Docstoc

State of Ohio Employee Salaries

Document Sample
State of Ohio Employee Salaries Powered By Docstoc
					      WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY
      CURRENT FUNDS BUDGET
       FISCAL YEAR 2009-2010
     BACKGROUND INFORMATION




                    PREPARED BY
THE OFFICE OF BUDGET PLANNING AND RESOURCE ANALYSIS
                     MAY 28, 2009
               Wright State University
Board of Trustees    Mr. Robert C. Nevin – Chair
                     Mr. Vishal Soin – Vice Chair
                     Mr. J. Thomas Young – Secretary
                     Mr. James F. Cannon
                     Mr. Don R. Graber
                     Ms. Jamie King
                     Mr. Larry R. Klaben
                     Dr. John C. Kunesh
                     Ms. Bonnie G. Langdon
                     Ms. Katie L. Bullinger – Student Trustee
                     Ms. Jessica L. Hoying – Student Trustee


Executive Officers   Dr. David R. Hopkins, President
                     Dr. Steven R. Angle, Provost
                     Dr. Dan Abrahamowicz, Vice President for Student Affairs
                     Dr. John A. Bantle, Vice President for Research
                     Dr. Matthew V. Filipic, Senior Vice President for Business and Fiscal Affairs and
                              Treasurer
                     Mr. Robert E. Hickey, Jr., J. D., Associate Vice President for Public Affairs
                     Dr. Lillie P. Howard, Senior Vice President for Curriculum and Instruction
                     Ms. Gwen M. Mattison, General Counsel
                     Dr. Bryan K. Rowland, Vice President for Advancement
                     Dr. Robert J. Sweeney, Executive Vice President for Planning and Secretary to
                              the Board of Trustees


Prepared by:         The Office of Budget Planning and Resource Analysis
                     Mr. Keith Ralston, Associate Vice President
                                                     WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY
                                                          Current Funds Budget
                                                                        Fiscal Year 2009-2010

                                                                Background Information

                                                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS




Ohio and the Knowledge Economy ........................................................................................................................................ 1
A Record of Stewardship...................................................................................................................................................... 13
The Great Recession ........................................................................................................................................................... 27
Wright State University Response........................................................................................................................................ 46
   Ohio and the
Knowledge Economy
                                                       Confirming the Connection
                                                         Income and Education


                                        120%
                                                                                                     Compared to
          Percent of national average




                                                                                                     the national
                                        110%
                                                                                                     average, per
                                                                       Ohio Per Capita Income        capita income
                                               U.S. Average                                          has paralleled
                                        100%
                                                                                                     the percent of
                                                                                                     population with
                                                                          Associate
                                        90%                               Degree Attainment          a bachelor’s
                                                        Bachelor’s                                   degree.
                                                        Degree Attainment
                                        80%
                                                1940     1950   1960    1970   1980   1990    2000


Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000
                                                                                                                   2
                      Ohio’s Education Deficit: 1990, 2000, 2006




   Grad Degree or More




   Bacc Degree or More
                                                                                                  1990
                                                                                                  2000
                                                                                                  2006
  Assoc Degree or More




            Any College



                          0     50      100      150      200     250      300      350     400
                                                                                     Thousands


Deficit=Number of additional Ohioans needed at a given level of educational attainment to bring
us to the national average in the respective year. (Census Data)


                                                                                                         3
          The U.S. is No Longer the World
         Leader in Educational Attainment
• We were first a generation ago
• Among young adults (25-34) we are now
  seventh
• Our educational attainment is stagnant,
  while it grows rapidly in most other
  developed countries
• We can expect to fall further behind in
  future years if we allow present trends to
  continue

                                               4
      Ohio’s Economy – Relationship
           to Higher Education

• Ohio is falling behind other states and
  must
  – Increase degree attainment
  – Improve workforce development
  – Increase sponsored research
  – Increase technology transfer
  – Create more jobs
  – Produce more tax revenues

