October 31, 2007 [Excerpt only]

Transcription

1 October 31, 2007 [Excerpt only] Prof. Toope presented an update on the 2007/08 and 2008/09 budget to the Administrative Heads at the MADHU / PAC meeting on Oct. 31. Presentation materials and podcasts of the meeting are available below: Presenter Subject Files UBC President Prof. Stephen Toope Audrey Lindsay and Richard Spencer Budget Update KUALI Student System Podcast (20MB) PowerPoint Presentation (109KB) Podcast (5.4MB) PowerPoint Presentation (190KB) From November 2007

2 Budgets and Planning UBC V October 31,

3 UBCV GPO budget 2008/9 proposal for a strategic transition budget 2007/8 budget update 2008/9 budget update 2

4 2008/9: A proposal for a strategic transition budget No recurring cuts or cash call beyond last year s $20m; Last year s $20m - $12m continues to be chilled (for at least a year pending enhanced strategic capability and greater certainty on the fiscal environment) $8m reallocated; Reinvest $8m (recurring) Strategic Priorities Fund University Investment Fund - $12m; one time [previously announced, year-end 2006/7 funds]. 3

5 2008/9: A proposal for a strategic priorities fund Create a Strategic Priorities Panel which would recommend allocations to the President from requests made by Deans, and VPs. Some ideas on the key yparameters: Panel composition; Criteria for recommendations; Timelines. 4

6 Strategic Priorities Panel: Who? Co-chaired by the Provost and Vice-President, Administration and Finance Membership: 2 senior faculty members 2 senior administrators 1 student 1 alumnus/a 5

7 Strategic Priorities Panel: Criteria? The SCAPP process has identified a set of key goals and cross-cutting themes drawn from Trek 2010 Goals: Undergraduate education; Graduate education; Professional Education; Research; Themes: Transformative student experience; Aboriginal engagement; International learning and global service; Sustainability; Connecting with our alumni/ae and serving our communities. 6

8 Strategic Priorities Panel: Criteria? The majority of proposals will be grounded firmly in the central goals; Some projects will also address one (or more) of the cross-cutting themes; There is no predetermined allocation to any goal or theme quality is determinate. 7

9 Strategic Priorities Panel: Timing These slides will be posted on the President ss web page immediately following the meeting; I look forward to discussion now and following this meeting and with Senate Budget Committee; Detailed proposal guidelines would be posted by Nov. 16. The Proposals would be due on December 10 th. Decisions would be made by the end of January. Questions? Comments? Please to: Budget.2009@exchange.ubc.ca ubc ca 8

10 University Investment fund A $12 million one-time enabling fund: Criteria: three types of projects are eligible: Those that generate permanent GPOF savings by elimination of unneeded activities; or Those that increase GPOF revenues; or Planning for the realignment of activities to achieve key aspects of Trek

11 University Investment fund Terms of reference posted at Application form will be available shortly Small proposals (<$100,000) may be submitted by units directly (consultation with Dean or VP required) Large proposals (>$100,000) to be submitted by Deans or VPs Deadlines: Small proposals Dec. 3 and Jan 14. Large proposals Dec

12 Budget 2007/8 update A number of new revenues received have been allocated out to the portfolios (eg medical school); these are neutral lfor the central budget. As promised, following last year s budget exercise we delved into the budget process. We concluded that there were recurring items both expenses and revenues - that required adjustment: Investment income $3.0m Reduced maintenance (less buildout) $2.8m Contingencies for cost overruns and benefits $12.0m Legal $(1.1)m Campus and community planning $(1.0)m Other $1.5m $17.2m 11

13 Budget 2007/8 update The net impact of these changes is about $17.2m, which will produce a surplus for 2007/8 and reduce the structural deficit for 2008/9. As well, we have a $7m operating contingency fund; the surplus could be as high as $25m. Options for use of the 2007/8 surplus: Pay down debt, thereby reducing recurring costs ($12m buys $1m recurring); Offset some of the expected deficit for 08/9 (details to follow); Fund for helping with mandatory retirement; Increase the UIF; Daycare facilities; Please send suggestions to budget.2009@exchange.ubc.ca 12

