Budget and Planning Committee Report February 2006

SUNY Delhi
Annual Budget and Planning Committee
Report to College Senate for 2006-07
February 13, 2006

Submitted by
Pat Heath and Chris Shields, Co-Chairs

Brian Hutzley, Cabinet Liaison
Carol Bishop
Roger Brain
Linnea Goodwin Burwood
Peg Garramone
Rick Golding
Marty Greenfield
Jackie Howard
Judy Lindsay
Pat Mente
Pam Peters
Ron Rosenblum

February 13, 2006

To our College Senate colleagues,

• The Budget and Planning Committee presented our report to the President’s Cabinet January 16, 2005. Chris Shields, Pat Heath, Pam Peters and Ron Rosenblum presented the report on behalf of the Committee.  The following is an executive summary of the report
• This report contains the findings of the Budget and Planning Committee after reviewing plans submitted by the 38 units.  The communication between the Committee and the Units continues to evolve, and that has extended to better communication between the Committee and the Cabinet.  The units value the process and see results.  Since the units recognize the value, they are beginning to understand how their units fit with the overall direction of the college. 
• In the next planning cycle, the Committee hopes to expand inter-department communication, financial planning within the units, and strategic planning and direction from the Cabinet.

Table of Contents

I.     Major Themes and Unit Goals
II.   Assessment Overview
III.  Staffing Recommendations
IV.  Resource Requests

I.  Major Themes and Unit Goals

As the Committee reviewed each unit’s top priorities and future directions, every unit plan touched on one or more of the following issues: Technology and the Web, Budget, Program Expansion and Enrollment Growth, Training, Communication and Maintenance.

A. Technology and the Web

1.  Web Support and development.

• The need for better and more interactive division web sites continues to be an issue for most units.  Few, if any, departments have dedicated staff for web design. It is a struggle for departments to find time to develop/support web design and online learning.
• In addition, and perhaps more critical is the growing need for online learning instructional development. Online courses are expanding and are expected to reach new highs with the push for online BBA/BT programs.  
• It is hoped that the current model of self support and a web advisory group will become more effective given time.  It is critical that a web-position be approved and filled. The position should be independent, and work cooperatively with CIS and all campus units. Recognizing that a dedicated web developer is not a panacea, units will still need to be involved with design and content management.
• The emphasis must be on critical technology improvements and improved tools for students and parents (recruitment, financial aid).  A prioritization process needs to address the conflicts between online learning development and unit requests for web development.

2.  Major upgrades of technology systems are being planned, including:
                        College Web Omni Update Conversion (underway)

• Windows NG Migration (2006-07)
• Banner 7 Upgrade (spring 2006)
• New Telecom System (spring 2006)
• Library Aleph 16 Implementation (spring/summer 2006)
• SUNY 5-year Strategic Plan Upgrade (e.g. online purchasing)
• Email upgrade (2006-07)
• All of these systems will require staff and campus training, and patience while CIS staff is potentially pulled away from daily technical support to manage these new systems.

3. The lack of a disaster plan including campus network and data must be addressed.  ADTAC is currently taking the lead on an IT disaster plan but does not have the expertise to develop.

4. A Technology Capital fund is needed for ongoing upgrades and planned technology infrastructure similar to capital facilities budget.

CABINET:       Though conceptually agreed, any funding for a Technology Capital Fund will have to come from existing revenue.  There are no “new monies.”

5. In light of the importance of information technology across campus, and in an effort to evaluate all the units who depend on technology, we recommend more coordination and communication among campus units.  We also hope to achieve a better understanding of the role played by the various technology advisory committees in campus planning:  Printing, Web, AdTac, ATAC, Distance Learning.  The committee will attempt to facilitate this coordination through the unit planning process next year.

B.  Budget Issues

• The Budget and Planning Committee finds a major component of the financial and planning process to be absent.  We agree that the budget and planning process is working better than in recent years, and as a result enormous steps have been taken to make our institution more fiscally responsible.
• We could enhance the budget and planning process by formally establishing a clear process for planning and tracking of expenditures in light of long-term strategic goals set by the Cabinet.

• Strategic Planning 

  • The Cabinet are the key decision-makers in the strategic planning process.  Guiding the institution in all areas (academically, physically, fiscally, etc.) is a top priority of this important group.  An annually updated five-year strategic plan would enable the Budget and Planning Committee to prioritize the requests from each unit in a more knowledgeable way.

• Operational Planning

  • The Budget and Planning Committee continues the process of identifying needs and goals for each unit at SUNY Delhi.  With the added long term vision of a strategic plan, the Committee would have two important areas of data on which to base their recommendations.
  • First, the strategic plan as described by the Cabinet would assist the committee in making certain that the goals and needs proposed by units are realistic and follow the strategic plan. Second, the development of a functional budgeting process at the unit level will outline monetary and personnel needs and how they relate to the strategic plan.

• Functional Planning and Budgeting

  • The creation of a process for reporting and spending of funds within unit areas should be given a high priority in the budget and planning process.  The Committee realizes that each unit works with a limited amount of funding and that most do a masterful job.  We also realize that funding comes from different means that may make this process somewhat difficult.  However, without a good knowledge of their fiscal standing, units may be unaware of available funding as well as the identification of open needs that may require attention from those charged with accessing discretionary funds. 
  • By tasking the unit leaders to budget their areas formally, the units would have a better idea of where monies are being spent, productivity levels, and be able to identify needs and inefficiencies.  Units must be more responsible for the monies that they spend and be able to justify identified needs as a result of a budgeting process that should include broad input from within their units.

