ASSOCIATION OF CATHOLIC COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES

(1)

One Dupont Circle NW, Suite 650, Washington, DC 20036

ph 202-457-0650 · fax 202-728-0977 · accu@accunet.org · www.accunet.org

Financial Concerns and Catholic Higher Education:

A Report on Presidential Perspectives

By Cheryl Rice

The current, sustained economic downturn has placed considerable financial stress on nearly all facets of American life, including higher education. Catholic college and university presidents have clearly felt the pressure, and this report analyzes the economic issues that they believe their institutions are facing and the steps they are taking to secure the financial stability of the institutions they lead.

College and university presidents maintain a number of overarching financial concerns:

how to cope with continued decreases in federal and state funding, how the current recession will affect enrollment rates and how to balance tuition

inflation and affordability. To help those involved in higher education better understand both the current financial situation and college and university presidents’ perspectives on these issues, the online news source Inside Higher Ed published Presidential Perspectives: The 2011 Inside Higher Ed Survey of College and University Presidents in the summer of

2011. The report highlighted many of the financial, technological, and political issues that presidents are confronting, and it provided a unique insight into the personal opinions and perspectives held by those who participated in the survey.

To better serve those in the field of Catholic higher education, ACCU has collaborated with Inside Higher Ed to present a detailed look at the responses of Catholic college and university presidents.

¹

• What are the top financial concerns facing your institution in the next two to three years?

This analysis addresses the following questions that were asked to 58 college and university presidents:

• What strategies would you employ to confront financial difficulties if you could? What strategies are you currently using?

• What strategies would you use to increase your institution’s revenue if you could?

Cheryl Rice is currently a volunteer at Tobar Mhuire Retreat Centre in Northern Ireland, where she coordinates retreat programming for young adults. She recently graduated from Boston College School of Theology and Ministry with her master’s degree in theological studies and was a graduate intern at ACCU in summer 2011.

1 All data in this analysis are courtesy of and copyrighted by Inside Higher Ed.

The respondents’ answers help clarify the current financial state of

Catholic institutions and suggest several concrete strategies toward

financial stability.

(2)

Page 2

• What strategies would you use to reduce your institution’s operating expenses if you could?

• What is the status of outsourcing at your institution?

• How well do various individuals and campus constituencies understand the financial challenges confronting your institution?

The respondents’ answers help clarify the current financial state of Catholic institutions and suggest several concrete strategies that presidents hope to enact to provide financial stability at their institutions. This report also presents the responses of presidents from other sectors of higher education, placing the situation of Catholic colleges and universities within a broader context.

Key Findings

• Presidents of both Catholic and all private institutions project many of the same financial concerns will affect their institution within the next two to three years, including rising tuition/affordability, which topped the charts for both sectors. Responses from public institution presidents highlight a few different concerns, most notably potential cuts in core state funding and operating support.

• Regarding strategies that college and university presidents would like to employ to respond to financial challenges, the data suggest a similarity among all three sectors: implementing strategies that address the institution’s financial difficulties while maintaining the academic integrity of the school. Unfortunately, a difference also emerges between the strategies that the president would most like to implement and those that are currently being implemented.

• Among all sectors of higher education, presidents are likely to use similar strategies to increase revenue. One slight difference is that Catholic and all private institution presidents are more likely to increase their school’s endowments, while public college presidents are more likely to expand their online programs.

• In selecting strategies that they are most likely to use to reduce operating expenses, the most common responses of Catholic college presidents correspond to strategies that seek to address current problems and make operations more effective. These presidents are least likely to employ approaches that involve reducing benefits for the intuition’s employees.

These same patterns are also seen among both all private and public institution presidents.

• The overwhelming majority of Catholic, private, and public college and university presidents have chosen to outsource bookstore and food service operations. The data suggest that presidents are more selective in outsourcing other aspects of university services, particularly those that directly affect current and future students and alumni.

• Finally, the data in this report suggest that, from the president’s perspective, those campus

officials who are more involved with the administration and overseeing the university as a

(3)

Page 3

whole are more likely to understand the current financial situation of the university. As people become less familiar with these functions, the less likely they are to fully grasp the institution’s financial situation.

