Minority-Serving Higher Education Institutions: Analysis of Selected Institutional and Student Characteristics

Order Code RL32674 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Minority-Serving Higher Education Institutions: Analysis of Selected Institutional and Student Characteristics November 16, 2004 Charmaine Mercer Analyst in Social Legislation Domestic Social Policy Division James B. Stedman Specialist in Social Legislation Domestic Social Policy Division Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress Minority-Serving Higher Education Institutions: Analysis of Selected Institutional and Student Characteristics Summary Federal education policy recognizes different groups of minority-serving institutions (MSIs) of higher education and targets financial resources to them. As the Congress considers the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA), it will be deliberating on programs directing aid to MSIs. In this report, selected characteristics of five MSI groups are analyzed. This analysis helps to address several questions relevant to federal policymaking. These include how MSIs are defined, the role they play in educating minority students, the diversity within and among MSIs, their geographic distribution, and the racial, ethnic, and income characteristics of their students. This report will be updated as warranted by major legislative or other relevant developments. For the purposes of this analysis MSIs include all Title IV eligible institutions that are in at least one of the following groups: majority-minority institutions (MMIs) — institutions where minority enrollment exceeds 50% of total enrollment; historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) — institutions eligible for HEA, Title III, Part B; Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs) — institutions where full-time undergraduate enrollment is at least 25% Hispanic; tribal colleges and universities (TCUs) — institutions eligible for HEA, Title III, Section 316; and Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions (ANNHIs) — current recipients of HEA aid targeted to these institutions (undergraduate enrollment is at least 20% Alaska Native or 10% Native Hawaiian). Some institutions are in more than one MSI group. Certain institutional and student characteristics are shared by many MSIs, yet there is substantial diversity among these institutions. A significant portion of MSIs in the aggregate are two-year public institutions (41%). Yet, nearly all HBCUs are four-year institutions (87%). Most MSIs are small, often enrolling fewer than 1,000 students; yet 10% of HSIs enroll 20,000 or more students. MSIs are located primarily in the southern and coastal states, many in areas with high concentrations of particular racial/ethnic groups. Though most states have MSIs, a few have none. The total students in each group of MSIs differs markedly — some 13,000 undergraduates are in ANNHIs, but over 2 million are in MMIs. Students in MSIs are predominantly from minority backgrounds — ranging from about 60% to over 80% of undergraduate enrollment. MSIs play an important role in educating minority students, often accounting for large shares of students from different minority groups (MSIs in the aggregate enroll 61% of all Hispanic undergraduates). Nevertheless, with the exception of Hispanic students, the majority of students from individual minority groups do not attend MSIs. Large percentages of students at some MSIs are low income. MSIs account for significant shares of all undergraduate degrees awarded to minorities, particularly for Hispanics (HSIs award more than 40% of Hispanic Bachelors degrees). The relative distribution of fields in which these degrees are awarded does not differ for most MSIs from that of all undergraduate degrees. Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Informing Federal Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Defining the Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Majority-Minority Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Historically Black Colleges and Universities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Hispanic-Serving Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Tribal Colleges and Universities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Minority-Serving Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Postsecondary Education Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Characteristics of MSIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Institutional Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Type and Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Highest Degree Awarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Enrollment Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Student Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Race and Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Economic Status of Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Undergraduate Degrees Awarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 List of Figures Figure 1. Geographic Distribution of MSIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 2. Geographic Distribution of MMIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 3. Geographic Distribution of HBCUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 4. Geographic Distribution of HSIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 5. Geographic Distribution of TCUs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Figure 6. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within MMIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 7. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within HBCUs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Figure 8. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within HSIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 9. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within ANNHIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Figure 10. