Faculty Pay Equity Study /
Prepared for Morgan State University /
Patrina Clark, President, Pivotal Practices Consulting, LLC /
August 1, 2014
Project Number 14/PRO-2008-S
(E-Maryland Solicitation MDR 1331011071)


Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Background

Study Methodology

Policy Analysis

Internal Policies and Practices Survey

Internal Policies and Practices Documentation Review

Summary of Results

Statistical Analysis

Comparison of MSU Faculty Gender Counts and Salaries to National Averages

Comparison of Salary Averages

Composition of the Faculty Pool

Data Analysis and Methodology

Assumptions and Data Limitations

Demographic Data Analysis

Univariate, Bivariate, and Multivariate Analyses

Tenure Status

Average Years of Service

Tenure and Average Years of Service

Faculty by College (Discipline)

Regression Analysis - Overview

Regression Analysis – Results

Transactional Data Analysis

Summary of Results

Recommendations

Salary Compression

Appendix A: References

Appendix B: Faculty and Staff Recommendations for Process Improvement

Appendix C: Regression Analysis Summary Output Tables

GENDER

GENDER AND TENURE

GENDER, TENURE, YEARS OF SERVICE

GENDER, TENURE, YEARS OF SERVICE, SCHOOL

List of Tables:

Table 1: Internal Policies and Practices Survey Summary...... 7

Table 2: Education Level Doctorate, National Public Institutions Comparison...... 9

Table 3: Education Level Master’s, National Public Institutions Comparison...... 10

Table 4: Education Level Doctorate, Regional Public Institution Salary Comparison...... 10

Table 5: Education Level Master’s, Regional Public Institution Salary Comparison...... 10

Table 6: Average Salaries, Standard Deviation, and Expected Salaries - By Rank...... 13

Table 7: Salaries, by Rank and Gender, Outside Expected Range...... 14

Table 8: Number and Percentage of Tenured and Non-Tenured Faculty, by Gender...... 15

Table 9: Average Years of Service, by Rank and Gender

Table 10: Tenure and Average Years of Service, by Rank and Gender

Table 11: MSU Faculty by College, Rank, and Gender...... 16

Table 12: Average Annual Salary by College (Discipline), Rank, and Gender...... 17

Table 13: MSU Enrollment by School/College, 2006...... 17

Table 14: Regression Results - Gender

Table 15: Regression Results - Gender and Tenure...... 20

Table 16: Regression Results - Gender, Tenure, and Years of Service...... 21

Table 17: Regression Results - Gender, Tenure, Years of Service, and School...... 22

Table 18: Number and Average Salaries of New Hires, by Rank and Gender

Table 19: Number of Promotions by Gender and Effective Date (Year)

Table 20: Adjustments by Type, Number, and Average % Increase

List of Figures:

Figure 1: Post-Secondary Faculty by Gender, National Totals

Figure 2: Faculty by Gender (2014), MSU

MSU Gender-Focused Salary Analysis, Pivotal Practices Consulting LLC | Page 1

Executive Summary

Introduction

Morgan State University (MSU) contracted with Pivotal Practices Consulting LLC (PPC), a Maryland-based management consulting firm, to conduct a faculty pay equity studyfor its tenured and tenure-track (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor) faculty to:

  • Determine whetherthere are gender-based salary inequities.
  • Make recommendations to resolve any such inequities.

Methodology and Analysis

PPC developed a study project plan consistent with widely accepted practices for conducting academic pay studies for higher education faculty.[1]PPC conducted quantitative and qualitative data analysis thatincluded the following elements:

  • Policy and Procedures Review
  • Internal Survey
  • Statistical Analysis

The study’s methodology was applied through the following analyses:

  • Internal Policies and Practices Survey
  • Internal Policies and Practices Documentation Review
  • General Statistical Analysis
  • Regression Analysis

Key Findings

The following are some of the key findings of the study:

