Performance-based funding (PBF) policies that closely link higher education funding to performance metrics are common in the United States. Similar to other performance management systems, evidence suggests PBF policies have unintended impacts, such as cream-skimming. More specifically, evidence shows the fiscal incentives of PBF encourage…

A.C.A. §6-61-234 (Act 148 of 2017) directs the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) to adopt polices developed by the Arkansas Division of Higher Education (ADHE) necessary to implement a productivity-based funding model for state-supported institutions of higher education. At its October 27, 2017 meeting, the AHECB approved the…

This chapter describes a comprehensive set of best practices for the evaluation of state formula funding models and state higher education funding in general, based on existing practices within the United States. It represents a review of practices that lead to stakeholder engagement as an objective, collaborative process.

Performance-funding for higher education diffused across the U.S. following the Great Recession that led to funding cuts for the system. Postsecondary funding never returned to pre-Recession levels, and public colleges are held to higher expectations even as the funding they might use to meet these expectations has diminished. This is a challenge…

This article examines and interrogates the formulas used to determine funding at both the designation and institutional levels for Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs) and Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions (AANAPISIs), in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act and the Coronavirus…

A.C.A. §6-61-234 (Act 148 of 2017) directs the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) to adopt polices developed by the Arkansas Division of Higher Education (ADHE) necessary to implement a productivity-based funding model for state-supported institutions of higher education. At its October 27, 2017 meeting, the AHECB approved the…

Most Americans today need some education beyond high school to secure a well-paying job, and higher education is a key factor in social and economic mobility. But higher education is not accessible to all students. To further equalize opportunity, states must understand options for improving the way they fund higher education. America's public…

The United States cannot meet its higher education goals without changing the way it funds public colleges and universities. Current funding models do not sufficiently advance fully scaled improvements. Instead, today's models create unfunded mandates: Colleges are required to increase completion rates, but they do not receive essential funding…

This publication provides governmental and higher education decision-makers a statewide perspective of Arkansas public higher education finance for the 2021-23 biennium, as well as trends for the past several years. It also contains a detailed financial profile of each institution and presents a basis for comparative assessments of revenue sources…

As part of the national agenda of accountability, state governments established performance funding policy to hold public institutions accountable for their performance. Accountability allows state policymakers to incentivize institutions to address state demands of increasing graduation rates in return for performance allocations. Although the…

A.C.A. §6-61-234 (Act 148 of 2017) directs the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) to adopt polices developed by the Arkansas Division of Higher Education (ADHE) necessary to implement a productivity-based funding model for state-supported institutions of higher education. Productivity-based funding is a mechanism to align…

The primary purpose of this study was to examine how best a Tennessee 4-year public university can perform under the state's outcomes-based funding formula, most commonly identified as either PF 2.0 or the Complete College Tennessee Act (CCTA) funding formula. Using a mixed methods approach, the research analyzed select input variable performance…

A.C.A. §6-61-234 (Act 148 of 2017) directs the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) to adopt polices developed by the Arkansas Department of Higher Education (ADHE) necessary to implement a productivity-based funding model for state-supported institutions of higher education. At its October 27, 2017 meeting, the AHECB approved the…

This paper reports on an analysis, using a comparative case study design, of the degree to which policy actors use evidence in designing performance-funding policies in Colorado and Texas. The analysis reveals that features of demanders of information--including their prior exposure to research, their attitudes toward evidence, and, in the case of…

There is a legitimate need for data on the performance of higher education institutions. It is important for the institutions themselves, as well as their stakeholders, including society. The use of indicators that measure the effectiveness or quality of education is increasing as there is much demand for more evidence-based evaluation and…