Testimony, March 2005, Office of the President, University of Maryland

Testimony March 2005 Home > Fighting an Uphill Battle > Impact of Funding... <- You Are Here

Impact of Funding Levels on Quality

If we wish to keep the best and brightest students in the State, additional funding must be found to support undergraduate education. The University cannot continue to provide quality education and access to that education without appropriate funding levels.

A key standard by which we nationally benchmark our capacity to offer quality programs is the expenditure per student, measured by the sum of State General Funds plus tuition expended per full time student. [Click Here to View Charts.] The State funding guideline calls for UM to be funded at the average (general fund plus tuition and fees) of our five peer universities. The changing financial circumstances show that we are rapidly falling backwards. In FY02, we lagged behind the peer average by $3,000 per student; in FY03 that deficit grew to more than $4,300 per student, and it is increasing. The graph below shows the striking and growing distance between Maryland and the average of its peers.

The deficit translates into larger classes, fewer staff, fewer faculty, fewer programs, less financial aid, and fewer initiatives. The graph below [Click Here to View Chart} compares staffing levels at the University of Maryland to those of our peers. It shows that the funding deficiency has been largely accommodated by short staffing.

To put this into perspective, a deficit of $4,300 for each of 29,000 FTES means the University spends $125 million less than the peer average to support its programs each year. This deficit has worsened by $40 million during the budgetary shortfall of the last two years. The university was under-funded prior to the budget reduction, as seen in the chart, but succeeded to compete by short staffing. The recent history shows that the latest budgetary shortfall has pushed it to stagnation. To maintain the State’s mandated expectations for flagship achievement, more resources must be developed. These could come from the State’s General Fund and from increases in tuition. The State could chose to increase scholarship support for students to modulate the impact of increased tuition. If, on the other hand, the General Fund support is not substantially increased and the tuition is also not increased so that the funding deficit relative to our peer average continues, the flagship campus will not achieve the stature mandated by the State.

>>Meeting the Challenge

Office of the President, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742