'10
j.oI^^
220 :ju?rord Hall
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
I nc UDTWXf
Trustees Approve Operating Budget for 1971-72
No. 223, Octobe
29, 1971
iiNIVERSITY OF ILl.
V- ,,r>" •»■•«. OLIO'"'-)
IS
The Board of Trustees, meeting on the Urbana-
Champaign Campus October 20, approved the annual
operating budget for the University for 1971-72 upon the
recommendation of President John E. Corbally, Jr. This
was his presentation to the Board :
The budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1971, is
submitted herewith, including recommendations for: (a) aca-
demic and administrative appointments beginning September
1, 1971; and (b) appointments to the nonacademic personnel
staff begiiming July 1, 1971. .Authorization to pay salaries and
wages for nonacademic and academic personnel for the month
of July and subsequent payrolls was granted by the Board of
Trustees on June 1 6, 1971, and July 21, 1971.
The funds appropriated by the Seventy-seventh General
Assembly to the University of Illinois for all purposes for
FY 1972 are summarized, with comparative figures for FY
1971.
The budget has been prepared by the Executive Vice Pres-
ident and Provost and the Vice President and Comptroller,
based upon recommendations of: (a) the Chancellors at the
three campuses (after consultation with their respective deans,
directors, and other campus administrative officers); and (b)
general University officers concerning the budgets for Univer-
sity-wide offices. The allocation of funds follow policies and
assignments recommended by the University Budget Commit-
tee* during the preparation of the University's FY 1972 budget
request.
Submitted herewith is the budget document containing:
(a) a Condensed Analysis, which outlines the income antici-
pated for fiscal year 1972 and describes the changes in the
budget; (b) Schedules A through I, which contain summaries
of income and appropriations for the entire University and
budget totals by major categories for each campus; and (c)
summaries for each college or other major administrative unit.
Also submitted are four supplemental volumes (two for
Urbana-Champaign and General University units, and one
' University Budget Committee: Lyie H. Lanier, Executive Vice
President and Provost, Chairman; William F. Sager, Professor
of Chemistry- and Head of the Department (Chicago Circle) ;
Joseph S. Begando, Chancellor at Medical Center Campus; E.
Joe DeMaris, Professor of Accountancy and Head of the De-
partment (Urbana-Champaign) ; H. O. Farber, Vice President
and Comptroller: Morris S. Kessler, Assistant Comptroller (Staff
Associate) ; Warren B. Cheston, Chancellor at Chicago Circle
Campus; Jack W. Peltason, Chancellor at Urbana-Champaign
Campus; Alexander M. Schmidt, Professor of Medicine and
Dean of The Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine (Medical
Center) ; Martin L. Zeigler, .Associate Provost and Director of
Institutional Studies (StaflT Associate).
each for the other campuses) presenting budget details for
departments, divisions, and other operating units.
I recommend that this budget, covering the allocation
of the presently estimated operating income from all sources
for the year beginning July 1, 1971, be approved by the Board,
and that the President of the University be authorized, in
accordance with the needs of the University and the equitable
interests involved, and within total income: (a) to accept res-
ignations; (b) to make such additional appointments as are
necessary subject to the provisions of the University Statutes
and the Policy and Rules-Nonacademic; and (c) to make
such changes and adjustments in items included in the budget
as are needed. All such changes are to be covered in the Vice
President and Comptroller's quarterly financial reports, or in
reports to the Board by its Secretary.
Condensed Analysis of 1971-72 Annual Budget
for Operations
SUMMARY OF INCOME'
General Income ($182,241,629). For the general oper-
ations of the University of Illinois for the fiscal year 1972, the
Seventy-seventh General Assembly of the State of Illinois ap-
propriated a total of $195,707,642. Using the power granted by
the 1970 Constitution, the Governor reduced the appropria-
tions to $182,241,629. The General Assembly can restore any
line item to the amount originally approved by it, and the
Board of Trustees is asking the General Assembly to restore
the Personal Services item, which would add $5,839,672 to
the total appropriations. All figures in this budget are based
on the appropriations as reduced by the Governor. If the
reduction in the Personal Services item is restored, supple-
mental recommendations will be submitted to the Board of
Trustees for the allocation of these funds for salary-rate
increases.
The appropriated funds include $158,158,200 from general
tax revenues, $22,900,000 from the University's own income
and $1,183,429 from the Agricultural Premium Fund. These
funds are shown as General Income in Schedules A and D,
and they may be allocated by the Board of Trustees for such
purposes as the Board approves.
Restricted and Institutional Income ($126,945,300).
There are certain other funds for operations that are handled
through the University Treasurer and that are included in the
University's annual budgets as Restricted and Institutional
' Not included in this operating budget are funds appropriated
by the General Assembly for new buildings, other capital im-
provements, and rentals to the Illinois Building Authority.
Income. Restricted funds, all earmarked for special purposes,
include gifts, grants, contracts, endowment income, appropria-
tions from the Federal Government, and income earned by
the University from auxiliary activities (housing, union build-
ings, bookstores) and other self-supporting operations. The
estimated total of such restricted funds for 1971-72 is
$117,945,300. Institutional funds amounting to $9,000,000 are
appropriated from Contract Research Reserve (funds re-
ceived as indirect cost reimbursement on grants and contracts) .
These funds are budgeted primarily to meet the indirect
costs allocable to the operations supported by these non-State
funds — at all levels of University organization.
Total Income ($309,186,929). The overall total of Gen-
eral, Restricted, and Institutional Income for 1971-72 is
$309,186,929, as compared to $311,385,456 for 1970-71. The
difference of $2,198,527 represents a decrease of 0.7 per cent.
The following figures show the State and non-State com-
ponents of these totals:
1970-71 1971-72
Amount Per Cent Amount Per Cent
State Tax
Funds $168,157,756 54.0 $159,341,629 51.5
Non-State
Funds 143,227,700 46.0 149,845,300 48.5
Total $311,385,456 100.0 $309,186,929 100.0
Thus, there has been a decline of $8,816,127 (5.24 per
cent) in State tax support for the University of Illinois in
1971-72 from $168,157,756 in FY 1971 to $159,341,629 in
FY 1972. (This decrease has been partially offset by an esti-
mated increase in University income, mainly from three
sources: (1) increased enrollments; (2) continuation of the
January, 1971, tuition increase for a full year; and (3) the
use of prior years' income fund balances. )
SUMMARY OF BUDGET RECOMMENDED
The following are the budget totals recommended for
1971-72, with comparable figures for 1970-71 :
Revised Proposed
1970-71 1971-72 Change
From General
Income $186,275,271 $182,091,629 -$4,183,642
From Restricted
and Institutional
Income 125,009,600 126,945,300 1,935,700
Total
Budgeted $311,284,871 $309,036,929 -$2,247,942
Unappropriated
Balance from
General Income $ 100,585 $ 150,000 $ 49,415
President's Statement on Budget Considerations Presented to Board
In regard to the University's 1971-72 operating bud-
get reported above, President Corbally submitted this
statement to the Board of Trustees at its October meet-
ing:
Before turning to your discussion, I wish to make one
other comment upon this budget. As I noted earlier, there
are no funds within this budget for general salary increases.
Following the failure of the effort to override the Governor's
reductions in our personal services appropriation, we began
to seek other alternatives which might provide salary increases
with minimum further damage to our programs. There are
no easy solutions and there are no solutions which do not
create new problems for the 1973 budgets. But we must find
a way to at least partially remedy the salary inequities which
have been imposed upon our staff.
There are now at least two new proposals before the Gen-
eral Assembly to deal with this problem. I issued the following
comments on October 18, and I will repeat them here today
for they speak to a matter of the utmost urgency.
We are highly gratified to leam of the continuing
interest of representatives of both political parties in
Springfield in finding funds for salary increases at the
University of Illinois for the current year.
It is clear that any favorable action by the General
Assembly to provide such funds must have bipartisan
support. It is essential to the continuing quality of
the University of Illinois that all concerned reach
agreement on a course of action that will make funds
available to permit salary increases averaging at least
5 per cent for the remainder of the year, beginning
December 1. The administrative officers of the Uni-
versity and the Trustees will work assiduously to
promote such agreement.
John E. Corbally, Jr.
President
Trustees Approve Reqiiest for Operating Appropriations for FT 1973
The Board of Trustees at its October meeting, upon
the recommendation of the President, approved the re-
quest for operating appropriations for fiscal year 1973
and authorized the President to submit the request to the
Illinois Board of Higher Education and to the appropri-
ate State offices.
Here is the President's presentation to the Board and
an excerpt and summary from the document :
The attached document presents recommendations for in-
creases in the University's appropriations for operations during
FY 1973. These proposals have been prepared by the Execu-
tive Vice President and Provost and the Vice President and
Comptroller, in the light of requests submitted by the three
Chancellors and in consultation with the University Budget
Committee.
The document was completed prior to the failure of the
Senate of the General Assembly on October 14, 1971, to re-
store the Governor's reduction in personal-services funds for
FY 1972 to the level originally appropriated to the University
in Senate Bill 717. As a result, one of the important premises
on which the attached appropriation request for FY 1973 was
based has been invalidated, namely: the assumption that the
sum of $5,839,672 for salary increases would be added to the
appropriations already approved for FY 1972, and that the in-
creased total would be used as a "base budget" to which the
proposed increases for FY 1973 could be added in arriving
at the total request for operations next year.
The failure to secure these additional salary-increase
funds for use this year will require changes in the total given
in Schedule A for FY 1972 appropriations from $188,081,301
to $182,241,629 (the amount in Senate Bill 717 as approved
by the Governor!. Changes will also be required in the
amoimts included in Schedule A and in Section IV on salary
increases. It is rcconmiended that approval be given to the
following guidelines to the revision of these .salary-increa.se
figures:
1. That increases averaging 6 per cent above the rates
for FY 1972 be requested for academic and for non-
academic staff members. Based upon the revised ap-
propriations total for FY 1972, it is estimated that the
following amounts would be substituted for the cor-
responding figures in Schedule A:
a. Academic increases (general funds) .... $5,401,200
b. Nonacademic increases (general funds) . 3,472,034
c. Agricultural Premium Fund 62,815
Total $8,936,049
(These amounts would be adjusted to conform with
whatever revisions in the FY 1972 salary base might
be made.l
2. That funds for supplemental increases in FY 1973 be
requested for the purpose of offsetting the lack of
salary increases in FY 1972 — up to a limit of 5 per
cent on an annual basis and subject to the wage-price
guidelines in effect after November 14, 1971.
\Vith such revisions, it is recommended that the President
be authorized to submit the attached appropriation request
to the Board of Higher Education and to the appropriate
offices of State Government.
Here is an excerpt from the introduction to Request
for Operating Appropriations, Fiscal Year 1973, com-
menting on the relationship of appropriation requests to
the question of the financial condition of the State:
The financial condition of the State in FY 1973. Repre-
sentatives of the Bureau of the Budget and staff members of
the Board of Higher Education have issued quite pessimistic
forecasts regarding the State's ability to provide increased
support for higher education in FY 1973. It has been strongly
emphasized that higher education as a whole should not ex-
pect appropriation increases for next year significantly higher
than those for the current year.
The University is in no position to estimate what the tax
revenues of the State will be in 1972-73 — a responsibility
which the new Constitution assigns to the General Assembly
and to the Governor — with the following limitation: "Ap-
propriations for a given year shall not exceed funds estimated
by the General Assembly to be available during that year"
'from Article \'III, Section 2(b)). What the University can
do, and believes that it should do, is to submit to the responsi-
ble agencies of State Government its best estimates of the
support the University would require in FY 1973 in order to
discharge its educational obligations to the State as it sees
them. That is what the present document attempts to do.
The General Assembly and the Governor must determine how
ihe total amoiuit of available State revenue should be dis-
tributed among the agencies and institutions that are de-
pendent upon the State for support. The University hopes
that a relatively higher level of funding can be provided for
higher education in FY 1973 than the Governor has approved
for the present year — and especially that the .sharp reduction
in State tax support for the senior public institutions can be
rectified. (The four systems of senior institutions have thus
far received .some $16.3 million less in general-revenue appro-
priations for FY 1972 than they had in FY 1971 — a cut of
4.6 per cent, for the benefit primarily of the private institutions
and the junior colleges.)
It should be strongly emphasized that the University's
position in this matter in no sense implies indifference to the
financial condition of the State or insensitivity to the claims
of other agencies and institutions to State support. The point
simply is that the University must limit its responsibility to
the determination of what educational programs it thinks it
should offer in order to meet the State's needs and to the esti-
mation of what such programs would reasonably require in
State appropriations. If the funds requested cannot be pro-
vided, the University would try conscientiously to make the
necessary adjustments in programs so as to minimize the ad-
verse effects upon the institution and its educational services to
the people of Illinois.
II. Summary of the FY 1973 Appropriation
Request for Operations
The University's appropriation needs for FY 1973 can be
understood better in the light of a brief review of the present
status of FY 1972 appropriations. Hence, a comparison of the
latter figures with the corresponding totals for FY 1971 will
be shown first — followed by a summary of the FY 1973
request.
APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE CURRENT YEAR (FY 1972)
The following figures show (a) the University's appropria-
tions for FY 1971 operations by source of funds and (b) cor-
responding figures for FY 1972 as approved, respectively, by
the Board of Higher Education, the General Assembly, and
the Governor.
The figures for regular operations show that the total thus
far appropriated for FY 1972 is lower in the net amount of
about $1.9 million than that for FY 1971. But the total ap-
proved by the Governor should be viewed in terms of two
components: (a) a decrease of $3.9 million (2.16 per cent)
below the FY 1971 level for all continuing operations except
the new or expanded programs in the health fields; (b) an
increase of $2.0 million in funds earmarked for expansion in
the health fields.
Although the net reduction in appropriations for FY 1972
is only $1.9 million, the figures in the preceding table show
a cut of $6.7 million in general-revenue appropriations (from
$159.6 million in FY 1971 to $152.9 million in FY 1972).
(This is the University's share of the total reduction of $16.3
million in .State tax support for the four senior systems of
higher education referred to in the Introduction.)
As already noted, the University hopes that a total of $5.8
million in general-revenue funds can be added to the amount
approved by the Governor, in order to provide general salary
and wage increases averaging about 4 per cent on an annual
basis above the FY 1971 level. This additional sum will be
included in the base budget assumed for FY 1972, to which
Source of Funds
for Operations
FY 197 1
Appropria-
tions
FY 1972 Appropriations (S.B. 717)
Recommended
by the BHE
Passed by the
General
Assembly
Approved
by the
Governor
Regular Operations
General Revenue $159,661,233
University Income 18,218,100
Agricultural Premium Fund 1,021,700
Subtotal ($178,901,033)
Retirement Contributions
General Revenue 7,391,323
Agricultural Premium Fund 83,500
Subtotal ($ 7,474,823)
Total, Operations $186,375,856
$172,041,877
27,290,000
1,166,719
($200,498,596)
24,307,000
106,721
($ 24,413721)
$224,912,317
$164,027,672
22,900,000
1,161,129
($188,088,801)
7,586,665
32,176
($ 7,618,841)
$195,707,642
$152,900,000
22,900,000
1,161,129
($176,961,129)
{$
5,258,200
22,300
5,280,500)
$182,241,629
the increases requested for FY 1973 will be added in order
to derive the total appropriation request for the next fiscal
year.
SUMMARY OF THE FY 1973 REQUEST FOR OPERATIONS
The University is requesting a total of $216,337,667 in
State appropriations to support its operations in FY 1973. A
summary of the appropriation request is shown in Schedule
A below — including the budget total for F\' 1972 and a
classification of the increases sought for FY 1973.
As Schedule A indicates, FY 1972 appropriations at pres-
ent total $182,241,629, but, as just noted, the University hopes
this amount can be increased by $5,839,672 for salary in-
creases through the restoration of a reduction made in S.B.
717 by the Governor. It will be assumed in this document that
these additional funds will be provided. Hence, the appropri-
ation total for FY 1972 would become $188,081,301.
The increases requested for FY 1973 total $28,256,366,
which ^v•ould represent an addition of 15 per cent to the
assumed FY 1972 base budget. This total does not include
any increase for retirement contributions, pending clarification
of the guidelines to be followed by the State-supported insti-
tutions regarding such requests.
It is interesting to compare the total amount for FY 1973
operations shown in Schedule A with that derived by follow-
ing the guidelines issued by the staff of the Board of Higher
Education. The following are the relevant figures:
University —
Schedule A
BHE Staff's
Guidelines
FY 1972 "base" (including
retirement contributions)
Increases for FY 1973 (omitting
any increase in retirement
contributions)
Total
$188,081,301 $187,975,892
28,256,366 32,161,982
$216,337,667 $220,137,874
Thus, following the BHE staff's guidelines resulted in an esti-
mated total for FY 1973 operations that is higher by the sum
of $3,800,207 than the amount proposed by the University.
It should be emphasized, as Schedule A shows, that the Uni-
versity's FY 1972 "base budget" includes the sum of $3,839,672
which it seeks to have added to its current appropriations;
and, even with this addition, the University's FY 1972 base is
approximately the same as the base derived from following
the Board of Higher Education guidelines (which do not use
the FY 1972 appropriations as a base).
SCHEDULE A — SUMMARY OF FY 1973 APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FOR OPERATIONS
A. Appropriations for FY 1972
General Revenue $158,158,200
University Income 22,900,000
Agricultural Premium Fund 1,183,429
Subtotal (S.B. 717 as
approved by Governor) ($182,241,629)
Restoration sought in S.B. 717 (General
Revenue) . . ." 5,839,672i
Total, FY 1972 Appropriations
Sought $188,081,301
B. Increases for FY 1973
1. Increased Enrollment $ 5,237,002
2. Salary-rate Increases (6 per cent) 10,781,377
a. Academic ($5,665,980)
b. Nonacademic ($3,642,254)
c. Agricultural Premium Fund ($62,815)
d. Annualization of FY 1972 Increases
($1,410,328)
3. Plant Operation and Maintenance 3,011,589
4. Price Increases (includes $7,650 from
the Agricultural Premium Fund) 1,768,61 1
5. Refunds 13,780
6. New and Improved Programs 7,444,007
7. Retirement Contributions ^
Total, Increases (FY 1973 Operations) $ 28,256,366
C. Total FY 1973 Request for Operations
1. Appropriations sought for FY 1972 $188,081,301
2. Increases for FY 1973 28,256,366
Total, FY 1973 Request $216,337,667
D. Sources of FY 1973 Funds
General Revenue $194,993,773
University Income 20,080,000
Agricultural Premium Fimd 1,263,894
Total, FY 1973 Request $216,337,667
' The sum of $5,839,672 is the amount by which the Governor
reduced the "Personal Services" item in S.B. 717. The Univer-
sity seeks to have this sum restored by the General Assembly,
in order to make salary increases for staff members this year.
The annual cost of such increases is $7,250,000, and the differ-
ence appears as item B2d.
° No increase for retirement contributions is being proposed at
this time — ■ pending clarification of the guidelines to be followed
regarding such requests.
SCHEDULE B — SUMMARY OF FY 1973 BUDGET INCREASES
REQUESTED FOR NEW PROGRAMS, PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT,
AND OTHER SPECIAL PURPOSES
Campus, Budget Category,
and Program
Amount
Requested
CHICAGO CIRCLE CAMPUS
New Programs
1. College of Urban Sciences $ 217,640
2. Doctor of Arts Degree 122,026
3. Ph.D. Degree in Engineering (Information
Systems and Bioengineering) 39,056
4. Urban Systems Engineering Laboratory .... 56,450
5. "Project Small Business" (minority-group
oriented) 24,500
Subtotal ($ 459,672)
Program Improvement and Expansion
1. Program for Teachers of E.xceptional
Children 26,940
Subtotal ($ 26,940)
General Campus Programs
1. Educational Assistance for Disadvantaged
Students (four special programs) 183,090
2. Library Improvement 430,896
3. Campus Security 1 19,300
Subtotal ($ 733,286)
Total, Chicago Circle Campus $1,219,898
MEDIC.\L CENTER CAMPUS
New Programs
1. Urbana-Champaign School of Basic Med-
ical Sciences $ 41,800
2. Peoria School of Medicine 632,500
3. Rockford School of Medicine 731,100
4. Metropolitan Chicago Group of Affiliated
Hospitals 329,400
5. School of Public Health 379,900
Subtotal ($2,1 14,700)
Program Improvement and Expansion
1. The Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine. . 641,500
2. College of Dentistry 51 1,200
3. Community-health Program 176,800
4. Division of Services for Crippled Children . . 586,969
Subtotal ($1,916,469)
General Campus Programs
1. Library of Health Sciences 381,000
2. Educational Assistance for
Disadvantaged Students 177,800
3. Campus Security 130,400
Subtotal ($ 689,200)
Total, Medical Center Campus $4,720,369
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN CAMPUS
New Programs
1. Training for Community Service $ 31 1,630
2. Environmental Studies Program 142,900
3. Housing Research and Development 65,500
Subtotal ($ 520,030)
Program Improvement and Expansion
1. Clinical Staff for the College of Veterinary
Medicine 407,000
2. Computer-based Education Research
Laboratory (PLATO IV) 180,000
Subtotal ($ 587,000)
General Campus Programs
1. Campus Security 196,710
2. Afro-American Programs 200,000
Subtotal ($ 396,710)
Total, Urbana-Champaign Campus... $1,503,740
UNIVERSITY TOTAL $7,444,007
Board Requests Study of Student Disciplinary Processes
In response to a request from the Board of Trustees
for a study of the student discipline procedures at the
University-, President Corbally sent the following letter to
the three Chancellors :
October 4, 1971
Chancellor Warren Cheston
Cha.vcellor Joseph Begando
Cha.vcellor J. W. Peltason
Gentlemen :
This letter will summarize the conclusions reached in our
discussions of an appropriate response to the request of the
Board of Trustees that "the administration develop recom-
mendations for a new procedure for handling student disci-
plinary cases."
Under current University of Illinois Statutes [Chapter II,
Section 6 (h)], responsibility for student discipline procedures
has been delegated to a Committee on Student Discipline on
each campus. The Committee is elected by each Senate. The
Board's request implies dissatisfaction with current procedures,
but I do not believe that meeting the request requires the
immediate removal of jurisdiction from the three Committees.
In addition, I believe we must recognize that there are at
least four classes of student di.scipLine problems and that each
class may require the application of difTerent procedures.
These classes are:
1. Mass disruptions or demonstrations.
2. Violations of academic rules and regulations.
3. On-campus violation of civil laws or of "regular" Uni-
versity rules and regulations; i.e., parking violations.
4. University action toward those charged with or con-
victed of the off-campus violation of laws or of ofT-
campus rules or regulations.
Present student disciplinary processes on our campuses
and on many others are inadequate. A number of problems
are cited:
1. The processes are not timely; hearings are slow and
action is too far removed from the event.
2. The processes require "colleague-against-colleague"
proceedings which have only rarely been viewed as
effective either by the participants or by observers.
3. The processes may be unduly expensive of time and of
money.
4. The processes tend to obscure the needs of the group
(the University community) w-hile emphasizing the
rights of the individual.
5. The processes often lead to great attention to interpre-
tations of rules and little attention to the application
of rules. Judicial processes tend to overlap and often
to interfere with the legitimate policy processes which
they are to protect.
Other difficulties could be cited. It would be less than
frank to ignore the widely-held feeling that current Univer-
sity student disciplinary procedures rarely, if ever, produce
disciplinary action even when all those involved are fully
aware of technical and real \iolations of University regula-
tions. This feeling — which has some degree of truth in it —
cannot lead to efforts to produce a system which always re-
turns findings of "guilty." Nonetheless, it is a claim which
requires analysis.
I would ask, then, that each of you put this matter im-
mediately before the Committee on Student Discipline on your
campus and before any other formal or informal group as you
feel appropriate. On or before November 5, 1971, I ask that
each of you forward to me the results obtained on your cam-
pus of a study of the responsibilities of the University toward
discipline problems in each of the classes mentioned above,
the effectiveness of the procedures currently used to meet these
responsibilities, and any recommendations for changes in re-
sponsibilities and/or procedures. I will make a progress re-
port to our Board on November 19, 1971, and will work with
you and others to create final recommendations for considera-
tion at the December meeting of the Board.
Each of you heard the discussion of this matter by Board
members in September and recognizes the seriousness with
which we must approach this task. I hope you will convey this
sense of urgency to your Committees. I will await your
reports.
John E. Corbally, Jr.
President
NOTE: Acting on a request from the Urbana-Cham-
paign Senate, the President extended the above procedure
thirty days as follows:
Reports due from Chancellors — December 5, 1971
Progress report to Board of Trustees — December
Board meeting
Final recommendations to be presented at the Janu-
ary meeting of the Board
From the Presidents Report on Selected Topics of Current Interest
PREPARED FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING
AT THE URBANA-CHAMPAIGN CAMPUS, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1971
CITIZENS COMMITTEE HOLDS MEETINGS IN CHICAGO, PEORIA
Members of the Chicago and the West Central Re-
gions of the University of Illinois Citizens Committee met
September 22 and October 15 in Chicago and in Peoria
with approximately 250 involved. Trustee President Earl
M. Hughes, Woodstock, chaired the Chicago meeting and
Trustee Timothy W. S\vain, Peoria, presided at the West
Central session. President John E. Corbally, Jr. spoke
at both meetings and participated in question and answer
sessions. Additional meetings will be held at Mattoon and
Mt. Vernon October 28 and November 11, respectively.
UNIVERSITY SECOND IN NATION IN ALUMNI GIFTS
TO PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS
An analysis of voluntary support of higher education
ranks the University of Illinois second among public in-
stitutions nationally in value of gifts received from
alumni. The eleventh annual Council for Financial Aid
to Education survey, covering fiscal 1969-70, reported
the University's total for funds given by graduates and
other former students at $3,647,369, close behind top-
ranking University of Kansas, $3,874,871.
In total voluntary support among state universities,
Illinois ranked fifth with $9,824,696, headed only by the
Texas and California systems, Michigan, and Wisconsin.
The University was sixth among public institutions in
contributions received from business and corporations
with $2,207,004. Leaders were Michigan, Wisconsin, the
Texas and California systems, and Purdue.
The 14,000 individual contributors to the University
of Illinois Foundation's annual fund placed the Univer-
sity ninth among public institutions in that category'.
The surv-ey, co-sponsored by the American Alumni
Council and the National Association of Independent
Schools, reported a 1.1 per cent decrease in voluntary sup-
port to United States colleges and universities, reversing
a growth trend that for more than a decade has averaged
more than 9 p)er cent annually.
UNIVERSITY PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING PROGRAM
OUTLINED AT REGIONAL MEETING
A report on the University of Illinois statewide con-
tinuing education program for public health nurses was
presented at the Midwest Continuing Professional Educa-
tion for Nurses meeting in St. Louis, October 1 . Professor
Helen Hotchner, Department of Public Health Nursing, ^
University of Illinois at the Medical Center, Chicago, out- fl
lined the program which is supported by annual grants
from the Illinois Department of Public Health. MCPEN
membership includes eight state nurses' associations and M
twenty-three imiversities and colleges from eight states. ^
MEDICAL EXPANSION MARKS MILESTONES:
TWO SCHOOLS OPEN THIS FALL
The extensive expansion program of the University
of Illinois College of Medicine marked two milestones
in September with the opening of the School of Basic
Medical Sciences at the Urbana-Cliampaigii Campus and
the Peoria School of Medicine.
Dr. Daniel K. Bloomfield, dean, welcomed the first
class of sixteen to the school at Urbana-Champaign. The
students, who already have a college degree and premedi-
cal training, are designated as beginning doctors and
progress primarily at an individual rate for the year. After
completing the one-year school, the beginning doctors will
go to a school of clinical medicine in a three-year pro-
gram through which the Uni\ ersit)- is cutting one or more
vears from the training time of physicians by integrating
medical education and internship.
Twenty students are enrolled in the first class of the
three-year Peoria School of Medicine. Dr. Nicholas J.
Cotsonas, Jr. is dean. A similar clinical school \vill open
in Rockford in the fall of 1972, where Dean Robert L.
E\ans is now organizing a faculty. Others are proposed
for additional population centers in the state.
Initial reorganization of the College of Medicine had
been to divide the traditional structure into the first
School of Basic Medical Sciences, with Dr. Truman O.
Anderson as dean, and the first three-year clinical school.
The Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine, with Dr.
Alexander M. Schmidt as dean.
INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON EDUCATIONAL PLANNING
AT MEDICAL CENTER
The University of Illinois at the Medical Center, Chi-
cago, hosted an international workshop, "Educational
Planning for the Health Professions," October 4-8. Some
fort)- teaching physicians, medical school deans, and ad-
ministrators from fifteen states, the District of Columbia,
and three foreign countries participated in the program
which \vas conducted by staff from the Center for Educa-
tional Development, headed by Dr. George E. Miller,
director.
FOUNDATION MEETS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN;
J. B. LANTERMAN PRESIDENT
The annual meeting of the University of Illinois Foun-
dation brought nearly 150 members of the organization
to the Urbana-Champaign Campus October 1-2. Joseph
B. Lanterman, Mundelein, Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer of Amsted Industries, Inc., Chi-
cago, was elected to a one-year term as president; Lee
L. Morgan, Peoria, Executive Vice President and Direc-
tor of the Caterpillar Tractor Company, \vas named vice
president.
Elected to three-year terms on the foundation's
eighteen-member board of directors were David F. Lino-
wes '41, New York, national partner in the accounting
fiiTn of Lavcnthol Krekstcin Honvath & Hoi-wath;
Thomas A. Murphy '38, Detroit, Group Vice President
of General Motors Corporation; and H. Gerald Nordberg
'2.5, of the investment firm of Dean Witter & Company,
Chicago.
Gifts, bequests, and other foundation receipts totaled
$3,116,888 for the fiscal year ending June 30, according
to University Vice President and Comptroller H. O. Far-
ber, foundation treasurer. This was a $209,500 increase
over the preceding )ear.
(From the President's Report for the September
meeting of the Board of Trustees.)
THREE CAMPUSES HOLD ORIENTATION PROGRAMS
FOR STUDENTS, PARENTS
Incoming students and their parents attended meet-
ings for orientation and advance enrollment at two cam-
puses of the University of Illinois during the summer.
County chairmen of the Dads and Mothers associations
presided at meetings at Urbana-Champaign, June 23-
August 4. A panel of two students and two faculty was
available daily at each precollege session to answer ques-
tions. Parents' Panels were held August 24, August 26, and
September 1 at Chicago Circle, sponsored by the Office of
Student Affairs. Program participants included students,
faculty, and administrators. A general orientation assem-
bly for all incoming students at the Medical Center, Chi-
cago, will be held September 22-24.
UNIQUE OPHTHALMOLOGY EQUIPMENT INSTALLED
AT MEDICAL CENTER
An argon laser photocoagulator, a powerful laser beam
for use in the treatment of major eye diseases, has been
installed in the University of Illinois Eye and Ear In-
firmary at the Medical Center, Chicago. It is the first
such equipinent in Illinois and one of only a dozen in the
world. The newly developed instrument, which carries
with it the potential for preventing the blinding side
effects of diabetes and sickle cell anemia, is used to burn
away diseased portions of the retina. Several hundred pa-
tients at the Medical Center will be treated annually with
the laser, according to Dr. Morton F. Goldberg, Head of
the Department of Ophthalmology in The Abraham Lin-
coln School of Medicine, College of Medicine.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
President Reports to Trustees on Budget
February 1, 1972
President Corbally presented the following statement
to the Board of Trustees at its meeting on January 19,
On Januan- 4, 1972. the State Board of Higher Edu-
cation approved Executive Director's Report No. 103
which included recommended operating budgets for
higher education for Fiscal Year 1972-73 and which also
contained a series of proposed program reductions and
estimated savings to be achieved if such reductions are
adopted. The action of the State Board means that the
proposed program reductions for the University of Illi-
nois are now referred to you for your consideration. M\'
vie\\s concerning these proposals are well known, but
each propxjsal will be referred to the appropriate Univer-
sity and Campus officers for revie\v' and analysis. The
results of our re\-iew \vill be presented to you for your
consideration at your February meeting so that you can
resjX)nd to the advice of the State Board.
The important part of Report No. 103 is the proposed
appropriation figures for Fiscal Year 1972-73. While the
amounts prof>osed for the University of Illinois fall far
short of amounts necessary to meet our needs, we have
concluded that the current financial situation of the State
of Illinois makes it unlikely that any sizable increases
will be available. I have been assured that special efforts
will be made to assist us in resolving currently unresolved
financial problems to enable us to continue our planned
expansion programs in the health sciences. I have further
been invited by Governor Ogilvie to join with him and
with others to explore possible Federal sources of income
to assist us in meeting some of our most pressing problems.
We are now beginning the process of developing
operating budgets for Fiscal Year 1972-73 within the
framework of the total amount recommended for the
University of Illinois by the State Board. This process will
be a difficult one and will raise many problems. Our time
table calls for the completion of an analysis of our prob-
lems and possibilities during the next few weeks and I
will make a report concerning the 1973 budget in some
detail to you at the February meeting.
University's 1971-72 Operating Budget and 1972-73 Appropriation Request
LYLE H. U^NIER. EXECUTrV'E MCE PRESIDENT AND PROVOST
This report is addressed primarily to the faculty and
to others within and outside the University of Illinois
who might well be perplexed by the budgetaiy develop-
ments of the past twelve months. The appropriation
process for 1971-72 was unusually protracted, at times
controversial, and far from satisfactory' in outcome.
Further, the situation has been complicated by the over-
lap of the final stage of legislative action for Fiscal Year
1971-72 with the initial phase of planning for 1972-73 —
with the attendant emergence of a new fiscal ideolog)-
from the State Board of Higher Education. One con-
sequence of these rapidly changing events has been the
lack of a definitive account of the interacting proceedings
— a gap that the present review will attempt to fill,
although as regards plans for next year it could well be
out of date before appearing in print.
The refxjrt is presented in two main sections. The
first is concerned with appropriations for the current
year, which were completed with the enactment of a
supplemental bill last November that provided funds for
salary increases. In the second section, the University's
appropriation request for Fiscal Year 1972-73 will be
discussed, with special reference to the recommendations
approved by the Board of Higher Education at its meet-
ing on January 4, 1972.
I. APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1971-72
A statistical summary of the results of successive actions
upon the University's 1971-72 request for operating funds is
presented in Schedule A, together with comparison totals for
Fiscal Year 1970-71.
A breakdowTi of these funds into two categories is shown :
"Regular Operations" and "Retirement Contributions" —
partly because such tabulations arc sometimes presented in
official reports and partly to facilitate the following brief
discussion of the funding of the retirement system.
SCHEDULE A — APPROPRIATIONS FOR OPERATIONS (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) — FISCAL YEARS 1970-71 AND 1971-72
FY 1971-72 Appropriations
„ ,p , FY 1970-71 iL-L
itources oj tunds Appropria- Requested Recommended Passed by Approved by Added by Total Appro-
for Operations ^.^^ ^^ ^f^ j^^ ,^ jg^^ g^^ Assembly Governor S. B. 1299 priations
University FY 1971-72 (S.B.717) (S.B.717) (Nov. 1971) FY 1971-72
Regular Operations
General Tax Revenue $159,661 2 $189,159.0 $172,041,9 $164,027.7 $152,900.0' $2,100.0^ $155,000.0
University Income 18,218.1 22,900.0 27,290.0 22,900.0 22,900.0 -0- 22,900.0
Agricultural Premium Fund ... . 1,021.7 1,2528 1,166.7 1,161.1 1,161.1 -0- 1,161.1
Subtotal ($178,901 .0) ($213,311 .8) ($200,498.6) ($188,088.8) ($176,961 . 1) ($2,100.0) ($179,061 . 1 )
Retirement Contributions
General Tax Revenue $ 7,391.3 $24,307.0 $24,307.0 $ 7,586.7 $ 5,258.2 -0- $ 5,258.2
Agricultural Premium Fund 83.5 106.7 106.7 32.1 22.3 -0- 22.3
Subtotal ($ 7,474.8) ($ 24,413.7) ($ 24,413.7) ($ 7,618.8) ($ 5,280.5) ( -0- ) ($ 5,280.5)
Total, Operations $186,375.8 $237,725.5 $224,912.3 $195,707.6 $182,241.6 $2,100.0 $184,341.6
'The general-revenue (State tax) funds approved by the Governor in S. B. 717 included $2.0 million for expansion in the health
fields, which vifas offset largely by reductions in general-revenue funds that had been approved by the General Assembly for capital
purposes.
'This sum of $2.1 million for FY 1971-72 salary increases was provided through a transfer of that amount (via S. B. 1299) from
an item appropriated for equipment in S. B. 717. The appropriated sum of $2.1 million was matched by the same amount from an
indirect-cost reserve (nonrecurring) — to provide salary increases for seven months averaging about 5 per cent.
Retirement Contributions
The figures under this heading in Schedule A show that
the University requested and the Board of Higher Education
recommended more than a threefold increase in retirement
contributions for 1971-72 over the amount for 1970-71. This
proposed increase from $7.47 million to $24.4 million was
the amount required by a State statute passed in 1967, to
provide full funding of the current service costs of the State
Universities Retirement System plus interest on its unfunded
accrued liability. Since passing that law, however, the Gen-
eral Assembly has regvilarly failed to appropriate the full
amoimt required by it and failed to do so again in Senate
Bill 717 (as shown in the fourth column of Schedule A).
Unfortunately, the Governor reduced the retirement fimds
still further to $5.28 million, which was not quite sufficient to
meet the University's current retirement obligations, although
the total appropriations made to all institutions in the System
were apparently sufficient to meet all of its current obligations.
Summary of Recommended Increases for 1971-72
The appropriation totals for the various stages of the
budgetary process for 1971-72 are shown in the last line of
Schedule A, and are reproduced below, together with the
amounts and percentages of increase above the base budget
for FY 1970-71:
Increase over
Dollars in py jgy^^j
Thousands
Amount %
Base budget for FY 1970-71 . . . $186,375.8
University request for FY
1971-72 237,725.5 $51,349.7 27.6
Approved by Board of Higher
Education 224,912.3 38,536.5 20.7
Passed by General Assembly... 195,707.6 9,331.8 5.0
Approved originally by
Governor 182,241.6 -4,134.2 -2.2
Total after addition of $2.1 mil-
lion for salary increases 184,341.6 -2,034.2 -1.1
General Assembly's Amendments to Senate Bill 717
A special study group of the Democratic majority of the
Senate Appropriations Committee developed the amendments
to Senate Bill 717 that were finally approved by both houses
of the General Assembly. A total of $195.7 million was rec-
ommended for the University of Illinois — a reduction of
$29.2 million below the amoimt recommended by the Board
of Higher Education. Also, the University income fund was
reduced to eliminate the income from the higher tuition rates
recommended by that Board. The Senate study group recom-
mended an overall increase of some $9.2 million above the
University's 1970-71 total, including $6.3 million for salary
increases averaging about 4.6 per cent. The remainder of the
increase ^^■as considerably below the amoimt needed for the
projected expansion in the health fields alone, but it looked
good in retrospect after the Governor had finished with
t^he bill.
The Governor's Reductions
Apart from retirement contributions, the Governor origi-
nally stipulated that the University's appropriations for op-
erations in Senate Bill 717 be reduced so as to bring the
University's total for 1971-72 to the same level as that for
1970-71, with the added proviso that the reduced total include
the additional income from the higher tuition rates recom-
mended by the Board of Higher Education. The latter condi-
tion amounted to a cut of approximately $3.9 million below
the total appropriated for operations in 1970-71, since the
General Assembly had refused to appropriate the additional
income that the higher rates would have produced.
The Governor later agreed to an increase of $2.0 million
in state-tax funds for use specifically to expand programs in
the health fields. In order to secure this addition, the Univer-
sity agreed to reductions in capital items totaling $1,235 mil-
lion. Further, even with this increase in state-ta.x funds, the
University's total in general-revenue funds ($155.0 million)
\vas some $4.66 million below the level of 1970-71 (a reduc-
tion of 2.9 per cent).
Efforts lo Secure Salgry Increase Funds for 1971-72
The Board of Trustees at its meeting on July 21, 1971,
voted: (a) to urge the General Assembly to rescind the Ciov-
emor's net reduction of $5.84 million for "Personal Services"
in Senate Bill 717, to provide funds for salar>' increases; (b)
to defer the decision on a tuition increase until after the
General Assembly had decided whether or not it would sup-
port the Governor's recommendation for such an increase;
and (c) to urge the General Assembly to restore the reduc-
tion in the item for retirement contributions.
The University's efforts to persuade the General Assembly
to override the Governor's reduction of the "Personal Ser-
vices" item met strong opposition from the Board of Higher
Education. .-Vt its meeting on September 8, 1971, the Board
voted "to recommend to the governing systems that with the
exception of the tuition question, they accept the figures
currently in effect, that they make no further attempts to
restore budget reduction. . . ." Despite the Board's opposition,
the University continued its effort to secure salary-increase
funds through the restoration of the personal-services item of
$5.84 million in Senate Bill 717. Unfortunately, the effort
failed in the Senate during the session of the General As-
sembly last fall — the vote being strictly along party lines
except that Senator \\'eaver joined the Democrats in voting
to override the Governor's reduction. Prior to that vote, a
bill introduced by Senator Hynes proposed a new appropria-
tion for salary increases, but that bill also failed to pass in
the Senate.
Following these two reversals, a successful effort was ini-
tiated by Representative Clabaugh and Senator Weaver to
secure salary-increase funds for the University — an effort in
which they were joined by legislators interested in other senior
imiversity systems. For the University of Illinois, the legisla-
tion consisted in amendments to Senate Bill 717 transferring
the sum of $2.1 million from an equipment item to personal
services. The University agreed to match that sum by assign-
ing $2.1 million from an indirect-cost reserve — to yield a
total sufficient to fund salary increases averaging 5 per cent
for a seven-month period (December 1, 1971, through June
30, 1972).
The wisdom of funding salary increases on such a basis
may well be questioned. An average increase of 5 per cent
would require approximately $7.2 million on an annual basis.
With only $2.1 million available in recurring state appropria-
tions for the 1971-72 increases, an additional sum of $5.1
million must be provided in 1972-73 to maintain salaries at
current levels. This will obviously be difficult to do in 1972-
73 in the face of the continuation of a condition of financial
stringency for higher education in Illinois. The decision to
proceed with the increases was made only because the alterna-
tive of no general salary increases this year seemed even more
undesirable to the administrative officers chiefly concerned,
at both campus and general-University levels. Whether or
not this judgment turns out to have been sound will perhaps
depend upon the outcome of current efforts to develop a
viable budget for 1972-73. Difficult as this task will be, how-
ever, the funds to maintain the present salary levels will be
found; and every reasonable possibility will be explored to
provide additional increases next year.
II. PROPOSED APPROPRIATIONS FOR OPERATIONS —
FISCAL YEAR 1972-73
The present report will be limited to the overall financial
aspects of Executive Director's Kcpon No. 103 which was
approved in its entirety by the Board of Higher Education on
January 4, 1972. That endorsement covered scores of sug-
gested reductions in "low-priority" programs and increases for
"high-priority" programs, in addition to the appropriation
totals recommended for the various institutions and agencies
concerned with higher education. The program changes and
associated financial estimates were proposed as the means
whereby the several senior systems of public imiversities could
live within essentially "status quo" budgets and yet manage
to accommodate increased enrollment, meet other cost in-
creases, and conduct new programs of high priority.
The University of Illinois is making a careful study of
the policy and program recommendations affecting it in Re-
port No. 103 — as well as the related budgetary assumptions
and implications — and a systematic commentary upon these
recommendations will be submitted to the Board of Higher
Education as soon as the study has been completed. That
report will advise the Board as to the acceptability of the
recommendations and as to the manner and schedule of im-
plementation for the proposals judged to be acceptable. Mean-
time, it might be useful to clarify the nature of the Board's
statutory responsibilities for the review of the educational
programs of the pulilic universities of the State.
Board of Higher Education's Authority over Existing Programs
Widespread misunderstanding has been evident in the
discussion in the news media of the Board's legal authority
over existing programs of the public universities. Certain
commentators have assumed that the Board has the legal
authority to direct the governing boards to implement its pro-
gram recommendations. The Board has no such authority
under State statutes, a fact clearly recognized in Executive
Director's Report No. 103 (p. 3). The controlling section of
the statutes reads as follows:
"The Board of Higher Education is authorized to review
periodically all existing programs of instruction, research
and public service at the state universities and colleges
and to advise the appropriate board of control if the
contribution of each program is not educationally and
economically justified." {Emphasis added.) (From Sec-
tion 187 of the Act creating a Board of Higher Education,
as amended by an Act approved June 30, 1967, Senate
Bill 1184.)
It might be added that another section of the statutes does
indeed give the Board of Higher Education mandatory con-
trol over the initiation of new programs of instruction, re-
search, and public service.
If the Board of Higher Education wished to force the
Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois to accept
changes in its existing programs that the University did not
favor, the Board of Higher Education could accomplish that
purpose only through persuading the General Assembly to
enact a bill containing such a provision and securing the
Governor's approval of it.
The remainder of this report will be concerned mainly
with the following topics: (a) the total appropriations recom-
mended for the University in 1972-73 by the Board of Higher
Education; (b) the failure of Executive Director's Report No.
103 to recognize certain mandatory cost increases facing the
University in 1972-73; (c) the invalid premises and data ap-
parently underlying the Board staff's contention that the Uni-
versity of Illinois is excessively funded in comparison with
other similar institutions and that the University could hence
finance very substantial cost increases next year for "high-
priority" purposes through internal economies and reallocation
of resources.
Total FY 1972-73 Appropriations Recommended for University by IBHE
A comparison of the funds available for University opera-
tions in 1971-72 with the amounts recommended by the Board
of Higher Education for 1972-73 is presented in Schedule B.
Both state appropriations and supplemental funds from fed-
eral sources are shown, and the two sources are combined in
a third section of the table. The following is a brief summary
of the essential facts shown in Schedule B:
1. An increase of about $1.74 million in regular state
appropriations is recommended — from $184,341,600
in FY 1971-72 to $186,079,200 in 1972-73.
2. But if the 1971-72 base be increased sufficiently to an-
nualize the salary increases made this year for seven
months (i.e., to provide funds to pay the increases for
twelve months instead of seven), the appropriation
level would be $3.36 million below the current budge-
tary level.
3. The inclusion of the supplemental federal funds for
health-manpower and indirect-cost purposes as "state
appropriations" would not add $9,646 million to the
resources of the University next year, which Executive
Director's Report No. 103 would lead one to think by
omitting any reference to the current levels of support.
These sources might provide a net increase of $1,342
million over the University's current level for such
funds. (The University will strongly oppose the rec-
ommendation that federal grants under the health-
manpower act be subject to Illinois legislative appro-
priation.)
With respect to state appropriations only, the University
administration has reluctantly concluded that it probably
would not be possible to secure an increase in the recom-
mended total of $186.1 million for 1972-73 — even though
this \\ould represent an increase of only $1.74 million above
actual appropriations for the current year and would be
$3.36 million short of the amount needed for salary annual-
ization next year. There are several reasons for this decision.
The first is based on the belief that the failure to secure an
override of the Governor's FY 1971-72 reductions last fall
means that another such effort this year would likewise be
unsuccessful, even if favorable action by the General As-
sembly could be secured (which is an unlikely prospect).
A second reason arises from the complete reversal of
the position of the Board of Higher Education during the
past year relative to the needs of higher education. Whereas
a year ago the Board recommended substantial increases be-
yond 1970-71 appropriations — including some $21.5 million
for the University of Illinois — its recent recommendations
relative to a substantially higher set of program projections
for 1972-73 inconsistently argue that the universities can meet
these expanded needs with budgets that overall are below the
1970-71 level. Whatever one might think about the influence
of that Board in Springfield, its outright opposition would
certainly not help a University effort to secure higher appro-
priations from the General Assembly than the Governor had
included in his budget.
A third reason for accepting the total in regular state
appropriations approved by the Board of Higher Education
SCHEDULE B — COMPARISON OF FY 1971-72 APPROPRIATIONS WITH FY 1972-73 IBHE RECOMMENDATIONS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
FY 1971-72 FY 1971-72 p,. „,, _., Increases Recommended for
Sources of Funds Appropriations Base with ^^'9/.-/ J py igj2.73 over FY 1971-72
, ^ ■ W, n , . , < ;• J Kecommenda-
for Operations Plus Supple- Annualized tions of IBHE --ictual Appro- Annualized
mental Funds Salaries^ ■' priations Base
I. STATE APPROPRIATIONS
Regular Operations
General Revenue 5155,000.0 $160,100.0 $155,010.0 S 10.0 -$5,090.0
University Income 22,900.0 22,900.0 24,580.0 1,680.0 1,680.0
Agricultural Premium Fund 1,161.1 1,161.1 1,208.7 47.6 47.6
Subtotal ($179,061.1) ($184,161.1) ($180,798.7) ($1,737.6) (-$3,362.4)
Retirement Contributions
General Revenue $ 5,258.2 $ 5,258.2 $ 5,258.2 -0- -0-
Agricultural Premium Fund 22.3 22.3 22.3 -0- -0-
Subtotal ($ 5,280.5) ($ 5,280.5) ($ 5,280.5) ( -0- ) ( -0- )
Total (State Appropriations) $184,341.6 $189,441.6 $186,079.2 $1,737.6 -$3,362.4
//. SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS
Federal Health Manpower Funds^ $ 1,554.0 $ 1,554.0 $ 3,683.0 $2,1290 $2,129.0
Indirect-Cost Income (75%) 6,750.0 6,750.0 5,962,5 -787.5 -787.5
Total (Supplemental Funds) $ 8,304.0 $ 8,304.0 $ 9,645.5 $1,341.5 $1,341.5
///. ALL FUNDS
State Appropriations $184,341.6 $189,441.6 $186,079.2 $1,737.6 -$3,362.4
Supplemental Funds 8,304.0 8,304.0 9,645.5 1,341.5 1,341.5
GrandTotal $192,645.6 $197,745.6 $195,724.7 $3,079.1 -$2,020.9
' Salary increases of 5 per cent were in effect for only the last seven months of FY 1971-72, and were paid partly from nonrecurring
funds. The figures in this column would be the appropriation base for FY 1971-72 in "annualized" recurring funds.
'The figures for FY 1971-72 are the University's estimates of grants currently available for health-education-improvement pro-
grams. The FY 1972-73 figures are estimates of the Board of Higher Education. The new health-manpower legislation would super-
sede existing support programs.
and the Governor is that definitive planning for next year's
budget should begin as soon as possible, in order to allow
time for the intensi\c studies and wide consultation that will
be necessar)' if wise decisions are to be reached on the critical
issues now before us.
Funds Needed to Annualize FY 1971-72 Salary Increases
Executive Director's Report No. 103 ignores entirely the
need for annualizing next year the salary increases made for
a seven-month period this year. This means that Executive
Director Holderman did not inform his Hoard of the highest-
priority obligation of the Uni\ersity of Illinois for FY 1972-73
— which presumably is that of the other public universities
as well. The addition of the required sum of $5.1 million to
the increases totaling $12.64 million "recommended" for the
University in Report Xo. 103 would inflate the total of the
"high-priority" increases to $17,376 million, which is approxi-
mately 40 per cent abo\e the amount he reported to the Board
of Higher Education.
For the funding of these increases, the only new income
would be the estimated total of $3.08 million — as shov\Ti in
Schedule B. Deducting this amount from the total of $17,376
million would leave an unfunded residue of "high-priority"
needs that would require funding through internal savings and
reallocation of resources in the amount of $14,657 million.
What this means is that the present budget of the Univer-
sity of Illinois would have to be cut by $14,657 million {8.2
per cent) in order to fimd the "high-priority" recommenda-
tions in Executive Director's Report No. 103, together with
the annualization of 1971-72 .salary' increases.
Dr. Holderman cannot claim that he did not know, or
had forgotten, about the salar>'-annualization problem, since
he wrote two letters to President Corbally on that subject
during December 1971. The second was \vritten on December
29 — only six days before the meeting of the Board of Higher
Education on Januan' 4, 1972 — requesting detailed informa-
tion on the fimds required to annualize salaries.
Dr. Holderman's failure to call this obligation — and the
similar commitments of other public universities — to the
attention of his Board is an appalling omission by a public
official charged with professional responsibility for coordi-
nating and reflecting the needs of higher education in Illinois.
Equally astounding is the fact that when his $5.1 million
"error" was called to the attention of the Board of Higher
Education on January 4, 1972, by the present writer — by
means of a documented analysis of the problem — the Board
even did not see fit to ask Dr. Holderman for an explanation.
Showing understandable restraint, he did not volunteer to
give one.
Misrepresentation of Comparative Status
of University's Financial Resources
Three main premises appear to underlie the recommenda-
tions in Executive Directors Report No. 103 concerning the
University of Illinois: (a i that the University has an excess
of financial resources in comparison with similar public insti-
tutions, and hence can support new undertakings through
economizing and reallocation of resources; (b) that certain
types of University expenditures are disproportionately high,
especially those for administration and physical-plant opera-
tions (an assumption said to apply also to the other Illinois
public universities); (c; that the University has a substantial
number of "lowest-priority" programs which can be readily
reduced or phased out to produce immediate savings for
1972-73. The last two assumptions will not be discussed in
this report but will be examined in considerable depth in the
forthcoming connuentary on Executive Director's Report No.
103, which probably will be completed early in March.
The only evidence thus far disclosed relative to the claim
that the University has an excess of financial resources is
ostensibly found in a set of tables distributed by the staff of
the Board of Higher Education, which show comparisons of
.state-tax appropriations for the nine public universities of the
Big Ten group. The following figures illu.strate the type of
comparisons that are made:
State Tax Amount Ap-
Appropria- Headiount propriated
Institution tions FY Enrollment per
1970-71 (Fall 1970) Headcount
( Thousands) Student
University of Illinois $169,100 58,022 $2,914
Michigan State University . . $ 70,100 44,092
University of Michigan 73,500 39,661
Total (Michigan) $143,600 83,753 $1,715
The inferences that have been encouraged from these isolated
figures are: (a) that the University of Illinois has a far higher
level of financial support for its educational programs than
the two Michigan universities; and (b) that the University of
Illinois has a sufficient excess in state-tax income that it could
afford to reduce expenditures for its current programs in order
to reallocate the savings to "higher-priority" programs.
These conclusions are entirely unjustified from the evi-
dence presented. The figures cited do indeed identify a marked
difference between the University of Illinois and the other
two institutions, but its nature has not been correctly inter-
preted. It is necessary to consider all of the resources available
to these institutions before valid conclusions may be drawn as
to their relative levels of financial support. A more adequate
picture of the comparative resources of the University of Illi-
nois and the two Michigan in.stitutions is presented by the
following income figures for the fiscal year 1970-71, taken
from their official financial reports:
Income per Headcount Student
Source of
Income
University University
of Illinois oj Michigan
Michigan
State
University
General Funds
State-tax Funds $2,899 $2,003 $1,629
University Income 292 933 71 7
Subtotal, General
Funds ($3,191) ($2,936) (S2,346)
Other Funds 2,389 3,924 1,721
.Ml Funds $5,580 $6,860 $4,067
These figures show clearly that the University of Michi-
gan — which is more nearly comparable overall to the Univer-
sity of Illinois than is Michigan State University — has a
considerably higher total income level than the University
of Illinois: $6,860 versus $5,580 per headcount student.
The University of Illinois shows a somewhat higher aver-
age for the category "General Funds" than the University of
Michigan (state-tax funds and appropriated university in-
come) : $3,191 versus $2,936 per headcount student. However,
the University of Illinois' figure includes approximately $21.0
million for research and extension in its College of Agricul-
ture and for the University of Illinois Hospital, whereas the
University of Michigan expends no "General Funds" for
agriculture and only $6.8 million in such income for its hos-
pital. The net difference of $14.2 million between the two
institutions relative to these differential requirements for "Gen-
eral Funds" amounts to some $245 per student for the 1970
fall-term-headcount enrollment of the University of Illinois.
Removing this amount from the University's overall "General-
Fund.s" average of $3,191 would reduce its figure to $2,946,
which is only $10 more than the University of Michigan's
average of $2,936.
The tabulation also shows that the University of Michigan
collects a markedly higher average amount of tuition and fees
than the University of Illinois: $887 per headcount student
for Michigan and $268 for Illinois. The reasons for this dif-
ference are threefold: (a) the lower tuition rates at the
University of Illinois; (b) the far higher proportion of non-
resident students at the University of Michigan, who pay
much higher tuition than residents of the state; (c) the larger
number of tuition waivers for both undergraduate and gradu-
ate students at the University of Illinois. Concerning waivers,
for example, the University is required by State statute this
year to waive tuition for 7,323 students (mostly veterans and
teacher-education trainees^, with a loss of income amoimting
to some $2.9 million.
The low level of tuition income for the University of
Illinois — and that for other Illinois institutions of higher
education — reflects a longstanding public policy designed to
make educational opportunity widely available at low cost
to the youth of the State. If it is believed that this historic
commitment should now be changed because of the financial
condition of the State, it is legitimate to advocate measures
towards that end. But the nature and implications of that
position should be clearly understood and the means to its
implementation should be forthrightly proposed. Perhaps the
Board of Higher Education's Commission on Financing Higher
Education will make constructive proposals directed towards
improving the income situation of the public universities, but
without depriving worthy students of educational opportunity
simply because they cannot afford to pay the higher tuition
rates and meet other costs.
With respect to the comparative "study" of Big Ten
universities, it is deplorable that such seriously misleading
information should have been so widely disseminated by the
staff of the Board of Higher Education among advisory com-
mittees of the Board, legislators, newspaper editors, and others
— as evidently has been done from reports reaching University
staff members. It is perhaps significantly symbolic of the cal-
ibre of the material and its use that officers of the University
of Illinois were not even infomied by Dr. Holderman of its
existence — much less afforded the professional courtesy of
an opportunity to comment on it or to have the University's
interpretation reach the recipients.
Concluding Comment
President Corbally has fittingly characterized in the fol-
lowing words the most objectionable aspect of the budget
recommendations submitted by the Executive Director to the
Board of Higher Education on January 4, 1972:
"In short, the certainty with which the Executive Direc-
tor and his staff have outlined millions of dollars worth
of 'savings' which can be applied to salary increases and
to new programs is a cruel fiction."
This judgment is fully supported by the evidence and inter-
pretation in the present report, as well as by other studies in
process that will be published later.
Apart from analytical studies, however, the credibility of
the Executive Director's professional advice might well be
questioned on the basis of a comparison between his budget
recommendations on January 5, 1971, in Executive Director's
Report No. 93 and those submitted on January 4, 1972, in
Report No. 103. A year ago he recommended an increase of
$21.6 million for the University in 1971-72 (not including
retirement contributions), which did not materialize; this year,
he finds so much "fat" in the University's budget that he
proposes cuts of $9.5 million to provide funds for further
salary increases and program expansion. (As already noted,
this figure becomes $14.6 million if the omitted sum of $5.1
million for annualizing 1971-72 salary increases is included.)
All three campuses and the general-administrative offices
of the University of Illinois are working intensively to evaluate
the consequences of the ceiling of $186.1 million in regular
state appropriations recommended for FY 1972-73 by the
Board of Higher Education. A report will be made to the
Board of Trustees at its meeting on February 15, 1972, con-
cerning the results of these studies to that date; and a rea-
sonably definitive picture should be available by the time the
General Assembly reconvenes in March. But if that total
amount, together with an increase of $2.0 million in federal
health-manpower funds, is all that is available ne.xt year, it
seems inevitable that plans for further salary increases and
for expansion in the health fields will have to be sharply
curtailed.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
'^Ca^-^J^
.i-cD Mumiora iiall
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
General Rules Relating to Academic, Administrative Staffs
Disability Leave Alodijied
No. 227, Febrvary 24, 1972
liiaiJ
UTAWERS'JJ.^:-
The Board of Trustees, meeting on the Urbana-
Champaign Campus Februaiy 16, appro\'ed modification
of General Rules relating to disability leave of members
of the academic and administrative staffs.
The following presentation was made to the Board :
Section 29, (c), (2) of The General Rules Concerning
University Organization and Procedures provides that unused
disability leave (sick leave) may be accumulated by members
of the academic and administrative staffs up to a maximum
of si.\ty days, .'\dditionally, and subject to the approval of the
President, such staff members who have completed at least
three years of ser\'ice may be granted disability leave with
full pay for a period not to exceed one-half of his appoint-
ment year. However, the additional leave is not cumulative.
A recent change in the retirement law allows the use of
unused disability leave in the calculation of service credit at
retirement. Accordingly, it is proposed to change the amount
of such leave which may be accumulated in any year from
sixty days to six months.
The President, with the concurrence of the three Chan-
cellors (who have had the advice of the Senate Committees
on Faculty Benefits at their campuses), recommends that the
rules relating to disability leave for academic or administra-
tive personnel be modified to read as follows: (new text is un-
derlined, deletions are shown by lines through text)
"Academic or Administrative Staff. Noncumulative leave
is granted with full pay for disability in each year of
service, including the first, of fifteen calendar days. In
addition, a staff member is eligible for extended disability
leave of ten calendar days with full pay for each year of
service, the unused portion of which is cumulative in any
year to a maximum of sixty days six months.
"Subject to the approval of the President, or Chancel-
lor as appropriate,* a member who has completed at least
three full years of .service may be granted a disability
leave with full pay for a period (including the annual
and extended leaves described above) not to exceed one-
half of his appointment year.
"No deduction of time from the annual leave or the
extended leave is made if the member is ill or disabled
at a time when he is not expected to furnish regular ser-
vice to the University.
"After the disability benefits described above have
been exhausted, a member may be granted a disability
leave without pay from the University. If such a member
is a participant in the University Retirement System of
Illinois, he may apply for the benefits to which he is en-
titled under that .system."
* In the case of staff members of General University offices the
President will act.
Revision of Statutes Relating to University Employment
At its February 16 meeting, the Board of Trustees
gave final approval of re\'isions of the University Statutes
relating to University employment for which it had given
provisional approval on September 15.
Here are the agenda item and revisions:
At the September 15, 1971, meeting, the Board of Trus-
tees provisionally approved revisions of Sections 33 and 34
of the University Statutes dealing with employment of rela-
tives and with other criteria for employment. The proposed
revisions were referred to the Senates and to the University
Senates Conference for their information and advice.
The University Senates Conference and the Medical Cen-
ter and Chicago Circle campus Senates now have approved
the revisions as proposed. The Urbana-Champaign Senate
adopted a slightly modified version.
In view of the fact that two of the Senates and the Uni-
versity Senates Conference are in agreement on the specific
language and all arc in agreement with the substance of the
proposed revisions, I recommend that final approval be given
to Sections 33 and 34 in the form provisionally adopted on
September 15, 1971.
TEXT, AS PROVISIONALLY APPROVED, SEPTEMBER 15, 1971
CRITERIA FOR EMPLOYMENT AND PROMOTION
Sec. 33. The basic criteria for employment and promotion
of all University Staff, whether or not subject to the act creat-
ing the University Civil Service System of Illinois, shall be
appropriate qualifications for and performance of the specified
duties. The principles of equal employment opportunity are a
part of the general policy of the University. Unless otherwise
provided by law, employees are to be selected and treated
during employment without regard to political affiliation, re-
lationship by blood or marriage, age, sex, race, creed or na-
tional origin.
EMPLOYMENT OF RELATIVES
Sec. 34. No individual shall initiate or participate in insti-
tutional decisions involving a direct benefit (initial employ-
ment, retention, promotion, salary, leave of absence, etc.) to
a member of his immediate family. "Immediate family" in-
cludes an individual's spouse, ancestors and descendants, all
descendants of the individual's grandparents, and the spouse
of any of the foregoing. Each Chancellor shall develop, for
the approval of the President, campus procedures to insure
against such conflict of interest.
MODIFICATIONS, URBANA SENATE
1. Sec. 33. Transposition, first and second sentences.
2. Sec. 34. Deletion, "initiate or," line one.
Student Rides of Conduct Revised
Another revision approved by the Board of Trustees
Februar) 16 pertained to the "Rules of Conduct Ap-
plicable to All Students Concerning Disruptive or Coer-
cive Action." Text of President Corbally's recommenda-
tion reads as follows:
Among the administrative recommendations on Univer-
sity judicial processes approved by the Board on January 19,
1972, was one indicating the need for development of a wider
range of fitting sanctions and penalties. Specifically, it was
recommended that there be a broadening of sanctions ap-
plicable to the variety of acts covered by the Board's state-
ment (adopted August 12, 1970; amended September 16,
1970) of "Rules of Conduct Applicable to All Students Con-
cerning Disruptive or Coercive Action."
To implement the Board action of January 19, 1972, I
recommend the following amendment to the final paragraph
of the Rules of Conduct (new language is imderlined) :
". . . When, through the disciplinary process, a student is
found to have knowingly engaged in a disruptive or coer-
cive action, as above defined, the penalty will be dismissal
or, upon a finding that substantial mitigating circum-
stances exist, suspended dismissal or other sanctions
deemed just and appropriate. The Chancellors, in con-
sultation with the President, are expected to institute and
implement the necessary procedures for referral of ap-
propriate cases to the disciplinary processes."
The change is consistent with recommendations made to
the administration and to the Board of Trustees by the Senate
Committees on Student Discipline at the Chicago Circle and
Urbana-Champaign Campuses.
Survey Research Laboratory's Social Science Data Archive
The Social Science Data Archive (SSDA) of the
University's Survey Research Laboratory has been com-
pletely reorganized and is available as a major source
of behavioral and social-science data needed for research,
teaching, and policy decision-making. In addition to
serving the University of Illinois, the SSDA will supply
data from its machine-readable files to other universities
and colleges throughout the State, governmental agencies
(both state and municipal), and various organizations in
the private sector.
The present holdings of the Archive are being up-
graded and made part of a comprehensive user-oriented
information system for the behavioral and social sciences.
The Archive has a wealth of data from several fields, in-
cluding sociology, political science, economics, and his-
tors'. Data from studies of major survey research organi-
zations and the Survey Research Laboraton,- ha\e been
achieved and can be retrieved for various forms of sec-
ondary processing.
CENSUS DATA PROCESSING CENTER
A major part of the Archive's reorganization has been
designed to develop the capability for processing all of the
data from the 1970 Census of Housing and Population.
At a minimum, the full set of machine-readable summary-
tape census data for the State of Illinois will be acquired,
and the SSDA staff will be capable of servicing requests
for these data. The census tapes for additional states will
also be acquired as user demand warrants and as re-
sources allow. Under consideration is the possibility of
acquiring the tapes for the entire Midwest, and arrange-
ments might ultimately be made to acquire the census
tapes for the entire United States.
The full set of census data for each state is divided
into six partitions known as "counts." The primary dif-
ference among these counts lies in the geographic areas
and the number of census items that each covers. The
First Count summary tapes of 1970 census data are in
hand now, and requests for data are being met as they
are received. It is expected that the Second and Third
Counts will be available in Februar)'. The Fourth Count
will probably be available in April or May. No indications
have been received from the Census Bureau concerning
the availability of the Fifth or Sixth Covmts.
DATA PROCESSING CAPABILITIES
The SSDA is implementing a package of computer
programs to perform various t)'pes of data-file manipula-
tion and management, and to provide "easy-to-read" and
"easy-to-work-with" output for users. The package con-
sists of six computer programs: four are presently opera-
tional and well-documented, and the remaining two are
under development. The package permits the extraction
of tabulations and cross-tabulations of census items for
any geographic area \vithin the State, or tables caii be
generated to summarize across se\eral geographic areas.
The package also allow's the user to take a "quick look"
at interesting data without spending valuable time and
mone\ on program de\elopment.
The SSDA programming staff also has the ability to
write and implement special-purpose computer programs
for sjjecial tabulation requests that cannot be serviced
using any of these six programs.
DEVELOPMENT OF STATEWIDE INFORMATION SYSTEM
The reorganization of die Archi\e has taken place
with the intention of de\eloping a comprehensive infor-
mation s\-stem for the State of Illinois, ^vhich will inte-
grate se\eral components to pro\ide a full range of social,
political, demograpluc, and economic data. The system
\vill be composed of se\eral computer-based data files
wliich can be machine-manipulated to provide optimal
service to svstem users.
A systematic approach to information storage and
retrieval allo\vs a great deal of flexibility, while preserving
optimal capability for meeting data requests. The SSDA
staff \sill work indi\idualh- \vith users to assist them in
taking full ad\antage of the Archi\e's services.
The Management Infomiation Di\ision of the Illinois
Department of Finance has agreed to use the Survey Re-
search Laboratory as a referral facility for requests from
state agencies for census data and other t)-pes of social-
science information.
WORKSHOPS AND TRAINING PROGRAMS
The SSDA is offering ^\•orkshops at the University for
interested students, faculty, and administrators to ex-
plain the structure and content of the census data files,
their availability and accessibility, and their uses. In addi-
tion, special training programs with tlie same intent will
be offered to users from governmental and nonprofit
agencies.
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
The SSDA will charge for its sei-vices basetl upon
retrieving its own costs for processing requests and to
cover its operating expenses. Prospective users are urged
to discuss their data requirements with SSDA's staff mem-
bers. Such discussions can help to clarify what types of
data will best fit the user's needs — as well as establish
a finn basis for developing estimates of cost.
Inquiries regarding the senices provided by the SSDA
should be directed to:
Dr. Daniel James Amick
Survey Research Laboratory
University of Illinois at Chicago Circle
P.O. Box 6905
Chicago, Illinois 60680
Phone— (312) 663-5304
Mr. Noel Uri
Survey Research Laboratory
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Room 1 1, David Kinley Hall
Urbana, Illinois 61801
Phone— (217) 333-6572
From the President's Report on Selected Topics of Current Interest
PREPARED FOR THE UNWERSITY OF ILLINOIS BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING
AT THE LRB.\NA-CHAMPAIGN CAMPUS, ^VEDNESDAV, FEBRUARY 16, 1972
WINTER ENROLLMENTS UP AT CHICAGO CAMPUSES;
DECREASE AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
Final winter quarter statistics at Chicago Circle and
the Medical Center, Chicago, indicate student enroll-
ments of 18,290 and 3,183, respectively. Numerical in-
crease at Chicago Circle is 729 or 4.15 per cent. Medical
Center reports an increase of 221 students, 7 per cent.
.\t the close of the regular registration period, pre-
liminary figures at Urbana-Champaign indicate a spring
semester enrollment of 30,020, a decrease of 1,130 stu-
dents, or 3.63 per cent, from 1971. Late registration is
expected to bring final enrollment at Urbana-Champaign
to 30,900.
ALLERTON TRUST FARMS HAVE RECORD CORN YIELDS IN 1971
Com yields on the seven University of Illinois Aller-
ton Trust Farms near Monticello averaged a record 145
bushels f>er acre on 1,284 acres in 1971, according to Pro-
fessor Donald G. Smith, of the Department of Agricul-
tural Economics and manager of the farms. The previous
record was 136.6 bushels per acre established in 1965.
UNIVERSITY REAPPOINTED TO PRESIDENT'S COMMIUEE
ON THE HANDICAPPED
The University of Illinois has been reappointed to
the President's Committee on Employment of the Handi-
capped for the three-year term 1972-74. The reappoint-
ment was announced in Washington by committee chair-
man Harold Russell at the same time he extended the
committee's appreciation for the University's "valued
support and continued interest" in the program. Presi-
dent John E. Corbally, Jr. will represent the University
on the committee.
STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS INCOME IS $2,440,840 IN 1970-71
The annual financial report of 835 student organiza-
tions at the three campuses of the University of Illinois
indicates a total income of $2,440,840 in 1970-71. In-
come to the student organizations fund at each campus
included $147,595 for 199 organizations at Chicago Cir-
cle, $189,830 for 112 organizations at the Medical Center.
Chicago, and $1,490,674 for 524 organizations at Urbana-
Champaign. Although the repwrt does not include ath-
letics, social groups, or student government, it does re-
port three organizations closely related to the University
and managed by separate boards consisting of staff mem-
bers and students. The 1970-71 combined income of the
Concert and Entertainment Board, Illini Publishing Com-
pany, and Universit>' Theatre, at Urbana-Champaign,
was $612,741.
Fiscal 1971 expenditures by student organizations to-
taled $2,447,895. Included was $157,149 at Chicago Cir-
cle, $202,031 at the Medical Center, Chicago, $1,470,453
at Urbana-Champaign and $618,262 by the three related
groups.
The report is issued by Vice-President and Comptrol-
ler H. O. Farber.
260 AT COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY SYMPOSIUM ON TEACHING AIDS
Two hundred and sixty dental educators from the
United States and Canada attended a program on dental
teaching aids and curriculum design, co-sponsored Febru-
ary 9 by the College of Dentistry, University of Illinois
at the Medical Center, Chicago, and the American
Equilibration Society. The fourth annual symposium con-
sidered methods to improve the teaching of the principles
of occlusion, proper bite, and tooth stnicture. to under-
graduate dental students. University chairman was Dr.
Robert B. Underwood, Head of the Prosthodontics De-
partment, College of Dentistry.
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION MAJORS IN ENGLAND
FOR EXCHANGE PROGRAM
Thirty juniors majoring in elementary education at
the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign are in
England for the spring semester, receiving sixteen to
eighteen hours credit for study in teachers' colleges af-
filiated with the University of Bristol. In conjunction \\dth
the three-year-old program, fifteen British students are for
the first time studying during the same period at the Ur-
bana-Champaign Campus. Students at both locations
will teach in local public schools and attend fornial uni-
versity classes. Supervisor is Professor Theodore Mano-
lakes, Department of Elementary Education.
TWO WORKSHOPS HELD FOR PUBLIC HEALTH NURSES
FROM TWENTY-SIX AGENCIES
Two one-day workshops, "Death and Dying," were
held at the University of Illinois at the Medical Center,
Chicago, on January 25 and Februan- 3 for public health
nurses representing twenty-six Illinois agencies. The work-
shops, concerned with the emotional crises of dying pa-
tients and their families, were coordinated by Professor
Helen Hotchner, Public Health Nursing Department,
College of Nursing, and director of a five-year plan for
public health nursing education in Illinois.
LATIN AMERICAN STUDENTS BEGIN INTENSIVE ENGLISH STUDY
AT UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Thirty students from nine Latin American countries
have begun an intensi\'e stud)- of English at the Univer-
sit\- of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. They are among
200 students who are studying English at United States
universities on scholarships airanged by the Latin Amer-
ican Scholarship Program of American Universities. The
program, which concludes July 31, is preparation for
graduate study the students will begin at American insti-
tutions in the fall. The project is supervised by Professor
Katharine O. Aston, Director of the Division of English
as a Second Language, and Professor Norman W. John-
son, Director of Short Courses and Conferences in the
Division of University Extension. The students do not re-
ceive academic credit.
8,000 ATTEND ANNUAL UNIVERSITY AGRONOMY DAYS
More than 8,000 Illinois farmers and businessmen in
agriculture participated in University of Illinois Agron-
omy Days in Januan,' and Februar)', annual programs
sponsored throughout the state by the Cooperative Ex-
tension Service of the College of Agriculture at Urbana-
Champaign. Faculty from the Departments of Agricul-
tural Economics, Agricultural Engineering, Agronomy,
Entomology and Plant Pathology- cooperated in the
eighty-three sessions held at sixty-seven sites. Professor
W. R. Oschwald and agronomist Lester V. Boone, both of
the Department of Agronomy, were directors.
MEDICAL CENTER HOSTS OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH CONFERENCE
Problems of occupational health and proposed im-
provement programs among Illinois industries were the
focus of a two-day conference, "Health in the Work-
place," at the University of Illinois at the Medical Center.
Chicago, in January. More than 125 representatives of
trade unions and health care professions participated in
the meeting, which was coordinated by Dr. Edward A.
Lichter. Head of the Preventive Medicine and Com-
munity Health Department, The Abraham Lincoln
School of Medicine, College of Medicine.
FARM INCOME TAX SCHOOLS REPORT HIGHEST ENROLLMENT
IN THIRTY-TWO YEARS
A 1971 enrollment of 2,587 was the highest in the
histon' of Farm Income Tax Training Schools held an-
nually for diirty-two consecutive years by the University
of Illinois College of Agriculture Cooperative Extension
Sen-ice at Urbana-Champaign. Registrants from all Illi-
nois counties plus Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri,
and ^Visconsin participated in the thirty-two schools
scheduled at twenty-three locations during November and
December. Coordinators were Professor F. M. Sims and
Professor C. A. Bock, both of the Department of Agri-
cultui-al Economics.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building.
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
.i6-.
C<y
If^.
Ja-iiei
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 228, March 13, 1972
Th£ President's Annual Message
JOHN E. CORBALLY JR., PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
INTRODUCTION
About a year ago, I was selected to become the thir-
teenth president of the University of Illinois. I spent those
early months following that e\ent vigorously studying the
University- — its past, present, and potential for the fu-
ture. In September, 1971, I officially assumed the duties of
the presidency. The months since September ha\e pro-
\ided all of us with the opportunity to learn something
about one another's interests, concerns, and philosophies
regarding public higher education.
In these past six months, I have tried to convey
tlirough my public statements and through the forty-five
formal addresses I ha\e made to civic and educational
organizations in the State, my views on current educa-
tional issues and the philosophy that undergirds those
views. In turn, the many conversations and written com-
munications I have had with student groups, members of
the facult)' and of the staff, board members, alumni. State
Government officials, other university presidents, and with
citizens, have given me some clear impressions of others'
hopes and aspirations for the future of public higher edu-
cation in this State.
I hear a majority of people voicing three hopes for
public higher education in Illinois. First, and simply
stated, the people want higher education facilities avail-
able for the oncoming generations of Illinois youth. Sec-
ondly, they want educational opportunities to be available
equally to all who are capable of pursuing advanced study.
.\nd finally, they want the highest quality education avail-
able at the Icrwest possible cost.
THE UNIVERSITY
One means to the realization of those hopes for the
future lies in one of the present strengths of public higher
education in Illinois — the purposeful distribution of go\-
eming authority among five distinct boards of trustees.
Each go\eming board either presides over one multi-
campus institution, or over several single-campus institu-
tions. The advantages of this governing arrangement to
the State's total program of higher education are twofold.
First, each board's area of responsibility is large enough
and contains sufficient diversity to provide a base for
APR 19)872
decision making and for planning which is much more
adaptable and flexible than is found on any single campus.
Yet, no board's responsibilities are so vast and so diverse
as to confound wise decision making or to impair progress.
Secondly, the five governing boards have a range of con-
cerns which can and does lead to comprehensive planning
and policy making rather than to the more limited range
of possibilities that are found in less comprehensive insti-
tutions. The task of coordinating higher education in Illi-
nois is enhanced by such a governance structure, provided
that the strengths of that structure are both recognized
and honored by those responsible for coordination.
We at the University of Illinois are convinced that the
quality of the total public and private system of higher
education can and must be improved through cooperative
efforts between systems and between institutions. Toward
that end, we have initiated a variety of discussions with
institution presidents from both the public and the private
sector. In Chicago, for example, Chancellors Joseph Be-
gando and Warren Cheston and I are dexeloping what
we are certain will be meaningful relationships with the
heads of the many fine private colleges and universities in
that metropolitan area. One of Vice President NoiTnan
Parker's main tasks in his new duties in the area of public
service is to strengthen existing patterns and to discover
new relationships in interinstitutional activities in exten-
sion and public service fields. Dr. Earl Porter, Secretary
of the University, devotes a great deal of his time to
interinstitutional cooperation and communication. This
effort is not a new nor a novel undertaking for the Uni-
versity of Illinois ■ — it is a part of our history and will
continue to be a part of our future.
GENERAL IMPRESSIONS
One hears constantly that the University of Illinois is
a complex institution of international stature. The Uni-
versity is unique in Illinois and is one of only a small
number of similar institutions in the world. I have noted
that we are expected to exert leadership in the State and
in the Nation. Because of my position as President of the
University of Illinois, I have already been asked to serve
in leadership roles in State, regional, and national educa-
tional groups. As much as I might like to claim that these
assignments come to me because of my personal chann
and my professional expertise, I must recognize that the
stature of the University of Illinois lends stature to all of
us who are associated with the University. The strength
of the University of Illinois is a precious State asset which
lends strength to our entire system of education and
which, indeed, adds to the stature of our State.
Part of the Uni\ersity's strength is found in its diver-
sity. We have within our Univereity a campus in Urbana-
Champaign o\'er one hundred years of age — a mature
and honored campus \vith resources gathered over that
hundred years of histon- that are unmatched in Illinois
and matched on only a ver)' few campuses amvvhere. At
Chicago Circle, ^ve ha\e a strong, developing institution
which has both the problems and the advantages of youth-
ful enthusiasm. Unfortunately, the successes achieved by
the faculty, staff, and students of our Chicago Circle
Campus ha\'e been so great over such a short space of
time that many forget that the Circle is young, is still
de\eloping, and is deserving of the special care and atten-
tion given to other developing institutions in our State.
At the Medical Center we have a specialized, professional
campus which is recognized and heralded throughout the
world. While all universities meet social needs in all of
their activities, current social concerns about the quality
and quantity of health care deliver)- systems place special
burdens upon the faculty' and staff of the Medical Center.
These special burdens must not be met at the e.xpense of
other programs on other campuses either within our sys-
tem or in other systems and yet they must be met. This
problem is one which State officials, including University
officials, are working together to solve and is but one ex-
tremely visible indicator of the dependence of a society-
upon its universities.
Add to these three major campuses the developing
medical programs at Peoria and Rockford and the activi-
ties of our University Extension and our Cooperative Ex-
tension staff members in every village, town, and city of
Illinois, and one is made aware of the strength which
comes to the University through its diversity. Adminis-
tered faithfully and well throughout its history and staffed
at every level by dedicated professional, semi-professional,
and skilled men and women, the University of Illinois has
prospered because it has been charged with managing its
affairs for the benefit of the people of Illinois and it has
responded to this charge with vigor and with effectiveness.
Those who would impose upon the University of Illinois
and upon its Board of Ti-ustees a whole series of external
controls have yet to demonstrate in any factual way the
ways in wliich the University has failed to exercise its
stewardship; has failed to respond to the needs of the
people of Illinois for teaching, research, and public ser-
vice; or has failed to maintain a superior level of quality.
To the contrar)-, the record of the University of Illinois
is a record of achievement which is deserving of continued
support.
As a newcomer to the State and to the University of
Illinois, I have been particularly impressed with the Uni-
versity's stewardship of tax monies allocated to it. For
me, the primary measurement of effective stewardship is
the quality of the work which those expenditures have
supported.
Using quality as my measure, I hold some clear first
impressions of the University of Illinois. I would like to
use this occasion to share some of those impressions with
you — to show you your University as I have come to
know it.
As my predecessor, David Henr)', noted in 1963, sheer
size in numbers of students, buildings, and campuses was
a byproduct and not an objective in the University's
progress through the years. The University's guiding ob-
jective throughout its long history as a public, land-grant
institution was and continues to be the satisfaction of
contemporary social needs through the vehicles of teach-
ing, research, and public serv'ice.
The University's ongoing work in the areas of health,
urban and rural community needs, educational assistance,
and environment, illustrates its continuing response to
contemporary problems.
Synthetic replacements for human "parts"' have been
developed through the coordinated efforts of people at
the Circle Campus, the Medical Center, and Presbyterian-
St. Luke's Hospital. These replacements make possible the
repair of hip and knee joints, the synthetic fusion of spinal
vertebrae, and the use of crack-resistant dental amalgams.
A laser beam device at the Medical Center's Eye and
Ear Infirmary offers new hope to patients suffering the
blinding side effects of diabetes and sickle cell anemia.
The instioiment, one of only a dozen in the world, is used
to bum away diseased portions of the retina.
As yet, much of the fundamental knowledge basic to
the complete solution of problems related to the common
cold, cancer, upper respiratoiy diseases, and blood diseases
in children does not exist. Many of the University's
health-related research projects, some of which have been
under way for more than two decades, are searching for
answers to these pressing problems. For example, our
studies in microbiology of the effects of viruses on cells,
and the response of cells — in tissue culture — to virus
infection, may teach us how to treat virus infections and
to approach the problem of controlling cancer.
Among families with severely limited income, health
problems can result from the inadequate diet forced upon
them by their economic circumstances. In evei-y major
metropolitan area of Illinois, the Expanded Food and
Nutrition Program, developed by the University's Coop-
erative Extension Service, helps low-income families buy
more foods and more-nourishing foods with their limited
purchasing power. Two unique features of the Program
are the Program Assistants themselves, and the one-to-one
basis of their work with nearly 10,000 low-income families.
The Program Assistants — who are themselves residents of
these communities — are employed by the University, and
work under the supenision of Extension personnel who
have taught them basic foods, nutrition, consumer mar-
keting, and budget principles.
The economic plight of minority group small business-
men in the inncr-iit\ antl that of independent farmers
has not escaf>ed tlic L'ni\ersity"s attention. Such efforts as
the Cooperative Extension's Farm Income Tax Training
Schools and the small-business management programs
sponsored by our Colleges of Business Administration and
the Division of Univereity Extension provide sought-after
^ infonnation and assistance.
" As we all know, our State economy depends in no
small measure upon its hea\y corn crop production. Re-
search done over a period of fifteen years in our College
^ of Agriculture lay behind the recent success in coping with
W southern corn blight. To Professors Arthur Hooker and
Malcolm Shurtleff of the Urbana-Champaign Campus
goes the credit for first identifying the ne\v, virulent strain
of blight (known as Race T), for publishing full informa-
tion regarding its nature, and for identifying the kinds of
com (Inbreds C and S) that are resistant to it.
Throughout the years. College of Agriculture research
teams have searched for sources of plant material that
would pro\ ide resistance to many crop diseases — not just
southern corn leaf blight, but also the stalk rots, other
leaf blights, rust, and a host of bacterial and virus dis-
eases. Those successes went unnoticed since serious disease
problems were either a\oided or stopped short before they
reached a critical stage. But as com breeders throughout
the Com Belt will attest, the benefits of the Illinois re-
search program have been passed along in sack after sack
of seed corn to Midwest com producers.
Now under w^ay at the Urbana-Champaign Campus is
a Civil Engineering project funded by the National Sci-
ence Foundation. Using an earthquake-simulating ma-
chine, investigators hope to leam the potential structural
damage effected on a city's buildings by such natural
hazards as last year's California earthquake. Tliose who
remember or experienced the Illinois earthquake of No-
vember 9, 1968, the tremors of which reached into twenty-
three states, will recognize the benefits this research may
hold for the Midwest as well as for other parts of the
Nation and the world.
Programs within the University's Colleges of Educa-
tion also reflect a keen awareness of the unique needs of
special segments of our Statewide community. A new
Native American Program, designed to help meet the
educational needs of American Indians, began this year
at Circle Campus through funds obtained from federal
and private grants. Chicago, incidentally, with an Indian
{Xjpulation of 18,000, has the third largest urban concen-
^ tration of native Americans in the United States. The
^ College is also preparing bilingual teachers to work in
schools serving predominantly Puerto Rican populations.
Most of these teaching candidates are from the commu-
m nities to which they will be returning as teachers.
^ The Urbana-Champaign College of Education and
Illinois Public School Districts 214, 25, and 59 are suc-
cessfully working at making a reality of what many edu-
cators and parents thought could be only a dream at best.
Through their Cooperative Teacher Education Program,
college professors, teachers of grades kindergarten through
t^velvCj and imdergraduate teacher candidates are jointly
exploring ways for strengthening curriculum, teaching,
and the preparation of persons for teaching at all levels
of formal schooling. The program seeks to identify po-
tential teachers at an early age among public school
students, and to give them capsulated experiences as
teachers; it provides undergraduate teaching candidates
with teaching exposure at e\ery school level from kinder-
garten through high school; and it promotes continuity
of the learning experience by stressing the sharing and
exchange of public school and college resources and
jaersonnel.
Also at Urbana-Champaign, the Institute for Research
on Exceptional Children ofTers the only program in Illi-
nois for training personnel in the preschool education of
multi-handicapped children. Mandatory law requires that
by 1973, evei7 Illinois community provide preschool edu-
cation for its multi-handicapped three- to five-year-old
children. Based on its twenty-five years of ongoing re-
search, the Institute no%v stands as every Illinois commu-
nity's one source for obtaining immediate answers to such
problems as the kinds of special equipment needed, blue-
prints for playgrounds, estimates of cost factors, and
models for effectively working with these children's spe-
cial motor-skill problems.
Other research and teaching efforts within the Univer-
sity are focusing on the quality of our environment, espe-
cially the present and potential hazards of air, water, and
noise pollution. In an efTort to reduce the air pollution
created by its own power plant operation, the Urbana-
Champaign Campus is converting its power base from
coal-fired boilers to gas-oil boilers. Our Environmental
Engineering research is one of only thirteen such univer-
sity projects throughout the United States selected for
funding by the Federal Government. From the research-
ers' studies of viruses that attack bacterial life in water
may come a better understanding of the results of similar
viral attacks on human cells.
The University's Colleges of Engineering and Agri-
culture are seeking ways of recovering energy from human
and animal solid wastes. Closely aligned with waste dis-
posal studies are Agriculture's investigations of the sources
of nitrate pollution in our water sources. Tlie interrelated-
ness of waste disposal, farm fertilizers, and nitrate pollu-
tion of water culminates in the potential problem of
consumed high-nitrate water leading to increased infant
mortality among female babies and among some farm
animals.
The nature of pure, basic research lends itself better
to a review of its past successes than to a discussion of
the highly theoretical investigations of the moment. For
example, to those of us whose knowledge does not en-
compass sophisticated levels of chemistry, to hear that one
of our Chemistry Department's current research projects
involves the discovery and identification of cytokinins
means nothing. We can, however, comprehend the con-
tributions of nylon, synthetic rubber, and antibiotic drugs
to our lives. Each of these contributions came to fruition,
in large part, as a result of the research efforts of the
Chemistry Department on the Urbana Campus.
Literature, as we know, reflects the aspirations, strug-
gles, and concerns of society. Through the teaching of
creative writing, our English faculty introduce potential
authors to problems of the imagination when it confronts
its world and finds meaning there, and to the place of the
writer in our time.
Teaching innovations provide another exciting and
vital side to the life of the Univeisity, as illustrated by
such innovations as PLATO, the Law College's Trial
Advocacy Course, and Basic Medical Science's approach
to training physicians.
First designed in 1960, PLATO is a teaching system
based on a computer. From an instructional carrel, the
student uses a key set to communicate with the computer.
The computer then selects information from lessons it
stores electronically and presents that information on a
television display. By 1974, one PLATO unit located on
our campus will have the potential to simultaneously offer
didactic instruction to 4,000 instructional carrels at junior
colleges and elementary and secondary schools within a
150-m:le radius.
Rated the best Trial Advocacy course in the United
States, the Law College course brings Illinois lawyers and
judges to the campus each week to give law students first-
hand assistance in experiencing trial lawyers' roles in sim-
ulated court proceedings.
New in Urbana-Champaigii this year is our School of
Basic Medical Sciences. Its students, who already hold a
college degree, work in a one-to-one relationship with
local physicians. The program has two unique features.
The study curriculum is organized for independent study
rather than for foiTnal classes in traditional medical
subjects. At the same time, the student sees firsthand,
through his apprentice role in the office of his physi-
cian-adviser, those problems common to the practicing
physician.
Many of our students, while they are still students,
combine fonnal learning experiences with activities which
benefit Illinois communities. Each of the University's
pharmacy students must devote 2,000 hours in community
service as an apprentice to either a phaiTnacist in private
practice or to a hospital pharmacist. Student nurse interns
are diffused among some thirty separate community agen-
cies. Each of the Medical Center's two-hundred resident
physicians rotates among several Chicago hospitals, gain-
ing a variety of experiences and providing a variety of
services. Graduate students in political science combine
learning and service through internship-working experi-
ences in such city and suburban government offices as
those of councilmen and city managers. Architecture stu-
dents develop their professional skills through classroom
projects dealing with real and current problems. Included
among such projects done in Chicago recently are designs
for utilizing vacant land in Logan Square — designs
which accommodate both revenue-producing ideas and
the social relevance of the acreage to the community — ;
the Garfield Environmental Center which was designed in
1970 by fifth-year architecture students at the Circle and
which was one of ten such designs earning recognition by
the American Institute of Architects; and a class project
in the mid-north area of Chicago which developed the
first historical architectural survey ever made of any
neighborhood in Chicago. In Champaign, architecture
students recently designed and built a new playground for
the handicapped preschool children attending the Colonel
Wolfe School.
Through their Community Involvement Program, our
second and third-year law students work in such com-
munity offices as those of the Legal Services, County
Public Defenders, and the State's Attorney, to help clients,
especially lower income citizens, with their legal problems.
Beginning in 1968, the students' activities have ranged
from work with mental patients and with prisoners to
assisting low-income citizens with their income tax returns.
Students' contributions to surrounding communities
are not limited to those activities directly related to their
formal learning ex-jjeriences. Their volunteer services run
the gamut from helping elementary school children master
reading skills, to teaching high school students the use of
computing machinery. Physical education majors in Ur-
bana work cooperatively with the Champaign Park Dis-
trict in sponsoring a basketball program for fifth and
sixth graders from Champaign schools. Among its many
services. Volunteer Illini Projects regularly sponsors local
bloodmobile drives; and at the Medical Center, students
of the College of Pharmacy offer church and civic groups
one-hour student presentations on drug abuse.
As our students graduate, many of them continue
their professional lives in Illinois. There are approximately
180,000 living graduates of the University, and it is esti-
mated that one-half of them reside in the State of Illinois.
Thus, as graduates, our students will continue to spread
the benefits of their learning to those communities where
they choose to live.
These illustrations barely scratch the surface of your
University's activities. There is literally not a single ele-
ment of life in Illinois, from cultural activities to sewage
disposal, from crime prevention to transportation, which
is not touched in some way by the work of your Univer-
sity of Illinois.
I commented earlier about sheer size being a by-
product and not an objective of our University. However,
the unprecedented growth of the University and, indeed,
of all higher education nationwide over the past twenty-
five years, does reflect our and other institutions' response
to the public's demand for more education for more
people. In 1950, approximately 25 per cent of college-
age young people actually were in attendance in some
form of formal, jrost-secondary school program. Today,
almost 47 per cent of all college-age youth are in such
programs. The growth of the University of Illinois during
this period is nothing short of phenomenal. The increas-
ing number of students and faculty and staff members,
the increasing amount of physical plant facilities to be
operated and maintained, the increasing sophistication of
laboratory and other learning equipment, the increasing
scope of activities undertaken by universities particularly
in increasing educational opportunities for culturally and
educationally disadvantaged young people, and the in-
exorable pressures of continuing inflation have combined
to generate what appear to be great increases in the cost
of higher education. The number of dollare spent in sup-
poTt of public higher education has indeed increased
many times over the twenty-five year period. However,
the actual cost in real and constant dollars per student
has not escalated to the extent that most people imagine.
For example: when economic inflation is removed, we
find that the total expenditures for all activities at the
Urbana-Champaign Campus in 1970 cost Illinois tax-
payers fewer real dollars than was true in 1 959. By exam-
ining per-student expenditxires in 1958 dollars, we dis-
cover that the cost to the State actually declined from
$1,750 in 1959 to s^l,679 in 1970.
One illustration of the Uni\ersity's efficiency and care-
ful stewardship of State funds is the little known fact that
the University of Illinois maintains the lowest adminis-
trative overhead costs of all Illinois public universities.
Furthermore, the University has developed its o\vn ver-
sion of "revenue sharing."' For each State-appropriated
dollar from general revenue, the University attracts al-
most an equivalent amount of self-generated money from
non-State sources. When coupled with this significant flow
of other-source dollars, the University's declining per-
student cost of education to the State clearly reflects the
efficiency which has accompanied its rapid growth in
enrollment and in serA-ices.
LOOKING TOWARD THE FUTURE
As we look toward the future, the most pressing prob-
lem facing the University and the public that supports it
is how to maintain the high quality teaching, research,
and public service now being oflfered. If we — the Uni-
\ersit\- and the public — continue to subscribe to the be-
lief that public higher education must provide educational
opportunities for all segments of society, while at the
same time economic inflation continues to spiral upward,
one fact is clear. Public universities will not be able to
meet existing needs and the services demanded of them
unless new income is found.
One current argument urges the use of much higher
tuition payments to support public higher education.
Some change in tuition charges seems essential. But the
long-term needs of public higher education cannot be
met by making students' tuition payments a major source
of University income. The financial crises facing this Na-
I tion's private colleges and universities should make that
• obvious. In spite of the fact that private institutions only
! concentrate upon selected special areas of study, their
I high student tuitions are not covering their total costs.
t It takes an impossible leap of logic, then, to assume that
student tuitions can pay the price for public higher edu-
cation's broader mission of meeting the full range of
society's needs.
Now, some argue that low tuition should be aban-
doned as a principle in Illinois because low tuition "sub-
sidizes" the well-to-do. To the extent that the Illinois tax
structure is regressive or non-progressive, it is true that
the burden of tax support of higher education falls un-
evenly upon income groups. If such is the case, the
remedy is in the tax structure; not in the abandonment
of the principle of low tuition.
The Illinois General Assembly and the Bureau of the
Budget face a massive problem in trying judiciously to
mete out apjiropriations among the many agencies de-
pendent upon State support. Tliey are faced with rising
costs in all State agencies. E\ en the basic costs of operat-
ing the executive and legislative branches of government
have experienced marked increases in recent years. The
Legislature's appropriations tasks are not lightened by
our continuing and conflicting demands as taxpayers for
more and better governmental services, but for no further
increases in taxes. Every person with whom I talk about
taxes would have all those governmental services con-
tinued which he sees as benefiting himself. Of course,
persons not on public aid would reduce the costs of that
program ; those without young children would reduce the
costs of elementary education; those who do not drive
would reduce highway expenditures. But the plain and
simple truth is that the stability and well-being of each
one of us is increasingly dependent upon the stability
and well-being of each of our fellow men. The emphasis
must be placed upon the real problem : our tax structure,
and the ordering of our priorities.
The University's task is to be as educationally efficient
as is humanly possible, and to point out clearly, directly,
openly, and honestly the levels of support we need to
accomplish what is asked of us. Having done that, we
continue to be confident that a knowledgeable public will
not abandon its commitment to high quality, higher edu-
cation and will not permit others to abandon that com-
mitment for them.
CONCLUSION
Often, something can be so much a part of our sur-
roundings for so long that we take it for granted. So it
is, at times, with members of our family, or with such
conveniences as our private automobile or the nearby
shopping center; and so it can be with such outstanding
State educational facilities as the University of Illinois.
As a newcomer to the State and to the University, I have
not yet succumbed to the comfort of taking for granted
the University's presence, its achievements, or its con-
tributions to the State.
I have been deeply impressed by the quality of the
people of the University of Illinois. We are a proud and
a capable community. There are a number of times when
our individual responsibilities cause us to have different
perspectives as we consider alternative solutions to prob-
lems. There are times when our differences will loom
large. But I feel in this University an overriding loyalty
to the totality of the University of Illinois among all seg-
ments of our community and I sense a desire on the part
of all to meet and to solve problems. I have never believed
in the theory that any person or any group of persons was
doomed to play constantly either the good or the evil
role. I see no villains nor any superheroes in our commu-
nity ; only able, striving human beings — each attempting
within his abilities and his assignment to make the pro-
grams of the University of Illinois superior programs. Our
predecessors have succeeded in meeting this challenge;
and working together, we shall continue to meet that
challenge. From my vantage point, it seems clear that we
have the people who can face such a\vesome responsibility
directly, cheerfully, confidently, and successfully.
Thus, my active, vocal support of the University dur-
ing these first six months has not been a mere exuberant
utterance of one experiencing the first blush of a new
position. Nor has it been the foolhard)- stance of defend-
ing this University, right or wrong. Tlie Uni\ersity of
Illinois has maintained a stature of excellence, both in its
past and present life. The University's pursuit of excel-
lence is an honorable tradition; and I am committed to
maintaining that tradition.
The President's Annual Message has been heard by lis-
teners of thirty-six radio stations and viewed by the audi-
ences of twenty-five television channels in Illinois, Indiana,
Missouri, and Kentucky.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Tiuigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
I
Ll6
JJ^
¥
^ly
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 231, July 10, 1972
The Scope and Missicm of the University and the
Basic Planning Assufnptions of Its Campuses
A POLICY DOCUMENT SUBMITTED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS TO THE STAFF
OF THE ILLINOIS BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION, JUNF, 15, 1972
INTRODUCTION
By the spring of 1972, both the staff of the Illinois Board
of Higher Education and the staff of the University of Illinois
had agreed that the principles and the procedures introduced
by the IBHE staff to prepare the operating appropriations re-
quests for FY 1972-73 left much to be desired. Executive
Director's Report No. 104 recognized that all sectors of Illi-
nois higher education "are mutually anxious to avoid the
problems and the constricted timetable which hampered
FY 1972-73 deliberations." More specifically, it stated:
"The systems have been asked to provide their separate
plans for approaching FY 1973-74 budget decisions. We
will work to coordinate their responses to effect uniform
de\elopment and review procedures. We are determined
that the next several months be dedicated to institutional
system and statewide planning, encouraging the priority
and program evaluation activity to be done at the cam-
pus and system level."
In response to the IBHE staff's request, the University
suggested that several general issues be considered before the
guidelines for the planning of succeeding appropriation re-
quests were formulated, including the establishment of a basic
fiscal frame of reference for institutional and IBHE-staff
planning, the assessment by each institution (and by the IBHE
staff) of the impact of the budget limitations for the biennium
1971-73 upon the individual institutions and upon the entire
system of higher education, the updating and further refine-
ment of statewide enrollment projections for each campus,
and the examination of the basic planning assumptions regard-
ing scope and mission for the various institutions. It is
toward the last of these issues that this policy document is
addressed.
In its commentary upon the recommendations in Report
Xo. 103 for the elimination or sharp curtailment of some of
its educational programs, the University indicated that its
imuillingness or inability to accept most of those recommen-
dations stemmed in large measure from fundamental dis-
agreements with what appeared to be the assumptions under-
lying them. fSee Faculty Letter No. 225, January 14, 1972.)
It seemed clear then, and the IBHE staff subsequently agreed,
that the apparent conflict between Report No. 103 assump-
tions and the Master Plan - Phase III and other IBHE policy
statements concerning the University's scope and mission had
to be resolved as a prerequisite to effective communication
and cooperation between the Board of Higher Education and
the University of Illinois in future planning.
The first item in Report No. 104 addressed this point di-
rectly in acknowledging that "Campus master plans at senior,
junior, and private institutions need sy.stematic revision to
bring these plans into full concurrence with MP - III, espe-
cially as it relates to scope and mission and interinstitutional
planning." The University commented in response to that ob-
servation that:
"... in the light of the discussion above concerning the
relationship of MP - III to the University of Illinois, that
there is considerable ambiguity or indeterminacy in MP -
HI regarding that document's 'basic planning assump-
tions' for the various institutions. Many aspects of Master
Plan - Phase HI have not been defined operationally, and
frequent disagreements have arisen between the IBHE
staff and institutional representatives regarding the inter-
pretation of MP - HI."
(University of Illinois Commentary on Executive
Director's Report No. 103, p. 57)
During later discus.sions between the IBHE staff and the
staff of each public higher education system, it was agreed
that the initial step toward accomplishing an operational defi-
nition of MP -HI would be the preparation by each institu-
tion of a statement of its conception of the scope and mission
assigned to it and of the corollary basic planning assumptions.
As these institutional statements were being developed, con-
ferences were held by the IBHE staff at each campus in May
to explore the critical issues that might have emerged prior
to the adoption of MP -III and since then, for the purpose
of achieving better mutual understanding of apparent diver-
gencies of interpretation and in the hope of resolving such
differences to the fullest extent possible. This document has
been prepared in the light of those discussions and partly on
the basis of the statements submitted by each of the Univer-
sity's three campuses following the meetings with IBHE staff
members.
The first chapter considers the scope and mission of the
University of Illinois as a whole, together with its major plan-
ning emphases. The following three chapters are focused upon
the distinctive contributions made by each campus to the Uni-
versity's educational mission and responsibilities, and upon
the basic assumptions underlying their respective sets of pri-
orities in educational planning and in the allocation of re-
sources. Considerable attention is given to several specific
problems that were identified during the May "Scope and
Mission Conferences."
While the basic purposes of a university such as the Uni-
versity of Illinois remain constant, the specific activities and
programs undertaken to meet those purposes will var>' with
time. The state of knowledge, current social conditions and
needs, and the nature of the student body are among the fac-
tors which create specific changes in approach while having
basic purposes unchanged. The task of defining the scope and
mission of an educational institution should not be limited
by an "atomistic" method. If the objective is to derive from
this cooperative effort between the IBHE and the institutional
staffs a planning frame of reference that helps avoid confusing
debate over mission whenever a specific program is proposed,
then the proper level of discourse at which to begin is that
concerned with the general educational nature of the Univer-
sity and its role within the total system of higher education.
The following chapter, beginning with a definition of the Uni-
versity's mission in the State, and concluding with an outline
of how it evaluates continuing and new educational programs,
is designed to meet those specifications.
CHAPTER I. Scope and Mission of the University of Illinois
The University of Illinois is a imique institution within
the spectrum of public higher education in the State. In the
words of its faculty senates:
"The people of the State of Illinois have demanded first
quality opportimities in higher education. The University
of Illinois has a unique role in meeting that demand be-
cause it is the most comprehensive of the state's institu-
tions of higher learning. Gathering its students from both
the geographic and populations center of Illinois, it is the
only institution in the public system proved capable of
delivering at the highest level a broad range of instruc-
tional, research, and public services.
"The three campuses of the University of Illinois, strongly
interdependent and mutually sustaining, comprise one of
the outstanding state imiversity systems in the country."
(Joint Faculty Senate Resolution, November 16-24, 1970)
As the land-grant institution of Illinois, this compre-
hensive University has constituencies throughout the entire
State, with principal components in different settings exliibit-
ing varying emphases and resources. Although its mission and
educational responsibilities encompass all levels of instruction,
research, and service, the University places particular em-
phasis upon its graduate and professional programs. The Uni-
versity of Illinois is the State's foremost graduate and pro-
fessional public institution, and it is the one public university
in Illinois with the established capabihty for generating the
Federal and private resources that are necessary to support
instruction and research of high quality at the advanced grad-
uate level.
Planning Assumptions
Five general assumptions were included in the Uni\ersity's
Provisional Development Plan that was presented to the IBHE
in September, 1970.
1. That the University of Illinois now has a imique role in
the State system of higher education and that this status
should be reflected in Master Plan - Phase III. More spe-
cifically, it is assumed that the University will have pri-
ority in responsibility for the future expansion of advanced
graduate and professional education among the public imi-
versities of Illinois, together with associated research and
public service.
2. That the University's claim to priority among the public
universities of Illinois in advanced graduate studies and ^M
research should be particularly recognized for programs ^B
involving multidisciplinary study and investigation.
3. That the Chicago Circle Campus be expanded as rapidly
as possible into a comprehensive urban university. ^^
4. That the University not propose the establishment of new ^0
campuses during the next decade, on the assumption that
the enrollment projections for the State over the next
twenty years do not justify such expansion.
5. That the University's enrollment growth henceforth em-
phasize upper-division, graduate and professional education
— with little increase beyond 1970 in lower-division
enrollment.
While the last two assumptions require no further com-
ment at this time, and the third will be discussed in a later
chapter, the overall economic, educational, and social condi-
tions that have evolved since the submission of those proposals
almost two years ago argue even more convincingly, as the
University stressed in its commentary on Report No. 103, that
such an assignment of responsibility is in the best interest of
the .State of Illinois. The mission of the University of Illinois
as a whole in the State system of higher education was am-
plified as follows in the Provisional Development Plan, and
has been cnnsistently presented since that document was
issued:
"It is firmly believed that the best interests of the State
will be served if the University not only is encouraged to
maintain the high quality of its present programs but is
granted priority in responsibility for whatever expansion
of advanced graduate and professional education might be
projected under Master Plan - Phase III. This does not
mean that the University seeks a monopoly upon all pro-
grams at this level in all fields; but it is believed that in
a period of some uncertainty as to how much expansion
of these fimctions might be needed during the next two
decades — especially during the 1980's — considerations
of economy and the assurance of quality argue convinc-
ingly for concentration of them at the University of Illi-
nois. A comprehensi\e university such as the University
of Illinois provides the most economical and most effec-
tive institutional means whereby the State can be assured
of maintaining the broad range of specialized faculties,
facilities, and programs that will be required to keep it
abreast of the rapidly changing technical and professional
needs of modem society. This is true not only because of ^m
the disproportionate cost to the State of trying to duplicate ^M
such resources in other institutions — without assurance
that the expected quality and productivity would be forth-
coming; but there is the further consideration that no m
other public institution could begin to match the Univer- ■
sity of Illinois in securing the outside support from Fed-
eral and foundation sources that will be essential to sup-
plement the State's contributions."
Recognized repeatedly across the country and around the
world as one of the nation's foremost centers of learning, the
University of Illinois is the only public institution with the
range and quality of expertise, supporting resources, and
differentiated strengths to undertake the high-quality profes-
sional and doctoral inultidisciplinar)' programs that nuist be
built upon tirst-ratc disciplinary foundations. Again, in the
language of the Proiisionat Dtiilopmint I'tan:
"The University recognizes the existence of a great di-
versity of human needs and social problems, with cor-
respondingly varied requirements of expertise and otlicr
V resources for relevant response by educational institutions.
' Hence, it does not assert a monopolistic claim to all types
of instructional or public-service programs of problem-
solving nature. Instead, it is urged that the University be
^ given priority in responsibility for those instructional, re-
P search, and public-service programs of this type that re-
quire doctoral-level education (or the equivalent), to-
gether with highly technical multidisciplinary resources
and a broad base of supporting disciplinary programs of
high quality. E\en with an unnecessary expenditure of
State funds in the effort to duplicate such disciplinary
resources in other State institutions, the probability of se-
curing comparable quality is not high. Furthermore, as
noted above, the University of Illinois is able to attract
a far higher level of outside support for multidisciplinary
programs than other State supported universities."
Program Emphases
Flowing from these basic planning assumptions are a num-
ber of program areas that will be emphasized by the Univer-
sity during this decade :
— expansion and inno\ation in the training of health profes-
sionals and the deliver)' of health care for the State;
— interdisciplinary instruction, research, and public service
related to the critical challenges confronting urban society
and metropolitan areas;
— improving the quality of graduate and undergraduate edu-
cation in order to increase the effectiveness and efficiency
of society's utilization of its hiunan resources;
— responding to social needs by cultivating programs for a
%-ariety of "public-ser\ice professions," such as public
health, social welfare, continuing education, public admin-
istration, education, etc.;
— cooperative interaction amongst a wide range of depart-
ments focused upon preventing and solving problems re-
lated to the environment.
