LONG RANGE PLANNING Maintaining Excellence
advertisement
LONG RANGE PLANNING Maintaining Excellence During a Period of Exceptional Growth September 2002 University of California Educates 187,000 students Touches the lives of every California family An economic engine for jobs, local dollars and tax revenues Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics Universities Are More Important than Ever University research advances California’s economy and quality of life UC’s contributions are even more vital as the world shifts to more of a knowledge-based economy UC is an economic engine driving regional industry clusters Education Pays $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $81,380 2001 Average Earnings $64,532 $54,714 $60,000 $40,000 $38,012 $30,056 $22,100 $20,000 $0 ($20,000) ($40,000) ($60,000) ($80,000) ($100,000) < HS H.S. Grad A.A. Bachelor's Master's Doctorate Education Pays $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 2001 Average Earnings $81,380 $64,532 $54,714 $60,000 $38,012 $40,000 $30,056 $22,100 $20,000 $0 0% ($20,000) ($40,000) 5% ($60,000) 10% ($80,000) 15% ($100,000) < HS H.S. Grad A.A. Bachelor's Master's Doctorate 2001 Average Unemployment Rate Education Is the Pathway to Upward Social Mobility $3,000,000 Estimated Lifetime Earnings $2,500,000 White Hispanic Asian Black $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $0 < HS H.S. Grad A.A. Bachelor's Advanced Degree Population Growth 1995 to 2025 (millions) California Texas Florida Georgia Washington Millions 0 5 10 15 20 Fastest Growing States 1995-2025 California New Mexico Hawaii Arizona Nevada Percent Change 48% 50% 52% 54% 56% 58% Increase in Immigrants 1995 to 2025 (millions) California New York Florida New Jersey Illinois Millions 0 2 4 6 8 10 Population Age 65 and Over 1995 2025 Florida 19% 26% California 11% 13% Alaska 5% 10% (Highest) (Lowest) Population under 20 Years of Age 1995 2025 Alaska 31% 34% California 28% 33% Florida 24% 21% (Highest) (Lowest) Population under 14 Years of Age 1985 2020 United States 20% 18.6% Western Europe 20% 13.7% Median Age 2000 2050 United States 35.5 36.2 Western Europe 37.7 52.7 Percent of Population by Ethnic Group California’s Population in 1980 100% California Population 24 Million in 1980 75% 67% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 50% 25% 19% 5% 0% White Hispanic Asian 8% Black Percent of Population by Ethnic Group California’s Population in 2000 100% California Population 35 Million in 2000 75% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 50% 50% 25% 31% 12% 0% White Hispanic Asian 7% Black Percent of Population by Ethnic Group California’s Population in 2020 100% California Population 45.5 Million in 2020 75% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 50% 40% 39% 25% 14% 0% White Hispanic Asian 6% Black Percent of Population by Ethnic Group California’s Population in 2040 100% California Population 59 Million in 2040 75% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 50% 48% 25% 31% 15% 0% White Hispanic Asian 6% Black Percent of Population by Ethnic Group Hispanics & Asians Increase as % of Population 100% 75% 67% 50% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 48% 31% 25% 19% 15% 5% 8% 6% 0% White Hispanic Asian Black Percent of Population by Ethnic Group Policy Leaders Want to Reduce Income Disparity Median Family 100% in 2001 Income $65,100 $35,000 $63,000 $41,700 % Below Poverty 75%in 2000 Level 7.4% 21.7% 11.9% 16.5% 67% 50% Demographic DemographicShift Shift 1980 to 2040 1980 to 2040 48% 31% 25% 19% 15% 5% 0% 8% 6% White Hispanic Asian Black 1998 Forecast of “Tidal Wave II” California Public High School Graduates 400,000 Actual Projected 1998 Series 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 The Latest Forecast Is Even Higher California Public High School Graduates 400,000 Actual Projected 2001 Series 1998 Series 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Maintaining Excellence Quality Enabling Factors Quality Undergraduate Education Students Academic Support Excellent Research Leading Graduate Programs Facilities Staff Faculty Maintaining Excellence Benchmarks of Quality Quality Quality Undergraduate Education Excellent Research Leading Graduate Programs Slow Moving Indicators Enabling Factors Students Academic Support Facilities Staff Faculty Maintaining Excellence Early Warning Indicators Quality Quality Undergraduate Education Excellent Research Leading Graduate Programs Slow Moving Indicators Enabling Factors Students Academic Support Facilities Staff Faculty Early Warning Indicators Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs UC Has High Persistence and Graduation Rates 