Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Jones2005
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
50
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • TRAC – Transparent Approach to Costing
    fEC – Full Economic Costing
  • Transcript

    • 1. Information ServicesInformation Services The JCPSG case studyThe JCPSG case study UMSLGUMSLG Summer Residential MeetingSummer Residential Meeting 7- 8 July 20057- 8 July 2005
    • 2. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 22 TRAC and fECTRAC and fEC Why and What?Why and What?
    • 3. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 33 PrinciplesPrinciples Publicly funded research should bePublicly funded research should be fully funded by public fundsfully funded by public funds Universities should know their ownUniversities should know their own costs, price forcosts, price for sustainabilitysustainability andand plan for reinvestmentplan for reinvestment Public money is for public good onlyPublic money is for public good only
    • 4. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 44 TransparencyTransparency TRAC - costing of teaching, research & allTRAC - costing of teaching, research & all other activitiesother activities In operation in HEIs for a few years atIn operation in HEIs for a few years at School levelSchool level Aims to identify the full economic costAims to identify the full economic cost (fEC) of activities(fEC) of activities From Sept ’05 funding from ResearchFrom Sept ’05 funding from Research Councils based on fECCouncils based on fEC Major ‘central’ costs – estates & ISMajor ‘central’ costs – estates & IS
    • 5. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 55 What is fEC?What is fEC? fEC is the full cost of undertaking anfEC is the full cost of undertaking an activityactivity fEC includes all direct costs and indirectfEC includes all direct costs and indirect costs such as space, central servicescosts such as space, central services and a contribution to the University’sand a contribution to the University’s infrastructureinfrastructure fEC is the same regardless of sponsorfEC is the same regardless of sponsor Creates a distinction between cost andCreates a distinction between cost and priceprice Objective is to ensureObjective is to ensure sustainabilitysustainability
    • 6. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 66 SustainabilitySustainability ““An institution is being managed on a sustainableAn institution is being managed on a sustainable basis if, taking one year with another, it isbasis if, taking one year with another, it is recovering its full economic costs across itsrecovering its full economic costs across its activities as a whole, and is investing in itsactivities as a whole, and is investing in its infrastructure (physical, human, and intellectual)infrastructure (physical, human, and intellectual) at a rate adequate to maintain its future productiveat a rate adequate to maintain its future productive capacity appropriate to the needs of its strategiccapacity appropriate to the needs of its strategic plan and students, sponsors and other customerplan and students, sponsors and other customer requirementsrequirements.”.” (TRAC Volume III, A1 para 51)(TRAC Volume III, A1 para 51) Thus resources must be identified to meet the fullThus resources must be identified to meet the full costs in the long run:costs in the long run: – Direct, indirect, maintenance, cost of capital & investmentDirect, indirect, maintenance, cost of capital & investment – Areas of cross subsidy and transparency for decision makingAreas of cross subsidy and transparency for decision making
    • 7. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 77 Information ServicesInformation Services The University of ReadingThe University of Reading JCPSG good practiceJCPSG good practice case studycase study
    • 8. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 88 The projectThe project Development of a methodology for theDevelopment of a methodology for the treatment of Information Servicestreatment of Information Services costs within the Transparency Reviewcosts within the Transparency Review – Project leader –Project leader – Annette HaworthAnnette Haworth,, Director of Information ServicesDirector of Information Services – Project officer –Project officer – Roger JonesRoger Jones
    • 9. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 99 Approach to the studyApproach to the study Analysis of centrally provided IS resourcesAnalysis of centrally provided IS resources to identify usage patternsto identify usage patterns Total University IS resources and demandTotal University IS resources and demand – include data from finance, facilities,– include data from finance, facilities, HR and student servicesHR and student services Develop allocation model(s)Develop allocation model(s) Assess implications & lessons for ReadingAssess implications & lessons for Reading
