

AAU, TARU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions National Academy Members, 2009 UC Berkeley UC San Diego Washington UCLA Michigan Wisconsin-Madison UT Austin Illinois, Urb-Ch UC Santa Barbara Minnesota Rutgers UC Irvine UNC Chapel Hill UC Davis Virginia Georgia Tech Colorado Maryland, College Park Pittsburgh Ohio State Arizona Penn State Florida Texas A&M Purdue Iowa Stony Brook Indiana Iowa State Oregon Michigan State Buffalo Missouri Kansas USF

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System National Academy Members 2010: 3 (est.)

3 0

100

150

200

250

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers National Academy Members, 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

20 15 10

Miami Mean & FSU

5 0

USF

FAU & FIU UCF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions National Academy Members, 2000 - 2009 225

AAU High

200 175 150 125 100 75 50

Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25% AAU Low

25 0

USF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects National Academy Members, 2000 - 2009

ASU

Utah NC State

VA Tech Mean

Cincinnati Georgia Colorado State UAB Illinois, Chicago

USF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

CITATION IMPACT

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

AAU Phase I Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The citation impact factor is a measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Citations are tracked in two ways: (1)The Florida Board of Governors tracks the number of persons at each SUS institution who are listed as Highly Cited Scholars in the database maintained by ISIHighlyCited.com. The number of Highly Cited Scholars per institution is reported here.The Association of American Universities (AAU) considers citations as a membership eligibility measure. The U.S. University Science Indicators citations database provides annually updated information.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

Thompson ISI

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions 5-Year Citation Impact, 2003 - 2007 Washington UC San Diego UCLA UC Berkeley UNC Chapel Hill Pittsburgh Stony Brook UC Santa Barbara UC Irvine Michigan Virginia Arizona Wisconsin-Madison Colorado Texas A&M Iowa Minnesota Oregon Rutgers Indiana Penn State Ohio State UC Davis UT Austin Buffalo USF Maryland, College Park Illinois, Urb-Ch Michigan State Iowa State Kansas Florida Georgia Tech Missouri Purdue 0.00

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

6.14

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers 5-Year Citation Impact, 1981/1985 - 2003/2007

PUBLIC AAUs

Miami USF FSU UF Mean FIU 2003-2007

UCF

1981-1985

FAU 0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

USF System & Florida Public AAU Institutions 5-Year Citation Impact, 1981/1985 - 2003/2007 AAU High Public AAU 75% Mean USF Public AAU 25%

2003-2007

AAU Low

1981-1985

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & Florida AAU Prospects 5-Year Citation Impact, 1981/1985 - 2003/2007 UAB Cincinnati Utah USF Mean Colorado State ASU Illinois, Chicago 2003-2007

Georgia NC State

1981-1985

VA Tech 0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

TOTAL RESEARCH EXPENDITURES PER TENURED / TENURE-TRACK FACULTY

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the ratio of total NSF research expenditures (research expenditures resulting from all external funding sources) and total employees at an institution classified with the faculty status of tenure/tenure-track, as reported to the National Science Foundation and IPEDS respectively.

NSF, IPEDS

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Total Research Expenditures by Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty, FY 2009 UC San Diego Georgia Tech Colorado Washington UCLA UC Berkeley UC Davis Wisconsin-Madison Penn State Pittsburgh Michigan Arizona UNC Chapel Hill Texas A&M UC Irvine Indiana Buffalo Minnesota Stony Brook Illinois, Urb-Ch Maryland, College Park UC Santa Barbara UT Austin Ohio State USF Purdue Rutgers Iowa Florida Missouri Michigan State Virginia Iowa State Kansas Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

$242

$100

$200

$300

Research Measures

$400

$500

Dollars in Thousands

$600

$700

$800

$900

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF & Florida Research University Peers Research Expenditures by Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty, FY 2002 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$300,000 USF

$250,000

Miami UF

$200,000

FSU Mean UCF FIU

$150,000 $100,000

FAU

$50,000 $0

$900,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF & Public AAU Institutions Research Expenditures by Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty, FY 2002 - FY 2009

$800,000

AAU High

$700,000 $600,000 $500,000 Public AAU 75%

$400,000

Mean

$300,000

USF

$200,000

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

$100,000 $0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

$400,000

USF & AAU Prospects Research Expenditures by Total Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty, FY 2002 - FY 2009

