Page 13 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 13 of 137 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
5
comparable competitors to evaluate the firm. Commonly used ratio analysis tools
include net-profit ratio, debt ratio analysis, and in the case of publicly held
corporations, earning per share. One of the most common measures is the current
ratio, which measures total assets divided by total liabilities. The purpose of this ratio
is to evaluate the value of assets relative to debts (Nadarajah & Kotz, 2007). Most
public institutions do not have a similar tool for analysis, particularly in higher
education. Even when considering the primary output of an educational institution,
student achievement, the CCC system lacks methods of standardized evaluation and
assessment. While some standardized assessments exist for comparing K-12
institutions, such as those created under the “No Child Left Behind” initiative and
California’s Academic Performance Indicator (API), institutions of higher education
in the state of California have no established standard tool for comparative analysis.
There is a clear need for the colleges to valuate their fiscal standing and report
comparable financial assessment values. A benchmark can be used for the purpose of
comparative analysis for community colleges, similar to those used in industry.
In order to understand both the revenues and capital outlays of CCC, a close
examination of the budgeting and accounting practices is needed. The California
Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office collects a vast amount data related to both
the current and historical fiscal condition of the various CCC districts. California
community college districts are required by regulations to prepare financial reports
and annual budgets that report all their actual and projected revenues and expenditures
Object Description
| Title | Finance in the California community college: Comparative analysis and benchmarking of instructional expenditures |
| Author | Karamian, Martin |
| Author email | martinsfsu@netzero.com; karamim@piercecollege.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-17 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-26 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Melguizo, Tatiana Vega, William |
| Abstract | The goals of this empirical study of community colleges are to 1) create a benchmark for per student instructional expenditures; and 2) account for variations in instructional expenditures among a peer group of community colleges in Southern California. The peer group sample included 22 single campus community college districts in the Los Angeles area. Using data for three fiscal years a refined mean benchmark value for instructional expenditures of $2,676.71 per full-time equivalent student (FTES) was estimated with a standard deviation of $326.54. Using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, 11 variables were correlated with instructional costs per FTES. The largest and only statistically significant determinant included the number of part-time instructors (-0.424). While other variables were correlated, none were statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval. The results from the sample suggest that larger colleges have lower instructional costs per FTES despite higher faculty pay. Expanding credit student enrollment within the funding growth limits set by the State, along with additional part-time instruction within the limits set by the State will likely result in lower instructional costs per FTES and an economy of scale effect. The effect of increased institutional size on quality of education was not assessed. |
| Keyword | finance; California; community college; comparative analysis; benchmarking; instructional expenditures; economics; higher education; spending; instruction; education; economy of scale |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 1990/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3775 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Karamian, Martin |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Karamian-4454 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume23/etd-Karamian-4454.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 13 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 5 comparable competitors to evaluate the firm. Commonly used ratio analysis tools include net-profit ratio, debt ratio analysis, and in the case of publicly held corporations, earning per share. One of the most common measures is the current ratio, which measures total assets divided by total liabilities. The purpose of this ratio is to evaluate the value of assets relative to debts (Nadarajah & Kotz, 2007). Most public institutions do not have a similar tool for analysis, particularly in higher education. Even when considering the primary output of an educational institution, student achievement, the CCC system lacks methods of standardized evaluation and assessment. While some standardized assessments exist for comparing K-12 institutions, such as those created under the “No Child Left Behind” initiative and California’s Academic Performance Indicator (API), institutions of higher education in the state of California have no established standard tool for comparative analysis. There is a clear need for the colleges to valuate their fiscal standing and report comparable financial assessment values. A benchmark can be used for the purpose of comparative analysis for community colleges, similar to those used in industry. In order to understand both the revenues and capital outlays of CCC, a close examination of the budgeting and accounting practices is needed. The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office collects a vast amount data related to both the current and historical fiscal condition of the various CCC districts. California community college districts are required by regulations to prepare financial reports and annual budgets that report all their actual and projected revenues and expenditures |
