Back to the dashboard
Wichita State University · Budget by category, revenue, programs and divisions · FY2019–FY2027, with peer comparisons

Wichita State budget

Ask the data

Ask about a faculty salary, a department or college average (tenure-track vs. non-tenure-track), a budget line, a trend over the years, or a comparison between universities. Answers come only from the source documents and arrive as a table and chart whenever the numbers call for one — or click a suggested follow-up.

Side by side · WSU vs. Kansas State vs. Oklahoma vs. Nebraska–Omaha vs. Colorado State

Five universities, the same budget line: WSU spends the least, and is the only one cutting it

Spending on the line, actual dollars

$50M $75M $100M $125M $150M $175M $200M $225M $250M $275M $300M $325M $350M $318.6M $215.9M $203.1M $136.0M $99.13M $342.0M · +7.3% $255.2M · +18.2% n/a $229.6M · +13.0% $146.0M · +7.4% $96.61M · −2.5% FY24FY25FY26FY27
Wichita State Kansas State Oklahoma Nebraska–Omaha Colorado State

Click any university above for a detailed, category-by-category comparison with WSU.

Each school publishes a core-budget line for what it spends on teaching faculty. Since FY24, WSU's Instruction line (all funds, including restricted) has fallen 2.5% to $96.6M and lost 3.0 points of budget share. Over the same years Kansas State is up 18.2% to $255.2M, the University of Oklahoma's budgeted faculty salaries are up 13.0% to $229.6M, Nebraska–Omaha's Instruction line is up 7.4% to $146.0M, and Colorado State's is up 7.3% to $342.0M.

Where the money comes from

Revenue rose and enrollment held flat — so why is instructional spending falling?

Degree-seeking enrollment (undergraduate + graduate headcount) is essentially unchanged since Fall 2023. Over the same span, both revenue sources that fund General Use spending grew — tuition income is up 7.8% and the General Operating allocation is up 6.7%. More money came in per student, while the share of it reaching Instruction went down.

Charts below run FY23–FY26 to line up with the enrollment data — the Fall 2026 census isn't available yet, so FY27 revenue has no matching enrollment figure.

Enrollment14,342−0.6%
14,43514,19714,342 Fall 2023Fall 2024Fall 2025

Degree-seeking headcount, WSU Fall Census

Tuition income$95.87M+7.8%
$88.90M$99.48M$99.32M$95.87M FY23FY24FY25FY26

Tuition revenue (General Fees Fund)

General Operating fund$79.95M+6.7%
$74.93M$78.54M$81.05M$79.95M FY23FY24FY25FY26

State General Fund, general operating allocation

Spotlight · reference year FY2024 · change through FY2027

Instructional expenditures are shrinking while non-instructional expenditures rise

Money spent on Instruction (faculty and instructional staff salaries) has gone down every year since FY24 — in raw dollars and as a share of the budget, no matter how you count the funds. Academic Affairs (Instruction's parent division, covering all six colleges) fell the same way, absorbing a $5.1M General Use budget cut in FY27 alone — about two-thirds of every dollar reallocated away from any division that year — the same year WSU's Intercollegiate Athletics budget more than quadrupled, from $3.2M to $13.9M. Institutional Support (central administration — finance, HR, general administration, public relations) grew about a fifth. Finance & Administration (business operations and administrative support) also grew sharply once grants and other outside funding are counted. Academic Support (libraries, computing services, and college Dean's/advising offices) was the only category that didn't move in a clear direction — up in outside funding, down everywhere else.

By Program

FY23→FY27 · each axis independently scaled to its own range · click a card for every sub-line, FY23–FY27 →

Instruction → detail

GUF$60.07M−6.0%
$63.93M$66.99M$65.24M$63.49M$60.07M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

27.5% of GUF budget (was 34.0% in FY23)

All Funds$96.61M+3.6%
$93.23M$99.13M$100.05M$100.14M$96.61M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $93.23M → FY27 $96.61M

Academic Support → detail

GUF$30.01M+11.3%
$26.97M$30.41M$32.40M$30.72M$30.01M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

13.7% of GUF budget (was 14.3% in FY23)

All Funds$39.85M+18.1%
$33.75M$38.26M$39.84M$41.65M$39.85M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $33.75M → FY27 $39.85M

Institutional Support → detail

GUF$26.71M+31.2%
$20.36M$21.97M$23.10M$24.37M$26.71M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

12.2% of GUF budget (was 10.8% in FY23)

All Funds$31.85M+28.0%
$24.88M$26.36M$28.05M$29.64M$31.85M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $24.88M → FY27 $31.85M

By Division

FY23→FY27 · each axis independently scaled to its own range, to make the trend visible

Academic Affairs

GUF$93.01M−2.3%
$95.23M$100.54M$100.75M$97.84M$93.01M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

42.5% of GUF budget (was 50.6% in FY23)

