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 Regional Public University (RPU) leaders experience acutely. Policymakers use performance-funding to hold postsecondary institutions accountable for meeting state goals. Policymakers may assume that postsecondary leaders will pursue performance-funding metrics to maintain or increase their institution's funding. Colorado is an interesting state in which to test this logic, given the state's ranking of 48th nationally for postsecondary funding. This multiple-site case study analyzed how leaders of four Colorado RPUs responded to performance-funding. Performance management theory framed this study. Findings show little to no institutional responsiveness to the implementation of performance-funding, with RPU leaders expressing skepticism and derision for the policy and pursuing alternative revenue sources. Historically, funding was an important lever states used to hold postsecondary institutions accountable. In the modern era of state disinvestment and high expectation, performance-funding's ability to drive institutional behavior and promote accountability may be weakened; this study points to this implication.