{"id":{"repo_id":"texas","oai_identifier":"oai:repositories.lib.utexas.edu:2152/62769"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/texas/oai:repositories.lib.utexas.edu:2152/62769","repository":{"repo_id":"texas","name":"University of Texas","base_url":"https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Performance funding 2.0 in higher education","abstract":"As tuition and student debt at public institutions of higher education have grown substantially over the last decade, state governments have looked increasingly to performance funding programs to incentivize the efficient delivery of higher education, particularly by decreasing time-to-degree. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to these efforts, however, it remains unclear whether the programs have a significant impact on an institution's operations and student outcomes or rather, for example, they simply reward those institutions which were already most able to meet the program's goals and which enroll the best prepared students. Initial performance funding systems that awarded institutions with additional funding for meeting outcomes goals have not been shown to be effective in impacting degree completions. In this paper I analyze whether new models of performance funding that tie performance to a portion of base formula funding, dubbed 2.0, are better at incentivizing institutions to increase degree completion. Considering the myriad influences on student success (and, consequently, graduation rates), it is questionable whether the incentives provided by these programs are sufficient alone to positively influence improvements to graduation rates. Accordingly, it may be more effective for states that desire increased graduation rates and reduced student loan debt to appropriate funds to direct measures of controlling tuition costs—such as increased financial aid tied to timely graduation—than to fund performance funding programs.","abstract_html":"As tuition and student debt at public institutions of higher education have grown substantially over the last decade, state governments have looked increasingly to performance funding programs to incentivize the efficient delivery of higher education, particularly by decreasing time-to-degree. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to these efforts, however, it remains unclear whether the programs have a significant impact on an institution's operations and student outcomes or rather, for example, they simply reward those institutions which were already most able to meet the program's goals and which enroll the best prepared students. Initial performance funding systems that awarded institutions with additional funding for meeting outcomes goals have not been shown to be effective in impacting degree completions. In this paper I analyze whether new models of performance funding that tie performance to a portion of base formula funding, dubbed 2.0, are better at incentivizing institutions to increase degree completion. Considering the myriad influences on student success (and, consequently, graduation rates), it is questionable whether the incentives provided by these programs are sufficient alone to positively influence improvements to graduation rates. Accordingly, it may be more effective for states that desire increased graduation rates and reduced student loan debt to appropriate funds to direct measures of controlling tuition costs—such as increased financial aid tied to timely graduation—than to fund performance funding programs.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Griffin, Sean Anthony"],"institution":"The University of Texas at Austin","degree_name":"Master of Public Affairs","degree_level":"Masters","degree_discipline":"Public Affairs","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Von Hippel, Paul T."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":["Dickerson, Mechele"],"year":2017,"date_issued":"2017-06-30","date_published":"2017-06-30","updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:01:04Z","subjects":["Higher education","Performance funding"],"languages":["en"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["doi:10.15781/T2WP9TP67"],"render_values":[{"text":"doi:10.15781/T2WP9TP67","href":"https://doi.org/10.15781/T2WP9TP67","code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2152/62769","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Von Hippel, Paul T."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Dickerson, Mechele"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Griffin, Sean Anthony"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2017-11-27T15:03:07Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2017-11-27T15:03:07Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2017-06-30"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Public Affairs"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Masters"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Public Affairs"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["The University of Texas at Austin"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Higher education","Performance funding"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["doi:10.15781/T2WP9TP67"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2152/62769"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["As tuition and student debt at public institutions of higher education have grown substantially over the last decade, state governments have looked increasingly to performance funding programs to incentivize the efficient delivery of higher education, particularly by decreasing time-to-degree. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to these efforts, however, it remains unclear whether the programs have a significant impact on an institution's operations and student outcomes or rather, for example, they simply reward those institutions which were already most able to meet the program's goals and which enroll the best prepared students. Initial performance funding systems that awarded institutions with additional funding for meeting outcomes goals have not been shown to be effective in impacting degree completions. In this paper I analyze whether new models of performance funding that tie performance to a portion of base formula funding, dubbed 2.0, are better at incentivizing institutions to increase degree completion. Considering the myriad influences on student success (and, consequently, graduation rates), it is questionable whether the incentives provided by these programs are sufficient alone to positively influence improvements to graduation rates. Accordingly, it may be more effective for states that desire increased graduation rates and reduced student loan debt to appropriate funds to direct measures of controlling tuition costs—such as increased financial aid tied to timely graduation—than to fund performance funding programs."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Performance funding 2.0 in higher education"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Von Hippel, Paul T."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Dickerson, Mechele"],"dc:creator":["Griffin, Sean Anthony"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2017-11-27T15:03:07Z"],"dc:date.available":["2017-11-27T15:03:07Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2017-06-30"],"dc:description.abstract":["As tuition and student debt at public institutions of higher education have grown substantially over the last decade, state governments have looked increasingly to performance funding programs to incentivize the efficient delivery of higher education, particularly by decreasing time-to-degree. Even with hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to these efforts, however, it remains unclear whether the programs have a significant impact on an institution's operations and student outcomes or rather, for example, they simply reward those institutions which were already most able to meet the program's goals and which enroll the best prepared students. Initial performance funding systems that awarded institutions with additional funding for meeting outcomes goals have not been shown to be effective in impacting degree completions. In this paper I analyze whether new models of performance funding that tie performance to a portion of base formula funding, dubbed 2.0, are better at incentivizing institutions to increase degree completion. Considering the myriad influences on student success (and, consequently, graduation rates), it is questionable whether the incentives provided by these programs are sufficient alone to positively influence improvements to graduation rates. Accordingly, it may be more effective for states that desire increased graduation rates and reduced student loan debt to appropriate funds to direct measures of controlling tuition costs—such as increased financial aid tied to timely graduation—than to fund performance funding programs."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["doi:10.15781/T2WP9TP67"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/2152/62769"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:subject":["Higher education","Performance funding"],"dc:title":["Performance funding 2.0 in higher education"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Public Affairs"],"thesis:degree_level":["Masters"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Public Affairs"],"thesis:institution_name":["The University of Texas at Austin"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T05:01:04Z"}