Statistical Analysis of Library Budgets, to be presented for the ARL Survey Coordinators and SPEC Liaisons Meeting, host...

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Statistical Analysis of Library Budgets, to be presented for the ARL Survey Coordinators and SPEC Liaisons Meeting, hosted by ARL Statistics & Assessment Center, at the 2014 ALA Midwinter Meeting
Physical Description:
Presentation Slides
Language:
English
Creator:
Keith, Brian W.
Publisher:
ALA Midwinter Meeting
Place of Publication:
Philadelphia, PA
Publication Date:

Subjects

Genre:
Spatial Coverage:

Notes

Abstract:
Statistical Analysis of Library Budgets, to be presented for the ARL Survey Coordinators and SPEC Liaisons Meeting, hosted by ARL Statistics & Assessment Center, at the 2014 ALA Midwinter Meeting
General Note:
This presentation featured on the ARL website on March 6, 2014, with the news: “Helping ARL member library staff understand their libraries’ budgets and make the case for their libraries is an important function of the data ARL collects. Brian Keith, associate dean for administrative services and faculty affairs at the University of Florida, demonstrated this in his presentation, “Statistical Analysis of Library Budgets” (PDF), at the ARL Survey Coordinators and SPEC Liaisons Meeting on January 24 in Philadelphia. Keith’s analysis takes place in the context of implementing a responsibility center management (RCM) budget model at Florida but investigates the broader concepts of how academic library system resources and the institutional demands of universities relate to one another. His work employs different analytical approaches to a variety of measures for library resources and university characteristics influencing the demand for materials and services, and has found statistically valid predictive relationships and correlations. His presentation reflects Florida’s efforts to address funding issues during a shift in university budget models.” (http://www.arl.org/news/arl-news/3162-using-arl-statistics-in-budget-justification-analysis-an-example-from-u-florida)

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
System ID:
AA00019455:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Statistical Analysis of Library Budgets Brian W. Keith ARL Survey Coordinators and SPEC Liaisons Meeting 2014 ALA Midwinter Meeting 1

PAGE 2

Slides available at http ://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00019455 2

PAGE 3

Background In 2011, the University of Florida (UF) adopted RCM budgeting and financial management. The UF libraries entered RCM chronically under funded and facing escalating materials costs. RCM was implemented at UF at a time of severe budget reductions, including steep cuts in state appropriations. 3

PAGE 4

4 $0 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $6,000,000 $8,000,000 $10,000,000 $12,000,000 $14,000,000 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 RCM Budget Review for the George A. Smathers Libraries Gap In Expenditures for Materials Add'l $ from HSC for HSCL Carry Forward Reallocated Salary $ Appropriation for Materials DSR $ to Maintain Content

PAGE 5

5 $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,500,000 $3,000,000 09-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 RCM Budget Review for the George A. Smathers Libraries Carry Forward Generation and Use Annual Carry Forward Balance Materials Expenditure Operating Expenditure Required Reserve ($766,288)

PAGE 6

Background In this environment, the UF libraries had to develop effective methods for communicating its budget circumstances and what appropriate funding levels students and researchers 6

PAGE 7

Approach The UF libraries have engaged in an ongoing analysis of how the resources of the libraries and the demands of the university compare to peer institutions using data from Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and ARL Statistics. 7

PAGE 8

Findings There is a considerable and statistically significant gap between the scale of UF programs and populations, and the resources of the library system that is not explained simply by the size of the large institution, but truly reflects a funding issue. 8

PAGE 9

PEER ANALYSIS 2010 Compared UF to 8 Public AAU Universities All with 4 or more Health C olleges All with a College of Law All with U.S. News Ranking a bove 30 All members of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) 4 are l and g rant u niversities 9

PAGE 10

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 Peer Universities University of Michigan (#4) University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (#5) University of Wisconsin, Madison (#9) University of Washington (#11) University of Florida (#15) Ohio State University (#18) University of Pittsburgh (#20) University of Minnesota (#22) Michigan State University (#29) 10

PAGE 11

PEER ANALYSIS ARL data for 7 factors that report library RESOURCES for materials and staff (2008) NCES data for 7 university factors that correlate with DEMAND for library resources & services (2008) 11

