A Comprehensive Public Institution in Shreveport-Bossier: Analysis of Alternative Strategies

Transcription

1 A Comprehensive Public Institution in Shreveport-Bossier: Analysis of Alternative Strategies Presentation of Report February 2012

2 Chapter 1 Introduction

3 How can a more comprehensive public university come about in Shreveport-Bossier (S-B)? A long-sought goal This time, consider wider range of possible solutions The Study Objectives Develop new analysis of unmet needs Identify and describe alternative models Use hard data, interviews, and experience to assess models Develop conclusions and recommendations

4 The Sponsors Sponsors Committee of 100 The Community Foundation of North Louisiana Shreveport-Bossier Imperative for Higher Education (Chamber of Commerce) Louisiana Board of Regents Unusual shared effort of local community and Board of Regents

5 Data Methodology Data and Interviews Economic, demographic, higher education Louisiana, region, S-B Models / examples national higher education data Interviews LSUS and LA Tech and LSUHSC-S Other higher education institutions in S-B and CERT UL and LSU Systems presidents, senior staff, and Board members BoR Commissioner, senior staff and Board members Governance Commission representatives Leaders of local sponsor organizations Business and community leadership groups (open sessions) Office of the Governor staff Review / Discussion Meeting (Jan 12, 2012)

6 The Client The Geography The Client The people present and future of the metro area and region Agreed that EKA could not represent interests of any specific institution, system, or organization The Geography Most direct focus on S-B Then also Ruston, Northwest Louisiana region, and State

7 Chapter 2 The Shreveport-Bossier Metro Area

8 Metropolitan Statistical Area Population Shreveport-Bossier Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) = Bossier, Caddo, and DeSoto Parishes Population of S-B MSA = 400,000 The Consolidated Statistical Area (CSA) adds Minden and Webster Parish adds another 70, % of state population and 12% of urban population Total Population of Louisiana and Populatons of its Eight Largest Metro Areas (MSAs) Rank by Size Number Percent of State Population Louisiana--ALL 4,533, % New Orleans 1 1,167, % Baton Rouge 2 802, % Shreveport-Bossier 3 398, % Lafayette 4 273, % Houma 5 208, % Lake Charles 6 199, % Monroe 7 176, % Alexandria 8 153, % Subtotal--8 Selected MSAs 3,380, % Shreveport-Bossier as Percent of State's "Urban" Population 11.8% Source: US Census Bureau, 2010

9 Racial Demographics Higher percentage of African-Americans than in New Orleans and in the State overall And, differences between Shreveport & Bossier City City of Shreveport is 54.7% black now the majority Bossier City is 25.6% black Important implications re: unmet higher education needs Comparison of Shreveport-Bossier MSA by One-Race Population Counts and Percentages with All of Louisiana and with its Largest Urban Center, New Orleans MSA All Louisiana New Orleans Shreveport-Bossier Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Population 4,533, % 1,167, % 398, % White 2,836, % 679, % 224, % Non-White Black or African American 1,452, % 397, % 155, % Hispanic or Latino (All) 192, % 91, % 13, % American Indian / Alaska Native 30, % 5, % 1, % Asian (All) 70, % 31, % 4, % Subtotal--Non-White 1,745, % 526, % 175, % Note: The percentage of African American / Black is much higher for City of Shreveport than for the total MSA. See below. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census

10 2,531 2,510 2,099 1,989 1,773 1,552 1,443 1,171 3,600 4,298 6,827 8,444 11,277 14,858 17,330 Industries by Numbers Employed Biggest: Health care Government Education Next: Retail Entertainment Manufacturing Industries in Shreveport-Bossier by Total Number Employed 20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0

