State Synopses of Performance Funding Programs

✍ Scribed by Joseph C. Burke; Andreea M. Serban

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1998
• Weight: 84 KB
• Volume: 1998
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0271-0579
• DOI: 10.1002/ir.9703

✦ Synopsis

Following are synopses of performance funding programs in eleven states.

Arkansas

Performance funding in Arkansas was short-lived. Although initiated by the State Board of Higher Education and the Higher Education Department (HED) and developed by a committee composed mainly of campus leaders, performance funding in this state reflected largely the concerns of then Governor Jim Guy Tucker and the legislature at the expense of college and university interests. The process that led to the approval of "Strategies for Improvement: Productivity Enhancement for Arkansas Higher Education"-the document that set the performance funding conceptual framework-was an attempt to avoid a state mandate that seemed imminent.

Dissatisfaction with public higher education led to a flood of mandates. By 1993, the general assembly passed and the governor approved new entrance requirements for public two-and four-year institutions, an assessment program for general education, a new proficiency test for college sophomores, a new method of program cost accounting, an annual review of faculty performance, information on program graduation rates and number of majors, annual accountability reports, and a reduction in state funds for remediation. Tax increases in 1991 allowed public colleges to overcome the recession with ample and growing budgets. During 1991-93, state appropriations for public higher education increased by 11 percent. However, officials did not intend to continue this trend. Indeed, appropriations increased only slightly from 1993 to 1995. According to a source close to higher education in Arkansas, it