EVALUATING PLANNING ANDBUDGETING PROCESSESJoint Meeting:Budget CommitteeAndPlanning and Institutional Effectiveness (P.I.E.) Committee

March 6, 2014

AGENDA

Review results of July, 2013 meeting Minutes Recommendations

Review Existing Documents Shared Governance Diagram Planning/Budget Diagram Calendars: Budget, Program Review, SLO Assessment Master Plan Calendars

Evaluation of Process Committee Self Evaluations Program Review Evaluations

Discussion of Effectiveness of Planning and Budgeting Processes

Recommendations and Next Steps Meeting Evaluation

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2013Recommendations & Clarifications Responsible Parties Target

Completion Date

I. Program review relateda. Start earlier in the fall to allow more

time to completePIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

b. Have the Prioritization Rubric available before program reviews are prepared

PIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

c. Ensure that the Prioritization Rubric addresses the support function provided by Administrative Services

PIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

d. Make public the allocation of funds resulting from Resource Requests promptly

President

e. Work toward broader participation within units in the preparation of the unit program review and plan

College-wide Sept. 2013

II. Budget relateda. Clarify how Divisions can request and

have funded their on-going supply and other ongoing operating needs (based on historical spending)

Budget Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

b. Identify funding sources, including VTEA, grants, categorical and other to be used before Program 100 funds are prioritized for Resource Requests

Budget Committee

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2013Recommendations & Clarifications Responsible Parties Target

Completion Date

III. Planning-Budget Connectiona. Make sure FPIP priorities are

aligned with program review resource request priorities

FPIP Committee/ PIE Committee

September 2013

b. Develop a prioritization process including a rubric for filling new and/or vacant Classified staff positions

College Council/ PIE Committee

c. Develop a technology replacement plan and implement it (total cost of ownership)

Technology Committee

d. Develop a process to respond to unplanned resource requests

Budget Committee

e. Centralize management of instructional technology repair

Library/Learning Resource Center

COLLEGE PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCESTRUCTURE

LINKING PLANNING TO BUDGETING

CALENDARS: PROGRAM REVIEW(PRIORITIZATION IS FOR 2014-15 FISCAL YEAR)

Date Action Responsible PartiesSeptember 3, 2013

Divisional Council orientation to program review

Dean, Chairs

September 3, 2013

Academic program review initiated (links to IES emailed to Chairs)

Dean, Chairs

September, 2013

Kick-off and orientation for Administrative program review: Student Services, Administrative Services and Academic Affairs

Deans, Managers

September 6, 2013

Training for Division Chairs Dean, Chairs

September –October, 2013

Workshops for all program review managers and team members

Program Review Workgroup

October 25, 2013

All program reviews due: Academic Affairs, Administrative Services, Students Services

Program Review Managers and Team Members

October 26, 2013

Validation cycle begins Deans

October, 2013 Validation training for deans DeansDecember 2013

Validation cycle ends Validation and Program Review Managers and Team Members

CALENDARS: PROGRAM REVIEW(PRIORITIZATION IS FOR 2014-15 FISCAL YEAR)

Date Action Responsible PartiesJanuary 2, 2014

Area prioritization cycle begins Vice Presidents

January 18, 2014

Area prioritization cycle ends Vice Presidents

January 22, 2014

College-wide prioritization cycle begins

PIE Committee

January 28, 2014 (moved)

Evaluation of effective use of fiscal resources

PIE and Budget Committees

March 14, 2014

Prioritization Retreat PIE Committee

April, 2014 College-wide priorities presented to Budget Committee

PIE and Budget Committees

April, 2014 College-wide priorities as approved by Budget Committee presented to College Council for approval; set amount of funds to be allocated to prioritized list

PIE and Budget Committees, and College Council

April, 2014 College-wide priorities presented to President for approval

College Council and President

May, 2014 College-wide priorities folded into budget preparation process

Administrative Services

June 2014 Evaluation of planning/budget PIE and Budget

CALENDARS: BUDGET PREPARATION2013-3014Date ActivitySept-Oct 2012 Development of Budget Preparation ActivitiesNovember 2012 Development of Budget Operation PlanDecember 2012 Budget Prep WorkshopJanuary 2013 Governor’s Proposed State Budget &

Preliminary AllocationsFebruary 2013 Constituencies Review Budget StatusMarch 2013 Preparation of Preliminary BudgetsApril 2013 Review of Preliminary Budget DataMay 2013 Revenue Projections UpdatedJune 2013 Tentative BudgetJuly 2013 Revision to Revenue Projections/ AllocationsAugust 2013 Final BudgetSeptember 2013 Final Budget/ Year-End Analysis

CALENDAR: COURSE SLO ASSESSMENT

CALENDAR: COURSE SLO ASSESSMENT

IMPACT: COURSE SLO ASSESSMENT ANDPROGRAM REVIEW

EVALUATION OF PROCESSES

Committee Self Evaluations Budget Committee Planning Committee

Program Review Evaluation Survey Unit evaluation if impact of resource request

funding

PROGRAM REVIEW SURVEY COMMENTS Good things

Was collaborative and the chair made the process easy to follow along and participate

It helped to clarify some of the departments needs and the resources that it takes to fulfill these needs. Our director asked for help from all of the faculty so everyone had an equal chance to voice their needs.

Collaboration with colleagues; open discussion of data

That I could work on it at home or in the office and that I could save work and then return later

Collaboration with full and part time faculty on program improvements and needs.

We got it done on time. We will get it all validated in time to continue the cycle. Divisional Council got specific what happened with resource requests form last year.

I thing that everything is working quite well. I thought the process was easier this year since last year there were so

many glitches. Also, being that I had more experience this time, I was able to figure out the linking in planning. Once you get it, it's easy to use.

