Hi
gherEducat
i
onEnr
ol
l
mentAnd
Fi
nanceI
nAr
i
zonaCompar
edToAl
l
St
at
es
Oc
t
ober2005

TOM R.REX,MBA

Associ
at
eDi
r
ect
or
,Cent
erf
or
Compet
i
t
i
venessandPr
osper
i
t
y
Resear
ch

HIGHER EDUCATION ENROLLMENT
AND FINANCE IN ARIZONA
COMPARED TO ALL STATES

October 2005

A product of Arizona State University’s
Productivity and Prosperity Project (P3)

Tom R. Rex
Associate Director
Center for Competitiveness and Prosperity Research
L. William Seidman Research Institute
W. P. Carey School of Business
Arizona State University
Box 874011
Tempe, Arizona 85287­4011
(480) 965­3961
FAX: (480) 965­5458
EMAIL: tom.rex@asu.edu
www.wpcarey.asu.edu/seid

SUMMARY
Enrollment in degree­granting institutions of higher education in Arizona as a percentage
of the state’s population was about equal to the national average in 2003. The Arizona figure was
higher than the national average at private for­profit institutions, slightly greater than the national
average at public institutions, but considerably below average at private not­for­profit
institutions.
Total revenues and expenditures per student at Arizona institutions of higher education
were far below the national averages in 2003, among the least in the nation. Among public
institutions, Arizona’s higher education revenues and expenditures were not as far below
average, but still ranked among the bottom 10 states in the nation.
The ability to pay in Arizona is below average due to the state’s subpar incomes. Thus,
the state’s higher education revenues and expenditures per student adjusted for income were not
as far below the national average in 2003. Among public institutions, Arizona’s per student
revenues and expenditures were close to the national average, ranking near the middle of the
states.
Public financial support for higher education, as measured by government appropriations,
was marginally higher in Arizona than the national per student average in 2003, with Arizona
ranking just above the middle of the states. Adjusted by the state’s ability to pay, public support
for higher education in Arizona was considerably higher in 2003 than the national average.
Increases in public support for higher education per student have been nearly equal in
Arizona and the nation. However, the increases have not been as great as gains in the ability to
pay, particularly in Arizona.
INTRODUCTION
Higher education is defined to include all public and private degree­granting institutions,
which primarily consist of two­year colleges and four­or­more­year (hereafter referred to as four­
year) universities. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary source of
statistics on higher education. The NCES provides various measures of higher education
enrollment and finance annually, but their latest complete data by state are for 2001 (the 2000­01
fiscal year). Incomplete data are available for 2003. Data limitations are discussed in more detail
in Appendix I.
Education finance and enrollment data are adjusted by other data — population, gross
product, and personal income — that are produced by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Data
for Arizona are compared to the national average, all states (including the District of Columbia),
and two smaller groups of states: 10 competitor states (California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia,
Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Utah, and Washington) designated by the Greater Phoenix
Chamber of Commerce, and 10 new economy states (California, Colorado, Connecticut,
Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Utah, Virginia, and Washington) selected by
the Milken Institute.
ALL INSTITUTIONS
The NCES database for 2003 includes 76 degree­granting institutions of higher education
in Arizona. Of these, all enrollment and financial data were missing from three and financial data
were missing from eight others. Thirty­four of the 76 were private for­profit institutions, with the
share of both two­year and four­year institutions above the national average. In contrast, the 17
private not­for­profit institutions accounted for a below­average share of the total. The five

1

public four­year universities (the three campuses of Arizona State University plus Northern
Arizona University and the University of Arizona) also were an unusually low share of the total.
The significance of missing data varies widely by state, with data for some major
institutions in other states missing from the NCES 2003 database. Thus, the incompleteness of
the data needs to be considered in evaluating the information presented in this section. The
financial data are for fiscal year 2003. The enrollment figures are on a full­time­equivalent (FTE)
basis for Fall 2003. Total revenues and expenditures in Arizona in 2003 are compared to the
national average and to each of the comparison groups of states based on three classifications of
degree­granting institutions of higher education: all institutions, public and not­for­profit
institutions (excluding for­profit institutions), and public institutions only.
Enrollment
Enrollment at public institutions in Arizona was nearly 196,000 (see Table 1), split
almost equally among two­year colleges (99,000) and four­year universities (nearly 97,000).
Enrollment at public institutions accounted for 2.1 percent of the national total, compared to the
state’s population share of 1.9 percent. The share of the nation was above average among two­
year colleges at 2.7 percent but slightly below average at four­year universities at 1.7 percent. All
three of Arizona’s original public universities had enrollment in excess of 15,000 and ASU West
had 5,000 students. Three public community colleges had enrollment of more than 10,000 and
three others exceeded 5,000.
In contrast, enrollment at private not­for­profit schools in Arizona totaled just 10,700,
only a tiny share of the national total at 0.2 percent for two­year institutions and 0.4 percent for
four­year schools. None of the private not­for­profit institutions in Arizona are large. Grand
Canyon University had the greatest enrollment at 2,000.
The enrollment of 104,000 at private for­profit schools in Arizona consisted largely of the
71,000 students in the online campus of the University of Phoenix that the NCES includes in the
Arizona statistics. However, even after excluding these students, for­profit institutions in Arizona
still made up a large share of the national enrollment total: 5.4 percent of two­year schools and
5.3 percent of four­year schools. The University of Phoenix was the only for­profit institution
with enrollment of more than 2,500, with nearly 8,000 at their Phoenix campus and a little more
than 3,000 at their Tucson campus. Excluding the online campus, total private school enrollment
in Arizona made up only 1.3 percent of the national total.
Accounting for 23 percent of the state’s enrollment total, the online campus at the
University of Phoenix greatly influences the Arizona enrollment and finance data. It was not
excluded from the following analyses because of similar institutions being included in other
states. Instead, given this anomaly and the specialized nature of many degree­granting for­profit
institutions — such as the Arizona Automotive Institute, the Refrigeration School, and the
Scottsdale Culinary Institute — for­profit institutions are excluded from some of the following
analyses.
Total enrollment in Arizona was 311,000. As a percentage of the state’s population,
enrollment was 27 percent higher than the national average, ranking sixth in the nation and
second among both the competitor states and the new economy states. However, excluding the
for­profit institutions, enrollment totaled 206,000; enrollment as a percentage of the population
was 12 percent below average in Arizona, ranking near the bottom of the states: 43rd overall,
eighth among the 11 competitor states and ninth among the 11 new economy states. Looking

