Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
REPORT ON
CUSTOMER SERVICE
June 2004
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Coordinating Board Members
Jerry Farrington, Chair Dallas
Robert W. Shepard, Vice Chair Harlingen
Cathy Obriotti Green, Secretary of the Board San Antonio
Neal Adams Bedford
Ricardo G. Cigarroa, Jr., M.D. Laredo
Gerry Griffin Hunt
Carey Hobbs Waco
Lorraine Perryman Odessa
Curtis E. Ransom Dallas
Hector de J. Ruiz, Ph.D. Austin
Terderma L. Ussery, II Dallas
Coordinating Board Mission
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board's mission is to work with the Legislature,
Governor, governing boards, higher education institutions and other entities to provide the
people of Texas the widest access to higher education of the highest quality in the most
efficient manner.
THECB Strategic Plan
2005-2009
Coordinating Board Philosophy
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board will promote access to quality higher
education across the state with the conviction that access without quality is mediocrity and
that quality without access is unacceptable. The Board will be open, ethical, responsive, and
committed to public service. The Board will approach its work with a sense of purpose and
responsibility to the people of Texas and is committed to the best use of public monies. The
Coordinating Board will engage in actions that add value to Texas and to higher education.
The agency will avoid efforts that do not add value or that are duplicated by other entities.
THECB Strategic Plan
2005-2009
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Report on Customer Service
June 2004
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.................................................................................................................. 1
Description of Services Provided.............................................................................................. 2
1. External Customers ......................................................................................................... 2
2. Information Gathering Methods ....................................................................................... 3
3. Chart of Customer-Determined Service Elements.......................................................... 4
4. Analysis of Findings ......................................................................................................... 4
5. Performance Measures ................................................................................................... 4
Strategy A.1.1 Close the Gaps in Participation and Success
Administer Grants and Scholarships Programs............................. 5
Strategy A.1.2 Administer the Hinson-Hazlewood College Student Loan ................... 6
Strategy A.2.1 Close the Gaps in Excellence............................................................... 7
Strategy A.2.2 Close the Gaps in Research............................................................... 10
Strategy A.3.1 Provide Planning and Information Services to
Close the Gaps ............................................................................. 11
Strategy F.1.3 Close the Gaps in Participation and Success
Teacher Quality Grants Program.................................................. 12
Executive Summary
Chapter 2114 of the Government Code requires state agencies to submit a Report on
Customer Service. This report includes (1) An inventory of external customers for each
strategy listed in the 2003-2004 General Appropriations Act (2) a brief description of
information gathering methods (3) a chart detailing the levels of customer-determined
service quality (4) an analysis of findings; and (5) an estimation of performance measures.
A description of services and a brief description of customer satisfaction assessments and
their results is offered for each budget strategy. Each section concludes with
recommendations for improving customer service.
Based on internal evaluations of customer feedback, customers are generally pleased with
the levels of service received from the agency. Both the two-year and four-year sectors of
higher education surveyed rated the agency “good” to “excellent” on point-of-service
evaluations. The agency also received positive ratings from the principal investigators in the
Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and from teachers participating in the Teacher
Quality Grants Program. Almost every evaluation indicated high satisfaction with agency
staff.
The agency should continue to improve its customer service data gathering methods.
Because rating scales were not uniform across divisions and departments, it is not possible
to compute an overall customer satisfaction level on a Likert scale, so an estimate is
provided. The agency also needs to more clearly define the complaint process so that the
appropriate data can be gathered for the dual purposes of accurate record keeping and
customer service improvement.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 1
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board
Report on Customer Service
Description of Services Provided
The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s mission is to work with the Legislature,
Governor, governing boards, higher education institutions, and other entities to provide the
people of Texas the widest access to higher education of the highest quality in the most
efficient manner.
The Coordinating Board performs three major functions to carry out its mission:
1. Establishes state higher education plans and provides information and data on
higher education,
2. Coordinates degree programs at higher education institutions and the
construction of major facilities at public higher education institutions except
community colleges,
3. Administers state and federal programs to expand access, raise quality, improve
efficiency, and increase research in higher education.
