BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
Meeting #2
December 2, 2014
Market Center Building, 1600 SW 4th Ave, Suite 541, Gold Conference Room
8:00 am – 9:00 am
Materials – Table of Contents
1. Meeting Agenda
2. March 4, 2014 Meeting Minutes
3. Docket 1. Internal Audit Charter & Executive and Audit Committee Charter
(Amendment)
4. Docket 2. Annual Risk Assessment and Audit Plan 2015
5. Docket 3. President’s 2014‐15 Goals
Portland State University Board of Trustees
i
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
Meeting #2
December 2, 2014 Market Center Building: 1600 SW 4th Ave, Suite 541 – Gold Conf Rm 8:00‐9:00 am
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL/ DECLARATION OF QUORUM
2. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 5, 2014 MEETING MINUTES
3. INTRODUCTION TO DAVID TERRY, DIRECTOR OF INTERNAL AUDIT (WIEWEL)
4. SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF INTERNAL AUDIT (TERRY)
STANDARDS
OBJECTIVES
PROCESS
ETHICSPOINT HOTLINE COMPLAINTS
5. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF INTERNAL AUDIT CHARTER AND AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE CHARTER AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL BOARD (TERRY)
6. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ANNUAL RISK ASSESSMENT AND AUDIT PLAN AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE
FULL BOARD (TERRY)
7. PRESENTATION OF PRESIDENT’S 2014‐15 GOALS (WIEWEL) AND DISCUSSION OF 2014‐15 PRESIDENTIAL EVALUATION PROCESS (NICKERSON)
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION: DISCUSSION REGARDING REVIEW AND EVALUATION OF THE PRESIDENT
9. APPROVAL OF PRESIDENT’S 2014‐15 GOALS AND DISCUSSION OF 2014‐15 PRESIDENTIAL EVALUATION PROCESS (NICKERSON)
10. HOUSEKEEPING ITEMS (NICKERSON)
Portland State University Board of Trustees
i
PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
March 5, 2014 Market Center Building: 1600 SW 4th Ave, Suite 541 – Gold Conference Room 4:00‐5:00 pm
Minutes
Committee Members Present: Gale Castillo, Margaret Kirkpatrick, Pete Nickerson (electronically), Wim Wiewel (ex officio, non‐voting) Committee Members not present included: Tom Imeson, Rick Miller PSU Staff present included: Dave Reese and Rachel Martinez
1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL/ DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Nickerson called the meeting to order at 4:03 pm and the Board Secretary took role. A quorum was present, and the meeting, having been duly convened, was ready to proceed with business.
2. BOARD OFFICER RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FY 14‐15
Board Secretary David Reese explained that the Committee was required to consider recommendations for Board Officers for FY 14‐15 and make those recommendations for the Board’s consideration at the Board’s March 12, 2014 meeting. Recommendations forwarded to the Board Secretary by members of the Board include the recommendation for Pete Nickerson to serve as Chair and for Tom Imeson to serve as Vice‐Chair. ACTION: Chair Nickerson called for a vote on the recommendations. The committee unanimously
agreed to nominate Pete Nickerson and Tom Imeson as Chair and Vice‐Chair, respectively, to the full
Board on March 12, 2014.
3. PRESIDENT WIEWEL’S EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
Chair Nickerson informed the committee they will need to review the PSU President’s contract and make recommendations to the Board. Reese outlined the current contract for the committee. The contract has a three‐year term ending on June 30, 2016, but does not include any compensation provisions beyond June 30, 2014. Chair Nickerson requested that Reese draft language amending the contract to continue the current compensation provisions and to remove obsolete references to the
Portland State University Board of Trustees
ii
Chancellor and Oregon University System, and to bring such revisions to the full Board’s meeting in June 2014.
4. SEARCH FOR DIRECTOR OF INTERNAL AUDIT
Reese briefed the Committee on the search for a Director of Internal Audit. Chair Nickerson suggested that an Executive and Audit committee designee will meet with the finalists once identified. Chair Nickerson asked Reese to keep the committee informed on the search for the Internal Auditor.
5. FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDA
Chair Nickerson suggested that the committee meet as needed. No future meeting was scheduled.
6. ADJOURN
With no further comments or questions from the committee, Chair Nickerson adjourned the meeting.
Docket 1 Internal Audit Charter
Executive and Audit Committee Charter
(Amendment)
BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM: 5 DATE: 12/2/2014 TITLE: Internal Audit Charter and Amendment to E&A Committee Charter and
Recommendation to the Full Board SUMMARY OF ITEM: Prior to July 1, 2014, the Internal Audit Charter of the Oregon University,
which had been approved by the State Board of Higher Education, detailed the authority and responsibility of the Internal Audit Division of the Chancellor’s Office.
This proposed Portland State University Internal Audit Charter is
substantially the same as the OUS Internal Audit Charter. In addition, the proposed changes to the charge of the Board’s Executive
and Audit Committee, which are being proposed by the Director of Internal Audit, make clear that (1) the Committee is responsible for reviewing the annual risk assessment and internal audit plan, and (2) the University’s internal audit function is to follow the Institute of Internal Auditors International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing.
REQUESTED COMMITTEE ACTION: Approve the Internal Audit Charter and the proposed revisions to the
Executive and Audit Committee Charter and recommend their approval to the full Board.
ATTACHED DOCUMENTS: 1. Draft Internal Audit Charter 2. Draft Revised Executive and Audit Committee Charter BACKGROUND READING: None
1
InternalAuditCharter
Purpose The authority and responsibilities of Portland State University’s Office of Internal Audit (OIA) are defined in this charter and approved by the Board. Internal auditing is an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity designed to add value and improve an organization's operations. It helps an organization accomplish its objectives by bringing a systematic, disciplined approach to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of risk management, control, and governance processes. The OIA shall uphold the principles of integrity, objectivity, confidentiality, and competency as defined in the Institute of Internal Auditors Code of Ethics and shall adhere to the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards). The OIA is to utilize the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) as the model for evaluating the adequacy of the University’s internal controls. Authority The Director of Internal Audit reports administratively to the President and functionally to the Executive and Audit Committee. Authorization is granted for full and complete access to any of the University’s records (either manual or electronic), physical properties, and personnel relevant to an audit engagement. Documents and information given to internal auditors during a periodic review will be handled in a confidential and prudent manner, as required by the Institute of Internal Auditors’ Code of Ethics. University management is responsible for the risk management and internal control structure over the areas audited. Internal auditors have no direct responsibility or any authority over any of the activities or operations that they review. They should not develop and install procedures, prepare records, or engage in activities, which would normally be reviewed by the OIA. Responsibility The OIA is responsible for developing and implementing an annual internal audit plan that outlines the engagements to be performed using an appropriate risk-based methodology. The annual plan is to include the consideration of any risks or control concerns identified by management and is to be reviewed and approved by the President and the Executive and Audit Committee. OIA performs four types of engagements:
1. Assurance Services. Assurance services are objective examinations of evidence for the purpose of providing an independent assessment. This includes assessing and reporting
2
on the adequacy and effectiveness of the internal controls and the quality of performance in carrying out assigned responsibilities. The scope includes reviewing and evaluating:
internal controls established to ensure compliance with applicable policies, plans, procedures, laws, regulations, and contracts
the means with which assets are safeguarded the reliability and integrity of financial and operating information the economy, efficiency, and effectiveness with which resources are employed IT systems to determine if they are appropriately managed, controlled, and
protected. 2. Consulting Services. Advisory and related client service activities, the nature and scope
of which are agreed with the client, are intended to add value and improve an organization’s governance, risk management, and control processes without the internal auditor assuming management responsibility. Examples include counsel, advice, facilitation, and training.
