[0:00]order the May 20th meeting of the Kansas Board of Regents. Great to see everyone. I hope the commencement ceremonies were all enjoyable and all went well. It's always an exciting time of year and just appreciate all the work that goes into not only commencement but getting the students there and just a great time of year and I know for for me personally it's maybe my favorite part of serving on on the board is getting to go to commencement ceremonies and and just being a part of that. So so thank you. Uh first item on this afternoon's agenda would be to consider the minutes from the March 11th board meeting, the April 15th special meeting, and the April 20th special meeting. Any discussion related to those minutes? If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Okay, have a motion by Regent Daikus. Second. Okay, a second by Regent Wolf-Moore. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. Any opposed? All right, the minutes are approved. Moving on to introductions and reports. Any introductions from any of our university presidents? I believe President Muma has an introduction this afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Couple of introductions and thank yous. First off, and I don't think they're here. They're they're I think they're stuck at lunch, but I I think some of them are. Uh I'd like to introduce our new faculty Senate President. She just took over, Dr. Victoria Coope. She's an associate professor of education leadership in the College of Education. Victoria, are you here? Yeah, oh there you are. Okay. Um so, welcome Victoria. And then Dr. Gabriel Fonseca, he is a new incoming staff Senate President. He's the director of our student engagement belonging office. Gabriel here. Oh, there he is walking in the door. Yeah. And I'd like to thank the outgoing folks who are not here. Dr. Christopher Stone, he's outgoing faculty Senate President and Dr. Jacob Mendez, he's he's outgoing staff Senate President. And then want to welcome two new student leaders. Jaden Ireland is currently the new student body president. She's also a Gore scholar and a McNair scholar and is a third-year student studying philosophy with minors in university honors, Spanish, and public health. And Jaden is over here. And Anishka Raju, she is a new incoming student body vice president. She's a fourth-year student studying biomedical engineering and biology minor minor and chemistry. And she's also very involved in her sorority Sigma Psi Zeta. And is Anishka here? All right, welcome. And I'd like to thank the outgoing student body president vice president Sharwin Wong and okay, Sharwin over there and then Amy Wynn. Vice president. Thank you, President Muma. Any other introductions, President Linton? Thank you and excuse me for being just a minute or two late. I got caught up in the parking lines. No worries. We have two students that we'd like to recognize here this afternoon. Christian Peña serves as the student body president for 2026-2027 academic year at Kansas State University. Originally from Sublette, Kansas, he's passionate about serving others, supporting rural communities, and creating opportunities for students to grow and succeed. Christian is currently pursuing a degree in diversified agriculture that aligns with his interest in agricultural leadership and community development while also remaining heavily involved in the industries that have shaped him as he's grown up. As the past Kansas FFA state president, he has developed a passion for building relationships, advocating for students, and helping people find confidence in their leadership abilities. Through his role as student body president, he has focused this year on making sure that students feel heard, valued, and connected to the K-State experience. So, if we can give Christian a big round of applause. Secondly, we also have here Evelyn Ediger. She serves as the director of government relations for the 2026-2027 student body president's cabinet at Kansas State University. She's a native of Hope, Kansas. She graduated from Abilene High School in 2023 and is majoring in political science and global food systems leadership. After graduation, Evelyn plans to attend law school and return home to provide legal support for her community. For the past 3 years, she has been actively involved in the Student Government Association and Alpha Xi Delta Sorority, and in the coming year, she will also serve as Catalyst Co-Director of the Honorable Blue Key Honor Society. Um, let's give her a big round of applause. All right. Thank you, President Linton. Yes, President Newsom. Yes, I've got a couple of student uh leaders that are here. Uh, one will be presenting later as part of the tuition uh presentation, and it's our outgoing uh student government association president >> [snorts] >> uh Corey Humble and Corey is a just newly minted graduate of Pittsburg State University from Gerard, Kansas who is a bio communications major and will be a new graduate student at Kansas State in the fall and will be working in the housing department and mastering in higher ed and I think in a few years we'll be fighting over which which one of the schools he's going to come back to work for. So And then our incoming student government association president Darrell McLead who is also from Gerard and he is a broadcast major and very active in the Gorilla Broadcasting Network with all of our sports teams. So I have them here today with me. Thank you. Are there introductions this afternoon? Well, greatly appreciate our student leaders. Thank you for stepping up to to represent your fellow students because I know if your plate is already full but it means a lot to all of us that you make sure that the the student voices are are represented. Also will mention thank you to Provost Arnsdorf for for stepping in for President Mason. President Mason, Regent Alicia Johnston and Regent Perasker are all currently in China. So thank you for for stepping in to to cover President Mason this afternoon. And obviously we miss Regent Johnston and Perasker but we'll we'll have them back in June. Any other introductions this afternoon? Yes, President Linton. Yes. [clears throat] >> Just one more. >> Yes, certainly. Not an introduction but certainly I think we should recognize Marshall Stewart if you can come into the room for just a second. This is his last meeting at the Kansas Board of Regents. So please pause. His leadership he starts as president of North Dakota State University next Tuesday. Very good. Well, congratulations, Marshall. Very much so. I can remember as 2 years ago we were on the the K-State campus and President Linton said, "Working on this one guy. If we could get this guy, he would be a game changer for us." And you certainly have been. So, thank you for not only what you've done for the K-State campus, but the system as well. So, we wish you all All right, moving on to the chair report. As I mentioned this past weekend, several of my colleagues had the opportunity to participate in commencement ceremonies across the state. It's certainly an exciting time of year when we get to celebrate our graduates and their families. And on behalf of the the Board of Regents, just congratulate all of the graduates and wish you the the best of luck moving forward. Last month, the board had an opportunity to to visit President Baker and his team on the campus of Emporia State University. President Baker, thank you to to you and your team for hosting us. It was an incredible campus visit as it usually is. Lots of momentum, lots of energy on the Emporia State campus, and appreciate you hosting us. Appreciated the discussions and the chance to learn more about the great work that you are all doing. And that will conclude my chair report. Moving on to the President and CEO report. President Flanders. Thank you, Chair Benson. I had the opportunity to attend and speak at a commencement ceremony that's not as traditional as some of our other ones in the system, but it was at the Kansas Law Enforcement Training Center. And I wanted to just publicly thank Director Darren Beck for welcoming there, and it's it's candidly just really a hidden gem of what we have in Kansas and where we produce University of Kansas produces police officers for communities. They're already employed and so it's a it's a 100% placement rate. >> [laughter] >> And and uh it's just just a great ceremony. Um Yeah, we also had our state higher ed executives group. Uh some of the staff uh including the CEO uh visited Kansas Board of Regents. Uh and the the purpose was for the staff to learn more about our agency priorities, a little more about our state, uh and our initiatives and our emerging challenges. And so it was great to be able to share information with them and then they take it back uh to the national organization. Uh also want to indicate that uh we did receive a uh legislative post audit uh on for select state universities on diversity, equity, and inclusion. So we look forward to working with those post auditors uh to help them complete their work. And then finally, I just wanted to publicly uh say that um uh I've really enjoyed working with Randy Watson. The commissioner had a retirement function the other day and it was it was great to see him and and uh A12 has been a while he's been at the helm has been a great partner for our system. And so I wish uh Commissioner Watson well. That concludes my report. Thank you, President Flanders. Any questions for President Flanders? All right, hearing none, we will move on to the Council of Faculty Senate Presidents' report uh from Emporia State University, Scott Wyckoff. Afternoon, President Wyckoff. Good afternoon. Um I'm not much Whoop, there we go. Good afternoon. Thank you for having me. Not much to report. Uh last week uh Dr. Koop and uh Cortez and I met with the AGB uh for the the search and we had a lively discussion about what we're our search for a for replacing you for next year. Um and then we just finished up lovely discussion in our president's meeting right before this and I'm looking forward to next year. Any questions? Any questions? We appreciate your service over the last year. Oh, I'm taking over that chair. Shelly Shelly had her surgery on Monday so she's doing well. Have a great >> Thank you. All right, next up the student advisory committee report also from the Emporia State campus Oz Squad Zeron. President Zeron. Thank you Chair Benson. Thank you all the regions for taking the time and coming to our commencement. It was a fantastic time at ESU and I graduated so that was extra special. Well done. Thank you. Um We had our last we adjourned our last student advisory council meeting where our main agenda was to really share feedback on all the things we've learned across our time at K-Board but also to introduce the new student body presidents. I'm super confident and excited to tell you that we have some excellent young men and women that are going to do some great things for the state of Kansas. Um lastly we had some parting gifts for you if you received them. Thank you to all of the K-Board partners for doing that. I got to pick the color so I of course I got black and black and gold. Um And lastly really it's been a fantastic experience for me personally. I've learned so many things about the state of Kansas and that my goal is to be in the community, be involved and so I'm super excited for that. So thank you for the opportunity and that concludes my report. Well President Zeron, thank you so much for for your past year of service and and not only representing the students on the Emporia State campus but you and your colleagues for for making sure that that student voice is is heard by us and and joining us for our meetings. You've done an incredible job. Any questions for President Zerran? All right. Well, once again, congratulations. Thank you. Moving into our standing committee reports, filling in for Regent Johnston this afternoon, Vice Chair Mendoza will handle the academic affairs report. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um we have met a few times um for BAS since our last in-person meeting. So, um I've got a little bit to to review here. At the March 31st virtual meeting, BAS reviewed and approved the placement of the state university academic calendars on today's board consent agenda. VP Bond Zraiky provided an overview of the academic year 2027 bridge performance agreements, and BAS received three annual reports. Um the report for the credit of prior learning, the dual credit report, and the SARA state authorization reciprocity agreement report. Of note is a 59% increase in dual credit over the last decade for Kansas students, with approximately 40,000 students earning dual credit in academic year 2025. We also received updates on the work of the reduced credit baccalaureate degree, a system-wide faculty leadership initiative to support the developmental education reform the system is doing, and Kansas is Kansas is participation in the rural talent lab, a multi-state initiative focused on strengthening rural talent development. BAS had another virtual meeting on May 5th, during which we approved two new system-wide transfer courses, introduction to digital logic design and discrete structures. Those are on today's consent agenda. BAS also approved the academic year 2027 bridge performance agreement and a change to the threshold for one program review metric for the three regional universities. Those items are on today's board discussion agenda as well. VP Bond Zraiky presented policy element recommendations developed by the reduced credit baccalaureate degree um work group and the associated recommended changes to KBOR policy to to support the also known um the reduced credit baccalaureate degree RCBD pilot. BASC had agreement on all the policy recommendations and updates except for one recommendation related to how degrees would be denoted on transcripts and diplomas, which needs more discussion. Chair Johnston requested feedback from the provost on this item, which is also on today's um board discussion agenda. BASC approved KU's 2024 and 2025 program review follow-up recommendations, including action plans, mergers, and program discontinuations. We also approved applying doctoral level review metrics to master of fine fine arts degree programs, recognizing the FMA as a terminal degree and applying doctoral metrics to those programs. BASC also approved WSU's request to remove the BS in forensic science and the BA/BS in physics from 2024 action plans after updated data showed improvement. VP Bond Raczkowski provided updates on revised tenure, post-tenure review, and faculty workload policies, which standardized reporting set to begin in 2026 and workload reporting anticipated in 2027. At today's BASC meeting, we received an annual report on the Apply Kansas application campaign and All-Star High School award recognitions. We also reviewed a new program proposal from Washburn University for a Master of Education in Science of Literacy. Both items were approved by BASC and are on today's board consent agenda. Regarding House Bill 2513, General Counsel John Eury presented a definition of DEI, CRT, and a statement of understanding as required by the state legislature to be included in board policy. Those are both on today's board discussion agenda as a first reading. VP Bond Raczkowski along with colleagues Dr. Sarah Robb and Jill Arensdorf reviewed key components of the RCBD policy elements and associated um updates to board policy after receiving feedback from the chief academic officers. And and that concludes my report. Okay. Thank you, Vice Chair Mendoza. BASK has been busy. Yes, we have. Questions for Vice Chair Mendoza. All right. Thank you so much. Moving on to Fiscal Affairs and Audit Committee, Regent Dykes. Thank you, Chairman Vincent. Fiscal Affairs, we had our agenda call on May 5th, and we also met this morning. This morning at our meeting today, we had uh Director Briscoe advise the committee that amendments to the board policy on facility approvals will be discussed at our June meeting, and those will parallel our discussions to how universities procure architectural and other technical services for for facility improvements. In addition, we heard audit findings on five community colleges, and we'll ask each of those colleges to give us an action plan on improving that process. In addition, we began discussions on the guidelines for state universities in seeking board approval for new facility procurement processes as envisioned in House Bill 2560. We asked the universities to provide the committee with feedback on these guidelines and will act on those in June. Much of the time this morning was devoted to our university state proposals on universities tuition and fee proposals. A lot of