IV. RESOURCES
Criterion IV. The school shall have resources adequate to fulfill its stated mission and goals, its instructional, research and service objectives.
Documentation
1. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all available funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the last five years, whichever is longer.
2. A concise statement or chart concerning faculty resources, showing number and percent time of faculty by program area and computing a student-faculty ratio for each and for the school as a whole. (FTE faculty and FTE student numbers should be used and these should be consistent with FTE faculty and student numbers presented in sections VIII and IX.)
3. A concise statement or chart concerning the availability of other personnel (administration and staff).
4. A concise statement or chart concerning amount of space available to the school by purpose (offices, classrooms, common space for student use, etc.), by program and location.
5. A concise statement or floor plan concerning laboratory space, including kind, quantity and special features or special equipment.
6. A concise statement concerning the amount, location and types of computer facilities and resources for students, faculty, administration and staff.
7. A concise statement of library/information resources available for school use.
8. A concise statement identifying field experience sites used during the last three years.
9. A concise statement describing other community resources available for instruction, research and service, indicating those where formal agreements exist.
10. Identification of outcome measures by which the school may judge the adequacy of its resources, along with data regarding the school’s performance against those measures over the last three years. As a minimum, the school must provide data on student-to-faculty ratio by program, institutional expenditures per full-time-equivalent student, and research dollars per full-time equivalent faculty.
11. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met.
IV.1. A clearly formulated school budget statement, showing sources of all available funds and expenditures by major categories, since the last accreditation visit or for the last five years, whichever is longer.
Budget statement
The School’s revenues have grown dramatically over the past decade and are expected to break $100 million in the current fiscal year (Figure IV.1.a). This is the 3rd largest budget of all schools of public health in the country. Table IV.1.a provides a detailed history of the School’s sources and uses of funds since the last accreditation report, from 1994-1995 to 2001-2002. The total revenue budget has grown 285% (compounded rate of 15% per year) since 1994-1995. In fiscal year 1994-1995, the School’s revenues were less than $35 million. Four years later, the budget reached $57 million and in the most recently completed fiscal year, 2001-2002, the total budget was just under $100 million. During the last eight years, the School has consistently maintained a balanced budget while sustaining significant growth.
Financial trends
Sources of funds
Table IV.1.a provides information on the sources of funds for the School since the last accreditation in 1994. One significant change in that time is the School’s success in securing external sources of funds (Figure IV.1.b). In the current year, 2001-2002, sponsored projects revenue, which is comprised of government grants, non-government grants and indirect cost recovery, was approximately $73 million (74% of the School’s revenues, Figure IV.1.c). This is compared to $24 million, (68% of the School’s revenues) in 1994-1995 (Table IV.1.a). The School is the 3rd largest recipient of sponsored project support for all schools of public health, and the 2nd largest recipient of sponsored project support for all schools at Columbia University.
Government grants grew 243% from $14.7 million in 1994-1995 to over $35.7 million in 2001-2002 (13% compounded annual growth) while non-government grants have grown 420% from $5.4 million in 1994-1995 to $22.6 million in 2001-2002 (23% compounded annual growth). Growth of tuition and fees increased 170% from $7.2 million to $12.1 million (7% compounded annual growth). Tuition and fees account for 12.5% of the School’s budget today compared to 20.7% in 1994-1995. Indirect cost recovery grew 405% from $3.5 million to $14.3 million (22% compounded annual growth). As shown in Figure IV.1.d, when we control for guideline budget growth, indirect cost recovery surpassed tuition and fees in 1998-1999 as our major source of unrestricted funds.
Uses of funds
Table IV.1.a also presents the uses of funds from 1994-1995 to 2001-2002. Since 1994-1995, total expenditures increased at a compounded annual rate of 14.6%. The School’s uses of funds are broadly distributed among 11 different budget categories (Figure IV.1.e).
The largest uses of fund is direct spending on sponsored projects. Spending on government sponsored projects grew 243% (13% compounded annually) since 1994-1995, and spending on non-government sponsored projects grew 420% (23% compounded annually). Spending on departmental academic programs increased 265%, from $3.6 million in 1994-1995 to $9.4 million in 2001-2002 (14% compounded annual growth rate) and student financial aid increased 400%, from $0.4 million to $1.7 million (23% compounded annual growth rate). Spending on recruitment and program development, which goes to support departmental academic programs, increased 389% (18% compounded annually). During the same eight-year period, administrative costs increased 196%, from $2.1 million to $4.1 million (9% compounded annual growth).
Indirect cost recovery
As measured in total dollars, indirect cost recovery (ICR) has grown rapidly since our last accreditation. In 1994-1995, indirect cost recovery was $3.5 million and in the current year it is $14.3 million, an annual growth rate of 22%. Currently the School’s effective ICR rate (ICR as a percentage of total direct grants and contracts) is 24.5%.
