Minutes of the Faculty Senate
DWR 205
November 21, 2019
Present: Senators Zia, Logan, Huang, Oden, Boumtje, Lowther, T. Schroeder, S. Schroeder, Tucker, White, Wise, Fanning, Wilson, Shirey, Hurdle, Testa
Ex-Officio: Leigh Labit, Jennifer Rowsam, Trey Berry, David Lanoue, Donna Allen, Roger Giles, Kim Bloss, Amanda Anderson
Call to Order at 3:41
Proxies – S. Schroeder for Boumtje
I. Approval of Minutes:
Minutes from October 17, 2019 [motion –S. Schroeder, second – White]
II. Special Orders of the Day:
President T. Schroeder asked Dr. Lanoue to address questions from faculty.
Dr. Lanoue asked for feedback on the change in atmosphere in higher education. We are seeing some challenging behavior by counterparts in the area of scholarships. SAU wants to make sure that we are being competitive with our scholarship offers. However, we don’t want to offer scholarships to the detriment of the budget. Dr. Lanoue shared information from a study that Dr. Rowsam found. Our SAU institutional research capacity is limited. He wants the faculty senate’s input on a consulting firm that provides data about scholarships and recruitment. There have been budget cuts and he wants to make sure that money is well spent. The consulting firm is approximately $47,000. SAU doesn’t have the capacity to analyze data to the level that would be needed in order to make good decisions about scholarships.
President T. Schroeder asked for Senator White’s feedback. Senator White said that the amount of scholarship offer need to be analyzed.
Senator S. Schroeder asked how many projects the firm could do at one time. Dr. Lanoue said that the firm could work on 4-6 projects per year.
Senator White asked what type of data could be obtained by using the consulting firm.
Dr. Lanoue stated that there is a variety of data that could be used in recruitment, retention, scholarships and more.
Senator Tucker asked for examples of what type of recommendations the firm would make.
Dr. Lanoue said that there would be an opportunity with the data collection would be able to be tailored to the specific circumstances.
Senator S. Schroeder said that the presentation seemed to be clinical and didn’t seem to align with the “Feels Like Home” moto of SAU.
Dr. Lanoue said that they will be making recommendations and answers to questions that we were asked.
Discussion ensued about the relevance of the consulting firm and the relevance of the data that could be provided.
Dr. Lanoue said that he wants the senate’s input as part of the decision-making process.
Dr. Lanoue discussed the Employee Satisfaction Survey. He summarized the survey results. For the most part the results improved. However, the employee satisfaction with the commitment to diversity declined; this concerned the administration greatly. He wants the input of faculty and staff to address this decline.
Dr. Lanoue answered questions for administration. He was asked if all course changes needed to go through the VPAA’s office instead of just going through the department chairs. Is the process efficient? It goes from chair to dean to VPAAs office. Dr. Lanoue wants input from the deans to see if the process can be improved.
Senator Tucker asked if the forms could be electronic, which could help make the process more efficient.
The other question was about technology. Dr. Lanoue is aware of the technology issues on the 3rd floor Wilson, and they are being addressed. Senator S. Schroeder said that the library is an area that is problematic. She explained that it is important for students to have adequate access to technology. Currently, student are periodically logged of the computers; thus, making it difficult to get assignments completed.
Mr. Josh Kee discussed advancement. He began with the Love and Loyalty campaign. There are six areas: Student Enrichment, faculty/staff Support, Academic Programs, Student Life/Community Engagement, Revitalized Facilities, and Athletics. These areas were based on survey data. Mr. Kee shared a Power Point that illustrated these areas. Then, he showed a report that outlines the giving. The staff go out and visit with alumni and friends to get donations until the campaign goes public. He explained each fund support area and the amount in each area. He discussed the Academic Campaign Highlights. There are 65 endowments during the campaign. $38,223,764.02 is the endowment balance as of 8/31/19. The endowment is important because state funds decline and the endowment funds are important.
Dr. Trey Berry announced that there is new endowed professorship that will be announced soon.
III. Committee Reports:
President T. Schroeder asked for a Handbook Committee report.
Senator S. Schroeder gave an update on the committee’s work. She discussed the progress that the committee has made going through a variety of different types of edits. There are some errors that are editorial and updates. However, there are others that will require input and discussion in faculty senate.
