↓ Download PDF ← Back to Library
~TIOCH UNIVERSITY
REPORT TO THE
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
2000-01 YEAR END PROJECTION
2001 -02 PROPOSED BUDGET
May 31 – June 2, 2001
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch University-wide Schedules 21
Antioch College ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 23
Glen Helen ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 36
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch New England 41
Antioch Seattle …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 51
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Antioch Southern California 66
Antioch University McGregor ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 76
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. University Administration 86
Antioch Review …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 98
………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Ph.D. in Leadership and Change 101
WYSO Radio ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 110
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. University-Wide Expenses 126
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Cost Centers 128
Line Items ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 129
REPORT TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
May 31 – June 2,2001
I. INTRODUCTION
The 2001-02 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 2000-01 experience dictated changes for 2001-02 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 2000-01 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 2000-01 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 on June 30.
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 2000-01 Year-End Projection section on page 7.
II. FORMAT AND CONTENT
The 2001-02 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 2001-02 that are also presented as 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 $10,000 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 2001-02. 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 2001-02. 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 new
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 2001-02 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&G”. 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 “businesses”.
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 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 released from the Endowment Fund to a campus appears 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 University 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 University 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 128.
The columns of the 2001-02 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 1998-99 and 1999-2000
actual expenditure history. The third column contains the 2000-01 Budget as revised by the Board of Trustees and the
fourth column contains information about how each of the Campuses anticipate their 2000-01 Budget will appear at the
end of the current fiscal year. That is, the 2000-01 Budget column is the plan for the current year while the 2000-01
Projected column shows how the plan is likely to play out. The next two columns, Change from 2000-01 Budget to 2000-
01 Projected show the dollar amount and percentage variance between the plan for the current year the likely outcome at
June 30.
Because the Proposed 2001-02 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 2001-02 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 2001-02 Budget with the
2000-01 Projected outcome, and the last two columns compare the Proposed 2001-02 Budget with the 2000-01 Budget
as approved by the Board. Each set of comparisons present the dollar variance and percentage variance. Major
dollartpercentage 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 2001-02 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 129.
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 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, Seattle, McGregor and 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 2001-02 will lower the effective Overhead rate
to 8.55% 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.
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
Wideexpensessection on pages126and 127.
The columns on the 2001-02 Proposed Budget by Category schedule are identical to those on the Budget by Function
schedule.
V. 2000-01 YEAR-END PROJECTION
With ten months of the current fiscal year already completed, the year-end projection for 2000-01 is that the University as a
whole will sustain an operating deficit. Each of the campuses has been asked to project their year-end accrual and cash
basis finish for the current fiscal year. To these projections are added known costs, such as depreciation, investment gains
or losses including those on the endowment, and other factors that have to be taken into account at year-end. As things
stand, at the end of April, Antioch University will finish 2000-01 with an accrual deficit of about $1.2 million. This projected
deficit follows a downward trend that began at least as recently as 1996-97 when the actual accrual balance was
$1,817,344. In 1997-98 it was $827,405, and in 1998-99 it had declined to $500,109. Last year, the actual accrual
balance remained nearly steady at $482,855 because of a series of fortuitous events.
In 1999-2000, we were able to record four particularly unusual, but beneficial, events. First, our endowment gains of
$1,215,988 included about $600,000 from an extraordinary appreciation in YSI, Inc. stock. Second, we realized
$220,000 during a period of brief appreciation in some shares of stock that we had taken in settlement of an outstanding
rent obligation at the Kettering Building. Third, the College received two gifts totaling $850,000 to support efforts to
improve enrollment and fund the capital campaign. Finally, late in June, the College received a bequest for $550,000
which was used to pay for scholarships. Together, these four items totaled more than $2.2 million and made it possible
for the University to complete 1999-2000 with positive accrual and cash balances. Had not all of these events occurred,
last year would have looked more like the forecast for 2000-01.
So far this year, the College has received three bequests totaling $650,000 and the YSI, Inc. stock has again made a
significant appreciation, increasing this year by $900,000. Unfortunately, our other investments, including the endowment
fund have recorded losses on a year-to-date basis because of the significant downturn in the stock market. As of the end
of March, the endowment portfolio had lost $1.3 million while it is projected to gain $200,000 by year-end. Of course,
there is a possibility that the stock market will recover further in May and June and erase the losses that have thus far
been recorded. However, it will need to make significant gains in order to eliminate the projected deficit if no other
positive factors contribute.
At the close of last fiscal year, it became apparent that the campus’ mandatory contingency reserves would not be
available for release during the year. The campuses were informed in June that they should not expect to benefit from
the contingency during the year. Not having these funds available has placed additional pressure on the campuses and
has made it more difficult for them to project positive accrual balances at year-end.
The following table shows how the campuses are projecting their year-end balances as of the end of April, except the
College, which made its projection as of the end of February.
2000-01 PROJECTED YEAR-END CONDITION
ANTIOCH GLEN NEW SOUTHERN ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE HELEN ENGLAND SEATTLE CALIFORNIA McGREGOR ADMIN
TOTAL REVENUE 16,956,568 521,067 10,565,549 9,384,610 10,166,293 5,112,500 1,987,320
TOTAL EXPENSES 17,157,899 583,672 10,596,856 9,219,818 10,130,975 5,109,576 1,933,208
EXCESS REVENUE over EXPENSE -201,331 -62,605 -31,307 164,792 35,318 2,924 54,112
NET CASH BASIS BUDGET -752,733 -62,605 -157,146 0 2,548 2,924 0
The College is projecting that revenues for the year will be down 2.2% ($382,000), while expenses will be up 3.33%
($552,598). This combination will produce an accrual deficit of $201,331 and a cash deficit of $752,773. In order to meet
these projections, the College will need to receive more than $1.6 million in Gift Income for the year, but to do this,
approximately $300,000 must be received in each of the remaining two months. The projected accrual and cash deficits
reflect the release of the College’s Campus Contingency of $144,505. The mandatory Contingency was released to the
College by the Chancellor in recognition of the financial situation of the College and the high natural gas prices which
were experienced this winter.
With ten months of the fiscal year completed, New England is projecting an accrual deficit of $31,307 and a cash basis
deficit of $157,146. As with the other adult campuses, these deficits assume that the Mandatory Contingency will not be
released for use by the campus. In order to minimize New England’s cash basis deficit, the campus is applying $101,964
from its Prior Year Reserves. This will exhaust its Reserve cash.
Seattle is projecting an accrual surplus of $164,792, but this is $-98,208 less than originally budgeted. Seattle is
projecting a balanced cash basis budget.
Southern California is looking for a positive accrual balance of $35,318. At the time that the 2000-01 budget was revised
by the Board, Southern California expected a small accrual deficit of $6,213, but this has been rectified and the
expectation is that the campus will have a modest accrual surplus. The projected cash basis balance is also expected to
be positive.
McGregor is projecting a revenue decline of $79,204 from the level of the adjusted budget and is planning to offset this
decline with a slightly greater reduction in operating expense. The result is a modest accrual surplus of $2,924 and an
identical cash basis surplus.
As in the past two years, total Tuition and Fee Revenue is now being projected below the budgeted level, but the
variances are much smaller than they were at this time last year. A year ago, the variance between the 1999-2000
budgeted and projected Tuition and Fee Revenues was a negative $2,045,232. This year, the variance is only a negative
$643,712. Even after budgets were revised after the fall term enrollments were known, all but one of the campuses
anticipated higher tuition and fee income in their revised budgets than they are now projecting to receive.
2000-01 TUITION AND FEE REVENUE
Budgeted*
Antioch College 12,162,465
Glen Helen 126,045
New England 8,870,495
Seattle 8,938,916
Southern California 9,792,932
McGregor 4,938,668
Projected
11,962,465
107,515
8,768,227
8,653,295
9,806,307
4,888,000
Variance
-200,000
-1 8,530
-1 02,268
-285,621
13,375
-50,668
TOTALS $44,829,521 $44,185,809 4643,712
*as revised by the Board
Tuition Discounts, which can have a significant impact on Net Tuition Revenue, are projected to be 2.5% ($81,884) above
the budgeted level.
University Wide, the other revenue lines are anticipated to be mixed. The $1.0 million Lead Gifts line will achieve only
$650,000. Grants will be down nearly 22% ($706,933) and Endowment Income is projected to be at the budgeted level.
For the single bright spot in the revenue picture, Contracts are expected to be 119% ($378,874) greater than the
budgeted level. Other Income is projected to be down nearly 10% and Auxiliary Enterprises is expected to be down 5%.
Released from Restrictions is expected to be 22% ($477,681) greater than the budgeted level.
Overall, for the University as a whole Operating Expenses are projected to be down 1.7% from the budgeted level. This
projected reduction of $1,013,523 is not sufficient to offset the 2.63% ($1,463,947) projected decrease in revenues. As
things now stand, the University as a whole is anticipating an accrual deficit of $1.2 million, but the cash basis budget will
break even because Depreciation is not a cash expense.
Capital expenditures during 2000-01 are projected to be $2,682,015, which is considerably more than in recent years due
to the availability of the $2.2 million Ohio Bond funding. This funding enabled the College to make numerous capital
improvements and for the College and McGregor to acquire additional instructional and support equipment. Other capital
expenses are primarily for library books and normal replacement equipment at other locations.
VI. 2001-02 BUDGET OVERVIEW
Growth in Tuition and Fee Income is essential to cover the increasing cost of salaries, wages, and general inflation. Of all
the revenue sources supporting the University, Tuition and Fee Revenue constitutes more than 80%. Therefore, the
financial viability of the campuses requires that Tuition and Fee Revenue grow at a healthy rate. In each of the last two
years, the campuses have projected exceptionally rapid Tuition and Fee Revenue growth, but they have not been able to
achieve the double-digit increases that they built into their budgets. In 2001-02, the adult campuses are projecting single-
digit increases which are derived from rate increases and modest enrollment growth. The College is projecting an
11.44% increase over the projected actual for the 2000-01 fiscal year. This projection includes Tuition and Fee Revenue
generated by the Antioch Education Abroad (AEA) program. AEA will be adding additional trips in the budget year and
these are expected to produce a significant portion of the additional Tuition and Fee Revenue.
The following table shows, by campus, the Tuition and Fee Revenue that the campuses are projecting for 2000-01 and
the amount each has included in the new budget. Budgeted revenue growth, including the $375,000 that will be
generated by the new Ph. D. Program, will total $4,021,674. Last year, the campuses predicted a 12.03% increase which
was expected to generate more than $4.9 million more in Tuition and Fee Revenue.
2001-02 BUDGETED TUITION AND FEE REVENUE
Projected*
Antioch College 1 1,962,465
Glen Helen 107,515
New England 8,768,227
Seattle 8,653,295
Southern California 9,806,307
McGreg or 4,888,000
Ph.D. Program 0
Budgeted
13,330,425
11 5,750
9,148,334
9,353,279
10,575,933
5,308,762
Change
1,367,960
8,235
380,107
699,984
769,626
420,762
375,000
Percent
Change
11.44%
7.66%
4.34%
8.09%
7.85%
8.61 %
TOTALS $44,185,809 $48,207,483 $4,021,674 9.10%
*as revised by the Board
The major portion of the Tuition Discounts are awarded by the College as Antioch Tuition Grants. In order to be
competitive with its peer institutions, the College is required to provide financial aid in the form of scholarships, federal
loans, work study and tuition discounts. As Tuition and Fee Income increase at the College, so too must the Tuition
Discounts. Both enrollments and rates will increase in 2001-02 and the College is pursuing a strategy of more carefully
targeting students so that it will not need to proportionally increase its Tuition Discount line. How well this approach
works will not be known until fall when the new entering class arrives. The nature of College recruitment involves
extending offers to more students than will ultimately accept. While a range of Tuition Discounts can be offered to
potential students, it is the students and their parents who, ultimately, decide whether to accept or reject the offers.
The following table shows the Tuition Discounts, by campus, projected to be awarded in the current fiscal year as well as
the amount budgeted for Tuition Discounts in 2001-02:
2001-02 BUDGETED TUITION DISCOUNTS
Antioch College
Glen Helen
New England
Seattle
Southern California
McGregor
Ph.D. Program
Projected*
2,942,602
0
10,000
2001 -02
Budgeted
3,149,377
0
0
71,000
212,100
37,130
0
Percent
Change Change
206,775 7.03%
0
-10,000 -1 00.00%
-30,851 -30.29%
-4,376 -2.02%
-44,870 -54.72%
0
TOTALS $3,352,929 $3,469,607 $1 16,678 3.48%
*as revised by the Board
On a University-wide basis, Gift Income is expected to increase about 14% over the prior year’s budget, and this is the
same Gift percentage increase being projected at the College. The Lead Gift line, an innovation introduced midway
through 2000-01 to allow the College to express its need for revenue, will increase by 66% over the prior budget and by
over 155% ($1,009,688) over the actual being projected for the 2000-01 actuals.
Grants are budgeted to increase 6% over the prior year’s budget while Endowment Income will increase 170% with the
addition of $600,000 as the College begins repaying a portion of the funds it borrowed from the adult campuses in order
to partially finance the last Capital Campaign. The accounting standards used by colleges and universities classify
accumulated gains in the endowment as unrestricted funds. In order to meet the 2001-02 budget needs of the
campuses, $400,000 will be released from the accumulated gains and an additional $200,000 will be allocated to the
College to help finance the new capital campaign.
Under current Board policy (Resolution 2.6.99:13), both the adult campuses and the College are to benefit from a
designated group of unrestricted bequests that were pledged during the last capital campaign. The adult campuses are
to receive $1.5 million from these bequests to repay the funds that they invested in supporting the first capital campaign.
The College is to receive the balance of these funds to support its own operations. Rather than requiring the adult
campuses and the College to defer their high-priority expenditure needs, $600,000 of accumulated gains will be released
as part of the 2001-02 budget. When the first bequests pledged in the last capital campaign are eventually realized,
these funds will be used in such a way as to allow the endowment to rebuild accumulated gains.
In order to rebuild the accumulated gains that will be used during 2001-02, a quasi-endowment account will be
established to receive a portion of the dedicated bequests. As funds accumulate in the quasi-endowment account, this
account will be used to provide the College with annual operating funds equivalent to the amount that would have been
provided directly from the endowment under the Board’s distribution policy. The actual distribution from the endowment,
however, will be suspended so that endowment earnings can accumulate and replace the accumulated gains that will be
distributed in the 2001-02 budget. This process will operate until the endowment is made whole, including any lost
interest. Once the accumulated gains have been restored, the quasi-endowment account will be desolved, the normal
endowment distributions will resume, and any subsequent funding received from the remaining dedicated bequests will
be distributed in accord with the Board policy governing the repayment of the “Unfunded Reserves”.
Contracts Revenue is budgeted at nearly a third ($104,232) lower than in the previous budget, but this is more a
reflection of our limited advance knowledge of contracts that will be received than a genuine expectation that contract
activity will decrease in the coming year. Until contracts have been awarded, we avoid budgeting both revenue and
expense. Because we require that these be self-supporting activities, when the contract is received, there will be
sufficient revenue to cover the associated expenses.
Other income will decrease slightly ($30,036) from the level of 2000-01, while the amount budgeted to be Released from
Restrictions will increase by about the same amount ($35,563).
Salaries and Wages will increase in 2001-02 by $2,124,138 (7.65%) over the 2000-01 budget. Proposed staffing
increases at the College in the Development Office and Admissions Office, the initial entry of all of the proposed positions
for the Ph. D. program, a small number of new positions at other campuses, and the proposed salary and wage increase
packages all contribute to this number.
At the start of the budget process, a considerable range existed in the proposed salary increase packages. Following the
budget presentations by the presidents to the ULC, the ULC agreed to take a conservative position regarding the
proposed salary increases for faculty and non-union staff. The ULC agreed to recommend that for 2001-02, campuses
may award increases of up to 2% at any time after July 1, 2001, provided that their budgets have made provision for such
increases. Later in the fiscal year, the ULC will evaluate the enrollment situation and determine if there is sufficient
revenue to allow additional increases at those campuses that have budgeted for larger salary and wage adjustments.
Regardless of the revenue situation, campuses that have not included larger increases in their original budgets will not
make additional awards later in the year. The following table shows how salary and wages will increase at each of the
campuses if campus revenue is sufficient to cover the additional budgeted costs and if ULC approves of the additional
expense.
CONDITIONAL SALARY INCREASES FOR 2001 -02
College
New England
Seattle
Southern California
McGregor
University
Administration
8.45% for faculty and 4.0% for staff effective 7-1-01. The
union staff will receive $.35/hour (approximately 2.9%)
effective 8-1 -01.
2% for core faculty and staff effective 7-1 -01.
3% pool for faculty and staff effective 7-1-01; about half of
the pool will be used for equity adjustments.
Faculty and staff will not be given an increase on 7-1-01, but
if enrollments are strong, the campuses will attempt to award
up to 2% later in the year.
2% for faculty and administrators effective 7-1-01. 3.0% for
union staff effective 7-1-01.
2% for staff and administrators effective 7-1-01
The net overhead that the campuses pay to support the University Administration and to provide central services will be
reduced again in the 2001-02 budget. 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 down to 9.0% in 1999-2000, decreased to 8.75% in 2000-01, and will
again decline to 8.55% in 2001-02. 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. The overall rate for all campuses will be
6.92% in 2001-02. If Overhead for central operations is calculated as a percentage of all revenues, the rate would be
less than 5%.
Reducing the overhead paid by the adult campuses has depended, in part, in the growth of net student-derived revenue.
The budget for 2001-02 actually decreased from $2,662,179 to $2,542,198. Therefore, in order to reduce the percentage
accessed to the adult campuses, it was necessary to make absolute reductions in the cost of central services. The
following table shows the calculation of the Net Overhead percentage for each of the campuses.
Net Overhead and Rebates
as a percent of Student Derived Revenue
2001-02 Proposed Budget
2001 -02
Student
Campus Derived
—— ——
College 6,778,375
New England 8,807,501
Seattle 7,689,811
Southern CA 9,980,324
McGregor 3,465,896
2001 -02
Budgeted
Overhead
——
1,130,770
1,211,031
1,057,349
1,372,295
476,561
$5,248,006
Budgeted
Rebate
——
-550,000
-457,990
-399,870
-518,977
-180,227
-$2,107,064
Percent
Budgeted Budgeted of Student
Subsidy Net Overhead Derived
VII. SUMMARY OBSERVATIONS
During most of the last decade, the University has benefited from a healthy stock market and a series of fortuitous
financial events. Together, the market and these events have allowed the University to cover its depreciation expense
while pursuing a “high risk” financing strategy for the College. Perturbations in the stock markets during 2000-01 and a
shortage of “fortuitous financial events” threaten to produce an accrual deficit for the University as a whole.
After the mid-year review of the 2000-01 budget, it became apparent that modification of our practices and policies would
be needed to avoid future deficits. With the impending North Central accreditation review, it is even more imperative that
we be able to guarantee that we have stable financing.
The 2001-02 budget was given particularly close scrutiny. In the case of the College, each line account was compared
with expenditures made in the previous and current fiscal years to be sure that amounts were budgeted wherever
expenditure were likely. In those cases in which policy or practice had been modified so that expenses would not be
expected to follow the historic pattern, appropriate adjustments were made. The budget for the College contained in this
Report was developed in a cooperative effort between the University Administration staff and the staff of the College. In
all cases, however, the decision to accept or reject a proposed change in the line item amounts rested with the College.
Similarly, revenue forecasts were reviewed and recommendations for change were made, but the College determined
whether revenue forecasts should be modified.
Time did not permit the University Controller to review the budgets of the adult campuses on a line-by-line basis and then
confer with them about each variance. Instead, all campuses were provided with printouts that made it easier for them to
compare their recent expenditure history with their proposed budgets. In addition, all campuses were asked to review
their revenue projections to be sure they were based on reliable data.
The Chief Financial Officers are a subcommittee of the ULC and as such constitute part of the governance structure of
the University. While they have a responsibility to their campuses, each has a responsibility to insure the financial
integrity of the entire University.
In their capacity as officers of the University, each CFO was asked to review their campus budget and to certify that in
their professional judgment, their budget presents a true and accurate projection of revenues and expenditures. The
CFOs of the adult campuses provided the requested certification.
As a result of the reviews, a number of changes were made to the College’s initial budget submission. The net total of
additions and reductions made by the College added $787,095 to the total expenditures. In addition, the College was
asked to comply with the University policy that prohibits the budgeting of bequests. If a bequest is known, it must be
reported in the current fiscal year. If it is unknown, it should not be included in the future budget. Removing the bequest
from the budget reduced the Released from Restrictions revenue line by $523,569.
