Skip to Main Content


A Management Review of Francis Marion University
August 1998

REPORT (PDF)     SUMMARY (PDF)

Members of the General Assembly asked us to conduct a review of Francis Marion University (FMU). The requesters were concerned about reports of conflict between the administration and the faculty and about FMU's decline in enrollment. They also asked us to review financial and academic issues at the university.

Faculty Issues
Francis Marion's current president assumed his position in July 1994. Since that time he has instituted a number of changes in the governance and programs of the university. His work has been well received by the FMU board of trustees and by constituencies outside the institution. However, the current administration's relationship with the FMU faculty has been generally characterized by conflict.

We surveyed faculty in February 1998 and found a pervasive conflict between the faculty and the administration that is costly and harmful to the university. Some general themes of the faculty's responses are listed below.

  • General negative characterization of the relationship between the faculty and the administration. This relationship is considered to lack trust and is variously described as poor, adversarial, poisoned, strained, torn, or "war."
  • Faculty perception that they lack input into decision-making at FMU.
  • Faculty concern with the climate in which they work. Respondents noted that faculty fear retribution and the administration attempts to govern through intimidation.
  • Faculty's generally negative views of the performance of the administration and individual administrators.
  • Faculty acknowledgment of their role in the problems that affect FMU.

We also reviewed some issues that are related to the conflict between the faculty and the administration.

  • The FMU administration disregarded the program proposal developed by a committee that considered general education issues from fall 1994 through spring 1997. As a result, the university wasted resources and has not achieved a redesign of its general education requirements.
  • The university's faculty grievance policy does not provide an adequate system through which faculty can appeal personnel decisions or alleged violations of academic freedom.
  • Francis Marion employed three part-time faculty during the 1997-98 academic year who did not meet the university's criteria for teaching courses.

Institutional Issues
Student enrollment has declined at Francis Marion in recent years. From fall 1993 to fall 1997, total enrollment declined 16%. We identified factors that may be associated with the enrollment decline.

  • Easier transfer from two-year public technical colleges to four-year public colleges may increase the likelihood that first- and second-year college students attend technical colleges.
  • Francis Marion did not have continuity in its admissions office staff from July 1995 to February 1998.
  • The disagreements and conflict between the university administration and members of the faculty have been communicated to the public through the media.
  • Though Francis Marion's tuition has been lower than many other four-year state institutions, the difference between FMU's tuition and that of nearby Florence-Darlington Technical College has increased significantly.

In response to declining tuition and fee revenues, FMU officials reported they have deferred needed maintenance of the campus. If the decline continues, Francis Marion may have to reduce staffing levels.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHE) is required by state law to develop a formula for funding public colleges and universities based on their performance. Performance funding is being phased in through FY 1999-2000. Francis Marion is responding to performance funding mandates that apply to all institutions of higher education.

  • For its FY 97-98 funding, Francis Marion's performance score ranked sixth among the nine institutions in its category. FMU has made changes in its operations, such as increasing admissions standards and obtaining accreditation for academic programs, to meet the objectives of the performance indicators.
  • There are shortcomings in the state's performance funding process. Also, the CHE should implement a system for verifying the accuracy of data reported by colleges and universities.

Financial Issues
We reviewed Francis Marion's expenditures and control over assets. Our findings are summarized below.

  • Francis Marion did not have an adequate budget for renovations made to the president's home in FY 94-95 and FY 95-96. We identified more than $235,000 in project costs, not including labor provided by university employees. Also, some items purchased were not cost-effective. The university spent approximately $100,000 to remodel the kitchen, including more than $51,000 for cherry wood kitchen cabinets. FMU also made procurement errors in the project.
  • FMU may have violated state law by improperly spending public funds on meals, receptions, and entertainment for groups of employees and board members.
  • Prior to our review, Francis Marion University had not been reimbursed for all services it provided to the Francis Marion University Foundation, a private organization. Also, FMU's internal auditor provides accounting services for the foundation, which could limit audit independence in reviewing FMU's fund-raising efforts.
  • Francis Marion could improve its system of accounting for equipment that is susceptible to theft.

Academic Issues
We reviewed several issues relating to academic standards. Our findings are summarized below.

  • FMU awarded scholarships to freshmen who did not meet the criteria for receiving the scholarships. Sixty-two (59%) of the 105 recipients did not meet the scholarship criteria. Although the criteria allow the university to make reasonable exceptions, FMU did not document why the scholarships were awarded.
  • More than 70% of Francis Marion's out-of-state (nonresident) freshmen did not pay out-of-state fees. The university has a broad policy allowing out-of-state fees to be waived for nonresident students who receive scholarships as small as $25 per semester. S.C. Code Section 59-112-70 allows institutions to waive out-of-state fees for recipients of scholarship aid. However, the practice of waiving fees for students who receive token scholarships may violate the intent of the General Assembly.
  • Francis Marion did not adequately implement its comprehensive achievement program (CAP) C a program for freshmen admitted with borderline qualifications. Also, the university has not adequately planned or monitored changes in its night class schedule.
  • Francis Marion needs to improve controls over student grade changes. Eight (15%) of 54 grade changes we examined were made without the instructor's signature. Also, the university did not use its grade appeal process.