1. Follow the Money: Funding Mechanisms for Texas Institutions October 10, 2005 4:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board 2005 Governing Board Conference Closing the Gaps: Achieving Excellence Presented by: Jesse W. Rogers President, Midwestern State University Chairman, University Formula Advisory Committee Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

2. Fiscal 2006 Bill Pattern Midwestern State University 1.Informational Listing of Appropriated Funds A.Instruction/OperationsFiscal 06 *A.1.1.Instructional and Operations Support$16,722,001 A.1.2.Teaching Experience Supplement$ 907,183 A.1.3.Staff Group Insurance Premiums$ 524,709 A.1.4.Workers Compensation Insurance$ 120,000 A.1.5.Texas Public Education Grants$ 1,200,491 A.1.6.Excellence Funding$ 136,968 B.Infrastructure Support *B.1.1E&G Space Support$ 3,275,719 B.1.2.Tuition Revenue Bond$ 1,375,621 C.Special Item Support C.1.1.Small Business Development Center$ 113,399 C.2.1.Institutional Enhancement$ 2,474,402 D.Research Development Fund D.1.1.Research Development Fund$ 9,470

4. Cost Centers Employed* To Construct New Matrix Faculty Salaries Faculty Salaries Academic Support Academic Support Institutional Support Institutional Support Student Services Student Services Departmental Operating Expenses (all fund sources) Departmental Operating Expenses (all fund sources) *taken directly from Annual Financial Report

5. **Abbrebiated FY04 and FY05 Formula Matrix** Lower Division Upper Division MastersDoctoral Liberal Arts 1.001.963.9412.04 Fine Arts 1.853.116.5117.47 Teacher Ed 1.281.963.239.95 Agriculture2.052.546.6416.37 Engineering3.013.468.2021.40 Business Admin 1.411.594.5913.91 Nursing4.915.326.4916.32

6. **Abbreviated FY06 and FY07 Formula Matrix** Lower Division Upper Division MastersDoctoral Liberal Arts 1.001.864.0710.89 Fine Arts 1.632.745.9112.31 Teacher Ed 1.341.912.898.41 Agriculture2.062.627.1413.43 Engineering2.433.287.2118.35 Business Admin 1.241.613.9516.59 Nursing3.584.965.8913.49

7. Formula Issues 1. The formulas are now related to the cost of operation by subject matter and level. 2. Since based on credit hour production, the formulas put money with student growth. 3. The formulas built-in funding differential accounts for university mission and level. 4. The formulas provide a clear and equitable manner of distributing available appropriated funds. 5. The formulas do not recognize quality issues. 6. Do the formulas encourage degree creep? 7. Finally, the formulas do not recognize the difference in cost in distance education methodology and traditional classroom methodology.