<p>If College Board charges such supposedly exorbitant rates for all of its services, and charges for everything that it possibly can, where does all the money go? For College Board is [URL=<a href="http://www.collegeboard.com/about/index.html%5Dnon-profit.%5B/URL">http://www.collegeboard.com/about/index.html]non-profit.[/URL</a>] Do tests really cost that much to administer?</p>
<p>Oh dear, willow. "Non-profit" does not necessarily mean nobody's getting rich. I intend no offense to anyone, and sit on the Board of a non-profit myself. However, many non-profits have been under fire for excessive salaries and perks to top employees, ridiculous travel junkets etc. In a non-profit, there are no investors earning a return on their investment. But if there are lots of revenues, they may or may not be being spent on "services," they may instead be making a cushy life for someone(s).</p>
<p>As to College Board, I have no specific info.</p>
<p>Willow - go to guidestar.com</p>
<p>Register (its free)</p>
<p>Look up "College Board" </p>
<p>Download the form 990 (PDF format) - and you will see where the money goes.</p>
<p>In 2004, the President of CEEB had a $568K salary plus $110K expense account. Other top officers and directors all had salaries in excess of $250K. </p>
<p>Total revenues were $426 million; total expenses were $393 million. </p>
<p>In other words, the not-for-profit CEEB came out $33 million ahead. </p>
<p>In the world of non-profits, this $33 million is called "excess" (as opposed to "deficit"). They can not dispose of this money by giving it away to shareholders or partners; instead it becomes part of the corporate "net assets". Meaning they hang on to it or invest it, or maybe they raise everyone's salaries in 2005.</p>
<p>No chance they'll make the SAT test cheaper?</p>
<p>Certainly not when they just started paying essay readers!</p>
<p>Such a coincidence--- I was just wondering about the particulars of "non-profit" status earlier in the week. And it's just as I suspected. "Non-profit" is such an extremely deceptive term. Certainly, it doesn't mean what it suggests. It really pi$$es me off that Collage Board can claim to be "non-profit" while making money hand-over-fist, and pay it's board members ridiculous salaries while it gouges the college test consumer at every turn. It's really like a private club, isn't it? It has an unwieldy amount of power and influence, and answers to no one but its insular cadre of "Board Members". Cash cow indeed!</p>
<p>I wonder how much they'd charge for the SATs if they were a for-profit organization. . .</p>
<p>Possibly they would charge less. Presumeably, if the testing business was run by for-profit corporations, there would be incentives for more companies to get involved, thus more competition, including lower prices. </p>
<p>I work with a for-profit organization in the educational field, and it frustrates me to no end to see many of our competitors who have incorporated as nonprofits have the benefit of some sort of veil of special trustworthiness, when they rake in far more in the way of income while their directors are paid high salaries ... while our organization operates on a shoestring, with no one earning more than 5 figures. Our for-profit status meant that in the first several years of doing business we operated at a loss, with the partners investing many hours of uncompensated time. </p>
<p>However, unlike CEEB, we are operating in a highly competitive field, and we can't charge more for products and services than the market will bear. For example, we recently developed an educational software program; the developers wanted to price it at around $600. I pointed out that competing software products were retailing for between $70 and $200 -- and we eventually settled on a price of within that range. </p>
<p>CEEB has no competition other than ACT - which runs a distant second -- so they can get away with charging whatever they want. It may very well be that their "nonprofit" status keeps the competition away -- somehow "not-for-profit" is seen to equate with "honest" -- the myth is that the can be trusted to develop and administer valid tests because they are not in it for the money. ACT is also nonprofit -- it had an "excess" of $12 million at the end of 2003 and a CEO with a salary of around $450K -- but overall it is smaller and its top employees receive significantly less than CEEB. </p>
<p>So a for-profit competitor would have a hard time entering the market - they would be seen as inherently untrustworthy, more interested in making money than providing accurate testing results. But without an incentive to make money, there is little reason for anyone to invest money in developing and marketing a different, alternative form of assessment -- even though one could certainly argue that there would be considerable value in doing so, as well as some intriguing niche market possibilities. The first competitor to enter the market would probably start by charging less than CEEB or ACT.... and as their assessments gained in popularity and started to be accepted by major universities, CEEB and ACT might need to take a second look at their own pricing policies.</p>
<p>Bottom line: in a free market system, healthy competition is what keeps prices down -- and competition tends to be tied very closely to the potential for profit.</p>
