Task force was flawed process that produced flawed result

When Chairman Lang commissioned the Board of Regents funding study last April, the charge was to support the missions of the three universities, to avoid harm and to create a body of about nine people which could insure balance in views represented. None of this happened.

Our committee was made up of only five members. Three (including me) had strong institutional bias and only have credentials in business. There was no committee member with any experience in university administration.

Inordinate time was spent on performance-based budgeting which is not a silver bullet.

The resulting proposal only counts Iowa resident undergraduates as the basis of allocation. With resident ratios of 92 percent at UNI, 65 percent at ISU and 60 percent at the UI, it obviously makes a significant tilt toward UNI at the expense of the UI.

Additionally, beginning with the flood of 2008 damage to and destruction of 20 campus buildings ($750 million), the UI managed student enrollment to its temporary capacity. This handicapped period is the base comparison period alleging UI underperformance in recruiting resident students.

Our regents institutions have mission statements outlining their focus on teaching, research and service. ISU and UI have a much stronger role in research than does UNI. ‘Residency' is never mentioned.

Our committee education process showed us flat Iowa demographics for the next decade. With no foreseeable growth in Iowa high school graduates, there is no organic student growth available to universities. The proposal is tied to a slow (dead) horse.

Not discussed by this committee was the substantial economic development engines that UI and ISU research adds to the state of Iowa. Last year grants and private donations (earmarked for purpose) totaled $568 million at UI and $323 million at ISU. This activity creates substantial employment and turnover economic value.

Both research schools (UI and ISU) generate about 33 percent of income from the state and 67 percent from tuition and fees.

UNI has state budget support at 53 percent of income and 47 percent tuition.

The target redistribution will push the UI budget below 30 percent state support, ISU near 40 percent and UNI above 60 percent.

Beginning in 2019, this reduction is a recurring $47 million every year. This amounts to a 22 percent reduction in UI support, a 14 percent increase at ISU and a 28 percent increase at UNI.

The windfall for UNI, at marginal costing, can 'buy” the university 5,000 to 6,000 more students. I doubt an 11,000 student campus has capacity for those students or the programs to attract them. The relative complexity of UNI when compared to the UI and ISU can be noted by the differential tuition schedules. UI and ISU have 15 levels compared with four at UNI. Double these numbers for non-resident fees. This is but one measure of how different the missions are and that one size does not fit all.

Withdrawing massive support from UI and investing it in UNI is a poor business investment decision. There are many examples of 'government” doing a poor job of picking winners and losers. To support, to facilitate and get out of the way is the appropriate posture.

The existing Board of Regents policy that non-residents pay the full cost of their education is appropriate. By charging 'market rates” for non-residents, the fees collected exceed the cost of instruction, allowing schools to subsidize resident tuition.

The median peer institution rates for UI and ISU are more than $3,000 above the frozen $7,500 Iowa resident rate of the past two years. UI and ISU have strong tuition discount programs that will be pressured by redistribution. The current practice does far more good for more Iowa families than does the dramatic reallocation being proposed.

Some years ago, to more thoroughly vet freshman admissions, the Board of Regents wisely instituted a Regents Admissions Index, which looks at high school credentials beyond class standing. It is serving its intended purpose of admitting students capable of successfully completing college work.

Admissions offices are allowed some discretion in granting policy exceptions. In the last four years, ISU and UNI have admitted more than 2,000 students below the Regents Admissions Index standard. The UI has admitted 231.

I find it exemplary that the UI has a four-year graduation rate more than 10 percentage points above its two sister schools.

Importing talent is important to the state. The UI reports that 40 percent of its non-resident students take their first job in Iowa.

The programmatic excellence and choices available at UI and ISU are important to the many non-resident students attracted here. The happy coincidence of location near high-cost neighbors (Illinois) is also key.

The task force is disbanded. Another task force should be commissioned. It should be large enough and balanced enough to minimize institutional bias and should include some current or past university administrators who could better vet unintended consequences.

This issue is not a burning building. There is time to find a more balanced answer. Our committee has work product which would save substantial time in reexamining the issue.

' Len Hadley, retired CEO of Maytag, was a member of the Board of Regents Performance-Based Funding Task Force. Contact: Hadleyml@aol.com