100% 90% One-Year Persistence Rates for Freshmen 80% 70% Five-Year Graduation Rates for Freshmen 60% 50% 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 1998-99 2000-01 Increase in Competitive Awards to UC Faculty General Campus Research Expenditures per Ladder Faculty FTE $100,000 $75,000 Federal $50,000 $25,000 Industry Foundation $1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 California Tops Federal Research Funding, FY 99 Funding Agency State Receiving Most Funding Percentage Received Defense California 26% Health and Human Services California 11% NASA California 30% National Science Foundation California 15% Fastest Growth is in Research Support from Industry Percent Increase in General Campus Faculty Research Expenditures by Source 250% 200% 150% Industry 100% Foundation 50% Federal 0% 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 (est) Many Indicators of Strong Graduate Programs Of the 261 doctoral-granting universities in the U.S., only 61 are members of the prestigious American Association of Universities (AAU). ¾ 6 of the 8 UC campuses eligible for the AAU are members. ¾ In spite of being small and young, UCR and UCSC are in top 15 on Graham/Diamond ratings. Of the top 12 universities on the NRC rankings, 3 are UC campuses. Of the 229 rated UC programs, more than half were in the top 20. Californians Take Pride in UC Quality The University of California The Best Public University System in the World Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics General Campus FTE Students Including Summer Creating Opportunities for More High School Graduates 250,000 Actual Projected 200,000 150,000 Graduate Students 100,000 Undergraduate Students Can CanWe WeMaintain MaintainQuality Quality during this Period during this Periodofof Exceptional ExceptionalGrowth? Growth? 50,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities 1999 Plan Forecast Many More Undergraduates 200,000 Number of Undergraduate Students Including Summer Actual Projected 175,000 150,000 125,000 UC Undergraduate Enrollment Plan of 1999 100,000 75,000 50,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Last Year’s Revision Assumed a Return to the Plan, But … 200,000 Number of Undergraduate Students Including Summer Actual 175,000 Projected 2001 Enrollment Revision 150,000 125,000 UC Undergraduate Enrollment Plan of 1999 100,000 75,000 50,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Community College Transfers are on Plan 16,000 Year-Average California Community College Transfers Actual Projected 12,000 UC Goal 8,000 4,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 UC is Accessible to Low-Income Families Percent of Undergraduates Who Receive Pell Grants 30 California Research Universities 20 Selected Flagship Public Universities 10 0 U of Virginia U of Wisconsin U of Michigan U of North Carolina Stanford Cal Tech USC UC Systemwide Graduate Enrollment is on Plan 40,000 Number of Graduate Students Including Summer Actual Projected 30,000 20,000 UC Graduate Enrollment Goal 10,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics Faculty Recruitment and Retention Faculty Quality ¾ Measures for Current Faculty ¾ How We Achieve It and What It Costs ¾ How We Nurture Continual Faculty Achievement Needs for Faculty Hiring Over the Next Decade ¾ Numbers and Causes ¾ Concerns ¾ Flexibility ¾ Opportunities Academic Achievement and Scholarly Recognition Nobel Prize Fields Medal National Medal of Science MacArthur Fellowships National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigators 26 3 39 37 350 150 117 48 Graham & Diamond “No aspect of our revised class of Research 1 universities is more arresting than the inclusion of all eight general campuses of the University of California… The speed with which [UC’s newer campuses at Santa Barbara, Riverside, and Santa Cruz] rose from modest beginnings is astonishing.” What Outstanding Faculty Want Outstanding colleagues Outstanding students Outstanding support ¾ Salary ¾ Services ¾ Finances Perception that the state and public value UC and treat UC well Intellectual stimulation and opportunities on campus and in surrounding area Good location/Quality of life Faculty Salaries Are Falling Below Market Again Faculty Salaries as % of Market 120% Privates Privates 110% UC UC 100% With WithNo No UC COLA UC COLA 90% Publics Publics 80% 1988-89 1990-91 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 1998-99 2000-01 2002-03 2002-03 Reasons First-offer Candidates Declined Appointments Better salary offer elsewhere Spousal employment Family/geographic considerations Housing problems Reasons Cited by Faculty who Resigned 2000-01 Low salary Family/geographic