RESEARCH EXPENDITURES

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "RESEARCH EXPENDITURES"

Transcription

1 RESEARCH EXPENDITURES September 1, 2004 August 31, 2005 Texas Universities and Health-Related Institutions Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Division of Finance, Campus Planning, and Research P.O. Box Austin, TX July 2006

2 Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Robert W. Shepard (Chairman) Harlingen Neal W. Adams (Vice Chairman) Bedford Lorraine Perryman (Secretary of the Board) Odessa Laurie Bricker Houston Jerry Farrington Dallas Paul Foster El Paso Joe B. Hinton Crawford George Louis McWilliams Texarkana Elaine Mendoza San Antonio Nancy R. Neal Lubbock Lyn Bracewell Phillips Bastrop Curtis E. Ransom Dallas A. W. Whit Riter, III Tyler Coordinating Board Mission The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board s mission is to work with the Legislature, Governor, governing boards, higher education institutions, and other entities to help Texas meet the goals of the state s higher education plan, Closing the Gaps by 2015, and thereby provide the people of Texas the widest access to higher education of the highest quality in the most efficient manner. Coordinating Board Philosophy The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board will promote access to quality higher education across the state with the conviction that access without quality is mediocrity and that quality without access is unacceptable. The Board will be open, ethical, responsive, and committed to public service. The Board will approach its work with a sense of purpose and responsibility to the people of Texas and is committed to the best use of public monies. The Coordinating Board will engage in actions that add value to Texas and to higher education. The agency will avoid efforts that do not add value or that are duplicated by other entities.

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The first six sections of this report are based on data provided by universities and healthrelated institutions for Fiscal Year 2005 September 1, 2004 through August 31, Highlights include: Total reported research expenditures were $3,003,747,594 in Fiscal Year Expenditures at public institutions increased 9.6 percent over Fiscal Year 2004 (from $2,252,897,987 in FY 2004 to $2,468,646,913 in FY 2005.) Research expenditures at public universities and health-related institutions grew $133,088,920 (12 percent) and $82,660,006 (7.2 percent), respectively, compared to Fiscal Year Research expenditures at public institutions increased by percent since Fiscal Year Scientific discipline categories benefitting from the largest research expenditures include medical sciences $1,052,641,219; biological and other life sciences $805,263,682; engineering $369,519,199; and physical sciences $177,607,093. The federal government provided $1,811,017,922 (60.3 percent) of the research funds expended. The seventh section of this report is based on data provided by the National Science Foundation for Fiscal Year 2003, the most recent year for which data are available. Highlights include: Texas ranked third among the states in total research expenditures for Fiscal Year Life sciences accounted for 67 percent of the research expenditures, followed by engineering (14 percent) and physical sciences (6 percent), at Texas institutions. Texas institutions of higher education ranked fourth in federal obligations for research and development in science and engineering, after California, New York, and Pennsylvania. The National Institutes of Health provide 64 percent of the federal research support for science and engineering to Texas higher education institutions. Eight institutions Baylor College of Medicine, The University of Texas at Austin, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Texas A&M University (including Texas A&M Service agencies), The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston accounted for 78 percent of the federal obligations for science and engineering to Texas higher education institutions in Fiscal Year i

4 ii

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... i Overview... 1 Major Findings... 3 Statewide Summary Data... 5 Institutional Data Universities Institutional Data Health-Related Institutions Historical Data for Public Institutions National Comparisons Appendix A Research Expenditures Surveys... A-1 Appendix B Institutional Contacts... B-1 iii

6 iv

7 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables: 1 Research and Development Expenditures Rankings, FY Federal/State Research and Development Expenditures Ratio Rankings, FY Sources of Funds for Research and Development, FY Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field and Source of Funding, FY 2005, Texas Institutions of Higher Education Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005, Texas Universities Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005, Texas Health-Related Institutions Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Universities, FY Federal R&D Expenditures/FTE Faculty Ratio, FY 2005, Texas Public Universities Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005, Texas Universities Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Universities Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Health Related Institutions, FY Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005, Texas Health-Related Institutions Expenditures for Research and Development by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Public Health-Related Institutions Expenditures for Research and Development, Texas Public Universities Federal Expenditures for Research and Development, Texas Public Universities Expenditures for Research and Development, Texas Public Health-Related Institutions Federal Expenditures for Research and Development, Texas Public Health-Related Institutions Federal Expenditures for Research and Development by Field, Texas Public Universities and Health-Related Institutions v

8 19 Top Five States in Federal R&D Expenditures, Selected Science and Engineering Fields, FY State Rank in Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D, FY Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D by Texas Institutions, FY Texas Universities and Colleges with Federal Science and Engineering R&D Obligations of More Than $10 Million by Support Agency, FY Figures: 1 Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Institutions of Higher Education, FY Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Universities, FY Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY Growth Rates in Research and Development Expenditures at Texas Public Institutions of Higher Education, FY FY Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Discipline Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Universities, FY Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Public Institutions of Higher Education, FY 1985 FY Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering, Universities and Colleges Selected States, Federally Financed R&D Expenditures, Universities and Colleges Selected States, Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering, Texas Universities and Colleges, Top Five Support Agencies Federally Financed Research Expenditures by Discipline, Texas Public and Private Institutions, FY vi

9 OVERVIEW The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board s annual research expenditures report summarizes data submitted to the Board as required by Section (h) of the Texas Education Code, which states: Once a year, on dates prescribed by the board, each institution of higher education shall report to the board all research conducted at that institution during the last preceding year. The Coordinating Board s summary report is based on expenditures rather than awards because expenditures more accurately reflect the level of current research activity. Awards tend to fluctuate from year to year, making them a much less stable indicator for year-to-year comparisons. The Coordinating Board is only able to verify the accuracy of the research expenditures data by asking institutions to ensure that the data reported are consistent with data in their Annual Financial Reports. Expenditures related to research are divided into two categories: expenditures for the conduct of (1) research and development and (2) other research-related sponsored activities. Other research-related sponsored activities refers to support received from external sources to fund activities that cannot be considered strictly research. Examples include grants for equipment or facilities, contracts to perform studies, and training. Definitions for both categories are included in the survey form that is Appendix A. Some institutions do not report funds used for other sponsored activities related to research. Expenditures for research and development account for 98.7 percent of all reported expenditures. A set of definitions is provided in the research expenditures survey to help ensure consistency from institution to institution. Even with these safeguards, institutions have some latitude in determining how they report data. Data elements and definitions used in this year s report are comparable to similar research expenditure data elements used by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The two sets of elements differ to some degree because the NSF focuses on science and technology alone, while the Coordinating Board s report includes research in all disciplines. Collection of research expenditure data is a challenging task for institutions. Administrators face many difficulties as they sort out research expenditures at their institutions. For that reason, information they have submitted and the Coordinating Board s research expenditures report should be considered indicative rather than definitive. Appendix A includes a copy of the survey form completed by each institution. Appendix B includes a list of the institutional contacts who collected the data on their campuses. 1

10 This report also contains a section, beginning on page 32, that compares research funding in Texas with that of other states. These data are drawn from three National Science Foundation reports on research obligations and research expenditures. 2

11 ---- MAJOR FINDINGS Total research expenditures at Texas public institutions of higher education increased by 9.6 percent during Fiscal Year 2005, continuing a long-term growth trend. Expenditures at public and health-related institutions grew $133,088,920 (12 percent) and $82,660,006 (7.2 percent), respectively, compared to Fiscal Year As in most states, Texas higher education research expenditures were concentrated in a relatively small number of institutions. Collectively, the top five institutions in research spending accounted for 65 percent of total research expenditures. The top 10 institutions accounted for 85 percent of the total. Seven of the state's health-related institutions ranked among the top 10 Texas public institutions in research expenditures. In addition, the top eight institutions in Table 1 also appear in the National Science Foundation s list of top 100 institutions in federal research and development expenditures for Fiscal Year Table 1 Research and Development Expenditures Rankings, FY 2005 Institution Baylor College of Medicine* Texas A&M University (including Texas A&M Services) The University of Texas at Austin The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio University of Houston Texas A&M University System Health Science Center *FY2005 is the first year Baylor College of Medicine has been included in this report. At academic institutions 1 nationwide, the National Science Foundation/SRS, Academic Research and Development Expenditures: Fiscal Year 2003, Table B-29 shows that 61.7 percent of the academic research was funded by the federal government. The federal 1 For this purpose, academic institutions are generally defined as institutions of higher education that grant bachelor's or doctoratal degrees in science or engineering. 3

12 government funded 60.3 percent of all research expenditures by Texas public institutions of higher education, making it the source of most research funds as it is in other states. State government in Texas provided 15.4 percent of the funds for all research expenditures in the state s public higher education institutions. Institutional and private funding accounted for the remaining 24.3 percent. The ratio of federal funds to state-appropriated funds for each of the 10 Texas institutions reporting the greatest research expenditures is provided in Table 2. Table 2 Federal/State Research and Development Expenditures Ratio Rankings, FY 2005 Institution R&D Rank Fed/State Ratio Ratio Rank Baylor College of Medicine* The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston The University of Texas at Austin Texas A&M University System Health Science Center University of Houston Texas A&M University (including Texas A&M Services) The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center *FY2005 is the first year Baylor College of Medicine has been included in this report. Although not ranked, the Univ North Texas HSC had the highest Fed/State ratio, Medical sciences, accounting for 35 percent of the total, led all other disciplines in expenditures. The top five disciplines medical sciences, biological and other life sciences, engineering, physical sciences, and environmental sciences collectively accounted for 85.0 percent of all reported research expenditures. Texas ranked third among the states in total research expenditures for Fiscal Year 2003 (behind California and New York). California ($3.19 billion), New York ($1.86 billion), Pennsylvania ($1.42 billion), Texas ($1.39 billion), Maryland ($1.29 billion), and Massachusetts ($1.22 billion) were the top six states in federal obligations for research and development in science and engineering for Fiscal Year The National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, and the National Science Foundation provided 68.3 percent, 14.2 percent, and 7.5 percent, respectively, of the Fiscal Year 2003 federal obligations for research and development in science and engineering to Texas higher education institutions. 4

13 STATEWIDE SUMMARY DATA Table 3 and Figures 1 3 provide information on expenses and sources of funds for research and development at universities and health-related institutions. Figure 4 shows growth rates in research and development expenditures for public universities and health-related institutions. Expenditures were $216 million higher in Fiscal Year 2005 than in Fiscal Year 2004, with increases of $133 million at public universities and $83 million at public health-related institutions. Sixty-one percent of the increase is from federal sources. Table 3 Sources of Funds for Research and Development, FY 2005 State Federal Contracts Institution Appropriated and Grants Public Universities $687,231,060 $178,457,426 $99,234,886 $129,826,117 Health-Related Institutions $752,991,078 $164,506,979 $11,621,269 $51,282,931 All Public Institutions $1,440,222,138 $342,964,405 $110,856,155 $181,109,048 Independent Universities $70,157,495 $0 $3,066,509 $8,186,049 Health-Related Institutions $300,638,289 $3,184,034 $3,086,176 $94,812,950 All Independent Institutions $370,795,784 $3,184,034 $6,152,685 $102,998,999 Universities $757,388,555 $178,457,426 $102,301,395 $138,012,166 Health-Related Institutions $1,053,629,367 $167,691,013 $14,707,445 $146,095,881 Totals $1,811,017,922 $346,148,439 $117,008,840 $284,108,047 (table continued on next page) 5

14 Public Table 3 - continued Sources of Funds for Research and Development, FY 2005 Private Total Profit Non-Profit Universities $71,010,748 $76,930,264 $1,242,690,501 Health-Related Institutions $78,454,499 $167,099,656 $1,225,956,412 All Public Institutions $149,465,247 $244,029,920 $2,468,646,913 Independent Universities $4,070,412 $6,961,561 $92,442,026 Health-Related Institutions $17,567,907 $23,369,299 $442,658,655 All Independent Institutions $21,638,319 $30,330,860 $535,100,681 Universities $75,081,160 $83,891,825 $1,335,132,527 Health-Related Institutions $96,022,406 $190,468,955 $1,668,615,067 Totals $171,103,566 $274,360,780 $3,003,747,594 Figure 1 Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Institutions of Higher Education, FY 2005 Federal 60.3% State 15.4% Institution 9.5% Private 14.8% 6

15 Figure 2 Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Universities, FY 2005 Federal 56.7% State 21.0% Institution 10.3% Private 11.9% Figure 3 Sources of Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY 2005 Federal 63.1% State 10.9% Institution 8.8% Private 17.2% 7

16 Figure 4 Growth Rates in Research and Development Expenditures at Texas Public Institutions of Higher Education FY 2001-FY 2005 FY % Increase over previous year FY % FY2003 FY2002 FY % 15.9% 6.0% Universities Health-Related Institutions ,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 (Millions of Dollars) The accelerated growth in research expenditures peaked in 2002, dropping precipitously in two of the following years to overall growth rates comparable to those of the mid-1990s, and well below those characteristic of the 1980s. The sudden decline in the growth rate of research expenditures at public universities in Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004 is a unique feature in the history of research expenditures at Texas public higher education institutions, and resulted from slow growth in federal support and reduction in state support during those years. 8

