1 / 10

Strategic Budget Infusion

Strategic Budget Infusion. Group Two. James Bouse Registrar’s Office Stephanie Dresie Chaney Office of Communications Marie Greig Biology Department

alaura
Download Presentation

Strategic Budget Infusion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Strategic Budget Infusion

  2. Group Two • James Bouse Registrar’s Office • Stephanie Dresie Chaney Office of Communications • Marie Greig Biology Department • Karen Jefferis Office of the Provost • Lynette M. Schenkel Responsible Conduct of Research

  3. Assignment: Project Two • The Provost has granted $100,000 for strategic investment with the potential for additional funding if your team is able to demonstrate a significant return on that investment. Using the concepts learned in the Financial Stewardship Institute, create a framework for identifying and analyzing potential strategic investments. You may also identify a specific investment proposal to demonstrate the application of this framework in identifying an investment opportunity. • Big Ideas…with an administrative twist

  4. Return to the University (ROI) • Dollar • Efficiency • Prestige • Compliance

  5. Review Scoring Tool and Test Project Strategic budget Infusion RFP Accreditation of the University of Oregon Human Research Protection Program (HRPP)

  6. What We Learned: Tool-Project • Quantitative vs. Qualitative • Did we ask too much? • Would this require a two-tier review process? • Could we rephrase our criteria to better solicit information? • Don’t make the reviewers have to stretch to find a reason to give a project a high score. • Spoon feed project responses in each section that directly explain why the project meets each criterion.

  7. Applicable to UO Missions? (25) ROI (35) Dollar Efficiency Prestige Compliance Builds on existing strengths? (5) Sustainability? (25) Adaptability? (10) Total - 100 Score: 23.75 Score: 28.49 Not available Not available Not available Not available Score: 4.24 Score: 21.90 Score: 7.26 85.65* How did the Test Project Score? *Composite score, four reviewers

  8. Dean Spock’s Assessment? A great tool, and a project worthy of investment. May it live long, and prosper!

  9. Wow!!! Group Two Plus Project Two Equals:

More Related