considerations Housing problems Spousal employment problems Lack of research money Promotion Review Process CANDIDATE DEPARTMENT SENATE ADMINISTRATION PREPARES FILE SOLICITS LETTERS LETTERS REVIEWS FILE AFTER LETTERS REVIEWS FILE REVIEWS FILE AFTER VOTE VOTES CHAIR’S LETTER AD HOC HOC AD COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REVIEWS REVIEWS COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PERSONNEL (CAP) REVIEWS CAP RECOMMENDATION DEAN REVIEWS FILE EVC / PROVOST REVIEWS FILE CHANCELLOR MAKES FINAL DECISION Faculty Promotions Campuswide process: input from department, academic senate and administration Individuals are reviewed throughout their professional careers World’s top people in fields are asked to evaluate Advancement is not automatic or merely a function of years-of-service Tenure Rates About 78% of UC’s non-tenured faculty hires eventually achieve tenure Over the last 10 years, nearly 90% of faculty who formally came up for tenure review were granted tenure ¾ Of those who left prior to tenure review, 76% secured positions at other universities (71% tenure track positions) Budgeted Student Enrollments General Campus 250,000 Actual Projected 200,000 150,000 Graduate Students 100,000 Undergraduate Students 50,000 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Tenure Track Faculty Positions 10,000 Actual Projected 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Tenure Track Faculty General Campus & Health Science Age Distributions 1990, 1995, and 2001 2,000 Number of Faculty 1,600 1995 1995 1,200 1990 1990 800 2001 2001 400 0 26-30 31-35 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55 56-60 61-65 66+ Tenure Track Faculty New Appointments Actual & Projected General Campus Recruitment 700 Actual Projected 600 Hires Per Year 500 400 300 200 100 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 2010-11 Concerns Number of searches Start-up costs Space Faculty salaries Flexibility Balance between temporary and permanent faculty Balance between new hires at junior and senior levels Opportunity Creating the faculty for the next several decades ¾Disciplinary balance ¾Coverage of growing fields ¾Diversity Summary UC has a faculty of very high quality and knows how to foster quality Fostering quality requires resources An unusually large wave of faculty hiring in this coming decade will set in place the faculty of the next several decades Concerns, flexibility, and opportunities Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics State Funding Cycles $7 UC Revenue in Billions $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $1980-81 1985-86 1990-91 State 1995-96 2000-01 Student Fee Revenues Increased During the Early 1990s $7 UC Revenue in Billions $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $1980-81 1985-86 State 1990-91 Student Fees 1995-96 2000-01 Private Fund-Raising Has Been a Terrific Success $7 UC Revenue in Billions $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $1980-81 1985-86 State 1990-91 Student Fees 1995-96 Private Funds 2000-01 So Has the Growth in Federal Research Support $7 UC Revenue in Billions $6 $5 $4 $3 $2 $1 $1980-81 State 1985-86 Student Fees 1990-91 Private Funds 1995-96 2000-01 Federal Research The Growth Plan and the Partnership Agreement Assumptions Assumptions Enrollment on plan State support - Partnership ¾ Cost increases to the base budget – 4% ¾ Catch-up funding in core areas – 1% ¾ Fund enrollment growth ¾ New academic facilities Federal – maintain $ per faculty Private – continue growth in private fund-raising Actual Actual Overenrolled State support - Partnership ¾ $237 million underfunded ¾ $29 million one-time cut to core areas ¾ Funded enrollment growth ¾ Larger GO bond + ISIs Federal – end of NIH increases? Double NSF? Impact of Federal deficits? Private – exceptional growth until this recession, then holding steady However, California is Facing a Fiscal Crisis Capital gains and stock options bubble Sharp Growth in Capital Gains & Stock Options Revenue 30% Actual Capital Gains and Stock Option Revenue as a Percent of Total General Fund Revenue $17.7 billion 25% 20% $12.7 billion Stock Options Capital Gains 15% $7.5 billion $5.5 billion 10% $4.0 billion $2.6 billion 5% 0% 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 Fiscal Year 00-01 01-02 01-02 California’s Bubble 30% Projected Estimated as of 2001- as of May $17.7 billion 02 Budget Revise 2002 Act Actual Capital G ains and Stock Option Revenue as a Percent of Total General Fund Revenue 25% 20% $12.7 billion Stock Options Capital Gains $12.4 billion 15% $7.5 billion $8.2 billion $5.5 billion 10% $4.0 billion $2.6 billion 5% 0% 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 