Contributed by Ian Hartshorn, Ph.D., UNR-NFA

The Nevada Faculty Alliance notes with concern the decision of the new administration to freeze all meetings, travel, communications, and hiring within the National Institutes of Health (NIH) until approved by new political appointees.  These actions have a chilling effect on vital academic research that not only serves to protect the health of the American people but generates significant economic benefit to our state.

The NIH is a part of the US Department of Health and Human Services and serves as the nation’s medical research agency. The agency has an annual budget of more than $47 billion dollars and runs multiple programs important to academic training and research across the country.

The Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) is the largest recipient of NIH Grants in Nevada. NIH awards exceed $30 million in the state, supporting 977 jobs and generating over $200 million in economic activity. A politicized slow-down of these vital funds will harm researchers, universities, and our state.

Early reports suggest that the Trump Administration may seek to use NIH funding as a bargaining chip for other desired reforms of the country’s higher education system. The NFA rejects further politicization of academic research. Grants from the NIH undergo a rigorous review process, a process now halted for political intervention. Grants should be funded by scientific merit, not by a political litmus test.

The Nevada Faculty Alliance calls on our Nevada Congressional delegation to exercise their responsibility of budget oversight, and our Senators’ constitutional obligation of advice and consent on presidential appointments to ensure that the new administration’s decisions align with the NIH mission and broader goals of academic integrity and freedom.

The NFA stands with any researchers impacted by these decisions, and encourages campus administration, the NSHE regents, and state leaders to do all they can to encourage a timely resumption of vital NIH programs. We encourage education professionals to register their objections with the White House, and your representatives in Congress.

We urge all NFA members who might be impacted by the NIH activity suspensions, or who are aware of their effects on peers and students, to share their experiences and the extent of these impacts by submitting impact statements to their NFA Chapter Presidents. This information is vital for our NFA representatives to effectively communicate the adverse effects and repercussions of the NIH suspensions to our federal and state officials, as part of our ongoing advocacy efforts for our faculty and NSHE institutions.

Sources

https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-hits-nih-devastating-freezes-meetings-travel-communications-and-hiring

https://www.unitedformedicalresearch.org/nih-in-your-state/nevada

https://www.aaup.org/news/statement-aaup-president-todd-wolfson-national-institutes-health-freeze

###

UPDATE:  The PEBP Board voted to retain the current HMO/EPO plan option and plan design, at least for FY2026.  They also accepted the bid for the Southern HMO plan from Health Plan of Nevada, the incumbent provider, contingent on successful contract negotiation.  Thanks to all members and other state employees who gave public comment!

###

At the Thursday, January 23, meeting of the Public Employees' Benefits Program Board, the Board will consider PEBP staff's recommendation to eliminate the HMO/EPO plan options.  The southern-Nevada HMO (Health Maintenance Organization) option has been chosen by over 3000 state employees. The northern Nevada EPO (Exclusive Provider Organization) is option used by another 3000 employees.  The HMO/EPO plan options provide certainty in copays for health services in exchange for higher monthly premiums, compared with the high-deductible and low-deductible plan options, that are borne entirely by the employee with no additional state contribution.  NFA's written public comment opposing the elimination of the HMO/EPO is copied below.

To object to the elimination of the HMO/EPO, participants may provide public comment by telephone at 9:00 am on Thursday, Jan. 23, using the instructions in the agenda:

There are two agenda items designated for public comment. If you wish to provide verbal public comment during those agenda items, please follow the instructions below:

Option #1 Join the webinar as an attendee https://us06web.zoom.us/j/87092730987 This link is only for those who want to make public comment. If you are just listening to the webinar, please use the YouTube Link located in the “Video Conferencing” field above.

Option #2 Dial: (669) 900-6833. When prompted to provide your Meeting ID, please enter: 870 9273 0987 then press #. When prompted for a Participant ID, please enter #.

