xt71jw86m14c https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt71jw86m14c/data/mets.xml  University of Kentucky 1988 1989 2013ua031 booklets  English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. University of Kentucky Fact Books The Case for a Great State University - University of Kentucky, 1988-1989 text The Case for a Great State University - University of Kentucky, 1988-1989 1988 2019 true xt71jw86m14c section xt71jw86m14c ll
THE CASE l=CJl=i A GREAT STATE UNIVERSITY
i “K
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

 7 ‘4 7 , 1 , , 7 7) 77.7_ ,7 177 7 7 ‘7 Z {/I/ 71 ‘ A} ((7 u .// g/ ‘ 7‘
777.7 "’g 7 . .. 7 A 7 I 7 7 7/ 7, MT”. 777 7 7 _ ,z 7 777' 1477771 7 7 7 71 I, 77' ‘77 7M 7 I g' "’"7' "’7 7
I
I
7 1 ‘
I
g ' '1’ ;" “:7 «9 I
, I 7 l
74/ I
/" I
,/ I
I
J

,7 2" y
77 77777 77777777 7‘7 7g777‘v I

'7/ Community Colleges :1 University of Kentucky Research Farms J Robinson FOIESC and Submations

 THE CASE FOR A GREAT STATE UNIVERSITY
; Since 1865 the University of Kentucky has been I We are not able to provide the environment that attracts
t engaged in its land-grant mission of providing education business and industry to the state and helps it prosper
l and services to the people of the Commonwealth. From the here.
3 Penn yri/e to the Big Sandy, and in every county of the state, ,
i UK has a presence of people and services, of alumni and 7990 marks not only the 725th anniver sar y Of the
of students. found/ng of the UnlverSIty of Kentucky, but also it heralds
At campuses in Lexington and the statewide network of another blennla/ sessron of the Kentucky General Assem-
fourteen community colleges, the University of Kentucky b/y. Education reform WI” surely be the key issue/n th/s
educates over 36% of all the students attending college 3e33lon. But While governmental leaders and legislators
_ public and private _ in the Commonwealth. concentrate on the mandate of the State Supreme Court
I A celebration of this 125 years of land-grant service and Wh’Ch declared the common 80/700,. system “Poona/t9"
l education would be hollow, however, if one did not pause tlonal, the hope .5 ”7‘?! higher education also WI” come I"
t l t ' 't fK t k d0 0 .' Of SGr/OUS COHS/ era Ion.
orealze the the Unrversr yo en ”0 y must m re The University of Kentucky wholeheartedly supports
I We are not able to provide the people with the same efforts to improve all of education because in the end UK
l educational o portunities offered people in other states. is a consumer of the educational product produced in the
. P
l
l
1

 state. Opportunity also exists to set in place a well-funded, ' :~‘. . ‘ .I '- = . ,, “
modern, comprehensive university, a flagship institution — 343?”, ‘.- ,.. ' ' ‘ ”,;f;"" "a“..ZF‘”
the University of Kentucky. Sit {Lg-'7, ._, ~ «is,
Neverbefore in the 125-yearhistory ofthis institution has 2'; 4.2" ”I; j ‘erw J
there been a greater opportunity to move the University of ';:’;,+-'-,‘if 1363??? V f ‘5 t
Kentucky to a place among the really great institutions of sift", ., . at; . yam, l
our nation. “(aghyv'gteq 'E. . ,.a.”-a’ Ea, , i
We are prepared to answer any questions about our ages «sky; ,1 f" “2%: l
funding needs or our stewardship. All of that, and more, is "Kg? 9 . ‘ Iggy ,-"‘-“
outlined in this booklet and in our biennial budget request. ,j’gj‘M“a L ‘,LItut“’ .
In short, our request is simply this: Give us the funding it 6% “,,,.e,;g§> «*W _:,-i ,, m .,
needed for the University of Kentucky to becomeanationa/ f ‘5?»‘ef'v; 31:; at .. ’ " My 7,
leader in the quality of its research, service and graduates. If?" .j, . .~ ' "it, ,. aft-1:. ‘ . 4;;
We will be accountable for using our resources in the most at“, fl ,_ ', A’, . 5‘1“»; 9"
efficient way. fif’n I; ff” . '\ a ,, .‘fIg" t
4%." x l N‘: '
On the followmg pages you Will find Informatlon and ft: . , t , \gi .
statistics to build “The Case forA Great State University." f5 Q?‘ at, * ‘1 , l
2

