Policies that Matter –
Game Changer Strategies and
Sample Policy Actions
October 2013
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2
Game Changer Strategies............................................................................................................. 2
Creating Conditions for Change: Metrics .................................................................................. 2
Common Completion Metrics ................................................................................................. 2
Metrics – State Examples ........................................................................................................ 3
Metrics – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action ........................................... 3
Creating Conditions for Change: Performance Funding ........................................................... 4
Potential Action ....................................................................................................................... 4
Performance Funding – State Examples .................................................................................. 4
Performance Funding – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action ..................... 5
Corequisite Remediation ............................................................................................................. 6
Corequisite Remediation – State Examples............................................................................. 6
Corequisite Remediation –Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action................. 7
Time and Intensity ....................................................................................................................... 7
Time and Intensity – State Examples ...................................................................................... 8
Time and Intensity – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action ......................... 8
Guided Pathways to Success (GPS) ............................................................................................ 9
GPS – State Examples ............................................................................................................. 9
GPS – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action .............................................. 10
Structured Scheduling ............................................................................................................... 10
State Examples – Structured Scheduling ............................................................................... 10
Structured Scheduling – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action .................. 11
Appendix ...................................................................................................................................... 12
ABOUT COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA ........................................................................ 12
34 Alliance of States Members ................................................................................................. 12
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 1
Introduction
There may be “101 Things One Can Do to Boost College Completion,” but which policy levers
produce the greatest returns on investment? After four years of working with Alliance states,
scouring the research and scrutinizing best practices, Complete College America has landed on
the most promising strategies. We call them the “game changers” because these significant
initiatives are proven to produce rates of success double, triple or more than other approaches.
Game changer success relies on bold, statewide policy action. When implemented in
combination, the game changers can be transformative. This document provides examples of game
changer strategies underway in states, as well as sample legislative or board policy language.
Game Changer Strategies

Creating Conditions for Change: Metrics & Performance Funding (student progression and
success data, performance funding and financial aid strategies) create the conditions for change,
ensuring policymakers measure what matters most and providing focused incentives for change.

Corequisite Remediation delivers the help and support underprepared students need
embedded or paired with full-credit, college-level gateway courses. Mathematics is aligned
with programs of study.

Time and Intensity strategies shorten the time it takes students to complete degrees and
certificates and increase on-time graduation, including “15 to Finish,” seamless credit
transfers, and caps on credit requirements, among others.

Guided Pathways to Success (GPS) direct students to on-time completion by leveraging
concepts from behavioral economics to create a student success system that informs selection
of meta-majors and majors, guarantees essential milestone courses inside default academic
maps, and utilizes intrusive advising to ensure students remain on track for graduation.

Structured Scheduling enhances GPS by adding essential predictability to the lives of
students balancing work and school. Tighter student cohorts also stimulate the development
of more peer-to-peer support and strengthen student-faculty relationships.
Creating Conditions for Change: Metrics
Common Completion Metrics
What we measure signals what we value. A true focus on and commitment to college completion
will require a common language – a common set of metrics to diagnose obstacles students face,
identify opportunities for improvement and provide a means for signaling progress and making
adjustments quickly when needed. Most important, metrics help hold everyone involved —
students, institutions, systems, and the state — accountable for success.
The purpose of the Common Completion Metrics is to:
•
Inform: To help policymakers and the public understand how students, colleges, and the state
are doing on college completion
•
Analyze: To help policymakers and colleges identify specific challenges and opportunities
for improvement
•
Show Progress: To establish a fair baseline and show progress over time
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 2
•
Hold Accountable: To hold students, colleges, and the state accountable to the public and to
policymakers investing taxpayer dollars in higher education
Metrics – State Examples
Georgia – As part of Complete College Georgia, the Data, Planning, and Research division the
Technical College System of Georgia (TCSG) will develop a CCA/NGA Campus-Level Metrics
dashboard that will track progress and performance by college by semester.
