The Performance-Based Funding for Higher Education dataset is produced annually by the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association (SHEEO) to broaden understanding of state variation in the use of performance-based funding (PBF) and how that variation impacts student outcomes. Since 2020, PBF data are collected as part of the State Higher Education Finance (SHEF) project and will be published annually.
SHEEO collects PBF allocations for two-year and four-year public institutions separately to encourage use and consideration of both state- and sector-level data. SHEEO’s sector-level designations are based on the Carnegie Basic Classification. States report the total state dollars awarded based on performance to institutions in each sector, including funds distributed through both system- and state-level PBF policies. A system-level policy refers to situations in which a system of institutions develops performance measures and allocates state funding based on institutional outcomes, whereas a state-level policy refers to when the state determines performance measures and distributes funding to institutions based on institutional outcomes.
The data summarized in these tables, figures, and maps are presented in fiscal years. For example, fiscal year 2024 ran from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024 for most states. The corresponding academic year for fiscal year 2024 began in the fall of 2023.
For state- and sector-level data on total PBF for all states, see Total PBF Allocations. For additional state- and sector level details PBF per FTE and PBF Percentage of Public Operating.
Data Download
Download the complete dataset for all available years of data on PBF to public institutions. Please update any previously saved PBF data using this file, as prior years include revisions that are not captured in the historical PBF tables. For most states, data elements are not available prior to 2020. Please contact Kelsey Kunkle at kkunkle@sheeo.org with questions about the data or for additional variables.
- 2020-2024 PBF Data – Complete Download (.xlsx) Last updated June 2025
Performance-Based Funding Report
Performance-based funding (PBF) has played an increasingly prevalent role in state higher education funding policy over the past 40 years, 1 Gándara, D., & Rutherford, A. (2018) Mitigating unintended impacts? The effects of premiums for underserved populations in performance-funding policies for higher education. Research in Higher Education, 59, 681-703. doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9483-x VIEW ALL FOOTNOTES and by 2020, 30 states reported having PBF models. The amount of performance-based funds that states provide to public institutions, as well as the portion of state appropriations that are distributed based on performance measures, varies widely across states, systems, and institution types. 2 Hearn, J. C. (2015, November). Outcomes-based funding in historical and comparative context. Lumina Foundation. luminafoundation.org/files/resources/hearn-obf-full.pdf VIEW ALL FOOTNOTES 3 Hillman, N., & Corral, D. (2017). The equity implications of paying for performance in higher education. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(14), 1757–1772. doi.org/10.1177/0002764217744834 VIEW ALL FOOTNOTES This variation in public institutions’ reliance on PBF for their operating budgets across states likely contributes to mixed evidence connecting PBF to student outcomes. 4 Boland, W. C. (2018). Performance funding and historically black colleges and universities: An assessment of financial incentives and baccalaureate degree production. Educational Policy. doi/pdf/10.1177/0895904818802118; Hillman, N. W., Tandberg, D. A., & Fryar, A. H. (2015). Evaluating the impacts of ‘‘new’’ performance funding in higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(4), 501–519.; Hu, X. (2019). Efficiency for whom? Varying impact of performance-based funding on community colleges in Louisiana. Community College Review, 47(4), 323–359.; Ortagus, J. C., Kelchen, R., Rosinger, K., & Voorhees, N. (2020). Performance-based funding in American higher education: A systematic synthesis of the intended and unintended consequences. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(4), 520–550. doi.org/10.3102/0162373720953128; Rutherford, A., & Rabovsky, T. (2014). Evaluating impacts of performance funding policies on student outcomes in higher education. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655(1), 185–208. doi.org/10.1177/0002716214541048; Tandberg, D. A., & Hillman, N. W. (2014). State higher education performance funding: Data, outcomes, and policy implications. Journal of Education Finance, 39(3), 222–243. VIEW ALL FOOTNOTES This issue brief highlights the PBF data that SHEEO is now collecting annually and provides an initial snapshot of the first two years of data.
- Performance-Based Funding Allocations for Public Higher Education Institutions, Fiscal Years 2020 and 2021 (.pdf) Published October 2022
Total PBF allocations refers to the sum of state dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions on the basis of how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes as defined by state or system programs. Table 1 provides the unadjusted state-level data and one-year percent changes that states reported by sector. See the footnotes at the bottom of the table for more detailed information.