 i
g { THE CASE FOR A GREAT STATE UNIVERSITY
\ r
55 l 3

 EducatesMoreThaIIOne
Thlrdefthemllegesmdems i
311(33ch i
1 i
I UK is now educating some 60,000 students — more exam scores of the freshman class (the ACT) are {
than 36% of all the students going to college, public the highest in the state, and three points better than I
or private, in the state. the national average.
IEnroIIment In UK‘s statewide network of fourteen IUK is the principal graduate-degree—granting insti-
community colleges exceeds 36,000 and has more tution in the state. This year there are more than
than doubled In the ’803. 4,000 graduate students at the University — a
. ' _ record. Many of the professional programs — such
lThe quality 01‘ the faculty and programs '5 attracting as medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, and law — have
many of the best students in the state. On the earned high marks nationally.
4 Lexington Campus the average college entrance

 l Attamahle

l

l lThe faculty is highly qualified — 98% on the
'e l Lexington Campus have the highest degree attain-
in l able in their fields.

I UK faculty last year attracted $60 million in outside
gi- grants, contracts, and gifts — a solid testimonial to
m their talent and expertise.
£1 l UK has had 21 Fulbright Fellows among its faculty '
/e ( since 1985.
5

 ‘ UK ‘CanBe Measured in ,

Terms Of Its Economc ,
Impact on Kentucky , .: _ , ;_,.;;;:~ J
l UK has an economic impact of over a billion dollars I University faculty bringto Kentucky some $60 million i
a year statewide—and more than $700 million a ayear in grants, contracts, and gifts—which in itself i
year on Fayette County alone. has a total economic impact on the state of about g
_ ' $150 million a year. i
lFor every tax dollar invested in the UniverSity, UK '

generates almost $2 more. lThe state’s investment of $43 million in the UK

_ . Community College System last year contributed

lln 1.9881119 UniverSIty generated as much revenue $440 million to the economies of the areas the

0“ Its 0W“ as all bUt twelve PUb'IC Kentucky COFPO' colleges serve, and another $100 million statewide.

rations. (Please see page 38.)
6

 1 Researchlnstltutmns ~
m l lThe Carnegie Foundation designated UK as a
:If , Research University of the First Class, one of only
ut , 45 public institutions in the nation so ranked.

l

L IUK operates an $85-million-a—year research pro-
K gram providing a significant benefit to Kentuckians
,d in such areas as agriculture, aging, business and V
is manufacturing, cancer, and coal and minerals :
e. research. '

7

 = UKSsGerceProgmmS
3 . a , l
= l
l
lln one year the UK Cooperative Extension Service IUK has a long history of providing agricultural {
will make more than 5 million service contacts regulatory services for the benefit ofthe state’s agri-
statewide. business.
lThe Small Business Development Program last year I UK provides livestock disease diagnosis and many ‘i
helped create 2,300 new jobs in Kentucky. other services to farmers and horse farm owners.
lThe UK Community College System has an award-
winning education-industry partnership program.
lThe Area Health Education Center program pro-
vides health professionals to under-served regions
8 of the state.

