UM Budget Situation Improves

[IdaGriz01]

...
Texas might offer more opportunities for engineering because if I'm not wrong their student population is slightly larger than Montana's.

You sentence could be read two ways, but just to nail it down: The total count of students in Texas colleges and universities is over 1.5 million, counting public and private institutions. (In 2017, there were over 650 thousand in public colleges and universities). The last estimate I found has the total "people" population of Montana just over a million.

Whole different ball game.

 

[SoldierGriz]

...
Texas might offer more opportunities for engineering because if I'm not wrong their student population is slightly larger than Montana's.

You sentence could be read two ways, but just to nail it down: The total count of students in Texas colleges and universities is over 1.5 million, counting public and private institutions. (In 2017, there were over 650 thousand in public colleges and universities). The last estimate I found has the total "people" population of Montana just over a million.

Whole different ball game.

And yet, both UND and NDSU offer engineering degrees....

I'm thinking population has nearly zero to do with degree offerings.

 

[SaskGriz]

...
Texas might offer more opportunities for engineering because if I'm not wrong their student population is slightly larger than Montana's.

You sentence could be read two ways, but just to nail it down: The total count of students in Texas colleges and universities is over 1.5 million, counting public and private institutions. (In 2017, there were over 650 thousand in public colleges and universities). The last estimate I found has the total "people" population of Montana just over a million.

Whole different ball game.

And yet, both UND and NDSU offer engineering degrees....

I'm thinking population has nearly zero to do with degree offerings.

Hey, I'm not saying it can't be done. The more things U of M can offer the better. Anything that gets more kids in school and especially at my alma mater is fine with me.

 

[hokeyfine]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

 

[SoldierGriz]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

 

[AZGrizFan]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

 

[tnt]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Time will tell what will happen. but you need a structure/foundation to build anything on. You need a tactical plan to fight the battle. Many years of neglect can't be undone in 2. You can't repair a wound that is still bleeding. The 300,000.00 Keck Grant or 1.2 million science education grant as part of the 400 million giving program will certainly help....

 

[PlayerRep]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Do you two have any clue as to what UM and Bodnar are doing? From your comments, I don't think you do. From a 2018 article: "The draft proposal calls for the elimination of dozens of jobs as well as the elimination or consolidation of several University of Montana programs."

 

[SoldierGriz]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Do you two have any clue as to what UM and Bodnar are doing? From your comments, I don't think you do. From a 2018 article: "The draft proposal calls for the elimination of dozens of jobs as well as the elimination or consolidation of several University of Montana programs."

Yes, I am closely tied to this stuff in ways I won't discuss here. You quoted the tactical decisions made...

In regards to this stuff...I have played the game. I will just leave it at that.

 

[tnt]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Do you two have any clue as to what UM and Bodnar are doing? From your comments, I don't think you do. From a 2018 article: "The draft proposal calls for the elimination of dozens of jobs as well as the elimination or consolidation of several University of Montana programs."

Just an FYR PR As often as not these "eliminations" are designed to eliminate overpaid tenured faculty who teach little and have failed to capitalize their positions with meaningful research grants. Other times it is to force that same faculty to increase the number of hours in the classroom actually teaching (some tenured staff can tach as few as 4 - 6 hrs a week while drawing very substantial salary. The net effect on programs and classes is usually very minimal. Elimination of programs usually involves eliminating administration whos duties are picked up elsewhere. I've played that game too.

 

[PlayerRep]

I will see if I can find a good summary of the Strategy for Distinction. Note that Engstrom and interim president also took some action. See article. Who is that handsome distinguished gentleman talking to coach Hauck in the photo?

https://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/2018/04/18/university-montana-faculty-cuts-budget-missoula-montana/527687002/

 

[tnt]

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Do you two have any clue as to what UM and Bodnar are doing? From your comments, I don't think you do. From a 2018 article: "The draft proposal calls for the elimination of dozens of jobs as well as the elimination or consolidation of several University of Montana programs."

