First to test our secretary, secretary Kramer to call the role. >> Thank you. Mike All >> present. >> Dez Fland. Kathy Cavo >> present. >> Ted Cather here. Doug Fisher.
Amanda Flyer >> present. Larry Gar >> Bill Hannah >> present. >> Nancy Jordan >> present. >> Molly Kitchell >> present. >> Framer's here. Pepper Mohorn >> here. >> Dan Peterson here.
We have excellent. Thank you otherwise. So uh we miss you. Um, next up, we uh need to formally approve the agenda for today's meeting. So, I would entertain a motion for approval. >> So, thank you.
>> Thank you. >> I'm sorry. >> Let's finish. Thank you. Right over. Um, all in favor approval of the agenda. >> I post saying thank you. I've totally skipped over and neglected. If I could
ask everyone to please stand alsisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. Thank you. Uh, next we uh would like to approve the
minutes from our January 26th uh January 2026 meeting uh which are in front of you. If I could get a motion for approval second >> any comments, corrections, questions. >> Okay. All in favor please say I.
>> I post same. >> All right. Wonderful. Um so just a couple of quick comments from me. Number one, uh, thank you, uh, to the Indiana State University team staff for being our host here today. I know a number of
people are wearing blue. I give credit for it, but it must have been divine intervention. I totally forgot and just happened to wear this beautiful tie. So, uh, must have been must have been meant to be. We'll hear from the president here shortly. But again, thank you very much for for being our host. Um, I would
like to say this, um, as always, just want to give a tremendous shout out to our incredible team here at the commission, uh, for all the work they do, um, on so many levels, uh, and but in particular, as we talk through some
things in today's agenda around the review program and project, uh, how important that project has been and how the team has really over many, many months now worked very number one super collaboratively with all the
universities and there's great partners there but uh also as a team um working to really work through the program and how a program like this should operate based on facts and based on thoughtful consideration based on appropriate
exchange and interaction around making this program you know as effective and as appropriate as possible and really to help our our students and state again progress. So, number one, Dr. Butler, not single out everyone, but I do want to thank you and your your great team
for the phenomenal work you've done. It's been it's been a in my from my perspective, it's been a bit of an develop and work through programs like this. So, thank you to you and and to all of our all of our university
partners for your for your work here. Um, with that I will turn it over to Secretary Jenner for your remarks and presentation. >> Excellent. Well, good morning all. Thank you for being here this morning. Um,
also just to really double down on what you shared, Dan, it's not it's it's tough sometimes to pass a policy in this building, but the real difficult work happens with implementation and doing it well.
And uh I could not be more impressed with the team that uh uh past Commissioner Lovers, past Commissioner Lowry put together. Uh they have been remarkable and uh you'll see you've seen some of their work with the documents,
but uh you'll see even more today when we walk through the the detailed presentation. So, a huge shout out to them. Uh, I also want to shout out and now I take pull I feel like I'm going to pull this product out of the but um I also want to shout out our university
partners. Uh some are in the room today, some are uh watching back at home, others are not watching, but they're keeping the university moving back at home. Um they were fantastic. Uh I I cannot tell you how many uh presidents
that I've talked to over the past several months who reached out who brainstormed who who um >> and the staff members here uh we know that it's all about the team around you and I'm looking at several of you who I
know we burned up the phone with and uh just really really appreciate all of your work work as So, let's get right into it. Um, we're going to start with uh just a high level overview of our focus. We're going to
have Doug Harter who's going to share uh an update on the Indiana College CP which is a required legislative report that we have to do as a commission. So, you will get the data first today and we will release it to the public to the media right following this meeting. We
will do a 2026 legislative session recap uh which you know it's kind of amazing. Session was about eight weeks this year and it was a whirlwind uh to say the least but uh several I think
important policies in the area of higher education were passed. We'll get that overview today. Uh and then we'll talk through today's agenda in moment. And so just uh remembering the focus which is on uh our students, our people across
Indiana. The team has created uh what I feel like is this clever little 4 A's. Focus on 4A. It's easy to remember. uh focus on affordability, accessibility for for our students, attainment for our
students and people and align aligning our our degree set ahead and and we'll talk and focus more on that uh as we move forward. But this time, I would like Doug Harter to come up. Doug serves as the commission's director of academic
affairs and transfer. And uh Doug, if you want to call out your team members as well. I know this uh was was also a lot of work in in putting this together, but really again implementing the policy statewide. So, they're welcome to do that. Come on up.
>> Thank you, Secretary and Commissioner Jenner. And good morning, commission members. Um, Senate Enrolled Act 8 that was passed in 2024 required the commission to prepare a report on the Indiana College Board and then that was
to be submitted to the governor and the legislative council uh which has been done. And so the reason I'm here today is just to share that report with you but then also to provide some updates. You are all very familiar I think with the Indiana College CPS and it's based
on six competency areas. So, I'm not going to spend time on that. You're also likewise very familiar with the fact that all public institutions here in Indiana accept the Indiana College Corps um and that the following public institutions award the Indiana College
Core certificate to high school students. One thing I would like to um share with you uh though is that the commission has worked here in this past year with um six Christian private uh colleges and universities here in
Indiana to create um a new professional pathways credential that is similar to the Indiana college core. So that that is an offering they can provide. Um however it does not have the same um uh transferability
uh that the Indiana College Board does and it's only within those six institutions themselves. But that is a a nice development with our private uh partners the impetus about We're not able to hear now.
>> And I'll just add to Dr. Joner's uh com those of us online aren't able to hear. Um, and it's typically those private institutions that um, have not been able to adopt Indiana College. And so they're looking for likeminded institutions just
like themselves and why they were established. And so this provides that opportunity for those institutions. Along with that, um I am also excited to share uh that we are now up to 12 private institutions
who are accepting the Indiana College Board. Um and so I just added Gan College to this list. Um I've been working with Goan this past year and I was just notified uh that their faculty just last week voted to accept the
Indiana College. We continue to add more private institutions to this who are accepting Indiana software. That's a very positive trend. At our commission meeting back in September, I shared with you that at the beginning of this school year, we had
312 high schools that were offering the Indiana College CPS, which was an increase of 42 schools from the previous year. Today, I'm excited to share with you that we are now up to 318 high schools who are offering the Indiana College, which represents a 279%
increase uh since uh August of 2021 and we and continue to make progress. Uh I anticipate us that number is going to continue to rise. Similarly, the number of high school students who are earning the Indiana college core has grown uh
significantly. Most recent data shows that 3,275 students in the 2024 high school uh graduation cohort earned Indiana college core which again represents a huge increase both in number and in
percentage of students since 2014. >> And if I can pause you there so just so you are aware commission members and also our higher ed partners um some of our our data that we have is fairly lag. So I know many of you have been working
very hard and in the needle. I know this was a a real focus of the commission. So the 2024 high school cohort is really the 23 24 students who were seniors. Um, so our goal, our push would be uh to
find a way uh with our uh higher ed partners to figure out how we might um better understand more quickly where we are in moving the needle because when we're running a two to threeyear lag tactically to drive faster, right, we've
got to know that information. So just wanted to flag that that will allow us to impact more students which is what we're here for. So now I'd like to share with you some really exciting data as well around student outcomes as they relate to our
key focus areas uh that Dr. Jenner started the meeting with and that is affordability, accessibility, and attainment. And so students who are in the Indiana College CP are more likely to enroll in college. 91% of high school students who earned
the Indiana College Core in 2023 enrolled in college, which is a much higher percentage than the statewide uh collegegoing rate, which is at 52%. It's also a higher percentage than any other group. So, if you look at students
who took and passed an AP exam, they went to college at an 86% rate. Students who earned the academic honors diploma, they went to college at a 84% rate. And then also even students who earned an associates degree um while in high school, they're going to college rate
86%. And this has been a trend that has been true every year since the since 2015. Also keep in mind that students who are in Indiana College CPS uh in high school basically complete uh what's equivalent to one full year. Uh most of the time
it's free, but at least at minimal cost to the high school students. And and as a reminder, India is number one in the nation for students leading with college credit. College credit meaning dual credit, could be dual enrollment, could be AP.
So when we think about the opportunities and how many students, how many thousands of students uh are sitting within one to two to three classes of completing the Indiana College Board and also our our effort to build the pool
system to have higher ed reach back in that 91% is yielding incredible ROI um uh for our state. So that in terms of students who are in the Indiana College CPS when they go to
college, then they're also demonstrating academic success while they're in college. 91% of Indiana College Core earners uh again in that 2023 high school cohort who enrolled in an Indiana public college, they persisted to a
second year of college which is compared to only 78% of students overall. Those same students who earned an average of 27 credit hours and also earned a 3.2 GPA their freshman year in college. again in comparison to the
overall state averages of 23 credits and 2.8 GPA. And then lastly, students who earn Indiana College Bo are more likely to graduate on time from college. 67% of Indiana College Bo earners from the 2021
high school cohort uh who enrolled in again in Indiana public college graduated from time from college on time compared to only 42% of students overall. So given this data, it is clear that the Indiana College CPS is an
essential piece to achieving our statewide goals around affordability, accessibility, and attainment. Finally, in terms of the new Indiana uh diploma requirements, um the Indiana
College Board is uh it's one way for student to earn a credential of value, which is necessary for students to be awarded the new Enrollment Honors Plus seal. So therefore, the Indiana diploma with enrollment honors plus seal
incentivizes students to now earn the Indiana college score, which was not present uh in years past. Um likewise, an additional incentive uh for students that's tied to students earning that new enrollment honors plus seal is that they
receive guaranteed admission to all the public colleges and universities here in Indiana and many private institutions who've also operated. So, in conclusion, the Indiana College Corps uh has been a great and it's going to continue to be a
great success and students are benefiting greatly from it. It works. Uh and we expect uh continued growth in the Indiana College Corp. Um and we also expect the continued continuation of
those positive outcomes for students who are in the Indiana College. And with that, I will take any questions. >> Couple other things I would try to slack. That is my boss. I might need to step out or hand someone on my phone. Buzzing
or you're next. Can I hand someone my phone? Thank you. Just answer that. >> They 318 high school. How many high schools are there in the state of Indiana currently? >> So, a little over 500 high schools. >> So, we're continuing to make progress.
We are now working with those schools where it's it's uh has been very difficult for them to be able to offer. That's right. As I mentioned, it's you know typically small private schools um or you know public schools that are also small in size u maybe in a rural area
that they don't have as much access. And so that's what we're working towards uh so we can have all of them be able to offer the Indiana College program. you know, sure the ones that are the young men and young people that are taking the
courses, AD courses and doing this are probably some of the better students. How do we continue to get more and more students engaged and following that path? Yes. So, that's a great um uh comment. So, I like to say there's sometimes it's
a little bit of window dressing and that we are a school can say yes, we're offering the Indiana College, which is great. That's a great first step, but we need to increase the accessibility to the I would say like more the B Bminus student, not just your high-f flyier
students. And so we are working to do that. Um and and creating ways in which it's more accessible for those students and not just your very top valatoran saludiatoran type of students. So,
>> can can private schools offer um uh the Indiana College Corps? >> Uh private high schools, yes, they can offer the and we we currently do have private high schools that offer the Indiana College Corp. >> Thank you.
>> So, a couple of things. part of this and and Doug, you mentioned this is building an entire system, linking all the pieces and parts to really drive changes that we plea as possible uh for our students. So, a couple things um commission
members will point out. So the um Indiana College Corps uh I think many of you know this is incentivized by the general assembly in the state budget for K12 schools. So so schools get funding
for every single student that gets the core. Um, additionally, uh, it is also recognized ahead as one of the the main pillars, the enrollment honors plus seal as one of the main pillars in the accountability. Um, so we can really
keep our eye on the outcomes that we are producing uh, in Indiana. And then the third thing just to double down. I believe we are or there are very few states in the
country. I think we're the only one that outside of autoenrolling students based on a number an SAT or a GPA. uh we are the only one that has a very
specific outcome like this that enrollment honors plus se and that is a huge complement to our higher life institutions. Um it's a a leap of faith and something that I think we're going to be watching that data uh closely but
again it is building the pool system to try to get more high school students interested in those high values. So just wanted to flag this is not just a one-off presentation. It's really trying to build out a system with K12 higher
education and that that talent pipeline questions. Um the you design is that you would have a full year of um college under your belt when you enroll. And just curious on the
the the data around the folks that graduate within four years. Is that within three years or is it actually important? Just wondering how much of that really does apply if I've got a year of college done or do I still have to go on to four
years? Yeah, I think the the data shows that often times students decide they can add a minor um to that uh or uh they travel abroad, they have, you know, those kinds of opportunities. So, we see the students, they're able to graduate
within four years. Some graduate with only in three years. Um but I think most students take advantage of that flexibility and they add more things to because they still want to be in college, right? Thank you. >> Yeah, you're welcome.
>> I really I love seeing the percentages of the persistence and just going on. And I think that final one, 91% going out to the second year. If they go on to the second year, they're on their way.
Research shows that they're they're pretty much, you know, have a impetus to finish. So I these numbers are really great to see them growing up even more. >> That's right. Well, again, I think being tied to the new diploma um and the
incentives around that as we continue to add more high schools um the our numbers are going to continue to increase um and so it'll be exciting to see um and so we're on the right track. >> I do have one more question on the religious cities that have started this.
When did that start? Is that a recent thing or is that 24 25? >> So we made the announcement um in October. Um and so that so that was kind of the announcement that this was going to be a new credential for the private institutions. Um Secretary Jenner was uh
there to to make the announcement. In terms of implementation though, um I believe that most of those institutions are going to be providing that this coming fall uh to high school students. And as I mentioned, I' I've heard from several private Christian um high
schools who are inquiring about that new credential and and I've you know I provided information to them and so I know they're having conversations with one of those six institutions. Um and and I would also add that of those six
institutions, two currently uh participate on the for transfer library and I've had further conversations with a couple others uh and encourage them to also join uh and participate on transfer library thus making their courses
guaranteed to transfer to all the publics uh and the private institutions who currently participate in the port transfer library. So, as we continue to work on that, that'll make that credential even more valuable to students. >> Thank you.
>> Can you tell us what marketing efforts or how you're encouraging more high schools to participate or more students per high school to participate? >> Yeah. Well, so I think um we are through the the Department of Education's um
incentives around the diploma. Um we also there's funding that's attached to the Indiana College course. So there's a lot of um in a sense uh subtle ways in which we're encouraging the the the completion of the Indiana College Cor. We are also uh intending to um embark on
a marketing campaign to reach out to those high schools that are currently not offering the Indiana College Core or who have indicated that they are encountering barriers to that and so that we can come around uh and help work with them on removing those barriers.