All Funds$173.51M+4.7%
$165.67M$175.13M$175.52M$177.96M$173.51M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $165.67M → FY27 $173.51M

Finance & Administration

GUF$78.83M+34.7%
$58.53M$77.01M$98.74M$76.02M$78.83M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

36.0% of GUF budget (was 31.1% in FY23)

All Funds$129.33M+53.4%
$84.34M$114.54M$133.67M$118.34M$129.33M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $84.34M → FY27 $129.33M

President's Office

GUF$14.47M+105.2%
$7.05M$7.81M$7.82M$7.89M$14.47M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

6.6% of GUF budget (was 3.8% in FY23)

All Funds$20.26M+126.9%
$8.93M$9.30M$9.08M$8.80M$20.26M FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27

FY23 $8.93M → FY27 $20.26M

What moved

Instruction is the only program category to fall in both dollars and share, in both fund views — GUF down 10.3% ($66.99M→$60.07M) and 4.0pp of share; All Funds down 2.5% and 3.0pp. Academic Affairs (its parent division) fell the same way.
President's Office is the clearest riser, and it is almost entirely Intercollegiate Athletics — GUF spending up 85.3% ($7.81M→$14.47M) and All Funds up 117.9% ($9.30M→$20.26M), FY24 to FY27, gaining share in both views. Within the division, the Intercollegiate Athletics line rose from $3.16M to $13.87M (+$10.7M), accounting for 98% of the All Funds increase and $6.5M of the $6.7M GUF increase — including a new $6.7M General Use operating line in FY27 that did not exist in FY26. The rest of the division (President's office, General Counsel, Equity & Compliance, Strategic Communications) was flat.
Institutional Support grew about a fifth in dollars (GUF +21.6%, All Funds +20.9%) and gained 1.9pp of GUF share — though its All Funds share was flat, since All Funds overall grew even faster.
Finance & Administration's All Funds spending rose 12.9% ($114.54M→$129.33M, +$14.79M) — the second-largest dollar increase of any category — even though its GUF held flat (+2.4%) and its budget share fell in both views, since the rest of the budget grew faster still.
Academic Support is the one category with no clear direction — GUF dollars down slightly (−1.3%), All Funds dollars up (+4.2%), and budget share down in both views. Within it, Academic Administration (Dean's offices, advising, recruitment) grew +12.2% while Libraries and Computing Support shrank.
Tuition income rose 7.8% ($88.90M→$95.87M, FY23–FY26) while degree-seeking enrollment barely moved — more revenue per student, not more students.
The General Operating allocation rose 6.7% ($74.93M→$79.95M, FY23–FY26) — the SGF portion that funds academic and administrative operations (separate from SGF allocations earmarked for aviation research, tech transfer, and digital transformation) — yet Instruction's GUF dollars still fell over the same span.

Check the sources yourself

every figure on this page comes from these official publications

About this analysis

This site is a personal, independent compilation and analysis of publicly available documents: the annual operating budget books and budgeted-employee reports published by Wichita State University, the University of Kansas, Kansas State University, the University of Nebraska system and the University of Oklahoma, enrollment factbooks, and the State of Kansas payroll records published through KansasOpenGov. It is not an official publication, statement, or position of any of those universities, the Kansas Board of Regents, the State of Kansas, or any of their offices, and has not been reviewed or endorsed by them. The author is a faculty member acting in a personal capacity.

Figures were extracted programmatically from PDF and spreadsheet documents, linked across years and across sources by name, and summarized by software. The "Ask the data" answers and the "why this salary changed" explanations are generated by an AI assistant from that data. While figures were cross-checked against the source documents during preparation, extraction, name-matching, title-classification, department-merging and AI-interpretation errors are possible, and some figures (hire-year vacancy budgets, split budget lines, merged department names) are the author's reconstructions, explained where they appear. Budgeted salaries are what a budget book funded a position at, and payroll figures are calendar-year totals as published by the state; neither is a statement of what any individual ultimately earned, and none of it is advice. Nothing on this site should be used for any employment, compensation, evaluation, hiring or other decision about any person — readers should verify against the original source documents linked in this page's footer. Everything is provided "as is", without warranty of any kind, and the author accepts no liability for errors or for any use made of it. Names appear only as they are printed in those public records; anyone who believes a figure about them is wrong is invited to point to the source line and it will be corrected. Category labels ("Instruction," "Academic Support," "Institutional Support," etc.) and their plain-language descriptions reflect WSU's own budget-program definitions; the "faculty salary proxy" language used for Instruction is this author's characterization, not an official designation, since the Instruction program also includes some non-salary instructional costs.

Headlines, framing, and commentary throughout this page reflect this author's interpretation of the underlying public data and are offered for informational and discussion purposes only. They are not statements of fact about any individual's or office's conduct, are not intended to imply wrongdoing, and should not be relied upon as financial, legal, or official institutional guidance.

Back to the dashboard