17 Table 4 indicates expenditures in the 16 different fields defined in Appendix A. The Coordinating Board s instructions directed institutions to assign project expenditures to only one field to avoid duplication. For the most part, this table reflects expenditures in particular academic disciplines. Some inconsistency may result, however, as institutions strive to categorize a particular research project into only one field. For example, a college of agriculture could perform basic research in biological sciences and report expenses in that field rather than in agricultural sciences. Proportions of expenses by discipline are shown in Figure 5. Medical and biological sciences account for slightly more than 60 percent of all research expenditures. Table 4 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field and Source of Funding, FY 2005 Texas Institutions of Higher Education State Federal Contracts Institution Appropriated and Grants Agricultural Sciences $34,666,618 $27,109,706 $3,715,283 $9,834,925 Biological and Other Life Sciences $532,692,950 $97,917,346 $7,226,206 $71,592,080 Computer Science $45,453,936 $5,986,717 $6,933,381 $3,327,820 Engineering $194,216,233 $33,079,832 $51,025,771 $38,728,241 Environmental Sciences $102,420,361 $14,557,254 $8,343,146 $8,141,665 Mathematical Sciences $32,257,396 $11,124,066 $844,111 $1,516,029 Medical Sciences $634,190,072 $98,736,377 $13,326,027 $99,644,785 Physical Sciences $119,030,416 $20,935,514 $1,479,265 $11,507,896 Psychology $31,549,320 $817,201 $4,752,737 $2,183,995 Social Sciences $21,407,396 $9,686,325 $7,656,732 $5,577,585 Other Sciences $9,351,009 $3,522,256 $1,359,097 $2,038,666 Arts and Humanities $1,716,239 $1,562,811 $1,024,849 $4,575,015 Business Administration $2,014,709 $2,587,346 $387,634 $2,259,814 Education $39,078,653 $1,102,407 $5,132,773 $4,522,251 Law and Public Administration $1,936,173 $1,456,114 $1,091,577 $369,048 Other Non-Science Activities $9,036,441 $15,967,167 $2,710,251 $18,288,232 Totals $1,811,017,922 $346,148,439 $117,008,840 $284,108,047 (table continued on next page) 9

18 Table 4 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field and Source of Funding, FY 2005 Texas Institutions of Higher Education Profit Private Non-Profit Total Agricultural Sciences $4,285,846 $7,598,412 $87,210,790 Biological and Other Life Sciences $14,350,719 $81,484,381 $805,263,682 Computer Science $2,462,696 $853,081 $65,017,631 Engineering $36,725,241 $15,743,881 $369,519,199 Environmental Sciences $8,761,980 $6,176,862 $148,401,268 Mathematical Sciences $2,774,681 $1,957,161 $50,473,444 Medical Sciences $86,232,089 $120,511,869 $1,052,641,219 Physical Sciences $5,995,522 $18,658,480 $177,607,093 Psychology $444,290 $1,276,152 $41,023,695 Social Sciences $3,965,964 $5,549,502 $53,843,504 Other Sciences $1,095,281 $2,456,612 $19,822,921 Arts and Humanities $626,039 $2,023,167 $11,528,120 Business Administration $1,263,043 $2,826,856 $11,339,402 Education $1,715,516 $5,794,211 $57,345,811 Law and Public Administration $88,204 $428,463 $5,369,579 Other Non-Science Activities $316,455 $1,021,690 $47,340,236 Totals $171,103,566 $274,360,780 $3,003,747,594 Figure 5 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Discipline Texas Institutions of Higher Education Biological and Other Life Sciences 26.8% Engineering 12.3% Physical Sciences 5.9% Medical Sciences 35.0% All Other 12.1% Environmental Sciences 4.9% Agricultural Sciences 2.9% 10

19 Table 5 shows research in nine different areas of special interest at public universities, and Table 6 shows research in six different areas of special interest at public health-related institutions. Double counting was allowed because many projects are relevant to two or more areas of research. Table 5 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Universities State Federal Contracts Institution Appropriated and Grants Aerospace Technology $13,180,292 $1,083,764 $945,200 $689,105 Biotechnology $56,209,497 $23,977,471 $1,556,031 $4,260,968 Energy $31,329,646 $4,562,456 $3,209,863 $1,359,656 Environmental Science & Engineering $99,459,491 $13,702,991 $5,943,780 $6,327,273 Food, Fiber, Agricultural Products $23,622,688 $29,669,283 $2,380,860 $14,274,390 Manufacturing Technology $5,573,002 $1,342,477 $723,422 $660,856 Materials Science $29,912,532 $1,292,902 $4,851,883 $1,916,122 Microelectronics & Computer Technology $47,733,036 $5,537,235 $2,773,833 $4,235,938 Water Resources $7,325,063 $2,822,345 $3,349,493 $3,380,896 Totals $314,345,247 $83,990,924 $25,734,365 $37,105,204 Table 5 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Universities Private Profit Non-Profit Total Aerospace Technology $731,221 $610,297 $17,239,879 Biotechnology $4,823,728 $7,057,556 $97,885,251 Energy $2,025,002 $7,455,911 $49,942,534 Environmental Science & Engineering $2,894,057 $8,751,789 $137,079,381 Food, Fiber, Agricultural Products $4,403,246 $7,521,496 $81,871,963 Manufacturing Technology $1,070,875 $496,218 $9,866,850 Materials Science $4,096,221 $4,713,126 $46,782,786 Microelectronics & Computer Technology $2,880,509 $6,750,080 $69,910,631 Water Resources $806,049 $1,149,720 $18,833,566 Totals $23,730,908 $44,506,193 $529,412,841 11

20 Table 6 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Federal State Contracts Appropriated and Grants Institution Aging $46,849,831 $1,986,534 $346,759 $2,217,952 Cancer Research $252,182,789 $104,961,804 $1,028,110 $32,075,242 Cardiovascular Research $92,238,243 $1,783,743 $347,943 $10,857,973 Child Health and Human Development $85,775,731 $1,000,346 $5,276,780 $12,396,641 Mental Health $40,921,350 $978,276 $317,892 $6,566,242 Substance Abuse $30,621,064 $217,616 $288,350 $1,295,127 Totals $548,589,008 $110,928,319 $7,605,834 $65,409,177 Table 6 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D in Areas of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Private Profit Non-Profit Total Aging $1,321,734 $4,514,954 $57,237,764 Cancer Research $33,498,034 $57,781,713 $481,527,692 Cardiovascular Research $9,156,495 $21,360,584 $135,744,981 Child Health and Human Development $7,816,300 $9,934,571 $122,200,369 Mental Health $5,914,989 $4,134,081 $58,832,830 Substance Abuse $1,794,846 $509,584 $34,726,587 Totals $59,502,398 $98,235,487 $890,270,223 12

21 INSTITUTIONAL DATA UNIVERSITIES This section of the report contains detailed information on research expenditures reported by individual institutions. Statements related to data quality and applicability found on page 1 of this report also apply to the data shown in this section of the report. Figure 6 Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Universities, FY 2005 (Millions of Dollars) All Others Stephen F. Austin State West Texas A&M Texas Southern Texas A&M at Galveston UT at Brownsville UT-Pan American Texas Christian Baylor Texas State - San Marcos Tarleton State Prairie View A&M Texas A&M-Corpus Christi Texas A&M-Kingsville Southern Methodist University of North Texas UT at San Antonio UT at Arlington UT at El Paso UT at Dallas Texas Tech Rice Univ. of Houston UT at Austin Texas A&M and Services

22 Table 7 Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Universities, FY 2005 State Institution Federal Appropriated Contracts and Grants R&D Other R&D Other R&D Other Midwestern State $46,493 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $1,076,097 $0 $0 $0 $305,619 $0 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $8,670,785 $151,548 $1,717,257 $791,038 $184,998 $2,922 Tarleton State $6,248,440 $0 $259,266 $0 $3,164,231 $0 Texas A&M and Services $212,918,255 $491,881 $86,268,851 $921,931 $35,018,870 $163,951 Texas A&M-Commerce $424,070 $0 $124,729 $0 $404,885 $700,725 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $5,059,684 $0 $1,311,208 $0 $2,365,319 $0 Texas A&M at Galveston $3,000,732 $336,270 $518,824 $318,062 $565,800 $0 Texas A&M International $190,209 $0 $0 $0 $26,615 $0 Texas A&M-Kingsville $5,028,940 $0 $3,041,208 $0 $700,608 $0 Texas A&M-Texarkana $199,617 $0 $0 $4,027 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $1,968,369 $0 $1,925,544 $412,659 $174,375 $0 Texas Southern $4,650,459 $0 $0 $0 $255,498 $0 Texas State University System Angelo State $127,653 $0 $437,557 $0 $59,708 $0 Lamar $1,259,293 $34,992 $1,223,536 $152,957 $703,202 $4,795 Sam Houston State $1,155,080 $0 $190,376 $0 $245,760 $0 Sul Ross State $1,506,617 $0 $354,133 $0 $91,175 $0 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $3,045,059 $0 $88,992 $0 $2,023,858 $0 Texas Tech $22,804,929 $0 $12,612,451 $0 $3,244,243 $0 Texas Woman's $940,048 $0 $435,829 $539,740 $289,755 $0 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $17,833,042 $0 $9,909,477 $0 $2,434,542 $134,478 UT at Austin $269,612,823 $0 $24,167,183 $0 $22,074,880 $0 UT at Brownsville $4,897,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UT at Dallas $19,933,291 $305,934 $7,193,757 $452,694 $9,496,024 $0 UT at El Paso $23,961,812 $0 $7,760,164 $0 $1,050,051 $0 UT-Pan American $3,770,457 $303,699 $1,367,088 $0 $34,899 $0 UT of the Permian Basin $360,016 $480,322 $579,177 $0 $7,464 $0 UT at San Antonio $16,174,944 $91,971 $3,276,193 $229,942 $1,748,151 $0 UT at Tyler $143,425 $172,502 $0 $0 $116,196 $269,658 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $41,484,043 $0 $12,900,355 $0 $10,082,230 $0 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $503,975 $38,863 $497,478 $280,286 $30,304 $216 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $353,756 $0 $184,785 $0 $0 $0 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of North Texas $7,881,131 $0 $112,008 $0 $2,335,626 $0 Independent Universities Baylor $1,928,007 $0 $0 $0 $904,767 $0 Rice $54,880,738 $8,117,806 $0 $0 $1,156,978 $561,675 Southern Methodist $9,983,365 $1,830,676 $0 $0 $483,072 $193,326 Texas Christian $3,365,385 $0 $0 $0 $521,692 $0 Totals $757,388,555 $12,356,464 $178,457,426 $4,103,336 $102,301,395 $2,031,746 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 14 (table continued on next page)

23 Table 7 - continued Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Universities, FY 2005 Institution Institution Private, Profit Private, Non-Profit R&D Other R&D Other R&D Other Midwestern State $0 $0 $0 $0 $41,487 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $2,116,175 $25,216 $536,157 $0 $268,893 $0 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $0 $301,540 $88,370 $0 $258,111 $0 Tarleton State $78,989 $0 $70,145 $0 $82,696 $0 Texas A&M and Services $61,963,187 $4,679,696 $15,372,256 $1,198,011 $23,322,840 $82,211 Texas A&M-Commerce $0 $0 $0 $0 $144,469 $0 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $1,462,085 $0 $133,520 $0 $1,741,254 $0 Texas A&M at Galveston $188,240 $37,698 $104,911 $1,018 $926,591 $15,135 Texas A&M International $33,508 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas A&M-Kingsville $401,912 $0 $837,530 $0 $2,616,306 $0 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $0 $0 $265,388 $0 $238,928 $0 Texas Southern $0 $0 $0 $0 $182,078 $0 Texas State University System Angelo State $0 $0 $12,343 $0 $77,493 $0 Lamar $8,531 $145,421 $66,684 $0 $114,221 $11,157 Sam Houston State $955,053 $0 $33,791 $0 $596,883 $0 Sul Ross State $0 $0 $424,474 $0 $0 $0 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $2,527,574 $0 $0 $0 $1,212,283 $0 Texas Tech $1,637,586 $230,216 $3,528,479 $0 $4,635,109 $0 Texas Woman's $0 $0 $63,503 $0 $198,250 $7,837 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $158,053 $0 $2,192,852 $0 $1,298,994 $0 UT at Austin $43,069,549 $0 $40,820,495 $0 $23,122,782 $0 UT at Brownsville $417,012 $0 $0 $0 $60,137 $0 UT at Dallas $1,722,288 $3,781,432 $1,675,544 $465,005 $3,089,895 $10,964 UT at El Paso $1,081,802 $886,057 $228,062 $0 $1,931,694 $0 UT-Pan American $23,885 $0 $92,163 $0 $527,672 $0 UT of the Permian Basin $177,859 $0 $0 $0 $36,178 $0 UT at San Antonio $1,283,132 $0 $180,751 $0 $942,673 $0 UT at Tyler $41,315 $23,531 $2,141 $0 $198,224 $2,198 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $6,599,699 $0 $3,406,687 $0 $6,980,172 $0 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $79,091 $61,506 $3,580 $3,580 $253,015 $118,855 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $21,073 $0 $715 $0 $2,923 $0 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $4,443 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of North Texas $3,774,076 $0 $870,207 $0 $1,828,013 $0 Independent Universities Baylor $1,969,025 $0 $2,214,977 $0 $1,398,364 $0 Rice $2,404,406 $8,845 $1,581,036 $2,697,593 $3,552,491 $0 Southern Methodist $2,721,528 $1,329,948 $274,399 $16,006 $976,052 $545,400 Texas Christian $1,091,090 $0 $0 $0 $1,034,654 $0 Totals $138,012,166 $11,511,106 $75,081,160 $4,381,213 $83,891,825 $793,757 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 15 (table continued on next page)

24 Table 7 - continued Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Universities, FY 2005 Institution Total R&D Other R&D and Other Midwestern State $87,980 $0 $87,980 Stephen F. Austin State $4,302,941 $25,216 $4,328,157 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $10,919,521 $1,247,048 $12,166,569 Tarleton State $9,903,767 $0 $9,903,767 Texas A&M and Services $434,864,259 $7,537,681 $442,401,940 Texas A&M-Commerce $1,098,153 $700,725 $1,798,878 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $12,073,070 $0 $12,073,070 Texas A&M at Galveston $5,305,098 $708,183 $6,013,281 Texas A&M International $250,332 $0 $250,332 Texas A&M-Kingsville $12,626,504 $0 $12,626,504 Texas A&M-Texarkana $199,617 $4,027 $203,644 West Texas A&M $4,572,604 $412,659 $4,985,263 Texas Southern $5,088,035 $0 $5,088,035 Texas State University System Angelo State $714,754 $0 $714,754 Lamar $3,375,467 $349,322 $3,724,789 Sam Houston State $3,176,943 $0 $3,176,943 Sul Ross State $2,376,399 $0 $2,376,399 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $8,897,766 $0 $8,897,766 Texas Tech $48,462,797 $230,216 $48,693,013 Texas Woman's $1,927,385 $547,577 $2,474,962 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $33,826,960 $134,478 $33,961,438 UT at Austin $422,867,712 $0 $422,867,712 UT at Brownsville $5,374,665 $0 $5,374,665 UT at Dallas $43,110,799 $5,016,029 $48,126,828 UT at El Paso $36,013,585 $886,057 $36,899,642 UT-Pan American $5,816,164 $303,699 $6,119,863 UT of the Permian Basin $1,160,694 $480,322 $1,641,016 UT at San Antonio $23,605,844 $321,913 $23,927,757 UT at Tyler $501,301 $467,889 $969,190 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $81,453,186 $0 $81,453,186 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $1,367,443 $503,306 $1,870,749 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $563,252 $0 $563,252 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $4,443 $0 $4,443 University of North Texas $16,801,061 $0 $16,801,061 Independent Universities Baylor $8,415,140 $0 $8,415,140 Rice $63,575,649 $11,385,919 $74,961,568 Southern Methodist $14,438,416 $3,915,356 $18,353,772 Texas Christian $6,012,821 $0 $6,012,821 Totals $1,335,132,527 $35,177,622 $1,370,310,149 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 16

