Q1a by keara

VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 19

									Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q1a. Describe the philosophy in your state specifically related to student fees (for example, fees make up for tuition limitations, fees are institutionally controlled, etc.) Alabama Alaska Arizona Determined by Boards of Trustees In general, fees should have a direct relationship to the associated service, activity, or course and be based upon the estimated cost of providing the services or benefit. These fees should not exceed, on a long-term basis, the actual cost of the service or activity for which the fee is assessed. Mandatory Fees range between $93-$170 annually depending on university. Mandatory Fees support financial aid, debt service on the student recreation centers, or student health. Designated fees are institutionally controlled and designated for a specific purpose. Designated fees established over $50 must be approved by the Board. Fees under $50 may be established without Board approval. Mandatory fees like tuition are controlled by the local institutional boards. The Coordinating Board establishes policies for funding purposes As noted earlier, in California "fees" are "tuition" for resident students. Historically, these fees were only supposed to be for support services and related activities for students and not to be used to cover the direct cost of instruction. However, this distinction was abandoned with the spikes in fees that accompanied the early 1980s economic recession. With each passing recession, resident fees were increased, with the dollars essentially co-mingled with State General Fund support in our public systems. We do differentiate between systemide student fees (SSFs) and "total" fees, the latter being SSFs + mandatory campus based fees. It is what we report to the State of Washington HEC Board in its annual survey of tuition and fee levels. These revenues are now used to essentially fully fund student services and to supplement/backfill in other expenditure categories, including direct instruction, though you won't find any formal accounting of this latter usage. In the UC system, the UC Regent technically retain control of SSF revenues, though these monies are taken into account in the annual budgeting process for the system. The Legislature, again technically, controls CSU's student fee revenues and CCCs SSF are handled as an offset to the system's regular State General Fund/Local Fund appropriation. Fees are institutionally controlled Generally, the same as tuition. Number of mandatory fees should be minimized. Institutionally controlled Institutional fees for specific purposes may be charged within parameters established by the legislature. Mandatory student fees are defined as fees which are paid by all students as required by the institution subject to approval by the Board of Regents. Please add the following to the 2002 response: Housing and food services fees are approved by the Chancellor, elective and all miscellaneous fees are approved at the institutional level. Fees are paid for specific services/benefits. The mandatory fees are defined by the Board for selected activities but the president of the institution sets the fees. However, these fees are included in considering the 10% fee increase limit. Designated fees are set by the institutions. Revenue from these fees are retained and controlled at the campus level. Fees are retained locally. Illinois Board of Higher Education policies call for student consultation in fee matters and indicate that fees should not be imposed for instructional purposes. Legislative Audit Commission guidelines set forth very specific rules for the reporting and accounting of these revenues. Fees, like tuition, are set and controlled by the institutions At state universities, fees, although set and approved by the KBOR, are initiated at the campus-level to provide student services, as determined by student government and the institution's administration. Tuition and Mandatory Fees are set by the Council on Postsecondary Education Fees for services and student self-assessed fees are institutionally controlled with governing board approval. Mandatory attendance fees are subject to Legislative approval. fees make up/supplement tuition limitations The institutions control the fees Fees are set by the individual institutions; factors considered include forecasted expenses and expected state support. Fees are institutionally controlled.