2

TABLE 1
FULL­TIME EQUIVALENT ENROLLMENT SUMMARY, FALL 2003
United States
Total
Private
Public
For Profit 2­year
For Profit 4­year
Not For Profit 2­year
Not For Profit 4­year
Public 2­year
Public 4­year
Excluding For Profit:
Total
Private

Enrollment
12,719,093
3,475,814
9,243,279
226,273
400,187
37,271
2,802,941
3,681,235
5,561,316

Share*
93%
94
93
86
94
81
95
89
95

12,083,491
2,840,212

93
95

Arizona
Share of
Total
27.3%
72.7
1.8
3.1
0.3
22.0
28.9
43.7
23.5

Enrollment
311,182
115,424
195,758
12,127
92,357
84
10,654
99,066
96,692
206,496
10,738

Share*
98%
95
100
81
99
100
66
100
100
98
66

37.1%
62.9
3.9
29.7
0.0
3.4
31.8
31.1

Arizona
Share
of U.S.
2.4%
3.3
2.1
5.4
23.1
0.2
0.4
2.7
1.7

5.2

1.7
0.4

Share
of Total

Notes: A small number of degree­granting schools with less than a two­year program are not shown
separately. Enrollment figures are not available for a number of schools across the country.
* Share at institutions with finance data reported
** Public revenue divided by all public and private students
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

only at public institutions, Arizona’s enrollment as a percentage of population was 9 percent
above average, ranking in the middle of the states among all comparison groups of states.
Enrollment at public institutions as a share of enrollment at all institutions was below
average in Arizona, ranking 42nd overall, last among the competitor states, and ninth among the
new economy states. Excluding for­profit institutions, the comparison reverses, with the public
share in Arizona well above average, ranking fifth overall, third among the competitor states, and
first among the new economy states.
Total Revenues and Expenditures
Revenues and expenditures are measured three ways: per FTE student, per student
relative to per capita personal income (PCPI), and per student relative to per capita gross state
product (PCGSP). The latter two measures reflect ability to pay.
Based on the classification including all institutions, revenues per student in Arizona
were 40 percent below the national average, ranking the state 48th overall, 10th among the 11
competitor states, and last among the new economy states. Excluding the for­profit institutions
does not substantially change the results, with Arizona 29 percent below the national average, the
national rank 46th, and the rank among the two other comparison groups unchanged. Looking
only at public institutions, the shortfall is smaller at 15 percent, but the national rank goes up
only to 44th and the rank among the competitor states to eighth; Arizona still ranks last among
the new economy states.
The comparisons of expenditures per student are similar to those of revenues per student
except for the classification of all institutions, in which Arizona ranked last among all states at

3

50 percent below average (see Table 2). Thus, higher education revenues and expenditures per
student are quite low in Arizona regardless of the set of higher education institutions included.
Per capita personal income and per person gross state product in Arizona are
considerably below the national averages, according to data reported by the U.S. Department of
Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. (The 2000 census, however, indicated that per capita
income in Arizona was not so far below average.) Thus, comparing revenues and expenditures
per student to PCPI and PCGSP somewhat raises Arizona’s higher education rankings and ratios
to the national average. However, among all institutions and the classification excluding for­
profit schools, the state still was far below the national average. Among public institutions,
Arizona’s per student revenues and expenditures were close to the national average, ranking near
the middle of the states.
Categories of Revenues and Expenditures
The NCES divides revenues into three categories: tuition and fees, state and local
government appropriations, and other. Since appropriations are made only to public institutions,
they are analyzed in the following section. Expenditures are split into five categories:
instructional support, academic support, student services, institutional support, and other.
Tuition and fees per student in Arizona were considerably below the national average in
2003 in each of the three classifications of institutions, though Arizona’s ranking was above the
middle of the states in the all institutions classification. Among public institutions, per­student
tuition and fees were 15 percent below average, ranking 36th overall, fifth among the competitor
states and 10th among the new economy states. Arizona still was a little below average after
considering ability to pay.
TABLE 2
REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FULL­TIME­EQUIVALENT STUDENT, 2003

Ratio to the U.S. Average
All Institutions
Excluding For­Profit
Public Only
Ranking Among All States
All Institutions
Excluding For­Profit
Public Only
Ranking Among 11
Competitor States
All Institutions
Excluding For­Profit
Public Only
Ranking Among 11 New
Economy States
All Institutions
Excluding For­Profit
Public Only

Per FTE
Student
60%
71
85

Revenues
Versus
PCPI
70%
82
98

Versus
PCGSP
69%
81
97

Per FTE
Student
50%
74
88

Expenditures
Versus
Versus
PCPI
PCGSP
58%
57%
85
84
102
100

48
46
44

42
40
31

42
41
34

51
47
44

51
39
31

48
41
32

10
10
8

7
7
6

8
8
6

11
10
8

10
7
5

11
7
5

11
11
11

8
8
5

8
8
5

11
11
11

11
7
5

11
7
4

Source: Calculated from National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds) and U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov).

