SCUP
 

Learning Resources

Your Higher Education Planning Library

Combine search terms, filters, institution names, and tags to find the vital resources to help you and your team tackle today’s challenges and plan for the future. Get started below, or learn how the library works.

FOUND 12 RESOURCES

SEARCHED FOR: budget x

REFINED BY:

  • Tags: Budget PlanningxResponsibility Center Managementx

Clear All
ABSTRACT:  | 
SORT BY:  | 
Example Plans

Published
September 2, 2022

Supporting Document

Public Associate’s College (California, United States)

The college recently redesigned its planning and budgeting process to strengthen alignment and improve communications. This calendar depicts the timeline for that process.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Conference Recordings

Published
July 15, 2021

Pivot! Planning During a Pandemic and Staying on Course

In this session, we'll share best practices and lessons learned in virtually adapting the cycle of planning and budgeting processes to an uncertain, volatile, and virtual environment.
Abstract: The pandemic hit during a crucial part of Saint Paul College's annual planning process, forcing processes, events, training, and decision-making to move to a totally virtual environment. In addition to pivoting operations, Saint Paul College also faced uncertain financial conditions. In this session, we'll share best practices and lessons learned in virtually adapting the cycle of planning and budgeting processes to an uncertain, volatile, and virtual environment.

Member Price:
$35  | Login

Non-Member Price:
$50

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
July 17, 2020

Featured Image

Academic Deans Reveal Their Leadership Styles

Annual Budgeting Becomes an Exercise in How Authority is Enacted

Academic deans adopt one of three approaches when developing the annual budget report for their colleges: distributed authorship, delegated authorship, or dominated authorship. Depending on the approach they select, deans can include and collaborate with their senior teams—or exclude, ignore, and alienate them. Their choice demonstrates how they lead.

From Volume 48 Number 4 | July–September 2020

Abstract: Few studies have investigated how academic deans enact their authority in Responsibility Center Budgeting (RCB), despite its widespread adoption. In this article I explore findings from a study that investigated how deans crafted a confidential annual budget report at an American university. Ultimately, deans adopted one of three approaches to crafting the report: delegating, distributing, or dominating authorship. Deans who distributed authorship collaborated with their senior teams to establish a shared sense of priorities for their colleges. In contrast deans who delegated and dominated authorship ignored and alienated members of their senior team during the budget review, engendering confusion and frustration.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
March 5, 2020

Featured Image

A Guide for Optimizing Resource Allocation

Link Assessment, Strategic Planning, and Budgeting to Achieve Institutional Effectiveness

By connecting assessment, strategic planning, and budgeting processes, the real needs and priorities of an institution are revealed. Colleges and universities can adapt the provided, step-by-step framework to their own institutional structure and methods.

From Volume 48 Number 2 | January–March 2020

Abstract: The article presents a framework for integrating assessment, strategic planning, and resource allocation at all levels of an institution. For that purpose, data are collected from academic departments and non-academic units. They are then integrated with strategic planning metrics into an assessment report that identifies the resources that need to be allocated, and to evaluate progress toward developing a strategic plan. The framework can be applied at the departmental or unit level, as well as at the institutional level. It provides valuable input for the budget process and can be used for updates in strategic planning.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Presentations

Published
July 14, 2019

2019 Annual Conference | July 2019

Data-Informed Faculty Staffing and Budgeting by Programs

Abstract: Institutions usually spend more on providing courses for some academic programs than others. Stakeholders need to decide where and how to allocate resources to support instruction. This session introduces recent best practices using the Delaware Cost Study data to facilitate 1) the identification of under-resourced academic programs and 2) decision making in faculty budgeting and staffing. You will leave this session ready to re-evaluate the metrics you use to support instructional budgeting decisions so you can identify under-resourced programs and accurately understand faculty hiring needs.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Presentations