                                            5
          Ohio’s Economy – Relationship
               to Higher Education
• Ohioans’ income declining relative to other
  states
• Ohioans’ per capita income has fallen from
  97% (1990) of national average to 90%
  (2007)
• Family background plays an important role
  in economic success
• Education plays a more important role for
  those who are not wealthy
                                                6
                           Raising Educational Attainment in Ohio
                                    State Strategic Plan

    • Create an entrepreneurial environment
      on campus that helps generate new and
      exciting career opportunities for
      graduates
    • Expend effort attracting talent that could
      start new business as the Ohio Dept. of
      Development spends trying to attract
      new business

Source: Condition Report                                        7
                           Raising Educational Attainment in Ohio
                                    State Strategic Plan



     • Attract students and faculty to study and teach
       in world-class academic programs and
       institutes

     • Promote co-op and internship programs that
       link student to Ohio business



Source: Condition Report                                       8
            University System of Ohio

• Strategic plan is committed to substantial
  enrollment growth
• Ten year goal to reach national averages in
  state funding and tuition charges
• Fund “centers of excellence” throughout the
  state
• “Our goal is not a cheap, low quality system,
  but an affordable, high-quality system.”



                                                  9
          University System of Ohio

• Greater emphasis on a state role to
  shape complementary campus
  missions
• More frequent state level, subjective
  funding decisions; less reliance on
  formulas
• New state funding initiatives require
  local match
• Incentivizing private fundraising

                                          10
                        State Funding per FTE 1996-2009


$7,500



$7,000



$6,500



$6,000



$5,500



$5,000
         1996   1997   1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009



                                                                                                           11
               Ohio Support Strong In Past Two Years



                                                          60%



48.5%                                                     50%




                                                                Appropriation Increase
                                                          40%


     29.2%      29.2%                                                                    Oh io
                                                          30%
                                                                                         U.S. Averag e



                    20.7%
                                                          20%

                                  13.2%
                                                   9.3%
                              7.9%                        10%


                                            0.9%
                                                          0%
10-yr Change    5-yr Change   2-yr Change   1-yr Change

                                                                                                         12
A Record of Stewardship
         Keeping Expenses Down So
         Tuition Remains Affordable

• Our tuition is $7,278 – high by historical
  standards, but well below that of our peers
• Pell and OCOG maximum grants fully
  cover our tuition, but fall short for most
  Ohio public universities
• Keeping tuition affordable is an important
  aspect of our mission


                                                14
Ohio Board of Regents
     Fees Survey




                        15
              How Have We Kept
               Expenses Down?
• By keeping auxiliary costs low
• By continually examining processes for
  improved efficiencies
  – Purchasing
  – Custodial reorganizations
• By carefully scrutinizing position vacancies
  before refilling them
• While continuing to create and fill needed
  faculty and staff positions

                                                 16
         We Remain Committed to
          Competitive Salaries
• AAUP reports show that our tenure line
  faculty salaries are consistently above the
  median
• There are no equally simple benchmarks
  for staff compensation, but we believe that
  we have competitive salaries for
  unclassified staff and have addressed
  classified staff pay issues even during this
  challenging time.

