InAPa-

INTER-UNWEIWW AND % O M P ~ N S

On* of the J s W c t S !ar rf fecrln#

FA is ro manage rlnancial afla;rs

UJ

utmost efllclencv

:?In the orgrnlsr tlon. with be

f. . 3

~ r h e r vital asp.ct Is to compare one's performance r:mI'ar :.proved. Or#JnlSJtiOnS so that the eff:cIency could
FA

that or further For tool

in

Universl ties is no erceptdon

to
J

this. handy

'nter-Unl versl t y i'omprrlson. ratlo anal vsfs becomes an0 b8ln# a

rJtJ0 I t

removes the effects

Of

variables which Could here to

70; be c o m p r e d In absolute terms. dmsl4n

J

An attempt 1s Ud.

n w b e r ot dla#nosllc ratlos in respect of all p r t s I to

I t 1s also andeavoured

f v of accounts and the Balance Sheet.

nor). out arm-1 rverr#es ol assets certaln Il#ltallon#
r::h

to

a v ~ e w to com~.re, ulthin status of

and lnterpretatlons, the rssets

dlfferenc Central Unlversltlee. Here. coeprrlson Is made w i t h NU.

1.

ldoortioa rad Wrtionrl Detelopnnt,

&.Cft.

l* at l critical crorr road of history where the cboice 18 b e t m w n education and disaster. lo must eitber build a round, balanced effective m d imaginative .due&tional ryrtem to meet our developing needs and rerpond to our Challenging aspirations or be content to be rvept arid. by the strong current. of history. This categorical statement of the Education in 1966 is Still valid even today. Need to Plug b r k a g e 1 educational reformsand tons and tons find of the Couission

recowandations of conissions and committees, do not ilgbt of the day becruee of resource crunch. :or Any

recommendation a long

developoent lnvolves cost and so merely enumerating

list of recommendations

Alone will not fetch the desired results Bence the first

jus to lack of funds for their ;@pleaentation.

bud loremost concern should be on developing the effectiveness of

tbc

fiaancirl could

system so that w l t h l n be ude

the available

resources, at the a

?!forts b:hleve.snt

to improve the system

aiming

o f the objectSv@s.

Any amount of pouring water in

ieaky bucket will not fetch benefit. Before identifying

:O

sources 1

improve re.ources,

i t is A must tbrt the present resources are

::illred

optimally rod effectively. Y . C . Kulandri Smamy states.

?hl000 no doubt bar been and is a constraint but th.t bar not b w n the u i n impediment. The real weaknetre of tb. higber education system in India todry ir the mlkBe88 of its management. If there is one siagle 18p.ct of bigber education that deserves and mrrrrntr 1 Y l i a t e attention, it is tbe managemat of Univer~ity mrrortion

?A, the Core of YAnag.rent System The entire management system ultimately depends on

finance, as it is required for implementing managerial decisions, except in the case of non-monetary incentive and motirational

programer.

Effective PA using modern techniques and methods, is highly

essentlbl especially in Universities, which are producing techalcal u n p o v e r to man the top corporate organisations.

With to develop

this vital objective in view, an attempt is to diagnose It

made the is

a few indicators which would help

wtaknesres of the departments or units of the University. also further attempted to find out certaln indicators for

Inter-

Onlverrlty Coaparlson which may have certain limitations to start

with,

but i t could be improved and made effective by introducing

better accounting and budgetary control. Rood for Ooiform Accounting Inter-firm coopariron is a technique used by bodlea country costing to
bt

corporate in the

improve

the porforunce of

the

industries

adoptlag wherever possible Such

uniform

~ c c o u n t l y and to identify the

wthoda.

comparison is useful

*e&knerrer of s c m of the units coming into tbe fold of inter-firm Caprrieon, rod try to improve their effectiveness

by

adopting

Certafa n t b o d r rod procedures folloved la better Intodim eaparieoa la r ready moans by which

organiaations. exp.rieoccl

and

rkill rrailable to tbe beat unit in an indurtry, is made available

1

to one and a11 within it. me11 and hence an

This is applicable to Universitier as here to identify inter-

attempt is made

unirerrity indicatorr in the field of PA.

The indicating unlverritlem need it8 tbe

annual

accounts cost

remain of the

as

static

record Though it

bistoric

Universities.

are service orgaaisrtions not aiming at profit,

not prevent the management to reform the system to productlvitp. If the Lniversitles want to improve

improve their be rith

productlvity,

naturally modern accounting techniques

should

rdopted incorporating the features of corporate accounting, 6u:table ~odiflcatlons and adaptations.

