Outcomes/measures tracked and tools utilized
As a result of the work done by the strategic plan task force, the 2015–2016 budget development process implemented significant changes based on the College’s strategic plan. Budget administrators used Self-Service Budget Development and Salary Planner for the first time, entered justifications for all line items, and developed budget requests based on the prior year's actual expenditures rather than carrying forward previously budgeted amounts. Additionally, the College was able to present a General/PTE Funds budget in which projected expenditures more closely approximated projected revenues, enabling use of a 98% expenditure rate rather than the 93% factor used in previous years. A follow-up survey of budget administrators conducted in Spring 2016 showed improvement in the budget process as indicated in Figure 5.8.
New Budget Development Cycle: The 2016–2017 budget development process continued to build upon the process improvements of the previous year. New processes included beginning the budget cycle in October, rather than in January, in order to align with the Program Review processes. Providing budget materials and historical data to budget administrators three months earlier allowed for departmental planning activities to happen in connection with instructional program review. This process aligned with the timeframe for submitting budget requests to deans for prioritization for the following year. It also allowed for additional time to complete budget requests rather than the one month (mid-January to February) usually provided to finalize.
Various other process improvements have been implemented to better assess efficient use of resources at the department level. For example, decentralized budgeting for accreditations and memberships was implemented for 2016–2017. In December 2015, the Document Services department began emailing quarterly “show back” reports on printing and copying usage to budget administrators to inform them on printing costs—which currently remain centrally budgeted—and to promote sustainability. Beginning July 1, 2016, Financial Services and Human Resources worked jointly to implement chargeback of employee benefit budgets and estimated benefit costs to all organization codes with salary expense. As departments begin the budgeting cycle for the 2017 academic year, the more complete data of expenditures for the departmental budgets, including benefits, will provide for a stronger budgeting process. This process allocates benefit costs to the proper departments as opposed to the previous process, which centralized approximately $28 million of employee benefit costs into one cost center in the general fund budget.
The budget development process must also be responsive to planning processes. The long-term goal to apply for the Government Finance Officers Association Distinguished Budget Presentation Award was established in Goal 4, Task 3 by the strategic plan task force. Criteria for this award include the degree to which resources are clearly linked to priorities at the institutional and unit level, the long-range planning evident in financial forecasting, involvement of key participants in budget development, and evidence of data-based decision making in resource allocation and budget process improvement.
Summary results of measures
The Banner system provides for view-only access that allows budget administrators to view and monitor budgets in real time. Results of the budget process include the College’s annual Management Budget book, which is published on the College’s website.
Each year, the director of Insurance and Risk Management publishes the College’s Insurance Program Policy Digest, which summarizes insurance policies in force as well as lists of brokers, underwriters, and annual premiums. This information is reviewed by the Management Committee of the Board of Trustees.
Emergency preparedness efforts at JCCC show continual improvement with campus participation in ongoing training and the 2015 publication of the JCCC Emergency Operations Plan, a major step toward compliance with National Emergency Management System (NIMS) standards for emergency preparedness and response. Other examples of actions the College has taken in recent years to ensure the safety of the campus community include:
- Investment in the promotion of armed intruder A.L.I.C.E (Alert, Lockdown, Inform, Counter, Evacuate) training for employees, students, and volunteers;
- The KOPS Program (Keeping Our People Safe), which provides information and avenues for communicating safety concerns, such as KOPS Watch and JCCC Guardian; and
- The Behavioral Intervention Team (BIT), a cross-functional team that receives and assesses reports of danger or harm that may result from the actions of an identified person or persons engaged with the College.
In late 2015, the College formed the KOPS advisory committee, a group of faculty and staff that solicits feedback from JCCC constituent groups and facilitates communication with the President’s Cabinet to provide input on making strategic decisions about safety and security issues. The committee is co-chaired by the College’s emergency preparedness manager and the executive director of Audit and Advisory Services.
Internal audit recommendations are presented to the Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees. Their recommendations may be in the form of internal control enhancements, efficiency and effectiveness, or process improvements. The committee also performs regular follow ups, requesting updates from departmental staff and measuring implementation progress and track until recommendations are complete.
Project completion data in Information Services is closely monitored through a variety of TeamDynamix dashboards and shared with functional and IS stakeholder groups. For example, the number of completed projects has steadily declined each year as smaller scale requests are now facilitated as a business process improvement ticket and alignment with institutional goals has increased. Dashboards are currently being developed for the purposes of benchmarking results with other institutions.
Comparison of results with internal targets and external benchmarks
College financial staff annually update a trend analysis of financial ratios and present this information to the Management Committee of the Board of Trustees. The Composite Financial Indicator (CFI) is a weighted index of 1) the primary reserve ratio, which is the ability of the College to cover its ongoing expenses with reserves; 2) the net operating revenue ratio, which is an indicator of whether the College is using or contributing to reserves; 3) the return on net assets ratio, which is an indicator of whether the College’s year-end net financial position is improving; and 4) the viability ratio, which is an indicator of the College’s ability to repay its long-term debt. Through sound financial planning, the College’s CFI has improved in recent years. The analysis is used by College financial staff and leadership to determine fiscal health and to forecast how future strategic investments may affect these ratios.
Interpretation of results and insights gained
The College continues working to establish processes and tools that enable data-driven decision-making in regard to resource allocations that support operational effectiveness. The instructional program review process that is now in place and the Administrative and Service Area reviews that were implemented in late 2016 both support this effort. Also, the Activity-Based Costing efforts funded through the College’s Gates Foundation Grant will provide data that the College needs to more fully support resource allocation and operational effectiveness.