                                                 17
        2008-09 AAUP Ohio Salary
                Rankings

• Professors – Ranked 5th of 12

• Associate Professors – Ranked 4th of 12

• Assistant Professors – Ranked 3rd of 12



                                            18
                       Average Salary & State
                             Ranking
      Institution                Professor                    Associate                   Assistant
                             98-99      08-09              98-99     08-09             98-99     08-09
Akron
    Average Salary         $68,937        $92,359       $52,898       $69,542       $44,563       $60,202
    State Ranking             9             9              8            11             5             7
Bow ling Green
    Average Salary         $68,770        $94,317       $53,556       $70,625       $42,793       $56,647
    State Ranking              10           10             7             9             8            11
Cincinnati
    Average Salary         $75,429        $99,680       $56,126       $72,425       $45,790       $60,158
    State Ranking             4             4              3             5             2             6
Cleveland State
    Average Salary         $69,987        $99,303       $55,193       $71,273       $43,341       $59,260
    State Ranking             8             6              6             7             6             9
Kent State
    Average Salary         $70,241        $97,807       $51,977       $71,390       $41,485       $59,319
    State Ranking             6             7             10             6            11             8
Miami
    Average Salary         $75,227      $102,144        $55,598       $74,283       $43,297       $64,624
    State Ranking             5            2               4             3             7             2
Ohio State
    Average Salary         $84,905      $126,447        $58,116       $84,217       $48,726       $74,986
    State Ranking             1            1               1             1             1             1
Ohio University
    Average Salary         $75,743      $100,012        $56,288       $74,612       $45,318       $61,808
    State Ranking             2            3               2             2             4             5
Shawnee State
    Average Salary            $0          $73,195          $0         $59,325          $0         $49,751
    State Ranking             0             12              0           12              0           12
Toledo
    Average Salary         $70,155        $94,318       $51,562       $70,183       $42,166       $61,941
    State Ranking             7             8             11            10            10             4
Wright State
    Average Salary         $75,555        $99,539       $55,511       $73,091       $45,731       $62,610
    State Ranking             3             5              5             4             3             3
Youngstow n State
    Average Salary         $66,592        $88,848       $52,176       $70,667       $42,218       $58,634
    State Ranking            11             11             9             8             9            10

NOTES: (-) A factor of 0.818 was used to convert 12 month salaries and fringes to a 9 month basis. (-)Source - Ohio
University Faculty Salary Survey data 08-09 &Salary Ranking FY98-99                                                   19
                Our Auxiliary Expenses
                      are LOW?
                2008 Auxiliary Operations
                          (thousands of $)
                                                            Net Income
                                           Net Income     (Loss) as a % of
  Institution   Revenue       Expenses        (Loss)         Revenue
Akron           $ 44,926     $    52,586    $   (7,660)               -17%
BGSU            $ 70,764     $    76,569    $   (5,805)                -8%
Central State   $    8,588   $    10,349    $   (1,761)               -21%
Cincinnati      $ 82,415     $    78,163    $    4,252                  5%
Cleveland       $ 15,289 $        23,216    $   (7,927)               -52%
Kent            $ 80,831 $        78,827    $    2,004                  2%
Miami           $ 106,209 $      109,650    $   (3,441)                -3%
Ohio            $ 69,154 $        68,945    $      209                  0%
OSU             $ 192,071 $      220,682    $ (28,611)                -15%
Shawnee State $      5,719 $       4,758    $      961                 17%
Toledo          $ 62,870 $        60,903    $    1,967                  3%
Wright State    $ 15,296 $        26,982    $ (11,686)                -76%
Youngstown      $ 17,942 $        23,908    $   (5,966)               -33%
Source: Ohio Auditor of State




                                                                             20
              Our Auxiliary Expenses
                    are LOW?
• Most state universities allocate their general fee revenue
  to various auxiliary functions and treat those amounts as
  auxiliary revenue. Wright State does not.

• Reports of auxiliary expenses are limited to operating
  expenses. Many universities have borrowed heavily to
  build auxiliary facilities. Debt payments are not included
  in the foregoing table.

• Wright State’s efforts to provide auxiliary functions at
  lower cost are better reflected in the expense column of
  this table than in the net income column.