Additional developments of great importance to the Uni-
versity and to the State ^vill be undertaken, and significant
shifts of emphasis within existing units and programs will oc-
cur. However, the University will concentrate upon the ac-
complishment of those objectives outlined above, as well as
the maintenance of the strength and excellence represented
by the requirements of its internal constituencies. Much of the
quality of other governmental agencies in Illinois — includ-
^ ing school systems and higher education institutions — will
B depend upon the ability of the University of Illinois to con-
:inue to provide professional personnel to staff those agencies
and to provide research findings to support programs of those
agencies. The University will need the understanding and the
I supfxjrt of the IBHE regarding the nature, the organization,
and the quality of its instructional and research programs,
and the value of the services they provide to the State and
the nation.
An Organic University
The University of Illinois is not a loose federation of uni-
versities, nor is it a system of totally independent units. Its
role in the State as the standard of excellence and service in
public graduate and professional education rests upon its
organic wholeness. The general statement of the mission to
which the University is committed, and upon which its devel-
opment thus far has been based, starts with an emphasis on
the fundamental responsibility of the University as a whole.
The specific contributions that each campus makes to the
University's mission are diverse, since they reflect the needs,
thrusts, and methodologies appropriate to different settings;
but the campuses are alike in the broad nature of their public
responsibilities, in their basic educational policies, and in their
institutional quality; and they are integrated by a university-
wide organization designed to maximize their educational
effectiveness and the efficient use of their academic resources.
All of the campuses of the University of Illinois share
common goals, even though each of them makes a highly
differentiated contribution to the University's mission. All of
the campuses are assisted and strengthened from intercampus
cooperation and from university-wide services, even though
each of them carries out the vast majority of its functions as
an administratively autonomous unit. All of the campuses are
urged to achieve intercampus complementarity, to avoid un-
necessary duplication, and to develop thrusts responsive to
their particular orientation and setting, even though each of
them is permitted to build upon and to foster faculty strengths
and initiatives. All of the campuses are encouraged to operate
at qualitatively equivalent levels, even though each of them
provides different services for varied clientele.
Particularly significant for the University's primary re-
sponsibility for state-supported graduate and professional edu-
cation is the fact that at advanced levels all of the campuses
share in its capability for securing Federal and private sup-
port. As the University explained to Committee N in a state-
ment submitted on October 28, 1970:
"It is important to stress the subject of supplementary
Federal and private resources as necessities for the effec-
tive realization of many educational goals and priorities
which are now clearly seen as being imperatives for the
1970's and beyond. State funds simply won't be available
in sufficient quantity and distribution to meet all of these
needs; indeed, the State alone should not be expected to
provide such support. The burden of providing a substan-
tial portion of the 'matching' funds required should and
could be shouldered by an institution such as the Univer-
sity of Illinois system."
In order to comprehend the University's assertion that it
operates as an "integrated university system" (because the
isolation of its components into discrete campuses does con-
siderable violence to the realities and values of both its pro-
grams and its governance), it is necessary to know the specific
functions carried out by the central administration of the
University. They were outlined recently by the President of
the University as follows. (See Faculty Letter No. 230, May
10, 1972.)
1. The enunciation of the mission of the University of Illi-
nois; the development of long-range, comprehensive plans
for the attainment of that mission; and the development of
a plan of evaluation on a regular basis of the success of the
University in meeting that mission.
2. The attainment of the resources necessary to permit the
support of plans and the development of facilities to meet
the mission of the University.
3. The allocation of resources, as available, to the campuses
and to other imits of the University within the require-
ments and the priorities of the long-range comprehensive
plan for the attainment of the mission of the University.
4. The development of relationships both within Illinois and
in the nation and world to insure that the University of
Illinois plays its appropriate role as a member of the
larger education community.
5. The coordination of the operation of the various com-
ponents of the University to insure that the University
functions as an organic university rather than as an aggre-
gation of unrelated campuses and capitalizes upon the ad-
vantages of its resources as a system.
6. The administration of University-wide educational pro-
grams. Examples include the Institute of Government and
Public Affairs, the Survey Research Laboratory, and the
Division of University Extension.
7. The operation of various specific tasks which should func-
tion at a University level either for efficiency or to insure
the consistency necessary to permit the University and its
Governing Boards to meet their responsibilities.
8. The de\-elopment of information programs to attempt to
secure full understanding of and support for the mission
and activities of the University of Illinois.
The relationship between function number five and the
special benefits derived from the Univ-ersity of Illinois' opera-
tion as a unified educational system constitutes a basic premise
of this "Scope and Mission" paper, and is developed through-
out each of the chapters. Function number si.x, however, re-
quires explication at this point — for the organization and
administration of university-wide programs is designed to
eliminate undesirable duplication of effort and to mobilize
the full resources of the University as a whole, in support of
important instructional, research, and public-service programs.
In addition to assisting in the coordination of intercampus
programs, the University of Illinois has several agencies and
programs that operate on a university-wide basis — both in
terms of intrauniversity ser\'ices and with reference to services
to the public. The Institute of Government and Public Affairs,
the Institute of Labor and Industrial Relations, the Survey
Research Laboratory, and the Division of University Extension
are well-kno\Mt examples of agencies with university-wide re-
sponsibilities for public services in their respecti\-e areas. It is
possible within the University system to coordinate the in-
terests and activities in these various areas so as to provide
more effective services and to control costly duplication. Con-
sidering the great demand for specialized professional services
in these various areas, there undoubtedly would be a pro-
liferation of competing units, programs, and ser\'ices among
the three campuses if they were not a part of the administra-
tive responsibility of the University of Illinois as a unified
multicampus system.
Establishment of New Programs
The relationship between institutional mission and new
program proposals has become most critical at the doctoral
level. The rigorous and consistent application of evaluative
criteria is a major responsibility of the University's central
administration (and is related directly to function number
five in the preceding section). It is also a crucial role of the
Board of Higher Education's program staff. Since the Univer-
sity of Illinois alone among the public institutions in the State
has demonstrated the ability to conduct high-quality advanced
graduate and research programs, and to generate the nonstate
resources required to support them, it should be allowed to
develop, transmit, preserve, and apply knowledge in response
to new conditions and to the social requirements created by
them. This academic development must occur whether or not
programs with similar titles exist potentially or in fact at other
universities in the State. It must be recognized, if these dis-
cussions of scope and mission are to serve any purpose for
the IBHE, that an investment in graduate and professional
programs at the doctoral level must be concentrated at the
University of Illinois where the calibre of faculty, disciplinary
strength, established expertise, and system resources promise
the greatest probability of return to the State. Mission and
quality must be the decisive factors, and at the advanced
graduate and professional level if there is a surplus of pro-
grams, that surplus is elsewhere than at the University of
Illinois.
Such a position by no means implies blanket authorization
for expansion by the institution or any of its campuses. A new-
program proposal at the doctoral level from any university
should stipulate a set of criteria for assessing the progress and
performance of that program, and delineate its basic disci-
plinary thrusts and boundaries. The proposal should include
a clear indication of its relationship to the university's mis-
sion and long-range planning assumptions (and at least in the
University of Illinois' case to the specific differential contri-
bution a particular campus provides in meeting the Univer-
sity's educational responsibilities). In addition, the submitter
should be prepared to discuss the general long-term resource
implications.
When the University examines the potential of a new
program at the doctoral level, questions are asked regarding
the requisite foundations, including:
— the need for a critical mass in the specific field and in the
broad disciplinary area;
— the strengths and weaknesses of the existing faculty in that
discipline;
— the evidence of responsible actions toward building a qual-
ity program;
— the capacity to generate nonstate resources;
— the potential for the achievement and maintenance of high
academic stature;
— the advantages of a unique setting or combination of
resources;
— the distinctiveness of the program (or its potential) in
relation to the natiu-e and quality of existing programs that
appear to be in the same field at other public or private
institutions;
— the clientele and the social need for the program;
— the complementary use of the University's (e.g., our sys-
tem's) academic resources.
These criteria for the evaluation of new programs gen-
erally are applicable to existing programs as well, and it is
appropriate to review the process for assessing the quality of
present programs as a conclusion to the discussion of the
University's mission.
The Evaluation of Existing Programs
The Executive Director of the IBHE emphasized, in his
closing remarks to the Collegiate Common Market planning
conference in Carbondale on June 2, 1972, the importance of
involv^ing faculty at both the initiatory and the evaluation
phases of cooperative academic programs. It long has been
the University of Illinois' position that the serious review of
any educational program should not be conducted without
the intensive participation of those faculty members re-
sponsible for considering matters of educational policy. The
competition for scarce resources at any reputable institution of
higher education assures in some degree a process of continu-
ing comparative evaluation, and the delineation of institutional
objecti\es should provide a more consistent and conipre-
hensi\e frame for the longer range task of program rc\iew.
One must always keep in mind, however, that "the unique
k system of academic decision-making in universities rests es-
sentially upon the historically validated recognition that the
development of sound educational policies requires the pri-
mary involvement of the faculty members who are best in-
^ fonned about the educational substance and \'alues at issue."
^ i'niiersity of Illinois Commentary on Report A'o. 103)
At all three of the University's campuses, faculty groups
are concluding work on long-range studies of their respective
academic programs and priorities. The report of the Urbana-
Champaign Study Committee on Program Evaluation
(SCOPES has been recommended by the Chairman of the
Board of Higher Education to even,' institution of higher edu-
cation in Illinois. Such .studies will provide the guidance re-
quired for sound decisions at the campus and the university
level in the academic planning and resource allocation pro-
cesses. These decisions will be based upon an understanding
of the overriding purposes of the University of Illinois and
will take into account the basic planning assumptions of the
campuses, their respective contributions to the mission of the
University within the state system of higher education, state
and national needs, and the prospects of financial support
from State, Federal and other sources.
CHAPTER II. Chicogo Circle Campus
No issue related to the mission of the University of Illi-
nois and its basic planning assumptions has been so mired
in uncertainty and controversy as the future of the Chicago
Circle Campus. Designated in Master Plan - Phase III as one
of seven "public graduate universities for expanded and new
graduate programs at the Ph.D. level," and supported in that
document as "a comprehensive urban university," it is still not
clear whether the general planning assumptions outlined for
the University in the preceding chapter are accepted by the
IBHE as applicable to Chicago Circle.
The Chicago Circle Campus derives its conception of its
nature and its fundamental academic objectives from the role
of the University of Illinois in the total structure of higher
education in the State. It is a basic imit of the State's land-
grant, premier graduate and professional university, and the
campus has built its contribution to the University's mission
upon specific strengths and resources in a particular setting.
It is assumed that the State's major public university has
unique responsibilities for advanced graduate and professional
I'ducation in the Chicago metropolitan area. Hence, the real
^ issue confronting Chicago Circle should be how it meets those
W responsibilities as an integral part of the University of Illinois
for example, Chicago Circle would default in its obligation to
the Chicago area if it did not generate substantial non-state
. resources to direct toward the solution of urban problems).
Basic Planning Assumptions
The reference shelves of the University and of the TPJIE
are filled with policy statements and commentaries concerning
the role of the Chicago Circle Campus. The IBHE's Report
of the Special Committee on Nezv Institutions, the Report on
Governing Structure, and Master Plan - Phase III all agree
upon the desirability of graduate and professional programs
at Chicago Circle; in turn, the University's Provisional Devel-
opment Plan, commentaries on the initial draft of MP -III
and on Report No. 103, statements to Committee N, and the
recent assessment of 1971-73 budgetary impacts all present
the University's attempts to articulate a conception of the
campus' role and to secure implementation of that conception.
The University repeatedly has expressed the strong belief that
its urban campus should be dedicated to the basic educational
values of the land-grant movement, with the determination
to find creative expression for them in the complex and turbu-
lent urban environment of the 1970's. This does not imply that
Chicago Circle is to be a mere replica of the campus at Ur-
bana-Champaign, since it has been recognized that there
should be considerably greater emphasis at Chicago Circle
upon the fundamental disciplines, professional education, and
applied research that are related to the major problems of
urban society. The University has always a.ssumed, however,
that its campus at Chicago Circle should and would achieve
a level of quality in its unique spectrum of educational func-
tions that would be essentially equivalent in general to that
existing at the Urbana-Champaign Campus. There are three
general reasons that seem clearly to justify this assumption:
1. The people of the .State of Illinois need and deserve to
have a public university of high quality that will provide a
broad spectrum of educational opportunities to a great
variety of urban students who wish to attend such an insti-
tution of higher education in an urban setting.
2. Only a public university of the kind conceived for the
University of Illinois at Chicago Circle would enable an
urban society to make the kinds of investment in its human
resources that are necessary to its viability and to its
capability for self-improvement.
3. Only this kind of uni\ersity would have the public commit-
ment and the varied scholarly and technical resources re-
quired to assist large metropolitan communities in their
efforts to solve critical problems.
The University remains determined to meet these com-
mitments to the State of Illinois through its Chicago Circle
Campus. Conditions have changed since the earlier statement
that discussed Chicago Circle, but the present situation only
reinforces the conviction that the campus must continue to
develop the instruction, research, and service programs that
are commensurate with this conception of its responsibilities
as part of the State's comprehensive public university in an
urban metropolitan setting.
When the first doctoral programs for Chicago Circle were
brought to the Board of Higher Education on January 10,
1968, the staff recommended approval of them with the
comment that "there was never any question concerning the
need for doctoral programs to be provided by a public insti-
tution in the Chicago area," and that it assumed that Chicago
Circle would be developed as a "fully developed, complex,
multipurpose university." Although there are other public
institutions of higher education in metropolitan Chicago, their
mission does not include the development of educational pro-
grams of the advanced graduate and professional nature that
are the hallmarks of the University of Illinois. In addition to
satisfying the educational needs of its potential student clien-
tele, Chicago Circle has a special responsibility to address
itself to the problems of the urban environment through ad-
vanced research and public ser\ice. Responsive to its par-
ticular setting, the Chicago Circle Campus plans to draw
upon the academic resources and expertise of the University
as a whole to develop and strengthen the educational thrusts
representing its contribution to the University's mission in the
State of Illinois and in the nation.
Major Program Areas
One of the historic qualities of the University of Illinois is
its ability to integrate the research and public service activities
of its faculty, staff, and student body with its educational pro-
grams. The nature of its commitment to research and public
ser\-ice therefore influences in large measure the nature and
scope of such a uni\'ersity's instructional programs. A strong
public urban university must de\elop programs in those pro-
fessional fields and disciplines that have a high potential for
making a measurable impact upon urban communities. There-
fore, such professional fields as engineering, architecture,
urban planning, social work, and urban education etc., —
coupled with a broad concentration in the applied social
sciences, and building upon the unique resources and organi-
zation of the College of Urban Sciences — will be distinguish-
ing characteristics of the long-term development of the Chi-
cago Circle Campus.
Ho-ivever, these applied fields must be supported by strong
programs in the related basic disciplines which provide an
underlying body of investigative methodology and systematic
knowledge. There are no examples in American higher educa-
tion of institutions that are strong in the applied areas but
weak in those basic fields of learning which must directly
support them. Doctoral programs both in the fundamental
and in the applied areas at the Chicago Circle Campus have
been and will continue to be designed so that they respond
to the criteria set forth in the "new program" section of the
preceding chapter.
The diverse ethnic, racial, and religious composition of
the population of metropolitan Chicago provides an oppor-
tunity for Chicago Circle to serve the community and to draw
strength from it in those areas and disciplines related to its
intellectual and cultural life. The quality of life in the com-
munity depends not only upon the physical, economic, and
social environments but also upon those areas that enrich
the experience of its inhabitants. The major public university
in a metropolitan area has a special responsibility to con-
tribute to this enrichment process through its unique capa-
bilities. Thus, the special nature of the metropolitan Chicago
community provides guidance for the development of instruc-
tional and research programs at Chicago Circle in the arts and
humanities.
Chicago Circle has a strong commitment to develop pro-
grams that directly complement and provide support to the
programs of the University of Illinois at the Medical Center.
Such a cooperative relationship is already under way in the
areas of bioengineering, public health, and the basic medical
sciences. Since these areas are of an advanced professional and
scientific nature, Chicago Circle's contributing programs must
be developed through the advanced graduate level to make
cooperation both possible and effective. The relationship be-
tween Chicago Circle's special capabilities in such areas as
social work, education, and administrative sciences and the
capabilities of the Medical Center in the health sciences and
allied fields are presently being examined ^vith the goal of
identifying additional opportunities for the imiversity-wide
use of academic resources.
As the campus of a comprehensive public university in
metropolitan Chicago, Chicago Circle has a special mission
to provide leadership and support for cooperative educational
ventures among the various public and private institutions of
higher education in that region. Many such cooperati\'e ven-
tures are now already in existence or in the planning stages,
involving institutions of higher education of practically every
size and type. If the campus is to fulfill its assignment under
Master Plan - Phase III "to be a focus for numerous Col-
legiate Common Market activities," it is essential that Chicago
Circle be able to contribute that which characterizes the
University of Illinois, a broad range of high-quality educa-
tional programs with concentration at the advanced graduate
and professional levels.
Finally, Chicago Circle has a special role in providing
educational opportunities to the various ethnic and racial
groups in Chicago which historically have had restricted
access to a major public university. Through special programs
such as the Educational Assistance Program and the Native
American Program, the campus will continue to seek out and
provide supportive services for these groups. This it nnist do
in consort with the other publicly supported institutions in
Chicago, particularly the Chicago City Colleges. The pilot
program of joint registration and programming with Mal-
colm X College is characteristic of the emphasis which Chi-
cago Circle will increasingly place upon cooperative methods
for achieving equal educational opportunity for the inhabitants
of Chicago. AVhile these acti\'ities in and for the Chicago
metropolitan area are important for that area, they also repre-
sent the commitment of a land-grant, comprehensive univer-
sity to the solution of state-wide and nation-w-ide problems.
Chicago Circle programs, for example, will speak to urban
needs be they found in Chicago, Peoria, in East St. Louis, or,
for that matter, in New York or Philadelphia. This broad con-
cept of the land-grant, comprehensive mission is crucial to
the success of Chicago Circle as a campus and to the success
of its contribution to the people of Chicago and of Illinois.
The Fundamental Policy Issue
In its commentary on the initial draft of Master Plan -
Phase III, the University of Illinois expanded upon its under-
standing of the Master Plan's commitment that "the Univer-
sity of Illinois at Chicago Circle is supported as a compre-
hensi\e urban university, the mission for which it was
designed" :
"In addition, one of the critical demands upon an urban-
oriented public university is to pro%'ide the highest quality
and broadest range of educational programs for students
in its geographical area. If the Chicago Circle Campus is
expected to expand first-rate, low-cost educational oppor-
tunities in the Chicago area, if it is expected to prepare
undergraduates and graduates for a vast spectrum of
urban-related employment and service requirements, and
if it is expected to develop or undergird innovative and
multidisciplinary graduate and professional programs that
respond to the needs of the Chicago area — then 'the mis-
sion for which it was designed' must be supported without
qualification, reser\-ation, or limitation.
"Existing strengths, demonstrable need, efficient use of
resources, potential cooperation — these are all important
criteria for assessing the merit of any proposed graduate
or professional program. However, the Chicago Circle
Campus is at a unique stage of growth. A generalized and
restrictive interpretation of its mission and range of pro-
grams should not be allowed to impede the establishment
of a public university that will train graduates who can
compete effectively in the local or the national employ-
ment market with the graduates of nationally prestigious
universities, and that will provide the kinds and quality
of research (basic and applied) required to assist a
large urban community in its eflorts to solve its critical
problems."
While discussing the basic planning assumptions of the
Chicago Circle Campus, and the major program emphases
that flow from those assumptions, the fundamental public-
policy issue in regard to Chicago Circle nnist remain in
f focus: Are the responsible agencies of State Government
willing to support the University of Illinois' eflorts to give the
Chicago metropolitan area the kind of public uni\ersity it
needs and which its contribution to the State's welfare would
m clearly justify?
CHAPTER III. Medical Center Campus
The reference to the Medical Center Campus in the
"Scope and Mission" chapter of Master Plan - Phase III is
short and somewhat circular. "The aspirations, histories, and
locale of Illinois' several systems yield seven campuses that
offer graduate programs that are comprehensive or modified
comprehensive in scope, including the Medical Center campus
of the University of Illinois, a distinguished institution whose
scope and mission clearly are a product of its objectives."
The Medical Center Campus offers such a wide range of
educational programs in the health field that it fulfills com-
pletely the definition of "a comprehensive health education
institution." The educational objectives of this modified com-
prehensive campus are to prepare high-quality professionals
to meet the manpower needs of the health fields, to develop
new knowledge through a wide range of research programs,
and to provide innovative health care ser\ices through the
operation of hospitals and clinics which represent the setting
for much of the patient-centered educational experiences for
students of this campus. The scope of the educational offerings
includes medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nursing, allied health
sciences, public health, and the graduate programs at master's
and doctoral levels. However important these offerings for
"in house" students may be, the basic responsibilities of the
campus include two additional important components: con-
tinuing education for practicing professionals, and house staff
programs leading to certification in the various specialty areas
(including "family practice").
Slate Policy
Unlike the other campuses of the University of Illinois,
the basic planning assumptions at the Medical Center are
mandated by and directly responsive to present state policy.
The report Education in the Health Fields for State of Illinois,
endorsed by the IBHE in 1968, reflects in the responsibilities
assigned to the University of Illinois the assumptions that
girded the University's original series of proposals submitted
one year earlier. Since these principles essentially still serve as
M the blueprints for the campus' contribution to the University's
W role in the State, they bear repeating.
"The University's program rests on several assumptions
as to the needs in the health fields which seem to be jus-
I tified by the results of numerous studies of professional
manpower in relation to the rising demand for better
health care. These needs may be stated as follows:
1. Greater opportunity for Illinois youths to secure profes-
sional education in the health fields. Admission to most of
these professions, especially medicine and dentistry, has
been limited by the shortage of educational facilities.
2. Increase in the number of graduates of professional train-
ing programs of the State — as one step toward overcoming
the shortage of its professional manpower.
3. Greater efficiency and effectiveness in the educational pro-
grams of the various health fields.
4. Increased retention within Illinois of the graduates of its
health professions schools.
3. Better methods of organizing and disseminating information
about advances in science and technology to practitioners.
6. Improved utilization of professional manpower and other
resources in the delivery of health care services.
7. Expanded research on the hazards to health due to unfav-
orable environmental conditions and development of the
means of preventing or ameliorating such conditions."
Experience in the intervening years has suggested that an
eighth general objective should be added.
8. Identify new functional areas where increasing specializa-
tion in the health fields suggests or demands entirely new
classifications of professional, technical, and/or vocational
manpower be developed. For these, if appropriate at the
University level, educational programs must be created.
The assumptions upon which the planning by all units of
the Medical Center Campus and the campus as a whole have
been predicated are based upon the recommendations in Edu-
cation in the Health Fields for State of Illinois. That report,
which suggests a .strategy for overcoming manpower defi-
ciencies in the health fields, ascribes major responsibilities to
the University of Illinois and particularly to the Medical
Center Campus. In fact, of the total sixty-six recommenda-
tions in the report, twenty-five are concerned with programs
at the University of Illinois. These recommendations include
the call for an increase of at least 200 medical student grad-
uates over the 205 who were graduated the year the report
was published (1968). Toward this objective the University
has embarked upon a comprehensive program of innovation
and expansion in medical education that is unparalleled in
this country. Further specific recommendations urge the Uni-
versity to help accomplish these increases by building upon
the faculty expertise at the Medical Center and the Urbana-
Champaign campuses, and by bringing into the University's
educational orbit (by afliliation) a substantial number of high-
quality community hospitals.
Other recommendations propose significant enrollment
and program expansion in dentistry, nursing, allied health
sciences, and pharmacy. In the field of nursing, especially, the
need for graduate education was stressed, because of the
dearth of teachers and administrators who are needed to staff
the expanding professional programs in this area.
Public Health
An entirely new program representing a field in which
there has been a conspicuous gap in Illinois higher education
was recommended by the IBHE for initiation by the Univer-
sity at its Medical Center Campus. In Recommendation 33
the statement is made: "Graduate programs of public health
be established by the University of Illinois capable of enrolling
100 master's degree candidates and 40 doctoral degree can-
didates." In suggesting the scope of this program, the special
areas of expertise residing at the other two campuses of the
University were recognized. The graduate programs in public
health will be heavily interdisciplinary, relying particularly
upon faculty members at the other two campuses for instruc-
tional and research support in the behavioral and social sci-
ences. The biological and engineering fields at the other
campuses — especially the Chicago Circle Campus — will
also support special aspects of the public-health program. In
addition, in the program planning for this new school, faculty
at the Center for Heahh Care Studies at the University of
Chicago Graduate School of Business, and at a similar center
recently started by Northwestern University in conjunction
with the American Hospital Association, were identified as
potential resources for strengthening and expanding the scope
of the school.
The Public Health program at the University of Illinois is
being planned as a model for the intercampus and interinsti-
tutional blending of academic resources — an internal and an
external "common market."
Basic Sciences
Recommendation 51 in Education in the Health Fields
for State of Illinois reads: "The teaching of the basic sciences
and general education components of curricula offered by the
University of Illinois College of Pharmacy be discontinued on
the Medical Center Campus and offered on the Chicago
Circle Campus or the Urbana-Champaign Campus. . . ." Those
general education offerings that were available on the Medical
Center Campus were introduced years ago before there was a
Chicago Circle Campus, and when the distance to Na\y Pier
was too great to permit student commuting for limited course
offerings. One of the basic planning assumptions of the Med-
ical Center Campus, however, is that as tenured faculty in the
few areas offering general-education courses in the curriculum
in pharmacy are retired or resign, replacements will not be
hired and arrangements will be made for these educational
requirements to be accomplished in conjunction with the Chi-
cago Circle Campus or other higher-educational institutions.
Of greater concern to the University, however, has been
the allegation that chemistry offerings at Chicago Circle, Col-
lege of Pharmacy, and the School of Ba<:ic Medical Sciences
of the College of Medicine are duplicative and the recom-
mendation that such work be consolidated on the Chicago
Circle Campus. A joint committee to study the basic medical
science programs at the two Chicago campuses has been estab-
lished, and the preliminary reports prepared for its chairman
indicate strong complementarity and rare duplication of re-
sources. Analysis of course contents reveals that the offerings
in the general discipline of chemistry at the Medical Center
Campus are highly specific to the curricula of which they are
a part. The biochemistry offerings in the School of Basic Med-
ical Sciences focus on the chemistry of human biology, a field
not offered by the chemistry department at Chicago Circle
(graduate students at Chicago Circle who need human bio-
logical chemistry within their graduate course studies enroll
in these courses at the Medical Center Campus). In the Col-
lege of Pharmacy, the Department of Medicinal Pharmacy
offers specially tailored organic chemistry which is totally
oriented toward the chemistry of drugs and biologicals, a
highly essential and integral component of the education of
the pharmacist in the contemporary setting. A basic planning
assumption, therefore, is that course offerings which are highly
specific to professional curricula, and are almost without
exception required as a prerequisite to continued accredita-
tion of the academic unit, will continue to be offered to stu-
dents in the various curricula and colleges on the Medical
Center Campus.
At the graduate level \ery few new doctoral programs are
anticipated. Intercampus programs in biomedical engineering
are in the development phase, and in human genetics there
is a growing requirement and demand for a program at the
master's and eventually at the doctoral level. There is also a
need to develop combined professional and graduate degrees,
i.e. M.S.-M.D., Ph.D.-M.D., D.D.S.-M.S., and perhaps others.
Many professional students want advanced training in specific
areas available in the graduate college and progress is being
made in the development of such programs. Both the College
of Medicine and the Graduate College have approved the
development of combined degree programs. Those students
interested in teaching and research as well as professional
practice will be tomorrow's well-qualified faculty.
The intercampus committee for the basic medical .sci-
ences has been charged with reviewing existing programs in
this area, and with developing further mechanisms for the
coordination of intercampus efforts. That committee, and
hopefully the IBHE staff, will take into account the historical
patterns, the comparative cost involved in alternative methods
of meeting the specific educational objectives and student
needs. Less attention should be paid to such factors as depart-
ment titles and administrative arrangements. Meantime, the
University wishes to reiterate the warning expressed in its
commentary on Report No. 103:
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly how damaging it
would be to the University of Illinois at the Medical Cen-
ter to eliminate or sharply curtail graduate education in
the basic medical sciences at that campus. Without any
question, the leading faculty members in these depart-
ments would seek to go elsewhere and with them would go
research grants that run to several million dollars each
year. The School of Basic Medical Sciences in the College
of Medicine, in particular, would be critically damaged
by the loss of its graduate and associated research pro-
grams. In comparison with the basic medical-science de-
partments in other medical schools, the University's
departments would rapidly lose ground in terms of faculty,
contribution to human health, and attraction of financial
support from outside agencies."
University of Illinois Hospital
A basic planning assumption which does not flow from
Education in the Health Fields for State of Ulinois relates
to the University of Illinois Hospital. The author of the IBHE
report recommended the reduction of the University of Illi-
nois (then Research and Educational) Hospital to a highly
specialized research and advanced training facility, with no
more than two to three hundred beds, and modeled after the
Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health. This
highly restrictive mission was questioned by the staff of the
Board of Higher Education and these recommendations were
not included in the final version of the report adopted by the
Board. Instead, the staff suggested that the Health Education
Commission take this issue under study and make further
recommendations.
The Medical Advisory Committee of the Health Educa-
tion Commission has annually reviewed the request for plan-
ning funds for replacing the obsolete portions of the University
of Illinois Hospital and has agreed that its continued existence
as a comprehensive, multi-mission institution is important in
undergirding the health professions education programs.
Further, they have recognized that with its patient population
drawn more and more from the west and south sides of Chi-
cago where there is a serious gap in the availability of health
care services, the University of Illinois Hospital has assumed
a major role supplementing Cook County Hospital's ser\'ices
and offering a variety of high-quality, sophisticated diagnostic
and therapeutic capabilities for patients in need of these spe-
8
cial senices. The contribution whicli the University of Illinois
Hospital makes in the preparation of highly qualified spe-
cialists is of equal importance. This hospital has traditionally
been among the leaders, not only in the Chicago metro-
politan area but in the country, in its attraction of quality
candidates for its house staff positions and the rate at which
it fills its positions through the various matching plans (the
highest in Chicago in the 1972 intern and resident matching
program).
Planning for the Medical Center Campus has, as one of
its basic assumptions, the need for a highly effective, com-
prehensive, high quality hospital facility to serve as the edu-
cational and research hub for the multiple clinical school
educational programs of the College of Medicine, and further
to serve as the clinical setting for innovative educational pro-
grams in nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, and the allied health
sciences.
Planning and Commitment
The University of Illinois consistently has stated in every
major policy document since its Provisional Development
Plan that the main problems regarding the programs at the
Medical Center Campus relate to the availability of resources
and not to uncertainty as to planning goals and policies. The
Medical Center Campus is the focus for one of the most far-
reaching developmental programs in the health fields ever
imdertaken in this country. Virtually all aspects of the
campus' operations provide professional, administrative, and
logistical support for nev\' and expanding programs located
both on the campus and in several regional centers outside
the Chicago area. The recent study of the impact of the
n' 1971-72 and F\' 1972-73 budgets submitted by the Uni-
versity to the IBHE staff emphasizes that with the investment
in planning, employment of faculty, creation of facilities,
commitments to students, and the inclusion of vast new and
eager constituencies fRockford, Peoria, and the Metro Six
Hospitals), any significant retreat from the programmatic ob-
jectives would ha\e repercussions of extremely serious dimen-
sions. Yet these programs cannot be carried forward unless
the essential additional resources are provided for FY 1973-74.
That year is the "go-or-no-go" one as regards the implemen-
tation of the University's participation in the State's program
of expansion in the health fields — as it will be for all other
institutions involved, public and private. If these additional
resources are not provided to support that program, it will
have to be acknowledged explicitly that the State's plan has
been curtailed. There is very little time left.
CHAPTER tV. Urbano-Chompaign Campus
The reference to the Urbana-Champaign Campus in the
Master Plan - Phase III "Scope and Mission" chapter ac-
knowledges the outstanding worldwide reputation that it
enjoys, and affirms that no arguments can be ofTered against
its continued leadership as a full scale comprehensive insti-
tution. However, the last paragraph of that section raises a
potential problem that cannot go unchallenged. Indeed, such
a challenge was issued in the University's commentary on the
initial draft of MP - III, and must be reiterated here, for the
campus cannot proceed with its planning responsibilities until
a clearer resolution is achieved.
The Master Plan sentence reads :
"The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's cur-
rent comprehensive roster of graduate programs should be
expanded only in areas not to lie developed at other Uni-
versity Centers."
The University maintains that innovative programs of grad-
uate and professional education proposed for development at
the Urbana-Champaign Campus to meet the changing needs
of society should not be stifled by the application of this
somewhat nebulous precept. The Urbana-Champaign Campus
cannot possibly meet its educational responsibilities to the
University or to the State if its current roster of programs is
viewed as the last word in completeness and comprehensive-
ness. The greatest universities are those which are most alive
to new fields of knowledge, changing disciplinary patterns,
and expanded social needs.
Basic Planning Assumptions
Intelligent state-wide planning would appear to require
that the University of Illinois have a virtual monopoly upon
doctoral programs in the public sector as long as resources
remain scarce and manpower demands at the doctoral level
continue to be constrained. Within that context, the Urbana-
Champaign Campus' basic planning assumptions should be
stated positively in the following terms (from the University's
Provisional Development Plan — 1971-72 Through 1980-81,
p. 65):
"The educational programs of the Urbana-Champaign
Campus at all levels will undergo marked changes during
the next ten years — in response to new conditions and
to the needs generated by them. In the spirit of the Uni-
versity's hundred years as a land-grant institution, the
development plan for this campus calls for full utilization
of its wealth of resources towards finding better ways to
meet human needs and to help society solve its critical
problems. These eflorts will involve the search for new
fundamental knowledge in difficult fields of inquiry,
problem-centered research and developinent, and unique
modes of public service that only a comprehensive univer-
sity of high quality can provide."
The campus must plan to broaden and enrich its pro-
grams, especially through increased emphasis upon multidis-
ciplinary studies related to the major problems of modern
society. The planning assumptions evolving from the Univer-
sity's mission as stated in Chapter I depend significantly upon
the development of new doctoral level program proposals by
the strong faculty at Urbana-Champaign. The major program
areas a,scribed in the previous two chapters reflect the specific
strengths and settings of the two Chicago campuses and are
envisioned as being complementary to, and coordinated with,
the existing programs and the new developments at Urbana-
Champaign. Although the greater portion of the support re-
quired for Urbana-Champaign's new programs will probably
come from Federal and foundation sources, the State should
plan to increase its own contribution to the campus' educa-
tional effort. If that is done, the history of over a hundred
years of highly productive instruction, research, and public
service gives strong assurance that the return on the invest-
ment will be great.
The Urbana-Champaign Campus also will continue to
be heavily involved in undergraduate education. Historically,
there has been and there will continue to be a strong interest
in undergraduate teaching on that campus. It is particularly
crucial to maintain strength in undergraduate education when
many of the campus' graduate and professional programs are
extending downward into and influencing undergraduate cur-
ricula. For example, undergraduate education in the allied
health fields will accompany new developments in medical
education; undergraduate programs in mental health care,
day care, and community psychology are by-products of ad-
vances at the graduate level and represent areas of great so-
cietal demand; and undergraduate engineering will continue
to be the major professional program for engineering (the
Urbana-Champaign curriculum is considered particularly
strong by virtue of the College's nationwide reputation as a
research center).
Major New Program Areas
Health fields. Expansion of education in the health fields
is of top priority to the Urbana-Champaign Campus. How-
ever, as at the Medical Center Campus, if this expansion is to
occur, major new resources, both operating and capital, will
have to be provided. The campus plans to develop a clinical
program in the medical area, with attendant development of
certain allied health fields (nursing, hospital management,
medical technology, physician's aides, etc.), and expansion
of the program in Veterinary Medicine.
Applied social sciences. The Urbana-Champaign Campus
plans to upgrade and expand the social sciences, with par-
ticular emphasis upon the applied social .sciences in an inter-
disciplinary context. In a planning process analogous to that
described for certain program areas at Chicago Circle, the
Urbana-Champaign Campus will take advantage of its par-
ticular resources and setting to reinforce its component of the
University's graduate and professional educational respon-
sibilities. In complementary and sometimes cooperative rela-
tionships with programs at other campuses, Urbana-Cham-
paign plans to apply specific faculty strength and initiative
toward responses to problems in areas such as housing, com-
munity and economic development, human resources, day
care, and mental health. The significant innovation repre-
sented by the "applied" Doctor of Psychology degree will be
introduced in other disciplines that could benefit from such
a program.
Continuing education and public service. A major devel-
opmental emphasis will be placed upon the areas of con-
tinuing education and public service. The current plan is to
focus upon a particular geographic location and establish a
center there, which would work in concert with local com-
munity and senior educational institutions (public and private)
to supplement their educational and public service efforts
with unique University resources. There is no intention to
compete xvith existing junior and senior-level college programs
in the area. Instead, through cooperation, the resources of the
Urbana-Champaign Campus will be made available to
strengthen and supplement their programs. The continuing
professional-education programs would concentrate on areas
where particular experience and expertise is established at
Urbana, and many of the center's activities would rely upon
technology developed at that campus (e.g., PLATO). Through
such a center the campus could, for example, provide re-
search and scholarship opportunities for faculty members at
the area institutions, and also serve as a "broker" for educa-
tional and public service programs — providing information
and possible entree into not only our own programs but into
those of other institutions throughout the State.
Unique Resources
Any discussion of the role of the Urbana-Champaign
Campus must recognize that its continuing and developing
programs always will be afltected by certain unique features.
It has the only College of Agriculture, the only College of
\'eterinary Medicine, and the only College of Law in the
public sector of Illinois' institutions of higher education. It is
internationally knov\Ti for its work in the computer field, with
the most progressive campus programs being located in the
Computer-based Education Research Laboratory (PLATO),
the Center for Advanced Computation, the Department of
Computer Science, and the Coordinated Science Laboratory.
The campus has one of the finest libraries in the United States.
Most important of all, the campus has a faculty that is one of
the greatest educational resources in the State of Illinois and
in the country — a fact of paramount relevance and impor-
tance in defining the nature and scope of the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
President's Statement on the University
President John E. Corbally Jr. issued the following
statement July 5 in view of actions of the General Assem-
bly on the University's appropriation bill :
There has been some confusion in the reports of the final
actions of the Illinois General Assembly with regard to House
Bill 4215 (the appropriation bill for the University of Illinois
for 1972-73). The General Assembly approved increases in
House Bill 4215 totaling $7,163,788. The original total for
operations was increased from $189,411,681 to $196,575,469.
The following is an analysis of the increase :
1. Retirement contributions $3,000,000
2. Personal services (nonacademic salary increases
and funds for physical-plant operations and
maintenance personnel) 3,541,126
3. Division of Services for Crippled Children .... 587,000
4. Natural History Survey Research Ponds (O &
M costs) 6,376
5. Exercise Therapy Clinic (College of Physical
Education, Urbana-Champaign) 29,286
$7,163,788
Appropriation
The addition for retirement contributions represents, in
effect, a technical assignment of funds to the University of
Illinois to provide sufficient funds to meet the expected obliga-
tions of the State Universities Retirement System to staff
members of the University who will be retiring during the
present fiscal year.
The increase in the personal-services item of House Bill
4215 totaling $3,541,126 would be used for the following
purposes, in accordance with agreements reached among
members of the General Assembly concerning this increase:
1. The level of employment of physical-plant operations and
maintenance personnel existing on June 30, 1972, would be
maintained throughout the fiscal year 1972-73, except in
areas subject to seasonal layoffs or in situations where such
retention of employees would be contrary to State law or
otherwise in conflict with soimd public policy.
2. All employees presently paid under prevailing-wage agree-
ments would receive increases in accordance with the
terms specified in the renewal of such agreements. This
procedure would conform to past practice, and the rates
would be in accordance with State statutes and regulations.
10
3. Additional funds would bi- allocatfd sufficicni to pio\ idc
increases averaging 3.5 per cent to employees who are paid
under negotiated-ratc contracts — the increases to become
effective upon the date specified in the renewal of sucli
contracts.
4. Additional funds would be allocated sufficient to provide
increases averaging 5.5 per cent for all other nonacademic
employees, effective September 1, 1972.
The University regrets that no funds were appropriated
by the General Assembly for additional increases in thr
salaries of academic stafT members. After consultation with
the general-University officers concerned and with the cliau-
lellors, I am prepared to recommend to the Board of Tnistees
that sufficient funds be accumulated through further internal
savings to permit increases in academic salaries a\eraging 5.5
per cent for eligible staff members, effective November I.
1972. This increase would create a condition of substantial
parity in the increases for nonacadcmic and for academic staff
members — in the sense that the effective dates for their
respective rate increases would be delayed in each case two
months beyond the dates on which salary increases tradi-
lionallv have liecome rffeclivc.
Ol)\iously, the implementation of the foregoing plans is
subject to the approval of House Bill 4215 by the Governor,
without reduction in the amounts appropriated by the
General Assembly.
Many members of the General Assembly and representa-
tives of the Governor's office and of the Bureau of the Budget
were of great assistance in reviewing the needs of the Univer-
sity of Illinois and in responding to those needs. Representa-
tive Charles Clabaugh and Senator Stanley Weaver provided
the floor leadership for House Bill 4215. In his last few
months of active service. Dr. Lyle Lanier was particularly
effective in providing the General Assembly with information
and in providing the University of Illinois with his fine repre-
sentation.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
n
I
'JC^^y^ta^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 233, November 1, 1972
University's Request for Operating Funds for FY 1973-74
Presented here is a pwrtion of the University of Illi-
nois' request for operating funds for FY 1973-74 which
was submitted to and appro\ed b)- the Board of Trustees
meeting on the Chicago Circle Campus October 18. The
request has been transmitted to the Illinois Board of
Higher Education.
The operating budget of the University of Illinois has
suffered dramatically during the period for FY 1971 through
FY 1973. There are no resenes left, and the budget cuts to
administrative units, physical plant and student services has
eliminated all but academic programs for future budget ex-
igencies. New buildings have been opened without operating
budgets, the equipment budget has been reduced by 50 per
cent, enrollment and price increases have been absorbed
through the use of reserves and administrative cuts men-
tioned above.
The operating budget for FY 1974 submitted herewith is
basic and fundamental. Close scrutiny of these documents will
show that the requests have been carefully analyzed.
INTRODUCTION
General Comment
The operating budget request for the University of Illinois
for Fiscal Year 1974 is for a net increase of $27,836,988 (ex-
clusive of retirement). Included in this document are detailed
calculations of the nonnew program elements and detailed
documentation of the new programs.
There are several other items which need special coverage.
First is a new program request for the Division of Services for
Crippled Children in the amount of $855,87.5. The base
budget for the DSCC and the salary increases and price in-
creases are built into the asking budget contained herein.
However, since the University of Illinois administers the Di-
vision of Services for Crippled Children as an agent of the
State, we cannot properly add this request to our priority
list inasmuch as many programs with high priorities were
omitted to attempt to bring the total needs into focus with
available resources. We are therefore transmitting the request
for consideration by the Board of Higher Education without
including this item in our operating budget request.
The second clarifying item involves the University of
Illinois libraries. No special program request is contained in
this budget, but the matter is growing critical. The matter is
described in general terms for the purpose of alerting the
Board that we anticipate making the libraries a high priority
item for FY 1975. Although we currently rank third in size of
collections, we rank tenth in size of staff. Many cuts in staff
and services have been made to protect the acquisitions
budget. But, the matter is critical and must be given very
serious consideration for next year. The same type of prob-
lem holds true for campus security. The campuses have re-
peatedly asked for new program funds to offset the gro\ving
needs for security from vandalism and attacks on persons. Lack
of such programmatic funds has forced a combination of in-
ternal reallocation and a general lack of sufficient security.
This item, too, will probably appear in FY 1975.
The third item for clarification is the enrollment on the
Urbana-Champaign Campus. While the total enrollment pro-
jections for Urbana-Champaign back in July appeared to be
too high, they now appear to be accurate. This is also true for
FY 1974. The enrollments projected for Urbana-Champaign
contained herein show a total of 32,270 against a long-range
projection of 33,750 made two years ago and used for FY 1973
budget preparation. It is now our best estimate that 33,800
will be achieved. Late registration, particularly graduate en-
rollment, is very high. Based on the estimate of 32,270 as de-
veloped in July, we were very concerned that the original
long-range projection of 34,100 for FY 1974 would not be
achieved. As a result of reducing this to 32,000, the funding
projected a decline from the original (33,750-32,000) pro-
jection of FY 1974 which produces a formula decline in sup-
port of $1.7 million. We expect to revise all of the projections
based on actual fall enrollment in November, but the con-
sensus projections now call for 33,800 in 1972 and 34,000 in
1973 — or no change in formula funding for Urbana-Chani-
paign. This, in fact, agrees with the budget as submitted, since
we included Urbana-Champaign at a zero increase in enroll-
ment. In other words, the overall budget request requires no
change and will be further supported with new enrollment
data in November.
One final item requiring separate explanation is a re-
quest for an increase of $88,850 in the Agricultural Premium
Fund. Documentation has been previously submitted on the
matter of adverse salary equalization between the county ex-
tension secretaries and the University secretaries and on cover-
ing new costs of printing extension materials for 4-H. This was
not funded in FY 1973 and is a cause of considerable prob-
lems. We are requesting this as a separate item due to the
separate funding source.
History
A great deal of concern exists about the amount of new
funds requested during the last several years. This has been
compounded by the combination of statewide budgetary pres-
sures, in general, and the Medical Center Campus expansion,
in particular, which have increased the pressures on the Uni-
versity of Illinois. The requests for FY 1974 must be viewed
in the light of the last several years.
Table 1 clearly shows that the level of state tax revenue
support has remained approximately the same for the last
two years. If $159.7 million in FY 1971* had growTi at only
6 per cent to FY 1972 and then 6 per cent to FY 1973, the
state tax revenues would have been $179.4 million, an increase
of $19.7 million (see Table 3). If this trend were continued
to FY 1974, the state tax appropriation would be $190.2 mil-
lion. The requested state tax support exclusive of retirement
for FY 1974 is $189.9 million (see Table 8). In other words,
including significant enrollment expansion, inflation, new
buildings to operate, and major medical expansion, the three-
year compound rate of growth for the University from state
tax revenues would be less than 6 per cent if the FY 1974
budget were fully funded.
Current Year FY 1974
There are obviously many ways to look at the percentage
change or need in an operating budget. Some of the numerical
outcomes of various historical strategies are insidious. For ex-
ample, because the last several years have resulted in budget
limitations, causing a cutback in service, maintenance, and
equipment budgets, the projections for returning to normal
look larger than is really the case. This, of course, is admirably
demonstrated in the previous historical calculation. Moreover,
in the State of Illinois, the somewhat erratic way of handling
retirement makes base to projected base a difficult calculation.
* Exclusive of retirement (see Table 8).
Perhaps the most realistic calculation is shown here as
Table 5. If we take the beginning base of $188,294,969, ex-
clusive of retirement, and add the built-in salary annualiza-
tion and restore the equipment ba.se to FY 1971 levels, the ad-
justed base is $192 million. This means that past enrollment
increase, price increases, and new programs have been ac-
commodated through cash savings and internal reallocations.
On this base, the request for continuation is 5.72 per cent. The
request for everything, exclusive of the medical expansion, is
7.88 per cent, and the total is 12.54 per cent — with medical
programs, therefore, representing 4.66 per cent. Or, the con-
tinuation and medical expansion only (no growth at Chicago
Circle and no other new programs) represents 10.38 per cent.
There are very realistic budget needs to fulfill the scope
and mission of the University.
TABLE 1
Percentage of Operating Budget from State Tax Revenues
Year
State Tax Revenues
% of Budget
1972-73
$168,662,969
51
1971-72
161,441,629
52
1970-71
168,157,756
54
1969-70
151,672,810
56
1968-69
132,816,794
56
1967-68
120,110,864
55
1966-67
103,084,391
56
1965-66
93,394,271
56
1964-65
79,880,203
56
1963-64
73,817,478
57
1962-63
66,346,500
56
1961-62
63,646,500
59
1960-61
57,956,150*
62
1959-60
54,141,150*
62
1958-59
47,383,940*
62
1957-58
45,378,340*
62
1956-57
38,894,990*
61
1955-56
38,660,990*
63
1954-55
34,008,279
64
1953-54
34,008,280
65
1952-53
32,553,746
65
Source: Internal 6i
udgets for 1952-53 through
1972-73.
* Prior to 1961-62 it was the practice to budget one-half the
biennial tax fund appropriation each year of the biennium.
From 1955-56 through 1960-61, the budget increase for the
second year was provided by reserving income from the first
year's budget for use during the second year. The figures for
each year of the biennium have been adjusted to reflect this
deferral in the tax fund figures to achieve comparability with
later years.
TABLE 2 — Summary of Totol University Budget for Fiscal Years 1970-71 through 1972-73
1970-71 1971-72
Amount
State Tax Funds $168,157,756
University Income 18,218,100
Restricted & Institutional 125,009,600
Total $311,385,456
Per
Cent
Amount
Per
Cent
1972-73
Amount
Per
Cent
54.0 $161,441,629 51.6
5.9 22,900,000 7.3
40.1 128,767,300 41.1
100.0 $313,108,929 100.0
$168,662,969 50.6
27,912,500 8.4
136,540,400 41.0
$333,115,869 100.0
TABLE 3 — Summary of Appropriafions for the University of Illinois, FY 1970-71, FY 1971-72, FY 1972-73
Purpose and Fund Source
FY 1970-71
Appropriations
FY 1971-72
Appropriations
FY 1972-73
Appropriations
I. OPERA TIONS AND GRANTS
Regular Operations
General Revenue $159,661,233
University Income 18,218,100
Agr. Premium Fund 1 ,021 , 700
Subtotal (SI 78,901 ,033)
Retirement Contributions
Genera! Revenue 7,391 ,323
Agr. Premium Fund 83,500
Subtotal ($ 7,474,823)
8,990,150
5,159,240
Total 5186,375,856
//. IB A RENTALS {General Revenue)
Previously Authorized
New Authorizations
Total $ 14,149,390
///. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (General Revenue)
New Appropriations
Reappropriations
IV
$ 1,761,975
19,392,382
Total $ 21,154,357
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS (Bond Issues)
New Authorizations 5 10,709,934
Reauthorizations of IBA Projects -0-'
Transfer from General-Revenue Reappropriations -0-
Total $ 10,709,934
V. GRAND TOTAL
General Revenue $202,356,303
University Income 18,218,100
Agr. Premium Fund 1,105,200
Bond Funds 10,709,934
Total $232,389,537
$155,000,000
22,900,000
1,161,129
($179,061,129)
5,258,200
22,300
($ 5,280,500)
$184,341,629
$ 14,137,915
1,623,740
$ 15,761,655
$ 4,043,750
9,561,149
$ 13,604,899
$ 17,969,700
18,344,104'
-0-
$ 36,313,804
$189,624,754
22,900,000
1,183,429
36,313,804
$250,021,987
$159,173,769
27,912,500
1,208,700
($188,294,969)
($
8,258,200
22,300
8,280,500)
$196,575,469
$ 9,335,645
-0-
$ 9,335,645
$ 4,540,600
5,923,000
$ 10,463,600
$ 8,970,100
70,304,100
2,733,000
$ 82,007,200=
$187,231,214
27,912,500
1,231,000
82,007,200
$298,381,914
' Other IBA projects were not started but did not require reauthorization. (Reauthorization is required for IBA projects if not started
after three years or if no interim lease has been negotiated.)
' Includes capital-developtnent-bond funds for: (a) all building projects previously authorized for funding by the Illinois Building Au-
thority but not bonded; (b) new (FY 1972-73) building projects; (c) selected "nonbuilding" projects for which general-revenue
funds were appropriated for FY 1971-72 but will not have been obligated by June 30, 1972; (d) selected new (FY 1972-73) "non-
building" projects.
TABLE 4 — Comparison of FY 1971-72 and FY 1972-73 Budgets
Revised
FY 1971-72
Budget
FY 1972-73
Increase
Budget
$ 2,010,172
$ 40,260,734
5,627,043
47,062,690
4,709,299
103,473,502
-145,116
5,636,687
32,442
141,856
512,233,840
$196,575,469
% 1,330,646
$ 23,039,172
-333,073
6,081,864
20,812
1,957,128
488,267
6,727,216
-90,000
425,000
598,000
1,650,000
-4,480
380,354
$ 2,010,172
S 40,260,734
$ 2,518,256
S 18,843,468
-21,188
3,346,125
213,972
783,368
791,735
6,122,311
4,000
18,700
626,483
3,920,501
600,051
12,023,544
699,000
1,865,000
194,734
139,673
$ 5,627,043
S 47,062,690
S 3,445,185
$ 72,430,884
-722,300
8,294,857
402,177
4,462,824
59,894
13,493,517
-0-
207,500
1,618,000
4,540,500
-93,657
43,420
$ 4,709,299
$103,473,502
$ -44,892
$ 2,610,791
-185,224
2,800,896
85,000
225,000
$ -145,116
S 5,636,687
/. All-University Summary
Chicago Circle Campus $ 38,250,562
Medical Center Campus 41 ,435,647
Urbana-Champaign Campus 98,764,203
General University 5,781,803
Unassigned Reserve 109,414
Total, All-University $184,341,629
//. Chicago Circle Campus
Academic Units $ 21,708,526
Administrative and Service Units 6,414,937
Library 1,936,316
Physical Plant 6,238,949
Refunds 515,000
Retirement 1 ,052,000
General 384,834
Total, Chicago Circle $ 38,250,562
///. Medical Center Campus
Academic Units $ 16,325,212
Administrative and Service Units 3,367,313
Library 569,396
Physical Plant 5,330,576
Refunds 14,700
Division of Services for Crippled Children 3,294,018
Hospital 11 ,423,493
Retirement 1,166,000
General -55,061
Total, Medical Center $ 41 ,435 ,647
IV. Urbana-Champaign Campus
Academic Units $ 68,985,699
Administrative and Service Units 9,017,157
Library 4,060,647
Physical Plant 13,433,623
Refunds 207,500
Retirement 2,922,500
General 137,077
Total, Urbana-Champaign $ 98, 764,203
V. General University
Academic Units $ 2,655,683
Administrative and Service Units 2,986,120
Retirement 140,000
Total, General University 8 5,781 ,803
TABLE 5
Pertenl Increases by Category — Recast to Correct Base
Total Base' S188, 294,9(19
Built-in Annualization 1 ,864,566
Restoration of Equipment 1 ,890,000
Revised Base 5192,049,535
Base Increases Requested
Salaiv Increases S 8,027,285
New Buildings 448, 738
Price Increases 2,511 ,683
$ 10,987,706 5.72%
Medical Expansion (All Campuses) . . S 8,944,428 4.66%
Enrollment Increases (Nonmedical) 2,818,778 1.47%
Other New Programs 1 ,331 ,510 .69%
New Base $216,131,957 12.54%
' Exclusive of retirement.
TABLE 7
Summary of FY 1974 Request for Operations
tExduding Retirement)
Appropriations for FY 1973 $188,294,969
(excluding retirement)
Increases Requested for FY 1974 27,836,988
1 Annualization of Salary
Increases $ 1,864,566
2 Increases in Enrollment
(including refunds and
matching loan funds) ... 5,851, 206
3 Salary Increases 8,027,285
4 Operation of New
Buildings 448,738
5 New Programs -
Virtually Required 6 , 749 , 960
6 Price Increases 2,511,683
7 New Programs - Very
Important 493,550
8 Restoration of Equip-
ment 1,890,000
Total FY 1974 Request for Operations. . . . $216,131,957
(excluding retirement)
General Revenue Funds .. . $ 1 89 , 934 , 04 7
University Income Funds. . 24,918,000
Agricultural Premium
Funds 1,279,910
TABLE 6 — Summary of Increases in Appropriation Request for FY 1974
Priority Name /
1 Annualization of Salary Increases $ 1 ,
2 Increases in Enrollment 5 ,
a. Refunds
b. Matching Loan Funds
3 Salary Increases 8 ,
4 Operation of New Buildings
5 New Programs - Virtually Required 6 ,
a. Chicago Circle S 692,960
b. Medical Center 5,116,000
c. Urbana-Champaign 941 ,000
6 Price Increases 2 .
7 New Programs - Very Important
a. Chicago Circle $ 193,550
b. Medical Center 200,000
c. Urbana-Champaign 100,000
8 Restoration of Equipment 1 ^
Total , Wf:
■ Base = $196,575,469 (including retirement).
= Base = $188,294,969.
Per Cent
Per Cent
imounl
oJBase^
o/Base^
864,566
.9
1.0
,552,206
2.8
2.9
244,000
.1
.1
55,000
-0-
-0-
,027,285
4.1
4.3
448,738
.2
.2
,749,960
3.4
3.6
511,683
493,550
890,000
836,988
1.3
.3
1.3
.3
TABLE 8 — Summary of Appropriations for Operations
Sources of Funds FY 1971 FY 1972 FY 1973 FY 1974
Regular Operations
General Revenue $159,661,233 $155,000,000 $159,173,769 $189,934,047
University Income 18,218,100 22,900,000 27,912,500 24,918,000
Agricultural Premium Funds 1,021,700 1,161,129 1,208,700 1,279,910
Subtotal ($178,901,033) ($179,061,129) ($188,294,969) ($216,131,957)
Retirement
General Revenue 7,391,323 5,258,200 8,258,200 24,351,100
Agricultural Premium Funds 83 , 500 22 , 300 22 , 300 1 1 3 , 200
Subtotal ($ 7,474,823) ($ 5,280,500) ($ 8,280,500) ($ 24,464,300)
Total $186,375,856 $184,341,629 $196,575,469 $240,596,257
Amendment of Statutes Re Nonreappointment of Professional Ernployees
The Board of Trustees at its September 20 meeting
gave provisional approval to an amendment of Univer-
sity Statutes providing for procedures for nonreappoint-
ment of professional employees.
This was the President's recommendation :
For some years there has been concern on the part of the
administration that the group of employees of the University
generally characterized as "professional" be given adequate
protection in situations of termination other than for due
cause. Presently the Statutes of the University provide no
such protection. These employees comprise a group for whom
the provisions of Section 40 of the University Statutes (mainly
relating to faculty) and the rules of the University Civil Ser-
vice System of Illinois are inapplicable.
In order to provide a degree of equity analogous to that
afforded other University employees, I recommend that the
attached addition to Section 38, "Principles Governing Em-
ployment of Academic and Administrative Staffs," of the
University of Illinois Statutes* be provisionally approved, with
the stipulation that the Trustees defer final approval until the
present action has been reported to the Senates and to
the University Senates Conference — and because of the sub-
ject matter of this recommendation, to the professional ad-
* In order to provide continuity of subject matter, it is proposed
that the new subsection be designated 38 (e) and that the ex-
isting subsection 38 (e) be redesignated 38 (f).
visory committee (or similar body) on each campus for their
information and advice.
Proposed Section 38 (el, University of Illinois Statutes
Section 38 (e) In the non-reappointment of a full-time
employee for \vhom procedures imder Section 40 of these
Statutes, or under the rules of the University Civil Service
System of Illinois, are not applicable: written notice of non-
reappointment shall be given not later than March 1 preceding
the end of the appointment year. The "appointment year"
in all cases shall be construed to begin as of September 1 and
to end on August 3 1 , requiring either nine-months or t\\elve-
months sers'ice.
If such notice is given later than March 1 in an appoint-
ment year, it shall be accompanied by an offer from the Board
of Trustees of a terminal contract for an additional one-half
of the next appointment year.
Notice of non-reappointment is not required for employees
in the above categories whose current appointments are with-
out salary or are conditional upon receipt of non-appropriated
funds, e.g., grant or contract fimds.
Excepted from the above provisions are the following ad-
ministrative officers: the President of the University; the chan-
cellors and vice-chancellors; the officers of the Board of
Trustees who are University employees, and those others who
are designated by the President as "general officers" of the
University; the deans, directors, heads and chairmen of aca-
demic imits.
Area Health Edn cation Center Contract for Medical Center
At its October 18 meeting, the Board of Trustees ap- The contract totals $9,724,026 payable over a fi\e-year
proved acceptance of a $9,724,026 contract from the period and distributed as follows :
United States Department of Health, Education, and Indirect
Welfare to the Medical Center for the de\'elopment of . Overhead
area health education centers. The award now is subject "^^'' ecovcry
to further action bv the Illinois Board of Higher First year $ 789,664 $158,627
Education ' Second year 1,014,684 204,831
„,. ■ , , , J . Third year 2,096,109 422,631
This vvas the text of the agenda Item: Fourth year 2,096,109 422,631
The University of Illinois, through its College of Medi- Fifth year 2,096,109 422,631
cine, has been awarded a contract by the Bureau of Health
Manpower Education, National Institutes of Health, Depart- Each of the annual amounts shown above, other than for the
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare for the development first year, are subject to the availability of funds from the
of "area health education centers" in selected areas in Illinois. National Institutes of Health.
The concept of the '"area health education center" was
described and recommended by the Caniegie Commission on
Higher Education in a special report entitled Higher Educa-
tion and the Xation's Health (October 1970). The concept
M-as incorporated into federal legislation aiad approved through
enactment of the "Comprehensive Health Manpower Training
Act of 1971."
A major objective to be achieved under the contract is
the gradual evolution and growth of the system of education
for a broad spectrum of health professions and occupations in
the regions of Illinois associated with the University's develop-
ing medical schools. The system of education would build on
existing resources, talents, and programs and l)c developed
in collaboration with the clinical facilities and educational
institutions in the regions. It will provide education for the
health manpower required to meet regional need,s, particu-
larly in underserved areas.
The specific sites for "area health education centers" are
Peoria (in conjunction with the Peoria School of Medicine),
Rockford (in conjunction with the Rockford School of Medi-
cine), Urbana-Champaigii (in conjunction with the School of
Basic Medical Sciences), and in the Chicago metropolitan
area (in conjunction with a group of six hospitals aflTiliatcd
with the College of Medicine).
Following the organizational period, the types of health
education programs to be developed under the contract are
those of several of the allied health professions, undergraduate
nursing, graduate nursing, and family practice.
General University and Cant pus Achninistrative Appoint7mnts
The Board of Trustees this fall has appro\-cd three
major appointments of General University and campus
administrative personnel. At its Septeinber meeting. Dr.
Arnold B. Grobman was named Vice Chancellor for Aca-
demic Affairs at Chicago Circle Campus, beginning Jan-
uary- 1, 1973. He also will have the title of Professor of
Biological Sciences.
Dr. Grobman presently is Dean of Rutgers College of
the State University of New Jersey (Rutgers University).
A native of Newark. New Jersey, he has a Bachelor of
Science from the University of Michigan and a Master
of Science and Doctor of Philosoph\- in zoology from the
University of Rochester. He also has been on the faculties
of Florida State Uni\ersity and the University of
Colorado.
At the October meeting, the Trustees approved the
appointment of Hugh M. Satterlee as Dean of Students
and \'ice Chancellor for Campus Affairs at the Urbana-
Champaign Cainpus, effective November 1. He has been
dean since April 1, 1970, and acting vice chancellor since
February 1, 1972. Born in Coffeen, Dean Satterlee is a
graduate of Blackburn College and Southern Illinois Uni-
versity. Before joining the University of Illinois staff as
Director of Student Financial Aids at Urbana in 1968, he
was with the National Science Foundation and the
United States Office of Education in Washington, D.C.
Another October appointinent was that of Donald S.
Rubenstein as University Deputy Director of Nonaca-
demic Personnel, beginning February 1, 1973, and Uni-
versity Director of Nonacademic Personnel, effective
April 1, 1973. He currently is Deputy Director of Civilian
Personnel of the United States Army in Washington, D.C.
A native of Baltimore, Mr. Rubenstein is a graduate of
the University of Richmond and has done graduate work
at Johns Hopkins University. He has served with the
Army since 1940, both in military and civilian capacities.
J. G. Randall Distinguished Professorship in History Established at Urbana
"The J. G. Randall Distinguished Professorship in
History" has been established at the Urbana-Champaign
Campus under the will of the late Ruth Painter Randall
and with the approval of the Board of Trustees at its
October meeting. Provisions for the bequest and guide-
lines for the professorship were included in the presenta-
tion made to the Board :
Under the will of the late Ruth Painter Randall, thrce-
^ fourths of her residuary estate was to be given to the Univer-
B Mty of Illinois Foimdation for the establishment of "The J. G.
Randall and Ruth Painter Randall Memorial Fund." The in-
come from the fund was to be used to supplement the funds
^ available from the University to pay the salary of a distin-
I guished scholar appointed to a Chair known as "The J. G.
Randall Distinguished Professorship in History."
Mrs. Randall, herself an historian, stipulated that the
appointee to the Chair was to be a scholar in the field of
American History in \vhich her husband gave distinguished
service, "specifically including Lincoln, Civil War, Southern,
and Constitutional history."
In order to implement the wishes of Mrs. Randall, a
search committee has been appointed and guidelines for the
administration of the Chair have been developed by the Dean
of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. Those guidelines,
as recommended by the Chancellor at the Urbana-Champaign
Campus, are as follows:
1. The Chair shall be known as "The J. G. Randall Distin-
guished Professorship in History"; and it shall be offered
to a person whose scholarly career is associated with "that
field of American History in which my husband [Professor
J. G. Randall] gave distinguished service, specifically in-
cluding Lincoln, Civil War, Southern, and Constitutional
history."
2. The professorship will normally be awarded on a "perma-
nent," not a rotating, basis.
3. The professorship may not stand vacant for more than two
consecutive academic years.
4. The final recommendation to the Chancellor, President,
and Board of Trustees is to be made by the Vice Chancel-
lor for Academic Affairs on the advice of the Dean of the
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and of the Executive
Officer of the Department of History. A search committee
is to be appointed by the Dean of the College, after con-
sultation with the principal administrative officer and Ex-
ecutive Committee of the Department of History.
5. The terms of Mrs. Randall's will make it clear that the
person holding the Chair must receive from University-
funds at least the minimum salary paid to a full professor
of history; the income from the trust is to be paid to the
person holding the Chair. It is, however, anticipated that
each appointee will in practice be offered a fixed salary, to
include both anticipated income from the trust and at least
a sum equivalent to the minimum salary established by the
University for full professors, such sum to be paid from
University funds.
6. The University of Illinois Foundation will be requested to
imderwrite from the endowment, as expenses of admin-
istering the trust, charges related to the identification of
holders of the Chair. These charges would include expenses
of a "search" as well as payment of moving expenses if a
new appointee is brought to the campus.
7. Policies with respect to the administration of the Chair
may be changed, within the terms of the bequest by the
Chancellor subject to the concurrence of the President after
consultation with the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts
and Sciences and the executive officer of the Department
of History.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
i
lie
A^l i^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
The President's Annual Message
JOHN E. CORBALLY JR., PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
It is difficult for me to realize that a )ear has gone by
since I deli\ered my first amiual message to the people
of Illinois on behalf of the Univei-sity of Illinois. It has
been an exciting and fulfilling year. I have been particu-
larly appreciati\e of the opportunities which ha\e been
afTorded me to speak with or to so many of you in pei-son
and to hear directly from you your concerns about and
hopes for the University. I intend to continue to travel
about this State to talk \\-ith you and to hear from you. I
thank you for listening to a ston' of which we can all
be proud.
First. I want to mention some achievements of faculty
and stafT members and of students on our three major
campuses, in Rockford and Peoria where medical pro-
grams are expanding, and in extension centers through-
out Illinois. Too often, reports about universities con-
centrate upon financial questions or upon spectacular
but minor problems. It is easy to forget that the most
exciting asjjects of university life are the slow and
steady educational triumphs of staff and faculty and
students working together. Such triumphs are both real
and significant, but rarely are able to crowd more im-
mediately newsworth} items from the newspaper pages
or from the tele\-ision screens.
Let us first remind ourselves of the impact of the
University^ of Illinois. During this current academic year
57.536 students are enrolled on our three campuses — an
increase of nearly 5 p>er cent over last year. While size
has no necessary- relationship to quality, it is important
to note that the widely publicized disenchantment with
higher education does not appear to apply to those who
desire to attend the University of Illinois. In spite of
constant application of rigorous admission standards, en-
rollment in the University over the past ten years has
increased by a total of 86 per cent. This year's freshman
class is a superior group in terms of all commonly used
admissions criteria.
TTie Division of University Extension ser\es thousands
of indi\nduals who are students in ever\- sense of that
word except that they are not regularly enrolled on a
campus and in most cases are not degree candidates.
During 1971-72, nearly 600 off-campus classes were con-
ducted by faculty members in all parts of Illinois. Nearly
15,000 individuals participated in such courses. Short
courses and conferences involved nearly 40,000, while
about 3,000 availed themselves of correspondence courses.
Special progi-ams within the Division include the highly
regarded Police Training Institute which enrolled over
3,500 law enforcement officers in courses ranging from
police-community relations through techniques of crimi-
nal investigation. Also under direction of the Division
are the Firemanship Training Program which includes
the oldest annual Fire College in the nation and an out-
standing program in Civil Defense Training which pre-
pares public officials to deal with disasters. All of these
programs are in addition to well-known offerings of the
Cooperative Extension Division of the College of Agri-
culture at Urbana-Champaign which reach into every
community in Illinois. An audience head count made
through the State Extension Management Infonnation
System (SEMIS) shows that 3.5 million adults and youth
participated in Extension programs during 1972.
These examples of extension programs represent only
a sample of the outreach activities of the University of Il-
linois. They do not include literally hundreds of such
activities sponsored by colleges and departments of the
University as regular components of teaching, research,
and service missions.
Other public and private universities, colleges, and
community colleges in Illinois provide similar, but less
extensive, programs. These regular, ongoing programs of
the system of higher education in Illinois provide an
impressive example of what some describe as "a univer-
sity without walls." There is some discussion of the need
for a new stioicture in Illinois to "bring liigher education
to the people." While there may be gaps in and undoubt-
edly are needs not met by existing college and university
outreach programs, it seems clear to us at the University
of Illinois that new structures such as a separate univer-
sity for extension programs would only compound the
problem. To be specific, I applaud the motivation of
those who recommend creation of a new Lincoln State
University; however, the achievement of their goals does
not require new structures, new administrative mech-
anisms and costs, or new institutions. We have been
committed to public service and to extension education
for over one hundred years. We and our sister institutions
in Illinois can and will meet new needs with greater
quality, efficiency, and timeliness than could any proposed
new structure.
Moving back to the campuses, we note that of special
interest to many in Illinois is the progress being made in
expanding our medical education program which is based
on the Medical Center Campus in Chicago. In prepara-
tion for budget requests for fiscal year 1974, the Univer-
sity Office of Planning and Resource Allocation and the
administration of the Medical Center Campus have devel-
oped a revised and detailed schedule of enrollment tar-
gets for the expansion program through 1982. Whereas
in the past the enrollment targets on a year-to-year basis
were less clear than were the final goals, we now have
a detailed year-by-year breakdown which will lead to
the goals for 1982. This breakdown facilitates financial
planning, makes clear the need for facilities and the
specific times when facilities must be available, and as-
sists in planning for staffing in the years ahead. The 1974
budget recommendations of the Uni\ersity and of the
Board of Higher Education include recognition of this
new enrollment schedule. This schedule represents one
of the first accomplishments of the efTort through the new
Office of University Planning and Resource Allocation
to establish long-range educational plans and long-range
detailed financing plans in support of program needs.
While it is clear that all State agencies must depend
upon annual appropriations, our hope is that as the
University develops sound, realistic and detailed long-
range plans, successive General Assemblies will support
the annual requirements of such plans. Effective manage-
ment of the educational enterprise depends upon the
ability to plan and to act upon plans. Most educational
programs can succeed only if their support is regular and
continuous. Both we and you — the taxpayers — can
gain educational and economic efficiency as our legisla-
tors support long-range plans rather than annual, "start-
from-scratch" budgeting methods.
I do want to provide a somewhat detailed report of
the first year of the University of Illinois medical educa-
tion program at Rockford.
The Rockford School of Medicine opened to its fii-st
class in September, the culmination of nearly a decade of
planning. All twenty students in the initial class have
earned bachelor's degi-ees and completed a year of basic
medical science. Following the three-year program at
Rockford, they will receive M.D. degrees and continue
internship or residency training before entering practice.
Clinical facilities in Rockford Memorial, Swedish-Ameri-
can, and St. Anthony's Hospitals and the Singer Zone
Center are being utilized in the teaching program.
While they are learning, students under professional
supervision are an integral part of the health care delivery
team in hospitals, medical offices, and homes. Students
also assist in the provision of care for patients in rural
areas that have had difficulty attracting physicians.
The Kirkland Community Health Center opened in
September. The initial professional staff consists of two
physicians, a nurse, and a technician. Supporting services
are provided by some 20-25 physicians forming an aca-
demic group practice. The Kirkland Community Health
Center is the first of fifteen health care facilities the
Rockford school anticipates developing in northern Illi-
nois. A Belvidere Community Health Center began ser-
vices in January.
Besides health care, the Rockford School of Medicine
will serve the community through its center for com-
munity health research and foster greater cooperation
among the four Rockford health care institutions. It will
also assist local physicians in remaining aware of new
methods of patient care.
Community physicians have been enthusiastic sup-
porters of the new school. Of the 275 practicing physi-
cians in the Rockford area, 230 are working in a teach-
ing, curriculum development, or other capacity.
Another program of the Medical Center of special
interest is supported by the Bureau of Health Manpower
Education, National Institutes of Health, Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare. This program will en-
courage development of area health education centers
in selected areas in Illinois.
The contract totals $9,724,026 payable over a five-
year period. It will enable the school to train physicians,
nurses, and other health professionals in four regions of
the State. The school will use existing facilities in com-
munity colleges, clinics, and hospitals. Peoria, Rockford,
Urbana-Champaign, the Medical Center Campus in Chi-
cago, and a consortium of four inner city hospitals in Chi-
cago will be involved in the program along with area
community colleges.
The University of Illinois was one of ten schools in
the United States to recieve such a grant. Its share was
one of the largest because regional extension of medical
education has already been established.
Our newest major campus, Chicago Circle, continues
to e.xhibit astonishing maturity for a still-developing com-
prehensive campus. Unless one visits this commuter cam-
pus enrolling about 20,000 students, it is difficult to
imagine the intellectual vitality which exists there. The
seeming confusion as thousands of young people drive,
walk, bus, or train to the campus masks a spirit of edu-
cational motivation on the part of students, staff, and
faculty which is not present on many campuses today.
Time permits recitation of only a few programs at the
Circle Campus.
One specialized concentration in the Jane Addams
Graduate School of Social Work is social treatment, in-
cluding a range of individual, small group, family, and
other therapeutic interventions.
The Social Work-Police Manpower Demonstration
and Research Project is an example. Professional social
workere and graduate students arc placed in police
stations to work on ju\cnile and ftiniil)- problems, pro\ide
crisis intenention, and ser\e in selected adult situations.
The social work effort is aimed at effective inter\ention
at the earliest point of contact with the criminal justice
SNStem. The students in\ol\ed in this program attend
^ classes two davs a week and ^^•ork three days in the field
" in Niles and in ^Vheaton. A major goal of this unique
progi-am, the first of its kind in the nation, is to develop
strong cooperative relationships between social work
^ professionals and law enforcement agencies and
W individuals.
For the Christian Action Ministry, which owns a site
on the Near West Side, students of the College of Archi-
tecture and Art in the summer of 1972 prepared program
and design studies to provide a facility for full-time child
care, adult day care, nursing services, a medical clinic, a
participating arts center, and a center for career de\elop-
ment in collaboration with several agencies.
How do you build a playground that is creative, edu-
cational, interesting to different children, safe and in-
e.\pensi\e?
This problem is one that freshman architecture stu-
dents at Chicago Circle worked on as a course project
beginning in September of 1971 and running through
mid-summer of 1972.
R. Thomas Jaeger, Associate Professor of Architec-
UuT, said his twenty-five students voted to design and
constiTict a playfield for Christopher House, a multi-ser-
\ice agency, following a suggestion by a teacher in the
agency's Day Care Program.
In the first five weeks of the project, students planned
for varied climbing structures for physical development;
mazes allowing a child to make a decision and thus exer-
cise his mind in a "fun" way; small playhouses and
wooden box structures to give him privacy and to let him
fantasize alone; and conventional equipment such as
sandboxes, slides, and different kinds of swings.
The Circle College of Education has received a $50,-
000 grant from the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare to assist the College in expanding its pro-
gram in special education.
A child study-diagnostic and research unit, when de-
velof)ed, will have facilities in the College of Education
for an in-depth study of handicapped children for the
purpose of research and training, as well as assisting
metrofxjlitan Chicago's school systems in providing more
^ efficient and effective special education programs.
B The problem of crime on the CTA is among several
new study areas added to mass transportation research
at Chicago Circle as a result of a $81,318 supplemen-
^ tarv grant from the Urban Mass Transportation
P .administration.
The three-year federal grant is added to an original
$150,000 awarded in 1970 for faculty-student study of
mass transportation.
In addition to the problem of CTA crime, organized
labor's considerations in the planning and generation of
urban mass transit systems are being investigated. Another
problem under study is how best to solve the transporta-
tion problems of fast-growing unincorporated areas near
major cities.
0\erall project objectives are encouragement of addi-
tional mass transportation research and the training of
students for jobs in the transportation field.
Our Urbana-Champaign Campus continues to dem-
onstrate its historic leadership in higher education. While
a highlight of this year must be the receipt by Professor
John Bardeen of his second Nobel Prize in Phvsics, each
month sees additions to the list of Urbana-Champaign
faculty members and students who ha\e received national
and international recognition for their work. Eleven fac-
ulty members or alumni of the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign have received Nobel Prizes; thirteen
have received Pulitzer Prizes. But other, less heralded
activities at Urbana-Champaign are also worthy of
mention. Examples are some current activities conducted
under auspices of the College of Education at Urbana-
Champaign.
Professors Keith Scott and Jana Lucas (Educational
Psychology) are investigating the types of errors made
by mentally retarded children in reading isolated words.
These results will be comjaared with the types of errors
made by normal elementary school children. From this
research, beginning reading materials for the mildly re-
tarded can be developed and implemented on the
PLATO IV system. The area of reading is of particular
interest because 1) it is a basic academic skill and 2) be-
cause the PLATO IV system, with random access audio
capabilities, can deliver "high quality programming to the
mildly retarded on an individual basis."
Professor Daniel Delaney is involved in several re-
search and service projects in the Kankakee area includ-
ing a study of "dropout prevention" strategies. The study
focuses on students determined by their teachers to be
potential dropouts.
Professor Larry Goulet is initiating a culture-based
education program at Crane High School in Chicago.
Culture-based education is a primary focus of several ed-
ucational psychology faculty members.
Associate Professor Thomas Long is studying ways
to train professors to be teachers by focusing on teacher
training of teaching assistants.
Or, here are two examples from the School of Chemi-
cal Sciences. In both cases the work cited involved col-
laboration between a faculty member and his graduate
thesis students.
1. Professor John Wood in the Biochemistry Depart-
ment received the first Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturers Association Medal for Outstanding
Achievement in Environmental Chemistiy. This was
awarded in recognition of the work that he and his stu-
dents have done on the mechanism by which mercury
waste can contaminate the food chain.
2. Professor Willis Flygare and students in the Chem-
istry Department discovered evidence of the existence of
a nitrogen containing molecule, fonnamide, in interstellar
space b)- observing its microwa\e spectrum. This has im-
plications about the existence of chemical molecules that
might be considered life precursors.
Or, consider a unique, student-directed program.
This year the students of Volunteer Illini Projects are
working with the Go\emor's Task Force on Blood to
help Illinois convert to all-volunteer blood for transfusions
by July 1, 1973, when blood from paid donors will no
longer be used.
The students have worked out a unique arrangement
with the Peoria Regional Blood Program of the American
Red Cross and the recently established Champaign
County Blood Bank. Recognizing that there is a continu-
ous need for blood, and that more donors will gi\e if
there are more opportimities to gi\'e, the students are
holding monthly three-day blood drives. The blood is
collected both by the Red Cross, for regional use, and by
the local blood bank, for local needs. Both agencies also
ship blood elsewhere in Illinois, to help with shortages.
The result is that donations are running several hun-
dred per cent higher than in previous years. Better than
that, they are coming at a pace better suited to the need
for blood.
The students hope that their program of monthly
drives, bringing blood both to local and to regional banks,
will ser\e as a model for campus in\olvement in an all-
\olunteer blood program for the State.
Many of these programs and others on our three cam-
puses are made possible in part by federal funds and
grants and contracts from private sources. Usuallv in
keen competition with universities throughout the nation,
the University of Illinois is one of the top institutions in
total of federal support and a leader among state uni\er-
sities in grants and contracts from private organizations.
The impact of this "revenue sharing," made possible be-
cause of the University's strength, has a major impact
ujx)n the educational and economic progress of the State
of Illinois. This fact is not often fully realized.
An example is a project labeled "an interdisciplinan-
study of environmental pollution by lead and other
metals." For an 18-month period ending April 30, the
University and its scientists have received $960,000 from
the National Science Foundation, and an additional $1
million has been requested for continuation of the study
of this important human problem.
Let's retrace, for a moment, how such grants come
into being and what effects they have upon society. Four
years ago a group of faculty members, ranging from en-
gineers to zoologists, began discussion of lead pollution,
lack of kno\vledge about its effects, and what ought to be
done to help fieople.
Lead is a poisonous element without any kno\\'n bene-
ficial biological function. National concern is reflected in
regulations about leaded gasoline. There has been con-
troversy over the importance of automoti\e lead as a
health hazard, but introduction of nearly three pounds
per capita per \ear of the poisonous metal affecting soils,
plants, animals, water can no longer be ignored.
Through discussions the faculty group worked up
twenty-three projects in departments in agriculture, en-
gineering, life sciences, social sciences, and physical
sciences.
First came a planning grant from NSF in the amount
of $259,000. This produced evidence that no compre-
hensive systems approach had been made to the distribu-
tion and environmental effects of lead; no study of the
ecosystem, including both rural and urban components,
had been made to describe the distribution of lead and
what areas of concern were related to this distribution;
no factual basis existed on which to predict the future.
Faculty members developed an interdisciplinary ap-
proach to focus University potentials on the total prob-
lem. Instead of individual activities in specific fields,
general goals were developed in which teams of scientists
could attack phases of the overall problem through
laborator\' and field studies.
The Sanitar%' Engineering Laboratoi-y at Urbana-
Champaign became the Environmental Research Labora-
tory-. Remodeling and new equipment funds came pri-
marily from overhead on outside-funded research —
money from existing research pumping the lifeblood into
a newly developing area not yet on its own.
Besides scientists and facilities, the University also
could make available its resources of Libran', other
laboratories on the campus, and outstanding computer
installations and experts to operate them. Three State
Sun.eys, located on this campus, provided expertise in
the areas of Geolog)-, Natural Histor)', and Water.
When the plan was ready, application for funding
was made to the National Science Foundation and the
grant of $960,000 was made. What specifically has this
"revenue sharing" meant? Three professional scientists
have been employed full time, another half time, and
se\en during a summer. Research experience has been
provided for ten post-doctoral research associates, forty-
seven graduate assistants \\orking on advanced degrees,
and twenty-one undergraduate students. Thirty-five fac-
ulty members ^vere in\olved, giving their service as part
of their regular activity. Results in the form of reports,
graduate theses, and other informational sources have
begun the flow of pertinent findings to the world. Fur-
ther, do not overlook the enricliment of knowledge made
possible by training of graduates who have developed ex-
pertise in a field not heretofore investigated in depth.
As a partial outgrowth has come the University's new
Institute for Environmental Studies whose public service
acti\ities include assistance to government and private
organizations. And the grant, through a portion set aside
from o\erhead pa)Tnents to the University, in turn will
provide support for other new research either unborn or
struggling to life.
No\v, to understand the totality of the Uni\ersit)'s
"revenue sharing" multiply all of the income and bene-
ficial results of this one instance by fifty times. You then
begin to comprehend how this cycle of funding, of activ-
ity, and of impact upon the progress and well-being of
the State of Illinois are made possible because of your
University's outstanding faculty, its facilities, resources
and know-how, and its traditional tledication to teaching,
research, and public sen ice.
These examples and the countless others that could be
. given are the ingredients which make up your University
of Illinois. We are programs and people; we share with
the Man of La Mancha the quest for "Impossible
! Dreams" ; and more often than not higher education has
succeeded in con\erting such dreams into the possible.
Because we deal in futures, the measurement and evalua-
tion of our success or failure is both difficult and deferred.
And now we face both the problems and the possibilities
of stability. The last t^venty-five years in higher education
have been \ears of unprecedented growth in students, in
staff, in facilities. Our current reality is that growth in
numbers will be slowed.
The people of the University of Illinois are hard at
work to face this reality of a new world. We can and will
substitute growth in quality and gi-owth in educational
effectiveness for growth in numbers. We are a major asset
of the people of Illinois and we must depend upon the
continuing support of the people if we are to continue the
appreciation of diat asset which characterizes our history.
The dollars invested by you, the taxpayers, in your Uni-
versity are dollars \vhich have earned handsome returns
for our State. We shall ask you to continue that invest-
ment program so that we can continue to ser\'e you as
you have come to expect us to do. Unlike many other tax
e.xpenditures, your dollars for us live on in programs and
in people. As we have contributed ^v•ith your help to the
solution of problems in agriculture, in engineering, in
business management, in health, and in many other fields,
so shall we contribute to the solution of those social prob-
lems which loom so large before us today. We, with you,
have faith in the power of the intellect and we, with you,
look toward the futiue with confidence and with en-
thusiasm. I am proud to work on your behalf as President
of the University of Illinois; we can all be proud of the
men and women, young and old, who continue to pro\ide
you with one of the great programs of higher education
in the world.
The President's Annual Message was released Feb-
ruary 25 and carried by twenty-eight television stations
in Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri and by sixty-two radio
outlets, including forty-seven in Illinois and fifteen
throughout the nation.
Erratum
An error in the Illinois Board of Higher Education
E.xecutive Director's Report No. 113, which was
presented in part in Faculty Letter No. 234, Febiii-
axy 21, 1973, appeared on page 6 in the Faculty
Letter. In the second line of Table 8 "(in thousands
of dollars)" should read "(in millions of dollars)."
Application for Retirement
It is important that members of the faculty who con-
template retirement file an application with the State
Universities Retirement System. Failure to do so before
the date the annuity is to become effective can result,
and in some instances has resulted, in delay in payment
and even loss of benefits.
Since the retirement system has no way of knowing
when faculty members plan to retire, especially those who
retire before mandatory age, is behooves the faculty
member to notify the retirement office sometime before
date of retirement. Write the State Universities Retire-
ment System, 50 Gerty Drive, Champaign, Illinois 61820.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
i
i
JiQuXJcL.
Gift and Exchan:
220a Library
3 copl«3)
'2 Division
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 236, April 27, 1973
THE LIBRARY OF THE
Impact of Proposed Federal Budget on the University of Illinois\\}W 4 1973
The folloiving material describes the impact upon the
University of Illinois of the federal budget for Fiscal
Year 1974 as proposed by President Nixon. Compiled by
the Office of the Vice President for Governmental Rela-
tions and Public Service, the report is based on indepth
reviews by the campuses.
This statement has been distributed to the Illinois
Congressional delegation, the Governor, the Illinois Di-
rector of the Bureau of the Budget, State legislative
leaders and chairmen of education and appropriations
committees, legislative staff members, and national edu-
cational associations. Federal budgetary impact also was
the topic of discussion at President Corbally's annual
Congressional breakfast meeting held earlier this month
in Washington, D.C.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
1. The federal budget impact represents a total loss of ap-
proximately $9,000,000 to the University of Illinois for
1973-74. (See table following.)
2. The loss in funds for operating purposes alone (excluding
construction of facilities) w\l exceed $5,300,000.
3. In view of the presumed federal priority for health-related
education, it is surprising that the heaviest operating impact
will be felt at the Medical Center — a loss of $2,800,000.
4. The smallest dollar impact will be felt at the Chicago
Circle Campus, which, as a developing institution, has a
relatively low federal-support base at present.
5. r.cdictabUity and fii::;:bili:y for budget plan.ning .".re pv.r
in jeopardy by particularly heavy cuts in unrestricted,
formula-based fimds for institutional support, as dis-
tinguished from student support.
6. Graduate and professional education suffers severely, not
only in student assistance, but in all the related supportive
serv'ices, which affect both faculty and programs. Injury is
also done to the recruitment of minority students in the
health professions.
7. AVTiile the federal budget puts heav\' funding emphasis on
general undergraduate student aid, or "etjual educational
opportunity," the net effect cannot now be deduced. The
intended maximum impact, with an estimated potential
half-million-doUar gain to the University of Illinois, seems
impossible of realization for student use in 1973-74, thus
leaving doubt also about existing programs as a source of
assistance. The short-run prospect is worse rather than
better.
) Tu 1 J . J . - U,,ivLK,jlTY OF.JLLINOl?
i. I he budget declares war on cat'<>gci|i)^^4gid(ie«aMyic>iqbthc
higher education portion adds some new categories while
taking away some old ones. The net effect will derive from
the balance between the mere possibility of some gains and
llic clear ccilair.ty of many losses. Whatc.^r liie result
for the University as an institution, the losses to particular
programs will be beyond any possible federal recovery be-
cause the new funds, like the old ones complained about,
are restricted as to purpose.
I. GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION
General Impact
1. As a prime example of eliminating categorical grants
and also programs which have allegedly "done the job,"
the fifteen-year-old, defense-related graduate fellow-
ships under NDEA, Titles IV and VI, are eliminated
for advanced language and area studies and phased out
for preparing college teachers, now regarded as in over-
supply.
2. Training grants are dealt a heavy blow: that is, those
grants which have long sustained advanced study toward
national manpower goals in critical areas and have
been used for graduate-student aid, related faculty
salaries, and supportive services. They are terminated
because of an "adequate supply of manpower" — "a
general policy to eliminate most subsidies for specialized
training in selected professional disciplines" because
"doctoral level scientists (can) . . . bear the cost of their
training themselves."
3. The NSF graduate trainceships will be cut to zero from
M.ROO^nOO currently.
4. As a reversal of recent trends, these trainceships are
being phased out, with no new starts :
Training of Teacher Trainers, Education Professions
Development Act
National Institutes of Health
National Institutes of Mental Health
5. A variety of nursing-training programs, some under-
graduate, are similarly eliminated or reduced.
6. Disciplines particularly hard hit are psychology, social
work, pharmacy, nursing, and public health.
7. On the upward side, the National Science Foundation
will support 500 new fcllo\s'ships, as distinguished from
trainceships.
8. The Health Professions Scholarship Program is cut by
a third ($5,000,000 cut from $15,000,000) as the fust
step in a phase-out operation; the related loan level
remains the .same despite increased enrollment.
9. To provide some offsetting relief in the health sciences,
a National Health Service Scholarship Program is pro-
posed ($23,000,000) for students who pledge to serve
in the National Health Service Corps or commissioned
corps of the Public Health Service.
University of Illinois Impact
1. Graduate education is hard hit, with losses both in
dollars and in presumed-established principles, the di-
rect financial loss running to $1,603,021 in federal fel-
lowships and traineeships.
2. An important and valued source of graduate student
support in the humanities and social sciences at Ur-
bana, under NDEA auspices. Titles IV and VI, will
drop from $326,068 to zero, compounding immediately
the competition for alternate University student aid
and contributing subsequently to reduced enrollment.
(Example of impact: 35 graduate students arc now
supported under Title VI in African, Russian, Asian,
and Latin American fields at Urbana.)
3. Present impoundment practice and lack of specifics
leave doubt that all graduate fellows and trainees "in
the pipeline" will be supported until completion of
their objectives; if not, other University funds must be
found or the student must choose between quitting and
resort to further indebtedness.
4. Traineeship cuts on the Medical Center Campus are
computed at $484,068, on the Urbana Campus at
$329,625, and on the Chicago Circle Campus at
$50,300; but if, in fact, terminations come abruptly,
there will be a 1974 loss of $1,735,602 at the Medical
Center alone.
5. Because some residency training stipends are supple-
mented by certain traineeships, losses will be felt in
the clinical areas of surgery, orthopedics, otolaryngology,
psychiatry, and psychology.
6. NSF aid for graduate study on the Urbana Campus is
seriously impaired: $144,000 lost in traineeships and
uncertainty about University of Illinois benefits from
1974 Federal Budget Impact
ANTICIPATED LOSSES IN FEDERAL SUPPORT*
University of Illinois
UICC
UIMC
UIUC
TOTAL
I. Graduate and Professional Education
1. Fellowships
NDEA, Title IV, college teachers
NDEA, Title VI, language and area fellowships
2. Traineeships
Training of Teacher Trainers
NSF traineeships
Training grants
Special nurse training (partly undergraduate)
II. Institutional Grants
1. Bankhead-Jones, land-grant formula
2. School of public health support
3. Language and area centers
4. Capitation grants
5. Special educational improvement grants
6. Social and rehabilitation services
III. Research
1. General research support grants
2. Regional medical program
3. Agricultural
4. Engineering research categories
5. Psychological research
IV. Public Service
1. Cooperative Extension Ser\'ice
2. University commimity ser\ice
3. Bilingual education program
4. Commimity mental health centers
\'. Construction of Facilities
1. Classroom Office-Student Service Building
2. Law Building addition
3. Speech and Hearing Clinic (interest subsidy: $480,000,
direct grant: $330,000)
TOTAL
TOTAL FOR OPERATING PURPOSES ONLY
$ 173,250
$ 173,250
152,818
152,818
84,997
84,997
144,000
144,000
$ 50,300
$ 484,068
329,625
863,993
186,953
186,953
268,752
268,752
102,000
102,000
185,542
185,542
645,200
216,000
861,200
501,000
501,000
20,000
20,000
228,800
228,800
665,000
665,000
440,896
440,896
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
100,000
11,538
11, .538
100,000
100,000
16,500
16,500
1,500,000
1,500,000
1,300,000
1,300,000
810,000
810,000
$1,870,300
$2,829,521
$4,217,418
$8,917,239
$ 370,300
$2,829,521
$2,107,418
$5,307,239
'Exclusive of consideration of undergraduate student aid; see Part VI of discussion.
»
^
the 500 new fellov\ships, since they will l)o awarded to
students in a national competition.
7. The Urbana College of Education will lose $84,997 in
the phasing-out TTT Program (Training of Teacher
Trainers).
8. Several specialized types of musing training grants,
some undergraduate, \\ill add another $186,953 to the
losses at the Medical Center.
P. The trend in student aid for health professionals is
downward, with heaviest impact on the most needy,
including minority students. The Medical Center has
what is approaching a "desperate financial aid situa-
tion" because of added scholarship demand resulting
from expanded enrollments in Chicago, Peoria, Rock-
ford, and Urbana, plus the rising cost of living and of
needed equipment.
10. The College of Medicine ($61,000) and the College of
Dentistry ($60,000) will have a minimum reduction of
$121,000 in federal loan and scholarship funds for
next year. The phasing out of the Health Professions
Scholarship Program affects more than 200 students in
medicine and dentistry. While current recipients will
have continued support, funds will not be available for
new starts or replacements in the first-year class, except
under the postgraduate public-ser\'ice restrictions. This
will seriously affect recruitment of minority students.
1 1 . ^^'hile some students will seek aid from the new Na-
tional Health Service Scholarship Program, the re-
strictive service conditions will keep it from ameliorating
the losses.
II. INSTITUTIONAL AID
General Impact
1. The explicit policy is to eliminate or phase out general
aid to institutions and put emphasis on student aid in-
stead, and also to cut back where national goals are
allegedly already attained; hence zero-budgeting is
applied to
a. historic land-grant aid under the Bankhead-Jones
Act (now $1 0^,000,000 )
b. schools of public health and allied health fields
(now $51,649,000)
c. language and area centers under NDEA (now $6,-
500,000)
d. capitation grants (based on enrollment increases for
health manpower development) in fields of nursing,
pharmacy, veterinary medicine, and allied health
fields.
2. Special improvement grants in medicine, under the
Health Professions Education Act, are cut 36 per cent.
3. Special improvement grants in allied health fields are
eliminated.
4. Cuts are made in Social and Rehabilitation Services,
HE\V, thus adversely affecting schools of social work.
University of Illinois Impact
1. The negative pohcy on institutional aid will mean a
major loss of $1,938,494 — and in that portion of fed-
eral assistance which heretofore has been most depend-
able for budget planning.
2. Traditional land-grant formula funds for instruction
will be reduced to zero (Bankhead-Jones), a loss of
$268,752 on the Urbana Campus.
3. The new School of Public Health, Medical Center, will
suffer a loss of $102,000, with the federal government's
stated expectation that state and private sources will
make up the difference for the seventeen public health
schools which serve the nation. The blow to this essen-
tially "federalized" area is not greater because of the
School's early development, but problems of alternate
funding remain nevertheless.
4. Long-standing federal aid, now totaling $152,818, for
three language and area centers (Russian and Eastern
European, Asian, and Latin American), Urbana Cam-
pus, will be discontinued; and while this had never
been the major source of center support, it is the
"critical margin" which goes to library resources, travel,
small classes in exotic languages, and flexibility beyond
state funds. It also legitimizes the international di-
mension for matching support from nonfederal sources.
5. Lo.ss of capitation grants will lop off 25 per cent of the
budget of the College of Pharmacy, Medical Center, or
$450,000, with serious and compounded impact because
the new and innovative programs are precisely those
developed and sustained by this existing federal income.
6. Other capitation-grant losses will total $195,000, in-
cluding the College of Nursing and the College of
Dentistry, which will be denied "bonus class" increases.
All capitation cuts are unexpected impediments to
plans for enrollment expansion under current federal
priorities.
7. The cut-back in special improvement grants means
Medical Center losses of $411,000 in the College of
Medicine and $90,000 in the School of Associate Medi-
cal Sciences.
8. Chicago Circle will suffer a $20,000 loss in faculty sup-
port in social work — part of a two-year federal phase-
out.
III. RESEARCH
General Impact *
1. This is essentially a standstill budget for academic sci-
ence, allowing for inflation, although the National
Science Foundation appropriation sought is almost
$40,000,000 below last year. A net of $58,900,000 is
carried forward from withheld funds; hence, the budget
claims that further shifting leaves an "effective" spend-
ing level of $46,200,000 more than in 1973.
2. Health research is little changed in total but quite dif-
ferently distributed, particularly among the Health
Institutes: cancer and heart disease funds are up but,
for the first time, at the cost of other programs (e.g.,
every other NIH institute suffers a decrease). Also for
the first time, general research funds for the National
Institutes of Health show an absolute decline. Training
of health research personnel is down.
3. General Research Support Grants in health-related
fields, awarded to the University by formula in rela-
tion to total grants and contracts, are being phased out.
4. Both the funding and the legal authority for the Re-
gional Medical Program (currently $60,000,000) will
come to an end in June, 1973, because the expectations
have "not in fact been realized" in seven years of
existence.
5. Agricultural research suffers a major decrease of $17,-
700,000, a 19 per cent cut for the Cooperative State
Research Service.
6. Funds for the National Foundation of the Arts and
Humanities are up a record $71,486,000.
7. The research and reform arm of the new Education
Division of HEW, the National Institute of Education,
will receive $43,000,000 more than in 1973; the expec-
tations are modeled after the National Institutes of
Health.
8. Defense, NASA, and the Atomic Energy Commission
budgets for research and development in universities
have small gains and losses which essentially balance
out.
9. Transportation, housing, and energy research are em-
phasized among the domestic ills to be attacked, but
with only modest increases related to university use.
University of Illinois Impact
1. Phasing out of General Research Support Grants in
health means a loss of $210,800 at the Medical Center.
2. The loss of the Regional Medical Program will total
$665,000, but part of the loss should be ascribed to
"service" as well as research.
3. The University's share of the agricultural research cut
is computed at $440,896.
4. Cuts and phase-outs in training grants (covered else-
where) will adversely affect research: by reducing sup-
port of related faculty and crippling the multiplier in
research when used as a teaching method \vith graduate
students.
5. The impact in most research grant categories cannot
be predicted because of the competitive awarding of
grants and contracts, different expiration dates, and the
effect of a single large project as compared with many
small ones. The impact will obviously be smallest on
the Chicago Circle Campus, where the present low
federal-support base reflects an early stage of develop-
ment.
6. From several sources, a loss of $200,000 is estimated in
engineering and psychological research ($100,000 each)
at the Chicago Circle Campus.
7. Possible research gains, although problematical, are
available through these new or expanded opportunities:
a. humanities projects. National Endowment for the
Humanities, particularly if related to the Bicenten-
nial Celebration of 1976
b. heart and cancer research
c. sickle cell disease center aid
d. educational initiatives awards imder the Compre-
hensive Health Manpower Act
e. NSF Research Applied to National Needs program
f. National Institute of Education programs
g. innovations imder new $15,000,000 fund administered
by the Assistant Secretary of HEW
h. transportation and housing research
i. energy programs.
IV. PUBLIC SERVICE
General Impact
1. While the budget justification statements look favorably
on the practical, the applied, and the problem-oriented,
as well as adult education, any dollar reading of the
impact is obscured by trade-offs, re\enue sharing al-
ternatives, and ill-defined categories.
2. While the Cooperative Extension Service shows an in-
crease, this is more than offset by an increase in the re-
imbursement for penalty mail, creating a net reduction
of $2,500,000.
3. University community service (Title I, Higher Educa-
tion Act), originally conceived as a general extension 4
program to parallel that in agriculture and home eco- "
nomics, was never fimded (last at $9,500,000) as au-
thorized and is now eliminated because of failure to
find a mission. M
4. Community mental health centers are cut out (from ^
current $134,000,000) on the assumption of local sup-
port instead.
University of Illinois Impact
1. The University's share of the national reduction will
take $100,000 from the Cooperative Extension Service.
2. The zero for university community service means a
$11,538 decrease from 1973; distribution, however, is
by grant from the Board of Higher Education and has
run as high as $80,000. The loss here is chiefly in the
principle of federal commitment to extension of the
non-rural type, intended as a prototype to expand
rather than to eliminate.
3. Cuts in the Education Professions Development Act
(covered elsewhere) will remove the $100,000 bilingual
education program at the Chicago Circle Campus.
4. The College of Medicine, Medical Center, will suffer
a $16,500 decrease in support for community mental
health centers.
V. CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES
General Impact
1. Amid references to "overbuilding," direct grants for
academic facilities are zero-budgeted.
2. There will be no new loans for interest subsidies for
academic facilities. The $31,425,000 in the budget is to
serve past loans from the private market.
3. Hill-Burton hospital construction funds are eliminated.
University of Illinois Impact
1. There will be no hope of getting the $330,000 direct
grant sought for the Speech and Hearing Clinic, Ur-
bana Campus, with application pending.
2. The negative will also apply to more than $3,280,000 of
potential grants (computed at the rate governing the
last grant) under pending applications for interest
subsidies on almost $11,000,000 in three projects:
Classroom Office-Student Service Building, fl
Chicago Circle $5,000,000
Law Building Addition, Urbana $4,342,000
Speech and Hearing Clinic, Urbana $1,607,760
3. While the Hill-Burton elimination has no effect in i
1974, that expected source is gone for direct federal "
matching aid in any future hospital construction.
Part VI of this report, dealing with the impact on stu-
dent aid, will appear in a forthcoming issue of the Fac-
ulty Letter.
Gift and Exchan^
220a Library
3 copies)
0 Division
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Pnsidcufs Statnmnt to IBHE on FY 1974 Operating Budgets
for Higher Education
JOHN E. CORBALLV JR., PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 237, May 4, 1973
THE LIBRARY OF THE
J UN 4 1973
On May 1, 1973, the Illinois Board of Higher Educa-
tion undertook to admse the Governor concerning the
way in which the sums for higher education proposed in
his budget message for Fiscal Year 1974 should be allo-
cated among institutions and programs. This advice
included no allocations for staff or faculty salary increases
or for funds to meet price increases caused by continuing
inflation. My statement in opposition to this advice
follows.
The IBHE took two actions on May 1 related to
FY 1974 budgets. The Board unanimously reaffirmed its
support of its earlier budget recommendations adopted
in December, 1972, and February, 1973. But the Board
also unanimously approved the advice mentioned above
concerning the allocation of the Governor's proposed
amount for higher education. The Board did add a phrase
to thii advice to express the view of the Board that such
an allocation would have "concomitant adverse effects"
upon higher education in Illinois. This amendment was
added by a 9-4 vote.
We shall continue to press our case for our needs and
for our priorities with the General Assembly and with
Governor Walker and his staff.
Members of the Board of Higher Education :
I rise to speak particularly to the suggestions which
you are being asked to endorse which relate to the allo-
cation of funds suggested by Governor Walker to repre-
sent the new money available for the operating budgets
for higher education for Fiscal Year 1974. While I am
troubled by Governor Walker's suggestions for both
of)erating and capital funds, the crucial area in which
we must now stand and be counted is in the area of
operating funds.
In 1970-71, the University of Illinois received an ap-
propriation from general revenue funds in the amount
of $168,157,756. The recommendation before you today
suggests that for 1973-74 the University of Illinois should
receive $167,387,969 in general revenue funds. That
recommendation envisions a decrease in general revenue
funds for the University since 1970-71 of approximately
$770,000.
The following events have occurred since 1970-71 :
1. We have faced an annual rate of cost increases of
approximately 5 per cent per year.
2. Our enrollment has increased by over 5 per cent.
3. We have begun the ex-pansion of programs in
medical education and the health services.
4. We have opened and are operating new buildings
on our three campuses.
5. We have conformed to and must continue to meet
new requirements of both Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and Occupational Safety and Health
Act at real cost to the University.
6. We have maintained and in many cases have im-
proved the quality of our programs and our com-
mitment to increase enrollment from minority and
disadvantaged groups.
The recommendations now before )0u for revising the
FY 1974 budgets as previously adopted by this Board
are preposterous. They are so at odds with the real and
pressing problems of higher education as to be actually
counterproductive. Our three most serious problems are:
1 . Personnel salaries. There is no major state in the
country which does not anticipate providing a needed
increase in compensation for public university staff
and faculty members. We are lagging behind the coun-
try in faculty salaries and behind the community in
nonacademic rates.
Yet the Board Staff recommends no salary increase!
2. Price increase. Surely no one is unaware of the most
pressing problems in the economy today. The price of
fuel alone will cost several millions of dollars more
ne.xt year for higher education.
Yet the Board Staff recommends no increase in operating
funds.
3. Loss of Federal Funds. The anticipated reduction in
the support of instructional programs by the Federal
Government will seriously impair programs of vital
interest to the State.
Yet the Board Staff recommends no offset and appears
not even to recognize the problem.
This apparent lack of awareness of the needs of
higher education is actually compounded by the absurdity
of the recommendation for the allocation of c\en a re-
duced amount of resources. What the Board Staff recom-
mends is:
A. A $9.8 million dollar expansion of new and expensive
programs.
B. An increase in ISSC funds of $2.9 million beyond the
estimated FY 1973 expenditure when in fact ISSC
will likely have a surplus of $2 million at the end of
FY 1973.
C. An increase of $2.5 million in support of private
higher education through raising the limit of ISSC
to $1,300.
D. An expansion in enrollment in the junior colleges
costing $6.1 million.
The Board Staff might respond by claiming that we
can meet all of the other problems through reallocation
— that mysterious asterisk on the sheet before you. It
is clear that we have met our needs over the past three
years through massive reallocations and that route is
no longer available to us. To imply that reallocation is a
solution is to imply what is simply not true.
I do not believe that the Board of Higher Education
can in good conscience approve this proposal. I do not
believe these allocations speak to the needs of higher edu-
cation in general and most assuredly do not speak to the
needs of the University of Illinois. They violate the pri-
orities of the Board of Trustees of the University and also
the previous priorities of this Board in adopting Executive
Director's Reports 112 and 113. I believe this proposition
is so against the best interests of the State, the people,
and higher education that it should be categorically re-
jected. If the Governor really seeks advice about the real
effect of his recommendation on higher education in Illi-
nois, this Board should provide that advice. The only
legitimate advice is that the amount \vhich he proposes
must be distributed to faculty and staff salary increases
and that the amount he proposes will only barely meet
that need on even minimum criteria of need and of
equity.
The only legitimate advice is that if the amount the
Governor proposes is all that is available, there must be a
total moratorium during Fiscal 1974 on all new or ex-
panded efforts in higher education in Illinois. That mora-
torium includes the cessation of growth in all health
professions education; the cessation of enrollment in-
creases in all of public higher education; the cessation of
improvements in scholarship programs; the cessation of
growth as planned in new institutions; and the cessation
of growth in so-called new delivery systems. If that is all
the money a\'ailable, we cannot devote our time to new-
planning efforts; we must instead \vork against heavy
odds to guarantee survival for 1973-74.
The amount the Go\'ernor proposes does not repre-
sent higher education's proportionate share of the re-
sults of economic growth in Illinois — growth to which
higher education contributes more than its fair share.
That advice is honest, straightforward, and factual.
It is not a threat, it is not a failure to respond, it is not
a failure to face reality. It is the reality.
Our nonacademic staff and our faculty and our stu-
dents should not be asked to continue to bear the finan-
cial burden of meeting the State's responsibility to sup-
port a quality program of higher education in Illinois.
The Governor asked for advice and I welcome his request
to you. But your task is to respond to that request with
honesty, with candor, and with facts. The fact is that
what you approved last February is what is needed if we
are to do what \ve are asked to do in higher education.
We ask that you not seriously confuse and undennine
that earlier advice with numbers which are artificial and
which represent poor advice. ^Ve hope that you will
support the needs of our people for salary equity as the
first priority and \vill state that even that priority is barely
met within the number suggested by the Governor.
It is inconceivable to me that the recommendations of
this Board could be for expansion, for new prograins, for
more aid to private universities and for even more
scholarships when the fundamental base of all of senior
public higher education is rapidly eroding. If funds are
to be restricted then we must contract not expand if we
are to maintain the quality and validity of our system.
