charge/duties http://www.cwu.edu/financial-affairs/sites/cts.cwu.edu.financial- affairs/files/BEC%20CWUP2-60%283%29%20.pdf
I believe the BEC Committee Structure - with the underlying other Committees is "acceptable" - but only if we get accurate and meaningful data. And, the system will work only if we follow the expected process, which did not happen in the first year for some of us (see details below).
DATA CONCERNS - STARTED BACK IN JANUARY This is the first year of the BEC, and one of my early concerns surrounded the data as to how much money and staffing the University has across the two broad categories of Colleges and Non-Colleges (often also called Academic and Admin/Support). The general "feeling" among many on campus is that more money was going to Support areas and less money was going to Academics. Per the initial data that was supplied in the attached spreadsheet, I did a quick analysis (attached as "Admin FTE growth 2010 to 2016.xls") which is summarized below. Since then, I have repeatedly asked at the BEC meetings for Headcount/Staffing data and it has not been provided, as there are apparently data issues in compiling this data (per e-mail exchanges with Finance staff). Unless there is better data, my conclusion remains that the University has been increasing the Admin/Support portion at a faster rate than the core Mission of the University, which is the Academic Colleges. I oppose this increase which is why I voted to not recommend the President's initially proposed General Fund Budget. Also, I think the Board may want to consider some form of "position control" whereby they receive regular reports on the number of employees in each organizational unit. PROCESS CONCERNS - ?Need to consider the methods with outside expertise? For this first year, the process did not flow as expected, whereby the "General Fund" budget (e.g. the roughly $120 million that is split between the Colleges and Non-Colleges... aka Academics and Support/Admin) was not initially discussed or analyzed by the BEC. Rather, the General Fund budget was 'determined' by the Cabinet and then announced to BEC - and it took several meetings before the BEC was able/allowed to make a recommendation on this budget (which was a split vote of 8 in favor and 4 against). One of the biggest unresolved issues is what budgeting "method" we should use for the Support/Admin side - and whether that method will lead to appropriate INCENTIVES/PRESSURE for actions that lead to mission attainment. We've talked 'around' these issues at BEC, but not gotten to the heart of the matter. One idea is that we really have never done a Business Plan for what Budget Method to follow - there are MANY different budget methods (e.g. program, performance, zero-based, outcomes, output, workload, participatory, incremental to name a few). A thoughtful approach might be to step back and consider the desired end state we want
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online