UNIVERSITY BUDGET COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF JULY 29, 2010 MEETING
I.
II.
Time, Location and Attendance:
•
10:00AM, Provost’s Conference Room at Administrative Center
•
UBC members present: Gail Hackett (Chair), Curt Crespino, Betty Drees,
Laura Gayle Green, Tony Luppino, Lanny Solomon, Mel Tyler and Karen
Vorst. Absent: Lawrence Dreyfus (SBS Retreat) and Gary Ebersole (out of
the country).
•
Others present: Chancellor Leo Morton, Dean Marsha Pyle (for first
substantive part of meeting), Rick Anderson, Margaret Brommelsiek, John
Morrissey and Karen Wilkerson.
Preliminary Administrative Matters:
•
III.
The minutes of the May 14, 2010 meeting of the Committee were approved,
in the form last circulated, but with the understanding that language
regarding the recommended composition of the 2020 Task Force be revised
to the extent necessary to reflect the Committee’s adoption of Vice
Chancellor Tyler’s suggestion that such Task Force include student
representation.
Flat Fee Professional School Students & Additional Degrees/Courses
•
The Committee discussed the issues described in UBC Secretary Tony
Luppino’s July 20 memorandum to UBC Chair/Provost Hackett regarding
tuition in certain multiple degree and cross-unit instruction situations, in
large part related to questions recently raised by Dean Pyle, who attended
and participated in this discussion.
•
After discussion of such issues, the Committee recommended the following,
with agreement from the Chancellor and Provost:
--Absent a formally-approved joint degree program or formally approved
scholarship or waiver, a student paying flat fee tuition in a degree-seeking
program at a UMKC professional school does not thereby have the right to,
without paying additional tuition to UMKC at the otherwise appropriate rate,
take courses for a degree offered by another UMKC academic unit.
1
--Deans are free to propose joint-degree programs that may involve courses
that count toward multiple degrees and/or tuition discounts to assist students
in earning such degrees in a financially efficient manner, but no such
programs shall be implemented unless approved by the Provost and
Chancellor and, if necessary, the Curators.
-- If a Dean of a flat fee professional school wishes to allow students to take
a limited number of courses outside the home unit not required for the
professional degree without paying additional tuition, the Dean and home
unit should develop a written policy for students in this regard. It is intended
in this connection that the home unit should approve only courses associated
with requirements of the home unit degree and perhaps a limited number of
other courses, but that in all cases, absent special agreement made by the
Deans of the home unit and the instructional unit and approved by the
Provost (hereinafter, a “Special Tuition Sharing Agreement”), the
instructional unit will be attributed (out of the tuition otherwise due the
home unit) the instructional unit share of tuition attributable to the
instruction per Appendix 2 of the Budget Model.
--In making proposals or decisions regarding cross-unit instruction, the
Deans of all UMKC academic units should be mindful of the opportunity
under applicable language of Appendix 2 of the Budget Model to negotiate
and seek the Provost’s approval of Special Tuition Sharing Agreements
which would override the general rule on the instructional unit share.
--The Deans of the flat fee professional schools should take steps to provide
clear written guidance to students and staff consistent with the forgoing. All
related policies or guidelines established with respect to such tuition matters
by the academic units and, where necessary, approved by the Provost,
Chancellor and/or Curators, should be communicated by the Provost’s
Office and Student Affairs to the Admissions, Cashiers, Financial Aid, and
Records & Registration offices so that they are all working with accurate,
complete and consistent information regarding such policies and guidelines.
IV.
Updates on System and UMKC Strategic Planning Matters:
System/State Planning Assumptions
•
Chancellor Morton reported that there have been of late no specific new
developments of significance at the State/System level in terms of budgeting
guidelines/parameters, except that all campuses are being encouraged to
explore ways to increase salaries by 2% in view of the widely-recognized
below-market level of salaries within the System generally. He and the
Provost explained that planning assumptions at the General Officers’ level
continue to include the likelihood of a significant cut in the State
2
Appropriation for FYE 2012. The Chancellor noted that the State is exploring
a variety of options to address the poor revenue projections for FYE 2012, and
the System may be asked to try to avoid increases in tuition rates.