Published
July 14, 2019

2019 Annual Conference | July 2019

Strategic Scheduling to Stay Within Budget

Abstract: Course schedules are often "rolled over" without understanding their impact on instructional budgets. Real-time scheduling and budget data allows for strategic decisions that balance student needs with institutional capacity. This session will demonstrate a process to develop a strategic scheduling and budget plan and make real-time, data-informed schedule adjustments that support institutional, departmental, and program budget goals. You will learn how to develop planning strategies that align scheduling with budget goals and how to make day-to-day decisions that maximize your ability to meet student needs.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Juggling Chainsaws

Managing the Tensions between Strategic Planning and Decentralized Budgeting

The numerous benefits of these processes can be realized only when the institution recognizes and plans for the different, sometimes conflicting perspectives they bring to high-stakes discussions.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: The advantages of thoughtful, well-structured strategic planning and decentralized budgeting are numerous. But they bring different and sometimes conflicting perspectives to high-stakes discussions within the institution. By recognizing and preparing for these tensions, the odds increase that their potential benefits will not be eroded or eclipsed by distractions or destructive forces and they can work in harmony to help an institution accomplish its goals in an increasingly challenging environment. The author considers specific tensions and conflicts and draws on the experience of a flagship public university to suggest ways to manage these tensions and reap the benefits of both approaches.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Planning at Mesa Community College

Integrated and Informed for Our Improvement

Within the span of a year, it’s possible to make significant progress toward achieving and institutionalizing integrated planning and budgeting.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: In an era of heightened accreditation expectations, declining resources, and increasing competition, tools such as integrated planning and budgeting, evidence-based decision-making (EBDM) processes, an overarching continuous quality improvement (CQI) framework, and up-to-date technology solutions for managing planning processes are no longer optional. While Mesa Community College (MCC) has a long history of planning, the integration of planning and budgeting was limited and our planning system was outdated (as in beyond end-of-life outdated). Additionally, planning and budgeting processes lacked EBDM practices and an overarching CQI framework. MCC’s Strategic Planning Committee set about remedying all of these issues and did so within the span of a year.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

No-Brainer or Brain-Twister?

Linking Planning and Budgeting

While there is no one right way to link planning and budgeting, there is good practice: what works to influence behavior in the direction of institutional goals, supported by strong leadership.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: This article presents a range of approaches for linking budgeting to planning. After briefly discussing the natures of planning and budgeting, it presents four conceptual categories of ways to link the two. The article defines these as structural, adaptive-incremental, devolved, and holistic/advanced. No one approach will be correct for all institutions. Even where there is a system in place to link planning and budgeting, this is unlikely to be enough unless there is firm, skilled, aligned, and distributed leadership to keep the system on track toward institutional goals.

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Responsibility Center Budgeting and Management “Lite” in University Finance

Why Is RCB/RCM Never Fully Deployed?

Despite its promise of revenue generation, cost reduction, and a host of other benefits, what is it about RCB/RCM that leads universities to deploy it only partially?

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: After its first application nearly 40 years ago, responsibility center budgeting/responsibility center management (RCB/RCM) is now in place at nearly 70 major North American universities. An unstudied fact is that despite its popularity RCB/RCM is rarely deployed to its fullest extent. Instead, it usually exists in parallel with conventional planning and budget models. This study asks why, instead of fully implementing RCB/RCM, universities have chosen to apply it partially. The study finds multiple explanations. On the revenue side, some universities hold back a portion of income to create funds that are used to underwrite institution-wide strategies or subsidize mission-central academic programs that cannot be fiscally sustained under RCB/RCM. In other cases, revenue is held back to fund shared “public utility” services, while in still others the practice of holding back revenue for allocation by some other means is due to difficulty in drawing a functional line between the “academic” and the “non-academic.” On the cost side, some universities have limited the application of RCB/RCM in order to limit market behavior and forestall “fragmentation” (Burke 2007). The study points to several problems in both the practice and theory of RCB/RCM. For example, models meant in theory to complement RCB/RCM may in practice compete with it or promote monopolistic behavior.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access