TheAntiochPapers: bud 23

TheAntiochPapers: bud 23

↓ Download PDF ← Back to Library

~TIOCH UNIVERSITY
REPORT TO THE
BOARD OF TRUSTEE
1999-2000 YEAR END PROJECTION
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
June 1-3,2000

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch University-wide Schedules 19
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch College 21
Glen Helen ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 34
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch New England 37
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Antioch Seattle 47
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch Southern California 59
The
McGregor
School …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 68
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. University Administration 80
Antioch Review …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 93
Ph.D.
in Leadership and Change …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 96
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… WSO Radio 104
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. University-Wide Expenses 121
Cost Centers ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 123
Line Items ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 124

REPORT TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
June 1-3,2000
I. INTRODUCTION
The 2000-01 Proposed Budget contains the spending plans developed by each of the Campuses and operating units for
consideration and action by the Board of Trustees. The Proposed Budget for each Campus reflects a careful analysis of
their future revenues and expenditures with appropriate adjustments for changes in enrollment and other demand factors.
In nearly every case, program redirection and changing circumstances have necessitated adjustments in staffing and
support cost levels. In some cases, the 1999-2000 experience dictated changes for 2000-01 in order to comply with the
policy of the Board of Trustees that each Campus submit and maintain a balanced Operating Budget. One quarter
remained of the 1999-2000 year at the time the Proposed Budget was developed, and the year-end projections in this
report were made with two months remaining in the fiscal year. The 1999-2000 full-year performance of each Campus
will be reviewed at the October meeting of the Board of Trustees following the close of the fiscal year.
The financial information in this report is presented using the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) 117 reporting
standards that became mandatory for independent colleges and universities on July 1, 1995. The objective of this FASB
standard is to enhance the relevance, clarity and comparability of financial statements issued by not-for-profit organi-
zations, regardless of the nature of their operation or mission. The material presented in this report provides a detailed
view of the budgeted revenues and expenses of the University and is intended to promote the understanding of University
operations as a whole and of each of its units. If you are familiar with the terms and format of this report, you may want to
begin reading at the 1999-2000 Year-End Projection section on page 7.
II. FORMAT AND CONTENT
The 2000-01 Proposed Budget contains summary schedules for the entire University and similar schedules for each
Campus. In addition, each Campus has prepared a narrative description of the significant events that have occurred in
the current year as well as those that are expected to occur during the next year. Expenditures that are linked to the

University Plan are given special attention in the narratives. The purpose of the narrative is to give an overview of how
each Campus is managing and what problems and opportunities it anticipates in the coming year. In addition, each
Campus has proposed capital expenditures for 2000-01 that are part of the Five-Year Capital Plan.
Under Board of Trustee policy, Trustee approval is required for any facility or equipment expenditure of more than
$25,000. Expenditures between $1 0,000 and $25,000 require the advance approval of the Vice Chancellor and they
must be reported to the Finance Committee in a timely manner. The capital expenditures contained in this report are
proposed for purchase in 2000-01. Campuses frequently identify planned purchases of less than $10,000 in order to
provide a more complete picture of their capital spending plan.
Board of Trustee action is needed to authorize tuition and fee schedule changes for 2000-01. Each Campus has
included a schedule of proposed student charges showing the prior year rates, the proposed rates, and the percentage
change. Although a schedule of tuition rate changes is included for the College, the Board of Trustees approved tuition
and fees for the College at the February meeting. Early action on College tuition and fee rates is needed in order to allow
the timely preparation of financial aid packets for prospective students.
I. THE FUNCTION SCHEDULE
For the University as a whole and for each of the Campuses, the Proposed Budget contains two schedules. The first is
the 2000-01 Proposed Budget by Function. This schedule provides information about Revenues by Type and Operating
Expenses by Function. The purpose is to show what is happening to the various major revenue streams that support the
University and to show how Operating Expenses are assigned to the various programs or functions.
In both the Revenues and Operating Expenses sections of this schedule is a reference to
“E&G1′.
This abbreviation
stands for Educational and General and the Total E&G lines show the Revenues and the Operating Expenses of all
functions other than those that are classified as Auxiliary Enterprises. The E&G subtotals are provided to simplify
comparison of the revenues and expenses of the primary missions of the University while excluding “support functions”
that are not part of the primary missions. Auxiliary Enterprises include support functions such as dining services,
housing, bookstore, and similar University-operated
“busine~ses’~.

An additional Revenues item that appears below the Total E&G Revenue totals is Released from Restrictions. The
amounts on this line reflect funds that were initially received by the University or Campuses for specific purposes and held
until they could be spent to further the specific purpose. Most of this money represents gifts or bequests that have been
provided for such things as scholarships or specific program initiatives. Much of the funding of this type is expended in
the year it is received but Restricted Funds are often held for several years until they can be expended in accordance
with the conditions set out by the donor. For example, scholarship funds that provide for students with certain types of
abilities or needs will not be expended until such students can be identified. Restricted Funds do not become part of the
Operating Budget until released. Prior to being transferred to the Operating Budget, Restricted Funds are carried in the
accounts of the University and invested in accordance with University policy.
Because restricted revenues do not become part of the unrestricted operating funds of the University until they are
Released from Restrictions, the amounts shown for Gifts and Grants may vary from the figures reported by the
Development Offices for the same period. The Development Offices report gifts on a cash basis, that is, as they are
received. The Accounting Office reports gifts on an accrual basis, that is, when they are received or pledged. Pledges
are commitments that will be realized at a future date and are not expendable until the funds are actually received.
Funds that are given for a restricted purpose are invested until they can be expended for the purpose specified by the
donor. Several years may pass before a campus can expend a restricted gift as the donor intended, but the restricted gift
is recorded by the Development Office when it is received. The financial schedules contained in this report do not reflect
restricted revenue until it is expended. Therefore, reports from the Development Office may show higher or lower giving
levels than will appear on these schedules.
Restricted Funds should not be confused with Endowment Funds. Endowment Funds are also separated from
unrestricted revenues and are also limited to specific purposes as provided by their donor. The primary difference is that
the principal of Endowment Funds must be retained in perpetuity and only the annual income can be expended to satisfy
the purpose of the donor. On the other hand, the principal amount of a restricted gift can be used as soon as a valid
purpose has been identified. Income from the Endowment Funds appear as a Revenue Item on the Endowment Income
line.
The Function schedule in this report for Antioch University as well as the Function schedules for Central
Administration
and University Wide expenses contain an additional line, “Net Overhead for Central Operations.” This line has been

added to the Function schedules of these three areas to more clearly display the cost of central operations. Ordinarily,
the Overhead used to support the Central Administration and the University Wide expenses budget would appear as a
“negative expense” entry, but the Board of Trustees has requested that central operations be displayed more in keeping
with the way the budgets of the individual Campuses are displayed. Accordingly, this line has been added to these three
schedules and appears as a quasi-revenue entry. It shows how much is transferred from the operating units to meet the
costs of central operations and it clearly separates the “revenue” of the central operations from their expenses and makes
it easier to see the true cost of these units.
The Operating Expenses section of the Function schedule provides financial information for each of the primary activities
or programs. Each operating department of the University is classified in accordance with its primary function. For
example, the Languages Department of the College is classified as Instruction and all of its expenditures will be
combined with those of other teaching departments and reported on the Instruction line of the Function schedules. A list
of the Cost Centers that comprise each of the Functions is presented on page 123.
The columns of the 2000-01 Proposed Budget by Function schedules present information about the two prior years, the
current year, and the coming year. For comparison purposes, the first two columns contain the 1997-98 and 1998-99
actual expenditure history. The third column contains the 1999-2000 Budget as approved by the Board of Trustees and
the fourth column contains information about how each of the Campuses anticipate their 1999-2000 Budget will appear at
the end of the current fiscal year. That is, the 1999-2000 Budget column is the plan for the current year while the
1999-
2000 Projected column shows how the plan is likely to play out. The next two columns, Change from 1999-2000 Budget
to 1999-2000 Projected show the dollar amount and percentage variance between the plan for the current year the likely
outcome at June 30.
Because the Proposed 2000-01 Budget is developed from current year operations, it is important to consider how the
current year will end before deciding on what is or is not possible in the new year. For this reason, the Proposed Budget
schedules show the changes from the current year budget to the anticipated year end amounts.
The Proposed 2000-01 Budget is segregated from the other columns by solid vertical lines and bold type to make it stand
out from the other numbers. The next two columns on this schedule compare the Proposed 2000-01 Budget with the
1999-2000 Projected outcome, and the last two columns compare the Proposed 2000-01 Budget with the 1999-2000

Budget as approved by the Board. Each set of comparisons present the dollar variance and percentage variance. Major
dollarlpercentage
changes tend to signify programmatic shifts or restructuring.
FASB 117 requires the presentation of information on an accrual basis, but the actual management of the University also
depends on maintaining an appropriate cash flow so that current obligations can be met. The schedules in this Report
contain an Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis section which identifies those expenses and revenue sources that
must be considered when adjusting from an accrual basis to a cash basis. These items are primarily concerned with
equipment and facilities which, although occurring in one fiscal year, are depreciated over their useful life. Accumulated
depreciation is shown as an offset to the Depreciation Expense that is included as a part of the Plant Maintenance
function. Borrowing proceeds, if any, associated with the expenditures shown are reflected on a separate line, as are the
Principal Payments necessary to retire the loans of previous years.
The Conversion to Cash Basis section also shows the use of any Prior Year Reserves. Prior Year Reserves are
maintained by the University as “funded” or “unfunded”. Whenever the campuses end the year with an operating surplus,
this sum is recorded and carried forward on the books. If the University has sufficient surplus cash at year-end, the
surplus is funded and invested in an interest bearing account. The “Unfunded Reserves” of the campuses become
‘Funded Reserves” whenever there is surplus cash at year-end. If there is not sufficient cash to cover the surplus, the
uncovered portion becomes a credit to the unfunded reserve. Campuses may propose the use of their Prior Year
Reserves in the annual budget, or they may request the Chancellor’s permission to use Funded Reserves to meet
unexpected expenses during the year.
IV. THE CATEGORY SCHEDULE
The second major schedule is the 2000-01 Proposed University Budget by Category. On this schedule, Revenues from
the Function Schedule (including Net Overhead for Central Operations) are condensed to a single line, but Operating
Expenses from the Function schedule are presented by category
(e.g.,
Salaries & Wages, Benefits, Supplies). These
Categories show how the Proposed Budget will be expended by the Major Expense categories that are explained in detail
on page 124.

A section of these schedules show the ContingencyIReserves that the Campuses are required to budget. The “Campus
Contingency, Mandatory” amount is budgeted at 2% of net student revenue. This Reserve will be retained centrally until
the University Administration is reasonably sure that overall University Revenues and Expenditures will balance for the
year. At the end of each quarter of the fiscal year, those Campuses that are performing at or above their budgeted level
may request the release of a portion of the Mandatory Reserve. In October we do not anticipate releasing more than
10% of the total. In January we would expect to release not more than 50% (cumulative) of the total with the remaining
50% to be released in April. These percentages are guidelines; if total University Revenue appear to be much higher or
lower than budgeted, the percentages that can be released at the end of any quarter will be appropriately adjusted.
The “Campus Program Contingency, Discretionary” is a reserve amount determined by individual Campuses. Depending
on the volatility of its programs, a Campus may elect to hold an additional sum in reserve to offset possible revenue
fluctuations. The amount of this Reserve is determined by the Campus, and the Campus determines when this Revenue
is released for expenditure. Beginning July 1, 2000, Campuses will have the opportunity to reserve money in an account
in the Major Capital Improvement Fund. This fund has been established to permit campuses to prepare for predictable
future capital purchases such as roof replacements. Deposits to the Major Capital Improvement Fund are budgeted on
this line. Not all Campuses elect to place funds in this Reserve.
The Liquidity Reserve is equal to 1.25% (1.5% for Seattle) of the net tuition and fee Revenue of each Campus. The
Liquidity Reserve is not available for expenditure for any purpose, but the amounts budgeted are added to the Liquidity
Reserve each year and allowed to accumulate in order to increase the financial integrity of the University. The bond
issues that have financed facilities at New England and Seattle and retired debt for the College require the University to
operate with an excess of revenue over expenses in each year. In order to satisfy this ratio requirement and to build for
the time when the University can satisfy Moody Investors Service requirements for a bond rating, this money is
accumulated during the year in a University-wide account. As with the Program Contingency, the Liquidity Reserve is
removed from the campus budgets and appears as an expense. However, the Liquidity Reserve is shown in the
University Wide section and this makes the University financial position as a whole appear somewhat worse than it is.
Unlike the Program Contingency, the Liquidity Reserve is not credited back to the campuses at year-end because it may
not be used to off-set expenditures. Rather, it is intended to assure an annual budgeted surplus.

The Overhead section shows the assessments that are made against each Campus in order to support operations of the
University. The assessments are made at the rate of 13.75% of net student revenue. Net student revenue excludes
tuition generated by new programs less than two years in operation, tuition discounts and waivers, and uncollectable
tuition and fees. From the overhead, Rebates from the University are transferred to the individual campuses, as is the
Subsidy from Adult Campuses and the Subsidy from Overhead. Campuses that receive Rebates and Subsidies will show
negative amounts in the various columns of this schedule because the transfer is shown as a “negative expense” rather
than as a Revenue. Although these transfers are “income” to the receiving campus, from the standpoint of the University
they represent only the reassignment of revenue from one campus to another.
The Overhead section of the Summary by Category schedule shows the assessments that are made against the student
derived revenue of each campus in order to support operations of the University. Although overhead is assessed at
13.75%,
Rebates reduce the effective Overhead rate. Rebate increases in 2000-01 will lower the effective Overhead rate
to 8.75% or less for the Adult Campuses. The Other line in this section of the Category schedule shows the effect of
various contractual relationships between Campuses as well as certain University-wide assessments such as the
University Conference. Because the University Conference did not occur last year, this line will show increases for all
campuses.
Depreciation is a major expense for the University, and is carried centrally because all facilities are held in the corporate
name of the University. Both the Depreciation Expense and the Add Back Depreciation entries appear in the University
Wide expenses section on pages 121 and 122.
The columns on the 2000-01 Proposed Budget by Category schedule are identical to those on the Budget by Function
schedule.
V. 1999-2000 YEAR-END PROJECTION
Success in the current budget year is important for the financial health of the organization and also because the current
budget is a template for the new budget. If there are significant problems with revenues and expense in the
cuuent
year,
care must be taken to insure that corrective actions are taken so that the problems do not continue in the new year. On
the basis of the first ten months of operations, the operating units have projected where they believe they will complete

the current fiscal year. To their numbers are added the projected University-wide revenues and expenses to arrive at the
forecast for the University as a whole. With 80% of the fiscal year completed, we are projecting that the University as a
whole will complete the fiscal year with an accrual balance of $388,563. The projected surplus is lower than the actual
accrual surpluses reported in each of the last three years. In 1996-97 the actual accrual balance was $1,817,344. In
1997-98 it was $827,405, and in 1998-99 it was $500,109. This pattern of decline has less to do with operations of the
campuses than it does with the performance of the stock market. Realized and unrealized gains on the endowment are
reported as revenues, and the performance of our portfolio and the market as a whole is not expected to be as great this
year as it was in previous years. The projected year-end cash basis balance is projected to be $1,490,950. A significant
portion of the projected cash balance is in the form of gains on the endowment. For this reason, the cash is not available
to the University for day-to-day operations and does not provide working cash to cover payrolls and other expenses
between the large seasonal influx of tuition revenue.
A fortuitous and unexpected addition to cash occurred this spring when the University Administration was able to sell
some stock that had been received in exchange for rent. Two years ago a tenant was unable to pay all of their
accumulated rent debt and we negotiated an arrangement by which they deposited their stock with us as security for
future payment. They had a year to pay the outstanding rent balance and retrieve their stock or the stock became the
property of the University. After a year had passed, the value of the stock had decreased below the rent debt and the
company opted to forfeit the shares as settlement of the obligation. The value of the stock decreased to about
$.I
0 per
share by the time the University was able to sell the it. However, in a period of days the stock came to the attention of the
market and the price rose dramatically. The University sold its shares at $1
-65
per share and realized $220,000. A
portion of these proceeds have been used to make necessary repairs to the Kettering Building and the balance will
become working capital.
Whether the projected accrual and cash balances become a reality at June 30 depends on the performance of the
campuses and the stock market. While we have little influence over the market, we do have responsibility for controlling
operating expenses and generating revenues. The College is projecting an accrual balance at year end of $471,937 and
a net cash deficit of $-351,977. Achieving these balances depends on whether the College can realize total gifts of
$2,525,011. This total is $1,097,235 more than the amount budgeted as Gift Revenue, but the College has already
received significant unrestricted gifts and the College administration is confident that the projected level can be reached.
The College is also projecting expenses that will be $464,723 below budget.

New England is predicting an accrual balance of $127,556 at year end and a zero cash basis finish. In order to meet the
requirement for a balanced cash budget, New England is planning to use $71,483 of Prior Year Reserves. The campus
administration is doing everything it can to avoid using its Prior Year Reserves.
The Seattle campus is projecting an accrual balance of just under $480,000 and a net cash basis balance of $145,262. It
is likely that the cash balance will be less than this amount because Seattle is planning to purchase some additional
computers and other capital before year-end. While these purchases will not affect the accrual balance, they will lower
the cash balance.
At Antioch Southern California, the projected accrual balance is $1 13,521 with a net cash basis forecast of $68,521.
Because revenues at Southern California are projected to decrease by more than 4% of budget, it has been necessary
for the Campus to lower its operating expenses by more than 5%.
The
McGregor
School has struggled this year because revenues did not make budget. The Campus is projecting that
revenues will be down more than 5.5% from budget. Expenditures have been reduced by nearly
4.8%,
but the campus is
projecting a cash deficit of $69,907 but a cash basis balance of zero at year-end. The zero cash balance will be achieved
by using nearly $1 00,000 of Prior Year Reserves.
As in 1998-99, Tuition and Fee Revenue is being projected below the budgeted level. Last year at this time, Tuition and
Fee Revenue was projected to be $2.5 million below the budgeted level, but this year the variance is better by $500,000.
Nonetheless, all of the operating units will fail to reach their budgeted Tuition and Fee level and this has necessitated
considerable realignment of expenditure plans during the year as well as a reliance on Prior Year Reserves and the need
to raise additional Gift Income.

1999-2000 TUITION AND FEE REVENUE
Budgeted Projected Variance
Antioch College 12,069,086 1 1,200,938 -868,148
Glen Helen 1 16,440 104,800 -1 1,640
New England 8,306,440 8,062,133 -244,307
Seattle 8,027,204 7,821,463 -205,741
Southern California 9,286,332 8,934,518 -351,814
McGregor
5,273,582 4,910,000 -363,582
TOTALS $43,079,084 $41,033,852
-$2,045,232
Tuition discounts, which can have a significant impact on net tuition revenue, are just slightly below the budgeted level.
Other revenues are anticipated to be above budget with Contracts being up 112.36% ($417,990) and Other Income up
77.95% ($866,440) over budget. The amount to be Released from Restrictions is expected to be $614,578 below budget
(-23.71 %) primarily because the College has not used as much restricted revenue as was anticipated at the beginning of
the fiscal year. At the College, Restricted Revenue is used primarily for scholarships and library books.
Salaries and Wages is the single larges expense category and accounts for 46.8% of all expenses. Directly related to
Salaries and Wages is Benefits which accounts for more than
13O/0
of total University expenses. Both of these categories
are projected to be below budget for 1999-2000 with Salaries and Wages dropping nearly 1 Oh and fringe benefits falling
more than 7% from the budgeted level. Student Aid Services is projected to be 8% ($104,306) above budget. This line
contains considerable funding from restricted grant scholarships that cannot be used for other purposes. Supplies are up
nearly 10%
($133,396),
Business Operations is projected to be up by
7.36%,
while the other categories are about at their
budget level or below. Total operating expenses are projected to be 3.43% below budget. Capital Expenditures are

expected to exceed the budget by $378,075 (62%) which reflects, in part, major repair work on the Kettering Building and
a number of unbudgeted projects at the College, several of an emergency nature.
In each of the last several years the University Administration has rebated fringe benefit funds to the individual campuses.
These rebates reflected savings in medical and drug costs as a result of central changes to the insurance coverage as
well as rebates from the State of Ohio for workers compensation. This year, we anticipated these savings and allowed
the campuses to build them into their 1999-2000 operating budget. Our projections were quite close and, as a result, the
campuses have already received the benefit of savings realized by the central programs. No significant rebates will be
provided at the end of 1999-2000.
VI. 2000-01 BUDGET OVERVIEW
Tuition and Fee Revenue constitutes more than 80% of all revenue received by the University as a whole. Growth in
tuition and fee income is essential to cover the increasing cost of salaries, wages and inflation. It is also the primary
vehicle for financing new programs, and new programs that attract additional students are the primary source of revenue
growth. Last year the campuses projected combined tuition and fee increases of 12.05% over their projected tuition and
fee revenue for the prior year. For 2000-01, the campuses are projecting Tuition and Fee Revenue increases of
12.03%
over the projected Tuition and Fee Revenue for the prior year. As in 1999-2000, the tuition and fee budgets for 2000-01
must be considered aggressive, but the distribution of the increases is different and at least one factor was not present
last year. In 1999-2000, the College budgeted $1.5 million more in Tuition and Fee Revenue than it projected to receive
in
1998-99.
This constituted a 14.42% increase while, in that same budget, New England was projecting additional
revenue of only $51,700, or .63% more than it was anticipating to receive in 1998-99. In 2000-01, the College is
projecting additional Tuition and Fee Revenue of only $91 1,528
(8.14%)
and New England is projecting an increase of
$808,362 (10.03%). While the other three adult campuses are also predicting double digit growth in their tuition and fee
income, each of the campuses has presented sound justification for the growth. New programs, particularly Teacher
Education, figure significantly at the adult campuses. Work done in previous years to initiate programs is now projected
to bring tangible results as new cohorts fill with additional students.
The factor that was not present last year in the Tuition and Fee Revenue equation is the new
Ph.D.
Program in
Leadership and Change. This program is projected to generate $290,000 as its first class enrolls. In the event that the

Ohio Board of Regents does not approve the program this year, the expenditures associated with instruction will not be
incurred.
The following table shows, by campus, the projected Tuition and Fee Revenue for 1999-2000 and the amount included in
the new budget:
2000-01 TUITION AND FEE REVENUE
Projected
Antioch College 11,200,938
Glen Helen 104,800
New England 8,062,133
Seattle 7,821,463
Southern California 8,934,518
McGregor
4,910,000
Ph.D.
Program 0
Budgeted
12,112,465
126,045
8,870,495
9,057,442
9,920,400
5,592,733
290,000
Percent
Change Change
91 1,527 8.14%
21,245 20.27%
808,362 10.03%
1,235,979 15.80%
985,882 1 1.03%
682,733 13.90%
290,000
TOTALS $41,033,852 $45,969,580 $4,935,728 12.03%
Each of the Presidents has described in the narrative the reasons why he or she is confident that Tuition and Fee
Revenue will increase in 2000-01. While the Presidents are projecting an increase of 12% in net tuition income for
2000-
01, net tuition income should improve even more because tuition discounts are being reduced. At the College, in
particular, the reduction is significant, but the reason for the change might not be obvious.

