Twelve current funds revenue sources utilized by 212 community colleges in 11 Midwest states during the decade of the 1990s were analyzed, using data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), available on the Internet. Comparisons were made by state as well as time, using the two-way analysis of variance. Of particular interest were trends in the proportions of student tuition and fees, and state and/or local appropriations from 1990 to 1995 to 2000. Also examined was the states' use of alternative funding sources to compensate for a possible reduction in government appropriations. Different funding models within the 11 states were identified. They were evaluated in terms of their success in sustaining or increasing revenue income without a disproportionate increase in student tuition and fees.;Significant differences were found among the states in the proportion of total current funds revenue attributed to the 12 sources, especially for tuition and fees, state appropriations, and local appropriations. The community colleges in the study were not actively utilizing alternative funding sources. The proportion of total current funds revenue was less than .05 for each of 6 revenue sources (federal appropriations, local grants, private gifts, endowment income, sales and service of educational activities, and other sources of revenue).;Overall, a significant difference in funding was found between the years 1990 and 1995 for state appropriations and student tuition and fees. For the decade, eight states reported a proportional decrease in state appropriations. Six of these states had an increase in tuition and fees. Two states indicated an increase in local appropriations. A continuing trend of reduced proportion of state support was found. Statistically significant state by year interaction results existed for state appropriations, sales and service of educational activities, and other sources.;Four models of current funds revenue funding were revealed. All four models generated revenue in excess of the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI) for the period. Only one model did not increase its proportion of current funds revenue attributed to student tuition and fees.