We recognize that the School’s effective ICR rate on grants and contracts remains low compared to other schools in the University and is a little lower than some of our peer institutions of public health. The low effective ICR rate at the School can be attributed to two issues. First, the School receives a large proportion of its funds from private foundations, which tend to provide little or no overhead. The second contributing factor is that the School receives many grants from federal and state agencies for service and training activities, which also carry a relatively low overhead.
Columbia University recently renegotiated its ICR rate with the federal government. The new rate is 63.5% of modified total direct costs on government research grants. In the past eight years, the negotiated rate was as high as 70.5%. Even with this decrease in the negotiated rate, the School has been able to increase the total dollars generated through indirect cost recovery and slightly increase its effective yield rate.
Common costs
The School is assessed charges by the University and Health Sciences for space, library, administration, financial, and student service costs. The School’s funds for these charges come from its unrestricted budget, which is comprised of tuition and fees, indirect cost recovery, endowment income, state aid, and miscellaneous income including gifts. A continuing financial burden for the School is the large proportion of the unrestricted budget that is required to cover the common cost charges. As shown in Table IV.1.b, University common costs in 2001-2002 consume $10.3 million, or 35%, of these unrestricted funds. Of that, $5.3 million goes to the Health Sciences campus central administration and $5 million to the University central administration. In comparison, the School’s central administrative costs are estimated to be $4.1 million in 2001-2002.
2001-2002 budget
For fiscal year 2001-2002, the School projects a balanced budget, with projected total revenues of approximately $98 million. The total expense budget is increasing due to the program growth of our departments and centers, as well as the cost of renovating the School’s new home at 722 West 168th Street with operating funds. In anticipation of renovation costs for the building at 722 West 168th Street, monies from prior years’ surpluses were set aside to offset these expenses.
The School’s expenditures by budget category are summarized in Table IV.1.c. Salaries and fringe benefits account for 50% of expenditures. Another 43% of expenditures are attributable to other direct expenses, a broad category that includes laboratory, medical, computer and other supplies, travel, communications, and subcontracts on research and service grants. Financial aid comprises 5% of expenditures and equipment comprises 2%.
The total unrestricted expense budget is expected to be $30 million, while our total unrestricted income is projected to be $30.1 million. We expect to generate approximately $12.1 million in tuition and fees, $14.3 million in indirect cost recovery, $2 million in endowment income, $1.6 million in miscellaneous revenue, and $110,000 in state aid.
The School generates its unrestricted revenue base from three major sources of income: tuition and fees, endowment interest, and indirect cost recovery on its sponsored government and non-government grants and contracts. These sources of income are subject to a number of external forces over which the School has limited direct control. Therefore, the management for the sources of funds budget is a combination of advanced strategic planning; financial forecasting based on academic priorities, historical trends, and incrementalism; program priorities of the School and its departments and centers, as well as priorities of government agencies and private foundations; availability of financial aid for students; aggressive and imaginative marketing and public relations; careful monitoring of the admissions and enrollment process; and the success of our development efforts.
Capital plan
During fiscal year 2001-2002, the School made major strides towards its longstanding goal of increasing and consolidating its physical plant. Negotiations continued between the Office of the Vice President for Health Sciences, the Dean’s Office of the Mailman School of Public Health, the New York State Office of Mental Health, and the New York State Psychiatric Institute to transfer the old Psychiatric Institute building located at 722 West 168th Street to the Mailman School of Public Health. The entire project is expected to cost $60 million. Of that amount, $23 million is in hand, leaving $37 million to be raised.
Development
The School’s development efforts have paid major dividends since the last accreditation (Table IV.1.d). A naming gift in 1998 by the Mailman Family Foundation elevated the School to the top tier of major public health schools. In addition to the total Mailman endowment, the School has been the recipient of a number of other significant gifts since 1994-1995. Two years ago, Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn made a $4 million gift to be used as permanent endowment to Population and Family Health, representing the latest and largest gift given by the Heilbrunns to support programs at the School. In 1995, the Heilbrunns gave $600,000 towards the construction of a new family planning clinic; in 1998, they gave an additional $1 million to establish the Harriett and Robert Heilbrunn Professor of Population and Family Health.
Other major development efforts at the School include an unrestricted gift in the amount of $4.6 million by Dr. Helen Edey for Population and Family Health; an endowment of $2 million from the estate of Dr. Rita Wyman to establish a financial aid scholarship fund; a $4 million endowment from The Ford Foundation to support the activities of the National Center for Children in Poverty; and $2 million in gifts to create the Rosenfield Scholars Program. In addition, in the past year, alumni and friends have contributed $750,000 in endowment funds to support student financial aid.