4

Arizona was far below average in the category of “other” revenues, ranking last among
the states among all institutions and in the classification excluding for­profit institutions, and
47th among public institutions. Even after considering ability to pay, Arizona’s public­sector
figure was 20 percent below average, ranking among the bottom 10 states overall and third to
last among the competitor and new economy states.
Arizona was far below average on expenditures per student in each of the five expense
categories, ranking at the bottom of the states among all institutions and near the bottom in the
classification excluding for­profit institutions. Among public institutions, Arizona’s figure
ranged from 7 percent below average in the academic support category (ranking 26th) to 30
percent below average in the student services category (ranking 45th).
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
This section focuses on public support for higher education, defined as state and local
government appropriations for higher education expressed on a full­time­equivalent student
basis. While appropriations are only a portion of the total funding available to institutions of
higher education, the other sources (such as tuition and fees) do not represent public support.
Traditionally, public support for higher education has been defined as state government
appropriations; for example, the Grapevine project of Illinois State University has collected state
government appropriations for higher education since 1961. The focus on state government,
however, fails to recognize that in some states local governments contribute substantially to the
funding of higher education while in other states all of the funding comes from the state
government. The State Higher Education Finance project (SHEF) of the State Higher Education
Executive Officers organization (SHEEO) reports that local government’s share of total
appropriations in 2004 averaged 10 percent nationally, but was 35 percent in Arizona — the
highest proportion in the nation. (Wisconsin ranked second at 23 percent.) Thus, looking only at
state government appropriations results in a misleading evaluation of government support for
higher education across the states.
The Grapevine data on state government appropriations for higher education is timelier
than the NCES data. In 2004, Illinois State University for the first time included local
government appropriations (collected by SHEF). However, since enrollment data are not
available for 2004, the Grapevine project compares appropriations data by state on a per capita
basis. By not reflecting the state­to­state fluctuations in public institution enrollment as a
percentage of the number of residents, per capita appropriation measures produce an incomplete
picture of public support. Similarly, state and local government appropriations for higher
education as a share of total government spending or of tax revenues also present an incomplete
picture since enrollments are not considered.
Through 2001
Complete annual data through 2001 are available from the NCES; data for 2001 are
compared especially to those of 1991, a comparable year in the economic cycle. Nationally, the
percentage of the population enrolled in public institutions of higher education held nearly steady
near 3 percent between the mid­1980s and 2001. The Arizona percentage was higher than the
national average in each year, but the differential declined from a little more than 1 percentage
point between the mid­1980s and early 1990s to 0.4 in 2000 and 2001 (see Figure 1).
The main reason for Arizona’s higher­than­average percentage of the population enrolled
in public institutions of higher education is the relative shortage of private not­for­profit

5

institutions of higher education in Arizona. The readily available and affordable nature of the
community college system in Arizona is another reason.
State and local government appropriations for higher education per full­time­equivalent
public student averaged $7,159 nationally in 2001 according to the NCES. The Arizona figure of
$6,711 was 6.3 percent less. In 1991, the Arizona figure was 4.8 percent less than the national
average. Arizona’s figure fluctuated from 1 to 8 percent less than the national average between
1991 and 2001 (see Figure 2). The differential typically was somewhat larger during the 1980s.
State and local government higher education appropriations per FTE student in 2001 in Arizona
ranked 30th among all states and the District of Columbia according to the NCES data. In 1991,
Arizona had ranked 29th.
This measure of appropriations per FTE student does not consider Arizona’s lesser ability
to pay. State and local government appropriations for higher education as a percentage of gross
product was higher in Arizona (0.74 percent) than the national average (0.61 percent) in 2001.
The 2001 percentages were less than those in 1991, especially in Arizona, as seen in Figure 3.
However, this measure of appropriations as a percentage of gross product does not reflect
Arizona’s above­average proportion of residents enrolled in public institutions of higher
education.
Appropriations by state and local governments for higher education rose an inflation­
adjusted 30 percent nationally between 1991 and 2001. Arizona’s real increase was a little larger
at 35 percent, but both the national and Arizona increases were less than real economic growth.
Nationally, real gross product gained 41 percent during the decade, while in Arizona real GSP
surged 95 percent.
FIGURE 1
ENROLLMENT IN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL POPULATION

Percent
4.3
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.5
3.3
3.1
2.9
2.7

United States

Arizona

2.5
1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Source: Enrollment from the National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds). Population
from the U.S. Census Bureau (www.census.gov).

6

FIGURE 2
INFLATION­ADJUSTED STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS
FOR HIGHER EDUCATION PER FULL­TIME­EQUIVALENT STUDENT
$
7,500

7,000

6,500

6,000

5,500
United States

Arizona

5,000
1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Source: National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds). Appropriations deflated by the
U.S. GDP price deflator produced by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov), expressed in
2001 dollars.
FIGURE 3
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS
FOR HIGHER EDUCATION AS A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS STATE PRODUCT
Percent
1.10
United States

1.00

Arizona

0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Source: Appropriations from the National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds). Gross
state product from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov).

