Integrated Postsecondary 

Education Data System (IPEDS) 

2014-2016

Proposed changes to the IPEDS 

data collection instruments for 

2014-15 and 2015-16

OMB No. 1850-0582 v.13

Submitted by:

National Center for Education Statistics

Institute of Education Sciences

U.S. Department of Education

March 6, 2013
2

Summary

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) seeks authorization from OMB to continue its Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) data collection. Current authorization expires 6/30/2014 (OMB No. 

1850-0582). We are requesting a new clearance for the 2014-15 and 2015-16 data collections to enable us to provide 

consistency in our collection of postsecondary data over the next three years and to offer institutions a “preview” 

year for changes to IPEDS data reporting forms. During the preview year, new items and associated reporting 

instructions will be available for preview through the Survey Materials web page, to give institutions one-year 

advance notice of how new data items will be collected in the future. In addition, we are requesting to carry over the 

clearance for the 2013-14 data collection which was obtained on 1/4/13, because this data collection occurs within 

the 3-year period covered by this clearance request. 

IPEDS is a web-based data collection system designed to collect basic data from all postsecondary institutions in the 

United States and the other jurisdictions. IPEDS enables NCES to report on key dimensions of postsecondary 

education such as enrollments, degrees and other awards earned, tuition and fees, average net price, student financial 

aid, graduation rates, revenues and expenditures, faculty salaries, and staff employed. The IPEDS web-based data 

collection system was implemented in 2000-01, and it collects basic data from approximately 7,500 postsecondary 

institutions in the United States and the other jurisdictions that are eligible to participate in Title IV Federal financial 

aid programs. All Title IV institutions are required to respond to IPEDS (Section 490 of the Higher Education 

Amendments of 1992 (P.L. 102-325)). IPEDS allows other (non-title IV) institutions to participate on a voluntary 

basis. About 200 elect to respond. IPEDS data are available to the public through the College Navigator and IPEDS 

Data Center websites.

This clearance package includes a number of proposed changes to the data collection.
3

Proposed Changes to the IPEDS Data Collection for 2014-15 and 2015-16

Background

Most of the proposed changes were suggested by the IPEDS Technical Review Panel (TRP). Meetings of the 

IPEDS TRP are convened by RTI International, the contractor for the IPEDS web-based data collection system; 

subject areas for the meetings are determined by legislation, emerging areas of concern in postsecondary 

education, and an ongoing goal of decreasing reporting burden while retaining the federal data necessary for use 

by policy makers and education analysts. Detailed summaries of each meeting are posted

(https://edsurveys.rti.org/IPEDS_TRP/TRP.aspx) and comments on panel suggestions are solicited. Five

meetings of the TRP resulted in changes included in this clearance package, as summarized in the table below.

Table 1: IPEDS TRP Meetings Relevant to Proposed Changes

Topic (Date) Summary

Survey Components 

Affected

Academic 

Libraries

(August 2011)

Based on a review of the current Academic Libraries Survey, which is not part of 

IPEDS, the Technical Review Panel suggests that a number of data elements be 

integrated into IPEDS in order to retain federal data necessary for policy making 

and analysis, while also improving response rates and reducing reporting burden 

for institutions.

 Institutional 

Characteristics

 New IPEDS 

component on 

Academic Libraries to 

replace the existing 

Academic Libraries 

Survey

Data on Veterans

(November 2011)

Since the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Program (Post-9/11 GI Bill) 

went into effect in August 2009, there has been dramatic growth in both the 

number of beneficiaries and benefits payments under the program to support 

study at postsecondary institutions. The increase in beneficiaries and federal 

dollars expended has led to demand for more information for (1) researchers to 

study the impact of these programs on college participation and success; (2) 

institutional researchers and other data users to conduct peer comparison in 

serving these students; (3) veterans and military service members looking to use 

their educational benefits; and (4) policymakers to assess the effectiveness of 

benefits programs and return on investment.

The Technical Review Panel suggests collecting information on veterans and 

military service members and the use of education benefits in order to capture 

data necessary for policy making and analysis, while also improving information 

available to veterans and military service members considering postsecondary 

education.

 Institutional 

Characteristics

 Student Financial Aid

Selected 

Outcomes of the 

Advisory

Committee on 

Measures of 

Student Success 

(February and 

October 2012)

The Committee on Measures of Student Success recommended that the 

Department of Education broaden the coverage of student graduation data to 

reflect the diverse student populations at 2-year institutions and improve the 

collection of student progression and completion data. In response, the 

Department released an action plan for improving measures of postsecondary 

student success in support of the Administration’s college completion agenda and 

based on those recommendations.