 VervLarestEnterpnses
t UK is clearly a dominant enterprise in the Common-
al ( wealth. The citizens of Kentucky, therefore, have a very
i- large and important investment in UK that is worth
. protecting. Consider further that UK is an enterprise
‘ which generates enough revenue on its own — outside
.y z of state appropriations — to rank as the 13th largest
3. t Kentucky “public corporation.” (Please see page 38.)
l
9

 l
!
IUK is the only land—grant university in the nation —serving as the principal institution for statewide ,
responsible for instruction, research, and service programs in all f
_ _ fields without geographic limitation, and the prin- 5
— a stateWIde system 01‘ community 00"9998; cipal doctoral—granting institution in the state.
—a medical center with a full range of programs; ‘
l
— a major teaching hospital;
—degree programs from the associate degree
through the graduate and professional degrees,
and, f
l
to

 MolmlaflafitUKI’ramS
AreCemletelvseH
: Supmn
is i
i” l lThe UK Hospital is an exceptional case. Most states A truly remarkable fact:
1' SUPP?“ ”'9 operation 0f their pUb'|C_ university Not only are these two programs — the UK Hospital
hospitals W'th state tax dollars, and prowde at least and UK Athletics — self-supporting, but also they are ,
part 91‘ their capital needs. Only $1 million a year '3 contributing generously to the operations of the Uni-
, prowded from tax-dollars'flor the operation of the UK versity _ $2. 5 million a year from the Hospital, and
hospital, and-that Is speCIflcally budgeted for the UK $1.5 million a year from Athletics go to UK’s operating
neo-natal unit. budget.
l UK Athletics is completely self-supporting, with no '
{ tax dollars involved.
i 11

 _ “0311.; ‘3» ”a , . / ,1
‘34“ «’ ‘ ~ " . g
y r“ ,V, ~ , :4},
) ‘ I! I . 1
L .34 . - ‘\ , ‘ 3 ,, z. . i I
A a” I

 r UESTINSN ‘
i NSWES

 Does UK get most of its operating funds from What is the main problem facing UK today?
i the state?
No. Only 38% of UK’s support comes from state inadequate state funding keeps UK from being
tax dollars appropriated to the institution. That is competitive with institutions similar to it in other 0,
why it is said that UK is state “assisted,” not state states, thus denying Kentuckians the same
“supported.” opportunities provided citizens in other states. .
l
Where does the rest of UK's funding come "lb what schools does UK compare itself? ,
From “user fees” — tuition, patient revenues at Institutions similar to UK in the contiguous states .
A the UK Medical Center, student housing and A and North Carolina, 6.9. the University of North i
dining fees. Voluntary grants, contracts, and gifts Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Tennes- l
are some of the other sources of revenue. see, Indiana University. The UK Community Col-
lege System has its own set of comparable institutions in f
the contiguous states and North Carolina. 1
14 i

 p How does the state of Kentucky measure up Where does UK stand in the funding of higher
' to other states in the nation in the support of education in the Commonwealth?
higher education?
Nationally, Kentucky higher education appropri- State funding of higher education is based on a
g , ations have dropped a staggering 25 percent in “formula.” The objective is 100% funding for all
’r 11 years in terms of purchasing power per of Kentucky’s public universities and the com-
e student, according to the “Halstead Report.” munity colleges. On this scale of funding, UK’s
_ Researcher Kent Halstead, author ofthat report, says, “You Campus in Lexington is next to last in percentage funding;
i kind of wonder how the system can keep going and maintain and the community colleges are last.
quality. How can that be? In the case of the commun-
YOU should wonder, tOO' ity colleges it is claimed that they educate
25% of the college students in Kentucky. ,
HOW (1063 UK stack up With SChOOlS Similar Surely they rank higher than last in funding
,S , to it in the South? if they continue to provide education to record enroll- ,
h i merits each year?
;_ , . , UK is indeed on the bottom of the funding heap, Q
|_ i ,0“ I“? bos'SPi state. appropriation per student and the UK Community College System, with its
‘ I A in Similar institutions in the southern states, UK heavy enrollment, is last. The UK Community
‘n i ranks 12th 0‘“ 0f 14- The UK Community College College System does educate 25% ofthe college
System ranks 13th outof15. students in Kentucky, but it gets only 8% of the higher
: education appropriation. 15