We therefore ask you to:
A. Reaffirm the needs and priorities of Executive Di-
rector's Reports 112 and 113 so that the General
Assembly and the Governor can consider the
actual needs against other state priorities; or if the
Governor's figure represents all that will be
available,
B. Reaffirm the need for salary increases and for
funds to meet price increases before new pro-
grams and expansion are considered and declare
the need for a moratorium on all growth and ex-
pansion in all of higher education in Illinois.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
l£C^-^j^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 238, July 6, 1973
University Joins Midzvest Universities Cvnsortiiun on Air Pollution
The Board of Trustees, meeting on the Urbana-
Champaign Campus June 20. approved participation of
the Uni\ersity in the Midwest Universities Consortium
on Air Pollution and authorized Univei"sity officers to
take such steps necessaiy to pro\ide for its representation
in the consortium and for its formation. Recommenda-
tion by the President for participation was supported by
the University Council for Environmental Studies and by
the \'ice President for Academic De\elopment and Co-
ordination.
This is the President's recommendation to the Board :
The University of Illinois has been invited to join with
the University of ^Visconsin-Madison, Purdue University, the
University of Minnesota, Northwestern University, Illinois
Institute of Technology, and the University of Notre Dame in
the formation of an organization to be known as Midwest
Universities Consortium on Air Pollution.
The purpose of the consortium will be to facilitate and
coordinate action by and among the member institutions in
education and research endeavors related to air pollution. It
is intended that the activities of the consortium will augment
the efforts of the individual participating institutions. Each
participating university will exercise internal review over any
consortium proposal or request for funds involving that par-
ticular university prior to submission to any potential funding
agency. To assist in reviews, the existing University-wide
Committee on Air Pollution will become a sub-committee of
the University Council on Environmental Studies.
Control of the consortium will be vested in a Board of
Directors, with each member institution appointing one
director with one vote. Each institution may be a.ssessed on an
equal basis for administrative expenses of the consortium up
to the sum of $1,000 for each university in any annual period,
September 1 to August 31. Any member of the consortium
may withdraw on written notice to the other members.
Appointments for Division of University Extension Reorganization
Pursuant to the '"Extension Reorganization" report
made to the Board of Trustees at its March 21 meeting
outlining the decentralization of certain continuing educa-
tion functions now performed in the Division of Univer-
sity E.xtension and the coordination of public service
functions generally, the Board on June 20 approved the
appointment of Dr. Stanley C. Robinson as University
Coordinator of Continuing Education and of Dr. John
B. Claar as Associate Vice President for Public Service.
The \'ice President for Governmental Relations and
Public Ser\'ice recommended the appointments.
Dr. Robinson, Dean of the Division of University Ex-
tension since July 1, 1960, became University Coordi-
nator on July 1 and also holds the rank of Professor of
Business Administration. A native of Missouri, he is a
graduate of Southwest Missouri State College and holds
graduate degrees from State University of Iowa and New
York University. He has been a member of the Univer-
sity faculty since 1948 when he joined as a visiting
lecturer after teaching for several years at Eastern Illinois
State College.
Dr. Claar became Associate Vice President for Public
Service July 1 in addition to his present responsibilities
as Director of the Cooperative Extension Service and
Associate Dean of the College of Agriculture. He holds
the rank of Professor of Agricultural Economics. Dr.
Claar has three degrees from the University and in addi-
tion to his teaching and administrative positions at the
University also has seiAed with the United States Depart-
ment of Agriculture Federal Extension Service.
Presented here is the progress report of the Division
of University Extension reorganization as made by the
President to the Board on March 21 :
Progress Report, Extension Reorganization
In the course of University reorganization, the Division of
University Extension has remained an operating function at
the general University level, headed by an executive officer
still bearing the title of "dean." To bring that function into
conformity with the evolving University organization as a
system, and to fix responsibility for continuing education closer
to the faculty, two objectives are now sought:
1 . Redistribution of the Division of University Extension func-
tions so as to (a) provide for decentralization of certain
operations to the campuses and (b) assure system-wide
policy setting, evaluation, and coordination.
2. While so doing, to strengthen the total public service
function in the University of Illinois.
It is proposed, therefore, that
1. Each campus provide an appropriate and clearly identifi-
able campus-wide framework of structure and responsi-
bilities for the discharge of the continuing education and/or
public service functions, with
a. Executive responsibility delegated by the Chancellor
to an officer who will give leadership to the function
and represent the campus in professional-technical rela-
tions with his counterparts on the other campuses and
with the Office of the Vice President for Governmental
Relations and Public Ser\'ice;
b. The designation of an officer in each appropriate college
or administrative unit (e.g., an Assistant or Associate
Dean) who will give leadership to that unit's counter-
part of the function organized in "a" above;
c. Systematic means of coordinating the activities repre-
sented by "a" and "b" above and of facilitating faculty
involvement in policy and planning.
2. Effective July 1, 1973, University-wide machinery be pro-
vided for recommending policy to the President, coordinat-
ing all relations involving a field stafi^, and facilitating and
evaluating all public service activities for University-wide
purposes, as follows:
a. Dr. Stanley C. Robinson (presently Dean of the Division
of University Extension) be given responsibility, at the
General University level, for
( 1 ) Assisting the Vice President for Governmental
Relations and Public Service in University-wide
relationships involving continuing education;
(2) Directing those parts of the Division of University
Extension which are retained under University-
wide administration (the three public safety pro-
grams, corresponding study, and the Visual Aids
Service ) .
b. Dr. John B. Claar be given responsibility, at the General
University level, for
( 1 ) Coordinating for University-wide service the activ-
ities of the University's field personnel involved
in the public service function, both the Cooperative
Extension Service field staff and other University
field representatives;
(2) Assisting the \'ice President for Governmental Re-
lations and Public Service in University-wide public
service relationships, particularly of the type involv-
ing problem-solving and community participation.
(He will retain responsibility for directing the Coopera-
tive Extension Service and serving as Associate Dean.)
c. A University Council on Public Service be established
to facilitate inter-campus programming and relations,
with necessary attention to questions of desirable uni-
formity of procedures and policies.
Implementing details will be worked out by the President
in consultation with the Chancellors, including (a) the trans-
fer of functions and resources, (b) field staff organization and
relationships, and (c) methods of reporting at campus and
University levels.
Appropriate amendment of the University Statutes, if
necessary, will be proposed to the Board of Trustees in due
course, and reports of campus organizational steps to meet
the requirements of Proposal No. 1 and the appointments
recommended for Dr. Robinson and Dr. Claar will be sub-
mitted to the Board as soon as possible.
StatemenI on Extension Reorganization
The changes here made, and others in progress, in how
the University of Illinois performs its public service function
are a significant additional milestone in the University's re-
sponse to the world in which it exists.
There are outside forces which call for new responses, in-
cluding:
1. the non-traditional educational needs which are giving
rise to the "open universities" abroad and to the pro-
posed Lincoln State University at home
2. the new institutions in Illinois, including community
colleges and senior institutions, with which the Univer-
sity of Illinois must share responsibility for serving the
public
3. the growing centrality of urban life and the University's
heightened commitment to serve the educational and
problem-solving needs of Chicago, where two campuses
are located
4. the inadequacy of college-age education for lifetime
careers in engineering, education, business, law, the
health fields, and other professional areas
5. new electronic devices which make possible the sharing
of knowledge in revolutionary dimensions of time and
space.
The University of Illinois is preparing to meet these
challenges more adequately and with greater flexibility. To
this end, two changes are being made: (1) placing respon-
sibility for extramural or continuing education firmly upon
each campus, where the professional schools and expert per-
sonnel provide what is to be "extended"; and (2) pulling
together the exi.sting field staff of the University, both that
which is general and that which relates to rural life, with
sufficient coordination to focus and multiply the University's
instructional and problem-solving impact throughout the state.
Agricultural and general extension are in no sense merged.
Instead, parts of them are coordinated to create a University-
wide field network. The Cooperative Extension Service will
remain unchanged except that the Director, Dr. John B.
Claar, and the ten District Directors will add a University-
wide dimension to what they now do as field representatives
attached to a particular campus. In other words, the work of
the general extension representatives, six of them now in the
Division of University Extension, and of the ten District
Directors of the Cooperative Extension Service will be co-
ordinated under the direction of Dr. Claar in his new capacity
as Associate Vice President for Public Service.
Dr. Stanley C. Robinson will continue to direct the
police training and other public safety programs, correspon-
dence study, and the Visual Aids Service. These units have
their independent staff's and do not have to rely heavily on
campus-based faculty. As University Coordinator for Continu-
ing Education, he will also serve as staff officer assisting with
the University-wide relationships which will necessarily ac-
company the placing of primary responsibility for all other
continuing education at the campus level.
In their University-wide capacities. Dr. Claar and Dr.
Robinson will report directly to Dr. Eldon L. Johnson, Vice
President for Governmental Relations and Public Service.
\Ve expect this pattern to encourage the Chicago Circle
Campus to give more service to Chicago, the Urbana Campus
to step up the continuing education of professionals at the
graduate level, and the Medical Center Campus to intensify
its present services in delivery of health care and in career-
long instruction for the health professionals. W'e also expect
the entire University, with the help of a coordinated field
staff, to be in a better position to determine public needs
and to make appropriate University response.
The public service tradition is built into the University of
Illinois as a land-gnmt institution. It needs no reiteration in
one sense. In another, it indeed does, because the University's
capacities as a center of knowledge may otherwise be .seen and
used only in the on-campus, college-age dimension. To assure
that the broader outreach dimension does in fact derive from
the traditional teaching and research functions, this reorgani-
zation attempts to create appropriate channels and re-
sponsibilities.
Proposal for Administrative Leaves Approved
The Board of Trustees at its June 20 meeting ap-
proved a proposal for the granting of administrative
leaves. Text of the President's recommendation was as
follows :
As the management of academic institutions has become
increasingly complex, there has been heightened concern ex-
pressed as to the ability of academic administrators to keep
abreast of developments in their profession and to find time
to design new approaches to their tasks. To provide for such
an opportunity on a limited basis, I recommend a plan for
administrative leaves as outlined below:
1. After at least five years of service in the position indicated,
the following may apply for leaves of two- to four-months'
duration at full salary: Deans, \'ice Chancellors, Vice
Presidents (and those holding the position of Assistant or
Associate Dean, Vice Chancellor, or Vice President), and
other General Officers, except for Chancellors and the
President.
2. Such leaves would be recommended by a Chancellor to the
President, or by the President, based upon a review of a
specific proposal submitted by an eligible administrator.
The proposal would detail the activities to be undertaken
during the leave and the manner in which those activities
would enhance the service of the administrator in meeting
his University or campus responsibilities.
3. The recommendations would be reviewed by a Committee
consisting of the President, the Vice President for Aca-
demic Development and Coordination, and the Chancellors.
Recommendations from the Committee for the award of
such leaves would be made to the Board of Trustees.
4. The duties of those on such leaves would ordinarily be
absorbed by others at no added cost to the University. In
cases where this is not possible, extra costs may be borne
by use of discretionary funds available to the Chancellors
or to the President from non-appropriated sources.
TTie plan proposed would be reviewed at the end of a
two-year period to appraise its success and to consider the
question of whether there may be justification for altering the
list of those now proposed to be eligible for such leave.
Provision has not been made for such leaves for Chan-
cellors or the President inasmuch as they cannot in fact be
said to "take leave" from their responsibilities. However,
short-term opportunities may be afforded to derive similar
advantages in working with professional groups on professional
problems.
Bachelor of Social Work Approved for Chicago Circle, Urhana Campuses
Another item on the June 20 meeting agenda of the
Board of Trustees was the establishment of a Bachelor
of Social Work degree program on the Chicago Circle
and Urbana-Champaign Campuses. The Board approved
the recommendation, subject to further action of the
Illinois Board of Higher Education.
Presentation at the meeting was as follows :
The Chicago Circle and Urbana Senates have recom-
mended the establishment of a Bachelor of Social Work degree
program in the divisions of the Jane Addams Graduate School
of Social AV'ork on each campus.
This program is designed to provide for professional
education for social work in the undergraduate years. It will
provide one year of professional social work content in the
student's junior and senior years, including a practicum in a
social agency. Graduates from the programs will be prepared
to assume beginning professional practice in direct social
ser\-ice delivery in a variety of public and private agencies.
The development of these programs follows a policy
change in both the National Association of Social Workers
and the National Council on Social Work Education. This
change accepted, for the first time, the policy of beginning
professional education in the undergraduate years, with con-
tinuation of graduate study for Master of Social Work and
Doctor of Social Work degrees. The period of study required
for the latter degrees will be reduced by one year as a result
of this change.
At Urbana, it is anticipated that most of the 300 students
presently majoring in social welfare in the College of Liberal
Arts and Sciences will transfer to the new program. In Chi-
cago, the expectations are that, in the first year of operation,
fifty majors might be accepted. In the first year of operation,
there will be no new costs involved on either campus.*
The Chancellors at Chicago Circle and Urbana and the
Vice President for Academic Development and Coordination
concur in this recommendation. The University .Senates Con-
ference has advised that no other Senate jurisdiction is
involved.
* The future costs will depend on growth in enrollment. How-
ever, estimates of such costs are:
Additional Costs
1974 1975 1976 1977 1978
Chicago Circle $17,000 $34,000 $51,000 $68,000 $85,000
Urbana-Champaign 16,000 32,000 48,000 64,000 80,000
These estimates are based on the premise that growth will be
steady throughout the period and that there will be 20-25 addi-
tional majors on each campus each year and require the addi-
tion of one new faculty member on each campus.
Impact of Proposed Federal Budget
on University of Illinois, Part VI
Presented here is Part VI of the report, Impact of
Proposed Federal Budget on the University of Illinois,
which appeared in Faculty Letter No. 236, April 27, 1973.
VI. STUDENT AID
General Impact
1. The "goal of equal educational opportunity" is by far
the highest budget priority and the best-treated, ac-
counting for the 7 per cent overall increase for higher
education despite many cuts in other programs.
2. ^Vhile general student aid (administered by the Office
of Education as distinguished from special aid programs
in the health professions) is increased by $130,000,000,
the mix and impact are drastically changed: there is a
trade-off of $622,000,000 in new Basic Opportunity
Grants (BOGs) for zero-budgeted Supplemental or
Educational Opportunity Grants and no new capital
contribution for the National Direct Student Loan
program.
3. The intention is to shift to Basic Opportunity Grants for
the most needy and to personal indebtedness by private
financing for the others. The effect will be aid for more
students, but smaller sums per student and more in-
debtedness for the middle-class.
4. This shift to BOGs is contrary to the provisions of the
Educational Amendments of 1972 (which prescribe
certain levels for the existing programs as a condition
for funding the BOGs); hence Congressional-Executive
"negotiations" will be required on a point which was
divisive and presumed settled last year.
5. The Congressional-Executive battle over the new mix
will produce a critical time impact. It is unlikely that
the delivery system for the BOG program can be op-
erative for 1973-74 or that appropriations for the other
programs (since Congress will have to confront the
Executive on the issue) will be known in time for even
tentative commitments to students this spring.
University of Illinois Impact
1. More total dollars may eventually be available — per-
haps an increase of $585,371 (above 1972-73 base of
$3,551,682) assuming that the University of Illinois
share of BOGs will be divided among eligible applicants
at a maximum level of $900 instead of $1,400, minus
family contribution, since the federal request is not
really "full funding." (See table following.)
2. The total new mix will offset a loss of $1,326,921 in
Educational Opportunity Grants and $1,485,846 in
direct student loans.
3. The critical time problem will affect all campuses but
is compounded on the Urbana-Champaign Campus by
the early calendar, with registration beginning August
23, 1973.
4. More undergraduate students will be aided but for
smaller sums than heretofore, with greater pressure on
state and University funds for the remainder, since no
student may cover more than half his educational costs
from federal sources.
3. Graduate students in particular will be adversely
affected
a. by the phasing out of the National Direct Student
Loan program unless given distinct priority for the
drastically reduced NDSL funds
b. by the emphasis on privately financed loans, because
experience shows that the mobile graduate student
has trouble finding a bank to make such a loan.
6. Cost of campus administration will rise, with more
paper work, without any federal aid for federally-
imposed tasks.
7. The University's student-aid officers prefer the existing
programs because
a. the proposed $622,000,000 in BOGs is not "full
funding"
b. the new program will operate by national guidelines
and forms
c. the existing campus-based programs permit greater
flexibility in meeting both individual student needs
and institutional recruitment and enrollment ob-
jectives.
STUDENT AID
University of Illinois
Estimated Moximum Share of FY74 Funds
Compared With Actual Share of FY73 Funds
ACTUAL SHARE FY73
Chlrago
Circle
Medical
Center
Urbana-
Champaign
Total
BOG
SEOG
CWS
NDSL
$ 451,963
284,965
429,534
$10,000
18,240
28,264
$ 864,958
303,189
1,160,569
$1,3'26,921
606,394
1,618,367
TOTAL
$1,166,462
$56,504
$2,328,716
$3,551,682
MAXIMUM SHARE
FY74
BOG
SEOG
CWS
NDSL
$1,161,707
2,53,000
35,221
$75,825
li5',600
2,300
$94,125
$2,228,000
270,000
95,000
$2,593,000
$3,465,532
539.000
132,521
T0T.4L
$1,449,928
$4,137,053
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 369 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-1562.
fjU^fa^^''
THt
C^i
^^p
o 1 \3i3
Gift anJ Elxchango Division
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OK THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 239, September 6, 1973
Evaluation of Administrator Performance
JOHN E. CORBALLV JR., PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
During the past year, conversations within the Uni-
versity and elsewhere have indicated that there is in-
creasing concern about the processes for the evaluation
of administrative performance in higher education. One
outgrowth of the elimination of biennial appointments
for a number of administrators in the University of Illi-
nois was the need to review and to revise our evaluation
procedures.
I have discussed this matter at some length with the
University Senates Conference and at one time during
1972-73 proposed that I would have a position paper
prepared on this subject for consideration by the Con-
ference. However, subsequent conversations led me to
address the following letter to Professor Peter Yankwich,
Chairman of the Conference, on June 8, 1973 :
During the past month a number of my conversations with
faculty groups have included discussion of the need for new
and clear procedures for the regular evaluation of University
administrators. While the elimination of biennial appoint-
ments has caused some of this concern, there is a general
feeling that the Statutes do not provide adequate guidance in
this area and that the area is one in which University guide-
lines are needed.
At one time, I indicated to the Senates Conference that
I would have a draft proposal for administrator evaluation
prepared for appropriate review by faculty groups. Upon re-
flection, I believe that it would be more appropriate for the
Conference to devise a procedure through which such a pro-
posal could be prepared rather than to start with an "admin-
istrative document." To use a popular administrative phrase,
"I want to make it perfectly clear" that I feel that there are
crucial administrative concerns which must be reflected in
the evaluation of administrators. I would want whatever grou|)
is working on this matter to be aware that sooner or later
real, as opposed to pru forma, administrative review of the
proposal would be in order.
It appears doubtful that I can be in attendance at the
Conference meeting on June 26. I would appreciate it if you
and the members of the Conference would consider this mat-
ter at that time and, if possible, agree upon a procedure to
develop a proposal for the evaluation of administrators. Be-
cause of general concern about this matter, I believe that when
a procedure is developed we should inform the faculty and
administrators of the University that the study is under way
so that we can avoid what might become duplication of
efforts. If it would not be considered undue interference, I
would be interested in reviewing with you the proposed pro-
cedure before it is finalized so that I could be aware of pro-
posed timing and of your vIpw; rnnremi'ng .Tdinini^lr.itivp
input to the process.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
On July 2, 1973, I received the following reply from
Professor Yankwich :
The University Senates Conference considered your re-
quest of June 8, 1973, at its June 26 meeting. The Conference
welcomes the opportunity to serve in this initiating capacity.
Evaluation of administrators is important and should
take place under an umbrella of policy and of procedural
guidelines that is University-wide. Further, such policy and
guidelines must be credible as well as applicable to a sub-
stantial variety of administrative levels and situations. These
considerations and a number of suggestions conveyed in your
recent letter and informally have helped the Conference to
devise the following procedure:
1. The Conference will appoint a task force or committee on
administrator evaluation to work during the 1973-74 Uni-
versity year on preparation of a comprehensive written
statement of University-wide policies and procedural guide-
lines for the evaluation of administrators. (We a.ssume that
such evaluations would be regular, not triggered only by
the development of crises, and that they would be coupled
with a decision-making mechanism and opportunity.)
2. The task force will report to you through the Conference,
and the Conference will be respon.sible for initial review of
the report of the task force.
3. While concurring with your interest in having strong fac-
ulty participation in this work, the Conference feels it im-
portant that a substantial number of task force members
be drawn from the several administrative levels of the
University. Accordingly, the Conference has selected the
following persons to be members of the task force :
Joseph S. Begando, Chancellor, Medical Center
George Bugliarello, Dean, College of Engineering, Chicago
Circle
I. E. Farber, Professor of Psychology, Chicago Circle
Richard L. Feltner, Head, Department of Agricultural
Economics, Urbana
Arnold B. Grobman, Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Chicago Circle
Eldon L. Johnson, Vice President of the University
Joseph L. Landin, Head, Department of Mathematics,
Chicago Circle
Mary M. Lohr, Dean, College of Nursing, Medical Center
Barry Munitz, Vice President of the University
Alfred NisinofF, Head, Department of Biological Chemistry,
Medical Center
Theodore Peterson, Dean, College of Communications,
Urbana
Sheldon J. Plager, Professor of Law, Urbana
Martin P. Schulman, Professor of Pharmacology, Medical
Center
Morton W. Weir, Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Urbana
We have selected Professor Plager to be Chairman and
Vice President Johnson to be Secretary of the Task Force.
Ralph Daniels, Professor of Chemistry, Medical Center, is
Chairman of the Uni\'ersity Senates Conference for 1973-74,
and it would be appropriate for him to issue the invitations
to membership on the Task Force.
Unless these arrangements are inconsistent with the views
expressed in your recent communications to us, I would ap-
preciate your notifying Professor Daniels so that the invita-
tions can be prepared.
I informed Professor Daniels of my full support of the
recommendations of the Conference and on July 9. 1973,
Professor Daniels invited the proposed members of the
Study Group on the Evaluation of Administrators to
accept this assignment. In his letter of invitation, Pro-
fessor Daniels on behalf of the Conference asked Pro-
fessor Sheldon J. Plager (Law, Urbana-Champaign) to
serve as chairman of the group and \'ice President Eldon
Johnson to serve as Secretary.
Because I am aware of various activities under way
related to this topic, I indicated to the Conference that
I would inform the faculty and staff of the University
concerning the Study Group and would ask groups and
individuals studying this inatter to coordinate their work
with the Study Group. While strict guidelines for the
work of the Study Group have not been developed, the
original thinking was that the administrative positions
under consideration would be academic administrators'
positions including those at the department, school,
college, campus, and University levels.
I believe that this study is important to the Univer-
sity, and I am most appreciative of the willingness of the
Study Group members to undertake this task and of the
Senates Conference to review the work of the Study
Group. The University community will be kept informed
of the progress of this work and will be asked for input
to the work as the study moves ahead.
Delay in Payment of State Health Insur^ance Claims
The following statement has been issued by the
Campus Insurance Offices in regard to processing of
health insurance claims with the Northeastern Life In-
surance Company of New York :
A number of complaints have been received by the Cam-
pus Insurance Offices of long delays in the processing of
health insurance claims under the State of Illinois Group
Health Insurance Contract with the Northeastern Life In-
surance Company of New York.
The Director of the State Department of Personnel ter-
minated the contract with the Northeastern Life Insurance
Company on June 30, 1973, and concurrently terminated the
arrangement for the University to process and pay health
insurance claims for our faculty and stafi under the program.
.All claims records and pending claims were transferred from
the University to the Northeastern Life Insurance Company's
claim office in Springfield, Illinois, on June 30, 1973. The in-
surance company also closed its Chicago claim office and
transferred the claim processing responsibility to the Spring-
field claim office.
The volume of pending claims in the Springfield claim
office is so large that some claims now in the office may not
be processed for another si.x to eight weeks. Unfortunately,
your Campus Insurance Office cannot expedite the payment of
these claims under the State Program even though we know
that hospitals and physicians are pressing you for the pay-
ment of their bills. W'e do suggest the following procedure:
1. If you have not filed a claim for medical expenses incurred
under the State Plan prior to July I, 1973, do so as soon
as possible. Be certain to send a completed claim form
with your bills so that there will be no delay when the
claims examiner processes llie claim. You should submit
the claim to your Campus Insurance Office to have a \eri-
fication that you were insured under the program and the
Insurance Office will send the claim on to the company's
claim office. Expenses incurred after June 30, 1973, should
be submitted directly to one of the Blue Cross-Blue Shield
claim offices listed in the 1973-74 State booklet.
2. If you have a claim pending for expenses incurred prior
to June 30 but failed to send in a claim form with the
medical bills, send in a completed claim form immediately.
If the claims examiner has requested additional informa-
tion, be sure to respond to the request promptly.
3. If you have assigned the benefit payments of a pending
claim to a hospital and/or physician, contact them to warn
them of this delay to avoid any impairment of your credit
rating. In some cases, the hospitals ha\e requested a small
payment on the bill.
4. In most cases your Campus Insurance Office will have a
transmittal form and can confirm that a claim has been
received and forwarded to the insurance company but
they do not have any copies of completed claim forms or
bills and cannot determine if your claim has been paid or
when it will be processed.
5. If you encounter an urgent problem as a result of this
delay, you may send the details of your claim to Mr.
Richard Shereda, Department of Personnel, Springfield,
Illinois, and request a status report on your claim. This
procedure should be limited to only the most serious prob-
lems because this procedure will disrupt the claim process-
ing and further delay the payment of claims.
6. If you have your dependents insured under the Univer-
sity's contract with the Continental Assurance Company,
there should be no inordinate delay in the processing of
the claims. If you have submitted a claim and wish to
know its status, contact your Campus Insurance Office and
you will receive a reply by return mail.
-£6
/j^j-jt^
unt anil CAca^:!;
220a Library
5 copies)
ui V i5 ion
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 240, October 4, 1973
TH£. LiartARY OF THE
OCT 2 4 1973
IJIilVERSiTY OF ILLINOIS
Restoration of Budget Reductions
STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY JR., TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES, SEPTEMBER 12, 1973
At this meeting, you ha\e before you budget recom-
mendations for both the current year and for 1974-75. I
will not repeat the comments I made at our July meet-
ing except to remind you that we are providing legislators
with budgetary' information in support of the efforts by
the General Assembly to o\erride Governor Walker's re-
duction of about $4 million in our operating appropria-
tion for 1973-74 and to restore funds for several capital
projects in our capital appropriations for the same period.
Some effort has been made to describe our strong
support of a restoration as a personal battle between
Go\emor Walker and the Universitx- or, more specifically,
between the Governor and me. This interpretation is
simply not true. The Governor, the General Assembly,
and University officials play separate and distinct roles in
Illinois government. Both the power of the Governor to
reduce or veto appropriations and the power of the
General .Assembly to restore such reductions or vetoes
are specified in our Illinois Constitution. ^Ve belie\ e that
the General Assembly was right in its appropriations to the
Uni\ersity for 1973-74 and we seek — as provided in
the Constitution — a reaffirmation by the General Assem-
bly of its position. While the Governor and I disagree on
the funding requirements of the University for 1973-74,
it is an honest and open disagreement which we have
discussed, which we both understand, and in which we
each must play the role and meet the responsibilities
assigned to us.
An analysis of our financial needs and of the program
restraints, which three — and now, perhaps, four — years
of State tax support which has failed to recognize our
needs have imposed upon us, makes it clear to me that we
must enter 1974-75 with a base operating budget aj^proxi-
mating the original appropriations made by the General
Assembly for 1973-74. If the Governor's reductions are
sustained, we must find other ways to restore that base. As
distasteful as it is to me and to you, one way which must
be considered is a sharp increase in tuition.
Our philosophical commitment to low tuition is a
matter of extensive public record. I do not agree that the
financial problems of either public or private higher edu-
cation should or could be solved by large increases in tui-
tion at public universities. But our greater commitment
must be to the University of Illinois and to the main-
tenance of its distinguished record of high quality people
offering high quality programs. The meeting of this
commitment requires financial support greater than we
have been receiving during the past years of inflation and
of the increasing costs of excellence. It is not an alarmist
statement, but rather is the truth, that the libraries, the
laboratory equipment, the facilities, and, yes, the quality
of the appearance of our campuses are slipping — slowly,
but surely. We must stop and reverse that trend and to
do so requires financial support greater than we have
been receiving.
Therefore, later this Fall, I plan to present to you
recommendations concerning income sources for 1974-75
based upon a detailed analysis of our financial and pro-
gram arrears and upon the action of the General Assem-
bly at its October, 1973, session. This analysis will include
a study of tuition policy for the future as well as a study
of tuition as it relates to the immediate need to restore
our budget base. It is within this framework of "un-
finished business" that we bring to you for your considera-
tion the budgets for 1973-74 and the budget requests
for 1974-75.
The University's 1973-74 Operating Budget
At its September 12 meeting on the Chicago Circle
Campus, the Board of Trustees approved an Operating
Budget for FY 1973-74 of $355,091,364, consisting of
$210,322,544 of General Funds appropriated by the State
Legislature and $144,768,820 of restricted and institu-
tional income. The General Funds appropriations in-
cluded $183,431,544 from general tax revenues; $15,000
for Municipal Clerk Training; $1,058,000 from the Agri-
cultural Premium Fund; and $24,918,000 from the Uni-
versity's own income (primarily tuition) .
The State tax support amounts to 62.2 per cent of the
total budget, compared with 50.5 per cent in 1972-73
and 54 per cent in 1970-71. Twenty years ago, the State
provided 65 per cent of the total budget from tax
revenues.
The increase in the General Funds budget is $13,-
344,075, as follows:
Salary and Wage Rate Increases $7,586,122
Net Staff Reductions -2,653,638
Increases in Expense & Equipment 4,768,991
Increase in Retirement System
Contribution 3,642,600
Virtually no funds were available for program im-
provement and expansion except in the health fields. In-
creases totaling $4,750,000 include $4,372,495 for ex-
pansion of enrollment in the health fields at the Medical
Center; $252,505 for the Urbana School of Basic Medical
Sciences; $132,000 for the College of Veterinary Medi-
cine; and $375,000 for the Division of Services for Crip-
pled Children.
The salary increase funds provide for the annualiza-
tion of the increases made in September and November
1972, plus further increases averaging approximately 4.5
per cent. All salary increases are effective with the pay
period beginning nearest to September 1, except for
employees paid in negotiated or prevailing rates, whose in-
creases are made on a date specified in the various col-
lective bargaining or prevailing rate contracts. Adjust-
ments have been made in the ranges of nonacademic
classifications, and new minimum salaries for the aca-
demic ranks have been made as follows :
Professor
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
Instructor
Research Associate
9-month
11 -Month
Service
Service
$14,700
$14,950
11,550
14,100
9,450
11,550
7,350
9,000
6,550
8,000
The University's Request for FY 1974-75 Operating Appropriations
Presented here is the Introduction of the University's
Budget Request for Operating Funds for FY 1974-75 as
submitted to the Board of Tmstees at its September 12
meeting:
INTRODUCTION
Background
Fiscal Year 1975 represents the first year of the initial
five-year combined operating and capital budget request
under the new Resource Allocation and Management Pro-
gram (RAMP) adopted by the Illinois Board of Higher Edu-
cation. The concept behind RAMP is a good one, but the
enormous volume of detail, extending to FY 1980, is incon-
sistent with sound long-range planning. Furthermore, the
implementation is most difficult, at least in the beginning, be-
cause a year has been omitted from the cycle. To begin the
envisioned five-year planning cycle, the IBHE staff and sys-
tem heads agreed, during a preliminary exploratory session,
that a two-year time frame was essential, with the first year
being devoted to the synthesis of planning assumptions and ob-
jectives (scope and mission) to be discussed and ratified by
pertinent constituencies. From a practical standpoint, however,
the first implementation (vis., FY 1975) necessitated a com-
pression of two years into one; otherwise, there would have
been no procedure to generate a budget request in the first
year.
This compression produces a vexing situation. The Uni-
versity is expected to submit a five-year budget plan, while
campus personnel and the Board of Trustees are still crystal-
lizing scope and mission — the fundamental underpinning
for a sound long-range plan. Furthermore, the IBHE will be
unable to review these plans until well into the budget request
year.
The final FY 1975 request is basically a continuation
budget, with special consideration given to a series of studies
which identify deficiencies in the base budget created by
exigencies of the last few years. Hence, the entire operating
budget presentation for FY 1975 is based upon the concept
that scope and mission will be in the process of review and
that the year is basically one of remaining at a constant size
(with the exception of the health-related professions), of re-
viewing our base deficiencies, and of exploring the future
through scope and mission.
It should be noted that the provisional scope and mission
statement, submitted separately, calls for a rate of growth of
about 950 students a year for the University of Illinois, under
the assumptions that medical expansion is adequately funded
and that state policy is to maintain a fairly constant enroll-
ment rate. However, no increase in enrollment is contem-
plated, except in the health-related professions, until the scope
and mission report is adopted and adequate progress in cor-
recting deficiencies in the base budget has been made. The
enrollment projections until 1980 in the RAMP documents
provide only for increases in the health professions.
Based upon the analytical studies, the University's needs
for FY 1975 are $49.7 million or 25.1 per cent of the base
budget for FY 1974.
The operating budget request for FY 1975 presented by
the President and the University administration to the Board
of Trustees is for $22,800,200 or 43 per cent of the calculated
need. Of this, $11,952,300 or 6.0 per cent is for continuation,
$3,900,000 or 2.0 per cent is for a programmed restoration of
deficiencies over six years, and $6,947,900 or 3.ri per cent is
for the expansion of health-related programs. The total in-
crease is 11.5 per cent.
The $11,952,300 continuation represents a 6 per cent in-
crease by the State.
The $3,900,000 programmed base correction represents
approximately the amount the governor reduced the FY 1974
budget passed by the General Assembly and recommended by
the Illinois Board of Higher Education.
Request for Capital Appropriations for FY 1974-75
President Corbally presented to the Board of Trustees
at its September 12 meeting the University's request for
capital appropriations for FY' 1974-75. This is the agenda
item as recommended by him :
The President of the Uni\ersity herewith submits the pro-
posed request for capital appropriations for Fiscal Year 1975.
The request has been prepared by the \'ice President for
Planning and Allocation, with the advice of the Vice Presi-
dent for Academic Development and Coordination and the
University Planning Committee, and after appropriate review
by the Chancellors and the President. The request has also
been reviewed and endorsed by the Uni\ersity Budget Com-
mittee. The submission date required by the Illinois Board of
Higher Education (September 4, 1973) has necessitated the
submission of preliminary requests prior to approval by the
Board of Trustees. All such transmittals have been identified
as "preliminary."
The University's FY 1975 request for capital appropria-
tions reflects three main types of needs: (a) funds to complete
and equip buildings under development; (b) funds for the im-
provement of existing facilities; and (c) new building projects
needed to meet the programs of the University. The total
requests from State funds are $43,556,200, exclusive of re-
appropriations. It is anticipated that $44,918,800 can be
funded from the Capital Development Bond Fund and
$637,400 from the General Revenue Fund.
The President recommends approval of the budget request
for FY 1975 as presented to the Illinois Board of Higher
Education and requests authority to submit the request to the
appropriate offices of State Government.
Medical Center Einployee Leaves Estate to the University
George H. Miller, \sho \\orked for the Universitx- of
IlHnois at the Medical Center Campus for forty-eight
years, left his entire estate to the University. Proceeds of
the estate amount to $111,702.36 and were entirely sav-
ings of Mr. Miller who died August 29, 1972. A native of
Chicago, he had graduated from the Worsham College of
Mortuar\' Science when his father brought him at age
nineteen to the Medical Center for a job. He was hired to
work in the Department of Anatomy taking care of
cadavers. At that time the department did its own em-
balming. Later he became the projectionist for the
anatomy classes and during his long career with the Uni-
versity Nvas known to almost every medical student on
campus. His competence and reliability won the affection
and respect of faculty, staff, and students.
Mr. Miller retired in 1969 but soon was asked to re-
turn for a special project. Living an austere life in a base-
ment apartment not too far from the campus, he regu-
larly deposited his earnings and not once, according to
his savings passbook, did he make a withdrawal from the
account.
Mr. Miller's gift to the University will be used for
educational programs at the Medical Center Campus.
Laurence J. Norton Chair Established at Urbana College of Agriculture
Under terms of the will of the late Aurene T. Nor-
ton, the Laurence J. Norton Chair has been established
in the College of Agriculture at the Urbana-Champaign
Campus in memory of her husband. Professor Norton,
who died in 1956, had sen.-ed on the University faculty
for 30 years in the area of agricultural marketing, policy,
and finance and also had been head of the Department
of Agricultural Economics.
The Laurence J. Norton Chair will be filled on a
rotational basis (normally a period of two years or less)
by individuals selected from the ranks of universities
(outside the University of Illinois), governmental
agencies, or industrial firms for the purpose of improving
the quality of the program in agricultural marketing.
The Chair will be administered by the Dean of the
College of Agriculture and the head of the Department
of Agricultural Economics.
Inquiries to the Facility Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 241, October H, 1973
THE LIBRARY OF THE
Organization for Continuing Education and Public Service OCT 2 4 1973
OFFICE OF \ICE PRESIDENT FOR GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS AND PUBLIC SERVICE
UiJivhrtoilr Oh ILLINOIS
Introduction by President John E. Corbalty Jr.
When I arrived at the University of Illinois in April,
1971 , as President-Designate, I was provided with a great
deal of reading material concerning ongoing projects.
One such paper was a report written by Vice President
Eldon Johnson dealing with the topic of the public service
responsibilities of the University and the structure of the
Uniz'ersity to meet those responsibilities.
During my two years on active duty here, this topic
has assumed new importance. The leadership of the
Board of Higher Education, for example, is increasingly
anxious to substitute the concept of "people served" for
the usual count of "FTE students" when the subject of
the real work load of higher education is discussed. There
are always those who would assign "franchise areas" to
each public university campus in Illinois — an assign-
ment which violates the traditional role of the University
of Illinois and an assignment which we cannot accept.
There is increasing interest on the part of municipal and
state governmental agencies for new and meaningful re-
lationships between those agencies and the resources of
higher education. And the whole subject of "non-tradi-
tional, innovative , modern . . . etc. methods of educational
delivery" is a subject with which we must come to grips
even as we strive to define its meanings.
Along with the recognition of the increasing impor-
tance of public service, extension, and continuing educa-
tion to the University have gone our efforts to structure
the University to provide as much "local option" to the
campuses as is consistent with our existence as a single
University of Illinois. We — and particularly Vice Presi-
dent Johnson and Dr. Stanley Robinson — have devoted
major attention to the development of a plan to revitalize
the campus commitment to public service, to restructure
our public service activities to insure that we can detect
and respond to public service needs in Illinois, and to
build upon the distinguished record of public service
activities which has characterized the University. The
following statement by Vice President Johnson provides
a description of that plan. Making the plan work is a
critical responsibility of all of us and many aspects of our
future are dependent upon our ability to do so. I com-
mend this report to your attention and seek your assis-
tance as we attempt to expand our commitment to this
part of our three-part mission ■ — teaching, research, and
public service.
ORGANIZATION FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION AND PUBLIC SERVICE
Substantial changes in the University's approach to
its off-campus or outreach responsibilities have been in
the making in the academic year 1972-73, with important
antecedents running back to 1968. The culminating or-
ganization, both at the campus and University-wide
levels, is herein described pursuant to the progress report
made to the Board of Trustees in March, 1973, and as a
matter of information for the general University
community.
In keeping with its organization as a single Univer-
sity system of three campuses, the public service function
is organized into four components :
1 . that which is University-wide
2. that relating to each of the three campuses.
The functional and organizational characteristics are:
University-wide : system-wide staff services, including
policy-setting, evaluation, and coordination, and the
operation of (a) a statewide network of field repre-
sentatives and (b) those continuing education func-
tions which are most general and autonomous, and
least dependent on campus personnel for "delivery"
(specifically, the following units from the former
Division of University Extension, now comprising
the new University Continuing Education: Police
Training Institute, Firemanship Training, Civil De-
fense Training, Correspondence Courses, and Visual
Aids Service) .
Campus: operation of continuing education pro-
grams to which the regular teaching personnel of the
campus make a major contribution, such as the Ex-
tramural Classes and Conferences units from the
former Division of University Extension, and pro-
vision of such off-campus services as flow from the
"mission" of that campus, including the traditional
land-grant functions of the Cooperative Extension
Service on the Urbana Campus.
Each component is briefly described below.
UNIVERSITY-WIDE
Reporting directly to the President of the University,
the University-wide organization has these major com-
ponents :
1 . Vice President for Governmental Relations and Public
Service, who exercises coordinative powers and aids
the President in a staff capacity regarding public
service.
2. UniversitN- Coordinator of Continuing Education, who
a. directs University Continuing Education, a unit of
127 employees who administer the five programs
named above
b. assists the Vice President in facilitating the con-
tinuing education function as performed throughout
the University.
3. Associate Vice President for Public Sen.ice. who in
addition to serving as Director, Cooperative Extension
Service, Urbana Campus,
a. directs the Uni\ersity field network, utilizing the
structure of the ten existing regions of the Coopera-
tive Extension Service
b. assists the Vice President in facilitating those public
service functions relating to personnel resident in
the field.
Field Network
Besides exercising a coordinative function, the Uni-
versity-wide officers also operate the field network, which
ser\'es as a bridge between public needs and University
capacity "to deliver" on such needs. That network con-
sists of special University personnel ser\'ing as "brokere"
in the field, or linkage mechanisms, or the University's
"eyes and ears," based on the ten regions of the state
which are used by the Cooperative Extension Service.
Such personnel work ^vith individuals, groups, and other
educational institutions in identifying needs and in match-
ing them ^\ith appropriate University knowledge and
programs. Present personnel in the netsvork under the
Associate Vice President for Public Service are
a. the ten Regional Coordinators, who tie together all
University outreach personnel in each region, attempt
to sharpen the University's focus and impact in the
area, and link the resources of the Cooperati\e Ex-
tension Service to all other University effort in the
field (e.g., the setvices of the Community Resource
Development officers)
b. six Regional Program Directors (one intended for
each region but with three Directors now serving more
than one region simultaneously), who represent con-
tinuing education in particular but assist in all field-
ser\'ice linkages
c. an overall Program Director, residing at the Univer-
sit)'-wide headquarters, who works with all field per-
sonnel, and Regional Program Directors particularly,
and facilitates communication and planning relation-
ships with campus personnel.
This structure is designed to produce a mutually sup-
portive and reinforcing efifect between the Cooperative
Extension Service, with its historical presence in all areas
of the state, and all other aspects of public service, in-
cluding continuing education in the professions and for
leisure time, ser\ice to the cities (see section below on
special coordinative mechanism in the Chicago area),
independent off-campus study, and the application of
knowledge to problem-solving, both statewide and na-
tionally. It does this, in part, by
a. having the Director of the Cooperative Extension Ser-
vice serve also as Associate Vice President for Public
Service
b. making the Cooperative Extension Service Regional
Directors also Regional Coordinators for University-
wide public service purposes in each region (except in
the Chicago area as described below)
c. tying all other public service field relations (and spe-
cifically all of the non-agricultural ts-pe) into this re-
vised but previously existing regional coverage of the
state
d. facilitating the work of the Vice President for Govern-
mental Relations and Public Service in coordinating
the application of University educational resources to
public service activities.
Regional Coordination in Chicago Area
Region II, comprising the northeastern portion of the
state, including Chicago, presents many special problems
not found in other regions :
a. two University of Illinois campuses are located in
Chicago
b. the Chicago Circle Campus has a special mission to
ser\-e the Chicago area and to meet the urban prob-
lems there
c. the concentrated population makes atypical demands
on the Cooperative Extension Service
d. the out-of-Chicago portion of the University of Illinois
(the Urbana Campus) also has special need for out-
reach activities in the most populous part of the state.
Therefore, the Director of Extension, Chicago Circle
Campus, has been designated as Regional Coordinator for
Region II, in addition to his campus role, which means
that he also serves in a University-wide capacity' and, for
that purpose, reports to the Associate Vice President for
Public Service, like all other Regional Coordinators. A
Program Coordinating Committee, chaired by the Re-
gional Coordinator and consisting of representatives from
each campus and of the other interested parties, \vill
assess regional needs and coordinate the University re-
sponses. This arrangement, recognizing both the special
geographical mission of Chicago Circle and the disciplin-
ary mission of the other campuses, is understood to be
subject to later evaluation in terms of its capacity to
maximize the total University of Illinois impact in
Reffion II.
University Council on Public Service
To pio\idc overall and intercampiis coordination and
policy recommendations, to exchange information, and to
facilitate program planning, a Unixereity Council on
Public Service, uiider die chaiiTnanship of the Vice Presi-
dent for Governmental Relations and Public Service,
brings together the cloief officei-s with continuing educa-
tion and public service responsibilities, both at the Uni-
versity and campus levels, plus the Vice President for
Academic Development and Coordination and the Exec-
utive Director of the Alumni Association.
Urbana-Champaign Campus
EfTecti\e Jul\- 1. 1973, the Office of Continuing Edu-
cation and Public Service has overall responsibility for
continuing education, extension, and public service for the
Urbana Campus. The Director of that office, as an Asso-
ciate Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, helps to re-
late continuing education and public service more closely
to resident instruction and research. He is a member of
the Uni\-ersity Council on Public Senice and is chairman
of a campus Council on Continuing Education and Pub-
lic Service, composed of persons from the various colleges
and institutes. This arrangement is designed to help coor-
dinate actixdties at University, campus, and college levels.
The persons to provide liaison between campus and each
of the colleges and institutes are now being designated.
The Office of Continuing Education and Public Ser-
\-ice contains some of the departments that were part of
the former Division of University Extension, including
extramural classes, conferences and institutes, and exten-
sion programs in international affairs, art, music, and
engineering.
The Urbana Campus Senate has a standing commit-
tee on Continuing Education and Public Service, com-
pwsed of facult)' members, students, and administrators.
It focuses attention on faculty a\\'areness and policy issues
regarding continuing education and public service as a
University function.
Chicago Circle Campus
That part of the former Division of University Ex-
tension vvhich drew heavily on the Chicago Circle Cam-
pus faculty for its "delivery" off campus is now part of
the organization of that campus. The transferred parts
are those portions of the former Extramural Classes and
Short Courses and Conferences which were Circle-based.
The new campus unit, effective July 1, 1973, is the
Office of Extension, headed by a Director, who reports
to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The Direc-
tor is also Regional Coordinator of continuing education
and public service in University^ Region II, the nine
counties of Northeastern Illinois, and a member of the
University Council on Public Service.
At the college level, each college has named an official
(e.g., an Assistant or Associate Dean) to be the liaison
officer or contact point for relations between "extension"
and the college. Representatives of a few non-college out-
reach-oriented units are also included. These taken to-
gether comprise the Council on Extension and Public
Ser\ice, which works closely with the Director of Exten-
sion in program planning and staffing. While all colleges
have such relationships, some, like the College of Urban
Sciences, have close and continuous relations because of
a strong public sei-vice commitment.
At the faculty level, the Chicago Circle Senate has a
standing Committee on Continuing Education and Public
Service, which contributes to faculty awareness and in-
volvement in the public service function.
Medical Center Campus
While continuing education for professionals and
health scmce delivery are functions of rising priority, they
are so built in to all other aspects of the Medical Center
Campus that the public service organization is bound to
be afTected. It is less "separated out" and more "built in,"
but it is nonetheless there.
The overall responsibility, under the Chancellor, rests
with the Vice Chancellor, whose duties extend to many
other areas, as well, including the academic. He is also
a member of the University Council on Public Service.
In each college and school, an Assistant or Associate
Dean is being identified to coordinate the educational
units and activities concerned with continuing education
and public service. Including these officers, plus represen-
tation from the Center for Educational Development, a
campus-wide coordinating council is in process of
formation.
A new factor is also being integrated into the campus
policy and structure: the Area Health Education System
program, funded by a generous grant from the Federal
Government. One of the purposes of that grant is to
improve the education of the health professionals, thereby
improving health service delivery. The director of the
Area Health Education System is the Dean of the School
of Associated Medical Sciences, who has continuing-
education representatives in Rockford, Peoria, and Ur-
bana, where medical education is now also offered.
Another piece of the public service structure is the
Center for Educational Development, College of Medi-
cine, which has initiated ex-perimentation on statewide
continuing education for practitioners in the health fields,
particularly by linking the Chicago resources with facili-
ties in Peoria and Rockford and by developing the teach-
inar faculties there.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS PUBLIC SERVICE REGIONS
' Tunis Dekker, RC
Richard Casper, RPD
Arthur Proteau, RPD
G. J. Chrislenson,
Reg. Dir., CES
Denzil Clegg, RC
. Richard Kalus, RPD
Glen Sons, RC
Fred Steuernagel, RPD
RC — Regional Coordinator
RPD — Regional Program Directo
-Mildred Nuttall, RC
Fred Steuernagel, RPD
' John Bicket, RC
Fred Steuernagel, RPD
I
(L
/^^^.^A
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
^ 'A
-r.
THE. LIBRARY OF THE
No. 242, November 12, 1973
_ DEC ^^1973
1^ _ UNiytK6>l r oe ILLINOIS
State of Illinois Group Health Insurance Claim Iriformation Requested
The number of complaints on the slow claims
processing of the State of Illinois Group Health
Insurance Program has been increasing signifi-
cantly. Of particular concern are the claims for
services prior to July 1, 1973, under the North-
eastern Life Insurance Company contract. Many
members of the faculty and staff are being pres-
sured and harassed by hospitals, doctors, and
collection agencies demanding payment of medi-
cal expenses covered by the State Plan. In some
cases, law suits have been threatened.
The University does not process these claims.
The State Department of Personnel terminated
the agreement for the University's administra-
tion of the program on July 1, 1973, and all files
and records were transferred to the insurance
company. Under these circumstances we have
been forced to refer individuals with complaints
to the State Department of Personnel and the
Northeastern Life Insurance Company. This has
not proved to be a satisfactory procedure and
many complaints have gone unanswered.
Since individual efforts have not been success-
ful, it is proposed that information on all of the
pending claims be gathered and presented to the
Director of the Department of Personnel and to
other State officials to secure payment of the
claims from the Northeastern Life Insurance
Company or a status report on each claim.
To help you and to help us in this effort,
please complete the following form and mail it
promptly to your campus insurance office.
John E. Corbally Jr.
President
EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE CLAIMS ONLY
Social Security-
Mnili
Type
of Service
Hosp
ital
M.D.
or Surgeon
Presc
ription Drugs
or Medical Expense
Name of Hospital or M.D.
Date of Service
Approximate Expense
Retirement Credit for Military Service
The following letter was sent October 23, 1973, by
Edward S. Gibala, Executive Director of the State Uni-
versities Retirement System, to the Presidents and Heads
of Universities, Colleges, and Other Agencies covered by
the State Universities Retirement System:
RE: Senate Bill 634 — Purchase of Credit
for Prior Military Service
During the past several months, we have kept you and
the Business and Personnel Officers informed of the current
status of Senate Bill 634 which covers the purchase of addi-
tional credit for military service which was rendered before
the participant became a member of the State Universities
Retirement System. Following is a very brief summary of the
action which has been taken on this Bill to date:
1. The Bill, as initially introduced, would have prohibited the
State Universities Retirement System from accepting any
payments covering prior military sen-ice after September 1,
1973, the effective date of the Bill.
2. The Senate adopted an amendment to the Bill which made
the change applicable only to persons hired after September
1, 1973. That amendment also eliminated credit for other
types of public employment for those persons hired after
that date. However, the Senate amendment preserved the
right of current employees to pay for prior military service
as well as other types of public employment. The Bill, as
amended, passed the Senate.
3. An additional amendment to the Bill by the House pro-
vided that an employee ivho ivas hired before September 1,
1973 could purchase credit for prior militan,' service only
if he (a) was eligible to purchase credit for prior military
service on that date, and (b) he had applied for purchase
of such credit by that date. (Note that the House amend-
ment provided that the participant must have applied for
the military service credit by September 1, 1973; it did
not require that he make his payment prior to that date.)
The House passed the Bill as amended.
4. Instead of sending the Bill to the Senate floor for concur-
rence in the House amendment, the Senate sponsor, at the
suggesdon of some members of the Pension Laws Commis-
sion, sent the Bill back to the Senate Pension Committee.
The Bill is still alive and in the Senate Committee at this
time.
5. The Pension Laws Commission considered the Bill at a
meeting which was held on October 11, 1973, and agreed
to recommend approval of Senate Bill 634, as amended by
the House, subject to extension of the deadline on filing
to January 1, 1974.
At this time, we can only speculate on the final outcome
of Senate Bill 634. However, we believe that the Conference
Committee will accept the recommendation of the Pension
Laws Commission that the deadline on filing of the Applica-
tion for Prior Military Service be extended to January 1, 1974.
We need your help in spreading the word concerning the
proposed January 1, 1974 deadline on filing. Hundreds of
participants failed to meet the proposed September 1, 1973
deadline on filing despite the unusual amount of publicity
which was given to this Bill in special releases from the Re-
tirement System Office and campus periodicals. We hope that
you \vill bring the proposed January 1, 1974 filing deadline
to the attention of your faculty and staff at meetings and in
campus periodicals \vhich you may distribute prior to Janu-
ary 1, 1974.
AVe wish to emphasize again that the Bill would require
that the participant file his Application for Prior Military
Service Credit before January 1, 1974; it would not require
that he pay for the service by that date.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
CAMPUS INSURANCE OFFICE
ll^^^ j^
2ii0a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Q^Q 1 7 1973 No. 243, De
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
President's Report on Tnition Policy and Tuition for 1974-75
nber 12, 1973
President John E. Coibalh Jr. on November 14 sent
the following report on tuition policy and tuition for
1 974-75 to the members of the Board of Trustees :
Discussions concerning tuition policies and tuition levels
have reached a new peak of volume during the past year. This
phenomenon is by no means only a local happening, but is a
matter of national concern. Both the public press and profes-
sional journals contain an increasing number of tuition pro-
posals, counter proposals, and rebuttals to both. There are
only two tuition positions which are based on sound, under-
standable, philosophical positions. The first is that there should
be no tuition charges levied in public higher education. The
other is that students in public higher education should pay
tuition equal to the full costs of their instruction. All in-
between positions are compromises which are based upon
practical and judgmental considerations rather than upon any
real philosophical framework. Unfortunately, many tuition
discussions today represent efforts to construct a philosophical
base for compromise positions for which no such base exists.
These discussions are interesting, but cloud the current basic
issues which are practical, financial resource issues.
For us, the time has come when tuition policy in general
and specific tuition rates for 1974-75 must be determined. I
had hoped that the position of the Illinois Board of Higher
Education concerning tuition policy for public higher educa-
tion in Illinois would have been determined by this time, but
no such determination will be made until at least December
4, 1973. I believe that it is incumbent upon us to provide our
students with information concerning changes in tuition as
early as possible before changes are made. I also believe that to
the extent possible our policy should reflect BIIE suggestions.
In an effon to meet the requirements of both of those
beliefs, I am recommending that the Board of Trustees of the
University of Illinois adopt a provisional position on tuition
for 1974-75 at the November 21 meeting with the under-
standing that this position will be reviewed and made final
following action of the BHE in December on tuition policy.
The adoption of a provisional position will provide our stu-
dents with an understanding of probable tuition levels for
1974-75 while at same time not foreclosing change if the
provisional position should sary greatly from BHE suggestions.
The current position of the BHE is that tuitions in public
universities in Illinois should approximate one-third of under-
graduate instructional costs. As stated above, there is no real
support in theory or in philosophy for such a pfjsition. In my
view, the theory and philosophy of public higher education
support the concept that no tuition should be charged those
who attend public universities. This concept, however, has
eroded over the years under the pressures of financial needs
and the inability and/or unwillingness of society to provide
financial support to meet those needs. Tuition at public uni-
versities is, thus, a concept which has been bom of necessity
rather than of theory. What we are discussing is a means of
providing some portion of the financial support requirement
of a public university through a price charged the students.
At the present time, tuition charges at the University of
Illinois are $495 per year for full-time students who are resi-
dents of the State of Illinois except for students in Dentistry
($261 per quarter) or in Medicine ($294 per quarter). For
non-residents, these charges are $1485 except in Dentistry
($591 per quarter) and in Medicine ($624 per quarter).
These tuition levels equal something less than 30 percent of
undergraduate instructional costs. This tuition level was
established for 1972-73 in an effort to achieve the BHE stan-
dard. However, at that time, the BHE cost data were for
1970-71 so that the tuition assessed did not actually achieve
the standard in spite of this Board's intent to do so.
Two facts must be clear as we review the financial re-
sources of the University. First, the resources available to the
University are not keeping pace with the costs of inflation.
Second, increases in State tax support of higher education
will not, in and of themselves, keep pace with the increased
need for resources. I will not review here the financial picture
with which you are all familiar. We are losing ground in meet-
ing the costs of quality. We can either revise downward our
goals for the University of Illinois or find resources to permit
us to meet those goals. I believe that we must choose the
latter course. One financial resource is tuition income. As
reluctant as we are to consider increasing tuition charges on
the basis of our theory and philo.sophy of public higher educa-
tion, that reluctance must give way to reality.
The budget requests for the University for 1974-75 en-
visioned the need for $7 million to continue the health pro-
fessions expansion program and $11.7 million (6 percent of
the 1973-74 base of $196 million) to meet current salary and
price increase needs. In addition, budgetary deficiencies ac-
cumulated over the past .several years in the amount of $30.9
million were detailed and the need for some funds to begin
dealing with those deficiencies was stressed. It was hoped that
the restoration of $4.1 million reduced from our 1973-74 ap-
propriation would provide funds to begin reducing deficiencies,
but that hope was not realized.
It now seems clear that realistic expectations for increased
State tax support in 1974-75 should include a 6 percent in-
crease in the tax portion of our appropriations ($171 million)
plus the $7 million for health professions expansion. In order
to realize a 6 percent increase over our total appropriations
(tax or general revenue plus income fund or tuition), we shall
have to impose a 6 percent increase in tuition or $30 per year
for all except tuition for Medicine and Dentistry students to
which a 6 percent increase will also be applied. No tax
sources seem available to even begin to deal with our ac-
cumulated budget deficiencies — deficiencies with which we
must begin to deal. As you know, to restore the $4-.l million
to our base would require an additional tuition increase of
$90 per year. Many believe that this restoration is so essential
that that additional tuition should be levied. I find this argu-
ment persuasive.
Based upon our budget requests for 1974-75, average
undergraduate instructional costs, exclusive of the health pro-
fessions for 1974-75, will be $2048.16. If tuition for 1974-75
were to be assessed at the suggested level of one-third of
undergraduate instructional costs, the charge would be $682
or an increase of $186 over current tuition. In spite of the fact
that current BHE policy would support such an increase, an
increase of that magnitude seems inappropriate.
It is difficult to determine what increase is appropriate,
but a rationale can be developed in support of adding $60
per year to the $30 per year mentioned above. Our costs have
been increasing due to inflation by at least 6 percent per
year. The "price" we charge students through tuition has re-
mained the same last year and this year in the hope that the
State would provide sufficient additional tax support to meet
the inflationary pressures upon both salary and other costs. The
State has not done so with resulting budgetary deficiencies for
the University. It seems clear that the State is operating on
a "tuition as price" concept and that tuition in the future will
need to reflect inflationary pressures. These pressures during
the last two years would have resulted in annual increases in
tuition of about $30 per year and one can argue that we must
now at least restore our tuition level for 1974-75 to the 1972-
73 level by adding the cost of inflation which has occurred
during this year and last.
This decision would provide approximately $2.75 million
in 1974-75 to begin to deal with budgetary deficiencies. Ob\'i-
ously some continuing reallocation to attempt to provide
another $1.35 million for this purpose would be necessary. It
is clear, however, that five years of reallocation have left us
with little room to create major sources of funds through this
method. This total increase of $90 per year in tuition would
still leave the level of tuition about $100 below the "one-third"
standard in 1974-75. After reviewing all alternatives, I find
myself in support of an increase in the amount of $90 per year
and it is this increase which I recommend.
It is further recommended that the same percentage in-
creases be applied to tuition in Dentistry and Medicine which
would result in increases of $47 per quarter in Dentistry and
$53 per quarter in Medicine. Non-resident tuition would also
be increased proportionately to $1752 per academic year ex-
cept for Dentistry ($697 per quarter) and Medicine ($736
per quarter).
The proposed tuition charges are well within the award
ceiling of the Illinois State Scholarship Commission and stu-
dents eligible for awards would not be penalized by these in-
creases. However, a special problem exists at the Chicago Cir-
cle Campus in which entering students have not appeared to
avail themselves of ISSC aid for which they are eligible. The
Planning Committee recommends that tuition levels for
freshmen students at Chicago Circle remain at the 1973-74
level while efforts are made to overcome this apparent com-
munication problem, and the Chancellors and I concur with
this recommendation.
It is understood that tuition levels for less than full-time
students will reflect these increases so as to continue the same
relationship as now exists between tuition for full-time and
part-time students.
In summary, then, I recommend that the Board of Trus-
tees adopt the following position with regard to tuition policy
and tuition levels for Fiscal 1975:
1 . The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois reaffirms
its support of the budget requests submitted by the Board to
the Illinois Board of Higher Education for 1974-75;
2. The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois expresses
its strong feeling that the financial needs of the University for
1974-75 can and should be met through State appropriations
without increases in tuition for 1974-75;
3. If deemed necessary in the light of recommendations of the
Board of Higher Education concerning 1974-75 budget levels
and concerning 1974-75 tuition levels, the Board of Trustees of
the University of Illinois expresses its intention to support the
financial needs of the University by adopting tuition levels
up to those tuition levels outlined above. In thus expressing
itself, the Board is alerting all those concerned that such
tuition levels may be required for 1974-75 and is suggesting
that the financial planning of students include consideration
of this possibility.
The Board of Trustees at its November 21 meeting
adopted the President's recommendations as outlined in
the report.
Revision of General Rules Re Disability by Reason of Pregnancy
The Board of Trustees meeting on the Medical Cen-
ter Campus November 21 approved the revision of Sec-
tion 29 (c) of The General Rules Concerning University
Organization and Procedure in regard to disability of aca-
demic or administrative staff by reason of pregnancy. This
was President Corbally's recommendation for the revision :
By administrative practice, pregnancy and the need to ha\ e
maternity leave have generally been constnied to be a con-
dition of "disability" under Section 29 (c) (2) of The General
Rules Concerning University Organization and Procedure. Ap-
plications for maternity leave were thus go\emed by the same
approval procedures and rules as other forms of disability.
In order to make explicit this construction of these pro-
visions and to assure consistent. University-wide policy in this
regard, I recommend that the following sentence be added to
Section 29 (c) (2):*
For the purposes of this subsection (2), disability includes
cases in which the staff member is disabled from perfor-
mance of duty by reason of pregnancy.
In accordance with procedures specified in the University
Statutes, I have consulted the University Senates Conference
in connection with this matter.
* Analogous provisions specifically relating to nonacademic
employees already exist in University of Illinois Policy and Rules
— Nonacademic.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
Tilfivl
A.
Gilt ana Lxcnanga jivision
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
. :: '-'^fifflv OF THE
MAR 2 a iy74
UNIVERSITY OF ILUNDIS
No. 244, March 13, 1974
Presidenfs Mc??w on Office of Academic Development and Coordination
The following memorandum was sent January 2 to
the members of the Board of Trustees by President
John E. Corbally Jr., regarding the Office of Academic
De\elopment and Coordination :
On July 9, 1973, I mailed to the Board of Trustees a
status repon concerning the Office of Academic Development
and Coordination. I indicated that in my April, 1972, state-
ment on .Administrative Functions and Organization, the
Office of .-Xcademic Development and Coordination was de-
scribed as follows:
As an interim step while the operation of the Office of
University Planning and Resource Allocation gets started
and while the flow of academic decision making and
academic coordination within the University is analyzed,
it is proposed that an Office of Academic Development
and Coordinadon be established with the responsibility
for the second set of functions listed above. (See below.)
The chief executive officer of this Office will be desig-
nated as the \'ice President for .Academic Development
and Coordination.
I further emphasized that the whole area of the administra-
tion of academic affairs w-as imder study and that recom-
mendations would be brought to the Board early in 1974,
following consultation with Uni\ersity staff. This memoran-
dum presents an outline of those recommendations, which
have been discussed with and are supported by the University
Senates Conference.
My April, 1972, statement identified three basic func-
tions for the Office of Academic Development and Coordina-
tion :
The development of relationships both within Illinois and
the nation and the world to insure that the University of
Illinois plays its appropriate role as a member of the
larger education community.
The coordination of the operation of the various compo-
nents of the University to insure that the University func-
tions as an organic university rather than as an aggregate
of unrelated campuses and capitalizes upon the advan-
tages of its resources as a system.
The administration of Universitywide educational
programs.
Four units repon directly to the Vice President (Survey
Research Laboratory, Institute of Government and Public
Affairs, Office of School and College Relations, University
Press) and he chairs the University Academic Council and
other councils coordinating Computer-Based Education,
Urban Programs, Environmental Studies, Equal Opportunity,
Graduate Education and Research, Health Affairs, and Li-
braries. The Administrative Guidelines assign to the Vice
President responsibilities for a portion of the planning and
evaluation processes, for the Universitywide review of aca-
demic programs and policies (including new degrees, majors,
curriculum revisions), for the appointment of University rep-
resentatives to commissions and agencies, and (as the dele-
gate of the President) for the approval of academic admin-
istrative appointments, faculty promotions, salary increases,
and other academic personnel matters. In addiuon to general
responsibilities for recommending University academic pro-
gram fiscal requirements and priorities, the Vice President
serves as the system's Program Officer in all relationships with
the Illinois Board of Higher Education, and he is the Uni-
versity Equal Opportunity Officer.
During the first year of the "post-Provost" organization,
academic functions at the general University level have been
carried out according to what one might call maximum de-
centralization. This principle was in keeping with the effort
to increase the operating role of the campus administration
and the coordinating role of the central administration. It is
clear, however, that the issue of the nature and intensity of
the involvement of a University-level academic officer at both
the University and campus levels must be pursued further.
Faced now with the formulation of recommendations
addressed to this issue, three points require emphasis:
1. No one supports the elimination of a major involve-
ment with academic concerns from the central University
administration • — in fact, there is general faculty and ad-
ministrative support for a strengthening of such involvement.
2. The prevailing opinion is that insufficient time has
elapsed to permit the current organization to undergo any
meaningful evaluation.
3. There is a need for reaffirmation of our commitment
to the development of Universitywide programmatic and
support systems where such arrangements constitute the most
effective response of the University to the requirements of its
mission.
These three observations represent a part of what we
have learned this past year, and point the way to the next
steps I am recommending. This statement will stipulate the
basic objectives of the Office of Academic Development and
Coordination, and will describe the outcomes that will be
observed in order to determine whether or not those pur-
poses have been served. An evaluation of this or any office
cannot be undertaken imtil evaluative criteria have been
established, and sufficient time has elapsed since the state-
ment of the criteria to permit a review of results. A valid
context for evaluation must be built, while at the same time
the quality of the University's academic functions is
maintained.
Success in meeting these functions will rest upon the
quality of three activities based in the system's academic
office — development, coordination, and evaluation.
DEVELOPMENT. Academic planning at a multi-cam-
pus uni\'ersity involves a sensitive layering of innovation
and stimulation. Board of Trustee action at its July,
1973, meeting established the Office of Policy Analysis
and Evaluation to aid the Academic Vice President in
the analysis of long-range program issues and to serve
as a link to the Planning and Allocation Vice President's
analytical staff. The implementation of this office will
require considerable attention during the next two years.
The detemiination of University priorities and re-
source requirements for new programs is the other major
task within the development function. The Vice Presi-
dent is charged this year with completion and initial
implementation of the program sections of the Univer-
sity's "Scope and Mission" document tied to monthly
meetings with the planning officers of the campuses. This
responsibility includes the identification of program areas
that fall within the mission of one, two, or all three
campuses, and the establishment of guidelines for the
development of new programs within these areas. Suc-
cessful planning will rest, in part, upon the relationship
between internal allocation procedures and the determi-
nation of program priorities; therefore, the system office
will participate in the development, administration, and
evaluation of major new programs in a way that will
increase the probability of achieving the required new
program support.
COORDINATION. There is an extremely delicate bal-
ance between preserving campus initiatives in academic
administration and facilitating the most efficient and
effective use of the University's academic resources. We
have not come close to maximizing the educational oppor-
tunities available to us through multi-campus academic
programs and support services. We plan to continue a
series of vigorous explorative discussions concerning
shared resources and the elimination of nonproductive
duplication. A major long-nm goal of the system's
Academic Vice President will be to encourage each of
the campuses to view the quality of the other campuses
as intimately related to its own welfare.
There are a variety of interpretations one can derive
from the "organic University" concept as it applies to
academic functions. During the next few years good
sense dictates a concentration upon a limited number of
testing models to gauge the opportunities and problems
confronting systemwide academic coordination :
Joint Degrees — Both the Chicago campuses and the
Board of Higher Education have been enthusiastic about
the development of a joint Ph.D. degree in Bioengineer-
ing. Built upon the complementary strengths in the
field at Chicago Circle and the Medical Center and
administered by a faculty committee appointed by the
Vice President, this program will be studied carefully
to determine whether it provides applicable lessons for
other disciplines.
University Councils — ■ A series of councils chaired by
the Vice President advises the President on program
matters affecting more than one campus. They help to
define Universitywide needs, exchange disciplinary in-
formation, and undertake ad hoc assignments addressed
to the sharing of resources. The University Council on
Environmental Studies has been particularly effective in
this endeavor, in large measure because it achieves
leveraged coordination through Trustee authority to
assist the Vice President in reviewing program priorities
and resource requirements.
Balancing Emphases — There are several fields where
a greater need exists to orient campus programs toward
unique strengths and settings. A number of the applied
social sciences, architecture, and urban plaiming are
within this group, and at least one of these should re-
ceive major staff attention to facilitate campus develop-
ment if resources permit.
Two-Campus Programs — For the past several months
campus and University officers have been exchanging
views on the organization of the Jane Addams School
of Social Work. A new joint doctoral degree, new
B.S.W. programs at both campuses, and increased de-
mand upon school resources have forced a reexamina-
tion of current patterns in social work at the University,
and the resolution of this issue will be watched as a
model for other programs presently or potentially split
between two or more campuses.
Program Expansion — As chairman of the University
Council on Health Affairs, and as the system officer
responsible to the President for coordinating aca-
demic planning in the health professions, the Vice Presi-
dent will continue to play an important role in the
long-range implementation of the University's health
programs. As in each of the categories within the coordi-
nation function, there are other fundamental require-
ments for system attention in this area (several major
professional fields, for example), but manpower and
energy constraints mandate a focus upon a limited num-
ber of programs.
Universitywide Degrees — There has been consider-
able discussion over the past year about the develop-
ment of quality programs at the University level. This
exchange includes the suggestion to expand degree-
granting authority in certain departments from campus
to University status under limited and carefully controlled
conditions, in addition to the recommendation for new
Universitywide degrees in areas such as Human Ecology,
or Urban Politics and Policy Analysis. The Office of
Academic Development and Coordination will explore
these issues with constant attention to faculty-defined
quality standards and an emphasis upon complementary
use of academic strengths.
Supporting Services — The Office of Academic Devel-
opment and Coordination plans a major effort in
the development of one or two University facilitative
mechanisms for improving the support of academic
functions. Research-Instruction computing and library
facilities have been identified by the University Planning
Committee for exploration to determine whether present
capacities can be strengthened in order to provide better
services to faculty at all three campuses.
It is all too easy to point out obstacles challenging
each of these academic coordination activities. No multi-
campus university has met very many of them success-
fully— '"initiatixc" must be present, but "autonomy"
must be preserved; interests must be protected, but
trust must prevail; staff is required, but people intrude;
authority must exist, but its exercise must be cautious;
resources must be available, but there are pressing cam-
pus needs. There is a call for wisdom, experience, respect,
and influence at the system academic level, but a con-
stant concern that the office not be too active or visible.
These ironies will never disappear, and the paradoxes
upon which they rest are in the very fiber of a high-
quality complex university. We do plan to invest time,
money, and manpower resources to coordinate the
multi-campus nature of this institution, and with the
present quality of our campus, college, and departmental
administrators the probability of success in responding
to the challenges above is higher than one would find at
most universities.
EV,\LUATION. Very few of the difficulties noted in
the last section do not apply as well to the evaluation
fimction, and the necessity to undertake this activity is
just as great. There are many aspects to the evaluation
function, which I have called elsewhere one of the three
major responsibilities of the University's central adminis-
tration along with planning and allocation. The Office of
Academic Development and Coordination has respon-
sibility for several of these aspects, primarily related to
academic programs. As a member of the task force to
study the evaluation of academic administrators, the
\'ice President will participate in the recommendation
of guidelines for interpreting or revising University
Statutes. As a personal recipient of a grant from the
Fimd for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education,
he will be analyzing the criteria and procedures for
evaluating the performance of university chief execu-
tives; as an institutional recipient of a National Science
Foundation grant, he is studying the organization and
administration of the University's federally supported
research activities.
The Academic Vice President's primary concern, how-
ever, relates to the Scope and Mission discussion of the
evaluation of proposed and existing programs. Each of
the campuses has begun to assess systematically the
quality of its academic programs, and at Urbana those
interests have reached a level of sophistication unmatched
at most institutions. The \'ice President, assisted by the
Office of Policy Analysis and Evaluation, will discuss with
each campus its mechanism for program review, its set of
criteria, and analyze reports of specific evaluations. A
major component of the Vice President's programmatic
resource allocation decisions to and between campuses
will rest upon the results of these efforts, and his partici-
pation in the planning and budgeting processes at the
University level requires a direct involvement in campus
evaluation activities.
In addition, each of the four units reporting directly
to the Vice President for Academic Development and
Coordination is involved to some degree in a similar
enterprise. The Survey Research Laboratory is part of
the first group of COPE evaluations, the University Press
has de\eloped a long-range fiscal strategy, the Institute
of Government and Public Affairs has just completed a
plan for program development and evaluation, and the
Office of School and College Relations is in the process
of defining its specific role and objectives. General cam-
pus and University procedures will be reviewed, and at
a fall, 1974, Board of Trustees meeting a report will be
presented by the Vice President summarizing the progress
made during the initial evaluation phase.
It is obvious that many of the systemwide academic re-
sponsibilities cut across two, or all three, of these primary
functions. One critical assignment that relates directly to all
three involves the interaction between the University of Illi-
nois and the Illinois Board of Higher Education. A recent
report from New York emphasizes the lifting of a two-year
moratorium on new doctoral programs, coinciding with plans
for State Education Department evaluation of all existing
doctoral programs in the State, and the view that all doc-
toral programs should be regarded as "an interrelated state-
wide resource." The Office of Academic Development and
Coordination has been working with the IBHE staff to insure
that the goals of quality and complementarity expressed by the
IBHE are achieved in Illinois without the disniptive intru-
sion implied by reports from other states. The University ad-
ministration and the Board staff are committed to faculty-
oriented quality control of academic programs, and the Vice
President for Academic Development and Coordination will
be exploring with the IBHE program staff the leadership
potential available at the University of Illinois in the areas
of academic planning and evaluation.
The announcement of an impending "Master Plan-Phase
IV" from the Illinois Board of Higher Education places even
greater emphasis upon this responsibility. If we are to present
the programmatic vision for the University of Illinois in the
1970s, supported by quantitative analyses and placed in a
priority context, then the leadership for such a document
must come from the Academic Vice President's office. It is
important to recognize, however, as we have stated in a draft
of our Scope and Mission report, that the system academic
officer also will continue to exercise a vigorous review of
internal program approvals. Only through such a vigorous
application of quality, need, and cost criteria at each Univer-
sity level will we be able to argue to the State that those
program developments the Illinois Board of Higher Education
is asked to endorse represent the best possible application of
quality resources.
These objectives encompass the range of functions assigned
to the systemwide Academic Vice President. The three es-
sential components of development, coordination, and evalua-
tion translate into the primary criteria one must apply within
three years in assessing the premises and performance of the
Office. If a valid test of multi-campus academic administration
is to be constructed, then the objectives must be spelled out
as they have been, and a commitment of resources and
stability must be made. A University academic officer with
major influence in matters relating to the allocation of re-
sources, the development and evaluation of academic pro-
grams, and the coordination of academic functions, provides
the opportunity to judge whether multi-campus academic
administration can assist the campuses in their mutual efforts
to enhance the quality of education.
We have learned during the initial year what the param-
eters of our effort should be in order to attempt such a judg-
ment. I recommend now that we proceed to see whether these
objectives can be approached.
Appointment of Associate Vice President fo?^ Academic Coordination
In line with the President's recommendations for the
Office of Academic Development and Coordination as
stated above, the Board of Trustees at its February 20
meeting approved the appointment of Dr. George A.
Russell as Associate Vice President for Academic
Coordination.
Dr. Russell, Associate Vice Chancellor for Research
and Development and Acting Dean of the Graduate Col-
lege at the Urbana-Champaign Campus, holds master
and doctoral degrees from the University. He served in
the Navy from 1940 to 1960, retiring with the rank of
lieutenant commander. In 1961 and 1962 he was a Sum-
mer Session lecturer at Urbana before joining the faculty
in 1962 as an associate professor of physics. He became
a full professor in 1965. He also has sened as Associate
Director of the Materials Research Laboratory, Associate
Head of the Department of Physics, and Associate Dean
of the Graduate College.
Dr. Russell will have responsibility for all aspects of
system academic coordination as outlined in the back-
ground paper, including the planning, implementation,
and evaluation of University-wide programs, and the
policy issues related to graduate education and research.
He will help coordinate the University's input to the
Illinois Board of Higher Education "Master Plan-
Phase IV," and pay particular attention to the more
efficient matching of external resources to internal
strengths. A fundamental long-range goal developed for
the Vice President and the Associate Vice President will
be to have each of the campuses view the quality of the
other campuses as intimately related to its own.
Board of Trustees Statenunt on the William L. Springer Lake Project
The Secretary of the Board of Trustees received a request
from Colonel James M. Miller, District Engineer, Chicago
District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers on November 5, to
comment on the environmental considerations of the Draft
Environmental Statement — William L. Springer Lake, dated
September, 1973. On December 19, 1973, the Board acknowl-
edged receipt of the Statement and asked the Director of
Robert Allerton Park, who had also received a similar re-
quest, to make an appropriate response on behalf of the Uni-
versity of Illinois. The response was forwarded to the Corps
of Engineers on January 18 as the Report of the Director,
Professor Walter M. Keith, with copies sent to the University
Board of Trustees.
The Director, in his report, raises several questions of
policy arising out of the review of the Environmental State-
ment. These questions bear upon the Memorandum of Agree-
ment of May, 1970, which was signed by the State of Illinois,
the City of Decatur, the Decatur Sanitary District and the
University of Illinois. These questions also relate to the
statement of support of the project by Governor Walker in
May, 1973.
Two of the conditions or assurances of importance both to
the Board of Trustees and to Governor Walker are:
1. That the project will not result in significantly in-
creased flooding in Allerton Park or adversely affect
the ecology of that park.
2. That the land above the joint-use pool for accommo-
dation of the flood control pool will be covered with
foliage and will be generally satisfactory for recrea-
tional use when not covered with water. (The Uni-
versity understands that the proposed project has
established the joint-use pool elevation at 623.0' above
mean sea level [MSL].)
The Draft Environmental Statement does not provide clear
evidence that these two conditions will be met.
In addition, because of the reported experience record
of other U. S. Corps of Engineers dams and reservoirs that
was not available to us when the 1970 Memorandum of Agree-
ment was negotiated, the Board of Trustees continues to be
concerned that possible errors in design or changes in opera-
tional procedures following construction of Lake Springer
may ultimately result in adverse eff^ects upon the vegetation
and wildlife in Allerton Park. Objective No. 7 of the Memo-
randum of Agreement of 1970 outlines the development of an
operational plan for water management in the reservoir. The
Board maintains its concern for and interest in the early
development of this plan prior to construction of the project.
Some of the elements of the Memorandum of Agreement
of 1970 have not been implemented and the draft of the
Environmental Statement submitted by the Corps of Engineers
does not appear to provide clear answers to concerns about
"significantly increased flooding" nor about the "adverse
eff^ects upon the ecology of Allerton Park."
Accordingly, the University of Illinois Board of Trustees
reaffirms its position with regard to the requirements of the
Memorandum of Agreement of 1970 and declares its un-
willingness to continue its present stance toward this project
unless assured that those requirements are being and will be
met. Toward this end, the Board of Trustees directs the
administration of the University to analyze the final draft of
the Environmental Statement when completed and to inform
the Board concerning whether this statement contains the
required assurances.
In addition, the Board authorizes the University to retain
suitable independent engineering or other consulting assis-
tance to:
1. Analyze the Draft Environmental Statement, and other
documents, to ascertain the probable effects on Allerton
Park, and other University properties, of the dam as
now proposed and to report the results and findings
of this analysis to the University.
2. Advise the University of any feasible alternatives that
would reduce, to an acceptable level, any damage to
be expected from the dam.
3. Advise the University as to how it can be guaranteed
that the dam and reservoir will be designed, con-
structed and managed so as to eliminate or restrict
possible damage to an acceptable level.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
j^jle^^Mj^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 246, April 10, 1974
'Tltf Measures of Qjuility'' — The President's Annual Message
JOHN E. C.ORBALLY JR., PRl.SIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
I am pleased once again to greet and to \ isit with
you — the people of Illinois — who are the constituency
of the University of Illinois. In this, my third annual re-
port to you, I am going to speak about quality. Quality
is an elusive concept which can often be felt rather than
measured. It is not easily described within the usual
framework of numbers and charts and its definition varies
witli the purposes of the individual or institution to which
it is applied. In spite of these difficulties, it is important
that those of us who represent the University of Illinois
and who work to maintain and to enhance the quality of
the University can describe that quality in meaningful
ways. For it is because of that quality that we are a
unique asset of the State of Illinois, that we require spe-
cial understanding and special levels of financial support,
and that we can contribute in so many ways to the
people of Illinois, of the nation, and of the world.
Obviously, our qualit)- must be measured in terms
of what we are asked to be. We are a Land-CJrant uni-
\ersity and as such we not only are asked to offer pro-
grams of instruction and of research but to bring these
programs to bear upon public problems through activities
of e.xtension and of public seivice. Within the require-
ments of this charge, we must be more than a teaching
and research institution in the mold of the great private
and public non-Land-Grant universities and must invoke
ourselves with people in ways which influence their daily
lives for the better.
In addition to our role as a Land-Grant university,
we have consistently been viewed as the primary public
university in Illinois in the areas of graduate and of pro-
fessional education. We are described as "a comprehen-
sive university" with programs encompassing every aca-
demic and professional discipline through the highest
academic or professional degree appropriate to each disci-
pline. This combination of breadth and depth requires
programs of teaching and research which are found in
only a few such comprehensive universities, rec)uires a
faculty- and staff with special abilities to permit the design
and offering of such programs at all levels of university
instruction, and requires a student body with the motiva-
tion and academic abilities to permit success in such
programs.
So it is within this dual role of Land-Grant univer-
sity and comprehensive university that the University of
Illinois performs and it is within this dual role that our
measures of quality must be found.
The high quality of the student body at the LTniversity
of Illinois is one of the major reasons for the University's
reputation as a center of excellence in higher education.
The "typical" freshman is a graduate of the upper
one-fifth of his high school class. Fewer than one student
in ten enters the University from the lower half of his
high school class.
In addition, freshmen entering the University of Illi-
nois earn test scores substantially higher than the na-
tional average for college-bound students. The "typical"
University of Illinois freshman earns a composite score
of twenty-four on the American College Test — which is
better than seven out of ten college-bound students taking
this exam, .'\mong the colleges, the average composite
scores vaiy from nineteen (better than four out of ten
students nationally) to twenty-seven (better than nine
out of ten). In comparison with more than 400 institu-
tions participating in the ACT Research Service, the
University of Illinois ranks in the upper two per cent
in teiTns of the average test scores of its entering
freshmen.
The success of these students at the University is evi-
denced by the fact that, at the end of their first year,
97 per cent are eligible to continue to their second year.
It is perhaps not surprising to leam that these highly
qualified and motivated freshmen earned more than
29,000 semester hours of college credit last fall on the
basis of proficiency exams — credit which represents the
equivalent of a full year of college work for nearly 1,000
students.
The University of Illinois also attracts a large num-
ber of highly qualified transfer students from a variety
of two- and four-year institutions, including every public
community college in the State. The typical transfer stu-
dent enters with a B— average for his previous college
work, having graduated from high school in the upper
third of his class. Approximately one of every five under-
graduates enrolled in the University entered as a transfer
student.
The quality of entering students is outstanding in the
professional colleges: Law and Veterinary Medicine at
Urbana-Champaign and Medicine, Dentistry, Pharmacy,
and Nursing at the Medical Center. There are far more
appHcants than spaces available in all of these colleges,
ranging from more than two applicants for each space
in Pharmacy to nearly ten to one in Medicine. And the
average grades of the successful applicants for college
work prior to entrance range from B— to A — . For the
professional colleges requiring standardized tests (Medi-
cine, Dentistry, Law, and Veterinary' Medicine), the
average scores of the entering students are better than
eight out of eveiy ten applicants in the nation.
At the graduate le\el, the high quality of entering
students is evidenced by their undergraduate academic
records. Those admitted ha\e, on the average, earned
undergraduate grades of B+ to A. In a number of de-
partments, competition for admission is so keen that only
those students with the most outstanding records can
be selected.
The attracti\-eness of the University to students with
excellent academic records and a wide variety of career
interests and goals results in a stimulating atmosphere
both inside and outside the classroom. As one reflection
of this atmosphere, the University ranks third among all
universities in the nation, and first in the Big Ten, in
the number of its baccalaureate graduates who have also
earned doctorates.
Among the outstanding graduates of the University,
there are five Nobel Prize winners and ten Pulitzer Prize
recipients; and thirty-one alumni are presidents or chair-
men of the board of the 500 largest United States cor-
porations, a record exceeded only by two universities in
the nation.
As impressive as are these facts, an even more impres-
sive measurement of student quality is found in visiting
infomially with these young men and women. The range
of their interests is enormous. One need only review the
list of out-of-class activity groups supported and mostly
de\eloped by students to realize that these are not ordi-
nary' young people. Singing groups, radio clubs, chess
clubs, foreign languages clubs, intramural sports, arts
and crafts clubs, volunteer activities in the communities,
astronomy clubs, hiking clubs — these and hundreds more
engage the attention of our students during their non-
class hours. One feels their quality in ways much more
convincing than are mere test scores and high school
ranks.
Faculty and staff quality can be measured in many
ways and also is better felt than quantified. Each month
I report to our Board of Trustees concerning the honors
and awards received by members of our faculty and
staff. Each month I report upon elective offices in pro-
fessional societies and organizations to which members
of our faculty and staff ha\e been elected by their col-
leagues.
Last June I was pleased to announce the election of
Professor Rudolph A. Marcus to the American Academy
of Arts and Sciences, bringing to sixteen the number of
our faculty members who belong to this group. The oldest
organization of its kind in the nation, the .\cademy elects
outstanding .Americans from all areas of arts and sciences.
Professor Marcus is a physical chemist.
In May, Professor David Pines was elected to the
National Academy of Sciences. Professor Pines is a mem-
ber of the Departments of Physics and Electrical Engi-
neering and his election brings to twenty the total num-
ber of University' facults' elected to this exclusive group.
-Vlso in May, two facult)' members were elected to
the National Academy of Engineering. Professor Nick
Holonyak, Jr., an electrical engineer, and Professor Ven
Te Chow, a civil engineer, bring the total University of
Illinois membership in this group to thirteen.
On January 1, an Illinois alumnus took office as presi-
dent of the 108,000-member American Chemical Society.
Professor Bernard S. Friedman of the University of Chi-
cago is the fifth alumnus of the University of Illinois
to become president of the group in nine years. Another
alumnus, Professor William J. Bailey of the University
of Maryland, will assume the post in 1975.
Particularly at the graduate and professional levels,
the reputation of the faculty is a key element in attract-
ing students and new faculty to an institution. The fact
that graduate enrollments continue to remain stable at
the University of Illinois in the face of declining enroll-
ments nationally, and the success of our campuses in
recruiting able young men and women to join our faculty
are further measures of quality.
And, as is true of our students, our faculty and staflf
members are interesting and involved human beings with
wide ranging activities in their communities and in their
leisure time. Whether it be gourmet cooking or weather
forecasting or ancient coins or antique cars, I have yet
to find an area of interest in which one or more members
of our faculty and staff are not bona fide experts. These
men and women are quality people as well as individuals
who perform their Uni\ersity tasks with quality.
The cjuality of the programs of the L^niversity is
best illustrated by citing just a few examples. These exam-
ples illustrate the attention which is paid by the people
of the LTniversity of Illinois to needs which are often
unrecognized. They are examples of \\hat might be called
a "quality of concern" which is a hallmark of the Univer-
sity and they illustrate that our programs are designed
to ser\-e all of the people of Illinois rather than only
"registered students."
The Intensive English Institute is a service of the
Di\ision of English as a Second Language and the Office
of Continuing Education and Public Service.
There are many inquiries and applications for admis-
sion from promising foreign students who seem well
qualified in their fields of study but have an insufficient
knowledge of English for academic work.
The Intensive English Institute is equipped to meet
the language needs of these students on the Urbana-
Champaign Campus. These students have the advantage
of concurrent campus orientation on the site of their
future academic work, and special arrangements can be
made to ease them into their academic courses of study
as they gain increased knowledge of the language of in-
struction which, of course, is English.
Such arrangements may include auditing of select
academic courses or interaction modules with "commu-
nication pals" from the relevant academic disciplines.
For any students needing some additional assistance in
English after their completion of the regular program,
semi-intensi\e non-credit courses in English are available
to be taken along with a reduced course load in the aca-
demic curriculum.
The program of instruction includes a minimum of
twenty hours of classes per week plus PLATO and tradi-
tional laboratop.- reinforcement: special clinics; tutoring
as needed on an indi\idual basis; field trips; communi-
cation pal assignments; and automatic community access
telephone instruction a\ailabilit\- through direct dialing
t\senty-four hours per day.
Community Health Centers have been established by
the University of Illinois Rockford School of Medicine
in Belvidere, Kirkland, Durand, and Mt. Morris, bring-
ing medical services to areas lacking sufficient doctors.
The vast majority of health care contacts are made in
the ambulator)- office setting. The teaching of ambula-
tors' medicine at the Rockford School of Medicine is
constructed to involve the student and the teacher deeply
in a system of comprehensive, continuing personal health
care.
The community health center office system was de-
signed specifically for student teaching and the concomi-
tant provision of health care in areas where medical ser-
vices are inadequate. The program is the first effort of
its kind anwhere in the United States. Excellence of
teaching and care, consistency in cjuality and availability
of service, and evidence of deep interest in the social and
professional needs of the community must be hallmarks
to accompany success for the community health centers
as a new mode for medical education.
The objectives of the program are the following:
1. to provide ambulator)' care centers involving pa-
tient, student and teacher in a continuing rela-
tionship :
2. to encourage students to practice outside urban
and suburban settings;
3. to provide health care services to communities
lacking such services ;
4. to experiment with delivery systems for health
care;
5. to develop experimental programs for sophisti-
cated "physician extender" care;
6. to fund the teaching of ambulatory care through
deliver)' of health care ;
7. to bring scientific backing and sophistication to
the health care deliver)' system through experi-
enced teachers in each office ;
8. to study the effect of the system on the function
of ph)'sician-teachers in the office teaching setting.
The Energy Resources Center at Chicago Circle was
established to study and offer advice on the overall energy
problem in the State of Illinois — established, inciden-
tally, weW before the "energy crisis" became a part of
our daily lives. The Center will initially determine the
magnitude of the flow of natural resources, coal, oil, gas,
and uranium into the State in general, and into Chicago,
in particular, to establish the use pattern of energ)' re-
sources in such areas as transportation, industi7, and
residential-commercial.
Critical research and development needs for the
energ)' resource program of the State will be identified
and active research undertaken in selected areas. The
technical manpower needs in the energy field in Illinois
and surrounding states will be explored and, if necessary,
recommendations for new programs to meet future needs
will be generated. The Department of Architecture, the
bioengineering program, and the Departments of Energy
Engineering, Materials Engineering, and Political Science
will be involved in the studies. Projects will include the
analysis of electrical power usage, coal desulfurization
processes and coal gasification systems for energy use
patterns, waste heat in the nuclear power program, and
possible energy savings through alteration of transporta-
tion patterns.
The Center is administered by the College of Engi-
neering.
The first Annual Illinois Energv' Conference was held
at Chicago Circle during the summer of 1972. It was
sponsored by the Department of Energy Engineering
and the Division of University Extension, and its purpose
was to examine the energy problems in the State of Illi-
nois. The first Illinois Conference was the initial step
in the development of the Energy Resources Center. The
Center is now actively involved in the planning of the
second conference devoted to energy conservation in
Illinois.
Doing business with the Russians requires training
and know-how — and the University of Illinois at Ur-
bana-Champaign is offering its help to Illinois leaders
in business, industry, and government.
The University of Illinois Committee for Public Ser-
vice in International Affairs — through the prestigious
Russian and East European Center — is mobilizing the
University's resources to help these leaders, their organi-
zations or firms and their associates deal effectively with
Soviet Union agencies.
Its ammunition includes three dozen faculty spe-
cialists, a stellar library collection, and even a com-
puterized Russian language teaching machine program.
And, first of all, the University is offering to industry
options as to how assistance in Russian-East European
background information and studies might be delivered.
"With the recent dramatic expansion of United
States-Soviet trade, many Illinois business leaders have
expressed a desire to know more about Russia — its insti-
tutions, language, culture, and society," according to
Professor Ralph T. Fisher, Jr., Director, Russian and
East European Center, and J. Terry Iversen, Chairman,
Committee for Public Service in International Affairs.
They explained that the plan is to help industry
"profit by the facilities and expertise readily available
at the University in order to deal more effectively and
efficiently with the Soviet Union."
The Committee and the Center are inviting businesses
to suggest the kinds of Russian studies programs which
would fit their needs — on-campus instruction, oflF-cam-
pus courses, short courses, or symposia.
They point to the outstanding faciUties and courses
associated with the University of IIHnois Russian and
East European Center.
The University of Illinois has been teaching Russian
history since the 1930's, and the present Center was
established with support from the United States Office
of Education.
"The Russian and East European Center brings to-
gether some three dozen Russian studies specialists on
agricultural economics, anthropology', economics, educa-
tion, geography, history, law, languages, library science,
literatures, political science, and sociology," the letter
explains.
Backing up faculty resources is the third largest ap-
propriate university library collection in the country.
Holdings in Slavic and East European studies now total
more than 300,000 volumes, the largest collection of any
libraiy west of Washington, D.C. A unique facility is the
special Slavic-East European Reading Room.
Even PL.\TO — the mighty computer — has been
drafted. The University of Illinois has developed a Rus-
sian language course using PLATO in conjunction with
a te.xtbook, "Reading and Translating Contemporary
Russian." It can be a self-instruction course, or be taught
by an instructor. Its advantage is that each student can
complete the lab work at his own pace and thus decrease
the time needed to learn Russian.
Ninety-five State contracts were actively being car-
ried out by the University as of April 11, 1973. Involved
are twenty-seven State agencies and a total dollar amount
of $4,698,767.
The projects are classified as research, public service,
fellowship, scholarship, workshop, instruction, adminis-
tration, or organized activities.
Research was contracted in many areas, including
adult education, exceptional children, cattle and swine
disease, Illinois wildlife, pollution control, drugs, mass
transportation, and many others.
Public Service contracts include veterinary diagnostic
services, supervision of a pollution control task force,
the annual Fire College, library services for Illinois resi-
dents, a workshop in bricklaying and masonry construc-
tion and one in mechanical trades, in-senice training to
health occupations instructors, and consumer and home-
making education for low-income families.
Fellowships and Scholarships include legislative stafT
internships, minority group members trained as public
service administrators, training of social workers, match-
ing funds for contributions of students for undergraduate
scholarships, special education traineeships, aircraft and
engine mechanic scholarships, and a master's level pro-
gram in preschool education of the handicapped.
Workshops and Instruction include an educational
program for low-income fami families in four Southern
Illinois counties, Asian and Middle Eastern studies,
sharing computer resources, a summer program for re-
training special education teachers in preschool education
of the handicapped, safety and driver education retrain-
ing for experienced teachers, aircraft maintenance pro-
gram, recruitment, training and placement of teachers in
the health field, a master's level program in criminal
justice, special education traineeships, an environmental
health seminar series, residency training in psychiatry,
and a nurse recruiting and education program.
Organized Activities include the Medical Center
Community Mental Health Program, the Child Psy-
chiatry Clinic, and clinical psychiatric services for adult
outpatients.
These examples are merely illustrative of the cjuality
of our students, of our faculty and stafT, and of our pro-
grams. These people and their activities are what led to
the designation of the University of Illinois as one of
forty-eight members of the .\ssociation of .\merican Uni-
versities, as a member of the International Association
of Universities, as a consistent high ranking institution in
ratings of faculty and programs conducted by the Amer-
ican Council on Education and other agencies, and as an
institutional member of the Argonne Universities Asso-
ciation and of the Universities Research Association —
two national groups engaging in cooperative advanced
research undertakings. It is these people and these pro-
grams that assist the University in contributing to the
economic strength of the State of Illinois through teach-
ing, research, and public service. It is these people and
these programs that enable the University of Illinois to
receive Federal support of its programs in amounts
exceeded by only nine or ten public and private univer-
sities of the nearly 1,700 in the nation. It is these people
and these programs which lead our sister institutions of
postsecondary education in Illinois to look consistently
to the University of Illinois for leadership in innovation
and in problem solving in higher education.
These examples and countless other activities add up
to the University of Illinois and to its unique and price-
less quality. When we speak of and seek dollars from the
General Assembly, we are really seeking support for these
people and programs and, ultimately, for each of you.
We could be a less expensive university; but we could not
do so and remain the kind of University of Illinois which
you have supported over the years and which our State
deserves. As one who has lived and worked in such states
as California, Washington, Ohio, and New York, I am
persuaded that no state in our nation can or should sur-
pass Illinois. We are a top-quality State and one hallmark
of such a state is the quality of its principal university.
Our State is known and respected throughout the world
by many who know only of the University of Illinois. We
want to continue to play our role as a leading indicator
of the quality of Illinois. To do so, we need your con-
tinuing understanding and your continuing support. We
represent you to many people and in many ways and we
shall continue to do our best to insure that your Univer-
sity of Illinois represents you in the special ways of quality
which characterize our State and the people of our State.
'jlliAA^-l'P''
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Prt'sident's Stattituiit to IBHE Tuition Study Ca?mmttee
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY JR., JUNE 3, 1974
MEMBERS OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE:
While the Board of Trustees of the University of Illi-
nois has taken various actions in the last year which are
cither directly or indirectly related to the matter of
tuition levels for students at the Univereity, the Board has
not adopted an official jxjlicy {XDsition concerning tuition
levels. It is, therefore, important to your consideration of
my statement that you view it as an administrative state-
ment wliich has the general support of my administrative
colleagues at the University, but which has not been con-
sidered by our governing board.
It is fair to report that in every case where tuition
le\els have been discussed by the Board of Trustees of the
University of Illinois, there have been statements made
in support of maintaining tuition levels at public univer-
sities at the lowest possible levels. Neither the Board nor
the administration of the Uni\ersity of Illinois believes
that the financial problems of either public or private
higher education can be resolved through a program of
ever increasing tuitions in the public sector with so-called
'"full-cost" tuition as the ultimate goal. The public sector
of higher education was established to meet public pur-
poses: to be responsive to public direction through gov-
erning boards selected or elected through public processes,
through the actions of the General Assembly, and through
the actions of the executive branch of State Government ;
and, accordingly, to be supported through public funds.
The methods of funding and of control differ for the
public and for the private sectors of higher education
and it is those differences which permit and nurture the
dual system of higher education which we believe to be
important in our nation. To the extent that current real
or imagined problems are permitted to lead to erosion of
those differences in funding and in control, the existence
of true and necessary duality is eroded.
Low tuition is the best and most efficient scholarship
mechanism available. Those who would argue that low
tuition "subsidizes the wealthy" overlook the fact that
public services are provided to all in this nation according
to the usefulness and necessity of those services to each
citizen and to the society as a whole. In the funding of
those ser\ices — the ta.x program — arrangements can
and have been made to provide for resting a greater tax
burden upon those most able to pay. If it is felt that the
No. 247^'W** 14. 1974
burden of paying for any public service is not distributed
equitably, an adjustment of the tax system is needed
rather than the imposition of special fees which penalize
the segment of society involved at any given time in a
program meeting public purposes.
At a time when many exjjress great concern about
"overhead" costs, it seems inconsistent to support pro-
grams which couple high tuition levels in the public sector
with various new scholarship, loan, grant, and waiver
programs — each of which adds overhead expense —
which are not necessary if tuitions are held at reasonably
low levels. It is equally inconsistent to become enamored
with complex systems of differential tuition charges with
the attendant "overhead" involved in calculating, assess-
ing, and collecting tuition within such systems. Obviously,
tuition charges deal with averages and with history. There
is no way to develop a clear and objective jjhilosojjhical
foundation for current tuition charges; to attempt to
develop such a foundation for complex subdivisions of
charges is to add confusion to confusion and is to attempt
to clarify a pragmatic event by inundating that event
with calculated subjecti\ ities.
As I review the testimony already jjresented to the
Committee, I am particularly impressed by the set of
questions addressed to you by Representative James R.
Washburn. I am not certain, for example, that there is
merit to a statewide tuition policy as opposed to system
tuition policies. I am not certain that tuition increases
of the magnitude proposed for Fiscal Year 1975 really
represent the massive and oppressive burden which they
have been said to represent. Obviously, dollars spent for
tuition payments represent dollars which cannot be spent
for other purposes. With the well-supported ISSC pro-
gram in Illinois, dollars spent by families and by indi-
viduals for tuition are not dollars wliich most of those
families or individuals would spend for food, shelter, or
clothing. The expenditure of tuition dollars may represent
some financial sacrifice, but our society has never, it
seems to me, been based on any concept other than that
worthwhile objectives are met through some choices and
some sacrifice. To attempt to design a plan which elimi-
nates the elements of sacrifice and of effort is, I believe,
lx)th impossible and unwise.
I am certain that the Study Committee is less inter-
ested in comments about what should not be done than
it is in suggestions concerning what might be done in the
area of tuition levels. It is my view that the Committee
should couch its recommendations in general terms,
should reaffirm the role of system governing boards in
considering tuition details, should seek system proposals
for tuition policies which offer the long-range frame-
works about which Representative Washburn spoke,
should stress the need for some kind of legislative-execu-
tive support at the State level of tuition plans ^vhich per-
mit both institutions and students to plan within a tuition
framework of stability and predictability, and should dis-
avow the use of tuition in public higher education either
as a means of dealing with problems of equity in tax pro-
grams or as a means of preserving private higher educa-
tion. While there is no magic in the current IBHE policy
which establishes one-third of undergraduate instructional
costs as a reasonable tuition goal, there is no magic in
other numbers either. The "one-third" concept has served
as a realistic goal, does have at least the merit of history,
and is a concept which preserves what most of us consider
to be low tuition levels in public higher education. It is
a flexible framework which responds to inflation or to
deflation and which pro\'ides for differences among sys-
tems depending upon the nature and costs of system
programs. It allows for special consideration within sys-
tems of differential tuitions without attempting to de-
scribe at the State level a set of complex considerations
which var\' from system to system and from ^'ear to year.
It provides a governing board with an opportunity to
establish tuition levels at a percentage of cost rather than
at specific dollar amounts so that all those interested in
tuition levels can predict with some accuracy what the
levels will be prior to specific governing board action to
confirm current levels.
In considering tuition levels within the University of
Illinois, we must pay special attention to tuition charges
at many institutions outside of Illinois. While it is im-
portant that our tuition charges bear some intelligent
relationship to charges at our sister public systems \vithin
Illinois, we must also consider our relationships with the
small number of public universities outside of Illinois who
strive to meet the unique responsibilities and to serve
the imique purposes of comprehensive Land-Grant uni-
versities with special responsibilities for graduate and
professional education, for public service, and for under-
graduate education of a special scope and quality. Con-
sideration, for example, of tuition charges at the graduate
and professional levels of instruction is of far more signifi-
cance to the University of Illinois than to anv other
system within Illinois and is a consideration which we
believe is best made by our Board of Trustees within a
general policy framework adopted by the IBHE.
I appreciate this opportunity- to present my views to
you and look fonvard to continuing opportunities to work
with the Committee and with the staff of the IBHE as
you complete your important tasks.
Scope and Mission of the University of Illinois. 1974-1980
President Corbally gave to members of the Board of
Trustees, meeting on the Medical Center Campus May
15. 1974, copies of the document. Scope and Mission
of the University of Illinois, 1974-1980, with this
presentation :
The accompanying document entitled Scope and Mission
of the University of Illinois, 1974-1980 describes a planning
framework for the educational activities of the University of
Illinois system during the remainder of the 1970-1980 decade.
This document is the culmination, but not the conclusion, of
activities initiated in the spring of 1972 and is the most recent
of several formal .statements of institutional mission, objectives,
and plans. The first of these statements, the Provisional Devel-
opment Plan, was approved in principle and for transmittal
to the Illinois Board of Higher Education by the Board of
Trustees on September 16, 1970.
By the spring of 1972, both the staff of the Illinois Board
of Higher Education and the staff of the University of Illinois
had agreed that the principles and the procedures introduced
by the IBHE staff to prepare the operating appropriations
requests for FY 1972-73 left much to be desired. Executive
Director's Report No. 104 recognized that all sectors of Illinois
higher education "are mutually anxious to avoid the problems
and the constricted timetable which hampered FY 1973
deliberations." More specifically, it stated :
The systems have been asked to provide their separate
plans for approaching FY 1974 budget decisions. ^Ve will
work to coordinate their responses to effect uniform
development and review procedures. We are determined
that the next several months be dedicated to institutional
system and statewide planning, encouraging the priority
and program evaluation activity to be done at the campus
and system level.
In response to the IBHE staff's request, the University
suggested that several general issues be considered before the
guidelines for the planning of succeeding appropriation re-
quests were formulated, including the establi.shment of a basic
fiscal frame of reference for institutional and IBHE-staff
planning, the assessment by each institution (and by the IBHE
staff) of the impact of the budget limitations for the biennium
1971-73 upon the individual institutions and upon the entire
system of higher education, the updating and further refine-
ment of statewide enrollment projections for each campus,
and the examination of the basic planning assumptions re-
garding scope and mission for the various institutions.
In its commentary upon the recommendations in Execu-
tive Director's Report No. 103 for the elimination or sharp
curtailment of some of its educational programs, the Univer-
sity indicated that its unwillingness or inability to accept
most of those recommendations stemmed in large measure
from fundamental disagreements with what appeared to be
the assumptions underlying them. It seemed clear then, and
the IBHE staff subsequently agreed, that the apparent con-
flict between Report No. 103 assumptions and the Master
Plan-Phase III and other IBHE policy statements concerning
the University's scope and mission had to be resolved as a
prerequisite to effective communication and cooperation be-
tween the Board of Higher Education and the Uni\crsity of
Illinois in future planning.
The first item in Report No. 104 addressed this point di-
rectly in acknowledging that "Campus master plans at senior,
jimior ;ind private institutions need systematic revision to
bring these plans into full concurrence with MP-III, especially
as it relates to scope and mission and intcrinstitutional plan-
ning." The University commented in response to that observa-
tion that:
... in the light of the discussion above concerning the
relationship of MP-III to the University of Illinois, that
there is considerable ambiguity or indeterminancy in MP-
III regarding that document's "basic planning assump-
tions" for the various institutions. Many aspects of Master
Plan-Phase III have not been defined operationally, and
frequent disagreements have arisen between the IBHE
staff and institutional representatives regarding the in-
terpretation of MP-III.
[University of Illinois Commentary
on Executive Director's Report No.
103, p. 57)
During later discussions between the IBHE staff and the
staff of each public higher education system, it was agreed
that the initial step toward accomplishing an operational
definition of MP-III would be the preparation by each institu-
tion of a statement of its conception of the scope and mission
assigned to it and of the corollary basic planning assumptions.
As these institutional statements were being developed, con-
ferences were held by the IBHE staff at each campus in May,
1972, to explore the critical issues that might have emerged
prior to the adoption of MP-III and since then, for the pur-
prase of achieving better mutual understanding of apparent
divergencies of interpretation and in the hope of resolving
such differences to the fullest e.\tent possible. In the light of
those discussions and partly on the basis of the statements
submitted by each of the University's three campuses following
the meetings with IBHE staff members, a document entitled
The Scope and Mission of the University and the Basic Plan-
ning Assumptions of Its Campuses was prepared and sub-
mitted to the IBHE staff in June, 1972.
For FY 1975 budget requests and multi-year budget esti-
mates, the Illinois Board of Higher Education introduced a
new format, the Resource Allocation and Management Pro-
gram (RAMP), within which Illinois public senior univer-
sities must submit their budgets for review by the IBHE. The
RAMP format required, for the first time as a formal re-
quirement, universities to state their .scope and mission ob-
jectives and technical plans for achieving those goals. The
accompanying document is in response partly to this require-
ment and is the product of a continuous process of interaction
between departments, colleges, campuses, central administra-
tion, governing board, and the Illinois Board of Higher Edu-
cation. Previous bound versions were prepared for distribu-
tion to members of the Board of Trustees on July 18, 1973,
and April 5, 1974.
The first chapter considers the scope and mission of the
University of Illinois as a whole, together with its major plan-
ning emphases, and the continuing process of academic de-
velopment and program evaluation. The following three chap-
ters are focused upon the distinctive contributions made by
each campus to the University's educational mission and
responsibilities, and upon the basic assumptions underlying
their respective sets of priorities in educational planning and
in the allocation of resources. Attention is given to several
specific problems that have been identified during the many
scope and mission deliberations.
The second section of the document spells out the Uni-
versity's assumptions about enrollment patterns and the avail-
ability of resources for higher education. The planning pro-
posals of the first four chapters depend in part upon the
validity of these assumptions. Also, the enrollments and re-
source projections of the financing model are reconciled with
the scope and mission statements of the first four chapters.
While the basic purposes of a university such as the Uni-
versity of Illinois remain constant, the specific activities and
programs undertaken to meet those purposes will vary with
time. TTie dynamic nature of the University and the multitude
of plans for innovative response to changes in the state of
knowledge, social conditions, and the nature of the student
body defy a statement which specifically defines the scope and
mission of the University of Illinois over an extended time.
The accompanying document, which I recommend for ap-
proval and for transmittal to the Illinois Board of Higher
Education, is already the subject of the continuous process of
reassessment and adjustment.