2
Om

Prakasb

brings forth the importance of h t i o s thus:

Tbe h t l n word Ratio stands for reason &nd indicates the relation or the proporticc of one thing to another and Accounting Ratios have been amply developed to dlagnore and Study the effecrlveness of organisations. Modern Management Science, lo an endeavour to import ObJectivity and precision i : nc the decision making prooerm, bar coma to rely rather heavily on Quantitative techniques, a jolnt family within which ratio a n a l y ~ i s appears to be mst conveniently &pprorch&ble member. Hovever, for tbe m s t prrt, the ererc1.e ham been limited to : e area of financial h uaaaswnt

1.

8 Banarjoe and J.B. Bhattachrrpa, Bend . U~UA Publirherr, Calcutta. 1867, p.698.

Book

of

Costing,

2.

h Prakroh,Ratio analyria for u n a g w n t in new p.rspectiveU W g a o n t Ratioo,Biulaya Publishing m . B b y .,#., l987,p.v.

Application of U t i o r Cosldering the immense value of ratio analysis, it is of or

being endeavoured to apply this technique to the entire field management, o~rational nanagewnt including financial management, production

management, and general

marketing management.

management, Such a technique

personnel is not

profusely applied for national and Inst:tutlonal

level comparison

tn the education system, even at University Education Level. Advantagr of Ratios as a Technique of Cosparison The beadr annual accounts provide information on four Accoxnt. major

Son-Plan/Yaintenance

Plan/Develop.ental and Deposits

~ccount. Account.

Earmarked Special Pund account and Debt

Rare an attempt is made In evolving a package of ratios The

wbicb could indlcate the comparative status of UnlVerSitie5. abrolutr V @ ~ U ~ S cannot be compared because affect the absolute values. For example, a multifarious nascent

factors

Oniversity

Bay not have much assets as compared to a century old University. Ration uke a help to r e m v e the limitations of t i w and units reasonable comparison.
A certain

and

to

number

of

possible to ~ n n u a l of ratios

ratior

a n
of

mr. 0kd

out here I r a the data

relating

Accounta

PU and BU for 1990-91.

The caap.rison

prrrents the profile of PA of the two Universities. 11.1

RATIOS O? COYPOSITIOI OI ACCWIITS

rtm .i of the composition of the total account8

mjor

am mrkod out

bere:

Oponins Balance
1.

total Receipts
2.

-------------Plan Receipt6

---------------total Receipts
total Receipts

Xon-Plan Receipts

NPR TR

---

.576

3.

-------------

4.

Total Receipt
Debt.
5.

Sarurked B m c i a l Fund Receipts ............................... Deposit, Advlnces, Receipts ................................

ESPR ---TR DDA R

.052

----

.I77

Total Receipt

TR

%OD-Plan Payments
6.

-----------------

Total Payeents
7.

?la0 P ~ Y M D ------------- ~ S Total P I J W O ~ S Earmarked Spacial Fund Payments

8.

...............................
Total Psymeots Total Payments

ESFP

---TP
DDAP

.051

Debt. Dspoalr. Advances Payments

9.

................................
Closing Balance total Payments

---TP

.I49

10.

Cap.riroo ot Paymonts to receipts NPP

NPU

---

19.

Plan P a ~ n ------------a t s Plan 8.c.ipts 8 a n a r k e d S p . c i r l Fund Payments Earmarked S p e c i a l Fund Receipt Debt Deposit Advance Payments

13.

...............................
.............................

ESFP

---

.984

ESFB

14,

Debt Deposit Advance Receipts

15.

DDAP ---DDAR

0.842

Closing 81 lance Opening 8alance

---------------

It

may

be

noted here t h a t Ratios 11

to

15

can

be

sbtained f r o a t h e corresponding r a t i o s of r e c e i p t s and pag6entS. WP P For Example:

--TP

TR

--NR P

NPP

---,
WP R

because TR

TP

Racelpts compared paynnts

are

r a t i o s i n d i c a t e t h e amount received during t h e year, 8s to t o t a l r e c e i p t s s o a l s o the payments ratios. The

t o r e c e i p t s r a t i o s ah08 wbether

rclceipt8 &ad

payments
and

equal o r t o what e x t a n t t h e deficiency has been c r e a t e d e b r t u j o r bead. l b e r e v e r the r a t i o is exceeding

1,

under

the

p a y n n t i s g r e a t e r than the r e c e i p t s , e i t h e r e a t i n g away,from t h e 0p.ning b l a o c e o r usinq t h e funds f o m o t h e r beads.

