Introduction
Our college has serious financial issues that need urgent attention. We have concerns about exceeding the allocated tuition discounted percentage, needing institutional financial aid, and having high housing occupancy. These challenges are linked and affect the institution’s financial stability and ability to provide quality education. Because of the over-budget tuition discounted %, the primary problem is financial strain. This discrepancy is negatively impacting the institution’s bottom line and causing a financial deficit that must be resolved. The Vice President of Enrollment Management also noted rising institutional financial assistance demand. While encouraging, the high home occupancy rate complicates capacity management and resource allocation. These financial issues must be addressed for several reasons. First, failing to do so could harm the institution’s finances and future. Second, excellent financial aid and low tuition rates are crucial to attracting and retaining students. Additionally, housing occupancy rates must be managed well to ensure student satisfaction and a good learning environment. For our institution to succeed, we must come up with solutions to these challenges.
Analysis and Tackling of the Current Issue
Numerous factors contribute to the tuition discounted percentage surpassing the budget. First, to compete, higher education institutions must offer attractive financial aid packages to potential students. Institutional funding for tuition discounts has been used more than expected. Changes in student demographics and socioeconomic backgrounds may have boosted financial help demand, straining tuition discount budgets (Hakan, 2020). The institution faces a significant financial issue due to the gap between budgeted and actual discount percentages.
High institutional financial aid attracts students, especially from disadvantaged families. We strive to increase education access and student diversity by providing substantial financial aid. The rising demand for institutional aid may signal concerns with our tuition pricing approach and financial viability (Mohamed Hashim et al., 2022). Overreliance on financial help to attract students can create a cycle of dependency in which prospective students seek increasingly substantial aid packages, straining our budget.
Our institution faces opportunities as well as challenges with 90% housing occupancy. The high occupancy rate shows that our residential offerings and campus experience are popular. This can boost student engagement and community vitality. We operate at such capacity limits flexibility to accommodate late applicants or unanticipated enrollment increases (Bergmann et al., 2020). Overcrowded housing can restrict living space, increase maintenance costs, and strain campus infrastructure. Thus, while a high occupancy rate indicates a desirable campus setting, careful planning and management are required to maximize student experience and operational efficiency.
According to Goldstein, institutional aid is crucial to college and university budgets. He regards institutional aid as a strategic investment in the institution’s mission and long-term success, as well as a financial tool for recruiting students. Essential takeaways from Goldstein’s book emphasize connecting financial aid policies with institutional goals (Goldstein, 2005). He stresses the importance of financial assistance administration that takes into account enrollment targets, student demographics, and budget limits. To promote equitable distribution and effective resource use, Goldstein supports financial aid allocation transparency and accountability.
Goldstein’s insights are essential as the institution struggles with tuition discounting and institutional financial aid’s fiscal effects (Goldstein, 2005). Understanding Goldstein’s perspectives can help us refine our financial assistance policies to balance affordability, enrollment goals, and economic sustainability.
Consideration of Tuition Reset as a Solution
A tuition reset systematically lowers tuition to address affordability, recruit students, and boost competitiveness. The school seeks to match market and student expectations by resetting tuition. Tuition resets may increase college access, enrollment, institutional affordability, and transparency(Hakan, 2020). Making informed decisions requires weighing both the benefits and the drawbacks of a tuition reset. It could attract more students, reduce tuition pricing, and set the school apart in a competitive market. Cons may include short-term revenue losses, financial uncertainties, and stakeholder value proposition communication issues. Reduced tuition rates may also affect the institution’s budgetary health and viability.
Strategic priorities and values must be considered when determining if a tuition reset fits the institution’s mission. A tuition reset may fit the institution’s objective of accessibility, affordability, and student success. If the institution prioritizes financial stability, prestige, or program investments, a tuition reset may conflict. Thus, the tuition reset strategy’s viability depends on its alignment with the institution’s goals (Mohamed Hashim et al., 2022). Discussion of tuition reset’s effects on enrollment and financial viability is vital. Tuition resets may boost enrollment, but they may negatively impact financial viability. Higher enrollment, lower revenue per student, and operational expenditures should be considered. For risk reduction and long-term viability, institutions must anticipate the effects of a tuition reset on their budget, income sources, and fundraising.
Recommended Solution and Implementation Plan
Increase institutional financial aid and address tuition discounting–
To recruit more students, the holistic method resolves tuition discounting exceeding the budget and increases institutional financial aid. First, evaluate and enhance financial aid policies. Redirecting financing from non-essential sectors may improve institutional financial aid (Hakan, 2020). Fundraising or local business partnerships might help offset costly tuition. Promote the school’s affordability and accessibility via targeted marketing to attract students.
Optimizing housing occupancy–
Utilize strategies to fill vacancies and maximize revenue to reach 90% occupancy. First, examine student housing preferences and market demand to match accommodation options with student needs. Offer incentives or discounts to early housing applicants (Bergmann et al., 2020). Consider working with adjacent off-campus housing providers to reduce on-campus housing overflow. Improve campus housing services to attract more students and increase occupancy.
Effective implementation of the recommended solution
Financial, enrollment management, and housing stakeholders should form a task force to oversee implementation.
Set implementation phase milestones and deadlines on a timeline.
Assign tasks and resources for project success.
Explain the strategic objectives’ benefits and rationale to students, faculty, and staff.
To achieve goals, evaluate and adjust solutions.
Ask stakeholders for input throughout implementation to ensure institutional goals are met and address concerns promptly.
Conclusion
Strategy and coordination are needed for tuition discounts, institutional financial aid, and housing occupancy. Streamlining financial aid, exploring new revenue streams, and enhancing housing can boost financial sustainability and student satisfaction. The solutions serve the institution’s mission while fostering affordability, accessibility, and academic success. With careful planning, implementation, and evaluation, the school can overcome these obstacles and meet its instructional goals.
References
Bergmann, M., Brück, C., Knauer, T., & Schwering, A. (2020). Digitization of the budgeting process: determinants of the use of business analytics and its effect on satisfaction with the budgeting process. Journal of Management Control, 31(1), 25-54.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00187-019-00291-y
Goldstein, L. (2005). College and university budgeting: An introduction for faculty and academic administrators. National Association of College and University Business Officers. 1110 Vermont Avenue NW Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005.
Hakan, K. Ö. (2020). Digital transformation in higher education: a case study on strategic plans. Высшее образование в России, (3), 9-23.
Langrafe, T. D. F., Barakat, S. R., Stocker, F., & Boaventura, J. M. G. (2020). A stakeholder theory approach to creating value in higher education institutions. The Bottom Line, 33(4), 297-313.https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-03-2020-0021
Mohamed Hashim, M. A., Tlemsani, I., & Matthews, R. (2022). Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 3171–3195.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1
write