Budgeting in the United States: From Theory to Practice Using Higher Education

  • Aziza Zemrani
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)


The purpose of this chapter is to review the literature pertaining to the evolution of budgeting in the United States and to deliver a case study of Higher Education to test empirically the implementation of the Performance-Based Budgeting (PBB). This review comprises the theory of budgeting with its historical background including PBB. The case appraises the specificity of budgeting for higher education along with the issue of the efficiency and productivity definitions including the issue of measurement (Salerno 2003). It addresses the question: Does the use of performance measurement (PM) as a rational approach to resource allocation in performance-based budgeting (PBB) alter the efficiency of higher education institutions in the United States? This study found that the level of implementation of PBB was associated with a statistically significant increase (p < 0.05) in the efficiency of higher education institutions. Over the years, states that use PM in their budget decisions, as opposed to those that do not, had greater efficiency in higher education.


Efficiency Effectiveness Productivity Performance-based budgeting Performance Inputs Outputs Higher education Measurement Budgeting reforms Measurement 


  1. Andrews, Matthew. 2004. Authority, Acceptance, Ability and Performance‐based Budgeting Reforms. International Journal of Public Sector Management 17 (4): 332–344. Scholar
  2. Bickman, Leonard, and Debra Rog. 1998. The Sage Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bifulco, Robert, and William Duncombe. 2000. Evaluating School Performance: Are We Ready for Prime Time? In Developments in School Finance, 1999–2000, ed. William Fowler. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.Google Scholar
  4. Blodgett, Terrell, and Gerald Newfarmer. 1996. Performance Measurement: (Arguably) The Hottest Topic in Government Today. Public Management, January, 6.Google Scholar
  5. Borgia, Carl R., and Randolph S. Coyner. 1995. The Evolution and Success of Budgeting Systems at Institutions of Higher Education. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management 7 (4): 467–492. Scholar
  6. Bouckaert, Geert. 1992. Public Productivity in Retrospective. In Public Productivity Handbook, ed. Marc Holzer. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.Google Scholar
  7. Boyd, Donald J. 2000. State Fiscal Issues and Risks at the Start of the New Century. Albany, NY: The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  8. Brinckman, Paul T. 1990. Higher Education Cost Functions. In The Economics of American Universities, ed. S. A. Hoenack and E. L. Collins, 107–128. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  9. Burke, Joseph C. 1998a. Campus Budgeting for Tough Times: Lessons from the First Half of the 1990s. Albany, NY: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  10. Burke, Joseph C. 1998b. Funding Public Higher Education for Results: Fad or Trend? Results from the Second Annual Survey. Albany, NY: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  11. Burke, Jospeh C., and Andreaa M. Serban. 1997a. Performance-Funding and Budgeting for Public Higher Education: Current Status and Future Prospects. Albany, NY: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  12. Burke, Jospeh C., and Andreaa M. Serban. 1997b. Performance Funding for Public Higher Education: Fad or Trend? New Directions for Institutional Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Spring.Google Scholar
  13. Burke, Joseph C., and Henrik Minassians. 2001. Linking Resources to Campus Results: From Fad to Trend: The Fifth Annual Survey. Albany, NY: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  14. Burkhead, Jesse. 1956. Government Budgeting. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Caiden, Naomi. 2010. Challenges Confronting Contemporary Public Budgeting: Retrospectives/Prospectives from Allen Schick. Public Administration Review 70 (2): 203–210. Scholar
  16. Calhoun, Joseph. 2003. Data Envelopment Analysis of Relative Efficiencies of Higher Education Learning. Paper Presented at the 28th Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, November 12–16, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
  17. Canto, Victor A., and Robert I. Webb. 1987. The Effect of State Fiscal Policy on State Relative Economic Performance. Southern Economic Journal 54 (1): 186. Scholar
  18. Carter, Karen. 1994. Performance Here By. State Legislatures. December, 22–25.Google Scholar
  19. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Knowledge. 2000. Comparative International Review. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8 (30). Retrieved from
  20. Epstein, Paul. 1984. Using Performance in Local Government: A Guide to Improving Decentralization, Personal, and Accountability. 1st ed. Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  21. Forsythe, Dall. 2000. Performance Management Comes to Washington: A Status Report on the GPRA. Albany, NY: Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York.Google Scholar
  22. Frederickson, G. 2001. Measuring Performance in Theory and Practice. Public Administration Times 23 (8).Google Scholar
  23. GAO/AFMD-93-41. 1993. Performance Budgeting: State Experiences and Implications for the Federal Government. Report to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.Google Scholar
  24. Gates, Susan, and Ann Stone. 1997. Understanding Productivity in Higher Education. Santa Monica, CA: Rand, Institute on Education and Training.Google Scholar
