1. K-State home
  2. »Office of the Provost
  3. »Resources
  4. »Manual
  5. »Service Codes
  6. »Contents: Examples of Reports Used

Office of the Provost and Senior Vice President

Department Head's Manual

Service Codes
Examples of Reports Used

Table 1: Allocation of Budget Dollars by Activity - FY 1999
All General Use Funding (including outside research and public service funding)

InstructionResearchPublic ServiceAdmin.Total

All Academic Departments

54,582,83435,102,58017,674,98520,628,983127,989,382
42.6%27.4%13.8%16.1%

Department A

826,55539,700153,04088,8881,108,183
74.6%3.6%13.8%8.0%

Department B

1,915,9013,559,0481,532,50946,6397,054,097
27.2%50.5%21.7%0.7%

Department C

1,633,515518,081174,491237,2792,563,366
63.7%20.2%6.8%9.3%

Department D

1,720,5321,656,82222,393601,6324,001,379
43.0%41.4%0.6%15.0%

Department E

611,786150,818164,85665,233992,693
61.6%15.2%16.6%6.6%

In Table 1, the budgeted general-use funds were reported by the four general activity areas for the total academic departments and five selected departments. The dollars represented in this table includes faculty salaries, support staff salaries, benefits, and general operating expenditures. Each faculty member's salary and benefits were multiplied by the percent of time spent by activity to yield dollars and accumulated over departments. To allocate staff support and operating expenditures, it was assumed that their time and expenses were used to support the above activities in the same general proportion. Traditionally, staff are assigned as administrative but the focus is not on their administrative duties but duties associated with the responsibilities of the faculty. Recall, faculty develop goals and expectations at the beginning of the year associated with the overall mission of their department and the university.

For the 60 academic departments at the University, 42.6% of the total general use dollars allocated to the academic units supported the instructional effort of the university's mission. On the other hand, 27.4% of the general use funds were attributed to the research function and 13.8% allocated to the public service activity. The balance of the academic units' allocation supports the administrative activity. This distribution of funds matches with the mission and goals of a land-grant institution.

Five departments from four of the colleges were selected to illustrate the different funding mechanisms used to fulfill the departments' goals and the overall mission of the university. As the table shows, each department has a distinct mission: (1) strong instructional activity, (2) strong research orientation, or (3) a combination of all three of the university's main functions with administrative as the support activity. Interestingly, each department supported all three of the general activity areas, but variation of support was quite prominent.

Table 2: Distribution of Faculty Time
Within the Four General Service Areas
Fall 1999

 Service Area
ServiceInstructionResearchPublic ServiceAdministration
RangeN%N%N%N%

0%

136

11.4%

265

22.3%

320

26.9%

1,010

84.9%

1-10%

49

4.1%

125

10.5%

397

33.4%

57

4.8%

11-20%

57

4.8%

159

13.4%

256

21.5%

27

2.3%

21-30%

57

4.8%

161

13.5%

85

7.1%

18

1.5%

31-40%

111

9.3%

186

15.6%

20

1.7%

21

1.8%

41-50%

254

21.3%

133

11.2%

16

1.3%

20

1.7%

51-60%

163

13.7%

48

4.0%

17

1.4%

13

1.1%

61-70%

119

10.0%

24

2.0%

8

0.7%

8

0.7%

71-80%

101

8.5%

27

2.3%

16

1.3%

2

0.2%

81-90%

62

5.2%

27

2.3%

16

1.3%

4

0.3%

91-100%

81

6.8%

35

2.9%

39

3.3%

10

0.8%

Total1,190100.0%1,190100.0%1,190100.0%1,190100.0%

Table 2 shows the distribution of time within the four general activity areas by service ranges for the total university. Using a frequency distribution, the number of faculty members and percent within the service range for each activity were provided. Table 2 highlights the diversity of faculty assignments for instruction, research, service, and administration. Thus, 136 faculty members have no instructional responsibilities. Conversely, 81 faculty members devoted over 90% of their time to teaching.