In 2 cases the cost ranged from 55 to 60 cents, in 3 from 50 to 55 cents, in 2 from 45 to 50 cents, in 1 from 40 to 45 cents, in 3 from 35 to 40 cents, in 8 from 30 to 35 cents, in 4 from 25 to 30 cents, and in 2 from 20 to 25 cents.

Where the cost of evaporating 1,000 pounds of steam exceeds the average, it would appear advisable for the head of the physical plant department to conduct an inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining the cause and with a view of reducing the operating expense, if possible. The production of the power plants of 8 institutions is so large that they are enabled to sell their surplus service. In 24 institutions all or part of the service is purchased from outside sources.

New Construction

To meet the increasing needs for additional space, State appropriations are made regularly or income from mill-tax levies is available for the erection of new buildings in the case of a number of the institutions. In others a comprehensive program of new construction has been adopted extending over a period of years. Building operations, therefore, are conducted on an extensive scale throughout the land-grant college group and procedure for their control and administration has become an important responsibility.

An examination of the reports shows that the construction of new buildings and additions to the physical plants of 12 institutions is under the full or partial control of State agencies, while in 31 the work is done under the jurisdiction of the governing boards. There are also nine institutions where the State control extends to major repairs and remodeling of the old plant in addition to all new construction. The exercise of control by State agencies over new construction is generally disadvantageous, due to the lack of familiarity of State officials with the particular types of buildings essential to higher educational institutions. Such an arrangement also results. in long-distance administration and supervision, complicated procedure, and frequently in conflict of authority. Continuity in design is also made more difficult because of changing administrations. On the other hand, where physical plant extensions are under the direct control of the governing bodies, responsibility is centralized and localized in the constituted authorities of the institutions who are closely in touch and vitally interested in the proper conduct of the work, and who are more permanent in tenure.

Funds for the erection of new structures in the great majority of the land-grant colleges are obtained through specific appropriations of the State legislatures, through the segregation for building purposes of a portion of their incomes from mill-tax levies and through special taxes in a few instances. There are some institutions, however, that are authorized to construct new buildings by bond issues.

A particular inquiry was conducted into the question, the results of which showed that all types of buildings may be constructed by bond issues by five institutions, only dormitories or resident halls by three, and only revenue-producing buildings by four. A general statute covers the authorization in four States and special legislation is necessary authorizing the construction of each individual building in three. Authority must be granted by a special election in one State.

The procedure followed and the machinery set up for the administration and supervision of physical plant improvements differ widely in the various institutions. For this reason a detailed study is necessary to obtain an adequate conception of the lines of authority and responsibility. The first step in new construction is to secure architectural services. According to the reports, such services are obtained through the State architect at 4 institutions, through the regular university architect at 5, through an architect employed by the State agency at 3, and through an architect employed by the governing board at 24. Both the State and university architect provide the services in three other cases, the State architect and the architect employed by the governing board in three, and the university architect and the architect employed by the governing board in three. The basis of compensation for architectural service varies in the several institutions. There are 31 where the architect is paid on a per cent of cost basis, 7 where he is compensated on a direct salary basis, and 3 where he is remunerated on a contract basis. That a widely varying number of officials exercise final authority over the architects employed to handle physical plant extensions is indicated by the returns. In 13 institutions the architect is responsible to the governing board, in 6 jointly to the governing board and the president, in 13 to the president only, in 4 to the chief business officer, in 2 to the institutional committee on physical plant and equipment, in 1 to the dean of engineering, in 1 to a State commission, in 1 to the State board of agriculture, and in 1 to a person appointed by the board of trustees.

Due to the differences in the terms and provisions of the laws covering the letting of contracts for public improvements in the different States, the procedure for securing, receiving, and opening bids varies considerably. Bids are secured upon invitation in 5 of the institutions, by formal advertisement in 27, and both by invitation and formal advertisement in 8 others. In cases where the colleges advertise for bids, insertions covering a period of one month are required at 13, of three weeks at 8, of two weeks at 7, and of one week or less at 3. There is one institution which constructs all of its own buildings, no bids being asked nor contracts awarded. A

lack of uniformity among the institutions is found in the authorities responsible for receiving and opening the bids.

The governing board is charged with this responsibility in 23, the president in 3, the chief business officer in 5, the head of the agricultural engineering division in 1, the secretary of the institutional board of administration in 1, the State architect and a committee of the governing board in 1, the State department of administration and finance in 1, the State building commission in 1, the State purchasing agent in 1, the State commission of institutions and agencies in 1, and the State board of agriculture in 1.

It is obvious that the State governments have assumed major control of this phase of the physical plant extension in a number of the colleges, a situation that is not altogether advantageous.

While a definite plan of procedure has been adopted in most of the institutions for the development of architectural plans for new buildings, there is considerable disparity in the practices.

Requirements for the buildings are received by the architect from the president at 16 colleges, the governing board at 7, the divisional or academic department heads at 10, the dean of engineering at 1, a building committee at 4, the superintendent of buildings and grounds at 1, the university cabinet at 1, and the chief business officer at 1.