And so it's more of a an approach where we're going to be sending out communication and kind of working one- on-one with those uh high schools. I think Larry, you just nailed one of our biggest opportunities for improvement. Um our parents and families and students
are really our chief customer. We have to make sure they are aware and as you know with the heart mind study that that you all did in partnership with Lily endowment our students listen to their parents thankfully I don't mind um more
than more than anyone and uh we see that as a huge opportunity for improvement to make um make sure every parent in all corner of our state uh know exactly the incredible opportunity unities that that
they have because right now it is very communitydriven. Uh so we have certain communities uh Larry to your point I'll just say the the community where I live is Madison Indiana. It is a a a highly and healthy competitive environment with
uh Madison Consolidated Schools, Southwestern Public Schools, um Shaw Memorial Private School in terms of the Indiana College Board. parents talk about it at the ball field, at the grocery, at church. That's what we want
everywhere and we just don't have that yet. So, we have work to do uh in this piece. So, thank you for flagging. >> I would just add that um you know, and I've been in the building level prior to coming to the commission. Um and so I've, you know, lots of years of
experience at the at the high school level. And that is a challenge. It's a challenge for principles, counselors, let alone parents to understand the Indiana College Board and what Paul is with that. And so the high schools have
to um be, you know, have a concerted effort to get the message out to their parents and students. Um our higher ed uh partners, they also play a part because as they partner with the high school, they can come alongside the high school and help provide some of those communications specific to their
institution. and and many of them do, but there's still work to be done on on getting the message out on on the great things that come within the college board. >> Can I pile on a bit to this in a very positive way? It's a great presentation very I think in addition, it's probably
obvious all of us who represent higher ed through the commission work across the city. were geographically identified, we all should be a part of trying to pass along this information to our regions within the state. Uh and
when I having worked for a long time in school systems and that's our region, who do they listen to? So those you have to think about who do those school system leaders, whether superintendent, principalists and others, who do they listen to around this? And I think we
should and I'm sure we are taking into account those types of communication benefits. Think about ch local chambers of commerce. You think about local community foundations thinking, you know, through some of those different channels that can help reinforce what a
positive opportunity this is for American students. >> Well, contact me. I'm ready to go. I'm passionate about this and I will get the word out. probably the the best ambassador, but but no, you're right. Your point is it's well taken. >> Yes.
>> Which point in high school do students need to commit to doing the college for in order to like how early is it? >> You know, it um a student could really start their junior year and be able to obtain the Indiana College Core. Now, it varies
obviously by the student and what kind of courses that they want to take and fit into their schedule. Um, so some students, you know, start as a sophomore. Um, but you could start as a junior and really be able to complete the core. >> Okay. And quick just clarification. I
mean, um, is it an all or nothing? Like I understand they feel you have to complete the whole thing, but as far as those credits transferring the colleges, do they accept partial and the students still get the benefit of that or is it all or none? So if a
student earns the Indiana College Core, it's legislated that they are the higher ed institutions are to accept it as a 30 credit hour block. That means that the institution cannot go in on a one course by one course basis and decide no, yes,
no, they have to accept it as a block. Now this is where we're also trying to work on there. We have several students who will start the Indiana College Board, but that they they come up short. They don't complete all 30 credit hours. I'm working with our higher ed institutions that to ensure that the
courses that they are offering for their Indiana College Bo are all on the course transfer library because we want to make sure that students who are working towards it, but they may not complete it, they get the basically the same guarantee of transferability um of all the courses that they have
taken. >> Okay. But right now that's not necessarily true. >> It's for I'd say mostly true, but there are a few courses that some of the institutions offer as a part of their ICC that are not on the transfer library >> or or that are not an equal transfer in
tune like an English class or uh we see that some and again huge huge kudos to our university partners for we're working the Vista thing through this. Uh we'll keep doing that. Thank you. Thanks. >> Thank you, Doug.
And we'll leave that flicker there because the next person I'd love to invite up is David Buzzy. He serves as our chief policy officer across uh the whole uh education vertical. So, David, if you can update us on uh specific laws
that impact higher education. >> Thank you, Dr. Jenner. Um and yeah, bring the committee. I'll walk through some of the legislative highlights from this most recent session. So, uh the first bill I'm going to highlight is Senate World Act 204 and
there were kind of uh two main components to it um highlighting today. Uh the first one is a threshold increase for capital project reviews. um for a number of years that threshold has been at $2 million and it has to come um to the commission for review and then go to
state budget committee for review and approval before the institution can proceed with that. Um that threshold was set in 2014 um so about 12 years ago and so the change from 2 million to 3 million for that threshold um is pretty closely aligned to inflation between
2014 and the current year. So that's how the 3 million number was um determined. Um, second major component of Sen Act 204 um, helps improve um, credit transferability. I think this is a perfect segue from um what Doug was uh
presenting on um where obviously dual credit is called a core transfer library, but students taking AP courses also um can earn credit in state law if they score
on AP exam that will transfer to college credit. But there is some discretion on whether or not that is elective credit or um core credit as was mentioned before um for like an English or math class. So this um enhance that that if
the AP course is in um a subject matter that is on uh in the core transfer library that the institution has an aligned course for it has to transfer um for core credit not just elective credit. So, um, that's a strong policy to help our students as they earn
college credit in high school. Making sure that it's transparent, what the value of that credit is, whether or not be elective, um, or transfer into the subject matter, and making sure that more of those credits will actually transfer subject matter. And David, if I could add, um, this this one is major
and it came to us from a high school principal in Northern Indiana who is, I would say, ahead of the game and a leader in Indiana College Board and uh, producing helping students get credential to value before leaving. and and he emailed and said, "Hey, um you
know, we just got noticed that students now have to have a a four on one of their assessments, on one of their AP assessments, and therefore we have in our district x number of students impacted, but across the state probably
thousands." Uh and he was right. Uh so I I say that because the bulk of what you're going to see here, it always there's always a motive. There's always a reason. And it often in its best when it comes from local community leaders or institutions who say hey we have a
problem here let's get it fixed. Um so that came was not something we saw. Uh but once we once it was shared um the general assembly and uh the institution who was requiring a four we worked straight with them and the other institutions to make sure they were good
and uh and move that forward. that that will help a lot of kids and allows continuity across the board. >> So, the next piece of legislation I want to highlight is Senator World Act 254 um which was uh really a bill being driven
by um IvyTech to kind of update um their mission and the number of operational um policies that are in um statute. So, um, one of the items was updating, um, Ivy Tech's, um, Trust B membership and the requirements for serving on that to make
sure that it does emphasize, um, workforce, um, industry and economic development, um, expertise on their board of trustees. Um, strengthens um, their campus responsibilities. Um, and then also um, did a lot of um, cleanup
work um, in their statute. there was a number of um just proficiency staff that had dates when something had to be accomplished or dates where um things would operate a different way going forward and a lot of those dates had passed. So it was just a lot of routine
um cleanup there as well. But want to emphasize a lot of this was being driven by uh the institution itself working with the legislators and really emphasizing how they're a key component of economic development in the state. um developing that talent uh pipeline and I
think as the bill itself says really helping to become or continue uh to improve as an economic engine um for the state. Next uh piece of legislation is Senate World Act um 199 and definitely two uh significant provisions
um in this piece of legislation. The first one is directing the commission um to explore options for both institutional and programmatic um accreditation. internally in the state the higher learning commission HLC is
the regional accredititor for our institutions and um the legislature um the bill doesn't direct any concrete action or a shift but the legislature is um interested in exploring um our current accreditation framework
is that delivering the best results for Indiana is it are the accredititors aligned with um our values and mission um are there others um that should explore and a significant driver behind this um is and the conversation has been
kind of ongoing for a decade but a lot of conversations about um HLC's requirements over dual credit instructors and whether or not those qualifications are too restrictive. Um so I think that's a lot of the genesis behind the general assembly wanting to potentially explore different options
because as we lean more into the college core as we lean into um other items and as dual print is really a pillar of our postsecondary preparation um in high schools like constantly work to find qualified instructors and we want to
make sure there's quality in the classroom but some of the requirements may not be the best rockers of quality. of legislator's interest in exploring options here a little bit be very honest and direct uh this allows us more bargaining power for the state of
Indiana we've seen other states move this direction uh we've talked to HLC they may be tuning in this does not mean we're walking away from the higher learning commission we may very well stay with the higher learning commission um uh we at this point are uh but we
have to understand what our options far as a state to best provide services to Indiana students period. And we have to move at a pace that is appropriate and not taking a decade long to have a discussion which I know Teresa lovers
and I talked about I think when I was still back to consolidating schools which does a lot about timeline there. Um so uh we also have um uh uh varying interest from our public institutions uh
on some programmatic accreditation. Um programmatic accreditation that conversation really came up uh for the most part uh because of some of the requirements that were in line to Indiana values. Um so glad to uh speak with any of you about that. But there
are some uh very interested uh universities and considering how might we do better for Indiana students? How might we really focus keep our focus on our mission? Um accreditation is a cumbersome process uh for our
institution. It's significant Tom and their money. Tom is money is Tom and we want to make sure that the time is best used uh on our key focus areas. So, >> so yeah, just to yeah emphasize that
with the institutions, there's a number of programs that have statutory required programmatic competitors. So, education is one, athletic trainers, architects that kind of run Saganda. But there are specific organizations mentioned in statute that have to be the creditors and just a review on are we getting the
best ROI for that because a lot of it can be focused on bureaucratic paperwork rather than support um to drive outcomes and there's a lot of expense there and fees for those accredititors. So and just kind of peeling back that I mean doing a comprehensive review. I'll add one more step so that to get additional
clarification on the institutional side. Remember the HLC is a big umbrella for all of our institutions. We've already seen many of our southern states uh launch into um another different
accrediting option. Uh it is a significant decision to do that. Um so our southern states uh we have already been in contact with them as have other states across our country who've been in contact with them. Uh we could probably
join their accrediting body if we decided to but we are again this is an exploration. This is nothing definitive. This is just allowing us and encouraging us to ask some important questions on the programmatic side. Um there are
several states who are pursuing the programmatic accreditation including um Texas as one. Uh Indiana is is on the edge on this like we're pushing we're one of the leading pushers in this which can be good but also can have some risk.
So again it's a exploration opportunity for us to better understand our options uh looking forward and again moving at the pace that we need to ensure we are uh in education.
>> Couple questions. What are the accredited bodies that are available out there? And then how many are there? >> Um And and then next question is what I'll be concerned with is how would that
accreditation for a degree be viewed nationally and with our degrees for our students competing you know nationally. >> So I would have to look at um the exact number of the regional um accredititors.
It's somewhere around a half dozen. Um so the nation's kind of divided up into regions. Indiana's in the HLC region with about 10 other um states. And so extrapolating that out, there's 10 or so states per um accrediting we region for
each of the regionals. Um and that is why regional um accreditation is essential for the institutions. In order for institutions to be eligible for federal student aid, both for grants and loans, you have to be um recognized by one of the regional accredititors. So,
what the southern states are doing since they were dissatisfied with theirs are creating a new one um that is about a two-year process. Um there's federal rules and ranks on what the entity has to do to go through to be recognized um as an accredititor. And that's very much
on the mind like that's why exploring um this path will make sure and advise the general assembly not to do anything that would risk um any harm to the institutions throughout the process. And the second part of your question was specific to uh students who may uh be in
Indiana, get a certain certification or degree and then go outside of Indiana. Uh that's another exploration piece that would be on the programmatic side. Uh so again there are two pieces. There's the institutional which is that high level umbrella and then every single program
has accreditation as well. So that is something that um we as a state will need to explore and I would flag other states that are in that conversation with us. Uh but that would get in front of their messaging >> different.
Yeah. Organization. So HLC the institutional ones um uh accredit the entire institution and then and we're looking into is it every single program or how many programs require a programmatic accredititation but there
are a lot of like one of the with like 200 programs that they have a 100 different predators that they work with for different >> yeah that vast structure range accreditation And each of most of them are different.
>> Yeah. And and I know certain industries and certain fields of study have particular programmatic credit. >> Yes. Excuse me. Not necessarily for students who are going to leave Indiana, but many of them may stay here and work
remotely, but they're recruiters. Yeah. That reputation, right? Nowadays, everybody works from home. Yes. The other piece that um that universities have flagged for us is um you know sometimes the programmatic
accreditation is tricky on our university partners when they're hearing from partner. I'll give an example like nursing saying we need we need we need help. We need we're we we can't fill all these jobs. We need help. And then our universities are limited on, you know,
how many seats they can have, how many spots, and um, you know, talking to some of our university partners and some sometimes that's appropriate to have that limit. Uh, but sometimes there there doesn't always seem to be a method to the madness on how that number
is set. And so when we have business and industry saying like we need help, we need help. we want it's that goes back to that nimleness being able to really adjust and provide what we need to for our students. So that was another point that I think our institutions
very smartly raised uh with this discussion and this is I'll say it one more time. I know you've said it five times already David expiration. This is expiration. We will bring back information to the commission to explore, but we want maximum bargaining
power in Indiana and we need people to move at a pace. Go ahead, T. >> So, this is just a comment from a faculty perspective. A creditors come to us and we have really no recourse. They come in into the programs, they come
into the schools, uh, and they have dictatorial agent. And that means that if some strange ideas get loose in the init bodies, they the university could have forced a sledgehammer and there's
nothing to be done. And so I just want to encourage this exploration and say it's a very good idea. states should be proactive about mashing bodies and um of their um you know make sure that they line
yeah 199. The second significant component of Senate rule 999 that's also gotten um some attention is um updating the annual degree review process to also include include an earnings threshold um for the median wage outcomes of that
degree program as a part of um part of what set this up for the uh Indian general assembly was um the federal one big beautiful buildup pass. they established this earning threshold um and that policy says that those
programs will no longer be um eligible for federal student loans um going forward. Um so that means in Indiana either like the students or the state would then have to start bearing the full cost um of these programs in um
similar to um current review processes. This is not an automatic elimination of the programs. I think it got um messaged that way a little bit or there was some confusion um on that, but it does not um dictate an elimination. It's just a flag to maybe we should look at this to make
sure um that it is um aligned with our workforce needs and making sure that it's providing good return on investment for students so that they're not investing years and thousands and thousands of dollars into a bachelor's degree and then um their earning potential is not any higher than a high
school um diploma. Now there are some sectors where a bachelor's degree may be required and their median earnings are the same or lower than a high school diploma. Like obviously that would be considered in this those um degrees wouldn't be eliminated but really just deflated um to make sure that students are getting a good um return on their um
investment and have that um knowledgeable degree degree group programs and just making sure that those are for review. >> Yeah. And I'll I'll flag this one as well. This was probably one of the most discussed higher education uh pieces of language across all of
session. I am highly highly supportive of this. Let me share with you why. And I'll also share depending on what you read is how the position you're going to which is unfortunate. This became partisan because it was in the big beautiful bill. So if you're reading
more leftleaning, you're going to hear that this is hated. If you're reading more conservative, more right, this is loved, which I think is always dangerous in the education space. We try to stay very focused on the student, the people and not this side or that side. But why
I was so for this is because the process of which you'll see shortly about the streamlining degree process and what this team did uh with our university partners to do an honest review, a transparent honest review. That is all
this calls for is a transparent, honest review of any program in Indiana that has a student who might graduate or or you know the the the bulk of students graduate with a um medium wage lower than what they would get for a high
school diploma. Part of our focus as a commission is affordability. Affordability. And so if we are charging uh uh you know and I I used this example in in testament so it's out there. We're
charging $20,000 a year for a four-year degree and the student comes out and they make $18,000. They should know that. The parent should know that. The student should know that. We are the commission and the university. We should all be very aware
of that. Um there will the federal government this is all public uh has every state in the country and in their estimates of like what what percentage of your degrees probably fall within this. Indiana we're actually on the um the lower side of that average whereas
some states have uh a higher percentage of their degrees that will be flagged. Indiana is estimated that we have 3% of our degrees will be flagged that are under this this median high school threshold. I imagine that as a commission and I'm
saying this very strategically uh for our media partners. I hope you hear this as well. We will have programs that continue on that are below that median wage. We we we almost certainly will
approve some that will continue on. But again, we have to be honest. If we want to improve the value proposition of higher education in our country, we have to be crystal clear and honest about the investment, what we're providing, um and
the overall impact. So, um I uh I was strongly supportive of this. Um, not to mention David's point about the federal government has approved that students will no longer get federal money to support and that's a big deal
for many of our kids. And so again, I think I think it's uh we have to be honest and um honest about this and we will see other states in our country follow. This is probably the most asked for legislation that we have right now
from other states. I can ask a question. So, does this include some kind of transparency or disclosure to potential parents and students that I mean, if you want this to breathe, get it, but you won't earn.
