County Support for Community Colleges: A Peer Expenditure Analysis. Planning Brief PB91-9.

Autor/in	Clagett, Craig A.
Institution	Prince George's Community Coll., Largo, MD. Office of Institutional Research and Analysis.
Titel	County Support for Community Colleges: A Peer Expenditure Analysis. Planning Brief PB91-9.
Quelle	(1991), (11 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Quantitative Daten; Community Colleges; Community Support; Cost Effectiveness; Educational Finance; Expenditure per Student; Financial Support; Full Time Equivalency; Instructional Student Costs; Local Government; School Funds; School Support; Tax Allocation; Tuition; Two Year Colleges; Maryland + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Community college; Community College; Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse; Kosten-Nutzen-Denken; Bildungsfonds; Finanzielle Förderung; Gemeindeverwaltung; Schulförderverein; Steuerentlastung; Unterweisung; Unterricht
Abstract	Maryland community colleges receive financial support from both the state and their local jurisdiction, as well as from student charges and other income from operations and investments. The proportion of local aid varies considerably across jurisdictions. A study was conducted at Prince George's Community College (PGCC) to measure local support for the college, as well as to examine the different methods of assessing county contributions to community colleges. The study compared the financial support provided by five counties in Maryland (Prince George's, Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Howard, and Montgomery) to their community colleges. Data were obtained from the Maryland Department of Fiscal Services and from the State Board for Community Colleges. Study findings included the following: (1) examining the share of county general fund expenditures, and the share of total county expenditures from all revenue sources, Prince George's county ranked lowest among all five counties in dollar support per full-time equivalent (FTE) student for each year from 1985 to 1989; (2) for fiscal year (FY) 1989, PGCC received $842 per FTE, while Montgomery County colleges received $2,518 per FTE; (3) when the real property assessable tax base was used to adjust for differences in county wealth and ability to support local colleges, Prince George's County continued to provide a lower level of support than its peers; and (4) an examination of tuition and fees, and college expenditures-per-student revealed that PGCC was the most cost efficient of the counties, but charged the highest tuition in order to cover its costs. Detailed data tables are included. (GFW)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC