Search

Defined benefit (DB) pension systems determine the size of pension payments using an employee's "final average salary". Thus, employees enrolled in DB pension systems face an incentive to "salary spike" -- strategically increase late career pensionable compensation -- to increase their retirement income. This is an important issue given that public pension systems face increasing scrutiny due to ongoing concerns about their fiscal sustainability. This paper develops an empirical method to quantify the prevalence of salary spiking by identifying cases where end-of-career compensation deviates from expected levels of compensation. We apply this method to the teacher pension systems in Illinois and examine how salary spiking changed in response to policy reform. The results suggest that salary spiking is very common, with about half of late career employees observed as having pensionable compensation that exceeds expectations. Policies designed to dissuade salary spiking by internalizing its costs across districts appear to reduce the prevalence of salary spiking, but there may be unintended consequences for individuals who are "not actually spiking," as such discouraging the assignment of supplementary responsibilities to late career employees.

With the advent of outcomes-based funding policies, state policymakers are increasingly committed to basing public college and university funding on how institutions perform on valued measures such as program progress and degree completion. This rising emphasis is considered here in the historical context of three earlier state funding approaches: "base-plus" approaches, enrollment-based formula-funding approaches, and early performance-based funding approaches. After detailed reviews of these funding approaches and the newer outcomes-based approach, the four models' respective strengths and weaknesses are reviewed comparatively. This paper then identifies some central conclusions for policymakers in this arena. [This paper was prepared for HCM Strategists, LLC.]

This paper examines the key aspects of stakeholder engagement that can strengthen the design, implementation and sustainability of outcomes-based funding policies. We seek to help policymakers understand the prevailing starting-point attitudes of institutional stakeholders, primarily college and university administrators, faculty and staff, and the importance of engaging them throughout the policy process. In addition, we recommend specific strategies for effectively engaging these stakeholders based on our work in multiple states and leading research in the field.

In an era of significant disinvestment in public higher education by state governments, many public universities are moving toward a "progressive tuition model" that attempts to invest approximately one-third of tuition income into institutional financial aid for lower-income and middle-class students. The objective is to mitigate the cost of tuition and keep college affordable. But is this model as currently formulated working? What levels of financial stress are students of all income groups experiencing? And are they changing their behaviors? Utilizing data from the Student Experience in the Research University (SERU) Survey of undergraduates and other data sources, this study explores these issues by focusing on students at the University of California and ten AAU institutions that are members of the SERU Consortium. At least to date, the increase in tuition, and costs related to housing and other living expenses, have not had a negative impact on the number of lower-income students attending UC. Reflecting to some degree UC's robust financial aid policies, and perhaps the growing number of lower-income families in California, there has been an actual increase in their number and as a percentage of total enrollment--a counterintuitive finding to the general perception that higher tuition equals less access to the economically vulnerable. At the same time, there is evidence of a "middle-class" squeeze, with a marginal drop in the number of students from this economic class. Students' concerns for paying for higher education and accumulated student debt in the 2014 SERU are predictably higher among lower-income students, yet upper-middle income students (with annual family incomes from $80-125,000) are the least likely to agree that the cost of attendance is manageable. With these and other nuances and caveats briefly discussed in this study, the "progressive tuition model" appears to be working in terms of affordability and with only moderate indicators of increased financial stress and changed student behaviors. These results are not necessarily predictive of the future if tuition rates go up further. But they do indicate the higher tuition rates at highly selective public universities, if accompanied by robust federal, state and institutional financial aid, may be the best path for maintaining access to lower-income students, and for generating income needed for institutions to maintain or improve student-to-faculty ratios and other markers of quality. Freezing tuition, as currently demanded by state lawmakers in California, does not appear to be based on any clear analysis of the correlation of tuition and affordability. It appears more as a politically attractive way to appeal to voters while ignoring the financial consequences for public colleges and universities and the quality of the student experience. The following are appended: (1) SERU Data Tables; (2) SERU responses by ethnicity among UC students; (3) SERU tabulations of responses; and (4) SERU Consortium Member Campuses.