Two IPEDS Technical Review Panel meetings were convened to address these 

needs. The first panel suggested that NCES clarify the definition of a 

degree/certificate-seeking student for IPEDS reporting purposes and collect 

certain outcome information in IPEDS for first-time, part-time students. The 

second panel suggested that NCES collect certain outcome information in IPEDS 

for non-first-time students similar to information that was proposed by the first 

panel for first-time, part-time students. The panel also suggested that similar 

outcome information be collected for first-time, full-time students.

 New Component 

on Outcome 

Measures
4

Table 1: IPEDS TRP Meetings Relevant to Proposed Changes

Topic (Date) Summary

Survey Components 

Affected

Finance for ForProfit Institutions

(August 2012)

The for-profit sector has experienced dramatic growth in both the number of 

institutions and enrollments since 2000. At the same time, demand for 

transparency around college costs and spending at all types of postsecondary 

institutions has increased. Policymakers and other stakeholders have expressed 

interest in topics like the distribution of instructional expenses by expense type 

and the percentage of total revenue from federal grants. However, the FASB 

forms for for-profit institutions collect considerably less detail than the FASB 

forms for nonprofit institutions and GASB forms, so there are limitations to 

accurately comparing these data statewide or aggregating them at the national 

level.

Based on a review of the current Finance component, the Technical Review 

Panel suggests that a number of changes be made to the FASB forms for forprofit institutions to increase data comparability across institutional sectors and 

utility to institutions and decision makers, while also ensuring data being reported 

are appropriate for the sector and accurately represent the institutions.

 Finance

Changes to 

IPEDS Data 

Collection 

Calendar 

(November 2007)

When the IPEDS web-based data collection system was implemented in 2000, a 

three-collection design was chosen. It was a good transition strategy from a 

paper-based system to a web-based system, and simplified development of the 

new technology. Based on the information available at the time, it aligned the 

collection of data from institutions to the times when the information was 

available. It simplified the scheduling of IPEDS tasks at institutions and state 

offices. But the web-based environment makes it possible to be far more flexible 

than the three-collection format will allow, so the TRP was convened to explore 

the possibilities.

The panel suggested numerous modifications to the IPEDS Data Collection 

Calendar, many of which have been phased in since the panel met.

 Institutional 

Characteristics

Detailed descriptions of all proposed changes are included in the following section, by survey component.

A Note about the Timing and Implementation of the Changes

NCES will once again offer institutions a “preview” year for additions to IPEDS data 

reporting forms. During the preview year, new items and associated reporting instructions 

will be available for preview through the Survey Materials web page, to give institutions 

one-year advance notice of how new data items will be collected in the future. The 

preview year for items in this clearance package will be 2013-14. 
5

Detailed Proposed Changes to Forms by IPEDS Survey Component

Institutional Characteristics (IC)

The first two changes below will provide important information about veterans and academic libraries; these 

were proposed by the IPEDS TRP. The TRP suggested that an item concerning services available to veterans be 

placed on IC. The TRP also suggested that the Academic Libraries Survey be re-integrated into IPEDS and a

screening question to determine institutional level of reporting for a new Academic Libraries component be 

placed on IC. 

The estimated enrollment items on IC were added in 2006-07 to fill a perceived need for an early estimate of fall 

enrollment, due to the fact that the IPEDS Fall Enrollment component is not collected until the following Spring. 

However, NCES has determined that these data are not of particularly good quality. Their inclusion in the 

IPEDS Data Center is a source of confusion to many (if not most) data users, and there is evidence that they are 

not being widely used. Further, these data are not displayed on College Navigator because they are estimates.

 

The last proposed change listed relates to moving the collection of admissions data to a small, separate 

component in the Winter. This change was proposed by the IPEDS TRP; moving the due date will enable all 

institutions to report data for the most recent Fall period. This, in turn, will make the IPEDS admissions data in 

the Data Center less confusing for data users, since only one reporting period will be represented in each data 

file. It will also mean that admissions data will be able to be used in the Trend Generator, which many data users 

have requested.