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within TCUs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 11. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within MSIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 12. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within “Universe” of Institutions, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 List of Tables Table 1. Groups of Institutions by Type and Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Table 2. Highest Degree Awarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Table 3. Distribution of MSIs by Enrollment Size, Fall 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Table 4. MSI Undergraduate Enrollment, Fall 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 5. Number and Percentage of Undergraduates by Institutional Group and Race/Ethnicity, Fall 2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 6. Share of All Minority Undergraduates in MSIs, Fall 2001 . . . . . . . . . . 14 Table 7. Share of Undergraduate Enrollment Receiving Pell Grants, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Table 8. Undergraduate Degrees Awarded by MSIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Table 9. Share of All Minority Undergraduate Degrees Awarded by Different Groups of MSIs, 2001-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Minority-Serving Higher Education Institutions: Analysis of Selected Institutional and Student Characteristics Introduction Federal education policy recognizes different groups of minority1-serving institutions (MSIs) of higher education and targets financial resources to them.2 As the Congress considers the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act (HEA), it will be deliberating on key programs directing aid to these institutions.3 A better understanding of the diversity and range of attributes of the various groups of institutions that are often collectively described as MSIs may assist in this federal policymaking process. This report analyzes selected characteristics of the institutions and students making up five separate MSI groups of institutions — majority-minority institutions (MMIs), historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs), Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions (ANNHIs), and tribal colleges and universities (TCUs). The definition of each of these groups of institutions is provided below. Data on MSIs in the aggregate are also analyzed. Informing Federal Policy The MSIs analyzed here are tied directly to current federal programs and provisions (see following section). This analysis will help address a number of basic background questions relevant to federal policymaking for MSIs. Among these questions are the following: 1 For the purposes of this analysis, minority means any individual belonging to any of the following groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black (not of Hispanic origin), and Hispanic. 2 For additional information regarding federal funding for minority-serving institutions see CRS Report RL32396, Federal Funding for Minority-Serving Institutions of Higher Education, by Charmaine Jackson. 3 Relevant HEA programs include Institutional Aid (Title III), Developing Institutions (Title V), and Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (Title III). These are all administered by the Department of Education. Among relevant programs administered outside of the Department of Education are the Educational Partnership Program with Minority Serving Institutions (Department of Commerce), and the Minority University Research and Education Program (National Aeronautics and Space Administration). CRS-2 ! ! ! ! ! ! How are MSIs defined and what are the implications of those definitions? What role do MSIs play in educating minority students, particularly with regard to number and proportion of minority students served? How different or similar are the several groups of MSIs? How do they differ within groups, across groups, and from postsecondary education institutions in general? How many and what types of degrees do MSIs award? Do they award the full range of postsecondary degrees? How widely distributed are MSIs across the country? Are there states with no direct ties to MSIs? What are the racial, ethnic, and income characteristics of students served by these schools? The answers that emerge from this analysis may assist in deliberation on federal policies and support for these institutions primarily because they help paint a more complete picture of the MSIs. Consider, for example, the two primary and different ways in which the federal government has defined MSIs — by the historical role they have played in educating minority populations (e.g., HBCUs) or by the current composition of their student body (e.g., HSIs). These two approaches may have some effect on the reach of these MSIs among all minority students. It may not be surprising that HSIs, identified by the current level of their Hispanic enrollment, serve a majority of all Hispanic undergraduates. In contrast, as shown in this analysis, a majority of all other minority undergraduates are being educated outside of the MSIs. As another example, it may be important for policy purposes to understand that, while the MSIs share some common characteristics (e.g., most are two-year institutions), there is significant diversity within and across MSI groups (e.g., over 80% of HBCUs are four-year institutions). Policymaking premised solely on basic similarities among all MSIs may be less effective than efforts that also recognize diversity across these institutions. Finally, there are limitations to the present analysis with regard to federal policymaking. This report addresses selected characteristics of the MSIs. It is beyond its scope to address a wider range of issues that are potentially relevant to federal policymaking. Possible issues include the effectiveness of MSIs in educating minority students, the impact of federal support