Just an FYI PR As often as not these "eliminations" are designed to eliminate overpaid tenured faculty who teach little and have failed to capitalize their positions with meaningful research grants. Other times it is to force that same faculty to increase the number of hours in the classroom actually teaching (some tenured staff can tach as few as 4 - 6 hrs a week while drawing very substantial salary. The net effect on programs and classes is usually very minimal. Elimination of programs usually involves eliminating administration whos duties are picked up elsewhere. The "majors" seldom go away. I've played that game too. Romance Languages at UM is a recent example. A number of Language majors are now in the "Modern and Classical Languages and Literatures" program

 

[PlayerRep]

Thanks. I only play the game by talking to Bodnar and my law partner and her husband, who is a UM tenured prof.

 

[The.Real.2506]

Thanks. I only play the game by talking to Bodnar and my law partner and her husband, who is a UM tenured prof.

So your getting a pretty narrow biased view huh?

 

[The.Real.2506]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Time will tell what will happen. but you need a structure/foundation to build anything on. You need a tactical plan to fight the battle. Many years of neglect can't be undone in 2. You can't repair a wound that is still bleeding. The 300,000.00 Keck Grant or 1.2 million science education grant as part of the 400 million giving program will certainly help....

As much as I dislike your sports teams, the dumpster fire that has been the U of M the last several years is not healthy for the state. Sounds to me like this guy is close to stopping the bleeding and beginning to heal, after some stability I will bet that he finds ways to grow the university back.

 

[PlayerRep]

Thanks. I only play the game by talking to Bodnar and my law partner and her husband, who is a UM tenured prof.

So your getting a pretty narrow biased view huh?

Getting the info straight from the top, and certainly better sources than what some of these other jokers have. I'm not looking for a consensus, I want to know what is going on when I ask. I also talk frequently to one of the top donors. Bodnar and the foundation talk to him a lot. He's a CFO-type. Knows numbers, budgets and budget cuts. Doesn't make "investments" unless he get comfortable with the numbers and good answers.

 

[IdaGriz01]

Nothing is tougher to change than an entrenched bureaucracy, whether it be government, military (a government adjunct), academia (usually a government adjunct, but not always) … or business. And yes, I’ve “played the game” with all of them. In each one, the primary strategy/tactic seems to be CYA. I think most people who have had to deal with such a system will agree with me.

In every large bureaucracy I have encountered, people who are basically non-productive have far out-numbered employees who actually produce value for the organization … i.e. make useful products, facilitate productive operations, or actually serve customers. The rest answer the phone and pass the buck, churn out reports that no one reads, or basically sit around and bitch about how under-paid and over-worked they are. Am I exaggerating? Maybe a bit, but not much … think “Dilbert.”

Does anyone recall this article from the September 2016 Kaimin? (I know, they’re not the epitome of authority, but they do have some useful stuff.)
http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/w...le_2aa74de6-8663-11e6-b157-6bcf591c82e0.html

Some key quotes:

In Montana, there are students who grow up with a strong connection to one university over another. Those students know from an early age where they’ll end up. But then there are those who have no allegiances, and who base their decisions on the information, service and encouragement they receive from each school.

This is where UM loses.
… During the summer, transfer student applications were backed up two months because of UM’s outdated application processing system.
…
To fix this, Crady said the admissions office has updated its computer software and will be going paperless. [Remember, this was in late 2016] He also said more people will be hired in the evaluation office to reduce the time it takes to process applications. …

There’s more that elaborates on the recruitment/perception problems at the time. Personally, I think Bodnar has done pretty well, considering what he was/is up against.

 

[tnt]

Thanks. I only play the game by talking to Bodnar and my law partner and her husband, who is a UM tenured prof.

So your getting a pretty narrow biased view huh?

Getting the info straight from the top, and certainly better sources than what some of these other jokers have. I'm not looking for a consensus, I want to know what is going on when I ask. I also talk frequently to one of the top donors. Bodnar and the foundation talk to him a lot. He's a CFO-type. Knows numbers, budgets and budget cuts. Doesn't make "investments" unless he get comfortable with the numbers and good answers.

