One of the more controversial recommendations made by the Post-Secondary Education Review Commission just before it wrapped up its work was to suggest a change in the way higher education is governed in Louisiana. That’s certainly not a new idea in the state as former Governors Buddy Roemer and Mike Foster each tried unsuccessfully to do something similar – consolidate the LSU, Southern and University of Louisiana systems into a single system governed by a strong, single board.

CABL has been supportive of such moves in the past and believes even today that a thorough review and debate about our governance structure is healthy. But we also believe it should be done with eyes wide open and as part of a process that makes good policy sense.

To that end, we would offer several observations for policy makers and the public to consider.

• Change in governance should be a means to an end – not the end game in and of itself. It should be a way of accomplishing something that cannot be accomplished well by the current governance structure. Why? Because national studies on the issue make it pretty clear that there is no “ideal” system of higher education governance. Broadly speaking there are generally two models of governance in play across the nation. About half of those look “something” like what Louisiana has and the other half look “something” like what the commission recommended. But there are wide variances in between. Each is largely a response to the political environment that exists in each state, not some educational ideal.
• If we are to change our governance structure, there are two key questions which we must ask and answer: 1) what is the problem we are trying to fix by changing governance, and 2) given that problem, what model works best to address that particular issue? So far we haven’t really had that discussion, but it should be laid squarely on the table before we proceed with a major change in governance.
• When past governors and Legislatures debated the “single board” concept, the model that was most often pointed to was the one that currently exists in North Carolina – a state with a robust higher education system that was well-funded and supported by state government for many years. The model proposed by the commission is not the North Carolina model, though it may resemble it from a distance. In North Carolina they have a single governing board for all four-year institutions that has authority over virtually all aspects of that system. But it delegates the day-to-day management function to “trustee” boards at the institutional level. So each institution has an appointed Board of Trustees to oversee operations, while the strong, single board oversees statewide policy, coordination and accountability. The commission recommendation puts all of that responsibility under the single board which raises serious questions about how all of those duties can be managed for more than 20 universities, professional schools, research centers and a public hospital system.
• Despite the fact that this was a recommendation of the commission, none of the out-of state experts who served on the commission voted for it. While they voiced concerns about the current governance structure in the state, they felt unanimously that the recommendation as it was finally adopted was the wrong way for Louisiana to go.

So where does that leave us? Well, if you get back to our first bullet, you get back to the heart of the matter. If change in governance should be a way to accomplish something that has been difficult to accomplish otherwise, is there an alternative? Interestingly, and almost coincidentally, the answer could be yes.

Louisiana’s current governance structure has made it difficult to aggressively enact a number of reforms or changes that CABL believes are important for the future of post-secondary education. Some of those are outlined in our recently released “10 Reform Recommendations to Move Higher Education Forward.” A number of those are also included in a legislative proposal recently unveiled by Governor Jindal called the LA GRAD Act.

The GRAD Act would essentially allow institutions additional tuition, fee and operational authority in exchange for agreeing to a series of performance goals very much in line with many of the reforms CABL and the commission have recommended. From CABL’s perspective, it would seem wiser for the Legislature to enact a strong LA GRAD Act which the Board of Regents and institutions could begin to implement immediately, than to get bogged down in a long, politically divisive debate over governance at a time when the future of higher education is hanging in the balance.

So why can’t you do both – pass the GRAD Act and change governance? It’s a fair question, but somewhat problematic. If the LA GRAD Act passes, the Board of Regents would have to play a pivotal role in making it work effectively. If a constitutional change in governance is also passed by the Legislature this spring and sent to voters for approval in the fall, the earliest the new board could be up and running would be January of next year with a lengthy transition period still to come. That would leave a lame duck Board of Regents with a weaker hand trying to make the GRAD Act work as planned in the interim. That seems to be a recipe for failure.

For that reason it would seem to make sense to pass the strongest LA GRAD Act possible with the expectation that the Board of Regents and each institution will work to enact performance goals that will accelerate reform in post-secondary education for the future while also addressing the short-term realities posed by the budget.

The Legislature should also consider the recommendation made by the commission that regardless of any change in governance, the authority of the Board of Regents should be strengthened and clarified immediately to make it more effective and accountable no matter what happens with governance in the future.

None of this is to say that governance is not an important issue. It is and it needs to be resolved. But it should be resolved with the benefit of thorough review, assistance and advice from outside experts with real experience, and open debate on what’s best for Louisiana. There are many ways to govern higher education differently and realign institutions within different systems. If we are to consider a change in governance we should put all these ideas on the table – not just the commission’s. That will take more time and a less volatile political environment then we’ll have this session, but we believe the wait – no matter what the ultimate outcome – will prove worth it.