What does it take to make it successfully through college? For a growing proportion of the nation's students--many of whom are racial and ethnic minorities, from low-income families, or the first in their families to enroll in higher education--the answer encompasses far more than affordable tuition and decent grades. As access to higher education has expanded to embrace these historically underrepresented groups, the formula for student success is increasingly understood to include a mix of programs and incentives tailored to their needs. Legislators are taking notice. Their primary policy objective in financing higher education was once to increase student enrollments. As their focus shifts beyond enrollment to attainment levels and gaps among underrepresented populations, states are developing outcomes-based funding models, which recognize that underrepresented students may require additional academic, financial, and social support to achieve success, and which allocate funding to institutions as a way to further promote a culture of student progression and success. As participation rates in higher education have increased across social and economic groups and non-traditional students have become the norm, the hurdles to success have multiplied for the students themselves and for the institutions that serve them. Outcomes-based funding is a relatively new approach to higher education financing based on the idea that colleges and universities should be supported to do more to foster student success. As public funding has become more constrained and attainment rates have fallen, the question of whether higher education is providing appropriate returns on public investment has become increasingly urgent. As more and more students fail to make timely progress toward a degree, drop out altogether, or do not succeed in finding jobs that leverage their degrees, attention has focused on tools policymakers can use to encourage those outcomes. Outcomes-based funding models are increasingly seen as an effective way to foster the efforts of colleges and universities to assist students once they are enrolled and to help them progress toward graduation. Such funding allocation models have been embraced by a growing number of states, with varied levels of investment and design. In contrast with a traditional funding model based on enrollments, or even a model that allocates a portion of funding based on key performance indicators, outcomes-based funding is a comprehensive model in which all or a substantial part of an institution's funding allocation is oriented toward achieving the state's desired outcome. Experts agree that while it's too early to assess the effectiveness of the state's outcomes-based funding model at increasing attainment, the changes it has ushered in have led to meaningful achievements.

This white paper analyzes the potential effects of requiring income-driven repayment for all federal loans as well as relying on paycheck withholding for loan payments, with particular attention to the implications for low-income students and families. The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS) also examines the relevance and evolution of mandatory IDR ["income-driven repayment"] systems in Australia and the United Kingdom, and the paper includes specific recommendations to streamline and improve student loan repayment options in the United States. Two appendices are included: (1) Citation List of Figure 2: "Key Comparisons of IDR Systems and Context: U.S., U.K., and Australia"; and (2) Borrower Example Details.

Accountability, "the extent to which one must answer to higher authority for one's actions" (Shafritz & Russell, 2000, p. 343), is a critical part of corporate and democratic life. In public institutions, sound accountability processes assure those in executive, governance, audit and "elected official" roles that public resources are being honestly and effectively used for the purpose for which they were intended. Additionally, information available to a broader audience should demonstrate that public institutions are effectively and efficiently managed and successfully perform their mandated roles. Because it is central to the public's trust in their institutions, accountability continues to be a media, political and public policy issue. The Association of Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology of Ontario (ACAATO) commissioned this study of the policies and mechanisms through member colleges are answerable to government and to the public. This study summarizes 7 principles of effective accountability practice drawn from a review of the relevant literature. These are: (1) clear lines of answerability; (2) a clear definition of the "responsibilities" for which an organization's leaders will be held accountable; (3) provisions for the reporting of performance; (4) defining and measuring "outcomes" and widely-recognized "core indicators" which relate "results" to "purpose", recognize the limits of unavoidable costs and available resources and which can be used systematically in decision making; (5) carefully balanced incentives; (6) relevant legal and financial rules and reporting to monitor compliance; and (7) a balance between the processes that hold organizations accountable and the authority needed to respond quickly to a dynamic marketplace. This paper assesses the current accountability policies governing the operation of Ontario's Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (CAATs) against the above "effective practice" criteria. It concludes that the colleges a held to rigid and comprehensive controls over their financial and legal affairs, real estate dealings and entrepreneurial activity. Prior approval, audit, public financial reporting and Board governance practices ensure transparency. A bibliography is included.