Illinois – In 2012, Illinois Lt. Governor Sheila Simon submitted written testimony to the Senate
Higher Education Committee in support of House Bill 5248, Amendment 2. The legislation will
require public and private colleges and universities to publish annual “College Choice Reports”
with key student and institutional data.
Maryland - SB 740 that, by December 1 of each year, the SHEEO office must submit to the
Department of Legislative Services Common Completion Metrics data.
Oklahoma – In 2011, In October 2011, the State Regents adopted a college completion agenda that
incorporates the Complete College America (CCA) and National Governors Association (NGA)
Complete to Compete metrics, recommitted to a revised Brain Gain performance program, and made
college completion a top priority with commitments to state and campus goals, action plans, and measures
of progress.
Texas – The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board launched a new data website,
http://www.txhighereddata.org/, the state’s primary source for statistics on higher education. It
also includes numerous K-12 and workforce data.
Metrics – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
“Enter State Name” public colleges and universities shall annually collect data to calculate the
Complete College America/National Governors Association (CCA/NGA) context, progress and
success metrics and annually report these data to the “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency
Name”.
The “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” shall annually collect data from and publicly
report college completion metrics for each public college and university in the state. At a
minimum, these metrics shall include the CCA/NGA metrics. The data shall be collected from
the colleges and universities in such a way that allows the metrics to be disaggregated by age,
gender, income and race/ethnicity. The “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” shall
annually report these metrics to the Governor and General Assembly. The state shall use these
data to inform, develop and improve policies that advance progression and postsecondary
completion for all students.
“Enter State Name” public colleges and universities shall annually and publicly post the
CCA/NGA metrics on their respective Web sites and annually update a metrics dashboard. The
“Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” shall determine the format of the metrics dashboard
and the manner in which the dashboard will be identified across the institutions. The dashboard
shall be accessible from each institution’s Web site home page. Additionally, the “Enter State
SHEEO/System Agency Name” may further define, clarify and supplement the CCA/NGA
metrics as necessary.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 3
Creating Conditions for Change: Performance Funding
State appropriations typically are driven by enrollment with funding based on the number of
students enrolled near the beginning of the academic term (also known as the census or count
date). As a result, colleges have a financial incentive to boost enrollment at the start of the term,
rather than make sure students successfully complete classes and earn degrees. Performance
funding values outcomes (e.g., classes successfully completed, degrees awarded, etc.). Shifting
to performance funding requires implementing new funding models that tie funding to outcomes,
thereby providing incentives for advancing and graduating students, not just enrolling them. Key
elements of a performance funding formula should include:






Keeping the formula simple and transparent;
Appropriating an amount that is significant enough to cause change (no less than 5%
initially);
Focusing on the progression to and completion of degrees and certificates of value;
Measuring change over time;
Addressing differences in institutional mission; and
Targeting specific under-served populations (to preserve access) and programs of study (to
ensure alignment to the economic needs of the state).
Potential Action
CCA recommends states consider and move forward with the ‘value-added’ performance
funding model, as outlined in the following issues briefs:
THINK THIS: Performance Funding - From Idea to Action, click here
Prepared by Dennis Jones, President of the National Center for Higher Education
Management Systems, this THINK THIS. brief makes the case for why colleges and
universities should shift to a system of performance funding and includes expert insights on:



Designing a smart system
Implementing it wisely, and
Overcoming potential roadblocks
DO THIS: Value-Added Funding - A Simple, Easy-to-Understand Model to Reward Performance,
click here
DO THIS. is a companion document to THINK THIS., and provides specific advice for
implementing a value-added performance funding model, highlighting “make it happen”
steps that will lead to a significant, fair, simple and sustainable performance funding system.
Performance Funding – State Examples
Arizona – The Arizona Legislature directed the three state universities to recommend a funding
structure that would address the disparities in per student funding.
