Top Banner
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems 3035 Center Green Drive, Suite 150 Boulder, Colorado 80301 Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes presented to Montana University System Helena, Montana March 11, 2010
39

Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Feb 02, 2016

Download

Documents

Lloyd

Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes. presented to Montana University System Helena, Montana March 11, 2010. Why?. What’s driving this policy shift?. What’s Driving this Policy Shift?. Increasing clarity of goals and an urgency about attaining them National level State level - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

National Center for Higher Education Management Systems3035 Center Green Drive, Suite 150Boulder, Colorado 80301

Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

presented to

Montana University SystemHelena, Montana

March 11, 2010

Page 2: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Why?

What’s driving this policy shift?

slide 2

Page 3: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

What’s Driving this Policy Shift?

1. Increasing clarity of goals and an urgency about attaining them– National level– State level

2. Resource constraints

3

Page 4: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

National Level

“By 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world”

President Barack Obama, February 24, 2009

slide 4

Page 5: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

State Level

• Board of Regents Goals– Increase educational attainment of Montanans – Assist in the expansion and improvement of the

economy– Improve institutional efficiency and effectiveness

5

Page 6: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Source: OECD Education at a Glance 2009

Comparing Montana with Nations & Other States in the

Percentage of Young-Adult Degree Attainment (ages 25-

34)

56 Canada • Korea

54 JapanMassachusetts

52

North Dakota 50

Minnesota • New York 48New Zealand

Connecticut • Iowa • New Hampshire • New Jersey 46Maryland

Nebraska • South Dakota • Vermont 44 IrelandIllinois • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island Norway

Virginia 42Colorado • Hawaii• Kansas Australia • Belgium • France

Wisconsin 40 Denmark • Sweden • UNITED STATESWashington Finland • Spain

Utah 38Missouri Netherland • United Kingdom

Indiana • Maine • MONTANA • Michigan • Ohio • North Carolina • Oregon 36 LuxembourgFlorida Switzerland

Georgia • Idaho • South Carolina • Wyoming 34

Alabama • Kentucky • Mississippi 32Arizona • Tennessee • Texas Iceland

Alaska • Oklahoma 30 PolandNew Mexico

Louisiana • Nevada • West Virginia 28 Greece

Arkansas 26

24Germany

22 HungaryPortugal

20Austria • Italy • Mexico

18

United States % OECD Counties

California • Delaware •

Slovak Republic (17%)Czech Republic (15%) Turkey (14%)

6

Page 7: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

slide 7

Current Annual Degree Production – 2,252,212

Additional Annual Degree Production Needed – 150,528 per Year

Associate and Bachelors Degrees Needed to Become the Most Educated Country by 2020

Increase in State and Local Funding at Current Cost per FTE

Note: Assumes private institutions will maintain current share

77

Page 8: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Annual Percent Increase Needed to Reach 2020 Goal of 51%

Note: for Montana this translates to 596 per year.

Colo

rado

New

Jers

ey

Min

neso

taN

ort

h D

ako

taC

onnect

icut

New

Ham

psh

ire

Mass

ach

use

tts

Page 9: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Undergraduate FTE Enrollment by Sector (2006-07)

9

Page 10: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

How Montana Ranks Among Other States on Selected Measures for Education and Economic

Development

Source: Tom Mortenson, Postsecondary Opportunity; US Census Bureau, 2006 ACS Public Microdata Sample (PUMS) File, Kauffman Foundation, Regional

Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce

State New Economy Index

Personal Income per Capita

Difference in Earnings Between Bachelor's & High School Diploma

Difference in Earnings Between Associate & High School Diploma

Migration Rate of College Graduates (Age 22-64)

Overall Results on Student Pipeline(Transition & Completion Rates, 9th Grade to College Completion)

Six-Year Graduation Rates of Bachelor's Students

Three-Year Graduation Rates of Associate Students

College-Going Rates of Students Directly Out of High School

Public High School Graduation Rates

Economic Development MeasuresEducation Measures

10

Page 11: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Undergraduate Credentials & Degrees Awarded at All Colleges per 1,000 Adults Age 18-44 with No College Degree, 2006

slide 11

Source: NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey 2005-06; U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 ACS