The Coordinating Board carries out its functions in ways that will help to reach the four goals
of the higher education plan, Closing the Gaps by 2015: close the gaps within Texas and
between Texas and other large states in participation, success, excellence, and research by
2015.
1. EXTERNAL CUSTOMERS
Coordinating Board Customer Service Strategies
Strategy Description Division
A.1.1. Close the Gaps in Participation and Success by Student Services
administering grants and scholarship programs and Participation and Success
by promoting access to higher education
A.1.2. Administer the Hinson-Hazlewood College Student Student Services
Loan Program
A.2.1. Close the Gaps in Excellence by coordinating and Universities &
evaluating university programs, community and Health-Related Institutions
technical college programs, and health programs Community and Technical
Colleges
A.2.2. Close the Gaps in Research by administering and Research
evaluating research programs
A.3.1. Provide Planning and Information Services to Close Planning
the Gaps Finance
Campus Planning
F.1.2. Close the Gaps in Participation and Success by Community and Technical
administering statewide federal grants programs: Colleges
Technical-Vocational Education Programs
F.1.3. Close the Gaps in Participation and Success by Participation and Success
administering statewide federal grants programs:
Teacher Quality Grants Program
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 2
External Customer List By Strategy
External Customers Strategy
State Governmental Authorities (includes Members of the A.1.1., A.1.2., A.2.1,
Legislature and Governor’s Office) A.2.2. , A.3.1.
Public Higher Education Institutions (including: higher education
All Strategies
institutions’ students, faculty and staff)
A.1.1., A.2.1., A.3.1.
Boards of Regents/Trustees
A.1.1., A.1.2., A.2.2.,
Higher Education Advisory Committees
A.3.1.
A.1.1., A.1.2., A.2.1,
Researchers
A.2.2. , A.3.1.
Other Texas State Agencies (Texas Education Agency, State A.1.1., A.2.1, A.3.1.,
Board for Educator Certification, Workforce Commission) F.1.2., F.1.3.
A.1.1., A.2.1.
News Media
A.1.1., A.1.2., A.2.1,
School Districts
F.1.2., F.1.3.
A.1.1., A.2.1, A.3.1.,
Other States’ Higher Education Agencies
F.1.2.
A.1.1., A.2.2.
Chambers of Commerce
A.1.1., A.1.2., A.2.1,
Educational Associations
A.3.1.
A.2.1.
Career Colleges and Schools of Texas
A.2.1., A.3.1.
Accrediting Agencies
All Strategies
Federal agencies, particularly U.S. Department of Education
A.2.1., F.1.2.
Consortia members (including workforce development boards)
2. INFORMATION GATHERING METHODS
To solicit meaningful, program-specific customer feedback for each budget strategy, Board
staff used a point-of-service evaluation on services offered during 2003-2004. Other
information gathering methods included a web-based survey and a call-volume analysis.
The Coordinating Board’s diverse customers, ranging from students and parents to elected
officials and the news media, make a statistically valid sample impractical. Further, very
limited information was collected on facilities and complaint process. Because of the types
of services the agency provides, neither apply directly. Almost all of the agency’s
customers rely on services provided at a distance and rarely access agency facilities.
Almost all of the complaints received concerned a higher education institution other than the
agency and are referred to the particular college or university when the agency staff has no
authority, knowledge or expertise to help resolve the complaint.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 3
3. CHART OF CUSTOMER-DETERMINED SERVICE ELEMENTS
Service element Excellent Good Neutral Fair Poor
Communication X
Staff X
Timeliness X
Website(s) X
Printed Information X
Facilities X
Complaint Process X
This chart summarizes staff’s assessment of overall agency performance based on the
multiple point-of-service evaluations used to gather feedback on the statutorily required
customer service elements.
4. ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS
Based on internal evaluations of customer feedback, customer satisfaction with agency
services is generally high. A survey of chief academic officers at public universities and
health-related institutions revealed that the majority consider agency staff to be
knowledgeable, courteous, professional, and timely in responding to questions. Based on
customer feedback, improvements were made to the agency’s student loan website to help
customers access more information about the status of their student loans and to enable
them to use an automatic draft service. Customers also indicated high levels of satisfaction
with processes used for research grant competitions, with financial aid workshops, and with
the Teacher Quality Grants Program.
5. PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Outcome Measures
• Percentage of Surveyed Customer Respondents Expressing Overall Satisfaction
With Services Received: 90%*
• Percentage of Surveyed Customers Respondents Identifying Ways to Improve
Service Delivery: 10%*
*Because Likert scale weighted values are not uniform, the agency cannot compute actual
percentage. Staff’s estimation is provided.
Output Measures
• Number of Customers Surveyed: 3,648
• Number of Customers Served: 1,412,721
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 4
Efficiency Measures
• Cost per Customer Surveyed: $3.27
Explanatory Measures
• Number of Customers Identified: 1,412,721
• Number of Customer Groups Inventoried: 16
Strategy A.1.1. Close the Gaps in Participation and Success by administering
grants and scholarship programs and by promoting access to
higher education
Student Services
Description of Services
The Grants and Special Programs department of the Student Services Division administers
18 grant, scholarship, work-study and exemption programs, which in Fiscal Year 2002
disbursed $116 million through 69,000 awards to students. In Fiscal Year 2003, the
programs disbursed $288 million through 141,092 awards to students. To date in Fiscal
Year 2004, $183 million has been disbursed through 91,611 awards to students. Also, the
department annually publishes and disseminates information about grant, scholarship, and
other programs and activities that improve educational opportunity.
Information Gathering Methods
At the end of spring and fall financial aid workshops, participants were asked to complete a
Likert values questionnaire.
Analysis of Findings
• There were 146 participants at the spring workshop.
• Approximately 96 percent of the participants completed the evaluation.
• 76 percent believed the information presented was useful.
• 58 percent believed their questions were answered.
• 73 percent believed the handouts were helpful.
Conclusion
The staff must more thoroughly answer attendees’ questions and strengthen the procedure
by which handouts and printed material are developed.
Participation and Success
Description of Services
The Participation and Success Division is responsible primarily for achieving the
participation and success goals of Closing the Gaps by 2015—specifically, to close the gaps
in, participation and success in Texas higher education. Division activities are directed at
increasing the level of students’ preparedness for participation and success in higher
education and increasing the effectiveness and productivity of educator recruitment,
preparation, and retention efforts in the state.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 5
Information Gathering Methods
At the 19th Annual Recruitment and Retention Conference held June 2003, attendees were
asked to complete a Likert scale questionnaire. Open-ended questions were included so
that quantitative and qualitative evaluations of key aspects of the conference were collected.
Analysis of Findings
• There were 700 participants.
• Approximately 5 percent of the participants completed the evaluation.
• Overall conference evaluation rating: 3.0 on a 4.0 scale (evaluation rating:
4 = Excellent; 3 = Good; 2= Fair; 1 = Poor).
• Evaluation categories: workshops, meeting rooms, registration process, hotel
accommodations, food, and conference reception.
Each of the 65 workshops received ratings in several areas, including clarity of objectives,
materials, and relevance. A list of comments was collected and studied in an effort to
improve next year’s conference.
Conclusion
The success and value of the conference is reflected in the increasing number and diversity
of people who participate. The highest ranked strengths of the conference were the:
1) ability to network,
2) value of information presented,
3) variety of topics discussed, and
4) quality of speakers.
The major recommendation was to have more interactive sessions and more participation by
the students in the GO Theatre motivational teams. The participants liked the hotel size,
location, meeting rooms, and food. In planning the event for 2004, the conference director
has scheduled additional interactive sessions, more performances by the GO Theatre
motivational teams, and invited more high school and college students to participate.
Strategy A.1.2. Administer the Hinson-Hazlewood College Student Loan
Program
Description of Services
The Loan Program Operations department of the Student Services Division is responsible
for administering various state and federally sponsored student financial assistance
programs, including the Hinson-Hazlewood College Student Loan Program, which consists
of seven loan portfolios with over $600 million in outstanding loans and a yearly loan volume
of $50-$60 million. The division also collects and maintains data necessary for estimating
the need for various types of student financial assistance and for the allocation of funds
through those programs to participating institutions. Student Services also publishes and
disseminates information about financial assistance programs, residency, and educational
opportunity.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 6
Information Gathering Methods
Student Services collects, measures, and evaluates data from the Coordinating Board’s
Telecommunications System to assess the service provided to customers. Calls are
automatically logged. Data evaluated includes the total number of calls answered total
number of calls not answered, number of agents answering calls, percent of calls not
answered, and average speed of responses.
