Planning Driven Budget Development Process

Transcription

1 Planning Driven Budget Development Process BUDGET DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Adopted by the Budget Committee on May 19, 2016 MT. SAN JACINTO COLLEGE

2 INTRODUCTION The Mt. San Jacinto College District resource allocation process has been developed collaboratively between classified staff, faculty, students and administration. It represents a college wide effort to unify planning and resource allocation as well as to develop a transparent, uniform practice of planning and assessment. The resource allocation process is driven by the District s Strategic Plan priorities, Board Goals and the Education Master Plan. Planning and resource allocation is an annual activity and this guide outlines the overall process of planning and resource allocation. PROCESS The Mt. San Jacinto College Budget Development Committee is charged with recommending the parameters, process and documentation for developing the annual budget. (Figure A) In order to provide thoughtful input, each year the Budget Development Committee is presented with the Governor s Proposed Budget, May Revise and the State Adopted Budget to better understand the statewide economy. They are also provided copies of the District s Fiscal Quarterly Reports, the Budget Development Calendar, the Chancellor s Office Apportionment Reports, and Audit Reports throughout the year. BUDGET COMMITTEE CHARGE--Approved October 15, 2015 Figure A 1. The Mt. San Jacinto College Budget Committee is a participatory governance committee that is charged with the following: (a) recommending the parameters, process, and documentation for developing the annual budget; (b) reviewing and recommending the process by which the District s discretionary funds and grants are allocated; (c) assessing the effectiveness of the allocation process in the prior and current years; (d) annual review of Education Code Mandates for compliance 2. The scope of work of the Budget Committee is determined by the annual institutional goals that are identified by the Superintendent/President and approved by the Board of Trustees. These annual institutional priorities are expressed in the (a) State Strategic Plan (b) MSJC Strategic Plan (c) MSJC Educational Plan and Program Reviews (d) MSJC Facilities Master Plan, Technology Plan, Staffing Plan & Distance Education Plan 3. The Budget Committee recommendations are sent directly to the Executive Cabinet prior to the 1 Page issue of the budget development documentation in March. Information copies of the recommendations are published on the Budget Committee web page, and are sent to the College Council.

3 In order to ensure the District s goals and priorities are considered when developing the budget, a resource allocation model was created. The District s resource allocation model directly links resource requests (Resource Allocation Proposals) to planning documents, such as the institution s three-year program review, education master plan, annual program assessment, strategic plan priorities and Board of Trustees goals. In the Fall of 2010 the Budget Development Committee proposed the creation of a special reserve that would fund annual allocation requests. This RAP reserve will assist in the funding of RAPs, however it is not the only source of funds available. When applicable, the District will fund RAPs out of categorical grants and other appropriate funds. Each Spring, during the budget development process, District s departments are given the opportunity to submit Resource Allocation Proposals (RAPs). The RAPs provides individuals an opportunity to request augmentations to their budgets while ensuring that the requestor is using planning documents as a justification for their requests. RAPs are not to be used for inflationary costs, items currently being paid from a department s budget, prior budget reduction backfills, classified and administrative staff or for full time faculty members. The RAPs are made up of five sections of criteria that must be incorporated when requesting an augmentation. Those five sections are (I) Program Review & Learning Outcomes, (II) Alignment with Institutional Priorities via the Strategic Plan, (III) Alignment with Institutional Plans, (IV) Goals and Measurable Outcomes, and (V) Implementation Plan. These criteria s are based upon the District s Integrated Planning Schematic. (see Figure B) The college wide allocation process represents an effort to identity and fund college wide demands and strategic plan priorities. It is a complex process developed with the understanding that it is not possible to fund every department s most urgent needs each fiscal year. 2 P age