As a result of TRP suggestions and public comments, NCES requests clearance on the following two new items

on the Institutional Characteristics component, the deletion of estimated enrollment items, and the creation of a 

new Admissions component in the Winter data collection, comprised entirely of items moved from the 

Institutional Characteristics component.

Table 2: Proposed Changes to the IC Form (all versions)

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Add the following item to collect data on veterans:

 Which of the following are available to veterans, military service 

members, or their families?

o Post-9/11 GI Bill, Yellow Ribbon Program

o Credit for military training

o Dedicated point of contact for support services for veterans, 

military service members, and their families

o Recognized student veteran organization

o Member of Servicemembers Opportunity Colleges

 URL for tuition policies specifically related to veterans and military 

service members

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Veterans

TRP

Minimal

Add screening question for degree-granting institutions to determine level 

of reporting on new Academic Libraries component:

 What are your annual total library expenditures?

 If annual total library expenditures = 0 there is no additional 

reporting.

 If annual total library expenditures >0, the institution will submit 

the new Academic Libraries component, as described in the 

Academic Libraries section below.

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Academic 

Libraries

TRP

Minimal

Delete Estimated Enrollment Items

 Early estimates of full-time and part-time undergraduate students, 

first-time undergraduate students, and graduate students, as of 

October 15 or the institution’s official fall reporting date.

2014-15 NCES, 

public 

comments

Slight 

decrease
6

Table 2: Proposed Changes to the IC Form (all versions)

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Delete the following items that collect admissions information from IC, 

and create a separate small component in the Winter collection. Items 

will be collected only from institutions that do not have an open admission 

policy. Moving the collection of these items to the Winter collection will 

enable all institutions to report data for the most recent fall period.

 Admissions requirements: Select the option (required, 

recommended, neither required nor recommended, don’t know) that 

best describes how your institution uses any of the following data in 

its undergraduate selection process:

o Secondary school GPA

o Secondary school rank

o Secondary school record

o Completion of college-preparatory program

o Recommendations

o Formal demonstration of competencies (e.g., portfolios, 

certificates of mastery, assessment instruments)

o Admission test scores

 SAT/ACT

 Other test (ABT, Wonderlic, WISC-III, etc.)

 TOEFL 

 Provide the number of first-time, degree/certificate-seeking students 

who applied, who were admitted, and who enrolled (either full- or 

part-time) at your institution for the most recent fall period. For each 

category, report men, women, and total as available.

o Number of applicants

o Number of admissions

o Number (of admitted) that enrolled full-time

o Number (of admitted) that enrolled part-time

 If test scores are required for admission for first-time, 

degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students, provide the 

number and percentage of enrolled students submitting SAT and/or 

ACT scores, and the 25th and 75th percentile scores for each test 

listed:

o SAT Critical Reading, Math, Writing

o ACT composite, English, Math, Writing

2014-15 Calendar 

TRP

None. 

Change in 

when data are 

collected.
7

Student Financial Aid (SFA)

TRP 36, Collecting Data on Veterans, focused on discussing possible ways to utilize existing data and collect 

new information on veterans and military service members to better address policy and research questions, as 

well as to provide more detailed information on the number and types of students using education benefits and 

how these students are being served by institutions. Many of the panel members either directly represented 

veterans organizations or represented institutions enrolling a large number of veterans and military service 

members.

Additionally, Executive Order 13607 requires the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Secretaries of 

Defense and Veterans Affairs, as part of IPEDS and other data collection systems, to collect information on the 

amount of funding received pursuant to the Post-9/11 Bill and the Tuition Assistance Program, for posting on the 

College Navigator website.

As a result of TRP suggestions, public comments, and Executive Order 13607, NCES requests clearance on the 

following items on the Student Financial Aid component.

Table 3: Proposed Changes to the IPEDS SFA Form (all forms)

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Add the following items:

o Number of undergraduate and graduate students

receiving Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits and the total dollar 

amount of tuition and fee benefits awarded to them 

through the institution

o Number of undergraduate and graduate students

receiving DoD Tuition Assistance and the total dollar 

amount of DoD Tuition Assistance awarded to them 

through the institution

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Veterans TRP Moderate
8

Outcome Measures (OM)

The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 established the U.S. Department of Education’s Committee on 

Measures of Student Success to advise the Secretary of Education in assisting 2-year degree-granting institutions 

of higher education in meeting the completion or graduation rate disclosure requirements outlined in the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended. The Committee completed its work in December 2011.