>> The specific legislation didn't speak to that, but there's a lot of ongoing um efforts. But I know um a presentation later on will cover a dashboard about a number of factors on degree programs and um ROI on that is part of that dashboard
that's out there. So this specific legislation did speak to that, but there's numerous other pieces of legislation that do focus on making sure to get that information to um students and families. And and I think Nancy like even if it's not in legislation that your your question is so important
because if that's the right thing to do, we should do it regardless. So as we um we anticipate the federal government will send us the programs that are under this threshold, we're anticipating early 2027.
So when we get that formal list of programs, I know there there's a lot of of speculation um you know a thought but when we get that list of programs um please be assured uh as a commission we will do our due diligence. We will be as thorough uh as possible. We will bring
back that data transparently and most certainly Nancy there will be things that you and others will say hey we should also share this or we should also and we need to we need to hear that. To me, again, that's a way we can get our value proposition up if we're really
just honest about um the value that some degrees have, which are incredible and exponential and um uh other degrees that may have have differing impact but are also very valuable to that student and
family. So, thank you for flagging that. >> Big question on um so this is going to be the report that we receive. This isn't part of our own annual um review process or is it a
>> this is we will receive a list of and Phil welcome to chime in David. we will receive a list of programs from the federal government. And I and I should flag um we are projecting that many of
these programs will be from our forprofit higher ed deliverers, right? They may not be our our typical public institution deliverer, but we will receive that list. Uh and then what this says is in Indiana
we will do our due diligence to look at every single program flag uh and you know do do a a fair analysis and um make some decisions. Some again will continue forward
uh and and some we may need to to take a look at. Uh so that is uh that that would be the plan ahead. So, so there's some time yet uh on this uh and and certainly more discussions. I think there will probably be uh
uh discussions that will happen in the 2020 session as well. I can almost guarantee that when it comes to uh the the general assembly making some budgeting decisions. So the commission's research will be very important for some of the
decisions that they will be making. >> I was just going to add real quick, you know, in these types of programs and devil's always in the details, right? So we can't control what the federal government is doing and I dealt with this program. We know where it's headed. But to me uh I think everyone should
feel comfort when especially when we hear the degree review program uh explanation and how that went went about that that it gives a good reflection in my mind of how we will go through this type of analysis with very thorough and thoughtful and and appropriate
considerations. The greatest value I see in this is as secretary Jenner spoke general spoke about the community action and think and perception how important it is enable so many of
these communities largely smaller to hear the the perception that a college degrees worthless because XYZ's child graduated and they didn't make as much is on college graduate. Well, the reality is they pursue limits to Bruce
in many instances that didn't provide a minable wage. And so now this information will be available backed up with data that we can demonstrate this is why and that's not the norm and this is how you
circumstance. You don't perceive study. So I think it's very important. One final emphasis before David goes on. It's an exclamation point to your point. This is not and for our media partners who again are our people really hear
from. This is not an automatic elimination. It is not. That is probably the most the the the myth that we've seen most often publicly. This is not an automatic elimination. This is a review process. the commission will uh take on
in a thorough way. >> Actually had a comment real quick. I wanted to ask when you're studying degree review, we're going into undergrad and graduate programs. I think that's something really important to know because as someone who is about to graduate next month, I have a lot of peers that are deciding whether they
want to continue higher education, what masters program they want to get into, and they don't really know how different their salary is going to look with another addition two or three years of of schooling. And I think that this is really important if they want to have a little bit of wage. Okay, if I was to invest into the social work programs
into another program, what is my salary going to look like? And can I have already lived in India? fantastic points just shows I think the students are craving some additional information and it allows us
has nothing to do with this has nothing to do with the decision the commission will make coming up. Those are the two things that could be conflated. This 199 is totally separate than what we're about to talk about.
Better change fast. >> So uh the next significant uh piece of legislation was Senate and World Act um 256. And this was a comprehensive um piece of legislation that looked at a lot of activities um that America's
foreign adversaries are engaged in. So um and I'll highlight the substantial portion um that impacts higher education, but just wanted to note that this bill covered a number of different sectors and fields beyond just um colleges and higher education. Um so
yeah, kind of three notable um provisions. Um and then the first one was um a prohibition on um universities and community colleges and um uh K12 schools as well from um contracting with
um entities tied to um foreign adversaries and the bill um without the uh nations that are foreign adversaries but um essentially Iran, North Korea, um Russia and China are the um notable
ones. Um it also um specifies that um beginning in August of uh this year um any institution or any of uh Indiana's public universities that would um admit a student who um is coming from one of
these um uh nations that are foreign adversaries, they'll have to do an extensive um background and affiliation check on them before admitting them into a list of sensitive programs. So law programs on the list are engineering programs. um AI um is in there and then
some bioscience ones national trends um that we have seen that a number of these for adversary countries and China over the last um decade plus have engaged in very intentional um programs to send um
agents over um to this country on the guise of coming um as students engaging in research um but their um real objective is to um engage in economic espionage and then intellectual property um theft and the FBI has a whole website
devoted to helping raise awareness for this and having um individuals like see the warning signs um of this and a lot of them these are not just students coming over for learning but they are trained agents of these um nations coming over to try to um gain um
intellectual um property to kind of advance their um global objectives and and we've seen a growing trend on this. So this was one way to just do extensive background checks as they come into um sensitive programs that essentially would have um
military and geopolitical application. Um so that background um check applies to our um public universities, but then um all universities um for the last several years have to submit um
enrollments if they have been uh enrolling students from these foreign adversaries, what programs um are they going into? And that one would just be umformational that will help us as um state leaders and uh national defense leaders kind of identify our specific um
institutions or programs being um targeted by these um efforts and just helping to get a better handle um on that >> quick question on that first bullet point. Uh is that public and private university?
>> That one would just be uh I I can double check and follow up. I believe that one is just um the public universities, but I would have to confirm that. >> But it's a good it's a good question and one that that we should flag uh for
upstairs as well. That also involve um foreign exchange programs, universities that have programs in China. >> Yes. >> But those would no longer be allowed.
>> No. It's not this is not prohibiting. Uh this is >> and on I feel like this is very important for homeland security. Uh >> of some of the briefings we've had and some of what you public can see on the
threats that we have in terms of getting other people foreign adversaries into our country. So it is not an automatic elimination but it it we will we may have students from some of these foreign adversary uh countries but we will
essentially be uh triple checking to make sure their intention and motive of being in our country. >> So I just got confirmation. So yeah, the first one it is just public universities and there's about a page of legally and
the legislation of like what contracts it applies to and stuff >> interested in some good nighttime reading. Uh, as David mentioned, the FBI >> does have an interesting site where they articulate some of, you know, how these
countries are trying to penetrate our homeland. And so, feel welcome to nighttime. Read that, Molly. >> No, I'm sorry. Don't too much into it. I just found out yesterday my son was supposed to be in
Israel for exchange programs, is now, as of yesterday, going to China. So I was just curious if that was about you. Do you want us to make don't >> Thank you for sharing that personal fun
fact. Yes. Uh anything else on that one? >> Okay, David. The um next significant legislation was um House Enrolled Act um 1003 and uh
this was part of a larger um effort by the governor's office and the legislature to really um streamline a number of boards and commissions across um state government that has become um rather voluminous um over the decades. And so this whole bill is 291 pages. So
it was just kind of a broader kind of state government um efficiency um project but there are a number of um items that did impact the commission for higher education. So wanted to flag um and note those. Um the first one um is
that it shifts the responsibilities of the board for propri proprietary education over to the commission for higher education. So this was a separate board that was established um to uh oversee and review programs, political
priority um educations. The responsibilities um are very similar to what CG does um for public institution programs. Um so it seemed made sense um to streamline
those um together. Another item that does is consolidates um the graduate medical education board and the metal medical education bill. Again, that's another board um and those are um two that have um similar responsibilities.
The graduate medical education um board oversees um grants to help uh provide technical assistance and support to residency um programs. Um and then the medical education board um provides
funding for uh and training. So rather than having two separate boards for that um the general assembly streamline those into one consolidated board. >> David, can I just u make a quick editorial comment on the latter when as
everybody knows we've got a challenge in this country and in this state around physician capacity in particular primary care in particular in our rural communities. So, anything that this and other things can do to help eliminate
and rightsize the training programs, rightize support for residencies, uh, rightsize and improve the opportunity, increase the number of residency opportunities we have in the state behind all four. So, I hope this is additive to that exercise. you know,
in terms of the gradical graduate medical board, they receive a $7 million line item um to support those residency programs. And the medical education board, it's a $2.4 million annual line item to support that work. So, that's kind of the level of financial support
to grow the um pipeline for educ or for health professionals and kind of fill some of those shortage needs. Thank you. Then um the final one um to highlight is this continuation of um 103 part of the
streamlining um efforts and also merge the responsibilities of the mental health and addiction services board um to CHE and that board um their full responsibility was basically overseeing um this professional loan um forgiveness
uh program for behavioral health professionals. So for like psychi psychiatrists um psychologists mental health professionals there was a loan forgiveness program you had to help fill um shortage needs there. So since it was um a loan program um the commission um
oversees a number of loan repayment programs. So rather than having a separate board to do this um they streamlined that into u the commission's um responsibilities. question. Did we get any resources since
I was ready to say congratulations? We have some more responsibility. Uh it was it was not a a budget session. Uh so uh at this time we will eagerly take on and
>> yeah the slides um say I should have noted and emphasized that these changes take effect July 1, 2027 which coincides after the but yeah so it's basically a signal all this stuff will be moving but since a number of them have line items
it would be in various places. This was the signaling kind of moves the programmatic infrastructure. Um but yeah, we'll allow a upcoming budget to be able to handle questions like that and make sure the money's in the right places. >> From our perspective, from the
commission, will we see more reports or if we focus on high now when we also get updates and things on this on these topics that are being taken on? >> Yeah, I I'll jump in. Yeah. It's happy.
I I would say we're in our infancy of diving into as I shared with Nancy and Dan here. I whispered, "Oh, I thought we were already going to put a prep time on this." Um, so stay tuned. Let us dig into this a bit more. Uh, and we'll get
back to you on that. >> Someh understood that. Thank you. Well, I would say too it's the budget and productivity committee that can assist with figuring any of this out with any necessity.
>> She terrible what you said. >> That is with that. That concludes um what I had for this presentation. I know we had handled questions throughout. I don't know if you have any any questions and kind of questions comment
on the GME issue. I mean the thing that Dan brought up. >> Oh my. >> So question um Dan brought up about issue about GME and you're talking about resourcing too and sort of the complexities around all of these. There is a supply and demand problem with that
residency program that what we can solve. Um, also though, are we going to be reviewing curriculum for more do sort of format for functional medicine for the state's goal of reducing the cost of healthcare across the board? Because right now we're producing docu, the same thing that we've done for an off time
with one of the largest medical schools in the country at IU. So I'm curious about that. Um, and uh, also I just wanted to make a comment about um, uh, the K12 issues earlier. So switching
hats for a second about um uh that issue my other my day job. So I'm the executive director of the embargo white family foundation and as you many of you know when Peter there when we did this couple years ago we announced we're investing $150 million into K12 education through diosis school northwest Indiana there's 20 schools
three high schools there um this is meant to be affirming and also bring out the issue of complexity there um I appreciate all of this leaning toward trans uh transparency here and also uniformity and some paring with public offerings with dual credits and others
because at the end of the day. Uh as Katie said, the student and the consumer is the objective there. Um we have a lot of trouble and as we've been doing realignment, uh trouble communicating as we've done realignment, we are focused in some of the heaviest hit areas
economically in the state, Gary, Chicago, and others that are struggling. Those kids need highquality education as much if not more than anyone else. Uh and so the more we can provide for those parents um to understand how the
pipelining issue is being addressed by this commission, the better off those students and parents are going to be. So I compliment the effort and say that yes, it's going to take a lot. Uh those two topics alone are are huge. Um but as somebody representing a family investing
that level uh into that issue, I can tell you directly um there's a huge need for both of those things. Um and then final example Samantha raised again I think goes into resourcing again is the complexity around the issue of transparency and pipeline stacking of
degrees is part of there's many might be a polyside kid he's going to go to law school the next you might be a social worker who's an MS and whatever it is I I think that's part of this uh uh issue transparency so if we can focus on those things the GME the continued
communication and then the complexity in this analysis I think that's going to benefit benefits that are trying to make the best selections they can for their kids and also operating parity with choice and other things. Thank you. >> All right, David, why don't you click to
the next? I'll just have you sit there. We can click to the next. We'll save a bunch of time. So, this is our our remaining agenda which is in front of everyone. I know uh our chair will introduce President Fedar who is uh here today.
And by the way, I just huge shout out. I mean, he is such a great partner and uh if you go to Indiana State University, which many of you have, the energy on that campus from students and uh and the team there, you uh so really excited to
hear his presentation. Then again, we'll go through our typical new business including um the reprogram review. And then finally we'll end with a discussion which is another required general assembly report on the program cost for various degree programs. We'll get into
that and uh that concludes my resation. >> Great. Secretary Jenner, thank you for your presentation. Thank you David and Doug for your great presentations as well. Very full and thoughtful and informative on a whole. So, as uh as
Katie referenced, I would love to invite President up to this uh through the microphone and uh really again, thank you for being our host today and thank you for your upcoming student success presentation. So, welcome.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And uh you know I I'll just say very quickly that um one of the joys uh that I have in my position at Indiana State University is being able to develop relationships and partnerships. And uh Katie has been just
that, an incredible partner and an individual that there's not too many weeks that go by that we're either not calling each other or texting each other and and a lot of it is just sharing of ideas and thoughts and everything. So, I truly appreciate everything that you do,
Dr. Jenner. Um, not only for the state, but specifically for Indiana State University. And by the way, one of her degrees is from Indiana State University as well. >> Despite that, I'll despite that, yeah, >> um, and um, I, you know, when I woke up
this morning and I said, well, it's it's April Fool's Day, I do think Katie still wanted me to come, so I'm here. Um, but I just want to say a quick shout out to some of my team members that are here as well. Behind me, I have uh Ardell Sanders who's my chief of staff, Seth
Inshaw, who's uh our VP for finance and administration and our legislative partners that we have on that side of the house with >> RA like the Ukrainian president or something. >> Okay. Um, I have the pleasure to um, kind of walk you through a little bit of
what's at Indiana State University, but I think history is always important to kind of set the stage for where we are, but certainly where we want to go. And oops, I went a little quick there. Uh, so where we were um, to the day I have
been at Indiana State now serving as president 22 months to the day. And so, um, I with there's been a lot of change that's went on in those 22 months, but I wanted to let you know kind of where we were about 22 months ago. Um, we did
have some sustained multi-year downward trends in our enrollment. Um, I am not an excuse maker at all. I'm all about where those opportunities are. So, we did need to really take a a real comprehensive look at that because a 29%
decline in our undergraduate headcount over um about a four to 5year period of time was quite significant for the institution and I will say quite significant to the state of Indiana as well in terms of the workforce and talent pipeline that we're entrusted to
be a solution for. Our four-year graduation rate was also at 34% which is not acceptable either and we're working towards that improvement. So when we when we look at some of the reasons of
the why I wanted to really quickly identify some uh and diagnose really some of the areas to address these declines and try to make sure that we shifted that momentum in a different direction. So some of the things just
these are more observations you know over the first six to eight months or so on the job really fragmented student experiences across units. You may get um one experience if you're in one college or or one area on campus and a much
different experience in others. And so we had students really navigating um disconnected systems, barriers to entry and re-entry. You know, we really looked at ways in which transfer and returning students were
experiencing these friction points as well. And what could we do to better align ourselves to take away those barriers? But certainly look at those pathways for students who might be non-traditional in nature and maybe stopped out for one reason or another.
