1. Overview of Dedicated Funding Streams Presented: January 17, 2007

2. Funding from Lotteries, Casinos, or other Gaming Gaming revenues are primarily used to support both merit and need-based financial aid Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers, State Higher Education Finance FY 2005 Red = state appropriates more than 15 percent of higher ed budget from gaming revenue Green = state appropriates less than 15 percent of higher ed budget from gaming revenue

3. Non-Appropriated Sources Money set aside for higher education from receipt of lease income or oil/mineral extraction fees. Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers, State Higher Education Finance FY 2005

4. Local Tax Appropriations Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers, State Higher Education Finance FY 2005 Blue = state appropriates more than 10 percent of higher ed budget from local taxes. Green = state appropriates less than 10 percent of higher ed budget from local taxes.

5. How are lottery monies used?  Most states have created merit or need-based scholarship programs, including: New Mexico  Student Success Scholarships – New Mexico residents that meet criteria Oklahoma  Oklahoma Higher Learning Access Program – need-based program that students enter in the 8 th grade to ensure they are prepared for college. South Carolina  HOPE scholarship – merit based scholarships. West Virginia  PROMISE program -- merit based scholarships.  Several states use lottery revenues to support operations, including: Florida Oklahoma South Carolina

6. Georgia – HOPE Scholarship  Merit-based program funded entirely from lottery revenues.  Georgia State Higher Ed. Budget: $2.5 billion state & local appropriations $502 million or 20.5% from lottery revenue  99% of in-state freshman enrolled at the University of Georgia last Fall received the award. Average full-time resident tuition & fees: $2,482/semester HOPE pays 100% of tuition and fees plus $150 for books.

7. Other “HOPE” Scholarship Programs  16 states have similar programs to Georgia’s HOPE program  Only three do not allow private institutions to participate: Alaska Massachusetts; and New Mexico

8. Lottery Funding – How has it impacted higher education? General Finding  Lottery funding often supplants existing state appropriations for education, making the percentage of state budgets allocated for education lower post-lottery.  Non-lottery states on average allocate a smaller percentage of their state budgets to education. Examples  In Ohio, the last time the lottery expanded, the state allocated $1.60 less in its general fund in aid to schools for every $1.00 in profits provided from the lottery.  In Vermont, after the state began using gaming revenues to support education, the percentage of general funds allocated dropped from 46% in 1990 to 39% in 1994. Source: North Carolina Lottery for Education: What are the Odds our Schools would win?; Charlotte Advocates for Education, May 2003

9. Non-appropriated sources – Higher Education Examples WYOMING – new endowment approved by voters Nov. 2006  $500 million endowment created for academic scholarships and endowed chairs using state mineral taxes.  Wyoming high school graduates will receive a scholarship equal to tuition and fees at the University of Wyoming (UW) or any state community college.  Authorizes $105 million for endowed chairs and faculty for research and instruction at UW and the state's community colleges.  University of Wyoming will receive two-thirds of the funding, while the community colleges will receive one-third.

10. Non-appropriated sources – Higher Education Examples StatePurposeSource of Funding ArizonaFunding for Engineering, Mining, & Military Science programs. Provides a small amount of funding for general operations. Provides endowment scholars for faculty Leases and sales of state-owned land. South Dakota Education Enhancement Trust Fund – funds college scholarships  Tobacco Settlement;  Cement Trust Fund; and  Tobacco tax revenue. MontanaA state-wide property levy contributes $14 million per year or 14 percent of state support toward Montana’s six four-year colleges and universities and five colleges of technology Levy on property at the rate of six mills. TexasPermanent University Fund (PUF)– The PUF principal in the fall 2005 was approximately $15 billion. The PUF primarily serves The University of Texas System with two thirds of its proceeds. The remaining third supports Texas A&M. Proceeds from leases and royalties on state land. Including royalties from oil discoveries.

11. Local Tax Appropriations Colorado  Support Local District Junior Colleges (LDJC)  Local district junior colleges have special property tax districts that contribute to the support of their their operations.  Students from the special property tax districts pay discounted tuition rates.  Historically the following LDJC’s were in operation: Aims Community College Arapahoe Community College Colorado Mountain College Grand Junction Junior College Lamar Junior College Morgan County Community College Northwestern Community College Otera Junior College Pueblo Junior College Sterling Junior College Trinidad Junior College  Today all but two are no longer supported by their local districts and funded entirely from the state Colorado Mountain College Aims Community college

12. Colorado Local District Junior Colleges Aims Community College Steamboat CMC Salida CMC Buena Vista CMC Leadville CMC Breckenridge CMC Dillon CMC Vail – Eagle Valley CMC Glenwood Springs CMC Rifle CMC Carbondale CMC Spring Valley CMC

13. Tuition at Local District Junior Colleges  Aims Community College In-District-Tuition: $50/credit hour Out-of-District Tuition: $75/credit hour Out-of-State: $300/credit hour  Colorado Mountain College In-District Tuition: $43/credit hour Out-of-District Tuition: $72/credit hour Out-of-State Tuition: $231/credit hour