25 Table 8 Federal R&D Expenditures/FTE Faculty Ratio, FY 2005 Texas Public Universities Institution Federal R&D Federal R&D FTE Faculty* Expenditures Expenditures/FTE Midwestern State $46, $ Stephen F. Austin State $1,076, $3, Texas A&M University System** Prairie View A&M $8,670, $39, Tarleton State $6,248, $30, Texas A&M and Services*** $212,918,255 1, $132, Texas A&M-Commerce $424, $2, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $5,059, $27, Texas A&M at Galveston $3,000, $68, Texas A&M International $190, $1, Texas A&M-Kingsville $5,028, $24, Texas A&M-Texarkana $199, $4, West Texas A&M $1,968, $12, Texas Southern $4,650, $31, Texas State University System Angelo State $127, $ Lamar $1,259, $4, Sam Houston State $1,155, $3, Sul Ross State $1,506, $23, Sul Ross - Rio Grande $ $0.00 Texas State - San Marcos $3,045, $5, Texas Tech $22,804, $25, Texas Woman's $940, $3, University of Texas System UT at Arlington $17,833, $35, UT at Austin $269,612,823 1, $154, UT at Brownsville $4,897, $36, UT at Dallas $19,933, $66, UT at El Paso $23,961, $55, UT-Pan American $3,770, $10, UT of the Permian Basin $360, $4, UT at San Antonio $16,174, $36, UT at Tyler $143, $ University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $41,484, $48, Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $503, $2, Univ. of Houston-Downtown $353, $1, Univ. of Houston-Victoria $ $0.00 University of North Texas $7,881, $11, Totals $687,231,060 12, $56, * FTE Faculty indicates number of full-time equivalents for tenured and tenure-track faculty for fall of ** A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. *** FTE faculty for Texas A&M and Services is based on its Legislative Appropriations Request for FY 2004 and includes 207 FTEs from Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and 16.1 from Texas Engineering Experiment Station. 17

26 Institution Table 9 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005 Texas Universities Agricultural Sciences Biological and Other Life Sciences Midwestern State $0 $40,717 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $1,764,499 $1,406,890 $0 $0 $90,890 $19,119 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $5,262,941 $550,473 $130,574 $3,494,954 $0 $102,286 Tarleton State $4,856,995 $1,420 $0 $25,411 $2,627,034 $22,242 Texas A&M and Services $51,589,479 $73,439,641 $10,182,153 $134,942,550 $68,730,067 $8,729,159 Texas A&M-Commerce $111,006 $2,017 $1,664 $0 $0 $206,273 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $925 $200,987 $786,602 $330,309 $3,963,915 $1,575,424 Texas A&M at Galveston $0 $599,308 $0 $293,787 $4,177,601 $0 Texas A&M International $0 $19,840 $0 $1,063 $109,367 $0 Texas A&M-Kingsville $6,368,308 $2,764,916 $0 $1,974,369 $942,978 $0 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $1,808,675 $174,728 $0 $855,422 $354,085 $0 Texas Southern $0 $3,230,813 $0 $9,137 $0 $24,941 Texas State University System Angelo State $499,753 $61,750 $0 $0 $0 $510 Lamar $0 $23,272 $49,747 $1,131,072 $1,548,750 $3,224 Sam Houston State $171,721 $475,797 $2,898 $0 $1,154,010 $147,847 Sul Ross State $379,241 $425,314 $9,698 $0 $1,221,048 $0 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $209,015 $1,053,693 $352,638 $34,823 $2,169,819 $157,442 Texas Tech $12,802,655 $4,040,414 $530,930 $12,109,383 $7,074,561 $423,495 Texas Woman's $0 $1,032,395 $0 $0 $0 $7,307 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $0 $875,856 $4,343,065 $15,036,986 $316,577 $463,586 UT at Austin $182,288 $36,086,780 $23,734,851 $137,400,427 $39,620,224 $16,431,656 UT at Brownsville $34,853 $622,078 $181,534 $0 $45,752 $0 UT at Dallas $0 $4,063,351 $7,796,281 $11,450,417 $867,780 $59,757 UT at El Paso $0 $4,651,582 $1,126,941 $4,822,170 $2,929,623 $69,798 UT-Pan American $39,867 $529,124 $413,789 $1,379,214 $203,167 $247,931 UT of the Permian Basin $0 $28,910 $0 $0 $2,033 $0 UT at San Antonio $0 $10,989,127 $617,196 $1,931,011 $1,149,829 $95,478 UT at Tyler $0 $48,784 $15,024 $123,421 $0 $0 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $3,051 $7,504,339 $4,557,473 $12,902,132 $1,673,096 $1,818,996 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $0 $225,389 $177,123 $52,603 $88,619 $48,672 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $0 $116,568 $218,264 $12,392 $105,538 $0 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of North Texas $83,991 $2,693,620 $551,731 $3,062,690 $1,521,203 $152,044 Independent Universities Baylor $0 $691,903 $222,206 $432,804 $580,181 $86,078 Rice $0 $12,500,887 $8,340,452 $17,926,337 $2,066,059 $3,591,578 Southern Methodist $0 $2,116,761 $674,797 $1,847,159 $2,368,638 $353,656 Texas Christian $0 $60,479 $0 $60,208 $133,788 $995 Totals $86,169,263 $173,349,923 $65,017,631 $363,642,251 $147,836,232 $34,839,494 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 18 Computer Science Engineering Environmental Sciences Mathematical Sciences (table continued on next page)

27 Table 9 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005 Texas Universities Institution Medical Sciences Physical Sciences Psychology Social Sciences Other Sciences Midwestern State $0 $0 $0 $770 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $0 $171,562 $11,753 $22,111 $184,853 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $67,986 $1,004,324 $13,187 $13,935 $0 Tarleton State $6,529 $445,880 $0 $12,888 $0 Texas A&M and Services $23,245,467 $28,703,881 $2,807,109 $16,571,263 $3,548,918 Texas A&M-Commerce $0 $256,706 $30,642 $1,677 $0 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $1,061,668 $190,950 $0 $65,135 $666,110 Texas A&M at Galveston $0 $168,394 $0 $66,008 $0 Texas A&M International $0 $0 $0 $0 $29,678 Texas A&M-Kingsville $0 $90,032 $0 $0 $22,559 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $0 $205,741 $4,368 $59,617 $0 Texas Southern $0 $1,169,373 $0 $0 $15,102 Texas State University System Angelo State $12,679 $43,661 $46,823 $0 $0 Lamar $0 $136,130 $4,241 $0 $0 Sam Houston State $0 $107,598 $32,638 $116,896 $0 Sul Ross State $0 $0 $0 $340,260 $0 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $71,359 $2,836,990 $12,042 $160,371 $204,583 Texas Tech $0 $5,103,002 $248,402 $4,530,134 $0 Texas Woman's $416,595 $69,619 $3,611 $15,314 $325,822 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $406,002 $4,608,662 $1,340,579 $519,976 $0 UT at Austin $17,824,731 $64,037,723 $8,358,968 $21,426,067 $2,449,724 UT at Brownsville $2,366,348 $1,989,725 $1,200 $14,454 $42,716 UT at Dallas $1,437,663 $12,290,005 $2,805,625 $951,837 $345,334 UT at El Paso $3,154,225 $1,597,950 $922,385 $913,867 $1,629,860 UT-Pan American $918,985 $100,125 $112,913 $93,322 $0 UT of the Permian Basin $7,464 $58,107 $0 $0 $85,850 UT at San Antonio $0 $1,028,465 $309,152 $328,589 $2,981,246 UT at Tyler $216,333 $22,004 $8,296 $0 $5,757 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $7,533,235 $18,163,162 $11,532,068 $880,382 $3,366,585 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $0 $115,264 $7,442 $1,587 $10,774 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $0 $46,905 $0 $649 $25,821 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,443 University of North Texas $36,637 $3,032,628 $552,522 $1,751,286 $0 Independent Universities Baylor $25,224 $1,959,909 $142,541 $1,158,061 $895,312 Rice $0 $16,694,899 $831,277 $597,609 $0 Southern Methodist $0 $2,208,036 $1,277,016 $634,533 $357,948 Texas Christian $608,235 $873,929 $2,509,986 $16,343 $15,157 Totals $59,417,365 $169,531,341 $33,926,786 $51,264,941 $17,214,152 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 19 (table continued on next page)

28 Institution Table 9 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005 Texas Universities Arts and Humanities Law and Business Administration Education Public Administration Other Non- Sciences Midwestern State $0 $0 $46,493 $0 $0 $87,980 Stephen F. Austin State $100,492 $14,036 $201,587 $64,518 $250,631 $4,302,941 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $687 $2,059 $222,807 $53,308 $0 $10,919,521 Tarleton State $9,749 $0 $257,190 $0 $1,638,429 $9,903,767 Texas A&M and Services $1,264,162 $2,532,064 $7,991,890 $313,472 $272,984 $434,864,259 Texas A&M-Commerce $7,546 $4,465 $433,734 $0 $42,423 $1,098,153 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $45,203 $52,559 $2,026,741 $0 $1,106,542 $12,073,070 Texas A&M at Galveston $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,305,098 Texas A&M International $17,080 $5,348 $67,815 $141 $0 $250,332 Texas A&M-Kingsville $200 $422 $145,616 $0 $317,104 $12,626,504 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $199,617 $0 $0 $199,617 West Texas A&M $72,070 $658,689 $370,019 $0 $9,190 $4,572,604 Texas Southern $0 $8,073 $182,944 $0 $447,652 $5,088,035 Texas State University System Angelo State $0 $10,000 $39,578 $0 $0 $714,754 Lamar $0 $0 $0 $0 $479,031 $3,375,467 Sam Houston State $20,989 $44,745 $98,514 $163,454 $639,836 $3,176,943 Sul Ross State $838 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,376,399 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $121,956 $109,483 $915,937 $259,839 $227,776 $8,897,766 Texas Tech $92,387 $516,525 $959,554 $31,355 $0 $48,462,797 Texas Woman's $2,393 $1,699 $15,199 $0 $37,431 $1,927,385 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $121,255 $129,929 $144,320 $255,494 $5,264,673 $33,826,960 UT at Austin $3,849,081 $3,212,293 $21,190,519 $1,388,973 $25,673,407 $422,867,712 UT at Brownsville $27,274 $0 $43,558 $0 $5,173 $5,374,665 UT at Dallas $415,133 $609,262 $18,354 $0 $0 $43,110,799 UT at El Paso $75,433 $6,243 $7,863,210 $751,989 $5,498,309 $36,013,585 UT-Pan American $597,557 $197,833 $835,124 $147,213 $0 $5,816,164 UT of the Permian Basin $2,986 $268,815 $533,402 $0 $173,127 $1,160,694 UT at San Antonio $1,565,940 $588,902 $784,695 $1,236,214 $0 $23,605,844 UT at Tyler $7,578 $14,078 $40,026 $0 $0 $501,301 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $780,229 $333,371 $5,900,427 $652,691 $3,851,949 $81,453,186 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $1,602 $182,358 $8,876 $0 $447,134 $1,367,443 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $0 $0 $37,115 $0 $0 $563,252 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,443 University of North Texas $421,567 $1,333,052 $1,557,172 $50,918 $0 $16,801,061 Independent Universities Baylor $790,501 $140,509 $1,218,303 $0 $71,608 $8,415,140 Rice $856,855 $147,377 $22,319 $0 $0 $63,575,649 Southern Methodist $158,535 $134,855 $2,168,874 $0 $137,608 $14,438,416 Texas Christian $100,842 $80,358 $804,282 $0 $748,219 $6,012,821 Totals $11,528,120 $11,339,402 $57,345,811 $5,369,579 $47,340,236 $1,335,132,527 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. Total 20

29 Table 10 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Universities Institution Aerospace Technology Biotechnology Energy Environmental Sciences Food, Fiber, Agricultural Products Midwestern State $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $0 $568,998 $0 $1,740,317 $1,787,336 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $6,646 $0 $3,036 $0 $118,167 Tarleton State $0 $0 $0 $55,275 $3,450,529 Texas A&M and Services $1,352,492 $46,564,608 $5,558,064 $68,730,067 $57,027,295 Texas A&M-Commerce $0 $0 $0 $0 $171,006 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $0 $461,268 $0 $2,031,796 $925 Texas A&M at Galveston $0 $0 $7,356 $709,967 $0 Texas A&M International $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas A&M-Kingsville $0 $2,791,006 $26,033 $1,928,898 $2,982,102 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $0 $12,811 $362,981 $263,306 $1,475,186 Texas Southern $0 $1,002,266 $0 $0 $0 Texas State University System Angelo State $0 $0 $0 $9,994 $454,762 Lamar $0 $0 $28,179 $1,931,491 $0 Sam Houston State $0 $0 $0 $190,448 $166,415 Sul Ross State $0 $0 $0 $243,125 $0 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $0 $855,871 $0 $919,324 $209,015 Texas Tech $1,256,778 $4,159,181 $2,199,265 $9,440,963 $13,203,416 Texas Woman's $0 $0 $0 $492 $304,384 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $235,987 $2,869,658 $3,462,158 $1,459,074 $0 UT at Austin $10,061,739 $20,851,044 $33,912,190 $37,286,388 $408,595 UT at Brownsville $1,737,630 $2,682,627 $40,110 $0 $0 UT at Dallas $318,893 $598,929 $0 $981,631 $0 UT at El Paso $0 $0 $1,256 $384,342 $0 UT-Pan American $0 $0 $0 $203,167 $39,867 UT of the Permian Basin $0 $28,719 $52,208 $5,898 $0 UT at San Antonio $0 $807,822 $0 $1,149,829 $0 UT at Tyler $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $2,001,229 $2,494,571 $2,504,823 $1,780,993 $0 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $52,603 $2,736 $0 $88,619 $0 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $8,575 $0 $0 $105,538 $0 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of North Texas $35,069 $754,266 $198,225 $1,591,815 $72,963 Independent Universities Baylor $0 $179,475 $83,127 $778,353 $0 Rice $172,238 $10,199,395 $1,503,523 $3,068,271 $0 Southern Methodist $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas Christian $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Totals $17,239,879 $97,885,251 $49,942,534 $137,079,381 $81,871,963 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 21 (table continued on next page)