Participants that call in will be muted until it is time for public comment. A moderator will then unmute callers one at a time for public comment. To resolve any issues related to dialing in to provide public comment for this meeting, please call (775) 684-7016 or email jcrane@peb.nv.gov 

NEVADA FACULTY ALLIANCE
840 S. Rancho Dr., Suite 4-571
Las Vegas, Nevada 89106

Date:   January 20, 2025

To:      PEBP Board Members

From: Kent Ervin, Director of Government Relations, Nevada Faculty Alliance

Subject:   HMO/EPO plan options

We have reviewed the Segal presentation on “EPO and HMO Considerations”.  We appreciate the response to some of the Board’s requests for additional information on the EPO and HMO plans and possible modification to the low-deductible PPO plan. Unfortunately, the presentation is extremely one-sided and biased. It argues for a certain outcome, the elimination of the HMO and EPO plan options, rather than providing balanced information for the Board’s consideration.  Among the issues with the report:

• The decline in EPO enrollment is provided, but the HMO enrollment trend –which is relatively stable—is missing (page 3).
• Projecting high future cost trends for the HMO (much higher than the self-funded plans) without reference to the actual bids from the recent Request for Proposals (page 5).
• Comparing the High-Deductible, Low-Deductible, and EPO plans but not the HMO plan or blended HMO/EPO plan (pages 8-11).
• Comparing plan design with other states but not with other public employers in Nevada, with whom the State competes for employees (pages 13-19).
• For the PPO 1 and PPO 2 options, no estimates of the total rate or employee premiums in comparison with the High-Deductible, current Low-Deductible, HMO, EPO, or blended HMO/EPO plans (pages 21-23). The “cost savings” appear to come mostly from decreased payments on participant claims and the high projected trend for the HMO. 
• ·       No estimates of total rates or employee premiums for Plan Year 2026, which should be possible for all options since the recent release of the Executive Budget with PEBP subsidies per employee (pages 24-25). What is the savings in total rate or employee premiums with the addition of a $500/$1000 deductible in PPO option 2 compared with PPO option 1 or the current Low-Deductible PPO?

The best solution is continuing the three current plan options for Plan Year 2026, with further study of plan design after open enrollment and after the legislative session.Alternatively, a decision should be deferred to the March rate-setting meeting with presentation of full rates and premiums for all options for the Board’s consideration.

My comments submitted on January 7, before the canceled board meeting on January 16 and release of the Segal report, are still valid and are repeated here:

As you consider plan design changes this month, the Nevada Faculty Alliance would like to emphasize the importance of the HMO/EPO plan option to many of our participants. 

• The HMO/EPO plan provides certainty in out-of-pocket costs, which some participants are willing to pay for through higher monthly premiums.
• The southern HMO especially includes network providers who are essential to the health and well-being of their patients, including mental and behavioral health, and the productivity of employees. Disruptions to provider access must  be avoided. Are providers within the various networks actually accepting new patients?
• Because the employer contributions (state subsidies) are identical for all three plan options, PEBP has no extra costs to provide the HMO/EPO option other than administrative oversight.
• Because the high-deductible plan, the low- (or zero-) deductible plan, and the EPO option are underwritten as a single risk pool, migration between the self-funded options should not affect overall costs or the viability of individual options.
• We are not privy to the HMO Request For Proposals results, but actual competitive bids are more reliable than consultant projections. Ideally, a cost-effective statewide HMO with a broad network would be chosen.
• Major plan design changes should be deferred to Plan Year 2027, after the legislative session and to see how enrollment trends stabilize several years after the introduction of the low-deductible middle plan option.

We surveyed all rank-and-file faculty at the seven NSHE colleges and universities in November, with a stellar 40% response rate (survey results on benefits questions). Our faculty rate lower out-of-pocket costs for health care as slightly more important than lower monthly premiums.  While access to the low-deductible plan option is most popular (88% rate it as somewhat or very important), 65% of respondents say the availability of HMO/EPO is somewhat or very important.  

Retain the HMO/EPO option. Thank you for your consideration.

###

The Nevada Faculty Alliance is the independent statewide association of professional employees of the colleges and universities of the Nevada System of Higher Education. The NFA is affiliated with the American Association of University Professors, which advocates for academic freedom, shared governance, and faculty rights, and the American Federation of Teachers/AFL-CIO, representing over 300,000 higher education professionals nationwide. The NFA works to empower our members to be wholly engaged in our mission to help students succeed.