Analysis of Findings
• In Fiscal Year 2003, 257,044 calls were received.
• The average response time was 11 seconds, with 1 percent of calls not answered.
• For Fiscal Year 2004 to date (Septermber1, 2003 through April 30, 2004) 181,377
have been received with an average response time of 11 seconds, with 1 percent of
calls not answered.
Conclusion
The agency continues to meet and exceed its goals by answering 99 percent of our calls
within 11 seconds.
Website Improvements
Calls received by the Student Services Division frequently regard the agency’s College for
Texans website which provides information about financial aid programs and the Lightning
Fast website which provides customer access to loan and account information 24 hours a
day. Most of the comments received in 2002 were requests for more detailed loan
information on the Lightning Fast website and for the ability to pay loans online or through
automatic draft.
Conclusion
Based on customer requests for more on-line services and more detailed information, the
agency redesigned the websites in 2003 and implemented automatic draft service for
monthly loan payments.
Some of the improvements made to the website include:
• Modifications to how information is pulled from the mainframe to speed movement
between pages
• Creation of a payment coupon page that borrowers can print and include with their
payment
• Addition of interest-paid information for tax purposes
• Breakdown of payment applications (annual basis)
• Information regarding status of loan applications
• Provision of a 10-day payoff balance
The automatic draft service was implemented in spring 2003, and 1,612 customers
presently use this service.
Strategy A.2.1. Close the Gaps in Excellence by coordinating and evaluating
university programs, community and technical college programs,
and health programs
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 7
Universities and Health-Related Institutions (UHRI)
Description of Services
The Universities department of the division coordinates oversight of academic matters at 35
public university campuses. The division handles accreditation information, certification of
private institutions, review of existing and proposed degree programs, off-campus courses,
role and mission statements and table of programs, and distance education policy
development and administration. The department approves core curricula, maintains course
and program inventories, and works with the Community and Technical Colleges Division on
field of study and transfer-related issues.
The Health-Related Institutions department of the division coordinates the state's oversight
of health professions education and related academic matters at health science centers and
universities. Additionally, the staff administers a variety of residency, medical education,
rotation, compensation, and preceptorship programs for graduate medical education.
Responsibilities also include studies and analyses of health professions, and
recommendation on Board policies and legislation related to the health professions.
Information Gathering Methods
The UHRI Division gathers information on customer satisfaction levels through a survey of
chief academic officers at public universities and health-related institutions. The chief
academic officers are the principal institutional representatives in contact with UHRI staff.
The survey assessed satisfaction with staff’s:
• Timeliness (response time);
• Knowledge;
• Information;
• Professionalism; and
• Concern for customers.
Analysis of Findings
• 17 universities, 1 system office, and 8 health science centers responded.
• 81 percent responded that the Coordinating Board website is helpful.*
• 96 percent responded that Coordinating Board staff is timely.*
• 100 percent responded that Coordinating Board staff is knowledgeable.*
• 100 percent responded that information received is appropriate.*
• 100 percent responded that Coordinating Board staff is courteous and professional.**
• 100 percent responded that Coordinating Board staff demonstrated concern about
customer needs.*
* response was “agree strongly” or “agree somewhat”
** response was “agree strongly”
Conclusion
Most respondents found the UHRI portion of the Coordinating Board website easy to use
and helpful, but the responses indicated a slightly lower level of satisfaction with the web
resources than with the personal, phone, or email assistance they received. Coordinating
Board staff are currently redesigning web resources, and customer comments and
suggestions have been sought as the project proceeds. This is an agency-wide project
which should increase customer satisfaction with the agency’s web resources overall.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 8
The survey instrument will be used annually instead of bi-annually beginning with Fiscal
Year 2004. Responses will be collaged for inclusion in the bi-annual report to the
Legislature.