Arkansas California

Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia

Hawaii Idaho

Illinois

Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan

Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana

MnSCU Board determines the type of fee that can be assessed and sets the maximum fee amount. Fees also cover extraordinary costs not covered by tuition. NA Fees are established by students (e.g., student activity fee, technology fee) and/or by the institution (health fee, course surcharge fee, e.g. engineering). A few years ago, a regent appointed committee made recommendations related to eliminating and or de-earmarked many fees into the current unrestricted fund. Since then, there still has been an on-going discussion between the educational units and the Board of Regents about fees. Should certain fees be part of tuition? Should the fee be deposited in general operating account or a designated account?. There continues to be disparity in how fees are being accounted for at each institution. Fees are institutionally controlled and are not even mentioned specifically in the Comp Plan guidelines. Institutionally controlled In general, institutions have mandatory fees and minimize designated, course-specific fees. Fees are not used to support auxiliary or similar functions that are not a direct aspect of delivering instruction. 2 years- fees supplement tuition Fees are controlled by the individual institutions No philosophy on fees. Fees are set to cover collegiate costs not anticipated or included in the calculation of tuition rates. Fees are generally set at the institution and controlled at the campus level to support unique services or programs for students Fees are institutionally controlled, and are intended to pay for the noninstructional services received by students such as student health and counseling, certain capital construction (e.g., for Student Unions or Student Rec Centers), or for unique charges associated with a particularly high-priced programs. 1) Certain general statutory limits are in place; 2) Institutions are expected to show a direct cost correlation for the fee charged; and 3) To some extent, the fees offset the standard, institution-wide tuition charged for high-cost programs. Fees are institutionally controlled. In the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education, the System's Board of Governor's has statutory authority to set "tuition fees" and broad fiscal policy, and each university's Council of Trustees is given statutory authority to set institutional fees. There are System policies that specify the kinds of fees universities may have, and limits the amount that can be charged for institutional instructional support fees and parking fees. This month the Board created a new "tuition fee" specifically for instructional technology. This is the only System-wide fee, other than tuition, that has been set by the Board. Same as 2002, except change the last 2 sentences to read: The Board established a technology tuition fee in 2002, which is the only System-wide "fee," other than the basic tuition fee. Fees are controlled by institution, but board must approve mandatory fees. Fees are institutionally controlled. Tuition and the application fee are deposited into two central pools; 80% to be distributed back to the campuses by the Board as part of the operating budgets; 20% used to fund capital projects and maintenance and repair of academic facilities. Tuition rates are uniform across the system. Mandatory fees are retained on campus and with some general policy direction are institutionally controlled. The cost to a student is about 50% fees and 50% tuition (not including room and board). It goes in cycles, with a movement toward many separate fees, then a move toward consolidation, etc. We are currently in the mode of adding user and differential fees. University fees are statutorily authorized and reflect funds for specific purposes. This makes them not very useful for making up for tuition limitations. Boards of regents, generally, may increase various fees by up to 10% per year under most of the authorizing statutes. Fees have been used as an additional source of revenue for institutions. General fees are approved by the Board of Regents but retained and controlled by institutions. Student leaders and institutional officials take the primary lead in proposing student fees. Other course-related fees are established, retained, and controlled entirely at an institutional level. Fees are generally increased the same percentage as tuition. VSC comment – most fees are accounted for in tuition. Remaining fees increase ~3% per year.

Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio

Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania

Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota

Tennessee Texas Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Mandatory non-Educational and General fees (for Auxiliary Enterprise activities such as athletics, student health services, student unions, recreational facilities and programs, campus transportation and capital debt service) are set by the institutional boards within limits established by the General Assembly. Language in the Appropriation Act limits these fee increases to the Consumer Price Index rate of inflation and wage and salary requirements with the following exceptions: (1) Increases directly related to capital projects authorized by the General Assembly. (2) Increases related to an approved plan to repay a deficit loan. (3) Increases of up to $15 at the community colleges, due to the small fees currently assessed students. (4) Other fee increases authorized by the General Assembly. The base student services and activities fee is controlled by statute and resident undergraduate tuition set by the legislature; however institutions can, with a vote of the students, impose additional fees for capital purposes such as recreation centers. Also, with a vote of the students a technology fee can be imposed. All fees are approved by institutional governing boards with final approval of mandatory fees by the HEPC or CTC Council, with the exception of WVU and Marshall. Fees are institutionally controlled with student input. The resources are used to fund programming and services that would not typically be charged to tuition. Assessment of fees should generally cover the cost of programs/activities supported by fees.

