UCLA Today: UC execs cite areas of concern

BY MARINA DUNDJERSKI
UCLA Today Staff

In the first of a series of discussions on planning and policy issues that will shape the university over the next two decades, University of California administrators identified for the Board of Regents, meeting in San Francisco Sept. 19, several key “warning” areas they are monitoring closely.

During a four-hour discussion on how to maintain excellence while undergoing exceptional growth, UC administrators cited “green” areas in which they felt UC was performing well — including undergraduate and graduate enrollment; financial aid; research funding; and rankings of departments and programs. And they pointed to “yellow” areas that they marked for caution. These included faculty hiring, staff salaries, facilities, and graduate and academic support.

While no areas were yet in the “red” zone (calling for immediate evaluation), facilities, such as research laboratories and classrooms, are in danger of falling into that category, said Larry Hershman, UC vice president for budget.

“If future bond measures fail and future state capital funding is reduced, our instruction and research space will drop to 78% of the standard necessary to support increased enrollment levels,” Hershman said.

Between 1995 and 2025, California is projected to be the fastest growing state, with its population jumping by more than 56%; by the year 2025, 33% of the state’s residents are expected to be under age 20, second only to Alaska with 34% in that age group. That translates into many more individuals of college-bound age in California.
“The challenge here is another period of dramatic growth,” Hershman said. “Are we going to not only be able to sustain that quality of excellence, but improve that quality? That’s the challenge for all of us.”

Already, UC has enrolled 4,000 students over budget, Hershman said.
Said Regent John G. Davies: “After 2020, it sounds like we’re going to have to start talking about the 11th campus and what effect that has on the allocation of our resources.”
Another major concern brought before the regents: faculty and staff salaries falling behind market levels.

While the university has done extremely well in the quality of its faculty hires, UC has fallen 7% behind the salary average of the Comparison Eight institutions, said C. Judson King, UC provost and senior vice president. That is a critical point, he said, at a time when the university expects to hire hundreds of faculty annually to accommodate growing student enrollments.

A survey of “first-offer” faculty candidates who declined appointments to UC in 2001-02 found that the top reason for going elsewhere was salary, followed, respectively, by spousal employment, family/geographic considerations and housing problems.

The reasons cited by faculty who resigned in 2001-02 were: low salary, family/geographic considerations, housing problems, spousal employment concerns and lack of research money.

Fortunately, said UC President Richard C. Atkinson, most private universities — with which the UC competes for faculty — will not be expanding as much as the UC. “We’ll be the research institution that will be hiring the most,” Atkinson said. “I think the supply will be out there, and the supply will respond. But it’s an issue to keep in mind.”

Staff salaries are also falling behind, and are a “very high priority” as UC officials look ahead, Hershman said. On a positive note, he said that the UC has a lower turnover rate for career staff compared to other large employers in the West, according to data from the Bureau of National Affairs.

On the whole, California with its population dynamics is well-positioned for economic competitiveness later in this decade, said Bruce Darling, UC senior vice president for university affairs, adding, however, that the state may be slow to rebound.
“Higher education is more important now than ever,” Darling said. “Staying on track will require careful and deliberate action.”

Several regents recommended the creation of a permanent board committee to monitor the situation and communicate the university’s long-range plan to legislators and the public.