Both

under r e c e i p t s and paywPtO,

Won-plan a

component
1 8 ~ ~

81s wrc)
tbln b.1:

tb.p

ball,

t h e c a s e PU. mhereas i t Baring b80a - 1 1

little

for BU i n 1890-91.

e8tablirh.d

1 1

year*

ahead

of

PO, IU war able to gain more t

fund.

funds

through sustained leas

earurked

~.i1 pc.

PU has to make a greater and

,ffortr in tbir direction, as tbe ratios relating to PO are than tbat of ilU: In tbe

ESPR/TR of W mas 0.052 and for HI) it was 0.122. case of payments to receipts ratio tbey were

more tban one for HU for Non-Plan,

Plan and Endowments accounts, received

~ndicating the fact tbat tbey spent more than what they
in

For PU, i t was so, only in tbe case of plan account. CB fbese facts were also reflected in the ratios which were OB s . 5 0 7 for BU and 1.653 for PU i.e. the CB became 1.653 times tbat

1990-91.

---

o f 38 for PO.

11.3

RATIOS OF PART I, WON-PLAN ACCOUNT payments income for and

The rtc:rrlng

receipts and payments account shows

and non-recnrrlng expendlture whereas the account upon the shows the recurring of

expenditure :*pending 2o;lalng

expenditure figures, as

alone. the

rvailability

detailed

recurring

expendlture analysls is

made,

Balance

Sheet figurer take care of assets aspects.

Ratlor of Receipts
1.

Yaintenanee Grants from UGC Total lnc-

---------------------------

YC

--

0.841

0.938

TI

2.

Univetmity Receipts ---,-,-----------Total Ino0.e

A?

total I s o o n

TI

0.030

Included in 4

4.

mio oat ion tees --------------Total Income

b o d and Building Income

5.

total Income
6.

........................

-----------------Total Income
Total Income

Publlcatlon Income

Yi~cellaneous Receipts
7.

.....................
Acadoalc Pees

8.

------------University Receipta
Examiaa tion Pees

Included in 9

9.

---------------University Receipts

University Receipts
10.

Land and Building Income -----------------------Publlcatioas Income

11.

-------------------

University Receipts

Yiscellansous Receipts
12.
--*-------------*-----

University Receipts

&.currlnf
13.

Payments ----------------. t

Total Py. am0

14.

loo Recurring Payments ---------------------Total payments Admlnistrativo Office Bxpanditura total txpooditure

15.

--------------------------------

16.

Olliae txpoodl ture -------------------TO-1 8~p.lrdit~r8

VC

Office Expenditure -----------------------t o u 1 txpanditure 1 . t r . Finance Office Expenditure Total Eapclnditure

ROE TE

---

----------------------------VCOE AOE ROE --A08 POE

.................................
VC Office Expenditure Adolnistrative Office Expenditure Registrar Office Expenditure ................................. Adoinistrative Office Expenditure Finance Office Expenditure

---------------------------------

Administrative Office Expenditure

---

AOE ADE TE

Academic Departments Expenditure ................................ Total Expenditure Total Salaries

- --

-----------------

Total Expenditure Other Cbarges

----------------Total Expend; turc Tssching Strfl Salar~es Total Salarles Won-Teacblng Staff Salaries Total Salaries
Conoa Service and G@ncrrl Cbarges
------------------*---------------

-----------------------

TSS TS

---

CSCS TE

----

Total Expenses Examlaat ion Bapencer --------------------Total Expenditure Library Exponser Total txponaea

--------------Expeoror

?~llOW.bip Bcholarship Expanses -------------------------20-1

FSE

--TE

31.

Bo8tel kxpan8es Total Expenses

--------------TE SFE --0.025 0.003 ODE TE

32,

Student Iacilities Expenses ........................... Total Expenres Other Departments Expenses

----------em--------------

33.

Total Expenses 34. Provldent Pund,Pension Expenditure .................................. Total Expenses

35.

---

0.081

0.156

PFPE ---TE PD

0.001 Not Provided

0.011

Provision for Depreciation

..........................