Support for the School’s annual campaign for student financial aid and general operations has grown by more than 250% since the last accreditation. In the year ending June 30, 2002, alumni, faculty, and friends contributed more than $350,000 to the School’s annual fund.
In addition to the Harriet and Robert Heilbrunn chair noted above, the School has received two additional endowed chairs since the last accreditation. One is for an endowed professorship in Epidemiology given to the School by Professor Emerita Anna Gelman, a member of our faculty for over fifty years. The other is for a Professorship in Global Health. This professorship resulted from a $1 million challenge grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, which was matched by an individual donor, creating a chair funded at $2 million. The School now has four endowed chairs, and a fifth endowed chair committed through an irrevocable trust.
Figure IV.1.a
Total Budget 1994-1995 to 2001-2002
($ in 000s)
Table IV.1.a
Sources and Uses of Fund from 1994-1995 to 2001-2002
($ in 000s)1994-95 / 1995-96 / 1996-97 / 1997-98 / 1998-99 / 1999-00 / 2000-01 / 2001-02
Sources1
Tuition and Fees2 / 7,164 / 7,462 / 8,011 / 8,549 / 8,880 / 9,844 / 11,583 / 12,163
Government Grants / 14,695 / 15,712 / 18,573 / 20,682 / 22,562 / 27,908 / 33,365 / 35,744
Non-Government Grants / 5,355 / 4,765 / 4,868 / 4,985 / 8,137 / 15,616 / 22,027 / 22,542
Indirect Cost Recovery / 3,520 / 4,126 / 4,893 / 6,747 / 8,697 / 10,554 / 12,402 / 14,284
Other Sources3 / 1,763 / 2,031 / 2,538 / 2,493 / 1,858 / 768 / 1,302 / 3,028
Hospital Service Activity / - / - / 5,000 / 5,500 / 5,750 / 6,000 / 7,000 / 7,000
Gifts / 1,712 / 436 / 357 / 373 / 574 / 469 / 818 / 616
Endowment (Expended Income) / 382 / 423 / 438 / 446 / 500 / 1,336 / 1,486 / 2,234
Total Sources / 34,591 / 34,955 / 44,678 / 49,775 / 56,958 / 72,495 / 89,983 / 97,611
Uses
Administration / 2,093 / 2,094 / 2,304 / 2,373 / 2,948 / 2,999 / 3,890 / 4,111
Academic Programs / 3,555 / 3,671 / 4,536 / 4,979 / 6,401 / 7,545 / 8,636 / 9,402
Financial Aid / 409 / 413 / 434 / 479 / 742 / 905 / 1,727 / 1,637
Research Government / 14,695 / 15,712 / 18,573 / 20,682 / 23,374 / 27,908 / 33,365 / 35,744
Research Non-Government / 5,355 / 4,765 / 4,868 / 4,985 / 8,137 / 15,616 / 22,027 / 22,542
Hospital Service Activity / - / - / 5,000 / 5,500 / 5,750 / 6,000 / 7,000 / 7,000
Recruitment/Program Development / 493 / 1,051 / 742 / 1,100 / 477 / 991 / 1,582 / 1,920
Renovations4 / - / - / - / - / - / 425 / 2,784 / 1,346
Debt Service4 / - / - / - / - / - / 740 / 590 / 616
University Common Costs5 / 5,191 / 5,288 / 5,536 / 5,885 / 6,170 / 6,443 / 7,334 / 10,267
Other Uses6 / 2,800 / 1,961 / 2,686 / 3,791 / 2,959 / 1,289 / 1,048 / 2,963
Total Uses / 34,591 / 34,955 / 44,679 / 49,774 / 56,958 / 70,861 / 89,983 / 97,548
Surplus (Deficit)7 / - / - / (1) / 1 / - / 1,634 / - / 63
Notes
1 Data from 1994-1995 to 2000-2001 are taken from the School’s annual financial plans. Data from 2001-2002 are estimates as of June 2002.
2 Student financial aid accounting procedure changed in 2000-2001. Rather than reducing the tuition for waived tuition as in the past, it was
expensed as financial aid.
3 Other sources include carryover from previous year, hospital reimbursement, clinical trials and cost sharing.
4 Prior to 1999-2000, debt service and renovations were lumped into other uses.
5 University common costs increased by $520k in 2001-2002 to account for common cost adjustment from 2000-2001. University common costs
lump Health Science administrative costs with University common costs.
6 Other uses include cost sharing activities, support of academic journal editing, facilities expenses, recruitment startups, designated funds for
hospital services and external contracts. Renovations are included through 1998-1999.
7 $300k of 1999-2000 surplus carried over to 2000-2001 budget for renovations. Balance of $1.3 million held in reserve account.
Figure IV.1.b