Continuous Process Improvement Data Integrity Team FTIAC Data

31 

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Loading....

Full text

(1)
(2)

 

Continuous  Process  Improvement

 

Data  Integrity  Team  –  FTIAC  Data  

 

Team  Members:    

Chris  Buczynski,  Research  Coordinator  

Peter  Kim,  Coordinator,  Learning  Lab  

Laura  Lubeck,  Academic  Affairs  Assistant,  Health  Careers  (Scribe)  

Timothy  Seguin,  Accountant,  Financial  Services    (Team  Leader)  

 

David  Cunningham,  Director,  Financial  Services  (Sponsor)  

       

(3)

   

Table  of  Contents

 

I.  Project  Statement………..…3  

II.  Operational  Definitions……….4  

III.  Background  Information……….6  

IV.  Analysis  of  Current  Process………..9  

V.  Theory  of  Improvement……….20  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(4)

 

 

 

 

 

I.  Project  Statement  

To   improve   data   integrity   related   to   FTIAC  

institutional  reporting  as  measured  by  a  decrease  

in  error  rates,  time  spent  in  error  correction,  and  

ability   to   successfully   generate   accurate   FTIAC  

reporting  through  Colleague.  

(5)

II.  Operational  Definitions  

 

ASP  

Active  Server  Pages  -­‐  Basically  a  "program"  used  to  create  dynamic  and  interactive  Web  Pages.    An  ASP  file  can  contain  text,  HTML  

tags  and  scripts  (programming  commands).  Scripts  in  an  ASP  file  are  executed  on  the  server.    (modified  from:  

http://www.w3schools.com/asp/default.asp

 and  

http://www.w3schools.com/asp/asp_intro.asp

 )  

DRUPAL  

An  open  source  content  management  platform  powering  millions  of  websites  and  applications.  Basically  a  "program"  used  to  create  

dynamic  and  interactive  Web  Pages.  It’s  built,  used,  and  supported  by  an  active  and  diverse  community  of  people  around  the  world.  

(modified  from:  

https://drupal.org/

 )  

Dual-­‐Enrolled  

A  student  who  is  enrolled  for  credit  in  a  college  or  university  while  still  in  high  school.    A  student  is  classified  as  dual-­‐enrolled  in  each  

semester  in  which  these  conditions  are  met.  

Ellucian  Recruiter  

A  software  package  from  Ellucian:  "Ellucian  Recruiter™  is  advanced  student  recruitment  and  enrollment  management  software  that  

provides  insight  into  the  prospect  pool,  using  enrollment  probability  and  predictive  modeling  to  help  identify  ideal  prospects.    

Ellucian  Recruiter  has  the  ability  to  personalize  the  message  to  each  prospect,  with  tools  to  ensure  the  message  gets  delivered  the  

desired  way.      In  addition,  this  student  enrollment  software’s  performance  tracking  and  analysis  tools  provide  real-­‐time  visibility  into  

campaign  performance  so  the  focus/energy  is  on  the  most  effective  strategies.  (adapted  from:  

http://www.ellucian.com/student-­‐

recruitment-­‐and-­‐enrollment-­‐management-­‐software/

 )  

FTIAC  

First  Time  In  Any  College  -­‐  A  student  who  has  enrolled  in  college  for  credit  in  a  degree-­‐seeking  program  for  the  first  time  after  having  

graduated  from  high  school  or  having  received  a  GED  or  the  equivalent.    A  student  is  only  classified  as  a  FTIAC  in  their  first  enrolled  

semester  in  college.    FTIAC  and  Transfer  student  classifications  are  mutually  exclusive.  

(6)

IPEDS      

 “NCES  (National  Center  for  Education  Statistics)  has  established  the  Integrated  Postsecondary  Education  Data  System  (IPEDS)  as  its  

core  postsecondary  education  data  collection  program.    It  is  a  single,  comprehensive  system  that  encompasses  all  identified  

institutions  whose  primary  purpose  is  to  provide  postsecondary  education.    IPEDS  consists  of  institution-­‐level  data  that  can  be  used  

to  describe  trends  in  postsecondary  education  at  the  institution,  state,  and  national  levels.”    (from  IPEDS  Reporting  for  Colleague  

Student  –  About  the  ST  Federal  Reporting  Module,  Ellucian)  

Transfer  Student  

A  student  with  prior  regular  (not  dual-­‐enrolled)  for-­‐credit  enrollment  in  a  postsecondary  institution  who  enrolls  at  Henry  Ford  

Community  College  for  the  first  time  with  the  intention  of  completing  an  award  at  Henry  Ford  Community  College.    A  student  is  only  

classified  as  a  transfer  student  in  their  first  enrolled  semester  in  college.    FTIAC  and  transfer  student  classifications  are  mutually  

exclusive.  