• Conclusion on Budgeting

  • A formal strategic planning and budgeting process would enable the university to grasp the overall financial structure more effectively with the assurance that units are being run as efficiently as possible.  Units are truly accountable for the funds placed in their stewardship.  This process also provides useful information to the Budget and Planning Committee that is necessary for making recommendations to the President and Cabinet.  Each unit would also have a better handle on their own finances which will aid them in identifying issues.

C. Program Expansion and Enrollment Growth

This theme repeats from last year.  Several academic divisions are planning and expanding new programs. Enrollment growth is projected to increase steadily, and as enrollment increases and more programs are added, the impact on units that support this growth is of increasing concern as bulleted below:

• Additional faculty, classroom and lab space.
• OTPS for supplies and equipment.
• Increased demand for upper division liberal arts courses with concurrent increased demand at the lower division level.
• Security issues.
• Absorbing staff losses by reassignment of duties to overqualified personnel, or committees.
• Online Course development.
• Better structure for Web CT support.
• Non traditional programs (telecenter, BBA/BBT programs at other colleges, etc.).
• Demand for support services such as Residence Life, Student Activities, Learning Center, CADI, and Library.

Expansion and enrollment growth necessitate proactive communication and analysis of impacts across the campus.

Several other themes in the unit plans are worthy of note:

Training

• As noted in the preliminary report, training is needed to support the completion of goals:

  • Advisor training for faculty
  • CAPP training
  • Purchasing staff (to implement new online systems)
  • Library staff (to migrate to new Aleph version)
  • IT staff (training in general to keep up with new technologies)

Communications

• All of these efforts would foster a sense of community and by being better informed, allow for better customer service.

  • Detailed campus calendar for faculty and staff which would include critical dates, due dates, published dates.  (E.g., student mailings, financial aid deadlines)
  • Individual units’ goals and action plans need to be communicated to other units who are impacted. (BPC goal for next year’s process)
  • Committee activities could be better shared across campus.

Maintenance

• Preventive maintenance
• Lab equipment in Vet Sci., Hospitality, IT and Technology.
• College of Technology should have state of the art equipment

Student Employment

• Progress has been made to streamline processes and a payroll guide will be published by the Human Resources office.
• There is still a need for expanded student employment and internship opportunities.  A campus job fair should be explored.  More internship programs need to be developed and publicized.

II. Assessment Overview

• Assessment has made progress as a campus wide endeavor during the past year.  The assessment workshop conducted in May 2005 was very useful for the users and committee members.  It clarified many of the issues surrounding assessment, and allowed the committee members to recognize the complexity both in responsibilities and composition of several departments/units.
• At the present time there is only one unit that did not have an assessment plan and one unit without a specific assessment tool.  This is a significant change from last year when nearly half the units did not have tools and nearly one third did not have a plan.
• It remains difficult to judge what specific actions have resulted from assessment because very few units provide detail on how the data has been used to improve services and program development.  
• The committee will seek more specific assessment issues in the 2007-08 unit plans.

III. Staffing Requests

Summary of Staffing Requests and Recommendations – By Funding Source

                                           State             DIFR      Other            Total

FTE

New

• Recommend                 6.25              0.00        0.00                 6.25
• Should Consider           6.00              0.00        0.00                 6.00
• Not Recommended       2.00              0.00        1.00                 3.00

Replacement

• Recommend                 0.50              0.00        0.00                 0.50
• Should Consider           0.00              0.00        0.00                 0.00
•  Not Recommended      0.00              0.00        0.00                 0.00

Expanded

•    Recommend              0.00              0.00        0.00                 0.00
•    Should Consider        1.50              0.00        0.00                 1.50
•    Not Recommended    0.00              0.00        0.00                 0.00

TOTALS                               16.25               0.00        1.00              17.25

Other Comments (not included above):

• 19 positions included in the original unit plans have either been filled or approved to fill
• Unit plans listed a total of 7 anticipated retirements that have not been formally announced
• The Learning Center submitted 5 separate unit plans with various position requests.  With new leadership in the Learning Center area, the Committee feels these requests should be reviewed and analyzed by the new Director before any further recommendations are made.
• In areas where there is new leadership (Enrollment Services, Learning Center, Athletics, Business Office, etc.), the Cabinet will wait for recommendations.
• Cabinet is not considering any requests for “anticipated retirements.”

IV. Resource Requests

• Resource requests were summarized for the cabinet and included academic supplies and equipment, technology systems and upgrades, marketing and publications, facility maintenance and repairs, campus security and additional OTPS.
• President Vancko will meet with unit heads regarding Cabinet’s decisions on resource requests. Examples of Cabinet’s high priority items range from accreditation issues (Vet Sci) to smaller, one-time needs (salt hopper). Determination on other items will be contingent upon finding alternate resources or incorporating into capital plans.
•  The committee will amend next year’s unit plan template in order to elicit better detail with regard to justification of resource requests