SCUP
 

Learning Resources

Where planning comes together. T​he power of SCUP is its community. We learn from one another, sharing how we’ve achieved success and, maybe more importantly, what we’ve learned from failure. SCUP authors, produces, and curates thousands of resources to help you prepare for the future, overcome challenges, and bring planning together at your college or university.

FOUND 7 RESOURCES

REFINED BY:

  • Planning Type: Resource Planningx
  • Tags: GovernancexSystem of Colleges or Universitiesx

Clear All
ABSTRACT:  | 
SORT BY:  | 
Webinar Recordings

Published
January 13, 2022

Higher Education Business Models Under Stress, Part 2

Graceful Business Model Transitions: Planning and Executing a College or Campus Closure

Join a panel discussion moderated by Rick Seltzer, senior editor of Higher Ed Dive, with guest panelists Melody Rose, author of AGB’s new book Higher Education Business Models Under Stress, and Lynn Priddy and James Lyons Sr., higher education leaders with experience closing financially distressed colleges and universities.
Abstract: Securing financial viability requires an engaged board that is monitoring the right trends and campus indicators, asking the right questions of campus leaders about the institution’s finances, and doing the scenario planning and stress testing necessary to transform a business model under stress.

The governing board’s fiduciary duty to steward the institution’s financial health requires that boards and leaders consider business model transformations, and plan for a range of scenarios like mergers, affiliations, strategic partnerships, and even—when all other options are exhausted—final transformations such as campus closures when continued mission fulfillment is impossible.

This is part two of a two-part webinar series delivered in partnership between SCUP and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), “Higher Education Business Models Under Stress: Planning for Successful Transitions”. This series will help build your fiduciary understanding of your institution’s business model as you prepare the campus for a range of possible business transformations, from mergers, strategic affiliations, corporate partnerships, or even the ultimate scenario of a campus closure. View the recording for part one, “Board Oversight of Finance and the Business Model: Key Indicators and Trends for Scenario Planning and Stress Testing”.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Webinar Recordings

Published
November 15, 2021

Higher Education Business Models Under Stress, Part 1

Board Oversight of Finance and the Business Model: Key Indicators and Trends for Scenario Planning and Stress Testing

Join a panel discussion on business model transformation moderated by Verne Sedlacek, vice board chair of Valparaiso University with guest panelists Melody Rose, coauthor of AGB’s new book, Higher Education Business Models Under Stress, and AGB consultants Carlton Brown and Larry Ladd, experts in higher education budgeting, finance, and strategic planning.
Abstract: Securing financial viability requires an engaged board that is monitoring the right trends and campus indicators, asking the right questions of campus leaders about the institution’s finances, and doing the scenario planning and stress testing necessary to transform a business model under stress.

The governing board’s fiduciary duty to steward the institution’s financial health requires that boards and leaders consider business model transformations, and plan for a range of scenarios like mergers, affiliations, strategic partnerships, and even—when all other options are exhausted—final transformations such as campus closures when continued mission fulfillment is impossible.

This is part one of a two-part webinar series delivered in partnership between SCUP and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), “Higher Education Business Models Under Stress: Planning for Successful Transitions”. This series will help build your fiduciary understanding of your institution’s business model as you prepare the campus for a range of possible business transformations, from mergers, strategic affiliations, corporate partnerships, or even the ultimate scenario of a campus closure. View the recording for part two, “Graceful Business Model Transitions: Planning and Executing a College or Campus Closure”.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Recordings

Published
March 19, 2021

2021 North Atlantic Regional Conference | March 2021

Designing the Money

Resilient Long-term Planning for CSCU's Sixteen Campuses

In this session, we'll share how Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) applies a standard process to address its unique capital needs and withstand the test of time. CSCU maintains its 10-year capital plan in a dynamic environment to remain relevant and resilient for allocating resources equitably between its sixteen campuses with optimal effect.
Abstract: Establishing capital projects is typically a long-term effort with changes occurring over months. In this session, we'll share how Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) applies a standard process to address its unique capital needs and withstand the test of time. CSCU maintains its 10-year capital plan in a dynamic environment to remain relevant and resilient for allocating resources equitably between its sixteen campuses with optimal effect. Come learn how a mission-driven, evidence-based capital planning approach responds to changing demographics and financial conditions while addressing specific facility and infrastructure needs in a wide variety of campus settings.

Member Price:
$35 | Login

Non-Member Price:
$50

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
January 1, 2018

An Exploration of Administrative Bloat in American Higher Education

Administrative bloat, the ballooning growth of administrative functions and personnel in U.S. higher education, is the unintended consequence of several factors and can be mitigated to some extent through deliberate strategies.

From Volume 46 Number 2 | January–March 2018

Abstract: This article evaluates administrative bloat, the ballooning growth of administrative functions and personnel, in American higher education. This evaluation was undertaken through a review of the available literature describing administrative bloat. Though unintentional, increased spending and government requirements for accountability may have contributed to overall growth and cost in higher education. Similarly, the changing composition of faculty—in terms of tenure-track faculty, annual contracts, and adjunct faculty—may have also played a role in the increased influence that administration has over campus policy and curricular decisions. Strategies to mitigate the cost of administrative bloat and to balance campus decisions between faculty and administration are suggested.

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Integrating Board, System, and University Planning and Performance During a Period of Rapidly Declining State Funding Commitment

Even in the most difficult financial times, integrating planning and budgeting throughout the organization creates opportunities for success.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: In 2009 the Arizona University System (supporting over 130,000 enrollments) through its Board of Regents directed its board president and the presidents of Arizona State University, University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to create an operational plan that reflected the board’s vision, goals, and strategic directions. A primary objective was to transform the system (or enterprise) vision into concrete goals and outcomes that would directly connect to financial decision making at the system and university level. The backdrop for higher education planning and budgeting expectations included the continuation of severe reductions in state funding, rapidly increasing student tuition and fees, and a call for greater accountability. The planning processes were characterized by the integration of board and presidential discussions, inclusion of constituent debate, identification of strategic choices, and approval of outcomes focused on measuring performance. The integration ran across and within three organizations or levels that included the Arizona Board of Regents, its system administration, and the three universities.

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
July 1, 2011

Engaging Faculty Senates in the Budget Planning Process

The opinions of faculty may add to the development of productive strategies during tough economic times.

From Volume 39 Number 4 | July–September 2011

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access