Lately, there has been much talk about money and the budget. The University leadership is trying to make the budgeting process transparent, and share responsibility of planning the budget with deans and directors. Basically, we won’t have much money coming in from the State, whether Republicans or Democrats are in power. We’d need to use whatever we have more efficiently, and generate more funds for ourselves. Although the University’s leadership is committed to a modest salary increase, there rest of the picture is quite bleak.
What kind of financial arrangement would allow the university to generate more funds? AT the moment, the thought at the top seems to be this: let’s collect whatever small carry-overs units might have, and invest them in university priorities. By collecting these small pockets of money into larger pools, we might build up enough momentum to actually do some good, innovative things. Besides, the university must have reserves for emergencies, unexpected expenditures, etc. Good logic, reasonable intentions, but I am afraid, it is all wrong.
The units are very unlikely to allow any carry-overs to accumulate, if they are going to be confiscated, or if there is even a risk of being confiscated. Why would we? Our school’s needs are enormous; we can spend every penny and more within a couple of weeks, and none of it would be frivolous. I am sure our Dean feels the same way about the College’s budget.
What needs to happen is this: The Provost should declare a competition of revenue-generating initiatives; business plans, really. Some body of knowledgeable people will decide which ones are likely to succeed and support the authors with specific commitments and maybe small start-up capital.
For example. Our Dean and I made a following deal just recently: We agreed to start a new Postbac cohort in Loveland. In exchange, he promised a new administrative position for us to support this and other off-campus activities we will have; plus we expect revenue-sharing practices to continue, so the School gets modest allocations. My point is this:
We could probably generate several more of projects like this – some more risky than others. We are not begging for money; we will bring money to the university. All we need is a clarity and stability of arrangements, an understanding that from profits we help generate, resources will be allocated to support these activities.
I always hear “we don’t have money to hire people, no resources for anything”. I am sorry, I don’t buy it. How is it possible that we do not have money to make more money? This is theoretically impossible. If there is a demand for our services (and we all know, there is), resources should not be a problem. We can easily grow our existing programs on campus, and offer many more off-campus. The problem is not the lack of resources, but a lack of connection between generating income and distribution of that income. There should be a simple feed-back loop: if you’re bringing money to the University, you will be allowed to use part of this money to support your faculty and reinvest it in more resources. That's all, no new money, no new taxes. just fiscal environment that is stable, clear, and allows for significant incentives.
No comments:
Post a Comment