cost sharing meaning in education

Search Menu
Browse content in Arts and Humanities
Browse content in Archaeology
Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
Archaeology by Region
Archaeology of Religion
Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
Biblical Archaeology
Contemporary and Public Archaeology
Environmental Archaeology
Historical Archaeology
History and Theory of Archaeology
Industrial Archaeology
Landscape Archaeology
Mortuary Archaeology
Prehistoric Archaeology
Underwater Archaeology
Urban Archaeology
Zooarchaeology
Browse content in Architecture
Architectural Structure and Design
History of Architecture
Residential and Domestic Buildings
Theory of Architecture
Browse content in Art
Art Subjects and Themes
History of Art
Industrial and Commercial Art
Theory of Art
Biographical Studies
Byzantine Studies
Browse content in Classical Studies
Classical History
Classical Philosophy
Classical Mythology
Classical Literature
Classical Reception
Classical Art and Architecture
Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
Greek and Roman Epigraphy
Greek and Roman Law
Greek and Roman Papyrology
Greek and Roman Archaeology
Late Antiquity
Religion in the Ancient World
Digital Humanities
Browse content in History
Colonialism and Imperialism
Diplomatic History
Environmental History
Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
Historical Geography
History by Period
History of Emotions
History of Agriculture
History of Education
History of Gender and Sexuality
Industrial History
Intellectual History
International History
Labour History
Legal and Constitutional History
Local and Family History
Maritime History
Military History
National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
Oral History
Political History
Public History
Regional and National History
Revolutions and Rebellions
Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
Social and Cultural History
Theory, Methods, and Historiography
Urban History
World History
Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
Language Learning (Specific Skills)
Language Teaching Theory and Methods
Browse content in Linguistics
Applied Linguistics
Cognitive Linguistics
Computational Linguistics
Forensic Linguistics
Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
History of English
Language Acquisition
Language Evolution
Language Reference
Language Variation
Language Families
Lexicography
Linguistic Anthropology
Linguistic Theories
Linguistic Typology
Phonetics and Phonology
Psycholinguistics
Sociolinguistics
Translation and Interpretation
Writing Systems
Browse content in Literature
Bibliography
Children's Literature Studies
Literary Studies (Asian)
Literary Studies (European)
Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
Literary Studies (Romanticism)
Literary Studies (American)
Literary Studies (Modernism)
Literary Studies - World
Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
Literary Studies (19th Century)
Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
Literary Studies (African American Literature)
Literary Studies (British and Irish)
Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
Literary Studies (History of the Book)
Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
Literary Studies (War Literature)
Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
Mythology and Folklore
Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
Browse content in Media Studies
Browse content in Music
Applied Music
Dance and Music
Ethics in Music
Ethnomusicology
Gender and Sexuality in Music
Medicine and Music
Music Cultures
Music and Religion
Music and Media
Music and Culture
Music Education and Pedagogy
Music Theory and Analysis
Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
Musicology and Music History
Performance Practice and Studies
Race and Ethnicity in Music
Sound Studies
Browse content in Performing Arts
Browse content in Philosophy
Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
Epistemology
Feminist Philosophy
History of Western Philosophy
Metaphysics
Moral Philosophy
Non-Western Philosophy
Philosophy of Science
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Perception
Philosophy of Action
Philosophy of Law
Philosophy of Religion
Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
Practical Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Browse content in Religion
Biblical Studies
Christianity
East Asian Religions
History of Religion
Judaism and Jewish Studies
Qumran Studies
Religion and Education
Religion and Health
Religion and Politics
Religion and Science
Religion and Law
Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
Religious Studies
Browse content in Society and Culture
Cookery, Food, and Drink
Cultural Studies
Customs and Traditions
Ethical Issues and Debates
Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
Sports and Outdoor Recreation
Technology and Society
Travel and Holiday
Visual Culture
Browse content in Law
Arbitration
Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
Commercial Law
Company Law
Browse content in Comparative Law
Systems of Law
Competition Law
Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
Government Powers
Judicial Review
Local Government Law
Military and Defence Law
Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
Construction Law
Contract Law
Browse content in Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
Criminal Evidence Law
Sentencing and Punishment
Employment and Labour Law
Environment and Energy Law
Browse content in Financial Law
Banking Law
Insolvency Law
History of Law
Human Rights and Immigration
Intellectual Property Law
Browse content in International Law
Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
Public International Law
IT and Communications Law
Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
Law and Politics
Law and Society
Browse content in Legal System and Practice
Courts and Procedure
Legal Skills and Practice
Primary Sources of Law
Regulation of Legal Profession
Medical and Healthcare Law
Browse content in Policing
Criminal Investigation and Detection
Police and Security Services
Police Procedure and Law
Police Regional Planning
Browse content in Property Law
Personal Property Law
Study and Revision
Terrorism and National Security Law
Browse content in Trusts Law
Wills and Probate or Succession
Browse content in Medicine and Health
Browse content in Allied Health Professions
Arts Therapies
Clinical Science
Dietetics and Nutrition
Occupational Therapy
Operating Department Practice
Physiotherapy
Radiography
Speech and Language Therapy
Browse content in Anaesthetics
General Anaesthesia
Neuroanaesthesia
Browse content in Clinical Medicine
Acute Medicine
Cardiovascular Medicine
Clinical Genetics
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Dermatology
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Genito-urinary Medicine
Geriatric Medicine
Infectious Diseases
Medical Toxicology
Medical Oncology
Pain Medicine
Palliative Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine
Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
Rheumatology
Sleep Medicine
Sports and Exercise Medicine
Clinical Neuroscience
Community Medical Services
Critical Care
Emergency Medicine
Forensic Medicine
Haematology
History of Medicine
Browse content in Medical Dentistry
Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Paediatric Dentistry
Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
Surgical Dentistry
Browse content in Medical Skills
Clinical Skills
Communication Skills
Nursing Skills
Surgical Skills
Medical Ethics
Medical Statistics and Methodology
Browse content in Neurology
Clinical Neurophysiology
Neuropathology
Nursing Studies
Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Gynaecology
Occupational Medicine
Ophthalmology
Otolaryngology (ENT)
Browse content in Paediatrics
Neonatology
Browse content in Pathology
Chemical Pathology
Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
Histopathology
Medical Microbiology and Virology
Patient Education and Information
Browse content in Pharmacology
Psychopharmacology
Browse content in Popular Health
Caring for Others
Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Self-help and Personal Development
Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
Cell Biology
Molecular Biology and Genetics
Reproduction, Growth and Development
Primary Care
Professional Development in Medicine
Browse content in Psychiatry
Addiction Medicine
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Forensic Psychiatry
Learning Disabilities
Old Age Psychiatry
Psychotherapy
Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
Epidemiology
Public Health
Browse content in Radiology
Clinical Radiology
Interventional Radiology
Nuclear Medicine
Radiation Oncology
Reproductive Medicine
Browse content in Surgery
Cardiothoracic Surgery
Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
General Surgery
Neurosurgery
Paediatric Surgery
Peri-operative Care
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Transplant Surgery
Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
Vascular Surgery
Browse content in Science and Mathematics
Browse content in Biological Sciences
Aquatic Biology
Biochemistry
Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
Developmental Biology
Ecology and Conservation
Evolutionary Biology
Genetics and Genomics
Microbiology
Molecular and Cell Biology
Natural History
Plant Sciences and Forestry
Research Methods in Life Sciences
Structural Biology
Systems Biology
Zoology and Animal Sciences
Browse content in Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Computational Chemistry
Crystallography
Environmental Chemistry
Industrial Chemistry
Inorganic Chemistry
Materials Chemistry
Medicinal Chemistry
Mineralogy and Gems
Organic Chemistry
Physical Chemistry
Polymer Chemistry
Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
Theoretical Chemistry
Browse content in Computer Science
Artificial Intelligence
Computer Architecture and Logic Design
Game Studies
Human-Computer Interaction
Mathematical Theory of Computation
Programming Languages
Software Engineering
Systems Analysis and Design
Virtual Reality
Browse content in Computing
Business Applications
Computer Security
Computer Games
Computer Networking and Communications
Digital Lifestyle
Graphical and Digital Media Applications
Operating Systems
Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
Atmospheric Sciences
Environmental Geography
Geology and the Lithosphere
Maps and Map-making
Meteorology and Climatology
Oceanography and Hydrology
Palaeontology
Physical Geography and Topography
Regional Geography
Soil Science
Urban Geography
Browse content in Engineering and Technology
Agriculture and Farming
Biological Engineering
Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
Electronics and Communications Engineering
Energy Technology
Engineering (General)
Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
History of Engineering and Technology
Mechanical Engineering and Materials
Technology of Industrial Chemistry
Transport Technology and Trades
Browse content in Environmental Science
Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
Environmental Sustainability
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
History of Science and Technology
Browse content in Materials Science
Ceramics and Glasses
Composite Materials
Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
Nanotechnology
Browse content in Mathematics
Applied Mathematics
Biomathematics and Statistics
History of Mathematics
Mathematical Education
Mathematical Finance
Mathematical Analysis
Numerical and Computational Mathematics
Probability and Statistics
Pure Mathematics
Browse content in Neuroscience
Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
Development of the Nervous System
Disorders of the Nervous System
History of Neuroscience
Invertebrate Neurobiology
Molecular and Cellular Systems
Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
Neuroscientific Techniques
Sensory and Motor Systems
Browse content in Physics
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
Biological and Medical Physics
Classical Mechanics
Computational Physics
Condensed Matter Physics
Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
History of Physics
Mathematical and Statistical Physics
Measurement Science
Nuclear Physics
Particles and Fields
Plasma Physics
Quantum Physics
Relativity and Gravitation
Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
Browse content in Psychology
Affective Sciences
Clinical Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Neuroscience
Criminal and Forensic Psychology
Developmental Psychology
Educational Psychology
Evolutionary Psychology
Health Psychology
History and Systems in Psychology
Music Psychology
Neuropsychology
Organizational Psychology
Psychological Assessment and Testing
Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
Psychology Professional Development and Training
Research Methods in Psychology
Social Psychology
Browse content in Social Sciences
Browse content in Anthropology
Anthropology of Religion
Human Evolution
Medical Anthropology
Physical Anthropology
Regional Anthropology
Social and Cultural Anthropology
Theory and Practice of Anthropology
Browse content in Business and Management
Business Strategy
Business Ethics
Business History
Business and Government
Business and Technology
Business and the Environment
Comparative Management
Corporate Governance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Entrepreneurship
Health Management
Human Resource Management
Industrial and Employment Relations
Industry Studies
Information and Communication Technologies
International Business
Knowledge Management
Management and Management Techniques
Operations Management
Organizational Theory and Behaviour
Pensions and Pension Management
Public and Nonprofit Management
Strategic Management
Supply Chain Management
Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
Criminal Justice
Criminology
Forms of Crime
International and Comparative Criminology
Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
Development Studies
Browse content in Economics
Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
Asian Economics
Behavioural Finance
Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
Economic Systems
Economic History
Economic Methodology
Economic Development and Growth
Financial Markets
Financial Institutions and Services
General Economics and Teaching
Health, Education, and Welfare
History of Economic Thought
International Economics
Labour and Demographic Economics
Law and Economics
Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
Microeconomics
Public Economics
Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
Welfare Economics
Browse content in Education
Adult Education and Continuous Learning
Care and Counselling of Students
Early Childhood and Elementary Education
Educational Equipment and Technology
Educational Strategies and Policy
Higher and Further Education
Organization and Management of Education
Philosophy and Theory of Education
Schools Studies
Secondary Education
Teaching of a Specific Subject
Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
Teaching Skills and Techniques
Browse content in Environment
Applied Ecology (Social Science)
Climate Change
Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
Natural Disasters (Environment)
Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
Browse content in Human Geography
Cultural Geography
Economic Geography
Political Geography
Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
Communication Studies
Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
Browse content in Politics
African Politics
Asian Politics
Chinese Politics
Comparative Politics
Conflict Politics
Elections and Electoral Studies
Environmental Politics
European Union
Foreign Policy
Gender and Politics
Human Rights and Politics
Indian Politics
International Relations
International Organization (Politics)
International Political Economy
Irish Politics
Latin American Politics
Middle Eastern Politics
Political Methodology
Political Communication
Political Philosophy
Political Sociology
Political Behaviour
Political Economy
Political Institutions
Political Theory
Politics and Law
Public Administration
Public Policy
Quantitative Political Methodology
Regional Political Studies
Russian Politics
Security Studies
State and Local Government
UK Politics
US Politics
Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
African Studies
Asian Studies
East Asian Studies
Japanese Studies
Latin American Studies
Middle Eastern Studies
Native American Studies
Scottish Studies
Browse content in Research and Information
Research Methods
Browse content in Social Work
Addictions and Substance Misuse
Adoption and Fostering
Care of the Elderly
Child and Adolescent Social Work
Couple and Family Social Work
Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
Emergency Services
Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
International and Global Issues in Social Work
Mental and Behavioural Health
Social Justice and Human Rights
Social Policy and Advocacy
Social Work and Crime and Justice
Social Work Macro Practice
Social Work Practice Settings
Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
Welfare and Benefit Systems
Browse content in Sociology
Childhood Studies
Community Development
Comparative and Historical Sociology
Economic Sociology
Gender and Sexuality
Gerontology and Ageing
Health, Illness, and Medicine
Marriage and the Family
Migration Studies
Occupations, Professions, and Work
Organizations
Population and Demography
Race and Ethnicity
Social Theory
Social Movements and Social Change
Social Research and Statistics
Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
Sociology of Religion
Sociology of Education
Sport and Leisure
Urban and Rural Studies
Browse content in Warfare and Defence
Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
Land Forces and Warfare
Military Administration
Military Life and Institutions
Naval Forces and Warfare
Other Warfare and Defence Issues
Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
Weapons and Equipment

