While recovering from decades of conflict and trying to adjust to an incipient free market economy, public higher education in Afghanistan is currently confronted with rapidly increasing enrollment and inadequate government financing. The imbalance between high demand for and insufficient supply of higher education has led to a decrease in the quality of education and an urgent need to develop non-state sources of funding. Using Johnstone’s (1986) diversified funding model as the conceptual framework, this exploratory case study reports actors’ attitudes and perceptions of the financing policy options for Afghan public higher education and the impediments to introduce this model in Afghanistan. Data were collected from documents and semi-structured interviews with Afghan administrators, politicians, instructors and students during four months in Kabul in 2008. The findings show that: (a) the state has most likely reached the maximum financial contribution to public higher education and that little more can be expected; (b) that the existing funding for this sub-sector is not managed well; (c) that the current legal framework does not support expansion of the entrepreneurial activities that are developing at the higher education institutions; (c) that the legal system does not provide incentives to develop Afghan national donor support; (d) that the introduction of user fees, though currently under consideration, is confronted with significant technical impediments, and (e) that the introduction of tuition is not on the agenda because the higher education institutions have found the introduction of “night school” as an alternative means that allows the charging of tuition under the guise of “extra” services. In light of the aggregated actors’ attitudes towards these funding options, this study identifies considerable legal, technical and political blockages that hinder the creation of a functioning diversified funding model. The findings indicate that one significant pre-requisite for any development of these new funding sources will be increased institutional autonomy. Without devolution in power from the centralized ministry to the institutions, the necessary incentives and mechanisms will probably be missing for the development of these alternative sources of funding.

<p> This comparative case study provides a qualitative exploration of how four private tuition-dependent colleges approached a tuition price reset, including the organizational context, approaches, and strategies involved. As evidenced by the literature reviewed, there is an increasing awareness that the traditional business model of &ldquo;high tuition/high aid&rdquo; is no longer viable for less selective, tuition dependent colleges and universities caught in the middle of the market. Some of these colleges and universities are trying to innovate to remain competitive and financially sustainable. One innovation is to drastically reduce undergraduate tuition sticker price; a trend referred to as tuition price resets. A tuition price reset is a strategy that shifts the pricing model for an institution from &ldquo;high tuition/high aid&rdquo; to &ldquo;low tuition/low aid&rdquo; by lowering published tuition and financial aid awards, often in similar, but not necessarily equal proportion. There are a number of tuition dependent colleges that either have or will consider resetting tuition. This study provides valuable insight for those individuals and institutions seeking to understand the process that colleges and universities go through in evaluating the tuition price reset strategy. Critical factors in each institution&rsquo;s motivations, challenges and lessons learned are explored, including the background behind the analysis and decision, planning and implementation, as well as the outcomes of the decision.</p>

<p> The value proposition of the public liberal arts colleges is that they provide the quality of education typically associated with esteemed private liberal arts colleges at a comparably lower cost. These institutions emphasize access and affordability, and a rich and rigorous undergraduate education in "small" residential settings, making this type of education available to students who otherwise could not afford it. Given the decline nationally in state funding of public higher education, demographic shifts affecting who goes to college and how, the &ldquo;disruption&rdquo; of technology, and the public questioning of the value of a liberal arts degree, this dissertation looks at how three public liberal arts colleges are responding to these changes and how both the changes and institutional responses to them are shaping or reshaping their mission.</p>

<p> Public universities face significant funding challenges as states continue to look for efficiencies or outright cuts. In addition, the call for accountability in higher education continues to grow as state lawmakers, policy analysts, and researchers voice concern that degree attainment has stagnated, is too low to support economic growth, and takes too long. Business and political leaders are also increasingly interested in developing higher education accountability in response to concerns by students and families over the rising cost of a degree. Together, these themes of accountability and cost control have resulted in dramatically different policy innovations in the form of performance-based funding in a growing number of states. However, these policies have thus far produced scant evidence of success. Furthermore, the potential unintended consequences of these policies seem large, including the risk of increased selectivity resulting in increased class-based inequality and the risk of decreased educational quality. Thus, the shift from basing state support on inputs to outputs could be much more than a simple accounting change. By stressing different priorities, the shift may ultimately alter the historic access mission of public higher education. Ohio created a new policy in 2012 that funds 100 percent of undergraduate higher education state appropriations to public universities on the basis of outcomes, the most aggressive policy of its kind in the nation. This study investigated the perceptions of 24 Ohio higher education leaders regarding this policy innovation and combined those responses with related performance metrics in order to synthesize a more comprehensive understanding of early impacts and implications, particularly as it pertains to outcomes, access, and education quality. The results of the investigation suggest that that retention has improved, access has decreased, and quality has been unaffected. University leaders were largely in favor of the policy and supported increased selectivity even in the face of declining enrollments. Although concerns remain regarding at-risk student support, the study suggests that a 100 percent performance-based policy may have positive benefits and achieve the intended objectives. It may also alter our conception of the broad access mission of higher education as access is traded for student success. </p>