The result for the College is that the proposed 2001-02 budget contained in this Report is in balance only because it
shows a Lead Gifts entry of $1,659,688 in the Revenues section. However, at this time we have no firm commitments or
other revenues to apply to this line. This means that the College budget is actually not in balance.
Although the College has accepted many of the proposed changes that were presented to them, we believe that some of
the items that appeared in the review should be recognized in the proposed budget. Specifically, the proposed budget
increases the revenue to be generated by the Annual Fund from the current budget of $1.6 million to $1,854,689. Our
concern is that the $226,689 may be difficult to achieve given that we do not expect Gifts revenue to reach the budgeted
level in the current fiscal year. In order to reach the current year’s budget target of $1,628,000, the College must realize
an additional $300,000 in each of the two months remaining in 2000-01. While this is not impossible, the six-year
averages for the Annual Fund in May and June are $1 15,436 and $171,927, respectively.
Two items in the Auxiliary area also appear to require adjustment. Cafeteria revenue appears to be about $75,000 higher
than will actually be realized, and the additional Bookstore items for resale appear to be $160,000 lower than they need
to be to generate the projected revenue. Had the College accepted a lower estimate for the Annual Fund and the
adjustments to the Auxiliary accounts, the Lead Gifts line would have been higher by an additional $400,000.
The other area of the proposed budget that has not been appropriately covered is Depreciation Expense. Depreciation
effects all units of the University, but it is budgeted in a central account. Although the campus budgets appear to be in
balance, they are not because they do not contain any depreciation. As proposed, the budget for the entire University
contains an accrual deficit (Excess Revenue over Expenses) of $1,245,147. It is technically possible to cover this
projected deficit by freezing the Mandatory Contingencies ($760,655) as we did in 2000-01 and by applying the Liquidity
Reserve ($492,448). The sum of these two equals slightly more than the projected accrual deficit, but applying these two
amounts at the beginning of the fiscal year leaves us with no flexibility to handle any variation in revenue or expense that
may occur. For example, the stock market might not reach the projected gains, enrollments might not reach the projected
levels, utility costs might increase faster than expected, winter or summer temperatures may be more extreme than
normal, etc. If anything should disrupt the budget as proposed, neither the University nor the campuses would have any
reserves that could be applied to ameliorate the situation.
We are experiencing just such a situation in the 2000-01 fiscal year. The stock market has been erratic and enrollments
have not reached projections. In addition, we have experienced dramatic spikes in energy costs and annual contributions
have been running below budget. While we might have sustained any one of these factors without major consequences,
in combination they may result in an accrual deficit for the first time in many years. We were able to balance the 1999-
2000 budget with the help of four fortuitous events that provided an additional $2.2 million, some of which came within
two days of the end of the fiscal year. It is unreasonable to believe that we will experience such good fortune every year
and we need to be more conservative in our financial planning.
In its present form, I cannot recommend the 2001-02 budget for your approval. To be reasonably comfortable, the
accrual deficit should be no more than $500,000 (preferably zero) so that it can be covered by the Liquidity Reserve. If
the accrual deficit were no greater than $500,000, the campus Mandatory Contingencies would be available to respond to
the unanticipated events that occur each year at the campuses.
For the College, the Lead Gifts line should be at least $2.0 million, but because this line does not represent tangible
revenue, the College needs to embargo expenses until such time as the revenue is realized.
It is imperative that we find a way to be more conservative in the way we structure our finances. If we did not have to rely
upon fortuitous events to balance our budget, we would be able to take advantage of those events to make substantive
improvements in our programs and our facilities. While it will be difficult to adjust to a level of expenditure that more
closely matches our revenues, doing so will give us security and free our time and energy to concentrate on improvement
rather than repairing tears in the financial fabric.
Glenn Watts
Vice Chancellor and
Chief Financial Officer
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
1998-99
Actual
–
38,893,382
-2,850,613
1,801,716
2,945,442
228,553
575,943
1,784,358
43,378,781
3,010,065
2,887,589
49,276,435
2,379,979
16,645,075
17,791
2,452,866
2,500,000
5,209,735
11,836,415
6,974,231
2,945,199
48,581,312
2,574,993
51,156,305
500,109
1,342,870
-40,110
71 2,228
-178,534
-2,721,206
-884,752
1,384,861
1999-00
Actual
–
41,348,919
-3,551,561
2,076,954
2,881,550
137,379
750,104
2,859,931
46,503,276
3,359,625
3,626,176
53,489,077
2,557,615
17,912,674
1,400
2,585,686
3,018,770
5,658,367
13,657,747
7,277,758
2,617.409
52,729,811
2,834,026
55,563,837
482,855
1,530,101
-194,921
740,635
-265,547
-2,785,307
-975,039
1,457,894
Antioch University
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
44,829,521
-3,271,045
2,411,897
1,000,000
3,230,261
357,222
318,023
1,234,838
50,110,717
3,489.833
2,143,549
55,744,099
2,662,179
19,194,899
0
2,437,981
3,572,224
5,818.740
15,796,836
7,199,181
2,913,227
56,933,088
2,722,920
59,656,008
-1,249,730
2,816,563
-2,184,200
854,548
0
-2,758,000
-1,271,089
21,359
2000-01
Projected
–
44,185,809
-3,352,929
2,429,226
650,000
2,523,328
357,562
696,897
851,472
48,341,365
3,317,557
2,621,230
54,280,152
2,657,060
19,351,749
8,600
2,628,859
3,338,417
5,672,689
14,447,936
7,651,018
2,824.780
55,924,048
2,718,437
58,642,485
-1,705,273
2,682,015
-2,325,384
926,631
-1 47,662
-2,850,743
-1,715,143
9,870
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
48,207.48i
-3,469,60;
2,747,631
1,659,681
3,425,842
967,26t
213,791
1,204,801
54,956.90C
3,318,466
2,179,112
60,454,480
2,392,442
2 1,455,058
0
2,895,599
3,093,155
6,394,252
16,570,038
7,859,506
3,074,842
61,342,450
2,749,6 19
64,092,069
-1,245,147
788,678
-100,000
966,175
0
-2,900,000
-1,245,147
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
Antioch University
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
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
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
58,406,278
27,749,542
7,987.237
1,676,198
1,595,460
253,821
1,473,581
5,799,077
3,398,877
1,394,427
688.300
334,643
773,408
521,787
500,862
5,088,192
-2,033.695
0
-400,000
96,291
2,758,000
59,656,008
-1,249,730
2,816,563
-2,184,200
854.548
0
-2,758,000
-1,271,089
21,359
2000-01
Projected
–
56,937,212
27,459,306
7,914,541
1,652,474
1,973,062
205,499
1,315,663
6,121,120
3,607,392
1,524,570
749,113
448,572
0
0
0
5,088,192
-2,033,695
0
-400,000
165,933
2,850,743
58,642,485
-1,705,273
2,682,015
-2,325,384
926,631
-147,662
-2,850,743
-1,715,143
9,870
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
62,846,922
29,873,680
8,736,900
1,942,510
1,767,62 1
273,921
1,434,357
6,215,955
3,938,180
1,373,196
683,352
355,308
760,655
724,955
492,448
5,248,006
-2,107,064
0
-748,500
226,589
2,900,000
64,092,069
-1,245,147
788,678
-100,000
966,175
0
-2,900,000
-1,245,147
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
4,440,644 7.60%
ANTIOCH COLLEGE
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 2000-01 Accomplishments and Challenges
A. Accomplishments
During 2000-01 the College has focused a great deal of attention on strengthening the academic program, one of the
central strategic objectives of our 1997 Strategic Plan. During the fall a team of GLCA faculty members visited the
campus and conducted a review of the academic program. While the review report was critical and flawed in some
respects, the team from Kalamazoo, Wooster and Oberlin provided constructive and useful feedback on the College’s
strengths and weaknesses and extraordinary insight into the sort of preparation that will be necessary for the upcoming
NCA accreditation review process. Faculty committees worked at conducting reviews of the College’s General Education
program, its Student Evaluation of Instruction instrument, and the summer block program; recommendations and
revisions are coming forward in each of these areas. Committees also delivered first drafts of an ADA policy and a Racial
Discrimination Prevention policy, both efforts requiring broad campus dialogue and participation. A call for faculty
involvement in on-line course development with other University campuses brought more volunteers than space
permitted, a positive sign of faculty interest in developing and extending our modes of course delivery.
The College stepped up grant writing activity during the year, preparing proposals for the Hughes Medical Foundation,
the Luce Foundation and the Fund for Improvement of Postsecondary Education. The Bonner Foundation awarded the
College a 3-year $45,000 enrichment grant, the College received a SCALE grant of $7,000, and gifts for new initiatives in
Co-op (the Robert Aller Co-op Development Fund), and Glen Helen.
Significant improvements to the physical facilities and technology infrastructure of the campus were accomplished
through the Ohio Higher Education Facilities Commission Bond. The College air-conditioned Main Building and Mills Hall,
paved parking lots and driveways, replaced roofs on the Science and Engineering buildings, wired the Union building,
Mills Hall and the Science Building for data, provided new furniture and carpeting in a number of areas, added equipment
and facility enhancements in the Science program, Communications and Art, and upgraded student, instruction and
library computer labs, as well as faculty and administrative computer facilities. The College’s Renovation Task Force
continued with long-term planning, and brought forward a proposal for prioritizing the Library, the Science Building, the
Theater building, and G. Stanley Hall Hall. The Task Force has held a series of very constructive planning and
consultation meetings with the Yellow Springs and College communities regarding planning for an ecological restoration
of the G. Stanley Hall building and the “golf course”.
During this year the College began to do the recruiting work necessary to increase enrollment at the College. An
extensive search effort involving sophomores and juniors produced an inquiry pool that was double that of the previous
year (12,000 vs. 6,000), and a 9% increase in applications. Developing the inquiry pool is the first step to increasing
recruitment, and while the results met expectations, the challenges involve being able to follow through with the labor-
intensive effort (mail-stream, phone call, field conversion and campus visit) necessary to realize a larger yield of
applications and to convert applications to matriculants. The College also strengthened its campus visit program, and
organized some very successful high-school guidance counselor visit programs that can be expected to contribute to
success in future years. And finally, the College began the process of repackaging admissions materials and its web
page through David Treadwell and Associates, a revamping process that will reach conclusion in the 2001-02 fiscal year.
B. Challenges
Enrollment continues to be the College’s most significant challenge, and in 2000-01 the College experienced its third poor
fall recruitment showing in a row. The cumulative effect of disappointing fall recruitment is devastating to the forward
progress of the College, and undermines confidence on- and off-campus. The College’s shortfall in enrollment revenue in
2000-01 necessitated fourth quarter budget cuts and staff layoffs. The key to turning this 25-year chronic problem around
involves allocating to the recruitment effort the resources necessary to be competitive in the marketplace along three
dimensions: (a) Reach: The College has to have sufficient resource capacity to conduct search and direct mail contact
in enough volume (1 10,000 to 200,000) to construct a viable inquiry pool (16,000-18,000), to be able to simultaneously
recruit multiple years (sophomore, junior and senior), and to be able to get the Antioch “brand” in front of the prospective
student public; (b) Touch: The College has to have the staffing, the print and other resources and the mailstream to
handle volumes of prospective students in numbers two to three times greater than we are currently managing, and to be
able to aggressively bring certain populations to the campus for visits in order to increase both yield and conversion; and
(c) Financial Aid: The College has to have the resources, preferably endowed, to aggressively compete for the best and
the brightest students against institutions that are meeting 100% of need (Antioch is only able to meet 84% of need),
offering merit incentives, and replacing loans with endowed aid (recent Chronicle of Higher Education stories have
documented efforts at Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Dartmouth and other schools, and these institutions tend to be the trend-
setters). The pressure on our limited capacity for financial aid is tremendous, and was one of the most significant
contributors this year to poor conversion.
Other challenges on the revenue side involve the heavy dependence that the College has on raising both Annual Fund
and Lead Gifts concurrent with spending in those areas. An aggressive effort in the fourth quarter of 2000-01 will be
required to bring those revenues in. An additional challenge this year had to do with Dining Services realizing fewer than
budgeted Board Plans (-$317,000), an amount that was partially made up by improved revenue from other Auxiliary
enterprises. The irony of the meal-plan shortfall is that the on-campus growth in student food co-ops (cooperative
cooking and eating arrangements) contributes positively to the stability of the campus and our retention numbers, but at
the same time erodes the revenue base of Dining Services.
Another pressing challenge is retention. While we continue to enjoy the best retention numbers in College history, the
short staffing of the College during 2000-01 threatened our capacity to retain students, and may have pushed us several
percentage points higher than last year. For example, the vacancy in the Office of Multicultural Affairs resulted in
considerable turmoil in the fall, and most probably contributed to the withdrawal of five students of color. Providing the
full complement of maintenance, housekeeping, cafeteria, counseling, academic support, health and other student
services with a skeleton crew results in the sort of slippage and lapses in service that contribute to attrition numbers.
The College experienced numerous challenges on the expense side during 2000-01. The telephone conversion to permit
installation of phones in dorm rooms (an essential safety feature) proved to be a nightmare that disrupted the entire
campus (as well as the University, WSO and McGregor) and created a high level of frustration. The College is now
well-represented in continued negotiation with those vendors who failed to deliver in our first several iterations of a phone
system change, and we estimate that the project cost the College approximately $70,000 in unanticipated expense. We
still hope to recover some part of that expense.
Utility costs skyrocketed during 2000-01, and the College found itself with increased expenditures for natural gas of
$1 11,000 by the end of February. In response, the College used our oil reserves to provide heat for two weeks, and
turned off heat to campus buildings as of April 3 in order to effect some savings on runaway energy prices. Contracts
and repairs for unanticipated events (e.g., raw sewerage backups into two residence halls required drain cleaning and
carpet cleaning services) accounted for $59,421 of the expense challenge. Unplanned overtime wages to cover staff
vacancies ($32,000) and campus maintenance turnaround between terms ($44,000), unfunded Capital Campaign
expenses ($162,705), reduction in intercampus agreement with McGregor ($66,116) and MIAP loan cancellations
($31,500) contributed to the challenge on the expense side.
Managing a major transition in the faculty of the College has proven to be another of the College’s significant challenges.
The College brought seven new faculty into the College during 2000-01, while at the same time searching 7 additional
positions (due to retirements and departures; three of those searches have since been put on hold), reviewing 5 faculty
cases in the fall, and reviewing another 11 faculty cases in the spring for renewal, tenure and promotion. The wave of
new faculty hired in the last three years is moving through the system, and as they do, the entire campus is consumed
with the process of searching, screening, hiring, orienting, mentoring, supporting and reviewing. More than half of the
faculty are now new — a sea change in the culture and the continuity of the College.
It is worth reiterating that one of the College’s major challenges this year, as it was last year and will be in 2001-02,
involves the pressure to conduct the fundraising necessary to cover the gap between fixed expenses and student-derived
revenue. The two areas where this gap has been most pronounced have been in Admissions — where the College has
attempted to increase its competitive effort by leveraging expenses against securing lead gifts — and in Development,
where the College has attempted to do the same in building the infrastructure necessary for a capital campaign.
Fixed costs at the College have grown commensurately with the Strategic Plan goals of re-establishing Antioch College’s
academic reputation among national private selective liberal arts programs. However, the capital improvements and
endowment-building called for in the 1997 Strategic Plan have not materialized. While the recent Bond issue allowed the
College to catch up on deferred maintenance (some of it more than 10 years old) and make modest improvements, it did
not address more than a tenth of the capital projects necessary to maintain a healthy and competitive residential campus.
While the endowment has grown from a little over $1 1 million to $18.8 million, it has not made the sort of quantum leap
necessary to replace some of the unfunded aid that impoverishes the College each year.
The College cannot compete programmatically with peer institutions. Its faculty is too thin, its facilities and labs are
antiquated, and its particular niche orientation is costly — Co-op, shared governance, AEA, etc. It cannot compete with
peer institutions in its recruitment efforts because it lacks sufficient resources for the level of Reach and Touch that
would sustain College enrollment, and the financial aid resources necessary to attract the best and the brightest. Its
student services are critically thin (security, health, counseling, residence life, academic support) and it lacks the
amenities of our better-endowed peer institutions (residence halls, recreational facilities, student life facilities). The
College’s options to survive and compete in the face of these challenges are (a) to balance projected expenditures
against aggressive fundraising, (b) to shift the expense structure internally among under-funded facets of college
operations, thus balancing the control of expenses against a volatile campus climate and the constant threat of attrition,
or (c) to take risks that implicate the entire University in order to accomplish essential objectives in building capacity.
Two other challenges in 2000-01 are worth mentioning. Due to the checkered financial history of the College, the staff
layoffs and reductions announced in late February and effected in March took a toll on campus morale and may yet have
a negative impact on revenue. Twenty percent of the College’s revenue comes from alumni and donors, and
compromising their confidence in the forward progress of the College may have a negative impact on their willingness to
invest. The Ketchum audit of our Development/Alumni Relations department provided extremely positive and
constructive feedback regarding our future directions, but at the same time, the changes in leadership implemented as an
outcome of that audit, while positive for the long run, may further erode donor confidence in the short term.
II. 2000-01 University Budget Priorities
A. Strengthen Employee Compensation
In the 2000-01 budget, the College increased the faculty salary pool by 8.75%, as the first year of a five-year plan to bring
Antioch College salaries to the bottom-to-median range of the GLCA. The College also provided a 4% pool for staff and
Union increases.
B. Building Fund Development at Every Campus
The initiation of the Development/Alumni Relations department audit and the feasibility study represents a giant step
forward in building the capacity for a capital campaign. Implementation of the Ketchum recommendations will continue to
clarify and strengthen that capacity.
C. Academic Program Development and Innovation
While the College does not often develop new College-wide programs, it does develop Antioch Education Abroad
programs, and it does innovate within the Liberal Arts and Co-op curriculum of the College. During 2000-01 we added an
Egypt program to AEA, and began the development of a program, in collaboration with Wilberforce, to study African art in
Mali. The University Innovation Fund, in combination with private gifts, permitted the College Co-op Department to begin
the process of bringing employers to campus. Three groups of employers have visited thus far, meeting with students,
conducting seminars and fora, and visiting classes, and we are beginning to see the fruits of this effort to strengthen our
ties to the “field faculty” who consistently take co-oping Antioch students. The College also continued to build and
support its block teaching innovation by having Colorado College faculty visit Antioch and conduct workshops on teaching
in the block-intensive format.
D. Strengthen Antioch Regional and National Visibility and Marketing
Our recent involvement with extensive search and direct mail initiatives can be viewed as one means of strengthening
Antioch’s regional and national visibility. This effort puts the Antioch name into 1 10,000 to 130,000 households and
several thousand schools across the nation. The Treadwell redesign of our admissions material and website will also be
geared toward strengthening and enhancing Antioch visibility. The recent NSSE publicity has been positive for Antioch,
and the ranking of the College among the top schools in the country on several dimensions of the study contributes to the
national visibility of Antioch University in positive ways. In recent months the College has also been exploring the
possibility of using a New York based publicist to place specific stories about Antioch College in national media. We are
seeking a gift which would allow us to initiate such an endeavor.
E. Begin to Implement the Recommendations of the Technology Task Force
The College’s Bond issue has permitted a number of projects which move the campus technology infrastructure forward.
The College has wired Miffs Half, the Union building, the Science Building and McGregor Hall, and has upgraded
computer labs, as well as faculty and administrative computers.
Ill. 2001 -02 Enrollment and Expense Projections
A. Budget Process
Administrative Council appointed a budget committee of faculty, staff, students and Administrators in the early Fall. The
Committee gathered budget recommendations from each department and program manager and began the process of
examining assumptions and weighing priorities. Budget assumptions were brought to Administrative Council in the late
Fall, and tuition and fee recommendations in early January, in preparation for the Board of Trustees meeting. The
Budget Committee met weekly during the sprinter term, consulting with the Academic Program Committee several times
regarding recommended cuts to the academic program. The process involved extensive community input and discussion
of the major parameters of the budget at the Academic Program Committee, and at the College’s Community meeting.
The full campus was engaged with the issues involved, primarily because of the deep cuts to various areas of College
operations. The Committee made recommendations to Administrative Council on March 13, with a wide cross-section of
the community in attendance, and AdCil deferred their final deliberations for a week to seek further input. The Budget
Committee was charged with making certain their projections were conservative and reasonable, and AdCil insisted on
including a healthy campus contingency in the budget proposal. The proposal returned to AdCil on March 20, and after
two hours of deliberation, was unanimously approved.
B. Assumptions used for projecting Enrollments and Revenues
New student enrollment projections for the 2001-02 College budget are based on yield and conversion rates applied to
our current prospective student pool. The budget anticipates 210 new students in the fall, 30 in the spring and 10 in the
summer. Continuing student numbers are based on currently sequenced students less an attrition factor of 10% (higher
than the average for the past several years. The budget anticipates 588 FPE, and with AEA added, a total of 618 FPE.
