× Close

Projects

CCSNH Structural/Organizational and Funding Review

Summary

The Community College System of New Hampshire, which governs seven separately accredited institutions, has been the subject of much discussion by state policymakers, higher education leaders, and at least one task force seeking to determine how it would continue to meet the needs of the state, its regions, and its students. These questions were being posed in view of recent but long-term enrollment declines across all of its institutions, combined with bleak demographic projections suggesting that enrollment demand would continue to slump. CCSNH was therefore seeking an assessment of how it might adapt its structure to face these future challenges, and specifically whether it should become accredited as a single entity.

CCSNH is facing many of the same challenges as other higher education systems and institutions. Its enrollment has declined significantly over the past 10+ years, which creates budgetary challenges given the System’s heavy dependence on tuition revenue to cover its costs. The CCSNH institutions are also quite small, which makes it difficult to achieve economies of scale. Enrollment pressures are sure to continue as the state’s population ages and fewer students graduate from high school. At the same time, New Hampshire’s economy is strong, and the demand for educated workers is high. In this context, CCSNH’s leadership has acknowledged that reform is necessary, but stakeholders’ perspectives vary considerably, and even when there is agreement about the challenges ahead, there is not a common perspective on how best to address them.

State and System leaders are attracted by the idea of transforming the System by unifying its seven separate institutions as a singly accredited entity, but they also determined that further study was necessary. CCSNH tasked NCHEMS with conducting a comprehensive study of the challenges facing the system, identifying its options moving forward, and providing recommendations for structural change. Specifically, we were asked to identify whether single accreditation or some other type of reform was the most appropriate path forward.

Topics Challenges Approach Impacts Resources

Topics

From this project, NCHEMS explored several topics while exploring the options for the challenges CCSNH is facing, including governance, system structure, and accreditation.

Challenges

While CCSNH’s questions aren’t unique, they are the product of relatively recent trends and unfavorable future projections. The System is trying to get ahead of these patterns before the circumstances reach a full-blown crisis, yet it can be difficult to convey the urgency effectively to all affected stakeholders. With respect to CCSNH’s desire to explore unifying the accreditation of the seven institutions, NCHEMS assembled a set of case studies that could inform CCSNH’s decision-making, but the number of relevant examples is small. It is difficult to compare and contrast systems that chose single accreditation with others that considered single accreditation but decided against it because there simply aren’t (yet) a large number of examples. There are lessons CCSNH can learn from other states and systems, but the System will still have to chart its own path. For that reason, NCHEMS balanced the takeaways from these case studies with New Hampshire-specific data and careful listening to New Hampshire stakeholders. We worked to craft a recommendation specific to CCSNH’s unique context.

 

Approach

We approached this work through a combination of stakeholder engagement, data analysis, and review of relevant case studies.

Four NCHEMS staff traveled to New Hampshire to visit all seven CCSNH institutions as well as the System offices. We spent a day at each location meeting with trustees, advisory committee members, System and institutional leaders, faculty, staff, students, employers, K-12 and government partners, legislators, and other community members. Through conversations with these stakeholders, we sought to learn more about each local context, the challenges stakeholders face, the opportunities they perceive, their priorities and how each institution is seeking to respond to those challenges and opportunities, and their opinions on potential structural changes to CCSNH.

We drew upon data from CCSNH, IPEDS, the New Hampshire state government, WICHE, the U.S. Census Bureau, and JobsEQ to examine trends in population, workforce, enrollment, transfer, student outcomes, finance, and organizational structure. We compared each CCSNH institution, as well as the system as a whole, to comparable peer institutions/systems around the country to put the data into context.

We also identified several case studies of other systems that had pursued single accreditation in order to glean lessons from their experiences.

Impacts

CCSNH will use this report to inform its decision about whether to pursue single accreditation in the near term. The System also plans to use the report to guide its implementation of structural reforms; the report identifies key areas where reform is most important, provides a sequence and timeline of reforms, and points out a number of pitfalls to avoid.

Resources

  • CCSNH Structural/Organizational and Funding Review – Final Report