In 2006 the Educational Policy Institute released the first edition of "Beyond the Sticker Price: A Closer Look at Canadian University Tuition Fees." The report presented a new way by which to look at the prices and costs associated with university tuition, an alternative to the annual tuition fee report produced by Statistics Canada which more accurately reflects what students and their families actually pay in tuition fees once all various subsidies are taken into account. The purpose of this paper is to build upon the research and analysis conducted for this paper's original release. This paper presents available data from a ten year period, from 1997-98 to 2007-08 and look at real changes in tuition fees, educational tax credits and tax rebate programs over that period. Of particular importance in this paper is the effect of the introduction of new tax rebate programs in four provinces since the last report. These programs have reduced the net cost of education substantially, particularly in Manitoba and New Brunswick. This new data will permit the authors to generate some alternative calculations of net tuition which are substantially more accurate as measures of cost than the simple tuition fee data. These measures, in turn, will permit them to see precisely how changing government policies on education tax credits and programs are affecting the people who receive them. The authors' brief excursion into calculating real costs for students revealed the following: (1) Education tax credits, which act as a kind of tuition rebate, have expanded by over 45 percent nationally over the past decade on a per-student basis; (2) Taking both inflation and tax credits into account, real "net tuition" is up by just 19 percent since 1997-98; (3) Since 1999-2000, the growth in tax credits has more than offset the growth in real tuition. Nationally, once tax credits are taken into account, "net tuition" has only increased 8 percent in the last 8 years; and (4) Very generous tax rebate programs recently introduced in four provinces have seen the "net tuition" figures, once adjusted for these rebates, decrease by as much as 102 percent. At the national level, taking these into account, tuition has actually fallen over the last eight years. One of the key concepts in this paper is that there is more than one way to measure "net tuition". Governments wishing to pay attention to affordability and accessibility need to pay more attention to these differences. It is possible--by ignoring tax credits and rebates completely--to make a case that net tuition costs in Canada are increasing. A more reasonable interpretation of the data presented here is that tuition is anything but out of control, and that tax credits in most of the country are more than offsetting tuition. (Contains 8 tables and 3 footnotes.) [For the first edition of this report, "Beyond the Sticker Price: A Closer Look at Canadian University Tuition Fees," see ED499854.]

How is your institution using its fiscal resources to its greatest advantage to fulfill the school's mission and meet expectations in today's economy? In an era of reduced resources and escalating costs, it's a question that every institution of higher education should be asking. Yet, despite the economic pressure, many campus leaders still need to take steps to fully integrate their enrollment policies and fiscal management. While institutions have become increasingly sophisticated and proactive in managing their enrollment outcomes, campus administrators often continue to set goals and pursue objectives for enrollment and fiscal policy without sufficiently connecting these two areas. At the heart of this issue are questions such as: (1) How certain are you that your tuition, fee, and financial aid structures are providing the strongest enrollment and revenue results possible?; (2) How are you monitoring the changing demographics and price sensitivity of prospective students in your marketplace?; (3) How do you know that you are offering the optimal number and variety of academic courses and programs in order to meet enrollment needs and address fiscal realities?; (4) Are you re-allocating at least a percentage of your operational budget to new initiatives based on sound analysis of current strategies and tactics?; and (5) What metrics should you be tracking in order to harmonize your enrollment and revenue goals? This paper addresses those questions and discusses the strategies and metrics your campus needs to optimize its enrollment and fiscal policies.