--

0.005

Total Expenses Yalntained Institutions Expenses 36. Total Expenses Analysls of Receipts For mbereas PC,

TE HIE TE

--------------------------------

---

Not Applicable 0.019

University receipts contributed

0.159

parts and

I t was only 0.062 parts for ID. The academic

exaslaation .hercar land Ratios 0.476 and

8

fees contributed 0.030

0.076

fees

0.106 parts for incore for (0.191

PO
from

i t was only 0.023 phrts for EU.

The other

building

and publications mere not so much 0.7

W.
+

and 9 indicate that fees formed nearly

0.667) parts of University receipts of PO.

An

anrlpris of the expenditure ratios 8os h.

that

the
for

Adrinfrtrrti~~ Office Expenditure was prop~rtionatelp higher (0.148) tarn for PU (0.104). Oftice of Ily1rtr.r
10 RU. the expandituret for

the

and Finance Officer were higher a8

cmp.nb

to

W.

Y . 8

imply the poraible interpretations that

either

in PO tbere was less number of staff or less facilities o r better ecoaOW. itrs
A

deeper analyair of the reveal the

expenditure the

by

individlul wag of

would

the point/area where at

expenditure ram

exceeding

standard in

BU

or

the

expenditure need to

nature

PD

indicating

the

provide the

addition&l staff or better facilities.

la the year 1990-91.

expenditure in Vice-Chancellor's office was higher in PU than W . Thlr had was due to the fact that at the infant stage to be taken or initiated at Vice-Chancellor's every action and of

office

hence required more staff to accomplish tbe work. expenditures of the three major heads,

The ratios

Vice-Chancellor

office,

Begiatrar oftice and Finance Office, to the total expenses (ratios

16

administrative view. .The

to

18)

also

confirm

this

expundlture
rlso

in HC war proportionately higher than that of PO, is Expenditure'.

corroborated by the indicator 'Per Employee

For

PU. i t was Rs. 18.97 thousands and for HU it was These are only broad ind~cators and can be drawn by further

Rs.

24.59

thousandr. exact

specific rith

and

inferences

analysis

-re
of are

inforution and details.

These indicators serve as a corpass

navigator rbowlng tbc dlrcctioa in which the institutions

w r i n g , which mag be due to inter-play o f

It

innwberable

factors. or

could pave way to find out the exact CaU6eS of deficiency

HamUrem requlred to improve the system.

4 c r

I.p.ndl

t ure
aide also the expenditure indiator m. a

In aaademic
higbor tor 110 (O.J84)

but not of much variation.

Per Teaoher m d

per

Student

Lxpenditures and

were far thousands).

higher These

for

EU

(88.351.22 8s. 224.34

thousands

88.4 1.66

were

thousands And 86.34.28 When cmpared. was 'Per

tbousands for PU. Teacher Departmental Expenditure' i.e. is

BU

it in found that the situation was the same more than PU but when 'Per Student

spanding

Departmental slightly

~xpenditure' is compared, i t is found that the rate was

higher for PU (16.67). This was due to low Student Teacher Ratio

:or Pt ( 2 . 1 8 ) .

I t was 5.091 for HV.

That is, for every

reacher Thus

there were 5.091 students whereas i t was only 2.18 for PU. tb@Se ratios in clearly indlcate the need to improve

students ST8 is and out

strength fixed

PC as compared to KC.

But when a standard

for each department for optimum .~tilizationof funds, found

effecttveners ln teachlug, the exac: .zariance can be and remedial measures can be suggested. Expenditure on Gxrmlnation men
expenditures on examination and the

library

are

c w p a r e d i t 1s found that PC was spending proportionately more on e~amlnrtlon than HU. ln~tltutions. The u j o r reason is that PO has affiliated on

A mtudy of the various items of

expenditure

examlnrtion at PU and BU w u l d reveal the possible ways and m a n s

of lntroduciog economy or cost reduction teachniques for

M y

PO. to

It be

r 1 . o

b.

due to the fact that the number of

b. high in pt~with small number Of

prpera
Cni.e .ddtt

.guird

for
a11

each
beaer

.aj.~t,which naturally would increare expenditure w

of ourinatiao.

