document resume ed 395 639 author cade, john a.; heller ... · document resume ed 395 639 jc 960...
TRANSCRIPT
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 395 639 JC 960 393
AUTHOR Cade, John A.; Heller, Henry B.TITLE Final Recommendations of the Community College
Financing Study Group.INSTITUTION Maryland State Dept. of Fiscal Services,
Annapolis.PUB DATE Jan 96NOTE 170p.
PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PC07 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Community Colleges; *Educational Finance; Financial
Support; Government School Relationship; SchoolDistrict Spending; *School Support; *State Aid; StateGovernment; *State School District Selationship;Statewide Planning; Two Year Colleges
IDENTIFIERS *Maryland
ABSTRACTThis report presents findings and recommendations
from a study conducted by the Maryland General Assembly examiningoptions for increasing state formula aid and changing thedistribution of aid to the state's 18 community colleges. Following aletter of transmittal providing background information on communitycollege financing, the report summarizes key findings, including thatcurrent state funding for the colleges continues to be inadequate andthat the state formula aid and distribution of that aid for communitycolleges leads to maior funding inequities. Next, recommendations foraddressing the situation are presented, including the provision of anadditional $15.5 million in community college funding for fiscal year(FY) 1997 and the implementation of changes in state formula aid anddistribution mechanisms. The bulk of the document consists of eightappended reports describing the role of community colleges inMaryland, the evolution of the community college funding formula, anational comparison of community college funding, options forincreasing state mandated aid for community colleges, options forchanging the distribution of community college formula aid for FY1997-2000, the current community college formula using full timeequivalency (FTE) counts, proposed maintenance of effortrequirements, and a proposal from the Maryland Association ofCommunity Colleges for strengthening community colleges' role ineconomic development. (TGI)
***********************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
***********************************************************************
R-c1
cr-
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSOF THE
COMMUNITY COLLEGE FINANCINGSTUDY GROUP
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
January 1996
2
U S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice Of EduCalOrlal Res larch and Improvemonl
EDUCATIONAL RESOJRCES INFORMATIONCEN1ER (ERIC)
This docurn ;nt has been reproduced asirom the person or organization
originating it
0 Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality
Points of view or opinions staled in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL
HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
W.S. Ratchford, II
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
FINAL RECOMMENDATIONSOF THE
COMMUNITY COLLEGE FINANCINGSTUDY GROUP
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND
January 1996
-
For further information concerning edis document contact:
Department of Fiscal Services90 State Circle
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Baltimore: (410) 841-3710 Washington: (301) 858-3710Other areas: 1-800-492-7122, extension 3710
TDD (410) 841-3814 (30) 858-3814
The Department of Fiscal Services does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion,or disability in the admission or access to its programs or activities. Thomas M. Fiddes has been designated tocoordinate compliance with the non-discrimination requirements contained in Section 35.107 of the Department ofJustice regulations. Requests for assistance should be directed to Mr. Fiddes at the telephone numbers shown above.
This report has been printed on recycled paper.
ii
4
i
J
GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND
ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21401
December 18, 1995
Honorable Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., President of the SenateHonorable Casper R. Taylor, Jr., Speaker of the House of DelegatesHonorable Members of the General Assembly
Gentlemen:
The Community College Financing Study Group respectfully submits its report for the1995 Interim. The sttily group's membership cons!sted of the Senate Budget and TaxationSubcommittee on Health, Education and Human Resources and the House Ways and MeansEducation Subcommittee, with two members from the Appropriations Committee. The studygroup focused on two major issues during its five joint meetings: 1) to examine options forincreasing state formula aid to community colleges; and 2) to explore options for changing thedistribution of aid. The study group agreed early in its proceedings that without additional fundsattempting to change the distribution formula would be futile.
Study group members perceive and appreciate the contributions of the eighteencommunity colleges in Maryland that provide diverse educational services to residents of all 24counties. Maryland's community colleges educate over half of all undergraduates in the state.Commun4 colleges also provide workforce training opportunities to the state'3 businesses,nonprofit organizations and government agencies. Yet despite the significant contributions ofthe colleges, we found that current state funding for community colleges continues to beinadequate.
To illustrate the dilemma of adequate funding, consider the following statistics: from1980 to 1993, %ate aid to community colleges increased 82%, while local aid to communitycolleges increased 158%, and tuition rose by 255%. Contrast this with state aid to the 4 yearpublic institutions, which increased 172% during the same time period. This burden ofincreasing tuition and fees tends to frustrate one of the most basic attributes of the communitycollege: that is accessibility, especially for students of limited means. This problem isexacerbated by the fact that many community college students do not qualify for state fmancialaid because of the number of credit hours carried.
Though legislation passed in 1991 called for the state to pay 46% of the colleges'budgets by fiscal 1996, the state share of total community college revenues has declined, from34% in fiscal 1991 to 28% in fiscal 1996. Further, the study group found that the currentformula, which distributes 70% of its funds via a fixed cost grant, 27% based on a marginal costgrant, .5% on a wealth grant, 1.75% for a small sized factor, .25% for a medium size factorand .5% for challenge grants is too complicated and gives no recognition to inflationary costs.
111
Honorable Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., President of the SenateHonorable Casper R. Taylor, Jr., Speaker of the House of DelegatesHonorable Members of the General AssemblyDecember 18, 1995Page 2
In addition, state formula aid per full-time equivalent (FTE) student varies from a highof $3,167 at Garrett County Community College to a low of $1,122 at Anne ArundelCommunity College. While the economies of scale that exist at large schools might justify somevariance in funding per FTE, those economies cannot account for a difference of $2,000 instate aid per FTE. The study group concluded the current formula leads to funding inequitiesacross community colleges statewide.
As a result of these findings, the study group made major recommendations concerningthe calculation of total state formula aid for community colleges as well as the distribution ofthat aid. The recommendations incbde an infusion of $15.5 million for community collegefunding in FY 1997. Since the FY 1996 budget includes a one-time grant of $5.5 million forcommunity college equipment expenditures, the study group's recommendation results in a netincrease of $10 million over last fiscal year's operating budget appropriation. This amountclosely mirrors the Maryland Higher Education Commission's request for additional communitycollege funding. The study group believes the additional funds are necessary for the communitycolleges to begin to "catch-up" to Maryland's other institutions of higher education, as well ascommunity college systems in other states.
A summary of the major recommendations is outlined below.
State Mandated Formula Aid: Committee members recommend that communitycolleges receive, on a per FIE basis, 22 percent of the 4-year public institutions' fundingper FIE for the first year. This percent then increases by one percentage point per year,until it reaches 25 percent by fiscal year 2000. For fiscal year 1997, this formula changetranslates into an additional $14.7 million, bringing the total state formula aid to $101.2million for FY 1997 (the $14.7 million is an aggregate amount; each college'sappropriation will be calculated through a distribution formula)..
Formula Aid Distribution Options: The committee members voted to support aformula with a fixed cost component set at 36% of total funding, a variable componentof 60% and the small size factor of 4%, beginning in fiscal 1997. The small size factorwould decrease by a percentage point each year, reaching 1% in FY 2000. Likewise,the fixed cost component would increase a percentage point each year, reaching 39%in FY 2000. The seven schools that currently receive a small size grant would continueto receive one under this option.
This formula proposal eliminates the medium size grant, wealth factor andchallenge grants that are part of the current formula, decreeses the fixed cost percent totalfrom 70% to 39% and increases the variable factor from 27% to 60%. The option is
i v
Honorable Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., President of the SenateHonorable Casper R. Taylor, Jr., Speaker of the House of DelegatesHonorable Members of the General AssemblyDecember 18, 1995Page 3
simpler than the current formula and more accurately reflects ccmmunity collegeexpenditures, which are more variable than fixed.
Full Funding for the Garrett/WVA Reciprocity Agreement: Committee membersrecommend that $501,000 be appropriated to fully fund the Garrett/WVA ReciprocityAgreement for FY 1997 and this program be fully funded in all future years. Thisfunding should be in addition to projected formula aid increases.
Full Funding for Statewide Programs. Committee members recommend that $809,200be appropriated to fully fund statewide programs for FY 1997 and this program be fullyfunO in all future years. This funding should be in addition to projected formula aidincreases.
Other recommendations of the study group include the following: 1) retain currentdefinition of small-size colleges; 2) Tetain current maintenance of effort requirement for localgovernments; 3) form a Governor's Subcabinet on Statewide Workforce Training; 4) includecommunity colleges under higher education funding for budgeting purposes; and 5) study thefunding needs of Baltimore City Community College and the role of adult education inMaryland.
On behalf of all the study group members, we thank you for the opportunity to closelystudy the issue of community college financing. We believe this joint effort by members of boththe Senate and the House of Delegates has resulted in a strong set of recommendations that willenhance the educational experience of Maryland's community college students. We ask foryour support and leadership in addressing these issues, both within the General Assembly andvis-a-vis the Administration.
Sincerely,
(//gtor .1:6A4. Cade Delegate Henry B. Heller
o-Chairman Co-Chairman
Maryland General AssemblyCommunity College Financing Study Group
1995 InterimMembership Roster
Senators
Senate Budget and Taxation CommitteeHealth, Education and Human Resources Subcommittee Members
John A. Cade, ChairmanUlysses Currie
Patrick J. HoganEdward J. Kasemeyer
Thomas MiddletonChristopher Van Ho llen, Jr.
Delegates
House Committee on Ways and MeansEducation Subcommittee Members
Henry B. Heller, ChairmanJean Cryor
Samuel C. LintonSa lima Slier Marriott
House Committee on Appropriations MembersNorman H. ConwayMaggie L. McIntosh
Committee Staff
Kristin TerchekJulie Weinberg
vi i
Table of Contents
Letter of Transmittal iii
Roster vii
Table of Contents ix
Summary of Final Recommendations 1
Appendix 1 Role of Community Colleges in Maryland 15
Appendix 2 Evolution of the Community College Funding Formula 21
Appendix 3 Community College Funding Overview: A National Comparison 41
Appendix 4 Options for Increasing State Mandated Formula Aid forCommunity Colleges 59
Appendix 5 Options for Changing the Distribution of Community CollegeFormula Aid FY 1997-FY 2000 65
Appendix 6 Current Community College Formula: College FTE Counts 103
Appendix 7 Proposed Maintenance of Effort Requirements 105
Appendix 8 Maryland Association of Community Colleges:Proposal to Secretary Brady for Strengthening Community Colleges'Role in Economic Development 111
i x
Community College Financing Study GroupSummary of Final Recommendations
Background
The Senate Budget and Taxation Subcommittee on Health, Education and HumanResources and the House Ways and Means Education Subcommittee, in consultation with twomembers of the Appropriations Committee, have spent the 1995 interim examining the issueof community college financing. This group of legislators, comprising the Community CollegeFinancing Study Group, focused on two major areas during their five joint meetings: (1) toexamine options for increasing state formula aid to community colleges; and (2) to exploreoptions for changing the distribution of aid. The study group agreed early in its proceedingsthat without additional funds attempting to change the distribution formula would be futile.
In addition to these issues, the legislators studied related matters, including funding forstatewide programs and reciprocity agreements, the defmition of a small size school,maintenance of effort requirements for counties, a possible subcabinet on statewide workforcetraining and funding for Baltimore City Community College.
Community Colleges Are Under Funded by the State
Study group members perceive and appreciate the contributions of the eighteencommunity colleges in Maryland that provide diverse educational services to residents of all 24counties. Maryland's community colleges educate over half of all undergraduates in the state.Community colleges also provide workforce training opportunities to the state's businesses,nonprofit organizations and government agencies. Yet despite the significant contributions ofthe colleges, study group members found that current state funding for community collegescontinues to be inadequate. The following points support that fmding.
The preamble to legislation passed in 1991 called for the state to pay 46% of thecolleges' budgets by fiscal 1996 as an established state policy; however, the state shareof total community college revenues has declined, from 34% in fiscal 1991 to 28% infiscal 1996. In FY 1996, local aid will in fact comprise 34% of the total revenues,tuition will account for 36% of revenues, and 2% will come from other sources. Thestate's recent unwillingness to meet its funding commitment simply continues a 20 yeartrend of avoiding legislatively established goals through the executive budget process.
In contrast to the state share of 28% of total community college revenues, state aidmakes. up 40% of total unrestricted revenues at the four-year public institutions in FY1996. Likewise, state support for students in the University of Maryland System average$6,690 per full-time equivalent (FEE) student in FY 1996, compared to $1,252 per FTEstudent at the community colleges.
While community colleges enroll more than half of Maryland undergraduates, theyreceived only 17% of state funding for higher education in FY 1996.
1 1 0
From 1981 to 1993, state aid to community colleges increased 82%, while local aid tocommunity colleges increased 158%, and tuition rose by 255%. Contrast this with stateaid to the 4 year public institutions, which increased 172% during the same time period.
Compared to other states, Maryland relies more heavily than most on local aid andtuition as sources of revenue for its community colleges, and its state appropriation asa percent of total funding is smaller than that of most states (see Appendix 3).
The Present Formula is too Complicatcd, Unrelated to the Realities of ActualExpenditures, and Leads to Major Funding Inequities Across CommunityColleges
The current formula, which distributes 70% of its funds via a fixed cost grant, 27%based on a marginal cost grant, .5% on a wealth grant, 1.75% for a small sized factor,.25% for a medium size factor and .5% for challenge grants is too complicated. Forexample, to calculate the wealth grant, one must determine (1) whether the county sharefor the previous fiscal year divided by the total assessed valuation of real property in thesupporting county or region is greater than or equal to the statewide median; and (2)whether the per capita wealth of the supporting county or region is less than 80% of thestatewide per capita wealth or the total assessed valuation of real property in thesupporting county or region is less than $1 billion.
State formula aid per full-time equivalent (FTE) student varies from a high of $3,167 atGarrett County Community College to a low of $1,122 at Anne Arundel CommunityCollege. While the economies of scale that exist at large schools might justify somevariance in funding per FIE, those economies cannot account for a difference of $2,000in state aid per FTE. The current formula leads to funding inequities across communitycolleges statewide.
The Secretary of the Maryland Higher Education Commission, in her testimony beforethe study group on August 29, discussed several problems with the formula, including:(1) no mechanism for inflationary increases; (2) unpredictable funding because formulatotal may increase or decrease based on enrollment changes at other institutions; (3)varying funding per FTE from institution to institution; and (4) possibility of a fundingreduction at one institution if another institution either enters the formula for the firsttime or enters the same size or wealth category.
Systemwide, 60% of total community colleges expenditures went to instruction andstudent services, which are in large part variable expenditure categories (i.e., the numberof professors and counselors retained by a college depends on the number of FTEstudents enrolled in that college). Therefore, a formula that relies on a fixed costcomponent of 70%, and a variable component of only 27% does not realistically reflectthe expenditires at community colleges.
2
1 1.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The study group made major recommendations concerning the calculation of total stateformula aid for commimity colleges and the distribution of that aid. The recommendationsinclude an infusion of $15.5 million for community college funding in FY 1997. Since the FY1996 budget includes a one-time grant of $5.5 million for community college equipmentexpenditures, our recommendation results in a net increase of $10 million over last fiscal year'soperating budget appropriation. This amount closely mirrors the Maryland Higher EducationCommission's request for additional community college funding. The study group believes theadditional funds are necessary for the community colleges to begin to "catch-up" to Maryland'sother institutions of higher education, as well as community college systems in other states.Maryland has one of the lowest rates of state support in the country in the area of communitycollege funding.
A summary of our recommendations is outlined below.
A. State Mandated Formula Aid
Committee members recommend that total state mandated formula aid be calculated bytying community college funding per FTE to prior year funding per Fit for the 4-year publicinstitutions. This method is similar to the one used to calculate total aid for Marylandindependent colleges and universities (MICUA schools); however, unlike funding for theMICUA schools, it will be used to determine an aggregate funding amount and not an amountfor individual schools.
Committee members recommend that community colleges receive, on a per FTE basis,22 percent of the 4-year public institutions' funding per FTE for the first year. This percent thenincreases by one percentage point per year, until it reaches 25 percent by fiscal year 2000. Forfiscal year 1997, this formula change translates into an additional $14.7 million, bringing thetotal state formula aid to $101.2 million for FY 1997, as shown below:
AIDYEAR
TOTAL FUNDSUNDER NEW
FORMULA(millions)
TOTAL FUNDSCURRENT
LAW(millions)
DOLLARDIFFERENCE
(millions)
INCREASEOVER
CURRENTLAW
1997 $101.2 $86.5 $14.7 16.9%1998 $108.8 $89,2 $19.6 13.2%1999 $118.1 $92.1 $26.0 21.2%2000 027.8 $94.1 $33.7 29.5%
B. Full Funding for the Garrett/WVA Reciprocity Agreement
Section 16-407 of the Education Article states that a resident of West Virginia whoattends Garrett Community College, under a negotiated reciprocity agreement between the statesof Maryland and West Virginia, is an in-county resident for tuition purposes. The sectionfurther states that "for each full-time equivalent student participating in the reciprocity
3
agreement, the State shall pay to Garrett Community College an amount equal to the net Statesupport per full-time equivalent student..."
How ever, the administration has not fully funded this reciprocity agreement for severalyears and is expected to again include $90,000 for FY 1997. This amount representsapproximately 15.6 percent of the $501,000 needed to fully fund the agreement. Therefore,committee members recommend that an additional $411,000 be appropriated to fully fund theGarrett/WVA Reciprocity Agreement for FY 1997 and this program be fully funded in all futureyears. This funding should be in addition to projected formula aid increases.
C. Full Funding for Statewide Programs
Section 15-407 of the Education Article states that if a student is a resident of Marylandand enrolls in an instructional program designated by the Maryland Higher EducationCommission as a statewide program', the student shall pay only in-county student tuition andfees and the state shall pay any applicable out-of-county fees. Currently, all colleges except forCarroll have at least one program designated by the commission as a statewide program andqualify for state reimbursement under this section.
In recent years, the state has not paid the full amount required until this section. Theexpected FY 1997 appropriation of $416,000 equates to approximately 48 percent of the totalamount noeded. An additional $443,200 would be necessary in FY 1997 to fully fund the state'sliability under this section. Therefore, committee members recommend that an additional$443,200 be appropriated to fully fund statewide programs for FY 1997 and this program befully funded in all future years. This funding should be in addition to projected formula aidincreases.
D. Formula Aid Distribution Options
The committee members voted to support a fonnula with a fixed cost component set at 36%of total funding, a variable component of 60% and the small size factor of 4%, beginning in fiscal1997. The small size factor would decrease by a percentage point each year, reaching 1% in FY2000. Likewise, the fixed cost component would increase a percentage point each year, reaching39% in FY 2000 The seven schools that currently receive a small size grant would continue toreceive one under this option.
This formula proposal eliminates the current formula's medium size grant (currently setat 0.25% of the total), wealth factor (0.5% of the total) and challenge grants (0.5% of the total);decreases the fixed cost percent total from 70% to 39%; and, increases the variable factor from27% to 60%. The option is simpler than the current formula and better reflects communitycollege expenditures, which are more variable than fixed. Please see the following eight pagesfor a detailed description of the option.
'Certain high cost, academic programs, such as allied health programs, are designatedby MHEC as statewide programs. Individual programs are offered at a limited number ofcolleges to promote efficiencies among the colleges while providing access to students acrossjurisdictions.
413
Distribution Model based on 36% Fixed, 60% Variable, and 4% SmallSize Factor. The small size factor declines a percentage point eachyear to 1% in fiscal 2000, while the fixed cost component rises to39%.
Total funding for this option, on a per FrE basis, is 22% of the aid perFrE at the four year pub& universities beginning in FY 1997. The fundinggrows a percentage point each fiscal year, reaching 25% in FY 2000.
Under this model, the small size factor is taken from the fixed costcomponent, lowering fixed costs to 36% of the total. The variable costcomponent is set at 60% of total state funds available. The fixed costcomponent increases by one percentage point each year until it reaches 39%in fiscal 2000. Likewise, the small size factor decreases a percentage pointeach year to 1% in fiscal 2000.
Under this model, the 36% fixed cost component is allocated to each collegeusing the current method for allocating fixed costs. Each college's share ofthe total state grant from the prior fiscal year is calculated, and that shareis multiplied by the total amount available for fixed costs. For example,Allegany received 3.5% of the total state grant in FY 1996. Thatpercentage is multiplied by $36.4 million, the total amount available forfixed costs in FY 1997. Thus, Allegany's share of fixed costs under thismodel is $1.3 million.
Of the remaining state funds, 60% is allocated on a per FTE basis, while theremaining 4% small size factor is divided amongst the schools that meet thedefinition of a small school.
As the bar graph shows, only Garrett County would lose funding per FTEby the fiscal year 2000 under this option. At $2,436 per FrE, Garrettwould still receive $329 more funding per FTE student than any othercommunity college in FY 2000.
As the summary sheet comparing the proposal to current law shows, Garrettis the only college to lose funds under this option. Garrett begins to losefunds in FY 1998 at a rate of 1.7%. The medium and large size schoolsshow the strongest gains under this option beginning in FY 1997.
Under this option, the spread in aid per FTE decreases about 74% by FY2000.
5
01
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge A
id D
istr
ibut
ion
Mod
el
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000 500
39%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble
and
1% S
mal
l Siz
eby
FY
200
0F
undi
ng P
er F
TE
Stu
dent
- F
Y 2
000
Alle
gany
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Che
sape
ake
Gar
rett
Har
ford
Mon
tgom
ery
Wor
-Wic
Ann
e A
rund
elC
arro
llC
harle
sF
rede
rick
Hag
erst
own
How
ard
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Mar
ylan
d C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s
.10
173
FY
200
0 -
Cur
rent
Law
J F
Y 2
000
- N
ew O
ptio
n
I 6
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
SU
MM
AR
Y
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge A
id D
istr
ibut
ion
Mod
el
Dis
trib
uted
by
36%
Med
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d 4%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
(Siz
e F
acto
r D
ecre
ases
to 1
% b
y F
Y 2
000,
Fix
ed G
row
s to
39%
)
Yea
r to
Yea
r in
crea
ses
(Dec
reas
es)
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
S
FY
199
6
Pro
ject
edS
tate
Aid
FY
199
7
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r P
rior
Yr.
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r P
rior
Yr.
''
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
"
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r P
rior
Yr.
FY
200
0
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
FY
200
0%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Prio
r Y
r.N
lega
ny3,
077,
320
3,33
8,42
08.
48%
3,27
5,83
0-1
.87%
3,27
5,96
70.
00%
3,25
5,68
9-0
.62%
Ann
e A
rund
el9,
161,
279
11,0
44,0
9520
.55%
11,9
85,3
868.
52%
13,2
43,8
3510
.50%
14,5
80,7
1010
.09%
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y20
,273
,159
23,4
07,5
6415
.46%
25,3
19,3
918.
17%
27,6
30,3
359.
13%
30,1
01,9
198.
95%
Car
roll
2,84
5,24
53,
222,
540
13.2
6%3,
436,
707
6.65
%3,
628,
940
5.59
%3,
788,
455
4.40
%C
ecil
2,25
0,54
12,
496,
705
10.9
4%2,
517,
911
0.85
%2,
558,
793
1.62
%2,
547,
937
-0.4
2%C
harle
s3,
811,
817
4,69
0,28
823
.05%
5,14
2,28
19.
64%
5,69
1,82
810
.69%
6,25
6,19
49.
92%
Che
sape
ake
2,44
0,79
62,
841,
608
16.4
2%2,
891,
019
1.74
%2,
928,
446
1.29
%2,
933,
593
0.18
%F
rede
rick
2,97
9,46
13,
404,
672
14.2
7%3,
726,
551
9.45
%4,
167,
978
11.8
5%4,
637,
069
11.2
5%G
arre
tt1,
701,
769
1,80
8,50
562
7%1,
793,
872
-0.8
1%1,
746,
756
-2.6
3%1,
632,
175
-6.5
6%H
ager
stow
n3,
079,
746
3,54
8,73
915
23%
3,70
6,86
34.
46%
3,83
4,28
53.
44%
3,93
7,85
12.
70%
Har
ford
4,33
4,43
54,
879,
227
12.5
7%5,
260,
476
7.81
%5,
779,
545
9.87
%6,
387,
835
10.5
2%H
owar
d4,
223,
116
4,94
5,12
517
.10%
5,36
5,33
68.
50%
5,96
0,61
711
.09%
6,63
7,54
911
.36%
Mon
tgom
ery
14,5
25,3
0516
,851
,975
16.0
2%18
,669
,495
10.7
9%20
,808
,119
11.4
6%23
,002
,900
10.5
5%P
rince
Geo
rge'
s10
,578
,382
11,8
39,7
0411
.92%
12,6
55,6
786.
89%
13,7
35,1
238.
53%
14,9
40,0
988.
77%
Wor
-Wic
2,39
8,66
32,
903,
582
21.0
5%3,
023,
348
4.12
%3,
125,
846
3.39
%3,
192,
325
2.13
%
108,
770,
14C
7.46
%11
8,11
6,41
2'8.
59%
127,
832,
299
TO
TA
L87
,681
,034
.00
101,
222,
748
15.4
4%
Not
e: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 22%
of t
he a
id p
erF
TE
at t
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
ics
begi
nnin
g in
fisc
al 1
997,
incr
easi
ng b
y on
epe
rcen
tage
poi
nt to
25%
by
fisca
l 200
0.
I V
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
CO
SUM
MA
RY
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge A
id D
istr
ibut
ion
Mod
el
Dis
trib
uted
by
36%
Fix
ed, 6
0% M
argi
nal (
Per
FT
E)
and
4% S
mal
l Siz
e F
acto
r(S
ize
Fac
tor
Dec
reas
es to
1%
by
FY
200
0, F
ixed
Gro
ws
to 3
9%)
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
997
- 20
00
CO
LLE
GE
S
! !
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
! !
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urr.
Law
FY
199
8P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
kov(
I:ecr
ease
),
r C
urr.
Lev
i
FY
199
9if
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
FY
199
9%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)r
Cur
r. L
awif
FY
200
0P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
ld
FY
200
0%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cum
Law
Alle
gany
3,33
8,42
09.
22%
3,27
5,83
06.
2Y%
3,27
5,96
74.
98%
3,25
5,68
93.
34%
Ann
e A
rund
el11
,044
,095
21.1
8%11
,985
,386
29.5
2%13
,243
,835
40.1
0%14
,580
,710
51.3
4%B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
23,4
07,5
6418
.39%
25,3
19,3
9127
.19%
27,8
30,3
3537
.40%
30,1
01,9
1948
.47%
Car
roll
3,22
2,54
017
.42%
3,43
6,70
723
.22%
3,62
8,94
026
.93%
3,78
8,45
529
.10%
Cec
il2,
496,
705
16.1
5%2,
517,
911
17.8
7%2,
558,
793
18.6
8%2,
547,
937
16.8
9%C
harle
s4,
690,
288
20.8
0%5,
142,
281
28.1
6%5,
691,
828
37.3
1%6,
256,
194
47.1
0%C
hesa
peak
e2,
841,
608
1923
%2,
891,
019
21.0
4%2,
928,
446
21.5
1%2,
933,
593
20.4
8%F
rede
rick
3,40
4,67
215
.56%
3,72
6,55
123
.54%
4,1e
7,97
833
.94%
4,63
7,06
944
.81%
Gar
rett
1,80
8,50
54.
08%
1,79
3,87
2-1
.71%
1,74
6,75
64.
42%
1,63
2,17
5-1
7.15
%H
ager
stow
n3,
548,
739
13.0
8%3,
706,
863
13.4
5%3,
834,
285
13.3
6%3,
937,
851
13.1
5%H
arfo
rd4,
879,
227
1527
%5,
260,
476
22.9
7%5,
779,
545
32.9
1%6,
387,
835
44.2
4%H
owar
d4,
945,
125
17.7
8%5,
365,
336
25.2
9%5,
960,
617
35.5
1%6,
637,
549
46.8
5%M
ontg
omer
y16
,851
,975
18.7
0%18
,669
,495
29.0
6%20
,808
,119
40.3
8%23
,002
,900
51.8
8%P
rince
Geo
rge'
s11
,839
,704
16.3
9%12
,655
,678
24.8
4%13
,735
,123
3520
%14
,940
,098
46.6
5%W
or-W
ic2,
903,
582
21.7
6%3,
023,
348
24.4
9%3,
125,
846
25.6
6%3,
192,
325
25.3
8%
TO
TA
L10
1222
,748
17.5
5%10
8,77
0,14
624
.64%
118,
116,
412
32.9
1%12
7,83
2,29
941
.50%
Not
e: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
col
lege
s,on
a p
er F
TE
bas
is, 2
2% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s be
ginn
ing
in Il
scal
'199
7, in
crea
sing
by o
ne p
erce
ntag
e po
int t
o 25
% b
y fis
cal 2
000.
0
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
FY
199
722
% P
erce
nt o
f Fou
r Y
ear
Fun
ding
Per
Stu
dent
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 36
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d4%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
5F
TE
S
36%
Axe
d C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
4%S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
Pro
pose
dF
Y 1
997
Sta
te A
id (
a)
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
997
Cur
rent
Aid
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)
-er
New
Opt
ion
FY
199
7
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
997
Alle
gany
1,67
71,
278,
932
1,48
1,07
257
8,41
63,
338,
420
3,05
6,60
59.
22%
1,99
11,
823
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
194
3,80
7,42
27,
236,
673
011
,044
,095
9,11
3,96
121
.18%
1,34
81,
112
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y16
,964
8,42
5,51
414
,982
,050
023
,407
,564
19,7
71,0
0618
.39%
1,38
01,
165
Car
roll
1,65
51,
182,
482
1,46
1,64
257
8,41
63,
222,
540
2,74
4,54
617
.42%
1,94
71,
658
Cec
il1,
113
935,
324
J82,
965
578,
416
2,49
6,70
52,
149,
487
16.1
5%2,
243
1,93
1C
harle
s3,
517
1,58
4,18
93,
106,
099
04,
690,
288
3,88
2,79
620
.80%
1,33
41,
104
Che
sape
ake
1,41
41,
014,
393
1,24
8,79
957
8,41
62,
841,
608
2,38
3,21
519
.23%
2,01
01,
685
Fre
deric
k2,
453
1,23
8,26
22,
166,
409
03,
404,
672
2,94
6,16
615
.56%
1,38
81,
201
Gar
rett
592
707,
254
522,
835
578,
416
1,80
8,50
51,
737,
536
4.08
%3,
055
2,93
5H
ager
stow
n1,
914
1,27
9,94
11,
690,
382
578,
416
3,54
8,73
93,
138,
812
13.0
6%1,
854
1,64
0H
arfo
rd3,
485
1,80
1,38
93,
077,
838
04,
879,
227
4,23
3,00
815
.27%
1,40
01,
215
How
ard
3,61
21,
755,
125
3,19
0,00
00
4,94
5,12
54,
199,
250
17.7
6%1,
369
1,16
3M
ontg
omer
y12
,246
6,03
6,70
910
,815
,267
016
,851
,975
14,1
96,9
0518
.70%
1,37
61,
159
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,42
84,
396,
370
7,44
3,33
40
11,8
39,7
0410
,172
,573
16.3
9%1,
405
1,20
7W
or-W
ic1,
504
996,
883
1,32
8,28
457
8,41
62,
903,
582
2,38
4,68
621
.76%
1,93
11,
586
TO
TA
L68
,768
36,4
40,1
8960
,733
,649
14,
048,
910
101,
222,
7481
86,1
10,5
5317
.55%
I1,
472
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID43
2,71
610
1,22
2,74
886
,543
,269
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
7 is
bas
edon
the
requ
est f
or F
Y 1
997
($86
,533
,252
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
14.7
mill
ion.
Tim
474
.7 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
unde
r a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 22.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
rs.
2!P
repa
red
by D
epar
tmen
t of F
isca
l Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
2(?,
FY
199
823
% P
erce
nt o
f Fou
r Y
ear
Fun
ding
Per
Stu
dent
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 37
% F
ixed
, GO
% M
argi
nal (
Per
FT
E)
and
3% S
mal
l Siz
e F
acto
r
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
8F
TE
S
37%
Fix
ed C
ost
Adl
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
3%S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
Pro
pose
dF
Y 1
998
Sta
te A
id (
a)
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
998
Cur
rent
Aid
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
998
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
998
-Alle
gany
1,58
31,
327,
316
1,48
2,35
746
8,15
83,
275,
830
3,05
2,68
0'6.
27%
2,06
91,
94-r
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
110
4,39
1,00
07,
594,
386
011
,985
,388
9,25
3,90
929
.52%
1,47
81,
141
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,100
9,30
6,56
718
,012
,823
025
,319
,391
19,9
07,0
4327
.19%
1,48
11,
164
Car
roll
1,80
41,
281,
243
1,68
9,30
646
8,15
83,
438,
707
2,78
9,09
823
.22%
1,90
51,
546
Cec
il1,
131
992,
680
1,05
9,09
446
8,15
82,
517,
911
2,13
6,14
417
.87%
2,22
61,
889
Cha
rles
3,50
01,
864,
803
3,27
7,47
80
5,14
2,28
14,
012,
499
28.1
6%1,
469
1,14
6C
hesa
peak
e1,
383
1,12
9,78
91,
295,
072
466,
158
2,89
1,01
92,
388,
419
21.0
4%2,
090
1,72
7F
rede
rick
2,53
41,
353,
657
2,37
2,89
40
3,72
6,55
13,
016,
448
23.5
4%1,
471
1,19
0G
arre
tt65
071
9,04
060
8,67
546
6,15
81,
793,
872
1,82
5,16
7-1
.71%
2,76
02,
808
Hag
erst
own
1,95
41,
410,
938
1,82
9,76
946
6,15
83,
706,
863
3,28
7,35
713
.45%
1,89
71,
672
Har
ford
3,54
61,
939,
922
3,32
0,55
40
5,26
0,47
64,
277,
828
22.9
7%1,
483
1,20
6H
owar
d3,
630
1,98
8,12
33,
399,
213
05,
365,
336
4,28
2,30
125
.29%
1,47
81,
180
Mon
tgom
ery
12, 7
826,
700,
144
11,9
69,3
510
18,6
89,4
9514
,465
,525
29.0
6%1,
461
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
488
4,70
7,32
57,
948,
353
012
,655
,878
10,1
37,1
3324
.84%
1,49
11,
194
Wor
-Wic
1,49
81,
154,
430
1,40
2,78
146
8,15
83,
023,
348
2,42
8,54
424
.49%
2,01
81,
621
TO
TA
L89
,693
40,2
44,9
5465
,262
,088
3,26
3,10
410
8,77
0,14
887
,270
,097
124
.64%
1,58
11,
252
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID43
8,54
310
8,77
0,14
687
,708
,640
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
8 is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 1
998
($87
.7 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
21 m
illio
n. T
he $
21 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
unde
r a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 23%
of t
heai
d pe
r F
TE
at t
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
ics.
2 4
2P
repa
red
by D
epar
tmen
t of F
isca
l Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
FY
199
924
% P
erce
nt o
f Fou
r Y
ear
Fun
ding
Per
Stu
dent
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 38
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d 2%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
_
CO
LLE
GE
S
stim
atF
Y 1
997
FT
ES
J,
Fix
ed C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
2%S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
Pro
pose
dF
Y 1
999
Sta
te A
ld (
al
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
999
Cur
rent
Aid
erce
ntIn
crea
seD
ecre
ase)
._
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
999
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
999
Alle
gany
1.58
91,
3501
11,
596,
713
337,
476-
3,27
5,96
73,
120,
613
4.98
%2,
062
1,96
4A
nne
Aru
ndel
8,31
04,
945,
796
8,29
8,03
90
13,2
43,8
359,
453,
461
40.1
0%1,
594
1,13
8B
altim
ore
Cou
n17
,207
10,4
48,1
0117
,182
,233
027
,630
,335
20,1
08,8
2537
.40%
1,60
61,
169
Car
roll
1,87
61,
418,
165
1,87
3,30
033
7,47
53,
628,
940
2,85
8,94
126
.93%
1,93
41,
524
Cec
il1,
184
1,03
9,02
21,
181,
296
337,
475
2,55
8,79
32,
156,
008
18.6
8%2,
161
1,82
1C
harle
s3,
575
2,12
1,97
33,
569,
854
05,
691,
828
4,14
5,26
037
.31%
1,59
21,
160
Che
sape
ake
1,40
01,
192,
985
1,39
7,98
533
7,47
52,
928,
446
2,41
0,14
021
.51%
2,09
21,
722
Fre
deric
k2,
634
1,53
7,76
92,
630,
209
04,
167,
978
3,11
1,91
333
.94%
1,58
21,
181
Gar
rett
670
740,
245
669,
036
337,
475
1,74
6,75
61,
907,
424
-8.4
2%2,
607
2,84
7H
ager
elvi
n1,
970
1,52
9,64
51,
967,
165
337,
475
3,83
4,28
53,
382,
383
13.3
6%1,
946
1,71
7H
arfo
rd3,
614
2,17
0,74
73,
608,
798
05,
779,
545
4,34
8,60
132
.91%
1,59
91,
203
How
ard
3,75
22,
214,
017
3,74
6,60
00
5,96
0,61
74,
398,
697
35.5
1%1,
589
1,17
2M
ontg
omer
y13
,123
7,70
4,00
813
,104
,112
020
,808
,119
14,8
22,8
4440
.38%
1,58
61,
130
Prin
ce G
eorg
e'8,
525
5,22
2,39
38,
512,
730
013
,735
,123
10,1
59,2
8335
.20%
1,61
11,
192
Wor
-lNic
1,64
31,
247,
591
1,54
0,77
933
7,47
53,
125,
846
2,48
7,47
825
.66%
2,02
61,
612
TO
TA
L70
,972
44,8
84,2
3770
,869
,847
2,36
2,32
811
8,11
6,41
288
,871
,670
132
.91%
I1,
664
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
118,
116,
412
446,
591
89,3
18,2
61
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
9 is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
199
9 ($
89.3
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$28
.8 m
illio
n. T
he $
28.8
mill
ion
Is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
4.0%
of t
he a
id p
er F
TE
at t
he p
ublic
four
yea
rs.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
aitm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
2
2
FY
200
025
% P
erce
nt o
f Fou
r Y
ear
Fun
ding
Per
Stu
dent
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 39
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
erF
TE
) an
d 1%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
IC
OLL
EG
ES
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
998
FT
ES
39%
Fix
ed C
ost
Ad
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
d us
tmen
t
1%S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
Pro
pose
dF
Y 2
000
Sta
te A
ld (
a)
Est
imat
edF
Y 2
000
Cur
rent
Ald
-11,
erce
ntIn
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 2
000
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 2
000
Ale
fiallY
1,59
01,
382,
721
1,69
0,35
018
2,61
83,
255,
689
3,15
0,31
23.
34%
2,04
81,
981
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
457
5,58
9,96
08,
990,
750
014
,580
,710
9,63
4,33
651
.34%
1,72
41,
139
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,345
11,6
62,2
1718
,439
,702
030
,101
,919
20,2
74,6
7148
.47%
1,73
51,
169
Car
roll
1,95
11,
531,
704
2,07
4,13
418
2,61
83,
788,
455
2,93
4,51
529
.10%
1,94
21,
504
Cec
il1,
209
1,08
0,01
61,
285,
304
182,
618
2,54
7,93
72,
179,
681
16.8
9%2,
107
1,80
3C
hade
s3,
625
2,40
2,40
83,
853,
786
06,
256,
194
4,25
3,00
747
.10%
1,72
61,
173
Chs
upea
ke1,
425
1,23
6,03
91,
514,
937
182,
618
2,93
3,59
32,
434,
821
20.4
8%2,
059
1,70
9F
rede
rick
2,70
71,
759,
221
2,87
7,84
80
4,63
7 06
93,
202,
073
44.8
1%1,
713
1,18
3G
arre
tt67
073
7,27
171
2,28
618
2,61
81,
632,
175
1,97
0,08
2-1
7.15
%2,
436
2,94
0H
ager
stow
n2,
010
1,61
8,37
62,
136,
858
182,
618
3,93
7,85
13,
480,
232
13.1
5%1,
959
1,73
1H
arfo
rd3,
714
2,43
9,43
13,
948,
403
06,
387,
835
4,42
8,66
944
.24%
1,72
01,
192
How
ard
3,87
72,
515,
858
4,12
1,69
10
6,63
7,54
94,
519,
883
46.8
5%1,
712
1,16
6M
ontg
omer
y13
,376
8,78
2,69
514
,220
,205
023
,002
,900
15,1
45,5
8551
.88%
1,72
01,
132
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,60
05,
797,
323
9,14
2,77
50
14,9
40,0
9810
,187
,699
46.6
5%1,
737
1,18
5W
or-W
ic1,
590
1,31
9,35
81,
690,
350
182,
618
3,1E
1,32
52,
546,
195
25.3
8%2,
008
1,60
1
TO
TA
L72
,146
49,8
54,5
9776
,699
,379
1,27
8,32
3112
7,83
2,29
990
,341
,761
41.5
0%1,
772
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
453,
979
127,
832,
299
90,7
95,7
40
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
200
0 is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
200
0 ($
90.8
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$37
mill
ion.
The
$37
mill
ion
is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
5.0%
of t
h ai
dpe
r F
TE
at
the
four
yea
rs.
z
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
E. Small-size Definition
Current law defmes a small sized college for formula distribution purposes as any collegewith an FTE enrollment less than or equal to 80 percent of the statewide median. Committeemembers recommend no changes be made to current law regarding the definition of a smallsized college (see Appendix 6 for more details).
F. Maintenance of Effort
Current law requires that local governments match the total dollar amounts they providedfor their local community college the previous year. Committee members recommend nochanges be made to the current maintenance of effort requirement (see Appendix 7 for a list ofall the options considered by the committee).
G. Governor's Subcabinet on Statewide Workforce Training
Committee members recommend the formation of the Governor's Subcabinet onStatewide Workforce Training. The subcabinet would promote economic development throughstatewide use of community colleges in workforce training and create a single point of contactfor accessing community colleges. Membership should consist of the Secretaries from theMaryland Higher Education Commission; the Department of Business and EconomicDevelopment (DBED); the Deparmient of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (DOLLAR); and theDepartment of Human Resources; as well as the Superintendent of the Maryland StateDepartment of Education and a representative from the Maryland Association of CommunityColleges. The subt.:_binet should be funded jointly by DBED and DOLLAR out of trainingcontracts. Monthly or bi-weekly meetings would be held to create and implement a statewidebusiness and industry training program (see Appendix 8 for more details on the Governor'ssubcabinet).
H. Including Community Colleges under Higher Education Funding
Committee members recommend that funding for community colleges be considered asfunding for higher educationrather than local aidwhen developing the budget. This is relatedto the recommendation tying community college funding per FTE to prior year funding per FTEfor the 4-year public institutions.
I. Baltimore City Community College
Baltimore City Community College, unlike its sister schools, is a state agency with littlereliance on local aid. Committee members recommend that the funding level and programofferings of Baltimore City Community College be closely examined by the administration. Theadministration should carefully consider the needs and mission of Baltimore City CommunityCollege while studying the issue of funding parity with other community colleges.
J. Adult Education
Committee members recommend that the Maryland Higher Education Commission andthe Maryland 3tate Department of Education study and submit recommendations in time for
13
2
consideration duri ag the 1997 legislative session as to whether adult education should beadministered through and offered by the community colleges rather than by local boards ofeducation at local high schools.
K. Regional Incentives
Committee members looked at incentives to promote regionalization among the colleges;however, no recommendations are being made on this issue at this time.
o 0
14
Appendix 1
Role of Community Colleges in Maryland
Statutory Role of Community Colleges
Generally
In 1988, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation, Chapter 246 of1988, which reorganized higher education in the state and included a "MarylandCharter for Higher Education". The Charter was intended to be a statement of policyfor higher education in Maryland and established in statute the following role for thestate's community colleges:
"(a) The community colleges of the state shall provide a diverse range ofeducation services, with particular emphasis on community centeredprograms and programs that afford open access to persons with avariety of educational backgrounds. (Emphasis Added)
(b) The community colleges of the state shall:
(1) Provide a core curriculum of general education, including courses inthe arts and sciences, that should be available to all students;
(2) Provide lower level undergraduate courses, in accordance with credittransfer guidelines set by the Maryland Higher EducationCommission, for students who aspire to continue their education ata senior institution;
(3) Provide technical and career education programs;
(4) Provide training in skills and fields of study of importance to theregion's business community;
(5) Provide a wide variety of continuing education programs to benefitcitizens of the community;
(6) Provide developmental and remedial education for citizens withneeds in these areas; and
(7) Provide public services to the community's citizens."
In accordance with the role envisioned by the legislature, Maryland communitycolleges are comprehensive institutions serving their immediate communities and, insome cases, broader constituencies. These institutions offer a flexible, lower costhigher education alternative to accommodate the needs of a wide variety of students
15 ^
and provide training and re-training services to business and industry in the region.Every community college in Maryland provides custom-designed and regularlyscheduled programs for businesses, government agencies, and professional and labororganizations in their regions. These programs include specific fields of vocational,technical and apprenticeship training, quality management training for all levels ofsupervisors, retirement planning, basic skills training, and certification courses formany professional organizations and career areas.
Chapter 246 required the president of each public institution of highereducation, including each community college, to develop a mission statement to besubmitted to the institution's governing board. The governing boards are required toreview and adopt the mission statement and then submit the statement to the MarylandHigher Education Commission. The Commission is required to review the missionstatement and approve the statement as long as the statement is consistent with theCharter and statewide plan for higher education, will not result in the unreasonableduplication of academic programs, and will promote the efficient and effective use ofthe state's higher education resources.
Baltimore City Community College
Although the role outlined above applies to all community colleges inMaryland, including Baltimore City Community College, the law also containsprovisions that are unique to this institution. In the 1990 Session, the MarylandGeneral Assembly passed legislation (Chapter 220 of 1990) that created the NewCommunity College of Baltimore as a state-funded institution to replace theCity-funded and governed Community College of Baltimore. The passage of thislegislation was based on the conclusions of the Greater Baltimore Committee andothers that the Community College of Baltimore was no longer able to meet the needsof the community and that a viable higher education system is essential to the City andthe state's economic and social well-being. The legislation creating the NewCommunity College of Baltimore contained a provision that would have required theinstitution to terminate after three years unless the General Assembly acted tocontinue it. Additionally, the 1990 legislation required the development of acomprehensive plan for the future organization and responsibilities of the NewCommunity College of Baltimore.
In accordance with those requirements, at the end of 1991, the MarylandHigher Education Commission developed a comprehensive plan for the future of theNew Community College of Baltimore. During the 1992 Session, the GeneralAssembly passed legislation (Chapter 208 of 1992) that renamed the New CommunityCollege of Baltimore as the Baltimore City Community College and provided for itscontinuance as a public two-year institution of higher education. Chapter 208 alsoprovided the Baltimore City Community College with auxiliary facilities bondingauthority in the amount of $15 million and required the City of Baltimore to beresponsible for providing at least $600,000 annually to support education at the
3 )16
College. Of this amount, at least $300,000 must be expended for tuitionreimbursement and scholarships.
Chapter 220 of 1990 set forth the following findings and policies:
"(1) Public higher education should be accessible to all those who seek andqualify for admission.
(2) There is a need for an effective comprehensive urban community collegein Baltimore City offering educational programs that will stimulate theparticipation of individuals, be responsive to the needs of thecommunity, and afford open access to individuals with a variety ofeducational backgrounds.
(3) Businesses in the Balthnore metropolitan area are undergoing aneconomic transition and need and must be ready to make extensive useof and provide financial support for an effective, well-managed urbaninstitution to train and educate their employees and prospectiveemployees in skills and fields of study of importance to the region'sbusiness community.
(4) A partnership between the state and business community is essential toattain the requisite level of fmancial support to create and sustain aquality institution that is responsive to the technological and continuingeducation needs of businesses."
Additionally, Chapter 220 provided that the purpose of the College is toprovide quality, accessible, and affordable education to the citizens of Baltimore inthe areas of basic skills, technical and career education, continuing education, and thearts and sciences. The law also requires the College to provide the services andprograms generally required of all community colleges in the state as set forth in theMaryland Charter for Higher Education, outlined above.
Organization and Governance of Community Colleges
There are 18 community colleges in Maryland (Exhibit 1.1). There is a boardof community college tnistees in each county that has one or more communitycolleges. Each board of trustees is responsible for the exercise of general control overthe community college, including the appointment of a president, the fixing of salariesand
Exhibit 1.1
Community College Boards
uns ictionCollege
urn er ofMembers
Appoints byApproved by
ermLength Number
Allegany County 7 Governor 6 Years No LimitSenate
Anne Arundel County 8* Governor 6 Years No LimitSenate
Baltimore City 9* Governor 6 Years 2Senate
Baltimore County 1 1 Governor 6 Years No LimitCatonsville SenateEssexDundalk
Carroll County 7 Governor 6 Years No LimitSenate
Cecil County 7 Governor 6 Years No LimitSenate
Charles County 7 Governor 5 Years 2Senate
Frederick County 7 Governor 5 Years 2Senate
Garrett County 7 Governor 6 Years No LimitSenate
Harford County 9 (7) by Governor 5 Years 2Senate
(2) by Board of Ed. 1 Year No LimitHoward County 7 Governor 6 Years No Limit
SenateMontgomery County 8* Governor 6 Years No Limit
SenatePrince George's County 8* Governor 5 Years 2
Senate"Queen Anne's, et al. 10" Governor 4 Years No Limit
Chesapeake House of DelegatesWashington County 7 Governor 6 Years No Limit
Hagerstown Junior Senate"Worcester, et al. 74*. Governor 6 Years No Limit
Wor-Wic Senate
Board includes a student member who serves a 1-year termGovernor appoints 2 members from each of Caroline, Dorchester, Kent, QueenAnne's and Talbot Counties.At present board has 3 members from Worcester County and 4 members fromWicomico County.
Sourc: Deportment of Rscal Services, February 1994
18 3,4
tenure of the president, faculty, and other employees of the community college, andthe acquisition and disposition of property. Subject to the minimum standards of theMaryland Higher Education Commission, each board of trustees may determineentrance requirements and approve offerings that consist of transfer programs, careerprograms, and continuing education programs. Each board of trustees may chargestudents reasonable tuition and fees set by it with a view to making college educationavailable to all qualified individuals at low cost.
Coordination of Community Colleges
Since July 1, 1992, the Maryland Higher Education Commission has beenresponsible for the statewide coordination of community colleges and for establishinggeneral policies for their operation. Prior to July 1, 1992, the former State Board forCommunity Colleges was charged with this responsibility.
The 1991 legislation which transferred the responsibility for the coordination ofcommunity colleges to the Commission set forth the following duties andresponsibilities:
"The Commission:
(1) May provide grants-in-aid for the planning of new communitycolleges and new programs in existing community colleges;
(2) Shall administer programs of state support and financial assistancefor the community college;
(3) Shall assist and represent the community colleges in seeking andadministering federal moneys available to them;
(4) May designate any community college instructional program as astatewide or regional program;
(5) Shall assure that courses and programs offered are within the scopeof the mission of the community colleges;
(6) Shall assure that state funds for community colleges are spentprudently and in accordance with state guidelines;
(7) Shall provide centralized data processing assistance; and
(8) Shall coordinate relationships between the community colleges, thestate and county public school systems, and the private high schoolsto:
19
(i) Facilitate cooperation among them in the guidance andadmission of students to the community colleges; and
(ii) Arrange for the most advantageous use of facilities."
Appendix 2
thele e...- . . .
, ;-; 5F1 AZ'S r3.i."../...TET' .. 7.
AL ;,S=11,4...-..N.... .
ND GENERA.L. r;:-.3SEMBLY MARYLAND GENERALASSEMBL'!' GENE13AL ASSEMBLY
1:4 Vi...Ai'W; GENER, M4W:IAN:2: GENERALENERA L A SSEME.'!1" f. 17".."!. 4 1),'L.", GENEF?z S. ASSEMBLY
-A RYL. ND GENEriA RV! =:,14f7. GENER4LASSE AS.5.7:Er; fr2LV
GEN.7.--r .!;:: t
PIZ:7 A .:.--75Eil;:i5L A 4:WAR YL.AND 7.3EN5-:74L
';.E NEL: L ASEMii L. Y. MAL': YL AND GENERAI. ASSEMBLY14RYL AND GENERAL SEMBLr 1.4 ARYL t.111.7. GENERAL;ENERAL ASSEMBLY aLRY LANE GENERAL A SSE MB LYARYLA ND GENERA, ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL..7.-"NERAL ASSEMBLY IWARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMB?!A RYLA ND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYL4ND GENERALENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY
'VD GAENE.RAL ASSfif,21ARYLAND GENERALL-NERAL 414wieustp4yysENERAL ASSEMBLY
GENEF4L ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERALEA.IE?; A i. 4 SSEMBLY A 7A RVI-Ahlt% GENERAL ASSEMBLY
; GEikCzE!!EFIIL 145..9E.
. 'v'D Et,:.
::;ENERAL ASSE,..1ARYLAND GCiv
7 -.. . GENERAL ASSE.ASSEMBLY .f1;41:1,'.... 4 N:7,
MARYLAND :-;E.-NER.f7: ASSEI/i.?...ASSEMBLY M4R'I...AIV:".. e. ; . Y
MA F?Yi. 4 Nr c,::
A SSEMEQV C.;EIVE
LAND . ;.:Cr;7 ;
RYL 7 5.: ikfr F.' Al ;;;;'11. *. fiL;
rviELMARYLAND GENERA:. a.:074.(7, -f!
ASSEMBLY M4FLiI",.U.:- EWERAI .4RYLANCJ GENER:ii.ASSEMBLY MA R 4ND GENF:7=AL ACSEMBLYMARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY ti/iA PYI..z; NDASSEMBLY MARYL AND C...ENERAI ASSEMBLvMARYLAND GENEF,A... A!:SEMSLY MAR irLANCASSEMBLY MARY?..c, C.:,ENER AL ASSEMBLYMARYLAND GENERAL ,4SSEIML.,ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GEi,IL'-i:AL ASSEMBLYMA PVI.. A ND GENEcAL A ...;57.E!I!EL '1" 4 R YL14 ND
Department of Fiscal Services::---rf4FITOFiSC.Y SERVICES
L SERVICESf..3)F r-:sc L 5 Vj66
5Er.: VT,: DERARTMENT
- S.:7f'
:.. ; . .7"-"
-
C.
C),-
z:ZP417;77:4EN7
PIS S E; L. T7MEN 7
DEPARTMENT car FISCAL SERVICESor PSCAL. z;ERVICES DEPARTMENTDEP4 Tñ'EN C FISC:Ai. SERVICES
DEDAPTMENTDE,73/ti'7-11rIfT FiSC4 .1_ SERVICES
: r r:-L.: --
'
. ; .7 '7
7 :7 2i--! r 7:1 .77 :7S
();*:
SEP DEr;AP7MENTO.FFTWIENT OF r!SC.rt?. SERVICESOF F!SC& SERVi:::ES /7.Z.PAi7TiliEWT
BEST COPY AVAILABLE21
MARYLAND GE1vGENER2iL ASSESMARYLAND GENGENE:;7:4L ASSEMARYLAND GEhGENERAL ASSEiMARYLAND GEi,.CiENERAL ASSESMARI-LAND Ga..GENERAL ASSEA.V..RYLAND GEAGENERAL ASSEMARYLAND GENGENERAL ASSEMAR YLAND GENfiENERAL A SSEf.SARYLANDGENERAL ASSE,MARYLAND GEAGENERAL ASSE.
1.-E.r7F.4;771::717iY7 SERWLES DEPARTtOF' S.CCAL. .13EPviCE5 DEPARTMENT OF FISCADEpAi-777PE;.'*: !..:fSCAL SERY1:3ES DEPARTh
riEPAR -.WENT or FISCA
LT: 77Ar''..'"`" .7;17DEf
OLF.Fi. R71-
.fT3r5'15.'6-1; T.
filiEtP 0DEPA;--717).
(".'-7 Or PSC:A:DEPARTMENT 01: HS.".:AL SE V1LS Or5PART4
SE: i.)E1-AP7IiiEN'T OF FISCA- --
Community College Establishment Dates
College Date
Hagerstown Junior College 1946
Montgomery College 1946
Catonsville Community College 1956
Essex Community College 1957
Frederick Community College 1957
Harford Community College 1957
Charles County Community College 1958
Prince Georges Community College 1958
Allegany Community College 1961
Anne Arundel Community College 1961
Chesapeake College 1965
Garrett Community College 1966
Howard Community College 1966
Cecil Community College 1968
Dundalk Community College 1970
Wor-Wic Community College 1975
Baltimore City Community College 1992*
Carroll Community College 1993
* Establishment date indk ztes the current operational structure of the college. The former CommunityCollege of Baltimore was established in 1947.
23
3
Evolution of the Conununity College Funding Formula
Flat Per Full-time Equivalent Student Grants
The state began funding community colleges in 1946 when Hagerstown andMontgomery Community Colleges were established. State support began as a systemof flat grants to each community college. From 1949 through the present, state aidhas been distributed in accordance with a formula largely based on enrollment. The1949 formula limited the maximum rate of state aid to $100 per full-time equivalentstudent (FrE). Exhibit 1 below shows increases in the maximum rate per full-timeequivalent student amount for most colleges by year of enactment.
Exhibit 1
19611963196519681969
$175- $225- $300- $400- $540
19711977198019811984
- $700- $800- $850- $878- $910
1985 - $980
A separate formula was established for small and regional colleges in 1972.In 1972, state aid per FIE for community colleges with small enrollments (less than500 Ftes), as well as regional colleges characterized by the same small enrollments,was raised from $700 to $875. The rationale for a higher aid rate for small andregional colleges was to help defray the fixed costs associated with a small college andto encourage counties to establish regional colleges. The 1972 change affected onlyChesapeake and Garrett Community Colleges. In 1977, Wor-Wic Community Collegewas brought into the regional aid classification, but at an aid level of $1,250. In1978, Cecil Community College was brought into the small college classification at$1,485. Exhibit 2 below shows increases in the maximum rate per full-timeequivalent student amount for small and regional colleges by year of enactment.
Exhibit 2
1973 - $1,100 1981 - $1,6191975 - $1,300 1984 - $1,7201977 - $1,485 1985 - $1,8651980 - $1,540
250 "
Funding For Fixed Costs, Part-Time Students and Low Income Students
During the 1981 legislative session, the funding formula for communitycolleges was supplemented with a $200,000 grant to each board (Cecil, Garrett,Chesapeake, and Wor-Wic were excluded from these new grants because their aid perFM continued at a higher level)) and an additional $10 for each part-time creditstudent. The rationale for the flat grant was to help support the fixed operating costsof mid-size colleges. The idea behind the amount per part-time student was to helpprovide for the costs associ.led with increasing part-time student population.
During the 1984 legislative session, the General Assembly, acting upon therecommendations of the Governor, increased the aid per full-time equivalent studentby $32 (small and regional colleges by $101), the amral flat grant by $70,000, andthe grant per part-time student by $4.
In 1984 the Special Joint Subcommittee on Community College Financing,chaired by Delegate Rawlings, examined community college funding. The jointsubcommittee recommended an increase in the formula and the addition of a lowincome student grant for each Pell Grant recipient served by the college. Legislationenacted in 1985 increased the aid rate per full-time equivalent student from $910 to$980 (small and regional colleges from $1,720 to $1,865), increased the annual flatgrant from $280,000 to $350,000, and implemented a new low income student gmntof $115 per Pell Grant recipient. The grant per part-time student increased $14.There were no further changes to the formula until it was completely revised in 1988.
Further Modifications
In 1988, the legislature acting upon the recommendation of the Committee onthe Future of Maryland Community Colleges (Blueprint for Quality), adopted a newfunding formula for community colleges. The new formula eliminated the flat grant,the higher FTE grants for regional and small colleges, the Pell Grant, and the part-time student grant components of the previms funding formula. The new formulaconsisted of three components:
(1) An amount per FM student to address variable costs associated withenrollment changes. All colleges received the same amount per FTE.
(2) An annual base grant to address the issue of institutional fixed costs andsize. Smaller colleges received relatively more under this component thanlarger colleges. This component, therefore, substituted for the higherFTE grant for smaller colleges and the flat grant under the previousformula.
(3) A supplemental grant to address equalization for poorer subdivisions(Allegany, Baltimore City, Cecil, Garrett and Hagerstown received aidunder this component).
26
Although the Committee on the Future of Maryland Community Collegesrecommended annual inflation adjustments, the formula did not include an inflationadjustment provision.
Legislation passed during the 1990 session resulted in Baltimore CityCommunity College (BCCC) becoming a state agency, effective July 1, 1990 (fiscal1991). BCCC is discussed later in the presentation.
Current Funding Formula
In 1991, the legislature approved the current community college fundingformula (See Appendix 1). The current formula took effect in fiscal 1993. Thecurrent community college funding formula distributes general funds on the basis offive factors: (1) fixed cost grant; (2) marginal cost grant; (3) a size factor; (4) awealth factor; and (5) challenge grants. The full-time equivalent enrollment used inthe calculation of the formula are audited tins in the fiscal year 2 years prior to thefiscal year for which the state share is calculated. The enrollment used in the fiscal1996 formula calculation are audited fiscal 1994 FTE enrollment.
Fixed Cost Grant - 70% of total state aid is distributed based in proportion toeach college's total formula aid (exclusive of challenge grants) in the previous year.For example, Allegany Community College received 3.5 percent of the fiscal 1995direct grant of $88.7 million. In fiscal 1996, Allegany Community College willreceive 3.5 percent of the fiscal 1996 fixed cost allocation of $61.7 million, or $2.1million.
