Integrated Postsecondary 

Education Data System (IPEDS) 

2014-2016 and 2013 carry over

Supporting Statement Part A

OMB Paperwork Reduction Act Submission 

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

Revised July 31, 2013

Revised September 23, 2013
Table of Contents

Summary.................................................................................................................................................1

A. Justification..............................................................................................................................14

A.1. Purpose of this Submission.........................................................................................14

A.2. Purpose and Use of IPEDS Information .....................................................................18

A.3. Use of Technology and Other Technological Collection Techniques........................24

A.4. Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication..................................................................25

A.5. Methods Used to Minimize Burden on Small Businesses/Entities.............................25

A.6. Frequency of Data Collection .....................................................................................25

A.7. Special Circumstances................................................................................................26

A.8. Consultations Outside the Agency..............................................................................26

A.9. Paying Respondents....................................................................................................26

A.10. Assurance of Confidentiality ......................................................................................26

A.11. Justification for Sensitive Questions...........................................................................27

A.12. Estimate of Burden .....................................................................................................27

A.13. Estimate of Cost Burden.............................................................................................30

A.14. Cost to the Federal Government .................................................................................30

A.15. Reasons for Change in Burden ...................................................................................31

A.16. Publication Plans/Project Schedule.............................................................................45

A.17. Request to Not Display Expiration Date.....................................................................48

A.18. Exceptions to the Certification....................................................................................48

B. Description of Statistical Methodology .....................................................................................1

B.1. Respondent Universe ....................................................................................................1

B.2. Statistical Methodology ................................................................................................1

B.3. Methods to Maximize Response Rate...........................................................................1

B.4. Tests of Procedures and Methods.................................................................................2

B.5. Reviewing Individuals..................................................................................................2
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.

Revisions to Clearance Requested, after 30-day Comment Period 

Two revisions have been made to the proposed IPEDS 2013-2016 collection, subsequent to the original 30-day 

comment period (August 8-September 9, 2013). 

The first revision is to the Academic Libraries component. The item “Serial Titles” was deleted because it had been 

deleted from the 2012 Academic Libraries Survey between the Technical Review Panel meeting and the submission 

of the clearance package.

The second revision is to the Outcome Measures component. A cohort status report at 6 years was added for all 

institutions to accommodate the measurement of awards in a timeframe that will align with proposed policy changes 

related to federal student loan limits and to provide a second point in time measure to assist students and their parents 

in the college selection process. Award information will now be reported at both the 6 year and 8 year timeframe, 8 

years after the cohort enters the institution.
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 the Outcome Measures (OM) component will be 2014-15. For all other items in this 

clearance package, the preview year 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

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
8

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. 

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.
9

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 at 8 years after the cohort enters the institution with 

award information collected for both the 6-year and 8-year 

timeframes. Outcome Measures data collection will begin in 

2015-16. Institutions will report on their 2007 cohorts.

2015-16

(2014-15 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

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.
13

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 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.
15

Section A. Justification

A.1. Purpose of this Submission

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is seeking clearance for the Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) for the 2014-15 and 2015-16 collections. Current 

clearance covers the 2011-12 through 2013-14 survey years and is due to expire on June 30, 2014. We 

are therefore requesting (1) to carry over the clearance for the 2013-14 data collection, and (2) a new 

clearance to conduct the 2014-15 and 2015-16 data collections, and to provide institutions with a preview 

year (in 2013-14) of new data submission requirements for 2014-15 for all sections except the Outcomes 

Measures, which will be previewed in 2014-2015 and collected in 2015-2016 (in response to public 

comment).

a. The Design of IPEDS

Related Background Information

IPEDS was developed to address technical problems with previous postsecondary education statistical 

programs, including the Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS) and the Vocational 

Education Data System (VEDS). IPEDS was designed to collect accurate, reliable and timely data from 

the entire postsecondary universe. Although it was based on the HEGIS model, which provides 

institution-level data submitted either directly to NCES by the institution or through a central or state 

coordinating office, the IPEDS design allows for varying institution types. The institution-level data 

collection allows for aggregation of results at various levels and permits significant controls on data 

quality to be exercised by NCES.

IPEDS Components

The IPEDS system consists of several components that obtain and disseminate 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 the resources involved in the provision of 

institutionally based postsecondary education, both human and financial. These approved components 

include:

 Institutional Characteristics (IC);

 Completions (C);

 Fall Enrollment (EF); 

 12-month Enrollment (E12);

 Student Financial Aid (SFA);

 Graduation Rates (GR); 

 200% Graduation Rates (GR200);

 Human Resources (HR); and

 Finance (F)

b. Proposed Modifications

1. Data Collection Method

We are proposing to continue using the IPEDS web-based system of collection for all components. 

This collection is organized into three phases based on data availability at the institutions: Fall, 

Winter, and Spring. 
16

The Fall collection includes: 

 Institutional Characteristics

 Completions 

 12-month Enrollment

The Winter and Spring components open simultaneously to allow respondents who wish to submit 

Spring data early to do so:

Winter collection components:

 Student Financial Aid 

 Graduation Rates

 200% Graduation Rates

 Outcome Measures – NEW component for 2015-16

 Admissions – NEW component for 2014-15 comprised of items moved from IC

Spring collection components:

 Fall Enrollment

 Finance 

 Human Resources

 Academic Libraries – NEW component for 2014-15

Institutions are able to enter data manually on a web-based form or to upload a file containing the 

data. In many instances, prior year data are provided for comparison purposes. The data are edited 

as they are entered into the system, and respondents must either correct any errors identified or enter 

an explanation to submit their response to NCES. This process shortens data processing time, 

increases data quality, and reduces burden on institutions by precluding the need for repeated 

callbacks from NCES contractors. The IPEDS system is accessible to persons with disabilities.

2. Data Content

We are proposing considerable additions in data content over the next three years. The formats for 

reporting IPEDS data are very similar to those used for the 2001-02 through 2013-14 data collection 

cycles. 

We anticipate that the IPEDS Technical Review Panel (TRP) may recommend consideration of 

additional data items; however, no major changes (additional items) will be made to the IPEDS 

forms without prior notification to OMB and subsequent approval. The IPEDS TRP was formed to 

assist NCES contractors in a variety of ways including: making suggestions for updating the surveys 

with items that are more relevant to current postsecondary issues; discussing universe definitions; 

suggesting ways IPEDS can better serve the institutions and respondents; discussing outcomes and 

products; and discussing current issues. The TRP generally meets three times a year (but not on a 

regular schedule) to discuss various topics of interest to the community of IPEDS data providers and 

data users. 

How the panels work:

 Issue/topic is identified;

 Panelists with expertise in the topic are invited to attend the meeting;

 A background paper is prepared by a consultant and distributed to panel members for review 

prior to the meeting;

 Meetings are held and the topics are discussed at length;

 Discussion and any suggestions are summarized and posted to the IPEDS website;
17

 The contractor accepts comments from the public on the topic;

 Once comments are received, they are summarized and sent to NCES; 

 Finally, a document is posted to the website that includes a summary of comments and 

NCES/IPEDS’ intent to respond and/or implement actions as a result of the comments.

c. Need for Clearance at this Time

Clearance helps assure that IPEDS maintains a consistent set of data items in order to collect data from the 

various institutions at the needed time and with the needed detail. This is important since the utility and 

quality of data collected in one component in some cases are dependent upon, and in all cases are enhanced 

by, data collected in other components. Internal consistency and the inherent relationships among IPEDS 

components also permit reliability indicators to be established for many of the IPEDS data elements. Having 

the capability for assessing reliability on an on-going basis and, in turn, being able to address individual and 

systemic problems as they occur, will result in significantly better postsecondary education data. Moreover, 

the concept of a data system rather than stand-alone, independent survey components also allows for the 

elimination of duplication of effort and thus reduces response burden. The web-based data collection system 

will continue to allow NCES to comply with the Higher Education Act, which required the redesign of the 

data collection system, so as to improve the timeliness and quality of IPEDS data, by increasing the 

efficiency of data collection. 

