Greenberg
addresses issues on state agency funding cut
News of an impending 15 percent cut in state funding has raised questions
among those who are concerned about MUSC's future.
Compiled here is a short list of questions with answers from MUSC President
Ray Greenberg, M.D., Ph.D. More information will be forthcoming as the
issue develops.
What is the current financial situation of
the university?
We have made great progress in addressing our budget situation. We
are in a position to end this year with a balanced budget. That represents
a $40 million dollar turnaround from last year and a more than $70 million
improvement from more than two years ago. This progress is a great tribute
to the hard work of many people across the university and the Hospital
Authority. It is too early to declare victory, however. We are operating
on the thinnest of margins at the moment and any unexpected losses of revenue
or increases in spending could put us back into a deficit situation. For
that reason, last week we introduced a freeze on new hires, except for
absolutely essential positions. Also, we have asked departments to defer
equipment purchases and restrict travel on state or UMA funds. We believe
that these measures can get us through the end of the present fiscal year
with a balanced budget.
The governor proposed 15 percent funding cuts.
What are we doing to respond to the proposed cuts?
We are meeting with members of the General Assembly to discuss our
situation. The local legislative delegation was on campus on Jan. 19 for
a briefing, and I made a presentation to the Higher Education Subcommittee
of the House Ways and Means Committee on Jan. 30. During the upcoming weeks
and months, we will be meeting regularly with our elected representatives
to advocate for the needs of the Medical University. We have requested
special consideration, given the financial challenges that we have faced
during the past three years. I am optimistic that the legislature will
be sensitive to our needs.
So what are we doing specifically? What is
our strategy?
First, along with our sister institutions, we have made the case that
education does not stop at grade 12 and that protected funding for education
should include higher education. Also, we have told the legislators that
unlike universities with very large student enrollment, we cannot compensate
for lost appropriations through tuition increases alone. We have also told
them that we have been aggressive in pursuing revenue from other sources,
such as grants and private philanthropy. These other funding sources generally
are restricted in the ways that the money can be spent, so they do not
help us with general operating expenses.
What we cannot accomplish through increasing other sources of revenue,
we will have to address through reduced expenditures. We have told the
legislators that we have eliminated virtually all discretionary spending
during the past few years and that any further reductions would result
in the loss of whole programs. We have tried to suggest to them ways
in which state revenues, such as tickets for failing to use seat belts
or for DUI violations, might be used to help support some of our efforts,
such as the trauma centers.
To the extent possible, we are trying to work in cooperation with the
other two research universities on support to the academic mission. Our
shared agenda is to continue the progress that has been made on all three
campuses in building nationally competitive institutions. On the
clinical side, we are trying to work with the other health care providers
in the state to develop a shared message. Sustaining state support for
Medicaid is a particularly high priority because every dollar of state
funding is matched against several dollars of federal support.
What impact will revenues from the lottery
have for us?
The debate on the use of the lottery funds is just beginning. The governor
developed a proposal, which has been introduced as a bill in both the House
and the Senate. The clear focus of the Governor's plan is to support education.
This is good news. From our perspective, the bad news is that the governor's
proposal includes scholarship support only for undergraduate education.
We are hoping that during the debate in the General Assembly, the proposal
will be modified to provide scholarship support at the graduate and professional
level as well. In addition, we would like to see some funding dedicated
for research development at the three research universities. Building this
capacity would serve the economic development interests of South Carolina,
by fostering an environment that would attract high technology industry.
What can faculty and staff do to help?
Certainly, the most immediate contribution that faculty and staff can
provide is to help increase revenue, and at the same time, control expenditures.
We have demonstrated continued high productivity in the research area.
It appears that we are on target for another record breaking year. In the
clinical area, our faculty and staff are working very hard, but we are
seeing mixed results in terms of revenue. In the hospital, our revenue
is up, but it is down somewhat in the outpatient area. The latter probably
reflects the departure of some highly productive faculty whose replacements
have not yet arrived.
It would not be appropriate for the university to either encourage or
discourage faculty and staff from contacting legislators. We do believe
that our official channels of communication with the General Assembly are
effective. As the legislative session progresses, we will have a better
idea of the level of support that the General Assembly will provide.
Finally, we all recognize that the university is experiencing great
challenges. If you have suggestions for ways in which we can operate more
effectively, please do not hesitate to let me know. Together, we will not
only overcome the present challenges, we will build an even stronger Medical
University for the future.
|