This morning the House Higher Education Committee held an interim planning session regarding future work on tuition policy.

In a roundtable styled discussion members of the House Higher Education Committee joined in conversation with representatives from each of the four-year public baccalaureate institutions, the Washington Student Association, the Council of Faculty Representatives, the Washington Education Association, the Council of Presidents, American Federation of Teachers, League of Education Voters, Joint Legislatiave Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) staff, and Higher Education Coordinating Board staff.

The conversation began with an overview of the upcoming JLARC study of a transparent link between revenues, expenditures, and performance outcome measures in higher education. The study, directed to the Committee through passage of ESHB 2344 last session, requires JLARC, in a nutshell, to identify the links between funding sources, performance, and the state’s strategic plan for higher education.

The objectives of the study are grouped into categories of expenditures, revenue, performance outcome measures, and linkages. A preliminary report will be presented by staff at the September 2010 JLARC meeting and the final report at the October 2010 JLARC meeting.

The summary of the upcoming JLARC study provided a foundation for further discussion by those present this morning. The conversation moved from the study to the structure or focus of ongoing discussions between now and the 2011 legislative discussion around performance agreements, funding, tuition, and financial aid.

Members of the Higher Education Committee expressed their goal of wanting to have a healthy higher education system and argued that the JLARC study will serve as a cornerstone of this discussion. In other words, legislators expressed that the state budget is not going to get easier and the pressure on higher education will likely increase with regard to funding and hopes are riding high that the study will provide new insights.

Members also expressed the need to continue a discussion that places into a single conversation policies that impact tuition, financial aid, and cost management at institutions. Representative Anderson, Ranking Minority Leader on the Committee, shared that life has to change at institutiions and life and the commitment by the state has to change not just for the immediate future but for the long haul.

Those representing four-year institutions, faculty, and students focused the conversation on the future of performance agreements in Washington. It was widely recognized that the performance agreements submitted in 2009 reflected very different times and it is unclear how new performance agreements would integrate declining funds.

Rep. Wallace, Chair of the Committee, stated that performance agreements must reflect where the state is at any given time and where the state is headed. This was echoed by some institutional representatives who agreed that a performance agreement must work both in good and bad times.

Emphasis within this conversation was placed on the notion of an “agreement”. This reflects the frustration by institutions and some policymakers that a conversation and an agreement never emerged from the initial submission of performance agreements to a state committee.  Policymakers are concerned that an agreement may make promises that are unable to be met because of the state context or because the tie the hands of future legislatures.

Institutions are concerned that future performance agreements will result in the same ending that happened with the first submission – there was no conversation with policymakers and no process to lead to an agreement between institutions and the state.

In the end the conversation did not go much beyond initial discussions of performance agreements and the role of funding, tuition, and financial aid within a performance agreement framework.

However, the conversation did serve to kick-off interim discussions regarding higher education policy in Washington and is likely to be the first of many meetings between now and January 2011.