30 Table 10 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Universities Institution Manufacturing Technology Materials Science Microelectronics and Computer Technology Water Resources Total Midwestern State $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Stephen F. Austin State $0 $0 $0 $1,585,135 $5,681,786 Texas A&M University System* Prairie View A&M $0 $0 $0 $0 $127,849 Tarleton State $0 $0 $0 $2,033,846 $5,539,650 Texas A&M and Services $3,131,270 $6,847,679 $7,657,176 $5,124,010 $201,992,661 Texas A&M-Commerce $0 $177,261 $1,663 $0 $349,930 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $0 $0 $577,952 $1,025,931 $4,097,872 Texas A&M at Galveston $0 $0 $0 $0 $717,323 Texas A&M International $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas A&M-Kingsville $0 $25,212 $1,296 $74,881 $7,829,428 Texas A&M-Texarkana $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 West Texas A&M $0 $70,567 $0 $82,976 $2,267,827 Texas Southern $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,002,266 Texas State University System Angelo State $0 $9,310 $0 $54,677 $528,743 Lamar $144,395 $0 $66,942 $150,610 $2,321,617 Sam Houston State $0 $0 $0 $730,617 $1,087,480 Sul Ross State $0 $0 $0 $0 $243,125 Sul Ross - Rio Grande $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas State - San Marcos $0 $2,278,987 $117,114 $1,210,420 $5,590,731 Texas Tech $1,239,862 $3,714,551 $2,211,457 $3,071,536 $40,497,009 Texas Woman's $0 $0 $0 $0 $304,876 University of Texas System UT at Arlington $2,548,932 $5,149,150 $6,655,996 $252,726 $22,633,681 UT at Austin $935,433 $16,165,287 $35,907,681 $2,591,174 $158,119,531 UT at Brownsville $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,460,367 UT at Dallas $0 $2,201,960 $1,100,093 $0 $5,201,506 UT at El Paso $2,607 $730,854 $149,125 $177,983 $1,446,167 UT-Pan American $1,126,479 $0 $413,789 $0 $1,783,302 UT of the Permian Basin $0 $0 $0 $0 $86,825 UT at San Antonio $0 $0 $617,197 $208,206 $2,783,054 UT at Tyler $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $727,323 $4,156,638 $5,186,490 $1,008 $18,853,075 Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $0 $0 $177,123 $0 $321,081 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $0 $0 $19,352 $0 $133,465 Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 University of North Texas $10,549 $3,302,039 $614,312 $168,844 $6,748,082 Independent Universities Baylor $0 $176,934 $113,522 $288,986 $1,620,397 Rice $0 $1,776,357 $8,322,351 $0 $25,042,135 Southern Methodist $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Texas Christian $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Totals $9,866,850 $46,782,786 $69,910,631 $18,833,566 $529,412,841 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. * A&M agency and research foundation expenditures reported by individual affiliated university. 22

31 INSTITUTIONAL DATA HEALTH-RELATED INSTITUTIONS This section of the report contains detailed information on research expenses reported by individual health-related institutions. Nine of Texas 10 health-related institutions are public institutions. The sole independent higher education health-related institution is Baylor College of Medicine. Statements related to data quality and applicability found on page 1 of this report also apply to the data shown in this section of the report. Figure 7 Expenditures for Research and Development at Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY 2005 (Millions of Dollars) UT Health Center at Tyler 11.4 Texas Tech Univ HSC 18.2 Univ North Texas HSC 22.3 Texas A&M HSC 70.7 UTHSC at San Antonio UTMB at Galveston UTHSC at Houston UT Southwestern Medical Center UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Baylor - Coll. of Medicine

32 Table 11 Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY 2005 State Federal Institution Appropriated Contracts and Grants R&D Other R&D Other R&D Other Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $300,638,289 $0 $3,184,034 $0 $3,086,176 $0 Texas A&M HSC $32,949,216 $0 $9,402,090 $0 $1,666,774 $0 Texas Tech Univ HSC $6,278,949 $0 $7,056,205 $0 $236,351 $0 Univ North Texas HSC $17,036,630 $905,667 $0 $0 $231,278 $38,757 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $160,953,856 $0 $99,498,671 $0 $178,248 $0 UTMB at Galveston $117,235,448 $0 $11,335,537 $0 $349,156 $0 UTHSC at Houston $116,397,631 $0 $7,435,961 $0 $6,951,055 $0 UT Health Center at Tyler $4,956,399 $0 $2,594,710 $0 $0 $0 UTHSC at San Antonio $95,125,850 $0 $4,406,613 $0 $398,513 $0 UT Southwestern Medical Center $202,057,099 $0 $22,777,192 $0 $1,609,894 $0 Totals $1,053,629,367 $905,667 $167,691,013 $0 $14,707,445 $38,757 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. Table 11 - continued Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY 2005 Institution Institution Private, Profit Private, Non-Profit R&D Other R&D Other R&D Other Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $94,812,950 $0 $17,567,907 $0 $23,369,299 $0 Texas A&M HSC $9,179,786 $0 $3,937,824 $0 $13,569,255 $0 Texas Tech Univ HSC $1,684,491 $0 $1,064,793 $0 $1,868,692 $0 Univ North Texas HSC $1,314,327 $1,513,029 $1,222,936 $18,770 $2,520,300 $0 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $11,519,509 $0 $26,766,196 $0 $43,062,199 $0 UTMB at Galveston $413,295 $0 $8,065,420 $0 $12,558,606 $0 UTHSC at Houston $2,857,092 $0 $8,222,581 $0 $14,655,375 $0 UT Health Center at Tyler $3,035,774 $0 $147,974 $0 $685,403 $0 UTHSC at San Antonio $9,694,431 $0 $14,603,209 $0 $9,829,919 $0 UT Southwestern Medical Center $11,584,226 $1,918,523 $14,423,566 $0 $68,349,907 $0 Totals $146,095,881 $3,431,552 $96,022,406 $18,770 $190,468,955 $0 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. Table 11 - continued Total Expenditures for Research and Other Research-Related Sponsored Programs by Source of Funds, Texas Health-Related Institutions, FY 2005 Institution Total R&D Other Total Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $442,658,655 $0 $442,658,655 Texas A&M HSC $70,704,945 $0 $70,704,945 Texas Tech Univ HSC $18,189,481 $0 $18,189,481 Univ North Texas HSC $22,325,471 $2,476,223 $24,801,694 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $341,978,679 $0 $341,978,679 UTMB at Galveston $149,957,462 $0 $149,957,462 UTHSC at Houston $156,519,695 $0 $156,519,695 UT Health Center at Tyler $11,420,260 $0 $11,420,260 UTHSC at San Antonio $134,058,535 $0 $134,058,535 UT Southwestern Medical Center $320,801,884 $1,918,523 $322,720,407 Totals $1,668,615,067 $4,394,746 $1,673,009,813 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. 24

33 Institution Table 12 Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $0 $227,505,363 $0 $0 $0 Texas A&M HSC $61,738 $111,437 $1,687,102 $550,164 $1,925 Texas Tech Univ HSC $0 $7,607,572 $0 $0 $0 Univ North Texas HSC $0 $15,973,670 $0 $0 $0 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $0 $121,083,426 $1,536,185 $0 $15,632,025 UTMB at Galveston $0 $78,571,025 $2,653,661 $0 $0 UTHSC at Houston $0 $25,868,186 $0 $0 $0 UT Health Center at Tyler $979,789 $0 $0 $14,872 $0 UTHSC at San Antonio $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 UT Southwestern Medical Center $0 $155,193,080 $0 $0 $0 Totals $1,041,527 $631,913,759 $5,876,948 $565,036 $15,633,950 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. Agricultural Sciences Biological and Other Life Sciences Engineering Environmental Sciences Mathematical Sciences Table 12 - continued Expenditures for Conduct of R&D by Field, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Institution Medical Sciences Physical Social Sciences Psychology Other Sciences Sciences Total Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $215,153,292 $0 $0 $0 $0 $442,658,655 Texas A&M HSC $68,104,520 $19,054 $101,110 $67,895 $0 $70,704,945 Texas Tech Univ HSC $10,581,909 $0 $0 $0 $0 $18,189,481 Univ North Texas HSC $6,351,801 $0 $0 $0 $0 $22,325,471 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $186,163,878 $8,056,698 $6,995,799 $2,510,668 $0 $341,978,679 UTMB at Galveston $68,732,776 $0 $0 $0 $0 $149,957,462 UTHSC at Houston $130,651,509 $0 $0 $0 $0 $156,519,695 UT Health Center at Tyler $10,425,599 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,420,260 UTHSC at San Antonio $134,058,535 $0 $0 $0 $0 $134,058,535 UT Southwestern Medical Center $163,000,035 $0 $0 $0 $2,608,769 $320,801,884 Totals $993,223,854 $8,075,752 $7,096,909 $2,578,563 $2,608,769 $1,668,615,067 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. 25

34 Table 13 Expenditures for Research and Development by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Institution Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $11,360,861 $73,578,317 $46,541,589 $68,191,403 Texas A&M HSC $1,226,836 $4,476,779 $6,840,465 $5,984,773 Texas Tech Univ HSC $2,614,370 $3,712,371 $2,823,102 $1,380,937 Univ North Texas HSC $5,023,993 $865,791 $3,078,537 $0 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $0 $341,978,679 $0 $0 UTMB at Galveston $12,736,474 $8,505,542 $9,354,106 $17,942,797 UTHSC at Houston $2,377,560 $3,705,828 $13,517,858 $12,044,841 UT Health Center at Tyler $0 $2,627 $0 $0 UTHSC at San Antonio $14,811,059 $14,954,110 $12,501,282 $8,346,059 UT Southwestern Medical Center $7,086,611 $29,747,648 $41,088,042 $8,309,559 Totals $57,237,764 $481,527,692 $135,744,981 $122,200,369 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. Aging Cancer Research Cardiovascular Research Child Health and Human Development Table 13 - continued Expenditures for Research and Development by Area of Special Interest, FY 2005 Texas Health-Related Institutions Institution Mental Health Substance Abuse Total Baylor - Coll. of Medicine $25,598,897 $6,924,575 $232,195,642 Texas A&M HSC $211,217 $1,561,899 $20,301,969 Texas Tech Univ HSC $831,144 $0 $11,361,924 Univ North Texas HSC $1,410,670 $1,093,542 $11,472,533 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $0 $0 $341,978,679 UTMB at Galveston $2,226,783 $5,582,551 $56,348,253 UTHSC at Houston $6,499,075 $6,795,882 $44,941,044 UT Health Center at Tyler $0 $0 $2,627 UTHSC at San Antonio $10,182,974 $7,131,157 $67,926,641 UT Southwestern Medical Center $11,872,070 $5,636,981 $103,740,911 Totals $58,832,830 $34,726,587 $890,270,223 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. 26

35 HISTORICAL DATA FOR PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS Figure 8 graphs total research and development expenditures since The recent accelerated growth in research expenditures for the public health-related institutions results primarily from the doubling of the National Institutes of Health budget, a major source of research funding, from 1999 to Figure 8 2,500 Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Institutions of Higher Education FY FY ,469 2,250 2,174 2,253 2,000 2,050 1,770 (Millions of Dollars) 1,750 1,500 1,250 1, ,044 1,137 1,177 1,211 1,266 1,323 1,381 1,452 1, Fiscal Year Universities Health-Related Institutions Table 14 on the following page shows total research and development expenditures at Texas public universities over the past four years. Table 15 shows federal research and development expenditures and the ratio of federal-to-state research and development expenditures over the past four years. Tables 16 and 17 show similar data for health-related institutions. One-year and five-year changes in federal expenditures for research and development for the different disciplines are shown in Table