Financial Challenges and Strategies

The survey asked presidents to consider the most important financial issues and concerns that they anticipate in the upcoming years. As Table 1 indicates, rising tuition/affordability, potential cuts in federal student aid programs, inadequate enrollment/tuition revenue, the rising discount rate on tuition, and potential cuts in state student aid programs were the top five financial concerns of Catholic college presidents. Potential cuts in federal research support, maintaining/improving the institution’s credit/bond rating, retirement liabilities, and state- imposed limits on the college’s ability to raise fees were the least popular responses, suggesting that they are less likely to cause concern among Catholic presidents.

Table 1. What are the top two financial concerns facing your institution in the next two to three years?

Percentage of respondents

Similar concerns can be seen between Catholic college and university presidents and the presidents of all private institutions. The rising cost of tuition and questions of affordability are ranked as their top two sources of unease. While these two sectors share many of the same financial worries, one difference that arises is that private college presidents tend to be more

All Institutions (n=597)

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

Catholic Colleges/Universities

(n=58) Potential cuts in core

state funding/

operating support (34.7)

Potential cuts in core state funding/

operating support (65.6)

Rising tuition/affordability

(36.6)

(41.4) Rising

tuition/affordability (31.5)

(26.6)

Inadequate enrollment/

tuition revenue (32.5)

Potential cuts in federal student aid programs

(37.9) Potential cuts in federal

student aid programs (27.1)

TIE: Potential cuts in federal student aid programs AND Budget

shortfalls (23.6)

Potential cuts in federal student aid programs

(28.4)

State-imposed limits on our ability to raise fees

(12.5)

The rising discount rate on our tuition

(28.1)

The rising discount rate on our tuition

(25.9) Budget shortfalls

(20.0)

Budget shortfalls (16.8)

Potential cuts in state student aid programs

(19.0)

(4)

Page 4

concerned about budget shortfalls, while Catholic institution presidents see potential cuts in state student aid programs as a larger fear.

The differences between Catholic college and university president responses and those from presidents of public intuitions are more pronounced. While all the presidents worry about rising tuition and affordability and potential cuts in federal student aid programs, public institution leaders are—as one might expect—more concerned with financial issues that are connected to state funding. In fact, the leading concern for public institutions is potential cuts in core state funding/operating support. This issue drew a response rate of 65.6 percent, making it decisively the top financial concern for presidents of public institutions. In comparison, potential cuts in core state funding/operating support is one of the least concerns for Catholic institutions, receiving a response rate of 1.7 percent.

Issues such as budget shortfalls and state-imposed limits on an institution’s ability to raise fees also rank prominently in the concerns of public institution presidents, but present minimal concern for Catholic colleges. The strong connection between financial concerns and state and federal funding among presidents of public intuitions should not be surprising: Public institutions generally depend on state and federal funding, while Catholic institutions rely more heavily on such factors as high enrollment and significant endowments for revenue.

In times of financial hardship, there are many different ways to respond. The strategy that a college or university president employs often depends upon the support of senior administrators and other key constituents. Table 2a (on the following page) summarizes the different strategies that presidents would prefer to employ, assuming they have the support needed to enact them. A surprising amount of similarity exists within the responses across the

different sectors. Removing poorly performing employees, including faculty, received the highest ranking by public, all private, and Catholic institution presidents, followed by cutting underperforming academic programs and increasing enrollment. There is also similarity among the strategies that the presidents are least likely to use. Moving to a more aggressive investment strategy for endowments and outsourcing instructional services ranked lowest among the strategies listed. These results suggest commonality among all college and university presidents—that is, a common desire to maintain the academic integrity of the school while addressing its financial difficulties. This is demonstrated by the presidents favoring removal of poorly performing programs and employees, and by their preference for keeping instructional services in-house.

In times of financial hardship, there are many different ways to respond.… A surprising amount of

similarity exists within the responses across the different

sectors.

(5)

Page 5 Table 2a. What strategies would you employ to confront financial difficulties if you could?

