Download
1 / 16
160 likes | 288 Views
The University of Texas – Pan American. HEAF Background, Model, Issues and Possible Strategies to Consider. Items Covered. Background Info/History Model explained HEAF Committee Charge, etc. Comparison & contrast between UTPA and other HEAF institutions Questions & Strategies. Background.
E N D
The University of Texas – Pan American HEAF Background, Model, Issues and Possible Strategies to Consider
Items Covered • Background Info/History • Model explained • HEAF Committee Charge, etc. • Comparison & contrast between UTPA and other HEAF institutions • Questions & Strategies
Background • Established in 1984 via a constitutional amendment after the repeal of the ad-valorem tax. • Allocations began in FY 1986. • Originally earmarked $100M; Currently $175M is allocated. • Purpose: • Acquire land • Construct, repair & rehabilitate buildings • Purchase equipment • Purchase Library materials • Retire debt not to exceed 50% of the appropriation. • About to begin the third 10-year cycle • Formulas re-visited/re-run with updated data every five years. • .
Background, Cont’d • Actual space data is compared to predicted data to determine deficit amounts • Documented reluctance, in the past, to use projections or other “non-factual” data
Model Four Parts: • Space Deficit: • Provide funding for predicted space needs • uses the space projection model • Condition of Facilities: • Provide funding for renovation & maintenance of facilities • Replacement value of E&G buildings x 2% (accepted industry standard) • Complexity: • Provide funding for carrying out the range & level of an institution’s programs • Appropriations • Set Asides: • 6.5% to Health Institutions • 2.2% for TSTC (max allowed by constitution) • $1M for TSU per Texas Educational Opportunity Plan (1983)
Condition of Facilities • Is simply calculated by multiplying the replacement value of each institution’s E&G space times 2% (“industry standard”). • 2003 UTPA replacement value = $242,331,008 • Condition of facilities + Space deficit = 50% of the funds
Institutional Complexity • Formula appropriations are used as a surrogate • 50% of the funds are allocated to this element
Space Deficit • Uses the Space Projection Model (SPM) used for the infrastructure formula. • Stated purpose of the SPM is “...to assess the need for new construction and to determine whether an institution’s new construction will qualify for maintenance & operations funding provided by General Revenue.”
Space Projection Model • Funding provided only for space deficits • Predicts Net assignable area in five categories: • Teaching • Library • Research • Office • Support
Teaching Space Four program areas: • Area 1: Most space intensive programs; agriculture and visual & performing arts. • Area 2: Architecture, engineering, trade & industrial arts. • Area 3: Computing, health sciences, psychology, physical sciences, languages, etc. • Area 4: All other programs such as english, history, math and political science.
Deadline: October 2004 Coordinating Board meeting Allow those not represented with an opportunity for input Review the relevant sections of the constitution & education code Review the assumptions and the data used & recommend changes “especially any that would help achieve the goal of Closing the Gaps by 2015.” Avoid radical reallocation Changes must be persuasive to the committee, the board and the legislature HEAF Committee Charge
Problems, Strategies & Questions • Persuade the committee to recommend an increase in funding beyond the $175M currently provided. • Persuade the committee to incorporate Closing the Gaps projections. • Get Bigger! Increase SCHs, Faculty FTEs, FTSEs, research expenditures, etc. • Suggest a change in weights • Suggest a set-aside for Closing the Gaps?
Problems, Strategies & Questions, cont’d • Existing formula rewards past success/growth. • Future trends are important and at least a portion of the allocation should be based on that—we need to prepare for the future now.
Problems, Strategies & Questions, cont’d • Identify additional elements? • % Hispanic? (vs. # of Hispanic) • Per capita income of the region? • Unemployment rates? • % of population without university education? • Growth rates of institution? • Growth rates of region’s population? • Suggest splitting of UT-Brownsville from us (technical, not substantive change)
