Years from now, the stunning University of Colorado Health Sciences Center now sprouting at the old Fitzsimons Army base will be one of the metro area’s crown jewels – a thriving medical hub where some of the world’s most accomplished doctors and scientists conduct research and train future generations of health care professionals.
That is, if it’s properly funded.
State funding to operate the health sciences center has dropped nearly $18 million, or 24 percent, in four years, down to $56 million. CU’s medical school ranks among the lowest in the country in terms of state appropriations and tuition revenue.
No one wants the actual buildings to be better – and better funded – than what’s inside them. Colorado lawmakers next year should restore funding levels to where they were when cuts began in 2001, before too many top-flight researchers jump ship and the now-proud reputation of CU’s medical school wilts. Achieving that benchmark next year should be just a beginning.
The center should be seen as an investment in Colorado’s health care and economy – both now and for the future.
Today, CU’s researchers, doctors and staff are doing yeoman’s work, ranking fourth among medical schools in the amount of federal grant money it takes in despite ranking 71st out of 73 public medical schools in the amount of state and tuition support it receives per student. (The state in 2005 provided a ubermodest $24,000 per student to CU’s medical school – far below the $95,000 national average for public medical schools.)
CU is almost doing too good of a job because you can practically hear the tax curmudgeons say: Why give them more if they’re doing more with less?
Simply put, the current system cannot be sustained.
Tuition has almost doubled in four years, jumping from $11,966 per medical student in 2002 to $20,718 last year. Professors now basically forage for their own salaries by practicing medicine. Then, 10 percent of their earnings goes to a “dean’s tax” that supports academic enrichment and research.
The campus has lost top faculty members to other campuses where there’s less pressure to earn their salaries and they can concentrate on teaching and research – the major reasons such facilities exist.
With last fall’s passage of Referendum C, lawmakers boosted the health sciences budget to $61.3 million for next year, a good gesture but still $12 million less than the 2001 budget. Lawmakers must seize the challenge when they convene in January and restore the massive reductions. No one wants to look back on the $822 million move to Fitzsimons as a wasted opportunity.
