COMMITTEE ON PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT
Steering Committee for Performance Funding
April 30, 1997
S.C. COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION
LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM
Ms. Dianne Chinnes
Mr. Dalton B. Floyd, Jr.
Dr. W. David Maxwell
Ms. Camille Brown
Mr. Michael Brown
Ms. Sandra Carr
Ms. Renea Eshleman
Mr. Charles Fitzsimmons
Ms. Maggie Hicks
Mr. Alan Krech
Ms. Lynn Metcalf
Dr. Gail Morrison
Mr. Fred Sheheen
Mr. John Smalls
Dr. Mike Smith
Mr. Jeff Richards
Dr. Lovely Ulmer-Sottong
Dr. Karen Woodfaulk
The Committee on Planning and Assessment, acting as the Steering Committee for Performance
Funding, met at 10:30 a.m. on March 27, 1997 in the large conference room. Mr. Dalton Floyd,
Mr. Floyd welcomed committee members and guests. All persons present introduced themselves
and stated which institution or agency they represented .
I. Approval of Minutes
It was moved (Chinnes) and seconded (Maxwell) and unanimously voted to approve the minutes of
March 27, 1997 Steering Committee meeting, as written.
II. Consideration of Performance Report Card Format and Method of Displaying Data
Dr. Michael Smith discussed the Higher Education Performance Indicators Report Card for 1997-98.
Dr. Smith explained that Institution A-Illustration (Attachment A) now includes the sub-measures
for the indicators, where applicable (example: 3. Instructional Qualify A. A.1.)
Dr. David Maxwell reiterated that the Commission should be consistent in applying the rounding
III. Consideration of Year One Institutional Bench Marking Process
Dr. Smith outlined how institutional benchmarks could be set for the first year.
Mr. Dalton Floyd explained that the institutional benchmark could be proposed to justify an
institutions performance; however institutions would not hav to propose benchmarks in year one (1).
Ms. Carol Garrison mentioned that the Presidents of University of South Carolina and Clemson
had written letters concerning sector bench marking. The letters indicated that the two institutions
had problems with some sector benchmarks and wished to propose institutional benchmarks.. CHE
staff assured the representatives that further discussions would be held to reconcile the differences.
It was agreed by the Committee that this subject needed further study and would be presented tat the
IV. Consideration of Performance Funding Time Line May 1 - July 10, 1997
Dr. Smith gave a brief overview of the current performance funding time line. The Committee
agreed that the time line was reasonable and could be met.
V. Discussion of Tentative Performance Funding Time Line 1997-98
Dr. Smith distributed a handout of the performance funding implementation
Proposed Time Line. After a brief discussion by Committee members and institutional
representatives it was agreed upon that the time line would be refined and considered at a later date..
VI. Other Business
The next meeting was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on May 13, 1997, in the large conference room at
the Commission on Higher Educatioj.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
Saundra E. Carr