International  Student  

Those  who  have  a  non-­‐immigrant  status  while  in  the  U.S.  that  allows  the  applicant  to  attend  college.    (modified  from:    

https://www.hfcc.edu/admissions/steps-­‐international)  

Guest  Student  

A  student  enrolled  at  another  college/university  who  wishes  to  take  classes  at  HFCC  and  then  return  to  their  current  

college/university.    (modified  from:  

https://www.hfcc.edu/admissions/steps-­‐guest

 )  

Site  Manager  

HFCC's  current  ASP-­‐powered  web  site  for  student  admissions  and  recruiting.  

Funneling  

In  Recruitment  Theory,  the  process  of  filtering  down  potential  students  to  enrolled  students.    

 

(7)

I

I

I.  Backg

round  Information

 

 

What  is  a  FTIAC?  

Beginning  with  a  uniform  baseline  is  an  implicit  part  in  measuring  change  in  any  system,  and  the  FTIAC  cohort  (First  Time  In  Any  College   after  having  graduated  from  high  school)  is  as  close  as  possible  to  a  uniform  group  of  individuals.    Consequently,  the  FTIAC  cohort  is  used   internally  by  Henry  Ford  Community  College  as  well  as  by  state  and  federal  governments  to  measure  a  variety  of  institutional  statistics   such  as  graduation  rates,  retention  rates,  college  readiness,  and  more.    This  data  is  used,  in  part,  to  allocate  funding  to  and  within  the   college,  develop  curriculum  and  initiatives,  and  allow  prospective  students  to  compare  institutions.  

Why  do  we  need  accurate  and  timely  FTIAC  data?  

FTIAC  data  is  reported  each  Fall  to  the  Integrated  Postsecondary  Education  Data  System  (IPEDS).    The  IPEDS  system  is  assembled  around   a  series  of  interrelated  surveys  to  collect  institution-­‐level  data  in  enrollments,  program  completions,  faculty,  staff,  and  finances.    Fall   enrollment  data  is  due  November  1st.  

IPEDS  Reporting  

“The  completion  of  all  IPEDS  surveys,  in  a  timely  and  accurate  manner,  is  mandatory  for  all  institutions  that  participate  or  are  applicants  for   participation  in  any  Federal  financial  assistance  program  authorized  by  Title  IV  of  the  Higher  Education  Act  of  1965,  as  amended.  The  completion   of  the  surveys  is  mandated  by  20  USC  1094,  Section  487(a)(17).    

“The  collection  and  reporting  of  racial/ethnic  data  are  mandatory  for  all  institutions  that  receive,  are  applicants  for,  or  expect  to  be  applicants  for   Federal  financial  assistance  as  defined  in  the  Department  of  Education  (ED)  regulations  implementing  Title  VI  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act  of  1964  (34   CFR  100.13),  or  defined  in  any  ED  regulations  implementing  Title  IX  of  the  Education  Amendments  of  1972.  The  collection  of  racial/ethnic  data  in   vocational  programs  is  mandated  by  Section  421(a)(1)  of  the  Carl  D.  Perkins  Vocational  Education  Act.    

“The  reporting  of  racial/ethnic  and  gender  data  for  institutional  staff  on  the  Human  Resources  component  is  also  mandated  by  P.L.  88-­‐352,  Title   VII  of  the  Civil  Rights  Act  of  1964,  as  amended  by  the  Equal  Employment  Opportunity  Act  of  1972  (29  CFR  1602,  subparts  O,  P,  and  Q),  in  odd-­‐ numbered  years  (i.e.,  2007-­‐08,  2009-­‐10,  etc.),  for  institutions  with  fifteen  (15)  or  more  full-­‐time  employees.“  (https://surveys.nces.ed.gov/ipeds/)  

(8)

Accurate  and  timely  FTIAC  reporting  is  required,  especially  if  the  College  is  to  participate  in  Federal  Aid  programs.      However,  the  need  for   timely  and  accurate  FTIAC  data  goes  well  beyond  regulatory  requirements.  Below  are  listed  some  of  the  reporting  at  HFCC  that  requires   accurate  FTIAC  data:  

 

IPEDS  Graduation  Rates  Survey  -­‐  150%   Annual  Institutional  Data  Update   Student  Profile   IPEDS  Graduation  Rates  Survey  -­‐  200%   Institutional  Characteristics   Retention  studies  

IPEDS  Enrollment   Gainful  Employment  (when  required  to  report)   Student  Satisfaction  Surveys   IPEDS  Student  Financial  Aid  Survey   Data  for  Center  for  Educational  Performance  

Improvement  (P-­‐12  Longitudinal)  

Community  College  Survey  of  Student   Engagement  

Achieving  the  Dream  Fall  Cohorts   Michigan  Postsecondary  Handbook  Profile   Grant  applications  

Net  Price  Calculator   Fast  Facts  

(9)

What  is  wrong  with  current  FTIAC  data?  