You may be getting the "info" but all the name dropping in the world only confirms you have no clue what the methodology is. Endpoints don't define how one gets there.

 

[bigsky33]

Nothing is tougher to change than an entrenched bureaucracy, whether it be government, military (a government adjunct), academia (usually a government adjunct, but not always) … or business. And yes, I’ve “played the game” with all of them. In each one, the primary strategy/tactic seems to be CYA. I think most people who have had to deal with such a system will agree with me.

In every large bureaucracy I have encountered, people who are basically non-productive have far out-numbered employees who actually produce value for the organization … i.e. make useful products, facilitate productive operations, or actually serve customers. The rest answer the phone and pass the buck, churn out reports that no one reads, or basically sit around and bitch about how under-paid and over-worked they are. Am I exaggerating? Maybe a bit, but not much … think “Dilbert.”

Does anyone recall this article from the September 2016 Kaimin? (I know, they’re not the epitome of authority, but they do have some useful stuff.)
http://www.montanakaimin.com/news/w...le_2aa74de6-8663-11e6-b157-6bcf591c82e0.html

Some key quotes:

In Montana, there are students who grow up with a strong connection to one university over another. Those students know from an early age where they’ll end up. But then there are those who have no allegiances, and who base their decisions on the information, service and encouragement they receive from each school.

This is where UM loses.
… During the summer, transfer student applications were backed up two months because of UM’s outdated application processing system.
…
To fix this, Crady said the admissions office has updated its computer software and will be going paperless. [Remember, this was in late 2016] He also said more people will be hired in the evaluation office to reduce the time it takes to process applications. …

There’s more that elaborates on the recruitment/perception problems at the time. Personally, I think Bodnar has done pretty well, considering what he was/is up against.

I agree he has done pretty well. A turnaround is going to take time. Especially in a bureaucracy. He has a huge challenge. The problems are multi-faceted. He has the perfect background to get it done. I thought he was an excellent choice.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I think you have to put in perspective this increase in the freshman class. An increase from last year's class which was a significant decline from the previous year.
UM can't afford to add programs. They still have a deficit. And when that deficit is gone then they need to put money into existing programs to make them better. A long ways to go to get the university on solid ground.

I look at it differently. I think UM can't afford NOT to add programs. Combining the J school with the arts programs is neat, but not meaningful in my opinion. Combining and re-arranging existing programs is not what I expected from Bodnar. Honestly, I expected him to propel the University beyond the here and now. He is making tactical adjustments in an environment where strategic adjustments are required. He ought to be aggressively killing programs wholesale and adding programs relevant to today and beyond proportionatley. These programs should center on the liberal arts while simultaneously providing deep knowledge in artificial intelligence, computer science, biomed and bio engineering, cyber security, data sciences, food science, health sciences, and multi- domain engineering.

Or, we should all resign ourselves to paltry enrollment rates in perpituity....

Just my opinion...

Agreed. Especially the bolded part.

Time will tell what will happen. but you need a structure/foundation to build anything on. You need a tactical plan to fight the battle. Many years of neglect can't be undone in 2. You can't repair a wound that is still bleeding. The 300,000.00 Keck Grant or 1.2 million science education grant as part of the 400 million giving program will certainly help....

I’ve successfully turned around two companies. Many times it is the work done in the first several weeks that sets the tone and pays the biggest dividends in the long run. I’m not looking for “instant” results, but he’s been there how long? You can’t save the university by cutting expenses...he’s gotta figure out and announce what the long term vision for the U is and get it implemented. These staff cuts and department reorganizations only go so far. BTW: I think the most recent budget announcement is great news and a great start, but as a CFO myself who’s paid handsomely to be an accurate forecaster, how in the FUCK are they off by that much....they’re fortunate those results are both in their favor. Maybe it’s by design (in that they’re being conservative on both sides of the income statement) but it sure would be better to be ACCURATE.