Among institutions in the comprehensive sector, the set of circumstances described above is unique to Kentucky State University. During the same period, the average increase in gross tuition and fee revenue among comprehensive universities other than KSU was $28.6 million, or 20.5 percent, and the average increase in total public funds revenue was $22.3 million, or 10.4 percent.

The loss in total public funds revenue has placed considerable stress on KSU's operating budget. Campus officials responded by implementing a number of cost savings and cost avoidance strategies, including several rounds of personnel layoffs. Actions to stabilize university finances resulted in a balanced budget for the current fiscal year (i.e., 2015-16), but projections indicate that, absent external intervention, KSU will be in an untenable financial position within the next two years.

In FY 2015, the University took a number of steps to address these structural problems. A plan was put in place to immediately stabilize finances and additional reductions were put in place in the FY 2016 budget:

• Eliminated all vacant positions;
• Eliminated Destiny and Legacy tuition programs (tuition discounts) for new students;
• Increased reserves for the write-off of delinquent student receivables;
• Increased tuition by 5% for FY 2016;
• Eliminated 32 positions across the university, with a plan to eliminate another 21 if fall 2015 enrollment does not meet projections;
• Eliminated all funding for consultants;
• Eliminated several coordinator positions and transferred duties to department chairs;
• Eliminated the position of Dean in all colleges and created a Dean of the University position;
• Significantly reduced reliance on adjunct positions to more effectively utilize full-time faculty;
• Reassigned faculty positions to meet changing course needs;
• Reduced scholarships by 10%;
• Reduced the athletics budget by $500,000.

These actions have resulted in a balanced budget for FY 2016, with no budgeted use of the University's fund balance. While these reductions have been severe, they have allowed the University to maintain core functions and focus efforts on activities that directly affect student success. The University is now in a position to strategically apply new resources to improve student success and stabilize the enrollment base.

Student Recruitment and Retention

The primary focus of the University's transformation plan is enrollment management. Retention rates over the past few years have been between 45% and 50%. The

34