1. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL 1 st Schitu Magureanu Blvd, 5 th Sector – Bucharest, 050025 Phone +40 21 307 1923, Fax +40 21 307 1929, Email cnfis@cnfis.ro Funding of Higher Education System in Romania Public (State) universities Prof. Radu Mircea DAMIAN President of NHEFC

2. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Funding system of the state universities in Romania University’s own revenues -State budget allocations -Other funding resources The State budget allocations are divided in : - core funding (allocated for staff expenditures and current material expenditures) - complementary funding (allocated to other expense categories, specific for university activities) Other funding resources may include: - students fees - participation in various projects (research and other national and international project) etc.

3. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL University funding system University Core Funding (CF) 45% Complementary Funding (CmF) 19% Student acomodation Scientific research External projects Micro production Fees and activities Own Funds 36% Other sources

4. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Core funding (budget allocations)  Expenditures for maintenance and administration;  Expenditures for functional materials and services;  Inventory goods;  Recurrent repairs;  Books and publications;  Staff training, protocol, labor protection etc. Personnel expenditures: Material expenditures:  Teaching and non-teaching staff payroll expenditures;  Travel expenditures (domestic and international)

5. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Complementary funding (budget allocations)  Social expenditures for students (scholarships, accommodation subsidies, travel expenditures etc.);  Funds allocated for capital expenditures, other investment expenditures and capital repair works;  University research funds allocated on competitive bases.

6. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL The principle of improving quality in the educational process Stages in the core funding distribution method (1) (for the public higher education system) physical student  equivalance coefficient (educational forms ) equivalent student  cost coefficient (domains) Quantitative approach 199920002001 2002  4 quality indicators (with ) 4 quality indicators (with complementary and corrective role) aggregate qualitative indicator (with impact only on personal expenditures – 80% from CF) (with impact only on personal expenditures – 80% from CF) IC 1 – The weight of filled teaching positions IC 2 – The weight of filled positions of professors and lecturers in the total number of filled teaching positions IC 3 – The weight of teaching staff under 35 years in the total number of teaching staff IC 4 – The weight of teaching staff with Ph.D title in the total number of teaching staff The first quality elements The principle “resources follow the student” unitary equivalent student

7. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL The general diagram of the indicators system Quality indicators Educational system Teaching Process (D) D - CS D-AS Other activities of educational system and specific servicies of university (AS) Scientific Research (CS) Resources – inputs  Human resources (academic staff and researchers, students, auxiliary and administrative staff)  Material resources  Informational resources  Financial resources Results – outputs  Students performances at graduation  Institutional resources  Other specific performances of the university Academical and Administrative Management ( M ) D-M

8. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL 200320042005 Quality of the teaching process Quality of institutional performances that influence the teaching process Quality of processes that influence directly the teaching activity (academic staff and endowments’ expenditures) + (financial management) The principle of improving quality in the educational process The principle “resources follow the student” unitary equivalent student + 13 quality indicators (structured in 3 groups) (structured in 3 groups) (87,3% from CF) (12,7% from CF) (academic and administrative management, scientific research, students services) Stages in the core funding distribution method (2) (for the public higher education system)

9. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL 20062007 unitary equivalent student + 13 quality indicators (structured in 4 groups) (structured in 4 groups) (80% from CF) (20% from CF) Academic staff The impact of scientific research on teaching process Resources and facilities The principle of improving quality in the educational process The principle “resources follow the student” (quality of the academic staff and its developement potetial) + (the level of scientific research and the ways to generate value out of it) (the quality of the available resources and facilities, and the documentation means) + (75% from CF) (25% from CF) Academic management (the quality of academic and administrative management, the quality of students services) unitary equivalent student 12 quality indicators (structured in 4 groups) (structured in 4 groups) Stages in the core funding distribution method (3) (for the public higher education system)

10. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL 2008 * 1,5% from CF are not allocated and represent the reserve (buffer) fund, as in previous years The principle of improving quality in the educational process The principle “resources follow the student” + + (70% from CF) (30% from CF) unitary equivalent student 13 quality indicators (structured in 4 groups) (structured in 4 groups) Stages in the core funding distribution method (4) (for the public higher education system)

11. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL The indicators classification for the budgetary allocation A. Quantitative indicators Equivalent Student Number Cost Coefficients 70% B. Qualitative indicators 30% 1. Quality indicators of the teaching process (IC 1, IC 3,IC 4, IC 5 ) 8,5% 2. Quality indicators of the research processes influence (IC 6, IC 8 ) 8,0% 3. Quality indicators of the resources development (IC 9, IC 10, IC 11 ) 3,5% 4. Quality indicators of the academic and administrative management (IC 13, IC 14, IC 15, IC 16 ) 10,0%

12. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Quality indicators (1) IC 6 IC 6 - The level of the scientific research performances 7,00% IC 8 IC 8 - The ratio of the reseach contracts to the total incomes of the univesity 1,00% Quality indicators for the didactical process Quality indicators for the scientific research impact IC 1 IC 1 - The ratio of the number of full-time teaching staff to the total number of unitary equivalent students 4,00% IC 4 IC 4 - The ratio of the number of full-time teaching staff, with doctoral academic title, to the total number of unitary equivalent students 1,50% IC 5 IC 5 - The ratio of the number of full-time teaching staff, under 35 years, to the total number of unitary equivalent students 2,00% IC 3 IC 3 - The ratio of the number of full-time lecturers, to the total number of unitary equivalent students 1,00%

13. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL IC 9 IC 9 – The ratio of the expenditures for development to the total number of students 1,50% IC 10 IC 10 – The ratio of the material expenditures to the total number of students 1,00% IC 11 IC 11 – The ratio of the expenditures for books and publications to the total number of students 1,00% Quality indicators for infrastructure IC 13 IC 13 - The quality of the academic and administrative management3,00% IC 14 IC 14 - The ratio of the extra budgetary incomes to the total incomes2,00% IC 15 IC 15 - The ratio of the expenditures from extra bugetary incomes for development to the total incomes 3,00% IC 16 IC 16 - The quality of the social and administrative services for students2,00% Quality indicators for university management Quality indicators (2)

14. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Evolution of the budgetary allocations between 2006-2008 (1) (for the public (state) higher education system) 200620072008* max106,53%108,26%109,89% min88,08%87,29%80,35% The evolution of the influence of quality indicators on the universities’ core funding Notes: * The results are based on the statistical data available at January 1st, 2008. The percentage of 100% correspond to a distribution of the budgetary allocation on student numbers’ only.

15. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL Total quality of academic and administrative management indicator into a mean of synchronizing the efforts made by the Ministry of Education, Research and Youth, NCHEF and Romanian Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ARACIS) to increase the quality of higher education. The role of the quality in higher education system became of utmost importance in the last years and takes the first place on the current agenda of European policies in higher education, and in the same time at national level. Quality indicators (3)

16. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL The external quality evaluation of institutions and programs remain the responsibility of ARACIS, the results of this evaluation will be made public, one important outcome being the “label” indicating the quality level of the educational structure and process. The results of the external evaluation for each institution will be also used by CNFIS for the qualitative component of the core funding and for the implementation of funding strategies and principles for complementary funding. The level of research performance in higher education (evaluated by CNCSIS in partnership with CNFIS) will be used by ARACIS in their research evaluation and accreditation component and by CNFIS in the formulation and implementation of funding strategies for higher education. Quality indicators (4)

17. MINISTRY of EDUCATION, RESEARCH and YOUTH NATIONAL HIGHER EDUCATION FUNDING COUNCIL In the context of the increasing role of quality policies and strategies for higher education, the results of external quality assessment will have more impact on the funding strategies and it will be necessary to underline the role of the partnership between the main institutions involved: ARACIS, CNFIS and CNCSIS. Synergy