Las Vegas Sun

March 29, 2024

editorial:

It doesn’t take a consultant to see where education dollars are wasted

It’s a standard response whenever a public agency talks about budget cuts. People are sure to say, “Why don’t you start at the top?”

So here’s the good news: The state bureaucracy that oversees our colleges and universities — the Nevada System of Higher Education — is about to launch some cost-cutting measures at its headquarters.

The news came from Rick Trachok, chairman of the Board of Regents, which governs the state’s institutions of higher learning.

“We’re focusing on administrative expenses in the chancellor’s office,” he said of the fiscal trimming. “We want to achieve savings so all the dollars we save, as we become more efficient, will go directly to the classrooms, labs, student services, student counseling.”

To grasp the fact that Chancellor Dan Klaich might be running a bloated office, we’ll turn to some numbers from five states closest in population to Nevada, ranging from 2.8 million to 3.1 million. Yes, numbers might deceive and can be twisted or misinterpreted. So, take the accompanying chart (the data comes from various publicly accessible sources, and is for 2014) for what it’s worth.

“Every organization can be more efficient,” Trachok said. “We’re not cutting for cutting’s sake, but to make sure we’re adopting best practices.”

Klaich said he’s imposed a hiring and promotion freeze and is reviewing the services his office provides campuses.

“If we are doing things that aren’t considered a value to the system, we’ve got to stop doing them,” he said. Added Regent Michael Wixom, “We’re trying to become more student-centric, community-centric.”

We’re not efficiency experts, but we’ll suggest one practice that might be worth examining. It has to do with how Klaich hires consultants.

Take, for instance, when Klaich hired, in 2014, a consultant who is said to be an expert on college governance, to study how Nevada could best govern its higher education system. The consultant, who was paid $10,000, suggested that a committee of regents be assigned to focus on the community colleges, and that an executive vice chancellor be hired to oversee them.

It was later learned, through emails obtained by the Las Vegas Review-Journal, that Klaich and his senior staff had reviewed the consultant’s draft report and ordered changes to some of its contents, tone and wording, to make its findings more to Klaich’s liking. He and the consultant insisted they did nothing foul and were merely collaborating, as clients and consultants are wont to do. Klaich ended up not sharing the report publicly or with regents, mostly because the final, edited version landed too late to deliver to legislators who were studying the issue.

But because of suggestions that Klaich was acting unethically in asking for a rewrite of the report, Trachok, himself an attorney, hired another attorney — rather than, say, an academic ethicist — to look into the matter. That attorney, Stephen Hirschfeld, concluded that Klaich did nothing untoward in editing the consultant’s work before tying a ribbon on it, and for interviewing nine people to reach that conclusion, he will be paid $50,000. (He’s also asking for $7,495.21 in expenses.)

While the enriched attorney came to Klaich’s defense at every possible turn, he did discover in his queries that the consultant had twice testified to legislators and wasn’t paid. The consultant sent a bill for $7,700 to Klaich’s office and even though Klaich hadn’t contracted him to appear before the legislators, he agreed to pick up the tab as “the right thing to do.”

By the time the dust settles, some $75,000 will have been spent on the decision by regents to set up a committee to govern community colleges.

We don’t know how many other reports Klaich has ordered over the years, what purposes they served, and how much they cost. But here’s a study that could have been done for free, by asking help from researchers already within the system — in this case, Brookings Mountain West and the Lincy Institute.

In fact, Lincy already has — for free — examined the governance of higher education in Nevada. Its 2014 report recommended two systems. One — the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada, as it is officially called in the state constitution — would watch over UNLV, UNR and the Desert Research Institute. A separate, college-level structure would be created — a statewide higher education board appointed by the Legislature to coordinate the system, and governing boards for each local campus, offering flexibility and responsiveness in meeting local education and training needs.

When the study was completed, it got the cold shoulder from the chancellor’s office for reasons that may well have been egotistically selfish. Who wants to walk away from the power and trappings of a big office?

So yes, it’s time for the chancellor to reassess his marching orders and expectations and to pare his expenses. He must identify what he is obligated to do, and not overreach. He must reposition himself as the humble, supportive back office, and empower the campus presidents to provide the best possible education for our students. That’s our advice, and he doesn’t owe us a nickel.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy