1. Higher Ed Finance and UTPA

2. Two Big Questions  Where Does the Money Come From? –For Texas –For Higher Ed –For UTPA  Where Does the Money go? –For Texas –For Higher Ed –For UTPA

3. Let’s Peel The Onion* *Dr. Nevarez

4. Where Does Texas Get Its Money? FY 2003 Sales Tax 24.5%$14.3B Federal Gov’t 36.0%21.0B Other Taxes (fuel, franchise, Alcohol, etc.) 20.3%11.8B Other Non-Tax (income, fees, lottery, etc.) 19.2%11.2B Total100.0%$58.3B

5. Where Does Texas Spend Its Money? FY 2003 Health/Human Services 38.0%$22.9B Education ($2.7B/4.5%, higher Ed) 34.6%20.8B Transportation8.2%4.9B Public Safety & Corrections 5.6%3.4B Government (Exec, Leg, Judicial) 3.3%2.0B Other (debt, regulatory, etc.) 10.3%6.2B Total100.0%$60.2B

6. Where Does UTPA get Its Operating Money? 2005 Budget State (Formula: $35m/19%) $70.2 M 37.2% Restricted (mostly fed) 42.0 M 22.2% Tuition (reg + desig) 37.9 M 20.1% Fees 13.5 M 7.1% Investments & Other Revenue 13.6 M 7.2% Other (balances, Indirect cost…) 11.7 M 6.2% Total$188.9M100.0%

7. Where Does UTPA Allocate Its Operating Funds? 2005 Budget Faculty Salaries $36.5M19.3% Other Academic Support 14.0M7.4% Scholarships11.7M6.2% Benefits15.8M8.4% Institutional Support 11.7M6.2% Student Services 4.9M2.6% Restricted Projects 41.8M22.1% Auxiliary Services 12.9M6.9% Designated (computer labs, etc.) 24.9M13.2% Plant Operations 8.4M4.4% Other (public serv, HEAF proj. ) 6.3M3.3% TOTAL$188.9M100.0%

8. Eight Funds Budgeted (1) Educational & General Yes (2) Auxiliary Yes (3) Designated Yes (4) Restricted Yes (5) Plant Only very small portion used for operations; most is for construction (6) Loan No (7) Agency No (8) Endowment & Similar Only the portion used

9. E & G (Appropriated) Funds  Consists of two types of funds –“True” state funds; General Revenue –Local funds; Mostly tuition along with some interest, indirect cost, and a few fees.

10. What State funds Does UTPA Receive?  Two Formulas: –Instruction & Operations –Infrastructure Support  Special Line Items  TRB Payments  HEAF (Constitutionally authorized but apportionment is driven by legislature)  Funds Trusteed to the Coordinating Board (ATP/ARP, Texas Grant, etc.)  Flow-through funds (UTEP’s Border Consortium, UTSA’s SBDC, etc.)

11. Instruction & Operations Formula The Coordinating Board receives certified data from the institutions by funding area and instructional level. The Legislative Budget Board computes a base rate to be used, according to how much money the legislature makes available for higher education. This base rate is used in a matrix to calculate the funding for each SCH in each discipline and level (Continued)

12. Instruction & Operations Formula 2004-2005 matrix excerpt (base rate: $51.25) LowerUpperMasterDoctoralSpecial Liberal Arts 1.001.963.9412.04 Science1.533.007.1719.29 Engineering3.013.468.2021.40 Teaching Experience Supplement: An additional weight of 10% is added to lower & upper division SCHs taught by tenured & tenure-track faculty.

13. Infrastructure Formula  Driven by the predicted square feet for E&G space produced by the Space Projection Model.  Looks at an institution’s space needs in five categories 1. TEACHING (level and program areas of funded SCHs) 2. LIBRARY (# of faculty, students, programs, and holdings) 3. RESEARCH (Research Expenditures and SCHs) 4. OFFICE (# of faculty, non-faculty, & current fund E&G expenditures) 5. SUPPORT SPACE (% of other factors, 9% in ’02)

14. Tuition Revenue Projects  One of few items that can be influenced by legislators  The Coordinating Board rates the requested projects –Excellent –Desirable –Fair –Questionable

15. HEAF  Established in 1984  Allocations started in 1986  Originally earmarked $100M; currently $175M is earmarked  To acquire land, construct & rehabilitate bldgs, purchase equipment, library materials, retire debt (not > 50%)

16. HEAF (Cont’d)  Four Parts: 1.Space Deficit 2.Condition of Facilities 3.Complexity 4.Set-Asides (Healths, TSTC, TSU)

17. --Thank You-- Questions? http://dba.panam.edu/budget/index.htm