3. Investigative Engagements. Investigations evaluate allegations of unethical business practices and/or financial and operational misconduct to determine if allegations are substantiated and to prevent future occurrences.
4. Follow-up Engagements. Follow-up engagements evaluate plans and actions taken to correct reported conditions.
A written report will be prepared and issued by the Director of Internal Audit following the conclusion of each engagement and will be distributed appropriately. University management shall respond in a timely manner. This response will indicate what actions were taken or are planned, and an anticipated completion date in regard to the specific recommendations. Copies of final reports will be distributed to the President and appropriate University personnel. (Updated DATE)
ExecutiveandAuditCommitteeThe Executive and Audit Committee is established. The Committee is empowered to act for the Board between regular Board meetings and to oversee the University’s financial practices and standards of conduct, as provided in this policy. The Committee shall have the following five voting members: the Chair of the Board, the Vice Chair of the Board, the Chair of the Academic and Student Affairs Committee, the Chair of the Finance and Administration Committee, and one at-large member appointed from among the remaining trustees. The President shall be an ex officio non-voting member of the Executive and Audit Committee. The Chair of the Board is the Chair of the Executive and Audit Committee. It is the expectation of the Board that the full Board will consider and make decisions regarding all significant matters before the Board. Nonetheless, the Board recognizes that certain matters may be appropriately handled by the Committee between regular Board meetings, either at the specific direction of the Board or because time is of the essence. The Committee is empowered to act for the Board between regular Board meetings on all matters except the following, which shall be reserved for the Board: (1) presidential selection, evaluation and termination, (2) board and committee officer election, (3) changes in the mission and purposes of the University, (4) amendments to the bylaws, (5) incurrence of University indebtedness, (6) sale or other disposition of real estate and other tangible property, (7) condemnation of real property, and (8) adoption of the University budget. The Committee is responsible for oversight of the institution’s financial practices and standards of conduct. The Committee is responsible for (1) overseeing the external financial audit, (2) ensuring compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, and (3) monitoring internal controls and risk management systems, and (4) review of the annual risk assessment and internal audit plan. In addition, the Committee is responsible for such other matters as may be referred to it by the Board or Chair. The University’s Director of Internal Audit reports administratively to the President and functionally to the Committee. Internal Audit will follow the Institute of Internal Auditors International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. The Committee has the authority, through its chair or a majority vote of its regular voting members, to ask management to address specific issues within the mandate of the committee, as well as the authority to engage independent legal counsel and other professional advisers to carry out its duties. The Committee is responsible for making nominations to the Board for Board and committee officers and for committee member assignments. The Secretary to the Board is responsible for providing staff support to the Committee. APPROVED BY BOARD OF TRUSTEES January 30, 2014
Formatted: Font: Italic
Docket 2 Annual Risk Assessment and Audit Plan 2015
BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM: 6 DATE: 12/2/2014 TITLE: Annual Risk Assessment and Audit Plan SUMMARY OF ITEM: The Director of Internal Audit has drafted a proposed 2015 Internal Audit
Plan. REQUESTED COMMITTEE ACTION: Approve the Internal Audit Plan and recommend its approval to the full
Board. ATTACHED DOCUMENTS: Portland State University 2015 Internal Audit Plan BACKGROUND READING: None
1 | P a g e
Portland State University 2015 Internal Audit Plan
December 2014
Prepared by:
David Terry, CPA, CIA
PSU Director of Internal Auditor
2 | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2015 Internal Audit Plan
Description Page
Cover Page 1
Table of Contents 2
Plan Overview 3
Internal Audit Plan & Budgeted Hours for 2015 – Exhibit A 4-5
2015 Entity Wide Risk Assessment – Exhibit B 6
2015 Top 10 Risk Scores and Potential Risks - Exhibit C 7-10
Risk Factors, Scoring Criteria, & Audit Plan Approval Process – Exhibit D 11-14
Auditable Units Defined – Exhibit E 15-20
3 | P a g e
PLAN OVERVIEW
This document provides the 2015 Internal Audit Plan as required by professional auditing standards.
AUDIT PLAN – Exhibit A
The final audit plan covers a 12-month period beginning January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015.
This plan includes internal audits selected based on the results of the entity wide risk assessment
performed by Portland State University’s Internal Audit department (IA), input from various stakeholders
and managers throughout the university, and input and approval from the Executive & Audit Committee.
PRIORITIZED POTENTIAL AUDITS – Exhibit B
The IA prioritized the university’s departments, or auditable units, by sorting the units from highest risk
to lowest risk based on scoring criteria used for the entity wide risk assessment. The IA analyzed the
results to determine if risk ratings were consistent with what professional judgment would expect. In
addition, the IA considered significant changes in processes units are currently undergoing and/or will be
undergoing in the near future to help identify the timing of when an Internal Audit should occur. This
resulted in the prioritized ranking of audits.
2015 TOP 10 RISK SCORES & POTENTIAL RISKS – Exhibit C
This exhibit helps outline the top 10 audit units by overall risk score and what potential risks could occur
in these areas if internal controls are not implemented and functioning effectively.
RISK FACTOR DEFINITIONS AND SCORING CRITERIA – Exhibit D
The IA established risk criteria, based on best practices implemented by other Internal Audit Departments
throughout governmental and higher education entities, to be used in determining the overall risk for each
potential audit unit. The IA scored risk for each auditable unit by: receiving input from key stakeholders
throughout the university; scoring the complexity of each unit; scoring the significance of the impact an
error and/or weakness would have to the college as a whole if a detrimental event were to occur in that
unit; scoring the significance of revenues and expenditures flowing through the unit; and scoring risk
based on the IA’s professional judgment.
AUDIT ENTITIES – Exhibit E
Exhibit E provides an overview of the audit universe at the university (i.e. “what is auditable”). Defining
the audit universe is a critical step in helping plan future internal audits at the university. Each auditable
unit must be distinct and contain activities structured to obtain common objectives. For the 2015 entity
wide risk assessment, there are 34 auditable units.