PROGRAM REVIEW SURVEY COMMENTS Challenges

Build in more time to complete the program review. More clarity on what happens to the resource requests and other

ideas floated in PR; notification in November for this year's requests is too late. Too long a gap between the College Council forwarding the prioritized list and the actual decisions on funding. I suggest the president communicate how far down the list he is prepared to go, periodically until all funds for the year have been allocated (including block grants).

Faculty want to know how more about which resource requests were funded and with what outcomes.

More reports generated and shared to give us an overview of the responses and resource requests.

Add examples of reasons why program reviews were returned by validators.

Clearer explanation with examples A glossary and some sort of information as what is needed The software often times ran slowly, so I wasn't always confident

that my work was being saved correctly.

PROGRAM REVIEW SURVEY COMMENTS Challenges

Having staff feel valued, connected, part of the process, and a sense of belonging by helping contribute to program review in any capacity. If staff does a huge portion of the work, but doesn't have a say in the goals, outcomes or review the process, then who is validating what really goes on in departments.

There is a huge lack of communication and respect for staff in student services, and while others are involved in program review, staff is marginalized and kept in the dark.

Improve access and technical bugs Improve validation process Improve training on goal setting Rollover of responses from last year

The amount of information having to be inputted. Would like to see a more condensed system. I suggest the president communicate how far down the

prioritized list he is prepared to go, until all funds for the year have been allocated (including block grants).

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: RESOURCE WASNOT RECEIVED

The allied Health division continues to enroll high numbers of students. However, medical requirements for acceptance needs to be collected and tracked for clinical externship participation.

Reduced class offerings instructors growth is somewhat delayed affect student's learning quality time intended for students spent on lab

tech work Program will be severly impacted and a decision

will need to be made about how to continue as program is sharing space with Aviation and it is severly impacting their program growth.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: RESOURCE WASNOT RECEIVED

Programs will continue to be sub par and offer a less than professional student experience and education.

Students who wanted the program were not able to take classes therefore less certificates and high paying union jobs.

limited student access to equipment Faculty are not able to teach current material on

the out-dated software There have been increased incidence of theft of

computer equipment in the past year need toner cartridges TODAY

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: RESOURCE WASNOT RECEIVED

chem students continue to search for colleges that offer all the organic sequences

Difficulty staffing sufficiently for registration periods and during staff absences for vacation and sick leave.

System Crash often, unrelieable hardware, More stress , difficulty for technical problem solving. Not up-to-Date Technology.

Continue repairing fleet using outside venders costing college far more than if completed in house

Facilities will not be able to control everything deliverd from Bond programs, front office already understaffed.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: RESOURCE WASNOT RECEIVED

Longer wait times for work orders & repairs. Premature failer on major equipment due to no preventive maintenance.

Struggle to coordinate program. Late payment of vendors due to struggle to obtain funds necessary.

the athletic department has not been able to enhance the promotion and marketing of our programs and student athletes in those programs. Additionally, the S.I.D. would have been our designee to provide required statistical reports to the Western State Conference, Southern California Football Association, and the CCCAA Presto Sports statistical web site.

IMPACT ASSESSMENT: RESOURCE WASNOT RECEIVED

Students not served in timely manner To adequatly serve evening students with assessment

services

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2013I. PROGRAM REVIEW RELATED

Recommendations & Clarifications

Responsible Parties

Target Compl-etion Date

STATUS, MARCH 2014

DISPOSITION FOR 2014-15

a. Start earlier in the fall to allow more time to complete

PIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

Started in Sept. rather than Oct.

Make data available in August

b. Have the Prioritization Rubric available before program reviews are prepared

PIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

Yes, it was in the Handbook

Done

c. Ensure that the Prioritization Rubric addresses the support function provided by Administrative Services

PIE Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Sept. 2013

Discussed at PIE where group decided the rubric is sufficient

Done

d. Make public the allocation of funds resulting from Resource Requests promptly

President Announced earlier than in the past

Needs to be announced by June 1

e. Work toward broader participation within units in the preparation of the unit program review and plan

College-wide Sept. 2013

Still room for improvement

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2013II. BUDGET RELATED

Recommendations & Clarifications

Responsible Parties

Target Compl-etion Date

STATUS, MARCH 2014

DISPOSITION FOR 2014-15

a. Clarify how Divisions can request and have funded their on-going supply and other ongoing operating needs (based on historical spending)

Budget Committee/ Program Review Workgroup

Informal discus-sionshave begun

Olga and Ken will develop a draftapproach. Explore how to accommodate this need through Resource Request Prioritization, VTEA-funded items, budget preparation process

b. Identify funding sources, including VTEA, grants, categorical and other to be used before Program 100 funds are prioritized for Resource Requests

Budget Committee

Informal discus-sionshave begun

Process for this needs to be worked out.

RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 2013III. PLANNING-BUDGET CONNECTION

Recommendations & Clarifications

Responsible Parties

Target Compl-etionDate

STATUS, MARCH 2014

DISPOSITION FOR 2014-15

a. Make sure program review resource requests are aligned with FPIP priorities

FPIP Committee/ PIE Committee

Sept. 2013

Status?

b. Develop a prioritization process including a rubric for filling new and/or vacant Classified staff positions

College Council/ PIE Committee

Committee to develop a classified staffing plan began work.

After EMP is available to staffing plan to align with, continue work on the plan.

c. Develop a technology replacement plan and implement it (total cost of ownership)

Technology Committee

In prgress Technology Committee is working on this

d. Develop a process to respond to unplanned resource requests

Budget Committee

Volunteer is drafting a process

New process to be finalized

e. Centralize management of instructional technology repair

Library/Learning Resource Center

Status?

RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS

Recommendations Responsible Parties Target Completion Date