New Languages and Landscapes of Higher Education

< Previous chapter
Next chapter >

5 Cost-sharing and Student Support

Published: December 2016
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

Cost-sharing in higher education is now a global phenomenon, underpinning much of its expansion and growing participation. Cost-sharing policies seek to alter the balance of private and public funding to higher education, and most do this by shifting more higher education costs away from government and taxpayers and onto students and their families. At the same time, such policies raise broader issues about the nature and the aims of higher education. This chapter addresses the following questions: What are the policy objectives of cost-sharing in higher education and what different forms do these policies take? What theoretical and practical rationales frame cost-sharing policies? And how have these changed and evolved over time? What alternative perspectives should inform their appraisal? The chapter addresses these questions by tracing the development of higher education student funding policies in the UK while also calling on experiences in other countries.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

Sign in with email/username & password
Get email alerts
Save searches
Purchase content
Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
Institutional account management
Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institutionâ€™s website and Oxford Academic.

Click Sign in through your institution.
Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institutionâ€™s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see â€˜Sign in through society siteâ€™ in the sign in pane within a journal:

Click Sign in through society site.
When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Rights and permissions
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Office of Research, Innovation and Collaboration (ORIC)

College of Education and Human Ecology

What is cost-share?

Cost-sharing (or “matching”) refers to a scenario in which the cost of a sponsored project is funded in part by a source other than the sponsor. Some sponsors or specific funding opportunities require cost-sharing while others may simply encourage it for an application to be competitive. In other cases, faculty and departments may opt voluntarily to cost-share a portion of a project if their budget exceeds the sponsor’s limit and they identify another source of available funds.

If cost-sharing is offered in any part of the proposal – whether required or voluntary – it is a binding commitment that must be met and documented. Cost-shared funds are to be treated the same way sponsor funds – they represent actual costs and require official accounting and financial reporting by the Office of Sponsored Pro grams (OSP).

The college’s general policy is avoid cost-sharing unless it is required or specifically requested by the sponsor. All forms of cost-sharing — whether in-kind salary contributions or other matching funds — require the prior approval of the college.

Sponsored project costs contributed by source(s) other than sponsor and represents real costs to the university.

Direct costs & their associated facilities and administrative (F&A) costs
Portion of F&A costs not paid by the sponsor (Unrecovered F&A costs)

Types of cost-sharing

Required by statute, terms of the program, or other sponsor policy
Required by sponsor to be provided at proposal submission and as a binding condition of the award
Any Cost share offered or provided when there is no specific sponsor requirement

Voluntary Committed

Cost share is offered in proposal when not required and subsequently is made a condition of award

Voluntary Uncommitted

Cost share is offered in proposal when not required, but is not made a condition of award

Sources of Cost-sharing

Have a completed budget proposal that has been reviewed by the EHE Office of Research.
The request be made at least one month before the submission deadline.
Include cost share support from the PI’s department.
Departmental Funds such as release-time funds or graduate student support.
University Funds — The OSU Graduate School has a Matching Tuition and Fee Award (MTFA) program that can sometimes be used as a source of cost share. If the sponsor doesn’t allow tuition/fees to be paid for by the grant, this program will cover those tuition/fees if approved by the graduate school. Requests need to be submitted at least two weeks in advance of the due date and require a statement of priority from the Associate Dean for Research and a complete budget. As of January 2020, the residual funds from this program will be used to support waiver requests that follow the priorities of the graduate school.
3 rd Party: In form of services ( Professional, technical or consultant), supplies, volunteer hours, equipment or cash from a source outside the university

Best items to use as cost-share

Want to cost-share expenses that are easy to account for – OSP will provide official fiscal reporting to sponsor and will need to see cost-share requirements have been met, if applicable. Best to use:

Unrecoverable F&A (if sponsor allows it)
Effort for hard-money faculty & staff
Grad School fee Authorization requests
Out-of-State portion
Large dollar equipment, supplies or services

If you have any questions about cost share, please contact one of our EHE grants managers: Essence Vaughn at 614-292-1802 or Michael Moses at 614-292-3883.

Office of Research, Innovation and Collaboration (ORIC) 153 Arps Hall 1945 N. High St. Columbus, OH 43210

Meet Our Staff

OFFICE HOURS

8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday–Friday

Phone: (614) 247-2412 Email: [email protected]

Utility Menu

Site Search
Cost Sharing Policy
Originally Issued: March 1, 2011
Last Revised: April 27, 2020
Responsible Office: Office for Sponsored Programs
PDF version of Cost Sharing Policy

Policy Statement

Harvard University has established the following policy for the management of cost sharing to comply with the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“Uniform Guidance”) and federal agency policies and procedures. Additionally, any non-federal sponsor cost share requires similar diligence to recognize the commitment and maintain appropriate documentation which provides evidence of a cost sharing commitment. Therefore, all committed cost sharing is subject to this policy.

Cost sharing is any project cost that is not reimbursed by the sponsor to support the scope of work defined by the federal or non-federal sponsored award. Cost sharing, also known as matching, is funded by Harvard or a third-party, which is generally a non-federal resource.

Harvard strongly discourages cost sharing, unless such a commitment is required by the federal or non-federal sponsor. All committed cost sharing must be tracked and may require reporting.

Reason for Policy

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Sections 2 CFR 200.306 (“Uniform Guidance”) states “Under Federal research proposals, voluntary committed cost sharing is not expected. It cannot be used as a factor during the merit review of applications or proposals, but may be considered if it is both in accordance with Federal awarding agency regulations and specified in a notice of funding opportunity.” Voluntary cost sharing should not be included in a federal proposal.

Cost sharing expenditures must adhere to the same accounting, financial, legal, and regulatory requirements as direct cost expenditures on sponsored awards and must comply with the following:

Federal or non-federal sponsored award terms and conditions
Federal regulations including restrictions for procurement and airfare
University and school/tub-level sponsored policies and guidelines
Donor restrictions

For federally-funded sponsored awards, Uniform Guidance Section 200.306 requires that “cost sharing funds are a) verifiable from the University's records b) not included as contributions for any other federal award c) necessary and reasonable for the accomplishment of the project or program objectives d) are allowable under Subpart E Cost Principles e) not paid from another federal award and f) included in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency.”

Failure to appropriately document cost sharing commitments from verifiable official University records could result in audit findings and require the return of funds to the sponsor.

Who Must Comply

All Principal Investigators (PIs) and administrators at Harvard University within all schools, units, divisions, University-wide initiatives, and centers who are involved with the administration and conduct of sponsored awards must comply with this policy

Types of Cost Sharing

Mandatory committed cost sharing.

Costs required as a condition of the award which must be tracked and may require reporting. This type of cost sharing is required by the Sponsor and must be included in the proposal.

Voluntary Committed Cost Sharing

Cost sharing specifically pledged by Harvard on a voluntary basis which is quantified in either the proposal budget and/or narrative and becomes a binding requirement of the award, must be tracked, and may require reporting. Note: When a PI decides to use other funding source(s) to fulfill a proposed and budgeted effort commitment, that effort must be treated as voluntary committed cost sharing for both effort reporting and inclusion in Facilities and Administrative rate calculation purposes; however, reporting to the sponsor is not required.

Voluntary Uncommitted Cost Sharing

Costs and effort that are not included as part of the submitted proposal or upon acceptance of the award. This does not need to be tracked or reported.

Over-the-Cap Salary

The portion of a faculty or staff member’s salary and associated fringe benefits that exceed regulatory maximum imposed by the sponsor (e.g., National Institutes of Health and Department of Defense salary cap). Over-the-cap salary cannot be used to meet a mandatory or voluntary committed cost sharing requirement, since it is considered an unallowable cost to the sponsor. This should be tracked via companion account for effort reporting.

In-Kind Cost Sharing

In-kind cost sharing are contributions wherein the value can be readily determined, verified, documented, and justified but where no actual cash is transacted in securing the good or service comprising the contribution. When applicable, an estimated value of the in-kind cost sharing must be identified and documented based on the fair market value determined at the time of accepting the award. In-kind cost sharing must be tracked manually by the department/local unit managing the award.

Refer to Appendix A for sources of cost sharing and types of expenditures which can be cost shared.

Refer to Appendix B for definition and applicable use of a companion account.

Roles and Responsibilities

The following roles and responsibilities are defined by this University policy. Please consult the Harvard University Cost Sharing Procedure Guide for more information. Implementation guidance may vary by school/tub.

PI & Department/Local Level Managing Units are responsible for the following:

At proposal.

Identifying the type of committed cost sharing and ensuring the cost share budget includes expenditures that are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and consistently accounted for in accordance with University and sponsor policies
Entering the cost sharing commitment in GMAS
Obtaining department/local level managing unit approval and signatures prior to proposal submission to sponsor

Upon receipt of award and during the award period

Upon request from the submitting office (Office for Sponsored Programs (OSP), HSPH or HMS Office of Research Administration (ORA)), determining if there have been any changes in the proposed cost sharing commitment (e.g. increased or decreased amount)
Confirming that funds are available for cost sharing as committed or providing an alternate source of funding to meet the commitment if adequate funds are not available
To or from University, Sponsored, In-kind, sub-recipient
From one sponsored fund to another sponsored fund
From one sub-recipient to another
From one In-kind source and/or Description to another
Monitoring the committed cost share through verifiable University records throughout the entire award period
Using companion accounts with a sponsored activity and subactivity value with a non-sponsored fund, when required
Providing cost sharing information to OSP Research Finance Team for reporting, if required by the sponsor

At Closeout

Providing cost sharing information and confirming the cost sharing commitment has been met (including any In-Kind contributions) and coordinating with OSP Research Finance to resolve any cost sharing discrepancies
Reconciling cost share companion accounts
Assuming any financial loss if cost sharing commitments are not met and sponsor does not approve a reduction of cost sharing commitment

School/Tub Level Officials are responsible for the following:

Reviewing proposal for cost sharing commitments and providing dean’s/designee’s approval
Working closely with department/local level managing unit and PI to monitor committed cost share through verifiable University records throughout the entire award period
Coordinating with the department/local level managing unit and OSP Research Finance Team to resolve any cost sharing discrepancies

Submitting Offices (OSP/ORA) are responsible for the following:

Reviewing proposals for cost sharing commitments and determining if the proposed cost sharing is allowable and in compliance with sponsor and University policies and ensuring the appropriate school- level approvals for cost sharing sources are obtained

Upon receipt of award and during the award period

Determining whether there have been any changes to the proposed cost sharing commitments
Confirming with the department/local level managing unit that committed cost sharing funds are available
Requesting a renegotiation of the cost sharing commitment from the sponsor if cost sharing obligation cannot be fulfilled (Note: If the sponsor is unwilling to renegotiate the cost sharing terms of the award, the University may be forced to decline the award.)

