Looking at satellite photos of the Brandeis campus on Google Earth a few weeks ago, one might have been surprised to find several buildings, including the Shapiro Campus Center that now anchors the southern end of campus, conspicuously absent from the map. Still today, the newest campus transformations are nowhere to be seen. It's a role that the creators of Google Earth probably never envisioned for their software: documenting the rapid changes on a campus previously bound by tight financial constraints.

This speaks less to the up to date nature of Google and more to the rapid expansion of Brandeis. Google Earth was indirectly demonstrating how for better or worse, money does change a place.

Ten years ago, the University was staring down the barrel of an $8.5 million deficit in the its operating budget and an miniscule endowment paled in comparison to those at peer institutions. A reaccreditation evaluation team visiting Brandeis in 1996 was critical of the University's financial management, which, among many other things, forced budgeters to draw almost nine percent from the endowment just to cover costs the year before.

That evaluation team, from the New England Association of Schools and Colleges, left administrators numerous suggestions for securing Brandeis' financial future, ranging from increasing faculty salaries and capital spending to overhauling the University's information infrastructure.

Last month, as part of the University's once-a-decade reaccredidation process, another team of evaluators arrived at a Waltham campus far different from the one their predecessors had seen.

Since 1996, the University has balanced the budget deficit and nearly tripled the $195 million endowment to $550 million, while also reducing the annual draw on the endowment to a more stable five percent, according to a recent self study prepared as part of the reaccredidation process. Thanks largely to ever-increasing alumni contributions, fundraising has been a booming success in recent years, capped by the record $81 million in cash donations collected by the University in fiscal year 2006.

With the surge in capital spending, the manifestation of all that money can be seen as the University shapes its future identity.

While the core values remain the same, at least officially, the landscape of the University-both physical and otherwise-has gone through some drastic changes.

"Brandeis, like every place I have ever worked at, has aspirations that exceed our assets," Chief Operating Office Peter French said. "But in the last 10 years we have put ourselves in a position to better understand what our assets are-now and for the future-and to use this knowledge to know what our priorities are."

Looking around campus, many of these priorities seem obvious. The last decade has seen new structures shoot from the ground at a frantic pace, with millions of dollars allocated to the construction of the Shapiro Campus Center, the Village Quad, the Abraham Shapiro Academic Complex and the recently-opened Schneider Building at the Heller school.

And then there's the whopping $154 million that have been set aside to build the new Carl J. Shapiro Science Center, expected to be completed in 2009.

"The success we've had [in raising money] has allowed us to build up and energize the University," Provost Marty Krauss said of the rapid build-up. "We're giving people room to breathe, and there's a positive spirit on campus. Now we can really be as good as we are, and really look as good as we are. It's a morale boost."

Having more money means more than just having buildings spring up around the peripheral road. Some of the contents of the University's growing coffers have been spent on increased maintenance.

In addition to spending much of the increased budget on the growing need for maintenance and depreciation costs, there has been an upsurge in the amount of money spent on professors' salaries and endowed chairs, all areas highlighted as insufficient by the evaluation team in 1996.

Today, Brandeis professors earn an average of 18 percent more than they did in the 2002-03 academic year. With the average salary at $106,000, tenured professors here are closing in on the average salary made at member institutions of Association of American Universities, a collective of research-intensive universities.

Still, even though the University has gone from being ranked 50 out of 60 AAU schools in faculty salaries in 1995 to 43 out of 59 schools last year, Brandeis still ranks behind fellow private institutions in that category: An appendix to the University's self study listed Brandeis as providing the second-lowest salaries among 25 private universities in the AAU.

"We still have a long way to go," said Myles Weisenberg '78, the University's vice president of development. "We need at least a billion dollars before money is not a scarce resource. We're grateful for the growth, but everyone here knows we are still in need of more money."

Weisenberg and others hope that this money will continue to come from a variety of sources. Still very much a young University, it was not long ago that there were relatively few alumni with purses to pilfer. Ten years ago, barely 10 percent of alumni were donors, and those donations accounted for about $5 million per year. Today, almost 25 percent of alumni are donors, accounting for just under $20 million on an annual basis-and growing.

Weisenberg said a great indication of improved alumni giving is the number of former students who have forked over more than $1 million. In the 1980's there were no alumni donations greater than $1 million. Twenty-five such alumni donations have been made since.

Brandeis still garners 37 percent of its fundraising from friends of the University, 22 percent from corporations, 10 percent from parents and seven percent from the National Women's Committee.

But Weisenberg said that there is something to be said about money coming from the University's own, and he should know.

"It's always beneficial to the school to have alums give money," said Weisenberg. "These people went here, and have a good understanding of what the school needs."

There are many reasons the University has been able to pull in more money in the last 10 years than ever before, but two stand out. The first has to do with changes in the alumni community. Primarily, this community has aged, with the average age of alumni, according to Wisenberg, reaching 41-an indication that former Brandeis students are now of the age to provide for their alma mater.

Susan Krinsky, associate vice president for the Campaign for Brandeis, pointed to another change in the alumni population.

"Many of the first graduates went into 'helping professions,'" Krinsky said. "Now there have been more graduates go into business-related fields in addition to all those still going into 'helping professions.'"

Krauss also mentioned better communication with these, and other, potential donors.

"It's all about communication," she said. "Sometimes it means going back many times to have conversations about the University in general. Sometimes we don't even talk about money."

Improved organizational efficiency has also stabilized Brandeis' financial footing. This year's self study highlighted improved information-sharing and teamwork, specifically pointing to the Integrated Plan.

Centralized information systems for budgeting, accounting and other campus operations, such as the PeopleSoft software were installed in 2001.

This new type of organizational software speaks to the importance of communication and teamwork at universities. Not only is everyone working with the same type of information, but they are also, according to the the self study, working toward common goals. This type of big-picture-thinking is what has led to policy-making ideas such as the Integrated Plan.

This new type of organization has clearly been working when it comes to money-making.

But the money Brandeis is not spending may serve as a better indicator of financial stability. Weisenberg said that the University spends only 10 cents on raising each dollar of donations it solicits, seven cents less than he said is average for peer institutions.

While few question the value in a university with deeper pockets, there are always critics. Some wonder whether distribution of new cash has been equitable, a sentiment most often found in the Humanities.

With millions of dollars being spent on new science and graduate buildings, departments in the Humanities have not seen the benefits of the financial boom that others have.

French said that these new facilities are crucial to keeping Brandeis competitive. Prof. Michael Gilmore, the chair of the English Department, said he wishes some of that money could be spent on the Humanities.

"We have long suffered from attrition in this department," Gilmore said. "[Dean of Arts and Sciences] Jaffe and others have issued a genuine attempt, but there is a feeling that the Humanities have been short changed."

Gilmore said that with more money in the Humanities, the discipline could have its own center, thus allaying concerns over organizational and space issues.

French responded that future plans include the building of a Humanities center, but that for now, the science complex is the University's first priority.

As Brandeis continues to strive toward its goal of $770 million by 2009-the original goal of the Campaign for Brandeis was broken last December-the University's priorities will continue to change. At any given point one group may feel short changed compared to another.

But Krauss stressed how far Brandeis has come in 10 years.

"We have put ourselves in a good financial situation," she said. "This is because we are not indulging in frivolous projects. We have made wise decisions to keep the University moving forward. It really is a great time to be at Brandeis.