Fiscal Year 00-01 01-02 01-02 The Fiscal Crisis Capital gains and stock options bubble Concern about economic slowdown, layoffs, lower tax receipts September 11, 2001 $23.6 billion budget problem for California over two years and $10 billion on-going problem Short-Term vs. Long-Term Cycles: California had financial problems in early 1980s and 1990s Costs to Universities Have Risen Steadily 175% Percent Increase/Decrease 150% 125% Higher Education Price Index 100% 75% 50% 25% 0% 1980-81 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 UC Spending Lagged, Then Caught Up 175% Percent Increase/Decrease 150% 125% Higher Education Price Index 100% 75% State and UC General Funds, and Student Fees Adjusted for Enrollment Growth 50% 25% 0% 1980-81 1985-86 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 2005-06 Short-Term vs. Long-Term Cycles: California had financial problems in early 1980s and 1990s ¾ Better funding when economy improves ¾ Fundamentals of California’s economy are strong; funding should improve again Short-Term vs. Long-Term Cycles: California had financial problems in early 1980s and 1990s ¾ Better funding when economy improves ¾ Fundamentals of California’s economy are strong; funding should improve again Lags: Faculty hiring and new buildings lag behind student increases and then we catch up at enrollment plateau Faculty Salaries Are Falling Below Market Again Faculty Salaries as % of Market 120% 110% 100% 90% With No UC COLA 80% 1988-89 1992-93 1996-97 2000-01 State Funding for UC Staff Salary Increases 10.00 Annual % Change in Funding for Staff Salaries 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 1998-99 -2.00 -4.00 Funding for UC Staff Salaries 2000-01 2002-03 Funding for Staff Salaries is Falling Below Market 10.00 Annual % Change in Funding for Staff Salaries 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 1992-93 1994-95 1996-97 1998-99 2000-01 -2.00 -4.00 Funding for UC Staff Salaries Market - Western Region 2002-03 But, UC Has Less Staff Turnover Than Other Large Employers Annual Employee Turnover Rates 20% 15% Large Organizations in the West 10% 5% University of California 0% 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities Yale and Michigan Have Excellent Libraries 1.60 Com puted ARL Index Value Based upon Library Books, Subscriptions and Staff Yale 1.20 0.80 U. of Michigan 0.40 0.00 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 Budget Cuts Have Eroded Traditional Library Measures 1.60 Computed ARL Index Value Based upon Library Books, Subscriptions and Staff Yale 1.20 U.C. Berkeley 0.80 U. of Michigan 0.40 0.00 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 But, Interlibrary Loans Have Doubled 3,750,000 125,000 3,000,000 Books Lent Between UC Campuses 100,000 Request Service Begins in Jan. '99 75,000 2,250,000 50,000 1,500,000 25,000 750,000 - 0 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 And, More Materials Are Being Shipped Electronically 3,750,000 Books Lent Between UC Campuses 100,000 3,000,000 Request Service Begins in Jan. '99 75,000 2,250,000 50,000 1,500,000 California Digital Library Begins in Jan. 1999 25,000 750,000 0 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 Use of Digital Journals and Archival Finding Aids 125,000 Student Fees Increased Sharply in Early 1990s, But … Student Fees for Resident Undergraduates $5,000 $4,000 Student Fees in Current Dollars $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 Fees in Constant Dollars $1971-72 1976-77 1981-82 1986-87 1991-92 1996-97 2001-02 Financial Aid Offset Impact on Low-Income Families $700 Student Financial Aid Expenditures Excluding Loans ($ in Millions) Private $600 Other UC Funds $500 $400 UC Student Fees & General Funds $300 California Student Aid Commission $200 Federal Finanical Aid $100 $0 1990-91 1995-96 2000-01 Student Loan/Work Has Decreased $16,000 How Financial Aid Recipients Pay for College One-Third Return to Aid Policy $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0 1990-91 1995-96 Loan/Work Parent Contribution 2000-01 Gift Aid Higher Doctoral Student Support Targets $25,000 Net Stipend for Doctoral Students Actual Targets $20,000 Competitors $15,000 $10,000 University of California $5,000 $0 1998-99 2002-03 2006-07 2010-11 Need Larger Fellowships and More $ for Enrollment Growth Total Expenditures for Graduate Student Support ($ in Millions) $400 Actual Targets $350 Fellowship Support $300 $250 RAs $200 $150 TAs $100 $50 $0 1998-99 2002-03 2006-07 2010-11 Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities With Future Bond Measures UC Could Increase Space Capacity 120% Percent of CPEC Standards Actual Projected 