America's system for financing K-12 education is not neutral about innovation and the use of new technologies. Indeed, that system is stacked against them. To remedy this, our education-funding system needs to shift dramatically. Instead of today's model--which rigidly funds programs, staff positions, and administrative structures, instead of schools and students--we need an approach in which funding follows the student. At present, America's charter school finance structure provides the best prototype, but even it does not go far enough. An appropriate school-finance system must also be able to defend ineffective schools and provide space and incentives for online providers to bring their products to the marketplace. (Contains 1 table and 13 endnotes.)

In state fiscal year (SFY) 2000, states expended at least $20 billion on child welfare services, 20 percent more than in SFY 1998. This increase occurred despite the fact that the number of children reported as abused and neglected and the number of children in foster care declined. This suggests that not only are child welfare agencies spending more money than they have in the past, they are spending more money per-child. Yet criticism of the performance of our nation's child welfare system has continued unabated. Many researchers and policy makers have argued that the existing structure of federal child welfare financing limits the ability of states to develop and implement innovative programs, services, and administrative reforms to address performance weaknesses. Over the past decade, a number of federal fiscal reform proposals have been introduced in Congress or floated around on Capitol Hill. Most recently, President Bush's FY 2004 budget proposed legislation that would offer states an alternative financing system that would provide for greater flexibility. This paper summarizes what is known about states' financing of child welfare services. The paper identifies commonly cited problems with the federal child welfare financing structure, describes and assesses recently proposed solutions, and questions how financing data can be used in assessments of state performance. (Contains 22 references.)(Author)

Within the context of the school finance literature, the concepts of equity and adequacy raise a number of complex definitional and pragmatic issues. The purpose of this paper is to clarify those issues and to use those concepts to evaluate the recent policy proposal called Weighted Student Funding (WSF). Though WSF contains some equity-enhancing elements, it is likely to fall short of its equity goals because the weights are likely to be inappropriate and the approach fails to take full account of the concentrations of challenging-to-educate students and their effects on the distribution of teachers. In addition, the WSF proposal can be faulted for paying no attention to adequacy, potentially stigmatizing individual students, and placing so much focus on individual schools. A more complete evaluation of WSF would require a broader institutional perspective that extends beyond the equity and adequacy considerations of this article. (Contains 8 footnotes.)

This paper discusses routes by which HIV/AIDS money is dispersed and received. It notes that capturing accurate data on actual spending patterns of large donors can be difficult, as there is no uniform tracking or reporting system and much HIV/AIDS money is spent under the broader category of sexual and reproductive health. Most of the information contained in the first two sections is based on main reports that assess the general manner in which HIV/AIDS money as a whole is being distributed. Moving on from who is providing funds for HIV/AIDS initiatives at global level, it tracks sources and flows from governments, through bilateral and multilateral channels. It does not include estimates of household spending on care and treatment, which cannot be realistically quantified. Information follows on top US and European donors, the international business community and pharmaceutical companies. Later sections look into ways HIV/AIDS funding is being spent, with the proviso, as before, that detailed breakdowns of actual spending are rare. The broadest categories are prevention, care and treatment, orphan support and research. Within the field of ECD vis-a-vis HIV/AIDS, funds are being directed through two main areas of concern--prevention of mother-to-child transmission and the care of orphans and vulnerable children. This paper describes major players in these arenas, showing that efforts are being made by a few agencies through the amount of funding directed along these channels is minimal in contrast to other target areas. Fundamental questions are raised about current donor priorities and there follows some discussion touching areas where new or reallocated HIV/AIDS funding could be directed. Obvious gaps in the provision of money for ECD and HIV/AIDS support are then identified along with opportunities to carry out work fill such gaps. The final section examines what it would take to direct more money to support young children living in the shadow of HIV/AIDS. Including very young children in HIV/AIDS response strategies will ultimately depend on individual communities devising their own solutions. A further section highlights the critical importance of sharing knowledge through networks that communicate and disseminate evidence-based research findings and project evaluations. In conclusion, this paper calls for advocacy to urge that more funding should go to ECD-HIV/AIDS needs and that current funding approaches to dealing with the crisis need, in addition, to be tracked and evaluated, with a view to promoting more and better ways of meeting the unfulfilled needs of very young children affected by HIV/AIDS. (Contains 2 figures.)

