Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013
description
Transcript of Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013
Successfully Aligning Resources With PlanningLeague of Innovation ConferenceMarch 10, 2013
Greg Nelson Vice President of Administrative Services
Tammeil GilkersonVice President of Academic Affairs
San José City College• Founded in 1921
• 10th Oldest Community College in California
• Accredited by the ACCJC/WASC
• Approximately 10k Students
San José City College
Accreditation Requirements• Implement a Mission-Based Strategic
Plan With Quantifiable Goals and Measures of Student Achievement
• Implement a Regular Cycle of Review, Including Information and Data to Update Plans on a Regular Basis
• Evaluate Progress Towards Strategic Plan Goals Using Results of Evaluation for Improvement
A 2010 Retrospective
• No Identifiable Goals or Benchmarks• No Formal Process for Allocating Dollars• No Consistent Program Reviews• No Formalized Process
Building the Foundation• Formalized Strategic Plan and Process• Established College Goals• Linked Key Performance Indicators to
Benchmarks• Instituted Program Review Process• Established Resources Allocation
Process
San José City CollegeIntegrated Planning Process
SJCC Strategic Plan
Master Facilities Plan Technology Plan Student Success
Plans
College Goals
• Promote Student Success• Expand Partnerships • Enhance Employee
Development• Foster Cultural
Competence• Increase Campus Safety
Key Performance IndicatorsCollege Strategic Goal #1: Promote Student Success
Key Performance Indicator:
1A: Increase the persistence rate of first-time students each year
1B: Increase the successful course completion rate of both full-time and part-time students each year1C: Increase the successful course completion rate in basic skills courses each year1D: Increase the improvement rate of students in basic skills
Source: 2012 and 2013 ARCC Reports; District research reports
Linking Goals to Programs
SJCC Strategic Plan
Master Facilities Plan Technology Plan
Dept/Service Program Review
Program Review Committee
Student Success Plans
Establish Quality Program Reviews
Year One: Annual
Program Review
Year Two: Annual
Program Review
Year Three: Annual
Program Review
Year Four: Comprehensiv
e Program Review
Establish Faculty Hiring Priorities
SJCC Strategic Plan
Master Facilities Plan Technology Plan
Dept/Service Program Review
Identify Resource Needs Dept/Service
Academic Senate Recommendations
for Faculty
Program Review Committee
Student Success Plans
Determine Hiring Recommendations
• Academic Senate Reviews Requests
• Program Review Required
• Prioritized Recommendations Submitted to President
• President Reviews Rationale and Establishes Positions to be Hired
Hiring: Lessons Learned
• Professional Alliances Skewed Voting Process
• Academic Senate Needed More Data• More Time For Review• Empower Program Review Committee
to Review and Rate Scoring Rubrics • Institute Parallel Review for Division
Deans
Historical Discretionary Dollars
• Budgets Rolled From Year to Year• No Input From Budget Managers• No Accountability• No Knowledge of Actual Program Costs
• Needed to Establish Process For Full Allocation Methodology
Pilot Process - Operating Funds
• One Time Funds • Limited to Mainly Equipment • Required a Validated Program
Review to Receive Funding• Program Review Had to Align With
Requests
Operating: Lessons Learned
• Not Enough Information to Make Quality Decisions
• Difficulty Reaching Proposers For Clarification
• Request Were Not Tied to Program Review
Operating DecisionsSJCC Strategic
Plan
Master Facilities Plan Technology Plan
Dept/Service Program Review
Identify Resource Needs Dept/Service
Budget HearingsFinance Committee Recommendations
Prioritization by Vice Presidents
Academic Senate Recommendations
for Faculty
Program Review Committee
Student Success Plans
Strengthen Overall Process
• Collect Trend Data• Enhance and Expand Program Review Data• 3 Years of Historical Expenses• Create Presentation Process• Harden the Line Between Planning and
Program Review
Zero Based Budget Process• First allocation process of this nature in
college history• Ability for Programs to Ask for
Adequate Funding• Achieved Buy-in from all constituency
groups
Zero Based Budget Process• Required Budget Managers to Defend
Budget Requests to College Finance Committee
• Finance Committee = 3 Administrators, 3 Students, 3 Classified, 3 Faculty
• No Program Review = No Dollars Allocated
• Made Programs Defend Need to Keep Historical Budget
Budget Hearings
• Finance Committee Reviewed Data a Week Prior
• Academic Managers: 30-45 Minutes • Non-Academic Managers: 15-30
Minutes• Subject Matter Experts • Detailed Questions From Finance
Committee • Completed 12-14 Hearings in 9 Hours
Budget Hearing Recommendations
• Finance Committee Met Subsequently to Deliberate
• Presidential Priorities Reviewed
• Deliberations Debated Budget and Line Items
• Revenue Available Not Revealed Until End of Deliberations
SJCC Strategic Plan
Master Facilities Plan Technology Plan
Dept/Service Program Review
Identify Resource Needs Dept/Service
Budget HearingsFinance Committee Recommendations
Alignment With Finance, Facilities, Technology Plans
College Planning Council Recommendations
Prioritization by Vice Presidents
Academic Senate Recommendations
for Faculty
Program Review Committee
Student Success Plans
President Approval/Allocation
Award Letters and Appeals
• Every Manager Received Award Letters • President Attends CPC to Explain Major
Changes to Allocations if Any• CPC Relays Information• Managers Have Opportunity to Appeal
if Appropriate
Survey of New Process• The process used for 2012–13, including the budget
hearings, was improved as compared to previous – 98% Agreed or Strongly Agreed
• I found the 2012–13 resource allocation process open and transparent.
- 91% Agreed or Strongly Agreed • The integrated planning process of using program
reviews for resource allocations helped in preparing the annual budget requests for the Finance Committee. – 91% Agreed or Strongly Agreed
• The budget hearing process should be the standard used for all annual budget allocations within the college. – 82% Agreed or Strongly Agreed
Zero Based: Lessons Learned
• Create a Scoring Rubric • Allocate More Time to Academic Divisions • Consider Using Process for Non-
Instructional Hiring• Provide Finance Committee More Training
to Understand Data More Efficiently• Make Unfunded Priority List for New
Dollars
Integrated Planning & Resource Allocation Handbook
• http://www.sjcc.edu/data/files/gallery/ContentGallery/SJCC_Strategic_Planning_And_Resource_Allocation_Handbook_2012.pdf
It Really Works!!!