Inconsistent pathways and sequencing that we had um not always clear, not always efficient in ways in which we we wanted we want to make sure students have a great experience. And I tell our prospective students and our families every day that I have a chance to
interact with them that we want to make sure that every student at Indiana State has an individualized pathway to be successful when they're at Indiana State, but to be successful in life and work once they graduate with that degree in hand. And so for us that's serious uh
work um and and something that we don't take lightly because that value proposition that we've heard a lot of today and that return on investment really matters and if we don't take an individualized approach to what students need at that particular point in time in
their journey, I really think we're missing the mark on what those outcomes could be in terms of the skills that they might uh be able to obtain when they're at Indiana state, but most importantly to see where those opportunities are for them to grow as
professionals and as uh young men and women. Limited integration of data and and and the uh intervention of our systems. Um and I want to be clear here, these were system issues, not student issues. And so that's on us to find
better ways to approach these challenges that we may have. and then our campus uh infrastructure and needs um in terms of what we needed in terms of the modernization and we have some great things that are going on at the institution right now. Um, we have two
residence halls on our campus, Jones and Hines Hall. And I got a couple of alums here on the commission as well who know those residence halls very well and and a former chair of our board of trustees here as well with Kathy. And those were um offline for a few years. We're
bringing those back online in the fall of of 2026 and we're going to densify our campus. We had university apartments that are about a mile and a half off from campus. We're taking those offline to make sure that our students have a
better experience on campus and making sure that we're really integrating them into our campus culture moving forward. A renovation upcoming in our student union as well. Our bookstores then kind of along the fringe of off off campus.
We're bringing that more centralized the branding and the pride and everything that we're looking to expand upon all fits into that campus infrastructure and requiring some modernization along the way. So when I think about um
what actions we're looking to take and what immediate challenges that were identified, the early interventions to really address these um really urgent barriers that our students face. One of the things that I did uh within the
first couple of months is I hired a new vice president for enrollment management. her name is uh Mayor Beth Stevens and she has uh come into that role and really found ways in which we could do things much more effectively but in the best interest of our
prospective students and families as well. We focused on high impact areas first and made sure that we could capitalize on those to ensure again that each student had that individualized pathway to be successful. We've engaged
our campus with external partners and examples that I could share, but I in light of time I'd love to be able to to share that with each of you and um at future conversations that we have. But we have a preferred partnership program where we're engaged with business and
industry in all 92 counties across the state of Indiana to make sure that there's seamless pathways for their employees to be students at Indiana State at a 15% reduction in in tuition costs for them at no cost to the
employee to the employers at all. It's just another way to make sure that they can retain talent, recruit talent within their businesses. We're working with other partners as well to re-engage those students who have stopped out for one reason or another and re-engage them
back into Indiana State University, maybe in the same degree path that they originally started, but maybe a different path for them to be able to cross that finish line. There's nothing worse than having some college credit, no degree in debt. And we are in the
business of making sure that our students can have those pathways. We have a plan in place over the next four years to allow over 2,000 students who have stopped out for one reason or another to get re-engaged and earn a degree from Indiana State University.
And I am confident that we will reach that goal. Aligning our institution for our long-term execution and we're we began our work on a strategic plan and I'll go into a little bit more of that here in just a minute. But really the highlights that we have and the threads
that we really have throughout Indiana State University are a true culture of care. Uh Dr. Jenner kind of mentioned that when you're on your campus. Hopefully you feel that when you're on our campus, but be 100% focused on career connectedness to what we're doing
so our students have those pathways to go out and get a highpaying job once they graduate from Indiana State. So when we think about our uh maybe there we go our strategic plan our
board of trustees approved this plan in December we are in the implementation phase of that right now really flushing out a lot of our KPIs but it's really focuses on three areas making sure that we have innovative curriculum making sure that there's an exceptional student
experience and that we also have unified people and process and what we do each and every day. And you can see in the slide that we really kind of break that down in terms of what does that mean for us. But by and large, our role in the state is to make sure that we're a
solution for the workforce needs and demands and to help drive the economy, not only in Terote and the Wash Valley, but across the state of Indiana as well. And you'll see our our outcomes that we're looking at for this are improve
student success is to make sure that they retain, persist, complete, get a job, remain in the state of Indiana if at all possible to continue to contribute to what's going on here in our great state. So again, I I won't
read through each and every one of these, but this gives you a snapshot of some of the things that we're focusing on with this strategic plan. again with the two threads being that culture of care and that career connectedness. So when we talk break that down into our
different areas um innovative curriculum um problems that we identified was the inconsistent pathways and inefficient process that's there. What we're doing about it is making sure that we truly implement a flexible uh modeling for our
students. That might look different for different programs certainly at the undergraduate level, graduate level, but we want to make sure that we're very very flexible in terms of the way in which we're engaging our students. At Indiana State University, um over 80% of our students work, uh that's part-time
or full-time. So, it's not just for the quote unquote non-traditional students. It's for our quote traditional students who are out working every day in our community to ensure that they can um fund their degree and and cross that finish line as well. Expanding the
credit for prior learning, I know a big push from the state and we're looking to be a solution for that. Again, taking those experiences that student have and aligning them to courses, not just elective courses, but courses that meet
the degree requirements for whatever the that degree is that they're pursuing. Strengthening those transfer pathways and our sequencing that we have as well. You know, that's an uh an opportunity that we really thought thought that we had um moving forward and then aligning
curriculum obviously with our workforce needs as well. So, when we look at all these um I'll give you a quick example of how we're aligning that. We have a a relatively new partnership um in our construction management program with Thompson Thrift. They're a well-known
national um construction and real estate company. Um Paul Thrift and John Thompson, both graduates of Indiana State University, started that um business when they were students at Indiana State University. We will have our first name department starting in
the fall of 2026 called the Thompson Thrift Department of Construction Management. Paul and John have contributed not only towards that naming, but have committed to well over $1.5 million in paid internship opportunities for students, not just
when they're seniors, but when they're early on in their degree progression to ensure that they're a part of that educational process. They help inform the innovative curricular changes that we're making in that program to ensure
that our students are ready day one and and be um productive members of their team. And we want to make sure that we model that across all of our academic programs so that there is that seamless integration with that innovative
curriculum. And what does business and industry really need uh from us as we prepare our students for those next steps? So um the next one is our exceptional student uh experience. Again kind of found that we had fragmented student
experiences across different services on our campus. You know one of the ways that we're trying to make sure we build a coordinated system of support is through the scaling of our bridge week. So bridge week is students come in a
week before classes actually start. We started this program through a Lily grant, a project success grant that we had with Lily, but that was really for students who were quote quote unquote at high risk. You know, I would argue that we all have risk coming into um a
university and ways in which we navigate through that looks much different depending upon the individual. So we um what I decided that we were going to do and um and I think it's worked out okay is we don't limit any any one student or
another from taking part in bridge week. So now we have over twothirds of our incoming freshman class that will take place that'll take part of this bridge week and the responses that we get is that oh my gosh I'm so glad I did that. I feel the anxiety level has come down.
And I feel like I'm so much ready to to kind of start day one and and take away a lot of the whatifs that are there. Institutionalizing our UC 110. I don't expect for you to know what that is, but imagine that intro course that really allows you to be set up for success and
understand where the different services are, meet people, develop those relationships to make sure that you're going to have that successful journey through your uh academic program when you're at Indiana State. And this is a retention increaser without a doubt. And
we are confident that as we implement this starting next fall, it'll translate into even greater increases in our retention and persistence rates. Um, professionalizing our advising model, we were very decentralized in that. We've
moved that to much more of a centralized approach. develop a one-stop shop where students can go for academic advising, tutoring, career services, financial aid, counseling, you name it, and you're not going to get bounced all over campus. You go to this one spot and you
know you're going to be able to get help that day. And um we're excited about how that's going to play out as we move forward. It's a very new endeavor this year as we ramp that up, but I have no doubt it will continue to make a difference in the lives of our students.
Our next one obviously in the last pillar that I had mentioned is our is our unified people and process. So again recognize this disconnected systems kind of limited use of data and we're looking
at ways in which we can truly have talent retention, engagement and empowerment of our individuals that make Indiana State what it is, our faculty and staff. Um so we're looking at ways in which we integrate that student data
systems. We were very disjointed in that. We are certainly looking to leverage AI. Um and I know again through the Lily endowment with the AI and higher education initiative that they've started um we're looking forward of how
that can even further accelerate some of the things that we know we want to venture into for the efficiencies but for predict for the predictive insights and predictive analytics that are going to be important for us. And we can identify, support, and intervene with
students in real time by doing this. And that it will be critically important for us to certainly stay competitive in a higher in a high competitive market space, but it's the right thing to do for our students in a timely manner to take to again take down those barriers
that might be in front of some of them. Um, so let me just uh talk a little bit about um some of the outcomes that we're seeing as a result of this. So we had the largest freshman class in 5 years
this fall. That was a 13% increase from what we've had in the past. That undergraduate total enrollment, again, if you have lower classes leading up to a larger class, it's going to follow you for a few years. that undergraduate uh
enrollment population increased by 2%. But what's important is that that our full-time equivalents, our FTEES actually increased by 4%. We had more students deciding to be full-time students than just part-time students. Um you know, of note with this, 86% of
our new freshmen who joined us this fall were Indiana residents. So we serve the state of Indiana in so many ways. Um, you know, our retention rate, although it's not where it needs to be,
was a record retention rate at 69%. I unbashfully have told our campus community that we will be an institution that has an 80% retention rate. It likely will take us a few years to get there, but that is certainly a goal that
we have in front of us. Um, our four-year graduation rate uh certainly is not as high as what we want it to be, but we did have a 4% increase in our four-year graduation rate this year and a 2% increase in our six-year graduation
rate this year as well. Um, this is who we serve. 48% of our students are first generation college students. 51% are PAL eligible. That's 78% that are Indiana residents are everything, undergraduate and graduate. Um, and I will say this,
sometimes we think about first generation college students and peligible students as being underachieving students. That freshman class that we brought in this year, 18% I'm sorry, 19% of those students were are in our honors college. Um, and they're hardworking students and we're
uh proud to be able to serve them on a day-to-day basis. So, our focus areas of our continuous improvement that we're looking for are to making sure that our enrollment mix and and our pipeline are are diversified
to the best of our ability. We will continue to focus on our traditional undergraduate markets of course, but we're looking to expand with our transfer adult learner, the re-engagement pathways that I mentioned as well. We want to we want to ensure that we strengthen everything we can do
with those uh those partnerships with our community colleges. Certainly IvyTech, but where we're located geographically close to Illinois, we're looking to partner with those uh community college institutions as well. About 10.5% of our students come from Illinois as well. uh just because of our
geographic location, our financial aid strategy and student access or balancing that affordability with the institutional sustainability. Um and improving that financial aid optimization and that timing really allows for us to think about what's
next. One of the ways that we're doing that is um trying to reverse or flip in a 180 uh direction our institutionally funded scholarships with our donorfunded scholarships. And um we just got done
with a capital campaign just a few months ago where we exceeded our goal by 33%. We raised $133 million. So much of that was focused on making sure that we provided scholarships for our students to be successful at Indiana State
University. Um we have u commissioners right here right now uh sitting in this room who have contributed towards those endowed scholarships for our students and I just want to say thank you for that. It makes a difference for us in terms of our sustainability as an
institution, but for the success of our students and um and their engagement that they're going to have as alums of Indiana State University as well. We will continue to align that age strategy for the persistence of our students and
getting them across the finish line as well. Sorry about a little bit of a delay as I'm hitting this There we go. Um, our scalable program delivery. A part of this is making sure that again that flexibility of it and
meeting students where they're at, but that online hybrid accelerated programs, more of the 3 plus 2, 4 plus 1 that we're looking for for our students to take advantage of. The access for our non-traditional learners, our veteran enrollment opportunities. We were best
for vets this year. uh top rated public institution in the state of Indiana meeting the needs of our veterans and and military affiliated students as well. We will continue to lean into that and strengthen our program alignment with the workforce needs. That's that
career connectedness. That's part of our ongoing review as an institution that we will continue to lean into. Certainly, it's a part of what you're all going to be considering today, but it's the right thing to do for our students to ensure that we are aligned. not just for the
short term but for the long term as well. You know, as as we uh think about how we are meeting Indiana's workforce needs, and I won't read this to you, it's up there, but we are 100 100%
committed that we are that solution. And there's a a favorite quote that I I actually have a plaque of this in my home office as well. And um you know, goals without a plan are just wishes. And we're not into just wishing
and hoping that things are going to translate into the outcomes that we know our students in Indiana deserve. We're into it to make sure that we have a plan in place and strategies moving forward. I'm incredibly encouraged on where we find ourselves right now in this
enrollment cycle and what that'll look for uh for us as an institution in the fall of 2026. I am very confident that we're going to welcome even more freshmen this coming fall than we did last to continue that enrollment
momentum. And yes, that's important for us as an institution, but I think it's it's more important for the state of Indiana, understanding how many students who graduate from Indiana State University remain to live and work in
the state of Indiana and contribute to the economy, but also to their civic engagement that they have to their communities as well. Thank you for the opportunity today to be able to be in front of you and be happy to answer any questions. fantastic presentation for sure. I think
you know those of us been around and followed IR uh through the commission and beyond obviously have have seen uh some of the challenging numbers over the last few years and um and certainly are hopeful and and uh but you brought in I think the type of enthusiasm and
strategy and direction that certainly gives great confidence that it's we're going to see a very different trend coming in the next few years and even >> Yep. super super confident that it starts at the top. So you're >> a number of Indiana state grants here,
right? and addressing them directly or you know I've had the opportunity to be on campus multiple times you know over over a long period of time but I tell you the uh uh the where it's at today
so it's uh it's really fantastic and I congratulate you on on having that the turnaround impact uh within just 22 months and already starting to see that happen and accelerate is is really exciting. So well done Mike great team.