$350,000

UAB Colorado State Cincinnati VA Tech Mean NC State

$300,000 $250,000

USF

Illinois, Chicago Utah Georgia ASU

$200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

FULL PROFESSOR AVERAGE SALARIES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This variable reflects the average salaries of full professors as reported in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

AAUP

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Full Professor Average Salaries, 2010 - 2011 UCLA UC Berkeley Michigan UNC Chapel Hill Rutgers Stony Brook Georgia Tech Virginia UT Austin Buffalo Maryland, College Park UC San Diego UC Santa Barbara UC Irvine Illinois, Urb-Ch Penn State Ohio State Pittsburgh Iowa Michigan State Minnesota Florida Indiana Purdue UC Davis Texas A&M Washington Arizona Kansas Colorado Iowa State Missouri Wisconsin-Madison USF Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$108,678 $0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Full Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$150,000 $140,000

Miami

$130,000

UF Mean UCF FIU

$120,000 $110,000

USF FSU FAU

$100,000 $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Full Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11 $160,000

AAU High

$150,000 $140,000

Public AAU 75%

$130,000

Mean

$120,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

$110,000

AAU Low

$100,000 $90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Full Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$130,000

Illinois, Chicago UAB ASU VA Tech Utah NC State Mean

$120,000 $110,000

USF

$100,000

Colorado State Georgia Cincinnati

$90,000 $80,000 $70,000 $60,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR AVERAGE SALARIES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

This variable reflects the average salaries of associate professors as reported in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)

AAUP

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Associate Professor Average Salaries, 2010 - 2011 UC Berkeley Stony Brook UCLA Michigan Rutgers Maryland, College Park Georgia Tech UNC Chapel Hill Buffalo Virginia UT Austin Washington UC San Diego Michigan State Penn State Colorado Ohio State Pittsburgh Minnesota Illinois, Urb-Ch Iowa UC Irvine Purdue UC Davis Florida Iowa State Indiana UC Santa Barbara Texas A&M Arizona Wisconsin-Madison Kansas USF Oregon Missouri

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$76,571

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Associate Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$95,000 $90,000

Miami

$85,000

UF FIU Mean UCF

$80,000

USF

$75,000

FSU FAU

$70,000 $65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Associate Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11 $110,000 AAU High

$100,000

Public AAU 75%

$90,000

Mean Public AAU 25%

$80,000

USF AAU Low

$70,000 $60,000 $50,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Associate Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11

$90,000

Illinois, Chicago ASU NC State UAB VA Tech Mean Utah Colorado State Georgia Cincinnati

$85,000 $80,000 $75,000

USF

$70,000 $65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AVERAGE SALARIES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Source:

This variable reflects the average salaries of assistant professors as reported in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP)

AAUP

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Assistant Professor Average Salaries, 2010 - 2011 UC Berkeley Georgia Tech Michigan UCLA Maryland, College Park UT Austin UNC Chapel Hill Washington UC San Diego Stony Brook Minnesota Illinois, Urb-Ch UC Irvine UC Davis Rutgers Ohio State Buffalo Purdue UC Santa Barbara Virginia Colorado Iowa State Indiana Wisconsin-Madison Iowa Florida Oregon Penn State Pittsburgh Texas A&M Michigan State Arizona USF Kansas Missouri

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$66,889

$10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 $100,000

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Assistant Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11

PUBLIC AAUs

$80,000

Miami

$75,000

FIU UF FSU Mean

$70,000

USF FAU UCF

$65,000 $60,000 $55,000 $50,000 $45,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Assistant Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11 $95,000 AAU High

$85,000

Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25%

$75,000

USF

$65,000

AAU Low

$55,000 $45,000 $35,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Assistant Professor Average Salaries, 2001/02 - 2010/11 $80,000 Illinois, Chicago Georgia Utah ASU VA Tech NC State Mean

$75,000 $70,000 $65,000

USF

Colorado State UAB Cincinnati

$60,000 $55,000 $50,000 $45,000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

NSF TOTAL RESEARCH EXPENDITURES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This measure reflects research expenditures resulting from all external funding sources (federal, state, local, business, and industry). These data are collected by the National Science Foundation. Figures reported by fiscal year (FY).