the analysis and campus engagement went into these requests. We are pleased to hear how hard everybody worked on campus to keep the students' interest in mind. We were particularly impressed with the attention paid by the student government leaders in gathering feedback from their fellow students on where to allocate fee revenue and weighing whether an increase should be advanced through the process. We heard from each campus about their efforts to minimize any increased in rates while advocating for the services they believe are the most benefit to those students. The business officers and their campus teams also have difficult decisions to make and we commend them on navigating this age of uncertainty in higher education. The CEOs will give a brief presentation this afternoon since we spent an hour and 40 minutes on this this morning. At least three of us did. So, we would appreciate that brief presentation. We will have time for further questions to the campuses in the next month as this is a first reading on the tuition and fee proposals. Any of you looking for the full documentation from each university that is available now on the board's website with the agenda for today's meeting. And that would be my report today. All right. Thank you, Regent Dykema. Any questions for fiscal affairs and audit? Okay, thank you. I'll deliver the retirement plan committee report. The retirement plan committee met yesterday. The board's investment consultant provided a performance overview for the funds available within the Board of Regents mandatory and voluntary retirement plans. The considering the data and analysis in that review, the committee placed three of the funds available on watch and the committee will re-examine those funds at its fall meeting. The committee also heard presentations from TIAA and Voya about their participant engagement models. I know it's very important to the committee that everyone who is a participant in the plan feel like they are engaged and have the opportunity to to be a part of that. Currently, I believe the number was about 53% of the participants meet with their advisor at least once a year, so we've we're encouraged by that, but we obviously want to continue to increase that uh moving forward. Uh lastly, the committee authorized board staff to undertake a system-wide evaluation of the retirement plans to include vendor performance and service delivery, the participant experience, and the plan's operational efficiency. So, you can look forward to that if you are a participant in the plan. That will conclude the retirement plan committee report. Uh we'll move on now to consent agenda. Are there any items on the consent agenda that need to be removed and discussed? If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Motion by Regent Ammar. Second by Regent Crocker. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay, consent agenda is approved. Moving on now to the discussion agenda. First up, act on request to change threshold for one program review metric for the regional universities. And here to present that is Vice President Bonds Racki. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Regents, and thank you so much, Mr. Chair. This item begins on page 90 of your agenda materials. So, just as a reminder, the current program review cycle runs from academic year 2025 through 2028, with each state university reviewing all academic programs during its assigned year. So, to briefly orient the board, KU, KU Med Center, and Kansas State University completed their program reviews in AY 2025. Wichita State completed their program reviews this year, and you'll be hearing a summary of that later today. And next year, the three regional institutions, Emporia State, Fort Hays State, and Pitt State will complete and present their reviews. Since Since review cycle was approved in June of 2023, the board has continued to refine these metrics uh within the process. In December of 2024, the board approved several adjustments. However, there was one item that needs to be finalized. That item involves establishing institution-specific thresholds informed by Carnegie Classifications to better reflect differences in institutional size and mission. So, the request before the board today is narrow in scope to reduce the minimum threshold for the number of juniors and seniors majoring in a baccalaureate program from 25 to 20 for the three regional institutions only for purposes of program review. I'll briefly highlight several data points that support this recommendation. Compared to the research universities, the regional universities operate at a much smaller scale. That's in terms of enrollment, faculty size, and number of academic programs offered. So, here's three examples of that from AY 2025. The regional universities averaged approximately 7,000 undergraduate students compared to approximately 19,000 at the research universities. The regional universities averaged approximately 362 faculty members that same year compared to about 1,600 at our research universities. And the regional universities averaged approximately 47 bachelor's degrees compared to 89 at the research universities. So, taken together, these differences support a more appropriately scaled threshold for our regional universities. Reducing the minimum number of majors to from 25 to 20 reflects the institutional capacity while maintaining the integrity and the intent of the program review process. Board staff concur with the recommendation of BASK from its May 5th meeting to approve these policy revisions. Mr. Chair, I'd be happy to stand for any questions. Thank Thank you, Vice President Bondreki. Any questions? Okay. If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Okay. Have a motion by Regent Johnston, a second by Regent Dykes. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right. Thank you. So, uh Vice President Bondreki, while you're there, if you will uh cover the act on program review recommendations for Wichita State University, please. My pleasure, Mr. Chair. This begins on page 96 of your agenda packet, and I'll wait while we pull up the associated PowerPoint slides. As those are coming forward, uh I'll just give a brief introduction. During AY 2026, Wichita State University reviewed data provided by board staff for all 129 academic programs. In today's presentation, I promise to briefly summarize the AY 2026 review process, provide a short update on the programs previously identified for action plan back from the AY 2024 review cycle, and conclude with a request of the board uh to approve action plans associated with programs identified during the current year's review. The mission of Wichita State University is to be an essential educational, cultural, and economic driver for Kansas and the greater public good. The mission is driven by the university's three priorities, three university strategies, and five values that are represented on this slide. Wichita State strategic, academic, and operational focus centers on strengthening the sustainability of their academic uh portfolio by prioritizing instructional efficiency. They are intentionally managing costs by maintaining programs at or below a 65% cost to revenue and aligning course delivery to meet 80% productivity threshold. Strategic section reductions and our disciplinary alignment to meet the 80% threshold and applying minimum course caps help to ensure research resources are deployed where student demand and outcomes are strongest. Together, these strategies are allowing the university to balance academic quality with fiscal responsibility while supporting the viability of the institution long-term. Wichita State's focus on student success is represented in the five areas that you'll see on this slide. In summary, Wichita State's student success strategy is grounded in campus-wide collaboration, aligning academic and student affairs partners to close retention and completion gaps for all students. Centralized services through the Shocker Success Center integrate advising, tutoring, and coaching to reduce barriers and ensure consistent proactive support for their students. The university uses academic data and predictive analytics to identify at-risk students early and deliver targeted interventions to keep them on track. Structured academic pathways and streamlined financial aid processes further support timely degree completions. In addition to KBOR's program review process, Wichita State University also conducts its own comprehensive internal review process, which I'll highlight briefly. WSU's review is a year-long academic uh program review conducted on a four-year cycle with each review following a structured timeline and evaluation process. Programs are assessed across nine criteria including alignment with the university mission and strategic plan, faculty and curriculum quality, market and student demand, return on investment, service contributions, evidence of continuous improvement, and cost-effectiveness. A key component of the process is the University Program Review Committee or UPR Committee, which provides faculty leadership and oversight for the university's annual academic review activities. Before we highlight this year's program review, I'd like to take a moment to look at this slide which looks at the AY 2024 program review. At that time, five undergraduate programs were identified for some type of action. Four programs were put on an action plan and one program, the BA in Women's Studies, was phased out as an individual program and merged into the Department of English as a field major. At the May 5th, 2026 BASK meeting, BASK approved the removal of the BS in Forensic Science and Technology and the BA/BS in Physics from action plans as WSU provided updates on the programs and they now meet the four metrics used in the AY 2024 program review. In AY 2027, WSU will provide updates on the two programs listed that are still on action plans. For AY 2026, Wichita State reviewed data provided by board staff for all their undergraduate programs and found no additional programs beyond the two already identified for follow-up in 2027 that met fewer than three of the four KBOR minima. For AY 2026, Wichita State University also reviewed data provided by Board staff for all graduate programs and only identified three programs that did not meet KBOR minima. For each of these programs, I will briefly summarize the areas in which the minima were not met and Wichita State's proposed action plan to move us forward. Starting first with nursing science masters from the College of Health Professions. Here, the minimum was not met in terms of the number of majors. KBOR minima is an average of 10 majors. I'm sorry. Wichita State had an average of 10 majors and KBOR minimum is 12. Similarly, they did not meet the minima for number of completers. Their average was three and KBOR's minimum is five in that area. Wichita State recommends an action plan for the program with a goal of meeting these required metrics by June of 2029. The program is collaborating with regional healthcare partners to expand nursing leadership preparation opportunities, including the development of a DNP nurse executive track. The program has also launched a revised MSN education curriculum, increased undergraduate research efforts, and is exploring dual degree pathways and flexible enrollment options to better support working registered nurses, and strengthen the future enrollment in that program. The next degree is physical sciences, the general masters. The minimum here was not met on the number of majors. The average was 10.75 and again, as a reminder, KBOR's required was 12, as well as the number of completers. The average for Wichita State was 4.5 and the minimum is five. Wichita State recommends an action plan for this program as well with the goal of meeting the required metrics by June 2029. Enrollment in this program continues to grow steadily and reach 13 students by fall of 2026, supported by enhanced advertising and increased faculty visibility at major international conferences. Recruitment efforts will continue through partnerships with environmental consulting firms, agencies, and nonprofit organizations to create applied learning placements and employer-sponsored cohort pipelines. And finally, faculty are also strengthening outreach to undergraduate geology and environmental science programs across the region while expanding national and international visibility through virtual information sessions as well as targeted promotional strategies. And lastly, the sociology degree, the masters. Again, the minimum here was not met in the number of majors. Their average was seven and the minimum again is 12 from Cabot, as well as the number of completers. The average was 2.25 and five is the Cabot minimum. WSU recommends an action plan for the program with a goal of meeting the required metrics by June of 2029. The department is strengthening recruitment and retention efforts by expanding GTAs, developing new fellowship and scholarship opportunities with the WSU Foundation, and broadening recruitment to include students from social science disciplines. The department is also assessing the feasibility of an online MA option to better serve working adults and developing partnerships with regional businesses and nonprofit organizations. In addition, the program now offers a non-thesis internship and applied learning track and is increasing communication efforts to highlight the program's applied research, analytical, and technological skill development opportunities. In addition to those really specific action steps discussed on the previous slide for the three programs, I want to also highlight that Wichita State University will implement several continuous improvement strategies across all three of those programs. Examples of these are shared on the slide and include requiring students to file a program of study by the end of the first semester to support timely progression towards degree completion, establishing a structured advising cadence with documented semester check-ins to strengthen student support and management, and monitoring student pacing and milestone completion with targeted reach and intervention strategies for students who may be off track. If it pleases the chair, I would be happy to stand for any questions before the board considers Wichita State University's request to place these three programs on action plans as recommended by board staff and supported by BASK. That's great information, Vice President Bonzarcki. We appreciate it. Questions? Okay. If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Okay. Um motion by Regent Crocker, second by Regent Ammar. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you again. Uh act on academic year 2027 bridge performance agreements. Once again, Vice President Bonzarcki. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This item begins on page 102 of your agenda materials. Board policy requires performance agreements tied to institutional improvement plans and the receipt of new state funds. As the current cycle concludes in academic year 2026, board staff are proposing a one-year bridge performance agreement for AY 2027 to maintain continuity while the next phase of the framework is developed. There are two primary benefits to this approach. First, it provides institutions additional time to finalize and assess measures related to math pathways and co-requisite support, which was significant system-level reform currently underway across all of our institutions in higher ed. The bridge year will allow us to collect more meaningful data and ensure we are measuring the most appropriate outcomes. Second, with new board leadership beginning next academic year, this approach allows for onboarding and engagement with the performance agreement framework prior to launching the next 3-year cycle. The proposed AY 2027 bridge agreement continues the current requirements while advancing institutional responsibilities uh to include the development of student-level reporting systems to support uh evaluation and continuous improvement. So, at this time I would ask that we display the rubric located on page 108 of the agenda packet. The rubric itself remains unchanged, so it will look very familiar to our institutions. And when we pull up that rubric, I'd like to highlight the second half of the page. It's coming. So, while we're working to pull that up, I will go ahead and talk about items 1 through 4. Um items 1 through 4 reflect ongoing efforts already underway across the system. Uh these were included in the current year performance agreement, and so they are not new to our institutions. Items 5 through 7 are new measures, and they're focused on helping us better understand the effectiveness of multiple placement measures and corequisite models. In sum, these additional student-level data elements will allow us to evaluate whether the board policy approved in May 2023 is achieving the intended outcomes. If we could go down one more page, please. That is for AY 2027 right there. We'll need the next rubric. There's a lot of rubrics. Under this proposal, institutions would use AY 2027 to build and operationalize reporting systems with student level data collection beginning in summer 2027 and included in the AY 28 reporting cycle. If the board is supportive of this direction, Cindy Ferrier and I from the data research and planning team here at K-Board will convene the system Council of Institutional Research Officers and continue engagement with math pathways task force and executive implementation teams to ensure measures are both meaningful and feasible for institutions to implement. For your information, this proposal was discussed at the April math pathways task force meeting and the March SKOKO meeting. Board staff concur with the recommendation of BASK from its May 5th meeting to approve these policy revisions. Mr. Chair, I would be happy to stand for any questions. Okay. Any questions? Any feedback? Hearing none, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Okay. Have a motion by Regent Crocker, second by Regent Amar. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. Motion is approved. First read on a reduced credit hour bachelor's degree policy element recommendations and updated policy. Thank you so much, Chair Benson. This item begins on page 115 of your agenda materials. So, just for a little context, in response to national conversations surrounding degree affordability, workforce alignment, and time to completion, K-Board has been exploring the development of reduced credit bachelor's degrees, which we will call RCBDs for the rest of today's presentation. These programs are intended to maintain the academic river rigor and learning outcomes associated with a traditional bachelor's degree while creating a more efficient pathway for our students. To support this work earlier this academic year, BASCH charged the RCBD work group with developing policy recommendations to inform a potential framework. The work group, composed of representatives from both two-year and four-year institutions, met regularly from fall 2025 through spring 2026 and served in an advisory capacity to develop recommendations grounded in the Higher Learning Commission guidance and informed by national breast best practices that we have available. Throughout the process, the work group focused on balancing institutional flexibility with clear expectations related to academic quality, transparency, transfer, accreditation, and of course student success. The proposed policy elements establish a structured pilot framework aligned with existing board policy, accreditation expectations, and the system-wide general education framework while also creating a process for ongoing evaluation through uh provincial approval and annual reporting requirements. These recommendations reflect a process uh that has been broad and with significant institutional engagement. These were presented for discussion at the May 5th BASCH meeting and again earlier today. And at this point, as I present these recommendations to the board, I would like to invite my colleagues, Dr. Sarah Robb, serving as the two-year representative from the RCBD work group, and Dr. Jill Arnstorf, serving as the four-year uh representative from the work group. And what we'll do is provide a very high-level, I promise we'll be brief, overview of those recommendations. Um and we are happy to take questions either as we move along at each one of those recommendations or at the end. So either works for us. And we would ask for those recommendations that are in the basket agenda to be pulled up and we'll just scroll along as we go through those. So I'll get us started with the general policy framework. So this work group really aligns with HLC and recommends that all proposals maintain the rigor and student learning outcomes expected of a traditional bachelor's degree. Programs must align with any relevant accreditation standards, comply with federal requirements, and demonstrate clear evidence of student and workforce demand for the degree. The next recommendation from the work group comes in the area of the approval process. The RCBD work group uh recommends that proposals follow the standard CABOR approval process with the exception that if we receive a proposal from a two-year institution, that those proposals would route through SCOCO and SCOPS in place of COCO and COPS. The provisional approval period, the work group recommends a three-year provisional approval period during which institutions may enroll new students annually. Total credit hours, consistent with the Higher Learning Committee Commission guidance, excuse me, proposals must justify any deviation from the standard 120 credits and include a minimum of 90 credit hours. The general education framework recommendation, RCBD programs should align with the general education seven-bucket framework requiring 34 to 35 credit hours of approved general education coursework. And then last for me, the institutional hour requirements. Institutional residency requirements should also follow HLC assumed practice B1B with any variation from the typical minimum clearly explained and justified. And to continue through with our recommendations, I will now turn things over to my colleague Sarah. Apologies, Sarah. Good afternoon and thank you. To continue on for program scenarios, the work group recommends allowing all three HLC recognized scenarios for RCBD implementation. This is one of the recommendations that did evolve as the group engaged with institutions and national practices. Next up for discipline or subject area recommendations, the institutions may propose RCBD programs in any discipline provided they can demonstrate sufficient demand and the ability to support appropriate student learning outcomes. With regard to upper division hours, to maintain alignment with existing KBOR policy, RCBD programs should include at least 34 upper division credit hours within a 90 credit hour structure. Next up naming convention, the work group recommends to consistently avoid the term accelerated as as it is not accurate in this case. Using the designated reduced bachelor's degree during the pilot. Requiring institutions to clearly communicate how the degree will appear on transcripts and diplomas. And to re-evaluate the naming conventions at the conclusion of the pilot. And for public disclosures, the work group recommends institutions must clearly communicate the structure, the expectations, and implications of the degree to both prospective and current students. And for the rest of the recommendations, I'm going to turn it over to my colleague Jill. Thank you, Sarah. Good afternoon, Regents. Um continuing on with the proposal, um I will focus on the element with the our system-wide transfer associate degrees, better known as SWADS. Um for disciplines with system-wide transfer associate degrees, institutions should accept the full 60 transfer credit hours. And to accommodate this structure, programs may reduce the upper division requirement from 34 to 30 hours. Next, the work group recommends uh along student pathways and transitions that if institutions that Excuse me, institutions should ensure transparency, provide clear pathways between reduced credit and traditional programs, and establish defined admissions requirements for RCBD programs. Annual report In terms of annual reporting, institutions will provide annual reports to BASK that include enrollment, retention, transfer credits, completion, and as available employment outcomes. And the interim indicators may be used in early years as we learn more about RCBDs in the state of Kansas. Um this is a really important point [clears throat] from the work group uh to make is that we want to balance the importance of reporting for accountability along with ensuring that our reporting is manageable on top of all of the other reporting that we already do for uh programs on an annual basis. Um this is an area, the next one, where uh the work group evolved its thinking. The work group does not recommend limiting the number of proposals during the pilot phase as institutions are best positioned to assess demand and feasibility. And lastly, uh this uh in terms of conclusion of the pilot, at the conclusion of the pilot, the work group recommends that the board would either terminate the program with teach-out plans, extend provisional approval, grant or grant full approval. And that concludes our formal presentation with regard to the framework. We're all three willing to answer questions at this point from the regions. Right. Thank you so much and and I will say I know that the conversation and the deliberation about this has really been ongoing for this entire academic year. So, thank you to all of you that have been a part of that because it's great information and something that we look forward to discussing. So, with that, Regent Crocker. Thank you, Chairman Vincent. Thank you for this uh thorough explanation of the discussions that Chairman Vincent just mentioned. I also appreciate the um transparency in terms of how the votes were taken on all of these points. To that, I was curious. I noticed with the naming convention, there is actually one vote that was opposed, whereas most of the others, I'm not sure if there were any other that were opposed, but could you provide a little bit more background on that individual's opposition or what the purpose is if you recall? To be clear, when we took the votes, we did not ask someone to speak to why they voted either in favor or against. Yeah. Yeah. >> any anything out of the discussion that might highlight that? Yeah, you know, I will just say I think that we continue to want to explore with the board and and the important stakeholders as we've been moving along how best to denote the names of the RCBDs on the diplomas and transcripts. And so, that was one point where we did spend a a significant amount of time. Thank you. Yes, Regent Duckett. Now, I don't sit on BASK, but I sit on the fiscal affairs for the universities. Yeah, help me understand when we always talk about recruitment and retention. Now, we're trying to get students off of campus quicker. Yeah, how does that play out in the full scope of the university and offering a education to all students? I'll start off and then invite my colleagues who are on our campuses right now to add to that conversation. We did have the opportunity to attend various sessions at HLC's annual conference where institutions who are offering these degrees walked us through the budget that's required from HLC when you apply to offer one of these programs, as well as kind of their thought process behind it. And I'll just highlight real quickly that, you know, one possible way to think about the budget is that when you have students for a shorter period of time, and in general we're seeing that students who are recruited for RCBDs tend to be more focused and goal-oriented, that the retention issues are not the same that we might see in a traditional program, and so there's less opportunity to lose those students along the way. And then I I will open it up for call my colleagues to comment, as well. I don't know that this really speaks to your question about budget. However, these would be in in very unique targeted situations where the employment demand is is is we're meeting a need for employment demands, and so that's of course a consideration for any degree proposal. And so as part of the program review proposal process, that budget um uh those budget considerations are already part of our proposal process, and it would continue to be for our RCBDs. The only thing I'll add is to echo what she said about unique situations. There there's going to need to be workforce demand, and so if workforce demand is there, perhaps getting those students prepared and out into the workforce is a is a good possibility for us. Thank you. I would be interested in hearing the viewpoint from employers on on this topic because I I can see them supporting it because it gets employees to them quicker, but I also would wonder if they would have any confusion related to what exactly a bachelor's degree means. So, are there plans for getting employer input? Yeah, really appreciate that question, Chair Benson, and absolutely we're interested to know a little bit more about what employers think about the degrees. We have some indicators from national surveys, but we're particularly interested in what our employers think about this within the state of Kansas. And so, I'll ask Sarah, who is an individual from the work group who was identified to work with the Docking Institute at Fort Hays State University as we conduct a survey of employers within the state. So, Sarah. Thank you, and it's an excellent question. Um as a member of the work group and a member identified to work alongside two other members to develop a a very brief questionnaire. We worked with the Docking Institute, developed a survey, very brief survey, I think perhaps less than 10 items. The survey is intended to go to go out to over 3,200 business and industry partners in Kansas. And so, this survey provides a bit of context at the very beginning with regard to what is an RCBD in case the respondent is not aware. It does give a brief contextual introduction to it, and then it asks for their opinion about a couple of very brief demographic questions, and then their opinions about an RCBD. That survey is ready to go out, and it's going to be go sent out this summer, I believe. I'm not sure exactly the time frame, but we'll have data back from that survey from our Kansas business and industry partners in the fall, I believe. Thank you for doing that. Other other questions? Yes, Regent Wolfmore. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and I also I'm not on BASK and so didn't have the benefit of all your discussion. But if an employer if if there isn't another name, an alternate name given, how would an employer distinguish between someone who did the reduced credit and the um full credit? Because I'm assuming the full credit must have value to it or else it wouldn't be offered. Right, really great question. So that information is uh always available on the transcript by taking a look at the courses that the individual completed and the transcript does note the total number of courses completed. Um to your point in a little bit more detail, where the the conversation with BASK left is that BASK supported all of the recommendations brought forward by the work group uh with the caveat that they wanted to bring to the board and have a further conversation around how should that be denoted on the transcript and diploma and is the current methodology of noting that the summation of the total hours um sufficient. We know it's important to balance transparency for our employers um and for students, but at the same time recognizing that if a student completes an RCBD, they are completing a bachelor's degree and they've met the student learning outcomes for that degree in which they've earned. So as follow-up question, do employers typically look at transcripts or is it more likely they're looking basing their decision on resume, references, those sort of things? I certainly have a biased opinion of that cuz I've always worked within higher ed and so we do rely on transcripts and understand right what that's communicating to us. So I want to be sure to open it up for my colleagues uh so that they can speak about other areas that that might be uh reviewing those materials. Any insights from I think I think we both simultaneously said it just really depends on the industry. >> That's what I assume. Yeah. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Absolutely. Are there questions? Are there discussion? Yes. Chancellor. Thank you, Regent Chair. Can I ask for a clarification? I'm a little bit con- I'm a little bit confused on the 34-hour upper-division requirements and then the 60-hour acceptance of transfer credits which are not upper-division and therefore you you end up not meeting HLC requirements. So, how how how do we resolve that? Uh if it pleases the chair. So, uh the specification of reducing the upper-division hours from 34 to 30 is only in the situations where we have system-wide transfer associate degrees and so the recommendations would be in those five degrees that we would be consistent with board policy and ask institutions offering RCBDs just in those five areas to to accept all 60 hours. Um and it is consistent with HLC policy because HLC does allow you to uh justify and document any of those deviations. So, the same degree could require 34 hours of one student and 30 hours of another student. Uh not for the system-wide associate transfer degree, right? Not that particular degree. >> a student from from who has that and a student who doesn't in the same program. >> That is correct. >> Different requirements. >> Yes. Yeah. Okay. Right. And that is true now, right? We have different tracks for the same degree within our institutions where students meet different requirements to earn the same degrees. And then the it came up actually in tops today which I think Thomas brought it up which was a great point is that I think students really need to know that this degree will not make them eligible for graduate degrees. So, you cannot go on to a master's degree with one of these degrees. And and and it also will likely make them ineligible for further financial aid for a bachelor's degree, meaning they give up essentially 1 year's worth of financial aid in the process. If I may respond, it is true for federal financial aid requirements that once a student obtains an RCBD degree, they are no longer eligible for continued financial aid because they have earned the bachelor's degree. And that's so important why we continue to remind ourselves that this is a bachelor's degree. In In terms of the graduate school admissions, you know, there are some national surveys on the RCBD website that we've created and it's linked in your agenda packet. There are graduate programs who frequently accept 3-year degrees from international partners. They were interviewed, not a very large sample I might add, but they were interviewed and asked if they would be willing to accept these degrees and there was an interest in doing so. And also at the HLC conference, those institutions who have developed RCBD pathways as part of their development were working with graduate schools to ensure that their graduates, if appropriate, did have that as a pathway. And I would love to see our institutions, if they decide to submit these proposals, to be proactive and make those connections with graduate programs in the beginning. Mr. Chairman. Great point. Yes, I may. I just want to follow up on the Chancellor's question. That came up in BAS this morning. We had a good discussion about um I I'm I'm concerned about the impact on students from with respect to graduate schools and professional schools. On the other side, I know this is coming. Um I know you know, medical schools are looking at condensing the 4 years to potentially 3 years. The law schools are looking at it. It's It's one of those um hot topics that we know is coming and I just want to make sure we're very cautious about uh, giving our students access to what is the latest and greatest without uh, him uh, creating problems for them if they want to go on to graduate school. So, I I I appreciate the comment and I know that BASK is very focused on that. No question. Yes, Regent Amador. Um, Vice President um, Bonds Raki, uh, this is for you, but if um, anybody else wants to comment, that's fine. Um, you mentioned that there are some um, uh, RCBD programs that um, some of the other schools uh, have accepted um, those um, uh, bachelor's degrees to to go on. Um, I understand all those are private. Are any of those public? I am going to turn to my colleague who was at the same presentation I was at HLC because I do think that was a public institution. It was. One, just one. But that we're aware of. We could certainly do a more comprehensive search if that would be helpful for the board. I think that's been done. Thank you. >> Yeah. Other questions? So, Vice President Bonds Raki, it's obviously um, a great discussion for us to have. If others have feedback, if they have questions, what's the best way for them to share their thoughts, get information? Do they contact you directly? That would be very appropriate and we would welcome that feedback. >> Okay. Yeah, this will be on the June BASK agenda and then again coming to the board again in June for a second read of the policy. Okay, very good. Yes, Regent Wolfmore. Thank you. Um, will we have access to the survey that's been done before we make our final vote on this? No, unfortunately that survey will be conducted this summer um, and then we will have that information available in the fall. Okay. Any other questions? Well, thank you again for all the work that's gone into it and we look forward to discussing further in June. Thank you so much, Regent >> Thank you again. Thank you. All right, moving on. Receive board policy amendments for DEI CRT definitions for 2026 House Bill 2513. This is a first read. General Counsel John Yourie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The uh materials for this item start on page 131 of your board packets. So, in part, uh the appropriations bill section 147 uh of of House Bill 2513 requires uh that on or before July 31st, 2026, the chief executive officer of the State Board of Regents, in consultation with the heads of the postsecondary educational institutions uh shall certify uh to the State Finance Council that for the 26-27 academic year, a definition of DEI CRT for use in section 147 of the bill uh and a statement of understanding establishing the goals of the section have been adopted by policy of the board. So, um board staff developed some draft language and then Vice President worked worked with the academic officers of the system. Uh that resulted in some modifications cuz they're smart group of people. Um I then worked with um the uh attorneys, the general counsels for the universities. Uh also resulted in a few We're not as smart, but uh in a few revisions and then um President Flanders uh sent the uh draft that resulted from those first two rounds uh to the representatives of the system council presidents and we've got some great feedback from them recently. After our publication for today. So this is the first read for this month based on all those revisions we receive or those that feedback we received. I intend to do a revised version and then we'll go back to those same folks and and see if that's workable and then come back next month with hopefully some finalized language for the committees and for the board. Right. Thank you General Counsel Yuri. Any questions? Yes, Regent Wolfmore. Thank you. Just for a matter of process. So then we vote on it and it's final. Then we send that over to the legislature. Is that correct? Yeah, the the language. Actually what will happen is the State Finance Council will schedule meeting and then the Board of Regents um president CEO goes over and does a certification to the council. Okay. Then after that the rest of the bill requires some other language to be done for future year or some other work to be done academically for future years. So based on that definition. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chair. Any other questions? Yes, Regent Amar. That leads me to another question. Um do we have any um informal uh suggestions from the legislature about that language? Yes. Thank you. Right. Any other questions? All right. Thanks so much John. All right, we'll now receive the enrollment report. Vice President Elaine Frisbee. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Happy to be here today. Just for clarity's sake, this is the annual enrollment report typically provided to the board earlier in the year, but we got a little bit waylaid in prior meetings because of some need for executive session, and so we got a little bit delayed, and then you didn't have an April meeting. So, here we are today, all the way in May. So, I'm going to be talking about AY 2025 information. And as always, I want to thank the many dozens of people from across our system who helps provide all the information that feeds into this report, our data research and planning team led by Cindy Farrior. Uh we use the information that I'm going to present today for a variety of reasons. We leverage it in a lot of ways, not only for our degree stats website, but also our strategic plan dashboard, the the data books, and our key stats online reporting tool. And here is a just a screenshot of our key stats portal. Uh we're going to have a little session with some legislative staff this week to help them orient some orient them to how to use this tool. There are a series of tabs across the top where anyone can go and download directly from the reporting tool into an Excel format. Enrollment, uh high school enrollment, there was a reference to dual enrollment and and CEP earlier today, uh retention of our students, which is improving, we're going to talk about that, transfer students, what credentials are we awarding to students, our graduation rates, our student success index, what is the out final outcome of our students, who is employed in our state, to what degree are they employed in our state, and what wages are they earning, uh information on all of our institutions for the publics, their tuition rates, their financials, and then other details for the technicians. And all of the information then down arrayed down the left side, you can get information either in a table format or in a chart. So, I just want to highlight that for our users. All right, so academic year 2025. Uh in an overall picture, our overall enrollment for AY 2025 did increase 3.2% for our head count and 3.4% for our FTE students. 2012, if you think all the way back in 2012, that was our peak enrollment year for our public institutions. So, we are down in the past uh in the since that point of peak, we are down in head count 11.9% and we are down 10.7% from that time. But, we have been making an upswing since the pandemic. Uh heard reference a number of times during the legislative session about the big six. The big six, the big six. Well, I thought maybe we should talk about who who is the big six. So, on an FTE basis, the University of Kansas is our largest institution for enrollment in AY 2025, uh followed by Kansas State, Wichita State, then Johnson County Community College, Fort Hays State University, and Pittsburg State. But, on a student head count basis, so if you take one credit hour for academic credit, you count as one. On that basis, we have a little different mix. So, on a student head count basis, KU is still the largest, but Johnson County is second, followed by K-State, Wichita State, Fort Hays State, and Barton Community College. So, be careful when you're saying the big six, cuz you might not might not be referencing who you you are. Uh on a system-wide basis, we still enroll many more part-time students than we do full-time. Uh we have a lot of high school students taking college courses, so they obviously are not typically full-time. We have a lot of working adults taking courses. We have a lot of students who as an undergrad, they're taking 12 hours, so they are considered full-time for purposes of financial aid, but on progress toward a bachelor's degree in 4 years for a 120-credit-hour degree, uh they aren't quite making the mark. So, uh part-time students, still many more than our full-time students. Our residency uh for our different sectors, the upper left-hand corner then, on a system-wide basis, uh we are down in our residents uh students by nearly 15% in the last 10 years, but we are up 19.4% for our non-resident students. So, we are importing uh non-resident students into our state. That's a positive, but again, that increase uh does not offset the reduction in our resident students. And then you can see array the similar information for the public universities, so the six state universities plus Washburn, our community colleges down on the bottom left-hand side, and our technical colleges who have seen a sizable increase in their resident tuition or resident student counts over the last 10 years. Uh looking at head count students uh uh by gender over the last 10 years, uh females uh arrayed in blue, uh everywhere increasing uh higher there adjusting higher than our our male students except at the technical colleges. Uh the gap between men and women is is large uh but small making a little bit of progress there at the technical colleges. So you can see again the system wide numbers on the upper left and then the public universities, our community colleges, and our technical colleges. How they all compare over the 10 years. Similarly for different race and ethnicity groups, our white student numbers down 17% across the system. So this is after all of our sectors. Uh you're we're seeing many more students in two or more races or unknown numbers. Part of the dynamic there in the gray bottom left was a sizeable adjustment uh for Fort Hays State and how they were reporting uh their Chinese national students in China. So that did affect our figures there a little bit there in one of those years. But overall, you can see a 48% increase for our Hispanic students. Uh otherwise, you can see some reductions there for our black and African American students and our Native American students. Uh thinking in terms of just age group, uh you could see the large jump there at 25.7% for across our system for those under the age of 20. That's a lot of high school students taking college courses while they are still in high school. Uh a more more of our typical uh upper age uh limit for traditional college students down 13.8%. We are losing ground uh with our older students, our working adults uh 29.8% for 25 to 34 and everyone over 35 uh we're down 19% over the 10-year period. Uh then thinking about a different uh way of considering our students, uh our undergraduates, uh your juniors, sophomores, seniors, our first time entering freshman, our graduate students, and our new transfer students. We have those arrayed there for you with the figures there across the bottom. Uh we are seeing uh the only a group that has increased in this 10-year period is our graduate student group with a 4.1% increase. Otherwise, we are down in each of the others. Although for our first-time entering and our new transfers, we have seen three straight years of increases, so we do want to highlight that. For those students who have Pell eligibility, uh we are seeing in general across our state our state universities, we've lost almost 9% uh ground there over the 10-year period. Our community colleges, 26% down. Our technical colleges down 2.8%. Uh you can see the effect that Washburn has uh has employed some new strategies with some financial aid and some recruitment, and they are seeing just a slight uptick just under 1% there across the 10-year period. So, you can see the figures there across the bottom of the table. And I do want to highlight just as a refresher, we mentioned this is kind of relative to the RC RBC D RCBD degree, uh Pell eligibility does not apply to graduate students. So, this is only our undergrad students in our system. Um what types of programs are students enrolling in? Just looking back at the last 5 years, uh you can see uh liberal arts, language, history, group studies, uh visual and performing arts. You can see the variety there. Uh healthcare is still a very important uh program that we offer. Uh 30 almost 34,000 students there. Uh we have a lot of architecture, engineering, construction, transportation, all of those programs there across the whole all of our sectors. It's not only a four-year um program type program. We don't have a a of people in our sciences. We've seen some there, uh and we you can see the other rates there, the business and communication, obviously another important program that we offer across the entirety of our system. Uh we talk a lot about distance education, traditionally called distance education, now more commonly referred to as online. So, comparing the two sets of bars, looking back 5 years, so academic year 2020, uh before just right about the pandemic, before the pandemic, and now in 2025, what percentage of our courses were delivered via distance education? So, more and more of our students are electing to take courses online, including students who live on campus. So, for our state universities, that percentage of total credit hours delivered for distance education grew from 26.5 to 32.4. Uh also for Washburn, there's a sizable increase. Over 44% of our community college courses were delivered in 2025 for distance ed. Uh difference there for the technical colleges, where you're delivering courses like welding, construction, you're in the you're in the you're in the classroom, you're in the lab doing stuff. Uh so, not far fewer courses there, but still some. And uh system-wide overall, we've grown from 27.6% delivered in 2020 to 35.3%. Again, just compare Whoa. Attention. Attention. Attention. An emergency has been reported. All occupants walk to the nearest exit and vacate building. All right. We will take a pause. >> Mhm.