Additionally, clearance will update the IPEDS burden estimates, reflecting revisions resulting from 

institutional estimates and NCES and GAO studies. The GAO report suggested that NCES consider basing 

estimates on institutional characteristics and IPEDS keyholder experience, as these have a more significant 

impact on variations in time burden than the actual forms do. Based on the GAO recommendations, NCES 

developed new time burden estimates for the previous clearance request that take into account the type of 

institutions and keyholder experience. These new estimates are now updated using institutional estimates 

submitted voluntarily during the 2012-13 data collection.

d. Statutory Requirements for IPEDS Data

General Mandate

IPEDS, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics, plays a major role in responding to the 

Center's Congressional mandate under the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C., § 9573).

Mandatory Reporting for Institutions with Program Participation Agreements

The completion of all IPEDS surveys, in a timely and accurate manner, is mandatory for all institutions that 

participate in or are applicants for participation in any Federal financial assistance program authorized by 

Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. The completion of the surveys is mandated by 20 

USC 1094, Section 487(a)(17) and 34 CFR 668.14(b)(19).

Vocational Education Data

IPEDS responds to certain of the requirements pursuant to Section 421(a)(1) of the Carl D. Perkins 

Vocational Education Act. The data related to vocational program completions are collected from those 

postsecondary institutions known to provide occupationally specific vocational education.
18

Data on Race/Ethnicity and Gender of Students

The collection and reporting of racial/ethnic data on students and completers are mandatory for all 

institutions that receive, are applicants for, or expect to be applicants for Federal financial assistance as 

defined in the Department of Education (ED) regulations implementing Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 

1964 (34 CFR 100.13), or defined in any ED regulation implementing Title IX of the Education 

Amendments Act of 1972. NCES has implemented the new reporting requirements for race-ethnicity and 

use of the new race/ethnicity aggregate reporting categories is mandatory for the collection of 2010-11 data. 

Data on Race/Ethnicity and Gender of Staff

The collection and reporting of racial/ethnic data on the Human Resources (HR) component are mandatory 

for all institutions which receive, are applicants for, or expect to be applicants for Federal financial assistance 

as defined in the Department of Education (ED) regulations implementing Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 

1964 (34 CFR 100.12). The collection of data are also mandated by Public Law 88-352, Title VII of the Civil 

Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 (29 CFR 1602, subparts 

O, P, and Q).

Student Right-to-Know

Sections 668.41, 668.45, and 668.48 of the Student Assistance General Provision were amended to 

implement the Student Right-to-Know Act, as amended by the Higher Education Amendments of 1991 and 

further by the Higher Education Technical Amendments of 1993 and 1999. These final regulations require an 

institution that participates in any student financial assistance program under Title IV of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended, to disclose information about graduation or completion rates to current 

and prospective students. Data must also be reported to the Secretary of Education; this is accomplished 

through the IPEDS Graduation Rates (GRS) component.

Consumer Information 

Section 101 of the Higher Education amendments of 1965 (PL 105-244) requires that NCES collect the 

following information from institutions of higher education: tuition and fees; cost of attendance; average 

amount of financial assistance received by type of aid, and the number of students receiving each type.

Section 132 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (PL 110-315) requires that ED “make publicly 

available on the College Navigator website, in simple and understandable terms,” information regarding 

enrollments, degree completions, admissions, net price, college costs, students with disabilities, graduation 

rates, and many additional consumer information items. 

A.2. Purpose and Use of IPEDS Information

IPEDS provides NCES with the basic data needed to describe the size of the postsecondary enterprise in 

terms of students enrolled, staff employed, dollars expended, and degrees earned. The IPEDS universe also 

provides the institutional sampling frame used in most other postsecondary surveys such as the National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and the National Survey of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF). 

Each of these surveys uses the IPEDS institutional universe for its first stage sample and relies on IPEDS 

data on enrollment, completions, or staff to weight its second stage sample. 

In addition to usage within NCES and other areas of the Department of Education, IPEDS data are heavily 

relied on by Congress, other federal agencies, state governments, education providers, professional 

associations, private businesses, media, military, and interested individuals. Finally, IPEDS data are used in 

the IPEDS Data Feedback Reports, annual reports that are sent to all postsecondary institutions. They 

contain data and figures comparing each individual institution to a group of “comparison” institutions, using 
19

a variety of IPEDS data variables and derived variables, and are mailed to the Chief Executive Officer of 

each institution. The reports serve as a means of highlighting the utility of IPEDS data, as well as providing 

comparative data for use by institutions in meeting their institutional goals relative to their postsecondary 

“peers.”

Additional uses of IPEDS data, specific to individual survey components, include:

a. Institutional Characteristics

Institutional Characteristics data are the foundation of the entire IPEDS system. These data elements 

constitute the primary information that is necessary to interrelate and understand other descriptive kinds of 

statistical data about education, such as enrollments, staff, graduates, and finance. The information is 

essential to: 1) establishing the universe control file for IPEDS; and 2) developing data collection sampling 

frames. The IPEDS universe is used as the sampling frame for many other NCES studies, including the 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS).

In addition to the need for these data within NCES and the Department of Education (Title III and Higher 

Education Act programs and the Office for Civil Rights use data from IPEDS), other federal agencies rely on 

the database and the resulting list of postsecondary institutions. NCES has utilized IPEDS data in fulfilling 

past information requests from the Air Force; the Immigration and Naturalization Service; the Department of 

Defense (including recruiting offices of all Armed Services); the Departments of Health and Human 

Services, Agriculture, and Labor; the National Science Foundation; the Veterans Administration; the Social 

Security Administration; and members of Congress. NCES continues to fulfill information requests as they 

are received, and has also significantly increased the volume of IPEDS data available on its public websites, 

allowing end users increased access to current and historic IPEDS data.

Much of the data collected through the IC component, are of special interest to consumers, and are made 

available through College Navigator, a web-based college search tool (see http://collegenavigator.ed.gov).

Additionally, NCES makes available on College Navigator data provided by the Office of Postsecondary 

Education (OPE) and the Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) for the purpose of disseminating relevant 

information to consumers. These enhancements include: information on accreditation, varsity athletics, 

cohort default rates, 90/10 data, and campus security data.

b. Completions and Compliance Report

IPEDS information on the number of students who complete a postsecondary education program by type of 

program and level of award constitutes the only national source of information on the availability and 

location of highly trained manpower. Types of programs are categorized according to the Classification of 

Instructional Programs (CIP). The CIP is a taxonomic coding scheme that contains titles and descriptions of 

instructional programs, primarily at the postsecondary level. Business and industry, the military, and other 

groups that need to recruit individuals with particular skills use these data extensively. The data also help 

satisfy the mandate in the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act for information on completions in 

postsecondary vocational education programs.

Information on completions in postsecondary education programs has been used extensively. For example:

 Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE), uses these data to respond to public 

inquiries regarding degrees awarded by different types of institutions, and for reference guides in 

preparation for budget justifications.

 Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), uses these data in preparing the Occupational 

Outlook Handbook and in matching projections of labor supply and demand.
20

 State Occupational Information Coordinating Committees (SOICC) also make use of these data on an 

annual basis for assisting citizens in career planning and in making state and local area estimates of 

trained manpower.

 The Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, uses these data to supply information to 

Members of Congress in order to assist them in assessing the changing and developing needs of the 

Nation with respect to manpower and postsecondary education.