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

NSF Expenditure Survey

Type:

AAU, NSF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions NSF Total Research Expenditures, FY 2009 Michigan Wisconsin-Madison UCLA UC San Diego Washington Penn State Minnesota Ohio State UC Davis UC Berkeley Colorado UNC Chapel Hill Texas A&M Pittsburgh Florida Arizona Illinois, Urb-Ch Georgia Tech UT Austin Purdue Indiana Maryland, College Park Michigan State Rutgers Buffalo Iowa UC Irvine USF Virginia Stony Brook Missouri Kansas Iowa State UC Santa Barbara Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

USF System NSF Total Research Expenditures

$309,456

FY 2010: $331 million

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000 Dollars in Thousands

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

USF System & Florida Research University Peers NSF Total Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

FLORIDA RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES

$600,000

Dollars in Thousands

$500,000 $400,000 USF

$300,000

Miami

Mean

$200,000

FSU

UCF FIU

$100,000

FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions NSF Total Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $1,000,000

AAU High

$900,000 $800,000 $700,000 Dollars in Thousands

Public AAU 75%

$600,000 AAU Mean

$500,000 $400,000

Public AAU 25%

$300,000

Florida Atlantic University Florida International University Florida State University University of Central Florida University of Florida* University of Miami University of South Florida

USF

$200,000 $100,000 $0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

UAB VA Tech NC State Cincinnati Mean Georgia Illinois, Chicago

$400,000 $350,000 Dollars in Thousands

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects NSF Total Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

Utah

USF

$300,000

Colorado State ASU

$250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU FEDERAL RESEARCH EXPENDITURES

AAU Phase I Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

These data are collected by the National Science Foundation. This metric is defined by the AAU Membership Committee as NSF federal funding minus NSF agricultural (USDA) funding.

NSF Expenditure Survey

Type:

AAU, NSF USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions AAU Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2009 Michigan Washington UC San Diego Colorado Wisconsin-Madison UCLA Pittsburgh UNC Chapel Hill Penn State Minnesota Georgia Tech Ohio State UT Austin Arizona UC Davis Illinois, Urb-Ch UC Berkeley Iowa Maryland, College Park Texas A&M Virginia Florida Indiana USF UC Irvine Purdue Rutgers Buffalo Michigan State Kansas UC Santa Barbara Stony Brook Missouri Iowa State Oregon

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

$190,851

Research Measures

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

Dollars in Thousands

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers AAU Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

$250,000 UF

Dollars in Thousands

$200,000

USF Miami

$150,000 FSU Mean

$100,000

UCF FIU

$50,000 $0

FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions AAU Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $700,000

AAU High

$600,000 Dollars in Thousands

$500,000 Public AAU 75%

$400,000 $300,000

AAU Mean

$200,000

Public AAU 25%

USF

$100,000 $0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

$350,000 $300,000

UAB

$250,000 Dollars in Thousands

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects AAU Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

Cincinnati Illinois, Chicago Utah

$200,000

USF

Mean Colorado State ASU VA Tech

$150,000 $100,000

NC State Georgia

$50,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

NSF NON-FEDERAL RESEARCH EXPENDITURES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

These data represent the nonfederally financed R&D expenditures at universities and colleges as reported by the National Science Foundation. The AAU Membership Committee recognizes that these sources of academic research support fund high-quality research; however, since thery are generally not allocated through competitive, merit-review processes, they are considered as Phase II indicators for membership consideration. Non-federal funding sources include associations, foundations, and industry.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

NSF Expenditure Survey

Type:

AAU, NSF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2009 Wisconsin-Madison UCLA UC Berkeley UC Davis Ohio State Michigan Texas A&M UC San Diego Florida Minnesota Penn State Purdue Arizona Illinois, Urb-Ch Indiana Georgia Tech UNC Chapel Hill Michigan State UT Austin Rutgers Buffalo Maryland, College Park Pittsburgh Washington Stony Brook UC Irvine Colorado Iowa State Missouri USF UC Santa Barbara Kansas Iowa Virginia Oregon

Student Measures

Faculty Measures

Research Measures

$118,507

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

Dollars in Thousands

$400,000

$500,000

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

FLORIDA RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES

$400,000 UF

$350,000 Dollars in Thousands

$300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000

USF

Mean FSU Miami UCF FIU FAU

$100,000 $50,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009 $500,000 AAU High

$450,000 $400,000 Dollars in Thousands

Florida Atlantic University Florida International University Florida State University University of Central Florida University of Florida* University of Miami University of South Florida

