Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Joe Cortright presented the year two Talent Dividend progress reports covering the 57 cities participating in the the Talent Dividend Prize competition. The webinar described the data and methods used to count the number of degrees awarded in each metropolitan area, and the process for reviewing and approving this data. The webinar described the range of results for participating Talent Dividend cities. The year two process and methods will serve as the basis for the final determination of the Talent Dividend Prize winner in the fall of 2014.
Citation preview
The Talent DividendYear Two Reports
Joe Cortright
December 2013
December 2013
Roadmap
1. The Talent Dividend
2. Year Two Reports
3. Questions
The Talent Dividend
December 2013
December 2013
Talent Dividend
Education drives individual success
Not a High School Graduate
High School Grad-uate
Some College/As-sociate's Degree
Bachelor's Degree Advanced Degree0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
Earnings Strongly Correlated with EducationAnnual Earnings (Chained 2012 $)
Educational Attainment of Population, All Persons Aged 25 and olderSource: Current Population Survey,
1975
This relationship has grown stronger
Not a High School Graduate
High School Grad-uate
Some College/As-sociate's Degree
Bachelor's Degree Advanced Degree0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
Earnings Strongly Correlated with EducationAnnual Earnings (Chained 2012$)
Educational Attainment of Population, All Persons Aged 25 and olderSource: Current Population Survey,
2011
College wage premium growing
Source: Johnathan James, FRB, Cleveland 2012
Enrico Moretti
• “Human capital is the best predictor of high salaries for both individuals and communities
• . . . The presence of college-educated residents - - - results in high wages not just for the skilled workers but also for workers with limited skills
• (page 90)
Education lowers unemployment
• Glaeser• Education has
“a social multiplier”
• Unemployment rates are lower for everyone in metro’s with high levels of education
December 2013
The hypothesis
• Better educated metropolitan areas have higher incomes
• Better skilled workers are more innovative and productive
December 2013
The evidenceEducation Explains Most Differences in Metro IncomeAnnual Per Capita Income, 2005
NO
RAL
ROC
SLC
BIR
BUF
OKC
HAR
RIC
LOUMEM
JAC NAS
AUS
MIL
CHA
PRI
VB
IND
COL
LV
SAT
KC
ORL
SACCLECIN POR
PIT
DEN
BAL
TPA
STL
SAN
MIN
SEA
PHO
DET
ATL
MIA
HOU PHI
DAL
CHI
LA
NY
y = 763.27x + 16466
R2 = 0.5846
$30,000
$32,000
$34,000
$36,000
$38,000
$40,000
$42,000
$44,000
$46,000
$48,000
$50,000
15 20 25 30 35 40 45Percent of Population with a 4-Year College Degree, 2006
Sources: BEA (Income), Census (Education)
Updated to 2011
December 2013
December 2013
Estimating the gain
• Each 1% improvement in college attainment is associated with a $763 $856 increase in per capita income for the entire metropolitan area
• These education gains are the product of a shift in the entire skill distribution, not just moving 1% past the 4 year mark
December 2013
Make progress at every stage
Year Two Reports
December 2013
The Talent Dividend Prize
• Prize: $1 million to the winning metro • 57 Competing Metropolitan Areas• The Talent Dividend Prize will be awarded
to the city that exhibits the greatest increase in the number of post secondary degrees granted per one thousand population over a four-year period
December 2013
Calculation details• Data Sources:
– Degrees Awarded: IPEDS– Population: Census Bureau, ACS
• Weighting– 2-year degrees: 1 point– 4-year and higher degrees, 2 points
• Base Year: 2009-10• Year Two: 2011-12• Rules: http://ceosforcities.org/talent/rules.html
December 2013
Scoring degrees
IPEDS Degree Classifications PointsAssociate's degree 1Bachelor's degree 2Master's degree 2Doctor's degree - research/scholarship 2Doctor's degree - professional practice 2Doctor's degree – other 2
December 2013
Base year
• 2009-10 academic year is the base year for the Talent Dividend competition
• Participating cities have been provided with provisional year two reports and are now being given the opportunity to review and correct them
December 2013
Year two reports
• Compare 2009-10 (base year) with 2011-12 (year two).
• Two reports– Detail: Results by institution– Summary: Metro area totals and score
• Data from IPEDS, and are preliminary
December 2013
Summary report
December 2013
Detailreport
December 2013
Detail report
December 2013
Validating results
• Year two results are preliminary• Participating cities should validate their
IPEDS-based data with local institutions• Though rare, reporting errors do occur
– Wrong data– Mis-classification– Administrative Changes
December 2013
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/datacenter/
December 2013
Next Steps
• Distribute year 2 “outlier” report– Identify unusual increases in degree awards
• Publish year 2 performance report• Collect year 3 data for judging and award
December 2013
IPEDS Key Dates
Talent Dividend Year
AcademicYear
Reporting Deadline
“Early Release” Date
Public Availability
Base 2009-10 October 2010 May 2011 October 2011
1 Year 2010-11 October 2011 May 2012 October 2012
2 Years 2011-12 October 2012 May 2013 October 2013
3 Years 2012-13 October 2013 May 2014 October 2014
4 Years 2013-14 October 2014 May 2015 October 2015
December 2013
Questions?
December 2013