OSP Research Finance Team is responsible for the following

During the award period and at award closeout.

Confirming that the cost share commitment has been met and complies with University and sponsor policy
Coordinating with department/local level managing unit to address and clarify potential cost sharing issues and, if necessary, resolve with school/tub-level officials
Reporting cost share commitment to sponsor, if required

Related Policies

Sponsored Expenditure Guidelines
Effort Reporting Policy
Sponsored Financial Reporting and Close Out Policy

Contacts and Subject Matter Experts

Office for sponsored programs:.

Pre-award: Joel Egland , Lee Zagorski
Post-award: Marc Todesco

School and Local Subject Matter Experts:

FAS Pre-award: Jennifer Lech , Jimmy Matejek-Morris
FAS Post-award: Charlotte Gallant
HGSE: Tiffany Blackman
HMS: Kelly Evans
SEAS: Pamela Baker-Webber
SPH Pre-award: Catalina Diaz
HKS: Charlene Arzigian , Sarah Svenson

Revision History

7/25/13 – Added to OSP website in PDF format
12/2/14 – Updated references for the Uniform Guidance
Reason for the Policy updated, Types of Costs Sharing updated, Basic Considerations section deleted, Sources of Cost Sharing moved to new Appendix A , Types of Costing moved to new Appendix A , Roles and Responsibilities section updated to include life cycle of cost sharing responsibilities, Related Policies removed and new added, Related Documents removed and new added, Resource section added, Forms section removed, Definitions section removed, Appendix B Decision Chart for Cost Sharing Companion Account Coding added, Appendix C Cost Sharing Documentation Decision Chart added.
11/30/2017 - Added clarification that subactivity is part of the cost sharing companion account.
2/26/2018 – Added clarification to “Reason for Policy” that cost sharing expenditure rules must comply with federal regulations including purchasing and airfare
4/27/2020 – Due to the GMAS release of enhancements to the cost sharing module, removed references to the Harvard University Cost Sharing Form (HUSCF) and Appendix C. Updated Roles and Responsibilities to reflect that changes to Cost Sharing must be made in GMAS, and updated the types of changes that must be entered. Moved responsibility to confirm funds are available from the school to the department/local level managing unit. Updated department/local level managing unit responsibility to obtain department/local level managing unit approval rather than school approval at proposal. Updated language to consistently use “cost sharing” rather than “cost share”

Sources of Cost Sharing Contributions

University contributions.

Commitments that are paid from University funds using gift, endowment, or other non-sponsored sources, as represented by the 000001- 054999 and 300000-699999 fund ranges.

Subrecipient Cost Sharing

Commitments, expenses, or in-kind cost sharing made by subrecipients where Harvard is the prime awardee. Cost share is included in the subrecipient’s proposal and documented in the subaward agreement. These types of cost sharing commitments cannot be tracked in Harvard’s systems; therefore, the commitments must be verified manually by the department or local unit managing the award through subrecipient invoices.

Cost Sharing Expenditures Types

Cost sharing commitments can be met using direct or indirect costs that are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and consistently accounted for in accordance with University and sponsor policies.

A. Direct Costs

1. committed effort.

Salary and fringe benefits associated with faculty and staff committed effort. Note that over-the cap salary, or salary paid to an individual in excess of a sponsor-designated limit, cannot be used to meet a cost sharing commitment.

2. Other direct costs

Direct costs that are considered allowable on a sponsored award could be cost shared. Some examples include the following:

Travel expenses (Note: Cost sharing for a federal award must comply with federal travel regulations including lowest economy airfare and the Fly America Act as outlined in the University Travel Policy.)
Laboratory and other supplies
Consultant costs and other professional services
Equipment items that do not meet the capitalization threshold

The purchasing of goods and services as cost sharing expenses must comply with federal procurement requirements including use of the vendor justification form and debarment certification, as outlined in the University Procurement Policy.

3. Equipment

Moveable, tangible personal property with a useful life of one year or more and a per-unit acquisition cost of $5,000 or more. Capital equipment includes scientific equipment, fabrications, and software. Capital equipment is recorded on the University’s general ledger as a capital asset and expensed to the appropriate capital equipment object code.

Existing capital equipment cannot be offered as cost sharing. Rather than committing the use of existing Harvard-owned equipment as cost sharing, proposals should characterize the equipment as "available for the performance of the project at no direct cost to the sponsored award.”

B. Indirect Costs or Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs

Indirect costs or F&A are costs that are incurred for common or joint objectives and, therefore, cannot be identified readily and specifically with a particular sponsored project, instructional activity, or any other institutional activity.

Indirect costs may be offered in a proposal to meet cost sharing requirements imposed by the sponsor and must be approved by the sponsor in order for the amount to be included as part of a cost sharing commitment.

Specifically, in the case of a federal award, the federal agency’s approval can be based on the acceptance of a budget that clearly includes F&A as part of cost share or a specific approval by the agency. Without such approval the indirect costs cannot count toward cost sharing requirements.

1. Unrecovered overhead

The amount of indirect costs not recovered from a sponsor due to a sponsor funding an award with an indirect cost rate below the University’s federally negotiated F&A rate. This type of unrecovered overhead cannot be included as part of cost sharing or matching without the prior approval of the sponsor.

2. Overhead on cost shared University resources

When direct costs using the University funds are included as cost sharing commitments, the associated indirect cost is not visible in General Ledger. Overhead on cost shared University resources may be included as part of the University cost sharing commitment only if it is approved by the sponsor.

Decision Chart for Cost Sharing Companion Account Coding

A companion account is an account that records cost-sharing amounts, often coded using the sponsored activity and subactivity value with a non-sponsored fund value, in the Harvard chart of accounts.

Note 1: There may be exceptional cases in which a companion account cannot be used to track cost sharing. Therefore, a detailed listing must be provided at interim reporting periods and at award closeout.

Absence Management Guidance
Administrative and Clerical Salaries on Federal Awards
At-Risk Account Guidance
Capital Equipment: Summary of Policy for Capital Equipment in Schools with Sponsored Research
Consulting or Related Service Agreements
Sponsored Cost Allocation Methodology Guidance
Cost Transfer Policy
Data Use Agreements
Entering Preproposals into the Grants Management Application Suite (GMAS) Guidance
eRA Commons Registration Requirements for Senior/Key Personnel
Establishing an Internal Grant-Making Program
Federal Work Study on Sponsored Awards Policy
Fixed Price Residual Balances Guidance
Guidance on Charging Approved Family and Medical Leaves to Sponsored Awards
Foreign Awards Paid in Foreign Currency Guidance
Gift vs. Sponsored Award Policy
Indirect Costs - Policy for the Application of Indirect Costs to Sponsored Awards
Intellectual Property
Interest Income Paid on Non-Federal Sponsored Funds
Interfaculty Involvement (IFI) Guidance
International Collaborations and Activities
International Projects Guidance
NIH Public Access Policy
Negotiating and Signing Authority for Agreements Related to Research
Guidance Regarding Individuals Outside of the United States Being Paid with Sponsored Funding
On-Campus and Off-Campus Indirect Cost Rates Policy on Federal Sponsored Awards
Participant Support Costs Guidance
Participation Agreement and Visiting Participation Agreement
Procurement
Program Income Guidance
Proposal Submission Deadlines
Provost Criteria
Publications
Retention of Research Data and Materials
Service Centers: Academic Service Center Policy
Severance on Sponsored Awards
Closeout and Reporting Policy for Sponsored Awards
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Collaborations: Guidance on Conflict Management Considerations
Sponsored Expenditures Guidance
Sponsored Travel Guidance
Stipends on Sponsored Awards
Subrecipient Monitoring Policy
Subrecipient vs. Contractor Guidance
Tuition Policy

My UW-System
Student Life
Schools & Colleges
Centers & Institutes
Leadership Team
For Faculty and Staff
For Researchers
Request Info
Give to UWM

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Office of research.

Powerful Ideas. Proven Results.

Cost-Sharing: Frequently Asked Questions

Cost-sharing (i.e., cost-share or matching funds) for grant proposals can be confusing, especially identifying sources for cost-sharing and accounting for it at the proposal stage. Sponsors may require cost-sharing on a grant program for a number of reasons, such as statutory requirements, demonstration of institutional buy-in, or to limit the number of proposal submissions.

Below are some of the most frequently asked questions that OSP receives from Principal Investigators about when and how to include cost-sharing in a proposal.

Q: What are the types of cost-share?

A: There are several types of cost share:

Mandatory Committed : Cost-sharing that is required by a sponsor in order for your proposal to receive consideration and review. Without it, your proposal will be returned without review.
Voluntary Committed : Cost-sharing that is not required by the sponsor for eligibility purposes, but is included in a proposal and becomes required at the time of award.
Third Party : Cost-sharing that is provided by an entity other than UWM , such as a company. This type of cost-share is usually provided only when required by the sponsor.

When UWM proposes or reports any type of cost-share, the cost-shared funds are expected to be available during the course of a project and cannot be used for other purposes. For example, a PI proposing to cost-share 15% effort during the academic year towards a project cannot use that 15% for other research, service, or instructional commitments. Additionally, upon award, the cost-share commitment now becomes trackable for the PI in ECRT .

Q: What kinds of funds may be used for cost-sharing?

A: Sources for cost-sharing may include start-up packages, department/division research-related funds, indirect cost returns, or other campus funds accessible by the PI . The PI’s department/division also can provide cost-sharing. Funds from other grants and contracts typically may not be used as cost-share.

Q: Should I include cost-share in a proposal if the sponsor/program does not require it (i.e., voluntary committed cost-share)?

A: No. OSP strongly recommends that PIs and their departments/divisions do not include cost-share on a project unless it is required by a sponsor/program. For federal programs, the Uniform Guidance states that federal grant programs may no longer consider cost-sharing during the merit review process unless it is statutorily required. Thus, voluntary committed cost-share at the proposal stage will no longer have an impact on the proposal’s review.

Additionally, the Uniform Guidance requires UWM to treat both federal and non-federal funds consistently. Thus, for non-federal projects, OSP recommends that PIs and their departments/divisions do not include cost-share unless it is required by the sponsor.

Q: If I cost-share a portion of my salary, do I also include the corresponding fringe benefits as cost-share?

A: Yes. Include fringe benefits on any cost-shared salaries. Additionally, use the same fringe benefit rate on cost-share salaries and wages as those salaries and wages budgeted with the sponsor’s dollars. See the current UWM fringe benefit rates on the Frequently Requested Information page.

Q: Can I include costs incurred outside of the proposed project start and end dates as cost-sharing?

A: No. Just as award expenses must be incurred during the project start and end dates, so does cost-sharing. Do not include expenses that will be incurred outside of these dates as cost-share.

Q: I am applying to a program that requires 1:1 cost-sharing (i.e., UWM must provide $1 for every $1 of sponsor funds). I want to provide 2:1 cost-sharing. Is this acceptable?

A: It is up to the PI and the department/division to decide how much cost-sharing is acceptable. However, OSP recommends meeting the minimum 1:1 cost-share requirement. Most sponsors require applicants to meet only the minimum match requirements, and they usually do not award “competitive preference” points during the review process for exceeding the required match amount.

Q: If the project is funded, do I need to track the cost-sharing?

A: Yes. The cost-share pledged to the sponsor and approved in an award notice now becomes auditable. PIs are required to keep detailed records on the amount of cost-sharing on their award.

Q: I am proposing a multi-institutional project and UWM is the lead applicant. The project partners will provide cost-sharing. Do I need to document their cost-share in the proposal?

A: Yes. Each partner must provide an institutional letter of commitment that documents their approved cost-share towards the project. If the proposal is funded, each partner will be required to contribute their cost-share and provide documentation showing that it was used for the project.

Q: I am developing a proposal that requires 50% cost-sharing. I plan to work with collaborators at other institutions. Will my collaborators be required to commit cost-sharing too?