<p>If they were a for profit entity, one thing that I am sure would change is that there would be more frequent testing dates CONVENIENT TO THE CUSTOMERS RATHER THAN THE TEST GIVERS and for sure testing dates in the summer. I don't know about you, but we have been pulling out our collective hair trying to figure out how to work in second tests, IIs, etc on top of a sport whose principal contests are held on Saturdays all fall and spring (and some in the winter). Private businesses maximize a customer's opportunity to "purchase", not restrict them.</p>
<p>One of the test dates used to be late June. I've no idea why it was eliminated. If CollegeBoard were a for-profit organization, they would have figured out long ago how to administer tests by computer and make them available at the students' convenience. </p>
<p>Look at the AP exams. They are given the first and second week of May, but some schools don't start until after Labor Day and don't finish until the third week of June. The result? Courses shortened by a month and students doing very little the last month.</p>
<p>
[quote]
they would have figured out long ago how to administer tests by computer and make them available at the students' convenience.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I understood that the Talent Search SAT, which can be taken via computer, is a pilot for offering the computer SAT more widely. It's been in use for quite a while. I suppose they must still be getting rid of kinks. Another issue maybe how to provide instructions to students who are not so computer-savvy.</p>
<p>ETS does give some tests by computer, such as the GRE: "The General Test is given year-round on the computer in the U.S., Canada, and many other countries. Paper-based General Test administrations are offered in areas of the world where computer-based testing is not available"</p>
<p>Curiously, they charge considerably more for the GRE, $115, so computer testing probably won't save much.</p>
<p>Many people mistakenly believe that being a "nonprofit" means you don't make money. Nonprofits would quickly disappear if they made no money. The real difference is the tax code. In return for not paying income taxes, nonprofits are supposed to have a philantropic mission. In the case of the ETS, I have a hard time figuring out what that mission is.</p>
<p>You want to know where the money goes? Go visit their campus sometime. Yes, ETS has a complete campus near Princeton. And it's posh.</p>
<p>publicivydad -- just want to let you know you are not alone - that was exactly my daughter's gripe: why don't they give these tests at a time that students actually have time to study or prep for them?</p>
<p>I'd like to also note that CEEB developed an interactive computerized version of the SAT years ago - this is much faster to administer because it is one of those programs that will ask progressively more difficult questions until the student reaches the point reflecting their maximum ability. It is also probably far more accurate as an assessment device, at least for students comfortable working with a computer interface, because it reduces likelihood of mistakes from fatigue, misaligned scantron bubbles - and allows students the opportunity to complete the test, whatever their pace in answering individual questions. It also reduces likelihood of cheating, because a computer assessment can present a truly randomized and individualized version of the test. Finally, a computer could offer virtually instantaneous score reporting, aiding tremendously in college planning as well as scheduling retakes. This computer version of the test is used to screen middle-school age students for eligibility for programs like CTY; but not available for college applicants. </p>
<p>I'm pretty sure that if the the goals of customer service that you mentioned were part of the CEEB model, then there would be an option for individualized computerized testing at times scheduled by appointment.</p>
<p>Edit: I posted this before reading the other responses, which also mentioned the computer testing. I'd like to note, in response to newmassdad's comment, that even if CEEB charged more for the computerized testing, it might represent an overall savings to parents in terms of number of tests scheduled and test prep services. In any case, a for-profit outfit might recognize that the integral part of marketing was to offer choice, and that customer are willing to pay more for extra services -- so the company could do very well offering inexpensive group paper testing for those who wanted to save money, and individualized computer administrations for those who chose to pay extra for the convenience.</p>
<p>I am totally with you all on the dates of the SAT's. My son had to take the the SAT II's on the June Saturday before his final exams were beginning this year. How can you prep for both adequately? He did OK on SAT II's but frankly he had done much better on the mock tests and I think it was the pressure.Took his SAT's in May, now he wants to repeat to improve his scores and next opportunity isn't until Oct.8 (which of course is the long weekend) So it will be the first monthof schoo, and he is taking 3 AP's, and he has to prep for the SAT again. What are they thinking?!?!??</p>