For Library, PU axpenditure was far lower than that RU. This 8180 discussed when the development of assets Puther the indicators discussed in The average was value

of was the of

rnalysd in Cbapter Five. succeeding book0 pager

also corroborate this.

per year was only Rs.19.8 lakhs for PU which

Rs.3B.i

lrkhr for HU. 5:udent

Thie is further strengthened by the indicators per books (13.15 for PL' and 36.39 for HU) books
(86.10 for PU and 306.84

library

and

per

rcrcber library ratlous sore angles

for

HU).
to

Prom
invest as

i t 1 s clearly found that PU required

on Library faci!it;es

:n buildlng up its stock as

well

providing faclllties.

11.4
Sow

RATIOS OF PART 1 1 , PLAN ACCOUNT

the

of

important

ratios

of

plan

account

as

:>eputed from receipts a n d payments accounts are given below: R8:ior of Plan Account Revenue/Recurring Payseors Total Payoants Won-Recurring Paywnts
2.

.,

-----,----,,-,--------

Total P a m a t e ~ u i i d i n g ~atmentr
3.
,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,-

Bon-Recurring

BP

-nm'

0.272

0.560

4.

--------------

Paymaate

NRP LBP ---

Ubr~r).books Payments

----

b - l r a u r r i a g Payments

5,

Purnitnro Payments

..................... Boa-Rocnrring Payments

Vohicln P a y w n t

6.

---------------Won-Recurring Payments

lon-hourring Payments 7. 5auip.nt Payments -----------------Computer Payments

8.

-----------------

CP

Won-Recurring Payments Structure Of Receipts and Payments These structure of ratios non-plan provide a fer:ile and plan receipts

--

Included under Equipment

RRP

field to and

analyse

the These

payments.

indicators are useful in comparing the expenditure pattern of the Cnlversitles. Revenue expenditure under plan account was a little higher than the Capltal expenditure for PU,because fresh specific schemes whlch were sanctioned to PC during Seventh P l a ~ were
was

continued in 1990-91 also,whereas for HU capital expenditure far beavler than the revenue expenditure in 1990-91. spared 0.70 parts of total payments for equipment and Further

PO

coDputers

whereas I1U could spend 0.367 parts.

11.5

BIT108 OF PART 111, BARNARKED SPECIAL PUID ACCOWI

&tios o f Barurked Special Fund Account are worked out

from receipts and payments accounts as shown below:

?o~lm.hip, Scholarship P a y m n t s

1.

. I -

T . t 1

P.ymnts

FSP TP

---

0.314

0.902

2.

PrOjOCt8 Prymontr
---------------**

Total Paywatr
3.

................................
Projoctr Payments ----------------Projects Receipts Seminar Payments

tellwrblp, Bcbolarrhip Payments Pellwrbip, Scbolarlrblp Receipts

PSP PSR

---

0.889

1.381

4.

5.

---------------Seminar Receipts

Total Payments
6,

Seminar Payments ---------------Asset8 Payments Total Payments In

,,

--------------PC.
only :o~kl prymeats on projects ratio including
If

Assrts

Trs

i.?E9,whereas I t was 0.425 for HU. mare !unds c a n be received to

:lke epxlpreer.:
:-rids

more up PU more

prc:actr
soae

arc conple:e:, tbe rsse:s tbc

build

of

and

books.

However, spent

-:.:ired
:ban
its

better

receives !or seminars. HU

recelpts st !eliorshlp an3 projects ln

1990-91, Using

opening balance.
il.6

RAT108 OF PAR:

I\',DEBT, DEPOSITS AND ADVANCES ACCOUhT

are

Seperates sets of ratios lor receipts and payments

oorkrd out for part I\' account as follo~s:

Rattor Of Ikoeiptr

PO
PPR TDR

1990

- 91 W
0.420

---

0.143

2 .

Depreciation Reeerve Receipts ............................. Total Deposits Receipts House Building Fund Receipt

DRR --TDR RBF

Not Provided

0.032

3.

...........................

Total Deposits Receipts Security Deposits

4.

TDR

---

0.004

0.537

......................
........................

Total Deposits Receipts

5.

SD --TDR CDR

0.011

0.017

Caution Deposit Receipts Total Deposits Receipts

TDR RRR

---

0.005

0.006

6.

Remittance, Recoveries Recelpts ............................... Total Receipts

TR

---

0.238

0.437

In
higher Accounts Advance ratio. for

Item

3, HU received Rs. 15 lakhs separate

from

UGC

hence

PU is also having

Temporary of

Advances Temporary for

Plan and Non-Plan heads.

