The voters feel the same way. In 1998, they approved a constitutional amendment preventing the legislature from redirecting any state lottery money away from HOPE. And this year, when Barnes proposed capping the use of HOPE money for student activity fees, he encountered a barrage of criticism and had to back down.
Indeed, merit-scholarship programs such as HOPE have become virtually untouchable in the dozen or so states that have launched them since Georgia went first in 1993. Few elected officials anywhere feel comfortable criticizing them. But privately, many say that if they'd known how fast these programs would grow, they would have designed them differently.
Quietly, then, states such as Georgia are beginning to confront some troubling questions about their prize programs. Some of these are simply about money. Others have to do with larger issues of educational policy. But each is finding out what Barnes found out-- that any adjustment in mid-course can be extremely difficult.
HOPE was the brainchild of then-Georgia Governor Zell Miller, who felt a merit scholarship would stem the loss of top students to out- of-state colleges. As drawn up by Miller and enacted by the legislature, HOPE provides that any Georgia resident who completes high school with a "B" average can receive tuition, mandatory fees and a book allowance at any public institution in Georgia--or a $3,000 stipend if he or she attends an in-state private college--regardless of family income. More than 400,000 Georgia students have taken advantage of the offer in just seven years. As they have done so, the cost has soared from $21.4 million to $189.2 million.
While other states have made modifications in setting up their own HOPE-style programs, their general characteristics are borrowed from the Peach State: The scholarships are geared to help middle-income families; students must meet certain academic standards before receiving a scholarship, as well as once they enter college; and awards are based on scholastic achievement rather than a family's ability to pay tuition.
From the beginning, many education policy experts have expressed reservations about subsidizing middle-class students at the expense of their poorer peers. "Instead of listening to analysis that indicates the most efficient use of state resources is need-based assistance, unfortunately many legislators are listening to the political concerns of high-income families, and merit scholarships are the result," says David Breneman, dean of the University of Virginia's Curry School of Education.
There's evidence to bolster his case. Georgia's HOPE, for example, initially had an income cap of $65,000, but Miller quickly pushed the ceiling to $100,000 and by 1995 had eliminated it altogether. And the Chronicle of Higher Education reports that funding for Georgia's need- based program decreased from $5.3 million in 1994 to $2.2 million in 1997.
Some states, concerned about the prospect of merit scholarships eating into need scholarships, have tried to strike a balance between the two. The 1998 law establishing the Kentucky Educational Excellence Scholarships (KEES), with funding from the state lottery, requires 55 percent of the money to go to students who truly need financial aid. The remainder is awarded on a sliding scale to those with grades of "C" or better.
Merit-scholarship critics also are quick to raise fears about high school grade inflation without much in the way of evidence. But officials in Kentucky are starting to worry that they may be accumulating some. School districts in Kentucky determine their own grading scales, and shortly after the KEES bill passed, Hardin County dropped its standard for an "A" from 95 to 92. The Higher Education Assistance Authority compiled statewide grade data for the first time last year and was stunned to see that nearly 70 percent of seniors would be eligible for scholarships, a figure completely out of line with their collective ACT test scores.
Grade inflation is a potential concern at the college level as well, with professors being tempted to help students retain their scholarship eligibility. But Georgia's track record points to a different--albeit equally disconcerting--scenario. The Georgia Student Finance Commission, which administers HOPE, reports that only 36 of all the freshmen who enrolled in 1997-98 managed to maintain the required "B" average after their first year of college.
Florida, which created a "Bright Futures" merit-scholarship program in 1997, has been more concerned about the pool of students coming into the program than the number dropping out. Policy makers there are deeply divided over whether its eligibility standards are too low--and its price tag too high.
Bright Futures started out as a $75 million program. It grew to $115 million in 1998-99, and is expected to approach $150 million when the tab is totaled for the current school year. Budget watchers worry that if the merit program continues to grow at this rate, it could top $400 million in 10 years. Since the money for scholarships comes from lottery revenue, which has essentially been flat since 1995, many see a crisis looming.
Florida's awards are multi-tiered: Students with a "B+" average in college-prep courses and a minimum SAT score of 1270 are eligible for full tuition, fees and a book allowance at a state university or community college. Those with a "B" average and a SAT score of at least 970 receive 75 percent of their tuition and fees.
That the latter is about 30 points below the average score of all Florida seniors who took the test last year has not gone unnoticed. Nor has the fact that 97 percent of all freshman at the University of Florida are receiving some form of Bright Futures scholarship.
Last spring, Senator Donald Sullivan, a Republican from St. Petersburg, introduced a bill that would have raised the 970 SAT requirement to 1020 by the year 2003. And to help the state get a handle on costs, he also proposed that the awards be based not on a percentage of tuition but rather a fixed-dollar amount: a $2,800 annual cap for "B+" students and $1,700 for "B" students attending four-year schools.
The proposal generated angry letters from the public, as well as editorials in the state's major daily newspapers, that decried changing the rules in the middle of the game. There was also strong opposition from the legislature's black caucus and its Cuban delegation, who argued that the new requirements would leave many of the neediest students behind because minority students tend to score lower on standardized tests than whites.
In the current session, with the support of Governor Jeb Bush, Sullivan is once again pushing to refine Florida's program. But his and other efforts to toughen requirements--including a recommendation from the state's Postsecondary Education Planning Commission this past January--still face an uphill battle. "I thought we ought to raise the standards," Sullivan says. "I didn't think it would be so hard."
While some say "the more, the merrier," the financial ramifications of throwing wide the doors of eligibility have to be taken seriously. When Louisiana launched its Tuition Opportunity Program for Students (TOPS) in 1998, lawmakers wanted it to include the broadest possible base of constituents. So the bar was set at a minimum ACT test score of 19 out of 36, along with a C+ grade point average.
State officials figured about 15,000 students would qualify. When that number turned out to be 26,000, a special legislative session had to be called to increase the first year's general revenue funding from $36.2 million to $62.5 million. If the criteria remain the same, the program cost could top $123 million by 2004. Nevertheless, the state's higher education commissioner, E. Joseph Savoie, has said lawmakers will "stop building roads before they stop funding this program."
It seems inevitable that their commitment will eventually be put to the test. For as Georgia's governor has learned, problems can crop up from the unlikeliest sources. Earlier this year, Barnes expressed concern that public and private colleges were taking advantage of HOPE funding by significantly raising both their tuition and mandatory fees. Records from the University System of Georgia Board of Regents showed, in fact, that since HOPE began, tuition and fees at Georgia Tech and the University of Georgia had gone up by 35 percent and 60 percent, respectively.
Still, when Barnes proposed capping the amount HOPE paid out for health and transportation fees and cutting athletic and recreation fees from the list of things covered by HOPE funds--thereby saving about $8 million--a firestorm of protest erupted. After much media attention and repeated pleas from student leaders, he abandoned the effort.
While the merit-scholarship trailblazers continue trying to fine-tune their programs, those following in their path are doing the best to avoid some of the pitfalls. Several states approved merit programs in 1999 with innovative twists: Nevada and Michigan tapped an entirely new funding source--tobacco settlement money; Texas' merit/need hybrid covers tuition and fees for 10,000 students with a "C" average in college-prep courses and demonstrated financial need; and recipients of Maryland's $3,000 HOPE grant must promise that upon graduation, they will work in Maryland for one year for every year they benefited from the scholarship--or pay the state back.
Just how any of these approaches will play out remains to be seen. But states seem to be increasingly mindful of the advice of Florida's Donald Sullivan to "get it right the first time."
