The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of private funds on selected Texas public institutions of higher education by identifying and comparing the specific ways these institutions are affected by private funds. Conclusions: 1. Private contributions to institutions of higher education will continue to increase in the immediate future. 2. Private contributions to public institutions of higher education come from a variety of sources. 3. Private contributions make a greater impact on programs and projects involving people rather than on buildings and equipment in public institutions of higher education. 4. Future uses of private money in public institutions of higher education also appear to be related to people rather than to capital spending. 5. Public institutions of higher education in Texas will depend upon private funds to a greater extent in the foreseeable future.

No description available.

External and internal funding is a way that nurse scholars can support research and scholarship activities. Often, programs are supported by a combination of internal and external funding to support projects. External funding through competitive grants is a valuable way to fund initiatives and to expand services. However, these applications commonly require a detailed and complete budget that will provide a framework to fiscally plan for program activities – which can be daunting to novice grant seekers. There is a scarcity of information in the literature on the framework for the development of a program budget or how to begin, which can be a challenge to those new to this process. A well-prepared and developed budget supports the success of an external funding application and serves as the framework to fiscally support and optimize activities. The purpose of this presentation is to provide nurses the basic information on how to develop a budget for external and internal funding applications.

Land grant, also known as Morrill Act, institutions and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) were founded upon the principles to educate a target population with limited access to resources to expand their educational opportunities and social mobility. With the rise of new public management and neoliberalism, state financial support for higher education has changed drastically over the past two decades. Institutions are required to demonstrate performance metrics for funding. However, some of these institutions have been disproportionately under-resourced for many decades and the funding inequality has left them with a unique set of challenges to overcome. Social construction theory demonstrates the way policy can influence a target population and how the policies can shape societal perceptions about the target group. Limited funding, or in some cases omitted funding, from state legislatures to HBCUs or other Predominantly Black Institutions has led inequitable learning environments despite these institution’s commitment to serving students who may not have the financial means to otherwise pursue a postsecondary education. This study seeks to analyze the historical context of state relationships with higher education institutions, the historical context of funding inequality in higher education policy, the current climate for land grant and minority serving institutions’ role in higher education, the evolving emphasis on performance metrics for higher education institutions, and the analysis of funding practices in a more recent allocation year to investigate if funding inequality persists in the current climate.

In this article, the author introduces us to the institution of third party funding and its future application in arbitration litigation. Third party funding allows the litigant’s costs can be funded. Moreover, he points out the problems that the third party financing has, and the implementation of rules to deal with this situation. Finally, there is a tendency to expand the duty of disclosure of the parties whether a third party is funding them. / En este artículo, el autor nos introduce a la institución del third party funding y su futura aplicación en los litigios arbitrales. El third party funding permite que los costos del litigante puedan ser financiados. Asimismo, señala los problemas que presenta el tercero financista, y la implementación de normas para afrontar esa situación. Finalmente, hay una tendencia de ampliar el deber de revelación de las partes sobre si se está siendo financiado por un tercero.

No description available.

This thesis is a collection of three essays. The first two study how ideas spread through a network of individuals, and how it an advertiser can exploit it. In the model I develop, users choose their sources of information based on the perceived usefulness of their sources of information. This contrasts with previous literature where there is no choice made by network users and thus, the information flow is fixed. I provide a complete theoretical characterization of the solution and define a natural measure of influence based on choices of users. I also present an algorithm to solve the model in polynomial time on any network, regardless of the scale or the topology. I also discuss the properties of a network technology from a public economic standpoint. In essence, a network allows the reproduction of ideas for free for the advertiser. If there is any free-riding problem, I show that coalitions of users on the network can solve such problem. I also discuss the social value of networks, a value that cannot be captured for profit. The third essay is completely distinct from the network paradigm and instead studies funding rules for public universities. I show that a funding rule that depends solely on enrolment leads to "competition by franchise" and that such behavior is sometimes inefficient. I suggest instead an alternate funding rule that allows government to increase welfare without increasing spending in universities. / Thesis (Ph.D, Economics) -- Queen's University, 2013-10-11 17:16:42.178