11 Economic Development Strategies (As compiled by EKA Not Official) S-B Industry Sector Targets Health Care (Regional Center and Specialty Health Care) Biomedical/Biosciences Gaming and Tourism Military Base/Defense-Related Film-Making and Digital Media/ Entertainment Other/General Information Technologies Energy/Gas Production and Management Advanced Manufacturing Distribution/Logistics Reasonable Alignment with Louisiana Blue Ocean Targets Advanced Manufacturing Agribusiness Clean-Tech Digital Media and Software Energy Entertainment Specialty Health Care Water Management

12 Conclusion: Future of S-B is Being Shaped Continue focus on target industries Bear down on growing competitive assets for the target industries Grow the population Increase talent and skill level of the population Innovation Capacity Some Shreveport-Bossier Metro Area Rankings #1 Best Place to Raise a Family in Louisiana (Forbes, 2009) #3 Best City in Nation for Independent Filmmaking (MovieMaker magazine, 2010) #4 National Economic Development: (Site Selection magazine, 2011) #7 Best Cities for Jobs among mid-sized metropolitan areas (Forbes, 2011) #19 Best Place to Raise a Family in the Nation (Forbes, 2009) #20 Top 25 Best Cities for Recent Graduates (The Daily Beast, 2011) g/ community/area-rankings/

13 Chapter 3 Higher Education Contexts

14 Very active higher education environment at present, e.g.: Four years of fiscal limitations and budget cuts PERC Commission GRAD Act Higher Education Contexts Louisiana BoR New Master Plan to 2025 (Attainment, Research, Accountability) Governance Commission Recent Transfer of UNO from LSU to UL Other Mandated Studies, e.g. Two-Year College Needs Employment Outcomes (of higher education) new use of workforce data Flagship Coalition/agenda and LSU work on potential reorganization and collaboration Big focus on pre-k to 12 Very similar activity in many other states at present

15 Higher Education Contexts Shreveport-Bossier Domiciled in S-B LSU Health Sciences Center-S LSU-Shreveport Centenary College BPCC SUSLA NwLTC In the region Grambling Louisiana Tech Northwestern State Univ of LA-Monroe CERT Operating programs in S-B LA Tech (programs at Barksdale and T2C) NSU (Nursing) UL-M (clinical Pharmacy) Louisiana College (planned Law School) University of Phoenix (Bossier City) Wiley College (BS-Bus Admin) Last 3 are especially interesting others see unserved markets in S-B

16 Headcount Enrollment LSU in Shreveport Good traditional program array; not large number Stable enrollments many years Growing transfer population Several niches of strength (listed in report) Several interesting accomplishments Attractive campus (underutilized) Headcount Fall Enrollment History--LSU in Shreveport: 1980 to ,000 4,750 4,500 4,250 4,000 3,750 3,500 3,250 3,000 2,750 2,500 2,250 2,000 3,755 Average = 4,295 and growth of 20% in period of 31 years BORSF Enhancement Award Campus Productivity: Dollars Per Faculty ('07-'11) $16,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 Fall Term LSU-Shreveport 4,504 Source: Board of Regents LSU LA Tech ULL UNO SLU SU ULM Grambling $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 LSU-S McNeese Nicholls NSU $0 All faculty Instructional faculty

17 Proposals pending but not approved EdD in Education Leadership (consortium) PhD in Bioinformatics (with LSUHSC-S and LA tech) MS in Biology (approved in January 2012) Proposed change in Role/Scope/Mission not approved Local community support not generating response in Baton Rouge Effects of Regents program approval moratoria New program list developed Good mix of bachelor s, master s, and applied doctoral programs LSU-Shreveport s Concerns

18 Conclusions Higher Education Contexts Louisiana Providing contexts for S-B solutions: Crossfire of opinions higher education s role in economic development 2-year vs. 4-year and beyond Fiscal constraints certainly now; maybe forever Admissions standards, accountability, efficiency = all good things Current initiatives, e.g. Governance Commission and LSU flagship agenda or reorganization All change is hard and higher education is particularly change-averse but traditional ways of doing things are unsustainable if we are to educate many more people to higher levels