Mean of likelihood to use (1 = not likely; 7 = very likely) All

Institutions (n=597)

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58) Removing poorly performing employees,

including faculty 5.7 5.8 5.7 5.7

Cutting underperforming academic

programs 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.7

Increasing enrollment 5.2 5.1 5.3 5.6

Increasing teaching loads for full-time

faculty 4.6 4.9 4.5 4.6

Increasing collaboration with other

colleges and universities 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.7

Centralizing/consolidating resources and

services 4.1 4.3 3.9 3.8

Increasing use of part-time faculty 3.9 3.9 3.8 4.4

Outsourcing non-academic campus

services (dorms, bookstore, etc.) 3.3 3.5 3.1 2.5

Significantly increasing tuition (by more

than 5 percent) 3.0 3.6 2.5 2.3

Significantly cutting budget for athletic

programs 3.0 3.1 2.9 2.9

Narrowing or shifting the college’s mission 2.8 3.1 2.4 2.3 Moving to a more aggressive investment

strategy for endowment 2.4 2.6 2.2 2.0

Outsourcing of instructional services 1.9 2.1 1.7 1.8

Table 2b (on the following page) presents similar trends to those seen in the previous

table, focusing on those strategies that presidents cited as being very likely to employ if they

could. Removing poorly performing employees, cutting underperforming academic programs,

and increasing enrollment received the highest percentages of responses, while outsourcing

instructional services and moving to a more aggressive investment strategy for endowments

received the lowest percentages of responses among all sectors. Where some disparity can be

seen is in the 19 percent of public institution presidents who responded that they are very likely

to increase tuition significantly, while only 2.2 percent of Catholic college and university

presidents indicated a high likelihood of implementing this strategy. It is possible that Catholic

institution presidents are less likely to increase tuition as a means of countering financial

concerns because their students’ tuition is typically higher than students who attend public

institutions.

(6)

Page 6 Table 2b. What strategies would you employ to confront financial difficulties if you could?

Percentage of those very likely to use (score 6/7; 1 = not likely; 7 = very likely) All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58) Removing poorly performing employees,

programs 57.3 56.7 58.1 62.3

faculty 38.3 42.9 34.7 38.9

Increasing collaboration with other

colleges and universities 29.7 27.2 32.1 38.8

services 28.3 29.0 26.9 16.2

programs 15.8 15.6 16.0 14.6

Outsourcing non-academic campus

services (dorms, bookstore, etc.) 14.7 19.0 11.1 8.6

Narrowing or shifting the college’s mission 13.8 16.8 10.3 8.5 Significantly increasing tuition (by more

than 5 percent) 12.5 19.2 6.4 2.2

Moving to a more aggressive investment

Outsourcing instructional services 2.7 4.6 .9 4.3

While Tables 2a and 2b present data on different strategies that presidents would like to

employ if they received the necessary support, Table 2c (on the following page) presents the

percentages of presidents who are currently using those approaches. Increasing enrollment is the

strategy that is being employed by the most campus leaders, including Catholic college

presidents—63.8 percent of them responded that they are currently seeking to increase

enrollment. The second most popular response is outsourcing non-academic campus services,

selected by 46.6 percent of Catholic institution heads and 39.8 percent of all university

presidents. Among the least popular strategies currently being used are significantly cutting the

athletic program budget (indicated by 1.7 percent of Catholic and 3.3 percent of all university

presidents) and outsourcing instructional services (3.4 percent of Catholic and 2.8 percent of all

university presidents).

(7)

Page 7 Table 2c. What strategies are currently being used to address your institution’s financial situation?

