Kaua‘i community college

Planning Agenda

• The college will continue to refine and improve the process of assessing the outcomes of financial planning decisions on student success and student learning and use that assessment to improve decision making.

III.D.1.a. Financial planning is integrated with and supports all institutional planning.

Descriptive Summary

On March 22, 2005, Kaua‘i Community College Policy 1-7 (Exhibit II-9: KCCM 1-7) established the College Council, which serves as both a representative forum for stakeholder dialogue on college issues and as advisory to the chancellor on major planning, policy, and budget issues. Members of the Council therefore serve as both representatives of their constituent groups and as campus leaders.

The College Council is the primary forum, which assures regular and in-depth dialogue among all stakeholders on campus about our mission, strategic planning, priority setting, policy development, and budget development. The composition of voting members of the College Council includes representation from administration, faculty, staff and students. The chancellor convenes the Campus Council and is a non-voting member. The Council’s role is to make recommendations to the chancellor who has final decision making authority according to Board of Regents’ policy. The chancellor reports to the Council and explains her reasons anytime she declines to accept their recommendation.
The college has developed an infrastructure for program planning based on the college’s strategic planning process. To date, all programs have completed either a mini or full program review (Program Review folder). During the Spring 2005 semester, the College Council went through the first budget prioritization process to develop the college’s supplemental budget request. Programs assessed their need for equipment, space for classrooms, labs and offices, new facilities, and funds for facilities and equipment maintenance based on their annual program review update (APRU). Each program is given an opportunity to present their need for resources before the Campus Council. Members of the Council ranked each request based on the following six criteria: alignment with the college’s goals, outcome expected, evidence, need, collaboration and impact.
During the Spring 2006 semester, the College Council completed their second budget prioritization process in preparation for the 2007-09 biennium budget request.
Self Evaluation
Spring 2005 was the college’s first full implementation of the new program review/APRU process to formally integrate financial planning with institutional planning. The process resulted in the ranking of budget requests for the FY 2006-07 Supplemental Budget request by the council members (APRU Budget Requests), who reviewed and ranked requests based on community needs, program reviews, and the strategic planning process in (Program Review Action Plans and Resource Allocations). The chancellor shared that her budget priorities and recommendations were consistent with the sentiments of the group.

During the Spring 2006 semester, the College Council went through a second resources prioritization process, which resulted in budget requests for the FY 2007-09 biennium as well as requests for the FY 2006-07 operating budget. While the process produced the desired budget requests, some members of the Council felt that the process could be streamlined. In addition, the quality and thoroughness of the APRU/PR presentations to the Council was uneven, with some programs including a full array of requests while others presented no requests. In a campus memo, the chancellor provided a summary of prioritized requests and a cover letter informing the campus community that the Council will be analyzing and seeking ways to further improve the college’s integrated planning and resource allocation process.

Planning Agenda

• 
  Additional professional development is needed to improve the use of evidence to clearly support program review documents as well as the general quality of the action plans.
  

• 
  In line with the KCCM, the Council should encourage collaboration across program and unit lines.
  

• 
  During the first council meeting in the fall semester, the Statement of Purpose in KCCM 1-7 should be read in order to remind members of their responsibilities to their constituency.
  

• 
  Council members should continue to improve communication with their respective constituencies.
  

III.D.1.b. Institutional planning reflects realistic assessment of financial resource availability, development of financial resources, partnerships, and expenditure requirements.

Descriptive Summary

Each program and division at the college is involved in institutional planning and receives information about the college’s current general fund allocation, projected tuition and fees revenues, and anticipated fiscal commitments. This budget information is disseminated at the College Council at the beginning of the fiscal year and updated after the spring semester revenues are received. This information reflects the college’s base budget, which is also used in developing the biennium and supplemental budget requests. Each division has an opportunity to express its budget concerns and share plans for resource development, potential partnerships and funding requirements.

In addition, the UHCC System Budget Office produces financial planning information on current and projected resources for use in the development of operating budget as well as the biennium and supplemental budget requests. For example, in preparing for the 2007-2009 biennium budget request, the system office distributed a spreadsheet with projected tuition revenues and required setasides for collective bargaining and financial aid (TFSF Projection - Amend 7 - Final TW and Faculty CB2). This information was incorporated into the preparation of both the operating budget for FY2007 and for the biennium budget request.
In preparing the operating budget for the next year, the Director of Administrative Services prepares a budget requirements projection, which incorporates whatever additions to the state funded current service base may have been granted, projected collective bargaining impact on salaries and wages, projected overhead costs such as utilities, and known recurring costs such as printing the schedules. The chancellor and deans and directors review this budget projection in the light of spending priorities determined through the program review process. They determine which of the various priorities might be funded by increased revenues, savings, or reallocations and identify items appropriate for grant requests, e.g., for Perkins improvement funds.
Funding priorities are established in March, after each program completes its Annual Program Review Update (APRU) and resource proposals. The campus relies on program review to establish its resource needs and priorities. An explanation of the criteria used by the Council in reviewing the requests was posted in CampusDocs and emailed to the campus in February 2005. Additional guidelines for developing the APRU were posted in CampusDocs on January and February of 2006. The guidelines ask for a one-page discussion of general improvement plans along with analysis of the program health indicators. The document also asks for a table of program resource needs in the areas of personnel, equipment and facilities with an explanation of the outcomes anticipated from the action as well as the program goal addressed by the action.

Self Evaluation