The Board gave approval of the document and its
transmittal to the IBHE. Copies of the document have
been made available to heads of departments.
Undergraduate Instruction A wards for Summer 1973 Projects
The Board of Trustees at its May 15 meeting ap-
proved several undergraduate instructional and cur-
riculum development awards for projects completed
during the summer of 1973. The recommendation was
as follows:
At its meetings on March 21, 1973, and April 18, 1973,
the Board of Trustees approved a total of twenty-six projects,
involving thirty-one faculty members, for support during the
summer of 1973 under the Urbana-Champaign program of
Undergraduate Instructional Awards and the Chicago Circle
program of Curriculum Development Awards. These awards
generally provided a full-time salary for two months to the
recipients for work on projects designed to improve the quality
of undergraduate instruction. (There were two awards for
projects of one month's duration and one award which pro-
vided half-time salary.)
In December, 1972, and again in October, 1973, the
.Standard Oil (Indiana) Foundation made available a total
of $5,000 for special awards for outstanding teaching by under-
graduate faculty — $3,000 on each occasion for the teaching
awards and $2,000 on each occasion to be deposited in the
President's Contingency Fund. The sum of $6,000 has been
held for special awards for projects conducted during the
summer of 1973.
The chancellors at the Chicago Circle and the Urljana-
Champaign Campuses each appointed a special committee to
review the reports submitted by the grantees following the
completion of their projects last summer. The committees
were asked to select the most meritorious projects for recom-
mendation to their respective chancellors. In the light of these
recommendations, ten proposals were submitted to the Vice
President for Academic Development and Coordination for
consideration (four from the Chicago Circle Campus and six
from the Urbana-Champaign Campus). After reviewing the
reports and the endorsements, the \'ice President for Aca-
demic Development and Coordination recommends that spe-
cial awards of $1,000 be made for six of the ten projects as
follows (in the instances where more than one person was in-
volved in one project, the award will be shared by the
participants) :
CHICAGO CIRCLE CAMPUS
Cynthia Jameson, Associate Professor of Chemistry; Leonard
Kotin, Assistant Professor of Chemistry; and C. F. Liu, Pro-
fessor of Chemistry, "Restructuring Chemistry III: Intro-
duction to Chemistry with Use of Video Tapes and Computer
Terminals."
Robert Arzbaecher, Professor of Electrical Engineering in
Information Engineering, "Curriculum Articulation in In-
formation Engineering: Modular Design and Computer-
Assisted Learning."
David Weible, Assistant Professor of German, "Development
of PLATO IV Programming for Vocabulary Learning in
First-Year German."
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN CAMPUS
Alan W. Haney, Assistant Professor of Botany, "Computer
Assisted Instruction for General Botany."
Robert A. Jones, Assistant Professor of Sociology, "Develop-
ment of an Interdisciplinary 'Phenomenological' Perspective
in Sociology 100."
Paul G. Schmidt, Assistant Professor of Chemistry and of Bio-
chemistry, and J. A. Katzenellenbogen, Assistant Professor of
Chemistry, "The Chemistry of Life."
Designation of a University Purchasing Director
At its May 15 meeting the Board of Trustees ap-
proved the designation of a University Purchasing Direc-
tor and the appointment of Lester E. Elliott to that
position. This follows the practice of several years at the
University in the area of purchasing by coordinating, and
in a number of cases by combining, purchases for its
several campuses, and also during the last year an attempt
for all of higher education in the State to achieve inore
coordinated purchasing. Common procurement practices
have been under development by the senior institutions
— a purchasing division of lECCS (Illinois Educational
Consortium for Computer Services) has been created,
and some commodities have been tentatively identified
for statewide procureinent.
Mr. Elliott, Director of Purchases for the Urbana-
Champaign Cainpus since 1960, has acted as coordinator
in the University's efforts at coordinating and combining
purchases for the several campuses. As University Pur-
chasing Director he will continue his present coordinating
role and also take a leadership position for the Univer-
sity in the developing statewide efTorts, efforts being pro-
moted by a number of State agencies as well as the Joint
Council on Higher Education.
Mr. Elliott, a graduate of the College of Wooster in
Ohio, has been on the University staff since 1946 when he
joined as Buyer-Assistant Director of Purchases on the
Urbana-Champaign Campus.
Of Special Interest to Resigning and Retiring Academic Staff
The following memorandum was sent May 30 to the
three chancellors by Morris S. Kessler, Assistant Vice
President for Planning and Allocation :
In connection with the change on policy of paying aca-
demic staff members upon termination of services, I should
like to point out that, in accordance with State law, the
health and life insurance coverage provided l)y the State and
benefits available to active employees under the Universities
Retirement System cease as of the resignation date. Some
employees might not think of this when they are anxious to
get their final paycheck early. Therefore, it would be desirable
to include such reminder in any notification to staff.
Staff members employed for the academic year can con-
tinue their benefits through the summer only if they resign
as of August 31 at Chicago, or August 20 at Urbana. Staff
members on a twelve-month basis can continue all their bene-
fits by taking their vacation before the resignation date. By
special rule the State insurance coverage is continued through
the period covered by the lump sum vacation payment. How-
ever, this ruling does not apply to academic year service per-
sonnel, since their final payment is not for vacation.
Staff members who are retiring continue to receive State
insurance benefits through the retirement system, and there-
fore, it is normally advantageous for them to retire and apply
for a retirement annuity as of the date of their last day of
service.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
J^jiC-i^-t-leL
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 248, August 14, 1974
The U&rary of tlw
NOV 5 1974
University of Illinois
Board Receives University's Request for Capital Appropriations for FY 1916
The Board of Trustees, meeting on the Urbana-
Champaign Campus July 17, 1974, received from Presi-
dent John E. Corbally Jr. the University's budget request
for operating and capital funds for Fiscal Year 1976.
The budget request had been prepared by the Vice Pres-
ident for Planning and Allocation and the Vice President
for Academic De\elopment and Coordination with the
advice and concurrence of the University Planning
Council and the University Budget Committee and with
the review of the three chancellors.
At tlie suggestion that final consideration of the
budget recommendations be postponed until the Sep-
tember meeting, the Board decided, because of time limi-
tations in the calendar of consideration by the Illinois
Board of Higher Education, that it would authorize the
administration to begin discussions with the IBHE Staff,
approving the materials submitted as "documents for
discussion" with the IBHE or its stafl and reserving final
action on the recommendations and accompanying docu-
ments until a later time.
In this issue of the Faculty Letter is presented a part
of the Capital Budget Request, an overview of the re-
quest. A summary of the Operating Budget Request will
appear in a later issue.
University of Illinois Budget Request for Operating and Capital Funds, Fiscal Year 1976
PREPARED FOR PRESENT.MION TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, JULY 17, 1974
Part II. Capital Budget Request
CHAPTER A. OVERVIEW
The FY 1976 Capital Budget Request for the University
of Illinois is presented in the next five chapters: (A) An
0\er\iew of the Request, (B) The Current Status of Capital
Programs at the University of Illinois, (C) The Capital Re-
quirements Necessary for the Scope and Mission of the Uni-
versity of Illinois for 1974 to 1980, (D) Section I of the
FY 1976 Request, and (E) Section II of the FY 1976 Re-
quest. In general terms, this request will show the current
status of capital facilities and those facilities which are re-
quired to carry out the programs of the University of Illinois
for the next five years. This request is the planning document
which translates the University's long range plans for capital
improvements into the building and remodeling programs
necessary to maintain the high quality of instruction, research,
and public service at the University of Illinois.
Summary of University's Capital Request for FY 1976
The total capital program requested from State funds for
FY 1976 is $50,329,500 exclusive of reappropriations. It is an-
ticipated that $49,903,200 can be funded from the Capital
Development Bond Fund and $426,300 from the General
Revenue Fund. It is estimated that additional funds in the
amount of $29,531,800 will be available from other sources to
supplement this request. Table 1 provides a listing of the
estimated State funds required in FY 1976 for the building
projects and budget categories by campus.
The justification for the request is divided into two sec-
tions which should be regarded as related but separate.
The first section ($21,466,100) contains only three proj-
ects. These projects — the Hospital Replacement Facility at
the Medical Center Campus in Chicago, the site improvement
necessary for the construction of the Peoria School of Medi-
cine, and a Crash Rescue Facility for the Willard Airport at
Urbana-Champaign — have statewide implications other than
education. The two health related projects are necessary to
the medical education expansion at the University of Illinois,
but also are improvements which will benefit other segments
of the State of Illinois. The Hospital Replacement Facility
will provide modem facilities to sen-e the referrals from all
over the state. The site improvement at Peoria will provide
a benefit to that city as well as to the University. The site is
part of an urban renewal project for the city of Peoria. The
University has selected the site for the Peoria School of Medi-
cine within the urban renewal area as a cooperative effort with
the city of Peoria and the site development costs requested are
the additional costs estimated for the development of this
area. The Crash-Rescue Facility at the Willard Airport pro-
vides minimal instructional support but is absolutely essential
for the safety of those using the University's airport. A com-
plete description of these projects is given in Chapter D.
The second section ($28,863,400) is comparable to pre-
vious annual requests for capital budgets. This request is the
smallest one submitted by the University of Illinois since
the state began annual budgeting in FY 1970 and indicates the
beginning of a change from mainly a new building oriented
request to a remodeling and replacement oriented request.
.^t the Chicago Circle Campus the request is for three
major items. It is requested that funds be authorized for (1)
completing the Library Addition project which will begin in
FY 1975, (2) beginning Phase I of the remodeling in the Sci-
ence and Engineering Laboratory to provide facilities for
graduate work in engineering and the sciences, and (3) plan-
ning for Phase H of the remodeling program and for an aca-
demic building.
At the Medical Center the request is mainly for funds to
( 1 ) equip and complete those projects previously authorized,
(2) remodel vacated space, (3) plan for remodeling in FY
1977 and for a new School of Public Health Facility, and
(4) construct a small storage facility for flammable liquids.
At the Urbana-Champaign Campus the request is mainly
for funds to ( 1 ) construct three buildings — a Law Building
Addition to increase law enrollment, a Library North Court
Addition, and Phase I of a Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Addi-
tion, (2) remodel and upgrade existing facilities for program
changes, and (3) plan three facilities — Life Sciences Teach-
ing Laboratory, Engineering Library Addition, a Botany
Greenhouse — and plan remodeling projects which will be
requested for construction in FY 1977.
A complete description of all projects in .Section II is
given in Chapter E.
TABLE 1 — CAPITAL REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 1976
Project Chicago Medical Vrbana-
Category Circle Center Champaign Total
1. Building Projects ($4,187,200) (520,475,000) ($8,983,200) ($33,645,400)
Hospital Replacement 20,425,000 20,425,000
Library Addition 4, 187,200 4, 187,200
Liquid Gas Storage Facility 50,000 50,000
Law Building Addition 5,783,200 5,783,200
Library North Court Addition 1 ,471 ,400 1 ,471 ,400
Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition, Phase 1 1,659,600 1,659,600
Airport Crash Rescue Facility 69,000 69,000
2. Funds to Complete Bond-Eligible Buildings -0- 235,300 42,200 277,500
3. Land -0- -0- 200,000 200,000
4. Equipment 845,400 1,567,000 655,000 3,067,400
5. Utilities 799,000 37,800 1,684,000 2,520,800
6. Remodeling and Rehabihtation 979,800 5,021,300 2,339,700 8,340,800
7. Site Improvements 103,000 1,075,900 393,000 1,571,900
8. Planning 195,000 159,000 163,800 517,800
9. Cooperative Improvements -0- -0- 187,900 187,900
TOTAL $7,109,400 $28,571,300 $14,648,800 $50,329,500
In addition to the above State Appropriations, it is estimated that $29,531,800 in additional funds from other sources will be
obtained — $29,325,000 from Hospital Income and Federal Grants, $206,800 from Federal Grants for Airport Crash Rescue
Facility.
University Priorities for FY 1976 Request
The criteria for placing projects in LTniversity priority
considered the campus priorities in all cases with the general
philosophy that those projects which were under constniction
would receive the highest priority. The next order of priority
was for projects which will provide for enrollment increases
and program development. This included both new buildings
and remodeling of existing facilities. The next order of prior-
ity was to provide for planning FY 1977 projects.
Table 2 provides a list of the projects requested in FY
1976 placed in LTniversity priority order according to the
rationale listed above. Each project is identified by budget
category and campus priority. .\n "H" by the project indi-
cates that it is a health-related project. Of the total
$50,329,500 requested in both Sections I and II, $28,771,300
(57%) can be attributed to health-related projects.
TABLE 2 — UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FY 1976 CAPITAL PROJECTS IN PRIORITY ORDER
Pri-
ority
Campus
Section J — Speci
IH
MC
2H
MC
3H
MC
4
LC
:>
LC
SfCtion II
1
UC-1
2
UC-2
3H
MC-1
4H
MC-2A
5H
MC-2
6H
MC-3
7H
MC-4
8H
MC-5
9H
MC-6
10
CC-1
11
CC-4
12
CC-3
13
UC-3
14
UC-4
15
UC-5
16H
MC-7
17
UC-6
I8H
MC-9
19H
MC-1 2
20
UC-7
21
UC-8
22
UC-9
23
UC-10
24
UC-11
25
UC-1 2
26
UC-1 3
27
CC-5
28
CC-6
29H
MC-8
30
UC-14
31
UC-1 5
32
UC-IG
33H
UC-1 7
34
UC-18
35
UC-20
36
UC-1 9
Project
Univei-sity Hospital Replacement
Peoria School of Medicine
Peoria School of Medicine
Airport Crash Rescue FaciHty
Airport Crash Rescue Facility
Speech and Hearing Clinic
Speech and Hearing Clinic
9th Floor SUDMP
Peoria School of Medicine
Peoria School of Medicine
Rockford School of Medicine
Dentistry Building, Phase II
Rockford School of Medicine
Rockford School of Medicine
Library Addition
Library Addition Sewer Relocation
Library Addition
Turner Hall Addition
Law Building Addition
Law Building Addition
School of Public Health
Life Sciences Teaching Laboratory
College of Medicine - Space
\'acated by Dentistry # 1
College of Medicine - Space
\'acaled by Dentistry #2
Solid Waste Disposal Landfill
Airport Sewage Treatment
Architecture Building Safety
English Building Renovation
Visual Arts Laboratory
College of Engineering -
Remodeling
Central Supervisory Control Center
Science Engineering Laboratory
Science Engineering Laboratory
Pharmacognosy and Pharmacology
Laboratory
Tennis Court Improvements
Library North Court Addition
Engineering Library Addition
\'eterinary Medicine
Energy' Conservation Heating
Controls
Freer Gym
Space Realignment and
Renovation Plan FY77
Residence Hall Con-
version-Plan 820,000
English Building Ren-
ovation-Plan 20,000
College of Engineer-
ing-Plan 20,000
Auditorium Roof Re-
placement-Plan. .. . 45,000
Veterinary Medicine-
Plan 20,000
Accumulated
Category
CDB
Gen
Rev
Other Total
Bldg, Addn/Struct
$20,425,000
$29,325,000 $20,425,000
Site Developinent
793,400
21,218,400
Funds to Complete
$164
700
21,383,100
Bldg, Addn/Struct
69
000
206,800 21,452,100
L'lilities
14
000
21,466,100
Funds to Complete
$ 40
200
$ 40,200
Equipment
% 250,000
290,200
Remodeling
210,000
500,200
Funds to Complete
19
000
519,200
Equipment
860,200
65
800
1,445,200
Equipment
491 ,000
1,936,200
Equipment
150,000
2,086,200
Utilities
37,800
2,124,000
Funds to Complete
51
600
2,175,600
Bldg, Addn/Struct
4,187,200
6,362,800
Utilities
115,000
6,477,800
Equipment
273,800
6,751,600
Funds to Coinplete
2
000
6,753,600
Bldg, Addn/Struct
5,783,200
12,536,800
LUilities
498,000
13,034,800
Planning
159,000
13,193,800
Planning
93,600
13,287,400
Remodeling
2,461,100
15,748,500
Remodeling
827,200
16,575,700
Coop Improvements
100,000
16,675,700
LItilities
56,000
16,731,700
Remodeling
262,500
16,994,200
Remodeling
250,000
17,244,200
Remodeling
162,200
17,406,400
Remodeling
250,000
17,656,400
Utilities
300,000
17,956,400
Remodeling
929,800
18,886,200
Equipment
571,600
19,457,800
Remodeling
270,000
19,727,800
Site Improvements
44,000
19,771,800
Bldg, Addn/Struct
1,471,400
21,243,200
Planning
41,200
21,284,400
Remodeling
200,000
21,484,400
Remodeling
105,000
21,589,400
Remodeling
150,000
21,739,400
Remodeling
125,000
21,864,400
Pri-
ority Campus
TABLE 2 — UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FY 1976 CAPITAL PROJECTS IN PRIORITY ORDER (Con».)
Project Category CDB Gen Rev Other
Accumulated ^^
Total P-
37H MC-10 Space Realignment and Renova-
tion Plan FY77
Instrument Shop Lab-
oratory-Plan $22,000
Basement & 1st Floor
SUDMP-Plan 60,000
Research & Library
Building- Plan 23,000
2nd Floor Old Illini
Union-Plan 26,000
Air Condition Phar-
macy-Plan 63,000
5th Floor-General
Hospital-Plan 10,000
General Services
Building-Plan 22,000
38 CC-7 Academic Building (Repro-
grammed COSSB)
39 UC-21 Abbott Power Plant Chimney
40 UC-22 Miscellaneous Remodeling Projects
41H MC-11 LIniversity Security and Fire Alarm
42H MC-14 Rockford School of Medicine
43 UC-23 Agriculture Replacement Land
44 UC-24 Boneyard Creek Channel
45 UC-25 Campus Landscape Improvements
46 UC-26 Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition
47 UC-27 Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition
48 UC-28 Botany Greenhouse
49H MC-15 Interconnect Chilled Water Lines
50 CC-8 Stack Emission Control System
51 UC-29 Animal Room Improvements
52 UC-30 Electrical Modernization
53 UC-31 Residence Hall Conversion
54 UC-32 Campus Water Main Extension —
Plan
55 UC-33 Turner Hall Addition
56 UC-34 Peabody and Pennsylvania Street
Improvements
57 UC-35 Coble Hall Improvements
58 UC-36 Steam Tunnel Improvements
59 UC-37 Mathews Street Improvements
60 CC-9 Building Equipment Automation
61 CC-10 Space Realignment — Plan for
FY77
62H MC-17 Pharmacy Laboratories — Room
200
63H MC-22 OSHA Corrections
64H MC-23 Building Equipment Automation
65H MC-24 Liquid Storage Facility
66 CC-11 Exterior Campus Lighting, Phase II
67H MC-27 Air Condition Third Floor FUDMP
68 CC-12 Campus Graphics — Exterior
69H MC-30 Correct Building Code Violations
70H MC-31 Pharmacy Offices
TOTAL SECTION I AND SECTION 2
Remodeling
226,000
22,090,400
Planning
195,000
22,285,400 e
Utilities
565,000
22,850,400
Equipment
205,000
23,055,400 >f
Remodeling
175,000
23,230,400 ""
Site Improvements
282,500
23,512,900 "
Land
200,000
23,712,900 '"
Coop Improvements
60,000
23,772,900 ^
Site Improvements
75,000
23,847,900 ^
Bldg, Addn/Struct
1,659,600
25,507,500 e
Utilities
175,500
25,683,000 i
Planning
29,000
25,712,000
Remodeling
207,000
25,919,000
Utilities
375,000
26,294,000
Remodeling
245,000
26,539,000 '
Remodeling
65,000
26,604,000 •
Remodeling
400,000
27,004,000 1
Utilities
25,500
27,029,500 [
Equipment
200,000
27,229,500
Site Improvements
274,000
27,503,500
Remodeling
125,000
27,628,500
Utilities
50,000
27,678,500
Coop Improvements
27,900
27,706,400
Utilities
309,000
28,015,400 ;
Remodeling
50,000
28,065,400
Remodeling
140,000
28,205,400
Remodeling
100,000
28,305,400
Remodeling
105,000
28,410,400
Bldg, Addn/Struct
50,000
28,460,400
Site Improvements
60,000
28,520,400
Remodeling
100,000
28,620,400
Site Improvements
43,000
28,663,400
Remodeling
100,000
28,763,400
Remodeling
100,000
28,863,400
$49,903,200 $426,300 $29,531,800 $50,329,500
PROPOSED PROGRAMMING OF REQUESTS FOR BUILDING PROJECTS LISTED IN FY 1976 (STATE FUNDS ONLY)
(In Thousand Dollars)
Total
Cost
Authorized
Prior to
FY 1976
Request
FY 1976
Programmed
Request for
FY 1977
Programmed
Request jor
FY 1978
ami Beyond
Chicago Circle
Library Addition $ 5,986.9 $ 1 ,280.0'
Academic Building 9,700.0
.Medical Center
Dentistry Building, Phase II S 12,563.6 S12,413.6
Peoria School of Medicine 8,700.6 6,816.5
Rockford School of Medicine 5,833.3 4,970.4
Hospital Replacement 30,000. 0^ 1,750.0
School of Public Health 9,828.3
Liquid Storage Facility 50 . 0
Urbana-Champaign
Speech and Hearing Clinic $ 2,514 3 $2,154.1
Turner Hall Addition 8,276.7 7,227.1
Law Building Addition 7,106.3 228.1
Library North Court Addition 1 ,621 .4
Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition 2,204. 3
Airport Crash Rescue Facility 90 . 5^
Life Sciences Teaching Lab 6,289. 7
Engineering Library Addition 2,252. 1
Botany Greenhouse 1 , 716 . 3
TOTAL $114,734.3 $36,839.8
' This amount has been approved by the General Assembly.
' This represents the State's portidn of the funding. The total cost will be .$60,000,000.
' This represents the State's portion of the funding. The total cost will be $297,300.
$ 4,576.0
195.0
$ 150.0
1,884.1
802.9
20,425.0
159.0
50.0
$ 290.2
202.0
6,281.2
1,471.4
1,835.1
83.0
93.6
41.2
29.0
$38,628.7
130.9
9,505.0
7,825.0
9,669.3
$ 70 . 0
847.6
423.0
80.0
200.0
7.5
5,819.6
1,952.9
1,615.8
$38,146,6
$ 1 74 , 0
70.0
169.2
376.5
258 . 0
71.5
$1,119.2
Implications of Approval of FY 1976 Projects Relating to Buildings
The time required for completion of a building project
from planning through occupancy will depend upon the size
and complexity of the project. In general, the time will vary
from one year for a very small project ($100,000) to four
years for a large project (over $5,000,000). The approval of
fimds for planning a building project will have an impact on
the budget requests for succeeding years. Table 3 — Proposed
Programming of Request for Building Projects Listed in the
FY 1976 Budget (State Funds Only) — provides an indication
of the status of existing building projects and the implication
of the additional funds that will be required in future budget
years to complete the projects.
Copies of the document, University of Illinois Budget
Request for Operating and Capital Funds, Fiscal Year
1976, may be examined in the offices of heads of
departments.
Legislative and Administrative Actions re Retirement System Operations
Edward S. Gibala, Executive Director of the State
j Universities Retirement System, sent the following report
on actions taken by the General Assembly and the Trus-
Itees of the State Universities Retirement System concern-
ing operations of the system to presidents of colleges and
universities and heads of other agencies covered by the
system.
Of special note is the second item of the report, "In-
crease in Prescribed Rate of Interest," regarding the in-
crease of the rate of interest from 4'/2 per cent to 5 per
cent, efTective September 1, 1974, and would be of par-
ticular impoitance to participants who are paying for
prior lUinois ser\-ice or for other public employment.
This is the report :
Revised Employer Contributions on Earnings
Paid from Federal and Trust Funds
Effective September 1, 1974, employers should submit to
the State Universities Retirement System, employer contribu-
tions of 11.27 per cent of earnings paid from Federal and
Trust funds. The charge will be reduced beginning that date
from 11.61 per cent. The reduction is due mainly to an in-
crease by the Actuary of the interest assumption from Wz per
cent to 5 per cent.
Increase in Prescribed Rate of Interest
The Trustees of the System approved the recommendation
of the System's Actuary that the prescribed rate of interest to
be used in actuarial valuations and preparation of annuity
tables be incrca<^ed from 4'/2 per cent to 5 per cent effective
September 1, 1974. The prescribed rate of interest is based
upon long-term investment predictions and is not necessarily
the rate of interest which is to be credited to the employee ac-
counts at the end of each year.
Under the provisions of the Illinois Pension Code, pay-
ment by the employee for prior Illinois service and for other
public employment is based upon the prescribed rate of in-
terest which is in effect on the date that the payment is re-
ceived. Consequently, if an employee defers his payment
beyond August 31, 1974, his cost for such service could be
increased substantially, depending upon the number of years
which elapses from the date he became a member to the date
he makes his payment. For example, if a person became a
member twenty years ago at an annual salary of $5,000, his
payment for ten years of other public employment would be
increased from about $9,646 to $10,613, if he defers his pay-
ment until September 1, 1974. Thus, he could save about
$967 by paying for the additional service before September 1,
1974.
The savings in interest cost is not the only reason why
it may be advantageous to pay for other public employment
as early as possible. Under legislation which was approved in
1971, there is a guarantee that the sur%-ivors annuity shall be
at least 50 per cent of the annuity earned by the member's
service and earnings credits, calculated on the assumption
that he is age sixty on the date of death. Thus, a point is
reached when payment for additional service will increase the
sun-ivors insurance protection for the member's spouse, chil-
dren under age eighteen or dependent parent.
Increase in Rate of Interest to Be Credited to Employee Accounts
In view of the continued increase in the return on invest-
ments, the Trustees of the State Universities Retirement Sys-
tem have agreed to credit interest for the fiscal year ending
August 31, 1974, of 8 per cent on the balance in the partici-
pant's account on September 1, 1973. This includes 6 per cent
to cover distribution of investment income earned during the
year plus an additional 2 per cent as partial distribution of
income earned in prior years in excess of the amount distrib-
uted. (Prior to 1973, the Retirement System was prohibited
by statute from crediting interest in excess of 4'/2 per cent.)
The statute provides that if a participant resigns and
elects to withdraw his contributions in a lump sum, he must
forfeit the interest credited to his account which is in excess
of 4'/2 per cent. We are attempting to secure legislation which
would enable a participant to receive full refund of the interest
credits. When a member withdraws from the System, he loses
the employer contributions. There appears to be little or no
justification for forfeiture by the participant of a portion of
the interest earned on his contributions. House Bill 2554, which
was introduced by Representative Hirschfeld on April 17,
1974, \\ould authorize the System to include full interest on
refunds. No action was taken on this Bill during the spring
legislative session and none is anticipated imtil the 1975
legislative session.
Amount to Include in Appropriation Request for FY 1976
The Actuar)' for the State Universities Retirement System
has certified that the minimum employer contribution re-
quired by the "Illinois Pension Code" for FY 1976 is }6.41
per cent of that portion of salaries covered by the State Uni-
versities Retirement System, and the Trustees of the System
have approved this rate. Therefore, the college and university
governing boards and other agencies covered by the System
should include this amount for employer contributions in the
State budget request for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1976.
The appropriations for retirement contributions covering the
community colleges are requested by the Illinois Community
College Board; therefore, the individual community colleges
need take no action concerning this matter other than to sup-
port the request of the Community College Board.
Credit for Prior Military Service
You may recall the correspondence during the past year
concerning SB 634, which would ( 1 ) limit the type of prior
public employment which can be used by new employees in
purchasing additional ser\'ice credit under the State Universi-
ties Retirement System, and (2) set September 1, 1974 as the
deadline for filing an application to purchase additional credit
based on prior military service. The initial deadline in the
Bill on applying for purchase of military service credit was
September I, 1973. The Pension Laws Commission later
agreed to extend the deadline until January 1, 1974, and the
sponsor of the Bill subsequently agreed to postpone the dead-
line until July 1, 1974. The Senate-House Conference Com-
mittee, which was appointed to resolve the differences in the
Senate and House versions of the Bill decided that September
1 , 1974, would be a more appropriate date. The Senate and
House adopted the Conference Committee report, and the
Bill is now awaiting action by the Governor.
We have received word that the Illinois Federation of
Teachers has suggested that its members urge the Governor
to veto the Bill. In view of the extension of the deadline on
filing to September 1, 1974, the Retirement System has recom-
mended that the Governor approve the Bill. The deadline
applies only to the filing of the application for military service
credit; it does not require payment by that date. The mem-
bers have been given ample time to file the application. Those
who are interested in purchasing the additional credit should
have met the filing requirement by this time.
Report on Employer Retirement Contributions for FY 1975
The minimum amoimt which the General Assembly should
have appropriated for FY 1975 to meet the statutory require-
ments is $83,625,800. The Governor's Budget included only
$25,004,600, which was slightly less than the amount required
to meet the State's share of the estimated benefit and expense
payments. The General Assembly appropriated $28,939,820
which was $3,935,220 more than the amount which was in-
cluded in the Governor's Budget but $54,635,980 less than the
minimum required by statute.
The minimum appropriation mandated by the statute is
the normal cost required to cover the pension benefits earned
by all employees during the year plus interest on the imfimded
liabilities for past senice. This is also the standard which the
Federal Internal Revenue Service has used in the past in de-
termining whether a private pension plan is "qualified," and
which the House Ways and Means Committee had recom-
mended as a standard for government pension plans under the
Pension Reform Bill of 1974. It is imlikely that the final ver-
sion of the Pension Reform Bill will require immediate dis-
qualification of a government pension plan, if it fails to meet
this minimum funding requirement; however, the Reform
Bill of 1974 (H.R. 2) mandates a study of state and local
government pension plans. Washington sources say the study
will not be an academic exercise, but the first step toward
e\entual legislation \\hich will set minimum funding, vesting,
and participation standards for state and local pension plans.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
Z^Ov^^f^
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
uionMKT UK THE
No. 22?r-A)i3U5fT28,(l974
Sumviary of University's Operating Budget Request for FT 197^%^^^iJ^^ofjLum\5
On July 17. 1974, President John E. Coibally Jr. pre-
sented the University's operating budget request for FY
1976 (July 1, 1975-June 30, 1976) to the Board of Trus-
tees. In his preface to the request. President Corbally
stressed the adverse effects of inflation upon the Univer-
sity and also noted that the requests contained no funds
for new programs other than for the continuation of the
planned expansion of programs in the health professions.
He also stated that the request contains no funds for
either personnel or operations beyond those needed to
attempt to meet inflationar)' pressures. The request re-
quires increased support of approximately 12 per cent
above the appropriations for FY 1975 if program expan-
sion in the health professions is included and of approxi-
mately 10 per cent above 1975 appropriations if this ex-
pansion is excluded.
A summar)' of the new funds requested is as follows —
FY 1976 Operating Budget Request
(Thousands of Dollc
>rs)
Per Cent
of Request
Personal Services — 9.5%
$15,537.5
4,272.9
277.9
59 24
Price Increases
General— 11% $2,632.6
Utilities 1,640.3
Opening New Buildings
Health Professions
Medical Center $3,940.6
College of Veterinary
Medicine 200.0
16.29
1.06
stated in the .Scope and Mission document, under continuous
analysis, will change from time to time as a result of economic
and demographic conditions, The following projections con-
tained in the FY 1976 operating budget request are based on
current conditions —
1. Inflation impact on salaries — 9.5%.
2. Inflation impact on expenses — 1 1.0%.
3. Enrollment — From a summary of enrollments from FY
1975 to FY 1980 by student level for each of the three
campuses, the following basic assumptions are made :
a. A base enrollment level of 18,200 students is planned
for the Chicago Circle Campus, with a significant shift
in student program and level. The reduction in total en-
rollment will be matched with the changing mix and
programs to alleviate the need for additional funds.
b. Continued increase of approximately 350 students per
year at the Medical Center Campuses.
c. A stable enrollment of appro.ximately 34,000 students at
the Urbana-Champaign Campus.
4. Alleviation of deficiences over a six-year period at an an-
nual funding level of $2,000,000.
To evaluate the effects of inflation on staff members of
the University of Illinois, estimates were made for varying
income levels at Urbana-Champaign, Chicago, and the United
States as a whole. Inflation rates by location and income group
are shown below.
INFLATION RATES BY INCOME LEVEL AND LOCATION
Income Level by Percentage
Bstiwale by U of I
4,140.6
Programmed Elimination
of Deficiencies $ 2,000.0
FY 1976 Request $26,228.9
Separate Items
\'eterinary Diagnosdc Laboratory
Division of Services
for Crippled Children
Remodeling Projects
Under $100,000
Cooperative Extension Service . . .
15.79
7.62
100.00
$ 33.9
1,059.7
462.5
174.8
hicovie Income Income Income Income
$7,000 $12,000 $17,000 $22,000 $30,000
Urbana-
Champaign
All 1973 10.1
Most Recent
Quarter .... 9.8
Total All Items $27,959.8
The operating budget presentation is based upon the
Scope and Mission of the University of Illinois, presented to
the Board of Trustees on May 15, 1974, as well as the con-
tinuous review of the base deficiencies. The basic assumptions
Chicago
All 1973 10.3
Most Recent
Quarter .... 9.9
United States
All 1973 10.3
Most Recent
Quarter 9.9
9.6
9.8
9.7
10.1
9.8
10.0
9.4
9.8
9.4
10.0
9.5
10.0
9.1
9.7
9.4
10.1
9.0
9.7
9.2
10.0
No Estimate
Made
In order that staff members of the University might even
partially retain the purchasing power of their salaries, the Uni-
versity must recei\e the requested salary increase money for
FY 1976. The total amount of incremental money necessary
for such an increase is $15,537,500.
The University of Illinois now is paying much higher
prices for the supplies which it purchases throughout the year.
To retain a purchasing power roughly equivalent to that pres-
ently in effect, an 1 1 per cent increase in funds used to pur-
chase goods and contracted services is necessary. The 1 1
per cent increase is based upon a conservative analysis of the
effects of inflation on the State appropriated object-of-expcndi-
ture categories, i.e., travel, equipment, contractual services,
commodities, telecommunications, and operation of automo-
tive equipment. From FY 1971 to FY 1974 the purchasing
power of the dollar used to purchase goods in these si.x cate-
gories has changed so that $1.33 today is necessary to purchase
those goods which $1.00 would buy in FY 1971. The total in-
cremental dollars necessary to fund the 1 1 per cent increase
are $2,632,600.
Utility price increases have risen considerably. It is esti-
mated that at Chicago Circle the FY 1976 price of fuel oil
will be 45 cents per gallon and the price of electricity will
increase 10 per cent. A similar increase in the cost of elec-
tricity is anticipated for FY 1976 at the Medical Center and
Urbana Campuses. In addition, the price of natural gas at
Urbana-Champaign is expected to increase approximately 20
per cent in January 1975.
No new buildings are scheduled to open in FY 1976, but
funds are requested to annualize funds for three buildings
opened in FY 1975 ($277,851). The FY 1976 request repre-
sents that portion of the operating cost which was not re-
quested in FY 1975.
The Medical Center Campus \\'ill require for FY 1975-76
the amount of $3,940,600 to continue its planned expansion of
health-related programs by 350 students. This amount includes
funds required for the groulh of the School of Basic Medical
Sciences at Urbana-Champaign and the continued develop-
ment of clinical schools at the regional locations. An FY 1976
request of $200,000 is also necessary to provide supplemental
instructional funds for students supported by federal capitation
funds at the College of Veterinary Medicine in Urbana.
Regarding programmed elimination of deficiencies, each
campus has identified the area in which needs are most press-
ing: Chicago Circle — Library; Medical Center — Library;
Urbana-Champaign — Equipment. Although the total need
in FY 1976 is $13,497,800, the University has decided that a
reasonable recovery program of these needs would be at a rate
of $2,000,000 per year. Base deficiencies, which are of a
recurring nature, are scheduled for recovery in three years
if considered by campus administrators to be the top campus
priority, and six years if not. The non-recurring deficiencies
are scheduled for recovery in nine years. The $2,000,000 is
required in FY 1976 to partially offset underfunding which
has occurred since FY 1971.
SEPARATE ITEMS
The Division of Services for Crippled Children (DSCC)
is the official state program for services to handicapped chil-
dren. Although this program is located at the Medical Center
Campus and has in the past been considered a public service
administered by the LIniversity of Illinois, its budgetary
treatment since FY 1975 is separate from the base operating
budget of the University. The budget request for the Division
of Services for Crippled Children is $1,059,700, to be em-
ployed for personal ser\'ices, price increases, hospitalization
and medical care, and increases in staff positions.
The College of Veterinary Medicine has administered and
operated the Urbana Diagnostic Laboratory on contract with
the Illinois Department of Agriculture. The contract for
FY 1975 will be $261,550. The College has also been con-
tracted by the Illinois Department of Agriculture to conduct
research on diseases of swine and cattle; in FY 1973 and
FY 1974 $102,000 was appropriated for this contract. The
University has provided support for these areas by contributing
physical facilities and manpower ($128,000 in FY 1974). In
order to assure the continuance of these activities, $33,900 in
funds is requested.
For FY 1976 the Illinois Board of Higher Education has
instructed that remodeling projects under $100,000 be in-
cluded in the operating budget request as an identified non-
recurring item. Ten such projects have been identified. All
are for the Urbana-Champaign Campus, amounting to
$462,500.
A request of $174,800 has been submitted for the Coopera-
tive Extension Ser\ice (fifteen counties in southern Illinois)
in order to intensify the work with lo\v-resource farmers; to
provide two area livestock development advisors to support
the statewide objective of developing the livestock industry
further in light of current needs; and to meet an increase in
mileage reimbursement for field staff.
Copies of the document, University of Illinois Budget
Request for Operating and Capital Funds, Fiscal Year
1976, can be found in the offices of head of departments.
Recent Actions re State of Illinois Group Health and Life Insurance
The following special notice has been issued by the
University's Insurance Office regarding an open enroll-
ment period for insuring dependents and an increase in
premituns under the State Plans and the University
Plans of the University's Health Insurance Program. The
special open enrollment period for the State Plans ends
September 8.
The State Department of Personnel awarded the health
insurance contract for the policy year July 1, 1974 to July 1,
1975, to the Blue Cross-Blue Shield organization.
The group life insurance contract \vith Crown Life In-
surance Company \vas continued at the same premiums.
HOUSE BILL 2848
The "State Employees Group Insurance Act of 1971"
was amended to provide:
1 . An open enrollment under the State Plan.
2. A contribution toward any increase in the cost of
purchasing dependent health insurance will be paid
by the State provided the increase became effective on
or after July 1, 1974. The contribution is limited to
the actual amount of the increase in premium or $7.00
per month, whichever is less.
Note: The contribution wall also be applicable to any in-
crease in the cost of the University Plan (Continental Assur-
ance Company ) .
OPEN ENROLLMENT
A special open enrollment period will be conducted during
which time you may insure your dependents imder the health
insurance programs without evidence of insurability. You may
also purchase optional life insurance under the State Plan
on the same basis.
Open EnroUment Effective Date
Period of Coverage
State Plans
I Blue Cross-Blue
Shield)
.August 8, 1974
to September 8,
1974
October 1, 1974
University Plans November 1, 1974 Januan' 1, 1975
(Continental Assurance thru November 29,
Company) 1974
PREMIUMS FOR 1974-75
University Plan (Continental .'\ssurance Company) —
The premiums for the dependent health and dental insurance
were established on January 1, 1972, and despite the increased
cost of medical care, there has been no adjustment in the
premiums. An adjustment is now required to continue the
coverage through 1975. Although the amount of the increase
has not been finalized it is anticipated the cost will not ex-
ceed the maximum contribution of $7.00 per month now
authorized by the State. This \\ill mean that your cost of in-
surance under the University Plan will remain the same if you
are eligible for the contribution.
State Plan (Blue Cross-Blue Shield) — Effective July 1,
1974, there was an adjustment in the premiums for some of
the plans available through the State and the changes are
outlined below:
Slale
Conlribu-
Cost
Employee $15.60 $22.60 — $22.60 = $ -0-
Dependents under 65, or over 65
and Ineligible for Medicare
High Option —
1 dependent 18.20 26.00 - 7.00 = 19.00
2 or more dependents 34.70 42.50 — 7.00 = 35.50
Low Option II —
2 or more dependents 18.10 21.08 — 2.88 = 18.10
Dependents 65 Years or over
Eligible for Medicare
High Option —
1 dependent 10.66 9.90 — -0- = 9.90
2 or more dependents 22.68 19.50 — -0- = 19.50
Low Option I — 1 dependent... 4.38 4.78 — .40 = 4.38
Low Option II— 1 dependent... 2.90 4.20 — 1.30 = 2.90
Sponsored Dependents 11.02 13.02 — 2.00 = 11.02
* You must be eligible for the State-paid Basic coverages to receive the con-
tribution. If you are on leave of absence without pay or otherwise eligible
to continue the basic coverage at your own expense, your cost will be those
listed in Column B.
Premiums for plans not listed above remain the same as
outlined in the State Booklet for 1973-74.
Contact the Insurance Office on your campus to enroll
dependents during the open enrollment period or if you
ha\e any questions relating to the group health and life
insurance programs.
Revision of Univei^sity Statutes re Graduate Work of Academic Staff Members
Upon recommendation of President Corbally, the
Board of Trustees at its July meeting approved a revision
of the University Statutes in regard to graduate work of
academic staff members.
This was the President's presentation to the Board :
Article IV, Section 7, of the University Statutes provides
that no person may be a candidate for an advanced degree
at the University who also holds an appointment as an assis-
tant professor, associate professor, or professor at the Univer-
sity. The intent of the language, which is identical to that
contained in the 1957 version of the Statutes, was to prevent
conflict of interest between members of ths academic staff of
professorial rank when one is also, at the same time, a candi-
date for a degree.
Developments within the University since 1957, particu-
larly in graduate faculty and degree programs at the Chicago
Circle Campus, have made it likely that a professorial staff
member might pursue an advanced degree in a department on
another campus of the University without prejudicing the
objectivity of the latter. In order to allow such action, I rec-
ommend that the Board approve provisionally the following
revision in Article I\', Section 7, of the Statutes (new lan-
guage is italicized; deleUons are in parentheses ) :
No person shall be admitted to candidacy for an ad-
vanced degree (who) on a campus of the University if he
holds an appointment as professor, associate professor, or
assistant professor in any department or division of that
campus of the University. Any person engaged in graduate
study who accepts an appointment with the rank of assis-
tant professor or higher at a campus of the University will
be dropped as a degree candidate at (this) that campus
of the University.
The Chancellors at the three campuses and the Vice Pres-
ident for Academic Development and Coordination concur in
this recommendation.
In accord with the procedures for amendment of the
Statutes, this recommendation, if approved, would be sub-
mitted to the Senates and the University Senates Conference
for their advice and subsequently submitted to the Board for
final action.
Attention — Academic Staff Retirees
Members of the academic staff who have retired or
are about to retire and who have not been con-
tacted about receiving the Faculty Letter during
retirement (if they wish) are asked to send their
name and address to the editor, Lucille Turigliatto,
272c Administration Building, Urbana, 111. 61801.
Or phone 333-6502.
Formal Decentralization of the Jane Addams School of Social Work
Another action of the Board of Trustees at its July
meeting was the approval of the recommendation for
establishment of two separate schools for the Jane
Addams School of Social Work, one at the Urbana-
Champaign Campus and one at the Chicago Circle
Campus where the program is now conducted.
Here is the text of the recommendation :
In March, 1970, the Board of Trustees approved a recom-
mendation of the Executive Committee and the entire faculty
of the Jane Addams Graduate School of Social Work' that
"two separate Schools be established, with the Urbana-
Champaign and Chicago Circle programs being conducted
under the legislative jurisdiction of the respective Senates of
these two campuses." While under the plan there was to be a
single director and a common Executive Committee, "pro-
posals relating only to the Chicago Circle school would be
sent to the Chancellor and thence to the Senate at that cam-
pus for review and approval; recommendations involving only
the Urbana-Champaign program would be sent to the Chan-
cellor and senate at that campus . . . Neither the Chancellor
nor the Senate at a given campus would be bound by actions
taken by the Chancellor or the Senate at the other campus."
The administration of the Jane Addams School of Social
Work is presently the responsibility of the Urbana-Champaign
Campus, with faculty and students on both the Urbana-
Champaign and Chicago Circle Campuses. Over the years,
both divisions of the School have grown in enrollment and
developed significantly in a programmatic sense. This growth
and development of maturity means that the Chicago division
no longer depends on or receives direction from the Urbana
division. Much of the joint effort of previous years no longer
exists and the two divisions have developed along different
paths. This has been viewed as appropriate in view of the
different but complementary campus missions and the differ-
ence in population served.
In the past several years, the two divisions have achieved
integration within the academic affairs of the individual cam-
puses. In practice, budgetary decisions involving each campus
'By Board of Trustees action on June 20, 1973, the word
"Graduate" was deleted from the name of the School concur-
rent with the introduction of the new Bachelor of Social Work
programs into the Chicago Circle and Urbana-Champaign
divisions of the School.
division have been made separately by each Chancellor. In
addition, recommendations as to promotion and retention of
faculty within the two divisions have been transmitted sepa-
rately by each Chancellor to the President. Both the old
M.S.W. degree and the new B.S.W. degree offered by each
division of the School are of concern to each campus senate
and the senate of each campus certifies to the Board of
Trustees those students who have successfully fulfilled re-
quirements for the degrees. The relatively new doctoral pro-
gram was approved by the Board of Higher Education as a
joint program between the campuses. Except in this last in-
stance, each division has been acting, in fact, as an autono-
mous unit with an appropriate amount of inter-campus
consultation.
In the light of these developments, the Chancellors have
now recommended the following steps to formally decentral-
ize the School (the changes would be effective September 1,
1974):
1. the establishment of the Jane Addams School of Social
Work at Urbana-Champaign and the Jane Addams
School of Social Work at Chicago Circle as adminis-
tratively independent schools reporting to the respective
chancellors;
2. the appointment of Professor Mark Hale, presently
Director of the Jane Addams School of Social Work,
as Director of the Jane Addams School of Social Work
at Urbana-Champaign and the appointment of Pro-
fessor George Magner, presently Associate Director of
the Jane Addams School of Social Work, as Director
of the Jane Addams School of Social Work at Clii-
cago Circle;
3. the establishment of a joint faculty committee ap-
pointed by the Vice President for Academic Develop-
ment and Coordination in consultation with the Chan-
cellors to advise him on the nature and extent of the
interaction of the two Schools with advice as to
changes, if any, which would be in the best interests of
both Schools and the University;
4. a charge to the present faculty doctoral committee to
recommend in 1974-75 whether the joint doctoral pro-
gram is in the best interests of the Schools or whether
it should be replaced by separate doctoral programs.
The Vice President for Academic Development and Co-
ordination endorses this recommendation.
New Director of University Office for Capital Programs
With the retirement of Vernon L. Kretschmer this
month as Director of Capital Programs in the University
Office for Capital Programs, the Board of Trustees ap-
proved the appointment of Joseph Frederick Green to
succeed him. Mr. Green has been Associate Director of
Capital Programs since 1972.
Mr. Kretschmer has served the University in many
capacities since his appointment as Illini Union Building
Manager in January, 1940, including directorship of the
Illini Union, Housing, Auxiliary Services, and Plant
and Services.
Mr. Green, a native of Mattoon, attended the Uni-
versity briefly in 1944 before entering the United States
Maritime Service. He was graduated from the U.S.
Military Academy in 1950 and served in the U.S. Air
Force for four years. He was engaged in field engineer-
ing in Illinois and California and as project manager for
development of Lincoln Square in Urbana for Carson,
Pirie, Scott and Company before joining the Uni\-ersity
staff in 1967 as assistant to the Director of the Physical
Plant. He served as Campus Director of Physical Plant
Planning for Chicago Circle Campus during 1968-1972.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
Gift and Exchange Division
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 251, October 16, 1974
The Uiiraiy of Uw
NOV 5 1974
University of Illinois
Changes in University Policies on Transfer of Sick Leave, Vacation Credit
President John E. Corbally Jr. sent the following let-
ter to the three Chancellors in regard to changes in Uni-
versity policies applying to the transfer of sick leave and
vacation credit of staff members, academic and non-
academic :
Ch.vncellor Begando
Chancellor Chesto.x
Chancellor Peltason
Gentlemen :
On June 25, 1974, I wrote you seeking your advice on
recommendations I had received from the Special Committee
on Professional Personnel concerning changes in University
fwlicies related to the transferability of sick leave and vacation
credit. I have now received from each of you support for the
recommendations. Accordingly, the following policies now
have my approval and should be put in force immediately.
I. Transfer of Sick Leave Credit
.■\. Sick leave credit will be transferred when a staff mem-
ber changes to an academic appointment from a non-
academic position within the University.
Under the current academic disability leave provisions,
it is provided that a staff member may accumulate up
to si.x months of sick leave credit. An employee trans-
ferring from nonacademic status to academic status
may transfer alt accumulated sick leave credit, but
should that credit exceed the allowable maximum, no
further sick leave may be accumulated. If the credit
transferred is less than allowable maximum, additional
sick leave may be accumulated up to that amount.
This policy is to be effective upon approval and is lo
cover current academic employees who in past years
have transferred from nonacademic to academic status.
.All transfers of sick leave credit require the presenta-
tion of appropriate records \erifying sick leave accumu-
lated under the nonacademic system.
B. Sick leave credit will be transferred when a staff mem-
ber changes to a nonacademic apjxiintment from an
academic position within the University.
This policy is to be effective upon approval and is to
cover current nonacademic employees who in past
years have transferred from academic to nonacademic
status. All transfers of sick leave credit require the
presentation of appropriate records verifying sick
leave accumulated under the academic system.
II. Transfer of Accumulated Vacation
A. When an employee transfers from a nonacademic posi-
tion to an academic position, any vacation earned under
the nonacademic system will ordinarily be taken or
paid for by the employing nonacademic unit before
the employee transfers to the academic position.
In cases in which the employee prefers vacation time
but taking it prior to transfer would create a hardship,
arrangements may be made for transfer of all or part
of the accumulated vacation provided that these ar-
rangements are acceptable to the two administrative
units and the employee. In no case can a transfer of
accumulated vacation result in a loss of accumulated
benefits, except that at the time a staff member retires,
resigns, or otherwise terminates his employment with
the University his accumulated vacation may not ex-
ceed 46 working days.
B. When an employee transfers from an academic posi-
tion to a nonacademic position, any vacation earned
under the academic system will ordinarily be taken or
paid for by the employing academic unit before the
employee transfers to the nonacademic position.
In cases in which the employee prefers vacation time
but taking it prior to transfer would create a hardship,
arrangements may be made for transfer of all or part
of the accumulated vacation provided that these ar-
rangements are acceptable to the two administrative
units and the employee. In no case can a transfer of
accumulated vacation result in a loss of accumulated
benefits, except that at the time a staff member retires,
resigns, or otherwise terminates his employment with
the University his accumulated vacation may not ex-
ceed that provided for in the Policy and Rula —
Nonacademic.
John E. Corbally Jr.
President
Administrative C/ianges at the Chicago Campuses
The Board of Trustees at its September 18 meeting
approved an administrative reorganization at the Medi-
cal Center Campus, the subsequent appointment of a
Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services at that cam-
pus, and the appointment of a Director of Business
AfTairs to serve both the Medical Center Campus and
the Chicago Circle Campus.
In regard to the reorganization at the Medical Cen-
ter, this was President Corbally's recommendation :
The revision of the general administrative structure of the
University approved in principle by the Board of Trustees on
April 19, 1972, and the substantial expansion, both achieved
and anticipated, of the programs and ser\ices offered by the
Medical Center Campus are the primary reasons for recom-
mending an administrative reorganization at the Medical
Center Campus at this time.
The focus of the proposed reorganization is upon a
decentralization of the current responsibilities undertaken
by the Office of the Chancellor. Central to the plan is the
inclusion of three Vice Chancellors in the administrative
structure :
1. the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
2. the Vice Chancellor for Administrative Ser\ices
3. the Vice Chancellor for Health Services
The Office of the \^ce Chancellor for Academic Affairs
will be established in accordance with the University of Illi-
nois Statutes which contain the following:
"Article III, Section 1(e): There shall be a vice chan-
cellor for academic affairs or equivalent officer at each
campus. He shall be the chief academic officer, under the
Chancellor, for the campus and will serve as chief execu-
tive officer in the absence of the Chancellor. He shall be
appointed biennially by the Board of Trustees on recom-
mendation of the Chancellor and the President, who
shall have the advice of the Senate on the occasion of
each appointment."
Upon approval of the plan for the reorganization, a search for
candidates will be conducted. In due course a recommendation
for appointment of a person to fill the position of \'ice Chan-
cellor for Academic .Affairs will be brought to the Board of
Trustees.
Establishment of the Office of the Mce Chancellor for
.Administrative Services will permit the Office of the Chan-
cellor to delegate the responsibility for se\eral units pro-
viding important supporting ser\ices. A recommendation for
appointment of the Mce Chancellor for Administrative Ser-
vices is included among the agenda items to come before the
Board at this meeting.
The Office of the \'ice Chancellor for Health Services
now exists. Thus, only a further definition and clarification
of the role of the \'ice Chancellor for Health Services is in-
volved in the current proposal.
The Chancellor at the Medical Center recommends ap-
proval in principal by the Board of Trustees. The Vice Presi-
dent for Planning and Allocation and the \'ice President for
.Academic Development and Coordination concur.
Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services
Following Board approval of the reorganization
President Corbally then recommended that David W.
Bonham. Director of Business Affairs at the Medical
Center, be named Mce Chancellor for Administrative ^H
Services, effective October 1, 1974. ^B
Initially the Mce Chancellor will have administrative
jurisdiction over the Physical Plant Department, the _
Office of Business Affairs (this office reports to the ^H
Mce President for Planning and Allocation but functions ^^
in the ser\-ice of the Medical Center Campus), the Per-
sonnel Sen.'ices Office, the Campus Services Division, the
Office of Administrative Data Processing, the Safety
Office, and such other administrative service units as
the Chancellor may assign from time to time.
He will report directly to the Chancellor on policy
matters related to the units under his administrative
jurisdiction, and provide budget allocations and policy
guidelines for those administrative units reporting to
him.
Mr. Bonham, a native of Galesburg, is an alumnus of
the University and a veteran of the U.S. Na\T. He
worked summers for the Illinois State Geological Survey
during student years and following graduation in 1950
was a systems analyst for the U.S. Rubber Company at
Mishawaka, Ind. In 1953 he joined the University staff
at Urbana as a senior accountant, became a procedures
and systems analyst, then assistant to the auditor before
moving to the Medical Center Campus in 1964 as assis-
tant to the business manager. He became business man-
ager in 1965 and Director of Business Affairs in 1968.
Director of Business Affairs, Chicago Campuses
With the installation of a single payroll system for all
three campuses, a single budget accounting system now
is being implemented. To further this administrative
consolidation, the Board of Trustees approved the nam-
ing of a single Director of Business Affairs to serve
both Chicago campuses. He will report directly to the
\'ice President for Planning and Allocation.
James E. Osbom, Director of Business Affairs at
Chicago Circle since 1969, has been appointed Director
of Business Affairs for the Chicago campuses. A native of
Pana, he received a Bachelors Degree from the Univer-
sity in 1938 and sen-ed in the Navy during 1941-45 and
again in 1951-53. He owned and operated the Southern ^^
Tea Room in Champaign for a year before his Navy ^H
service. He joined the University staff in 1945 as senior ^^
purchasing assistant, became purchasing agent for the
Galesburg Undergraduate Division the following year, ^^
then served successively as acting assistant director of ^|
purchases, assistant director, and finally director at Ur-
bana before going to Chicago in 1961 as business man-
ager of the Chicago Colleges and Divisions. He was
named business manager at Chicago Circle in 1965.
^t
Gift and Exchange Division
220a Library
3 • copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 252, October 25, 1974
TJie Initiation, Review, and Approval of New Units of Instruction'
OFFICE OF VICE PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COORDINATION
At the University of Illinois the Senates determine
matters of educational policy, subject to final approval
by the Board of Trustees. Administrative officers through-
out the University structure — from the department head
to the President — participate directly in the formulation
of such policy through the allocation of budget and
space, through recommendations to the Board of Trust-
ees concerning faculty proposals for new programs, and
through the initiation of suggestions for appropriate
review.
The purpose of this memorandum is to describe the
review process by which faculty proposals for new units
of instruction are approved for implementation. Estab-
lished University policy and regulations of the Illinois
Board of Higher Education which influence the process
are described. The nature of responsibilities delegated to
the various participants in the review process is discussed,
with attention to the rationale behind the particular
assignment of responsibility. The final section details the
procedures instituted for the orderly and timely process-
ing of proposals subsequent to approval by the Senate.
POLICY STATEMENTS
Senate proposals are implemented with the concur-
rence of the President, usually in consultation with the
Secretary of the Board of Trustees and with the Vice
President for .Academic Development and Coordination.
The President takes action on recommendations routinely
forwarded from the offices of the campus Chancellor.
The Office of .Academic Development and Coordination
reviews those items referred to the President to deter-
mine whether or not they fall within any of those cate-
gories of new programs described below which require
the approval not only of the central administration but
also of the Board of Trustees and/or the Illinois Board
of Higher Education.
* Including, but not limited to, new, expanded, or otherwise
substantially modified depanments, colleges, schools, institutes,
degrees, curricula, and majors.
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
The organization of University-wide responsibilities
attempts to maximize the educational efl'ectiveness and
efficiency of the programs of each of the campuses. Fac-
ulty Letter No. 230, May 10, 1972, spoke to eight spe-
cific functions of the central administration, six of which
relate directly to the role of the central administration
in the approval process for new, axpgnded, and improved
units of instruction, particularly those requiring State
Board and/or Board of Trustees approval. Enunciation
of institutional mission, development of plans for attain-
ment of that mission, and evaluation of the success in
meeting that mission constitute the fundamental respon-
sibilities of the central administration — fundamental re-
sponsibilities which, in the context of academic planning,
depend heavily upon the interest, initiative, and support
of campus faculty and administrators.
\'ested in the system-wide academic officer is central
administrative responsibility for the development, coordi-
nation, and evaluation of academic policies, procedures,
and activities. It is the academic Vice President's respon-
sibility not only to ultimately articulate the academic
scope and mission of the University system, but also
to plan for its realization. Thus, the determination of
University priorities and resource requirements for new
programs is a major task within the academic Vice Presi-
dent's office. The review of new, expanded, and im-
proved program proposals by the Office of the President
will be coordinated by the Vice President for Academic
Development and Coordination working with the Vice
President for Planning and Allocation.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
All new degree programs must be approved by the
Board of Trustees, which acts upon recommendations
submitted by the President. The categories of academic
items requiring central administration and Board of
Trustees approval are as follows: new degree programs,
new majors, new or revised units, substantial curricular
revisions, intra-institutional arrangements, inter-institu-
tional arrangements, and educational policy generally
(including admissions).' Items which come to the atten-
tion of the Vice President through the referral process
from the Chancellor to the President will be reviewed
and steps taken to assure appropriate authorization. The
central administration will consider recommendations
from the Chancellors' offices that a particular item, while
not requiring Board of Trustees action, go to the Trustees
as a report item.
ILLINOIS BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION
Campus recommendations regarding action by the
Illinois Board of Higher Education are considered in the
context of State Board guidelines. The act which estab-
lished the Illinois Board of Higher Education provides
that the governing boards of the state universities:
"shall not hereafter undertake the establishment of
any new unit of instruction, research or public ser-
vice without the approval of the Board. The term,
'new unit of instruction, research or public service,'
includes the establishment of a college, school, divi-
sion, institute, department or other unit in any field
of instruction, research or public ser\ice not there-
tofore included in the program of the institution,
and includes the establishment of any new branch or
campus of the institution. The term does not include
reasonable and moderate extensions of existing cur-
ricula, research or public service programs which
have a direct relationship to existing programs; and
the Board may, under its rule making power define
the character of such reasonable and moderate
extensions."
At its regular meeting of April 3, 1962, the State
Board gave final approval to a rule defining "reasonable
and moderate extensions" and established guidelines re-
lated to that question. In 1968 the Board amended the
1962 rule so that approval of the Bachelor of Arts degree
in a specific discipline implied approval of the Bachelor
of Science degree in that discipline and vice versa, with
s'milar joint approval being extended to the Master of
.\rts and Master of Science degrees.
At its regular meeting of November 9, 1972, the
Board approved an amendment to the rule defining "rea-
sonable and moderate extensions" as that rule pertains
to changes in the names of existing programs, depart-
ments, or degrees. The text of the rule as adopted in
1962 and as amended in 1972 is as follows:
"Reasonable and moderate extensions" of existing
[instructional] programs are hereby defined as those
which are directly related to existing programs, and
(a) which consist of new and additional courses
of instruction within an existing academic depart-
ment or division which do not involve a new de-
gree, certificate, or academic major . . .^
' Guidelines for Administrative Procedures, March 1, 1973.
-Subparagraphs (b), (b)(i), and (b)(ii) of the rule deal
with research and public service activities.
Any change in the name of an existing unit of in-
struction, research, or public service (including but
not limited to departments, colleges, schools, insti-
tutes, degrees, and majors; and excluding individual
courses) which by the commonly accepted standards
of the academic community denotes a substantive
change in the unit itself, shall not be considered a
reasonable and moderate extension, and must there-
fore still be submitted to the Board for approval as
a new unit of instruction, research, or public service.
In particular any change in name which denotes a
change in discipline or academic major, or a change
from an arts and science discipline to a similarly
named professional discipline or vice versa, or a
change from a teacher education curriculum to a
similarly named professional or arts and science cur-
riculum or vice versa, or a change in level of degree
or level of organization, must still be submitted to
the Board for approval as a new unit.
In regard to the planning of programs for any new
campuses which have been or may be established, the
Board so far has expected the governing boards to submit
for approval any new units of instruction, research or
public service (including a college, school division, de-
partment, or institute) on a given campus even though
similar programs are already in existence at another
campus within the same system.
Further, in order to assist the Board in comprehend-
ing the scope and nature of its planning function, each
institution is requested to submit annually, not later than
March 1, a list of all new courses, new research contracts,
and new public service activities which were initiated
during the twelve-month period ending on the previous
December 31 and which were considered "reasonable
and moderate extensions" of existing programs and as
such were not presented to the Board for approval. Each
institution is requested to report at the time of System
Board approval any change in the name of an existing
unit of instruction, research, or public service (except
individual courses) which that institution or system plans
to implement as a reasonable and moderate extension.
Current programmatic priorities established by the
Illinois Board of Higher Education provide guidelines for
the review of academic programs. Those priorities have
been presented as follows :
"1. Health-related programs at all levels;
2. Programs of excellence and innovation at the under-
graduate level, programs aimed at improving under-
graduate instruction; 'Report of the Committee on
New Institutions'; Less Time, More Options (Car-
negie Commission) and Report on Higher Education
(Newman Report) ;
3. Programs which respond to the special needs of those
who have been historically excluded from higher edu-
cation by virtue of age, race, sex, economic or social
status or geographic location ;
4. Programs of cooperation between public and private
institutions;
5. Programs which respond to specific recommendations
in Master Plan — Phase III.
"When all institutions are facing tight fiscal situa-
tions, the review of new program proposals must give
special care and scrutiny to the basic questions asked
historically of all new programs: Are the resources avail-
able adequate? Is there clear evidence of need? Does the
new program duplicate other similar existing programs?
"3
and, in regard to doctoral program proposals through
June, 1975:
"1) No new doctoral program of any kind be considered
unless a compelling need within the State for that
program can be established ;
2) additionally, no new Ph.D. program be considered if
a similar program exists in a public or private insti-
tution of higher education within Illinois . . ."^
PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF PROPOSED NEW
OR REVISED UNITS OF INSTRUCTION
In general, the initiation and review of a new or re-
vised academic unit is a sequential legislative process
which takes place at several levels within the University
organization: department, college (including the Gradu-
ate College), Chancellor, Senate, University Senates
Conference, central administration, Board of Trustees.
.\ proposal usually originates in a department, the
primary unit of education and administration. (Occa-
sionally an interdepartmental or intercampus committee
or "division" will initiate and after approval administer
a new instructional program.) .\fter re\'iew and approval
by the departmental executive or advisory committee,
the proposal is sent to the dean of the college.
The dean of the college refers proposals to the col-
lege committee on educational policy (or committee on
courses and curricula) . Major changes are referred, with
committee recommendation, to the general faculty of the
college. In certain colleges, the committee on courses and
curricula is authorized to act for the faculty on proposals
for individual course changes, deletions, or additions.
The Graduate College has jurisdiction in the case of
all programs which lead to graduate degrees. The Grad-
uate College review, which normally is undertaken by a
committee appointed specifically for each program and
representative of all colleges having an interest in that
program, concerns itself with the academic cjuality of
proposed programs.'^ Individual courses that carry both
undergraduate and graduate credit must be approved by
both the cognizant undergraduate college and by the
Graduate College.
^ Illinois Board of Higher Education, March 7, 1972.
* Illinois Board of Higher Education, December 4, 1973.
^ "At each campus, a Graduate College shall have jurisdiction
over all programs leading to graduate degrees as determined
by Senate action and approved by the Board of Trustees. It is
the responsibility of the Graduate College to develop and safe-
guard standards of graduate work and to promote and assist in
the advancement of research in all fields." University of Illi-
nois Statutes, V, Sec. 1(a).
Following approval at the college le\el, the proposal
is submitted to the Chancellor's office. The Chancellor
refers it to the Senate Committee on Educational Policy
(at Chicago Circle, the Senate Committee on Academic
Programs) which reviews it and recommends action,
favorable or otherwise, to the Senate." Deliberations in
Senate committee or full Senate meetings are predomi-
nately concerned with the educational policy implications
and academic merit of a proposed new unit of instruc-
tion. It is to the Senates that responsibility for the assur-
ance of a quality program, particularly at the under-
graduate level, is delegated. When approved by a given
Senate, the proposal is referred to the University Senates
Conference, and, at the same time, back to the Chan-
cellor's office.
The University Senates Conference, consisting of
elected representatives of the Senates of all three cam-
puses, considers the proposal in the context of system-
wide University educational policy. If a proposal involves
more than one campus, it will be referred by the Senates
Conference to the other Senate or Senates concerned.
A proposal always will be referred to one or both of the
other Senates if their representatives so request. If the
Senates disagree, the Senates Conference will first seek
agreement on the part of the Senates, but will make its
own recommendation to the President if no such agree-
ment can be reached.' Clearance by the University Sen-
ates Conference is a prerequisite to either Board of
Trustees or State Board action.
A key element in the process is review of the proposal
by the Office of the Chancellor. Prior to the submission
^ "Each Senate may exercise legislative functions in matters of
educational policy affecting the University as a whole or its
own campus only. No such Senate action shall take effect until
it has been submitted to the University Senates Conference
. . . and either approved by the Board of Trustees itself or ap-
proved in a manner agreed to by the Board.
"Except as otherwise provided in these Statutes, each Senate
shall determine for its campus matters of educational policy
including but not limited to: requirements for admission to
the several colleges, schools and other teaching divisions; gen-
eral requirements for degrees and certificates; relations be-
tween colleges, schools and other teaching divisions; the aca-
demic calendar; and educational policy on student affairs."
University of Illinois Statutes, II, Sec. 1(b), (c).
' "The University Senates Conference shall review all matters
acted upon by each Senate. The Conference shall determine
whether Senate actions requiring implementation or further
consideration by officials or other groups within the University
have been referred to the appropriate officials or groups. The
Conference itself may make any original or additional referral
it deems advisable, and may append its comments and recom-
mendations. Should the Conference find a matter acted upon
by one of the Senates to be of concern to one or more of the
other Senates, it shall refer the matter and the action to the
other Senate(s) . . .The Conference may act and may autho-
rize its Executive Committee to act as an advisory group to
the Board of Trustees (through the President), the President,
other administrative officials, and the several Senates on mat-
ters of University-wide concern." University of Illinois Stat-
utes, ll,Stc.2{h), (c).
of a proposal to the Office of the President, the Chan-
cellor has the responsibility for ensuring a review that
evaluates the proposed unit of instruction from such
standpoints as quality, scholarly importance, student
need, job market demands, relationship to campus pri-
orities in scope and mission, and resource requirements
and availabilities. The Chancellor forwards the proposal,
with his own recommendations for disposition, to the
President, to the Vice President for Academic Develop-
ment and Coordination, and to the Secretary of the
Board of Trustees, in line with the referral procedure
for all academic Senate items.
The President and the Vice President arrange for
appropriate review by the staff of the Vice President for
Planning and Allocation and by other offices or com-
mittees as appropriate. This review may include consul-
tation with the University Academic Council, the Uni-
versity Planning Council, the University Council on
Graduate Education and Research or other relevant all-
University councils.
The review by the Office of the President emphasizes
the total needs, resources, and priorities of the University.
It includes an analysis of the "relationship (of the pro-
posed item) to the University's mission and long-range
planning assumptions" and "the general long-term re-
source implications."^ There is an examination of the
programmatic content of the proposal in the light of the
priorities established in the University Scope and Mission
statement; the budgetaiy impact of the proposed item;
and its impact on enrollment, faculty hiring, and space
utilization. The nine criteria outlined in the Scope and
Amission statement will be applied, particularly at the
advanced graduate and professional levels. The Vice
President for Academic De\elopment and Coordination
reviews with the other Chancellors any intercampus im-
plications, and, as a final step, advises the President
concerning action to be taken on the recommendations.
The President reports to the relevant Chancellor (s)
on the final disposition to be made of the recommenda-
tions. The recommendations of the Senate, as modified
by the review by the University Senates Conference and
at the Chancellor and central administration levels, are
submitted by the President with his own recommenda-
tions to the Board of Trustees for final internal action.
The President is required to submit a proposal approved
by the Senates or the University Senates Conference to
the Trustees, but may recommend that it be modified or
rejected — for policy reasons or due to lack of funds or
facilities. After an item requiring State Board approval
has been approved by Board of Trustees' action, the item
is formally submitted to the State Board by the Office
of the Secretary of the Board of Trustees. Revisions to
proposals after University Senates Conference or Board
of Trustees approval, either at the initiation of the State
Board or as a result of negotiations with the State Board,
will be made at the discretion of the Vice President for
Academic Development and Coordination in consulta-
^ Scope and Mission, May, 1974.
tion with the relevant Senate Educational Policy or Aca-
demic Programs committee and reported by him to the
various University offices concerned.
In an institution of the size and complexity of the
University of Illinois, the process outlined, although
time-consuming, is essential. Not infrequently in the
course of their journey through the legislative process,
proposals are modified, rejected, or abandoned, in whole
or in part. The total process is designed so that the
intrinsic educational worth of new programs is weighed ^^
by the bodies most competent to make such evaluations ^0
— the various committees of the entire University fac-
ulty. Administrative review at any level within the Uni-
versity structure presumes thorough academic review and
sound faculty advice regarding the educational worth of
a proposed new or revised unit of instruction. The fac-
ulty assume this fundamental responsibility for academic
excellence in departmental. Senate committee. Senate,
and Graduate College settings.
Given this tradition of faculty responsibility in edu-
cational policy, administrative appraisal and recommen-
dation will not normally be concerned with the substan-
tive aspects of intrinsic educational policy. However,
before a proposal is finally approved and implemented
or forwarded to the Illinois Board of Higher Education,
it is evaluated in terms of the total needs, resources, and
priorities of the campus as judged by the campus admin-
istration and in terms of the total needs, resources, and
priorities of the University as judged by the University
administration and by the governing body, the Board
of Trustees.
PROCEDURES FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS FOR REVIEW
AND/OR APPROVAL BY THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AND/OR ILLINOIS BOARD
OF HIGHER EDUCATION"
Proposals to Be Submitted
Proposals for the following should be submitted in the
format required by the State Board to the Office of the
President for review, approval, and, generally, forward-
ing to the Board of Trustees and the Illinois Board of
Higher Education :
1 . New or revised units of instruction ;
a. New degree programs (graduate and undergradu-
ate) , including new curricula ;" ^t
h. New majors;" ^^
^ While all Senate items may be implemented only with the
approval of the Office of the President, these procediues apply
to those academic Senate items requiring approval beyond that
office — by the Board of Trustees and/or the Illinois Board
of Higher Education.
'° Nomenclature may differ from one campus, college, or de-
partment to another; however, the terms "curriculum" and
"major" designate and include those sub-units of academic de-
gree programs one or two steps removed from the degree itself,
whether labeled fields of concentration, specializations, etc.
c. Substantial re\isions" of degree piogiani, curricular,
or major requirements;
d. New academic administrative units;
e. Reorganizations of academic administrative units ;'-
2. New or substantially revised units of research ;
3. New or substantially revised units of public service.
In addition to the above, formal intra-institutional
and inter-institutional agreements require the approval
of the Office of the President, the Board of Trustees,
and, possibly, the Illinois Board of Higher Education.
Similarly, changes in ongoing programs which have sig-
nificant impact on enrollment, budget, faculty hiring, or
on librar>-, space, and/or facility requirements must be
reviewed and approved by the Office of the President
and possibly by the Board of Trustees and the State
Board. Agreements and proposals for these changes
should be submitted as described in this document in
the format appropriate to the nature of the proposal.
Format for Submission
Seven copies of each request for approval should be
submitted to the Office of the \'ice President for Aca-
demic Development and Coordination. All requests
should include the following:
••The guideline for campus determination is the IBUE rule
on "reasonable and moderate extensions."
'^ This category includes those reorganizations which would
require IBHE approval under the "name change" regulation
of the State Board.
1 . The title page form "Program Approval Request" ;
2. A statement of clearances given the proposal on the
campus at the department, college, Senate, Graduate
College, etc. levels;
3. A discussion by the Chancellor of the relationship of
the proposed program to the campus statement of
scope and mission, its priority level within that general
plan if it requires new resources or represents major
campus reallocation, and its relationship to the stated
priorities of the campus;
4. A draft Board item if Board of Trustees approval is
required ;
5. The completed forms required by the Illinois Board
of Higher Education; in individual instances, only
portions of the form may be relevant.
Preliminary review of the proposal may establish a
need for information beyond that submitted. In that case
a request will be made for those additional materials.
Once final approval is given by the Board of Trustees,
fifteen additional copies will be requested of the campus
(with any modifications agreed to) for foi"warding to
the State Board.
Schedule of Submission
Proposals may be submitted for review at any time
during the year. However, proposals which will affect
the FY 1977 fiscal year budget request should be for-
warded for review and approval to the Office of the
President no later than March 15, 1975, in order to re-
PROGRAM REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS
CHANCELLOR
CAMPUS
(2)
UNIVERSITY
SENATES
CONFERENCE
(4)
LONG RANGE .
^ PLANNING "^
1(3)
POLICY ANALYSIS
AND EVALUATION
-♦ REVIEW
-»• INFORMATION
(7)
VICE PRESIDENT
FOR ACADEMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND
COORDINATION
t 1
(6)
SENATES
CONFERENCE
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
(10)
COMMISSION
OF SCHOLARS
(8)
(9)
SECRETARY
BOT
Li (5)
BOARDS
ceive adequate consideration before the construction of
the FY 1977 budget request in late spring or early sum-
mer of 1975.
The Review Process
A flow chart of the process of review and approval
at the University, Board of Trustees, and Illinois Board
of Higher Education levels of review appears on page 5.
The Chancellor's Office ( 1 ) has the following major
responsibilities with respect to this process:
a. Ensuring the review of the proposal as required at the
campus level ;
b. Reviewing the stated need for the proposed program,
establishing whether or not the campus has the capa-
bilities (financial and academic) to build and main-
tain a high-quality program in this area, reviewing and
approving the projected resource requirements for the
program, and defining its relationship to the campus
scope and mission;
c. Ensuring the submission of the proposal to the Univer-
sity Senates Conference (2), as required;
d. Submitting the proposal to the Office of the President,
including a formal request to the President and, in the
format described above, to the Vice President for
Academic Development and Coordination with an
information copy to the Secretary of the Board of
Trustees (5). (Included in Format for Submission
section.)
e. Preparing and submitting, upon request by the Vice
President, to the Board of Trustees office fifteen copies
of the finally approved format for referral to the Illi-
nois Board of Higher Education.
The Vice President for Academic Development and
Coordination (3) has the following major responsibilities
for the review of proposals :
a. Determination of the final level of approval required
for a given proposal (in consultation with the Secretary
of the Board of Trustees) ;
b. Review of the proposal for completeness of informa-
tion;
c. Coordination of the review of the proposal by other
units (4) in the Office of the President (Vice President
for Planning and Allocation, Budget and Long-Range
Planning offices) and, as necessary, by all-University
councils or committees;
d. Submission of an information copy to the Secretary of
the Board of Trustees (5) and to the University Man-
agement Information System office (6) ;
e. P'inal review of the proposal and of comments by other
offices;
f. Recommendation to the President.
The President (7) and the Secretary of the Board
(5) have responsibility for submission to the Board of
Trustees (8) and for notification of the action of the
Board.
Subsequent to approval by the Board of Trustees and
when required, the Secretary of the Board and the Vice
President for Academic Development and Coordination
are responsible for the following :
Vice President for
AcacJemic Development
and Coordination
Determination of any
additional documenta-
tion required;
c) Negotiations, as re-
quired, with the staff
of the Illinois Board of
Higher Education;*
Secretary,
Board of Trustees
b) Formal submission of
the request to the Illi-
nois Board of Higher
Education (9) ;
d) Notification to those
involved of the formal
action of the Illinois
Board of Higher
Education.
* The Vice President would ordinarily involve campus aca-
demic officers and faculty in such discussions; should the
negotiations result in changes to the proposal approved by the
faculty Senate concerned, the University Senates Conference,
and the Board of Trustees, the Vice President for Academic
Development and Coordination will determine whether such
changes are significant enough to require review and re-
approval by these University bodies.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 272c Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Gift and Exchange Division
220a Library
3 copies)
DCU8RARY0FTNE
JAN 2 4 1975
UNIVERSITY OF ILUNOIS
Trnsfccs Approve Amendment of FY 1976 Operating Budget Request
Meeting on die Chicago Circle Campus November
13, the Board of Trustees among other actions approved
an amendment of the University's Operating Budget
Request for Fiscal Year 1976 in regard to salary increases.
The Board had initially approved the Operating Budget
Request at its September 18 meeting.
This was the recommendation offered to the Board
by President John E. Corbally :
On September 18, 1974, the Board of Trustees approved
an operating budget request for Fiscal Year 1976 which in-
cluded salar\' increase funds in an amount to provide a\erage
increases of 9.5 per cent. .\t that time it was clear that eco-
nomic conditions continued to be unstable and that, while
the assumptions which supported the salary increase request
would remain valid, updated information related to those as-
sumptions could change the amounts required to meet salary
needs of University personnel.
.\s of this date, a number of new studies have been com-
pleted concerning all types of salary levels, and the analysis
of the cost-of-living impact by level of salary has been up-
dated for the quarter ending September 30, 1974, and for the
year to that date. This analysis shows clearly that the impact
of inflation on the "market basket comparison" for both the
recent quarter and year is between 11.9 per cent and 12.1
per cent. This result is, as expected, not significantly different
from the recently-published Consumer Price Index.
It is also clear from studies and comparisons which are
incorporated into the President's Report at the November,
1974, meeting of the Board of Trustees that a deficiency in
salary levels for all categories and all campuses exists with
respect to state and national comparisons.
It is therefore concluded that any increase of less than
12 per cent will not only cause the University to lag behind
the measured cost of living, but indeed would increase the al-
ready-existing salary deficiency level at the University of
Illinois.
The cuncntly-appro\ed FY 1976 operating budget request
seeks $26.9 million in additional support, an increase of 12.6
per cent on the base of FY 1975. If medically-related expan-
sion programs are removed from the request, the increase is
10.4 per cent. An increase from 9.5 per cent to 12 per cent
for personal services adds $3.7 million, for a total increase
o\er 1975 of 14.3 per cent (12.1 per cent without the medi-
cally-related expansion ) . Table 1 reflects these changes in
dollars and in percentages. (See page 2)
It is clear that the economy remains unstable and it cannot
be assumed that even these current data will remain correct
as the appropriations process for Fiscal Year 1976 moves
along toward action in June, 1975. We will continue to moni-
tor the appropriate data and to bring to the Board quarterly
reports of our salary needs for 1976. At this time, it is essential
that we amend the request which is pending before the Board
of Higher Education so that Board will have the benefit of
current data. These data show that the rationale which origi-
nally led me to recommend salary increases for Fiscal Year
1976 averaging 9.5 per cent now supports increases averaging
12 per cent.
I, therefore, recommend that the operating budget request
for Fiscal Year 1976 be amended to include personal services
increases averaging 12 per cent and that this amendment be
transmitted to the Board of Higher Education. I further rec-
ommend that the studies which led to this amendment be
continued and that this Board be prepared to for\vard further
recommendations when and if the data warrant such
recommendations.
Toble 1 — FY 1976 Operating Budget Request
(Thousands of Dollars)
Per Cent of
Request
Personal Sendees — 12.0%' $19,236.3 62.89
Price Increases
General — 1 1% $2,632.6
Utilities 2,275.2
4.907.8 16.05
Open New Buildings 184.0 .61
Health Professions
Medical Center 3,940.6
College of Veterinaiy
Medicine 200.0
4.140.6 13.53
Student Loan Matching
Funds 121.5 .39
Programmed Elimination
of Deficiencies 2,000.0 6.53
FY 1976 Request $30,590.2 100.00
Increase Over FY 1975 Base 14.3%
Separate Items:
Veterinary' Diagnostic Lalioratory". . $ 39.6
Division of Sen'ices for
Crippled Children' 1,076.4
Remodeling Projects
Under $100,000 462.5
Cooperative Extension Ser\ice 174.8
Total — All Items $32,343.5
NOTE: 'y Increase = r5% X 2/12 X 12% X 10/12)
= 10.89'r
' Personal Services Base $177,571.1
' Base Personal Services $272.8
Other $ 90.8 (IKr is applied)
' DSCC Personal Ser\'ices Base $801.9
A report, "Study of Salaries for University of Illinois
Personnel," covering the four employee groups at the
University, comparison of academic salaries with those of
other institutions, and a "Proposed University of Illinois
Step Plan" for nonacadcjnic employees will appear in the
next issue of the Faculty Letter.
University of Illinois Employees Job Satisfaction Study
I'NIVERSITY BURi:.\U OF INSTITUTIONAL RESF..\RCH
There are difTerences, both University-wide and
among the three campuses, in the way the University's
employees feel about their job situation. Moreover, there
are distinctions in job satisfaction between academic and
nonacademic employees and within each of these groups.
These conclusions are based on the results of a sur-
vey (The University of Illinois Employees Job Satisfac-
tion Study) conducted last spring by Dr. Sandra A.
Warden at the request of President Corbally.
The survey questionnaire, designed to examine the
attitudes of University employees to a variety of job-
related variables and conditions, was distributed by mail
at each campus to a random sample of employees in each
of the following nine employee groups:
Academic Staff : 1. Tenured Faculty
2. Non-tenured Faculty
3. Professional
4. Graduate Assistants
.5. Officials and Managers
6. Professional and Technical
7. Office and Clerical
8. Skilled, Semi-skilled, and
Unskilled
9. Service Workers
A random sampling of the nonrespondents in each group
at each campus was followed up by telephone.
The final analyses of the survey results were based
on the mail and phone samples in combination, which
totaled 2,048 employees, distributed by campus as fol-
lows: Urbana-Champaign, 976; Chicago Circle, 490;
Medical Center. 582.
\nnacademic Staff :
UNIVERSITY-WIDE AREAS OF RELATIVELY HIGH
AND LOW SATISFACTION
The results of the University of Illinois Employees
Job Satisfaction Study indicate that the University's aca-
demic and nonacademic employees as a whole are \vell
satisfied with the following job-related factors or cir-
cumstances, each item having been responded to favor-
ably by at least three-fourths of the employees surveyed,
with the percentage often approaching or exceeding
ninety per cent:
( 1 ) The work itself — pride in and liking for one's work;
(2) Co-workers — their friendliness, intelligence, com-
petence, and cooperation ;
(3) Feeling of being liked, respected, and needed ;
(4) The boss — his/her honesty, competence, coopera-
tion, and fairness;
(5) Opportunity to use and to improve one's skills and
training;
(6) Opportunity to control how the job is done ;
(7) .\vailability of needed supporting services, supplies,
and equipment ;
(8) The job-related information received.
The lowest relative level of satisfaction among Uni-
\ersity employees as a group apparently centers around
the following job-related factors or circiunstances, each
item having been responded to unfavorably by more than
40 per cent of the employees included in the study:
( 1 ) Opportunity for promotion and professional ad-
vancement;
( 2 ) Prospects for a comfortable retirement ;
(3) Earnings and prospects for financial security;
(4) Chances (if briiiiiiiia; about needed changes in one"s
unit.
CAMPUS DIFFERENCES IN JOB SATISFACTION
Where iiiter-campiis dill'erenies in le\el of job satis-
faction exist, and the suney findings suggest that sucli
differences are rather general, the tendency is for tlie
Medical Center employees to be most satisfied and the
Chicago Circle employees least satisfied, with the Vr-
hana-Chanipaign employees intemiediate to the other
two. This higher overall degree of dissatisfaction on the
part of Chicago Circle employees is substantiated by the
fact that relatively fewer employees at that campus fSfi
per cent), comjsared to the employees at the other cam-
puses (72 per cent for Urbana-Champaign and 78 per
cent for Medical Center "i, would prefer to continue
working at the Uni\-ersity.
JOB SATISFACTION FOR ACADEMIC
AND NONACADEMIC EMPLOYEES
The results of die study did not reflect consistent
Uiii\ersit\-wide differences between academic and non-
academic employees in their degree of job satisfaction.
On some factors the academic stafT are somewhat more
satisfied while on others the reverse is true.
Academic employees in general appear to be more
satisfied than non-academic employees on factors such
as the opportunities (1) to achieve promotion and pro-
fessional advancement, (2) to use and to improve one's
skills and training, (3) to control how the job is done,
('4) to bring about needed changes in one's unit, (5) to
study or research in one's field, and (6) to accomplish
desired things. Academic staff, moreover, are more in-
clined to be favorably impressed by the distinction or
eminence of the University, by its physical facilities,
and by the academic atmosphere and surroundings.
Xonacademic employees as a group seem to be more
satisfied than academic employees concerning such vari-
ables as (1) prospects for financial and job security, (2)
prospects for a comfortable retirement, and (3) the
fringe benefits. These factors are related more to the con-
ditions of eniploynient with the University than to the
work itself, which is consistent with the fact that non-
academic employees are noticeably more inclined than
academic staff to indicate a preference for working at
the University, but are somewhat less predisposed than
academics to prefer working in the same kind of job thev
now hold.
.Academic and nonacademic employees apparently
are in striking agreement regarding what could be
changed to impro\c working conditions at the University.
Both most frequently cite salaries as the item most in
need of improvement.
There are University-wide differences among both
academic and nonacademic employees in degree of satis-
faction \vith employment at the University. The most
consistent difference within the academic employees is a
tendency for Graduate Assistants to be less satisfied than
other academic staff, and even this tendency is reversed
for some aspects of the employment situation. Among
the nonacademic stafT, the most pronounced tendency is
for Skilled, .Semi-skilled, and Unskilled employees to ex-
hibit the highest level of satisfaction, but this trend oc-
curs for less than half of the job-related variables in-
cluded in the study.
The results of the Employees Job Satisfaction Study
provide one measure of satisfaction with the employment
situation at the University.
After reviewing the results of the study, President
Corbally indicated that those matters appearing to lead
to employee dissatisfaction will be discussed with appro-
priate University personnel so that remedial actions can
be taken. The question of the economic status of Univer-
sity personnel has already been described as the top
priority concern of the University administration and
efforts continue to be made to deal with that concern.
A detailed report of the study can be received by
contacting the University Bureau of Institutional Re-
.search, 252 Illini Tower, Champaign.
Academic Term Defined for Staff Exemption from Tuition and Fees
Because of recent calendar changes at the University,
there is confusion about the wording of policy in regard
to regulations governing the assessment and exemption
from fees for staff members. The policy, which appears
in both undergraduate and graduate catalogs, reads as
follows :
'For fee assessment purposes, a staff appointment must
require service for not less than three-fourths of the
term. fTTiis is interpreted as a minimum of three and
one-half months in a semester, nine weeks in a quarter,
and six weeks in an eight-week summer session.)"
To disjjel the confusion and to clarify the application
of the "three-fourths" rule in the specification of the
pteriod of time covered by a "term,"' the following
changes in the wording of the current policy are being
made (deletions are in parentheses and additions are
italicized) :
"For fee assessment purposes, a staff appointment must
require service for not less than three-fourths of the
academic term (.), defined as the period between the
first day of registration and the last day of final examina-
tions. Specific dates marking the end of three-fourths of
the term shall be established by the Chancellor or his
designee on each campus. (This is interpreted as a mini-
mum of three and one-half in a semester, nine weeks in
a quarter, and six weeks in an eight-week summer
.session. )
Inquiries to the Fatuity Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 364 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
L)LUAA.-^jcLy
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 254, December 13, 1974
Study of Salaries for University of Illinois Personnel
PREPARED BY THE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF PLANNING AND PRESENTED IN CONNECTION WITH PRESIDENT CORBALLY S
SALARY INCREASE RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE NOVEMBER 13 MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
INTRODUCTION
A study of salaries for University personnel is a very
complex problem. It involves over 12,400 employees paid
from State appropriations and located on three different
campuses, who have varying degrees of responsibilities up
to the President of the University. It is the policy of the
University to treat all classes and all campuses as equi-
tably as possible. Thus, when salary increases are ob-
tained, the funds are distributed to four employee groups
in proportion to their portion of the total Personal Ser-
vices budget. The groups are ( 1 ) academic employees,
(2) nonacademic open range employees, (3) nonaca-
demic prevailing rate employees, and (4) nonacademic
negotiated rate employees. The ratio of the total State
dollars for Personal Services paid to these classes is
shown below :
Per Cent
Group of Total
Academic
Nonacademic Open Range
Nonacademic Negotiated
Nonacademic Prevailing
Total
65.60
20.83
10.95
2.62
100.00
This study will be mainly directed to the academic and
nonacademic open range salaries, as the salaries of the
other nonacademic employees are set by either negotia-
tion or in accordance with prevailing rates in the com-
munity. The study will attempt to indicate the status of
University of Illinois employees in relation to groups out-
side the University to determine if any deficiencies exist.
Where Do We Stand in Relation to Our Competi-
tion?— In order to determine where we stand in rela-
tion to our competition, the following chart shows how
each group of employees can be compared with their
appropriate competition.
REVIEW WITH
PEERS
MARKET ANALYSIS
NONACADEMIC
OPEN RANGE NEGOTIATED
REVIEW OF REVIEW OF BY IDENTICAL
BENCHMARK SIMILAR TRADES AND
OCCUPATIONS OCCUPATIONS CRAFTS
The salaries of the academic employees can be reviewed
with the salaries of academic employees at selected peer
institutions. The nonacademic employees can be com-
pared by a market analysis. In the case of (a) the open
range employees, a review of benchmark occupations can
be made; (b) the negotiated employees, a review of simi-
lar occupations in the community can be made, and (c)
the prevailing group, a review of identical outside groups
can be made.
Relationship of Market Surveys and Cost of Living
Surveys — Quite often market surveys and cost of living
surveys become intermingled in salary studies. This is
quite easy to do, but the diagram below is provided to
eliminate some of the confusion.
RELATIONSHIP OF MARKET AND COST OF LIVING
IN SALARY STUDIES
COMPARISONS
BY
MARKET ANALYSIS
m
COST OF LIVING
CONSIDERATIONS
FY 1971-72 FY 1972-73 FY 1973-74 FY 1974-75 FY 1975-76
ntC UBRARY OF THE
JAN 24 1975
The preparation of budget requests must necessarily
be made prior to the implementation of the request. In
the case of the FY 1976 budget request, the studies for
comparison with competition had to be made in FY 1974
and prior years, i.e., any market analysis that compares
a group with similar occupations must be made looking
backward as far as budget requests are concerned. \Vhen
the budget is prepared, consideration must be given to
looking forward to what is thought will occur. This is
where cost of living considerations are made to estimate
what the market will be in the budget year.
ACADEMIC SALARY STUDIES
The academic salary studies were made in two parts.
One part was the study of the status of the academic per-
sonnel at the Urbana-Champaign and Chicago Circle
Campuses, and the other part was the study of the status
of the academic personnel at the Medical Center Cam-
pus. Because of the slight differences, each part will be
discussed separately.
The data for the Urbana-Champaign and Chicago
Circle Campuses were obtained from A.\UP bulletins
giving reports on the economic status of the profession
for the years 1971-72, 1972-73, and 1973-74 and Univer-
sity of Illinois salary statistics for academic and adminis-
trative staff for the years 1971-72, 1972-73, and 1973-74.
The institutions selected for comparison with the aca-
demic employees at Urbana-Champaign and Chicago
Circle are shown below :
CORNELL UNIVERSITY (NP)
INDIANA UNIVERSITY (P)
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY (NP)
STANFORD UNIVERSITY (NP)
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SYSTEM (P)
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-UC 8 CC (P)
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN (P)
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA (P)
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN -MADISON 8 MILWAUKEE (P)
Of these groups, six are public (P) institutions and three
are non-public (NP).
The procedure for making the salary comparison was
to (a) determine the salar)' for each academic rank at
each institution, (b) determine the median, and (c) ob-
tain the difference between the median salary and the
University of Illinois salary. An illustration of the data
for the cash salary comparison for an academic year at
the rank of professor follows:
MEDIAN
RANGE
U OF I LESS MEDIAN
$21.100 (CORNELL) $22,100 (U OF I) $23,600 (CORNELL)
$3,900 $4,000 $«,000
+ $200 -0- -$600
1971-
72
1972-
-73
1973-
-74
SALARY
RANK
SALARY
RANK
SALARY
RANK
CORNELL
$21,100
5
$22,100
5^
$23,600
5
INDIANA
$20,700
6
$21,100
7
$21,700
8
NORTHWESTERN
$23,700
1
$24,600
1
$25,500
1
STANFORD
$22,300
2
$23,300
2
$24,400
2
CALIFORNIA SYSTEM
$20,400
7
$22,600
H
$23,800
4
UNIVOF iLL.-ccauc
$21,300
4
$22,100
»^
$23,000
6
UNIV. OF MICH. ■^" "■•"
$21,600
3
$22,600
3i
$23,900
3
UNIV Of MINN.
$19,800
8^
$20,600
9
$21,500
9
UNIV OF WISC.-MAOISON
MILWAUKEE
$19,800
H
$20,900
e
$21,900
^
The data indicate the Uni\ersity of Illinois professor
ranked fourth in salary in 1972, dropped to 5V2 position
in 1972-73 (median), and dropped to sixth position in
1973-74. Stating the data another way, the salary for
University professors was $200 above the median in
1971-72, but dropped to $600 below the median bv
1973-74.
When similar calculations were made for all of the
ranks, the salary differences from the median were those
shown below :
Rank
1971-72
1972-73
1973-74
Professor
+ 200
0
-600
.Associate Professor
0
0
-400
-\ssistant Professor
-100
0
-200
Instructor
+ 200
-100
-100
When calculations were made considering the staff
on both campuses by rank, the funds required to bring
the cash salary of the academic staff at the Urbana-
Champaign Campus to the median of 1973-74 was
$918,500 and for the Chicago Circle Campus $301,100,
for a total of $1,219,600.
The data for Medical Center were not available
from A.\UP bulletins and it was necessary to utilize
national and regional salary surveys conducted by the
respective national professional organizations of the dis-
ciplines.^ The data were very similar to those given in
the A.-\UP bulletins except that only one year's data
were available and the data were given by college rather
than by the entire campus. As such, the data were ana-
lyzed by colleges and then combined in the same manner
as for the Urbana-Champaign and Chicago Circle Cam-
puses with one exception. .\s the data included all medi-
cal schools for each discipline and all the schools are not
as comprehensive as the Medical Center, each academic
rank of each college was compared with the 75th per-
centile of the reference source material. From this study,
it was determined that the total funds required to bring
the cash salary of the academic staff at the Medical
Center to the 75th percentile in 1973-74 would be
$2,340,336.
Comparison of Probable Academic Salary Increases
in FY 1975 and FY 1976 — Data for FY 1976 salarv'
increases to be requested are still pending, as many insti-
tutions have not had their requests approved by their
governing boards. The information given below is the
result of telephone conversations with representatives of
several institutions.
1 Dentistry: Office of Educational Resources and Studies,
American Association of Dental Schools, Harry Wiesenfelder,
Director, December 21, 1973.
Medicine: Division of Operational Studies, Association of
.American Medical Colleges. February, 1973 and May, 1974.
Pharmacy: American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy,
Charles W. Bliben, Executive Secretary. February 6, 1974.
Nursing: A study conducted by the School of Nursing at the
University of Colorado, 1971-72.
FY 75
CORNELL
6.CX)
8.00 (PENDING)
INDIANA
5.53
12.00
NORTHWESTERN
5.70 EST.
12.00
STANFORD
6.00
7.00 (PENDING)
CALIFORNIA
5.45
11.00
ILLINOIS
5.00
12.00
MICHIGAN
8.00
N/A
MINNESOTA
5.00
16.50
WISCONSIN
5.50
17.00
IOWA
6.75
12.00
OHIO STATE
6.50
N/A
MICHIGAN STATE
8.00
12.00
PURDUE
5.00
12.00
These data show that while salary increases were ob-
tained in FY 1975 and are also pending for FY 1976, the
University of Illinois salars- increases for FY 1975 are
at the lower end of those offered for the institutions con-
tacted and they are about average for the request in FY
1976. If the salary- increases indicated are provided, the
result will probably be that the University of Illinois
academic group will remain at about the same relation-
ship with their competition in FY 1975 and FY 1976, i.e.,
they will still be below the midpoint and will still have
a total salary deficiency in the order of $3.5 million.
NONACAOEMIC OPEN RANGE EMPLOYEES
Whereas the academic group studies required the
analysis of only four ranks, the nonacademic open range
study involves approximately 600 job classification titles.
Each of these titles has a salary range that indicates the
minimum and maximum salary which can be paid to a
specific employee within this range. In order to reduce
the time required to individually analyze 600 specific
classification titles, a procedure was developed in which
the 600 titles were consolidated to twenty-four levels with
each level combining classes displaying relatively similar
salary characteristics. Then each of these levels was com-
pared to benchmark jobs in the community, the weighted
average for each level was determined and a difference
was obtained. A flow chart of this procedure is shown
below :
CXASSiriCATION
TITLES
(APPROXtlUTELy
600>
IN COMMUNITY
DIFFERENCE
A further consolidation was made of the levels into
three groups that mainly included clerical personnel for
levels .A-H, senior clerical and technical personnel for
levels I-M, and professional and supervisory personnel
for levels N-X. It was also determined that positions
within levels .^-M are mainly influenced by local condi-
tions and those positions within levels N-X are mainly
influenced by national trends. Thus, separate surveys
were made in the Urbana and Chicago areas for levels
A-M, and one survey was used for the levels N-X.
The Urbana-Champaign survey for levels A-M em-
ployees was made with thirty-two employers in the
Urbana-Champaign, Danville, Rantoul, Bloomington-
Nornial, and Decatur areas. This suney covered 4,720
people in forty-nine clerical and technical occupations.
The Chicago survey for levels A-M included data from
the .Administrative Management Society and covered
45,100 non-supervisory positions in 106 firms. Also used
were data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics which
involved 685,000 office jobs in 579 firms, and data from
the Chicago Hospital Personnel Management Association
which involved 80,000 positions in ninety-five hospitals.
The survey for levels N-X utilized the Bureau of
Labor Statistics Survey of Professional and Administra-
tive Positions, which covered 1,550,000 employees, and
also the Weber Survey of Data Processing, which in-
cluded 110,000 positions in 1,461 firms.
Results of Market Survey — The results of the mar-
ket surveys for the nonacademic open range employees
are shown in a series of graphs below.
The following graph indicates a difiference of market
salaries for similar positions at Urbana-Champaign and
Chicago.
COMPARISON OF ANNUAL MARKET SALARIES
AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN AND CHICAGO
(FY 74 -LEVELS A THROUGH M)
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
CHICAGO
MARKET
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
-SENIOR CLERICAL
L Ml
CAL »l
The graph indicates that the market salaries at Chicago
are higher than those at Urbana-Champaign, but as the
level increases to level M, where the employees are more
influenced by national conditions than local conditions,
they become similar.
The comparison of the average annual salaries at
Urbana-Champaign to the market in the Urbana-Cham-
paign area (as of 7-1-74) is shown below:
Chicago campuses is shown for five job classification
titles.
MARKET U of 1 DEFICIENCY
/J
CLERK TYPIST H
$620
$492
-$128
'T
CLERK STENO HI
$721
$676
-$45
SECRETARY STENO
$788
$804
+$16
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
URSANA'CHAMPAIGN
MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIST H
$971
$830
-$141
DATA PROCESSING ANALYST H
$1362
$1314
-$48
-Mi
This graph indicates that, with the exception of level
M, all of the levels are paid below the market at Urbana-
Champaign.
A sample of the difference in monthly salaries for
five positions on the Urbana-Champaign Campus is
shown below :
MARKET
Uof I
DEFICIENCY
CLERK TYPIST I
$562
$440
-$122
CLERK STENO 311
$674
$567
-$107
SECRETARY STENO
$768
$767
-$1
ACCOUNTANT I
$971
$892
-$79
ENGINEER
$1,797
$1,665
-$132
The comparison of the average annual salaries at
Chicago Circle and Medical Center to the market (as
of 7-1-74) is shown in the next graph.
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
CHICAGO CIRCLE
ACTUAL
^UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
MEDICAL CENTER
ACTUAL
The comparison of the average annual salaries at
the University of Illinois to the market for the profes-
sional and supervisory levels (N-X) is shown below:
MEDICAL CENieR
Oi
-PROFESSIONAL, SUPERVISORY-
LEVELS
The salaries of the levels for all three campuses are
shown on the same graph for comparison to the market,
as these levels are influenced by national conditions
rather than local conditions. The data indicate that, in
most cases, the salaries paid are below the national
market.
When the data are analyzed for each level and the
number of employees in each level is considered, the
calculations indicate that the funds required to bring
the nonacademic open range groups up to the market of
FY 1974 would be $1,986,460. This amount, with the
deficiency in the academic group, indicates a total re-
quirement of $5,546,423 necessary to bring these two
groups up to the market.
Again, these data indicate a similar trend to that at
Urbana-Champaign with most of the annual salaries
being below the market level.
A sample showing the difference between the monthly
salaries of the market and the weighted average of the
If the University r.eceives the requested salary in-
creases in FY 1976, a step plan will be initiated for the
nonacademic open range employees. A step plan is a
salary administration plan which provides for progres-
sive upward movement within a pay range, and which
emphasizes both seniority and merit. It is believed that
if a step plan is provided and funds are made available,
the following advantages will be obtained:
1. AVOIDS CONGESTION AT ENTRANCE SALARY LEVEL -ESPECIALLY
TRUE AT LOWER LEVELS.
2. PROVIDES FOR ORDERLY MOVEMENT TOWARD THE MARKET
AVERAGE.
3. ALLOWS PREDICTION OF FUTURE FUNDING NEEDS.
4 GIVE EMPLOYEES A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF ADVANCEMENT
POTENTIAL.
To gain a better conception of the possible advan-
tages and results of a step plan, a comparison of the
distribution of Univereity of Illinois employees within
pay ranges with the distribution of similar employees of
the State of Illinois Code Departments was made. There
are seven steps within each pay range of the job classifi-
cations for State Code Department employees. Data were
obtained to determine the percentage of employees
within each step. Data for the University of Illinois
employees were also obtained and, from their pay data
for each range, the percentage of employees was deter-
mined that would have fallen into corresponding steps
of the State Code Departments. The following three
graphs indicate distribution of University of Illinois and
State Code employees within steps of pay ranges for the
clerical group, senior clerical and technical group, and
the professional and supervisory group.
Looking at the clerical employee group, the State
Code Department indicates what is believed to be the
results of a mature step plan; i.e., the employees are
fairly well distributed along the steps of the salary range
with the ma.^mum number being at the midpoint (step
5) and a reduction in the number in steps 6 and 7,
which are superior performance areas. This distribution
of employees is contrasted to the present distribution of
University of Illinois employees where the greater por-
tion of employees are at steps 1 and 2 and relatively few
of the employees at the higher steps within the pay range.
It is believed the initiation of a step plan at the Uni-
versity of Illinois will tend to distribute the University
employees over the range of pay in a more equitable
manner similar to the distribution of the State Code De-
partment employees.
The characteristics of the Proposed University of
Illinois Step Plan are shown below :
WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE PROPOSED UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS STEP PLAN?
1. A SALARY RANGE FOR A PARTICULAR CLASS IS DIVIDED INTO
EQUAL PARTS, OR STEPS.
2. STEPS WILL VARY FROM 9 TO 13 AS GROUPS PROGRESS FROM
CLERICAL TO SUPERVISORY. ANNUAL INCREASES TO BE 4^% OF
ENTRANCE SALARY.
3. EMPLOYEES WHO PERFORM SATISFACTORILY PROGRESS FROM STEP
TO STEP TO JUST BEYOND THE MIDPOINT OF THE SALARY RANGE
AS THEIR SENIORITY INCREASES.
4 SUPERIOR PERFORMANCE INCREASES GRANTED UP TO 20% OF
ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES ON ANY DATE WITH AN 18 MONTH INTERVAL
BETWEEN SUCH INCREASES FOR A PARTICULAR EMPLOYEE.
.\s indicated in the characteristics of the University of
Illinois Step Plan, it is proposed that each salary range
be divided into a number of steps which will vary from
9 to 13 and in which nomial progression will proceed up
to market average, after which further progression will
only be on the basis of superior performance. An example
of a salary range and step for a class is shown on page
6 as well as an example of the progression through a
ten-step plan. The first two steps of a ten-step plan
would be 2'/4 per cent of the entering salary for the class.
Thereafter, all other steps would be at a 4'/2 per cent
level. Normal progression would be the first two steps
at 6-month intervals and, thereafter, all the next steps
up to the market average on the anniversary date of
employment. Beyond the market average the progres-
sion would only be the result of superior performance.
COMPARISON OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF SENIOR CLERICAL
AND TECHNICAL EMPLOYEES
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS- STATE CODE DEPARTMENTS
i »
COMPARISON OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF PROFESSIONAL AND
SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-STATE CODE DEPARTMENTS
EXAMPLE OF A SALARY RANGE AND STEP
FOR A CLASS
MAXIMUM SALARY
FOR CLASS
SALARY
RANGE
IN
DOLLARS
■
. SALARY MIDPOINT
FOR CLASS
MINIMUM SALARY
FOR CLASS
EXAMPLE OF A 10 STEP PLAN
STEP
STEP LENGTHS
(% OF ENTERING)
123456789 10
impact by level of salary has been updated for the quar-
ter ending September 30, 1973, and the analysis shows
that the impact of inflation on the market basket is be-
tween 11.9 per cent and 12.1 per cent, not significantly
different from the recently published Consumer's Price
Index. The data obtained by the Bureau of Labor Sta-
tistics for families of various income levels and the re-
sultant calculation of the impact of inflation upon the
market basket expenditures are shown below:
LOWER INCOME LEVEL
COST OF FflMILt CONSUMPTION
MEDICAL OTHER FAMILY
1973 FALL
2.420
1.711
FACTORS
1.1126 1
1340
197"! FALL 2.692
(CALCULATEOl
1.940
L 1974
Z 1973
iHI-—
INTERMEDIATE INCOME LEVEL
NORMAL
PROGRESSION
MONTHS
6 12 12 12
12 12
SUPERIOR
PERFORMANCE
ONLY
The estimated cost of the proposed step plan is about
4.1 per cent of the FY 1975 Personal Services base for
FY 1976 and about 5.3 per cent for FY 1977. The esti-
mated cost of starting the plan and maintaining the
plan is shown below :
FY 76
"GETTING ON THE PLAN"
PAY PLAN MAINTENANCE
(SEPT 1975- JUNE 1976)
COST-STATE FUNDS % OF FY75 BASE
$697,000
$984,000
$1,681,000
1.7
2.4
COST OF FAMILY CONSUMPTION
1973 FALL 3,196 3,159 1.046 1.089
FACTORS 1.1126 11340 11646 10904
1974 FALL 3.556 3.582 1.218 1,187
(CALCJLATEDI
1.229 10,405
10984
1,355 11.668
:: 19» ii!«?. 11214
C 1973 10,405
HIGHER INCOME LEVEL
COST OF FAMILY CONSUMPTION
FOOD
CONSUMPTION
1973 FALL 3386 4,614
FACTORS 11126 11340
1974 FALL 4.435 5.232
(CALCULATED)
1.350 1.567
11646 1,0904
1.572 1.709
1.911
10984
2,099
ANNUALIZATION OF FIRST
YEARS COST
PAY PLAN MAINTENANCE
(JULY 1976 -JUNE 1977)
MARKET BASKET EXPENDITURES
C J974 15,824 _
L 1973 14.129"
$779,000
$1,394,000
$2,173,000
1.9
3.4
5.3
When the FY 1976 budget was presented to the
Board of Trustees on September 18, 1974, the request
included salary increase funds in an amount to provide
an average increase of 9'/2 per cent. President Corbally
indicated that the economic conditions were unstable
and that updated information regarding the amounts
required to meet salary needs of the University personnel
would be provided as new information became available.
Since the September Board meeting, the cost of living
Summary
INCOME LEVEL
MARKET BASKET
EXPENDITURES
SEPT, 1973
EQUIVALENT
EXPENDITURES
SEPT, 1974
$7,652
PERCENT
INFLATION
SEPT , 1973 TO
SEPT, 1974
LOWER
$6,836
11.9
INTERMEDIATE
$10,405
$11,688
121
HIGHER
$I4,i20
$15,824
12.1
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 364 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
X ^i/-^^- ■
T
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 256, March 28, 1975
^^
JQ?r
ACCOUNTABILITY— Is the University of tllimis Efficient and Productive?