Governor Lombardo’s recommended Executive Budget for FY2026 and FY2027, known as “GovRec”, was issued with his State of the State Address on January 15, 2025. The budget outlook for NSHE colleges and universities and NSHE employees is . . . mixed.

The Good

GovRec increases the overall NSHE budget from $2.48 billion in the 2023-2025 biennium to $2.86 billion for 2025-2027, a 15.1% increase for the biennium or 7.3% annualized. Student fees and other revenues are projected to increase more (18.0%) than state appropriations (13.8%). The fraction of the total NSHE budget funded by state appropriations will decrease from 69.1% to 68.4%. The increases primarily go to fund inflation in personnel costs and utilities and enrollment growth, not new programs, improved staffing ratios, or enhancements.

NSHE Overall Budget [1]
Year	General Fund Appropriations	Student Fees & Other Revenue	Total Revenue
FY2024 actual	$816,736,844	$378,039,730	$1,194,776,574
FY2025 budget	$898,940,295	$387,835,109	$1,286,775,404
FY2026 GovRec	$979,845,771	$440,554,453	$1,420,400,224
FY2027 GovRec	$972,202,485	$463,198,572	$1,435,401,057
Biennium-over-Biennium Change
2025-27 vs 2023-25	13.8%	18.0%	15.1%

For the main state-supported instructional budgets [2] of the seven NSHE colleges and universities, state appropriations increase 15.9% overall biennium-over-biennium, ranging from 7.3% at GBC to 25.8% at WNC. The variation among the institutions results from differential enrollment growth and the partial implementation of the new NSHE funding formula.

State Appropriations for NSHE Instructional Operating Budgets
Institution	FY24 actual	FY25 budget	FY26 GovRec	FY27 GovRec	Change 2023-25 to 2025-27
UNLV	$233,991,397	$253,973,037	$292,207,372	$288,094,171	18.9%
UNR	$160,582,630	$173,121,548	$192,367,866	$191,207,189	14.9%
NSU	$32,863,186	$38,814,685	$39,015,309	$38,960,218	8.8%
CSN	$117,591,040	$125,133,833	$133,786,731	$133,143,032	10.0%
GBC	$17,101,283	$18,105,687	$18,780,503	$18,996,114	7.3%
TMCC	$39,918,718	$42,777,073	$51,638,274	$51,415,387	24.6%
WNC	$16,053,002	$19,333,255	$22,148,208	$22,374,812	25.8%
TOTAL	$618,101,256	$671,259,118	$749,944,263	$744,190,923	15.9%

The recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on Higher Education Funding are partially implemented in GovRec, phased-in over the two years of the biennium. The enhancements for each institution are shown in the table below (including the additions to the Small Institution Factor for GBC and WNC). The two comprehensive universities are held harmless; otherwise, funding would shift from them to the community colleges. NSHE estimated that  the full implementation of the new formula would cost $21.1 million per year.  The formula implementation figures represent a phase-in with 20% implementation in year 1 and 40% in year 2 of the calculated amounts for the small institution factor update and the new funding distribution formula, except without offsets for UNLV and UNR [3].

Formula Funding Enhancements in GovRec
Institution	FY2026	FY2027
UNLV	$0	$0
UNR	$0	$0
NSU	$963,120	$2,177,813
CSN	$1,991,237	$4,326,348
GBC	$492,355	$1,047,741
TMCC	$626,826	$1,279,916
WNC	$472,048	$908,700
Total	$4,545,586	$9,740,518

Other mostly good items:

GovRec funds the already-awarded cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) of 12% in FY2024 and 11% in FY2025 at 80% for 2025-2027. The COLAs for NSHE were not fully funded by the 2023 legislature, with funding at only about 65%, versus the 80% funding level for most state agencies. NSHE had to come up with the balance through a combination of budget cuts, increased student fees, and a three-month delay for faculty COLAs in FY2025. GovRec adds the funding back at the 80%, although as an enhancement item not in the base budget.

The funding of enrollment growth measured by Weighted Student Credit Hours (WSCH) is adjusted for the COLAs, increasing the per-WSCH amount from $173.29 to $208.99. In the past, the enrollment growth maintenance item was usually funded without an increase to the per-WSCH amount.