2000-01 TUITION DISCOUNTS
Projected
Antioch College 3,184,173
Glen Helen 0
New England 78,176
Seattle 81,892
Southern California 21 3,623
McGregor
51,300
Ph.D.
Program 0
Budgeted
2,604,879
0
0
68,000
212,100
51,283
30,000
Percent
Change Change
-579,294 -1 8.1 9%
0
-78,176 -100.00%
-1 3,892 -16.96%
-1,523 -0.71 %
-17 -0.03%
30,000
TOTALS $3,609,164 $2,966,262
-$642,902
-1 7.81 %
In 2000-01, the campuses are moving tuition waivers granted to University employees and their families from the Tuition
Discount line (a revenue reduction) to the Fringe Benefit line (an expense item). This change is being made to better
reflect the true nature of waivers granted to employees. That is, they are not discounts in the classical sense, but are, in
fact, a fringe benefit and should be treated as an expense rather than revenue foregone.
For the University as a whole, gift income is projected to increase more than 16% over the prior budget. This reflects the
College’s projection of a 14% increase ($200,224) over the prior year, but the College is budgeting a 35.53% decline in
gift income from the projected 1999-2000 actual ($-897,011). Endowment income will remain flat on a budget-to-budget
basis as the University transitions so the Total Return policy previously adopted by the Board. 1999-2000 was a
transition year in which one-time allocations to the College were necessary to prevent a decline in available income as a
result of the new policy. The 2000-01 year amount is driven by the formula and the formula will produce increases in
each subsequent year.

Projected Contract Income is down both on a projected-to-budget and budget-to-budget basis primarily because of
conservative budgeting practices at New England. Although New England has prepared and issued a number of contract
proposals, the campus chooses not to budget revenue until the contracts have been issued.
Salaries and Wages will increase in 2000-01 by $2,054,867 (7.8%) over the 1999-2000 budget. The proposed filling of
some positions in order to meet the objectives of the University Plan, particularly in the area of development, are part of
the reason for the growth on this line. Most significant, however, is an effort to recognize the need for salary
improvements for faculty and staff. Faculty salary increases at the College are being increased in an effort to bring
compensation to a minimally competitive level over the next several years. The following table shows how salaries and
wages will increase at each of the campuses.
BUDGETED SALARY INCREASES FOR 2000-01
COLLEGE 7.8% for faculty and 4.0% for staff effective 7-1-00. The contract for
union staff will be negotiated this fall.
NEW ENGLAND 4% for core faculty and staff effective 7-1 -00.
SEATTLE 3% for core faculty and staff effective 1-1-20001.
$501 course for adjunct faculty effective 7-1 -00.
SOUTHERN 4% for faculty and staff earning less than $50,000.
CALIFORNIA 2% for faculty and administrators earning more than $50,000.
McGREGOR
2% for faculty and administrators effective 7-1-00; some equity increases
were given above this percentage. An additional 1 % may be given 1-1-01
if revenues permit.
3.5% for union staff effective 7-1-00.
UNIVERSITY
3%
for staff and administrators effective 7-1-00
ADMINISTRATION

For most faculty and staff, these increases will provide a modest amount of catch-up after the recent years of small or no
salary increases. The increases for McGregor are small, but they have had to make considerable sacrifices to provide
even these increases. For the College, this increase represents the only significant priority they have in the 2000-01
budget.
The 2000-01 budget has again reduced the Net Overhead that the campuses pay to support the University Administration
and to provide central services. In 1997-98 the Net Overhead rate for the Adult Campuses was reduced to 10% or less.
It was reduced to 9.5% in 1998-99, went to 9.0% in 1999-2000, and it will fall to
8.75%
in 2000-01. The Net Overhead
Rate is calculated by reducing the Budgeted Overhead by the amount of Budgeted Rebate and Budgeted Subsidy
provided to the individual campuses. The Budgeted Net Overhead is then divided by the Student-Derived Income to get
the effective overhead rate. For the adult campuses, the 2000-01 Net Overhead Rate has been reduced by a quarter of
a percentage point. The overall rate for all campuses will be 7.19% in 2000-01. If Overhead for central operations were
calculated as a percentage of all revenues, the rate would be less than 5%.
Net Overhead and Rebates
as a percent of Student Derived Revenue
2000-01 Proposed Budget
Campus 2000-01 2000-01 Budgeted Budgeted Budgeted Percent of
Student Budgeted Rebate Subsidy Net Student
Derive Overhead Overhead Derived
College 7,225,241 993,471 -550,000 -400,000 43,471 0.60%
New England 8,395,579 1,154,392 -417,279 737,113 8.78%
Seattle 7,867,581 1,089,472 -393,379 696,093 8.85%
Southern CA 8,871,500 1,219,831 -440,779 779,052 8.78%
McGregor
4,645,152 638,708 -232,258 406,450 8.75%

VII. SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS
Although Tuition and Fee Income is projected to grow at a rate that was not attainable last year, the College has become
more conservative in its projections and New England is catching up with increased enrollment and the completion of a
technical conversion in its fee structure. Collectively, the campuses have prepared sound budgets, and they have
hedged by increasing their Discretionary Reserves by
43.15O/0.
In 2000-01 the campuses have a combined Discretionary
Reserve of $830,455. In the event that they are below their projected revenues in the fall, they can use their
Discretionary Revenue to cushion their budgets.
From the standpoint of the individual campuses, we anticipate that their budgets can be kept in balance even if revenues
do not reach the projected levels. This will require mid-year expenditure corrections, but the range of likely adjustments is
within reason.
The most worrisome aspect of the proposed 2000-01 budget is the accrual deficit of nearly $1.5 million. This deficit is not
the result of campus extravagance or willful disregard of University budget guidelines; it is due to our practice of
budgeting depreciation as a University-wide expense. All depreciation is carried in the central University Wide account
and, in recent years, this expense has been covered by realized and unrealized gains in the endowment and other
investments. Our concern about the future performance of the stock and bond markets has caused us to take a
conservative approach in the amount of gains being forecast. As a result, the accrual deficit projected for 2000-01 has
increased by nearly $300,000 over the accrual deficit of $1,193,170 that was budgeted for 1999-2000. The fortuitous
appreciation of the stock received in lieu of rent
($225,000),
and the significant appreciation of YSI stock ($600,000) and
modest growth in the stock market at June 30 are projected to enable the University to end the year with a positive
accrual budget. Unfortunately, we have no other stock being centrally held to offset rents and it is unlikely that YSI will
experience similar growth in 2000-01. Worse, the stock market is becoming increasingly difficult to predict. Should the
stock market actually decline, we would not only face the prospect of not having realized and unrealized gains to offset
depreciation, but we would need to cover the loses with operating revenues in order to have a positive accrual budget. I
believe that we need to take steps to lower the risk of a negative accrual balance in 2000-01.

As we move into the 2000-01 fiscal year, it will be necessary to rigidly enforce a long-standing policy concerning the
release of contingency reserves. This policy states:
The Campus Contingency will be retained centrally until we are reasonably sure that overall
University revenues and expenditures can be made to balance for the year. At the end of each
quarter of the fiscal year those campuses which are performing at or above their budgeted level
may request the release of a portion of the Contingency … In October we would not anticipate
releasing more than 10% of the total. In January we would expect to release not more than
50% (cumulative) of the total, with the remaining 50% being released in April. These
percentages are guidelines: If University-wide revenues appear to be much higher or lower
than budgeted, the percentages that we can release at the end of any quarter will be
appropriately adjusted.
This policy has been in place for many years, but the University Administration has been lax in enforcing it and the
campuses have grown to anticipate spending the funds. As a result, the Contingency has lost its ability to cushion
University-wide and campus specific revenue problems.
For the last several years the University has incrementally deducted the Contingency on a monthly basis. That is,
1112th
of the Contingency was debited to the campuses each month. This practice has reinforced the belief that the
Contingency was available for expenditure at any time because most of the Contingency was visible in the monthly
accounting statements.
Beginning in 2000-01, the entire Mandatory Contingency amount will be removed from each campus and the University
Administration budget on July 1. In this way, the money will be removed from the campus budget reports and it will be
clear that this money is not available for local expenditure. If revenues are being realized as expected, and if the stock
market appears to be stable, a portion of the reserve could be released to those campuses that are exceeding their
revenue targets. However, if the stock market is performing erratically and it appears that there may not be sufficient
realized and unrealized gains to cover depreciation, the contingency will not be returned.

With the higher Discretionary Contingencies and the change in policy to return the Mandatory Contingencies to their
original role, I am comfortable that the 2000-01 budget is a responsible financial plan. Antioch needs to develop new
programs and aggressively pursue new revenues, and the Presidents are following this course of action. By protecting
ourselves from the vagaries of the stock market and by prudently monitoring month-to-month activity, this budget can
provide a sound basis for the operation of the University and its campuses.
Glenn Watts
Vice Chancellor and
Chief Financial Officer

Antioch University
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to 1999-00 Projected
$ %
– –
Proposed
2000-0 1
Budget
1997-98
Actual
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Budget
1999-00
Projected
–
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total
E&G
Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Net Overhead for Central Operations
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total
E&G
Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget

Antioch University
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected $ %
– – –
54,675,202 -347,004 -0.63%
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget
$ %
– –
3,671,087 6.670h
Change From
1997-98
Actual
–
50,362,650
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
—
53,693,293
1998-99
Actual
–
51,656,414
1999-00 Projected
to 2000-01 Budget
$ %
– –
4,018,091 7.35%
1999-00
Budget
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Con9
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget

ANTIOCH COLLEGE
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
During the 1999-2000 year the College struggled with its second successive year of poor fall recruitment, while at the
same time maintaining a vigorous agenda of rebuilding the strength of the academic program and improving the
infrastructure sufficiently to be competitive. The College’s Strategic Plan continued to provide the focus and direction for
the College’s efforts. The Plan outlines a blueprint of action steps as well as providing benchmarks against which to
measure progress. Efforts aimed at enhancing both recruitment and retention were focused on continuing to bolster and
build a strong academic program, continuing our reconceptualization and strengthening of the Co-op program,
addressing our capital and technology infrastructure needs, and strengthening student services. Development efforts
involved parallel work on covering the immediate operating gap resulting from two successive years of poor fall
enrollment, and at the same time building the foundation and the capacity for a major capital campaign. The College’s
efforts during the 1999-2000 year were directed toward the following areas critical to the long-term health and quality of
the College:
Improving recruitment efforts. The College experienced very poor recruitment outcomes in the fall of 1998 and the fall
of 1999 due to several factors. First and foremost, our analysis has led us to believe that we are seeing a “late-market”
result. Admissions programs at peer institutions are more and more often seeking to reach high school sophomores and
juniors. The use of direct marketing, summer “camps” and programs for sophomores and juniors, and well-funded field
recruitment efforts all contribute to “tracking” prospective students at earlier stages of their high school careers. By the
time a student is a senior,
shelhe
has already narrowed the field of college choices, if not having already made a
decision. We tend to do well in the “after-market” pool, and have shown significant improvement in our recruitment of
spring transfer and entering students, but apart from our very modest foray into building a “junior pipeline”, have not been
able to reach our goals in the fall cycle. The majority of the highly qualified and motivated seniors have
already.begun
to
narrow their choices of schools by the time we first contact them.

Second, the recruitment practices for undergraduate private liberal arts institutions have become more competitive than
ever, and Antioch College is under-resourced and outspent at every level of the recruitment process and critically
understaffed relative to our peer institutions. We are outspent in searching sophomores and juniors (by hundreds of
thousands of dollars), outspent in counselors on the road (by more than two to one, with 4 counselors covering the entire
US and managing on-campus visits), outspent in advertising and materials (by as much as 5-to-I), outspent in financial
aid (both in meeting percentage of need — we are only able to meet 84% of need — and in merit offers, where our $5,000
unfunded Community Responsibility Scholarships compete with $8-10,000 funded scholarships at peer institutions) and
outspent in the communication stream we are able to maintain with prospective students and parents.
This past year we continued with our strategy of building relationships with target schools that share our values and
pedagogy. We have continued our affiliation with the Coalition for Essential Schools and have managed to build the
foundation of a feeder network of source schools. At the same time we have cultivated a relationship with the Coalition of
Alternative Schools, and that organization will hold its national conference on our campus in May. Our school-to-work
grant from ORISE has partnered us with Sinclair Community College and six Ohio high schools in strengthening the link
between work-based learning and college attendance in partnered schools. This program has put us in contact with
hundreds of students and parents across the state and has placed us in a positive role of counseling students in
preparation for co-op colleges.
During the 1998-99 year we began to do minimal work in the area of building a junior pool, and in the 1999-2000 year we
decided to allocate the resources necessary (approximately $1 50,000 in direct mail and publication costs) to get into the
‘early market” decision-making by doing direct mail solicitation of sophomores and juniors, thereby building our inquiry
pool for the fall of 2001. This strategy had been successful. To date we have developed 11,782 inquiries (including
7,500 juniors and 4,325 sophomores) which places us in an excellent position for the years ahead. We will begin this next
year with approximately 10,000 inquiries at the top of our funnel — the best inquiry position the College has enjoyed in the
past ten years. Follow up to this effort will involve a four-day junior program to be held in July, a one-day sophomore
college planning workshop in August, and additional mailings to this pool. The challenge will be to sustain this effort
financially with support communication, phonathons, counselor contact, etc. We expect continued success with our
spring “late market” recruiting.

Improving retention efforts. The Strategic Plan called for building the strength of the academic program, making
improvements to our capital and technology infrastructure, enhancing the delivery of student services, and attending to
dimensions of community life that would contribute positively to retention. Central to this effort was the revitalization of
the faculty and the academic program. The quality, range and depth of our faculty hires over the past three years have
had immediate and palpable impact on both recruitment and retention. Our first year attrition, 314 of the way through the
year, is at 5% (compared to 8% in our best previous year), and our overall attrition is significantly reduced as well. Co-op
has been revitalized by the appointment of Pat Linn as Dawson Professor and Susan
Eklund-Leen
as Director. Under Dr.
Linn’s leadership, the department is once again providing intellectual leadership to the campus. Another contributing
factor has been our very deliberate efforts to strengthen student support services. The work of the Academic Support
Center in supporting student growth and excellence has been stunning, and improved health and counseling services
have contributed to positive retention numbers. Diminished progress in building and updating the technology
infrastructure of the campus has continued to fuel
pricelvalue
discussions among students on the fence, and to negatively
impact our retention efforts. The budgetary challenge involves our capacity to continue to show progress in this area. In
general, the College has continued to improve upon its dramatic retention gains of two years ago, our graduation rate
continues to inch upward (against the grain of national averages), and we continue to improve on first-year retention.
Strengthening the Academic Program. Prospective students and their parents, alumni, trustees and even critics of the
College all point to the strength and credibility of the academic program as central to Antioch’s reputation and its capacity
to attract and retain students. We searched tenure track positions, hired well, and filled the roster to capacity. Of course
the implication is that there is far less budgetary flexibility in having a full roster. We have added approximately $800,000
to our budget for the academic program, and this has reduced our choices in other areas. The improvements to the
academic climate of the campus, however, have had far reaching implications for the long-term health of the College.
This past spring the faculty organized a symposium for faculty presentations of research and work in progress; sixteen
faculty members presented their work to an enthusiastic gathering of students and faculty colleagues. An initiative by Pat
Linn engaged twenty five faculty members (nearly half the faculty) in reading and discussing theories of “situated
learning” in terms of finding continuity between cooperative, classroom and community learning and the manner in which
we structure those “communities of practice”. Another initiative involved preliminary faculty discussion of an honors
program in “Civic Leadership and Community Service.” The academic climate of the College is perhaps the strongest it
has been in recent years, and we are experiencing this as a real strength in our recruitment and retention efforts.

Building the foundation for a major capital campaign. We began the process of ramping up to a capital campaign by
adding senior level staff in the Development office. The rationale for being aggressive in this area was that the resources
committed during the 1999-2000 year (approximately $150,000) would yield results in the coming years. Two new senior
development officers embarked on structured interviews with potential campaign donors and the foundation work
necessary for a major campaign. The structured interviews (a) yielded direct results in the form of gifts, (b) provided
critical information on capacity, and (c) helped to establish a positive foundation for the campaign. In addition, the
increased fundraising effort helped to cover the revenue gap resulting from enrollment shortfalls.
Addressing technology and infrastructure needs. Technology, infrastructure and facilities continue to be critical
negative factors in Antioch College’s competitive position among liberal arts colleges nationally. Our progress in this area
slowed during the 1999-2000 year due to constraints of funding. Continued wiring and networking of the campus is on
hold, pending approval of a proposed bond issue. Ironically, this is one of the first questions posed by prospective
students and their parents, and one of the tipping points in
pricelvalue
considerations. We made some progress
upgrading our phone switch and bringing sufficient lines to campus to permit phone service in dorm rooms, but the
system has not yet been activated. The College’s Renovation Task Force met throughout the year, conducted a physical
assessment of College buildings, continued consultation with constituent groups across the campus, and with the
assistance of the architectural firm of Schooley Caldwell, prepared an agenda of priorities for campus facilities. A
preliminary report from this Task Force will be presented to the Physical Facilities Committee for discussion, the priorities
will be blended with capital campaign planning, and detailed work on the prioritized projects will begin in the 2000-01
year. Deferred maintenance continues to be of significant concern.
In general, the College continued the steady implementation of its Strategic Plan during the 1999-2000 fiscal year.
However, our aggressive efforts (a) to strengthen the academic program, (b) to become competitive in the admissions
arena, (c) to continue forward progress with our technology infrastructure, and (d) to build the foundation for a major
capital campaign, in combination with two successive years of poor performance in the recruitment of a fall class, resulted
in expenditures running well ahead of revenues.

II. FINANCIAL SITUATION IN 2000-01 COMPARED TO 1999-2000
The College is projecting a slight decrease in enrollment for the 2000-01 year. This in part reflects the cumulative impact
of the two years of shortfalls in fall enrollment noted above. We are budgeting for flat tuition and fees (based on slightly
reduced enrollment, the 4% increase in fee schedule, an overall increase in AEA program revenues and two new summer
Institutes), increased annual fund revenue (based on commitments of matching gifts), and reduced Released from
Restrictions revenue (based on our most conservative projection). We have also budgeted a lower tuition discount
number (based on the shift of tuition remission and co-op stipends to the expense side, and replacement of tuition
discounts with restricted scholarships).
On the expense side, our budget will include reductions in most categories, including the holding back of some unfilled
positions, and a 2% across the board reduction to be held until gifts increase or contingency can be released. Fringe
benefit expense projections have increased 16.7% due to both an increase in benefit costs and the shift of employee
tuition remission to the benefits line. In an inter-campus agreement with the
McGregor
School, the College has reduced
its subsidy from McGregor by one percentage point. Also reflected on the expense side is the repayment of the $200,000
Drey “backstop” to be used to balance the 1999-2000 year-end budget.
It should be noted that there are two scenarios for capital expenditures that rest on the Board’s decision regarding moving
a bond forward. The bond includes a number of capital projects (including the air-conditioning of Main Building and Mills
Hall) that are drawn from the 5-year capital list submitted to the Board for the last three years. What is budgeted here is
$150,000 for the first year of debt service on that proposed bond, in addition to a small amount to cover projects that are
not anticipated in the bond and cannot be accommodated under operating budgets. If the bond should move forward, the
College will undertake the capital projects outlined there, and will have the first year of debt service covered. If the Board
decides not to move the bond forward, the College would project a $100,000 capital expense line, and move the
remaining $75,000 to other expenses. In the second scenario, capital projects would only be undertaken as gift funding
became available.