Unfortunately,  the  FTIAC  cohort  is  difficult  to  define  at  HFCC.    In  a  perfect  world,  the  student's  admit  status  would  be  established  as  part  of   the  application  process  and  would  reliably  indicate  their  true  admit  status.    The  HFCC  data  system,  Ellucian's  Colleague,  aka  "HANK",  does   contain  a  data  field  associated  with  the  application  to  record  the  student's  admit  status.    Prior  to  June  1,  2013,  complications  arose  

because:  

1. The  student  was  allowed  to  self-­‐declare  their  status.  

2. The  options  allowed  in  this  field  are  not  mutually  exclusive.  

3. The  student  is  allowed  to  apply  more  than  once  and  may  have  multiple  applications.  

4. Some  conditions  require  that  the  student  have  more  than  one  application  on  file  (e.g.  restricted/wait-­‐listed  programs)  

5. The  student  application  is  for  a  specific  academic  term,  but  once  the  application  is  approved,  the  student  may  enroll  in  any  term,   including  terms  prior  to  or  after  their  "admitted"  term.  

Some  of  these  issues  have  improved  in  recent  years.    Many  duplicate  online  applications  are  being  detected  prior  to  being  imported  into   HANK.    The  student,  after  a  fashion,  still  self-­‐declares  admit  status,  but  as  of  June  1,  2013  the  online  application  limits  the  available  

statuses  to:  DOM  (domestic);  IL  (international);  and  GS  (guest  student).    Unfortunately,  the  FT  (FTIAC)  status  is  not  one  of  the  options,  and   the  remaining  options  are  not  mutually  exclusive.      Domestic  students  could  be  FTIAC  or  transfer  students  and  international  students  may   be  FTIAC  or  transfer  students.    So,  both  domestic  and  international  students  may  be  FTIACs.  

Without  a  reliable  admit  status  as  part  of  the  application  data,  multiple  other  criteria  must  be  evaluated  to  determine  if  a  student  is,  or  is   not  a  FTIAC.    These  other  data  (student  program;  institutions  attended;  dates/years  attended;  transfer  credits;  prior  enrollment  at  HFCC)   are  often  contradictory,  and/or  incomplete  and  they  require  manual  evaluation  on  a  case-­‐by-­‐case  basis.  

Student  status  is  determined  twice  for  each  student  for  each  term.    A  preliminary  determination  is  made  after  grades  are  required  for  15-­‐ week  classes  (at  which  point  students  in  15-­‐week  classes  are  considered  "officially"  enrolled),  and  again  after  the  semester  is  complete   and  all  final  grades  have  been  posted.    Manual  verification  of  a  student  status  is  often  subjective  and  is  always  time-­‐intensive,  requiring  up   to  3-­‐4  weeks  a  year.  

Because  a  FTIAC  status  on  an  application  does  not  reliably  indicate  that  a  student  is  a  FTIAC,  and  because  FTIAC  status  cannot  easily  be   derived  from  HANK  data,  the  FTIAC  status  for  a  student,  once  determined,  is  stored  in  a  separate  database.  

(10)

IV.  

Analysis  of  

Current  Process

 

 

The  process  that  needed  to  be  reviewed  and  analyzed  was  that  of  the  online  admission  process.    The  preponderance  of  regular  admissions   applications  results  from  prospective  students  visiting  the  HFCC  website  to  apply  for  admission.    There  is  a  need  to  look  at  both  the   current  process  (implemented  June  1)  and  the  most  recent  previous  process  as  the  historical  data  is  skewed  in  terms  of  frequency  and   types  of  data  errors.    The  focus  is  always  on  the  Fall  term  as  that  data  is  utilized  for  IPEDS  reporting.  

Previous  Process  

Here  are  the  steps  that  occurred  from  a  student’s  initial  contact  with  the  HFCC  website  through  generation  of  the  IPEDS  report:   1) Student  visits  website  and  begins  application  for  admission  

2) Student  self  declares  their  status   a. International  Student   b. Guest  

c. First  Time  In  Any  College  (FTIAC)   d. Transfer  

e. Domestic  

3) Student  completes  and  submits  their  application  

4) The  ELF  process  is  run  (multiple  times  hourly)  which  transfers  student  data  for  applicants  into  HANK.    It  is  also  run  weekly  for  prospects   data  which  is  also  transferred  into  HANK.  

5) A  Web  Focus  report  is  generated  providing  Fall  enrollment  data  which  is  then  subjected  to  multiple  queries  and  use  of  both  internal  and   external  data  to  arrive  at  a  fairly  accurate  FTIAC  cohort.  

6) The  data  from  this  cohort  is  submitted  as  part  of  the  IPEDS  reporting  process.    

   

(11)

Flow  Chart  1    

Prior  to  June  1st,  2013,  there  were  two  processes  by  which  FTIAC  data  was  identified.    The  first  process  relied  on  student  self-­‐identification  as   “first  time  student”  on  both  a  paper  and  online  application,  and  the  resulting  data,  as  represented  in  the  yellow,  included  applications  for   students  who  did  not  enroll  or  misidentified  themselves  as  FTIAC.    The  second  process  involves  one  Research  Analyst  using  several  decision   points  and  creative  use  of  existing  resources  to  identify  FTIACs,  and  the  resulting  data,  as  represented  in  the  yellow  3D  block,  includes  students   who  enrolled  but  who  misidentified  as  FTIAC  or  for  whom  there  were  no  applications  for  the  term  enrolled.  

