The analysts at Ernst & Young put it straight: If recent trends continue at the University of Akron, and no action is taken, the annual budget deficit “could grow significantly and create even greater challenges in the near term.” How great? The university will draw $18 million from its reserve balance this school year.
Do that in each of the next few years, and the current available reserves would be exhausted.
In response, Matt Wilson, the UA president, has unveiled a two-year plan to “stabilize, invest and grow” — with the understandable emphasis on that first challenge. The university administration has in mind generating $25 million in savings the first year by, among other things, offering campuswide voluntary buyouts.
This squeezing follows the budget-cutting in the short, turbulent tenure of Scott Scarborough, the university axing $20 million a year. Whatever the shortcomings in his methods, the previous president correctly diagnosed the budget troubles. The difficulties include the $35 million to $40 million per year tied up in debt payments.
Enrollment drives funding more than anything else, and as practically everyone around here knows, the university has seen the number decline the past five years, from 29,699 to the current 23,152. Thus, the university must “right-size” to a significant degree, the question hovering: How big UA? Is 25,000 the target? More or less?
President Wilson has been applauded for his early engagement and outreach as part of student recruitment. No surprise that the two-year plan stresses building on those efforts, for instance, revamping scholarship money so that students know the university will be there to help when they are close to graduating and need aid to stay in school.
One hard reality is that the 20 percent decline in this year’s freshman class will be with the university for four years. If the goal is to get back to recent norms in freshmen enrollment as quickly as possible, the larger mission also comes into focus. To thrive, the university must find ways to build on its strengths, developing a reputation for what is distinctive and offering a high-quality education across the board of its academic offerings.
That begins, in no small way, with repairing the distrust on campus, especially between the faculty and the trustees. The budget problems do not stem just from the time of Scarborough. The trustees must take responsibility for what has happened on their watch, reflecting, in part, what political appointees do not know about higher education.
The Tiger Team, put together in the wake of Scarborough’s exit and made up of faculty members and administrators, proposed a helpful step in closing this understanding gap: Allow faculty to a sit as non-voting members on committees of the board of trustees. That would work to ease suspicions, serving the worthy idea of collaboration or shared governance, which has suffered at the university.
This could be the contribution of the trustees to the two-year plan, and more to a stronger future for the school. The quality of the university, and thus strong enrollment and finances, turns on the experience of students, which in most cases is defined by their time with faculty.
Want to make the University of Akron stronger? See the trustees include faculty on their committees, knowing they would tap expertise without having to cede any power.