Performance-Based Funding by Sector and State, FY 2020-2024 (Unadjusted Dollars)
| Two-Year PBF | Four-Year PBF | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | % Change Since 2023 | % Change Since 2020 | 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | % Change Since 2023 | % Change Since 2020 | |
| Alabama | $32,068,470 | $37,251,561 | $39,050,811 | 4.8% | 21.8% | $0 | $15,000,000 | $0 | -100.0% | N/A |
| Alaska | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Arizona | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Arkansas | $1,938,134 | $2,897,559 | $1,585,422 | -45.3% | -18.2% | $5,495,145 | $8,508,875 | $4,754,444 | -44.1% | -13.5% |
| California | $353,560,185 | $491,687,784 | $548,251,469 | 11.5% | 55.1% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Colorado | $0 | $260,032,744 | $258,839,141 | -0.5% | N/A | $0 | $633,449,934 | $630,542,269 | -0.5% | N/A |
| Connecticut | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Delaware | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Florida | $44,000,000 | $44,000,000 | $50,000,000 | 13.6% | 13.6% | $265,000,000 | $265,000,000 | $350,000,000 | 32.1% | 32.1% |
| Georgia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Hawaii | $1,037,747 | $585,090 | $558,472 | -4.5% | -46.2% | $1,472,204 | $1,330,046 | $1,373,693 | 3.3% | -6.7% |
| Idaho | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Illinois | $359,000 | $359,000 | $359,000 | 0.0% | 0.0% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Indiana | $16,739,191 | $20,188,754 | $5,984,439 | -70.4% | -64.2% | $69,402,489 | $67,724,662 | $17,912,742 | -73.6% | -74.2% |
| Iowa | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Kansas | $8,501,724 | $8,594,483 | $9,508,356 | 10.6% | 11.8% | $40,053,333 | $61,469,910 | $78,872,663 | 28.3% | 96.9% |
| Kentucky | $149,355,400 | $187,275,400 | $195,779,300 | 4.5% | 31.1% | $518,230,100 | $596,820,400 | $629,796,900 | 5.5% | 21.5% |
| Louisiana | $120,187,089 | $137,848,161 | $150,137,205 | 8.9% | 24.9% | $365,007,740 | $399,627,158 | $435,014,750 | 8.9% | 19.2% |
| Maine | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Maryland | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Massachusetts | $2,862,397 | $9,530,811 | $10,078,100 | 5.7% | 252.1% | $2,624,536 | $9,001,345 | $9,820,456 | 9.1% | 274.2% |
| Michigan | $2,163,900 | $11,328,800 | $11,894,300 | 5.0% | 449.7% | $7,882,000 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% |
| Minnesota | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Mississippi | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Missouri | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Montana | $2,479,027 | $1,621,895 | $2,095,180 | 29.2% | -15.5% | $11,054,891 | $10,938,980 | $9,849,683 | -10.0% | -10.9% |
| Nebraska | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Nevada | $33,316,859 | $38,746,107 | $38,520,800 | -0.6% | 15.6% | $66,424,623 | $70,966,999 | $70,966,999 | 0.0% | 6.8% |
| New Hampshire | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| New Jersey | $0 | $149,123,000 | $169,123,000 | 13.4% | N/A | $35,000,000 | $124,168,000 | $150,503,000 | 21.2% | 330.0% |
| New Mexico | $6,319,219 | $4,800,801 | $8,459,682 | 76.2% | 33.9% | $16,270,642 | $13,710,648 | $27,392,818 | 99.8% | 68.4% |
| New York | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| North Carolina | $24,000,000 | $24,000,000 | $24,000,000 | 0.0% | 0.0% | $0 | $0 | $32,921,356 | N/A | N/A |
| North Dakota | $49,182,049 | $51,432,799 | $58,921,227 | 14.6% | 19.8% | $189,308,222 | $196,887,009 | $234,344,297 | 19.0% | 23.8% |
| Ohio | $447,761,978 | $477,517,524 | $484,026,522 | 1.4% | 8.1% | $1,376,794,012 | $1,470,171,438 | $1,480,081,932 | 0.7% | 7.5% |
| Oklahoma | $5,680,187 | $4,953,128 | $6,759,374 | 36.5% | 19.0% | $12,393,392 | $11,446,872 | $22,240,626 | 94.3% | 79.5% |
| Oregon | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $204,238,780 | $229,683,600 | $246,355,261 | 7.3% | 20.6% |
| Pennsylvania | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Rhode Island | $2,490,408 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% | $4,871,357 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% |
| South Carolina | $6,845,495 | $7,000,000 | $7,000,000 | 0.0% | 2.3% | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| South Dakota | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Tennessee | $288,655,500 | $342,822,600 | $371,193,400 | 8.3% | 28.6% | $790,256,600 | $920,303,400 | $1,092,682,900 | 18.7% | 38.3% |