This paper provides background information about a statute that affects the fiscal operation of California community colleges. The Fifty Percent Law (Education Code 84362) requires "there shall be expended each fiscal year for payment of salaries of classroom instructors by a community college district, 50 percent of the district's current expense of education." This paper is intended to inform discussions of a taskforce by providing historical background, information on the wide variety of factors which affect local district decisions in competing fiscal requirements, and context for discussions about the appropriateness of the Fifty Percent Law. The October 2000 State Auditor's report identified specific categories of expenditures that it believes have been misclassified or mischaracterized by the local districts and the Chancellor's State Accounting Manual. The most significant area of dispute is the inclusion of salaries of instructors who are released from all or a portion of their direct teaching duties to provide other services related to the district's instructional program. Community college board and district personnel have a wide variety of issues, which must be addressed in determining the appropriate expenditure of state revenues. Among the most important is that of meeting minimum conditions--programmatic requirements that a district must meet as a condition of receiving state funds. (JA)

This paper is designed to provide the reader with a map of how government funding of post-16 education and training provision in Great Britain operates, with a particular focus on Training and Enterprise Council (TEC) and Further Education Funding Council (FEFC) funding streams. It also outlines some consequences current funding arrangements have for skills delivery. Following an introduction, section 2 considers how work-based training supplied by TECs is funded. This covers the way in which funds are allocated from central government to the government offices for the regions and how funds are then passed on to TECs. The section provides evidence on the varied and less than transparent ways that TECs use to fund training providers. These differences are highlighted with examples taken from existing provider contracts. Section 3 reviews evidence on the impact these funding arrangements have for the nature of skills delivery. Sections 4 and 5 shift the focus onto the funding of further education. Section 4 considers how the FEFC provides financial support to the 435 institutions it funds. The impact of the FEFC funding methodology on skills supply is the subject of section 5. The paper concludes with a summary. (Appendixes include lists of abbreviations and 83 references.) (YLB)

This policy analysis presents the "new-school" finance, one that, in contrast to most discussions about funding that have concentrated on spending patterns only, asks how resources are used within schools and classrooms, and whether they are used in ways that can enhance educational outcomes. The analysis, directed toward policymakers and educators in California, reviews a variety of literatures from different areas of education to clarify the implications of this new-school perspective for policymakers, administrators, and researchers. The first section details the political and organizational features of schools that lead to resources being spent with no potential effects on outcome. The second section reviews literature that reports on efforts to move beyond discussions of spending to more detailed analyses of resource use, including educational production functions, school-effectiveness research, and identifying effective teaching conditions. The next three sections detail the implications of the research for researchers, educators, administrators, and policymakers. The analysis concludes that without the kind of political changes necessary for the new-school finance to emerge, spending for education will keep escalating without much improvement to show for it. (Contains 2 tables, 29 endnotes, and 121 references.) (WFA)

This document discusses the principles that guide the development of the contingent funding methods and the implementation criteria for the Partnership for Excellence Program, as well as significant issues and questions for the system to resolve. The first principle states that the level and pace of progress toward the Partnership goals are not expected to be uniform among all 71 districts in California. Secondly, the funding methods and implementation criteria should reflect that progress will differ among the five Partnership goals over time. The third principle states that the level of progress is dependent upon: (a) the State's responsibility to provide full funding for enrollment growth, inflation, and the Partnership itself; and (b) exogenous factors beyond the direct control of the system, the colleges, and the State. The fourth principle supports permanent funding in order to allow districts to make long-term plans. The fifth principle allows for funding to be adjusted based upon the level of improvement achieved by district. The sixth principle provides for a reward structure to encourage districts to reach their performance goals. The seventh principle demands an accountability system to prevent grade inflation, or manipulation of data. Finally, the eighth principle encourages an easily comprehensible system. The document concludes with a brief description of the process and time frame for the activities mentioned. The appendix contains the education code. (TGO)