<p> This qualitative study focuses on the duality of the principal-agent relationship experienced by elected community college trustees in the California Community Colleges system; i.e., their roles as principal to the agent role of employee unions, and the quasi agent role in the districts association with the state. It examines this relationship through the lens of the unintended consequences of Proposition 13, including the centralization of school finance at the state level, the de facto change of the property tax from a local tax to a state tax, and the removal of the power of taxation from local boards. The study includes interviews with nine current or former elected trustees whose service began prior to the 1978 enactment of Proposition 13. Four of the nine trustees still held elective office when the interviews for this study were performed in fall 2014.</p>

<p> One in five federal student loan borrowers today is enrolled in income-driven loan repayment (IDR), a set of safety net programs in which loan payment amounts are tied to borrowers&rsquo; incomes. Policymakers across the political spectrum support expanding IDR as a way of reducing loan default and encouraging borrowers to work in public service careers, though there is little evidence of the effects of IDR on borrowers&rsquo; outcomes. Through the lenses of human capital theory and risk aversion theory, this study investigates two key gaps in our knowledge about IDR in comparison to other repayment plans: whether IDR borrowers&rsquo; make different career choices and whether IDR borrowers are more successful at paying their loans. Using the National Center for Education Statistics&rsquo; Baccalaureate and Beyond dataset (B&amp;B:08/12), I weighted borrowers by their propensity to enroll in IDR, based on family, institutional, communities, and political and economic characteristics. This analysis found that IDR borrowers are statistically significantly more likely to be women, of Hispanic origin, and from low-income households. IDR borrowers are no more likely to pursue public service careers four years after graduation, but they are substantially more likely to be in repayment as opposed to being in default, forbearance, or any other loan status. The total estimated costs of loan repayment are more varied for IDR borrowers than for borrowers in other plans. Borrowers of color in IDR are likely to pay more than White borrowers in IDR. I conclude with a discussion of the implications for policy, research, and practice, including how policy makers and researchers should interpret the tradeoffs in these results.</p><p>

<p> Today 17 elite private colleges in the U.S. have offered no-loan policies, which replace student loans with grants, scholarships and/or work-study in the financial aid packages awarded to all undergraduate students eligible for financial aid. Generally, the goal of these policies is to increase the socioeconomic diversity of campuses and to reduce the amount students borrow to finance their education. However, since the 2007&ndash;2008 credit crisis two colleges eliminated their no-loan policies for all students on financial aid and several restricted the policies to their lower-income students on financial aid. Therefore, this qualitative case study explored the financial implications of no-loan financial aid at private elite liberal arts colleges. </p><p> Leaders from various offices involved in planning and implementing no-loan policies at four colleges were interviewed: two campuses that maintained their full no-loan policies after the financial crisis of 2007&ndash;2008 and two that did not. The leaders were interviewed to understand how no-loan policies were financed and managed; how they affected operating budgets and other academic priorities; and how they were communicated to college constituents. </p><p> Findings from this study provided a more nuanced understanding of why some schools maintained and others retracted no-loan financial aid. Contrary to reports in the news, endowment losses, while symbolic of financial distress, were not the only reason that schools retracted no-loan policies. Endowment losses in the context of other internal and external budget pressures resulting from the credit crisis and Great Recession led to this decision. Each college in this study made a series of tradeoffs in how to balance mission and market pressures in a new budget reality where all three of their primary revenue sources were constrained. These competing priorities included how to increase faculty lines and compensation, reduce teaching loads, fund capital projects, reduce student loan debt, and distribute scholarship aid to ensure proportional socioeconomic diversity on campus. Higher education policymakers and leaders can use this study&rsquo;s findings to improve institutional policies and practices in higher education finance.</p><p>

