Approved by the Academic Senate 4/26/06.

 

April 27, 2006

 

Dear President Bowman:

 

Attached please find the 2006 Institutional Goals and Priorities Report of the Academic Senate Planning and Finance Committee.  The Senate requests that you disseminate this document to the Vice Presidents and the Deans.  In addition, we would ask that you charge them with reporting their response to these recommendations to the Senate chair during the first month of the Fall semester.  The response will go to the Planning and Finance committee to inform their 2006-2007 discussions.

 

The Committee would like to know how each of the above mentioned administrators has used, or plans to use, these recommendations in their planning processes.  Their feedback and ideas will be of great value to the Committee as it begins to explore the dual goals of recommending procedural priorities for the University and writing the 2007 Institutional Goals and Priorities Report.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Martha Burk

Chairperson of the Academic Senate Planning and Finance Committee

 

 

 

======================================================================================

 

 

 

Institutional Goals and Priorities

 

2006

 

Report of the Planning and Finance Committee of the Academic Senate

 

 

Introduction

 

Educating Illinois, the strategic plan for Illinois State University (ISU), is a product of ISU’s shared governance system.  The plan recognizes that “implementation is the shared responsibility of all members of the campus community,” and that its performance indicators will be “reviewed by shared governance groups.”  The Planning and Finance Committee of the Academic Senate plays a key role in the design, implementation, and review of that plan.

 

Committee Charge

 

      The Planning and Finance Committee of the Academic Senate is to make recommendations to the Senate on all programs, procedures, policies and proposals that have a broad or long-range budgetary impact (ISU Blue Book, 2004). The committee will: 

a.       Evaluate the progress made in allocating campus resources (both new and reallocated) to the University's highest priorities as defined in its academic and capital strategic plans.

b.      Recommend changes in either the broad goals or directions in campus planning or in budget strategies aimed at achieving those goals.

c.       Evaluate the sources of funds available to the University including:
1) Study the effect on the budget of proposals requesting new or internally reallocated resources.
2) Analyze policies and trends in the reallocation of resources.
3) Analyze the trend in new State resources and in tuition and fee income.

 

In particular, as directed in the Academic Senate Executive Committee Memos of 9/3/02, 8/23/04 and 8/15/05, the Planning and Finance Committee is to annually develop a Priorities Report, in which it outlines the issues, ideas, and goals it believes should be our top priorities as a University [see appendix for FY 03 & 05 Priorities].  The Committee is to disseminate the report to Vice Presidents and Deans, and follow up on the implementation of recommendations in the report.

Background to the Committee’s Work

 

In order to obtain information on the University’s fiscal policies and progress towards achieving its goals, members of the Planning and Finance Committee held meetings with a number of University representatives in 2005-2006.  These included meetings with the following:

 

Steve Bragg, VP, Finance and Planning

 

Debra Smitley, Assistant VP, Finance and Planning

 

Helen Mamarchev, VP, Student Affairs

 

Brent Paterson, Associate VP, Student Affairs

 

John Presley, VP and Provost

 

Dianne Ashby, VP, University Advancement

 

Cheryl Elzy, Dean, University Libraries

 

Gary Olson, Dean, Arts and Sciences

 

Sam Catanzaro, Associate Dean, Arts and Sciences

 

The following items were sent to the VPs in advance. 

 

 

 

A few themes were common to many of these discussions.

 

  • Meaningful salary increases will take up most of the University’s discretionary spending for the next 3-5 years.
  • Aging facilities are a growing problem.
  • Rising costs coupled with flat resources are straining already stretched budgets.
  • Our students are facing affordability challenges due to rising tuition.
  • The University’s information systems are out of date.

 

The Planning and Finance Committee also visited with two deans.  The deans chosen were Cheryl Elzy (for her best practices planning procedures and her authoring of Special Emphasis: Achieving Distinctiveness Through Coordinated Planning for the NCA review), and Gary Olson (due to the recent strategic planning exercise in CAS).  The Deans were asked to tell us about budgeting processes in their college.

 

Information provided by these representatives, and from ISU documents such as Educating Illinois and its Accountability reports, the ISU Academic Plan, the NCA Self-study (Emphasis on Coordinated Planning), and the ISU Board of Trustees Recommended Policies for Guiding Price Setting, Revenue Generation, Affordability, and Use of Funds Decision-Making were used in preparing this report.

 

 

Recommended Administrative Action

The Planning and Finance Committee requests that the Vice Presidents and Deans make a formal, written, response to the recommendations below, either supporting or rejecting them.  If an administrator rejects a recommendation or recommendations, the Committee requests that the administrator provide reasons for doing so.

Priorities drafted by Planning and Finance Committee, Spring 2006

 

The Planning and Finance Committee, building on its prior reports, its meetings with the four University Vice Presidents, and the University’s mid-year salary adjustment plan initiated in January 2006, makes the following recommendations for University priorities for both the immediate and mid-term future:

·        continue efforts to improve competitiveness of faculty and staff salaries with the effect of achieving at least peer group median salaries within 3-5 years.  This plan should continue to intermix mid-year, targeted pay raises for under-rewarded merit within categories of employees who are below peer group medians as well as annual, general merit-based raises. 

The Planning and Finance Committee recognizes that, as a practical matter, this single item will likely consume most of the new and reallocated dollars that come to Illinois State University for the foreseeable future.  For example, a 1% increase in salaries for personnel support by Appropriated Funds (e.g., almost all faculty and administrators) would cost the University about $1.04 million while a 1% increase in salaries for personnel in the Bond Revenue and Agency areas would cost approximately $433,000.   Simply achieving peer group medians for all categories of employees will cost at least $7,000,000—assuming none of our peer groups raise salaries in the interim.  This will need to be a multi-year, fundamental institutional priority if the goal of achieving even peer group medians is to be achieved. 