Illinois – Public Act 97-320 called on the development of a performance funding formula for
consideration by the 2012 state legislature. The formula was developed and approved by the state
legislature, starting with an incremental amount of funds.
Indiana – Indiana initiated performance funding to higher education through a formula-based
model in 2007. Even as state money for colleges has decreased in recent years, Indiana has
remained steadfast in its use of performance-based funds to encourage reforms at both two- and
four-year institutions. Currently, 5 percent of the state appropriation to the colleges and
universities is based on performance. Not only has this percentage continued to increase over
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 4
time, but there also has been a compounding effect on the base with each subsequent year of
performance funding implementation.
Nevada – A new formula based on college completion rather than enrollment is being developed.
Ohio – Ohio initiated performance funding to higher education through three separate formulas
based on institutional mission in 2009. For four-year institutions, 100 percent of funds are
allocated through the performance formula; 5 percent increasing annually for the community
colleges.
Oklahoma – Working closely with campus presidents, the Oklahoma Board of Regents for
Higher Education approved a performance funding model with distribution of funds beginning
July 1, 2012.
Pennsylvania – Once the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) receives its
state appropriation, the System uses performance funding as a means of distributing 8 percent of
its state allocation to its colleges.
South Dakota – The South Dakota Board of Regents adopted a framework for a performance
funding model that will reward the state's public universities for success in producing graduates.
The model will be piloted beginning July 1, 2012.
Tennessee – The Complete College Tennessee Act of 2010 called for the development and
implementation of an outcomes-based funding formula for higher education. Eventually 100
percent of funds will be allocated through the formula over a four year phase-in factor.
Texas – Texas House Bill 9 required that new plans for outcomes-based funding be submitted for
consideration. Advisory committees made up of college and university administrators have been
collaborating on an outcomes-based funding system that can generate enough support to get
through the legislative process in 2013.
Washington – Beginning in 2009-10, 5 percent of funding for Washington’s community colleges
is based on performance funding, specifically student success points. The Washington state
legislature directed the state’s Office of Financial Management to submit a report by the end of
the year on how best to measure and reward the state’s four universities' performance.
Performance Funding – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
In making recommendations for appropriations to the “Enter State Name” General Assembly, the
“Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” shall base no less than five percent of the total
higher education appropriations on performance funding. The “Enter State SHEEO/System
Agency Name” shall develop the performance funding formula to include such measures as
certificate and degree completion, degree completion for low-income students, course
completions and other measures as determined by the “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency
Name”. To be eligible for performance funding, a “Enter State Name” public college or
university shall be in compliance with the other provisions of this Act. (Please note that the
performance funding model should not be applied to just new money; it should also be applied to
existing funds, compounding over time into the base funding for colleges and universities.)
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 5
Corequisite Remediation
Far too many students show up to college underprepared, and most underprepared students are
placed into an extended series of developmental education courses that do not count toward their
degrees or certificates. On average, less than 10 percent of students starting in developmental
education courses graduate from a community college and less than 36 percent graduate from a
four-year college. Rather than providing an on ramp to college, developmental education often is
an exit. Our traditional approaches to remediating the academic deficiencies of entering college
students simply are ineffective. Rather than focusing on “better developmental ed programs,”
sound policy and practice must promote placing all students in their major field of study as soon
as possible and providing the types of services and supports that will ensure their success.
Corequisite Remediation – State Examples
Connecticut – The state legislature passed legislation eliminating no-credit remedial college
classes by 2014 and replacing them with regular credit-bearing classes that come with embedded
remedial support for students who need it.
Maryland – The Community College of Baltimore County’s Accelerated Learning Program
(ALP) is an innovative approach to basic writing programs that accelerates basic writing students
through their developmental writing course and college-level, gateway ENG 101 writing course
in one semester. Additionally, the University of Maryland College Park places over half of its
underprepared students into an accelerated remedial math course that meets daily for five weeks,
followed by a college-level class that meets five days a week for the remaining 10 weeks of the
semester.