The provision of public services has changed significantly over the years. One of the more recent changes has involved the increased delivery of public services by non-governmental organizations, whether these organizations be private in nature or belong to the so-called third sector. The third sector is known by a number of different terms, including the non-profit sector, the voluntary sector, civil society, and the social economy. Of particular interest in this study are those social economy organizations (SEOs) that receive the whole or a part of their revenue from the government. These organizations must be accountable to the government for the funds that government provides to them. The purpose of this accountability is to ensure SEOs undertake their obligations to use public resources effectively and to deliver quality public services. One potential accountability challenge involves the limitations associated with the performance evaluation of SEOs, since performance is often not easily observable. Performance is comprised of two parts: the work done by the organization (output) and the impact of this work (outcome). The difficulty in the observation of both outputs and outcomes may result in a conflict for the SEOs between focusing on observable parts of their work that can be more readily measured and reported to meet accountability requirements versus work with less tangible outputs and outcomes. In a funding agreement between an SEO and government, the SEO might have to agree with government requirements, for instance, to follow standardized procedures so that the government can monitor the observable aspects of its work. This requirement may conflict with the SEO’s desire to focus on things that are not observable, and consequently not funded by the government, but are important to the SEO’s mission and social goals. The goal of this research study is to examine the challenges that arise in the operation of SEOs, given that they need to be responsive to government’s expectations and at the same time follow their mission requirements. In-depth interviews were used to examine the extent to which outputs and outcomes are unobservable in SEOs as well as the possible conflicts that might arise between competing objectives within SEOs. Interview participants are three SEO executive directors and one manager, each of whom is responsible for the work carried out by his or her respective SEO. A government employee involved in providing funding to one of the SEOs was also interviewed. The results of this study suggest that the SEOs that were examined have varying degrees of unobservable outputs and outcomes. This study also found that organizations with a greater percentage of unobservable outputs and outcomes experienced a greater degree of conflict in their relationships with government. One of the reasons for the conflict is that the SEO personnel felt that the government focused its attention too much on the observable outputs/outcomes and not enough on outputs and outcomes that, although unobservable, were nevertheless important to clients and the public. Moreover, the SEOs examined in this study that serve specific groups of clients, such as seniors or immigrants, experienced less conflict than those whose services (e.g., increasing environmental sustainability) target the general public. The results of this research have implications for the way in which government structures its activities. Over the last 25-30 years, governments have, through New Public Management (NPM), privatized the provision of public services and encouraged greater competition in the delivery of public services. The results of the analysis carried out in this thesis suggest that this restructuring may not be as effective in situations where the services are directed toward the general public and/or where the services provided involve unobservable outputs and outcomes. The added conflict that appears to accompany these situations suggests that there may be goals and objectives that are important to society but are not being met through the contractual relationship established between the government and the SEO. Since NPM is expected to remain in place, government may wish to find ways of better addressing important unobservable outputs and outcomes. One suggestion, drawn from the interviews with SEOs, is that the government officials who are assigned to work with SEOs should have a good knowledge of the SEOs and be familiar with their missions and functions. This knowledge and familiarity might enable the government officials to evaluate the degree to which non-observable outputs and outcomes are being provided, which in turn might reduce conflict and ensure a better provision of services to clients and the public.

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited / The Managing To Payroll program was implemented in October 1987. The program is intended to improve the control of Navy civilian personnel costs. The program is also intended to give Navy line managers the ability to tailor civilian work force structures to payroll budget control numbers. This thesis is about the US Navy Managing To Payroll program and how it has affected the payroll budget execution process of the Naval Postgraduate School Public Works Department. The program has improved the control of Public Works Department civilian personnel costs. The program has not given the Public Works Department the ability to tailor its civilian work force structure to payroll budget control numbers. / http://archive.org/details/managingtopayrol00boyc / Lieutenant Commander, United States Navy

Mainstream institutions have, historically, dismissed Indigenous worldviews, knowledges, and research approaches (Bowman-Farrell, 2015; Harrington & Pavel, 2013). However, in recent years, a literature has emerged articulating Indigenous research methodologies (IRMs), and their distinctiveness from Western, Eurocentric perspectives on inquiry (Denzin, Lincoln, & Smith, 2008; Kovach, 2009; Smith, 1999 & 2012; Wilson, 2008). This has coincided with increased need for IRM scholars and practitioners to secure extramural funds to support their activities. But questions remain as to how the U.S. federal grant making enterprise has accommodated Indigenous frameworks. This research explores synergies in the ways that grantees, grant makers, and other related stakeholders understand and navigate the federal funding enterprise in science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and health (STEM-H) fields; and the impact of how, and to what extent, this space is successfully navigated. To align with Indigenous worldviews, I use triple theoretical lenses of Tribal Critical Race Theory (Brayboy, 2005), Storytelling, and Interstitial Spaces (Cram & Philips, 2011), and an indigenized case study design. Eleven participants from Tribal Colleges and Universities and tribal communities, federal funding agencies, and consulting firms participated in unstructured interviews to tell their views about Indigenous approaches in the federal funding environment. Coupled with document review, the analysis showed that perceptions of risk, evidence, and expertise were sources of tension, although there were also areas of real and lasting success. I suggest that despite policies to diversify STEM-H grant making, Indigenous perspectives have largely been excluded from these discourses. This may have the effect of compromising the integrity of the validity construct as used in the dominant research methodology literature. I offer a model, called Fifth Paradigm Grantsmanship, as one means to usher transformative change in grant making.