(12)

While  the  student  was  given  the  four  options  to  self-­‐identify  on  the  application,  as  the  following  WebFocus  data  shows,  there  are  other   categories  for  the  student’s  admit  status.  HFEC  stands  for  Henry  Ford  Early  College,  which  uses  a  different  application  procedure.    DES   stands  for  Dual  Enrolled  Student,  which  also  uses  a  different  application  procedure.    The  DOM  status  began  in  Fall  2013.      

 

Current  Process  

Here  are  the  steps  that  currently  occur  from  a  student’s  initial  contact  with  the  HFCC  website,  following  that  process  to  generation  of  the   IPEDS  report:  

 

1) Student  visits  website  and  begins  application  for  admission  

a. Student  self  declares  status:  International  Student,  Guest,  Domestic   2) Student  completes  and  submits  application  

3) The  ELF  process  is  run  (multiple  times  hourly)  which  transfers  student  data  for  applicants  into  HANK.    It  is  also  run  weekly  for  prospects   data,  which  is  also  transferred  into  HANK.  

4) A  Web  Focus  report  is  generated  providing  Fall  enrollment  data  which  is  then  subjected  to  multiple  queries  and  use  of  both  internal  and   external  data  to  arrive  at  a  fairly  accurate  FTIAC  cohort.  

(13)

 

Flow  Chart  2  

After  June  1st,  2013,  the  online  application  was  streamlined,  removing  the  option  for  students  to  self-­‐identify  as  FTIAC  altogether.    Now,  links  on   the  application  will  take  the  student  to  one  of  three  options:  International  Student,  Guest  (external  generic  application),  or  Domestic.    The  data   field  that  would  normally  identify  a  FTIAC  student  is  no  longer  being  populated  by  the  online  application,  leaving  the  identification  of  FTIACs   exclusively  to  the  manual  process  of  the  Research  Analyst,  who  must  use  the  lengthy  decision  points  and  must  still  filter  through  applications   and  enrollment  data  to  try  to  determine  FTIAC  status  of  hundreds  of  students  that  existing  data  and  reporting  instruments,  including  WebFocus,   cannot  determine  without  such  manual  intervention.    

  www.hfcc.edu Online Application International Student First Time Student Transfer Type of Application Dom IS

New Student HANK

Credit/Non-Credit Audit Y/N Dual Enrolled Y/N Degree Programs Y/N Degree, Guest?Transfer, Non- FTIAC students

identified HANK

After June 1

st

, 2013, online applications

no longer identify FTIACs

Guest

Enrolled in College Before (check against National

Clearinghouse

Admitting Institution College Y/N?

Variable decision points to determine FTIAC status

M isid en tifie d w ithou t ap plic atio ns f or the term en rolled M isid en tifie d w ith ap plic atio ns f or the term en rolled

FT

IA

C

s a

fte

r

Ju

n

e 1

st

, 2

0

1

3

(14)

Relationship  Diagram    

 

One  of  the  process  improvement  methods  that  the  team  used  to  attempt  to  locate  the  main  cause  for  the  majority  of  FTIAC  errors  was  the   relationship  diagram  as  shown  above.    We  were  able  to  identify  communication  between  three  areas  of  the  college—the  Office  of  Research,   Planning,  and  Effectiveness,  Admissions  and  Recruitment,  and  IT  Services  as  an  important  process  for  insuring  FTIAC  data  is  part  of  the   application  and  reporting  processes.    One  change  that  highlighted  the  importance  of  communication  was  the  fact  that  the  online  application   starting  June  1st,  2013,  no  longer  has  the  option  for  students  to  self-­‐identify  as  FTIAC.    The  communication  process  is  what  helped  also  identify  

(15)

Although  Data  Transfer  is  a  mechanical  process,  it  was  felt  by  the  team  to  be  important  to  identify  when  that  import  process  occurs,  which  can   impact  the  process  of  collecting  accurate  FTIAC  data.    If  the  import  process  occurs  without  a  process  to  verify  the  student’s  admit  status,  then   misidentified  and  non-­‐identified  FTIACs  are  likely  to  occur.  Also,  the  relationship  diagram  identified  the  importance  of  having  an  advisor  meet   with  a  student  whose  admit  status  as  FTIAC  may  be  questionable;  the  team  felt  that  could  be  a  place  where  a  secondary  verification  could  occur   in  such  instances,  with  the  advisor  then  updating  the  student’s  admit  status  in  the  system.    