Modest funding for campus safety improvements is included in GovRec, with a one-time appropriation of $11 million. NSHE requested $38 million in one-time funding and $7 million per year in ongoing funding. GovRec thus underfunds campus safety and security improvements requested by NSHE by 72% and makes no provisions for continuing funds for the Southern and Northern Commands of University Police Services..

The nursing education expansion funded in 2023 was continued with one-time appropriations of $10 million per year.

The UNLV School of Medicine expansion funded with one-time appropriations in 2023 was continued as part of its base budget.

The budgets include increases for inflationary utilities costs and for fringe benefits including PEBP and retirement contributions.

The Bad

The Governor has not recommended any COLAs for state employees in FY2026 or FY2027. Because mandatory retirement plan contributions will increase by 1.75%, take-home pay will decrease. With inflation running at 2.5% or higher, COLAs of 5% in FY2026 and 3% in FY2027 are needed to avoid declines in real take-home salaries.

No NSHE capital improvement projects are included in GovRec, not even planning funds. Deferred maintenance is funded at only $15 million statewide, which is totally inadequate. In 2023, no NSHE building projects were funded but $50 million in one-time funds was allocated to deferred maintenance.

Graduate Medical Education is funded at $25 million per year, which should be a good thing but it is one-time funding, explicitly for 2025-2027 only, with non-state funds through the Governor’s new Public Health Authority and therefore does not provide for a sustainable increase in capacity.

The Public Employees’ Benefits Program is being moved into the new Public Health Authority along with Medicaid and the American Care Act Insurance Exchange. PEBP is an employee benefit program, not a public health program; it belongs with human resources and benefits. PEPB is currently a semi-autonomous agency under the state Department of Administration supervised by its own board appointed by the Governor.

Many one-time appropriations from the 2023 session were not continued in GovRec.

The Ugly

Upon release of the Governor’s Executive Budget, Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager expressed concern that the budget is not balanced: “It looks like ongoing expenditures are more than revenues. The budget that was brought to us actually has a structural deficit.” The statewide general fund total appropriations in GovRec is $12.769 billion for the biennium. In December 2024 the Nevada Economic Forum forecast revenue of $12.433 billion. That implies a deficit of $335.4 million for the biennium ($233.3 million in FY2026 and $102.1 million in FY2027). Because state law requires a balanced budget based on the Nevada Economic Forum forecast (the final forecast is in May 2025), the legislature will have to resolve this discrepancy. We will be interested to hear explanations from the Governor’s Finance Office at its presentation to the Legislative Commission Budget Committee on Tuesday, January 21.

Also ugly:

The work program budgets for FY2025 in GovRec, which are used as the base budgets for the next biennium, do not include the full 12%+11% COLAs already awarded to NSHE employees. Although GovRec includes the COLAs as an enhancement funded at 80%, other state agencies apparently have the actual salaries for employees including past COLAs automatically included in the base budgets.

GovRec funds PEBP claims assuming medical, prescription drug, and dental inflation will be 3.55% in FY2026 and 3.50% in FY2027, lower than the trend projection from PEBP’s actuary of 6.75% for medical and prescription drugs and 3.0% for dental. That virtually guarantees future deficits.

[1] “FY2024 actual” represents actual revenue received in fiscal year 2024 from the annual NSHE State Operating Budget Budget-to-Actual Comparison Report. “FY2025 budget” represents expected revenue for fiscal year 2025 from the annual NSHE State-Supported Operating Budget. “GovRec” is Governor Lombardo’s recommended budget in the 2025-2027 Executive Budget as proposed in January 2025 to the 2025 Legislature. All revenues in GovRec are matched by budgeted expenditures.

[2] State-Supported Operating Budgets include the main instructional budgets of the seven NSHE colleges and universities. There are a total of 31 state-supported NSHE programs that are separately budgeted by the State, including the educational institutions, professional schools, Desert Research Institute, System Office, statewide programs, and other entities, with restrictions against transferring funds between the separate budgets. There are also many Self-Supporting Budgets funded by student fees, user fees, sales, and other revenue, without any state funding.

