Policies, Patterns, and Changes in State Fiscal Regulation of Public Universities Since Fy1980.

The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine the policy differences among the states regarding the type and degree of fiscal regulation exerted over public comprehensive colleges and universities; (2) to examine how state regulation has changed in recent years; and (3) to determine whether regulatory patterns exist among the states. The relationship between geographical, socioeconomic, and political conditions of the states and the degree of fiscal regulation exerted over public universities and the relationship of these factors to changes in the degree of regulation was examined. A survey sent to both a state and institutional representative was used to identify the type and degree of fiscal regulation for the following categories by fund source: (1) type of appropriations; (2) transfer authority; (3) allotment/retention of funds; (4) year-end fund balances; (5) procurement practices; and (6) position control. The study's findings showed that a majority of states exert low control over public universities in the type of appropriations, transfer authority, and position control. High state control is exerted over the allotment/retention of funds, year-end fund balances, and procurement practices. Increasing state control was reported in the allotment/retention of funds, year-end fund balances, and position control. Decreasing state control over universities' transfer authority and procurement practices was reported. The study identified two similar dimensions of state fiscal regulation over public universities. The first dimension included the state general fund appropriation, other funds appropriation, state general fund/tuition transfer authority, position control, and position/classification approval. The other dimension included the state general fund/tuition and other funds retention items. By combining the measures of regulation, the states were ranked based on the overall level of control exerted over public universities using two different statistical techniques. State and local tax revenues per $1000 of personal income served as the best predictor of changes in public universities' transfer authority, type of appropriations, and position control. With the exception of the level of manufacturing, the relationship between state condition variables and the degree of fiscal regulation was weak. Thus, one must conclude that the factors influencing policy differences among the states are more complex than were included in the study.PhDEducational administrationHigher educationUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/161658/1/8801324.pd