Benchmarking  

During  the  data  gathering  stage,  we  decided  to  look  at  how  other  colleges  addressed  this  issue.    Hoping  to  identify  best  practices,  we   looked  at  several  Colleague  community  colleges  with  varying  enrollments.    We  did  not  find  any  obvious  best  practice:  

   

Benchmarking  FTIAC  Data  Integrity

College/ Query

Schoolcraft  

College Monroe  County   Comm College St.  Clair Comm College Jackson   Comm College Kalamazoo   Valley   Comm College Fall  2013 Enrollment? 12,642 4,070 4,660 5,660 11,150 Student  self-­‐ identifies as  

FTIAC? YES YES YES NO YES

Significant   editing  by   IT/Reporting   Dept.?

YES YES YES N/A N/A

Ellucian

(16)

 

 

FTIAC  errors  can  be  viewed  as  one  of  two  main  types  -­‐  students  who  say   they  are  FTIACs  and  are  not  (box  "A",  the  yellow  area  to  the  upper  left  of   the  diagram),  and  those  who  should  be  counted  as  FTIACS  but  are  not   (box  "C",  the  orange  area  to  the  lower  left).    This  second  group  may  have   been  misidentified  either  because  they  do  not  have  an  application  on  file   for  the  term  in  which  they  first  enrolled,  or  they  were  incorrectly  

identified  as  non-­‐FTIACs  on  their  application  for  the  term.    

The  error  rates  may  be  calculated  as  percentages  of  the  two  subgroups   (A/(A  +  B)  and  C/(B  +  C)  or  as  percentage  of  the  whole  group  (A/  (A  +  B  +   C)  and  C/(A  +  B  +  C))  or  some  variation  of  that.  

   

 

Two  Main  Types  of  FTIAC  Errors  

   

A  

                           

              FTIACs  on  their  application  Students  identified  as  

for  the  term  

                                                                                                   

B  

                       

C  

                FTIAC  students   who  were   correctly   identified  on   their  application  

for  the  term  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        FTIAC  students  who:    1)  Did  not  have  an  

application  for  the  term;     or  

2)  Were  incorrectly   identified  as  a  non-­‐FTIAC  

on  the  application                                                                                                        

(17)

 

• This  chart  displays  the  error  rates  as  calculated  on  the  two  subgroups  (14FA  estimated).    There  were  three  significant  events  which  have  

influenced  the  type  and  magnitude  of  the  error  rates.    First,  after  HANK  was  installed  in  2002,  the  application  admit  statuses  were  not   properly  assigned.    Most  of  the  "Misidentified  as  FTIAC  on  the  Application"  errors  were  due  to  an  incorrect  status  being  manually  assigned  to   dual-­‐enrollment  students.    That  error  rate  improved  through  the  years  as  understanding  of  the  admit  satus  and  its  uses  increased.    

• A  second  major  decrease  in  the  "Misidentified  as  FTIAC  on  the  Application"  errors  rate  occurred  with  a  change  in  HFCC's  Registrar  between  

2008  and  2009.  

• The  third  major  change  occurred  on  6/1/2013  with  a  revised  online  application  process  which  no  longer  allows  a  student  to  self-­‐identify.    

One  of  three  admit  statuses  (DOM,  IS,  GS)  is  assigned  based  on  one  of  four  links  selected  by  the  student  and  FT  (FTIAC)  is  not  an  option.  

FTIAC  Not  Idenpfied  on  Applicapon  Misidenpfied  as  FTIAC  on  Applicapon   0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%   80%   90%   100%  

02FA   03FA   04FA  

05FA   06FA   07FA   08FA   09FA   10FA  

11FA   12FA   13FA   14FA  

(18)

Types  of  Error  Rates  continued:  

This  chart  includes  all  of  the  actual  FTIAC  students  who  were  correctly  identified  (green  bars)  and  misidentified  (orange  bars)  as  well  as  those   who  were  incorrectly  classified  as  FTIAC  students  (yellow  bars)  (14/FA  is  estimated).  The  actual  FTIAC  cohort  has  been  normalized  to  100%  so  the   green  and  orange  bars  represent  the  true  FTIAC  cohort  for  the  term.    Until  13/FA,  both  error  rates  were,  in  general,  decreasing  

-­‐200%   -­‐150%   -­‐100%   -­‐50%   0%   50%   100%  

02FA   03FA   04FA   05FA   06FA   07FA   08FA   09FA   10FA   11FA   12FA   13FA   14FA  

79%   81%   61%   65%   79%   71%   74%   76%   75%   75%   81%   40%   0%   21%   19%   39%   35%   21%   29%   26%   24%   25%   25%   19%   60%   100%   -­‐193%   -­‐205%   -­‐42%   -­‐57%   -­‐23%   -­‐19%   -­‐28%   -­‐8%   -­‐4%   -­‐4%   -­‐7%   -­‐5%   0%  

Two  Types  of  FTIAC  Error  Rates  By  Term  

 

(19)

 

  The  above  two  charts  display  the  main  sources  of  error  in  FTIAC  determination  before  and  after  6/1/2013  and  how  they  influence  FTIAC  errors   by  term.    These  are  qualitative  approximations  and  do  not  represent  actual  calculated  error  percentages.    The  errors  have  been  normalized  to   100%  for  each  chart.  