4 Figure B Upon submittal of the RAPs, an Ad-Hoc Committee made up of Faculty, Administrators, Classified Staff and Students will review and score the RAPs using a Prioritization Allocation Rubric (PAR). The PAR scores are based on the same five criteria on the RAP with a total score of 100 possible. Each RAP will be scored by at least three individuals, including one faculty member, one classified staff, one administrator and one student (when available) and their average score is then assigned to the RAP. Once scoring is completed the RAPs scores will be presented to the Budget Committee and the Institutional Planning Committee for review and recommendation. These RAPs will be forwarded to Executive Cabinet for final approval. There are no guarantees that the highest scored RAPs will be automatically funded, as other factors are taken into account when assigning funding. Other factors include budgeting restraints, Institutional Priorities and project feasibility. Please see Exhibit A to see the historic record of RAPs funded for each fiscal year. 3 Page

5 Individuals who completed RAPs that were not funded are provided feedback regarding areas of improvement. Further, individuals whose PAR score qualified for funding and yet was not awarded will be contacted by the Institutional Effectiveness Department as to why their RAP was not funded. The transparency in the process allows for the RAP authors to gain additional information to strengthen future RAP submissions. All RAPs along with the PAR are placed on the District s web site to allow individuals the opportunity to review all RAPs that were submitted. Funded RAP authors are required to submit a Utilization and Assessment Report at the end of each respective academic year documenting the use of funds and the impact on student learning, achievement and institutional effectiveness as a result of the allocation. ASSESSMENT RAP scorers and authors are encouraged to provide feedback on the Resource Allocation Process in order to continually improve this process. The evaluation of the complete resource allocation cycle includes a review of the existing processes, a comprehensive review of the rubrics, and informal (virtual) focus groups that discuss and evaluates the planning, assessment and resource allocation processes which results in improvements to the process. Revisions are made to each specific document (RAP/PAR) and are reviewed and approved by the Budget Committee and Institutional Planning Committee. All updates and revisions to the RAPs/PARS are made available to faculty, staff, students, and administrators for use during the subsequent planning cycle. (See Figure C) 4 P age

6 Figure C: Planning Driven Budget Development Cycle Revenue projected, budget parameters established & prioritized annual goals published to stakeholders (P1 Anticipated) RAPS to be submitted to Deans for review Jan Budget workshop held by Business Services and budget files provided to area administrators for reallocation & augmentation requests Feb Mar April All prioritized Resource Allocation Proposals (RAPs) due to Business Services May Completed budget files due to Business Services Convene PAR ad-hoc committee to score RAPs Business Office reviews completed budget documents against parameters & revenue projections and develops tentative budget Position file clean-up Nov June Funded RAPs approved by Budget & IPC Committees Budget development calendar presented to BOT for approval BDC receives annual goals from BOT & Super/President BDC Recommends budget development process & calendar Oct Final budget presented to BOT for approval Sep Aug Executive cabinet selects augmentation requests eligible for allocations July Funded RAP communications distributed with implementation document RAP Assessment Report due P2 Anticipated New FY Commences July 1st Tentative Budget presented to BOT for approval PERSONNEL REQUESTS During the assessments of the recourse allocation process it was quickly discovered that the RAP process was not the appropriate way to evaluate and fund Classified and Administrative Personnel requests. 1 In the Fall of 2015 an ad hoc committee made up of members of the Institutional Planning Committee and the 1 New Full Time Faculty requests are handle through the Joint Hiring Process. 5 P age

7 Budget Committee developed a process for funding personnel request. As a result the Classified and Administrative Personnel Prioritization Request (CAPPR) was created. These request may only be submitted by an Administrator or Department Chair and must be supported by evidence documented in the most recent program review or annual program assessment. The criteria to consider when developing a CAPPR is the growth in student population, increase in sections/courses, new buildings, new service or program, or external mandates. The CAPPRs will be prioritized at the Division level (Vice Presidents and Deans) and the prioritized requests will be forwarded to Executive Cabinet for final prioritization and approval. A multi-year prioritization status list will be maintained so that positions not previously approved due to funding deficiencies may be supported as funding becomes available throughout the fiscal year. As with the RAPs, the CAPPRs process will be evaluated/assessed each year so that improvements to the process can be made. CONCLUSION The Mt. San Jacinto College resource allocation process is continuous. This model is evidence of how the resource allocation process is integrated with planning. This document should be viewed as a living document and will be updated to meet future needs. It is important to note that in fiscally challenging years the resource allocation process and the classified and administrative personnel prioritization process should not stop. Funding does not drive planning; planning drives funding. 6 P age