Public AAU 75%

$350,000 $300,000 $250,000

Mean

$200,000

Public AAU 25%

$150,000

USF

$100,000 $50,000 $0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects NSF Non-Federal Research Expenditures, FY 2000 - FY 2009

$300,000 $250,000 Dollars in Thousands

Georgia NC State

$200,000 Mean ASU

$150,000

Illinois, Chicago

Utah UAB Cincinnati

USF

$100,000

Colorado State

$50,000 $0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

RESEARCH PERFORMANCE INDEX (RPI)

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

Student Measures

As reported in the High Impact Universities pilot study designed to benchmark the research output or performance of the world’s top univesities involving over 1,000 universities and 5,000 faculty. This variable is based on the calculation of a g-value index value representing the quality and consistency of publication or research output. This value is between 0 and 1 comprised of equal contributions from all faculties and is interpreted as an indication of the comprehensiveness or all around relative performance of a universities. The actual RPI value is an indication of performance relative to a dream team comprising the best faculties of all the universities in the world. The RPI value is calculated following a three-step process for each university (1-calculate the g-index for each faculty; 2-normalize the g-index for each faculty by that of the highest globally performing faculty; 3-average the normalized faculty indices for final value).

High Impact Universities, in affiliation with the University of Western Australia

Type: USF

USF & Public AAU Institutions Research Performance Index (RPI), 2010 UCLA UC Berkeley Michigan Washington UC San Diego Minnesota Wisconsin-Madison Penn State UNC Chapel Hill Pittsburgh Ohio State Maryland, College Park UT Austin UC Davis Arizona Michigan State Virginia Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida UC Irvine Rutgers Georgia Tech UC Santa Barbara Iowa Colorado Indiana Purdue Texas A&M Stony Brook USF Iowa State Buffalo Missouri Oregon Kansas

6* 7* 10* 12* 18* 20* 26* 31* 32* 34* 35* 38* 39* 41* 43*

Faculty Measures

48*

50* 51* 52* 56* 59* 64* 66*

Research Measures

69*

74* 85* 103*

0.3709

110* 115* 138* 152* 224* 260*

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

*data represents international ranking

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Research Performance Index (RPI), 2010

PUBLIC AAUs

Florida

50*

USF

110*

Miami

113*

FSU

150*

0.3709

Mean UCF

299*

FIU

433*

FAU

485*

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

* data represents international ranking USF System & Public AAU Institutions Research Performance Index (RPI), 2010 Highest Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25%

0.3709

USF Lowest

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Research Performance Index (RPI), 2010 ASU

58*

Utah

63*

Cincinnati

93*

Illinois, Chicago

105*

USF

110*

0.3709

Mean NC State

134*

VA Tech

163*

Georgia

168*

Colorado State

201*

UAB

258*

0.0

0.1

* data represents international ranking

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

POSTDOCTORAL APPOINTEES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS

AAU Phase II Indicator

INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The number of postdoctoral appointees per institution reported via the NSF Survey on Graduate Students and Postdoctorates in Science and Engineering as reported by the Top American Research Universities (TARU). Postdoctoral appointees reported in the 2009 report were for Fall 2007.

NSF Survey of Graduate Students & Postdoctorates in Science & Engineering

Type:

AAU, Carnegie, NSF, TARU

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Postdoctoral Appointees, Fall 2009 UC Berkeley

Student Measures

UCLA

UC San Diego Michigan Washington Minnesota Pittsburgh Wisconsin-Madison UNC Chapel Hill UC Davis Florida Ohio State Illinois, Urb-Ch Penn State Michigan State UC Irvine

Faculty Measures

Texas A&M

Virginia Iowa Purdue Maryland, College Park Arizona Buffalo

Research Measures

Georgia Tech

261

USF UT Austin

USF Postdoctoral Appointees

Kansas Iowa State

Fall 2010: 293

Rutgers Missouri Stony Brook UC Santa Barbara Oregon 0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Postdoctoral Appointees (Fall), 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

600

500 400

USF

300

FSU Miami

Mean

200 100 0

UCF FIU FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Postdoctoral Appointees (Fall), 2000 - 2009

1600 1400 1200

AAU High

1000 800

Public AAU 75%

600

AAU Mean

400

USF &

Public AAU 25%

200 0

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Postdoctoral Appointees (Fall), 2000 - 2009 400 Utah