Marginal Cost Grant - 27% of total state aid is distributed based on the totalnumber of full-time equivalent students (FrE) at each community college. The fiscal1996 rate per full-time equivalent student is $339.8 (Marginal cost allocation of$23,792,843 divided by FY 1994 FT Es of 70,021). Example: Allegany CommunityCollege's marginal cost allocation of $570,057 is calculated by multiplying 1,678FTEs by the rate per FTE of $339.8.
Size Factor - 2% of total state aid is distributed on the basis of size. Collegeswith FIE enrollment less than or equal to 80% of the statewide median receive 1.75%of the total formula, divided evenly among those which qualify. 80 percent of thestatewide median FTE enrollment (2,492 FM) used in calculating the fiscal 1996"small size" allocation is 1,994 FTEs. In fiscal 1996, $1.5 million will be dividedevenly among Allegany, Carroll, Cecil, Chesapeake, Garrett, Hagorstown, andWor-Wic Community Colleges. Each college receives $220,304.
For colleges with FIE enrollments between 80% and 200% of the statewidemedian, 0.25% of the total formula aid is evenly distributed. 200 percent of thestatewide median FTE (2,492 FM) used in calculating the fiscal 1996 "medium size"allocation is 4,984 FT Es. In fiscal 1996, $220,304 will be divided among Charles,Frederick, Harford, and Howard Community Colleges.
274 1
Wealth Factor 0.5 % of total state aid is distributed based on wealth. Acounty or region is eligible for a wealth factor component if the following criteria aremet:
(1) The county share for the previous fiscal year divided by the total assessedvaluation of real property in the supporting county or region is greaterthan or equal to the statewide median, and
(2) The per capita wealth of the supporting county or region is less than 80percent of the statewide per capita wealth or the total assessed valuationof real property in the supporting county or region is less than $1 billion.
In fiscal 1996, Allegany, Garrett, and Hagerstown Community Colleges will eachreceive $146,869.
Challenge Grants - 0.5% of total state aidis distributed on a competitive basisto community colleges. The purpose of the challenge grant component is to addressstatewide initiatives and economic development needs. In fiscal 1995, challengegrants were awarded for initiatives related to distance education. Seven collegesreceived challenge grants in fiscal 1995.
State/Local/Student Share of Funding (Appendix 2)
From the outset, the state, local political subdivisions, and students have sharedthe responsibility of funding community colleges. Until 1969, the general principleremained that the state, political subdivisions, and students should each contributeone-third of the costs in equal shares. In 1969, the respective theoretical shares wereshifted to 45-30-25 percent. In 1971, the goal of 50-28-22 percent distribution fromthe state, the political subdivisions, and students was promulgated. In 1980, the stateshare was altered for small and regional colleges from 50 percent to 55 percent of thecurrent expenses. The county share of current expenses for Cecil, Garrett andChesapeake Community Colleges was increased from 30 to 32 percent in 1985. Itshould be noted, however, since the state funded a maximum amount per full-timestudent, the state aid goal was not met for most colleges.
The preamble of the 1991 legislation establishing the current funding formulaincluded the following statement:"It is the state's objective that by Fiscal Year 1996 the percentage ofstate support for the operating costs of community colleges, includingstate paid fringe benefits and challenge grants, shall be 46% of thecommunity colleges' operating budget."
The 46 percent target was linked to the level of support provided four yearcolleges and universities in 1990. The administration's testimony in support of thebill included the assumpdon that the state would fund 40 percent of the operating costsin fiscal 1993 at a cost of $19.3 million. The state would increase its share 2 percent
28
4"
per year between fiscal years 1993 and 1996, reaching the 46 percent goal in fiscalyear 1996. In fiscal year 1996, the state share is at 28 percent.
There are maintenance of effort requirements that the state and localgovernments must adhere to with regard to the funding of community colleges.Statute states that "the total operating fund per full-time equivalent student to thecommunity colleges for each fiscal year as requested by the Governor shall be not lessthan an amount equal to the total state operating fund per full-time equivalent studentin the previous fiscal year".
By statute, in order for a board to receive an increase in the state share ofsupport, each county that supports the community college or colleges must provideoperating fund appropriations to the board in an amount not less than the countyprovided in the previous fiscal year. This maintenance of effort requirement waswaived during the state's fiscal crisis (Fiscal 1992 - 1994).
As indicated in the administration's 1991 testimony, reducing the students'share of the cost was a central goal of the legislation. Unfortunately, state costcontainment actions in fiscal 1991 ($5.8 million), fiscal 1992 ($28.8 million), andfiscal 1993 ($8 million), due to the fiscal crisis led to significant increases in tuitionwith a decline in the state share of support ( See Appendix 3). Tuition and fees haveincreased from approximately 34 percent of the total system wide budget in fiscal year1992 to 36 percent in fiscal year 1996.
Other Forms of State Support
In addition to state funding through the formula, the state provides support forteachers' retirement, capital improvement projects, interstate and regional tuitionagreements, and statewide programs. In fiscal 1996, the state will provide $23.8million for teachers' retirement contributions, $20.4 million in general obligation bondand "PAYGO" funding for capital improvement projects, $180,000 for interstate andregional tuition agreements, and $416,000 for statewide programs.
Teachers' Retirement - Up until fiscal 1994, the state provided funds forteachers' retirement and social security contribution payments. Beginning in fiscal1994, the colleges or local governments assumed responsibility for payment of socialsecurity contributions. This action resulted in the shifting of approximately $8 millionin costs to the colleges.
Capital Improvement Program - The state shares the cost of capitalimprovement projects with local governments. The state provides at least 50 percentof a project's total cost. The state share is dependent on the wealth of the county.In recent years, the state general obligation bond appropriation for community collegecapital improvement projects has increased from a level of $7.8 million in fiscal 1992to $24.7 million in fiscal 1995; an increase of 217 percent. In fiscal year 1996, a
29
total of $20.4 million is provided for capital improvement projects ($16,350,000 ingeneral obligation oonds and $4 million in "PAYGO" funding).
S..-mnerset Grant - The state provides funds for Somerset County residents toattend Wor-Wic Community College at in-county tuition rates. The state pays 50percent of the applicable out-of-county fee, provided that Somerset County pays theother 50 percent. $90,000 is budgeted for this program in fiscal 1996.
West Virginia/Garrett Agreement - Garrett Community College has areciprocity agreement with West Virginia. Under this program, the state is requiredto pay to Garrett Community College an amount equal to the formula state support perFTE for each West Virginia FTE at the College under the reciprocity agreement.$90,000 is budgeted for this program in fiscal 1996.
Statewide Program - Under this program, state residents enrolled in communitycollege instructional programs designated by the commission as a health manpowershortage program or a statewide or regional program pay only in-county tuition andfees. The state pays the differential between this amount and any applicableout-of-county tuition and fees. $416,000 is budgeted for this program in fiscal 1996.
Baltimore City Community College (BCCC)
Historical Data
Due to legislation passed during the 1990 session, BCCC became a stateagency effective July 1, 1990. The legislation abolished the Community College ofBaltimore and created the state controlled BCCC for a period of at least three years.
The state take-over of BCCC was predicated by management inefficiencies,ineffective resource allocation, a lack of quality in teaching and a curriculum that didnot meet the current needs of the student body.
BCCC's newly approved mission emphasized a curriculum focusing on careerprograms, built upon a foundation in liberal arts and the sciences. Specificallyemphasized were programs in nursing, computer information systems and humanservices.
Currently, BCCC continues to operate on two Baltimore City campuses atLiberty and the Inner Harbor. The college's administrative and academic controldiffers from others in the state due to the fact that no local funding is provided to thecollege. Beginning in FY 1992, the college's operating and capital budgeting processbecame similar to the state's public four-year higher education institutions, asindicated by funding trends in Exhibit 3. The exhibit indicates that state general fundscontinue to comprise the majority of the college's funding from FY 1991 through FY1996. However, both restricted funds and unrestricted funds have continued toincrease on an average basis during the same time period.
30 4 4
Restricted funds consist of federal, state and local contracts and grants, as wellas endowment income and sales and services of educational products. Unrestrictedfunds consist of tuition and fees, and sales and services of auxiliary enterprises suchas cafeteria and bookstore sales.
Exhibit 3
Baltimore City Community College - Revenues by SourceFiscal Years 1992 - 1996
FY 1992Actual
FY 1993Actual
FY 1994Actual
FY 1995Actual
FY 1996Approp.
CurrentUnrestrictedFunds 7,627,965 8,705,764 7,683,922 11,739,910 9,319,444
State General 15,106,231 15,988,943 15,692,726 16,646,288 16,591,279
Subtotal 22,734,196 24,694,707 23,376,648 28,386,198 25,910,723
RestrictedFunds 6,636,933 10,326,359 7,500,404 10,587,910 14,150,517
Total Funds 29,371,129 35,021,066 30,877,052 38,974,108 40,061,240
Cap. Approp 1,924,000 445,000 0 872,000 15,553,000
FTE 5,974 6,261, 5,537 5,705 5,835
BCCC's current curriculum serves students seeking associate degrees intechnical and transfer programs, plus customizgd training for business and industry.The curriculum includes specialties in health care, human services and businzssprograms, in addition to life sciences programs.
BCCC's FY 1996 operating budget is $40.1 million. The state contributes64% of current unrestricted funds. The FY 1996 capital program includes funds of$15.6 million related to the construction of a new Life Sciences Building. The collegeis authorized 396 positions, including 118 full-time faculty.
Joint Legislative Workgroup on Community College Financing
During 1994, the Joint Legislative Workgroup on Community CollegeFinancing met to evaluate and consider changes to the community college fundingformula and to examine the state's responsibility to adequately fund Baltimore City
31
Community College. In light of a myriad of options presented to the workgroup andinsufficient time to carefully consider each option, the workgroup recommended theimplementation of 3 interim measures. The workgroup recommended that anyadditional money available to community colleges over and above the statutoryformula in fiscal year 1996 be distributed on a priority basis as follows:
1. Fund a hold harmless provision, so that no institution receives less moneythan it received in the previous year.
2. Fully fund "statewide programs." These programs give in-county tuitionand fees to out-of-county students for high-cost academic programs andprograms in allied health fields with labor shortages.
3. Any remaining funds should be distributed to colleges on a full-timeequivalent student basis.
None of the recommendations of the Joint Legislative Workgroup onCommunity College Financing were implemented. The Governor did include anadditional $5 million for community colleges; however, the funds are to be used tofund one-time instructional and research equipment grants to the community colleges.The distribution of funding is found in exhibit 4.
Exhibit 4
Community CollegeDistribution of *5 Million for
One-Time Instructional and Research Equipment GrantBased on Formula Distribution
Colleges
AuditedFY 1994
FITSVormula
OptionAllegany 1,677.65 $175,483Anne Arundel 8,168.27 522,421Baltimore County 17,333.50 1,156,074Carroll 1,713.65 162,250Cecil 1,112.80 128,336Charles 3,380.79 217,369Chesapeake 1,377.49 139,186Frederick 2,491.93 169,904Garrett 537.30 97,043Hagerstown 1,963.55 175,622Harford 3,581.12 247,170Howard 3,538.21 240,823Montgomery 12,645.12 828,303Prince George's 9,029.52 603,231Wor-Wic 1,470.27 136,785
CatonsvilleDundalkEssex
Source: Maryland Higher Education Commission
7,821.062,686.456,825.99
$514,050187,423
$454,601
1995 Session Developments
During the 1995 Session, sevetal bills concerning community colleges wereintroduced. A summary of these bills follows:
HB 696: This bill would have implemented the recommendations of the JointLegislative Workgroup on Community College Financing. This bill diedin committee.
33
4 7
HB 897: This bill would have placed in statute a hold harmless for all communitycolleges for fiscal years 1996 and 1997 only. This bill passed bothchambers but was vetoed by the Governor.
BB 943: This bill, referted to as the "level playing field" bill, would have basedcommunity college aid on state general fund support per student for thepublic higher education institutions. This bill died in committee.
HB 1054: This bill requires the state to make grants to all community colleges(including Baltimore City Community College) that provide instruction andservices to students enrolled in an English for Speakers of Other Languages(ESOL) program. The grant can be up to $800 per student, with a $1million appropriation cap ($200,000 for BCCC). This bill was signed bythe Governor (Chapter 434 of the Acts of 1995).
App
endi
x 1
FY
199
6 C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E A
ID F
OR
MU
LA C
ALC
ULA
TIO
N A
ND
OT
HE
R S
UP
PO
RT
CO
LLE
GE
S-
Aud
ited
FY
199
4F
TE
SF
ixed
Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
Med
ium
Sm
all
Mar
gina
l Cos
tS
ize
Siz
e
Adj
ustm
ent
Fac
tor
Fac
tor
Wea
lthF
acto
r
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
996
Sta
te A
idA
id p
er F
TE
Alle
gany
1,67
8$2
,140
,089
$570
,057
$220
,304
$146
,869
$3,0
77,3
19$1
,834
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
168
6,38
5,74
22,
775,
537
9,16
1,27
9$1
.122
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y (a
)17
,334
14,3
83,3
225,
889,
837
20,2
73,1
59$1
,170
Car
roll
1,71
42,
042,
651
582,
290
220,
304
2,84
5,24
5$1
,660
Cec
il1,
113
1,65
2,11
437
8,12
422
0,30
42,
250,
542
$2,0
22C
harle
s (b
)3,
381
2,60
7,96
51,
148,
776
55,0
763,
811,
817
$1,1
27
Che
sape
ake
(c)
1,37
71,
752,
427
.46
8,06
422
0,30
42,
440,
795
$1,7
72F
rede
rick
2,49
22,
077,
640
846,
745
55,0
762,
979,
461
$1,1
96G
arre
tt53
71,
152,
024
182,
572
220,
304
146.
869
1,70
1,76
9$3
,167
Hag
erst
own
1,96
42,
045,
368
667,
204
220,
304
146.
869
3,07
9,74
5$1
,568
Har
ford
3,58
13,
062,
512
1,21
6,84
755
,076
4,33
4,43
5$1
,210
How
ard
3,53
82,
965,
774
1,20
2,26
655
,076
4,22
3,11
6$1
,194
1M
ontg
omer
y12
,645
10,2
28,5
564,
296,
749
14,5
25,3
05$1
,149
'
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
9,03
07,
510,
197
3,06
8,18
610
,578
,383
$1,1
72W
or-W
ic (
d)1,
470
1,67
8,76
849
9,59
022
0,30
42,
398,
662
$1,6
31I
Und
istr
ibut
ed r
etire
men
t con
tr. (
e)ro
-tA
L70
,021
61,6
85,1
4923
,792
,843
220,
304
1,54
2,12
944
0,60
887
,681
,034
I
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
s44
0,60
8T
otal
For
mul
a A
id88
,121
,642
Tot
al F
ringe
Aid
24,9
37,1
44E
quip
men
t gra
nts
5,00
0,00
0W
est V
irgin
ia R
esid
ents
90,0
00S
tate
wid
e &
Reg
iona
l50
6,00
0T
otal
,$1
18,6
54,7
86
NO
TE
S: (a
) B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
cons
ists
of C
aton
svill
e, D
unda
lk, a
nd E
ssex
cam
puse
s.(b
) C
harle
s se
rves
Cha
rles,
Cal
lort
, and
St M
ary'
s co
untie
s.(c
) C
hesa
peak
e se
rvos
Car
olin
e, D
orch
este
r, K
ent,
Que
en A
nne'
s, a
nd T
albo
t cou
ntie
s(d
) W
or-W
ic w
ves
Som
erse
t, W
icom
ico
and
Wor
cest
er c
ount
ies.
Sou
rce:
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Aug
ust 1
995.
4 9
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
50
App
endi
x 2
CU
RR
EN
T U
NR
ES
TR
ICT
ED
RE
VE
NU
ES
BY
SO
UR
CE
MA
RY
LAN
D C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
ES
FIS
CA
L Y
EA
RS
199
2-19
96
Sou
rce
Sta
te S
hare
:
FY
199
2A
ctua
l%
of
Tot
alF
Y 1
993
Act
ual
% o
fT
otal
FY
199
4A
ctua
l%
of
Tot
alF
Y 1
995
Est
imat
ed%
of
Tot
alF
Y 1
996
Est
imat
ed%
of
Tot
al
Sta
te a
id66
278,
070
83,3
20,4
1487
,427
,065
88,7
49,8
3187
,681
,034
Ben
efits
19,8
12,4
8129
,268
,315
20,6
98,0
4121
,349
,535
23,8
37,1
44T
otal
86,0
90,5
5126
.8%
112,
588,
729
31.3
%10
8,12
5,10
629
.5%
110,
099,
366
28.3
%11
1,51
8,17
827
.9%
Loca
l Sha
re11
8,87
1,24
437
.0%
109,
938,
197
30.6
%12
1,43
4,96
033
.1%
132,
188,
846
33.9
%13
6,44
5,39
934
.1%
Tui
tion/
Fee
s11
0,16
9,87
834
.3%
130,
670,
112
36.4
%13
0,34
0,90
635
.6%
139,
274,
707
35.8
%14
3,63
4,21
3735
.9%
c...)
othe
rcr
i6,
391,
470
2.0%
6,16
6,42
11.
7%6,
554,
418
1.8%
7,80
3,90
72.
0%8,
813,
223
2.2%
Sys
tem
wid
e32
1,52
3,14
310
0.0%
359,
363,
459
100.
0%36
6,45
5,39
010
0.0%
389,
366,
826
100.
0%40
0,41
1,06
710
0.0%
FT
E72
,361
70,8
6475
,558
74,7
6174
,153
Not
es:
(1)
Beg
inni
ng in
fisc
al 1
991,
Bat
timor
e C
ity C
omm
unity
Col
lege
le n
ot in
clud
ed In
the
form
ula.
(2)
Beg
inni
ng in
fisc
al 1
994,
loca
l gov
ernm
ents
are
res
pons
ible
for
soci
al s
ecur
ity c
ontr
ibut
ion
paym
ents
.
Sou
rce:
Mar
ylan
d N
ig lw
Edu
catio
n C
omm
issi
on, B
altim
ore
City
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge, M
AC
C.
App
endi
x 3A
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
Tui
tion
and
Req
uire
d Fe
es P
er C
redi
t Hou
r fo
r R
esid
ent o
f Se
rvic
e A
rea
Col
lege
1990
Fisc
al Y
ears
199
0 -
1996
Fisc
al Y
ear
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
% c
hang
eFY
199
0 -
FY 1
996
Alle
gany
Ann
e A
rund
el
Bal
timor
e
Car
roll
Cat
onsv
ille
Cec
il
Lo
Cha
rles
(1)
--4
Che
sape
ake
(2)
Dun
dalk
Ess
ex
Fred
eric
k
Gar
rett
Hag
erst
own
Har
ford
How
ard
Mon
tgom
ery
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Wor
-Wic
(3)
Wic
omic
o C
ount
yN
otes
:
39.8
3
38.4
0
37.6
7
N/A
36.0
0
33.0
0
41.2
026
.93
36.0
736
.00
42.2
5
30.0
0
39.0
0
37.8
0
48.4
046
.20
50.0
0
34.4
0
44.9
7
43.4
0
37.6
7
N/A
36.0
0
35.0
0
44.2
637
.13
36.0
036
.00
46.7
5
34.0
0
42.0
0
41.0
0
48.4
0
48.4
053
.00
34.6
7
50.9
7
44.0
037
.75
N/A
39.0
039
.00
48.4
040
.35
38.4
7
38.4
7
51.2
5
38.0
0
47.0
0
43.0
0
51.7
0
51.7
058
.00
39.6
7
51.0
0
57.3
3
40.0
0
N/A
47.2
7
45.0
0
55.6
7
50.0
0
47.2
7
47.2
7
61.2
5
49.0
0
57.0
0
61.6
0
63.8
0
52.2
071
.00
50.0
0
62.1
7
58.7
3
44.0
8
49.9
3
51.9
3
53.0
0
56.3
3
50.0
0
51.9
3
51.9
3
66.7
3
54.0
0
63.6
7
61.6
0
72.6
0
63.7
071
.00
53.6
7
67.1
7
62.7
3
50.0
0
49.9
3
56.2
7
55.0
0
63.3
3
56.4
3
56.2
7
56.2
7
65.5
0
58.0
0
64.6
7
61.6
0
78.1
0
64.4
1
81.3
3
53.6
7
72.1
7
62.7
3
55.0
0
55.0
0
60.2
762
.00
66.3
3
60.1
7
60.2
760
.27
71.2
5
63.0
0
67.6
7
62.6
0
80.3
0
69.9
3
86.3
3
53.6
7
58.6
7
81.2
%
63.4
%
46.0
% N/A
67.4
%87
.9%
61.0
%12
3.4%
67.1
%67
.4%
68.6
%
110.
0%
73.5
%
65.6
%
65.9
%
51.4
%72
.7%
56.0
% N/A
(1)
Cha
rles
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s C
harl
es, S
t Mar
y's
and
Cal
vert
Cou
ntie
s.
(2)
Che
sape
ake
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erie
s C
arol
ine,
Dor
ches
ter,
Ken
t, Q
ueen
Ann
e's
and
Tal
bot C
ount
ies.
(3)
Wor
-Wic
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s So
mer
set,
Wor
cest
er a
nd W
icom
ico
Cou
ntie
s.r
10
:!So
urce
: Mar
ylan
d A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
Dat
aboo
ks
App
endi
x 3B
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
Tui
tion
and
Req
uire
d Fe
es P
er C
redi
t Hou
r fo
r R
esid
ent O
utsi
de o
f Se
rvic
e A
rea
Col
lege
1990
Fisc
al Y
ears
199
0 -
1996
Fisc
al Y
ear
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
% c
hang
e
FY 1
990
- FY
199
6
Alle
gany
57.8
362
.97
68.9
769
.00
80.1
785
.17
91.1
757
.7%
Ann
e A
rund
el75
.40
85.4
088
.00
100.
0010
2.73
110.
7311
0.73
46.9
%
Bal
timor
e72
.67
37.6
737
.75
40.0
044
.08
50.0
055
.00
-24.
3%
Car
roll
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
92.9
392
.93
102.
00N
/A
Cat
onsv
ille
60.3
360
.33
74.0
086
.00
94.9
399
.27
103.
2771
.2%
Cec
il64
.00
68.0
076
.00
88.0
010
6.00
111.
0011
9.00
85.9
%
Cha
rles
(1)
81.2
086
.26
92.4
010
5.67
108.
3312
1.33
127.
3356
.8%
c...)
Che
sape
ake
(2)
60.6
083
.46
90.0
011
5.00
115.
0012
8.10
120.
5098
.8%
coD
unda
lk60
.40
60.3
370
.00
86.0
094
.93
99.2
710
3.27
71.0
%
Ess
ex60
.33
60.3
370
.00
86.0
094
.93
99.2
710
3.27
71.2
%
Fred
eric
k80
.25
88.7
597
.25
116.
2512
6.77
127.
5013
5.25
68.5
%
Gar
rett
50.0
050
.00
56.0
067
.00
72.0
076
.00
81.0
062
.0%
Hag
erst
own
63.0
066
.00
71.0
081
.00
88.6
790
.67
93.6
748
.7%
Har
ford
71.8
075
.00
77.0
099
.00
99.0
099
.00
96.6
034
.5%
How
ard
77.0
077
.00
77.0
010
1.20
118.
8012
4.30
124.
3061
.4%
Mon
tgom
ery
86.9
091
.30
97.9
010
8.90
120.
9012
3.17
133.
2153
.3%
Prin
ce O
eorg
e's
113.
0011
6.00
121.
0013
4.00
134.
0014
4.33
149.
3332
.2%
Wor
-Wic
(3)
79.4
079
.67
91.6
711
7.00
124.
6712
4.67
131.
6765
.8%
Not
es:
( I
) C
harl
es C
omm
unity
Col
lege
ser
ves
Cha
rles
, St M
ary'
s an
d C
alve
rt C
ount
ies.
(2)
Che
sape
ake
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s C
arol
ine,
Dor
ches
ter,
Ken
t, Q
ueen
Ann
e's
and
Tal
bot C
ount
ies.
(3)
Wor
-Wic
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s So
mer
set,
Wor
cest
er a
nd W
icom
ico
C.n
ntie
s.
Sour
ce: y
aryl
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s D
atab
ooks
) t)
App
endi
x 3C
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
Tui
tion
and
Req
uire
d Fe
es P
er C
redi
t Hou
r fo
r O
ut-o
f-St
ate
Res
iden
ts
Col
lege
1990
Fisc
al Y
ears
199
0 -
1996
Fisc
al Y
ear
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
% c
hang
eFY
199
0 -
FY 1
996
Alle
gany
89.9
394
.97
100.
9794
.00
105.
1711
0.17
118.
1731
.4%
Ann
e A
nuid
el14
9.40
169.
4017
6.00
188.
0019
0.73
206.
7320
6.73
38.4
%
Bal
timor
e10
7.67
107.
6710
7.75
110.
0014
6.08
128.
0017
8.00
65.3
%
Car
roll
N/A
.N
/AN
/AN
/A15
2.93
152.
9316
8.00
N/A
Cat
onsv
ille
112.
4011
2.40
123.
0013
8.53
154.
9315
9.27
163.
2745
.3%
Cec
il95
.00
101.
0011
3.00
129.
0014
1.00
146.
0015
4.00
62.1
%
Q., qz
Cha
rles
(1)
121.
2012
8.26
136.
4015
5.67
160.
3317
9.33
188.
3355
.4%
Che
sape
ake
(2)
113.
4015
8.46
160.
0021
0.00
210.
0023
3.10
178.
5057
.4%
Dun
dalk
112.
4711
2.40
112.
8713
8.53
154.
9315
9.27
163.
2745
.2%
Ess
ex11
2.40
112.
4011
2.87
138.
5315
4.93
159.
2716
3.27
45.3
%
Fred
eric
k15
6.25
172.
7518
9.25
199.
2519
9.77
196.
5020
0.25
28.2
%
Gar
rett
102.
0010
2.00
104.
0011
7.00
122.
0012
6.00
131.
0028
.4%
Hag
erst
own
88.0
091
.00
96.0
010
6.00
119.
6711
7.67
120.
6737
.1%
Har
ford
114.
8011
8.00
120.
0014
6.30
146.
3014
6.30
139.
6021
.6%
How
ard
118.
8015
4.00
154.
0015
4.00
154.
0015
4.00
157.
3032
.4%
Mon
tgom
ery
118.
8012
5.40
135.
3015
1.80
169.
3017
2.89
187.
4557
.8%
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
194.
0019
7.00
202.
0021
5.00
215.
0022
5.33
230.
3318
.7%
Wor
-Wic
(3)
145.
5014
5.67
145.
6714
5.00
145.
6714
5.67
150.
673.
6%
Not
es:
(1)
Cha
rles
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
enPe
s C
harl
es, S
t Mar
y's
and
Cal
vert
Cou
ntie
s.
(2)
Che
sape
ake
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s C
arol
ine,
Dor
ches
ter,
Ken
t, Q
ueen
Ann
e's
and
Cou
ntie
s.
(3)
Wor
-Wic
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge s
erve
s So
mer
set,
Wor
cest
er a
nd W
icom
ico
Cou
ntie
s.
Sour
ce: M
aryl
and
Ass
ocia
tion
of C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s D
atab
ooks
5'i
56
ommunity College1
A i,:-......-.-1,,,:..; ...:-.. .--Ait..-.--.--.....:3,....,...,,,;,:....A...../.2.....L.;:..7...,........,...,. ....:_.......
verview:
:V .7: Gi.:::;E;:: `.
GENEFIlt;_ ti . A::
'EP/Er; liSSEME'LY kRYL4NC.;;ARYLAND GENERAL I;SSET,'IBZ..YZNERAL ASSEMBLY /11,41-7Yi. ANL;
I.L; ND GENERA L ASSEMBLYENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLA.ND;ARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLyENERAL L t,:;A YL 4ND
ENERA .4SEEMBLvENZ.A L:4R1-7.14,V:711L3Z..:NE,T;4/_ ASSEaBlY
F.SE.:14:5L1
TARYL.;AND GENERAL ASSEMBLY'ENO-1AL ASEEMBLY MARYLAND!ARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLYENER A L A *VW 110Q'ARYLAND Attn E ffi..17ENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLANDARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLYENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLANDARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY77NEF.;.4.?. ASSEMBLY 1,111.R YLANDARYLi.N.C1 GENERAL ASSEMBLYENFF;.eli. ASSEMBLY MARYLAND
Appendix 3
m: arlson .4 :
.
:.: -7 ;. '
CENEL Y Lr:t' NE: GENERAL ASSErsTi3L:' ;:.e: ..
GENERAL. AiSSEMBLY Ill:ARYLAN12 .".LNEFL A/0II.7ARYLAA'D GENERAL ASSEMEL j1.5 1".2 V s
GENERAL .4SSEMBLY MARY L NO C..;ENE itSSEMBL.MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY M4F;VNDGENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND G.FAEFI-41.
GENER4L ASSEMEL ;.:4RYL.,e4N,7; GENErs'ALNEF&L ASSEMBLY MARYLAND at:::'!E':.!";. "::SSEIVELY ; ;AP I1AND
AS3EMBLI'GENERAL ASSE1-%3LY ii7/1 F YL AN:j ci SEMEL ?VD
MARYLAND GENERAL A.3SEMELYGENERAL. ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMULY 11:AHYL. NDMAF?I'L ANC GENERAL ASSEMBLY MAR Yi.A.":7 7E1Er, SS.c:MBLY
.-NERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERi;:. ASSE11;;EL.. !!ZJIT:YLANDmARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLANE; GENET; L ASSEMBLYGENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLANDMARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GE ;1ERAL ASSEMBLYGENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL ,:i::3EMBLY MARYLANDMARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAN1:' GENERAL ASSEMBLYGENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERA:. ASSEMEL!' MARK_ ANDMARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLYGENERAL ASSEMBLY MARYLANE: GENERAL ASSEMBLY tURYLAND
Department of Fiscal Services:.f-:;-'77:7:11F/VT OF FiSC/-:.L SERVICES
.L ...3ERVES DEPARTMENTOr' 17.5CAL SERVICES
Si'L-F; VIE ES T,Ez'AR7ItIENT.c.)F FISCAL izER VICES
;
S:7% ill(::117:.F".
t/;
..=7;;Tf7.=::::
:,
SEP 1,';DEL-;*
EPL -7 A SSE:GEN
ENERAL ASSE.iMARYLAND OENGENERAL ASSE.MARYLAND GEhGENERAL ASSESMARYLAND GENGENERAL ASSE,MAM/LAND GEP4GENERAL ASSEMARYLAND GEAGENERAL ASSE,MARYLAND GEi+GENERAL ASSEII.ARYLAND GEhGENERAL ASSE.MARYLAND GENGENERAL ASSEMARYLAND GENGENER,L ASSE:MARYLAND GENGENERAL ASSE,MARYLAND GENGENERAL ASSE.