>> Just like to add, you know, the the uh the blocking and tackling, the nuts and bolts, everything here is just is just wonderful. Um but the presence you have on campus uh is quite inspiring and uh you know just an example uh you know
heavy presence on social media uh you did the uh snow angel in your suit posted that. So I just wondered what's next. >> Oh my goodness. I don't know. They they
uh I I am very fortunate to just have a wonderful team and uh I I'll call out one individual and she'll hate me for it, but Marba Ramos is our social media manager that works out of my office and she'll come to me some days and be like,
"Hey, what do you think?" And she knows I'm going to say yes. I mean, she knows that the answer is yes, but um you know, so important, you know, attent to that. when I came to campus and I said you know what is our what is our strategy with social media when and we didn't really have one and so that was an
initiative and hired uh Marba to kind of help us in that area I really was thinking in terms of ways in which we engage our current students to be more active on campus and know what's going on and certainly our prospective students and families to be more engaged
and kind of see what could happen what I did not anticipate is the amount of the lungs who are now more engaged because they're seeing what's happening on campus every day. And that to me just puts a smile on my face and no matter if I'm in Dallas or Arizona or where I am
uh meeting with alums, they always want to talk about something that they saw on social media, which I think that's wonderful to to know that there's that level of engagement. >> I would just like to say I I love the approach. I think it's it's very
innovative and I think one thing that stood out to me is the practice of the sycamore one stop I don't think and I hope all the other universities are attentive to that because that's critical that has been some that's being
driven in industry health and human services nationally that one stop there's no wrong goes to one place they know what they're going to do and then even though the answer's not there they know where to filter the people and I think That's the biggest barrier with students is they go to a place they get
a no or you're at the wrong place, go somewhere else and then they shut down because they're new and things out and they don't know and they get a no and I think that's going to back a lot.
Congratulations on >> Thank you. Thank you, Kathy. Yeah, it's uh something we're excited to kind of see where those outcomes will lead us certainly in the future. >> Well, once again, thank you so much for your presentation and to the entire ISU team both for hosting us today. Oh, I'm
sorry, D. Apologies, sir. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you. And I want to say through my entire tenure on the commission, I had never
heard a spontaneous round of applause. sincerity, but it says a lot to me involving the depth of your presentation, but it was really insightful.
So, be encouraged in terms of a of a question. 22 months in and clearly Eric there's a tremendous amount of insight that you have gained. I'm then going to ask advice for the
good of the public based upon your 22 months of incent. And my question actually goes back to saying comments commissioner was sharing earlier regarding some of
the challenges in East Chicago. He talked about young people be even greater education investment than any. What insights have you gathered
that could be of help and benefit to current students in K through 12 K through 12 educators that could be of benefit to those students to those population but then ultimately to benefit that would bring
down to the benefit of Indiana State and other universities in our state. what are the insights I can share with K3 that will come forward that benefits allies >> and I appreciate it and you know uh
certainly um don't claim to have all the insights for every community and every situation that's out there but I will say that um we've talked a lot right about what is the value proposition what does that
look like um I think about that each and every day. Um, I'm a first generation college student. I was that PEL student as well. And I think about the opportunities that those young people
have in terms of not only the trajectory that their life can go and the impact that a degree can have on their trajectory regardless of the degree program, I would argue regardless of the degree program. But I think about the generational
impact that that can have on a family and I think about the role that we can play in that generational impact as public higher education institutions in the state of Indiana. Um I think we play a unique role at
Indiana State because of the diversity that we have in our student body. And by that I don't I mean diversity in terms of coming from rural, coming from urban,
coming from a firstgen, coming from a different socioeconomic background. It's very very diverse. I mean twothirds of our students come from rural communities at Indiana State. And I think about where those opportunities are for all of
our students across the state and where we set them up to be able to understand that this can be their pathway as well. And a lot of that um I believe starts with the families because if we have
families who perhaps haven't had the opportunity to go to college, we need to educate moms and dads and aunts and uncles and grandparents in terms of truly what that value
proposition is for their child when they're in fourth and fifth grade, not when they're in 8th, 9th. 9th, 10th, 11th grade and be able to show them what those opportunities will be. And part of
that is that career connectedness. Part of that is getting them on a college campus throughout our communities to be able to allow for them to see themselves there and to embrace what might what they thought might not be possible. Um,
and that's why it's going to be a communitywide effort on how we do that. And I think we have so many opportunities in the higher education to engage in that. But it is that generational impact. >> Follow how would you then summarily
describe or define that value propos what is that value proposition? Yeah, that value proposition for me is to be able to allow yourself to have um opportunities to be able to change the trajectory of
not only your life but your family's life. And I think about often times I tell our students this all the time, your first job is preparing yourself for the job that you want from 5 to 10 years from now, right? I mean that's honestly but how are we providing you with the
workbased learning opportunities and experiential learning opportunities along your time with us to prepare yourself to get that first job to then have that career trajectory as opposed to and this is no disrespect for anyone who takes a different route other than
going to college but as opposed to having a job that perhaps is going to keep you at around that same wage for the next 10 to 15 20 Thank you again very thank you. >> Yeah once again thank you so much for a great presentation. A lot of pearls of wisdom there not only in the
presentation but in particular at the end that value proposition statement was remarkably on the target in my mind. So hope capture that which is a great so thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thanks everyone. It's all been good. Uh, our next item of
business is new business. Um, bless you as posted online. Um, this is through for this next set of new business involves the approval of capital projects. But before we dive into the capital projects under consideration, turn it over to Mike Ally, chairman of
the committee. >> Thank you. Thank you, Dan. I appreciate very much the committee budget perspective. met on March the 12th and we looked at three uh capital projects which we'll talk about in both one for full discussion, two for expedited review. We received legislative updates
similar to what you have heard today. We also began discussion on uh really some uh some new initiatives we're going to have with regard to 2027 capital reviews and recommendations and more information will be coming forth on that. But again, we will be
collaboratively working with uh with each of you institutions to to really create a new model or a new approach in terms of how we evaluate our capital projects and make recommendations for the uh legislature going forward. This is actually at the request of the
legislature to ensure that we're really utilizing all of the capital expenditures uh and the resources we have to appropriately use those resources across all of our institutions to to better our total product rather than just saying each institution gets
their top priority. We're going to really evaluate them on a uh on a more global statewide total institution uh perspective. So there'll be a lot more information coming on that and uh you will be each institution will be uh deeply involved in that process along
with Cody and the rest of our staff as we uh develop that model and uh and continue to refine it. So with that let's look at a couple of projects. The first uh is the uh full discussion and it's from Indiana University the Jacob
School of Musical uh music musical arts center known as MAC. And uh with that, I'll turn it to Cody and Zach. Zach, do you want to begin the presentation? >> Happy to. Thank you, Mike. Secretary Jenner, members of the commission, Zach Howard, director of state relations for
Indiana University. I am here today to request authorization to proceed with the renovation of the control systems, underststage equipment, overstage equipment, and electrical systems, including lighting at for the musical
arts center or the MAC, as Mike already mentioned, at the IU Bloomington campus. For those of you who aren't aware, the MAC is considered one of the grandest performance venues in the United States and is regularly compared to the Metropolitan Opera in New York City. It
seats a little over 1,400 theatergoers in the main space. This project is estimated at 15.7 million and will be funded by campus reserves and MAC operating revenues. Many of the foundational and theatrical
open or have seen minimal replacement leading to impacts to student curricular and perform upgrades to the control systems, lighting, electrical infrastructure, and stage flooring will bring maxilities up to current safety and functionality standards. Understage equipment will
include the replacement of the venue's tracking, turntable, and deck wagons. Overstage entertain any questions questions. Would you like to share staff recommendation? >> Yeah, staff approval of this project. Uh
we think that this obviously as Zach shared um has a huge cultural uh component for IU and who they are as an institution and has national recognition. Um and so we think this is a worthy investment and our discussion at our committee meeting the committee also recommends
approval. And with that I'll make a motion for approval of the $15.7 million capital project. >> Thanks Mike. >> So move second. >> Thank you Larry. Thank you. Any other comments or questions for uh Santa or
Cody or Mike? Okay, hearing none. All in favor, please say I. >> I post same. >> Very good. Congratulations. Thanks, Zach. And next we have Indiana State University and Okay. Again, these are expedited
reviews. So, why don't we I think we could take both of these together if you're approval. So with that, Cody, why don't you just give us a small review of these two expedited reviews and we'll uh submit for for both. >> Absolutely. So our budget and productivity committee reviewed these projects in detail and approved both for
expedited review. One is at uh Indiana State University's campus. It's a renovation of their homeland common space. We recommend this project for approval because of its uh position within kind of a initial exposure to students who are uh you know prospective
students and uh it's used by current students as a gathering place in a place to study. The second project is a clean room renovation at IvyTech in LA uh West Lafayette and sorry Lafayette. Y >> and uh this is for the semiconductor
manufacturing and fabrication program in partnership with SJ Heinix. Uh this will be an incredible cost savings to IvyTech as currently students that are in this program are having to be transported out of state to complete this portion of their education. And so this will be a great vision to us and deeply connected
to the economic development uh initiative going on. So we recommend both these projects uh for expedited re review and approval. >> Thank you Cody and likewise the committee recommends approval and we offer them make a motion for approval of these two expedited projects.
>> Thank you again. So move. >> Thank you. Thank second. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments, questions for Cody or Mike? Both great programs. All right, hearing none. All in favor, please say I. I post. Okay, thank you
very much. Back to the police report. Thank you very much. Great report. Great job. Thank you everyone. Uh, next item for new business is are the approval of three programs. These are all for action. There are six of them. Before we
turn it over to Dr. Butler, turn it to chairman Bland for his remarks. Thank you, Chairman Peterson. I turn it over to Dr. Butler, my my brief comment will just be as I've had an opportunity
to get more in depth and chair quality committee. It seemed like it was important to state that the term expedited action can be misleading misleading.
So I just want to really appreciate the staff. They're very in depth in the siduous review of these programs. And I also want to appreciate the universities for their outstanding work and the indepth
preparation that goes into the submission. When we look at these submissions, there just isn't too much that speaks of something that finally a materials have been very great
insightful questions. >> Thank you, Chairman Bland, Chairman Peterson, Dr. General commissioners, the AQ committee simply ordered um six expedited items. The first being a bundled pair of certificates from IvyTech Community College, both dealing
with early childhood education. The first is CT was built in response to first steps Indiana, which is a developmental delay and disability intervention service for all users regardless of means from age zero through three. They face a crisis in terms of shortage. Anyone with a
bachelor's can become a first sets provider as long as they take 15 credit hours in early childhood intervention or they've already had a degree in something similar. So this is going to help that pipeline. It also stacks into the TC of infant toddler educator and
that fills a gap that IvyTech has right now for 0 to three uh instruction at the TC level. All of these in which stack in a stack in an embedded format towards the associate degree in early childhood education and we all know a foundational part of our PK through 12 uh pipeline.
The committee did adopt those uh together as a bundle. The next was Indiana State University a BA and media production. This is a partnership across four entities or four academic units at the university and it is the applied
production of let's say media content broadly construed from art and design uh say from live performances from video preparation and that the faculty and departments were realizing that so many of the technical applications and software they were using spanned many
different departments. So they put together this program of study uh to prepare students with industry standard uh applications and techniques and processes. They think it's so flexible that many who are a major in those home departments will double major in this
other uh the next two uh degree programs were offered by Purdue University Global. Uh a BS in human resource management and a BS in marketing. both are evolutionary splits or um split offs from their generalist business degree.
Um there are concentrations through microcredential credits in both of of both those and their business degree and there's and there's significant uh student interest and enrollment in those signifying uh enrollment viability. Uh
they work with industry partners to ensure industry standard uh curriculum. For example, the human resource degree is certified by SHERM. Students because they're in a dedicated four-year degree will be eligible and prepared to sit for the Sherm exam their final year. Uh and
similar uh uh curricular uh features for the marketing degree. The last is Purdue University, West Lafayette, an MS, MSE in sustainability engineering. Uh this is an interdisciplinary engineering degree that's bringing together uh a
systems level approach of looking at industrial u and infrastructure and production issues in which you can maximize profitability but while minimizing externalities kind of the essence of sustainability. Um and they will be offering it fully
online and uh expect a healthy uptake given the industry demand for professionals with that technical knowhow and sustainability. >> Chair these programs. Okay. Thank you guys very much. Thank you Dr. Butler. Um I
would entertain a second. >> Thank you very much. Um, any comments or questions? Okay, hearing none. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> All right. Very good. Um, number one, I
want to be a great and thank Dennis for the comments around the expedited definition, if you will. Having the pleasure of sitting on that committee as well. Uh, I know how thorough and in-depth the process is and the back and forth with the universities to really understand these programs. So, Dr.
Butler, Dr. V, thank you for your both your leadership and the entire team uh for that that good work. It's it's a it's a very thoughtful process. It's gotten better, I think, over the years, recent years, and I think it's very appropriate. So, thank you for that. All
right. Um so, I would welcome uh Dr. Butler, Dr. Radcraft uh onto the stage if you will to give us uh the overview follow up on our new program review project. >> Thank you chairman Peterson. Uh for
those who don't know me I'm Michelle Ashcraft chief operating officer and I'm going to uh co-present this presentation with Dr. Butler who will cover most of the content today and I will pop in occasionally to remind you how certain parts of this presentation will be important when we ask you to take action
here at the end of this presentation. Uh this presentation is on degree program review which is from house enrolled act 101 from the 2025 session. And with that I will turn it over to Dr. Buffler to get started. >> Thank you Dr. Ashcraft. Yep. Commission
members. Um we'll be going over what we've been calling under threshold program review. And let's preview today's agenda. We'll start with our why. that is in terms of a statutory assignment from state lawmakers as well as a policy the policy rationale behind
it. We'll look briefly at the pre July 2025 opportunity for voluntary early action which provide allowed us to get out in front of this before the effective date of the law July 1st. We'll go through the timeline from July to today April 1st. We'll take a look at
the program requests by their individual categories. We'll zoom out and we'll look at the totals, the streamlining and what's remaining. And then finally, we'll transition to the recommendations of those action items uh by the approval categories requested.