Washington

West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q1b. Is this fee philosophy formalized in the state constitution, by legislative statute, by other rule or policy, or not formalized? Constitution Statute State Board rule/ Not Comments rule policy formalized Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Response for 2002 should have reflected that Louisiana's constitutional provision requiring twothirds vote approval by the legislature was determined several years ago to be applicable to mandatory tuition and fee increases. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Note - The response for 2002 should have been Board rule/policy, as well. State statute (Sect. 304-4, HRS) recognizes the need to charge student fees for specific services/benefits by authorizing the governing board to impose such fees. Again, the formal, old policy (no fee revenues for instruction) is not followed, and the new, real-world one (fees are just dollars) is not a stated policy, just operational practice.

Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon

1 1 1

Constitution Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming TOTALS 2

Statute 1

State rule

Board rule/ policy 1 1 1 1

Not formalized For PASSHE only.

Comments

1 1

The State Board for Technical and Comprehensive Education sets fees for the Technical Colleges

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 other rule/policy

1 1 1

18

0

21

17

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q1c. Describe any fee policy changes in your state in the past three fiscal years (not changes in fee levels). Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida none Network fee of 2% for each enrolled student per semester none NA Just a continuing debate over which set of philosophies should drive fee levels, though no specific policies have been formally adopted. none The 40 percent cap remains. However, university athletic fees (cap of $2) associated with changing NCAA divisions is exempt from the cap. Capital improvement fee allowance for child care centers was changed to a maximum of 15% of the capital improvement fee instead of 15 cents per credit hour. (Senate Bill 670) no changes since 2002 in policy NA In August 2001, Illinois Board of Higher Education policies concerning student input on fee matters were changed. Policies adopted in 1994 required a student referendum when an institution either significantly restructured or imposed a new fee. The new policies call for each institution to develop policies that specify how students are to be consulted in fee matters, define student fees, provide for disclosure of fee information, and provide for cessation of fees after they have served their intended purpose. The institutions seem to be heading down a road where new fees are created to replace state appropriations that have been rescinded or reduced. For example, Indiana used to appropriate "technology" funding to institutions, funded through lottery & gaming proceeds. Once those appropriations were reduced, all public institutions instituted a "technology fee." Likewise, one state university has announced a "repair and rehabilitation fee" to begin in 2006 to supplement state appropriations for capital upkeep that have lagged well below the formula driven recommended amount. No other significant changes to fee policies. None - state univ.

Georgia Hawaii Idaho

Illinois Indiana

Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico

none none There is no fee policy. none Yes. The MnSCU Board of Trustees recently made changes to designations for mandatory and optional fees effective in FY2008. none none For FY 2006 and FY 2007, The Board of Regents spent more time analyzing and having educational units justify fees that have grown at a higher rate than inflation. none None Individual institutions have reduced fees or used other than state revenues to pay the fees. There is a concern that institutions could reduce fees while increasing tuitions. Since lottery revenues provide approximately $30 million annually for scholarships. A reduction in fees with increases in tuition would shift in revenue sources to the greater benefit of the institution Specific for each institution

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia

The Board reviewed the process for setting fees in 2003. The previous annual process was quite extensive and collaborative at all levels - the campus level and the Board of Governors' level. The Board altered the process to be a biennial process with fees increased by an inflationary index in the second year. If a campus needed more than an inflationary increase, the extensive process had to be followed before a fee increase could be proposed. Only one or two campuses settled for the inflationary option. Based on this, the Board needs to consider whether or not to revert to the old policy and require an annual fee process to be followed by all campuses. none In-state UG mandatory fees were subject to a state cap of 6% per year during the 1990s. The cap was lifted in FY 2002. There was no cap on miscellaneous fees, or on certain fees imposed to pay for certain campus capital obligations. Caps were reimposed beginning in FY 2004. Mandatory fees and Tuition are capped statutorily by a formula based upon other states' and peer institutions' activity. 2003-04 Building Fee increased to $45.00 per term. No changes have occurred in PASSHE fee policies.

Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

none no changes none no policy changes There have been no major policy changes regarding fees. none The policy that limits mandatory non-Educational and General fee increases was established in FY 1999. At the same time, the institutions were also given the authority to charge a limited (up to a fixed percentage of 1997-98 total tuition and fees) technology services fee. All but one institution currently charge a technology fee. No major changes have occurred since that time. no change Expanded authority of institutional governing boards to establish the level of fees, and increased emphasis on setting fees at a level to fully offset the cost of running auxiliary operations. No response

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q1d. Are there any potential fee policy changes under consideration in your state? If so, please describe. Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California no NA The Board has established and Tuition and Fee Workgroup, with one of the charges to review undergraduate program fees and class fees. NA More rationalizations for increasing fee levels -- e.g., students should pay for X percent of the cost of instruction, the individual (vis-à-vis societal) value of a degree is high enough that students should pay more for it up-front, etc. Other than the afore-mentioned "Compact," there are no pieces of legislation or student fee policy initiatives currently under consideration. No same as tuition

Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico

none no No changes under consideration. No Not at this time. No - state univ. Mandatory Fee policy would be governed by the new tuition policy approved by the Council. No major changes - mandatory fees and student self-assessed fees would be subject to overall limits prescribed in the BOR policy as adopted. Again, policy implementation is subject to legislative approval. none The University System of Maryland has implemented a technology fee for students effective during the 2002-2003 academic year NA none no none not at this point none no Possible changes over legislative concerns No no no no See previous response. none none no no

Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Will be reviewing all mandatory fees as well as determining whether some fees should be included within tuition rates and which should stand alone no Costs were increased for residence halls to cover the improvements. None have been identified none identified none no

New Tuition and Fee Policy to be drafted Mandatory fees have been consolidated.

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q1e. Has there been a curb, cap, freeze or other limit placed on fees in the past three fiscal years? No Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas Yes 1 1 1 1 Not formally, however in May 2004 our then-new Governor agreed to a "Compact" with UC and CSU that set forth some funding, performance and other goals. Part of this agreement called for UC and CSU, individually to raise fees by an average of 10% a year for three years (FY04 - FY06). California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Lesser of 6% or $500 on resident undergraduate instructional and mandatory fees mandatory fees and tuition are capped by a statutory formula that is based upon other state's and institutions' activities. Designated fees art limited to the direct costs of service. Each year, a cap is debated when the Board considers fees. Two years ago, no fee could be increased by more than 5%. For fiscal 2006, fees that are shifts from other institutional sources are included in the tuition cap. As reported in 2002 efforts to minimize the impact on the HOPE Scholarship Program continues. The program no longer pays for increases in mandatory fees. The Board policy continues to limit increases to 10% when considering the total full-time fees. Fee increases are curbed by state policy Comments

None other than requirements described above.

Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming TOTALS

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 35 15

2004-05 Undergraduate Resident tuition was capped at 15% above prior year UG Res rates. 2005-06 Undergraduate Resident revenue is capped at 3% over 2004-05 UG Res revenue. 2005-06 Resource Fee revenue is capped at 3% over 2004-05 Resource Fee revenue.

some selective fee increases As stated earlier, in 2002-2003 fees for institutions above the average were capped at HEPI + $250. Cap did not apply to institutions at or below the average. The Board start with the CPI and allows exceptions based on individual campus justification.

For mandatory, non-educational fees the increase is capped to 5% Percentage increase in total tuition and fees placed in statute in 2003.

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q2. Please indicate which entities in your state have the authority to set mandatory and/or designated fees. Governor Legislature State coordinating/ Individual system governing Mandatory Designated Mandatory Designated Mandatory Designated Mandatory Designated Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Local district governing Mandatory Designated 1 1

1

Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Governor Mandatory Designated North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming TOTALS 1 0

Legislature Mandatory Designated

State coordinating/ Mandatory Designated 1 1 1

Individual system governing Mandatory Designated

Local district governing Mandatory Designated 1 1 1 1

1

1

1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 17

1

7

1

14

10

23

15

14

Individual institutions Mandatory Designated Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California 1 1 1 1 1