In its final report to the Secretary, the Committee noted that the “current federal graduation rate measure is 

incomplete and does not adequately convey the wide range of student outcomes at 2-year institutions.” In 

addition, the Committee observed that “data are not collected on other important outcomes achieved by students 

at 2-year institutions.”

The Committee recommended that the Department:

 Broaden the coverage of student graduation data to reflect the diverse student populations at 2-year 

institutions

 Improve the collection of student progression and completion data

 Improve technical guidance to institutions in meeting statutory disclosure requirements

 Encourage institutions to disclose comparable data on employment outcomes and provide incentives for 

sharing promising practices on measuring student learning

Although its work focused on 2-year institutions, the Committee suggested that its recommendations be 

considered and implemented for 4-year institutions as well. The Committee’s final report is available at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/cmss-committee-report-final.pdf. 

In April 2012, the Department released an action plan for improving measures of postsecondary student success 

in support of the Administration’s college completion agenda and based on the recommendations of the 

Committee on Measures of Student Success (http://www.ed.gov/edblogs/ous/files/2012/03/Action-Plan-forImproving-Measures-of-Postsecondary-Student-Success-FINAL2.pdf).

The Department’s action plan is designed to improve the quality and availability of student success data at the 

federal level for consumers, institutions, policymakers, and researchers. This plan also includes activities to help 

institutions, systems, and states increase their capacity for collecting and disseminating data on student success. 

Various offices within the Department are responsible for implementing the activities within the plan. In the plan, 

the Department has committed to “revise, where feasible under its current authority, existing data collection 

vehicles to include more comprehensive measures of student success for a broader group of students.”

As part of this activity, the NCES has taken steps to enhance graduation rate and transfer rate reporting in 

IPEDS. Using existing processes for considering changes to IPEDS, NCES examined the feasibility of 

broadening measures by collecting outcome information for part-time, degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate 

students and non-first-time, degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students in IPEDS.

IPEDS TRP 37 was convened in February 2012 to discuss the feasibility of collecting outcome information on 

first-time, part-time students. The TRP suggested that NCES clarify the definition of a degree/certificate-seeking 

student for IPEDS reporting purposes and collect certain outcome information in IPEDS for first-time, part-time 

students. 

IPEDS TRP 40 was convened in October 2012 to discuss the feasibility of collecting outcome information on 

non-first-time students. The TRP suggested that NCES collect certain outcome information in IPEDS for nonfirst-time students similar to information that TRP 37 proposed for first-time, part-time students. The TRP also 

suggested that similar outcome information be collected for first-time, full-time students. Institutions would 

report outcome information for four cohorts in mutually exclusive categories, as outlined below. 
9

The new outcome information that institutions would report to IPEDS is designed to provide consumers, 

policymakers, and researchers context for and an alternative to the graduation rates calculated for the purposes of 

the Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act of 1990.

To expedite the availability of data that will be useful to consumers, policymakers, and researchers, TRP 40 

suggested that institutions report on student outcomes retrospectively. If a prospective reporting model were 

used, outcome measures data would not be available until 2023. 

As a result of TRP suggestions and public comments, NCES requests clearance to implement a new Outcome 

Measures component in the Winter collection.

Table 4: Proposed New Outcome Measures Component 

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Collect outcome measures data from degree-granting 

institutions on 4 degree/certificate-seeking student cohorts as 

shown below. Academic reporting institutions will report on Fall 

cohorts; program and hybrid reporters will report on Full-year 

cohorts.

 Full-time, first-time students

 Part-time, first-time students

 Full-time, non-first-time entering students

 Part-time, non-first-time entering students

Note: Data will not be disaggregated by race, ethnicity, or 

gender. 

Note: No outcome data will be collected from non-degreegranting institutions.

For each of the 4 cohorts, collect a status update using the 

following categories:

 Received award

 Did not receive award, still enrolled at reporting 

institution

 Did not receive award, subsequently enrolled at 

another institution

 Did not receive award, subsequent enrollment status 

unknown

A total of students who did not receive an award will be 

calculated. 

Collect the status update from both 2-year and 4-year 

institutions 8 years after the cohort enters the institution. 

Outcome Measures data collection will begin in 2014-15. 

Institutions will report on their 2006 cohorts.

