Search

Two case studies of states that illustrate innovations in higher education budgeting are presented, based on a project of the Education Commission of the States. The two states, Colorado and Minnesota, took different approaches. In Colorado, the impetus for change came from key legislative members interested in providing greater autonomy to the higher education governing boards. Five key conditions provided the impetus for change: legislative leadership, governing board readiness, fiscal austerity, the presence of a mediator, and the success of more modest changes. The governing boards were given greater financial autonomy and responsibility for conducting their own business affairs. In Minnesota, the state coordinating board realized that the incremental approach appropriate in a growth environment was not well suited to an era of fiscal constraint. The board initiated a study of new approaches to budgeting and tapped a reservoir of support in the governor's office, legislature, and among the institutions. The results in both cases were similar: greater decision-making authority for those with more direct responsibility for running the institutions. (SW)

Higher education in South Carolina was evaluated, with attention to college missions, financial resources for colleges, and the role of the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education. The development of higher education during the last 30 years and the state's role in organizing and managing the higher education enterprise are described. The climate for colleges in South Carolina and strengths and weaknesses of higher education in the state are also discussed. Included are nine recommendations to improve the quality of higher education in the state through systematic assessment at the state level and state-level policies. Thirteen recommendations to strengthen the Commission cover leadership responsibility, statewide planning, commission relationships with public and private colleges, and the agency's legal structure. Important trends likely to affect higher education are identified that concern population growth, income, racial composition, educational attainment, economic changes, and state revenues and expenditures. Also provided are comparative data for South Carolina's 33 state colleges as well as peer institutions in other states on: sources of revenue, expenditures by function, expenditure ratios, tuition and fees, enrollments by level, student racial composition, faculty salaries, and distribution of faculty by rank. (SW)