Covet Thy Neighbor or “Reverse Policy Diffusion”? State Adoption of Performance Funding 2.0
- 864 Downloads
Performance funding has become an increasingly prevalent state policy to incentivize student retention and degree completion at public colleges. Using a Cox proportional hazards model on state-level data from years 2000 to 2013, this study analyzes the latest wave of policies that embed base appropriations into the state budget to fund student outcomes. Results indicate that having a greater proportion of bordering performance funding states diminishes the likelihood of policy adoption, capturing a “reverse policy diffusion” effect. States with Republican-controlled legislatures, more professionalized legislatures, and rapid growth in unemployment rates are more likely to adopt the policy, while those with higher educational attainment levels and more bachelor’s degrees awarded per student are less likely. Implications include the surprising finding of reverse policy diffusion, which suggests that states are delaying adoption until after they can observe the political consequences and impacts of the policy in neighboring states. Findings point to a policy learning effect—by observing other state’s experiences, policymakers can make more informed decisions about whether to pursue performance funding as an accountability tool.
KeywordsPerformance funding Higher education finance Policy diffusion Policy learning State policy adoption Survival analysis
This research was supported by a Dissertation Grant from the American Educational Research Association which receives funds for its “AERA Grants Program” from the National Science Foundation under Grant #DRL-0941014. Opinions reflect those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the granting agencies. This research was supported in part by a research grant from the TIAA Institute, Grant #63-0151 and by the Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, Grant #R-305-B-090012. This study is the first of three dissertation papers on performance funding. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 2015 conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education in Denver, CO. The author thanks William Zumeta, Chris Adolph, Nick Hillman, Maresi Nerad, and Justin Marlowe for comments on earlier versions of this paper. The author also thanks discussant Jennifer Delaney for her comments at ASHE, as well as the feedback of two anonymous reviewers.
- Allison, P. D. (1995). Survival analysis using the SAS system: A practical guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
- Allison, P. D. (2010). Survival analysis. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (pp. 413–424). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (2007). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 223–260). Davis, CA: Westview Press.Google Scholar
- Bowen, D., & Greene, Z. (2014). Legislative professionalism component scores, 1973–2011. Ewing, NJ: Department of Political Sciences, The College of New Jersey.Google Scholar
- Burke, J. C. (2002). Funding public colleges and universities for performance. Albany: Rockefeller Institute Press.Google Scholar
- Cleves, M., Gutierrez, R. G., Gould, W., & Marchenko, Y. V. (2010). An introduction to survival analysis using Stata (3rd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.Google Scholar
- Cox, D. R. (1972). Regression models and life-tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 34(2), 187–220.Google Scholar
- Diez, D. M. (2013). Survival Analysis in R. OpenIntro. Retrieved from https://www.openintro.org/download.php?file=survival_analysis_in_R&referrer=/stat/surv.php.
- Dougherty, K. J., Jones, S. M., Lahr, H., Natow, R. S., Pheatt, L., & Reddy, V. (2014a). Performance funding for higher education: Forms, origins, impacts, and futures. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655(1), 163–184. doi: 10.1177/0002716214541042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dougherty, K. J., & Natow, R. S. (2015). The politics of performance funding for higher education: Origins, discontinuations, and transformations. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
- Dougherty, K. J., Natow, R., Hare, R., Jones, S., & Vega, B. (2011). The politics of performance funding in eight states: Origins, demise, and change: Final report to Lumina Foundation for Education. New York: Community College Research Center. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED517751.
- Dougherty, K. J., Natow, R. S., Jones, S. M., Lahr, H., Pheatt, L., & Reddy, V. (2014b). The political origins of performance funding 2.0 in Indiana, Ohio, and Tennessee: Theoretical perspectives and comparisons with performance funding 1.0 (CCRC Working Paper No. 68). New York: Community College Research Center. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/political-origins-performance-funding-2.html.