Net tuition and fees for the 2001-02 College Budget proposal increase by $1,068,185 or 9.8% over the 2000-01 budget
year. Six percent of this increase is due to increase in the tuition and fee rate.
Anticipated gifts and Annual Fund increases by $226,689. The Lead gifts line was decreased by $1,000,000, but then
increased again to show (a) a buildup in Admissions to continue the recruitment initiative begun this year and to improve
staff and budget in order to allow the College to increase both yield and conversion ($455,075); (b) the buildup of
Development/Alumni Relations for the capital campaign ($270,756); (c) adjustments to several budget lines following a
review of recent expenditure trends ($588,325); (d) removal of a possible bequest from Released from Restrictions
($523,569); and (e) some small salary adjustments ($21,963).
It is abundantly clear that the College cannot survive and prosper with its current endowment, and that there is some
urgency in launching a comprehensive campaign to address College facilities and endowment. It is equally clear that the
College has too few students to cover its fixed costs, and that flat enrollment is a symptom of (1) the quality, breadth and
depth of the academic program, (2) the physical facilities, labs, technology and infrastructure of the College, (3) the
resources allocated to marketing and recruitment in a competitive national marketplace, and (4) the amount of funded aid
available to attract and retain students. The budgetary effort here was to recognize the initiatives to move the College
forward in these two areas by including them in expenses, while at the same time acknowledging that budgeting such
Lead Gift items is not based on solid revenue projections.
Grants and other income decreases slightly while endowment income increased due to the additional $200,000 released
for the capital campaign. Released from Restrictions decreased by $459,383, but the $714,997 will be used primarily for
scholarships and Book funds. Total revenue increases by $720,233 in addition to the Lead Gifts ($659,688).
C. Significant Expense Changes for Continuing Operations
The College’s 2001-02 budget proposal includes an 8.45% faculty compensation increase, as the second installment in
the five-year plan to bring College salaries into the low end of the Great Lakes Colleges Association range. A 4% pool for
staff wage increases is included, and the total salary and wage increase in this proposal is $455,000. Medical plan cost
increases of $80,000 are included in this proposal.
The College’s principle payments increase by $149,071 for 2001-02, due primarily to the recent Bond issue; this will
decrease and level out somewhat in 2002-03 year. Included in the College’s budget proposal is a $190,000 increase for
utilities (to accommodate natural gas prices) and a $200,000 to repay the Drey revolving contingency that was needed in
2000-01, Discretionary Campus Contingency of $207,389.
To cover operating expenses, the College delayed three faculty searches, cancelled the search for a Dean of Faculty,
reduced and reorganized administrative staff, eliminating four staff positions, left one dining services position vacant, and
reduced various other program and miscellaneous expenses.
D. Goals and Objectives for 2001-02
1. To continue to build the base for recruitment that will bring the College to a level of revenue which will allow
sustainability.
2. To build and refine the Development and Alumni Relations infrastructure, and to launch a comprehensive campaign in
sufficient time to make inroads in closing the College’s revenue gap.
3. To continue to rebuild the faculty, orient and support our new faculty and their development, and rebuild the academic
program. To implement program innovations in the academic program, in the Co-op program and AEA, and to work on
strengthening areas of the curriculum such as the Sciences.
4. To hold retention in spite of having diminished resources to address the health and stability of the campus.
5. To fully prepare the campus for the coming NCA review.
6. To build public presence for the College through marketing, public relations, and building on the elevated status of the
NSSE study.
7. To continue to address the multicultural issues of the campus through strengthening the Office of Multicultural Affairs,
implementing a Racial Discrimination Prevention Policy, and continuing to press for recruitment and retention of faculty
and students of color.
8. To bring forward a long-term campus plan through a consultative community and Board process, and to begin work,
as possible, on the ecological restoration of G. Stanley Hall Hall and the “golf course”.
Robert H. Devine
President
Antioch College
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
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
1999-00
Actual
–
11,266,083
-3,112,064
1,303,415
1,426,879
196,135
1,135
163,391
11,244,974
2,480.522
2,526,005
16,251,501
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
12,162,465
-2,942,602
1,628,000
1,000,000
1,339,569
188,000
0
162,000
13,537,432
2,626,756
1,174,380
17,338,568
5,073,644
0
0
1,081,315
2,482,864
2,459,742
1,401,862
1,907,253
14,406,680
2,198,621
16,605,301
733,267
2,254,067
-1,946,800
426,000
0
0
733,267
0
2000-01
Projected
–
11,962,465
-2,942,602
1,628,000
650,000
1,416,569
188,000
0
175,000
13,077,432
2,526,756
1,352.380
16,956,568
5,156,539
0
0
1,098,694
2,348,439
2,671,101
1,689.766
2,024,470
14,989,009
2,168,890
17,157,899
-201,331
2,193,484
-2,175,384
533,342
0
0
551,442
-752,773
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
13,330,425
-3,149,377
1,854,689
1,659,688
1,338,293
381,000
0
133,139
15,547,857
2,455,635
714,997
18,778,489
5,373,971
0
0
1,013,357
2,848,595
2,782,292
1,822,127
2,012,166
15,852,508
2,210,910
18,063,418
655,071
80,000
O i 575,071
0
0
655,071
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
–
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
Antloch College
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001 -02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– – 1,761,921 10.39%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– – 1,379,921 7.960h
Campus
Campus
Campus
Campus
Campus
Campus
College
ANTIOCH COLLEGE
2001102 Capital Budget
Buildings Amount
Total Buildings
Building Improvements Amount
Total Building Improvements 0
Equipment Amount
Total Equipment 0
Furniture & Fixtures Amount
Total Furniture & Fixtures 0
Vehicles Amount
Total Vehicles
Library Books
Library Books
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
80,000
Antioch College
Tuition Rate Changes 2001-02
2000-01 2001 -02
Program Rates Rates % Change
——– ——– ——– ——–
Tuition 19,408 20,574 6.01 %
Room and Board 5,132 5,440 6.00%
Fees 834 908 8.87%
Total per Year 25,374 26,922 6.10%
GLEN HELEN ECOLOGY INSTITUTE
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
The proposed operating budget for 2001-02 totals $742,401 including $150,000 for the renovations to the Outdoor
Education Center (OEC).
The proposed budget represents what I feel are minimum funding levels to successfully operate the Glen Helen Ecology
Institute and allow the Institute to continue to move forward. The proposed budget is conservative in projecting OEC
revenues, but overall will require aggressive fundraising efforts to successfully balance the budget.
Raptor Center
The proposed budget for this cost center represents excess expenses over revenue of $24,131 ; this represents
increase of $603 from 2000-01. I am recommending a salary increase of 3% for the Raptor Center Director.
Outdoor Education Center
The proposed budget for this cost center represents excess expenses over revenue of $-25,945; this represents an
increase of $3,601 from this fiscal year. I am recommending a salary increase for the Assistant OEC Director) of lo%,
and a salary increase for the Office Manager of 4.5%. The Assistant OEC Director’s recommended salary increase
accounts for her added responsibilities with the departure of the OEC Director. The Office Manager’s recommended
increase is a continuing effort to equate her salary with her responsibilities.
Glen Helen
The proposed budget for this cost center represents excess expenses over revenue of $-33,329. This includes $32,137 to
be released from restriction.
Glen Helen Administration
The proposed budget for this cost center represents excess expenses over revenue of $80,243. Of special note is the
budget line for the Executive Director’s salary, which represents a 4% salary increase – this line was included at the
recommendation of the Budget and Finance Office and contingent upon approval of Antioch College; it also represents
the full salary (compared to 2000-01, which only included the amount to be expensed by the GHEI). The budgeted
amount for this line item will require a final recommendation from the GHEI Board of Overseers and clarification from
Antioch College regarding the amount of salary to be cost shared (if any), and the line item adjusted appropriately.
Glen Helen Development
The proposed budget for this cost center represents excess expenses over revenue of $-45,100. Key budget lines in this
cost center include:
Gifts, which represent a budgeted amount of $60,000 ($19,112 less than 2000-01);
Printing (newsletter), in the amount of $13,000 ($2,000 less than 2000-OI), and intended to allow for the
publication of three issues instead of four).
Robert S. Whyte
Director
Glen Helen
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Ad) Budget
2000-01
Projected
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
– –
-18,530 -1 4.70′
0
-31,858 -24.77Â
0
-7,626 -59.79:
0 0.00:
-1,471 -14.01?
0
-59,485 -1 8.599
-29,930 -1 1.279
13,590 1 19.469
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
-10,295 -8.17%
0
-30,612 -23.80%
0
-12,754 -100.00%
0 0.00%
0 0.00%
0
-53,661 -16.77%
-12,272 -4.62%
21 1,442 1858.67%
Glen Helen
2001-02 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
1998-99
Actual
–
563,130
347,831
100,373
7,851
0
0
60,382
58,438
66,570
1 08
7,567
1,397
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
650,517
-87,387
300
0
2,338
0
0
2,638
-90,025
1999-00
Actual
–
526,505
265,955
70,149
8,180
0
0
51,037
50,307
64,675
120
7,382
2,139
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
519,944
6,561
0
0
1,855
0
0
1,855
4,706
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
596,892
302,859
90,741
4,550
0
0
56,700
41,300
76,072
70
7,000
1,600
0
16,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
596,892
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2000-01
Projected
–
521,067
292,513
86,076
3,911
0
0
48,972
46,759
94,874
79
8,183
2,305
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
583,672
-62,605
0
0
0
0
0
0
-62,605
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
– –
-75.825 -12.70′
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
742,40 1
279,782
84,172
4,600
0
0
54,000
38,050
108,087
70
7,000
1,300
0
15,340
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
592,401
150,000
150,000
0
0
0
0
150,000
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
221,334 42.48%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
145,509 24.38%
GLEN HELEN
2001 102 Capital Budget
Campus Buildings
Campus
Campus
Campus
Campus
Campus
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
OEC Remodeling
Amount
Amount
150,000
Vehicles
Total Vehicles
Library Books
Amount
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
Total Equipment 0
Furniture & Fixtures Amount
Total Furniture & Fixtures 0
Amount
0
Amount
Total Library Books 0
Grand Total Capital Budget 150,000
——– ——–
ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND GRADUATE SCHOOL
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
It is important to state in this preface that the narrative is bereft of breadth and depth simply because the budget which is
being presented for review is the end product of an exercise which offered little, if any, flexibility at the outset. Absent
throughout the process and at the moment of drafting for presentation purposes were definitive short-term solutions to the
fiscal squeeze — access to funded reserves that can provide some marginal, but critical, relief on the operations budget;
no ability to project utilization of Contingency Reserves for 2001-02; the absence of funds already earmarked for the
College Fund and for the Antioch University Faculty Conference; and additional overhead support, beyond 2000-01 ….
there were no significant choices to be made in the construction of the 2001-02 budget.
Following the solicitation of some input from budget managers regarding priority needs in the areas of academic
programming, student services, public relations, and technology, the President’s Council did a careful analysis of all the
data available — carry-forward tuition dollars, new student enrollment projections, attrition rates, fixed expenditures,
revenue-to-expense ratios on the academic side to consider targeted, arm-twisting expense cuts, other revenue sources,
etc. — and determined that we had the resources to do the following: (a) meet the increased cost of our health insurance
benefit; (b) provide a 2% salary and benefit increase (less medical and prescription drug cost increases) for core
employees, effective July 1 ; (c) develop a small discretionary contingency; and (d) cut expenses wherever possible
without seriously impacting programs and services (adjuncts, library journals, maintenance items, some travel,
publications, technological needs all felt the scalpel). As a result of the extreme tightness and the absolute uncertainty
around several key items, mentioned above, this budget is the end product of a compressed process that was
dramatically constrained by the realities of a very small Houdini-like box, complete with heavy chains and strong
padlocks.
I. Accomplishments and Setbacks Encountered in 2000-01.
Antioch New England was able to achieve its overall enrollment projections for the year, though we fell short of our
spring 2001 goals; unfortunately, we also exceed our budgeted attrition rate of 9% — the attrition rate was at 10.5%
and contributed to a revenue shortfall which can be covered only if the 2000-01 Continqency Reserve is released
and a portion of the funded reserves remaining is applied. Expenses in some categories, especially personnel,
increased for a variety of legitimate reasons, most all beyond our control.
We were able to provide core employees a much needed compensation package increase in the range of 4.5 –
5%. This improved morale, especially among faculty and some administrative staff. However, low salaries for
some staff positions led to a rather significant turnover in personnel during 2000-01, for the local job market is
simply too lucrative (better salaries, signing bonuses, etc.) for staff level opportunities. The good news is that we
have been able to replace exiting staff with highly competent hires.
With the addition of new hardware (via lease) and strengthened technological infrastructures (added support, etc.),
the use of computers to enhance instruction, services, and communication continued to make numerous positive
contributions to the work of the Graduate School and strengthened the learning community as envisioned when
the computer and Internet access requirement was implemented in September 1999. See capital budget narrative
for mention of a major technological grant for computers, etc.
Public visibility remained very high, locally and in the region — high profile grants and contracts continue to come to
the Graduate School (e.g., a study of youth violence in Keene; new funding to expand the Selectpersons Institute
into Concord and Portsmouth, support for conservation biology research in third world countries; a new
consultation initiative with NPR for its “Living on the Earth” series; creation of the ANE Multicultural Center that is
already providing consultation and awareness programs for a region that is becoming more culturally diverse;
problem-based learning training for college faculty in Vermont, through the newly organized Vermont Campus
Compact (the work continues with college faculty in Maine and New Hampshire); continued programming in the
environmental education area; the Annual Speaker’s Series; visits from well-known experts, including former
Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt; etc. The downside to this visibility, and especially to the grant and contract
work, is that the budget tightness (high attrition and the lack of contingency fund access) for the current fiscal year
forced us to hold off on the construction of space to house the project managers and interns involved. In an effort
to counter the serious morale issues which accompany the reality of having people packed like sardines into three
small rooms and the real potential that we would lose some of these projects, we developed a bridge funding
strategy that we believe will permit us to do the project over two fiscal years – see capital budget narrative.
Expanded examples of facultylstudent collaborations — projects, research and papers presented in public arenas
and at professional conferences.
Program development efforts centered on: environmental advocacy as a potential track within the master’s
program in Environmental Studies; feasibility study of the development of a track within the Organization and
Management Department to focus specifically on elder care management and administration and training of
educational leaders using fundamental principles behind the “Coalition of Essential Schools” (the latter two
initiatives were submitted to the University for funding support via the Innovation Fund and received $19,000 and
$1 4,000 respectively); etc.
The new work structure (i.e., teams organized on the basis of functionality rather than direct reporting lines) seems
to be working well and the objectives of the development of a new President’s Council are being met. Leadership
in Department of Environmental Studies has been changed and the Department’s inertia is disappearing.
Lots of solid accomplishments and other setbacks (death of yet another Core Faculty member –leukemia and
serious illness for another), but the above should suffice for illustration purposes.
Enrollments and Revenues for 2001-02
In building our tuition revenue projections for 2001-02, we considered the following factors to develop what we feel
is a realistic assessment of tuition revenue:
– Carry-forward revenue from presently matriculated students.
– New student matriculation of some 360 students (93-177-90 by semester). This compares to new student
enrollment in 1999-2000 of 367 (85-191-91) and new student enrollment of 348 in 2000-01 (84-184- 80). New
student projections have been fairly consistent, and we feel that steps taken to enable some internship
acceleration of students in master’s level applied psychology programming will boost summer enrollment
numbers in 2001-02. In addition, strong activity in the dance movement therapy arena provides some
legitimate optimism that we will exceed current projections in the fall ’01 by 8-10 students, creating the
possibility of entering two cohorts.
– The Psy. D. program has 36 deposits for the fall 2001 start; although we always have attrition over the
summer, we have never had more than 32 deposits for a class of 25-26. (As of this writing, inquiry activity,
deposits, etc. indicate that these numbers are realistic and justifiable.) While there are no definitive predictors,
historically we have seen an increase in numbers when the economy softens a bit, and we have a suspicion
that activity in the field of environmental studies might increase because of current directions in Federal policy
related to sensitive environmental issues.
– A 10% attrition ($’s) factor has been applied on the revenue side to acknowledge the reality that attrition has
increased over the past several years from its historical 8% level. While attrition in 2000-01 hit levels above the
10% mark, we believe that the return (from interim status) of Ph.D. students, creation of “extended” program
options for master’s level students in the environmental studies programs so that fewer choose to take an
interim leave — especially in the summer semester, and a heightened awareness of attrition concerns in the
advising all make the 10% achievable.
-Tuition increases (see schedules), ranging from approximately 2% to 3.8%, based on program, have been
factored into the operating budget revenue projections.
– Other revenue projections are based on historical data and activity.
– Grant and Contract revenue projections are based on what we currently know about continuing grants and
contracts and a reasonable certainty of what we expect will come into the Graduate School in 2001-02.
Significant Expense Changes for Continuing Operations
This expense budget includes the following: (a) with some exceptions, where larger cuts have been negotiated,
funding sufficient to maintain academic programs slightly below their current levels; (b) funding for the medical
(including prescription drug) increase; (c) a 2% raise — salaries and benefits — for core employees, effective
July 1, 2001; (d) basically level funding for administrative services and plant needs, though some budgetary
cuts have been targeted in library acquisitions, technology replacement, publications and public relations; (e)
capital expenditures for technology, library support, debt retirement (principal payments), capital expansion of
offices, and (e) an internal discretionary contingency reserve.
II. Goals and Objectives for 2001 -02
Fund all or a portion of the unfunded reserves so the campus and its leaders can breathe, enjoy a dollop of
both security and flexibility, and put the brakes on the nickel and diming approach which is so destructive to
morale and the good work being accomplished. In the same vein, explore and utilize other strategies to
leverage resources, allowing greater flexibility. [University and campus]
Achieve revenue goals contained in the budget, including reducing attrition to a level below 10%.
Implement some of the new program development ideas via funding.
Resolve the space issues so that our grant and contract activity can continue to grow and attract students
wishing to work with faculty on these interesting and exciting projects.
Prepare for the NCA Review.
Maintain local and regional visibility and continue implementation of Strategic Plan (especially Development)
Continue to cobble creative solutions to problems and needs.
Jim Craiglow
President
Antioch New England Graduate School
2001-02 Budget~ummary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
1998-99
Actual
–
8,318,253
-56,680
38,584
773.186
0
421,698
145,216
9,640.257
0
358.1 00
9,998,357
4,121,495
0
889,840
442,012
583,540
2,276,697
71 3,060
435,987
9,462,631
0
9,462,631
535,726
521,004
0
75.000
-60,278
0
535.726
0
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
Antioch New England Graduate School
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 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 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
Proposed
2001 -02
Budget
–
11,310,428
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
– –
744,879 7.05%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
– –
746,135 7.06%
Campus
ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND GRADUATE SCHOOL
2001 -02 Capital Budget
Campus
New England
Campus
New England
Campus
Campus
New England
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
Space Remodeling
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
Computer Equipment
Total Equipment
Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Library Books
Library Books
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
75,000
Amount
26,000
Amount
ANTIOCH NEW ENGLAND
Tuition Rate Changes 2001 -02
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 All
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
Fail, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
2000-01
Rate
———
$4,200
$5,700
$5,300
$3,300
$3,400
$2,500
$5,300
$2,500
$9,000
$3,800
$7,200
$4,900
$3,300
$4,900
$3,300
$4,900
$3,300
$3,200
$6,400
$2,300
$4,300
2001 -02
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)
Organization & Management
OM Weekend MEdIMHSA
OM Weekend MEdIMHSA –
OM Weekend MS
All
Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring
Summer
All
Spring Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall Fall, Spring
Summer
Fall, Spring Fall, Spring
Summer
ANTIOCH SEATTLE
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 2000-01 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
The Seattle campus accomplished much of what we set out for the 2000-01 year:
We have been heavily involved in filling a number of faculty, staff and administrative positions. Our recruitment efforts
have strengthened the overall quality of our personnel. We had a successful search for the Academic Dean who will join
us in September 2001. For the first time in years, the Education program has a full complement of faculty in its teacher
education program and a new director of the Education Center will be joining the program in July 2001. A new director for
the recently created center to hold Environment and Community, Management, Organizational Psychology and Whole
System Design also joined us in January 2001.
In regards to our academic programs, the BATC program has strong new leadership and is reaching the stabilization of
its current cohorts with plans to bring on two new cohorts in 2001-02. A principalship certificate program was designed,
approved and implemented. Grant money was received to create a new certificate in foster care in collaboration with
another non-profit entity and will be offered in fall 2001. On-line courses in the BA program were offered for the first time
in collaboration with Southern California. Grant money was received from AmeriCorps for both Reads American and a
new service-learning initiative.
