This is the fifth and final report of "The Lincoln Project: Excellence and Access in Public Higher Education", an initiative of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Since it began its work in January 2013, the Lincoln Project has examined the causes and results of reduced state investment in public research universities. A distinguished and diverse project committee met frequently over the past three years to discuss the challenges and opportunities for these important institutions, which educate millions of students, support the cultural and economic vitality of their states, and generate research that creates new knowledge and technology. Project leaders also convened regional forums in Charlottesville, Virginia; Austin, Texas; Atlanta, Georgia; New York, New York; and Chapel Hill, North Carolina, to share ideas with leaders from academia, business, philanthropy, government, and the media. This publication is the culmination of the Lincoln Project committee's work. It draws from previous publications and presents new recommendations for stabilizing and strengthening public research universities at an inflection point in their history. This report calls on the federal government, state governments, corporations, foundations, philanthropists, and, of course, public research universities to come together -- to share responsibility for maintaining these institutions so that they continue to serve their states and the nation for generations to come.

How do we know when an initiative is ready to pursue a rigorous evaluation? More and more funders, policymakers, and program leaders recognize the value of high-quality evidence. But to make good use of a program evaluation, initiatives must contend with a set of fundamental questions first. Some of these are about the initiative itself: What outcomes does it seek to affect? Are daily activities in line with long-term goals? Others are about the purpose of the evaluation: What do initiative stakeholders hope to learn? Who is the audience for evaluation findings? One way to answer these questions is to undertake an "evaluability assessment" -- a process designed to determine the current potential for a rigorous evaluation, and to provide recommendations for how an organization, or a group of partnering organizations, can prepare for a successful evaluation in the future. This report describes an evaluability assessment conducted by the Research Alliance for NYC Schools on behalf of the Teagle Foundation. The Foundation contracted the Research Alliance to explore the feasibility of a variety of approaches to evaluating its College-Community Connections (CCC) initiative, which funds partnerships between community-based organizations and universities, aimed at promoting college access and success among talented but underrepresented students in NYC.

How do we know when an initiative is ready to pursue a rigorous evaluation? More and more funders, policymakers, and program leaders recognize the value of high-quality evidence. But to make good use of a program evaluation, initiatives must contend with a set of fundamental questions first. Some of these are about the initiative itself: What outcomes does it seek to affect? Are daily activities in line with long-term goals? Others are about the purpose of the evaluation: What do initiative stakeholders hope to learn? Who is the audience for evaluation findings? One way to answer these questions is to undertake an "evaluability assessment" -- a process designed to determine the current potential for a rigorous evaluation, and to provide recommendations for how an organization, or a group of partnering organizations, can prepare for a successful evaluation in the future. This report describes an evaluability assessment conducted by the Research Alliance for NYC Schools on behalf of the Teagle Foundation. The Foundation contracted the Research Alliance to explore the feasibility of a variety of approaches to evaluating its College-Community Connections (CCC) initiative, which funds partnerships between community-based organizations and universities, aimed at promoting college access and success among talented but underrepresented students in NYC.

How do we know when an initiative is ready to pursue a rigorous evaluation? More and more funders, policymakers, and program leaders recognize the value of high-quality evidence. But to make good use of a program evaluation, initiatives must contend with a set of fundamental questions first. Some of these are about the initiative itself: What outcomes does it seek to affect? Are daily activities in line with long-term goals? Others are about the purpose of the evaluation: What do initiative stakeholders hope to learn? Who is the audience for evaluation findings? One way to answer these questions is to undertake an "evaluability assessment" -- a process designed to determine the current potential for a rigorous evaluation, and to provide recommendations for how an organization, or a group of partnering organizations, can prepare for a successful evaluation in the future. This report describes an evaluability assessment conducted by the Research Alliance for NYC Schools on behalf of the Teagle Foundation. The Foundation contracted the Research Alliance to explore the feasibility of a variety of approaches to evaluating its College-Community Connections (CCC) initiative, which funds partnerships between community-based organizations and universities, aimed at promoting college access and success among talented but underrepresented students in NYC.

This report describes developments in the new generation of cross-sector collaborations for education and presents findings from a scan of such initiatives across the United States. We describe the broad ecology of cross-sector collaborations for educational improvement and examine various rationales for the current interest in collaboration. We explore the prominent new model of collaboration known as "collective impact," review the history of cross-sector collaborations for education, and revisit some reasons for cautious optimism about the changing context for collaboration. Then, using information from public websites, we describe characteristics of the national array of current collaborations. We report an additional analysis, based on multiple data sources, of factors that seem to position some cities to develop cross-sector collaborations while others are less likely to do so. To conclude, we revisit some trends and considerations that are worth watching, acknowledging that new efforts are often layered on the foundation of previous collaborations but also take place in an altered context with new possibilities and challenges.

This report describes developments in the new generation of cross-sector collaborations for education and presents findings from a scan of such initiatives across the United States. We describe the broad ecology of cross-sector collaborations for educational improvement and examine various rationales for the current interest in collaboration. We explore the prominent new model of collaboration known as "collective impact," review the history of cross-sector collaborations for education, and revisit some reasons for cautious optimism about the changing context for collaboration. Then, using information from public websites, we describe characteristics of the national array of current collaborations. We report an additional analysis, based on multiple data sources, of factors that seem to position some cities to develop cross-sector collaborations while others are less likely to do so. To conclude, we revisit some trends and considerations that are worth watching, acknowledging that new efforts are often layered on the foundation of previous collaborations but also take place in an altered context with new possibilities and challenges.

This report takes a look at how government officials have pressed college accreditors to focus more on "student outcomes" -- quantifiable indicators of knowledge acquired, skills learned, degrees attained, and so on. It then argues that it is not these enumerated outcomes that are the best way to hold colleges accountable, but rather the evidence of student engagement in the curriculum -- their papers, written examinations, projects, and presentations -- that holds the most promise for spurring improvement in higher education. Furthermore, this engagement is also a key factor in keeping students in school all the way to graduation. The report concludes that reformers seeking to enhance college performance and accountability should focus not on fabricated outcome measures but instead on the actual outputs from students' academic engagement, the best indicators of whether a college is providing the quality teaching, financial aid, and supportive environment that make higher learning possible, especially for the disadvantaged.

This report is the first of a series from The Century Foundation, sponsored by Pearson. The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or position of Pearson. The series grew out of an August 2014 conference at which researchers and several university presidents were exploring new paths to diversity in higher education in light of emerging legal constraints on race-based affirmative action. As participants discussed ideas to ensure access for low-income and minority students, university leaders were equally concerned about how to improve rates of college graduation by disadvantaged students.