58

.7

14

.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Iowa

North D

akotaR

hode IslandW

yoming

Utah

Minnesota

Nebraska

Verm

ontK

ansasA

rizonaM

assachusettsS

outh Dakota

Wisconsin

IllinoisN

ew H

ampshire

Pennsylvania

Colorado

Washington

New

York

Kentucky

Missouri

Florida

Delaw

areIndianaU

nited States

Michigan

Virginia

Montana

Ohio

North C

arolinaO

klahoma

Maryland

IdahoO

regonH

awaii

Georgia

Connecticut

California

Maine

West V

irginiaS

outh Carolina

Alabam

aN

ew M

exicoM

ississippiA

rkansasT

ennesseeN

ew Jersey

Texas

LouisianaN

evadaA

laska

Bachelor's Associate Certificates/Diplomas

Unite

d S

tate

s

33

.5

48

.7

Monta

na

32

.0

Page 12: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Undergraduate Awards per 100 FTE Undergraduates2006-07

Source: NCES IPEDS Peer Analysis System (http://www.nces.ed.gov/ipedspas/), IPEDS 2006-07 efia2007 Early Release Enrollment File; NCES IPEDS Peer Analysis System (http://www.nces.ed.gov/ipedspas/), IPEDS 2005-06 c2006_a Final Release Completions FileNote: Completions reflect 2006-07 total undergraduate degrees (Associate, Bachelors) and certificates (less than 1-year, 1-2 year, 2-4 year) awarded at Title IV degree granting public and private institutions. Enrollments reflect 2006-07 annual FTE undergraduate enrollments at Title IV degree-granting public and private institutions as reported in the IPEDS 2006-07 12-month instructional activity enrollment file. Enrollment data were aggregated from an early release data file and are subject to change.12

Page 13: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Public Research Institutions - Bachelors Degrees Awarded per 100 FTE

Undergraduates, 2006-07

13

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Completions File; c2007_a Early Release Data File Downloaded 04-28-08; NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Instructional Activity File; efia2007 Final Release Data File; NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Unduplicated Headcount File;

effy2007 Final Release Data File.; NCES, IPEDS Fall 2006 Enrollment File; ef2006a Final Release Data File.

Page 14: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Public Masters & Bachelors Institutions - Bachelors Degrees Awarded per 100 FTE Undergraduates,

2006-07

14

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Completions File; c2007_a Early Release Data File Downloaded 04-28-08; NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Instructional Activity File; efia2007 Final Release Data File; NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Unduplicated Headcount File;

effy2007 Final Release Data File.; NCES, IPEDS Fall 2006 Enrollment File; ef2006a Final Release Data File.

Page 15: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Public Associate Colleges - Total Credentials Awarded (Less than Bachelors) per 100 FTE Undergraduates, 2006-07

Page 16: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

THE FISCAL REALITIES

slide 16

Page 17: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

The Flow of Funds

17

Federal Government

Tax Policy

Appropriations/GrantsStudent Aid

Tuition

Scholarships &Waivers

Student Aid (Restricted)

Income

Available State and Local

Govt. Funds

FederalGovernment

Higher Education

Students Institutions

Economy

• K-12• Corrections• Health Care• Other Govt.

DonorsFoundationsCorporations

Stimulus

Funds

Page 18: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Income

The Flow of Funds - State

18

Tax Policy

Appropriations/GrantsStudent Aid

Tuition

Scholarships &Waivers

Available State and Local

Govt. Funds

Higher Education

Students Institutions

Economy

Federal Government

Student Aid

Page 19: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

State Tax Capacity and Effort—Indexed to U.S. Average

Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO)

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

GA HI

IL

IN IAKS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MA

MS

MT

NE

NV

NJ

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

PA

RI

SC

SD

UT

VT

VA

WA

FL

ID

MI

MN

MO

NH

NM

TNTX

WV

WI

WY

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Sta

te T

ax C

apacity

(Tota

l Taxable

Reso

urce

s Per C

apita

)

State Tax Effort (Effective Tax Rate)

US

OR

Slide 19

Page 20: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Projected State & Local Budget Surplus (Gap) as a Percent of Revenues, 2016

slide 20Source: NCHEMS; Don Boyd (Rockefeller Institute of Government), 2009

-2.1

-2.2

-2.3

-2.3

-2.4

-2.6

-2.7

-2.9 -3

-3.3

-3.5

-3.5

-3.8

-4.1

-4.6

-4.7

-4.8

-4.9 -5

-5.1

-5.2

-5.4

-5.7

-5.7

-5.8

-5.8 -6

-6.2

-6.3

-6.3

-6.7

-6.7

-6.8

-7.2

-7.4

-7.8 -8

-8.1

-8.1

-8.5

-8.5

-8.5

-8.7

-8.9

-9.1

-9.4

-9.5

-9.7

-10.