Percentage of respondents using All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58)

Outsourcing non-academic campus services

(dorms, bookstore, etc.) 39.8 40.7 39.4 46.6

Increasing collaboration with other colleges

and universities 39.6 46.6 33.2 34.5

services 37.3 40.7 32.5 36.2

programs 30.7 39.7 20.2 20.7

Removing poorly performing employees,

Significantly increasing tuition (by more than

5 percent) 25.6 40.0 11.3 10.3

faculty 18.5 24.3 12.3 5.2

Moving to a more aggressive investment

Narrowing or shifting the college’s mission 6.6 7.5 5.1 3.4

programs 3.3 4.9 1.4 1.7

Outsourcing instructional services 2.8 4.3 1.4 3.4

As the reader can see, strong similarity exists among the responses of Catholic, all private, and public institution presidents. While the percentages vary slightly, the rankings are essentially the same, with a few notable exceptions. First, public college presidents are currently increasing the use of part-time faculty to a greater extent (48.5 percent) than they are outsourcing non-academic campus services (40.7 percent). They are also employing this strategy far more than their colleagues in other sectors, especially Catholic university presidents. Second, public college presidents stand out in their use of increasing

tuition by more than 5 percent. These deviations suggest considerable variation in the support that presidents receive to implement potential strategies.

This theory can be further supported by returning to Table 2a. As we saw, increasing enrollment, cutting underperforming academic programs, and removing poorly performing employees are the top three strategies that university presidents

say they would like to employ. From this list, only increasing enrollment is found among the top three strategies that are currently being employed. Notably, more than 62 percent of Catholic

More than 62 percent of Catholic university presidents considered cutting underperforming academic programs a very important financial

strategy, but only 20.7 percent

currently use this strategy.

(8)

Page 8

university presidents considered cutting underperforming academic programs a very important financial strategy, but only 20.7 percent currently use this strategy. Similarly, nearly 60 percent of Catholic college presidents responded that removing poorly performing employees would be a very important financial strategy, but only 25.9 percent currently do so. The same trend holds true for public and private university presidents’ responses, thus underscoring the idea that the number of viable strategies for confronting financial challenges may be limited, perhaps by a lack of support from senior administration and other important campus figures.

Increasing Revenue

Next, the survey asked presidents to rate the importance of various strategies to their institution’s ability to increase revenue within three years. Table 3 shows that Catholic college and university presidents identified increasing net tuition revenue, securing greater corporate support, recruiting more full-pay students, and significantly increasing the size of the endowment as the top four strategies for increasing revenue. Creating programs to serve foreign markets, becoming more aggressive about endowment investments, and increasing revenues from bookstore operations were the least popular strategies selected by these presidents.

Table 3. How important will the strategies listed below be to your institution’s ability to increase revenue in the next two to three years?

Mean of importance (1 = not important; 7 = very important) All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58)

Increasing net tuition revenue 5.5 5.1 5.9 6.3

Securing more corporate support (grants,

gifts, contracts, etc.) 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.6

Recruiting more full-pay students 4.9 4.6 5.1 5.5

Significantly increasing the size of the

endowment 4.9 4.4 5.2 5.5

Developing/expanding online program 5.1 5.4 4.8 5.2

Recruiting more out-of-state students (U.S.

residents) 4.2 4.1 4.3 5.1

Using campus facilities and other resources

on a year-round basis 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.8

Increasing revenue from other auxiliary

enterprises 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.7

Recruiting more international students 4.0 4.1 3.8 4.1

Reducing the discount rate 3.9 2.9 4.6 4.9

Moving more core campus operation and

support services to the web 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.7

Increasing revenue from bookstore

operations 3.3 3.5 3.0 3.3

Becoming more aggressive about

endowment investments 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.1

Creating programs to serve foreign markets 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0

(9)

Page 9

The preferences indicated by Catholic college and university presidents reflect those of all private institution presidents. For their part, public college presidents identified developing/expanding online programs, increasing net tuition revenue, securing more corporate support, and recruiting more full-pay students as the most important strategies for growing revenue. In comparison, developing/expanding online programs was ranked fifth by Catholic university presidents.

Another difference between these two sectors is the weight given to recruiting more out- of-state students. One might be inclined to think that this strategy would be more important for public institutions, which typically assess higher tuition rates to out-of-state students, compared to Catholic colleges, which generally charge equal

tuition rates to both in-state and out-of-state students.

However, although this response falls neither in the top nor the bottom for either Catholic college presidents or public college presidents, the public institution leaders actually ranked this option lower (4.1 mean compared with 5.1 mean by Catholic college presidents). One possible explanation is that, by actively recruiting out- of-state students, Catholic college and university

presidents are trying to expand their pool of applications, thus boosting their name recognition, either regionally or nationally.

