Subject for Approval by the Steering Committee at its next Committee meeting.
Committee on Planning and Assessment Steering Committee for Performance Funding
September 24, 1996
IBM lst Floor Conference Room
1333 Main Street
Columbia, SC 29201
Mr. Dalton B. Floyd, Jr.
Dr. W. David Maxwell
Mr. Bill H. Stern
Mr. Roger B. Whaley
Dr. Robert Alexander Mr. Jeff Olson
Mr. Charlie Brooks Dr. Jack Parson
Ms. Sybil Fix Mr. Don Peterson
Dr. David Fleming Ms. Sharon F. Pothering
Ms. Carol Garrison Mr. William T. Putnam
Mr. Charlie Gould Mr. Bill Robinson
Dr. H. McLean Holderfield Mr. Tim Rogers
Dr. Sally Horner Ms. Sandy Smith
Dr. Harry Matthews Dr. John Sutusky
Dr. Michael McCall Mr. Bob Taylor
Dr. Robert Mellon Mr. Ed Troublefield
Col. Isaac S. Metts, Jr. Dr. Lee A. Vickers
Dr. Robert Mignone Mr. Jim Vincent
Dr. Phil Moore Mr. William D. Workman, III
Dr. Marge Tebo-Messina Dr. Friedericka Wiedemann
Mr. Larry Wilson
Mr. Melford Wilson
Ms. Camille Brown Ms. Lynn Metcalf
Ms. Saundra Carr Dr. Gail Morrison
Mr. Charlie FitzSimons Mr. Fred Sheheen
Ms. Sherry Hubbard Mr. John Smalls
Mr. Raghu Korrapati Dr. Lovely Ulmer-Sotton
Dr. Lynn Kelly Dr. Michael Smith
Mr. Nelson Lindsay
Dr. David Loope
For the record, notification of the meeting was made to the public as required by the Freedom
of Information Act.
The Committee on Planning and Assessment, acting as the Steering Committee for Performance
Funding, met at 10:00 a.m. on September 24, 1996 in the IBM 1st floor Conference Room. Mr.
Roger Whaley, presided.
Mr. Whaley welcomed Committee members and guests. All persons present introduced
themselves and stated which institution or agency they represented.
II. Approval of Minutes of August 8, 1996
It was moved (Stern) and seconded (Maxwell) and unanimously voted to approve the minutes
of the August 8, 1996 Steering Committee meeting, as written.
III. Consideration of Task Force Reports
A. Planning/Institutional Effectiveness
Mr. William D. Workman, III, Chair of the Planning/Institutional Effectiveness Task
Force, reviewed the task force recommendations of its assigned performance indicators. Mr.
Workman explained that the Task Force's assignment was to define and set measures for the
performance indicators. Mr. Workman asked that the Task Force go on record regarding its
views on performance funding. The Committee foresees the process as having two routes which
must be followed regarding Act 359: (1) the Commission must comply with the Law and (2) as
the process moves into the implementation phase, Commission members and staff should hold
workshops or meetings in order to bring legislators, the business community, and institutional
representatives together to create a common vision for higher education. Mr. Workman also
stated that the measures will need continued revision and modification as more is learned
about the process, and this may necessitate adjustments in the legislation.
Each indicator was discussed and comments were considered from the guests. Dr. David
Maxwell expressed concern over the fact some measures are based on subjective evaluation
rather than objective measures, and that indicators should provide a "truer perspective" on
higher education's success in educating the State's students. There was lengthy discussion
from the floor concerning the measure for 7A Graduation Rates. It was agreed that "degree
seeking" be added to the 7A performance indicator's definition. It was also agreed that the
measure for 7F Credit Hours Earned of Graduates must be stated: The total number of hours
required by a graduate by sector discipline/degree and by institution compared to the total
number of hours earned by graduates upon graduation." There being no further discussion, it
was moved (Stern), seconded (Maxwell), and voted unanimously that the Planning/Institutional
Effectiveness Task Force Report be accepted with the minor modification suggested.
Mr. Larry Wilson, Chair of the Academic Task Force, presented the recommendations of
the performance indicators assigned to the Academic Task Force. Mr. Wilson stressed to the
Committee the importance of being able to revisit the measures because of evolving issues in
higher education; as more is learned about the process it may necessitate adjustments in the
legislation. Mr Wilson also expressed concern that an institution might be able to "beat the
system" and receive rewards without meeting the intent of indicators. Thus, for some
indicators the Committee developed measures that included best practices and relative
rankings of institutions.
Each indicator was presented and discussed. During the discussion of indicator 2.F
Community and Public Service Activities of Faculty for Which No Extra Compensation is Paid,
Mr. Wilson stated that this particular indicator should be weighted less heavily than others.
After some discussion, Dr. Gail Morrison, Director of Academics Affairs at CHE, agreed
to clarify language in the definition of indicator 3.C Ratio of Full-time Faculty as Compared
to Other Full-time Employees relating to "health-related professions."
Dr. David Maxwell noted that the measure for research was based on dollars awarded,
rather than the actual value of the research. He pointed out that some of the most
significant research at a university is not funded research.
During the discussion, Dr. Sally Horner asked whether both progress and excellence
would be rewarded. Mr. Whaley pointed out that he believed that funding should be based on
both--whether an institution was making progress and whether it had already achieved its goal
and was doing an excellent job.
There being no significant changes in the report, it was moved (Stern), seconded
(Floyd), and voted unanimously that the Academic Task Force Report be accepted as
written with the modification of definitions.
C. Administrative Management
Mr. Bill Stern made a motion that due to the lateness of the hour and having received a
written report from Dr. Walter Owens (Attachment 1) the Administrative Management Task
Force Report should be accepted as written without a one-by-one presentation of each assigned
performance indicator. Mr. Whaley opened the floor for discussion and comments. After a
brief discussion of concerns, it was moved (Stern), seconded (Floyd) and voted unanimously
that the Administrative Management Task Force Report be accepted as written.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m.
Saundra E. Carr