The Ratio

Receipts (Non-Plan) to total receipts was 0.162 and

Plan, it was 0.128. Ratioe of Payments PF Payments 7. Total Payments Depreciation Fund Payments
8.

PFP

---

0.070 Not Provided

0.448

TP DEP

..........................

---

0.029

Total Payments
9.

TP BBAP TP CDP

House Building Advance Payment Total Payments

..............................

----

0.014

0.056

10.

Security Deposit Payments ......................... Total Payments Caution Deposit Payments

--TP

11.

........................

CDP TP

---

0.002

0.004

~otal payments

Remittance, Recoveries Payments ~ o t a lPayments PF Payments ----------PF Receipts House Building Advance Payments

...............................

RRP

PFP --PFR HBAP BBFR SDP --SDR CDP

...............................
Security Deposit Receipts

Rouse Building Fund Receipts Security Deposit Payments ......................... Caution Deposit Payments

----

........................

---

Caution Deposit Receipts Depreciation Fund Payments .......................... Depreciation Fund Receipts Remittance 8 Recovery Payments Remittance 8 Recovery Receipts

CDR DFP --DFR RRP

--RRR

......................
Total Receipts

Pension Fund Receipts

--TR

PFR 0.025

Not. Shown Not Shown Not Shown Not Shown

Pension Fund Payments

.....................

PFP

---

0.012

Total Payments Pension Payments .................... Pension Fund Receipts Endowments Interest Receipts

TP PP

--PFR

0.472

............................

--TR

EIR

0.012

Total Receipts Endorment Payments -----------------Total Payments Endowment Payments

0.007

Aeglible

..........................

--EIR

Endowment Interece Receipts Endowment Total Receipts ........................ Total Receipt

There statement

is no uniform presentation of the items

of

the

and hence a few receipts/payments cannot be

compared. cushion are not

The receipts of various advances and deposits serve as a for paying temporary advances. When adequates funds

available for meeting urgent expenses,the deposits in these items may be temporarily utilised and then recouped. For

PU,

the ratio of OB to Total

receipts

was

2.60

whereas the CB to total payments was 0.377. This indicates there was adequate balance for meeting payments. to CB was 1.450 Depreciation on Assets

that

The ratio of OB

PU is not providing depreciation on fixed assets.

is a major issue to be decided at national level. There Though

This are the

viers

both for and against providing depreciation. grant is paid by UCC, when major

maintenance obsolete purchasing or

equipment

becomes for

out-of-order, a major amount will be such equipment but normally all cannot

required be

purchased in made

from Maintenance Account. plan from

If funds have been already planned be

account, the purchase of the costly equipment can it. If an expenditure occurs due to unexpected

break-down

of any of the costly equipment, it would be difficult to meet the expenditure. Since University is non-profiting organisstion, and

there is no P and L account or P and L appropriation account hence depreciation in not provided.

11.7

RATIOS OF BALANCE

SHEET

The ratios relating to assets and liabilities are given below separately: ~ a t i o rof Asretr
1

Fixed Assets ----- -----. Total -Assets Current Assets

2,

--------------Fixed Assets

Buildings Value
3.

Fixed Assets
4.

---------------Fixed Assets Library Books Value

Furniture Value

5.

-------------------

LBV

---

0.085

0.201

Fixed Assets
6.

FA

Vehicles Value -------------Fixed Assets Equipment Value Fixed Assets

7.

---------------

8.

-----------------Current Assets PF Investments

Temporary Advances

9.

--------------

PFI CA

---

Not Shown

0.403

Current Assets 10. Endowment Investments ..................... Current Assets

11.

Rouse Building Advance

......................

HBA

---

Not Shown

-0.255

Current Assets
12.

CA
CBA --CA 0.585

Cash Bank and Hand -----------------Current Assets

RatiOB of Liabilities Capital Grants 13.

------------------------------------

Total Liabilities Current Liabilities

14.

Total Liabilities Endomen ts

15.

-------------------

Current Liabilities Deposits

16.

----------------Current Liabilities PF Deposits

17.

-----------------

PFD

--CL

Current Liabilities HBA Fund

18.

CL HBAF ----

----------------....................

Current Liabilities Unspent Balance

19.

Current Liabilities 20. Net Working Capital ------------------Total Assets Unit Investment on Assets 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
28.

