1 / 25

Putting it in Perspective: the State Budget, and the Future of UC and UCLA Volunteer Development Orientation Program P

Putting it in Perspective: the State Budget, and the Future of UC and UCLA Volunteer Development Orientation Program Peter J. Taylor Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer University of California October 15, 2011. I. General Overview. The University of California.

nedaa
Download Presentation

Putting it in Perspective: the State Budget, and the Future of UC and UCLA Volunteer Development Orientation Program P

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. Putting it in Perspective: the State Budget, and the Future of UC and UCLA Volunteer Development Orientation Program Peter J. Taylor Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer University of California October 15, 2011

  2. I. General Overview

  3. The University of California “… Amherst has created a model for attracting talented low- and middle-income students that other colleges can copy. It borrows, in part, from the University of California, which is by far the most economically diverse top university system in the country.” “[The transfer program] is one of the reasons the University of California campuses in Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego are so much more diverse than other top colleges.” - David Leonhardt, “Top Colleges, Largely for the Elite” The New York Times, May 24, 2011 QUALITY ACCESS AFFORDABILITY

  4. The University of California includes 10 Campuses, 5 Academic Medical Centers and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory • Established in 1868 and Governed by a 26-member constitutionally autonomous Board of Regents • Educated over 230,000 full-time equivalent students in FY09-10 and has conferred approximately 1.9 million degrees • Pre-eminent faculty who have won 57 Nobel Prizes, more than any other U.S. public university • 28 Nobel Prize winners currently on faculty • Over 380 University researchers have been elected to the prestigious National Academy of Sciences • Record number of undergraduate applications for Fall 2011

  5. II. UC Student Profile – Maintaining Quality, Access and Affordability

  6. UC Received a Record Number of Undergraduate Applicants for Fall 2011 • Total applications rose from 134,029 to 142,235, a 6.1% increase • Freshmen applications rose from 100,320 to 106,070, a 5.7% increase • Transfer applications rose from 33,709 to 36,165, a 7.3% increase • Legislature sees an opportunity! Applicationsby Residency Total Applicationsby Campus & Universitywide * * unduplicated count

  7. Undergraduate Access and Excellence at UC • California’s ongoing fiscal crisis has raised concerns that the University would be unable to sustain a track record of access and excellence. Recent data suggest the opposite: • UC enrolls more Pell Grant recipients than ever before, at every campus ($286 million in 2009-10) • 31% of California students admitted for Fall 2011 are from underrepresented ethnic groups -- up from 28% in 2010 • Average high-school GPA of Fall 2011 California freshmen admits is 3.83 • 46% of first-year students are first-generation college students • Despite recent fee increases, the UC’s strong financial aid program – including the Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan* – have kept UC financially accessible to students from every income level • Once enrolled, students thrive: 93% persist to second year and 83% graduate in 6 years or less Pell Grant Recipients (UC 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 & Select Universities 2008-09) * Ensures system-wide fees for eligible students from families earning less than $80,000 are fully covered by grants and scholarships

  8. Quality, Access, and Affordability • UC’s enrollment strategy is adaptable to state funding levels • Priority is enrolling all state-funded CA residents • UC will continue to enroll some California residents beyond funded level in the short term • Campuses will increase non-resident enrollment, not to exceed systemwide cap of 10% • Alternative enrollment strategies under consideration • Self-supporting programs, online

  9. III. State Budget

  10. Background • In March 2011, the Legislature approved a $500 million reduction to the University’s budget for FY 2011-12, followed by another $150 million cut in June 2011 • The Regents approved an 8% increase in tuition and fees for FY 2011-12 to address the original UC budget plan (presented to the Regents) in November 2010, which called for significant increases in State support • Tuition and fee increase addresses $115.8 million • An additional 9.6% tuition and fee increase was approved by UC Regents in July 2011 to address the additional $150 million cut $500 million cut in Governor’s budget proposal Budget revision Determination of trigger occurrence June 2011 January 2011 March 2011 May 2011 December 2011 Approved and signed budget Regents’ Item discussion on Governor’s budget proposal

