Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013

1. Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013 Greg Nelson Vice President of Administrative Services TammeilGilkerson Vice President of Academic Affairs

2. San José City College • Founded in 1921 • 10thOldest Community College in California • Accredited by the ACCJC/WASC • Approximately 10k Students San José City College

3. Accreditation Requirements • Implement a Mission-Based Strategic Plan With Quantifiable Goals and Measures of Student Achievement • Implement a Regular Cycle of Review, Including Information and Data to Update Plans on a Regular Basis • Evaluate Progress Towards Strategic Plan Goals Using Results of Evaluation for Improvement

4. A 2010 Retrospective • No Identifiable Goals or Benchmarks • No Formal Process for Allocating Dollars • No Consistent Program Reviews • No Formalized Process

5. Building the Foundation • Formalized Strategic Plan and Process • Established College Goals • Linked Key Performance Indicators to Benchmarks • Instituted Program Review Process • Established Resources Allocation Process

6. San José City CollegeIntegrated Planning Process

7. College Goals • Promote Student Success • Expand Partnerships • Enhance Employee Development • Foster Cultural Competence • Increase Campus Safety

8. Key Performance Indicators

9. Linking Goals to Programs

10. Establish Quality Program Reviews

11. Establish Faculty Hiring Priorities

12. Determine Hiring Recommendations • Academic Senate Reviews Requests • Program Review Required • Prioritized Recommendations Submitted to President • President ReviewsRationale and Establishes Positions to be Hired

13. Hiring: Lessons Learned • Professional Alliances Skewed Voting Process • Academic Senate Needed More Data • More Time For Review • Empower Program Review Committee to Review and Rate Scoring Rubrics • Institute Parallel Review for Division Deans

14. Historical Discretionary Dollars • Budgets Rolled From Year to Year • No Input From Budget Managers • No Accountability • No Knowledge of Actual Program Costs • Needed to Establish Process For Full Allocation Methodology

15. Pilot Process - Operating Funds • One Time Funds • Limited to Mainly Equipment • Requireda Validated Program Review to Receive Funding • Program Review Had to Align With Requests

16. Operating: Lessons Learned • Not Enough Information to Make Quality Decisions • Difficulty Reaching Proposers For Clarification • Request Were Not Tied to Program Review

17. OperatingDecisions

18. Strengthen Overall Process • Collect Trend Data • Enhance and Expand Program Review Data • 3 Years of Historical Expenses • Create Presentation Process • Harden the Line Between Planning and Program Review

20. Zero Based BudgetProcess • First allocation process of this nature in college history • Ability for Programs to Ask for Adequate Funding • Achieved Buy-in from all constituency groups

21. Zero Based BudgetProcess • Required Budget Managers to DefendBudget Requests to College Finance Committee • Finance Committee = 3 Administrators, 3 Students, 3 Classified, 3 Faculty • No Program Review = No Dollars Allocated • Made Programs Defend Need to Keep Historical Budget

22. Budget Hearings • Finance Committee Reviewed Data a Week Prior • Academic Managers: 30-45 Minutes • Non-Academic Managers: 15-30 Minutes • Subject Matter Experts • DetailedQuestions From Finance Committee • Completed 12-14 Hearings in 9 Hours

23. Budget Hearing Recommendations • Finance Committee Met Subsequently to Deliberate • Presidential Priorities Reviewed • Deliberations Debated Budget and Line Items • Revenue Available Not Revealed Until End of Deliberations

24. President Approval/ Allocation

26. Award Letters and Appeals • Every Manager Received Award Letters • President Attends CPCto Explain Major Changes to Allocations if Any • CPC Relays Information • Managers Have Opportunity to Appeal if Appropriate

28. Survey ofNew Process • The process used for 2012–13, including the budget hearings, was improved as compared to previous • 98% Agreed or Strongly Agreed • I found the 2012–13 resource allocation process open and transparent. - 91% Agreed or Strongly Agreed • The integrated planning process of using program reviews for resource allocations helped in preparing the annual budget requests for the Finance Committee. • 91% Agreed or Strongly Agreed • The budget hearing process should be the standard used for all annual budget allocations within the college. • 82% Agreed or Strongly Agreed

29. Zero Based: Lessons Learned • Create a Scoring Rubric • Allocate More Time to Academic Divisions • Consider Using Process for Non-Instructional Hiring • Provide Finance Committee More Training to Understand Data More Efficiently • Make Unfunded Priority List for New Dollars

30. Integrated Planning & Resource Allocation Handbook • http://www.sjcc.edu/data/files/gallery/ContentGallery/SJCC_Strategic_Planning_And_Resource_Allocation_Handbook_2012.pdf

31. It Really Works!!!