                                                               21
           Our Auxiliary Expenses
                 are LOW?
• Wright State one of only three of the 12
  reporting universities without football
• Wright State has chosen to provide the
  functionality of a recreation center within
  the Student Union
• Even with a recreation center component,
  our Student Union costs are low
• Our “no frills” approach to auxiliary
  operations has helped make us affordable

                                                22
            Expenditure Trends

• Expenditures per undergraduate were
  $1,505 or 13.1% below the state average in
  2007

• Expenditure trends continue over last 5
  years to be less than sector experience

• FY2002 to FY2007 percent cost change per
  undergrad FTE WSU 20.6%, undergrad state
  average 27.4%

                                               23
                                            Efficiency Initiatives
                                              Fiscal Year 2009

•   Center for High Performance Computing –                 •   Increased tuition revenue through expanded MBA
    partnership with Japanese firm                              expanded program
•   Participation in tabletop exercise in conjunction       •   Restructure Family Medicine dept, create more of
    with State of Ohio preparing for emergency                  an emphasis on clinical productivity
    response                                                •   Restructured staff positions to work multiple
•   Collaborative Master’s Program – Renewable and              departments
    Clean Energy                                            •   Accelerate research growth and achievement with
•   Restructure presidents lecture series                       NIH funding and other grants/contracts
•   Reduction of print/mailing expense                      •   Reassigned staff to expand utilization of online
•   New long term disability provider                           resources
•   Redistribution of desktop computers                     •   Utilize email lists and website postings instead of
•   Consolidation of university’s computer servers              mail
•   Ohio CORE/PK-12 dual enrollment program                 •   Center for Multifunctional Nanomaterial's to
                                                                promote collaboration and additional research
•   Automated electronic vendor disbursements               •   Grants charged with salary & benefits for
•   New air filter program                                      prelicensure program to increase the number of
•   Lighting retrofits to reduce energy consumption             RNs
    with more efficient lighting                            •   STEP grant increased articulation with Sinclair &
•   Recycling grant from State of Ohio                          retention at WSU in STEM fields
•   New copier program eliminating inventory of             •   International student recruitment contract and Public
    owned and maintained copiers                                relations
•   Improved floor finish – longer lasting “green” finish   •   Library Acquisition's reducing expenses on
                                                                binding, book purchases and new requests
•   Savings due to continued restructure of
    departments

                                                                                                                        24
                              Efficiency Initiatives-Summary
                                           Fiscal Year 2008-09 As of January 23, 2009

                                                                                Calculated Value
                                                                Collaborative      Individual
                          Division/ Unit                         Efficiencies     Efficiencies         Total


Office of the President                                                         $      124,970     $     124,970
Office of the Provost                                                           $      623,422     $     623,422
Division of Curriculum and Instruction                          $      17,580   $      353,295     $     370,875
Division of Business and Fiscal Affairs                         $   1,460,170   $     1,374,440    $    2,834,610
Division of Student Affairs                                                     $      136,673     $     136,673
Division of Grad. Studies/ Research and Sponsored Programs      $      80,000   $        60,000    $     140,000
Raj Soin College of Business                                                    $      689,000     $     689,000
College of Education and Human Services                                         $      896,000     $     896,000
College of Engineering and Computer Science                     $     397,589   $        42,500    $     440,089
College of Liberal Arts                                                         $      493,900     $     493,900
College of Nursing and Health                                   $     544,135                      $     544,135
College of Science and Mathematics                              $     375,632   $      219,770     $     595,402
Boonshoft School of Medicine                                                    $      430,000     $     430,000
School of Professional Psychology                                               $      114,698     $     114,698
University College                                                              $      124,627     $     124,627
Lake Campus                                                                     $     4,060,000    $    4,060,000
University Libraries                                                            $      471,025     $     471,025

                                    Fiscal Year 2008-09 Total   $   2,875,106   $    10,214,320    $   13,089,426
Fiscal Year 2007-08 Excess Efficiencies Balance                                 $     6,346,061    $    6,346,061
                                                 Grand Total    $   2,875,106   $    16,560,381    $   19,435,487
Required Efficiencies for Fiscal Year 2008-09                                                      $    3,705,256
Fiscal Year 2008-09 Excess Efficiencies Balance                                                    $   15,730,231