 . _ . . lDuring the 19803, UK substituted $20 million in funds it
H_as UK always been 1“ thls f1nanc1al would have used for faculty and staff salaries to make
dilemma? up for a $20 million shortfall in the state budget. If UK had
been able to hold on to those dollars for salary increases,
the University would not have salary problems today.
In the late 19603, UK received nearly 60% of the I . .
state’s appropriation for higher education. That IUK substltuted money 't needed for equment pur- .
has declined to 44% today. In 1979, 45 cents of chases In the 19803 for shortfalls ln the state budget. .As ‘
each dollar UK spent came from the state. Today a result, the Unlver3lty could find Itself WIth $71 mllllon
that is down to 38 cents. worth of obsolete equipment in two years.
I UK also substituted $17 million it needed for maintenance '
. _ _ on buildings and other facilities during the 19803 to make
UK'S budget 13 1318- Sureh] UK has enough up for shortfalls in state revenue.
1:; money some place to shore up faculty and I I II
staff salaries, replace obsolete equipment IUK ellmlnated 260 p03ltlons, mostly support staff, to
and do all the other things which need doing make badgetary ends. meet during the 19803 and
at UK to make it competitive with other schools? became lncrea3lngly' rellant on part-tlme facu|ty, partlc- .‘
This is exactly what UK has been doing all many m the commun'ty ”“9993
through the 19803. This is known as the practice IUK met very large increases in health insurance costs
of “substituting.” Taking out of one budget pocket for its employees by reducing salary increases. If these 1‘
and putting it in another. “Robbing Peter to pay increases had not occurred, UK employees could have
Paul." For example: received 3% to 4% more in salary.
16

 it
e IUK substituted quality for quantity in students on the IUK made the Student Health Service completely self-
d Lexington Campus by instituting a selective admissions supporting by increasing the student health fee from $25
;, policy in 1984 which significantly decreased the size of to $50 a semester.
the entering freshman classes, and thereby lessened a
‘ growing budget crunch.
s ‘ lThe University automated many of its offices and elim- Why can t UK IUSI keep on substituting.
n inated a number of secretarial/clerical positions.
‘ I Through adept management of its utilities operations, UK

e ' stabilized its energy expenditures with savings amounting There are no more places from which the Uni-
e to several mIHIOHS 01‘ dollars. A versity can take the funds it so badly needs.

IUK used its state appropriated funds to make up for
:o decreasing federal support of its statewide agriculture
d service programs. From 1970—71 to this year, the federal '
;- 1 support share of the Cooperative Extension Service

program was decreased from 53% to 32%. .
is lThe University dipped into the funds of the athletics
;e r program and the University Hospital to meet critical
re funding needs.
17

 Doesn't an institution with a budget the size These funds are restricted by the granting agen- l
of UK have surplus funds some place that can cies for specific purposes and cannot be spent
{gIgIII €3<:f:;;ji5' be applied to these problems? by UK for other purposes no matter how critical
the need might be. I
UK is a big institution. The fiscal year 1989
balance sheet indeed shows some $860 million - - . ‘
in balances. But, $668 million ofthis is in the value What Spemhcan‘l are UK 5 thlemS?
of the investment in buildings and property which
obviously cannot be used to solve the problems; a large .
portion is in accounts designated by entitles outside the I I I I I "
University for specific purposes such as student loans ($17 To compete W'th all the other 'nSt'tUt‘OnS ”1 the
million), the University’s endowment ($67 million, of which A country, UK mUSt have:
only the income can be used), and restricted gifts and grants
($33 million); $50 million of non-cash balances, called
“working capital”; and the balance of some $25 million lCompetitive Salaries. Faculty salaries are $5,016 , J
budgeted to support University operations in 1989-90. behind the benchmark median on the Lexington Campus, '
and $2,302 behind in the Community College System. Ul<
The UK faculty is widely praised for attracting Staff salaries are only 89% of the marketplace. Employee
some $60 million last year in extramural benefits are 9V9” further behind. ’
grants: COHUaCtS and glits- 08111991116 0f iIhIS I Buildings. The condition of the University’s buildings and
money be used to help UKs funding physical plant is deteriorating alarmingly.
18 problems?

