BACgrounder: What you need to know about the Dal budget

A look at the numbers from the first BAC report for 2013-14

Ryan McNutt - January 17, 2013

.
.

Dalhousie is about to enter another budget season, and faculty, staff and students can expect plenty of discussion ahead about government grants, tuition fees and more.

The Budget Advisory Committee (BAC), which makes budget recommendations to the president, has just issued its first discussion report for 2013-14. This report outlines the budget scenario Dal faces in terms of revenue and expenditures, but doesn’t make concrete suggestions for balancing it (those come later).

While it’s not uncommon for the BAC report to identify a shortfall at this stage in the process, especially at a time when government operating grants are being reduced, the number is somewhat larger this year: $17.6 million that will have to be made up through spending cuts, efficiencies and increased revenue.

Read:
The full Budget Advisory Committee discussion report [PDF]

Just where does that $17.6 million come from? We dug into the BAC report for an inside look at Dal’s budget, how it might be balanced, and how you can contribute to the process.

Who is the Budget Advisory Committee?


The BAC issues two reports in advance of the budget itself each year: a discussion paper, followed by the budget proposal with recommendations for the fees and expenditures of a balanced budget. (That report comes out in February/March.)

The BAC is chaired by the university’s vice-president academic, Carolyn Watters, and includes three faculty members, an additional VP, one dean, a student representative, the vice-president administration and finance, the assistant vice-president of ancillary services and the director of budgets and financial planning.

Its budget discussions and reports (and all the analysis below) do not consider the Agricultural Campus budget, because for 2013-14 that budget is set in a separate agreement with the Province of Nova Scotia.

The budget must be balanced


This is a requirement of Dal’s Board of Governors. Any shortfall identified in the planning process has to be addressed, and there are three ways to do that: raise fees, recruit more students or make spending cuts.

Last year’s budget was balanced with revenues and expenditures at $330.9 million by implementing a 2.75% budget reduction across the university.

Government funding: A $4.9 million cut


More than half of Dal’s budget (54.3%) comes from an operating grant from the Province of Nova Scotia. But this support has been cut back significantly in recent years: a combined 10% since 2011-12 (an accumulation of $16.6 million less for Dal). This year, Dal will receive $4.9 million less from the government — a cut of 3%.


Tuition: 3% fee increase = $3.7 million in revenue


That 3% number isn’t arbitrary: it’s the maximum that the province will let universities raise tuition this year in most programs. If Dal were to implement such an increase across the university, the $3.7 million raised would still not be enough to cover the funding cut from the province.



Enrolment growth: can it help?


More students equals more tuition equals more revenue. In recent years, Dal’s enrolment growth has helped cushion the university from more serious spending cuts.

Given the increased competition for students nationally and a decrease in regional high school students, the BAC is, for now, assuming flat enrolment for 2013-14 (though that may change as applications for Fall 2013 rise or fall). While Dal recruited a large class of international students this year, leading to slightly higher than expected enrolment revenue, new students from Canadian high schools declined for the second year in a row. Demographics suggest greater challenges ahead as the high school age population across the country continues to decline.

Even with the best efforts of Dal’s recruitment team, relying on enrolment to address ongoing budget shortfalls is an unlikely proposition.

Increasing expenditures: salaries, pension investments, facilities and more


Having less money is only half of the budgeting challenge. The other half: many budget items continue to cost more.

Here are a few areas where Dal is expecting to spend more in 2013-14, and why:

1. Salaries: The largest expenditure in the budget, about 75% of Dal’s funds go to support faculty and staff. This expense goes up each year as regular salary adjustments occur across all of Dal’s employee groups, and with new collective agreements in place, the salary cost will increase by $9.7 million next year.

2. Pension contributions: The university must make up any shortfall in employee/employer contributions. An actuarial valuation of the pension fund is due in March, and preliminary estimates are that the university will need to add an additional $4 million to meet its “going concern” requirements.

3. Energy, water, taxes and insurance: Just as you keep paying more for these services, so does Dal – an estimated $686,000 (4.5%) more next year.

4. Operating costs of new buildings: Dal’s two new buildings set to open next year – the Oceans Science Research Building and the LeMarchant Street Mixed-Use Building — will add an estimated $1.28 million to the budget for maintenance and upkeep.