| Texas | $184,148,461 | $231,438,891 | $1,176,908,916 | 408.5% | 539.1% | $222,116,814 | $246,292,975 | $495,003,304 | 101.0% | 122.9% |
| Utah | $4,540,300 | $3,999,900 | $4,229,700 | 5.7% | -6.8% | $26,959,700 | $26,000,100 | $27,204,300 | 4.6% | 0.9% |
| Vermont | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Virginia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Washington | $42,538,050 | $51,796,750 | $57,267,550 | 10.6% | 34.6% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| West Virginia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Wisconsin | $26,560,470 | $30,985,470 | $31,915,020 | 3.0% | 20.2% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Wyoming | $15,593,165 | $16,230,068 | $17,929,708 | 10.5% | 15.0% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| D.C. | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| U.S. | $1,872,884,405 | $2,648,049,080 | $3,740,376,094 | 41.3% | 99.7% | $4,230,856,580 | $5,378,502,351 | $6,047,634,393 | 12.4% | 42.9% |
- Performance-based funding represents the state tax dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions based on how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes defined by state or system programs.
- Performance-based funding data are recently required components of the SHEF data collection and are not currently available for years prior to 2020.
- Sector is determined at the institution level using the Carnegie Basic Classification (https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/). Baccalaureate/Associate's Colleges and "less-than-two-year" degree-granting institutions not assigned a Carnegie classification are considered two-year institutions.
- The U.S. calculation does not include the District of Columbia.
- Two-year performance based funding for 2023 and 2024 is estimated for Alabama.
- In Kansas, calculated performance-based funding varies widely from year to year depending on state appropriations and potential increases in state funding made available to institutions.
- The following states did not utilize their performance-based funding formulas due to budget reductions: Colorado in fiscal year 2020 and Rhode Island in fiscal year 2023.
- Connecticut has a system-level performance-based funding model that is not reported in this table.
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
PBF per FTE
PBF per FTE, FY 2024
For comparisons across states and sectors, it is important to contextualize performance-based funding amounts with net FTE enrollment.
Map 1 can be used to visualize the PBF per FTE in each state. By using the full map, users can customize between statewide and the two- and four-year sectors, apply different state and inflation adjustments, and access a variety of download options.
Table 2 provides adjusted state-level data, including sector breakouts and one-year percent change. The table is sortable by clicking on each column header that can show the range of PBF per FTE. See the footnotes at the bottom of the table for more detailed information.
Performance-Based Funding per FTE by Sector and State, FY 2020-2024 (Constant Adjusted Dollars)
| Two-Year PBF | Four-Year PBF | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | % Change Since 2023 | % Change Since 2020 | 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | % Change Since 2023 | % Change Since 2020 | |
| Alabama | $785 | $788 | $788 | -0.1% | 0.3% | $0 | $125 | $0 | -100.0% | N/A |
| Alaska | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Arizona | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Arkansas | $86 | $132 | $67 | -49.1% | -22.2% | $94 | $135 | $71 | -47.5% | -24.5% |
| California | $358 | $516 | $506 | -1.9% | 41.5% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Colorado | $0 | $4,534 | $4,241 | -6.5% | N/A | $0 | $5,260 | $4,890 | -7.0% | N/A |
| Connecticut | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Delaware | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Florida | $172 | $179 | $187 | 4.4% | 8.5% | $1,090 | $978 | $1,227 | 25.4% | 12.5% |
| Georgia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Hawaii | $60 | $37 | $33 | -10.6% | -44.5% | $60 | $48 | $47 | -2.5% | -21.5% |
| Idaho | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Illinois | $3 | $4 | $4 | 3.6% | 14.7% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Indiana | $346 | $371 | $96 | -74.0% | -72.1% | $493 | $444 | $111 | -75.0% | -77.4% |
| Iowa | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Kansas | $210 | $211 | $219 | 4.2% | 4.5% | $644 | $942 | $1,150 | 22.1% | 78.6% |