on these institutions, and the education of minority students in general. Defining the Groups This section defines the groups of minority-serving institutions that are included in the analyses presented in this report. Although the groups of MSIs are distinct, membership is not exclusive. As a result, a single institution can be classified in more than one group. To a large extent, all MSI groupings were constructed based upon definitions found in the HEA, specifically Titles III and V. As a result, all of the institutions examined in this report (MSIs and a comparison group of institutions) are degree-granting, two-year and four-year institutions that are either public or private, non-profit. Proprietary institutions are not eligible to participate in HEA CRS-3 Title III and V and, hence, none could be considered to be MSIs for this analysis.4 They are also excluded from the comparison group of schools (see below) to allow for a more accurate comparison with MSIs. The MSIs and the institutions included in the comparison group are limited further to those that also meet the eligibility criteria for participation in the student aid programs under Title IV of the HEA.5 Majority-Minority Institutions. MMIs are identified by the percentage of an institution’s student body that can be identified as a racial or ethnic minority. Specifically, MMIs are those institutions whose enrollment of a single minority or a combination of minorities exceeds 50% of the total student enrollment. This follows the HEA’s Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program (MSEIP) definition for minority-serving institution.6 For the purposes of this analysis, each institution’s minority enrollment percentage was calculated by dividing the reported racial/ethnic minority student population by the total student enrollment, resulting in 474 institutions being defined as MMIs. Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Institutions are classified as HBCUs if they are eligible to receive a grant under Title III, Part B of the HEA. To qualify for a grant under Title III, Part B of the HEA an institution must have been established prior to 1964 and have as its principal mission the education of African Americans. This is an historical designation, not one predicated on the current racial composition of the institutions. As a result, several HBCUs are majority white in terms of enrollment. There are 102 institutions classified as HBCUs for this analysis.7 4 For additional information regarding Title III eligible institutions, see CRS Report RL31647, Reauthorization of Title III and Title V of the Higher Education Act: Issues for the 108th Congress, by Charmaine Jackson. 5 This additional requirement, which is not specified in Title III or Title V, is intended to limit institutions to those meeting a broader array of eligibility requirements that are shared across these HEA titles (e.g., being accredited). This has a very small impact on only some MSI groups and on the comparison group. To be eligible for Title IV student assistance, a postsecondary institution must: be licensed or otherwise legally authorized to provide postsecondary education in the state in which it is located; be accredited by an agency recognized for that purpose by the Secretary of Education; and be deemed eligible and certified to participate in federal student aid programs by the Department of Education. For additional information on institutional eligibility for Title IV student aid, see CRS Report RL31926, Institutional Eligibility for Participation in Title IV Student Aid Programs Under the Higher Education Act: Background and Issues, by Rebecca R. Skinner. 6 Unlike the MSEIP, the definition of MMI used in this analysis includes Asian Americans; MSEIP does not include Asian Americans in its definition of minority students. 7 Using the Title III, Part B eligibility criteria to select institutions for inclusion in the HBCU category produces a group that is slightly different from some other listings of HBCUs. Specifically, both Mary Holmes College (MS) and Morris Brown College (GA) are ineligible to receive Title III aid due to their loss of accreditation, thus they are excluded from this analysis. In addition, Title III, Part B, Section 326 provides grants to 18 selected institutions based on their contribution to certain professional fields. Charles Drew University of Medicine and Science (CA) is included in this analysis because it is one of the 18 designated institutions, although not always included in listings of HBCUs. Finally, (continued...) CRS-4 Hispanic-Serving Institutions. HSIs analyzed in this research are intended to approximate the definition of an eligible HSI appearing in Title V of the HEA. The ones included here were identified by the Department of Education (ED) in its Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) for FY2001-FY2002. An institution received this designation if at least 25% of its full time, undergraduate student enrollment is Hispanic. There are 237 institutions identified as HSIs for this analysis.8 Tribal Colleges and Universities. The TCUs selected for inclusion in this analysis are the institutions that are eligible for grants under Title III, Part A Section 316 of the HEA. Section 316 defines TCUs as institutions identified by Section 2 of the Tribally Controlled College or University Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801) or those that are included in the Equity in Educational Land Grant Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301).9 For this report, there are 30 institutions10 identified as TCUs. Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions. The institutions included in this group currently receive a grant under Title III, Part A, Section 317. An institution is eligible for a grant under this section if at least 20% of its undergraduate students are Alaska Native or 10% are Native Hawaiian.11 There are eight institutions defined as ANNHIs for this analysis. 