14 Budget 2008/9 update Link the current projection for the annual 2008/9 budget to our projection in January 2007; Discuss the key budget drivers for 2009/10; 2010/11. 13

15 Budget 2008/9 update $m $m Deficit coming out of 2007/8 (as of Jan 2007) Recurring savings taken in 2007/ Recurring increases in expenses 2007/8 PTR Faculty and staff 7.60 Recurring increases in expenses 2007/8 VP D and AE) 2.00 Recurring savings identified in 2007/08 (see earlier slide) Other variances 2.80 Adjustments to anticipated deficit Base for 08/9 Annual budget Lower Q1 salary levels 4.10 Base for 08/9 Fiscal budget

16 Budget escalation drivers Recurring Impact in $Millions -UBCV As of Oct 22, 07 09/10 10/11 Carry forward surplus (deficit) (17.82) (26.18) Anticipated new Revenue eg tuition Anticipated new Expenses: Unfunded faculty PTR & Benefits Unfunded staff salary increases & Benefits Non-salary inflation (Maintenance for new construction and Commitments Total Expenses Net Impact - Surplus / (Deficit) (8.36) (8.76) Structural surplus /(deficit) (26.18) (34.94) 15

17 Concluding remarks Ii invite it your feedback. 1. Strategic Reallocation Proposal a) About $8m (recurring dollars) be reallocated b) A Panel be used to make recommendations c) Continue to chill $12m 2. University Investment Fund proposals 3. Suggestions with respect to any 2007/8 surplus Budget.2009@exchange.ubc.ca 16

18 Kuali Student Service System MADHU Oct 31, 2007 Audrey Lindsay and Richard Spencer

19 The Changing Environment External review in 2005 confirmed UBC student system is functionally rich, but cannot address expanding and changing requirements with current resources SIS Technology requires an uplift Vendor solutions are expensive and do not provide the functionality that custom solutions provide Ability to sustain in-house development is declining Increasingly complex technology requires more specialists User needs and expectations increasing exponentially Budgets and funding are constrained Recommended leading a collaboration and community source development to address these problems 2

20 The Next Generation System Focus on the needs of all users Student centric services that anticipate users needs Make tasks simpler, easier and reduce time to complete administrative tasks Learner, learning and institution agnostic Support a wide range of learner, learning activities and institutions Support a wide range of academic & business processes Can be configured to support changing business processes Processes can cross departments, systems and institutions Use a modular design Business logic is in rules and workflow engines, not code Service Oriented Architecture using Web Services Achieve long term sustainability Through community source development and distribution Wide-spread adoption 3

21 Why Community Source? Benefits Shared resources means more efficient development Institutions share ideas and create innovative solutions, leveraging their user experiences Institutions have direct input into functions and features Sustainability a community that contributes to enhancements can ensure sustained development Support commercial partners for implementation and support are encouraged Kuali Student will Build a community of adopting institutions Establish procedures and standards for development Encourage commercial affiliates Share implementation experiences 4

22 Kuali Planning Phase Kuali planning phase: Oct 2006 to July 2007 Began at Educause in Oct 2006 Share and develop the vision Find appropriate partners Gain executive support at UBC and at other institutions Develop the Project Charter and terms of reference Memorandums of Understanding and official signoff Develop the overall plan for the 5+ year project Develop a proposal for external funding Mellon Foundation 5

23 6 Functional Scope

24 Founders & Partners Founders University of British Columbia University of California, Berkeley University of Maryland, College Park Florida State University San Joaquin Delta College Partners Massachusetts Institute of Technology Carnegie Mellon University The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation 7

25 Additional Information and Questions ECAR article Next Generation Administrative Systems Kuali Student Web Site and Project Charter See Questions 8