[1:20:34]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:24:24]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:28:14]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:35:54]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:39:44]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:45:29]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[1:49:53]>> All right, had a little excitement there. Appreciate everybody's understanding. We will resume the the meeting. Vice President Frisbee was presenting the enrollment report for the last year. Vice President Frisbee, we'll turn it back to you. All right, we got a little fresh air and sunshine. Few steps in, so very good. We're all awake now. I wanted to highlight this next slide focusing on the 10-year look back for our retention of students from one fall to the next. So, as a system, we have improved by over four percentage points in the 10-year cycle and would look forward to seeing more improvement here as the universities and institutions continue to adopt more and more student success uh processes and policies. I am going to speed through quite a bit of this just to make up for time. We have the same slides in our published enrollment report that is on our website under system data. Similar trajectory as we have for our state universities, the same data on a head count and FTE basis, down slightly for head count, bit more on our FTE counts for the state universities over the 10 years. And we also have specifics among the six universities for our fall census for our first time entering freshmen, and our transfer students as well across the six universities. And our international students, you can see some remarkable changes there. Of course, I did mention previously uh the big change in how Fort Hays is uh is showing their Chinese students. So, that does affect us starting in 2022. Uh we'll highlight yet again this information for our six state universities. For those undergrad students who are at least taking 12 hours, so reportedly they are trying to accomplish their studies on a full-time basis, are they taking enough courses in the year in order to proceed through a bachelor's degree within 4 years? And as a system, we are doing slightly better. We're almost at 53% in 2025 compared to 51.2% But you again, you can see the effect of the tuition charging rate. We're going to talk about tuition here in a minute. For Emporia and Pittsburg, they have higher numbers. Uh I would still contend that that is attributable in some regard to how they charge their full-time students, not by the credit hour. Uh similar information for Washburn, enrollment head count FTE, community colleges head count FTE, technical colleges remarkably uh had a little dip in 2021 with the pandemic, but they have made quite a surge in recent years. The percentage of credit hours delivered by our two-year colleges for high school students, for our community college, since 2015, it has nearly doubled the extent to which they're delivering to high school students. It was 11% of the credit hours in 2015. In 2025, it's now 20% for our technical colleges, it's nearly 40%. Uh Uh, here's the detail of our two-year college enrollment of high school students. There are different ways in which we track high school students. You can just be a dually enrolled student. You're in high school and you also happen to be taking a college class. You can be in our Excel and CTE courses, in our program, or you could be taking a concurrent enrollment course at your high school delivered by the college. Which can also be an Excel and CTE course to some degree. You could be taking Excel and CTE course at the high school. So, just some detail there over the 10 years. We've seen great growth in that program, very successful. A little bit of information on our college readiness. Our Kansas high school graduating seniors, so of those high school students who take the ACT, who graduate high school, we are now at 17% of those students meeting all four of the ACT benchmarks. ACT has changed. It's, I don't want to say standards, but the way they have adopted policy now, uh, you do take get to take the test multiple times, different pieces of the test. You don't have to take the entire test all at once and you get to take your highest score. Uh, several years, I think it was in 2070, 2015, no, sorry, 2019. With the class of 2019, uh, starting in 2019, the high school students in Kansas, the state will pay for your taking the ACT. So, we did see some jump in the numbers of students taking it, but we are seeing a decline in our, uh, in our success on the ACT. Cuz I want to understand, I want to understand it. So, these are this is showing me, uh, seniors who took the ACT and if they took it three times, it's their best score. Mhm. Yes. Okay. The benchmark on scoring, so and uh Blake can speak to this better than Dr. Flanders can speak to this better than I, uh but meeting the benchmark means that you are uh research says that you are more likely to succeed in your college level course. >> Yeah, and those are the benchmarks that you >> Those are the benchmarks down in the right-hand corner. I just want I That's an extraordinarily bad slide. So, I just I just wanted to make sure I was understanding it. >> Yes. Thank you. Uh we do I have a slide here. Uh there's a very direct effect uh according to family income. We get this information from our K-12 partners, KSDE and ACT. For students who have lower income, their results on the uh test are are much poorer. I have a question, sorry. Um Are all universities and all everybody in our system still requiring the ACT? Uh Madam, no. Uh Regent May Martin, no. Not everyone requires it, and I believe uh it is an option. It is an option. So, you could go off high school GPA or an ACT. >> Okay, thank you. If I could just follow up, it it there were several states that uh uh mostly many that stopped giving it at times. And so, like if you required it, you wouldn't be able to recruit any of those students from that state. And so, we had to make it where it was um you know, it's optional or a part just part of it. All right. Also referencing uh our college readiness, we collect uh detailed information on our high school graduating seniors who come into our system who require some form of developmental education. So, for across our system, nearly 16% of our students, so this is at any of our institutions, four-year university, two-year college, 16% nearly need a math, an English, or a reading assistance of some kind. Now, those of you who serve on BASK are very familiar with the corequisite remediation model that we're adopting, and that is big part of our performance agreement process now, but this is something I think Dr. Elaine would would be interested in seeing, but yet we're still seeing some challenges for our students who come to us from our Kansas high schools. So, this is not someone coming to us from Missouri or Oklahoma or Vermont, these are our high school graduates. Uh also, uh slide very familiar to those of you who have have seen these reports before, our college-going rate did increase ever so slightly in 2024. Uh we're still though down quite a bit from 2014. So, we still highlight this information, so this references 2024, so these are our 2024 high school graduates coming in in 2025. So, any improvement there will of course improve our our system-wide enrollment for our for our institutions. Uh just also lastly want to just point out every one of our institutions has a very important public public service mission beyond instruction. So, all those figures that I talked about previously, those were enrollments in courses for academic credit, but as Blake mentioned earlier, Dr. Flanders, he went to the law enforcement training center, our institutions have a lot of services they offer that are not counted in any of the data that I've mentioned previously. Our institutions do a lot of work with employers directly. Uh they do personal enrichment courses, they offer a lot of things, a lot of services to Kansans. So, want to just point that out? Unless that's all I have. All right. Great information, Vice President Frisbie. Any other questions? All right. Thank you again. Moving on to a first read of state university tuition and fee proposals for fiscal year 2027. Once again, Vice President Frisbie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh just a brief comments before I turn it over to our university CEOs and our student leaders. Uh first, I want to commend our student government leaders. Uh they devoted a lot of time and energy to their responsibilities to administer student fees. We went over that quite a bit this morning. Uh they reviewed not only the fee structure and the rates, but whether funds should be reorganized and applied to higher priority areas. So, sometimes they're making hard decisions affecting the services that their students that they are that their friends rely on. Campus administration are also facing budget challenges this coming year. They are balancing the legislated budget cuts uh while keeping an eye and a sensitivity over imposing higher costs on their students and maintaining their cost competitiveness with their peers and their neighboring uh institutions. So, every uh university will present key highlights on their proposals. You will note some structural changes to tuition that are designed perhaps to cover program-specific course costs uh such as at uh Wichita State and Pittsburg State or maybe to aligned rates across different groups. Uh the K-State Salina campus versus the Manhattan Salina campus for K-State. Or Fort Hays aligning online and on-campus student rates. So, with that introduction, I would just turn it over to President Baker. Good afternoon and uh thank you for the opportunity and I recognize and understand Regent Deicas' request for brevity. Um heard that a couple times. Um we can talk for 2 minutes or 30 minutes, you just say the word, but um we're very excited and proud of Emporia State to propose no tuition increase for our students for next year. Um again, I've been there under 3 months, and we've spent many, many hours talking about our FY27 budget, uh sat with uh Vice President Wolgram and our CFO, and the entire staff in the finance office to understand what our needs and opportunities are. One of the things that allows us some comfort in doing that is our enrollment pipelines are looking very strong for next year. Um Dr. Carley would tell us in the enrollment management world that our enrollment pipelines are looking very, very strong, stronger than they've looked in years. However, she would follow it up quickly with they're still very fragile. And so, while we think about how do we recruit students for this fall, next fall, and the and the you know, years to come, we really are concerned about making sure we have affordability. Uh since I started here in the state of Kansas again a few months ago, I understand uh the mission of and the the goal of helping Kansas families, and we have the flexibility within our budget right now to continue to do that for the third straight year. I will tell the board that I I don't think that will continue much longer. I don't think we have the ability to do that for 4 years or 5 years, but I do think right now it is important for us to continue to strengthen those enrollment funnels to make sure we do have our students. We're providing an outstanding academic and engagement experience for our students, and we have the flexibility to do that. Uh the last thing I would point out is that we have some flexibility within our budget. Um again, I'm less than 90 days in. Um we have some opportunity to help leaders think differently and more strategically about their budgets. Um we have a lot of uh we have lots maybe not a lot, but we have some opportunity to be more strategic about what where we fund, where we don't fund, and we have we need to work that down into the organization a little bit more deeply so that all kinds of leaders understand what they really need versus what they want. And perhaps my third final thing that I'll mention, I keep saying the final one and there's always just one more. But we found that several of our departments have everybody has a rainy day fund. Well, we've established that we don't need five rainy day funds. We need one and so we can be more efficient with those funds that departments are kind of holding back just in case but our finance office is holding back just in case, our foundation is holding back just in case. And so we're helping people have better understandings of what the current need is and we spend the money that our current students are spending on our current students. And so really look forward to keeping costs affordable for our students into the foreseeable future but we're very excited about holding our tuition flat for next year. I would take any questions you may have. Right. Thank you, President Baker. I know I know [clears throat] in the past you and maybe you referenced this, you've worked with student government leaders to to make sure they're comfortable that. I assume that occurred again this year. That did. We have a very robust program and actually President Zarwad is here and has done this for several years with our Associated Student Government. We also bring our faculty and staff leadership in our shared governance into that conversation. There's multiple meetings that happen over multiple weeks. And there was conversation from students about asking you know about different services they may be interested in the future and we had conversations about is that now or is that in the near future and everybody was comfortable with us holding flat for right now. Okay, very good. Well, appreciate you engaging them and appreciate your input uh Mr. President because obviously it impacts the students as much as anybody else. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. Any questions for President Baker, Regent Diemer? I also throw in since uh Oswald talked about this morning there would be no increase in the student fees at Emporia State University. Yeah, that is true. There we are um changing one graduation fee instead of a one-time $20 fee. We are putting it at $3 per semester. So, it is a net change of $4 over 4 years. Um but we feel like that's acceptable um in today's economic climate. So. Yeah, it's a good point. Any other questions for our President Beker? All right. Thank you so much. Believe next up we have President Muma, Wichita State University. Thank you Regent Bensen. Um you should have this handout in front of you. Um I know that Vice President Frisbee told our CFO that we only had three slides, but I just couldn't do it in three. But I think I can go through this really quickly. So, um So, I I just want to just point out first and foremost, which is a priority for us, is to make sure that we follow our priorities of our strategic plan. So, everything that I talk about today preserves the investments that we've made around our priorities around affordability and access and feeding the talent pipeline, increasing economic prosperity. So, uh scholarships, retention work, all that's included in here, including applied learning funds that we provide for our students. And then, of course, the research development that we have on our campus. We had a really extensive, like we do every year, um shared governance model and got input from all kinds of people across the campus for this past entire academic year. Um and really some of our financial challenges have started the last couple of years with the decline in international enrollment. So, we've been working really closely with our constituency heads to make sure they understand what we need to do and get their input. So, in terms of our request, we're requesting a 3.8% overall increase. Um that's a 4.9% increase in tuition, no increase in um mandatory fees, no college course fee changes. Um we are restructuring some of our high-cost, high-demand program and and creating a more in all-inclusive tuition models. This model is based on projected revenue declines mostly due to international enrollment as I as I mentioned. We're also instituting a 7% SGF cut in our budget this particular year. And of course this is just affecting our general use budget, which is about $200 million of a nearly $1 billion budget, which includes lots of other things like research and some of the auxiliary services. Just to make sure you understand our benchmarking still see among our peers on the low end of tuition and fees. So we feel good in terms of our price point there with our peers, but more importantly if you're looking at our regional research universities, you can see also