Minutes of May 4, 1995 Meeting
The meeting convened at 10:08 a.m. in room 817 Cathedral of Learning.
UPBC members present were: Thomas Anderson, Toni Carbo Bearman, Jacob
Birnberg, John Brice, James Cassing, George Chambers, Thomas Detre, Ronald
Gardner, Darlene Harris, James Holland, Randy Juhl, Peter Koehler, James
Maher, Bruce Williams, Philip Wion, Jeffrey Woodard, Julius Youngner, and
Judith Zimmerman. Also present were: Joseph Gil, William Laird, Jeffrey
Liebmann, William Madden, Jeffrey Masnick, Robert Pack, Cindy Roberts, James
Vesco, and Lawrence Weber.
UPBC members not present were: Brian Hart, Franklin McCarthy, Glenn
Nelson, Jeffrey Romoff, Michael Stuckart, and Ben Tuchi.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the April 20 meetings were approved.
FY 1996 Budget Parameters
Koehler distributed the latest draft budget parameters for FY 1996,
which include a 4.5% tuition increase and restoration of the Technology
Enhancements budget ($2.0 million) and the Programmatic Enhancements ($1.25
million). After lengthy discussion, the Committee agreed that the Provost
will make adjustments to the draft parameters and present them for action at
the next UPBC meeting.
Update of Attribution Methodology Subcommittee Activities
Wion distributed the analysis of FY 1994 budget information based on the
FY 1993 attribution study methodology. The analysis of FY 1994 budget
information based on the current revised methodology should be available in
the next few weeks. The revised methodology includes an improved manner for
distributing the Commonwealth appropriation among units, detailed examination
of administrative costs, and a revised treatment of UPMC transfers.
Provost's Area Planning and Budgeting Update
Pack reported that FY 1996 budget allocation letters based on the review
of unit long-range plans and budgets were sent to the deans, campus
presidents, and University center directors on May 3. Units were asked to
present scenarios that reallocated 2.5% of their current University budgets
from areas of lesser to areas of greater priority. They were also asked to
prepare models both reducing and augmenting their current budgets by 2.5%.
This exercise occurred within the context of a level FY 1996 overall budget
for the Provost's area.
Pack reported that the 2.5% internal reallocation totalled nearly $4.5
million in amounts units are reassigning to areas of higher priority. The
Provost also reallocated $1.77 million among units, or another 1% of the
Provost's area budget. Of the 18 units that report to the Provost, four
received budgetary enhancements, six received level budgets, and eight
received reduced budgets for the next year. Pack summarized that, including
the Provost's reserve and an estimated fraction of institutional Programmatic
Enhancement funds, the result of these combined actions will represent the
allocation of nearly $7.5 million in one year to advance the individual goals
of units and the larger academic goals of the University. He stressed the
significance of this exercise in making long-range plans truly operational.
Koehler stated that the current year's efforts represented improved
outcomes over past planning and budgeting efforts. Maher stated that the
desire of people to participate in the process is real, resulting in decisions
made in good faith with full consultation. Maher added that the letters sent
to responsibility center heads include comments on their plans and budgets by
the Provost's Area Planning and Budgeting Committee and the Provost's staff,
as well as explanations of the decisions.
Faculty Salary Equity/Market Issues
Maher discussed details on the distribution to units of $215,000
included in the FY 1995 budget to address salary equity and market issues. He
stressed the need to institute uniform evaluations that would provide clear
and appropriate communication on performance. In response to several
comments, Maher agreed that efforts to improve the quality of relevant peer
salary information should continue, especially relative to the regional
campuses. Pack added that the University must re-examine the manner in which
institutional salary goals are met, stressing the need to use salary resources
to advance the University's priorities.
The meeting adjourned at 12:01 p.m.