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.
DISPLAYING 2864 RESOURCES

FOUND 2864 RESOURCES

Clear All
ABSTRACT:  | 
SORT BY:  | 
Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Fiscal Structure and Public College and University Credit Ratings

An Exploratory Analysis

By understanding how fiscal structure affects institutional credit ratings, leaders can better respond to today’s variable economic conditions.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: Using ordered response models often employed in public finance, we explore the possible determinants of public college and university credit ratings based on the fiscal structure of a number of institutions that are members of the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). We argue that by understanding the role of fiscal structure in the determination of institutional credit ratings, leaders can respond appropriately to variable economic conditions. They can also begin to manage and plan the ways in which their operations and fiscal structure impact their debt costs through credit ratings.

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

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
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

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

Campus Energy Master Planning

A Road Map to Carbon-Neutral Institutions in Northern U.S. Latitudes

Higher education institutions can lead the way in reducing energy consumption and advancing carbon neutrality by starting with their on-campus facilities.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: The imperative for higher education institutions to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions is driven by the energy required to sustain their campus facilities and by rapid, irreversible changes to the climate that threaten global infrastructures. This article provides a framework that comprehensively addresses campus facilities’ energy consumption reduction and conversion to renewable resources while helping building users become more aware of how their actions impact greenhouse gas emissions. Case studies illustrate how two different institutions developed campus energy master plans and set incremental goals toward carbon neutrality and net-zero fossil fuel energy consumption.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning for Higher Education Journal

Published
April 1, 2017

Featured Image

College Affordability and Institutional Pricing Policies

Institutions would do well to make their complex pricing policies more clear to students and families to help them understand how a higher education is more affordable than most people believe.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: The complexity of college pricing policies makes it difficult for students and families to understand how much they will have to pay and which colleges will fit their budgets. Colleges and universities should be able to explain their pricing and aid policies and why they have chosen them. Both financial aid and the high returns on a postsecondary education make college more affordable than most people believe. Colleges should take responsibility for clarifying this confusing issue.

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

So, You Need a New Chart of Accounts

Designing a new chart of accounts provides an opportunity to review and improve current practice and positively affect institutional financial data use and reporting.

From Volume 45 Number 3 | April–June 2017

Abstract: This article provides an overview of the process for the design of a new institutional chart of accounts. It includes some background as to the nature and purpose of a chart of accounts and also speaks to the details of the design process. Implications for data security and usability through design are highlighted, and practical tips on the process to ensure inclusion are featured.

Member Price:
Free  | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

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