  • There is no evidence of gender-based salary inequities. Further, PPC found no meaningful relationships between tenure, years of service, and salary.
  • While beyond the scope of the study, PPC did find disparities in salaries attributable to factors other than gender among MSU faculty, most notably School/College affiliation and academic discipline.
  • In comparing MSU faculty salaries with salary averages at the national level:
  • Average salaries for MSU female faculty at the Assistant Professor level were significantly higher than the national average.
  • The salary gaps between male and female faculty at the Associate Professor and Professor levels were smaller for MSU faculty than for faculty at the national level.
  • In comparing MSU faculty salaries with average salaries at the regional level[2]:
  • For faculty with a master’s degree, the MSU faculty average salaries were generally comparable to their regional counterparts.
  • For faculty with a doctorate degree, MSU faculty average salaries were generally less at the Associate Professor and Professor ranks.
  • Generally, the Board of Regents’ Policies and Procedures on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenureis followed to some degree. However, there are differences in how the guidance is applied and the processes employed for salary setting.

Key Recommendations

Following are the key recommendations in support of the above findings:

  • Make this report available to all MSU tenured and tenure track faculty, as well as those with a role in the compensation process.
  • Conduct further analysis to determine the relationship between salary, school, college, and discipline.
  • Conduct facilitated discussions with faculty to identify issues that are contributing to perceptions of gender-based salary inequity and develop strategies to address these issues.
  • Update, align, and make broadly internally(e.g., posted to MSU’s internal website) available the Board of Regents’ Policies and Procedures on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure and the Faculty Handbook to create a comprehensive resource on MSU talent management.
  • Design a compensation process to compare faculty salaries to appropriate external sources on a fixed basis to ensure competitiveness and equity in salary determinations.
  • Provide annual briefings on compensation policies and procedures, to include relevant and appropriate updates on any compensation initiatives to foster open communication.
  • Charter a faculty compensation working group to address ongoing salary issues and facilitate transparency and open communication.

Questions

Please direct any questions regarding this study to:

Patrina M. Clark, President, Pivotal Practices Consulting LLC

6301 Ivy Lane, Suite 108

Greenbelt, Maryland 20770

(301) 220-3179 office

Introduction

Morgan State University (MSU), a State-supported university located in a residential area of Baltimore, Maryland,identified a need for assistance from a qualified firm to analyze the salaries among its tenured and tenure track faculty. MSU contracted under Project Number 14/PRO-2008-S (E-Maryland Solicitation MDR 1331011071)with Pivotal Practices Consulting LLC (PPC), a Maryland-based management consulting firm, to:

  • Conduct a study to determine whether there are gender-based salary inequities.
  • Make recommendations to resolve any such inequities.

Background

MSU’s faculty members deliver a comprehensive set of undergraduate academic programs and a selective set of master’s and doctoral programs to approximately 8,000 students, approximately 70% of whom are Maryland residents.

MSU has a total of 43 academic departments listed in their departmental directory. These 43 departments offer:

  • 45 programs leading to the bachelor’s degree,
  • 30 programs leading to the master’s degree, and
  • 15 programs leading to the doctorate, including the online Community College Leadership Program.

As a testament to the desirability of MSU’s academic programs, the University has seen a 25% increase in enrollment over the last decade.

To remain competitive for the most talented staff available and sustain quality academic programs, MSU recognizes the importance of ensuring pay parity among similarly situated faculty members and acknowledged the following:

  • Salary inequities among similarly situated professionals are disruptive to quality education programs and cause discord within productivity, departments, faculty turnover, and productivity.
  • There is a meaningful distinction between salary differences (based on variances in productivity, contributions to the University, and economic climate) and salary inequities (based on unjustified factors, such as qualifications, assigned responsibilities, and market forces).
  • While no system can perfectly determine to the individual level, the appropriate salary, certain inequities are obvious and extreme as to be readily identifiable and to demand attention and remedy.