<p>Spikemom,
to be fair, I think the early June date works for more people than you think. Many schools get out in late May, giving students a week JUST to prep for the SAT. while some schools run into late June, if CB had the test date as late June instead of early June they would lose a lot of the people who got out of school earlier and have already begun their summer adventures.</p>
<p>On another note, I don't see an online administration of the test coming any time soon (unless they were on computers being monitored, like a computer lab of a school....), as we all know people would cheat at home - GATHER ROUND FAMILY!</p>
<p>A computerized test wouldn't be an online, do-it-at-home format. What would make sense would be if the CEEB would contract with local facilities to provide the computerized version of the test under conditions specified by the college board. The main advantage would be that the testing could be done at any time.</p>
<p>Some things to consider about non-profits (not necessarily saying these apply directly to the College Board)...</p>
<ol>
<li><p>If a non-profit spends less than it takes in, it may just be saving cash for an future expenditure, which they should be right now considering all of the changes to their tests.</p></li>
<li><p>I don't think the term non-profit is really deceptive--the organization itself is not striving to achieve profit. I think it may be a little unfair to jump to conclusions and assume that the management has devious intentions just because they are paid more than $500k. That's sometimes what it takes to get qualified managers. Just because it's a non-profit doesn't mean that people should volunteer their time for free for no benefit. If you want a qualified president--which you would for such a large organization that can have a large effect on one's education if there were an internal control issue-- you have to compete with other companies who also offer such salaries. Would you rather them take the risk of having a less qualified manager?</p></li>
<li><p>Whether or not the company is for profit or non-profit, I'm sure that most people would still have essentially the same complaints, but would subsitute "this is because they're non-profit and inefficient" with "it's terrible that they are making money off of students like this!"</p></li>
<li><p>I have a feeling that the test date schedule and the computerized topic may be a more complicated issue than some think--for instance, I bet there are a lot of schools that wouldn't be equipped to handle computerized testing. The cost of changing over to a new method of administration may also just be prohibitive at the moment. I also don't know that costs would go down, either, as the costs of the CPA exam increased when it went computerized.</p></li>
<li><p>I personally liked not having anything to do in any of my classes for the last month of high school :)</p></li>
<li><p>Am I the only one who didn't do any kind of preparation for the SATs?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I still maintain that The CEEB/College Board hides behind its non-profit designation and behaves like the 800 pound gorilla. As others have pointed out, since it has little in the way of competition, it can conduct business like a monopoly. They can charge what they want, and they can disregard the needs of the test taking public, knowing that people have little choice but to pony up the cash and sign up for whatever testing dates and testing products CB makes available. As long as institutions of higher learning regard the SAT, GRE, etc. as essential in the admissions process, we can wring our hands in frustration as much as we want. We are held essentially hostage.</p>
<p>Don't forget AP testing and CSS profiles, two more monopolies. Both very expensive.</p>
<p>And for students on the block system, the AP testing in May is a real bite when it comes to the classes you finished in December. In addition, the May dates generally conflict with UIL state in Texas, which requires more money to take the alternate test.</p>
<p>Collegeboard is only amenable to change when one of the big university systems threatens to pull out.</p>
<p>"I still maintain that The CEEB/College Board hides behind its non-profit designation and behaves like the 800 pound gorilla. As others have pointed out, since it has little in the way of competition, it can conduct business like a monopoly. They can charge what they want, and they can disregard the needs of the test taking public, knowing that people have little choice but to pony up the cash and sign up for whatever testing dates and testing products CB makes available."</p>
<p>800 pound gorilla? I that's a little melodramatic...</p>
<p>I really don't think the test dates are THAT inconvenient for most people. I'm pretty sure they provide fee waivers for people who can't afford to pay the fees. What are the major needs are they are disregarding?</p>
<p>I don't know...I showed up early in the morning on a Sunday, took a test and told them where the results should be sent. The results were what I expected them to be and were safely delivered to my school. Sounds simple and easy to me. Couldn't ask for more.</p>