 The Department of Agriculture, Office of Higher Education Programs, uses these data to include 

program data on agriculture and home economics in various reports.

 The National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resource Studies, relies heavily on IPEDS 

Completions survey data, in conjunction with their own surveys, to study degree production, particularly 

in science, mathematics, and engineering fields. 

 The U.S. Office of Personnel Management uses these data to provide guidance to other Federal agencies 

in their recruiting efforts. 

 The Office for Civil Rights (Department of Education) uses these data in reviewing institutional 

compliance with anti-discrimination statutes.

 The Department of Justice uses these data when court suits are brought in civil rights cases.

 The Department of Defense uses these data to identify institutions training significant numbers of 

individuals in occupational programs, and with particular military related skills.

 Private firms use these data for recruiting trained manpower and large corporations use the racial/ethnic 

completions data to identify the potential pool of new employees for EEO requirements.

 States also use data by program to compare changes in degree patterns among states and for manpower 

planning and projections.

 The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has utilized these data for use in developing 

their institutional classification schemes. 

c. Enrollment

Enrollment is probably the most basic parameter in postsecondary education since it indicates access to an 

educational experience that is potentially both economically and socially advantageous. Because enrollment 

patterns differ greatly among the various types of postsecondary institutions, there is a need for both different 

measures of enrollment and several indicators of access. Aspects of the enrollment collection are described 

below.

1. Fall Enrollment and Compliance Report

Fall enrollment is the traditional measure of student access to higher education and IPEDS continues this 

important statistical series. The Education Department uses fall enrollment data in program planning and for 

setting funding allocation standards for such legislatively controlled programs as the College Work-Study 

Program and others. NCES collects fall enrollment data through this component of IPEDS to update its 

annual college projections, its mandated annual Condition of Education report, and the Digest of Education 

Statistics. The Bureau of the Census, the National Science Foundation, and most state education agencies 

depend heavily on annual fall enrollment data for such uses as economic and financial planning, manpower 

forecasting, and policy formulation. Educational and professional associations also use IPEDS enrollment 

data for a wide variety of purposes. The race/ethnicity and gender data by level are necessary for the Office 

for Civil Rights (Department of Education) to perform functions mandated by Title VI and Title IX. 

2. Residence of First-Time Students (required in even-numbered years)

IPEDS also collects data on the counts of first-time freshmen by state of residence, including data on the 

number who graduated from high school the previous year. These data are used to monitor the flow of 

students across state lines and calculate college-going rates by state. The primary purpose of these data is to 

provide states with more complete information about the attendance of their residents in college than the 
21

States can collect in their own surveys. States can then use resulting data to make estimates about the 

college-going rates of their high school graduates, examine problems caused by excessive student outmigration or in-migration, and determine the types of institutions that attract their citizens into other states. 

Such data are critical for postsecondary education planning at the state level.

States as well as various associations have made it clear that only a national agency can collect the data 

needed to examine residence and migration patterns. There are a number of national and state level issues 

that can be addressed by collecting and disseminating residence data. These needs include the following:

 planning/budgeting for institutional support - public and private;

 planning for shifting institutional demand by region, state, and institution;

 monitoring or establishing out-of-state quotas; and

 reassessing state support to private institutions serving large numbers of in-state students.

3. Age Data (required in odd-numbered years)

In 1987, NCES began collecting fall enrollment by age of student on a biennial basis. These data offer 

insight into the relationship between the changing demographics of college-going cohorts and enrollment in 

different types of postsecondary institutions; they permit detailed projections of enrollment by institutional 

type and by age. Because a student's dependency status is strongly related to age, the data can also be used 

to provide estimates of the number of independent/dependent students attending a postsecondary institution, 

which should be useful in financial aid modeling and projections. In addition, the Department of Defense 

U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command has indicated a strong need for these data to identify 

institutions with a sufficient number of recruitment-age students to make recruiting efforts cost effective.

4. Total Entering Class

NCES began collecting total entering class data in the 2002-03 data collection, based on a recommendation 

from the TRP. These data are collected in order to address concerns that the cohort used by the Graduation 

Rates (GR) component is not representative of an institution’s entering class because the GR cohort is 

comprised only of full-time, first-time students. The collection of a total entering class allows for a more 

accurate picture of incoming students, and also permits the calculation of the fall GR cohort as a proportion 

of the total entering student body. 

5. Retention Rates

NCES began collecting retention rates data in the 2003-04 data collection, based on a need identified by the 

TRP. Retention rates data provide an indicator of postsecondary performance that is broader in scope than 

completions data or graduation rates data, and is a critical measure of success as viewed by many 2-year and 

4-year institutions. 

6. Unduplicated 12-Month Head Count 

The collection of unduplicated head count of students enrolled over a 12-month period provides a way of 

looking at enrollment that is especially valuable for institutions that utilize non-traditional calendar systems 

and institutions that offer short programs. An enrollment figure that encompasses an entire year provides a 

more complete picture of the services being provided by these schools.

7. Instructional Activity

The collection of instructional activity, as measured in total credit and/or contact hours delivered by 

institutions during a 12-month period, provides an overall indicator of the scope of educational activity 
22

provided by the institutions. NCES uses the total instructional activity measure as a basis for computing a 

total student full-time equivalency (FTE). FTE is commonly used by postsecondary institutions as a measure 

of size and performance, and is one of the best available indicators for the measurement of educational 

endeavors. 

d. Student Financial Aid

The Student Financial Aid component was added to IPEDS to help respond to the request for information on 

the cost and price of higher education in the Higher Education Amendments of 1998. Data collected through 

this component allow prospective students to compare average amounts of financial aid received by fulltime, first-time degree or certificate-seeking undergraduates by type of aid received across institutions. Data 

collected here are also used to calculate institutional net prices, as required in the Higher Education 

Opportunity Act of 2008. These data are posted on College Navigator.

e. Graduation Rates

The Graduation Rates component provides a structure for calculating comparable graduation rate statistics 

across institutions. The data also provide much needed information to researchers as an outcome measure of 

institutional productivity, and offer insight into the relationship between the changing demographics of 

college-going cohorts within different types of institutions. The information collected in this component is 

used by institutions to help satisfy regulations regarding the Student Right-to-Know Act to disclose 150 

percent of normal time graduation rates. The 200% Graduation Rates component collects consumer 

information on 200 percent graduation rates to meet requirements in the HEOA.

f. Finance

Finance data are needed for reporting and projecting the revenues and expenditures of a national activity 

representing a significant component of the GNP. To enhance the comparability and utility of the finance 

data, IPEDS redesigned the data collection instruments to conform to the accounting standards governing 

both public and private institutions. 

The Department of Education's Title III (Institutional Aid) grant program relies on the finance data to help 

determine whether or not an applicant college or university is eligible to receive a grant. These data are 

needed annually. The Government Accountability Office published a report on Postsecondary Education 

Financial Trends in Public and Private Nonprofit Institutions for the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, 

Education, Labor, and Pensions that used IPEDS finance data. The National Science Foundation is a regular 

user of IPEDS finance data. The Bureau of the Census relies on this form to collect data required in its 

census of governments. NCES and Census worked closely to ensure that one instrument satisfied the needs 

of both agencies. The Bureau of Economic Analysis also contributed significantly to this endeavor. The 

Office of Management and Budget asked NCES to collect these data because the Bureau's survey universe 

was a subset of the IPEDS universe. The Bureau of the Census also uses the data from other parts of the 

survey to:

 develop estimates of state and local governments' finances to provide to the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis for calculation of the Gross National Product; and

 collect supplemental data that their census of governments does not collect.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service are secondary users of 

NCES/Census finance data. The Office for Civil Rights has used finance data to determine states' or 

institutions' compliance with anti-discrimination laws. From these data OCR was able to determine whether 

or not predominantly black, publicly controlled institutions were being discriminated against through funding 

decisions made by state boards of higher education. The Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. 