36 Table 14 Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Universities Institution FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Percent Change* Midwestern State $74,626 $85,760 $119,653 $87, % Stephen F. Austin State $5,583,051 $5,491,566 $3,639,457 $4,302, % Texas A&M University System Prairie View A&M $10,330,085 $10,682,633 $10,697,128 $10,919, % Tarleton State $7,909,999 $8,229,694 $8,579,202 $9,903, % Texas A&M and Services $372,828,854 $390,305,058 $390,654,670 $434,864, % Texas A&M-Commerce $629,496 $520,321 $609,864 $1,098, % Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $10,365,501 $12,110,618 $13,682,911 $12,073, % Texas A&M at Galveston $4,010,618 $4,949,454 $4,537,645 $5,305, % Texas A&M International $677,346 $570,457 $185,137 $250, % Texas A&M-Kingsville $8,591,828 $10,148,177 $10,536,809 $12,626, % Texas A&M-Texarkana $212,252 $116,913 $188,653 $199, % West Texas A&M $6,036,713 $6,221,085 $5,503,151 $4,572, % Texas Southern $4,930,117 $3,872,628 $4,647,980 $5,088, % Texas State University System Angelo State $800,044 $699,836 $885,426 $714, % Lamar $4,237,915 $3,958,697 $3,210,250 $3,375, % Sam Houston State $1,931,014 $1,829,162 $2,858,129 $3,176, % Sul Ross State $841,426 $816,917 $1,058,664 $2,376, % Sul Ross - Rio Grande $10,464 $21,610 $3,506 $ % Texas State - San Marcos $10,400,827 $9,112,931 $9,129,998 $8,897, % Texas Tech $51,701,449 $56,147,235 $48,142,661 $48,462, % Texas Woman's $2,960,015 $2,998,340 $2,233,085 $1,927, % University of Texas System UT at Arlington $21,072,964 $23,314,938 $22,417,130 $33,826, % UT at Austin $366,355,359 $376,403,651 $382,391,771 $422,867, % UT at Brownsville $1,286,638 $1,558,306 $3,273,326 $5,374, % UT at Dallas $27,444,057 $32,547,141 $31,274,590 $43,110, % UT at El Paso $27,328,772 $27,847,152 $32,067,735 $36,013, % UT-Pan American $2,605,758 $3,193,419 $4,309,262 $5,816, % UT of the Permian Basin $980,905 $1,118,184 $1,895,564 $1,160, % UT at San Antonio $12,402,017 $14,547,732 $16,516,457 $23,605, % UT at Tyler $375,821 $411,275 $894,034 $501, % University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $82,865,307 $88,608,021 $75,927,432 $81,453, % Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $8,862,208 $1,707,440 $1,211,307 $1,367, % Univ. of Houston-Downtown $1,270,494 $678,068 $669,019 $563, % Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 $0 $0 $4,443 NA University of North Texas $18,875,396 $17,587,767 $15,636,344 $16,801, % Totals $1,076,789,336 $1,118,412,186 $1,109,587,950 $1,242,690, % * Percent change for 2005, relative to 2002; NA indicates not applicable 28

37 Table 15 Federal Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Universities Institution FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Midwestern State $0 NA $20, $77, $46,493 NA Stephen F. Austin State $1,054, $1,208, $1,025, $1,076, Texas A&M University System Prairie View A&M $7,915, $8,106, $8,138, $8,670, Tarleton State $5,431, $5,856, $5,439, $6,248, Texas A&M and Services $166,285, $178,016, $174,570, $212,918, Texas A&M-Commerce $315, $198, $355, $424, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $4,473, $5,667, $6,233, $5,059, Texas A&M at Galveston $2,362, $3,128, $2,757, $3,000, Texas A&M International $572, $486, $119, $190, Texas A&M-Kingsville $1,950, $2,766, $3,856, $5,028, Texas A&M-Texarkana $182,262 NA $113,290 NA $188,653 NA $199,617 NA West Texas A&M $3,531, $3,190, $2,580, $1,968, Texas Southern $4,147, $3,247, $3,969, $4,650, Texas State University System Angelo State $254, $131, $155, $127, Lamar $2,279, $1,998, $1,504, $1,259, Sam Houston State $1,491, $1,397, $2,175, $1,155, Sul Ross State $76, $95, $261, $1,506, Sul Ross - Rio Grande $ $ $ $0 NA Texas State - San Marcos $4,769, $3,975, $3,536, $3,045, Texas Tech $20,511, $23,285, $23,393, $22,804, Texas Woman's $1,321, $1,493, $1,238, $940, University of Texas System UT at Arlington $7,923, $7,993, $11,093, $17,833, UT at Austin $235,436, $240,537, $249,014, $269,612, UT at Brownsville $896, $1,011,353 NA $2,889,894 NA $4,897,516 NA UT at Dallas $11,815, $14,432, $15,733, $19,933, UT at El Paso $19,796, $17,022, $22,232, $23,961, UT-Pan American $1,394, $1,895, $2,666, $3,770, UT of the Permian Basin $138, $166, $1,215, $360, UT at San Antonio $7,641, $10,049, $11,705, $16,174, UT at Tyler $67, $174, $585, $143, University of Houston System Univ. of Houston $33,239, $34,242, $31,682, $41,484, Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $7,659, $696, $396, $503, Univ. of Houston-Downtown $783, $378, $490, $353, Univ. of Houston-Victoria $0 NA $0 NA $0 NA $0 NA University of North Texas $8,827, $8,328, $6,927, $7,881, Totals $564,550, $581,313, $598,209, $687,231, NA indicates not applicable (no state research and development funds expended). 29

38 Institution Texas A&M HSC $45,066,569 $50,435,247 $58,485,824 $70,704, % Texas Tech Univ HSC $19,279,797 $19,751,348 $19,827,013 $18,189, % Univ North Texas HSC $12,347,141 $14,901,791 $18,519,957 $22,325, % UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $262,144,960 $282,260,250 $313,916,355 $341,978, % UTMB at Galveston $109,139,538 $129,860,903 $132,768,911 $149,957, % UTHSC at Houston $140,827,726 $152,117,064 $150,222,206 $156,519, % UT Health Center at Tyler $8,453,709 $9,217,039 $10,240,390 $11,420, % UTHSC at San Antonio $112,232,653 $119,279,555 $124,912,722 $134,058, % UT Southwestern Medical Center $263,958,410 $277,956,511 $314,403,028 $320,801, % Totals $973,450,503 $1,055,779,708 $1,143,296,406 $1,225,956, % NA indicates not applicable * Percent change for 2005, relative to 2002 Table 16 Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Health-Related Institutions FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Percent Change* Institution Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Texas A&M HSC $22,417, $26,729, $30,283, $32,949, Texas Tech Univ HSC $8,802, $8,674, $7,603, $6,278, Univ North Texas HSC $7,224, $9,454, $13,258, $17,036, UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $117,633, $122,868, $150,528, $160,953, UTMB at Galveston $78,100, $93,039, $102,490, $117,235, UTHSC at Houston $101,738, $111,170, $110,438, $116,397, UT Health Center at Tyler $2,783, $3,493, $4,659, $4,956, UTHSC at San Antonio $83,760, $86,854, $89,661, $95,125, UT Southwestern Medical Center $155,257, $177,133, $200,887, $202,057, Totals $577,718, $639,417, $709,811, $752,991, NA indicates not applicable Table 17 Federal Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Health-Related Institutions FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 Fed/ State Ratio 30

39 Institution Texas A&M HSC $50,435,247 $58,485,824 $70,704,945 $72,326, % Texas Tech Univ HSC $19,751,348 $19,827,013 $18,189,481 $21,665, % Univ North Texas HSC $14,901,791 $18,519,957 $22,325,471 $23,867, % UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $282,260,250 $313,916,355 $341,978,679 $409,679, % UTMB at Galveston $129,860,903 $132,768,911 $149,957,462 $155,036, % UTHSC at Houston $152,117,064 $150,222,206 $156,519,695 $175,153, % UT Health Center at Tyler $9,217,039 $10,240,390 $11,420,260 $12,598, % UTHSC at San Antonio $119,279,555 $124,912,722 $134,058,535 $139,778, % UT Southwestern Medical Center $277,956,511 $314,403,028 $320,801,884 $333,256, % Totals $1,055,779,708 $1,143,296,406 $1,225,956,412 $1,343,362, % NA indicates not applicable * Percent change for 2006, relative to 2003 Table 16 Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Health-Related Institutions FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Percent Change* Institution Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ Federal R&D State Dollars Ratio Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Federal R&D Dollars Fed/ State Ratio Texas A&M HSC $26,729, $30,283, $32,949, $35,213, Texas Tech Univ HSC $8,674, $7,603, $6,278, $9,712, Univ North Texas HSC $9,454, $13,258, $17,036, $19,183, UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $122,868, $150,528, $160,953, $182,028, UTMB at Galveston $93,039, $102,490, $117,235, $120,407, UTHSC at Houston $111,170, $110,438, $116,397, $122,870, UT Health Center at Tyler $3,493, $4,659, $4,956, $6,512, UTHSC at San Antonio $86,854, $89,661, $95,125, $95,110, UT Southwestern Medical Center $177,133, $200,887, $202,057, $196,622, Totals $639,417, $709,811, $752,991, $787,660, NA indicates not applicable Table 17 Federal Expenditures for Research and Development Texas Public Health-Related Institutions FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY

40 Field Table 18 Federal Expenditures for Research and Development by Field Texas Public Universities and Health-Related Institutions FY 2000 FY 2004 FY 2005 One-Year Change Five-Year Change Agricultural Sciences $18,961,362 $29,761,742 $34,666, % 82.83% Biological and Other Life Sciences $198,458,882 $326,338,774 $344,345, % 73.51% Computer Science $22,830,123 $32,913,333 $37,229, % 63.07% Engineering $126,003,441 $161,944,610 $178,660, % 41.79% Environmental Sciences $88,462,057 $78,624,859 $98,199, % 11.01% Mathematical Sciences $16,026,249 $27,621,316 $28,647, % 78.76% Medical Sciences $289,567,494 $470,857,882 $508,455, % 75.59% Physical Sciences $69,189,774 $93,589,792 $102,157, % 47.65% Psychology $8,174,898 $22,479,729 $26,990, % % Social Sciences $14,598,924 $17,240,621 $20,745, % 42.10% Other Sciences $5,702,280 $4,539,171 $9,201, % 61.37% Arts and Humanities $1,161,447 $778,886 $1,162, % 0.08% Business Administration $1,774,871 $2,829,412 $1,736, % -2.16% Education $21,045,789 $27,239,592 $37,087, % 76.22% Law and Public Administration $2,820,499 $2,234,255 $1,936, % % Other Non-Science Activities $2,653,892 $9,026,998 $8,999, % % Totals $887,431,982 $1,308,020,972 $1,440,222, % 62.29% In 2001, the 77th Legislature passed the Centers for Technology Development and Transfer Act (Texas Education Code, Section ), which specifies reporting requirements for intellectual property income and expenses. Intellectual property income is now reported biennially in a new report, Technology Development and Transfer. 31

41 NATIONAL COMPARISONS This section of the report is based on data provided by the National Science Foundation. It is not entirely consistent with data provided in earlier sections of the report because it is based on an earlier year, because reporting requirements are somewhat different, and because the federal reports do not differentiate between state-funded and independent institutions. The National Science Foundation makes three reports available, and each provides somewhat different information: Federal Obligations for Science and Engineering shows federal obligations for grants and contracts awarded to higher education science and engineering programs by federal agencies during the fiscal year. Funds obligated in any given year may be expended over a number of years, so obligations will be somewhat different from expenditures. This report includes support for a number of programs that are not necessarily research and development programs, such as science education programs and assistantship support for engineering students. The amount of support is reported by the agencies. Federal Obligations for Research and Development in Science and Engineering includes only federal funds obligated during the year to support, directly or indirectly, basic and applied research and development in science and engineering disciplines at higher education institutions. The amount of support is again reported by the agencies. Data from this report measures progress toward the research goal for Texas higher education plan, Closing the Gaps by 2015, which was revised in Federally Financed Research and Development Expenditures summarizes federal funds expenditures by higher education institutions to support research and development in any given year. This report is based on data reported by institutions and summarized by the National Science Foundation. Some of the highlights of the 2003 survey of federal research and development expenditures include the following: o o o o o The top five states in federal research and development expenditures were: California $3.18 billion New York $2.01 billion Texas $1.55 billion Maryland $1.50 billion Pennsylvania $1.44 billion Texas ranked first in state- and local government-funded research and development expenditures. Texas ranked third in total research and development expenditures. Texas ranked third in research and development expenditures from institutional sources (behind California and New York), third in research and development expenditures from industrial sources (behind California and North Carolina), and second in research and development expenditures from all other sources (behind California). Texas was among the top three states for all of the different types of sources. 32

42 o In Texas, life sciences accounted for 67 percent of the research and development expenditures, followed by engineering (14 percent) and physical sciences (6 percent). Table 19 Top Five States in Federal R&D Expenditures Selected Science and Engineering Fields, FY 2003 Rank Life Physical Environmental $ Engineering $ $ Sciences Sciences Sciences $ 1 California 1.8B Maryland 434M California 434M California 186M 2 New York 1.4B California 432M Massachusetts 200M Massachusetts 117M 3 Texas 1.1B Pennsylvania 219M Maryland 184M Texas 95M 4 Pennsylvania 887M Massachusetts 212M New York 173M Colorado 95M 5 Massachusetts 701M New York 186M Texas 108M Florida 88M Note: M refers to million; B refers to billion. Source: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System, 05/15/2006 Table 20 shows the ranking of all states in federal obligations for science and engineering, federal obligations for research and development in science and engineering, and federally financed research and development expenditures for Texas ranks third in federal obligations for science and engineering, which includes science education, and ranks fourth in federal obligations for research and development in science and engineering, which excludes science education. Texas ranks third in research and development expenditures from federal sources. Patterns in federal research and development support over time for the top six states are shown in Figures 9 and 10. California and New York are the uncontested leaders in federal research support to the states. State Table 20 State Rank in Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D, FY 2003 (Thousands of Dollars) Federal Obligations for Federal Obligations for R&D Federally Financed R&D Science and Engineering to in Science and Engineering Expenditures at Colleges Colleges and Universities to Colleges and Universities and Universities FY 2003 Rank FY 2003 Rank FY 2003 Rank California $3,530,082 1 $3,193,421 1 $3,183,762 1 New York $2,138,072 2 $1,857,646 2 $2,014,483 2 Texas $1,719,056 3 $1,385,229 4 $1,551,740 3 Pennsylvania $1,570,869 4 $1,417,348 3 $1,444,109 5 Maryland $1,520,402 5 $1,294,617 5 $1,503,759 4 Massachusetts $1,489,621 6 $1,220,700 6 $1,379,361 6 North Carolina $1,065,329 7 $938,818 7 $838,312 8 Illinois $974,748 8 $878,352 8 $963,582 7 Michigan $821,689 9 $714,343 9 $792,521 9 Washington $720, $628, $642, Ohio $683, $603, $742, Colorado $661, $523, $534, (table continued on next page) 33

