Learning Resources

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(MCC) has a long history of planning, the integration of planning and budgeting was limited and our planning system was outdated (as in beyond end-of-life outdated).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: State institutions of higher education in Connecticut are experiencing a dramatic and unprecedented period of change: the consolidation of four universities and 13 community colleges into Connecticut State Colleges & Universities (CSCU) and the creation of a new administrative structure. This article charts the early stages of this process, presenting events as they unfolded during Governor Dannel Malloy’s first term beginning in January 2011, through his November 2014 reelection, until his state budget was passed in June 2015.

Advocates of systemness in higher education are challenged to balance the promise of centralized leadership and localized prerogative in designing and implementing policy. Systemness offers the promise of synergy and innovation within and across the system guided by common purpose and vision.

This article discusses five specific implementation processes and challenges: a systemwide credit transfer articulation program; Southern Connecticut State University’s early Transform CSCU 2020 initiatives; an ongoing effort throughout CSCU to develop a systemwide identity; the potential impact of budget constraints on systemness; and difficulties selecting and developing administrators and leaders.

Abstract: A reprint of the 1976 article with a new 2015 introduction by the author.

Original abstract: Drawing on his experience as Provost for Planning at West Virginia University, Raymond M. Haas deals in the following article with the importance of a proper charge to the Planning Office as a means of achieving integrated planning. He further proposes that the role of the Planning Office should be clearly coordinative in the nature--to the point where its only responsibility for actual planning should be in planning the planning process. Finally, he argues that "... integrated planning can be achieved only when planning is a regularly scheduled activity which occurs frequently, and which produces results that manifest themselves in the allocation, reallocation, and effective use of resources within the institution." The author's remarks have been adapted from his presentation at the Society's 11th Annual Conference in Washington, D.C.

Abstract: Most colleges and universities have well-developed strategic plans. But these plans may not be helpful if there is a sudden or unexpected leadership transition or crisis. Sadly, succession planning is the least understood and practiced form of planning in higher education. This neglect often results in leadership crises, confusion in leadership, disorganized search and transition processes, and a lack of appropriate professional development. This article provides a clear explanation of the meaning and purpose of succession planning as well as a guideline and process for implementing succession planning in any institution of higher education.

Abstract: Looking for tools to help make your next planning or campus project easier? SCUP’s Resource & Budget Planning Advisory Group generated practical analyses of and insights toward tools and processes that can help you today and with projects to come. Integrated Resource and Budget Planning at Colleges and Universities is the culmination of several years of discussions, face-to-face roundtables, conference calls, and virtual meetings. There is a bit of opinion and some original research, but this publication is mostly very practical descriptions, analysis, and insights into tools and processes. We hope you find it to be informative, interesting, and useful. Each chapter will give you a tool that was crafted by experienced, on-campus peer-practitioners.