<p>
[quote]
The University of Washington released details Wednesday of how it intends to slash its budget by $73 million over the next fiscal year.</p>
<p>The cuts range from 9 percent in the College of Arts and Sciences to 16 percent in President Mark Emmert's office.</p>
<p>Sixty-day layoff notices for some staff members will likely go out today and Friday to remove those salaries from the books before the fiscal year begins in July. Emmert says about 600 to 800 positions will be eliminated through a combination of attrition and layoffs.</p>
<p>The reductions are in response to the state budget, approved by the Legislature last weekend, which cuts a total of about $500 million from higher education over the next two years.</p>
<p>The general approach to UW's budget was to cut administrative and support functions more deeply than academics, Emmert said. He said the differences in cuts to the various colleges came down to a calculation of instructional and research loads.</p>
<p>"We'll have a smaller number of class offerings in most, if not all, of the schools and colleges," Emmert said. "We'll probably have slower responsiveness in our administrative areas and academic support areas."</p>
<p>Emmert said the university will mothball some of its writing centers, which provide tutors to help students improve their writing skills. Also gone is a $4 million fund to provide computer and instructional equipment to any college that needs it.</p>
<p>....
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Tuition will go up 14%, and the number of new students will be cut by 1,300, including more than 300 from this fall's incoming freshman class.</p>
<p>I think this is probably something that we will be seeing more of across the country.</p>
<p>I wonder how they will reduce this year’s class by 300. Hopefully, that means they admitted fewer students this year. I can’t imagine a school suddenly saying, “Oops, sorry, we can’t take you after all.”</p>
<p>Hopefully they have a waitlist that they can axe or maybe the tuition increase will push some to other schools. Sending a rejection after an acceptance letter that was accepted would be very poor form.</p>
<p>It seems to me that cutting slots is more of a last resort type of thing. Cutting available courses is something done earlier on and it can make it a pain to get the courses needed to graduate in 4.</p>
<p>Isn’t Univ Wash one of those school that students already have trouble getting in classes and graduating on time? My kids liked UW but were scared away from the school due to stories on inability to get classes.</p>
<p>This sure makes UW less attractive from an OOS perspective.</p>
<p>State universities are usually SO MUCH less expensive than that of most private schools that I just don’t understand why ,under this economic climate, they just don’t raise either fees or tuition in order to avoid any cuts in educational quality. I just don’t get it.</p>
<p>^^ taxguy,
It’s politics, plain and simple. There’s a popular misconception that public universities get most of their budgets from state legislative appropriations. That’s generally not true anymore, certainly not at the better publics where state support has been shrinking as a share of total revenue for decades now. They’ve become much more dependent on endowments, on annual alumni giving, on external research grants, on tuition (including in some cases a heavy dose of OOS tuition), and various other non-tax-based revenue streams. In extreme cases, e.g., the University of Michigan, state funding amounts to a paltry 6 to 7% of the university’s total budget. Still, the $300 million or so the university gets from the state is an important revenue source, all the more so because it comes with no strings attached. OOS tuition and fees are already high at Michigan, just a little lower than at top privates; but that’s a market niche the university can comfortably occupy with OOS kids as a high-quality but slightly value-priced alternative to their own, generally weaker in-state publics and more costly privates. But OOS tuition and fees probably can’t rise much there if the university is to remain competitive for those applicants. </p>
<p>On the other hand, there probably is some room for in-state tuition to grow. But too-rapid growth in in-state tuition comes with the risk of loss of market share to cheaper in-state alternatives (e.g., Michigan State), as well as political risk—the danger that the legislature, in a fit of political grandstanding, will further slash appropriations or move to impose statutory restrictions on the university’s budgeting process and tuition levels. So it all involves a fine political balancing act.</p>