4 | P a g e
EXHIBIT A
Internal Audit Plan January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015
Audit # Engagement Title Hours* Timeframe** Comments
Risk
Assessment
1st Annual Risk
Assessment
200 Nov-Dec. 2014 Annually required
by IIA auditing
standards.
Tier I Audits
2015-1 Athletics Estimated at
400 hrs.
Jan-Mar. 2015
2015-2 Advancement Estimated at
80 hrs.
Jan-Feb. 2015 Consulting project
2015-3 Research & Strategic
Partnerships Estimated at
400 hrs.
Mar.-Jul. 2015
2015-4 Financial Aid Estimated at
400 hours
Jul.-Aug. 2015
2015-5 Housing and
Residence Life Estimated at
400 hours
Sept.-Nov. 2015
SPECIAL
REVIEWS
Special reviews 200 Calendar Year
2015
Special reviews are
largely based on the
# of EthicsPoint
reports received
during the year.
CONSULT Consulting Work 40 Calendar Year
2015
Consulting work as
needed/requested
by mgmt.
Total Audit Hours
for 2015 Calendar
Year
1,920
INDIRECT Indirect hours for
2015 160 Calendar Year
2015
Hours are estimates
for training, leave
time, & mgmt.
meetings.
Total Budgeted Hrs 2,080
Tier II Audits 2016-1 Planning, Construction,
& Real Estate Estimated at 500
hours
Estimated for
early 2016
2016-2 Office of International
Affairs
Estimated at 500
hours Estimated for mid
to late 2016
2016-3 Student Health and
Counseling
Estimated at 500
hours
Estimated for mid
to late 2016
2016-4 CPSO and Clery Act
Compliance
Estimated at 500
hours
Estimated for late
2016
* Hours may be adjusted as needed based on scope and objectives of the planned audit and potential issues identified during fieldwork.
** Dates may be adjusted as needed to avoid a negative impact on PSU projects, available staff and resources.
5 | P a g e
Audit Plan
Description of Audits
January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015
Audit # Description
2015-1 Audit will focus on reviewing internal controls over revenues, expenditures, capital
assets, and key compliance requirements. In addition, major contracts will be
reviewed. Moreover, key compliance requirements such as NCAA and Big Sky
Conference compliance will be tested.
2015-2 President Wiewel has asked for a consulting review of funds raised through and
reported by Advancement and the PSU Foundation.
2015-3 This audit will focus on internal controls over a sample of federal grant funded
programs. Testing will be conducted to gain reasonable assurance that key
compliance requirements are being adhered to and grant funds are being used for
allowable purposes. In addition, a review of potential risks related to export
controls will be conducted. Moreover, changes to the OMB circulars will be
reviewed to gain reasonable assurance that PSU has processes in place to comply
with new federal standards.
2015-4 Audit will focus on reviewing internal controls over revenues, expenditures, and
key compliance requirements associated with Federal Financial Aid.
2015-5 Audit will focus on reviewing internal controls over revenues, expenditures, capitals
assets, and key compliance requirements associated with Housing and Residence
Life. In addition, major contracts and/or agreements will be reviewed.
Risk
Assessment
The annual risk assessment forms the basis of the audit plan. Auditing standards
require the IA to conduct an annual risk assessment to conform to standards.
Consulting PSU management may ask Internal Audit for consulting services to be performed in
accordance with the Mission & Authority of the Office of Internal Audit.
Special
Reviews
Includes hours for unplanned, special requests for audit reviews and investigations
arising from allegations received and/or actual detrimental events occurring at the
university.
6 | P a g e
EXHIBIT B
2015 Prioritized Audit Risk Model – Auditable Units
Auditable Entity / Unit Total Risk
Risk Ranking
Risk Category
IA Planned for 2015?
Athletics 155.4 1 High Yes
Research and Strategic Partnerships 154.8 2 High Yes
Financial Aid 130.6 3 High Yes
Campus Public Safety Office (CPSO) 129.0 4 High No
Office of Information Technology (OIT) 128.7 5 High No
Planning, Construction, & Real Estate 113.0 6 High No
Student Health and Counseling 110.8 7 High No
Housing and Residence Life 107.5 8 High Yes
Human Resources & Payroll 107.5 9 High No*
Office of International Affairs 104.5 10 High No
Risk Management 101.5 11 High No*
University Place 99.7 12 Moderate No
Enrollment Management and Student Affairs (EMSA) 91.0 13 Moderate
No
Financial Services, Treasury, and Budget 91.0 14 Moderate No*
Transportation and Parking Services (TAPS) 89.8 15 Moderate No
University Advancement 88.6 16 Moderate Yes^
Intensive English Language Program (IELP) 87.0 17 Moderate No
General Counsel 86.2 18 Moderate No
Office of the President and Board of Trustees 86.2 19 Moderate No
Office of Academic Affairs (OAA) 85.4 20 Moderate No
Government & Community Relations and Marketing and Communication 81.2 21 Moderate
No
Diversity and Inclusion 80.1 22 Moderate No
General University 80.0 23 Moderate No*
Maseeh College of Engineering and Computer Science (MCECS) 78.9 24 Low
No*
College of Urban and Public Affairs (CUPA) 78.4 25 Low No*
School of Social Work (SSW) 78.4 26 Low No*
College of Liberal Arts & Sciences (CLAS) 77.8 27 Low No*
Graduate School of Education (GSE) 71.2 28 Low No*
College of the Arts (COTA) 63.9 29 Low No*
Institutional Research 61.7 30 Low No
School of Business (SBA) 57.4 31 Low No*
Libraries 57.4 32 Low No
University Studies – (UNST) 56.8 33 Low No*
Honors College (HON) 55.6 34 Low No*
* - IA may indirectly audit aspects of this auditable unit via the planned audits for 2015. For example,
certificates of insurance are maintained in Risk Management, which may be reviewed during the audit of
Athletics.
^ - The project requested by President Wiewel here will be performed as a consulting project.
