Planning and Budgeting Workshop
Planning and Budgeting Workshop
September 24-25 | Louisville, KY
NACUBO’s professional development programs are designed to deliver the skills, concepts, and best practices for success to individuals in the business of higher education. The following course information is provided to help you determine the best learning experience to meet your needs
No prerequisites and/or advance preparation required.
RECEIVE 13 CPE CREDITS
Participants will be awarded an estimated 13 CPE credits for this group live event. CPE credits can be earned in the following categories: Management Services, Finance, and Personal Development. Learning Level for this program is Intermediate.
NACUBO is registered with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA) as a sponsor of continuing professional education on the National Registry of CPE Sponsors. State boards of accountancy have final authority on the acceptance of individual courses for CPE credit. Complaints regarding registered sponsors may be submitted to the National Registry of CPE Sponsors through its website www.nasbaregistry.org.
Tori McClure, Spalding University
Erica Vogt, Hodges University
This session will describe the process Hodges University followed to change from faculty unawareness and lack of involvement in the budget process to an active partnership with the CFO’s office. Hear how this collaborative effort evolved. The speaker will also cover the means by which strategic plans for academic programs are developed using program costing—including the maintenance of current programs, the start-up of new programs, and the sunset of under performing programs.
Elliot Felix, Brightspot Strategies
Richard Minturn, University of Virginia
How can you create a flexible and comprehensive operating budget for a space that’s shared across dozens of providers? This engaging session will show how the University of Virginia created an integrated budgeting tool that forecasts space, technology, staffing, and operational costs for an “Advising Center” that brings together different units to share space, services, and data.
Lissa Bill, University of Notre Dame
Kathryn Valenti, University of Notre Dame
The most successful changes in a university have three components: 1) they are driven at a unit level, 2) they are sponsored by top university leaders, and 3) they are aligned with the institution’s goals. Find out how your institution can catalyze successful change through administrative unit reviews. Presenters will share a roadmap that starts with a unit’s assessment of its own work, incorporates feedback from campus partners and external experts, and arrives at a clear and strategic course of action supported by top university leaders. Through a formal and systematic program, the University of Notre Dame conducts over eight reviews per year to spark real change and help the university accomplish its goals. Learn how you can utilize a similar approach to help identify operating efficiencies, means to deliver services more effectively, and a more strategic way to align resources.
Crystal Smith, University of Chicago
This presentation will convey how the Finance Unit partners with the Facilities Services Operations & Maintenance Unit to effectively review and communicate monthly financial information. Considerable time will be spent describing the monthly process that reviews variances between budgeted and actual data, identifies cost trends and savings, and uses financial tools created by the Finance Unit to provide effective forecasts and analysis.
Belva White, Emory University
Understanding cost per program requires a blend of direct costs and allocated indirect plus faculty salary costs. This presentation provides a step-by-step process that can be followed by any school to understand their cost structure and position the institution and its schools to have more strategic discussions going forward. Before you can go forward, you have to know where you really are.
Cherokee Staples, University of Oregon
Leslie Wolgamott, University of Oregon
Chris Mortensen, University of Oregon
Higher education is facing budget uncertainties nationwide. Consequently, it is important to ensure adequate resources and develop a sustaining budget model that aligns with the university’s mission. Using visual examples and strategies to engage attendees, the panel will share their planning and approach to effectively develop and implement a robust budget plan. This is a highly interactive session that walks participants through the university’s methodologies and provides best practices and key strategies for building budgets and forecasts.
Sunny Donenfeld, University of Southern California
Campus efficiency initiatives tend to focus on savings on the administrative side, but few schools have worked successfully to realize savings in instruction. By defining, measuring and adjusting a few key teaching metrics, the potential efficiencies can be considerable. This session covers the methods and is is focused on larger research schools and campuses that have a mix of tenure track and non-tenure track faculty.
Ruth Johnston, New Mexico State University Main Campus
Segan Jobe, University of Washington, Bothell
Hear how UW Bothell developed a process to work in partnership with faculty, staff, students and leadership. The goal: identify and implement a new model that recalibrated their $120 million budget to transparently factor in strategic initiatives, commitments, and an equity reserve fund for capital needs. Learn how they developed an inclusive process and made decisions around collaborative processes, budget type, and a three year phase in period.
Irene Pedraza, Boise State University
Leslie Odom, Boise State University
Holly Mikesell, Boise State University
Kenneth Kline, Boise State University
After you have had endless committee meetings to design your new budget model, numerous presentations to vet your proposal across campus to gain buy-in, and answered for the thousandth time why you need a new model, you are ready to go live. But what happens next? Boise State will share some of the expected as well as the unexpected issues—and new demands from Colleges—that occurred after going live on their new decentralized budget model.
Jean Cibuzar, Gallaudet University
Reed Gershwind, Gallaudet University
James Vigil, rpkGROUP
Despite the challenges facing academic institutions today from falling enrollments, resource constraints, and heightened stakeholder expectations, these organizations remain trapped in ineffective resource allocation and decision making processes. This session will focus on the use of rapid response team (RRT) approaches to surface solutions, create engagement and implement solutions in 90 days or less. The panel will review a case study from Gallaudet University’s recently completed RRT that engaged faculty and staff and resulted in saved resources allocated to strategic initiatives. The approach is now a model for change management and strategic investment.
