Abstract

The use of performance-based funding that ties state higher education appropriations to performance metrics has increased dramatically in recent years, but most programs place at stake a small percent of overall funding. We analyze the effect of two notable exceptions—Ohio and Tennessee—where nearly all state funding is tied to performance measures. Using a difference-in-differences identification strategy along with a synthetic control approach, we find no evidence that these programs improve key academic outcomes.

You do not currently have access to this content.