Sorry for length of this but thought some might be interested.
Generation of revenues for UTC by
Athletics and Men's Golf Program:
As both a faculty member (since 1969 --now under a post-retirement
contract) and golf
coach (since 1977) -- I have had the somewhat unique experience of
being on both sides
of what has now turned into a very divisive battle between academics
and athletics. Part
of the rancor from the academic side stems from our having for years
been underfunded,
with at times no annual raises at all, sometimes a 2% raise that was
actually not given
until January, and at the best of times perhaps a 3% raise. And the
extreme cutbacks for the last two years have meant positions have
been eliminated; research, travel, and equipment funds have been
severely reduced or dropped completely; and programs have been
threatened and some eyed for serious reduction or possible
elimination. Given these
realities it is understandable why faculty desire to examine
non-academic budgets,
especially since there is widespread belief among faculty that
non-academic programs
are really non-essential, or really are at best a drain of resources
that should be allocated
to the support of teaching, research, equipment, travel for faculty,
etc. (By the way,
the Athletic Dept. budget has been cut by over 19% during the last two years.)
Unfortunately budget information, especially allocation and
expenditure reports, do not
adequately tell the story or show where and how monies are generated. This is
particularly true for athletics, where bottom line numbers are
frequently misleading.
Here are some basic numbers to begin with:
Tuition/fees Instate: $3,852
(apart from board Out-of-state: $11,504
room, books, etc) State monies
per FTE $5,135
Now, let me offer an example of how budget numbers can be misleading.
This past year the Athletic Dept. was provided monies for athletic
grants-in-aid that amounted to approximately $2.1 million. Thus, the
Athletic Dept. budget shows an expenditure of $2.1 million for
grants. But that figure is misleading because most of that money went
back to UTC itself as tuition/fees. Though it is difficult to
separate out precise numbers for tuition/fee amounts as distinct from
room/board/book amounts, it is a pretty good estimate that close to
2/3's of the grant monies went directly back to the institution to
cover tuition/fees. In effect, approximately $1.4 million was a
pass-through budget figure, with the monies going back into the
general budget of the institution. In addition, there are restricted
gifts, endowment income, and other monies earmarked for athletic
scholarships that help cover the cost of the $2.1 million that the
Athletic Department is charged by UTC.
Moreover, last year UTC received from the state $5135.00 for each FTE at UTC.
The total number of athletes (these numbers from the NCAA compliance report for
this year) is as follows:
Men: Football 103
$528,905
Other
106 544,310
Women: 132 677,820
Total state monies allocated to UTC for FTE headcount of athletes:
$1,751,035
The assumption here is that most, if not all, of these athletes would
not be attending
UTC without our having the particular sport they are participating in.
Football issue:
Eliminating football would thus reduce the state's appropriation to
UTC automatically by $528,905. Eliminating football grants-in-aid
would certainly show a significant Athletic Department reduction, but
approximately $600,000 of this reduction would not be an actual
increase in income or savings for the institution since that is
approximately the amount that UTC is already getting and is paying
back to itself through the football tuition/fee portion of the
grant-in-aid budget. (The "real" dollars are the monies used to pay
salaries, travel expenses, medical costs, equipment costs, room and
board, etc.)
There are also additional monies the department is charged that go
right back to the
institution. For example, Plus-one funds (used to help pay tuition
for athletes who have used up their eligibility time as a means of
helping them finish their degree) and summer school funds are
additional costs charged against the department. Last year a
$200,000 donation helped cover these costs.
I do not have enough information to analyze all the sports UTC
sponsors, but let me provide a run-down of the Men's Golf Budget.
The figures show that we actually
made money for the institution, and probably have been doing so for
years. Here
are some interesting numbers:
2003-04
Income: NCAA payments to
UTC for each sport:
Golf share: $6,450
Tuition/fee
charges by UTC that
were paid by golfers $17,926
themselves
Endowment income $42,808
for golf scholarships
State appropriated $51,350
FTE mones (10)
@ $5135 per
Total income for UTC: $118,534
2003-04
Budget: Coach's salary/benefits $25,236
Operating (travel, equipment
supplies, recruiting, etc.) 11,919
Grants-in-aid 46,855
Total golf budget: $84,010
Total income: $118,534
Total expenses paid 84,010
by UTC
Net income for UTC $ 35,524
Tuition/fee payback
43,550
from golf to UTC
Total net income/
Payback income $ 79,074
Of this last grant-in-aid figure of $46,855 at least $43,550 was paid
back to UTC as
tuiton/fees (UTC paying itself), which meant that the endowment
income of $42,808
and the $17,926 paid by the golfers themselves was all gravy.
What doesn't show up here is that there is obviously no way to run a
Division I program on $11,919 a year. (In fact, most SEC and ACC
schools have golf operating budgets
of over $150,000 a year, and some have unlimited budgets that can run
as high as $250,000, depending on recruiting. Even Belmont has an
operating budget of over
$50,000.) The actual operating expenditures for golf this year will
be over $30,000, (which would show up in a final budget report), but
the difference in the budgeted amount and the actual expenditure was
made up from doing a fundraiser, donations, special gifts, restricted
accounts, etc.
This rather lengthy document doesn't settle anything, and probably
won't change any
minds one way or another. But I would advise those making arguments
and attacking non-academic budgets across campus to make sure they
become informed about the
hidden and subtle matters related to incomes and expenditures. One
place to start would be one's own department. Get all costs,
including all salaries, operating expenses, etc. and then divide
total costs by number of credit hours generated each year in each
department.
That will let you know just how expensive the offerings are for each
department and programon the academic side. Then do a comparison
across all academic programs and
see who's subsidizing who.
--
|
