The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) surveys approximately 6,500 postsecondary institutions, including universities and colleges, as well as institutions offering technical and vocational education beyond the high school level. This survey, which began in 1986, replaced the Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS).
IPEDS consists of eight integrated components that obtain information on who provides postsecondary education (institutions), who participates in it and completes it (students), what programs are offered and what programs are completed, and both the human and financial resources involved in the provision of institutionally-based postsecondary education. Until 2000 these components included: Institutional Characteristics, Fall Enrollment, Completions, Salaries, Finance, and Fall Staff. Data are collected in the fall for institutional characteristics and completions; in the winter for employees by assigned position (EAP), salaries and fall staff; and in spring for enrollment, student financial aid, finances, and graduation rates.
The degree-granting institutions portion of this survey is a census of colleges awarding associate’s or higher degrees that were eligible to participate in Title IV financial aid programs. Prior to 1993, data from the technical and vocational institutions were collected through a sample survey. Beginning in 1993, all data are gathered in a census of all postsecondary institutions. The tabulations on "Institutional Characteristics" developed for this edition of the Digest are based on lists of all institutions and are not subject to sampling errors.
The definition of institutions generally thought of as offering college and university education has been changed in recent years. The old standard for higher education institutions included those institutions that had courses that led to an associate’s or higher degree, or were accepted for credit towards those degrees. Higher education institutions were accredited by an agency or association that was recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, or recognized directly by the Secretary of Education. Tables, or portions of tables, that use only this standard are labeled "higher education" in the Digest. The newer standard includes institutions which award associate’s or higher-level degrees that are eligible to participate in Title IV federal financial aid programs. Tables that contain any data according to this standard are titled as "degree-granting" institutions. Time-series tables may contain data from both series, and they are labeled accordingly. The impact of this change has generally not been large. For example, tables on faculty salaries and benefits were only affected to a very small extent. Also, degrees awarded at the bachelor's level or higher were not heavily affected. The largest impact has been on private 2-year college enrollment. In contrast, most of the data on public 4-year colleges have been affected only to a minimal extent. The impact on enrollment in public 2-year colleges was noticeable in certain states, but relatively small at the national level. Overall, enrollment for all institutions was about one-half a percent higher for degree-granting institutions compared to the total for higher education institutions.
Prior to the establishment of IPEDS in 1986, HEGIS acquired and maintained statistical data on the characteristics and operations of institutions of higher education. Implemented in 1966, HEGIS was an annual universe survey of institutions accredited at the college level by an agency recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. These institutions were listed in NCES's Education Directory, Colleges and Universities.
HEGIS surveys collected information on institutional characteristics, faculty salaries, finances, enrollment, and degrees. Since these surveys, like IPEDS, were distributed to all higher education institutions, the data presented are not subject to sampling error. However, they are subject to nonsampling error, the sources of which varied with the survey instrument.
The NCES Taskforce for IPEDS Redesign recognized that there were issues related to the consistency of data definitions, accuracy, reliability, validity, and other quality measures within and across surveys. The IPEDS redesign in 2000 provided institution-specific data forms with information and data previously provided. While the new systems shortened data processing time and provided better data consistency it did not address the accuracy of the data provided by institutions.
In 2003-04, prior year data were available for revision at the same time institutions were entering current data. This allowed institutions to make changes to their prior year entries by either adjusting the data or providing missing data. These revisions allow the evaluation of the data’s accuracy by looking at the changes made.
When institutions made changes to their data, it was assumed that the revised data was the "true" data. The data were analyzed for the number and type of institutions making changes, the type of changes, the magnitude of the changes, and the impact on published data.
Because NCES imputes missing data, imputation procedures were also addressed. For this assessment, differences between revised values and values that were imputed in the original files were compared (i.e., revised value minus imputed value). These differences were then used to provide an assessment of the effectiveness of imputation procedures. The size of the differences also provides an indication of the accuracy of imputation procedures. To assess the overall impact of changes on aggregate IPEDS estimates, published tables for each component were reconstructed using the revised 2002-03 data. These reconstructed tables were then compared to the published tables to determine the magnitude of aggregate bias and the direction of this bias.