5. Facilities renewal: To help address necessary maintenance and upkeep to its more than 100 buildings, Dal has been increasing its facilities renewal budget by $1 million each year as recommended by the Board’s Long Term Financial Planning Committee.

The challenge: finding $17.5 million


When you take Dal’s expected revenues — assuming a 3% tuition increase — and place them up against planned expenditures, you end up with a $17.6 million gap that the university will have to close before the budget is passed.

So just where do you find $17.6 million in the Dal budget? The BAC report outlines a few of the options the committee is considering:

1. Larger fee increases for some students: The government does allow an increase of more than 3% in a few areas where it typically costs more to deliver competitive programs and services: medicine, law, dentistry and the differential fee for international students. A 1% increase in one of the professional programs generates approximately $125,000 in revenue, while the same percentage increase to the international differential brings in $120,000. But all of these groups have faced larger fee hikes in recent years than the rest of the university, so further increases have to be carefully considered.

2. Budget cuts: Dal’s taken a number of different approaches to budget reductions over the past 10 years, sometimes making slightly larger cuts to Faculties (which can increase revenues if they attract more students) than to service units (which can’t). If Dal were to try and address its budget deficit only through spending cuts, and applied them as it has in previous years, all units would be asked to cut 7.5% of their budgets. (For comparison: this past year’s cut was 2.75%.)

3. Tap into reserve funds: Dal has an accumulated surplus fund from previous years when enrolment turned out better than expected. This $5.9 million is available to address a budget shortfall, but only on a one-time basis. Dal must be careful in using one-time funds for long-term issues, as it may only defer tough choices until the next budget.

4. Make changes to strategic initiatives funding: Each year Dal puts aside funding to address key strategic priorities to stay competitive with its peers. In recent years, the university has spent most of this on one-time projects to avoid adding to the regular operating budget. Currently the BAC report assumes the same amount of funding will be available for these projects ($3.38 million) on a one-time basis, but this is also up for discussion.

5. Facilities renewal: Dal could reduce or forgo the $1 million increase this year.

You may be wondering what role Dal’s $250 million capital campaign plays in this discussion. Bold Ambitions donations are targeted as designated by donors to go towards specific projects and initiatives in key areas like student success, student experience, sustainability, design and innovation and more. These do help the operating budget, in so much as they reduce the amount of operating funds needed to make these projects possible. But the operating budget itself can’t rely on donations; its goal is to keep Dal’s funding model as reliable and consistent as possible.

Next steps – a chance to provide your feedback


Ultimately, it will take a combination of approaches to balance the budget — perhaps including measures that have yet to be considered. The committee is looking for your feedback on how best to approach the budget this year. Some of the questions its members are asking:

•    How should Dal approach making cuts to Faculty and service unit budgets?
•    Should additional fee increases be applied to Medicine, Law, Dentistry and International Students?
•    Should Dal take advantage of its one-time reserve fund?
•    How should the university consider strategic initiative funding?
•    Should Dal forego its increase in facilities renewal spending?

BAC members will be meeting with key groups across campus in the weeks ahead to consider these and other questions. If you’d like to submit feedback on the report in writing, you can do so by emailing Susan Robertson in Financial Services at susan.robertson@dal.ca.

In late February or early March, the BAC’s second report will be issued, which will include recommendations for tuition and fees and a proposed solution for next year's budget. Students can then expect a series of forums across campus in March — a chance to offer feedback on tuition and fees as part of the Board-approved fee consultation process.

Editor's note: The originally published version of this story used "$17.5 million" as the number for the identified budget shortfall. As the actual number is $17.55 million, we have rounded up to $17.6 million for consistency with other published budget documents.

Readers Say

Well done! This article was clear and explained the process and issues when managing a budget for a large institution.
The article was good at summarizing, although lets summarize it a different way.

Tuition WILL go up 3% for everyone, guaranteed.
Cuts will be implemented University wide, again.
STUDENTS are getting LESS for MORE and the administration will continue to get pay raises, while still continuing to construct new buildings.
This WILL happen AGAIN next year, and the year after...

The administration can call this "our problem" rather than their own because it is true, but that problem that now affects us all was due to the mismanagement caused by the administration. Does anyone forecast beyond one year anymore? Welcome to an institution with some serious issues Dr. Florizone.
As we have low student fees compared to many other institutions, why not raise them by a small amount for the Fall and Winter semesters. This would allow much needed facility upgrades to the recreation facilities that students use very often.

