Perspectives on accountability in higher education are considered. It is suggested that educational targeting be undertaken: a coalition of planners, financers, and deliverers of postsecondary education should establish goals to meet perceived societal needs. Out of these goal statements, priorities for state funding could be established and incentives offered to those institutions willing to accept the challenge. Colleges and universities must help the legislature by establishing benchmarks for measuring the effectiveness of the program. Each new educational target would contain information about starting dates, ending dates, and magnitude of expected impact. Difficulties nontraditional programs encounter in relation to state funding policies are considered, along with ways that colleges can provided needed information to help legislators evaluate programs for which funds are requested. Among the problems associated with evaluating nontraditional programs are the following: use of the credit hour as a measure of productivity poses difficulties for many nontraditional curricula; many new programs are aimed at finding more efficient ways of educating through the use of paraprofessionals, and some funding formulas do not allow faculty salary money to be transferred to other line items. Legislators have indicated a need for instructions on measuring impact, when an educational impact statement is provided. Legislators also want information on the outcomes of education. A model for assessing the value of educational programs is briefly described in terms of measuring the attainment of its content objective, actual student dollars spent for education, foregone earnings due to job dislocation for study, and psychological costs or benefits. (SW)