Search News


Browse Archives

News

Budget Cutting Strategies Reviewed

November 12, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Scrambling to address revenue shortfalls, the hardest hit public universities most often chose to delay deferred maintenance projects, cut staff and reduce contingent faculty positions, according to a survey released today by the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. But those institutions still have plenty of "strategic" thinking to do about long term solutions, the survey found.

Of the responding universities where budgets have been cut by at least 10 percent, more than 90 percent have reduced permanent and part-time staff positions. In that same sample, about 88 percent are putting off maintenance projects and reducing adjunct faculty slots.

Raising tuition hasn’t proven the panacea for public universities, the survey notes. While more than 90 percent of all responding institutions raised tuition and fees, half of those surveyed said education revenues -- the sum of net tuition dollars and state appropriations -- still declined. Consequently, universities have reduced services that benefit students even as they’ve required them to pay more. Indeed, 55 percent said student support services were “harmed” by state cuts, and 54 percent said their ability to maintain academic programs and course offerings had been hampered by the reductions.

Even as public universities cram more students into classes -- nearly 58 percent report larger sections -- they appear to have no intention of slowing enrollment as a general rule, the survey suggests. Quite the contrary, 63 percent of responding universities see enrollment increases as part of a long-term revenue growth strategy, compared with just 10 percent that plan to decrease enrollment in specific areas to manage costs.

About 70 percent of universities said they were relying on federal stimulus dollars as a short-term strategy, but there's considerable anxiety about whether states will replace that money when it runs out.

Of the 188 institutions surveyed, 87 colleges, or 46 percent, responded. Of those that responded, which were primarily large research institutions, 85 percent reported some decrease in state appropriations, and nearly half saw cuts of 10 percent or more.

Many Plan Strategic Reviews

The survey asked universities to articulate both short-term and long-term strategies. In the long term, the most popular response -- by 78 percent -- was to invest in more energy efficient systems. Barring that, however, most institutions said they would conduct “strategic review(s)” of areas as diverse as administrative structures, distance education and tuition levels.

While the survey suggests that some hard choices have already been made by public universities, the long-term solutions indicate universities are still more apt to conduct further reviews than announce permanent changes at this point. Indeed, 67 percent of respondents said they plan a strategic review of administrative structures, compared with just 22 percent that said they plan to permanently change staffing levels for tenured and tenure-track faculty.

“We’ve taken cuts where we can, and now the campuses are really doing the very hard things and asking how can we change fundamentally,” said David Shulenburger, vice president of academic affairs for the APLU.

There are notable distinctions between the responses provided by the hardest hit universities and those that have suffered less significant cuts. Of those universities where appropriations have decreased by 10 percent or more, 21 percent have laid off tenured or tenure-track faculty, the survey says. In contrast, none of the institutions with appropriations decreases of less than 10 percent said they’d laid off tenured or tenure-track faculty.

Unsurprisingly, mandated furloughs were also less common at institutions with smaller budget reductions. About 15 percent of respondents with budget cuts of less than 10 percent said they’d mandated furloughs, compared to 36 percent of universities with more severe reductions.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Budget Cutting Strategies Reviewed

  • 'time' is the critical variable
  • Posted by Dean Dad on November 12, 2009 at 9:00am EST
  • Based on what I've seen locally, I'd suggest that the missing variable here is time. Cutting travel money is easy and quick, but making fundamental decisions about the direction of a college takes time, especially if you want the process to be inclusive and thorough. For many of us, the money started evaporating relatively abruptly in the Fall of 2008, which wasn't all that long ago. It didn't get really awful until the Spring of this year. Add some lag time for perceptions to catch up to reality, and it's only been a few months that we've understood the 'new normal.'

    Repeat this inquiry a year from now, and I'd expect markedly different results.

  • Rushing the pardigm shift
  • Posted by Hannah , Ex-Adjunked on November 12, 2009 at 3:15pm EST
  • From a purely budgetary perspective, it makes far more sense/cents to lay off tenured faculty and keep the much, much less expensive contingent faculty. By having a higher proportion of fewer state-funded students taught by "expensive" tenured faculty, the cost of educating each student soars. K-12's do not have this conundrum, because almost all the faculty are either full-time or pro-rata part-time; the budget axe is thus hitting all the faculty sort of equallly.

    If the exploitative two-tier system in higher education, especially community colleges, had never been institutionalized, almost all of public higher education would have either been shut down or become expensively non-accessible to anyone but the wealthiest students by now. Or, state budgets would not have become to tightly shrink-wrapped around severely underpaying over two thirds of faculty in public higher education. Scores of full-time faculty have made great cases for students having access to the "quality" of education from full-time faculty with paid office hours and institutional resonance, we haven't until now been forced to examine how the two-tier system is pitting "quality" of education against the ability of public-funded higher education to survive.

    I suspect that in the not-too-distant future, there will be no more convenient bump cushion of adjuncts to lay off, and the taxpaying public will need to decide, once and for all, whether it really wants to support higher education--and what college graduates give back to society in vocational, professional, and political skills. Let's hope taxpayers finally realize that cops, irefighters, nurses, lawyers, mechanics, surgeons, CPA's, CIS technicians, and a huge, huge variety of necessary social personnel can't be ordered (yet) off of ebay.

  • 'time' is the critical variable
  • Posted by Townsend Harris at City University of New York on November 12, 2009 at 4:30pm EST
  • For those public institutions new to massive budget cuts, keep an eye on *the* institution with decades of deep experience with massive budget cuts: watch my beloved CUNY. With all due sarcasm and cynicism, we're now public higher education's bellwether.

    And here's how we're going to lead the flock: big budget cuts to the institution, more students stuffed into more classrooms, freezes on replacing tenure lines, and further 'adjunctification' of classroom teachers. And that's just CUNY warming up, because here's how we'll really *show* the way to you third-rate public pikers in other states: tuition hikes that go right into the public treasury to reduce taxes on the wealthy and build more prisons. Yup, that's right, more students at CUNY brings more money into the public treasury as we disinvest in higher education. The idea is simple: why invest now in our young and risk making money off them later as taxpayers? Why not make the money, for sure, right now, this semester? This is government competing efficiently in the marketplace for higher education.

    More students are more than good for the public treasury, they're great for it. New York's political leaders still draw inspiration from the late Tammany Hall politician who advocated "honest graft". George Washington Plunkitt said "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em."

  • Time, time, time. Tick, tick, tick.
  • Posted by DFS on November 12, 2009 at 11:15pm EST
  • While I have nothing but respect for the previous posters here, I ask everyone: while some cost-cutting measures may have been taken, has the bloat actually been attacked?