I STRATEGIC UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES
There are two central concerns in our budgeting process. The first is clearly enrollment. While the College continues to
make progress, we are clearly being out-spent and out-marketed in our peer group, and we simply cannot compete with
the merit aid being offered to prospective students at competing institutions. The market is even more competitive this
year than last, and we are not spending enough to have a break-out recruitment year. We don’t have the resources to
put more into this effort in the 2000-01 budget year, but know that we should. The second is faculty compensation. We
have lost one of our best new faculty, and another is attracted to institutions with higher compensation. In addition, in our
extensive search experience we are finding increasing difficulty in attracting the faculty we seek to the College. Faculty
strength and the strength of the academic program are in a large part responsible for our retention gains, and so the
College’s budget addresses compensation improvement as the only significant change in the budget from last year.
Strengthening faculty and staff compensation. This is the central priority of the 2000-01 budget. In the fall the
Faculty Salary Committee brought to Administrative Council a five-year proposal to make aggressive improvements in
faculty compensation. The proposal documented a gaping disparity, as much as
20%,
between Antioch College salaries
and the bottom level of compensation among Great Lakes Colleges Association schools — in every rank. The
Committee’s proposal sought to close the gap between average salaries by rank and those at the college next above us
within three years, and to move toward the median in the following two years. This plan is central to our ability to attract
and retain both faculty and students. The College has experienced the consequences of poor compensation in the past:
those with the strongest credentials and teaching experience depart, and those who are weakest in both teaching and
scholarship remain. There are clear tensions and risks involved in addressing this goal, but there are more substantial
risks involved in failing to address the critical issue of faculty recruitment and retention. Toward this end, the College has
budgeted an overall compensation increase of 8.76% for faculty, and an overall compensation increase of 4% for staff.
Building fund development at every campus. The College is actively preparing the ground for a major campaign. We
have secured several lead gifts, have staff in place, and will seek further enhancements of our capacity that are tied to
securing further lead gifts for the campaign. No increases for this strategic priority are built into the 2000-01 budget.

Academic program development and innovation. The bulk of the College’s program development and innovation
effort is focused in two areas – our summer term, and the situated and problem-based learning work that is being led by
Dr. Pat Linn. Faculty summer opportunities for participatory and action research, field work, intensive course delivery,
team teaching, and Institute development provide a mechanism for innovation that has proven extremely productive, and
manageable within normal budget parameters. It continues to “back-feed” innovations into the fall and spring terms. A
faculty development workshop on summer block teaching, led by visiting Colorado College faculty, was attended by 23
College faculty. Again, the costs were covered by restricted faculty development funds and were not carried in the
operating budget. We are offering two new Summer Institutes in the Summer 2000 semester — a Leadership Institute
and a Writers Institute. While we have developed a new Antioch Education Abroad program (Buddhist Studies in Japan)
and are working on several additional new programs, program development in this area is required to be self-supporting,
and in fact produces additional revenue for the College.
Strengthening Antioch regional and national visibility and marketing. The College senior staff met with David
Treadwell and Matt Ralph of Plainspoke this winter, to explore the possibilities of a multi-phased approach to re-tooling
our admissions materials, marketing effort and web design. This team was responsible for the award-winning admissions
materials we are currently using, and David Treadwell has been associated with the College for a number of projects over
the years. The approach involves research and assessment through interviews on campus, and the development of a set
of admissions and marketing materials that are integrated with a redesigned web page. This project is not in our 2000-01
budget, and though we continue to prepare for this effort, it will wait on lead gifts or outside funding. Other efforts at
increasing visibility and preparing the ground for a capital campaign include (a) the College’s series of lectures and
performances celebrating the liberal arts, (b) the scheduled investiture and distinguished panel on “The Future of the
Liberal Arts”, increased frequency of alumni events around the country, (c) participation in the update of the Loren Pope
book on colleges that change lives, and (d) increased regional and national marketing of Antioch College’s summer
program.
Begin to implement the recommendations of the Technology Task Force. Since the recommendations are as yet
unclear, it is difficult to assess budgetary impact. The College, however, is not in a good position to meet additional
challenges in this regard, except through short- and long-term capital borrowing and continued fundraising with .alums.
The wiring of our basic infrastructure is critical (roughly half of our buildings are wired, 160 of 500 beds are wired, and

only 35 of our 61 faculty are networked) to recruitment and retention, and will be done outside of our operating budget.
Technology projects included in the bond under consideration are as follows:
Residence Halls Data network and telephone service $1 81,500
Computer and laboratory upgrades 66,600
Antioch Hall data network wiring 74,000
Digital editing equipment 8,700
There are no additions to our Technology Resources budget in our 2000-01 operating budget.
IV. ENROLLMENT, RECRUITMENT, RETENTION & FTE PROJECTIONS.
The College projects enrollment for the 2000-01 academic year of 598, down slightly from 1999-2000. The budget
projects 388 continuing students, with an attrition rate of 12.5% (based on a three-year historical average). The budget
anticipates 21 0 new student FTEs across the year, with 195 entering in the fall and 30 entering in the spring term (the
equivalent of 15 FTEs). In addition, we anticipate sustained non-matriculant enrollment in the summer term
(approximately
30),
and a sustained yield of 8-1 0 Limited Residency Degree Completion students.
V. TUITION AND FEES.
College tuition and fees reflect an increase of 4%. The tuition and fees for 2000-01 , as approved by the Board at the
February meeting, are as follows:
Tuition $ 19,408
Room 2,510
Board 2,622
Fees 422
CG Fees 412
TOTAL $ 25,374

This year our “facilities” fee was rolled into the tuition fee to make our structure comparable to that of other institutions. It
should be noted that health fees and Community Government fees have not yet been finalized.
Robert H. Devine
President

Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total E&G Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Hems
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
Antioch College
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
1998-99
Actual
–
10,817,666
-2,496,675
1,292,339
1,406,747
176,082
891
89,748
11,286,798
2,277,600
2,008,590
15,572,988
4,037,623
17,791
0
924,099
2,198,529
1,806,973
1,534,691
1,972,521
12,492,227
2,138,947
14,631,174
941,814
556,210
-40,110
425,714
0
0
941,814
0
1999-00
Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected 1
Projected
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
12,112,465
-2,604,879
1,628,000
1,450,000
230,000
0
120,000
12,935,586
2,669,426
1,170,122
16,775,134
5,022,644
0
0
1,081,315
2,252,864
2,559,686
1,406,754
1,739,567
14,062,830
2,206,304
16,269,134
506,000
2,026,800
-1,946,800
426,000
0
0
506,000
0
Change From
1999-00 Projected
to
2000-01
Budget
$ %
– –
911,527 8.14%
579,294 18.19%
-897,011
-35.530h
245,454
2O.38Oh
-143,167
-38.37OL
0
78,594 189.81 %
774,691 6.37%
136,797 5.40%
27,620
2.42%
939,108
5.93OA
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to
2000-01
Budget
$ %

Antioch College
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
1997-98
Actual
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Budget
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Con0
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected $ %
– – –
15,836,026 -585,498 -3.57%
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %

ANTIOCH COLLEGE
2000-01 Capital Budget
Campus Buildings Amount
Total Buildings
Campus
College
Building Improvements
Fire System Upgrade
HVAC Improvements
Replace Electrical
Transformel
Classroom Furniture & Lab Equ
Exterior Improvements
Hot Water Heaters
Condensate Lines & Pump
Roof
RepaIrslReplacements
ADA Ramps, Doors, Restrooms
Resurface Parking
LotsIDrives
Landscaping
North Hall
WindowsILighting
Amount
1 0,000
529,000
60,000
300,000
40.000
10.000
10,000
120.000
200.000
1 05,000
10,000
120,000
Total Building Improvements
Campus
College
Equipment
Instructional Comm Editing Eq
Campus Network
Computer Upgrades
Residence Hall
TechIPhones
Amount
8.700
74.000
66,600
181,500
Total Equipment
Campus
College
Furniture & Fixtures
Furniture & Carpet Res Halls
Amount
65,000
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Campus
College
Vehicles
Mowers
Vehicle Rewlacement
Amount
1 2.000
25.000
Total Vehicles
Campus
College
Library Books
Library Books
Amount
80.000
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget

Program
– – – – – – – –
Tuition
Room and Board
Fees
Total per Year
Antioch College
Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01
1999-00 2000-01
Rates Proposed % Change
——– ——– ——–
1 7,556 1 9,408 10.55%
4,876 5,132 5.25%
1,965 834 -57
-56%

GLEN HELEN ECOLOGY INSTITUTE
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
After a primarily “caretaker” leadership year, the Glen Helen Ecology Institute projects a slight surplus.
The total of contributions to the Institute from individuals has gradually increased. This budget assumes that this trend will
continue.
Fees charged by the Outdoor Education Center are being increased.
Following a budgeted 30 percent cut in total salaries from 1998-99 levels, 1999-2000 shows further savings in benefits
not due administrative employees on temporary contracts. In 2000-01, continuing employees will receive modest raises
and full benefits.
The contingency expenditure line is increased.
Don Hollister
Acting Director

Glen Helen
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total
E&G
Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
–
104,800
0
99,000
1,560
42,000
5,000
87
252,447
248,560
14,531
51 5,538
0
0
51 0,627
0
0
0
0
0
510,627
0
510,627
4,911
0
0
1,855
0
0
1,855
3,056
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
126,045
c
128,612
12,754
42,006
10,500
0
319,911
265,605
11,376
596,892
0
0
596,892
0
0
0
0
0
596,892
0
596,892
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

Glen Helen
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
1997-98
Actual
1998-99
Actual
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree
&
Univ Conf)
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1999-00
Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projectec
Projected
Change From Change From
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND GRADUATE SCHOOL
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
Antioch New England’s budget narrative for 2000-01 is presented below. Our budget planning exercise typically engages
all primary budget managers in the Graduate School — all academic department heads, administrative unit heads, and
the directors of our three primary
grantlcontract
units — the Antioch Psychological Services Center, Education by
DesignTM,
and the Antioch New England Institute. The President’s Planning and Advisory Council works with individual
budget managers to assess operating unit and institutional needs and also seeks input from standing and ad hoc work
groups who are looking at specific needs in the areas of marketing, technology and student services. As a result of this
comprehensive exercise, budgetary priorities are established and funding decisions are made.
From almost every perspective, including the critical variable of new student matriculants into our degree programs,
Antioch New England Graduate School’s 1999-2000 experience was highly positive. Supporting
“evidence”
for that
assessment may be found in the highlights that are covered in the meetings of the Antioch New England Campus
Committee. This presentation will focus exclusively on matters related to the 2000-01 budget.
In 1999-2000, Antioch New England was successful in countering the problematic fiscal picture which emerged during
1998-99.
As a reminder and as information to new readers, a brief historical perspective may be helpful. A year ago
(1998-99),
we were faced with an approximate 36 FPE shortfall, or the dollar equivalent of approximately $435,000,
because we simply did not meet our new student projections. Beyond the difficulty of bringing in a balanced budget in
1998-99, we also faced a huge hole (translation: greatly diminished “carry forward” of tuition dollars) for 1999-2000. This
problem was exacerbated by the fact that we implemented a new tuition schedule in June 1999 which eliminated the past
practice of “front loading” tuition payments, a factor which further reduced the tuition and fee income (by approximately
$1 50,000) that could be projected for 1999-2000. We developed some aggressive, but realistic, projections for new
student matriculants and still were in a position of submitting for 1999-2000 a budget which requested ULC and Board of
Trustee support for the up front use of funded reserves (as a substitute for the eventual release of the budgeted

contingency in order to provide salary increases and cover some essential costs related to strengthening our
technological infrastructure).
In 1999-2000, overall we hit our new student enrollment targets: 373 new matriculants entered, a 17% increase over
1998-99 and our best year in this regard since 1994-95. The one negative fiscal reality for 1999-2000 is that attrition
increased to
9%,
1% above the budgeted target and historical level of
8%.
While we anticipate balancing our 1999-2000
budget on June 30, the increased attrition has put some annoying constraints on the operating budget for the current
year. A significant percentage of the attrition, however, can be attributed to the fact that this is the fourth year of our
Ph.D.
program in Environmental Studies, and we discovered that a number of students went on interim status because
they were not yet ready to tackle the dissertation. This will be factored into subsequent budgets now that we have some
history with this relatively new program. The 2000-01 Tuition and Fees projection was constructed with the following
assumptions: There is a difference of approximately
$800,00
between projected “actual” tuition and fees for 1999-2000
and projected tuition and fees for 2000-01. (Please note that third-party contracts which provide tuition payments for
student participants have been reassigned from Tuition and Fees to the Contract line in both the
1999-2000
budget and
2000-01 so we are comparing “apples to
apples”
in this presentation):
(a) “carry forward” revenues from continuing students (47 more FTE students studying in 2000-01 than in
1999-2000 at an average yearly tuition of $7,765) yields $365,000 in 1999-2000 dollars;
(b) a somewhat conservative, but certainly realistic, projection of newly matriculating students in 2000-01 ;
(c) realization of “lost” revenue from the second year of the new tuition schedule’s implementation yields
$125,000 not included in (a) above;
(d) an approximate tuition increase in the 3.3% – 3.5% range, depending on program provides a net yield
of
$310,00);
and
(e) a projected 9% attrition factor.

II. KEY BUDGETARY PRIORITIES FOR 2000-01
Priority One – Compensation We see a need to provide Core faculty and staff with a salary and benefit package
increase in the 4.5 – 5% range (cost of living plus an increase in the cost of medical premiums) and a raise pool of 4% for
Associate and Adjunct faculty who have not had any raise for the past four years. The rationale here is simple: our
salaries are quite low and it is difficult to compete in a tight labor market; we are moving to a 10% premium share on
health coverage next January which makes it tough on people at the lower end of the pay scale; and we need to
demonstrate commitment to our loyal employees, some of whom easily recall the fact that we could not give raises in
1998-99. Total increase for Priority One = $250,000.
Priority Two – Position Replacement and Full Staffing While some of this actually will take place prior to June 30,
2000, we need to fill four positions that currently are or will be vacant: one faculty position in the Department of Clinical
Psychology; one faculty position in the Department of Education; one reference librarian; and one staff member in the
Business Office. Total increase for Priority Two, not included within the 1999-2000 budget = $100,000.
Priority Three – Fund Development From a staffing perspective, we believe that we have the basic fundraising
infrastructure in place: a Director of Development; a Director of the Annual Fund and
Alumnilae
Affairs; an administrative
assistant; two persons in publications and public relations; a part-time graphic designer; and significant work-study
support. The budget for this priority dovetails with the marketing and visibility budget (see below), but we have identified
a need to increase operational expense for travel, entertainment, expanded alumni events, professional training, etc. from
its current level of $22,000. Total increase for Priority Three, excluding personnel costs = $3,000.
Priority Four – Academic Program Development and Innovation Program development funding is also partially
lodged in the Fund 2 – Restricted category and it must be pointed out that much of the program development and
innovation activity comes from that source, not allocated to the operating budget from tuition and fee revenue sources
(i.e.,
we are looking at the feasibility of adding Environmental Advocacy as a track within our master’s programming in
environmental studies; presently that program
development/innovation
work is being funded via grants that total roughly
$40,000). No additional allocation to Priority Four for 2000-01.
Priority Five – Visibility and Marketing Costs here continue to escalate as the work and activities of the Graduate
School proliferate. Funds here are spent on publications of all kinds (catalogs, brochures, newsletters, flyers, an

environmental journal, reports, cards, etc.); advertisements (radio and print); World Wide Web management; design; etc.
Beyond increased demands and the customary inflationary expenses, we anticipate this budget to increase substantially
over the $200,000 allocated this year. Total increase for Priority Five, excluding personnel costs = $20,000.
Priority Six – Technology While we have yet to see the final recommendations of the University Task Force on
Technology, we did take some major steps in 1999-2000 to address some important infrastructure issues, especially in
light of the requirement that students have access to a computer and the Internet: (a) outsourcing of the First Class E-
mail operation; (b) reassignment of a faculty member to direct the educational technology component of our operation
and oversee the technical management of the World Wide Web (responsibility for training, student orientation, distance
learning initiatives, etc.); (c) job reengineering for a highly computer literate staff member to direct computer support
services for students; (d) continued employment of someone to assist in the Datatel transition and programming efforts
for admissions and registrarial functions; and (e) technical upgrades to a moderate expenditure level. Excluding the
academic computing, which is connected to the delivery of library services, currently we have 4.2 FTE personnel plus the
outsource as our technological personnel infrastructure. Though not quite adequate, we intend to keep it at that level for
2000-01. We do, however, continually need to upgrade hardware and software, expand licenses, etc. With the changes
made during 1999-2000 incorporated into the 2000-01 budget, Total Allocation to Priority Six, $323,00, a net
increase of $101,000 over the allocation in the 1999-2000 budget. ($1 8,000 of capital expense, including lease for
computers, is in the capital budget.)
Priority Seven – Capital Improvements The final budget priority for 2000-01 is in the area of capital improvements.
There are three key projects which need attention and we believe that we have the operating resources to address them.
First, the main parking lot has two cracks which need to be filled and the entire lot needs to be sealed and striped at an
estimated cost of $5,500. The West Wing of the building which houses the expanded Antioch Psychological Services
Center needs to have its roof replaced. We have known this fact for some time, and it seems prudent to tackle the
problem now, before we find ourselves in a position where there is serious damage (estimated replacement cost is
$35,000). At the present time, we have not allocated funds from the operating or capital budget to repair the roof.
However, we may do so via the operating budget if the admissions picture improves, use of a campus-based contingency
(see below), use of the mandatory contingency, or the use of the funded reserves. Each of these capital projects ought
to be done in the summer 2000. (Again, this critical priority underscores the incredible pressure that has been put on

campuses because the unfunded reserves continue to remain largely unfunded after eight years of what was presented
as immediate hope — it makes it really impossible to plan!) Total increase for Priority Seven = $5,500. (Capital
budget also includes principal payment on building, library books and journals, and computer lease.)
Goes Without Saying Priority – Mandatory Expense Increases $9,800 for University Faculty Conference; $1 5,000 for
additional mandatory contingency; and $9,500 for additional mandatory liquidity reserve. This budget also contains a
Discretionary Campus Contingency of $36,000 which may be used to address equity issues, roof repair, etc.
At this point in time, we believe that this 2000-01 budget presentation is viable and does begin to address, though
modestly in all cases, critical needs of Antioch New England Graduate School. Certainly the budgetary picture at this
time is considerably brighter than it appeared one year ago, for we have a substantially enhanced, and realistic, revenue
picture on the horizon.
Jim Craiglow
President

1997-98
Actual
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total E&G Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
Antioch New England Graduate School
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
1998-99
Actual
–
8,318,253
-56,680
38,584
773,186
0
421,698
145,216
9,640,257
0
358,100
9,998,357
4,121,495
0
889,840
442,012
583,540
2,276,697
713,060
435,987
9,462,631
0
9,462,631
535.726
521,004
0
75,000
-60,278
0
535,726
0
1999-00
Budget
–
8,306,440
-40,000
41,000
830,000
0
250,000
57,700
9,445,140
0
268,000
9,713,140
4,239,619
0
761,000
430,792
594,691
2,524,042
704,996
423,000
9,678,140
0
9,678,140
35,000
105,000
0
80,000
-1 50,000
0
35,000
0
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
8,870,495
c
102,026
993,095
c
186,972
164,502
10,317,094
c
156,19S
10.4
73,292
4,355,BOS
c
834.61C
608,515
605,477
2,86
1,805
684,577
339,OOC
10,289,793
10,289,793
183.506
98,501.
c
85,OOC
c
c
183.50C
c
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — —

Antioch New England Graduate School
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf)
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
9,260,966
4,535,279
1,334,148
362,124
19,585
12,130
244,041
879,482
288,825
441,149
0
51,583
0
0
79,947
973,515
-277,000
61,800
0
0
0
9,006,608
254,358
234,027
0
70,000
-49.669
0
254,358
0
1998-99
Actual
–
9,998,357
5,097,104
1,265,337
251,838
45,462
16,830
182,615
959,845
31 7,641
432,941
0
79,027
0
0
102,262
993,374
-313,415
61,000
0
-29,230
0
9,462,631
535,726
521,004
0
75,000
-60,278
0
535,726
0
1999-00
Budget
–
9,713,140
5,067,478
1,368.852
202,481
48,000
10,910
182,205
953,854
312,025
429,075
0
105,625
164,383
0
102,739
1,054,645
-364,332
60,200
0
-20,000
0
9,678,140
35,000
105,000
0
80,000
-150,000
0
35,000
0
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
–
9,944,268
5,220,533
1,351,395
335,176
59,729
10,829
175,467
994,732
328,852
426,570
0
33,329
0
0
102.739
1,054,645
-364,332
60,200
0
32,613
0
9,822,477
121,791
11 3,274
0
80,000
-71,483
0
121,791
0
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
10,473,293
5,256,094
1,492,771
2 77,468
19,000
12,050
199,744
1,005,819
324,250
425,367
0
33,386
1 79,530
36,000
112,206
1,154,392
-4 17,279
59,800
0
119,195
10,289,793
183,500
98,500
0
85,000
0
0
183,500
0
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND GRADUATE SCHOOL
2000-01 Capital Budget
Campus Buildings
Total Buildings
Campus Building Improvements
New England Sealing & Striping Parking Lot
Total Building Improvements
Campus Equipment
New England Computer Equipment
Total Equipment
Campus Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Campus Library Books
New England Library Books
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
5,500
Amount
1 8.000
Amount

ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND
Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01
Program
Applied Psychology Department
Dance & Movement Therapy Certificate
Dance & Movement Therapy MA
Counseling Psychology MA
Marriage & Family Therapy MA
Clinical Psychology
Psy.D.
Environmental Studies Department
Environmental Studies MS
Resource Management & Administration MS
Environmental Studies MS w Certification
Environmental Studies
Ph.D.
Fall Ail
Fall All
Fall Fall, Spring
Summer
Spring Spring
Summer Summer
Summer Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
1999-00
Rate
–.—-
$4,000
$5,500
$5,100
$3,200
$2,100
$5,100
$2,100
$8,750
$3,700
$7,000
$4,700
$3,200
$4,700
$3,200
$4,700
$3,200
$3,100
$6,200
$2,200
$4,100
2000-01
%
Rate Change