7 | P a g e
EXHIBIT C
Overview of Risks Identified in the Top 10 Risk Scores
# Audit Unit Risks(s) Identified Impact to PSU if
Risk Occurred
1 Athletics
a) Procurement rules not being
followed;
b) Monitoring of major contracts
may be deficient;
c) Internal controls over revenues
or expenditures not sufficient;
d) NCAA compliance not
maintained;
e) Equipment and other PSU assets
not adequately
secured/controlled;
f) Athletic training staff lack
health/safety
certifications/licenses;
g) High turnover in management
could lead to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures.
a) Moderate
b) Moderate
c) Moderate
d) Moderate to
High
e) Moderate
f) Moderate
g) Moderate
2
Research and Strategic
Partnerships
a) Requirements for export controls
may not be implemented or
effective.
b) New OMB standards may not be
effectively implemented;
c) High turnover in management
could lead to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures;
d) Monitoring of major grants may
be deficient;
e) Grant compliance requirements
may be out of compliance;
f) Internal controls over revenues
and expenditures may be
ineffective.
a) High
b) Moderate
c) Low to Moderate
d) Moderate
e) Moderate to
High
f) Moderate
3
Financial Aid
a) High turnover in management
could lead to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures;
a) Moderate
8 | P a g e
3
Financial Aid
b) Overawarding of financial aid to
students;
c) Federal regulations not adhered
to related to financial aid funds;
d) Debt collection procedures not
effective related to loans.
b) Moderate
c) High
d) Moderate
4
Campus Public Safety Office
(CPSO)
a) High turnover in management
could lead to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures;
b) Clery Act requirements are not
ensured leading to fines and
freeze on financial aid;
c) Internal controls over revenues
and expenditures are not
effective.
a) Low
b) High
c) Low
5 Office of Information
Technology (OIT)
a) Malicious attacks are not
sufficiently mitigated, identified
timely, and timely resolved;
b) Software licensing requirements
not achieved leading to fines;
c) Disaster recovery and business
continuity procedures are
inadequate;
d) User access to critical systems is
not effectively monitored and
administered.
e) Monitoring of major IT contracts
is not effective and adequate
service level agreements are not
in place to protect PSU.
a) Moderate to
High
b) Moderate
c) Moderate
d) Moderate
e) Moderate
6 Planning, Construction, & Real
Estate
a) Procurement rules not followed;
b) Monitoring of major contracts
may be deficient;
c) Capital assets not being properly
accounted for and depreciated;
d) High turnover in management
could lead to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures.
e) Safety requirements and
insurance not being maintained
a) Moderate
b) Moderate to
High
c) Moderate
d) Moderate to Low
e) Moderate to
High
7
Student Health and Counseling
a) Medicines not adequately
controlled and accounted for;
b) HIPAA compliance
requirements not achieved;
a) Moderate to
High
b) Moderate
9 | P a g e
7
Student Health and Counseling
c) Recent turnover in some key
management positions leads to
inconsistent adherence to
policies and procedures;
d) Lack of internal controls over
revenues and expenditures;
e) Major contracts not adequately
monitored and administered;
f) Risk of students with infectious
disease like Ebola being treated
in Student Health and
Counseling.
c) Moderate
d) Moderate
e) Moderate to
High
f) Moderate
8 Housing and Residence Life
a) Contract monitoring and
management may be
insufficient;
b) Key federal and/or state
compliance requirements not
maintained;
c) Lack of internal controls over
revenues and expenditures;
d) Recent turnover in management
positions leads to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures.
e) Physical security/access controls
inadequate.
a) Moderate
b) Moderate to
High
c) Moderate
d) Moderate
e) Moderate to
High
9
Human Resources and Payroll
a) Pay inconsistencies and/or
overpayments to personnel;
b) Affordable Care Act compliance
requirements not maintained
leading to fines;
c) Recent turnover in management
positions leads to inconsistent
adherence to policies and
procedures;
d) Benefits granted to those that are
ineligible;
e) I-9 compliance requirements not
being consistently followed.
f) Performance evaluations not
performed timely and/or not at
all by managers
a) Moderate
b) Moderate to
High
c) Moderate
d) Moderate to Low
e) Moderate
f) Low to Moderate
10 Office of International Affairs
a) International students must
maintain a full-time load to
maintain student VISA
requirements;
b) International students must show
evidence of health insurance;
a) Moderate to
High
b) Moderate
10 | P a g e
10
Office of International Affairs
c) International students are limited
to the number of credit hours
they can take via distance
education;
d) International students must
present evidence of sufficient
financial resources to pay higher
tuition rates before being
admitted;
e) Lack of internal controls over
revenues and expenditures.
c) Moderate
d) Moderate to Low
e) Moderate to Low
11 | P a g e
EXHIBIT D
Risk Factor Definitions, Scoring Criteria, & Internal Audit Plan
Approval Process
Overview of Entity Wide Risk Assessment
A Complexity of Unit and Impact to PSU B C = A x B D
E F = C + D + E
Auditable Unit
Risk Assessment
Survey Score Strategic Operational Financial IT
Legal Compliance
Total Business
Risk Factors
Combined Risk
Assessment & Complexity
Score
Financial Significance
Score
Last Time Audit by IA Score
Total Risk Score
Example Unit A 40 1 1 1 1 1 5 200 20
25 245
Example Unit B 10 0 1 0 0 0 1 10 .2
0 10.2
Risk Assessment Survey Score – The IA held interviews with key stakeholders from the
various auditable units to help gain an understanding of risks and obstacles each unit was facing
and to gain a more thorough understanding of the duties and responsibilities of each unit. The IA
met with about 30 stakeholders throughout PSU to obtain input on the 2015 risk assessment. The
IA asked stakeholders questions on:
General Risks
Control Environment – This describes the tone management sets/displays for personnel in
regards to how policies and procedures are followed and control activities are performed.
Risk Assessment is management’s identification and analysis of risks relevant to the
achievement of objectives and goals. In addition, it includes a plan for determining how
known risks should be managed to help the organization achieve its objectives and goals.
Control Activities include policies and procedures, segregation of duties, and physical &
automated controls that help management ensure directives are carried out.
Information and Communication is the identification, capture, and exchange of
information in a form and time frame that enable people to carry out their responsibilities.
Information systems deal with both internally generated data and information about external
events, activities, and conditions.
Monitoring is a process established by management that assesses the quality of internal
control and program performance over time. Monitoring provides external oversight, either
ongoing or in the form of independent checks of internal controls by management or other
parties outside the process.
Specific Risks
Obstacles the unit faces – examples include spikes in demand on services, lack of
adequate infrastructure, etc…
Known risks the unit faces – grant requirements, monitoring requirements, safety risks,
etc…
12 | P a g e
Confirmed or alleged instances of fraud, waste, or abuse – misappropriation of assets,
loss of funds, termination of personnel, etc…
Risks with turnover of personnel – The risk that the organization will lose a significant
amount of institutional knowledge at a key time in operations.
