![Page 1: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report
Faculty Senate MeetingFebruary 16, 2005fffff
![Page 2: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Committee Members
• Buddy Babcock Ro DiBrezzo
• Judy Brittenum Luke Howard
• Uche Ewelukwa Phyllis Miller
• Tim Kruse Robert Brady
![Page 3: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Faculty Handbook Charge
• Standing committee composed of a representative from each college
• Solicit ideas from the faculty and communicate to campus administration– Cost Saving– Budget Priorities
• Nominated by the Committee on Committees and appointed by the Chair of the Campus Faculty
• Five year terms
![Page 4: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Special Senate Chair Charge
• Benchmark Adm. & Faculty Salaries against National/Regional Groups
• Compare Adm. & Faculty Raises at U of A
• Analyze, Report, & Recommend
• Five Year Period from FY 2000 – FY 2005
![Page 5: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Mode of Operation
• Met monthly for approximately 1-1/2 hrs.• Two special called meetings• Various tasks assigned between meeting dates• Collected data from:
– Institutional Research Office– Annual Budget Documents– Various benchmark websites– A few personal interviews– Human Resources Office
![Page 6: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Data Groups
• Alabama Study - Administrators– Southern Universities Group (31 Public
Doctoral Granting Univ. from Ariz. to Del.
• AAUP Study – Faculty
• Oklahoma State Study
• Delaware Study
![Page 7: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Relative Size of Faculty & Non-Classified Staff
FY05 FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01 FY00
Prof 310/46* 309 290 292 303 300/36
Assoc 226/72 226 226 219 224 218/59
Asst 154/62 147 164 170 171 165/69
Instr &Lect
107/71 116 111 116 115 113/66
Total 797/251 792 791 797 813 796/230
Staff 754 717 678 627 585 540
![Page 8: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Definitions
• No. of faculty is a head count including Instructors and Lecturers as defined by the AAUP study (800)
• Administrators were limited to the following groups:– Cat. 1 President, Provost, Chancellor & Vice
Chancellors (7)– Cat. 2 Associate Vice Chancellors (10)– Cat. 3 Deans (10)– Others Included Administrative Directors/Selected
Equivalent Positions (34)
![Page 9: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Benchmarking Faculty – RegionalUof Aavg/SUGavg 1000’s $
FY05 FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01 FY00
Prof 85/XX 82/9190%
81/9090%
78/8790%
76/8490%
74/7895%
Assoc 63/XX 61/6594%
61/6495%
59/6394%
57/5997%
55/5796%
Asst 56/XX 53/5695%
53/5596%
52/5398%
50/5198%
48/4998%
Inst 40/XX 37/4093%
37/3995%
37/3897%
37/3897%
36/34106%
![Page 10: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Benchmarking Administrators-SUGUofAavg/SUGavg 1000’s $
FY05 FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01 FY00
Cat 1 194/XX 173/201*
86%
181/193
93%
173/173
100%
170/174
98%
159/168
95%
Cat 2 104/XX 105/118
89%
101/112
90%
90/108
83%
89/102
87%
85/98
87%
Cat 3 161/XX 161/171
94%
150/163
92%
151/160
94%
149/153
97%
135/146
92%
All(57-61)
112/XX 109/125
87%
106/120
88%
103/115
90%
102/111
92%
93/107
87%
![Page 11: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
National Comparison
• It’s Lucrative at the Top – Chronicle of Higher Education by Basinger & Henderson, Nov 19, 2004
• Top 20 Paid Public Univ. Leaders Salaries range from $762,000 down to $477,650
• U of A Salaries do not even begin to be competitive with these salary ranges
![Page 12: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Faculty Yearly % Raises Benchmarking - SUG
FY05 FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01
Prof 3.2/XX 1.7/0.7 2.8/3.6 2.6/3.8 3.8/4.1
Assoc 3.3/XX 0.4/0.6 3.3/3.1 3.0/3.5 3.6/3.9
Asst 2.6/XX 0.2/0.8 3.3/3.1 3.6/4.2 5.9/3.9
![Page 13: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Administrators Yearly % Raises Benchmarking - SUG
FY05 FY04 FY03 FY02 FY01
Cat. 1 11.9/X -4.3/4.3 4.6/11. 2.1/-.4 6.8/3.7
Cat. 2 -1.3/XX 3.9/5.1 12.0/3. 0.9/5.9 5.0/4.6
Cat. 3 0.2/XX 6.9/4.8 -0.3/2. 1.0/4.0 10./5.0
![Page 14: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Cumulative % Raise Benchmarking - SUG
Prof Assoc Asst Cat. 1 Cat. 2 Cat. 3
4 Yr Cum
11/13 11/12 12/14 9/20 24/20 19/17
5 Yr Cum
14.9 14.3 14.6 22.1 22.0 18.9
![Page 15: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
BU 5 YR Budget Increases