This model is broken. Increasing student fees and cutting services is insane. In the private sector this would mean you're out of business. Unfortunately this is the norm in the public sector. We need to have a major re-organization from the top down, not the bottom up. Unfortunately all the people with the power to make that decision aren't going to be in support of reducing their pay, or losing their job for the good of the university. They are only selfish and thinking about themselves and will single handedly bring this university to its knees. I'm wondering if Dalhousie will even be around in 20 years at this rate. What a shame.
I'm sure that there are big savings to be found in senior administration. Sounds like a good place to start finding savings in. The president of Dal makes more than the Prime Minister of the country, for example.
Dalhousie has a pretty bloated administration, and the highest-level employees are extremely well-paid – how about finding cuts there? It might not bridge the gap entirely, but it would certainly make students and faculty more willing to make sacrifices. That being said, everybody knows an undergraduate education is worth less than it used to be. If you raise tuition much more, enrollment will suffer greatly once university stops being worth the price.
Three percent for professional students is already a much larger hike than the rest of Dal. I get that budgets have to balance, but with tuition already at more than $13000 a year, MY budget can only take so much! Most of us are in debt at it is - a 3% hike is more than enough. Look elsewhere, please!
Although tight budgets and subsequent service cuts can lead to poor student experiences and demoralized faculty, it can also present an opportunity for improvement. Greater use of online courses is just one such opportunity to improve student learning. I would love to see Dal implement online classes similar to what is being offered by coursera.org. Supplementing traditional class and lab time with online tutorials and lectures would be a cost effective way of reaching more students with less overhead spending. Let us all (students, faculty and administration) try to find better ways of delivering meaningful high-level education.
Lets try 100 cost cutting suggestions and add the total.
50% tuition reduction for employees children without checks on grades.
Bursaries for C average varsity athletes.
Super cheap parking passes compared to downtown rates.
Car and Parking allowances for well paid employees.
2% pension contribution with 2% raise - no effective new contribution
And then let's try 100 revenue generating ideas.
I think we can find 10 million dollars - after all the current Dal fundraiser seeks 250 million.
Cut unnecessary programs like the co-curricular record and dal connects. People can keep track of their own volunteer work and potential employees ask for references anyways.
I agree with harbourbay, 50% tuition reduction for employees children without checks on grades, don't see how I should pay for an employees child to go to dal at 50% off tuition costs.
like the fancy graphics, but the numbers are chilling partly this is Dextor govt. to blame and mind you, the fat cats need to take a cut too just like everyone else not just us students.
Co-curricular record and dal connects; tuition waivers for children of employees (including very poorly paid support staff); parking allowances and cheap parking passes: these are all great ideas for cuts and would save tens of hundreds of dollars. Maybe even thousands. Now, how many thousands are in 17.5 million again?

@dal prof we have to start somewhere. What do you suggest?
I'll try: Stop creating new senior administrative positions that add permanent budget lines of hundreds of thousands of dollars, but leave teachers and students wondering why. And perhaps dial down the enormous new construction projects until it's demonstrated they can be, you know, peopled and run over the long term.

(Admittedly, that's not 17.5 million, but it's starting somewhere!)
Yes, I think the administration should lead by example and in fact eliminate a number of positions. For instance, if construction were to be reined in, we wouldn't need a VP overseeing all this construction, would we? The rationale for other admin cuts could be found by eliminating any number of professional programmes (I would suggest all but Law and Medicine). Once the salaries of fat cat administrators and professors (like my very well paid self; remember, our new collective agreement added 9.7 million in salaries, which are already the university's single largest budget item) are off the books, the only belt left to tighten would be the students'. So, raise tuition. There is a limit on the amount, but if there were not, I would say let's make most students pay for more than half of the cost of their own education. Right now I am not aware of a single programme in which students pay even half of the cost of their education in tuition, and in some programmes they pay only a fraction, the rest being made up by various forms of subsidization (some from the province, but a lot comes from the cash cow faculties, like FASS). Use some of this new money to really expand scholarships, but also decrease the number of admissions each year, until Dalhousie is a more sustainable size. Let's live within our means for a change.

Join the conversation, but keep it clean, stay on the topic and be brief. Read comments policy.

Characters remaining: 2000

(optional)