UCLA Chancellor discusses budget crisis, plans, priorities

[menloparkmom]

^^Oooooh, with Calif's budget crisis, which is nowhere close to being solved, I would highly doubt that!

[dstark]

How come Menloparkmom? The losses to Stanford's, Harvard's, Princeton's, and Yale's endowments exceed the total California budget deficit.

And this doesn't include future private equity commitments, and future real estate commitments. These are also larger than California's budget deficit.

http://gonzaloraffoinfonews.blogspot...commended.html


"In the near term, endowment chiefs may be wrestling with how to handle commitments to private-equity and real-estate funds. At Harvard, investment commitments totaled $11 billion on June 30, 2008; at Yale, $8.7 billion, and Princeton, $6.1 billion. These commitments are especially large relative to shrunken endowments. Harvard's endowment could end this month in the $25 billion range; Yale's is about $17 billion, and Princeton's, $11 billion, after investment declines, yearly contributions to university budgets and new gifts from alumni and others.

One closely watched endowment-liquidity barometer is the level of existing limited-partnership investments -- including hedge funds, private equity and real estate -- plus investment commitments as a percentage of the total endowment. Yale and Princeton are thought to have some of the highest -- that is, worst -- ratios. The risk is that these endowments could become even more illiquid in the coming year."

[menloparkmom]

Because I highly doubt the HSYP's are going to be firing profs wholesale. They may not be hiring or replacing them for a while but they still have hefty endowments, even if they have to sell some of their investments. They have not run out of $$ to run day to day operations as Calif has.
The UC's are not going to be hiring profs at any time soon, which is what I assumed mini was referring to.

[TheDad]

Actually, the UC's are hiring profs, even now. UCLA has them in the budget for next year. The numbers are down but will be somewhere in the 25-40 range.

Next?!

[mini]

"They have not run out of $$ to run day to day operations as Calif has."

Actually, they have, and are accruing debt against their day-to-day operations.

[toodleooo]

didn't note any plans to have "undocumented" immigrants pay out-of-state tuition, much less revoke their admission status. until that happens, the uc system can go scratch itself. no wonder the system is broke.

[dstark]

How many undocumented immigrants go to the UCs?

[epiphany]

blue, I don't know why you conclude that most or all Pell grantees *need* an admissions tip, let alone receive it. As to the "tip," that's a formula, and you know it. You don't get a bump if you are needy per se. You get a bump if you have achieved a whole hell of a lot and are needy to boot. that's the "challenge" quotient in the point system. I doubt that I am the only parent on the board with students who more than deserved their admissions but were Pell grantees. Further, not all ELC kids are from upper-income. Matter of fact, if you go to a high-performing school in a "rich" district, good luck making that 4% cutoff: you'll have lots of competition within that school, and are more likely not to make the cut -- vs. a determined poor kid in an ill-performing school who will stand out from the crowd and be the ELC.

To trash the poor but high-achieving admits to UC is just not where the blame lies. Take a look at what CA cannot let go of: its immense social services, quite a bit of which go to illegal immigrants, but to a number of other programs as well. (I agree with toodleoo, btw.)

Education: I don't know if any other State approaches the expenditures per capita that CA has, and whether that funding in other states includes the kinds of non-educational services within the schools that characterize the often-dysfunctional CA system. It's wild: you get hired as a teacher, and in some districts you spend your day mostly performing social work, explicitly. It's considered a "program" that is funded, and you're supposed to go with the flow, even though you did not earn a "social worker credential" but a teaching credential.

CA is irresponsibly attached to its social services without the means to pay for the large population that receives them. It has also become a State too large to fund or govern at the current rate of outgo vs. input. I realize that the thread is about UC and UCLA in particular, but clearly these budgets and the State's funds are related, and it's being specifically brought up.

[just saw dstark's question]: a fair amount. I don't have stats.