43 Table 20 - continued State Rank in Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D, FY 2003 (Thousands of Dollars) Federal Obligations for Federal Obligations for R&D in Federally Financed R&D Science and Engineering Science and Engineering Expenditures at Colleges to Colleges and Universities to Colleges and Universities and Universities State FY 2003 Rank FY 2003 Florida $628, $541, $667, Missouri $617, $550, $519, Georgia $597, $483, $638, Wisconsin $571, $471, $504, Connecticut $478, $439, $418, Virginia $458, $399, $482, Tennessee $458, $372, $382, Alabama $448, $343, $409, New Jersey $433, $362, $361, Minnesota $355, $316, $297, Indiana $351, $307, $327, Oregon $326, $288, $317, Arizona $302, $260, $341, Iowa $300, $255, $284, Utah $282, $260, $264, Louisiana $259, $202, $224, Kentucky $217, $186, $172, South Carolina $216, $167, $226, District of Columbia $203, $172, $214, Mississippi $185, $147, $207, Hawaii $180, $146, $148, New Mexico $173, $125, $199, New Hampshire $163, $139, $165, Kansas $153, $131, $155, Oklahoma $148, $114, $127, Rhode Island $133, $114, $133, Nebraska $125, $105, $106, Montana $100, $75, $84, Vermont $97, $84, $71, Arkansas $93, $75, $82, Alaska $88, $74, $77, Nevada $81, $73, $103, Delaware $80, $67, $73, North Dakota $78, $58, $66, West Virginia $62, $42, $73, Idaho $54, $42, $55, Maine $44, $30, $31, South Dakota $42, $28, $28, Wyoming $26, $23, $23, SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System, 05/15/2006 Rank FY 2003 Rank 34

44 Figure 9 3,000 Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering Universities and Colleges - Selected States, ,500 California Millions 2,000 Dollars in 1,500 1,000 Maryland Massachusetts New York Texas 500 Pennsylvania Year SOURCE: National Science Foundation WebCASPAR Database System, Constant 2000 Dollars, 05/15/2006 Figure 10 3,000 Federally Financed R&D Expenditures Universities and Colleges - Selected States, ,500 California Dollars in Millions 2,000 1,500 1,000 Texas Massachusetts New York Maryland Pennsylvania Year SOURCE: National Science Foundation WebCASPAR Database System, Constant 2000 Dollars, 05/15/

45 Table 21 shows federal obligations and federally financed research and development expenditures for Texas higher education institutions for FY The table includes public and independent institutions. The top five institutions account for 60, 59, and 65 percent of the total federal support in Federal Obligations for Science and Engineering, Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering, and Federally Financed R&D Expenditures categories, respectively. Table 21 Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D by Texas Institutions, FY 2003 (Thousands of Dollars) Institution Abilene Christian $165 $165 $172 Alamo Community Coll. Dist. $ Alvin Community Coll. $ Austin Coll. $16 $ Austin Community Coll. $ Baylor- Coll. of Medicine $297,252 $251,800 $302,764 Baylor Univ. $561 $561 $812 Coll. of the Mainland $1, Collin County Community Coll. $ El Paso Community Coll. $480 $ Houston Community Coll. $450 $ Huston-Tillotson Coll. $177 $ Jarvis Christian Coll. $592 $92 $100 Lamar $1,177 $1,051 $1,998 Laredo Community Coll. $429 $ Le Tourneau Univ. $99 $ Midwestern State $ Odessa Coll. $250 $ Our Lady of the Lake $1,043 $ Prarie View A&M $13,444 $5,942 $7,886 Rice Univ. $51,472 $47,770 $43,706 Richland Coll. $ Sam Houston State $83 $83 $2,726 San Jacinto Coll. $ San Jacinto Coll. District System $ Southern Methodist $13,261 $11,240 $5,940 Southwest Texas Junior Coll. $ St Mary's Univ. $432 $190 $199 Southwestern Univ. $105 $ St. Edward's Univ. $180 $ Stephen F. Austin State $615 $610 $759 Sul Ross State $301 $5 $96 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. Federal Obligations for Science and Engineering Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering Federally Financed R&D Expenditures 36

46 Table 21 - continued Federal Obligations and Federally Financed R&D by Texas Institutions, FY 2003 (Thousands of Dollars) Institution Federal Obligations for Science and Engineering Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering Federally Financed R&D Expenditures Tarleton State $686 $578 $5,698 Texas A&M and Services $110,994 $69,942 $177,119 Texas A&M HSC $43,998 $42,952 $26,729 Texas A&M International $530 $ Texas A&M System Office $7,303 $6, Texas A&M-Commerce $43 Texas A&M-Corpus Christi $2,008 $1,173 $4,581 Texas A&M-Kingsville $3,649 $2,364 $2,766 Texas Christian $3,352 $3,270 $2,716 Texas Southern $3,518 $3,215 $2,925 Texas State Technical Coll. $ Texas State - San Marcos $2,955 $2,235 $3,873 Texas Tech (includes HSC) $30,584 $28,126 $31,776 Texas Wesleyan Univ. $ Texas Woman's $1,368 $308 $1,494 Trinity Univ. $1,892 $1,192 $636 Univ. North Tx HSC $9,927 Univ. of Dallas $15 Univ. of Houston $30,338 $27,427 $32,556 Univ. of Houston System Administration $4,836 $3, Univ. of Houston-Clear Lake $495 $40 $514 Univ. of Houston-Downtown $2,649 $234 $373 Univ. of St. Thomas $71 $ Univ. of the Incarnate Word $ University of North Texas $16,416 $14,686 $6,320 UT at Arlington $10,325 $7,649 $7,884 UT at Austin $206,247 $154,473 $231,996 UT at Brownsville $3,849 $2, UT at Dallas $11,327 $11,060 $14,530 UT at El Paso $19,672 $10,411 $18,116 UT at San Antonio $14,811 $10,102 $9,982 UT at Tyler $333 $ UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $143,054 $140,472 $122,869 UT Southwestern Medical Center $182,142 $174,408 $177,196 UT System Office $68,580 $67,796 UTHSC at Houston $101,305 $94,711 $107,481 UTHSC at San Antonio $91,787 $84,882 $86,683 UTMB at Galveston $208,286 $95,051 $93,039 UT-Pan American $2,328 $1,484 $1,887 UT of the Permian Basin $ West Texas A&M $708 $491 $2,595 Wiley Coll. $ $263 Texas Total $1,719,056 $1,385,229 $1,551,740 SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System, 05/15/2006 Shading indicates the five highest in each category. 37

47 Figure 11 shows federal obligations to Texas higher education institutions for research and development in science and engineering by federal agency. The National Institutes of Health have a long history of providing most of the federal research support to Texas higher education institutions. The budget of this federal agency doubled from 1999 to 2003, providing more research funding for higher education institutions across the country. Figure Federal Obligations for R&D in Science and Engineering Texas Universities and Colleges, Top Five Support Agencies 800 Dollars in Millions National Institutes of Health Department of Defense 0 NASA National Science Foundation Department of Energy Year SOURCE: National Science Foundation WebCASPAR Database System, Constant 2000 Dollars, 05/15/2006 Table 22 shows obligations from federal agencies providing the most support to Texas higher education institutions. The National Institutes of Health provide most of the federal support at health-related institutions. The National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, and the National Science Foundation provide most of the federal support for The University of Texas at Austin. The Department of Agriculture and the National Science Foundation provide most of the support for Texas A&M University. The National Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, and the National Institutes of Health provide most of the federal support for Rice University. The University of Houston receives most of its federal support from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. Texas Tech University receives most of its support from the Department of Defense and the National Science Foundation. 38

48 Table 22 Texas Universities and Colleges with Federal Science and Engineering R&D Obligations of More Than $10 Million by Support Agency, FY 2003 (Thousands of Dollars) Institution National Institutes of Health Dept. of Defense National Science Foundation NASA Dept. of Energy Dept. of Agriculture All Other Federal Agencies Total of All Federal Agencies Baylor-Coll. of Medicine $239,940 $6,835 $1,776 $ $7 $2,575 $251,800 UT Southwestern Med Center $166,992 $4,831 $348 $ $2,036 $174,408 UT at Austin $45,795 $45,148 $34,184 $8,835 $16,300 $276 $3,935 $154,473 UT M.D. Anderson Cancer $129,984 $9, $ $558 $140,472 UTMB at Galveston $90,414 $991 $539 $1,576 $ $1,286 $95,051 UTHSC at Houston $85,383 $3,846 $689 $622 $585 $166 $3,420 $94,711 UTHSC at San Antonio $78,649 $3,618 $ $1,836 $84,882 Texas A&M --- $13,074 $18,288 $9,814 $3,106 $18,922 $6,738 $69,942 UT System Office $2,674 $65, $ $5 $67,796 Rice $5,524 $10,974 $24,386 $2,628 $3,823 $385 $50 $47,770 Texas A&M HSC $42, $42,952 Texas Tech (includes HSC) $6,799 $8,388 $3,643 $1,832 $2,362 $2,169 $2,933 $28,126 Univ. of Houston $16,204 $522 $5,998 $1,822 $1,693 $69 $1,119 $27,427 University of North Texas $10,733 $1,523 $1,802 $217 $ $176 $14,686 Southern Methodist $1,720 $1,444 $1, $ $6,000 $11,240 UT at Dallas $3,319 $3,687 $2,443 $1,246 $ $11,060 UT at El Paso $3,843 $1,912 $2,338 $ $1,960 $10,411 UT at San Antonio $4,107 $3,519 $743 $1,035 $280 $ $10,102 All other Institutions $11,378 $11,802 $4,653 $4,565 $4,651 $5,322 $5,549 $47,920 Totals $946,410 $196,406 $103,862 $36,056 $34,585 $27,734 $40,176 $1,385,229 SOURCE: National Science Foundation, WebCASPAR Database System, 05/15/2006 Figure 12 shows federally financed research and development expenditures at Texas public and independent higher education institutions by scientific discipline. Most of the expenditures are made in medical and biological sciences. Figure 12 Federally Financed Research Expenditures by Discipline Texas Public and Private Institutions, FY 2003 All Other Life Sciences Biological Sciences Computer Sciences Engineering Environmental Sciences R&D Discipline Mathematical Sciences Medical Sciences Other Sciences Physical Sciences Psychology Social Sciences SOURCE: National Science Foundation WebCASPAR Database System, 05/15/2006 Dollars in Millions 39

49 APPENDIX A RESEARCH EXPENDITURES SURVEYS THECB - Survey of Research Expenses, FY 2005 Public Universities and Health-Related Institutions About the On-Line Form The survey should be completed by using the on-line form by December 9, 2005 The on-line form will be used to submit your institution's FY 2005 research expense data. The login page for the form has an instructions page and links to previous expenditures reports. Blank Lotus and Excel worksheets can be downloaded here, but the information still must be entered into the on-line form. The on-line form consists of five parts, easily navigated with the buttons on the bottom of each web page. The whole form is saved when clicking on the "Total" buttons, going from page to page or clicking the "Save and Logoff" buttons. Using the "Reload Last Save" button will return information changed on a particular page before any other buttons are clicked on. Clicking underlined row or column labels will open a viewable definition for that item, and full instructions and definitions are accessible from the bottom of any page. Use whole dollar amounts, as the system will truncate decimals. The system will ignore any characters (dollar signs, commas, etc.) typed into entry blocks in parts 2-5. Click on any "Total" button to calculate column and row totals which are clearly marked in yellow. The FICE code for your institution will be used to log in to the system, and please safeguard the provided password and authorization code. The password may be issued to individuals for completion of the form. When the form is ready for final submission, the final approval authority (usually the highest research executive at the institution) clicks the "Submit to THECB" button in part 5 and enters name, title and the authorization code. Using the print button before final authorization will produce a draft printout of all forms. After final authorization, your data cannot be accessed or altered, but a printout of the final version can be produced. If you have questions or need assistance, contact information is located at the bottom of each web page or you may call Dale Cherry or Linda Domelsmith at A-1

50 A-2

51 A-3

52 Part 5 for Public Universities Part 5 for Public Health Institutions A-4

u Articulation and Transfer Best Practices

u Articulation and Transfer Best Practices Articulation and Trevor Chandler Houston Community College December 17, 2014 What is an Articulation Agreement Content of an Articulation Agreement What is the purpose of an Articulation Agreement What

More information

Texas Healthcare & Bioscience Institute

Texas Healthcare & Bioscience Institute Texas Healthcare & Bioscience Institute Tom Kowalski President October 27, 2004 What is THBI? The Texas Healthcare and Bioscience Institute (THBI) is a non-profit, public policy research organization,

More information

LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST

LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST FISCAL YEARS 2018 AND 2019 Submitted to the Governor's Office and the Legislative Budget Board THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION August 2016 THE UNIVERSITY

More information

Higher Education. Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. November 3, 2017

Higher Education. Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. November 3, 2017 November 3, 2017 Higher Education Pennsylvania s diverse higher education sector - consisting of many different kinds of public and private colleges and universities - helps students gain the knowledge

More information

Financing Education In Minnesota

Financing Education In Minnesota Financing Education In Minnesota 2016-2017 Created with Tagul.com A Publication of the Minnesota House of Representatives Fiscal Analysis Department August 2016 Financing Education in Minnesota 2016-17

More information

TRENDS IN. College Pricing

TRENDS IN. College Pricing 2008 TRENDS IN College Pricing T R E N D S I N H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N S E R I E S T R E N D S I N H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N S E R I E S Highlights 2 Published Tuition and Fee and Room and Board

More information

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT By 2030, at least 60 percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 will have a postsecondary credential or degree. Target: Increase the percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 with a postsecondary credential.