| Kentucky | $4,598 | $5,497 | $5,264 | -4.2% | 14.5% | $7,168 | $7,493 | $7,466 | -0.4% | 4.2% |
| Louisiana | $3,498 | $3,888 | $3,989 | 2.6% | 14.0% | $3,835 | $3,806 | $3,841 | 0.9% | 0.2% |
| Maine | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Maryland | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Massachusetts | $57 | $213 | $189 | -10.9% | 231.2% | $22 | $80 | $84 | 4.9% | 275.9% |
| Michigan | $27 | $141 | $138 | -2.1% | 407.9% | $43 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% |
| Minnesota | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Mississippi | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Missouri | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Montana | $463 | $281 | $333 | 18.5% | -28.1% | $456 | $418 | $359 | -14.2% | -21.4% |
| Nebraska | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Nevada | $1,234 | $1,420 | $1,478 | 4.0% | 19.8% | $1,523 | $1,480 | $1,525 | 3.1% | 0.1% |
| New Hampshire | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| New Jersey | $0 | $1,617 | $1,705 | 5.4% | N/A | $214 | $711 | $819 | 15.2% | 282.5% |
| New Mexico | $232 | $170 | $285 | 67.4% | 22.6% | $549 | $356 | $690 | 94.1% | 25.8% |
| New York | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| North Carolina | $167 | $155 | $139 | -10.4% | -16.7% | $0 | $0 | $169 | N/A | N/A |
| North Dakota | $8,429 | $7,698 | $7,857 | 2.1% | -6.8% | $8,375 | $7,923 | $8,863 | 11.9% | 5.8% |
| Ohio | $5,774 | $5,713 | $6,096 | 6.7% | 5.6% | $6,561 | $7,009 | $6,784 | -3.2% | 3.4% |
| Oklahoma | $205 | $167 | $213 | 27.6% | 3.9% | $184 | $160 | $291 | 81.8% | 58.1% |
| Oregon | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $2,611 | $2,739 | $2,765 | 1.0% | 5.9% |
| Pennsylvania | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Rhode Island | $251 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% | $209 | $0 | $0 | N/A | -100.0% |
| South Carolina | $149 | $134 | $126 | -5.6% | -15.2% | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| South Dakota | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Tennessee | $5,326 | $6,794 | $6,729 | -0.9% | 26.4% | $9,466 | $9,503 | $10,829 | 14.0% | 14.4% |
| Texas | $499 | $622 | $2,903 | 366.5% | 481.2% | $483 | $481 | $909 | 89.0% | 88.1% |
| Utah | $218 | $173 | $167 | -3.6% | -23.5% | $313 | $264 | $260 | -1.7% | -17.1% |
| Vermont | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Virginia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Washington | $391 | $475 | $514 | 8.1% | 31.2% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| West Virginia | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Wisconsin | $511 | $567 | $547 | -3.6% | 7.0% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| Wyoming | $1,679 | $1,502 | $1,641 | 9.2% | -2.3% | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| D.C. | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A | $0 | $0 | $0 | N/A | N/A |
| U.S. | $511 | $733 | $952 | 29.8% | 86.1% | $746 | $876 | $935 | 6.8% | 25.4% |
- Performance-based funding represents the state tax dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions based on how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes defined by state or system programs.
- Performance-based funding data are recently required components of the SHEF data collection and are not currently available for years prior to 2020.
- Sector is determined at the institution level using the Carnegie Basic Classification (https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/). Baccalaureate/Associate's Colleges and "less-than-two-year" degree-granting institutions not assigned a Carnegie classification are considered two-year institutions.
- The U.S. calculation does not include the District of Columbia.
- Two-year performance based funding for 2023 and 2024 is estimated for Alabama.
- In Kansas, calculated performance-based funding varies widely from year to year depending on state appropriations and potential increases in state funding made available to institutions.
- The following states did not utilize their performance-based funding formulas due to budget reductions: Colorado in fiscal year 2020 and Rhode Island in fiscal year 2023.
- Connecticut has a system-level performance-based funding model that is not reported in this table.
- Adjustment factors to arrive at constant dollar figures include Cost of Living Index (COLI) and Higher Education Cost Adjustment (HECA). The COLI is not a measure of inflation over time. The Enrollment Mix Index (EMI) is not applied to sector-level data and is not used in this table.