A new Director of Enrollment Services joined us in January 2001 and she has brought new energy and expertise. The
admissions/recruitment office is fully staffed for the first time since its reorganization in 1998. We have increased our
advertising to include multiple radio stations and buses. Our recruiting staff is much more visible in the Seattle area and
at community colleges. We have a new catalog for the first time since 1996-97. Our website has been revamped to a
more attractive and accessible model, including the option for students to access and complete our application form on-
line. Financial aid forms are now accessible on-line also.
Our technology and communications infrastructure has been greatly strengthened. The campus has a new voice mail
system and direct inward dialing, which allows our potential students and stakeholders to phone individuals and the
academicladministrative offices directly. The purchase of a new server and the hiring of two additional highly trained
individuals have done wonders to reduce network and computer problems as well as provide training for our staff and
education classes for students. The decor of the lobby and student study areas has been enhanced through artwork
displayed by local artists and organizations.
Our challenges have also been great:
The visits by “consultantslevaluators” in both July and December have required a high demand on everyone’s energy,
time, and resources. It seems to have taken its greatest toll on outreach related to recruiting, program development
initiatives and fund development. It is probably without question that the problems on campus negatively affected our
enrollments both in lower than projected admission numbers and higher than normal attrition this year. We originally
projected 920 annualized full pay (FPE) enrollments and currently estimate that we will be 44 below that projection. We
are converting our student tracking systems to FTE as requested in this year’s budget guidelines, but for now our history
is in the FPE numbers and tied to dollars generated for budget purposes. The lower enrollments are expected to result in
a $439,199 shortfall in revenue. The smaller programs of the Antioch Center for Creative Change account for $287,315
of the revenue shortage. Organizational Psychology was the only program in that grouping to exceed its projections this
year. The remaining Psychology degree programs are projected to be $1 99,757 short of their projections. The BA
completion program is also expected to be below projections by $154,818. The Education programs are projected to
exceed their overall forecast with the site-based MA in Education enrollments covering the shortage of BAITC
enrollments and graduate Teacher Certification.
The campus environment also negatively affected areas where we relate to the community and conduct outreach and
fundraising. Consequently, the campus has been set back a year in relation to program development, fundraising, public
relations and visibility initiatives. We lost both our Dean of University Relations and Director of Integrated Marketingl-
Communications during the first part of the year, reducing that office to one newly hired employee who is still “learning the
environment”. We hired a new Director of Integrated Marketing in April, but our first search for a Dean of University
Relations failed and we are in the process of conducting a second search. Problems with the company that handles our
bulk mailing prevented our annual fund letters from being sent to our alumni and donors before the new year, thereby,
reducing the amount of money projected for the annual fund.
A tremendous amount of time has been spent in recruiting faculty, academic program directors, and other administrative
positions. Although we have been successful in the quality of hires, the resources expended for advertising and bringing
candidates on campus for interviews were certainly higher than budgeted. Our legal fees have also been extremely high
because of an inordinate number of student and personnel issues along with the costs of assessment of the financial aid
operations. However, we have kept our spending to a minimum, cut our budgets in the fall as directed, and continue to
monitor and limit spending. With the release of our campus contingency funds of $157,352 in conjunction with our own
reserve fund of $1 55,959 we would be able to come in with a balanced budget. We are concerned that we will be forced
by the University to use our very limited amount of funded reserves and not be allowed to use our own campus
contingencies to balance our budget.
Decreased revenues also prevented us from starting the renovation of the 4200 sq. ft. of space available from our
previous tenant. Lack of classroom and office space continue to plague us as the Education program, Admissions,
Continuing Education and the University Relations office grow.
II. 2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET GENERAL SUMMARY
The Planning and Budget Council, which is composed of program directors, Deans, faculty, staff and student
representatives, guide our budget process. This is the Council’s third year of operation and it has a good track record of
recommending responsible budget actions. The Council heard compensation proposals from both staff and faculty
committees. The Interim Academic Dean worked with the individual academic programs and units on budget issues and
all Deans presented their recommendations to the Council.
Antioch Seattle is submitting a budget for the year 2001-02 that we consider conservative and responsible. With the
exception of the Education P.rogram, we are predicting lower enrollments or no growth in the remainder of our academic
programs. Consequently, the fact that we are projecting a flat budget with revenue and expenditures almost equal to the
past year is remarkable, given that our fixed costs continue to increase across the range from health benefits to energy
bills.
Overall we are projecting a decrease in FTE from last year of 21 and a $51,873 decrease in revenue prior to the tuition
increase, which will generate an additional $346,446. The FTE decrease is cushioned by the projected increased
revenue of $147,000 above last year’s figures in our continuing education unit. More specifically, the BA Completion
program is projecting 11.1 fewer FTE and Psychology 29 less FTE than last year. Psychology remains problematic since
it has declined in total enrollments over 47% since 1996. The new Antioch Center for Creative Change, which is
composed of Environment and Community, Management, Organizational Psychology, and Whole Systems Design, is
also projecting fewer FTE than last year. The Education Program is projecting a 77.3 increase in FTE from last year with
small growth in its Experienced Educators and Master’s programs of 27.6 FTE and BATC of 2.4 FTE. Education’s major
growth is in the new principalship certificate program which is expecting an enrollment of a 47.3 FTE. These conservative
projections in areas where we have historically had difficulty achieving our projections along with a fully functioning
admissions staff, give us some optimism that these are enrollment projections can be achieved and hopefully exceeded.
We are proposing a general 4.21 % increase in tuition, but in reality the effect upon the student and programs operates in
a range 1.6% to 4.92%. The two-year cohort of Management will be increased 7%, but is fixed for the two-year cycle.
In a declining enrollment environment, what is most difficult to manage is the reduction in “cost effectiveness” as
measured by a revenue to expense ratio. Antioch Seattle is not operating at an efficient economy of scale, meaning that
virtually every program has the ability to take on more students without increasing faculty FTE. Our revenuelexpense
ratios among the programs range from 2.03 to 2.49. These are not the types of ratios that allow for extra revenue to
increase our investment in salaries, program development, or even capital expenditures. The Interim Academic Dean
has worked hard to increase the overall ratio which hovers around 2.24 in the proposed budget compared to a projected
2.18 for 2000-01. However, the increase has been owing to cuts and reduced budgets of some programs that have high
faculty FTE compared to their student enrollments. The targets of reduction in those budgets were adjunct faculty and
non-personnel lines. The conundrum faced in these situations is that reducing the budgets only further weakens the
academic programs that really need investment and a strong influx of money to assist in curriculum redesign and
marketing.
Ill. STRATEGIC UNIVERSITY PRIORITIES
Strengthen faculty and staff compensation.
This priority has been the only focus in the 2001-02 budget and the increases in compensation have come from budget
cuts in other areas. The ULC agreement is to allow a compensation increase on each campus of up to 2% with any
further increases contingent on summer and fall enrollments. We have budgeted for the 2% compensation increase in
July and another 2% compensation increase in January contingent upon making our summer and fall enrollments. The
faculty body has requested that some internal salary inequity issues be addressed between more recently hired faculty
with faculty who have been here. The equity adjustments will use close to 50% of the compensation pool available to
increase salaries. As of the writing of this narrative it is yet to be determined how the equity adjustments will be made in
relation to the 2% +2% compensation package. A major cause of the compression is a salary schedule adopted a few
years back being used for advancement instead of placement for which it was originally designed. The President has
asked that the faculty salary schedule be reviewed and possibly revised before next year’s budget process. This should
be our last year to address internal inequities created by the current salary schedule. We did continue our commitment to
move toward more competitive adjunct salaries by increasing their compensation by 10%. However, we are still far below
the market for adjunct salaries in the northwest region.
For staff, we are recommending a 2% increase for all classifications in July. Contingent on enrollments, we are
recommending a 2% compensation increase in January for staff above level Ill on a seven-grade scale. For levels I
through Ill, we are recommending a 3% increase in compensation. The greater increase in the lower categories is the
first attempt to address some comparative salary issues. As part of our goal to work toward strengthening faculty and
staff compensation, it was necessary for us to determine some benchmarks from which to develop a plan for
improvement. This year we engaged a consultant to conduct a salary study based on comparable institutions. We
selected 10 institutions that participated in the 199912000 CUPA annual salary surveys to establish our relative position.
These institutions were mainly regional, both from the public and private sectors.
Although we have yet to review the data thoroughly, the consultant’s analysis showed the faculty compensation at ADS to
be 15% below the market surveyed, with individual academic departments showing between 5 and 13% below the
market. The staff survey not only included CUPA data but also local market data. Overall, the analysis showed staff
compensation to be 6% below the market surveyed. However, levels I through Ill showed to be about 8% below the
market. Since these salaries barely provide a living wage, we agreed they should receive a greater increase. In a
cursory analysis of the data, we found that we could increase those levels by 5% without violating the integrity of the
salary schedule.
The data acquired in this study are to be more thoroughly analyzed by a compensation committee headed by the Dean of
Finance and Administration. Our intent is to reexamine both salary schedules to determine how they might actually be
promoting salary compression and further compounding the problems of internal equity. In addition, we would like to
propose a plan for all levels of staff and academic programs to achieve the market and move above it over a reasonable
number of years. The group of employees showing the greatest distance from the market is administrators, which means
that attracting experienced professionals will continue to be a challenge.
In keeping with our strategic plan goal of “retaining and valuing quality employees,” we have maintained the current level
of funding for professional development, staff and faculty diversity training and education, and community building
activities such as campus teas, the end-of-year recognition picnic, and convocation.
Building fund development at every campus
The objective in the 2001-02 budget for fund development has been to maintain our investment in staffing, not easy to do
during a year of budget cuts. Over the last three years we have increased the staffing in that unit from one to four and we
are maintaining that staffing for next year. Some cuts were made in the operational part of the budget this year with the
hope that the reductions will not adversely affect our development activities too much. We now have positions budgeted
for a Director of Development, Director of Integrated Marketing, administrative assistant, and Dean of University
Relations. For the office to be complete, there is still the need for a position that focuses solely on alumni relations and
development. Currently, each staff member holds pieces of that responsibility and as the institution’s alumni body grows
more attention needs to be devoted to this area.
Strengthening Antioch regional and national visibility and marketing
As with the University Relations unit, the challenge for 2001-02 is to strengthen our visibility and protect our investment
by not making major cuts in the areas of marketing and admissions. We have increased our admissions/recruiting staff to
a total of eight. We now have an admissions associate to support the site based education programs, in addition to staff
for Education’s campus program. Through the reorganization of admissions staff, a staff position was transferred from
the academic programs to support the newly formed Center for Creative Change and allowed for admissions staffing in
the Psychology programs. We consider the staffing for admissions/recruiting complete and future increases in that area
will go toward operational monies for advertising, marketing, and outreach. This year we provided a small increase in the
admissions’ budget to allow for more off-campus outreach. We maintained our current level of funding for advertising and
publications. The one area that continues to need strengthening is adequate staffing for the web site.
Academic proqram development and innovation
The Education program continues to be the area of greatest growth and activities in our academic programs. The year
2001-02 will see the official implementation of the principalship certification program, which is projected to add 47 FTE to
our enrollments. Our other site programs, including BATC and the MA for Experienced Educators, continue to develop
and we are hoping to have full cohorts in all these areas. We are also exploring the offering of a BATC on-site for the
Muckleshoot Tribe. As the result of Washington State law, all new teachers within five years of hire will have to enroll in
and successfully complete an approved university-based professional development program. Our education program has
been on the forefront in moving toward developing such a certification program. We submitted an $8,000 proposal for
university-wide innovation funds to implement a Professional Certification Program, which was recently approved.
Last year at this time we were just bringing together into one center the four programs of Environment and Community;
Management; Organizational Psychology; and Whole Systems Design. This Center is now under new leadership, has a
new name (The Antioch Center for Creative Change), is revamping its curriculum, and beginning to do more outreach in
the business, corporate, and non-profit sectors. Already it is offering a certification in Permaculture and is exploring in
collaboration with other Antioch campuses, offering a certificate in Patient Advocacy. The center is looking at an
opportunity to offer its management program on-site to a small company located south of Seattle. We look to 2001-02 as
the year to set up the structures, systems, and integrated, adaptive curriculum to respond to the needs of Seattle’s
organizations and businesses. By building this foundation, we anticipate that 2002-03 will bring increased enrollments for
the first time in almost six years to most of the center programs. It will be essential for the University Relations office to
work closely with this new center to acquire external support from alumni, foundations, and other entities.
We will continue to offer some BA on-line courses in collaboration with three other Antioch campuses. Support for this
project is coming from university-wide innovation funds as well as some funding set aside in the Academic Dean’s
budget. However, we do not see this initiative as having a direct effect upon our enrollments at this time. The
Psychology program is initiating a new Certificate for Foster Care and Adoption, which is in collaboration with a local
agency.
We have reserved $1 0,000 in the Academic Dean’s budget to assist in our accreditation self-study process as well as
provide support for the development of new initiatives. Other initiatives that we are hoping to investigate and develop
next year are an MA in Liberal StudiesIArts and an MFA incorporating creative and technical writing.
Begin to implement the recommendations of the Technology Task Force
During this past year we made significant progress on upgrading our computers, especially for faculty. All faculty now
have computers that can access the Internet. In this budget, we reduced our capital budget for computer purchase by
$5,000. However, the budget should still be adequate to maintain our replacementlupgrade schedule which will result in
“up to date” computers on all employees’ desks. We also expect to fill a position that was held vacant this year, which will
allow us to continue our efforts to create an integrated communications information portal. Progress to date has
increased on-line access to student information for faculty, staff and students. Later this spring we expect to move
student course assessments on-line and by next spring we will have our registration system on-line. Training
opportunities for faculty and staff and students have also begun and will be maintained in the coming year.
IV. OTHER PRIORITIES
Strategic objectives in Seattle’s five-year plan that are not incorporated in the five University-wide priorities include (1)
enhancing student services, (2) diversifying our financial base and reserves, and (3) continued improvement of our
physical environment to attract and retrain students. Below is an explanation of the strides we are making in these areas
for the 2001 -02 academic year.
Enhanced student services
The topic of enhancing our student services continues to surface on a regular basis on campus. We were fortunate this
year to have a graduate student from another institution serve his internship at Antioch. As a result, he worked with the
Interim Academic Dean to conduct an assessment of student needs. The results of the survey are a testimony to the
diverse nature of Antioch Seattle’s student body. Various needs surfaced throughout the population, but no one
particular need was expressed by the majority. Most needs fell in the realm of better advising and library services.
Consequently, we did make a commitment in the 2001-02 budget to provide operational money to support our connection
to OhioLINK and a half-time staff support position. Our goal in the future will be to increase the staff position to a full-time
position, which will allow for interlibrary loan services.
We continue to support a 50% position operating out of my office to work on student outcomes assessment and the
accreditation self-study. We will provide a graduate assistant to the person for research and data support.
A new pilot program that we are initiating this year is to provide one graduate assistant position to each academic center.
The position will be to support research and scholarship efforts by faculty within each center. In addition, the position will
serve as a recruitment device by admissions. If this pilot is successful and we find more faculty performing scholarly work
as a result, we will most likely expand the program in the following years.
The healthy employment market in Seattle has made it difficult for us to fill workstudy positions. Last year we raised
workstudy wages hoping to attract more students into those positions, which met with some success. We are intending
to make another incremental increase this year.
Diversifying our financial base to support institutional excellence and innovation
The 2001-02 budget shows a flat revenue projection for fund raising from our development office. Since we have not met
the 2000-01 year projection in this area, we do not want to risk revenue inflation. However, we expect with a full
complement of staff, including a new Dean of University Relations by June 2000, that we will be back on track with our
fund raising efforts. We continue to grow our Board of Visitors, which is up to eight members. Our goal is twelve to
fifteen.
In an effort to diversify our revenue sources, we are increasing our efforts in continuing education. We have had a 50%
position in the past with one FTE staff support. The past revenues have mainly come from teacher education initiatives.
We are moving toward a co-director position in an effort to build a financial structure and systems that will provide an
incentive for programs to offer continuing education activities and expand beyond the teacher education field. As a result,
we are projecting an 82% increase in revenue from our continuing education unit with a 30% increase in expenditures.
Part of the increase is due to bringing all continuing education activities under one umbrella. Therefore, courses needed
by prospective students to meet entry requirements in the teacher certification program and psychology program will be
handled by the continuing education unit instead of their respective programs. New initiatives involve a partnership with
the Education Delivery Center in Massachusetts to handle on-line teacher education technology courses, a Professional
Certification in Education, Certificate in Permaculture, Certificate in Foster Care and Adoption, and numerous continuing
education offerings to counselors and therapist.
Improving our physical environment
We had hoped in the year 2000-01 to have expanded and renovated the 4200 square feet of space that was recaptured
when our previous tenant went bankrupt. We had set aside reserves to begin the process. However, the enrollment
downturns prevented us from actually moving forward with this goal. Our space needs are even more pressing now as
we continue to build an admissions and fund development infrastructure along with the constant pressure for more
classroom space. As stated last year, we hope to move both the Admissions Staff, Continuing Education, and University
Relations staff to a more accessible and centralized location, improve our technology teaching center, create centralized
offices for our computing staff, add two new classrooms and two new seminar rooms, and expand the space for the
library and learning lab. Funding for this improvement will need to be borrowed. We are moving ahead with the plan to
begin renovation this summer. A very preliminary estimate for the renovations is $350,000. We also have plans to
upgrade our HVAC system and replace windows based on an energy conservation report. Please see our Five-Year
Capital Budget Narrative for more detail.
We are placing $25,000 in the capital improvement fund to build reserves for the day our roof will need repair. Last year
we were able to put aside $50,000 and our goal was to deposit $50,000 a year in the fund, but our budget situation for
2001-02 will only allow for $25,000.
We continue to enhance the aesthetics of our building. We have a committee that encourages local artists to display their
work and continue a small fund to support those efforts. The artwork has transformed the interior of our building to feel
much more welcoming and warm to student study areas and lobbies.
Overall, our hopes for next year is to stabilize enrollments in those programs that have shown declines over the last six
years; support growth in the Education programs while continuing to refine the organization and operations of the site-
based programs; begin planning for new initiatives in the Center for Creative Change; meet the demand for more
classroom and office space by moving into a newly renovated 4200 sq. ft. area; recapture the progress we had made in
the fund development area; provide a welcoming environment for our new hires; and, generally learn how to live together
as an educational institution in a ferociously competitive and changing environment.
Toni Murdock
President
Antioch Seattle
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
– –
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
699,984 8.09%
30,851 30.29%
7,388 22.65%
0
82,160 48.81 %
100,000
0
-87,700 -25.22%
832,683 9.15%
85,678 30.89%
-7,182 -1 00.00%
911,179 9.71%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
Antioch Seattle
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
10,295,78!
5,321,991
1,317,77t
213,731
48,071
51,201
129,975
601,172
302,776
589,73 1
277,006
40,746
153,796
100,000
115,347
1,057,349
-399,870
53,600
0
8,400
0
9,982,789
313,000
173,000
0
140,000
0
0
313,000
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
911.179 9.71%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
514,828 5.26%
Campus
Campus
Seattle
ANTIOCH SEATTLE
2001 -02 Capital Budget
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
Parking Lot Resurfacing
HVAC Replacement
Total Building Improvements
Campus Equipment
Seattle Computer Equipment
Audio Visual Equipment
Total Equipment
Campus Furniture & Fixtures
Seattle Classroom Chairs
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Campus Library Books
Total Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
1 0,000
70,000
Amount
60,000
1 5,000
Amount
1 8,000
Antioch Seattle
Tuition Rate Changes 2001 -02
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 ere
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)
Corporate Leadership Full Time
2000-01
Rates
——–
335
2,010
3,660
305
335
260
1,560
3,120
260
260
360
1,440
2,880
360
360
366
1,464
2,928
366
366
4,215
1,405
3,900
2001 -02
Proposed % Change
Program
——–
Education Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add ere
Non Matriculated
Site Based
EducationITeacher Cer Full Time
EducationITC MA Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add ere
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
Cohort 7 Part Time
Environment & Community SWO
Per Credit
Half Time
Full Time
Overload Add ere
Non Matriculated
2000-01
Rates
——–
340
1,360
2,328
29 1
340
2,060
3,540
426
1,704
3,408
426
3,682
3,682
2,042
2,165
2,250
2,500
2,600
366
1,464
2,928
366
366
2001 -02
Proposed % Change
ANTIOCH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND SETBACKS ENCOUNTERED IN 2000-01
It is possible you will remember 2000-01 and Antioch University Southern California (AUSC) not for what we did or did not
do on the campuses. You will remember California this year as the year the lights went out.