This report examines cost sharing, a term that combines the concepts of direct-cost recovery and indirect contributions from pupils, their parents, and sponsors. Such contributions may be voluntary, quasi-compulsory, or even compulsory. For the study reported here, cost sharing is used when the subject under discussion is not restricted to user-fee issues. The approach of the study was quantitative, but important cultural and sociological aspects were also considered. The report is primarily concerned with putting together a modest body of evidence on education expenditures by governments and households and with exploring the implications the evidence has for the central questions that need to be asked to develop and sustain government-expenditure policies. The report is presented in five chapters. Following an introduction, chapter 2 outlines the principles of cost sharing and explores the key issues that underpin cost-sharing policies. The next two chapters consist of case studies of specific countries: Ghana and Tanzania. These chapters are not self-contained and each complements the other. The last chapter summarizes the issues surrounding cost sharing and draws some policy conclusions. (Contains approximately 105 references.) (RJM)

Respondents to a good practice questionnaire (n=27) rated financial administration as the factor most impeding development of continuing vocational education (CVE) in Britain. A discussion paper identified four critical areas for this inquiry: costing, pricing, overheads, and incentives. Of the 30 universities to which the paper was sent, 21 agreed to be visited. Findings indicated that all universities accepted the requirement for CVE to be self-financing and adopted their own definition. The primary objective of CVE was rarely income generation, although this was likely to be a necessary condition for sustainability. Universities believed CVE budgeting and accounting should be managed by staff who understand CVE and are trusted professional colleagues in its administration; the ways in which financial regulations were administered were often more important than the regulations. Other findings were as follows: CVE units needed to combine academic credibility and strong links with central administration; the opportunity cost of CVE was rarely fully included in the costing of courses; overheads were extremely variable, as was the range of services they included; much financial administration was driven by costs; and some universities were creating conflicting pressures on CVE units by requiring them to be self-financing and accept institutional responsibilities. (Appendixes include summaries of the financial arrangements at the 21 universities visited.) (YLB)

This discussion paper examines mechanisms through which governments allocate resources to higher education, particularly in developing countries, in order to establish effective means to transfer these subsidies to institutions. The discussion of funding mechanisms develops within the context of three major types of government restrictions which have had an impact on institutional behavior: (1) controlling student enrollments; (2) imposing high financial dependency on universities through prohibiting revenue diversification; and (3) imposing restrictions on the extent to which institutions are able to allocate their funding as they see fit. These restrictions have resulted in institutional deterioration. The challenge is to find a way to grant universities more autonomy over decision making while ensuring accountability to the providers of the funding. One solution is seen in the use of buffer funding bodies that lie between the government and the institutions. Another solution is to change the criteria for allocation of resources. The paper goes on to review the experience with different categories of funding criteria. The paper also looks at Chile's approach which has been to transfer funds via students through loans or grants rather than directly to institutions. Included are numerous tables and 38 references. (JB)

This monograph offers an overview of historical trends in the funding of special education programs, examines current issues, and considers directions for the future. After an introductory section, a section on historical perspectives notes trends in federal and state funding since 1975. A table shows the current funding formulas used by each state. Section 3 discusses federal fiscal policy issues including: census-based funding, fiscal disincentives for least restrictive placements, the "incidental benefit" rule, blended funding and service provision, and poverty adjustment. Section 4 evaluates various interrelated factors driving future fiscal policy at the state level, including: rising enrollments, rising expenditures, restrictiveness resulting from public aid differentials, and lack of program flexibility at the local level. Tables detail enrollment trends and trends in expenditures per student. Section 5 offers a case study of two key features of Florida's funding system--its system of "mainstreaming weights" to allow funding for students in general education classes, and its Exceptional Student Education Finance Program Model which uses a limited set of cost factors based on the severity of student need and the intensity of support required. The final section considers the future of special education finance, noting expected growth and such trends as reduction of incentives for student identification, increased integration across categorical program areas, greater local discretion and parent involvement, needs-based funding systems, and results-based accountability. (Contains 33 references.) (DB)