Community and Technical Colleges
Description of Services
The Community and Technical Colleges Division administers federal postsecondary
technical and vocational funds and plans and participates in workforce development
programs and services. In addition, the division handles adult vocational courses,
apprenticeships, creation of new community colleges, compliance monitoring, course and
program inventories, discretionary grants, formula allocation, general academic offerings,
and proprietary schools.
Information Gathering Methods
The Community and Technical Colleges Division conducted a workshop in Fiscal Year 2003
to provide technical assistance to representatives of the two-year colleges regarding the
specific use of the Workforce Education Course Manual (WECM), Guidelines for
Instructional Programs in Workforce Education (GIPWE), and general information to assist
in development and implementation of workforce programs.
The evaluation instruments for the workshop included Likert scale items regarding the
helpfulness of the topics addressed. Both workshop evaluations included an open-ended
question for general comments or suggestions.
Analysis of Findings
• 163 of the 217 workshop participants submitted completed evaluations (75.1 percent
response rate).
The Likert scale questions received responses as follows (5=very helpful to 1=not
helpful):
o Suitability of meeting facilities 4.0
o Usefulness of handouts 4.1
o Overall satisfaction with workshop 3.8
o WECM projects 3.9
o Nuts and Bolts, Part I 3.9
o Nuts and Bolts, Part II 3.8
o Coordinating Board Update 3.3
For the open-ended questions provided at the end of the evaluation, the majority of the
respondents provided positive comments. Suggested improvements included conducting
the workshop via teleconferencing and offering two workshop tracks for beginners and
advanced users of the electronic systems.
Conclusion
Owing to anticipated budget constraints in the near term, staff agreed that offering the
workshop via teleconferencing may be the best alternative to reach the widest audience. In
addition, offering two workshops to address concerns of beginners and advanced users will
be implemented.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 9
Strategy A.2.2. Close the Gaps in Research by administering and evaluating
research programs.
Research
Description of Services
The Coordinating Board administers the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and other
research-related efforts for Texas’ higher education institutions. Sponsored programs
officers, research executives, and research scientists and engineers at 45 public and private
institutions participated in the 2003 ATP grants competition.
Information Gathering Methods
The Research department of the Finance, Campus Planning, and Research Division gathers
feedback regarding changes to 1) the grants competition 2) program grant conditions 3) the
electronic submissions process; and 4) the Technology Development and Transfer Progam
survey.
Participating institutional research officers and all submitting principal investigators are
surveyed electronically at the close of the grants competition. A summary of the survey
results is provided to the Coordinating Board's Advisory Committee on Research Programs
for consideration at its pre-competition planning meeting.
Also, the ATP grant competitions require interaction with potential and recruited
reviewers who evaluate all proposals submitted by the institutions. The Research
department provides administrative support and guidance regarding review procedures and
state priorities. Feedback is obtained through 1) e-mail and telephone contacts; 2) pre-
review sessions to provide information and answer questions; and 3) surveys of the
reviewers at the close of the grants competition.
In addition, an external evaluation of the ATP is conducted each biennium. The panel meets
with representatives from the Senate Finance Committee, the Governor's Office of Budget
and Planning, and the House Appropriations Committee, as well as institutional research
officers, principal investigators, reviewers, participating industrial partners and high school
teachers.
Analysis of Findings
The key findings of the most recent post-competition surveys are:
• 92 percent of responding institutional research officers described the Coordinating
Board as “very responsive and helpful” in their interactions.
• 95 percent of responding reviewers termed their general interactions with the
Coordinating Board as “very good.”
• Nearly 100 percent of all respondents favored the move to a fully electronic proposal
submission and review system that has been implemented.
• 94 percent of the responding reviewers found the on-line proposal review system
either “very easy to use” or “easy to use.”
Conclusion
Suggestions and comments from principal investigators, institutional research officers and
reviewers are incorporated into the external panel's final report, which is presented at a
Coordinating Board quarterly meeting and distributed to the Advisory Committee on
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 10
Research Programs, the executive officers, and participating legislative offices. This
feedback is used to improve the ATP grants competition, the administration of the grants,
and the dissemination of the impact of the projects.
