This story was updated on Nov. 11 at 7:50 p.m.

The New School is moving forward with key restructuring proposals, including some that could result in layoffs, reduced benefits, and cuts to academic programs, according to documents obtained by The New School Free Press.

The proposals have been formally presented twice to faculty, staff, and students and made available for view on an employee intranet since Sep. 25. They were drafted this summer by a collective of faculty and staff known as the Summer Working Groups to form the groundwork for the university’s long-promised plan to stabilize its finances.

Administration said the proposals are in a phase dedicated to community feedback and engagement. However, the majority of the proposals being considered have already been accepted, according to slides from the Charrette on University Planning on Oct. 16 and a comment from Amy Malsin, vice president of university communications.

The accepted proposals will be moved into action plans and timelines in an effort led by Prisca Wood, assistant provost of compliance and accreditation.

The proposals dubbed “Accepted Recommendations” include the two college model, which will combine Eugene Lang College of Liberal Arts with the New School for Social Research and the College of Performing Arts with Parsons School of Design.

Others include “curriculum and program delivery consolidation,” “faculty management and rebalancing,” “compensation and benefits rightsizing,” and “piloting of AI tools in administration.”

Critics call it the early stages of an effort to downsize the university. Last week, the university proposed cutting half the staff of Student Health Services and outsourcing their services next year.

The university has run a steadily increasing deficit since 2023 that’s projected to grow to $38 million this fiscal year. TNS aims to use these proposals to achieve its multi-year goal to break even by 2028 and achieve a 4% operating surplus by 2030.

A notable accepted recommendation is the implementation of “8K scenario planning.” This summer, the Finance Working Group modeled three scenarios — 6,000 students, 8,000 students, and 10,000 students — and adopted “levers,” or cost saving measures, for each enrollment scenario that could help the university reach its financial goal.

The university is now reviewing and deciding which levers from the 8,000 student model to implement, Vice President of Financial Operations and Budget and Chief Financial Officer Loretta Ferrari said in an emailed comment.

Those levers include cutting academic programs, reducing electives, and increasing class sizes, according to a Finance Working Group document. The university could increase courses taught by full-time faculty by 10% and freeze full-time faculty hires until fiscal year 2027 except for essential roles. A voluntary severance plan may also be launched. 

Some levers would reduce healthcare for newly eligible retirees, cut the university’s contribution to new hires’ retirement benefits by 2%, increase retirement eligibility for new hires by two years, and offer a voluntary retirement program.

Other levers could save money on campus events, expand venue rentals and summer housing, and end the lease for 301 Residence Hall. Administrative staff could be reduced by implementing “more efficient processes through AI and other means,” according to the document.

Ferrari said the levers are being reviewed by those with the most expertise in each topic. The reviews are based on data, comparisons, and modeling.

While the majority of restructuring proposals, like “8K scenario planning,” have been accepted, several proposals were not.

Some, like “Satellite campuses” and “Prioritizing performance/public events scheduling,” were instead labeled “Long Term Priorities.” Even fewer were the proposals labeled “Recommendations requiring feedback,” which include “Doctoral program strategy” and “Strengthening Lang.”

A previous version of this article made inaccurate claims that the university was moving forward with nearly all of its restructuring proposals and that the proposals were only presented to faculty and staff twice. The corrected version states the university is moving forward with key restructuring proposals and the proposals were available to faculty and staff more than twice. The previous version was unclear on how many levers existed. Unclear language regarding levers was corrected.