7

On a per FTE student basis, the 17 percent real increase in appropriations in Arizona was
slightly less than the national average of 18 percent. While inflation­adjusted appropriations rose
even on a per student basis, the increase was less than the rate of economic growth, especially in
Arizona. Per capita real gross product rose 25 percent nationally and 39 percent in Arizona
between 1991 and 2001. Thus, whether measured in aggregate terms or on a per person basis,
appropriations for higher education did not keep up with economic gains between 1991 and
2001, especially in Arizona.
In order to incorporate both enrollments and ability to pay in one measure, state and local
government appropriations per FTE student were calculated as a share of gross product per
capita. As seen in Figure 4, Arizona’s figure has been greater than the national average, but the
differential was less in 2001 than over the prior decade. Thus, public support for higher
education in Arizona has waned relative to the national average, but the state’s effort remains
higher than the national average because of its limited ability to pay.
In 2003
Arizona’s total higher education appropriation per FTE student at public institutions was
3 percent higher than the national average in 2003, ranking just above the middle of the states at
20th. Arizona ranked third among the competitor states and fifth among the new economy states.
Considering Arizona’s reduced ability to pay, the figure was 20 percent above average relative to
PCPI, ranking 14th, and 18 percent above average relative to PCGSP, ranking 15th. On each
ability­to­pay measure, Arizona ranked second among both the competitor states and new
economy states.
FIGURE 4
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION
PER FULL­TIME­EQUIVALENT STUDENT AS A SHARE OF GROSS STATE PRODUCT PER CAPITA
Percent
25
23
21
19
United States

Arizona

17
15
1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Source: Appropriations and enrollment from the National Center for Educational Statistics
(nces.ed.gov/ipeds). Gross state product from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (www.bea.gov).
Population from the U.S. Census Bureau (www.census.gov).

8

The appropriation per FTE student varies across Arizona colleges and universities. These
comparisons are greatly affected by special programs that receive substantial funding at
particular institutions. Public support for the University of Arizona appears to be relatively
strong in large part due to its medical school and agricultural extension program.
Using NCES data for 2003, state and local government appropriations per FTE
enrollment varied widely among Arizona’s universities, from $12,276 at the University of
Arizona to $7,472 at Arizona State University’s west campus, $7,067 at Northern Arizona
University, $6,769 at Arizona State University’s west campus, and $6,654 at Arizona State
University’s main campus.
Compared to its official peer group, the U of A ranked fourth among 16 universities (all
but two of which have a medical school) with a figure 21 percent higher than the average of the
15 other schools. NAU also ranked fourth among 16 peer universities (data were not available
for two other peers: Bowling Green State University and Miami University) at 15 percent higher
than the average of the other 15 schools. In contrast, the main campus at ASU ranked ninth
among 14 peer universities (data were not available for Rutgers and the University of
Connecticut), with its FTE government appropriations figure 16 percent less than the average of
the 13 peers. However, seven of the 13 peer universities have a medical school. ASU ranked
third among the seven institutions without a medical school.
ASU and U of A also were compared to a broader list of comparison schools – the
Carnegie classification of “doctoral/research universities – extensive” (limited to public
universities). Among 95 institutions (about one­third of which have a medical school), the U of
A ranked 12th, but ASU 69th, on state and local government appropriations per FTE student in
2003. ASU’s figure was 26 percent less than the average of the 93 non­Arizona universities,
while the U of A figure was 37 percent above average. Among 59 “doctoral/research universities
– intensive,” NAU ranked 20th though its per student figure was 18 percent less than the average
of the other 58 schools (several of which have a medical school). No private institution in
Arizona is classified as doctoral/research.
ASU West was categorized in “masters colleges and universities I.” Of the 243 schools in
this classification, ASU West had the 31st highest government appropriations per FTE student
with a figure 30 percent higher than the average. Among Arizona’s private institutions, Grand
Canyon University and Western International University were included in this classification.
Prescott College was a masters colleges and universities II. ASU East in 2003 was classified as a
school of engineering and technology.
Eighteen public community colleges in Arizona were included in their classification of
844 colleges. Appropriations per student varied widely among the Arizona colleges, from 47
percent less than the average to 105 percent more than average. The median value of the 18
Arizona colleges was at the average of the entire group of 844 colleges. Two other public two­
year colleges — Estrella Mountain Community College and Dine College — were included in
other classifications.
Appropriations per FTE student is shown in Table 3 for each of the higher education
institutions in Arizona included in the NCES 2003 database. Other revenue categories and
enrollment also are presented. Expenses per FTE student overall and in five categories are shown
in Table 4.

9

TABLE 3
PUBLIC INSTITUTION REVENUES PER FULL­TIME­EQUIVALENT STUDENT, 2003
Institution Name
Arizona State University­Main Campus
University Of Arizona
Northern Arizona University
Arizona State University­West
Arizona State University­East
Arizona Western College
Central Arizona College
Chandler/Gilbert Community College
Cochise College
Coconino County Community College
Dine College
Eastern Arizona College
Estrella Mountain Community College
Glendale Community College
Gateway Community College
Mesa Community College
Mohave Community College
Northland Pioneer College
Paradise Valley Community College
Phoenix College
Pima Community College
Rio Salado Community College
Scottsdale Community College
South Mountain Community College
Yavapai College
Ratios:
ASU Main Ratio to 13­Peer Average
ASU Main Ratio to Average of 93 Doctoral Extensive
U of A Ratio to 15­Peer Average
U of A Ratio to Average of 93 Doctoral Extensive
NAU Ratio to 15­Peer Average
NAU Ratio to Average of 58 Doctoral Intensive
ASU West Ratio to Average of 242 Masters I
Ratio to Average of 844 Community Colleges:
Arizona Western College
Central Arizona College
Chandler/Gilbert Community College
Cochise College
Coconino County Community College
Eastern Arizona College
Glendale Community College
Gateway Community College
Mesa Community College
Mohave Community College
Northland Pioneer College
Paradise Valley Community College
Phoenix College
Pima Community College
Rio Salado Community College
Scottsdale Community College
South Mountain Community College
Yavapai College