350

Colorado State

300

Cincinnati NC State

USF

Mean & UAB Illinois, Chicago U of Georgia VA Tech Arizona State

250 200 150 100 50

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

NON-FACULTY RESEARCHERS WITH DOCTORATES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Non-faculty research staff include all doctoral scientists and engineers who are involved principally in research activities but are not considered either postdoctoral appointees or members of the regular faculty.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

WebCASPAR, NSF Survey of Graduate Students & Postdoctoral Appointees in Science & Engineering

Type:

AAU, Carnegie, NSF, TARU USF System includes all member institutions (USF, USF St. Petersburg, USF Sarasota-Manatee, USF Polytechnic). USF refers to the campus located in Tampa which includes USF Health and the College of Marine Science.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates, Fall 2009 Wisconsin-Madison UC Davis

Student Measures

Minnesota Arizona UC Irvine Michigan Washington Seattle UNC Chapel Hill Kansas Texas A&M Ohio State Pittsburgh

164

USF Illinois Urb-Ch SUNY Stony Brook UC San Diego

Faculty Measures

Indiana UT Austin Rutgers Buffalo Penn State Iowa

Research Measures

Iowa State UC Santa Barbara

USF System Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates

Virginia Michigan State

Fall 2010: 136

Colorado Purdue Missouri Oregon Georgia Tech 0

100

200

300

400

500

Total Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates Note: Florida, Maryland-College Park, UCLA, and UC Berkeley data not available.

600

700

800

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates (Fall), 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

250

Miami

200

USF 150

100

Mean FSU FAU

UCF

FIU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Note: Florida data not available.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates (Fall), 2000 - 2009

800 700

AAU High

600 500 400 300 Public AAU 75%

200

USF Mean

100 0

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates (Fall), 2000 - 2009 450 400 350 300 UAB

250

Colorado State Illinois, Chicago

200

USF

150

Mean VA Tech & Utah

100 50 0

Cincinnati Georgia

2000

2001

2002

2003

Note: Arizona State, NC State data not available.

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

INVENTION DISCLOSURES RECEIVED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The number of invention disclosures received in a given year as reported by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Invention Disclosures Received, 2009 UC System

Student Measures

Michigan

Washington Georgia Tech Wisconsin-Madison Illinois, Urb-Ch Florida SUNY System Colorado Pittsburgh Purdue Minnesota Texas A&M System

Faculty Measures

Ohio State

Virginia Missouri System

141

USF System UNC Chapel Hill Indiana

Research Measures

Michigan State

Arizona Penn State

USF System Invention Disclosures Received 2010: 161

Kansas Iowa State Rutgers Iowa Oregon 0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Invention Disclosures Received, 2000 - 2009

USF STRATEGIC

PUBLIC AAUs PERFORMANCE

Georgia Institute of Technology METRICS Indiana University-Bloomington Iowa State University INPUT/OUTPUT Michigan State University TheMEASURES Ohio State University Pennsylvania State University Infrastructure Measures Purdue University TotalUniversity University Expenditures Rutgers Total Expenditures Stony Brook University per FTE Tuition & Fees Texas A&M University University Buffalo Tuitionat& Fee Revenue per FTE University of Arizona State Appropriations University of California, Berkeley State Appropriations per FTE University California, Davis AnnualofGiving University of California, Irvine Endowment University of California, Endowment per FTE Los Angeles University of California, Student Measures San Diego Total Student Headcount University of California, TotalBarbara Student FTE Santa Graduate Student at Headcount University of Colorado Boulder Doctorates Awarded ** University of Florida FTIC Student University of Illinois,Enrollment Urbana-Champaign National Merit Scholars University Iowa PercentofUndergraduates University of Kansas Receiving Pell Grant Aid University of Maryland, Percent of Classes with College FewerPark than 20 Students University PercentofofMichigan Classes with University Minnesota, Twin Cities 50 orofMore Students University of Missouri, Columbia Freshman Retention Rates University North Carolina, Six Yearof Graduation Rate for Chapel Hill First Time in College Students University of Oregon International Students University of Pittsburgh % International Students University of Texas, Austin Students Studying Abroad University of Virginia % Students Studying Abroad University of Washington Student-to-Faculty Ratio University of Wisconsin-Madison