  25. Gilmore, Jeffrey L., and Duc-Le To. 1992. Evaluating Academic Productivity and Quality. New Directions for Institutional Research 75: 35–47. Scholar
  26. Government Accounting Standard Board (GASB). 2000. Introduction to Performance Measurement. Retrieved from
  27. Grosjean, Atkinson J., and Garnet Grosjean. 2000. The Use of Performance Models in Higher Education: A Comparative International Review. Education Policy Analysis Archives 8: 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hager, Greg, et al. 2001. Performance-Based Budgeting: Concepts and Examples. Research Report No. 302. Legislative Research Commission.Google Scholar
  29. Halachmi, Arie. 1999. Mandated Performance Measurement: A Help or a Hindrance? National Productivity Review 18 (2): 59–67. Scholar
  30. Haoran, Lu. 1998. Performance Budgeting Resuscitated: Why Is It Still Inviable? Journal of Public Budgeting, Accountability, and Financial Management 10 (2): 151–172.Google Scholar
  31. Hatry, Harry P. 1999. Performance Measurement: Getting Results. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  32. Hatry, Harry P., Elaine Morley, and Scott P. Bryant. 2001. Comparative Performance Measurement. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.Google Scholar
  33. Holzer, Marc. 1992. Public Productivity Handbook. Public Administration and Public Policy (45) New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  34. Holzer, Marc, and Stuart Nagel. (Eds.). 1984. Productivity and Public Policy. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Hopkins, D. (1990). The Higher Education Production Function: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Findings. In The Economics of American Universities, ed. S. Hoenack and E. Collins, 11–32. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hovey, Harold A. 2000. State Spending for Higher Education in the Next Decade: The Battle to Sustain Current Support. San Jose, CA: State Policy Research, National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.Google Scholar
  37. Jordan, Meagan M. and Merl M. Hackbart. 2000. Performance Budgeting and Performance Funding in the States: A Status Assessment. Public Budgeting and Finance: New Brunswick 19 (1): 68–88. Spring.Google Scholar
  38. Kerlinger, Fred N. 1986. Foundations of Behavioral Research. 3rd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  39. Key, Valdimer O. 1940. The Lack of a Budgetary Theory. American Political Science Review 34 (December): 1137, 1140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Koven, Steven G. 1999. Public Budgeting in the United States: The Cultural and Ideological Settings. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Layzell, Daniel T. 1998. Linking to Funding Outcomes for Public Institutions of Higher Education: The U.S Experience. European Journal of Education 33 (1): 103–111.Google Scholar
  42. Lee Jr., Robert D., and Robert C. Burns. 2000. Performance Measurement in State Budgeting: Advancement and Backsliding from 1990 to 1995. Public Budgeting and Finance 20 (1): 38–54.
  43. Lee Jr., Robert D., and Ronald Johnson. 1998. Public Budgeting Systems, 5th ed. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.Google Scholar
  44. Lewis, Verne B. 1952. Toward a Theory of Budgeting. Public Administration Review 12 (1): 42–54. Scholar
  45. Lindblom, Charles E. 1959. The Science of ‘Muddling Through’. Public Administration Review 19 (2): 79–88. Scholar
  46. Lynch, Thomas D., Y. W. Hang, and Cynthia E. Lynch. 1996. Cycle of History and Twenty-First Century Budget Reform: Performance, Entrepreneurial, and Competitive Budgeting. Paper Presented to International Spryer Workshop on Assessing and Evaluating Public Management Reform Held at Spryer, Germany.Google Scholar
  47. Lynch, Thomas D. 1975. Policy Analysis in Public Policymaking. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Google Scholar
  48. Lynch, Thomas D. 1995. Public Budgeting in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  49. Lynch, Thomas D., and Lawrence L. Martin (Eds.). 1993. Handbook of Comparative Public Budgeting and Financial Management. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  50. McGuiness, A. C. 1999. The States and Higher Education. In American Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Social, Political, and Economic Challenges, ed. Philip G. Altbach, Robert O. Berdahl, & Patricia J. Gumport. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  51. McMillan, Melville, and Debasish Datta. 1998. The Relative Efficiency of Canadian Universities: A DEA Perspective. Canadian Public Policy (24): 485–511.Google Scholar
  52. Melkers, Julia E., and Katherine G. Willoughby. 1998. The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in Forty-Seven Out of Fifty. Public Administration Review 58 (1): 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Melkers, Julia E., and Katherine G. Willoughby. 2001. Budgeters’ Views of State Performance-Budgeting Systems: Distinctions Across Branches. Public Administration Review 61 (1): 54–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mercer, John. 2002. Performance Budgeting for Federal Agencies. A Framework. International Business and Technology Consultants.Google Scholar
  55. Merewitz, Leonard, and Stephen Sosnic. 1971. The Budget’s New Clothes: A Critique of Performance-Based Budgeting and Cost Benefit Analysis. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