Department of Commerce uses financial statistics to prepare totals and forecasts on total non-farm 

expenditures for structures and equipment, and to develop Gross National Product accounts. Increasing 
23

numbers of state agencies use the NCES Finance report to assemble data to plan and evaluate their higher 

education policies.

Among associations, the American Council on Education (ACE), the Association for Institutional Research, 

the Brookings Institution, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and The Delta Cost 

Project are frequent users of Finance data. Researchers from these and other organizations use the data to 

assess the economic future of the nation's colleges and universities. 

g. Human Resources

Human resource data provide another basic measure of postsecondary education because they indicate the 

extent of the human infrastructure and knowledge base represented at institutions of higher learning. 

Because the size and type of staffing patterns vary greatly across postsecondary education, there is a need to 

measure different aspects of the human capital in postsecondary institutions. 

The HR section that collects race, ethnicity, and gender data (previously referred to as the fall staff section, 

and required in odd-numbered years) replaces the former EEO-6 survey, and is used by the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in place of their data collection efforts. Under Public Law 

88-352, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 

1972, all institutions of higher education that have 15 or more (full-time) employees are required to keep 

records and to make such reports biennially to EEOC. NCES now collects the data and provides it to EEOC 

as required in their regulations. The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) and the Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs (OFCCP) of the Department of Labor also use these data. The filing of race, 

ethnicity, and gender data on staff is mandated under Section 709(c) of Title VII.

The data provide information on staffing levels at the institutions for various occupational categories and are 

used extensively in peer institution analysis, manpower utilization studies, and in examining the health of the 

institutions. Good quality data on racial/ethnic composition of postsecondary employees are useful to EEOC 

and OCR for monitoring compliance with Title VII.

On an annual basis, institutions also classify all of their employees by full- or part-time status, faculty status,

and occupational category; in addition, medical school staff are reported separately. 

Salary outlays for full-time instructional staff and other full-time employees are also collected annually. 

These data are used by:

 the Department of Education's Grants and Contracts Service, which makes frequent use of the salary data 

collected by NCES to set standards for expected salary outlays during grants and contracts negotiations 

processes;

 the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Department of Labor, which includes salary data when developing 

its Occupational Outlook Handbook. 

The House Labor and Human Resources Committee, the Office for Civil Rights, and the Bureau of the 

Census have requested trend data. State agencies rely on salary data to determine budgets for their statesupported institutions and to make comparative studies with other states.

Institutions use salary data to establish their own compensation packages, and institution officials study the 

compensation packages offered by their peers and/or competitors prior to developing their salary schedules.

A.3. Use of Technology and Other Technological Collection Techniques

The IPEDS web-based data collection system makes use of advanced technology to reduce respondent 

burden and to improve the timeliness and quality of the reported data. NCES has taken several actions to 

facilitate the cooperation of postsecondary institutions responding to IPEDS. These actions include:
24

a. The development of a fully automated web-based data collection for all components of IPEDS data. The 

data collection is organized into three modules, taking full advantage of data availability schedules. 

b. Survey components are customized based on screening information so that institutions are prompted to 

respond only to those items relevant to their institution. For example, if a private institution does not 

have a differential tuition charge for out-of-state students, they will be prompted for one tuition charge. 

Additionally, many data items (answered previously) will be available to the respondent on the 

collection instrument, so that only those items that have actually changed since the previous report need 

to be completed or updated.

The system allows for direct data entry as well as file upload and batch import. Edit checks and data 

verification procedures are built into the system, thus improving the efficiency of data collection by 

resolving errors at the time of data submission. Processing time and cost are thus reduced. All 

administrative functions are provided through the web, including nonresponse follow up, distribution of 

passwords, and other activities and correspondence. IPEDS also provides a Help Desk, which is 

available to respondents during and after data collection, to respond to questions, assist with data entry 

and error resolution, and provide general assistance with many other types of requests.

Data release is timelier. The system is designed to migrate reported/edited data to a SQL server as soon 

as the administrative functions have been performed and NCES has cleared the data. Institutions whose 

data have been migrated to the SQL server have immediate access to data for other institutions that have 

also completed the process through the IPEDS Data Center. This means that data may be available 

before survey closeout (for peer analysis). National data will become available within a matter of 

months after closeout.

c. NCES works closely with state coordinators, many of who submit IPEDS reports for institutions in their 

state. Increasingly, states obtain data from institutions electronically on a student unit record basis (data 

per student). Other states collect institutional data using either IPEDS forms or their own state forms, 

which are compatible with IPEDS. Data are then extracted from the state database in the IPEDS format 

and file uploaded to the collection system. Thus institutions can provide data to their state and to NCES 

simultaneously. 

d. NCES will continue to encourage respondents to prepare IPEDS data in a format for uploading to the 

web-based collection instrument by providing detailed file specifications and instructions as well as 

"do's" and "don'ts" for data submission. Three upload formats are available for institutions to use: a 

fixed length format, a key value pair format, and an XML format. 

A.4. Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication

NCES devotes considerable effort to assure that IPEDS does not duplicate other data collection activities 

involving postsecondary education providers. In developing IPEDS, NCES continues to assess the data 

collection efforts of other Federal agencies (e.g., National Science Foundation, Department of Agriculture, 

Department of Defense, Census Bureau, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, Veterans Administration) through an examination of their forms. In addition, NCES has in-depth 

discussions with the Department of Labor, as well as other Education Department offices (e.g., OCR, FSA, 

OPE, OVAE) to ascertain their needs for data and the role IPEDS can play in meeting those needs. Through 

meetings, workshops, and TRPs, NCES works closely with other stakeholders including the State Higher 

Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), the National Association of College and University Business 

Officers (NACUBO), the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers 

(AACRAO), the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU), the American 

Association of Community Colleges (AACC), the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities

(APSCU), the American Council on Education (ACE), the Consortium on Financing Higher Education 
25

(COFHE), the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU), the Western Interstate 

Commission for Higher Education (WICHE), the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB), and others. 

Duplication is avoided as various federal agencies, groups within the Department of Education, and other 

agency representatives share access to IPEDS data.

A.5. Methods Used to Minimize Burden on Small Businesses/Entities

Certain providers of postsecondary education included in the IPEDS universe of Title IV eligible institutions 

- operators of proprietary (private for-profit) schools - are small businesses. NCES has taken several actions 

to reduce reporting burden for these entities. These actions include:

a. requesting a reduced set of data items from schools offering only certificates below the baccalaureate 

level, and 

b. maintaining a close liaison with the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities, which 

represents proprietary postsecondary institutions, to assure the appropriateness of data being requested 

and the feasibility of collecting it.

A.6. Frequency of Data Collection

The survey components proposed for this request are those that will be collected beginning with the Fall 

2014 collection and extending through the Spring 2016 collection (see Table 33), which will cover two full 

survey cycles. The survey data items are similar to those used through 2013, with the additional items and 

modifications to improve clarity and enhance the use of the data as described in this submission.

A.7. Special Circumstances

None of the special circumstances described apply to these collections.

A.8. Consultations Outside the Agency

IPEDS was developed in conjunction with providers and users of postsecondary education data. Continuing 

a pattern that began with the initial development of the project in 1983, opportunities are taken throughout 

the year to discuss the project with data respondents, Federal agencies, data users, and any other interested 

parties. 