  11. State Budget for UC • On June 28, 2011 the Legislature adopted a second budget package for 2011-12 that includes additional targeted reductions for many State programs, including the University and CSU, and a trigger mechanism for more cuts mid-year if certain revenue targets are not realized • Trigger mechanism included in the budget package means that if State revenues fall short of the $4 billion projection by more than $1 billion, the University will face an additional mid-year budget reduction of up to $100 million • The University has begun to address the additional $100 million in potential cuts. Examples include: • Using monies in our benefits reserve fund • Additional investment in TRIP out of STIP • One-time use of FFE payout • State appropriations to the University now total $2.374 billion for FY 2011-12 • Estimated tuition revenues for FY 2011-12 is $2.9 billion

  12. UC Budget Pressures • State funds have declined and remain volatile • ARRA funds provided temporary relief in FY 2008-09 • Student tuition and fees have helped maintain total revenue levels • UC General Funds – nonresident tuition and federal indirect cost recovery – have grown modestly • Proposed revenue for FY 2011-12 is only 3.4% above 2007-08 levels • Volatility makes planning difficult • Growth in costs has exceeded revenue growth • Core Fund: Budget Pressures FY 2007-08 to FY 2011-12 Cost Reductions • Temporary savings through furloughs and debt restructuring • Cost avoidance through deferred faculty hiring, expansion of class sizes and alternative health benefit offerings • Administrative efficiencies • Layoffs Core funds include State General Funds, UC General Funds (nonresident tuition and a portion of indirect cost recovery), and student tuition and fees. Excludes return-to-aid funds.

  13. The Long-Term Funding Problem • Core expenses will continue to increase • Pace of growth in mandatory costs is accelerated by post-employment benefit contributions • UC needs steady and predictable revenue growth to address budget shortfalls and meet our future financial expenses • Failure to bridge the gap threatens UC’s quality, access, and affordability • State General Fund spending per student as drastically declined since FY 1990-91 while student tuition and fees has increased • Per-Student Average Expenditures for Education* * Average inflation-adjusted resources per general campus student in 2010-11 dollars; Includes graduate students; Excludes health science students

  14. UC’s Critical Need for a Multi-Year Budget Plan • Stable, permanent and predictable revenue streams are critical to maintenance of quality • Reduce significantly the volatility in revenue that prevents campus leadership from investing strategically in academic programs and tenured faculty • Students – both current and future – need a firmer understanding of their costs of education and financial aid opportunities • Partnership with the State to ensure student access, education quality, and a future highly skilled workforce • Addressing the “fiscal rollercoaster” sends a positive message to existing and prospective students, faculty members, and supporters of advancing the quality of UC as a world class research university

  15. Working Smarter Initiative E-Procurement Extramural Fund Accounting System • UC has created Working Smarter Initiative to save $500 million in administrative costs over five years Organizational Improvement at Individual Campuses Existing Regional / Collaborative Efforts Future Regional / Collaborative Efforts Financial Systems Job Classification System Business Software E-Procurement USHIP / GSHIP1 • and eventually more… Operational Excellence Process Simplification Facilities Maintenance System San Diego Super Computing and eventually more… Human Capital Management System Efficiencies Workgroup Restructuring Steering Cmte. Tiger Teams Streamlined Administration Organizational Excellence 1 Undergraduate/Graduate Student Health Insurance Program

  16. UC Is Actively Pursuing Administrative Efficiencies & New Revenue Opportunities Administrative Efficiencies New Revenue Development • Organizational improvement at individual campuses • Operational Excellence at Berkeley • Process simplification at Irvine • Streamlined administration at UCLA • Existing regional/collaborative efforts • Human capital management system • Undergraduate/graduate student health insurance program • Future regional/collaborative efforts • E-procurement • Facilities maintenance system • Enhanced indirect cost recovery • Increases in non-resident student fees • New models of private philanthropy • Establishing a partnership with the State to ensure steady, consistent growth in State revenues and tuition • Development of new extension and self-supporting programs

  17. IV. UCLA Budget

  18. Tuition Has Replaced State Funding • Student tuition fees have increased by $500 million from FY 2000-01 to FY 2011-12 while State funding has decreased by $300 million over same period • State Funding for UCLA Students Compared to Tuition Fees (Millions)