·  increase operations budgets.

Given the reality of the amount of money it will take to satisfy the first priority, the Planning and Finance Committee recognizes that increasing operations budgets will be a struggle for the University.  For example, a 1% increase in operating budges for departments supported by Appropriated Funds would cost approximately $343,000 while a 1% increase in operating budgets for Bond Revenue and Agency departments would cost approximately $373,000.  However, University operating budgets have remained constant—or been reduced—for over a decade even as new pressures for travel, faculty start up costs, computer upgrades and other needs have been placed on these budgets.  As a consequence, as alternative income sources may become available—e.g., monies derived from larger and more profitable summer school offerings (projected) or grants overhead—the Planning and Finance committee expects administrators and managers to address operations budget items with these alternative monies before advocating program expansions or new facilities requests to the capital planning board.

·  enhance resource bases to units to help maintain aging facilities.

The Planning and Finance Committee supports the University’s decision to move forward with two infrastructure renewal/building projects in the near future: the Campus Dining and Housing Plan, and the planning process for a new Student Recreation Center to be built on campus.  The Committee notes, however, that both of these projects are funded through the sale of bonds (as, in the case of campus housing and dining, Illinois state law requires).  The rest of the University’s aging infrastructure needs attention as well.  The Planning and Finance Committee supports the University’s decision, based on its Facilities Condition Assessment, to move the rehabilitation of the Fine Arts Complex to the top of its facilities request to the state’s Capital Planning Board.  Such major projects are likely to be funded on a hit-or-miss basis, however.  The University should also establish a strategy by which a sufficient pool of money can be saved over time to address one-time, major expenses for repairing infrastructure.  There is simply too much infrastructure on the verge of wearing out to ignore the problem.

·  continue efforts to recruit high quality students to ISU.

This priority largely rests with the office of University Advancement as it works with donors to create and expand the pool of scholarships and other forms of support needed to attract and keep high-achieving, highly motivated students at Illinois State University.  It also requires an engaged, committed faculty that has the resources it needs to capture and retain these students’ intellects.  Similarly, the University must create and maintain appropriate support services to make the institution attractive to these highly sought-after students.  This, in turn, will assist us in attracting the next generation of accomplished students, engaged faculty, and positive support staff.  The accomplishments of each part of the Illinois State University community affect us all.

·        In the interest of openness and transparency, the Planning and Finance Committee requests that the Vice Presidents for Finance and Planning, Student Affairs, and Development invite the campus to attend Budget Presentations from their areas.

This was done in the past, but fell by the wayside during the recent troubled financial times.  As we begin to experience some financial relief, this type of financial transparency and openness becomes increasingly important.  As Academic Affairs has a long-standing series of such Budget Presentations, that area is not included in this request.

·        Continue to address the procedural priorities noted in the 2004-05 Planning and Finance Committee report

Given its focus on the question of salaries, the 2005-06 Planning and Finance Committee made little progress on the procedural priorities outlined for it in the 2004-05 report.  It will be the responsibility of the Chair of the Academic Senate to ensure the Committee addresses these matters in the 2006-07 academic year.

Appendix

 

Priorities

Summary of Priorities Report endorsed by Academic Senate in April, 2003

In its April, 2003 Priorities Report (there was no report forwarded in Spring 2004), the Planning and Finance Committee listed the following as its top short-term priorities.

·  Raise faculty salaries to enable the institution to attract and retain top faculty, and

·  Raise staff salaries to enable the institution to attract and retain top staff members.

Also in that report, listed as 3-5 year priorities, were actions that supported the two priorities listed above, and actions that supported the institutional aspiration to “seek students who are academically talented, motivated learners.”

Illinois State University was able to focus on these priorities over the last two years, and make progress on most items listed in the Priorities Report.  The recent update of Educating Illinois states that ISU’s top priority remains the competitiveness of faculty and staff salaries.  This update also shows that ISU has made some progress in that direction over the last few years, although current salaries remain at only about 95% of the salaries in comparable institutions.  ISU has also done well, overall, in recruiting more high-achieving students, developing a comprehensive student retention plan, implementing its Plan for Diversity, and addressing the most pressing facilities needs; these were all listed in the previous report as high priorities that support the goal of seeking academically talented learners.

 

Priorities drafted by Planning & Finance Committee, April, 2005

Based on the information gathered, the Planning and Finance Committee believes that while competitiveness of salaries remains a top priority, other needs now require equal attention.  In particular, recent structural and support problems in residential halls and academic buildings give evidence of the difficulties of a deteriorating infrastructure.  We therefore recommend the following as top university priorities:

Content:

·   restore resource bases to units to help maintain aging facilities,

·   continue efforts to improve competitiveness of faculty and staff salaries,

·   continue efforts to recruit high quality students to ISU, and

·   increase operations budgets.

Procedural:

·   continue to improve our coordinated planning and budgeting system to allow for permanent new resource allocation and old resource reallocation for stronger and higher priority initiatives,

·   make it easier within the budgeting system to build a fund over a multiyear period for major non-recurring projects,

·   establish policies, processes, and procedures that facilitate:

o       early Senate involvement in university level financial planning and prioritizing,

o       the integration of financial planning and prioritizing with academic planning and prioritizing at every level of the university,

o       continuous improvement of university financial planning and prioritizing, and

an examination of various assumptions, models, and philosophies of financial planning and prioritizing and their appropriateness to the current context.