Strategy A.3.1 Provide Planning and Information Services to Close the Gaps
Planning and Information Resources
Description of Services
The Planning and Information Resources Division is responsible for the development of the
agency’s Strategic Plan and the State’s Higher Education Plan, forecasting enrollments,
coordinating an annual training program for university regents, and producing a wide range
of reports and studies on higher education issues.
Information Gathering Methods
No formal customer service assessment given in Fiscal Year 2003-2004.
Analysis of Findings
Not applicable
Finance
Description of Services
The Finance department of the Finance, Campus Planning and Research Division works
with Formula Advisory Committees to review and revise formula funding recommendations
for community and technical colleges, universities, and health-related institutions. The
recommended formulas are presented to the Coordinating Board and the formulas approved
by the Board are used in calculating the formula funding recommendations for the next
legislative session. The committees are comprised of presidents, provosts, business
officers, and faculty members.
Information Gathering Methods
No formal customer assessment conducted is conducted. Feedback on performance is
usually informal and may consist of phone calls, e-mail, and written comments. The Finance
Department will continue to use formula advisory committees to get feedback on the formula
recommendation process.
Analysis of Findings
Not applicable
Campus Planning
Description of Services
The Campus Planning department of the Finance, Campus Planning, and Research Division
collects, compiles, maintains and evaluates data regarding cost, efficiency and space use to
ensure efficient use of construction funds and the orderly development of physical plants to
accommodate projected student enrollments.
Information Gathering Methods
An evaluation form, using Likert scale values, is given to participants at the biennial
Facilities Conference.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 11
Analysis of Findings
2004 Conference Evaluation:
• Approximately 500 people attended the 2004 conference.
• 93 percent of the attendees indicated the conference was a satisfactory experience.
• 96 percent were satisfied with the facilities.
• 91 percent were satisfied with the general sessions.
• 89 percent agreed that the information presented at the workshops was directly
useful to their work.
Conclusion
Overall, the facilities conference met the needs of the respondents. Future changes should
focus on improvements for providing post-conference, topic-related ancillary information.
Campus Planning will continue to make adjustments to its procedures based on feedback
from its customers through advisory committees, facilities conference evaluations, and
informal feedback.
Strategy F.1.3. Close the Gaps in Participation and Success by administering
statewide federal grants programs: Teacher Quality Grants
Program
Description of Services
The Teacher Quality Grants Program (formerly known as the Eisenhower Professional
Development Program) in the Participation and Success Division provides approximately
$5.6 million annually in competitive grants to institutions of higher education. The grants
support partnerships between the institutions of higher education and local school districts
for professional development of teachers of grades 6 to 12 mathematics and science.
Approximately 70 to 80 grant-funded partnerships per year provide teachers with summer
coursework and year-round professional development in mathematics and science to
improve instruction and student achievement in secondary schools across the state.
Information Gathering Methods
Each year the teachers who participated in Teacher Quality projects are surveyed by mail
and asked to complete the Teacher Quality Evaluation regarding their experiences in the
summer courses and professional development activities. The survey instrument is
designed to measure customer satisfaction and program impact on teachers.
Analysis of Findings
About 65 percent of the 2,100 teachers surveyed return the survey instrument. The
teachers’ responses generally are positive, as indicated by the summary below:
• 95 percent of teachers reported that the summer course objectives in academically
rigorous mathematics and science content were met.
• 90 percent of teachers reported that the understanding and achievement of their
students in mathematics and science was improved by their participation in the
Teacher Quality project.
• 62 percent of math and science teachers teaching "out of field" reported that the
Teacher Quality summer courses helped them progress toward certification in
math/science.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 12
• 70 percent of teachers reported that the Teacher Quality courses helped them
progress toward a master’s degree in math/science, if they did not already have the
degree, or helped them complete an academic major in math/science, if they did not
already have one.
• 95 percent of teachers reported that they remained in the teaching profession as a
result of their experiences in the Teacher Quality Program.
Conclusion
The results from the 2002 Teacher Quality Evaluation surveys from the participants showed
that teachers were extremely satisfied with their experiences in the program. The significant
incentives and professional development opportunities for the teachers participating in the
program appear to have been influential in retaining mathematics and science teachers in
the Texas teacher workforce.
THECB Report on Customer Service Page 13