By FITSNews || A day after University of South Carolina president Harris Pastides blasted out a weepy letter bemoaning state budget cuts, USC officials acknowledged that the largest college on the school’s $1 billion campus is running a $22 million surplus.
The information was obtained from the school via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
“Our margins for absorbing further cuts are thin, and there won’t be any easy cuts this year,” Pastides wrote this week. “Colleges, schools and campuses throughout our system have already made substantial reductions.”
Yet the College of Arts and Sciences – which has a $116 million annual budget – is $22 million in the black, part of a gradual increase in total University funding that goes chronically unreported by the state’s mainstream media.
In December, FITS ran an exclusive report exposing the turmoil at the College of Arts and Sciences – which is home to 500 professors and over 8,000 students (roughly a third of USC’s total student population). 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.
Stay tuned for a follow-up story on 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 percent over the past three years.
Again, though, 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.
To its credit, USC’s media relations office provided FITS with the College of Arts and Sciences budget spreadsheets promptly and without charging us for the information, so props to school spokeswoman Margaret Lamb and her outfit for that.
WEB EXTRA
USC College of Arts and Sciences Budget
USC College of Arts and Sciences Carry-forward
By Bobby March 4, 2010 at 1:30 pm
So, just for clarification, USC is sitting on a surplus and hiking tuition? That is criminal.
By Kyle March 4, 2010 at 2:49 pm
Do you really believe that South Carolina colleges and universities are sitting on stockpiles on cash or slush funds? If so, you are truly an idiot and completely misguided with inaccurate information. Provide facts in your reporting and quite inciting the ill informed public. The percentage of state funds going to public universities has been cut drastically during the past 25 years. If the school IS in fact, running in the black, then it is because of layoffs, fewer classes and belt-tightening from university employees. This should be commended and not a rallying cry that the universities in the state are flush with money.
By Boo freaking hoo March 4, 2010 at 3:01 pm
March 2, 2010
Dear Carolina Faculty and Staff,
Across the campus these first days of March, trees are starting to bud and flower. Yet just two weeks ago we were under an eight-inch blanket of snow. We all know the ebb and flow of seasons, and we are in a prolonged season of economic distress. The state budget process that provides funding for the University of South Carolina is not complete, but I write to tell you what cuts we expect in the coming year and what impact those cuts could have.
We face a new 21-percent cut in state funding, in addition to the 32-percent cut we have experienced since July 2008. Therefore, by July of 2010 our cumulative cut would be 46 percent ($103 million) for the University system, and state funding would make up approximately 12.5% of our total budget. I understand the extreme difficulty that the South Carolina legislature faces in crafting a budget while in a still-severe recession, but we must also realize the long-term impact of cutting education so drastically.
Because we have the second year of the federal “stimulus” allocation that all public universities in the United States received, it might appear, as The State newspaper’s reporting suggested last week, that our university has been “mostly left untouched.” Clearly, this is not the case as these one-time funds were to have been allocated to one-time needs such as badly needed repairs to academic buildings; now they will likely be diverted to even more fundamental priorities such as retaining personnel who provide essential academic and student support services.
Quite frankly, our margins for absorbing further cuts are thin, and there won’t be any easy cuts this year. Colleges, schools and campuses throughout our system have already made substantial reductions. The provost, chancellors and deans are scrutinizing their budgets and assessing their resources. We will also examine the impact on our budget, but especially on the quality of the education we provide, of increasing our enrollments. With the Board of Trustees, the faculty and other University constituencies we will have much to discuss and decide. As we work through these challenges, I will keep you informed through these e-blasts and other regular communications. But I want to hear from you, too. We need your continuing engagement and support.
When this prolonged season of economic hardship ebbs, I assure you that I expect the outstanding education we provide to students from our state and from around the nation and the world, as well as our most stellar programs, to be in full bloom. I can’t tell you exactly how long that will take, but I know you will agree we can’t afford to have them wither.
In the meantime, I will keep looking for the encouraging hues of spring on the Horseshoe and on each one of our campuses, and I will keep you informed of our progress in the days and weeks ahead.
Harris Pastides
By Jeffy01 March 4, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Just win some freaking football games after october!
By caintstandit March 4, 2010 at 4:49 pm
“Layoffs, fewer classes, and belt-tightening from university employees”. Makes good sense to me. Sounds a little bit like the real world.
By Peter March 4, 2010 at 5:51 pm
What an embarassment to USC, even documented in their own spreedsheets!
