Greater accountability in public higher education systems is a fact of life in the current political climate. Increasingly, one form this accountability takes is performance funding, which arises from elected officials' need for assurance that taxpayer funds are not only being invested and used properly but are resulting in desired outcomes at acceptable levels or rates. Performance funding has gained support from major higher education foundations, the Obama administration, numerous state legislatures, governmental organizations such as the National Conference of State Legislatures and the National Governors Association, and policy groups that include texashighered.com and the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. The American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) has also provided an overview and analysis of various performance-funding models. This article features the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) as an example of a system that initially created for itself a one-size-fits-all performance-funding model but that has recently revised it to be more flexible and recognize differential missions and strategic directions. Because it is one of the oldest continuous models in the United States (it was implemented in 2003), it has longitudinal outcomes data and hence constitutes a useful proof of concept. The authors analyze the model and its record in helping PASSHE achieve its strategic goals. (Contains 2 figures and 7 online resources.)