7 (...continued) although Hinds Community College (MS) is included in this analysis, the enrollment figures are not limited to the Utica Campus, which is the designated HBCU. Hinds reports enrollment figures to the Department of Education for all six of its campuses collectively. The total student enrollment, as well as the racial/ethnic composition of the entire community college was included in this analysis. 8 The full range of HSI eligibility requirements for Title V, Part A (Hispanic-Serving Institutions) of the HEA cannot be applied due to data limitations. To qualify as an HSI for the purposes of Title V, an institution must have at least 25% full time, Hispanic undergraduate student enrollment, and not less than 50% of its Hispanic student population must be low income. These latter data are not available. In addition, eligible institutions must have low educational and general expenditures (E&G), a requisite enrollment of needy students, be legally authorized within its respective state to award Bachelors degrees or be a community college, and be accredited by a nationally or state recognized accrediting agency (Title V, Part A, Section 502). 9 Designated TCUs must also satisfy the needy student requirement and have low E&G, as described in the previous reference for HSIs (HEA, Title III, Part A, Section 312 (b)). 10 This analysis includes institutions that meet the definition of eligibility for Title III, Section 316, have complete data available in IPEDS for 2001-2002, are identified in IPEDS as a tribal college or university, and are Title IV-eligible. Of note, Si Tanka University consists of two campuses: Si Tanka Huron University-Eagle Butte Campus and Si Tanka University Huron-Huron Campus. Only the former campus is identified in IPEDS as a TCU and only data for that campus are included in this analysis. 11 In addition to the percentage requirement, these institutions must also satisfy the eligibility requirements of the HEA, Title III, Part A, Section 312 (b). The currently funded ANNHIs make up this category because the requisite data on racial group membership to determine the full range of eligible institutions are not available. CRS-5 Minority-Serving Institutions. For the purposes of this analysis, MSIs include all Title IV eligible institutions that belong to at least one of the groups of institutions under analysis in this report: majority-minority institutions; historically black colleges and universities; Hispanic-serving institutions; tribal colleges and universities or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions. An institution can be in more than one MSI group. For example, an HBCU can also be an MMI because its undergraduate student population may be greater than 50% minority. There are 550 institutions classified as MSIs for this analysis. Postsecondary Education Institutions. For the purposes of comparing the characteristics of the different groups of MSIs, a “universe” of postsecondary education institutions (PSEIs) was created. The universe is defined as all Title IV eligible, two-year and four-year, public and private, non-profit postsecondary education institutions. The type and control of the MSIs, as noted earlier, dictated the attributes of the comparison group. Thus, institutions that are not eligible for Title IV, exclusively award less than an Associates degree, or are proprietary, are not included in the analysis. The analysis was limited to institutions with these characteristics to allow for an accurate comparison between groups. There are 3,407 postsecondary education institutions included in this analysis. This “universe” of postsecondary institutions also includes any institution that is included in any of the MSI categories previously outlined. Data The data presented in this report are derived primarily from IPEDS. IPEDS is a series of surveys of postsecondary education institutions that gather information on such variables as location, institutional control, types of degrees awarded, the number and minority status of enrolled students, and the number of degrees awarded by field. Institutions participating in the HEA Title IV student aid programs are required to complete the series of surveys annually. The IPEDS data used for this analysis come from surveys of this universe of postsecondary education institutions, and are not derived from survey samples.12 Nevertheless, some of the data reported in IPEDS have been imputed by ED to compensate for missing or erroneous data. Thus, all values presented in this report should be interpreted as estimates. The data on institutional characteristics, including student enrollment, are for fall 2001, while that for degrees completed apply to academic year 2001-2002. The race/ethnicity categories used in this analysis are derived from IPEDS. Currently, IPEDS uses five basic racial/ethnicity categories: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black (not of Hispanic origin), Hispanic, and White (not of Hispanic origin). These categories do not disaggregate data for American Indian, Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, separately. As a result, the student data presented in this report may differ somewhat from the institutional 12 These data were downloaded from ED’s Peer Analysis System and can be found at [http://nces.ed.gov/ipedspas/]. CRS-6 categories. For example, the exact number of Pacific Islanders cannot be ascertained from the IPEDS data because IPEDS data group Pacific Islanders and Asians. The economic status of undergraduate students enrolled at these institutions was determined using ED data on the number of Pell Grant recipients in postsecondary education institutions at any point during the award year 2001-2002.13 Characteristics of MSIs In the following sections, this report analyzes selected institutional characteristics of MSIs — location, size, and highest degree offered — and selected data for students attending MSIs — racial and ethnic group membership of students, income status of students, and degrees awarded. Generally, for each variable, MSIs are compared among themselves and to the selected “universe” of Title IV PSEIs described earlier. Institutional Characteristics MSIs differ among themselves, and often with PSEIs in general, with regard to their location, size, and highest degree offered. As is explored below, some of the differences are substantial. At the same time, some attributes characterize the majority of MSIs. Type and Control. A significant portion of the MSIs are two-year public institutions (40.5%). Most notably, 53.3% of TCUs are two-year public institutions, as are nearly half of all HSIs (46.8%). In contrast, nearly half (47.1%) of all HBCUs are four-year private, non-profit institutions and another 40.2% are four-year public schools. Information on institutional type and control is presented in Table 1. Table 1. Groups of Institutions by Type and Control Institutional group Four-year public Four-year private, nonprofit Two-year public Two-year private, nonprofit MMIs 18.9% 32.1% 38.4% 10.5% HBCUs 40.2% 47.1% 10.7% 1.9% HSIs 19.8% 27% 46.8% 6.3% TCUs 16.7% 3.3% 53.3% 26.7% ANNHIs 37.5% 12.5% 50.0% 0% 13 These unpublished data were provided by ED’s Office of Postsecondary Education. For information on the Pell Grant program, see CRS Report for Congress RL31668, Federal Pell Grant Program of the Higher Education Act: Background and Reauthorization, by James B. Stedman. As is discussed below, receipt of Pell Grants is a proxy for students’ economic status. CRS-7 Institutional group Four-year public Four-year private, nonprofit Two-year public Two-year private, nonprofit MSIs 20.3% 30.0% 40.5% 9.0% Title IV PSEIs* 18.7% 45.8% 31.7% 3.8% Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Notes: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numeric data shows that an estimated 18.9% of MMIs are four-year public institutions. All percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. * Excludes proprietary institutions. Highest Degree Awarded. Analysis of MSIs by highest degree awarded reveals that, with the exception of HBCUs and ANNHIs, MSIs are more likely to award only undergraduate degrees. This is particularly true for TCUs, 80% of these institutions solely award an Associates degree (Table 2). In contrast, over a quarter (27%) of all HBCUs offer either a first professional degree14 and/or a doctorate as their highest degree. Table 2. Highest Degree Awarded Institutonal group BA and first prof. MA and first prof. Doctoral and first prof. Doctoral First prof. only** 17.3% 5.9 % 1.0% .4% 2.1% 4.8% 37.2% 22.5% 12.7% .9% .9% 2.9% 9.8% 53.1% 12.2% 19.8% 7.6% 0% .4% 1.6% 5.1% TCUs 80.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% ANNHIs 50.0% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% 0% 0% 0% 12.5% MSIs 49.6% 17.6% 17.8% 6.0% .9% .5% 2.2% 5.3% Title IV PSEIs* 35.5% 17.3% 23.6% 7.5% 1.1% .6 % 3.6% 10.4% AA BA MA MMIs 48.9% 19.4% HBCUs 12.7% HSIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Notes: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numeric data shows that an estimated 48.9% of MMIs award no degree higher than an Associates degree. All percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. 14 Examples of a first professional degree are: Masters of Business of Administration (MBA) or Juris Doctorate (JD). CRS-8 * Excludes proprietary institutions. ** IPEDS makes a distinction between academic and first professional degrees. The academic degrees (e.g., AA and BA) are hierarchically ordered, with the doctorate being the highest. Institutions that award professional degrees are identified separately, and by academic degree they might also award. The degree categories are exclusive, a single institution can only be counted once. Enrollment Size. Most MSIs are small, enrolling fewer than 5,000 students. Further, a significant portion have fewer than 1,000 students (35.1%). For example, as illustrated by Table 3, 90% of TCUs enroll fewer than 1,000 students. But there are some exceptions among the MSI groups. For example, 9.7% of HSIs enroll 20,000 or more students, a higher percentage than for the full population of comparable Title IV postsecondary institutions (4.4%). Table 3. Distribution of MSIs by Enrollment Size, Fall 2001 Institutional group 0-999 Students 1000-4999 Students 5000-9999 Students 10,00019,999 Students 20,000+ Students MMIs 38.4% 31.8% 14.5% 9.9% 5.2% HBCUs 32.3% 48.0% 17.6% 1.9% 0% HSIs 19.8% 31.2% 21.1% 18.4% 9.7% TCUs 90.0% 10.0% 0% 0% 0% ANNHIs 37.5% 25.0% 25.0% 12.5% 0% MSIs 35.1% 32.5% 15.6% 11.1% 5.6% Title IV PSEIs* 30.7% 42.5% 13.5% 8.7% 4.4% Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numeric data shows that an estimated 38.4% of MMIs enroll fewer than 1,000 students. All percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. * Excludes proprietary institutions. Location.15 MSIs are primarily located in southern and coastal parts of the country, though nearly all states have one or more MSIs.16 It is important to note that eight states have no MSIs — Idaho, Nevada, New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Wyoming (see Figure 1). 15 A map illustrating the geographic distribution for ANNHIs is not included because these institutions are solely located in Alaska and Hawaii. 