Innovation in the use of facilities is considered an important way to maximize resources and increase capacity. Tapping unused capacity in other states’ colleges and universities and in independent institutions also drew strong interest, although the policy barriers in both cases were considered high.

While firm interests in building new facilities remain, many alternative conceptions of "campuses" are emerging, and a new planning atmosphere may have formed as states experiment with more modest and nontraditional configurations. Consortially-operated campus centers, upper-division community colleges, branch campuses, co-located institutions, and other "minicampus" forms are being used to address local needs without the monetary and physical costs of creating full-fledged colleges and universities. The availability of technology is making much of this possible.

The potential to capitalize on unused institutional capacities at home and in other states is also appealing. This can be accomplished through interstate arrangements, exchange programs such as the WICHE Student Exchange Program, portable student financial assistance programs, or state/institutional tuition policies that encourage in-migration. Conversely, counter pressures in the form of restrictive residency requirements and high nonresident tuition rates are apparent. These could prove counter-productive to the goal of increasing capacity at minimal cost. Clear statements of the public interest may be needed.

Examples of programs to expand physical capacity include:

• North and South Dakota have excess capacity available to students in other states.
  
• The WICHE Commission has acted recently to increase participation in the Western Undergraduate Exchange program. Some governors have suggested that all WGU students should be treated as residents.
  
• Washington is developing a consortium- operated higher education center for collaborative community college, university, university branch, private institution, and distance education programs. A co-located community college and university branch campus also will open soon in the north Seattle region.
  
• Utah is experimenting with lower tuition rates for students attending afternoon classes.
  
• To better utilize the capacity of private institutions, California has continued to increase its Cal Grants throughout the 1990s.
  
• Colorado’s new prepaid tuition plan applies to public and independent institutions.

Policy Implications for Increasing Capacity

Regionalism - States are beginning to view the enrollment crisis as a regional phenomenon and to work together on a regional basis. This requires reconsideration of policies from an entirely different perspective.

Nonresidency - States that have implicitly or explicitly moved in the direction of full cost recovery for nonresident students may need to reconsider their policies if a greater public benefit can be realized through the more open movement of students across state boundaries.

Policy - It may be necessary to establish different policies for professional and more general under-graduate programs; states also may need to come to some agreement on the tuition issue and how it will affect funding formulas; financial aid issues need to be considered; state licensing and registration requirements need review in this new context.

Independent Institutions - A high tuition/high aid approach may cause students to move to the privates but leave the public institutions to provide the higher cost, smaller, less profitable programs. The best state policy toward independents may be no policy at all. Increasing financial aid available to students at independents could increase the percentage of the enrollments they carry, but public programs to involve the independent institutions could raise questions of constitutionality.