NCES has a strong relationship with many stakeholder groups that provide feedback on proposals for 

IPEDS. Identified below are organizations that have played a major consultative role:

a. An IPEDS Technical Review Panel (TRP) was formed to assist in survey revisions and to discuss 

universe definitions. Representatives include state coordinators, federal representatives, educational 

association members, and institutional researchers and registrars from all postsecondary education 

sectors. 

b. The National Postsecondary Education Cooperative (NPEC) is responsible for IPEDS research and 

development activities. NPEC's mission is to promote the quality, comparability and utility of 

postsecondary data and information that support policy development at the federal, state, and institution 

levels. The NPEC IPEDS R&D Panel does this by developing a research and development agenda for 

IPEDS, identifying topics that will help improve the quality, comparability, and utility of IPEDS data for 

the postsecondary education community, consumers, and policymakers, as well as providing expertise to 

NCES on related IPEDS R&D projects.

c. The American Council on Education established an advisory group consisting of representatives from 

the various organizations involved in higher education issues. This group meets periodically with NCES 
26

to discuss the IPEDS project.

d. Annual meetings are held with IPEDS coordinators to obtain state input on IPEDS operations, survey 

revisions, analysis plans, and data needs.

e. IPEDS workshops and presentations are made at various conferences and annual or regional meetings of 

educational and professional associations. IPEDS staff discuss proposed modifications or problem areas 

and receive input from the data providers as part of the data collection training.

A.9. Paying Respondents

There are no payments or gifts offered to respondents.

A.10. Assurance of Confidentiality

IPEDS data are not collected under any pledge of confidentiality. 

The PRA language for IPEDS is made available on homepage for the data collection center. The current 

statement for the 2012-13 collection reads as follows; it is updated annually to reflect approval by OMB of 

the new respondent burden hour estimates:

According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of 

information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The valid OMB control number for this information 

collection is 1850-0582.

Summary of Time Burden Estimates by Institution Type and Keyholder Experience, 

2012-13 Data Collection

Estimated Range Estimated Average

4-year institution

 New Keyholder 162-296 hours 234 hours

 Returning Keyholder 108-196 hours 156 hours

2-year institution

 New keyholder 124-234 hours 183 hours

 Returning keyholder 83-153 hours 121 hours

<2-year institution

 New keyholder 63-114 hours 80 hours

 Returning keyholder 49-75 hours 53 hours

These IPEDS reporting burden estimates include the time it takes to review instructions, query and search data 

sources, complete and review the components, and submit the data through the Data Collection System.

If you have any comments concerning the accuracy of the time estimate(s) or suggestions for improving this form, 

please write to: U.S. Department of Education, Information Management Team, Washington, DC 20202-4537. If 

you have comments or concerns regarding the status of your individual submission, please direct them to 

ipedshelp@rti.org.

 

A.11. Justification for Sensitive Questions

These collections contain no questions of a sensitive nature.
27

A.12. Estimate of Burden

Annual	Burden	Calculation

Table 10 displays the estimated burden to respondents for the upcoming 2013-14 data collection (already approved) 

and estimated burden to respondents for the two additional collection years for which we are seeking approval in this 

submission, including the proposed changes: 2014-15 and 2015-16. The estimated number of institutions responding 

reflect those that are required to respond (approximately 7,300 Title IV eligible institutions) and those that 

voluntarily respond (approximately 200 per data collection year). Table 11 shows estimated ranges for institutions 

based on type of institution and keyholder experience.

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.

Response rates for this item on the three Fall survey components are shown in the Table below.

Table 8. Response Rates for IPEDS Preparation Time Item, Fall 2012

Returning Keyholders New Keyholders

Institutional Characteristics 75% 81%

Completions 62% 67%

12-month Enrollment 75% 80%

Response rates for the preparation time items are high enough to incorporate these data into burden estimate 

calculations. The response rates for the Completions component are lower than for the other two Fall components 

due to the fact that more data are uploaded by states and systems for this component; the item does not appear on the 

import layouts.

NCES anticipated using the keyholder reported times in two ways: 

1. To gauge whether the recalculated burden estimates from the previous clearance submission are realistic, 

compared to what keyholders report; 

2. To determine whether the 50% additional time premium established for new keyholders accurately represents 

what new keyholders experience. 

The times to prepare and complete the Fall components reported by both experienced and new keyholders are, on 

average, much lower than the recalculated burden estimates from the previous IPEDS clearance package. Rather 

than prematurely adjusting the IPEDS burden estimates down for 2014-15 and 2015-16, NCES proposes to review 

the way in which the item was presented and worded, and reframe the item for the 2014-15 IPEDS collection cycle to 

ensure that there is no respondent misunderstanding as to what their reported time should cover. In addition, a 

glossary term that defines respondent burden will be added to the IPEDS Glossary. The results from both 2012-13 

and 2014-15 will be available for use in verifying burden estimates prior to the next clearance submission.

As to the second point, the keyholder reported times do support the belief that it takes new keyholders longer to 

prepare and submit their IPEDS components. While the premiums reported for the Fall vary from component to 

component, and are somewhat less than the 50% used in IPEDS burden calculations, NCES proposes to retain the 

50% premium for the current clearance submission, and reevaluate for the next submission, when there will be 

additional responses to take into account. The table below summarizes the preparation hours reported by experienced 

and new keyholders, and shows the average premium for new keyholders:
28

Table 9. Reported and average preparation hours for experienced and new IPEDS keyholders, and average 

premium for new keyholders, Fall 2012

Total 

preparation 

hours, 

experienced 

keyholders

Number of 

experienced 

keyholders 

responding

Average 

preparation 

hours, 

experienced 

keyholders

Total 

preparation 

hours, new 

keyholders

Number of 

new 

keyholders 

responding

Average 

preparation 

hours, new 

keyholders

Average 

Premium for 

New 

Keyholders

IC 19,452 4,819 4.04 4,720 851 5.55 37%

C 18,909 3,976 4.76 4,886 710 6.88 45%

E12 16,382 4,722 3.47 3,364 751 4.48 29%

Table 10. Summary of Estimated Response Burden by Survey Component: 

2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16

Survey Component

Number of 

institutions

(respondents)

2013-14

(Collection Approved) 2014-15 2015-16

Avg hours 

per 

institution

Total 

hours

Avg hours 

per 

institution

Total hours

Avg hours 

per 

institution

Total 

hours

Institutional 

Characteristics 7,500 8.1 60,750 5.7 42,750 5.7 42,750

Completions 7,500 11.6 87,000 11.6 87,000 11.6 87,000

12-month Enrollment 7,500 7.2 54,000 7.2 54,000 7.2 54,000

Student Financial Aid 7,500 25.4 190,500 28.7 215,250 27.7 207,750

Graduation Rates 6,400 12.6 80,640 12.6 80,640 12.6 80,640

200% Graduation Rates 6,400 3.7 23,680 3.7 23,680 3.7 23,680

Outcome Measures 4,900 -- -- -- -- 32.7 160,230

Admissions 2,500 -- -- 3 7,500 3 7,500

Fall Enrollment 7,500 14.2 106,500 14.2 106,500 14.2 106,500

Finance 7,500 11 82,500 14.8 111,000 13.4 100,500

Human Resources 7,500 21.1 158,250 21.1 158,250 21.1 158,250

Academic Libraries 4,900 -- -- 4.3 21,070 4.3 21,070

Total

77,600 

responses 

from 7,500

respondents

-- 843,820 -- 907,640 -- 1,049,870

Table 10 shows that across the three years of data collection, on average there are 71,867 responses per year, from 

7,500 institutions, resulting on average in 933,777 estimated annual burden hours across all respondents.