16 The District of Columbia is not visible on these maps. However, there are four institutions in the District of Columbia classified as MMIs, two of which are also HBCUs. CRS-9 The different MSI groups are often located in the areas of the country where there are concentrations of citizens from the respective racial/ethnic group. This pattern can be observed, for example, among HSIs. There are a large concentration of Hispanics in the southern and western states, and, as shown in Figure 4, a majority of HSIs are located in the southern and western regions of the country. The ways in which MSIs are defined may influence this distribution. In contrast to the HSIs, HBCUs, for example, are designated on an historical basis (founded prior to 1964 with a principal mission of educating African Americans), and are not necessarily located in places that today have large concentrations of African Americans. Figure 1. Geographic Distribution of MSIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-10 Figure 2. Geographic Distribution of MMIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Figure 3. Geographic Distribution of HBCUs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-11 Figure 4. Geographic Distribution of HSIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Figure 5. Geographic Distribution of TCUs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-12 Student Characteristics What are some of the socioeconomic characteristics of the students enrolled in minority-serving institutions and how do they differ from all postsecondary students? The following analysis focuses on students’ race and ethnicity, and their economic status. It begins with an overview of the total number of undergraduates in MSIs. In 2001, the aggregate number of students in all of the MSIs analyzed in this report was over 2.8 million (2.6 million of whom were undergraduates). The total number of students enrolled in each group of MSIs varied significantly. Some, such as the TCUs, enrolled few students, while others, such as the HSIs, had substantially higher numbers of students and accounted for significant percentages of all postsecondary education enrollment. Table 4 shows that undergraduate enrollment at MSIs ranged from almost 14,000 (TCUs) to over 2 million students (MMIs). Variation in the MSIs’ percentage share of undergraduate enrollment at comparable Title IV postsecondary institutions was from 0.1% (TCUs) to 16.0% (MMIs). MSIs in the aggregate accounted for 19.6% of total undergraduate enrollment. Table 4. MSI Undergraduate Enrollment, Fall 2001 Institutional group Estimated undergraduate enrollment Estimated share of all undergraduate enrollment in comparable Title IV institutions 2,150,799 16.0% 260,466 1.9% 1,674,652 12.5% TCUs 13,800 0.1% ANNHIs 31,957 0.2% 2,623,641 19.6% 13,414,552 100.0% MMIs HBCUs HSIs MSIs Title IV PSEIs* Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numeric data shows that MMIs enrolled an estimated 2,150,799 undergraduates in 2001, or an estimated 16.0% of all undergraduates. * Excludes proprietary institutions. Race and Ethnicity. Not surprisingly, the enrollment in each of the groups of MSIs is largely minority. In 2001, the portion of undergraduate enrollment in each of the MSI groups that was minority ranged from 58.3% (ANNHIs) to 84.1% (HBCUs and TCUs). In MSIs in the aggregate, 67.1% of undergraduate enrollment was minority. In general, the predominant cohort of minority students within each MSI group reflected the specific minority focus of that institutional sector (e.g., HBCU undergraduate enrollment was 80.9% black). In MMIs, there were two predominant racial/ethnic cohorts — Hispanic students (34.7% of MMI CRS-13 undergraduate enrollment) and black students (25.0% of MMI undergraduate enrollment). These data are provided in Table 5. Table 5. Number and Percentage of Undergraduates by Institutional Group and Race/Ethnicity, Fall 2001 Institutional group Black Hispanic Native American/ Alaska Native Asian/Pacific Islander Total minority* Total undergraduate enrollment Estimated number of undergraduate students MMIs 537,272 745,555 26,303 251,092 1,560,222 2,150,799 HBCUs 210,696 6,164 527 1,580 218,967 260,466 HSIs 160,750 788,679 14,955 130,875 1,095,259 1,674,652 39 120 11,414 30 11,603 13,800 430 661 2,023 15,531 18,645 31,957 564,542 879,676 35,545 281,070 1,760,833 2,623,641 1,497,382 1,455,203 133,068 802,985 3,888,638 13,414,552 TCUs ANNHIs MSIs Title IV PSEIs** Estimated percentage share within each group of institutions MMIs 25.0% 34.7% 1.2% 11.7% 72.5% HBCUs 80.9% 2.4% 0.2% 0.6% 84.1% HSIs 9.6% 47.1% 0.9% 7.8% 65.4% TCUs 0.3% 1.0% 82.7% 0.2% 84.1% ANNHIs 1.3% 2.1% 6.3% 48.6% 58.3% MSIs 21.5% 33.5% 1.4% 10.7% 67.1% Title IV PSEIs** 11.2% 10.8% 1.0% 6.0% 29.0% Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Notes: This table should be read as follows: The first row with numeric data shows the numbers of students enrolled in the MMIs (e.g., MMIs enrolled an estimated 537,272 black students). The first row with percentage values shows the percentage of undergraduates in MMIs who are members of the designated racial or ethnic group (e.g., an estimated 25.0% of MMI undergraduates were black). The undergraduate enrollment totals include non-resident aliens and students whose race/ethnicity was reported as unknown. As a result, the difference between the total minority percentage for each group of institutions and 100% does not equal the non-minority enrollment percentage. *Each entry for Total Minority is equal to the sum of the values in that row for each of the preceding minority groups of students. **Excludes proprietary institutions. CRS-14 In comparison to their shares of undergraduate students, MSIs in the aggregate and many of the MSI subgroups of institutions account for disproportionately large shares of undergraduate minority students. For example, in 2001, MSIs enrolled 19.6% of all undergraduate students (see Table 4), but they enrolled the following shares of specific cohorts of undergraduate minorities — well over half (60.5%) of Hispanics, over a third (37.7%) of blacks, more than a third (35.0%) of Asian/Pacific Islanders, and nearly half (45.3%) of all minority undergraduates (see Table 6). Among Hispanic undergraduates, MMIs and HSIs enrolled 51.2% and 54.2% of Hispanic undergraduates, respectively, in fall 2001.17 Nevertheless, with the exception of Hispanic undergraduates, undergraduate minority students are predominantly enrolled outside of the MSIs. This is true even if one considers the total pool of individual institutions that belong to one or more MSI groups. Table 6. Share of All Minority Undergraduates in MSIs, Fall 2001 MSI group Black Hispanic Native American/ Alaska Native