I imagine, then, that our major accomplishment in this vein was to keep our light ON. This was not a fiscal issue, of
course, but literally rolling with the punches . . . er, blackouts . . . which, you will be pleased to hear, have not affected us
thus far.
Keep your fingers crossed for the summer. And hope (against hope?) that we don’t get socked with huge increases in the
monthly bill.
Other accomplishments? Setbacks?
We are asked, to provide some historical consistency for you, to frame this section in terms of our previously identified
ULC Budget Priorities.
A. We wanted to strengthen faculty and staff compensation. The specific plan was to implement an across-the-board
salary increase (accomplished); an increase in adjunct faculty pay (accomplished); and University-mandated
medical benefit increases (no choice there).
B. We proposed to build fund development at the campus level. In a broad sense, that was achieved, as I have
continued to work on fundraising cultivation, and we have continued to seek major grants (and we received a
$270,000 three-year slice of a $1 million dollar partnership grant in Santa Barbara). At the level of what we said
we would do – hire a development officer for the region (no), hire clerical support for Development/Fiscal (no), hire
a presidential executive assistant (yes), and hire an alumni affairs person for Santa Barbara (yes) Not good
enough, though 50-50.
C. In academic program development and innovation, we offered a plan to hire a new Los Angeles (LA) academic
dean and to increase programmatic (Teacher Education) and administrative support (for LA deans and for LA
registrar’s office). Other than funding the Teacher Education program, I am disappointed to report that none of the
proposed hirings have been accomplished. We are, however, on track to take care of all of these personnel needs
in the new budget.
D. It was suggested that each campus should work to strengthen Antioch’s regional and national visibility and
marketing. Both goals we offered – to have a regional Program Development position and to publish a quarterly
newsletter – were accomplished.
E. ULC agreed that each campus would begin to implement recommendations of the technology task force. We
suggested we would build an on-line library for LA -we went that better and have the beginnings for the region in
place. We planned to allocate funds for technical support for academic computing and we did that. We wished to
purchase computers: in this realm, we far exceeded our desires by replacing all legacy hardware and updating to
state-of-the-art applications completely at LA and mostly at SB. What a difference having new iMacs and software
consistency and compatibility has made!
But the story of achievements and challenges for the ending year must go well beyond a list based on last year’s goals.
With enrollment shortfalls and higher-than-anticipated expenses, we implemented two budget cuts. First we cut
$133,905; then we cut $89,723. We eliminated two positions with layoffs, and left positions unfilled, to achieve this goal.
Through salary savings primarily (approximately $273,000 projected), we have kept the budget in balance this year. As
you might guess, these moves – leaving positions unfilled, layoffs – are not without psychic cost in terms of organizational
morale.
Another word or two about “enrollment shortfalls.”
We projected tuition and fee income, in our original budget, of $9.7 million. We will end the year, we anticipate, with this
income at $9.5 million. It is the case, therefore, that it looks like we will bring in about $200,000 less than we projected
originally (our mid-year revision of the budget requested by the Board accounted for roughly $127,000 of this shortfall as
a revised projection).
It is also the case, however, that our tuition and fee income has grown from about $7.6 million (FY 99) and about $8.7
million (FY 00). Thus, such income has risen just about 25% over two years ago and just about 10% over a year ago if
we achieve our projected $9.5 million by June 2001. That’s not too shabby, indeed.
II. ENROLLMENT AND REVENUES FOR 2001-02
We will begin the next fiscal year in an organizational frame of mind that might be labeled “optimistic demoralization”. I
am reminded of the phrase “been down so long it looks like up to me.” As one AUSC staff member put it, “It’s hard times,
but it’s authentic times. In the past, we too often built our plans on illusions. Now we have gotten real, and that feels
good.”
I must stress that our budget process, under the superb leadership of our new CFO, Parm Bajaj, and the Executive
Deans (Chloe Reid and Donna Starr) and AUSB Academic Dean Richard Whitney, was tense, difficult, and trying. The
reason? There just wasn’t enough revenue to do what we hoped we could do.
But I also must acknowledge the wonderful maturity and professionalism of the entire organization. In a profoundly
democratic, participatory, and transparent process, we gritted our teeth (leading to the required stiff upper lip), and
finished the job. (I would say we discovered that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself, but that would take the
metaphor too far.)
The calculus and mechanics are rather simple to explain this year. Our planning process led us to an extremely
conservative assumption about enrollment for next year. We are projecting fundamentally steady state, with some
variations program-to-program and campus-to-campus, but a bottom-line enrollment projection equal to (2.68 fewer to be
precise) FY2001 actuals.
This means that the growth in revenues is attributable to tuition increases (ranging from 4.5-6%). While this leaves us
very little room for growth (e.g., no salary increases), and requires us to leave positions we wish we could fill unfilled (e.g.,
Development Director, Human Resources Director), it is nevertheless the fiscally prudent approach, given our
circumstances.
If we have been too conservative in our projections, hallelujah! We will institute cautious increases in spending as we
carefully track enrollments. I believe the entire organization is on board with this approach. While it does not make them
happy, it does reassure them that a steady hand is on the till (and on the rudder, too, for those on board).
I. SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE CHANGES FOR CONTINUING OPERATIONS
Our facilities costs continue to climb, due to rent increases and acquisition of additional space in both LA and SB.
We anticipate increases in utility costs. This is because of you-know-what in California. It gives me a headache to think
about. But we will handle it by hook or by crook.
The other changes in expenses are business-as-usual additions; we have not planned any significant reallocations or
new allocations that should be brought to your attention. This is a year for holding the line in both revenues and
expenses while we gear up for our future expansion and innovation – q.v. the next section.
IV. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 2001-02
There are five ULC budget priorities for next year. Two of them – Funding Unfunded Reserves and the Ph.D. – are not
Antioch University Southern California-specific issues. The other three – Strengthening Development Capacity,
Academic Technology, and Innovative Opportunities – are infused in our everyday attitudes and objectives. I need not
separate them out here; I need only pledge that all we do will enhance the university-wide achievement of these goals.
Our AUSC priority for next year is to take the first steps to become an Enrollment Management Organization. “The term
‘enrollment management organization’ is used to identify a system’s approach to establishing optimum enrollment at a
college or university. It integrates assessment, planning and budgeting on an institution-wide basis to determine and
achieve enrollment goals.”
The senior administrative team recognizes that our best hope for a successful future is to increase enrollments in current
and new programs. The Board will see the fruit of that approach in new program proposals and innovative delivery
systems we shall bring you over the next months.
But we need to diffuse an awareness of the importance of recruitment and retention through every nook and cranny of
the organization. To that end, we have hired a consultant, Tom Jackson, who will work with not only the admissions and
financial aid staff on each campus, but also the faculty. Also to that end, with the consultant’s recommendation, we are
restructuring the student services offices in LA. He tells us, with training, new personnel structures and processes, and
budgetary reallocations, we can increase enrollment by one-third in LA in two years. We say: All right, let’s go! And we
are bringing Tom back to work with SB as well.
Our buy-in to the Enrollment Management Organization notion comes from work by the senior administrative team to
comprehend the budgetary, humanlphysical resources, and institutional cultural imperatives of implementing this
approach. We are just at the beginning of this process. We are determined to achieve this goal.
When we have firm footing on this path, we will be on the way to becoming what Peter Jonas and Alexander Popovics
describe in their article “Beyond the Enrollment Management Division: The Enrollment Management Organization”:
V. CONCLUSION
I have noted above that we worked well collaboratively to produce this budget. I noted also that it wasn’t easy and,
because it ended up so spartan, it wasn’t fun. Significantly, we managed to work through differences between the
campuses and among the multiple constituencies. And we exhibited a respect, seriousness, flexibility, openness, and
concern for one another that made me proud. I am thinking as I look at next year’s tight situation: We may be hanging on
by our fingernails, but we will never let go.
But, oh, what we could do at Antioch University Southern California with another half-a-million dollars! (Well, why stop
there – another million dollars!)
We plan to get a chance to see just what we can do as the Enrollment Management Organization idea takes hold and the
Development effort blossoms. We will pursue aggressively the University’s and our AUSC goals and we now know we
can meet the challenges thrown our way by the vicissitudes of the cities, the region, the country, the world, and the
universe.. . .
. . . if we have electricity, that is.
Mark Schulman
President
Antioch Southern California
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
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
Actual
–
8,910,551
-216,258
110,175
215,473
0
0
23,894
9,043,835
21 1,701
242,175
9,497,711
3,509,245
1,400
66,609
699,718
1,087,631
2,465,377
1,220,942
193,723
9,244,645
230.369
9,475,014
22,697
85.488
0
0
-1 5,466
0
70,022
-47.325
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
9,792.932
-212,100
87,500
0
257,500
0
0
13,300
9,939,132
200,152
144,030
10,283,314
2000-01
Projected
–
9,806,307
-21 6,476
73,000
0
153,604
0
0
19,157
9,835,592
209,159
121,542
10,166,293
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
10,575,93!
-212, lot
48,OOI
i
343,876
100,00C
0
13,550
10,869.25S
190,000
151,862
11,211,121
3,934,083
0
172,143
796,589
1,215,483
3,172,831
1,443,429
263,002
10,997,560
183,561
11,181,121
30,000
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
Antioch Southern California
2001-02 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/Rese~es
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
–
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
Actual
–
9,497,711
4,510,331
1,008.845
252,122
61,776
98,926
226,033
1,040.740
1,150,051
30,743
191,331
1,544
0
0
103,718
1,140.897
-395,438
53.395
0
0
0
9,475,014
22,697
85,488
0
0
-1 5,466
0
70,022
-47,325
2000-01
Adj Budget
–
10,283,314
5,090,608
1 .I 14,854
191,213
77,155
35,010
221,808
940,721
1,316,175
23,250
146,000
1,516
177,430
0
110,894
1,219,831
-440,779
55,200
0
8,641
0
10,289,527
-6,213
100,000
-100,000
0
0
0
0
-6,213
2000-01
Projected
–
10,166,293
4,843,749
1,123,182
146,622
64,935
28,218
200,693
1,012,750
1,372,153
27,146
177,819
2,491
177,430
0
1 10,894
1,219,831
-440,779
55,200
0
8,641
0
10,130,975
35,318
32,770
0
0
0
0
32,770
2,548
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
–
11,211,12
5,433,581
1,191,861
225,31
64,851
35,161
224,991
880,92.
1,460,474
27,251
143,001
1.501
199,601
233,57t
124,75′
1,372,29!
-518,977
58,801
22,141.
11,181,121
30, OOC
30,000
c
0
0
0
30,000
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
– –
1,044,828 10.28%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
Campus
ANTIOCH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
2001 -02 Capital Budget
Buildings Amount
Total Buildings 0
Campus Building Improvements Amount
Total Building Improvements 0
Campus Equipment Amount
Southern CA Computer Equipment 1 0,000
Total Equipment 10,000
Campus Furniture & Fixtures Amount
Southern CA Classroom Furniture 20,000
Total Furniture & Fixtures 20,000
Campus Library Books
Total Library Books 0
Grand Total Capital Budget 30,000
——– ——–
Antioch Southern California
Tuition Rate Changes 2001 -02
2000-01 2001 -02
Rates Proposed
Program Per Quarter Per Quarter % Change
——– ——– ——– ——–
Los Angeles – BA Program 3,550 3,700 4.23%
Los Angeles – MAP & MAOM 3,700 3,925 6.08%
Los Angeles – MFA Program 4,350 4,550 4.60%
Los Angleles – Teacher Cert 3,550 3,750 5.63%
Santa Barbara – BA Program 3,400 3,600 5.88%
Santa Barbara – MAP Progro 3,550 3,750 5.63%
Santa Barbara – MAOM Pro< 3,550 3,750 5.63%
Santa Barbara - Teacher Ce 3,550 3,750 5.63%
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY McGREGOR
2001 -02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 2000-01 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
Antioch University McGregor has faced many challenges in fiscal 2001, but also created many opportunities. These
opportunities signify potential areas for new markets and service delivery and are harbingers for advancement of the
academic mission and financial health of the school.
Because student enrollment, and thus revenue, was less than originally budgeted, the fiscal 2001 budget was revised in
November 2000 and resubmitted in response to the request from the Board's Finance Committee. The revenue shortfall
was addressed primarily by non-salary expense reductions, eliminating the contingency funds for professional
development and faculty and administrative staff salary increases, and opting to leave vacant positions unfilled for the
remainder of the fiscal year. Additional adjunct faculty members were hired to teach in the case of vacant faculty
positions, while administrative staff assumed additional responsibilities to ensure that all necessary work was completed.
While this caused a strain on the remaining staff, we believed the course of action was essential for balancing the budget
and preferable to terminating existing employees. Introduction of the purchase order system to facilitate more adequate
expense controls was also advantageous for budget monitoring purposes.
Several of McGregor's academic programs have undergone significant changes during the fiscal year. The Conflict
Resolution track of the Individualized Master's Program was approved by the Ohio Board of Regents as a freestanding
Master of Arts Program in November 2000. The decision was made to dissolve the partnership between McGregor on
behalf of the Intercultural Relations (IR) track of the Individualized Master of Arts (IMA) program and the Intercultural
Relations Institute (ICI) in Portland, Oregon, although existing students will continue to be served by both entities. As a
result, new students will not be accepted into the IR program in fiscal 2002; however, the IR program faculty are
contacting former students who withdrew prior to completing the program to determine whether they have interest in re-
enrolling. Fiscal 2001 marked the last year in which students were accepted into the Teacher certification program;
some remaining students will complete the program in fall 2001. Four new teacher education programs will begin in fiscal
2002: Early Childhood Teacher Licensure, Middle Childhood Teacher Licensure, Adolescent/Young Adult Teacher
Licensure, and Special Education Teacher Licensure.
Significant progress has been made on "The Classroom of the Future Project." A $10,000 donation from the Dayton
Business Committee was received to conduct a studyon the project, of which the stated goals include integrating theory
and practice of instructional technology into a well-established and respected Teacher Education program and
establishing a technologically advanced classroom environment for teaching and learning of Teacher Education
candidates. The classroom can become a laboratory for experimental, new technology for local area businesses in the
information technology field (when related to the teaching-learning process). A draft lease is under review by the Vice
Chancellor's office for the first classroom to be located in the Entrepreneur Center in Dayton; a commitment for donations
for equipping the room of approximately $250,000 has already been obtained.
Fay Volenik, Executive Assistant to the President, performed a feasibility study, funded by a $1 2,000 grant from the
Porrath Foundation for Patient Advocacy, to explore building a program to train professional personal patient advocates
and make them accessible to the public. McGregor will undertake the Patient Advocacy Program only if the program will
be self-sustaining, which currently is unknown.
The Title II federal institutional and state report card mandate goes into effect this fall. All teacher education institutions
must submit the names of students who complete their programs to ensure that all program graduates are included in the
statement and federal Institutional Report Cards' data. Title II requires that examination passing rates be published in all
institutional literature.
The following section addresses each of the five ULC Budget Priorities previously identified for 2000-01.
A. Strengthen Employee Compensation
Personnel represented by the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE), Local 796 were awarded a
3.5% salary increase, as was agreed upon in the current contract. In addition, 6 of the 15 staff in the bargaining unit were
upgraded during the fiscal 2001 budget year due to acceptance of increased responsibilities. Faculty and administrators
received a general 2% raise or an equity adjustment at the beginning of the fiscal year, whichever was higher. We had
included money in a contingency line in the original fiscal 2001 budget for an additional 1 % raise and other equity
adjustments to be given in January 2001 (retroactive to July 1, 2000), but were forced to eliminate the contingency due to
less than budgeted revenue results.
Many of our employees paid for their own professional development during fiscal 2001, as we also eliminated the amount
in our contingency line for that purpose when revising the budget in November 2000. McGregor funded no professional
development in fiscal 2001.
If we are provided access to the mandatory contingency at the end of fiscal 2001, we would like to use some of those
funds to complete the originally proposed compensation increases, in a lump sum that is not added to base salaries for
fiscal 2002. To the extent possible, we also would like to reimburse those employees who paid for their own professional
development, within the professional development guidelines of McGregor. Not to do so leaves us at risk that our
dedicated faculty and administrators will seek other employment that compensates more competitively. We believe we
already are seeing this happen.
B. Building Fund Development at Every Campus
Sean Creighton began working as the Director of Alumni Development and the Annual Fund in October 2000 and initiated
the Renaissance Campaign in December 2000. Gift commitments currently exceed the campaign goal of $25,000 by
more than 30%. Solicitations were sent to alumni, the McGregor community, current students and the McGregor Board of
Visitors. The Antioch University Board of Trustees also will be invited to participate in this campaign by the Antioch
University Development Office. Contributors of $1,000 or more will become founding members of the Douglas McGregor
Society. The first Douglas McGregor Society event was held on April 25, 2001 at the Packard Museum in downtown
Dayton. All donors who send a gift by June 30,2001 will be considered a Founding Member of the Renaissance Fund.
The Fund currently has more than 100 founding members.
Development plans for next year include an Executive Spelling Bee or Executive Trivia event with area businesses to
raise scholarship funds to be awarded to McGregor students. We currently are speaking to potential sponsors.
C. Academic Program Development and Innovation
Fay Volenik, Executive Assistant to the President, will have obtaining continuing education contracts as her chief
responsibility during the next fiscal year. The Classroom of the Future space in the Entrepreneur Center will create new
opportunities for continuing education. It can be used for offerings to employees in the greater Miami Valley area by the
Graduate Management Program, as well as for certificate programs in conflict resolution and intercultural relations. With
a convenient location and state of the art facility, our visibility in the community will be greatly enhanced.
The new teacher licensure programs will play an essential role in this area in meeting the State of Ohio's focus on
teacher education, particularly in special education. There is far greater demand for teachers than there are teachers in
the special education area. The Classroom of the Future will figure prominently in various teacher education offerings.
The "2+2" agreement between the McGregor undergraduate program and Sinclair Community College has significant
potential in assisting students in the local area earn bachelor's degrees in general education, humanities, human
development, human services administration, human resource management, liberal arts and management.
The Graduate Management program has continued the strategic use of alumni in recruiting new students to the program.
Under the direction of Dr. Iris Weisman, a track will be added for Community College Management, aimed at educating
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 believe it has great potential for the future.
D. Strengthen Antioch Regional and National Visibility and Marketing
Through our IMA, Conflict Resolution, on-line courses, and my personal involvement, McGregor enjoys a national, and in
some cases, an international presence.
However, we believe that we should concentrate more of our energies in the local area. I have spent a great deal of time
and effort in the community during fiscal 2001 and was asked to join a number of community organizations, such as the
Dayton Chamber of Commerce, in leadership roles. This involvement resulted in raising the McGregor profile in the
greater Dayton area, and that of its various programs. Strategic recruitment of strong community and business leaders to
the McGregor Board of Visitors has been beneficial to the school, and community involvement led to the investments in
The Classroom of the Future Project." To date, McGregor has had three feature stories in The Dayton Business Journal,
including a front-page headline article.
E. Begin to Implement Recommendations of the Technology Task Force
During fiscal 2001, McGregor completed the first phase of its plan to offer expanded technology systems and services to
benefit the campus' students and employees. A new business lab was created and equipped with IBM NetVista PCs.
The education and multimedia lab was renovated and equipped with iMac DVs. The Department of Information Systems
(IS) hired an Applications and Lab Administrator to provide oversight for the labs, assist students, and train employees.
The IS Department also created a "Technology Boot Camp" for faculty and will deliver the curriculum in April and May
2001. WebCT 3.x, a new web-based on-line course delivery system, was purchased and will be used to deliver some of
McGregor's on-line curriculum in some programs, and technology-enhance selected courses for local students. An IEEE
802.1 1 Direct Sequence spread Spectrum (DSSS) wireless network layer also was added to the campus data network.
New ListServ services and web discussion boards for alumni also are now available.
II. 2001-02 ENROLLMENT AND REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Net tuition and fees are budgeted at $5,271,632, which represents a 7.8% increase from the fiscal 2001 revised budget.
Three percent of this increase is related to an increase in tuition.
The focus next fiscal year will be on marketing. To this end, we plan a reorganization of all student services offices so
that the students can be served with enhanced quality and convenience. We also plan to hire two new Recruiters to
facilitate the student recruitment and admissions process. Our target for marketing will be on local rather than distance
students. This change will allow maximization of our marketing dollars and will narrow our target audience.
Revenue was increased from projections initially submitted because of this planned focus. If revenue targets are not met
as of fall quarter (October 2001), the McGregor budget will immediately be revised to reflect appropriate expense levels.