More information

Texas Libraries: Responding to the Needs of Job Seekers

Texas Libraries: Responding to the Needs of Job Seekers Texas Libraries: Responding to the Needs of Job Seekers Kyla Hunt, Consultant, Continuing Education and Consulting Dawn Vogler, Manager, Continuing Education and Consulting Library Development Division

More information

San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium

San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium SABCS UPDATE Saturday, January 20, 2018 Kleberg Auditorium Alkek Building, 1st Floor Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza Houston, TX 77030 Featuring highlights

More information

Governor s Office of Budget, Planning and Policy and the Legislative Budget Board. Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi

Governor s Office of Budget, Planning and Policy and the Legislative Budget Board. Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST For Fiscal Years 212 and 213 Submitted to the Governor s Office of Budget, Planning and Policy and the Legislative Budget Board by Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi

More information

State Budget Update February 2016

State Budget Update February 2016 State Budget Update February 2016 2016-17 BUDGET TRAILER BILL SUMMARY The Budget Trailer Bill Language is the implementing statute needed to effectuate the proposals in the annual Budget Bill. The Governor

More information

FY Matching Scholarship Grant Allocations by County Based on Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL) Population 1

FY Matching Scholarship Grant Allocations by County Based on Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL) Population 1 FY 2015-2016 Matching Scholarship Grant Allocations by County Based on Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL) Population 1 Y NAME K-12 FRL % FRL % OF STATE FRL Population Graduates in class of 2014 Estimated number

More information

1.0 INTRODUCTION. The purpose of the Florida school district performance review is to identify ways that a designated school district can:

1.0 INTRODUCTION. The purpose of the Florida school district performance review is to identify ways that a designated school district can: 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview Section 11.515, Florida Statutes, was created by the 1996 Florida Legislature for the purpose of conducting performance reviews of school districts in Florida. The statute

More information

Program Change Proposal:

Program Change Proposal: Program Change Proposal: Provided to Faculty in the following affected units: Department of Management Department of Marketing School of Allied Health 1 Department of Kinesiology 2 Department of Animal

More information

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) is the core postsecondary education data collection program for the NCES. It is a single, comprehensive

More information

CHAPTER 4: REIMBURSEMENT STRATEGIES 24

CHAPTER 4: REIMBURSEMENT STRATEGIES 24 CHAPTER 4: REIMBURSEMENT STRATEGIES 24 INTRODUCTION Once state level policymakers have decided to implement and pay for CSR, one issue they face is simply how to calculate the reimbursements to districts

More information

NC Community College System: Overview

NC Community College System: Overview NC Community College System: Overview Presentation to Joint Appropriations Subcommittee on Education Brett Altman Mark Bondo Fiscal Research Division March 18, 2015 Presentation Agenda 1. NCCCS Background

More information

Texas Bioscience Institute Educating Scientists For The Future. Nelda Howton

Texas Bioscience Institute Educating Scientists For The Future. Nelda Howton Texas Bioscience Institute Educating Scientists For The Future Nelda Howton www.texasbioscienceinstitute.com Nov. 20, 2007 Impact of the Health Care Industry Temple is home to three hospitals and the Texas

More information

2016 Match List. Residency Program Distribution by Specialty. Anesthesiology. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis MO

2016 Match List. Residency Program Distribution by Specialty. Anesthesiology. Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis MO 2016 Match List Residency Program Distribution by Specialty Anesthesiology Cleveland Clinic Foundation - Ohio, Cleveland OH University of Arkansas Medical School - Little Rock, Little Rock AR University

More information

INTERPRETATIONS. Condensed FY 2009 Annual Report RESEARCH. Norman Campus

INTERPRETATIONS. Condensed FY 2009 Annual Report RESEARCH. Norman Campus Norman Campus RESEARCH INTERPRETATIONS Condensed FY 2009 Annual Report THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF RESEARCH NORMAN CAMPUS AND NORMAN CAMPUS PROGRAMS AT OU TULSA Norman Campus

More information

Appendix IX. Resume of Financial Aid Director. Professional Development Training

Appendix IX. Resume of Financial Aid Director. Professional Development Training Appendix IX Resume of Financial Aid Director Professional Development Training ALBERT TEZENO 6815 Chapelfield Houston Texas 77049 Tezeno_aj@yahoo.com 281-459-4114 cell 832-642-6937 Director of Financial

More information

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Title I Comparability

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Title I Comparability Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Title I Comparability 2009-2010 Title I provides federal financial assistance to school districts to provide supplemental educational services

More information

Accelerated Plan for Closing the Gaps by 2015

Accelerated Plan for Closing the Gaps by 2015 Accelerated Plan for Closing the Gaps by 2015 April 29, 2010 1 Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board A.W. Whit Riter III, CHAIR Fred W. Heldenfels IV, VICE-CHAIR Elaine Mendoza, SECRETARY OF THE BOARD

More information

INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA.

INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Education Act 1983 (Consolidated to No 13 of 1995) [lxxxiv] Education Act 1983, INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Being an Act to provide for the National Education System and to make provision (a)

More information

All Hands on Deck! Engaging Faculty Voices to Rise Above the Storm!

All Hands on Deck! Engaging Faculty Voices to Rise Above the Storm! All Hands on Deck! Engaging Faculty Voices to Rise Above the Storm! Introduction Five R s to Diversify Engineering Faculties Recruiting Faculty Colleagues Relating to Faculty Colleagues Retaining Colleagues

More information

Financial Plan. Operating and Capital. May2010

Financial Plan. Operating and Capital. May2010 10 Financial Plan Operating and Capital May2010 Published by: The Division of Planning and Budget Cornell University 440 Day Hall Ithaca, New York 14853 http://dpb.cornell.edu 607 255 0155 May 2010 Edited

More information

STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA

STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA NOVEMBER 2010 Authors Mary Filardo Stephanie Cheng Marni Allen Michelle Bar Jessie Ulsoy 21st Century School Fund (21CSF) Founded in 1994,

More information

Program Review

Program Review De Anza College, Cupertino, CA 1 Description and Mission of the Program A) The Manufacturing and CNC Program (MCNC) offers broad yet in-depth curriculum that imparts a strong foundation for direct employment

More information

ALAMO CITY OPHTHALMOLOGY

ALAMO CITY OPHTHALMOLOGY 34th ANNUAL ALAMO CITY OPHTHALMOLOGY C LINICAL CO NFERE N C E Original Research, Ethics, Patient Safety Projects Saturday, April 12, 2014 San Antonio Country Club 4100 N New Braunfels Avenue 78209 Sponsored

More information

Director, Ohio State Agricultural Technical Institute

Director, Ohio State Agricultural Technical Institute Director, Ohio State Agricultural Technical Institute The Ohio State University invites applications and nominations for the position of Director, Ohio State Agricultural Technical Institute (Ohio State

More information

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT By 2030, at least 60 percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 will have a postsecondary credential or degree. Target: Increase the percent of Texans ages 25 to 34 with a postsecondary credential.

More information

Moving the Needle: Creating Better Career Opportunities and Workforce Readiness. Austin ISD Progress Report

Moving the Needle: Creating Better Career Opportunities and Workforce Readiness. Austin ISD Progress Report Moving the Needle: Creating Better Career Opportunities and Workforce Readiness Austin ISD Progress Report 2013 A Letter to the Community Central Texas Job Openings More than 150 people move to the Austin

More information

Teacher Supply and Demand in the State of Wyoming

Teacher Supply and Demand in the State of Wyoming Teacher Supply and Demand in the State of Wyoming Supply Demand Prepared by Robert Reichardt 2002 McREL To order copies of Teacher Supply and Demand in the State of Wyoming, contact McREL: Mid-continent

More information

46 Children s Defense Fund

46 Children s Defense Fund Nationally, about 1 in 15 teens ages 16 to 19 is a dropout. Fewer than two-thirds of 9 th graders in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana and Nevada graduate from high school within four years with a regular diploma.

More information

AB104 Adult Education Block Grant. Performance Year:

AB104 Adult Education Block Grant. Performance Year: AB104 Adult Education Block Grant Performance Year: 2015-2016 Funding source: AB104, Section 39, Article 9 Version 1 Release: October 9, 2015 Reporting & Submission Process Required Funding Recipient Content

More information

Welcome. Paulo Goes Dean, Eller College of Management Welcome Our region

Welcome. Paulo Goes Dean, Eller College of Management Welcome Our region Welcome. Paulo Goes Dean, Welcome. Our region Outlook for Tucson Patricia Feeney Executive Director, Southern Arizona Market Chase George W. Hammond, Ph.D. Director, University of Arizona 1 Visit the award-winning

More information

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas An Introduction to School Finance in Texas May 12, 2010 Sheryl Pace TTARA Research Foundation space@ttara.org (512) 472-8838 Texas Public Education System 1,300 school districts (#1 in the nation) 1,025

More information

UIC HEALTH SCIENCE COLLEGES

UIC HEALTH SCIENCE COLLEGES Academic Mission Report: Board of Trustees March 10, 2010 Joseph A. Flaherty, MD Dean, College of Medicine INNOVATION EXCELLENCE SERVICE Brief History 1858 Illinois Eye and Ear Infirmary opens 1859 College

More information

The Policymaking Process Course Syllabus

The Policymaking Process Course Syllabus The Policymaking Process Course Syllabus GOVT 4370 Policy Making Process Fall 2007 Paul J. Bonicelli, PhD Assistant Administrator United States Agency for International Development (USAID) 1300 Pennsylvania

More information

Toward a Latino Attainment Agenda:

Toward a Latino Attainment Agenda: Toward a Latino Attainment Agenda: Shaping Our Own Destiny by Francisco G. Cigarroa, M.D. TomÁsRivera LECTURE SERIES AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF HISPANICS IN HIGHER EDUCATION 2013 Toward a Latino Attainment

More information

A Comparison of the ERP Offerings of AACSB Accredited Universities Belonging to SAPUA

A Comparison of the ERP Offerings of AACSB Accredited Universities Belonging to SAPUA Association for Information Systems AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) SAIS 2004 Proceedings Southern (SAIS) 3-1-2004 A Comparison of the ERP Offerings of AACSB Accredited Universities Belonging to SAPUA Ronald

More information

Dr. Tang has been an active member of CAPA since She was Co-Chair of Education Committee and Executive committee member ( ).

Dr. Tang has been an active member of CAPA since She was Co-Chair of Education Committee and Executive committee member ( ). 2015 CAPA Candidates Profiles For President-elect (alphabetic order): Dr. Ping Tang Dr. Ping Tang is a Professor at Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center,

More information

Strategic Plan Update, Physics Department May 2010

Strategic Plan Update, Physics Department May 2010 Strategic Plan Update, Physics Department May 2010 Mission To generate and disseminate knowledge of physics and its applications. Vision The Department of Physics faculty will continue to conduct cutting

More information

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio Facilities and Technology Infrastructure Report For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio Introduction. As Ohio s national research university, Ohio State

More information

Trends in Student Aid and Trends in College Pricing

Trends in Student Aid and Trends in College Pricing Trends in Student Aid and Trends in College Pricing 2012 NYSFAAA Conference Katrina Delgrosso Senior Educational Manager Agenda What is the College Board Advocacy & Policy Center? Trends in College Pricing

More information

A Comparison of State of Florida Charter Technical Career Centers to District Non-Charter Career Centers,

A Comparison of State of Florida Charter Technical Career Centers to District Non-Charter Career Centers, A Comparison of State of Florida Charter Technical Career to District Non-Charter Career, 2013-14 At a Glance In school year 2013-14, there were 4,502 students enrolled in the state of Florida s charter

More information

An Analysis of the El Reno Area Labor Force

An Analysis of the El Reno Area Labor Force An Analysis of the El Reno Area Labor Force Summary Report for the El Reno Industrial Development Corporation and Oklahoma Department of Commerce David A. Penn and Robert C. Dauffenbach Center for Economic

More information

November 6, Re: Higher Education Provisions in H.R. 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Dear Chairman Brady and Ranking Member Neal:

November 6, Re: Higher Education Provisions in H.R. 1, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Dear Chairman Brady and Ranking Member Neal: The Honorable Kevin Brady The Honorable Richard Neal Chairman Ranking Member Ways and Means Committee Ways and Means Committee United States House of Representatives United States House of Representatives

More information

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS Palm Desert, CA The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) is the nation s core postsecondary education data collection program. It is a single,

More information

Greetings, Ed Morris Executive Director Division of Adult and Career Education Los Angeles Unified School District

Greetings, Ed Morris Executive Director Division of Adult and Career Education Los Angeles Unified School District Greetings, The thesis of my presentation at this year s California Adult Education Administrators (CAEAA) Conference was that the imprecise and inconsistent nature of the statute authorizing adult education

More information

2012 ACT RESULTS BACKGROUND

2012 ACT RESULTS BACKGROUND Report from the Office of Student Assessment 31 November 29, 2012 2012 ACT RESULTS AUTHOR: Douglas G. Wren, Ed.D., Assessment Specialist Department of Educational Leadership and Assessment OTHER CONTACT

More information

JOB OUTLOOK 2018 NOVEMBER 2017 FREE TO NACE MEMBERS $52.00 NONMEMBER PRICE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND EMPLOYERS

JOB OUTLOOK 2018 NOVEMBER 2017 FREE TO NACE MEMBERS $52.00 NONMEMBER PRICE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND EMPLOYERS NOVEMBER 2017 FREE TO NACE MEMBERS $52.00 NONMEMBER PRICE JOB OUTLOOK 2018 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND EMPLOYERS 62 Highland Avenue, Bethlehem, PA 18017 www.naceweb.org 610,868.1421 TABLE OF CONTENTS

More information

Virginia Principles & Practices of Real Estate for Salespersons

Virginia Principles & Practices of Real Estate for Salespersons Volume 1: January 2015 Virginia Principles & Practices of Real Estate for Salespersons Please read the catalog in its entirety. To register for the VA Online Pre-Licensing Course click on the link on the

More information

Texas A&M University-Texarkana

Texas A&M University-Texarkana LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST For Fiscal Years 216 and 217 Submitted to the Governor s Office of Budget Planning and Policy and the Legislative Budget Board by Texas A&M University-Texarkana October

More information

CAMPUS PROFILE MEET OUR STUDENTS UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS. The average age of undergraduates is 21; 78% are 22 years or younger.

CAMPUS PROFILE MEET OUR STUDENTS UNDERGRADUATE ADMISSIONS. The average age of undergraduates is 21; 78% are 22 years or younger. CAMPUS PROFILE MEET OUR STUDENTS Freshmen are defined here as all domestic students entering in fall quarter from high school. These statistics include information drawn from records available at UC Davis.