>> Important to remember why since the commission was established in state law, it's always had program approval and review as a May provision. The commission has exercised that May provision for approvals. It is not for review. That all changed with Senate
enrolled act 448 effective July 1st of last year in which those may be shallow directives. So going forward program approvals will continue like we just did but they will also be the exercise of program review. So what will become standard practice is also complemented
by a separate statute enacted last year which is the under threshold review of degree programs. Well, as Dr. as Dr. Ashcraft said, that's from House Enrolled Act 101. And it states that if a institution has a degree program whose three-year rolling
average of graduates falls below a freshman, uh that being 10 for an associate degree, there we have it. 15 for a bachelor, seven for a master's, three for education specialist programs, and three for doctoral programs. If it falls below that three-year average, if the institution would like to continue
it, they must request approval to continue from the commission. Otherwise, the degree program must be eliminated with any associated costs. It's always important to understand that institutions have the ability and it's also their prerogative to curate their
program offerings. They can do that through routine staff actions to uh suspend with teachabout eliminate zero enrollment programs merge and consolidate. What this process has involved from the statute is that it's allowing institutions to look at their
inventory at scale with intentionality uh to ensure alignment with student interest alignment with industry need and uh their sustainability. So this is discipline governance at the state level partner in partnership with uh institutional leadership at the campus
level. Well, how did we get here in this policy? Well, there has been a trend and dynamic of program excess. This is not unique to Indiana. It's been across the country since 2000. Um the number of bachelors in higher degree programs has
grown approximately 40%. This has implications that can be negative for affordability. Uh every degree will have a marginal cost. Uh that can influence fixed and variable costs such as uh institutional advising, scheduling
infrastructure. Um and it can also affect enrollment, recruiting, what have you. Also, the sheer numbering of offerings can uh constrain or hinder student navigation as they look at their career options and their post-secary options. And then finally, we heard a lot about the Indiana College Corp here
earlier on other aspects such as TAPs and 2 plus2 articulation agreements. Indiana is a national leader when it comes to facilitating a transfer. And when you have a lot of different overlapping degree programs, it can hinder that and delay completion. So say a student has to take an extra year and
we know that those delays increase cost and can uh sometimes deter obtainment. And then finally, part of this statute and the policy behind it is to align our degree offerings with student interests. It's important to know that the under threshold degree programs that are being
reviewed today, many of them have very few students currently enrolled and they've been struggling to produce uh graduates over the last few years and they'll likely uh struggle to get future students. We all know that students have been voting with their feet since the
great recession from certain u era from certain disciplinary fields to more direct preparation fields where the the career alignment is quite evident. Um so the impetus and tools are there with under threshold review to align our offerings with student interest and
industry demand. And finally, before we move on to program review, it's always important to remember that students who are enrolled in a program that's going to be suspended or merge consolidated, they are entitled to complete the original degree they entered uh through what's called a TAP. It's not only the
right thing to do, but it's also required by creditors. >> Okay. So, this next part of the presentation is to revisit what we presented at the July Commission meeting last summer. Uh Matt will reiterate this at the end of this section, but it's important to remember that everything that's shared in this section, which we
did present last summer, did not require commission action, but will be summarized at the end of this presentation. So you see the whole picture of what has occurred through voluntary action from the institutions last summer, as well as all the work that has been done since then to get us to this April 1st uh request for action
today. So with that, I'll turn it back to Dr. Butler. >> Thank you, Dr. Ashcraft. I won't go through each step of this timeline here, but you'll see since died, which was April 25th, 2025, we tackled this legislative mandate immediately because we knew it was becoming effective back
July 1st. Uh we first u conceptualized how can we address newer degree programs that say were just approved a couple months ago or a couple years ago, how could they realistically have a three-year rolling average of graduates? So the commission devised what's called a ramp up period to accommodate your
degree programs. I will get to that later in the presentation on what that means for each degree level because it is different that time that that ramp up period. Uh we also invited our institutions to get out in front of this uh this mandatory exercise starting July 1st with an opportunity for voluntary
early action. Uh a way in which to look at their program offerings perhaps attract what one might call lowhanging fruit. In order to prepare for that, we issued initial guidance and FAQ. And then on June 30th, the institutions that voluntarily participated, there were
six, submitted either immediate actions that were taken then and there to suspend, merge, consolidate or eliminate, or they made a commitment to suspend, but overwhelmingly the commitments were to merge, consolidate by the end of the this current academic year. And the reason why I bring this up
is that some many of these that are say a suspend or a commitment carry over into our action items for today because they're under threshold programs that they seek to continue. Therefore, they need approval. Just a brief a brief overview of the
voluntary early actions and commitments. 372 under threshold programs were addressed. Uh you might remember a higher number uh last year and that's because some above threshold programs were pulled into the mix when it came to mergers and consolidations. Institutions
eliminated then and there on June 30th 71 programs 64 of which had zero enrollments. The remainder were either had already concluded their teachouts or they could administratively accommodate the students in a unique fashion. This is in many ways one can say clearing the cobwebs of a lot of degree programs that
weren't producing any students and didn't really have any students. Uh also 92 programs were either suspended then and there or commitment to suspended with their teachout. 33 were merged and consolidated and then there was a commitment to merge and consolidate 176.
It's important to remember again these were voluntary actions or commitments that did not require any commission approval uh until we get to today for some. >> Okay. So now that we have recapped what happened last summer, again the portion that did not require commission action,
the rest of this presentation will focus on the action that we will request for you to take today. Uh again before we move on into the details of the steps that we've taken to get to today, I just want to echo Chairman Peterson and Secretary Jenner's acknowledgements at the beginning of our
meeting today for the institutional partnership that we have had throughout this process. Uh we really believe that this has strengthened our relationship with the institutions. We've really been able to be a sounding board for each other as we've gone through this process. Dr. Butler and his team have worked very collaboratively with
presidents, provos, deans, and others uh to be able to get us to where we are today. And what I really want to highlight is we are in 100% agreement between the institutions and the commission staff on the recommendations that you will see before you today. Um so really we're viewing these as joint
recommendations between the institutions and the commission staff. So with that, I'll turn it over to Dr. Butler to talk about that collaboration in more detail. >> Yes. Uh collaboration indeed did lead the way. Uh after the voluntary uh period, we then switch to effective
implementation of the law July 1st going forward. The what do we have to do in order to do a review of under threshold programs? We have to identify and determine who they are. So in July we started this process and we offered what was a preliminary analysis to our
institutions identifying older, newer, that's in the ramp up and then above threshold programs and then the institutions responded to that and we worked together to determine what we call the mutual consensus list of degree programs that were under threshold for
the three-year period of FY223 24. Why that period? Well, FY24 was the most recent year we had validated graduation data. From that, we had the mutual consensus list. Institutions knew that what was on that list, if they wanted to continue it, they had to
request approval to continue based off the initial guidance from mid June and in October 6, a memo that was sent to the institutions. We outlined the approval category requests, which I'll get to shortly. And then the institutions worked during that period up to November 7th which is on the next
slide on uh submitting uh their initial request. Since then working to today academic affairs has worked very closely with the institutions to arrive at these these joint recommendations and here we are today where we have the action items and then we also have the info items
from the summer. >> Okay. As we go into uh what Matt is going to go through slide by slide now is to walk through the categories that he referenced of the institutional request. He will explain what you see of these four categories here at the top of the screen. And what I want to reiterate
is that when we at the end of this presentation summarize the recommendations before you and request your action. It will be by these four categories. So there will be four votes at the end of this presentation by the four categories here at the top of this screen. And I will turn it over to Dr.
Butler to explain those in more detail. >> Thank you, Dr. Alex. For this action uh period based off the mutual consensus list, institutions submitted, 156 under threshold programs for approval. Those are broken down into
four buckets within them are approval categories. The first being an improvement plan, which I'll get to. The next one being a commission divide uh uh categories. The first being the ramp up, which I explained is for newer programs, and I'll get to how that's determined.
And then the other is for stopout degrees. Those are an embedded credential in which someone who gets to a certain point is eligible and they happen to exit will receive something uh for for their studies. The last or sorry, the second last being merger and consolidation. And then the fourth being
suspension elimination. Um many of these involved some commitments and all the suspensions from the summer. And and we have the 1056, we have the 104 actions from over the summer. And so we get to 1,160 under
threshold programs for action and information items today. Those 1,16 which which were are a part of 2300 degree programs across our state institutions accounted for only 4% of
our state institution graduates in FY24. the last year of the 3-year period, roughly 3,800 students or like say 3,800 graduates, whereas the remaining uh degrees of that 2300 account for 96% of
state graduates for that year. So the first bucket we we discussed was improvement plans. 139 programs requested improvement plans. An improvement plan is where the institution makes an evidence-based argument for the talent pipeline purpose
of the degree, outlines high impact student serving practices such as work-based learning, co-ops, experiential learning, capstone experiences, uh, and then other aspects of industry alignment and also outlines a plan to increase enrollment and
completions and and other features. These programs accounted for nearly 1% of state institutional graduates in FY24. The recommendation is to approve these 139 programs across our institutions. The next program category was uh stopout
and the stopout degree as I said is something in which a student gets all or something instead of the paradigm all or nothing. It's a student serving feature uh and it helps it helps enable a student in fact to come back and complete their studies if they're in the in the position. So of these 30 53 uh
stopout programs they accounted for 2% of institutional graduates in the FY24 and the recommendation is to approve these 53 programs. The next is the ramp up period. These are the newer degree programs. As you know, it'd be very hard for a brand new program to build a three-year rolling
average. So at a minimum, the commission devised a special consideration insulates them for at least seven fiscal years. Um it's also important to understand that institutions that had under threshold programs that were in their ramp up sometimes the institution
still requested to suspend, eliminate, or merge and consolidate because they know better on how that newer program got off got off the launch pad. The next slide explains how we devise the ramp up period and it's obviously by degree level. You see in the first column
degree levels associate all the way up to doctorate. All programs get their first year for free a start period and then the next is a time to completion period. That's a an extended on time or an extended time of completion for example 6 years for a bachelor's then a
maturation period of three years and then you'll see off to the side is what the ramp up period is 10 years for a bachelor's etc. It's important to also note that this approval category provides ramp up approval for the duration of the ramp up period for that
degree program. In the action item you will see the FY year in which that degree program exits ramp up period. when it exits, it is then subject under threshold review just like any older program. There were 280 programs uh requesting
ramp up approval and I will say these in include programs all the way up through the January commission meeting. So there was a significant chunk before under threshold review began but we kept adding on newer programs that way we could address them here in April. It's
also important to note that of those 280, 25 include newly consolidated degrees that were part of this process. So the recommendation is to approve these 280 programs in the ramp up. And also remember that the rampups are
bundled in the same action item bucket with the stopouts. The third action item bucket is for mergers and consolidations totaling 374 programs for action. 206 were submitted for merger and a merger is in which uh
one program absorbs one or more programs and typically what was absorbed is accommodated through a concentration or track or the curriculum is overhauled to accommodate all of those programs of study into a new reorganized format. The other was 168 programs submitted for
consolidation. That's when at least two or more programs consolidate to create a newly consolidated degree. Of these 374, this is not part of the number, but of these 374, an additional 79 above threshold programs are part of these
merger consolidation requests. These uh pro 374 programs accounted for near almost 2% of graduates in FY24. the recommendation is to approve these 374 programs for mergers or consolidations.
>> So, commission members, as we discuss the next few slides, you're going to see a number at the bottom bottom of the slide that Matt just mentioned, which shares the percent of graduates from 2024, which is our most recent
graduating year data and in the impact. And I think the overall uh while this seems like big numbers over a thousand degree programs overall only 4% of graduates were impacted meaning we
about 1,300 other programs where 96% of our graduates are impacted some of which as we know have waiting lists uh depending on the university or institution. sold uh just keep a close eye on that percentage impact because as we are very student centered I want to
make sure I've thanks m thank you Dr. The the last bucket uh comprises suspensions and eliminations. 210 under threshold programs were submitted for action under this 171 for a suspension to begin their teachout. That's where
they stop admitting new students and then they allow the currently enrolled students to complete their studies. 39 programs were submitted for elimination. Together of these 210 accounting for less than 1% state graduates for FY204.
The recommendation is to approve these 210 programs for suspension or elimination. >> Okay. So Matt has gone through the categories by which we have made recommendations and we'll ask for your action today. I do want to take a little bit of time to acknowledge that during this timeline that we have been doing
this un threshold review and admission cycle has been going on. And so this is something that we have been asked about quite frequently. So just want to address that quickly. The institutions all handle this a little bit differently. Some institutions because they knew they were going to be uh
making requests for mergers and consolidations, suspensions or eliminations went ahead and paused admissions for those programs. And others went ahead and proceeded with an admission cycle for the fall 2026 cohort knowing that if decisions were made
today to merge, consolidate, suspend, or eliminate that that would be the last class they admitted. So, we just want to call attention to that there may still for some of these programs at some campuses be new enroles this fall, but based on the decisions that you would make today, that would be the last class
that would be admitted. And then on the left hand side of the screen there, you'll just see a reiteration of uh we really do view these as mutual recommendations between the institutions uh and the commission staff. Um, and once your actions are taken today, it will then be up to the individual
institutions to decide how they're going to reallocate those resources to best serve students and other programs. So, with that, I'll turn it back to Dr. Butler. We'll wrap up with some overarching data um and then move to explain the actions that we'll request
for you today. So this table right here, it's quite involved, but all it does is detail the action and info items for today, that 1,160. Um, so as was stressed that that this roughly,00 of the 2,300 total is only 4%
of the graduates for that last year. Another thing to remember is of the first two action items you will see that's 474 programs continuing either in an improvement plan as a stopout or as a ramp up.
We then have uh 407 mergers and consolidations. And of the mechanics of that, it might be important to know that the mergers are leading going into 113 absorbing programs that will continue. And then there are 58 newly consolidated programs that are coming out. 25 that
have already occurred, which I mentioned are in the ramp up bucket because they're new and they need that consideration. And then 33 that are to be added. They're still coming. So in terms of big picture programmatic impacts, when we look at the voluntary
decisions and actions taken in June of last year and include them today with today's action items, we have that 104 plus 1056 to get to uh 1,160. We have a total of 1,279
programmatic impacts because 86 above threshold programs were pulled into this for mergers and consolidations. And we have 33 forthcoming newly consolidated degrees that then can be broken down to by the institutions in terms of
programmatic impacts. And I won't read them all off there, but it's important to know that when institutions or the public are looking, is that all of the under threshold programs? know that's every programmatic impact uh involved in this entire under threshold review process.