19 Conclusions: Higher Education Contexts Shreveport-Bossier Need to consider: Northwest / North Louisiana vs. metro area Not the same; requires more refined considerations of program duplication Dichotomy: Above average track record in collaboration CERT 2+2 Social Innovation Grant (workforce collaboration; only 5 awarded in US) BUT fierce competition for S-B urban market enrollments LSU-Shreveport has not grown as one would expect/hope it would Strained relationships Significant local 2-year institution capacity No residential students (housing prohibited in early years; then not pursued) Program opportunities not pursued Weak branding and marketing/recruitment (Airport example) Very effective competition from UL institutions in I-20 Corridor

20 Chapter 4 Unmet Higher Education Needs in Shreveport-Bossier

21 A Time to Choose, Morrison Study, 1988 Other Shreveport-Bossier Studies Report of the BoR Ad Hoc Committee on Higher Education in the Shreveport-Bossier Metro Area, 1997 Board of Regents Strategic Plan, LSUHSC-S, EKA, 2003 Merger Concept Analysis LSUS and LSUHSC-S, EKA, 2005 Unmet Postsecondary Needs in S-B, NCHEMS, 2008 Academic Program Strategy for LSU-Shreveport, EKA, 2009 Two-Year Education Needs Selected Regions, FutureWorks, 2011 LSU System Work Group on Organization and Collaboration (Preliminary Report), LSU System, 2011

22 Community Report Card Education Attainment Comparison with 4 Peer Metro Areas Baton Rouge, LA; Columbus, GA; Jackson, MS; Montgomery, AL All have larger public institutions S-B MSA underperforms in Bachelor s and Grad/Prof degrees

23 Education Attainment Comparison with More Metro Areas (2004 data) Figure 1: Comparison of Public Comprehensive Universities in SMSAs of Closest Comparable Size to Shreveport-Bossier City Standard Metropolitan Population Carnegie Institution Enrollment Statistical Area (April 2000) Class Chattanooga, TN 465,161 University of Tennessee-Chattanooga 8,528 Masters I Des Moines, IA 456,022 Kalamazoo-Battle Creek, MI 452,851 Western Michigan University 29,178 Doctoral/Research Ext Lansing-East Lansing, MI 447,728 Michigan State University 44,452 Doctoral/Research Ext Modesto, CA 446,997 Fort Myers-Cape Coral, FL 440,488 Florida Gulf Coast University 5,825 Masters I Jackson, MS 440,801 Jackson State University 7,815 Doctoral/Research Ext Boise City, ID 432,345 Boise State University 18,431 Masters I Madison, WI 426,526 University of Wisconsin-Madison 41,588 Doctoral/Research Ext Spokane-Cheney, WA 417,939 Eastern Washington University 9,506 Masters I Pensacola, FL 412,153 University of West Florida 9,508 Masters I Canton-Massillon, OH 406,934 Saginaw-Bay City, MI 403,070 Saginaw Valley State University 9,168 Masters I Salinas, CA 401,762 Santa Barbara, CA 399,347 University of California-Santa Barbara 20,847 Doctoral/Research Ext Shreveport-Bossier City, LA 392,302 LSU-Shreveport 4,377 Masters I Lafayette, LA 385,647 University of Louisiana-Lafayette 16,208 Doctoral/Research Int Beaumont, TX 385,090 Lamar University Masters I York, PA 381,751 Corpus Christi, TX 380,783 Texas A&M University 7,861 Masters I Average Population/Enrollment 418,785 11,665 Source: Census Data. Not all institutions in these SMSAs are listed. A few have substantial private universities.