Tuition and Government
fees
appropriations
$4,639
$6,654
5,393
12,276
3,145
7,067
2,986
7,472
4,495
6,769
607
5,624
582
4,718
1,305
5,043
1,048
5,799
1,316
5,410
661
1,400
479
3,838
940
5,698
1,064
3,907
1,397
6,266
1,234
3,633
1,011
6,261
803
5,399
1,204
4,532
1,080
4,380
1,054
4,674
1,665
2,625
1,517
4,457
514
7,748
1,571
10,093
77.8%
88.5
83.0
102.8
64.1
68.9
90.4
36.0
34.5
77.3
62.1
78.0
28.4
63.1
82.8
73.1
59.9
47.6
71.4
64.0
62.5
98.7
89.9
30.5
93.1

83.6%
74.0
120.6
136.5
115.3
82.2
130.2
114.4
96.0
102.6
118.0
110.0
78.1
79.5
127.5
73.9
127.4
109.8
92.2
89.1
95.1
53.4
90.7
157.6
205.3

Source: National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

10

Other
$5,683
17,518
4,055
1,077
4,676
3,060
1,384
609
2,657
1,826
13,485
1,429
1,463
1,031
2,433
917
1,493
1,837
806
1,444
2,104
1,397
713
2,504
2,265
33.1%
40.9
77.4
126.0
57.5
27.0
24.9
88.1
39.8
17.5
76.5
52.6
41.1
29.7
70.0
26.4
43.0
52.9
23.2
41.6
60.6
40.2
20.5
72.1
65.2

Total
$16,976
35,187
14,267
11,535
15,940
9,291
6,684
6,957
9,504
8,552
15,546
5,746
8,101
6,002
10,096
5,784
8,765
8,039
6,542
6,904
7,832
5,687
6,687
10,766
13,929

FTE
Enrollment
41,617
32,835
15,032
5,033
2,175
3,272
3,022
4,156
2,692
1,454
1,234
2,393
2,574
10,980
3,377
14,280
2,510
2,188
4,009
6,586
16,728
5,594
6,297
2,084
3,636

54.6%
60.3
89.5
125.0
78.9
50.7
86.3

135.6%
179.5
96.4
141.6
93.2
134.1
65.7

92.2
66.3
69.0
94.3
84.9
57.0
59.6
100.2
57.4
87.0
79.8
64.9
68.5
77.7
56.4
66.4
106.8
138.2

89.2
82.4
113.4
73.4
39.7
65.3
299.5
92.1
389.5
68.5
59.7
109.3
179.6
456.2
152.6
171.7
56.8
99.2

TABLE 4
PUBLIC INSTITUTION EXPENSES PER FULL­TIME­EQUIVALENT STUDENT, 2003
Academic Student Institutional
Institution Name
Instruction support services support
Arizona State University­Main Campus
$6,264
$1,991
$713
$1,422
University Of Arizona
10,313
2,209
752
2,234
Northern Arizona University
5,330
1,158
1,022
1,675
Arizona State University­West
4,874
1,961
657
632
Arizona State University­East
6,786
1,717
494
999
Arizona Western College
3,384
659
876
1,095
Central Arizona College
2,601
402
481
1,110
Chandler/Gilbert Community College
2,687
588
452
1,233
Cochise College
4,005
283
938
1,499
Coconino County Community College
2,697
970
789
1,654
Dine College
2,657
640
639
1,974
Eastern Arizona College
2,040
101
636
1,088
Estrella Mountain Community College
3,231
612
671
1,163
Glendale Community College
2,923
522
390
397
Gateway Community College
4,585
544
875
1,529
Mesa Community College
2,626
497
357
565
Mohave Community College
2,619
1,726
636
1,723
Northland Pioneer College
2,577
267
1,199
1,700
Paradise Valley Community College
2,934
695
682
510
Phoenix College
3,212
605
490
758
Pima Community College
2,523
914
719
923
Rio Salado Community College
2,014
495
227
542
Scottsdale Community College
3,204
596
526
538
South Mountain Community College
3,438
1,235
736
1,870
Yavapai College
3,593
1,005
1,082
2,405
Ratios:
ASU Main Ratio to 13­Peer Average
63.5%
74.7%
74.9%
85.5%
ASU Main Ratio to Average of 93 Doctoral Extensive
73.0
90.8
65.0
77.4
U of A Ratio to 15­Peer Average
92.5
78.8
69.8
112.5
U of A Ratio to Average of 93 Doctoral Extensive
120.2
100.7
68.5
121.6
NAU Ratio to 15­Peer Average
78.0
75.7
116.9
116.8
NAU Ratio to Average of 58 Doctoral Intensive
66.7
39.8
89.8
78.5
ASU West Ratio to Average of 242 Masters I
99.0
170.2
67.0
39.5
Ratio to Average of 844 Community Colleges:
Arizona Western College
87.5
88.8
94.1
81.8
Central Arizona College
67.3
54.2
51.7
82.9
Chandler/Gilbert Community College
69.5
79.3
48.6
92.1
Cochise College
103.6
38.2
100.8
111.9
Coconino County Community College
69.8
130.8
84.8
123.5
Eastern Arizona College
52.8
13.6
68.3
81.2
Glendale Community College
75.6
70.4
41.9
29.6
Gateway Community College
118.6
73.3
94.0
114.2
Mesa Community College
67.9
67.0
38.4
42.2
Mohave Community College
67.8
232.7
68.3
128.6
Northland Pioneer College
66.7
36.0
128.8
126.9
Paradise Valley Community College
75.9
93.7
73.3
38.1
Phoenix College
83.1
81.6
52.6
56.6
Pima Community College
65.3
123.2
77.3
68.9
Rio Salado Community College
52.1
66.7
24.4
40.5
Scottsdale Community College
82.9
80.4
56.5
40.2
South Mountain Community College
88.9
166.5
79.1
139.6
Yavapai College
92.9
135.5
116.3
179.6