In terms of total streamlining from this 661 programs that's 634 under threshold and 27 above threshold will be streamlined by the end of the next academic year from the voluntary actions commitments and the approval requests
today. And by streamlining those are programs that are going sort uh through emergent consolidation the program of study will be kept in some manner in the new strategically reorganized offering but then there are nearly uh a little over a quarter that are being suspended
that means they stop in bending will begin their teach and then almost a fifth are just eliminations but again I stress that almost 60% of that streamlining are merger and consolidations. So, I just want to um reemphasize 1,270
non degree programs in Indiana that are universities or andor uh the commission review that equates to over 50% of our degree programs across Indiana that we are
doing a thorough review to ensure alignment and student impact. Uh so again a huge thank you to the university partners uh and commission team for all your work on that. >> Looking to the future it's important to
take stock of what we have remaining programs. Again to reiterate under threshold review already created 25 newly consolidated programs. We have 33 on the way and then since the spring of 2025 the commission has approved 35 new degree programs. So, this is a dynamic
that continues. Um, once all these revisions take effect, by the end of 2627 academic year, Indiana's public institutions will still continue to offer over 1,700 degree programs. And that is an at least figure because, as
you know, this is moving. Uh, it's fluid, but we broke it down by those major disciplinary fields such as the arts and humanities, business and communication, education, health, social, behavioral sciences, STEM, and trades. So uh significant programming
offerings across all of those fields and it's also important to remember that as I said earlier institutions retain the the authority and the prerogative to voluntarily nerge consolidate suspend and eliminate their programs as they wish. And as we saw earlier today they
will propose new responsive degree programs to student uh demand and industry demand. and and to achieve that alignment we we all are striving for. >> Okay, so we have reached the end of the content of the presentation. Before you
is a rather large packet. It has a big black clip on it uh that has the recommendations across the four categories that Matt just outlined uh organized by institution and then by those categories. Uh so you have seen that information. And so on this next
slide, I'm just going to uh summarize the recommendations we have before you. We'll then take questions and then turn it back over to Chairman Peterson to to walk through the actions. So again, there are four action categories. The first one being action category one
improvement plans. So there's 139 programs across all state educational institutions and the recommendation is to approve the request to continue those programs. Action category two is the commission device stopout and ramp up. Again, stop out are those embedded
stackable credentials. And then ramp up is those newer programs that we have to give some time to uh ensure that they have a rolling three-year average of graduates to look at. There's 333 programs across all state educational institutions and the recommendation is to approve the request to continue those
programs. Action category 3 is merger and consolidation. There's 374 programs across all state educational institutions and the recommendation is to approve the request to merge and consolidate. And finally, action category 4 are suspensions and
eliminations. There's 210 total across all the educational institutions and the recommendation is to approve the request to suspend or eliminate those programs. Um so with that, I'll turn it over to Chairman Peterson to help facilitate questions. >> Number one, great presentation. Thank
you for explaining it in such a clear and and thoughtful and understandable way. So before we get to the books, do want to entertain questions that folks may have. So I saw your light first. So the privilege of getting involved it's
like a game show. Um I'd like to share some faculty perspectives. Uh but first I just have a question about something. Is there a single student currently enrolled in a program
in the state of Indiana who will not be able to complete the program as a result of these? >> No. Um, as Matt has shared uh throughout the presentation, it is a requirement of accrediting bodies that students are afforded a teachout to be able to
complete the original program of study that they enrolled in. So any program that is merged or consolidated, suspended or eliminated, the students will be able to complete their studies in the original degree program that they were enrolled. K, I really appreciate that strategic question uh because I'm
certain that uh when the board does take action there we have a threat of misinformation being out there. So I appreciate that question. Any student in Indiana who is currently enrolled in one of these programs will have the opportunity to complete. Thank you for that point.
>> Thank you. >> I thought that would be the case, but I thought >> what I'd like to do is take a couple minutes to share what I've heard from faculty members. Um, first I'd like to confess this is a IU Bloomington biased sandal. I've only
been contacted by a few faculty outside of IU. So it may be the case that president daughter at ISU president polio tech the institution less um that they may
have different so uh what I hear from faculty is a split opinion and it's it's marked by not as my backyard so they're not contacting me because they're excited because they're
contacting me because they they don't want their program to be shut down. But in in a rational conversation, they will admit that that other program which has slow and roll is probably going to need that. >> So uh and that's been uh common and I
think that's innocent and expected not that difficult. But um earlier Secretary Jan talked about the idea of how unfortunate it is when an important public policy issue by its nature is neutral.
So reviewing programs it's a neutral thing becomes partisan and we all know there's stuff like partisansship. Uh and I would like to point out there's another kind of partisanship among faculty
which It comes with the accusation Neil that that uh you know trying to look at the bottom line is is um trying to turn the university into business. That's our accusations too and I I sadly report
that the faculty is highly partisan and has difficulty approaching these issues from any other lens. Uh so what does this look like? Well, on the one hand, there seems to be an unwillingness to understand what is
actually. So we all know the structure. We know that the legislature passed the law and the law is about campuses and that the commission has the job
of implementing the law. But what I hear from faculty is a lot of heat about vision and they say can you talk to some can you make them change and we can't change the law and my interactions with staff suggest
to me that what we have is a bunch of dedicated civil servants who are simply trying to do what the legislature has asked. So it's unfortunate that there's been a reputational hit to the commission over these issues because the
faculty are not open to the possibility that the commission is is but I think there's also a failure to respond include faith to this pressure and u where's the pressure coming from why do
we have well student and parent decisions that's one source of pressure obviously programs. It's like I say to faculty members and commissioners they say why is your enrollment low. So as a commission it's that you have no
enrollment. No one here would be talking to you if they had value. And for that you would invite someone to look at the value of their teaching. Why is it that students don't see value what you're offering? And uh this comes
up a lot in uh nonvocational areas and and those of you who've heard me speak before, I'm a huge fan of general liberal arts education, but I believe that education can be delivered in a way that strongly enhances the character of
a student and programs that did that not only have high enrollment, but employers love to to hire those people. So the fact that that's not happening that student that parents are saying well that degree is not worth getting
into well the low and holding sign that something about the teaching is not working then uh just we heard from the president about the honors college state my son
just graduated from a great book school this can be done well for some reason the phenomen convocation uh programs. And then the other source of pressure obviously is the legislature. And
it it's difficult for me to communicate the gap between what the people of the state seem to be expecting and what professors believe that they are allowed to do. And I just I won't read through these things, but I have to relate two things. Just happened to be randomly
past three days. Two days ago, I was in an awards ceremony from the for program that is going to be a fabric. It's going to be rolled into something awesome. And uh one of the colleges, one of the oldest fellows came up and said, "This
is the history of our program." And throughout the presentation, I guess not knowing me in the audience, the professor said, "Well, we had an intellectual justification. We sent it to the Commission on Higher Education and they said, "No, throw it away. All we care about is jobs." And uh so well we got ourselves
approved. We said what they wanted and then we immediately did this other thing that they didn't approve. And after a few years they came and said why didn't you do this other thing? I said oh fine we'll do that. So in other words this this attitude the professor had is that the university is his playground
and I sat in the audience and I and I thought well why are you questioning that there's pressure from those slates very you and I have to work with that kind of attitude. It's common. And then the second uh thing that happened is I just received an abstract act which I don't want to poison your brains with
that is hogwash and it's in my media school of Indian pure hogwash and by attitude you all say why is anyone why why are human resources going through this and so uh the you know I think
society has a right to say our experts have let us down something has gone wrong And I think that's what creates project in the legislature is uh questions about university research and what this this
professor's playground would be great professors were producing wonderful things we can all rely on in the past 10 years disappointing the performance of our experts. So, I wanted to I thank you
all for sitting through these extended comments because I thought I should explain why I'm going to vote yes. >> Thank you, Dr. Cash. Any other comments before we move through the approvals? Uh I wanted
to give my perspective as the student commission member and sort of have a question of honor for the institutions. Uh the ISD president came and talked about how he wanted to contact those who did not finish their their degree program. And my question to the
institutions is how what are we going to do to the students who come to the doorstep of the institutions and their programs don't exist anymore and they have extra credits that may or may not transfer to these new programs. So something to ponder. um just to make sure that the students are able to get
their money's worth when they're putting money into the institution. I think that's a a good question to think through. Um the opportunity for acknowledging prior learning will be important. Um but
Samantha, we'll make sure to think through that. Thank you for that. of the comments. >> That didn't answer the question, but okay. >> Larry, is that you? >> No. >> Okay. Sorry.
>> Um, I would just like to make a comment. I know it was stated earlier, but I want to thank you both and commission with staff for all the work that you've done. It is it is a it was not an easy thing. I know that. And I know you probably
played your hair down and we lost a little bit of hair. I don't know. Um just a lot of effort and we appreciate it. It's a commission but I know the parents and and students and and the universities the institutions thank you
for your efforts also in making this collaborative. These are not always collaborative um actions that have to be taken, but this was collaborative and I know it was a lot of work. So, thank you so much doing all this. I appreciate
you. So, one one point that I want to make sure we also emphasize um is the important we've talked about this a few times today, but the important role that we have in acknowledging our primary customer who
is parents, families, and students. So, as a mom of sophomore daughters, taking my secretary hat off, putting my mom hat on, um I deeply care about this
conversation the commission has had because if we have 2300 programs in Indiana where my mic wasn't on, But as a as a parent who has two daughters who want to go to
college, who want to pursue a higher education, and we know the expense that is coming, but the value as well. We have 2300 programs, degree programs in Indiana
where over a thousand have 4% of graduates. There is a cost to that for sure. And while we cannot articulate the exact cost, we're going to talk cost per degree in here shortly. We cannot
articulate the exact aligned cost per degree uh quite yet. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars and good stewards and supporters of our parents, families, and students who are investing in higher
education. That is the way we can increase our value proposition and bring quite frankly the greatest value to our people. So, um I mentioned that Ted because your good points. Yes, the general assembly did require us to do
this exercise. uh and I support this process that we just went through. I think it's very important. I believe that as the secretary. I also believe that as a mom of future likely who's your college students, who's your
meaning could be any instance. How about that? As I will start getting text messages from the other institutions. There we go. I was just going to say uh to clarif clarify but highlight when we're talking 4% I would go even further that it's
less than 1% it's actually being students from 2024 looking at that sample um that's actually losing the program as far as eliminations or suspensions
yeah6% so over 99% of our students are being served well by improvements to the system that we're making as we pass these today. I also want going back to the the cost
side because I'm sure my team uh uh shook a little bit when I when I made that point, but every business person in Indiana when they read about this is going to immediately think about, well, if we had a thousand programs that were
going to shift, where is that additional investment? Many of you asked that on call. Where is that additional investment going to go? So, I am really pumped to see how our institutions strategically invest these dollars uh in
ways that improve our programs, our opportunities for the masses. as as a member of the academic affairs and equality committee. I'll share one of the comments I shared in our meeting
and the comment went towards INA Facebook reading articles regarding this matter and I share with our members of our committee said after reading the articles I had
it makes me think was I in the daily and cute committee meeting really what's that expression cognitive dissonance it's really back so I'll tell you an example and this was the point that made me
comment on fun voluntary early action outcomes I was stupified not the number this year that there Of the 71 programs were eliminated and of the 7164 had zero enrollment
zero enrol integrity. and honestly what we mention six grand I would just share from a business perspective you know in today's dynamic business environment with AI occurring
and and all the other dramatic changes that are happening every day it it's really impossible to nail down or inappropriate to have specific degree programs that are so finitely uh you know fine-tuned to a certain discipline
or or or area uh because in the business world we need a broader perspective and uh and I know that we can accomplish that and we can be more dynamic by putting appropriate curriculum in place within those existing degree programs that are going to deliver the value and
the the preparedness fairness and the education to our to our students that will be relevant without having to create new degree programs. So, as you suggested, Dennis, I hope as we look going forward, we're going to see a much lower propensity of new degree requests
because I think we've shown that we really need to have something that uh represents a a a new paradigm to to create new degree programs. So I hope that we'll live by that discipline as we're as we're moving forward and we don't have
to go through this process, you know, multiple times 10 years from now. >> This I'd like uh I'd like to make a comment. the uh I think this entire uh process is a almost a no-brainer. Uh when you look at the
evolving environment in which we live and if if you ask our universities to act more like a business, you've got to offer programs and and uh degrees that your customers want to buy and quit and eliminate those c those programs that your customers don't want to buy. So
this is a continuing process and I think this whole thing is very healthy. Thank you, Larry. Appreciate the good point. Other other questions? >> Sorry.
>> Yes. I'm sorry. >> Um before we move and as Michelle mentioned, we're going to run through the approvals in by category, if you will. we will approve each of those categories as a whole um rather than go through you know every individual line
item obviously makes sense. So we'll go through those but before we do that unless there's any other questions u Michelle Matt if you Michelle in particular do you want to go into a little bit more depth about what all has been provided to commission members in
addition to uh the presentation with letters and stuff like that. Sure. Absolutely. Uh so all the commission members have been provided with a copy of this presentation. Uh there is also an extensive capgate. It's well over a 100 pages that again has all of the 1,160
programs from the institution sorted by institution and sorted across these categories. So you've been able to review what the decisions are on those individual programs. Uh it's important to note that um within those categories. So um in ramp up you can see the fiscal
year by which those programs will exit ramp up. Um in mergers and consolidations you can see what the outcome of those mergers and consolidations are. Um so there's quite a bit of detail that's in there. There is also the threshold uh number for each of those programs. So for example, if it
was supposed to be 15 and it is one, you can see that number as well. Um so that is in that exclusive packet. Um and then you also have a packet of letters from each of the public institutions. Um each of them have written a letter to explain what their process was on their campus.
Um each handled it a little bit differently. Um so they have provided some more information about how they collaborated with the commission about how they collaborated across uh the teams on their campuses about how they plan to inform their students, faculty and alumni etc.
Great. Thank you very much. All right, to Dennis's prompting, let's move forward. Uh we're going to start by recommendation or approval of the recommendations in the action category which are the 139 programs uh that are
part of um the improvement plan program category if you will has been described. So I would entertain a motion for approval of that group of programs. >> Any other comments or concerns? Are we voting about
I think we're okay unless somebody has a concern. Happy to do it either way. Hey, we're good. Uh so hearing no more questions. All in favor, please say I. I. >> I.
>> Any opposed or any abstensions? >> Okay, very good. Thank you. Category one approved. Action category two, same process for the 333 programs that are part of the stopout or the ramp up subcategories. Would again entertain a
motion for approval there. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments, questions, concerns? Hearing none. All in favor, please say I. I. >> Opposed extensions.
Very good. Uh category three mergers and consolidation 374 programs would entertain a motion for approval. >> So moved to second. >> Thank you and thank you. Comments, questions. All in favor, please say I. >> I.
>> Opposition or abstensions? Okay. Finally, uh action in category 4, which are the 210 programs for suspension or elimination. Would you entertain a motion for approval? So move Thank you. Thank you. Uh any comments,
questions? All in favor, please say I. I. >> Opposed for extensions. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you very much. Great presentation. Uh again, just huge thank you to both of you and the teams
both the clinician and the institutions. uh we set a process that in my mind worked as it should have and uh fidelity to the objectives and with the we the primary focus on students and
families and state of Indiana. So thank you very much. All right, last but not least, Cody Robinson, Deputy Chief Financial Officer and Works Tile, Senior Associate Commissioner for
Business Solutions will um present to us uh the last discussion of the discussion item only presentation about reporting on degrees and no offense, but I'm following if I may before we uh kick off, I'm going to have to step out here shortly.
So, commission members and and those watching, I just want to uh re-emphasize we're about to talk through some important data, cost of degree programs. The data is is not perfect
here. So, we cannot compare apples to apples by institution or program. We also um cannot compare uh the the cost savings if you will or the costs of the programs that we just
approved because every university looked at this in a little bit of a different way. Some included infrastructure, some included other variable costs. So I want to emphasize one piece of about 12 components required by statute for us to report. there is a dashboard that is
totally transparent that anyone in the public will be able to see right after and this just covers one of those 12. So on that note, uh Cody and Brooke, whenever you're ready. >> Awesome.
>> So, uh excited to meet you all. Thank you for this marathon that is today. We're going to close you out. Uh and we're going to be talking about um an annual reporting requirement that the uh commission does in partnership with the institutions. And one piece of that we
wanted to really spend some specific time on uh because we believe we needed to do so to be good data stewards. So we're going to dive into that here to finish us out. Also, thank you to the whole team that just helped me figure out the clicker like.