I. 2001 -02 EXPENSE PROJECTIONS
Our first draft of the budget revealed a deficit of more than $1 million. The President's Council spent an enormous
amount of time and effort reducing that amount to $155,000.
The assistance provided by the Chancellor's office in adding $100,000 to the endowment income line and adjusting
McGregor's overhead to Antioch College to 4% of student-derived income results in a budget submission with a positive
accrual balance of $16,818. This amount will be used to make McGregor's principal payment on the Series 2000C bond
issue. We greatly appreciate the support of the Chancellor's office and the Board in this regard.
Part of our planning was to identify the changes outlined in the section on revenue above. The proposed budget also
leaves vacant the following positions: 3 faculty, 2 administrators, and 1.5 represented staff positions.
The budget includes a 3% salary increase for UE-represented personnel, which is included as a part of the current
contract. In addition, it includes a 3% salary increase for faculty and administrators, and professional development funds
to comply with McGregor's policy on professional development. We strongly believe that these expenses should be
included in the fiscal 2001 budget, as we are asking everyone "to do more with less" for the second consecutive year.
IV. CONCLUSION
The budget submitted by Antioch University McGregor is very tight, and certainly is not without risks. However, we
believe it is an appropriate budget to begin fiscal 2002, and believe strongly in our ability to provide top quality academic
services in a fiscally responsible way.
We are confident about our future possibilities and stand poised to ensure that 2001-02 is the best year in Antioch
University McGregor's history.
Barbara Gellman-Danley
President
Antioch University McGregor
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
Antioch University McGregor
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
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 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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
- -
-79,204 -1.53'
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
-
5,680,766
2,793,883
840,199
146,021
179,871
35,320
77,026
746,325
138,000
34,300
0
32,732
69,318
8,679
43,324
476,56 1
-180,227
33,400
0
189,216
0
5,663,948
16,818
100,000
-1 00,000
16,818
0
0
16,818
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
- -
568,266 11.12%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
- -
489.062 9.42%
Campus
Campus
The McGregor School of Antioch
2001 -02 Capital Budget
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
Amount
Amount
Total Building Improvements 0
Campus Equipment Amount
McGregor Student Record Archive Project 50,000
Instructional AV Equipment 25,000
On-Line Course Development 25,000
Total Equipment
Campus Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Campus Library Books
100,000
Amount
Total Library Books 0
Grand Total Capital Budget 100,000
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The McGregor School of Antioch
Tuition Rate Changes 2001 -02
2000-01
Rates
Program Per Quarter
-------- --------
Weekend College 2,616
Graduate Management 3,285
IMA Classic 1,577
IMA Intercultural Relations* 2,600
IMA Conflict Resolution* 2,877
Teacher Certification 3,036
MA Education 2,116
Ohio Principalship Cert
Early Childhood Licensure
Middle Childhood Licensure
Adolescent/Youg Adult Licensure
Special Education Licensure
200 1 -02
Proposed
Per Quarter
--------
2,695
3,384
1,624
2,678
2,962
3,127
2,179
2,304
2,304
2,304
2,304
2,930
% Change
--------
3.02%
3.01 %
2.98%
3.00%
2.95%
3.00%
2.98%
ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I. 2000-01 Accomplishments and Challenges
Although not without its frustrations and setbacks, 2000-01 has also been a year of advancement and accomplishment.
We have struggled with some serious internal problems and we have attacked some of the financial factors that are
stressing the infrastructure of the University. As much as I would like to tell you that all of our problems have been
resolved, the fact is that while we are making progress, several fundamental questions remain to be answered. We will
continue to work on these issues and employe a firmer hand in resolving some of the remaining problems facing the
University.
Among the challenges that absorbed a great deal of our time and attention during the year was the outbreak of faculty
discontent at Seattle. The Seattle campus is undergoing a significant restructuring of its programs and organizational
structure. Change is invariably uncomfortable for many people and some were unwilling to accept new direction. With
the support of the Board, however, we were able to work through the problems and allow Antioch Seattle to continue to
advance. However, the process was lengthy and involved several trips to the West and investment of many hours in
discussion, contemplation, and introspection.
Our efforts to obtain administrative approval from the Ohio Board of Regents for the new Ph. D. in Leadership and
Change has also consumed an inordinate amount of our time and energy. We recognized at the outset that the
bureaucratic review would be lengthy, but we had prepared well and believed that the innovative nature of this new
degree was extremely attractive and that it would gain acceptance once it was understood. Our design work and the
academic rigor of the proposed program gained acceptance of the external consultants gathered to review the program
on behalf of the Board of Regents, but we are continuing to encounter demands for additional documentation and further
refinements from the Board staff. On each occasion, we have satisfied each new request for information, documentation,
and modifications, only to be met with additional requests and delays. While we are frustrated by the length of time
required by this process, we feel that we have satisfied all reasonable requests that might be raised by an administrative
tribunal responsible for insuring the quality of each degree that is offered. We continue to believe that this is a quality
program and that there is an unmet need for this degree. Therefore, we continue to persevere with the expectation that
the staff of the Board of Regents will soon recognize the value of our work and the promise of this program. We are fully
prepared to begin accepting students and we have identified a qualified cohort of entering students who are anxious to
begin study in this exciting new program. I remain hopeful that State approval will be granted in the very near future.
Among the more significant accomplishments and challenges of 2000-01 are the following:
Ensuring Financial Stability. During the first part of the last decade the adult campuses of the University experienced
significant enrollment growth. While not all campuses grew rapidly in every year, the period is marked by steady growth
at most of the adult campuses and a period of exceptional growth for the McGregor. In the latter years of the period,
however, enrollment growth leveled off and so did the ability of the adult campuses to generate additional revenue. What
has ensued has been a period in which tuition rates have been increased in order to meet increasing operating costs, but
the campuses are now facing a situation in which it will be difficult to raise additional significant revenue by increasing
tuition rates. New initiatives to grow enrollment and increase revenue are clearly needed. The purpose of the recent
University planning process was to outline the strategies that can be employed to advance the University in the coming
years. In addition to the University-Wide plan, each of the campuses has developed its own plan and each campus is
pursing its most important objectives.
Part of the difficulty that we have had in planning has been the financial uncertainty caused by the College. The
traditional programs of the College have yet to attract an enrollment sufficiently large to fully support their costs. The
College is maintaining a physical plant and a faculty designed for a much larger enrollment, and as a consequence, costs
have been running well ahead of revenue. This situation has deprived the College of the ability to invest in its own
infrastructure and has caused deferred maintenance to increase. Despite the fact that the College has a faculty larger
than its current enrollment can support, the current faculty is not large enough to fully support all of the academic areas
envisioned by its current curriculum. The result has been a spiral in which inadequate facilities and a faculty of limited
size discourage the enrollment of additional students.
In recent years the College has made considerable progress in improving the quality of its academic programs, in part by
hiring well-qualified faculty, and in part by using bond revenue to improve its facilities. These efforts have stabilized the
existing enrollment and contributed to a high retention rate. The College has attracted national attention this past year for
the quality of its undergraduate program, and we are hopeful that all of these efforts will soon contribute to a larger
entering class.
Regrettably, the plateauing of enrollment growth at the adult campuses has limited their ability to provide additional
revenue for the operation of the College. While they continue to supply more than $1.0 million per year in budgeted
subsidies and unplanned supplements whenever the College budget ends in deficit, they are having difficulty satisfying
the needs of their own infrastructure and they are becoming increasingly uncompetitive in terms of staff and faculty
compensation. The needs of the College are such, however, that the College leadership has adopted high-risk
approaches to its funding. We have implicitly supported the College and have even explicitly taken steps to insure that
additional funds would be contributed from the adult campuses above and beyond the official subsidies should the high-
risk strategies fail. While the strategies have succeeded on occasion, they have failed too often and deprived the adult
campuses of necessary resources. In the current fiscal year, it appears that the Contingency Funds needed by the adult
campuses for a variety of essential purposes will not be available because they will be needed to satisfy a portion of the
College's deficit. There are two months remaining in the current fiscal year and it is possible that we will see a dramatic
event that will reverse the College's deficit. We had such an event last year, but it is imprudent to assume that such
events will occur with annual regularity.
As great as the need is for additional funding to support the College, the College can no longer pursue a policy of high-
risk financing when it jeopardizes the operation of the adult campuses and risks the financial solvency of the University as
a whole. Therefore, while we have struggled mightily during this year to find ways to improve the funding for the College,
it is apparent that we must slow the growth in spending at the College to a rate that matches the additional income that
can be reasonably expected. We have revised our budget development policies to encourage each campus to become
more realistic in its expenditure forecasting and to pay greater attention to predicting additional revenues. Each campus,
but particularly the College, has been asked to present a 2001-02 Budget that is sound in every respect.
The ULC plays a major role in insuring the integrity of the campus budgets and the budget for the entire University. The
Chief Financial Officers constitute a formal subcommittee of the ULC and this group plays a major role in the
development of the annual operating budgets. They provide technical advice to their presidents about what is and what
is not possible, and they meet as a group to review the budgets of the other campuses and the University Administration.
As a part of the ULC, they are responsible not only for the integrity of the budget of their campus, but for the integrity of
the budget of the entire University. For the first time this year, the Chief Financial Officers are being requested to formally
certify that the budget of their campus has been reviewed and that its revenue and expense projections are based upon
sound data and reasonable expectations.
Beginning in 2001-02, the University will adopt financial accruals as part of its accounting processes. Encumbering funds
at the beginning of the fiscal year will greatly reduce the possibility of a program or campus over-spending its budget.
The encumbrance process "sets aside" funds to insure their availability when needed later in the year to meet predictable
commitments. For example, salaries will be encumbered each time an appointment is made. In this way, the full salary
will be "set aside" and released for expenditure as each payroll occurs. By encumbering the salary, the money in the
budget for this purpose cannot be spent for any other purpose.
By more closely monitoring expenditures, insufficient revenue becomes the greater potential cause of a deficit. If costs
are not reduced when revenues fail to meet expectation, a deficit will result. Beginning in 2001-02, whenever campus
revenues fail to meet the level projected in the budget, the campus will be required to "embargo" unencumbered expense
lines to force costs to stay within revenues. Requiring expenses to be reduced to stay within revenues has been the
official policy of Antioch for many years. Severe penalties were imposed on presidents who permitted unapproved
deficits, and we need to consider reinstating that policy.
Stimulating Academic Program Development and Innovation. In order for the University to advance, each campus
must strengthen its academic offerings in response to the expectation of a new generation of students. To assist and
encourage the campuses, we established an academic program innovation fund in the University budget in 1999-2000.
Initially, we funded this program at $50,000, but for a variety of reasons including insufficient funding, the program was
slow to start. In 2000-01 we increased the fund to $100,000 and a significant number of awards were made. During the
year the ULC asked the deans to develop a review process and to assist in the evaluation of proposals submitted by the
campuses. That process has been reviewed by the ULC and is now in place. The second series of awards were made
in April for funding in 2001-02.
Capital Campaign. Work has intensified to launch the capital campaign with the College as the focus. We have
benefited greatly from the assistance of Bill Dietel, President of the P-L Foundation, and will shortly receive a campaign
fund analysis from the Ketchum Group. This preliminary work is essential to determine feasibility and the capacity of a
new capital campaign. In anticipation of a favorable recommendation from the consultants, the College and the
University have agreed to shift a portion of the time of the Vice Chancellor for Development to the College so that she can
serve as staff direct of the capital campaign. In 2001-02, Lois Mann will spend 75% of her time at the College to help
insure the success of the campaign.
Strengthening the ULC. During 2000-01 the ULC has worked to improve communication and increase our
cohesiveness. We have benefited greatly from the work of consultant Fred Miller. Fred has given us a number of
recommendations that have greatly improved our ability to cooperate and function as a team. The serious financial
problems confronting the University continue to be a source of stress, and resolving these problems remains a critical test
for the ULC.
Ph. D. in Leadership and Change. Bureaucratic delay in approving the Ph. D. program has prevented us from
accepting the initial student class. Although we have not advertised the availability of this program, word-of-mouth has
brought the program to the attention of many individuals who have expressed interest in the program. We are staying in
touch with these individuals and more than enough of them have indicated a strong intent to begin studying with us as
soon as the program is approved. Unfortunately, it does not appear that we will be able to begin the program in July
2001 as we had intended.
Trustee Vacancies. During the year we have worked to identify and track candidates to fill vacancies on the Board. The
Trusteeship Committee has devoted considerable time to this effort and we were able to successfully recruit Jeffrey C.
Kasch and Arthur J. Zucker. Both bring unique and exceptional qualifications to the Board and they are already
beginning to make important contributions to the work of the Trustees.
Legal Matters. Continuing the pattern of last year, 2000-01 has been relatively free of litigation with only two potentially
serious lawsuits pending against the University. One of the suits involves an employee of Antioch Southern California
who has alleged discrimination, while the other involves a Seattle student who has allegedly slandered a state employee
in her Master's Thesis. Antioch Seattle and three faculty were named as defendants in this suit because the faculty
approved the thesis. We have also incurred legal expenses in conjunction with various union grievances and unfair labor
practices charges that have been filed by an international union representative.
The University counsel's legal audit work continued during the year and was focused on the student services components
of the several campuses. These include admissions, registrar, financial aid, and similar support units that have direct
administrative contact with students. There are numerous federal and state laws which govern our relationship with
students and specify things that we must and may not do in these areas. It is important that our employees understand
the law and fully comply with its several requirements.
Potential legal action may be required to recover costs expended by the College in connection with expansion of the
telephone system. In order to secure additional telephone numbers to allow the dormitory rooms to have direct dial
service, the College was told that all of their numbers had to be moved to a new exchange. The problems encountered
following that move required a move to a second exchange and all of the units in Yellow Springs experienced difficulties
as a result of these relocations. If negotiations with the consultants and Ameritech cannot resolve this situation, we may
need to resort to litigation.
A continuing legal controversy that involves the University centers on the lease of the tower used by WYSO-FM. Until
two years ago, the tower and site were owned by the Wright State University Foundation which leased tower space to
WYSO and a radio station operated by Cedarville College, WCDR. The Foundation sold the tower and site to P&R
Communications, Inc. which was required to assume the leases of WYSO and WCDR. Unfortunately, a controversy over
the leases arose almost immediately and eventually WCDR brought suit against P&R Communications to enforce the
terms of the lease. In an effort to resolve the matter, the two stations and P&R entered into mediation and we believed
that resolution had been achieved. However, it now appears that P&R is reneging on the agreement reached during
mediation and additional litigation may be required.
Computing Improvements. The data stored in Datatel, our integrated administrative system, was made more secure at
the beginning of the current fiscal year as we completed installation of a Redundant Array of Independent Drives (RAID)
system. In our RAID system, data is spread over five active drives and coded in such a way that it can be recreated if
any one of the drives should fail. This system employs a redundant power supply and is supported by uninterruptible
power to insure that data is not lost and the system remains available even during brief electrical outages such as those
caused by thunderstorms.
During the year we updated the Datatel software in preparation for Web Services. Web Services is new software that will
eventually allow us to support student services via the Web.
Several additional steps were taken to improve the security of our administrative systems. We licensed the newest
version of a popular anti-virus software program to insure that our desktop machines have the latest protection and that
coverage does not lapse because we failed to renew for an individual machine. The site license is also a more
economical way to obtain the software. Security on the administrative server was improved by removing unnecessary
protocols that can be used by hackers to gain access to the machine, upgrading the Solaris operating system to take
advantage of the most recent security additions, and by implementing Internet Protocol filtering to limit access to the
server to recognized Antioch sites.
We improved the efficiency of our local area network by replacing some old routers with a high-speed switch, and we
restructured our external communication protocols so that we can communicate directly with McGregor using an existing
fiber optic cable rather than having all traffic routed over the Internet. This change has reduced traffic on the T-1s circuits
of both McGregor and the University.
North Central Association Accreditation Activity. Antioch University's comprehensive ten-year review by the North
Central Association is scheduled for fall 2002. In preparation, a plan for conducting self-studies at each of the campuses
was completed, reviewed by NCA, and approved by the ULC in fall 2000. A university-wide steering committee,
coordinated by Paul Ewald and including Jim Craiglow, Laurien Alexandre, and Steve Schwerner, was appointed and has
met throughout the year. Conferences were held with campus coordinators and the plan for self-study was implemented.
Campus coordinators submitted outlines of their self-studies to the steering group in early March 2001. The steering
team then reviewed the outlines, identified strengths and weaknesses, and provided feedback and constructive criticism
to the campuses. Progress reports were provided to the Board in February and to ULC in April. In early April, Paul
Ewald, Steve Schwerner, and Shanae Ellsworth attended the NCA annual meeting where they participated in workshops
and informational sessions and were able to consult with our NCA staff liaison on self-study progress to date.
Academic Program Reviews. In 2000-01, two reviews were conducted as part of our on-going program to assure
academic quality. The first was a full review of the College curriculum, arranged by the College and conducted by their
GLCA colleagues. The second was a review of the Intercultural Relations Program of the Individualized Master's of Arts
at McGregor. The 1-R review team was chaired by Paul Ewald, and included Iris Weisman (McGregor) and Eloise Klein-
Mealy (Antioch Los Angeles). The focus of the review was on reducing the high attrition rates in that program. The result
of the review was a decision by McGregor to end their partnership with the Intercultural Relations Institute in Portland,
Oregon and implement a plan to finish out the remaining students. Discussions are under way to introduce an
intercultural relations component into the Conflict Resolution program.
University Faculty Conference. In November 2000, the Seventh Antioch University Faculty Conference was held in
Yellow Springs and approximately 70 faculty and administrators from throughout the University attended. The conference
theme was "Dialogue on Faculty Leadership". In addition to opening and closing plenary sessions, eleven individual and
group faculty presentations were scheduled on leadership and leadership related topics. The conference also created
opportunities for faculty from across the University to meet, get to know each other and network with disciplinary
colleagues.
Building Maintenance. The Kettering Building, constructed in 1953, has not received sufficient routine maintenance
even in the period prior to being acquired by the University. As a result, most of its mechanical systems are beyond their
useful life. Last fall, a new boiler was installed in the building to replace the original heating unit. The old boiler had been
found unsafe by state inspectors and it was on the verge of failing. We were able to locate a rebuilt boiler that had been
in use for only six months. The price was considerably better than what we would have paid for a new unit and
occupants of the building were much more comfortable this winter than they have been in the previous several years. In
addition, the far greater efficiency of the new unit enabled us to reduce our costs for natural gas despite a significant
increase in the rates.
The HVAC system that serves the Chancellor's office area was redesigned and control problems corrected. The original
thermostatic control system and elaborate plenum controls were not working properly. In fact, the air conditioning system
operated continuously throughout the winter and, needless to say, contributed to our high electrical costs as well as cool
winter interiors. That anomaly is now corrected.
II. MAJOR BUDGETARY CHANGES
2001 -02 Staff Compensation. Although market conditions dictate otherwise, we are limiting our general staff salary
increase to 2% in 2001-02. We have made this decision because of the limited capacity of the campuses to support a
higher figure due to tight budgets and because we are sensitive to the comparisons that are made within Yellow Springs.
Nonetheless, our salary schedule is not competitive within the Miami Valley and we run the risk of losing some very
valuable people if the current situation is allowed to continue much longer.
After several years of being able to avoid the increases in medical costs experienced by almost every other employer, we
had few remaining options to avoid higher rates for our self-insured medical program. Largely due to the higher cost of
prescription drugs, the cost of our health program will increase 19% in 2001-02. We have had to recognize this cost, as
have the other parts of the University.
Reduced Staffing. As a result of an analysis of workload in the Student Loan department, we were able to eliminate one
full-time position. We are increasing the use of Datatel information and have streamlined the way work is handled. This
staffing reduction brings the Student Loan group to two employees. A half-time position in the Chancellor's office was
eliminated and the Vice Chancellor for Development has been assigned to the College to oversee the Capital Campaign.
The Vice Chancellor for Development will spend 75% of her time at the College in 2001-02 which represents the transfer
of 42% of her wages and fringes to the College. She will continue to spend 25% of her time to provide support to the
adult campuses and the Chancellor.
As part of the 2000-01 budget, we had added an additional Datatel programmer in the Computing Services Department.
However, after an extensive search, we were unable to find a qualified programmer to work on the many needs of the
campuses. However, we were able to identify an individual who had "retired" in order to be at home with her school-age
children. We have arranged to have her work for us on an "as needed" basis and she has completed several projects for
us for less money than we had originally budgeted for the new position.
