> Office of Planning & Analysis
Productivity, Quality, and Outcomes Agreement
Appendix B: Financial Implications of the PQO Agreement
MSU-Bozeman has identified resources which will accommodate the
expenditures required for success of this Productivity, Quality, and
Outcomes plan. These targets represent the best intentions of the
Administration and Faculty, rather than a firm commitment. As
circumstances change during the four years of the plan, budgetary
decisions will reflect both the desired outcomes and changing economic
The sources of revenue to fund the plan will be a mixture of
reallocated base resources and new general fund and tuition
collections. General fund growth for the state pay plan is estimated
at 2.3% and 3.9%, respectively, for FY 1996 and FY 1997. The total
Commissioner of Higher Education's allocation of general fund/millage
for FY 1996 and FY 1997 is estimated to be sufficient to fund the base
level of operations required to support the outcome-based plan.
Significant reallocation of the base budget in addition to application
of incremental revenues will be required, which is viewed by the
University as an appropriate means to focus on improved productivity.
Projected growth rates of 3.03% per year in state funding for each of
the four years covered in the plan are appropriately conservative.
The most significant source of new revenue to fund the plan is
student tuitions. The historic commitment by the state to fund the
universities continues, but in a much-decreased fashion. Montana's low
tuitions, relative to its competitor states, place growing pressure to
increase rates for residents and non-residents alike. As the cost of
education rises, and as the states relative contribution to that cost
declines, tuition will soon be the most significant revenue source to
fund the academic enterprise. Tuition collections are anticipated to
grow by about 17% during the current biennium over FY 1995. This
estimate is the result of very conservative enrollment growth
projections as submitted to the Commissioner of Higher Education and
of tuition rate increases already approved by the Board of Regents.
Acknowledging our dependence on state funding levels and enrollment
projection refinements, we project 12% growth in average tuition
rates for the FY 1998/99 biennium.
The attached tables identify specific outcomes included in the
plan, and their related expenditures. Where dollar costs are
identified, allocations of marginal funds have been made by the
Presidents Executive Council for FY 1996. For example, $175,000 has
been allocated to ensure access to specific courses needed for timely
graduation (Goal 1.a). In addition, $50,000 was allocated to increase
access to smaller sections (Goal 3.a).
The University is restructuring its information technology
services under a Chief Information Officer who will be responsible for
bringing together the computing resources scattered throughout
MSU-Bozeman ultimately to provide students greater access to those
technologies (Goal 5a). The Executive Council allocated $40,000 from
new revenues and mandated internal reallocation of Systems and
Computings budget to provide remaining needed funds for the
restructuring (estimated at a total of $200,000).
The College of Letters and Science was allocated an additional
$81,250 in its operating base beyond the resources called for in the
plan to accommodate previous enrollment growth and thus to position
the College for successful implementation of this plan.
Budgetary decisions for FY 1997-99 would be finalized in those
years according to projected available revenue, but the numbers
reflect intent to invest in the productivity initiatives. Base
reallocation will be achieved through an iterative process of academic
and administrative budget/program reviews. The objectives of these
reviews will be to improve our programs and services while minimizing
costs, so as to generate savings which will be dedicated to funding
the improvements outlined in this document.
Salaries for faculty at MSU-Bozeman are nearly the lowest of all
like institutions in the nation. Because MSU-Bozeman competes in a
global market for its faculty, it must be able to provide competitive
salaries to attract and retain excellent faculty. MSU-Bozeman accepts
the obligation to provide its faculty compensatory rewards equivalent
to its level of expectations of its faculty. Therefore, this
document includes a salary plan that is designed to protect faculty
salaries from inflation over the covered period.
For the purpose of comparing faculty salaries, MSU-Bozeman has
identified a group of twenty-five Category I institutions located in
states with 1993 per capita incomes between $16,297 and $18,434.
These data were collected during the Montana University System's 1994
Cost of Education study. The per capita incomes fell between levels
that closely bracket that of Montana.
The FY 1994 faculty salary for all ranks in the Comparison Group
ranges from $36,200 to $57,900. The average is $46,400. The average
salary for MSU-Bozeman is $40,700, or 87.72 percent of the Comparison
Group average. If one assumes that the Comparison Groups average
annual salary increase for the near future will be 2.50 percent, it is
estimated that the average salary of this group will be $49,970 in FY
1997. In order for faculty salaries at MSU-Bozeman to maintain their
relative status with the Comparison Group average, a salary increase
of 6.9 percent per year, for FY 1996 and FY 1997, will be necessary.
This two-year rate of increase will result in an average salary of
$47,200 at MSU-Bozeman in FY 1997.
MSU-Bozeman intends to provide this level of salary increase for
its faculty during each of the next two years. During the second year
of the current biennium, a review would be conducted of the status of
faculty salaries, the current market, and the progress made towards
the objectives of the document. Based upon this review, the
University would either modify or reaffirm its intentions to extend
this rate (6.9%) of salary increase for another two years (i.e.,
through FY 1999).
The proposed rate of increase for faculty salaries will be a
campus average. Individual increases will be based on factors such as
The application of these factors will be established by the President
and his Executive Council, after discussion with faculty
- Institutional priorities
- Individual merit
- Academic discipline /market conditions/equity considerations
- Cost of living index.
Contract Professional staff and GTA/GRA salary increases at
MSU-Bozeman are estimated at 5.0% per year for FY 1997-99. Classified
staff salary increases are estimated to average 4.8% for FY 1997
(estimated for the specific mix of position/longevity for employees on
the Bozeman campus, as differentiated from the estimated state-wide
average of 3.9%). For FY 1998 and FY 1999, the conservative figure of
3.5% is used in the model. We estimate just over $300,000 per year in
termination pay costs, based on historical experience.
Enrollment growth is anticipated throughout the period covered by
the plan. No new faculty lines are budgeted in the current biennium
which is consistent with our commitment to minimize faculty growth as
much as possible. However, the combined student FTE growth of the
current and following biennia will create the need for additional
faculty lines to meet demand for instruction. For the FY 1998/99
biennium, we budgeted very conservatively at one new faculty per 22
additional students, given that our student faculty ratio is less than
20, and is expected to decline in accordance with the PQO plan.
Further, we have allocated no additional funds for staff support of
those faculty, nor operating funds, nor equipment funds for those
We have identified one-time assistance to the Montana
Agricultural Experiment Station, Cooperative Extension Service and
Fire Service Training School in the FY 1996/97 biennium for salary
increases not funded by the 54th Legislature. These funds are shown
under Fund Transfers on the third page of the accompanying budget
projections. We anticipate that we will seek legislative
appropriations to fund the base obligations of these and future salary
increases for faculty in these organizations.
Back to Table of Contents or
On to Table 1