ANNUAL MESSAGE OF JOHN E. CORBALLV, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
r-^'^^^g^s
I am pleased once again to have this opportunity to
report to you about the University of Ilhnois. This mes-
sage is my fourth annual report to the citizens of Illinois
on behalf of your principal State university. As is my
usual custom I intend to emphasize our positive accom-
plishments ratlier than our difficulties and problems. I
would, however, be less than honest in reporting to you
if I failed to state that as citizens of Illinois, we all owe
a great debt to our staff and faculty who have main-
tained the quality of the University of Illinois in the face
of declining real-dollar support, increasing enrollments,
and increasing demands for service. We make no effort
to conceal the fact that an institution such as ours cannot
be at the same time inexpensive and of high quality. Our
libraries, laboratories, and - particularly - our faculty and
staff are of the highest order of quality. Our people are
the kind of university' people who are in great demand
regardless of the circumstances in which our economy
might find itself. Our staff and faculty represent a truly
valuable and scarce resource. It is on behalf of this scarce
resource and of the contributions in teaching, research,
and ser\-ice that this resource provides to the people of
Illinois that we press so hard for the funds which are
necessar)' to maintain the quality of our University.
But I want quickly to reassure you that because of
our understanding both of the scarcity of our resources
and of the economic pressures of today we do not waste
these resources. We are an institution which is both effi-
cient and productive, although both terms must be mea-
sured differently in a comprehensive institution of higher
education than is true for many other enterprises. We
cannot — to repeat an old story — do as the s)Tnphony
orchestra was said to have been told to do by an efficiency
expert: save money by playing our music twice as fast
and by avoiding duplication of musical instruments.
Teaching, research, and public service require unique
tests of efficiency and of productivity. It is within those
requirements that we have been striving for a number
of years to insure faithful stewardship over the dollars
you provide in support of the University. In this annual
report I mention but a few of literally hundreds of efforts
we have been making to improve and to maintain effi-
cient and productive operations. I recognize the danger
in focusing on any single aspect of a complex under-
taking, but it seems worthwhile this year to describe some
of these efforts in detail.
EFFICIENCY EFFORTS RESULTING IN DOLLAR SAVINGS
In some ways the University operates as a business
enterprise and is able to adopt or modify effective and
efficient business practices which result in obvious dollar
savings — a measure of efficiency upon which I believe
we all can agree.
The purchasing of supplies and equipment for the
University offers one example. We carefully coordinate
our purchasing activities among the Chicago Circle,
Medical Center, and Urbana-Champaign Campuses.
Whenever a monetary or service advantage is made possi-
ble by a collective effort, we solicit bids and contract as
one group. Such procedures are advantageous, for ex-
ample, in purchasing paper, light bulbs, computer tapes,
X-ray film, and standard classroom and office furniture.
The University has also taken a leadership role in
working within the Illinois Educational Consortium for
Computer Services. This organization began as a con-
sortium for sharing costly computer resources among a
number of colleges and universities within the State.
Recently, the University of Illinois has coordinated the
expansion of the Consortium's activities to include col-
lective purchasing arrangements among all public insti-
tutions of higher education in the State. More than one
million dollars in products have been purchased or con-
tracted for under the Consortium's auspices in the six-
month period beginning July 1, 1974. Equally important,
the colleges and universities of the State have gained
valuable insight into the potential benefits to be gained
from such cooperative efforts. As a result of the success
of this venture and of the organization's broadened
scope of activities, steps have now been taken to change
the name of the organization to the Illinois Educational
Consortium.
Dollar savings have also resulted from centralization
of the use of costly and complex scientific equipment, as
in the case of the Center for Electron Microscopy at
Urbana-Champaign. The Center's dozen major micro-
scopes and their supporting equipment represent an in-
vestment of nearly one million dollars. Resources for the
purchase of this equipment were obtained from funds
contributed by the agencies and organizations which sup-
port research projects at the University. Such equipment
is priced beyond the reach of any single department, so
centralization is the only way to provide widespread fac-
ulty access to it. Approximately 100 different projects are
now being conducted at the same time at the Center,
involving research personnel from such diverse schools
and departments as life sciences, chemical sciences, engi-
neering, agriculture, veterinary medicine, basic medical
sciences, anthropology, home economics, and horticulture.
Beyond providing substantial dollar savings in equip-
ment costs and allowing for greater equipment utiliza-
tion, the presence of the Center has allowed many faculty
members to continue to develop and expand research
interests and skills, and it has helped to attract new funds
for research projects we otherwise would not have had
the ability to undertake. Further, it has allowed us to
develop a formal course of instruction in the theory and
operation of electron microscopes and we have trained
more students in the use of electron optical equipment
than has any other such facility in the country.
Another area in which major dollar savings have been
realized is in the operation of our physical plants. Cam-
puses as large and diverse as those of the University of
Illinois require a complex process of balancing the needs
and desires of each department within the limitations of
available facilities. An Office of Space Utilization on each
campus is assigned this difficult task, which is compli-
cated by several problems peculiar to the operation of a
university. For example, laboratory facilities in many
buildings are highly specialized. We cannot teach dra-
matics in the Nuclear Reactor Laboratory nor teach
botany in a home economics laboratory. Our general
policy is to allow as much use of a building as is prac-
tical. Until recently, the policy was quite liberal. Most
buildings remained open and heated for long hours, and
were available for use even by non-University groups.
In the last few years, this unlimited access has been
severely curtailed, primarily because of tremendous in-
creases in the cost of energy. A secondary motivation has
been to reduce the threat of vandalism and theft.
Heat is now turned off in most buildings week nights
and weekends. It is left on only when utilization of the
building is very high — as in the libraries — or when
educational needs of the University demand it. Green-
houses, for example, need constant heat. So do certain
laboratories where experiments are in progress twenty-
four hours a day.
If a group needs a classroom at night or on the week-
end, either for a regular class session or for a special
meeting, it is scheduled into a building which must be
heated anyway. Other buildings are locked except during
normal business hours. While this may cause some minor
inconveniences, the instructional program does not suffer
and savings result.
Perhaps the best measure of the effectiveness of this
program is the fact that it has resulted in a 20 per cent
reduction in fuel consumption and a 15 per cent reduc-
tion in the use of electricity at the Urbana-Champaign
Campus. Without these cost-saving measures, the Uni-
versity would have had to pay approximately $587,000
in additional utility costs during the period from July,
1974, to January, 1975.
Yet another example of dollar savings which have
resulted from improved efficiency and productivity con-
cerns our efforts to enhance the upward career mobility
of nonacademic personnel. In an attempt to help indi-
viduals as well as the institution, the University has made
a direct effort to encourage nonacademic employees to
make greater use of abilities they already possess or to
develop their potential skills through further training. At
Urbana-Champaign, an "underutilization program" has
been established to search out employees who may have
skills which are not being fully utilized in their current
jobs. Employees' educational levels and job-related apti-
tudes are reviewed and compared with the educational
requirements, salary, and job requirements of their cur-
rent positions. Whenever it is found that an employee's
abilities and aptitudes are not being fully utilized, he or
she is counseled about the availability of more demand-
ing and rewarding positions.
To further our continuing interest in affirmative ac-
tion the Personnel Services Office focused the initial trial
of this "underutilization program" upon nonacademic
employees who were members of minority groups or who
were women. Approximately 400 employees learned
about the opportunity for personal job counseling when
they were contacted directly by the Personnel Services
Office. Nearly 100 chose to take advantage of the oppor-
tunity to explore new job possibilities, and some were
among the 271 employees on the Urbana-Champaign
Campus who advanced to higher paying, more demand-
ing and rewarding positions by changing job categories.
At Chicago Circle, thirty employees were promoted out-
side of the normal promotion lines, and at the Medical
Center an additional 123 were similarly promoted. Thus
the University is now more fully utilizing the skills and
abilities of more than 400 of its nonacademic employees
in addition to the much larger number of employees who
advanced through tlie normal promotional lines.
STUDENT-CENTERED PRODUaiVITY
Of course, the University is productive and efficient
in many other ways which cannot be measured directly
in terms of dollars and cents.
In the interest of providing an opportunity for quali-
fied students to accelerate their undergraduate programs,
the Carnegie Corporation is sponsoring a study of time-
shortened degree programs at Urbana-Champaign. The
program, initiated in 1972, has two major experimental
components : residential early admission of students after
the junior year of high school, known as EEA, and an
individuahzed degree program, entitled ISSP.
The EEA plan is based on the assurn[)tion that some
students are academically and emotionally ready to begin
a four-year college career one year before normal gradu-
ation from high school, thus shortening the time to the
baccalaureate by one year. The firet group of fifty-four
early admission students was enrolled in September, 1972,
the second in September, 1973, and the third in August,
1974. Two members of the first group are scheduled to
graduate this June, receiving bachelor's degrees two years
earlier than other members of their high school classes.
The ISSP program examines shortening time to the
degree by constructing a student's program in six eigh-
teen-hour semesters, rather than eight fifteen-hour semes-
ters, and by providing more efTecti\-e long-range schedule
planning on an individualized basis with academic coun-
selors who help students identify situations in which their
goals can be reached more efficiently. The program is
comprised of 140 student \olunteers chosen from the
freshman class which entered the College of Liberal Arts
and Sciences in September, 1973.
Students in these programs have performed well aca-
demically, with each group earning average grades higher
than tlie all-University grade point average. Although it
remains to be seen how many members of these experi-
mental groups actually will complete requirements for
a bachelor's degree in less than the usual time, evidence
so far supports the idea that good high school prepara-
tion, coupled with counseling at the University, can en-
able students to plan college careers more efficiently and
to complete degree requirements in fewer than eight
semesters.
Our interest in students goes beyond their quality at
entrance and their achievements while on campus. We
are equally concerned about the employment success and
satisfaction our graduates enjoy after they receive their
degrees. It is no secret that the job market is currently
constrained across the nation, and that unemployment
has been rising. Beyond the question of employment,
however, we are deeply interested in the satisfaction our
graduates find in their jobs and the degree to which their
skills and abilities are being used productively. These
latter two areas are admittedly difficult ones to measure
with precision. But few issues are more important than
studying and strengthening the contribution which higher
education can make to expanded productivity at the
state and national levels while at the same time providing
educational experiences which ofTer enrichment in areas
not directly related to employment, particularly those
areas related to civic and social leadership.
For several years our Bureau of Institutional Research
has been conducting surveys of recent graduates to ex-
amine these issues in detail. Survey information indicates
that graduates of the University of Illinois stand well
above the national average not only in terms of their
ability to find jobs but to find jobs for which their train-
ing and skills are appropriate. For all of our campuses
together and for all degrees combined in 1972, four per
cent of those graduates surveyed were unemployed and
seeking employment. In 1973, this figure rose slightly to
four and one-half per cent. The National Bureau of
Labor Statistics reports that in 1972 for all degrees com-
bined, 7.2 per cent of the college-educated work force
was unemployed and seeking work. Thus, the unemploy-
ment rate for our graduates was about one-half the
national average.
Using the job classification categories suggested by
the United States Bureau of the Census, we have ex-
amined the wide variety of jobs our graduates take to
determine how many are employed in positions for
which their level of education is appropriate. Those who
appear to have an educational level higher than that re-
quired by their current jobs are termed "underemployed."
For all degree levels on all three campuses combined in
1972, we found 12.3 per cent of our employed graduates
underemployed. Applying the same procedures to infor-
mation reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals
a national rate of underemployment of 19.6 per cent ^ —
more than 50 per cent larger than that for University of
Illinois graduates. Thus, for all three campuses, roughly
88 per cent of our graduates are believed to be employed
in positions appropriate for their educational levels. This
figure is given additional support by the fact that 86 per
cent of those surveyed indicated that they were either
highly satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their current
jobs.
Further, slightly more than 70 per cent of the group
surveyed in 1973 took jobs within the State of Illinois.
This group includes graduates with advanced degrees
who must look to a nationwide labor market for employ-
ment. We are encouraged by the fact that only 1.3 per
cent of the group indicated that if they had the decision
to make again, they would elect not to attend college. We
are doubly proud of the fact that more than eight out of
ten of them indicated that if they had another oppor-
tunity to decide, not only would they attend college, but
they would attend the University of Illinois.
As with faculty appointments and nonacademic per-
sonnel employment, we are especially concerned about
insuring that members of minority groups receive oppor-
tunities to pursue careers in areas in which they have
traditionally been underrepresented — for whatever rea-
sons. One such area is the field of engineering. For more
than a decade the Urbana-Champaign and Chicago
Circle Campuses and Bradley University have coopera-
tively offered a program known as the Illinois Junior
Engineering Technical Society Two- Week Summer Pro-
gram in Engineering, designed to give high school stu-
dents an opportunity to become familiar with the field
of engineering. Recognizing that this program was an
effective means of drawing interested students into the
field, but aware that virtually no minority students were
participating, Howard L. Wakeland, Associate Dean of
the College of Engineering and Jerry S. Dobrovolny, Head
of the Department of General Engineering, conceived
of the Inner-City Engineering Orientation Program
(ICEOP). They felt that a special program for black
students from the inner-city areas of Chicago and East
St. Louis, patterned after regular programs, could be
instrumental in helping minority students toward engi-
neering careers.
The program was designed to provide students an
opportunity to be expiosed to college life, to learn what
the different areas of engineering are, to learn about the
educational requirements in a college of engineering,
and to become acquainted with the working life of a
practicing engineer. Basic areas in mathematics, engi-
neering problems, lectures on engineering, experiments,
research, and professional engineering practice were
covered in the program.
The Inner-City Engineering Orientation Program
ran for five years. It was followed by the Minority Intro-
duction to Engineering Program (MITE), held at the
University of Illinois July 7 to 20, 1974, and at nine other
sites across the nation. The ICEOP program was used
directly as a model for the MITE program which was
sponsored at the national level by the Engineers' Council
for Professional Development. More than 300 minority
students participated in the ten MITE programs in 1974.
Extra sites will be added for the coming year, and more
than 500 student participants are expected.
FACULTY EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY
No discussion of productivity and efficiency at the
University would be complete without some attention to
the topic of faculty productivity. That our faculty is
productive by any measure is beyond question. Each of
my last two messages has been filled with examples of
effective and efficient faculty endeavors in the classroom,
the laborator)', and the community, state and nation. I
have stressed that quality in teaching and research must
be felt as much as measured. And so it is with produc-
tivity in teaching and research. To be sure, there are
statistical measures available which can provide an idea
of the relative productivity of our faculty over time. We
can, for example, count the total number of credit hours
taught per full-time equivalent faculty member. When
we do so, we find that at Urbana-Champaign the num-
ber of credit hours taught per FTE faculty member has
increased more than five per cent since 1970. That state-
ment is a rather complicated way of saying that we are
teaching more students with fewer faculty. The same
situation applies at Chicago Circle this year with respect
to upper division students. So by this particular measure,
our productivity is good. But what is so much more im-
portant is what we teach, and how well we teach it.
Faculty members whose research interests lag so that they
become unaware of the most recent developments in
their fields or who fail to take advantage of useful devel-
opments in instructional methods are neither as effective
nor as productive as we desire no matter how many
student credit hours they may generate. These deficien-
cies will be passed on to their students, and by them to
our society in general.
Rather than describe further evidence of productivity
broadly across our entire faculty', as I have done in die
past, I prefer this year to center my discussion upon the
accomplishments of two specific programs which together
in\ol\e the cooperative efforts of faculty, staff, and stu-
dents on all of our campuses. The first concerns our
eff'orts to reduce both the time and the expense required
in the medical education of physicians through tlie pro-
grams offered in the University's School of Basic Medical
Sciences at Urbana-Champaign (SBMS-UC). Students
in the School essentially complete in one year the equiva-
lent of a two-year program for most medical schools.
This achievement is made possible by allowing students
to proceed at their ovra pace through a carefully con-
structed curriculum designed to take maximum advan-
tage of the student's academic background and of recent
advances in instructional technology involving compu-
terized instruction. The curriculum incorp)orates over 350
specific learning units in eleven basic science disciplines
and provides the beginning doctor with skills necessary
for clinical training.
At the present time the enrollment of first-year
medical students has grown from sixteen in 1971-72 to
sixty-four in the current academic year, and it will be
approximately 100 in 1975-76. A full complement of
128 first-year students should be achieved by the fall of
1976. Following completion of their year at Urbana-
Champaign, students continue their programs at our
Medical Center Campus in Chicago or in our Schools
of Medicine in Peoria and Rockford.
The Basic Medical Sciences program provides a high
quality educational experience for students and is cost-
effective. Because the students proceed through a cur-
riculum with built-in evaluation instruments to help
measure their progress, the faculty can devote a large
proportion of teaching time to direct instruction and to
personal interaction with students. This procedure in-
creases both the quality of the program and the produc-
tivity of faculty members and students.
To realize additional dollar savings, we rely upon the
interest and cooperation of local area physicians who
volunteer to work with the School in various ways. Many
physicians serve as curriculum advisers and developers,
working with the basic science faculty in devising and
continually revising the unique basic-science, clinical-
problem-structured foiTnat in which the curriculum is
presented. Other physicians volunteer to devote time
each week to advise or evaluate SBMS-UC students. One
physician in each major urban region within a seventy-
five-mile radius of the School serves as a regional assistant
to the Dean. These voluntary contributions save the
School many thousands of dollars in faculty salaries an-
nually and also play an important role in the continuing
professional growth of the practicing physicians who
participate with us in medical education. In a further
cooperative venture SBMS-UC presently sponsors one
family practice residency program and is in the process
of helping implement others within the east central
region of Illinois.
The second program I wish to mention is the doc-
toral program in bioengineering administered jointly by
the College of Engineering at Chicago Circle and by the
Medical Center through the Intercanipus Hioeiigineering
Coordinating Committee. Bioengineering applies engi-
neering science and technolog)' to biological and medical
problems ranging from fundamental studies in biologv'
and physiology' to specific applications in the develop-
ment of medical devices, such as artificial limbs.
The program has a faculty of thirty-three which in-
cludes twehe members from the Chicago Circle College
of Engineering and twenty-one from the Medical Center.
Only four members of this faculty are on the specific
budget for bioengineering — the other twenty-nine con-
tribute their time because of their professional interest
in the area. Thus the program has virtually no budgetaiy
implications. However, this fall forty-nine graduate stu-
dents from both Chicago campuses \vere enrolled in the
program, including thirty-five master's degree candidates
and fourteen doctoral candidates — a 50 per cent in-
crease o\-er last year's enrollment.
Not only has tlie program in this field cost the Uni-
versity very little, it has contributed to bringing more
than one and a half million dollars in outside funding
to the University in the form of grants and contracts.
These and many other examples of our productivity
and efficiency have a common theme. It is that the Uni-
versity of Illinois is a most complex organization which
performs a \'ast range of different — though interrelated
— functions and services. In some respects we are simi-
lar to other complex organizations, such as businesses,
hospitals, go\ernment agencies. To the extent that we
are similar to such organizations, we can judge our pro-
ductivity against standards which apply to them. I believe
we demonstrate that those segments of our operations
which are comparable fare quite well when judged
against such standards.
But we must never lose sight of the fact that the
university is perhaps the most complex organization in
our society. At the very center of that complexity is our
involvement in the creation of new knowledge, as well
as its transmission to new generations of students and
its application to our most pressing societal problems.
We have been able to maintain high quality only
through steady improvements in efficiency and produc-
tivity. I assure you that we shall continue to search for
additional ways in which we can become more efficient,
always conscious that we must not sacrifice the quality
which is at the heart of our institution. I know that the
University can count on your continued support to sus-
tain the high degree of excellence which you have come
to expect from the University of Illinois.
Inquiries to the Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 364 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
i
I
ri(ji^-^f'^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
0fC4
Tl/g
No. 257, April 9, 1975
ua-,.
/975
Statement re Governor's Recommendations fm^ FT 1976 Budget
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLV TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES, MARCH 19, 1975
On March 5, 1975, Governor Walker presented to a
joint session of the Illinois General Assembly his budget
recommendations for fiscal year 1976 (July 1, 1975-June
30, 1976). In general, the Governor supported the rec-
ommendations presented to him by the Illinois Board of
Higher Education for the funding of higher education
in FY 1976.
As we analyze the entire budget proposed for the
State of Illinois for the coming year, it is clear that the
Governor and the Bureau of the Budget ha\'e given
special and favorable attention to the needs of education
at all levels. \Vhile we are and must be strong advocates
of our sector of the education system, as responsible
people we must also recognize the needs of other sectors
of this system and the needs in other areas of State ser-
vice such as welfare, mental health, transportation, and
criminal justice. We cannot retain either leadership or
credibilit)' if we pursue our owii goals in the absence of
an honest recognition of the totality of State goals and of
the totalit-y of demands upon State revenues.
As you know, the recommendations of the Governor
include the following:
1. Funds equal to 10 per cent of 90 per cent of our
personal services base offset by several deductions
from that base related primarily to studies of program
cost effectiveness and to nonrecurring funds appro-
priated for the current year.
2. Calculated amounts in support of the increased costs
of goods and contract services and of utilities.
3. Funds in support of the continuation of the planned
enrollment increases in the health professions.
4. Funds in support of the commercial operations at tlic
University of Illinois- Willard Airport.
5. Funds in support of increased needs of the Division
of Services to Crippled Children.
6. Funds in support of the calculated increases in opera-
tion and maintenance funds due to the opening of
new buildings.
7. Funds in support of the calculated "payout" require-
ment of the State Universities Retirement System.
I will comment only upon the first and last of those
recommendations. With your firm support, we have
stated consistently that the salary needs of all University
personnel represent our first priority need for 1975-76.
We have calculated that increases averaging 12 per cent
represent the dimension of that need. Through careful
management of the funds recommended by Governor
Walker including some reallocations of funds internally,
we believe that we can accomplish salary increases aver-
aging 9.5 per cent for 1975-76 within that recommenda-
tion. Included within that accomplishment will be the
achievement of the step-pay plan for so-called open-
range employees which you have twice reviewed and en-
dorsed. I want to emphasize one point so that I am not
misunderstood. We will be able within the recommended
funds to achieve the step-pay plan with average increases
for open-range employees of 9.5 per cent; we will not
achieve the step-pay plan in addition to such average
increases.
In my view and in the view of my administrative
colleagues, the ability to achieve salary increases of this
magnitude in today's uncertain economic climate repre-
sents a major step forward toward regaining the eco-
nomic status of our personnel and toward regaining our
traditional competitive position vis a vis institutions and
other employers of comparable stature. It would, in our
view, be the worst sort of "dog in the manger" approach
to greet the recommendations of the Governor with any-
thing other than support. I know from conversations with
his representatives and with representatives of the Board
of Higher Education, that the proposed increases in
salary for our personnel were made with care and with
support for the high priority of our salary needs. While
some would wish that you and I continue to argue that
"this amount is not enough," I cannot recommend that
course of action. Accordingly, unless directed otherwise,
it is my intention to support the recommendation of the
Governor and to ask my colleagues to turn their attention
to the important questions of salary policy for 1975-76
within the amounts available in the Governor's budget.
The other matter I would mention is the perennial
question of support for the State Universities Retirement
System. Several of you, through service on the SURS
Board, are aware of the controversy surrounding the
adequacy and, indeed, the legality of tlie levels of support
provided SURS throughout its histor)'. The only things
of which I am certain in this situation are that it is a
problem which cannot be solved unilaterally by any single
university, that it is a problem whose magnitude is sub-
ject to great disagreement among experts, that it is a
matter currently under litigation, and that it is a prob-
lem of real concern to all of us who are members of
SURS. We shall continue to press for some resolution of
this matter, but we intend to deal with this problem as a
matter which must be separate from the operating budget
for any given year. The solution must be long-range, it
must have strong support from a number of elements of
State government, and it can only be developed through
special attention separate from normal budgetary con-
siderations. ^Ve shall continue to call for and to partici-
pate in efforts to provide diat needed special attention.
Board of Trustees Holds Annual Meeting
The University of Illinois Board of Trustees held its
annual meeting on the Urbana-Champaign Campus
March 19. Elected president was Earl L. Neal; Secretary,
Earl W. Porter; Comptroller, Ronald W. Brady; and
University Counsel, James J. Costello.
Mr. Neal, a member of the Board since 1971, is a
Chicago attorney and a member of the University of
Illinois Class of 1949. Three new members took seats at
the meeting: Robert J. Lenz, Bloomington attorney and
member of the Class of 1959, Law 1963; Mrs. Nina
Temple Shepherd, Winnetka, Class of 1955; and Arthur
R. Velasquez, President of Azteca Com Products Corpo-
ration, Chicago, and a 1960 graduate of the University
of Notre Dame.
Other members of the Board include \ViUiam D.
Forsyth, Jr., Springfield; Ralph C. Hahn, Springfield;
George W. Howard III, Mt. \'ernon; Park Livingston,
LaGrange; and Mrs. Jane Hayes Rader, Cobden. Gov-
ernor Daniel Walker is an ex officio member.
Student members who do not vote are Michael Lee
Conlon, Medical Center Campus; Terry P. Cosgrove,
Urbana-Champaign Campus; and Kim Gilbertsen, Chi-
cago Circle Campus.
Trustees Adopt Resolution re Faculty Promotion and Tenure
In response to requests from students related to a
specific nonreappointment case, the Board of Trustees at
its March 19 meeting approved the following resolution:
Resolved,
That the Board of Trustees desires to determine the
nature and extent of concern among faculty, staff, and
students about promotion and tenure policies, and related
issues;
That the purpose of this effort shall be to reaffirm the
promotion and tenure policies vvliich contribute to the
academic distinction of the University of Illinois, and to
consider such changes as may be needed to more effec-
tively build and maintain a great university;
That the Board of Trustees is cognizant of the special
role of the Senates on these issues and states that par-
ticular care shall be employed to obtain the consultation
of the faculty throughout this study;
That the University President is hereby requested to
consult with appropriate parties at the campuses of the
University to determine whether and to what extent
changes should be considered in the policies, practices,
procedures, guidelines, and Statutes pertaining to pro-
motion and tenure;
That, following a presentation by students and others
at an informal conversation yesterday with some members
of the Board of Trustees and an analysis of an admin-
istrator's report on the so-called "Byars case," the Board
of Trustees resolves further that it will not intervene in
this case. Inter\ention by the Board in a case of non-
reappointment of a non-tenured faculty member would
only be done upon compelling reasons which are absent
in this case.
As of this writing, President Corbally is de\eloping
plans for the study requested by the Board.
Application for Retirement
Faculty and staff who are planning to retire this year
are reminded they must file an application for retirement
with the State Universities Retirement System. Failure
to file before the date the annuity is to become effective
can result, and in some cases has resulted, in delay of
payment and even loss of benefits.
Since the Retirement Office has no way of knowing
when faculty and staff members plan to retire, especially
those who retire before the mandatory age, it is up to the
member to notify the Retirement Office sometime before
the date of retirement.
Write to the State Universities Retirement System, 50
Gerty Drive, Champaign, Illinois 61820.
Inquiries to tlie Faculty Letter may be directed to the
editor, Lucille Turigliatto, 364 Administration Building,
Urbana. Telephone 333-6502.
220g Librai'y-
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 258, August 20, 1975
UNIVERSITY OF Illi
Presidents Statement on University's FY 19/0 "Elu^^f^*
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES JULY 16, 1975
lilEiWHARyOEIKg
OCT 21 1975
UNIVERSITY OF Illinois
Under normal circumstances, I would today be pre-
senting to you a final budget proposal for fiscal year
1976 and a preliminary' budget request for fiscal year
1977. Those normal circumstances have not prevailed
this year as they have not for several years. On June 1 1 ,
1975 — only a little more than a month ago — Governor
\Valker announced that due to a fiscal crisis in Illinois
all operating budgets of State agencies were to be re-
duced by 6 per cent of the proposed 1976 base. Since
that date, little has been done with regard to 1977 bud-
gets as efforts have been undertaken to respond to and
to make adjustments required by the new budget mes-
sage of the Governor. And in spite of my statement made
at our meeting last month that a per capita contribution
of $280 from 10 per cent of Illinois taxpayers would solve
the crisis without budget reductions, I must report to
you today that it is reductions rather than my proposed
solution which have prevailed.
I can report, however, that with a high degree of
cooperation among the four senior university systems,
the stafT of the Board of Higher Education, the staff of
the Bureau of the Budget, and representatives of the
Governor's Office, we have been able to ease the impact
of these reductions upon our proposed salary increases.
We have been unable to sustain the average 9.5 per cent
increases which were called for in our original appropria-
tions bill, but neither have we had to fall back to the
4 to 5 per cent increases which could have resulted from
a strict application of the Governor's reduction message.
Each university system first sustained cuts in new
programs (in our case the elimination of prior deficien-
cies in such areas as equipment, library support, and
operation and maintenance) . Through rapid action on
the part of the Medical Center Campus, we were able
to slow down the planned rate of expansion in the health
professions for 1975-76 and thus reduce the new program
funds in that area.
Each university system then reviewed capital pro-
grams which were to be funded from general revenue
funds and each system contributed some of those funds
to a "pool" by agreeing to eliminate or defer some gen-
eral revenue capital projects. Each system reviewed again
its anticipated income fund receipts for 1975-76 and sev-
eral systems with unanticipated enrollment increases were
able to "release" general revenue funds to the "pool" by
offsetting these funds with new income fund receipts.
This "pool" was then allocated among the systems to
provide personal service funds to permit average salary
increases of 7 per cent for personnel in all senior univer-
sity systems. I cannot overemphasize the significance of
this cooperation among the four systems, for without
such cooperation a number of inequities could have been
created by "temporary" or serendipitous windfalls for
one campus or another. We agreed to pool and share such
windfalls and I find that agreement most heartening.
We are now in the process of redoing our 1975-76
budgets within the new 7 per cent average salary increase
guideline. We are preserving the step-pay plan for open-
range employees; we are honoring our legal requirements
for prevailing rate employees and our contracts with
negotiated employees, but to do so within the funds avail-
able will require reductions in work force in these cate-
gories; and we are making proportional reductions in
increases proposed for faculty and administrative staff
to maintain with the 7 per cent increase the same rela-
tive increases proposed earlier with the 9.5 per cent
increase. While the 9.5 per cent increase was clearly
warranted, current forecasts of the inflation rate indi-
cate that we will restore some of our losses to inflation
with the amount still available.
I want to make it clear that the reductions we have
made in order to preserve reasonable salary increases
have been difficult to achieve and have hurt our ability
to maintain our programs at the level we are expected
to maintain. Over $12 million have been taken from the
amount originally endorsed by the Board of Higher Edu-
cation and by Governor Walker. This amount is nearly
half of our original increase. In order to support salary
increases we have developed procedures on each campus
and within the divisions at the General University level
to insure that all personnel replacements and new ap-
pointments are made only after careful review and a
finding of the necessity of the replacement or new ap-
pointment. Dr. Brady and his people along with the
Chancellors and their staff members, including certainly
the Deans and Directors of our colleges and other units,
have worked long and hard and imaginatively to bring
order out of chaos and to create only austerity where
disaster threatened. I am proud both of the solutions they
have developed and of the spirit with which they sought
those solutions.
On the capital side, we fared well. Turner Hall has
finally made it; the new University Hospital is well
funded for 1975-76 although agreement was reached to
stretch out the funding over two fiscal years rather than
to put the full amount in one year; our other projects
have all been approved. In spite of the controversy over
the so-called supplemental capital program, higher edu-
cation projects were supported strongly by the General
Assembly.
It is clear that 1977 will be another difficult fiscal
year. Only during the next few weeks can we complete
the task of recasting our 1977 needs in the light of the
new 1976 base. We will bring to you in September a
final 1976 budget and a tentative 1977 budget. The 1976
budget will be based upon the specifics I have just
briefly described. We will seek action on 1977 budget
requests at the October meeting of the Board. In view
of the fiscal condition of the State, I can see no way to
avoid recommending a tuition increase for 1976-77. It
is illogical to assume that the taxpayers of Illinois will
continue to bear the full share of the increased costs of
higher education and our user fee (tuition) must be in-
creased, in my view, to bear some part of that burden.
Our people, our libraries, our laboratories, our grounds,
our buildings have been carrying more than their share
of these increased costs and the taxpayers have carried
their share. The time has come to reassess the appropriate
share which must be borne by those enrolled in our pro-
grams, and our 1977 budget recommendations to you
v^all contain the results of that reassessment.
Finally, let me close this report with a note of opti-
mism. ^Vhile the last few weeks have been traumatic, no
one can deny that Illinois faces serious financial prob-
lems. Recognizing that fact, it is clear that higher edu-
cation did receive strong support from the General As-
sembly and from the Governor. Rather than concentrate
upon our losses, we need to recognize our gains. Many
jjeople have worked very hard to insure that the fiscal
problems of our State did not lead to fiscal disaster for
higher education. We have a strong base of support and
I cannot feel that despair is a proper feeling in recogni-
tion of that support.
Summary of Final Action
on University'' s FY 1976 Capital Appropriations Request
UNrVERSITY OFFICE FOR PLANNING
OVERVIEW
The interim between the tentative request of $50,-
329,500 for the FY1976 capital appropriations presented
to the Board of Trustees on July 17, 1974 (reported in
Faculty Letter No. 248) and the approval of the projects
by the Governor in July 1975 was quite a turbulent
period. When the tentative request was made in July
1974, it was assumed that the projects approved by the
General Assembly for FY1975 (SB1424 and HB2274)
would be approved by the Governor. However, the Gov-
ernor vetoed the Turner Hall Addition and when the
budget request for the FY1976 capital appropriations
was submitted to the Board of Trustees, the Turner Hall
Addition was included, plus an adjustment to the Library
Addition at Chicago Circle. The total amount approved
on September 18, 1974, was $89,526,100. Of this re-
quest, the Illinois Board of Higher Education approved
$73,953,420 on January- 7, 1975. The Board of Higher
Education approved $7,500,000 more for the University
Replacement Hospital in FY1976 than was requested,
as it was desired to approve the total project at one time
and develop a financing arrangement whereby the State
would bond the entire project and the amortization of
the project would be accomplished by the State paying
$30,000,000 and the remaining $30,000,000 plus financ-
ing charge would be provided from Hospital Income over
the repayment period.
In January of 1975, the Governor proposed an ac-
celerated building program for the State and the Board
of Trustees approved an additional amount of $9,125,520
in capital projects for FY1976. The Board of Higher
Education approved $8,598,000 of these projects and
the original amount requested in September 1975. In
total, the Board of Trustees approved $98,651,620 for
FY1976 and the Board of Higher Education approved
$82,551,420.
In June of 1975, two amendments were proposed to
the 79th General Assembly which involved capital proj-
ects for the University. One amendment was made to
House Bill 802 to provide ( 1 ) a new building for Veter-
inary Medicine Research Animal Facility, (2) remodel-
ing of the Small Animal Clinic, Surgery and Obstetrics
Laboratory, and Basic Sciences Building of the College
of Veterinary Medicine, (3) conversion of old Large
Animal Clinic to a Meats Laboratory, (4) planning a
new building for Agricultural Engineering Sciences, and
(5) planning Phase I of the Veterinary' Basic Sciences
Building. Another amendment was made to House Bill
289 to provide for air conditioning the Terminal Building
at Willard Airport.
On June 11, 1975, tlie Governor requested that all
State agencies reduce the General Revenue portion of the
budget request by 6 per cent. During the negotiations by
the Board of Higher Education with the Bureau of the
Budget, it \vas agreed to defer some of the FY1976 Gen-
eral Revenue Funds for capital projects (mainly funds
to complete projects and for non-bondable equipment)
in order to provide funds to allow an average 7 per cent
salary- increase for all continuing employees.
The total capital projects for the University of Illinois
presented to the 79th General Assembly for action were
$84,707,420. Of this amount, $84,201,420 was in House
Bill 289 and House Bill 802, and $506,000 in Senate
Bill 468. Of this total request, $68,675,020 was authorized
by the Governor. A summary of the recjuest by major
project categoiy and campus with the amount authorized
is shown in Table 1 and a complete description of all
projects requested and the action taken throughout the
history of the FY76 capital request is shown in Table 2.
TABLE 1 — COMPARISON OF FY 1976 CAPITAL REQUESTS BY CATEGORY AND CAMPUS
WITH FINAL AMOUNTS AUTHORIZED BY THE GOVERNOR
Tcltil Capital ProjrcH for FY 1976
Total Capital Projects Signed by Governor in FY 1976
Chicago Medical Urbana-
Project Calf gory Circle Center Champaign Total
1. Building Projects
MC Hospital Replacement $49,750,000 $49,750,000
CC Library .addition S 5,828,700 5,828,700
MC Liquid Gas Storage Facility 50,000 50,000
UC Speech and Hearing Clinic $ 62,000 62,000
UC Turner Hall .•\ddiuon 7,933,200 7,933,200
UC Law Building .\ddilion 5,783,200 5,783,200
UC Librar\- North Court Addition ... . 1,471,400 1,471,400
UC Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition,
Phase II 1,659,600 1,659,600
UC .\irport Crash Rescue Facility 275,800 275,800
Subtotal ( 5,828,700) (49,800,000) (17,185,200) (72,813,900) (
2. Funds to Complete Bond-Eligible Build-
ings -O- 235,300 57,600 292,900
3. Land -O- -O- 200,000 200,000
4. E<iuipment 571,600 1,567,000 455,000 2,593,600
5. UtiUtics... 1,174,000 37,800 2,120,000 3,331,800
6. Remodeling and Rehabilitation 2,294,820 9,221,800 5,284,700 16,801,320
7. Site Improvements 280,500 1,225,900 506,000 2,012,400
8. Planning
CC .\cademic Building 195,000 195,000
MC School of Public Health 159,000 159,000
UC Life Sciences Teaching Lab 93,600 93,600
UC Engineering Library Addition 41,200 41,200
UC Botany Greenhouse 29,000 29,000
Subtotal ( 195,000) ( 159,000) ( 163,800) ( 517,800) (
9. Cooperative Improvements -0- -0- 187,900 187,900
7"Or.4i $10,344,620 $62,246,800 $26,160,200 $98,751,620
Chicago
Afedical
Urbana-
Circle
Center
Cbampaign
Total
$51,250,000
$51,250,000
-0-
-0-
50,000
50,000
% 62,000
62,000
7,933,200
7,933,200
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0- )
( 51,300,000)
( 7,995,200)
( 59,295,200)
-0-
70,600
-0-
70,600
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
200,100
1,511,700'
313,000
2,024,800
375,000
37,800
386,000
798,800
829,820
2,161,200
2,265,200!
5,256,220
100,000
1,075,900
-0-
1,175,900
-0-
-0- ) (
23,500
$1,504,920 $56,157,200 $10,982,900 $68,645,020
' Includes $159,000 in Equipment for the School of Public Health.
•Includes $1,086,000 in additional appropriations. ($66,000 for AC Terminal Building at Willard Airport, and $600,000 for re-
modeling old Large Animal Clinic into a Meats Laboratory and $420,000 for remodeling College of Veterinary Medicine space.)
DETAILED FY 1976 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST AND FINAL APPROPRIATIONS
Otiginal Rfquest Supplemental Request Additions
Project Category
Chicago Circle
Library Addition Buildings
Library Addition Utiliiies
Science and Engineering Laboratory Remodeling
Science and En^necring Laboratory Equipment
Academic Buildmg PlanDing
Stack Emission Ck>ntroI System Utilities
Building Equipment Automation Utiiitief
Space Realignment, Plan — for FY77 Projects RemodeliDg
EJctcrior Campus Lighting, Phase II Site Improvements
Campus Graphics Exterior Site Improvements
Campus Security Remodeling
Rooocvelt Road Building Remodeling
Subtotal, Chicago CirrU
Medical Center
University Replacement Hospital Buildings
Peoria School of Medicine Site Improvements
Peoria School of Medicine Funds to Complete
9th Floor SUDMP Remodeling
Peoria School of Medicine Funds to Complete
Peoria School of Medicine Equipment
Rockford School of Medirine Equipment
E>cntisiry Building. Phase II Equipment
Rockford School of Medidne Utilities
Rockford School of Mediane Funds to Complete
ApproDed
BOT
9/18/74
Approved
BHE
1/7,75
Approved
BOT
2/19/75
Approved
BHE
2/7/75
Signed by Governor
,828,700
115,000
929,800
571,600
195,000
375,000
309,000
50,000
60,000
43,000
-0-
-0-
412,020
222,300
-0-
375,000
-0-
-0-
100,000
-0-
840,220
-O-
-O-
-0-
-0-
850,000
-0-
-0-
-O-
177,500
($ 8,477,100) ($ 1,109,320) ($1,867,520) ($1,502,300) ( $1,504,920)
49,750,000
793,400
164,700
210,000
19,000
926,000
491,000
150,000
37,800
57,250,000
793,400
164,700
210,000
19,000
862,000
491,000
150,000
37,800
-0-
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-O-
-O-
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-o-
-0-
-o-
-o-
51,250,000
793,400
-0-
210,000
-O-
775,800
441,900
135,000
37,800
-O-
TABLE 2 — DETAILED FY 1976 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST AND FINAL APPROPRIATIONS (Cent.)
Original Reijuest Supplemental Request Additions
Category
Approved
BOT
9.118/74
Approved
BHE
1/7/75
Approved
BOT
2/19/75
Approved
BHE
2/7/75
Signed by Governor
School of Public Health Planning/Equipment 159,000
College of Medicine Space Vacated by
Dentistryifl Remodeling 2,461,100
College of Medicine Space Vacated by
Dentistry #2 Remodeling 827,200
Pharmacognosy & Pharmacology Lab Remodeling 270,000
Instntment Shop Laboratory Remodeling 22,000
Basement & First Floor SUDMP Remodeling 60,000
Research and Library Remodeling 23 ,000
Second Floor Old mini Union Remodeling 26,000
Air Condition Pharmacy Remodeling 63,000
Fifth Floor General Hospital Remodeling 10 ,000
General Services Building Remodeling 22,000
University Scctiritv and Fire Alarm Remodeling 175,000
Rockford School of Medicine Site Improvements 282,500
Interconnect Chilled Water Lines Remodeling 207,000
Pharmacy Laboratories — Room 200 Remodeling 140,000
OSHA Corrections Remodeling 100,000
Building Equipment Automation Remodeling 105,000
Liquid Storage Facility Buildings 50,000
Air Condition 3rd Floor FUDMP Remodeling 100,000
Correct Building Code Violations Remodeling 100,000
Pharmacy Offices Remodeling 100,000
Exterior Lighting Graphics & Landscape. . . . Site Improvements
Elevator Renovation-General Hospital Remodeling
Elevator Renovation ISI Remodeling
Chiller in FUDMP Remodeling
Elevator Renovation-FUDMP Remodeling -O-
Elevator Renovation-SUDMP Remodeling -O-
Elevator Renovation-General Services Remodeling -0-
Elevator Renovation-Research & Library. . . Remodeling -0-
Elevator Renovation-General Hospital Remodeling -0-
Install Electric Hand Driers Remodeling -0-
Subtotal, Medical Center ($57,896,300)
Urbana-Champaign
Airport Crash Rescue Facihty Buildings 275,800
Airport Crash Rescue Facihty Utilities 14,000
Turner Hall Addition Buildings 7,933,200
Turner Hall Addition Utilities 86,000
Turner Hall Addition Funds to Complete 17,400
Speech and Hearing Clinic Funds to Complete 40,200
Speech and Hearing Clinic Equipment 250,000
Law Building Addition Buildings 5,783,200
Law Building Addition Utilities 498,000
Life Sciences Teaching Laboratory Planning 93,600
Solid Waste Disposal Landfill Co-op Improvements 100,000
Airport Sewage Treatment Utilities 56,000
Architecture Building Safety Remodeling 262,500
English Building Renovation Remodeling 250,000
Visual Arts Laboratory Remodeling 162,200
College of Engineering Remodeling 250,000
Central Supervisory Control Center Utilities 300,000
Tennis Court Improvements. Site Improvements 44,000
Library North Court Addition Buildings 1,471,400
Engineering Library Addition Planning 41 ,200
Veterinary Medicine Remodeling 200 ,000
Energy Conservation Heating Controls Remodeling 105,000
Residence Hall Conversion Remodeling 20,000
English Building Renovation Remodeling 20,000
College of Engineering Remodeling 20,000
Auditorium Rool Replacement Remodeling 45,000
Veterinary Medicine Remodeling 20,000
Freer Gym Remodeling 150,000
Abbott Power Plant Chimney Utilities 565,000
Visual Arts Laboratory Equipment 160,000
Morrill Hall Animal Room Equipment 20,000
Residence Hall Conversion Equipment 25,000
Agriculture Replacement Land Land 200,000
Boneyard Creek Channel Co-op Improvements 60,000
Campus Landscape Improvements Site Improvements 75,000
Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition, I Buildings 1,659,600
Nuclear Reactor Lab Addition, I Utilities 1 75,500
Botany Greenhouse Planning 29,000
Animal Room Improvements Remodeling 245,000
Electrical Modernization Remodeling 65,000
Residence Hall Conversion/Memorial
Stadium Remodeling 400,000
Campus Water Main Extension-Planning UtiUties 25,500
PeabodySt Pennsylvania Street Improvements Site Improvements 274,000
Coble Hall Improvements Remodeling 125,000
Steam Tunnel Improvements Utilities 50,000
Mathews Street Improvements Go-op Improvements 27,900
Volatile Storage Improvements Remodeling 50,000
Gregory Hall — lournalism Remodeling 40,000
Horticulture Field Laboratory Remodeling 25,000
Davenport Hall — Geography Remodeling 50,000
" ' " " search Laboratory Remodeling 44,900
: Offices Remodeling 25,200
Library Reference Room Remodeling 31 ,500
Airport Main Hangar Remodeling 90,900
Advanced Computation Building Remodeling 25,000
Campus Emergency Warning System Remodeling 80,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0~
77,000
282,500
-O-
100,000
-O-
50,000
-0-
100,000
-0-
-O-
-0-
-0-
178,000
546,100
-0-
240,400
-0-
90,000
303.000
298,000
-0-
235,000
-0-
120,000
290,000
-0-
130,000
275,000
150,000
400,000
300,000
350,000
75,000
100,000
150,000
100,000
827,200
270,000
200,000
120,000
395,000
-0-
100,000
-O-
100,000
150,000
275.000
150.000
-0-
-O-
-0-
77,000
282,500
-O-
-0-
100,000
-0-
50,000
(162,890,000) ($4,350,500) ($3,642,200) ($55,086,600)
7,933,200
86,000
-0-
40,200
100,000
-O-
262,500
250,000
162,200
250,000
-0-
-O-
-0-
-O-
-0-
-O-
-0-
-O-
-0-
500,000
300,000
58,000
-0-
-0-
280,000
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-O-
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
500,000
300,000
-0-
-O-
-O-
200,000
102,000
-0-
250,000
-0-
550,000
300.000
7.933.200
86,000
-0-
-0-
23,500
-0-
262,500
250.000
162.200
270.000
300,000
-0-
-fl-
-0-
14,500
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-0-
-0-
-0-
245,000
-0-
-0-
65,000
-0-
500,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
274,000
-0-
100,000
225,000
-0-
50,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
50,000
-0-
-0-
40,000
-0-
-0-
25,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
35,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-0-
-0-
50,000
40,000
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-o-
-0-
-0-
TABLE 7 — DETAILED FY 1976 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST AND FINAL APPROPRIATIONS (Cont.)
Project CaUgory
Speech and Hearing Clinic Buildings
Grcgor>' Hall Stair Improvement Remodeling
Building Safely Improvements Remode!ing
Lighting ImprovemeJits Remodeling
Stadium Drive Resurfacing Site Improvei
Terminal Building, Willard Airport Remodeling
Veterinary Medicine Research Animal
FacUiiy ($300.000) Buildings
Veterinary Medicine Small Animal Clinic
Surger>* & Obstetrics Lab and Basic
Sciences Building Remodeling
Conversion of Old Large Animal Clinic into
Nfeats Laboratory Remodeling
Agricultural Engineering Sciences Building
($350,000) Planning
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences Phase I
($420,000) Planning
Subtotal Urbana-Chamfiaign
TOTAL
Origt
nal Ri^ueit
Supplementat R
Approved
bOT
2/19/75
qufst Addttions
Approved
2/7/75
Sigrted by Governor
''Tot'
9/18/74
ApprovtJ
BHE
1/7/75
HB2S9
HR802
SB46S
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
62,000
102,000
67,000
61,500
55.000
62,000
102,000
67,000
61,500
-0-
62,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
66,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
420,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
600,000
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
(»23, 152,700) (19,954,100) ($3,007,500) (53,453,500) (J 9.855,900) (51,020,000) (5 41,000)
589,526,100 573,953.420 59.125,520 58,598,000 567,513,420 51,020,000 5111,600
In general, the projects approved by the Board of
Higher Education in January of 1975 were approved by
tlie General Assembly and signed by the Governor. In
addition, during the period from the presentation of the
capital request to the completion of the legislative session,
agreements were made to permit the use of the unfinished
portion of the Public Health Laboratories at 2121 West
Taylor to be used as a permanent headquarters of the
School of Public Health at the Medical Center. The
General Assembly appropriated $3,795,300 to the Gen-
eral Services Administration for the remodeling of this
facility and the Governor has signed the bill.
House Bills 289 and 802 and Senate Bill 468, ap-
proved by the General Assembly and signed by the Gov-
ernor, now await action by the University's Board of
Trustees.
Reorganization of General University Structure
When Dr. Barry Munitz, Vice President for Aca-
demic Development and Coordination, indicated in the
spring that he did not wish to be reappointed to that
post at the end of this appointment year, it was decided
a change in the general University organization was in
order. Instead of three vice presidents, there would be
Uvo — one in academic affairs and the other in adminis-
trative affairs, effective August 21, 1975. Currently, the
three vice presidencies are for planning and allocation,
academic development and coordination, and govern-
mental relations and public service.
Consequently, the Office of Vice President for Aca-
demic Development and Coordination is to be phased
out and its functions combined with those of Vice Presi-
dent for Governmental Relations and Public Service
Eldon L. Johnson. His new title will be Vice President
for Academic .\ffairs.
The general responsibilities of the Office of Vice
President for Academic Development and Coordination
to be assigned to the Office of Vice President for Aca-
demic Affairs include responsibility (with the involve-
ment of other personnel and of the chancellors and the
president on policy matters) for the development of aca-
demic relationships, coordination of the operation of
various academic components of the University, and
administration of University-wide educational programs.
Vice President Johnson has been at the University
since 1966 when he was named vice president after serv-
ing as president of the Great Lakes Colleges Association
in Detroit for four years. His title became Vice President
of Governmental Relations and Public Service in 1973.
He holds degrees from Indiana State University and the
University of Wisconsin and honoraiy degrees from Dart-
mouth College, Indiana State, and the Universities of
Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. A former
president of the University of New Hampshire, he also
has worked for the United States Department of Agri-
culture in Washington, at the University of Chicago, and
the University of Oregon. He is a member of the Over-
seas Liaison Committee of the American Council on
Education, and is a consultant for African universities.
Also effective August 21, 1975, the title of Vice
President for Planning and Allocation will become Vice
President for Administration. Dr. Ronald W. Brady holds
that position. The change in title involves no change in
functional responsibilities.
rxC^--'c if^^
220a Library
3 ' copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 259, October 29, 1975
Operating and Capital Budget Requests for' FT 1977
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES OCTOBER 15, l^Ty'^Y JQp -f^ ■
At the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees held
on October 15, 1975, President John E. Corbally pre-
sented the fiscal year 1977 (July 1, 1976, to June 30,
1977) operating and capital budget requests of the
Universit)-.
A description of the request items was presented in
the report titled "Budget Request for Operating and
Capital Funds" which was prepared by the Vice Presi-
dent for Administration with concurrence of the Uni-
versits' Planning Council, the University Budget Com-
mittee, and the three Chancellors.
The request, which has been approved by the Board
of Trustees, will be forwarded to the Illinois Board of
Higher Education.
OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST
The operating budget request is divided into three
components totaling $29,276,300 : ( 1 ) Continuing Com-
ponents ($20,158,200), (2) Programmatic Components
($7,595,600), and (3) Special Services and Special
Funding Components ($1,522,500). The first two com-
prise the mainstream of the University's operating re-
quest ; the third contains the request for essential services
pro\ided to the State by the University.
Continuing Components
SAURY INCREASES
The administration is requesting sufficient funds to
annualize the 7 per cent increase in FY 1976 and to grant
7.5 per cent average raises in FY 1977. This request has
taken into account comparative market analyses of
wages and purchasing power in Urbana-Champaign and
in Chicago, and estimates of inflation rates projected to
occur between June 1975 and September 1977, as well
as the fiscal realities within the State of Illinois.
GENERAL PRICE INCREASES
A 7 per cent general price increase is requested for FY
1977 to partially offset the declining purchasing power
which the University, as a consumer, has incurred. The
inflation increase from June 1974 to June 1975 was
10.8 per cent for all products and services (excluding
utilities) purchased by the University. The University is
presently examining its method of purchasing services
and products to more efficiently analyze the use of funds
at its disposal. However, regardless of the sophistication
of the system, the University has not been able to keep
pace with inflation. The 7 per cent figure was arrived
at from analysis of the past effect of inflation and was
based on the parallel between the purchasing power of
the University and the individual.
UTILITY PRICE INCREASES
Determination of the 20 per cent requested increase
for utilities for FY 1977 took careful consideration of
many factors which afTect utility prices. Historical trends
show that approximately 45 per cent of the University's
utility bill is spent on fuel oil for heating, 40 per cent on
electricity, 9 per cent on steam, 2 per cent on natural gas,
and 4 per cent on water. It is difficult to predict accu-
rately what will happen to the prices of these utilities;
however, there are indications that these costs will go
up in the future. The following summarizes these indi-
cations:
1. On November 15, 1975, the present control on do-
mestic oil produced from wells before May 15, 1973,
will expire under an agreement between President
Ford and Congress. Without the control authority,
the price of oil per barrel could approach the world
market level.
2. The oil exporting countries agreed to raise prices by
10 per cent on October 1, 1975.
3. Electricity provided by Commonwealth Edison in
Chicago is produced from low sulphur coal from the
western states; because the costs of mining and trans-
porting coal are increasing, electricity costs will also
rise.
4. Electrical companies pass their increased costs to the
consumer.
5. The production of steam, high temperature hot water,
and chilled water require the inputs of water, natural
gas and/or fuel oil, and electricity; these costs have
risen 30 per cent in the jiast twelve months.
Over the past year, steps have been taken to con-
ser\e energy where possible. At Urbana-Champaign, ap-
proximately $90,000 in electricity charges were saved
through the telephone energy alert program. During
peak load periods, about ten days during the summer
months between 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., offices were
called and requested to turn off air conditioners and
other electrical appliances for short periods of time. At
the Chicago campuses, significant savings were achieved
by balancing hydronic systems, reducing lighting loads,
and more efficiently using refrigeration equipment.
To achieve further savings, two types of capital im-
provements are needed. First, to control the transfer of
heat the following should be added: weather stripping
and caulking, translucent insulating panels in place of
glass, and storm windows. Additionally, Central Super-
visory Control Centers at Urbana-Champaign and Build-
ing Equipment Automation at the Chicago campuses,
which \vould allow O&M personnel to routinely shut off
energi,' consuming devices when an area is not in use, are
in the initial phases and are estimated to achieve a sav-
ings of 15 per cent of the energ)' used in any building
connected. Other additions include air-to-air heat ex-
changers in exhaust stacks and "free-cooling" coil ar-
rangements for areas which must be cooled twelve
months.
The second type of improvement is ventilation re-
duction in existing buildings. Nationwide, universities are
beginning to reduce ventilation from the original design
conditions to those consistent with use and occupancy of
the building.
However, even with these attempts to conserve en-
ergy consumption, an increase of 20 per cent is still
needed to offset the effects of rising costs and inflation.
OPERATING COSTS FOR NEW FACILITIES
Operating funds for new facilities in FY 1977 are
requested for : ( 1 ) recently constructed buildings ; ( 2 )
University buildings which have not been operated by
the University in the past; and (3) private hospitals
which are affiliated with the University's medical edu-
cation program. Eleven facilities are included in this
category: four at the Medical Center, four at Urbana-
Champaign, and three at affiliated hospitals. The request
for the affiliated hospitals is made in concurrence with a
recommendation by the Board of Higher Education
Commission that the State fund the operations and
maintenance costs of space in affiliated hospitals for
which capital grants have been given and that these
funds be part of the annual operating request.
Programmatic Components
CONTINUING EDUCATION
As a statewide resource, the University serves the
citizens through its public service mission. The University
extends its knowledge to the public through continuing
education for the professions, agriculture, and other
varied audiences. Public demand for genuine "alterna-
tive education" off-campus has been rising at a time
when on-campus enrollments are tapering off. Thus,
reaching the new audiences has been added to the
University's public sei-vice mission. To meet these obliga-
tions, $1,595,000 for continuing education is requested
for FY 1977.
In addition, $45,000 for FY 1977 is requested for
the development of studio facilities, acquiring needed
equipment, and hiring of a core staff for a public radio
station in the Chicago area to be operated by the Uni-
versity. Presently, the Chicago area has the dubious dis-
tinction of being the largest metropolitan area without
a public AM radio station. A license application would be
filed during FY 1976 to the Federal Communications
Commission, and if approved, the abo\e funding would
be required for FY 1977. The AM facility in question is
currendy under the call letters \V\^ON, 1450 KHZ.
EXTENDED DAY AT CHICAGO CIRCLE
The Chicago Circle campus is seeking to extend its
hours of operation from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday to 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday
through Thursday and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Friday.
The objective of this program is to provide increased
educational opportunity and access to residents of the
Chicago metropolitan area who have not been able to
pursue educational endeavors for a variety of reasons. It
is anticipated that 1,700 students would be enrolled dur-
ing the extended hours, 1,200 of which would be in-
cremental to the campus. Additionally, it is expected
that the extension of hours will achieve a greater utiliza-
tion of the campus' physical facilities and faculty and
achieve a reduction of costs per FTE student from
$2,808 to $2,750 in FY 1977. This cost is expected to
continue to fall with each year of operation. To begin
this program, intended for degree candidates who will
be taught by the same faculty as day students, $1,650,000
is requested for FY 1977.
EXPANSION IN HEALTH RELATED FIELDS
Health related expansion pertains to both the Medi-
cal Center and the College of Veterinary Medicine at
Urbana-Champaign. Funding at the Medical Center is
requested for the continued planned enrollment expan-
sion of 350 students during FY 1976 and FY 1977. The
amount required for this continued development is
$3,955,600. To improve and expand the programs offered
by the College of \'eterinary Medicine, $350,000 is re-
quested for FY 1977.
Special Service and Special Funding Components
These components of the University's operating
budget request provide essential services to Illinois resi-
dents. The programs are managed by the University but
remain outside of its instruction, research, and public
service programs. Funding for each program is requcsteil
based on need and should not be in competition with ed-
ucational funds requested. The following summarizes
the University's operating request for these programs.
1. Special Ser\ice Components
\'eterinar\^ Diagnostic Laboraton,-. . . ($ 280.900)
Division of Ser\-ices
for Crippled Children ( 300,000)
Police Training Institute ( 343,000)
\Villard Airport-Commercial
Operations ( 237,100)
TOTAL $1,161,000
2. Special Funding Components
Cooperative Extension SeiA'ice ($ 183,000)
County Board Matching Funds ( 178,500)
TOTAL $ 361,500
Total Increment $1,522,500
Summary of New Funds Requested
FY 1977 OPERATING BUDGET
(Thousands of Dollars)
Percent of
Request
I. Continuing Components
A. Salary Increases (7.5%) $14,035.4 50.57
B. General Price Increases (7.0%) 2,096.3 7.55
C. Utility Price Increases (20.0%) 2,331.0 8.40
D. Operating Costs for
New Faciliues 1,695.5 6.1 1
(Subtotal) $20,158.2 72.63
II. Programmatic Components
A. Continuing Education $ 1,610.0 5.91
B. E.\tended Day 1,650.0 5.95
C. Expansion in the Health
Related Fields 4,305.6 15.5 1
(Subtotal) $ 7,595.6 27.30
FY 1977 Request — Total $27,753.8 100.00
Capital Budget Request
SUMMARY OF THE FY 1977 CAPITAL REQUEST
The total capital program requested from State
funds for FY 1977 is $36,989,500 exclusive of reappro-
priations. Table 1 provides a listing of the estimated
State funds required in FY 1977 for the building projects
and budget categories by campus.
This Capital Budget Request recognizes the need to
preserve and remodel existing buildings for more effi-
cient and more effective utilization. The new buildings
which are requested are library additions, replacement
buildings, special purpose buildings, and minor additions
which are closer in scope to remodeling projects than to
building requests.
The major requests for the Chicago Circle campus
are for ( 1 ) a library addition for which planning funds
were appropriated in FY 1975, (2) continuation of re-
modeling in the Roosevelt Road Building and the Science
and Engineering Laboratory, and (3) continuation of
the Building Equipment Automation Program. The
thrust of the capital program at Chicago Circle is to
coinplete the library addition which will accommodate
the projected enrollments for several years and to begin
remodeling the campus space to reflect the changing
mission of that campus.
The Medical Center request includes no new build-
ings but continues the trend of the past several years of
upgrading space and remodeling vacated areas for ex-
panding programs. The next five years will see the com-
pletion of the replacement hospital and the conversion
of the old hospital space into academic space for the
colleges at the Medical Center.
The Urbana-Champaign campus is comprised of
some of the oldest buildings of all of the public uni-
versities in Illinois. Over one-third of the space on this
campus was built before 1930 and much of it is in old
houses and wood frame structures. It is the University's
intention to replace or remodel much of this space in the
next ten years. The Urbana-Champaign campus also has
the responsibility for expanding some special purpose
buildings during this period, e.g.. Library Stacks, Law
Building, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory. The FY 1977
capital request is composed of three buildings (Library
Sixth Stack Addition, Botany Greenhouse, and Nuclear
Reactor Laboratory Phase II) and planning funds for
five buildings for FY 1978 in addition to the remodeling
projects.
The Scope and Mission of the University of Illinois
1974-80 lists seven major buildings which will be re-
quired by the University. Of the seven, two buildings,
both libraries, are requested for FY 1977; the Replace-
ment Hospital was approved for FY 1976; the Law
Building Addition will be requested in FY 1978; an office
building at Chicago Circle has been deferred pending
the development of a campus plan, and the remaining
two buildings are future library additions at Urbana-
Champaign.
The remainder of the decade will see continuous re-
modeling at the Chicago campuses — to accommodate
the shifting enrollments at Chicago Circle and to pro-
\ide for program expansion at the Medical Center. At
the Urbana-Champaign campus the needs are for re-
placement buildings, special purpose buildings, and re-
modeling for space realignment and rehabilitation.
The University estimates it will require approximately
25 to 30 million dollars per year over the next five years
to replace buildings and to maintain the present build-
ings. It is planned for 6 million dollars to be requested for
space realignment, remodeling, and replacement in the
capital budget; 6 million dollars to be requested for ma-
jor remodeling in the capital budget; and 10 to 15 mil-
lion dollars to be requested for new buildings. Table 2
shows the proposed building requests for the next five
years.
TABLE 1 — SUMMARY OF FY 1977 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUESTS
(Total Dollars Requested by Each Campus)
Chicago Medical Urbana-
Circle Center Champaign Total
Buildings, Additions, and/or Structures $ 7,375,100 -0- $ 7,793,200 $15,168,300
Library Addition ( 7,375,100)
Vet Med Research Buildings ( 366,400)
Physics Lab Research Addition ( 1 19,800) '
Ornamental Horticulture Addition ( 29,700)
Library Sixth Stack Addition ( 3,978,900)
Nuclear Reactor Lab, Phase II ( 1,955,600)
Botany Greenhouse ( 1,342,800)
Funds to Complete Bond-Eligible Buildings 43,000 213,700 45,100 301,800
Land -0- -0- 350,000 350,000
Equipment 690,500 4,003,400 730,000 5,423,900
Utilities 221,000 -0- 1,147,500 1,368,500
Remodeling and Rehabilitation 2,150,600 7,204,400 3,039,300 12,394,300
Site Improvements 350,500 -0- 546,500 897,000
Planning -0- 182,000 730,800 912,800
Cooperative Improvements 110,000 -0- 62,900 172,900
TOTAL $10,940,700 $1 1,603,500 $14,445,300 $36,989,500
' $100,000 available from federal funds in addition to $1 19,800 from State funds.
TABLE 2 — PROPOSED PLANNING AND BUILDING REQUESTS FOR MAJOR BUILDINGS FY 77-81
(In Thousand Dollars!
Campus Project FY 77 FY 78 FY 79 FY 80 FY 81
CC Library Addition $7,808.6 $ 107.8
MC University Replacement Hospital 3,000.0 4,000.0
MC Rockford School of Medicine 49.1
MC Peoria School of Medicine 314.9
UC Turner Hall Addition 400.0 655.5
UC Speech and Hearing Clinic 215.1
UC Library Si.xth Stack Addition 4,408.9 67.6
UC Nuclear Reactor Phase II 2,150.1 200.0 $ 209.3
UC Botany Greenhouse 1,695.3 115.1
UC Life Sciences Teaching Lab ( 141.8) 6,669.6 150.0 $ 353.7
UC Vet Med Basic Sciences Phase I ( 200.5) 9,535.1 160.0 389.1
UC Law Building Addition ( 126.0) 5,539.1 464.0
UC Engineering Library Stack ( 50.9) 2,255.5 175.0 87.0
UC Agricultural Engineering Building ( 156.6) 7,950.4 100.0 340.0
UC Research Animal Facility ( 18.1) 699.7 200.0 $ 63.8
UC Library North Court Addition ( 40.4) 1,758.0 130.0 122.4
UC Architecture Building ( 148.8) 8,234.9 160.0 185.0
UC Pilot Training Facility ( 17.2) 619.5
UC Fire and Police Station ( 38.5 ) 1 ,533.6
UC Library South Wing { 1 13.6) 4,987.8 100.0
UC Nuclear Reactor Lab III ( 35.9) 1,388.7 135.0
UC Aviation Research Lab ( 57.2) 2,307.6
UC Car Pool Maintenance ( 27.4) 1,380.4
UC Medical Life Science Library ( 1 1 1 .5 ) 4,930.8
UC Swine Research Complex ( 49.7) 1,967.7
UC Vet Med Basic Science Phase II ( 88.5 )
UC Geology Building ( 125.0)
UC Krannert Art Museum Addition ( 25.0)
TOTAL BUILDING $19,682.0 $37,095.7 $11,951.8 $10,189.4 $11,192.7
TOTAL PLANNING ($ 675.8) ($ 207.3) ($ 205.2) ($ 245.8) ($ 238.5)
Building costs include fimds to complete, utilities, and equipment. All cost estimates are in FY 1977 dollars. Planning requests are
shown in parentheses.
President's Statement on Non-Discmnination, Equal Opportimity Compliance
President John E. Corbally sent the following letter
on September 15, 1975, to die three Chancellors in re-
gard to the Univereity being in full compliance with all
Federal and State Non-Discrimination and Equal Op-
portunity Laws, Orders, and Regulations, including the
more recent Title IX of the Education Amendment ;
In 1973, I wrote: "Progress for these employees (minor-
ities and women), and for those who come to the University
seeking jobs, will not result from just having an Affirmative
Action Plan, or by just reading an AfTirmative Action Plan."
I called upon supervisors to work to achieve the University's
equal opportunity objecti\es in the areas of hiring, training,
and promoting.
Since then, efforts have been made to eliminate any sal-
ary differentials between male and female staff members hav-
ing the same qualifications, responsibilities, and merit, a com-
mitment made in the Affirmative Action Plan. To avoid the
possibility of inequities developing in the future, male and
female salaries are regularly monitored.
Also as pledged in the Affirmative Action Plan, there has
been added emphasis on recruiting, training, and upgrading
nonacademic women and minority employees. Special affir-
mative action procedures have been established for the recruit-
ment, appointment, and promotion of academic staff members.
While many persons, either individually or as members
of committees concerned with affirmative action, play an ac-
tive role in assuring that equal opportunity is provided in the
hiring, retention, training, transfer, promotion, and upgrading
of all employees, without regard to race, age, religion, color,
national origin, or sex, there is at the University administra-
uon level, a University Council on Equal Opportunity. Among
other concerns, this Council keeps abreast of Federal and State
legislation having affirmative action implications, such as Title
IX of the Education Amendments.
The University of Illinois is in full compliance with all
Federal and State Non-Discrimination and Equal Opportu-
nity Laws, Orders and Regulations, and will not discriminate
against any person because of race, color, sex, religion, or
national origin in any of its educational programs and activi-
ties. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and
regulations issued thereunder require the University of Illinois
not to discriminate on the basis of sex in its educational pro-
grams and activities, including the areas of employment and
admissions.
For additional information on the equal opportunity and
affirmative action policies of the University, please contact
on the Urbana-Champaign campus Walter Strong in the Office
of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs at 201 Coble
Hall for academic personnel and James Ransom, Jr. in the
Office of Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action for Non-
academic Personnel at 52 East Gregory; nn the Chicago
Circle Campus, Nan McGehee in the Chancellor's Office,
2801 University Hall; and on the Medical Center Campus,
Anthony Diekema in the Office of the Chancellor, 414 Ad-
ministrative Office Building, 1737 West Polk Street.
While we are doing what is required by Federal and State
laws, I ask each of you, supervisors and supervised, to walk
that extra mile and make the University of Illinois as dis-
tinguished and respected for its affirmative action and equal
opportunity conduct and achievement as it is for its excellence
in academic disciplines.
While by law the University is obligated to carry out
affirmative action and equal opportunity objectives, I still feel
in 1975 as I did in 1973 when I wrote, "Real progress cannot
be made on paper alone. Help take affirmative action off paper
and put it into daily practice. It's the RIGHT THING TO
DO."
John E. Corbally
President
President's Statement on Reorganization of OJfice of Acade?nic Affairs
SENT BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO GENERAL OFFICERS OCTOBER 2, 1975
Recent reorganization is designed to consolidate and
strengthen the academic dimension of University admin-
istration. For this purpose, some steps have already been
taken and others are hereby authorized.
Matters of general University administration will
henceforth flow to the President in two streams,
through two Vice Presidents: one for Administration
and one for Academic Affairs. The President and Chan-
cellors, with other general officers, meet monthly as the
University Policy Council.
Assisting the \'ice President for Academic Affairs are
two Associate Vice Presidents, representing the public
service functions and academic affairs generally, and the
Director of Federal Relations and Special Projects (Mi-
chael O'Keefe). The Associate Vice President for Public
Sen-ice (John B. Claar, who is also Director of the Coop-
erative Extension Service) deals with continuing educa-
tion and direct off-campus services, including a state-
wide field network and certain University-wide units
(Police Training Institute, Visual Aids Service, and
Firemanship Training). The Associate Vice President
for Academic Affairs (Victor J. Stone) deals with other
academic affairs involving teaching and research, in-
cluding certain University-wide units (University Press,
Survey Research Laboratory, Institute of Government
and Public Affairs, Robert Allerton Park, and the Uni-
versity Office of School and College Relations) .
I ha\e officially created (in place of the previous
larger, unofficial body) a University Academic Council,
to consist of five members: the Vice President for Aca-
demic Affairs, who shall be Chairman, and the campus
chief academic officers at or above the Vice Chancellor
level. In terms of incumbents, the Council will, therefore,
currently consist of:
Eldon L. Johnson, Vice President for Academic Af-
fairs (Chairman)
Joseph S. Begando, Chancellor, Medical Center
Campus (The new position of Vice Chancellor for
Academic Aflfairs at the Medical Center has not
yet been filled. )
George W. Magner, Acting Vice Chancellor for Aca-
demic Affairs, Chicago Circle
George A. Russell, Vice Chancellor for Research,
Urbana
Morton W. Weir, Vice Chancellor for Academic
Affairs, Urbana
While the Council itself will not exceed this small
number for effective working relations and direct oper-
ating responsibility, its consultation and cooperation with
resource personnel on special issues will be expected.
The University Academic Council will have these
major responsibilities:
1 . To help articulate the academic point of view in the
administration of the University's affairs.
2. To recommend academic policy to the Chancellors
and President.
3. To facilitate the exchange of information among
academic officers.
4. To facilitate the administration of common policy and
procedure when arrived at.
5. To monitor intercampus academic relations with a
view to realizing the benefits of a single University
"system."
In view of my own ultimate responsibility for aca-
demic affairs and for administration in general, I am
also seeking further coordination by asking the aca-
demically oriented University Councils to make their
recommendations to me through the University Aca-
demic Council. The purpose is to have all such recom-
mendations sent on to me with such observations as the
University Academic Council shall see fit to make.
As a companion piece, to produce more participation
"closer to the action," chairmanships of the University-
wide Councils will be more widely distributed, .'^s a first
step, the pattern for 1975-76 will be as follows:
University Council on Libraries (chaired by a li-
brarian, rotating among campuses)
University Council for Environmental Studies
(chaired by a faculty member, rotating among
campuses)
University Council on Federal Relations (chaired by
the Director of Federal Relations and Special
Projects)
University Council on Health Affairs (chaired by the
Chancellor of the Medical Center Campus)
University Council on Public Sei^ice (chaired by the
Vice President for Academic Affairs)
University Council on Graduate Education and Re-
search (chaired by the Vice President for Aca-
demic Affairs)
I am also instructing the University Academic Coun-
cil to promulgate concrete procedures for eliciting the
points of view of the other named Councils and for maxi-
mizing two-way communication on matters of intersect-
ing interests.
The University of Illinois policy is to be in full
c nipliance with all Federal and .State Non-Discrimina-
tion and Equal Opportunity Laws, Orders and Regula-
tions, and it will not discriminate against any persons
liccause of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin
in any of its educational programs and activities. Title
IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and regula-
tions issued thereunder require the University of Illinois
not to discriminate on the basis of sex in its educational
|irograms and activities, including the areas of employ-
ment and admissions.
_ \'ice President Ronald W. Brady has been desig-
nated as the University Equal Opportunity Officer for
the University of Illinois. For additional information on
the equal opportunity and affirmative action policies
of the University, please contact:
For the general university, Dean Barringer, 349 Ad-
ministration Building, Urbana, 111. 61801 (217-333-
1563).
For the Urbana-Champaign campus, academic per-
s mnel, Walter Strong, Office of the Vice Chancellor
for Academic Affairs, 201 Coble Hall, Champaign, 111.
til 820 (217-333-0389); and for nonacademic personnel,
James Ransom, Jr., Office of Equal Opportunity, Af-
firmati\e .*\ction for Nonacademic Personnel, 52 East
Gregory, Champaign, III. 61820 (217-333-2147).
For the Chicago Circle campus. Nan McGehee,
Office of the Chancellor, 2801 University Hall, P.O. Box
4318, Chicago, 111. 60680 (312-996-4878).
For the Medical Center campus, .Anthony Diekema,
Office of the Chancellor, 414 Administrative Office
Building, 1737 West Polk St., P.O. Box 6998, Chicago.
Ill, 60680 (312-996-8060).
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 260, February 11, 1976
State t?ient on IBHE Budget Recommendations for FY 1977
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES JANUARY 21, 1976
OPERATING BUDGETS fallen short of inflation rates have required enormous
The ad\ice which the Illinois Board of Higher Edu- efiforts in productivity and reallocation on the part of
cation will provide to the General Assembly and to the Public universities, and that these efforts have enabled
governor concerning appropriations in support of higher "^ only to lose ground slowly rather than to create new
education in Illinois for Fiscal Year 1977 was approved i"0"ey for new eff«|te. I will not burden you again today
bv the IBHE on Januan' 6, 1976. Following this action ^'th a recitation 2@h^ays jn which inadequate ap-
of the IBHE there was the usual confusion in the press, propnations hav^^igo erode our quality — both m
which re?ularlv fails to differentiate among the advising terms of our abiHw to^ay competitive salaries and of
function of the IBHE in budgetary' matters, the appropri- our ability to provSe support services to our faculty and
ations functions of the General Assembly and of the ^taff. We are not^ thtoyear faced with IBHE budget
governor, and the governing and allocating functions of documents which-; pretend ^at we can support millions
the governing boards of the svstems of public higher edu- of dollars worth of sa^ increases or of other cost factors
cation. Thus we read headlines such as "IBHE Raises by consuming our own b^ies through a process called
Tuition" or "Student Tuition to Support Salary In- productivity. We are highly productive; we shall remain
creases" as if IBHE advice represents some sort of final so; and we are pleased that this fact has been recognized,
decision. Reports of IBHE advice also fail to recognize Second, while I, my administrative colleagues, and
the authorit^' of this Board of Trustees to allocate all Y^" ^re being criticized m some quarters for our failure
University- funds among the campuses and other func- to match other institutions in developing massive budget
tional units of the UniversitN' of Illinois. The University request figures, I am not yet prepared to state that the
is recognized bv the General Assembly and by the execu- General Assembly and the governor will find our bud-
tive branch of government as a single university, and g^tary restraint either poor tactics or poor advocacy. The
IBHE data on a campus-bv-campus basis are for pur- Board of Higher Education budget documents support
poses of calculation rather than of allocation. These con- ^n increase in our appropriations of $21,233,300 as
cepts should be kept firmlv in mind by all who read re- opposed to our request for $29,276,300. However, the
ports of so-called IBHE "budget actions." ^^^'^ documents calculate tlie support of the contmua-
,,,, ., , , , .. . T-r,T»T^ , , tion of our expansion of proarrams in health professions
While most of the public attention to IBHE bud- . V^r r ijttj j
1 • r T-<r ^r^^■^ i r , ■ • lu a manner dinerent irom our method. Had we used
getar\' ad\ace for lY 1977 has focused upon tuition rec- ^, tt>tti- .u j . r r j u i
° ■ , . ,, 1-11 T . 11 the IBHL method, our request for new funds would have
ommendations 'a locus which has been strensthened by ^ ^ i j e.nc -ion mn t-i .i tt>ttt- j ^•
... Ill TT^TTT- r .1-1 • totaled $2o,7oO,400. thus the IBHE recommendation
the simultaneous conduct bv the IBHL oi public hearinsrs ,.„ , . r mc r .-, ir,r, t-i •
1 i-.rr.TtT- ' I- , ■• . . dmers from our request in an amount OI $5,547,100. 1 his
on the proposed MP IV in which tuition proposals have ,.„ . , ^ r i r n -
, , ' . .... . , '. .' . ditterence is made up ot the tollowinff components:
been the major topic ot discussion i , the tuition question
is not the maj'or item upon which either we or the IBHE
/-, 1 A ui J ii, 1. ij ^ i Item Request Support Difference
General Assembly and the governor should concentrate. ^ . » „ ,.. „, „„,
D ., ,. , ' . c A J . r .u J Salary $14,035,400 $13,060,600 $ 974,800
Rather, the statement of and endorsement of the needs PHce Increases ... . 4,427,300 4,259,900 ( 167,400)
of public higher education as presented in the IBHE New Expanded
documents are the crucial elements. Programs 6,622,200 3,076,500 (3,545,700)
For the first time since I have been involved with °^^ , kqc =nn q^k ctnn i h";q 9nn^
T-TiTTT^ 1 J 1 - - - ,r,-^, . (New Bldgs.) ... 1,695,500 836,300 ( 859,200)
IBHL budget recommendations starting in 1971, the so-
called "new money gained through productivity or real- ^'"«' $26,780,400 $21,233,300 ($5,547,100)
location" has been eliminated. The IBHE has finally The major difference between the IBHE budget ad-
recognized that appropriations which have consistently vice and our request is in the area of new programs. We
find this difference regrettable because we can find no
rationale which leads us to believe that our very few
program proposals deserved such rejection. If we ■ — ■ and
you — are to be faulted in our advocacy on behalf of
the University of Illinois, it is in this area of new pro-
grams that we are most vulnerable and it is in this area
that we are currently reviewing our relationships with
the IBHE most vigorously. In a period, for example,
when continuing education is viewed as a major need of
society we find it impossible to understand the basis for
the total rejection by the IBHE of our program requests
in this field.
With regard to salaries, our request for funds to sup-
port increases averaging 7.5 percent was cut to funds
to support increases averaging 7 percent using a formula
which provides 7 percent of 95 percent of our personal
services base — a formula which creates considerable dif-
ficulty in achieving increases averaging 7 percent. Other
systems which recommended increases as high as 20 per-
cent were also reduced to increases at this 7 percent level.
I find much more merit in arguing on behalf of the
realistic and of the possible than in playing games which
lead people to believe that the impossible is possible. I
know how our salaries have lagged and I intend to work
as hard as possible to preserve our ability to grant salary
increases which will average about 7 percent. Even if
all of us involved can get together and work together to
achieve that level of increase, it is entirely possible that
we will achieve less. Today's climate is not one in which
we should make great claims to overcome losses ; we must
work hard to avoid new losses and the more united our
voice can be, the better our slim chances of success.
All in all, it seems to me that the crucial factor is to
recognize that the "bottom-line" increase recommended
by the IBHE for the University of Illinois is a serious
attempt by the IBHE, based upon a similar attempt by
our Board of Trustees, to recognize legitimate and es-
sential needs during a time of constrained resources. We
must not permit debate about tuition policy, about ac-
cess, and about aid to other components of higher educa-
tion in Illinois to divert our attention and the attention of
the General Assembly, of the governor, and of the people
of Illinois from the fact that we and the IBHE are in
reasonable agreement concerning the minimum funding
necessary to maintain the quality and the service of the
University of Illinois.
CAPITAL BUDGETS
The University of Illinois submitted capital budget
requests for FY 1977 in the amount of $37,168,361 and
the IBHE documents support an amount of $22,131,950.
Within a framework of funds available for capital de-
velopment, the IBHE had to reduce requests from the
systems totaling $247,857,117 to recommendations total-
ing $97,929,769, or a reduction to about 40 percent of
requests. In this process, several projects of major im-
portance to the University of Illinois have been deferred,
including particularly a $4,000,000 addition to the li-
brary stacks at Urbana-Champaign, over $2,000,000 for
phase two of the nuclear reactor laboratory at Urbana-
Champaign, and about $1,700,000 for botany green-
houses at Urbana-Champaign. On the positive side, how-
ever, and of crucial importance is IBHE approval of
$4,360,250 for space realignment, remodeling, and re-
placement on our three campuses. This program will
permit the timely and efficient preservation of physical
plants in which the people of Illinois have a major in-
vestment, and will enable us to adapt old space for new
uses at great savings in time and in money.
Detailed Comparison: UI Budget Request, IBHE Recommendations
OPERATING BUDGET
Table 1 shows the detailed comparison of the Uni-
versity's operating budget request with the Board of
Higher Education's recommendations.
General Price Increases
The IBHE recommended a 7 percent increase for
expense items and a 10 percent increase for equipment.
The increased amount for equipment was recommended
because appropriations in recent years have not been
sufficient to replace equipment and library books.
Utility Price Increoses
The recommendation of a 15 percent increment in-
stead of the 20 percent requested on the FY 1976 utility
base was made on the assumption that, while utility
prices would continue to rise faster than other prices, they
were not increasing as fast as in recent years and that
the University would continue to show savings in the
amount of energy consumed.
Operating Funds for New Buildings
The new buildings to be opened in FY 1977 were
uniformly funded at $2.10 per gross square foot with
the exception of the Veterinary' Medicine Feed and
Storage Building at Urbana-Champaign and the Liquid
Storage Facility at the Medical Center; these buildings
\vere funded at a lesser amount. The request to fund the
operation and maintenance of Memorial Stadium and
the University Ice Rink was not approved.
Continuing Education and Extended Day
The request for funds for continuing education was
not approved and the request for the Extended Day pro-
gram at Chicago Circle was reduced by $850,000 (ap-
proximately 50 percent). The IBHE recommended that
the development of the Extended Day program be de-
veloped over a period of five years instead of three years
as proposed by the University.
Expansion in Health Related Fields
The IBIIE recommended that the University recei\e
an additional $1,000,000 for health-related expansion at
the Nfedical Center and $200,000 for expansion of the
College of \"eterinar)' Medicine at Urbana-Champaign.
The IBHE also recommended that a nonrecurring appro-
priation of $2,495,900 from FY 1976 for operation of
1919 West Taylor be reallocated to health expansion for
FY 1977. This amount will allow the University to ad-
mit an additional 109 students in health-related cur-
ricula, bringing the number of additional students to
350 during tlie Fiscal Years 1976 and 1977.
Special Services and Special Funding Components
Tlie IBHE recommended $150,000 for the Division
of Ser\ices for Crippled Children, $83,000 for the Police
Training Institute, $15,000 for the Cooperative Extension
Serv-ice, and $178,500 for county board matching funds.
No recommendation was made on the commercial opera-
tions of Willard ."Mrport. The University will negotiate
this request ($237,100) with the Bureau of the Budget
and the staffs of the General Assembly Appropriation
Committees.
Other Recommendations
The board made recommendations for some funds
which were not requested directly by the University. The
funds for equipment mentioned earlier were part of the
general price increases request; in addition to these
funds, the IBHE recommended an additional $250,000
for equipment at Urbana-Champaign based on need
shown in special analytical studies submitted in the past
two years.
An additional $650,000 was recommended for Ur-
bana-Champaign for space realignment, remodeling,
and replacement, the concept which prescribes funding
levels needed at each campus to prevent deterioration of
the physical facilities. This amount is for those space
realignment, remodeling, and replacement (SR^) proj-
ects which cannot be funded from Capital Development
Bond Funds in the capital budget.
The IBIIE recommended $18,664,300 for retirement
to allow for the annual payout. The University requested
the minimum statutory requirement of $33,966,100.
CAPITAL BUDGET
The capital budget request of the University of Illi-
nois for FY 1977 was $36,989,500 as reported in Faculty
Letter no. 259, October 29, 1975. The total capital bud-
get request was increased to $37,168,361 as a result of the
Board of Higher Education's acceptance of the space
realignment, remodeling, and replacement (SR^) con-
cept. The University proposed that, if the SR^ concept
was approved, the request of $6,041,261 would replace
projects totaling $5,862,400. Table 2 shows the request
(including SR^) and the recommendations of the Board
of Higher Education by campus and by budget category.
No new building projects were approved, although
building projects with prior appropriations (such as the
Library .Addition at Chicago Circle, the Speech and
Hearing Clinic at Urbana-Champaign, the Peoria School
of Medicine, and the School of Public Health at the
Medical Center) were continued. In keeping with the
stated guidelines, the major emphasis of the IBHE rec-
ommendations was on remodeling and rehabilitation,
funded both as major remodeling and as space realign-
ment, remodeling, and replacement. Funds were also
recommended for equipment associated with ongoing
building projects and ongoing and new remodeling proj-
ects. Central supervisory control at Urbana-Champaign
was the only utility request approved in the utility cate-
gory, although some other utility projects were approved
as part of SR^. The only site improvement approved was
security lighting at Chicago Circle. No requests for land
or cooperative improvements were approved. Planning
funds were approved for three buildings at Urbana-
Champaign (Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences Phase
I, Law Building Addition, and Engineering Library
Stack Addition) and two major remodeling projects
(ventilating and air conditioning of the Pharmacy Build-
ing at the Medical Center and Auditorium roof replace-
ment at Urbana-Champaign). Planning funds for the
Life Sciences Teaching Laboratory and the Agricultural
Engineering Building were not approved.
TABLE 1 — COMPARISON OF Ul OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST FOR FY 1977 WITH IBHE RECOMMENDATIONS (IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS!
UI Request
Salary Increases (7.5%) $14,033.4
General Price Increases (7.0%) 2,0%.3
Equipment
Utilitiej (20.0%)
O&M New Buildings
Conlinuiog Education
Extended Day
Health Expansion
Veterinarv Medicine
SR> — LC
2,331.0
1,695.5
1,&40.0
1,650.0
1,459.7*
350.0
(7.0%) $13,060.6
(7.0%) 1,833.4
(10.0%)
(15.0%)
405.9
1,770.6
836.3
-0-
800.0
1,000.0*
200.0
650.0
* The IBHE recommended $1,OCIO,000 for health expansion, but agreed to
adjust the FY 1976 base by $2,495,900 which had the same effect as recom-
mending a $3,495,900 increment for health expansion.
Equipment — UC
DSCC
Veterinary Diagnostic
Laboratory
Police Training
Cooperative Extension . . .
County Board Matching
Funds
Willard Airport
280.9
343.0
183.0
178.5
237.1
Total (11.3%) $26,780.4
IBHE
Recommendations
$ 250.0
150.0
-0-
83.0
15.0
(9.0%) $21,233.3
■ No recommendation; this will be negotiated with the Bu
TABLE 2 — DETAILED FY 1977 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST AS APPROVED BY BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION
BOT
Category and Project 10/15/75
Chicago Circle
Buildings, Additions, and/or Structures
Library Addition $ 7.375,100
Subtotal ( 7,375,100)
Funds to Complete Bond-Eligible Buildings
Library Addition 43,000
Subtotal ( 43,000)
Land -0-
Equipment
Library Addition 390,500
SEL-Engineering 300,000
Subtotal ( 690,500)
Utilities -0-
Remodeling and Rehabilitation
SEL-Engineering 300,000
Roosevelt Road Building 600,000
Building Equipment Automation 300,000
Subtotal ( 1,200,000)
Site Improvements
Exterior Lighting 177,500
Exterior Campus Graphics 43,000
Bus Stop Shelters 35,000
Changes to Accommodate Handicapped 95,000
Subtotal ( 350,500)
Planning -0-
Cooperative Improvements
Pedestrian Traffic Control — Morgan 55.000
Pedestrian Traffic Control — Polk 55,000
Subtotal ( 110,000)
Space Realignment, Remodeling,
and Replacement 1,170,013
Campus Security ( 95,600)
ECB & FEB Interior Graphics ( 35,000)
UH First Floor Security Doors ( 34.000)
Fire Alarm Modification ( 96,500)
Service Building ( 32,000)
BSB Acoustical Treatment Room 4113A ( 18,500)
OSHA Phase I ( 57.000)
Lecture Center 12KV Duct Corrections ( 72.500)
Lecture Center Air Intake ( 52,000)
Lecture Center Lighting Correction ( 45,000)
Safety Valve for Heating System ( 70.000)
Repair Roofs (Library, A&A, BSB) ( 100,000)
Switch Gear Maintenance Program ( 30,000)
Ventilation Changes in Service Building ( 10,000)
Vibration Eliminators (PEB & ECB) ( 3,500)
Sump Pump Rehabihtation Program { 20,000)
Rehabilitate Exterior Doors to Clsrm Bldgs..( 15,000)
Exterior Wall Repairs ECB ( 39,413)
Repair Seating in Classroom Bldgs ( 10,000)
Pigeon Control ( 30,000)
Elevator Rehabilitation ( 10,000)
Exterior Masonry Repair ( 40,000)
Repair Insulation in Heating & Cooling Sys..( 25,000)
Valve Replacement for Heating System ( 10,000)
Rehabilitate Fresh Air Dampers ( 10,000)
Rehabilitate Ventilation System in Lecture
Center ( 5,000)
Rehabilitate Upper Walkway & Stairs, Phl..{ 100,000)
Rehabilitate Lectiure Center Roof and
Drainage, Phi ( 100,000)
Rehabilitate S-4 Fan System in SEL ( 4,000)
Architecture and Engineering Fees -0-
Total, Chicago Circle Campus $10,939,113
Medical Center Campus
Buildings, Additions, and/or Structures ~0~
Funds to Complete Bond-Eligible Buildings
Peoria School of Medicine 164,700
School of Public Health 49,000
Subtotal ( 213,700)
Land -n-
Equipment
Replacement Hospital 3,000,000
College of Medicine, Project 1 707,300
School of Public Health 96,800
Rockford School of Medicine 49,100
Peoria School of Medicine 150,200
Subtotal { 4,003,400)
Utilities -0-
Funds '
provided from a federal grant.
Approved
IBHE
1/6/76
$ 7,375,100
( 7,375,100)
43,000
( 43,000)
-0-
240,500
150,000
( 390,500)
-&-
250,000
350,000
300,000
( 900,000)
177,500
-0-
-0-
-0-
( 177,500)
-f>-
-0-
-ft-
-0-
813,328
( 95,600)
-0-
-0-
-0-
( 32,000)
( 18,500)
( 57,000)
( 72,500)
-0-
( 45,000)
-0-
( 100,000)
-0-
( 10,000)
-0-
( 20,000)
-0-
( 57,500)
-0-
-0-
-O-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
{ 100,000)
-0-
( 105,228)
$ 9,699,428
-0-
164,700
49,000
( 213,700)
-0-
3,000,000
707,300
96,800
49,100
-0-»
( 3,853,200)
-O-
Category and Project
Remodeling and Rehabilitation
Complete College of Medicine Project 1 . . ,
College of Medicine Project II
1919 West Taylor
College of Medicine, Complete SUDMP. . .
Ventilate Pharmacy Building**
College of Pharmacy, Pharmacognosy, and
Pharmacology
Elevator Renovation SUDMP
Basement. R&L Instrument Shop
Building Equipment Automation.
Subtotal ( 4,526,900)
Site Improvements.
Plan
ung
Study of Space in Areas Vacated in Hosp. . . .
Renovation of FUDMP Mechanical & Elec.
Ventilate and AC Pharmacy**
Subtotal
Space Realignment, Remodeling,
and Replacement
Masoiu-y Repair
Roof and Gutter Repair
General Hospital — Third Floor
Elevator Renovation — General Hospital....
— Research and Library.
— NPI
— ISI
Biologic Resource Lab — Cage Washing .
Pharmacy Room 200
Pharmacy Offices
Window Renovation (NPI, FUDMP)....
General Services Building
Pigeon Control
Replace Chilled Water and Steam Coils. .
Building Code Violations***
Architecture and Engineering Fees
Total, Medical Center Campus
Approved
Approved
BOT
IBHE
10/15/75
1/6/76
$ 417,800
$ 1,065,200
827,200
-0-
900,000
900,000
666,900
-0-
625,000
-0-
270,000
-0-
450,000
-0-
220,000
-0-
150,000
150,000
( 4,526,900)
( 2,115,200)
-0-
-0-
100,000
-0-
82,000
-0-
-0-
120,000
( 182,000)
( 120,000)
1,301,319
926,242
( 25,000)
-0-
( 30,319)
-0-
( 175,000)
( 175,000)
( 100,000)
( 100,000)
{ 100,000)
-0-
( 125,000)
( 125,000)
( 150,000)
( 150,000)
( 101,000)
( 101,000)
( 140,000)
-0-
( 100,000)
-0-
( 50,000)
( 55,319)
( 100,000)
-0-
{ 30,000)
-0-
( 75,000)
-0-
-0-
( 100,000)
-0-
( 119,923)
$10,227,319
$ 7,228,342
Urbana-Champaign Campus
Buildings, Additions and/or Structures
Vet Med Research Buildings
Physics Research Lab Addition
Ornamental Horticuhure Addition
Library Sixth Stack Addition
Nuclear Reactor Lab, Phase II
Botany Greenhouse
Subtotal
Funds to Complete Bond Eligible Buildings
Speech and Hearing Clinic
Subtotal
Land
Life Sciences Teaching Lab
Agricultural Replacement Land
Subtotal
Equipment
Speech and Hearing Clinic
College of Engineering
English Building Renovation
Animal Room Improvements
Turner Hall Addition
Subtotal
UtiHties
Central Supervisory Control
Library Sixth Stack Addition
Condensate Reli
Nuclear Reacto
Watermain ExK
Pha
Systei
II.
SE..
Botany Greenhouse
Subtotal
RemodeUng and Rehabilitation
College of Engineering
Enghsh Building Renovation...
Morrill Hall Ventilation Plan..
Animal Room Improvements. . .
Coble Hall Improvements
Subtotal
Site Improvements
Tennis Court Improvements....
Peabody and Pennsylvania
Landscape Impro\'ements
Intramural Field Improvements.
Subtotal
366.400
-0-
119,800
-0-
29,700
-0-
3,978,900
-0-
1,955,600
-0-
1,342,800
-0-
7,793,200)
-0-
45,100
45,100
45,100)
( 45,100)
100,000
-0-
250,000
-0-
350,000)
-0-
187,000
187,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
25,000
20,000
20,000
400,000
400,000
657,000)
( 657,000)
300,000
300,000
70,000
-0-
155,000
-0-
194,500
-0-
25,500
-0-
352,500
-0-
1,097,500)
( 300,000)
275,000
275,000
285,000
285,000
35,000
35,000
279,000
279,000
275,000
275,000
1,149,000)
( 1,149,000)
161,500
-0-
274,000
-0-
75,000
-0-
36,000
-0-
546,500)
-0-
■ Project changed from Remodeling to Planni
^ Project changed from RemodeUng to SR^ :
g in negotiations with IBHE.
negotiations with IBHE.
TABLE 2 (Conlinuedl
ApproLfd
BOT
Category and Project 10/15/75
Planning
Law Building Addition 126,000
Engineering Librari' Stack Addition 50,900
Vet Med Basic Science Phase 1 200,500
Life Sciences Teaching Lab 141,8(K)
.\uditorium Roof Replacement 55,000
.\gricullural Engineering Bldg 156.600
Subtotal ( 730,800)
Cooperative Improvements
Sanitary District Improvement 35,000
Mathews Avenue Resurfacing 27,900
Subtotal ( 62,900)
Space Realignment, Remodeling,
and Replacement 3,569,929
GregorN- Hall Journalism — Remodeling ( 28,000)
Gregor>- Hall Journalism — Equipment ( 60,000)
Energy Conser\aiion Heat Control ( 150,000)
.-Vrchitecture Building — Roof and Gutters ( 75,000)
Morrill Hall — Masonry Repair ( 20,000)
Freer Gtoi Remodeling ( 171,000)
Library Fire Protection ( 88,000)
Memorial Stadium — Remodeling ( 440,000)
Lincoln Hall Remodeling ( 64,000)
Natural History — Heating Sj-stcm Replace... ( 150,000)
Exterior Painting { 135,000)
Environmental Research Lab ( 70,000)
Electrical Modernization ( 70.000)
Building Safety Improvements ( 88,500)
Building Safetv- Improvements ( 86,000)
.Architecture Building — Flooring ( 15,000)
Agronomy Seed House — Windows ( 40,000)
Approred
IBHE
1/6/76
126,000
50.900
200,500
-0-
55.000
-O-
432,400)
-0-
-0-
-O-
2,620.680
28,000)
60,000)
150.000)
75,000)
-0-
171,000)
88,000)
-O-
64,000)
150,000)
-0-
70,000)
70,000)
-0-
-0-
15,000)
40,000)
Apprortd
BOT
Category and Project 10/15/75
Davenport Hall — Geography ( 93.000)
Commerce Offices ( 28,000)
Huff Gym Roof and Gutters ( 80,000)
Geological Survey — Masonry ( 20,000)
Natural History Building Sprinklers ( 95,000)
David Kinley Hall — Room 114 Remodeling. . ( 95,000)
David Kinley Hall — Room 114 Equipment..! 5,000)
Airport Hangar Improvement ( 97,000)
Architecture Building Heating System ( 150,000)
Interior Painting ( 150,000)
Steam Tunnel Improvement ( 50.000)
Lincoln Hall Stair Enclosure ( 132,000)
Lincoln Hall Elevator Replacement ( 70,000)
Krannert Performing Arts ( 50,500)
Mumford Hall Basement — Remodeling ( 74.800)
Library Reference Room — Remodeling ( 25,000)
Library Reference Room — Equipment ( 8.000)
Library — Flooring Replacement ( 8.400)
Coble Hall — Plumbing ( 7,000)
Armory — Roof and Gutters ( 94.000)
Physics Building Remodeling ( 40,000)
East Chemistry — Masonry Repair ( 10,000)
Gregory Hall Stair Enclosure ( 1 16.500)
Interior Painting ( 129.929)
Exterior Painting ( 112,300)
Altgeld Hall ~ Elevator Replacement ( 72,000)
Condensate Return System -0-
Architecture and Engineering Fees -0-
Total, Urbana-Champaign Campus $16,001,929
UNIVERSITY TOTAL $37,168,361
Approved
IISHE
1/6/76
93,000)
28,000)
80,000)
-0-
95,000)
95,000)
5,000)
67,000)
150,000)
-0-
-0-
-0-
( 70,000)
( 56,500)
( 74,800)
( 25,000)
( 8,000)
( 8,400)
( 7,000)
{ 94,000)
-0-
-0-
( 116,500)
-0-
-0-
{ 72,000)
( 155,000)
( 339,480)
$ 5,204,180
$22,131,950
UI Intercampiis Relations Topic of Concern
President John E. Corbally sent the following letter
to Vice President Eldon L. Johnson December 10, 1975,
in regard to intercampus relations within the University
of Illinois:
Vice President Eldon L. Johnson :
As a result of discussions which I ha\-e had with you and
with others, I have developed a list of problems or concerns
in the area of intercampus relations within the University of
Illinois. As you and I have mentioned, these relations are
crucial to the effectiveness of a multicampus university and
can either be beneficial or injurious to the achievement of
our purposes, depending upon the degree of skill with which
they are managed.
Without attempting to outline either the details of these
areas of concern or the procedures through which they might
be approached, I am hereby requesting that you and the Uni-
versity Academic Council provide the leadership for exam-
ining these areas and for developing reports which recommend
how the University and the campus together can understand
and deal with these areas.
The topics of concern are as follows :
1. Graduate Degree Programs: The University's clarification
of its total graduate education role in Illinois higher educa-
tion in view of the spirit of Master Plan, Phase IV, through
reexamination and "recodification" of all its graduate pro-
grams on the three campuses, with the derivative considera-
tion of
a. the intercampus imphcations;
b. the relevant experience in other multicampus university
systems;
c. the probable curricular areas, if any, in which new grad-
uate programs will or ought to be proposed in the next
quinquennium as collaborative between campuses or
Universitywide.
2. Internal Evaluation: establishment or continuation of sys-
tematic campus plans for periodic program evaluation (e.g.,
the existing COPE plan for the Urbana-Champaign cam-
pus) and the dovetailing of these with the experimental
Administrator Evaluation Project for maximum economy
of time and effort.
3. Library Resources: the immediate practicable means of im-
proving library services to students and faculty by inter-
library collaboration.
4. Transfer of Students: the facilitation of intercampus rela-
tionships among faculty and students which would be
mutually advantageous to faculty members, students, and
the University itself. While "transfer" matters are a part
of this area of concern, other matters including intercam-
pus use of faculty and support resources are equally im-
portant.
,5. Educational Services Off-Campus: those additional inter-
campus relations, beyond the present statewide and inter-
campus efforts, which will strengthen the campus capacities
to extend their knowledge-based resources to appropriate
off-campus needs, both individual and societal.
It would be my hope that studies in these areas might
produce reports and recommendations by mid-September 1976
so that we can incorporate these results into campus and inter-
campus planning and action as well as into long-range Uni-
versity academic planning. I am most appreciative of the
work which you and the Academic Council have undertaken
to date and I thank you in advance for your willingness to add
these items to your agenda.
Sincerely,
John E. Corbally
President
Vice President Johnson made the following response
in his letter of Januaiy 5, 1976 :
President John E. Corbally :
In consultation with the University Academic Council, I
have allocated responsibility for all the intercampus studies
mentioned in your letter of December 10. When the results
are available in September, I hope to incorporate them in a
composite document dealing with intercampus academic re-
lations generally.
Considering the problem of intercampus relations, already
dealt with, there are six areas of study, with assignments as
follows :
1. Research Relations. This research-related matter has al-
ready been extensively considered by the University Aca-
demic Council, which adopted on November 21 two policy
and operational statements. [See statement below.] If addi-
tional effort seems necessary in the light of experience, the
UAC will proceed further.
2. Graduate Degree Programs. This instruction-related mat-
ter has been assigned to the University Council on Gradu-
ate Education and Research, working closely with the
graduate deans and their campus colleagues.
3. Educational Services Off-Campus. This service-related mat-
ter has been assigned to the University Council on Public
Service, which has a series of related studies and reports
now before it.
4. Internal Evaluation. My own Office of Academic Affairs
will retain responsibility for this task, which has two key
parts. First, the office will encourage and review the estab-
lishment and operation on each campus of a prescribed
system of academic-program evaluation, recognizing that
campus systems may be quite different, that the Urbana-
Champaign campus has a comprehensive formal system
now, and that the other campuses have much more in-
formal methods which, by already-expressed intention,
ought to be made more systematic. Second, this task will
involve coordination of the campus systems with the Uni-
versitywide Administrator Evaluation Project \vhich is
now proceeding experimentally with Trustee authorization,
to provide integration rather than duplication and to mini-
mize time demands on all participants.
5. Library Services. I had already talked to Chairperson Irwin
Pizer about this assignment for the University Council on
Libraries and have now made it a formal request. The
several existing reports and memoranda bearing on the
need for improved intercampus library services will be
utilized.
6. Intercampus Services to Students and Faculty. We are
using this broader rubric implied in your description under
"Transfer of Students," because more than transfers and
more than students are involved, plus the fact that study
of the student-transfer problem is already well advanced.
This assignment has been made to Director Eugene E.
Oliver, to capitalize on his past and present involvement.
He will use, at his discretion, existing or ad hoc commit-
tees or task forces.
I share your hope and confidence that these combined
efforts will have a self-educative effect on those of us in-
volved and will yield results beneficial both in management
and academic planning.
Sincerely yours,
Eldon L. Joluison
Vice President
STATEMENT ON INTERCAMPUS RELATIONS ADOPTED
BY THE UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC COUNCIL, NOVEMBER
27, 7975
Intercampus relations are an important part of the or-
ganization and effectiveness of a multicampus university. Ob-
viously, the quality of these relations can be either beneficial
and supportive or debilitating and injurious to the University
as a whole.
In a multicampus university it is inevitable that pursuit
of a campus interest may have an unanticipated or unex-
amined impact on the interests of another campus. The Uni-
versity of Illinois has experienced this problem at certain
growth points, particularly in those research initiatives which
are significant enough to require organizational embodiment.
In assessing the problem and its possible amelioration, the
University Academic Council has sought to strike a balance
between encouragement of research initiatives and the har-
monization of intercampus interests. For that purpose, the
Council has adopted two systems of facilitation, an Early
Notification System and an Encouragement System, as
follows :
EARLY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
1. Each campus officer holding membership on the University
Academic Council will undertake to alert the council
chairperson (the vice president for academic affairs) at the
outset of all initiatives for the establishment of a campus
unit which must go before the Board of Higher Education,
the Board of Trustees, or the Executive Committee of the
Graduate College and is to be called an "office," "center,"
"institute," or equivalent. By "outset" is meant as early
as possible in the formulation of plans for such a unit, in-
cluding the preparatory stages of a grant or contract pro-
posal which would include the establishment of such an
organizational unit.
2. The vice president for academic affairs will inform/consult
others as need be or involve others having sufficient stake
(e.g., the University Council on Graduate Education and
Research ) .
3. The objective is the establishment of a continuing, well-
known, and well-accepted intercampus forum for careful
exploration and debate and the reaching of either agree-
ment or full understanding of the bases of disagreement.
ENCOURAGEMENT SYSTEM
To encourage scholarship through shared intercampus
awareness, the University Academic Council collectively, and ^^k
its campus-based members individually, utilizing a central fi- ^0
nancial pool, will take responsibility for:
1. Two experimental intercampus workshops, one disciplinary ^^
and one problem-oriented, in each of the next two years ^H
(1975-76 and 1976-77), emphasizing current and proposed
research, plus promising new efforts, with heavy faculty
consultation and participation.
2. The systematic fostering of other intercampus professional,
research-level activities, including occasional joint project
planning, to supplement the campus-based activities which
are recognized as central and preponderant.
a
■CO
i,
Estela Refdovajncev
220 S Llbraryl
/serials Dept
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 261, April 15, 1976
Statement on Fiscal Year 1977 Budgets
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES MARCH 17, 1976
The Ubrary of the
at Orbana- Champaign
On March 3, 1976, in his annual budget message
Governor \Valker recommended total appropriations of
$817,559,200 for higher education for fiscal year 1977.
This recommendation for FY 1977 operating funds refj-
resents increases of $43,352,300 in total resources and
$40,108,200 in general revenue funds for FY 1977 over
FY 1976 for all of higher education. The increases rec-
ommended in the governor's budget message contrast
with the Illinois Board of Higher Education recommen-
dations of increases of $90,447,400 (with tuition in-
creases) and of $85,556,300 in general revenue funds.
The impact of potential reductions to the Univer-
sit)''s budget request in terms of this budget message is
major. The budget increment for FY 1977 of $26,780,-
400* appro\ed by the Board of Trustees was described
as a ". . . set of items and programs which are needed to
continue the scope and mission of the University of
Illinois — tempered by the awareness of restricted re-
sources." Yet, significant reductions to the University's
request beyond IBHE recommendations may take place
in the state's legislative and executive budgetary decision-
making process.
In view of the numerous budget-related uncertainties
facing the University for the next few months, a set of
decisions must be made now, based on the governor's
budget message, to allow the internal campus budget
process to continue. These decisions should not be con-
strued as the final set of recommendations, which I will
bring to you in September, but rather should be treated
as the minimum maintenance continuation elements to
which we must commit now.
TTie following budget allocations for FY 1977 are
necessary merely to continue the operations of the Uni-
versity :
I. Salaries— 2.5% ($6,218,200). First priority will be
given to the annualization of salary increases which
•Adjusted by inclusion in FY 1976 base of Chicago Public
Health Hospitals and Clinics — $2,495,900.
were granted in FY 1976 ($2,238,600) . The remain-
ing funds ($3,979,600) will be sufficient to provide
periodic and superior performance increases to open-
range nonacademic personnel and to grant an aver-
age 2.5% merit increase to all other employees.
II. General Price Increases — 7% ($2,239,300). Con-
sistent with the original philosophy of the University
and reinforced by the recommendations of the
IBHE, the loss of purchasing power for e.xpense and
equipment items cannot be allowed to continue.
III. Utility Price Increases — 15% ($1,770,600). Cur-
rent trend data indicate that the 15% increase may
be reasonable. Obviously, if utility prices were to
increase beyond these estimates, funds to pay for
the additional costs would have to be reallocated
from other expense items.
IV. O&M for New Buildings — the IBHE has recom-
mended $836,300 or $1.40 per gross square foot
(GSF). This allocation is below the University's
estimated needs of $1,695,500 or $2.60 per GSF.
The following comparisons illustrate the continuing
decline in our potential resources for FY 1977, and the
attached letter [below] to Mr. Furman summarizes my
current posture related to this decline.
Obviously, there is no certainty concerning the rec-
ommendations which the Board of Higher Education will
make related to the allocation of the amounts recom-
mended by Governor Walker. It is clear that the IBHE
staff stands firmly in support of its original recom-
mendations as the amounts necessary to maintain the
system of higher education in Illinois. Our appropriations
bill will be introduced in terms of those original recom-
mendations and this action has full IBHE staff support.
We shall continue to work on behalf of those recommen-
dations and shall keep the members of the Board of
Trustees informed regularly concerning both legislative
and executive actions related to the support of higher
education in Illinois.