A: PIs typically work with their collaborators to determine how each institution will provide resources towards the 50% cost-share commitment. PIs should carefully review the program guidelines to determine how the cost-share can be met by all partners.

Q: Does both my department and my division need to approve the cost-share for my proposal?

A: Yes. The PI’s department and division must approve any proposed cost-sharing via WISPER prior to proposal submission. Failure to obtain approval may result in the proposal being withdrawn or UWM declining the award.

Q: My grant award is less than my original budget request. Is the difference between the award and original proposal budget now considered cost-share?

A: No. If a sponsor awards less than requested in the budget, OSP will work with the PI and the sponsor to negotiate an appropriate reduction in the scope of work and/or develop a revised budget. If the original proposal included cost-sharing, the cost-share amount also should be reduced proportionally to align with the smaller award total and revised scope of work.

Q: Can I use award funds from one sponsored project to cost-share on another sponsored project?

A: No. Most federal and non-federal sponsors do not allow PIs to use their awards as cost-sharing towards another sponsored project. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule – please contact your Pre-Award Specialist .

Q: If a cost is an unallowable expense for budgeting purposes, could it then be used for cost-share purposes?

A: No. If a cost is unallowable for sponsor budgeting purposes, it cannot be counted towards cost-share commitments either. For example, alcoholic beverages are not allowed on federal grants. Since alcoholic beverages are not permitted on federal funds, a PI could not use cost-share funds to cover these costs and meet cost-share requirements.

Q: I am submitting a proposal to an agency that requires cost-share and allows indirect costs at the fully negotiated indirect cost rate. Do I calculate the indirect costs on both my project budget and the cost-share funds?

A: Yes. Indirect costs are real costs that UWM incurs in the administration of grants and contracts such as OSP services, library services, utilities, building depreciation, and other administrative functions. Thus, indirect costs must be calculated on cost-shared funds at the fully negotiated indirect cost rate.

Q: I am submitting a proposal to an agency that requires cost-share but does NOT allow indirect costs at the fully negotiated indirect cost rate (or does not allow indirect costs on the budget altogether). How should I include indirect costs in the project budget?

A: OSP typically recommends first calculating the “forgone indirect costs” as a method to meet the cost-share requirements – these are indirect costs that UWM is entitled to receive through its federally negotiated indirect cost rate agreement, but cannot as a result of the sponsor’s limitation on (or prohibition of) indirect costs. Since sponsor and program requirements vary, PIs should contact their Pre-Award Specialist to discuss whether forgone indirect costs may be included in the cost-share budget.

After determining the amount of forgone indirect costs on the cost-sharing, PIs and their department/division should determine how that amount can be used to meet the cost-share requirements and if additional cost-sharing is necessary.

Q: Who do I contact if I have questions related to cost-sharing on a proposal?

A: Contact your Pre-Award Specialist to discuss cost-sharing in a proposal and for expert guidance.

Office of Research University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Mitchell Hall 235 3203 North Downer Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53211
Staff Directory

Type 2 Diabetes
Heart Disease
Digestive Health
Multiple Sclerosis
COVID-19 Vaccines
Occupational Therapy
Healthy Aging
Health Insurance
Public Health
Patient Rights
Caregivers & Loved Ones
End of Life Concerns
Health News
Thyroid Test Analyzer
Doctor Discussion Guides
Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
Lipid Test Analyzer
Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
What to Buy
Editorial Process
Meet Our Medical Expert Board

An Overview of Health Insurance Cost-Sharing

Cost-sharing refers to the fact that you and your health insurer both pay a portion of your medical costs during the year. This article will explain what cost-sharing is, how it works, why it's used, and what you should expect if and when you need medical care.

Your health insurer requires you to pay part of the cost of your healthcare expenses in order to prevent over-utilization of healthcare services, and in order to keep health insurance premiums in check. Plans with lower cost-sharing (ie, lower deductibles , copayments , and total out-of-pocket costs when you need medical care) tend to have higher premiums , whereas plans with higher cost-sharing tend to have lower premiums.

Cost-sharing reduces premiums (because it saves your health insurance company money) in two ways. First, since you’re sharing the cost of the claim with your insurance company, they pay less. Second, since you have to pay part of the bill, it’s more likely you'll only seek medical care when you really need it.

There are some healthcare reform proposals that call for a transition to a system in which people do not pay anything at the time they receive care. But for the time being, cost-sharing is incorporated into virtually every existing health insurance program in the US, including private health plans, Medicare , and even Medicaid (although cost-sharing in Medicaid is very limited due to enrollees' low incomes).

The most common forms of cost-sharing are deductibles , copayments , and coinsurance . The monthly premiums you pay to get health insurance coverage aren’t considered a type of cost-sharing. Let's briefly take a minute to understand how each of those types of cost-sharing works:

The deductible is the amount that you have to pay for certain services before your health plan starts to cover your expenses. For most health plans, the deductible applies once per calendar year, although there may be separate deductibles for medical expenses and prescription expenses.

Most health plans do have deductibles, but they vary considerably in size. Some plans have deductibles as low as $250 or $500—or even $0—while other plans have deductibles well in excess of $5,000. But unlike coinsurance (discussed below), the deductible will be a pre-determined amount, rather than a percentage of the bill.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) limits total out-of-pocket costs for all major medical plans (except those that are grandfathered or grandmothered or not regulated by the ACA ) to no more than $9,100 for a single individual in 2023, so the deductible cannot exceed that amount.

This limit changes annually; for 2024, the upper limit on out-of-pocket costs will be capped at $9,450 for a single individual, and for 2025 it will drop to $9,200 (the first year-over-year decrease since ACA-compliant plans debuted).

Once you pay your deductible, your health plan will start to pick up at least part of the tab for your ongoing medical expenses for the remainder of the year. But if your health plan includes copays for services like healthcare provider visits or prescriptions, you'll continue to pay those copays until you reach your out-of-pocket maximum for the year.

If you have Original Medicare, your Part A deductible will apply once per benefit period , rather than per year. So you could potentially have to pay more than one deductible in a given year, but you'd also be protected from having to pay the deductible twice if you're hospitalized at the end of the year and are still in the hospital when the new year begins.

Like deductibles, copayments (also known as copays) are a set amount that you'll pay for certain medical services. But copays tend to be much smaller than deductibles. A health plan might have a $1,500 deductible, for example, but only require $35 copays to see a primary care physician.

In that case, you'd pay $35 to see your healthcare provider, and your health plan would pay the rest of the healthcare provider's bill, regardless of whether you'd already met your deductible for the year or not. Keep in mind that there might be other services performed in conjunction with the office visit, such as lab work, that are counted toward the deductible and have to be paid in addition to the copay.

There are some health plans that start to allow for copays on prescription drugs only after a prescription deductible is met. On a plan like that, for example, you might pay the first $500 in prescription costs, and then start to pay a set copay amount for each prescription.

In general, copays and the deductible apply to different services, and the amount you spend on copays doesn't count towards the deductible (again, all health plans are different, so read the fine print on yours). But all ACA-compliant plans do count the amount you spend on copays towards the plan's out-of-pocket maximum , and deductibles count towards that maximum spending cap too.

Out-of-Pocket Costs for Medicare Advantage

Note that the out-of-pocket maximum on Medicare Advantage plans does not include out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs. Prescription drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries are not currently capped, although they will be as of 2024, and more so as of 2025 .

Some health plans have what they refer to as a "hospital copay" that might be $500 or more. Although this is an amount more along the lines of what we'd think of as a deductible, the difference is that the copay could be assessed multiple times in the year (until you hit your out-of-pocket maximum), whereas a deductible would generally only be assessed once, even if you're hospitalized multiple times (as noted above, it works differently if you have Medicare Part A).

Coinsurance

Unlike deductibles and copays, coinsurance is not a specific dollar amount. Instead, it's a percentage of the total costs (after they're reduced by your health plan's network agreement with your medical provider).

Coinsurance usually starts to apply after the deductible is met, and you'll continue to pay it until you hit the out-of-pocket maximum for your plan. Coinsurance generally does not apply to services that are covered with a copay.

So let's say your plan has a $1,000 deductible and 80/20 coinsurance, with a $4,000 maximum out-of-pocket limit. Now let's assume you have a minor outpatient surgery that costs $3,000 after your insurer's negotiated rate is applied, and it's your first medical cost of the year (ie, you haven't paid anything toward your deductible earlier in the year).

You'll pay the first $1,000 (deductible), and you'll also pay 20% of the remaining $2,000. That will add $400 to your bill, bringing your total out-of-pocket for the surgery to $1,400. Your insurance will cover the other $1,600 (80% of the portion of the bill that was above your deductible).

Now let's say you have a bad accident later in the year and end up with $200,000 in medical bills. You've already met your deductible, so you're going straight to coinsurance. You'll pay 20% of the bill, but only until you've paid $2,600.

That's because your health plan has a $4,000 out-of-pocket cap, and you already spent $1,400 out-of-pocket on the earlier surgery. So the first $13,000 of the bills for your accident recovery will be split 80/20 between your insurance company and you (20% of $13,000 is $2,600).

At that point, your insurance policy will start to pay 100% of your covered in-network expenses for the rest of the year, as long as you comply with your health plan's rules for things like prior authorization , referrals , step therapy , etc.

Cost-Sharing & the Out-Of-Pocket Maximum

Unless they're grandfathered or grandmothered, all private major medical plans that require cost-sharing also have a cap on how much cost-sharing you’re responsible for each year. (For this discussion, all of the numbers refer to the cap on out-of-pocket costs assuming you receive care within your health insurer's network; if you go outside the network, your out-of-pocket maximum will be higher, or in some cases, unlimited. )

Before 2014, there were no regulations governing how high a health plan's out-of-pocket maximum could be—indeed, some plans didn't cap out-of-pocket costs at all, although that was relatively rare. But the Affordable Care Act changed that, and new health plans cannot have an out-of-pocket maximum in excess of $9,100 in 2023, or in excess of $9,450 in 2024 (as noted above, this amount is indexed for inflation, so it changes each year).

Many plans cap out-of-pocket costs below that level, but they cannot exceed it. In addition, under a rule that took effect in 2016, a single individual can't be required to pay more in out-of-pocket costs than the individual out-of-pocket maximum for that year, even if he or she is covered under a family plan instead of an individual plan.

After you’ve paid enough in deductibles, copayments, and coinsurance to reach the out-of-pocket maximum, your health plan suspends your cost-sharing. The plan will then pick up 100% of your covered medical bills for the rest of the year, assuming you continue to use in-network hospitals and healthcare providers and follow all of your health plan's rules.

Original Medicare does not have a cap on out-of-pocket costs. Medicare Advantage plans do, although it's not the same as the cap that applies to other health plans. Medicare Part D has not historically had a cap on out-of-pocket costs, but it will as of 2024, due to the Inflation Reduction Act.

Cost-Sharing & the Affordable Care Act

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) made a significant amount of preventive health care exempt from cost-sharing. This means things like age-appropriate screening mammograms and colonoscopies, cholesterol screening, and many vaccines aren’t subject to a deductible, copayments, or coinsurance.

The ACA also created a cost-sharing subsidy to make using your health insurance more affordable if you have a fairly low income and buy your own health insurance. The cost-sharing subsidy lowers the amount you pay in deductibles, copays, and coinsurance each time you use your insurance.

Cost-sharing subsidies are automatically incorporated into silver plans on the exchange if your income doesn't exceed 250% of the poverty level (for 2024 coverage in the continental U.S., the upper income limit to be eligible for cost-sharing subsidies is $36,450 for a single individual and $75,000 for a family of four ; these amounts are based on the 2023 federal poverty level, as the prior year's numbers are always used; note that the limits are higher in Alaska and Hawaii).

What About Things That Insurance Doesn't Cover?

The phrases cost-sharing and out-of-pocket expenses are sometimes used interchangeably, but people often use "out-of-pocket" to describe any medical expenses that they pay themselves, regardless of whether the treatment is covered at all by health insurance.

However, if the treatment isn't covered at all by your health plan, the amount you spend isn't considered cost-sharing under your plan and won't count towards your plan's out-of-pocket maximum.