Tennessee – Austin Peay State University (a college located in rural Tennessee) eliminated
developmental math courses and instead places students in redesigned credit-bearing courses that
include extra workshops and specialized help for students in need.
Texas – Officials from all 50 Texas community colleges have endorsed a multi-year project
designed to fundamentally change remedial math.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 6
Time and Intensity
Corequisite Remediation –Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
For placement exams – College placement exams or assessment tests, if used by a “Enter State
Name” public college or university, shall be used only as an advising tool in conjunction with a
student’s high school transcript to assist students in proper course selection and accompanying
support that may be necessary. “Enter State Name” public colleges and universities shall not use
college placement exams or assessment tests as a definitive placement into a specific course
based on a cut score. “Enter State Name” public colleges and universities shall provide a student
with test guides, practice tests and a specified period of time to review prior to administering a
college placement exam or assessment test.
For gateway courses – All students admitted to a “Enter State Name” public college or
university shall be placed into credit, college-level courses in math and English. A student who
has low to moderate basic academic deficits shall be provided additional basic skills instruction,
but this instruction shall be delivered as a co-requisite scheduled course requirement with
mandatory attendance rather than a pre-requisite requirement. A student who has substantial
basic academic deficits shall be offered an option of taking one accelerated semester of courses
focused on remediating the academic deficiencies or an option of pursuing a certificate programs
that would allow the student to learn a skill while improving basic academic skills as instruction
would be embedded within or simultaneous to their program. To increase student success, there
should be no gaps in terms of the time sequencing between the extra support (be it supplemental
instruction or an accelerated semester of courses or a one-semester course) and the actual
gateway course.
For aligning math requirements to degree programs – “Enter State Name” public colleges and
universities shall review the alignment of math requirements to the needs of each respective
degree program or major field of study. Each college and university shall determine the
appropriate math requirement for each degree program or major field of study based on the
review.
For career and technical programs – All career and technical programs offered at “Enter State
Name” public colleges and universities shall address basic skills deficiencies through embedded
instruction or instruction that is simultaneous to progression in the program. These programs
shall use WorkKeys or a similar assessment to ensure students meet the skills required for
employment in the chosen field of study.
For four-year institutions not offering remedial education – A “Enter State Name” public fouryear university may admit a student who meets the general admission requirements of the
university, is academically deficient in only one subject matter and needs only one
developmental education course. If admitted, the student shall be placed into the credit-bearing,
college-level course for which the student was deficient and receive supplementary support to
address the deficiency.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 7
The standard for an associate degree is 60 credit hours for completion, and a bachelor’s degree is
120 credit hours. Unfortunately, many students take far more credits than these standard
requirements. The average credit accumulation for student earning an associate degree is 79
credits, 19 credits above the standard requirement. Students earning a bachelor’s degree, on
average, accumulate 136 credits, 16 credits above the standard requirement. This translates into
real costs both in time and resources for students, families and taxpayers. States should align
policy and practice to reduce unnecessary course taking by enacting caps of 60 credit hours for
an associate degree and 120 credit hours for a bachelor’s degree.
Time and Intensity – State Examples
Idaho – Faculty at the University of Idaho have reduced credit requirements from 128 to 120 for
bachelor’s degree programs.
Indiana – House Enrolled Act 1220 requires bachelor’s degrees to not exceed a 120 credit hour
requirement and associates degrees to not exceed a 60 credit hour requirement. The state’s
colleges and universities must provide justification to exceed these standards.
Maryland – SB 740 enacts that, beginning the Fall 2015, the standard number of credits for a
bachelor’s degree from a 4-year public higher education institution is 120 credits and for an
associate’s degree from a public community college is 60 credit hours.
South Dakota – The South Dakota Board of Regents recently reduced the number of credits
required for students to graduate from 128 to 120. With this reduction, students now only need to
take 15 credits a semester to graduate within four years.
West Virginia – The West Virginia Policy Commission is encouraging universities to streamline
academic programs so that all bachelor's degrees require 120 credit hours. Associate degrees are
to require 60 credit hours.