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
This section presents state-level PBF as a percentage of total public operating data, broken out by sector. Figure 1 shows the percentage of public operating funds allocated to two-year institutions through PBF. See the footnotes at the bottom of the figure for more detailed information. States are excluded from the sector-level figure for which they did not report PBF.
Two-Year PBF as a Percentage of Two-Year State Public Operating by State, FY 2024
- Performance-based funding represents the state tax dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions based on how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes defined by state or system programs. Only states with a performance-based funding model for two-year institutions are included in this figure.
- State public operating appropriations are a measure of state support directly allocated to public two- and four-year institutions. State public operating excludes local appropriations, agency funding, and student financial aid.
- Performance-based funding may equal more than 100% of state public operating appropriations in states that allocate non-operating appropriations such as RAM or non-credit appropriations through a performance-based funding formula.
- Sector is determined at the institution level using the Carnegie Basic Classification (https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/). Baccalaureate/Associate's Colleges and "less-than-two-year" degree-granting institutions not assigned a Carnegie classification are considered two-year institutions.
- Connecticut has a system-level performance-based funding model that is not reported in this figure.
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
Figure 2 shows the percentage of public operating funds allocated to two-year institutions through PBF. See the footnotes at the bottom of the figure for more detailed information. States are excluded from the sector-level figure for which they did not report PBF.
Four-Year PBF as a Percentage of Four-Year State Public Operating by State, FY 2024
- Performance-based funding represents the state tax dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions based on how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes defined by state or system programs. Only states with a performance-based funding model for four-year institutions are included in this figure.
- State public operating appropriations are a measure of state support directly allocated to public two- and four-year institutions. State public operating excludes local appropriations, agency funding, and student financial aid.
- Performance-based funding may equal more than 100% of state public operating appropriations in states that allocate non-operating appropriations such as RAM or non-credit appropriations through a performance-based funding formula.
- Sector is determined at the institution level using the Carnegie Basic Classification (https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/). Baccalaureate/Associate's Colleges and "less-than-two-year" degree-granting institutions not assigned a Carnegie classification are considered two-year institutions.
- Connecticut has a system-level performance-based funding model that is not reported in this figure.
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
Table 3 provides state-level PBF as a percentage of total public operating data, broken out by sector, and one-year percentage point change. See the footnotes at the bottom of the table for more detailed information.
Performance-Based Funding as a Percentage of Total Public Operating by Sector and State, FY 2020-2024
| Two-Year PBF | Four-Year PBF | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | Change Since 2023 | Change Since 2020 | 2020 | 2023 | 2024 | Change Since 2023 | Change Since 2020 | |
| Alabama | 8.1% | 3.8% | 6.1% | 2.3 | -2.0 | 0.0% | 1.0% | 0.0% | -1.0 | 0.0 |
| Alaska | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Arizona | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Arkansas | 1.1% | 1.6% | 0.9% | -0.7 | -0.2 | 1.2% | 1.8% | 1.0% | -0.8 | -0.2 |
| California | 6.1% | 7.3% | 8.2% | 0.9 | 2.1 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Colorado | 0.0% | 97.1% | 72.8% | -24.3 | 72.8 | 0.0% | 105.6% | 96.1% | -9.5 | 96.1 |
| Connecticut | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Delaware | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Florida | 3.5% | 3.1% | 2.9% | -0.1 | -0.6 | 9.9% | 8.5% | 9.2% | 0.7 | -0.7 |
| Georgia | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Hawaii | 0.5% | 0.3% | 0.2% | 0.0 | -0.2 | 0.4% | 0.3% | 0.3% | 0.0 | -0.1 |
| Idaho | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Illinois | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Indiana | 5.7% | 6.6% | 1.8% | -4.8 | -3.9 | 7.8% | 7.4% | 1.8% | -5.6 | -6.0 |
| Iowa | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Kansas | 4.9% | 4.2% | 4.0% | -0.3 | -1.0 | 9.5% | 12.1% | 13.8% | 1.7 | 4.3 |
| Kentucky | 86.9% | 94.5% | 100.9% | 6.4 | 13.9 | 96.5% | 92.9% | 93.3% | 0.5 | -3.1 |