For example, infertility treatment often isn't covered by health insurance (it depends on state rules and the type of coverage), which means you'll have to pay for it yourself if your health plan doesn't cover it. The same is generally true of adult dental care, unless you have a separate dental insurance policy .

Although you might think of these expenses as "out-of-pocket" (and indeed, they are coming out of your own pocket), the money you spend isn't counting towards your health plan's out-of-pocket maximum, nor is it considered cost-sharing under your plan.

Cost-sharing refers to the fact that health insurance plans do not pay 100% of a person's medical costs. Instead, the plan shares the cost with the member, with the specific arrangement varying from one plan to another.

The member's portion of the cost-sharing will come in the form of a deductible, copays, and/or coinsurance. The specifics depend on the plan; some plans have all three of these, while others might have just a deductible. And the amount of cost-sharing will vary considerably from one plan to another. But nearly all plans are subject to the ACA's maximum out-of-pocket limit, which caps a member's cost-sharing for covered services received from in-network providers.

A Word From Verywell

Because cost-sharing varies considerably from one health insurance plan to another, you'll want to make sure you understand the details of your plan before you need to use your coverage, so that the amount you have to pay for your treatment doesn't come as a surprise. It's important to know what services are covered by a copay (if any), and what services are subject to the deductible and coinsurance. These are also important factors to keep in mind when you're shopping for a health plan or comparing multiple plan options offered by your employer.

Kaiser Family Foundation. Employer Health Benefits, Summary of Findings .

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Premium Adjustment Percentage, Maximum Annual Limitation on Cost Sharing, Reduced Maximum Annual Limitation on Cost Sharing, and Required Contribution Percentage for the 2023 Benefit Year .

healthinsurance.org. Out-of-pocket maximum .

Whicheloe E. Medicare Rights Center. What is a benefit period?

Q1 Medicare. What Is My Medicare Advantage Plan's Maximum Out-of-Pocket Limit?

Appleby J. Kaiser Health News. PPO Plans Remove Out-Of-Network Cost Limits, A Costly Trap For Consumers .

Federal Register. Department of Health and Humana Services. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, HHS Notice of Benefit and Payment Parameters .

Department of Health and Human Services. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines Used to Determine Financial Eligibility for Certain Federal Programs .

By Elizabeth Davis, RN Elizabeth Davis, RN, is a health insurance expert and patient liaison. She's held board certifications in emergency nursing and infusion nursing.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
J Manag Care Spec Pharm
v.28(2); 2022 Feb
PMC10372964

Cost sharing: implications of a well-intended benefits strategy

Maribeth m bettarelli.

1 Senior Director, Quality and Accreditation, CVS Caremark, Buffalo Grove, IL.

As health care expenditures in the United States continue to increase year after year, payers are faced with the challenge of controlling costs while providing access. Medications, particularly higher-cost specialty products, contribute significantly to the overall health care spend. Prescription drug costs totaled $535.3 billion in 2020, an increase of 4.9% compared with 2019, and are projected to increase by 4%-6% in 2021. 1 To help mitigate these increases, several cost-containment strategies, such as closed formularies, prior authorization, step therapy protocols, and cost sharing, have been widely used by payers.

Cost sharing, an arrangement in which consumers pay a portion of costs associated with health care services and prescription drugs, are intended for consumers to be good stewards of their pharmacy benefit. Examples of cost-sharing payment methods such as deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments may be considered by payers who are seeking solutions to control medication cost, while ensuring that patients get the medicines they need. 2

In theory, as cost-sharing shifts some responsibility on consumers, it serves as a motivating factor for them to do the necessary due diligence—to assess all options and balance costs and benefits before making health care decisions. Many plans offer their beneficiaries incentive-based formularies whereby drugs are assigned to one of several tiers based on their cost to the plan, the number of close substitutes, and other various factors. If a patient has a tiered formulary in which a brand-name medication is at a $25 copay and its therapeutically generic equivalent is at a $5 copay, it makes sense for that individual to fill his or her prescription with the generic drug, as long as the only considerable factor is cost.

Heightened financial awareness, as a result of increasing copays, can lead to a reduction in nonessential use and its correlating costs. While this may be the case, these savings may be offset by increases in other health care spending as a result of lower rates of drug treatment, poor compliance, and more frequent discontinuation of therapy. 2 - 4 Essentially, as consumers face increasing out-of-pocket costs, access to necessary drug therapy and quality care may be compromised. In this vein, cost-related medication underuse leads to worsening health outcomes, such as uncontrolled hypertension and hypercholesteremia, and can significantly increase medical costs. 5 Prescription drugs are instrumental to managing and preventing chronic disease. Recent changes in cost sharing could affect access to them. 4

The very idea of sharing health care costs with consumers so they have some “skin in the game” assumes that consumers (1) understand what cost sharing means and (2) are able to navigate through their pharmacy benefits, including cost-sharing scenarios, to make informed decisions. These assumptions bring to light the inherent complexities of benefit design; they can be very challenging for patients and lead to inadvertent consequences, the worst being not filling any medications altogether. 6 With more emphasis on cost-sharing strategies and patient decision making, there is greater responsibility on the plan and other health care providers and educators to ensure that patients have the understanding and skills to balance their out-of-pocket costs with the health care they need. To facilitate the education, a baseline assessment of health insurance literacy is critical.

Health insurance literacy involves an individual’s understanding, ability, and confidence with health insurance concepts to find and evaluate information to make informed health care decisions based on their financial and health circumstances. In their 2019 article entitled “Health Insurance Literacy: Disparities by Race, Ethnicity, and Language Preference,” Villagra et al write that “health insurance literacy must be viewed as a unique skill, without which consumers cannot rationally choose or use health insurance or realize the full value of their policies.” 7 In their study, over 500 individuals completed a 13-question telephonic survey. Questions targeted consumer understanding of various health insurance terms, such as health insurance premium, annual health insurance deductible, annual out-of-pocket limit, copay, health insurance, formulary provider network, and appeal. Overall, 62.4% of respondents correctly answered all questions. While gaps were evident among all respondents, racial and ethnic minorities, and those with limited proficiency in the English language were particularly disadvantaged. White respondents had the highest health insurance literacy score at 73.8%, followed by Black respondents at 53.3% and Hispanic respondents at 50.3%. English-speaking respondents scored higher than non-English speaking respondents at 66.5% and 44.9%, respectively. Based on these findings, consumers can obtain disparate value from identical plans based on their health insurance literacy. 7

Enhanced health literacy may be realized through various concurrent activities. First, education is necessary for consumers to fully understand their health conditions, including preventive measures, signs of worsening status, and appropriate drug therapy. Second, consumers must have the skills to accurately calculate out-ofpocket expenses. Because benefits may entail deductibles, copayments vs coinsurance, maximum lifetime coverage, and other financial terms, consumers must understand what is covered and at what cost to them. Finally, general medical and pharmacy benefits knowledge is critical.

Specific to pharmacy, evidence-based formularies, tiered copayments, utilization management strategies, and other benefit design approaches serve to ensure access to safe, sound, cost-effective care leading to desired clinical outcomes. Given the complexities of such approaches, pharmacy benefit managers work closely with payers and offer supportive tools for consumers and their health care providers. A real-time benefit check is one tool with proven utility. It gives providers, at the point of prescribing, visibility to an individual’s prescription benefit, including drug coverage, formulary alternatives, and out-ofpocket costs. This functionality allows providers to prescribe accordingly and helps minimize any adverse experience that the patient may encounter at the pharmacy.

Another digital tool, electronic prior authorization , functions similarly by providing a smoother experience for the prescriber, patient, and dispensing pharmacy. Electronically transmitted prior authorization requests are handled more efficiently, resulting in decreased turnaround times and improved access to necessary drug therapies. 8 Digital technology certainly plays an important role in the health care delivery system by enabling convenience, enhancing health literacy and transparency, streamlining processes, and improving the consumer and provider experience.

In summary, payers continue to seek innovative means to control drug spend. Cost-sharing strategies, such as copayments, play a role in this domain, and while they are associated with reduced drug utilization, their long-term consequences are uncertain and may give rise to unintended consequences. To enhance the effectiveness of cost-sharing strategies, it is critical that consumers understand their benefits and how to successfully navigate through their plans. Health insurance literacy is a substantial barrier, since simply having health insurance does not mean that an individual will get the full value of such benefit. Rather, low health insurance literacy may lead to a negative response with underuse or misuse of drug therapy. Further, low health insurance literacy, in combination with complex health plan structures, presents challenges for all, particularly for minority populations.

In short, while cost-sharing strategies are well intended, they may also lead to reverse outcomes and potential harm. Health insurance literacy education and support are key drivers in helping consumers make wise, informed decisions to become good stewards of overall health care.

Furthermore, with the heightened attention to health disparities, it is imperative that the impact of benefit design strategies on currently underserved and underrepresented populations are also considered. Villagra et al summarized it best: To improve insurance value for all, health insurance literacy education research, greater point-of-care coaching and support for insurance needs, and overall health insurance simplification are critical next steps. 7

Supported by

What to Know About Biden’s New Student Debt Relief Plan

The proposal would affect nearly 30 million people and would target groups that have had hardships in repaying their loans.

Share full article

Biden Announces New Plan for Student Debt Relief

President biden announced a large-scale effort to help pay off federal student loans for more than 20 million borrowers..

Today, I’m proud to announce five major actions to continue to relieve student debt for more than 30 million Americans since I started my administration. And starting this fall, we plan to deliver up to $20,000 in interest relief to over 20 million borrowers and full forgiveness for millions more. [applause] I will never stop to deliver student debt relief and hardworking Americans. And it’s only in the interest of America that we do it. And again, it’s for the good of our economy that’s growing stronger and stronger, and it is, by freeing millions of Americans from this crushing debt of student debt. It means they can finally get on with their lives instead of being put — their lives being put on hold.

By Erica L. Green

Reporting from Washington

President Biden released details on Monday of his new student loan debt forgiveness plan for nearly 30 million borrowers.

The proposal still needs to be finalized and will have to withstand expected legal challenges, like the ones that doomed Mr. Biden’s first attempt to wipe out student debt on a large scale last year.

Biden administration officials said they could begin handing out some of the debt relief — including the canceling of up to $20,000 in interest — as soon as this fall if the new effort moves forward after the required, monthslong comment period.

Here’s what is known so far about the program:

Who would benefit from the new plan?

The plan would reduce payments for 25 million borrowers and erase all debt for more than four million Americans. Altogether, 10 million borrowers would see debt relief of $5,000 or more, officials said.

The groups affected include:

— Borrowers whose loan balances have ballooned because of interest would have up to $20,000 of their interest balance canceled. The plan would waive the entire interest balance for borrowers considered “low- and middle-income” who are enrolled in the administration’s income-driven repayment plans.

The interest forgiveness would be a one-time benefit, but would be the largest relief valve in the plan. The administration estimates that of the 25 million borrowers that could see relief under this waiver, 23 million would see their entire interest balance wiped out.

— Borrowers who are eligible for, but have not yet applied for, loan forgiveness under existing programs like Public Service Loan Forgiveness or the administration’s new repayment program, called SAVE, would have their debts automatically canceled.

— Borrowers with undergraduate student debt who started repaying their loans more than 20 years ago, and graduate students who started paying their debt 25 or more years ago, would have their debts canceled.

— Borrowers who enrolled in programs or colleges that lost federal funding because they cheated or defrauded students would have their debts waived. Students who attended institutions or programs that left them with mounds of debt but bleak earning or job prospects would also be eligible for relief.

— Borrowers who are experiencing “hardship” paying back their loans because of medical or child care costs would also be eligible for some type of relief. The administration has not yet determined how these borrowers would be identified, but is considering automatic forgiveness for those at risk of defaulting.

How is this different from the last plan?

Mr. Biden initially tried to grant $400 billion in debt relief for 40 million borrowers by using the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003, or HEROES Act, which the administration argued allowed the government to waive student debt during a national emergency like the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Supreme Court blocked that move , saying that Mr. Biden had exceeded his authority.