Catholic college and university presidents may be trying to expand

their pool of applications, thus boosting their name recognition,

either regionally or nationally.

(10)

Page 10

Reducing Expenses

Besides increasing revenue, presidents must also seek ways to reduce the current operating expenses of their institutions. Table 4 lists various strategies that campus leaders were asked to rank, and shows that using metrics and technology to identify problems and devise potential improvements ranked highly among Catholic college and university presidents, as did making more efficient use of facilities. Much less popular were reducing retirement benefits for employees, sharing more retirement costs with employees, and reducing health insurance benefits, suggesting that these are three areas that presidents are least likely to pursue in their attempts to lower institutional costs. Note that the strategies receiving the highest mean scores all seek to address current conditions and make operations more efficient, while the strategies with the lowest mean scores involve reducing benefits for the intuition’s employees. From this we can surmise that, despite current financial challenges, Catholic institution presidents are less likely to make cuts that directly affect college employees.

Table 4. How important are the following strategies for reducing operating expenses in the next two to three years?

Mean of importance (1 = not important; 7 = very important) All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58) Using metrics to analyze programs and

strategies to identify problems and potential improvements

5.3 5.3 5.3 5.5

Making more efficient use of facilities 5.2 5.3 5.0 5.4

Using technology tools to evaluate programs and to identify problems and potential improvements

4.9 5.0 4.8 5.1

Eliminating low-enrollment academic

programs 5.1 5.2 4.9 4.9

Using technology to reduce instructional

costs 4.7 5.0 4.4 4.7

Centralizing/consolidating administrative

functions 4.6 4.8 4.3 4.3

Centralizing/consolidating IT resources and

services 4.4 4.7 4.0 3.9

Increasing teaching loads for full-time faculty 4.1 4.3 3.9 3.8 Sharing more health insurance costs with

employees 4.0 3.9 4.2 3.8

Developing/expanding early retirement

programs 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.5

Reducing health insurance benefits 3.3 3.2 3.3 2.8

Sharing more retirement costs with

employees 3.1 3.3 2.9 2.5

Reducing retirement benefits for employees 2.7 2.8 2.6 2.3

(11)

Page 11

Similar trends arise from the responses of all private and public college and university presidents. Like Catholic college presidents, their peers at private and public institutions favor using metrics to analyze programs and strategies to identify problems and potential improvements, and making more efficient use of facilities. While all three sectors shared these top two strategies, however, private and public college presidents were more likely to eliminate low-enrollment academic programs than to use technology to evaluate programs and identify potential improvements. Regarding the least popular strategies, we again find consistency among private and public college and university presidents: Reducing retirement benefits and sharing more retirement costs with employees were the two least popular responses. Cutting health insurance benefits and developing/expanding early retirement programs tied for third least popular.

Outsourcing

Outsourcing has become a popular option for organizations that are seeking to find less expensive options for production and services. As we saw in Tables 2a through 2c, outsourcing is one strategy that some institutions are employing to reduce costs, though its current use appears to be largely confined to non-academic services. Table 5 (on the following page) presents a more in-depth look at the practice of outsourcing on college and university campuses.

This table reveals that Catholic college and university presidents—like their peers—have

chosen to outsource certain university services, and not others. Of the 12 areas investigated in the

survey, only two functions are being outsourced by a majority of Catholic college and university

campuses. In both cases, Catholic institutions reported a higher prevalence of outsourcing than

their public and private peers. Nearly 85 percent of Catholic college presidents said they have

chosen to hire external food service providers, while 67.2 percent have chosen to subcontract

bookstore management. These findings are not surprising, given that companies such as Barnes

and Noble and Aramark have become mainstays on college campuses.

(12)

Page 12 Table 5. What is the status of outsourcing at your institution?