24 Education Attainment Comparison with Louisiana s Largest MSAs Educational Attainment Comparison: Shreveport-Bossier MSA with Three Other Largest Louisiana MSAs 4 Largest Louisiana MSAs Baton Rouge New Orleans- Metairie- Kenner Shreveport- Bossier City Lafayette S-B compares favorably for high school completion and associate degrees Averages-- These 4 MSAs S-B compares unfavorably in Bachelor s and Grad/Prof degrees S-B Above (Below) 4 MSA Avg No HS Diploma (1.0) HS (including equivalency) Some College, No Degree Associate's Degree Bachelor's Degree (3.6) Graduate or Professional Degree (0.9) Degree--Associate and Higher (3.1)

25 Education Attainment Louisiana, Although Improving, Lags SREB and US Percent With High School Diplomas or GED Credentials Percent With Bachelor's Degrees or Higher states and D.C. SREB states states and D.C. SREB states Louisiana Louisiana In 2009, Louisiana reached Bachelor s degree percentage that US had in 1990.

26 Global and National Competition S-B lags US, SREB, and Louisiana in some measures of education attainment. So, if S-B wants to be an urban center that is competitive in the US and globally, it needs to work harder on education attainment S-B leaders have known this for a long time. Percent of Adult Population With Bachelor's Degrees or Higher Percent 50 states and D.C SREB states 25.5 Louisiana 20.8 Shreveport-Bossier MSA 20.3 Sources: 50 States/DC, SREB states, and Louisiana from Table 2--Educational Attainment of the Adult Population, SREB, Shreveport-Bossier data from American Community Survey, 2010 And, sadly, the US now lags several countries.

27 Conclusions: Unmet Postsecondary Education Needs in S-B 3 distinct types of unmet needs not all subject to the same solution: Degree Programs Expanded range of programs needed for individuals and/or to support and enhance economic development strategies and targeted industries Some baccalaureate programs, plus needs at master s level, with selected applied doctorates Better articulation from plethora of two-year to four-year programs Underserved Population Segments Program opportunities (above) Different service delivery for the place-bound, including working adults all levels and Shreveport s majority minority population Research and Innovation Capacity (Economic Development) Perceived by many as the MOST serious deficit and requiring significant changes and rapid growth NOT ONLY about research; it s about human capital and deliberate outreach programs

28 Chapter 5 Overview of Models/Alternatives

29 Grow an In-Place Institution Partnership Program Collaborations Partnership Program Importation To an existing institution/campus To a university center Consolidation Four Generic Models Reviewed

30 Four Additional Specific Scenarios Georgia Tech-Emory University collaboration in Bioengineering Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI) Consolidation of LSU-Shreveport and LSU Health Sciences Center-Shreveport Consolidation of LSU-Shreveport, LSU Health Sciences Center- Shreveport, and Louisiana Tech

31 Chapter 6 Evaluation of the Alternatives for Shreveport-Bossier

32 Program Expansion Principles for the Analysis Acquire and develop undergraduate and graduate programs that are sound in quality, responsive to interests of current and future learners and target industries, and avoid unnecessary duplication some programs to lead demand Serving the Underserved Sustain increasing educational attainment for metro area citizens Provide local access to higher programs, with special consideration of working, place-bound adults and City of Shreveport s African- American majority Innovation Capacity Increase metro area s intellectual capital and innovation capacity to support innovation in business, industry Contribute to social and cultural advancement in the metro area

33 Administrative/Support Principles for the Analysis Produce some substantial results soon as waiting decades for improvement is unacceptable Provide efficient and effective administrative services that support the educational mission Maintain an active, physical university campus/location in the metro area with instruction delivered primarily face-to-face, but supplemented with distance delivery as appropriate. The analysis assumes that LSU-Shreveport continues to exist as an independent institution, or exists in some form of consolidation.