    0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%  

Web  

Structure  

A  

Main  Sources  of  Error  AQer  6/1/2013    

Web  Structure:  Student  can  no  longer  self-­‐idenTfy  as   FTIAC  

 

A:  No  Applicapon  for  Term    

0%   10%   20%   30%   40%   50%   60%   70%  

A  

B  

C  

A:  No  ApplicaTon  for  Term      

B:  Student  Self-­‐IdenTfies  as  FTIAC  Incorrectly    

(20)

Types  of  errors  continued:  

FTIAC  data  for  Fall  2013  and  Fall  2014  are  projected  to  include  a  mixture  of  types  of  errors,  with  the  web  structure  increasingly  being   identified  as  the  source  of  the  errors  as  indicated  in  the  graphs  below.  

(21)

 

VI.  Theory  of  Improvement  

 

Since  June  1,  2013,  the  online  admissions  application  no  longer  asks  students  to  self-­‐identify  as  “first  time  in  any  college”  (FTIAC).    Students  are   either  identified  as  “domestic”  (DOM)  or  “international”  (IS).    Prior  to  June  1,  2013,  students  were  asked  questions  on  the  application  to  try  to   have  them  self-­‐identify  as  FTIAC.      Investigating  how  the  process  works  at  other  institutions  as  well  as  with  our  current  IT  structure,  we   recommend  implementing  a  two-­‐part  admission  application.    We  recommend  that  the  first  part  of  the  application  ask  clear  yes/no  questions   that  can  accurately  identify  if  a  student  is  FTIAC  or  not.    Two  recommended  questions  are:  (1)  Will  you  have  graduated  from  high  school  or   earned  a  GED  before  you  enroll?    (2)  Did  you  take  a  college  credit  class  after  graduating  high  school  or  earning  your  GED?  

The  current  online  admission  process  uses  an  online  web-­‐form  developed  by  The  Doyle  Group  called  “Site  Manager.”    Site  manager  not  only  is   used  for  the  online  admissions  application,  but  also  for  recruiting  students  for  orientation  as  well  as  other  web  forms  and  online  applications.     Site  manager  uses  “ASP”  which  are  “active  server  pages”  that  use  the  “asp”  extension.    These  pages  require  ActiveX  and  Java  script  code  and   regular  updates  and  plug-­‐ins  to  browsers.    IT  Services  recommends  no  longer  supporting  Site  Manager.      

The  College  has  migrated  Web  resources  from  the  ASP.NET  framework  to  Drupal,  an  open  source  web  management  system.    Rather  than   individual  pages  having  to  be  managed  and  updated,  the  Drupal  architecture  allows  more  efficient  “pushing”  of  changes  to  information  across   web  pages.    To  replace  all  of  the  web  forms  and  online  applications  currently  using  Site  Manager  with  a  Drupal-­‐based  system  would  require  a   “Drupal  Team”  dedicated  to  such  a  project,  and  this  would  be  a  new  customized  build.    One  of  the  concerns  with  customized  builds  of  this   nature  is  the  uncertainty  with  how  sustainable  and  easy  to  maintain  the  new  recruitment  and  application  system  would  be.  

Ellucian  (Datatel)  Recruiter  is  part  of  Ellucian’s  overall  customer  relationship  management  (CRM)  package  that  would  replace  Site  Manager  and   potentially  more  seamlessly  integrate  with  Datatel  Colleague  (HANK)  and  the  other  Ellucian  (Datatel)  products  the  College  currently  uses  such  as   Retention  Alert  and  the  new  Ellucian  mobile  app.    Ellucian  Recruiter  is  used  by  hundreds  of  colleges  nationwide.  

(22)

Secondary  Verification  

In  addition  to  recommending  replacing  Site  Manager  with  Ellucian  Recruiter,  we  recommend  the  implementation  of  a  secondary  verification   process  of  FTIAC  status,  and  under  the  current  arrangement,  we  envision  this  could  happen  when  the  student  meets  with  an  advisor  or   counselor.    In  particular,  we  recommend  that  the  term  of  admittance  be  updated  to  reflect  the  first  semester  the  student  has  enrolled  at  the   College.    This  step  could  resolve  the  discrepancy  between  admittance  term  and  first  term  of  enrollment  which  creates  one  of  the  current  

problems  with  determining  FTIAC  status  because  a  student  could  have  submitted  an  application  indicating  he  or  she  was  a  first  time  student,  but   may  not  enroll  until  several  semesters  or  years  later,  yet  in  the  mean  time,  that  student  may  have  enrolled  at  another  College,  invalidating  their   FTIAC  status.    (Note:  At  Schoolcraft  College,  students  are  required  to  submit  a  request  to  update  their  applications  if  they  have  not  enrolled  at   Schoolcraft  within  two  years.  During  this  process,  Schoolcraft  students  are  asked  if  they  have  attended  other  colleges.)  

