INCOME AND EXPENDITURE
John N. Olsgaard, Jane K. Olsgaard, and Kathy Coyle
This section of the report provides a descriptive analysis of the data pertaining to the financial status of graduate programs of library and information science whose first professional degree programs have been accredited by the American Library Association. Complete financial data were received from all 56 of the 56 eligible schools with ALA-accredited programs.
Funding: Amounts and Sources
A total income of $161,607,050 was reported by 56 schools; this represents an average income of $2,885,840 as shown in Table IV-1.† Funding for the schools ranged from a high of $16,394,706 to a low of $507,068.† The median income in 2001-2002 for the 56 schools was $1,905,473, which represents an increase of 10.6 percent above the previous yearís median income of $1,722,427.
The average income continues to increase, and the percentage of increase continued to rebound from the smaller increases in the late 1990's.† A review of the percentage of increase or decrease for individual schools is reported in Table IV-2.
The number of schools receiving increases in total income of one percent or greater increased to 40 in 2001-2002 from 39 in 2000-2001.† The number of schools receiving decreases of one percent or greater decreased from 14 in 2000-2001 to 12 in 2001-2002.†
The frequency distribution of the total income for schools with ALA-accredited programs is contained in Table IV-3.† Forty-seven schools reported income over $1,000,000, compared with 44 schools in 2000-01 and 41 schools in 1999-00.† The number of schools reporting income over $2,000,000 increased from 19 to 27.
††††††††††† In Table IV-4, the sources of funds for schools with ALA-accredited programs are described for the ten-year period, 1992-93 to 2001-02.† The largest percentage of funding continues to come from the parent institution.† The percentage of support from the parent institution showed a marked increase after having remained reasonably steady during the previous five reporting years.†
Table IV-5 depicts
the frequency distribution of income from the parent institution.† These figures ranged from a high of $8,530,724
to a low of $369,509, with a median income of $1,441,854. Two schools
reported income under $400,000, and four additional schools reported
support under $600,000 in 2001-2002.†
Thirty-nine schools reported support in an amount over $1,000,000
compared to thirty-seven schools last year.†
Thirty-five of these 39 schools were from the
Schools were again asked to indicate if there was any special basis for receiving funding from the parent institution, such as FTE, credit hours generated, or head count.† Table IV-6 provides the responses received from the ALA-accredited programs.† There is little change from previous years.
In 2001-2002, the number of schools who reported federal funding increased to 37 as shown in Table IV-7.† The mean for federal funding continued the general increase in federal funding over the decade.
The range of federal funds in 2001-2002 went from a high of $4,119,336 to a low of $4,228.† (The median was $255,738).† Table IV-8 reports the frequency distribution of income from federal funding.
Differences in income between schools with doctoral programs and those without continue to be examined.† Table IV-9 shows that the total mean income for schools with doctoral programs continues to be more than 2.5 times as high as that of schools not offering the doctorate.† Schools without the doctorate continue to have greater dependence on the parent institution than those with doctoral programs.
Income data for the ALA-accredited schools were first examined by geographic regions in 1982-83; these data are again presented in 2001-2002 according to the regional listings established by the American Library Associationís Committee on Accreditation.† Table IV-10 reports these data.
Expenditures: Types and Amounts
The 2001-2002 expenditures by category for member schools are shown in Table IV-11, along with mean expenditures, percent of total, and ranges.
Questions relating to the library and information science facilities were again included in 2001-2002.† Schools were asked to indicate if they had a separate library; whether the library received its major support from the school; whether the librarian was funded by the school; and if the library was administratively a part of the main library.† Table IV-12a displays the responses.
††††††††††† Schools were also asked to indicate if they had a separate computer lab; whether the computer lab received the majority of its funding from the school; whether the computer lab supervisor was funded by the school; and if the computer lab was administratively a part of the Universityís central computing facility.† Table IV-12b displays the responses.
Table IV-13a shows the amount of support given to the library for those schools that reported library support as a direct budget line. Table IV-13b shows the amount of funding given to computer support for those schools that reported computer support as a direct budget line.
Schools were asked to indicate the allocation of salaries and wages among five categories: faculty, specialist, clerical, students, and fringe.† Table IV-14 provides the distribution for all schools plus a comparison for those with and without the doctoral programs.
A review of the teaching and administration expenses by category is provided in Table IV-15.
††††††††††† All categories of expenditures were examined for schools with and without doctoral programs, and these results are shown in Table IV-16.
††††††††††† Tables IV-17 and IV-18 from previous years have been dropped from this year's report.† Much of the data from these tables are included in Table IV-16.
†††† Table IV-21 summarizes by school the reported equivalent value of resources provided to the school by its parent organization.