34 Examined for each model: Advantages (pros) Requirements (what it would take to make the advantages happen) Disadvantages (cons, or risks) Mitigation (what could be done to eliminate or mitigate the risks) No silver bullet All models have pluses and minuses with various ways to ensure advantages and mitigate disadvantages In the end total solution comprised of a core solution with specific applications of some other models Structure of the Analysis Advantages Requirements Disadvantages Mitigation

35 Grow LSU-Shreveport Advantages Most straightforward Least disruptive Preserves S-B ownership Retains LSUS identity Requirements Role/scope/mission change Get approval for new programs Expanded marketing Changed institutional culture Disadvantages Still requires significant new program development and revisions Extended time horizon Brand building required Does not solve Engineering Resistance to cultural change Mitigation Enrollment growth College of Technology degree programs Positive attitudes: LSUS/System/BoR

36 Expand Program Collaborations Advantages Possibly quick implementation Eases Role/Scope/Mission issue Gain economies of scale 2+2/co-enrollment opportunities Less unnecessary program duplication Requirements Willing partners Terms acceptable to both Disadvantages Competitive & cultural barriers Logistics Mitigation Supportive policies and incentives by BoR and management boards Partners recognize and acknowledge mutual benefits

37 Import Programs to LSUS or to a Metro University Center Advantages Quick implementation Planned program selection Great flexibility Many partner options If university center, greater community influence Requirements Authority and governance clear Competitive proposals Cost coverage Disadvantages No growth of local intellectual capital/outreach Market/not service driven Risk of impermanence Cost to students Quality control Mitigation Well crafted contract terms Systematic program needs assessment and evaluation Disciplined, selective use of importation

38 Consolidate LSU-Shreveport and Louisiana Tech Advantages Practical source of new programs Clears Role/Scope/Mission issue Gain LA Tech s enterprise culture Brand credibility/local knowledge May be politically feasible Expand collaboration with LSUHSC Requirements Best management system home Commitments: Research and innovation Economic development Leadership Disadvantages Time / effort / stress Risk of unintended consequences Commitment risk Political/governance/constituency considerations Cost comes first, savings and efficiencies later Mitigation Communications plan Statutory & contractual protections Implementation funding Leadership continuity Planning/planning/planning

39 Georgia Tech Emory University Coulter Department of BioEngineering Summary One public with Engineering One private with Health Sciences Both in Atlanta $25 MM gift Contractual relationship Hugely successful example of synergies, because of complementarity Conclusion Definitely provides good model to adapt for Bioengineering as collaboration of Louisiana Tech and LSU Health Sciences- Shreveport Coulter Department of Biomedical Engineering at Georgia Tech and Emory University Enrollment as of Spring ,174 Undergraduates 158 Graduates Undergraduate Degree Programs Bachelor s degree in Biomedical Engineering conferred by Georgia Tech Graduate Degree Programs Doctorate conferred by Georgia Tech and Emory University Doctorate conferred by Peking University, Emory University, and Georgia Tech MD/PhD conferred by Georgia Tech and Emory University School of Medicine Total Degrees Awarded 638 BS degrees 159 doctoral degrees

40 Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis Summary Two large research universities neither domiciled in Indianapolis Both developed presence in the city evolved from 19 th century beginnings Unusual, specific type of merger (1969) Joint name Indiana University operates campus, services, and provides huge array of programs Purdue provides Engineering and Science Now 30,000+ students Conclusion IUPUI circumstances are so specific and unique that the model cannot really be adapted for Shreveport-Bossier Indiana University and Purdue University Programs at IUPUI Indiana University Programs Art and Design Business Dentistry Education Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Informatics Journalism Law Liberal Arts Library and Information Sciences Medicine Music Nursing Physical Education and Tourism Management Public and Environmental Affairs Social Work Purdue University Programs Purdue s schools of Engineering and Technology and Science make up the other components of IUPUI.

41 Summary Consolidation of LSU-Shreveport and LSU Health Sciences Center-Shreveport Has been suggested many times as local version of the Birmingham model 2005 EKA Merger Concept Analysis Attractive feature is relatively less stress in consolidating two LSU institutions Conclusions No instant synergies in merging programs, faculties, campuses, policies, cultures, etc. Program growth needed in S-B still would require more faculty, program development, and approvals (in all but Health Sciences) Does not really enhance research or innovation capacity

42 Consolidation of LSU-Shreveport, LSU Health Sciences-Shreveport and Louisiana Tech Summary Create a truly larger, comprehensive institution in the North of the State by this 3-way consolidation very attractive hypothetically Many substantive issues would require analysis Politically challenging Conclusions An intriguing idea that merits consideration BUT well beyond the scope of this EKA study to analyze and develop a competent recommendation

43 Chapter 7 Conclusions and Recommendations

44 Program Collaboration Conclusions Narrowing the Options Not best way to achieve the program and overall institutional growth Excellent way to address some needs of the underserved Specific applications in research where complementarity exists Program Importation Normally the solution where no university exists Has flexibility advantages Does nothing to enhance local intellectual/innovation capacity Can severely limit growth/success of LSU-Shreveport Narrows the options to: Grow LSUS Consolidate LSUS and LA Tech

45 For Consolidation Option Conclusions System Questions Initial presumption was that consolidated, enlarged Louisiana Tech (including LSU-Shreveport) would best fit in LSU System If a System of comprehensive, special purpose research institutions Noted some potential willingness on both sides Later, changed view due to Flagship Coalition/agenda and potential reorganization uncertainties LSU System s preference For Grow LSUS Option If / as LSU reorganizes, incorporating flagship/research goals as priorities, UL System would be better fit for small institution in need of basic program and enrollment growth Would reduce negative aspects of competition with UL institutions in North Louisiana, and make collaborations easier

46 Recommendation #1 Consolidation Consolidate LSU in Shreveport and Louisiana Tech University as a single, enlarged new Louisiana Tech in the UL System a single university with a Ruston Campus and a Shreveport Campus #1A: Consolidation Implementation Plan #1B: Special, Interim Governance/Management. #1C: Critical Leadership Continuity in the Early Years #1D: One-Time Special/Transition Funding

47 Recommendation #2 Transfer of LSUS to UL System If support for Recommendation #1 is not acquired, then transfer LSU-Shreveport to the UL System and seek a fresh start in growing the institution #2A: Name Change #2B: Comprehensive Program Review and Updates #2C: Additional Program Strategies #2D: Supportive Role of the Board of Regents

48 Recommendation #3 Priority Accorded to Research / Innovation Capacity and Enhanced Institutional/Community Collaborations Aggressively accelerate planning and actions to bring about growth in strategically selected areas of research and innovation support, matching the combined strengths of Louisiana Tech and LSU Health Sciences Center in Shreveport to the MSA/regional economic development industry targets #3A: Collaborative Biomedical Engineering Program #3B: Regional Strategic Research / Innovation Agenda #3C: Business/Industry Outreach and Problem-Solving

49 Recommendation #4 Improved Delivery to Underserved Populations and Higher Baccalaureate Completion Rates Evaluate all service delivery options and techniques typically used in large, successful urban universities and take concrete steps to further encourage and facilitate the twoyear to four-year transition and completion for more learners #4A: Adult/Place-Bound Baccalaureate Completions #4B: African-American Participation and Degree Completions #4C: Pragmatic Aspects of Delivery for Adults and All Place-Bound Students

50 Recommendation #5 Communications and Consensus Create and carry out a Communications Plan, to immediately engage constituents and stakeholders from Shreveport-Bossier, Ruston, and North Louisiana in understanding the issues at stake, and the proposed solutions #5A: Support of Legislative Delegations #5B: Statutory Language

51 Last Words Very challenging assignment Higher education institutions are change-averse Many substantive issues to understand and weigh Big range of opinions, allegiances, alliances, even emotions Remember: Who is the Client? Only way to do this assignment responsibly: Focus only on those served, and not on the providers (institutions / systems) Some Comfort? These same uncomfortable restructurings being considered in other states and all over Europe At the end we believe these conclusions are correct for Shreveport-Bossier, Ruston, and the region.

52 A Comprehensive Public Institution in Shreveport-Bossier: Analysis of Alternative Strategies Presentation of Report February 2012