The best part of this model, however, is that the state's responsibility is also made clear.
The State of Nebraska need to provide its citizen a financial vision of the future and layout steps needed to get there including the projected needs for workforces and how these workforces can be developed by the state's educational systems.
As we think about legislation in general, a lot of laws are formed as reactions to issues that occurred. And a lot of them are, therefore, created in a form of responding to the events rather than a form that will address broader and more profound question.The State of Nebraska need to provide its citizen a financial vision of the future and layout steps needed to get there including the projected needs for workforces and how these workforces can be developed by the state's educational systems.
Funding for community colleges in Nebraska is of no exceptions. As the community college evolved from vocational training school to adding academic training, the funding issue is to keep community colleges operational by allowing state aid and local property tax support. But the accountability part of the funding is never tied directly to each funding sources. And because of this, it is becoming difficult in deciding on how much fund should be coming from which funding source and what level of state fund is adequate and, in the center of the issue, who entitled how much of the state fund?
One idea I have is to have state provides the basic infrastructure and oversight, but let institutions run their own business. The principle behind this idea is that state of Nebraska does have interest in providing reasonable resources in educating its residents. However, this investment must be a calculated move - how the state plan to recover these investments? (This should quite the argument of providing education entitlement to citizens who insisted to live in a remote area.)
Based on the population by age data, state can allocate supports for a reasonable amount of classroom and office space and a reasonable number of staff and instructors. The fund can be adjusted based on the local price index. These funds will provide the basic supports for institutions to provide courses to their local communities. Institutions are then required to make sure these facilities are used in an efficient manners.
Institutions are then allowed to use local tax and private funds to extend their operation and should be held responsible to each fund source. For example, courses supported by the local tax need to address the general education needs of the local community. For a manufacture-heavy community, the community may decided to support general machinery courses with the tax fund while the specialized mechanic training may have to be supported by private funds from local companies in a co-operational manner.
In addition to these funding, state can provides strategic funding to encourage institutions to provide special courses that will benefit the state. For example, if a state is planed to attract motor companies and to become a heavy industry state, it makes sense for the state to provide extra fund for automobile related courses.
By tying a institution's operation to individual funding sources, the responsibility of an institution become clear and, therefore, the accountability. The best part of this model, however, is that the state's responsibility is also made clear.
The State of Nebraska need to provide its citizen a financial vision of the future and layout steps needed to get there including the projected needs for workforces and how these workforces can be developed by the state's educational systems.