The new plan would forgive some or all loan debt for nearly 30 million borrowers under the Higher Education Act, the federal law that regulates student loan and grant programs. By targeting specific groups of borrowers — instead of offering broad loan forgiveness — the administration believes it can act within the narrower confines of that law.

The Biden administration said lawyers for the White House and the Education Department studied last year’s Supreme Court ruling and designed the new program to make sure it did not violate the principles laid out by the justices.

Still, there could be questions about whether the borrowers under the latest plan would be considered “limited,” as the Supreme Court said the Higher Education Act requires, or whether the administration again overstepped its authority.

What’s the timeline?

The new plan still needs to be published in the Federal Register, which then will start a monthslong public comment period. Administration officials have said they hoped some of the provisions would begin going into effect in “early fall.”

That could leave the debt relief plan unresolved as voters go to the polls in November to choose between Mr. Biden and former President Donald J. Trump.

But Biden campaign officials hope the latest effort will help rally voters who were sorely disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision last year.

Erica L. Green is a White House correspondent, covering President Biden and his administration. More about Erica L. Green

Our Coverage of the 2024 Presidential Election

News and Analysis

Former President Donald Trump said that abortion rights should be left up to the states , remarks that came after months of mixed signals on the issue.

With his clearest statement yet on the future of abortion rights since the fall of Roe v. Wade, Trump laid bare how faulty a messenger he had always been for the anti-abortion cause .

President Biden released details of his new student loan debt forgiveness plan for nearly 30 million borrowers. Here is what to know about the proposal , which will have to withstand expected legal challenges.

Protests over the Biden administration’s handling of the war in Gaza are disrupting the activities of Democratic officials, complicating their ability to campaign during a pivotal election year .

For all Trump’s populist rhetoric in 2016, his presidency proved to be business-friendly. But Trump and those around him are signaling that a second term would be different .

It’s usually a given that Republicans will win voters 65 and over, but that’s not the case in this election. Nate Cohn, our chief political analyst, explains Biden’s strength among seniors .

In Chicago, restaurants and venues are booking fast for the Democratic National Convention in August. But Milwaukee, host of the Republican National Convention in July, is wondering if customers will come .

Higher Education in the BRICS Countries pp 237–251 Cite as

Cost Sharing in China’s Higher Education: Analyses of Major Stakeholders

Rui Yang 6
First Online: 01 January 2015

1494 Accesses

2 Citations

Part of the book series: Higher Education Dynamics ((HEDY,volume 44))

With changed relationships between society, the market, and universities, stakeholders have penetrated China’s traditional monopolistic relationships between the state and public higher education institutions, with the role of external actors becoming far more important during the last few decades in influencing internal affairs of individual higher education institutions. As the proportion of governmental sources for higher education (in relation to GDP) shrinks year by year, the share of students and their families has been increasing significantly. Alongside China’s developmental paths/models there have been changes of university governance modes as well, which have led to changed relationships among stakeholders with different winners and losers created each time. This chapter focuses on the three most significant stakeholders in Chinese higher education: governments, students and their families, and the business community.

High Education
High Education Institution
High Education System
Chinese Communist Party
High Education Policy

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

For instance, the percentage of students in higher education from workers and peasant families increased from 20.5 % in 1952 to 55.28 % in 1958, and reached 71.2 % in 1976 (Ma and Gao 1998 ). As reported by Chen and Le ( 2012 ), students from rural background at Peking University were over 30 % in 1972, remained between 15 and 20 % in the 1980s, and only occupied slightly over 10 % during the 1990s. It is widely acknowledged that China’s contemporary higher education contributes to social and educational inequalities (Zhao 2005 ).

A variation on this theme is that students alleged to be taking more years and/or more courses than are necessary or even useful merely or largely because the courses and sometimes even the living expenses are free of charge.

It is important to point out that the Chinese government has selected a handful of institutions to invest focally. Typical examples are national initiatives such as Projects 211 and 985. The first is a constructive project of nearly 100 universities and disciplines in the twenty first century conducted by the government of China aiming at cultivating high-level talents for national economic and social development strategies starting from the mid-1990s. The second is another constructive project, to some extent based on the first, for founding world-class universities in the twenty first century by the Chinese government of China, reflecting a conscious strategy to concentrate resources on a handful of institutions with the greatest potential for success in the international academic marketplace. For those chosen ones, funding is a very different story. This policy has understandably caused much resentment among most institutions.

Asian Development Bank. (2012). Counting the cost: Financing Asian higher education for inclusive growth . The Mandaluyong City: Asian Development Bank.

Google Scholar

Bain, O. (2001). Cost of higher education to students and parents in Russia: Tuition policy issues. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 57–80.

Article Google Scholar

Buchert, L., & King, K. (1995). Learning from experience: Policy and practice in aid to higher education . The Hague: Centre for the Study of Education in Developing Countries.

Campbell, C., & Rozsnyai, C. (2002). Quality assurance and the development of course programmes. Papers on higher education regional university network on governance and management of higher education in South East Europe . Bucharest: UNESCO.

Chen, L., & Le, J. (2012). A silent revolution: Research on family background of students of Peking University and Soochow University (1952–2002). Social Sciences in China, 1, 98–118 (in Chinese).

Cheng, L., & Xu, N. (2011). The complexity of Chinese pedagogic discourse. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 606–614.

Chung, Y., & Lu, G. (2003). The equity effects of cost recovery in higher education. Peking University Education Review, 1, 52–64 (in Chinese).

Colclough, C., & Manor, J. (1991). States or markets? An assessment of neo liberal approaches to education policy . Oxford: Clarendon.

Cui, L. T. (2012). Student loan programs in a context of cost sharing in higher education. Academic Exchange, 1, 180–183 (in Chinese).

Dong, S. H. (2007). On the sharing of higher education cost by the business community. Journal of Technology College Education, 26, 67–69 (in Chinese).

Dong, H. Y., & Wan, X. H. (2012). Higher education tuition and fees in China: Implications and impacts on affordability and educational equity. Current Issues in Education, 15, 1–8.

Dong, Y. C. (2003). Trinity: The relationship between the university, government and society. Fudan Education Forum, 1, 6–9 (in Chinese).

Gibbons, M. (1998). Higher education relevance in the 21st century . Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Gornitzka, Å., & Maassen, M. (2000). Hybrid steering approaches with respect to European higher education. Higher Education Policy, 13 (3), 267–285.

Gross, K., & Godwin, P. (2005). Education’s many stakeholders. University Business. (January 9th).

Hannum, E., & Xie, Y. (1998). Ethnic stratification in northwest China: Occupational differences between Han Chinese and national minorities in Xinjiang, 1982–1990. Demography, 35, 23–333.

Hayhoe, R. (1996). China’s universities 1895–1995: A century of cultural conflict . New York: Garland.

Book Google Scholar

Jin, H. (2012). Is subject structure of investment rational or not? Based on data analysis of the higher education investment during 2001–2009. Journal of University of Science and Technology, Beijing (Social Sciences), 28, 63–70.

Jeffreys, E., & Singley, G. (2009). Governmentality and China. In E. Jeffreys (Ed.), Chinese governmentalities: Governing change, changing government (pp. 1–25). London: Routledge.

Johnstone, D. B. (1986). Sharing the costs of higher education: Student financial assistance in the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Sweden, and the United States . New York: College Entrance Examination Board.

Johnstone, D. B. (1993). The costs of higher education: Worldwide issues and trends for the 1990s. In P. G Altbach & D. B. Johnstone (Eds.), The Funding of higher education: International perspectives (pp. 3–24). New York: Garland Publishing.

Johnstone, D. B. (2002). Challenges of financial austerity: Imperatives and limitations of revenue diversification in higher education. The Welsh Journal of Education, 1, 18–36.

Johnstone, D. B. (2003). Cost sharing in higher education: Tuition, financial assistance and accessibility in a comparative perspective . Prague: Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.

Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: Interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56, 303–324.

Kickert, W. (1995). Steering at a distance: A new paradigm of public governance in Dutch higher education. Governance, 8 (1), 135–157.

Li, M., & Yang, R. (2014). Governance reforms in higher education: A study of institutional autonomy in China. In N. V. Varghese & C Edwards (eds.) Governance reforms in higher education in Asia . International Institute for Educational Planning . Paris: UNESCO.

Liu, Y. B. (2011). Pedagogic discourse and transformation: A selective tradition. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 599–606.

Liu, Y. S., Wang, Z. M., & Yang, X. F (2009). Selection of elites: Views from social status, geographical variation and capital gaining: Case study of farmers’ children admitted into peking university (1978–2005). Tsinghua Journal of Education, 30, 42–59 (In Chinese).

Ma, H. M., & Gao, X. P. (1998). Educational sociology research . Shanghai: Shanghai Education Publishing House (in Chinese).

Maassen, P. (2000). Editorial. European Journal of Education, 4, 377–383.

Marginson, S. (2007). The public/private divide in higher education: A global revision. Higher Education, 53, 307–333.

Meyer, H. D., & Boyd, W. L. (Eds.). (2001). Education between states, markets and civil; society: Comparative perspectives . New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.

Ngok, K. L. (2007). Chinese education policy in the context of decentralisation and marketisation: Evolution and implications. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8, 142–157.

OECD. (2009). Higher education to 2030 (Vol. 2 Globalization) . Centre for educational research and innovation. Paris: OECD.

Plafker, T. (2001) China’s long—but uneven—march to literacy. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/12/news/12iht-rchina.t.html . Accessed 18 June 2011.Psacharopoulos, G. (1973). Returns to education: An international comparison . Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Psacharopoulos, G. (1985). Returns to education: A further international update and implications. Journal of Human Resources, 20, 583–604.

Psacharopoulos, G. (1994). Returns to investment in education: A global update. World Development, 22, 1325–1343.

Rosen, S. (1997). Education and economic reform. In C. Hudson (Ed.), The China handbook (pp. 250–261). Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers.

Singley, G. (2006). Chinese governmentalities: Government, governance and the socialist market economy. Economy and Society, 35, 487–508.

Snodderly, B. (2013). The impact of education on nation building: A western perspective. William Carey International Development Journal, 2 (1), 23–32.

Tan, S. H. (2011). Why study classics and how o go about it: Response to Zongjie Wu’s “Interpretation, autonomy, and transformation”: Chinese pedagogic discourse in cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43, 623–30.

Teng, M. L., & Zhang, J. H. (2005). Reflections improvement of cost-sharing system in China’s higher education. Theory and Practice of Education, 25, 11–14 (in Chinese).

Tu, L. X. (2010). Higher education funding in India: Mechanism and model. Modern Economic Information, 2, 204–205.

UNESCO. (1998). Higher education in the twenty-first century: Vision and action . Paris: UNESCO.

Wang, P. G. (2004). Economics of higher education . Beijing: Economic Management Press (in Chinese).

Wang, Z. S., & Jiang, F. (2011). The problems of self-made benefits in Chinese universities. Modern University Education, 4, 15–21 (in Chinese).

Woodhall, M. (1992). Changing sources and patterns of finance for higher education: A review of international trends. Higher Education in Europe, 17, 141–149.

Woodhall, M. (2007). Funding higher education: The contribution of economic thinking to debate and policy development . Washington, DC: The World Bank.

World Bank. (1994). Higher education: Lessons of experience . Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Wu, S. (2004). The comparative analysis of the students’ cost about attending school and getting employment between public and private universities. Education and Economics, 2, 6–10 (in Chinese).

Yan, Z. J. (2006). A study of macro decision-making system and process of higher education in China . Doctoral dissertation, Xiamen University (in Chinese).

Yang, D. P. (2006). Bluebook of Chinese education: 2006 . Beijing: Social Sciences Academic.

Yang, D. P. (2008). Higher education public policy in China. In X. L. Zhang (Ed.), China’s education development and policy: 1978–2008 (pp. 251–289). Beijing: Social Sciences Academic.

Yang, R. (2004). Toward massification: Higher education development in the People’s Republic of China since 1949. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 311–374). Kluwer: Dordrecht.

Yang R. (2011). Self and the other in the Confucian cultural context: Implications of China’s higher education development for comparative studies. International Review of Education, 57, 337–355.

