Performance-Based Budgeting
Steering Committee
January 28th, 2013
Agenda
Introductions (Monica and Sona)
Where we left off (Monica)
PBB working group report -attribution tool
 Revenue
 Costs (Direct and Indirect)
Next… moving from an attribution tool to PBB (Sona)
Where we left off
 2011-2012 Built a Revenue and Cost Attribution tool – prelude to
PBB
 Essential for understanding our budgetary environment (long
term: revenue = expenses)
 Attribution tool is not the budget model
 The attribution tool is not an SCH model. It examines the
source of all revenue and attributes it accordingly . It will
adjust to future changes (State Allocation based on degrees
granted, credit for prior learning versus SCH)
 Cross subsidies are acceptable, but must be understood and
have an upper limit.
What is in a name
A common language





Attribution tool (AT)
Budget Attribution Tool (BAT)
Revenue and Cost Attribution Tool (RCAT)
Other?
Steering Committee Recommendation
PBB Working Group
The Attribution Tool
SEE HANDOUT 1
 Built using 2012-2013 budgets and current enrollment.
 REVENUE
 Tuition (Undergrad and Grad) Actual versus theoretical tuition collected,
residency, differential, UNST classes, SCH redistributions, includes tuition from
summer and Salem Center





Remissions
IDC (predicted, can be updated)
Targeted revenue
State Share of research funding
State Share of Instruction
Attribution Tool (Handout 1)
EXPENDITURES
 Direct Expenses
 Summer Session and Salem Center Adjustments (1 year only)
 NACUBO Categories- (expenditure classification by function)
Attribution Tool (Handout 1)
EXPENDITURES
Indirect Expenses- Steering group decisions (close calls)
NACUBO Category
Academic Support
Institutional Support
Driver
X
Y
Cost Drivers
Alternatives
 2-Close Calls Institutional support and Indirect Component of O
and M
 Research – fixed per steering committee instructions
 Summary of effect of different drivers
 Discussion of whether the group wishes to change drivers
Effect of Different Drivers
INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT
Cost Driver
Student, Faculty & Staff Headcount
Student, Faculty & Staff FTE
Net Effect of Change in Driver
OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
Cost Driver
Student, Faculty & Staff FTE
Student, Faculty & Staff Headcount
Net Effect of Change in Driver
UGE
CLAS
SSW
SBA
GSE
MCECS
FPA
CUPA
$ 50,544 $ 11,124,858 $ 1,031,982 $ 3,115,147 $ 1,449,575 $ 2,645,555 $ 2,451,158 $ 2,896,750
$ 1,674,998 $ 12,529,519 $ 782,350 $ 2,339,343 $ 1,773,164 $ 1,457,363 $ 1,837,261 $ 2,371,572
$ (1,624,454) $ (1,404,661) $ 249,633 $ 775,804 $ (323,589) $ 1,188,191 $ 613,897 $ 525,178
UGE
CLAS
SSW
SBA
GSE
MCECS
FPA
CUPA
$ 1,442,630 $ 13,119,151 $ 1,126,328 $ 2,098,800 $ 1,675,063 $ 3,225,190 $ 3,304,710 $ 2,952,702
$ 310,474 $ 12,140,179 $ 1,300,308 $ 2,639,493 $ 1,449,539 $ 4,053,295 $ 3,732,563 $ 3,318,723
$ 1,132,156 $ 978,972 $ (173,980) $ (540,693) $ 225,524 $ (828,105) $ (427,853) $ (366,021)
Total
$ 24,765,570
$ 24,765,570
$
-
Total
$ 28,944,574
$ 28,944,574
$
-
Moving from an Attribution Tool to a
Performance Based-Budgeting
Objectives
Get input from the group on the AT
At the end of today’s session we will have a better sense of:
 It’s effectiveness for budget modeling
 What modification are needed to the AT
Questions for the Team
 What is in the AT that might make it an effective tool to “feed” a
budget model?
 What is missing from the AT that prevents it from being an
effective tool to “feed” a budget model?
 What is missing to “feed” an effective budget model that cannot
be part of the AT?
Work Session
 Every member of the Steering committee uses as many post-it
notes possible to provide responses to each of the 3 questions
(put your initials in the lower right corner)
 Stick post-its randomly on the white board with the appropriate
question number
 Break up into assigned groups and categorize individual responses
 Label the categories
Group Conversation
 Have a group conversation about the categories
 Do they feel right?
 What is missing?