Financial Value Transparency (FVT) VS. Post-Secondary Employment Outcomes (PSEO) Outcomes Explorer.

I just emailed my team (to be delivered Monday morning) a chart that I created using the PSEO outcomes explorer tool for my employing institution. I have very skilled and thoughtful team members who will dig through my email, the data, and we'll talk about it all in an upcoming team meeting.

The chart includes annual earnings of degree holders from graduates out 1 year, 5 years, and 10 years postgrad, in 3-year cohorts ('07-'09, '10 -'12, '13 -'15, '16 -'18) disaggregated by broadly identified instructional programs. The chart includes: All Instructional Programs, Area Studies, Biology-General, Chemistry, Computer Science, Economics, English Language and Literature - General, Film/Video and Photographic Arts, Fine and Studio Arts, Geological and Earth Sciences/Geosciences, History, International Relations and National Security, Mathematics, Natural Resources Conservation and Research, Philosophy, Physics, Political Science and Government, Psychology - General, Religion/Religious Studies, Romance Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics, Social Sciences - Other, and Statistics. While the names of the majors are not exact matches to our catalog, the PSEO delivered chart does provide some good reference points to corroborate or question postgrad earnings claims.

I include a sanitized, low-res version of the PSEO data where the data are in no order, and program names, and earnings data are removed. I don't want readers getting hung up on comparisons just yet.

The point I make is that these data are available for colleges in states where PSEO partnerships are strong. It might not be a bad time to nudge your leaders about developing such partnership.

Before I get too carried away, I have to say that I feel fortunate to be in Minnesota, and must acknowledge the work of the Minnesota Office of Higher Education, the Minnesota Private College Council, the leaders at Carleton, and my fellow IR professionals at all of the private colleges in Minnesota who had many questions and concerns but signed on to make this information available. And, of course, the PSEO folks who have been working data partnerships around the country for a few years.

I've been envisioning what might be returned from FVT in a few years, and the more I read, the more it seems like it is going to look something like the PSEO data but much less usable because of its plan to include only a small sample of our postgraduate data. My confidence level that DOE's FVT will be return accurate data is low. I do expect FVT to report lower salaries because, like it's equally unusable older cousin, College Scorecard, will only include Title IV recipient graduates. At least PSEO cares about the results of all graduates that are findable. With that said, PSEO will provide a good counterpoint should anything be way off in the FVT reporting.

Something that puzzles me about FVT is that "PSEO is made possible through data sharing partnerships between universities, university systems, State Departments of Education, State Labor Market Information offices, and the U.S. Census Bureau." PSEO data are already better and more inclusive than FVT will ever be, so why not mandate PSEO partnerships instead of inflicting FVT on colleges? Sure it feels awkward to use "mandate" and "partnerships" together; my experience suggests that PSEO has effectively partnered with many institutions, states and university systems, and skillfully navigated a highly charged political landscape without coming across, well, political. I'm not sure that I can say that about the DOE. Hey DOE, why don't you do a solid and channel your resources into helping PSEO cut through the red-tape in state and university systems to develop a national PSEO?

Sorry, I lost myself for a second and used logic again. I was wishfully imagining a national PSEO network where PSEO more easily forms new partnerships, and adds credibility and thoughtfulness to an embattled DOE. Honestly, having a good partner to help collect earnings data that are historically difficult, expensive, and overly reliant on self-reported information would be a boon for most colleges.

PSEO isn't perfect. Data partnerships are difficult to launch, and maintain even within a college. Aligning disparate data systems and structures takes very skilled navigation, patience and testing. The biggest limitation for PSEO utility for me and my employer is that most of our peers are private highly selective liberal arts colleges on the east and west coasts where PSEO partnership are weak, non-existent or don't include private colleges. While it isn't perfect, I think it starts from a much better place than FVT is starting.

If you are unfamiliar with PSEO, here's a link to the PSEO documentation on the Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) data tab that discuss PSEO methodology, sources, and other references. Also, if you interested, you can take a look at the PSEO Employment Outcomes Explorer (I believe it still defaults to Colorado) and see if a college or university of interest to you has data available. You can also brush up on your FVT knowledge here.

Thanks for reading. I welcome thoughts and counterpoints.