1 / 12

Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Hearing April 14, 2011

Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Hearing April 14, 2011. Presentation on 2011-12 UC Budget Patrick J. Lenz Vice President for Budget and Capital Resources. Decline in Spending Per Student. The State an Unreliable Fiscal Partner. Volatility of Tuition and Fee Increases.

jillian-nicholson
Download Presentation

Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Hearing April 14, 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Senate Budget and Fiscal ReviewCommittee HearingApril 14, 2011 Presentation on 2011-12 UC Budget Patrick J. Lenz Vice President for Budget and Capital Resources

  2. Decline in Spending Per Student

  3. The State an Unreliable Fiscal Partner

  4. Volatility of Tuition and Fee Increases

  5. State Actions On 2011-12 UC Budget • $500 million reduction for 2011-12 UC budget • $733.4 million or 22.5 percent below the $3.2 billion state investment in FY 2007-08 • Equal to state funding in 1998-99 fiscal year when UC served 73,000 fewer students • Equal to the combined state support for UC San Francisco, Santa Barbara, and Santa Cruz

  6. 2011-12 UC Budget Pressures • State Budget Reduction $500.0 M • Cost Increases $362.5 M • Total $862.5 M • State funds CSU employer retirement contribution • Uncertainty of voter approval for tax initiative • Need for long-term fiscal stability

  7. UC Campus Actions Since 2007-08 • $3.2 billion peak state General Fund investment • More than 4,400 layoffs, more anticipated • More than 3,700 positions are unfilled or have been eliminated • About $155 million has been saved from programs consolidated/eliminated • Academic and administrative units have been assigned cuts generally ranging from 6% to 35%

  8. Good Efficiencies versus Bad • Operational Improvements: desirable for the University: • Development of IT systems that reduce personnel effort • Strategic sourcing • Joint Procurement Efforts • Shared library collections • Energy savings programs • Austerity Measures: negative impacts on the health of UC: • Higher student-faculty ratios, larger class sizes, increasing time to degree • Reduced graduate student enrollments • Faculty and staff salary lags • Deferred equipment purchases and technology lags • Deferred facility maintenance • Reduced administrative oversight

  9. Budget Pressures: Enrollment

  10. California Economic Future • UC produces on average, 4 inventions per day for 1,000 R&D-intensive companies • Every $1 invested in UC returns $4 to California • Every $1 investing in UC Research returns $8 to California • California will need 1 million more graduates by 2025 (PPIC Study – 2009) • Information Technology, Biotechnology, Human Health, Green Technology

  11. UC’s 2015-16 Funding Gap: $2.5 billion

  12. Addressing UC’s Budget Gap with State Funds and Tuition: Annual Increases Required to Generate $1.5B

More Related