Promise programs are proliferating across the United States, with wide variation in their design. Using national data on 33 Promise programs affecting single, 2-year colleges, this study examines program effects on first-time, full-time college enrollments of students by race/ethnicity and gender classification. Results suggest Promise programs are associated with large percent increases in enrollments of Black and Hispanic students, especially students classified as females, at eligible colleges. Promise programs with merit requirements are associated with higher enrollment of White and Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander female students; those with income requirements are negatively associated with enrollment of most demographic groups. More generous Promise programs are associated with greater enrollment increases among demographic groups with historically higher levels of postsecondary attainment.

Objective: Performance funding (PF) policies allocate a portion of state funding to colleges based on student outcomes. This study is the first to account for policy type and design differences, and explores the impact of performance funding on three levels of credential completions: short-term certificates, medium-term certificates, and associate’s degrees. Method: We create a panel dataset of 751 two-year colleges from years 1990 to 2013 using data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. We conduct a series of analyses using difference-in-differences with the inclusion of college- and state-level control variables. Results: We find that, on average, performance funding produces no significant changes in completions of any of the three credentials. Policy types characterized by a greater proportion of funding tied to the base budget, mission differentiation in performance metrics, inclusion of underrepresented student metrics, and longer periods of operating years produce an increase in short-term certificates, no significant change in medium-term certificates, and a decrease in associate’s degrees. Contributions: This study’s findings suggest that because awarding more short-term certificates is a relatively quick and cost-effective way to capture performance funds, colleges might be engaging in a path of least resistance by churning out short-term certificates and redirecting focus away from associate’s degrees, which is concerning given that short-term certificates generally offer limited labor market benefits compared to medium-term certificates and associate’s degrees. Our results also underscore the importance of policy designs in explaining differential impacts on credential completion.

Objective: We investigate whether performance funding—an increasingly prevalent state policy that allocates appropriations based on outcomes that prioritize retention and completion—places minority-serving institutions (MSIs) at a financial disadvantage due to these institutions serving a greater proportion of historically underrepresented students. Method: Using data from 2004-05 to 2014-15 within Texas and Washington, we compare state funding allocations to 2-year institutions designated as MSIs versus non-MSIs, before and after performance funding policies are implemented. We additionally compare funding allocations for each performance metric. Results: On average, MSIs in Texas and Washington are allocated the same or less in per-student state funding after performance funding compared to non-MSIs. MSIs in Texas are advantaged in performance metrics for transfers and for gateway courses in math (credit-bearing courses that serve as a “gateway” to continued study), and MSIs in Washington are advantaged in developmental education courses. However, MSIs are typically disadvantaged in metrics for degree completions. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that MSIs in Texas and Washington are not financially disadvantaged due to performance funding because the funding formulas in both states incentivize milestones in addition to outputs. We recommend that policy makers consider incorporating performance metrics for developmental education and gateway courses in addition to retention rates and degree completions, and tailor metrics to the student population of institutions to mitigate the potentially inequitable funding consequences of performance funding policies.

Performance funding policies for higher education allocate appropriations to public institutions based on student outcomes such as degree completions. This study investigates whether a special science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) incentive in 13 state performance funding policies leads to greater undergraduate degree completions in STEM fields. This study applies a conceptual framework of principal–agent theory and anticipatory policy effects. Incorporating a panel data set on 551 public 4-year institutions from 2003-2004 to 2014-2015, results from difference-in-differences analyses suggest that the STEM incentive increases total STEM bachelor’s degrees completed as well as STEM bachelor’s degrees completed as a proportion of all bachelor’s degrees. Findings are robust to alternative specifications, suggesting that institutions are responding to the performance funding STEM incentive by graduating more students in these high-demand fields.