NWC

--TA
(Rs. in thousands) PEFA 85.72 106.84 1526.17 181.01 36.39 60.61 6.33 306.84 511.06

Per Employee Fixed Assets Per Teacher Fixed Assets Per Student Pixed Assets Per Student Library Books Per Student Equipment Per Employee Furniture Per Teacher Library Books Per Teacher Equipment

PTFA 1013.72 PSFA PSLB PSE PEF PTLB PTE 154.82 13.15 12.06 4.69 86.10 78.97

UNIT EXPENDITURE INDICATORS

A Comparison

of the indices per unit expenditure from

maintenance grant speci&l efforte:

shows the gaps which should be bridged by

(Rs. in thousands)
1.

Per Employee Expenditure Per Teacher Expenditure Per Student Expenditure Per Teacher Departmental Expenditure Per Student Departmental Expenditure

PEE PTE PSE PTDE PSDE

18.97 224.34 34.26 67.77 16.67

24.59 351.22 41.66 128.04 15.19

2.

3.
4.

5.

Ratios of Unit Expenditure Per Employee Expenditure

6.

........................

PEE

---

0.085

Per Teacher Expenditure

7.

PTE

.......................

Per Student Expenditure Per Teacher Expenditure

---

PSE
0.153

PTE PSE PEE

Per Student Expenditure

8.

.......................

Per Employee Expenditure

9.

---

1.806

..................................
Non-Teaching Staff Number

Per Student Department Expenditure PSDE

-------

0.200

Per Teacher Department Expenditcre PTDE

10.

..........................
11.8

NTSN TSN

4.280

Teaching Staff Number

RATIOS OP INTRA-UNIVERSITY CONPARISON

Detailed analysis of inter-departmental expenditure was

made in Chapter Seven.

Here application of

ratios for

Intra-

Univerrity comparison is illustrated by taking Physics Department

as

a case study, attempting inter-University comparison of

such

intra-University indicators.

Ratios of Physics Department Teacher Department Expenditure

1.

..............................

TDE DE

--DE

0.656

BA

Department Expenditure Non-Teacher Department Expenditure 2.

..................................
Departmental Expenditure

NTDE ---NTDE

0.108

NA

3.

Non-Teacher Department Expenditure .................................. Teacher Department Expenditure

------DE

0.111

NA

TDE 0.236 NA

Other Charges Department Expenditure OCDE

4.

Department Expenditure Department Expenditure

5.

................................
STR =

DE

--SN --

0.288

0.288

Group of Departments Expenditure

6.

GDE 2.180 5.091

Students Number --------------Teachers Number Teachers Number

TN TN TSR =

7.

------------

-SAE --SPE

0.460

0.196

Students Number
8.

SN 0.833 0.955

Students Appeared for .......................... Exam. Students Passed the Exam

9. Per Student Department Expenditure = PSDE 36.37

10. Per Teacher Department Expenditurs = PTDE 89.27

(Rs. in 1000) 24.38 124.13 Department for other

These indicators are worked Out for Phpsics as an example and similar analysis can be done

department6 also.

1l.B

AVERAGE ACCUMULATION OF ASSETS COMPARISON

Problem in Comparison It asset6 of is not meaningful to compare the accumulation years. of

two Universities established in different established for longer period would

A
have

university

normally

accumulated more assets. With time

1

a view to compare accumulation of assets

over

a the

span and to nullify the time impact to certain extent,

average value Cnlversities

of assets accumulated can be computed and by this, of different years of existence could be compared.

Average Value Per Annum as Indicator

1.

Average Fixed Assets Value Average Buildings Value Average Equipment Value Average Library Books Value Average Vehicles Value Average Furniture Value

(Rs. in lakhs) (AFAV) 252.6 225.5

2.
3. 4.

(ABV)
(AEV) (ALBV) (AVV) (AFV)

179.0 18.2 19.8 3.4 12.8

75.3 65.2

39.1 3.5 11.5

5.

6.

Analysis
PU

being in the nascent stage, has to invest

more

on

basic
So,

building requirements to accommodate

DepartmentsJSchools. nearly double

the Average Buildings Value for PU (179) was value of HU (75.3). facilities

the

But PO was lagging behind in These two areas

providing should get

library

and equipment.

more

attention in PU.

UCC should provide

proportionately

lore

funds for these two areas under Plan scheme. In Rs. as fact, if the absolute value is to be avoided, say taken can be

of expenditure, the average Fixed Assets Value can be the denominator and the ratios of respective assets

worked out and compared. Ratios of Average Values per Annum Average Buildings Value
1.

