5.6.4 NMAC

TITLE 5 POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

CHAPTER 6 POST-SECONDARY ENROLLMENT AND DATA REPORTING

PART 4 ENROLLMENT VERIFICATION

5.6.4.1 ISSUING AGENCY: State of New Mexico Higher Education Department.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.1 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.1, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.2 SCOPE: All public post-secondary educational institutions operating within and receiving financial support from the state of New Mexico.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.2 NMAC - Rn, 5 NMAC 6.4.2, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.3 STATUTORY AUTHORITY: Authority for 5.6.4 NMAC is found in Section 21-1-26.3, NMSA 1978.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.3 NMAC - Rn, 5 NMAC 6.4.3, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.4 DURATION: Permanent.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.4 NMAC - Rn, 5 NMAC 6.4.4, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.5 EFFECTIVE DATE: December 31, 1998, unless a later date is cited at the end of a section.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.5 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.5, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.6 OBJECTIVE:

A. An on-site enrollment verification visit will be scheduled at each institution and campus at least once every five years. If earlier verification visits and procedures indicate problem areas in reporting, the verification schedule and department consultation with the campus will be on a more frequent basis.

B. The objectives of an on-site enrollment verification of campus data submissions to the department are:

(1) Clarify department data requirements, definition and procedures with campus personnel.

(2) Evaluate campus compliance with department data submission guidelines and policies, especially as such compliance affects calculations for enrollment funding.

(3) Identify problem areas regarding clarity of department policies and procedures or campus compliance with department data requirements.

(4) Solicit institutional assistance in refining department data elements, submission procedures and data use.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.6 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.6, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.7 DEFINITIONS: [RESERVED]

5.6.4.8 PRINCIPLES GUIDING ENROLLMENT VERIFICATION: The on-site department data verification will be done by the department staff, with additional assistance if warranted by the content and scope of the verification. The verification process includes the following:

A. Arrangements will be made with the institution, including dates of the visit and data to be provided by the institution to the verification team.

B. Preparation of the department data to be used in conjunction with the visit.

C. Meetings with institutional administration at beginning and end of the verification visit to discuss objectives, procedures, time frame and follow-up.

D. Preliminary report of the visit shared with institution for review and comment.

E. Final report which contains the data elements and institutional procedures that were examined, the findings and summaries of concerns or problems, recommended corrective action and suggestions as to modifications in department definitions, submission procedures or data use.

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.8 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.8, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.9 MAJOR AREAS OF VERIFICATION:

A. Is the degree credit student population reported correctly in the department student file submissions and can the differences in data between the student file and the registrars enrollment report to the department on student enrollments be reconciled?

B. Is the course-section population reported correctly on the department course file and do the credits reported correspond with those reported on the student file?

C. Are the credits for which the degree-credit student population registered by the census date properly reported?

D. Does the tuition paid by students correspond to the credits which are reported on the department student and course files?

E. Are department data collected and transmitted in an accurate and timely manner?

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.9 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.9, 7/31/05]

5.6.4.10 VERIFICATION PROCEDURES: A more detailed description of the verification process follows as it relates to each of the concerns addressed above. Both the areas to be reviewed and the materials and data needed for such a review are discussed.

A. Student population: Is the degree-credit student population reported correctly in the department student and course file submissions? This is the most critical area for review in the verification process, since the student population determines the amount of enrollment funding allocated to each institution or campus. Student enrollments are to be reported as of the census date. The student population should not include early withdrawals, late registrants or those students who have made no financial commitment to complete registration. It also should not include students enrolled in extension classes, continuing education courses or non-credit vocational programs.

(1) Late registrants are students who register after the census date. They should not be included in the department data submissions. Campuses should recognize cut-off dates in order to maintain reporting integrity. Campus data must reflect the census date and department guidelines in order to ensure that the student population reported is eligible for funding. Procedure:

(a) Review campus late registration policies and department census date cut-off procedures.

(b) Compare campus lists of late registrants with department student and course lists to show if any late registrants were submitted to the department. Check registration activity close to census date.

(2) Noncommitted students are those who have completed the registration process but have not paid required tuition and fees and have made no arrangement or commitment for doing so by the department census date. Since a student who does not pay appropriate tuition and fees will eventually have his/her registration canceled and not receive credit for any work begun, students with no serious financial commitment toward registration should not be included in the student population as bona fide enrollees. Campuses should have clearly specified policies and procedures for determining whether a student has made a financial commitment by the census date. Procedure:

(a) Review campus policies regarding financial commitment as a part of registration and procedures to identify and follow up on noncommitted students.