Program
—————-
Education Department – Waldorf Programs
Waldorf Certificate
Waldorf 3+2 Certificate
Waldorf
MEd
year round
Waldorf
MEd
Summer Sequence
Education Department – Integrated Learning
Intergrated Learning MEd
Education Department – Experienced Educator
Experienced Educators MEd (5 semester)
Experienced Educators
MEd (4 semester)
Organization & Management
OM Weekend MEdIMHSA
OM Weekend
MEdIMHSA –
OM Weekend MS
1999-00 2000-01 %
Start Term Term Rate Rate Change
All
Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
All
All
Spring Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring Fall, Spring
Summer

ANTIOCH SEATTLE
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
For our actual budget performance this year, we are estimating 8 FPE fewer students than our 1999-00 projections
resulting in about a $160,000 reduction in projected tuition revenue. The balance in the mix of student enrollments
influenced negatively the tuition revenue this year. Our three highest-priced programs (Management, Psychology, and
Whole Systems Design) came in with lower than projected enrollments that, in turn, were compensated by increased FTE
in the Education and new BATC Programs, two of our lower tuition programs. However, other sources of revenue are
better than we originally projected and with the use of our reserves and contingency funds we will present a balanced
budget at the end of this year.
Antioch University Seattle is submitting a budget for next year that we consider conservative (while indicating enrollment
growth) and responsible. It provides for increased reserve funding and needed capital improvement. The Budget and
Planning Council, which is composed of all program directors, Deans, faculty, staff, and student representatives, guided
our budget process. This is the Council’s second year of operation and it has a good track record based on the budget
proposal it recommended to the President in 1999-00. The Council heard compensation proposals from both staff and
faculty committees and a student personnel proposal from the Student Services Council. The Academic Dean worked
with the individual academic programs and units on budget issues and all Deans presented their recommendations to the
Council.
While the last two years of enrollment figures at Antioch Seattle have seen an overall increase, many of our programs
have not met their projections. Our enrollment projections for next year are conservative despite showing an increase
over both last year’s projection (109 FPE) and this year’s anticipated actual performance (1 16.4 FPE). The conservatism
is based on projecting stable or decreasing enrollments in the programs that had difficulty the past few years. Whole
Systems Design is projected at 7.4 FPE below this year’s anticipated performance. Psychology and Management are
projected flat when compared to this year’s anticipated enrollments and significantly below last year’s projections. The
growth in FPE is in our successful site-based MA Education program and the new Bachelor’s in Liberal Studies and

Teacher Certification (BATC) program. The BATC alone is projected at 93.3 FPE and that combined with the increase in
the site-based education program accounts for 132 FPE growth in our overall enrollment. Our continuing education
initiative predicts a decrease in enrollments because of the new standards imposed by the state and its effect on how
teachers acquire on-going training.
Highlights of the increase in tuition revenue for AUS between the projected actual for 1999-2000 and the rejections for
2000-01 can be explained as follows. $308,727 of the new revenue is from the tuition increase. The new initiative,
Bachelor of Arts
wneacher
Certification accounts for $809,448 in new revenue with the tuition increase included.
Expansion of the MA in Education site based program is projected to produce an additional $300,280. Incremental
growth in the BA completion program will add an additional $105,800. Smaller growth in total revenue generated is also
noted in Psychology (due to the tuition increase), Environment and Community SWO, and OSR. The programs that are
projecting less revenue next year (even with a tuition increase) are: Teacher Certification, Teacher Certification
MA,WSD,
HRD,
Corporate Leadership, E & C Limited Residency. The Management Program is projecting nearly flat revenue after
the Tuition Increase.
We are proposing a general 4% increase in tuition, but in reality the effect upon students and programs operates in a
range of a 0% to 4.35% increase. The range reflects our continued movement toward a tuition schedule that is more
linear and provides for the cost per unit within a program to be the same no matter the number of credit hours enrolled by
a student.
Our University Relations Office continues to show improvement in our fund development and annual fund campaign
efforts.
The four areas of priority the Council identified for the 2000-01 year are (1) salaries and compensation, (2) enhanced
student services, (3) marketing and recruitment, and (4) fund raising. These four areas are in keeping with our campus
strategic plan and coincide with the five areas identified by Chancellor Hall as priorities for the University.
II. STRATEGIC UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES
s
Strengthen faculty and staff compensation We are recommending a 3.6% general raise in compensation for all staff
and administrators, which is an actual 3.0% increase in salary. The faculty body has also requested that we address
some internal salary inequity issues that have resulted from a couple of years when faculty were not advanced on the

salary schedule because of the inability of the institution to give any raises. Consequently, the faculty salary pool
translates into a 3.7% salary raise and a 4.5% total compensation raise. In addition, we continue to make snail-like
progress in trying to move toward more competitive adjunct salaries by increases their compensation
$50/course.
Our longer-term plan for strengthening salary and compensation involves a fairly bold model for revenue sharing built on
a growth. We are proposing to both faculty and staff that they become partners in campus growth through the sharing of
some portion of future increases in revenues. The plan will involve defining a reference group of institutions that
participate in the CUPA annual salary survey to establish our relative position. Once the salary benchmarks are
established we will propose a four-year plan for improving our position relative to the reference group. The portion of
increased revenue set aside for compensation will have correction factors for inflation as well as increases in overhead.
In keeping with our strategic plan in “retaining and valuing quality
employees,”
we are funding a staff and faculty
diversity-training program, a formal employee recognition program, an ergonomic study for staff, and community-building
teas.
Building fund development at every campus Since Fall 1997, Seattle has steadily increased its investment in fund
development. We currently have a Dean of University Relations, whose major responsibility rests in the area of fund
development, and a Director of Advancement, whose responsibility is managing the annual fund and minimal alumni
relations support. We also have a
.5
FTE graphics person. We approved a staff support position for the University
Relations Office effective January 2000; however, the position has been delayed until July because of revenue shortages.
As of July 2000 we will have 3.0 FTE in this area, but it is important to recognize that these positions also cover alumni
relations, publications,
community/corporate
relations, government relations, fund development, and media relations.
The increase is this area as a result of the staff increase will be approximately $35,000.
If the fund development grant proposed by the University Administration becomes a reality, we will hire a full-time alumni
relations and events planning person. The addition of the fourth FTE will provide us with the staffing required to make our
fund raising and visibility efforts successful.
Strengthening Antioch regional and national visibility and marketing The responsibility for visibility and market rests
with both the University Relations Office and the Admissions Office. In an attempt to be as efficient as possible, we are
increasing the staff of the University Relations Office by
.5
FTE and adding that to the current open graphics position to
create a new full-time position responsible for publications, web page content, and media. Publications is an area that

has been sorely neglected at Antioch Seattle and with the increase demand for Web page content, staffing in this area is
a must. We plan to outsource the graphics work.
In Admissions we are adding another recruitment position to cover off-site recruitment and admissions in the new BATC
and MAED sites. In addition we are increasing the advertisement budget from $75,850 to $1 10,850. Next year is our 25″
Anniversary and to cover numerous celebratory events and activities we are budgeting $1 8,000.
In total, we are increasing our allocations for visibility and marketing by approximately $103,000 with $60,000 in 1.5 FTE
staffing, $25,000 in advertising, and $18,000 for anniversary events.
Academic program development and innovation Our major enrollment growth next year will be the result of
expanding our new BATC program to four cohorts and increase our MAED sites from four to six cohorts. These will
increase the head count of those two initiatives by 120. However, the development of those programs will call for
increased faculty and operational expenses in both areas by a total of
$535,000+.
We are considering two new
off-
campus Teacher Certification sites. If these develop, they will require an increased investment to cover faculty and
operational costs.
We will begin offering some BA on-line courses in collaboration with Southern California, but we currently do not look for
that initiative to have a direct effect upon our enrollments. The $35,000 invested in this collaborative effort comes from
University innovation funds.
The four programs of Management, Whole Systems Design including its Organizational System Renewal program,
Human Resource Development, and Environment and Community are being brought together into one system tentatively
named the “Center for Sustainable Systems.” Our current strategy is to unite the budgets of all of these programs to
create the Center’s first budget. However, we know that there is a need to enhance the 2000-01 budget of the Center in
order to attract a quality director and provide venture capital for potential contracts and educational services. We will
have to obtain this money from gifts, most likely from alumni and friends who are supportive and excited about the
Center’s concept. We estimate an enhancement need for our first year of at least $100,000. We have also applied for a
$15,000 grant from the University Innovation Fund to assist in marketing the new Centers and the expected new
curriculum initiatives. However, much of the additional financial support will depend on how successful Dr. Mary Marcy

and I are in soliciting gifts. The reorganization is an attempt to stop the enrollment leakage in all of these programs and
prevent the potential termination of two of the programs.
We have reserved $10,000 in the Academic Dean’s budget to address professional development and potential growth in
the academic
computing/technology
area and an additional $10,000 to fund any efforts or consulting needed to prepare
us for our accreditation self-study process. The budget reflects an increase in the salary for the new Academic Dean to
replace the current, lower paid interim person.
Begin to implement the recommendations of the Technoloqy Task Force We are increasing our technology staff to
3.0 FTE to increase support for Web maintenance and provide some minimal training to faculty and staff. In addition, we
have set aside faculty funds the past two years for a person to work with faculty on gearing-up for Internet usage and
course development, but these funds have been frozen because of budget complications. We hope that this next year
we can move ahead in this area of technology.
Last year we increased funding for computer and software acquisition to a total of $70,000. We are increasing this by
$10,000 which is dedicated mostly to software acquisition. Our Technology Round Table has recently reviewed an
assessment of our individual desk computers. It appears we need to replace about 40% of our computers to bring all
faculty up to basic standards for doing Internet research. Short of some creative financing or University-wide purchasing,
it may be difficult to replace that many machines in this budget year. Our long-term goal is to establish a replacement
cycle of three to four years.
I OTHER PRIORITIES
Strategic objectives in Seattle’s five-year plan not incorporated in the five University-wide priorities include enhancing our
student services, diversifying our financial base and reserves, and continued improvement of our physical environment to
attract and retain students. Below is an explanation of the strides we are making in these areas for the
2000-01
academic year.

Enhanced student services The topic of enhancing our student services has surfaced in the Planning and Budget
Council as a priority expressed by students who feel that their voice is not represented in the administration and that their
needs are not being met in various areas within the institution. The history of Antioch Seattle has been that individual
programs have provided what little student services are offered beyond the registrar, financial aid, admissions, and
student accounts. In fact, most of the service provided in the programs has been in advising with the exception of
teacher education and psychology providing some intern placement services. Issues around career counseling and
placement, child care, student governance, student newspaper, counseling, health services, student grievance and
affirmative action and minority affairs, to mention a few, have either not been provided or provided in a sporadic manner
through the years. Our inability to provide some of these services continues to be raised in student complaints.
We have yet to determine the best solution to address student service needs on an adult campus. The Student Service
Council has proposed the creation of a new Dean of Student Services or the establishment of at least some position that
would focus on student needs. However, there is no unanimity of opinion around this particular solution. Consequently,
we are performing an in-depth needs assessment during the first part of next year. We will then develop a plan to
address the priorities that student designate over the next three to four years.
The librarian is being moved to a full-time position. The position was increased from a half-time position last year to a
three-quarter position and needs to be increased to full-time this year. The increase of 1 FTE in technology support will
also assist in providing technological services and training to students.
The work-load in our student accounts area has doubled over the last six years. Therefore, we are adding an additional
.5 FTE to this office to better serve students. We are also increasing the FTE of the part-time assistant in our bookstore
and staffing in our Registrar’s Office. One other area where students are showing greater need is in career workshops
and we are increasing the number provided by hiring career consultants.
The whole area of student outcomes assessment has also taken on a priority at the Seattle campus. Last year I funded a
25% faculty position to start evaluating and designing our campus’ approach to outcomes assessment. This year we are
bolstering our efforts by increasing the faculty position to half-time, provide a graduate student as a research assistant for
the faculty member, and provide funds from the President’s budget for professional development of faculty in this area.

Diversifying our financial base to support institutional excellence and innovation One means of diversifying our
financial base and increasing the fiscal health of our campus is our increased efforts and success in fund raising. We will
be increasing our projected revenue in annual giving from $20,000 to $40,000 and our
25th
Anniversary will provide us
with an opportunity to initiate an annual scholarship endowment event. In addition, we are increasing the President’s
fund reserve from $36,315 last year to $1 55,959 this year, which will provide for an emergency or to cushion a failure to
meet our projected enrollments. We will be seeing new revenue from having all of our tenant space leased and from the
implementation of new education programs.
Improving our physical environment We are positioning ourselves to move ahead with plans to renovate 4200 square
feet of space that was recaptured when our previous tenant went bankrupt. The primary needs we hope to address are
moving the admissions staff and University Relations staff to a more accessible and centralized location, improving our
technology teaching center, creating offices for our computing staff, adding two new classrooms and two new seminar
rooms, and expanding the space for the library. Funding for this improvement will need to be borrowed. If by January
our financial and enrollment picture look healthy, our current plan is to use the President’s reserve fund as a down
payment on the construction loan. A 9 preliminary estimate for the renovations is $350,000. In addition, our operating
budgets will need to account for increased utility and cleaning expenses of $1 0,800.
We are placing $50,000 in the newly formed capital improvement fund as a start to build reserves to, literally, prepare for
that rainy day when the roof has to be totally resurfaced. The last estimate we received was about $500,000. Our plan is
to continue to put a minimum of
$50,OOO/year
in this fund to help defer the eventual cost of this capital improvement. This
budget also includes funds to pay for the costs associated with paying for our new phone and voice mail systems.
Toni Murdock
President

Antioch Seattle
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total E&G Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Hems
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
7,085,708
-59,353
6,928
158,522
0
67,919
202,816
7,462,540
250,786
65,095
7,778,421
3,377,932
0
109
391,862
547,792
1,942,423
826,264
165,087
7,251,469
242,294
7,493,763
284,658
1,968.557
-1,647,883
100,000
-136,016
284.658
0
1998-99
Actual
–
7,054,518
-57,126
23,065
168,179
0
26,120
223,656
7,438,412
275,075
40.427
7,753,914
3,374,420
0
76 1
275,594
61 1,789
1,960,690
794,329
197,245
7,214,828
262,307
7,477,135
276,779
59,606
0
11 0,000
0
0
169,606
107,173
1999-00
Budget
–
8,027,204
-86,700
20,000
189,641
0
10,000
188,765
8,348,910
285,000
7,000
8,640,910
3,412,450
0
0
336,456
751,813
2,552,770
875.257
181,641
8,110,387
270,823
8,381,210
259,700
139,500
0
120,200
0
0
259,700
0
1999-00
Projected
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to 1999-00 Projected
$ %
– —
Change From Change From
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

Antioch Seattle
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
1997-98
Actual
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Con0
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1998-99
Actual
–
7,753,914
3,872,617
924,645
134,643
87,310
30,654
11 9,652
530,773
212,240
603,979
218,489
9,959
0
0
90,644
830,907
-262,705
48,000
0
25,328
0
7,477,135
276,779
59.606
0
110,000
0
0
169,606
107,173
1999-00
Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
9,900,716
4,980,026
1,208,595
167,072
56,072
68,350
137,617
590,164
3 13,939
599,190
270,300
18,173
157,352
205,959
118,014
1,089,472
-393,379
50,800
0
0
0
9,637,716
263,000
133,000
0
130,000
0
0
263,000
0
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

Campus
Campus
Seattle
Campus
Seattle
Campus
Seattle
Campus
ANTIOCH SEATTLE
2000-01 Capital Budget
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
ADA Compliance, Misc
Lobby Lighting
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
Computer Equipment
Audio Visual Equipment
Computer Instruction Cart
Total Equipment
Furniture & Fixtures
Classroom Chairs
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Library Books
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
1 0,000
1 2,000
Amount
69,000
1 2,000
1 0,000
Amount
20,000

Antioch Seattle
Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01
Program
——–
BA Completion Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
ere
Non Matriculated
BA Teachers Certificate Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add credit
Non Matriculated
Psychology Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
ere
Non Matriculated
Whole System Design Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
ere
Non Matriculated
Management Full Time
(Monthly Rate)
1999-00 2000-01
Rates Proposed % Change
——– ——– em—–e
335 335 0.00%
2,010 2,010 0.00%
3,540 3,660 3.39%
295 305 3.39%
335 335 0.00%
Corporate Leadership Full Time

Program
– – – – – – – –
Education Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
cre
Non Matriculated
Site Based
EducationITeacher
Cer Full Time
EducationITC
MA Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
cre
Organization Systems Ren
Northwest Full Time
Midwest Full Time
Environment & Community LRO
Cohort 1 & 2 Part Time
Cohort 4 (Win ’98) Part Time
Cohort 4 (Win ’99) Part Time
Cohort 5 Part Time
Cohort 6 Part Time
Environment & Community SWO
Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add
ere
Non Matriculated
1999-00
Rates
– – – – – * – –
340
1,360
2,240
280
340
1,980
3,400
410
1,640
3,280
410
3,682
3,682
2,042
2,165
2,250
2,500
355
1,420
2,840
355
355
2000-01
Proposed % Change

ANTIOCH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
1999-2000 was a good year, fiscally speaking, for AUSC. That’s “good” not “great,” but good is good enough in the
context of the poor performances several years ago.
According to our revenue projections generated after the March 2000 monthly close, we will finish this fiscal year with a
positive balance of about $70,000 and perhaps as much as $100,000. (The spread is a function of how much in restricted
funding can be allocated in the next two months to the FY operating budget.) All of the ponderables are accounted for in
this projection; there are a few imponderables that remain in both income (actual
LAIMFA
enrollment for June 2000) and
expenses (anticipated and unanticipated purchasing needs, particularly for urgent technology issues). But we think this is
a solid statement of where we will be at year’s end — which does not mean we will not persist in our vigilance. Stamping
out luxury and extravagance are the ever-present goals (though, truth be told, at AUSC as in much of Antioch, we’re so
thrifty I’m not sure we’d know opulence if we saw it) — all kidding aside, the AUSC community has excelled in keeping
expenses under control and they have my unbounded gratitude.
In summing up this year, there are a few variances that require scrutiny:
The LA Psychology Program was approximately $400,000 below projected tuition income. This is a
matter for alarm and I have directed the Program Chairpersons to address the issues associated with
this shortfall as a high priority.
Our new bookstore in LA did not produce the anticipated income, falling about $32,600 short. However,
expenses were also under budget by roughly the same amount. We will scrutinize this auxiliary
enterprise closely in the next year.

Serious questions about its financial viability led us to question continuing the Antioch University
Counseling Center, a major community outreach effort in LA. The Center’s director has come up with a
reasonable approach to fiscal sustainability for next year; under scrutiny, it will remain open, and we
hope prosper, though we have retained the possibility of closure depending on success of the current
plans.
Questions continue about how to handle information technology in the region. We overspent our budget
by two-thirds ($60,000 beyond the $90,000 budgeted) in LA and kept to budget, by delaying fulfilling
needs, in SB. We do not have this area under control and it should be. We are examining options for
hiring in place of LA outsourcing, but are not sure if that will result in better quality service and cost
efficiencies. It’s a quandary.
Other budget areas were quite within the range of acceptability and, in the case of tuition-based programs other than LA
Psychology, we are extremely proud of the staff and faculty whose Herculean efforts helped us to exceed the annual
projections in most cases. Indeed, all programs were above projections with the exception of SB
MAOM
(down 8%). (To
our delighted surprise, LA
MAOM
was up by
66%!)
The regional Teacher
EducationIMA
was down in its LA cohort
numbers (24 budgeted; 10.73 actual) for the year, but this is not a worry at this point because it was due to start-up
anomalies (only a month to recruit in Spring 1999).
The other highlight this year has been in personnel arrivals and departures at the leadership level.
Laurien Alexandre, formerly the regional Academic Dean, and Laura Pelligrini, the regional Human Resources Director,
left their positions this year. We decided, as part of our continuing reorganization, not to replace them with regional
officers. Matt
Bentley
in LA and Linda Hackett in SB have filled in with remarkable ability in the human resources area,
and they will have major roles after reorganization. I took on the title of Acting Academic Dean after Laurien’s departure
in September 1999, and I will be charitable to myself by characterizing my soon-to-end deanship as unremarkable yet
able given the plethora of other responsibilities.
Donna Starr and Richard Whitney changed titles and roles in SB. Donna will leave the regional Dean for Administration
and Finance position to become SB Executive Dean and SB
MAOM
Chairperson. Richard moves from half-time

Associate Academic Dean to full-time SB Academic Dean. These are definitely good moves, already producing major
benefits.
Chloe Reid joined us in February as LA Executive Dean and has been an excellent addition to my team.
We are concluding searches for regional Chief Fiscal Officer, LA Academic Dean, and the President’s Executive
Assistant. We have strong candidates for all positions and I hope to be able to announce these appointments at the June
2000 Board meeting.
II. 1999-2000 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Our proposed budget for 2000-01 reaches the $10,000,000 benchmark, an increase of about $800,000 over the budget
for 1999-2000 and approximately $1,000,000 above 1999-2000 projected actuals.
The bulk of this increase in revenue is projected in program growth — modest increases in growth in all programs, except
for Teacher Education, with significant additional income from cohort expansion, and in LA Psychology, with a decline
projected from the previous year. We are projecting conservatively in all programs and we can anticipate stronger
performance than budgeted. But we are adopting a prudent approach to financial planning as we ascertain how accurate
we can be in enrollment projections. We have been gratified by how accurate we have been in this fiscal year, with the
exception of the unanticipated LA Psychology decline.
Additional 2000-01 income comes from an increase in tuition which amounts to a 3.6-4.4% for all programs.
There will be small but important increases in facilities. We have added a suite in LA for the regional offices and will be
adding additional space in SB to accommodate program expansion. We have abandoned our plan to move to a new
building in SB since conditions in our current building have changed and we can sublet or lease all needed additional
space for the next five to ten years. .