OE111EWT ar FISCAL SERVICES DET)-4F77:1E07 OF FiSC.AL SEP Ill:.:ESOr 9SCAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT O 1RC4.L. S.S.P1/+CES DEPARTMENTDEPARTME7N7 01 ISCA I. SERVICES DEPAIr-'7"MErI7' r r FISCAL SERVICESOF L'AL. SERVICES :3EA.:7TMENT FISEAL SE DEPARTMENT
F FISCAL SERIW.:ES.7 :7 DE .7 or :7--
; :LE DEr:....7'EPA.r..:7.:7;%.r.- OF ,
: 777-4712,A7
:: :ES
ic
* ,1r; .
., :"
\-.%;* - 1 ! : . 1 ' . / . : / " 7 1 : : f 7 . 7 CY: ;11
C V
DEPART,:OF FISCADEPARTI.OF FISCA
RV(CES r.; EPA RTL.:rMEN17 C*:r
[1.FiL
TL'aPifi
c:i.MENI' Qr
.
R.r10,YN? OF F:S:4;AL. & ir r ;1:3F:AL SER VICE!:;P/17.-ii:iEN7
4 f 5 9BEST COPY AVAILABLE
orDEPARTipOF EIS C.::
Community College Funding Overview:A National Comparison
Introduction
Unlike primary, secondary and four year higher education funding, fewnational studies exist in the area of community college funding. This paper examinesthe limited available data on states' community college system size, fundingmethodologies and revenue sources (a state by state profile is attached as Appendix1).
Most of the information in this report came from a document entitled Forty-Nine State Systems, 1992 Edition, which is published by the American Associatior ofCommunity Colleges (AACC), and An Analysis of Formula Funding DifferentiationBetween Comprehensive Community Colleges and the Lower Divisions of SeniorInstinaions edited by the South Carolina Stare Board for Technical and ComprehensiveEducation.
Community College System Size - Maryland Falls in the Middle
Every state but South Dakota has at least one community college. They rangein size from Delaware's one community college (with 4 branch campuses) toCalifornia's 107 community colleges. Maryland joins 21 other states that havebetween 10 and 20 community colleges. Sixteen states, or 32.7% of the total, havefewer than 10 community colleges, while 11 states offer classes at more than 20community colleges statewide. Not surprisingly, states like California, Illinois,Michigan, New York and Texas, which have both large populations and geographicalareas, have the greatest number of colleges.
Funding Methodologies Vary Across States
The states use different funding models to distribute aid to the communitycolleges. These models include the state budget process, a unit rate model (often costper full time equivalent student), and a bas.., plus increment funding methodology, aswell as other unique approaches.
43
60
State Budget Process is Used by States Which Rely on Little or NoLocal Assistance
This model involves budget negotiations between the community colleges, theexecutive branch and the legislature. Budget requests are based on actual programcosts. The state usually provides the majority of funds, though student tuition andfees, as well as special funds, are sources of revenue. Connecticut, Delaware,Hawaii, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, and Vermont use this fundingmethodology. While revenue sources were not available for three of these states,Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont do not rely on local funding sourcesto support their community colleges. This funding model applies to one ofMaryland's community colleges, Baltimore City Community College.
A Unit Rate Model is Used by 18 States
This model provides a rate of support based on units of production, such ascost per full time equivalent (FfE) student or cost per credit hour by program.Maryland relied entirely on this funding methodology from 1949 until 1982. Underthis system, different rates for instructional categories are sometimes used. Eighteenstates currently fund their community colleges on an unit rate basis. Of these states,nine have different rates by instructional category (this information was unavailablefor the remaining nine states). Some states use higher rates for health or vocationalprograms. New York provides supplemental aid for business and technical students,while Alabama provides additional funding for students in health related fields.
Base Plus Increment(s) Funding is Favored by 14 States
Some community college systems provide a base level of funding and then add"increments" - inflation factors, enrollment factors, productivity factors, maintenancecosts, college size factors or special program costs, for example. The "base" of thisfunding may reflect fixed costs, past budgets, a fixed proportion of total funds, or pastenrollment, and appears to be a relatively stable source of revenue for the collegesfrom one year to the next. Fourteen states, including Maryland, use some form ofthis model. Under Maryland's formula, 70% of a community college's total state aidis allocated in the proportion as was received in the prior year, while the remainingfunds are distributed according to a cost per FTE factor, a college size factor, awealth factor, and challenge grants.
The "base plus increment" model varies from states to state. In 1995,Arkansas moved to a base (using past enrollment) plus incremental funding forinflation, productivity, special programs, and maintenance. A state official inArkansas indicated that the legislature will probably add an FTE factor this legislative
session, to recognize major enrollment gains or losses. Colorado recently changed itsformula to a base plus funding for five different categories set by the legislature eachyear. Oregon allocates its funding for community colleges on a 49% adjustable base,with the remaining 51% allocated by cost per FTE.
Other Funding Methodologies
Some states do not fit neatly into a funding category. Missouri provides itscommunity colleges with flat grants based on programs, workforce preparation,performance and inflation. Rhode Island bases its funding methodology on thehistorical proportion of the community colleges in the total budget for highereducation (around 23%). Massachusetts funds its community colleges using factorssuch as faculty-student ratios, physical plant needs, and enrollment. Seven states didnot provide enough information to adequately label their funding methodologies.Some are in the midst of change; for example, Georgia is revising its fundingmethodology and expects to move from a block appropriation to costs by discipline,while appropriations to all of Minnesota's higher education institutions will be 35%fixed cost, 63% variable, and 2% reward-based.
Maryland Appears To Be the Only State That Includes a WealthComponent in Its Funding Formula
An examination of the available information on community college funding(see Appendix 1) shows only one state with a wealth factor in its funding formula -Maryland. While the descriptions of the funding formulas are limited, they do includemention of such factors like inflation and maintenance, so usage of a wealth factorappears limited. One of the editors of 49 State Systems does note that states canequalize funding among jurisdictions indirectly through state aid. The more state aida community college receives, the less reliant it becomes on local contributions anda local jurisdiction's ability to raise local revenue for community colleges.
Performance/Producfivity Measures Are Gaining Popularity as StatesRevise Formulas
In recent years, several states have included performance and productivitymeasures in their revised formulas. Examples of these measures include graduationsrates, grade point averages, and job placement success. Missouri, Arkansas andMinnesota have adopted such measures within the last few years.
Sources of Revenue - Maryland Relies on Tuition and Local ContributionsMore Than Most States
Sources of funding for community colleges vary widely by states. AsAppendix 1 shows, some states rely almost solely on state appropriations (forexample, Hawaii), while other states utilize combinations of state assistance, tuitionand fees, and local aid. Federal funds may comprise from 4% (Iowa) to 16 percent(Alabama) of a community college systems' total revenue sources.
Maryland relies on a combination of revenue sources, with 30% of its revenuefrom state appropriations, 35% from tuition and fees, 33% from local sources, and2% from "other" in fiscal year 1994. The state appropriation and local share havedeclined since FY 1991, from 33% to 30%, and 37% to 33% respectively, whiletuition and fees inarased from 29% of total revenue in FY 1991 to 35% in FY 1994.Compared to the other states that provided data on their sources of revenue forcommunity colleges, Maryland tends to rely more on local aid and tuition than moststates.
It is important to note that the reports used to provide revenue informationprecede the national recession of the early 1990s, and many states may havesubsequently increased their tuition and cut state aid, following Maryland's example.
Maryland Relies Less on State Appropriations Than Most States
Of the 29 states that provided information on their FY 1991 state appropriationas a percent of the total budget (see Appendix 1), 31 percent, or 9 states, relied onstate appropriations for at least 60 percent of their community college budget.Fourteen state community college systems (48% of the total respondents) saw stateappropriations make up 40-60% of their budget, while only 6 of the 29 statesresponding relied on state aid for less than half thoir budgets. Maryland was one ofthose states, and fits in this category regardless of whether FY 1991 or FY 1994 datais used.
A Majority of State Community College Systems Rely on Tuition andFees for Less Than a Third of Their Total Funding
Of the 27 states that provided data on FY 1991 tuition and fee collections asa percent of total revenue, 12 states, or 44% of the respondents relied on tuition forless than 20% of their total funding. A third of the states relied on tuition for 20-30%of their revenue, while 4 states expect tuition to make up 30-40% of their totalallocation to community colleges. Only two states, New Hampshire and Vermont,realize more than 40% of the revenue from tuition. Neither of these two state systems
6 346
receive any local funding. Using current FY 1994 data Maryland ranks high ontuition, using it for 35% of total revenues (note: In FY 1991, Maryland relied ontuition for 29% of revenues).
Few States Expect More Than a Third of Their Funding To ComeFrom Local Contributions
Twenty-six states responded to a request for information on local contributionsas a percent of total revenue. Nine of the states had no local contribution. Half ofthe states relied on local sources for up to 30% of their revenue, while four states,including Maryland, rely on local contributions for more than 30% of their totalfunding for community colleges.
Summary
Compared to all states' community college systems, Maryland falls near themedian in system size. While a unit cost funding formula is the favored methodologyof 18 states, Maryland joins 14 other states that chose a "base plus increment"funding methodology (note: a wide variety of approaches to funding exist within thismodel). Given the available data, Maryland appears to be the only state that includesa wmdth factor in its formula. Maryland also relies more heavily than most states onlocal aid and tuition as sources of revenue for its community colleges, and its stateappropriation as a percent of total funding is smaller than that of most states.
6 4
47
App
endi
x 1
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ng-
All
Stat
es'
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Ala
bam
a90
,031
38T
he f
undi
ng m
odel
is b
ased
on c
ost p
er F
ull T
ime
Stat
e A
ppro
p.52
%E
quiv
alen
t (FT
E)
with
add
ition
al f
undi
ng f
or h
ealth
prog
ram
s.T
uitio
n an
d fe
es22
%A
uxili
ary
Rev
.5%
Fed'
l Fun
ds16
%O
ther
5%A
lask
aN
/A1
(plu
s 2
Eac
h ca
mpu
s ha
s a
base
leve
i of
fund
ing
bypr
ogra
mSt
ate
App
rop.
56%
(734
4 in
year
base
d on
pre
viou
s ye
ars'
cos
ts. I
ndiv
idua
lca
mpu
ses
Tui
tion
and
fees
5%19
85)
prog
ram
sat
uni
v.)
rece
ive
incr
emen
t or
decr
emen
ts b
ased
on "
need
."A
uxili
ary
Rev
.18
%L
ocal
Sup
port
21%
Ari
zona
N/A
16 (
30C
omm
unity
col
lege
fun
ding
is b
ased
on th
e pr
ior
year
Stat
e A
ppro
p.20
%ca
mpu
ses)
appm
pria
ti--
uste
d fo
r en
rollm
ent a
nd a
n in
flat
ion
fact
or.2
Tui
tion
and
fees
12%
Loc
al S
uppo
rt46
%C
ash
Bal
ance
13%
Oth
er9%
'The
dat
a on
Enr
olle
d St
uden
ts, S
yste
mSi
ze a
nd S
ourc
es o
f R
even
ue is
bas
edon
FY
199
1 re
port
ing.
Fun
ding
Met
hodo
logy
is c
urre
nt a
s of
Jun
e 19
94. S
ourc
es f
orth
is d
ata
tabl
e ar
e: 1
) T
olle
fson
, Ter
ence
and
Foun
tain
, Ben
(ed
s.),
For
ty-
Nin
e St
ate
Syst
ems.
199
2 E
ditio
n. W
ashi
ngto
n, D
.C.:
Am
eric
an A
ssoc
iatio
n of
Com
mun
ityC
olle
ges,
199
2 an
d 2)
Sou
thC
arol
ina
Stat
e B
oard
for
Tec
hnic
al a
nd C
ompr
ehen
sive
Edu
catio
n, A
n A
naly
sis
of F
orm
ula
Fund
ing
Dif
fere
ntia
tion
Bet
wee
nti
Com
preh
ensi
ve C
omm
unity
Col
IeE
esL
and
the
Low
erD
ivis
ions
of
Seni
or I
nstit
utio
ns, 1
994.
2Inf
onna
tion
on A
rizo
na's
fun
ding
met
hodo
logy
isba
sed
on a
pho
ne c
onve
rsat
ion
that
took
plac
e on
Aug
ust 2
3, 1
995
with
staf
f fr
om th
e A
rizo
na S
tate
Boa
rd o
f D
irec
tors
for
Com
mun
ityC
olle
ges.
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Ark
ansa
s19
,215
(12,
419
9 (p
lus
3tw
o ye
arbr
anch
esof un
iver
sity
)
Prio
r to
199
5, f
unds
wer
e al
loca
ted
on a
cos
t per
FT
Eba
sis.
In
1995
the
high
er e
duca
tion
com
mun
ity m
oved
toba
se f
undi
ng, p
lus
fact
ors
for
infl
atio
n, p
rodu
ctiv
ity,
spec
ial p
rogr
ams,
and
mai
nten
ance
.'
N/A
Ft E
s)
Cal
ifor
nia
1.41
mill
ion
107
The
fun
ding
met
hodo
logy
for
Cal
ifor
nia
com
mun
ityco
llege
s is
bas
ed o
n a
"bas
e pl
us in
crem
enta
l cos
t"m
odel
. The
bas
e re
venu
e is
the
prio
r ye
ar f
undi
ng.
Incr
emen
tx1
fact
ors
incl
ude
a C
OL
A, p
rogr
amim
prov
emen
ts, a
nd e
nrol
lmen
t gro
wth
.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.48
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es23
%Fe
d'I
Fund
s6%
Loc
al S
ourc
es22
%
Col
orad
o68
,526
(40,
292
FTE
s)
11(s
yste
mal
so in
cls.
7 vo
tech
s)
The
Col
orad
o co
mm
unity
col
lege
sys
tem
use
s a
base
plu
sin
crem
enta
l cos
t fun
ding
mod
el. E
ach
year
the
Col
orad
ole
gisl
atur
e de
cide
s w
hich
5 in
crem
enta
l cos
ts w
ill b
efu
nded
on
top
of th
e ba
se.4
N/A
Con
nect
i-cu
t43
,788
17E
ach
inst
itutio
n su
bmits
a c
urre
nt s
ervi
ces
requ
est w
hich
is d
efm
ed a
s la
st y
ear's
act
ual c
ost p
lus
addi
tiona
l dol
lars
requ
ired
to p
rovi
de th
e sa
me
leve
l of
serv
ices
this
year
.Sp
ecia
l req
uest
s (i
.e.,
for
new
pro
gram
s) b
ecom
e "a
bove
curr
ent s
ervi
ces
requ
ests
."
Tui
tion
and
fees
25%
Add
ition
al in
form
atio
n is
1
unav
aila
ble
,
Del
awar
eN
/A1
(4ca
mpu
ses)
The
col
lege
sub
mits
a b
udge
t req
uest
to th
e st
ate
budg
etdi
rect
or b
ased
on
pres
ent a
nd p
ropo
sed
prog
ram
s.T
echn
ical
cou
rses
are
not
fun
ded
diff
eren
tly f
rom
oth
erco
urse
s/pr
ogra
ms.
N/A
(Not
e: q
uart
erly
tuiti
onco
uld
not e
xcee
d $3
48 f
orth
e 92
-93
scho
ol y
ear)
'Info
rmat
ion
base
d on
a p
hone
con
vers
atio
n w
ith s
taff
at th
e A
rkan
sas
Dep
t. of
Hig
her
Edu
catio
n on
Aug
ust 2
1, 1
995.
'Info
rmat
ion
base
d on
a p
hone
con
vers
atio
n w
ith s
taff
at th
e C
olor
ado
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge a
nd O
ccup
atio
nal E
duca
tion
Syst
em o
n A
ugus
t 22,
199
5.
6s
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Flor
ida
N/A
(64,
362
FTE
s)
28Fu
ndin
g is
bas
ed o
n di
rect
inst
ruct
iona
lco
sts
per
FTE
with
adj
ustm
ents
for
infl
atio
nary
incr
ease
s. T
hefo
rmul
afo
r th
e re
ques
t for
fun
ds f
orne
w e
nrol
lmen
t is
a "f
ull-
cost
" m
odel
bas
ed o
n pr
ior
year
cos
t per
FT
E w
ithad
just
men
ts f
or a
cade
mic
sup
port
cos
ts.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.69
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es22
%O
ther
9%
Geo
rgia
35,7
09(2
5,59
9FT
Es)
15G
eorg
ia is
rev
isin
g its
fun
ding
met
hodo
logy
and
expe
cts
to g
o fr
om b
lock
app
ropr
iatio
n to
cos
ts b
y di
scip
line.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.75
%T
uitio
n, f
ees,
gif
ts 2
5%an
d ot
her
- Haw
aii
21,0
00(p
lus
20,0
00 in
non-
cred
it)
7E
ach
cam
pus
budg
et is
sub
mitt
ed v
ia th
e ad
min
istr
atio
nof
the
Uni
vers
ity o
f H
awai
i and
its
boar
d of
rege
nts
toth
e go
vern
or a
nd u
ltim
atel
y to
the
legi
slat
ure.
The
re is
no g
uara
ntee
that
the
curr
ent s
ervi
ce b
ase
will
incr
ease
annu
ally
.
Bul
k of
fun
ding
com
esfr
om s
tate
app
ropr
iatio
n.
Idah
o7,
500
2Pr
ogra
ms
are
fund
ed o
n a
base
allo
catio
n pl
usan
ann
ual
"mai
nten
ance
" in
crem
ent t
o co
ver
cost
s fo
r m
aint
aini
ngth
e pr
ogra
m a
t cur
rent
leve
ls. N
ewpr
ogra
ms
are
cons
ider
ed "
abov
e m
aint
enan
ce"
requ
ests
.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.64
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es16
%C
ount
y T
axes
20%
Illin
ois
352,
898
(181
,524
FTE
s)
49Fo
rmul
a al
loca
tion
is b
ased
on a
rat
e pe
r fu
nded
sem
este
rcr
edit
hour
equ
ival
ent.
The
six
fun
ding
cat
egor
ies
and
tent
ativ
e 19
95 r
ates
are
: bac
cala
urea
te a
ndge
nera
lac
adem
ic (
$26.
92),
bus
ines
s an
d se
rvic
evo
catio
nal
($16
.50)
, tec
hnic
al v
ocat
iona
l ($3
5.04
), h
ealth
($59
.39)
,re
med
ial/d
evel
opm
enta
l ($1
5.82
), a
nd a
dult
basi
ced
ucat
ion
($16
.78)
. Rat
esar
e ba
sed
on u
nit c
ost o
fin
stru
ctio
n as
rep
orte
d by
the
49 c
omm
unity
colle
ges.
N/A
Indi
ana
N/A
14T
he V
ocat
iona
l-T
echn
ical
Col
lege
Sys
tem
is f
unde
d on
"bas
e pl
us."
One
fac
tor
is c
ost
per
FTE
. The
re is
no
diff
eren
ce b
etw
een
fund
ing
for
art/s
cien
ceco
urse
s an
dte
chni
cal c
ours
es. T
he n
ursi
ngpr
ogra
m d
oes
get a
spec
ial a
ppro
pria
tion.
N/A
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Iow
a49
,351
15Io
wa
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges
have
a f
ound
atio
n fo
rmul
aSt
ate
App
rop.
48%
(36,
563
whi
ch is
enr
ollm
ent-
driv
en o
n th
e ba
sis
of a
thre
e-ye
arT
uitio
n an
d fe
es32
%ro
lling
ave
rage
of
cont
act h
ours
elig
ible
for
sta
te g
ener
alai
d.Fe
d'I
Fund
s4%
Loc
al S
ourc
es8%
FT E
s)
Oth
er8%
Kan
sas
56,0
0021
The
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges
have
taxi
ng a
utho
rity
and
use
prop
erty
tax
asse
ssm
ents
for
fun
ding
. The
loca
l boa
rds
dete
rmin
e ho
w th
e m
oney
will
be
spen
t.
12%
of
educ
atio
n an
dge
nera
l rev
enue
s co
me
from
tuiti
on
Ken
tuck
y40
,758
14N
/ASt
ate
App
rop.
51%
Tui
tion
and
fees
20%
Oth
er29
%
Lou
isia
na17
,390
45In
Lou
isia
na, t
he f
orm
ula
is s
uppo
sed
to b
e re
vise
dan
nual
ly to
ref
lect
the
regi
onal
ave
rage
for
sta
te f
undi
ngpe
r FT
E s
tude
nt a
nd c
ost p
er s
tude
nt c
redi
t hou
r.
N/A
Mai
ne2,
991
6Fu
ndin
g fo
r th
e M
aine
Tec
hnic
al C
olle
ge S
yste
m is
Stat
e A
ppro
p.58
%F-
T,
requ
este
d ba
sed
on a
n ac
tual
cos
t bud
get.
The
legi
slat
ure
Tui
tion
and
fees
14%
11,0
00 P
-re
view
s ne
w a
nd e
xpan
ded
prog
ram
bud
get r
eque
sts
ina
Fedi
Fun
ds15
%T
sepa
rate
bud
get b
ill e
ach
sess
ion.
Oth
er13
%
Mar
ylan
d11
0,00
018
Col
lege
s re
ceiv
e ap
prox
imat
ely
70%
of
thei
r al
loca
tions
base
d up
on th
eir
shar
e of
pri
or y
ear
fund
ing
and
27%
onan
FT
E b
asis
. Add
ition
al f
orm
ula
com
pone
nts
incl
ude
aco
llege
siz
e fa
ctor
, a w
ealth
fac
tor,
and
cha
lleng
e gr
ants
.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.'
30%
Tui
tion
and
fees
35%
Loc
al S
ourc
es33
%O
ther
2%O
ne o
f co
mm
unity
col
lege
s, B
altim
ore
City
Com
mun
ityC
olle
ge, g
oes
thro
ugh
the
stat
e bu
dget
pro
cess
.,
5In
addi
tion
to th
e 4
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
ther
ear
e 46
pos
tsec
onda
ry v
ocat
iona
l-te
chni
cal s
choo
ls.
'Mar
ylan
d's
reve
nue
sour
ces
refl
ect F
Y 1
994
actu
al d
ata.
The
stat
e ap
prop
riat
ion
has
decl
ined
sin
ce F
Y 1
991,
fro
m 3
3%to
30%
, whi
le tu
ition
and
fee
s in
crea
sed
from
29%
of
tota
l rev
enue
in F
Y 1
991
to 3
5% in
FY
199
4.
7172
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
I
Mas
sach
u-72
,579
15Fu
ndin
g is
bas
ed o
n fa
culty
-stu
dent
rat
ios,
phy
sica
l pla
ntSt
ate
App
rop.
'53
69%
setts
(42,
503
need
s, a
nd e
nrol
lmen
t.T
uitio
n an
d fe
es 1
0-
25%
FLE
s)G
ov't
fund
sl
- 18
%O
ther
911
%
Mic
higa
n22
5,17
138
The
fun
ding
for
mul
a co
nsid
ers
aver
age
cost
s, e
qual
izat
ion
Stat
e A
ppro
p.38
%(1
23,0
00of
loca
l eff
ort,
and
a m
inim
um p
erce
ntag
e in
crea
se,
Tui
tion
and
fees
30%
thou
gh th
e pr
imar
y fa
ctor
is a
vera
ge c
ost
per
FTE
.L
ocal
Sou
rces
27%
FIls
)T
uitio
n an
d fe
es f
or e
ach
colle
gear
e de
term
ined
by
loca
lly e
lect
ed b
oard
s.O
ther
5%
Min
neso
ta55
,000
18M
inne
sota
did
use
a r
ate
per
FTE
for
mul
a. B
egin
ning
inSt
ate
App
rop.
67%
(33,
000
1995
, all
of M
inne
sota
's a
ppro
pria
tions
for
hig
her
Tui
tion
and
fees
33%
FT E
s)ed
ucat
ion
will
be
fund
ed o
n a
63%
var
iabl
e, 3
5% f
ixed
and
2% r
ewar
d (p
erfo
rman
ce)
basi
s.
Mis
siss
ippi
33,0
0015
(36
In M
issi
ssip
pi, a
bas
e am
ount
of
the
stat
e ap
prop
riat
ion
isSt
ate
App
rop.
57%
(21,
000
cam
puse
s)al
loca
ted
to e
ach
of th
e fi
ftee
n in
stitu
tions
equ
ally
. The
Tui
tion
and
fees
25%
FTE
s)fo
rmul
a pr
ovid
es f
or a
dditi
onal
rei
mbu
rsem
ent
to c
olle
ges
base
d on
cos
t per
ful
l-tim
e eq
uiva
lent
stu
dent
.C
ost p
erFe
d'l F
unds
6%L
ocal
Sou
rces
12%
FTE
is d
eter
min
ed in
fiv
e w
eigh
ted
prog
ram
are
as:
acad
emic
, tec
hnic
al, v
ocat
iona
l, pa
rt-t
ime
acad
emic
,an
dnu
rsin
g.
Mis
sour
iN
/A12
(16
In M
isso
uri,
fund
ing
for
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges
com
es in
Stat
e A
ppro
p.36
%ca
mpu
ses)
flat
am
ount
s ba
sed
on p
rogr
ams
or a
ctiv
ities
, i.e
.,w
orkf
orce
pre
para
tion,
per
form
ance
, and
infl
atio
n.T
uitio
n an
d fe
es25
%L
ocal
Sou
rces
27%
Oth
er12
%,
Mon
tana
5,00
03
publ
ic,
7 tr
ibal
lyco
ntro
lled
Col
lege
s m
ake
adju
stm
ents
to p
rior
year
allo
wan
ce.
.
N/A
'Tui
tion
and
fees
hav
e in
crea
sed
inM
assa
chus
etts
sin
ce F
Y 1
991
- th
e st
ate
now
pro
vide
s 55
% o
f th
e fu
ndin
g, 3
5%co
mes
fro
m tu
ition
, and
the
rest
fro
m o
ther
sou
rces
.
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Neb
rask
a33
,000
6 (1
5ca
mpu
ses)
The
for
mul
a in
Neb
rask
a is
enr
ollm
ent d
rive
n w
ithdi
ffer
ent w
eigh
ting
for
voca
tiona
l/tec
hnic
alpr
ogra
ms.
_
Tui
tion
and
fees
com
pris
ed 1
7 pe
rcen
t of
the
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges'
reve
nue
in F
Y 1
990.
Nev
ada
37,2
764
(with
sate
llite
cam
puse
s)
The
fun
ding
for
mul
a ha
s 2
com
pone
nts.
The
inst
ruct
iona
l are
a is
bas
ed u
pon
the
num
ber
of f
ull-
time
equi
vale
nt s
tude
nts
enro
lled
or p
roje
cted
to b
e en
rolle
d.A
stu
dent
/fac
ulty
rat
io d
eter
min
es th
e nu
mbe
r of
ful
l-tim
efa
culty
aut
hori
zed.
The
sec
ond
area
incl
udes
a s
uppo
rtse
rvic
es f
orm
ula
that
cov
ers
acad
emic
and
inst
itutio
nal
supp
ort,
stud
ent s
ervi
ces,
and
pla
nt o
pera
tion
and
mai
nten
ance
.
No
loca
l aid
; maj
orfu
ndin
g so
urce
is s
tate
appr
opri
atio
n.
New
Ham
pshi
re27
,000
(mos
t in
even
ing
prog
ram
s)
1 co
llege
(6 bran
ches
)
Fund
ing
goes
thro
ugh
the
stat
e bu
dget
pro
cess
and
isba
sed
on "
actu
al c
ost,"
whi
ch in
clud
es p
rior
yea
rex
pend
iture
s.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.49
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es47
%Fe
d'l F
unds
4%
New
Jer
sey
N/A
17T
he f
orm
ula
used
to a
lloca
te s
tate
aid
cha
nged
fro
man
enro
llmen
t dri
ven
mod
el to
one
with
a b
ase
foun
datio
nfo
r ea
ch in
stitu
tion,
with
cat
egor
ical
aid
and
dif
fere
ntia
lpr
ogra
m c
osts
incr
emen
ts.
N/A
New
Mex
ico
37,0
00(1
7,80
0FT
Es)
17'
The
fun
ding
met
hodo
logy
is f
orm
ula
base
d an
d co
nsid
ers
cost
for
cre
dit h
ours
. The
for
mul
a pr
ovid
es f
orad
ditio
nal f
undi
ng f
or te
chni
cal p
rogr
ams.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.58
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es11
%L
ocal
Sou
rces
29%
Oth
er2%
'New
Mex
ico'
s 17
two
year
col
lege
s in
clud
e fi
ve c
omm
unity
col
lege
s,th
ree
voca
tiona
l-te
chni
cal i
nstit
utes
, eig
htun
iver
sity
bra
nch
cam
puse
s, a
nd o
ne m
ilita
ry in
stitu
te.
ert
Stat
eE
nrol
led
I
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
New
Yor
kC
ityU
nive
rsity
of N
.Y.
(CU
NY
)
61,0
007
Stat
e ai
d is
der
ived
fro
m a
com
bina
tion
ofen
rolh
nent
driv
en f
orm
ulas
incl
udin
g ba
se a
id, d
isad
vant
aged
aid,
rent
al a
id, s
uppl
emen
tal a
id f
or b
usin
ess
and
tech
nica
lst
uden
ts, a
nd a
ppro
pria
tions
for
cat
egor
ical
ope
ratin
gai
d,in
clud
ing
such
item
s as
par
t-tim
e st
uden
tsu
cces
s an
d co
reop
erat
ing
supp
ort.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.36
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es24
%L
ocal
Sou
rces
40%
New
Yor
kSt
ate
Uni
vers
ityof
N.Y
.(S
UN
Y)
190,
000
(plu
s21
0,00
0no
n-cr
edit
enro
llees
)
30Sa
me
as a
bove
.St
ate
App
rop.
36%
Tui
tion
and
fees
28%
Loc
al S
ourc
es36
%
Nor
thC
arol
ina
741,
387
(126
,929
FTE
s)9
30Fu
ndin
g is
bas
ed o
n co
st p
er s
tude
nt F
TE
. The
syst
em is
cons
ider
ing
chan
ge a
nd m
ay b
e go
ing
to b
udge
ting
base
don
pro
gram
cos
t fac
tors
.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.77
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es7%
Loc
al S
ourc
es12
%Fe
dera
l4%
Nor
thD
akot
a7,
259
910
The
for
mul
a is
the
sam
e st
ate
fund
ing
form
ula
as lo
wer
divi
sion
s in
the
seni
or c
olle
ges.
The
for
mul
ais
bas
ed o
ncr
edit
hour
pro
duct
ion
whi
ch is
con
vert
edto
FT
Es.
Ara
tio o
f av
erag
e fa
culty
sal
arie
s aa
dFT
Es
dete
rmin
e th
enu
mbe
r of
fac
ulty
pos
ition
s to
be
fund
ed.
Nor
th D
akot
a's
two
year
colle
ges
rece
ive
no lo
cal
dolla
rs.
'Stu
dent
enr
ollm
ent i
nclu
des
224,
535
inth
e cu
rric
ulum
pro
gram
and
516
,852
in th
e ex
tens
ion
prog
ram
. Cur
ricu
lum
prog
ram
s ac
coun
t for
64
perc
ent o
f th
e to
tal F
TE
s. T
he e
xten
sion
cour
ses
are
shor
t cou
rses
des
igne
d to
mee
tve
ry s
peci
fic
need
s, a
nd in
clud
e co
urse
s in
hom
e m
aint
enan
cean
d re
pair
or
cari
ng f
or th
e de
velo
pmen
tally
disa
bled
.
