Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Higher Education Funding Formula topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislative analysts and higher‑ed officials explain funding formula, urge debate on performance incentives
Summary
LFC analysts and higher‑education officials told a Las Cruces field hearing that New Mexico’s higher‑education funding formula protects base budgets while the formula allocates only new money — a mix of market‑share distributions and performance premiums that the Legislature should review.
An LFC briefing at the Sept. 10 Legislative Finance Committee meeting in Las Cruces explained how state higher‑education funding flows through a "base + allocation" formula that protects institutions’ current base funding and distributes only new appropriations. Connor Jorgensen, LFC higher‑education analyst, told the committee the fiscal year 2025 base for instruction and general (ING) funding stood at roughly $842.9 million; a 2.5% policy increase that year produced about $21.1 million in new money to be allocated through the formula.
Jorgensen summarized key mechanics: 80% of new shared money flows through a combination of a standard allocation (market‑share distribution across 4 measures: student credit hours and three award categories) and an institutional performance premium (IPP) that requires institutions to meet benchmarks to qualify for additional shares. The remaining 20% funds mission‑specific performance measures that target research and momentum points (MP30/MP60) for credit accumulation. Jorgensen said not all institutions qualified for IPP increases the year reviewed; unallocated IPP funding rolls into standard allocation.
Higher‑education leaders told the committee the system aims to reward outcomes but has trade‑offs: standard allocation stabilizes institutions’ shares even if overall output is falling, while IPP ties money to performance benchmarks that some institutions may miss after long enrollment declines. Jorgensen and witnesses urged legislative discussion about adequacy (defining the minimum funding necessary for institutional operations), retention metrics (not currently in the formula), and whether mission‑specific measures dilute performance‑based incentives. Committee members asked where graduate and professional (medical, law) programs fit; analysts said awards and student credit hour measures include graduate production but noted policy decisions and tuition remain at institutional level. The briefing set the stage for fall discussions on possible formula refinements and the budget priorities that LFC will present for the 2026 session.