[epiphany]

Just to clarify further, the tip given to the needy in the UC admissions system is a ratio: it's the proportion of academic excellence + outside achievement "divided by" the level of challenge experienced by that student. Just note that finances, also, are not the only challenge. You could have a different significant challenge, or finances + an additional challenge. Nor is it some kind of arbitrary quota system. It works, just like most admissions work, as a comparative dynamic. As a live recent example I've seen in many schools over the last 2 years, if there are six comparably achieving seniors (including grades, scores), and 4 of them are upper-middle class with no particular challenges in their lives, while 2 of them have experienced significant obstacles, there will be a higher probability of those 2 being admitted, esp. if it's to Berkeley or UCLA. (It will make less of a difference to some campuses, such as SC.) It doesn't mean they will definitely be admitted, just that the probability is higher.

This is actually not radically different from how the Ivies have recently operated as well. I also find much of this argumentation baseless, because in the vast majority of cases you will find that not only were those 2 above examples "comparably achieving," they were in fact considerably higher-achieving. Typically, they will have equal scores/grades, but much more achievement in e.c.'s, community service, and leadership.

Also, challenge is not the only admissions factor. Plenty of students are admitted without challenge factors. Just understand that the 70% who are not Pell grantees may have other-than-economic challenges in their lives, or they may have no/few challenges.

[epiphany]

One more thing re CA expenditures:
Enormous sums are spent on the prison system. Part of this is a result of Three Strikes, which include drug infractions, and CA has been awash with illegal drug trafficking and use for decades. Addtionally, it would save a little ($182 million) by deporting the illegal immigrants now incarcerated.

[toodleooo]

how many? what difference does it make? each one admitted, no matter how good the gpa/sat scores, etc, takes a seat that would otherwise be filled by a kid who is either a us citizen, or has been authorized by our government, to be here. thanks to the econ-meltdown, we'll be mowing our own lawns for awhile now (thank-you very much mexico).

California Supreme Court to Take On Discounted Tuition for Illegal Immigrants - On Education (usnews.com)

[LongPrime]

Why is everyone concerned? We/They made a lot of money in W's early administration. The money managers made the wrong bets, just like they made the correct bets.

[bluebayou]

I don't know why you conclude that most or all Pell grantees *need* an admissions tip.

Never said that they "need" anything. The point is that they automatically receive admission points for being low income. It's policy. Being low income earns admissions points regardless of what else is offered in the application. UCSD and UCDavis even so state on their websites. The UCs even recognize that their four-year grad rate is low bcos of their poor financial aid to matriculating low income students. (Thus, the Blue and Gold scholarship plan.)

And no, not bashing low income kids. But again, admitting more rich from OOS is gonna displace those from instate. And I'll bet that those rich OOS'ers end up displacing the lower part of the instate acceptees, and I'll further bet that many of these are low income kids. If my premise is correct, why not just displace those same kids with full pay instaters instead?

This is actually not radically different from how the Ivies have recently operated as well.

Perhaps, but totally irrelevant. The UCs are public institutions, requesting state tax payor dollars.

Take a look at what CA cannot let go of: its immense social services...

If I was budget czar, there is a heck of lot of stuff that I would cut from the state budget before education, but since this thread started about UCLA.....OTOH, there was/is absolutely zero justification for UC Merced, IMO.

[White_Rabbit]

"Actually, the UC's are hiring profs, even now. UCLA has them in the budget for next year. The numbers are down but will be somewhere in the 25-40 range."

This is the same as the Ivies and Stanford. They are hiring fewer Professors and just going after the big names they really want.

[dstark]

University of California - UC Newsroom | New Tuition Exemption Would Make UC More Affordable For Some Students

This is from 2002 so if anybody has updated numbers,I would love to see them.

Ok. Found this.

http://news.newamericamedia.org/news...30c1e7294b8319

"but being low income earns admissions points regardless of what else is offered in the application. UCSD and UCDavis even so state on their websites"

I view that as a good thing.