Yang, Y., & Gao, X. H. (2009). Higher education investment from public good theories. Journal of Huaibei Coal Industry Teachers’ College (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 30, 151–53.

Yi, S. J., & Yao, Q. C. (2007). A probe into higher education efficiency: Based on the beneficiaries. Journal of Wenzhou University (Social Sciences), 20, 107–12 (in Chinese).

Yuan, Z. G. (2001). Education policy . Nanjing: Jiangsu Education Publishing House (in Chinese).

Yuan, Z. G. (2002). Policy-type researchers and research-type policy-makers. Educational Research, 11, 3–7 (in Chinese).

Zhang, L. T. (2002). Educational policies and laws: Theories and practices . Shanghai: East China Normal University Press (in Chinese).

Zhang, M. X. (1998): Changing conceptions of equity and student financial support policies. In M. Agelasto & B. Adamson (Eds.), Higher education in post-Mao China (pp. 237–258). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.

Zhang, Y. L., & Liu, B. J. (2005). Professional strata and higher education opportunities in China. Journal of Beijing Normal University, 3, 25–31.

Zhao, H. L. (2005). An empirical study of direct beneficiaries of public expenditure on higher education in China. Journal of Guangdong University of Business Studies, 1, 43–47.

Zhu, J. X., & Zuo, Q. (2011). An analysis of higher education investment system. Journal of Finance and Economics, 11, 13–14 (in Chinese).

Ziderman, A., & Albrecht, D. (1995). Financing universities in developing countries . Washington, DC: The Falmer.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education, Division of Policy, Administration and Social Sciences Education, University of Hong Kong, Room 418, Runme Shaw Building, Hong Kong, China

Prof. Rui Yang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui Yang .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Institute for Studies on Labor & Society, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Simon Schwartzman

Faculty of Education, University of Oslo, Kristiansand S., Norway

Rómulo Pinheiro

University of Witwatersrand Grad. School of Public & Development, Johannesburg, South Africa

Pundy Pillay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Yang, R. (2015). Cost Sharing in China’s Higher Education: Analyses of Major Stakeholders. In: Schwartzman, S., Pinheiro, R., Pillay, P. (eds) Higher Education in the BRICS Countries. Higher Education Dynamics, vol 44. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9570-8_12

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9570-8_12

Published : 25 March 2015

Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht

Print ISBN : 978-94-017-9569-2

Online ISBN : 978-94-017-9570-8

eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Blog The Education Hub

https://educationhub.blog.gov.uk/2024/04/08/free-childcare-how-we-tackling-the-cost-of-childcare/

Free childcare: How we are tackling the cost of childcare

England has some of the highest quality childcare provision in the world, with 96% of early years settings rated by Ofsted as good or outstanding. But we recognise that childcare is also one of the biggest costs facing working families today.

That’s why we’re making the biggest investment by a UK government into childcare in history, doubling the amount we expect to spend over the next few years from around £4 billion to around £8 billion each year.

By September 2025, working parents will be able to claim 30 hours of government-funded childcare a week, over 38 weeks of the year, all the way through from nine months up to their child starting school.

The scheme is already being rolled out, with more families able to sign up for the support than ever before.

When does the 30 hours free childcare start?

The increased offer will be rolled out in stages to allow childcare providers time to be able to implement the changes, making sure the places that are needed are available across the country when the offers are introduced.

Eligible working parents of 2-year-olds are now able to access 15 hours childcare . Eligible working parents of 3- and 4-year-olds are also able to access 30 hours of government-funded childcare.
From  September 2024 , 15 hours childcare support will be extended to eligible working parents with a child from 9-months-old.
From  September 2025 , support will reach 30 hours for eligible working parents with a child from 9-months-old up to school age.

These hours can be used over 38 weeks of the year during school term time, or up to 52 weeks if you use fewer than your total hours per week.

You can start using the entitlements from the term after you apply. These terms begin on 1 January, 1 April and 1 September.

Applications are now open for eligible working parents whose children will be 2 or older by the 31 August to receive 15 hours childcare, starting from September 2024.

And from 12 May, eligible working parents whose children will be aged between 9- and 23-months old on 31st August, can apply to receive 15 hours childcare starting from September 2024.

Why won’t this be available until 2025?

This is a massive expansion in the offer and will take some time to implement and rollout.

The staggered approach will give childminders and nurseries time to prepare for the changes, ensuring there are enough places ready to meet demand.

The government is supporting with this, with a range of new initiatives to boost the workforce, including a national recruitment campaign and a £1,000 cash incentive pilot to encourage new staff into the sector.

How else is the government supporting nurseries and childminders?

Nurseries are set to receive a £204 million cash boost as part of the government’s promise to deliver the largest ever investment in childcare.

Every area across the country is getting a share of the government funding which childcare providers can use to ease cost pressures such as staffing costs, training and bills.

Funding rates per child paid from September will increase from an average of £5.29 to £5.62 for 3 and 4-year-olds, and from an average of £6.00 to £7.95 for 2-year-olds.

All local authorities have started to receive their share of £289 million in funding to support their delivery of the programme, with parents expected to see an expansion in the availability of wraparound care from September 2024.

How will this make childcare cheaper?

Nurseries are not allowed to charge top-up fees when providing the free hours offers, and that won’t change as these are expanded.

Some providers may ask for charges in addition to the government-funded childcare, such as meals. You can find more information the Childcare Choices  website.

And of course, parents will be paying for far fewer hours in the future.

What do you mean when you say free childcare is for ‘working’ parents?

Working parents who individually earn more than £9,518 (from April 2024) but less than £100,000 per year are eligible.

If you’re in a couple, the rules apply to both of you, so you must both earn at least £9,518 and neither one of you can earn more than £100,000 adjusted net income.

There’s more information available on the exact criteria on the Childcare Choices  website, for example if you work irregular hours.

Who is eligible for free childcare now?

Eligible working parents of 3- and 4-year-olds already get 30 hours a week of government-funded childcare.

Eligible working parents of 2-year-olds are also now able to access 15 hours childcare support.

What childcare support is available for people on Universal Credit?

Parents on Universal Credit are set to get further support too.

The amount parents are able to claim from Universal Credit to cover childcare costs is £951 a month for one child, and £1,630 for two children.

Parents can receive DWP support to cover their costs upfront, making it easier for them to get a job or increase their hours. This eases parents into the childcare costs payment cycle.

What other Government childcare support is there?

Local authorities and schools will be given more funding for what’s known as “wraparound care”, so that parents of school-age children can access childcare in their local area from 8am – 6pm.

This could include provision of activities that fall outside of school hours, via things like breakfast clubs and after-school clubs.

The funding worth up to £289 million will enable schools to test different ways to increase their wraparound options, including working with local private providers or partnering with other schools.

This will be rolled out in September 2024, and we expect that by September 2026, all parents will be able to access wraparound care, either from their school or other provider.

Parents can also get up to £500 every three months (up to £2,000 a year) for each child to help with the cost of childcare, or up to £1,000 every three months (up to £4,000 a year) if a child is disabled, with Tax-Free Childcare. You can find out more about the scheme on Gov.uk . Parents may also be able to claim back up to 85% of their wraparound childcare costs if they are eligible for Universal Credit .

Sharing and comments

Share this page, related content and links, about the education hub.

The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.

Please note that for media enquiries, journalists should call our central Newsdesk on 020 7783 8300. This media-only line operates from Monday to Friday, 8am to 7pm. Outside of these hours the number will divert to the duty media officer.

Members of the public should call our general enquiries line on 0370 000 2288.

Sign up and manage updates

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Windows 10 end of support updates for education

April 02, 2024.

By Microsoft Education Team

Share this article

Windows 10 will reach end of support (EOS) on October 14, 2025, less than two years from today.  While two years may seem like a lot of time, upgrading your school’s devices now will help your organization stay focused on learning outcomes and protect educational data without interruption.

For nearly a decade, you’ve helped shape the learning experiences of countless students and educators with Windows 10. We wish to express our gratitude and appreciation for the ways you’ve used Windows 10 to empower learners, leaders, and intuitions to transform education. Thank you for being an integral part of our mission to enable equitable education for all.

We encourage you to transition to Windows 11 sooner than later, and we’re here to help you plan your move. Learn about the options you have to smoothly transition to Windows 11, including extended protection for Windows 10 devices that may need more time to transition. 

What does Windows 10 end of support mean?

End of support means that Microsoft will no longer provide bug fixes for issues, security fixes for vulnerabilities, time zone updates, or technical support for problems that might occur. 

As noted on the  Windows 10 release information  page, version 22H2 is the final version of Windows 10. All editions of Windows 10, version 22H2 will remain in support with monthly security updates through October 14, 2025.  

Transition from Windows 10 to Windows 11 to meet your needs 

Windows 11 helps every learner do their best work with easy-to-use tools built right in and ready to go from the first day—all in a secure and trusted environment . Windows 11 security features are enabled by default, providing protection for your school’s devices and peace of mind. The accessibility features and AI improvements built into Windows 11 help educators personalize learning and meet the needs of all students.

In addition to upgrading eligible PCs to Windows 11 using  Microsoft Intune , your options to adopt Windows 11 include:

Upgrade eligible PCs to Windows 11. 
Purchase new modern Windows 11 Pro PCs . 
Move to Windows 11 on a Cloud PC with Windows 365.

As we continue to develop Windows 11 for education, along with a wide range of devices from our partners, we remain dedicated to creating products that help all students access the tools and support they need to explore new opportunities and succeed in their learning. Find the perfect learning device at a low cost from Microsoft Education .

Windows 11 helps every learner do their best work with easy-to-use tools built right in and ready to go from the first day.

Take advantage of the Extended Security Update program for Windows 10 

We encourage you to switch to Windows 11 , but we recognize that some situations might not allow you to upgrade your Windows 10 devices before the EOS date. For this reason, Microsoft will provide Extended Security Updates (ESU). The ESU for Windows 10 is designed to provide you with peace of mind as you migrate to Windows 11 and identify Windows 10 PCs that need more time to transition. 

Devices enrolled in ESU can receive monthly security updates but no feature or other updates. 
Similar to the Windows 7 ESU program, you will be able to purchase yearly subscriptions to security updates, renewable for up to three years. 
Windows 365 customers, as well as those that run Windows 10 in an Azure Virtual Desktop, will receive ESU at no additional charge.

To help you plan a successful transition, we’re offering special education pricing for the Windows 10 ESU program:

ESU pricing 1 for Microsoft education customers will be $1 per license for the first year, $2 the following year, and $4 the third year to ensure institutions receive the support they need.   
This offer is extended to all education customers, including K-12 and Higher Education.

We know educators and students have experienced great benefits with Windows 10 and there's even more to love with Windows 11 , including built-in accessibility features on devices that are secure, easy to deploy, and manage. We look forward to helping you plan your transition to Windows 11 and supporting you on your journey.

We’ll continue to share updates about Windows 10 EOS and in the meantime, visit Lifecycle FAQ for Windows for more details. Additionally, more information on the ESU program will be shared later as availability and Windows 10 EOS approach. Read the Tech Community Blog on Windows 10 EOS or our visit the Windows Tech Community for more details on ESU enrollment. Looking for support? Visit Windows on Microsoft Q&A .

Microsoft 365, Windows devices, and comprehensive security combine to help schools and classrooms worldwide accelerate learning, improve efficiency, and enable equitable education. Learn about a suite of products that provide a comprehensive solution for everyone at your school, from educators to students to admins.

1 All prices are in US dollars. Regional prices will vary based on foreign exchange rates at the moment of ordering SKUs.

AI and security breakthroughs from Microsoft Ignite 2023 that schools won't want to miss

Each year at Microsoft Ignite—one of our largest and most popular events—we focus on sharing our most innovative updates with the world. The overarching theme for this year’s Microsoft Ignite event was how we are working to empower our customers, partners, and developers so that they can thrive in this exciting era of AI.