'Nor
th D
akot
a's
two-
year
col
lege
sin
clud
e fo
ur c
ontr
olle
d by
Ind
ian
trib
es, t
hree
exte
nsio
ns o
f un
iver
sity
mul
tica
mpu
sdi
stri
cts,
one
com
mun
ity c
olle
ge, a
ndon
e st
ate
scho
ol o
f sc
ienc
e.
Stat
e
-
Enr
olle
dSt
uden
tsSy
stem
Size
Fund
ing
Met
hodo
logy
Sour
ces
of R
even
ue
Ohi
o16
0,00
0(9
1,85
8FM
)
17 (
plus
30 regi
onal
cam
puse
sof un
iver
sity
)
Ohi
o's
form
ula
cons
ider
s st
ate-
wid
eav
erag
e co
sts
per
FTE
for
fif
teen
dif
fere
nt g
roup
s of
cour
ses
sort
ed b
ydi
scip
line
and
leve
l (m
odel
s). T
he f
orm
ula
uses
thre
em
odel
s fo
r ge
nera
l edu
catio
n co
urse
s an
d tw
o m
odel
s fo
rte
chni
cal c
ours
es,
Onl
y si
x ca
mpu
ses
(5co
mm
unity
col
lege
s an
d 1
tech
nica
l) h
ave
loca
l tax
esle
vied
for
ope
ratin
gsu
ppor
t.
Okl
ahom
a36
,330
13Fu
ndin
g is
bas
ed in
larg
e pa
rt o
n pr
ior
year
s' a
ctua
l cos
tsN
/A14
1'E
spe
r st
uden
t cre
dit h
our
by f
ield
of
stud
y (2
2 di
ffer
ent
disc
iplin
es).
Eac
h in
stitu
tion
gene
rate
sa
sepa
rate
rat
eba
sed
on a
ctua
l cos
ts, m
issi
on d
iffe
rent
iatio
n, a
nd a
nnua
lsu
rvey
of
200
peer
inst
itutio
ns n
atio
nwid
e.
,
. Ore
gon
300,
000
16_
The
Nat
iona
l Cen
ter
for
Hig
her
Edu
catio
n M
anag
emen
tSt
ate
App
rop.
30%
(57,
000
Syst
em h
elpe
d O
rego
n de
sign
a f
orm
ula
that
wou
ldT
uitio
n an
d fe
es20
%FT
Es)
allo
cate
49
perc
ent o
f st
ate
dolla
rs to
the
colle
ges
as b
ase
adju
stm
ents
and
51
perc
ent o
f th
e st
ate
dolla
rson
an
FTE
basi
s.
Loc
al S
ourc
es50
%
Penn
syl-
100,
000
14C
omm
unity
col
lege
s ar
e fu
nded
at a
dol
lar
rate
per
FT
E.
Stud
ent-
gene
rate
d fu
nds
vani
aFT
Es
Var
iatio
ns e
xist
in th
e pr
oces
s fo
r th
ree
cate
gori
es o
fpr
ogra
ms:
tech
nica
l edu
catio
n, $
1,00
0 pe
r FT
E; a
dvan
ced
tech
nica
l edu
catio
n, $
1,10
0 pe
r FT
E; a
nd o
ther
s, $
500
per
FTE
. The
sta
te a
lso
shar
es o
ne h
alf
of th
e co
st o
fde
bt s
ervi
ce f
or le
ases
.
are
limite
d to
1/3
of
aco
llege
's o
pera
ting
cost
s,T
he s
tate
sha
re c
an v
ary
from
1/3
to 1
/2 o
faA
lege
's o
pera
ting
budg
et.
- Rho
de16
,623
1 (w
ith 3
No
form
ula
is u
sed.
The
com
mun
ity c
olle
gebu
dget
isN
/AIs
land
(8,8
10ca
mpu
ses)
base
d on
the
hist
oric
al p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
tota
l bud
get f
orFT
Es)
_hi
gher
edu
catio
n, a
ppro
xim
atel
y 23
%.
Sout
h50
,172
16T
he f
undi
ng f
orm
ula
is b
ased
on d
isci
plin
e sp
ecif
icSt
ate
App
rop.
60%
Car
olin
a(3
6,89
0st
uden
t fac
ulty
rat
ios.
Tui
tion
and
fees
18%
FTE
s)L
ocal
Sou
rces
10%
Oth
er12
%
79
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Sout
hD
akot
aN
/A0"
N/A
N/A
Ten
ness
ee64
,467
14Fo
rmul
a fu
ndin
g in
Ten
ness
ee, p
rese
ntly
und
erin
tens
ive
N/A
(38,
641
stud
y, d
oes
diff
eren
tiate
bet
wee
n te
chni
cal
and
acad
emic
Fi: E
s)co
urse
s. T
he f
orm
ula
also
rec
ogni
zes
a di
ffer
ence
betw
een
rem
edia
l and
oth
er lo
wer
leve
l cou
rses
and
reco
gniz
es c
ost f
acto
rs in
tech
nica
lpr
ogra
ms
thro
ugh
the
use
of f
acul
ty-s
tude
nt r
atio
s an
d sa
lari
es.
Tex
as37
2,00
049
(67
The
fun
ding
for
mul
a is
bas
edon
sta
tew
ide
med
ian
cost
sSt
ate
App
rop.
50%
cam
puse
s)pe
r co
ntac
t hou
r fo
r ea
ch o
f th
e 18
gen
eral
aca
dem
icpr
ogra
ms
and
39 te
chni
cal p
rogr
ams
area
s in
Tex
as.
Tui
tion
and
fees
21%
Loc
al S
ourc
es22
%St
ate
fund
s ar
e di
stri
bute
d up
on s
ubm
issi
onof
act
ual
enro
llmen
t and
con
tact
hou
rs d
urin
g th
e bi
enni
um.
Fede
ral
7%
Uta
h25
,217
6T
he f
orm
ula
for
fund
ing
high
er e
duca
tion
is b
ased
on
Stat
e A
ppro
p.70
%(1
8,46
6hi
stor
ical
fun
ding
, tho
ugh
itus
es F
rE c
alcu
latio
ns to
Tui
tion
and
fees
24%
dete
rmin
e fu
ndin
g fo
r ne
w e
nrol
hnen
t gro
wth
.U
tah'
sfo
rmul
a al
so r
ecog
nize
s th
e ef
fect
of
mis
sion
assi
gnm
ents
on c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, a
s w
ell a
s th
e di
ffer
entia
l cos
ts o
fvo
catio
nal e
duca
tion,
leve
ls o
f in
stru
ctio
n,an
d su
bjec
tm
atte
r.
Oth
er6%
Fr E
s)
Ver
mon
t4,
000
1 (1
2T
here
is n
o fu
ndin
g fo
rmul
a in
Ver
mon
t for
the
Stat
e A
ppro
p.40
%(1
,600
offi
ces
com
mun
ity c
olle
ge; i
nste
ad, i
tgo
es th
roug
h th
e st
ate
Tui
tion
and
fees
50%
FTE
s)st
atew
ide)
budg
et p
roce
ss. F
undi
ngco
mes
in a
lum
p su
map
prop
riat
ion
base
d on
his
tori
cal f
undi
ngan
d av
aila
ble
reso
urce
s fo
r in
flat
ion-
base
d in
crea
ses.
Oth
er10
%
"Sou
th D
akot
a ha
s no
sta
te-s
uppo
rted
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges.
Tec
hnic
al in
stitu
tions
are
unde
r lo
cal p
ublic
sch
ool
gove
rnan
ce, a
nd a
ny o
ther
two
year
pro
gram
sar
e co
mpo
nent
s of
sta
te-s
uppo
rted
uni
vers
ities
.
Stat
eE
nrol
led
Stud
ents
Syst
emSi
zeFu
ndin
g M
etho
dolo
gySo
urce
s of
Rev
enue
Vir
gini
a12
8,19
5(6
0,79
2FT
Es)
23 (
33ca
mpu
ses)
Due
to f
man
cial
con
stra
ints
, the
Vir
gini
a C
omm
unity
Col
lege
Sys
tem
has
exp
erie
nced
bas
e fu
ndin
g w
ithou
tin
crea
se f
or th
e la
st th
ree
year
s. A
for
mul
a de
velo
ped
the
base
fun
ding
usi
ng f
acul
ty-s
tude
nt r
atio
s, a
nd h
asad
just
men
ts f
or d
iffe
rent
siz
e co
llege
s.
N/A
Was
hing
ton
N/A
(94,
755
FTE
s)
27T
he f
undi
ng f
orm
ula
is a
"ba
se p
lus
cost
" m
odel
whi
chre
cogn
izes
var
iatio
ns in
sup
port
allo
catio
ns f
or a
cade
mic
,vo
catio
nal a
nd b
asic
ski
lls e
nrol
lmen
t.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.89
%12
Loc
al S
ourc
es4%
Oth
er7%
Wes
tV
irgi
nia
N/A
11"
Fund
ing
is b
ased
on
a co
st p
er f
ull-
time
equi
vale
ntst
uden
t usi
ngpe
er a
vera
ges.
N/A
Wis
cons
in44
7,81
9(6
0,28
6te
rEs)
16 (
45ca
mpu
ses)
Stat
e ai
d is
bas
ed o
n a
dist
rict
's p
ropo
rtio
n of
the
stat
ewid
e ai
ded
cost
s, m
odif
ied
by a
dditi
onal
fac
tors
incl
udin
g th
e nu
mbe
r of
ful
l-tim
e eq
uiva
lent
stu
dent
sse
rved
.
Stat
e ai
d is
app
roxi
mat
ely
30%
.
Wyo
min
gN
/A(1
2,93
4FT
Es)
7C
omm
unity
col
lege
s ar
e fu
nded
thro
ugh
a ra
tepe
ren
rollm
ent p
erpr
ogra
m. B
usin
ess
prog
ram
s ge
t 150
% o
fth
e am
ount
allo
cate
d fo
r lib
eral
art
s, a
nd te
chni
cal
cour
ses
and
heal
th c
ours
es g
et 2
00%
. The
re is
a s
mal
lsc
hool
sup
plem
ent w
hich
is a
fla
t rat
egr
ant.
Stat
e A
ppro
p.70
%T
uitio
n an
d fe
es14
%L
ocal
Sou
rces
16%
'2T
he s
tate
gen
eral
fun
d ap
prop
riat
ion
incl
udes
tuiti
on.
S 0
"Nin
e of
the
elev
en c
omm
unity
colle
ges
in W
est V
irgi
nia
are
bran
ches
of
four
year
inst
itutio
ns.
8 4
Appendix 4
Options for IncreasingState Mandated Formula Aid
forCommunity Colleges
Department of Fiscal ServicesOctober 1995
59
85
CALCULATION OF THE FY 1996MINIMUM GRANT
FY 1995 Aid
FY 1993 FTEs
Rate per FTE
FY 1994 FTEs
Minimum $ FY 1996
$89,180,935
70,863
$1,259
70,021
$88,121,642
61 86
STA
TE
MA
ND
AT
ED
RE
VE
NU
E O
PTIO
N:
PER
CE
NT
OF
4-Y
EA
R P
UB
LIC
1996
AID
PE
R F
TE
AT
4-Y
EA
R P
UB
LIC
:$6
,690
.56
1996
FO
RM
UL
A A
ID P
ER
FT
E F
OR
CO
M. C
OL
LE
GE
S$1
,258
.50
CU
RR
EN
T P
ER
CE
NT
19%
TH
E A
TT
AC
HE
D O
PTIO
NS
SHO
W S
EV
ER
AL
EX
AM
PLE
S O
F T
HE
EFF
EC
T O
FIN
)IN
CR
EA
SIN
G T
HE
CO
M. C
OL
LE
GE
'S P
ER
CE
NT
OF
4-Y
EA
R P
UB
LIC
AID
PE
R F
TE
.FO
R C
OM
PAR
ISO
N A
4T
H O
PTIO
N B
ASE
SO
N T
HE
GR
OW
TH
IN
IN
FLA
TIO
N.
TH
E A
SSU
MPT
ION
S U
SED
IN
TH
E F
OL
LO
WIN
GO
PTIO
NS
AR
E:
1. G
RO
WT
H I
N 4
YE
AR
PU
BL
IC E
NR
OL
LM
EN
T:
AV
G. I
NC
RE
ASE
OF
1.4%
2. G
RO
WT
H I
N S
TA
TE
SU
PPO
RT
FO
R 4
YE
AR
PUB
LIC
SC
HO
OL
S: 3
.5%
3. G
RO
WT
H I
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OL
LE
GE
EN
RO
LL
ME
NT
: AV
G. I
NC
RE
ASE
OF
1.6%
4. N
UM
BE
RS
USE
D F
OR
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LL
EG
E F
TE
S A
RE
TW
O Y
EA
RS
PRIO
R
LJ5.
NU
MB
ER
S U
SED
FO
R S
TA
TE
SU
PPO
RT
FOR
4-Y
EA
R P
UB
LIC
AR
E O
NE
YE
AR
PRIO
R
TH
RE
E O
PT
ION
S U
SE
% O
F 4
YE
AR
PU
BLI
C;
FO
UR
TH
OP
TIO
N U
SE
S IN
FLA
TO
R
1. IN
CR
EA
SE
TH
E P
ER
CE
NT
OF
4-Y
R P
UB
LIC
BY
1%
PE
R Y
EA
R:
(C*B
)*A
=D
A
AID
PE
R F
TE
AID
CO
M. C
OL.
@ 4
-YE
AR
YE
AR
FT
ES
PU
BLI
C19
9768
,769
$6,6
119
9869
,693
$6,7
8619
9970
,972
$6,9
3420
0072
,146
$7,0
87N
OT
E: A
id p
er F
TE
at 4
-yea
r pu
blic
sch
ools
isC
omm
unity
col
lege
FT
Es
are
two
year
PR
OP
OS
ED
FO
RM
. AID
1% IN
C.
PC
T.
(mill
ions
)20
%21
%22
%23
%
$92.
0$9
9.3
$108
.3$1
17.6
FO
RM
ULA
AID
CU
R. L
AW
_Jm
iilio
ns)
$86.
5$8
7.7
$89.
3$9
0.8
DIF
.m
illio
ns$5
.5$1
1.6
$19.
0$2
6.8
INC
.O
VE
RC
UR
.6.
3%13
.2%
21.2
%29
.5%
$ IN
C.
YR
-TO
-YR
(mill
ions
)$3
.9$7
.3$9
.0$9
.3
% IN
C.
YR
-TO
-YR
4.4%
7.9%
9.0%
8.6%
base
d on
an
assu
med
ave
rage
enr
ollm
ent i
ncre
ase
w to
the
aid
year
.
2. IN
CR
EA
SE
TH
E P
ER
CE
NT
OF
4-Y
R P
UB
LIC
BY
1.5
% P
ER
YE
AR
:(C
*13)
*Ar-
D
of 1
.4%
and
3.5
% g
row
t h in
gen
eral
fund
sup
port
.
AID
YE
AR
CO
M. C
OL.
FT
ES
AID
PE
R F
TE
@ 4
-YE
AR
PU
BLI
CP
CT
.
PR
OP
OS
ED
FO
RM
. AID
1.5%
INC
.
(mill
ions
)
FO
RM
ULA
AID
CU
R. L
AW
(mill
ions
)D
IF.
(mill
ions
)
INC
.O
VE
RC
UR
.
$ IN
C.
YR
-TO
-YR
(mill
ions
)%
INC
.Y
R-T
O-Y
R19
9768
,769
$6,6
9120
.5%
$94.
3$8
6.5
$7.8
9.0%
$6.2
7.0%
1998
69,6
93$6
,786
22.0
%$1
04.0
$87.
7$1
6.3
18.6
%$9
.710
.3%
1999
70,9
72$6
,934
23.5
%$1
15.7
$89.
3$2
6.3
29.5
%$1
1.6
11.2
%20
0072
,146
$7,0
8725
.0%
$127
.8$9
0.8
$37.
040
.8%
$12.
210
.5%
NO
TE
: Aid
per
FT
E a
t 4-y
ear
publ
ic s
choo
ls is
Com
mun
ity c
olle
ge F
TE
s ar
e tw
o ye
ar
89
base
d on
an
assu
med
ave
rage
enr
ollm
ent i
ncre
ase
prio
r to
the
aid
year
.of
1.4
% a
nd 3
.5%
gro
wt h
in g
ener
al fu
nd s
upp
ort. 30
3. IN
CR
EA
SE
TH
E P
ER
CE
NT
OF
4-Y
R P
UB
UC
BY
2%
PE
R Y
EA
R: (
C*1
3)*A
=D
AP
RO
PO
SE
DF
OR
MU
LAA
ID P
ER
FT
EF
OR
M. A
IDA
ID$
INC
.$
INC
.A
IDC
OM
. CO
L.@
4-Y
EA
R2%
INC
.C
UR
. LA
WD
IF.
OV
ER
YR
-TO
-YR
% IN
C.
YE
AR
FT
ES
PU
BLI
CP
CT
.(m
illio
ns)
(mill
ions
)(m
illio
ns)
CU
R.
(mill
ions
)Y
R-T
O-Y
R19
9768
,769
$6,6
9122
%$1
01.2
$86.
5$1
4.7
17.0
%$1
3.1
14.9
%19
9869
,693
$6,7
8624
%$1
13.5
$87.
7$2
5.8
29.4
%$1
2.3
12.1
%19
9970
,972
$6,9
3426
%$1
28.0
$89.
3$3
8.6
43.3
%$1
4.5
12.7
%20
0072
,146
$7,0
8726
%$1
32.9
$90.
8$4
2.2
46.4
%$5
.03.
9%N
OT
E: A
id p
er F
TE
at 4
-yea
r pu
blic
sch
ools
is b
ased
on a
n as
sum
ed a
vera
ge e
nrol
lmen
t inc
reas
e of
1.4
% a
nd 3
.5%
gro
wth
in g
ener
al fu
ndsu
ppor
t.C
omm
unity
col
lege
FT
Es
are
two
year
prio
r to
the
aid
year
.
4. IN
CR
EA
SE
FU
ND
ING
PE
R F
TE
US
ING
TH
E IM
PLI
CIT
PR
ICE
DE
FLA
TO
R F
OR
ST
AT
E &
LO
CA
L G
OV
ER
NM
EN
T:
(PR
EV
IOU
S Y
EA
R A
PP
RO
P/P
RIO
R Y
EA
R F
TE
)*(1
+E
ST
.IP
WC
UR
RE
NT
YR
. ES
T. F
TE
=T
OT
AL
FU
ND
S
PR
EV
IOU
SA
IDY
EA
RY
EA
R(m
illio
ns)
CO
M C
OL
FT
ES
TO
T F
UN
DS
ES
T.
IDP
ME
TH
OD
IPD
(mill
ions
)19
97$8
8.1
68,7
692.
8%$8
9.0
1998
$89.
069
,693
2.3%
$92.
319
99$9
2.3
70,9
722.
6%$9
6.4
2000
$96.
472
146
2.8%
$100
.7N
OT
E: I
DP
est
imat
e fr
om th
e B
urea
u of
Rev
enue
Est
imat
es, J
uly
1995
9 1
FO
RM
. AID
CU
R. L
AW
(mill
ions
)
$D
IF.
(mill
ions
)
INC
.O
VE
RC
UR
.
DO
LLA
R IN
C.
YR
-TO
-YR
(mill
ions
)%
INC
YR
-TO
-YR
$86.
5$2
.42.
8%$0
.91.
0%$8
7.7
$4.6
5.2%
$3.3
3.7%
$89.
3$7
.07.
9%$4
.14.
4%$9
0.8
$9.9
10.9
%$4
.34.
4%
Opt
ions
for
Cha
ngin
g th
eD
istr
ibut
ion
of C
omm
unity
Col
lege
Form
ula
Aid
FY 1
997-
FY 2
000
Tot
al F
undi
ng is
a Pe
rcen
t of
the
Four
Yea
r U
nive
rsity
Fun
ding
Per
Stud
ent -
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Pres
ente
d to
Sena
te B
udge
t and
Tax
atio
n C
omm
ittee
Hea
lth, E
duca
tion
and
Hum
an R
esou
rces
Sub
com
mitt
eelo
use
Com
mitt
ee o
n W
ays
and
Mea
nsE
duca
tion
Sulv
omm
ittee
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fi
scal
Ser
vice
sN
ovem
ber
1995
9394
Sunu
nary
Thi
s do
cum
ent i
nclu
des
five
for
mul
a di
stri
butio
nop
tions
for
com
mun
ity c
olle
ge f
undi
ng. T
otal
fund
ing
for
each
opt
ion,
on
a pe
r FT
E b
asis
, is
20%
of
the
aid
per
FTE
at t
he f
our
year
pub
licun
iver
sitie
s be
ginn
ing
in f
isca
l 199
7.T
he f
undi
ng g
row
s a
perc
enta
ge p
oint
eac
h fi
scal
year
,re
achi
ng 2
3% in
fis
cal 2
000.
Eac
h op
tion
incl
udes
:
bulle
ted
high
light
s;a
bar
grap
h sh
owin
g fu
ndin
g pe
r FT
E in
the
year
200
0 un
der
the
prop
osed
opt
ion
vers
usfu
ndin
g pe
r FT
E u
nder
cur
rent
law
at c
urre
nt f
undi
ng le
vels
;a
sum
mar
y sh
owin
g th
e ef
fect
of
the
prop
osed
opt
ion
com
pare
d to
curr
ent l
aw; a
ndfo
ur s
prea
dshe
ets
deta
iling
the
optio
n fo
r FY
199
7-
FY 2
000.
The
fiv
e di
stri
butio
n op
tions
are:
A 4
0% F
ixed
and
60%
Var
iabl
e B
asis
(M
odel
1);
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble,
and
5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fact
ors
(Mod
el 2
);
_
Var
iatio
n of
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble,
and
5%
Sm
all
Size
Fac
tors
. The
sm
all s
ize
fact
orde
clin
es a
per
cent
age
poin
t eac
hye
ar to
2%
in f
isca
l 200
0, w
hile
the
fixe
d co
st f
acto
r ri
ses
to 3
8% in
fis
cal 2
000
(Mod
el 3
);
An
Equ
al B
ase
($1,
150,
000
in f
isca
l 199
7), A
lloca
ting
the
Rem
aind
er o
n an
FT
E B
asis
(Mod
el 4
); a
nd
Hol
d H
arm
less
at F
Y 1
996
Lev
els,
Dis
trib
utin
g th
e R
emai
nder
on a
n FT
E B
asis
(M
odel
5,.
9096
Stat
e Fu
nds
Dis
trib
uted
on a
40%
Fix
ed a
nd 6
0% V
aria
ble
Bas
is (
Mod
el 1
)
Und
er th
is m
odel
, 40%
of
the
tota
l fun
dsav
aila
ble
are
dist
ribu
ted
on a
fix
ed c
ost b
asis
. Thi
s40
% is
allo
cate
d to
eac
h co
llege
usi
ng th
ecu
rren
t met
hod
for
allo
catin
g fi
xed
cost
s. E
ach
colle
ge's
sha
re o
f th
e to
tal s
tate
gra
nt f
rom
the'
prio
r fi
scal
year
is c
alcu
late
d, a
nd th
at s
hare
ism
ultip
lied
by th
e to
tal a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
for
fixe
dco
sts.
For
exa
mpl
e, A
llega
ny r
ecei
ved
3.5%
of
the
tota
l sta
te g
rant
in F
Y 1
996.
Tha
tpe
rcen
tage
is m
ultip
lied
by $
36.8
mill
ion,
the
tota
lam
ount
avai
labl
e fo
r fi
xed
cost
s in
FY
199
7. I
.Ale
gany
's s
hare
of f
ixed
cos
ts u
nder
this
mod
el is
$1.
3m
illio
n.
coT
he r
emai
ning
60%
in s
tate
fun
ds is
allo
cate
don
a p
er F
TE
bas
is (
$803
per
FT
E).
Und
er M
odel
1, t
he s
mal
l sch
ools
lose
stat
e fu
nds
each
fis
cal y
ear
(as
com
pare
dto
the
curr
ent
dist
ribu
tion
met
hod)
. The
bar
gra
ph f
or th
isop
tion
show
s th
at A
llega
ny, C
ecil,
Che
sape
ake,
Gar
rett,
and
Hag
erst
own
wou
ld a
ll lo
se f
undi
ngpe
r FT
E in
fis
cal y
ear
2000
. The
sum
mar
y sh
eet
show
s th
eir
perc
ent l
osse
s fr
om th
ecu
rren
t for
mul
a.
Und
er th
is o
ptio
n, th
ere
is li
ttle
vari
atio
n in
aid
per
stud
ent b
y fi
scal
200
0 (a
id v
arie
s fr
om $
1,61
3at
How
ard
to $
1,67
8 at
Gar
rett)
.
The
larg
e an
d m
ediu
m s
ize
scho
ols
all f
are
wel
lun
der
this
mod
el, s
how
ing
gain
s of
arou
nd 4
0%in
fis
cal 2
000
(as
com
pare
d to
pro
ject
edcu
rren
t fun
ding
leve
ls in
the
year
200
0).
3500
3000
I
2500
2000
1500
1000 500 0
Opt
ion
1-40
% F
ixed
, 60%
Var
iabl
eF
undi
ng P
er F
TE
Stu
dent
- F
Y 2
000
r--
Alle
gany
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Che
sape
ake
Gar
rett
Har
ford
Mon
tgom
ery
Wor
-Wic
Ann
e A
rund
elC
arro
llC
harle
sF
rede
rick
Hag
erst
own
How
ard
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Mar
ylan
d C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s
EJ
FY
200
0 -
Cur
rent
Law
FY
200
0 -
Opt
ion
1
100
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
SU
MM
AR
Y
Mod
el 1
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 40
% F
ixed
and
60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) F
acto
rs
Per
cent
incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
awE
stim
ates
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
S
FY
199
7P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
' 99%
Incr
ease
I
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
8P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
9P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
ld
FY
199
9%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
2bo
oP
ropo
sed
1
Sta
te A
idI I
Alle
gany
2,63
8,28
0-1
3.69
%2,
492,
385
-19-
.15%
2,54
1,40
2-1
8.56
%2,
659,
303
Ann
e A
rund
el10
,424
,675
14.3
8%11
,434
,271
23.5
6%12
,592
,957
33.2
1%13
,742
,840
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y22
,130
,665
11.9
3%24
,174
,073
21.4
3%26
,292
,558
30.7
5%28
,388
,036
Car
roll
2,52
3,19
2-8
.07%
2,63
1,65
6-5
.64%
2,86
4,84
20.
21%
3,15
2,91
1C
ecil
1 83
8,37
6-1
4.47
%1,
760,
614
-17.
58%
1,85
1,56
5-1
4.12
%1,
986,
942
Cha
rles
4,42
3,91
813
.94%
4,90
2,25
822
.17%
5,41
0,21
430
.52%
5,89
6,09
6C
hesa
peak
e2,
159,
911
-9.3
7%2,
114,
877
-11.
45%
2,20
3,77
2-8
.56%
2,35
1,23
0F
rede
rick
3,22
0,23
39.
30%
3,55
6,71
017
.91%
3,96
2,08
627
.32%
4,36
9,05
5G
arre
tt1,
189,
703
-31.
53%
1,06
9,33
4-4
1.41
%1,
079,
613
-43.
40%
1,12
4,37
0H
ager
stow
n2,
829,
581
-9.8
5%2,
892,
171
-11.
48%
3,06
4,49
4-9
.40%
3,29
7,36
1H
arfo
rd4,
617,
619
9.09
%5,
025,
207
17.4
7%5,
499,
530
26.4
7%6,
021,
950
How
ard
4,67
2,85
311
.28%
5,12
0,87
119
.58%
5,66
7,56
628
.85%
6,25
4,38
2M
ontg
omer
y15
929
,746
12.2
1%17
,805
,310
23.0
9%19
,776
,898
33.4
2%21
,675
,195
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
11,2
07,4
4510
.17%
12,0
95,3
7619
.32%
13,0
78,0
6128
.73%
14,0
93,4
69W
or-W
ic2,
214,
483
-7.1
4%2,
236,
760
-7.9
0%2,
387,
819
-4.0
1%2,
592,
575
TO
TA
L92
,020
,680
6.86
% ,
99,3
11,8
7313
.80%
108,
273,
377
21.8
3%11
7,60
5,71
5N
ote: T
otal
am
ount
ava
ilabl
e is
bas
ed o
n a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FIE
bas
is, 2
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s be
ginn
ing
in fi
scal
1997
, inc
reas
ing
to 2
3% b
y fis
cal 2
000.
10 ! Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
FY
200
0%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
,-1
5.59
%42
.64%
40.0
2%7.
44%
-8.8
4%38
.63%
-3.4
3%36
.44%
-42.
93%
-5.2
5%1
35.9
8%38
.37%
43.1
1%38
.34%
1.82
%
30.1
8%
Mod
el 1
AF
Y 1
997
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 40
% F
ixed
and
60%
Mar
gina
l(P
er F
TE
) F
acto
rs
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
5F
TE
SD
irect
Gra
nt
oD
irect
rant
:FY
96
40%
IF
ixed
Cos
tid
ust
men
til
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tus
tmen
t
ropo
FY
199
7S
tate
Aid
a
mF
Y 1
997
Cur
rent
Aid
- er
-
Incr
ease
Dec
reas
e
- O
r
New
Opt
ion
FY
199
7
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
997
Alle
gany
1,6
3,07
.3 0
0.03
509,
-- 1
,291
,86i
--1,
346,
4,0
-',T
e-1
.69%
1,57
31,
823
"
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
194
9,16
1,27
90.
1044
843,
845,
881
6,57
8,79
310
,424
,675
9,11
3,96
114
.38%
1,27
21,
112
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y16
,964
20,2
73,1
590.
2312
158,
510,
620
13,6
20,0
4622
,130
,665
19,7
71,0
0611
.93%
1,30
51,
165
Car
roll
1,65
52,
845,
245
0.03
2450
1,19
4,42
71,
328,
765
2,52
3,19
22,
744,
546
4.07
%1,
525
1,65
8C
ecil
1,11
32,
250,
541
0.02
5667
944,
771
893,
605
1,83
8,37
62,
149,
487
-14.
47%
1,65
21,
931
Cha
rles
3,51
73,
811,
817
0.04
3474
1,60
0,19
12,
823,
727
4,42
3,91
83,
882,
798
13.9
4%1,
258
1,10
4C
hesa
peak
e1,
414
2,44
0,79
60.
0278
371,
024,
640
1,13
5,27
12,
159,
911
2,38
3,21
5-9
.37%
1,52
81,
685
Fre
deric
k2,
453
2,97
9,46
10.
0339
811,
250,
770
1,96
9,46
33,
220,
233
2,94
6,16
69.
30%
1,31
31,
201
Gar
rett
592
1,70
1,76
90.