- Dougherty, K. J., Natow, R., & Vega, B. (2012). Popular but unstable: Explaining why state performance funding systems in the United States often do not persist. Teachers College Record, 114(30301), 1–41.Google Scholar
- Dougherty, K. J., & Reddy, V. (2013). Performance funding for higher education: What are the mechanisms? What are the impacts? ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 39, No. 2. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ezell, M. E., Land, K. C., & Cohen, L. E. (2003). Modeling multiple failure time data: A survey of variance-corrected proportional hazards models with empirical applications to arrest data. Sociological Methodology, 33, 111–167.Google Scholar
- Fox, J. (2002). Cox proportional-hazards regression for survival data: The Cox proportional-hazards model. Toronto: University of Toronto.Google Scholar
- Jenkins, S. P. (2005). Survival Analysis. University of Essex. Retrieved from https://www.iser.essex.ac.uk/files/teaching/stephenj/ec968/pdfs/ec968lnotesv6.pdf.
- Lahr, H., Pheatt, L., Dougherty, K. J., Jones, S. M., Natow, R. S., & Reddy, V. (2014). Unintended impacts of performance funding on community colleges and universities in three states (CCRC Working Paper No. 78). New York: Community College Research Center. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Performance-Funding.html.
- Li, A. Y. (2014). Performance funding in the states: An increasingly ubiquitous public policy for higher education. Higher Education in Review, 11, 1–29. Retrieved from http://sites.psu.edu/higheredinreview/2014/02/.
- Li, A. Y., & Zumeta, W. (2016). Performance funding on the ground: Campus responses and perspectives in two states. New York, NY: TIAA Institute. Retrieved from https://www.tiaainstitute.org/public/pdf/rd_performance_funding_on_the_ground.pdf.
- McGuinness, A. C. (2003). Models of postsecondary education coordination and governance in the states. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.Google Scholar
- McLendon, M. K., Tandberg, D. A., & Hillman, N. W. (2014). Financing college opportunity: Factors influencing state spending on student financial aid and campus appropriations, 1990 through 2010. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655(1), 143–162. doi: 10.1177/0002716214540849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- National Conference of State Legislatures. (2015). Performance-based funding for higher education. Retrieved March 12, 2016 from http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/performance-funding.aspx.
- Ohio Board of Regents. (2014). State share of instruction report. Columbus, OH: Ohio Board of Regents. Retrieved from https://www.ohiohighered.org/sites/ohiohighered.org/files/uploads/financial/ssi/SSI_Performance-Based-Funding-Evaluation-Report_Dec2014.pdf.
- Reddy, V. T., Lahr, H. E., Dougherty, K. J., Jones, S., Natow, R. S., & Pheatt, L. E. (2014). Policy instruments in service of performance funding: A study of performance funding in three states (CCRC Working Paper No. 75). New York: Community College Research Center. Retrieved from http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/catalog/ac:180631.
- Sanford, T., & Hunter, J. (2011). Impact of performance-funding on retention and graduation rates. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 19(33), 1–30.Google Scholar
- SHEEO. (2015). Regional interstate compacts for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.sheeo.org/regional-interstate-compacts-higher-education.
- Snyder, M., & Fox, B. (2016). Driving better outcomes: Fiscal year 2016 state status and typology update. Washington, DC: HCM Strategists. Retrieved from http://hcmstrategists.com/drivingoutcomes/.
- Sponsler, B. (2010). Coveting more than thy neighbor: Beyond geographically proximate explanations of postsecondary policy diffusion. Higher Education in Review, 7, 81–100.Google Scholar
- Tandberg, D. A., Hillman, N. W., & Barakat, M. (2014). State higher education performance funding for community colleges: Diverse effects and policy implications. Teacher’s College Record, 116(120307), 1–31.Google Scholar
- Zumeta, W. (2009). State support of higher education: The roller coaster plunges downward yet again. Journal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy, 1(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Zumeta, W., Breneman, D. W., Callan, P. M., & Finney, J. E. (2012). Financing American higher education in the era of globalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
- Zumeta, W., & Li, A. Y. (2016). Assessing the underpinnings of performance funding 2.0: Will this dog hunt? New York, NY: TIAA Institute. Retrieved from https://www.tiaainstitute.org/public/pdf/ti_assessing_the_underpinnings_of_performance_funding_2.pdf.