[3] Phase-in information updated 1/20/2025 per information from NSHE.  The new formula shifts from 100% WSCH (weighted student credit hours) to 75% WSCH, 10% student enrollment attributes, and 15% outcome-based factors. Additional information on the new funding formula.

Prepared by Kent Ervin, Director of Government Relations, Nevada Faculty Alliance. Corrections or amplifications are welcome. Contact: Kent.Ervin@NevadaFacultyAlliance.org, 775-453-6837.

Inflation and Retirement Contribution Increases Reduce Value of Take-Home Pay

Mandatory retirement contributions for state employees including NSHE faculty are slated to increase on July 1, 2025, by 1.75% for the employee and 1.75% for the employer.  Inflation is running at 2.5 to 3.0%. Just to maintain the purchasing power of our current salaries, the Nevada Faculty Alliance is advocating for a 5% cost-of-living adjustment for 7/1/2025 and a 3% COLA for 7/1/2026 for all state employees. The COLAs for NSHE should be fully funded by the state to avoid further burdening students with increased registration fees.

At the December 17, 2024, meeting of the Interim Retirement and Benefits Committee, Kent Ervin submitted a statement on behalf of Nevada Faculty Alliance members regarding the Public Employees Retirement System and the contribution rate increase:

At the Public Employees' Benefits Program, a dozen-year record of generating excess reserves has ended with a deficit in the mandatory reserves of tens of millions of dollars, health care costs especially prescriptions drugs are rising more rapidly than state funding, and PEBP is threatening to eliminate the Health Maintenance Organization (HMO/EPO) plan option.  The Governor's executive budget needs to replenish the reserves and maintain plan benefits without increasing employee premiums.  In the meantime, legislative threats to PEBP are on the horizon.

At the December 17, 2024, meeting of the Interim Retirement and Benefits Committee, Kent Ervin submitted the following statement on behalf of Nevada Faculty Alliance members about the Public Employees' Benefits Program:

The NFA obtains public employee data for NSHE faculty and classified staff through public records requests annually. New employment and salary data as of November 2024 are compared here with the prior year.[1]

Highlights:

• Continuing employees benefited from the 11% COLA as of 7/1/2024 for Classified staff and 10/1/2024 for faculty. NFA pushed hard for approval by the Board of Regents of the 11% COLA for faculty.
• There were no merit raises for academic or administrative faculty. Merit awards this year were waived by the Board of Regents when they approved the 11% COLA. Classified staff are eligible for up to nine annual 3%-5% step increases within a compensation grade. Classified employees in some collective bargaining units received higher COLAs.
• Excluding clinical faculty and DRI [2], the number of academic faculty increased by 12 to 3181 (0.4%), the number of administrative faculty increased by 231 to 4139 (5.9%), and the number of classified staff decreased by 422 to 2446 (-14.3%). These represent filled positions as of 10/31/2024 versus 10/31/2023. There appears to be a pattern of replacing classified positions with administrative faculty positions.

• The table below shows the total number of continuing employees systemwide with the same position title, continuing employees with a new position title, and new employees. [1]

Category	Total as of 10/31/2024	Continuing, same position title	Continuing, new position title	New employees	Percent Continuing
Academic Faculty	3520	2788	406	326	91%
Administrative Faculty	4192	2889	602	701	83%
Classified	2587	1900	260	427	83%
Total	10299	7577	1268	1454	85%

• Linked tables report:
• • Employee numbers and average salaries by rank and institution, for 11/2024, 11/2023, and year-over-year changes. [1,2]
  • Top 100 salary increases for continuing employees from 11/2023 to 11/2024. [1,2]
  • Top 100 salaries. [2]