Percentage of respondents All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58) Dormitory management

Not applicable Currently doing this Beginning in fall 2011 Currently under review

Reviewed and decided against Too political to consider

36.0 3.6 0.2 5.8 43.6 10.9

49.8 5.6 0.3 4.9 32.8

6.6

21.2 1.0

- 6.5 55.5 15.8

22.4 - - 1.7 53.5 22.4 Bookstore management

6.4 55.9

1.3 8.3 26.9

1.2

5.9 56.4

1.6 4.3 29.8

2.0

7.2 55.1

1.0 12.0 24.3 0.3

3.5 67.2

1.7 8.6 19.0

- Food service management/operation

7.1 73.6

0.5 3.5 13.4

2.0

7.9 69.2

0.3 4.9 14.4

3.3

5.8 78.8

0.7 2.1 12.3

0.3

5.2 84.5

- 1.7 8.6 - Physical plant/custodial services

6.3 23.1

0.8 11.1 47.5 11.2

5.3 19.0

1.0 11.2 47.9 15.7

7.5 27.1

0.7 10.6 47.3 6.9

8.6 25.9

- 13.8 48.5 3.5 Technology/IT user support services

8.9 9.6 0.7 16.0 54.5 10.4

7.9 9.8 0.3 16.4 54.4 11.2

9.9 9.6 1.0 15.1 54.5 9.9

8.6 13.8

- 10.3 55.2 12.1 Technology/core IT management services

9.2 8.6 - 14.5 56.4 11.2

8.2 8.5 - 14.1 57.1 12.1

10.3 8.9

- 14.7 55.5 10.6

8.6 15.5

- 13.8 50.0 12.1

Table continues on next page

(13)

Page 13 Table 5. What is the status of outsourcing at your institution? continued

All Institutions

(n=597)

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58) Call center services for recruitment/adms.

18.4 6.9 0.7 13.4 47.1 13.6

20.1 5.6 0.3 15.5 45.7 12.8

16.8 7.2 1.0 11.3 49.0 14.7

15.5 3.5 1.7 12.1 53.5 13.8 Call center service for financial aid counseling

17.9 4.0 1.0 14.7 49.8 12.7

17.8 4.9 1.6 18.4 46.1 11.2

18.2 2.4 0.3 10.6 53.8 14.7

15.5 1.7

- 8.6 55.2 19.0 Call center services for alumni/development

25.3 7.9 0.7 10.7 44.3 11.1

30.9 6.6 1.0 12.5 41.5 7.6

19.9 8.9 0.3 8.2 47.6 15.1

17.2 8.6

- 8.6 48.3 17.2 Instructional support services

(counseling/academic advising etc) Not applicable

Currently doing this Beginning in fall 2011 Currently under review

16.0 5.1 0.7 6.6 50.0 21.6

14.1 4.3 0.3 8.9 49.2 23.3

18.2 6.2 0.3 4.5 50.3 20.6

15.5 10.3 1.7 1.7 50.0 20.7 Development of instructional resources for

our online courses and programs Not applicable

Currently doing this Beginning in fall 2011 Currently under review

16.2 15.9 1.7 22.5 33.9 9.9

12.2 17.8 1.6 21.1 36.2 11.2

20.6 14.0 1.7 23.6 31.2 8.9

12.1 15.5 5.2 27.6 29.3 10.3 Delivery of instruction in our online courses

and programs Not applicable Currently doing this Beginning in fall 2011 Currently under review

16.2 15.7 2.3 20.0 34.7 11.1

11.2 18.1 1.3 17.8 37.5 14.1

20.9 13.4 3.4 22.6 31.5 8.2

13.8 13.8 8.6 27.6 29.3 6.9

(14)

Page 14

Besides noting the areas that Catholic university presidents have chosen to subcontract, Table 5 also highlights the areas that they have decided against outsourcing. For example, outsourcing call center services for financial aid counseling (55.2), IT user support services (55.2), call center services for recruitment/admissions (53.5), and dormitory management (53.5) have all been reviewed and decided against by more than half of Catholic institutions. It is interesting to note that the employees who perform the functions that these presidents most often opt to keep in-house all have direct interaction with current, future, or past students. This suggests that presidents wish to restrict this contact to

official university employees.