6-1

0.8

-10.

9

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Mar

ylan

dM

aine

Verm

ont

New

Jers

eyCo

nnec

ticut

New

Ham

pshi

reRh

ode

Isla

ndN

orth

Dak

ota

Wis

cons

inM

assa

chus

etts

Mic

higa

nW

yom

ing

Calif

orni

aO

hio

Del

awar

eKa

nsas

Ore

gon

Virg

inia

New

Yor

kM

inne

sota

Wes

t Vir

gini

aPe

nnsy

lvan

iaIll

inoi

sA

lask

aN

ebra

ska

Mon

tana

Uni

ted

Stat

esLo

uisi

ana

Indi

ana

Haw

aii

Okl

ahom

aN

ew M

exic

oM

isso

uri

Kent

ucky

Iow

aSo

uth

Dak

ota

Was

hing

ton

Flor

ida

Sout

h Ca

rolin

aA

rkan

sas

Geo

rgia

Colo

rado

Tenn

esse

eN

orth

Car

olin

aId

aho

Uta

hA

rizo

naN

evad

aA

laba

ma

Texa

sM

issi

ssip

pi

Page 21: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

State/Local Funding plus Tuition Revenue per FTE Student

All Institutions (Public)

21

Source: SHEEO SHEF

Page 22: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations

Public Research

slide 22

$29,172$24,184

$23,263$22,095

$21,640$21,384

$20,010$19,865$19,783$19,721$19,545$19,227$18,989$18,843$18,773$18,657$18,537

$17,610$17,360$17,267$16,974$16,774

$16,275$16,195$16,172$16,155$16,092$16,059$16,057$15,837$15,774$15,714$15,568$15,541$15,406$15,180$15,125$15,093$15,003$14,865$14,777

$14,018$14,006$13,675

$13,121$12,666$12,449$12,324

$11,620$11,243

$9,682

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

Alaska

Minnesota

Haw

aiiConnecticutN

ew York

Vermont

North Carolina

Massachusett

sKentuckyW

yoming

Maryland

Nebraska

Alabam

aCaliforniaIow

aD

elaware

New

JerseyTennesseeW

ashingtonSouth CarolinaM

ainePennsylvaniaN

ew M

exicoN

ationIdahoIndianaM

ichiganM

issouriRhode IslandKansasVirginiaG

eorgiaU

tahW

isconsinO

klahoma

Nevada

Ohio

West Virginia

Arizona

Arkansas

IllinoisFloridaN

orth Dakota

New

Ham

pshireTexasLouisianaM

ississippiO

regonSouth D

akotaM

ontanaColorado

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files.

NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File.NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data

Files.

Page 23: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations

Public Masters and Baccalaureate

slide 23

$17,984 $16,148 $14,587$14,440$14,426

$13,683$12,929

$12,324$12,105$12,011$11,862

$11,443$11,443$11,389$11,284$11,266$11,249$11,063$10,836$10,788$10,778$10,721

$10,464$10,405$10,370$10,343$10,312$10,275$10,251$10,179$10,162$10,039

$9,957$9,945$9,933$9,702$9,701$9,630$9,622$9,410$9,185$8,959$8,846$8,748

$8,414$8,400

$7,964$7,877

$7,209$6,311 $5,105

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

Delaw

areH

awaii

ConnecticutN

orth CarolinaA

laskaN

ew Jersey

New

Mexico

Iowa

Maryland

Massachusett

sM

aineVerm

ontVirginiaRhode IslandA

labama

Montana

IllinoisW

ashingtonN

ew York

FloridaM

ichiganSouth CarolinaKentuckyO

hioM

ississippiN

ation IdahoM

issouriD

CKansasPennsylvaniaCaliforniaN

ew H

ampshire

Minnesota

TexasIndianaTennesseeO

regonN

orth Dakota

Arkansas

Nebraska

Wisconsin

Nevada

Oklahom

aLouisianaG

eorgiaW

est VirginiaSouth D

akotaA

rizonaU

tahColorado

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files.

NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File.NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data

Files.

Page 24: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations

Public 2-Year

slide 24

$14,793$11,197

$10,683$10,287

$9,964$9,953 $9,125

$8,844$8,801$8,705$8,625$8,480$8,449$8,411$8,378$8,214$8,067$8,044

$7,772$7,633$7,566$7,509$7,507$7,448$7,432$7,416$7,403$7,329$7,239$7,222$7,117$7,018$6,918$6,895$6,844$6,823$6,714$6,676$6,630$6,510$6,465$6,353

$6,082$6,028$5,970$5,945$5,939

$5,712$5,517

$5,297$3,369

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

Wisconsin

Haw

aiiW

yoming

Maryland

Delaw

areConnecticutVerm

ontKansasO

regonN

ew York

New

Ham

pshireIdahoM

assachusetts

New

Mexico

Alaska

Michigan

PennsylvaniaN

orth Dakota

Minnesota

Arizona

Rhode IslandO

hioU

tahN

orth CarolinaTexasN

ationM

ontanaCaliforniaW

ashingtonM

aineN

evadaA

labama

IllinoisN

ebraskaM

issouriLouisianaTennesseeIow

aA

rkansasN

ew Jersey

Oklahom

aSouth CarolinaFloridaG

eorgiaM

ississippiVirginiaSouth D

akotaColoradoIndianaKentuckyW

est Virginia

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files.

NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File.NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data

Files.

Page 25: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Net Tuition as a Percent of Public Higher Education Total Educational Revenue by

State, FY 2008

Note: Dollars adjusted by 2008 HECA, Cost of Living Adjustment, and Enrollment Mix

Source: SHEEO SHEF

25

Page 26: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Net Tuition Revenues per FTE and State-Funded Tuition Aid per FTE by State, FY 2008

(Public Institutions Only)

Note: Figures are adjusted for inflation, public system enrollment mix, and state cost of living. Funding and FTE data are for public non-medical students only.

Source: SHEEO SHEF

26

Page 27: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Affordability: Need-based Financial Aid

slide 27

108% 102%96%

88% 86% 84%84% 82%

74% 70%62% 59% 57%

56%50%49%48%48% 46% 43% 41%

41% 37%36% 33%

32% 29%28%28%28% 24% 21%

20%19% 17%

16% 13% 10% 9% 8% 8% 6% 5% 5% 5% 3% 1% 1% 0% 0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Washington

New

Jersey Verm

ont N

ew York

Pennsylvania Indiana M

innesota Illinois Connecticut N

orth Carolina W

isconsin M

aryland M

assachusetts

California Virginia D

elaware

Kentucky N

evada O

hio W

est Virginia Colorado O

klahoma

Maine

South Carolina Iow

a Texas M

issouri A

rkansas M

ichigan Rhode Island O

regon Florida N

ew M

exico N

ebraska Kansas Tennessee N

ew H

ampshire

North D

akota M

ontana Louisiana U

tah A

laska A

labama

Haw

aii Idaho A

rizona M

ississippi W

yoming

Georgia

South Dakota

Source: Measuring Up 2008

State need-based aid as a proportion of federal need-based aid.

Page 28: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Measuring Up: Affordability

Source: Measuring Up 2008

28

Page 29: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Median Earnings of Population Age 25-64 by Level of Education, 2006

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 American Community Survey PUMS File

29

Page 30: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Education Attainment & Personal Income by Montana CountiesPers

onal In

com

e P

er

Capit

a

Adults aged 25-64 with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher (%)

30

Page 31: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Adjusting to Changed Circumstances

Improving Productivity

31

Page 32: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Productivity: Total Funding per Degree/Certificate

