E Identification of measurable objectives by which the school may evaluate its success in achieving a diverse complement of faculty, staff and students, along with data regarding

the performance of the program against those measures for each of the last three years.

The measurable objectives for faculty, staff and student diversity within four targeted populations (see above, Criterion 1.8.A.i) are presented in Data Template 1.8.1. As indicated there, the measure for students of international origin reflects the mathematical concept of entropy, which measures the distribution of GSPH students as representing countries globally: we wish to see the entropy measure increasing over time.

The measure for socio-economic status is based on a count of matriculating students who are a first-generation college graduate within their immediate family. Because the purpose of this measure is to monitor the effect of state funding cuts to higher education, the target is to maintain the numbers seen prior to these cuts.

The measure for each racial- and ethnicity-based diversity target is drawn from an “availability pool”—that is, the representation of the specified group within a defined source population (shown with a reference on Data Template 1.8.1), as follows:

• The student availability pool is based on college-degree holding Pennsylvanians, since the majority of GSPH’s students are Pennsylvania residents, and since a college degree is a pre-requisite for matriculation at GSPH.

• The faculty availability pool is based on doctoral degree holders in all fields within the U.S. population since faculty with few exceptions must hold a terminal degree in their field.

• The staff availability pool is based on the Allegheny County, Pennsylvania population, since most university staff members reside here.

Each of these availability pools tends to over-state the actual availability for enrollment or employment at GSPH: undergraduate and doctoral preparation in science or mathematics is pursued less frequently by members of minority groups; and the general population may not meet the educational or skill-level requirements of GSPH staff positions. Nevertheless, in this first cycle of the School’s self-monitoring, we choose these pools as diversity targets because more highly defined pools may lead to under-estimating availability, and because this initial experience, carefully considered, will more accurately guide our future recruitment and retention efforts.

Based on these metrics, Data Template 1.8.1 provides the following insights—first for students, then for faculty and staff.

For Black or African American students, the availability pool for GSPH enrollment is 14.9%. The data for the past three years indicate that GSPH’s student enrollment in this racial group relative to the availability pool is low, well below 7% and declining. In part, this may be due to the fact that the Black and African American population of Pennsylvania is concentrated in the southeast, where college graduates pursuing public health studies have access to another school of public health (Drexel University in Philadelphia) and six other public health degree programs (in Philadelphia are Temple University, Thomas Jefferson University, University of

Pennsylvania; and close by in southeast and central Pennsylvania are Pennsylvania State University, West Chester University, and East Stroudsburg University). Many of these MPH programs have been accredited within the past decade and are now likely to be drawing enrollments away from GSPH, as evidenced by the drop in total student population from over 640 in two previous years to 619 in 2014. Nevertheless, the down-trend appears to be affecting Black and African American enrollments more than others: the proportion of these students at GSPH has fallen from 6.5% in 2012 to 5.3% in 2014. [Need to add discussion of these trends, including comparison of applicant numbers and enrollee numbers. Are both declining?] For Hispanic and Latino students, the availability pool is 5.9%. Data Template 1.8.1 shows GSPH student enrollments below this target but holding steady at 3.6 to 3.7%. Again, the concentration of this minority group in the southeastern corner of Pennsylvania may provide a partial explanation.

For students of disadvantaged socio-economic status, the number of first-generation college graduates matriculating at GSPH has fallen sharply during the three year period reported in Template 1.8.1: from 17.2% in 2012 to 10.4% in 2014. This trend raises concerns for the School and has implications for overall diversity goals—especially focusing on the need to establish and build funding for financial aid for this group of students.

For students of international origin, our goal is to increase the breadth of representation from around the globe so that our international student population is not dominated by just a few countries. The entropy statistic measures uniformity of a distribution, and has been stable over the three-year period. There was a slight decrease in 2014, reflecting a slight increase in the number of students from China (relative to other countries), but the change amounted to only a few students.

For faculty in the targeted racial and ethnic categories, GSPH has fewer members than are represented in the availability pools: 2.5 to 2.9% Black and African American faculty compared with the availability pool of 4.2%; and 2.5 to 2.6% Latino and Hispanic faculty compared with the availability pool of 3.8%. [Need interpretation of this.]

For staff, GSPH has fewer members than are represented in the availability pools: 6.8 to 7.2% Black and African American staff compared with the availability pool of 13.3%; and 0.7 to 1.4% Latino and Hispanic staff compared with the availability pool of 1.7%. In both groups, the diversity numbers declined between 2012 and 2014. [Need interpretation of this ]

1.8.F. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s