Reduced Contingencies. In recognition of the extremely tight campus budgets, the Chancellor's contingency was
reduced from $50,000 to $40,000 as a one-time effort to lower the overhead rate. In addition, the University Contingency
of $1 50,000 was applied as a stop-gap measure to finance the reduction in the seven percent subsidy payment from
McGregor to the College. In 2001-02 this payment will be reduced to 4% without reducing the payment to the College. In
fact, an additional $69,000 was provided to the College as an increase in the subsidy amount.
I. BUDGET SUMMARY
As a result of the reductions in staffing, lowering the contingencies, and reducing non-salary expenses, the University
Administration budget for 2001-02 will require $421,997 less from Net Overhead. We cannot sustain this reduced level of
funding and continue to meet the needs of the campuses and the expectations of the Trustees, but we will do our best to
make do in 2001-02.
James W. Hall
Chancellor
University Administration
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
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
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
Proposed
2001 -02
Budget
-
0
0
35,000
0
0
0
0
0
35,000
0
0
35,000
1,927,164
0
0
0
0
100,722
1,805,442
0
0
1,906,164
0
1,906,164
56,000
56,000
0
0
0
0
56,000
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
University Administration
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
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 Hems
Net Cash Basis Budget
1999-00
Actual
-
2,011,291
1,023,229
290,620
211.123
0
703
40,915
169,240
152,413
676
0
8,019
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,555
0
1,901,493
109,798
109,798
0
0
0
0
109.798
0
2000-01
Adj Budget
-
2,369,161
1,084,000
332,388
268,800
0
2,000
43,950
193,550
157,400
0
0
5,877
0
200,000
0
0
0
0
0
4,100
0
2,292,065
77,096
77,096
0
0
0
0
77,096
0
2000-01
Projected
-
1,987.320
1,053,540
324,646
175,026
0
0
27,925
183,563
158,348
4
0
5,598
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,558
0
1,933,208
54,112
54,112
0
0
0
0
54,112
0
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
- -
-381,841 -16.12?
Proposed
2001 -02
Budget
-
1,962,16
1,007,211
335,341
169,801
1
1
28,901
155,701
157,35~
1
1
7,501
Â
40,244
c
c
c
c
0
4,100
0
1,906,164
56,000
56,000
0
0
0
0
56,000
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
-25,156 -1.27%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
- -
-406,997 -1 7.1 8%
UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATION
200 1-02 Capital Budget
Land
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
Parking Lot Resurfacing
Kettering BIdg Pipe Replacement
Rehabilitation of Kettering BIdg Heating Units
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
2 Uninterrupted Power Sources
3 Gateway Replacement PC's
2 Laptop Computers
Sun Blade Box
Rack for Computer Equipment
Total Equipmeni
Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Vehicles
Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
20,000
6.500
17,000
Amount
2,000
5.000
3,000
1,000
1,500
Amount
Amount
ANTIOCH REVIEW
2001 -02 PROPOSED BUDGET
The Review budget for 2001-02 is based on two assumptions: that we maintain the status quo with reference to the size
and scope of the Review and that we increase our fund raising to account for the modest increase ($4,636) from 2000-01.
Whether we can continue to raise the necessary monies is an open question. Our Sixtieth Anniversary year events
increased the amount raised significantly, but diverted staff time away from editorial work to organize five separate
events.
Our sales revenue has been steady, but next year, because of consolidation in the distribution business, we may lose
some of those sales. We expect, however, to add additional distributors.
In short, the budget makes no significant changes in our operations (even though we have needs), but we are not
confident that, without development help, we can sustain the level of fund raising achieved this year.
Robert Fogarty
Editor
Antioch Review
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Adj Budget
2000-01
Projected
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
- -
0
0
-12,255 -24.1 4
0
-3,000
340 3.70'
0
2,787 44.95'
-12,128 -17.54'
2,160 3.89'
-2,500 -1 00.00'
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
Antioch Review
2001-02 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 Hems
Net Cash Basis Budget
1998-99
Actual
- 106,309
31,656
17,054
3,523
0
0
-2,465
52,112
-1 26
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
Actual
- 108,728
32,547
17.539
2,331
0
0
-2,142
54,859
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,556
0
109,690
-962
0
0
0
0
0
0
-962
2000-01
Adj 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
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- - 17,104 14.91%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- - 4,636 3.65%
Ph.D. in Leadership and Change
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
BUDGET GENERAL SUMMARY
Academic Year 2001-02 is the start-up year for the Ph.D. in Leadership and Change. Our basic principles behind the
operations is a 'one-stop service shop' for the students, a networked faculty model, an intense faculty-student mentoring
relationship, and the use of many support services provided from other campuses of the University. All of these principles
impact delivery and structures, and consequently, operating budgets.
This budget proposal attempts to be conservative on the income and we are committed to vigilant oversight in this first
year. Some projections are based on our best estimates, which will have to be closely monitored during this and
subsequent years.
We have presented here a budget of income and expenses for the full year, assuming that the program will start in
Summer 2001. However, we have developed two contingency budgets, as well: one, if the program starts in mid-year,
January 2002, and the final, if the program does not start this year at all. The critical factor in determining the start-up
date is when the Regents' approval is secured. Both contingency budgets will be available for discussion if desired.
REVENUE
1. The $375,000 tuition revenue represents an entering student cohort of 25 FTE Student and a competitively set
tuition of $1 5,000 per annual term. In subsequent years, entering classes are 30 FTE students annually. Tuition has
been set competitively with other non-traditional doctoral programs, and is projected to increase at 4% every two years,
but this may obviously vary depending on market analysis at the time. Ph.D. Candidacy tuition will be set at one-half of
the full annual rate.
[Student Residency Explanation: Students must complete the Program within seven years, with a 3-year pre-Candidacy
requirement. We estimate that most students will complete during years four and five of their residency. The Program's
retention is based on 60% completion rate and attrition calculated at 40% within a seven-year cycle. This is a fairly
conservative rate, and I am hopeful the Program will do better than this, given the close mentoring. Ohio Board of
Regents' reviewers have noted that "the enrollment projections appear realistic and well determined.''
2. $237,402 represents the amount released from the restricted gift line.
EXPENSES
PERSONNEL
Faculty
Core faculty salaries for 2001-02 cover half of the Director's time (0.50), a full-time Core Faculty at $75,000 to start in Fall
(0.75) and a full-time Core Faculty at $65,000 to start in Winter (0.50) for a total of 2.00 Core Faculty FTE. Al Guskin's
salary (0.25) is not carried in this budget, but rather, is in the Chancellor's budget.
In addition, with regard to the faculty, there are also 3 non-permanent start-up part-time faculty budgeted at $65,000 total,
for another 1 .OO FTE. These funds are in the consulting services line. Thus, there are 3.00 Faculty FTE for 25 Student
FTE, a ratio of approximately 1 :6.6.
Finally, a full-time librarian at $35,000 annual, housed at the Graduate Library of Antioch New England, starts in Fall and
is also placed in this faculty line.
Long-term ProjectionIExplanation:
At full capacity, the Program's faculty-to-student ratio is expected to be approximately 1 : 15.
Administration
The following items are in the administrator and non-union staff lines. Half of the Director's salary is under the
administrator category, as is the full-time Program AdministratorIRegistrar. There is also an annual stipend ($5,000) for
the services of the Sr. Registrar Advisor, who is the Registrar of Antioch Seattle. Finally, there is a part-time library
assistant for the full year ($1 1,500).
Long-term ProjectionlExplanation:
Over the long-term, our goal is to keep the staffing small, efficient, and organized around student/faculty needs. During
this first year of operation, the program office will be staffed by the full-time program administratorlregistrar and part-time
assistance, which is in the purchased services line. In the second year of operation, a second staff person will join the
program administrator at a less-than-full-time capacity.
NON-PERSONNEL EXPENSES
I. Business Travel at $50,000 represents required travel for Core and Guest Faculty and staff for meetings and
residencies. Travel is calculated at $500 airfare per trip for a minimum of the four residencies scheduled for 2001-02,
plus several additional trips for the Director and some faculty. Hotel stays are calculated at $125 per night for hotel; $50
per day for food.
Long term ProjectionIExplanation:
Given the dispersed nature of the Program's faculty, the travel budget reaches a projected $125,000 in 2005-06.
2. Local Meetings at $1 2,000 represents one meeting of the Advisory Board as well as minor costs incurred at the four
residencies, such as coffee and snacks, security. Costs for residencies are minor because these meetings will be held at
various Antioch campuses, so we do not pay for facilities.
3. Professional Development at $5,000 represents faculty development and a small amount of research support,
primarily for the Core Faculty.
Long-term ProjectionIExplanation:
This line is projected to increase steadily each year, reaching $50,000 in 2005-06, with 5.0 Core Faculty FTE and
continues to cover mentor training.
4. Office Supplies ($3,000), Computer Supplies ($2,000) and Furniture ($4,000) represents an estimated amount to cover
the costs of the program office, and three faculty home offices, and is based on costs incurred at the home office of the
Director during her first year
5. Subscriptions at $6,000 represents $5,000 for acquisitions at the ANE library, based on a percentage of the library's
total acquisition costs proportioned by the number of the Ph.D. student FTE to the entire campus FTE. The additional
$1,000 is for faculty subscriptions.
6. Consulting Services at $45,000 represents $35,000 for out-sourced technology support and $10,000 for Guest Faculty
($4,000 at the 7-day residency, and $2,000 for each of the 3 weekend residencies).
7. Printing at $5,000 represents the printing of handbooks, brochures, Learning Guides, and other program materials.
8. AdvertisingIRecruitment at $40,000 represents direct mail to Antioch University alumnus, recruitment meetings at
Antioch campuses, and niche marketing to specialized groups, such as Peace Corp returnees, the Social V9, Ventures
Network, and the like.
Long-term ProjectionIExplanation:
By 2005-06, we have estimated an advertising budget of $60,000. We believe that a major source of student recruitment
will be Antioch's adult campuses. As well, we would do niche marketing as opposed to large national ads.
9. $12,000 for telecommunications represents $1,000 a month for phone and conference calls and DSLlcable
modem connections for the home offices of Core Faculty.
10. $1 5,000 for Intercampus Agreement represents approximately $10,000 to Antioch New England as a proportion of
the library overhead based on the program's FTE as part of the whole campus FTE. There is also $1,000 to Antioch
Seattle's Registrar's Office as part of the agreement to have the advisory services of their registrar. The final $4,000 is
set aside for potential costs to Antioch McGregor for Financial Aid support, and to the other campuses for miscellaneous
direct costs incurred for the Ph.D. program.
Long-term ProjectionIExplanation:
In future years, the amount of overhead to ANE will increase as the student FTE increases. As well, based on an
agreement with the Chancellor and campus Presidents, each campus will receive $500 for each Ph.D. Mentor Faculty
member that comes from the respective home Antioch campus. The Mentor faculty become an active part of this
program's design in the second half of the second year.
1 1. $1 0,000 for employee recruitment represents projected expenses for two faculty searches.
12. $10,000 for purchased services represents part-time temporary help for the program office on an as needed basis.
Note: $5,000 is in the capital line, for the purchase of three computers and two printers.
Note: On the assumption that the program starts Summer 2001, there is no University Overhead until 2003-04 per
University policy. At that time, calculated at 8% of tuition-generated revenue, the amount will be approximately $87,000;
in 2004-05, it is expected to be $107,000; in 2005-06, it will be $125,000, etc.
Laurien Alexandre
Director
PhD in Leadership and Change
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
Change From
2000-01 Budget
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2000-01 to 2000-01 Projected
Actual Actual Adj Budget Projected $
- - - - -
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
375,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
375,000
0
237,402
612,402
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
PhD in Leadership and Change
2001-02 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 Items
Net Cash Basis Budget
Change From
2000-01 Budget
1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2000-01 to 2000-01 Projected
Actual Actual Adj Budget Projected $
- - - - -
0
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
612,402
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
612.402
PhD in LEADERSHIP AND CHANGE
200 1 -02 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 2001 -02
Program
--------
Tuition
Total per Year
2001 -02
Proposed
--------
1 5,000
WYSO RADIO
2001-02 PROPOSED BUDGET
I 2000-01 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES
WYSO Public Radio is the Miami Valley's most popular public radio station (according to Fall 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), and the Great Lakes Radio Consortium (GLRC).
Additionally, WYSO features programming from the BBC World Service and locally-produced programming of interest to
the DaytonISpringfield marketplace.
During the current fiscal year, the station has continued along the growth path it has pursued for the last several years. It
is consistently demonstrating that targeted investments in talent acquisition, professional development, and infrastructure
allow it to operate a relatively self-sufficient public radio service. With assistance from the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting (CPB), 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:
Q1 began immediately following the station's second, successive end-of-fiscal year, on-air membership
campaign. The successful two-day drive, held the last week of June 2000, raised $20,000 for the station. It
began FY01 having submitted its second balanced budget in a row (FYOO actually ended with a cash surplus of
$2,610).
WYSO kicked off the very first day of the new fiscal year by hosting its First Annual 5K Family Fun Run & Walk.
The revenues from this special event have been earmarked for use as part of the local matching component of
a capital improvements grant awarded to WYSO by the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network
Commission (OETNC) to retrofit the station's performance studio to accommodate broadcast audio.
WYSO1s Fall 2000 On-Air Membership Campaign established an overall fundraising goal of $120,000 ---
$80,000 through telephone pledges, $30,000 though direct mail, and $10,000 via Internet pledges placed at
www.wyso.org. The final tally was $125,871 --- $69,133 through 843 phone pledges, $33,718 through 399
direct mail renewals, and $10,334 via 107 Internet pledges. 60 lapsed members rejoined via mail for a total of
$3,819, while new memberships via mail raised $155. Additional gifts from current members brought in $7,712.
Challenge grants from businesses netted $1,000.
Though a separate revenue stream, WYSO receives additional funds pledged each fall from federal employees
via the Combined Federal Campaign (CFC). The quantity of CFC-pledged funds is neither known nor available
until the following February or March. CFC funds pledged during the Fall 2000 campaign totaled $36,366.
The Spring 2001 On-Air Membership Campaign was certainly one of, if not the most successful in WYSO's
history. The campaign established an overall fundraising goal of $120,000 --- $60,000 through telephone
pledges, $50,000 though direct mail, and $10,000 via Internet pledges. Since the station sends out four direct
mail renewals in conjunction with its Fall and Spring campaigns (two prior to the on-air drive, two following), the
final income from the spring fundraising period will not be available until closer to the end of the current fiscal
year. As of this writing, although the post-drive mail drops for the spring drive have not yet occurred, the tally
breaks down as follows: $129,343 raised --- $75,869 through 889 phone pledges, $26,524 through 301 direct
mail renewals, and $10,303 via 95 Internet pledges. 38 lapsed members rejoined via mail for a total of $3,026,
while new memberships via mail raised $91. Additional gifts from current members brought in $9,029.
Challenge grants from businesses netted $2,500. Management believes that the final tally could go as high as
20% above the campaign's overall goal of $120,000. Most noteworthy about this campaign was that the station
achieved its overall campaign goal before the on-air portion of the drive had concluded (past history has been
that this overall figure is not reached until revenues from the post-drive mail drops flow in).
As has been the case over the past two years, the station continues to improve the quality and volume of its
direct mail appeals, with these efforts producing a dramatic return on the time and energy invested in
increasing this revenue stream. WYSO's use of public broadcasting-specific software to manage the station's
membership database is a major contributor to this success. Most valuable are the software's ability to analyze
membership data and to generate mailings specifically tailored to the individual interests of members. Almost
two years after implementation, the system demonstrates its revenue generation value to WYSO. During the
Spring 1999 membership campaign period, the station was bringing in approximately $20,000 from direct mail.
The final tally for direct mail during the Spring 2001 membership campaign period will likely exceed $50,000.
Regarding business underwriting of WYSO and its programming, the goal for the current fiscal year is
$185,000. At this writing, the station has secured signed contracts totaling $155,531. It is unclear whether the
goal is obtainable before 30 June, as WYSO has been without a Development Director since November 2000
(a national search for a replacement is nearing conclusion).
WYSO1s Fall 2000 Arbitron ratings book was the second best in its history.
On 7 September 2000, WYSO hosted National Public Radio's (NPR) WAIT, WAIT ... DON'T TELL ME
(WWDTM), the network's weekly news quiz program, in a performance at the Victoria Theater in downtown
Dayton. The two-hour show was recorded in front of a live audience. The broadcast edition of the live event is
available for on-demand listening, via RealAudio, at www.npr.or~/ramfiles/waitwait/20000909.waitwait.rmm.
The performance generated a lot of press coverage and attention for WYSO, and netted $5,789 for the station.
Funds will be used towards the local matching fund component of capital improvements grants approved in
F Y O O by the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network Commission (OETNC).
On Tuesday, 14 November 2000, WYSO, in conjunction with the Friends of the Dayton and Montgomery
County Public Library, presented AN EVENING WITH DAVID SEDARIS & SARAH VOWELL at the Dayton
Convention Center Theater. Sedaris and Vowell are both writer/humorists, best known to public radio listeners
for their frequent contributions to PRI's THIS AMERICAN LIFE (www.thislife.orq). The live event at the 800-
seat theater was standing room only, as well as a positive public relations and revenue-generating event.
The legal dispute, which began in Fall 1999, involving Antioch UniversitylWYSO, Cedarville UniversityIWCDR-
FM, and P&R Communications, Inc. (the successor to Wright State University Foundation as owner of the
tower site of the two radio stations) was scheduled to go to trial in March 2001. However, a Greene County,
OH magistrate ordered that mediation between the parties take place to determine if a trial could be avoided.
The mediation occurred in January 2001 and resulted in a draft revision of the current lease enjoyed by WYSO
and WCDR. In the draft, the stations were granted a quarter-century extension (to 2032), beyond the 2007
termination date of the current lease. The radio stations will be able to broadcast from the present tower or any
successor structure.
Additionally, P&R agreed to a non-interference clause, guaranteeing that it would produce engineering studies
to WYSO and WCDR demonstrating that its current activities on the site (especially with tower sub-lessee,
Nextel) will cause any problems for the radio broadcasters' signal delivery to their listeners. P&R further
agreed that it would produce similar studies regarding any future activities it engages in on its own behalf
and/or for those of sub-lessees. Should P&R1s own studies determine that interference is occurring, it will, at its
own expense, take immediate corrective action. At any time, should either or both of the stations believe that
interference is occurring, they may commission an engineering study at their own expense. Should this
evidence an interference problem, P&R will take immediate corrective action, as well as reimburse the stations
for the costs they incurred for the study.
In exchange for these and other terms, Antioch University and Cedarville University agreed to relinquish their
rights under the current lease to act as sub-lease agent for the negotiation of tower sub-leasing, as well as to
collect 37.5% each of any revenues generated from such sub-leasing.
During this fiscal year, WYSO will absorb over $1 0,000 in unbudgeted expenses for legal services associated
with this matter. Additionally, unanticipated tower site maintenance costs were incurred this year. Although,
WYSO and WCDR share these maintenance expenses, WYSO's contribution for work performed in FY01 is
$9,687.50.
During Q3, WYSO filed capital grant applications with U.S. Department of Commerce's National
Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) Public Telecommunications Facilities Program
(PTFP), as well as with the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network Commission (OETNC). The
submissions request support for the purchase and installation of: a new (digital-, or IBOC-, ready) transmitter
and station-to-transmitter (STL) link, two (2) digital, broadcast studio consoles; and a high-end digital audio
workstation.
WYSO continues to seek local matching fund support for the OETNC capital grants it received this fiscal year to
retrofit for broadcast its performance studio area and to create a high-end digital production studio. In Q3, a
local matching grant proposal for funds to support the former project was submitted to the Dayton Foundation.
WYSO has begun to explore opportunities to obtain specific operating grants support to fund capacity building
and infrastructure growth, as well as targeted funds for the purchase of computer hardware and software
systems to improve productivity and service.
WYSO received two awards from Public Radio News Directors, Inc. (PRNDI). The 2000 PRNDI Awards were
in that organization's Division C category (for newsrooms comprised of one or two full-time staff). For Best
Weekly Program, the station received a First Place award for its Sounds Local magazine (broadcastlnetcast
every Friday evening at 6:00pm, re-broadcast Saturdays at 7:30pm ET). WYSO's News Director, Aileen
LeBlanc, serves as Sounds Local's producer and host. For Best CommentaryIEssay, WYSO received a
Second Place PRNDI award for "Toy Story 2," a commentary written and presented on Sounds Local by that
program's regular contributor on disability issues, Greg Smith. Mr. Smith is the host of On a Roll, the first and
only live weekly syndicated commercial radio talk show on life and disability.