• CHAN Business Unit– Salaries $374,452 to 569,775 52%– Total All CC $585,635 to 855,382 46%
• VCAC – Academic Affairs– Salaries $277,510 to 472,170 70%– Total All CC $1,510,231 to 2,031,097 34%
• VCAD - Advancement– Salaries $254,907 to 338,168
33%– Total All CC $304,594 to 394,143 29%
![Page 16: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
BU 5 YR Budget Increases
• VCFA – Financial Affairs– Salaries $336,582 to 398,533 18%– Total All CC $478,274 to 770,747 61%
• UDEV– Salaries $1,077,285 to 2,721,668 153%– Total All CC $ 1,402,993 to 3,294,550 134%
• GNSS– Salaries $571,207 to 592,260 4%– Total All CC $ 742,847 to 1,407,841 90%– Salaries 1,874,899 to 3,194,025 70%– Total Hard Budget 2,2821,394 to 3,434,791 22%
![Page 17: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Academic Colleges 5 YR Hard Budget Increases
• AGRI (1000’S $)– Total $ 4,662 to 5,646 21.1%
• ARCH – Total $2,418 to 2,836 17.3%
• ARSC– Total $30,761 to 34,911 13.5%
• BADM– Total $10,239 to 13,716 34.0%
![Page 18: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
BU 5 YR Budget Increases
• CTED (1000’S $)– Total $ 3,035 to 3,221 6.0%
• EDUC – Total $8,655 to 10,170 17.5%
• ENGR– Total $10,138 to 13,315 31.3%
• LAW– Total $6,122 to 8,532 39.4%
• GRAD– Total $1,376 to 2,754 100%
![Page 19: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Distribution of 5 Yr Increase To Colleges ($17.695MM)MM$ $ / Stu04 $/$04Resh $ / Fac04
AGRI 0.984 7 683 6 0.0188 8 6,517 7
ARCH 0.418 8
1075 3 7.340 1 23,222 4
ARSC 4.150 1 627 7 0.2280 7 12,652 6
BADM 3.477 2 1024 4 3.440 2 45,156 2
CTED 0.186 9 916 5 N/A N/A
EDUC 1.515 5 596 8 0.5913 5 16,833 5
ENGR 3.177 3 1564 2 0.2417 6 36,517 3
GRAD 1.378 6 N/A 0.9053 4 N/A
LAW 2.410 4 4990 1 3.210 3 89,259 1
![Page 20: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Historical Comparisonof Revenue FY 2000 to FY2005
FY00
MM$
% Total
FY05
MM$
% Total
% Incrse
Tuition & Fees
52.38 34.68 96.76 44.57 84.73
State Approp
92.63 61.32 99.30 45.74 7.2
Other
Total
6.04
151
4.0
100%
21.02
217
9.60
100%
248.0
43.7
![Page 21: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Historical Comparison of Budget Allocations (Selected Cat.)
FY00
MM$
% Total
FY05
MM$
% Total
% Incrse
Instr 69.10 45.74 83.38 38.41 20.67
Resh 5.03 3.33 11.48 5.29 128.17
Schola. 16.55 10.96 31.23 14.39 88.70
StudenService 8.21 5.43 14.21 6.54 73.05
Facility 17.01 11.26 24.23 11.16 42.41
![Page 22: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Additional 5 Year Trends
• Student enrollment has increased 13.4 %
• Total payroll salaries increased 19 %
• Six year graduation rates have risen to 52.9 % (1998 Cohort)
• Entering Students HSGPA has risen from 3.44 to 3.59
• Research Dollars have risen 30% to $91MM
![Page 23: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
5 Year Conclusions(1)
• Faculty numbers have remained constant• Total employees has only slightly increased(2%)• The number of staff including administrators has
increased significantly(40%)• Both faculty & administrator’s salaries averages
are below the SUG averages, but not egregiously so.
• At this campus, administrator’s absolute and % salary raises have been disproportionately large over the past 5 years compared to that of the faculty
![Page 24: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Conclusions (2)
• Tuition & fee revenue has increased 84% and the overall campus budget increased 44% while the Instruction budget category increased only 20%.
• Administrator’s budget unit % increases are high compared to academic college budget unit increases.
• Scholarship expenditures have increased 89% to $31 MM.
![Page 25: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Recommendations (1)
• Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration, in concert with FAC, report to the faculty senate each spring semester on trends in pertinent budget categories
• The Chair of the Financial Advisory Committee, the Faculty Chair and the Chair of the Faculty Senate be included in the yearly budget planning process
![Page 26: Faculty Senate Financial Advisory Committee Report](https://reader036.vdocuments.mx/reader036/viewer/2022062520/56815887550346895dc5e7a5/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Recommendations(2)
• Performance criteria be established and outcome assessments made of all administrative BU’s.
• Process reviews conducted on all administrative BU’s activities with a goal of reducing overhead costs
• Six sigma procedures be investigated as a means to achieving stated goals and objectives