                                                                                                                    25
          Our Past Stewardship Positions
          Us Well for Today’s Challenges
• As incomes fall and wealth contracts,
  families will look for value in higher
  education
• Wright State offers a solid, high quality,
  affordable educational experience
• If enrollment growth is sustained as a
  result, we will become even stronger


                                               26
The Great Recession
            Economic Downturn

• University budgets are being pressed from all
  sides.
• Just as economic downturns are squeezing state
  revenues for education, a financial meltdown
  has reduced the value of universities’
  endowments & investment pools.
• Household financial losses are forcing many
  families and students to re-evaluate college
  plans and select less expensive options in
  higher education.
                                                   28
               Case Schiller Home Price Indices:
                           2005-2009

240



220



200



180
                                               10 City
                                               Index

160                                            20 City
                                               Index


140     Both indices
      down about 31%
         from their
120
       Summer 2006
           peaks.
100



                                                   29
       S&P 500 Index

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

  0


                       30
Car and Light Truck Sales:
 U.S., Jan 2000 - Mar 2009




                             31
                                Real GDP by Quarter
6



4



2



0
     I 2005 II 2005 III 2005    IV    I 2006 II 2006 III 2006    IV    I 2007 II 2007 III 2007    IV    I 2008 II 2008 III 2008    IV    I 2009
                               2005                             2006                             2007                             2008


-2



-4



-6
       Source: BEA
       5/1/2009


-8

                                                                                                                                                  32
               0%
                         2%
                              3%
                                   4%
                                             6%




                    1%
                                        5%
     Jan-00
     Apr-00
      Jul-00
     Oct-00
     Jan-01
     Apr-01
      Jul-01
     Oct-01
     Jan-02
     Apr-02
      Jul-02
     Oct-02
     Jan-03
     Apr-03
      Jul-03
     Oct-03
     Jan-04
     Apr-04
      Jul-04
     Oct-04
     Jan-05
     Apr-05
      Jul-05
     Oct-05
     Jan-06
     Apr-06
      Jul-06
                                                      Change, 2000-2009




     Oct-06
     Jan-07
     Apr-07
                                                    Not Seasonally Adjusted




      Jul-07
     Oct-07
                                                  Consumer Price Index, Annual




     Jan-08
     Apr-08
      Jul-08
     Oct-08
33




     Jan-09
                                 State Personal Income Tax
                                        Collections
                                       Annual Change

20%


15%


10%


 5%


 0%
       1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
                                                                                                      YTD
-5%

                                                                                                    -15.3%
-10%


-15%


-20%




                                                                                                             34
             Ohio’s Challenge
• State revenues collapsing due to Great
  Recession
• Federal stimulus funds and Rainy Day
  fund made Governor’s budget workable
• Now that budget needs to be reduced by
  $3 billion
• Challenge continues in 2012-2013
  biennium when federal stimulus funds are
  gone
                                             35
                              Total State-Only General Revenue Fund
                                           Appropriations
                                    FY2009 Total $21,055 million
                                                            Executive, Legislative
                        Environment and                    and Judicial Branches,
                       Natural Resources,                       $328.5, 1.6%
                         $138.9 , 0.7%
                                                                           General Government/
                                                                               Tax Relief,
                                                                              $1,671, 7.9%




    Primary and
Secondary Education,
  $7,599.1, 36.1%
                                                                               Health and
                                                                            Human Services,
                                                                              $6,310, 30%

              Higher and
           Other Education,
                                      Transportation and           Justice and
           $2,688.9 , 12.8%
                                         Development,           Public Protection,
                                         $392.1, 1.9%            $1,924.7, 9.1%




                                                                                                 36
                   State Response
Ohio Civil Service Employee Association
   Members agreed on:
    Taking 10 “cost saving days” off without pay per year for 2
     years
    No pay raises for 3 years
    Employees will lose 10 paid holidays per year
The Service Employees International Union agreed to a
new contract that includes $14.9 million in concessions
   The new contract includes:
    10 unpaid days off
    Wage Freeze
    Give-back 32 hours of personal leave