<p> <i>Revenue diversification</i> is a term that becomes more relevant as higher education institutions are confronted with increased regulation, competition, declining enrollments, and strained finances. A challenge that many institutions face is that expenditures are higher than revenues and increase faster than them. The term <i>Revenue diversification </i> seems obvious to higher education administration professionals, although they do not all define it the same way. For that reason, it needs a precise definition so that the industry genuinely can embrace the concept and thereby seek to generate more revenues to drive existing and innovative agendas. Indeed, a common understanding will allow universities to develop strategies to reduce the reliance on traditional tuition and fees. The study examines three not-for-profit institutions with a student population less than 5,000 that already are diversifying their revenue streams. The definition of leadership at each institution is compared with the strategies that have been implemented or proposed in order to understand whether there is alignment. The three cases&mdash;Stevenson University, Franklin &amp; Marshall College, and Oglethorpe University&mdash;respectively have the following story lines: 1) growth is the only possibility; 2) the current situation is one of stasis, and the way forward is unclear; 3) efforts must be undertaken to improve financial viability. In addition to the qualitative research, the study also encompasses an analysis of IPEDS that reflects how each institution is changing its revenues in comparison to a similarly situated group of institutions. The findings reveal that <i>Revenue diversification</i> is on everybody&rsquo;s mind, but the definition of the term is inconclusive. Leadership teams are trying to determine what revenue-diversification strategies will work for the institutions and its stakeholders to be able to offset expense increases. Identifying new revenue sources will entail pursuing non-historical revenue sources, which includes academic programs, services, property, institutional advancement, and more. The higher education environment is concerning to many of its member institutions, and by diversifying revenues, long-term viability can be secured.</p><p>

As state appropriations, once the primary public source of funding for higher education, have decreased, higher education institutions have attempted to increase the private funding they can generate in addition to increasing tuition. This shift from public to private sources of funding for public higher education institutions requires a better understanding of the relationship between these two sources of funding. The purpose of this study was to explore the change in philanthropic funding for public four-year higher education institutions from 2004–2018. It examined the relationship between state appropriations and philanthropic funding received by public four-year higher education institutions to determine if state appropriations were associated with philanthropic giving. It also investigated whether the relationship differed by institutional type and competitiveness to determine if it increased stratification among public higher education institutions. This study found that between 2004 and 2018, total philanthropic funding per FTE increased while state appropriations per FTE decreased. The main reason for these trends were decreases during the recession, where state appropriations per FTE decreased 21% while total philanthropic funding per FTE only decreased 3%. All types of philanthropic funding had a U-shaped growth curve showing a decline then increase except for foundation philanthropic funding per FTE, which grew linearly. State appropriations were found to be associated with the amount of philanthropic funding received. An increase in state appropriations was associated with an increase in philanthropic funding from 2004–2010, but a decrease in philanthropic funding from 2011–2018. There were significant differences by Carnegie classification and flagship status but none for Barron’s selectivity. There were also differences based on donor types. The findings add to the research on donor motivations in higher education by showing the differences in growth curves for different donor types. They also add to the literature on philanthropic funding during recessions by analyzing giving trends before, during, and after the Great Recession of 2008. Finally, results show that there was most likely an increase in the stratification of public higher education institutions as they shifted to more private sources of funding, as philanthropic funding is more unequally distributed than state appropriations.

<p> The rising cost of higher education has positioned federal financial aid as an inescapable part of the college experience for a growing number of incoming students (Baum, 2006). In the 2014&ndash;2015 academic year, the U.S. Department of Education allocated more than $150 billion of federal financial aid for eligible college students (Federal Student Aid, 2014). Although billions of dollars in federal student aid have been made available, finances or lack thereof, remain an oft-cited barrier to student success (Long &amp; Riley, 2007; Myers, 2008). Community college student support services such as financial aid advising, contribute to promoting successful student outcomes (Cooper, 2010). More research is needed regarding the role of the campus financial aid adviser as it relates to community college student outcomes (McKinney &amp; Roberts, 2012). </p><p> The purpose of this study was to use the theory of student engagement as defined by Kuh et al. (2006) as it relates financial aid advising to the engagement of community college students. Ex post facto data from the Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) 2014 Cohort was used to investigate whether a difference in student engagement existed between students who reported use of financial aid advising and those who did not. The researcher also examined the relationship between the frequency of use, satisfaction with, and importance of financial aid advising and student engagement as well as the five CCSSE benchmarks of effective practice. </p><p> The results of the study show students who indicated use of financial aid advising reported significantly higher levels of student engagement than those who did not. The researcher found weak to moderate positive relationships between the frequency of use, satisfaction with, and importance of financial aid advising and student engagement. Additionally, each of the financial aid advising variables served as predictors of at least one CCSSE benchmark and student engagement. These findings provide meaningful information regarding the relationship between financial aid advising, particularly student satisfaction with the advising, and student engagement.</p><p>