Faculty Measures FLORIDA RESEARCH Tenured / Tenure Track Faculty UNIVERSITIES

Full-Time Florida Atlantic Instructional University Staff Faculty Awards *University Florida International Florida State University National Academy Members * University of Central Citation Impact Florida * University of Florida*Expenditures per Total Research University of Miami Tenured / Tenure Track Faculty University of South Florida Full Professors Avg. Salary Associate Professors Avg. Salary AAU PROSPECTS Assistant Professors Avg. Salary Arizona State University Colorado State University Research Measures North Carolina University NSF Total State Research Expenditures University of Alabama, Birmingham AAU Federal Research Expenditures * University of Cincinnati NSF Non-Federal University of Georgia Research Expenditures University of Illinois, Chicago Research Performance Index University of Utah Postdoctoral Appointees Virginia Polytechnic Institute ** and State University Non-Faculty Researchers with Doctorates Invention Disclosures NATIONAL PEERS Received Total Patents Issued North Carolina State University Licenses/Options Rutgers University* Executed Stony Brook University* Cumulative Active Licenses University Buffalo*Received LicenseatIncome University of Alabama, Startups Initiated Birmingham University of California, Irvine* * AAU Indicator - Phase I University of Cincinnati ** AAU Indicator - Phase II University of Illinois, Chicago

350

250 200 150

USF

100

Mean Miami

FIU FSU & UCF FAU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Invention Disclosures Received, 2000 - 2009 1600 AAU High

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400

Public AAU 75% Mean

200 0

USF

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & AAU Prospects Invention Disclosures Received, 2000 - 2009 250 Utah

200

VA Tech ASU

USF

150

Mean Georgia NC State Cincinnati Colorado State UAB

100 50 0

*AAU member

300

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Note: Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2006

2007

2008

2009

TOTAL PATENTS ISSUED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The number of U.S. patents issued during the period indicated as reported by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Patents Issued, 2009 UC System

Student Measures

Wisconsin-Madison Florida Michigan Illinois, Urb-Ch SUNY System Georgia Tech Purdue Michigan State Washington Minnesota

USF System Penn State

Faculty Measures

Pittsburgh

Iowa Colorado Rutgers Virginia Iowa State

Research Measures

Texas A&M System Ohio State

USF System USF TotalTotal Patents Patents Issued Issued

UNC Chapel Hill Missouri System

2010: 2010:66 91 (est.)

Arizona Kansas Oregon Indiana 0

100

150

Note: Institution level data not available for current year for Maryland, College Park and UT Austin.

200

250

300

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

PUBLIC AAUs

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Total Patents Issued, 2000 - 2009

90 80

70 60 50 40

UCF

USF

Mean

FSU Miami FIU FAU

10 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Florida Public AAU Institutions Total Patents Issued, 2000 - 2009

350 300

AAU High

250 200 150 100

Public AAU 75% Mean

USF

50 0

Public AAU 25% AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

USF System & AAU Prospects Total Patents Issued, 2000 - 2009

60 50

NC State

USF

NATIONAL PEERS

Utah

30 20

Georgia & ASU

Cincinnati & UAB

Mean VA Tech

Colorado State

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Note: Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2006

2007

2008

2009

TOTAL LICENSES / OPTIONS EXECUTED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The number of licenses or option agreements that were executed in the year for all technologies as reported by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Licenses/Options Executed, 2009 UC System

Student Measures

Washington

Florida Rutgers Purdue Iowa State Missouri System Michigan UNC Chapel Hill Georgia Tech Texas A&M System Colorado Wisconsin-Madison

Faculty Measures

Virginia

Minnesota SUNY System Illinois, Urb-Ch Arizona Michigan State

Research Measures

Pittsburgh

Oregon Indiana

USF System Total Licenses/Options Executed

Ohio

USF System Penn State

2010: 37

Iowa Kansas 0

100

150

200

250

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Total Licenses/Options Executed, 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

140 120

100 80 60 Mean

USF

Miami FSU UCF FIU FAU

20 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Total Licenses/Options Executed, 2000 - 2009 350 300 AAU High

250 200 150 100

Public AAU 75%

Public AAU 25%

Mean

USF

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Total Licenses/Options Executed, 2000 - 2009 140 Georgia

120 100

NC State

Utah

Mean

ASU VA Tech UAB

Cincinnati Colorado State

USF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Note: Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2006

2007

2008

2009

CUMULATIVE ACTIVE LICENSES

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

The cumulative number of actice licenses as reported by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Cumulative Active Licenses, 2009 UC System

Student Measures

Washington Seattle

Minnesota Florida Wisconsin-Madison SUNY System Iowa State Texas A&M System Georgia Tech Virginia Rutgers Michigan State Michigan

Faculty Measures

UNC Chapel Hill Illinois, Urb-Ch Iowa Indiana Arizona

Research Measures

Pittsburgh

Penn State Ohio State Colorado

USF System Cumulative Active Licenses

Oregon

2010: 155

130

USF System Missouri System Kansas 0

500

1000

1500

2000

Note: Data for Purdue was not available; Institution level data not available for current year for Maryland, College Park and UT Austin.