                                                                   37
                            Ohio Universities’
                            Budget Reductions
Ohio University to eliminate $15 million from the budget
   89 people laid off
   5.1% cut to support units
   Academic units averaged a 3.2% reduction

Miami University projecting a $22 million shortfall for 2010, will
cut $16 million from its operating budget
   Lay off 73 employees at Oxford and Middletown campuses
   Eliminate 216 positions
   Implement a hiring freeze
   Implement a retirement incentive option
   Provide outplacement assistance and extended tuition waivers.
   Halt all capital building projects
University of Toledo to eliminate $16 million from the budget
   100 people laid off
   Operating budgets cut



                                                                     38
               University Budget Reductions
                      Outside of Ohio

A few examples:

• Arizona State University is facing a $126 million dollar cut
  in state aid in FY2009 and $194 million in 2010.
• University of Alabama slashed $75 to $80 million. 300
  jobs to be cut.
• Clemson University cutting approximately $26M
  permanent budget in FY09. Announced a hiring freeze
  and 20% reduction in operating budgets.
• University of Connecticut AAUP agreed to reductions in
  junior faculty pay to fund senior faculty retirements.
• State of California now considering elimination of its
  entire need based grants program.
                                                                 39
                            Total State Support for Higher Ed


2,900,000,000


2,700,000,000


2,500,000,000


2,300,000,000
                                                                     Total General Fund Support
                                                                     Excludes Debt Service
2,100,000,000


1,900,000,000


1,700,000,000
                Executive
                Budget
1,500,000,000
                FY 2007      FY 2008   FY 2009   FY 2010   FY 2011




                                                                                                  40
                                    Core Formula Funding (SSI)


           2,200
Millions




           2,000


           1,800


           1,600                                                           Core Formula Support
                                                                           With Stimulus Funding


           1,400


           1,200     Executive Budget




           1,000
                   FY 2007         FY 2008   FY 2009   FY 2010   FY 2011




                                                                                                   41
                        Statewide Enrollment Change
                                 Over Time
                               University Main & Branch Campuses Only


255,000                                                                                                   6%

250,000
                                                                                                          5%
245,000
                                                                                                          4%
240,000
                                                                                                          3%
235,000

230,000                                                                                                   2%

225,000
                                                                                                          1%
220,000
                                                                                                          0%
215,000
                                                                                                          -1%
210,000

205,000                                                                                                   -2%
          2000   2001   2002        2003         2004   2005        2006       2007    2008      2009**
                         UM-UB State Eligible FTE's     % UM-UB State Growth      % WSU Growth
                                                                                                                42
            Highlights of Executive
              Budget for 2009-11
• Gratifying levels of support, given the
  economic situation
• Focus on core formula funding, at the
  expense of other higher education
  priorities:
  – CUPA
  – Computer science
  – DAGSI
  – Research support

                                            43
            Highlights of Executive
              Budget for 2009-11
• What might have been a short term crisis
  has been changed to a long term
  challenge as a result of Federal Stimulus
  funding
• Plunge in State Revenues through April
  will force major revisions in proposed
  spending



                                              44
             Highlights of Executive
               Budget for 2009-11
• Allocates a greater share of need-based
  aid to students attending public
  universities
• Holds undergraduate tuition flat for a third
  consecutive year
• Reliance on one time revenues (Federal
  stimulus, Rainy Day fund) raises issues
  about sustainability in 2011-13