Source: National Center for Educational Statistics (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

11

Other
$6,677
18,890
4,929
3,028
6,241
2,631
1,503
1,543
2,377
2,708
11,106
2,519
2,037
1,351
2,016
1,211
2,436
1,457
1,150
1,382
2,089
994
1,376
2,730
2,892

Total
$17,067
34,398
14,114
11,152
16,237
8,645
6,097
6,503
9,102
8,818
17,016
6,384
7,714
5,583
9,549
5,256
9,140
7,200
5,971
6,447
7,168
4,272
6,240
10,009
10,977

48.7%
52.8
95.9
149.3
71.1
38.1
77.3

59.1%
64.7
93.7
130.5
80.2
52.1
88.7

100.1
57.2
58.7
90.5
103.1
95.9
51.4
76.7
46.1
92.7
55.5
43.8
52.6
79.5
37.8
52.4
103.9
110.1

91.0
64.1
68.4
95.8
92.8
67.2
58.7
100.5
55.3
96.2
75.7
62.8
67.8
75.4
44.9
65.6
105.3
115.5

APPENDIX A: DATA LIMITATIONS
A significant limitation of much of the NCES data (that compiled by state and nation) is
the age of the data, with 2001 being the latest year available. Data for 2003 are available by
institution, but these data are unedited (with some errors apparent), and with data missing for a
number of institutions.
For most institutions with missing data, enrollment figures are available but the finance
figures are missing. These missing data are summarized in Table A­1. The importance of missing
data varies widely by state, so caution must be exercised in interpreting the 2003 data.
For some institutions, enrollment figures also are missing. Private institutions make up a
disproportionate share of the schools with missing enrollment and finance data. However,
Washington State University is a large public school missing all data.
The finance data are for the fiscal year. A 12­month FTE enrollment figure — which
would best match the finance data — is available, but because of some obvious errors FTE
enrollment for fall 2003 was used. The relationship between fall and 12­month enrollment varies
by institution: many public four­year institutions have lower enrollment in spring than fall, but
for most other institutions, 12­month enrollment is greater than that in the fall.
A number of private schools have extremely large revenue (and to a lesser extent,
expenditure) figures for the number of students they educate (for example, in a few schools
revenue per student exceeds $1 million). Though the number of schools with such a high figure
is a tiny proportion of all institutions, these extreme figures have an impact on the overall dollar
totals. Nearly all of the private schools with such large figures are in the for­profit category.
Thus, the analyses that exclude all private for­profit institutions largely avoid this problem.

12

TABLE A­1
INSTITUTIONS WITH ENROLLMENT DATA BUT NO FINANCE DATA IN 2003
State
AL

Missing*
2.8%

AK
AZ
AR
CA

0.0
2.0
4.2
17.8

CO
CT
DE
DC
FL

0.8
18.1
2.7
0.3
2.5

GA

5.9

HI
ID

Major Missing Institution

State
MT

Missing*
14.7%

NE
NV
NH
NJ

0.7
0.0
30.3
18.6

NM
NY
NC
ND
OH

4.2
3.5
0.1
0.0
12.6

OK

1.2

2.9
0.0

OR
PA

12.3
18.2

IL
IN
IA
KS
KY

1.1
1.3
3.7
2.5
23.7

RI
SC
SD
TN
TX

14.2
3.2
0.4
0.8
2.1

LA

9.2

UT

22.6

ME
MD
MA
MI
MN
MO

0.0
0.0
1.1
5.7
0.9
11.7

VT
VA
WA
WV
WI
WY

2.1
0.3
2.6
8.2
0.1
8.4

MS

2.2

San Diego State and many
public community colleges
University of Connecticut

Georgia Institute of
Technology

Nearly all public community
colleges
Southern A&M and most
public community colleges

Several private schools
Several public community
colleges

Major Missing Institution
Montana State (Billings) and
Montana Tech
University of New Hampshire
Rutgers and Farleigh
Dickenson
Eastern New Mexico
Fordham
University of Akron, Bowling
Green State, Miami University
Oregon State
Penn State and some public
community colleges
Johnson and Wales

Utah State and Salt Lake
Community College

Fairmont State

* Percentage of total enrollment at institutions with missing finance data
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

13

APPENDIX B: DETAILED TABLES
This appendix presents tables of per­student revenues and expenditures. A table for each
of the detailed classifications of institutions (e.g. private for­profit two­year institutions) follows.
TABLE B­1
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT ALL INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Government Appropriations*
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$7,811
1,798
1,368
2,444
7,407
20,827
9,444
4,674
9,896
24,014

