1. Academic Business Officers Group 44 th Annual Conference Break Out Session Budget Planning & Management Challenges Lisa Daniels, Assistant Dean Division of Humanities and Fine Arts UC Santa Barbara 1

2. 2 Campus Budget Cut Process Chancellor established Coordinating Committee on Budget Strategy in February 2003 Committee charged with developing set of principles and priorities to guide the budget reduction process No across the board cuts -- budget reduction percentages varied across campus according to committee principles and priorities

3. 3 College Budget Cut Process Divisional Deans have autonomy to determine how to meet their assigned budget reduction target Each division analyzed various models for assessing budget reductions to departments Some years, reductions taken at the divisional level; other years, reduction targets given to departments

4. 4 Divisional Budget Cut Process

5. 5

6. 6 Divisional Budget Cut Process Temporary Cut Options Carry-forwardSavings Support budget funds Work-study savings Temporary sub 0 allocation (with permission)

7. 7 Divisional Budget Cut Process Permanent Cut Options $1,000,000 = ~30.00 TA FTE = 60 full-year 50% TAships $1,000,000: $600,000 = ~18.00 TA FTE = 36 full-year 50% TAship $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE $1,000,000: $100,000 = ~2.00 Lecturer FTE $500,000 = ~15.00 TA FTE = 30 full-year 50% TAship $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE $1,000,000: $100,000 = ~2.00 Lecturer FTE $400,000 = ~12.00 TA FTE = 24 full-year 50% TAship $400,000 = 7.00-8.00 Staff FTE $100,000 = Support Budget Funds

8. 8 Divisional Budget Cut Process HFA Departments 22 departments/programs in HFA Division 25% of departments had less than 3 staff FTE 40% of departments had less than 4 staff FTE 60% of departments had less than 5 staff FTE Wide variance in staff/faculty ratios

9. 9 Administrative Support Models Individual Departments Pros:Common culture Tradition Staff close to faculty and students Family/Town Square Cons:Small departments below critical mass Inequities across departments Part-time, fractions, multiple responsibilities Increasing burdens on individual staff Reduction of services Nothing left to cut

10. 10 Administrative Support Models Service Centers Pros:Specialized services ExpertiseEfficiency Cons:Staff removed from faculty and students Problem of seasonal labor Inefficiency

11. 11 Administrative Support Models Shared Staffing Pros:Specialized staff Efficiency Leveraging of resources Local presence Cons:Staff present only part-time Less responsive to faculty Unpredictable needs and workload Staff pulled in different directions Where do we scale back?

12. 12 Administrative Support Models Administrative Support Centers Pros:More equitable distribution of resources and workload Greater efficiency Local presence if building-based clusters Specialized expertise Better support for faculty More professional opportunities within ASCs Use of VSO and open provisions will reduce lay-offs Note:Not a merger of departments or programs; Individual chairs, faculties, degrees, meetings, programmatic identities remain New common space for faculty and graduate students could foster interdisciplinary culture

13. 13 Budget Cut Alternatives Take cuts entirely from Sub 0 (TA FTE, Associates, Lecturers) Eliminate more faculty FTE Eliminate departments or programs within departments Reduce staff of some departments below critical mass Mergers, increased sharing after reductions Note: While this discussion focuses on clustered departments within the division, non-clustered departments had permanent cuts to staff FTE and temporary instruction FTE.

14. 14 Administrative Support Centers Staffing Model Lead Manager (Director) Academic Services Manager Academic Personnel Analysts/ Chair Assistants Financial Analysts Student Services Manager Student Affairs Officers Graduate Undergraduate Note: Some staff would continue to focus on single programs, some would work across programs

15. 15 Administrative Support Center Implementation Process Coordination with HR Detailed discussions with individual Chairs and Managers Discussions with faculty and staff Recruitment of Lead Managers (Directors); only current managers in clustered departments eligible to apply Lead Managers (Directors) and Chairs design positions, configurations, re-assignments within HR policy

16. 16 Administrative Support Centers Implementation Process (cont.) Restructuring would involve transfer to new positions rather than lay-offs and new hires Reclassification of some positions to recognize management responsibilities Positions defined by areas of specialization Reconfiguration of administrative offices

17. 17 Administrative Support Center Implementation Process (cont.) Department permanent support budget funds returned to Division Annual support budget allocations provided to departments and Administrative Support Centers (Funding sources both permanent and temporary) Permanent staffing actions coordinated through Division, since cluster departments and ASCs have no permanent support funds Ongoing meetings with cognate staff to identify ways to streamline job duties

18. 18 Administrative Support Center Results and Follow-Up Flexibility for final staffing implementation led to 4 similar yet different versions of the model We have experienced successes and problems Regular meetings between Directors and divisional staff Ongoing meetings with cognate staff to identify ways to streamline job duties

19. Planning for Future Cuts ??? 19