(23)

  While  the  first  two  countermeasures  in  our  force  field  analysis  above  are  specific  to  the  objective  of  this  CPI  Team  to  address  the  integrity  of  

FTIAC  data,  the  third  and  fourth  countermeasures  we  have  identified  came  to  the  attention  of  the  team  from  researching  other  areas  of  the   College  involved  with  the  application  process.    The  team  discovered  that  three  years  ago  the  College  was  very  near  to  implementing  Datatel   Recruiter,  which  had  shown  promise  to  resolve  not  only  the  FTIAC  data  issue  but  potentially  a  host  of  other  customer  relations  management   (CRM)  and  enrollment  data  concerns.    Cost  and  staffing  concerns  left  the  project  abandoned,  but  interest  among  Admissions  and  Recruitment  

(24)

managers  and  staff  still  remains.    The  CRM  software  has  now  been  rebranded  as  Ellucian  Recruiter,  and  has  expanded  its  recruitment  and   customer  relations  management  tools,  including  addressing  the  two  countermeasures  that  our  team  identified  as  recommendations  for  most   likely  improving  FTIAC  data  collection.    Ellucian  provides  testimonials  and  literature  to  suggest  cost-­‐savings  and  improved  retention  and   enrollment  as  a  result  of  Ellucian  Recruiter.    Notable  Michigan  colleges  that  have  already  adopted  Recruiter  include  Walsh  College,  Kalamazoo   Community  College,  and  Jackson  Community  College.    As  some  of  the  screenshots  below  demonstrate,  Recruiter  is  a  robust  CRM  tool  that  can   help  optimize  the  time  of  limited  recruiting  staff  to  better  personalize  communication  with  prospective  students  and  thus  improve  opportunities   to  recruit  and  retain  them.  

   

(25)

 

After  careful  review  of  process  for  determining  FTIAC  status,  with  particular  focus  on  the  transfer  of  data  from  Site  Manager  to  Colleague,   the  following  process  improvements  are  recommended:  

 

Theory  of  Improvement   Implementation   Monitor  Results  

1) Recommend  Ellucian  Recruiter  which  will   not  only  resolve  the  FTIAC  data  problem   that  was  the  focus  of  this  CPI  Team  but   could  potentially  increase  the  retention  of   prospects  and  improve  overall  customer   relations  management  

2) Recommend  cost-­‐benefit  analysis  on  the   purchase  of  Ellucian  Recruiter,  estimated   to  be  over  $320,000    

3) Recommend  review  of  information  in  this   CPI  report  as  it  relates  to  any  changes  to   the  recruitment  and  admissions  processes  

Purchase  Ellucian  Recruiter   a) Install  Recruiter   b) Train  staff  

i) Include  “Train  the  Trainer”  for   selected  individuals  to  reduce   external  training  costs  

c) Make  sure  Recruiter  is  set  up  to   funnel  only  enrolled  student  data  to   Colleague.  

d) Design  online  admissions  application   so  that  applicants  are  asked  a  series  of   questions  prior  to  completing  an   application  that  will  determine  FTIAC   status.      

Institutional  Research  Coordinator,  in  the   process  of  preparing  IPEDS  reporting,   monitors  and  documents  the  accuracy  of   FTIAC  cohorts.                    

(26)

Implementation  

Assumed  in  the  Gantt  chart  above  is  the  direct  involvement  of  several  departments  including  Recruitment  and  Admissions,  IT  Services,  Financial   Services,  the  Office  of  Research,  Planning,  and  Effectiveness,  and  Ellucian  trainers  and  technicians.    While  the  timeline  extends  into  Winter  2017,   improvements  are  expected  with  the  first  monitoring  of  FTIAC  data  when  it  needs  to  be  reported  in  Fall  2015.  

Potential Future Side Benefits

Currently  there  are  in  the  HANK  system  120,992  applicants  with  no  student  record  history.    These  are  people  we  would  rather  not  have  in  HANK.     There  are  about  298,598  individuals  with  student  records  with  no  applicant  history  (pre-­‐HANK  students  is  a  best  guess).      There  are  438,472  total   individuals  with  some  sort  of  student  record.  

Over 22,000 students are currently in the system that were billed an application fee that have never enrolled. Managing student account

(27)

Cost-­‐Benefit  Analysis  

The five-year cost summary is provided below for two Ellucian solutions. The Ellucian Hosted SaaS solution requires an annual subscription fee

and higher user fee, but has a lower set up cost.  