(b) Compare campus list of students with no financial commitment by the census date with the department student and course files to identify the extent of reporting of such students.

(3) Withdrawals for the purposes of department data are students who register for courses but withdraw completely from the institution by the department census date. Students who have withdrawn by the census date should not be included on the department student or course files. Procedure:

(a) Review campus policies and procedures for identifying and processing students who withdraw and for ensuring that these students are not included in the department data submissions.

(b) Compare campus lists of withdrawn students and lists of student fee reimbursements with department student and course file data to ensure that those students withdrawn by the census date are not on the department files.

(4) Materials needed for review process:

(a) printouts of department student and course files;

(b) list of class schedules by student as of the census date;

(c) list of students who registered after the census date (late registrants), including social security number, course-sections and credits;

(d) list of students who withdrew from the institution, including social security number, course-sections, credits and withdrawal date;

(e) list of students who had registered but not made a financial commitment by the census date, including social security number and amount owed;

(f) list of students whose registration was canceled for the term due to nonpayment of fees.

B. Course-section population: Should the course-sections reported to the department be included on the course file, have any sections been missed, or are any sections inappropriately identified? Sections to be reported are those in which students were registered by the date of record, were part of the institution's academic mission, were paid for out of the institution's instructional budget, and were taught as a part of load. Sections not to be reported include extension, continuing education and non-credit vocational courses. Courses paid for by restricted funds must be identified separately so they may be removed from funding calculations.

(1) Off-campus or extension courses are considered self-supporting and are not to be reported to the department. Procedure:

(a) Review campus definitions of off-campus courses and procedures to avoid including them in department data submissions.

(b) Compare campus list of off-campus courses and the printed campus schedule of courses or timetable with department course file.

(2) Courses paid for in whole or in part by restricted funds must be identified so the resulting credits are not included in funding calculations. Procedure:

(a) Compare campus list of restricted funds sections with the department course file and hard-copy data on restricted credits.

(b) Compare campus list of faculty and salary by funding source from the payroll with department staff and course file data.

(3) Course numbering policies and practices of the four-year institutions impact enrollment funding calculations since funding by level of instruction is based on the course numbers of the sections generating the credits. Procedure:

(a) Review institutional policies on course numbering.

(b) Check prerequisites, course requirements and eligibility of course for undergraduate or graduate credit for a sample of upper division and graduate sections.

(c) Compare course numbers of a sample of upper division and graduate sections with a campus list of enrollments in those sections by student classification (level of student).

(4) Materials needed for review process:

(a) printouts of department course and staff files;

(b) campus schedule of courses or timetable;

(d) list of faculty and salary by funding source from payroll.

C. Student choice: Are the credits for which the student population registered by the census date properly reported? Since credits reported are used to generate enrollment funding, all reported credits should be valid and appropriate.

(1) Add/drop transactions may impact considerably the reporting of student credits to the department. It is critical that all add and drop transactions made on or before the census date be included in the department submission and that all transactions after that date not be reflected in department data. Procedure:

(a) Review campus processed add/drop forms, campus processing procedures and campus policies as to when the "add" or "drop" is official.

(b) Review the add/drop processing lists by week to determine whether there are significant "adds" prior to the census date and significant "drops" after that date. Sample adds after the census date to determine whether they were included erroneously in the department submissions. Sample "drops" before the census date to determine whether their processing was delayed until after the department files were submitted.

(2) Tuition payments by student should correspond with student credits for which they were registered as reported on the department data files. Resident or non-resident tuition charges should be based on the department residency policy. Procedure:

(a) Compare data on fee collections with credits, residence status and tuition special status on the department student file.

(b) Review campus procedures for determining residence status for evidence of accuracy of campus records.

(3) Materials needed for review process:

(a) printouts of department student and course files;

(b) list of all course-section "adds" and "drops" by date of transactions, including social security number, course-section number, credits, add or drop indicator;

[12/31/98; 5.6.4.10 NMAC - Rn & A, 5 NMAC 6.4.10, 7/31/05]

History OF 5.6.4 NMAC:

Pre-NMAC History: The material in this part was derived from that previously filed with the State Records Center and Archives under:

BEF Rule 630, Enrollment Verification, 2/27/85.

History of Repealed Material: [RESERVED]