..........................

ABV

Average Fixed Assets Value 2.

AFAV AEV

---

0.709

0.334

..........................

Average Equipment Value Average Fixed Assets Value

--AFAV ALBV

0.072

0.289

3.

Average Library Books Value

...........................
Average Vehicles Value

---AVV --AFAV

0.078

0.173

Average Fixed Assets Value

4.

AFAV 0.014 0.016

..........................
Average Fixed Assets Value Average Furniture Value

5.

..........................
The analysis

AFV

---

0.051

0.051

Average Fired Assets Value of the ratios

AFAV as indicators connected established

with

various accounts and Balance Sheet has clearly

the hypothesis H 10: The variations between diagnostic indices of

PA of an older University m d a new University are considerable.

8Uuaz-y and Conclusion The finmcial malyring ratio analysis is useful in of the getting a complete

perspectives the

Universities

compared. shown

By
under

ratios of the receipts and Payments

~ b s t r a c t r / r u ~ a r y ,the composition of Parts I to IV, along the OB/CB 18 clearly brought out. HU. PU's receipts and

with

payments plan

sere leas than

PU spent more than its receipts

under

account wharear HU did so in parts I to 111 accounts. An analysis of the ratios of Nan-Plan accounts showed to PU.

that PU's share of grants from UCC was only 0.841 as compared 0.938 of HU. The University internal receipt was better in

~dministrative and accademic expenses were higher in HO. expense was proportionatly higher in BU but it was expense in PU. PU spent more on

Teacher for and

higher

non-teacher

examination

students facility hut less on library. Under Plan Account, PU being a new University the on was for

proportion of revenue payments vere higher

-ne PU's payments

not-recurring items vere only 0.478 to the total, whereas it

0.616

for HU.

PU could spare 0.070 parts of total payments

equipment and computers whereas, HU could spend 0.367 parts.

In the case of Earmarked Special Funds, HU was able pay than much towards scholarships and projects (ratios were
1

to

greater utilized

which

vas not so high ior PU.

Rovever,

PU

better, the funds received for seminars. Under Debt and Deposit of accounts, the major component (0.537) in was higher
AU

receipts for HU was HBA (House Building Advance)

1990-91.PP receipts ratio was also higher for HU,O.42O,which only 0.143 for PU. Payments of HBA to ABA Receipts, was

for PU. 0.002

Receipt8 to total receipts ratio was 0.025 for

and

for RD which was very low.

The Ratio of fixed assets to total assets for PU was

0.923 and 0.863 for AU. The major chunk of the investment had

gone to buildings.

The ratio of Buildings value to Fixed

Assets far was ratio

was 0.767 for PU and 0.387 for AU. higher 0.133 for for PU. PU

Endovment investment was current assets The

The ratio of endowment to and 0.001 for AU it

was very meagre.

of PP Deposits to Current Liabilities was higher for HU than PO. The negative for PU ratio ratio of Net Working Capital to Total
(-

Assets The

was

0.034) and it was 0.027 for HU.

negative in

for PU indicatesthe financial difficulties faced by PU

1990-91. Unit in per student expenditures were less for PU than AU, departmental expenditure. For example, except unit Except were

values of fixed assets for PU sere far less than that HU. ln Equipment and Library the Average Fixed Assets values

higher for PU,because of acceleration in accumulating the assets, in its infant stage. Ratios have been evolved so that the Intra-University

Comp&rison of departments, as well as Inter-University Comparison of respective departments may be made. The ratio

of

Physics was and

Department same

expenditure to that of Science Group in

1990-91 lower

for PU and HU but the Student Teacher Ratio was

Per Student Department Expenditure was higher for PU.

The output (for

ratio (number of students passed) was better for AU (0.955) PU it wrs (0.833).

Packape of

diagnostic

ratios

to picturise system

the

complete evolved.

financial This

profile of the University would help to make

bas been

package

Inter-University The with

coa~prriron like Inter-firm comparison of corporate bodies. four major accounts, ratios, parts I to I V have been analysed the

appropriate Sheet. aleo which

along with ratios relating to

Balance have field with

Ratios been has

based on unit and average values of The study of ratios is a University

assets fertile system

attempted.

opened new vistas in PA in

fascinating findings and there is ample scope to evolve ratios at further micro levels as a separate study.