0194
0971
4,39
847
5,30
51,
189,
703
1,73
7,53
6-3
1.53
%2,
010
2,93
5H
ager
stow
n1,
914
3,07
9,74
60.
0351
241,
292,
869
1,53
8,71
12,
829,
581
3,13
8,81
2-9
.85%
1,47
81,
640
Har
ford
3,48
54,
334,
435
0.04
9434
1,81
9,58
52.
798,
035
4,81
7,61
94,
233,
008
9.09
%1,
325
1,21
5H
owar
d3,
612
4,22
3,11
60.
0481
651,
772,
853
2,90
0,00
04,
672,
853
4,19
9,25
011
.28%
1,29
41,
163
Mon
tgom
ery
12,2
4614
,525
,305
0.16
5661
6,09
7,68
89,
832,
061
15,9
29,7
4614
,196
,905
12.2
1%1,
301
1,15
9P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
428
10,5
78,3
820.
1206
464,
440,
777
6.76
6,66
711
,207
,445
10,1
72,5
7310
.17%
1,33
01,
207
Wor
-Wic
1,50
42,
398,
663
0.02
7357
1,00
6,95
31,
207,
531
2,21
4,48
32,
384,
686
-7.1
4%1,
472
1,58
6
TO
TA
L
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
68,7
6887
1681
,034
1.00
0000
36,8
08,2
7255
,212
,408
92,0
20,6
801_
88,1
10,5
531
8.86
%1,
338
1,25
21
043
2,71
892
,020
,680
86,5
43,2
69
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
7 is
bas
ed o
n th
e re
ques
t for
FY
199
7 ($
86,5
33,2
52) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
5.5
mill
ion.
The
$5.
5 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
untty
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 20.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E e
t the
four
year
s.
1 0
6
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.B
EST
CO
PY A
VA
IIA
BL
E
104
Mod
el 1
BF
Y 1
998
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
erS
tude
nt -
1%
Ann
ual i
ncre
ase
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 40
% F
ixed
and
60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) F
acto
rs
_
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
6F
TE
S
40%
Fix
ed C
ost
Ad
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tM
ust
men
t
Pro
pose
dF
Y 1
998
Sta
te A
id a
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
998
Cur
rent
Aid
Per
cent
Incr
ease
-as
e
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
998
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
998
Alle
gany
1,58
31,
138,
929
1,35
3,45
62,
9,
,058
9. 5
1,57
41,
947
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
110
4,50
0,26
76,
934,
004
11,4
34,2
719,
253,
909
23.5
6%1,
410
1,14
1B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,1
009,
553,
669
14,6
20,4
0424
,174
,073
19,9
07,0
4321
.43%
1,41
41,
164
Car
roll
1,80
41,
089,
246
1,54
2,41
02,
631,
656
2,78
9,09
8-5
.64%
1,45
91,
546
Cec
il1,
131
793,
615
966,
999
1,76
0,61
42,
136,
144
-17.
58%
1,55
71,
889
Cha
rles
3,50
01,
909,
777
2,99
2,48
04,
902,
258
4,01
2,49
922
.17%
1,40
11,
146
Che
sape
ake
1,38
393
2,42
01,
182,
457
2,11
4,87
72,
388,
419
-11.
45%
1,52
91,
727
Fre
deric
k2,
534
1,39
0,15
42,
166,
556
3,55
6,71
03,
016,
448
17.9
1%1,
404
1,19
0G
arre
tt65
051
3,58
755
5,74
61,
069,
334
1,82
5,16
7-4
1.41
%1,
645
2,80
8H
ager
stow
n1,
954
1,22
1,51
21,
670,
659
2,89
2,17
13,
267,
357
-11.
48%
1,48
01,
672
Har
ford
3,54
61,
993,
397
3,03
1,81
05,
025,
207
4,27
7,82
817
.47%
1,41
71,
206
How
ard
3,63
02,
017,
241
3,10
3,63
05,
120,
871
4,28
2,30
119
.58%
1,41
11,
180
Mon
tgom
ery
12,7
826,
876,
771
10,9
28,5
3817
,805
,310
14,4
65,5
2523
.09%
1,39
31,
132
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,48
84,
838,
183
7,25
7,19
212
,095
,376
10,1
37,1
3319
.32%
1,42
51,
194
Wor
-Wic
1,49
895
5,97
81,
28%
782
2,23
6,76
02,
4285
44-7
.90%
1,49
31,
621
IT
OT
AL
69,6
9339
,724
,749
59,5
87,1
2499
,311
,873
187
,270
,097
13.8
0%1,
425
1,25
2C
halle
nge
Gra
nts
TO
TA
L S
TA
TE
AID
043
8,54
399
,311
,873
87,7
08,6
40
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
8 is
base
d on
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 1
998
($87
.7m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
11.6
mill
ion.
The
$11
.6 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 21%
of t
he a
id p
er F
TE
at t
he fo
urye
ar p
ublic
s.1
0 b
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
1995
.
Mod
el 1
CF
Y 1
999
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 40
% F
ixed
and
60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) F
acto
rs
CO
LLE
GE
S
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
997
FT
ES
40%
Fix
ed C
ost
Adi
ustm
ent
.74,
r
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
d'us
tmen
tF
Y 1
999
Sta
te A
id a
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
999
Cur
rent
Aid
Per
cent
Per
FT
EIn
crea
seN
ew O
ptio
n(D
ecre
ase)
FY
199
9
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
999
Alle
gany
1,58
91,
086,
915
1,45
4,48
72,
541,
402
3,12
0,61
3-1
8.56
%1,
599
1,96
4A
nne
Aru
ndel
8,31
04,
986,
421
7,60
6,53
612
,592
,957
9,45
3,46
133
.21%
1,51
51,
138
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,207
10,5
42,1
7815
,750
,380
26,2
92,5
5820
,108
,825
30.7
5%1,
528
1,16
9C
arro
ll1,
876
1,14
7,65
01,
717,
191
2,86
4,84
22,
858,
941
0.21
%1,
527
1,52
4C
ecil
1,18
476
7,79
41,
083,
771
1,85
1,58
52,
156,
008
-14.
12%
1,56
41,
821
Cha
rles
3,57
52,
137,
847
3,27
2,36
65,
410,
214
4,14
5,26
030
.52%
1,51
31,
180
Che
sape
ake
1,40
092
2,28
61,
281,
486
2,20
3,77
22,
410,
140
4.56
%1,
574
1,72
2F
rede
rick
2,63
41,
551,
061
2411
,025
3,96
2,08
63,
111,
913
27.3
2%1,
504
1,18
1G
arre
tt67
046
6,33
061
3,28
31,
079,
613
1,90
7,42
4-4
3.40
%1,
611
2,84
7H
ager
stow
n1,
970
1,26
1,26
01,
803,
234
3,06
4,49
43,
382,
383
-9.4
0%1,
556
1,71
7H
arfo
rd3,
614
2,19
1,46
53,
308,
065
5,49
9,53
04,
348,
601
26.4
7%1,
522
1,20
3H
owar
d3,
752
2,23
3,18
33,
434,
383
5,66
7,56
64,
398,
697
28.8
5%1,
511
1,17
2M
ontg
omet
y13
,123
7,76
4,79
612
,012
,102
19,7
76,8
9814
,822
,644
33.4
2%1,
507
1,13
0P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
525
5,27
4,72
67,
803,
335
13,0
78,0
6110
,159
,283
28.7
3%1,
534
1,19
2W
or-W
ic1,
543
975,
439
1,41
2,38
12,
387,
819
2,48
7,47
8-4
.01%
1,54
81,
612
TO
TA
L70
,972
43,3
09,3
5164
,964
,026
108,
273,
3771
88,8
71,6
70 f
21.8
3% I
1,52
6
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
446,
591
108,
273,
377
89,3
18,2
61
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
9 is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 1
999
($89
.3 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
19.0
mill
ion.
The
$19
.0 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
unde
r a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 22.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
10'i
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
108
1,25
2
Mod
el 1
DF
Y 2
000
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
rF
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt -
1%
Ann
ual i
ncre
ase
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 40
% F
ixed
and
60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d F
acto
rs
CO
LLE
GE
S
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
998
FT
ES
40%
Fix
ed C
ost
Adi
ustm
ent
80%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
Pro
pose
dF
Y 2
000
Sta
te A
id (
a)
;I-7
-r:
FY
200
0C
urre
et A
id
-er
ain
crea
seD
ecre
ase
-r
New
Opt
ion
FY
200
0
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 2
000
Alle
gany
1,59
01,
104,
181
1,55
5,12
22,
659,
303
3,15
0,31
2-1
5.59
%1,
673
1,98
1A
nne
Aru
ndel
8,45
75,
471,
350
8,27
1,49
013
,742
,840
9,83
4,33
642
.64%
1,62
51,
139
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,345
11,4
23,5
1018
,984
,526
28,3
88,0
3620
,274
,671
40.0
2%1,
837
1,16
9C
arro
ll1,
951
1,24
4,70
81,
908,
204
3,15
2,91
12,
934,
515
7.44
%1,
616
1,50
4C
ecil
1,20
980
4,46
21,
182,
480
1,98
6,94
22,
179,
681
4.84
%1,
643
1,80
3C
harle
s3,
625
2,35
0,61
33,
545,
483
5,89
6,09
84,
253,
007
38.6
3%1,
627
1,17
3C
hesa
peak
e1,
425
957,
488
1,39
3,74
22,
351,
230
2,43
4,82
13.
43%
1,65
01,
709
Fre
deric
k2,
707
1,72
1,43
52,
647,
620
4,36
9,05
53,
202,
073
38.4
4%1,
614
1,18
3G
arre
tt67
046
9,06
765
5,30
31,
124,
370
1,97
0,08
2-4
2.93
%1,
678
2,94
0H
ager
stow
n2,
010
1,33
1,45
21,
965,
909
3,29
7,38
13,
480,
232
-5.2
5%1,
640
1,73
1H
arfo
rd3,
714
2,38
9,41
93,
632,
531
6,02
1,95
04,
428,
689
35.9
8%1,
821
1,19
2H
owar
d3,
877
2,46
2,42
73,
791,
955
6,25
4,38
24,
519,
883
38.3
7%1,
613
1,16
6M
ontg
omer
y13
,376
8,59
2,60
613
,082
,588
21,6
75,1
9515
,145
,585
43.1
1%1,
620
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
600
5,88
2,11
68,
411,
353
14,0
93,4
8910
,187
,899
38.3
4%1,
639
1,18
5W
or-W
ic1,
590
1,03
7,45
21
,555
,122
2,59
2,57
52,
546,
195
1.82
%1,
631
1,60
1T
OT
AL
72,1
46 j
47,0
42,2
8670
,563
,429
117,
605,
7151
90,3
41,7
611
30.1
8%1
1,63
01
252
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
117,
605,
715
453,
979
90,7
95,7
40
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
200
0 is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 2
000
($90
.8 m
)pl
us1
n9an
add
ition
al $
26.8
mill
ion.
The
$26
.8 m
illio
n is
wha
tco
llege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 23.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blk.
..
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
Ito
Dis
trib
utio
n M
odel
bas
edon
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble,
and
5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fact
or(M
odel
2)
Und
er th
is m
odel
, the
sm
all s
ize
fact
or is
take
n fr
omth
e fi
xed
cost
com
pone
nt, l
ower
ing
fixe
dco
sts
to 3
5% o
f th
e to
tal.
Var
iabl
e co
sts
are
set a
t 60%
of
tota
lst
ate
fund
s av
aila
ble.
As
the
bar
grap
h sh
ows,
eac
h co
mm
unity
col
lege
gai
nsfu
ndin
g pe
r FT
E u
nder
this
opt
ion.
Opt
ion
2 do
es n
ot s
igni
fica
ntly
narr
ow th
e sp
read
in f
undi
ng p
er F
TE
bet
wee
n th
e sm
all c
olle
ges
and
the
med
ium
and
larg
e si
ze s
choo
ls.
No
colle
ge lo
ses
fund
s un
der
this
opt
ion.
112
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
3500
113
3000
Opt
ion
2-
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble
and
5% S
mal
l Siz
eF
undi
ng P
er F
TE
Stu
dent
-F
Y 2
000
2500
2000
1500
I !
1000 500 0
Alle
gany A
nne
r--
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Che
sape
eke
Gar
rett
Har
ford
Mon
tgom
ery
Wor
-Wic
Aru
ndel
Car
roll
Cha
rles
Fre
deric
kH
ager
stow
nH
owar
dP
rince
Geo
rge'
sM
aryl
and
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ges
1 0
FY
200
0-
Cur
rent
Law
ED
FY
200
0 -
Opt
ion
2
o
iS
UM
MA
RY
Mod
el 2
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d 5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
aw E
stim
ates
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
S
FY
199
7P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
71
% In
crea
se
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
8P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
9P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
9%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
200
0P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
200
0-1
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
ur. L
awA
llega
ny3,
134,
089
2.53
%3,
246,
672
5.32
%3,
466,
742
11.0
9%3,
713,
105
17.8
6%A
nne
Aru
neel
9,94
3,94
09.
11%
10,6
90,1
4915
.52%
11,6
85,7
1023
.61%
12,7
14,0
1531
.97%
Bal
timor
e C
cunt
y21
,066
,838
6.55
%22
,578
,023
13.4
2%24
,365
,761
21.1
7%26
,227
,592
29.3
6%C
arro
ll3,
031,
179
10.4
4%3,
396,
754
21.7
9%3,
786,
715
32.4
5%4,
187,
830
42.7
1%C
ecil
2,37
7,57
010
.61%
2,57
4,45
420
.52%
2,83
9,51
931
.70%
3,10
2,01
342
.31%
Cha
rles
4,22
3,89
48.
78%
4,58
7,98
014
.34%
5,02
3,06
021
.18%
5,45
5,08
628
.26%
Che
sape
ake
2,68
9,12
212
.84%
2,90
7,59
521
.74%
3,16
4,35
531
.29%
3,43
6,76
741
.15%
Fre
deric
k3,
063,
887
4.00
%3,
323,
884
10.1
r1)
3,67
9,36
118
.23%
4,04
6 39
326
.37%
Gar
rett
1,75
7,69
41.
16%
1,92
9,05
45.
69%
2,12
2,75
711
.29%
2,30
2,34
716
.87%
Hag
erst
own
3,32
5,26
25.
94%
3,63
6,08
811
.29%
3,96
4,08
317
.20%
4,31
2,96
523
.93%
Har
ford
4,39
0,17
13.
71%
4,69
0,11
89.
64%
5,09
7,73
217
.23%
5,57
0,52
225
.78%
How
ard
4,45
1,24
76.
00%
4,78
5,00
811
.74%
5,26
0,25
919
.59%
5,79
1,73
428
.14%
Mon
tgom
ery
15,1
67,5
366.
84%
16,6
57,8
0215
.16%
18,3
68,4
2923
.92%
20,0
65,6
6532
.49%
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
10,6
52,3
484.
72%
11,2
80,9
2511
.28%
12,1
07,9
4019
.18%
13,0
14,3
9627
.75%
Wor
-Wic
2,74
5,90
515
.15%
3,02
7,36
824
.66%
3,34
0,95
334
.31%
3,66
5,28
443
.95%
TO
TA
L92
,020
,680
6.86
%99
,311
,873
108,
273,
377
21.8
3%11
7,60
5,71
530
.18c
io-
Not
e: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 20%
of t
he a
id p
erF
TE
at t
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
ics
begi
nnin
g in
fisc
al 1
997,
incr
easi
ng to
23%
by fi
scal
200
0.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
115
116
OD
Mod
el 2
AF
Y 1
997
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt 1
%A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
isbi
bute
d by
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% M
argi
nal (
Per
FT
E)
and
5% S
mel
l Siz
e F
acto
rs
CO
LLE
GE
S
wo:
---.
'
_IN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
997
- er
Cur
rent
Law
1997
7416
9anY
.- ,,,
-,e
tkV
e:7
V.7
",-
:iC
Ann
e A
rund
elt 1
949,
161,
279
0.10
4484
3,36
5,14
86,
578,
793
09,
943,
940
9,11
3,96
19.
11%
1,21
41,
112
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y16
,964
20,2
73,1
590.
2312
157,
446,
792
13,6
20,0
480
21.0
e6,6
3819
,771
,005
6.55
%1,
242
1,16
5C
arro
ll1,
655
2,84
5,24
50.
0324
501,
045,
123
1,32
8,78
585
7,29
13,
031,
179
2,74
4,54
810
.44%
1,83
21,
658
Cec
il1,
113
2,25
0,54
10.
0256
6782
6,67
589
3,60
565
7,29
12,
377,
570
2,14
9,48
710
.81%
2,13
61,
931
Chi
tties
3,51
73,
811,
817
0.04
3474
1,40
0,18
72,
623,
727
04,
223,
894
3,88
2,79
68.
78%
1,20
11,
104
Che
sape
ake
1,41
42,
440,
796
0.02
7837
896,
560
1,13
5,27
185
7,75
412,
689,
122
2,38
3,21
512
.84%
1,90
21,
685
Fre
deric
k2,
453
2,97
9,46
10.
0339
811,
094,
424
1,96
9,48
30
3,06
3,88
72,
946,
166
4.00
%1,
249
1,20
1G
arre
tt59
21,
701,
769
0.01
? 09
625,
098
475,
305
657,
291
1,75
7,69
41,
737,
536
1.16
%2,
969
2,93
5H
ager
stow
n1,
914
3,07
9,74
80.
0351
241,
131,
261
1,53
6,71
105
7,29
13,
325,
262
3,13
8,81
25.
94%
1,73
71,
640
Har
ford
3,48
54,
334,
435
0.04
9434
1,59
2,13
72,
796,
035
04,
300,
171
4,23
3,00
83.
71%
1,26
01,
215
How
ard
3,61
24,
223,
118
0.04
8165
1,55
1,24
72,
900,
000
04,
451,
247
4,19
9,25
06.
00%
1,23
21,
163
Mon
tgom
ery
12,2
4614
,525
,305
0.16
5661
5,33
5,47
50,
832,
061
015
,167
,538
14,1
96,9
056.
84%
1,23
91,
159
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,42
810
,578
,382
0.12
0646
3,88
5,68
06,
768,
667
010
,852
,348
10,1
72,5
734.
72%
1,26
41,
207
Wor
-Wic
1,50
42,
388,
683
0.02
7357
881,
0e3
1,20
7,53
185
7,29
12,
745,
905
2,38
4686
15.1
5%1,
826
1,58
6T
OT
AL
68,7
6867
,681
,034
l1.
0000
0032
,207
,238
55,2
12,4
08
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
Not
es: (a).
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
199
7* b
ased
on
the
requ
est f
or F
Y 1
507
($88
,533
,52)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$5.
5 m
illio
n. T
he $
5.5
mill
ion
* w
het c
olle
ges
voou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
mr_
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
one
per
FT
E b
asis
, 20.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
rs.
117
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
ortm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
oes,
Oct
ober
198
6.
4,60
1,03
4 I
9z02
o,e8
0 I
86,1
10,5
63 I
432,
718
92,0
20,6
8088
,543
,269
6.86
%1,
338
1 25
21
Mod
el 2
0F
Y 1
998
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ed
FY
199
6F
TE
S
35%
Fix
ed C
ost
Ad
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
d us
tmen
t
5%S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
Pro
pose
dI
FY
190
8S
tate
Aid
a
Eim
aF
Y 1
998
Cur
rent
Aid
T
Incr
ease
D -
ase
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
998
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
998
1 eg
any
.ic.
.,
,.
$,
, je
,r.r
,$
$.
.7)
1A
nne
Aru
ndel
8:11
03,
758,
144
6,93
4,00
40
10,6
90,1
499,
253,
909
15.5
2%'1
,318
1,14
1B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,1
007,
957,
819
14,6
20,4
040
22,5
78,0
2319
,907
,043
13.4
2%1,
320
1,16
4C
arro
ll1,
804
1,14
4,97
31,
542,
410
709,
371
3,39
6,75
42,
789,
098
21.7
9%1,
883
1,54
6C
ecil
1,13
189
8,08
496
6,99
970
9,37
12,
574,
454
2,13
6,14
420
.52%
2,27
61,
889
Cha
rles
3,50
01,
595,
500
2,99
2,48
00
4,58
7,98
04,
012,
499
14.3
4%1,
311
1,14
6C
hesa
peak
e1,
383
1,01
5,76
71,
182,
457
709,
371
2,90
7,59
52,
388,
419
21.7
4%2,
102
1,72
7F
rede
rick
2534
1,15
7,32
82,
166,
556
03,
323,
884
3,01
8,44
810
.19%
1,31
21,
190
Gar
rett
650
663,
937
555,
746
709,
371
1,92
9,05
41,
825,
187
5.69
%2,
968
2,80
8H
ager
stow
n1,
954
1,25
8,05
81,
670,
859
709,
371
3,83
8,08
83,
287,
357
11.2
9%1,
881
1,67
2H
arfo
rd3,
546
1,65
8,30
83,
031,
810
04,
890,
118
4,27
7,82
89.
84%
1,32
31,
206
How
ard
3,63
01,
681,
378
3,10
3,63
00
4,78
5,00
84,
282,
301
11.7
4%1,
318
1,18
0M
ontg
omer
y12
,782
5,72
9,26
410
,928
,538
016
,657
,802
14,4
85,5
2515
.18%
1,30
31,
132
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,48
84,
023,
733
7,25
7,19
20
11,2
80,9
2510
,137
,133
11.2
8%1,
329
1,19
4W
or-W
ic1
498
1 03
7 21
61
280
782
709
371
3 02
7 38
82
428
544
24.8
5%2,
021
1 62
1
IT
OT
AL
69,6
9334
,759
,156
59,5
87,1
244,
965,
504
99,3
11,8
7387
,270
,097
113
.80%
1,42
51,
252
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
438,
543
99,3
11,8
7387
,708
,80
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
8 Is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
1998
($8
7.7
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$11
.6 m
illio
n. T
he $
11.6
mill
ion
Is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
1% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
119
120
Mod
el S
CFY
199
9Pe
rcen
t of
Four
Yea
r Fu
ndin
g Pe
r O
udot
- 1%
Mnu
al in
crea
se
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 10%
Mar
gina
l (Pe
r FT
E)
and
5% S
mal
l Siz
e Fa
ctor
CO
LL
EG
ES
Est
imat
edFY
199
7FT
ES
I. ,
Fixe
d C
ost
_A _
id u
strn
ent
.ri"
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
dlus
tmen
tSm
all W
sFa
ctor
FY 1
999
Stat
e A
ld a
LL
IRIn
crea
seD
ecre
ase
erN
ew O
ptio
nFY
199
9
Per
FTE
Cur
rent
Law
FY 1
999
Akg
any
1,58
91,
238,
874
1,45
4,48
777
3,38
,3,
117"
2,18
21,
964
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
310
4,07
9,17
57,
606,
536
011
,685
,710
9,45
3,48
123
.61%
1,40
61,
138
Bal
dmor
e C
ount
y17
,207
8,61
5,38
015
,750
,380
024
,365
,761
20,1
08,6
2521
.17%
1,41
61,
169
Car
roll
1,87
61,
296,
142
1,71
7,19
177
3,38
13,
766,
715
2,85
8,94
132
.45%
2,01
91,
524
Cec
il1,
184
982,
367
1,08
3,77
177
3,38
12,
639,
519
2,15
6,00
631
.70%
2,39
81,
621
Cha
rles
3,57
51,
750,
693
3,27
2,36
60
5,02
3,06
04,
145,
260
21.1
8%1,
405
1,16
0C
hesa
peak
e1,
400
1,10
9,48
81,
281,
486
773,
381
3,16
4,35
52,
410,
140
3129
%2,
260
1,72
2Fr
eded
ck26
341,
268,
336
2,41
1,02
50
3,67
9,36
13,
111,
913
1823
%1,
397
1,18
1G
arre
tt07
073
6,09
361
3,28
377
3,38
12,
122,
757
1,00
7,42
411
29%
3,16
82,
847
Hag
erst
own
1,97
01,
387,
468
1,80
3,23
477
3,38
13,
964,
083
3,38
2,38
317
20%
2,01
21,
717
Har
fo:..
!3,
014
1,78
9,66
73,
308,
065
05
097,
732
4,34
8,60
117
23%
1,41
11,
203
How
ard
3,75
21,
825,
876
3,43
4,38
30
5;40
,259
4,39
8,69
719
.59%
1,40
21,
172
Mon
tgom
ery
13,1
236,
356,
327
12,0
12,1
020
18,3
68,4
2914
,822
,644
23.9
2%1,
400
1,13
0Pr
ince
Geo
rge'
s8,
525
4,30
4,60
57,
803,
335
012
,107
,940
10,1
59,2
8319
.18%
1,42
01,
192
Wor
-Wic
1,54
31,
155,
191
1,41
2,38
177
3,38
13,
340,
953
2,48
7,47
834
.31%
2,16
51,
612
flT
OT
AL
70,9
7237
,895
,882
64,9
64,0
265.
413,
669
108,
273,
377
I88
,871
,670
121
.83%
Cha
Nen
ge G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
446,
591
108,
273,
377
89,3
18,2
61
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
9 is
bas
ed o
n th
epr
ojec
tions
for
FY
199
9 (6
89.3
m)
pkis
an a
dditi
onal
$19
.0 m
illio
n. T
he $
19.0
mill
ion
is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
veun
der
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r FT
E b
asis
, 22.
0% o
f th
e ai
dpe
r FT
E a
t the
pub
lic f
our
year
s.
121_
Prep
ared
by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fi
scal
Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
1,52
61,
252
J
Mod
el 2
DFY
200
0Pe
rcen
t of
Four
Yea
r Fu
ndin
g Pe
r St
uden
t1%
Ann
ual M
ania
s'
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 110
% M
argi
nal (
Per
FTE
) an
d 5%
Sm
all S
im F
acto
r
CO
LL
EG
ES
Est
imat
edFY
199
8FT
ES
35%
Eke
d C
ost
Atit
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
7
Smal
l Siz
e1.
Fact
orFY
200
0St
ate
Aid
a
.1-
FY20
00C
urre
nt A
ldIn
crea
se-
or
New
Opt
ion
FY 2
000
Psr
Cur
rent
Law
FY 2
000
1,5a
og1,
317,
MT
1,55
6,12
2'84
0,1,
-3,
1- .
17. 7
",
351,
981
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
457
4,44
2,52
58,
271,
490
012
,714
,015
9,63
4,33
631
.97%
1,50
31,
139
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,345
9,26
3,06
616
,964
,526
026
,227
,592
20,2
74,6
7129
.36%
1,51
21,
169
Car
roll
1,95
11,
439,
585
1,90
8,20
484
0,04
14,
187,
830
2,93
4,51
542
.71%
2,14
71,
504
Cec
il1,
209
1,07
9,49
21,
182,
480
840,
041
3,10
2,01
32,
179,
681
42.3
1%2,
566
1,80
3C
harl
es3,
625
1,90
9,60
33,
545,
463
05,
455,
086
4,25
3,00
728
.26%
1,50
51,
173
Che
sape
ake
1,42
51,
202,
984
1,39
3,74
264
0,04
13,
436,
767
2,43
4,82
141
.15%
2,41
21,
709
Fred
eric
k2,
707
1,39
8,77
32,
647,
620
04,
046,
393
3,20
2,07
326
.37%
1,49
51
183
Gar
rett
670
807,
003
655,
303
840,
041
2,30
2,34
71,
970,
082
16.8
7%3,
436
2,94
0H
ager
stow
n2,
010
1,50
7,01
51,
965,
909
840,
041
4,31
2,96
53,
480,
232
23.9
3%2,
146
1,73
1H
arfo
rd3,
714
1,93
7 ,9
913,
632,
531
05,
570,
522
4,42
8,66
925
.78%
1,50
01,
192
How
ard
3,87
71,
999,
778
3,79
1,95
50
5,79
1,73
44,
519,
883
26.1
4%1,
494
1,16
6M
ontg
omer
y13
,376
6,98
3,07
713
,082
,588
020
,065
,665
15,1
45,5
8532
.49%
1,50
01,
132
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,60
04,
603,
043
8,41
1,35
30
13,0
14,3
9610
,187
,699
27.7
5%1,
513
1,18
5W
or-W
ic1,
590
1,27
0,12
11,
555,
122
840,
041
3,66
5,28
42,
546,
195
43.9
5%2,
305
1,60
1
1T
OT
AL
72,1
461
41,1
62,0
00
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E N
D
70,5
63,4
295,
860,
286
ET
7,6
05,7
1590
,341
,761
130
.18%
11,
630
1,25
2
453,
979
117,
605,
715
90,7
95,7
40
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e kc
FY
200
0 is
bas
ed o
n th
epr
ojec
tions
for
FY
200
0 ($
90.8
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$26
.8 m
illio
n. T
he $
26.8
mill
ion
is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r FT
E b
asis
, 23.
0% o
fal
d pe
r FT
E a
tth
e fo
ur y
ears
.
Prep
ared
by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fi
scal
Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
124
123
Dis
trib
utio
n M
odel
bas
edon
35%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble,
and
5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fact
or. T
hesm
all s
ize
fact
or d
eclin
esa
perc
enta
ge p
oint
eac
h ye
ar to
2%
in f
isca
l 200
0, w
hile
the
fixe
dco
st c
ompo
nent
ris
es to
38%
(M
odel
3)
Und
er th
is m
odel
, the
sm
all s
ize
fact
or is
take
n fr
om th
e fi
xed
cost
com
pone
nt, l
ower
ing
fixe
d co
sts
to 3
5% o
f th
e to
tal.
The
var
iabl
e co
stco
mpo
nent
is s
et a
t 60%
of
tota
l sta
tefu
nds
avai
labl
e. T
he f
ixed
cos
t com
pone
nt in
crea
ses
byon
e pe
rcen
tage
poi
nt e
ach
year
until
it r
each
es 3
8% in
fis
cal 2
000.
Lik
ewis
e, th
e sm
all s
ize
fact
or d
ecre
ases
a pe
rcen
tage
poin
t eac
h ye
ar to
2%
in f
isca
l 200
0.
As
the
bar
grap
h sh
ows,
onl
y G
arre
tt C
ount
y w
ould
lose
fund
ing
per
FTE
by
the
year
200
0co r.
)un
der
this
opt
ion.
Gar
rett
wou
ld s
till r
ecei
ve $
2,59
2pe
r st
uden
t, ap
prox
imat
ely
$470
mor
epe
r st
uden
t tha
n an
y ot
her
com
mun
ity c
olle
ge.
As
the
sum
mar
y sh
eet s
how
s, G
arre
tt is
the
only
col
lege
to lo
se f
unds
und
er th
is o
ptio
n,be
ginn
ing
in f
isca
l 199
8 w
ith a
1%
loss
. Fou
r of
the
smal
l sch
ools
(C
arro
ll, C
ecil,
Che
sape
ake
and
Wor
-Wic
) ha
ve th
e st
rong
est g
ains
in th
efi
rst f
isca
l yea
r of
this
opt
ion.
By
fisc
al 2
000,
as
the
smal
l siz
e fa
ctor
dec
lines
in v
alue
,m
ediu
m a
nd la
rge
scho
ols
show
the
best
gai
ns u
nder
this
opt
ion.