                                                 45
Wright State University
      Response
           Strategic Plan – adopted by Board
                             of Trustees 6/13/08
• Goal 1: Academic Distinctiveness and Quality
   – Enhance our distinctive learning experience
   – Produce talented graduates with knowledge & skills essential for critical
     thinking, meaningful civic engagement, international competency,
     appreciation for the arts, life-long learning
   – Lead and adapt in rapidly changing world
• Goal 2: Educational Attainment
   – Enhance student access
   – Enhance student success
• Goal 3: Research and Innovation
   – Expand scholarship in innovative and targeted ways
• Goal 4: Community Transformation
   – Provide leadership to promote social, cultural and economic
     development
• Goal 5: Valued Resources
   – Develop and sustain the human, financial and physical resources
     required to accomplish the university’s strategic goals

                                                                             47
            Accomplishing the Plan in a
             Challenging Environment
• Our budget will require
  – A continued appreciation for the contributions
    of our faculty and staff
  – General belt tightening by all units
  – Targeted reductions in areas that can be
    reduced consistent with accomplishing the
    strategic plan
  – Continued new investments, but at a smaller
    scale than recently, to preserve our
    momentum

                                                     48
                  Ohio Universities’
        Administrators Forego Salary Increase



• Wright State’s President , President’s
  Cabinet and Council of Deans led the way,
  announcing that seventeen top
  administrators would forego increases to
  help fund student aid.




                                                49
                  Ohio Universities’
        Administrators Forego Salary Increase


• Youngstown State’s president and 8 top
  officials

• Ohio State’s president and 18 top officials

• Sinclair’s president and 8 top
  administrators



                                                50
         Wright State Addresses the
               Needs of Ohio


• Preparation – Learning Communities
• Affordability – Maintained low tuition
• Financial condition and productivity –
  Efficiency Requirement met; continuous
  improvements and efficiencies that have
  been identified for the past 4 years
• Workforce development, research and
  technology transfer

                                            51
        WSU Budget Development
• Wright State has an ongoing record of cost
  management that allows us to keep tuition
  down while keeping salaries at or above
  state benchmarks.
• Budget for 2009-10 will continue this
  tradition by emphasizing targeted
  reductions to permit greater focus on our
  core missions.
• Management of attrition will be a key
  strategy for achieving budget targets.
                                               52
          WSU Budget Development
• A one-time Separation Incentive is designed to
  create more position openings for us to manage.
• Contractually required faculty pay raises will
  require a shift to temporary faculty positions for
  the remainder of this contract.
• Our goal will be to restore these positions as the
  principal objective of the next contract.
• We expect some reduction in staff positions in
  certain areas, but understand the need to
  accomplish essential functions

                                                       53
         WSU Budget Development
• Estimates of investment income have
  been reduced substantially, reflecting the
  shrinkage of our investment pool.
• Enrollments are very uncertain. We are
  assuming flat enrollments, based on our
  applications and the underlying
  demographics.
• Residential enrollments may decline.


                                               53
         WSU Budget Development
• Our allocation for Strategic Investments is
  reduced.

• Most of our capital line is dedicated to
  creating new classrooms in the Medical
  Science Building in time for Fall.




                                                54
            WSU Budget Development
• In future budgets, we will need to restore our pool of
  funds for strategic investments, and operating margins.
• Our budget is surrounded by more uncertainty than
  usual:
   – Ongoing state budget deliberations may result in major changes
   – State revenue projections tied to an uncertain economy. Worst
     case projections from late last year are proving to be too
     optimistic
   – How will enrollments respond to changes in family finances?

• We are asking the Board of Trustees to approve a
  temporary spending resolution until the state budget is
  clarified.


                                                                      55
                   Reasons for Hope
• Ohio is going through some especially difficult times.
  We cannot expect to be insulated from them.
• But there are reasons to be optimistic about our
  future:
   – We meet an essential need, one that is recognized now both
     by state government and by the people at large
   – Our past financial conservatism is helping us get through this
     period of challenges
   – We offer a solid education at an affordable price, making us
     an especially attractive option in today’s world
   – If we can sustain our recent enrollment growth, our
     challenges will be eased substantially



                                                                  56

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: State of Ohio Employee Salaries document sample