100% If G.O. Bond Measures Pass 80% 60% 40% 1993-94 1996-97 1999-00 2002-03 2005-06 2008-09 2011-12 Space Drops to 78% of Standard If Future Bond Measures Fail 120% Percent of CPEC Standards Actual Projected 100% If G.O. Bond Measures Pass 80% If G.O. Bond Measures Fail 60% 40% 1993-94 1996-97 1999-00 2002-03 2005-06 2008-09 2011-12 Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics UC Housing Task Force Task Force charge ¾Review current housing resources and programs; ¾Assess housing needs; ¾Examine the adequacy of current housing programs; ¾Identify resources and programs to provide additional housing for students, faculty, and staff. Membership of the Task Force The Challenge High cost of housing in California Local housing needs in UC communities Needs associated with UC growth plan Campuses Vary in Size and % Currently in Student Housing Fall Headcount Enrollment/ Students Housed 40,000 UC UCAverage Average 26% 26%Housed Housedon onCampus Campus 30,000 20,000 10,000 14% 20% 23% 30% 27% Berkeley Davis Irvine UCLA 24% 35% 20% 42% Santa Barbara Santa Cruz 0 Merced Housed Riverside San Diego Not Housed San Francisco Campuses Have Increased Student Housing Goals for 2011-12 Fall Headcount Enrollment/ Students Housed 40,000 More MoreStudent StudentHousing Housingfor: for: 1.1. Enrollment EnrollmentGrowth Growthand and 2.2. 38% Housed on Campus 38% Housed on Campus 30,000 20,000 10,000 50% 39% 29% 36% 38% 39% 20% 23% 30% 27% Berkeley Davis Irvine UCLA 32% 24% 42% 14% 60% 30% 35% 20% 42% 0 Housed Merced Riverside San Diego Housed (2011-12) San Santa Francisco Barbara Not Housed Santa Cruz Student Housing Plan Systemwide Benchmarks 250,000 Projected Actual 200,000 150,000 100,000 38% 34% 50,000 26% 26% 0 1996-97 2001-02 Beds Goal 2006-07 Students 2011-12 UC Student Housing Plan Student Housing Base 2001-02 16,000 Bedspaces 12,000 8,000 4,000 Berkeley Davis Irvine UCLA Merced 2001 Base Riverside San Diego San Francisco Santa Barbara Santa Cruz UC Student Housing Plan New UC Owned Beds by 2011-12 16,000 Bedspaces 12,000 8,000 4,000 Berkeley Davis Irvine UCLA 2001 Base Merced Riverside New UC Owned San Diego San Francisco Santa Barbara Santa Cruz UC Student Housing Plan New Beds by 3rd Party Developers 16,000 Bedspaces 12,000 8,000 4,000 Berkeley Davis Irvine 2001 Base UCLA Merced New UC Owned Riverside San Diego New 3rd Party San Francisco Santa Barbara Santa Cruz 3rd Party On-Campus and Community Housing Major expansion Complex management, financial and tax issues State incentives for off-campus development Community support for student, faculty and staff housing Uncertainties That Could Affect the Housing Plan Growth Economic environment Financing 3rd party development State and community support Faculty and Staff Housing Programs Faculty housing programs Staff housing programs ¾Nationally recruited ¾Other staff needs Faculty and Staff Housing Recommendations Increase maximum loan thresholds; Increase the maximum allowable loan term to 40 years; Introduce a new graduated payment mortgage program; Increase the size of the mortgage program. Campus Plans for Additional Faculty and Staff Housing Nine campuses are exploring plans for developing additional for-sale and/or rental units resources for faculty and staff. As of June 30, 2002, there are 966 forsale housing units and 711 rental units for faculty and staff. Status Revised mortgage program guidelines have been implemented. New graduated-payment mortgage program has been launched. Mortgage pool has been sold. Summary Housing is a critical resource. Need to monitor progress toward housing goals. Annual housing report to Regents. Today’s Agenda Overview Enrollment plans Faculty recruitment and retention Resources Housing task force report Summary and future topics Take-Home Messages Higher education is more important than ever UC faces a period of exceptional growth Can we maintain quality given California’s fiscal crisis? California is well positioned for economic competitiveness later in the decade But, the state may be slower in rebounding this time So, need to monitor benchmarks continuously Are We on Track? Slow Moving Indicators ¾ Graduation rates for undergraduates ¾ Research funding ¾ Rankings of departments and programs Early Warning Indicators ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ ¾ Undergraduate enrollment Graduate enrollment Faculty hiring Staff salaries Academic support Financial aid Graduate student support Facilities Future Topics Regular review of the benchmarks Focused discussions on key topics ¾ Demographic trends ¾ Enrollment projections ¾ Competitive salaries ¾ Capital program funding ¾ Graduate student support ¾ Technology transfer