Und
er th
is o
ptio
n, th
e sp
read
in a
idpe
r FT
E d
ecre
ases
abo
ut 6
0%.
1.2b
ra;
03
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
! ,
1000
12
500
H
0
Opt
ion
3-
38%
Fix
ed, 6
0% V
aria
ble
and
2% S
mal
l Siz
eF
undi
ng P
er F
TE
Stu
dent
-F
Y 2
000
7p
:1
Alle
gany
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Che
sape
ake
Gar
rett
Har
ford
Mon
tgom
ery
Wor
-Wic
Ann
e A
rund
elC
arro
llC
harle
sF
rede
rick
Hag
erst
own
How
ard
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Mar
ylan
d C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s
7: F
Y 2
000
- C
urre
nt L
aw E
l FY
200
0-
Opt
ion
3
Sm
all s
ize
fact
or is
5%
in F
Y 1
997;
dec
reas
es a
per
cent
age
poin
t eac
h ye
ar to
2%
In F
Y 2
000.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
128
SU
MM
AR
Y
Mod
el 3
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
erF
TE
) an
d 5%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
(Siz
e F
acto
r D
ecre
ases
to 2
% b
y F
Y 2
000,
Fix
edG
row
s to
38%
)
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
aw E
stim
ates
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
S
FY
199
7P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
idI
FY
199
7%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
8:
Pro
pose
dS
tate
Aid
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
9P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
9%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)Jj
Ove
r C
ur. U
vjj
FY
200
0P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
rF
Y 2
000
-1%
Incr
ease
I(D
ecre
ase)
Love
r C
ur. L
aw'A
llega
ny3,
134,
089
2.53
%3,
138,
622
1.81
%3,
184,
596
2.05
%3,
205,
5901
1.75
%A
nne
Aru
ndel
9,94
3,94
09.
11%
10,7
97,4
6716
.68%
11,9
62,0
9726
.54%
13,2
08,8
8337
.10%
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y21
,066
,838
6.55
%22
,805
,383
14.5
6%24
,949
,783
24.0
7%27
,262
,626
34.4
7%C
arro
ll3,
031,
179
10.4
4%3,
287,
593
17.8
7%3,
507,
394
22.6
8%3,
691,
907
25.8
1%C
ecil
2,37
7,57
010
.61%
2,45
8,23
915
.08%
2,53
9,42
217
.78%
2,56
6,65
117
.75%
Cha
rles
4,22
3,89
48.
78%
4,63
3,56
615
.48%
5,14
1,48
824
.03%
5,68
7,64
833
.26%
Che
sape
ake
2,68
9,12
212
.84%
2,79
4,74
317
.01%
2,87
2,87
919
.20%
2,91
5,54
819
.74%
Fre
deric
k3,
063,
887
4.00
%3,
356,
950
11.2
9%3,
765,
176
20.9
9%4,
201,
708
31.2
2%G
arre
tt1,
757,
694
1.16
%1,
806,
150
-1.0
4%1,
805,
889
-5.3
2%1,
738,
706
-11.
85%
Hag
erst
own
3,32
5,26
25.
94%
3,53
0,10
18.
04%
3,69
1,26
19.
13%
3,82
5,50
59.
92%
Har
ford
4,39
0,17
13.
71%
4,73
7,49
810
.75%
5,21
9,11
220
.02%
5,78
6,73
530
.67%
How
ard
4,45
1,24
76.
00%
4,83
3,04
712
.86%
5,38
3,97
322
.40%
6,01
4,20
733
.06%
Mon
tgom
ery
15,1
67,5
366.
84%
16,8
21,4
9516
.29%
18,7
97,6
8026
.82%
20,8
41,3
8937
.61%
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
10,6
52,3
484.
72%
11,3
95,8
8912
.42%
12,4
00,2
9222
.06%
13,5
29,6
1232
.80%
Wor
-Wic
2,74
5,90
515
.15%
2,91
5,12
920
.04%
3,05
2,33
622
.71%
3,15
1,00
023
.75%
TO
TA
LP
92,0
20,6
806.
86%
99,3
11,8
7313
.80%
108,
273,
377
21.8
3%11
7,60
5,71
530
.18%
Not
e: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
chlle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
0% o
f the
aid
per
,FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s be
ginn
ing
in fi
scal
199
7, in
crea
sing
to 2
3% b
y fis
cal 2
000.
1 j
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
Mod
el 3
AF
Y 1
997
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r Fu
ndin
g Pe
r St
uden
t - 1
% A
nnua
l Inc
luse
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 35
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (Pe
r FT
E)
and
5% S
mal
l Siz
e Fa
ctor
CO
LLE
GE
S
ITP
: de
FY
199
5F
TE
S
, ...
Dire
ctG
rant
'ti
Dire
ctan
tFY
96
-'
Fbo
d C
ost
Adu
stm
ent
:1 '
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
d us
tmen
t
e-.:
,
.
leN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
997
Of
Cur
rent
law
FY
199
7Ile
gany A
rund
el8,
194
9,16
1,27
9
..
0.10
4484
ii
3,36
5,14
6
11.
6,57
8,79
30
V0
.t
9,94
3,94
0
I 4
.:7
1'
9,11
3,98
19.
11%
1,21
41,
112
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y16
,964
20,2
73,1
590.
2312
157,
446,
792
13,6
20,0
460
21,0
68,8
3819
,771
,008
6.55
%1,
242
1,16
5C
arro
l1,
655
2,84
5,24
50.
0324
501,
045,
123
1,32
8,76
565
7,29
13,
031,
179
2,74
4,54
810
.44%
1,83
21,
658
Cec
il1,
113
2,25
0,54
10.
0256
6782
6,67
589
3,60
585
7,29
12,
377,
570
2,14
9,48
710
.61%
2,13
61,
931
Chi
llies
3,51
73,
811,
817
0.04
3474
1,40
0,16
72,
823,
727
04,
223,
894
3,88
2,79
88.
78%
1,20
11,
104
Che
sape
ake
1.41
42,
440,
796
0.02
7837
896,
560
1,13
5,27
185
7,29
12,
689,
122
2,38
3,21
512
.84%
1,90
21,
685
Fre
deric
k2,
453
2,97
9,46
10.
0339
811,
094,
424
1,96
9,46
30
3,06
3,88
72,
946,
166
4.00
%1,
249
1,20
1G
arre
tt59
21,
701,
769
0.01
9409
625,
098
475,
305
657,
291
1,75
7,69
41,
737,
536
1.16
%2,
969
2,93
5H
ager
stow
n1,
914
3,07
9,74
60.
0351
241,
131,
261
1,53
8,71
185
7,29
13,
325,
262
3,13
8,81
25.
94%
1,73
71,
640
Hat
ford
3,48
54,
334,
435
0.04
9434
1,59
2,13
72,
798,
035
04,
390,
171
4,23
3,00
83.
71%
1,28
01,
215
How
ard
3,61
24,
223,
116
0.04
8165
1,55
1,24
72,
900,
000
04.
451,
247
4,19
9,25
06.
00%
1,23
21,
163
Mon
tgom
ery
12,2
4614
,525
,305
0.16
5661
5,33
5,47
59,
832,
081
015
,187
,536
14,1
96,9
056.
84%
1,23
91,
159
Prim
e G
eorg
e's
8,42
810
,578
,382
0.12
0648
3,88
5,68
06,
768,
667
010
,652
,348
10,1
72,5
734.
72%
1,26
41,
207
Wor
-Wc
1,50
42,
398,
663
0.02
7357
881,
083
1,20
7,53
165
7,29
12,
745,
905
2,38
4,68
615
.15%
1,82
61,
566
1---
YO
TA
L68
,768
87,6
81,0
34
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
1.00
0000
32,2
07,2
3855
,212
,408
4,60
1,03
492
,020
,680
186
,110
,553
16.
86%
I1,
338
1,25
2
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
199
7 is
bas
ed o
n th
e re
ques
t for
FY
199
7 ($
88,5
33,2
52)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$5.
5 m
illio
n. T
he $
5.5
mill
ion
is *
bat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 20.
0% o
f the
aid
pot
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
rs.
131
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
043
2,71
892
,020
,880
86,5
43,2
69
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
132
CO
Mod
el 3
I3F
Y 1
998
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r Fun
ding
Per
Stu
dent
1%
Ann
ual i
ncre
ase
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 36
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d 4%
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
r IC
OLL
EG
ES
Aud
ited
FY
199
6F
TE
S
36%
Fix
ed C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
80%
-M
argi
nal C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
44S
mal
l Siz
eF
acto
r
,ro
P°
PF
319:
:Y
Sta
te A
id a
Est
in1a
ted
FY
1998
Cur
rent
Ald
Per
cent
r
Incr
ease
. - t
-as
e
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
998
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt la
wF
Y 1
998
Alle
gany
1,58
11,
217,
670
1,35
3,49
37.
, 38,
60
;2.;
.1.8
1%1,
983
1,94
7A
nne
Aru
ndel
8,11
03,
863,
463
6,93
4,00
40
10,7
97,4
879,
253,
909
18.8
8%1,
331
1,14
1B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,1
008,
184,
979
14,6
20,4
040
22,8
05,3
8319
,907
,043
14.5
6%1,
334
1,16
4C
arro
ll1,
804
1,17
7,68
71,
542,
410
567,
496
3,28
7,59
32,
789,
098
17.8
7%1,
822
1,54
6C
ecil
1,13
192
3,74
496
6,99
956
7,49
62,
458,
239
2,13
8,14
415
.08%
2,17
41,
889
Cha
rles
3,50
01,
641,
086
2,99
2,48
00
4,63
3,56
84,
012,
499
15.4
8%1,
324
1,14
6C
hesa
peak
e1,
383
1,04
4,78
91,
182,
457
567,
496
2,79
4,74
32,
388,
419
17.0
1%2,
021
1,72
7F
rede
rick
Z53
41,
190,
395
2,16
8,55
80
3,35
8,95
03,
016,
448
11.2
9%1,
325
1,19
0G
arre
tt65
068
2,90
755
5,74
656
7,49
61,
806,
150
1,82
5,16
7-1
.04%
2,77
92,
808
Hag
erst
own
1,95
41,
291,
945
1,67
0,65
956
7,49
63,
530,
101
3,26
7,35
78.
04%
1,80
71,
672
Har
ford
3,54
81,
705,
688
3,03
1,81
00
4,73
7,49
84,
277,
828
10.7
5%1,
336
1,20
6H
owar
d3,
630
1,72
9,41
83,
103,
630
04,
833,
047
4,28
2,30
112
.86%
1,33
11,
180
Mon
tgom
ery
12,7
825,
892,
957
10,9
28,5
380
16,8
21,4
9514
,485
,525
16.2
9%1,
316
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
488
4,13
8,69
67,
257,
192
011
,395
,889
10,1
37,1
3312
.42%
1,34
31,
194
Wor
-Wic
1,49
8_1,
066,
851
1,28
0,78
256
7,49
62,
915,
129
2,42
8,54
420
.04%
1,94
61,
621
TO
TA
L
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
69,6
9335
,752
,274
159
,587
,124
3,97
2,47
599
,311
,873
187
,270
,097
113
.80%
1,42
51,
2521
438,
543
99,3
11,8
7387
,708
,640
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
199
8 is
bas
ed o
n th
epr
ojec
tions
for
FY
199
8 ($
87,7
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$11
.6 m
illio
n. T
he $
11.6
mill
ion
is w
hat
colle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
at13
3gr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
1% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
134
Mod
el 3
CF
Y 1
999
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt. 1
% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 37
% F
ixed
, 40%
Mar
gina
l (P
er F
TE
) an
d 3%
Sm
all N
u F
acto
r
CO
LL
EG
ES_
_I
Est
imat
edFY
199
7FT
ES
37%
Fbre
d C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
djus
tmen
t
3%S
mal
Siz
eFa
ctor
Prop
osed
FY 1
999
Stat
e A
ld a
Est
imat
edFY
199
9I
Cur
rent
Aid
--Pe
rcen
tIn
crea
seI
Dec
reas
e
-Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nFY
199
9
Per
FTE
Cur
rent
law
FY 1
999
Afi
gany
1,58
91,
266,
080
1,45
4,48
716
4021
84,
3,12
0,51
.05%
2,00
41,
964
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
310
4,35
5,56
17,
606,
536
011
,962
,097
9,45
3,46
126
.54%
1,43
91,
138
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,207
9,19
9,40
215
,750
,380
024
,949
,783
20,1
08,8
2524
.07%
1,45
01,
169
Car
roll
1,87
61,
326,
173
1,71
7,19
146
4,02
93,
507,
394
2,85
8,94
122
.68%
1,87
01,
524
Cec
il1,
184
991,
622
1,08
3,77
146
4,02
92,
539,
422
2,15
6,00
817
.78%
2,14
51,
821
Cha
dors
3,57
51,
869,
122
3,27
2,36
60
5,14
1,48
84,
145,
260
24.0
3%1,
438
1,16
0C
hesa
peak
e1,
400
1,12
7,36
41,
281,
486
464,
029
2,87
2,87
92,
410,
140
19.2
0%2,
052
1,72
2Fr
eder
ick
2,63
41,
354,
151
2,41
1,02
50
3,76
5,17
63,
111,
913
20.9
9%1,
429
1,18
1G
arre
tt67
072
8,57
861
3,28
346
4,02
91,
805,
889
1,90
7,42
4-5
.32%
2,69
52,
847
Hag
erst
own
1,97
01,
423,
998
1,80
3,23
446
4,02
93,
691,
261
3,38
2,38
39.
13%
1,87
41,
717
Har
ford
3,61
41,
911,
047
3,30
8,06
50
5,21
9,11
24,
348,
601
20.0
2%1,
444
1,20
3H
owar
d3,
752
1,94
9,59
03,
434,
383
05,
383,
973
4,39
8,69
722
.40%
1,43
51,
172
Mon
tgom
ery
13,1
236,
785,
578
12,0
12,1
020
18,7
97,6
8014
,822
,644
26.8
2%1,
432
1,13
0Pr
ince
Geo
rge'
s8,
525
4,59
6,95
77,
803,
335
012
,400
,292
10,1
59,2
8322
.06%
1,45
51,
192
Wor
-Wic
1,54
31,
175,
926
1412
,381
464,
029
3,05
2,33
62,
487,
478
22.7
1%1,
978
1,61
2
TO
TA
L70
,972
40,0
61,1
4964
,964
,026
3,24
8,20
110
8,27
3,37
7188
,871
,670
121
.83%
]1,
5261
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
446,
591
108,
273,
377
89,3
18,2
61
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
1999
is b
ased
on
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 1
999
($89
.3 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
19.0
mill
ion.
The
$19
.0 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 22.
0% o
f the
ald
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s.
135
Prep
ared
by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fi
scal
Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995,
136
co
Mod
el 3
DFY
:000
Perc
ent o
f Fo
ur Y
ear
Fund
ing
Per
Stud
ent -
1%
Ann
ual i
ncre
ase
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y 38
% F
ixed
, 60%
Mar
gina
l (Pe
r FT
E)
and
t% S
mal
l Siz
e Fa
ctor
CO
LLE
GE
S
Est
imat
edP
t' 19
98F
TE
S
18%
Fix
ed C
ost
Adj
ustm
ent
60%
Mar
gina
l Cos
tA
dlus
tmen
t
. 7
Sm
all S
ize
Fac
tor
FY
200
0S
tate
Aid
a)
e7 "
..r.'
.
FY
200
0C
urre
nt A
ldIn
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
-er
New
Opt
ion
FY
200
0
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt la
wF
Y 2
000
Alle
gany
1,59
01,
314,
452
1,-t
.i.V
.I
.1%
i '1
/Tif
f1,
981
Ann
* A
rund
el8,
457
4,93
7,39
38,
271,
490
013
208,
883
9,63
4,33
637
.10%
I ,56
21,
139
Bak
knor
e C
ount
y17
,345
10,2
98,1
0016
,964
,526
027
,262
,626
20,2
74,6
7134
.47%
1,57
21,
169
Car
roll
1,95
11,
447,
688
1,90
8,20
433
6,01
63,
691,
907
2,93
4,51
525
.81%
1,89
21,
504
Cec
il1,
209
1,04
8,15
41,
182,
480
336,
016
2,56
6,05
12,
179,
681
17.7
5%2,
123
1,80
3C
harle
s3,
625
2,12
2,16
53,
545,
483
05,
667,
648
4,25
3,00
733
.26%
1,56
31,
173
Che
sape
ake
1,42
51,
185,
790
1,39
3,74
233
6,01
62,
915,
548
2,43
4,82
119
.74%
2,04
61,
709
Fre
deric
k2,
707
1,55
4,08
82,
647,
620
042
01,7
083,
202,
073
31.2
2%1
552
1 18
3G
arre
tt67
074
5,38
665
5,30
333
6,01
61,
736,
706
1,97
0,08
2-1
1.85
%2,
592
2,94
0H
ager
stO
ven
2,01
01,
523,
579
1,17
+65
,909
336,
016
3,82
5,50
53,
480,
232
9.92
%1,
903
1,73
1H
arfo
rd3,
714
2,15
4,20
53,
632,
531
05,
786,
735
4,42
8,66
930
.67%
'1,
558
1,19
2H
owar
d3,
877
2,22
2,25
23,
791,
955
06,
014,
207
4,51
9,88
333
.06%
1,55
11,
166
Mon
tgom
ery
13,3
787,
758,
801
13,0
82,5
880
20,8
41,3
8915
,145
,585
37.6
1%1,
558
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rges
8,60
05,
118,
259
8,41
1,35
30
13,5
29,6
1210
,187
,699
32.8
0%1,
573
1,18
5W
or-W
ic1,
590
1,25
9,86
11,
555,
122
336,
016_
3,15
1,00
02,
546,
195
23.7
5%1,
982
1,60
1
TO
TA
L72
,146
44,6
9017
270
.563
,429
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
Z35
2,11
411
7,60
5,71
5190
341,
7611
30.1
8%1
1,63
01,
252
045
3,97
911
7,60
5,71
590
,795
,740
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
200
0 is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
200
0 ($
90.8
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$26
.8 m
illio
n. T
he $
26.8
mill
ion
is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
. a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
3.0%
of t
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
ics.
13'i
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.B
EST
CO
PYA
VA
ILA
BL
E
d
Dis
trib
utio
n M
odel
Usi
ngan
Equ
al B
ase
and
Allo
catin
g th
e R
emai
nder
on a
n FT
E B
asis
(Mod
el 4
)
Und
er th
is m
odel
, $1,
150,
000
is g
iven
to e
ach
colle
ge in
fis
cal 1
997,
and
the
rem
aind
er is
allo
cate
d on
a p
er F
TE
bas
is. T
he b
ase
incr
ease
sby
$10
0,00
0 ea
ch y
ear.
The
bar
gra
ph f
or th
is o
ptio
n sh
ows
that
ever
y co
llege
gai
ns f
undi
ng p
er F
TE
by
fisc
al 2
000,
thou
gh th
e la
rge
scho
ols
have
pro
port
iona
tely
smal
ler
gain
s th
an s
ome
of th
e sm
all a
ndal
l of
the
med
ium
siz
e sc
hool
s.
Alle
gany
wou
ld lo
se f
unds
und
er th
is o
ptio
nin
the
firs
t tw
o fi
scal
year
s (1
997
and
1998
). A
sco
note
d ab
ove,
med
ium
siz
e sc
hool
s do
very
wel
l und
er th
is o
ptio
n; F
rede
rick
and
Cha
rles
wou
ldga
in 5
8% a
nd 4
7%ov
er c
urre
nt f
undi
ng b
y fi
scal
200
0.
The
re is
a s
light
dec
reas
e in
the
vari
atio
nin
aid
per
FT
E b
etw
een
the
smal
l and
larg
e co
llege
san
d an
incr
ease
in v
aria
tion
in a
idpe
r FT
E b
etw
een
the
med
ium
and
larg
e co
llege
s.
139
140
4000
lOpt
ion
4-
Equ
al B
ase
and
Per
FT
EF
undi
ngI
Fun
ding
Per
FT
E S
tude
nt-
FY
200
0
3500
7-
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000 500 0
Alle
gany
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Che
sape
ake
Gar
rett
Har
ford
Mon
tgom
ery
Wor
-Wic
Ann
e A
rund
elC
arro
llC
harle
sF
rede
rick
Hag
erst
own
How
ard
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Mar
ylan
d C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s
11
FY
200
0-
Cur
rent
Law
0 F
Y 2
000
- O
ptio
n 4
IPre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
SUM
MA
RY
Mod
el 4
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y E
qual
Bas
e an
d P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
Fac
tors
Per
cent
Incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
aw E
stim
ates
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
SI
FY
199
7P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
7I;
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
11P
ropo
sed
(Dec
reas
e)li
Sta
te A
idO
ver
Cur
. Law
!,
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
9P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
9%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
200
0
Pro
pose
d1
Sta
te A
idI I
FY
200
01
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ow
- C
ur. L
awA
llega
ny2,
973,
383
-2.7
2%3,
079,
875
-0.0
9%3,
320,
765
6.41
%3,
562,
5301
13.0
8%A
nne
Aru
ndel
10,0
59,2
4510
.37%
10,6
24,7
8414
.81%
11,6
56,5
1923
.30%
12,6
86,2
681
31.6
8%B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
19,5
94,7
68-0
.89%
121
,016
,806
5.57
%22
,691
,068
12.8
4%24
,495
,178
i20
.82%
Car
roll
2,94
9,46
37.
47%
3,33
5,34
019
.58%
3,67
6,71
828
.60%
4,04
2,16
7 I
37.7
5%C
ecil
2,36
0,15
29.
80%
12,
557,
384
19.7
2%2,
818,
462
30.7
3%3,
056,
320
i40
.22%
Cha
rtes
4,97
3,99
528
.10%
i5,
295,
838
31.9
8%5,
783,
912
39.5
3%6,
266,
303
47.3
4%C
hesa
peak
e2,
687,
426
12.7
6%;
2,84
8,68
419
.27%
3,08
8,35
728
.06%
3,34
3,30
537
.31%
Fre
deric
k3,
817,
120
29.5
6%4,
179,
186
38.5
5%4,
616,
832
48.3
6%5,
046,
615
57.6
0%G
arre
tt1,
793,
675
3.23
%2,
001,
370
9.65
%2,
180,
971
14.3
4%2,
340,
186
18.7
9%H
ager
stow
n3,
231,
071
2.94
%3,
508,
733
7.39
%3,
793,
302
12.1
5%4,
120,
557
18.4
0%H
arfo
rd4,
939,
202
16.6
8%5,
349,
011
25.0
4%5,
832,
282
34.1
2%6,
384,
551
44.1
6%H
owar
d5,
077,
287
20.9
1%5,
446,
112
27.1
8%6,
003,
437
36.4
8%6,
601,
119
46.0
5%M
ontg
omer
y14
,464
,939
1.89
%16
,025
,399
10.7
8%17
,625
,866
18.9
1%19
,221
,824
26.9
1%P
rince
Geo
rge'
s10
,313
,670
1.39
%11
,061
,734
9.12
%11
,923
,174
17.3
6%12
,876
,263
26.3
9%W
or-W
ic2,
785,
282
16.8
0%2,
981,
618
22.7
7%3,
263,
713
31.2
1%3,
562,
530
39.9
2%
TO
TA
L92
,020
,680
6.86
%99
,311
,873
13.8
0%10
8,27
3,37
721
.83%
117,
605,
715
30.1
8% r
Not
e: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
colle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blirs
beg
inni
ng in
fisc
al 1
997,
incr
easi
ng to
23%
by fi
scal
200
0.
144
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
143
Cfr
Mod
el 4
AF
Y 1
997
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
erS
tude
nt -
1%
Ann
ual I
ncre
ase
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y E
qual
Bas
e an
d P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
,
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
5F
TE
S
FY
199
TB
ase
Fun
ding
$17,
250,
000
FY
199
TP
ropo
sed
Per
FT
EF
Y 1
997
1,08
7.29
Sta
te A
id (
a)
alm
a.).
FY
199
7C
urre
nt A
id
Per
cent
1 P
er F
TE
incr
ease
I New
Opt
ion
(Dec
reas
e)F
Y 1
997
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
997
Alle
gany
467
i,150
,0-6
01,
823,
383'
2,97
3,38
3rA
g5,6
0512
%1,
775
4,f
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
194
1,15
0,00
08,
909,
245
10,0
59,2
459,
113,
961
10.3
7%1,
228
1,11
2B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
16,9
641,
150,
000
18,4
44,7
6819
,594
,768
19,7
71,0
06-0
.89%
1,15
51,
165
Car
roll
1,65
51,
150,
000
1,79
9,46
32,
949,
463
2,74
4,54
67.
47%
1,78
21,
658
Cec
il1,
113
1,15
0,00
01,
210,
152
2,36
0,15
22,
149,
487
9.80
%2,
121
1,93
1C
harle
s3,
517
1,15
0,00
03,
823,
995
4,97
3,99
53,
882,
796
28.1
0%1,
414
1,10
4C
hesa
peak
e1,
414
1,15
0,00
01,
537,
426
2,68
7,42
62,
383,
215
12.7
6%1,
901
1,68
5F
rede
rick
2,45
31,
150,
000
2,66
7,12
03,
817,
120
2,94
8,16
629
.56%
1,55
61,
201
Gar
rett
592
1,15
0,00
064
3,67
51,
793,
675
1,73
7,53
63.
23%
3,03
02,
935
Hag
erst
own
1,91
41,
150,
000
2,08
1,07
13,
231,
071
3,13
8,81
21
2.94
%1,
688
1,64
0H
arfo
rd3,
485
1,15
0,00
03,
789,
202
4,93
9,20
24,
233,
008
16.6
8%1,
417
1,21
5H
owar
d3,
612
1,15
0,00
03,
927,
287
5,07
7,28
74,
199,
250
20.9
1%1,
406
1,16
3M
ontg
omer
y12
,246
1,15
0,00
013
,314
,939
14,4
64,9
3914
,196
,905
1.89
%1,
181
1,15
9P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
428
1,15
0,00
09,
163,
670
10,3
13,6
7010
,172
,573
1.39
%1,
224
1,20
7W
or-W
ic1,
504
1,15
0,00
01,
635,
282
2,78
5,28
22,
384,
686
16.8
0%1,
852
1,58
6I
TO
TA
L68
,768
17,2
50,0
0074
,770
,680
92,0
20,6
8086
,110
,553
16.
86%
11,
338
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID0
432,
716
92,0
20,6
8086
,543
,269
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
7 is
bas
edon
the
requ
est f
or F
Y 1
997
($86
,533
,252
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
5.5
mill
ion.
The
$5.
5 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
sw
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
14b
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 20.
0%of
the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
year
s.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
1995
.
.,
.
1.14
k;
Mod
el 4
BF
Y 1
998
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y E
qual
Bas
e an
d P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
FY
199
6F
TE
SJ
FY
ma
Bas
e F
undi
ng$1
8,75
0,00
0
FY
199
8P
ropo
sed
Per
FT
EF
Y 1
998
1155
.95
Sta
te A
id (
a)
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
998
Cur
rent
Aid
Per
cent
incr
ease
Dec
reas
e
Per
FT
EN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
998
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
998
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
01,
250,
000
1,25
0,00
0
1,82
9,87
59,
374,
784
19,7
66,8
062,
085,
340
1,30
7,38
44,
045,
838
1,59
8,68
42,
929,
186
751,
370
2,25
8,73
34,
099,
011
4,19
6,11
214
,775
,399
9,81
1,73
41,
731,
618_
3,07
9,87
53,
082,
680
10,6
24,7
849,
253,
909
21,0
16,8
0619
,907
,043
3,33
5,34
02,
789,
098
2,55
7,38
42,
136,
144
5,29
5,83
84,
012,
499
2,84
8,68
42,
388,
419
4,17
9,18
63,
016,
448
2,00
1,37
01,
825,
167
3,50
8,73
33,
267,
357
5,34
9,01
14,
277,
828
5,44
6,11
24,
282,
301
16,0
25,3
9914
,465
,525
11,0
61,7
3410
,137
,133
2,98
1,61
8_2,
428,
544
-0.0
9%14
.81%
5.57
%19
.58%
19.7
2%31
.98%
19.2
7%38
.55%
9.65
%7.
39%
25.0
4%27
.18%
10.7
8%9.
12%
22.7
7%
1,94
61,
310
1,22
91,
849
2,26
11,
513
2,06
01
649
3,07
91,
796
1,50
81,
500
1,25
41,
303
1,99
0
1,94
71,
141
1,16
41,
546
1,88
91,
146
1,72
71,
190
2,80
81,
672
1,20
61,
180
1,13
21,
194
1,62
1
Alle
gany
Ann
e A
rund
elB
altim
ore
Cou
nty
Car
roll
Cec
ilC
harle
sC
hesa
peak
eF
rede
ridc
1,59
38,
110
17,1
001,
804
1,13
13,
500
1,38
324
534
650
1,95
43,
546
3,63
012
,782
8,48
81,
498
Gar
rett
Hag
erst
own
Har
ford
How
ard
Mon
tgom
ery
Pdn
ce G
eorg
e's
Wor
-Wic
TO
TA
L
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
69,6
9318
,750
,000
80,5
61,8
731
99,3
11,8
7387
,270
,097
113
.80%
11,
4251
1,25
21
438,
543
99,3
11,8
7387
,708
,640
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
8 is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 1
998
($87
,7 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
11.6
mill
ion.
The
$11
.6 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
sw
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 21%
of t
he a
id p
er F
TE
at t
he p
ublic
four
year
s.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
147
148
4.0
4:6
Mod
el 4
CF
Y 1
999
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ngP
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y E
qual
Bas
e an
d P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LLE
GE
S
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
997
FT
ES
FY
199
9B
ase
Fun
ding
$20,
250.
000
Fs'
199
9P
er F
TE
1,24
0.25
Pro
pose
dF
Y 1
999
Sta
te A
id (
a)
$ m
a.
FY
199
9C
urre
nt A
id
elts
Incr
ease
Dec
reas
e
erN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 1
999
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
999
Alle
gany
1,58
91,
350,
000
1,9'
70,7
653,
320,
765
3,12
0,61
36.