we're on the low end as well. So we don't think that we're even with this increase that we're uh overpricing our our education. And then for more context, this is over the years looking at public support versus tuition support. You can see that we have had sort of a flattening of that in the last 7 8 years, but it increased recently because of declining support from the public sector. So just to have that as context. We've been looking at our projections over the next 5 years and if we do nothing, particularly with declines in international enrollment, we're going to end up with a pretty significant budget reduction. You can see that expenses are out out pacing revenues. But with this cut, this tuition increase, we will get back in line projecting out over the next 5 years. We have some assumptions that we have here in terms of moderate increases in tuition going forward, certainly not anything overly ambitious. We believe that we're correctly predicting international enrollment at the university. We've been really accurate so far, and so we put that into the model as well. And then you can see these other sorts of things there that that were listing as our key assumptions to get us to a sustainable more sustainable financial future. Any of these things may change. We don't know what's going to happen. These are conservative estimates. And if there are changes to the negative, then we will have to make more cuts. So, believe our student body president or or actually our past student body president, he wanted our students to speak to this too, is that right? Regent Musson. So, I'm going to have uh John Wine Lung come up and have a few comments. Good afternoon. I promise I'll keep this a little bit brief. But, I did want to speak a little bit more on the tuition proposal from the student perspective. Throughout the entire year, Vice President Winn and I have had multiple conversations with not only the budget office team, but also with Provost Landsberry and President Mumma about the reasoning behind the tuition. And so, we've like he has mentioned, we've also attended all of our university budget advisory committee meetings, making sure that we were getting live updates and information as the year went along. And parts of the proposal that we especially appreciated were the dollars to continue to support student success initiatives. As we've heard a lot of the student body feedback from that, that has really positively impacted them and has positively impacted our retention needs. And also some of the consolidation of our programs tuition and fees into one package for our students. And then just I know going forward in the 69th session student government through President Island and Vice President Raju that will be continued conversations with university administration as they implement this forward. Thank you for your input. Any questions? Yeah, Rachel Offutt Moore. Thank you. Thank you very much to both of you. Um, could you go back to that slide that was tuition versus state support over the years? I didn't look at it in time. The Is that something you could send to us that slide? >> Yeah. Okay. Right. That'd be helpful. >> We have that. You have it, too. Okay. Yeah, the Regents have or I thought it would roll up for it, but we we all have have a similar looking slide. Yeah, and I don't >> look the same. And I don't know that Different colors. Yeah, I don't know everyone's aware of that. Yeah. I'm not sure that's a point that is made enough. Thank you. President Muma, you mentioned the decline in international enrollment. How big is that drop been? Well, um, Vice President Frisbee showed that we had in her report, I think, 3,200 international students. I can't remember what year that was. Maybe she could tell us. That's degree bound and non-degree bound students. We had about at our peak 2,600 degree bound students the fall of '22. So, the decline has actually started 4 years ago. And probably at all all institutions across the country. And so, we believe that we'll end up about 750 students this fall. So, about 2,000 students decline over the last 4 years. We have been, you know, cutting and reallocating internally. So, we've been handling it internally, so it hasn't been a crisis of any any kind of but it's certainly not good I think for the state in terms of workforce issues going forward but also just the vibrancy that international students bring to to our community. Are there questions for Wichita State? All right. Thanks so much. Next up Fort Hays State University Provost Arnsdorf. Good afternoon on behalf of President Mason I am delighted to present for first reading our tuition and fee proposal for fiscal year 27. So I'll talk quickly about our process before I talk about this slide but um through this entire process of course Fort Hays State University along with probably all our peers up here are are remaining committed to our mission committed to high quality education at an affordable and accessible rate for students and so part of our process involved tuition recommendation committee that consists of students faculty and staff and many of those folks are here with us today and at the end of the presentation I will ask our outgoing president to come up and and speak on behalf of the students. So this particular slide shows you one component of work that the tuition committee did recommendation committee look did on on behalf of President Mason and the committee reviewed financial data and projections and other data points such as these above. So you can see that the tuition and fees that we are proposing for 26-27 are still far below our key board average in this current year and the national average and this national average data comes from College Board as the data source. Um the tuition recommendation committee also reviewed um current SGF distribution, um our geopolitical environment um in in our world, uh tuition and fee elasticity for Fort Hays State University, inflation, uh student debt burden, and various other components uh as we were making our recommendation. So, on behalf of Fort Hays State University, we are recommending a um modest $9.78 per credit hour uh on-campus tuition increase, uh fee increase of $2.33 per credit hour, which I think uh Jackson will talk a little bit more about in a few minutes. There was a the part of this fee that went to referendum for students. Um so, uh for a 15-credit-hour load, that will be under $200 increase for our students um and under $400 for uh a full academic year worth of credit. My final slide before I ask uh Jackson to to come up and share um this shows our proposed tuition and fees are significantly lower still than the board-approved fees for all of the regent institutions last year. Um our proposed tuition and fee increases are essential for maintaining our high-quality education and student services, and even with this increase um Fort Hays State University remains a a high-value, cost-effective choice for students. So, at this time, I'd like to call up Jackson Sinsel, our outgoing uh student government association president, who also walked across the stage not once but twice uh to receive two degrees from Fort Hays State. He earned, not received. He earned two degrees from Fort Hays State University and walked across the stage last week to shake President Mason's hand. So, Jackson, share on behalf of the students, please. I'd say congratulations to St. Cloud. Thank you, guys. So, um just really quickly I wanted to share kind of committee make up. So, we had about eight people on this committee. Um, it's important to know we had an online SGA student cuz we have a vast majority of online students and we also had me as our on-campus representative. So, we had two students on this committee. Um, we met about eight times, about an hour and a half each. Um, and I think what we came to the recommendation I I initially dissented with the original recommendation, but I think President Mason honestly took my recommendation and went with it. My recommendation was initially higher than what the university even settled on. Um, so I am very happy with where we came in at. Um, I think students, when they understand, um, kind of if they were here today, they would see that other institutions are offering, uh, student fees for other areas. I don't pay a single, besides my mandatory student activity fee and my tuition, I don't pay any course fees or any other fees that are like that. Um, and I think that's important to note, um, specifically for our increase. So, um, and then Grace did a great job this morning talking about fees. Our $2.33 um, has been pushed off several years. We've kept low or reduced rates. Um, and that is completely ran by the students at Fort Hays State University and President Mason initially signs off on that and she signed off on everything that we did, um, with flying colors. So, we're excited with that as well. So, I stand for any questions. So, All right. Any Yes, Regent Johnston. Yeah, just a question for the conference, if I may. >> Sure. Yeah, let's get this on. Um, I'm just since this is the first my first go around with the tuition ranges, I'm curious looking at the lineup on your slide. Um, is there a strategic desire uh, to somewhat catch up or is there a strategic desire to not catch up and to stay? I mean, that's a big gap between you and the other um, regionals. And I'm And the other side of that is I'm curious if you if if you look at a particular group of peer institutions that you feel like you're competitively aside from aside from our institutions, if there's another peer group that you look at. It's our strategic desire to remain affordable. Um, I don't want to This isn't something I've vetted through President Mason before, so I want to be a little thoughtful about how I answer, but um, it's a strategic a desire for us to remain committed to our mission. Um, and that's to be affordable and accessible and provide a high-quality education. Um I do think that um, we have we have um, enjoyed uh, being the lowest tuition in in the state for many many years and have used that um, to our advantage. Um Uh I think I'll stop there. I I appreciate >> [laughter] >> I'll stop. I appreciate the answer and if nothing else you can you can convey to President Mason my interest. You bet. And and to our to our we do look at our regional peers as well, not only in the state but outside of the state and we still remain extremely competitive and and affordable even compared to them. Super. Thank you. >> If you look back to to maybe more thoroughly answer your earlier question your first question, we we have raised our tuition percentage-wise a bit more over the last few years when we had an opportunity to do so. Rachel Wolfgramm Thank you, Mr. Chair. What has been your international population decline over the last Good question. Majority of our international students are with our cross-border partners in China and so while that number has fluctuated based on the quota that we're allowed based on the province in China the provincial government in China, our on-campus student international student numbers have have declined and we're looking at perhaps maybe fewer than 100 student international students on campus in the fall due to probably very similar reasons that that the rest of the institutions have trouble getting visas that kind of thing. How big a decline is 100? >> At our peak we were around 400 students. That's helpful. Thank you. >> Mhm. Yes, Regent Ammar. Thank you, Chair. A quick question and I know I could probably do the math, but I'm not doing it. What is the percentage increase? Maybe I missed it. >> Sure. I intentionally left that out. Sorry. [laughter] But but but I'll say it and it is 6% for on campus and 4% for online. Thank you. Mhm. Any other questions for Fort Hays State? I'll just remind you that that 6% is still under $10. That's well said. All right. Thank you so much. Next up, University of Kansas, Chancellor Girod. Good luck. Nice job. Thank you. Thank you very much and good afternoon and and I'm pleased that I have our incoming student body president Shemarni here with us today as well. She, thank you for hanging out through a fire alarm and everything else. Um or whatever it was. Um I'll I'll try and go through this quickly as well. Um you know, I think we all appreciate some of the challenges economically, but certainly this year with reduction in state funding as well as elimination of some of the student success funding. Um that's something that we're all absorbing. Obviously, you're very aware of all the headwinds in higher education today and I won't spend any time going through all these. I think we talk about them quite frequently. Um but >> [clears throat] >> as as others have said, concentrating our resources on our highest priorities is an exercise we've been going through for some time. Uh I will say that we also uh for example at the Lawrence campus have implemented a $37 million annual reduction just in the last year uh to try and make sure that we are able to focus our our resources where they need to be. This is our proposal to get to it which which uh as you can see is is uh we're a big complicated place so there's there's multiple areas where this is impacting but uh Lawrence and Edwards is uh from a tuition perspective about a 4% increase. Um Medical Center is um uh or when you look at the fees uh from the record student fee, there's no increase in the Lawrence Edwards campus. Uh kudos to the student government for all the work that they did to achieve that and and a slight increase at the Medical Center. And then there are some changes in course fees uh really to bring our courses more in line with our competitors uh around the country. Um and [clears throat] uh what I really did want to point out was this. Red is is the CPI over the last 7 years and blue is what we've done with our tuition. And so we have been able despite the challenges uh really keep our uh tuition and current fee increases well below the rate of inflation uh over those last 7 years despite all the many challenges that we've all been dealing with. And in regards to where that puts us with our peers, which we didn't include that slide, but it actually does not shift us at all within the rankings within our peers. We're still sort of right squarely in the middle of our peer institutions. And for the sake of brevity, I will stop and ask for questions. Well done. Or perhaps give Shay an opportunity to say a word. >> please. Mike, Shay, please. Hello. Welcome. Um just in terms of our fee process, our fee committee is made up of 12 students both from graduate and undergraduate degrees and from the Lawrence and the Edwards campus. These students get presentations from every fee entity that is funded, and this year we were able to keep it flat, which is really exciting. Well done. And I might add, just to speak to the robustness of that that group manages almost 29 million dollars in student fees and allocates that across a whole broad array, everything from our buses to mental health services, and they do an incredible job. We have a similar process at the Medical Center student government. Very good. Questions for the University of Kansas. Great. Thank you. >> Thank you both so much. Appreciate it. Uh Chair Uh yes, Regent Ammar. I had a quick question, sorry. Sure. Um what's the percentage you're asking for? It's it's with fees is about 5 and 1/2 total. 5% 5.5 5 5.5 out of state, yeah, 5 resident. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Next up, President Linton, Kansas State. Thank you, Chair Benson and rest of the Board of Regents. Um I guess as I get started, I First, this was probably um the most conversational strategic conversation we've had about um our budget and budget transformation with tuition and fees, and I'm incredibly appreciative of the strategy to be able to support our financial needs, our programmatic needs, and working hand in hand with student enrollment to be able to be ensured that we're competitive with our aspirational and our peer institutions. Um from a communication standpoint, I think this year we did a really good job in communicating with our internal stakeholders, external stakeholders, and the partnership to be able to arrive at these consensus-based recommendations, um especially working with the students. So, I think this past year were were just fantastic, and Brady Cappelman's here to be able to talk about their perspective on both tuition and fees. We are also a complex um organization like like KU. Um when we take a look at tuition requests, um we look at um three major components. The Manhattan / Olathe campuses, which are similar. Um the Salina campus, and then the College of Veterinary Medicine. For the Manhattan and Olathe campuses, uh we are requesting um for undergraduate for a resident increase of 4% and a non-resident increase of 5.5%. And we're asking that for both the undergraduate um student population and the graduate student population. And 4% across for all cohorts for the online programs. For the Salina pro- program, if you remember 2 years ago, we started a multi-year process to be able to get all of our graduate student tuition and all of our undergraduate student tuition to be equivalent across all campuses. And the Salina campus was greatly below these other campuses. So, this is the third and final year of that process in order to be able to make both in-state and out-of-state students identical across three campuses. That would require for undergraduates a 7.7% increase for residents and a 9.21% for non-residents. For graduate students, a 4% and 5.5% much like the Olathe campus and Manhattan campus. And then online, you can see the percentages as shown on this slide. For the College of Veterinary Medicine, uh we need to be able to keep that increase um lesser in order to be competitive with our with our peers around the country. So, we lessened that to a 3% increase request. From a fee perspective, there are three fees that um are under consideration for this year. I'll start actually at the bottom, which is the student service fee, which comes to us from student government. Um they are asking for that to be increased to uh $23.04 uh an increase per semester. And for those that are wondering um what percentage that is, that's a 4.7% increase. From a college fee perspective, the College of Agriculture and the College of Architecture, Planning and Design have both asked for increases in fees. For the College of Agriculture, that's now $62.10 per credit hour increase. And this is something that hasn't been increased in decades. So, this is something that we're catching up on from many, many years. And no increase to the online rate. And then the College of Architecture, Planning and Design, $11 per credit hour increase. And that is a 20% increase for the College of Architecture, Planning and Design. This is a slide, a similar slide that I showed the board several months ago when talking about some of the challenges that Kansas State University currently faces with the challenges with compensation for faculty, staff, and and graduate students with about 14 to 16% under the bar compared to our competitive peers. We've got some challenges now with with research and the way in which research dollars are distributed. We have aging technology needs, and of course we have athletics as well. And so, we've gone through a a process that's called budget transformation. And over the next 3 years, we will look to be able to recalibrate the budget using different levers in that process to be able to capture $100 million recurring. About 70% of that will be for compensation for faculty, staff, and graduate students. And a one-time investment of $75 million mainly for technology needs to be able to modernize the institution. And if you look at the bottom right, this is kind of all the different ways in which we're getting there. Some of it's taxation, some of it's budget reductions this year. In the next 2 years, we're planning on just a 1.1% budget reduction. Philanthropy is a big piece of it. Our partnership with state and federal funding is a big piece of it. We're distributing dollars differently from a research perspective. Tuition rate increases and fees is one way in which we can help to be able to assure that we're going to have the operational needs of the institution satisfied to make us a modernized next generation land grant institution. So, with that, I'd like to turn it over to Brady Cappleman to be able to talk about it from a student perspective. Hi. Um so, to touch on the student perspective, um first talking about tuition, we have a tuition and fee strategy committee where we compile um one student from every college to voice in their concerns and hear um the tuition proposal. This year, something that went really well for our group was students were able to hear and understand the budget transformation, and we're really um for pro um supporting the tuition increase. It was actually a unanimous vote by that group. Um students really saw that continuing to support resources that students find important to their time at K-State was something that is worth having a tuition increase, um as well as our student services fee. President Linton mentioned a 4.7% increase. This was also unanimously passed by our student service fee committee and by our student senate as well. Um so, students again want to be able to see um students across campus receive their resources um as things are changing in our state and our country with inflation and things like that. Um and really want to give a shout out to our administration for being transparent with our students, making sure that they're aware of the different things that are happening um and making sure students have the resources that they need to make an educated decision. So, thank you. Thank you. I'll stand for questions if there's any questions. >> Yeah, just a clarification just to again as I'm going through this the first time. Um on the the fees I've got a question just to understand the the college fees versus the student services fees. So, if I pick on the an architecture student the architecture student pays a credit hour fee that's that 11 It did this would increase that 11 $11 more per credit hour based on what the current um based on what the current fee is today. >> Yeah, and then and then is the student services fee a different fee or is that everybody that's not It's a separate it's a separate fee. Yeah, so the the college fees are very specific to that particular college to be able to support the resources needed for the operation. >> Okay, and then the student what I would the student services fee is more obvious to me. Okay, The student services fee is for all students. >> Yeah, yeah. Okay, thank you. I just wasn't sure I was tracking that. Are there questions for K-State? Regent Ammar. And just a comment, excuse [clears throat] me, I didn't realize that the College of Architecture Planning Design was a little more um costly than the vet school because I noticed the 3% there about 11% more for the this College of Architecture Planning Design. Well, I I I Well, wait. I don't know that you're you're you're evaluating um cost just by looking at this information. All of All this is showing is what is the increase that we're requesting. >> I see. Okay. >> per credit hour, but if you're asking why the College of Architecture Planning and Design it's a very very hands-on college where there's pilot labs and there's activities that are done in shops and things that require additional resources. Thank you. Yeah. Any other questions for President Linton or his team? All right. Thank you. So much. And bringing us home, President Newsum, Pittsburg State University. All right. Thank you very much. So, we went into the the process with our committees uh both for tuition and fees with the idea of supporting our new Access Pitt State uh strategic plan, which has four pillars, many of which uh circle back to affordability and making sure that we can balance a budget without using reserve funds for reoccurring expenses. And one of the things that we really focused on was where we stand with peer institutions. And as you see there, the top chart is where we stand with our uh conference cohort in terms of our athletic conference and still toward the bottom of that uh cohort uh we were we rank uh well below two thirds of our MIAA uh cohort. And then the bottom graph there shows that we're below nine of our 10 of the cable selected peers. And one I'd point out to you is that we don't talk about enough is the Missouri Southern uh number. We are so close to Missouri Southern in terms of geographically that that's really the one that we have to make sure that we are uh more affordable and um and give folks a a bigger appetite to come to to Pittsburg instead of Joplin when it comes to making decisions, especially for those folks in Southeast Kansas. So, we are asking for uh tuition increase of 3.5% for undergraduate. It's right at $114 per semester hour, which is still less than $10 a credit hour. And a fee increase of uh $28.50, which is three which brings the tuition and fee total to 3.3%. That's about $6 a credit hour with the understanding that we do have flat rate tuition which was referred to earlier. So that is based on a 12 credit hour delivery because students at Pittsburg State pay the same based on a 12 credit hour delivery regardless of how many hours of addition in addition to 12 credit hours they are taking. And then our graduate tuition increase is 1.5% that's $57 per semester and with tuition and fees 85 which is 1.8%. So we hope that that we not hope that what our but our strategy is to use this tuition and fee increase to offset some growth in expenses for our great gorilla scholarship program which is our automatic scholarship program for freshmen that follows them all four years at Pitt State and we've seen great growth in that which has resulted in growth in expenses but that also is sparking the 11% tuition 11% enrollment increase in our freshman class this last fall and we're hoping to see similar numbers in terms of percentage of growth in our freshman class next fall. It also will help us with increases in in compensation and benefits specifically health care for our employees. It'll help us offset some student success initiatives that were non-funded this year by the legislature to the tune of about $600,000 and then it'll help us offset a loss of about $2.4 million in state funds. And I say help because this fee tuition and fee proposal gets us really nowhere close about about 1/3 of what we really need to make up. So we will find an additional $3 million in budget reductions and reallocations to again make sure that we have a balanced budget and we're not using reserves for ongoing ongoing expenses. We also have taken some approaches to other tuition actions and that is uh holding tuition for high high demand specifically graduate programs flat. So, our uh education master's degrees and our MBAs uh which we feel like fill some critical needs in Kansas and across our region for workforce will remain flat. So, that 1.5% increase in graduate uh tuition fees does not include those programs. We're also expanding our Gorilla Advantage program, which is our uh ability to offer in-state tuition rates uh to two additional states, which would be Pennsylvania and New York, which would expand that to 34 states now that we offer the Gorilla Advantage program to and we think that we feel like that there's some traction that we can gain in Pennsylvania and New York specifically for for programs in the Crossland College of Technology given that some of those programs are very unique and quite frankly, the only programs in the country uh like those. So, we we we think that there's some ability for us to attract some more students to only study and get a degree in Kansas, but to stay in Kansas after after they graduate. And then uh the fee uh the set the fee increase that we set are part of approval that we received last year, which were a two-year phase approach to uh to increase some fees for those high um undergraduate business programs that are are costly. And when fully implemented, those will be $20 a credit hour with a $300 per uh semester cap on those. So, with that, I would like to ask uh Corey Humble, our outgoing president of our student government association to come and talk about the uh the fees and how the student body came came up with those numbers. Hi there, board. Um so, yeah, just to give you a little bit color on the uh the student process that was involved in this. Um we'll start with the fees and then I know the tuition or the committee earlier had asked me to cover tuition as well uh just because they would like to know that. So, uh starting off with fees, uh my team of eight to 10 people, depending on the week, uh met for um about 2 months, 2 hours for 2 days a week. Um so, very extensively took a look at fees. Um and as you notice, there's only a 2.1% increase, that's $18.50 per semester. I I know Dr. Newsum touched on it briefly. We are a flat-rate institution. Um and so, instead of that $18.50 being attached to per credit hour, that's just $18.50 fund raised per student. Um and so, when we took a look at that, we tried to find um where we could best utilize uh the money that we already had in our budget um and redistribute it. Um I know previously in the Fiscal Affairs meeting, Emporia State had touched on the idea um that they had looked at uh their student uh yearbook. We did the same and found that there were some cost savings we could do there as well. There was also a student concert fund that was barely being used, and so we found ways to reallocate that. Um it's a better align with student policies and student wants and needs. Um this includes implementing a menstrual product initiative um that will cover free menstrual products in every first-floor uh women's restroom across campus, both academic and non-academic buildings, um as well as providing a certain amount of money, I believe around $10,000 being set aside for Pitt State students to study abroad on study abroad scholarships. Um so, this 2.1% um was funded um to other programs outside of student uh need areas, including the Student Activity Center, which is receiving a large amount of money um to invest in their programming efforts, uh new hires that include our new sustainability officer, Lacey, um and for continued maintenance, um since a roof is not cheap, and uh they're going to have to replace it someday. So, um they are going to continue to use this money appropriately. And then, the last big chunk of this 2.1% is going to our Student Rec uh Center. And that Student Rec Center A just got a brand new fancy rock wall if you haven't seen it yet. If you hadn't climbed it yet, highly recommend. It's a beaut and you should go check it out. But we needed a dollar for that so that we could continue to maintenance it. As well as we're going to be funding some additional opportunities for Pitt State students. Currently I as well as other members of SGA thought we vastly underfunded our club sports activities and so a large portion of these fee dollars will go to club sports and sharing that they have the ability to travel to compete and to enjoy all of the amazing opportunities that club sports brings as well as establishing a new club sport in trap shooting which if Dr. Stumo was still here, he'd love to tell you all about as we found that that is actually a really great enrollment driver for community colleges and local high schools. The one that I graduated from that's 20 minutes away recently got a team itself. So very excited for what we're going to be able to do with just this moderate increase. And as far as moderate increases go to tuition as well, tried to keep that moderate for the sake of students as I'd said to the tuition committee earlier, I think one thing that you have to do as a student body president is convince people that it's okay to actually increase fees and it's okay to actually have to spend more money because I think truthfully I think every student would come up to you and tell you that they don't want to pay more for the same services they got last year. I think all of you could say the same thing about every single bill you've ever paid. But truthfully we recognize that increases have to happen especially if we want to continue to fund the amazing things that Pitt State gives us the opportunity to do it just given me for the last four years. And so overall after having many conversations with both students in the student government association and outside of it, I think a lot of people began to see that you know honestly a moderate raise is a lot better than 10 years down the line somebody else have to pay them twice as much. So we're excited to see what this money can do to help Pitt State and to continue make it a great place to go. All right, well said. I'll stand for questions. Okay. Any questions for Pittsburgh State? All right. Thanks so much. And again, that was the first read. We will take final action on these proposals at the June meeting. So, speaking of first read, we'll move on now to receive capital improvement request and 5-year plans for fiscal year 2028 for the university system. This is a first read. And here to present is Director Chad Bristow. Thank you, Chair Benson. Got some slides today to to provide some context uh for the 5-year plan with respect to the board's facilities initiative. Uh while we're waiting on that, I'll just note that this item is