Here it is.
The executive summary is above, and the full report is below.
This needs much closer review, but the gist of it appears to be: No glaring problems, but the U could be more efficient.
The report compares the U’s administration to that of more than half a dozen similar universities. It appears to be in the middle of the pack.
The U’s finance chief, Richard Pfutzenreuter, says the study validates the belief that the U is not making any big mistakes:
“We’re not out of line. There isn’t an extremely inefficient function, and there isn’t an extremely efficient function. We’re in the middle. … I’d like to be able to say that we’re a lot like Lake Woebegon where everything we do is above average. We’re not. We know that we have work to do — hard work to do — but that said, I don’t think we’re all that bad, either.”
Pfutzenreuter says out of four departments studied, human resources shows the greatest need for improvement. Information technology and finance seemed strongest, he said. The report also looked at procurement.
Among the report’s suggestions are that the U computerize some procedures, and Pfutzenreuter says the U needs to make some operations more centralized.
The U paid half a million dollars for the study after legislators began questioning its administrative spending.