By Genomic Repairman March 4, 2010 at 6:38 pm
They should make money, any scientist with a federal grant gets charged (not them but the funding agency) a 44% overhead that goes to facilities and support. This money does not really go to the lab but ends up in the grants administration and physical plant budgets. That’s why institutions will tolerate shitty teachers as long as they are bringing in the casholla. Some of it goes back to support fellowships for students and other departmental expenses (copiers, pens, computers). But a 22 million surplus, that’s fucking crazy. I’m surprised USC hasn’t funneled that shit into Innovista (read worst fucking concept ever planned). Believe me the grad students don’t see the money, I turned down USC east for their crappy stipend.
By beetrave March 4, 2010 at 10:08 pm
Read the spreadsheet on the carry-forward before you start frothing at the mouth. $9.2 million of that is money that has been committed but not spent. For example, if a newly hired professor gets $100,000 to start up research in a lab, but only spends half in the first year they are at the university, then the other half goes into the carry-forward. It is not “surplus” because the money has been spoken for and the university is legally obligated to hand it out at any time; if it doesn’t have that money on hand, the university could get sued. Another $6.8 million is committed for similar items.
Looks to me like most or all of this surplus talk is a red herring. I think there are legit reasons to be upset with USC for money spent on other projects like Innovista or all the money that gets thrown at football coaches and their staff, but you have no traction on this one.
By Houseguest March 4, 2010 at 11:21 pm
Why not close the multi-multi-multi million dollar Wellness Center for a while? If you want students to be healthier, stop selling doughnuts in the Russell House.
By R March 5, 2010 at 2:56 am
I used to work at USC and I’m no fan of how they run the place. However, I think to take a $22 million carry forward and run around and cry foul, lier and call them a rich university is very misleading without allowing the University or College to explain. I’ve poured over the two spread sheets you attached and it doesn’t explain a lot to me. I’m not an accountant and further more don’t have a clue what most of those terms refer to. Do you?
“CARRY FORWARD GENERATED BY UNDERGRADUATE LAB FEES EARMARKED FOR MAJOR LAB EQUIPMENT AND LAB RENOVATION PROJECTS”, “CARRY FORWARD IN DEPARTMENT CONTROLLED ACCOUNTS USED AT DISCRETION OF EACH DEPARTMENT CHAIR TO MEET UNBUDGETED NONPERSONNEL NEEDS”, “CHAIR’S AGREEMENTS
DEAN’S INCENTIVE PROGRAMS
NEW HIRE STARTUPS
NEW PROGRAM SUPPORT
ONE-TIME ITEMS
RENOVATIONS
RESEARCH SUPPORT
RETENTION OFFERS
SUBTOTAL EXISTING COMMITMENTS”
Great Mr. know it all how about explain what these terms refer to, how they created the budget, how far forward the budget applies, what specifications are attached to each line item. One line item notates “Contractual Services” is this a lump sum received up front to be administered over more than one year? Dean’s incentive programs, new program support, chair’s agreements, are these contractual? Is this money associated with a grant and stipulated how its to be spent?
Before I buy into your conspiracy theory and accuse USC as stashing cash left and right I’d like to allow them an opportunity to walk us through these spreadsheets. Otherwise this is just crappy piss poor “journalism” rumor mongering, and misleading at best.
By vicupstate March 5, 2010 at 11:37 am
If the University is a $1 billion dollar operation, then 22 million is only a 2.2% ‘surplus’, which appears to be carry forward or otherwise encumber funds anyway. Get a CPA to review this stuff before slandering the university. Crediblity is all you have to offer as a blogger, so you might want to do some research before you create nonsense like this, without some expertise to back it up.
By . March 5, 2010 at 12:22 pm
If you read the article the 22 million is a surplus in just ONE (large) undergraduate college – not for the entire university. One mismanaged college with a $116M total budget has been allowed to accumulate a 22M surplus on the back of undergraduate tuition. The college surplus has grown over the last three years from 9M to 22M, while tuition was raised by 17%. The sham allocation of the surplus carry forward is for hypothetical future needs (like new hires) which will not happen this year.
By The Colonel March 6, 2010 at 3:18 am
Arts and Sciences has a surplus because unlike almost every other program on campus, they actually manage their budget (the largest on campus). I teach at USC in a department under the College of Arts and Sciences – they nickel and dime us pretty hard but it sure looks like it was the right thing to do since evey other College is broke.
By . March 6, 2010 at 9:58 am
The only reason that Arts and Sciences has a surplus is that they have the undergraduate tuition to hoard, unlike other colleges. It is not due to great management relative to other colleges, in fact the micromanagement style of the dean has hurt USC. Why have the provost, CFO and Pastides allowed one college to have such a surplus at the expense of the other great colleges (like the Business school) that suffer just because they do not have the undergraduate tuition? This is just bad management/oversight and crying poor us while any college has a $22M surplus is terrible pr for the university.
