1. Composite Benefits Rates
Budget and Resource Management
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

2. Summary
UCSF will implement Composite Benefits Rates (CBRs) when we implement UCPath, scheduled for September 2019
Implementing CBRs will result in cost shifts across units and funds
Cost shifts are due to variation in several areas:
Departments will need to examine the impact on their costs, particularly for contracts and grants and recharges
The campus needs to develop a plan for addressing cost shifts
Salary levels
Higher pay typically means a lower benefits rate
Funding sources and benefit eligibility for different types of pay
Z payments have little or no benefits cost;
Y payments are not covered by UCRP
Employee benefit selections
Some employees have more dependents
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

3. CBRs will be implemented along with the UCSF launch of UC Path
Year
Month
Activity
2018
September – November
BRM updates analysis using data
BRM works with Control Points to help prepare departments
December
In coordination with UCOP, UCSF submits proposal to DHHS
2019
January – May
Campus engages in financial planning using proposed model
June
DHHS approves UCSF proposal (target)
July – August
Campus reviews budget allocations to mitigate cost shifts
September
UCSF launches UCPath, implements agree-upon mitigating allocations
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

4. Our goal is to identify a CBR model that best balances several competing principles
Simplicity
Models should be easy to understand and implement. Employees should be grouped in a rational, logical, and easily identifiable way.
Minimized Impact
Cost shifts across funds, control points, and employee types should be minimized.
Accurate Accounting
Expenditures assigned to specific lines of University business should accurately reflect the true cost of that business line.
Consider moving after timeline
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

5. Our CBR model development is based on certain key assumptions and constraints
Most individuals who share a title code will be assigned the same benefits rate
Individuals with less than full benefits will be assigned a Partial/Minimum/Students rate (except Post Docs)
Some salary components will not be charged benefits in the new model (e.g., Z incentive payments)
Salary components for an individual that are charged (e.g., the X and Y components of faculty salaries) will be assigned the same benefits rate
CBRs will cover retirement contributions, payroll taxes and assessments, and health and welfare benefits; excluded benefits include GAEL and tuition remission 
The vacation leave assessment will be handled separately
Based on the UCOP structure, the campus cannot exceed nine categories
UCSF Health will charge its own rate; the rate applied to jointly-funded faculty and staff will be based on the business unit making the salary payment rather than the home department of the employee
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

6. A simple single rate model (27
A simple single rate model (27.9%) would result in dramatic cost shifts across funds
Sales and Service–Professional funds, including Medical Compensation Plan, would experience a major increase in benefits costs
Sales and Service–Other funds, would experience a significant reduction in costs
Fund Group
Cost Shift
Federal Contracts and Grants
($2,095)
Private Contracts and Grants
(2,095)
State and Local Contracts and Grants
636
Gifts & Endowment Earnings
(137)
Sales and Service – Professional
31,199
Sales and Service – Other
(14,610)
State and Tuition
(3,151)
Campus Core Fund
(8,851)
Total
$ -
We will not do this.
Consider intent and purpose of slide and presentation
is 2016 vs 2017 comparison meaningful
are bullets helpful on slide or better as talking points
Dollars in thousands. Positive values indicate additional benefit costs; negative values indicate reduced benefit costs.
S&S – Professional includes Medical Compensation Plan, Dental Compensation Plan, Dental Clinic, and Neuropsychiatric Hospital funds; S&S – Other includes auxiliaries, investment income, patent income, recharges, affiliation revenue, and other sales and service
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

7. UCSF’s “best” models use six or seven categories
Category
Category Members (examples)
7 Rates
6 Rates
Faculty 1
Ladder Rank – Associate and Full
Health Science Clinical Professor
Professor of Clinical ______
Professor in Residence
21.5%
Faculty 2
Ladder Rank – Assistant
Adjunct Professor
Visiting Professor
29.7%
Management and Professional Specialties
Managers
Pharmacists, Physicians, Dentists
Nursing Services, Police Services
31.3%
Specified Services
Custodial Services
Animal Care Technicians
Laboratory and Allied Services
Parking and Guard Services
49.7%
40.8%
Other Academics and Staff
Specialists
Administrative, Budget, and Personnel Analysts
Computer Programmers
40.0%
Postdoctoral Fellows
20.0%
Partial/Minimum/Students
Students and Residents
All employees with appointments offering partial or minimum benefits
4.5%
Original format to slide 8
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

8. UCSF’s “best” models use six or seven categories
Category
Category Members (examples)
Count
Salary (millions)
Faculty 1
Ladder Rank – Associate and Full
Health Science Clinical Professor
Professor of Clinical ______
Professor in Residence
2,360
$577.1
Faculty 2
Ladder Rank – Assistant
Adjunct Professor
Visiting Professor
546
56.3
Management and Professional Specialties
Managers
Pharmacists, Physicians, Dentists
Nursing Services, Police Services
1,408
136.5
Specified Services
Custodial Services
Animal Care Technicians
Laboratory and Allied Services
Parking and Guard Services
1,052
39.3
Other Academics and Staff
Specialists
Administrative, Budget, and Personnel Analysts
Computer Programmers
9,010
464.9
Postdoctoral Fellows
1,479
53.3
Partial/Minimum/ Students
Students and Residents
All employees with appointments offering partial or minimum benefits
6,057
172.9
Original format to slide 8
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

