Click here for a guide to using the Peer Analysis tool in the web portal
Standard Peer Analyses
In this report, you can select a custom group of institutions for comparison. A minimum of 10 participating institutions for a study year must be included. Refined means are calculated using only the selected institutions, and results are reported for all Tables – both as refined means, and as ratio tables showing the row level data. Results are provided for all CIPs which meet the minimum sample size of 5 programs.
Important Notes About Peer Analyses:
- Data in the peer analyses are not aggregated at the 4-digit CIP level in the same way as norm data. All programs entered into the portal are kept as separate row level data in the ratio tables and in the computation of the refined means.
- Data used for peer analyses are based on live data in the portal. Occasionally an institution may find an error in their data after norms are released for the year. While the norms remain a frozen file, the peer analysis reports will use the updated live data each time the report is viewed.
All peer analysis requests must be approved by The Cost Study team before the results are viewable in the portal. The purpose of this approval process is to ensure confidentiality of each institution’s data. For instance, if you make one request with 10 schools, and a second request with the same 10 schools plus one more, you would be able to ascertain the exact data for that additional school by comparing the row level data. For this reason, use caution when selecting multiple peer analysis groups for the same study year, as the selected institutions may need to be adjusted.
Program Specific Peer Analysis
This option is new for the 2020 study year. Here, institutions can select different peer groups for a single CIP (or CIP Group) at the 4-digit level. A minimum of 7 participating institutions must be included. Data in the program specific peer analyses also use live data from the portal.
A CIP Group is used to obtain comparative data for several CIPs that are all similar. For example, some “physics and astronomy” programs are often reported under 40.0801 (Physics, General), and others are reported under 40.1101 (Physics and Astronomy). By including both 40.08 and 40.11 in a program specific peer analysis, you would receive comparative data for programs that report to either of these CIPs combined into one report. Another example where a CIP group could be used is for a kinesiology program, which is sometimes reported as 13.1314 (Physical Education Teaching and Coaching), 26.0908 (Exercise Physiology), 31.05 (Health and Physical Education / Fitness), and 31.0505 (Kinesiology and Exercise Science).
Results are reported for all Tables – both as refined means, and as ratio tables showing the row level data. Results are provided only for the CIP(s) and institutions selected.
If multiple CIPs are selected for the same program specific report, then all programs from the selected institutions that report at least one of those CIPs will be included in the report. For confidentiality purposes, the ratio table results will only display that the row level data comes from the CIP group, but not which specific CIP.