A significant regional goal is to establish a full-fledged development office. To do this, we plan to redefine several current
positions and hire a Chief Development Officer in January 2000. Foundation, major donor and grant development
activities will accelerate over the course of the year.
Program development continues. We press on to build upon recent initiatives in the Community Humanities Education
and California Community Internet Institute programs and a nascent long-term institutional relationship with Compton
Community College. Religion and Public Life, Critical Media Studies, and continuing education, including distance
learning, are areas we are exploring for credit and non-credit initiatives. These will not have an impact on the budget for
next year, most likely, but will have a future impact which will be significant.
To buttress our international component, 1 have been exploring relationships with a Brazilian university and the Ministries
of Higher Education in Vietnam and Cuba. These are still in their infancy, but I anticipate exciting possibilities with these
areas and others in the next year.
I. ULC Strategic Planning Budget Priorities at Antioch University Southern California
In this section, I will link specific increases in allocations to the five strategic planning budget priorities identified by ULC
for special attention in 2000-01.
A. Strengthen Faculty and Staff Compensation
An across-the-board salary increase for the region: 4% for those earning less than $50,000; 2% for
those earning more than $50,000.
Substantial increases in the pay rate for adjunct faculty at both campuses in all programs.
Mandated University-paid increases in medical benefit costs.
B. Building Fund Development at Every Campus
Addition of a position for a Chief Development Officer at the regional level to begin January 2000.
Clerical support for the Development Office and Fiscal Office.

Executive Assistant position for the President’s Office.
Hiring a part-time alumni assistant for SB.
C. Academic Program Development and Innovation
Newly-created LA Academic Dean position.
Clerical support for the LA Academic Dean and Executive Dean.
Budget increase for the Teacher EducationIMA program (core faculty, adjunct faculty, operating
expenses).
Creation of a 50% position for the Registrar staff.
D. Strengthen Antioch Regional and National Visibility and Marketing
Creation of a new regional Program Development position.
Increase in the publication schedule for our newsletter from two to four times a year
E. Begin To Implement Recommendations of the Technology Taskforce
Funding of an on-line library for LA.
Additional funding of technical support for academic computing.
Allocation of capital budget to computer purchases as possible.
Mark Schulman
President

Antioch Southern California
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total
E&G
Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
7,439,528
-1 82,975
11,705
238,306
0
0
17,526
7,524,090
561
64,118
7,588,769
2,877,836
0
84,175
500,821
1,040,449
2,007,239
1,136,581
251,712
7,898,813
0
7,898,813
-310,044
38,516
0
0
-92,203
0
-53,687
-256,357
1998-99
Actual
–
7,821,333
-194,981
65,820
200,424
0
0
13,842
7,906,438
119,913
132,682
8,159,033
2,899,988
0
95,614
617,397
961,452
2,098,537
1,121,661
201,924
7,996,573
113,165
8,109,738
49,295
49,295
0
0
0
0
49,295
0
1999-00
Budget
–
9,286,332
-212,100
97,500
263,500
0
0
35,550
9,470,782
230,000
159,000
9,859,782
3,612,262
0
106,603
760,097
1,112,595
2,515,310
1,219,440
271,000
9,597,307
230,000
9,827,307
32,475
32,475
0
0
0
0
32,475
0
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected $ %
– – –
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
9,920,401.
-212,lOc
87,50C
257.50C
c
c
13,30C
10,066,60C
200,152
144.03C
10,410,782
3,738,8 16
c
89,286
798,735
1,213,634
2,832,93S
1,260,004
265,500
10,198,920
184,862
10,383,782
27,000
27,000
0
0
0
0
27,000
0
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
s % $ %
– — –

