derived from this source as well as athletic earnings to meet the current expenses of intercollegiate athletics. In the remaining universities and colleges, the athletic earnings apparently being insufficient, it has been necessary for the States to make appropriations or the institutions to grant subsidies. One institution reports that the intercollegiate operating expenses are paid through athletic earnings, State appropriations, and institutional subsidies, three others through athletic earnings, State appropriations, and student athletic fees; and three through athletic earnings, institutional subsidies, and student athletic fees. Intramural athletics are an integral part of college athletics and are more important in furnishing recreation and diversion to the general student body than intercollegiate athletics. The returns indicate that in the case of 12 land-grant colleges the expenses of intramural athletics are defrayed wholly or in part by the earnings of intercollegiate athletics. Of this number two institutions support intramural athletics from athletic earnings alone; five by athletic earnings supplemented by student athletic fees; two by athletic earnings supplemented by student athletic fees and State appropriations; one by athletic earnings, supplemented by student athletic fees and institutional subsidies; and one by athletic earnings supplemented by State appropriations and institutional subsidies. The support of intramural athletics is dependent upon State appropriations, institutional subsidies, or the assessment of athletic fees against the students in the other universities and colleges submitting returns. Five institutions report that the operating costs of intramural athletics are paid entirely by State appropriations. In three universities the source of support consists wholly of institutional subsidies and in two colleges the support is derived solely from student athletic fees. Intramural athletics are financed partially by institutional subsidies and State appropriations in two additional institutions while in three others both institutional subsidies and student athletic fees form the means of support. Of vital import and significance is the control and administration of college athletics, particularly in view of the capital investments, loans, and large amounts of moneys handled annually. Another portion of this report discusses in detail the organizations created in the different land-grant colleges for the general supervision of intercollegiate and intramural athletics so that only questions connected with the actual business and financial procedure will be taken up here. It has already been pointed out that the different types of organizations for the control of athletics include student athletic associa tions, committees of the faculty and administrative officers, special athletic officers, departments of physical education, and other agencies. Regardless of the type of organization existing, the reports show that all moneys connected with athletics are collected and disbursed by the institutional business officer in 26 institutions. Athletic moneys are handled by student athletic associations or similar organizations in 10 institutions, and by athletic councils or boards of control consisting of faculty or administrative officers in 4, while in the case of 1 institution such moneys are handled by the athletic manager, who is an institutional officer. Inquiry into the question of final authority over the athletic funds, including power of issuance of requisitions, vouchers and other methods of disbursement discloses a variety of complicated financial and business procedures. Without doubt the most efficacious plan of controlling athletic finances is to handle them in the same manner as the finances of any regular division or unit of the institutional establishment are administered. The returns indicate that this practice, however, has been adopted in the case of only 13 institutions where athletics are regarded as part of the functions of the department of physical education and all funds administered accordingly. In nine institutions financial administration is exercised by an athletic committee or council of the faculty assisted by a graduate manager or director and in three by a committee composed of both faculty members and students. A dual system of control over athletic finances by the student athletic organization and the institutional administration exists in seven universities. Although the athletic moneys, as already shown, are collected by student athletic associations in 10 institutions, full authority over the disposition of the funds themselves rests in the student athletic organizations in only four cases, the remaining six being compelled to submit to institutional supervision. The business control of athletic finances is vested in a director of athletics appointed by the institution in two other cases, in a graduate manager responsible to a student board in a third, in an athletic council of the faculty in a fourth, and an athletic board of students in a fifth institution. Notwithstanding the fact that this presentation indicates that most of the land-grant institutions have retained control over the financial affairs of athletics, there is need for revision of the practices prevailing. The plan of delegating to a committee or board composed of faculty members the responsibility of collecting and disbursing large sums of athletic moneys is inconsistent with their primary duties as academic officers. It is likewise difficult to comprehend the reason for conferring such authority on specially created and appointed officers, such as graduate managers or athletic directors. In cases where student athletic associations actually or partially control the fiscal affairs of athletics, there is little doubt that the boards of trustees would be justified in discontinuing such control in view of the large capital investments and earnings, and in view of the fact that the institutions themselves in the end are the responsible agents. Sound business principles dictate that athletic finances be handled through regular institutional channels. All moneys should be collected, deposited, and disbursed by the institution's financial officer. Chapter VI.—Land and Buildings, Operation, Maintenance, and New Additions to Physical Plants Although a meritorious academic program may have been outlined, an excellent staff of teachers and research workers organized, and the necessary educational equipment provided, land for campus and experimental farms and buildings for classrooms, laboratories, administrative offices, residence halls for students, and other facilities are essential for the conduct of the work of the land-grant institutions. Not only must the physical plant be sufficient in size and capacity to meet the needs of the administrative and educational organizations, but it must be operated and maintained at the highest possible standard of efficiency. In previous sections of this report, the amounts of capital actually invested in the physical plants of the individual land-grant colleges, including campus, farms, other lands, buildings, and residence halls have been presented in detail. Figures have also been given showing the expenditures for new buildings and improvements during the single year of 1928 indicating that because of enlarged programs, growing activities and larger student enrollments the physical plants of most of the institutions are being expanded on a large scale. The present chapter, therefore, will deal with the size of the plants rather than the capital investments in them, the amount of land owned and the purpose for which used, the number of buildings and their types, the sources of funds for their erection, the administration of the buildings, the organizations for the care and maintenance of the buildings and grounds, the operation of power and utility plants, and the procedure for the extension and construction of new additions to the plants. Table 25 shows the land and buildings owned by the colleges in 1928. 237 |