Asian/Pacific Islander Total minority MMIs 35.9% 51.2% 19.8% 31.3% 40.1% HBCUs 14.1% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 5.6% HSIs 10.7% 54.2% 11.2% 16.3% 28.2% TCUs less than 0.1% less than 0.1% 8.6% less than 0.1% 0.3% ANNHIs less than 0.1% less than 0.1% 1.5% 1.9% 0.5% 37.7% 60.5% 26.7% 35.0% 45.3% MSIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numerical data shows that black undergraduates in MMIs constituted an estimated 35.9% of all black undergraduates enrolled in fall 2001. The percentages for each minority group do not add to the total minority percentage. The total minority percentage represents the share of all undergraduate minority students at all Title IV comparable institutions. Economic Status of Students. A substantial percentage of students at some groups of MSIs are low-income (using Pell Grant receipt as a proxy for lowincome status).18 Undergraduates in certain MSIs groups are much more likely to 17 That both of these percentages exceed 50% is due to the relationship among MSI groups explained earlier. MSIs, though distinct, are not exclusive; institutions do fall into more than one MSI group. 18 Most dependent students (in excess of 90%) who receive Pell Grants have family income of less than $40,000; and over 90% of independent students who receive Pell Grants have (continued...) CRS-15 receive Pell Grants — the major federal need-based grant aid for undergraduates — than are their counterparts in other MSIs or the universe of institutions analyzed in this report. As shown in Table 7, in 2001-2002, this was particularly true for HBCUs and TCUs where an estimated 46.8% and 40.9% of undergraduates, respectively, received Pells. These percentages are more than twice that of Pell recipients across all PSEIs in the comparison group (18.9% of undergraduates).19 Table 7. Share of Undergraduate Enrollment Receiving Pell Grants, 2001-2002 Institutional group Pell recipients as estimated percentage of undergraduate enrollment in the institutional group MMIs 21.6% HBCUs 46.8% HSIs 18.8% TCUs 40.9% ANNHIs 12.3% MSIs 21.6% Title IV PSEIs* 18.9% Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data provided by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Postsecondary Education, and the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of data shows that, in 2001-2002, an estimated 21.6% of undergraduates enrolled in MMIs received Pell Grants. *Excludes proprietary institutions. 18 (...continued) family income below $30,000. The financial resources of parents are considered in determining dependent students’ eligibility for Pell Grants; they are not considered for independent students. See CRS Report for Congress RL31668, Federal Pell Grant Program of the Higher Education Act: Background and Reauthorization, by James B. Stedman for a detailed discussion of how Pell Grant eligibility is determined. As has been noted, the information presented here is derived from unpublished data provided by ED’s Pell Grant program office. 19 The undergraduate enrollment data used in these calculations measure the total number of undergraduate students enrolled at any juncture throughout the 2001-2002 academic year, not at a point in time during fall 2001 (as is true with all other enrollment data presented in this report). Given that Pell Grants are awarded to students throughout the award year, it is appropriate to compare those counts to full-year enrollment data. The percentages shown here were derived from two different data sources that may not be strictly comparable. As a result, these percentages are estimates. CRS-16 Undergraduate Degrees Awarded In academic year 2001-2002, with the exception of the TCUs, each of the MSIs awarded more Bachelors than Associates degrees. Though more than half of the undergraduate degrees at MMIs and HSIs were Bachelors degrees, both groups of institutions awarded significant numbers of Associates degrees. Table 8 shows the number of Associates and Bachelors degrees awarded in 2001-2002 by the different groups of MSIs. Table 8. Undergraduate Degrees Awarded by MSIs, 2001-2002 Institutional group Associates degrees Bachelors degrees MMIs 87,095 101,796 HBCUs 4,082 28,703 HSIs 65,217 77,911 TCUs 1,373 159 ANNHIs 1,201 2,867 MSIs 103,517 135,223 Title IV PSEIs* 520,807 1,282,928 Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of data shows that, in 2001-2002, MMIs awarded an estimated 87,095 Associates degrees and an estimated 101,796 Bachelors degrees. *Excludes proprietary institutions. As Table 9 shows, MSIs account for significant portions of the undergraduate degrees earned by different racial and ethnic groups of students; this is particularly true for MMIs and HSIs. For example, HSIs accounted for 55.6% of all Associates degrees awarded to Hispanics and 42.0% of all Hispanic Bachelors degrees. HBCUs and TCUs accounted for relatively large shares of the undergraduate degrees awarded to students from a single racial or ethnic group, at one level of degree — HBCUs accounted for 23.1% of the Bachelor degrees awarded to blacks; TCUs awarded 19.7% of the Associate degrees received by Native American/Alaska Native students. CRS-17 Table 9. Share of All Minority Undergraduate Degrees Awarded by Different Groups of MSIs, 2001-2002 Institutional group MSI group Estimated percentage share of all Associates degrees awarded at Title IV institutions to students from specified minority background Black Native American/ Alaska Native Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander MMIs 34.2% 55.0% 31.1% 42.8% HBCUs 4.0% 0.6% 0.2% 0.2% 13.0% 55.6% 9.9% 21.0% TCUs less than 0.1% less than 0.1% 19.7% less than 0.1% ANNHIs less than 0.1% 0.1% 1.0% 2.5% 35.8% 63.4% 36.0% 45.7% HSIs MSIs Institutional group MSI group Estimated percentage share of all Bachelors degrees awarded at Title IV institutions to students from specified minority background Black Native American/ Alaska Native Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander MMIs 31.9% 37.2% 4.5% 