Committee reviews changes to university performance‑funding model after SB 191; student‑rights group urges ruling of deficiency

The Review Subcommittee of the Committee on Licensing, Occupations, and Administrative Regulations on Tuesday considered agency amendments to administrative regulations 13 KAR 2:120 and 13 KAR 2:130, which revise the funding models for public universities and KCTCS to implement provisions of Senate Bill 191.

The changes described by Travis Powell, senior vice president and general counsel for the Council on Postsecondary Education, include replacing the underrepresented minority degree production metric with a definition of “underrepresented students” (determined by the work group as first‑generation college students), adding an adult‑learner metric (students age 25 or older) with double weighting for credit hours, increasing the low‑income degree premium from 3% to 8% in the university model, raising the nonresident credit hour weight from 50% to 75% of a resident credit hour, increasing small‑school adjustments for Kentucky State University and Morehead State University, and reducing the student credit hour production pool from 35% to 30%.

The regulation revisions reflect recommendations from the performance funding work group and direction in Senate Bill 191, Powell said. He described a work‑group vote on metric weighting that he characterized as a split vote (about 7–6), and said the agency filed amendments to capture the work‑group’s decisions. Powell also said the council provided information outside the formal fiscal‑note process and offered to provide additional funding‑model scenarios to committee staff.

Michael Frazier, executive director of the Kentucky Student Rights Coalition and a representative of Eastern Kentucky University Student Government, testified in opposition to 13 KAR 2:120 as it applies to four‑year institutions. Frazier said SB 191 was intended to serve Kentucky’s most underserved students—"low income, first‑generation, underrepresented minority, LGBTQ and homeless students"—and argued that applying sector weightings to the 3% pool (which he said amounts to roughly $4 million) misappropriates funds intended for those students. Frazier urged the committee to rule the regulation deficient, to ask the General Assembly to clarify statutory weighting, and to require an updated cost analysis showing how the applied weights would affect comprehensive universities.

Committee members asked procedural and timing questions. Powell said the work group meets on a three‑year cycle and that the current changes were prompted by the group's 2024 review and Senate Bill 191. Representative Frazier Gordon noted the cumulative funding differences for comprehensive institutions and said the committee and legislature might reassess weightings in future sessions.

No motion to declare the regulation deficient was made on the floor during the subcommittee meeting; the committee chair said the item will proceed to the committee of jurisdiction, providing another opportunity for review.

Why it matters: These regulatory weightings determine how a portion of performance funding is distributed among Kentucky colleges and universities and, by extension, how money is targeted to students identified by the statute and work‑group process.

Provenance: Topic introduced when the council’s regulations were called for consideration and Powell began his explanation; discussion and public testimony by Michael Frazier occur later in the transcript.