By FITSNews || At a time when the University of South Carolina is crying poor, it’s largest college is running a $23 million surplus, sources close to the University tell FITS.
The College of Arts and Sciences, which includes roughly a third of the USC’s total student population, is one of several schools reportedly running significant “carry forward balances” at the supposedly cash-strapped institution.
In December, FITS ran an exclusive report exposing the turmoil at the College of Arts and Sciences. Based on confidentially-obtained excerpts from a faculty review, our story highlighted allegations of mismanagement and incompetence on the part of the college’s dean, Mary Ann Fitzpatrick. At the time, we submitted a FOIA request to the University seeking access to the faculty report – a taxpayer-funded document – but nearly two months later we have not received a response.
Well, other than being told that USC has a new FOIA policy.
Today, we are sending another FOIA requesting detailed information on the school’s budget.
Obviously, with lawmakers facing one of the worst revenue environments on record, scrutiny of spending across state government is at an all-time high.
In keeping with that theme, though, it bears noting that USC has seen its total budget soar by more than $300 million over the last six fiscal years – and that’s not counting the massive tuition hikes it has imposed on parents.
In fact, this year the school is running a $1 billion budget for the first time in its history – with tuition up 17% over the past three years.
Needless to say, this substantial increase in funding goes completely unreported by the state’s sycophantic mainstream media, which continues to perpetuate the fiction that the University is struggling financially.
Yet while administrators are living high on the hog on these surpluses – and pursuing costly, non-academic projects – the rank-and-file professors who are actually performing the school’s core mission are getting the shaft.
That’s causing a near revolt on campus – as well as slippage in the national rankings.
USC isn’t alone in having a frustrated faculty, though. The anger rippling below the surface at the school’s largest college mirrors a trend of faculty outrage seen at South Carolina’s other major (and under-performing) research university, Clemson.
By Roy February 3, 2010 at 10:08 am
Keep preaching it.
This is a story that somehow flies under the radar.
By Jay-Pee February 3, 2010 at 12:17 pm
I wonder:
a $23 million carry-forward in times like this
and
a 5-year Dean review being burried by the provost (Amiridis has the review since after Thanksgiving 2009!)
You think there is some connection?
One thing is for sure: If you are a Dean at USC don’t worry about what your faculty thinks about your job performance, just make sure the provost and president believe “You are too big to fail”…heard that before?
By CNSYD February 3, 2010 at 1:29 pm
I would be the last one to say you may be a little unfair to USC east but since you also throw Clemson under the bus I must comment. You say the USC budget has gone up $300M in the last 6 FYs. So do you think a 6 year old dollar and a current one are equal? Not so. I would estimate that at least one third of that $300M is due to inflation or which USC or you have zero control. Now once again you roll your favorite grenade across the table that Clemson is underperforming. Yet, per usual, you provide NO details or data to support your claim. So please provide it. You feel you must hit USC with a FOIA request for data yet you act just like them by making unsupported statements.
By fitsnews February 3, 2010 at 1:39 pm
CNSYD-
So if one third of that growth is due to inflation then whoop dee do and la dee fucking da – they still grew government out the ass during the WORST ECONOMY IN EIGHT DECADES.
Empirical evidence regarding Clemson? They’ve come to a screeching standstill according to the one national ranking that they spent every ounce of energy they had trying to manipulate.
Watch them drop like a rock now that the gig is up.
Seriously, dude LTBOSB.
-FITS
By CNSYD February 3, 2010 at 4:32 pm
FITS apparently you have fallen into the “give away” when you lack data to support your position. The use of profanity. I was not aware that the “mission” of Clemson was to advance in ONE national ranking. Your intent by your article was to imply that their research and teaching efforts had failed, not rankings. I was merely calling your lack of data, which is normal for you, into question. Tell me which research grants have “failed” and what criteria you used to determine it. IRT USC are there now more or less students than there were 6 years ago?
By fitsnews February 3, 2010 at 4:53 pm
http://www.fitsnews.com/2009/06/03/clemsons-fatal-attraction/
educate yourself, fool.
By Rebel February 3, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Back to the topic, they have increased enrollments, but they are not building more classroom space. They have cut custodial services to the bone, and the buildings are nasty and depressing. Even worse, some of the buildings need critical maintenance and renovation–but the policy is to defer maintenance projects. And I’m told by the students that because the circus is in town (!), they’ve taken away their paid parking lot. The core mission is the educate the students. Yet they tout everything but academics: ‘initiatives’ (service learning, civility programs, gardening projects, etc). How do you attract top students and keep the best in-state students with these conditions? Meanwhile colleges within the university are run like fiefdoms, with no oversight and no recourse for faculty to have their voice heard. The students and faculty seem an afterthought. Who dares complain? It might ruin chances for tenure and promotion. There’s money, but they’re blowing it on crap. No one needs to cite every research grant awarded and whether or not it failed, whatever that means. They’ve pissed away a hundred million already and still want more. There will be a push back from faculty and from taxpayers.
By CNSYD February 3, 2010 at 6:55 pm
So I have read your drivel…again. You have continually missed the point. You want to obfuscate by playing your one note sing song over and over. YOU imply that Clemson had failed in its mission as a research institution. I merely asked you to prove it. If this is all you got, then you have nothing worth discussing.
By CNSYD February 3, 2010 at 7:57 pm
Rebel, many years ago I heard Sol Blatt proposed that USC move out of downtown. He saw it as a cost savings long term. USC refused. Sol told them this was their one and only chance and not to come whining to him later.
By Pete February 3, 2010 at 9:27 pm
At the end of the day it comes down to the board of
trustees and their focus has never been
academics or teaching.
Every state gets the universities it deserves
and as long as athletics trumps everything else
you will not have change and the president is
nothing but the cheerleader in command.
This guy can’t start any meeting or presentation
anywhere without regurgitating the last score.
And thAt’s strategic leadership?
The Greek mafia and the bot are the biggest
hurdle to progress.
Fitzpatrick is just another mediocre administrator
with a judge Judy complex stealing money from
faculty by hoarding overhead.
Until faculty grab their pitchforks and clean
out Osborne these educrats will continue to
gather at the trough
By Richard February 8, 2010 at 6:32 am
Unless I’m completely mistaken, USC now receives just 16% of its funds from the State. If that’s indeed the case then USC has no other recourse but to rely of tuition and research dollars. Many colleges within the University have their own endowments and other gifts that have been designated for specific purposes. Out of this $23 million “surplus” what is the break down? Is this “surplus” including research grants (obviously the many science programs are going to attract large amounts of grants) and their own endowment? As far as costly non academic projects, one of USC’s mandates is to attract research to this state and help foster high tech industry. USC’s small business incubator has helped create a number of small businesses (and small businesses create 70% of all new jobs).
By CNSYD February 8, 2010 at 10:21 am
Richard, how dare you inject thought and logic into the discussion!