Time and Intensity – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
Effective “Enter Date”, the program length for all baccalaureate degree programs offered by
“Enter State Name” public colleges and universities shall not exceed 120 credit hours, and the
program length for all associate degree programs offered by “Enter State Name” public colleges
and universities shall not exceed 60 credit hours.
The “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” shall appoint a committee to receive and
recommend to the “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency Name” appeals to exceed the credit hour
requirements set forth in this section. Documented exceptions for additional hours may include:
1) specialized accreditation requirements for specific disciplines, e.g., engineering, architecture,
etc.; 2) specific occupational licensure requirements. The “Enter State SHEEO/System Agency
Name” shall approve or disapprove a recommendation from the committee to provide an
exemption to the credit requirement limits set forth in this section.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 8
Guided Pathways to Success (GPS)
Today’s students are faced with too many college course choices with limited advising on how
those choices will either hinder or help them earn a degree. The reality is that full-time students,
on average, take almost 4 years to complete a two-year degree and almost 5 years to complete a
four-year degree. Students deserve clear and concise pathways to a degree. Default academic
pathways identify the specific core courses and elective courses that students must take and the
specific order in which the courses must be taken for students to graduate on time (two years for
an associate degree and four years for a bachelor's degree). These mapping tools go well beyond
the traditional program outlines in most college course catalogues, and ensure students receive in
their first semester a graduation plan that encompasses their entire academic pathway through
graduation.
GPS – State Examples
Arizona – Arizona State University implemented eAdvisor, a streamlined path to completion for
students. Degree requirements, course sequencing, pre-requisites, and other degree-related
details are provided to students at the onset of enrollment. These items are organized via detailed
degree maps that are monitored for progression by both the student and faculty/advisers. These
monitoring tools allow for intrusive advising to occur if students get off track.
Maryland – SB 740 calls for the development of a pathway system whereby public institutions of
higher education establish graduation progress benchmarks for each academic major and for the
general education program for students who have not declared a major.
New York – Beginning fall 2012 at the University of Buffalo, the Finish in Four initiative will
provide interested incoming freshmen the opportunity to sign a pledge promising to keep in
touch with an advisor, hone in on a major early on and put academics over outside work. For its
part, the university will promise a four-year course guide, help get students a seat in the classes
they need and let them know if they're falling short along the way. If a student upholds his or her
end of the bargain but still can't graduate in four years, the University will pay the tuition and
fees for the work that remains. Tuition runs $5,270 per year for New York residents and about
$14,300 for out-of-state students.
Tennessee – (Note: this model also utilizes embedded remediation and a structured model that
are important policies listed below). Tennessee Technology Centers provide students with clear
pathways to industry-recognized degrees and certificates in high skill-high wage occupational
fields. When students enroll, their main decision is which program to enter. Rather than being
overwhelmed with a bulky course catalog that outlines a myriad of individual course
descriptions, course numbers, credits per course, prerequisites and electives, students are instead
provided a streamlined, one-page program description, including the number of clock hours it
will take to earn a degree or certificate in the program. They are also provided with a single path
to complete a credential including all courses and requirements in the proper sequence. The class
schedules are fixed and therefore predictable across semesters. Some programs provide full-time
or part-time options as well as days or evenings. Classes are small only including about 20
students. This allows faculty to use a competency-based approach that enables students to move
on once they achieve proficiency in skill sets required for their degree or certificate.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 9
GPS – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
A student shall be placed in an academic pathway based on the student’s intended major field of
study upon admission to a “Enter State Name” public college or university. A student who is
“undecided” or unsure of his/her intended major or degree goal shall be placed in an academic
pathway for a liberal arts core or a math and science core that could lead to any choice of major.
