Texas Reviews Four-Year Funding Framework with Focus on Research and Completion Metrics

The Alabama Joint Legislative Education Committee convened on August 29, 2025, to discuss various aspects of education funding and institutional performance metrics. The meeting focused on how different states implement funding formulas based on specific educational outcomes and institutional missions.

The session began with a presentation on mission differentiation in funding formulas. It was noted that institutions are compared against their peers using specific metrics, allowing for flexibility in focusing on their unique missions. The discussion highlighted that Texas employs research-specific funding formulas, which can be tailored to address particular institutional missions.

Several examples from Southern states, including Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Ohio, and Tennessee, were presented. Each state utilizes progression and completion metrics in their funding formulas, emphasizing high-priority fields and, in some cases, research and public service. Notably, Arkansas and Ohio are beginning to develop metrics related to workforce outcomes, indicating a trend towards measuring return on investment in education.

The committee also explored the concepts of transfer metrics and efficiency. Transfer metrics assess whether students successfully transfer to four-year institutions and their completion rates. Efficiency metrics, such as cost per degree produced, were discussed, with Arkansas noted for its approach to measuring degree production relative to student enrollment.

A question was raised regarding the prevalence of regent-type structures for four-year institutions across states. While specific data was not immediately available, it was acknowledged that such structures are more common in the four-year sector, complicating cohesive funding formula development.

Senator Roberts inquired about public service and research funding models. The discussion revealed that many funding models focus on research expenditures, with some states, like Oregon, distributing funds based on enrollment rather than outcomes.

The meeting concluded with a commitment to gather additional data on regent structures and further explore the implications of funding formulas on educational outcomes. The committee's discussions underscored the importance of aligning funding strategies with institutional missions and the evolving landscape of educational metrics across states.