2500

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Cumulative Active Licenses, 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

600

500 400 300 200

Mean

USF

Miami FSU UCF FIU FAU

100 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Cumulative Active Licenses, 2000 - 2009 AAU High

2000

1500

1000

500

Public AAU 75% Mean Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Cumulative Active Licenses, 2000 - 2009 800 700

Georgia NC State

600 500 400

Mean UAB Utah

300 200

USF

100 0

Cincinnati ASU Colorado State

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Note: Virginia Tech and Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2007

2008

2009

LICENSE INCOME RECEIVED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

This revenue includes several fees, payments and royalties as reported and specified by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

Source: AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions License Income Received, 2009 UC System

Infrastructure Measures

Student Measures

Minnesota

Washington Seattle Wisconsin-Madison Florida Iowa Michigan SUNY System Illinois, Urb-Ch Missouri System Texas A&M System Iowa State Rutgers

Faculty Measures

Oregon

Virginia Indiana Michigan State Colorado Purdue

Research Measures

Pittsburgh UNC Chapel Hill Georgia Tech Ohio State

USF System License Income Received

Kansas

2010: $17,900,000 (est.)

$1,300,000

USF System Penn State Arizona $0

$30,000,000

$60,000,000

Note: Institution level data not available for current year for Maryland, College Park and UT Austin.

$90,000,000

PUBLIC AAUs

USF System & Florida Research University Peers License Income Received, 2000 - 2009

$70,000,000 $60,000,000

$50,000,000 $40,000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000

Mean

USF

$10,000,000 $0

Miami

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

FSU UCF FIU

Note: FAU data missing/not available.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions License Income Received, 2000 - 2009

$300,000,000 $250,000,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000

AAU High

$100,000,000 $50,000,000

Mean Public AAU 75% Public AAU 25%

USF

AAU Low

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

$35,000,000

Georgia

$30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000

Utah

$10,000,000

Mean NC State Colorado State UAB VA Tech ASU

$5,000,000 $0

*AAU member

USF System & AAU Prospects License Income Received, 2000 - 2009

USF

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Note: Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Cincinnati

START-UPS INITIATED

USF STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE METRICS INPUT/OUTPUT MEASURES

Definition:

Infrastructure Measures

Source:

The number of new companies initiated in a given year as reported by the Association of University Technology Managers in the annual Licensing Survey.

AUTM

Type: USF

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Start-ups Initiated, 2009 UC System

Student Measures

Colorado Washington Purdue Florida Georgia Tech Michigan Illinois, Urb-Ch Ohio State Arizona Texas A&M System Indiana SUNY System

Faculty Measures

Rutgers Missouri System Pittsburgh Penn State Minnesota

Research Measures

Iowa

USF System Virginia

USF System Start-ups Initiated

Kansas

2010: 5 (est.)

Wisconsin-Madison UNC Chapel Hill Oregon Iowa State 0

Note: Institution level data not available for current year for Maryland, College Park and UT Austin; Michigan State data missing/not available.

* AAU Indicator - Phase I ** AAU Indicator - Phase II

USF System & Florida Research University Peers Start-ups Initiated, 2000 - 2009

PUBLIC AAUs

14 12 UF

10 8 6

Mean

UCF

USF

2 0

FSU

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Note: FAU and FIU data missing/not available.

USF System & Public AAU Institutions Start-ups Initiated, 2000 - 2009

60 50

AAU High

40 30 20 10 0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

AAU PROSPECTS

NATIONAL PEERS

USF System & AAU Prospects Start-ups Initiated, 2000 - 2009 20 16 14 12 10 8

Mean & Georgia & VA Tech Tech UAB & ASU

6 4

NC State Cincinnati

2 0

*AAU member

Utah

USF

Colorado State

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Note: Illinois-Chicago data combined with Illinois-Urbana-Champaign.

2006

2007

2008

2009