• For continuing employees with no change in position title, the average individual salary increase (including COLAs, step increases, and ad hoc adjustments) between 10/31/2023 and 10/31/2024 was 10.8% for academic faculty, 10.5% for administrative faculty, and 13.3% for classified staff. [1,2]
• For continuing employees with a change in position (e.g., promotion in rank, job change, or new title), the average individual salary increase was 17.2% for academic faculty, 22.8% for administrative faculty, and 21.9% for classified staff. These percentages include individuals who switched to a different employee category. [1,2]
• The number of executives (Executive and Administrative Faculty Range E) employed rose from 307 to 325, a 5.9% increase, representing net new positions and filled vacancies from the prior year. GBC added four executives, TMCC added three, UNLV added four, and the System added eight. UNR was down three executive positions, a result of vacancies as of 11/1/2024. [3]
• SB375 of the 2023 session appropriated $10 million per year in one-time funds to expand nursing instruction programs. This funding is not reflected in large increases in full-time nursing faculty and staff between 11/2023 and 11/2024 (these data do not include part-time temporary instructors). At the UNR Orvis School of Nursing, a new dean was hired with a base salary of $395,000 and about a dozen continuing faculty received raises of 50% in addition to the 11% COLAs. NSHE is requesting the continuation of the SB375 funding for the next biennium.
• Despite the historically large COLAs for faculty of 12% on 7/1/2023 and 11% on 10/1/2024, net take-home pay as funded by the legislature is still 16.4% below FY2009 after accounting for inflation, retirement contributions, COLAs and funded merit raises, as shown in the following chart.

Sources: NSHE Public Records Requests. Analysis by NFA 12/2024

[1] Continuing employees are identified by email addresses; individuals who changed their email address for any reason including a name change or change of institution are treated as new employees. Individuals who were terminated from faculty or classified positions but rehired on a Letter of Appointment or other category disappear from the Workday records obtained here. Because of these and other limitations of the public records, totals may not add up exactly compared with our 2023 summary report. NFA would welcome similar analyses by NSHE human resources personnel where individuals can be properly tracked through unique identifiers.

[2] Clinical faculty and DRI are excluded from comparisons because of their different ranks and compensation structures from the seven educational institutions, as well as the high prevalence of external funding.

[3] UNR’s General Counsel and Vice President for Legal Affairs retired in October 2024. A new General Counsel was appointed in December 2024, without the Vice President title. As NFA previously pointed out, the previous General Counsel was promoted to Vice President without a full search and consultation with faculty as required by UNR Bylaws 3.6.3.

Previous Reports:

• 2023 NSHE Employment and Salary Trends (November 2023)
• The Compensation Gap (October 2023)
• NSHE Salaries Remain Low (October 2023)

In the early hours of Saturday morning of December 21st, the U.S. Senate passed the Social Security Fairness Act, repealing the Windfall Elimination Provision and Government Pension Offset which reduced social security benefits for retirees who also worked for states and universities not participating in Social Security. That includes NSHE faculty and classified staff on PERS or the NSHE Retirement Plan who earned Social Security benefits from prior employment. When the Nevada Faculty Alliance met with congressional representatives in Washington this year, the Social Security Fairness Act was one of our top issues. The success in Congress was due to a strong national coalition of public employee advocates including our affiliate, the American Federation of Teachers.

Statement from Randi Weingarten, AFT President:

AFT members just helped secure a major victory for working Americans! The Senate passed the Social Security Fairness Act overnight, capping a decadeslong fight for retirement justice for educators, nurses, firefighters, first responders and other public employees.

Read about this important victory here!

From the start of his administration, President Joe Biden has acted decisively on retirement security. Now we hope he will sign this bill quickly, because so many of us know a teacher, firefighter, law enforcement officer, nurse or public worker who's paid into Social Security year after year, only to have their payments curbed by the Windfall Elimination Provision and the Government Pension Offset when they retire.

After 40 years of advocacy and coalition-building by our members—and other workers and retirees across the nation—I'm thrilled that justice was finally done for the millions of Americans who have dedicated their lives to serving the public but would see their retirements throttled by a punitive and unnecessary loophole.

As you know, the WEP and GPO create real financial hardship for retired educators, firefighters, police officers and other public employees. For example, the WEP unfairly penalizes retirees who have spent careers in public service but who have also paid into Social Security at some point, whether while working in the private sector or while working in the public sector in states not affected by the WEP.

Educators covered by the WEP have seen their earned Social Security benefit reduced by 40-60 percent. They represent a substantial portion of the more than 2 million retired public employees and more than 6 million current public employees who are affected by the WEP.

Similarly, the GPO hurts hundreds of thousands of retired teachers, support staff and other public employees; current public employees will potentially triple that number. Under the GPO, a Social Security-penalized teacher receiving a public pension, whose spouse is collecting a Social Security benefit, is not entitled to that spousal benefit when the spouse dies before the teacher.

