Lumina Foundation released the first installment in a series of papers on how states and public institutions are using new outcomes-based funding models to improve upon outdated performance- and enrollment-based funding approaches.
A new series of reports argue for tying public funding to student outcomes.
Lumina releases the third and final round of papers exploring how public colleges and universities are responding to moves nationally by state policymakers toward the use of outcomes-based funding and away from enrollment-based funding.
Better tools for assessment are key in ensuring quality By Susan Headden Layla Quinones, a bright, vivacious 19-year-old, has an unusually impressive Web page. She has posted an attractive photograph of herself, an engaging biography, and a personal statement about her passions and interests. She’s included a page of modern artwork that she likes, with insightful […]
Policymakers are moving to outcomes-based funding in an effort to inspire public higher education institutions to drive the transformative change required to expand access, increase graduation rates and contain costs. For outcomes-based funding to have a significant effect on student outcomes, system and institutional leaders must successfully translate these policies into action. In an effort to inform the design, development and implementation of future outcomes-based funding policies, this paper presents a real-time account of how the prospect of outcomes-based funding, and the financial incentives that have been put in place by the state of California and the California State University system, have provided a frame for California State University, Fullerton to engage and mobilize its campus community to improve student outcomes, advance the institution’s mission and achieve its strategic goals.
State governments serve as a key-funding source for public higher education. Outcomes-based funding is an alternative to other methods of state allocations to institutions, such as base-plus funding, enrollment-based funding, and early performance-centered funding.
Recent years have seen rapid increases in both the need and demand for higher education, just as the economic downturn has placed increasing pressure on state higher education budgets. These trends and others have converged to inspire state policy- makers, the coordinating and governing boards for higher education, and other stakeholders to consider ways to better align institutional priorities and activities with state goals, create incentives for quality, and more ef ciently prioritize dwindling state resources for higher education.
A detailed review of four different outcomes-based funding models leads to some central conclusions for policymakers in this arena.
Outcomes-based funding, in which some states link a portion of their funding for public colleges to a performance formula emphasizing metrics on completion, equity, employment, or other measures, is a high-stakes, complex policy.
Miriam and Mark Blackman run a small machine shop in the Texarkana region of southwest Arkansas. The site is rural, but the work is increasingly high-tech – particularly since the couple’s recent purchase of a computer-controlled metalworking machine. However, by applying what she’s learned in a competency-based education program in nearby Marshall, Texas, Miriam is staying ahead of the technology.