Making Pell Grants an entitlement and tying the maximum award to a measure of inflation, as President Obama has proposed, would probably yield larger awards and stop the cycle of shortfalls that have plagued the program. The president's plan, which would index the maximum award to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus one percentage point, probably would not end the erosion of the grant's purchasing power or make the program more predictable for families, a "Chronicle" analysis shows. That's because college tuition tends to rise at twice the rate of inflation and because changes in the Consumer Price Index fluctuate widely, based on economic conditions. Since the Pell Grant program was created, in the mid-1970s, increases in the CPI, which measures what urban consumers pay for a market basket of goods and services, have ranged from a low of 1.6 percent in 1998 and 2002 to a high of 13.5 percent in 1980. Meanwhile, college costs have skyrocketed, growing from an average of $1,666 in tuition, fees, room, and board at a four-year public college in 1975-76 to $14,333 this year, according to the College Board. Those increases have chipped away at the power of the Pell Grant, reducing its value in the higher-education marketplace. But restoring the grant's purchasing power to mid-1970s levels would be extraordinarily expensive. According to the Education Department, every $100 increase in the maximum Pell Grant costs the federal government $560-million. Other college lobbyists suggest that the government increase the maximum award by a certain dollar amount or percentage each year. They argue that such an approach would provide more predictability for students and families than the CPI, which fluctuates year to year and can't be forecast. Supporters of the president's proposal, like Brian K. Fitzgerald, executive director of the Business Higher-Education Forum, say tying Pell Grants to the CPI could actually constrain costs, by putting pressure on colleges to hold tuition growth to inflation. Opponents of the plan, like Neal McCluskey, associate director of the Center for Educational Freedom, at the libertarian Cato Institute, warn that it will simply create a floor for tuition growth.