8 GLOSSARY 50% Law Education Code Section (EC) (also known as the Fifty Percent Law) requires all community college districts to spend at least half of their current expense of education for salaries of classroom instructors. Actuarial Report Annual Appropriation Limit (Gann Limit) Apportionment Audit Budget Categorical Funding A report prepared by an actuary to determine the financial impact of risks and uncertainties. Generally used to determine the required contributions of post-employment benefits or self-insured liabilities. In California, all governmental jurisdictions, including community college districts, must compute an annual appropriation limit based on the amount in prior years adjusted for changes in population, cost-of-living, and other factors, if applicable (Article XIII-B of the State Constitution). Allocation of State or Federal aid, district taxes, or other moneys to community college districts or other governmental units. An official examination and verification of financial statements and related documents, records, and accounts for the purpose of determining the propriety of transactions, whether transactions are recorded properly, and whether statements drawn from accounts reflect an accurate picture of financial operations and financial status. Audit procedures may also include examination and verification of compliance with applicable laws and regulations, economy and efficiency of operations, and effectiveness in achieving program results. The general focus of the annual audit conducted on the district is usually a financial statement examination and compliance audit. A plan of financial operation for a given period consisting of an estimate of expenditures and the proposed means of financing them Allocations that are required to be spent in a particular way or for a designated program. 7 P age

9 Classified & Administrative Personnel Prioritization Request (CAPPR) COLA Deficit Factor/Revenue Shortfall Divisions Fiscal year Full-Time Faculty Obligation (FON) Full-Time Equivalent Students (FTES) General Fund Grants Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) The form an individual completes to request a classified or administrative position. Cost of Living Allowance Applied to Apportionment Revenue based on available funding from the State Chancellor s Office. President s Office, Business Services, Student Services, and Human Resources A 12-month period to which the annual operating budget applies and at the end of which a government determines its financial position and the results of its operations. For governmental entities in the State of California, the period beginning July 1 and ending June 30. The California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 5, Section requires community college districts to increase their base number of full-time faculty over the prior year in proportion to the amount of growth in credit FTES. An FTES represents 525 class (contact) hours of student instruction/activity in credit and noncredit courses. Fulltime equivalent student (FTES) is one of the workload measures used in the computation of state aid for California Community Colleges. The fund used to account for the ordinary operations of the district. It is available for any legally authorized purpose not specified for payment by other funds. Contributions or gifts of cash or other assets from another government or private organization to be used or expended for a specified purpose, activity, or facility. Post-employment benefits that an employee will begin to receive at the start of retirement. This does not include pension benefits paid to the retired employee. Other postemployment benefits that a retiree can be compensated for are life insurance premiums, healthcare premiums, and deferred-compensation arrangements. 8 P age

10 Prioritization Allocation Rubric (PAR) Reserve Resource Allocation Proposal (RAP) Tax Revenue Anticipation Notes (TRAN) The form used to score the RAPs. An amount set aside to provide for estimated future expenditures or losses, for working capital, or for other specified purposes. The form an individual completes to request an augmentation to their budget. Instruments issued to secure short-term moneys borrowed in expectation of collection of taxes. Work Load Measure Reduction Utilized to quantify the reduction in FTES required when corresponding reductions in revenues have been imposed. LINKS RAP Form PAR Form CAPPR Form 9 P age

11 EXHIBIT A Fiscal Year Number of RAPS Submitted Number of RAPS Eligible to be Funded Number of RAPs Funded Score Required for Funding 2 Due to the large number of RAPs submitted during Fiscal Year 12/13 Division were asked to send a prioritization list of RAPs to be considered for funding. Note all RAPs were scored and feedback was provided to the requestors. 10 P age