  19. Three-Quarters of UCLA Revenue is Non-Core • UCLA Total Revenues are projected at $5.2 billion in FY11. • Core revenues make up 24% of the total, or $1.24 billion. • Non-core revenues make up 76% of the total. • Sponsored research funding now exceeds $1 billion. • Medical Center revenues make up one-third of the total. • Sales and services revenues consist largely of outpatient clinical services. • Auxiliary operations include housing, parking, intercollegiate athletics, and ASUCLA. • Gifts include current gifts and pledge payments, but not new pledges, endowed gifts, or capital gifts. • Investment income includes endowment payout, and short-term investments. • UCLA FY 2010-11 Total Revenue ($millions) • Core Revenues in Blue: $1.24 billion

  20. State Funds Now Make Up a Minority of Core Revenues • Core revenues support the basic academic mission for academic departments and central administrative and facility functions. • Core revenue include state funds, student tuition and fees, and research indirect cost recovery. • State funds made up 38% of core revenues in FY11, and will fall to 28% in FY12. • All forms of student tuition made up 49% of core revenues in FY11, and will increase to 58% in FY12. • Mandatory Student Fees includes Tuition ($11,220 in FY12) and the Student Services Fee ($972 in FY12) totaling $12,192. • Nonresident Supplemental Tuition is $22,878 for undergraduates, $15,102 for graduate academic, and $12,245 for graduate professional students. • Self-supporting Degree Program fees vary by program, and must recover the full direct and indirect cost of the program. • Indirect Cost Recovery is derived from federal, state, and private contracts and grants. • UCLA FY 2010-11 Core Revenues ($millions)

  21. General Funds are Allocated Primarily in Support of the Academic Mission • 68% of General Funds support academic departments in the college, general campus professional schools, and health sciences schools and programs. • Another 9% goes to other academic units, such as the University Library and International Institute. • Campus services, such as building maintenance, utilities, and the police department, make up 12%. • Administrative functions, such as the Chancellor’s office, financial services, payroll, and admissions, receive 11% of General Funds. • Allocation of FY 2010-11 • General Funds Budget ($millions)

  22. VI. UC’s Economic Impact on California

  23. The University of California’s Economic Contribution to the State of California • UC recently commissioned a report that quantifies UC’s economic impact at the state and regional levels in California. • This is the firstUC economic impact report conducted on a systemwide level since 2003 and also thefirstto isolate the economic contributions of the UC health enterprise. • The Report, conducted by Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) contributes to an ongoing effort by the Office of the President (UCOP) to evaluate the primary impacts of the UC system on the California economy • These impacts derive from spending by UC and its faculty, staff, students and retirees. This spending of goods and services in California create a ripple or multiplier effect • EPS quantified UC’s primary impacts that considered direct, indirect and induced effects on employment, employment compensation and spending • Direct impacts – expenditures made by UC, its employees, its retirees and students • Indirect impacts – economic effects on the industries that supply UC with goods and services • Induced impacts – economic effects that results from personal and household spending attributable to UC

  24. UC Contribution to Economic Activity Key Findings UC generates about $46.3 billion in economic activity in California and contributes $32.8 billion to the gross state product Every $1 the California taxpayer invests in UC, leveraged by other revenue sources, results in $13.80 in economic output Every $1 that is cut from the State’s support of UC would result in direct losses of about $2.10 in the state’s economic output, $1.30 in employee compensation, and $1.60 gross state product plus a potential for negative secondary impacts associated with a decline in the scale and quality of UC’s academic and research programs • California’s $3.35 billion in UC-related spending including general support, Cal Grants, contracts, health care payments, and special appropriations is matched by an additional $17 billion from non-state government sources • Through the economic “multiplier effect” the $3.35 billion investment provides foundation for a total economic impact of $46.3 billion creating $13.80 in economic output for every $1 of state investment • In terms of employment, UC creates 128 jobs per $1 million in state taxpayer funding or about $7.790 per job • $25 billion in annual direct spending from the University creates successive rounds of economic activity through consumers and businesses • Economic activity related to UC supports about 1.8 percent of the California’s gross state product • This report evaluates the primary economic impact of two hypothetical funding scenarios, one in which the state cuts UC employee compensation and another in which it cuts total UC operating expenditures. Report can be found at the following link: http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/sept11/f7.pdf

  25. The University of California QUALITY ACCESS AFFORDABILITY

More Related