Other areas of concerns – manual vs. automated processes, lack of key data to help
manage programs, perceptions of program processes that cause concerns, etc…
The IA scored the responses provided by stakeholders to the 10 topic areas listed above based on
his professional experience and observations of each unit by the IA. The IA then received input
from stakeholders provided during interviews. The IA then averaged his risk score with the
stakeholders’ risk scores and placed this averaged score into Column A above. The highest score
possible for this section of the risk assessment was 40 points and the lowest was 10 points. Complexity of Unit and Impact to PSU Scores – The IA scored each unit based on his
understanding of the complexity of processes overseen by the unit and the impact that an actual
error in the unit’s processes could have to the university as a whole. Complexity and impact
were broken out into five various subject areas as defined below:
Strategic – The IA scored this category primarily based on his understanding of high
level goals the university wants to strive to achieve. A few examples of a significant
strategic impact for PSU might include the university’s goals for sustainability measures,
and diversity of the university’s workforce and student population.
Operational – The IA scored this category primarily based on customer service aspects
the auditable unit provided to students and to other university departments. An example
of a significant operational unit for PSU would be Financial Aid.
Financial – The IA scored this category primarily based on the number of funding
streams each auditable unit had and the significance of the amount of funds flowing
through the unit. An example of a significant financial unit would be Financial Aid.
Information Technology – The IA scored this category primarily based on the significant
amount of information technology (i.e. computers, specialized equipment, etc…) the unit
used within its daily processes. Also, the IA looked at how significant a role the unit had
in determining what type of information technology was used and how it would be
implemented throughout the university. An example of a unit that had a significant
impact on information technology would be OIT (Office of Information Technology).
Legal Compliance – The IA scored this category primarily based on the complexity of
legal and regulatory compliance requirements each auditable unit faced. The IA
considered FERPA, HIPAA, ADA, Clery Act, PCI, Title IX, grant rules and regulations,
etc… in scoring each audit unit for this category. An example of an audit unit with
significant and/or complex legal compliance requirements over it would be Financial Aid
or Campus Public Safety Office.
The IA would give a score of either 0 or 1 for each of these five complexity/impact areas per
auditable unit. These complexity/impact scores were then used as a “multiplier” score to help
assess risk. The total complexity/impact scores were placed in Column B above and used to
compute C above for each unit. The highest risk score possible for Column C, after the risk
“multiplier” was considered, was 200 points and the lowest was 10 points.
13 | P a g e
Financial Significance Score – The IA also assigned a risk score to each auditable unit based on
how much revenues the unit processed during fiscal year 2014 (FY14) or how much
expenditures the unit incurred during FY14. The primary concept of the risk scoring for this
attribute was that as the amount of revenues and/or expenditures increases in a unit the risk for
that unit also directly increases. The IA primarily used financial data extracted from FY14 using
Banner’s FGIBDST report to obtain the revenue and expenditure amounts. The greater of
revenues or expenditures being processed through the unit for FY14 was used to score the
financial risk for the unit using the scoring matrix outlined below:
Risk Score Matrix for Financial Significance: Revenue or Expenditure Total for FY14
Multiple Risk Score in Column C to Calculate Financial Risk Score Placed in Column D
> $20,000,000 10.00%
$19,999,999 to $10,000,001 8.00%
$10,000,000 to $5,000,001 6.00%
$5,000,000 to $2,000,001 4.00%
$2,000,000 to $0 2.00%
The highest score an audit unit could obtain from the financial risk scoring here would be 20 points,
and the lowest possible score an audit unit could obtain from this scoring would be .2 points. The
highest combined risk score possible for Column D, after the Financial Significance “multiplier”
was considered, was 220 points and the lowest was 10.2 points.
Last Time Audited by the IA Score - The IA also assigned a risk score to each auditable unit
based on how much time has elapsed since the IA conducted an Internal Audit or consultation
review at each of the auditable units. A risk score was added onto each auditable unit using the
scoring matrix below based on the length of time that has elapsed from the IA’s last audit of the
unit.
Last Time Unit was Audited by
PSU IA
Risk Points
Scale
Never Audited by PSU IA 25
Audited 10+ years ago 15
Audited 8+ to 10 years ago 9
Audited 5 to 7+ years ago 7
Audited 3 to 4+ years ago 5
Audited by PSU IA or other External
Auditors in 2013/14 with no follow-up
audit performed at this time
3
Internal Audit conducted during 2015 0
14 | P a g e
The risk scores from the length of time elapsing since an internal audit has been conducted at the
auditable unit was placed in Column E above. The highest combined risk score possible for
Column E, after the Last Time Audited score was considered, was 245 points and the lowest was
10.2 points.
Total Risk Score - To obtain the total risk score for each auditable unit, the IA took the risk score in
Column C and added it to the financial risk score calculated in Column D. In addition, the risk score
in Column E based on the last time the unit was audited was added in to get the total risk score was
placed in Column F above. These risk scores are the scores presented in Exhibit B and Exhibit C that
were used to sort the various auditable units from high risk (i.e. a large risk score) down to low risk
(i.e. a small risk score). The highest total risk score an audit unit could obtain using the risk scoring
criteria above would be a score of 245 points, and the lowest score an audit unit could obtain would
be a score of 10.2 points. Finally, to help designate high, moderate, and low risk audit units, the IA
took the highest third of the audit units total risk scores (i.e. the top 33% of the audit units) and
classified these as high risk units. The next third were classified as moderate risk units, and the
bottom third were classified as low risk units. Note – IA had to round the audit units up and/or down
a risk classification based on the total number of units being assessed.
Internal Audit Plan Approval Process Flowchart
IA conducts a financial analysis over of each audit
unit’s fiscal year 2014 financial transactions. This
analysis is scored into a portion of each audit
unit’s risk assessment score.
IA interviews a sample of key stakeholders at PSU to receive
input into the annual risk assessment and audit plan and to
discuss potential risks to PSU and controls implemented to
mitigate those risks. The input from the interviewees is then
scored as a portion of the risk assessment scores.
Draft annual audit plan and results of annual risk
assessment presented to Executive and Audit Committee
(EAC) at December meeting. EAC and IA finalize the areas to
be audited over the next calendar year based on review and
discussions over the results of the annual risk assessment.
IA projects are then conducted in accordance
with the approved audit plan.
15 | P a g e
EXHIBIT E
Auditable Units
Summary Descriptions
1. Athletics – Athletics includes: Stott Center Operations; Athletic Administrative Costs;
Ticket Office; Training Room Operations; Concessions; Equipment Room; nine women’s
sports (Basketball; Cross Country; Golf; Soccer; Softball; Tennis; Track & Field;
Volleyball; and Cheerleading) and six men’s sports (Track & Field; Cross Country;
Football; Basketball; Cheerleading; and Tennis). This auditable unit also includes the
subsidy PSU contributes to Athletics and the cost of NCAA certification. Athletics is
budgeted under Organization Codes 63xxxx, 902400, and 902410 in Banner.
2. Campus Public Safety Office (CPSO) – CPSO helps to promote a safe and secure
campus community through the delivery of personal and facility security, crime
prevention services, public safety communication, emergency medical services and
public assistance. CPSO is also responsible for Clery Act reporting at PSU. CPSO is
budgeted under Organization Code 600200 in Banner.