A student shall be required to stay in the selected academic pathway unless the student receives
permission from the college advisor to opt-out or alter his/her program of study. A student shall
be provided a term-by-term graduation plan, which encompasses both core and electives that
must be taken to remain on track to the degree once the student has selected an academic
pathway. The graduation plan or schedule of courses shall identify the critical prerequisite
courses that must be taken by the student and in which term the courses must be taken. A student
shall adhere to the schedule of courses for each respective term unless the student receives
permission from a college advisor to opt- out of his/her graduation plan. A student, who fails a
course, does not take the critical prerequisite courses, or who does not adhere to the prescribed
schedule shall be required to register in subsequent terms through his/her advisor. All academic
pathways shall be available on-line and easily navigated from each college or university Web site
home page.
Structured Scheduling
Over the past few decades, the types of students entering college has changed dramatically, but
the overall method of delivering education has not adapted to the increasingly varied and
complex needs of these students. On average, less than 19 percent of full-time students graduate
with an associate degree within four years, and less than 56 percent of full-time students graduate
with a bachelor’s degree in six years. There are promising practices demonstrating scalable
success through prescribed, structured delivery mechanisms that are focused on student
progression and completion.
State Examples – Structured Scheduling
New York – Opening in Fall 2012, the New Community College draws inspiration from the
highly structured and successful Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). Operating
throughout the CUNY community college system, ASAP requires students to attend blockscheduled classes full-time, often with co-requisite developmental courses. Fifty-five percent of
ASAP students receive their Associates degree, compared to the national average of 16 percent
at urban community colleges. The first year curriculum at the New Community College is fulltime, highly structured and clearly defined to enable students to complete the core curriculum
and offers only five major options.
Ohio – The Chancellor of the University System of Ohio has asked the state’s public two-year
schools to consider scheduling some classes as a block, in which they are offered back-to-back at
a set time.
Tennessee – The Complete College Tennessee Act of 2010 mandated the use of block scheduling
and cohort programming within the Tennessee community college system. This model has been
used effectively by the Tennessee Tech Centers for decades, achieving a 70 percent completion
rate.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 10
Texas – New directives to layout course offerings in a more systematic and predictable way have
begun with officials across the University of Texas-Brownsville working together to implement
block scheduling.
Structured Scheduling – Sample Legislative or Statewide Board Policy Action
A “Enter State Name” public community college that has a three-year graduation rate of 25% or
less and a public four-year university that has a six-year graduation rate of 25% or less shall
develop and implement a structured model of delivery for academic programs selected by the
institution. The structured model shall incorporate the use of block scheduling, cohort
programming and embedded developmental instruction as a means of delivering educational
programs. Programs developed pursuant to this provision shall be developed in a manner that
results in the opportunity for more rapid and significantly higher rates of program completion
through structured degree and certificate programs that incorporate fixed course offerings that
meet the requirements for the degree being offered on a pre-determined schedule. By “Enter
Date”, 30% of students must be enrolled in programs using the structured model.
A “Enter State Name” public community college that has a three-year graduation rate above 25%
but less than 50% and a public four-year university that has a six-year graduation rate above 25%
but less than 50% shall consider developing and implementing a structured model of delivery for
high enrollment academic programs and/or academic programs that target critical workforce
shortage areas. The structured model shall incorporate the use of block scheduling, cohort
programming and embedded developmental instruction as a means of delivering educational
programs. Programs developed pursuant to this provision shall be developed in a manner that
results in the opportunity for more rapid and significantly higher rates of program completion
through structured degree and certificate programs that incorporate fixed course offerings that
meet the requirements for the degree being offered on a pre-determined schedule.
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Page 11
Appendix
ABOUT COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA
Established in 2009, Complete College America is a national nonprofit working to significantly
increase the number of Americans with a college degree or credential of value and to close
attainment gaps for traditionally underrepresented populations. The organization was founded to
focus solely on dramatically increasing the nation’s college completion rate through state policy
change, and to build consensus for change among state leaders, higher education, and the
national education policy community.
34 Alliance of States Members
Arkansas
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA, Policies the Matter
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Page 12