Transcript UNC School of Medicine Basic Science Faculty Compensation Plan Proposal:

UNC School of Medicine
Basic Science Faculty
Compensation Plan Proposal:
Linking Performance with Resources and Rewards
Robert N. Golden, M.D.
Vice Dean, UNC School of Medicine
“Linking Performance with Resources
and Rewards”

Why do we need a compensation plan for the SOM
basic science faculty?



Brief background re: the nature of academic medical
centers/schools of medicine
Goals for the plan
Summary of the proposed plan



Process
Essential features
Example
What are the missions of the
UNC School of Medicine?

Three essential missions:





Clinical Care
Teaching
Research
Woven into all missions: Service
Ideally, these 3 missions are synergistic;
however, there is a potential for competition
among them for scarce resources
The School of Medicine (SOM) is one of a
dozen schools that comprise UNC-CH

In FY04 SOM represented:

33% of UNC-CH workforce







Over 1300 faculty
3300 Permanent employees (including faculty)
2000 Temporary employees
42% of UNC-CH operating expenditures
53% of UNC-CH Sponsored Program Awards
56% of UNC-CH indirects earned
Large educational and training programs:




~640 medical students
~320 AHS students
~500 graduate students
>650 residents
SOM is also part of the UNC Health Care Enterprise
a $1.8b entity w/ 12,363 employees*
SOM
$642m operating
expenditures
3,308 employees
AHEC
$44.9m operating
expenditures
18 employees
HCS
$1.1b operating
expenditures
9,000 employees
P&A
$205m expenditures
300 staff employees
Medical Foundation
UNC Hospitals
24 employees
$1.82m Exp; $10.3 awards
$586m expenditures
Rex
5,100 employees
(5,600 w/residents)
$327m expenditures
3,600 employees
Medical Air
Est. $1.5m operating
expenditures
13 employees
*$1.8b “double counts” P&A expenditures as “variations” of their financials are included in both SOM and HCS reports
One Challenge:
Third Party Payment for Physician Services
If charges posted in FY 2004 had the same
payer mix and collection rates as were seen
in FY 1998 (a six year span), receipts would
have been 23% higher resulting in an
additional $31.1M of revenue.
School of Medicine
Five and Ten Year Comparisons
Expenditures By Fund Source
(Excluding AHEC)
Faculty# 1,372
Faculty# 1,076
$464m
Faculty# 925
16%
$207m
500
18%
400
30%
300
28%
13%
28%
43%
37%
37%
20%
15%
1990
STATE APPROPRIATIONS
1995
2000
CONTRACTS & GRANTS
P&A Funds
200
100
36%
23%
600
31%
$320m
Faculty# 766
15%
11%
Expenditures (Millions)
700
$642m
-
2004
OTHER (F&A, Trusts, Receipts)
*Reporting Change- Effective 10/1/03, Intrah Health became a 501c3. FY03 included $21m of Intrah expenditures (primarily C&G); FY04 only includes $8m from
Intah. Annual totals are, therefore, not fully comparable. If Intrah's 12 month expenditures had been included in FY04, total expenditures w ould have been more
then $655m.
School of Medicine
State Appropriations As % of Expenditures
1990 Versus 2004
(Excluding AHEC)
25%
Faculty# 766
Faculty# 925
20%
23%
20%
Faculty# 1,076
15%
15%
Faculty# 1,372
10%
11%
5%
0%
1990
1995
2000
2004
School of Medicine
Faculty Salaries Analysis By Year
Shift in Funding Source For Salaries
33%
7%
31%
7%
30%
7%
40%
20%
0%
1998
41%
21%
0%
1999
41%
22%
0%
2000
40%
0%
29%
8%
23%
27%
9%
26%
9%
36%
28%
25%
8%
38%
29%
2001
38%
1%
25%
2002
0%
2003
0%
2004
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Millions
State
Trust/ Other
UNC P&A/Contract Trust
Source: SOM Finance and Business Operations Office
Contracts & Grants
Overhead
$12.2m
School of Medicine
Three Year Trend FY02-FY04
Basic Science Departments By Fund Source
0%
(Excluding AHEC)
23%
2002
20%
2003
18%
2004
$
0%
68%
6%
71%
5%
3%
73%
6%
20%
3%
40%
60%
3%
80%
STATE APPROPRIATIONS
STATE RECEIPT SUPPORTED
OVERHEAD
CONTRACTS & GRANTS
TRUSTS/OTHER
P&A Funds
100%
$12.2m
School of Medicine
Three Year Trend FY02-FY04
Centers/Programs By Fund Source
(Excluding AHEC)
7%
2002
2003
5%
2004
6%
0%
79%
4%
3%
3%
$
20%
10%
83%
9%
82%
9%
40%
60%
80%
STATE APPROPRIATIONS
STATE RECEIPT SUPPORTED
OVERHEAD
CONTRACTS & GRANTS
TRUSTS/OTHER
P&A Funds
100%
NIH Grant Support
UNC School of Medicine
1970-present
$250,000,000
Dollars
$200,000,000
$150,000,000
$100,000,000
$50,000,000
19
70
19
73
19
76
19
79
19
82
19
85
19
88
19
91
19
94
19
97
20
00
20
03
$0
Year
SOM is highly dependent on grant funds(> 43% of budget).
What impact will the flattening of the NIH budget have?
Basic Science Faculty
Compensation Plan: Goals