3. College of Liberal Arts & Sciences (CLAS) – CLAS is composed of several academic
departments that include: Anthropology; Biological Sciences; Black Studies; Chemistry;
Chicano-Latino Studies; Communication; Economics; English; Environmental Science;
Foreign Languages; Geography; Geology; General Liberal Studies; History; Indigenous
Nations Studies; International Studies; Judaic Studies; Linguistics; Math; Philosophy and
Conflict Resolution; Physics; Psychology; Religious Studies; Sociology; Speech and
Hearing Sciences; Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies; and numerous professional
centers and other academic areas of study. CLAS is budgeted under Organization Code
22xxxx in Banner.
4. College of the Arts (COTA) – This unit is made up of four schools: architecture; art &
design; music; and theatre & film, where more than 125 teaching faculty, staff and
instructors collaborate with students and the city’s major arts institutions to energize and
enrich the arts community. COTA is budgeted under Organization Code 30xxxx in
Banner.
5. College of Urban & Public Affairs (CUPA) – CUPA is composed of three schools that
include: Government, Urban Planning & Public Affairs; and Community Health. CUPA
is budgeted under Organization Code 31xxxx in Banner.
6. Diversity and Inclusion – Diversity and Inclusion is responsible for managing
Affirmative Action matters and diversity initiatives at PSU. Diversity and Inclusion is
budgeted in Banner under Organization Codes 100099 through 101615.
16 | P a g e
7. Enrollment Management and Student Affairs (EMSA) – EMSA includes multiple
departments and functions at PSU including, but not limited to: Veterans Services;
Student Activities; Dean of Students; Commencement; PSU Recreation; Student
Ambassadors; ASPSU and Student Organizations & Clubs; Women’s Resource Center;
Enrollment Management; Advising; Registration and Records; EMSA Box Office; Food
Service; Vending Operations; Viking Bowl & Billiard; University Market; and Lost and
Found. EMSA is budgeted under Organization Code 330000 through 33500; 640130;
640520; 652504; 670130; 670140; 670202; 670203; and 670400 in Banner. Note – The
following departments and functions were broken out of EMSA and assessed as separate
auditable units due to specific risks inherent in these functions: Financial Aid; and
Student Health and Counseling.
8. Financial Aid – The Financial Aid Office provides customer service and financial
assistance through grants, scholarships, loans, work-study, and/or a combination of these
aid packages to students to help with the cost of education. Financial Aid is budgeted
under Organization Codes 331241 and 80xxxx in Banner.
9. Financial Services, Treasury, and Budget – For the entity-wide risk assessment
presented here, Financial Services, Treasury, and Budget includes the following
departments: Accounting; Treasury; Budget; Purchasing; Surplus Property; Accounts
Payable; the Bursar’s Office functions (i.e. Accounts Receivable/Collections, Cashiering,
and ID Card Services); the VP FADM Office; and the Strategic Management Reserve.
These departments are budgeted primarily under Organization Codes: 640300-640350;
600901; 620000; 640400; 640410; 664100, 600501, 651711, 654000, 670010; 640100-
640140; 600000; 600995; and 999001-999002.
10. General University – General University is used to pay for university wide costs and
services such as utilities, debt service on bonds and loans, accreditation, executive level
job search costs, early retirement incentives, and other miscellaneous university wide
costs. General University is budgeted in Banner under Organization Codes 900000
through 990000.
11. Government & Community Relations and Marketing & Communications – These
departments are charged to support and promote the President’s five themes that include:
Provide Civic Leadership Through Partnerships;
Improve Student Success;
Achieve Global Success;
Enhance Educational Opportunity; and
Expand Resources and Improve Effectiveness
These departments are budgeted under Organization Codes 100200, 101000, and 151000
in Banner.
17 | P a g e
12. Graduate School of Education (GSE) – GSE offers over 50 degree, licensure, and
continuing education programs to students. GSE is budgeted under Organization Code
26xxxx in Banner.
13. Honors College (HON) - HON runs students through an academically intense
curriculum that reflects all the challenges, uncertainties, and deep thinking real world
problems require. HON is budgeted under Organization Code 222300 in Banner.
14. Housing and Residence Life – Housing and Residence Life operates 10 locations in the
Portland metro area for student housing. There are approximately 2,000 beds for student
housing throughout PSU’s housing facilities. Housing is primarily budgeted under
Organization Code 670499-670520 and 652503 in Banner.
15. Human Resources & Payroll – The Human Resources department assists PSU with
hiring personnel, negotiating various unionized employment contracts, employee
performance management, and employee compensation and benefits management. The
administration of employee benefits is also managed within this department. Human
Resources is budgeted under Organization Codes 600299 and 600300 in Banner. The
Payroll office administers paying employees for their services to the university and works
closely with Human Resources to help ensure pay and benefits are accurate. Payroll is
budgeted in Banner under Organization Code 999000 and 999899.
16. Institutional Research – Institutional Research assists PSU in conducting research and
surveys, reporting student FTE figures to the State of Oregon and Federal Government,
and assists with other ad hoc student data requests from management. Institutional
Research is budgeted under Organization Code 200901 in Banner.
17. Intensive English Language Program (IELP) – IELP assists students that have been
admitted to PSU who do not have a TOEFL or IELTS score. Students in IELP are fully
immersed in campus life while improving their English skills and preparing themselves
for academic success at PSU. IELP is budgeted under Organization Code 221510 in
Banner.
18. Library – The PSU Library assists students and faculty with homework, research, and
other informational needs. The PSU Library is budgeted under Organization Code 32xxx
in Banner.
19. Maseeh College of Engineering and Computer Science (MCECS) – The MCECS
includes the Computer Science Department, Civil & Environmental Engineering
Department, Electrical & Computer Engineering Department, Mechanical and Materials
Engineering Department, Engineering and Technology Management, and Systems
Engineering. MCECS is budgeted under Organization Code 27xxxx in Banner.
18 | P a g e
20. Office of Academic Affairs (OAA) – The OAA is the central administrative office, with
responsibility for the institutional academic mission, programming and policy
implementation, support programs for academic personnel and students, academic fiscal
management, and collective bargaining with the American Association of University
Professors (AAUP-PSU Charter) and the American Federation of Teachers Union
(PSUFA). The departments and functions that make up this auditable unit include, but are
not limited to: the Provost’s Office; Faculty Senate, Military Science, Advising,
Registrar, Learning Resource Center, and Dean Searches. These departments and
functions are budgeted under Organization Codes 200000 through 200500 in Banner.
21. Office of Information Technologies (OIT) – OIT supports PSU’s technology needs,
which includes, but is not limited to, networks; telecommunications; servers and data
storage; email and web services; and lab and classroom technologies. OIT is budgeted
under Organization Codes 610000 through 610750.