While the percentages vary slightly, the data suggest a general consensus on the areas that college and university presidents choose to outsource. Much like Catholic institutions, a high percentage of public and private institutions outsource bookstore and food service management. More than 55 percent of private and public institutions outsource bookstore management; over 69 percent of public colleges and nearly 79 percent of all private colleges outsource food

service operations. While these proportions are slightly smaller than those for Catholic institutions, they still represent the majority of presidential responses.

Common Knowledge

The survey also asked presidents how well various individuals and campus constituencies understood the financial challenges of the institution. The responses may give some indication of which individuals could be targeted as campuses seek to expand understanding of financial conditions so that a college or university can achieve greater stability and financial security.

Employees who perform the functions that Catholic college presidents most often opt to keep in-house all have direct interaction

with current, future, or past

students.

(15)

Page 15

Not surprisingly, as Table 6 shows, Catholic university presidents and CEOs ranked themselves as having the clearest understanding of financial challenges, with a mean score of 6.4 (of 7).

Next, presidents gave high ratings to their regents and trustees, followed by provosts and chief academic officers. Department chairs, faculty leaders, and faculty were considered moderately aware of the financial challenges of their institutions, with means of 4.4, 4.0, and 3.4, respectively. Lastly, with means of 3.0 or lower, local/state elected officials, alumni, students, and community members/civic leaders were considered to have the least developed understanding of institution finances. The data suggest that in presidents’ minds, as people become further removed from the administrative aspects of an institution, the less likely they are to understand the financial issues and challenges that the institution is facing.

Table 6. How well do various individuals and campus constituencies understand the financial challenges confronting your institutions?

Mean of level of understanding (scale 1 = do not understand; 7 = understand very well) All

All Public (n=305)

All Private (n=292)

(n=58)

Presidents/CEO 6.4 6.5 6.3 6.4

Provost/chief academic officers 5.7 5.8 5.7 5.8

Regents/board of regents/trustees 5.6 5.4 5.8 6.0

Department chairs and deans 4.5 4.8 4.3 4.4

Elected faculty leaders 4.1 4.3 3.9 4.0

Faculty 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.4

Local/state elected officials 3.5 4.1 2.8 3.0

Community members/civic leaders 3.1 3.5 2.6 2.5

Alumni 3.0 3.1 2.9 3.0

Students 3.0 3.3 2.7 2.9

This trend also can be observed in the responses of public and all private institution

presidents. One notable difference is that leaders of public institutions gave higher marks to their

local and state elected officials, in terms of understanding financial issues in their institutions

(4.1), than did the presidents of all private institutions (2.8) and Catholic institutions (3.0). One

could suggest that because public colleges depend on state funding, it is more likely that elected

officials would be knowledgeable of the financial struggles of these institutions within their

jurisdiction.

(16)

Page 16

Conclusion

The results of this survey present several noteworthy trends and insights with regard to the current financial situation of Catholic colleges and universities. Although an analysis of contemporary financial challenges to Catholic colleges and universities may be disheartening, this review can serve as a resource to those who wish to better understand the financial situation of Catholic colleges and universities today. Two encouraging points in particular can be gleaned from this analysis. Without minimizing the current financial troubles of Catholic colleges and universities, these bright spots may provide a bit of hope to Catholic intuition leaders as they move forward in responding to challenges.

First, one simple yet important observation that the analysis suggests is that there are many strategies that can be employed by presidents and senior administrations—provided they can muster the necessary support—to begin to counteract negative economic forces. No single blueprint will lead colleges out of their financial

problems, but rather a myriad of strategies can be tested and adapted to best fit the institution. It becomes both the task and the goal of campus leaders to find the strategies that will be most effective on their campus.

This analysis, which presents the responses of 58 Catholic college and university presidents, can be a helpful starting point in identifying possible strategies for creating financial stability.

Second, a surprising amount of similarity arose among the responses of Catholic, all private, and public college and university presidents. While it is important not to overlook the differences, this analysis suggests that all sectors of higher education are facing similar financial trials and responding to them with some of the same strategies. Catholic college presidents may find it helpful to turn to their peers at other private or even public institutions for different ideas and strategies. Ultimately, the circulation of innovative ideas and increased networking among presidents and senior-level administrators may prove especially beneficial as colleges continue to confront financial issues and challenges.