| Louisiana | 92.2% | 87.5% | 87.3% | -0.2 | -4.9 | 91.2% | 83.5% | 75.5% | -8.0 | -15.7 |
| Maine | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Maryland | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Massachusetts | 0.7% | 1.8% | 1.6% | -0.2 | 0.9 | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.6% | 0.0 | 0.4 |
| Michigan | 0.6% | 2.5% | 1.9% | -0.6 | 1.4 | 0.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | -0.6 |
| Minnesota | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Mississippi | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Missouri | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Montana | 8.8% | 5.7% | 6.7% | 1.0 | -2.1 | 5.9% | 5.3% | 4.6% | -0.7 | -1.3 |
| Nebraska | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Nevada | 20.1% | 19.9% | 16.8% | -3.2 | -3.3 | 17.6% | 21.7% | 16.5% | -5.2 | -1.1 |
| New Hampshire | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| New Jersey | 0.0% | 72.4% | 82.1% | 9.7 | 82.1 | 2.9% | 8.0% | 8.7% | 0.7 | 5.8 |
| New Mexico | 3.1% | 2.1% | 3.3% | 1.2 | 0.3 | 3.0% | 1.8% | 4.9% | 3.0 | 1.9 |
| New York | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| North Carolina | 2.3% | 2.1% | 1.9% | -0.2 | -0.5 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.1% | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| North Dakota | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Ohio | 99.7% | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0 | 0.3 | 97.8% | 97.6% | 95.2% | -2.4 | -2.5 |
| Oklahoma | 3.8% | 3.0% | 3.6% | 0.6 | -0.2 | 2.7% | 2.3% | 3.8% | 1.5 | 1.1 |
| Oregon | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 49.2% | 46.1% | 54.7% | 8.6 | 5.6 |
| Pennsylvania | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Rhode Island | 5.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | -5.3 | 3.8% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | -3.8 |
| South Carolina | 3.7% | 3.4% | 2.9% | -0.5 | -0.8 | 0.0% | 0.0% | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| South Dakota | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Tennessee | 73.6% | 67.7% | 63.6% | -4.1 | -10.0 | 97.4% | 85.6% | 97.7% | 12.1 | 0.4 |
| Texas | 18.4% | 23.0% | 94.1% | 71.1 | 75.7 | 7.5% | 7.9% | 15.0% | 7.0 | 7.5 |
| Utah | 1.9% | 1.3% | 1.2% | -0.1 | -0.7 | 3.2% | 2.5% | 2.1% | -0.4 | -1.1 |
| Vermont | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Virginia | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Washington | 5.0% | 5.0% | 5.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| West Virginia | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Wisconsin | 5.2% | 5.6% | 5.7% | 0.1 | 0.5 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| Wyoming | 12.4% | 14.7% | 16.0% | 1.2 | 3.5 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| D.C. | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
| U.S. | 9.1% | 11.1% | 14.7% | 3.7 | 5.6 | 8.8% | 9.6% | 10.0% | 0.4 | 1.1 |
- Performance-based funding represents the state tax dollars allocated to two- and four-year public institutions based on how well institutions accomplish goals or outcomes defined by state or system programs.
- Total public operating for all public institutions is the sum of two- and four-year public operating. These state-level totals differ from state-level general public operating totals, as they do not include any agency funding.
- Performance-based funding data are recently required components of the SHEF data collection and are not currently available for years prior to 2020.
- Sector is determined at the institution level using the Carnegie Basic Classification (https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/). Baccalaureate/Associate's Colleges and "less-than-two-year" degree-granting institutions not assigned a Carnegie classification are considered two-year institutions.
- Year change columns show percentage point increases or decreases, not percent change.
- The U.S. calculation does not include the District of Columbia.
- Performance-based funding may equal more than 100% of state public operating appropriations in states that allocate non-operating appropriations such as RAM or non-credit appropriations through a performance-based funding formula.
- Two-year performance based funding for 2023 and 2024 is estimated for Alabama.
- In Kansas, calculated performance-based funding varies widely from year to year depending on state appropriations and potential increases in state funding made available to institutions.
- Colorado updated their formula funding model in fiscal year 2021 to utilize the College Opportunity Fund (COF) and Fee-for-Service (FFS) contracts in performance-based funding allocations. This resulted in performance-based funds exceeding general public operations in 2023.
- The following states did not utilize their performance-based funding formulas due to budget reductions: Colorado in fiscal year 2020 and Rhode Island in 2023.
- Connecticut has a system-level performance-based funding model that is not reported in this table.
- State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