Alaska will face a large fiscal gap and growing budget deficits in the near future. The timing of such fiscal gap open hinges on the joint effect of state budget growth and the oil price change. This paper explains Alaska's dependence on state spending and offers policy options addressing the fiscal gap. State spending: (1) supports nearly one in two local government jobs (including school district jobs); (2) supports more than one in four private sector jobs; (3) accounts directly or indirectly for nearly one in three of all jobs; and (4) accounts for three dollars in ten dollars of all personal income. State cash payments to individuals or state payments under medical aid programs are financed by 1 out of every 13 dollars of personal income. State spending effects regions of Alaska differently; however, the Southeast and Rural Interior are particularly dependent upon state spending for economic activity. Policy options addressing the fiscal gap are described in terms of job effects, income effects, and public spending effects. Options are proposed for dealing with the problem, namely: (1) across-the-board cuts; (2) reduce employee costs; (3) income tax; (4) increase return on Permanent Fund; (5) use dividends in general fund; (6) combine sustainable options; (7) no inflation proofing. This paper contains numerous tables, graphs, and charts. (KS)

This study addressed the relationship between alternative types of state funding formulas and the use of separate placements for students with disabilities, and identified other characteristics of states that might be associated with the degree to which they use separate placements for the delivery of special services. Three research questions are addressed: (1) identification of states which are high or low users of separate placements for students with disabilities; (2) identification of any relationships existing between use of separate placements and a state's type of funding mechanism; and (3) other factors associated with a state's high or low use of separate placements. First, states were ranked on their use of separate placements based on federally reported data for the 1991-92 school year. Second, components of state funding systems were reviewed to identify patterns or likely relationships. Third, state administrators in states identified as high or low users of separate placements were interviewed to discuss possible relationships. Finally, when interviews revealed that demographic characteristics might play an important role in the use of separate placements, geographic and regional relationships were investigated. States that are low users of separate placements tended to use a funding formula not explicitly linked to student placement. No single type of funding formula was found for states that ranked high in their use of separate placements. Administrators did not feel that state funding formula alone was a strong influence on student placement policy. Other factors, such as geographic features, history, and educational tradition, were identified as possible contributors to the extent of separate placements. (Contains 14 references.) (DB)

The consideration of school choice plans raises policy questions for school administrators. This paper addresses pragmatic concerns about definitions and policy questions related to educational finance. Interdistrict choice, emphasizing families' right to choose among existing public schools, raises questions regarding transportation and facilities planning responsibilities, Chapter 1 funding, and information distribution costs. Second-chance programs, which extend interdistrict choice and postsecondary options to at-risk youth through alternative programs, can face the same financial problems as interdistrict plans where inequities already exist or where the state share of per pupil expenditure is low. "Hard" state funding should support alternative schools and their staff development and training costs. Controlled choice plans, requiring all families to choose a school within the district, do not involve funding transfers between districts or systems, but may require the reallocation of funding between schools. Extra costs include transportation, parent information, planning, technical assistance, and staff development. Intradistrict choice plans based on teacher-initiated schools have high startup costs and raise administrative control questions. Magnet schools, aiming at school improvement through special resources, require additional costs for transportation, improved facilities, special programs, and additional staff and staff development. Finally, postsecondary options for upper division high school students raise equity and equal access concerns. (11 references) (MLH)