Senator S. White gave a report on the Senate Budget Committee.
SAU Faculty Senate Budget Committee Report
November 21, 2019
Senators Testa and White met with Vice President Reed met on Friday, Nov 1.
Vice President Reed Provided copies of the 2019-2020 SAU Budget Overview document presented to and approved by the SAU Board of Trustees on May 30, 2019. VP-Reed also provided the senators with comparison pie chart/data table that compared prior year to the current year budget line report, and a document that served as a help to identify account numbers by their codes. These later two document are attached to this report.
The following is a summary of notes made by Senator White. All page numbers refer to the Budget Overview document.
pp 9-10 All Revenue for tuition (-40) Course Fees (-41) State Appropriation (-42)
pp 11-13 Auxiliary Revenue
pg 13 “58” residence halls (Arkansas, Magnolia Columbia) kept separate for Alumni Foundation 501c3 reporting
pg 14 (-50) salary summary budgets [look at revenue by dept.?]
[MC, or marginal contribution has been calculated, SSCH $ revenue / Salary expense $]
*MC could be used as a measureable index over time to observe trends, changes etc… rather than a metric of a desired optimal quantity.
*MC measure (calculated by VP-Reed, not in the budget book) ratio of contract salary expenses without fringe.
pg 13 Rent $ for Arkansas, Columbia and Magnolia Residence Halls
pg 47 Transfer $ to trustee for loan payment for AR, Col, Mag RH
Expenses for operating the residence halls are the responsibility of SAU
Example, for Columbia Hall, Rent Revenue $ budgeted at $495,900. $468,085 transferred to pay the bond to the accounts on pg 47. The difference is the required % for renovation/repair as stipulated by the bond. The foundation is a 501c3 organization and these transfers must be kept separate for IRS reporting.
pg 44-45: Scholarships *what % of these scholarships are funded?*
Foundation scholarships budgeted at $665,000 in 10-0000-4306 pg10
(Total foundation distribution is much larger and includes dept enrichments, professorships, etc.)
Total scholarships budgeted at 15,296,931 (pg44) 4.5%
A supplemental chart was distributed with cost vs. revenue
Housing Revenue = 8,033,550 (attached report corresponds to total on pg13)
Housing Expenses = 3,515,801 (pg82) + 1,556,011 (pg86) = 5,071,812
$3M Budgeted Housing Profit
Food Service Revenue = 5,277,995 (pg12)
Food Service Expense = 67,709 + 4,109,664 = 4,177,373 (pg82)
$1.1M Budgeted Food Service Profit
Total Net Profit $4.1M
Use the pg 8 Budget Book chart: (This chart represents Auxiliary expenses only)
41.6% student housing + 26.7% food services = 68.3% (pg 8) * $15,644,387 (pg7) = $10,685,116
**Or see Student Housing and Cafeteria totals on pg 7**
pg 14: teaching salary total $9,725,881 for regular terms
Summer 1 ($218,288)
Summer 2 ($218,288)
Overload Fall ($47,650)
Overload Spring ($50,050)
Adjuncts (pg19) ($1,201,640) – Summer Pay, Overload, and Adjuncts typically have a low flat budget. Will be offset by tuition revenue or lapsed salaries.
Total Teaching Salary Expenses: $11,461,797
pg 9: total tuition revenue $27,303,761 (does not include course fees of $8,182,117)
Difference of teaching salary and tuition revenue: $15,841,964
*not in the budget book(?): Total SSCH assigned to transcripts = 73,072 *214/hr = $15,772,338
pg 9 (10-000-4000 to 10-000-4003) accts total projected (before scholarship) UG revenue is $22,104,066
pg 44 = total UG scholarship waiver is $15,296,931
The difference between UG revenue and scholarship waiver is $6,807,135
Add the $6,807,135 and the $4,062,360 net aux revenue yields $10,869,495 net income for operations
Tuition Discount Rate Calculation (estimation?):
Budgeted ratio of $15,296,931 / $22,104,066 = 69.2 % discount (a.k.a. Tuition Discount Rate)
Actual ratio is lower @ 59%
IV. Motion to adjourn
[motion –Logan, second – Oden]
Meeting adjourned at 4:55