To provide incentives and rewards for
outstanding performance in teaching, research,
and service
To provide a greater measure of fiscal security
for each department
To create a “meritocracy” via a reward system
that is similar in philosophy and approach to
the current Clinical Faculty Compensation Plan
Basic Science Faculty
Compensation Plan: Process




Intention to develop such a plan was announced at
a SOM Faculty Meeting
Ad Hoc committee formed
First draft presented at Dean’s Advisory Committee
Revised drafts presented at several “town
meetings”, department chair meetings, and a SOM
Faculty Meeting, and several department
meetings. Input also sought from the Provost’s
Office and the President’s Office.
Essential Features of the Plan





Applies to tenure-track faculty in basic science
departments* (approximately 140 current faculty)
Current tenured faculty can elect to participate (or
not) in the plan at its inception
All new faculty and non-tenured tenure track faculty
will be automatically enrolled
Current faculty who initially opt out can enroll later
only with the approval of their chair
Several procedures will be in place to review any
grievances or complaints
Essential Features of the Plan

Salary consists of two components:




A. Academic Base Salary (with a “floor” set by rank)
B. Variable Component
For existing faculty, their current salary will
become their academic base salary, unless
otherwise negotiated with the chair.
For new faculty, the academic base will be
determined at the time of recruitment.
Essential Features of the Plan



The aggregate academic base salaries for each department
can never increase more than the increase in state funds for
a given year.
Each department will develop specific details for their
compensation plan, which will be shared with the faculty and
on file in the Dean’s Office. Plans will be reviewed at least
every two years.
Individual variable components can be adjusted up or down
each year, based on productivity and achievement. The total
salary for a faculty member cannot be reduced by more than
15% in any given year.
EXAMPLE:
(DEPARTMENT GOAL = 50% GRANT SUPPORT)









FACULTY ACADEMIC BASE SALARY
GRANT SUPPORT (40% of 100K)
DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT (60% of 100K)
$100K
$ 40K
$ 60K
GRANT SUPPORT INCREASES TO 60% :
VARIABLE COMPONENT:
TOTAL COMPENSATION:
GRANT SUPPORT (60% of $110K)
DEPARTMENTAL SUPPORT (40% OF $110K)
DEPARTMENTAL FUNDS “OFF LOAD”
$ 10K
$110K
$ 66K
$ 44K
$ 16K
“ A good plan, well implemented, is
better than a great plan that is
poorly implemented.”