Table 11: Summary of Ranges of Time Burden Estimates by Institution Type and Keyholder Experience

2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

4-year institution

 New Keyholder 139-283 hours 169-292 hours 189-351 hours

 Returning Keyholder 93-189 hours 113-195 hours 126-234 hours

2-year institution

 New keyholder 107-226 hours 137-236 hours 156-293 hours

 Returning keyholder 71-151 hours 292-158 hours 104-196 hours

<2-year institution

 New keyholder 63-113 hours 68-118 hours 69-116 hours

 Returning keyholder 43-75 hours 46-78 hours 47-77 hours
29

In all cases, if the data are readily accessible in machine-readable files, the time required is less than the estimated 

burden hours. Estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. The number of institutions 

responding is estimated based on the 2011-12 universe; changes to these numbers for successive years are expected 

to be small. 

The total cost to respondents is based on the estimated response burden (hours) multiplied by $37.15 (in 2013-14), 

which includes average data analyst and associated computer costs (for running programs to extract data). The 

hourly wage is increased by an assumed 2.0% cost-of-living adjustment for each subsequent year. Total estimated 

costs to respondents for the 2013-14, and 2014-15 through 2015-16 are as follows:

A.13. Estimate of Cost Burden 

There are no capital or startup costs associated with this data collection.

A.14. Cost to the Federal Government

We estimate a total cost to the government for the IPEDS 2013-14 through 2015-16 survey years of 

approximately $ 28,800,000. The total annual cost for this collection will be $9.6 million. On an annual 

basis, over the three survey years, the contract costs will average about $8 million per year. Federal S&E 

will be approximately $1,600,000 per year. More than 95% of this amount will be spent in direct support of 

the institutional training, and the collection, analysis, and reporting of the IPEDS data described herein. The 

contract amount includes all activities related to program support; data collection system maintenance; help 

desk support activities; programming and software modifications and documentation; training of contractor 

staff as well as institutional respondents; data collection, data review, and analysis; survey administration; 

imputations; file preparation, reporting, and data dissemination; Technical Review Panel meetings; and 

activities including training, dissertation and research grants, and other related activities. The costs include 

personnel, fringe benefits, travel, supplies, computer related activities, consultants, other direct and indirect 

costs, plus overhead and G&A.

The time estimates and costs associated with the activities described above and in the IPEDS Statement of 

Work for the RFP are based on recent experience with the contractors that currently support the IPEDS 

operations (RTI International, IT Innovative Solutions, AIR, and others). IPEDS in-house staff costs are 

based on FY2013 pay schedules and on an estimated 0% pay increase for each of the subsequent fiscal years 

due to the uncertainty surrounding pay increases for federal employees.

Table 12. Estimated Total Burden Hours 

for All Institutions

Estimated Cost to All 

Institutions

Average Estimated Costs 

Per Institution

2013-14 843,820 $31,347,913 $4,180

2014-15 907,640 $34,390,480 $4,585

2015-16 1,049,870 $40,577,476 $5,410
30

A.15. Reasons for Change in Burden

The significant increase in estimated annual burden to respondents presented in this package is due to:

 Continued refining of the previous burden estimates as a result of incorporating institutionally reported 

burden; and

 A set of changes to the data collection, described in this submission, mostly in the areas of outcome 

measures, finance for for-profit institutions, veterans benefits, and academic libraries, that will improve on 

the usefulness to IPEDS data users including policymakers, researchers, and consumer. The majority of 

these changes were suggested by the IPEDS Technical Review Panel and have been previously posted for 

public comment from the higher education community.

The overall average change in response burden can best be explained by looking at the burden hour estimates on a 

component-by-component basis. 

Fall Collection

Institutional Characteristics (IC): 

Detailed estimates for the Institutional Characteristics component are presented in the table below. These 

estimates account for both institution type and keyholder experience, 

Table 13. Burden Hours, Institutional Characteristics 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 8 10 5 8 5 8

4-year schools 3,100 10.5 15.75 7.5 11.25 7.5 11.25

2-year school 2,300 6.5 9.75 4.5 6.75 4.5 6.75

<2-year schools 2,100 4.5 6.75 3 4.25 3 4.25

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following changes to the form, and take into 

consideration respondent self-reported preparation time for this component:
31

Table 14: Proposed Changes to the IC Survey Component (all versions)

Change Implementation Year

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)

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)

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

Delete the following items that collect admissions information, and create 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
32

Completions (C): 

Detailed estimates for the Completions component are presented in the table below. These estimates account 

for institution type, number of programs, and keyholder experience, and take into consideration respondent 

self-reported preparation time for this component. No changes have been requested for the Completions 

survey component.

Table 15. Burden Hours, Completions 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of institutions 

(Title IV and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 11 16 11 16 11 16

4-year schools 3,100 15 22 15 22 15 22

 Less than 10 programs 1,130 5 7.5 5 7.5 5 7.5

 10-100 programs 1,000 17 24.75 17 24.75 17 24.75

 More than 100 programs 970 27 40.5 27 40.5 27 40.5

2-year school 2,300 11 16 11 16 11 16

 Less than 10 programs 970 5 7.5 5 7.5 5 7.5

 10-100 programs 430 14 21 14 21 14 21

 More than 100 programs 900 21 31.5 21 31.5 21 31.5

<2-year schools 2,100 5 7 5 7 5 7

 Less than 3 programs 920 3 3.75 3 3.75 3 3.75

 3 to 9 programs 700 7 9.75 7 9.75 7 9.75

 10 or more programs 480 13 19.5 13 19.5 13 19.5
33

12-month Enrollment (E-12):

Detailed estimates for the 12-month Enrollment (E12) component are presented in the table below. These 

estimates account for institution type, enrollment size, and keyholder experience, and take into consideration 

respondent self-reported preparation time for this component. No changes have been requested for the 12-

month Enrollment survey component.

Table 16. Burden Hours, 12-month Enrollment 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 7 10 7 10 7 10

4-year schools 3,100 7 11 7 11 7 11

800 or less students 1,130 4 6 4 6 4 6

801-3000 students 1,000 6 9 6 9 6 9

>3000 students 970 12 18 12 18 12 18

2-year school 2,300 7 10 7 10 7 10

500 or less students 970 4 6 4 6 4 6

501-1500 students 430 6 9 6 9 6 9

>1500 students 900 10 15 10 15 10 15

<2-year schools 2,100 6 8 6 8 6 8

100 or less students 920 4 6 4 6 4 6

101 to 250 students 700 6 9 6 9 6 9

>250 students 480 8 12 8 12 8 12
34

Winter Collection

Student Financial Aid (SFA):

Detailed estimates for the Student Financial Aid component are presented in the table below. Estimates 

account for institution type, enrollment size, and keyholder experience. 

Table 17. Burden Hours, Student Financial Aid 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 23.5 36 26.75 39.5 24.25 38.5

4-year schools 3,100 29 44 31.75 47 27 46

800 or less students 1,130 20.25 30.375 23.5 34.75 22.5 33.75

801-3000 students 1,000 30.25 45.375 33.5 49.75 32.5 48.75

>3000 students 970 36.25 54.375 39.5 58.75 38.5 57.75

2-year school 2,300 25 38 28 41.5 27 40.5

500 or less students 970 18.25 27.375 21.5 31.75 20.5 30.75

501-1500 students 430 24.25 36.375 27.5 40.75 26.5 39.75

>1500 students 900 32.25 48.375 35.5 52.75 34.5 51.75

<2-year schools 2,100 14 21 18 26.5 17 25.5

100 or less students 920 12.25 18.375 15.5 22.75 14.5 21.75

101 to 250 students 700 14.25 21.375 17.5 25.75 16.5 24.75

>250 students 480 18.25 27.375 23.5 34.75 22.5 33.75

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following changes to the form:

Table 18: Proposed Changes to the SFA Survey Component (all forms)

Change Implementation Year

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)
35

Graduation Rates (GR): 

Detailed estimates for the Graduation Rates component are presented in the table below. Estimates account 

for institution type, enrollment size, and keyholder experience. No changes have been requested for the 

Graduation Rates survey component.