Arizona
$4,175
872
462
931
4,008
10,446
6,566
4,282
3,631
14,480

AZ to US
Ratio
53.5
48.5
33.8
38.1
54.1
50.2
69.5
91.6
36.7
60.3

11,833

305

2.6%**

All 51
States
51
50
51
51
51
51
19
34
51
48

Rank
11
Comp^
11
11
11
11
11
11
3
8
11
10

11 New
Economy
11
11
11
11
11
11
6
7
11
11

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Public revenue divided by all public and private students
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

14

TABLE B­2
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT ALL INSTITUTIONS EXCLUDING FOR PROFITS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Government Appropriations*
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$7,292
1,890
1,438
2,569
6,451
19,641
6,016
4,914
10,136
21,066

Arizona
$5,200
1,310
694
1,399
5,872
14,474
3,190
6,436
5,293
14,919

AZ to US
Ratio
71.3
69.3
48.3
54.5
91.0
73.7
53.0
131.0
52.2
70.8

11,255

203

1.8%**

All 51
States
47
39
50
48
31
47
45
6
51
46

Rank
11
Comp^
11
8
10
10
6
10
10
2
11
10

11 New
Economy
11
11
10
11
8
11
11
2
11
11

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Public revenue divided by all public and private students
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).
TABLE B­3
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$12,812
2,867
2,422
4,565
9,595
32,262
25,372
15,499
40,871

Arizona
$2,462
132
74
247
353
3,268
13,270
497
13,767

AZ to US
Ratio
19.2
4.6
3.1
5.4
3.7
10.1
52.3
3.2
33.7

3,281

109

3.3%**

All
States*
49
50
50
50
49
50
19
50
43

Rank
11
Comp^
10
11
11
11
11
11
4
11
9

11 New
Economy
11
11
11
11
11
11
6
11
10

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 50 states have private institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

15

TABLE B­4
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS EXCLUDING FOR PROFITS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$11,739
3,485
2,944
5,549
6,094
29,810
14,527
17,719
32,247

Arizona
$7,141
2,028
1,141
3,797
1,111
15,218
13,117
2,969
16,086

AZ to US
Ratio
60.8
58.2
38.8
68.4
18.2
51.0
90.3
16.8
49.9

2,700

7

0.3%**

All
States*
34
24
49
34
41
39
17
49
38

Rank
11
Comp^
10
6
10
8
7
9
6
11
9

11 New
Economy
11
8
10
8
9
10
5
11
10

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 50 states have private institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).
TABLE B­5
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Government Appropriations*
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$5,892
1,388
963
1,630
6,567
16,440
3,332
6,467
7,746
17,546

Arizona
$5,129
1,284
677
1,312
6,044
14,447
2,830
6,669
5,378
14,877

AZ to US
Ratio
87.1
92.5
70.3
80.5
92.0
87.9
84.9
103.1
69.4
84.8

8,552

196

2.3%**

All 51
States
40
26
45
39
34
44
36
20
47
44

Rank
11
Comp^
8
6
11
6
7
8
5
3
10
8

11 New
Economy
10
11
11
7
11
11
10
5
11
11

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Public revenue divided by all public and private students
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

16

TABLE B­6
2003 ENROLLMENT, REVENUES, AND EXPENDITURES
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AS A SHARE OF ALL INSTITUTIONS

Enrollment
Adjusted Enrollment*
Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES

United
States
72.7%
72.3
54.5
55.8
50.9
48.2
64.1
57.0
25.5
56.6
52.8

Arizona
62.9%
64.2
78.9
94.6
94.2
90.5
96.8
88.8
27.7
95.1
66.0

Arizona
less U.S.
­9.8
­8.1
24.4
38.8
43.3
42.3
32.7
31.8
2.2
38.5
13.2

All 51
States
42
41tie
20
5
3
3
10
8
41
5
33

Rank
11
Comp^
11
10tie
5
2
2
2
4
2
9
2
9

11 New
Economy
9
8tie
3
1
1
1
3
1
8
1
7

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Excludes enrollment at institutions for which revenue and expenditure data are missing.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).
TABLE B­7
2003 ENROLLMENT, REVENUES, AND EXPENDITURES
PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AS A SHARE OF ALL INSTITUTIONS EXCLUDING FOR PROFITS

Enrollment
Adjusted Enrollment*
Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES

United
States
76.5%
76.0
61.4
55.8
50.9
48.2
77.3
63.6
42.1
58.1
63.3

Arizona
94.7%
96.4
95.2
94.6
94.2
90.5
99.3
96.3
85.6
98.0
96.2

Arizona
less U.S.
18.2
20.4
33.8
38.8
43.3
42.3
22.0
32.7
43.5
39.9
32.9

All 51
States
5
4
4
5
3
3
3
4
4
3
4

Rank
11
Comp^
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

11 New
Economy
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Excludes enrollment at institutions for which revenue and expenditure data are missing.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

17

TABLE B­8
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE FOR­PROFIT TWO­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$47,212
75,590
122,802
199,381
14,230
213,611

Arizona
$1,903
488
2,391
6,360
185
6,545

AZ to US
Ratio
4.0
0.7
1.9
3.2
1.3
3.1

196

10

5.0%**

All
States*
30
20
30
34
34
35

Rank
11
Comp^
5
6
5
8
9
8

11 New
Economy
8
4
7
10
10
10

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 42 states have private for­profit two­year institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