Microsoft Ignite: Bringing the innovations of the cloud to your CTE classroom

During November at Microsoft, we focus on innovation, AI, and the cloud at one of our biggest events of the year: the Microsoft Ignite conference. It is free to join online from anywhere November 15 and 16, 2023, so anyone can learn about how Microsoft is innovating in ways that will impact teaching, learning, and the future of work. This year, a large focus of Ignite will be how Microsoft Azure brings your data together securely and privately to analyze your information and leverage other applications to provide enhanced learning, collaboration, and security. With secure access to your data on prem, in the cloud, or in a hybrid implementation, utilizing innovative education solutions with embedded AI and harnessing analytics in your career and technical education (CTE) classroom becomes easier than ever before.

SCHOOL STORIES
MICROSOFT EDUCATOR CENTER
CONTACT SALES

COMMENTS

Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Tuition, Financial Assistance, and
Cost sharing in higher education refers to a shift in the burden of higher education costs from being borne exclusively or predominately by government, or taxpayers, to being shared with parents and students. This cost sharing, as articulated in Johnstone [1986, 1992, 1993b, 2002, 2003], may take the form of tuition, either be-
Cost-Sharing in Financing Higher Education
The term cost-sharing has two connotations in connection with the financing of higher education. The first is a statement of fact: that higher education's instructional costs as well as the costs of student living are perforce shared among the following parties: Governments (or the general citizenry) via taxation, the confiscation of ...
PDF COST SHARING: AN OVERVIEW
The Uniform Guidance (UG) at §200.29 defines cost sharing or matching to mean the portion of project costs not paid by Federal funds (unless otherwise authorized by ... and Rate Determination for Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) A.1.a(3) Only mandatory cost sharing or cost sharing specifically committed in the project budget
Cost-sharing and Student Support
Cost-sharing in higher education is now a global phenomenon, underpinning much of its expansion and growing participation. Cost-sharing policies seek to alter the balance of private and public funding to higher education, and most do this by shifting more higher education costs away from government and taxpayers and onto students and their ...
Trends in Cost-sharing in the US and Potential International ...
Cost-sharing — that is, the principle that a variety of sources should make financial contributions to higher education — has long been a staple of US higher education (McMahon, 2009).US HEIs have blended tuition receipts with public funds collected via taxation since the establishment of Harvard College, the first HEI in the country, in 1636 (Bailyn, 1986).
The economics and politics of cost sharing in higher education
Cost-sharing in higher educationThe term cost-sharing, in reference to higher education, begins with an assumption that the costs of higher education in all countries and in all situations can be viewed as being borne by four principal parties: (1) the government, or taxpayers; (2) parents; (3) students; and/or (4) individual or institutional ...
PDF Good Practice in Cost Sharing and Financing in Higher Education
The guide discusses the debate and evolution of cost sharing and financing in higher education, options and design aspects in these areas, and strategies for policy dialogue and project preparation. The guide includes a practical "toolbox" to support these efforts. Victor Levine, consultant, prepared a draft guide.
(PDF) The Importance of Cost Sharing in the Education ...
PDF | On Jan 1, 2022, Shephard Masaraure and others published The Importance of Cost Sharing in the Education Sector and its Impact on Quality of Education Cost | Find, read and cite all the ...
A Comparative Study on Cost-Sharing in Higher Education ...
As can be seen from these three issues, changes to cost-sharing are expected to affect the behaviour of institutions of higher education and of students. For this reason, the study adopts a twofold perspective on cost-sharing: firstly, cost-sharing is investigated in terms of the changing balance of public and private revenues for institutions ...
PDF The Importance of Cost Sharing in the Education Sector ...
The Concept of Cost Sharing in Educational Financing Cost sharing concept according to Mamdani (2012), combines the concepts of direct cost recovery and education pricing policies, and indirect
Education Cost Sharing (ECS) Formula
The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) formula is the method the State of Connecticut has established to distribute approximately $2.2 billion annually in state education funding. The ECS formula is used exclusively to provide state funding to local and regional public school districts. The ECS formula is made up of several different components: the ...
Cost Sharing in Education: Public Finance, School and Household
This report examines cost sharing, a term that combines the concepts of direct-cost recovery and indirect contributions from pupils, their parents, and sponsors. Such contributions may be voluntary, quasi-compulsory, or even compulsory. For the study reported here, cost sharing is used when the subject under discussion is not restricted to user-fee issues.
Cost Share
Cost-sharing (or "matching") refers to a scenario in which the cost of a sponsored project is funded in part by a source other than the sponsor. Some sponsors or specific funding opportunities require cost-sharing while others may simply encourage it for an application to be competitive. In other cases, faculty and departments.
Cost Sharing Policy
Therefore, all committed cost sharing is subject to this policy. Cost sharing is any project cost that is not reimbursed by the sponsor to support the scope of work defined by the federal or non-federal sponsored award. Cost sharing, also known as matching, is funded by Harvard or a third-party, which is generally a non-federal resource.
(PDF) Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Tuition ...
Cost sharing in higher education is the assumption by parents and students of a portion of the costs of higher education - costs that in many na- tions, at least until recently, have been borne ...
Cost-Sharing: Frequently Asked Questions
A: No. Just as award expenses must be incurred during the project start and end dates, so does cost-sharing. Do not include expenses that will be incurred outside of these dates as cost-share. Q: I am applying to a program that requires 1:1 cost-sharing (i.e., UWM must provide $1 for every $1 of sponsor funds). I want to provide 2:1 cost-sharing.
PDF Comparing Education Cost Sharing Formulas
The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) formula is the method the State of Connecticut has established to distribute approximately $2.2 billion annually in state education funding. The ECS formula is used exclusively to provide state funding to local and regional public. school districts.
(PDF) Cost-Sharing and Equity in Higher Education: Implications of
Implications of Income Contingent Loans. D. Bruce Johnstone∗. This paper explores the fitful saga of cost-sharing in European higher education, and some implications of th e current (2003 ...
Cost Sharing: Deductibles, Coinsurance, Copays and More
Cost-sharing refers to the fact that health insurance plans do not pay 100% of a person's medical costs. Instead, the plan shares the cost with the member, with the specific arrangement varying from one plan to another. The member's portion of the cost-sharing will come in the form of a deductible, copays, and/or coinsurance.
Cost sharing: implications of a well-intended benefits strategy
Cost sharing, an arrangement in which consumers pay a portion of costs associated with health care services and prescription drugs, are intended for consumers to be good stewards of their pharmacy benefit. Examples of cost-sharing payment methods such as deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments may be considered by payers who are seeking ...
What to Know About Biden's New Student Debt Relief Plan
April 8, 2024. President Biden released details on Monday of his new student loan debt forgiveness plan for nearly 30 million borrowers. The proposal still needs to be finalized and will have to ...
PDF Chapter 12 Cost Sharing in China's Higher Education ...
12 Cost Sharing in China's Higher Education: Analyses of Major Stakeholders 245. Even for those already admitted in higher education, a major issue is what pro- grams they are in. Students from low-income families have to consider tuition and fees as a significant factor in their choice of institutions and programs.
Education Cost Sharing ECS
Education Cost Sharing (ECS) Pursuant to Section 10-262f (26) of the Connecticut General Statutes, ECS Town Wealth is determined based on a town's property tax base and the income of its residents. The Education Cost Sharing (ECS) grant has been in existence since 1989-90. It continues to be Connecticut's primary education equalization aid ...
Free childcare: How we are tackling the cost of childcare
Every area across the country is getting a share of the government funding which childcare providers can use to ease cost pressures such as staffing costs, training and bills. Funding rates per child paid from September will increase from an average of £5.29 to £5.62 for 3 and 4-year-olds, and from an average of £6.00 to £7.95 for 2-year-olds.
FAFSA Delays Leave Students Unsure of College Costs on Decision Day
For him, financial aid will be the "tie breaker," with the sticker price of USC at about $95,000 a year compared with UCLA's in-state tuition of about $42,000. But he has yet to receive any ...
(PDF) Cost Sharing in China's Higher Education: Analyses of Major
fees charged by China's higher education institutions grew 35 times, from 200 RMB in. the 1989-1990 academic year to 7,000 RMB in 2009. During the same period, average. rural per capita net ...
Windows 10 end of support updates for education
Windows 10 will reach end of support (EOS) on October 14, 2025, less than two years from today. While two years may seem like a lot of time, upgrading your school's devices now will help your organization stay focused on learning outcomes and protect educational data without interruption. For nearly a decade, you've helped shape the ...

5 Cost-sharing and Student Support

Signed in as

Personal account

Institutional access

IP based access

Sign in through your institution

Sign in with a library card

Society Members

Sign in through society site

Sign in using a personal account

Viewing your signed in accounts

Signed in but can't access content

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

OFFICE HOURS

Policy Statement

Reason for Policy

Who Must Comply

Types of Cost Sharing

Voluntary Committed Cost Sharing

Voluntary Uncommitted Cost Sharing

Over-the-Cap Salary

In-Kind Cost Sharing

Roles and Responsibilities

PI & Department/Local Level Managing Units are responsible for the following:

Upon receipt of award and during the award period

At Closeout

School/Tub Level Officials are responsible for the following:

Submitting Offices (OSP/ORA) are responsible for the following:

Upon receipt of award and during the award period

OSP Research Finance Team is responsible for the following

Related Policies

Related Documents

Contacts and Subject Matter Experts

School and Local Subject Matter Experts:

Revision History

Sources of Cost Sharing Contributions

Sponsored Contributions (or Matching Funds)

Subrecipient Cost Sharing

Cost Sharing Expenditures Types

A. Direct Costs

2. Other direct costs

3. Equipment

B. Indirect Costs or Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Costs

1. Unrecovered overhead

2. Overhead on cost shared University resources

Decision Chart for Cost Sharing Companion Account Coding

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Cost-Sharing: Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What are the types of cost-share?

Q: What kinds of funds may be used for cost-sharing?

Q: Should I include cost-share in a proposal if the sponsor/program does not require it (i.e., voluntary committed cost-share)?

Q: If I cost-share a portion of my salary, do I also include the corresponding fringe benefits as cost-share?

Q: Can I include costs incurred outside of the proposed project start and end dates as cost-sharing?

Q: I am applying to a program that requires 1:1 cost-sharing (i.e., UWM must provide $1 for every $1 of sponsor funds). I want to provide 2:1 cost-sharing. Is this acceptable?

Q: If the project is funded, do I need to track the cost-sharing?

Q: I am proposing a multi-institutional project and UWM is the lead applicant. The project partners will provide cost-sharing. Do I need to document their cost-share in the proposal?

Q: I am developing a proposal that requires 50% cost-sharing. I plan to work with collaborators at other institutions. Will my collaborators be required to commit cost-sharing too?

Q: Does both my department and my division need to approve the cost-share for my proposal?

Q: My grant award is less than my original budget request. Is the difference between the award and original proposal budget now considered cost-share?

Q: Can I use award funds from one sponsored project to cost-share on another sponsored project?

Q: If a cost is an unallowable expense for budgeting purposes, could it then be used for cost-share purposes?

Q: I am submitting a proposal to an agency that requires cost-share and allows indirect costs at the fully negotiated indirect cost rate. Do I calculate the indirect costs on both my project budget and the cost-share funds?

Q: I am submitting a proposal to an agency that requires cost-share but does NOT allow indirect costs at the fully negotiated indirect cost rate (or does not allow indirect costs on the budget altogether). How should I include indirect costs in the project budget?

Q: Who do I contact if I have questions related to cost-sharing on a proposal?

An Overview of Health Insurance Cost-Sharing

Out-of-Pocket Costs for Medicare Advantage

Coinsurance

Cost-Sharing & the Out-Of-Pocket Maximum

Cost-Sharing & the Affordable Care Act

What About Things That Insurance Doesn't Cover?

A Word From Verywell

Cost sharing: implications of a well-intended benefits strategy

What to Know About Biden’s New Student Debt Relief Plan

Biden Announces New Plan for Student Debt Relief

Who would benefit from the new plan?

How is this different from the last plan?

What’s the timeline?

Our Coverage of the 2024 Presidential Election

Cost Sharing in China’s Higher Education: Analyses of Major Stakeholders

Buying options

Transition from Windows 10 to Windows 11 to meet your needs 

Take advantage of the Extended Security Update program for Windows 10 