22. Office of International Affairs – International Affairs offers students three different
program options that fit their interest and needs. These programs include: the
BUSINESS Program; LOHAS (Life of Health & Sustainability) Program; and TNP
(Transnational Program) Program. The BUSINESS Program is designed for students
interested in taking American undergraduate business courses. The LOHAS Program is
designed for students interested in the general theme of Environmental Sustainability and
students take courses in PSU’s University Studies curriculum. Finally, TNP is designed
for students interested in Comparative Asian Studies. International Affairs is budgeted
under Organization Code 200800 through 200860 in Banner.
23. Office of the President and Board of Trustees – These offices and positions help to
oversee and administer the core mission and objectives of PSU. These functions are
budgeted in Banner with Organization Codes 100050 and 100000 through 100010.
24. Planning, Construction, & Real Estate – This auditable unit includes: material
management; capital projects & construction; facilities, property, and grounds
maintenance; sustainability and energy management; and custodial. Planning,
Construction, & Real Estate is budgeted in Banner under Organization Codes 650000
through 664211.
25. PSU Office of General Counsel (GC) – GC supports the mission of PSU by providing
legal advice and representation to PSU, to its constituent colleges, schools and units, and
to its officers and employees while acting on PSU’s behalf. GC is budgeted under
Organization Code 100401 in Banner.
26. Research and Strategic Partnerships – Research and Strategic Partnerships provides
support for PSU faculty in Research Development, Sponsored Projects Administration,
and Research Integrity for federal, state, and locally grant funded programs. Research
and Strategic Partnerships is budgeted under Organization Code 40xxxx in Banner;
however, grant funds generated from this function impact the majority of auditable units
broken out in this assessment.
19 | P a g e
27. Risk Management – The Risk Management department helps oversee PSU’s various
insurance policies, safety training and drills for emergency preparedness, and other safety
and health risks present at PSU. Risk Management is budgeted under Organization Code
640450, 662100, 600401, and 600601 in Banner.
28. School of Business (SBA) – The SBA offers majors in: Accounting; Advertising
Management; Finance; Human Resource Management; Management & Leadership;
Marketing; and Supply & Logistics Management. Also, SBA offers certificates in
Athletic and Outdoor Industry; Entrepreneurship; Food Industry Management;
International Business Studies; Post-Baccalaureate Accounting; and Social Innovation.
Moreover, SBA offers various minors to students. SBA is budgeted under Organization
Code 25xxxx in Banner.
29. School of Social Work (SSW) – SSW offers degree programs in Child and Family
Studies; Bachelor of Social Work; Masters of Social Work; and a PhD in Social Work
and Social Research. SSW includes various institutes and centers and offers distance
options for students. SSW is budgeted under Organization Code 24xxxx in Banner.
30. Student Health & Counseling (SHAC) – SHAC is a community-based health care
organization that provides high quality, accessible mental health, physical health, dental
services, and testing services targeted to the needs of the PSU student population. SHAC
is budgeted under Organization Codes 330300 through 333601 in Banner.
31. Transportation and Parking Services (TAPS) – TAPS falls under Auxiliary Services
and sells parking permits to students and faculty, enforces parking rules throughout PSU,
and also operates a bike hub. TAPS is budgeted in Banner under Organization Code
670000, 670003, 640510, and 640511.
32. University Advancement – This auditable unit refers to PSU funds provided to the PSU
Foundation to help support advancement and fundraising initiatives that are meant to
foster enhanced giving to the PSU Foundation leading to increased scholarship and
professional support to PSU students and faculty. University Advancement support funds
are budgeted under Organization Code 15xxxx in Banner. Note – This audit unit may not
appear in the 2016 Internal Audit Plan as this unit has been absorbed into the PSU
Foundation as of July 2014.
33. University Place – University Place is a 235 room hotel and conference center. The
hotel was purchased in 2004 as a strategic investment into future campus growth in
downtown Portland. University Place is budgeted under Organization Code 670551 in
Banner.
20 | P a g e
34. University Studies (UNST) –UNST is PSU's four-year general education program is
required of all students, with the exception of those enrolled in Liberal Studies or the
Honors Program. University Studies begins with Freshman Inquiry, a year-long course
introducing students to different modes of inquiry and providing them with the tools to
succeed in advanced studies and their majors. At the sophomore level, students choose
three different Sophomore Inquiry courses, each which leads into a thematically linked,
interdisciplinary cluster of courses at the upper-division level. Finally, all students are
required to complete a Capstone course which consists of teams of students from
different majors working together to complete a project addressing a real problem in the
Portland metropolitan community. UNST is budgeted under Organization Codes 222699
through 222710 in Banner.
Docket 3 President’s 2014‐15 Goals
BOARD OF TRUSTEES EXECUTIVE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
AGENDA ITEM: 7 DATE: 12/2/2014 TITLE: President’s 2014‐15 Goals and Discussion of 2014‐15 Presidential
Evaluation Process SUMMARY OF ITEM: Prior to July 1, 2014, the evaluation of the University President was
conducted by the Chancellor of the Oregon University System and the State Board of Higher Education. Now, the Bylaws of the Portland State University Board of Trustees state that evaluation of the University President is one of the specific functions of this Board.
In order to conduct an evaluation at the end of the current academic
year, the President has prepared a document detailing his goals for 2014‐15.
The Chair of the Board proposes the following process for evaluation of
the President in 2014‐15: 1. December 2, 2014: the Executive and Audit Committee will consider
and be asked to approve the President’s goals for 2014‐15 and the process for conducting an evaluation at the end of the academic year, and recommend the same action to the full Board.
2. December 11, 2014: the full Board will be asked to approve the President’s goals for 2014‐15 and the process for conducting an evaluation at the end of the academic year.
3. In June or July 2015, the Chair of the Board will meet with the President to discuss the President’s progress on his goals, and may discuss the President’s performance with other members of the Board or the community.
4. In July or August 2015, the President will report to the Executive and Audit Committee regarding his progress on the goals. The Committee will hold an executive session regarding the President’s performance. The Chair of the Board will then prepare a short evaluation summary for presentation to the full Board.
5. September 10, 2015: The Chair of the Board will present the evaluation summary to the full Board. The full Board will hold an executive session regarding the President’s performance.
The Chair of the Board also proposes that the Committee prepare a Board policy regarding the evaluation of the President, for use in subsequent years, for presentation to and consideration by the full Board at the Board’s meeting in June 2015.
REQUESTED COMMITTEE ACTION: A motion to approve and to forward and recommend to the full Board:
(1) the President’s 2014‐15 goals, (2) the proposed process and timeline for evaluating the President for 2014‐15, and (3) the proposal to draft a Board policy regarding presidential evaluation.