(Weighted*, 2006-2007)

slide 32

29,0

75

30,6

19

33,2

73

33,7

56

34,3

30

34,5

94

36,4

98

37,8

23

38,3

64

38,3

65

39,5

16

39,5

16

39,9

18

42,1

77

42,1

98

42,4

08

42,6

93

42,8

47

42,8

73

42,9

48

43,8

20

44,2

72

44,3

71

45,8

33

45,9

04

46,5

22

46,8

80

47,4

53

47,6

72

47,7

49

48,6

11

49,8

94

52,4

91

52,5

72

52,8

88

53,5

35

54,5

53

56,0

90

56,2

80

56,8

88

56,9

60

59,4

20

59,4

65

63,8

22

64,9

34

65,9

75

66,6

23

72,8

46

75,7

44

79,7

94

86,0

09

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

FloridaColoradoW

ashingtonU

tahN

orth Dakota

Oklahom

aW

est VirginiaM

ontanaSouth D

akotaKansasG

eorgiaLouisianaW

isconsinIdahoN

ew H

ampshire

IllinoisM

ississippiArizonaArkansasM

innesotaO

regonKentuckyIow

aVirginiaM

issouriN

ationO

hioIndianaN

ebraskaTexasSouth CarolinaN

orth CarolinaM

ichiganTennesseeN

ew M

exicoCaliforniaM

ainePennsylvaniaAlabam

aN

ew York

Nevada

Maryland

Vermont

New

JerseyM

assachusetts

Haw

aiiConnecticutRhode IslandD

elaware

Wyom

ingAlaska

Tuition and FeesState and Local

Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use MicrodataSamples)

*Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree type and level)

Page 33: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Degrees & Certificates awarded per FTE vs. Total Funding per FTE (2006-2007)

slide 33

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

FL

GA

HIIDIL IN

IAKS

KY

LAME MD

MA

MI

MN

MS MO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TNTX

UT

VTVA

WA

WV

WI

WY

US

14

17

20

23

26

29

32

5,000 8,000 11,000 14,000 17,000 20,000

Low Resources, High Production

Low Resources, Low Production

High Resources, High Production

High Resources, Low Production

Performance:Degrees

Awarded per 100 FTE

Resources: Total Funding per FTE

Source: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008: NCES IPEDS Completions Survey

Page 34: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Total Funding per FTE (2006-07)

Perfo

rmance

(200

6-0

7)

AL

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

FL

GAHI

I D

I L

I N

I AKS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MAMI

MN

MS

MO

MT

NE

NV

NHNJ

NM

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RI

SC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

WA

WV

WIWY

US

15

18

21

24

27

5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000

Performance Relative to Funding: Bachelors Degrees Awarded per 100 FTE Undergraduates

(Public Research Institutions)

Source: NCES, IPEDSslide 34

Page 35: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Total Funding per FTE (2006-07)

Perfo

rmance

(200

6-0

7)

AL

AK

AZ AR

CA

CO

CT

DE

FL

GA

HI

I D

I L

I N

I A

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MAMIMN

MSMO

MT

NE

NV

NH

NJ

NM

NY

NCND

OH

OK

OR

PA

RISC

SD

TN

TX

UT

VT

VA

WA

WV

WI US

5

10

15

20

25

30

2,000 5,000 8,000 11,000 14,000 17,000 20,000

Performance Relative to Funding: Bachelors Degrees Awarded per 100 FTE Undergraduates

(Public Bachelors and Masters)

Source: NCES, IPEDSslide 35

Page 36: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Total Funding per FTE (2006-07)

Perfo

rmance

(200

6-0

7)

Performance Relative to Funding: All Credentials Awarded per 100 FTE Undergraduates

(Public Two-Year Institutions)

Source: NCES, IPEDSslide 36

Page 37: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

How?

What are Emerging Best Practices?

slide 37

Page 38: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Basic Principles

• Applied to allocation of base – not just a small add-on

• Few factors that can be measured unambiguously• Different factors for different types of institutions

– Research– 4-Year teaching– 2-Year

• Methodology is transparent – incentives created are linked to goals in obvious ways

• They can be applied in good times and bad

38

Page 39: Linking Finance to Performance/Outcomes

Emerging Practices

• Using completed SCH – not enrolled SCH – as driver in calculating base

• Additional funds tied to specific goals– Increasing number of graduates – with variations for

• At-risk students• Students in priority fields

– Increasing research funding from sources other than state or institution’s own funds

– “Momentum Point” attainment in two-year institutions

39