Antioch Southern California
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
Contingency/Reserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Con9
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Hems
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
7,588,769
3,903,729
812,557
147,803
89,834
34,426
120,152
722,589
1
,I
83,403
18,390
0
7,024
0
0
78,064
993,908
-271,066
58,000
0
0
0
7,898,813
-310,044
38,516
0
0
-92203
0
-53,687
-256,357
1998-99
Actual
–
8,159,033
3,960,231
870,178
232,456
64,341
24,194
181,077
751,295
1,126,567
26,754
94,734
3,520
0
0
89,688
949,170
-325,147
54,200
0
6,480
0
8,109,738
49,295
49,295
0
0
0
0
49,295
0
1999-00
Budget
–
9,859,782
4,641,716
1,054,160
284,279
75,800
57,010
157,148
1,006,985
1,170,203
13,150
190,000
2,015
183,058
100,039
103,718
1,140,897
-406,271
53,400
0
0
0
9,827,307
32,475
32,475
0
0
0
0
32,475
0
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00
to 1999-00
Projecte< Projected $ % - - - 9,438,458 -421,324 -4.27' Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 10,410,782 5,192,437 1,136,874 195,493 77,155 31,510 198,508 919,405 1,220,173 11,750 146,000 1,516 1 77,430 121,744 110,894 1,219,831 -440,779 55,200 0 8,64 1 0 10,383,782 27,000 27,000 0 0 0 0 27,000 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - ANTIOCH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 2000-01 Capital Budget Campus Buildings Amount Total Buildings 0 Campus Building Improvements Amount Total Building Improvements 0 Campus Equipment Amount Southern CA Computer Equipment 27,000 Total Equipment 27,000 Campus Furniture & Fixtures Amount Total Furniture & Fixtures Campus Library Books Total Library Books 0 Grand Total Capital Budget 27,000 -------- -------- Antioch Southern California Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01 1999-00 Rates Program Per Quarter -------- -------- Los Angeles - BA Program 3,400 Los Angeles - MAP & MAOM 3,550 Los Angeles - MFA Program 4,200 Los Angleles - Teacher Cert 3,400 2000-01 Proposed Per Quarter % Change -------- -------- 3,550 4.41 % 3,700 4.23% 4,350 3.57% 3,550 4.41% Santa Barbara - BA Program 3,250 3,400 4.62% Santa Barbara - MAP Progra 3,400 3,550 4.41% Santa Barbara - MAOM Proc 3,400 3,550 4.41% Santa Barbara - Teacher Ce 3,400 3,550 4.41% THE McGREGOR SCHOOL 2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES Fiscal 2000 marks the first year in The McGregor School's history operating with both a President and an Academic Dean. While the projected revenues did not meet expenses, The School was able to come in with a balanced budget. This is due to cutting back on expenses in all areas of operation. This narrative will note that one program is ahead of projections - Teacher Education. The other area of noticeable strength is continuing education, with growth in the Educational Leadership Seminar Series (ELSS). This program served almost 800 Miami Valley teachers during this academic year. Highlights of the current year include the Ohio Board of Regents approval of the Master degree in Education (M.Ed.). We have successful recruitment underway for the first M.Ed. class of 22 students. Another new development is the approval from the Ohio Department of Education for Principalship Licensure. In effect, a student can earn the M.Ed. then continue on for principal certification. Once the learner has two years teaching experience, the certification becomes official. The School stabilized enrollment within the Weekend College, which now has fourteen competitors in the region. To assist in the undergraduate enrollment at McGregor, a strong articulation policy was finalized with Sinclair Community College (over 20,000 students) in December. This should result in an even greater transfer program from Sinclair. The University review of the Individualized Master of Arts (IMA) was completed, resulting in significant improvements in quality and delivery. The redesign of the Conflict Resolution program created a transition from an individualized program to a course-based, technology enhanced program. As indicated above, growth is strong in continuing education. In addition to ELSS, McGregor created an ongoing partnership with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections, resulting in two very successful seminars offered during the current year to individuals who teach inmates in the system. The Board of Trustees approved a Masters of Correction Education, for which the continuing education credits are a feeder. We have also contracted for our second year with The Public Television Outreach Association (PTOA) for a summer continuing education seminar ($50,000). Challenges Projected revenue for fiscal 2000 is $5,170,750, which is $371,227 (6.7%) less than budget. Projections include $35,000 released from restriction from the Lovelace Education Fund. This decrease is primarily due to less than budgeted enrollment in the Graduate Management, IMA Self-Design, and Conflict Resolution. This revenue shortfall will be countered by reductions in expense as detailed in the following section (Expense Reductions). There is continued increase in competition from other colleges and universities in the local area for the Weekend College, Graduate Management and distance providers for several programs, including the IMA. As will be noted in next year's budget narrative, plans are underway to meet the competition head on. With the introduction of a new president, several areas of weakness were targeted for improvement. This included the Fiscal Office, and Public Relations, specifically. The School now has a new Chief Financial and Administrative Officer with over fifteen years experience as a CPA. Her leadership helped us build a very realistic budget for the upcoming year. Where the past had "hopeful" numbers, this budget is closer, as possible, to what is likely to take place in enrollments. The School never had a professional development officer. The former individual assigned to this area was also responsible for public relations and alumni relations. This person left for another position, and the office is going to be transformed next year to more realistically and aggressively meet our needs. Another continuing challenge for The McGregor School is facilities. Our adult learners are often displeased with the campus environment in Yellow Springs. They demand a more sophisticated, modern environment, which is well maintained and responsive to their needs. The small liberal arts atmosphere, with older facilities is a definite obstacle to our growth. There is sometimes a confusion of identity, which hurts McGregor's enrollment. Further, a demographic analysis of our learners shows a very small percentage from Yellow Springs, which limits our marketing to a broader base of potential students downtown or in the suburbs. If we are to grow, as we believe is possible, this issue will have to be addressed in the very near future. EXPENSE REDUCTIONS Because it was unlikely that revenue could be significantly increased during this fiscal year, apart from some additional continuing education course offerings, The McGregor School administrative team performed a detailed analysis of existing budgeted expenses in order to identify areas wherein budgeted expenses could be reduced. The following adjustments to the fiscal 2000 budget have been made to compensate for the revenue shortfall: Campus Contingency Fund Funded Reserves Salary & benefit expense reductions 102,200 Non-salary expense reductions 73,110 Total adjustments $ 371,741 II. 2000-01 ENROLLMENT AND REVENUE PROJECTIONS REVENUE Revenue is budgeted at 6.1% above the fiscal 2000 budget, which includes an overall tuition increase of 3%. Our major growth areas overall during the next budget period are in continuing education and teacher certification. Some additional adjustments were made in the tuition for the IMA Self-Design program so that evaluators were paid by the school rather than directly by the students. We have also added a technology fee so that we can upgrade our IT services to students. I. Weekend College - Program activity is budgeted at 3.5% less than the fiscal 2000 budget. The responsibility for undergraduate management faculty and students has been transferred to the Graduate Management program, directed by Michael Robinson. The former director, Fay Volenik, has been named the Executive Assistant to the President and will be responsible for generating growth in The McGregor School's continuing education program. Jane Brown has been named the new director of the Weekend College. ** Teacher's Certification - This program represents our largest growth area in The School in the next fiscal year, with a fall goal of 79 new certification students. This will be the final year that we offer certification. Master's in Education - On March 24 we received official word from the Ohio Board of Regents that our proposed M.Ed. program had been approved. The number of students in this program will more than triple in the next fiscal year due to this program approval and our addition of the Principal's Certificate program. Conflict Resolution - Eight new students have enrolled this spring. The program will now admit only one cohort a year, which will maximize our revenue, decrease expenses and will be more manageable for faculty. Many of CR students will be registered to tuition maintenance in the next year as they are working on their theses. *:* Intercultural Relations - We are continuing discussions on how the breadth of this program can be refocused to a more targeted group. Graduate Management - The undergraduate and graduate management education programs have been merged for a trial period. The newly formed Graduate Management Program Advisory Committee, consisting of Graduate Management alumni and adjunct faculty members, are developing student recruitment strategies for the next year. With co-director Rosemary Hartigan's departure, former co-director Michael Robinson has assumed the directorship of the program. EXPENSES Overall, salaries and wages increased 3.1% over the fiscal 2000 budget. Of the total, 0.5% is related to salary increases for represented (union) employees, who are scheduled to receive a 3.5% across the board increase on July 1, 2000. Equity increases for selected employees account for 1.9% of the increase. The remainder is related to a 2% across-the-board salary increase for administrative staff and faculty who were not given equity adjustments. Additional equity increases and a 1 % across-the-board increase (retroactive to July 2000) are included in t6e discretionary contingency and will be given if revenue generation is greater than anticipated. 3 The benefit expense decrease is attributable to changes in the costs of some benefits from that budgeted in fiscal 2001. 3 Other expenses increased $207,807 (20.6%). More than $109,000 of this increase is related to student vouchers, which are used to pay evaluators who were formerly paid directly by the students; revenue in the IMA area was increased to cover this expense. Other components of the increase include: GLCA tuition ($32,000), honorarialstipends for increased course offerings ($43,000), advertising and purchased services related to student recruitment ($32,000), increased technology-related costs of $21,000 (covered by revenue generated by the technology fee) and subscriptions and publications ($5,000, all covered by private contract funds). These expense increases are partially offset by decreased professional development costs of $46,500. A discretionary contingency of $125,900 has been added to the budget for fiscal 2001. A breakdown of the major components of this amount is $61,500 for salary and wage increases (including equity increases), $44,400 for professional development and $20,000 for depreciation expenses. These amounts will only be spent if revenue generation is greater than anticipated. UNIVERSITY STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS A. Strengthen Faculty and Staff Compensation Meeting this goal is a priority for everyone preparing the Fiscal 2001 budget. After determining ways to reduce many expenses, we were able to include several equity adjustments and a general 2% raise for faculty and administrators in the budget package. If funds are available, another one percent will be given in January (retroactive to July 1). While we strongly believe our faculty and administrators should receive a higher increase, the revenue projected will not provide for greater increases. Our represented staff receives a 3.5% increased based on the union contract. B. Building Fund Development at Every Campus The vacancy left in the Director of Public Relations position, coupled with an agreement to cut the overhead by one percent to the College this year, helps us to fill a new position, which will be dedicated to development and alumni relations. The position will be responsible for database updates, the Annual Fund and maintenance of alumni relations. There are sufficient funds to hire a person with strong qualifications for this level. In the future, we hope to allocate additional funds for a Director of Development position. C. Academic Program Development and Innovation The position of Director of Continuing Education has been vacant for nearly a year. We have used this position to create an Executive Assistant to the President who will handle new program development, continuing education and grants. Fay Volenik, current Director of The Weekend College, will move into this position. Plans are underway to strengthen and build upon existing programs. In the works is the new Master of Corrections Education program. We are awaiting formal contractual arrangements with The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections to guarantee sufficient enrollments for program success. Future growth in The Weekend College will be fueled by the new Liberal Studies major, which will provide science, math, and social science foundations mandated by The State of Ohio for students seeking to enter the teacher licensure program beginning in 2001 -2002. The Graduate Management Program, now merged with the undergraduate program, will take many of its courses online during the upcoming year. A track will be added for Community College Management, aimed at educating the thousands of individuals who are in management positions without formal training in that field. We are working with leading community colleges in the country to develop this program and to date each college contacted has been extremely encouraging about the prospects for enrollments. The exponential growth in Teacher Education, coupled with the new principalship credential, will allow us to add continuing education courses for administrators some time during the upcoming year. We are currently studying our partnership with the Intercultural Communications Institute in Portland to determine whether the arrangement is fiscally sound, or if we need to offer the Intercultural Relations master on our own. The Conflict Resolution master continues to find strength in partnerships and is likely to grow in the upcoming year. Strengthen Antioch Regional and National Visibility and Marketing Good marketing begins at home. The ,President is spending a great deal of time in the community raising the profile of our programs and The School. As the Board of Visitors increases in size and scope, more community relations will result. This must be our first priority. However, we do have a presence on the national level. The President was recently interviewed for The Chronicle of Higher Education on the topic of distance learning. She continues to speak nationally on the topic of information technology. Our faculty is present as speakers and leaders in their respective associations, as funds allow for travel. We are in the second year of a continuing education affiliation with the Public Broadcasting Outreach Association. Finally, we believe our online courses will bring a lot of positive attention to the University as they are built over the next few years. Begin to Implement Recommendations of the Technology Task Force The McGregor School is making a very sound contribution to the Technology Task Force. Plans are underway to participate in an Ohio bond effort that will bring much needed technology to The School. We will upgrade our service to students through better labs, improved communications systems and the development of online courses. We are adding a Microsoft Office User Specialist (MODS) to our staff to train employees, assist students and help in the development of online courses. We believe this is an area in which McGregor can be of great service to the University. II. EFFORTS TO INCREASE ENROLLMENTS AND REVENUE Many of the efforts to increase enrollments and revenue are described above in the strategic plan section. The McGregor School plan (Values, Vision, Ventures) will outline many new strategies for increasing enrollment. Our key focus will be program improvement, the growth of continuing education, adding the community college track to the Graduate Management Program, continued addition of online courses and programs, increased use of the Web for recruitment and major new investments in technology to meet learner (and employee) needs. I. MAJOR CHANGES FROM THE 1999-2000 BUDGET As previously noted, a concerted effort was made in seeking to set realizable revenue targets. A 3% tuition increase was included as a hedge against increasing costs. While some programs have seen a downturn in student enrollment, we believe that the growth in the Teacher Education areas and additional continuing education and online offerings will more than offset these declines. We have undertaken detailed analyses of all expenses in the proposed budget for 2000-01 and have developed a priority list of areas that will be funded if revenue targets are exceeded. The prioritization was developed collaboratively by members of the President's Council and acknowledged the interests of The McGregor School community. Although reducing expenses to a reasonable level was quite challenging, special attention was given to ensuring that program delivery was not compromised by the decisions made. We believe that the salary raises and equity adjustments are a good start; the delay in funding professional development is going to be trying, especially for faculty. CONCLUSION While this budget is very tight, it begins to bring The McGregor School to the level playing field we need to begin to move forward. It is built upon the principal that realistic numbers are far better than those that are "hopeful." We do believe strongly in the future of the campus and its positive impact on the University. We will need to seriously study the facilities issue, as growth may be severely limited in the current environment. However we stand ready to look ahead and expect the collaborative team at The School will have a good year in 2000-01. Barbara Gellman-Danley President Revenues Tuition & Fees Less Tuition Discounts Gifts Grants Endowment Income Contracts Other Income Total E&G Revenue Auxiliary Enterprises Released From Restrictions Total Revenues Operating Expenses Instruction Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support Plant Maintenance Scholarships Total E&G Expenses Auxiliary Enterprises Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget 1997-98 Actual - 4,712,931 -14,138 250 72,575 0 122,998 16,783 4,911,399 47,542 -10,544 4,948,397 2,144,096 0 124,190 127,919 700,098 1,554,819 84,724 6,965 4,742,811 60,043 4,802,854 145,543 95,526 0 0 0 0 95,526 50,017 The McGregor School of Antioch 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function 1998-99 Actual - 4,761,827 -45,151 8,205 11 0,460 0 11 3,397 45,067 4,993,805 32,275 -1 1,973 5,014,107 2,272,854 0 11 1,436 159,320 735,251 1,626,758 89,284 11,954 5,006,857 60,574 5,067,431 -53,324 64,932 0 0 -1 18,256 0 -53,324 0 1999-00 Budget - 5,273,582 0 20,000 67,625 0 102,000 18,770 5,481,977 45.000 15,000 5,541,977 2,341,456 0 189,726 146,668 726,043 1,941,711 90,816 17,500 5,453,920 60,500 5,514,420 27,557 45,000 0 0 -17,443 0 27,557 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Projected - 4,910,000 -51,300 11,235 75,400 0 214,100 1 1,300 5,170,735 30,000 35,000 5,235,735 2,258,000 0 123,400 146,000 707,200 1,903,476 90,000 17,566 5,245,642 60,000 5,305,642 -69,907 30,000 0 0 -99,907 0 -69,907 0 Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 5,592,733 -51,283 20,000 14,000 0 110,000 13,160 5,698,610 7,320 0 5,705,930 2,411,405 0 15 1,226 100,000 754,44 1 2,164,356 108,500 11,000 5,700,930 5,000 5,705,930 0 137,400 -137,400 0 0 0 0 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - The McGregor School of Antioch 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Benefits Training & Development Student Aid Services Special Events Supplies Business Operations Plant Maintenance Interest Expense Resale Costs Miscellaneous ContingencyIReserves Campus Contingency, Mandatory Campus Contingency, Discretionary Liquidity Reserve Overhead To the University Rebates form the University Subsidy from Adult Campuses Subsidy from Overhead Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Con9 Depreciation Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget 1997-98 Actual - 4,948,397 2,173,360 637,785 86,355 1,000 30,596 72,848 662,981 85,489 15.864 0 6,822 0 0 49,130 675,543 -1 84,239 35,800 0 453,520 0 4,802,854 145,543 95,526 0 0 0 0 95,526 50,017 1998-99 Actual - 5,014,107 2,413,694 655,695 122,425 35,457 24,269 66,438 616,727 94,847 15,985 0 9,143 0 0 61,308 674,389 -21 3,588 36,800 0 453,842 0 5,067,431 -53,324 64,932 0 0 -118,256 0 -53,324 0 1999-00 Budget - 5,541,977 2,683,581 758,544 114,175 39,300 37,650 50,975 634,602 96,566 16,260 0 20,710 96,524 0 60,327 663,601 -228,435 34,600 0 435,440 0 5,514,420 27,557 45,000 0 0 -17,443 0 27,557 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected 1 Projected - 5,235,735 2,610,000 730,000 105,000 35,800 40,000 65,000 639,000 90,000 15,000 0 10,309 0 0 60,327 663,601 -228,435 34,600 0 435,440 0 5,305,642 -69,907 30,000 0 0 -99,907 0 -69,907 0 Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 5,705,930 2,766,542 805,082 72,93 1 119,125 35,685 61,372 685,005 1 13,205 15,000 0 19,482 93,76 1 125,900 58,60 1 638,708 -232,258 34,200 0 293,589 5,705,930 0 137,400 -137,400 0 0 0 0 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - The McGregor School of Antioch 2000-01 Capital Budget Campus Buildings Amount Total Buildings 0 Campus Building Improvements Amount McGregor Conference Room Renovation 20,000 Total Building Improvements 20,000 Campus Equipment Amount McGregor Network Service Systems 1 4,000 Improvement & Expansion of Computer Lab Equipment 83,400 Conference Facility Equipment 20,000 Total Equipment 1 17,400 Campus Furniture & Fixtures Amount Total Furniture & Fixtures Campus Library Books Total Library Books 0 Grand Total Capital Budget 137,400 -------- -------- The McGregor School of Antioch Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01 1999-00 1999-00 Rates Proposed Program Per Quarter Per Quarter % Change -------- -------- -------- -----me- Weekend College 2,544 2,616 2.83% Graduate Management 3,289 3,388 3.01% IMA Classic 1,531 1,577 3.00% IMA Intercultural Relations' 2,094 2,600 24.16% IMA Conflict Resolution* 2,404 2,877 19.68% Teacher Certification 2,948 3,036 2.99% MA Education 2,116 * IMA tuition now includes evaluator cost ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION 2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES Activities begun in 1998-99 continued to occupy much of the time of the Chancellor's Office during 1999-2000. In particular, advancing the University Plan was a central focus of our efforts. Several ULC meetings and teleconferences were occupied with discussion of the content of the plan and with its integration into the proposed budget for 2000-01. Putting concrete actions behind the objectives of the plan have proven difficult for the individual campuses. Understandably, in a time of tight budgets it is difficult to find the resources necessary to invest in the future, yet unless we make those investments we will not be able to move forward. In fact, the normal cost-to-continue expenses of inflation and salary increases will actually cause us to fall farther behind if we cannot grow and increase our revenue streams. Efforts to strengthen programs, to innovate and introduce new programs are essential if we are to expand our enrollment base. With a full leadership team in place, the University Plan has formed the basis of much of the activity of the Chancellor's Office and much of what we have done this year has been guided by the Plan. Among the more significant accomplishments and challenges of 1999-2000 are the following: Stimulating Academic Program Development and Innovation. Recognizing that each campus must strengthen its academic offerings in order to meet increasing competition for students, we established an academic program innovation fund in the university budget, inviting campuses to seek internal grants to support new program initiatives. The first such grants will be made this month. During the past year, three campuses have continued to work on offering on-line courses, and this area holds much promise as we develop our internal capacity to deliver such courses. The Board has also approved a number of new campus programs during this period, including new and expanded initiatives in Teacher Education. Teacher Education has been Antioch's most dynamic area of enrollment growth over the past two years. New academic programs are the lifeblood of Antioch's future and we are making good progress in this area. Trustee Vacancies. As it did last year, the Trusteeship Committee worked hard at screening the new prospects that we proposed for membership on the Board. During the year we successfully recruited William L. Clay, retiring Senior US Congressman, and an additional candidate will be proposed prior to the June meeting. Our efforts to identify appropriate candidates for Board membership will continue as we seek to fill the vacancies that will open at the end of this fiscal year as well as those needed to strengthen the Board for a prospective capital campaign. Capital Campaign. An important element of the Strategic Plan is increased fund raising. At the February meeting of the Board, Bill Dietel, President of the P-L Foundation, spoke to the Board about the importance of giving and what is required to conduct a successful capital campaign. The Vice Chancellor for Development and I have worked closely with the ULC on ways to strengthen our fund-raising capacity and to make ready for the capital campaign. National Recognition. Each of the campuses and the University Administration have concentrated on improving Antioch's image in our local areas and nation-wide. We have done this with limited advertising budgets and, for the most part, staff who can devote only a portion of their time to media placement and news generation. Collectively, however, we have had considerable success in calling attention to the work we are doing and the quality of our faculty and students. Unfortunately, not all of the media attention that we have received this year was welcome. The tragic murder of two College students in Costa Rica this spring focused national attention on the College. Throughout the unfolding of this tragedy, the college handled events with dignity and a positive focus. Also in the spring, the student choice of Mumia Abu-Jamal to speak at commencement generated hostile and threatening attention. Again, the College was called upon to respond and it did so in a very positive way. Team Building. Beginning with the July ULC Retreat, I have devoted considerable energy towards helping the members of the ULC to work more closely together, to be mutually supportive, and to advance the strategic planning objectives that the Board has adopted. Through retreats, conference calls, and individual contact, the ULC is becoming stronger and is functioning better. Nonetheless, the ULC has not achieved the effective level that all members believe is necessary. University-wide Ph.D. Significant progress was made in 1999-2000 to make the new Ph. D. in Leadership and Change a reality. Laurien Alexandre was appointed director, a solid academic plan has been put in place, a proposal for program approval submitted to the Ohio Regents, and information packets sent to prospective students. While the Ohio Regents have not completed their program review, significant numbers of prospective students are making their interest known and we expect that when approval comes later this spring, we will be in a very good position to enroll the first class for a fall 2000 start. NCA Accreditation Planning. Preparation for the North Central Accreditation review that will occur in 2001-02 began in earnest during 1999-2000. Under the guidance of Paul Ewald and Laurien Alexandre, the academic deans developed a plan and time table, including the appointment of an advisory committee to oversee the self-study required by NCA. A related activity has been an accelerated academic review of each of the degree programs being offered by Antioch. During 1999-2000, a major internal review of the Management programs offered by three Antioch campuses was completed. The review identified strengths and weaknesses in these programs and suggested ways in which the programs can attract more students and be of greater service to those who are already enrolled. Legal Matters. Fortunately, 1999-2000 has been relatively free of litigation and there have been no major law suits initiated against the University. The legal audit of the Human Resources functions has been completed and an extensive series of recommendations has been provided to each of the campuses. We are working with the Human Resources Directors at each campus to identify best practices and to ensure that these practices are adopted. By cooperatively strengthening our HR functions, we can avoid litigation by employees and reduce complaints from state and federal agencies. The legal audit of the student areas is now in progress. Real estate matters have required some attention, particularly in Southern California where additional space was needed by both campuses. At Santa Barbara, considerable effort went into the planning for a new campus before space became available in the existing building that allowed the campus to expand without relocation. In Los Angeles, additional space was obtained in the same building and much of the space pressure has been eased. At the College, we were able to negotiate the purchase of four small lots along one side of the main access street to the campus. There are no buildings on these lots, but their acquisition was critical to the College's future plan to significantly improve the appearance of the approach to the campus. WYSO Tower. Last year the Wright State University Foundation sold the tower and site used by WYSO. The new owners, a private company, attempted to impose a new lease and a major increase in the rent. The tower is also used by another non-profit station, WCDR. WCDR brought suit against the new owner to enforce the terms of the existing lease. Because Antioch is a tenant on the tower, we were also named in the suit. We have had to spend considerable time negotiating with the new landlord, and the outcome of this lawsuit is not yet known. Property and Liability Insurance. Confronted with a 15% increase for property and liability coverage, we elected to solicit bids with alternative carriers. As a result, our property carrier reduced the premium increase and provided a more attractive rate for liability coverage than our previous carrier. Savings on other specialized policies, coupled with the smaller increase, kept the total insurance cost increase below 5%. New Bond Issue. The College needs to catch-up on deferred maintenance and to replace worn out furniture and obsolete equipment. Its operating budget allows for only modest investments in the needed repairs and additional funding is needed to insure that the campus is attractive and functional for new students. The McGregor School needs to upgrade and expand its computers and other technology to allow it to be competitive for adult students. Both campuses are participants in an Ohio Pooled Bond Issue that will be funded in either late June or early July. The additional $2.2 million that will be available to Antioch over the next two years will enable the College and McGregor to dramatically improve the available facilities and equipment. Computing Improvements. During 1999-2000 the University worked on improving our computing infrastructure to improve security, increase reliability, and improve functionality for users. Several of these efforts are already in place, others are quite far along, and one is in the early phases. Security for the Datatel system was significantly improved by limiting Datatel server access to the Antioch campuses. Previously, access to the server was available from any computer on the Internet. Access to desktop machines in the University Administration has also been limited by the installation of firewall security software which monitors and rejects unauthorized access attempts. This software has proven quite affective in resisting hacker intrusions. The desktops in the University Administration have also been equipped with virus detection software which is routinely updated. University network reliability was improved significantly this year with the installation of uninterruptible power supplies (UPS) for the Datatel, E-Mail, and Name servers, as well as all desktop machines. Although the reliability of municipal power has improved in Yellow Springs in recent years, periodic power outages have been a problem. Both mechanical and weather problems in Yellow Springs have caused network interruptions for all University users. The installation of the UPS units are sufficient to bridge 30 minute interruptions of power to the network servers. Desktop units can bridge 10 minute power interruptions. Datatel security is also being improved by the installation of a redundant array of independent drives (RAID) that will safeguard against data loss due to the failure of a disk drive. In our RAID system, data will be spread over five active drives and coded in such a way that it can be recreated if any one of the drives should fail. A spare drive is always available, and if one drive fails, the system will automatically recreate the lost data on the spare drive. Work is currently proceeding on installation of the RAID system and it should be fully operational by mid-July. Datatel's Report Writer, Safari, was purchased this year and work on the foundation programming and data organization has begun. Considerably more time will be needed for the development of "profiles" of the data before it can be released for campus use, but we expect Safari to be initially available by late fall. Building Maintenance. The Kettering Building was built in 1953 and, while of sound construction, it has not received routine maintenance, even before it was acquired by the University. Over the next several years we will invest in the property to extend its life and minimize the cost of future repairs. On the front and back of the building, above each course of windows, is a three-foot overhang. These "awnings" are supported by beams which extend out from the building and because the roof surfaces of the awnings have not been maintained, water has entered the space between the exterior brick and the interior masonry. In addition, the water was allowed to seep in and destroy the metal panels of the awnings and "rot" the concrete deck. This neglect has threatened the structural integrity of the awnings and also allowed water to permeate the brick facing and damage its integrity. This spring the worst of the steel panels and concrete decking were removed and replaced with new steel and styrofoam insulation. The less damaged panels were repaired with new steel plate. Finally, new roof membrane was applied to prevent water from seeping into the awnings. In the front of the building downspouts were installed to remove water that was previously allowed to accumulate on top of the awnings. At three of the four corners of the Kettering Building, foundation failure permitted the brick exterior to shift and open large cracks from foundation to roof. At these cracks, the exterior brick began to shift away from the building and one of the corners was in imminent danger of separating completely. Masons were employed to remove damaged brick and reattach the facade to the building. Then, the cracks were tuckpointed to prevent future water intrusion. II. STRATEGIC UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES 2000-01 Staff Compensation. Compensation increases for employees in the University Administration have lagged the market because of limits on financial resources and our sensitivity to the comparisons that are made within Yellow Springs and to the increases given at the campuses at other locations. There is some risk in allowing this situation to continue because turnover in a few key positions would put the University at a great disadvantage. While compensation is but one factor in the employment equation, in a tight job market such as the one we are now in, ignoring compensation can be done only at our peril. Compensation rates in the technology area have grown at a very rapid rate in recent years. The demand for individuals with knowledge of computing systems, networks, web pages and servers has been particularly high. It is unlikely that we will have the financial resources in 2000-01 to bring our salaries to a fully competitive level in this area, but we feel the need to avoid losing additional ground. The increasing cost of fringe benefits alone, particularly medical and drug, will require a 1.6% increase in the cost of our compensation plan. On top of this we propose a 3% increase in salary and wages to match inflation. Unfortunately, this package will provide only a modest increase in salary rates after adjusting for inflation. We believe that this is the minimum increase that we can provide without jeopardizing critical operations. Increasing University-wide Development Capacity. Increasing our development effort over the next five years is a major goal of the University Plan. Typically, fund-raising costs between three and ten percent of the total amount to be raised, and to maximize the efficiency of our fund-raising effort, some of the staff and associated costs must be shared with the campuses. Key staff will be added on each of the campuses and a Director of Planned Giving should become part of the University Administration. This Planned Giving officer would report to the Vice Chancellor for Development, who will assign and re-assign the person to the campus where he or she can be most effective. Additional staffing, shared across the campuses, will require that Antioch University find significant up-front external funds in the near future. The Vice Chancellor for Development will need to increase her amount of travel in 2000-01. Increased travel will be needed to contact potential donors and to solicit implementation and support grants, but also to coordinate the various aspects of the campaign. She will need to meet with the newly hired development staff at the campuses to help orient them to the campaign and to familiarize them with fund-raising activities at Antioch. A critical component of the effort to mount an effective campaign is a grant to partially support the needed infrastructure of fund development. Such an institutional capacity-building grant would supply the funds to enhance current development efforts at each campus as well as to enhance the capacity of the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Development. In addition to the Planned Giving specialist, we are seeking grant support for up to four other specialized positions that would be available to collaborating campuses. One of these is a Grants Officer, whom we project to be located in Yellow Springs, working primarily with McGregor, the College, and the Chancellor's Office. A second will likely be a CorporateIFoundation Relations Specialist, possibly to be located on the west coast. The grant would also provide for technology needs and assist with visibility issues that are critical to the success of a development campaign. University-wide Academic Program Development. In 2000-01 we will continue our efforts to provide support for the Ph.D. in Leadership and Change. We believe that this program will pass critical milestones during the fiscal year and that there will be unanticipated situations that may require special attention from the University Administration. The full description of the spending plans for the Ph.D. in Leadership and Change appear in a separate section of this report. During 2000-01 the University Administration will also work with the campuses to develop and offer additional on-line courses that may be shared across university campuses. As we develop and test these initial courses and the technology and systems needed to support them, we will evaluate the concept and feasibility of an on-line BA Completion program. In recognition of the need to quicken the pace of University-wide academic program development and expand our support for collaboration between similar and compatible programs on a University-wide basis, the University Administration created an Academic Development Fund. It is becoming increasingly clear that Antioch can no longer rely on its traditional core programs to attract the enrollment and produce the revenues that are needed to sustain our operations. We must become more innovative and more responsive to the needs of potential students of all ages, and to do this we will need to make both financial and intellectual investments. Initially funded at $50,000, the Academic Development Fund was too small to support the scale of innovation that is required. During 1999-2000 a small number of projects received support but the bulk of the funds were not committed. The Academic Deans and the ULC are working on a streamlined procedure that will allow campuses to apply for funds and receive them in a timely way. We believe that this will encourage faculty innovators to seek the funds they need to make their ideas operational. Some number of these new program ideas will be successful and capable of generating future overhead funds that can sustain the Innovation Fund. For 2000-01 we believe that the Innovation Fund should be increased to $100,000. Ideally, the fund should be larger, but financial constraints make it difficult to fund even this level. Strengthening Regional and National Visibility and Marketing. Despite the significant efforts of the campuses within their regions and the work of the University Administration to increase the visibility of Antioch, much remains to be done before there is Antioch "brand recognition". In 2000-01, the University Administration will work with the campuses to develop a more coherent image while recognizing the need of each campus to respond to its own audiences. The bulk of the publication and media investment will continue to be made by the campuses, primarily to attract new students. However, the demands of a capital campaign require that Antioch establish a broader recognition base. This will require the use of several different forms of media, but each investment must be strategically targeted because we do not have the resources to pursue "saturation" approaches. One of the most effective ways to reach individuals who have some knowledge of Antioch is through the World Wide Web. The current web site needs to be significantly upgraded and made more attractive, useful and interactive. This will require professional design talent and improved technology. The University Administration needs to cultivate links from other sites that will bring people to the Antioch server while establishing links to other sites that will make the Antioch site more useful. Today, with so many sites on the Web, only those that are skillfully constructed to meet user needs will attract visitors. A minimum investment of $25,000 in 2000-01 will significantly improve the effectiveness of the University's site, but a larger investment would produce even greater results. Media placement can be a very important way to gain favorable recognition of the University and its campuses, but it can also be very expensive. In order to promote media placement on a selective and economical basis, the University Administration will work with the campuses to develop media guides that identify those faculty and staff with unique expertise. The information contained in these guides will then be made available to appropriate media outlets with the goal of encouraging print and broadcast reporters to tap the Antioch knowledge base. Faculty and staff will also be encouraged to write articles for local and national placement and the University Administration will assist whenever possible. At present the University has only limited printed media that can be used for promotional efforts. By using desktop publishing and economical reproduction techniques, the University should be able to create a narrow range of targeted materials and a single general-use document that can be used to introduce Antioch to a wide audience. In 2000-01, the publications budget will increase by $25,000. Given the competing demands for very scarce resources for these purposes, some of the funding to achieve regional and national visibility will necessarily need to come from the Institutional Capacity Grant being sought by the University Administration. This grant will provide the necessary funds to augment campus and University resources and allow the development of a comprehensive marketing plan. Technology in Support of Academic Programs. The Technology Task Force has identified a need for greater Datatel support of the student services areas including admissions, registrar, and financial aid offices. At present, the University Administration has only one programmer committed to developing Datatel reports and special applications. This individual serves not only the business functions of the University, but also the student services areas. Because of the very large demand from the student services areas, largely as a result of the recent adoption of Datatel for student services and the fact that each campus represents a unique and diverse set of academic structures, the backlog of projects is quite large. In order to reduce this backlog, the University will hire an additional Datatel programmer who can assist with the most immediate projects and who can also facilitate the introduction of Safari, the Datatel report writer. Safari will give campus personnel the ability to develop many of their own specialized reports without the need for professional programmer intervention. This will greatly improve the efficiency of the campus offices and allow the university programmers to focus on the more complex reports that cannot be handled by Safari. The cost of an additional Datatel programmer for a full year, including salary and fringe benefits, is $70,500. In addition to the salary costs, the individual will require a computer, office furniture, and a place to work. Office renovation will be needed to provide space for the new person. Finally, in order to provide minimal support for the emerging on-line courses across the university, we will attempt to find funding for the recommendations of the technology task force. Among the top priorities are university-wide support for the on-line library function, especially as it will support the Ph.D. program in Leadership and Change, and possibly a student support help desk. The need for the latter will depend on the complexity of the technology adopted and the speed with which programs move to the new technology. Board Self-Evaluation. The Chair of the Board has suggested that 2000-01 might be a good time for the Board to conduct an evaluation of how it conducts its business and how it might become more effective. We anticipate that approximately $25,000 will be required for a consultant/facilitator. James W. Hall Chancellor University Administration 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function Revenues Tuition & Fees Less Tuition Discounts Gins Grants Endowment Income Contracts Other Income Total E&G Revenue Auxiliary Enterprises Released From Restrictions Total Revenues Net Overhead for Central Operations Operating Expenses Instruction Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support Plant Maintenance Scholarships Total E&G Expenses Auxiliary Enterprises Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget 1997-98 Actual - 0 0 40,311 0 0 0 0 40,311 0 0 40,311 1,804,359 0 0 0 0 11 4,573 1,673,836 0 0 1,788,409 1,788,409 56,261 56,261 0 0 0 0 56,261 0 1998-99 Actual - 0 0 29,450 0 0 0 -5,041 24,409 0 0 24,409 1,898,726 0 0 0 0 119,174 1,757,000 0 0 1,876,174 0 1,876,174 46,961 46,961 0 0 0 0 46,961 0 1999-00 Budget - 0 0 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 0 54,315 74,315 2,126,544 0 0 0 0 120,733 1,980,126 0 0 2,100,859 0 2,100,859 100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Projected - 0 0 20,437 0 0 0 0 20,437 0 0 20,437 1,939,704 0 0 0 0 11 9,744 1,760,397 0 0 1,880,141 0 1,880,141 80,000 80,000 0 0 0 0 80,000 0 Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 0 0 20,000 0 0 0 0 20,000 0 0 20,000 2,351,733 0 0 0 0 121,528 2,199,005 0 0 2,320,533 0 2,320,533 51,200 51,200 0 0 0 0 51,200 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - University Administration 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Benefits Training & Development Student Aid Services Special Events Supplies Business Operations Plant Maintenance Interest Expense Resale Costs Miscellaneous Contingency/Reserves Campus Contingency, Mandatory Campus Contingency, Discretionary Liquidity Reserve Overhead To the University Rebates form the University Subsidy from Adult Campuses Subsidy from Overhead Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf) Depreciation Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Hems Net Cash Basis Budget 1997-98 Actual - 1,844,670 966,713 265,600 206,974 0 0 16,848 135,972 178,481 0 0 10,671 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,150 0 1,788,409 56,261 56.261 0 0 0 0 56,261 0 1998-99 Actual - 1,923,135 969,350 292,731 190,171 0 47,133 55,388 159,822 148,984 203 0 7,836 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,556 0 1,876,174 46,961 46,961 0 0 0 0 46,961 0 1999-00 Budget - 2,200,859 1,070,104 314,914 190,500 0 2,000 37,200 106,707 151,434 0 0 4,000 0 224,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,100,859 100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Projected $ % - - - 1,960,141 -240,718 -1 0.94'< Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 2,371,733 1,121,500 341,356 268,800 0 2,000 43,950 173,550 159,400 0 0 5,877 0 200,000 0 0 0 0 0 4,100 0 2,320,533 51,200 51,200 0 0 0 0 51,200 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - UNIVERSITY CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION 2000-0 1 Capital Budget Land Buildings Total Buildings Building Improvements Kettering BIdg Renovations Repave Kettering BIdg Parking Lot Total Building Improvements Equipment Hardware for WEB Server Computers Cabling Smart Switch & MMAC Total Equipment Furniture & Fixtures Total Furniture & Fixtures Library Books Grand Total Capital Budget Amount Amount Amount 1 7,000 20,000 Amount 3,500 2,400 1,900 6,400 Amount Amount ANTIOCH REVIEW 2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET The Antioch Review has balanced its budget for 1999-2000 as the result of fund raising activities and meeting projected income targets. Our circulation remains steady and there has been a modest increase in revenues generated by electronic publishing. Progress toward increasing the endowment has been slow. Our projected budget for next year shows an increase in the salary line as the result of a shift of budgetary responsibilities from the College to the University. All other items reflect a rollover budget. Once again this is a bare-bones budget with development funds inadequate to the task of raising money to support the Review. Robert Fogarty Editor Antioch Review 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function Revenues Tuition & Fees Less Tuition Discounts Gifts Grants Endowment Income Contracts Other Income Total E&G Revenue Auxiliary Enterprises Released From Restrictions Total Revenues Operating Expenses Instruction Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support Plant Maintenance Scholarships Total E&G Expenses Auxiliary Enterprises Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget 1997-98 Actual - 0 0 15,585 1,231 12,100 0 5,539 34,455 60,052 8,310 102,817 0 0 102,607 0 0 0 0 0 102,607 0 102,607 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 1998-99 Actual - 0 0 18,461 2,957 10,471 0 7.791 39,680 57,667 8,962 106,309 0 0 106,309 0 0 0 0 0 106,309 0 106,309 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999-00 Budget - 0 0 24,123 8,100 11,700 0 6,400 50,323 54,000 0 104,323 0 0 104,323 0 0 0 0 0 104,323 0 104,323 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Projected - 0 0 18,500 8,101 9,564 0 9,000 45,165 58,500 2,760 106,425 0 0 106,425 0 0 0 0 0 106,425 0 106,425 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 0 0 50,757 3,000 9,200 0 6,200 69,157 55,500 2,500 127,157 0 0 127,157 0 0 0 0 0 127,157 0 127,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - Antioch Review 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category 1997-98 Actual Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Benefits Training & Development Student Aid Services Special Events Supplies Business Operations Plant Maintenance Interest Expense Resale Costs Miscellaneous Contingency/Reserves Campus Contingency, Mandatory Campus Contingency, Discretionary Liquidity Reserve Overhead To the University Rebates form the University Subsidy from Adult Campuses Subsidy from Overhead Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf) Depreciation Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget 1998-99 Actual - 106,309 31,656 17,054 3,523 0 0 -2,465 52,112 -126 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,555 0 106,309 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1999-00 Budget - 104,323 31,989 17,474 700 0 0 -2,500 52,210 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,350 0 104,323 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Change From 1999-00 Budget 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Projected - 106,425 31,982 17,143 2,332 0 0 -2,591 53,003 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,556 0 106,425 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 127,157 50,850 22,882 2,200 0 0 -2,575 53,700 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 127,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY Ph.D. in Leadership and Change 2000-01 PROPOSED BUDGET GENERAL BUDGET COMMENTS This is the start-up year for the new Ph.D. in Leadership and Change. Some projections are based on our best estimates, which will have to be closely watched during the first year. Our principle behind the operations is a one-stop service shop for the students, a networked faculty model, and an intense mentoring relationship that takes full advantage of on-line communications capabilities between the on-site residencies. All of these principles impact delivery and structures, and consequently, operating budgets. We have tried to be conservative in the income, generous in the expenses, and we are committed to vigilant oversight in this first year. INCOME The $290,000 tuition revenue represents an entering student cohort of 20 and a competitively set tuition of $14,500 per annual term, with a $1,500 tuition discount for all students in the entering class. The discount is established because these first-year students will, in many ways, be a 'beta group,' helping us create and modify aspects of the model still under formation. In subsequent years, entering classes are 30 students annually. Tuition is projected to increase 4% every two years. Ph.D. Candidacy tuition is one-half of the full annual rate. [Student Residency Explanation: Students must complete the program within seven years; the minimum is three, and we estimate most students will complete during years four and five of their residency. The program's retention is based on 60% rate and attrition calculated at 40% within a seven-year cycle. This is a conservative approach, and I believe we can do better than this; the 60140 split is based on other non-traditional Ph.D. programs.] The $240,000 shown as Release from Restrictions is from the multi-year Pierson-Lovelace grant plus carry-forward from 1999-2000 from that line as well. EXPENSES Faculty Salaries. Core faculty salaries for 2000-01 represent hiring one new full-time Core Faculty member at $60,000 plus benefits. Al Guskin's salary, as half-time Core Faculty, is not picked up by the program. Laurien Alexandre's salary, as full-time Core FacultyIDirector is under the Administrator Line (with 50% of her time as Core Faculty). Thus, for 20 students we will have 2.0 Core Faculty in 2000-01 making a Core Faculty to student ratio of 1:lO. [Long term ProjectionIExplanation: Given the program's unusual faculty structure, the faculty FTE is difficult to calculate in traditional ways. The Core faculty-to-student ratio is set for the long-term at 1 :I 1-15. This is figured in the following way: At full capacity, the program will have 120 students, with approximately 30 in the Candidacy stage at any one time. The 90-odd pre-Candidacy students will have 4 fulltime Core Faculty FTE overseeing the Core Curriculum, which is half of the students' curricular work; thus, four Core for 45 student-time FTE or 1 : 11. The 45 student-time FTE in the Individualized Curriculum is served by Mentor Faculty. The salary and benefits of the Mentors in future years is equal to the salary of approximately three Core FTE; thus three Core Faculty for 45 students or 1 :I 5.1 Mentors are paid at $1 500 per mentee annually for 2000-01, with that amount increasing in future years to $1 800 in 2004-05. A total of $18,000 has been budgeted for Mentors. Administrator. Administrator salaries include a full-time DirectorICore Faculty, a full-time staff Program Administrator, and a quarter-time Coordinator of Mentor Learning. A 3% across-the-board salary increase has been included. Non-union Staff. $14,400 is set for a part-time on-line Reference Librarian paid hourly at $30-$35 an hour for 8-10 hours a week. [Long term: this position increases to 17 hours in 2001-02; and, in 2002-03, is scheduled to become a full-time position.] NON-PERSONNEL EXPENSES Business Travel. $34,000 represents travel for faculty and staff for meetings and residencies. Travel is calculated at $500 airfare per trip for faculty involved in the four residencies scheduled for 2000-01, plus several additional trips for the Director. Hotel stays are calculated at $125 per night, $50 per day for food. Local Meetings. $1 1,000 represents support for the annual meeting of the program's Advisory Committee as well as miscellaneous food and logistics costs incurred at the residencies. Professional & Faculty Development. $1 0,000 for conference attendance for Core Faculty and in-service training for Core & Mentor, with the expectation that this increases to a total $20,000 in 2002-03. Office Supplies. $5,000 represents office supplies, postage, phones, faxes, and the like. Computer-Related Lines. A small amount, $2,500 for computer supplies. $4,000 is set aside for computer software, which represents a $1 00 program package of standard software applications & First Class licenses for a total of 40 students/faculty/staff. Note: $5,000 for the purchase of computer equipment is on the Capital sheet. This amount represents approximately two computers (with one earmarked for the new Core Faculty and one for the on-line librarian) and a small amount for emergency. Furniture. $5,000 for some office furniture as we set up the Ph.D. office in the Kettering Building. Advertising. $50,000 for Ph.D. program advertising in 2000-01. Approximately $3,000 is for the production of brochures; $12,000 for alumni and selected mailings; $5,000 for Web redesign and updates; $30,000 for targeted ads/announcements in selected newsletters and magazines. Miscellaneous Services. $1,000 for the unexpected. Intercampus Agreements. In 2000-01, $1 6,000 expenses for Intercampus Agreement include $1 0,000 for possible support services (particularly at McGregor). There is also $6,000 for compensation to campuses for the involvement of any of their faculty as Ph.D. Mentor Faculty (@$500 x12). There is no University Overhead until 2002-03, per University policy. Consulting Services. $59,000 includes $24,000 for out-sourcing technology support; $25,000 for Faculty Academic Consultants and Guest Lecturers; $10,000 for temporary office help on an as needed basis. Subscriptions. $10,540 is for on-line subscriptions and data bases for the on-line library. Printing. $5,000 is for printing residency materials, program catalogs. Telecommunications. $10,000 represents approximately $800.00 a month for phone and network conference calls, which is an educated estimate based on current planning year operations. Laurien Alexandre Director PhD in Leadership and Change 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function Change From 1999-00 Budget 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projectec Actual Actual Budget Projected % - $ - - -- - - Revenues Tuition & Fees Less Tuition Discounts Gifts Grants Endowment Income Contracts Other Income Total E&G Revenue Auxiliary Enterprises Released From Restrictions Total Revenues Operating Expenses Instruction Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support Plant Maintenance Scholarships Total E&G Expenses Auxiliary Enterprises Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget Proposed 2000-01 Budget - 290,000 -30,000 0 0 0 0 0 260,000 0 240,000 500,000 495,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 495,000 0 495,000 5,000 5,000 0 0 0 0 5,000 0 Change From 1999-00 Projected to 2000-01 Budget $ % Change From 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % PhD in Leadership and Change 2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category Change From 1999-00 Budget 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected Actual Actual Budget Projected $ % - - - - - - Revenues Operating Expenses Salaries & Wages Benefits Training & Development Student Aid Services Special Events Supplies Business Operations Plant Maintenance Interest Expense Resale Costs Miscellaneous Contingency/Reserves Campus Contingency, Mandatory Campus Contingency, Discretionary Liquidity Reserve Overhead To the University Rebates form the University Subsidy from Adult Campuses Subsidy from Overhead Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf) Depreciation Total Operating Expenses Excess Revenue over Expenses Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis Capital Expenditures Borrowing Proceeds Principal Payments Prior Year Reserves Add back Depreciation Total Cash Items Net Cash Basis Budget Proposed 2000-01 Budget Change From Change From 1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget $ % $ % - -- - 500,000 500,000 PhD in LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE 2000-01 Capital Budget Land Buildings Total Buildings Building Improvements Total Building Improvements Equipment Computer Equipment Total Equipment Furniture & Fixtures Total Furniture & Fixtures Library Books Grand Total Capital Budget Amount Amount 0 Amount Amount 5,000 Amount Amount PhD in Leadership and Change Tuition Rate Changes 2000-01 Program -------- Tuition 1 st Year Discount Total per Year 2000-01 Proposed -------- 14,500 -1,500 WYSO RADIO 2000-2001 PROPOSED BUDGET I. 1999-2000 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES WYSO-FM is the Miami Valley's most popular public radio station (according to Winter 2000 Arbitron audience data). It is a member station of National Public Radio (NPR) and an affiliate of Public Radio International (PRI). The station airs and files news stories with NPR, Ohio Public Radio (OPR), the Great Lakes Radio Consortium (GLRC), and Pacifica Network News. Additionally, WYSO features programming from the BBC World Service and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, along with locally-produced programming of interest to the DaytonISpringfield marketplace. Almost four years ago, the station was at-risk of loosing its "qualified" status at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) and, thereby, losing over $80,000 in annual federal support. It also lacked the personnel or infrastructure to operate a truly self-sufficient public radio service. With assistance from the CPB, NPR, several station consultants, and a lot of hard work and initiative on the part of the WYSO Resource Board, Antioch University's administration, and the staff and volunteers of WYSO, the station continues to make significant progress. Among this year's most notable achievements are: The first quarter began immediately following the station's first-ever, end-of-fiscal year, on-air membership campaign. The successful three-day drive, held the last week of June 1999, raised $20,000 for the stated purposes of a) assisting WYSO to defray a significant cost increase for the purchase of NPR programming and b) purchasing much needed digital production equipment. Regarding the latter, WYSO began the current fiscal year able to purchase a server, three (3) PCs, and the software necessary to establish digital audio workstations in the master control and main production studios. A third digital workstation was set up in a room in the broadcast and production area that had originally been designed for use as a third studio. It had always been used as additional office space as the station had not had the resources to acquire the equipment to convert it towards its intended purpose as the station's news production studio. Also purchased for this newsroom was a small mixing/production console, speakers, microphones, two (2) mini-disk player/recorders, cabling, etc. What the studio mainly lacks is appropriate studio furniture and cabinetry to house the equipment properly for optimal use. WYSO also upgraded its master control, main production, and satellite operations facilities with the purchase of six (6) mini-disk player/recorders, allowing the complete phase out of reel-to-reel, analog tape. Finally, WYSO purchased nine (9) PCs, one for each of its full-time employees. The station reported last year that its computer resources were wildly insufficient to the needs of its staff and woefully incompatible with achieving the station's mandate that it operate as a self-sufficient cost center. Acquisition and implementation of these computers caused a decided rise in personnel productivity and helped improve morale, as well. Using CPB funds provided as part of a NPR managed project to assist previously at-risk public radio stations, WYSO purchased, installed, and received extensive training in the use of software to manage the station's membership database. This system, custom-designed for the specific needs of public broadcasters, allows greater efficiency in the station's business affairs operations. Most valuable are the system's ability to analyze membership data and to generate mailings specifically tailored to the individual interests of members. Almost a year after implementation, the system is already demonstrating its revenue generation value to WYSO as it is facilitating the management of the station's direct mail solicitations. This savings of time and expense is allowing for more and better targeted mail drops to occur, Toward the end of the first quarter, WYSO debuted its own, locally-produced newsmagazine, SOUNDS LOCAL. Produced and hosted by WYSO News Director Aileen LeBlanc, this weekly half-hour program is rich in sound and has quickly become a very popular signature of the station's schedule. (A sample episode of particular interest to the Antioch community begins the compact disc being provided separately to the Board of Trustees.) At the beginning of the second quarter, the station experienced both good news and bad. The latter was that Frank Dudgeon, WYSO's local host of NPR's MORNING EDITION@, announced that he would be resigning his position. Mr. Dudgeon was a 25-year broadcast veteran. A Boston station sought him out and made a much more lucrative offer than anything WYSO could offer at this time. Shortly after Mr. Dudgeon's departure, WYSO's Summer 1999 Arbitron ratings were released. The book evidenced the largest audience in the station's 42-year history, over 45,000 weekly listeners. Management attributed this success to an improved station schedule but, in much larger measure to the talents of Frank Dudgeon. As weekday morning drive time (6:OO-10:OOam) is the most critical part of the day for any radio station, quality performance on the part of a local anchor is crucial. Accordingly, with Dudgeon's departure, management was quick to note that it would be very surprised if the station could sustain its high numbers into the Fall 1999 ratings period --- which it did not. Despite this, as Arbitron numbers should always be averaged over three to five consecutive quarters to produce a more reliable sense of market listening patterns, WYSO still found itself sustaining an average weekly audience of 40,000 listeners. This number has been consistent for close to two years now. Although weekly audience figures have fluctuated, the station has seen a continuous rise in the Time Spent Listening (TSL) of its listeners. This ratings figure is key as it speaks directly to listener loyalty which, in turn, tends to provide a greater potential for revenue generation (i.e., the more time a given listener spends with a station, the more it is valued by that listener, and, in the case of public radio, the more likely that the listener will respond to an on-air appeal or direct mail solicitation.) The Summer 1999 Arbitrons demonstrated WYSO1s potential to be a more significant station to the Miami Valley, when it can maintain the right staff in the right positions. Anticipating grant funding from the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network Commission (OETNC) in 2000-01 for the purchase, installation, and programming of a digital automation system, WYSO requested and received a loan from Antioch University towards the acquisition of this equipment. The system was purchased and installed in November 1999, it was successfully deployed during Thanksgiving weekend. Phase-in to daily broadcast operations began about a month later. The automation system is helping to streamline station operations, particularly allowing for greater efficiency on the part of WYSO's on-air personnel. Deborah Wilson has been hired as WYSO1s Development Associate. Ms. Wilson's primary responsibilities are to assist the station's Development Director with the various and several projects and events the station sponsors and/or participates in, help coordinate mailings, and acquire and coordinate non-broadcast volunteer help. Deborah also attracts new, and manages existing, underwriting sales accounts in the immediate Yellow Springs. At WYSO management's request, a meeting was arranged between the station, its local public radio partner WDPR, Dayton, and the president of Second & Main, Ltd., the company managing the construction of a major artslperformance complex on the site where downtown Dayton's famous Rike's department store once stood. Now known as the Schuster Arts Center, the two stations proposed that the architectural designs of the main theater be redesigned to accommodate a radio broadcast/production facility adequate for the transmission of live audio and the recording of live events for delayed broadcast. Management of Second & Main reacted very favorably to this suggestion. At this writing, work is progressing towards achieving this goal. WYSO, as is common practice at many public radio stations, ran on-air announcements in December reminding listeners that if they had not completed all of their charitable giving for the calendar year to please think about a gift of cash or appreciated stock to WYSO. On December 29, 1999, WYSO received a gift of $50,000 from a member of the station who had dutifully been contributing $100 annually to the station for several years. Management recommended and received endorsement from the WYSO Resource Board to designate $10,000 of this gift for immediate distribution as staff bonuses (based on months of service). The vote of confidence, in the form of this unanticipated windfall, brought a much needed morale boost. In July 1999, WYSO1s Underwriting Sales Representative, Pete Ziehler, resigned to accept a significantly more lucrative position as sales representative at a commercial radio station in the area. It was very difficult for WYSO to find an adequate replacement. After more than six months, the station hired Julia Sizemore to fill this position. At about the same time, after several months in search of a professional broadcaster to serve as local host for NPR1s MORNING EDITION, the station hired Mike Frazier in a permanent, part-time capacity. In its 1999-2000 Proposed Budget narrative, WYSO reported that it had received support from the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network Commission (OETNC) for three capital grants it was requesting for the following projects: > Establish a high-end, digital production studio;
> Purchase digital automation; and
> Completely equip WYSO1s newly renovated performance studio, including wiring the
space for sound, construction of an engineering booth at the back of the space,
installation of appropriate stage lighting and sound dampening curtains.