 I Equipment. In tWO years, it iS estimated that some $71 Be more specific. What will another budget
million of the University equipment for research and crisis bring?
instruction may have exceeded its life expectancy.
lFacuIty and staff positions are needed in the UK . . . . . .
_ Community College System to meet heavy enrollment Another 'nSUfi'C'ent approprlatlon '” the 1999
’ demands. sessmn of the Kentucky General Assembly WlII
have the following results:
é,3,3,Pitta Is this a problem of crisis proportions unlike . . .
r‘ anything the University and its faculty, staff, lThe quallty of the educatlon students recelve from UK
i students and alumni have faced before? WI” be damaged;
. . l Many of UK’s best faculty will go elsewhere;
Yes. The UnlverSlty has essentially exhausted all , , ,
available management and financial options to lPrograms whlch should enhance the'economlc develop-
i , deal. with future budget problems _ short of ment of our state and create jObS WIII be cut back, and
i ' sl'gnlflcantly changlng the expectatlons placed on lMany of the services UK now provides to millions of
. UK by the Cltlzens 0f the Commonwealth. Kentuckians will be severely curtailed. "
f
I
19

 Then what is the solution? How do we know that UK will use its funding
wisely?
Adequate and equitable funding for the University. UK is under constant evaluation—first, by a Board ‘
This requires approximately $68 million more for of Trustees, some of the state’s most respected
the Lexington Campus and $28 million for the UK citizens who meet regularly to review UK policy
Community College System over the next two and programs.
fiscal years. There also are numerous other evaluations made: a
g _ . lPerformance evaluations are conducted annually on
HOW (1085 UK propose to “33011 Its funding every employee at UK — and salaries are administered
$0315? on the basis of individual employee merit.
3;, l UK is audited by external auditors.
UK wants to take a responsible “3031' approach IA Price Waterhouse management study, commissioned '
A and IOOKS forward to being a partner Wlth GOV' by the state, gave UK high marks for effective use of
ernor Wilkinson and all the members of the limited resources.
General Assembly in addressing the state’s prob— . . . . _ r
lems and helping to advance all of the critical programs of IUK '3 checked 9'039'3’ by agenCIes Wh'Ch accredit ”3
the Commonwealth. programs, including the Southern Association of Col—
20 leges and Schools.

 l A periodic University review is made of every educational Please summarize the “Case for A Great State
unit. University."
IUK has a number of large donors and agencies which
carefully monitor how UK uses its funds and Operates its . .
programs before they provide their money to support UK If Kentucky wants to keep 'ts best and brightest
9 A students at home to study and then to work,
programs.
‘ I UK is often scrutinized by state management studies and If Kentucky wants 'ts best and brightest students
legislative committees, and the state Council on Higher to be taught by the best and brightest faculty,
1 Education reviews UK budgets and programs 0“ a If Kentucky wants the University of Kentucky to provide
I regular baSIS- assistance in Kentucky’s economic development in the age
I of technology and information,
Etitetiiififientlfigelrlgtlefi natlonally-renowned Then the expectations the citizens of the Commonwealth
‘1' make of the University must be supported from state tax
t revenues at a level that is competitive in the marketplace.
f It has a good one right now but it is being severely UK IS WORTH IT!
, threatened. Kentuckians do not like, and should
1 not accept, having their state university second
5 in anything — athletics or academics.
21

