Search

An audit was done of the Health Science Center, a teaching hospital in the State University of New York (SUNY) system at Syracuse. The audit addressed whether Syracuse has effective controls over selected payroll, equipment and inventory expenses. Syracuse reported an operating loss for 1990 of over $21 million dollars. The audit found that management's controls were not effective in ensuring that payments for certain payroll costs were reasonable and proper with the consequence that Syracuse may spend too much on staffing. To ensure that staff is available to meet patient needs, Syracuse uses an "on-call" and a "re-call" service. As a result of reviewing 499 employee timecards, the audit recommends that management implement better monitoring and control of on-call and re-call activities. Appendixes contain information on major contributors to the report, comments of SUNY officials, and State Comptroller's notes. (JB)

This study examined the effectiveness of the State University of New York's (SUNY) energy conservation program which involves monitoring campus utility budgets and promoting energy awareness. The study proceeded primarily through a review of 112 energy audits that were conducted at SUNY campuses in 1989 and 1990 and analysis of energy consumption at SUNY's State-operated campuses over a 10-year period. In addition, the study investigators reviewed selected records, visited seven colleges and universities, and interviewed officials at SUNY Central Administration. The researchers found that if recommendations made by the energy audits were implemented, campus energy costs could be reduced by at least $4.6 million annually. However, they also found that no action had been taken by SUNY to address any of the energy audit recommendations. Other findings were: (1) that consumption was particularly high at three campuses where consumption was between 123 and 335 percent more per square foot that other campuses and that these campuses together accounted for more than 27 percent of SUNY's total energy costs during the year ending March 31, 1990; and (2) that campuses with higher rates of energy consumption received far less in conservation funding than campuses with lower consumption. Appendixes list report contributors, and contain the response of SUNY officials to the report recommendations and the State Comptroller's notes to SUNY's response. (JB)

This study examined the status of a State University of New York (SUNY) plan to standardize administrative computer systems and the success of the implementation in light of the intention to proceed using cooperative leadership rather than an executive order or policy mandate. The Comprehensive Computer Upgrade Program (CCUP) aimed to modernize campus mainframe computing facilities, establish a SUNY-wide data communications network, and increase standardization of administrative systems. The evaluation proceeded by interviewing SUNY management, reviewing and analyzing planning documentation, and analyzing responses from 29 campuses to a questionnaire dealing with campus development and maintenance of administrative systems. The evaluation found that SUNY has made progress in standardizing administrative systems at the campuses. However, further standardization and cost savings are possible and to achieve this, Central Administration must provide stronger, executive-level direction. In particular, the policy of cooperative leadership has been unsuccessful with four university centers where few steps have been taken toward standardization and where centers continue to develop and maintain unique systems. However, the cooperative leadership has been more successful at the other SUNY campuses. Appendixes list major contributors to the report and also provide State Comptroller's notes and the comments of SUNY officials. (JB)

This study examined how effective the State University of New York (SUNY) practices are for verifying in-state residency in determining tuition charges. The study proceeded by comparing SUNY's policies for determining in-state residency with those of similar institutions through review of applicable policies, procedures, rules, and regulations; interviews with SUNY Central Administration and campus management and staff; surveys of 34 peer institutions located in 17 states; review of SUNY financial and operating information; and observation of various SUNY operations. In addition, two SUNY campuses were visited. The analysis found that, for fall 1989, 2,111 full-time undergraduate students were charged resident tuition rates although information on their applications indicated that they were nonresidents. Those making campus visits reviewed relevant records for 211 of these students and found that 46 students were charged incorrect rates with no indication of follow-up by school administration. Comparison of SUNY's tuition policy on the establishment of domiciliary intents found it generally consistent with other institutions. However, SUNY is more lenient in accepting declarations of financial independence than 55 percent of the responding peer institutions. Appendixes contain a list of contributors to the report, the State Comptroller's notes and the comments of SUNY officials. (JB)

This study examined State University of New York (SUNY) costs for support services to students, focusing particularly on why SUNY's costs are higher than those of similar states and where more efficiency might be achieved. The study involved the following elements: analysis of service costs for all SUNY campuses for fiscal year 1989-90; six visits to campuses; review of policies, procedures, rules, and regulations; interviews with management and staff; review of relevant support service records; observation; personal services evaluation; and comparison of study data with data from peer institutions. The evaluation found that SUNY has not established expenditure guidelines for support service costs or analyzed or evaluated campus support service costs. Comparison with peer institutions found that support service costs per enrolled full-time student vary widely among campuses with some institutions spending nearly 50 percent more per student than others. Analysis and comparison of support service costs at six institutions where site visits were conducted found that SUNY could achieve cost savings totaling almost $10 million at these six campuses if the least efficient operations could achieve the same efficiency as at the most efficient campuses. Appendixes contain a list of contributors to the report, State Comptroller's notes, and the comments of SUNY officials who disagree with the report's observations and recommendations. (JB)