TABLE B­9
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE FOR­PROFIT FOUR­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$2,886
525
3,411
13,050
613
13,664

Arizona
$2,164
272
2,436
14,043
337
14,380

AZ to US
Ratio
75.0
51.8
71.4
107.6
55.0
105.2

377

92

24.4%**

All
States*
35
18
34
11
22
10

Rank
11
Comp^
11
10
11
4
8
4

11 New
Economy
10
7
10
4
8
4

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 41 states have private for­profit four­year institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent. The
Arizona figure includes 71,000 students enrolled in the University of Phoenix’s online program.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

18

TABLE B­10
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE NOT­FOR­PROFIT TWO­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment

United
States
$5,767
1,375
2,903
5,123
2,490
17,657
11,065
6,936
18,001
30,053

Arizona
$14,286
5,474
4,220
15,951
2,789
42,720
1,192
40,736
41,928
84

AZ to US
Ratio*

All
States

Rank*
11
Comp^

11 New
Economy

0.3%**

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Comparisons are unreliable since Arizona has only one institution in this category.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

TABLE B­11
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PRIVATE NOT­FOR­PROFIT FOUR­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$11,821
3,513
2,948
5,560
6,142
29,983
14,584
17,862
32,446

Arizona
$7,055
1,986
1,104
3,652
1,091
14,889
13,259
2,517
15,776

AZ to US
Ratio
59.7
56.5
37.4
65.7
17.8
49.7
90.9
14.1
48.6

2,666

7

0.3%**

All
States*
36
25
48
35
42
39
16
49
38

Rank
11
Comp^
10
7
10
8
7
9
4
11
9

11 New
Economy
11
8
10
9
9
10
6
11
10

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 50 states have private not­for­profit four­year institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

19

TABLE B­12
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PUBLIC TWO­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Government Appropriations*
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$3,722
692
857
1,214
2,412
8,897
1,686
4,706
3,054
9,446

Arizona
$2,881
656
591
946
1,839
6,912
1,129
4,713
1,660
7,502

AZ to US
Ratio
77.4
94.8
69.0
77.9
76.2
77.7
67.0
100.1
54.4
79.4

3,291

99

3.0%**

All
States*
43
28
41
36
41
45
44
22
48
46

Rank
11
Comp^
10
7
10
6
9
9
8
5
10
10

11 New
Economy
11
8
10
7
10
10
10
7
11
10

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* 50 states have public two­year institutions.
** Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

TABLE B­13
2003 REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES PER FTE ENROLLMENT
AT PUBLIC FOUR­YEAR INSTITUTIONS

Instructional Support
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Other Expenditures
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
Tuition and Fees
Government Appropriations
Other Revenues
TOTAL REVENUES
Adjusted FTE Enrollment
(000)

United
States
$7,250
1,824
1,030
1,891
9,167
21,161
4,362
7,569
10,683
22,614

Arizona
$7,433
1,928
766
1,686
10,353
22,167
4,574
8,673
9,186
22,432

AZ to US
Ratio
102.5
105.7
74.4
89.2
112.9
104.8
104.9
114.6
86.0
99.2

5,260

97

1.8%*

All 51
States
17
15
38
27
15
18
25
12
31
23

Rank
11
Comp^
4
3
5
6
6
5
4
3
8
6

11 New
Economy
6
7
8
7
6
7
9
4
10
8

^ The 11 competitor states of AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA. The 11 New Economy
states are AZ, CA, CO, CT, MA, MD, MN, NJ, UT, VA, WA.
* Arizona share of national enrollment; the state’s share of the U.S. population was 1.9 percent.
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System: Peer
Analysis System, Data Cutting Tool (nces.ed.gov/ipeds).

20

THE PRODUCTIVITY AND PROSPERITY PROJECT
The Productivity and Prosperity Project: An Analysis of Economic Competitiveness (P3) is an ongoing
initiative begun in 2005, sponsored by Arizona State University President Michael M. Crow. P3 analyses
incorporate literature reviews, existing empirical evidence, and economic and econometric analyses.
Enhancing productivity is the primary means of attaining economic prosperity. Productive individuals
and businesses are the most competitive and prosperous. Competitive regions attract and retain these
productive workers and businesses, resulting in strong economic growth and high standards of living.
An overarching objective of P3’s work is to examine competitiveness from the perspective of an individual,
a business, a region and a country.

THE CENTER FOR COMPETITIVENESS
AND PROSPERITY RESEARCH
The Center for Competitiveness and Prosperity Research is a research unit of the W. P. Carey
School of Business, specializing in applied economic and demographic research with a geographic
emphasis on Arizona and the metropolitan Phoenix area. The Center conducts research projects under
sponsorship of private businesses, non-profit organizations, government entities and other ASU units. In
particular, the Center administers both the Productivity and Prosperity Project: An Analysis of Economic
Competitiveness (P3) and the office of the University Economist. These ongoing initiatives began in
2005 and are sponsored by university President Michael M. Crow.
Formerly known as the Center for Business Research, the Center for Competitiveness and Prosperity
Research, along with the Economic Outlook Center, was created in 1986 from the Bureau of Business
and Economic Research, which dates back to the 1950s.

CENTER FOR COMPETITIVENESS AND PROSPERITY RESEARCH
L. WILLIAM SEIDMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE
W. P. CAREY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AT ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
PO Box 874011 | Tempe, AZ 85287-4011 | P (480) 965-3961 | F (480) 965-5458 | wpcarey.asu.edu/seid