In early May 2000, the Ohio State Legislature, upon the recommendation of Governor Bob Taft’s Office of
Budget and Management, approved a capital budget for OETNC for 2001-02 which includes all of the grant
funds requested by WYSO for these projects. As OETNC may only provide 40% of total project costs, WYSO
is now assured of $58,118 towards project expenses.
During the third quarter, WYSO requested similar grants support for these projects from the federally funded
Public Telecommunications Facilities Program (PTFP). The PTFP had provided major equipment funding to
WYSO eleven (1 1) years ago. This request is pending.
In March 2000, WYSO hired Timothy
Tattan
as its Program Director. An Ohio native, with over a quarter
century’s experience in radio, Mr.
Tattan
is an experienced and accomplished public radio program director
who is, arguably, the station’s first full-time professional to hold this position. This hiring brought WYSO back to
a full staff of nine (9) full-time employees and one (1) part-timer. Timothy came to WYSO about a month before
the station’s Spring 2000 on-air membership campaign and simultaneous with the general manager’s absence
for much of that month due to unanticipated surgery and a period of recovery. His experience and talents
assured the smooth, seamless operation of
WYSO’s
broadcast division, as well as appropriate planning and
preparation for the on-air campaign. Mr.
Tattan
is currently engaged in the most comprehensive analysis of
WYSO’s
broadcast service ever conducted. This includes extensive exploration of audience data, which
WYSO has previously been unable to work with on anything other than the most cursory level. Management
fully anticipates that Timothy’s recommendations and his broadcast skills will bring improvements to
WYSO1s
air schedule, attracting greater listenership and revenue-generation opportunities.
With Mr.
Tattan
able to oversee day-to-day programming operations, management is now able to devote
significantly more time, attention, and energy to the long-range planning, policy, and large-scale development
objectives of the station.
Since joining the WYSO team in March 1999, News Director Aileen LeBlanc has filed almost 70 stories with
NPR. Most of these were used as part of the network’s hourly newscast service, while several others were
features on
NPR1s
premiere newsmagazines MORNING EDITION, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, and
WEEKEND EDITION. Ms.
LeBlancls
news items and features have also been heard on the statehouse news
feed of Ohio Public Radio (OPR) and on Pacifica National News. Aileen’s work has significantly raised

WSO’s visibility within the national public radio system and, in so doing! helped to attract more national
attention to its licensee. Following is a short list of feature stories Ms.
LeBlanc
has produced and the NPR
newsmagazines upon which they have appeared! along with the
RealAudio
URL for accessing the archived
audio for playback via the
Internet:
P from NPR9s MORNING EDITIONB.. .Tuesdayl February I, 2000
http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20000201 .meSO4.ram
BIKE TRAIL CONTROVERSY – From member station WYSO in Yellow Springs! Aileen
LeBlanc
reports that a dispute over bike trails is brewing in Ohio. A new proposal to erect
privacy or security fencing along all bike trails may cause some of the existing trails to close
and prevent others from being built.
(3:39)
P from NPR’s WEEKEND EDITION-SATURDAY@. .. Saturday! December 4! 1999
http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/wesaV19991204.wesat. I 0.ram
URBANA, OHIO – The growth of suburbs over the past few decades have turned many
downtowns into retail skeletons. But
Urbana!
Ohio has managed to buck this trend — and
while its downtown has remained viable — it now faces an unlikely threat from within. Aileen
LeBlanc
of member station WSO in Yellow Springs reports.
(4:30)
> from NPR’s MORNING EDITION@’. . . Wednesday, November 24, 1999
http://w.npr.or~/ramfiles/me/19991124.me. 14.ram
A CELEBRATION OF DANCE – Aileen LeBlanc of member station WSO reports on two
concurrent exhibitions at two different Ohio museums that celebrate African-American dance.
Together they try to capture the influence that African movement has had on American
dance. One explores the work of various contemporary artists; the other is a more
conventional exploration of the history of dance in America. The concurrent exhibitions are
called! “When the Spirit Moves.”
(6145)
P from NPR’s MORNING EDITIONB.. .Wednesdayl August 25! 1999
http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/me/l999O825.me.O5.ram

By contrast, the Spring 2000 on-air membership campaign was nothing short of a rousing success. The
campaign secured 850 pledges totaling $72,766 (the on-air goal was $60,000). Additional gifts totaled $8,930.
Mail renewals from 383 members brought in $31,633 (with an average gift of $82.59). 65 lapsed members
rejoined via mail for a total of $3,546, while new memberships via mail raised $471. Challenge grants from
businesses netted $2,750. 77 pledges came in via the
station’s
website
(www.wvso.or~),
raising
$7,61
4.
The grand total for the Spring 2000 period includes two (2) post on-air campaign mailings to members whose
renewals are due. At this writing, one of those mail drops has occurred while the second is scheduled to go out
in May 2000. Accordingly, the grand total for the Spring campaign currently stands at $1 21,918. Since the
campaign’s overall goal was set at $120,000, management believes that the final tally should be about 10%
above goal. WYSO saw the average pledge jump from $68 to almost $86.
It should be noted here that WYSO did receive complaints and animosity directed at it as a result of the
publicity generated by the choice of Mumia Abu-Jamal as the keynote speaker at this year’s commencement
activities at Antioch College. Numerous phone calls, e-mails, and letters accused the station directly of being
involved in this decision. As the national publicity on this issue coincided with the station’s Spring on-air
campaign (and the pledge fulfillments that need to occur immediately afterward), some listeners and members
suggested that they would not donate (perhaps ever again) because of this matter.
Regarding business underwriting of station programming,
WYSO’s
goal for the current fiscal year is $160,000.
At this writing, the station has secured signed contracts totaling $133,912. Although the goal may be
unobtainable before June 30, this figure is, once again, impressive considering that for a little over half of this
year
WYSO1s
Development Department consisted of a staff of one.
WYSO1s
Development Director continues to coordinate the activities of the WYSO Resource Board’s
Development & Fundraising Committee. The committee is presently helping the station to identify major donor
support dollars and otherwise raise funds to be used as the local matching component of the OETNC grants
described above.