So, uh, like I said in today, we're going to start with the kind of where this comes from in state law, but then also how it connects to our overall mission. Uh, and then we're really going to think about how do we engage with some of this data. So, uh, House and Roll Draft of 10, uh, House Act 101 of
2024, uh, organized a set of annual reporting requirements, uh, for the institutions to the commission of higher education. We're currently in the second cycle of collection and reporting on those items. Uh there are 13 items in total uh and you can see them here. Most
of them have to do with degree programs and data surrounding those degree programs. Some have to do with some other operational aspects of our institutions. And today >> the total cost for the institution to offer the program to help bring clear
what we mean by we say we're going to often refer to this as cost to operate because we're talking about the cost to the institution not necessarily the cost to the students our students are families. So quick point there just to make sure we're all on the same page as
as we get going. key focus areas for us is affordability and ensuring that hoosers have access and affordability to higher education. Uh and part of how we think about affordability is making sure that yes, we're delivering highquality education
at our institutions, but we're also doing it efficiently. Um and so we have an interest in seeing this data and looking at it and partnering with our institutions to figure out what do we do next. Uh we're also as a commission we've repeatedly kind of come to this table and said we want to be
transparent. One, we want Hoosiers at home to know what's going on uh at their higher ed education institutions. And we also want to provide strong tools for decision makers who are setting policy and who are deciding um the various things that impact our students and our
institutions as well. All of the data that we'll be presenting today into 13 points that will be going live on our website uh later today. That can be found on the reporting on degrees data dashboard. uh which is in in the C
website under data and research. Today, like I said, we're going to be really focusing in on that cost to operate data that can be found specifically under the institution submissions tab. So, if you wanted to go see that, that's where you'll find it. And just to reiterate again, this is something that we will
update annually. So, we're currently in our second cycle. Uh we'll do this again next year as well. There we go. So, time to zero in on that cost to operate data. These reports are in a PDF format and they are organized
by institution and then within each institution you've separated them by campus. uh the main kind of meat of these reports that I think a lot of people will be interested in is the total cost to operate the academic programs at the institutions, the number of students who are enrolled in those
programs and then the subsequent calculated cost per student. Now, one of the things that uh one of the reasons we wanted to spend a lot of time really talking about this data and making sure we lay out exactly how we uh
are encouraging folks to engage with it is because there's a lot of nuance to how this was reported. uh inst. We gave institutions quite a bit of choice when it came to reporting the data to us and that was a reflection of the understanding that each of our
institutions have made strategic internal management decisions around how they allocate costs, how they internally and uh or externally go through the audit process. And thus there was not a one-sizefititall solution yet for uh
getting this data reported to the commission. For that reason uh there were three primary ways that institutions were allowed to submit data and we're going to review those now. So the first was submitting uh cost and student data by degree program. This is
the most obvious one. It's probably what you imagined when we started talking about cost to operate degree program. Uh this one means that as we got the data we got different sets of data in terms of the the cost and the student enrollment uh based on uh you know a
degree so like an associates a bachelor's or a master's and the the major or the subject area such as business administration, marketing and accounting. Three of our institutions reported us data in this way. Uh that was Indiana State University, Indiana University and IvyTech Community
College. The second way that institutions were allowed to submit their data was by cost center. And if you're unfamiliar with cost centers, essentially a cost center is just a tool or way that we can approach thinking about the internal financial operations
of an organization by pulling things together that share a lot of the same expenses and revenues. And in a lot of uh in a lot of uh environments, organizations, this is a incredibly strategic option that makes a ton of sense. and for a couple of our
universities it makes sense for them as well. So in this case uh Ball State, Purdue and Vincent chose to submit their data in this formatting. We also had a third option that recognized that one all of our institutions to be clear were doing this sort of work before we asked
them to show the data. In fact, some had already invested a lot of time and money into establishing really effective cost studies at their own institution. And we wanted to recognize that and not further bur and put an additional burden that was unnecessary. And so we allowed
institutions to submit data in a format that matched a a current or recent cost study. Uh and uh University of Southern Indiana chose that option. And for the sake of the reports, we're going to show you how that one might that report might look a little different, but it is very
similar to our option A degree programs report to uh really just hit the nail with a hammer on this one. So, to make it super clear, we've also added a visual here. So, for our our reports that are by
degree program, you're going to see here on the left a little bit of what they might look like. So a you know the universities might be organized by large subject areas such as business and then there's sort of those areas within business like accounting, finance and
marketing. And for those programs that or sorry for those institutions that reported by degree program each of these little orange boxes here like a bachelors of accounting or masters of accounting we got a different data set for each of those. For those that uh reported by cost center, uh it's going
to be more like what you see in that flowchart under B where uh again we got the reported data according to the orange boxes, but you'll see it's more of something along the lines of a department such as the department of accounting or the finance department or the marketing department. And to really
just beat a dead horse on this one. So to as you can see here we with this one we've brought it all the way out which professors teach key courses align to those degree programs and as you can see someone like professor Jones teaches
almost every one of them. So you begin to have this question of how do I account for professor Jones's compensation and how do I split that across my military degree programs. That's a complex question in terms of organizational leadership and management. And again, this is where
cost centers become really effective as a management tool. I also want to make sure that we're really clear what we mean when we say cost. So for this definition, we utilize an industry standard uh definition of cost. And that is that the cost that
you'll see must include the compensation for faculty and staff that are related to the instruction or research associated with that program. All other costs were considered optional. That includes uh compensation for support staff, for student services
staff, uh other operating expenses, plant and facility expenses. Uh those were optional costs that could could be included in the reports. That means that some of our universities chose to report the compensation for faculty and staff
and some chose to report a larger pool of expenses uh for all of these other items. The last two points that I'll just make here really quickly is that in uh what do we mean by FTE or full-time equivalent? Something that you'll see in
the reports and what do we uh mean by kind of reporting here. So, uh each institution was allowed to create a narrative explanation of what they mean by FTE or full-time equivalent student. This seems like it should be really obvious, but once you start getting into situations like withdrawals or double
majors or students who are part-time, there actually becomes a lot of student. And so we allowed institutions to sort of set their own definition here for the sake of interpreting the data. It is very fair to see one FTE as equivalent to one student. And that's a perfectly acceptable and fair way to interpret the
data. The other thing that we just wanted to make clear was that in the reports you will see that some institutions reported us data from different fiscal years. This was a reflection that institutions are on different timelines when it comes to the internal and external uh auditing
of their financial information. And we of course want to give them the space to do that properly. And so you will see institutions report uh on separate fiscal years. We required that it be data from one of the most three recent fiscal years and all institutions
reported either fiscal year 24 or 25 which at the time of collection were were the two most recent closed fiscal years. So when you go to see a report I'm going to show you a little bit about how they might look and kind of point out just walk through each of the elements. So
this is an example of that option A that reporting by degree program. We start with the fiscal year. We provide some information related to the institution and the campus in question. Then we provide the degree program information. Here you can see like we said you know
the uh each line here is a separate degree program uh at these institutions. Next we then report the cost information. So the total cost to operate the number of students and then the calculated cost to operate per student. Lastly, we indicate whether or
not any of those optional costs were included. For this example, you can see that that changes. Generally speaking, uh that will be the same per institution. So, institutions either reported operation or optional cost or they did not. You're not going to see a
situation where that is maybe different within a particular campus. Next, uh here's the example of what option B will look like. In this case, we start similarly. We show the fiscal year. We show the institution. Uh and we
show then instead the cost center. And as you can see here the examples we have are like the department of biology or the department of English. We then indicate what is the cost to operate that department. How many students are enrolled in programs within that cost center or that department and then we
list the uh majors or degree programs that are a part of that department and include the indication of optional costs were included as well. For option C, this one will be unique to uh USI. Um but as you can see here,
looks very similar to the degree program setup of option A. What's different here is you can see that as part of their cost setting, they broke out cost a little slightly differently in terms of separating out full-time faculty and they did include non uh uh
compensation costs. Importantly though, they have the same key information as all the other reports such as the instructional cost, the number of student uh full-time equivalent students, and then the calculated cost per student.
So, uh as we begin to think about engaging with this data, there's a couple limitations that we currently have uh and it's something that we want to be very forward and very explicit with both, uh you know, to us, to this body, and to the general public. One is
that because of all of these nuance differences between how institutions reported the data uh institution to institution comparisons at this time cannot be made. We would not go so far to say it can be made versus say you know we would
discourage it. Um and that is just that time um there's just too many differences and there's too much nuance that would need to be taken into account. Uh it's also important to remember that as we think about these sorts of conversations, there are other
aspects of financial operations that we can't separate out and we can't ignore such as revenue programs may be expensive to operate, but they could also be a great revenue source and that's something that we have to have as part of the conversations. It's also
important to note that we don't indicate the source of funding for these programs. So it would not be fair to say necessarily if you look at one of the reports to say that this is a cost to the state via the state appropriations or that this is all tuition fees or even a third some other kind of revenue
source. Uh we don't indicate that and so it's it would not be fair to draw any of those conclusions with the current data set as it stands. And lastly, outside of the USI, we don't really do an expense breakdown, especially if those operational costs were included. And that, of course, is something that would be important to do.
Um, you can see a couple of the other considerations that we've got here. New programs may not have a financial like uh setup yet, so it may take a while before they're represented in the data. Just like in any industry, you know, compensation can vary differently
depending on a number of different factors. And because this cost data so heavily weighs compensation, it's important to keep in mind that some of those uh may be quite complex. And then lastly, one of the things that we're really thinking about is how we
represent um service forces or and really not even the service forces, but you know, uh the example I've used is uh I don't know, there might be um someone can email me and correct me if I'm wrong, but there's probably very few if any professors here in the state of
India who teach only students that have a, you know, are majoring in their program. uh all of our professors are teaching and instructing and providing services to students that are outside of their degree programs. That's particularly true for what we refer to
as service courses. These are your like English 106, COM 114, bio 101. These courses that u deliver education to a wide breadth of the student body. Uh thus we would expect you know those
departments to have higher expenses and how that's represented currently in our data is that you will see that those departments might have inflated expenses and thus when you then put the uh you know number of students that are enrolled in those programs as degrees in
the denominator that cost per student data becomes inflated and not necessarily true representation of educating those particular students. Um, and so that's something that we've got to work through. So looking ahead, one, I think we're
very excited uh to be collecting this data and we're excited to be transparent about it and sharing it. We also recognize and have a certain reverence for uh it's not just about having data. It's about being able to use it and know how to use it well and right. And so as
we go forward, our commitment is to continue to work with our stakeholders, including our institutions to to determine how best to collect and use operational cost data like this, especially at the program level um to continue to inform decision-m and to
move our sort of united mission of uh making keeping higher education affordable to Hoosiers and their families. And so with that, uh, we'll close there, but we'll provide any time for questions from this. >> Thank you both. Great presentation. Very
informative text. Just a real quick question. Would it be possible in this process to give us a sense of the uh say facilities cost student? So like for Indiana state this is this is where they told the story this is
body support services positive but it would be a way to kind of benchmark you're probably going to say no but it might be interest the u uh are you actually getting to a
point where you're going to ask all the schools to report in the same format using the same policies. >> That's something that we're certainly working towards as as a potential like future goal. I think that the there's a
lot of conversations there and we need to one of the things we're really cognizant of is the the um what would an institution need to do to their own internal systems in order to
get to a place uh where we're able to combine or utilize data for that strategic decision-m and is the uh I'm forgetting the example but it's like the butterf the median. No, that's not uh
Oh, is the juice worth the squeeze? That's what I That's what I was trying to get to. So, uh it's certainly it I I think what we are absolutely committed to is getting to this to a place where we can use it and we can make it meaningful for who's your families
because I guarantee you, you know, folks at home are probably wondering, yeah, how much does it cost to put on this program that my child is interested in? So how we get there, we're still going to be we're still going to partner with our institutions and some other stakeholders who are asking this
question on a national level. Uh uh and so uh so really up in the air, but I do think that we're going to get there. >> Have Have you found the schools to be mainly cooperative or possibly having some push back?
>> Absolutely. And I'll let Brook answer that because she really did a lot of that work. >> Uh yeah, thanks for the question, Larry. I would say that our institutions have been fabers through this entire process giving really good feedback of how we can uh meet the legislative intent um and also get meaningful data and not
just data that you know meets the again meaningful data. So great question. >> Yeah, great to hear. Thank you. >> I would say one of the greatest values here is just ensuring that each institution is doing this process within the confines of their own systems. I
think uh to to compare and contrast between the the institutions, it truly is impossible because they're all doing it a little bit differently. Their cost structure is different. But the key is that that they're that administration and their board of trustees. In fact, we probably should ensure that this
information is elevated higher to their boards of trustees because I know their internal management uh is examining this information, but but they really should be taking this at at a certain level to the trustees so that they fully understand the cost structure as well
too. But to compare institution to institution, not only are the the the accounting systems and the control systems different, but quite frankly, their missions are all different as as well too to so I say to compare a Indiana University to, you know, Indiana
State or Ball State or University of Southern Indiana is is really not you're not going to get relevant information. You're going to get a lot of things that maybe you can say all that that's a that that's a gotcha. Well, you really don't have a gotcha there. and and and oft
times that's what some people are looking for is those gotcha moments. And I would say that you know you'd have to dig really deep if you think you got to adopt Gotcha to truly understand the the uh the concepts and and and where all
this all this cost together because until you fully fet that you don't have a gotcha. That's my only fear about misinformation being out there and publicly disseminated because it may make people think that they've got something when they really don't.
>> Yeah. And the value is for each institution to do this themselves and understand what their cost structures are. >> Absolutely. I think one thing that we would encourage folks if they are going to dive into this data I think I would encourage you to approach it with a mindset of when I find something I'm not
necessarily uncovering a truth but I am finding an opportunity to ask more questions and I think that's a great way at this time to engage with this um and a perfectly fair way to to engage with it at this time. I would just add to kind of M's points.
I mean, this is as we talked about it leading up to this meeting. It really is a a cost accounting exercise to a great degree and that's a very complicated thing in any business and industry and depends on what you're attempting to do to understand your cost and therefore
what your drivers are for how those costs are generated, how revenues are generated. So it's very easy to uh to think oh if I just knew this uh I would be able to extrapolate to this um our institutions I know the boards and the
leadership you know spend a lot of time on financial systems to help them make the right decisions the best possible decisions. So unless there's a national industry standard for cost accounting for higher ed that would drive an apples
to apples comparison you know to to the bel point here it's going to be hard to necessarily make minutia determinations about you know comparing one to another. So I appreciate the exercise and and all the good work
that's gone into them. So any other comments? This is information only. I know this topic will come back up. Um, so any other any other thoughts? All right, hearing none, I think that brings us to the end of our agenda. So,
thank you all very much. Uh, we look forward to seeing everyone in May, which will be Samantha's last meeting. I'm sad. Can I tell you listening to you over the couple years you've been on every year being having been on the commission for a long time
every year we have this phenomenal student say we've had phenomenal student representatives uh and faculty representatives and each time it's like when someone departs saying how could gift and it just keeps getting better.
So we'll celebrate you effectively here in a couple of months. But thank you all very much for your time, diligence, and efforts to students of the state of Indiana and have a great rest of the day. Thank you. The