 .. , .. ..
‘ A», 5 _ .
> 3:. g
g :44»: . , 3, ‘ 3W— 4 ‘ ' ,‘ 5: ‘0
g _ 45"" "a . t ,, ’ a; 1’1
4. tr, . I F”: »,, w; s f , ' , m
, “L’ a"??? 3' ”“"‘ .’ £528? 1.68.5.3 ‘38:“ " .- - 8
‘ 7 85:24.2 5 ' 888, ‘ m..- ’ 4 ' -- . - ,QKRT\\\/Z§:§{€i ' ,
4'. :8 e »~s*,«:::..g ‘ii" :a\a:\/. 8:5}: -,
, . . ‘3; WV“ . ‘ i .f ,1: m
v f 1 , x _ r 07.5 ‘ / ‘ 5‘5 ~,_ ' ‘v ‘ Q
4iW‘ / Rmxxfi .. .
{"25 ’ ” “1:348 .1 2‘13: ”8% \xf‘vmxktx'? -. A“ l
:4, ,- , to”; "w n; 4 , :5 ‘ ’4 4,,5 ‘5 \8, #:5831238. :74; ,3 ’st * ‘
«5‘5,» ‘N f\ 8:58, >88\\\»\~8 \ 2
~ 8-5” "" “@4528. A 8 '3 ' ‘ / . x Q ~ ‘50, ~» 8 \ ”88,8;
_ .. .1 . ; «,4 ' 1. . a, , \ng Kt,\~¢:\E¥JQQ . ~ ..
my: «\ ”at" 5 .fi 2“
t”,,”'>§'m nit”: , § .' _ 3. :
kw; ‘ J' ‘ R ' ‘
‘ N <‘ — V _ ‘ “- m«------~\-wu~.«\\\m___\\_..‘_§.R:, v7 , ‘
_ » , § ‘ I.
‘y , > . ‘ r “3% v , \ k ,4» § (tfiggx. . ,_ i .,
_ _ ,_ s; x ‘ ,_ a , ‘1. W: T x W... ,_ _; , , w 1 . . ,
_ ‘ § _ U My; a .gfi» ‘. 1‘ § g . A: ,_w Wm ,,,,, V
«\, , ,t g-_ - ,, ,3,«._.‘.a.-‘ 1;: 1
.‘s'¢fi {- 3w w.§;z\“; .' ‘ - , '» i w“ ””1. > - V» ' \
R x ‘ ts ' “‘ : i
1?; 3,9 3:“; _. .. , > 3;. ., .. ,., :w .3 , ,, _
__ \ k ,; __ ,y. , in, ., 1 A , . _
~ ~ 2 T: _ 5-. " 7 *3 L ‘ '
. ' z ‘ ; g-i - xx ' V; - ‘ ~
. A“ A - a, : x » 1* « ‘ _- , ,
< v -:-z! .< fiw‘ «ff: ' . ' . W , fl _‘ “ I 7 '5'
x :35“ V V A» \ ,,:3 / , . 35 ,-
> 7,; a v,‘ {w “a,“ _,/ "~ ,_
' - “£3 ; KN»
a, .7 if V, _, ¢ >11” :"~

 3 THE CASE FOR A GREAT STATE UNIVERSITY ‘
, .i

 FACULTY SALARIES
[amount below benchmark median)
___—____________.—————
Community College System
.5335, , $242 [31347 ,.
0 :—- 2 ' 3—"? 2 07—0, T—_"“—“““ / ’ , , ’4 v v 4’ 4’ ,2;:: ’~’ 4’
-$687 13725" ’17" vial)? 137515.,2425
$1,125 -$1,161 ‘$1’044 3&3;
'-$1,517 iii}; if
2352362
__________—._._.——
________.__.__———
_______—__._.——
_________—_.__.——
___________._—————
70 75 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88
34 FALL

 FACUITY SALARIES
[amount below benchmark median]
_ __________________.—_—
University System
_____—__—_——
-$50 a”? f: a , g1; , I“ “ ' ’ ’