There’s a Budget Surplus at UMass. But Austerity Provides A Pretense to Cut Unfavored Programs.

A new report from UMass Amherst Associate Professor of History Kevin Young critiques UMass Amherst’s budgetary decisions, arguing they undermine the university’s mission and integrity. The report proposes alternatives to austerity measures (find the full report along with supporting documents here), arguing that there is no need to cut resources and programs on which students, workers, and the community depend when so many viable alternatives are available.

The report was published by the following campus organizations: Professional Staff Union (PSU),  University Staff Association (USA), Graduate Employee Organization (GEO), Public Higher Education Network of Massachussets (PHENOM),  Massachusetts Society of Professors Solidarity Caucus (MSP), GEO Palestine Solidarity Caucus, Center for Popular Economics, UMass Divest Coalition,  and Sunrise Movement.

UMass Amherst’s Budgetary Challenges
The 31-page report, entitled  “Besieged from Without, Undermined from Within: How UMass Amherst’s Budgetary Decisions Contradict Its Mission and Weaken Its Defenses Against Hostile Politicians,” argues that ongoing claims of austerity provide the university a pretense to cut unfavored programs and that there are substantial counter-arguments to administrator’s claims that there is no money. The report argues that:

• UMass Amherst faces existential threats from funding cuts and political attacks on higher education.
• Administrators have complied with right-wing demands, undermining academic freedom and the university’s mission.
• Austerity measures have been implemented, harming students and employees while prioritizing administrative growth.
• Austerity provides a pretense for the university to cut unfavored programs.
• There is a need for alternatives to austerity that align with the university’s values.
• The available substantial budget surpluses at UMass offer several possibilities for the aforementioned alternatives.

Ideological Roots of Austerity Measures
The report discusses how austerity in higher education is driven by ideological and economic motives from right-wing politicians.  The report argues that:

• Right-wing animosity towards higher education stems from a belief that universities promote critical thinking and public good.
• The defunding of public higher education has been a long-term strategy to reduce taxes for the wealthy and control educational content.
• UMass Amherst has experienced significant funding cuts, leading to austerity measures that contradict its mission.
• Austerity is a choice made by administrators rather than an unavoidable reality.

Administrative Growth and Financial Waste
The report highlights the disproportionate growth of UMass Amherst’s upper administration and its financial implications.  The report highlights that:

• Between 2010 and 2025, the number of upper administrators grew by 143%, while faculty and librarian numbers increased by only 17%.
• Total administrative salaries rose from $40 million to $102 million, accounting for 15% of all salaries in 2025.
• The growth of administrative positions undermines the university’s financial stability .
• Reducing administrative positions and capping salaries could yield significant savings.

Alternatives to Austerity for UMass Amherst
The report proposes several viable alternatives to austerity that could provide financial relief for UMass Amherst.  The report illustrates how:

• Potential savings could come from capping administrator salaries at $200,000, which could save $49 million in 2024, enough money to raise the salaries of around 1,100 staff to $60,000.
• Reallocating one-third of the athletics budget, which totals $61.7 million, could yield substantial savings without layoffs. Spending on athletics increased 30% between FY 24 and FY 25 and a $30M overhaul of the football stadium has been announced.
• Utilizing budget surpluses, which exceeded $220 million over three years, could address urgent needs and support essential projects.
• The UMass Stabilization Fund, holding $164 million, could be tapped for emergency funding in unforeseen circumstances.

Funding Sources and Revenue Opportunities
The report identifies various funding sources and revenue opportunities available to UMass Amherst.  These include:

• The Fair Share Amendment (Millionaires Tax) could provide over $2 billion annually to state coffers, benefiting public education.
• The UMass endowment, valued at $1.6 billion, and the Stabilization Fund could be utilized for essential needs.
• Increased fundraising efforts for public good projects could supplement university resources.
• The report emphasizes the importance of a transparent and inclusive decision-making process to allocate these funds effectively.

UMass Endowment and Investment Practices
The UMass endowment has reached a record high, but its investment practices raise ethical concerns regarding fossil fuels and weapons.

• UMass endowment reached an all-time high of $1.5 billion in 2024.
• $451 million in unrestricted funds available at the end of FY2024.
• Investment decisions are managed by the UMass Foundation, which lacks transparency and has rejected requests for review of investments in fossil fuels and weapons.
• The foundation’s actions contradict UMass Amherst’s commitment to sustainability and socially responsible investing.
• Historical context: UMass was established as a land-grant institution using proceeds from the sale of Indigenous land, raising ethical questions about current investment practices.

State Government Funding Opportunities
Significant state funding sources are available to support UMass, particularly for emergency needs and campus decarbonization. ​

• Over $16 billion in potential funding from five sources: Millionaires Tax, Commonwealth Stabilization Fund, Corporate Fair Share bill, DRIVE Act, and BRIGHT Act.
• Millionaires Tax generated $5.4 billion in its first two years, with over $2 billion expected annually. ​
• Commonwealth Stabilization Fund held over $8 billion as of June 2025, with proposals to allocate 15% for emergency needs. ​
• DRIVE Act aims to provide $400 million for public colleges and universities, primarily benefiting UMass. ​
• BRIGHT Act would allocate $2.5 billion for infrastructure, emphasizing campus decarbonization. ​

Administrator Salaries and Budget Allocation
The report highlights the rising salaries of top administrators at UMass, raising concerns about budget allocation priorities.

• Top administrator salaries include: Head Basketball Coach ($1,269,945), Head Football Coach ($1,164,116), and Chancellor ($636,525).
• Administrator salaries have increased significantly, with raises averaging around 5.8% in 2025.
• Faculty salaries comprised only 13% of total campus spending in 2024, unchanged since 2010.
• Spending on athletics and public relations has grown faster than academic spending, indicating a shift in budget priorities.

Tuition and Affordability Trends Over Time
Tuition and fees at UMass Amherst have dramatically increased over the years, raising concerns about affordability for students. ​

• In-state tuition rose from $1,562 in 1984 to $17,772 in 2025, a 170% real increase when adjusted for inflation. ​
• Total costs for in-state students increased from $3,926 in 1984 to $33,900 in 2025. ​
• Student costs as a percentage of median family income rose from 15% in 1984 to 29% in 2024, indicating decreased affordability.
• The increase in costs is attributed to both external factors (declining state funding) and internal policy decisions. ​

Decline of Tenure-Track Faculty Positions
The percentage of tenure-track faculty positions at UMass Amherst has declined, reflecting broader trends in higher education. ​

• Tenure-track positions have steadily decreased as a percentage of total faculty positions. ​
• This trend raises concerns about the quality of education and faculty engagement with students.

Spending on Academic Affairs Over Time
UMass Amherst has reduced its spending on academic affairs as a percentage of its total budget over the past two decades. ​

• Academic affairs spending as a percentage of total spending has significantly decreased. ​
• This trend suggests a shift in focus away from academic investment towards other areas such as athletics and administration.

Methodology and Data Sources
The report’s methodology and data sources were outlined to ensure transparency and accuracy in the analysis.  Supporting documents can be found here.

---

This article was compiled with the assistance of Adobe’s Generative Summary.