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Outcome 

Measures TRPs

Substantial
10

Admissions (ADM)

As detailed in the Institutional Characteristics section above, NCES proposes moving the collection of 

admissions data to a small, separate component in the Winter. This change was proposed by the IPEDS TRP so 

that all institutions will be able to report data for the most recent Fall period. This, in turn, will make the IPEDS 

admissions data in the Data Center less confusing for data users, since only one reporting period will be 

represented in each data file. It will also mean that admissions data will be able to be used in the Trend 

Generator, which many data users have requested. Finally, it will ensure that admissions data displayed on 

College Navigator will represent the same Fall period.

NCES requests clearance to establish a separate Admissions component in the Winter collection.

Table 5: Proposed Separate Admissions Component 

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Create separate small component in the Winter collection from items 

formerly in IC component. Items will be collected only from institutions 

that do not have an open admission policy. Moving the collection of these 

items to the Winter collection will enable all institutions to report data for 

the most recent fall period.

 Admissions requirements: Select the option (required, 

recommended, neither required nor recommended, don’t know) that 

best describes how your institution uses any of the following data in 

its undergraduate selection process:

o Secondary school GPA

o Secondary school rank

o Secondary school record

o Completion of college-preparatory program

o Recommendations

o Formal demonstration of competencies (e.g., portfolios, 

certificates of mastery, assessment instruments)

o Admission test scores

 SAT/ACT

 Other test (ABT, Wonderlic, WISC-III, etc.)

 TOEFL 

 Provide the number of first-time, degree/certificate-seeking students 

who applied, who were admitted, and who enrolled (either full- or 

part-time) at your institution for the most recent fall period. For each 

category, report men, women, and total as available.

o Number of applicants

o Number of admissions

o Number (of admitted) that enrolled full-time

o Number (of admitted) that enrolled part-time

 If test scores are required for admission for first-time, 

degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students, provide the 

number and percentage of enrolled students submitting SAT and/or 

ACT scores, and the 25th and 75th percentile scores for each test 

listed:

o SAT Critical Reading, Math, Writing

o ACT composite, English, Math, Writing

2014-15 Calendar 

TRP

None. 

Change in 

when data are 

collected.
11

Finance (F)

TRP 39, Improving Finance Survey Forms for For-Profit Institutions, centered around how to increase data 

comparability across institutional sectors and utility to institutions and decision makers, while also ensuring data 

being reported are appropriate for the sector and accurately represent the institutions. Members of the for-profit 

sector were well represented on the panel.

The for-profit sector has experienced dramatic growth in both the number of institutions and enrollments since 

2000. At the same time, demand for transparency around college costs and spending at all types of postsecondary 

institutions has increased. Policymakers and other stakeholders have expressed interest in topics like the 

distribution of instructional expenses by expense type and the percentage of total revenue from federal grants. 

However, the FASB forms for for-profit institutions collect considerably less detail than the FASB forms for 

nonprofit institutions and GASB forms, so there are limitations to accurately comparing these data statewide or 

aggregating them at the national level.

The panel examined the current finance survey forms item by item to consider which items are reported by 

GASB and nonprofit FASB institutions that could also be reported by the for-profit institutions to increase 

comparability across the forms. This review of the finance forms also focused on possible additions to the FASB 

forms for for-profit institutions that could help provide a more complete picture of financial conditions within 

higher education and address changing policy and research needs.

As a result of TRP suggestions and public comments, NCES requests clearance on the following items on the 

Finance component.

Table 6: Proposed Changes to the For-Profit Finance Form

Change Implementation 

Year Source Estimated burden

Make changes to Revenues information collected

 Separate federal appropriations, grants, and contracts into two 

categories: 

o Federal appropriations

o Federal grants and contracts

 Separate state and local government appropriations, grants, 

and contracts into four categories: 

o State appropriations

o State grants and contracts

o Local appropriations

o Local grants and contracts

 Add private gifts to be reported with private grants and 

contracts 

 Add the following two revenues categories:

o Hospital services

o Independent operations revenue

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Finance

TRP

Significant increase
12

Table 6: Proposed Changes to the For-Profit Finance Form

Make changes to Expenses information collected:

 Separate research and public service into two categories:

o Research

o Public service

 Separate academic support, student services, and institutional 

support into three categories:

o Academic support

o Student services

o Institutional support

 Add the following new functional expense categories:

o Operation and maintenance of plant

o Hospital services

o Independent operations 

 The following categories will be allocated across the functional 

categories and will also be reported as a total amount 

following the expense matrix used by public and private 

nonprofit institutions:

o Salaries and wages

o Employee fringe benefits

o Operations and maintenance 

o Interest

o Depreciation

o All other

 Add a new screening question:

o What is your business structure?

