Illustration by M. Scott Ricketts
Illustration by M. Scott Ricketts
Ignoring the Obvious
With all the restructuring the state has done to save revenue, you’d think that UMaine System consolidation would be next. Why are we ignoring that mammoth opportunity?
In the vernacular of the college student who spent this summer unable to find a job: The economy really sucks right now.
Maine’s governor and legislature know it all too well—and have thus far responded to the crisis admirably. The leadership of the state has moved aggressively to consolidate K-12 education, and to reduce costs and consolidate, both within DHHS and across the state’s entire administrative structure. They have made tough choices and have tried to make changes with prudence and sensitivity. I applaud them.
Curiously, one area that has remained untouched in terms of consolidation is higher education—specifically, the University and Community College systems, along with Maine Maritime. They, for sure, have been impacted by reductions in state aid. But the elephant in the living room—the fact that Maine simply cannot afford to support these systems as presently configured—remains dutifully ignored.
In my view, and in the view of many other pragmatic employees who dare not speak, the current structure of Maine’s public higher education system is unsustainable. Few insiders acknowledge the degree to which the systems compete in every budgetary cycle for ever-shrinking state dollars, but the battle is fierce. We also fight one another for a shrinking high school student population. Everyone is shuffling dollars and shutting down programs, but still doggedly protecting their turf “until the storm passes.”
This is no mere storm. Our climb out of the recession will come, but it won’t come with substantial new funds or a Maine baby boom. In terms of Maine’s higher education outlook, we’re looking at permanent climate change. We need to make serious changes, and we need to start now.
It is time to seriously consider consolidation within and across the University and Community College systems.
No one, not even the highly educated and dedicated, likes change. For that and for a variety of other good reasons, the leadership of these two systems cannot and will not perform this task. Consolidation, if implemented, will, by necessity, result in staff cuts, offices closing, and worst of all for those who remain, a sense of losing control. The aversion to these things is natural, and is the very reason we cannot expect the system to implement any serious reconfiguration. No one, outside of whiskey-soaked cowboys in old westerns, can perform surgery on themselves.
This was made clear by a recent task force organized by the chancellor of the University System, who clearly and explicitly rejected any consolidation in his charge to that task force. The New Challenges, New Directions Initiative was dragging a ball and chain before it even began.
The legislature is also not the proper place for such an effort, again for a variety of good reasons. What is needed is an independent commission—like the base commission at the federal level—that is charged with restructuring and redesigning the University and Community College systems in light of current and future financial demands and the declining student population
This commission and its processes need to be open, transparent, and focused on defined objectives. Its leadership needs to believe, at least in principle, that both cost savings and quality improvement can be simultaneously achieved. This commission needs the freedom, unlike the aforementioned task force, to proceed with an open mind.
To that end, here are some “possible ideas” that could be considered. These suggestions do not involve the closing of any facilities (although an independent commission might come to that conclusion), as the savings are obtained from elimination of administrative costs and overhead.
For one, consider options for consolidation among the professional schools within the University of Maine System. Merge the UMaine and USM business schools into one entity and merge the various schools of education into one entity. Both business schools are internationally accredited and have faculty strengths that in a combined unit would allow for innovation and creativity. Education is located at three of the system schools and would also benefit from a unified leadership and direction. In both cases, the business and education schools could continue in multiple locations, but be managed by one administrative structure. More integrated programs save money and afford new opportunities for innovation and collaboration.
A second alternative is to merge the administrative structures of a University of Maine and Maine Community College unit that are in close proximity to one another. For example, why not have one administrative structure for UMM and Washington County Community College? This would save substantial funds and allow for seamless transfer of students from the Community College System into the University of Maine System, a goal of both systems.
A third alternative would be to reduce the number of administration units laterally—for example, have UMM report to UMF administratively, or WCCC report to EMCC. UMaine’s Hutchinson Center is an example of how thousands of students can be successfully managed by a very streamlined administrative structure.
A final alternative would be to take a serious look at the costs of the University of Maine System Office and President’s Office in the Community College to assess the value received in relation to the funds required to maintain them, and to trim the administrative fat across both systems.
Streamlining the Chancellor’s Office could be the quickest and easiest way of all to save money. It certainly makes one wonder why “consolidation” was taken off the task force’s table.
You must log in to post a comment.