Tying the Knot Between Strategic Planning and Budgeting

1. Tying the Knot Between Strategic Planning and Budgeting Utilizing Microsoft Access to Support an Integrated Planning Framework Alan Socha and Raymond Barclay

2. Design Influences, part I • Director called upon early (and current) experience in national assessment work and institutional and individual-level portfolio movements in particular: • Bonner Foundation: • http://www.bonner.org/resources/guides/bwbrs/introduction/background.html • The College of New Jersey: • http://planning.wcu.edu/bios/presentations/Planning_Portal.ppt • Corporation for National Service Performance Assessment Frameworks: • http://nationalserviceresources.org/resources/online_pubs/perf_meas/index.php

3. Design Influences, part II • Director also reviewed James Madison and Virginia Commonwealth Frameworks: • James Madison: • http://www.jmu.edu/instresrch/obj_example.shtml • VCU • http://www.weave.vcu.edu/sacs/

4. Design Influences, part III • To ensure efficient strategy, integrate disparate processes, and promote buy-in, the Director needed to coalesce to the extent feasible variant campus and UNC-general administration planning, effectiveness and budgeting process for the following constituents: • WCU IR/Planning; • WCU Assessment; • WCU Budgets Office; • SACS-Institutional Effectiveness (Standard 2.5); and • UNC-General Administration expectations (PACE, Performance Framework, etc.)

5. Design Influences, part IV • Director needed to have a “proof-in-concept” that was affordable, technically approachable via IR to minimize reliance on IT, and could move the institution toward a more comprehensive approach or a vendor product. • Most importantly, no processes, sources, or vendor products available did a thorough/adequate job of merging BUDGETING PROCESS with PLANNING/EFFECTIVENESS PROCESSES.