Table 19. Burden Hours, Graduation Rates 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 6,400 12 17.5 12 17.5 12 17.5

4-year schools 2,500 14 21 14 21 14 21

800 or less students 700 6 9 6 9 6 9

801-3000 students 900 16 24 16 24 16 24

>3000 students 900 20 30 20 30 20 30

2-year school 2,100 14 21 14 21 14 21

500 or less students 800 6 9 6 9 6 9

501-1500 students 400 16 24 16 24 16 24

>1500 students 900 20 30 20 30 20 30

<2-year schools 1,800 6 8 6 8 6 8

100 or less students 800 4 6 4 6 4 6

101 to 250 students 600 6 9 6 9 6 9

>250 students 400 8 12 8 12 8 12

200% Graduation Rates (GR200): 

Detailed estimates for the 200% Graduation Rates component are presented in the table below. Estimates 

account for institution type, enrollment size, and keyholder experience. No changes have been requested for 

the 200% Graduation Rates survey component.

Table 20. Burden Hours, 200% Graduation Rates 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 6,400 3.5 5.5 3.5 5.5 3.5 5.5

4-year schools 2,500 4 6 4 6 4 6

800 or less students 700 2 3 2 3 2 3

801-3000 students 900 4 6 4 6 4 6

>3000 students 900 6 9 6 9 6 9

2-year school 2,100 4 6 4 6 4 6

500 or less students 800 2 3 2 3 2 3

501-1500 students 400 4 6 4 6 4 6

>1500 students 900 6 9 6 9 6 9

<2-year schools 1,800 2 4 2 4 2 4

100 or less students 800 2 3 2 3 2 3

101 to 250 students 600 2 3 2 3 2 3

>250 students 400 4 6 4 6 4 6
36

Outcome Measures (OM):

Detailed estimates for the Outcome Measures component are presented in the table below. Estimates account 

for institution type, enrollment size, and keyholder experience. 

Table 21. Burden Hours, Outcome Measures 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 4,900 -- -- -- -- 30.5 46

4-year schools 3,100 -- -- -- -- 28 42

800 or less students 1,130 -- -- -- -- 13 19.5

801-3000 students 1,000 -- -- -- -- 33 49.5

>3000 students 970 -- -- -- -- 41 61.5

2-year school 1,800 -- -- -- -- 35 53

500 or less students 970 -- -- -- -- 13 19.5

501-1500 students 430 -- -- -- -- 33 49.5

>1500 students 900 -- -- -- -- 41 61.5

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following items on this new survey form:

Table 22: Proposed New Outcome Measures Component 

Change Implementation Year

Collect outcome measures data from degree-granting institutions on 4 degree/certificateseeking 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-degree-granting 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 at both 6 years and 8 years 

after the cohort enters the institution. Outcome Measures data collection will begin in 2015-

16. Institutions will report on their 2007 cohorts.

2015-16

(2014-15 preview year)
37

Admissions (ADM):

Detailed estimates for the Admissions component are presented in the table below. Estimates account for 

both institution type and keyholder experience. 

Table 23. Burden Hours, Admissions 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 2,500 -- -- 2.5 4 2.5 4

4-year schools 2,000 -- -- 3 4.5 3 4.5

2-year school 300 -- -- 2 3 2 3

<2-year schools 200 -- -- 1.5 2.5 1.5 2.5

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following items, which will move from the 

Institutional Characteristics component to this new survey form:

Table 24: Proposed Separate Admissions Component 

Change Implementation Year

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
38

Spring Collection

Fall Enrollment (EF):

Detailed estimates for the Fall Enrollment component are presented in the table below. These estimates 

account for institution type and enrollment, and keyholder experience. No changes have been requested for 

the Completions survey component.

Table 25. Burden Hours, Fall Enrollment 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 13 20 13 20 13 20

4-year schools 3,100 18 27 18 27 18 27

 800 or less students 1,130 9 13.5 9 13.5 9 13.5

 801-3000 students 1,000 18 27 18 27 18 27

 >3000 students 970 27 40.5 27 40.5 27 40.5

2-year school 2,300 15 22 15 22 15 22

 500 or less students 970 9 13.5 9 13.5 9 13.5

 501-1500 students 430 13.5 20.25 13.5 20.25 13.5 20.25

 >1500 students 900 20.5 30.75 20.5 30.75 20.5 30.75

<2-year schools 2,100 4 7 4 7 4 7

 50 or less students 920 2.5 3.75 2.5 3.75 2.5 3.75

 51 to 250 students 700 4.5 6.75 4.5 6.75 4.5 6.75

 >250 students 480 7 10.5 7 10.5 7 10.5
39

Finance (F):

Detailed estimates for the Finance component are presented in the table below. Estimates account for both 

institution type and keyholder experience. 

Table 26. Burden Hours, Finance 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 10.75 16.25 14 20.75 13 19.5

4-year schools 3,100 15 22 17.25 25.5 16 24

GASB 700 18 27 18 27 18 27

FASB Not for Profit 1,600 16 24 16 24 16 24

FASB For Profit 800 4 6 19 27 16 24

2-year school 2,300 11 17 18.25 26.75 17 25

GASB 1,050 18 27 18 27 18 27

FASB Not for Profit 200 16 24 16 24 16 24

FASB For Profit 1,050 4 6 19 27 16 24

<2-year schools 2,100 4 7 4 7 4 7

GASB 250 6 9 6 9 6 9

FASB Not For Profit 100 4 6 4 6 4 6

FASB For Profit 1,750 4 6 4 6 4 6

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following changes to the FASB For Profit form:

Table 27: Proposed Changes to the FASB For Profit Finance Form

Change Implementation Year

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)

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 

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview year)
40

Table 27: Proposed Changes to the FASB For Profit Finance Form

 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

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)

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)

Human Resources (HR): 

Detailed estimates for the Human Resources component are presented in the table below. Estimates account 

for both institution type and keyholder experience. No changes have been requested for the Human 

Resources survey component.

Table 28. Burden Hours, Human Resources 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of institutions 

(Title IV and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 7,500 19 29 19 29 19 29

 4-year schools 3,100 32 48 32 48 32 48

 2-year school 2,300 16 24 16 24 16 24

 <2-year schools 2,100 6 9 6 9 6 9
41

Academic Libraries (AL):

Detailed estimates for the Academic Libraries component are presented in the table below. Estimates account 

for both institution type and keyholder experience. 

Table 29. Burden Hours, Academic Libraries 2013-14

(Collection Approved)

2014-15 2015-16

Number of 

institutions (Title IV 

and non-Title IV)

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for 

New 

Keyholder

Burden for 

Returning 

Keyholder

Burden for New 

Keyholder

Total 4,900 -- -- 4 6 4 6

4-year schools 3,100 -- -- 4 6 4 6

2-year school 1,800 -- -- 4 6 4 6

The burden estimates for 2014-15 and 2015-16 cover the following items:

Table 30: Proposed New Academic Libraries Component 

Change Implementation Year

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 Databases

o Media

Circulation, physical and digital/electronic, as applicable

2014-15 

(2013-14 preview year)

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)

All Collections: 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. 
42

A.16. Publication Plans/Project Schedule

a. Schedule of Activities

TABLE 31. IPEDS 2014-15 PLANNED DATA COLLECTION SCHEDULE

Date Activity

No later than November 15, 2013 Development of new and revised screens based on OMB approval of proposed changes

and Development of training materials; preview year 2013-14

April-July 2014 Development of all 2014-15 survey materials (screens, instructions, FAQs, import 

specifications) 

Early September 2014

Fall Data Collection opens

 Institutional Characteristics and Prices (2014-15 data)

 Completions (2013-14 data)

 12-month enrollment (2013-14 data)

