Campus Budget Cut Process

1. Academic Business Officers Group44th Annual ConferenceBreak Out SessionBudget Planning & Management ChallengesLisa Daniels, Assistant DeanDivision of Humanities and Fine ArtsUC Santa Barbara

2. Campus Budget Cut Process • Chancellor established Coordinating Committee on Budget Strategy in February 2003 • Committee charged with developing set of principles and priorities to guide the budget reduction process • No across the board cuts -- budget reduction percentages varied across campus according to committee principles and priorities

3. College Budget Cut Process • Divisional Deans have autonomy to determine how to meet their assigned budget reduction target • Each division analyzed various models for assessing budget reductions to departments • Some years, reductions taken at the divisional level; other years, reduction targets given to departments

4. Divisional Budget Cut Process

5. Divisional Budget Cut Process

6. Divisional Budget Cut ProcessTemporary Cut Options • Carry-forward • Savings • Support budget funds • Work-study savings • Temporary sub 0 allocation (with permission)

7. Divisional Budget Cut ProcessPermanent Cut Options • $1,000,000 = ~30.00 TA FTE = 60 full-year 50% TAships • $1,000,000: • $600,000 = ~18.00 TA FTE = 36 full-year 50% TAship • $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE • $1,000,000: • $100,000 = ~2.00 Lecturer FTE • $500,000 = ~15.00 TA FTE = 30 full-year 50% TAship • $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE • $1,000,000: • $100,000 = ~2.00 Lecturer FTE • $400,000 = ~12.00 TA FTE = 24 full-year 50% TAship • $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE • $100,000 = Support Budget Funds

8. Divisional Budget Cut ProcessHFA Departments • 22 departments/programs in HFA Division • 25% of departments had less than 3 staff FTE • 40% of departments had less than 4 staff FTE • 60% of departments had less than 5 staff FTE • Wide variance in staff/faculty ratios

9. Administrative Support ModelsIndividual Departments Pros: Common culture Tradition Staff close to faculty and students Family/Town Square Cons: Small departments below critical mass Inequities across departments Part-time, fractions, multiple responsibilities Increasing burdens on individual staff Reduction of services Nothing left to cut

10. Administrative Support ModelsService Centers Pros: Specialized services Expertise Efficiency Cons: Staff removed from faculty and students Problem of seasonal labor Inefficiency

11. Administrative Support ModelsShared Staffing Pros: Specialized staff Efficiency Leveraging of resources Local presence Cons: Staff present only part-time Less responsive to faculty Unpredictable needs and workload Staff pulled in different directions Where do we scale back?

12. Administrative Support ModelsAdministrative Support Centers Pros: More equitable distribution of resources and workload Greater efficiency Local presence if building-based clusters Specialized expertise Better support for faculty More professional opportunities within ASCs Use of VSO and open provisions will reduce lay-offs Note: Not a merger of departments or programs; Individual chairs, faculties, degrees, meetings, programmatic identities remain New common space for faculty and graduate students could foster interdisciplinary culture

13. Budget Cut Alternatives • Take cuts entirely from Sub 0 (TA FTE, Associates, Lecturers) • Eliminate more faculty FTE • Eliminate departments or programs within departments • Reduce staff of some departments below critical mass • Mergers, increased sharing after reductions Note: While this discussion focuses on clustered departments within the division, non-clustered departments had permanent cuts to staff FTE and temporary instruction FTE.

14. Administrative Support CentersStaffing Model Note: Some staff would continue to focus on single programs, some would work across programs

15. Administrative Support Center Implementation Process • Coordination with HR • Detailed discussions with individual Chairs and Managers • Discussions with faculty and staff • Recruitment of Lead Managers (Directors); only current managers in clustered departments eligible to apply • Lead Managers (Directors) and Chairs design positions, configurations, re-assignments within HR policy

16. Administrative Support CentersImplementation Process(cont.) • Restructuring would involve transfer to new positions rather than lay-offs and new hires • Reclassification of some positions to recognize management responsibilities • Positions defined by areas of specialization • Reconfiguration of administrative offices

17. Administrative Support Center Implementation Process (cont.) • Department permanent support budget funds returned to Division • Annual support budget allocations provided to departments and Administrative Support Centers (Funding sources both permanent and temporary) • Permanent staffing actions coordinated through Division, since cluster departments and ASCs have no permanent support funds • Ongoing meetings with cognate staff to identify ways to streamline job duties

18. Administrative Support Center Results and Follow-Up • Flexibility for final staffing implementation led to 4 similar yet different versions of the model • We have experienced successes and problems • Regular meetings between Directors and divisional staff • Ongoing meetings with cognate staff to identify ways to streamline job duties

19. Planning for Future Cuts ???