UCLA Council on Planning and Budget (CPB) Chair - Ajit Mal, 2003-04

1. UCLA Council on Planning and Budget (CPB) Chair - Ajit Mal, 2003-04 CPB involvement in the budget process STANDING ORDER OF THE REGENTS The Academic Senate is authorized to select a committee or committees to advise a Chancellor concerning a campus budget and to select a committee or committees to advise the President concerning the University budget.

3. 2004-05 Budget Analysis • Guidelines from EVC, Sept 15, 2003 • Each unit is requested by the EVC to submit preliminary budget plans for 2004-05 incorporating a 5% reduction in state (19900) funds. • All proposals prepared by the academic units should be developed in consultation with appropriate Faculty Executive Committees (FEC). • Due date: Dec 1, 2003.

4. Winter Quarter, 2004 • CPB has received the budget plans and related documents from APB, and has assigned a lead reviewer or a review team to study them. • A special subcommittee has been assigned to review the Administration’s Budget. • CPB lead reviewer and the FEC Chair of each unit are being encouraged to discuss the unit’s budget planning process.

5. Winter Quarter, 2004 • CPB lead reviewers present their reports to full council. • Each report is discussed and revised as needed. • CPB is planning to carry out a cross- disciplinary analysis of the Budget Plans, to the extent possible, after all the budget plans are reviewed

6. Spring Quarter, 2004 • CPB’s integrated report on the Budget Plans will be submitted to Senate Chair, Senate Vice Chair, EVC, and VC Finance. • Chancellor will make final budget decisions in June?

7. Budget plan from Unit X • Total State Funds: $32,000,000 • Faculty Salaries: $17,000,000 • 5% Budget Cut: ($1,600,000) • Temp Faculty (667,000) • GSR Support (163,000) • Staff Support (222,000) • Supplies and Equipment (548,000) Effective 10% cut in non-faculty-salary items Cumulative cuts for the last 3 years > 20%

8. Budget plan from Unit Y • Total State Funds: $160M • Ladder faculty Salaries: $85M • 5% Budget Cut: ($8M) • Equivalent to more than 10% cut in temporary lecturers, supplies, staff, recruitment and retention activities, etc. • This unit also has a large structural deficit that must be eliminated within the next few years!

9. All preliminary budget plans indicate strong negative impact on: • Undergraduate instruction • Graduate student recruitment/retention • Further deterioration of infrastructure • Faculty recruitment and retention • Etc, etc.

10. Issues of concern • Negative impact of approximately 3% budget reduction in 2003-04 and 5% (or more?) in 2004-05 on academic units’ core missions. • 2004-05 budget plans from most units propose cuts in staff (already at subsistence level), supplies, instructional support and reductions in temporary FTE. • How would these cuts affect students’ academic programs, faculty workload and faculty/graduate student research?

11. Possible Scenarios (All Painful!) • Across-the-board cuts • Strategic cuts • Smaller cuts for units with highly ranked programs • Smaller cut for the College • Higher cuts for professional schools with large non-state funds • Higher cuts for administration • Etc. Suggestions welcome. nykiel@senate.ucla.edu or ajit@ucla.edu