Comparison of FY77 BOT Request
and IBHE Recommendations
Approved Recommended
by BOT by IBHE
Salary Increases $14,035.4 $13,060.6
General and Utility
Price Increases 4,427.3 4,259.9
O&M for New Buildings.. 1,695.5 836.3
Continuing Education .... 1,640.0 -0-
Extended Day 1,650.0 800.0
Health Professions 1,809.7* 1,200.0
DSCC 300.0 150.0
PTI 343.0 83.0
Willard — Commercial... 237.1 —
Cooperative Extension . . . 183.0 15.0
County Board Matching. . 178.5 178.5
Vet. Diagnostic Lab 280.9 Removed bv
U of I** '
SR^ — UC — 650.0
Total $26,780.4* $21,233.3
* Adjusted by inclusion in FY76 base of Chicago Public Health
Hospital and CHnics ($2,495.9)_.
** Vet. Diagnostic Laboratory is to be funded in Department of
Agriculture budget at $261,600. This is same as FY76.
Commitment Plan for FY 1977 Allocations
MINIMUM MAINTENANCE CONTINUATION ELEMENTS
Salary Increases ($6,218.2)
Annualization $2,238.6
2.5% Increase 3,979.6
General Price Increases 2,239.3
Utility Price Increases 1,770.6
O&M New Buildings 836.3
Subtotal $11,064.4
BALANCE OF MINIMUM NEEDS
Salary Increases (4.5%) $6,842.4
Health Professions 1,200.0
Extended Day 800.0
SR^ 650.0
Equipment 250.0
DSCC 150.0
PTI 83.0
Coop. Extension 15.0
County Board Matching 178.5
Subtotal $10,168.9
Total New Resources
(Legislative Bill) $21,233.3
Evolution of Major Features of the FY77
Budget Request
Approved
by BOT
Salary Increases. . 7.5%
General Price
Increases 7.0%
Utility Price
Increases 20.0%
O&M for New
Buildings $2.60/GSF
Extended Day . . . 1200 new
students
Health Professions
Expansion .... 125 new
students
Continuing
Education .... 21 new and
expanded
programs
New individ-
uals served
Percent of
FY76Base .... 11.38
Absolute
Minimum
within
Recom-
Governor's
mended
Budget
by IBHE
Message
7.0%
2.5%
7.0%
7.0%
15.0%
15.0%
$1.40/GSF
$1.40/GSF
600 new
students
-0-
125 new
students
-0-
-0-
-0-
9.02
-0-
-0-
4.70
LETTER TO JAMES M. FURMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ILLINOIS
BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION, DATED MARCH 11, 1976
In response to your request during the last System Heads
meeting (March 5), the following represents my current think-
ing about FY 1977 budgets after brief consultation with mem-
bers of the administration, but without review by the Board of
Trustees of the University.
First, we continue to believe that the existing IBHE rec-
ommendations (including the amount represented by a tuition
increase shifted to GRF) represent the absolute minimum to
continue the programs of the University and to give equitable
salary increases. To that end we anticipate introducing our
FY 1977 operating appropriations bill at that level • — approxi-
mately $21.0 million in additional funds. I believe it is neces-
sary to strive for this amount through all the processes avail-
able in the General Assembly and with the Governor.
We recognize that at this time the funds recommended for
higher education by the Governor would provide far less than
the amount recommended by IBHE. We also recognize the
requirement that the IBHE give advice about allocations of
these lesser amounts. Our position at this time about the allo-
cation of lesser amounts is as follows.
Our first priority continues to be the salary increases re-
quired to maintain a quality faculty and a quality work force.
We have now lagged behind e\en the "cost of living" for two
years. Our faculty salaries are not in the top 50 universities in
the country (AAUP comparisons), and our nonacademic pay
scales are becoming so uncompetitive that we cannot recruit
to provide essential services. However, almost of equal con-
cern and of equal importance are the general areas of ma-
terials, supplies, utilities, and the costs of opening new facili-
ties. Because these nonpersonal resource items have become
critical and because the financial limitations that we may have
to sustain may be insurmountable, we have conceptualized the
salary increases into two components. First is an absolute mini-
mum of 2.5 percent (after annualization of the 7 percent in-
creases granted in September for July and August 1976). This
amount provides only enough funds to maintain the "pay
plan" for nonacademic employees and to provide a token in-
crease for faculty. A second component of 4.5 percent is to
adjust the "ranges" for market movement for the nonacademic
and to provide a "purchasing power maintenance program"
for the faculty.
Therefore, our first set of minimum maintenance continu-
ation elements consists of:
1. Salar>' Increases (2.5% -f annualization) $ 6,218,200
2. Price Increases 2,239,300
3. Utility Increases 1,770,600
4. Opening new facilities 836,300
Subtotal $11,064,400
The balance of our minimum needs consists of:
1. Additional Salary Increases (4.5%) $ 6,842,400
2. Health Related Expansion 1,200,000
3. SR3 and Equipment — Urbana 900,000
4. Extended Day 800,000
5. Other 426,500
Subtotal $10,168,900
Total $21,233,300
These items are all significant, important, worthwhile, and
necessary, but the first set must be guaranteed. We are not
prepared to develop an infinite list of incremental budgets
based upon "what if" questions of small amounts between the
$11.1 and the $21.2 million. Our response would be different
based on the magnitude of "what if." Clearly we must achieve
some movement beyond the first 2.5 percent for salaries — but
just as clearly we need to fund the health fields expansion al-
ready under way. We will not be prepared to finalize our inter-
nal recommendations to our Board of Trustees, beyond the first-
set level of $11.1 million as shown, until we know finally the
outcome of the legislative and executive review and action pro-
cesses. It is, however, our considered opinion that since $11.1
million represents a 4.7 percent increase on our appropriated
funds base as compared to the Governor's recommendation of
about 5.6 percent additional funds for higher education, there
should be no circumstance under which the IBHE recommen-
dation related to the reduced budget would be less than the
$11.1 million for the University of Illinois.
Sincerely,
John E. Corbally
President
Policy on International Activities
ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT ITS MEETING MARCH 17, 1976
During the past several years, some problems have
arisen in the international activities of universities — oc-
casioned by staffing criteria not in keeping with universit)'
standards being imposed by foreign governments. Al-
though the University of Illinois has not experienced such
problems directly, it seems appropriate to forestall their
occurrence by adopting a policy position which makes
the University's standards and obligations clear. The fol-
lo%ving statement has been adopted as policy of the Uni-
versit)- of Illinois.
I. Preamble
The growing interdependencies among the world's peoples and
institutions increase the need for identifying appropriate pro-
cesses to enable groups with different heritages, cultures,
values, and styles of behavior to ^vork effectively together to
solve mutual problems, to leam from each other, and to join
in cooperative programs.
The University of Illinois, as one of the world's major
imiversiues, attaches high priority to encouraging its staff to
participate in international activities generally recognized by
academic institutions as beneficial to the teaching, research,
and public service needs within the state and throughout the
world.
A key element in the process of enabling the University
of Illinois to make its contribution to our international needs
is to recognize and develop ways of meeting the special respon-
sibilities required for cooperation with scholars and institutions
throughout the world. One responsibility is our obligation not
to impose our political, social, or other values on others
abroad. At the same time we expect others not to impose their
values on us. Accordingly, a second responsibility is to reject
requests or agreements which commit the University of Illinois
to actions that conflict with our fundamental values. A third
responsibility is to take adequate steps to insure the high aca-
demic quality of specific activities and to avoid nonacademic
tests for programs and participating program personnel.
To satisfy these responsibilities, in the operation of agreed-
upon joint programs the University of Illinois will propose for
participation in such programs only those individuals who
possess special competence and qualifications for the tasks.
Likewise, it expects that the criteria of competence and qual-
ifications will be employed by other groups when evaluating
University of Illinois personnel for participation in a project.
Adherence to these criteria implies that neither the University
of Illinois nor any cooperating institution will discriminate
against University of Illinois project personnel because of race,
color, religion, sex, or ethnic origin, nor will political tests be
applied.
II. Statement of Policy
In entering into collaborative arrangements (agreements, con-
tracts, or other such arrangements) with foreign countries or
institutions, international agencies, or their representatives, and
in negotiating for grants from such countries or organizations,
the University of Illinois, its constituent units, and those act-
ing on its behalf should not knowingly enter into any agree-
ment which contravenes any of the following principles :
1. The particular program, project, or other undertaking
should be judged by appropriate officers and staff members
of the University who are most directly concerned to have
academic merit and to contribute to the established pur-
poses of the University.!
2. Nothing in the contract, letter of agreement, or other docu-
ment, or in understandings not committed to print, may be
(a) in violation of the pertinent state or federal laws re-
garding discrimination, use of human subjects, or other
relevant issues, or (b) contrary to the generally prevailing
' Under current practices, this is accomplished by the proposal
approval process.
ethics of the disciplines or professions involved, or those
principles of conduct generally shared by members of aca-
demic institutions.'
III. Remedy When Integrity of Activities Is Challenged
If a formal allegation is made by an aggrieved party that the
University of Illinois has engaged in illegal or unprofessional
conduct or has contravened the above principles either by (a)
entering into a particular collaborative relationship with a
' Under current practices, this is accomplished by the proposal
approval process.
foreign country, a foreign institution, an international agency,
or their representatives, or (b) the conduct of any collabora-
tive activity, project, or program, then such allegation will be
reviewed by an ad hoc committee appointed by the Chan-
cellor. If the review sustains the allegation, the Committee
shall advise the Chancellor to recommend to the President
appropriate remedial steps, including suspension of work, re-
fusal to renew or extend the contract, or outright termination
imless the University obtains assurances from the other con-
tracting party that such practices will not occur in the future.
Graduate Work of Academic Staff Members
REVISION TO STATUTES APPROVED BY BOARD AT MARCH 1 7 MEETING
On July 17, 1974, the Board approved provisionally
an amendment to the University Statutes to permit a
professorial staff member to pursue an advanced degree
in a department on another campus of the University.
The revision of Article IX, Section 7, of the Statutes
is as follows (new language is italicized; deletions are in
parentheses) :
No person shall be admitted to candidacy for an advanced
degree (who) on a campus of the University if he holds an
appointment as professor, associate professor, or assistant pro-
fessor in any department or division of tliat campus of the
University. Any person engaged in graduate study who accepts
an appointment with the rank of assistant professor or higher
at a campus of the University will be dropped as a degree can-
didate at (this) that campus of the University.
The revision was approved by the Senates of the three
campuses and by the University Senates Conference. The
Chancellors at the three campuses and the Vice President
for Academic Afifairs concurred in the proposal and the
Trustees gave final approval to the amendment at the
March 1 7 meeting.
Changes in Nonacademic Employee Holidays
REVISION OF POLICY AND RULES NONACADEMIC APPROVED BY BOARD
Policy and Rules — Nonacademic has been revised
to conform with House Bill 3093 efTective July 1, 1976,
which amends "An Act to create the University Civil
Service System of Illinois and to define its powers and
duties."
The new policy recognizes eleven holidays for non-
academic employees and specifies that, to the extent fea-
sible, University facilities will be closed on those holidays.
Previously, only nine holidays were recognized.
Eligible employees will be excused with full pay, ex-
cept for necessary operations, on New Year's Day, Me-
morial Day as determined by state law, Independence
Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, and
five other holidays designated by the president.
i^^^r
220a Library
3 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
That Vital Margin of Greatness
ANNUAL MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLV TO CITIZENS OF ILLINOIS
No. 262, May 10, 1976
The Library of the
JUL 1 3 1976
University of mnois
at Urbana-Champafgn
This is my fifth annual report to you, Illinois citizens,
on behalf of your University of Illinois. I cannot over-
emphasize the fact that it is your University — a great,
public university- which serves you every day.
You benefit even- day from your University of Illinois
and the cost is only $20 per year per person. In an age
of high prices and often inferior products, we are perhaps
the greatest bargain you have.
You may not think about it, but the University of
Illinois and its faculty-, staff, and students play an impor-
tant role in your daily lives. Our work at the University
has afTected the food you eat and the clothes you wear;
it has afTected the buses you ride and the cars you drive.
The University- of Illinois has probably played a role
in developing the health seivices you take for granted for
yourself, your family, and even your pets.
Your schools, and your libraries, the power plant
which provides you \\ith energ)', and the roads you
travel on - — all these aspects of your lives have benefited
from efforts at the University of Illinois.
And w-e are working as hard as we can to insure that
your support of the University' of Illinois remains among
the best investments you can make in a period of insta-
bilitv' and of inflation.
Of course, there are many public universities — 552,
in fact, in the United States — and most of them are
good and solid and useful. What makes a public univer-
sity good? Ideas, faculty, staff, students, facilities. These
products cost money. And where does the money come
from? Primarily from state legislatures, counties, or cities.
And, since no government really has money or earns
money, it really comes from the people; not just tax-
payers, but citizens who give us their support in many
ways as individuals.
The people of Illinois have built a university with
more than 60,000 students on three campuses at Urbana-
Champaign, Chicago Circle, and the Medical Center in
Chicago. The people have invested more than $680 mil-
lion in our physical plant over the past 108 years, and it
would cost many, many times that to replace these struc-
tures todav.
And the people of Illinois have built a university
which has attracted some of the finest minds in the nation
to the heartland of our country. More than 2,500 of our
faculty members hold doctoral degrees — and that is
more than any other .\merican university save one.
From my vantage point, I can observe many concrete
examples of evidence that the University of Illinois does,
indeed, possess greatness.
• There are such things as the recorded judgments of
scholars and professionals.
• There are the rankings the University of Illinois re-
ceives from academic and professional associations.
• There are the many, many honors which our faculty
and staff and students receive, and the many state, na-
tional, and international offices to which they are elected
by their colleagues.
• There are the pressures from prospective students who
wish to enroll in our programs, at every level and on each
campus — students not only from the state of Illinois,
but prospective students, literally, from throughout the
world.
• And certainly as I travel around this state and this
country and occasionally outside this country, the great-
ness of this University is shown throughout the world by
the accomplishments of the graduates of this institution.
So that is why I am persuaded and why I can say
with comfort that by any measure the University of
Illinois has achieved a stature enjoyed by very few aca-
demic institutions in the world.
But it has been increasingly difficult, in some ways
seemingly impossible, to maintain our stature. That vital
margin of greatness which we have always prized be-
comes increasingly difficult to maintain. We have de-
clining support of research at the federal level in terms
of net dollars. The federal government appears to have
adopted the plan that the old joke describes for the
small grocerjman. He was losing a nickel on every can
of peas he sold, so he decided to make up for the losses
by selling more peas. We seem to lose a little bit of
money on each student, so the federal government is
making it possible for us to have an increased volume of
students.
We are losing general support at the state level. Cer-
tainly we are receiving more dollars from the state, but
in terms of real dollars — dollars uninfluenced by infla-
tion — and in terms of dollars as they relate to such
fixed problems as energy, our ability to support our edu-
cational and our general and research programs is declin-
ing. As a people we seem to be more willing to support
cures — prisons, public aid, mental health, law enforce-
ment ■ — than we are to support the greatest preventive
mechanism of all — public education. As we allocate
our public funds — your tax dollars and mine — we dis-
tribute funds by formula to all manner of public services
and we distribute what is left to education. We demand
more and better public ser\'ices and we insist that we not
pay the price in support of these demands.
While I receive letters from many people indicating
that they believe the University is receiving too much
money, I receive even more letters from students, from
parents, from grandparents, who report to me that they
are upset that their youngsters needed to get into certain
courses and found these courses closed; that they at-
tempted to get into the library and look at various kinds
of volumes, and they discovered that we were way be-
hind in cataloging and shelving — or a host of other
complaints. Many complaints, incidentally, come from
the same people who indicate that we are receiving too
much money — people who wonder why we don't do
something to try to save money.
Each of those complaints relates to the hard and real
fact that we have cut staff in almost every area of this
University. We have fewer classes, we have larger classes,
we have fewer counselors, we have fewer policemen, we
have fewer people to catalog and shelve library books,
we have fewer people to keep our buildings clean and
in good repair and to mow our lawns and paint our
buildings. We simply have less ability to maintain the
kind of quality which we all expect.
So, what we need to maintain our vital margin of
greatness is money. We are in jeopardy of losing our
greatness not because of a lack of talented, caring per-
sonnel, but because of a simple lack of funds.
What are our options? We have a certain income
from tuition and student fees. But this income is far
below the actual cost of putting the student in a chair
and putting a qualified faculty member in front of him,
of heating the building and making sure the library has
the books he needs and the laboratories have the test
tubes and microscopes. But even at these bargain rates, an
education is expensive, and we must try to avoid pricing
a public education out of the reach of many citizens. We
have tax resources from the state which meet about 50
percent of our needs. We have a certain small income
from federal appropriations. Our auxiliary enterprises,
such as the Assembly Hall, the Illini Union, the dormi-
tories, and so forth, bring in as income just about what
is necessary in order for them to offer the services which
they provide.
But we do not content ourselves with simply sitting
back and waiting for tax or tuition funds to flow our
way. We believe in the University of Illinois, and our
faculty and staff and many of you work hard to attract
private support for University programs. We depend
heavily upon our friends to provide us, not with frills,
but with the support to create our margin of greatness
— those funds which outstanding personnel can turn
into outstanding projects. It takes money to bring ideas
to life, and the key is extra funds. Private gifts, bequests,
research grants — these funds make possible the pro-
grams and services that contribute to our vital margin
of greatness.
At our Chicago Circle campus, which celebrated its
tenth birthday in 1975, we serve some 20,000 students in
an urban setting. This campus came into being because
the University recognized the need to bring quality
higher education to one of the nation's greatest metro-
politan areas. In bringing the University to the city, the
University of Illinois has not limited its purpose to the
geographic boundaries of the Chicago Circle campus.
The campus is only the nucleus of the University in the
city. Reaching out from the campus, the University
meets with and interacts with the city and with its peo-
ple through educational resource centers in the commu-
nities, counseling, tutoring, summer programs for ele-
mentary and high school students, and the community
recreation program. And, on the campus, a trust to serve
the people and the state has led us to develop innovative
programs related to the people and their heritage, as
well as programs related to the people and their govern-
ment. We have the Native American Studies Program,
the Black Studies Program, the Latin American Studies
Program, the College of Urban Sciences with its master's
program in urban policy and planning, and numerous
internship programs in education, social work, political
science, architecture, and business administration.
These kinds of programs have broadened the con-
cept of the comprehensive university beyond its tradi-
tional definition. They cost as much as the traditional
programs because they are of tlie same high quality as
all of the University's programs. And they are as impor-
tant as the traditional programs. Many have been fully
or partially funded from various sources outside the
University. But there is less and less money forthcoming
from granting agencies, including the federal govern-
ment, to support programs such as these. The University
of Illinois needs these programs to maintain its margin
of greatness.
The importance of private gifts and bequests to the
Urbana-Champaign campus can be graphically illus-
trated. The campus looks one way today, but it would
look quite different if there had been no gifts or be-
quests. A few examples of facilities we simply would not
have if we were forced to depend solely upon tax funds
for our income: the Krannert Center for the Performing
Arts, a unique cultural facilit\- which adds distinction to
teaching in drama, in music, in the arts, made possible
by a gift of $13 million from Herman and Ellnora Kran-
nert; the Krannert Art Museum, also made possible by
a large gift from the Krnnnerts : Burnsides Laboratoiy,
devoted to research in diet and in geriatrics, made pos-
sible by a $250,000 contribution from Miss Ethel Bum-
sides: Smith Memorial Hall, a gift to the University
from Captain Thomas J. Smith as a memorial to his
wife, Tina; Allerton Park and Allerton House, with its
incomparable formal gardens and with 1,700 acres of
forest and park land ; and, of course, the Assembly Hall,
Memorial Stadium, and the Illini Union.
So you can see that much of our physical plant was
a direct result of outside support. But it is also true that
many of the works of art and artifacts in our museums,
many of the books in our librar\', and even the bells in
the tower of Altgeld Hall are gifts to the University
from its friends. These things are so much a part of the
University of Illinois, but they would have been beyond
our means if we had not had extra support.
Nontax funds are also extremely important to the
Medical Center campus. The U.S. Public Health Service
alone granted nearly $8.5 million for research and equip-
ment at the campus in 1975. The campus depends on
funds from the .American Cancer Society, the Muscular
Dystrophy Association, the Heart and Lung associations,
service groups such as Kiwanis and the Lions, to provide
it with funds for research ; and of course, these organiza-
tions also are dependent upon the University for the
execution of this research.
One alumnus. Dr. Sol Maizus, class of 1922, left a
bequest of $372,000 to the College of Medicine for the
establishment of a scholarship fund, and another alum-
nus. Dr. Benjamin Goldberg of the class of 1916, made
f)ossible construction of the $2.7 million Benjamin Gold-
berg Research Center which will be devoted to biomedi-
cal research, including some cooperative programs with
Chicago Circle.
These grants and many others like them are what we
call restricted in nature — they are designed to fill spe-
cific needs, and we depend upon them to allow our
research and development to go forward. Sometimes,
however, our most pressing needs are not directly sup-
ported by the granting agencies. In those cases, we must
depend upon unrestricted gifts to help us maintain our
margin of greatness. When we receive an unrestricted
gift, we are free to decide how it can best be used to
maintain or improve the quality of an education at the
University of Illinois.
The University of Illinois Library is the nation's
largest public university library and fifth largest librarv'
of any kind. Only the Library of Congress, the New York
Public Library', and the libraries of Harvard and Yale
are more extensive. Seldom does the day go by when
some individual or group of individuals from some part
of this countn- or from some part of the world fails to
arrive on one of our campuses to make use of the col-
lections in our libraries. .\nd these facilities are available
each and every day, to our students, to our faculty, and
to our staff. But the collections and their usefulness are
in trouble because of the deadly combination of rising
costs and decreasing support. Our libraries lack the funds
to get ahead and are struggling hard just to keep up.
In 1975, no state funds were allocated directly to
research titles for the main library at Urbana-Cham-
paign. We had to make massive cancellations of periodi-
cals, particularly foreign periodicals. This decision is an
extremely difficult one for a library whose importance
rests on its large research collections. The deficiencies
sufTered in the research areas over the last four years
can never be rectified without special money above and
beyond the regular budget.
In areas such as this, unrestricted gifts can be life-
savers. The Joyce Foundation of Chicago made an un-
restricted gift of $200,000 to the University of Illinois
in December. Every penny was allocated to our libraries,
to try to repair some of the damage which has been suf-
fered during recent years.
It is not just the large bequests from friends and
alumni or the massive funding of research from federal
agencies which keep the University going and which
enable it to pursue the goal of continued greatness.
As I have said, many of those who make contribu-
tions to the University have rather firm ideas on how
they wish their contributions to be used. Of course, we
honor such wishes. But those who make unrestricted
contributions permit us to make decisions about the way
funds can be used to contribute to our mission of service
and to the cause of greatness. Those who make such un-
restricted contributions are aware that each and e\ery
decision about the use of the funds that they have given
to us will not be precisely the decision they would have
made. But a few dollars of discretionaiy funds frequently
can make that elusive margin of greatness more acces-
sible to us.
Let me give you just one example of what the avail-
ability of just $75 in discretionary funds has meant to
the University and to the world. In 1925, Professor W. C.
Rose v/as given $75 to support his research on a project
which was then "way out" — he was examining the nu-
tritive value of two amino acids of the protein molecule.
From that initial work in a new, uncharted area, Rose
developed a program of research that involved a number
of his doctoral students, including three who went on to
win Nobel Prizes. That initial research project, the one
that cost $75, has proven to be basic to the developments
in plant genetics which, according to the dean of our
graduate school, give us a chance to successfully cope
with the hunger problems of the world. All of that began
with $75.
From our beginning in 1867, when we had seventy-
seven students, one building, and an annual budget of
$36,000, until 1935, private giving to the University
totalled about $3 million. Some of the bequests in the
early years included a prize bull and a lot of trees and
shrubs. The first recorded cash gift, back in 1895, was
$100. But let us take a look at our more recent history.
From 1935 to 1955, private gifts totalled about $15 mil-
lion, and from 1955 to 1975, such gifts totalled $111
million.
In 1955, the state gave us $34 million; for fiscal year
year 1976 $219 million were appropriated. Student fees
in 1955 brought in $2 million; the amount is up to $28
million this year. Income from research grants and other
sources was about $8 million twenty years ago, and totals
$100 million this year. And private gifts, grants, and
contracts, at the $2 million level in 1955, rose to $11.5
million this year. So our income from these sources rose
considerably during this period.
However, during those same twenty years, the cost
of living more than doubled, as measured either by the
consumer price index, which rose from 80.2 to 161.5, or
by the implicit price deflater of the gross national prod-
uct, which went from 90.86 to 185.
So in 1976 we would have needed more than twice
as much money as we had in 1955 simply to maintain
the status quo.
But, in fact, we did not maintain the status quo. Our
enrollment rose from 24,036 in tlie first semester of 1955-
56 to 60,347 in the first semester of 1975-76 — an in-
crease of more than 250 percent. Our physical plant
investment grew from $128 million in 1955 to $685 mil-
lion in 1975.
The "information explosion" gave rise to greater and
greater volumes of knowledge to fill our libraries, and
sophisticated new equipment like computers became es-
sential to our teaching, to our research, and to the
efficient management of our institution.
In 1955, there was one home-made computer on
campus — ILLIAC I. It was a phenomenon in its time,
as very few institutions even had computers. It cost us
about a quarter of a million dollare to build, and $50,000
to $100,000 per year to run. Today, major universities
need to budget in the millions of dollars per year for
computers.
These figures and cost factors do not include the
salaries paid the people of the University of Illinois.
Our faculty and our staff consist of dedicated men and
women, people who work hard and people of great abil-
ity. When someone casually suggests that we trim more
''fat" from our budget after four years of trimming, he
or she is really suggesting that we get rid of people or
that we permit the salaries of our people to lose more
and more ground to inflation and to salaries paid com-
parable people elsewhere. If we are to save real amounts
of money in the years ahead, we must cut our services;
we must reduce our enrollments — close our doors to
even more qualified young men and women than is now
necessary; we must reduce our public service efforts and
stop making our resources available to you in your home
or on your farm; and we must cut back on our research
efforts and leave to others — if they are available — the
search for solutions to problems in our communities, our
schools, our businesses. We can trim our budget, but
what a horrible alternative for a state such as ours which
rightfully is proud of its leadership role in our nation.
The time has come for you to speak out on behalf of
the quality of Illinois — a quality which has in many
ways been demonstrated to the world by the University
of Illinois. We are told by some that the people of Illinois
no longer wish to support quality; that the support of
one of the truly great universities in the world is too ex-
pensive for the people of Illinois; that the people do not
care if the University of Illinois slips from greatness to
mediocrity. I do not believe that to be true and I know
that most of you do not believe it to be tnie. For the vital
margin of greatness which characterizes your University
of Illinois also characterizes the people of Illinois. You
are our greatest resource and in this bicentennial year
of a nation founded in part upon a belief in education
we need your help and your action on behalf of that
belief.
We have a great University: at $20 per citizen per
year, it is a tax bargain. It is a good investment, even
an essential investment in the future, and it brings the
citizens of Illinois many returns each day.
The president's annual message was released March 28
and was carried by twenty-nine television stations in Illi-
nois, Indiana, and Missouri and by seventy-six radio
stations, including forty-three in Illinois and thirty-three
elsewhere around the nation.
r'l6^^lf^^
''t H ^/I'Snia i 0 V 1 r c 0 V
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
_, No. 263, June 9, 1976
^ "frary Of the
Statement on Current Status of the FT 1977 Budget
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES MAY 19, 1976
•'^^ 1 3 1976
It is an interesting commentary upon the current
financing of public higher education in Illinois that an
action by the Senate Appropriations Committee last
Friday to approve appropriations bills for higher educa-
tion for fiscal year 1977 in a total amount some $35
million less than the amount supported by the institu-
tions and by the Board of Higher Education (BHE) is
hailed as at least a minor victory by those institutions.
.\ headline in a Champaign-Urbana newspaper even
described this action with the words "Panel Raises Edu-
cation Outlay." The fact, of course, is that these appro-
priations bills as amended by the Senate Appropriations
Committee total about $20 million more than had been
recommended for higher education by Governor Walker,
and the rumor mills p>ersisted in reporting that it was
this lower level which would pre\ail in the General
Assembly. There is still a long road for these appropria-
tions bills to travel, and our efforts to sustain at least
the level of funding recommended by the Senate Appro-
priations Committee must continue unabated.
I want to comment upon two general aspects of the
Senate Appropriations Committee meeting last Friday.
First, several members — Senator Hynes, Senator Weaver,
Senator Buzbee, Senator \^ada]abene, and Senator Rock
— spoke on behalf of the legitimacy of the requests sup-
ported by the institutions and by the BHE. Each of th^.Le
senators indicated that it was only the serious financial
condition of Illinois which made it impossible for him
to support the funding of these legitimate requests. All
of us in higher education appreciated their comments
and their support even though some of us believe that
Illinois does have the resources to maintain its traditional
excellence in higher education if only minor increases in
revenue programs were to be adopted.
Others on the committee, however, continued what I
believe to be outworn and unfair attacks upon higher
education and particularly upon faculty and administra-
tive costs. Time and time again our studies have shown
that faculty members average more than fifty hours per
week of effort on behalf of their responsibilities. Few
would deny that the selection and retention policies and
procedures of the University of Illinois bring to the
University and to Illinois a faculty of unequalled back-
ground and ability in higher education. Our faculty
deser\'es first-rate compensation because it is made up of
first-rate people giving first-rate service to students and
to citizens in the conduct of our programs of teaching,
research, and public senice. And without dwelling on
the point, we seek the same qualities in our administra-
tors, require the same kinds of work loads, and devote
only about 2 percent of our funds to so-called adminis-
trative personnel. As Mr. Furman of the BHE has pointed
out so clearly and so vigorously, we are in 1976 providing
the state of Illinois with more and broader services in
higher education than ever before with fewer dollars
per student, a smaller share of the General Revenue
Fund, and fewer dollars in per capita support than be-
fore. We are as productive and as efficient as any uni-
versity system I know of, and I know of no other state
agencies which have maintained quality to the extent
we have in the face of declining support and of the
pressures of inflation.
What would be the results for the University of
Illinois if funding were to be approved finally at the
level approved last Friday by the Senate Appropriations
Committee? On the negative side, our new program
efforts to extend operating hours at Chicago Circle and
to continue the expansion programs in the health pro-
fessions probably could not be undertaken. Our ability
to take steps to make up for deficiencies in library and
equipment purchases would be gone.
On the positive side, our ability to keep pace with
inflationary pressures upon our purchases would be
protected, and a propo.sed 2.5 percent average salary
increase at the governor's budget level would increase to
about 4.5 percent. New proposals inserted into our bill
would permit the University to use its own work force
in space remodeling, renovation, and repair projects
funded through capital development bond funds which
would lead to efficiencies and to greater stability in our
operation and maintenance staffing.
Even with these positive impacts, our salary patterns
will continue to fail to represent the quality of our
people. From data supplied to us by other Big Ten uni-
versities, for example, it is clear that if we achieve faculty
salary increases of 4.5 percent for fiscal year 1977, our
salaries for next year will place the Urbana-Champaign
campus salaries at fourth place for professors, eighth
place for associate professors, and eighth place for assis-
tant professors in the Big Ten. Contrary to rumors, our
competition is not standing still. Those institutions which
have traditionally had lower salary ranges than ours have
made major and successful efforts to overtake us — one
such institution accomplished a 14 percent increase this
year and will accomplish an 8 percent increase next year
and in those two jumps will have gone from a tie for
eighth rank for professors to third ; from seventh to first
for associate professors : and from a tie for eighth to first
for assistant professors. We, meanwhile, during that same
period, will have gone from third to fourth for profes-
sors; from a tie for fifth to eighth for associate profes-
sors; and the same dip for assistant professors. And all of
this will be true only if the action of the Senate Appro-
priations Committee prevails.
But one point must not be overlooked. Part of this
progress on the part of our competition has been sup-
ported by increases in tuition — these institutions have
not attempted to rely upon the taxpayer alone to meet
the demands of inflation. If we do achieve the increases
approved last Friday, we would be only $1,717,000 short
of being able to bring all of our faculty ranks at all of
our campuses up to at least the midpoint of salaries at
Big Ten universities. That amount represents about
another 2.4 percent increase for faculty members. To
provide a similar increase above the 4.5 percent range
for all other personnel would require about another $2.9
million. To achieve at least average parity for our faculty
and to provide similar increases for all other personnel
requires, then, about $4,617,000 — the proceeds of a
tuition increase of about $100 per student per year. Of
course, parity with the average salaries of Big Ten uni-
versities is not, in my view, the kind of parity our people
deserve. I can find no logic to support our being at less
than third place among these institutions and compelling
logic to argue that we should be in first place in salaries
as we are in so many other areas of academic quality.
Had tuition over the past three years increased at about
$35 per year (an increase of about 7 percent per year),
we would at least have maintained salaries at a Big Ten
average level, would not now have tuition levels as high
as several in the Big Ten, and would not be faced with
legislative arguments which now, ironically, are claiming
that we are unwilling to ask students to share increases
with the General Revenue Fund.
It is clear to me from discussions with legislators,
with gubernatorial candidates, and with legislative and
executive branch staff personnel, and from a review of
data relating to comparable institutions, that our tuition
level must go up in 1977-78. In fact, conditions dictate
consideration of tuition increases for midfiscal 1977 as
we continue to gather data concerning the salary status
of our people. I believe that most students and most
parents understand that it is better to pay slightly more
for quality than to pay the same rate and receive de-
clining quality. Recent Illinois State Scholarship Com-
mission (ISSC) data reveal that families in Illinois with
incomes up to $23,000 per year can receive financial aid
up to one-half of tuition and fees. No Big Ten state offers
university students the kind of financial aid offered in
Illinois, and Illinois has reconfirmed its support of ISSC
programs through recent legislative and gubernatorial
action to approve supplemental appropriations to ISSC
for this year to meet obligations in full.
To summarize — predictions that fiscal year 1977
would be a difficult year for higher education in Illinois
are proving to be correct although the action of the
Senate Appropriations Committee last week may indicate
that the year will not be as disastrous as \vas feared. As
we continue to seek our fair share of Illinois tax revenue,
we must face the virtual inevitability of tuition increases
for 1977-78 and even the possibility of increases in mid
1976-77. We obviously must continue to strive to do an
always better job in describing and demonstrating the
quality of our faculty and staff and the contributions
they make through hard and dedicated work to the
quality and to the strength of Illinois.
Resolution on Tenure and Promotion Policies and Procedures
ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT ITS MEETING MAY 19, 1976
On March 18, 1975, the Board of Trustees requested
the president of the University to consult with appropri-
ate parties at the campuses of the University to deter-
mine whether and to what extent changes should be
considered in the policies, practices, procedures, guide-
lines, and Statutes pertaining to promotion and tenure.
On behalf of the full Board of Trustees, the General
Policy Committee has heard two presentations related
to this study, and all members of the Board have received
written reports from faculty groups, students, and ad-
ministrators concerning the topic.
As a result of these activities conducted in response
to its resolution of March 18, 1975, the Board of Trustees
adopts the following recommendations submitted by the
president of the Uni\ersity:
1. Because tenure and promotion policies and procedures
contribute in a major way to the academic distinction
of the University, the administration of the University
and of the campuses and the appropriate facuUy and
campus Senate bodies should continue the practice of
annual review and evaluation of such policies to In-
sure that they ser%-e the University, the faculty, and
the students in achieving academic distinction.
2. Changes in tenure procedures which result from this
regular review and evaluation and which do not
result in policy changes requiring Board approval
should be reported to the Board by the president.
3. Studies of current tenure and promotion procedures
and policies within the University reveal that the
following areas of concern should be given special
consideration in the ongoing re\iew of such proce-
dures and policies :
a. the manner in which faculty members are made
aware of tenure and promotion policies and proce-
dures to insure full understanding of those poli-
cies and procedures;
b. the degree to which University and campus tenure
and promotion policies and procedures are followed
at the departmental level;
c. the degree to which evaluations of teaching gath-
ered for tenure and promotion decisions are used
in in-ser\ice programs with faculty members to
assist in improving teaching performance;
d. the degree to which instruments used for evaluating
teaching performance are valid and reliable and
enjoy the confidence of both those evaluated and
those evaluating.
4. While the University system does recognize the legiti-
macy of variations in procedures among its campuses,
the University administration through the vice-presi-
dent for academic affairs and the faculty through the
University Senates Conference or through a procedure
developed by the conference should conduct regular
rexiews of tenure procedures to insure that procedural
variations among the campuses do not reflect differing
standards of excellence nor differing interpretations
of University policies.
As it has done consistently, the Board of Trustees re-
affirms its support of the principles of academic tenure
and promotion as reflected in the University Statutes.
The Board also reaffirms its commitment to the concept
that the principle of tenure is designed to insure the
attainment of the highest standards of excellence in both
teaching and scholarship. The Board also commends the
faculty members who have developed at the University
of Illinois a system of tenure and promotion which is
viewed as generally satisfactory and thanks those students
and faculty members who have assisted in this study of
tenure and promotion policies and procedures. The
Board believes that the studies resulting from the resolu-
tion of March 18, 1975, have been both useful and pro-
ductive in focusing attention upon and in enhancing
sensitivity to the important area of tenure and promo-
tion policies and procedures.
Guidelines on Grievance Procedures for Complaints of Discrimination
TRUSTEES ADOPT MEANS OF HANDLING ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION
These guidelines are designed to cover grievance pro-
cedures for complaints by faculty, academic/profession-
als, students, and nonacademic staff concerning alleged
discrimination by the University on the basis of race,
sex, national origin, religion, age, or handicap.
Each campus is responsible for developing and im-
plementing its own grievance procedures in such matters,
within these guidelines. A separate procedure will be
established for general University staff, also within these
guidelines. When developed, all campus and general
University grie\-ance procedures are to be presented to
the president of the University for approval prior to
implementation.
A distinction is recognized between a complaint and
a grievance. An employee may be said to ha\e a com-
plaint when some situation or event related to the em-
plo\Tnent is viewed as unsatisfactory. Employees and
sujservisors are exf)ected and encouraged to make every
effort to resolve complaints informally as they arise. If
a complaint cannot be satisfactorily resolved between
the complainant and the immediate supervisor through
informal discussion, the complainant may reduce the
matter to writing and file it promptly as a formal
grievance.
To be effective, a grievance procedure must provide
for a prompt, fair, and definitive resolution of the matter.
Under these guidelines the chancellor is designated as
the final decisional point on grievances by campus staff
and students, subject only to an appeal to the president
of the University on the question of whether or not
established campus grievance procedures have been fol-
lowed. Campus procedures must provide for a final
University decision, including any presidential review,
within 180 days of the filing of a formal grievance.
The following guidelines are applicable to formal
grievance procedures relating to complaints based on
alleged discrimination :
1. Final decisional authority on the substance of a
grievance initiated by campus employees or students
shall reside with the chancellor, subject only to an
appeal to the president of the University on the
question of whether or not established campus
grievance procedures have been followed in the
specific case. Final decisional authority on both sub-
stance and procedure shall reside with the president
of the University with respect to grievances filed by-
general University staff.
2. Each campus may establish separate grievance pro-
cedures, within these guidelines, for different classes
of employees, students, and applicants (students and
employees ) .
3. A time limit for filing a formal grievance shall be
established, related to a specified number of days
after the occurrence leading to the grievance or after
the grievant was reasonably able to determine that
the occurrence might affect the grievant's status.
4. Grievance procedures shall require formal grievances
to be in writing. Management decisions thereon, at
all levels, shall also be reduced to writing.
5. Grievance procedures shall provide for a hierarchical
consideration, decision, and apjjeal, through estab-
lished channels, with a minimum of two separate
tiers, except when the chancellor or the president is
the first tier in the hierarchical channel.
6. At least one opportunity for hearing must be pro-
vided to the grievant. Subsequent hearings, if any,
afforded the grievant may, but are not required to,
be de novo hearings. Nothing in the grievance pro-
cedures shall preclude receipt of additional informa-
tion relating to the grievance at any level of con-
sideration.
7. At each level of decision the individual or panel
charged with responsibility for the decision shall be
provided the existing record of the matter, including
a copy of the written grievance, the resolution sought
by the employee, and the written disposition at all
preceding levels. The individual or panel responsible
for a decision may make such further investigation
as is deemed appropriate and, for that purpose, may
seek assistance or information from other personnel.
8. Grievance procedures shall provide that a grievant
shall be permitted to have a representative at each
stage.
9. Final disposition of a grievance must occur within a
maximum of 180 days from the time of filing, but
final resolution within a much shorter period is
strongly encouraged.
10. The record-keeping aspects of the grievance proce-
dures should be adequate to insure proper monitor-
ing and reporting.
m Lx^ -i /-^
Gift and Exchange Division
220a Library
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Operating and Capital Budget Requests for FY 1978
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO TRUSTEES, SEPT. 15, 1976
No. 265, October 22, 1976
APR 1.^1977
OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGET REQUESTS FOR FY 1978
At the regular meeting of the Board of Trustees held
on September 15, 1976, President John E. Corbally pre-
sented the FY 1978 (July 1, 1977 to June 30, 1978) oper-
ating and capital budget requests of the University.
A description of the request items was presented in
the report titled "Budget Request for Operating and
Capital Funds — FY 1978" which was prepared by the
Vice President for Administration with concurrence of
the Universit)' Planning Council, the University Budget
Committee, and the three Chancellors.
The request, which has been approved by the Board
of Trustees, will be forwarded to the Illinois Board of
Higher Education. .\ summary of the three sections of
the request — (1) operating request, (2) capital request,
and (3) a food production and research complex (Food
for Century Three) request follows :
SUMMARY OF THE FY 1978 OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST
The operating budget request is divided into three
sections — (1) Continuing Components — $19,455,000,
(2) Programmatic Components — $9,913,000, and (3)
Sf)ecial Service and Special Funding Components • —
$1,668,400 for a total of $31,036,400. The first two com-
ponents comprise the bulk of the University's operating
request and the third contains the request for other es-
sential services provided to the state by the University.
Continuing Components
Salary Increases ($14,646,100) — The University has
requested sufficient funds to ( 1 ) annualize the increase
granted in FY 1977, (2) to grant an 8% average in-
crease to all employees and (3) to grant an additional
2% increase to the open range civil service employees.
This request is based upon competitive market studies
conducted by the University during FY 1976. It has been
documented that the average salaries of the University's
academic employees are less than the average salaries at
the Big Ten universities and that the non-academic
employees are paid less than those who do similar work
in the same geographical area as their campus. The 8%
increase is based on an estimated 5.5% normal market
increase and 2.5% for market recovery. This request is
based on the assumption that the effort to restore the
funds reduced by the Governor in FY 1977 will be
successful.
General Price Increases ($2,240,900) ~ A. 7% gen-
eral price increase has been requested. The request is
comprised of an estimated 5% price increase in the mar-
ket and 2% to begin to recover lost purchasing power.
Inflation studies have shown that prices have increased
approximately three times faster than appropriations
from FY 1972 to FY 1977. Obviously, if market increases
are more than 5% in FY 1978, the University will re-
cover less than the additional 2% purchasing power.
Utility Price Increases ($1,723,100) — Budgeting for
the University's utility needs refers specifically to the
purchase of components necessary to provide heat, light,
air conditioning, laboratory gas, water, and occasionally
power (from the Abbot Power Plant at Urbana-Cham-
paign). These components, which must be purchased at
market prices, include fuel oil, electricity, steam, natural
gas, and water.
Beginning with the fuel oil crisis in 1974, the Univer-.-
sity utility costs have increased faster than any compo-
nent in the budget. The utility budget increased 34% in
FY 1975, 20% in FY 1976 and it is estimated at 15%
in FY 1977. During this period many cost reducing and
energy conservation measures have been instituted and
the cost of utilities, although continuing to rise, appears
to be leveling at 10 to 15% per year. The University has
requested a 12V2% increment for utilities.
Operating Costs for New Facilities ($772,900) — The
three types of facilities for which operating funds have
been requested in FY 1978 are: (1) Recently con-
structed buildings; (2) Space created by remodeling; and
(3) Private hospitals which are affiliated with the Uni-
versity's medical education program. The Board of Edu-
cation has adopted the recommendation of tlie Health
Education Commission that the state fund the operations
and maintenance costs of space in afSHated hospitals for
which capital grants have been made. The board has
directed that the University request these funds as part
of the annual operating request. Therefore, funds are
requested to: (1) annualize the operating costs of build-
ings partially opened in FY 1977, and (2) for new fa-
cilities opened in FY 1978. The University buildings for
which funds are requested are: Medical Center; Peoria
School of Medicine and Goldberg Research Facility',
Urbana-Champaign ; Speech and Hearing Clinic, Physics
Research Lab Addition, Visual Aids Addition, Mechani-
cal Engineering Lab (Remodeling) , Turner Hall Addi-
tion, and the Veterinary Medicine Clinic (Remodeling).
Programmatic Componenfs ($9,913,000)
An incremental funding request for $7,595,600 was
submitted in FY 1977 for programmatic components in
Extended Education ($3,290,000) and Expansion in
Health Related Fields ($4,305,600). The needs of the
state and hence the University to fund these programs
were recognized in FY 1977, but the funds were not pro-
vided because of fiscal constraints. The year's delay in
implementing these programs amplifies their need and
increases their costs due to inflation. Thus, the FY 1978
request for $7,789,200 in incremental funds for Extended
Education and Expansion in Health Related Fields essen-
tially represents a reiteration of the FY 1977 request up-
dated for minor changes in program content and infla-
tion. A third component ($1,223,800) containing several
high priority new programs consistent with the scope and
mission of the University has been added to the FY 1978
programmatic request.
The new programs, in addition to continuing educa-
tion and medical expansion, for which funds are re-
quested in FY 1978 include a Center for Bilingual-Bi-
cultural Education at Chicago Circle, an Institute for
Environmental Studies at Urbana-Champaign, an Insti-
tute for the Study of Developmental Disabilities at Chi-
cago Circle, Expansion and Maintenance of the Coopera-
tive Extension Service Program in Urbana-Champaign, a
Library Automation Program at Urbana-Champaign and
a program to reduce the deficiencies in equipment re-
placement and building maintenance at Urbana-Cham-
paign.
The Center for Bilingual-Bicultural Education ($75,-
000) — Will be particularly concerned with the coordi-
nation of existing academic resources (and identification
of new resources), the preparation of bilingual-bicultural
education programs, and the development of related
community resources in adult education programs. In
addition, the center will coordinate all research activities
in bilingual-bicultural education.
Reflecting specific areas of faculty strength and in-
terests, as well as important ethnic linguistic demographic
concentrations in Chicago, the center will initially focus
on Spanish-English and Polish-English programs at the
elementary and secondary school levels.
The Institute for Environmental Studies ($153,300)
— Currently has active programs centered in the natural
sciences such as the metals task force and the toxic sub-
stances task force and has recently established a new task
force concerned with the environmental effects of wastes
from coal conversion plants. A partial measure of the
success of this relatively new institute is its proven ability
to attract other sources of funds that are projected to
exceed $1 million in FY 1977 as compared to its state
funds of approximately $300,000 in the same year. The
objective of the FY 1978 request for $153,300 is to ex-
pand the core of the institute to develop ne^^' task forces
which can respond further to the needs of the people of
the state. In particular, the institute recognizes the need
to further develop research, education, and public service
activities in four important areas : social sciences, air and
water resources, environmental trade-offs in energy pro-
duction and consumption systems, and environmental
effects of alternative transportation systems.
The Institute for the Study of Developmental Dis-
abilities ($218,800) — ^Vill be operated cooperatively by
the Departments of Biological Sciences and Psychology
at Chicago Circle and the Illinois Department of Mental
Health and Developmental Disabilities. The State of Illi-
nois has mandated that the Department of Mental
Health and Developmental Disabilities provide through
such an institute services for some 200,000 developmen-
tally disabled persons not presently served by existing
programs. The institute and participating faculty will
sponsor seminars and lectures, coordinate courses, pro-
mote cooperative research and combine practicum and
laboratory' facilities for specialized training for service
and research personnel in areas related to mental retar-
dation, epilepsy, cerebral palsy and autism.
Cooperative Extension Service ($188,400) — In or-
der to carry out the mission of the Cooperative Extension
Ser\'ice to provide expertise in areas directly affecting
Illinois agriculture, the Cooperative Extension Ser\'ice
of the University of Illinois will require new funds to
support necessary program expansion and to allow main-
tenance of the current level of state-wide contact. Addi-
tional funds are required to support the preparation of
4-H literature. Enrollment in the 4-H program has in-
creased by 46% in the last four years and there has been
a comparable increase in the cost of providing support
literature. Furthermore, paper and printing costs have
risen 30-40% compounding the cost increases.
Area extension advisers are needed as back-up to
county ad\-isers to pro\'ide more specific knowledge in
livestock production, business and marketing and agri-
cultural engineering. The lack of area advisers to provide
back-up is seriously hampering efforts to implement the
state-^vide plan for agricultural growth and development.
The Library Sharing Program ($588,300) — At Ur-
bana-Champaign involves the implementation of a com-
puterized circulation system at the Urbana-Champaign
Library which will also provide state-wide access to this
collection. The proposed system is currently operational
at Ohio State University where it was developed by Pro-
TABLE 1
FY 1978 OPERATING BUDGET COMPONENTS
I. Continuing Components
A. Salary Increases (8.4%) $14.
9,
4,
1. Regular Market (5.5%)
2. Market Recovery (2.5%)
3. Open Range Adjustments (2.0%) . . .
B. General Price Increases
1. Regular Increase (5.0%)
2. Purchasing Power Recovery (2.0%).
C. Utility Price Increases (12.5%) 1
Subtotal $18,
D. Operating Funds for New Facilities
E. Workmen's Compensation Increase
Subtotal (Part I) $19
% Increase over FY 1977 Base*
,646.1
864.8)
103.8)
677.5)
,240.9
600.6)
&i0.3)
,723.1
,610.1
772.9
72.0
,455.0
7.92
II. ProErrammatic Components
A. Extended Education
1. Continuing Education
2. Extended Day
B. Health Professions
1. Medical Center
2. Veterinary Medicine
C. Program Development
1. Bilingual Education Center
2. Institute for Environmental Studies.
3. Institute for De\elopmental
Disabilities
4. Agriculture Cooperative Extension. .
5. Library Sharing Program
D. Equipment Recovery
E. Space Realignment, Remodeling,
& Replacement
TOTAL (Part II)
% Increase over FY 1977 Base*
Total Increment (Regular)
3,876.7
1,989.3)
1,887.4)
3,912.5
3,500.0)
412.5)
1,223.8
75.0)
153.3)
218.8)
188.4)
588.3)
250.0
650.0
$ 9,913.0
4.04
$29,368.0
III. Special Service and Special Funding $ 1,668.4
GRAND TOTAL $31,036.4
% Increase over FY 1977 Base* 12.63
* FY 1977 Base, excluding retii
I, IBA, and GRF Capital = $245,547.6.
fessor Hugh Atkinson, the new Director of the Urbana
Campus Library. The new circulation system is seen to
have benefits far in excess of its cost, since it will not only
substantially improve library circulation and acquisition
functions but will also provide a key role in sohing the
state-wide library storage problem.
Equipment and Building Maintenance ($900,000) —
Funds are requested for elimination of equipment de-
ficiencies at Urbana-Champaign which have occurred
because large numbers of equipment items have become
obsolete in a period of low state funding. There is cur-
rendy a deficiency of over $1 million in equipment funds
at the Urbana campus alone. For this reason $250,000
are requested for FY 1978 to begin funding the most
pressing equipment needs. Another program deficiency
area is that of operation and maintenance. The
Urbana campus currently has a $4 million deficiency in
operation and maintenance, which has occurred due to
inadequate funding during the past six years; therefore,
$650,000 are requested for space realignment, remodel-
ing, and replacement which would give the University
the feasibility it needs to solve the most pressing problems
in building maintenance.
Special Service and Special Funding Components ($1,668,400)
These components of the Uni\ersity's operating bud-
get, although outside the main function of the Univer-
sity, provide essential services to Illinois residents. The
programs, although managed by the University, are out-
side the mainstream of University instruction, research,
and public service ; and, therefore, should not compete
with educational funds. The special services components
are the Division of Serv'ices for Crippled Children ($954,-
400), Willard Airport Public Service ($254,800), and
the Police Training Institute ($258,100). The special
funding component ($201,100) is County Board Match-
ing Funds for the Cooperative Extension Service and
will be requested from the Agricultural Premium Fund.
Table 1 summarizes the FY 1978 operating budget
components.
SUMMARY OF THE FY 1978 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUEST
The total capital program requested from state funds
for FY 1978 is $56,115,900 exclusive of reappropriations.
Of this amount, $8,591,018 is a resubmission of projects
approved by the 79th General Assembly for FY 1977
but vetoed by the Governor. Table 2 provides a listing of
the estimated state funds for building projects and budget
categories by campus.
The FY 1978 capital request for the University of
Illinois is a reflection of two major forces — ( 1 ) the
programmatic needs of the campuses, including new pro-
grams and changes in existing programs which necessi-
tate changes in space functions, and (2) the need to
renovate space which has become obsolete both physi-
cally and functionally. Recognizing the realities of the
fiscal conditions in Illinois, the capital program approved
by the Board of Trustees is a sincere effort to obtain
maximum benefits for the University and for the state.
In developing the FY 1978 capital budget request, the
University has requested fimds for those projects which
are the most urgent and most essential to the mission of
the University of Illinois. In addition to program related
projects, there are projects which are designed to save
future operating costs both in terms of energy consump)-
tion and manpower. The only new major building proj-
ects — three library additions and a law building addi-
tion — are required to meet needs which cannot be met
through remodeling and/or realignment of space. Space
realignment, remodeling, and replacement funds as well
as major remodeling funds are requested for each cam-
pus to continue a program of renovating and upgrading
existing space.
The capital program at Chicago Circle campus re-
flects the effort toward accommodating the needs of a
changing mix of students, the beginning of the extended
day program (with its anticipated enrollment increases),
and the increased emphasis on life-long learning and
community involvement. The major projects are ( 1 ) the
library addition for which planning funds were appro-
priated in FY 1975, (2) continuation of remodeling in
the Science and Engineering Library and in the Roose-
velt Road Building, and (3) continuation of the Building
Equipment Automation program.
The capital program at the Medical Center campus
reflects the effort to upgrade and remodel existing space
to accommodate the changing needs of the expanding
programs in the health professions. The major projects
include the continuation of the remodeling in SUDMP,
beginning the renovation of the building at 1919 West
Taylor, ventilating and air conditioning the College of
Pharmacy Building, beginning the remodeling in the
building at 715 South Wood, and planning for use of
the space to be vacated upon completion of the Replace-
ment Hospital.
The capital program at the Urbana-Champaign
campus reflects the effort to upgrade and remodel exist-
ing structures to accommodate changing needs for teach-
ing and research programs and to provide new buildings
in those cases which cannot be met by remodeling of
existing structures. The major projects include (1) five
new building projects — Willard Airport Crash Rescue
Facility, Two Veterinary Research Buildings, Engineer-
ing Library Stack Addition, Library Sixth Stack Addi-
tion, and the Law Building Addition, (2) continuation
of remodeling in the English Building, and the College
of Engineering, and (3) planning for a new Life Sciences
Teaching Laboratory, Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Phase
II and the remodeling of the space in Davenport Hall
that will be vacated upon completion of the Turner Hall
Addition.
Table 3 provides a detailed listing of all capital proj-
ects in priority order that have been requested for FY
1978. The first 26 projects are projects from the FY 1977
request that were vetoed by Governor Walker. If the
override is successful, they will be removed from the FY
1978 request. The projects listed as Space Realignment,
Remodeling, and Replacement (SR^) are umbrella proj-
ects that include many small projects to be accomplished
within a total dollar amount that has been determined
by a formula to account for the necessary space changes,
remodeling and replacement that will occur in a building
each year dependent upon the replacement cost of the
building. The priority of the SR^ projects is considered
the same among the campuses even though they are
listed in the order of Chicago Circle, Medical Center,
and Urbana-Champaign.
Table 4 gives a detailed list of the projects to be in-
cluded under each request for Space Realignment, Re-
modeling, and Replacement. The small projects listed
under SR^ are in priority order and will be accomplished
in accord with the funds finally appropriated and re-
leased.
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF FY 1 978 CAPITAL BUDGET REQUESTS
(Total Dollars Requested by Each Campus)
Chicago Medical Urbana-
Circle Center Champaign Total
Buildings, Additions, and/or Structures $ 7,562,500 -0- $11,241,400 $18,803,900
Library Addition ( 7,562,500)
*Willard Airport Crash Rescue Facility ( 100,000)
*Veterinary Medicine Research Buildings ( 366,400)
Engineering Library Stack Addition ( 2,127,500)
Library Sixth Stack Addition ( 3,966,300)
Law Building Addition ( 4,681,200)
Funds to Complete Bond. Eligible Bldg 41,000 $1,000,000 65,100 1,106,100
Land -0- -0- 148,500 148,500
Equipment 720,500 6,421,300 1,952,960 9,094,760
Utilities 150,000 -0- 1,498,200 1,648,200
Remodeling and Rehabilitation 2,215,000 6,998,600 5,221,700 14,435,300
Space Realignment, Remodeling & Replacement 1,662,828 1,976,119 4,922,283 8,561,230
Site Improvements 278,300 85,000 414,400 777,700
Planning -0- 250,000 808,400 1,058,400
Cooperative Improvements 145,000 -0- 336,900 481,900
Total $12,775,128 $16,731,019 $26,609,843 $56,1 15,990
* This project is a resubmission of the FY 1977 project which was approved by the 79th General Assembly, but vetoed by the Governor.
4
TABLE 3
DETAILED LIST OF FY 1978 CAPITAL REQUEST IN PRIORITY ORDER
Vastly Cliuago Midical Urbana-
"""'0' "»;«■' Caligory Cirdt Ctnltr Champaign
•1 Rtplacimcnt Hospital Equipment ( 1 ,345,000
•2 Continuation SUDMP Remodeling 830,200
•3 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.> Remodeling ( 813,328
•4 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.' Remodeling 485,842
•3 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.' Remodeling J 1 018 288
•6 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.' Equipment ' 65*000
•7 English Building Renovation Remodeling 285*000
•8 English Buildmg Renovation Equipment 23!960
•9 .\nimal Room Improvement-Morrill Remodeling 279 000
•10 .\nimal Room Improvement-MorriU Equipment 20*000
•II Central Supervisory Control Center Utilities 270*000
•12 Building Equipment Automation Remodeling 300,000 '
•13 Upgrade 1919 West Taylor-Ph. I Remodeling 685,000
•14 Coble Hall Improvements Remodeling 270,000
•15 SEL Engineermg Equipment 135,000
•16 SEL Engineering Remodeling 250,000
•17 College of Engineering Remodeling Remodeling 275,000
18 College of Engineering Remodeling Equipment 25,000
•19 Engineering Librarv Stack Planning 50*900
•20 Roosevelt Road Building-Ph. IH Remodeling 115,000 '
*21 College of Medicine Project I Equipment 100,000
■22 Law Building .\ddition Planning 126,000
23 Veterinary* Medicine Basic Sciences Planning 200 500
•24 Willard .\irport Crash Rescue Building ] 00 *000
•25 Vet. Med. Research Building (2) Building 366)400
•26 Agricultural Engineering Sciences Bldg Planning 156,600
27 NIedical Sciences Building Land 38,500
28 Replacement Hospital Funds to Complete 1 ,000,000
29 Replacement Hospital Equipment 4,655,000
30 Turner Hall .\ddinon Funds to Complete 65,100
31 Turner Hall .\ddition Equipment 1,110,000
32 \ et. Med Research Bldgs. (2) Equipment 75,000
33 Library .\ddilion Building 7,562,500
34 Librar>- .\ddition Utilities 150,000
35 Library .\ddition Funds to Complete 41 ,000
36 Library .addition Equipment 240,500
37 Library .addition Site Improvements 85,300
38 Enghsh Building Renovation Remodeling 1 ,000,000
39 Engineermg Library Stack Building 2,127,500
40 Engineering Library Stack Utilities 22 200
41 College of Engineering Remodeling Remodeling 2, 177] 000
42 College of Engineering Remodeling Equipment ' 35*000
43 Continuation SUDMP — Part I Remodeling 1,217,400 '
44 SUDMP — Project II Equipment 229,300
45 Pharmacy .\/C and Ventilate Remodeling 950,000
46 SAMS — 1919 West Taylor Equipment 55,800
47 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.' Remodeling 849,500
48 Space Realignment, Remodeling & Repl.' Remodeling 1 ,490,277
49 SR'-General Hospital Third Floor. Equipment 36,200
50 Space Realignment. Remodeling & Repl.' Remodeling ' 3,903,995
51 SR'-.Animal Room Improvements Equipment 85,000
52 SR«-KCPA Remodeling Equipment 20,000
53 SR*-Visual Arts Laboratory Equipment 310,000
54 SR'-Library Remodeling Equipment 9,000
55 SR'-Davenport Hall Biophysics Equipment 60,000
56 SR'-Lincoln Hall Remodeling Equipment 15 000
57 SR>- Veterinary Medicine Remodeling Equipment 75!oOO
58 SR>-Huff Gvm Basement Equipment 25 000
59 SEL Engineering Ph. Ill Equipment 345,000
60 SEL Engineering Ph. Ill Remodeling 400,000
61 Pedestrian Traffic Control- Morgan Cooperative Impr. 55,000
62 Life Sciences Teaching Lab Planning 153,100
63 Life Sciences Teaching Lab Land 1 10,000
64 Building Equipment Automation Ph. Ill Remodeling 300,000
65 Central Supervisory Control Utilities 330 000
66 U.C. Sanitary District Wastewater Project Cooperative Impr. 228*, 000
67 Library Sixth Stack Addn Building 3,966,300
68 Library Sixth Stack Addn Utilities 90 900
69 Coble Hall Improvements Remodeling 1I7!700
70 Upgrade 1919\Vest Ti.ylor Ph. II Remodeling 900,000
71 Pedestrian Traffic Control-Polk & Halsted Cooperative Impr. 55,000
72 Continuation SUDMP — Part II Remodeling 950,000
73 Davenport Hall Remodeling Planning 70,000
74 Auditorium Roof Replacement Remodeling 660,000
75 Condeiuate Return System Utilities 155,000
76 Roosevelt Road Building Ph. IV Remodeling 850,000
77 715 South Wood Ph. I Remodeling 1 ,225,000
78 Law Building Addirion Building 4,681,200
79 Law Building Addition Utilities 602,200
80 Rockford School of Medicine Remodeling 241 ,000
81 Exterior Campus Graphics Site Improvements 43 ,000
82 Nuclear Reactor Lab Ph. II Planning 51,300
83 Instructional Tennis Court Impr Remodeling 158|000
84 Pennsylvania Avenue Street Impr Site Improvements 300,000
85 Vacated Hospital Space Planning 250 000
86 Bus Stop Shelters — CTA • Cooperative Impr. 35,000
87 Campus Landscape Improvemeata Site Improvements 75,000
88 Watermain Extension (SE) Utilities 27,900
89 Stadium Drive Resurfacing Cooperative Impr. 96,400
90 Urbana Signalization Program Cooperative Impr. 12,500
91 Intramural .Vhletic Fields Site Improvements 39,400
92 Campus Landscaping Site Improvements 150,000
93 Demolition-General Services Bldg Site Improvements 85,000
TOTAL BY CAMPUS 512,775,128 516,731,019 526,609,843
* Thijproject is a resubmission of the FY 1977 project approved by the 79th General Assembly but vetoed.
' See Table 3 for detailed listing of projects included in SR>.
TABLE 4
DETAILED LIST OF PROJECTS INCLUDED WITHIN THE FY 1978
CAPITAL REQUEST FOR SPACE REALIGNMENT, REMODELING,
AND REPLACEMENT (SR")
Chicago Circle Campus
FY 1977 Projects „ „
Security System ^^^°&
Roof Replacement, A&A, Libr. BSB, SEL 115,300
Lecture Center Roof & Drainage. Pli. 1 115,300
Rehabilitate Upper Walkway Ph. 1 115,300
OSHA 65,700
Exterior' Wail' 'eCB 66,300
Service Building Rms. 150-156 36,900
Service Building-Ventilation 11,500
Sump Pump Installation Ph. II 23,100
Lecture Center 12KV System 83,600
Lecture Center Lighting ^^'ifS
BSB-Acoustical-RM4113A 21,300
FY 1978 Projects
Code Compliance — Elevators 46,000
OSHA — Compliance — Ph. II 100,000
Campus Security (Ph. Ill) 95,000
Roof Replacement — (Science & Engineering Laboratory) 280,000
Floor Slab Room B-50D — (Science & Engineering, South) 35,000
Rehabilitate Upper Walkway & Stairs, Ph. II 100,000
Fire Alarm Modification 96,500
Window Replacement — Roosevelt Road Building 45,000
Lecture Center Air Intake 52,000
Medical Center Campus
FY 1977 Projects
General Hospital Third Floor 201,700
Elevator Renovation 'K'i99
Window Replacement NPI, FUDMP 63,800
Building Code Violations 115.300
Biologic Resource Lab 116,400
FY 1978 Projects
Code Compliance — Elevators 103,000
•General Hospital — Third Floor — Eciuipment 36,200
Remodel Room 346 — Pharmacy Building 270,000
Administrative Offices — Pharmacy Building 62,000
Remodel Room 200 — Pharmacy Building 212,000
Remodel Room 404 — Pharmacy Building 132,300
Biologic Resources Lab — Cagewashing Area 160,000
Interconnect Chilled Water Systems 173,000
Upgrade Kiie Alarm System — Ph. 1 250,000
Hospit.ll OSHA and Code Compliance 200,000
Window Replacements — 715 S. Wood, Hosp. Residence,
Illinois Surgical Institute 'l^'^S?
Building Equipment Automation 150,000
Elevator Renovation — Illinois Surgical 150,000
Campus Security — Ph. Ill 95,000
Campus OSHA Compliance 150,000
2035 W. Tavlor — Heating and Air Conditioning 158,000
2035 W. Taylor — Window Renovation 45,000
Urbana-Champaign Campus
FY 1977 Projects
Electrical Modernization 80, /OO
Energy Conservation Heat Control 172,900
Natural History Bldg. — Heating Replacement 172,900
Natural History Bldg. — Sprinklers 109,500
Gregory Hall — Journalism 32,300
•Gregory Hall — Journahsm Equipment 69,200
Architecture Bldg. Roof & Gutters 86,500
Altgeld Hall Elevator 86,500
Environmental Research Lab 80,700
Coble Hall Plumbing 8,100
Librar- Fire Protection 101,400
Freer G\-m Remodeling 197,100
Lincoln Hall Remodeling 92,200
David Kinley Hall — Room 114 109,500
*David Kinlev Hall — Room 114 Equipment 5,800
Huff Gym Roof and Gutters 92,200
Agronomy Seed House Windows 46,100
Condensate Return System 178,700
Lincoln H?ll Elevator Replacement 98,000
Krannert Center for the Performing Arts 65,100
Library Reference Room 28,800
*I.ibrarv Reference Room — Equipment 9,200
Library Floor Replacement 9,700
Gregory Hall Stair Enclosure 134,300
Davenport Hall — Geography 107,200
Commerce Office Remodeling 32,300
Architecture Bldg. — Heating System 173,900
Architecture Bldg. — Floor Replacement 17.300
Armory-Roof & Gutter 108,300
Mumford Hall Basement 86,200
Airport Hangar Improvements 77,300
FY 1978 Projects
Animal Room Improvements — Burrill Hall,
Animal Science Lab , 365,000
*AnimaI Room Improvements — Equipment 85,000
Krannert Center for the Performing Arts 275,000
*Krannert Center for the Performing Arts — Equipment 20,000
Visual Arts Laboratory 98,000
•Visual Arts Laboratory — Equipment 310,000
Elevator Replacement — Lincoln Hall, Architecture Building.... 195,000
Library Remodeling 73,000
•Library Remodeling — Equipment 9,000
Ventilation Turndown — Civil Engr. Bldg., Library 90,000
Stair Enclosures — Gregory and Lincoln Halls 273,000
Elevator Installation — Flagg Hall 220,000
Electrical Distribution System (Primary) Willard Airport 80,500
Davenport Hall — Biophysics 180,000
•Davenport Hall — Biophysics — Equipment 60,(X)0
Roof Replacement — Armory (94.000). Bevier (107,600),
Civil Engr. Ph. I (131,000), Hort. Field Lab (26,500),
Psychology (75,600) . and Talbot (37,800) 472,500
Lincoln Hall Remodeling 170,000
•Lincoln Hall Remodeling — Equipment 15.000
Temperature Control — Adams Lab, Armory, Auditoriimj 99,000
Storm Window Installation — Mumford, Commerce
West. Lincoln 80,000
Magnetic Door Holders — Bevier, Animal Science Lab 36,000
Gregory Hall Lighting Improvements 30,000
Animal Room Exhaust Air — Small Animal Chnic Bldg 90,000
HVAC Retrofit — Physics Building 80,000
Condensate Pump Replacement — Vet. Med. Bids. & Annex,
Meats Lab. \"et. Med. Research Bldgs., Child Development
Lab. 1107 West Green 45,000
Commerce Remodeling 111,000
Cooling To\ver Remodeling 67,000
Davenport Hall — Geography 102,000
College of Veterinary Medicine Remodeling 250,000
•College of Veterinary Medicine Remodeling — Equipment 75.000
HufT Gym Basement Remodeling 250,000
•Huff Gym Basement Remodeling — Equipment 25,000
H"at;'ig System Remodeling — Architecture Building 165.000
Metallurgy and Mining — Rooms 100 & 119 — Air Conditioning. . 60,000
Fire Alarm and Signal System Replacement — Library,
Children's Research Center 26,300
Lighting and Electrical Improvement — Morrill Hall,
Vet. "Med. Bldg. & Annex 43,400
Window Replacement — Law Building 70,500
Remodel Air Conditioning Piping — Civil Engr.,
Digital Computer Lab 60,000
Remodel Steam Absorption Machines — Morrill, Fine
and Applied Arts, Library, Commerce 137,700
Mumford Hall Remodeling 84,000
Physics Building Remodeling 45,000
Chilled W'ater System — Student Staff A/C Center 31,500
Building Plumbing System — Davenport, Lincoln,
and BurrUl Halls 205,500
Centrifugal Freon Air Conditioning System Replacement — Water
Resources Building 35,000
Reolacement — Window Sash (ME Lab) Auditorium
Seats (Commerce) 63,500
Replacement — Stairs and Entrance Areas — Noyes,
Wood Shop, EERL 23,500
* Equipment requests are not included in the SR^ formula (which deter-
mines the total SR" funds and their distribution) or total dollar amount.
They are shown here to demonstrate their relationship to the SR' projects.
Equipment requests are made separately for each project in the equipment
category.
FOOD PRODUCTION AND RESEARCH COMPLEX
(FOOD FOR CENTURY THREE)
The FY 1978 budget request contains a tliird section,
a capital request for a food production and research
complex commonly called "Food for Century Three."
This request is made separately from the capital program
described previously and will not compete for the same
funds. It is anticipated that this agricultural-veterinary
medicine program will be funded from the Agricultural
Premium Funds which exist to advance agriculture in
the State of Illinois.
The magnitude of the world food shortage is increas-
ing annually. Increasing population growth coupled with
rising affluence in developing countries is expected to
require an increase in food production of three percent
annually or 30 million metric tons of food per year. To
put this increased need in perspective, Illinois (which
usually ranks first or second in the nation in com pro-
duction) produced 3.5 million metric tons (1.2 billion
bushels) in 1975. Meeting expanded world food needs
for one year would be the equivalent of doubling the
1975 Illinois corn crop.
The $1.67 billion in agricultural commodities pro-
duced in Illinois made it the nation's leading export
state and a major contributor in the fight against hunger
and starvation. Illinois led all states in soybean exports
TABLE 5
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOOD PRODUCTION AND RESEARCH COMPLEX
(FOOD FOR CENTURY THREE!
PROPOSED LIST OF CAPITAL PROJECTS
Total Can F 11978 Ff 1979 Fr 1980 Fri98l Fr 1982 Fr 1983
BuiUings, Additians and I or Strvttures
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences Bldg $21 ,813, 200* $21 ,612,700
Agricultural Engineering Sciences Bldg 7, 859, 200* * 7,702,600
Dain' Farm Consolidalion 298,600 298,600
Downers Grove Extension — Storage 63,900 63,900
Greenhouse Replacement • . 3,183,600 t 3,183,600
\elerinar\- Medicine Research Buildings 524,500 524,500
Dixon Springs Research Facility 216,000 216,000
Downers Grove Extension Center 2,324,500 2,324,500
Swine Research Center 1 ,381 ,800 $ 1 ,381 ,800
High Security Isolation Research Lab 13,798,100 13,798,100
Car Pool Maintenance Relocation 1,390,800 1,390,800
Ruminant Laboratory 37,500 37,500
Greenhouse Headhouse 1,749,500 1,749,500
Veterinar\- Research Farm Complex Building! 285,600 285,600
Dixon Springs Agricultural Center 1 ,415,400 1 ,415,400
Western Illinois Agriculturt: Center 150,100 150,100
VeterinarvMedicineBuildingAddiuon for Agriculture.. 4,261,400 $ 4,261,400
Turner Hall. Ph. Ill 24,067,000 24,067,000
Isolation Research Lab 4,605,500 4,605,500
.\gricultural Resources Center 7,327,400 $ 7,327,400
Turner Hall Greenhouse 1,973,800 1,973,800
Subtotal ($98,727,400) •>•• (529,677,800) ($ 6,248,600) ($20,208,800) ($32,933,900) ($ 9,301 ,200)
FwuU to CmpliU Bond Elipbli Buildings $1,000,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 307,200 S 96,000 $ 229,700 $ 365,100
Agriculture — Vet. Med $1,400,000 $1,000,000 $ 400.000
Dixon Springs 500,000 500,000
Western lUinois 600,000 600,000
Subtotal ($2,500,000) ($2,100,000) ($ 400,000)
Etr-apmfnt
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences Building $1,560,000 $ 560,000 $1,000,000
Agricultural Engineering Sciences Building 340,000 90,000 250,000
Swine Research Center 150,000 50,000 $ 100,000
Greenhouse Replacement 220,000 220,000
Veterinars- Medicine Research Building 135,000 135,000
Downers Grove Extension Center 30,000 30,000
High Securiry Isolation Research Lab 800,000 300,000 $ 500,000
Car Pool Maintenance Relocation 100,000 25,000 75,000
Greenhouse Headhouse 200,000 200,000
Vet. Res. Farm Complex Bldg 50,000 50,000
Dixon Springs .W Center 20,000 20,000
Vet. Med. Bldg. Remodeling for Agr 200,000 200,000
Vet. Med. Bldg. .Addition for Agr 300,000 100,000 $ 200,000
Turner Hall, Ph. Ill 1,500,000 500,000 1,000,000
Isolation Research Lab 300,000 100,000 200,000
Agricultural Resources Center 200,000 200.000
Turner Hall Greenhouse 110,000 110,000
Animal Science Lab Remodeling 250,000 250.000
Subtotal ($6,465,000) ($ 650,000) ($1,685,000) ($ 695,000) ($1,475,000) ($1,960,000)
Utilititi fcT Btdldingt $2,257,100 $ 72,100 $ 600,000 S 395,000 $ 740,000 $ 450,000
RimedtUng
Dain- Farm Consolidation $ 160.000 $ 160.000
Veterinary Medicine Bldg. Remodel for Agriculture.... 1,980.000 $1,980,000
Veterinarv Research Farm Bldgs 200,000 $ 200,000
Animal Sciences Lab Remodel 1,100,000 $1,100,000
Subtotal ($3,440,000) ($ 160,000) ( -0- ) ($1,980,000) ($ 200,000) ($1,100,000)
Siu Imprcxmml! (.CimJalion Rmsiims) $ 610,500 $ 610,500
TOT.\L $1 15,000,000" •• $32,010,900 $8,110,100 $24,576,000 $35,064,900 $12,555,900 $2,325,100
• Includes $200 500 in Planning Funds Requested in FY 1977.
•• Includes $156,600 in Planning Funds Requested in FY 1977.
— $699 million; was second in com exports — $723 mil-
lion ; and was second in meat products export — $28.6
million. Illinois has ranked fourth among all states in
total cash receipts from the sale of all farm products for
a number of years, exceeded only by California, Texas,
and Iowa — all of which are larger in acreage. Illinois is
usually first in the nation in soybean production, first or
second in com and in pork production, and among the
first ten states in production of all livestock products.
The gross farm income in Illinois has been over $3 bil-
lion annually since 1968. It was $5,363 billion in 1973,
$6,174 billion in 1974, and will probably be about $6
billion in 1975, when final figures are tabulated.
Many authorities have long realized that education
and research represent the major tools that can lead to
better fanning methods, increased grain and livestock
production, better transport systems for delivering food,
improved food packaging and preservation, new and
different foods, more effective fertilizers and herbicides,
etc. The State of Illinois has invested resources in build-
ing a strong state university system, with particular
strength in research at the Urbana-Champaign campus.
Faculty members in many departments and colleges at
the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign have
contributed to Illinois' leadership in the food production
area. In turn, using the results of faculty research in
direct application to Illinois' agricultural enterprise, the
state's overall economy has prospered, and it has been
able to make a significant contribution toward solving
national and world-wide food shortages.
The University of Illinois can provide the human
resources to mount the attack against food shortage, and
the proposed building program provides the physical re-
sources from which to launch it. By supporting such a
program, the State of Illinois will be enhancing and im-
proving the investment it has already made in first-rate
agricultural teaching, research, and extension programs.
At the same time it will be investing in activities which
are critically important to improving the state's own
agricultural productivity and thus improving its eco-
nomic base.
As summarized in Table 5, the proposed building
program would provide the needed space to allow fac-
ulty members in the Colleges of Agriculture and Veteri-
nary Medicine to pursue more effectively federal research
funds that will soon be available. It will allow both col-
leges to expand and modernize their extension efforts in
the state, and it will provide space for the College of
Veterinary Medicine to increase the size of its entering
freshman class from 70 to 104 students.
It is proposed that the capital projects in this pro-
gram, which are to be constructed over a period of eight
years, be financed by a special issue of bonds totaling
$114,000,000 to be retired over a period of 32 years at
an annual interest rate anticipated not to exceed 5.75%.
The source of funds for the annual payments to retire the
bonds is proposed to be the Agricultural Premium Fund
— a special fund created for the advancement of agri-
culture in the State of Illinois.
4
I
I
l,li
cLy
220a Library
3 1 oopies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 266, November 15, 1976
Summary of American Council on Education Report '^^ '^•^5A,VA-c/w^<pS
COSTS OF FEDERALLY MANDATED SOCIAL PROGRAMS AT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
The operating costs of colleges and universities have
increased over the past decade far faster than has the
general price level. Part of the increases are attributable
to the added cost of implementing an ever-growing num-
ber of federally mandated social programs. The Ameri-
can Council on Education (.\CE) undertook a study to
provide quantified e.xamples of these cost increases and
to reach a better understanding of their impact on the
financial conditions of academic institutions. The follow-
ing comments are excerpts from the special report
titled 'The Costs of Implementing Federally Mandated
Social Programs at Colleges and Universities," published
in June of 1976 by the American Council on Education.
Rather than provide an extensive survey of institutions
using a form questionnaire, the ACE decided to use the
approach of an intensive investigation by a small task
force with a small number of institutions. This procedure
was followed because in the judgment of .'\CE, the close
collaboration with a few institutions would produce far
more usable information than a large scale survey, and
it would provide a more solid basis for any subsequent
broad sur^'ey on narrowly defined topics.
TASK FORCE INSTITUTIONS
In order to assemble a reasonably typical group of
colleges and universities, six task force institutions were
selected on the basis of the following criteria:
1 . Type and control ;
2. Geographic location (constrained by consideration of
travel costs) ;
3. Financial conditions (apparently not in unusual fi-
nancial distress) ;
4. Availability of cost data, including historical data,
and experience with sophisticated data collection
techniques ;
5. Awareness of commitment to the objectives of the
selected programs.
The six task force institutions selected by control and
type were :
University of Illinois at Urbana, Illinois (state institu-
tion)
Miami-Dade Junior College, Miami, Florida (commu-
nity college)
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina (private uni-
versity with hospital)
Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. (private uni-
versity with hospital)
Hampton Institute, Hampton, Virginia (private com-
prehensive college)
College of Wooster, Wooster, Ohio (private liberal arts
college)
FEDERALLY MANDATED SOCIAL PROGRAMS INCLUDED IN THE STUDY
The federally mandated social programs listed below
were selected because they apply to colleges and univer-
sities as business entities, and do not extend to social
programs directed only at educational institutions. Thus,
the programs included are only a small part of the mas-
sive legislation — federal, state, and local — that affects
higher education.
Equal Employment Opportunity — Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Equal Em-
ployment Opportunity Act of 1972.
Equal Pay — Equal Pay Act of 1963.
Affirmative Action — Executive Order 11246, issued in
1965, as amended by Executive Order 11375 to include
discrimination on basis of sex, 1967.
Age Discrimination — Emplo)Tnent Act of 1967, as
amended.
Wage and Hour Standards — Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) of 1938, as amended.
Unemployment Compensation — Social Security Act of
1935; Employment Security .Amendments, 1970.
Social Security Tax Increases — Social Security Act of
1935; Employment Security Amendments, 1970.
Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) — Health
Maintenance Organization Act of 1973.
Retirement Benefits — Employment Retirement Income
Security Act (ERISA) of 1973 (note: public institutions
excluded) .
Wage and Salary Controls — Economic Stabilization
Act of 1970 (note: public institutions excluded; non-
profit institutions exempted January 25, 1974) .
Occupational Safety and Health — Occupational Safety
and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970.
Environmental Protection — Regulations implemented
under several laws by the Environmental Protection
Agency.
PERIOD COVERED BY THE STUDY
The period covered in die study is the ten years from
1965 to 1975, which covers the tvvo business recessions in
1970-71 and 1974-75. Because enactment of new federal
social legislation accelerated rapidly in the late 1960s
and early 1970s, information had to be collected over a
period beginning as early as 1965 in order to establish
at least a rough baseline for identifying incremental
costs. In general, the participants in the study were able
to provide better infonnation for the years after 1970
than for the previous years. This may have the effect of
understating costs more in the earlier years than in the
later years of the study and thus overstating the rate of
cost increase. However, the estimates of the dollar cost
of the mandated program are probably more conservative
than are the estimates of the rate of cost increases.
HIGHLIGHTS
The major highlights of the study are given below.
In 1974-75, the costs to the individual institutions of
implementing these federal programs were small (1-4
percent) relative to total institutional operating budgets,
but large relative to ( 1 ) income from endowments and
gifts, (2) the deficits suffered by some institutions in re-
cent years, and (3) the budgets of some academic de-
partments that face extinction because of shifts in insti-
tutional budget priorities.
As new mandated programs were added over the
1965-75 decade, the costs increased considerably faster
than instructional costs or total revenues. Thus, to cover
these mandated costs, institutions have had either to
generate added revenues or to cut expenditures.
Administering these federal programs is itself costly,
having increased over the decade from a negligible share
to as much as one-eighth to one-fourth of general ad-
ministrative costs.
By far the greatest cost increases result from increases
in social securit)' taxes, i.e., taxes on employment. Inas-
much as colleges and universities are highly labor-inten-
sive, employment taxes fall especially heavily on them.
Thus, the value of the tax exemption conferred on aca-
demic institutions because of their nonprofit status —
an exemption that generally applies to taxes on income,
property, and sales, but not to taxes on employment - —
is vitiated.
These programs have contributed substantially to the
instability of costs at the task force institutions from year
to year and thus have compounded their difficulties in
financial management and budget balancing.
In addition, the study suggests the following hy-
pothesis, which needs to be tested with a larger sample.
The cost impact of the programs differs by size and
type of institution, being most severe for highly "visible'"
(i.e., large and prestigious) institutions and for private
institutions.
Because a large part of the mandated costs is related
to emplo^Ttnent, and because academic institutions are
more labor-intensive than are most manufacturing and
many service enterprises, the cost impact of the programs
may be greater on them than on many profit-oriented in-
dustrial firms. In addition, colleges and universities have
less flexibility in raising prices and reducing other expen-
ditures to generate fimds to cover the mandated costs,
all of which must be met out of current institutional
budgets.
Federal policies relating to social justice, manpower,
science, defense, and taxation may have a far greater fi-
nancial impact on higher education than does any ex-
plicit and coherent federal jxilicy in support of higher
education.
Some actual data from the report indicating the
trends in costs of implementing the federally mandated
social programs over the period from 1965 to 1975 are
shov^m in the table on the next page.
Copies of the report are available from the Publica-
tions Division, American Council on Education, One
Dupont Circle, ^Vashington, D.C. 20036, at a cost of
$3.50 per copy.
TRENDS IN COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING FEDERALLY MANDATED SOCIAL PROGRAMS
1965-75
(By Institution, Including Social Security Taxes)
Institution
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Control and Type
Public
Public
Private
Private
Private
Private
State
Local
University,
University,
Comprehensive
Liberal
University
Coinmunitv
with
with
College
Arts
College
Hospital
Hospital
College
Highest Degree Offered
Doctorate
Associate
Doctorate
Doctorate
Master's
Master's
FTE Enrollment, 1974-75
33,000
23,000
8,000
10,000
3,000
2,000
Expenditures, 1974-75
$213,000,000
$-44,500,000
$160,000,000
$86,000,000
$12,500,000
$10,500,000
1965-65
$ 438,470
$ 110,736
$ 2,158
$ 4,540
1966-67
348,809
359,522
71,113
16,028
1967-68
176,467
555,194
131,926
23,081
1968-69
346,265
$ 25,567
$ 391,545
611,384
202,908
43,511
1969-70
683,645
138,250
661,559
1,440,581
221,908
105,583
1970-71
856,429
156,240
1,607,738
992,038
216,493
119,753
1971-72
880,932
240,107
1,450,318
1,485,302
242,245
131,893
1972-73
819,815
337,451
2,493,210
1,809,287
279,659
123,789
1973-74
1,156,583
441,257
3,715,170
2,330,676
385,619
154,965
1974-75
1,302,545
480,067
3,618,070
3,603,243
467,493
240,164
Source: American Council on Education, Policy Analysis Service. Data compiled by the Special Costs Study Task Force, spring 1975.
Letter from Annuitants' Association to Faculty
ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT J. E. BLAZE ADDRESSES UIUC FACULTY AND STAFF
People who are dependent, or will be, on the State
Universities Retirement System, are facing real trouble.
For years the office of the system, and the annuitants,
have carried the major burden of concern because of the
underfunding of the State Universities Retirement Sys-
tem. The time has now arrived for the active faculty to
be concerned about the resources upon which they will
depend when they become retirees.
Our pension system, and the other state-funded sys-
tems of Illinois, are in serious difficulties.
"A study of the pension liabilities of thirty-five states with
significant amounts of general obligation debt outstanding, by
Smith Barney Harris Upham & Co. has found five states sig-
nificantly underfunded.
'"The study concluded that Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecti-
cut, Michigan, and Florida had potential difficulties in meet-
ing their benefit payments. Turthermore,' the study said, 'none
of the above has yet made significant strides in overcoming its
funding difficulties'."*
A 1967 amendment to the lUinois Pension Code (Il-
linois Revised Statutes, Chapter 108 V2, Sec. 15-155) pro-
vides that "The contributions of employers from State
appropriations for any fiscal year shall not be less than an
amount which is required to fund fully the current costs
in accordance with actuarial reserve requirements as
prescribed in paragraph ( 1 ) of this section, plus interest
at the prescribed rate on unfunded accrued liabilities."
This provision was designed to stabilize the liabilities
* June 7, 1976, issue of "Pensioo and iDvestmeots," page 26.
for past service at the July 1, 1967, level of $143,000,000.
It would do this by fixing the employer contributions at
no less than the current service costs plus interest on the
unfunded accrued liabilities.
Since this legislation was approved, many efforts have
been undertaken unsuccessfully to improve the rate of
funding through legislative appropriations and litigation.
On May 8, 1973, Governor Walker said in a letter to
Timothy Swain, president of the Board of Trustees, of
the State Universities Retirement System, "I promised
to provide adequate funding and I mean to do just that."
On September 24, 1974, Mr. Harold Hovey, director
of the Bureau of the Budget, in a letter to the Board of
Higher Education said, "Neither the governor nor the
Bureau of the Budget has made a decision to 'fully fund'
or a decision to pay 100 percent of payouts. . . ."
The 1975 appropriation for the State Universities Re-
tirement System was $64 million less than the minimum
statutory requirement. The unfunded accrued liabilities
for this one system e.xceeded $587 million on August 31,
1975, and the deficit for the five state-supported systems
was approximately $3 billion. In 1975, the state appro-
priated to the State Universities Retirement System
$2,049,000 less than the state's share of benefit payouts
for the 1975-76 fiscal year.
The annuitants of the State Universities Retirement
System sincerely believe that :
\. At a minimum, the state should appropriate annually
funds sufficient to meet its share of the annual payouts.
Although full funding of the systems may not be
feasible, the governor, the Pension Laws Commission,
and the legislature should agree on a program which,
over a period of fifteen to twenty years, would raise
the rate of funding of the system (45 percent) at least
to that of the General Assembly System (now 61.7
percent) .
The solution to the funding problem actually is more
important to the faculty and staff than the annuitants.
The older members of the staiT will become concerned
with the problem of funding as they approach the time
when they will be dependent on the reserves of the sys-
tem funds for their own security in retirement. But the
younger members of the faculty should be even more
concerned because of the larger sums they will contribute
to a less and less reliable system. So, there are strong
reasons for the faculty and staff to be concerned and
active in seeking corrective measures.
Grievance Procedures to Follow on Three Campuses
IMPROVED TO COMPLY WITH TFTLE DC, NONDISCRIMINATION ON
Each campus of the University of Illinois has adopted
grievance procedures in compliance with Title IX, Non-
discrimination on the Basis of Sex, for academic/profes-
sionals, faculty, and students. The General University
also has adopted such procedures. Nonacademic person-
nel with complaints should follow the procedures out-
lined in Chapter VII, Grievances of the Policy and Rules
— Nonacademic.
The new procedures provide for the processing and
disposition of complaints by faculty, staff, and students
as well as applicants for admission and for employment
alleging discrimination on the basis of race, sex, national
origin, religion, age, handicap, or status as a disabled
veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era.
Copies of the procedures can be obtained as follows.
Chicago Circle:
Faculty grievances: Nan E. McGehee, 2801 University
Hall (phone: 4878)
Academic/Professional grievances: Nan E. McGehee,
2801 University Hall (phone: 4878)
Student grievances: Weyman Edwards, 801 University
Hall (phone: 3123)
Nonacademic grievances: Yvette Jackson, 707 University
Hall (phone: 2602)
BASIS OF SEX
Medical Center:
Faculty grievances: Carol A. Mootry, 414 Administrative
Office Building (phone: 8670)
Academic/Professional grievances: Carol A. Mootry,
414 Administrative Office Building (phone: 8670)
Student grievances: William A. Overholt, 204 Admin-
istrative Office Building (phone: 4942)
Nonacademic grievances: George McGregor, 310 Ad-
ministrative Office Building (phone: 6680)
U rbana-Champaign:
Faculty grievances: Office of Academic Affirmative
Action, 209 Coble Hall (phone: 3-0574)
Academic/Professional grievances: Office of Assistant
Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs, B-3 Coble Hall
(phone: 3-2759)
Student grievances: Campus Student Assistance Center,
130 Student Services Building (phone: 3-4636)
Nonacademic grievances: James Ransom, 52 East
Gregory Street (phone: 3-2147)
General University:
Copies of all of the General University grievance pro-
cedures may be obtained from Jean E. Somers, 306 Illini
Tower (phone: 3-2590).
BROWN NORMAN 3
FAC
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 267, February 9, 1977
Report to the President on Intercampns Relations
PRESENTED BY ELX)ON L. JOHNSON, VICE-PRESIDENT FOR ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
This is a report in response to the assignments given
this office on certain aspects of intercampus relations.
Your letter of assignment was dated December 10, 1975.^
It contemplated a response by, or soon after, September
15, 1976, on the assiimption that a single, consolidated
report would be made. Experience has shown the wis-
dom of filing separate reports, sector by sector. There-
fore, it seems appropriate now to summarize what has
been done, with a generalized commentary.
It must be realized, of course, that there are deep-
seated, per\-asive intercampus attitudes and historical
relations which proxide the unspoken context for all that
is rejxjrted here. Intercampus distance is a factor, some-
times producing problems over the 135-mile axis between
Chicago and Urbana-Champaign and sometimes pro-
ducing both cooperation and o\erfamiliarity between
the two Chicago campuses located three-quarters of a
mile apart. Difference in campus missions is another
factor, and so is comparative stage of development. A
new operation in the shadow of the Sears Tower is
bound to be different from a centur}'-old operation at
the site of what was long THE University of Illinois;
and a specialized health-related campus is bound to differ
from both.
The resources of this amalgam do, or should, provide
enrichment and interlocking strength; otherwise the sys-
tem is without merit. It is to discover and enhance the
means of reciprocal support and mutual benefit that the
assignments \vere made and executed.
Within this context the six selected segments chosen
for study are summarized below.
Intercampus Research Relations. Examination of this
area was, in fact, \irtually completed when the overall
task was assigned. It is included here because, in a sense,
it set in motion concern for other intercampus relations.
That examination was the result of response to one or
two critical, and t)pical, intercampus problems which
had arisen and had presented experience out of which
future remedy might be wrought.
.\fter extensive discussions in the University Aca-
' See Faculty Letter No. 260, February 11, 1976.
demic Council, two policy statements were agreed upon
and put into operation.^ The first is an Early Notifica-
tion System adopted on November 21, 1975, and sent to
you on December 5, 1975. The vice-chancellors of aca-
demic affairs have used the system conscientiously and,
on the basis of several concrete cases, testify to its effec-
tiveness. The chief merit is the sharing of information
among campuses early enough to anticipate and iron
out intercampus complications, particularly in the cre-
ation of offices, centers, institutes, and other units of
potential mutual concern.
The only problem areas so far experienced are:
(a) the remaining possibility of an accomplished fact
or "end run" via a successful grant application (although
this possible bypassing of the policy was anticipated and
steps taken to prevent it) and (b) the current campus-
based reconsideration of plans for an All-University
Center for Gerontology as previously worked out by an
intercampus committee.
The second policy statement (also adopted November
21, 1975) concerned intercampus workshops, with the
following results:
1. Gerontology. A most successful workshop, as judged
by responses from the approximately 100 participants
from the three campuses, was held on May 7 and 8,
1976, in Chicago. Emphasis was placed on research in
progress, the national picture, and the most needed
and promising research areas for the future. Com-
mendation belongs particularly to Dr. Ethel Shanas
(UICC) and her steering committee and Associate
Vice-President Victor J. Stone for planning and
execution.
2. Cancer. A three-campus planning committee under
the chairmanship of Dr. Tapas Das Gupta (UIMC)
is organizing a workshop on cancer research to be
held on April 15 and 16, 1977.
3. Genetics. An intercampus committee has been ap-
pointed under the chairmanship of Dean William A.
Overholt (UIMC) to plan a symposium workshop
dealing with the frontiers of research in human
genetics, including recombinant DNA research and
social and ethical implications. Commissioned papers
are planned with postsession publication for wider
dissemination.
This sector of the original plan has worked as well
as — perhaps better than — anyone contemplated. An
original goal, not yet realized but still planned, is similar
periodic intercampus effort on a disciplinary, rather than
problem, basis.
Special thanks are due the President's Office for fi-
nancial suppKjrt of these efforts, the last two of which will
have the aid of a Joyce Foundation grant to the
University.
Graduate Degree Programs. A separate report will be
filed soon on this important section of the intercampus
studies. The campuses have now formulated answers
(through special committees at UIUC and UICC and
with similar aid on graduate program evaluation at
UIMC) to key questions about current status and five-
year plans for graduate education. These answers will,
like the original questions, be considered by the Univer-
sity' Council on Graduate Education and Research.
Appropriate generalizations and systemwide considera-
tions will be incorporated in the repwrt.
Completion of this sector has been the most time-con-
suming of all, but emphasis has been on thoughtful
planning rather than meeting deadlines. Without antici-
pating the final outcome, it can now be observed with
confidence that these gains will be realized :
1. An internal status report and five-year projection of
intent, sometimes general and sometimes specific,
although perhaps falling short of "an internal master
plan for graduate education" as once envisioned ;
2. Extensive consideration and planning by all the regu-
lar machinery for graduate education at both the
campus and system levels, plus augmentation by the
participation of ad hoc committees;
3. Illumination of intercampus cooperation as a supple-
mental vehicle for achievement of the University's
goal in graduate education — the special significance
as a developmental device for Chicago Circle, the
current status of joint degree programs, and options
for the future;
4. Partial response to the planning expectations set
forth in Master Plan IV of the Board of Higher
Education.
OfT-Campus Educational Services. The sector concern-
ing University outreach has been completed. Reports
were sent to you on September 1, 1976, one setting forth
policy issues and planning targets and the other giving re-
ports from five task forces. These latter groups and the
parent body, the University Council on Public Service,
spent months investigating problems and options for
improvement. On the basis of your endorsing letter of
September 22, 1976, the chancellors and campus officers
are now seeking to make appropriate campus applica-
tions. The University Council on Public Service will also
attempt to give priority to policies and targets which are
attainable under present circumstances. If this urgent
matter of delivery of off-campus services (e.g., ad-
\anced continuing education for professionals and the
application of knowledge to societal problems) is to take
its place alongside, or in supplementation of, traditional
on-campus activities, it deserves and requires explicit at-
tention and action.
Internal Evaluation. Universitywide concern about in-
ternal evaluation, with intercampus implications, takes
two forms: (a) assurance that each campus has a sys-
tematic plan for periodic evaluation of programs and
units and (b) Universitywide experimentation with a
program for evaluation of top administrative personnel.
This is an area in which progress, rather than com-
pletion, will have to be reported. Progress on the first
task, concerning campus systems, can be summarized as
follows :
1. Urbana-Champaign campus. The COPE evaluation
program was in being, and fully operative, before
these intercampus studies were begun. Its early devel-
opment and comprehensiveness have won it national
attention.
2. Chicago Circle campus. All the essential pieces of a
comprehensive system are now in place and an Evalu-
ation Review Board has begun its work. This includes
the establishment of evaluative criteria with workable
definitions and the identification of programs and
units to be evaluated in the first round. Two major
components are incorporated: the work of the elabo-
rate self-study organization called into being for
accreditation review by the North Central Association
and the program for evaluation of all graduate degree
programs e\ery five years. The remaining question is
whether all these pieces can be cast together as a co-
herent plan which can be published and made known
both to insiders and outsiders as an instrument of
fjeriodic "accountability," with due allowance for the
imprecision of both the word and the expectations it
engenders. Putting the several pieces into replicatable
form is now being undertaken at the campus level.
When done, it should be an appropriate and worthy
parallel to the COPE system on the Urbana-Cham-
paign campus.
3. Medical Center campus. A system of evaluation is
nearing completion, but it is bound to reflect the
unique features of UIMC and its special academic
mission. \Vith the emphasis on professions and the
customary reliance of the health professions on pe-
riodic accreditation by outside bodies, these processes
will inevitably loom largely in any final system. That
regularizing process is now proceeding under the su-
p>ervision of \^ice-Chancellor William J. Grove, and a
report is anticipated in a few weeks.
The conclusion of this phase of the studies now
awaits the receipt (from UICC and UIMC) of the com-
pleted evaluative plans, their transmission to the Presi-
dent's Office, and their wide dissemination on the ap-
propriate campus. We are on the threshold of having in
place for the first time, on all campuses, systems of
periodic program evaluation. This is not as novel as it
sounds because evaluation has never been absent. How-
ever, die new thnjst is toward a more fonnal system
with emphasis on estabHshed periodicity, greater cer-
tainty, higher visibihty, broader staff participation, and
spelled-out procedures.
Supplementing, and in some ways complicating, the
evaluative pixnresses is the Administrator Evaluation
Project. It is Universitywide and, in a sense, laid on top
of the campus program evaluations, raising the inevitable
question as to whether and how the two schemes are to
be reconciled. ^Vhile the project, under the direction of
Professor Peter Yankwich, is proceeding with official and
real evaluations of representative administrators by cate-
gories (e.g., department heads and deans), it is under-
stood both by authorizing Senates and Trustees to be ex-
perimental. The future will depend on total experience,
which will be analyzed and reported by the director
at the end of the summer of 1977. Therefore, further
comment would be premature.
This is unquestionably an era of general zeal for
evaluation of all kinds, including performance auditing
by state governmental agencies. Contributing components
are the drives for openness, accountability, and partici-
pation. Candor requires recognition that some campus
resistance is rising against these extensive evaluative
efTorts, with complaints about the time demands and
fears about the budgetary uses. Experience is confirming
that problems exist in how and ^vhat to publicize, the
uses to which results should be put, who should do the
evaluating, how the many le\els of evaluating can be
reconciled, the time/benefits trade-ofT, the internal-
external tensions, and the short-run and long-run
administrative effects. ^Vhile the old assurance that evalu-
ation inheres in ongoing budgeting and personnel pro-
cedures \vi]\ no longer suffice, the shape of the more for-
mal and purposeful substitute has not yet fully emerged.
What is now taking place at the campus and University-
\vide levels will contribute to that process of emergence.
Intercampus Library Services. How to maximize the use
of the University's library resources has long been a
problem and challenge. The library at the Medical Cen-
ter campus in Chicago has immense capacity to enrich
the resources of the other two campuses in the life sci-
ences and their adjuncts. Given its size and compre-
hensiveness, the Urbana-Champaign library is potentially
an invaluable ally of the Chicago Circle campus as it
builds towards its objective of on-site capacity to match
its teaching-research-service mission in the Chicago area.
Likewise, it is a rich supplementary resource for the
Medical Center campus.
Yet experience shows that this is better theory than
practice. A recent report indicates that interlibrary loans
between the Urbana-Champaign campus and the Chi-
cago Circle campus have actually declined in number,
while the opposite was the intended objective. Also, in
response to this perpetual problem, the University Coun-
cil on Libraries (when it was created in 1967) was asked
to maximize "the accessibility of all the University's li-
brary resources to potential users on all campuses, and
including a consolidated statistical report for all li-
braries." In other words, the old challenge and the new
ln\estigat!on came together. Therefore, the University
Council on Libraries was asked to consider the library
sector of the intercampus studies and to report its
recommendations. That report, received on November
10, 1976, was sent to you on November 29, 1976. For a
modest financial outlay, it proposes several remedial
steps for irmnediate implementation :
1. Implementation of a courier service to provide 24-
hour turnaround time for interlibrary loans.
2. Coordination of collection development to minimize
duplication, facilitate purchase of expensive and
esoteric items, and avoid conflicting actions.
3. E.xpansion of the Union List of Serials.
In addition to these steps hope lies in the implicit com-
mitment of the top library personnel to strive, through
their planning and recommendations, for a better match
between theory and practice in the intercampus use of
the University's total library resources.
To avoid confusion mention should be made of the
Library Sharing Request in the FY 1978 budget which
was \vorked out subsequent to the plan outlined above.
While the more ambitious sharing plan, based on com-
puterization, also addresses itself to interlibrary services,
it is not a substitute for the procedural and personnel
recommendations of the University Council on Libraries.
The two plans have their independent but related mer-
its and should be neither confused nor regarded as
competitive.
While it would be naive to assume that intercampus
library relations can be solved by yet another report
(there have been many in the past!), the sound and
modest recommendations which have resulted from your
December 10, 1975, inquiry do augur well for some im-
mediate improvement. They are eminently worth trying,
in the full knowledge and with the deteiTnination that
still more will be insisted upon if necessary to bring the
unique resources of one library to the urgent needs of
another in the University system.
Intercampus Student and Faculty Services. To be faith-
ful to the organic concept of the multicampus Univer-
sity of Illinois, as distinguished from a loose confedera-
tion of autonomous institutions, students and faculty of
the different campuses should engage in some sharing,
reciprocity, and accommodation. There should be some
advantage in being within the system as compared with
being outside it — for example, student admissions from
one campus of the University to another campus. In
fact, the admissions problem antedated this study and
served as the centeipiece for an examination of a range
of similar intercampus relations, actual and potential,
affecting students.
Responsibility for this sector was assigned to Director
E. Eugene Oliver, University Office of School and Col-
lege Relations, who chaired intercampus committees al-
ready engaged in, or well prepared to become engaged in,
consideration of such shared services. His report will be
ready as soon as intercampus agreement can be obtained
on the assessment and collection of fees and the provision
of services for students in intercampus programs. He has
alread)' reported how the admissions, or student transfer,
problem between campuses was resolved through an
intercampus policy agreement. He will report also on
other types of intercampus services (e.g., concurrent en-
rollment) affecting students and faculty under certain
circumstances, with comment on what improvement
seems feasible.
The conclusion seems warranted that, while impor-
tant, this is not an area of intercampus relations which
will generate either great need or much use.
Independently of tliis study, a proposal for a system
of Uni\-ersity Professorships, involving intercampus status
and services, originated on the Chicago Circle campus.
The idea was discussed both in the University Academic
Council and tlie University Council on Graduate Edu-
cation and Research and was referred to the campuses
for consideration. Under present conditions the idea
seems to lack sufficient interest for implementation. The
major supplier of potential talent, the Urbana-Cham-
paign campus, reported unencouraging response.
To recapitulate, the sector studies now stand as
follows :
1. Research Relations. Completed. (Policy statement on
Early Notification System and Encouragement System
available on request. )
2. Graduate Degree Programs. Campus reports have
now been received and the composite Universitywide
report will follow as soon as the University Council
on Graduate Education and Research can be con-
sulted. (All to be available on request.)
3. Off-Campus Educational Services. Completed, with
two reports submitted on September 1, 1976. (Avail-
able on request.)
4. Internal Evaluation, (a) Campus program evaluation
at UIUC has long been complete; UICC has a system
now beginning to operate, with an integrated descrip-
tion soon to be available; UIMC is building on a com-
posite of its professional accrediting reviews, with a
final report expected soon, (b) Administrator Evalu-
ation Project preliminaiy report due, as planned
from the beginning, in autumn 1977. (All to be avail-
able on request.)
5. Library Services. Completed, with report submitted
on November 10, 1976. (Available on request.)
6. Student and Faculty Services. To be completed by
the end of February. (To be available on request.)
Report on the Pass-Fail Option at Chicago Circle and Urhana
PRESENTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BO/VRD OF TRUSTEES DECEMBER 15, 1976
At its meeting on June 19, 1974, the Board of Trus-
tees approved the continuance and modification of the
pass-fail grading option for the Urbana-Champaign
campus. In the discussion of the recommendation, it was
understood that a report on pass-fail options would be
prepared for the Board at the end of a two-year period.
A summary report follows of the policies, participa-
tion, and success rate of students utilizing the pass-fail
option at Urbana-Champaign and Chicago Circle for
the period fall 1973 through fall 1975 at the Urbana-
Champaign campus and from spring 1974 through win-
ter 1976 at the Chicago Circle campus. .\t the Medical
Center campus, although all grades in certain clinical
courses are either pass or fail, students are not offered the
choice of taking courses on a pass-fail or regular grading
system.
URBANA-CHAMPAIGN
Several substantive changes in the pass-fail system at
the Urbana-Champaign campus were approved by the
Board of Trustees on June 19, 1974, to be effective for
the 1974-75 spring semester. These changes specified a
minimum grade of C to receive credit under the option,
rather than the D grade required previously, and ex-
cluded from the option those courses (a) used to satisfy
the University general education requirements, (b)
specifically required by the student's college for gradua-
tion, or (c) specifically designated by the curriculum as
satisfying the student's major or field of concentration.
Also excluded were fourth semester foreign language
courses when taken to fulfill the graduation requirement
in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The revi-
sions permitted part-time students to participate for the
first time by taking a maximum of one course pass-fail
in any one semester and permitted full-time students to
take a maximum of two courses in any one semester,
rather than only one course as permitted under the
pre\-ious policy. The terminology was also changed from
pass-fail to credit-no credit.
Table 1 (page 5) shows the number and percent of
student grades in courses taken on the pass-fail (credit-
no credit) basis from fall 1973 through fall 1975. The
percentages are based on the total number of courses
taken by all students.
A substantial decline in participation is noted:
credit-no credit courses taken by students at Urbana-
Champaign in fall 1975 represent 1 percent of the
total courses taken by students on that campus, com-
pared with 4 percent in the fall of 1973. The actual
number of courses taken on a credit-no credit basis
dropped from 5,729 to 1,963 during this period.
The proportion of students taking credit-no credit
courses who fail or, under the re\'ised policy, receive no
credit for the course, has increased slightly, from 4.61 to
6.16 percent of the total grades in such courses. The
follo\ving table indicates the percentage of courses passed
or failed as compared to the total number of courses
taken on the credit-no credit basis;
Fall Spring Fall Spring Fall
1973 1974 1974 1975 1975
Pass (credit) 95.39 96.20 96.15 94.08 93.84
Fail (no credit) .. . 4.61 3.80 3.85 5.92 6.16
CHICAGO CIRCLE
The University of Illinois at Chicago Circle's pass-fail
option for undergraduate students \vas initiated spring
quarter 1974. This study covers the period from spring
quarter 1974 through winter quarter 1976, and Table 2
^page6) show-s the number and percent of student grades
in courses taken on a pass-fail basis during this period.
During that period, no changes were made in the
])rovisions for the use of the option. There are two major
diflTerenccs between the pass-fail option at UICC and
the credit-no credit option at Urbana-Champaign : at
UIUC a student may take two courses per tenn under
the option, whereas at UICC only one may be taken;
under the UIUC credit-no credit option a C is the
passing grade, whereas under UICC's pass-fail option a
D is considered passing.
Three of the colleges at UICC established additional
requirements for the use of the pass-fail option beyond
those specified by the campus. Those colleges were :
business administration, engineering, and liberal arts and
sciences.
The additional requirement of the College of Liberal
Arts and Sciences was that no more than two courses
could be taken on a pass-fail basis in a single discipline;
LAS does, however, allow a student to use the option
for any course that is not a requirement for the major.
In the Colleges of Business Administration and Engi-
neering, each of which has a substantial number of core
courses, more stringent rules on the use of pass-fail have
been imposed. The College of Business .-\dministration
prohibits its use for (a) English composition, (b) begin-
ning economics, (c) required mathematics courses, and
(d) administrative core courses other than business
electives.
The College of Engineering restricts the number of
hours that can be taken under the pass-fail option by
limiting the courses permitted to six and imposing these
additional restrictions: (aj no 100-level courses, (b)
only t\vo courses per discipline, and (c) no courses in
the core.
A nonrigorous comparison of grades taken under
the pass-fail option at UICC and under the regular
grading system indicated that the incidence of failure is
lower in courses taken pass-fail than in courses taken for
a letter grade. This circumstance seems particularly in-
teresting in view of the fact tliat under the UICC pass-
fail option the instructor does not know that a student
is registered in his course under the pass-fail option.
During the period studied, the greatest use of the
pass-fail option was in courses offered by the College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences. Those ofTered by the College
of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation ranked
second. For neither college, however, were pass-fail
registrations high. Pass-fail grades in LAS courses never
exceeded 4 percent; in HPER they never exceeded 2
percent. It is perhaps relevant that each of these col-
leges had a pass-fail option prior to the adoption of the
campuswide option. Prior to initiation of the campus-
wide option, LAS had conducted a four-year pass-fail
experiment under rules closely paralleling the campus
option; HPER had authorized pass-fail grades in its
service courses since fall quarter 1970. In the other col-
leges at UICC, with the exception of the Jane Addams
School of Social Work where pass-fail registration hit an
atypical high of 11 percent summer quarter 1974 and
then dropped to less than 1 percent, pass-fail registra-
tions were less than 1 percent for most of the period
studied (Table 2).
In reviewing the report of its Ad Hoc Committee to
Study the Pass-Fail Option, the Senate Committee on
Academic Programs reached the following conclusions:
the data presented provided no indication that the pass-
fail option at UICC should be expanded, contracted, or
modified ; and the nimiber of students exercising the
pass-fail option is too small to justify pursuing other
hypotheses or gathering additional data for further study.
The following table indicates the percent of courses
passed or failed as compared to the total number of
courses taken under the pass-fail option :
Pass.
Fail.
Spring 1974
.. 94.89
.. 5.11
Summer 1974
96.09
3.91
Fall 1974
96.19
3.81
Winter 1975
94.68
5.32
Spring 1975
95 . 60
4.40
Summer 1975
94.62
5.38
Fall 1975
95.44
4.56
Wmtet 1976
95.06
4.94
TABLE 1
STUDENT PARTICIPATION IN UNDERGRADUATE PASS-FAIL (CREDIT-NO CREDIT) COURSES AT THE URBANA-CHAMPAIGN CAMPUS, BY COLLEGE
Number and Percent of Student Grades in Courses Taken on Pass-Fail (Credit— No Credit) Option
Fall 1973
No. %
College P F P F
.\griculture 137 4 2 ..
Cx)inmerceand Business Ad-
ministration 436 20 3 . .
Education 59 2 1
Engineering 97 7 1
Fine and .-\pplied Arts 380 31 2 ..
Communications 60 3 3
Liberal .\rts and Sciences. . 4,132 194 6
Applied Life Studies 159 3 2 ..
Aviation 5 1
Campus Total 5,465 264 4
Spring 1974
Spring 1975
Fall 1975
Cr
82
244
35
29
149
8
989
305
1
A'-
Cr
2
22
5
12
1
66
13
Cr
4,645 186
2,320 146
1,842 121 1
TABLE 2
STUDENT PARTICIPATION, BY COLLEGE, IN THE CAMPUSWIDE PASS-FAIL OPTION AT THE CHICAGO CIRCLE CAMPUS
Number and Percent of Student Grades in Courses Taken on Pass-Fall Option
Spring 1974
No.
52
College P
Architecture and Art 40
Business Administration 35
Education 4
Engineering 4
Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation 42
Jane Addams School of Social Work .... 24
Liberal Arts and Sciences 983
Urban Sciences
Spring 1975
No.
College P
Architecture and Art 40
Business Administration 71
Education 3
Engineering 8
Health, Physical Education, and
Recreation 43
Jane Addams School of Social Work .... 4
Liberal Arts and Sciences 916
Urban Sciences
%
%
Summer 1974
7
18
336
No.
349 20
%
P F
Fall 1974
%
P F
23
694
No.
%
P F
613
1
32
34
1
7
22
2
863
No.
New University Director of Public Information Named
DAVID LANDMAN APPOINTED AT JANUARY MEETING; TO ASSUME OFFICE APRIL 1
David Landman, 59, has been named University di-
rector of public information at the University of Illinois
effective April 1.
He will become one of ten general officers of the
three-campus system of the University and will partici-
pate in policy discussions and decisions. He will be based
in Chicago with a satellite office on the Urbana-Cham-
paign campus.
The position has been vacant since the resignation of
Charles E. FlyTin.
Director of public affairs for the Pathfinder Fund in
Boston since 1973, Landman formerly was director of
information at the Harvard Business School (1969-73),
associate director of development at Princeton Univer-
sity (1963-69), and assistant to the president of Cooper
Union, New York (1959-63). From 1947 to 1959 he
was a free-lance writer and editor.
Throughout his career. Landman has been involved
with public relations, publications, communications, and
development.
He is the author of numerous articles on education,
social problems, health, and other areas and is a mem-
ber of the American Society of Journalists and Authors.
He also has taught professional writing at the School of
Public Communication, Boston University.
Landman holds an A.B., magna cum laude, from
Brown University and an M.A. from Columbia. He is a
member of Phi Beta Kappa.
At Illinois Landman will be responsible for develop-
ing programs to inform the public about the goals, ac-
tivities, sendees, and accomplishments of the University.
In recommending Landman's appointment, Univer-
sity President John E. Corbally said, "I am pleased to be
able to attract to the University of Illinois a person who
is both a student of and experienced practitioner in the
field of communications.
"The University needs to ha\-e its record of service
to Illinois and to the nation described in ways which
reinforce the understanding of its crucial significance to
Illinois. It is to this task that Mr. Landman will devote
his abilities and his energy."
His appointment was approved at the January meet-
ing of the Board of Trustees.
FACULl
BROWN NORN'AN B
220S LIBRARY
StRIALS DEPT
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 268, March 15, 1977
Illinois Board of Higher Education Budget Recommendations for FY 1978
COMPARISON OF UI BUDGET REQUESTS AND IBHE PROPOSAL
The Illinois Board of Higher Education (IBHE) ap-
proved on March 1. 1977, a suggested allocation of the
$50 million which Governor Thompson has stated repre-
sents the new money available for higher education in
Illinois for Fiscal Year (FY) 1978. It is important to
remember. howe\er, that this suggested allocation does
not represent the IBHE recommendations, but is an allo-
cation made at the request of the governor.
On Januan,' 11. 1977, the IBHE made recommenda-
tions for FY 1978 operating and capital budget appro-
priations based upon IBHE analysis of needs and of the
resources of the State of Illinois. These recommendations
will be used in developing the appropriations bills for
the University of Illinois for FY 1978. This report, then,
is a comparison of the budget requests of the University
of Ilhnois (see Faculty Letter no. 265, October 22, 1976)
with the January- 1977 recommendations of the IBHE.
The amount recommended for the Fiscal Year 1978
regular capital budget for the University is $25,969,347.
In comparison, the University originally requested $56,-
1 15.900 for new capital projects. The University's capital
request was revised to $46,195,166 after the governor's
veto of the FY 1977 budget was sustained. The major
impact of the IBHE recommendations for regular capital
projects will be the deferral of the proposed new building
projects and the revision of the phasing of the major
remodeling efforts.
The University's Food Production and Research
Complex (Food for Centura' Three) proposal was fa-
vorably received by the IBHE. The IBHE recommended
funding $31,203,100 of the requested $32,368,000.
DETAILED COMPARISON OF THE U. OF I. BUDGET REQUEST
IN IBHE RECOMMENDATIONS: OPERATING BUDGET
Table 1 shows the detailed comparison of the Univer-
sity's operating budget request with the Illinois Board of
Higher Education recommendations.
Salary Increases — The University requested salar)-
increases averaging 8 percent for all personnel and an ad-
ditional 2 percent for lower-paid staff personnel. ,\ mar-
ket study has shown that this employee group is farther
from market conditions than the other groups. The IBHE
recommended an average 7 percent increase for all person-
nel with an additional 2 percent for the lower-paid group.
General Price Increases — The IBHE recommended
a 5 percent increase for expense items and a 9 percent
increase for equipment. The increased amount for equip-
ment was recommended because appropriations in recent
years have not been sufficient to replace equipment and
acquire library books.
Utility Price Increases — The IBHE recommended
the amount requested by the University for utility price
increases. The requested increase of 12.5 percent is the
smallest increase requested in the past three years for
utility increases.
Operating Funds for New Buildings — The IBHE
recommended a flat rate to support new buildings of
$2.20 per gross square foot; the University request ($3.19
per gross square foot) represented the actual estimated
cost for operating the new buildings. The problem of
inadequate maintenance for University buildings will be
increased as a result of adding new buildings without
sufficient operating funds.
Continuing Education and Extended-Day — The con-
tinuing education and extended-day programs were sup-
ported at a level lower than that requested ($998,000 vs.
$3,876,700) . There are sufficient funds in this recom-
mendation to begin the extended-day operation, but with
fewer students than was originally planned. The funds
for continuing education were recommended for needs
assessment and evaluation at the Medical Center and for
continuing education in engineering at Urbana-Cham-
paign.
Expansion in Health-related Fields — The IBHE rec-
ommended that the University receive an additional
$2.5 million for expansion at the Medical Center and
$368,000 for replacement of federal capitation funds for
the College of Veterinary Medicine at the Urbana-
Champaign campus. These increases will allow the Med-
ical Center campus to fund an enrollment increase of
eighty-three students and will allow the College of Vet-
erinary Medicine to maintain an entering class size of
eighty-six students.
TABLE 1
COMPARISON OF UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS OPERATING BUDGET REQUEST FOR FY 1978 WITH THE IBHE RECOMMENDATION
(in thousands of dollars)
U. of I. Request
I. Continuing components
A. Salaiy increases 14,646.1 (8%) *
B. General price increases 2,240.9 (7%)
C. Utility price increases 1,723.1 (12.5%)
D. Operating funds for new facilities 772.9
E. Workers' compensation increases 72.0
Subtotal ($19,455.0)
II. Programmatic components
A. Extended education
1. Continuing education 1,989.3
2. Extended-day 1,887.4
B. Health professions
1. Medical Center 3,500.0
2. Veterinary Medicine 412.5
C. Program development
1. Bilingual Education Center 75.0
2. Institute for Environmental Studies 153.3
3. Institute for Developmental Disabilities 218.8
4. Agriculture Cooperative Extension 188.4
5. Library Sharing Program 588.3
D. Equipment recover)' 250.0
E. Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement . . . 650.0
Subtotal ($9,913.0)
III. Special service and special funding
A. DSCC 954.4
B. Willard Airport 254.8
C. Police Training Institute 258.1
D. County Board matching 201.1
Subtotal ($1,668.4)
E. Refunds (0)
TOTAL $31,036.4
* These amounts include an extra 2 percent increment for lower-paid staff personnel.
•* This amount includes a 9 percent increase for equipment.
IBHE
Recommendation
14,314.1 (7%)*
1,780.1 (5%)**
1,723.1 (12.5%)
522.4
72.0
($18,411.7)
98.0
900.0
2,500.0
368.0
40.0
24.0
-0-
90.0
450.0
-0-
300.0
($4,770.0)
350.0
No recommendation
121.1
201.1
($672.2)
(96.7)
$23,950.6
Special Services and Special Funding Components —
Additional funds were recommended for the Division of
Ser\-ices for Crippled Children ($350,0001. the Police
Training Institute ($121,000), and County Board match-
ing funds ($201,100) which match the county budgets
for Cooperative Extension programs at a one-to-four
ratio. There was no recommendation for the Willard
Airport public service operations. The Willard Airport
request ($254,800) will be discussed separately with the
staffs of the Bureau of the Budget and the General As-
sembly Appropriation Committee.
Other Recommendations — Funding was recom-
mended at reduced levels for the following new pro-
grams: Center for Bilingual/Bicultural Education ($40,-
000), Institute for Environmental Studies ($24,000).
expansion of the Cooperative Extension Service ($90,-
000), and the Librar>' Sharing Program ($450,000). In
addition, $300,000 was reconmiended for repair and
maintenance of buildings for the Urbana-Champaign
campus. The IBHE recommended $25,556,900 for re-
tirement. This amount would meet the annual payout
requirements and begin to meet the funding require-
ments of the retirement system. The University requested
the minimum statutoiy requirement of $37,392,887.
CAPITAL BUDGET
The regular capital budget request of the University
of Illinois for FY 1978 was $56,115,990. After the gov-
ernor's veto of the FY 1977 capital projects was sus-
tained, the requested amount was reduced to $46,195,166
as a result of deferral of some projects and redefinition
of others. The IBHE recommended $25,969,347 for new
capital projects for the L'^niversity of Illinois. Table 2
shows the reduced request and the recommendations of
the IBHE by campus and by budget category. Table 3
details the projects included in the SR^ category for each
campus.
The only new building projects approved by IBHE
were the two Veterinary Medicine Research buildings,
Willard Airport Crash Rescue Facility, and the Library
.Si.xth Stack Addition, all at Urbana-Champaign. Funds
to complete bond-eligible buildings were recommended
for the Replacement Hospital and Turner Hall Addition.
Equipment funds were also recommended for these two
TABLE 2
DETAILED FY 1978 CAPITAL BUDGET REQLJEST AS APPROVED BY BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND IBHE
Approved Explanation oj revision oj
U. of I. Approved FY 1978 request after veto
Category and Project BOT IBHE of FY 1977 request
Chicago Circle
Buildings, additions, and/ or structures
Library Addition $ 7,562,000 -0- No change
Subtotal ($ 7,562,000) (-0-)
Funds to complete bond-eligible buildings
Library Addition S 41 ,000 -0- No change
Subtotal ($ 41 ,000) (-0-)
Land -0- -0-
Equipment
SEL Engineering $ 400,000 $ 400,000 Combined and reduced
Library Addition 240,500 -U- No change
Subtotal ($ 640,500) ($ 400,000)
Utilities
Library Addition S 162,000 -0- Escalated
Subtotal ($ 162,000) (-0-)
Remodeling and rehabilitation
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement I $ 1 ,278,620 $ 1 ,278,620 Formula amount for FY 1978
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement II 671,300 615,300 Residual SR' projects
Building equipment automation 747,500 447,500 Combined and escalated
SEL engineering 406,000 406,000 Combined and reduced
Roosevelt Road building 600,000 -0- Combined and reduced
Subtotal : ($ 3,703,420) ($ 2,747,420)
Site improvements
Library Addition % 85,300 -0- No change
Exterior campus graphics 48,300 -0- Escalated
Campus landscape improvements 165,000 -0- Escalated
Subtotal ($ 298,600) (-0-)
Planning -0- -0-
Cooperative improvements
Pedestrian traffic control — Morgan and Park Place $ 56,000 $ 56,000 Escalated
Bus stop shelters CTA 39,500 -0- Escalated
Pedestrian traffic control — Polk and Halstead 56,000 -0- Escalated
Subtotal ($ 151,500) ($ 56,000)
Total, Chit-ago Circle campus $12,559,020 $ 3,203,420
Medical Center
Buildings, additions, and/or structures -0- -0-
Funds to complete bond-eligible buildings
Replacement Hospital $ 1 ,000,000 S 1 ,000,000 No change
Subtotal ($ 1,000,000) ($ 1,000,000)
Land -0- -0-
Equipment
Replacement Hospital J 6,000,000 $6,000,000 Combined
College of Medicine 333,400 333,400 Combined and escalated
School of Public Health 96,800 96,800 Need to match federal funds
Subtotal ($ 6,430,200) ($ 6,430,200)
Utilities -0- -0-
Remodcling and rehabilitation
SUDMP— Project II $1,118,500 $1,118,500 Project scope redefined, new
cost figure
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement I 1 ,490,277 1 ,490,277 Formula amount for FY 1978
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement II 1,301,319 -0- Residual SR^ projects
1919WestTaylor — Phase 1 719,250 719,250 Escalated from FY 1977
amount
SUDMP — Project III 1,217,400 -0- Project scope redefined, new
cost figure
Approved
U.ofl.
Category and Project BO T
1919 West Taylor — Phase II 975,000
715 South Wood 1,225,000
Rockford School of Medicine 241 ,000
Subtotal ($ 8,287,746)
Site improvements
Demolition of General Services Building $ 85,000
Subtotal ($ 85,000)
Planning
Pharmacy Building air conditioning — ventilate $1 ,225,000
Vacated hospital space 250,000
Subtotal (S 1 ,475,000)
Cooperative improvements -0-
Total, Medical Center campus ($17,277,946)
Urbana-Champaign
Buildings, additions, and/or structures
Veterinary Medicine Research Buildings (2) S 396, 700
Willard Airport Crash Rescue Facility 60,000
Library Sixth Stack Addition '. 3,966,300
Subtotal ($ 4,423,000)
Funds to complete bond-eligible buildings
Turner Hall Addition $ 65, 100
Subtotal ($ 65, 100)
Land
Medical Science Building $ 38,500
Life Sciences Teaching Laboratory 1 10,000
Subtotal (S 148,500)
Equipment
Turner Hall Addition $ 1 , 1 10,000
English Building renovation 25,000
Animal room improvements 65,000
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement 1 450,000
College of Engineering remodeling 50,000
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement II 14,000
Subtotal ($ 1,714,000)
Utilities
Central supervisory control S 600,000
Library Sixth Stack Addition 90,900
Condensate return system 167,400
Watermain extension (S.E.) 27,900
Subtotal ($ 886,2001
Remodeling and rehabilitation
English Building renovation $ 1,375,000
Animal room improvements 507,000
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement I 1 , 181 ,500
College of Engineering remodeling 902,000
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement II 1,137,000
Coble Hall improvements 415,000
Space realignment, remodeling, and replacement III 1,585,500
Instructional tennis court improvement 88,000
Subtotal ($ 7,191,000)
Site improvements
Pennsylvania Avenue street improvements S 300,000
Campus landscape improvements 75,000
Approved
IBHE
-0-
-0-
-0-
($ 2,328,027)
-0-
(^)
Explanation oj revision of
FY 1978 request after veto
oj FY 1977 request
Escalated
No change
No change
No change
$ 120,000
-0-
Changed from remodeling to
planning by IBHE
No change
{% 120,000)
-0-
($10,878,227)
'
$ 396,700
Escalated
60,000
Reduced
3,966,300
($ 4,423,000)
No change
$ 65,100
($ 65,100)
No change
$ 38,500
No change
-0-
($ 38,500)
No change
1
$ 1,110,000
25,000
No change
Escalated
45,000
Project redefined, new cost
450,000
50,000
figure
No change
Combined and reduced
14,000
($ 1,694,000)
No change
$ 300,000
Combined
90,900
-0-
No change
Cost escalated
-0-
($ 390,900)
No change
$ 1,375,000
Combined and escalated
306,000
Project redefined
1,181,500
First third of formula amount
for FY 1978
902,000
Combined and reduced
1,137,000
Second third of formula
amount for FY 1978
-0-
Combined and escalated
-0-
Last third of formula gener-
ated amount
-0-
($ 4,901,500)
Cost reduced, scope changed
-0-
No change
-0-
No change
Approvid
U.oJI.
Category and Project BO T
Intramural athletic field 39,400
Subtotal ($ 414,400)
Planning
Life Sciences Teaching Laboratory $ 153, 100
Engineering Library Stack Addition 98 , 500
Davenport Hall remodeling 100,000
Law Building Addition 116,200
Auditorium roof replacement 660,000
Nuclear Reactor Laboratory Phase II 51 ,300
Subtotal ' (S 1 , 179, 100)
Cooperative improvement
UC Sanitary District $ 228,000
Stadium Drive resurfacing 96,400
LVbana signalization 12, 500
Subtotal ($ 336,900)
Total, Urbana-Champaign Campus $16,358,200
TOTAL, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS $46,195,166
projects along with equipment funds for major ongoing
remodeling efTorts. Central Supervisory Control Center
and Library Sixth Stack Addition LTtilities were the only
utility projects approved. In keeping with the philosophy
of the past few years, the bulk of the IBHE recommenda-
tion for new funds is for remodeling and rehabilitation
projects, including both major renovation projects and
space realignment, remodeling, and replacement projects
at each of the three campuses. Planning funds were ap-
proved for three remodeling projects: air conditioning
and ventilating the Pharmacy Building at Medical Cen-
ter, renovation of Davenport Hall at Urbana-Cham-
paign. and replacement of the Auditorium roof at Ur-
bana-Champaign; and for two building additions: Law
Building Addition and Engineering Library Stack Addi-
tion, both at Urbana-Champaign. The only cooperative
improvement recommended was for pedestrian traffic
control at Morgan and Vernon Park Place at Chicago
Circle. No site improvement projects \vere approved.
Food Production and Research Complex (Food for
Century Three) — The original Food for Century Three
FY 1978 request of $32,010,900 was increased to $32,-
368,000 as a result of the sustaining of the governor's
veto of planning funds for \'eterinary Medicine Basic
Sciences Building ($200,500) and Agricultural Engineer-
ing Sciences Building ($156,600). The IBHE recom-
mended $31,203,100 for FY 1978. The specific projects
approved are :
\'eterinary Medicine Basic Sciences
Building $21,813,200
Utilities 10,000
Agricultural Engineering Sciences
Building 7,859,200
Utilities 56,100
Dairs- Farm Consohdation Building 298,600
UtUities 6,000
Remodeling 160,000
Approved
IBHE
Explanation oj revision oj
FY 1978 request after veto
oj FY 1977 request
-0-
(-0-)
No change
-0-
98,500
No change
Escalated (building deferred
until FY 1979)
100,000
Escalated
116,200
Cost reduced
60,000
-0-
($ 374,700)
Changed from remodeling to
planning by IBHE
No change
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
No change
No change
No change
No change
$11,887,700
$25,969,347
1 research land
1,000,000
Those Food for Century Three projects proposed for
oflf-campus sites were not recommended for funding in
FY 1978. These include land at Dixon Springs ($500,-
000) and in western Illinois ($600,000) and the Storage
Building at Downers Grove ($64,900). These projects
are being deferred until the FY 1979 request.
TABLE 3
SPACE REALIGNMENT REMODELING AND REPLACEMENT
REVISED PROJECT LIST
pproved
Approve
BOT
IBHE
12/76
1/77
Chicago Circle
First group ($1,278,620)
Lecture Center roof and
drain Phase I $ 137,360
Security Phase II 125.820
Roof repairs Phase I . . . 130,860
Roof repairs Phase II . . 360,200
Rehab upper walkway
Phase I 121,050
OSHA 72,890
Lecture Center 12
KVduct 96,110
Elevator code compliance 63,200
Window replacement
RRB 58,460
Lecture Center air intake 68,670
Floor slab room
B-500-SES 44,000
($1,278,620)
Second group ($671,300)
Security Phase III $ 121,000
$ 137,360
125,820
130,860
360,200
121,050
72,890
96,110
63,200
58,460
68,670
44,000
($1,278,620)
$ 121,000
Rehab upper walkway
Phase II . .
OSHA Phase II
Exterior wall repair —
ECB
Service Building
remodeling
Lecture Center lighting.
BSB acoustical
Fire alarm modification .
Medical Center
First group ($1,490,277)
General hospital
renovation
Elevator code violations
General code violations
Window replacement .
Third floor, hospital . .
Room 200 Pharmacy . .
Room 346 Pharmacy . .
BRL cage washing
Phase I
($
Approved
EOT
12/76
126.000
115,000
68,750
38,700
57,000
22,350
122,500
671,300)
Second group ($1,301,319)
Building equipment
automation
Window replacement . .
General code violations .
Elevator renovation, ISI
Administration,
Pharmacy
Room 404 Pharmacy . . .
Instrument shop
2035 West Taylor
Urbana-Champaign
First group ($1,181,500)
Electrical modernization
Krannert Center for the
Performing Arts
Energy conservation —
heat control
Gregory Hall, Journalism
Altgeld Hall elevator . . .
Approved
IBHE
1/77
126,000
115,000
68,750
38.700
57,000
22.350
66.500
$ 615,300)
\'isual Arts Laboratory-
Davenport Hall,
98,000
98,000
$
297,890
$
297,890
133,030
133.030
120,600
120,600
84,957
84,957
203,700
203,700
214,000
214,000
272,700
272,700
163,400
163,400
$1,490,277)
($1,490,277)
$
193,450
$
-0-
168,259
-0-
120.600
-0-
190,450
-0-
62,900
-0-
134,300
-0-
306,160
-0-
125,200
-0-
$
1,301,319)
$
^0-
$
163.500
$
163,500
275,000
275,000
140,300
140,300
32,300
32,300
92,100
92,100
Biophysics
180,000
180,000
Freer G>-m remodeling .
200,300
200,300
($1,181,500)
($1,181,500)
Second group ($1,137,0001
Architecture Building
roof and gutters
$ 89,900
$ 89,900
Environmental Research
Laboraton,'
80,900
80,900
Natural History Building
— heating
173,300
173,300
Natural Histor\' Building
— sprinklers
117,400
117,400
David Kinley Hall,
Room 114
150,000
150,000
Elevator replacement —
Lincoln Hall
93,000
93,000
Library fire protection . .
111,500
111,500
Librar}' remodeling ....
73,000
73,000
Energy conservation —
vent turndown
90,000
90,000
Stair enclosure
128,000
128,000
Lincoln Hall remodeling
30,000
30,000
($1,137,000)
($1,137,000)
Third group ($1,585,500)
Huff Gymnasium roof
and gutters
$ 92,600
$ -0-
Elevator install —
Flagg Hall
220,000
-0-
Roof replacements
459,900
-0-
Temperature control —
remodeling and
replacement
99,000
-0-
Energ)' conservation —
remodel windows ....
80,000
-0-
Magnetic door holders —
Bevier and ASL
36,000
-0-
Gregory Hall lighting . .
30,000
-0-
Huff G)'mnasium
remodelins;
250,000
-0-
Energ\' conseivation —
animal room vent . . .
90,000
-0-
Commerce remodeling .
116,000
-0-
Condensate pump
replacement
45,000
-0-
Cooling tower
remodeling
67,000
-0-
($1,585,500)
$ -0-
open Enrollment for Medicare Part B (Physician) Ends March 31
UI EMPLO'\'EES SHOULD ENROLL AT 65 FOR BEST BENEFITS
The 1977 general enrollment period for Medicare
Part B (physician) ends March 31. Any employee, annui-
tant, or retiree 65 years of age or over is eligible to sign
up for these benefits and may do so by contacting the
nearest Social Security Office by telephone. Coverage
will begin July 1 for those who sign up during this gen-
eral enrollment period.
Although eligible state employees are not required to
enroll in Medicare Part B, the state insurance program
will not pay any benefits which Medicare would have
paid, leaving the patient responsible for this portion of
the charges.
For further infoiTnation, contact the insurance office
on your campus.
'yCU
220a Library
3 1 copies)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
APR 'i b ^"^ '*^' *p"' '*' '"'
'T lJR?J'NA-dV^.3!*■-?p■A!f;^I
Report to the People: The State of the University of Illinois
ANNUAL MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY TO CITIZENS OF ILLINOIS
Each year at this time I come to the people of Illi-
nois to report on the work of their state University. In
the past I have singled out an area of education or ser-
vice which the University performs and have focused on
that segment of our activity. This year, however, I offer
a more basic report — a Report to the State on "The
State of the Universitv' of Illinois," where we stand, and
how we hope to progress.
The people of Illinois have an educational treasure
in the University' of Illinois. The University of Illinois,
by any standard, is a great University. Someone recently
called it "one of America's great natural resources."
That is a valid statement.
The Universit)' of Illinois, and this can be said in all
honesty, is not only a repository — a treasury, if you
will, of the store of humankind's knowledge — it also
is a generator of knowledge, a research institution where
the perimeters of lore and learning, of truth and tech-
nology-, are made to move and to expand. It is an insti-
tution where the proven truths are revered and where
new horizons of science and skill are approached.
The people of Illinois, through their support over a
span of 109 years, have made their University great, and
for this they are to be commended.
Yet sometimes it seems that these same people — the
residents of the state of Illinois — are not fully aware of
their treasure. For this reason, let me cite briefly a few
of the yardsticks by which the stature of a university is
measured.
I. First, the quality of its departments and its faculty.
A measure of faculty eminence is the selection of an
institution's scholars for exclusive and prestigious honors.
The University' of Illinois can boast twenty-six members
of the National Academy of Science, twenty members of
the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, nineteen
members of the National Academy of Engineering, a
Pulitzer Prize winner, five recipients of the National
Medal of Honor, and the only scientist ever to receive
a Nobel Prize twice in the same field.
Academic units also are rated nationally. Deans of
engineering were asked to list the five engineering schools
(other than their own) they considered to be the best.
The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was
second, after MIT and tying with Stanford. The Ameri-
can Council on Education, in a survey of thousands of
scholars, ranked our graduate faculty in the top ten of
all universities and in the top four among publicly sup-
ported universities. Eleven departments ranked among
the top seven.
2. Second, the quality of the student bodies on the
campuses.
The average freshman at the University of Illinois
earned test scores substantially higher than the national
average for college-bound students — a composite score
of 23 on the American College Test — which is better
than seven out of ten college-bound students. Compared
with over 350 institutions participating in the ACT
Research Service, the University of Illinois ranks in the
upper 7 percent in terms of the average test scores of
its entering freshmen. Six percent of all students in the
nation who earned the highest possible ACT math score
enrolled as freshmen at the University last fall.
These highly qualified and motivated freshmen
earned more than 6,000 semester hours of college credit
last fall in College Board Advanced Placement exams
taken during their senior year in high school — in addi-
tion to more than 7,500 credit hours based on the College
Level E.xamination Program and other proficiency
examinations.
The University also attracts a large number of highly
qualified transfer students from a variety of institutions,
including every public community college in the state.
It is appropriate — and not at all boastful — to
note that while other excellent institutions of higher
learning are seeking ways to attract more students, the
University of Illinois, term after term, is turning away
qualified prospective undergraduate and graduate stu-
dents — bright, capable, young people we wish we could
find space and funds to admit.
3. Third, the quality of its alumni.
A recent survey reveals that thirty-one of the chief
executive officers of America's major corporations are
graduates of the University of Illinois, a number ex-
ceeded only by two other institutions.
Among the graduates of the University are five
Nobel Prize winners and 10 Pulitzer Prize recipients. The
University ranks third among U.S. universities and first
in the Big Ten in the number of its graduates who have
gone on to earn the Doctoral degree.
4. Fourth, its stature as an institution where research
thrives and public service is a commitment.
In 1909 the nation's first organized Engineering
Experiment Station was established here. Research
breakthroughs include development of the Betatron, pi-
oneering work in amino acids which made possible the
production of 150-bushel-per-acre com, and many
others. We can take pride, as can the people of Illinois,
in numerous "firsts," not only in the sciences but also in
such diverse areas as early childhood education, music
and other fine arts, linguistics, and intercultural studies.
As a land-grant institution, and as the multifaceted
comprehensive public University in Illinois, the Uni-
versity of Illinois is asked not only to offer instruction
and research, but also to bring these programs to bear
on public problems through extension and public ser\dce.
Within this charge, the University must be more than
a teaching and research institution ; it must involve it-
self with people in ways that influence their daily lives
for the better.
One of the channels for University service to
the people of Illinois is a closer relationship with the
branches and agencies of state government. Therefore,
we compile a listing of these services by University of
Illinois units and faculty for state agencies. The report
is titled "Illini Service to the State." Its listings are but
examples of the many services to the state. They total
395, in 15 areas of interest. A complete listing would
occupy many volumes.
We also serve local communities and their agencies,
and we offer educational opportunities off campus to
adults who, for job or family reasons, are not able to
attend their state University as full-time residents on
the campuses. We do this in many ways — through
extramural classes, correspondence courses, conferences
and institutes in professional areas, new educational de-
livery systems such as the UNIVEX-Net (a telephonic
network), and even by mighty PLATO, our computer-
ized instruction system.
Although the University of Illinois maintains its ma-
jor campuses at Urbana-Champaign, Chicago Circle,
and the Medical Center in Chicago, it is a presence in
every corner in Illinois. Each of you has in your part of
the state a University of Illinois office staffed by regional
directors who can help find ways to fulfill your educa-
tional needs, those of your town, and those of your or-
ganization or business.
Our effort to increase the quantity and quality of
health services led to the establishment of medical pro-
grams at Urbana-Champaign, Rockford, and Peoria.
There are experiment stations and other research
units in many locations, including the famed agricul-
tural facility at Dixon Springs.
I spoke of extramural classes. We have set up a net-
work of centers devised to ensure that no present or
prospective teacher, for example, has to drive more than
fifty miles to take a sequential course which will enable
him or her to work toward an advanced degree from the
University of Illinois.
Now let us add to all of these locations at the Uni-
versity of Illinois — campuses, regional headquarters,
health education sites, experiment stations, and extra-
mural class centers — the locations of Cooperative Ex-
tension Service offices, and you will see that your multi-
University is located in each of the 102 counties in
Illinois.
Yes, you say, but the Cooperative Extension Service
is out there to serve farmers and their families. True, but
not entirely true. The times have changed and are
changing; the University of Illinois is meeting the
changing needs. As urban and suburban populations
grow, people of all sorts still need to draw upon the
expertise of their University. One way we deliver this
expertise to their doorsteps is through the Cooperative
Extension Service.
Within the boundaries of Chicago alone, without in-
clusion of the entire great metropolitan district, the Co-
operative Extension Service has more than 100 full-time
employees. What do they do in the city? They carr^' on
programs which help urban residents cope with everyday
problems, such as consumerism and nutrition. They
offer healthy, wholesome outlets for young people
through 4-H work. They assist establishments concerned
with agribusiness, and they work with governmental
agencies.
Yes, times do change. The University is not an in-
stitution which looks only to the past. We look also to
the present and to the future.
Presently we are embarked on hundreds of exciting
activities ; I will cite only three.
Residents of Illinois who come from other cultures
benefit by our pioneering work in techniques for the
teaching of English as a second language; their com-
munities and the economy also benefit.
With starvation stalking the world, we have launched
a mighty research thrust which will involve scores of
distinguished faculty members beginning in 1978. We
call this project "Food for Century III."
Energy is a primar)' concern. In our Small Homes
Council-Building Research Council at Urbana-Cham-
paign, our Energy Resources Center at Chicago Circle,
and in other parts of the University, we originate and
consolidate work on alternate sources of energy and
provide services \vhich have statewide and national
ramifications.
Yes, we are a great University, made so by the
stature of our faculty, our academic colleges and de-
partments, our student body, our research eminence, our
public service outreach into your communities, and most
of all by the people of Illinois and their support. I want
to speak about that support.
As a great University our needs also are great, and
our needs are not being met. To the uninitiated, our
budget may seem large. As a fact, it is veiy small vvhen
translated into wages, research and teaching equipment,
heat and light for cla-ssrooms and laboratories, books for
m libraries, and other fundamentals.
The people of the state of Illinois, so generous to the
L'niversity for decades past and so richly rewarded for
^ their generosity, now are failing in their support. The ap-
B propriations made to the Uni\-ersity and approved by
our governoi-s have been cut beyond the bare bone and
deep into the verv- marrow. I need not stress what this
means to our missions of educating the young and the
aspiring adult, pushing back the boundaries of knowl-
edge and technology, and meeting the public service
needs of the people of the state.
The support for higher education in Illinois falls far
below that of most states by several important measures.
A survey of how the states compare in their financing
of higher education was made recently bv The Chronicle
of Higher Education. The results show that Illinois ranks
fortv-fourth in its percent increase in appropriations for
higher education from 1974-75 to 1976-77. Our nine
percent increase over this period is far below the national
average of 24 percent.
A similar analysis ov^er the past ten years shows Illi-
nois ranking thirty-si.xth, indicating state support de-
clines drastically compared to the rest of the nation.
Illinois ranks thirty-second on the basis of appropri-
ations per capita. The $61.10 figure for Illinois is 6.7
percent below the U.S. average of $64.21.
Finally. Illinois ranks forty-third in appropriations
per .$1,000.00 of personal income, at $9.00. This is 22.8
percent below the national average of $11. 05.
There are heartening signs of renewed support in
Illinois. The General Assembly recently restored to the
University salarv- funds reduced by gubernatorial action.
This permitted the University to provide salary in-
creases averaging a total of 4.5 percent for the second
half of 1976-77 instead of 2.5 percent. We are extremely
pleased with this action by the General Assembly, and
we are most appreciative of the support which thousands
of you gave to our efTorts to slow the steady decline in
the salary status of our people.
Yet, even with the restoration of these funds, Illinois
still falls behind the average in its support of higher
^ education and most particularly in the salaries for our
^ employees. The salary ranking of University of Illinois
faculty — in comparison to other Big Ten faculties —
has declined at every level since the 1975 fiscal year. In
U the current year, your University is fifth in the Big Ten
for salary increases given full professors, sixth for asso-
ciate professors, eighth for assistant professors, and ninth
for instructors.
The salary picture is bleak not only for the faculty,
but also for the supportive staff — janitors and clerks,
lab technicians and accountants — all up and down the
line. The problem is most acute in the lowest-salaried
ranks, where the deficiencies range about 20 percent.
University nonacademic staff salaries average 12 percent
less than those of other state employees doing the same
jobs and 16.2 percent less than those of people in similar
jobs in local business and industry.
The fact that we remain a strong and vital Univer-
sity is, first of all, a testimony to the dedication of faculty
and staff who have struggled to maintain quality on
starvation rations. Even so, we are at a crisis point.
Through combinations of increased tax support plus
realistic increases in student tuition, other great public
universities have slowly and relentlessly equalled and
then passed us by. And it is these universities with which
we compete for outstanding faculty, for the most gifted
graduate students, for research dollars, and for positions
of leadership in scholarly organizations.
We are attempting to stretch decreasing resources
in an era of constant inflation to meet the unceasing de-
mands on our educational assets, our facilities, and our
faculty and its expertise. To meet our most basic needs,
we are at the desperation level of "eating our own seed
corn."
The University of Illinois Library is a source of
honest pride. It is the heart of the University. When
ranked with other universities it stands third in the num-
ber of volumes, behind only Harvard and Yale. But even
our Library is ailing. Last year, in volumes added, Illi-
nois ranked ninth. In total outlay for books and bindings,
it slid from fifth to thirteenth, and in total operating
expenditures, from ninth to thirteenth.
The "knowledge explosion" which is occurring as
science and learning expand in volume and in force
brings demands for all kinds of information to meet the
needs of students and scholars. The pressure on the
Library is greater than at any time in history. It is oc-
curring in almost all fields of subject matter. Add to
this the grim fact of our financial problem, and you can
picture the situation. A great library can survive a year
or two of short rations, but not five years, and never ten.
We must find ways to stop the slippage. We must find
ways to correct the downward trend.
Another great need is for funds for the support of
research of young faculty. This is a must if we are to
attract and retain the brightest, most eager, and most
effective young faculty members. We need these men and
women. Those of you with children or grandchildren
who in a few years may come to their state University
need them too. These young faculty members will be
academic leaders in that tomorrow; their scholarship will
enrich the education of your children, and their research
findings might well assist the economic climate in Illi-
nois and the nation.
People who visit the University of Illinois at its cam-
puses are impressed by the beauty of the buildings and
what seems to be a wealth of equipment, but whole de-
partments are on the verge of obsolescence for lack of
up-to-date equipment and tools. This is true not only
in the technologies but also in social sciences, commerce,
the arts, and other fields. Obsolescence, inflation, and
the need to maintain high-caliber instruction and re-
search have added both needs and costs to meet those
needs. Imagine any research corporation devoting only
3 percent of the value of its equipment to replacement.
That is our condition today!
We are, of course, turning to alumni and other
friends of the University with requests for gifts which
can help in this crisis. But even the most regal gifts can-
not possibly meet all the needs.
There is another source of the necessary funds which
other universities have used, but which the University of
Illinois has not. That is increased student tuition. No
academic administrator — and I less than most • — • likes
to ask for an increase in the cost of an education for the
student who receives it.
Nevertheless, it is a fact that those maior universities
with which we compare have increased their tuitions
step by step, year after year, to help meet the increased
expense of educating students. This is one factor which
has made our competitors able to increase faculty sal-
aries on a much more realistic level than has the Uni-
versity of Illinois.
An increase of $90 per year for an undergraduate
has been approved by our Board of Trustees, efTective
next fall. It will be coupled with similar increases for
in-state graduate and professional students and for all
out-of-state students. These seem like increases of some
size, but they are not as high as the increases instituted
recently at most comparable institutions. Thus, even with
the increases we are asking for, an education at the Uni-
versity of Illinois still will not cost the student as much
as at most other comprehensive universities. Some ele-
ment of hardship to the student and his or her family
may exist, but it is not as severe as it may appear. If the
state of Illinois often has been deficient in its support of
higher education, it has not been deficient in its support
of student benefits. Illinois has better scholarship oppor-
tunities than most other states. In this state, a student
from a family with a $23,000 income still may qualify for
scholarship assistance.
What will it take in hard dollars to bring the Uni-
versity of Illinois up to the standard of excellence we
must maintain to provide a fitting capstone for Illinois's
educational structure?
The University of Illinois does not conjure up its pro-
posed annual budgets in any mystical or even whimsical
way. We do not submit inflated budget requests. Our
requested budget for fiscal 1977-78 is, I can assure you,
a realistic one. Any increases it suggests and any pro-
posals for funding of programs were worked into that
budget proposal only after a series of expert decisions
had been made which were aimed at eliminating all
nonessentials. You know that before our budget is ap-
proved, it must pass a number of hurdles and often is
decreased considerably in the process.
We have proposed a faculty-staff salary increase of
8 percent, but the IlUnois Board of Higher Education
staflF now recommends only 7 percent, and recent esti-
mates in Springfield of the monies which will be avail-
able to higher education next year may cut that to 5
percent. Even the 8 percent would not have counteracted
the erosion in our employees' buying power which has
been caused by inflation and unsatisfactory salary in-
creases, but it certainly is better than the very small
percentages we have been forced to accept in the past.
The staff of the Board of Higher Education has rec- m
ommended an increase of nearly $24 million for the ^
University of Illinois's operation in the next fiscal year.
After careful appraisal, we had ascertained that an in- ^
crease of $31 million was required. Much less will be fl
included in the recommendations of the governor, so we
will continue to face financial pressures and problems.
In no way do I want to close this report on the Uni-
versity of Illinois on a negative note. Instead I go back
to what I told you in the beginning. There are problems,
and we admit them. Most of them stem from shortages
in state appropriations. You can help, if you will, by re-
flecting your support and your concern for the University
of Illinois when you talk or write to your local legislator.
I have dwelt at some length on the University's fi-
nancial needs. This emphasis on needs is prompted by
several factors, only one of which is our current climate
of crisis. More importantly, I believe that you people
have a right to know where the University of Illinois
stands as of this March 1977. You are not only its stock-
holders, you are its family.
The University of Illinois is rightly known for its
excellence. I think you also want it known for its emi-
nence. This is a University whose climate of learning,
research, and public service has brought forth scores
of educational and scientific "firsts." It is the University
where the modern photoelectric cell was developed and
where the sound-on-film motion picture was invented.
It houses the world's first comprehensive college program
for the severely disabled. It is the headquarters for the
world's largest educational film lending library. The list
is long.
Even at this moment, as I make this report, in dozens
of laboratories, library cubicles, quiet offices and busy
classrooms, the search goes on. It is a never-ending
search . . . the search for the hidden fact . . . the potential
. . . the possible . . . the pioneering . . . the new truth and
the beginning of a hairline crack in the seemingly im-
penetrable barrier of humankind's vast ignorance. There
is so much to know, and we know so little.
It is because of this excellence and excitement, this
promise of eminence, that I have reported today to you,
the people of Illinois, on the state of the University of
Illinois.
It is your support which has made this University
great.
For this you are to be commended.
The president's annual message was released March 20
and was carried by twenty-nine television stations in
Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri and by sixty-one radio
stations, including nineteen in Illinois and forty-two else-
ivhere in the nation.
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Gift and Exchange Division
220a Library
3 copies)
No. 270, May 16, 1977
Note to the Faculty on Tuition Policy Memo Which Follows
REMARKS BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY ON MEMORANDUM SENT TO TRUSTEES
The subjects of tuition levels and of tuition policies
continue to be among the dominant themes in university
administrative discussions. Not only are these subjects
basic to discussions of state and federal student financial
aid policies and programs, but they also represent one of
the difficult points of friction between the public and pri-
vate sectors of higher education. Obviously, the subjects
are also key elements of discussions related to the financ-
ing of all of higher education.
The Board of Trustees and the administration of the
University of Illinois, along with faculty and student
groups, have discussed tuition issues each year during my
tenure here - — usually in connection with a specific an-
nual budget request. In February 1977, members of the
Board asked that a "long-range tuition policy" be con-
sidered — a framework within which annual tuition de-
cisions could be made with a minimum de novo discus-
sion of tuition policies. Prior to the April 1977 meeting
of the Board, I was asked to develop a sample long-range
tuition policy in order that Board members might con-
sider how such a policy might read.
The following sample policy is just that — a sample.
It is not a recommendation, and the sample contains
some obvious deficiencies — for example, the sample pol-
icy, if observed faithfully, would diminish tuition income
if tax support declined, a result not to be desired. Be-
cause of faculty and staff interest in the tuition issue, I
did feel it appropriate to share this sample with you.
Comments or suggestions concerning this or alternative
samples would be most welcome.
Sample Long-Range Tuition Policy for University of Illinois
PRESENTED TO GENERAL POLICY COMMITTEE, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, APRIL 18, 1977
The levels of tuition charged students in public insti-
tutions of higher education are established by action of
the governing boards of those institutions. Because of
the current and past appropriations processes in Illinois,
howe\er, the ability to spend income generated by tui-
tion collections is subject both to legislative and to guber-
natorial approval. The complexities and the timing of
appropriations processes — including the appropriation
to the institutions of funds collected from the assessment
of tuition — have worked against the development of
and conformance to long-range tuition policies by gov-
erning boards. Instead, tuition levels have been estab-
lished on the basis of political realities with little con-
sistent regard to an appropriate relationship between
taxpayer support and student support of the costs of
public higher education. Discussion of tuition levels has
generally centered about such topics as the desirability of
low tuition levels for students in public universities, the
concern that tuition charges not limit access to higher
education by students from lower-income levels, and the
creation of theories of the presumed proper relationship
between taxpayer support and student support of costs.
Because the theories are based on opinion rather than
fact and because there are no fixed and widely accepted
definitions of such terms as "low tuition," "low income,"
and "access," neither the political realities nor the dis-
cussions have led to the creation of anything even ap-
proaching a tuition policy for public higher education in
Illinois.
Instead, the history in Illinois is that tuition levels in
public higher education tend to plateau for a few years
and then are increased sharply when fiscal pressures are
intense enough to make such increases politically feasible.
Following such an increase is another plateau period
until once again pressures generate feasibility which leads
to another increase. Because of the inability to predict
when "pressures" will build up sufficiently to lead to tui-
tion increases, neither the universities nor the students
can make reasonable predictions of tuition income and of
tuition levels and both institutional and personal plan-
ning in this area of concern are impossible. It is equally
difficult for financial aid officers and for the Illinois State
Scholarship Commission to predict the need for financial
aid funds in advance because of the inability to predict
tuition levels — a primary determinant of financial aid
requirements.
In an effort to bring some degree of predictability to
the area of tuition levels, the administration and Board
of Trustees of the University of Illinois have considered
the development of long-range tuition policy for the Uni-
versity. This consideration has been made with the full
understanding that under current processes in Illinois,
acting within a long-range tuition policy requires not
only the support of the Board of Trustees, but of the
General Assembly and of the governor as well. It is also
fully understood that any long-range policy requires peri-
odic review, evaluation, and perhaps revision by the pol-
icy-making body.
Within those understandings, the Board of Trustees
has reviewed historical trends in tuition levels at the
University and in comparable universities; comparative
data concerning current tuition levels at comparable uni-
versities; proposals for long-range tuition policies put
forth by the Illinois Board of Higher Education, the
Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, the Com-
mittee for Economic Development, and others; the re-
lationships between tuition, required fees, and student
financial aid; and historical and current data related to
instructional costs and tuition levels. The Board has also
reviewed projections of inflation rates and of tax support
for public higher education in Illinois in future years.
Many bodies including the Illinois Board of Higher
Education have recommended that undergraduate tui-
tion rates approximate one-third of instructional cost. In
fiscal year (FY) 1973 (academic year 1972-73) —the
last year in which tuition levels were increased at the
University of Illinois — undergraduate tuition came close
to meeting this recommendation in that tuition equalled
31.1 percent of instructional costs. Without attributing
any "magic" or "scientific proof" to support the "one-
third concept," the Board of Trustees does find the con-
cept to offer guidance and to bear a close relationship
to the situation which existed in FY 1973 when tuition
was last increased at the University. At that time, tuition
was considered to be "low" and to bear an appropriate
relationship to instructional costs. Since that time, in-
structional costs have increased as a result both of infla-
tion and of increased tax support of higher education
and, it can be argued, the definition of "low" has been
changed through the impact of inflation.
Also since that time the Board of Trustees has ap-
proved a tuition action which will in the fall of 1977
provide a "differential tuition level" for graduate stu-
dents. The average costs of graduate instruction are
higher than the average costs of undergraduate instruc-
tion, and many argue that a "cost-based tuition policy"
should reflect that fact. The Illinois Board of Higher
Education has recommended that tuition levels for grad-
uate students be one-third higher than those for under-
graduate students. This recommendation has little or no
statistical underpinning, but is simply a way to recognize
differential costs rather than a method of accounting for
those differential costs.
In the light of the above discussion and in an effort
to provide guidance to University and state planning
agencies and to provide some certainty to present and
future students about tuition levels, it is recommended
that the Board of Trustees adopt the following long-
range tuition policy :
1. In general, tuition levels for undergraduate students
at the University of Illinois should approximate one-
third of undergraduate costs; tuition levels for grad-
uate students should approximate one and one-third
the level of undergraduate students; tuition levels for
professional programs should increase proportionately
to tuition levels for graduate students; and tuition
levels for nonresident students at any level should be
three times the level for resident students.
2. Tuition levels should increase annually to reflect in-
creases in instructional costs caused by increased tax
support and/or inflation; tuition levels should de-
crease annually to reflect decreases in instructional
costs caused by decreased tax support and/or defla-
tion.
3. Annual tuition increases or decreases as required by
(2) above should be calculated on the basis of the
latest available data and included as a part of the an-
nual budget request of the University of Illinois.
4. Information concerning annual tuition increases or
decreases should be provided by the University to
appropriate state and federal agencies responsible for
student financial aid programs at the time that the
annual budget request for the University is approved.
5. While moving from present levels of tuition to levels
which meet the requirements of ( 1 ) above, no annual
tuition increase for resident undergraduate students
shall be in excess of 10 percent of the then current
tuition for resident undergraduate students nor shall
increases for resident graduate students be in excess
of 133.3 percent of the increase for resident under-
graduate students.
University Policy on Recombinant DNA Research
RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING APRIL 20, 1977
In the light of the controversies and hazards atten-
dant to recombinant DNA research (sometimes referred
to as a forerunner of genetic engineering) / the Univer-
sit\''s graduate facuhies are taking steps to ensure that
appropriate safeguards are observed whenever such re-
search is undertaken.
On March 31, 1977, the University Council on Grad-
uate Education and Research recommended to the presi-
dent adoption of the following resolution :
The University of Illinois has adopted the NIH (Na-
tional Institutes of Health) "Guidelines for Research
* The technique seeks to study the working of heredity by taking genes
— composed of DNA, or deox>TibonucJeic acid — from the cells of complex
organisms and inserting them into simple bacteria, where their functioning
can be studied in a less complicated en\ironment.
Involving Recombinant DNA Activities" as Univer-
sity policy for all proposed recombinant DNA research
whether externally or internally funded.
With the support of the vice-president for academic
affairs, I recommend that the Board of Trustees adopt
this resolution as University policy, with the understand-
ing that steps are under way on each campus to develop
and to approve implementing and monitoring procedures
which will ensure strict compliance with the NIH Guide-
lines. The Graduate College at Urbana has developed
compliance procedures which will be published in the
immediate future. Similar action soon will be taken at
the Medical Center and Chicago Circle campuses.
Ajnendment to Statutes on Employment and Promotion Criteria
APPROVED BY UNTVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT APRIL MEETING
In Jjinuary the Board approved provisionally the
amendment of Article IX. Sec. 1, of the University of
Illinois Statutes, as indicated in the attachment, in order
to comply with Sec. 402 of the Vietnam Era Veterans
Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Sec. 503 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
The Senates and the University Senates Conference
have now concurred in the proposed amendment.
Therefore, I recommend that the Board of Trustees
finally approve the proposed amendment of the Statutes.
University of Illinois Statutes
Article IX. Academic and Administrative Staffs
Sec. 1. CRITERIA FOR EMPLOYMENT
AND PROMOTION
The basic criteria for employment and promotion of
all University Staff, whether or not subject to the act
creating the University Civil Service System of Illinois,
shall be appropriate qualifications for and performance
of the specified duties. The principles of equal employ-
ment opportunity are a part of the general policy of the
University. Unless otherwise provided by law, employees
are to be selected and treated during employment with-
out regard to political affiliation, relationship by blood or
marriage, age, sex, race, creed, [or] national origin, handi-
cap, or status as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Viet-
nam era.^
language is italicized; deletions are in brackets.
220a Library
3 1 cppiQs)
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 271, August 24, 1977
Report to Board on Actions of Illinois General Assembly
PRESENTED BY PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY AT JULY 20 MEETING, CHICAGO CIRCLE
THE LIBRAP.X C
T ii4 \^i6
lY rjt- ILLINOIS
Each of you has read and heard reports of the ac-
tions affecting higher education and the University of
Illinois taken by the Illinois general assembly during its
recent session. My purpose today is not to repeat the
details of each of those actions, but rather to highlight
a few significant events and to comment briefly upon the
general tone of die session and of our relationships widi
the general assembly and with other agencies of state
government.
In round numbers, appropriations in support of all
those acti\ities included in the category', higher educa-
tion, for FY 1978 are $60 million above appropriations
for FY 1977. This $60 million includes approximately
$50 million in general revenue funds and approximately
$10 million in income funds, the latter increase reflecting
increases in tuition levels at senior universities. It should
be remembered that appropriations for FY 1977 follow-
ing the restoration by the general assembly of funds re-
duced by then Governor Walker included sufficient funds
to support an additional 2 percent salary increase (be-
yond the 2.5 percent approved by Governor Walker) for
the entire contract year, but that the restoration of funds
was done by the general assembly based up>on an under-
standing that that additional increase would not be ef-
fective until January, 1977. The base used by the general
assembly and by Governor Thompson for FY 1977 was,
however, the appropriations base rather than the expen-
diture base so that the annualization of the cost of the
additional 2 percent salary increase was in the base
rather than considered to be "new money" for FY 1978.
This technical detail results in the ability to use all new
1978 funds for new purposes and the support of this
method of calculating the base by the general assembly,
by the Bureau of the Budget, and by Governor Thomp-
son was another indication of the understanding which
higher education received in this session.
For the University of Illinois, appropriations for FY
1978 are $22 million above appropriations for FY 1977
including retirement s\-stem funding and including $4
million new income due to the tuition increase. With re-
drement f$5.5 million), income fund ($4 million), and
Agricultural Premium Fund f$0.4 million) increases ex-
cluded, the University received an increase of about $12
million in General Revenue Fund (GRF) support or a
5.25 percent increase in GRF support for FY 1978 over
FY 1977. Without dwelling upon the point, the income
fund increase of $4 million is a significant amount when
compared with the GRF increase of $12 million (exclu-
sive of retirement funding) and does have a real rather
than a token impact upon our ability to meet our needs.
In terms of the one-third ratio of tuidon support to tax
support recommended by the Illinois Board of Higher
Education, FY 1978 is the first year for some time that
resource increases for the University meet that recom-
mendation.
In summary, Governor Thompson stated early in his
term that without new sources of revenue he could sup-
port no more than an increase of $50 million in appro-
priations to higher education for FY 1978 and he would
support tuition increases if governing boards found such
increases to be essential. In his action in signing appro-
priations to higher education, he was faithful to that
statement. The general assembly sent the governor appro-
priations representing increased general revenue spend-
ing in the amount of $64 million; these measures were
reduced by Governor Thompson to the $50 million level
in accordance with the allocation of $50 million sug-
gested by (but not supported by) the Illinois Board of
Higher Education. Major reductions included funds to
increase a 5 percent average salary increase to 5.5 per-
cent, to provide for estimated utility cost increases of 12.5
percent rather than 10 percent, and to provide for State
Universities Retirement System (SURS) funding at the
gross payout level rather than at the net payout level.
The State Universities Retirement System situation is
worthy of special comment. Through actions of this
Board of Ti-ustees and of the Illinois Board of Higher
Education special priority attention was focussed uf)on
SURS funding problems. A legislative strategy was
adopted with the full support of the administration of
the university systems which forced the general assembly
to pay particular attention to the funding of SURS
rather than having that problem "buried" in each uni-
versity system appropriation bill. Two legislators from the
Urbana-Champaign area — Senator Weaver and Repre-
sentative WikofT — worked with other legislators to in-
sist that obligations to SURS be considered separately
and not merely in catch-all amendments to university
appropriations bills. The result was that for the first time
in many years, the general assembly appropriated funds
to SURS at the gross rather than at the net payout level.
While Governor Thompson reduced this appropriation
to the net payout level, the fact that he was dealing with
retirement system appropriations in a separate bill led to
his public recognition of the problem of our retirement
system and to his inclusion of retirement system funding
among the six high priority concerns to which he has
asked the Illinois Board of Higher Education to address
itself and to which he has committed himself and his
staff to address themselves. This set of actions represents
a major step forward toward the achievement of a plan
for solving a basic problem in Illinois higher education.
I should also mention the atmosphere which we en-
countered in our hearings before the committees of the
general assembly. We were asked probing questions about
faculty workloads, about research activities, about facults-
and staff travel, about admissions procedures, about ef-
forts in remedial education, about efTorts toward achiev-
ing equal educational and employment opportunities for
members of minority groups and for women, and about
other activities. These questions were asked with an atti-
tude of seeking information and understanding and I
felt that the members of the legislative committees were
truly trying to clarify misunderstandings and to seek in-
formation which would assist them in explaining our
needs and our practices to constituents. Not once during
many hours of hearings did I detect hostility toward the
University of Illinois nor toward our people and our
programs.
This same type of relationship exists with legislative
and executive agencies. We have this year engaged in
efTorts with the Legislative Audit Commission and the
auditor general to attempt to insure that we could main-
tain necessary flexibility while at the same time insure
that the commission and the auditor general can meet
the statutory requirements of their assignments and we
the statutory requirements of oiu-s. These efTorts have
been conducted in an atmosphere of cooperation and of
mutual understanding and have led to the preservation
of the flexibility' necessar\' if a great university is to re-
main great. Similar efTorts with the Economic and Fiscal
Commission of the general assembly, with the Bureau of
the Budget, with the Capital Development Board, and
with the Office of the Governor have produced similar
results — mutual understanding and mutual agreement
that procedural straitjackets are not necessary to achieve
accountability and to protect stewardship. In many ways,
these mutual efTorts which have led to the absence of
new statutes or of new regulations are among the most
positive results of the past year.
On the capital side, actions and results have also been
so widely publicized as to need little repetition here to-
day. It is worth noting, however, that $6 million to equip
the Replacement Hospital has been appropriated as has
$1 million to equip Turner Hall. The debate over Food
for Century III — a debate which had little to do with
the merits of that program — is well-known to you, but
it should be noted that this successful efTort was led by
Senator Weaver with help from many legislators. Sig-
nificant support also came from alumni, from staff mem-
bers, from farm organizations, from Governor Thompson,
from the Capital Development Board, from the Depart-
ment of Agriculture, and from many others.
All in all, it was a successful session. Many pieces of
legislation which would have had negative impact upon
the University were not enacted. While it is clear that
the salary needs of our people have still not been met
and while efTorts to meet those needs must continue un-
abated, we did receive funds to support an average salary
increase of 5 percent without requirements which are
becoming common in other states that we reduce num-
bers of faculty members as the price for salary' increases.
Our lower-paid employees in the open-range category
will receive increases averaging 7 percent. A much-
needed increase in tuition was supported, and the board's
role in establishing tuition levels seems to me to have
been enhanced.
Major gains in correcting some of our deficiencies
still await a major change in the revenue picture in Illi-
nois. Given the unwilling:iess of either the governor or
the general assembly to increase revenues now through
new or increased taxes — an unwillingness undoubtedly
shared by those who elect governors and legislators —
higher education has fared well within available revenue,
and the legislative and executive attitude toward higher
education seems to me to be reaching better levels each
year in Illinois.
Peter Yankivich Named, Vice-President for Academic Affairs
APPOINTMENT APPROVED BY UI BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT JULY 20 MEETING
Peter E. Yankwich has been named vice-president for
academic affairs at the University of Illinois effective
September 1.
Yankwich, a member of the chemistry faculty at
Urbana-Champaign since 1948, succeeds Eldon L. John-
son, who is retiring after nine years as vice-president.
Yankwich moved to UIUC from the University of
California at Berkeley, where he received his undergrad-
uate and graduate degrees and was a member of the
faculty.
At UIUC he has taught a wide range of classes from
introductory chemistry to advanced graduate courses.
His own research is in the field of chemical reaction rates.
Since 1975, Yankwich has been special faculty as-
sistant to Johnson and has directed a study evaluating
academic administration.
Amendments to Articles of University of Illinois Statutes
APPROVED BY II BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT MAY 18 AND JULY 20 MEETINGS
At the May 18 and July 20 meetings of the Board of
Trustees, nineteen new amendments to the University
of Illinois Statutes were approved to take effect imme-
diately.
The amendments deal largely with issues of depart-
mental and college governance. Their effect is to broaden
faculty participation in these matters.
The amended statutes are more specific and explicit.
They were proposed by the senates of the three cam-
puses and coordinated by the University Senates Con-
ference.
The statutes now emphasize that only tenure-track
faculty members are guaranteed the right to vote in de-
partmental or college mattere, although units still have
the option of granting this right to nontenure-track per-
sonnel at the level of instructor or above.
This clarification was made in several articles.
The membership of the Faculty Advisory Committee
and its functions are set out in one of the amended ar-
ticles. One significant change is that any faculty member
holding an administrative appointment is ineligible for
membership on the committee.
The faculty's role in evaluating administrators is set
forth in several of the articles. Specifically, the amend-
ments provide that deans, directors, chairpersons, and
department heads be evaluated at least once every five
years and that faculty views be solicited during this
process.
The amended articles more clearly define the faculty
role in cjuestions of appointment, reappointment, nonre-
appointment, and promotion. The faculty has input into
these matters through the advisory committee in depart-
ments with a head and the executive committee in col-
leges and in departments with a chairperson. The articles
also clarify the role and composition of the advisory
committee and executive committee.
Factors such as committee work, continuing educa-
tion, public service, and special assignments are given
additional emphasis in the evaluation of a faculty mem-
ber's performance for salary and promotion purposes.
Statement on Nondiscrimination at the University of Illinois
HANDICAPPED PERSONS GUARANTEED EQUAL TREATMENT UNDER REHABILITATION .\CT
The Universitv' of Illinois policy is to fully comply
with applicable Federal and State Nondiscrimination and
Equal Opportunit)- Laws. Orders, and Regulations. As
a recipient of Federal financial assistance, the University
of Illinois is subject to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, which states that "no otherwise qualified
handicapped individual . . . shall, solely by reason of his
handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any program or activit)' receiving Federal financial
assistance." The Department of Health, Education and
Welfare has adopted regulations defining and forbidding
acts of discrimination against qualified handicapped per-
sons in emploNTnent and in the operation of programs
and activities. A handicapped person has been defined
as any person who (a) has a physical or mental impair-
ment which substantially limits one or more major life
acti\-ities, (b) has a record of such an impairment, or
'c) is regarded as having such an impairment. The Uni-
versity of Illinois does not and will not discriminate
against handicapped persons in x-iolation of the Rehabil-
itation Act of 1973 or the HEW regulations. This non-
discrimination jx>licy applies to admissions or access to,
treatment, and employment in ihe University programs
and activities.
Vice-President Ronald W. Brady has been designated
as the University Equal Opportunity Officer for the Uni-
versity of Illinois. For additional information on the
equal opportunity and affirmative action policies of the
University, please contact :
For the General University, Dean Barringer, 409
East Chalmers St., Room 306, Champaign, IL 61820
f 217/333-2993).
For the Urbana-Champaign campus, academic per-
sonnel, Michele Thompson, Office of Vice-Chancellor
for Academic AfTairs, 209 Coble Hall, Champaign, IL
61820 (217/333-0574) ; and for nonacademic personnel,
James Ransom, Jr., Chancellor's Nonacademic Affirma-
tive Action Office, 52 East Gregory, Room 136, Cham-
paign, IL 61820 (217/333-2147).
For the Chicago Circle campus. Nan McGehee, Office
of the Chancellor, 2807 University Hall, P.O. Box 4348,
Chicago, IL 60680 (312/996-4878) .
For the Medical Center campus, Carol Cottrell-
Mootry, Office of the Chancellor, 414 Administrative
Office Building, 1737 West Polk St., P.O. Box 6998,
Chicago, IL 60680 (312/996-8670) .
University of Illinois Affiimative Action Plan
SUPPLEMENT ON RIGHTS OF DISABLED VETERANS, VIETNAM VETERANS, AND HANDICAPPED
The Statement below is a supplement to the AfRrma-
tive Action Plan for the University of Illinois published
in Faculty Letter No. 222, October 6, 1971. This supple-
ment is the Affirmative Action Plan for Disabled Vet-
erans, Veterans of the Vietnam Era, and Handicapped
Individuals. The supplement was sent to the United
States Department of Health, Education and Welfare
on July 29, 1977.
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN
The following is the University of Illinois Affirmative
Action Plan stating policies, practices, and procedures to
employ and to advance in employment disabled veterans,
veterans of the Vietnam era, and the handicapped.
This plan, developed to carry out the intent of Sec-
tion 402 of the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment
Assistance Act of 1974 and Sections 503 and 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, is available for inspection by
employees and applicants for emplo)'ment at each of the
following locations Monday through Friday during the
regular working hours of the University :
General University: 306 Illini Tower (Urbana)
Chicago Circle: 2801 University Hall
Medical Center: 414 Administrative Office Building
Urbana-Champaign: 209 Coble Hall; 52 East Greg-
ory
This plan is reviewed annually and updated as neces-
sary to reflect changes in employment conditions and
governmental regulations. Each campus has also devel-
oped an affirmative action program featuring procedures
to implement the intent of Section 402 and Section 503.
For purposes of this affirmative action plan, a handi-
capped individual shall be defined as "... any person
who ( 1 ) has a physical or mental impairment which sub-
stantially limits one or more of such person's major life
activities, (2) has a record of such impairment, or (3)
is regarded as having such an impairment ... a handi-
capped individual is substantially limited if he or she is
likely to experience difficulty in securing, retaining, or
advancing in employment because of a handicap."^
"Disabled veteran" is defined as "... a jjerson entitled
to disability compensation under laws administered by
the Veterans Administration for disability rated at 30
fjer centum or more, or a person whose discharge or re-
lease from active duty was for a disability incurred or
aggravated in the line of duty."^
"Veteran of the Vietnam era" is defined as "... a
person (1) who (i) served on active duty for a period
of more than 180 days, any part of which occurred be-
tween August 5, 1964 and May 7, 1975, and was dis-
charged or released therefrom with other than a dis-
honorable discharge, or (ii) was discharged or released
from active duty for a service-connected disability if any
part of such active duty was performed between August
5, 1964 and May 7, 1975, and (2) who was so dis-
charged or released within 48 months preceding the al-
leged violation of the (Vietnam Era Veterans Readjust-
ment Assistance) Act (of 1974), the affirmative action
clause, and/or the regulations issued pursuant to the
Act."2
1. STATEMENT OF PHILOSOPHY
The University of Illinois, as an institution of higher
education, recognizes its resp)onsibilities to facilitate full
participation in the educational and employment pro-
cesses of all qualified individuals who seek to partake of
the institution's resources and opportunities. Committed
to the goal of equal opportunity, the University of Illinois
recognizes the need to formulate procedures to insure
that no qualified individual will be denied participation
in the University because of artificial and discriminatory
barriers.'' -■ " It is the University's commitment to take
affirmative action to employ and advance in employment
qualified disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era,
and handicapjDed individuals. It is the stated policy of
the University of Illinois that appropriate qualifications
for and performance of specific duties are the basic cri-
teria in all aspects of the employment process, including
hiring, retention, training, transfer, promotion, and up-
grading.
The University of Illinois reaffirms its commitment
to three basic goals :
a. The continuing analysis of current practices and pol-
icies and the adoption of new or revised practices and
policies when necessary to insure the establishment of
effective and specific objectives and procedures for
equalizing opportunities in each employment unit.
b. The identification and elimination of all employment
practices whose relationship to job performance has
not been clearly established and which have adverse
impact on disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam
era, and the handicapped.
c. The wide recruitment of the above groups of potential
employees to insure that persons with appropriate
qualifications and potential are afforded equal op-
portunity for emplo)'ment, training, promotion, and
compensation.
The University of Illinois realizes that in order to
foster these goals, it is essential to enlist the active and
genuine participation of current University employees,
as well as to encourage the voluntary self-identification of
these individuals wishing to benefit from these pro-
grams.^' -
2. RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ADMINISTERING
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN
The president of the University of Illinois is respon-
sible for the development and implementation of the
equal opportunity policy and affirmative action plan.
Specific authority and responsibility are delegated by the
president as follows :
a. The vice-president for administration has responsibil-
it>' for overall coordination for the president and
serves as liaison between the University and state and
^^ federal agencies concerned with equal opportunity - —
wth special reference to insuring that ail University
procedures are in accord with go\emmental regula-
• tions.
In carrj'ing out this assignment, the vice-president
for administration ser\'es as chairman of the Univer-
sit)- Council on Equal Opportunity, whose major func-
tions are:
(1) To advise the president on all University-wide
matters pertaining to equal opportunity.
(2) To review af!]rmati\e action plans to make cer-
tain that they insure equal opportunity in all
phases of University affairs.
(3) To stimulate, facilitate, and coordinate planning
and implementation of aihiinative action pro-
grams at the general University and campus
levels.
b. A UniversiU' equal opportunity officer is appointed by
the president. The vice-president for administration,
who is the University equal opportunity officer, is au-
thorized to structure and coordinate the affinnative
action plan, to monitor its implementation, and to
assess its accomplishments at the general University
level.
In order to review and evaluate the campus-level
programs implementing University policy, the Univer-
sity equal opportunity officer or designee periodically
u-ill convene the Universits- Council on Equal Oppor-
tunity' and other appropriate representatives from the
campus.
c. Basic responsibility for equal opportunity and affirma-
tive action rests with the chancellor at each campus.
The chancellor appoints one or more senior adminis-
trative officers to coordinate affirmative action pro-
grams at the campus level. In devising the specific
programs that will implement University policy, and
in defining and meeting each campus' affirmative
action objectives, each campus coordinator may be
advised and assisted by a committee ^consisting, for
^^ example, of the officers responsible for campus policies
^B and pro^'edures in the areas of academic, nonaca-
^^ demic, construction, and student employment, and
including other appropriate representatives as campus
^ needs dictate) .
y d. Primary operational resp)onsibility for accomplishing
the University objectives in the three-campus system
in regard to hiring and to promoting disabled vet-
erans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and handicapped
individuals, rests with those campus administrators in
charge of academic, nonacademic, construction, and
student employment, and the heads of the units re-
porting to them. Not only are they responsible for
performing all of their activities in a manner consis-
tent with the institution's equal opportunity policy,
but they must include in their policies and procedures
the implementation of affirmative action and compli-
ance programs developed at the campus level.
3. INTERN.VL AND EXTERNAL DISSEMINATION
OF POLICY: FORMAL AND INFORMAL
a. Through University policy and procedure manuals
and campus publications this institution's policy of,
commitment to, and procedures for equal opportunity
will be promulgated among campus and community
members and agencies within the recruiting area.
b. Administrators vsath hiring responsibilities will be in-
formed that federal legislation requires that they take
affirmative action to employ and to advance in em-
ployment qualified disabled veterans, veterans of the
Vietnam era, and handicapped individuals. Such ad-
ministrators also will be informed that evaluation of
their work performance will take into account the
manner in which they carry out their affirmative ac-
tion responsibilities.'' ^
c. The designated general University and campus ad-
ministrative officers shall be responsible for communi-
cating the University's equal opportunity commitment
to local, state, and national organizations serving the
needs of disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam
era, and the handicapped. The veterans employment
representative of the Illinois State Employment Ser-
vice, the Veterans Administration Regional Office,
the Office of the National Alliance of Businessmen,
and campus veterans counselor/coordinators, the ser-
vice officers of the several national veterans organiza-
tions and local service centers, and the several or-
ganizations which serve disabled veterans and veterans
of the Vietnam era will be called upon as needed to
assist the University in recruitment efforts. State vo-
cational rehabilitation agencies, sheltered workshops,
state educational agencies, labor organizations, orga-
nizations of and for the handicapped, and educational
institutions which participate in training of the handi-
capped will be utilized where necessary to aid in
recruitment.
d. The responsible University officials will advise all
contractors, subcontractors, vendors, and suppliers of
their responsibilities under Section 402 of the Vietnam
Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
and under Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 and will reference both acts in all covered con-
tracts, purchase orders, and leases. Nondiscrimination
clauses wall be included in all contracts and subcon-
tracts, and posters in support of affirmative action will
be displayed.
e. The responsible Personnel Services Office staff wdll
inform union officials of the University's affirmative
action p>olicy and their full cooperation will be re-
quested in the recruitment, employment, and training
of disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and
handicapped individuals. Contractual provisions of
union contracts will be reviewed to insure that they
are nondiscriminatory. Nondiscrimination clauses will
be included in all union contracts.^' ^
f. The University will seek the cooperation of the Uni-
versity Civil Service System of Illinois in removing
barriers to the employment of disabled veterans, vet-
erans of the Vietnam era, and handicapped indi-
viduals. The University shall continually review all
physical and mental job qualification requirements to
determine if they tend to screen out disabled veterans,
veterans of the Vietnam era, and handicapped per-
sons. When such a tendency is identified, these job
qualifications will be further reviewed to determine
their job-relatedness and their consistency with busi-
ness necessity and the safe performance of jobs. The
University will continually review its personnel prac-
tices and procedures to assure that they result in care-
ful, thorough, and systematic consideration of the job
qualifications of persons known to be disabled vet-
erans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and handicapjjed
persons. Should new procedures be required, they will
be adopted.
g. Reasonable physical accommodation for disabled vet-
erans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and handicapped
persons will be determined through consultation with
line management, representatives from the covered
groups, and consultant groups, and then will be made
with consideration of business necessity and financial
costs and expenses. ^' ^' ^
4. IDENTIFICATION OF INDIVIDUALS
COVERED
Persons identifying themselves for coverage under this
affirmative action plan will be asked (a) to describe any
sfjecial methods, skills, and procedures which qualify
them for positions that they might presumably be unable
to fill because of their disablement or handicap so that
they will be considered for all such positions, and (b) to
alert the University regarding accommodations which
might be made to enable them to perform their jobs
properly and safely, including special equipment, changes
in the physical layout of the job, and elimination of cer-
tain duties related to the job.
The University may request medical documentation
or may require an applicant or employee to undergo a
comprehensive medical examination at the University's
expense. The University will make every effort to assist
persons identified as handicapf)ed to reach their full em-
ployment potential.
Self-identification shall be voluntary and refusal to
provide it will not subject a person to discharge, disci-
plinary action, or other adverse treatment. Information
obtained concerning individuals shall be kept confidential
except that (a) supervisors may be informed regarding
restrictions on the work or duties of disabled or handi-
capped individuals, (b) first aid and safety personnel
may be informed, when and to the extent appropriate, if
the condition might require emergency treatment, and
(c) government officials investigating compliance with
the act shall be informed.
a. Persons wishing to be considered for protected class
employment as handicapped persons will be asked to
identify themselves based on the following categories _
under which they qualify : ^|
1. Orthopedic
2. Visual
3. Speech ^^
4. Hearing ^^
5. Cerebral Palsy
6. Epilepsy
7. Muscular Dystrophy
8. Multiple Sclerosis
9. Cancer
10. Heart Disease
1 1 . Diabetes
12. Mental Retardation
13. Emotional Illness
14. Drug Addiction
l.'i. Alcoholism
16. Other (specify) .
b. In order to assure proper suppwrt of affirmative action
objectives, the general University and each campus
shall analyze employment records and the profiles of
self-identified persons in order to ascertain:
— the representation by unit of disabled veterans,
veterans of the Vietnam era, and handicapped
persons.
— the nature of the applicant flow.
— salary and rank differential, if any, between persons
covered by Sections 402, 503, and 504 and other
employees.
— the composition of committees and other mecha-
nisms for selection and promotion of staff.
Problem areas identified by such analysis will be re-
p)orted to the president and to the chancellor at each
campus. Appropriate action will be taken on each cam-
pus and at the general University level to remedy such
problems within the University's ability to respond.
5. EMPLOYMENT OBJECTIVES AND MAN-
POWER (LABOR FORCE) REQUIREMENTS
The University will utilize attrition to the maximum
extent feasible to upgrade and extend the participation
of disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and
handicapped persons among the academic and non-
academic work forces.
Every vacant or new academic and nonacademic posi-
tion will be subject to affirmative action procedures and
full consideration will be given to all qualified applicants.
6. MONITORING AND REPORTING SYSTEM
Monitoring and reporting procedures to measure the
effectiveness of general University and campus affirma-
tive action programs will be used to provide an evalua-
ti\e tool in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of
campus recruitment and selection activities.
The University equal opf>ortunit>' officer, with the
adNice of the campus review committees described in
"Responsibilities for Administering Affirmative Action
Plan," coordinates the reporting on the nature and the
degree of implementation of the University's affirmative
action programs. Annual rep>orts as to the number of
handicapped p>eople employed will be prepared for the
L'nivereity equal opportunity officer, and will be pre-
sented annually to the president of the University and
to the Board of Trustees.
7. CAMPUS AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PROGRAM
a. Academic Employment: Each campus affirmative
action program has a mechanism established by the
Office of the Chancellor which assures that equal
opportunity guidelines have been considered before
appointments receive final authorization. The follow-
ing features are also incorporated :
— position descriptions, including a written list of the
broad responsibilities anticipated initially for each
appointee.
— ■ evaluation procedures and documentation to assure
equal opportunit)- at every step of the selection
process, including a special review of the appoint-
ment papers before authorization to fill a position
is given,
b. Nonacadcmic Employment: Appropriate efforts will
be made to recruit, train, and upgrade all qualified
individuals.
8. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES
The University has adopted "Guidelines on Grievance
Procedures for Complaints of Discrimination," and the
general University and the campuses have adopted
grievance procedures to cover complaints by faculty,
academic professionals, and students concerning alleged
discrimination by the University on the basis of race,
sex, national origin, religion, age, handicap, or status
as disabled veteran, or veteran of the Vietnam era.
Similar grievance procedures are available to nonaca-
demic employees and these are found in the Policy and
Rules-N ojiacademic. These procedures are available for
disabled veterans, veterans of the Vietnam era, and
handicapped persons who seek relief of alleged pre-
employment or employment discrimination.
■ Section 503. Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
= Section 402, Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974.
= Section 504, Reliabilitation Act of 1973.
LiLlii^I f^^L^
^IFT & EXCHA>JGE OIVISIOM
220A LIBRARY CAVPUS
TY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 274, February 15, 1978
, H- ulbR/'.SY OF i:-;
Budget Recommendations of Board of Higher Education
STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT CORBALI.V TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT JANUARY 18 MEETING
iA>;
1 'iJN
As you know, the Illinois Board of Higher Education
at its regular meeting held on January' 10 approved the
advice which it will pro\ide the governor and the Gen-
eral Assembly about Fiscal Year 1979 budget requests for
higher education. This advice is presented in two docu-
ments, one relating to operations and grants, the other to
capital improvements.
It is apparently still difficult for some jjeople to un-
derstand the roles of various groups in developing bud-
gets and appropriations decisions for higher education in
Illinois. Thus, immediately following the IBHE meeting,
we read or heard reports such as "University tuition in-
creases for 1978-79" or "Board reduces faculty salary
increases." The IBHE is an adviser — not a governing
board — and decisions about the appropriations we shall
seek and the allocation of the funds we receive are mat-
ters under the jurisdiction of this board, subject to the
actions of the General Assembly and of the governor.
.Any reports, then, of what is or is not to be done in FY
1979 at the University of Illinois are definitely pre-
mature.
In the operations and grants area, the IBHE recom-
mended increased appropriations for all of higher educa-
tion in Illinois amounting to $93,824 million. This
amount is allocated among various units as follows:
Senior universities
$ 56.0
million
Community colleges
7.3
"
ISSC
9.6
"
Private institutions
1.0
"
Health education grants
2.3
"
Retirement
16.7
»
Other
.8
"
Total
$ 93.7 "*
(* $0.1 million lost in rounding)
The IBHE recommends that this new dollar amount
of S94 million be made up of about $87.5 million in new
General Revenue Fund appropriations and about $6.5
million to be gained through tuition increases averaging
$48 per student per academic year. This recommenda-
tion provides that the total increase of 10.64 percent
o%-er FY 1978 be supported by an 11.4 percent increase
in General Revenue Fund support and a 7 percent in-
crease in support through the income funds of the senior
universities.
For senior universities, the recommended new dol-
lars ($56 million) are allocated as follows among (1)
systems and (2) purposes:
(1)
Board of Governors
Board of Regents
$
9.5
10.2
milli
n
Southern Illinois Univers
ty
10.0
"
University of Illinois
Total
26.3
"
$
56.0
"
(2)
Salary increases
Price increases
O & M — new buildings
Program support
Other
$
36.4
8.3
2.6
6.0
2.5
milli
Adjustments to FY 1978 base
Total
0.2
"
$"
56.0
"
These recommendations compare to requests for FY
1979 submitted by the various units included within the
category "higher education" as follows:
(1) Total request $154.8 million
Total recommendation 93.8 "
Recommendation as percent
of request 60.6%
(2) Request — senior universities $ 82.6 million
Recommendation — senior
universities 56.0 "
Recommendation as percent
of request
(3) Request — U. of I.
Recommendation — U. of I.
Recommendation as percent
of request
67.8%
$ 34.5 million
26.3
76.2%
For the University of Illinois, the differences between
requests and recommendations total $8 million and are
as follows:
Salaries
$
1.68 million)
Price increases
.75
" )
O & M — new buildings
.12
" )
New programs
4.87
" )
Other
.57
" )
Total
r
7.99 million)
These figures and comments represent the cold facts
of the IBHE budget recommendations for FY 1979.
Several items are worthy of special mention. The IBHE
recommendations contain a careful and thorough discus-
sion of the funding problems of the State Universities
Retirement System (SURS), and the recommended in-
crease of $16.7 million for SURS funding will enable
Illinois to achieve retirement funding above the so-called
payout level for the first time for many years. The rec-
ommendation provides the funds necessary to achieve
the level recommended by the Pension Laws Commis-
sion — net benefit payout plus 2 percent of total esti-
mated payroll. This recommendation deserves and will
receive our strong support.
We are presently engaging in conversation with the
staff of IBHE concerning the nearly $5 million reduction
in our request for funds to support program initiatives.
^Vhile it seems clear that we will need to adjust to the
reduction, we do not yet have full agreement with the
IBHE staff about the distribution of the reduction
among various programs. I expect that we will reach
agreement and I do agree with the IBHE staff that pro-
gram initiatives must follow salaries, retirement funding,
and meeting price increases in any reasonable list of
priorities.
The tuition issue is one about which we shall talk
later today and I will simply mention here that in spite
of the IBHE recommendations it is clear that the two
questions — "Whether or not an increase shall occur?"
and "If so, how great shall the increase be?" — are far
from settled. My only regret at this moment is that the
careful and wise efforts made last year to remo\'e this
issue from the political arena and to place major re-
sponsibility for tuition decisions in the hands of govern-
ing boards seem now to be forgotten. I believe that what
was a principle in 1977-78 is still a principle in 1978-79,
and I will continue to express that view.
Before making the final point with regard to budget
requests for operations and grants for FY 1979, let me
speak very briefly about IBHE recommendations for
capital improvements. It is generally understood that
authorizations and thus appropriations for new capital
projects in FY 1979 will be limited. While the IBHE
staff recommends support of $125 million in new capital
expenditures of which $22 million are in response to re-
quests from the University of Illinois and $34 million
are for the second phase of the Food Production and Re-
search program, it is unlikely that these totals will be
realized. It seems clear that the commitments to the
Food Production and Research program will be met and
that some portion of the space remodeling, renovation,
and repair (SR^) program will be funded. This entire
area of concern is still under discussion and little weight
can be given to current recommendations related to
capital improvements.
My final comments relate to the salary portion of the
IBHE recommendations. You know that at the January
meeting of the IBHE I spoke vigorously in support of
the salar)' recommendations which you approved in our
budget request — salary increases averaging 10 percent
for all University personnel. A copy of my remarks at
that meeting is attached to these remarks. I have been
somewhat surprised that some people would find it
unusual or a sign of "giving in to pressure" that my com-
ments about and actions on behalf of salary increases
might be modified as a result of my conversations with
members of the faculty of the University. One of my pri-
mary tasks is to represent the faculty of the University
and I hope always to be alert to and receptive to sug-
gestions and criticisms from that primary constituency.
But more persons than faculty members found the IBHE
salary recommendations for increases averaging 8 per-
cent plus 2 percent for "low-paid employees" seriously
deficient. In meetings with academic deans and direc-
tors as well as with representatives of our professional/
administrative staff, the intensity of feeling about the
failure of the IBHE to support salary increases at the
10 percent level was expressed to me. It is clear that our
initial salary recommendations were justified when you
approved them and are at least as fully justified today
and it is my hope that you will support my intention to
continue to work on behalf of those justified increases.
I will be pleased to respond to your questions or to
hear your comments concerning this report.
President's StateTnent on FY 1979 Budget Recomnundations
DELIVERED TO ILLINOIS BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN CHICAGO, JANUARY 10, 1978
Fiscal Year 1979 Higher Education Budget Reconunen-
dations, Operations and Grants, Illinois Board of Higher
Education
Both the dollar figures of the IBHE budget recom-
mendations for Fiscal Year 1979 and the text in support
of those dollar figures deserve the careful attention of
the citizens of Illinois. The staff of the Board of Higher
Education has worked long and hard to develop both
the recommendations and the supporting material and
has done so in full consultation with representatives of
the systems and other higher education units in Illinois.
\Vhile I recognize that some have already suggested that
the recommendations seek too much, I must strongly
suggest that our data indicate that in the area of faculty
and staff salaries these recommendations seek too little.
The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois de-
voted major attention in the development of its budget
request to salary needs and concluded that salary in-
creases averaging 10 percent for all personnel of the Uni-
versity were essential. The data in support of increases
of at least this amount have been before you in salary
studies conducted by or for your staff and I will not
repeat those data again.
But I do want to say to you today and through you
to the p)eople of Illinois, to Governor Thompson, and
to the General Assembly that %vhat you see as printed
justifications of salary needs, I and my colleagues ex-
perience each day in real and human terms. I am watch-
ing the beginnings of the deterioration of one of the great
universitN- faculties in all the world — the faculty of the
Universit\- of Illinois. Morale is low : contentiousness is
high ; minor irritations assume major proportions ; and a
faculty which traditionally devoted its attention to
teaching, research, and public ser\ice now finds itself
increasingly concerned about its own welfare.
The low salary^ rank of our top quality faculty is
viewed by the faculty as a sign of the lack of respect
which Illinois and its leadership have for higher educa-
tion, for intellectual excellence, and for over a century-
of significant academic achievement.
I know the leadership of Illinois and I know that
they do respect and honor higher education. The time
is nearly here when we will have lost what our predeces-
sors built. The time is here for real, honest action, not
for pats on the head and for friendly words. I will urge
the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois to
continue its strong support of its request for 10 percent
salary increases and I hope that many of you on the
Board of Higher Education will join in this effort. This
support is crucial if education is indeed to remain visible
as a real priority of the leadership of Illinois.
There are other and much less significant items
within these recommendations about which we continue
to work with the IBHE staff. My view about the recom-
mendations is a positive view and it seems inappropriate,
therefore, to discuss details today. Only in the crucial
area of salaries is it imperative that we speak out today
strongly and clearly so that the significance of that con-
cern is not lost.
University Boards and Committees
.ANNOUNCEMENT OF MEMBERS FOR 1977-78 ACADEMIC YEAR
University Academic Council. Peter E. Yankwich,
Chairperson, Norman F. Cantor, William J. Grove,
Harold \V. Hake, Dillon E. Mapother.
University Committee on Accident Compensation. Rob-
ert N. Parker. Chairperson, Truman O. Anderson, Dean
Barringer. Dale X. Brostrom, Allan J. Harrison, William
J. Hart. Timothy O. Madigan, Alexander M. Schmidt,
Laurence M. Solomon.
University Committee on Accountancy (C.P.A.). J.
Nelson Young, Chairperson, Edwin Cohen, Jane AV.
Loeb, ex officio, Kenneth \\'. Pern,-, Edward J. Smith.
Secretary, Eldred C. Strobel (DePaul University).
Avery Brundage Scholarship Fund Committee. Dale E.
Mattson, Chairperson, Rosemary Cahill, Bruce Jorgen-
son, Teri Legner, Michael T. Moore, Ernest T. Pas-
carella, Edward G. Perkins, Jack H. Prost, Marjorie
Souder, E. Eugene Oliver, Secretary.
University Budget Committee. Ronald W. Brady, Chair-
person, Werner H. Baur, David \V. Bonham, Norman F.
Cantor, Paul J. Doebel, Etta A. Hincker, William J.
Grove, \Valter H. McMahon, Alexander M. Schmidt,
Richard H. Ward, Morton AV. AVeir, Peter E. Yankwich,
Harlan D. Bareither, Staff Associate.
University Committee on Copyrightable Works. Ronald
W. Brady, Chairperson, James J. Costello, Dillon E.
Mapother, W. Ann Reynolds, Jan Rocek, Peter E.
Yankwich.
University Council for Environmental Studies. Viron L.
Diefenbach, Benjamin B. Ewing, Roger W. Findley.
James P. Hartnett, Edward R. Hermann, R. Thomas
Jaeger, Robert L. Metcalf, Thomas L. Poulsen, W. Ann
Re\-nolds.
University Council on Equal Opj>ortunity. Ronald W.
Brady. Chairperson, Dean Barringer, Donald A. Henss,
Carol Cottrell-Mootry, Nan E. McGehee, Michele M.
Thompson.
University Committee on Financial Aid to Students. E.
Eugene Oliver, Chairperson, Richard K. Barksdale,
Thorn P. Brown, Theodore Hymowitz, Harold Klehr,
Larry Matejka, William J. Otting, Jr., William A. Over-
holt, William C. Wagner.
University Committee on Gerontology. Ethel Shanas,
Chairperson, Thomas O. Byerts, e.x officio, Dennis A.
Dahl, Edward L. Deam, Marilyn L. Flynn, Henry Jeffay,
Edward A. Lichter, George W. Magner, David W. Plath,
Harriet H. Werley.
University Council on Graduate Education and Re-
search. Peter E. Yankwich, Chairperson, A. Lynn Alten-
bernd, Dale R. Eisenmann, Robert R. Heitner, David
Lazarus, Dillon E. Mapother, W. Ann Reynolds, Jan
Rocek, Piergiorgio L. E. Uslenghi.
University Council on International Education. Peter E.
Yankwich, Chairperson, George K. Brinegar, Robert L.
Hess, George E. Miller.
University Council on Legislative Relations. R. Samuel
Baker, Chairperson, George H. Bargh, James J. Costello,
Samuel K. Gove, Robert N. Parker, William H. Rice.
University Council on Libraries. Beverly P. Lynch,
Chairperson, Hugh C. Atkinson, Herbert Goldhor, John
Lussenhop, Irwin H. Pizer, John P. Waterhouse, Ian D.
Westbury.
University Nonacademic Employees Advisory Commit-
tee. Marjorie Beasley, Patricia Curtis, E. T. Flynn,
Francis Gaughan, C. R. Hickman, P. T. Hughes, Bess
Matteson, J. C. Radmaker, John Saldeen, Henry Walli,
Bemice L. Wright.
University Patent Committee. Ronald W. Brady, Chair-
person, James J. Costello, Dillon E. Mapother, W. Ann
Reynolds, Jan Rocek, Peter E. Yankwich.
University Planning Council. Ronald W. Brady, Chair-
person, David W. Bonham, Norman F. Cantor, Paul J.
Doebel, William J. Grove, Harold W. Hake, Alexander
M. Schmidt, Richard H. Ward, Peter E. Yankwich,
Harlan D. Bareither, Secretary,
University Press Board. Robert W. Johannsen, Chair-
person, Gloria G. Fromm, Keneth Kinnamon, Dillon E.
Mapother, ex officio, Miodrag Muntyan, ex officio, Ir-
win H. Pizer, W. Ann Reynolds, ex officio, Jan Rocek,
ex officio, Norman E. Whitten, Jr.
University Council on Public Service. Peter E. Yank-
wich, Chairperson, John B. Claar, Dennis A. Dahl, Sam-
uel K. Gove, Thomas M. Jenkins, Alexander M.
Schmidt, James E. Vermette, Thomas F. Zimmerman.
Advisory Committee to the Board of Trustees of the
University Retirement System of Illinois. Walter H.
Franke, Stephen W. Forbes, Beverly T. Lehman, Howard
A. Mcintosh, Lois E. Owens, William H. Ross, William
W. Tongue, Wallace H. Wilson.
University Committee on State-University Relations.
Samuel K. Gove, Chairperson, Samuel R. Aldrich, Den-
nis A. Dahl, Alan W. Donaldson, Michael Goldstein,
James P. Hartnett, Boyd R. Keenan, Ross J. Martin,
James T. McGill, Peter E. Yankwich, W. Ann Reynolds.
University Committee on University Relations. David
Landman, Chairperson, Lewis Barron, J. B. Claar, Lynn
Pierce, Jack Righeimer, James E. Vermette.
University Senates Conference.
Chicago Circle. Elizabeth Gebhard, John Curtis John-
son, Chairperson, Richard M. Johnson, Leonard Kent,
Harriet Talmage, Bert L. Zuber.
Medical Center. Bernard Ecanow, Secretary, Olga M.
Jonasson, Sabath F. Marotta, George E. Miller, John
P. Waterhouse, Harriet H. Werley.
LIrbana-Champaign. A. Lynn Altenbernd, Rupert
Evans, Kenneth Harshbarger, Robert G. Spitze, Mac
Van Valkenburg, Rollin Wright.
LTniversity Committee on Admissions.
Chicago Circle. Robert J. Adelsperger, Robert E.
Corley, Chairperson, Eloise H. Cornelius, William J.
Dunne, Jose Ortiz, William C. Price, ex officio.
Medical Center. Thomas W. Beckham, ex officio,
Donald W. Rice.
Urbana-Champaign. Margaret D. Early, Jane W.
Loeb, ex officio, James C. Martin, Robert L. Mosborg,
Ben A. Rasmusen, Jack Riley.
University Representative. E. Eugene Oliver, ex
officio.
tliiuif^
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 275, April 10, 1978
Review ofProgrrss on FT 1979 Budget; Tuition-Salary Issues ^ g .Q-^g
STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT CORBALLY TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES
This Statement to you started out to be a recommen-
dation related to tuition levels for the coming academic
vear. It is now much broader than that and while I
apologize for the length of these remarks, I cannot over-
emphasize their importance nor the need to view them
as a whole rather than as a collection of separate items.
At this point in time as we face our final decisions
related to the 1978-79 operating budget and to our strat-
egies for securing appropriations in support of our needs,
it is imp)ortant to review the steps which have taken place
to date :
1. In September 1977 you approved the submission
to the Board of Higher Education [BHE], to the gover-
nor, and to the General Assembly of a budget request for
1978-79 in the amount of $300,395,700 (inclusive of
Agricultural Premium Funds and exclusive of SURS
contribution). This request included funds to support
salary increases averaging 10 percent for all members of
the faculty and staff. This request did not include any
recommendations concerning sources of funds — particu-
larly concerning tuition increases.
2. In January 1978 the Board of Higher Education
approved budget recommendations for the University for
1978-79 in a total amount of $292,268,900 — a decrease
of $8.1 million from our request. I provided the details
of that decrease to you in January; most of the dollars
were deleted from new programs. However, our request
for salary increases averaging 10 percent was reduced to
a recommended increase of 8 percent plus 2 percent for
lower-paid Civil Service employees. The BHE recom-
mendations also included recommended tuition increases
of $48 per year — increases which would have provided
$2.4 million in support of our budget.
3. Earlier this month, the Board of Higher Educa-
tion responded to a request from Governor Thompson
and provided a recommended allocation of the funds the
governor has said will be available for higher education
for 1978-79. This allocation provides the University of
Illinois with $290,681,500 for 1978-79 — a decrease of
$1,587,400 from the original BHE recommendation, but
an allocation which does not depend upon a tuition in-
crease. This allocation also provides for salary increases
averaging 8 jiercent plus 2 percent for lower-paid Civil
Service employees.
AT MARCH 15 MEETING , ,,,. -,
diversity ot Illinois
4. Recommendations related to SURS fuVlWng have
also gone through several stages. We requested $48.8 mil-
lion— an increase of $27.9 million over the 1977-78
level — which is the so-called "minimum statutory re-
quirement." The BHE recommended $26.8 million (an
increase of $5.85 million) which is the so-called "Pension
Laws Commission Plan" or "net pay-out plus 2 percent
of payroll." Within the governor's recommended amount,
the BHE recommends SURS funding for the University
of Illinois in an amount of $25.9 million — the "gross
benefit payment" requirement and an increase of $4.9
million over 1977-78.
Of particular importance here is that even the small-
est amount recommended — $25.9 million — is $4.4 mil-
lion more than the amount required for "net benefit pay-
ment" — the funding basis which has prevailed for the
last decade.
The decisions which we face today, then, are related to
the content of the appropriation bill which we will in-
troduce for 1978-79 and a decision on tuition levels for
1978-79. While there are other topics which seem to
arrive on our discussion agenda regularly, the subject of
tuition is the topic which has appeared with the greatest
regularity and with the most consistent intensity during
my seven-year tenure with the University of Illinois. I
find that fact unfortunate, for the topic of tuition charges
in public higher education in Illinois should be relatively
simple and straightforward. Our tuition levels are low by
almost any measure; Illinois supports one of the most
comprehensive plans of student financial aid in the na-
tion and there is no evidence that tuition levels in Illinois
are even approaching the point where they interfere with
access to public higher education; and while we may
argue about the sufficiency of increased appropriations
for higher education, tax support in Illinois for higher
education has increased each year, and there is certainly
no evidence of intent on the part of governing boards,
the General Assembly, or governors to place an excess
burden on tuition for the support of higher education.
As I have said many times, the simple fact is that tuition
is a price and that in times of inflation prices go up or
the quality of what you are paying for goes down.
But we have permitted tuition to become both an
emotional and a political issue, and tuition decisions in
Illinois are not based on facts alone. In neighboring
states, tuition levels at comparable universities have been
increased — at no identifiable cost to access even in states
with miniinal financial aid programs. In our state some
private institutions have been forced to raise tuition by
increments larger than our total tuition, and state finan-
cial aid programs have been adjusted in attempts to ease
the burden of these increases — adjustments which send
an increasing number of public dollars to support the
payment of high private university tuitions. And while
governing boards in Illinois systems of public higher edu-
cation are held responsible for the institutions they gov-
ern on behalf of the people, the ability of governing
boards to study, to deliberate about, and to establish
tuition levels is presently more a fiction than a fact.
So this year again we have discussed the tuition issue
as if we really could do something about it. We — both
you and I — have done so in spite of statements from
legislative leaders that tuition increases for 1978-79 would
not be approved and in spite of statements from the gov-
ernor's office that tuition increases for 1978-79 would be
vetoed and from the governor that tuition increases for
1978-79 should not be sought. It seems clear to me that
our first tuition objective must be to seek legislative
change so that the governing boards of the four senior
university systems have the same responsibility and au-
thority for tuition decisions that now prevail in the Illi-
nois system of community colleges. Governor Thompson
has endorsed such legislation as has the Board of Higher
Education, and with your approval, I intend to work
actively in support of such legislation, starting imme-
diately.
Given the inability of this governing board to make
binding tuition decisions because of the roles of the Gen-
eral Assembly and of the governor in such decisions, and
given the current emphasis upon tuition as a political
issue, I do not find any reason other than a symbolic one
to ask you to approve increased levels of tuition for
1978-79. I personally believe in the need for and in the
equity of a tuition increase based upon inflation factors.
I regret the fact that the setting in Illinois makes it diffi-
cult, if not impossible, for this governing board to make
tuition decisions in a clear and straightforward and final
way. But if I ask you to approve a tuition increase and
if you do so, that approved increase becomes a part of
our appropriations bill. In testimony and hearings before
the General Assembly, our approval of a tuition increase
and emotional and/or political arguments about that in-
crease can become of greater interest and assume greater
importance than discussions of our crucial and real bud-
getary needs. Even faculty members otherwise eloquent
seem rendered incoherent when asked to consider tuition
and other sources of revenue to support meeting realistic
salary and programmatic needs. It would be unfortunate
to permit a set of artificially constructed controversies
described as "tuition issues" to divert our attention from
our real needs. So, unless you demand that I do so, I
have determined that I will not seek the tuition increase
which I believe to be right, but will instead settle for
what I regretfully believe to be real for 1978-79.
A decision not to seek a tuition increase for 1978-
79 means that our budgetary decisions must be based
upon increases in general revenue funds only. Governor
Thompson has recommended an increase of 10.3 per-
cent over expenditures and 9.6 percent over appropria-
tions in general revenue supf)ort of higher education in
FY 1979. For the University of Illinois, the BHE alloca-
tion of the governor's recommendations pro\ides an in-
crease in general revenue support of 10.3 percent over
appropriations including SURS contributions. Our legiti-
mate concerns about tuition levels or about unmet needs
must not lead us to overlook the strong level of support
wliich Governor Thompson's recommendations represent.
The dollar increase is the greatest year-to-year increase
ever received by the University from general revenue
funds and is the largest percentage increase since FY
1971. The governor's recommendations do support salary
increases greater than inflation and do provide for in-
creased SURS funding. It is essentially in programmatic
support that the various budget recommendations differ
and that support is crucial to our quality and to faculty
satisfaction just as is equitable salary treatment. Just as
some faculty members have chided me for lack of sup-
port for adequate salary increases, others have chided me
for lack of support for the programmatic elements of our
budget requests.
It is, therefore, my intent with your approval to intro-
duce our appropriations bill at the BHE-recommended
level, but without the BHE-recommended tuition in-
crease. This level provides for an increase of $26.3 mil-
lion over 1977-78 — all now from general revenue funds.
It seeks $1.6 million more than Governor Thompson's
recommendation will provide. It will support SURS con-
tributions at the level recommended by the Pension Laws
Commission. It will provide programmatic support for
each of our campuses in essential areas of concern. It will
provide for salary increases averaging 8 percent plus 2
jjercent for lower-paid Civil Ser\'ices employees without
a tuition increase.
Let me make clear that these salary increases will not
solve our salary problems, even though they v^dll improve
our situation somewhat. I shall continue to point out our
unmet needs and will do so vigorously. Our unmet salary
needs will remain an issue for FY 1980 just as will an
intelligent approach to responsibility for tuition decisions.
But if I must face reality today with regard to tuition, so
must I face reality with regard to the speed with which
we can overcome several years of inadequate salary sup-
port.
I have been asked what is difi'erent today from the
conditions which existed on January 10, 1978, when I
urged you to continue your strong support of our request
for a 10 percent salary increase. What seem to me to be
differences are that the chances for a tuition increase are
now no, SURS contributions have moved from "net" to
"gross" at a cost of about two and one-half percentage
p)oints on our salar)' and wages base, and support for
programmatic needs has been reduced to no better than
a bare minimum in order to preserve salary increases and
SURS contributions. I do not back away from my sup-
port of our budget request nor do I want you to do so,
and I shall continue to enunciate our needs. As we seek
to supfwrt the BHE budget recommendations and as we
recognize new levels of support from the leadership of
Illinois, we must tread the thin line between seeking too
much and being content with too little. FY 1979 can
represent real progress on the road back to needed levels
of financial support, and I urge all of those concerned
with the quality and health of the University of Illinois
to come together in support of that progress as a base
for continuing progress in the years to follow.
Refinancing University Debt — Auxiliary Enterprises
EXPLAN.\'nON OF PL.\N APPROVED BY BOARD IN MARCH
At the March 1978 meeting of the Board of Trustees,
a major program to refinance the debt of the University
was approved. The debt involved is for facilities in what
are described as the auxiliary' operations of the Univer-
sity — primarily student housing and various activity fa-
cilities. At the present time the debt is being retired by a
combination of income received from operations, from
user fees, from student fees, and from tuition payments
retained by the University for debt service. This latter
source of funds (tuition retention) is available only to
the Uni\ersit\' of Illinois and to Southern Illinois Uni-
versity under existing Illinois statutes. However, various
state agencies are seeking the elimination of "tuition re-
tention" and the University' of Illinois has been striving
to do so for the past several years, so that all tuition
income will be used to support the education and gen-
eral expenses of the University.
The refinancing plan involves the following steps :
1. The direct exchange of approximately $22 million
of bonds held by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development on a par for par basis (this transaction will
jsennit a reduced debt service reserve requirement and
iinpro\e the flexibility of funding for the use and support
of housing and auxiliary facilities) .
2. The sale of $50-60 million of bonds for the pur-
pose of "advance refunding" existing debt. The proceeds
of this sale will be placed into an escrow account ( sinking
funds) to be used in retiring existing debt as it becomes
due o\er the next thirty years.
3. In the process of providing for the full long-term
pavTnent of existing debt, the University's debt structure
will be altered and leveled (stabilized) at approximately
$3.7 million p)er year for the next thirty years. Under the
present debt structure, net debt service requirements in
1979 are approximately $6.0 million; therefore, on an
annual basis, roughly $2.3 million in cash savings occur
through the creation of a new debt structure.
4. The $2.3 million in annual cash savings would
enable the University to support over $31 million in new
debt over the next thirty years. By maintaining a net an-
nual debt service level of $6.0 million over thirty years,
the University could not only retire the indebtedness of
the advance refunding bonds (at $3.7 million per year),
but also new debt incurred through a subsequent "parity
bond series" (at $2.3 million per year) .
5. Because the University's immediate construction
needs (for auxiliary enterprises only) total $24 million,
a net annual debt service level of approximately $5.5
million is required to meet the total new debt require-
ments. In other words, although the University would
have the capacity to support $31 million of new debt in
a parity bond series (without increasing its net debt ser-
vice level of $6.0 million), selling only $24 million "frees
up" roughly $500,000 per year in available revenue.
6. To eliminate the need for tuition retention (money
retained presently by the University from the Income
Fund), a jjer-student service fee increase of approxi-
mately $25 would be required. This fee increase would
eliminate the use of $1.2 million of Income Fund collec-
tions which are now being pledged in support of certain
auxiliary services. However, because the University will
be establishing a new total annual debt service level
nearly $500,000 less than total income will support, these
dollar savings will be used to partially reduce the current
tuition and fee amount being retained. A $15 per-student-
per-year fee increase will generate $700,000 per year.
When combined with the $500,000 of available, but un-
used, income in the system, these two amounts will be
sufficient to eliminate the need for $1.2 million in re-
tained Income Fund revenue. (This action will allow the
University to place the $1.2 million heretofore retained
for auxiliary services into the Income Fund for appro-
priation and use by the three campuses. )
7. Current "debt service" and "repair and replace-
ment" reserves totaling approximately $16 million will
be placed into a special account (through the purchase
of long-term government securities). Interest from this
account (estimated at almost $1.8 million or 8 percent
■per year) will be pledged toward annual debt service
requirements. Present earnings on these funds are re-
stricted because of existing bond covenant requirements
— present yield is approximately $1.1 million per year or
6.2 percent. This facet of the new "system," then, will
generate roughly $700,000 more for the University in
interest earnings.
8. Slightly more than $7 million of the $50-60 million
to be gained from the sale of "advance refund" bonds
wUl be used to retire existing Foundation debt for the
Stadium ($1.2 million) and the Intramural-Physical
Education facility ($6.0 million) at Urbana-Champaign.
Under the umbrella of the new "system," the Athletic
Association will provide annual payments toward the
retirement of existing and new debt for the Stadium.
Existing student fees will support annual debt service on
the IMPE facility.
9. $6 million of the "advance refund" bonds will be
used to establish a debt service reserve which is equiva-
lent to one year's net debt service requirement for the
system.
10. As part of a program to insure the physical integ-
rity of the facilities in the system, a repair and replace-
ment reserve wall be established over the next two years.
In addition to the $2-3 million reserve contemplated for
this purpose, an annual amount approximating $1.5 mil-
lion will be claimed from the revenues of the system to
meet yearly repair and replacement needs.
SUGGESTED PROJECT PRIORITIES FOR CAMPUS LIFE AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES SUPPORT SYSTEM
ioritv Current Indebtedness
1 IMPE BuildiDg at Urbana-Champaign
2 Memorial Stadium at Urbana-Champaign
Subtotal
Remodeling, Equipment Replacement, and Completion oj Current Structures
3 Urbana-Champaign — Memorial Stadium — Weatheiproofing
4 Urbana-Champaign — .\ssembly Hall Roof Resurfacing
5 Chicago Circle Center — Revolving Doors
6 Chicago Circle Center — Recreation Lighting
7 Chicago Circle Center — Swimming Pool Locker Room Floor
8 Chicago Circle Center — Second Floor Locker Room Conversion
9 Medical Center — Housing and Union — Equipment Replace-
ment and Facility Renewal
10 Urbana-Champaign — McKinley Health Center — Roof and
H.V.A.C.