More information

FTE General Instructions

FTE General Instructions Florida Department of Education Bureau of PK-20 Education Data Warehouse and Office of Funding and Financial Reporting FTE General Instructions 2017-18 Questions and comments regarding this publication

More information

DELIVERING A DEMAND LED SYSTEM IN THE U.S. THE ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGES APPROACH

DELIVERING A DEMAND LED SYSTEM IN THE U.S. THE ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGES APPROACH DELIVERING A DEMAND LED SYSTEM IN THE U.S. THE ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGES APPROACH LEARNING AND SKILLS DEVELOPMENT AGENCY NORTHERN IRELAND DR. BRUCE LESLIE, CHANCELLOR THE ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGES 40

More information

AGENDA ITEM VI-E October 2005 Page 1 CHAPTER 13. FINANCIAL PLANNING

AGENDA ITEM VI-E October 2005 Page 1 CHAPTER 13. FINANCIAL PLANNING Page 1 CHAPTER 13. FINANCIAL PLANNING Subchapter F. FORMULA FUNDING AND TUITION CHARGED FOR REPEATED AND EXCESS HOURS OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS Section 13.100. Purpose. 13.101. Authority 13.102. Definitions.

More information

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center 15% 10 +5 0 5 Tuition and Fees 10 Appropriations per FTE ( Excluding Federal Stimulus Funds) 15% 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93

More information

MARYLAND BLACK BUSINESS SUMMIT & EXPO March 24-27, 2011 presented by AATC * Black Dollar Exchange * BBH Tours

MARYLAND BLACK BUSINESS SUMMIT & EXPO March 24-27, 2011 presented by AATC * Black Dollar Exchange * BBH Tours Baltimore, MD. February 23, 2011 Lou Fields, President of AATC and founder of the Black Dollar Exchange announced the First Annual Maryland Black Business Summit & Expo being held in the City of Baltimore

More information

Laura G. Jones-Swann

Laura G. Jones-Swann Laura G. Jones-Swann Email: lalaswann@gmail.com EDUCATION 1975-1977 Indian River Community College, Ft. Pierce, Florida 33450. DEGREE: Associate of Arts, awarded May 1977. 1977-1979 University of Texas

More information

Biomedical Sciences. Career Awards for Medical Scientists. Collaborative Research Travel Grants

Biomedical Sciences. Career Awards for Medical Scientists. Collaborative Research Travel Grants Biomedical Sciences Research in the medical sciences provides a firm foundation for improving human health. The Burroughs Wellcome Fund is committed to fostering the development of the next generation

More information

Michigan State University

Michigan State University Michigan State University Dean of the College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Michigan State University (MSU), the nation s premier land-grant university, invites applications and nominations for

More information

Evaluation of Teach For America:

Evaluation of Teach For America: EA15-536-2 Evaluation of Teach For America: 2014-2015 Department of Evaluation and Assessment Mike Miles Superintendent of Schools This page is intentionally left blank. ii Evaluation of Teach For America:

More information

Data Glossary. Summa Cum Laude: the top 2% of each college's distribution of cumulative GPAs for the graduating cohort. Academic Honors (Latin Honors)

Data Glossary. Summa Cum Laude: the top 2% of each college's distribution of cumulative GPAs for the graduating cohort. Academic Honors (Latin Honors) Institutional Research and Assessment Data Glossary This document is a collection of terms and variable definitions commonly used in the universities reports. The definitions were compiled from various

More information

A Financial Model to Support the Future of The California State University

A Financial Model to Support the Future of The California State University A Financial Model to Support the Future of The California State University Report of the Chancellor s Task Force for a Sustainable Financial Model for the CSU LETTER TO CHANCELLOR FROM THE CO-CHAIRS The

More information

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment

Strategic Plan Dashboard Results. Office of Institutional Research and Assessment 29-21 Strategic Plan Dashboard Results Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Binghamton University Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Definitions Fall Undergraduate and Graduate

More information

UCB Administrative Guidelines for Endowed Chairs

UCB Administrative Guidelines for Endowed Chairs UCB Administrative Guidelines for Endowed Chairs I. General A. Purpose An endowed chair provides funds to a chair holder in support of his or her teaching, research, and service, and is supported by a

More information

University of Central Florida Board of Trustees Finance and Facilities Committee

University of Central Florida Board of Trustees Finance and Facilities Committee ITEM: FFC-1 University of Central Florida Board of Trustees Finance and Facilities Committee SUBJECT: Minor Amendment to the University of Central Florida 2015-25 Campus Master Plan Update DATE: December

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR MEETING OF THE BOARD

TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR MEETING OF THE BOARD TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR MEETING OF THE BOARD Board Meeting: 11/15-16/2006 Austin, Texas A. Wednesday, November 15, 2006 CONVENE THE BOARD IN OPEN SESSION FOR THE 125 TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION PROGRAM (U.

More information

Northwest-Shoals Community College - Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual 1-1. Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual I. INTRODUCTION

Northwest-Shoals Community College - Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual 1-1. Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual I. INTRODUCTION Northwest-Shoals Community College - Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual 1-1 Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual I. INTRODUCTION Northwest-Shoals Community College - Personnel Handbook/Policy Manual 1-2 I. INTRODUCTION

More information

File Print Created 11/17/2017 6:16 PM 1 of 10

File Print Created 11/17/2017 6:16 PM 1 of 10 Success - Key Measures Graduation Rate: 4-, 5-, and 6-Year 9. First-time, full-time entering, degree-seeking, students enrolled in a minimum of 12 SCH their first fall semester who have graduated from

More information

David Erwin Ritter Associate Professor of Accounting MBA Coordinator Texas A&M University Central Texas

David Erwin Ritter Associate Professor of Accounting MBA Coordinator Texas A&M University Central Texas David Erwin Ritter Associate Professor of Accounting MBA Coordinator Texas A&M University Central Texas Education Doctor of Business Administration (1986) Juris Doctor (1996) Master of Business Administration

More information

Value of Athletics in Higher Education March Prepared by Edward J. Ray, President Oregon State University

Value of Athletics in Higher Education March Prepared by Edward J. Ray, President Oregon State University Materials linked from the 5/12/09 OSU Faculty Senate agenda 1. Who Participates Value of Athletics in Higher Education March 2009 Prepared by Edward J. Ray, President Oregon State University Today, more

More information

Council on Postsecondary Education Funding Model for the Public Universities (Excluding KSU) Bachelor's Degrees

Council on Postsecondary Education Funding Model for the Public Universities (Excluding KSU) Bachelor's Degrees Bachelor's Degrees Institution 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 UK 3,988 4,238 4,540 UofL 2,821 2,832 2,705 EKU 2,508 2,532 2,559 MoSU 1,144 1,166 1,306 MuSU 1,469 1,512 1,696 NKU 2,143 2,214 2,196 WKU 2,751 2,704

More information

Proficiency Illusion

Proficiency Illusion KINGSBURY RESEARCH CENTER Proficiency Illusion Deborah Adkins, MS 1 Partnering to Help All Kids Learn NWEA.org 503.624.1951 121 NW Everett St., Portland, OR 97209 Executive Summary At the heart of the

More information

Trends in College Pricing

Trends in College Pricing Trends in College Pricing 2009 T R E N D S I N H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N S E R I E S T R E N D S I N H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N S E R I E S Highlights Published Tuition and Fee and Room and Board

More information

Nancy Guilloteau The University of Texas at Austin Department of French and Italian 201 W. 21st St. STOP B7600 Austin, Texas 78712

Nancy Guilloteau The University of Texas at Austin Department of French and Italian 201 W. 21st St. STOP B7600 Austin, Texas 78712 Nancy Guilloteau The University of Texas at Austin Department of French and Italian 201 W. 21st St. STOP B7600 Austin, Texas 78712 EDUCATION Ph.D. French Linguistics with concentration in Second Language

More information

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools 1 BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES Council of the Great City Schools 2 Overview This analysis explores national, state and district performance

More information

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution

FY year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution Student Aid Policy Analysis FY2007 2-year and 3-year Cohort Default Rates by State and Level and Control of Institution Mark Kantrowitz Publisher of FinAid.org and FastWeb.com January 5, 2010 EXECUTIVE

More information

Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data

Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data Student Admissions, Outcomes, and Other Data Data on Incoming Class UNL Clinical Psychology Training Program (CPTP) August Academic Year of Entry 7 8 9 Number of Applicants 9 7 8 8 8 Number Interviewed

More information

The Economic Impact of College Bowl Games

The Economic Impact of College Bowl Games The Economic Impact of College Bowl Games September 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 2 Bowl Game EI Studies 4 Analysis 5 Limitations 7 Research Team 8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

More information

VOL VISION 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

VOL VISION 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION VOL VISION 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION CONTENTS Vol Vision 2020 Summary Overview Approach Plan Phase 1 Key Initiatives, Timelines, Accountability Strategy Dashboard Phase 1 Metrics and Indicators

More information

Enrollment Trends. Past, Present, and. Future. Presentation Topics. NCCC enrollment down from peak levels

Enrollment Trends. Past, Present, and. Future. Presentation Topics. NCCC enrollment down from peak levels Presentation Topics 1. Enrollment Trends 2. Attainment Trends Past, Present, and Future Challenges & Opportunities for NC Community Colleges August 17, 217 Rebecca Tippett Director, Carolina Demography

More information

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE Michal Kurlaender University of California, Davis Policy Analysis for California Education March 16, 2012 This research

More information

medicaid and the How will the Medicaid Expansion for Adults Impact Eligibility and Coverage? Key Findings in Brief

medicaid and the How will the Medicaid Expansion for Adults Impact Eligibility and Coverage? Key Findings in Brief on medicaid and the uninsured July 2012 How will the Medicaid Expansion for Impact Eligibility and Coverage? Key Findings in Brief Effective January 2014, the ACA establishes a new minimum Medicaid eligibility

More information

For Your Future. For Our Future. ULS Strategic Framework

For Your Future. For Our Future. ULS Strategic Framework For Your Future. For Our Future. ULS Strategic Framework Contents Mission Vision Development Introduction Framework For Your Future. For Our Future. Academic Success, Student Success & Educational Attainment

More information

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDUCATORS. Instructional Practices in Education and Training

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDUCATORS. Instructional Practices in Education and Training ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDUCATORS Instructional Practices in Education and Training Copyright Copyright Texas Education Agency, 2014. These Materials are copyrighted and trademarked as the property of the

More information

CURRENT POSITION: Angelo State University, San Angelo, Texas

CURRENT POSITION: Angelo State University, San Angelo, Texas Raelye Taylor Self, Ed.D Angelo State University College of Education Department of Curriculum and Instruction ASU Station #10921 San Angelo, Texas 76909 Phone: 325-486-6773 Email: Raelye.Self@angelo.edu

More information

Like much of the country, Detroit suffered significant job losses during the Great Recession.

Like much of the country, Detroit suffered significant job losses during the Great Recession. 36 37 POPULATION TRENDS Economy ECONOMY Like much of the country, suffered significant job losses during the Great Recession. Since bottoming out in the first quarter of 2010, however, the city has seen

More information

Apply Texas. Tracking Student Progress

Apply Texas. Tracking Student Progress Apply Texas Tracking Student Progress Common Admission Application System Apply Texas (AT) Originally, only for general academic teaching institutions; now, all public higher education institutions must

More information

SCICU Legislative Strategic Plan 2018

SCICU Legislative Strategic Plan 2018 The primary objective of the South Carolina Independent Colleges and Universities Legislative Strategic Plan is to establish an agenda and course of action for a program of education and advocacy on matters

More information

Facts and Figures Office of Institutional Research and Planning

Facts and Figures Office of Institutional Research and Planning Facts and Figures 2008-2009 Office of Institutional Research and Planning Office of Institutional Research Fall 2009 Facts at a Glance Credit Headcount Enrollments Headcount Ethnicity Headcount Percent

More information

Reaching the Hispanic Market The Arbonne Hispanic Initiative

Reaching the Hispanic Market The Arbonne Hispanic Initiative Reaching the Hispanic Market The Arbonne Hispanic Initiative Hispanic Initiative Overview 2002 Arbonne en Español Started 2006 Initiated Hispanic Initiative 2007 Market Study & Survey Field Support» Jael

More information

Graduate Division Annual Report Key Findings

Graduate Division Annual Report Key Findings Graduate Division 2010 2011 Annual Report Key Findings Trends in Admissions and Enrollment 1 Size, selectivity, yield UCLA s graduate programs are increasingly attractive and selective. Between Fall 2001

More information

Testimony in front of the Assembly Committee on Jobs and the Economy Special Session Assembly Bill 1 Ray Cross, UW System President August 3, 2017

Testimony in front of the Assembly Committee on Jobs and the Economy Special Session Assembly Bill 1 Ray Cross, UW System President August 3, 2017 Office of the President 1700 Van Hise Hall 1220 Linden Drive Madison, Wisconsin 53706-1559 (608) 262-2321 Phone (608) 262-3985 Fax e-mail: rcross@uwsa.edu website: www.wisconsin.edu/ Testimony in front

More information

2015 Academic Program Review. School of Natural Resources University of Nebraska Lincoln

2015 Academic Program Review. School of Natural Resources University of Nebraska Lincoln 2015 Academic Program Review School of Natural Resources University of Nebraska Lincoln R Executive Summary Natural resources include everything used or valued by humans and not created by humans. As a

More information

Austin Community College SYLLABUS

Austin Community College SYLLABUS ARTS 1311 Design I Austin Community College SYLLABUS 1. Course Description Introduction to fundamentals of design: line, color, form, texture, and arrangement. Emphasis on two-dimensional principles. 2.

More information

The number of involuntary part-time workers,

The number of involuntary part-time workers, University of New Hampshire Carsey School of Public Policy CARSEY RESEARCH National Issue Brief #116 Spring 2017 Involuntary Part-Time Employment A Slow and Uneven Economic Recovery Rebecca Glauber The

More information

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS REVISED BY THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS ANALYSIS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS REVISED BY THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS ANALYSIS BILL #: HB 269 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS REVISED BY THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS ANALYSIS RELATING TO: SPONSOR(S): School District Best Financial Management Practices Reviews Representatives

More information