This report focuses on university/U.S. Agency for International Development (AID) interactions in activities directly related to agriculture, natural resources, and the environment in developing nations. It is noted that U.S. university participation in AID development assistance ventures has declined since passage of the Title XII program of the Foreign Assistance Act in 1975. New opportunities for U.S. university involvement in foreign development assistance, however, are arising from new initiatives in AID, and in other development assistance organizations. In addition, AID is focusing on its affiliations with development assistance organizations, including U.S. universities, to encourage multi-institutional collaborative relationships. The report covers the following topics: how AID has utilized university resources; recent trends in AID/university collaboration; trends in AID policies, programs, and funding; perceived conflicts in the AID/university relationship, both historical and recurrent; and opportunities for U.S. university participation in development assistance. Also discussed are new directions for university participation in development assistance. Appendices include a list of programs supporting research and technology generation, AID Regional Bureau strategies, and AID actions in developing countries. Contains 120 references. (GLR)

Ways of rethinking school financial policy issues are examined in this report. This rethinking has evolved from growing recognition of two related principles: school finance as part of public finance; and policy formation as a product of commitments and constraints. Principles of public finance, commitments and constraints are described. Five policy options are offered, which include subsuming school finance within public finance, developing comprehensive databases, rearranging the sequence of school finance policy, developing an accountability system, and increasing collaboration. A conclusion is that each part of the system must compromise to a small extent and that school finance reform will not take place until actual school improvement occurs, which requires additional funding. (LMI)

This study traces public sector expenditures for nine Latin American countries in the 1980s in order to determine how social services and social well-being fared during the economic stringencies of the decade. The countries included are Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Jamaica, and Venezuela. The sectors covered are health, education, and social security. Real per capita public social spending on health, education, and social security fell during some part of the 1980s in every country in the study. Numerous efforts to increase the efficiency and equity of social service provision were undertaken, but the data available do not indicate that these efforts were successful. The policy agenda should include a growth oriented strategy, coupled with a high priority for the social sectors in the government budget in order to assure adequate resources to the social sectors. Even with these steps, increased coverage and quality of social service delivery cannot be expected to result primarily from growth in expenditures. Rather, improvements in service delivery must come from increasing the equity and efficiency of resource use. The usual gamut of tools is relevant--priority for primary health and primary education, targeting, cost recovery with provision for exemptions for the poor and for preventive services, decentralization, and institutional development. Better management and monitoring systems are needed in order to evaluate the success of such program changes. (Author/DB)

The papers and discussions which follow were presented at the December 1973 meetings of the Allied Social Science Associations in New York City. They provide a stimulating review and perspective on the state of policy and reform possibilities in income maintenance and the welfare system. In his paper, "The Role of Income-Conditioning in the American System of Transfer," Robert J. Lampman notes that between 1960 and 1973 public social welfare expenditures increased from 52 billion dollars to 215 billion dollars. In addition, there is a growing set of private transfers to persons. The scope and scale of this system have grown particularly rapidly since 1964. Lampman points to a few of the more remarkable changes of recent years. The changes selected for discussion were all designed to concentrate their benefits on families in relatively low-income status. The recent moves toward more income-conditioning of benefits suggest that advocates of a simple, straight-forward negative income tax with a moderate tax rate in it are caught between a rock and a hard place. In his paper, "Reflections on Recent History," James Tobin suggests six lessons we can learn from the dismal legislative and political history of tax and welfare reform in recent years. Alice M. Rivlin and Alvin L. Schorr discuss several aspects of these two papers. (Author/JM)

Designed to provide a technical context for discussions of student charges, student financial aid, and educational access in California's community colleges, this report presents three papers clarifying options related to student fees and financial aid. The first paper considers three questions related to charges in the California community colleges: (1) Who should be charged? (2) How should charges be structured? and (3) How should the level of charges be determined? For each question, a number of possible options and alternative structures are discussed. The second paper examines existing financial aid programs that may be necessary, given the imposition of a general student charge in the California community colleges. The final paper reviews policies and structures for student charges and student financial aid in community colleges in six states, and discusses differences among the states as they relate to possible options for California. The Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges' statement on contingency fees and the California Community Colleges Resolution on Matriculated Students are appended. (LAL)