Other

Mandatory- President of the University of Alaska Individual universities may set designated fees if under $50. Fees over $50 must be approved by the Board. This is a bit confusing but, here goes! The Gov & Leg have formal power to set CCC SSFs, with the individual campuses (under the general direction of local districts) having the power to ask students to agree to increasing user-specific campus-based fees. UC and CSU's governing boards have the formal power to set SSF levels and the individual campuses, following the general parameters set by the two systems' respective systemwide administrative offices, have the power to set some -- and ask students to vote on setting other -- campus-based fees, both mandatory and user-specific. However, when it comes to SSFs, UC and CSU usually follow the direction of the Gov & Leg, in terms of what is being negotiated or agreed-upon in the annual budget process, in setting these fees. The systems have occasionally, but rarely, ignored these two parties sentiments and raised fees by more than was expected but genearlly have later found this to be painful error, in budgetary and political terms. . .

1

Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Designated fees are no longer utilized in Iowa. f. pertains to Washburn University

Housing & food services fees are approved by the Chancellor.

1 1 1 1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1

for 2 years, individual system governing boards also set designated fees.

The Board of Governors sets fees based upon campus requests.

North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming TOTALS

Individual institutions Mandatory Designated 1 1 1 1

Other

1

1

1

1

Individual system governing boards, generally, may increase fee levels by up to 10% per year under the authorizing statutes.

1 1 1 1 21

1 1 1 1 28

In the 2-year-system, the state board sets mandatory fees, each college can set designated fees. At the 4-year schools, each institution can set mandatory and designated fees.

Survey of 2005-2006 State Tuition, Fees, & Financial Assistance Policies for Public Colleges and Universities Q3. Please describe any differences in philosophy or policy concerning fees at public two-year vs. four-year institutions in your state. Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California

Tuition and fees at public two-year institutions should be lower than at public four-year institutions to provide work-force education and to make programs available to as many people as possible. CCC fees = keep absolutely as low as possible, BUT "absolutely" has been relativized, with the hope that financial aid (fee waivers, some State aid) will compensate for increases in fee levels, generate modest-to-increasing amounts of money (now more than $300 million) annually for State coffers. CSU = keep kind of low relative to comparable institutions in other states, rely on financial aid (some State, some institutional), use fee revenues to generate nearly $1 billion annually for the system. UC = keep low enough to claim they are kind of "low" relative to "high" states, rely heavily on State, federal and institutional financial aid, generate over a billion-and-a-quarter dollars a year in SSF revenues to use to fund the system.

Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana

none

Unsure how community colleges handle fees

none Two-year programs may assess the equivalent of "course fees" as "Program Fee" that are assessed on all students enrolled in a given program. Because fees are for a specific purpose designated by the Board of Regents, the financial activity from these fees are accounted for in the designated fund at each campus. There are no differences. unsure

Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey

New Mexico

New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

Fees for the use by or availability to the students of all or any property, buildings, structures, activities, services, operations or other facilities of the college district (TWO-YEAR COLLEGES) may be pledged to the payment of the bonds and shall be fixed and collected from all or any designated part of the students enrolled in the colleges of the college district in the amounts and in the manner determined and provided by the board in the resolution authorizing the issuance of the bonds. Such fees: (1) may be collected in the full amounts required or permitted under this section, without regard to actual use, availability or existence of any facility, commencing at any time designated by the board; (2) may be fixed and collected for the use or availability of any specifically described property, buildings, structures, activities, services, operations or other facilities or may be fixed and collected as general fees for the general use or availability of the colleges of the college district; and (3) whether fixed and collected as specific or general fees, may be pledged to the payment of any issue or series of bonds issued by the board, in the full amounts required or permitted under this section, in addition to and regardless of the existence of any other specific or general fees at the colleges of the college district; provided that the board may restrict its power to pledge such additional specific or general fees in none no difference See answer to question 19A above.

Public technical colleges are open-enrollment institutions and as such, their fees are to be kept "reasonable." The technical institutes are governed by the local school districts. Two-year institutions have fewer fee categories. none no differences

Two-year institutions have philosophical desire to keep increases as low as possible to ensure access. Four-year institutions have had to raise tuition and fees to offset reductions in state appropriations.


								
To top