Every college and university experiences some form of financial hardship at one time or another.
Program closures on the scale we have recently witnessed represent a massive transfer of power from the faculty to the administration over curricular matters that affect the educational missions of institutions, for which the faculty should always bear the primary responsibility.
In most cases the decisions to close programs are made unilaterally and are driven by criteria that are not essentially educational in nature; they are therefore not only procedurally but also substantively illegitimate. Increasingly, administrators are making budgetary decisions that profoundly affect the curricula and the educational missions of their institutions; rarely are those decisions recognized as decisions about the curriculum, even though the elimination of entire programs of study ostensibly for financial reasons has obvious implications for the curricular range and the academic integrity of any Financial exigency in universities essay.
This report responds to this state of affairs in two ways: Regulation 4c pertains to financial exigency, and Regulation 4d concerns program discontinuance based on educational considerations.
First, as to governance and consultation, this report insists that faculty members must be involved in consultation and deliberation at every stage of the process, beginning with a determination that a state of financial exigency exists.
We offer specific recommendations for such faculty involvement: Faculty bodies participating in the process may be drawn from the faculty senate or elected as ad hoc committees by the faculty; they should not be appointed by the administration.
The faculty should have access to, at minimum, five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cashflow estimates for future years. In order to make informed proposals about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty needs access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.
Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of financial exigency should be informed in writing that it is being so considered and given at least thirty days in which to respond. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members should be involved.
As set forth in the introduction, our new definition names a condition that is less dramatic than that in which the very existence of the institution is immediately in jeopardy but is vastly more serious and threatening to the academic integrity of the institution than ordinary short- and long-term attrition in operating budgets.
In proposing this new definition, however, we insist that financial exigency is not a plausible complaint from a campus that has shifted resources from its primary missions of teaching and research toward the employment of increasing numbers of administrators or toward unnecessary capital expenditures.
The AAUP has long acknowledged that a college or university can discontinue a program of instruction, but our standard has been that if the discontinuation is not undertaken for financial reasons, it must be shown to enhance the educational mission of the institution as a whole; we have long acknowledged that programs can be cut in times of financial exigency, but only if an appropriate faculty body is involved in the decision-making process, beginning with the determination of whether an institution is experiencing bona fide financial exigency.
But by and large, the program closings of recent years do not meet any of these standards. They represent a violation of the principles on which American higher education should operate and must be contested by a vigorous, principled, and informed faculty.The desirable thing to do about financial exigency and governance issues is for colleges and universities, through joint action by the faculty, administration, and governing board, to ensure that sound standards and procedures exist to deal with budgetary problems in good times and bad, and to ensure that what is applied in actual practice.
For a comprehensive analysis of the financial exigency provision in the RIR, see Ralph S. Brown, Jr., "Financial Exigency," Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors 62 (), Mar 07, · Still, if more universities declare financial exigency in the coming years to cut payroll costs, "the competitive risks to reputation would likely lessen over time," the report said.
Advertisement Author: Audrey Williams June. A financial exigency is defined as a situation when the general College financial resources may necessitate a reduction in College personnel. Pr It is the responsibility of the President of the College to determine whether a financial exigency exists and in such case, the situation will be reviewed with College personnel with opportunities for comment and discussion.
Southern University Financial Exigency in Universities Financial Exigency is a state of financial crisis, commonly a judicially accepted condition permitting an educational institution to terminate programs and eliminate staff positions, including those of tenured faculty.
Every college and university experiences some form of financial hardship at one time or another. Financial Exigency in Universities At the very least, an institution’s financial faculties can lead to the reallocation Of resources; at the worst, they can threaten the institution’s existence.
Faculty travel budgets and money for new faculty appointments are often early casualties.