Based on the information provided, institutions with 

the business structure of either C Corporations or 

LLC will subsequently be asked to report income tax 

expenses as follows:

 Total Federal income tax expenditures

 Total state and local income tax 

expenditures

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Finance

TRP

Significant increase

Make changes to Scholarships and Fellowships information collected:

 Separate state and local grants (government) into two 

categories:

o Grants by state government

o Grants by local government

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Finance

TRP

Significant increase

Make changes to Balance Sheet information collected:

 Add the following new categories:

o Long-term investments 

o Property, plant, and equipment, net of accumulated 

depreciation 

o Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization 

o Debt related to property, plant, and equipment 

o Additional detail to align with financial statements 

o Land improvements 

o Buildings 

o Equipment—including art and library collections 

o Construction in progress 

o Other plant, property, and equipment 

o Total plant, property, and equipment 

o Accumulated depreciation

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview 

year)

Finance

TRP

Significant increase
13

Academic Libraries (AL)

TRP 35, Reintegrating the Academic Libraries Survey (ALS) into IPEDS, considered the feasibility of 

reintegrating ALS into IPEDS, examined current ALS data elements, and discussed ways of improving data 

quality by clarifying definitions and better aligning key elements of the library component with data reported in 

other IPEDS components. Representation on the panel included individuals from academic libraries.

The current Academic Libraries Survey is collected from degree-granting postsecondary institutions every other 

year in even-numbered years; the current burden estimate is 8.1 hours. When implemented in IPEDS, the 

Academic Libraries component will be comprised of fewer items, collected annually; the TRP estimated that the 

burden would be 4 hours. 

As a result of TRP suggestions and public comments, NCES requests clearance to implement a new Academic 

Libraries component in the Spring data collection, to replace the existing ALS.

Table 7: Proposed New Academic Libraries Component 

Change Implementation Year Source Estimated 

burden

Add items for degree-granting institutions if expenditures > 0:

 Is the library collection entirely electronic? (Y/N)

 Collect library collections counts, physical and 

digital/electronic, as applicable:

o Books

o Serial titles

o Databases

o Media

Circulation, physical and digital/electronic, as applicable

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview year)

Academic 

Libraries TRP

Moderate

Add items for degree-granting institutions if expenditures are > 

threshold:

 Number of branch and independent libraries—exclude 

main or central library

 Total salaries and wages

 Are staff fringe benefits paid out of the library budget? 

(Y/N)

 Fringe benefit expenditures if paid by the library budget

 One-time purchases of books, serial backfiles and other 

materials

 Ongoing commitments to subscriptions

 Other information resources

 Preservation services

 All other operations and maintenance expenditures

 Total interlibrary loans and documents provided to other 

libraries

 Total interlibrary loans and documents received

Does your library support virtual reference services?

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview year)

Academic 

Libraries TRP

Moderate
14

All Survey Components

In order to provide better estimates of burden on an ongoing basis, NCES will ask IPEDS keyholders to report 

voluntarily the time required to complete each survey component as follows: in the 2012-13 data collection, the 

2014-15 data collection, and every third year thereafter. NCES estimates a burden of 0.2 hours to track, record 

and report this time for the following components: Institutional Characteristics and Admissions, Completions, 

12-month Enrollment, Graduation Rates, 200% Graduation Rates, Outcome Measures, and Fall Enrollment. 

NCES estimates it will take 0.4 hours for Student Financial Aid, Finance, Human Resources, and Academic 

Libraries, because these four components typically involve additional offices at the institution and require 

keyholders to get time estimates from others at the institution. 

Burden Calculations 

In the previous IPEDS request for clearance, submitted for the 2011-12 through 2013-14 data collections, based 

on an NCES-commissioned study of burden estimates and revisions across federal agencies, NCES proposed to 

ask respondents to voluntarily report the time required to prepare and complete each component of the IPEDS 

data collection at the end of the survey form. This voluntary collection was implemented in the 2012-13 data 

collection, and the results from the Fall data collection were used in establishing burden estimates for the Fall 

components. Results from the Winter and Spring data collections will be used in future estimates.

Detailed findings and calculations can be found in section A.12, starting on page 27.