MSU further acknowledged that identifying internal salary inequities can be difficult because of the large number of variables that can influence pay determinations. Additional potential factors that increase the challenges of identifying these inequities include the absence of:

  • Documentation for setting base salaries,
  • Guidance for awarding incremental salary adjustments,
  • Guidance for awarding discretionary salary increases,
  • Clearly defined pay categories for departments and occupational groups (i.e., position titles).

Further, inconsistent application of any established guidance can also be a complicating factor.

This study endeavored, to the maximum extent possible, to identify true gender-based inequities based on appropriate statistical analyses.

Study Methodology

PPC developed a study project plan consistent with widely accepted practices for conducting academic pay studies for higher education faculty identifying critical milestones, collaboration and input points to ensure timely delivery of the study.

PPC participated in the following meetings associated with the study:

  • Work initiation meeting on April 8, 2014, with Mrs. Armada Grant, Director of Human Resources, and Mr. Hambisa Belina, MSU Procurement.
  • Meeting with Dr. David Wilson, President, and Mrs. Armada Grant on April 18, 2014.
  • Provided a project overview and status update and addressed questions during the MSU Deans’ Meeting on May 12, 2014.

PPC conducted quantitative and qualitative data analysis thatincluded the following elements:

  • Policy and Procedures Analysis
  • An internal survey regarding use of internal pay-setting and compensation policies and practices to determine how such practices are applied and if the application of said practices is a contributing factor to gender inequity in salaries for professors, assistant professors and associate professors.
  • A review of MSU’s current written compensation and pay-setting practices to determine how such practices are applied and if the application of documentation is, in any way, a contributing factor to gender inequity in salaries for professors, assistant professors and associate professors.
  • Statistical Analysis
  • A general statistical analysis of educational compensation to establish the overall context of MSU compensation, policies and pay-setting practices.
  • The development of a comprehensive regression analysis to identify variables that may be impacting gender-based salary decisions.

Recommendations were developed based on the results of the application of the study’s methodology.

Policy Analysis

Internal Policies and Practices Survey

An internalsurvey was conducted regarding the application of compensation policies by college deans and other salary determination participants and stakeholders. The survey was designed to identify any particular gaps or trends that may influence gender based salary decisions. The survey was viewed as an opportunity to identify compensation best practices and processes within MSU, and to assess the faculty’s awareness of MSU’srequirements for salary determinations and merit increases.

The survey was sent to 33 participants, and all 33 participants at least partially completed the survey. Of the 33 respondents, 6 respondents provided only their names and titles and the other 27 answered some or all of the questions, resulting in a 100% response rate and a 82% substantive response rate.

In summary, PPC did not observe any policy or procedure that resulted in gender-based pay setting or merit pay decision. However, it is noteworthy that several survey respondents identified a lack of replicable written process documentation, which makes it impossible to establish a clear, consistent process that can actually be assessed. In terms of best practices, more than one respondent identified that the process of securing the Dean’s recommendation for submission to the Provost worked well. Finally, there were several recommendations for improving the process, to include establishing a fair, equitable and transparent process that allows for some flexibility.

Table 1on the following page provides an overview of the survey and summarizes the responses and findings. Appendix B includes the narrative comments for process improvement recommendations without individual attribution.

