Chapter 15 – Accounting for Colleges and Universities
15–11
© 2013 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or distribution in any
manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.
Ch. 15, Solutions, Case 15-13 (Cont’d)
Access – a possible measure would be the percentage of students receiving Pell
grants.
Affordability – possible metrics would be the net price of attending and student
loan debt.
Outcomes – possible metrics would include graduation/transfer rates, earnings of
graduates, and completion of advanced degrees.
d. The expectation is that the rating system will be in place so students can use it for
the selection decisions they would make prior to their admission in fall of 2015.
e. Students will have very different views on what they believe to be strengths and
weaknesses of such systems. Some possible points include:
Strengths – a national system that will allow for increased comparability,
increased transparency of information, increased accountability
Weaknesses – a national system cannot consider the different missions of each
university, the diversity of the student body, the different funding
levels/structures in each state
General Problem Information: Rating college and university performance
Learning Objective: 15-5
Topic: Other Accounting Issues
Bloom’s Taxonomy: Analyze
15-14. a. Yes, organizations in Minnesota are subject to UPMIFA.
b. The foundation would be subject to UPMIFA since it is located in Minnesota and
c. The spending rate is not set by UPMIFA. UPMIFA allows NFP organizations to