Though IPEDS provides the most comprehensive data system for postsecondary education there are 100 or more entities that collect their own information from postsecondary institutions. The additional collections raise the issue of how valid the IPEDS data are when compared to educational data collected by non-IPEDS sources. The Thomson Peterson data was chosen to assess the validity of IPEDS data because it is one of the largest and most comprehensive sources of postsecondary data available.
Not all IPEDS components could be compared to Thomson Peterson. Either the Thomson Peterson survey did not collect data related to a particular IPEDS component or the data items collected by Thomson Peterson were not comparable (i.e., different data item definitions). Comparisons were made for a selected number of data items in five components—Tuition and Price, Employees by Assigned Position, Enrollment, Student Financial Aid, and Finance. More details on the accuracy and reliability of IPEDS data can be found in Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175).
Further information on IPEDS may be obtained from:
Elise Miller
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Elise.Miller@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
This survey was part of the HEGIS series throughout its existence. However, the degree classification taxonomy was revised in 1970–71, 1982–83, 1991–92, and 2002–03. Collection of degree data has been maintained through the IPEDS system.
Degrees-conferred trend tables arranged by the 2002–03 classification are included in the Digest to provide consistent data from 1970–71 to the most recent year. Data in this edition on associate’s and other formal awards below the baccalaureate, by field of study, cannot be made comparable with figures prior to 1982–83. The nonresponse rate did not appear to be a significant source of nonsampling error for this survey. The return rate over the years has been high, with the degree-granting institutions response rate for the 2003-04 survey at 99.8 percent. The overall response rate for the non-degree-granting institutions was 99.6 percent in 2003-04. Because of the high return rate for the degree-granting institutions, nonsampling error caused by imputation is also minimal. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2003-04 survey are discussed in Postsecondary Institutions in the United States: Fall 2003 and Degrees and Other Awards Conferred: 2003-04 (NCES 2005-154).
The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175) indicated that most Title IV institutions supplying revised data on completions were able to supply missing data for the prior year. The small differences between imputed data for the prior year and the revised actual data supplied by the institution indicated that the imputed values produced by NCES were acceptable.
Further information on IPEDS Completions surveys may be obtained from:
Andrew Mary
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Andrew.Mary@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
This survey collects basic information necessary to classify the institutions including control, level, and kinds of programs; and information on tuition, fees, and room and board charges. Beginning in 2000, the survey collected institutional pricing data from institutions with first-time, full-time, degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students. Unduplicated full-year enrollment counts and instructional activity are now collected on the Fall Enrollment survey. The overall response rate was 100.0 percent for Title IV degree-granting institutions in 2003.
The IPEDS Data Quality Study (NCES 2005-175) looked at tuition and price in Title IV institutions. Only 8 percent of institutions reported the same data in the IPEDS and Thomson Peterson data collections consistently across all selected data items. Difference in wordings or survey items may account for some of these inconsistencies.
Further information on the IPEDS Institutional Characteristics survey may be obtained from:
Frank Morgan
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Frank.Morgan@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
The fall staff data presented in this publication were collected by NCES, through the IPEDS system, which collected data from postsecondary institutions, including all 2- and 4-year degree-granting education institutions. NCES collects staff data biennially in odd numbered years from institutions of postsecondary education.
The "Fall Staff" questionnaires were completed on the IPEDS data collection website between December 3, 2003 and January 28, 2004; the respondents reported the employment statistics in their institution that cover the payroll period in the fall of the survey year. The "Fall Staff, 2003" survey had an overall response rate of 99.9 percent. The Staff component of the winter 2003–04 survey had a response rate of 99.9 for degree-granting institutions, and 99.9 for the non-degree-granting institutions. Imputation methods and response bias analysis are discussed in Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003, and Salaries of Full-Time Instructional Faculty, 2003–04 (NCES 2005-155).