on pages 135 through 146 of the board book. And as you said, it's the first read for the capital improvement requests and 5-year plans for FY28. So, as required by state law and in accordance with the format prescribed by the division of the budget, the universities each year submit their capital project plans. And each agency, state agency, must submit these plans to the division of the budget by July 1st each year. So, the board's process has typically been to review and approve these in the spring. Uh we're doing this in May and June because of no meeting in April this year. And I will also note that uh these plans typically do not uh include small capital projects. So, the tradition with the division of the budget has been only large capital projects, and that's defined by over $1.5 million. Let's see here. Let's see here. Nope. Okay. So, this year's five-year plan uh projected for FY28 totals $819 million. Uh overall for all the years included in the five-year plans, there are 158 large capital projects included by the universities this year. And that breaks out to about 30% new construction and 70% made up by remodeling, renovation, rehab, and repair, and demolition of existing facilities. The uh I think everyone knows the state universities depend on a on a wide array of funding sources. Um so, these plans include projects that are active and have funding identified. Uh they also include aspirational projects, projects that would uh proceed if and when funding becomes available. Currently, the universities make use of over a thousand buildings across the state, uh well over a thousand. Uh just under half of those are currently categorized as mission-critical academic and research facilities. And half of those are over 50 years old. There's a good portion of those that are over 100 years old. And those buildings that were built before 1975 or over 50 years old or so, uh those make up a majority of the backlog of maintenance renewal needs. And this year, it's it's important to note, I think if you uh look at the list of projects uh in the book, you'll see that a lot of them are uh relative to rehab and repair. You'll see the titles uh HVAC replacement, roof replacements. And and these projects we increasingly see large capital projects in the universities' plans that address the the most uh typical needs. And with the data that that is collected each year now, we can pretty keenly see how the needs break out across the existing facilities. As you can see here in the graph, most of the need is heating and air conditioning, electrical, plumbing systems that need to be updated or replaced in older buildings, roof replacements, fire protection, things of that nature. The state universities in the first 3 years of the board's facilities renewal initiative to increase the amount of annual investment in existing facilities. The universities with a variety of sources from the university and additional state funds have exceeded the goal. You can see though FY28 represents the first year where the board's goal of getting a 2% reinvestment, which we've defined as a best practice, 2% of the replacement value of the mission-critical buildings. That's the first year we we've kind of gradually gotten up to this 2% level. That is currently projected to be about $166 million. And I say projected because that is a calculation that references the universities mission-critical portfolios that they manage and submit to the board each year. What what buildings are they classifying as academic mission-critical? It also represents you know, any buildings that the universities have taken off line. There's been a fair number of buildings in the first few years that have been divested of. And and it also references national data from RSMeans construction cost data that that is used as a unit cost that all of our facilities data is linked to, so we get a consistent read on how much we should estimate the replacement renewal of those systems are. So, um, this changes each year currently and and construction inflation, of course, inflation rates play into this as well. So, you can see that the model currently is a shared funding model where the universities provide basically a dollar and and state funds uh, combining the EBF and the campus restoration act are dollars. So, you can look at that as right now we're at 1% of replacement value in this fiscal year. In 28 we'll be looking at 2% and so it's a significant amount of money, but currently it's being achieved. And then just to highlight this, the universities in the first few years have taken off a couple dozen at least buildings that have been been raised. These are obsolete buildings that the board has approved and the universities have classified as obsolete. There is several hundred thousand square feet that have been taken offline because of that. The maintenance backlog that's been estimated, the liability, you know, relative to those systems that are are need in need of replacement are eliminated by these. And I think as we move forward we're we're all looking for ways to better quantify this, but operating and utility cost savings don't even factor into to that cost that's eliminated. So, looking out 10 years if you reference the universities campus master plans that the board has approved recently, we think that there's some additional possibility in this area. So, with that happy to try to address any questions. Thank you, Director Bristow. Questions? All right. Again, that was a first read. Thank you so much, Director Bristow. Another first read sticking with the first read theme, receive guidelines for submission of state university policies pursuant to 2026 House Bill 2560. General Counsel John Yuri. Thank you chair, members of the board. Uh so House Bill 2560 was passed this year. That is the bill that exempted the state universities from a number of requirements for procurement um and made those um types of services able to be procured subjects to university policies which are approved by the board. So, uh the what you what you have I think what was provided as maybe supplemental materials are a set of short guidelines about what the board might consider expecting uh from those policies as they're uh being prepared by the universities for universities for submission. Uh so there's will be things like uh um the framework for the selection process including procedures for providing public notice of solicitations, um procedures for evaluating and selecting firms, um the various delivery methods, how would how would the university pick between those in a construction project the things like construction manager at risk, um whether or not uh or having having some involvement for the uh board president or CEO in certain projects or designate, um maybe some reporting uh that might be required uh to the board uh as those um are done annually or or um like I said this is a first read so we got got some guidelines out. These were I believe shared uh by Vice President Frisbee with business officers and also discussed at fiscal affairs and audit uh the committee meeting this morning. My understanding there were a few questions. So, first read we'd expect those things as they're considered either by regions if there's any request for changes or by the university and their representatives to let us know and then we'd come back hopefully next month. Uh I would anticipate to the business officers again and through COBO fiscal affairs and audit and back to the board for consideration and possible action. All right. Thanks so much. Any initial thoughts, questions? I have a comment. >> Yes, President Flanders. Yeah, I think I think the we've had a lot of input from the business officers on these guidelines. I think one thing that's slightly different that is a real improvement is the look back at projects. So, it's it's really expensive to take a lot of time as as you're procuring because you're because of the time factor. But these kind of guidelines will help the system I think improve because we'll look back at projects and say, "Hey, how did it go?" You know, so many times you'll get a bid and then the actual cost of the project was very different. So, I think that's a a key piece of this. Yeah. Agreed. Any other questions, feedback? All right. Look forward to discussing them more in June. Thanks, John. Next step, President Muma request to name a space at Wichita State. Thank you, Regent Benson. Wichita State respectfully requests your approval to name its university stadium the Crossland Stadium. This proposed naming recognizes Crossland Construction's long-standing partnership with the university and their significant contributions to the establishment and expansion of the Innovation Campus at Wichita State. As many of you know, Crossland Construction was started 1977 by Ivan Crossland Sr. and has grown from being one of the top 400 contractors in the nation to one of the top 150. In 2008, Crossland Construction opened its first regional office in Wichita. Since then, Crossland has been a key partner in turning WSU's Innovation Campus Master Plan into reality. This includes involvement in the design, construction, and development of numerous facilities that support research, business partnerships, retail, and student life, such as Braeburn Square, residence halls, and our partnership buildings across the Innovation Campus. In recognition of Crossland's Crossland Construction's support of Wichita State University, WSU seeks approval to name its newly reconstructed track, field, and soccer stadium to Crossland Stadium. This designation reflects the university's deep respect for Crossland Construction's leadership in our community, state, and nation. Be happy to answer any questions. Any questions for President Muma? If not, uh President uh pardon me, uh Regent Emar. Thank you, chair. A quick question. Um is this um helping to reach the goals of that you have for um to take care of the west side of the stadium? Yes, uh the the phase 1A and 1B, the east side and the track and field has been reconstructed already. And uh the west side will be torn down after the state track meet, which we host every year, um the first week of June, and so it'll be rebuilt. And what's the estimated time? It will take 2 years to reconstruct the west side. But you don't Do you not see that anticipating the track and field? No, uh we've been working with them on the design of the facility and staging that where the our current track and field team will be able to continue to use the facility as well as the state track meet that we host. Thank you. Any other questions for President Muma? If not, we'd entertain a motion to approve. Okay, have a motion from Regent Johnston, second from Regent Wolfmore. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. President Muma, request to approve granting of honorary doctorate and commencement speaker at Wichita State. Yes, I'm honored to present Shocker alumnus and chairman and CEO of Kaiser Permanente, Greg Adams for your consideration as this recipient of an honorary doctorate to be conferred at Wichita State University's December 2026 commencement. Greg Adams is a nationally recognized leader in healthcare with more than 40 years of executive experience. In December 2019, he was named chairman and CEO of Kaiser Permanente, the nation's largest integrated not-for-profit health system, which provides high-quality healthcare to more than 12 million Americans. Under his leadership, Kaiser Permanente has expanded access to care, advanced value-based models, launched Risant Health to broaden integrated care nationally, and continues addressing social determinants in health. Greg Adams' personal journey and professional journey powerfully exemplifies the spirit of Shocker Nation, the core values of Wichita State. As a first-generation college student who rose from the rural roots in Georgia and frontline clinical practice to lead one of America's most influential health organization, he embodies the resilience and determination that define our community. I am confident Greg Adams with his presence at commencement will strengthen ties between WSU and the broader health care community at a pivotal moment for Wichita and the Wichita biomedical campus prepared to come online in 2027. I cannot think of a more suitable person to be recognized at this moment in time for Wichita, Wichita State, and the state of Kansas. Be happy to answer any questions. Any questions for President Muma? I would entertain a motion to approve. Okay, we have a motion from Regent Ammar. Seconded by Regent Johnston. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Thank you. All right. Thank you, President Muma. Moving on to election fiscal year 2027 board chair and vice chair. May meeting is always when we elect board leadership for the the following year. So, we'll open up nominations. We'll start off with board chair. Are there any nominations for fiscal year 2027 board chair? I would make the nomination to appoint Alicia Johnston as the board chair for our academic year 2027. Always good to nominate someone who's not here to defend themselves. >> [laughter] >> Thank you, Regent Dicus. Teach you to go to China. Yeah, don't miss a meeting. Yeah. >> [clears throat] >> Yeah, yeah, especially this one. Any other nominations for board chair? Okay, we'll move into vice chair. I would make a nomination that Regent Kathy Wolf-Moore serve as vice chair for fiscal year 2027, but would entertain any other nominations. With that, I'd second that. I I will officially make a motion that Regent Alicia Johnston serve as board chair and Regent Wolf-Moore serve as vice chair for fiscal year 2027. Do we have a second? I would second. Have a second by Vice Chair Mendoza. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Congratulations to both. Look forward to your year of leadership. All right. We'll move on now to acting on the presidential profile for the Kansas Board of Regents office. As all of you know, the the search for the next president of the Kansas Board of Regents is being conducted as a closed board-led process. The board has engaged AGB consultants to support this effort following their selection through a competitive procurement process. Over the last 2 weeks, AGB has conducted outreach with a broad range of key stakeholders, including Regents, institutional leaders, agency staff, and our external partners. And these conversations were intended to gather input on the priorities, opportunities, and leadership qualities most important for the next president of the system. Based on that stakeholder input and supporting research, a draft presidential profile has been developed to to reflect the board's priorities and clearly define the leadership expectations for the next president. So, today the board is being asked to consider and take action on the proposed presidential profile. Would ask for any questions, any feedback regarding the the presidential profile that has been provided. I know a lot of work. I know a lot of people in in this room have already given input into that. We appreciate your time because it's extremely important. So, um hearing no other discussion, would entertain a motion to approve the presidential profile as presented. So moved. Okay, motion by Regent Ammar. Second by Regent Wolf-Moore. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Okay, the profile is accepted. All right. Believe we are now up to a an executive session. Does anyone have a motion to recess into an executive session? Well, yes, I do, Mr. Chair. Um I move the Kansas Board of Regents recess into executive session. The subject of the executive session is to discuss personnel items and the purpose is to protect the privacy of the individual board employees involved. The session should last approximately 30 minutes and shall include the following persons who are either members of the body or who will aid in this discussion. Members of the Kansas Board of Regents, K-State Board President and CEO Blake Flanders for all or a portion, ESU President Matthew Baker for a portion, PSU President Thomas Newsom for a portion. The open meeting of the board shall resume at 4:36. >> Okay, thank you, Vice Chair Mendoza. Do we have a second? Second by Regent Ammar. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? All right, we will recess into an executive session. Okay. I think especially since then. >> Mhm.
[3:07:54]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:11:44]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:17:29]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:25:09]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:28:59]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:32:49]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:36:39]>> Mhm. >> Mhm.
[3:40:29]>> Mhm.