Table 1: Internal Policies and Practices Survey Summary

Survey Question / Purpose / Response/Finding
1. Please provide your name: / Self Evident
2. What is the title of your current position? / Self Evident
3. Please describe how you use the "Board of Regents' Policies and Procedures on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure" and the "Faculty Handbook" in pay setting determinations. / To determine consistency in application and knowledge of processes to be used in pay setting. / At a variety of levels, respondents indicated awareness that these two documents drive MSU pay-setting processes was evident.
4. Please describe the process for setting salary for a new faculty member, to include any peer and/or upper level reviews. / To determine consistency in application and knowledge of processes to be used in pay setting for new faculty. / All respondents indicated a general understanding of the requirements,withprocess variations among schools.
5. Is this process documented in writing? / To assess the existence of written process guidance for the pay setting decision-making process. / The process for setting salary of new faculty members is not consistently documented. Nine (9) respondents indicated the process was documented in writing and fourteen (14) indicated it was not.
6. Is the written process available to all faculty within the Department and/or School? / To assess the degree of transparency regarding the pay setting process. / Where written process documentation exists, it is generally made available. Of the nine (9) respondents indicating the process is documented in writing in Question 5, seven (7) responded that it is available to faculty within the Department. Interestingly, two (2) of the faculty members who responded that the process is not documented in writing responded that it is available to faculty.
7. Please describe any required review process before a merit salary increase is approved/finalized. If no review process exists, please enter "None." / To determine consistency in application of processes to be used in requests for merit salary increases. / Almost all respondents indicated the annual report is a key element of the process. Some schools described a fairly robust process for merit increases, with almost all requiring multiple levels of review.
8. What aspects of the pay setting process work particularly well? / Provide an opportunity to MSU faculty and staff to identify internal best practices / Responses to this item were somewhat sparse, with some indicating a clear need for more robust process rigor beginning with a documented policy.
9. What recommendations do you have for improving the pay setting process? / Provide an opportunity to MSU faculty and staff to provideprocess improvement recommendations based on process experience / Responses were more robust than those for Question 8. Responses indicated consensus in the need for a fair, equitable and transparent process that allows for appropriate, supportable flexibilities.

Internal Policies and Practices Documentation Review

As part of the analysis regarding MSU’s pay practices, a review of the University’s current written compensation and pay-setting practices was conducted to determine how such practices are applied and if the application of the documentation is a contributing factor to gender inequity in salaries for professors, assistant professors and associate professors.

The following information was requested:

  • Compensation policies, memorandum, negotiated agreements, processes and any other documentation used for salary determinations. This includes any information MSU may have on classification or positional salary decisions, as well as information on longevity increases, if this salary approach is used by the University.
  • Pay grade matrix for position categories that includes the complete salary ranges (i.e., minimum salary and maximum salary) for each position category.
  • Job analysis for each position category that describes the required knowledge, skills and abilities.
  • Pay setting decision matrix for newly hired faculty members.
  • A title comparability matrix showing how position title variations align with the position categories of #3 above.
  • A description of the bases for discretionary salary increases (e.g., attainment of a terminal degree, publication in nationally recognized trade journal, etc.).
  • Any compensation or pay-related studies conducted by or on behalf of MSU.
  • Copies (may be redacted of personal information) of any compensation complaints or appeals filed under negotiated agreements.

While not all requested documentation was received, sufficient information regarding the University’s compensation and pay practices was provided. Analysis focused on the Board of Regents' Policies and Procedures on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenureand the MSU Faculty Handbook. The analysis indicated the following:

  • Board of Regents’ Policies and Procedures on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure: A review of this document did not find any obvious policies or procedures that would result in gender-based pay decisions. All documentation presented is neutral and merit-based.
  • MSU Faculty Handbook: A review of this document did not find any obvious policies or procedures that would result in gender-based pay decisions. All documentation presented is neutral and merit-based.

In summary, the documentation review did not identify any policy applications or procedures that would result in a gender-based salary or merit pay decision. There may be some process discrepancies between these two documents, which should be addressed to ensure consistency.

Summary of Results

The policy analysis and internal policy survey did not reveal any specific trends, gaps or issues that would indicate the MSU compensation and pay-setting policies and practices contribute, either positively or negatively, to gender-based salary decisions.

Statistical Analysis

Comparison of MSU Faculty Gender Counts and Salaries to National Averages

According to the U.S. Department of Education, in 2010-2011 there were 2,870 Title IV post-secondary four-year colleges.[3] The Title IV status encompasses those institutions that have written agreements with the Secretary of Education to participate in Title IV federal student financial assistance programs. Within the state of Maryland, this includes a total of 62 institutions, 30 of which are public.[4]