Under the GPO, the Social Security benefit is “offset” by the public pension. Any other surviving spouse is entitled to that Social Security death benefit, even if they are drawing from a substantial retirement account like a 401(k) or an IRA. This is deeply unfair, and it’s also cruel to continue when it's well-known that the GPO has a disproportionate impact on women, who are more likely to be impoverished as they get older.

The Senate joined the House and delivered on its promise to pass the Social Security Fairness Act so that every public employee can retire with dignity and grace.

This win is important because a fair and secure retirement is how we respect the workers who uplift our communities. It's also how we recruit and retain the next generation to help our country thrive.

I'm so grateful to the bill's sponsors—Reps. Abigail Spanberger and Garret Graves, and Sens. Sherrod Brown and Susan Collins—and to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer for shepherding this bill through the legislative process.

For our retirees and for our future, we, and the 118th Congress, have made a difference.

Congratulations to all the AFT members and supporters who worked to make this victory happen.

After fighting for so long for Social Security fairness, this win is a sweet way to start the holidays.

Thank you.

In unity,
Randi Weingarten
AFT President

2024 NFA Survey of NSHE Faculty

The Nevada Faculty Alliance has surveyed academic and non-managerial administrative faculty at the seven NSHE colleges and universities about compensation and benefits, shared governance, academic freedom, institutional leadership, recruitment and retention, campus climate, and collective bargaining.  The aggregate numerical results and a narrative with highlights are presented here.  

The survey was conducted from November 9 to November 30, 2024, via SurveyMonkey with individual email invitations. A total of 6168 invitations were sent to all academic faculty and to administrative faculty ranges A to D; 2488 responded giving a 40% overall response rate. Ninety percent of those who started the survey completed it. 

We would like to thank everyone who responded to the survey and provided written comments. Your input is incredibly valuable to us, and we will read and consider all of the comments. As always, we remain committed to working in solidarity with members of our faculty alliance to ensure that our voices are heard and our needs are met.

The detailed aggregate and institutional results are linked below:

2024 Summary Results - All Institutions with Comparisons and Statistics

• College of Southern Nevada
• Great Basin College
• Nevada State College
• Truckee Meadows Community College
• University of Nevada, Las Vegas
• University of Nevada, Reno
• Western Nevada College

A similar survey of NSHE faculty was conducted two years ago.

Key highlights from the surveys include the following:

After our two large cost-of-living adjustments of 12% in July 2023 and 11% in October 2024, for which NFA fought strongly, faculty are feeling better about their overall compensation, with 62% saying they moderately or strongly agree that their overall compensation is satisfactory while  37% moderately or strongly disagree. That’s a reversal from two years ago when 64% of respondents reported dissatisfaction with their overall compensation. However, approximately half of the respondents believe their compensation is not appropriate compared with others in their field and stage of career nationally or compared with others hired before or after them at their own institution.

About 59% express moderate or strong satisfaction with health care benefits, an improvement from 49% two years ago. Since then, some PEBP benefits have been partially restored and NSHE has provided Long-Term Disability Insurance for faculty employees (a NFA priority). A strong majority of respondents (83%) are satisfied with retirement benefits. For NFA’s advocacy in the next legislative session, faculty prioritize across-the-board salary increases and lower out-of-pocket costs for health care.

Although majorities of faculty members say their institutional administrations and presidents promote a strong academic environment (64%) and protect academic freedom (54%), shared governance is called into question by faculty. Only 45% overall agree that their administration affirms the principles of shared governance through their decision-making. GBC at 75% and WNC at 68% stand out as positive cases, versus less than half at the other institutions and 38% at UNR.  Only 55% of respondents overall (less than half at UNR) agree with the statement “Faculty committees largely determine educational policy, curriculum design, curriculum review, and academic standards”--areas where faculty should have primary authority under basic shared governance principles. Only 53% of respondents overall (less than half at GBC and UNR) agree that the recommendations of faculty committees largely determine the nature of the evaluation or tenure and promotion of individual faculty members. While 60% agree that faculty recommendations are decisive for faculty search outcomes, only 32% agree and 39% disagree that faculty recommendations decisively influence executive-level searches.  Notably, only 45% overall believe their presidents or provosts are appropriately selecting capable executive administrators and deans. At UNR, 49% disagree with that statement. 