Mid October 2014 Fall Data Collection closes

Early December 2014 Winter and Spring Data Collection opens

 Student Financial Aid (2013-14 data)

 Graduation Rates (2013-14 data)

 Graduation Rates 200 (2013-14 data)

 Admissions (New, excerpted from Institutional Characteristics) (Fall 2013 data)

 Fall Enrollment (Fall 2014 data)

 Finance (Fiscal Year 2014)

 Human Resources (Fall 2014 data) 

 Academic Libraries (NEW) (Fiscal Year 2014)

Note that for the 2015-16 data collection, Outcome Measures will be added as a Winter 

component

Mid February 2015 Winter Collection closes

 Student Financial Aid (2013-14 data)

 Graduation Rates (2013-14 data)

 Graduation Rates 200 (2013-14 data)

 Admissions (New, excerpted from Institutional Characteristics) (Fall 2013 data)

Note that for the 2015-16 data collection, Outcome Measures will be added as a Winter 

component

Mid April 2015

Spring Collection closes

 Fall Enrollment (Fall 2014 data)

 Finance (Fiscal Year 2014)

 Human Resources (Fall 2014 data) 

 Academic Libraries (Fiscal Year 2014)

June 2015 Non-Compliance Report Due to Office of Federal Student Aid

No later than January 2015 Public release of data in IPEDS Data Center of data collected in Fall 2014

No later than May 2015 Public release of data in IPEDS Data Center of data collected in Winter 2014-15

No later than July 2015 Public release of data in IPEDS Data Center of data collected in Spring 2015

Survey activity will include registration period followed by a collection cycle that varies in length depending on the 

collection. Registration must take place (only once) before data can be entered into the system. Data can be entered 

directly or through file or batch upload. However, respondents must resolve all errors/flags before data can be locked. 

This lock must take place before the collection period closes if data are to be considered as submitted in a timely 

fashion. Once the collection closes for institutions, coordinators have a two-week period for review. Once complete, 

the survey administrators (Help Desk) review the data, additional error resolution is performed, and a preliminary file 

is created for review by NCES. Following NCES approval of this file, a publication is prepared, and preliminary data 

are released to the public. Then, imputations are run. Following NCES approval of the imputed file, the publication 

is revised, and these provisional data are released to the public.

Frequent communications occur with the institution over the course of the data collection to ensure compliance with 

this statutorily mandated collection. The planned 2014-15 Communications and Follow-up Schedule is detailed 
43

below.

Table 32.

IPEDS 2014-15 Data Collections

Communications / Follow-up Schedule

Collection Correspondence type When Why

Registration Email to keyholder Early August - Registration 

open

UserID + password

Letter to CEO Early August - Registration 

open

UserID + password; importance of 

keyholder selection; thank you 

Email, Mailed packet At registration Welcome to new keyholders

Letter to CEO Late August No registered keyholder

Letter & phone call to CEO Mid September No registered keyholder

Each collection:

 Fall 

 Winter 

 Spring 

Email to keyholder Open Collection open

Email to keyholder Close – 4 wks No data entered

Email to New keyholder Close – 4 wks All surveys not locked

Thank you Email to CEO Close – 3 wks All surveys locked 

Phone call to CEO/KH Close – 2 wks No data entered

Phone call to New keyholder Close – 2 wks All surveys not locked

Email to keyholder Close – 2 wks All surveys not locked

Email to keyholder Close – 1 wk All surveys not locked

Additional for Spring Email to keyholder Late March No data entered since Winter

Email – This Week in IPEDS Twice in February Reminder that Spring surveys are open

b. Distribution Methods

NCES distributes IPEDS data to users in a timely fashion and in a format that is easy to use. Specifically, IPEDS will 

be distributed in the following ways:

1. Data Dissemination Tools

IPEDS Data Center: The IPEDS Data Center is the primary method of disseminating IPEDS data to the 

postsecondary education, policy, and research communities. The data center allows data users to create different 

reports and datasets, depending on their individual needs. Users can create reports that highlight a particular 

institution and compare it to other institutions, or they can simply create a report about a group of institutions. Users 

follow a step-by-step approach to retrieve the data in the format of their choice. Institutions included in the report or 

dataset can be selected by name or abbreviation, by using variables or advanced grouping functions, or by uploading 

a previously saved group of institutions. Variables to be included in the report or dataset can be selected using the 

IPEDS variable tree, users can create their own variables using IPEDS variables, or they can upload a previously 

saved set of variables. Users can retrieve data for single or multiple institutions, rank or trend variables, create group 

statistics, generate pre-defined reports, and create custom data files as well as download survey data files. 

Throughout the data center, there is context help to aid users in understanding the different steps, as well as the 

IPEDS data. The data center is built to accommodate users from beginning to advanced levels.

Trend Generator: The IPEDS Trend Generator is a quick and easy way to see IPEDS data over time. Users can 

create trends, see graphs, download data, and print. Trend data can be displayed at an aggregate level, or by 

institutional and student characteristics. 

Executive Peer Tool (ExPT)

Now part of the IPEDS Data Center, NCES designed the ExPT to be used in conjunction with the IPEDS 

Datafeedback Reports (DFRs). Using the ExPT, users can duplicate DFRs with different sets of comparison 

institutions, and incorporate additional indicators not included in the printed DFR. Custom reports generated with 

this tool can be saved as PDF files with full informational and methodological notes. A detailed online user guide is 

available. Visit http://nces.ed.gov/ipedspas/ExPT for more information on this tool. 
44

College Navigator: In response to the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, NCES developed a searchable 

website to provide up-to-date statistics on a broad range of postsecondary institutions for easy access by consumers. 

The site presents general information about each institution and its mission, as well as data on institution prices and 

average net price, admissions, financial aid, enrollment, program offerings, degrees and awards conferred, graduation 

and retention rates, accreditation, varsity athletic teams, campus security, and cohort default rates. College Navigator 

is designed to help college students, future students, and their parents understand the differences among colleges and 

how much it costs to attend college. The site also provides direct links to each institution's home page and net price 

calculator, the College Affordability and Transparency Center; Federal Student Aid’s Prepare for College website 

and the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA); and the Occupational Outlook Handbook. Visit 

http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/ for more information. 

Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) on the Web: The Office of Federal Student Aid (FSA) now uses 

IPEDS data on graduation and retention rates, college costs, and net prices in their online FAFSA application. When 

students look up schools to which they want their FAFSA information sent, they are presented with information on 

these schools based on IPEDS data. 

Tabulated Data: IPEDS data are tabulated and are available through the Tables Library.

2. Survey Reports

NCES releases data in a wide variety of formats, including basic tables, descriptive reports, and more detailed 

analyses. A few of these types of reports are detailed below:

(a) First Look Reports: Concurrent with the preliminary and provisional release of the data file for each IPEDS 

collection cycle, a predetermined set of tables called is produced and disseminated to the public. These 

tabulations include 1-year data tables and selected findings.

(b) Descriptive Survey Reports: Shortly after First Look reports are produced, reports highlighting additional 

findings from the survey may be produced for various components. These reports are widely distributed to 

policymakers as well as the general public.

(c) Analytic Reports: Comprehensive reports are produced periodically to analyze major policy issues, such as 

trends in minority enrollment and degrees, trends in faculty salaries, and trends in degrees by field of study.

(d) Other NCES Reports: The Digest of Education Statistics, Projections of Education Statistics, and the 

Condition of Education contain major sections based on IPEDS data. These publications have large 

distributions to a broad spectrum of users of postsecondary education statistics.

A.17. Request to Not Display Expiration Date

The Department is not seeking approval to forego displaying the OMB approval expiration date.

A.18. Exceptions to the Certification

There are no exceptions to the certification statement.