<p>D had already sent in her SIR in Dec from OOS but after visiting (again, we made a special trip twice in two years to specifically visit UW) we had an idea that there were going to be some serious problems at UW. UW had been D’s #1 choice for 2 years. After watching the financial situation and already seeing a $1800 tuition increase from financial aid with the potential of even a larger increase, D tearfully withdrew her SIR two weeks ago. She is a science major and we also saw that 3 bio profs had already resigned. She had UCLA and Cal acceptance but UW was her first choice. It no longer made financial sense to go to UW, especially not knowing what the tuition would ultimately be and whether or not she would be able to graduate in 4 years. She is the only kid I know that was crying when she accepted UCLA, but she is excited now so it all worked out. It did break my heart though because she worked so hard in school and was #1 in her class, we told her she could go to UW but she ultimately understood that there is a limit to our budget and she could either spend it all at UW or get some help with grad school.</p>
Yep, happening all over the country. UC Regents are considering a 9.3% (or $662)student fee increase for resident undergrads, 10% for OOS undergrads and 0-25% for professional degree programs:</p>
<p>Missouri has announced that there will be no tuition increases on any public campus (UM system, state univ. system or community colleges) this year, and funding from the state coffers will be flat–no decreases. However, a severe hiring freeze is in effect, and all academic departments canceled participation in the national meetings at which new PhDs and other faculty candidates are generally screened. Meanwhile, the U of Mo (Columbia) is expecting another record increase in freshmen enrollment.</p>
<p>Sounds like some bigger classes or fewer classes offered. It is interesting that few people seem to be doing the arithmetic. (However, it should be noted that there were several years in a row of average tuition increases of 7.5%, which generated a lot of negative publicity. The new governor likes his job.)</p>
<p>^^^Sorry, I meant state residents in MO who are applauding the tuition freeze, the hiring freeze and the increased enrollment all at the same time. Those numbers add up to fewer and larger classes, and possibly inability to graduate on time. That is what I meant by not doing the arithmetic.</p>
<p>I am very sympathetic to families who are facing considerably higher costs than they were including in calculations when decisions were being made about where to attend.</p>
<p>The legislature’s actual cut for UW was 26%, which the pres pointed out is probably the highest of any university in the country. Only with the tuition increase will the effective cut be less than 20%, with amounts varying by department. OOS tuition is still under discussion, I guess, but it has a long way to go before it even comes close to OOS tuition at places like UVA or Berkeley (around $29500). </p>
<p>UW will have to continue on the inexorable journey to being less and less dependent on state support. I think this fact is lost on most of the parents who assume the UW will be available to their kids at a dirt cheap price. If the legislature isn’t funding, that means that not much of the money is coming from the pockets of state residents. (WA doesn’t even have an income tax, which is a whole other story.) The money’s got to come from somewhere, be it grants, fundraising, or the students’ tuition payments.</p>
<p>Any1can - I’m so sorry your daughter was disappointed. It sounds like UW is losing a terrific student. Maybe she can try again for grad school?</p>
<p>Any1, sorry to hear your daughter is disappointed. But you know, UCLA is pretty good too (smile.) FWIW, I have a niece at UCLA who chose the school somewhat against her parents’ wishes. They felt she was too shy for UCLA, too quiet and lacking a certain assertiveness for a school that size. Today niece is finishing up her freshman year as a pre-med in the honors program; she’s very happy, she made friends, she loves the bigness of the campus. Every cliche about shy kids & UCLA proved untrue in this case. Here’s hoping UCLA meets your daughter’s needs – whatever they may be! – like they did for my niece.</p>
<p>There cuts and there are cuts. The 26% cut was probably in what UW asked for. Not what they had last year. The cut from last year was more like 21% much of which is offset by the tuition increase. UW will have nearly the same total budget as last year I’d bet.</p>
<p>Here’s the numbers I could find. These numbers often get adjusted for changes in health costs, bond payments, etc.</p>
<p>UW state aid budget numbers </p>
<hr>
<p>Actual reduction of about 21% in state funding from prior year. Partially offset by 14% a year tuition charge increase for two years. Not the best case nor the worst.</p>
<p>2007-2009 state funds $792,417,000
2009-2011 state funds $621,090,000</p>
<p>Apparently the net cut will be around $50 million per year for the next two years, after factoring in both the tuition increase and stimulus money. So Barrons, are you saying UW probably asked for the 26% cut in exchange for more autonomy regarding tuition rates? That’s what one comment on the blog contends.</p>