Ellucian  Recruiter  SaaS  (Hosted)  Solution  

       

Cost  Estimate  

       

                                   

Description       Year  1   Year  2   Year  3   Year  4   Year  5          

Recruiter  SaaS  Subscription:                                  

Users  @  2850  per  user   10   28,500     28,500     28,500     28,500     28,500            

                                   

Implementation  &  Training  Package:                                  

Estimated  hours  @  $225  per  hour   412   92,700                            

                                   

Totals:       121,200     28,500     28,500     28,500     28,500         235,200    

Based  on  information  provided  by  Jerry  Kondraciak  (IT  Services),  the  on-­‐premise  solution  is  preferable,  because  possible  cost-­‐savings  

for  hardware  can  be  explored,  such  as  using  an  existing  server  originally  allocated  for  the  Portal  to  host  Recruiter.    

 

 

 

 

 

(28)

The “on –premise” Recruiter solution involves a one-time license fee and then on-going annual maintenance.

Ellucian  Recruiter  On  Premise  Solution  

       

Cost  Estimate  

       

                                   

Description       Year  1   Year  2   Year  3   Year  4   Year  5          

Recruiter  Software  License:                                  

Recruiter  Base  License       66,000                            

User  Licenses  @  1500  per  user   10   15,000                            

                                   

Implementation  &  Training  Package:                                  

Estimated  hours  @  $225  per  hour   412   92,700                            

                                   

Recruiter  Annual  Maintenance:                                  

Fixed  fee       23,100     24,255     25,468     26,741     28,078            

Per  user  fee  @  525  per  user   10   5,250     5,513     5,513     5,513     5,513            

        28,350     29,768     30,980     32,254     33,591            

Totals:       202,050     29,768     30,980     32,254     33,591         328,642    

                                   

New  students  needed  for  5  year  payback:       7.00     7.00     7.00     7.00     8.00            

Revenue  per  student       9,100     9,100     9,100     9,100     9,100            

                                   

Additional  Revenue  per  year  required  for  payback       63,700     63,700     63,700     63,700     72,800         327,600    

Note: Revenue per student assumes 70/30 split between out-district/in-district, out-district tuition approximately $150 per credit hour (weighted between out-district and out-state/international), District tuition $87 per credit hour, weighted average tuition approximately $130 per credit hour, students pay for 70 credits to graduate, and approximate revenue per retained new student: $9,100.

(29)

 

Relationship  to  AQIP  Criteria  

 

AQIP  Criteria   Project  Relationship  

Understanding  Student  Needs   This  project  can  improve  customer  relations,   increasing  retention  of  prospective  and   existing  students.  

Supporting  Institutional  Operations   • This  project  can  improve  reporting  of  FTIAC  

data,  which  is  used  for  institutional  reporting   externally  and  internally;  FTIAC  data  is  used   for  retention  and  student  success  initiatives.      

• This  project  can  help  college  leaders  with  

their  decision-­‐making  by  providing  reliable   enrollment  data  more  efficiently.      

• This  project  can  improve  the  college’s  

student  records  database  by  keeping   prospective  student  data  separate  from   enrollment  data.  

Planning  Continuous  Improvement   This  project  will  create  improved  efficiency  in   not  only  the  collection  and  verification  of   FTIAC  data  but  also  in  the  processes  involved   with  collecting  data  on  the  recruitment  and   enrollment  of  students  at  HFCC.  

Building  Collaborative  Relationships   This  project  will  build  internal  relationships   between  HFCC  departments,  including   Recruitment  and  Admissions,  IT  Services,   Counseling,  Advising,  Financial  Services,  and   the  Office  of  Research,  Planning,  and   Effectiveness.  

(30)

Steering  Committee  Feedback  

Team  Name:       Data  Integrity  Team    

Date:    

11/18/2013    

 

Sponsor:      

David  Cunningham    

 

Idea  For  Improvement

 

Support  

 

1.  Replace  Site  Manager  with  Ellucian  Recruiter.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.  Create  a  two-­‐part  form  in  Ellucian  Recruiter  and  develop  screening  questions  to  

establish  student  admit  status  using  part  one  of  the  two-­‐part  form.  

 

 

 

 

3.  Train  counselors/advisors  to  verify  and  update  the  student  admit  status  during  

the  student's  first  appointment.  

 

 

 

 

 

4.  Optimize  use  of  Recruiter  to  enroll  prospective  first  time  students.  

 

 

 

 

Team  Feedback  Meeting  –  Date:  __________________________  

 

 

 

 

(31)

       

Acknowledgments

We thank our College President, Dr. Stan Jensen, and

his Cabinet: A. Reginald Best, Jr., Becky J. Chadwick,

Dr. Lisa Copprue, Dr. Cynthia Eschenburg, Dr. Tracy P.

Pierner, and John Satkowski.

We thank everyone who helped served as resource

persons in the preparation of this report: Becky

Chadwick, Holly Diamond, Nicole Ford, Kathleen Fox,

Imad Nouri, Jerry Kondraciuk, Micah Webner, Sandro

Silvestri, and Lorraine Paffenroth. Special thanks to

team member, Laura Lubeck, and our team sponsor,

David Cunningham. We also thank the staff at Graphics.

Figure

Updating...

References

Updating...

Related subjects :