WYSO also received two 2000 Ohio Society of Professional Journalist (Ohio SPJ) Awards in the categories of
Best Coverage of the Environment and Best Coverage of Children's Issues. In the former category (a prize
awarded to the radio report that "best served to improve the environment in 1999, either by pointing out a
trouble spot or otherwise spotlighting an ecological topic1'), WYSO's LeBlanc garnered First Place for her piece,
"Beavercreek Wetlands." The judges' commented that the feature provided, "Thoughtful coverage of an
overlooked, and now threatened, preserve and its value to the community. It's rare in Ohio for one relatively
small area, a thousand acres, to have 475 species. It's probably also rare in Ohio for a radio reporter to devote
such time and care to such an uncelebrated topic as a wetland."
For Best Coverage of Children's Issues (a prize awarded to the radio report that "best served the needs of
children in 1999, either by exposing an abuse or exploring solutions to challenges faced by youth"), LeBlanc
picked up Second Place for the piece, "Body Image." Aileen LeBlanc, WYSO Public Radio, Yellow Springs, OH.
News Director Aileen LeBlanc continues to file news items regularly with NPR's hourly newscast unit, as well as
to produce feature stories for NPR's premiere newsmagazines MORNING EDITION, ALL THINGS
CONSIDERED, and WEEKEND EDITION. Her work raises WYSO's visibility within the national public radio
system and, in so doing, attracts more national attention to its licensee. Following is a short list of feature
stories Ms. LeBlanc has produced during the current fiscal year and the NPR newsmagazines upon which they
have appeared! along with the RealAudio URL for accessing the archived audio for playback via the Internet:
"Tecumseh" aired July 19, 2000 on NPR's Morning Edition
Aileen Leblanc of member-station WSO reports on a controversy surrounding an outdoor drama that is
performed every summer in Ohio. Tecumseh is about a Shawnee warrior chief's struggle to protect his land
from white settlers! but critics say the play is marred by historical inaccuracies. (6145)
hHp://w.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20000719.me. 16.ram
"Falling Water House Restoration Benefit'' aired July 21, 2000 on NPR's Morning Edition
Aileen LeBlanc of member station WSO reports on a quartet of musicians are trying to raise money to help pay
for the restoration of architect Frank Lloyd Wright's Falling Water house. The group has composed music they
say was inspired by the house itself. They will be performing their work tomorrow at the house in Mill Run
Pennsylvania. (7126)
hHp://w.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20000721 .me. 12.ram
"D. J. Moon Mullins" aired September 5! 2000 on NPR's Morning Edition
Aileen LeBlanc of member-station WSO profiles deejay Moon Mullins. Mullins broadcasts on a small AM
radio station in Ohio and insists on doing commercials the old fashioned way - live and with local businesses.
His style is a throwback to the early days of radio where stations were as diverse as the communities they
served. (7: 16)
hHp://ww.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20000905.me. 16.ram
"One Killed in Tornado" aired September 21, 2000 on NPR's Morning Edition
Aileen LeBlanc of member station WSO reports from Xenia, Ohio, on a tornado that hit the city shortly after
seven o'clock last night. The storm flattened buildings and knocked down power lines. One person was killed,
and over a hundred were injured. (3126)
hHp://~.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20000921 .me. 14.ram
"Ohio Storms" aired September 21 2000 on NPR's All Things Considered
Aileen LeBlanc of member station WYSO reports on the Southwest Ohio town of Xenia that was struck by a
tornado last night! which killed one resident and injured more than one hundred. Xenia has been hit by
tornadoes before! including one in 1974 that devastated the small town. (4:OO)
h~p://w.npr.org/ramfiles/atc~20000921 .atc. 15.ram
"Wright Brothers" aired October 221 2000 on NPRys Weekend Edition-Sunday
100 years ago todayl the Wright Brothers! who hailed from Dayton! Ohio! flew their first glider! a major step
toward their historic powered flight three years later. Today! another Dayton pilot will re-create those first glider
flights. Aileen LeBlanc from member-station WYSO reports. (5:OO)
http://~.npr.org/ramfiles/wesun/2000~ 022.wesun.06.ram
"Save Classical Radio" aired November Z1 2000 on NPRys Morning Edition
Aileen LeBlanc of member-station WYSO reports on how the owners of the classical radio station WCLV-FM in
Cleveland have engineered a complicated deal in order to preserve full-time classical radio in their city. It
involves a frequency swap and an ownership transfer to a non-profit organization. (4:55)
h~p://w.npr.org/ramfiles/me/20001102.me. 14.ram
"Cincinnati Jazz'' aired January1 2001 on NPRys Morning Edition
From member-station WSO1 Aileen LeBlanc reports on how the end of the year also brought the end of an era
for jazz music in Cincinnati. An AM station there has been playing jazz music for the last 40 yearsl but early
this morning switched its format to religious programming. (6:34)
http://w.npr.org/ramfiles/me/2OOlOlOl .me.Oa.ram
This year! WYSO became a subscriber to The Media Audit (TMA)l a multimedial qualitative audience survey
that covers over 450 target items for each rated media's audience. TMA allows underwriting sales staff to
create more targeted presentationsl demonstrating how WYSO ranks in comparison to other media choices
available in its market to attracting audiences with specific interests. Qualitative data points cover things such
as socioeconomic characteristics! life stylesl business decision makers! product purchasing plans! retail
shopping habits! travel historyl supermarket shoppingl stores shopped! products purchased, fast-food
restaurants eaten inl soft drink consumption, brands purchased! health insurance coveragel leisure activities,
banks used! credit cards used and other selected consumer characteristics important to local media and
underwriters. TMA is especially useful in that WSO can make direct comparisons between its audience and
those of other media; something the station is prohibited from doing with its Arbitron radio ratings numbers
(Arbitron only permits its subscribers to distribute ratings numbers for the subscribing station but disallows
distribution of comparative datal which may be used for in-house analysis purposes only).
As reported in the 1999-2000 Year End Review, WYSO launched an Internet audio streaming service a few
weeks prior to the publication of an article that appeared in the July 2000 edition of ATTACHE, the in-flight
magazine of USAirways. The feature piece, entitled, itstation to Station: A Guide to Great Radio from Coast to
Coast," lists WSO and nine others as the best radio stations in the United States, all of which aim "to broaden
horizons as well as to entertain." The article is available through the ATTACHE website, in its archive section
at w.attachema~.com.
WSO Public Radio faces a number of opportunities and challenges in the coming fiscal year. Among these are:
WYSO management, in collaboration with the WSO Resource Board, has begun to prepare for a major
strategic planning initiative to take place during the coming fiscal year. To that end, the station anticipates that
it will soon release an RFP to facilitators and planners experienced in assisting public radio businesses in
achieving their full potentials. Significant funding support for the strategic planning initiative will be requested
from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), as well as other Miami Valley foundations.
WSO anticipates the purchase of new software and software upgrades in FY02. Specifically, it plans to
upgrade its Associated Press wire service to accommodate 24-hour news feeds (presently it subscribes to
receive news items for morning and afternoon drivetimes); it will also purchase a new computer to allow it to
run the latest version of the AP's Newsdesk software. The station also hopes to scrap two antiquated and
rather cumbersome software systems (operating on two different hardware platform^)^ which manage its
scheduling and billing, and replace them with a new computer running a public broadcasting-specific
schedulinglbilling software program.
WYSO hopes to secure grants support to automate several functions in its master controllon-air operations,
including program logs, music playlists, and music cataloguing/trackinglretrieval.
Morning drive time is the most significant daypart for any radio broadcast operation (approximately 55% of ALL
radio listening in the United States takes place between 6:OOam and lO:OOam, Monday through Friday).
Retaining a solid personality in the local hosting position for NPR1s MORNING EDITION (ME) has been an
ongoing problem for many years at WSO. For over a year, the station has had a part-time employee in this
job. At the same time, this individual, Michael Frazier, continues to hold down a full-time position with the City
of Beavercreek? OH. Although Mr. Frazier assured management that he could handle the two jobs, it was
clearly understood that eventually this arrangement would take its toll. In recent weeks, Mike has indicated his
desire tol if possible, become a full-time employee at WSO. Management will shortly begin to explore options
to accommodate this request but, it is unclear whether a satisfactory opportunity will present itself. Specific
concerns are that the station willl at this timel be unable to come close enough to matching Mr. Frazierls
current salary with Beavercreek to allow him to take on a full-time position at WYSO. Additionallyl the station is
in great need of an administrative assistant for a variety of needs in departments throughout the shop. One
option, if he would be so amenable, might be to have Mike host ME and spend the rest of his hours in this
administrative assistant's role. If a mutually agreeable arrangement cannot be reached then it may be very
likely that WYSO will, yet again, be looking to replace this critical on-air personality.
There is no polite way of stating the following so, please forgive the abrupt tone: Lack of voice mail at a major
broadcast radio station in 2001 is simply ridiculous. Over the past several years, WYSO has demonstrated that
it can be fiscally responsible and that it understands how to invest in its operations strategically so as to
optimize results and maximize revenues. Each and every staff member of the station is far less productive than
slhe otherwise can be simply because of the need for everyone to play receptionist all day long. WYSO
sincerely and earnestly begs the University to do whatever it can in the coming fiscal year to help the station
overcome this hurdle. Management assures the administration and the trustees that it will be able to quantify
the results that will accrue to WSO by making it dramatically more productive through the introduction of this
basic tool of the business world into its operations.
Progress will once again be made in the coming fiscal year 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. Staff
turnover in a relatively small operation like W S O ' s can impact organizational benchmarking, sometimes
dramatically so. And identiwing, 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 maintain its human
resource assets. Nevertheless, while significant advances have been made, more still needs to be done before
WYSO can consider itself competitive within its own industry as regards talent acquisitionlretention.
Ohio Governor Bob Taft announced an $850 million shortfall in anticipated revenues through 2003, due to the
general downturn in the economy. This is being made up in reductions to the current budget of most state
agencies. Accordingly, the annual operating subsidy that WYSO (and all other public broadcasters in the state,
radiomlradio reading services) receives from the Ohio Educational Telecommunications Network Commission
(OETNC) was cut during the current fiscal year. In January and then, again, on 28 March 2001, Governor
Taft's Office of Budget and Management announced a series of across-the-board budget cuts. The January
announcement called for 2% across-the-board reductions; the second announcement added another I % to
this. These cutbacks were declared necessary to allow the state to pay for increased Medicaid costs and to
fund a State Supreme Court-ordered revision in the way Ohio funds its public schools. WYSO had been
scheduled to receive $56,283 in FYOI. That figure has now been reduced to $54,594; a loss of $1,689. At this
writing, the legislature is working on the budget. It is unclear if OETNC funding for upcoming fiscal years will
proceed from this "setback" position or if the body can be persuaded that the educational mission of public
broadcasting is significant enough to warrant a return to a healthier financial foundation of support.
On a related front, due to voter approved term limits for state office holders in Ohio, the state legislature has
witnessed a major turnover in the session that commenced in January 2001. Management, in partnership with
its colleagues at Ohio Public Radio, understands that additional time and energy will need to be devoted to
maintaining existing and establishing new relationships with state (along with federal) elected oficials to assure
continued and appropriate financial support for public broadcasting.
Media and telecommunications convergence is placing new demands upon and creating new paradigms for
traditional, terrestrial broadcasters. To remain competitive, WYSO will need to devote more time and resources
toward the development of, among other things, its website and the services provided therein.
On the new media front, during the current fiscal year WYSO confronted the reality that website services it had
been receiving for little or no cash outlays will require additional financial resources to maintain, let alone
develop. The station's webmaster is charging more for his services, while Public Interactive
(www.publicinteractive.org), the organization providing WYSO and scores of other public radio and television
stations with content and services to enhance their websites (and, most notably, Internet streaming of stations'
broadcast signals), now requires stations to pay quarterly affiliation fees (which commenced Q4lFY01). These
actions, particularly on Pi's part, are indicative of the continuing shakeout that is occurring in the .corn
marketplace. WYSO management is seeking cost effective alternatives to its current relationships with its
webmaster. Management has determined that the PI arrangement (in comparison to competing services) is
appropriate and cost-effective. Accordingly, WYSO has signed an affiliation agreement with PI through the end
of FY02.
WYSO will likely need to create a New Media Services managerial position (alone or, perhaps, in collaboration
with another entity, such as Antioch University-McGregor, another broadcast station, area Internet Service
Provider, etc.) or secure funds sufficient to cover the costs of continuing to provide (and grow) these services.
On another competitive front, satellite digital audio radio services (SDARS) are scheduled to begin operations
in the United States this year. 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.com), 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 $10.00 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 permeation 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. A number of NPR
member stations, WYSO included, have expressed concerns about the amount of that network's programming,
previously available only to its terrestrially based member stations, that it now anticipates distributing via its two
Sirius channels. Competing with "ourselves" via a bypass route continues to create anxiety within the NPR
system.
On the other hand, both Sirius and NPR1s satellite radio division (NPR2) have encountered significant problems
with their respective business models. If revenues from satellite radio cannot satisfy the enormous costs
associated with sustaining such services, the venture may fail or, at least, be relegated to that of a niche
service. Reasonable expectations are that if satellite radio is going to be a serious competitor with terrestrial
radio broadcasters, this will not be evidenced for some 3-5 years. Nevertheless, WYSO and its fellow Earth-
bound counterparts are monitoring developments on this front closely and are formulating contingency plans,
accordingly.
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 the board can meet the challenges that only it, in
association with station management, can achieve. Management remains hopeful that recruitment efforts will
increase the board's active membership and bring to that body skill sets that will be of enormous value to
achieving WYSO1s long-term objectives.
II. THE 2001-02 BUDGET
WYSO1s gift revenues are likely to achieve budgeted goals for the current fiscal year. Grant support from OETNC
declined modestly this year, while federal grants support from the CPB increased appreciably.
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.
For the coming fiscal year, WYSO anticipates its major revenue streams producing as follows:
Gifts (listener support) $ 388,464
Federal Grants (CPB) 1 16,790
State Grants (OETNC) 51,880
Underwriting 21 2,750
Other Income 45,500
TOTAL $81 5,384
The two largest cost sectors for WSO are staff salaries and the fees the station pays to acquire programming from NPR
and PRI. For the foreseeable future, the station will continue to have critical needs for new office and broadcast
equipment. As regards the latter, this is particularly so as digital conversion of a station's production and broadcast chain
will be the imperative for all terrestrial broadcasters, television and radio, for many years to come. Federal, state, and
other grant support will assist in the digitization process but, there will also be cost burdens that stations, themselves, will
also be required to bear.
As noted in the last three year-end budget reports, WYSO still needs to secure a reliable 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 and/or service disruptions from the Dayton Power & Light Company.
Management believes that a major capital campaign will need to be organized and conducted within the next two years to
allow WSO 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 and the asset
that is WYSO. Management remains hopeful that continued development of the WSO 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
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
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
1999-00
Actual
-
0
0
360,549
139,533
0
0
227,474
727.556
124
17,286
744.966
0
0
686,757
0
0
0
0
0
686,757
0
686,757
58,209
78,614
-40,876
17,861
0
0
55,599
2,610
2000-01
Adj Budget
-
0
0
330,000
0
138,860
0
0
205,864
674,724
0
0
674,724
0
0
644,676
0
0
0
0
0
644,676
0
644,676
30,048
16,500
0
13,548
0
0
30,048
0
2000-01
Projected
-
0
0
372,840
0
155,602
0
0
21 9,291
747,733
335
40,000
788,068
0
0
707,445
0
0
0
0
0
707,445
0
707,445
80,623
3,369
0
55,164
0
0
58,533
22,090
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
s %
- -
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
-
1
1
388,464
c
168,67t
Â
c
257,756
814,884
500
0
815,384
781,538
781,538
781,538
33,846
18,678
0
15,168
0
0
33,846
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
0
0
15,624 4.19%
0
13,068 8.40%
0
0
38,459 17.54%
67,151 8.98%
165 49.25%
-40,000 -1 00.00%
27,316 3.47%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
WYSO
2001-02 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
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
2000-01
Ad] Budget
2000-01
Projected
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
- - 113,344 16.80'
Proposed
2001 -02
Budget
- 8 15,384
278,671
83,677
28,935
0
500
16,095
295,89 1
54,656
9,613
0
2,500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0'
11,000
0
78 1,538
33,846
18,678
0
15,168
0
0
33,846
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- - 27.316 3.47%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- - 140,660 20.85%
WYSO
200 1 -02 Capital Budget
Buildings
Total Buildings
Building Improvements
WSO Wing Renovations
Total Building Improvements
Equipment
Computer Equipment
Total Equipment
Furniture & Fixtures
Total Furniture & Fixtures
Library Books
Grand Total Capital Budget
Amount
Amount
2,000
Amount
16,678
Amount
University Wide
2001-02 Budget Summary by Function
Revenues
Tuition & Fees
Less Tuition Discounts
Gifts
Lead 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
1998-99
Actual
-
0
0
0
133,318
0
0
1,069,945
1,203,263
0
249,688
1,452,951
481,253
-61,305
0
0
81,578
0
309,760
2,721,206
125,568
3,176,807
0
3,176,807
-1,242,603
26,769
0
84,121
0
-2,721,206
-2,610,316
1,367,713
1999-00
Actual
-
0
0
0
123,985
-1 10,320
0
1,768,677
1,782,342
0
442,916
2,225,258
587,060
-78,538
0
0
268,219
0
406,321
2,785,307
124,115
3,505,424
0
3,505,424
-693,106
47,866
0
55,425
0
-2,785,307
-2,682,016
1,988,910
2000-01
Adj Budget
-
0
0
0
0
125,000
118,022
0
392,400
635.422
0
531,064
1,166,486
31 3,018
0
0
0
478,015
0
648,917
2,758,000
125,000
4,009,932
0
4,009,932
-2,530,428
0
0
200,000
0
-2,758,000
-2,558,000
27,572
2000-01
Projected
-
0
0
0
0
120,617
1 18,022
0
-212,255
26,384
0
566,906
593,290
747,258
0
0
0
420,000
0
-319,848
2,850,743
125,000
3,075,895
0
3,075,895
-1,735,347
24,987
0
123,125
0
-2,850,743
-2,702,631
967,284
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2000-01 Projected
s %
- -
Proposed
2001-02
Budget
-
0
0
0
0
125,000
134,766
0
212,700
472,466
0
428,44 1
900,907
465,278
0
0
0
166,765
0
950,302
2,900,000
125,000
4,142,067
0
4,142,067
-2,775,882
0
0
124,118
0
-2,900,000
-2,775,882
0
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
s %
- -
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
1998-99
Actual
1999-00
Actual
University Wide
2001-02 Budget Summary by Category
Change From
2000-01 Budget 1 Proposed
2000-01
Adj Budget
-
1,479,504
252,340
123,558
114,000
0
0
10,300
417,073
69,000
95,000
0
4,000
20,830
0
10,831
0
0
0
0
135,000
2,758,000
4,009,932
-2,530,428
0
0
200,000
0
-2,758,000
-2,558,000
27,572
2000-01
Projected
-
1,340,548
346,601
135,626
103,223
0
0
14,514
415,095
72,704
112,556
0
31,048
-608,073
-50,000
-490,031
0
0
0
0
141,889
2,850,743
3,075,895
-1,735,347
24,987
0
123,125
0
-2,850,743
-2,702,631
967,284
to 2000-01 Projected
$ %
- -
-138,956 -9.39%
2001-02
Budget
-
1,366,185
250,649
114,861
191,917
0
0
4,100
327,346
79,000
94,777
0
4,000
26,218
0
14,199
0
0
0
0
135,000
2,900,000
4,142,067
Change From
2000-01 Projected
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
25.637 1.91%
Change From
2000-01 Budget
to 2001-02 Budget
$ %
- -
-1 13,319 -7.66%
COST CENTERS
INSTRUCTION:
Undergraduate
Heritage 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 (Antioch Education Abroad)
MS Management
MA Psychology
MA Education
OSR
Whole System Design
MA Organizational Management
DanceIMovement Therapy
Counseling Psychology
Marriage and Family Therapy
Environmental Studies
Education
Organization & Management
Applied Psychology
Clinical Psychology
IMA
Weekend Program
Intercultural Relations
INSTRUCTION (Cont'd):
Conflict Resolution
Environment & Community
Fine Arts
PhD in Leadership & Change
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
Advocate's Office
Infirmary
Counseling
STUDENT SERVICES Cont'd:
Security
Student Loan Office
Community Government
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT:
Chancellor
Trustees
Provost/President
Fiscal Operations
Business Operations
General Administration
Central Services
Personnel
Alumni
Development/Advancement
Public Relations
Publications
Administrative Computer Service
University Administration
PLANT MAINTENANCE:
Maintenance
Custodial
Building & Grounds
Power Plant
Depreciation
SCHOLARSHIPS:
Grants & Scholarship
AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES:
Dining Services1 Gathering Space
HousingIBookstore
Computer Sales
McGregor Conference Center
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
MedicalIDental 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
