Search results

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how funding systems influence higher education institutions and their strategies and core tasks.

Taking the results of a comparative study between Denmark, Norway and Portugal as a point of departure, the paper identifies and analyses the main features of these state funding systems, their strengths and weaknesses, and their impact on academia.

The system‐level analysis offers an illustration of a trend across Europe. The paper shows that mixed funding models have been implemented in all three countries.

Funding systems and their impacts do not come in neat packages. The systems demonstrate a mixed pattern of strengths and weaknesses. The impacts of the funding systems converge, although different mechanisms are employed. There are no clear cut differences in the perceived strengths, weaknesses and impacts of the two main types of funding systems – input‐based funding and output‐based funding – presented and discussed in the paper.

Not much information is broadly shared about how current system and resource library funding formulas operate. Do the formulas encourage or discourage certain programs or services? How are systems and resource libraries funded across the country? These questions are vital to systems looking for fiscal models that work. Having examined the costs of basic services provided by the seven Colorado regional library service systems and the Colorado Resource Center (CRC) previously in the Bottom Line (Fall 1990, pp. 18–24), this second article reviews the current funding formulas for the systems and the CRC.

Public pension plans in the U.S. are seriously underfunded, especially following the financial market crisis of 2008-2009 which resulted in large investment losses. However, funding levels vary widely across plans. Pension boards of trustees make key management decisions in pension systems and these decisions have significant effects on funded levels, yet our empirical knowledge of board management is limited. This study explores the effect of board composition on pension funding levels. Existing theoretical debates lead to differing expectations, and previous studies have mixed results. Our research uses a panel data set of large public pension plans from 2001-2009. We also collect data for pension board composition from this time period. We find that increasing political appointees and employee members on the board increases the funding performance of the pension system.

The deferred nature of retirement benefits provides public officials with a means of postponing to later years the retirement financing burden. This practice is aided by the fact that the Employee Retirement Income and Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) does not apply to the public sector. Failure to provide for full actuarial funding violates the concept of interperiod equity, which the Governmental Accounting Standards Board cites as a fundamental responsibility of public administrators. Underfunding also violates the just savings principle developed by the philosopher John Rawls. This paper examines the extent of retirement system underfunding in state and local government and considers the various ways in which underfunding imposes an unfair burden on future generations. The ethical significance of underfunding is tied to the works of Rawls, and remedial measures are proposed which are consistent with Rawls’ just savings principle.

This paper presents three models of funding health care in 130 developing countries, based upon a public system, a private system and personal remittances.

The authors trace the funding of health from foreign aid to health funding and health outcomes in the public system, foreign direct investment to health funding in the private system, and personal remittances to health outcomes. This is followed by panel data, fixed effects models subjected to 2-, 3- and 4-stage least squares regressions.

Findings from the first model were that aid in the form of Technical Cooperation Grants funded Infrastructure. Infrastructure Spending due to aid funds Government Health Plans, which reduced the Incidence of Tuberculosis, which in turn reduced Undernourishment and increases Life Expectancy. Other positive health outcomes included reduced Birth Rate and reduced Maternal Mortality. In the second model, Foreign Direct Investment increased Female Employment and GDP per Person, funding Private Health Plans, which increase Life Expectancy, reduced Undernourishment, increased Skilled Care at Birth, increased the Number of Hospital Beds, reduced Maternal Mortality and increased the Birth Rate. In the third model, Remittances influenced both Out-of-Pocket Medical Expenses and Private Plans.

Publicly funded programs may be directed to nutrition, increasing life expectancy. Private funding may be directed to improving maternal conditions, with remittances removing the liquidity constraints.

This paper is the first attempt to trace health funding from its sources of foreign aid, foreign direct investment and personal remittances using three separate paths.

Examines the construction of the funding formula, following the 1988 Education Act, used to determine the levels of devolved budgets in three English local education authorities (LEAs). Explains that, in each LEA, a team was formed to determine the funding formula. Also explains that, as most schools pre‐local management of schools (LMS) only kept aggregate records showing the cost of education at the levels of primary/secondary sectors rather than individual school level, the LMS teams faced serious problems in defining budget parameters, identifying cost elements and attributing costs to functions. More critically, points out that while the 1988 Education Act made it clear that the new budgeting system should be comprehensive in the sense of not merely reflecting past expenditure patterns but being based on perceived education needs, the LMS teams developed funding formulae which predominantly preserved the status quo established by historical expenditure patterns. Explores both the arguments and the mechanisms which each LMS team deployed in order to produce an incrementalist budgeting system and the constraints that operated on incrementalism.

The purpose of this paper is to illuminate the history of national education policy through an interview with one of its significant makers and critics, Lyndsay Connors, a former Australian Schools Commissioner.

The paper occurs as an interview. The text is based on a revised conversation held as an event of the Australian and New Zealand History of Education Conference held at the University of Canberra, on 26 September 2017.

Australian educational policy is peculiarly complex, and apparently “irrational”. This appears especially so in relation to the government, tax-raised, funding of government and non-government schools. A combination of the peculiarities of Australian federalism in relation to education, political expediency, popular exhaustion with the “state aid” debate, the power of entrenched interest groups and the distancing of democratic decision making from the decision-making process in relation to education all play a part.

The originality of this contribution to a research journal lies in its combination of autobiography with historical policy analysis.

A successful automation project combines a sound financial plan with convincing arguments, thoughtful strategies, and sensitive treatment of potential supporters. A proposal that details costs and returns is as essential to raising funds as a well‐ conceived technical plan. Sources of financial support include governing bodies, foundations, granting agencies, businesses, and individuals. Creative alternatives for financing library automation are mentioned.

This article is about how to fund care and support for a growing, and increasingly diverse, population of older people. We ask whether it is possible to create a funding settlement for longterm care that meets four criteria. These are: fairness; transparency; sustainability (financial and social sustainability); and capacity to support the outcomes that people want and value. Can we create a funding settlement that starts from people's lives ‐ not service‐based assumptions?

The international literature on the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs has been wide‐ranging, focusing mainly on curriculum and assessment, and social inclusion. The issue of funding has been mainly confined to discussions about the size of budget needed to support the resource needs of inclusion (e.g. the costs of additional teachers, support assistants or transport). Less attention has been given to the actual structure of the budget for special education. There has been greater interest in the strategic management of budgets and in the interaction of funding mechanisms at the national, local and institutional levels. This article discusses the effect of resourcing mechanisms for special education and draws on a study across Europe, and other studies based in The Netherlands, the USA and the UK. The strategic behaviours generated by different approaches are considered and the degree to which any particular strategy can influence the inclusion of pupils with special educational needs is assessed.