Learning Resources

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.

Abstract: FLEXSpace—The Flexible Learning Environments eXchange—and the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) are tools that can help you plan, design, assess, and improve learning spaces on your campus. In this session, you will learn about the newly released FLEXspace 2.0 along with the LSRS. We'll cover the features and benefits of both tools and how they can be incorporated into the planning process. Come learn how to use these tools to inform designs and support end users from planning through post occupancy.

Abstract: Financial stability is critical to success in college. The new economics of college create conditions of poverty for many students. It’s an outdated assumption that if a young person works hard enough, they’ll be able to get a college degree and be on the path to a good life. That’s simply not true anymore.

Points of entry to higher education are increasingly out of reach. Increased enrollment of lower- and moderate-income students coupled with inadequate employment opportunities and high college prices mean that making ends meet while attending college can be very difficult. In fact, a growing body of evidence suggests that a previously unnoticed challenge has emerged: basic needs insecurity. Goldrick-Rab’s seminal research provides a better understanding of the complexity and the urgency of the crisis that many students face. She communicates a transformational vision for higher education in America that stresses affordability and access for all, especially lower- to middle-income students and first-generation college students.

Sara Goldrick-Rab is best known for her innovative research on food and housing insecurity in higher education, having led the three largest national studies on the subject, and for her work on making public higher education free. She is the recipient of the William T. Grant Foundation’s Faculty Scholars Award and the American Educational Research Association’s Early Career Award, and in 2016 POLITICO magazine named her one of the top 50 people shaping American politics. Her latest book, Paying the Price: College Costs, Financial Aid, and the Betrayal of the American Dream (University of Chicago, 2016), is an Amazon best-seller and a 2018 winner of the Grawemeyer Award, and has been featured on The Daily Show With Trevor Noah. The Chronicle of Higher Education calls her “a defender of impoverished students and a scholar of their struggles,” she is ranked 6th in the nation among education scholars according to Education Week, and in April 2018 the Carnegie Corporation awarded her the Carnegie Fellowship.

Abstract: Due to the rising price of tuition, the prevailing narrative regarding higher education is that the cost of delivering a college degree is increasing substantially. However, the cost of delivering an education is not definitively linked to the price in tuition paid to attend. Prior studies confirmed small increases in instructional expenditures per full-time-equivalent student from the 1980s to 2000; however, more recent trends in instructional costs are relatively unknown. The purpose of this study was to track instructional expenditures from 2004 to 2015 at U.S. public two-year and four-year institutions, and to calculate those expenditures as a proportion of U.S. Gross Domestic Product.

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.

Abstract: As colleges and universities plan efforts to improve financial reporting and analysis, which often entail making costly investments in new systems and tools, they should first evaluate whether to redesign the institution’s chart of accounts. The chart of accounts is the DNA of financial reports and is used to track financial activity across the institution. This article proposes a planning, evaluation, and design process for a new chart of accounts and identifies key considerations for leaders undertaking this effort.

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.

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.

Abstract: Introducing housing on a community college campus will affect several areas of campus life including dining, security, recreation, and student programming. Unlike four-year institutions, community colleges have limited activity after a certain hour with the exception of library and recreational facilities. Additional programs and services will be needed to support a 24-hour operation, which will have an impact on the overall operating costs of the college. This article is intended to identify the direct and indirect costs involved and assess the overall financial impact of operating student housing.