The presumption is that in the drawing up of the plans the architect designated for the work would consult with practically the same officials from whom the requirements were received. The reports of the survey show, however, that in many cases he confers with an entirely different set of officials. The architect consults with the president and the building committee of the governing board in 6 institutions, with the president only in 19, with the chief business officer in 4, with the deans and department heads in 6, with an administrative and faculty committee in 4, and with the superintendent of buildings and grounds in 2. The governing board in all cases finally approves the plans when completed by the architect, but at 11 land-grant colleges they must be submitted to a State agency or official for their approval before actual work on the new construction may be commenced.

Of these institutions, the State architect or engineer must officially approve the plans in 3, the State board of finance and control in 1, the State board of accounts in 1, the State board of examiners in 1, the State commissioner of departments and agencies in 1, the State insurance commissioner in 1, the State director of public works in 1, and the State finance commissioner in 1.

After the bids are received and opened, it is customary to refer them for examination and recommendation for award of contract to specially selected officials or groups of officials. In 28 of the land-grant colleges where control over the procedure for new construction is retained by the institutions, the bids are referred to a variety of governing, executive, and administrative officers.

The returns disclose that they are referred to the board of trustees or a committee of the board in 15; to the architect in 6; to the president and the architect in 2; to the president, architect, and university attorneys in

1; and to a committee composed either of the chief business officer, the superintendent of buildings and grounds, the dean of engineering, or others directly concerned in 4. In the 10 colleges where State agencies exercise jurisdiction, the bids are examined and recommendations for awards made by the State board of public works jointly with the governing board in 1, the State department of administration and finance in 1, the State purchasing agent in 1, the State architect or engineer in conjunction with the university architect in 3, the State board of agriculture in 1, and the State commissioners of finance in 1.

Final awarding of the contract is made by the governing bodies at 31 institutions and by the president after approval by the executive committee of the board of trustees in 1.

In the remainder State control is exercised, the contract being awarded by the State architect on authority of the business and building committee in 1 college, the State business manager in 1, the State board of agriculture in 1, the State building commission in 1, the State purchasing agent with the approval of the governing board in 1, the State commissioner of institutions and agencies in 1, the State commissioner of education in 1, and the State director of public works and the governing board in 1.

In order to make the contracts legal, they must be signed by official representatives of the State governments in 12 of the land-grant colleges.

An examination of the reports shows that the governor, State architect, and chief engineer must affix their signatures in 1 State, the attorney general and territorial auditor in 1, the attorney general in 1, the members of the State building commission in 1, the State board of examiners in 1, the State commissioner of education in 1, the State board of agriculture in 1, the State business manager in 1, the president and secretary of the State commission of institutions and agencies in 1, the president and secretary of the State board of administration in 1, and the director of the State board of public works and the secretary of the governing board in 1. Where the institutions have full authority over the awarding of contracts for new buildings, they are signed by the president of the governing body at 6; the president and secretary of the governing body at 1; the executive committee of the board of trustees at 1: the university president at 3; the president, business agent, and chairman of the executive committee at 1; the chairman of the executive committee at 1; the chairman of the governing board and the university president at 1; the full membership of the board of trustees at 2; and the chief business officer at 3. Upon the question of whether contracts may be awarded if the bids exceed the architect's estimate of construction costs, it was found that 31 institutions permit the awarding of contracts under such circumstances.

Supervision of the work of construction is an essential part of the administration of building operations. Attention has been given this matter in all the land-grant colleges. In addition, it is found that in 12 cases the State government also supervises the work.

Institutional supervision is conducted by the architect in 22 colleges, by the superintendent of buildings and grounds in 9, by the construction superintendent in 4, by the chief business officer in 3, by a person designated by the governing board in 1, by the dean of the agricultural engineering division in 1, and by a special inspector in 1. The State governments supervise the work through the State architect or a representative at 9 institutions, a special State building inspector at 2, and by the State engineer at 1.

In the case of disputes, provision for arbitration is contained in the building contracts of 27 instances while the contracts of 6 others provide no definite arrangement for their settlement. Information was not supplied on this point by the other institutions.

Chapter VII. Summary and Conclusions

Reorganization of financial administration, business procedure, and accounting systems is an outstanding need of the land-grant institutions. Business management and finance, as they at present exist in some of the colleges, are inadequately organized and based on unsound principles.

(1) A primary essential is recognition of the fact that in every institution there are two distinct types of activities-educational and business. The business organization should function as a service agency to the educational organization and should be responsible for the handling of all its business and financial affairs. The educational organization should be responsible for the performance of academic and educational functions. The intermingling of these two organizations is found in many of the colleges.. Educational officers and members of the teaching staff are frequently charged with duties belonging to the business administration which results in division of responsibilities and in improper functioning of both the educational and business organizations.

(2) The specific functions that should be assigned to the business organization are the receipt of money, handling of expenditures, custodianship of funds, accounting, purchasing, operation of physical plant, financial control of residence and dining halls, management of auxiliary enterprises, and all other services involving the collection and disbursement of funds. These activities should be concentrated in a central business office under the control of a chief business officer. Any plan of distributing part of the business functions to independent agencies, to faculty and administrative committees, and to deans of colleges or department heads-situations that are found in a number of the institutions-can only lead to confusion and to complicated procedures.

(3) The chief business officer should serve directly under the president. He should be selected by the president and his appointment should be recommended by the president to the governing board. The heavy responsibilities involved in the management of the business affairs of a land-grant institution make it essential that the chief business officer be of unquestioned ability and specially trained in business administration. To obtain service of this type