11 Urbana-Champaign — Housing Division — Roof Repair
12 Urbana-Champaign — Housing Division — Kitchen and Safety
Improvements
13 Urbana-Champaign — Illini Union — Kitchen Equipment
14 Urbana-Champaign — IMPE Patio and Indoor Pool Repair
15 Chicago Circle Center— Great Circle Hall Completion
16 Chicago Circle Center — Enclose First Floor High Rise Building
Subtotal R, R, and Completion of Current Structures
New Projects
1 7 Medical Center Union Addition and Recreation Facilities
18 Chicago Circle Pavilion
19 Urbana-Champaign — Illini Union Bookstore Improvement
20 ' Chicago Circle Outdoor Playing Fields
21 Medical Center Outdoor Recreation Facilities
22 Urbana-Champaign — ■ McKinley Health Center Elevator
Subtotal Enrichment
Urbana-
Champaign
80,000
20,000
40,000
50,000
C( 7,351,073) (S 7,351,073)
t 2,100,000
1,600,000
80,000
20,000
40,000
50,000
Cumulative
Total Without
Foundation
% 2,100,000
3,700,000
3,780,000
3,800,000
3,840,000
3,890,000
625,000 625,000
180,000 180,000
290,000 290,000
1,700,000 1,700,000
100,000 100,000
(5 1,990,000) ($1,737,490) (8 5,650,000) (5 9,377,490)
5 7,500,000
620,000
S 8,120,000
510.110,000
$5,745,000
57,482,490
5 740,000
$13,741,073
$ 5,550,000
7,500,000
600,000
620,000
195,000
140,000
514,605,000
$31,333,563
7,107,490
7,387,490
7,577,490
9,277,490
9,377,490
14,927,490
22,427,490
23,027,490
23,647,490
23,842,490
23,982,490
Cumulative
Total With
Foundation
% 9,451,073
11,051,073
11,131,073
11,151,073
11,191,073
11,241,073
1,737,490 5,627,490 12,978,563
14,458,563
14,638,563
14,928,563
16,628,563
16,728,563
22,278,563
29,778,563
30,378,563
30,998,563
31,193,563
31,333,563
..TTHE
iLTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 276, September 15, 1978
Sfaternent on State Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1979
REPORTS ON THE OPER.\TING BUDGET, THE CAPITAL BUDGET, AND FOOD FOR CENTURY HI
OPERATING BUDGET
Governor Thompson has signed the University's
operations and grants legislation for the 1978-79 fiscal
year. While one can never be completely pleased with an
appropriations process which does not meet in full
measure the total needs represented by the Board of
Trustees budget request, the Fiscal Year (FY) 1979 ap-
propriation can be viewed with considerable satisfaction.
Excluding retirement and capital appropriations, the
FY 1979 legislation provides incremental funds totaling
$24,755,600. This figure represents an increase of 9.3
percent over the Universit)''s FY 1978 base — the highest
Increase in four years and the second highest since FY
1971. The FY 1979 increase is well above the 5.86 per-
cent average increase for the past seven fiscal years.
Highlights of the appropriations signed by the governor
include the following:
— Funds sufficient to provide salary increases aver-
aging 8 percent for continuing University faculty and
staff members.
— Supplementary salary increase funds for lower-paid
civil service employees.
— Recognition of an inflation-induced decline in the
ability of the University to maintain adequate library
acquisition rates, and provision of a 10 percent increase
in fimds for acquisitions to begin recovery from this
decHne.
— Acceptance of the principle of replacing declining
federal funds in support of health professions and vet-
erinary medicine education and a commitment of state
funds to begin the replacement process.
— Recognition of the growing deficiency in funds
a\ailable for replacement of equipment, and provision
of $200,000 to begin the recovery process at Urbana-
Champaign.
— Funding to continue the growth and development
of the Chicago Circle Extended Day/Program PM
efforts.
— Funding (in separate legislation) of the state con-
tribution to retirement at the "gross payout level" which
vkdll permit the establishment of reserves to help offset
future growth in unfunded liabilities in the State Univer-
sities Retirement System.
The actions of the General Assembly and the gover-
nor this year in support of the University — indeed, of
all higher education • — appear to indicate their recog-
nition of the need for recovery from past years of funding
levels inadequate to allow the advancement, or in some
cases the continuation, of the University's major missions.
Table A describes the history of the FY 1979 operating
budget request from approval by the Board of Trustees
through signature by the governor. The following sec-
tions describe the major components of the budget as
approved by the governor.
Salary Increases ($15,984,600) —The Board of
Trustees requested funds to allow average salary in-
creases of 10 percent for University employees. The Illi-
nois Board of Higher Education (IBHE) originally rec-
ommended increases of 8 percent for most employees and
10 percent for lower-paid civil service personnel. The
IBHE held to its recommendation when advising the
governor on the allocation of his budget for higher edu-
cation. However, in order to maintain the 8 and 10 per-
cent levels in the governor's budget, the IBHE advised
using a 10 percent employee turnover rate for calculating
the funds necessary to support its recommendation. This
turnover rate is higher than the University of Illinois has
experienced in the past.
Although recent evidence of increased inflation has
been noted, it appears that for FY 1979 most University
personnel will receive salary increases which will exceed
current inflation estimates. This is the most favorable
position the University has been in since FY 1973. In
addition, although final data are not yet available, it
appears that both academic and nonacademic employees
wall show some gains relative to their respective salary-
comparison groups.
Price Increases ($3,467,900) — The University re-
ceived funds to provide general price increases of 4.5
percent for most goods and services ($1,372,900). As in
the past, the state provided additional support for utility
price increases, funded at an 11.5 percent increase
($1,775,600).
For the first time, difl'erential price increase funds
were also provided to support increases in library ac-
quisitions. Due to severe inflationary increases related
to publication costs, price increases of 10 percent for
acquisitions were approved ($319,400) .
TABLE A
FY 1979 INCREMENTAL REQUEST
(In Thousands of Dollars)
Board IBHE Approved by Signed by
of Trustees Approved General Assembly Goverrior
I. Continuing Components
A. Salary Increases 518,759.0 $17,145.9 $16,028.6 $15,984.6
B. Price Increases
1. General 2,022.1 1,478.9 1,372.9 1,372.9
2. UtUity 2,316.5 1,761.7 1,775.6 1,775.6
3. Libraries ... 424.9 319.4 319.4
C. O&MSupport 1,514.4 1,390.4 1,390.4 1,390.4
D. Workman's Compensation 80 . 0 80.0 80.0 80 . 0
Subtotal ($24,692.0) ($22,281.8) ($20,966,9) ($20,922.9)
% of 1978 Base' 9.29% 8.39% 7.88% 7.87%
II. Recovery of Deficiencies
A. Equipment 750.0 250.0 200.0 200.0
B. Library^ 500.0
C. O&M/SR' 1,400.0 400.0 500.0 500.0
Subtotal ($2,650.0) ($ 650.0) ($ 700.0) ($ 700.0)
% of 1978 Base 1.00% .20% .30% .30%
III. Programmatic Components
A. Assistance to Students (CC) 496.7 40.0 150.0 150.0
B. Extended Day (CC) 800.0 500.0 400.0 400.0
C. Capitation Replacement 2,500.0 575.0 575.0 575.0
D. Dentistry Expansion (MC) 333.0 333.0 333.0 333.0
E. Library Circulation (UC) 475.0 400.0 400.0 400.0
F. Veterinary Medicine (UC) 740.8 480.0 400.0 400.0
G. College of Law 116.0 75.0 50.0 50.0
H. Impr. Undergrad. Educ. (UC) 192.0
Subtotal ($5,653.5) ($2,403.0) ($2,308.0) ($2,308.0)
% of 1978 Base 2.13% .90% .88% .88%
IV. Special Services
A. DSCC 579.0 420.0 150.0 150.0
B. Energy Resources Center 60.0 30.0 30.0 30.0
C. Urban Health Programs 165.0 165.0 165.0 165.0
D. Coop. Extension Service 85.0 60.0 60.0 60.0
E. County Board Matching 222.1 65.0 65.0 65.0
Subtotal ($1,111.1) ($ 740.0) ($ 470.0) ($ 470.0)
%ofl978Base .42% .28% .18% .18%
V. Other ... 340.7' 354.7* 354. 7<
VI. Grand Total ($34,106.6) ($26,415.5) ($24,799.6) ($24,755.6)
% of 1978 Base 12.83% 9.93% 9.33% 9.31%
' FY 1978 Base = $265,925.8 excluding capital, retirement, and IBA rentals.
' IBHE funded Library Price Increases at 10% instead of deficiency.
•Includes Income Fund Adjustment due to Audit Commission requirements ($238.0) plus refunds tied to IBHE recommendations for tuition ($102.7).
* Includes lowered Income Fund Adjustment ($187.5) plus Contingency ($167.2).
Operation and Maintenance Support ($1,890,000) —
Funds for additional maintenance costs arising from the
opening of new buildings were provided at the rate of
$2.20 per gross square foot for the Turner Hall addition,
Veterinary Medicine remodeling, Visual Aids addition,
and the Ornamental Horticulture addition (all at Ur-
bana-Champaign), and at $3.30 per gross square foot
for the Replacement Hospital at the Medical Center
($1,390,400).
In addition, $500,000 has been provided for the dual
purpose of funding nonbondable items related to com-
pletion of construction or remodeling of capital projects
and to support administrative costs associated with the
University's Space Realignment, Renewal, and Replace-
ment Program ( SR' ) . This funding for SR^ represents
the most tangible evidence of the state's acceptance of
the need to provide funds on a regular basis for the re-
newal and repair of the University's physical facilities.
Workmen's Compensation ($80,000) — The Univer-
sity has faced steadily rising costs for Workmen's Com-
pensation awards in the past three fiscal yeare, due to an
increase in die number of claims and a significant liber-
alization in benefits. To meet this growth for FY 1979,
an increment of $80,000 was appropriated.
Program Support ($2,308,000) — Chicago Circle:
Incremental funds have been provided for two major
^ program thrusts : the Extended Day/Program PM effort,
^^ which has made academic programs at Chicago Circle
accessible to students at hours outside the traditional
class day ($400,000) ; and Assistance to Students, which
• will provide a variety of e.xpanded services to stu-
dents \vho need special academic or otlier assistance
($150,000).
Medical Center: Program funds have been provided
to replace declining federal capitation funds, thus avoid-
ing the possibility that a reduction in enrollments might
be necessary' ($575,000). Additional funds were pro-
\ided to enable the College of Dentistiy to increase its
enrollment by thirty-three students, thus achieving the
level required under provisions of a federal grant
which provided $1.25 million for dentistry equipment
($333,000).
Urbana-Champaign : Sufficient new funds were ap-
proved to continue the development of the library com-
puter SN'Stem to the extent that it should become func-
tional within the University during FY 1979 ($400,000).
Incremental funds were provided for the College of Vet-
erinary Medicine both to replace federal capitation
funds no longer available and to continue the upgrading
of the college's teaching and research programs ($400,-
000). In addition, funds were provided to begin expan-
sion of interdisciplinary teaching programs in the College
of Law ($50,000).
Special Services Support ($470,000) — In addition to
the continuing and progressive components of the budget
request, funds are sought each year to support certain
special service components which the University is asked
to provide outside the realm of its regular teaching and
research efforts. Included in this category for FY 1979
were incremental amounts for the Energy Resources
Center ($30,000) (CC), the Urban Health Program
($165,000) and the Division of Services for Crippled
Children ($150,000) (MC), and the Cooperative Exten-
sion Service ($60,000) and County Board Matching
Fund ($65,000) (UC).
Retirement Contributions ($4,947,400) — Retirement
appropriations for all state systems of higher education
• were placed in separate legislation again this year. The
go\emor has officially signed the retirement bill, which
represents a significant step forward in retirement fund-
ing for higher education. For the first time, the state's
^ contribution will be funded at the "gross payout" level
B rather than at the "net payout" level used in the past.
At the net level, only enough state funds are con-
tributed each year to meet actual pension requirements
of retired state employees, when combined with contri-
butions from active employees. At this level, no reserves
can be set aside to offset the future costs of higher pen-
sion payment requirements.
Under the gross payout level appropriated this year,
the state will contribute not only its share of current
pension payments, but also an additional amount equal
to the contribution of active employees. This will permit
the establishment of a reserve equal to the contribution
of the active employees, with the state funding the cost
of actual pension requirements.
Although the gross payout level remains below the
statutory full-funding requirement, the increase in ap-
propriations for the State Universities Retirement System
is a welcome sign of recognition of the state's need to
maintain an adequate financial base for a retirement sys-
tem which will grow rapidly in the next twenty years.
Vetoed Provisions ($44,000) — During Senate con-
sideration of the University's appropriations, an amend-
ment was approved to provide $44,000 in additional
salary funds for nonacademic employees at the Dixon
Springs Agricultural Center. This amendment was passed
by the House as well, but was vetoed by the governor.
The amendment appeared to be in conflict with the stat-
utory requirement that the Universities Civil Service
System provide salary schedules based upon regional
rates of pay.
CAPITAL BUDGET
With the exception of two major capital programs
requiring special funding (the Replacement Hospital
and the Food Production Research Complex) the Uni-
versity's capital appropriation in recent years has fallen
far below the levels requested by the Board of Trustees.
Fiscal Years 1977 and 1978 were especially difficult for
the capital programs for all higher education. Table B
provides a history of the University's capital budget re-
quests from FY 1975 through FY 1979.
In this context, the FY 1979 capital appropriation
appears somewhat improved over the last two years.
Governor Thompson has signed legislation (SB 1601)
providing the University with a total of $8.5 million in
projects, as described in Table C. This total is some $2.8
million above the level originally recommended by the
governor. However, the final outcome of the capital ap-
propriation process is still uncertain, because the Gen-
eral Assembly failed to approve a bond authorization
level sufficient to finance all of the capital projects in-
cluded in the legislation the governor signed.
The General Assembly will meet in November to
consider raising the bond authorization level. If the bond
authorization level is raised in November, projects can
proceed on schedule. If it is not raised, the remaining
funds from the existing authorization will be used to fund
a reduced list of projects.
The following sections describe the major projects for
each campus approved for FY 1979.
TABLE B
HISTORY OF RECENT CAPITAL BUDGET REQUESTS
FY 1975 FY 1976 FY 1977 FY 1978 FY 1979
Campus Requests*
Chicago Circle 513,890,100 $8,447,100 510,939,113 $12,775,128 $7,788,520
Medical Center 9,488,500 8,146,300 7,227,319 10,731,019 12,409,965
Urbana-Champaign 20,427,600 23,152,700 16,001,929 26,609,843 16,937,056
Total ($43,806,200) ($39,746,100) ($34,168,361) ($50,115,990) ($37,135,541)
IBHE Recommendations*
Chicago Circle $2,796,600 $1,109,320 $9,699,428 $3,203,420 $3,311,200
Medical Center 3,966,000 5,640,000 4,228,342 4,878,227 5,111,500
Urbana-Champaign 9,881,700 9,951,100 5,203,520 11,887,700 13,524,100
Total ($16,644,300) ($16,700,420) ($19,131,290) ($19,969,347) ($21,946,800)
Appropriation*
Chicago Circle $1,627,100 $1,504,920 $ 177,500 $ -0- $1,715,000
Medical Center 3,967,000 4,907,200 148,400 296,800 2,430,000
Urbana-Champaign 2,958,600 10,982,900 234,130 1,273,600 4,330,500
Total ($8,552,700) ($17,395,020) ($ 560,030) ($1,570,400) ($8,476,400)
Appropriations for Special Projects
Replacement Hospital $1,750,000 $51,250,000 $ -0- $ 6,000,000 $ -0-
Food Production Research -0- -0- -0- 2,450,000 30,473,500
Total ($1,750,000) ($51,250,000) ($ -0- ) ($8,450,000) ($30,473,500)
Total University of Illinois
Appropriation $10,320,700 $68,645,020 $ 560,030 $10,020,400 $38,949,900
* Excludes Replacement Hospital and Food Production Research.
TABLE C
FY 1979 PROJECTS IN SB 1601
AS SIGNED BY THE GOVERNOR
1. Buildings, Additions, and/or Structures. $ -0-
2. Land -0-
3. Equipment
Medical Center — SUDMP 227,000
Urbana-Champaign — Animal
Room Improvements 70,200
Urbana-Champaign — English
Building Renovation 35,000
3a. SR^ Equipment
Urbana-Champaign 93,000
4. Utilities
Urbana-Champaign — Central
Supervisory Control 710,000
5. Remodeling and Rehabilitation
Chicago Circle — - Building
Equipment Automation 1,010,000
Medical Center — SUDMP 1,339,500
Urbana-Champaign — Animal Room
Improvements 520,000
Urbana-Champaign — English
Building Renovation 1,500,000
5a. SR' Remodeling
Chicago Circle 650,000
Medical Center 864,400
Urbana-Champaign 1,402,300
6. Site
Chicago Circle — Pedestrian Safety.. 55,000
7. Planning -0-
8. Cooperative Improvements -0-
TOTAL $8,476,400
Chicago Circle — Three projects totalling $1,715,000
are included in SB 1601. By far the largest of these is
the $1,010,000 for the Building Equipment Automation
project, which will allow addition of some 17 buildings
to the campus' centralized monitoring program for
building systems equipment such as fans, refrigeration
equipment, water heaters, etc. Completing this project
will mean that most major campus buildings will be
within the system. In addition to the Building Equip-
ment Automation project, $650,000 was approved for
SR^ projects which will be used to repair roofs on three
buildings. The final project approved provides $55,000
as the campus' share of a joint project with the City of
Chicago to place a traffic control device at the comer of
Morgan and Vernon Park Place.
Medical Center — Three projects totalling $2,430,900
are included in SB 1601. They are remodeling and equip-
ment funds for continuation of the rehabilitation of the
SUDMP building, and $864,400 for SR^ projects.
Within the SR' funding, the following projects will
be completed: remodeling of the cage washing area in
the Biological Resources Laboratory; roof replacement
for the Biological Resources Laboratory, miscellaneous
remodeling at Rockford School of Medicine; window re-
placement in the Old Chicago Illini Union Building and
the Neuropsychiatric Institute ; a variety of building code
and safety corrections; modifications to 19 elevators in 8
buildings; and remodeling in the Research Resources
Center.
Urbana-Champaign — Seven projects totalling $4,-
330,500 are included in Senate Bill 1601. These projects
represent equipment and remodeling funds for animal
room improvements, equipment and remodeling for con-
tinuation of the English Building renovation, equipment
and remodeling for SR', and the Central Supervisory
Control project. The animal room funds ($590,200) will
allow work to begin to upgrade current animal quarters
in Morrill Hall and the Animal Science Laboratory to
meet federal safet\' standards. The English Building proj-
ect ($1,535,000) represents the second phase of a multi-
phased effort to remodel the entire interior of the build-
ing. The Central Superv,isor\' Control project ($710,000)
is part of an ongoing efTort to add major buildings to
the Urbana campus' central monitoring equipment for
energv' conservation. It is similar to the Building Equip-
ment Automation project at Chicago Circle. Finally, the
SR' appropriation ($1,495,300) will include the follow-
ing projects : Kenney G^Tnnasium Annex and Freer
Gymnasium remodeling; electrical systems moderniza-
tion; ventilation remodeling in the Civil Engineering
Building and the Library; Hayes Laboratory remodeling;
replacement of the Altgeld Hall elevator; roof, skylight,
and gutter repairs in the Architecture Building and Huff
G)Tnnasium: remodeling in Gregory Hall; heating sys-
tem controls repair and replacement; remodeling in
Freer Gymnasium of the consolidation of academic de-
partments; temperature control remodeling in Roger
.\dams Laboratory, the Armory, and the Auditorium,
and remodeling in the Law Building.
FOOD PRODUCTION AND RESEARCH PROGRAM
(FOOD FOR CENTURY III)
In line with a commitment made in FY 1978, the
General Assembly approved and the governor signed a
FY 1979 appropriation of $28,715,700 for the Food Pro-
duction and Research Program (Food for Century
Three). Included in this appropriation were construc-
tion and equipment funds for three major projects begun
in FY 1978: the Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences
Building ($21,027,800) ; the Agricultural Engineering
Sciences Building ($7,612,900) ; and equipment for the
Veterinary Medicine Research Buildings ($75,000) .
The original FY 1979 request for Food for Century
Three included an additional $1.9 million in equipment
funds for the Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences and
Agricultural Engineering Sciences buildings. It was
agreed that these funds would not be needed in FY 1979,
since construction of the buildings will be in initial stages,
and the equipment funds could not be expended until at
least FY 1981. It is anticipated that these funds will be
included in the FY 1981 and 1982 requests. Similarly, it
was agreed that the funds to complete nonbondable
items would not be appropriated in FY 1979. When re-
quired, the funds will be included in the recurring Oper-
ation and Maintenance Supjxjrt arrangement discussed
earlier in the Operating Budget section. Planning funds
for the Greenhouse Replacement project, and the bal-
ance of funds originally removed from the FY 1978 re-
quest by the General Assembly were not added for
FY 1979. Table D provides a history of the FY 1979
request for the Food Production and Research Program.
TABLE D
FOOD PRODUaiON AND RESEARCH COMPLEX (FOOD FOR CENTURY III)
FY 1979 APPROPRIATION
(Dollars In Thousands)
Board of IBHE
Category/ Project Trustees Request Approved
Buildings
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences $20,913.2 $20,913.2
Agricultural Engineering Sciences 7,519.2 7,519.2
Greenhouse Replacement (Planning) 193.0 -0-
Veterinary Medicine Research Buildings 36 . 7^ -0-
Subtotal ($28,662.1) ($28,432.4)
Funds to Complete
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences 168.4 168.4
Agricultural Engineering Sciences 94. 7 94. 7
Subtotal ($ 263.1) ($ 263.1)
Equipment
\eterinary Medicine Basic Sciences 1 ,560.0 1 ,560.0
Agricultural Engineering Sciences 340.0 340.0
Veterinary Medicine Research Buildings 75.0 75.0
Subtotal ($ 1,975.0) ($ 1,975.0)
Utilities
Veterinary Medicine Basic Sciences 10.0 10.0
Agricultural Engineering Sciences 56.1 56.1
Subtotal ($ 66.1) (8 66.1)
Remodeling
Dairy Farm Consolidation 14.6' -0-
TOTAL $30,980.9 $30,736.6
* Includes utilities; also includes addition of .5% for works of art as directed by new legislation.
' Funds removed hy General Assembly from FY 1978 request.
' Included in Builoing appropriation.
Amount
Appropriated
$21,027.8»
7,612.9«
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-0-
-a-
75.0
10.0'
56. P
($ 66.1)
-0-
$28,715.7
General Rules Revised by Board of Trustees at May Meeting
REVISION INCREASES ALLOWABLE SICK LEAVE ACCUMULATION FOR ACADEMIC STAFF
The Board of Trustees on May 24, 1978, approved a
revised version of the General Rules Concerning Univer-
sity Organization and Procedure — the first general re-
vision since December 1957. The new version contained
changes of three general kinds :
1. Substantive changes recommended by the Presi-
dent of the Universit)-. These changes include recom-
mendations relating to preferential treatment for agencies
sponsoring research and distribution of income to in-
ventors in sections dealing with patent matters (described
in another article in this issue) and a complete revision
prop)osed by the University Committee on Copyrights
and Records in the section dealing with copyrights. In
addition, with the concurrence of the University Sen-
ates Conference, changes were made in Article III, Sec-
tion 4, defining allowable sick leave in terms of work
days instead of calendar days and increasing the maxi-
mum allowable accumulation of sick leave from six
months to 180 work days.
2. Amendments already approved by the Board. In-
formation concerning the numerous changes approved
by the Board over the past twenty years has appeared
in University publications and in the press and most have
been shown in supplementary "tip-in" pages which were
distributed widely. But no new printed version has been
produced which reflected such changes.
3. Changes brought about by structural and title al-
terations. The University has experienced extensive or-
ganizational change over the past twenty years, primar-
ily due to the advent of the chancellorship system. New
units have been organized; some already existing units
have been assigned to the campus and some to the Uni-
versity level; and many administrative titles have
changed. For the most part, these changes are reflected
in the elimination of the first ten sections of the 1957
version of the Rules and the substitution therefor of a
general overview of the organization of the University
and the campus and the functions of the general ad-
ministration of the University. However, the effect of
such organizational changes is found throughout the
new version of the Rules.
Copies of the revised General Rules are available
through the chancellors.
General Rules Revision Benefits University Inventors
DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT CrVES INVENTORS INCREASED PROPORTION OF PATENT INCOME
From time to time during the normal operation of a
university, an idea will emerge that might be valuable
to a large number of users. The Board of Trustees of the
University of Illinois has considered such eventualities
and has adopted policies and procedures to be followed
in order to commercialize inventions. The University en-
courages development of useful and valuable inventions
by arranging payment of the costs of patenting, by assist-
ing as much as possible with necessary papervvork, and
by marketing and licensing the invention. It then dis-
tributes a part of any income to the inventors.
In a meeting on May 24, 1978, the Board of Trustees
adopted revised General Rules Concerning University
Organization and Procedure, and one of the major re-
visions was the determination by stated formula of the
amount of patent income to be distributed to inventors.
The inventor will now receive 50 percent of the first
$50,000 net income, 35 percent of the next $50,000, and
20 percent thereafter. The formula shall apply to the net
income received by the University of Illinois Foundation,
or the net income available to the foundation or to the
University after all costs and expenses of securing a
patent and of development and administration of a
patent. The dollar values are cumulative regardless of
the time of receipt.
This revision will result in a general increase to the
inventor of 27.5 percent on the first $100,000 net income
over previous distribution agreements.
A one-page handout entitled "Guidelines for Prepar-
ing an Invention Disclosure" is available from the chair-
man of the Research Board at each campus or from any
member of the University Patent Committee.
State Health Insurance Plan Expands Benefits July 1
UNrVERSFFY BENEFITS OFFICE REPORTS MORE CHARGES PAID UNDER HIGH, LOW OPTIONS
Benefits under the state group health insurance plan
are greatly improved. For instance, there is an increase
in the hospital room and board rate to be paid as well
as increased benefits related to coverage under Medicare.
Many of the new improvements in the group health in-
surance plan were proposed in fall 1977 by representa-
tives of the University of Illinois Insurance Office par-
ticipating in State Employees Group Insurance Advisory
Commission meetings. Through their efforts, more
charges are paid under both high-option and low-option
coverage.
AH University faculty and nonacademic staff em-
ployed at 50 percent time or more and eligible to par-
ticipate in the State Universities Retirement System re-
cently reenrolled in the group health and life insurance
plan, with co\erage under the expanded benefit program
beginning July 1, 1978.
With medical costs increasing on every side, it is a
pleasure to report that the group health insurance
premiums for the high-option and low-option (one de-
pendent) plans actually went down, and that premiums
for the low-option (two or more dcp)endents) plan only
went up 14 cents per month.
HIGH OPTION BENEFITS
All eligible University faculty and nonacademic staff
receive high-option group health insurance coverage
without charge, and many elect such coverage for their
dependents. Following are highlights under the new high-
option plan.
Hospital Room and Board
Before July 1, 1978, if your hospital room and board
rate was more than $125 per day, you had to pay the
difference. Now, if the charges are more than $125 per
day, you pay a one-time-per-year $50 deductible (it is
the same $50 deductible used for prescription drugs)
and the group health insurance plan pays 80 percent of
the difference between $125 per day and actual rate
charged.
Surgery Claims
Before July 1, surgerv' claims were paid at the rate of
80 p)ercent of usual, reasonable, and customary charges
of the first $1,000, 90 percent of the next $2,000, and
100 percent for charges over $3,000. The benefit has
been improved to pay 80 percent of the first $1,000 of
usvial, reasonable, and customary charges, and 100 per-
cent of any remaining charges.
Physician Fees
Formerly eligible physician fees were paid the same
way as surgery charges. Since July 1, there is an annual
$100 deductible for physician fees, then reimbursement
at 80 percent through $1,000, and 100 percent thereafter.
Under the improved benefit, routine office visits will be
covered; previously these were covered only after $200
of expense, and then at only 50 percent of the charges.
Prescription Drugs
Prior to July 1, prescription drugs, physical therapy,
and medical equipment costs each had an individual $50
deductible. Once this was satisfied, reimbursement was
80 percent for the first $1,000 of claims, 90 percent for
the next $2,000, and 100 percent thereafter. Now, staff
can get more money back. Prescription drugs and other
medical costs have been combined into what is termed
"major medical" with only one $50 deductible. This is
followed by a reimbursement of 80 percent through
$1,000, and 100 percent of the charges thereafter.
Medicare
A major improvement has been made for staff with
Medicare benefits. Before July 1, staff paid a deductible
and 20 percent of the charges. Since July 1, a person en-
rolled in Medicare and the group health insurance plan
normally will not be required to pay any deductible or
coinsurance amounts.
LOW OPTION BENEFITS
There are also many improvements to the group
health insurance plan for those who elected low-option
coverage for their dependents.
Major Medical
Prior to July 1, major medical had an all-inclusive
$100 deductible. Then payments were as follows: 80 per-
cent of the charges up to $15,000, 100 percent of the
next $10,000, with a maximum of $25,000 per contract
year. Since the new contract year started July 1, all this
remains the same except for the maximum; it has gone
up to $250,000 per contract year.
Obstetrician Fee
Payment for the obstetrician fee paid by the group
health insurance plan has gone up $25 for a normal de-
livery, that is to $200, and that paid for caesarean sec-
tion has increased by $100, that is to $400.
HANDBOOK, CLAIMS, COUNSELORS
The above highlights some of the changes made in
the state group health insurance plan; there are more.
You are urged to read your Illinois State Employees
Group Insurance Program handbook for complete de-
tails. These books are available on a limited basis in the
University Benefits Center at the UIUC campus and in
the insurance offices of the UICC and UIMC campuses.
As more handbooks are received by the University they
will be mailed to faculty and nonacademic staff.
Those with claims problems at the UIUC campus
may dial a new local phone number (359-3594) that will
connect with a Blue Cross/Blue Shield claims representa-
tive in Springfield. Those at the UICC and the UIMC
campuses should continue to call the Chicago Blue Cross/
Blue Shield telephone number which appears in the
group health insurance program handbook.
Faculty and nonacademic staff are encouraged to
telephone the Benefits Center or Insurance Office to talk
with one of the counselors concerning questions about
any aspect of group health insurance plan benefits. Tele-
phone numbers follow: Chicago Circle, 996-2870; Medi-
cal Center, 996-6470; Urbana-Champaign, 333-3111.
.^ iru-i-^a_
.ULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
TH!
LIBRARY OF TH£
OCT ^^4iy78
No. 277, October 4, 1978
President Corhally's Rcsi motion
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
TEXT OF LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE HONORABLE G. W. HOWARD IJIiPRfiSftlENT OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
September 1, 1978
Dear Bill:
I have been contemplating my personal career plans
for some time, particularly because of my belief that
one's tenure in a chief executive's position in a major
and comprehensive organization should not exceed six
to eight years. By August 31. 1979. I will have served a
total of ten years in university presidencies — two years
at Syracuse University and eight years at the University
of Illinois. While such a position always will contain
more unfinished than finished business, there are a num-
ber of accomplishments at Illinois in which I take some
pride. I do feel, however, an increasing sense of repeti-
tiousness in the tasks of my position. It is, then, clearly
time for me to de\elop new career opportunities which
I can undertake with a renewed enthusiasm.
I have great respect and affection for the University
of Illinois and I have explored with appropriate indi-
viduals the possibility that I might join the faculty at
Urbana-Champaign. I am pleased to know that the pos-
sibilitv' is available to me. The University of Illinois
Foundation is about to undertake a major capital funds
campaign. While the leadership of that campaign will
need to come from the Foundation staff and especially
from the President of the University, I believe that with
the concurrence of the President and of the Foundation
staff I can be of assistance in that effort. I could and
would explore other ways in which I might be of assis-
tance to the University, but my primary goal is to return
to teaching, research, and outreach activities in the aca-
demic fields of educational administration, higher edu-
cation, and educational policy. It is this work for which
I prepared myself through graduate work and to which
I have devoted only about three years since joining the
facult)' at Ohio State in 1955.
I believe that under our policies I would be eligible
for an administrative or sabbatical leave which I would
request for the academic year 1979-80. It is then my in-
tention to accept a faculty position at Urbana-Cham-
paign in August, 1980. My resignation as President of
the University of Illinois would be effective on August
31, 1979.
One of the difficult tasks facing a university president
who is confident in and who enjoys the confidence of
those with whom he works is to decide when the time
has come that new leadership, new vigor, new ideas, and
even a new personality will benefit the university. There
is a strong tendency to de\elop a sense of well-being and
of indispensability which persuades one to overlook clear
signs that the time has come for a change of positions
for the president and for a change of leadership for the
institution. It is also clear that many will seek higher
motives or causes for such a decision because of their
inability and unwillingness to understand the demands
of such a position and the limits upon an individual's
ability to meet those demands with the constant peak
effort they require and deserve.
I want to assure you and my other colleagues on the
Board of Trustees and my friends and colleagues within
the University that there are no hidden motives for my
decision. The Board of Trustees has been, is, and I am
sure will continue to be supportive of me as an adminis-
trator and as a person. I sense a great deal of support
from the faculty, staff and students of our three cam-
puses. I simply find myself in need of and ready for a
change. In justice to what I consider to be the best posi-
tion available in the administration of higher education
— the presidency of the University of Illinois — I believe
that the time for that change will be here on August 31,
1979. I intend to pursue my duties vigorously during
1978-79 and look forward to another excellent year for
our University of Illinois.
With warm regards and with appreciation.
Sincerely,
John E. Corbally
Board of Trustees Reaffirms Position on Discrimination
TEXT OF RESOLUTION APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AT ITS MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 20, 1978
Resolved by the Board of Trustees of the University effects of historic societal discrimination; and (c) to
of Illinois that it reaffirms its commitment and policy comply fully in all University activities and programs
(a) to eradicate prohibited and invidious discrimination with applicable federal and state laws relating to non-
in all its forms; (b) to foster programs within the law discrimination and equal opportunity,
which will ameliorate or eliminate, where possible, the
, A L I -< ^ w y : A "^ ? J s
jLty letter
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
OCT 2 7 1978
Nexv Copyright Laxv Affects Policy y^ivERsirY of Illinois
TEXT OF REVISED COP^TUGHT PROVISIONS FROM UNIVERSITY S GENERAL RULES
No. 278, October 18, 1978
The General Rules Concerning University Organiza-
tion and Procedure have been amended in the light of
the new Copyright Law (Public Law 94-553, 94th Con-
gress, 17 use 100 et seq.). The vice-president for ad-
ministration has been given responsibility for copyright-
ing and marketing copyrightable works belonging to the
L'niversity, other than those administered by the Univer-
sity Press.
It is important that staff members become familiar
with the new General Rules, which also set forth policies
related to the PLATO s\-stem usage and developments.
Accordingly, the text of Article II, Section 9 ("Copy-
rights'") of the General Rules follows:
SECTION 9. COPYRIGHTS
(a) Copyright in a work protected under the federal
Copyrights Act (Public Law 94-553, 94th Congress,
17 use 101 et seq.), vests initially in the author or
authors of the work.
(b) In the case of a "work for hire," the employer or
other person for whom the work was prepared is
considered the author. Accordingly, except as other-
wise specifically provided in this Section, the Uni-
versity shall have all ownership rights in "works for
hire" as herein defined.
(c) A "work for hire" is ( 1 ) a work prepared by a Uni-
versity employee within the scope of his or her Uni-
versity emplo>'ment; or (2) a work specifically
ordered or commissioned if the University and an-
other party expressly agree in a written instrument
signed by them that the work shall be considered a
"work for hire" or otherwise owned by the Uni-
versity.
(d) With respect to employees in the academic ranks
recognized in Article IX, Section 3c, of the Univer-
sity of Illinois Statutes, a "work for hire" does not
include individually produced material such as
books, articles, theses, dissertations, art objects, or
musical compositions, except when a member of
such academic rank is specifically commissioned in
writing by the L^niversity to prepare the work, or
except when the terms of the University grant or
contract, if any. under which the work is being pre-
pared provides that the granting or other party
shall have ownership rights.
With respect to employees in said academic ranks
a "work for hire" does include materials (such as
videotapes, films, recordings, slides, microfiche,
microfilms, and computer generated material) pre-
pared for the purpose of use in systematic instruc-
tional activities. "Work for hire" shall also include
all material produced under terms of a grant or
contract for the purpose of producing such material.
(e) The original records of an investigation for a grad-
uate thesis or dissertation are the property of the
University but may be kept by the student at the dis-
cretion of the student's major department. The
completed thesis or dissertation is the property of the
University. The right to publish and copyright the
thesis or dissertation shall remain with the author.
(f) PLATO lessonware. Policies governing ownership,
copyright, and royalty distribution differ for various
authors and may be governed by (c) (2) above. The
policies are summarized in paragraph (k) of this
section.
(g) The administration of University-owned works and
copyrights will be as follows :
(1) University Press Publications. The University
Press shall be responsible for copyrighting the
works owned by the University and published
by the Press, and for administering contracts
with authors. Such contracts shall define the
rights and obligations of the author and of the
University, and shall state the basis on which
royalty payments are to be made to the author
and the basis on which receipts from the sale of
secondary rights — reprints, foreign transla-
tions, serial, dramatic, motion pictures, radio,
television — are to be divided between the Uni-
versity and the author. A copy of the printed
agreement in use by the Press shall be made
available upon request.
(2) Other Copyrightable Works. The Vice-Presi-
dent for Administration shall be responsible for
copyrighting and marketing copyrightable
works belonging to the University other than
those administered by the University Press.
Each campus shall be responsible for establish-
ing a mechanism for regularly transmitting to
the Vice-President for Administration lists of all
works that bear a copyright notice and three
copies of each work immediately upon its
publication.
(3) On the recommendation of the Vice-President
for Administration, the Comptroller and Secre-
tary are authorized to execute on behalf and in
the name of the Board of Trustees contracts for
marketing of University-owned copyrightable
work when the estimated net receipts under any
single contract do not exceed $10,000 in any 12-
month period.
(h) Materials and copyrights belonging to the University
shall be noticed and registered in the name of The
Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois and
not in the name of the unit or individual (s) who
prepared the work.
(i) The University, on copyrights owned by it, may
assign to the author(s) or developer(s) a propor-
tionate share of the net income, that is, the income
after deducting expenses directly attributed to mar-
keting or other requirements for use and sale of
materials outside the University,
(j) A University Committee on Copyrightable Works,
appointed by the President, will review the circum-
stances involved in any case that might arise under
(i) and make recommendations to the President and
the Board of Trustees.
(k) The PLATO system is a highly sophisticated and
effective system of computer-based education. A
large number of computer-based lessons have been
produced on this system by authors at the University
of Illinois and at other institutions. This portion of
the General Rules described policies for ownership,
copyrights, and royalties as they apply to PLATO
lessonware. Established policies, as set out elsewhere,
are intended to apply to other materials, indepen-
dent of the policies for lessonware and associated
materials.
( 1 ) Definitions.
a) "PLATO system" shall mean a computer-
based system comprising one or more cen-
tral computers and one or more interactive
Display Terminals and/or Plasma Display
Termials remotely located therefrom and in
communication therewith, which system is
covered wholly or in part by the claims of
U.S. Patent No. 3,405,457.
b) "Lessonware" and/or "Courseware" shall
mean all materials developed for the pur-
pose of presenting instruction or informa-
tion via or associated with the PLATO
system developed by the University of Illi-
nois, or any future developments or en-
hancements thereof. These materials shall
include, but are not limited to, the follow-
ing:
1 ) Lessons and/or units in a form readable
by the PLATO system software and/or
associated software.
2) Ancillary materials, produced by the
Author, necessary or supplementary to
the lessons or units which are developed
for use with one or more lessons or units.
Such materials shall include, but are not
limited to:
i) Course syllabi
ii) Microfiche materials and/or other
photographic presentation materials
iii) Audio/visual materials, both com-
puterized and for other media
iv) Course workbooks
v) Course handbooks and/or similar
printed materials for use by stu-
dents, authors, or instructors
vi) Evaluation materials and any ac-
count of the pedagogical methodol-
ogy used in testing, diagnostic, or
prescriptive activities related to the
use of such materials
vii) Programs developed for the man-
agement of lessons or units or for
linking the delivery of instruction to
other media or education prescrip-
tions, both computer-based and non-
computer-based
"Participating Institution" shall mean any
other institution or organization which
leases or purchases PLATO terminals con-
nected to the University of Illinois PLATO
system, and which pays the full costs asso-
ciated with the provision of such access to
such system.
"Joint Venture Institution" shall mean any
institution or organization which collabo-
rates with the University in a program which
utilizes the University's PLATO system and
which shares the costs of such program with
the University.
"Author" shall mean any person who has or
is given access to the University of Illinois
PLATO system for the purpose of produc-
ing Lessonware. This document is intended
to cover Lessonware produced by a variety
of Authors defined as follows :
1) "Noncommissioned Author" shall mean
any Author who is an employee or stu-
dent of the University of Illinois, but
who is not specifically commissioned by
the University or one of its departments
or units to produce Lessonware.
2) "Commissioned Author" shall mean any
Author who is employed by the Univer-
sity to produce Lessonware or is given
released time by the University for the
purpose of producing Lessonware.
3) "Other Author" shall mean any Author
who is not an employee or student of the
University and who is given access by
the University, at no charge, to the Uni-
versity's PLATO system.
4) "Participating Institution Author" (PI
Author) shall mean any Author em-
ployed by, or given access to, the Uni-
versity's PLATO system by a Participat-
ing Institution.
The policies governing ownership,
copyright, and royalty distribution differ
for the various tj'pes of Authors as de-
fined abo\e. These policies are sum-
marized in accordance with the type of
Author in the following section.
(2) Policies for ]'arious Author Types.
a) Noncommissioned Author. As a condition
to receiving access to the University of Illi-
nois PL.ATO system, Noncommissioned Au-
thors shall agree to transfer to the Univer-
sity full right, title, and interest in and to
all Lessonware developed by the Noncom-
missioned Author, including all copyrights
and intellectual rights in and to such Les-
sonware. The Noncommissioned Author
shall have the sole right to designate whether
or not the Lessonware developed by such
Author is suitable for and ready for distri-
bution. The University shall have a period
of seven (7) months, except that, in the
case of Lessonware developed prior to May
1, 1976, the University shall have twenty-
five (25) months, from the date of such
designation, to elect to act as the distributor
or marketer of such Lessonware. In the
event the University elects to so act as dis-
tributor or marketer, the above transfer of
rights to the University shall become ir-
revocable and perpetual and the University
shall have the right to determine in its sole
and nonreviewable discretion, the time and
manner of distribution or marketing, if any,
and the amount of royalties to be charged.
The University may use Lessonware for
its educational or internal activities without
pa^TTient therefor. In addition, the Univer-
sity' may make Lessonware available to
others, without payment, for use on an ex-
perimental PLATO system operated by the
University.
In the event the University elects not to
act as such distributor or marketer within
the specified period, all rights to such Les-
sonware, including ownership and all rights
of assignment, and collection of royalties,
etc., will be assigned and transferred to the
Author, provided, however, that, in all
events, the University shall retain a royalty-
free, nonexclusive, unrestricted, irrevocable,
and perpetual license for use of such Les-
sonware on PLATO systems operated by the
University of Illinois and provided that the
Author shall pay to the University twenty-
five (25) percent of any gross royalty income
that might be received by the Author sub-
sequent to such assignment and transfer.
In the event tlie University elects to act
as distributor or marketer, Noncommis-
sioned Authors shall receive seventy-five
(75) percent of gross royalties received by
by the University for use or sale of such
Lessonware. In exceptional cases, and by
mutual agreement of the Noncommissioned
Author and the University, the percentage
distribution of royalties may be altered so as
to improve the benefit to both parties.
At any time after the election by the Uni-
versity to act as distributor or marketer of
Lessonware, the University may give written
notice to the Author of its intention to dis-
continue marketing or distributing such
Lessonware and immediately upon such
notification the University shall have no
further obligations of any nature to market
or distribute such Lessonware. The Univer-
sity will assign and transfer to the Author,
without warranty of any kind, the Univer-
sity right, title, and interest in and to such
Lessonware. Such assignment and transfer
shall be subject to the following conditions
and provisions :
1) The University receive, within six (6)
months of the notification to the Author
of the University's intent to discontinue
marketing or distributing such Lesson-
ware, the Author's written request to
transfer title.
2) The University shall receive twenty-five
(25) percent of gross income received
by the Author in relation to the use of
such Lessonware that results subsequent
to the assignment and transfer of Les-
sonware rights to the Author.
3) The University shall retain an irrevo-
cable, unrestricted, perpetual, nonexclu-
sive, and royalty-free license for use of
such Lessonware on PLATO systems
operated by the University.
4) The assignment shall be subject to any
rights, licenses, and sublicenses granted
by the University to third parties and
which are outstanding at the time of
such assignment. The University shall
continue to be obligated to distribute
royalties received with respect to any
such continued use of such Lessonware
in the same amounts and upon the same
terms as provided for elsewhere.
The Noncommissioned Authors shall
agree to diligently affix the words,
"Copyrighted by The Board of Trustees
of the University of Illinois," to all Les-
sonware produced by the Author, to take
such other action as the University may
request to assure protection and registra-
tion of copyright and renewals thereof,
to cooperate in the prosecution of in-
fringers, and to take other actions re-
quired or requested to effectively market
and distribute Lessonware.
The Noncommissioned Author shall
agree to promptly correct all errors
which are of a technical nature. In the
event the Noncommissioned Author fails
to correct such errors, the University
shall have the privilege of correcting
such errors and to withhold and retain
the Noncommissioned Author's share of
future royalty income in the amount of
the cost of such correction. The Non-
commissioned Author shall have the sole
right to determine whether or not errors
or claims of errors in the intellectual
content or the Lessonware shall be cor-
rected.
The Noncommissioned Author will be
required to warrant that the Lesson-
ware, submitted to the University for
consideration for marketing or distribu-
tion, shall be the original work of the
Audior and free from infringement of
existing copyright. If the Noncommis-
sioned Author incorporated copyrighted
materials in such Lessonware, the Non-
commissioned Author shall provide proof
of release from copyright holder. Fur-
ther, the Noncommissioned Author shall
be required to agree to take no action or
enter into any agreements or arrange-
ments, under which any other person
or organization might develop rights in
Lessonware, without the prior written
approval of the University.
b) Commissioned Authors. The policies for
Lessonware produced by Commissioned Au-
thors, and the obligation of Commissioned
Authors, are the same as those set forth for
Noncommissioned Authors in Section (2) a)
above, with the exceptions that the Univer-
sity of Illinois has the right to designate that
Lessonware is suitable for and ready for dis-
tribution, that the percent of gross royalties
received by the University to be distributed
to Commissioned Authors shall be forty
(40) percent, and that the University shall
have the right to correct errors of a tech-
nical nature and/or errors in intellectual
content.
c) Other Authors. The policies for Lessonware
produced by Other Authors, and the obliga-
tions of Other Authors, are the same as those
set forth for Noncommissioned Authors in
Section (2) a) above, with the exception
that the percent of gross royalties received
by the University to be distributed to Other
Authors shall be twenty (20) percent.
d) PI Authors. The Participating Institution
shall be provided the opportunity to request
that the University represent the Participat-
ing Institution for the purpose of marketing
distributing Lessonware. If the Participating
Institution requests and the University
agrees to provide such representation, the
policies for Lessonware shall be the same as
those set forth for Noncommissioned Au-
thors in Section (2) a) above, with "Par-
ticipating Institution" substituted for "Non-
commissioned Author" or "Author" in such
section, and with the exception that the
University will not participate in royalty in-
come received for use of Lessonware that
reverts to the Participating Institution.
If the Participating Institution does not
request the University to provide such rep-
resentation, the Participating Institution
will retain all rights in all Lessonware pro-
duced by PI Authors, except that, in all
events, the University shall retain a royalty-
free, nonexclusive, irrevocable, unrestricted,
and perpetual license for use of such Lesson-
ware on PLATO systems operated by the
University of Illinois.
e) Joint Venture Authors. The institution em-
ploying Joint Venture Authors will be pro-
vided the opportunity to request that the
University represent such institution for the
purpose of marketing and distributing Les-
sonware. If such institution requests and the
University agrees to provide such represen-
tation, the policies for Lessonware shall be
the same as those set forth for Noncommis-
sioned Authors in Section (2) a) above,
wdth the "Joint Venture Institution" sub-
stituted for "Noncommissioned Author" or
"Author" in such section.
If such institution does not request the
University to provide such representation,
such institution will retain all rights in all
Lessonware produced by Joint Venture Au-
thors, except that, in all events, the Univer-
sity shall retain a royalty-free, nonexclusive,
irrevocable, unrestricted, and perpetual
license for use of such Lessonware on
PLATO systems operated by the University
of Illinois and with the exception that any
gross royalties generated by the Joint Ven-
ture Institution's marketing or distribution
of such Lessonware shall be shared equally
between the University and the institution.
(3) University Seal of Approval. The University
may establish review bodies, similar to the Press
Board, to review I^ssoiiware de\-eloped by Non-
commissioned and Commissioned Authors and
submitted by the Author for such review. Re-
views may lead to the granting of a "University
Seal of Approval." Failure to obtain this seal
will not imply that the University will not mar-
ket or distribute Lessonware — it shall be,
rather, an additional indicator of quality. Other
persons or institutions using the University sys-
tem may be encouraged, but not required, to
seek the "University Seal of Approval" for
lessons offered for distribution.
(4) Foreign-Language Translations. The Univer-
sity shall ha\e the right to prepare or have pre-
pared foreign-language versions of Lessonware
which it distributes or markets. One-half of
gross royalties on such foreign-language versions
may be retained by the University to recover
translation expenses, until such expenses have
been fully recovered. During and after this
period, remaining gross royalties shall be dis-
tributed between the University and the Author
according to the percentage applicable to the
original Lessonware. The original Author shall
be notified and given an opportunity to inspect
the translated version before it is distributed.
(5) Marketing of Similar Lessonware. The Univer-
sity shall decide to act as the marketer or dis-
tributor of Lessonware on an item-by-item basis.
Other Lessonware covering the same or similar
subject matter may simultaneously be distrib-
uted or marketed by the University.
(6) Exception for Particular Contracts and Grants.
These policies are subject to exceptions ap-
proved by the University in accepting partic-
ular contracts and grants such as these for
PLATO development.
State Group Life Insurance Plan
INCREASE IN BENEFITS/REDUCTION IN COSTS
Changes were recently made in the State Group
Life Insurance Plan which in many cases reduced
premium rates and increased insurance amounts. All
L^niversit\' facult\' and staff employed at 50 percent time
or more and eligible to participate in the State Univer-
sities Retirement System recently reenrolled in the group
health and life insurance plan, with newly elected cover-
age beginning July 1, 1978.
In the September 15, 1978, Faculty Letter we an-
nounced, "It is a pleasure to report a reduction in
premium for the group health insurance plan," and we
are now pleased to announce the following changes in
the life insurance program :
1. A reduction in premium for the employees' optional
life insurance plan.
2. A reduction in the rates for the children's optional
life insurance plan.
3. An increase in the benefit amount for the spouse and
children's optional life insurance plan.
EMPLOYEE BASIC LIFE BENEFITS
Eligible employees (including disability recipients)
and immediate annuitants under age 56 are provided life
insurances equal to one-half their annual salary, rounded
up to the next higher $100. For full-time employees, the
minimum is $2,000. At age 56 the amount of basic life in-
surance is reduced 20 percent, with further reductions of
20 percent on each subsequent birthdate, to a minimum
of $2,000. When an eligible employee elects retirement
under the State Universities Retirement System, the
minimum basic life insurance coverage continues to be
provided without cost.
EMPLOYEE OPTIONAL LIFE BENEFITS
Employees qualifying for the state life insurance bene-
fit may elect optional life insurance equivalent to one-
half their annual salary. At age 61, the 20 percent an-
nual reduction procedure described above applies, wath
a minimum of $2,000 at age 65 or sooner.
The premium for this life insurance benefit is paid by
the employee through a payroll deduction, and as of July
1 this premium was reduced approximately 9 percent to
56 cents per thousand. Other than during an open en-
rollment, coverage may be acquired by completing an
Evidence of Insurability application.
SPOUSE OPTIONAL LIFE BENEFIT
Employees, immediate annuitants, and their survivors
may elect spouse life coverage equal to 50 percent of the
amount of total life insurance coverage (basic plus op-
tional) in force on the life of the member (excludes any
accidental death and dismemberment), but limited to a
maximum of $5,000. The premium for this life insurance
benefit is paid by the employee through a payroll deduc-
tion, and as of July 1 the premium increased to 64 cents
per thousand. Except during the first 30 days of employ-
ment or an open enrollment, you will be required to
complete an Evidence of Insurability application to par-
ticipate in the plan.
DEPENDENT CHILDIREN) LIFE BENEFIT
Employees, immediate annuitants, and their survivors
may elect child life coverage equal to 50 percent of the
total life insurance coverage (basic plus optional) in
force on the life of the member (excludes any accidental
death and dismemberment) to a maximum of $2,000,
except:
1. Each eligible dependent child under 14 days of age
has no benefits.
2. Each eligible dependent child age 14 days to 6 months
will have $100 in benefits if elected.
As of July 1, 1978, the insured amount increased
$1,000, and the premium decreased 40 percent to 30
cents per thousand. As with the other optional coverages,
the premium for this life insurance benefit is paid by the
employee through a payroll deduction. Except during the
first 30 days of employment or an open enrollment, com-
pletion of an Evidence of Insurability application will be
required to participate in the plan.
ACCIDENTAL DEATH AND DISMEMBERMENT LIFE BENEFIT
Employees, immediate annuitants, and their survivors
may elect accidental death and dismemberment equal
to either of the following:
1 . Amount of the basic life benefit.
2. Amount of the combined basic and optional life bene-
fits (optional life must have been elected) .
HANDBOOK, APPLICATIONS, COUNSELORS
The above highlights some of the changes made in
the State Group Life Insurance Plan. You are urged to
read your Illinois State Employees Group Life Insurance
Program handbook for complete details. The new life
insurance handbook is also a first; in the past the life
insurance description has appeared in a combined hand-
book with the Illinois State Employees Group Health
Insurance. The new books are available in the University
Benefits Centers on your campus.
Faculty and staff members are encouraged to tele-
phone or visit the Benefits Center with any questions on
the group life insurance plan. Telephone numbers are:
Chicago Circle, 996-2870; Medical Center, 996-6470;
Urbana-Champaign, 333-3111.
x-e/icjr-pc
(X,
0Ct«6
)?0A LlPr(ARY
^tpT ^;^^ EXCHANGE
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 279, Novembw 15, 1978
State Universities Retirement System Affects Social Security Dependent
and Survivor Benefits under New Law
Recent changes in the Social Security law provide for
the offset of Public Retirement benefits against the de-
pendent and sur\'ivor benefits of Social Security. A Uni-
versity employee who will receive a retirement benefit
from the State Universities Retirement System and who
will receive a wife's, husband's, widow's, widower's,
mother's, or father's Social Security insurance benefit
may be affected by the change. If affected by the change,
the sur\-ivor or dependent benefit from Social Security
would be reduced dollar for dollar by the amount re-
ceived from the State Universities Retirement System
in the form of a retirement check, based on the individ-
ual's own earnings. It is impwrtant to note that the offset
will apply only to pension payments based on the spouse's
own work in public employment which is not covered
under Social Seciirity.
Exception to the Pension Offset Provision
A transitional clause applies to the offset provision,
stating that an exception is provided for those people
(women and dependent husbands and widowers) who,
wthin the sixty-month period beginning with the month
of enactment (December 1977) become eligible for a
non-Social-Security-covered pension, and at the time the
individual files for or becomes entitled to Social Security
spouse's or surviving spouse's benefits, can qualify for
Social Security benefits under the law as it was adminis-
tered on January 1, 1977 (with one-half support retire-
ment proof needed for men). Thus the offset will not
apply if any time prior to December 1, 1982, an employee
reaches age sixty-two and has five, six, or seven years in
the State Universities Retirement System, or age fifty-
five and has eight or more years in State Universities
Retirement System.
Examples as It Applies After November, 1982
Example one:
a. Husband working under Social Security at place of
employment.
b. Wife worked for U. of I., retired, and is receiving
State Universities Retirement System benefit.
c. Husband dies, so wife is eligible for survivor benefit
under Social Security; however, under new law the
Social Security survivor benefit would be offset by her
State Universities Retirement System retirement ben-
efit.
Example two:
a. Husband retires after working under Social Security
at place of employment.
b. Wife worked under Social Security prior to her em-
ployment with the U. of I. and is eligible to receive
minimum Social Security benefits. Wife's portion of
husband's Social Security is higher than her own
benefit so she receives Social Security under husband's
benefit. Wife is receiving retirement benefit from State
Universities Retirement System amounting to more
than the wife's portion of husband's Social Security.
c. In this case, under the new law, wife's amount under
her husband's Social Security would be offset by her
State Universities Retirement System retirement ben-
efit. She would then be able to claim her lesser per-
sonal Social Security retirement benefit.
d. If wife did not have personal Social Security retire-
ment benefits, she would not have been eligible for
any Social Security retirement benefits due to the off-
set.
Careful Planning Advised for Many
It becomes very evident that careful planning should
take place by those employees who will become eligible
for a benefit as a dependent or survivor under their
spouse's Social Security account; however, it is still pre-
mature to make any final retirement-related decisions
until we are closer to the actual offset date. It is possible
that future legislation or court decisions could affect the
offset decisions before 1982. Future articles will appear
in this publication as new developments occur.
Faculty and staff are encouraged to call your Benefits
Center and talk with one of the counselors concerning
any questions you might have about the new Social Se-
curity provision, or benefit questions in general. Tele-
phone numbers are: Chicago Circle, 996-2870; Medical
Center, 996-6470; Urbana-Champaign, 333-3111.
Action on Selection of President of the University
The Board of Trustees at its meeting at Allerton
House October 20 took additional action on the selection
of a president for the University pursuant to its action of
October 3.
The Board confirmed the following members of the
Consultative Committee to assist in the selection of a
president under the chairmanship of Martin Wagner,
professor of labor and industrial relations, Urbana-Cham-
paign, and faculty member-at-large on the committee:
I. Faculty Members: Medical Center, Mary E. Bevis.
associate professor of medical-surgical nursing, and
George E. Miller, M.D., professor of medical education
in the Center for Educational Development and coordi-
nator of international activities, Office of the Vice-Chan-
cellor for Academic Affairs: Chicago Circle, Philip
Dwinger, professor and head of the Department of Math-
ematics, and Harriet Talmage, professor of urban edu-
cation research and director of the Office of Evaluation
Research: Urbana-Champaign, Theodore L. Brown, pro-
fessor of chemistry, and David Gottlieb, professor of
plant pathology.
II. Students: Medical Center. Joseph H. Gaziano. third-
year medical student; Chicago Circle, Joseph Maltese,
junior (Liberal Arts and Sciences) ; Urbana-Champaign,
Mark McClees, graduate student (Sociology) .
III. Facult\' Member-at-Large: Martin Wagner, pro-
fessor of labor and industrial relations, Urbana-Cham-
paign.
IV. Members of the Nonacademic Staff: Medical Cen-
ter, Beverly Lehmann, administrative aide. Director of
Payroll Services; Chicago Circle, Patrick T. Hughes,
plant operating engineer; Urbana-Champaign, John A.
Saldeen, electronics engineer, School of Chemical Sci-
ences.
V. Administrative Officers: General Administration,
Ronald W. Brady, vice-president for administration;
Medical Center, Alexander M. Schmidt, M.D., vice-
chancellor for health services; Chicago Circle, Elmer B.
Hadley, dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences ;
Urbana-Champaign, Orville G. Bentley, dean of the Col-
lege of Agriculture.
VI. Academic/Professional Members: Medical Center,
Gust E. Hermanson, assistant for fiscal affairs to the
Dean of the College of Dentistry: Chicago Circle, James
J. Overlock, director of university services; Urbana-
Champaign, Julian M. Frankenberg, director of the
Health Professions Information Office, in the Office of
the Dean of Students.
VII. Representarives of the University of Illinois Alumni
Association and the University of Illinois Foundation:
Henry B. Blackwell (Indianapolis, Indiana), president.
University of Illinois Alumni Association, and William
G. Karnes (Chicago), president, University of Illinois
Foundation.
The Board at a meeting in Urbana on October 3 ap-
proved the charge to the Consultative Committee which
is as follows:
In addition to establishing the Consultative Committee it
is necessary for the trustees to specify the charge of the com-
mittee and the general procedures within which it will oper-
ate:*
Although the several broad constituencies of the University
are reflected in the structure of the committee, in no sense
does the Board regard the members as "representatives" or
"delegates" of any single interest group. Rather, each member
is expected to serve as an individual, exercising his or her
own best judgment in the interest of the University of Illinois
as a whole.
The committee's first task will be to recommend criteria to
be used as the basis of judging the qualifications of candidates
for the office of President of the University; and second, to as-
semble a list of names of individuals judged to be suitable for
the position. (In this regard, the trustees urge the committee
to give careful consideration to the "guidelines" developed by
the Consultative Committee of 1970-71 and approved by the
Board on July 22, 1970.) The several constituencies of the
University should be invited to suggest suitable possible candi-
dates, and suggestions might be sought from other appropriate
sources, including other institutions of higher learning. The
tnistees will of course maintain a continuing interest in the
identification of outstanding candidates and may wish to sug-
gest names.
Soon after the committee has been organized, the trustees
will arrange a meeting with it, to discuss and fix criteria to be
used in judging candidates and procedures to be followed in
later stages of the search. The trustees will follow, and expect
the committee to follow, all of the regular University affirma-
tive action policies in the conduct of the search and the ap-
pointment of a president of the University.
After a list of possible candidates has been assembled, the
committee should conduct a preliminary screening designed
to identify a number of individuals judged to be the most
promising in the list. Detailed information should then be
secured concerning these indi\Tduals, initially from public
records such as professional directories and bibliographic
sources.
At this point, care should be taken neither to approach
prospective candidates nor to solicit formal evaluations of
candidates by non-University persons, inasmuch as such in-
quiries may prove to be embarrassing to the candidates or to
the University. Informal inquiries may be made by the com-
mittee, but only with clearance from the president of the
Board of Trustees, and it should be made clear that the search
is in a preliminary stage and that no approach has yet been
made to any candidate.
In this connection, the trustees emphasize the importance
of careful coordination and channeling of all committee com-
munications concerning candidates through the chairman of
the committee, who is charged with the responsibility of
keeping the Board fully informed — and who, in turn, will be
kept informed by the Board. It is anticipated that the Board
will receive progress reports, at least on a monthly basis, from
* The committee is expected to develop its own rules and
internal procedures within the limits of this charge and after
consultation with the Board of Trustees.
the chairman of the committee in person. (The Board will
wish to have the benefit of the \-iews of all members of the
committee, including "minority" views, if any. However, all
communications should be transmitted to the Board as a whole
and through the committee chairman.)
.After a review of the credentials of the reduced list of can-
didates, the committee should provide the trustees with a
panel of names of individuals who appear to be most promis-
ing. .\ meeting will then be arranged by the Board of Trustees
to discuss candidates and the procedures to be followed in
approaching them.
The trustees assume as a clear objective that the Board and
the committee wll seek consensus in the final selection. As
indicated in part I of this document, the trustees have the
responsibility of making the final decision. Although it will be
the responsibility of the Board to approach final candidates
and to conduct all negotiations, the Board will seek such as-
sistance from the committee in these matters as the Board
may feel necessary.
It is axiomatic that discretion and confidentiality are re-
quired of all committee members. The committee's usefulness
to the Board is dependent upon this general requirement, and
acceptance of it is a condition of membership on the com-
mittee. The trustees also require that all communications with
the press be channeled through the secretary of the Board,
who will act at the direction of the president of the Board.
President's Assembly on State Policy Research
Cooperation between University of Illinois faculty
and state go\emment officials in matters of public policy
research was the theme of a Uni\'ersity-wide faculty con-
ference held October 4-6, 1978, in Crete, Illinois. Sixty-
four faculty, together with a number of state officials, met
over a two-day period to discuss ways to bring University
faculty concerned w-ith Illinois public policy research
together with state government units or agencies con-
cerned with those policies. The President's Assembly on
State Policy Research at the University of Illinois was
organized by the State Government/University Relations
Committee which is chaired by Samuel K. Gove, director
of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs. The
assembly was supported by a grant from the Joyce Foun-
dation. Professor Gove noted that, while there has been
considerable cooperation between state agencies and the
University in the past, it has been "hit or miss," and needs
to be a little more systematic. The findings from the
assembly are noted below.
At the close of their discussions, the participants re-
viewed as a group the following statement. The statement
represents general agreement. It should not be assumed,
ho\vever, that every participant subscribes to every part
of the statement.
As a land-grant institution, the University of Illinois
seeks to be responsive to the concerns of the citizens of
the state of Illinois. Its faculty and staff already partici-
pate in collaborative relationships with the state in a wide
range of activities, including research on matters involv-
ing public policy. The assembly encourages the strength-
ening of such research through the utilization and pos-
sible expansion of existing linkages between the University
and state government.
The assembly believes that in the future public policy
questions will require even closer relationships between
state government and institutions such as the University
of Illinois, and that this matter should be a continuing
item on the agenda of both the University administration
and its faculty.
Whether future responses should take the form of
new organizational mechanisms remained a point of de-
bate throughout the assembly. There was, however, con-
sensus that any efforts at innovation should neither di-
minish nor replace present approaches to research on
matters affecting public policy as exemplified by exten-
sion service activities, service on state committees and
commissions, symposia, and communication networks in-
volving both the University and state government.
In addition to such traditional mechanisms, the Uni-
versity should encourage researchers to develop new
approaches for addressing social and technological prob-
lems facing the state. Specifically, the University's State
Government/University Relations Committee is urged to
evaluate experiments in California and other states which
seek to develop cooperative efforts between universities
and state government in policy research.
As the committee carries out this assignment, partic-
ular attention should be given to:
1 . Evaluating the purpose and quality of current and
proposed modes of cooperation, especially in terms of in-
ducements and impediments to faculty and governmental
participation.
2. Developing and maintaining up-to-date surveys of
research and research capability on matters affecting
public policy carried out by University faculty.
3. Communicating to all appropriate sectors of the
state on the extent of current research at the University
of Illinois focusing on state problems.
4. Encouraging expanded personal contact between
members of the University faculty and various state
officials in a variety of settings.
5. Planning by the State Government/University Re-
lations Committee for symposia on a broad range of
topics pertaining to state policy research. Representatives
of the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the
judicial branch (where appropriate) of state government
should be involved in early symposia planning.
Finally, the assembly encourages the University's
State Government/University Relations Committee to
develop recommendations that would implement closer
relations between the faculty and state government in
policy research but cautions against any plan that would
adversely affect the academic independence of the Uni-
versity.
i
_L.c:(^M.j-^c5_
?^.
z
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
^6>
e.
No. 280, January 30, 1979
Tax-Sheltered Annuities Revisited
Some time during the career of faculty persons, a tax-
sheltered annuity should be considered for the purpose of
supplying additional income at retirement. A tax-shel-
tered annuity provides the faculty member with a tax-
favored means for setting aside savings for retirement
out of current earnings. Altliough these savings are in-
tended for retirement purposes — and the greatest advan-
tages are obtained from using tliem for this purpose —
they are available for emergency use or during a period
of a lower annual income such as could occur during
certain types of leaves.
Congress decided to encourage savings for retirement
by allowing such savings to be removed from reportable
income resulting in a lowering of current income tax.
Since the reduction in reportable income occurs in the
faculty member's top bracket, the tax saved is at the rate
for his or her top bracket. This can mean a considerable
tax savings.
When benefits are received from the tax-sheltered an-
nuity plan, such benefits are then reportable income;
ho\vever, the impact of the tax at that time may be
lessened considerably. In the first place, if the benefits are
received after reaching age sixty-five, the faculty mem-
ber's personal exemption is doubled; and, if the faculty
member's spouse is also over age sixty-five, the exemption
for the spouse is doubled. Second, other reportable in-
come after the faculty person's retirement is likely to be
less than income received while working. Many Univer-
sity faculty members choose to withdraw sizable amounts
during the first two or three years of retirement — while
they are paying no income tax on the retirement income
received from the State Universities Retirement System.
Finally, the benefits from a tax-sheltered annuity may be
spread out over the remaining lifetime of the participant,
so that the tax implication may not be great in any one
year.
CONTVIBUTION LEVEL DEFINED
A faculty member may enter into an agreement with
the University once a year to establish a percentage of
<^
^^^0
'<5>
salary to be reduced, from his or her gross salary. In no
way does the reduction fonmonthly tax-sheltered annuity
contributions affect the atnount of contribution made by
a faculty member or the State Universities Retirement
.System for the individual's SURS plan.
Under the General Limitation, the faculty member
may have his or her annual gross salary reduced less
but not more dian 20 percent per year, and, in some
cases the maximum is less depending on the individual's
personal situation. Many faculty members approaching
retirement may wish to make larger contributions than
die 20 percent of gross income allowed under the General
Limitation. For those faculty. Congress included in the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(which became effective January of 1976, and recently
clarified by Internal Revenue rulings) Special Elections
that allow the participant to contribute more than 20
percent of gross annual salary by using past service credit
with the University.
BENEFITS CENTERS OFFER ASSISTANCE
Each campus Benefits Center, upon request, will
send an in-depth description of the tax-sheltered annuity
program, including information dealing with exclusion
allowances, federal income and estate tax implications,
and a comparison of the five tax-sheltered annuities
offered at the University of Illinois.
After reviewing the informational material, faculty
may call their campus Benefits Center and make an ap-
pointment with a counselor for a personal interview to
answer further questions concerning the program.
In addition, each campus now has a computer
terminal connected to a computer located in Atlanta,
Georgia, for calculating an individual's personal annual
exclusion allowance.
For further information faculty members are en-
couraged to call their Benefits Center: Chicago Circle,
996-2870; Medical Center, 996-6470; Urbana-Cham-
paign, 333-3111.
University Patents, Inc., Announces Program to Pay Honoraria to Inventors
University Patents, Inc. (UPI), now a public cor-
poration with headquarters in Connecticut, was estab-
lished originally by the University of Illinois Foundation
to "seek out, evaluate, patent, and license emerging
technologies" at the University of Illinois.
Effective January 1, 1979, and until further notice,
UPI's management will initiate a new program offering
a $150 honorarium to inventors at the time a U.S. patent
application is filed. This program has been successfully
evaluated, on a test basis, at a number of other aca-
demic institutions currently serviced by UPI. UPI and
the University believe this program, when implemented
in Urbana and Chicago, will have a very positive effect
on the number and timeliness of invention disclosures
submitted by University researchers for processing. UPI
personnel visit all campuses of the University regularly,
and UPI also employs several professional local consul-
tants who are available to discuss topics related to
patents.
Additional information about the patent program
and UPI, and specifically their invention honorarium
plan, may be obtained from the office of Robert N.
Parker, Associate Mce-President, Financial Affairs, whose
telephone number is 333-2464 in Urbana, or by writing
UPI's vice-president, A. Sidney Alpert, P.O. Box 6080,
Norwalk, Connecticut 06852, telephone (203) 846-3461.
University Admission Requirements: English Competency^
TEXT OF AN AGENDA ITEM APPROVED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON NOV^EMBER 17, 1978
The Senates at all campuses have approved a revi-
sion of the admission requirements for English compe-
tency. The present policy states that a test of competence
in English shall be required of all foreign students, in-
cluding transfers, except foreign students who are citizens
of a country where the native language is English. The
revision extends the requirements to all students who
apply to the University, and is as follows:
Minimum requirements for competence in English apply
to all University students. An applicant for admission may
complete minimum requirements for competence in English
by certifying that the following requirements have been ful-
filled in a country where English is the primary language and
in a school where English is the primar)' language of in-
struction :
1. Undergraduate college applicants: graduation with credit
^ A proposed revision of this requirement was presented
to the Board in April 1976 and was not approved. In line
with the concerns of the Board, the revision now proposed
addresses the general question of English competency of all
applicants for admission, rather than that of a small and
specific group of applicants, i.e., the foreign students and
those whose native language is other than EngUsh.
for 3 units, or the equivalent, of English from a secondary
school; or successful completion of a minimum of two
academic years of full-time study at the secondary school
or collegiate level immediately prior to the proposed date
of enrollment in the University.
2. Graduate and professional college applicants: completion
of at least two academic years of full-time study within five
years of the proposed date of enrollment in the University.
For applicants who do not meet the above requirements, evi-
dence can be provided by achieving a satisfactory score on a
test of competence in English. The test(s) to be used and the
minimum scores(s) shall be subject to approval by the Uni-
versity Committee on Admissions with the advice of the Uni-
versity's Technical Committee on Testing. This requirement
may be waived upon agreement by the director of admissions
and records and the dean of the college concerned, if evidence
of competence in English presented by the applicant clearly
justifies such action.
The revision has been approved by the University
Committee on Admissions and the admissions commit-
tees of the Chicago Circle, Medical Center, and Urbana-
Champaign campuses. The University Senates Confer-
ence has indicated that no further Senate jurisdiction is
involved.
University Councils and Committees 1978-79
University Academic Council. Peter E. Yankwich,
Chairperson, Edwin L. Goldwasser, William J. Grove,
Richard M. Johnson, Morton W. Weir.
University Committee on Accountancy (C.P.A.). J. Nel-
son Young, Chairperson, Edwin Cohen, Jane W. Loeb,
ex officio, Kenneth W. Perry, Margaret Richardson, Sec-
retary, Eldred C. Strobel.
University Committee on Admissions. Eloise H. Cor-
nelius, Chairperson, Robert H. Adelsperger, Robert E.
Corley, William L. Daniel, James W. Graham, ex officio.
Barry Greenstein, Carol A. Leaf, Jane W. Loeb, ex
officio, Frank D. Maglione, Jr., Robert L. Mosborg, E.
Eugene Oliver, ex officio, Jose Ortiz, William C. Price,
ex officio, Ben A. Rasmusen, Donald W^ Rice.
Avery Brundage Scholarship Fund Committee. Nancy D.
Berryman, Alma R. Brown, Rosemary Cahill, Michael T.
Moore, Edward G. Perkins, Elizabeth P. Rogers, Debbie
Romersberger, William C. Wagner, Richard A. Wang,
E. Eugene Oliver, Secretary.
University Committee on Copyrightable Works. Ron-
aJd \V. Brady, Chairperson, James J. Costello, Edwin L.
Goldwasser, \S. Ann Re^Tiolds, Jan Rocek, Peter E.
Yankwich.
UniversiK Council for Environmental Studies. Benja-
min B. Ewing. Roger ^V. Findley, James P. Hartnett,
Edward R. Herman, R. Thomas Jaeger, Anthony M.
Marinelli, Robert L. Metcalf, Thomas L. Poulsen, W.
Ann Re>Tiolds.
University- Council on Equal Opportunity. Ronald W.
Bradv, Chairperson, Craig Bazzani, Donald A. Henss,
Carol Cottrell-Mootr)', Nan E. McGehee, Michele M.
Thompson.
University Committee on Financial Aid to Students. E.
Eugene Oliver, Chairperson, Richard K. Barksdale,
Thorn P. BrouTi, Harold Klehr. Larry Matejka, James A.
Nelson. William J. Otting, Jr., William A. Overholt,
William C. ^Vagner.
University Council on Graduate Education and Re-
search. Peter E. Yankwich, Chairperson, Dale R. Eisen-
mann. Paul A. Gaeng, Edwin L. Goldwasser, Robert J.
Maurer. \V. .\nn Reynolds, Jan Rocek, Charles Rhodes,
Judith Tomey.
University Council on International Education. Peter E.
Yankwich, Chairperson, George E. Brinegar, Robert L.
Hess, George E. Miller.
University Committee on Legislative Relations (State).
Ronald ^V. Brady, Chairperson, Samuel K. Gove, Vice-
Chairperson, R. Samuel Baker, Harlan D. Bareither,
James J. Costello, Robert N. Parker, William H. Rice.
University Council on Libraries. Hugh C. Atkinson,
Chairperson, Roger G. Clark, L. Rowell Huesmann,
Judith S. Liebman, Beverly P. Lynch, Irwin H. Pizer,
John P. Waterhouse.
University Nonacademic Employees Advisory Commit-
tee. Eugene T. Flynn, Chairperson, Marjorie M. Beasley,
Patricia Curtis, Josephine Dolciamore, Charles R. Hick-
man, Patrick T. Hughes, Barbara Monro, William
O'Donnell, John C. Radmaker, John A. Saldeen, Bemice
L. Wright.
University Patent Committee. Ronald W. Brady, Chair-
person, James J. Costello, Edwin L. Goldwasser, W. Ann
Re\Tiolds, Jan Rocek, Peter E. Yankwich.
Universit>' Planning Council. Ronald W. Brady, Chair-
person, Harlan D. Bareither, Secretary, Jonathan Amsel,
Werner H. Baur, David W. Bonham, William J. Grove,
Richard M. Johnson, Walter W. McMahon, Alexander
M. Schmidt, Richard H. Ward, Morton W. Weir, Don-
ald F. Wendel, Peter E. Yankwich.
University Press Board. Robert W. Johannsen, Chair-
person, Gloria G. Fromm, Edwin L. Goldwasser, ex
officio, Keneth Kinnamon. Irwin H. Pizer, W. Ann Rey-
nolds, ex officio, Jan Rocek, ex officio, Richard L. Went-
worth, ex officio, Norman E. Whitten, Jr.
LTniversity Professional Advisory Committee. Ronald W.
Brady, Chairperson, Julian Frankenberg, Thomas E.
Gamble, Gust Hermanson, Roger E. Martin, Patricia A.
Nelson, Richard H. Ward.
LTniversity Council on Public Service. Peter E. Yank-
wich, Chairperson, John B. Claar, Dennis A. Dahl, Sam-
uel K. Gove, Thomas M. Jenkins, Alexander M.
Schmidt, James E. Vermette, Thomas F. Zimmerman.
Advisory Committee to the Board of Trustees of the
University Retirement System of Illinois. Walter H.
Franke, Beverly T. Lehman, Howard A. Mcintosh, Lois
E. Owens, Arthur R. Robinson, William H. Ross, Wil-
liam W. Tongue, Wallace H. Wilson.
Risk Management Policy Committee. Joseph A. Diana,
Chairperson, James R. Gallivan, Secretary, Dean Bar-
ringer, James J. Costello, Robert N. Parker, Alexander
M.'Schmidt, Richard H. Ward, Donald F. Wendel.
Workmen's Compensation Subcommittee. Dean Bar-
ringer, Chairperson, James R. Gallivan, Secretary,
David W. Bonham, Arthur W. Catrambone, Marvin J.
Colbert, Warren H. Glockner, Marion D. Kinzie, Wil-
liam A. Mason, George F. McGregor, Harrison
Streeter.
Hospital and Medical Professional Liability Subcom-
mittee. Alexander M. Schmidt, Chairperson, James R.
Gallivan, Secretary, Truman Anderson, Clifford Gru-
lee, Jr., William J. Hart, Norman P. Jeddeloh, Allan
Levy, Vidvuds Medenis.
Nomnedical Professional and General Liability Sub-
committee. Timothy O. Madigan, Chairperson, James
R. Gallivan, Secretary, Raymond Borelli, L. Rea
Jones, Raymond S. Stephens.
University Committee on State-University Relations.
Samuel K. Gove, Chairperson, Samuel R. Aldrich, Jane
Rae Buckwalter, James R. Collier, Viron L. Diefenbach,
James P. Hartnett, Boyd R. Keenan, Ross J. Martin,
James T. McGill, W. Ann Reynolds, Peter E. Yankwich.
T~e,(^uT^o
GIFT t EXCHANGE DIVISION
^?0A LinKARY
CAMPUS
FACULTY
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
Tuition Policy Reconmiendation, Fiscal Year 1980
^e
No. 281, April 9, 1979
i-ie,
ar" (Octr"^'
TEXT OF LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 12, 1979, FROM PRESIDENT JOHN E. CORBALLY ADDRESSED TO ^EMBERS
OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
As you know, the Board of Higher Education (BHE)
has submitted budget recommendations to the governor
and the General Assembly which include a provision for
tuition increases for Fiscal Year 1980. While increased
tuition le\els may have been viewed as "necessary" with-
in the context of the BHE recommendations, the need
to secure tliese increases is now "absokitely essential"
given the governor's recent announcement regarding the
amount of general revenue funds he will supix)rt for
higher education within the executive budget.
Although the debate over tuition in past years has
been both comprehensive and objective, the recommen-
dations presented by the BHE for FY80 — which I
endorse — appear to require that some attention be
given to President Carter's call for voluntary coopera-
tion with wage and price guidelines established at the
close of calendar 1978. The price standards, which
would apply to goods and services, indicate that price
'ffAffy
Op
^fie:
increases during the "prog,<Mn year" (OctoberCj, 1978,
through September 30, 19^^^6^)^yjiot exceed the an-
nual rate of increase during cMMl^ar^J^acs 1976 and
1977 less a deescalation factor of one-naII&/Q5!rQ/ipercent.
Under the working guidelines issued by the Council on
Wage and Price Stability (COWPS), the weighted aver-
age increase for all related price increases should not
exceed 9.5 percent.
It is important to note that, while consideration may
be given to the spirit of the president's program, any
tuition increase adopted by the board at this time will
become effective for periods not substantially included in
the president's program year (again, the expiration date
is September 30, 1979). Nonetheless, I have prepared
the following table for your information which displays
a comparison between tuition increases recommended
by the BHE and maximum levels theoretically allowed
by the COWPS formula:
Current Annual
BHE Proposed
Total FY80
% Increase
COWPS
Rate
Increase
Rate
BHE Proposal
8.2%
Formula
Undergraduate
$ 585
$48
$ 633
8.2% ($ 48)
Graduate/Law
615
64
679
10.4
9.5% ($ 55)
Vet. Medicine
804
56
860
7.0
9.5% ($ 76)
Dentistry
969
68
1,035
7.0
9.5% ($ 92)
Medicine
1,344
94
1,438
7.0
9.5% ($128)
The data on the table reveal that, with the exception
of rates proposed for graduate and law students, indi-
vidual price levels are at or below the percentage maxi-
mum which derive from the COWP.S formula. However,
because the BHE-proposed levels for veterinary medi-
cine, dentistry, and medicine are below the allowable
ma.>dmums, the overall weighted average increase for
all students is well within the president's guidelines. As
for graduate student charges, one additional fact is
worth noting — a substantial percentage (about 65 per-
cent) of graduate student-assessed tuition is waived,
thereby reducing the net tuition level for graduate stu-
dents as a group below the theoretical maximum.
As I have indicated in the past, real qualitative
gro\Nth at the University of Illinois depends on our
ability to at least keep pace with inflation. With infla-
tion for fiscal year 1 980 expected to range between 7 and
10 percent, I am persuaded that the rate increases pro-
posed by the BHE are both realistic and necessary.
I might add that, although the campuses have not yet
presented recommendations regarding increases for such
items as housing and student service fees, I am reason-
ably certain that, in the aggregate, these increases will
relate closely to the levels allowed by the COWPS
formula.
I therefore recommend that the Board of Trustees
approve the tuition increase indicated above and I will
present a formal agenda item at the regular meeting of
the board in March.
Board of Trustees Action on Building Designs
On Tuesday and Wednesday, Febmary 20 and 21,
1979, recommendations requesting approval of four
building designs were presented to the Buildings and
Grounds Committee of the Board of Trustees. The
buildings were as follows :
U rhana-Champaign Campus
Veterinary Medicine Beisic Science Building
Agricultural Engineering Sciences Building
Chicago Circle Campus
Pavilion
Medical Center Campus
Chicago mini Union Addition and Recreation Facility
/. Veterinary Medicine Basic Science Building,
Urhana-Champaign
The Veterinary Medicine Basic Science Building will
be located south of St. Mary's Road and west of Lincoln
Avenue in Urbana at the site of the existing Veterinary
Medicine complex. The project, which is being designed
by Lester B. Knight and Associates of Chicago, will con-
tain approximately 252,000 gross square feet of floor
space (157,600 net assignable square feet). The design
consists of a three-story research wing which houses diag-
nostic laboratories, Research Animal Quarters, the De-
partment of Veterinary Pathology and Hygiene, the
Department of Veterinary Bioscience, and the college
administrative offices, a two-story wing which houses the
teaching areas, the Office of Continuing Education and
Public Service, the Audiovisual Aids department, the
Student Services area, and the Learning Resources and
Library. The two wings are connected by two bridges at
the second-floor level. The building is to be constructed
with a precast concrete exterior to relate to the existing
concrete structures in the complex. When it is com-
pleted, it will accommodate 208 professional veterinary
medicine basic science students, 96 graduate students,
and 100 staff members. It will also allow the College of
Veterinary Medicine to increase its entering class size
from 70 to 104 professional students. The building is
scheduled for occupancy in the fall of 1981. (The project
which has a total budget of $21,927,800 is being financed
by the Illinois Capital Development Board.)
2. Agricultural Engineering Sciences Building, Urbana-
Champaign
The Eightieth General Assembly appropriated capital
development bond funds in the amount of $7,952,900 for
construction of an approximately 104,000-gross-square-
feet (60,500-net-assignable-square-feet) facility which
will house the Departments of Agricultural Engineering,
Forestry, and Food Science. The new building will per-
mit the relocation of the Department of Agricultural
Engineering, the Wood Science program of the Depart-
ment of Forestry, and much of the Food Engineering
program of the Department of Food Science. All of these
programs are currently located in poor-quality tempo-
rary space which cannot meet their growing needs. The
consolidation of these three programs into a new facility
is essential to the research and teaching responsibilities of
the department.
Located near the Stock Pavilion and existing Agri-
cultural Engineering Building, the building is the first
element of a contemplated south campus expansion of
the College of Agriculture. The site selected for the
building resulted in a linear design. The project will
form the east edge of a new south quadrangle.
The building is organized in three separate but linked
elements to express the functional autonomy of three
major departments: Agricultural Engineering, Forestry,
and Food Science. Pedestrian circulation occurs through
a central corridor paralleling an open three-story me-
chanical gallery which forms a skylighted enclosed street.
The exterior of the building blends a brick facade with
the continuous glsiss skylights visible on the east side of
the building. The architects for the project are C. F.
Murphy Associates, Chicago. It is anticipated tliat bids
will be received in the early fall of 1979 and construction
will be completed in order for the building to be occu-
pied in the fall of 1981.
3. The Pavilion, Chicago Circle ($7,500,000)
The PaviHon at the Chicago Circle campus is to be
located on the campus at the northeast comer of Harri-
son and Racine (adjacent to the Eisenhower Express-
way) and has been designed by the architectural firm of
Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, Chicago. The facility
will become the home of a wide variety of athletic and
entertainment events and will serve students, faculty,
and the community.
Hockey, ice skating, basketball and volleyball, tennis,
wrestling, and gymnastic competition and events are
among activities planned. The facility will also be used
for Chicago Circle and Medical Center convocations,
lectures, entertainment (concerts, star performances,
circuses, etc.) and for conventions, conferences, shows,
and expositions.
The 100,000-square-foot Pavilion will seat between
7,000 and 12,000 spectators depending on the main
event. Construction will begin in mid- 1979 and the struc-
ture is expected to be completed by early 1981. It will be
accessible on all sides (Chicago Transit Authority ser-
vice, the campus, and the community), and three Uni-
versity parking lots with nearly 2,700 spaces will be avail-
able to patrons.
The innovative design for the Pavilion has been
adapted for performance use as well as for sports events
by the internal configuration of its seating arrangements,
public concourses, and circulation areas. Its exterior will
be compatible with the architectural environment of the
Chicago Circle campus.
The project is being financed by University of Illinois
Auxiliary Facilities Sy-stem Revenue Bonds, Series N,
which will be retired by income from the scheduled
^^ events.
4. Chicago Illini Union Addition and Recreation
Facility, Medical Center
^^k The Chicago Illini Union Addition and Recreation
^^ Facility is currently being planned for the Medical Center
campus of the University of Illinois. The new building
will provide space for recreation and exercise programs,
conferences, continuing education functions, campus
organization offices, and a variety of campus activities.
Included in the facility will be a multipurpose gym-
nasium \\ith a suspended jogging track, racquetball
courts, a sLx-lane 25-meter swimming pool, 350-seat
auditorium, crafts center, exercise rooms, and support
offices and facilities. The new facility will be constructed
to the west of the e.xisting Chicago Illini Union, joining
it at the second floor and lower level. The addition will
also join the new Single Student Residence on the north.
The new residence, to house 632 students, is currently
under construction.
A lower-level courtyard will be developed between
these buildings and the other residence halls on the block.
The courtyard will encourage convenient access and will
feature both informal and planned activities such as
noon-time concerts and crafts demonstrations. It will be
designed as a green space with room for group activities,
but also more private individually pleasant areas as relief
from the surrounding high-impact urban area. The build-
ing's design will relate its materials and form to the ex-
isting structure.
The 59,700 square foot Chicago Illini Union Addi-
tion and Recreation Facility is being designed by the
architectural firm of Loebl, Schlossman and Hackl, Chi-
cago. The project cost is $5,055,500. Construction is
planned to begin in October 1979, with completion in
April 1981. The project is being financed by University
of Illinois Auxiliary Facilities System Revenue Bonds,
Series N, which wall be retired from student fees.
Board Amends Shareholder Policy
RESOLUTION APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES,
MARCH 21, 1979
^VHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the University of
Illinois and the Finance Committee of the Board have
studied in depth questions relating to investments held
by the Universit)' and shareholder responsibility for
certain of its investments; and
\Vhereas, the Finance Committee previously held
hearings in Urbana and Chicago, following which the
committee recommended and the board adopted on
September 21, 1977. amended procedures involving
shareholder responsibility and specifically involving in-
vestments in companies doing business in South Africa;
and
AVhereas, the Finance Committee has subsequently
received substantial additional information from inter-
ested persons and groups, has held hearings in Urbana
on November 16, 1978, and has been provided with re-
ports from the Investor Responsibility Research Center,
Inc., as well as copies of recent statements from other
universities; and
• Where.\s, the official policy of apartheid in the
Union of South Africa has virtually excluded from the
poUtical process all blacks, colored, and Asians (groups
which compose approximately 83 percent of the pKjpula-
• tion) ; and
Whereas, educational, religious, and civil rights
groups in the United States have increasingly opposed
Corjxjrate involvement in South Africa by U.S. com-
panies; and,
Whereas, such corporations are faced with a variety
of imposing, although not necessarily convincing argu-
ments for either continuing to do business in South
Africa and by that presence to help to effect constructive
change, or to withdraw, and the decision to either re-
main or withdraw is not susceptible of a clear-cut
solution; and,
Whereas, the Finance Committee, in its continuing
efforts to recommend a responsible policy as a share-
holder, remains convinced that the question of with-
drawal by U.S. corporations is not a simple one and that
responsible minority voices in the United States and in
South Africa have spoken against withdrawal; and
Whereas, the Board of Trustees of the University of
Illinois opposes racial injustice and that such injustice
and oppression of human rights exists in South Africa.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Finance Com-
mittee recommends to the Board of Trustees that the
current policy of the board be amended as follows:
A. Shareholder Petitions
The University of Illinois will support shareholder
petitions for withdrawal of a company in which the Uni-
versity of Illinois has investments from South Africa in
the following instances :
1. The company will not adopt principles, such as the
Sullivan Principles, whose objective is to provide im-
proved opportunities and employment practices for
nonwhites.
2. The company refuses to demonstrate within a reason-
able p)eriod of time its determination to initiate pro-
gressive employment practices.
3. The company fails to implement efTectively such
practices.
4. The company's continued presence in South Africa
does more to strengthen the apartheid regime than to
contribute to the welfare of the nonwhites.
B. Stock Divestiture
Because of our belief that the University can more
effectively influence company policy by correspondence,
shareholder resolutions, and public statements than by
divestiture, the divestiture of stock in companies doing
business in Africa would be appropriate only under very
limited circumstances.
However, when jjersistent efforts to persuade a com-
pany to abandon unethical practices have proved in-
effective and the outlook for future success seems hope-
less, divestiture may be justified as a last resort.
Accordingly, the University vnll consider divestiture
if the following conditions are obtained :
1. The company has failed substantially to conduct its
business in a manner consistent with the policy estab-
lished by the Board of Trustees.
2. The company has failed to amend its policies in spite
of our persistent efforts to persuade the company to
conform with the policies as established by the Board
of Trustees.
3. The company clearly indicates that it will not amend
its position and policy to conform with the jx)licy as
enunciated by the Board of Trustees.
C. Bank Investments
The University will apply the same stockholder and
divestiture policy for banks doing business in South
Africa (see A 1-4, B 1-3).
D. Implementation of University Policy
To carry out the jxylicy outlined in this statement,
the University will take the following steps :
1. We will inform the managements of p)ortfolio com-
panies of our policy as set forth in this statement.
2. We will support shareholder resolutions which are
consistent with this policy and support monitoring of
the follow-up and implementation of the Sullivan
principles.
The University recognizes that this policy formula-
tion should be reexamined from time to time, in light
of changing events in South Africa.
JVote
There are an increasing number of examples where
members of the faculty and staff are exercising their legal
rights as citizens but are doing so on University sta-
tionary.
I am fully supportive of each of us exercising our
rights as citizens but hope that we wUl do so at personal
expense rather than at University expense.
John E. Corbally
President
I
top. 5-
FACULTY LETTER
FROM THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT • UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
No. 282, April 24, 1979
1979-80 Tuition and Fee Increases Approved by the Board of Trustees
At its March 21 meeting, the Board of Trustees ap-
proved tuition increases for students at the University of
Illinois effective fall 1979, as recommended by President
Corbally.
The approved tuition increases are the same as those
recommended by the Illinois Board of Higher Education,
which also recommended sufficient increases in Illinois
State Scliolarship Commission Awards to offset the im-
pact of the tuition increase uf)on financially needy under-
graduate students.
The annual tuition rates, current and as approved
by the board for 1979-80, for full-time residents and
nonresidents are shown below. The new annual rates for
full-time resident students reflect a $48 increase in under-
graduate tuition, a $64 increase in graduate tuition, and
an approximately 7 percent increase in tuition for medi-
cal, dental, and veterinary medical students. These rates
are in accordance with the president's price guidelines.
The annual increases for full-time nonresident students
are at the level of three times the resident student in-
crease. New rates for summer terms, reduced loads, and
extension courses will be calculated in relation to the
full-time resident and nonresident rates.
ANNUAL TUITION RATES'
Urbana
Resident
-Champaign
Nonresident
Chicago Circle
Resident Nonresident
Medical Center
Resident Nonresident
Undergraduate
1978-79
1979-80
$ 386
634
$1,758
1.902
$585
633
$1,755
1.899
$585
633
$1,755
1,899
Graduate (includi
1978-79
1979-80
[ng
Law)
616
680
1.848
2,040
615
678
1,845
2,034
615
678
1,845
2,034
Medicine
1978-79
1979-80
1,344
1,440
4,032
4,320
1,344
1,440
4,032
4,320
Dentistry
1978-79
1979-80
969
1,035
2,907
3,105
Veterinary Medicine
1978-79
1979-80
804
860
2,412
2,580
' Breakdown of tuition rates by terms and ranges will be calculated according to past practices in relation to full-
time resident and nonresident rates.
The Board of Trustees also approved fall 1979 in-
creases in the student service fee and selected health fees,
as recommended by the chancellors at each of the cam-
puses.
Semester/quarter fee levels, current and as approved
by the board for 1979-80, for full-time students are
shown below.
/iUG 18,979
Uni
«S2«!£
<£».
Urbana-
1978-79
■Ch:
:inipaia;n
1979-'80
Chicago
1978-79
Circle
1979-80
Student
service fee
$ 79
$ 82
$57
$63
Health service
fee UC, MC
Pharmacy fee CC
33
$112
40
$122
3
$60
2
$65
Fee increases will be covered by the Illinois State
Scholarship Commission for undergraduate students with
financial need who hold full-value Illinois State Scholar-
Medical Center
1978-79 1979-80
$ 87
20
$107
$ 94
22
$116
ship Commission awards.
Health insurance fee increases will be considered by
the Board of Trustees at the meeting in April.
University Term Life Pro^^ram Offers Additional Coverage
PLAN PROVISIONS
The University Life Insurance Program is soecificallv
designed for all permanent and continuous faculty and
staff who are employed or on an appointment of at least
50 percent time. The program provides faculty or staff
the opportunity to purchase term life insurance coverage
through a payroll deduction for themselves, spouses,
and/or children for a reasonable cost. The plan is
basically a three-year renewable convertable term in-
surance plan that allows the faculty or staff member to
continue term coverage until age seventy, and also pro-
vides portability of the term coverage in case of resigna-
tion or retirement.
INCREASE IN BENEFIT AMOUNTS
Employee Life Benefit:
A faculty or staff member may, during his or her first
thirty days of employment, or through an open en-
rollment period, choose to purchase $5,000 or $10,000
of life insurance with guaranteed acceptance, and
the right to increase coverage a like amount each
year until a maximum amount of $60,000 is reached.
At any time, faculty or staff members may elect to
receive coverage with evidence of insurability. In the
past faculty and staff could receive up to $100,000 of
coverage. Now the new provisions allow the partici-
pant to acquire as much as $150,000 of term life
insurance.
Spouse Optional Life Benefit:
In the past a faculty or staff member could insure
his or her spouse for up to a maximum of $10,000;
however, now the spouse may be insured subject to
evidence of insurability up to $20,000.
Dependent Child(ren) Life Benefit:
Prior to these recent improvements, faculty or staff
members could only elect to insure their children for
$2,500, but now thev can be insured for $5,000. If the
coverage is requested within thirty days of employ-
ment or during an open enrollment period no evi-
dence is required.
BROCHURE, DETAILS, COUNSELORS
The University designed this program to be respon-
sive to the changing needs of faculty and staff. 0\er the
years there have been a number of improvements in the
University Supplemental Term Life Insurance Program
which has proven to be an important benefit program
and responsive to the increased needs of the faculty and
staff. Additional information is available at your Bene-
fits Center:
Urbana-Champaign
127 Administration Building
333-3111
Chicago Circle
1225 University Hall
996-2870
Medical Center
179 Pharmacy
996-6470
State Offers Deferred Compensation Program
Faculty and staff have been eligible to participate in
the University's Tax-Sheltered Annuity Program, In-
ternal Revenue Code 403 (b), for many years. A Tax-
Sheltered Annuity proWdes the faculty or staff member
with a tax-favored means of setting aside savings for re-
tirement through a salary reduction out of current earn-
ings. Although these savings are intended for retirement
purposes — and the greatest advantages are obtained
from using them for this purf)Ose — they are available
for emergency use or during a fjeriod of a lower annual
income such that could occur during certain types of
leave.
The University's Tax-Sheltered Annuity Program,
Internal Revenue Code 403 (b) , is not available by law
to most other state agencies. In order to accommodate
those other state employees, the state has developed a
Deferred Compensation Plan, Internal Revenue Code
457; however, this plan does not have many of the de-
sired features available under the Tax-Deferred Annuity
Program due to the state's Deferred Com[)ensation Plan
being covered under a different law.
Since the state has made this program available to
all state employees, an announcement of the open en-
rollment period is being made at this time. Employees
may enroll in the Deferred Compensation Program until
May 10, 1979, and will again have an opportunity dur-
ing the fall. For those faculty or staff interested in either
the Ta.x-Deferred Annuity Program or the State De-
ferred Compensation Program, comparison material will
be provided by calling your campus Benefits Center:
Chicago Circle, 996-2870; Medical Center. 996-6470;
Urbana-Champaign, 333-3111.
Report of Gifts, Grants, and Contracts 1971-78
The Uni\ersity continues to receive substantial sup-
port through private and corporate gifts and grants and
federal and state agency grants and contracts. Of the
University's total revenues of $527 million for FY 1978,
over $113 million (21 percent) came from gifts, grants,
and contracts.
Private and corporate gifts and grants in FY 1978
were up from $20.6 million to $23.9 million, an increase
of 16 percent. Many of these gifts, $5.8 million, for use
by the University, came through the University of Illi-
nois Foundation.
Federal agency grants and contracts amounted to $81
million at all campuses, up from $74 million in FY 1977.
The principal source continues to be \arious units of the
Department of Health. Education, and Welfare. The
National Science Foundation and the Department of
Energy also provided major support for many Univer-
sity projects.
The University works cooperatively with State of
Illinois agencies and entered into agreements of over $8
million with thirty fi\e state government units in FY
1978 to further mutually desirable projects for our state.
The following is a comparative summary of the gifts,
grants, and contracts for the past two fiscal years:
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF GIFTS, GRANTS, AND CONTRACTS
FOR FISCAL YEARS 1977 AND 1978
1977 1978
From private gifts, grants, and
contracts:
Chicago Circle $ 1,474,948
Medical Center 4.584,938
Urbana-Champaign 1 2,965,2 1 2
General University units.... 430,964
University of Illinois
Foundation 4,260,059
2,144,596
3.824,848
16.081,885
379,425
5,841,991
23,716,121 28,272,745
Less gifts transferred from the
University of Illinois Foun-
dation to all campuses . . .
Total private gifts,
grants, and contracts.
'rom United States Government
grants and contracts:
Chicago Circle
(3.031,856)
20,684,265
5.254,388
17,318,439
51.237,192
310,137
74,120,156
506,440
681,024
4,225,567
531,362
5,944,393
$100,748,814
(4,324,209;
23,948.536
6,278.955
20,598,905
53,457,111
671,383
81,006,354
546,956
Urbana-Champaign
General University units....
Total United States Govern
ment grants and
rom State of Illinois grants
and contracts:
730,458
6,533,717
249,808
8,060,939
$113,015,829
Urbana-Champaign
General University units. . . .
Total State of Illinois
grants and contracts. . . .
Grand total
COMPARATIVE SUMMARY OF GIFTS, GRANTS, AND CONTRACTS
BY LOCATION FOR FISCAL YEARS 1977 AND 1978
1977 1978
Chicago Circle $ 7,235,776
Medical Center 22,584,401
Urbana-Champaign 68,427,97 1
General University units 1,272,463
University of Illinois Foundation. 4,260,059
103,780,670
Less gifts transferred from the
University of Illinois Foundation
included above
Chicago Circle (177,307)
Medical Center ( 1,040,065)
Urbana-Champaign ( 1,788,130)
General University units (26,354)
Grand total $100,748,814
(334,381)
(1,126,058)
(2,860,479)
(3,291)
M13,015,829
I
Op. 2-
^IFT L FXCHA'viGt DiVIblJN
No. 283, August 9, 1979
StateTTient by President John E. Co? bally
JULY 20, 1979
In many ways I feel that I have spent the last two
months making "farewell addresses" and I do not want
to burden you with a lengthy addition to that series. I
do, howe\-er, want to report that I am fully aware that
as a sort of symbol of a university, a president's image
is dependent in many ways upon the quality and upon
the effort of the facultv' and staff of the University. By
that statement I do not mean to imply either that a
president is unnecessary or that the presidential role is
an easy one, but I do want to recognize that the many
generous comments which have been made about my
service as president are comments which apply to our
contributions to the excellence of this University rather
than merely to my contributions. It has been an honor
and a privilege to represent you and the University of
Illinois in the many arenas in which such representation
takes place. I am pleased that so many of you have taken
the time to indicate to me that you have felt well repre-
sented at least most of the time.
I look forward to my new role in the University of
Illinois and to continuing opportunities to work with
many of you. Thank you for your support, your encour-
agement, and your friendship. I have told Dr. Ikenberry
that he can count on you as friends, as constructive critics,
as supporters, and, most importantly, as colleagues in a
great undertaking.
Board of Trustees Adopts Mandatory Retirement Policy, July 18, 1979
TEXT OF BOARD AGENDA ITEM
Amendments to the Federal .'^ge Discrimination in
Emplo)Tnent Act have e.xpanded coverage of that act to
include workers in state governments. The amendments
further supersede the provisions of any public or private
pension plan which require retirement before age seventy,
effective January- 1, 1979, for nontenured employees with
the exception of certain administrators; and July 1, 1982,
for tenured faculty members.
House Bill 594, now awaiting action by the governor,
amends the article of the State Pension Code dealing
with the Illinois State Universities Retirement System,
effective July 1, 1979, to remove the requirement that
participants in the system must retire by September 1
following the employee's sixty-eighth birthday. This latter
requirement is presently referred to in Article III, Sec-
tion 4(b) of the University of Illinois's General Rules
Concerning University Organization and Procedure.
In \\ew of these changes in federal and state law, and
to provide a University policy on this matter, I recom-
mend that effective immediately each University em-
ployee be required to retire no later than September 1
immediately following his or her seventieth birthday as
set forth in the following proposed amendment to Article
III, Section 4 of the General Rules, the adoption of which
is recommended.
In accordance with the Preamble of the University of
Illinois Statutes, I have consulted with the University
Senates Conference.
Article III, Section 4. Retirement, Death, Survivor, and Disability
Benefits'
[(a) General.] University policy provides for the pay-
ment of salary in case of illness or other disability for
specified periods as described below. In addition to the
benefits provided by the University, a system of retire-
ment, death, suivivor, and disability benefits is estab-
lished by law creating the State Universities Retirement
System of Illinois, a state agency separate and distinct
from the University of Illinois.
(a) Retirement Age. Each employee of the University
must retire no later than September 1 immediately fol-
lowing his or her seventieth birthday; however, in
exceptional cases and for substantial cause, retirement
may be deferred upon written request of the employee,
approved by the Chancellor, when appropriate, and the
President, for a period not to exceed one year at any
one time.
(b) Participation in State Universities Retirement
System. A deduction is made from the salaries or wages
1 Deletions are in brackets; Sec. 4 (a) is new.
of all employees who are participants in the retirement
system, as defined by law. [Under State Universities
Retirement System policy a participant must retire by
September 1 following his or her sixty-eighth birthday;
however, in exceptional cases and for substantial cause,
retirement may be deferred by the employer for a period
not to exceed one year at any one time.]
Amendments to University of Illinois Statutes, Adopted July 18, 1979
TEXT OF BOARD AGENDA ITEM
The Senates of the three campuses have considered
a variety of amendments to the Statutes over the past
academic year.
The University Senates Conference has coordinated
the various versions of these amendments and has now
forwarded the attached texts which represent agreement
among the Senates and the University Senates Confer-
ence.
I recommend approval of the proposed amendments.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS'
Article II, Section 2a
Sec. 2. University Senates Conference
a. Organization. Each Senate shall elect from its mem-
bership six persons who shall be members of the Univer-
sity Senates Conference. Any faculty member or member-
elect of a Senate shall be eligible for election to the
Conference, except that no member shall serve more than
two terms consecutively. The term of office shall be three
years; one-third of the members from each Senate shall
be elected annually. . . .
Article II, Section 3
Sec. 3. Faculty Advisory Committee
Any member of the Faculty Advisory Committee elec-
torate shall be eligible for membership on the committee
except those who hold an administrative appointment.
Any eligible person may be nominated as a Committee
member by a petition signed by three members of the
electorate and filed with the Clerk or Secretary of the
Senate [prior to April 1]. The deadline for filing shall be
set by each campus Senate. The Clerk or Secretary of
the Senate shall conduct the election by University mail
as soon as possible thereafter. . . .
Article XII, Sections 1, 2, 3, and 4
Sec. 1. Sponsored Research, Gifts, and Grants
a. It is the policy of the University to encourage re-
search on the part of all persons and groups within the
several faculties. Such encouragement includes the en-
dorsement and support of acceptable proposals for out-
side contracts or grants.
b. Such outside support must be integrated with the
regular educational and research functions of the Uni-
versity. The acceptance of contracts or grants involves
substantial indirect costs, Physical Plant operating costs,
and the use of departmental, college, and general Uni-
^ New material is italicized or underscored; deleted material
is in brackets.
versity facilities. Funds to meet these indirect costs must
be provided either by the sponsors or by tax funds. In
the latter case, because such activities come into direct
competition for funds with other interests within the
University, careful consideration shall be given the ac-
ceptance of such contracts.
[c. Rules governing the acceptance of contracts for
research, of gifts, and of grants, are contained in the
"General Rules Concerning University Organization and
Procedure."]
Sec. 2. Patents on Inventions
[The principle is recognized that the results of experi-
inental work carried on by or under the direction of the
members of the staff of the University,] The results of
research or development carried on at the University by
any of its faculty, employees, students, or other users of
its facilities and having the expenses thereof paid from
University funds or from funds under the control of the
University, belong to the University and [should be] are
to be used and controlled in ways to produce the greatest
benefit to the University and to the public.
[.Any member of the staff of the University who has
made an invention as the direct result of his regular
duties on University time and at University expense,]
An inventor whose discovery or invention is subject to the
conditions of the previous paragraph is required to dis-
close the discovery or invention to the University and
may be required to patent the discovery or invention,
and to assign the patent to the University, the expenses
connected therewith to be borne by the University.
[The above shall not be construed to include] This
section shall not apply to questions of ownership [in copy-
rights on books, or] of inventions made by members of
the staff outside of their regular duties, and [at their own
expense] without the use of University funds or funds
under the control of the University, and without the use
of University facilities.
[The rules and regulations regarding patents and the
procedures to be followed are contained in the General
Rules Concerning University Organization and Proce-
dure.]
Sec. 3. Scientific and Scholarly Publications
and Creative Work
It is the policy of the University to foster the publica-
tion of scientific and scholarly periodicals which are
edited, published, and subsidized by the University. It
is further the policy of the University that authors and
artists who are members of the academic ranks recog-
nized in Article IX, Section 3, may copyright their
works except works specifically commissioned by the
University in writing and works prepared under terms
of a University grant or contract which provides other-
wise. [Rules governing the sponsoring of such periodicals,
and copyrights and recordings, are contained in The
General Rules Concerning University Organization and
Procedure.]
Sec. 4. Rules About Research, Patents, and Publications
"The General Rules Concerning University Organiza-
tion and Procedure" shall contain rules and regulations
governing patents, copyrightable works, recordings, spon-
sored periodicals, and the acceptance of contracts, gifts,
and grants for research, and the procedures to be fol-
lowed.
Proposed changes in these General Rules related to
patents, copyrightable works, or recordings shall be sent
to the University Senates Conference which shall move
as expeditiously as practicable and, if necessary, reconcile
the views of the several Senates and advise the President
and, through the President, the Board of Trustees before
such a ride change is adopted.
Article IX, Section 7
No person shall be admitted to candidacy for an ad-
vanced degree [on] in a [campus] department or division
of the University [if he] wlio holds an appointment as
professor, associate professor, or assistant professor in
[any] that department or division, [of that campus of the
University. Any] Likewise, no person while engaged in
graduate study [who accepts an appointment with] shall
be appointed to the rank of assistant professor or higher
[at a campus of the University will be dropped as a de-
gree candidate at that campus of the University.] in the
department or division of that graduate study.
A person in or accepting the rank of assistant profes-
sor or higher on a campus of the University may continue
in or be admitted to advanced degree candidacy in a
department or unit other than that of his or her appoint-
ment upon the special approval of the executive officer
of each department or unit involved and the Executive
Committee of the Graduate College.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11