The most recent data quality study, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175), found that employee data items were changed by 1.2 percent (77) of the institutions that responded. All who made changes made changes that resulted in a different employee count. For both institutional and aggregate differences, the changes had little impact on the original employee count submissions. A large number of institutions reported different staff data to IPEDS and Thomson Peterson; however, the magnitude of the differences was small—usually no more than 17 faculty members for any faculty variable. See Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175) for more information.
Further information on the IPEDS Salaries, Tenure, and Fringe Benefits survey may be obtained from:
Sabrina Ratchford
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Sabrina.Ratchford@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
This institutional survey has been conducted for most years from 1966–67 to 1987–88, and annually since 1989–90. Although the survey form changed a number of times during those years, only comparable data are presented in this report.
Between 1966–67 and 1985–86 this survey differed from other HEGIS surveys in that imputations were not made for nonrespondents. Thus, there is some possibility that the salary averages presented in this report may differ from the results of a complete enumeration of all colleges and universities. Beginning with the surveys for 1987–88, the IPEDS data tabulation procedures included imputations for survey nonrespondents. The response rate for the 2003-04 survey was 99.9 percent for degree-granting institutions. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2003-04 survey are discussed in Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003, and Salaries of Full-Time Instructional Faculty, 2003-04 (NCES 2005-155). Although data from these surveys are not subject to sampling error, sources of nonsampling error may include computational errors and misclassification in reporting and processing. The electronic reporting system does allow corrections to prior year reported or missed data and this should help with these problems. Also, NCES reviews individual colleges' data for internal and longitudinal consistency and contacts the colleges to check inconsistent data.
The NCES report, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175), found that only 1.3 percent of the responding Title IV institutions made changes to their salaries data. The imputations made in the original publication proved to be acceptable when the revised data indicated small differences, and therefore had little impact on the published data.
Further information on the IPEDS Salaries, Tenure, and Fringe Benefits survey may be obtained from:
Sabrina Ratchford
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Sabrina.Ratchford@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
This survey has been part of the HEGIS and IPEDS series since 1966. The enrollment survey response rate is high. Beginning in 2000, the data collection method was web-based, replacing the paper survey forms that had been used in past years. In 2004 the overall response rate was 100.0 percent for degree-granting institutions and the 2003 response rate was 99.6 percent. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2003-04 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2003 (NCES 2005-177). Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2002-03 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2002 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2002 (NCES 2005-168).
Beginning with fall 1986, the survey system was redesigned with the introduction of IPEDS (see above). The survey allows (in alternating years) for the collection of age and residence data. In 2000, the enrollment survey collected the instructional activity and unduplicated headcount data, which are needed to compute a standardized, full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment statistic for the entire academic year.
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175) showed that public institutions made the majority of changes to enrollment data during the 2004 revision period. The majority of changes were made to unduplicated headcount data with the net differences between the original data and the revised data at about 1 percent. Part-time students in general and enrollment in private not-for-profit institutions were often underestimated. The fewest changes by institutions were to CIP code data. More institutions provided enrollment data to IPEDS than to Thomson Peterson. A fairly high percentage of institutions that provided data to both provided the same data, and among those that didn’t the difference in magnitude was less than 10 percent.
Further information on the IPEDS Fall Enrollment survey may be obtained from:
Cathy Statham
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Cathy.Statham@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/
This survey was part of the HEGIS series and has been continued under the IPEDS system. Substantial changes were made in the financial survey instruments in fiscal years (FY) 1976, 1982, 1987, 1997, and 2002. While these changes were significant, considerable effort has been made to present only comparable information on trends in this report and to note inconsistencies. The FY 1976 survey instrument contained numerous revisions to earlier survey forms, which made direct comparisons of line items very difficult. Beginning in FY 1982, Pell Grant data were collected in the categories of federal restricted grants and contracts revenues and restricted scholarships and fellowships expenditures. Finance tables for this publication have been adjusted by subtracting the largely duplicative Pell Grant amounts from the later data to maintain comparability with pre-FY 82 data. The introduction of IPEDS in the FY 1987 survey included several important changes to the survey instrument and data processing procedures. Beginning in FY 1997, the data for the private institution were collected using new financial concepts consistent with Financial Standards Board (FASB) reporting standards, which provides a more comprehensive view of college finance activities. The data for the public institutions continued to be collected using the older survey form. The data for the public and private institutions were no longer comparable, and as a result, no longer presented together in analysis tables. Beginning in FY 2001, public institutions had the option of continuing to report using the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) standards, or using the new FASB reporting standards. Beginning in FY 2002, the public institutions had three options: the original GASB standards, the FASB standards, or the new Government Accounting Standards Board, Statement 35 standards (GASB35). Because of the complexity of the multiple forms used by the public institutions, recent finance data for public institutions are not presented in the Digest.