9. Faculty and Postdoc Distribution
Optimizing Resource Allocation Models
5/19/2019

10. Other Academic and Staff Distribution
Optimizing Resource Allocation Models
5/19/2019

11. Impacts vary across control points
Rates
Control Point
Federal C&G
Private C&G
State and
Local C&G
Gifts and Endowment
S&S Prof
S&S Other
State/Core
/Tuition
Total 6
SOM
$(1,124)
$507
$660
$130
$6,156
$(110)
$(1,636)
$4,583
SOD
(85) 24 23 26
(758)
(52)
(984)
(1,806)
SOP
(97)
(1)
(32)
(11)
(2) 10
(353)
(486)
SON
(113)
(27)
(29)
(16) -
(88)
(761)
(1,034)
IGHS 56
128
(160) 9
(0) 60 16
109
FAS
(3)
(3,043)
866
(2,181)
Other 19
132
(31) 33
(587)
1,248
815
$(1,344)
$762
$431
$168
$5,396
$(3,810)
$(1,603) $- 7
$(1,212)
$419
$20
$5,774
$(271)
$(1,762)
$3,387
(77) 20 27
(807)
(51)
(1,004)
(1,870)
(111)
(40)
(12)
(381)
(551)
(26)
(17)
(89)
(782)
(1,056) 66
123
(136) 12
130
(1,780)
841
(943) 30
(162)
911
905
$(1,421)
$666
$203
$54
$4,964
$(2,300)
$(2,164)
Need to update to include SOP as separate and FAS w/Other for balance
Dollars in thousands. Positive values indicate additional benefit costs; negative values indicate reduced benefit costs.
Within SOM, cost shifts across departments can be as large as or larger than those observed for the other schools
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

12. In the 7 rate model, the largest shifts are occurring in the Faculty 1 category
Employee Category (7 Rates)
Federal C&G
Private C&G
State and
Local C&G
Gifts and Endowment
S&S Prof
S&S Other
State/Core
/Tuition
Total
Faculty 1
$(1,386)
$(328)
$(192)
$368
$5,235
$(104)
$(3,593) $-
Faculty 2
(49)
106
119
(6) 6
(36)
(140) -
Management and Professional
(187)
(169)
(109)
(17)
230
(207)
459
Specified Services
299
342
199 45 56
(1,008) 67
Other Academics and Staff
(110)
436
170
(31)
(733)
(958)
1,229 2
Postdoctoral Fellows 1
512 17
(280)
(139)
(76)
(35)
Partial/Minimum/Students 12
(234)
(0)
(25)
309 88
(151)
(1)
$(1,421)
$666
$203
$54
$4,964
$(2,300)
$(2,164) $1
Need to update to include SOP as separate and FAS w/Other for balance
Dollars in thousands. Positive values indicate additional benefit costs; negative values indicate reduced benefit costs.
This is primarily due to:
The relationship between fund source and salary level
The relationship between fund source and salary component (X versus Y)
Shifts across departments are also caused by variation in salary scale (0, 3, or higher)
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

13. Implementations at other campuses have been relatively smooth
Davis moved to CBRs in 2011, initially with 13+ rates, now down to 10 rates – they will need to consolidate further
Berkeley implemented in and now has 4 rates (academic, staff, students, and limited)
UCLA will launch this month with 6 rates, similar to our proposal
Full and Associate HCOMP faculty separated from other faculty
Postdocs included with other faculty
Other academics and staff in three categories, including a high- rate category for food service, custodial and grounds workers
Optimizing Resource Allocation Models
5/19/2019

14. Potential mitigation strategies may alleviate cost shifts on a one-time or recurring basis
Options:
One-time funding for negatively affected contracts and grants
Shifts in recurring funding allocations within and across control points
Special handling of the increased cost to UCSF Health and ZSFG contracts
Need to update to include SOP as separate and FAS w/Other for balance
5/19/2019
5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]

15. Awareness: BRM has presented about CBRs to the following groups
Budget & Investment Committee
Control Point Financial Officers
SOM Chairs and Directors
SOM Department Managers
SOD, SOP, and SON Chairs and Department Managers
FAS Finance Service Center Business Partners
Costing Policy Group
Optimizing Resource Allocation Models
5/19/2019

16. Next Steps and Change Management
Evaluate data and finalize proposed structure
Distribute data to control points
Initiate discussion with UCSF Health about mitigation
Initiate discussion with OSR about C&G mitigation
Develop an FAQ
Develop communications to departmental analysts
Develop communications to RSAs, recharge units
UPlan and PLUS will seed planning data with CBRs
Optimizing Resource Allocation Models
5/19/2019

17. 5/19/2019
[ADD PRESENTATION TITLE: INSERT TAB > HEADER & FOOTER > NOTES AND HANDOUTS]