Leanne Hill, Rochester Institute of Technology
Ross Koenig, Rochester Institute of Technology
The panel presents a follow up from their “measuring the financial contribution of academic programs” session at the 2016 Planning and Budgeting Forum. RIT provides an overview of how the academic program review framework has evolved since implementation, including additional business analytics and strategic use of the data, to reshape common perceptions. Presenters share their improvements and lessons learned, including how they have continually leveraged the data as a foundation for added analytics. Attendees will gain insights into how a single analysis was repurposed for multiple uses.
Cuba Plain, University of Missouri System
Lisa Cerney, Missouri University of Science and Technology
Hear how communicating internally and externally and changing how capital projects are traditionally structured can make a difference. A panel from a mid-sized public institution will share techniques for reducing deferred maintenance and improved funding for capital projects. The panelists, (CFO, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Facilities and Operations, and Budget Director), will reveal improvements from their vantage points. They will address comparisons to sister campuses and how the innovations and collaborations worked.
J. Michael Gower, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey New Brunswick Campus
Randy Roberson, NACUBO
How can the business analysis and decision framework developed in NACUBO’s Economic Models Project inform and enhance existing college and university planning processes? Presenters will discuss ways to incorporate economic sustainability issues into your institution’s existing planning processes to yield improved outcomes and continued financial viability.
Craig Fitch, University of Notre Dame
Missy Little, University of Notre Dame
Aimee Heeter, Indiana University
Linda Kroll, University of Notre Dame
Jill Piedmont, Indiana University System
As the higher education landscape becomes more constrained with the focus on access and affordability, colleges and universities must seek ways to optimize all available resources. This presentation will explore what all funds planning means for both public and private institutions, while sharing benefits and considerations for implementation, as well as key takeaways for your institution to consider if you pursue all resource planning. The presentation will include case studies from Indiana University and the University of Notre Dame.
Tony Ard, Kaufman Hall
Sandip Patel, Quinnipiac University
Quinnipiac has undergone a transformation of its financial planning activities that spans new processes, software, and staffing. A key element of this transformation has been the implementation of a software solution for the operating budgeting that includes tuition planning as well as labor planning and control. This session will walk through how the solution was developed and how it operates on a day-to-day basis. Because key elements of any transformation are implementation and management of organization change, presenters will address how Quinnipiac undertook vendor evaluation and selection, software implementation, communication, and rollout.
Beverly Daniel Tatum, <em>Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria? And Other Conversations about Race</em>
John Barnshaw, Ad Astra
John Calahan, Stephen F. Austin State University
Learn how advanced analytics are transforming the course scheduling process from a routine enterprise to a strategic investment that has the power to efficiently allocate facilities, improve student demand, retain and graduate more students and save over a million dollars in the process. Utilizing benchmarked data from the Higher Education Scheduling Index and advanced analytics on student demand, Stephen F. Austin State University was able to hire fifteen full-time during a budget shortfall, offer 52 new course sections, increase student credit hour production by 3,000 hours and teach 1,200 more students while generating more than $1. 4 million in margin.
David Patrick, Virginia Commonwealth University
David Allen, Virginia Commonwealth University
A challenge for many schools under Responsibility Centered Management (RCM) models is being able to accurately and easily project how student changes will impact a school's bottom line. This presentation will address this by reviewing the various inputs needed to develop a financial model and will provide a template to participants. This template is a multi-year cohort model that is used to forecast the impact enrollment has on revenues and costs under RCM from entry to graduation. At the end of this presentation, participants will better understand cohort modeling and will have a tool to take back to their institutions.
Allison Hanson, University of Saint Thomas
Nora Fitzpatrick, University of Saint Thomas
Adam Meyer, Huron Consulting Group
In 2016, an administrative review (with institution stakeholders and Huron consulting) identified improved resource allocation as vital to support the University of St. Thomas’s strategic plans. Internal stakeholders identified opportunities for a new budget model that provides incentives for deans and others to develop new revenue streams; increases accountability for financial results; and establishes metrics-based evaluation of budget requests. The panel will review how an incentive-based budget model was planned and implemented by focusing on goals and guiding principles, model development, key revenue and expense allocation decisions, implementation timeline, and change management strategies.
Bryan Elmore, Auburn University
Paul Friga, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Universities continue to look at administrative expenses as the cost of education rises, specifically in the areas of facilities and information technology (IT). To examine these costs, this discussion will review a journey to secure meaningful benchmark data. To better assess the performance of facilities and IT spend and highlight areas of potential under or over investment, participation in the Academic Benchmarking Consortium provided access to proprietary activity-based data for campus units and peer universities. Hear how the consortium standardized the data into apples-to-apples comparisons for several categories within larger functional groupings and the key insights provided.
Katya White, Georgetown University
Implementing a zero-based budget (ZBB), approach takes effective leadership and can transform an organization’s culture. The means by which ZBB is implemented requires thoughtful and collaborative development that is directly tied to the strategic plan and has buy-in from senior leadership. This presentation addresses the detailed steps to effect such an organizational change. The speaker reviews how continuous communication about the process and outcomes created a dynamic whereby individuals came together to collaborate, determine their resource needs and create an overall return on investment.
Phone Reservation: 502.313.6664
Rates guaranteed until: 8/21/2018 (subject to availability)
The call for proposals is now closed for the NACUCBO 2018 Planning and Budgeting Forum. Acceptance notifications will be sent by June 11, 2018. The person listed as the primary contact for the proposal will be informed of the final decision via email. Please note that only a limited number of proposals will be accepted for inclusion.