Possible sources of nonsampling error in the financial statistics include nonresponse, imputation, and misclassification. The response rate has been about 85 to 90 percent for most of the historic years presented in the Digest; however, in more recent years response rates have been much higher because Title IV institutions are required to respond. The 2002 IPEDS data collection was a full-scale web-based IPEDS data collection, which offered features that improved the quality and timeliness of the data. The ability of IPEDS to tailor the online data entry forms for each institution based on characteristics such as institutional control, level of institution, and calendar system, and the institutions’ ability to submit their data online were two such features that improved response. The response rate for the FY 2002 survey was 98.7 percent for degree-granting institutions. The response rates were 99.7 for public 4-year, 98.7 for public 2-year, 98.7 for not-for-profit 4-year, and 98.4 for not-for-profit 2-year. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2002-03 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2002 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2002 (NCES 2005-168). The response rate for the FY 2003 survey was 99.9 percent for degree-granting institutions. The response rates were 100.0 for public 4-year, 99.8 for public 2-year, 99.9 for not-for-profit 4-year, and 99.2 for not-for-profit 2-year. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2002-03 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2003 (NCES 2005-177).
Two general methods of imputation were used in HEGIS. If the prior year's data were available for a nonresponding institution, these data were inflated using the Higher Education Price Index and adjusted according to changes in enrollments. If no previous year's data were available, current data were used from peer institutions selected for location (state or region), control, level, and enrollment size of institution. In most cases estimates for nonreporting institutions in IPEDS were made using data from peer institutions.
Beginning with FY 87, the IPEDS survey system included all postsecondary institutions, but maintained comparability with earlier surveys by allowing 2- and 4-year institutions to be tabulated separately. For FY 87 through FY 91, in order to maintain comparability with the historical time series of HEGIS institutions, data were combined from two of the three different survey forms that make up the IPEDS survey system. The vast majority of the data were tabulated from form 1, which was used to collect information from public and private not-for-profit 2- and 4-year colleges. Form 2, a condensed form, was used to gather data for the 2-year for-profit institutions. Because of the differences in the data requested on the two forms, several assumptions were made about the form 2 reports so that their figures could be included in the degree-granting institutions totals.
In IPEDS, the form 2 institutions were not asked to separate appropriations from grants and contracts, nor state from local sources of funding. For the form 2 institutions, all the federal revenues were assumed to be federal grants and contracts, and all of the state and local revenues were assumed to be restricted state grants and contracts. All other form 2 sources of revenue, except for tuition and fees and sales and services of educational activities, were included under "other." Similar adjustments were made to the expenditure accounts. The form 2 institutions reported instruction and scholarship and fellowship expenditures only. All other educational and general expenditures were allocated to academic support.
The NCES study, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Data Quality Study, Methodology Report, July 2005 (NCES 2005-175), found only a small percentage (2.9 percent/168) of postsecondary institutions either revised data or submitted data for items they previously left unreported. Though relatively few institutions made changes the changes made were relatively large—greater than 10 percent of the original. With a few exceptions these changes, large as they were, did not greatly affect the aggregate totals.
Again, institutions were more likely to report data to IPEDS rather than to Thomson Peterson, and there was a higher percentage reporting different values among those reporting to both. The magnitude of the difference was generally greater for research expenditures. It is likely that the large differences are a function of the way institutions report this data to both entities.
Further information on IPEDS Financial Statistics surveys may be obtained from:
Cathy Statham
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Cathy.Statham@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds
NCES Sources