14.4% HBCUs 23.1% 0.2% 0.7% 0.2% 5.8% 42.0% 5.1% 6.5% 0% 0% 1.6% 0% less than 0.1% less than 0.1% 0.7% 2.1% 33.6% 46.2% 9.3% 18.3% HSIs TCUs ANNHIs MSIs Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Note: This table should be read as follows: The first row of numerical data shows that MMIs awarded 34.2% of all Associates degrees awarded to black students in 2001-2002. There are relatively few major differences between the distribution of academic fields in which MSIs awarded Bachelors degrees and the distribution for Bachelors degrees awarded by PSEIs.20 The only institutions that appear to have a noticeably different distribution from the distribution prevailing elsewhere are the TCUs; but, it is important to stress that the TCU distribution is based on very few Bachelors degrees. In the aggregate, MSIs are more likely to award Bachelors degrees in the Arts and Humanities, Business Management, and the Social Sciences than in any other fields. The following figures depict the distribution of Bachelors degrees by 20 The focus here is on the Bachelors degree level given that this is the predominant undergraduate degree level in MSIs. Nevertheless, the distribution of Associates degrees within MSIs also largely mirrors the distribution for all PSEIs. CRS-18 academic field within each group of MSI institutions, as well as the “universe” of Title IV participating institutions in the comparison group. Figure 6. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within MMIs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Arts & Humanities Social Science Science Business Management Other Math & Engineering Law Education Health Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Figure 7. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within HBCUs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Arts & Humanities Social Science Business Management Science Other Education Math & Engineering Law Health Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-19 Figure 8. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within HSIs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Arts & Humanities Social Science Science Other Business Management Math & Engineering Law Health Education Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Figure 9. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within ANNHIs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Social Science Arts & Humanities Science Other Business Management Math & Engineering Health Education Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-20 Figure 10. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within TCUs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Social Science Arts & Humanities Science Business Management Health Education Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Figure 11. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Academic Field Within MSIs, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Arts & Humanities Social Science Science Other Business Management Math & Engineering Law Health Education Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CRS-21 Figure 12. Distribution of Bachelors Degrees by Field Within “Universe” of Institutions, 2001-2002 Vocational Technical Arts & Humanities Social Science Science Business Management Other Math & Engineering Law Health Education Source: Congressional Research Service, estimates based on data from the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Conclusion Minority-serving institutions play a special role in the education of minority and low-income students. This group of institutions annually receives a significant amount of federal funding to pursue their educational mission and educate minority students. The preceding analysis reveals that there are some institutional and student characteristics shared by many of the groups of MSIs considered in this report. At the same time, it shows that there is diversity among these groups of institutions. Both findings are potentially important for federal policymaking in this area. In general, MSIs are disproportionately two-year public institutions. Yet, this attribute does not characterize all MSI groups — nearly all HBCUs are four-year public or private schools. Most MSIs are likely to be small institutions, often enrolling fewer than 1,000 students, though some are large, enrolling 20,000 or more students. MSIs are concentrated in certain regions, with a large majority of the institutions located in areas where high concentrations of a particular racial/ethnic group reside. Most states have one or more MSIs within their borders, although several have none. Not unexpectedly, students in MSIs are predominantly from minority backgrounds. The proportion of undergraduates in these schools who come from minority backgrounds ranges from about 60% to in excess of 80%. MSIs play a significant role in educating minority students, often accounting for substantial shares of all postsecondary students from minority backgrounds. Nevertheless, with the exception of Hispanic students, the majority of undergraduate students from individual minority groups do not attend MSIs. CRS-22 Substantial shares of undergraduate enrollment in MSIs are likely to be composed of low-income students. For some groups of MSIs, this low-income share of undergraduate enrollment is significantly higher than the comparable share of all undergraduates at Title IV PSEIs in general. More than 45% of undergraduates at HBCUs received a Pell Grant compared to 19% of undergraduates at all Title IV PSEIs analyzed. As noted, most MSIs primarily award undergraduate degrees as their highest degree. These degrees represent significant shares of all degrees awarded to minority undergraduates, particularly for Hispanic degree recipients. The relative distribution of fields in which these degrees are awarded does not differ for most groups of MSIs in comparison to the distribution of undergraduate degrees for all Title IV PSEIs included in this analysis.