•
The Chancellor emphasized that the ongoing work UMKC has been doing to
manage costs, promote efficiencies and generate more revenues will be
critical to working through the challenges of the State revenue picture for FYE
2012. He also told the Committee that each campus is being asked to submit a
cuts impact report on 5%, 10% and 15% alternative hypothetical cuts in the
State Appropriation in October, preceded by a preliminary report to be
delivered at the early September General Officers’ meeting. Accordingly, it
was agreed that the Committee will meet with the Chancellor in mid-to-late
August to work through an exercise similar to that done in December of 2008.
•
On the issue of expanded sources of revenue the Chancellor noted the great
potential he is seeing for increases in international programs, particularly
programs with China (from which he recently returned from a successful trip
with Dean Tan).
UMKC Strategic Planning
V.
•
The Provost noted that we are seeing data indicating significant enrollment
increases at UMKC, and stressed the importance of continuing to vigorously
pursue the initiatives to increase enrollment and retention.
•
The Provost also reported that the 2020 Task Force is substantially
organized and will begin its work shortly. In addition, she circulated the
latest draft of a useful list of UMKC working groups, task forces,
committees, advisory councils, and panels of significance in strategic
planning, and listed by reference to applicable strategic planning goals. She
indicated that the list is substantially complete, though it is possible that
other groups supporting UMKC strategic planning will be identified and
added on an ongoing basis.
•
In addition, the Provost noted that there seemed to be strong support for
UMKC exploring a Public Health Program, and indicated that she intended
to include in UMKC strategic planning collaborative discussion of the
development of such a program among her office and multiple UMKC
academic units.
Shared Services Initiative
•
Vice Chancellor Anderson circulated two documents regarding the Systemoriginated Shared Services Initiative, designed to provide pertinent
definitions, summarize objectives, and outline a system of processes to
implement the initiative.
3
•
VI.
VII.
The materials and related comments made by Vice Chancellor Anderson
indicated that the initial data collection phase of the initiative has been
completed, and the each campus is engaged in internal and external data
validation during August, with preliminary reports to be made in late August
and a final data report to be produced in late August. The Committee agreed
that the Support Costs Review Committee should meet with Vice Chancellor
Anderson shortly after the projected August 20 release of a preliminary
report so it can work with him on observations and suggestions to be made
to the Committee to assist with any recommendations it may make to the
Chancellor regarding the Shared Services Initiative.
FAC Drafts of Major Project Discussion Proposal Reports
•
The Committee the discussed drafts of Major Project Discussion Proposal
Reports prepared by the Facilities Advisory Committee (“FAC”). Vice
Chancellor Anderson and UBC Secretary Luppino explained that the FAC
was asking if the drafts looked suitable for transmittal to the Faculty Senate,
Deans’ Council and other intended constituencies for discussion.
•
It was noted that during FAC discussions questions had arisen as to whether
the drafts contained enough financial and other detail. After some discussion
the consensus of the Committee was that the drafts seemed to have sufficient
detail for circulation to the intended constituencies, with the understanding
that such constituencies will likely have follow-up questions which will shape
what further information/detail will be in order to allow them to provide
meaningful input on whether and how any proposed project should go
forward. Accordingly, the Committee felt it was acceptable for drafts along
the lines of the samples provided to it to be prepared and circulated for each
pending major (i.e., over $500,000) capital project.
Possible Agenda Items for Future Meetings
The meeting was then opened to discussion of possible items for the agenda of
of future Committee meetings. Possibilities identified by various Committee
members included:
•
Seeking to identify, apart from our State Appropriation, what State-supported
programs affecting UMKC might be in line for reduction or elimination in
FYE 2012 planning, and what challenges to UMKC might ensue from such
reductions or eliminations.
•
Exploring “Recovery F & A” policies—in terms of both growing the volume
of research grants and corresponding revenue and in determining how
4
Recovery F & A should be apportioned and utilized—but to be put on the
UBC agenda after its receipt of a related report from the Provost’s Office.
•
Space planning for non-academic units.
•
Better marketing of UMKC’s efforts to keep tuition affordable.
•
Exploration of more use of targeted student fees.
VIII. Administrative Matters Going Forward
•
In addition to its joint meeting with the FAC on August 19, the Committee
will participate in a late August meeting with the Chancellor to work on the
above-described cuts impact analysis, preferably in the data/focus room.
5