41%
2,00
1,96
4A
nne
Aru
ndel
8,31
01,
350,
000
10,3
06,5
1911
,656
,519
9,45
3,46
123
.30%
1,40
31,
136
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,207
1,35
0,00
021
,341
,068
22,6
91,0
6820
,108
,825
12.8
4%1,
319
1,16
9C
arro
ll1,
876
1,35
0,00
02,
326,
718
3,67
6,71
82,
858,
941
28.6
0%1,
960
1,52
4C
ecil
1,18
41,
350,
000
1,46
8,46
22,
818,
462
2,15
6,00
830
.73%
2,38
01,
821
Cha
rles
3,57
51,
350,
000
4,43
3,91
25,
783,
912
4,14
5,26
039
.53%
1,61
81,
160
Che
sape
ake
1,40
01,
350,
000
1,73
8,35
73,
086,
357
2,41
0,14
028
.06%
2,20
51,
722
Fre
deric
k2,
634
1,35
0,00
03,
266,
832
4,61
6,83
23j
11,
913
48.3
6%1,
753
1,18
1G
arre
tt67
01,
350,
000
830,
971
2,18
0,97
11,
907,
424
14.3
4%3,
255
2,84
7H
ager
stow
n1,
970
1,35
0,00
02,
443,
302
3,79
3,30
23,
382,
383
12.1
5%1,
926
1,71
7H
arfo
rd3,
614
1,35
0,00
04,
482,
282
5,83
2,28
24,
348,
601
34.1
2%1,
614
1,20
3H
owar
d3,
752
1,35
0,00
04,
653,
437
6,00
3,43
74,
398,
697
36.4
8%1,
600
1,17
2M
ontg
omer
y13
,123
1,35
0,00
016
,275
,866
17,6
25,8
6814
,822
,644
18.9
1%1,
343
1,13
0P
rince
Geo
rges
8,52
51,
350,
000
10,5
73,1
7411
,923
,174
10,1
59,2
8317
.38%
1,39
91,
192
Wor
-Wic
1,54
31,
350,
000_
1,91
3,71
33,
263,
713_
2,48
7,47
8_31
.21%
2,11
51,
612
IT
OT
AL
70,9
7220
,250
,000
88,0
23,3
771
108,
273,
3771
88,8
71,6
701
21.8
3%1,
5261
1,25
2C
halle
nge
Gra
nts
TO
TA
L S
TA
TE
AID
010
8,27
3,37
744
8,59
189
,318
,261
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
9is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
1999
($8
9.3
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$19
.0 m
illio
n. T
he $
19.0
mill
ion
is w
hat co
llege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
Eba
sis,
22.
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
publ
ic fo
ur y
ears
.14
:; Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
1:00
Mod
el 4
0F
Y 2
000
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngD
istr
ibut
ed b
y E
qual
Bas
e an
d P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LLE
GE
SF
Y 1
998
FT
ES
FY
200
0B
ase
Fun
ding
$21,
750,
000
FY
-200
0P
er F
TE
1,32
6.84
ropo
FY
200
0S
tate
Aid
a
$ m
aF
Y 2
000
Cur
rent
Aid
eIn
crea
seD
ecre
ase
rN
ew O
ptio
nF
Y 2
000
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 2
000
1 eg
any
(.,
411
elT
s43
, *T
oIt;
'!I;
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
457
1,45
0,00
011
,236
,268
12,8
88,2
889,
634,
338
31.8
8%1,
500
1,13
9B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,3
451,
450,
000
23,0
45,1
7824
,495
,178
20,2
74,8
7120
.82%
1,41
21,
169
Car
roll
1,95
11,
450,
000
2,59
2,16
74,
042,
187
2,93
4,51
537
.75%
2,07
21,
504
Cec
il1,
209
1,45
0,00
01,
606,
320
3,05
6,32
02,
179,
881
40.2
2%2,
528
1,80
3C
harle
s3,
625
1,45
0,00
04,
816,
303
6,26
8,30
34,
253,
007
47.3
4%1,
729
1,17
3C
hesa
peak
e1,
425
1,45
0,00
01,
893,
305
3,34
3,30
52,
434,
821
37.3
1%2,
346
1,70
9F
rede
rick
2,70
71,
450,
000
3,59
6,61
55,
046,
615
3,20
2,07
357
.60%
1,86
41,
183
Gar
rett
670
1,45
0,00
089
0,18
62,
340,
186
1,97
0,08
218
.79%
3,49
32,
940
Hag
erst
own
2,01
01,
450,
000
2,67
0,55
74,
120,
557
3,48
0,23
218
.40%
2,05
01,
731
Har
ford
3,71
41,
450,
000
4,93
4,55
18,
384,
551
4,42
8,66
944
.18%
1,71
91,
192
How
ard
3,87
71,
450,
000
5,15
1,11
96,
601,
119
4,51
9,88
346
.05%
1,70
31,
166
Mon
tgom
ery
13,3
761,
450,
000
17,7
71,8
2419
,221
,824
15,1
45,5
8526
.91%
1,43
71,
132
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,60
01,
450,
000
11,4
26,2
6312
,876
,263
10,1
87,6
9926
.39%
1,49
71,
185
Wor
-Wic
1,59
01,
450,
000
2,11
2,53
03,
562,
530
2,54
8,19
539
.92%
2,24
11,
601
TO
TA
L
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
ST
AT
E A
ID
72,1
4621
,750
,000
95,8
55,7
15 E
T17
,605
,715
90,3
41,7
611
30.1
8%I
1,63
011,
252
045
3,97
911
7,60
5,71
590
,795
,740
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
200
0 is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 2
000
($90
.8 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
26.8
mill
ion.
The
$26
.8 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
era
form
ula
that
gran
ts c
omm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FT
E b
asis
, 23.
0Y)
of th
e ai
dpe
r F
TE
at 1
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
ics.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
151
152
Dis
trib
utio
n M
odel
that
Hol
ds E
ach
Col
lege
Har
mle
ssat
FY
199
6 L
evel
s an
d D
istr
ibut
esA
dditi
onal
Fun
dson
a P
er F
TE
Bas
is (
Mod
el 5
)
Und
er th
is m
odel
, eac
h co
llege
rece
ives
the
sam
e st
ate
gran
t it
rece
ived
in f
isca
l 199
6. A
nyad
ditio
nal f
unds
wou
ld b
edi
stri
bute
d on
a p
er F
TE
bas
is. T
hefi
scal
199
6 gr
ant b
ecom
esth
e ba
se f
or f
utur
eye
ars.
No
colle
ge lo
ses
fund
ing
per
FTE
und
er th
is o
ptio
n by
the
year
200
0.
No
colle
ge lo
ses
fund
s un
der
this
mod
el in
the
firs
t fis
cal
year
. Gar
rett
wou
ld h
ave
smal
lga
ins
in f
isca
l 199
7 an
d 20
00,
with
sm
all l
osse
s in
fis
cal
1998
and
199
9. G
arre
ttw
ould
still
rec
eive
mor
e fu
ndin
g pe
r FT
E th
anan
y ot
her
colle
ge.
The
oth
er c
olle
ges
gain
fro
m12
% to
39%
in f
isca
l 200
0ov
er p
roje
cted
fun
ding
und
ercu
rren
t law
.
Und
er th
is o
ptio
n, th
e sp
read
inai
d pe
r FT
E is
red
uced
by
abou
t a th
ird.
1'015
el
Opt
ion
5 -
Hol
d H
arm
less
at F
Y 1
996
Leve
ls P
lus
Per
FT
E F
undi
ngF
undi
ng P
er F
TE
Stu
dent
- F
Y 2
000
3500
3000
h- 1
2500
r--
1
2000
r^1
7-7
1 50
0
1000
^
500 0
L--
I.
Alle
gany
Ba
timor
e C
ount
yC
ecil
Ann
e A
rund
elC
hew
pea
keG
arre
ttH
arfo
rdM
ontg
omer
yW
or-W
icC
arro
llC
harle
sF
rede
rick
Hag
erst
a.in
How
ard
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
Mar
ylan
d C
omm
unity
Col
lege
s
1 D
. FY
200
0 -
Cur
rent
Law
0 F
Y 2
000
- O
ptio
n 5
155
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r 19
95.
156
SUM
MA
RY
Mod
el 5
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngH
old
Har
mle
ss a
t FY
199
6 Le
vels
Plu
s P
erF
TE
Fun
ding
Per
cent
incr
ease
(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
urre
nt L
awE
stim
ates
FY
199
7 -
2000
CO
LLE
GE
S
FY
199
7P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
FY
199
7%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
8P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
idI
FY
199
8%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
FY
199
9P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
---7
Y19
99%
Incr
ease
(Dec
reas
e)O
ver
Cur
. Law
----
-PY
200
0P
ropo
sed
Sta
te A
id
1--
FY
2000
'
% In
crea
se(D
ecre
ase)
Ove
r C
ur. L
awA
llega
ny3,
183,
148
4.14
%3,
341,
502
8.40
%3,
638,
364
13.3
9%3,
736,
819
18.6
2%A
nne
Aru
ndel
9,67
8,36
76.
19%
10,5
14,7
3113
.62%
11,5
72,4
0422
.41%
12,6
69,0
7031
.50%
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y21
,343
,682
7.95
%23
,126
,922
16.1
7%25
,265
,725
25.6
4%27
,467
,509
35.4
8%C
arr
oll
2,94
9,68
57.
47%
3,14
6,30
912
.81%
3,38
9,56
118
.56%
3,65
4,48
024
.53%
Cec
il2,
320,
778
7.97
%2,
439,
290
14.1
9%2,
594,
076
20.3
2%2,
752,
010
26.2
6%C
harle
s4,
033,
759
3.89
%4,
395,
921
9.56
%4,
849,
094
16.9
8%5,
315,
393
24.9
8%C
hesa
peak
e2,
530,
027
6.16
%2,
671,
600
11.8
6%2,
847,
002
18.1
3%3,
031,
856
24.5
2%F
rede
rick
3,13
4,25
96.
38%
3,40
2,35
212
.79%
3,74
3,70
920
.30%
4,10
2,26
928
.11%
Gar
rett
1,73
9,12
70.
09%
.1,8
10,2
45-0
.82%
1,89
6,16
8-0
.59%
1,97
9,67
10.
49%
Hag
erst
own
3,20
0,53
01.
97%
.3,
405,
843
4.24
%3,
651,
336
7.95
%3,
913,
453
12.4
5%H
arfo
rd4,
554,
358
7.59
%1
4,92
6,21
515
.16%
5,38
3,02
723
.79%
5,87
4,92
632
.66%
How
ard
4,45
1,05
46.
00%
4,87
8.91
512
.76%
5,31
1,74
920
.76%
5,83
1,21
629
.01%
Mon
tgom
ery
15,2
98,0
967.
76%
16,6
58,4
5115
.16%
18,3
32,9
0923
.68%
20,0
73,3
9532
.54%
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
11,1
10,2
369.
22%
11,9
94,9
1718
.33%
13,0
51,8
8928
.47%
14,1
45,4
8638
.85%
Wor
-Wic
2,49
3,57
44.
57%
2,64
8,65
99.
06%
2,84
6,36
014
.43%
3,05
8,16
220
.11%
30.1
8%T
OT
AL
92,0
20,6
806.
86%
99,3
11,8
7313
.80%
108,
273,
377
21.8
3%11
7,60
5,71
51N
ote: Tot
al a
mou
nt a
vaila
ble
is b
ased
on
a fo
rmul
a th
atgr
ants
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
0% o
f the
aid
per
FT
E a
t the
four
yea
r pu
blic
s be
ginn
ing
in fi
scal
1997
, inc
reas
ing
to 2
3% b
y fis
cal 2
000.
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervi
ces,
Nov
embe
r, 1
995.
Mod
el 5
AF
Y 1
997
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngH
old
Har
mle
ss a
t FY
199
6 Le
vels
Plu
s P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LLE
GE
S
Aud
ited
Pt'
1995
FT
Es
FY
199
6S
tate
Ald
FT
E D
istr
. ove
rB
ase
Gra
nt$4
.339
.648
Net
FY
199
7S
tate
Ald
(a)
Ths
t. cu
rren
tF
Y 1
997
Sta
te A
id
Diff
eren
ceN
ew O
ptio
nV
s. C
urre
nt
Per
FtE
New
Opt
ion
FY
199
7
Per
FT
-E-
Cur
rent
Law
FY
199
71
egan
y1,
677
3,07
7,32
010
5,82
83,
183,
148
3,05
6,60
54.
14%
1,89
81,
823'
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
194
9,16
1,27
951
7,08
79,
678,
387
9,11
3,96
16.
19%
1,18
11,
112
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y16
,964
20,2
73,1
591,
070,
523
21,3
43,6
8219
,771
,006
7.95
%1,
258
1,16
5C
arro
ll1,
655
2,84
5,24
510
4,44
02,
949,
685
2,74
4,54
67.
47%
1,78
21,
658
Cec
il1,
113
2,25
0,54
170
,237
2,32
0,77
82,
149,
487
7.97
%2,
085
1,93
1C
harle
s3,
517
3,81
1,81
722
1,94
24,
033,
759
3,88
2,79
133.
89%
1,14
71,
104
Che
sape
ake
1,41
42,
440,
796
89,2
312,
530,
027
2,38
3,21
56.
16%
1,78
91,
685
Fre
deric
k2,
453
2,97
9,46
115
4,79
83,
134,
259
2.94
6,16
66.
38%
1,27
81,
201
Gar
rett
592
1,70
1,76
937
,359
1,73
9,12
71,
737,
536
0.09
%2,
938
2,93
5H
ager
stow
n1,
914
3,07
9,74
612
0,78
43,
200,
530
3,13
8,81
21.
97%
1,67
21,
640
Har
ford
3,48
54,
334,
435
219,
923
4,55
4,35
84,
233,
008
7.59
%1,
307
1,21
5H
owar
d3,
612
4,22
3,11
622
7,93
74,
451,
054
4,19
9,25
06.
00%
1,23
21,
163
Mon
tgom
ery
12,2
4614
,525
,305
772,
791
15,2
98,0
9614
,196
,905
7.76
%1,
249
1,15
9P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
428
10,5
78,3
8253
1,85
411
,110
,238
10,1
72,5
739.
22%
1,31
81,
207
Wor
-Wic
1 50
42,
398,
663
94,9
112,
493,
574
2,38
4 68
64.
57%
1,65
81,
586
1T
OT
AL
68,7
68.0
087
,681
,034
14,
339,
6461
92,0
20,6
801_
86,1
10,6
531
6.86
%1,
338
1,25
21
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
432,
716
92,0
20,6
8086
,543
,269
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
199
7 is
bas
ed o
n th
e re
ques
t for
FY
199
7($
86,5
33,2
52)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$5.
5 m
illio
n. T
he $
5.5
mill
ion
Is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
veun
der
a fo
rmul
a th
at
Pre
pare
d by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fis
cal S
ervl
ces,
Oct
ober
199
5.
159
160
Mod
el 5
BF
Y 1
998
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt-
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngH
old
Har
mle
ss a
t FY
199
6 Le
vels
Plu
s P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LLE
GE
S
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
996
FT
Es
FY
199
6S
tate
Aid
FT
e D
istr
.ov
erB
ase
Gra
nt11
630
839
Net
FY
199
8S
tate
Aid
a
Gt.
Cur
rent
IF
Y 1
998
Sta
te A
idji
Diff
eren
ceN
ew O
ptio
ni
Vs.
Cur
rent
i.
ri"
LP
er F
TE
New
Opt
ion
FY
199
8
Per
FT
EC
urre
nt L
awF
Y 1
998
-1eg
any
4;k-
1I
V--
--W
-.9
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
110
9,16
1,27
91,
353,
452
10,5
14,7
319,
253,
909
13.6
2%1,
297
1,14
1B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,1
0020
,273
,159
2,85
3,76
423
,126
,922
19,9
07,0
4316
.17%
1,35
21,
164
Car
roll
1,80
42,
845,
245
301,
064
3,14
6,30
92,
789,
098
12.8
1%1,
744
1,54
6C
ecil
1,13
12,
250,
541
188,
749
2,43
9,29
02,
138,
144
14.1
9%2,
157
1,88
9C
harle
s3,
500
3,81
1,81
758
4,10
44,
395,
921
4,01
2,49
99.
56%
1,25
61,
146
Che
sape
ake
1,38
32,
440,
796
230,
804
2,67
1,60
02,
388,
419
11.8
6%1,
932
1,72
7F
rede
rick
2 53
42,
979,
461
A.
3,40
2,35
23,
016,
448
12.7
9%1,
343
1,19
0G
arre
tt65
01,
701,
769
1%_.
.,,*/
81,
810,
245
1,82
5,16
7-0
.82%
2,78
52,
808
Hag
erst
own
1,95
43,
079,
748
328,
097
3,40
5,84
33,
267,
357
4.24
%1,
743
1,67
2H
arfo
rd3,
546
4,33
4,43
559
1,78
04,
926,
215
4,27
7,82
815
.16%
1,38
91,
206
How
ani
3,63
04,
223,
116
606,
799
4,82
8,91
54,
282,
301
12.7
6%1,
330
1,18
0M
ontg
omer
y12
,782
14,5
25,3
052,
133,
147
16,6
58,4
5114
,465
,525
15.1
6%1,
303
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
488
10,5
78,3
821,
418,
535
11,9
94,9
1710
,137
,133
18.3
3%1,
413
1,19
4W
or-W
ic1,
498
2,39
8,66
324
9,99
626
48,6
592,
428,
544
9.06
%1,
768
1,62
1
TO
TA
LI
69,6
93.0
0187
,681
,034
11.6
30,8
391
99,3
11,8
731
87,2
7009
713
.80%
1,42
51,
252
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
438,
543
99,3
11,8
7387
,708
,640
Not
es: (a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e in
FY
199
6 is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for F
Y 1
998
($87
.7 m
) pl
usan
add
ition
al $
11.6
mill
ion.
The
$11
.8 m
illio
n is
wha
t col
lege
s w
ould
rece
ive
unde
r a
form
ula
that
that
gra
nts
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
ape
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
1.0%
of t
he a
id p
er F
TE
at t
he fo
urye
ar p
ublic
s.lu
iP
repa
red
by D
epar
tmen
t of F
isca
l Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
Mod
el 5
CF
Y 1
999
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er S
tude
nt -
1% A
nnua
l Inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngH
old
Har
mle
ss a
t FY
199
6 Le
vels
Plu
s P
er F
TE
Fun
ding
CO
LL
EG
ES
Lla
aFY
199
7FT
Ee
FY 1
996
Stat
e A
ld
e".:1
ove
rB
ase
Gra
nt0
592
343
eFY
199
9St
ate
Aid
a
rre
FY 1
999
Stat
e A
id e.
' mew
sN
ew O
pdon
Vs.
Cur
rent
1139
ir
erN
ew O
ptio
nFY
199
9.;
erC
urre
nt L
awFY
199
9eg
any
r;1.
.ic
T.
T,-
.7,9
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
310
9,18
1279
2,41
1,12
511
,572
,404
9,45
3,48
122
.41%
1,39
31,
138
Bal
timor
e C
ount
y17
,207
20,2
73,1
594,
992,
567
25,2
65,7
2520
,108
,825
25.8
4%14
681,
169
Car
roll
1,87
62,
845,
245
544,
317
3,38
9,58
12,
858,
941
18.5
6%1,
807
1,52
4C
edl
1,18
42,
250,
541
343,
535
2,59
4,07
62,
156,
008
20.3
2%2,
191
1,82
1C
harl
es3,
575
3,81
1,81
71,
037,
277
4,84
9,00
44,
145,
260
16.9
8%1,
356
1,16
0C
hesa
peak
e1,
400
2,44
0,79
640
6,20
62,
847,
002
2,41
0,14
018
.13%
2,03
41,
722
Fred
eric
k2,
634
2,97
9,48
176
4,24
83,
7433
093,
111,
913
20.3
0%1,
421
1,18
1G
arre
tt67
01,
701,
769
194,
399
1,89
6,16
81,
907,
424
-0.5
9%2,
830
2,84
7H
ager
stow
n1,
970
3,07
9,74
857
1,59
03,
651,
338
3,38
2,38
37.
95%
1,85
31,
717
Har
ford
3,61
44,
334,
435
1,04
8,59
35,
383,
027
4,34
8,60
123
.79%
1,48
91,
203
How
ard
3,75
24,
223,
116
1,08
8,63
35,
311,
749
4,39
8,69
720
.76%
1,41
61,
172
Mon
tgom
ery
13,1
2314
,525
,305
3,80
7,60
518
,332
,909
14,8
22,6
4423
.68%
1,39
71,
130
Prin
ce G
eorg
e's
8,52
510
,578
,382
2,47
3,50
713
,051
,889
10,1
59,2
8328
.47%
1,53
11,
192
Wor
-Wic
1,54
3Z
398,
663
447,
697
2,84
8,36
02,
487,
478
14.4
3%1,
845
1,61
2
1T
OT
AL
_170
,972
.001
87,6
81,0
341
20,5
92,3
431
108,
273,
377
88,8
71,6
701
21.8
3%1,
526
1,25
2
Cha
lleng
e G
rant
sT
OT
AL
446,
591
108,
273,
377
89,3
18,2
61
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
199
9 is
bas
ed o
n th
e pr
ojec
tions
for
FY
199
9($
89.3
m)
plus
an a
dditi
onal
$19
.0 m
illio
n. T
he $
19.0
mill
ion
is w
hat c
olle
ges
wou
ld r
ecei
ve u
nder
a fo
rmul
a th
atth
at g
rant
s co
mm
unity
col
lege
s, o
n a
per
FTE
bas
is, 2
2.0%
of
the
aid
per
FTE
at t
he f
our
year
pub
lics.
Prep
ared
by
Dep
artm
ent o
f Fi
scal
Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
163
164
Mod
el S
DF
Y 2
000
Per
cent
of F
our
Yea
r F
undi
ng P
er-
1% A
nnua
l inc
reas
e
Com
mun
ity C
olle
ge F
undi
ngH
old
Har
mle
ss a
t FY
199
6 Le
vels
Plu
s P
erF
TE
Fun
ding
1
CO
LLE
GE
S1
Est
imat
edF
Y 1
908
FT
Es
FY
199
6S
tate
Aid
FIE
Dis
k ov
erB
ase
Gra
nt;2
9 92
4,68
1
Nat
FY
200
0S
tate
Aid
a
- .
urre
ntF
Y 2
000
Sta
te A
id
'ere
nce
New
Opt
ion
Vs.
Cur
rent
- er
New
Opt
ion
FY
200
0
rP
er F
TE
Cur
rent
Law
FY
200
0A
llega
ny1,
590
3,07
7,32
065
9,49
9, 3
6,81
3,1
,38.
82,3
501,
981
Ann
e A
rund
el8,
457
9,16
1,27
93,
507,
790
12,6
69,0
709,
634,
336
31.5
0%1,
498
1,13
9B
altim
ore
Cou
nty
17,3
4520
,273
,159
.7,
194,
350
27,4
67,5
0920
,274
,871
35.4
8%1,
584
1,16
9C
arro
ll1,
951
2,84
5,24
580
9,23
53,
654,
480
2,93
4,51
524
.53%
1,87
31,
504
Cec
il1,
209
2,25
0,54
150
1,46
82,
752,
010
2,17
9,68
126
.26%
2,27
61,
803
Cha
rles
3,62
53,
811,
817
1,50
3,57
65,
315,
393
4,25
3,00
724
.98%
1,46
61,
173
Che
sape
ake
1,42
52,
440,
798
591,
061
3,03
1,85
82,
434,
821
24.5
2%2,
128
1,70
9F
rede
rick
2,70
72,
979,
461
1,12
2,80
84,
102,
289_
3,20
2,07
328
.11%
1,51
51,
183
Gar
rett
670
1,70
1,76
927
7,90
21,
979,
671
1,97
0,08
20.
49%
2,95
52,
940
Hag
erst
own
2,01
03,
079,
748
833,
707
3,91
3,45
33,
480,
232
12.4
5%1,
947
1,73
1H
arfo
rd3,
714
4,33
4,43
51,
540,
491
5,87
4,92
64,
428,
669
32.8
6%1,
582
1,19
2H
owar
d3,
877
4,22
3,11
61,
608,
100
5,83
1,21
64,
519,
883
29.0
1%1,
504
1,16
6M
ontg
omer
y13
,370
14,5
25,3
055,
548,
090
20,0
73,3
9515
,145
,585
32.5
4%1,
501
1,13
2P
rince
Geo
rge'
s8,
600
10,5
78,3
823,
567,
104
14,1
45,4
8810
,187
,899
38.8
5%1,
645
1,18
5W
or-W
ic1,
590
2,39
8,66
3_65
9,49
93,
058,
162_
2,54
8,19
520
.11%
1,92
31,
601
TO
TA
Lr
72,1
46.0
0 j
87,6
81,0
34]
29,9
24,6
811
117,
605,
715]
90,3
41,7
611
30.1
8%1,
630
1,25
2C
halle
nge
Gra
nts
TO
TA
L45
3,97
911
7,60
5,71
590
,795
,740
Not
es:
(a)
The
tota
l am
ount
ava
ilabl
e In
FY
200
0 Is
bas
edon
the
proj
ectio
ns fo
r F
Y 2
000
($90
.8 m
) plu
san
add
ltion
al $
26.8
mill
ion.
The
$26
.8 m
illio
n is
wha
tco
llege
s w
ould
rec
eive
und
er a
form
ula
that
that
gra
nts
com
mun
ity c
olle
ges,
on
a pe
r F
TE
bas
is, 2
3.0%
of t
he a
ldpe
r F
TE
at t
he fo
ur y
ear
publ
lcs.
repa
red
by D
epar
tmen
t of F
isca
l Ser
vice
s, O
ctob
er 1
995.
''
BE
ST C
OPY
AV
AIL
AB
LE
18t;
Appendix 6
Current Community College FormulaCollege FTE Counts as Percent of Total FTEs
Sorted by College SizeFY 1996
COLLEGES
AuditedFY 1994
FTESCount as %
of Total FTEsGarrett 537 0.77% !Cecil 1, 113 1.59%Chesapeake 1,377 1.97% ;Wor-Wic 1,470 2.10%1Allegany 1,678 2.40%Carroll 1,7141 2.45%Hagerstown 1,964 2.80%1Frederick 2,4921 3.56%Charles 3,381 , 4.83%1Howard 3,538 5.05%1Harford 3,581 5.11%Anne Arundel 8,168 11.67%Prince George's 9,030 12.90%Montgomery 12,645' 18.06%Baltimore County 17,334 24.75%
TOTAL 70,021 100.00%
Definitions under current law (as shown by bold lines):
Small School: FTE enrollment less than or equal to 80%of the statewide median.
Medium School: FTE enrollment between 80% and 200%of the statewide median.
167103
Prepared by Department of Fiscal Services, October 1995.
Appendix 7
PROPOSED MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENTSFOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE APPROPRIATIONS
BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
CURRENT LAW: REQUIRES LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MATCH TOTALDOLLAR AMOUNTS FROM PREVIOUS YEAR.
ALTERNATIVE #1: WOULD REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MATCH A PERPUPIL DOLLAR AMOUNT FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, OR TOTAL DOLLARAMOUNT IF ENROLLMENT DECLINES. THIS ALTERNATIVE IS SIMILAR TO THEMAINTENANCE OF EFFORT REQUIREMENT UNDER THE BASIC CURRENTEXPENSE FORMULA.
ALTERNATIVE #2: WOULD REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MATCH A SETPERCENTAGE (I.E., 50%) OF THE STATE INCREASE IN THE MANDATEDFORMULA AMOUNT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE ANY INCREASE IN THE STATEAPPROPRIATION.
ALTERNATIVE #3: RECOGNIZING THAT THE STATE IS INFUSING ASUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE FIRST YEAR, POSTPONE THEIMPLEMENTATION OF ALTERNATIVE #2 UNTIL THE SECOND YEAR; CURRENTLAW OR ALTERNATIVE #1 COULD APPLY IN THE FIRST YEAR.
ALTERNATIVE #4: ALTERNATIVE #2; HOWEVER, IF A LOCAL GOVERNMENTFAILS TO MEET ITS REQUIRED INCREASE, ITS SHARE OF THE STATE INCREASEIS LOWERED FOR INSTANCE, IF THE STATE'S SHARE INCREASES BY 15%,LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WOULD NEED TO INCREASE THEIR SHARE BY 7.5% INORDER TO RECEIVE THEIR FULL SHARE OF THE STATE INCREASE. IF ALOCAL GOVERNMENT ONLY INCREASES ITS SHARE BY 5%, MEN IT WOULDONLY RECEIVE 10% OF THE STATE INCREASE.
ALTERNATIVE #5: CURRENT LAW FOR YEARS 1-5; STARTING IN YEAR 6,LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO MATCH 33% OF THE STATEINCREASE OF MANDATED FORMULA AID.
MA CO RECOMMENDATION: CURRENT LAW
MACC RECOMMENDATION: CURRENT LAW
in; 168
Maryland Association of
Community Colleges
Appendix 8
60 West StreetSuite 200
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Phone: (410) 974-8117Fax: (410) 263-6425
Proposal to Secretary Brady forStrengthening Community Colleges' Role in Economic Development
In response to your request, the Maryland Council of Community College Presidents(MCCCP) developed the following statement and proposal, which has been approved by the
MACC Executive Committee.
The nation has moved from a domestic economy to a world economy. As the nation goes, sogoes each state. New and improved technology, communications, and transportation haveput the pressure on companies for continuous change to keep up in the marketplace. Theworld of work has experienced massive restructuring, layoffs and retraining at anunprecedented level Within each state these rapid changes require the support of a highlycompetent educational infrastructure that can train and retrain its workforce.
Maryland's community college system has evolved into a strong educational network withtremendous potential for affecting the total economic development of the state. It is a systemof eighteen institutions that serve the citizenry of Maryland from Garrett County to Wicomicoand from Harford to Worcester. The community college is the educational and technical hubwithin each county and/or region. It is the place where community forums come together andare heard, where learning draws an eclectic group of students (age, ethnicity, economic,etc.) And where businesses now, more than ever, are realizing the rich resources containedwithin its domain.
Over the past ten years the borders surrounding each community college have expanded,
linking one to another in educational partnerships and common community initiatives. In thislink lies its strength - that is its strength in numbers. It is a network that succeeds because ofits responsive nature both individually and collectively, to its publics. In 1993 alone,Maryland's community colleges delivered customized instruction to 1600 businesses
throughout the state. It is a resource that is perched at Maryland's economic developmentdoorway.
RECOMMENDATION;
Create a permanent linkage/infrastructure among the state's community cr lieges, theDepartment of Business and Economic Development (DBED), the Departri ent of
A Labor, Licensing, and Regulations (DOLLAR) and the Maryland Higher Education, Commission (MHEC) in the form of a subcabinet: The Governor's Subcabinet on
1Statewide Workforce Training.
1107
69 BEST COPY AVAILABLE
MACC ProposalPage 2
PURPOSE.
To promote economic development through statewide use of community colleges inworkforce training and to create a single point of contact for accessing communitycolleges.
MEMBERSHIP:
Appropriate MHEC SecretaryAppropriate DBED SecretaryAppropriate DOLLAR SecretaryMACC Representative
FUNDING:
To be funded jointly by DBED and DOLLAR out of training contracts.
MEETINGS;
Monthly or bi-weekly
TASKS;
1. To create and implement a statewide business and industry training programanalogous to North Carolina's, to include:
Emphasis on providing a technically competent wokforceAssessment of workforce needsParticipation on recruiting trips and site visitsCreation and dissemination of promotional materialsIdentification of strong training programs throughout the State
2. To create and implement a mechanism for use of training funds at communitycolleges (e.g. voucher system for small and large businesses, etc.)
STRATEGY;
Get the Governor to issue an Executive Order establishing the Governor's Subcabineton Statewide Workforce Training.
1t18