Refocusing Funding on Learning Centered Policies, Programs, and Practices

Monday, June 26, 2001

Facilitator: Robert Barr

Recorder: Carole Lester

Resource: Robert McCabe

Session Purpose: To seriously engage the need for funding shifts in order to became a true Learning College

Proposed Session Outcome: Identify principles and strategies for reallocating resources especially funding to learning centered tasks, policies and functions.

Overview:

· Introductions of participants

· Brainstorming work sessions

· Report back

· Concepts and Framework

· Funding framework:

Control/Source

Internal new funds 1	External 2
reallocated funds 3	4

· Funding sources unique to area and local practices

· Framework dimensions:

• Transformation vs. add-ons
• Labor intensive vs. much less
• Cost of change vs. ongoing costs
• Transition vs. maintenance
• Cost per credit hour of instruction vs. cost per unit of learning

· The Learning College shift problem

• How does the college take on funding new tasks and functions by reallocating, restructuring, and improving efficiencies?
• What do you stop doing?
• What do you do more efficiently?
• What are the strategies?
• Who decides?

· Key Questions:

1. How do you pay for new learning college tasks and functions without increases in funding?

2. How do you fund institutional structural changes (e.g., roles, rewards, systems)?

3. How do you work around the seat-time funding formula?

4. How would restructuring (new architecture) free funds for new learning college tasks?

5. Does becoming less labor intensive help?

6. How do you identify the things you can stop doing in order to do learning college things?

· Possible Principles Suggested From Key Questions

• Become more efficient to become more effective
• Reallocation and restructuring go hand-in-hand
• Technology can be a key tool to improving efficiency and new architecture as a potential tool
• Structure is our lever for producing more results

· Observations

• The current rule of funding is that existing things have priority over nonexisting things even if nonexisting is better.
• Technology issues discussed in terms of cost benefits/expense
• How we use technology impacts the results–it can either be a tool or an impediment
• The major question: Does increased technology reduce the level of staffing for cost savings? Myth or fact?
• Reality: 70-80% of budget costs relate to personnel (instructional paradigm vs. learning paradigm)
• Distance learning materials seem to be very cost effective. Need to look for innovative delivery systems.

· General reallocation options

• Stop doing some things
• Do less of some things
• Do some things more effectively
• Redesign how things are done

· New learning college tasks/functions

1. Identify learning outcomes

2. Design effective assessment strategies

3. Assess learning outcomes

4. Design and experiment with new learning experiences and environments

5. Redesign organizational structure and support alternative learning methods and pathways

6. Document the improvement of learning and institutional effectiveness

Task for the Three Break-Out Groups

Your college has:

· $100 million budget

· 75% in salaries/benefits

· $1 million needed for defining and assessing outcomes

· Enrollment stable

· No new money

· Funded by seat time

Group One

· Eliminate unneeded program (athletics?)

· Community use of buildings to produce revenue to fund new learning college things

· Fewer meetings; more time to tend to things like teaching classes

· Cross-training groups to provide more comprehensive student services

· Change processes to be more inclusive (e.g., technology to deliver orientations)

· Bookstore partnered with publishers to create alternatives for text books

· Eliminate dying programs

· Outsource

· Criteria for release time assessment to show learning centered outcomes

· Try to effect change without having to have a crisis

· Value existing culture but shift the discussion and bridge from success to success

· Create impetus from boards and legislatures

· Freeze or delay hiring

· Uniform strategic department cuts in things like travel and hospitality

· Slow salary growth

· Review profit of profit centers; do they really produce?

· Consolidate laboratories (see collaboratotium)

· Rent space to community

Group Two

· Change scheduling and registration process

· Low enrollment program review

· Space utilization

· Personnel utilization

· Core competencies

· Outsourcing

· Improve retention through process management; consolidate ownership of problem

· Core/shared measurements, vision, personal plans

· Empowerment teams-based environment

· Institutional vision starts from the general to the individual

Group Three

· Create deeper stewardship with internal fund balances directed toward learning uses

· Search & Destroy program review

· Inelastic deliverables (e.g., facilities)

· Engineer out hidden costs (precision scheduling)

· Moving dollars to learning is not necessarily moving dollars to instruction

· New revenue (cost centers to revenue centers); outsourcing and partnerships (career center and job search company)

· Cross-functioning use of money in fund balances to impact learning positively

· Making learning initiatives a part of budgeting process

· Budget process based on designed principles for value added

· Field data from peer colleges on cost/ROI; need better data

· Need to talk more among colleges; share data and strategies

Major Issues in Marketing the College

· Who does the marketing?

· How much does marketing cost?

· Do marketing efforts address recruiting or retention?

· Is it or should it be a centralized process?

· Who controls and who spends?