WYSO’s growth is enabling it to achieve two major objectives. First and foremost, to bring all staff members’
compensation to at least parity with the median for similar positions at similarly sized stations within the public radio
system. While we have not achieved this goal, we have made significant progress. The purpose of overcoming this
hurdle is to appreciably diminish the high rates of staff turnover, which has been a perpetual problem at WYSO and has
hampered its long-term opportunities for the development of the station and its services to the community.
The other major objective is to develop more local and regional programming. Opportunities to do this have never been
better. In particular, WYSO hopes to produce documentary features for national distribution about the centennial of
powered flight and the bicentennial of the State of Ohio, both occurring in 2003. As well, WYSO continues to look
forward to developing broadcast projects to compliment various Antioch University initiatives, including “Antioch: A Place
for Writers.” The station has also had preliminary discussions with the Antioch Review about opportunities to create
collaborative projects. As this work progresses, it will allow WYSO to offer specific, project-oriented internships and
apprenticeships for Antioch College students and others.
As Antioch University’s public radio service, WYSO continues to make public service announcements aimed at increasing
awareness of the programs and events of the College and the
McGregor
School. The station continues to suggest to
both campuses better ways to refine and target on-air messages to reach listeners and reach them in a way most likely to
generate results.
Despite the accomplishments cited above, WYSO faces a number of challenges in the coming fiscal year. Among these
are:
Half of the current full-time staff receive a salary that is below the public radio industry’s standards for similar
positions at stations in similar markets. While compensation packages have improved modestly since last
year’s report, this ongoing situation is a problem. Staff turnover in a relatively small operation like
WYSO’s
can
impact operations dramatically, and identifying, securing, and retaining good talent in today’s economy is not
always easy, particularly in the not-for-profit sector. Since WYSO now boasts its most professional and
team-
oriented staff in many years, management is committed to doing everything it can reasonably do to become
competitive within the industry.
In October 1998, when current management was installed at WYSO, each member of the station’s staff was
asked to identify the three most pressing problems they wanted addressed to increase their productivity. Every

staff member had the same item at the top of his or her list: voice mail. Management assumed that this would
not be a relatively easy matter to resolve. Unfortunately, it is over eighteen months later and the problem
appears nowhere closer to resolution than it was in 1998. Management understands that during this time a
series of miscalculations and missteps (too numerous to detail herein) occurred in the process of attempting to
upgrade the College’s telephone system, and that absent such an upgrade (or total replacement of the existing
system), WYSO cannot obtain voice mail service.
This is a very serious problem for WYSO. As the station continues to grow, its workload rises. As the station
attracts new listeners and members, daily contact with the general public also continues to grow. When the
staff is forced to act as phone receptionists, efficiency suffers greatly. Many hours of staff time are spent
providing basic information
and/or
taking messages for staffers who are out or unavailable to answer calls.
Providing automated answers to frequently asked questions and voice mail for staff would significantly
decrease interruptions for staff.
During the first quarter, WYSO became aware that the ownership of the site upon which its broadcast tower
and transmitter facilities are located had been transferred from its long-time landlord, the Wright State
University Foundation, to P&R Communications Services,
Inc.,
a Dayton-based company. Antioch University’s
Vice
ChancellorICFO
and
WYSO1s
General Manager met with
P&R1s
representative during the early part of the
second quarter. The meeting was cordial but, P&R presented a new lease agreement that was thoroughly
objectionable to Antioch University and WYSO. Specifically, the monthly rental payment was proposed to rise
from $75 per month to $1,500 per month.
Antioch
University/WYSO
rejected the P&R lease, as did
Cedarville
College/WCDR
which also uses the tower.
The two institutions expressed their opinion that the existing lease extend through the year 2007 (with a clause
providing for biennial adjustments to rental payments pegged to the current consumer price index).
In the middle of the second quarter,
Cedarville
College filed suit in Greene County, OH against
P&R,
naming
Antioch University in the same action. WYSO and WCDR agree on almost all matters pertaining to the current
situation and remain in regular contact about the situation as it proceeds to an anticipated court date in August
2000.

An unfavorable decision could be potentially devastating. It would result in a massive increase in the tower
rental costs or it could result in the need to move to
and/or
construct another tower site. Even the most
favorable court decision will likely mean that WYSO will need to identify
and/or
construct another
tower/broadcast
transmitter facility by 2007 or risk a huge increase in rent or the possibility that P&R will
choose not to offer any lease agreement beyond that time.
Media and telecommunications convergence is placing new demands upon and creating new paradigms for
traditional, terrestrial broadcasters. Until relatively recently, a radio station’s
website
could safely be classified
as an adjunct service. However, in recent months, even WYSO has had to confront the expectations of
audience members who believe that the station should and must provide ancillary content on its
website.
In
other words, the lines between radio broadcasting and web publishing are blurring at an increasingly rapid
pace. To remain competitive, WYSO will need to devote more time and resources to the development of its
website
services. In keeping with this thinking, WYSO and other broadcasters will likely shift their operations
from being broadcasters-only to being content providers.
On another competitive front, satellite digital audio radio services (SDARS) are scheduled to begin operations
in the United States beginning by this calendar year’s end. Each of the two companies licensed to supply this
new class of radio service — Sirius Satellite Radio (www.siriusradio.com) and XM Satellite Radio (www.xmradio.com) —
– are promising to deliver 100 channels of CD quality audio to subscribers coast-to-coast. Both Sirius and XM
are promising that half of their channels will offer commercial-free music services, while the other half will be
devoted to news, talk, information, sports, and entertainment programming. Sirius and XM will be available in
homes, offices, and vehicles via small, cellular phone-sized antennas and specially designed receivers. Major
electronics manufacturers will be selling these new receivers in the very near future. Additionally, all major
automobile manufacturers have already signed deals with one or both of these U.S. SDARS companies.
Eventually, it is anticipated that all vehicles will come with
AMIFMISDARS
receivers as standard equipment. As
opposed to cable radio services (such as DMX Music,
www.dmxmusic.corn),
SDARS number one selling feature is
its portability. Listeners will soon be able to travel from Maine to California and never have to worry about
losing a radio signal. At this writing, both Sirius and XM are suggesting a monthly subscription fee of about
$1 0.00 per month for access to their respective services.

Terrestrial broadcasters cannot predict how the marketplace will respond to SDARS. However, it is reasonable
to assume that if the top 30-50 radio markets respond favorably
(i.e.,
a market penetration of 60% or more is
achieved in most of these regions), then traditional broadcasters will face significant and serious competition.
Additionally, both NPR and PRI are developing programming for distribution via SDARS (although NPR, at
least, is currently promising its member stations that NPR programming offered via SDARS will not compete
with its terrestrially based member stations).
In this new media environment, WYSO recognizes that its current eclectic line-up of programs may not,
ultimately, be sustainable. For example, if an SDARS subscriber can access, 2417, not one but, several
different channels devoted to jazz (traditional, fusion, smooth, etc.), it is questionable whether that same
listener would take pains to seek out
WYSO1s
current jazz service. To prepare for the possibility that SDARS
will be a major media player, WYSO is focusing its attention on the growth and development of services
SDARS will be unable to provide — local and regional programming. WYSO management believes more of
this type of programming must be a part of the station’s overall service profile if it is to remain competitive and
unique. The station also understands that producing high-quality
local/regional
programming is often more
expensive than the purchase of national and other programming. Accordingly, WYSO will continue working to
acquire the necessary resources to expand its locally-produced offerings, assuring that they meet or exceed
the quality standards the station’s listeners have come to expect.
The WYSO Resource Board continues to evolve. However, management believes that the station can
continue to keep apace with its growth in recent years only if recruitment efforts increase the Board’s active
membership and bring to that body the skills necessary to achieve
WYSO’s
long-term objectives. In the next
year, WYSO is looking forward to working with its Resource Board to develop realistic business, strategic,
sales, and marketing plans. Management, in particular, is hopeful that it will be able to work with appropriate
board members to acquire better, smarter finance and budgeting techniques.
II. THE 2000-01 BUDGET
WYSO’s gift revenues are likely to achieve budgeted goals for the current fiscal year. Grant support from OETNC
increased modestly this year, as did federal grants support from the CPB.

Underwriting support for WYSO and its programming from local and regional businesses and organizations continues to
increase. Management has high expectations that this revenue stream will continue to experience significant growth in
the year ahead and beyond. This will be especially likely considering the growth in professional personnel in the station’s
Development Department. As stated previously in this report, WYSO is extraordinarily pleased with the performance of
its Development Department and, in particular, the dedication and considerable skill of its Development Director,
Melodie
Bennett. Her efforts are establishing many new business relationships and renewed respect for WYSO throughout the
Miami Valley.
For the coming fiscal year, WYSO anticipates its major revenue streams producing as follows:
Gifts (listener support) $330,000
Federal Grants (CPB) 83,148
State Grants (OETNC) 55,712
Underwriting 185,000
Other Income 20,864
TOTAL $674,724
The two largest cost sectors for WYSO are staff salaries and the fees the station pays to acquire programming from NPR,
PRI, and Pacifica. For the foreseeable future, the station will have critical needs for new office and broadcast equipment.
This is particularly so as digital conversion becomes an imperative. Federal, state, and other grants support will assist in
the digitization process, but there will also be cost burdens that WYSO will also be required to bear.
As noted in the last two year-end budget reports, WYSO still needs to secure a reliable back-up transmitter to assure
consistent delivery of the broadcast service should the primary transmitter fail. And the current transmitter should have a
generator or UPS (uninterrupted power supply) unit as part of the transmitter plant to assure continuation of the broadcast
service in the event of power fluctuations
andlor
service disruptions from the Dayton Power & Light Company.
With the current, ongoing legal situation with P&R Communications,
WYSO1s
new towerltransmitter site landlord, it is
prudent for the station to begin exploring other transmitter
towerltransmitter
site opportunities. WYSO management,
Antioch University administration, and the WYSO Resource Board anticipate that legal consultation fees may well rise,

perhaps significantly, for at least the next year. Should WYSO need to relocate to a new tower/transmitter facility and/or
need to construct such a facility, legal, filing, engineering, and other costs may also rise substantially.
For these significant but, as yet, unquantifiable costs, there may be the possibility of the station obtaining low interest
loans from a new fund, potentially soon-to-be-established by the Station Resource Group (SRG), a membership
organization of public radio’s leading broadcasters.
SRG1s 46 members operate 164 public radio stations across the
country, account for one-third of public radio’s audience, and produce the majority of public radio’s national programming.
This fund may also help WYSO to refinance its current debt to the University. WYSO anticipates that it will become a
member station of the SRG in the coming fiscal year.
Management believes that a major capital campaign will need to be organized and conducted within the next two to three
years to allow WYSO to keep pace with the radio broadcast industry, remain competitive within the public radio
community, and have the funds, above and beyond general operating expenses, to protect the University’s investment in
WYSO. Management is also hopeful that continued development of the WYSO Resource Board will soon allow the
station to create the framework for the establishment of a WYSO Endowment Fund, thereby providing further protection
of and stability within the station.
Steve Spencer
General Manager

WYSO
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total E&G Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
0
0
286,465
105,650
0
0
103,691
495,806
0
0
495,806
0
0
466,098
0
0
0
0
0
466,098
0
466,098
29,708
7,593
0
14,621
0
0
22,214
7,494
1998-99
Actual
–
0
0
304,831
130,671
0
0
188,787
624,289
0
6,948
631,237
0
0
598,389
0
0
0
0
0
598,389
0
598,389
32,848
17,793
0
15,055
0
0
32,848
0
1999-00
Budget
–
0
0
310,000
118,912
0
0
178,500
607,412
0
0
607,412
0
0
581,364
0
0
0
0
0
581,364
0
581,364
26,048
12,500
0
13,548
0
0
26,048
0
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
–
0
0
349,152
139,392
0
0
181,350
669,894
117
7,286
677,297
0
0
606,048
0
0
0
0
0
606,048
0
606,048
71,249
53,109
0
17,732
0
0
70,841
408
Change From Change From
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
—
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
— — – –

WYSO
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
1997-98
Actual
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Budget
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Projected
Revenues
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
ContingencyIReserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf)
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
Change From Change From
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %

WYSO
2000-01 Capital Budget
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
WYSO Wing Renovations
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
Computer Equipment
Total Equipment
Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
2,500
Amount
1 4,000
Amount

University Wide
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Grants
Endowment Income
Contracts
Other Income
Total
E&G Revenue
Auxiliary Enterprises
Released From Restrictions
Total Revenues
Net Overhead for Central Operations
Operating Expenses
Instruction
Research
Public Service
Academic Support
Student Services
Institutional Support
Plant Maintenance
Scholarships
Total E&G Expenses
Auxiliary Enterprises
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
1997-98
Actual
–
0
0
0
11 8,352
0
0
1,014,207
1,132,559
0
240,582
1,373,141
602,569
3,403
0
0
166,224
0
348,779
2,503,482
118,352
3,140,240
0
3,140,240
-1,164,530
26,454
0
451,921
0
-2,503,482
-2,025,107
860,577
1998-99
Actual
–
1999-00
Budget
–
0
0
0
120,000
95,578
0
417,400
632,978
0
304,686
937,664
455,415
0
0
0
261,724
0
660,617
2,620,000
120,000
3,662,341
0
3,662,341
-2,269,262
0
0
350,738
0
-2,620,000
-2,269,262
0
1999-00
Projected
–
0
0
0
120,000
95,578
0
1,193,970
1,409,548
0
347,267
1,756,815
642,255
1,034
0
0
216,841
0
182,639
2,763,000
120,000
3,283,514
0
3,283,514
-884,444
10,227
0
242,649
0
-2,763,000
-2,510,124
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to 1999-00 Projected
$ %
– –
Change From Change From
Proposed
2000-01
Budget
–
1999-00 Projected 1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget to 2000-01 Budget
$ % $ %
– — –

University Wide
2000-01 Proposed Budget Summary by Category
Change From
1999-00 Budget
1998-99 1999-00 1999-00 to 1999-00 Projected
Actual Budget Projected $ %
– – – – –
1,934,204 1,393,079 2,399,070 1,005,991 72.21 Â
Change From
1999-00 Budget
to 2000-01 Budget
$ %
Change From
1997-98
Actual
~ p~~~~~d
Budget
, —
1,156,932 Revenues
1999-00 Projected
to 2000-01 Budget
$ %
– –
-1,242,138 -51.78%
Operating Expenses
Salaries & Wages
Benefits
Training & Development
Student Aid Services
Special Events
Supplies
Business Operations
Plant Maintenance
Interest Expense
Resale Costs
Miscellaneous
Contingency/Reserves
Campus Contingency, Mandatory
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
Overhead
To the University
Rebates form the University
Subsidy from Adult Campuses
Subsidy from Overhead
Other (Intercampus Agree & Univ Conf)
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Excess Revenue over Expenses
Annual Budget Conversion to Cash Basis
Capital Expenditures
Borrowing Proceeds
Principal Payments
Prior Year Reserves
Add back Depreciation
Total Cash Items
Net Cash Basis Budget

COST CENTERS
INSTRUCTION:
Undergraduate
~eritage
Institute
Preparatory-Remedial Education
Teacher Certification
Arts
Human Services
Computer Instruction
Cooperative Education
Environmental Field Program
Continuing Education
History, Philosophy & Religion
Physical Sciences
Languages, Literature & Culture
Environmental & Biological Sciences
Self, Society & Culture
Cultural & Interdisciplinary Studies
Social & Global Studies
AEA Brazil
AEA Buddhist Studies
AEA Egypt
AEA Germany
AEA
Japan1
AEAMexico
AEA Overseas Non-AEA Program
AEA Women’s Studies
AEA Thailand
AEA France
AEA Cape Verde
MS Management
MA Psychology
MA Education
OSR
Whole System Design
MA Organizational Management
DanceIMovement
Therapy
Counseling Psychology
Marriage and Family Therapy
Environmental Studies
-a ..
INSTRUCTION (Cont’d):
Organization & Management
plied Psychology
Clinical Psychology
I MA
Weekend Program
Intercultural Relations
Conflict Resolution
Environment & Community
Fine Arts
RESEARCH:
Individual and Project Research
PUBLIC SERVICE:
Glen Helen
Antioch Review
WYSO
Counseling Centers
ACADEMIC SUPPORT:
Academic Administration
General Faculty
AEA Administration
Cross Cultural Program
ArchiveslAntiochiana
LibraryIMedia
Services
Psychological Services Center
Research and Evaluation
Writing Center
WSD Institute
Academic Computing
STUDENT SERVICES:
Financial Aid Administration
Student Admissions
Registrar (Student Records)
Student Services
A A A-9-
STUDENT SERVICES Cont’d:
Infirmary
Counseling
Security
Student Loan Office
Community Government
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT:
Chancellor
Trustees
ProvosffPresident
Fiscal Operations
Business Operations
General Administration
Central Services
Personnel
Alumni
DevelopmenffAdvancement
Public Relations
Publications
Administrative Computer Service
University Administration
PLANT MAINTENANCE:
Maintenance
Custodial
Building & Grounds
Power Plant
Depreciation
SCHOLARSHIPS:
Grants & Scholarship
AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES:
Dining Serviced Gathering Space
HousingIBookstore
Computer Sales
hA.-.rl-.-.”~~ r’~”*c.rc.”r.a Pamter

LINE ITEMS
SALARIES & WAGES: Compensation
Paid to Contracted Employees
Core Faculty
Associate Faculty
Adjunct Faculty
Administrators
Administrative Associate
Teaching Assistants
Unionized Staff
Non-Unionized Staff
Students
Retirees
Other Staff Employees
Student Vouchers
Student Stipends
Overseas Allowance
BENEFITS: Required and Non-Required
Benefits Paid
MedicallDental
Card
Dental
FICA
Worker’s Comp
Unemployment
Life Insurance
Long & Short Term Disability
Retirement
Moving Expenses
Employee Tuition Waivers
Miscellaneous Benefits
TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT:
Non-Contracted Expenses for Trg &
Develop
Business Travel
Local
Meetings~Workshops
Professional Development
Employee Recruiting
Program Development
STUDENT AID:
Restricted Grant Scholarships
Student Vouchers
SPECIAL EVENTS:
Graduation
Orientation
Miscellaneous Special Events
SUPPLIES:
Office Supplies
instructional Supplies
Research Supplies
Duplicating Supplies
Computer Supplies
Computer Software
Maintenance Supplies
Furniture Supplies
Equipment Supplies
Library Supplies
Food Supplies
Miscellaneous Supplies
BUSINESS OPERATIONS COSTS:
General Cost of Doing Business
Subscriptions & Publications
Purchased Services
Consulting
HonorariaIStipends
Information & Communications
Memberships & Dues
Printing
PostageIFreight
AudioNisual
Advertising
Telecommunications
Internet & Leased Lines
Legal
Audit
Bad Debt Expense
PLANT MAINTENANCE COSTS:
Costs Related to Facilities
Maintenance Contracts & Repairs
Computer Maintenance
Purchased Services
Utilities
Vehicle Operation
Facility Rental
Equipment Rental
Insurance/Taxes
DEPRECIATION:
INTEREST EXPENSE:
Interest
Bank Charges (include credit card charges)
RESALE COSTS:
Books for Resale
Computers for Resale
Supplies for Resale
MISCELLANEOUS COSTS:
Miscellaneous
Student Activities
Student Insurance
Payments to Annuitants
CONTINGENCYIRESERVES:
Campus Contingency, Mandated
Campus Contingency, Discretionary
Liquidity Reserve
HonorariaIStipends
OVERHEAD COSTS:
Regional Overhead
University
OverheadIRebate
University Conference
College Fund
Operation Subsidy
Inter-Campus Agreements