Performance Funding Comparison: Arizona and Florida

Arizona Florida Funding For FY 2017, $5 million was For 2017-2018, the current appropriation of Allocated approved for the performance $520 M includes $245 M for state funding model. investment and $275 M for institutional investment. Florida has not provided funding based on enrollments since 2007- 2008. Rather, funding is based primarily on performance and the allocation of dollars towards special university initiatives. Eligibility All institutions are eligible. The Starting in 2016-2017, institutions must Arizona legislature requires The score 51 points and not be in the bottom allocation model be similar to that three to be eligible for new funding. For used in the previous fiscal year. fiscal years 2014-2015 and 2015-2016, universities were required to score 26 points or more and not be in the bottom three to be eligible for new funds. Guiding Arizona’s Performance Funding The Florida model has four guiding Principles Model is predicated upon two principles: primary performance goals: 1. Use metrics that align with SUS  Increasing annual Strategic Plan goals production of degrees by 2. Reward excellence or improvement 50% by 2020 3. Have a few clear, simple metrics  Doubling research and 4. Acknowledge the unique mission of public services expenditures the different institutions by 2020 Metrics Three components: The Florida 10-Metric Model: 1. Percent of 2. Median Wages of  Increases in degrees Bachelor's Bachelor’s awarded Graduates Graduates Employed Employed Full-time One Year  Increases in completed ($25,000+) and/or After Graduation student credit hours Continuing their Education Further  Increases in externally 1 year after generated research and graduation public service funding 3. Net Tuition and 4. Six Year Fees per 120 Graduation Rate Credit Hours (Full-time and Part- time FTIC) 5. Academic 6. Bachelor's Progress Rate Degrees Awarded in (2nd Year Areas of Strategic Retention with Emphasis (includes GPA Above 2.0) STEM) 7. University 8a. Master's Access Rate Degrees Awarded in (Percent of Areas of Strategic Undergraduates Emphasis (includes with a Pell-grant) STEM) (NCF Excluded) 8b. Freshman in 9. Board of Top 10% of Governors Choice Graduating High School Class (NCF Alternative Metric) 10. Board of Trustees Choice

Weighting Added weight may be given to Presently the Florida 10-Metric Model is and degrees related to science, not weighted but the Board reserves the Improvement technology, engineering and option to weight specific metrics such as Scores mathematics, as well as other high- the Six Year Graduation Rates and the value degrees that are in short Academic Progress Rate. supply or are essential to the state’s long-term economic Improvement points are determined after development strategy. reviewing data trends for each metric. If the improvement score is higher than the Each university is given added excellence score, the improvement points weight based on their individual are counted. This can result in a university missions. scoring lowest in one metric but getting the most points for that metric because of their improvement in the metric. Institutional Arizona institutions do not have Florida institutions also do not have control Control control over appropriation levels or over appropriation levels and institutions choice of metrics. There is an can control performance on outcomes adjustment made to address within reason. However, the Florida 10- institutional mission in the form of Metric Model does give institutions some weighting of data, for example, the control given that there is a metric chosen weight ensures an institution with by institutional boards as part of the model. less of research focus is not unduly penalized in the Increases in External Research and Public Service Funding metric.

https://www.azleg.gov/jlbc/17baseline/unibor.pdf https://public.azregents.edu/Shared%20Documents/09-24- 2014%20Item%2001%20PPT%20ABOR%20Universities%20PFM%20BF%20Cmt%20v.3.0.pdf