PAGE 12

12 LIBRARIES Avg. Excluding UF UF as % of Non UF Avg. EXPENDITURES Library Materials Expenditures $14,820,857 84% Total Library Expenditures $39,116,382 73% PERSONNEL SALARIES Salaries & Wages Professional Staff $9,602,922 63% Total Salaries & Wages $18,656,818 75% PERSONNEL FTE Professional Staff (FTE) 149 68% Support Staff (FTE) 192 99% Total Staff (FTE) 454 84%

PAGE 13

13 UNIVERSITY Avg. Excluding UF UF as % of Non UF Avg. PhDs Awarded 635 135% Prof Degrees Awarded 626 200% Total PhDs and Prof Degrees 1,261 167% PhD Fields 95 131% Faculty (Full Time) 3,449 128% Total Student Enrollment 43,195 119% Total Graduate & Prof Students 12,579 134%

PAGE 14

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 14 UF Libraries are BELOW a verage for every library RESOURCE factor for materials and staffing UF is ABOVE average for every university factor correlating with DEMAND for library resources and services

PAGE 15

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 15

PAGE 16

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 Average library e xpenditures as % of university budget (8 peers w ithout UF): 1.8352% Library e xpenditures as % of university b udget (UF): 1.6442% 16

PAGE 17

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 More useful comparison by accounting for differences in scale at the peer institutions Analyzed correlations between ARL data on library expenditures and NCES data on university factors The highest correlation was with total university budget (R 2 = 0.8278) 17

PAGE 18

18

PAGE 19

PEER ANALYSIS, 2010 19 Total UF Expenditures Projected Library Expenditures Actual Library Expenditures Difference $1,737,832,000 $37,899,670 $28,573,302 $9,326,368 Data from 2008 Application of Linear Regression Formula to UF

PAGE 20

PEER ANALYSIS, 2013 20 Total UF Expenditures Projected Library Expenditures Actual Library Expenditures Difference $2,121,460,000 $41,851,038 $28,147,202 $13,703,836 Application of Linear Regression Formula to UF Using 2009 Data

PAGE 21

PEER ANALYSIS, updated 21 PROPORTION OF LIBRARY EXPENDITURES Materials and Operations Staffing Median for Peers 50% 48% Average for Peers 54% 46% University of Florida 53% 47%

PAGE 22

Smathers Libraries Staffing 22 Decrease in Smathers Libraries Staffing 2009 2010 Through 2011 2012 Faculty & Other Professionals Non Professional Staff Total 2010 97 186 283 2011 85 172 257 2012 81 167 248

PAGE 23

PEER ANALYSIS, 2014 23 Top 10 Top 25 AAU UF Identified Peers ILLINOIS, URBANA MICHIGAN CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY MICHIGAN MINNESOTA ILLINOIS, URBANA NORTH CAROLINA NORTH CAROLINA INDIANA PENNSYLVANIA STATE OHIO STATE MICHIGAN VIRGINIA PENNSYLVANIA STATE NORTH CAROLINA WISCONSIN PITTSBURGH OHIO STATE TEXAS PENNSYLVANIA STATE VIRGINIA TEXAS WASHINGTON TEXAS A&M WISCONSIN VIRGINIA WISCONSIN

PAGE 24

24

PAGE 25

PEER ANALYSIS, 2014 25

PAGE 26

26

PAGE 27

PEER ANALYSIS, 2014 27 Univ. Inst., Res. & PS Exp. v. Library Exp. Top Ten Publics Exc U of Californias, William and Mary and G. Tech

PAGE 28

28 20,000,000 25,000,000 30,000,000 35,000,000 40,000,000 45,000,000 50,000,000 55,000,000 60,000,000 65,000,000 70,000,000 0 500,000,000 1,000,000,000 1,500,000,000 2,000,000,000 2,500,000,000 Univ Tuition, Fees, State App, and Fed Grants Income v. Library Exp. Top Ten Publics Exc. U of Californias, William and Mary and G. Tech 2011-12 2010-11 2009-10 2008-09 2007-08 2006-07 FLORIDA Linear (2011-12) Linear (2010-11) Linear (2009-10) Linear (2008-09) Linear (2007-08) Linear (2006-07) Linear (FLORIDA)

PAGE 29

PEER ANALYSIS, 2014 29 Univ. Tuition, Fees, State App. & Fed Grant Inc. v Library Exp. Top Ten Publics Exc U of Californias, William and Mary and G. Tech

PAGE 30

30

PAGE 31

31

PAGE 32

Slides available at http ://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00019455 32