By The Colonel March 8, 2010 at 6:31 am
.,
Won’t argue that College of A&S has the largest student population but the other side of the equation is they also have the highest expenditures on faculty/staff/resources/facilities.
The truth is, they nickel and dime the departments heavily and it paid off. I work there (normally) I spent last winter freezing because of “cost savings” on the HVAC system in my building.
By Darth March 10, 2010 at 3:40 pm
So do these numbers include grants recieved by the subordinate departments? Having spent my time in the South Main Street Physics nad Chemistry schools and done too much lipid research from Blossom St to the old Capitol Cafe on Main, I have to refer to Doyle’s detective, “Data, data, data! I cannot make bricks without straw, Watson!” (Thanks to Dr. Stephen Morgan for that quote bein included in the 621 notes way too long ago).
By Mr. Goodman March 10, 2010 at 7:16 pm
USC is a ruse when it comes to properly handling money. The emphasis on prestige and growth has totally run the true purpose of the University into the dirt. Student’s education is the goal. When I attended USC, one could pay for their own classes by working a part time job. There is absolutely no reason student’s should not be able to do that currently.
I sat in classes with football players that came periodically with a cute girl at their side. Interesting how they always passed even when they missed tests or didn’t turn in reports. Do away with all sports at USC. Its a waste of money. Educate students to actually do something because they won’t be getting any jobs around here.
The idiots promoting “hydrogen” forgot you still have to generate power somewhere because hydrogen only a transport medium. Duh! All the money thrown at the project and NO NEW PATENTS or DISCOVERIES! What a deal! Our tax money hard at work! Let’s hire some more PhD researchers from some other state and bring them here to clog our roads and use our resources.
USC’s business school pokes its chest out talking about how great it is. Idiots! They think “economic growth” is more jobs, more buildings, more use of land, and more people moving into your neighborhood. Real ‘economic growth” is simply the ability to do more with what you have and the knowledge of how to do it. Plot that on a supply / demand curve you bunch of pompous arrogant overpaid idiots!
By hugh compton March 12, 2010 at 12:07 pm
This article is actually blatantly untrue. The carryforward money is all committed to a number of things in the College–like building laboratories, repairing building, fixing classrooms–which is now the responsibility of the colleges. It is like saying that all of your salary is luxury income and not noting that it is committed to paying rent, buying groceries, etc. This is the same distortion that a small group of people who were unhappy that a woman was placed in charge of the college and that she committed to supporting African American faculty have been vending for the last three years.
There are lots of real bad things wrong with the University–this is a distraction that comes out of a personal dispute.
By PeterF March 21, 2010 at 12:51 am
This article clearly highlights the genuine lack of transparency about budgetary matters at USC! No one who is an integral part of the university can deny that statement.
The main fact clearly detailed in this story is that the CAS dean was caught being sloppy with her budget; ironic she was caught the prior year as well – recall my chair recounting how pissed off she was even then when central administration ‘took’ $15M of her “warchest”. She is even alleged to brag about her warchest! As any good accountant or administrator will tell you in confidence – they just encumber their surplus dollars under some alleged commitment(s).
Perhaps the glimpse of the dean’s recent review seen back in December on this site explains her repeated sloppy actions – the dean was characterized in that article as “stupid, inflexible and arrogant.” Obviously a poignant example here of why so many have such an opinion.
The great majority of the faculty of that college have had enough of her mismanagement – at so many levels – buy why does a Provost or University President tolerate such mismanagement? A +20M surplus reflects so much missed opportunity to have strengthened the university.
Since the highest levels of administration have failed to correct this mismanagement across years, are they not asking the state legislature to do something sane – like maybe even reduce tuition for 20,000 undergraduate students by $1,000 each this year – that would put the surplus right back from where it originated!
By Jim April 13, 2010 at 11:04 am
PeterF: why so surprised that the Provost and President love this “stupid, inflexible and arrogant” dean? She hoards tuition into a surplus that can be transferred into the central accounts to support Innovista, and the salaries of the top administrators in the high $200,000s. That takes a lot of cash to support all those guys.
Hugh Compton: pathetic nonsense. The vast majority of the faculty hate Fitzpatrick because she is, as the report stated: “stupid, inflexible and arrogant”. So, now as soon as someone is criticized for these traits that apply equally to men and women, critics are labelled as sexist and racist. How about disclosing the dollar amount that you personally have benefitted from this dean?
By . April 15, 2010 at 3:38 am
So anyone that disagrees with Fitzpatrick accumulating a huge $22M “war chest” based on student tuition over several years while classrooms are filthy, paint is peeling, laboratories not to code, water undrinkable and the HVAC turned off in several buildings – is now labelled as one of a small group that are obviously sexist and racist by “Hugh” Compton. This accusation just highlights some of the problems in the deans management style and the college.