ATTACHED DOCUMENTS: President’s Goals 2014‐15 BACKGROUND READING: None.
December 1, 2014
To: Board of Trustees Executive Committee From: Wim Wiewel Subject: Presidential evaluation At your request, I propose the following criteria for my evaluation for 2014-2015. Since the year is already halfway over, and since no process was in place to set formal goals with the board, I propose largely following the criteria historically used by the State Board of Higher Education. This included key indicators in regard to enrollment, retention and graduation; diversity; research productivity; and fundraising. In addition, it included a narrative component related to leadership; organizational achievements, challenges and opportunities; and advocacy and collaboration. Following this general approach, I propose that I report to the Board on the attached indicators that were historically part of the evaluation. The attachment included historical data for the past five years and my goals for the current year, as well as the definitions and sources of the data. I also propose to add to one piece of financial information to be agreed upon with the Board Finance Committee. This may be something like actual financial performance compared to the approved budget for the year. In addition, I will provide a narrative that covers the following topics: 1. Leadership at the institutional, local and national level. 2. Financial management. 3. Enrollment, retention and graduation. 4. Research, scholarship and knowledge creation. 5. Representation of the university and collaboration with other educational institutions. 6. Progress on other specific presidential goals as communicated to the Board previously (e.g. Completion of draft strategic plan; completion of Business School and Viking Pavilion campaigns; legislative success on the budget). 7. Major other achievements, events, and challenges. 8. Future opportunities, challenges, and goals. In the future, we may want to adjust this approach to reflect specific goals in the new strategic plan. I'm happy to discuss this proposed approach with the Committee.
Office of Institutional Research and Planning
Revised December 2, 2014
Fall Term
# Enrollment Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Fall 2014
Goal
1 Total Credit Enrollment (Headcount) 29,081 29,818 29,703 29,524 29,452 29,452
Retention and Graduation Rates (Entering cohorts) Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Fall 2014
Cohort Goal
2 Freshman Retention (% returning after one year) 70.0 72.2 73.2 72.7 71.7 73.2
3 Six-Year Graduation Rate (% graduated after 6 years) 32.8 35.8 39.5 39.8 39.2 40.8
4 Transfer Retention (% returning after 1 year) 79.4 79.8 77.3 77.1 75.1 78.1
5 Six-Year Graduation Rate (% graduated after 6 years) 64.3 62.9 64.4 66.1 64.0 67.1
Degrees Awarded 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014
2014-2015
Goal
6 Total Degrees Awarded (Annual) 5,207 5,784 6,039 6,074 6,040 6,000
Fall Term
Students and Faculty Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013
Fall 2014
Goal
7 Student-to-Faculty Ratio 22 21 21 20 21 21
8 Student Diversity (%) 18.8 18.2 22.7 23.7 25.1 25.1
9 Faculty Diversity (%) 13.1 13.3 15.5 17.0 16.4 16.4
10 Faculty Compensation (% mean of peers) 96.1 93.5 95.5 97.4 99.6 100.0
Fiscal Year Indicators
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14
FY 2015
Goal
11 Sponsored Research Expenditures ($ millions) $58.2 $64.9 $67.4 $59.1 $57.5 $61.0
12 Philanthropy ($ net assests in millions) $44.1 $58.1 $59.7 $69.8 $89.9 $93.0
13 Financial indicator TBA -- -- -- -- -- --
Academic Year
Suggested Indicators for Portland State President's Review
Academic Year Indicators
Entering Year
# Indicator Definition page 2
1
Total Credit Enrollment: Total end-of-term enrollment for the
fall term of the academic year.
2
Freshman Retention: Percentage of first-time, full-time
freshmen returning to PSU in the fall term of their second year.
Data are reported in the entering cohort year (for example, the
Fall 2009 rate represents the fall 2009 cohort returning in fall
2010).
3
Freshman Six-Year Graduation Rate: Percentage of first-time,
full-time freshmen who completed a bachelor's degree from
PSU within six academic years of their first enrollment. Degrees
counted for an academic year are those awarded fall through
the following summer. Data are reported in the graduating year
for the cohort that entered PSU six years earlier.
4
Transfer Retention: Percentage of sophomore and junior
transfer students returning to PSU in the fall term of their
second year. Data are reported in the entering cohort year (for
example, the Fall 2009 rate represents the fall 2009 cohort
returning in fall 2010).
5
Transfer Six-Year Graduation Rate: Percentage of sophomore
and junior transfer students who completed a bachelor's degree
from PSU within six academic years of their first enrollment at
PSU. Degrees counted for an academic year are those awarded
fall through the following summer. Data are reported in the
graduating year for the cohort that entered PSU six years earlier.
6
Total Degrees Awarded: Total number of bachelor's, master's
and doctoral degrees awarded during the academic year.
Degrees counted for an academic year are those awarded fall
through the following summer. Students earning a single degree
with more than one major are counted only once.
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years.
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years.
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years
Source
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years.
PSU Annual Statistical Portrait, SCARF Degree File, subject years.
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years.
Indicator Definition Source
7
Student-to-Faculty Ratio: The ratio of FTE students to FTE
instructional faculty. FTE is equal to the number of full-time
students divided by the number of full-time faculty, plus 1/3 the
number of part-time students divided by the number of part-
time faculty.
page 3
8
Student Diversity: Percentage of all PSU students during Fall
Term who identify as member of a racial or ethnic minority
group, including those who have declared "multiple ethnicities."
(International students are not counted as minorities.)
9
Faculty Diversity: Percentage of all PSU full-time instructional
faculty (as identified in the PSU annual data extract, based on
Fall Term) who identify as member of a racial or ethnic minority
group, including those indicating multiple ethnicities.
10
Faculty Compensation: Annual average PSU all-ranks, combined
average faculty compensation (salary and benefits) as a
percentage of the all-ranks, combined average compensation
among peer universities: U. of Illinois Chicago, George Mason
U., U. of Texas at Arlington, San Diego State U., U. of Toledo,
Indiana U.-Purdue U. Indianapolis, U. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
Western Michigan U., and U. of Memphis.
11
Sponsored Research Expenditures: Total fiscal year dollar
expenditures for externally sponsored grants/contracts,
excluding ETIC legislative funding for engineering. Displayed in
millions.
12
Philanthropy: Net assets of the PSU Foundation at the end of
the fiscal year. Displayed in millions.
PSU Foundation Consolidated Financial Statements and IRS Form
990, tax years.
American Association of University Professors, Annual Report on
the Economic Status of the Profession. Data based on Fall Terms,
subject years.
PSU Office of Finance and Administration, University Budget and
Planning Office.
IPEDS, Fall Enrollment, subject years.
PSU Fall Term Fact Book, SCARF End of Term, subject years.
HR-PSU Employee Database as of October 28, subject years.