The allocation of resources to departments and programs is another area of concern, with 43% disagreeing vs 39% agreeing that budget allocations reflect appropriate strategic goals and the missions of the institutions.  

Faculty respondents generally report having a collegial work environment within their own departments or programs (74% overall), suggesting good working relationships with close colleagues.  The work environments on campuses overall are rated positively at a lower rate (64%). There is variability across the seven institutions regarding how the campus climate has changed over the past two years, with majorities saying the climate has improved at CSN, GBC, and WNC and pluralities saying the climate has deteriorated at NSU, UNLV, and UNR. Tellingly, a substantial minority (36% overall) fear that they may face discipline or retaliation for expressing criticism of their department, program, or institution and 15% say they have personally experienced such retaliation.  

Forty-two percent of respondents believe that the ability of their department or program to recruit high-quality new faculty has deteriorated over the past two years (versus 28% saying it has improved).  The most-cited reason is low salary offers, followed by better competing offers.  High housing and living expenses are cited more often at the northwest Nevada institutions (TMCC, UNR, and WNC).

About 44% of the faculty respondents have seriously considered leaving their institution in the past two years, a slight reduction from 50% in the 2022 survey. Low salaries are the most common reason followed by limited advancement opportunities and a lack of sense of belonging, then tension with supervisors or the upper administration and an unwelcoming campus climate.  Sixteen percent of those who seriously considered leaving were recruited by or offered a position at another institution.

Asked about the political atmosphere for higher education in Nevada, 50% find it very or somewhat unfavorable versus 39% who find it very or somewhat favorable.  Although higher education and academic freedom are under stronger attack in other states such as Texas and Florida, state funding of higher education in Nevada has been deficient and the Board of Regents has been dysfunctional over many years.

Finally, at the four institutions without faculty collective bargaining units (GBC, NSU, UNLV & UNR), a supermajority of 78% of respondents moderately or strongly support the formation of a bargaining unit to negotiate for improved compensation, benefits, and working conditions.

The survey responses will inform our advocacy efforts at the legislature for higher, fully-funded COLAs, for improvement of benefits, and for a bill to secure collective bargaining rights in state law.

This faculty survey is strongly indicative of differences in campus climate and shared governance among the seven institutions, but does not substitute for the need for comprehensive campus climate studies and faculty evaluations of administrators, which should be conducted by external consultants as part of the periodic presidential reviews by the Regents. Such studies could delve into the specific groups of faculty who feel the campus climate is unwelcoming or uncomfortable and why.

This survey includes several questions similar or identical to questions in the faculty surveys for the 2023-24 presidential evaluations of Presidents Sandoval and Whitfield. These questions are noted in the survey summary report. The response rates for the NFA survey at UNLV (43%, 974 responses) and UNR (38%, 850 responses) significantly exceeded the response rates for the presidential evaluation surveys for President Whitfield (16%, 491) and President Sandoval (19%, 456).  The public evaluation committee reports quoted survey responses for only a few of the questions in the presidential evaluation surveys (five of 37 questions for Sandoval and nine of 40 questions for Whitfield).

Questions or feedback on the survey results may be directed to kent.ervin@nevadafacultyalliance.org.

The State Board of the Nevada Faculty Alliance is saddened to learn of the death of Regent Lois Tarkanian.  Dr. Tarkanian was a long-time advocate for education at all levels. She served with distinction on the NSHE Board of Regents since her election in 2016. The NFA appreciated her careful consideration of issues before the board and her support of students and faculty.

Read More>>

Nevada Independent: An educator first and basketball wife second: Regent Lois Tarkanian dies at age 90

Las Vegas Sun: Lois Tarkanian, education champion and staunch supporter of UNLV basketball, dies at 90

Las Vegas Review-Journal: ‘Her remarkable life’: Lois Tarkanian was pillar of Las Vegas as educator, politician

NSHE: NSHE mourns the loss of Dr. Lois Tarkanian, regent and advocate for education