U. funding doesn't help $100,000 deficit

After years of budget deficits in the Athletic Department, University administrators said they hit a "break-even point" at the end of fiscal year 1996, and are confident they will be able to continue successful financial planning. Athletic Department Administrative Affairs Director Edwin Ledwell, who oversees all budgets in the Athletic Department, said the department's new budgeting system is the reason it was able to reach the equilibrium point. And Athletic Director Steve Bilsky explained that "starting two years ago, we got the coaches involved in the process to create more realistic and practical budgets, and since then, things have turned around." Ledwell noted that under the old system, coaches had a poor understanding of the financial situations of their teams, leading to increased amounts of over-spending. "The deficits in the old system were in some sense planned deficits, but it was an unrealistic approach," Ledwell said last month."Now we are taking more responsibility and trying to build a better system," he added. Since the Athletic Department has recently revamped its budgeting process, administrators are confident they will continue to balance the budget in the future. Associate Athletic Director Carolyn Shlie Femovich emphasized that the new system not only helps coaches plan a budget, but also helps them adhere to it. "We've worked hard to develop responsible budget for each team, and we're committed to help them live with it," she said. In the new system, coaches and administrators sit down together to discuss the each program's needs. In past years, however, administrators provided budgets which coaches could break to meet the needs of unplanned expenses. "Basically we get to pick and choose what to spend our money on," said men's baseball coach Bob Seddon. "In the past it wasn't a very strict system, and we could ask for extra funding after the budget was submitted. Everyone was overspending." Despite the Athletic Department's recent ability to create more balanced budgets, the majority of its funds come from the University's student general fee, because Athletic Department revenue is not nearly sufficient to cover the costs, according to Ledwell. As reported in the University's 1996 NCAA Certification Self Study, 65 percent of the Athletic Department's operating budget comes from general funds. "The University funds virtually the entire budget for the DRIA [Department of Recreation and Intercollegiate Athletics] -- everything that the gifts and ticket revenue doesn't cover," University Budget Director Mike Masch said. In the 1996 fiscal year, total operating expenses for the Athletic Department hit $8,738,730 -- only $3,076,000 of which was covered by student activity fees. That same year, the budget exceeded the total operating revenue by $2,778,566, and as a result, the University provided the department with an additional contribution of $2,642,000. But the department lost $96,566 in 1996, even after the extra University funding. Femovich said "that's just a cost of doing business, and we will account for it." Ledwell claims the department is currently working to pay back the past deficit, but he declined to explain the source of the funding. One source of additional funding was last summer's U2 concert, which was expected to net $100,000 to 200,000 for the Athletic Department. "There seems to be more optimism that they will do better this year," Masch said. "We want to fund the program to be able to develop its extensive varsity, intramural and growing recreation programs. That's the type of thing the general fee is suppose to aid," Provost Stanley Chodorow also justified the extensive University support of the Athletic Department. "It's part of the Ivy League philosophy to support athletics as a function of the school," he said. And Bilsky added that "Penn athletics raises the most money -- by far -- in all the Ivies, and we are encouraged to do so."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.