  56. Miller, Gerald, William Bartley Hildreth, and Jack Rabin. 2001. Performance-Based Budgeting. An ASPA Classic. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  57. Neter, John K., Christopher J. Nachtsheim, and William Wasserman. 1996. Applied Linear Statistical Models. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  58. Newman, Frank, Lara Couturier, and Jamie Scurry. 2004. The Future of Higher Education: Rhetoric, Reality, and the Risk of the Market. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  59. Nyhan, Ronald C., and Lawrence L. Martin. 1999. Comparative Performance Measurements. Public Productivity & Management Review 22 (3): 348–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Penã, Deagelia M. 2000. Higher Education Finance Variables: An Analysis. Almanac of Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  61. Posner, Paul. 1999. Performance Budgeting: A Critical Process. Public Manager (28) 3: 8.Google Scholar
  62. Research Associates of Washington. 2000. State Profiles. Retrieved from Information Is Then Passed on to the National Center for Higher Education Information and Policy at
  63. Rhodes, Edwardo L., and Lawrence Southwick. 1986. Determinants of Efficiency in Public and Private Universities. Columbia: Department of Economics, University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
  64. Rosen, Ellen D. 1997. Improving Public Sector Productivity: Concepts and Practices. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. Rubin, Irene S. 1998. Class, Tax, and Power: Municipal Budgeting in the United States. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.Google Scholar
  66. Ruppert, Sandra S. 1997. Roots and Realities of State-Level Performance Indicator Systems. In Public Policy and Higher Education, ed. Lester F. Goodchild, Cheryl D. Lovell, Edward R. Hines, and Judith I. Gill, 315–324. New York: Simon & Schuster, Custom Publishing, and Sage.Google Scholar
  67. Salerno, Carlo. 2003. On the Technical and Allocative Efficiency of Research-Intensive Higher Education Institutions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University: University Park, PA.Google Scholar
  68. Schachter, Hindy Lauer. 1995. Reinventing Government or Reinventing Ourselves: Two Models for Improving Government Performance. Public Administration Review 55 (6): 530. Scholar
  69. Schick, Allen. 1971. Budget Innovation in the States. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  70. Schick, Allen. 1990. Budgeting for Results: Recent Developments in Five Industrialized Countries. Public Administration Review 50 (1): 26. Scholar
  71. Schick, Allen. 2014. The Metamorphoses of Performance Budgeting. OECD Journal on Budgeting 13 (2): 49–79. Scholar
  72. Shea, Robert J. 2008. “Performance Budgeting in the United States.” OECD Journal on Budgeting 8 (1): 2–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Simon, Herbert. 1946. The Proverbs of Administration. In Classics of Public Administration, ed. Jay M. Shafritz and Albert C. Hyde, 3rd ed. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  74. Snell, Ronald K. 1998. Reinventing Government, Not Easy, but Possible. State Legislatures 24 (2): 34–38.Google Scholar
  75. Smith, Kenneth, and Rita Cheng. 2006. Assessing Reforms of Government Accounting and Budgeting. Public Performance & Management Review 30 (1): 14–34. Scholar
  76. Smith, Robert, and Thomas D. Lynch. 2004. Public Budgeting in America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  77. Swan, Wallace K. 1983. Theoretical Debates Applicable to Budgeting. In Handbook on Public Budgeting and Financial Management, ed. Jack Rabin and Thomas D. Lynch. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
  78. The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government. 2000–2003. Annual Surveys. Albany, NY: The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government.Google Scholar
  79. Tuckman, Bruce W. 1978. Conducting Educational Research, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Universities Bloomington. Mimeo, School of Environmental and Public Affairs, Indiana University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  80. Von Mises, Ludwig. 1944. Bureaucracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wellman, Jane. 2002. Flip Flop in Florida. Higher Education Policy.Google Scholar
  82. Wildavsky, Aaron. 1964. The Politics of the Budgetary Process. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  83. Wildavsky, Aaron. 1985. The New Politics of the Budgetary Process, 2nd ed. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  84. Willoughby, Katherine G., and Julia E. Melkers. 2001a. Performance Budgeting in the States. In Quicker, Better, Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government, ed. Richard Nathan and Dall Forsythe. Albany: The Rockerfeller Institute. Google Scholar
  85. Willoughby, Katherine G., and Julia E. Melkers. 2001b. Assessing the Impact of Performance Budgeting: A Survey of American States. Government Finance Review 17 (2): 25–30.Google Scholar
  86. World Bank. 2003. Performance-Based Budgeting: Beyond Rhetoric. PREMnotes. Public Sector 78. Retrieved from,
  87. Zumeta, William. 1996. Meeting the Demand for Higher Education Without Breaking the Bank: A Framework for the Design of State and Higher Education Policies for an Era of Increasing Demand. Journal of Higher Education 67 (4): 367–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zumeta, William. 1999. Fiscal Prospects for Higher Education. Almanac of Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  89. Zumeta, William. 2000. Accountability: Challenges for Higher Education. Almanac of Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar
  90. Zumeta, William. 2001. Higher Education Finance in the Nineties: Lessons for the New Millennium. Almanac of Higher Education. Washington, DC: National Education Association.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aziza Zemrani
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Texas Rio Grande ValleyEdinburgUSA

Personalised recommendations