    • 10. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1010 Reading - BackgroundReading - Background Study based on 2002/03 dataStudy based on 2002/03 data SchoolsSchools - 23 in 4 Faculties- 23 in 4 Faculties StudentsStudents - 11,400 FTE- 11,400 FTE Academic Staff - 1,560 FTEAcademic Staff - 1,560 FTE (1,284 in Schools)(1,284 in Schools) Three sites in Reading with two main campusesThree sites in Reading with two main campuses Information Services (IS) at Reading include:Information Services (IS) at Reading include: - IT Services (ITS)- IT Services (ITS) - Library- Library - Museums & Collections Services- Museums & Collections Services IS - total cost £8.9MIS - total cost £8.9M (= 6.4% of total income)(= 6.4% of total income) - 207 FTE- 207 FTE (all grades)(all grades)
    • 11. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1111 IS usage patternIS usage pattern School average usage per FTE studentSchool average usage per FTE student ranges widelyranges widely ⇒⇒ considerable imbalanceconsiderable imbalance Imbalance in availability and resourcesImbalance in availability and resources partly due to:partly due to: - School/department location- School/department location - Student profile (self funding; FT v PT;- Student profile (self funding; FT v PT; mix of UG, PGT, PGR)mix of UG, PGT, PGR) - Predominately “9-5 culture”- Predominately “9-5 culture” Enabled identification of some important ISEnabled identification of some important IS issues facing the University and its Schoolsissues facing the University and its Schools
    • 12. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1212 Relative use of servicesRelative use of services by user typeby user type ServiceService UGUG PGTPGT PGRPGR StaffStaff Library:Library: Library lendingLibrary lending 11 1.61.6 1.41.4 0.70.7 Use of e-sourcesUse of e-sources 11 2.22.2 8.08.0 5.65.6 ITS:ITS: e-mails sent/receivede-mails sent/received 11 3.93.9 6.26.2 18.818.8 Web useWeb use 11 4.64.6 9.89.8 11.011.0 e-mail server storagee-mail server storage 11 2.12.1 5.95.9 8.68.6 Home directory storageHome directory storage 11 2.62.6 12.712.7 9.29.2 PC laboratory usagePC laboratory usage 11 1.71.7 1.11.1 0.20.2
    • 13. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1313 Relative IS usage by SchoolRelative IS usage by School
    • 14. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1414 Total University IS resourceTotal University IS resource Need to understandNeed to understand totaltotal UniversityUniversity resources devoted to IS, not only the ISDresources devoted to IS, not only the ISD (Directorate) spend(Directorate) spend Considerable (but highly variable)Considerable (but highly variable) proportion of resourcing is from Schoolproportion of resourcing is from School fundsfunds Analysed ‘central’ data prior to meetingAnalysed ‘central’ data prior to meeting with Schoolswith Schools
    • 15. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1515 Development of costing modelsDevelopment of costing models Models not directly tied to management structure:Models not directly tied to management structure: - PC labs treated separately from other ITS costs- PC labs treated separately from other ITS costs - E-source costs of library service modelled with- E-source costs of library service modelled with general IT costsgeneral IT costs - Library archives & special collections included- Library archives & special collections included with museumswith museums 4 models – 1 for each group of services:4 models – 1 for each group of services: - PC labs- PC labs - General IT services (incl. e-sources)- General IT services (incl. e-sources) - General library service (excl. e-sources)- General library service (excl. e-sources) - Museums, archives & special collections- Museums, archives & special collections
    • 16. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1616 The modelsThe models Alternative models considered for each –Alternative models considered for each – 14 for library and 12 for ITS costs14 for library and 12 for ITS costs Target – to match allocations to usageTarget – to match allocations to usage Allocations based on staff & student FTEsAllocations based on staff & student FTEs Adjusted for some elements of direct spendAdjusted for some elements of direct spend by Schoolsby Schools Constructed to enable cost of IS for staff,Constructed to enable cost of IS for staff, taught and research students for eachtaught and research students for each School to be identifiedSchool to be identified
    • 17. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1717 ITS cost modelsITS cost models Weightings for general ITS (incl. e-sources):Weightings for general ITS (incl. e-sources): - UG = 1 - allocated to teaching- UG = 1 - allocated to teaching - PGT = 3 - allocated to teaching- PGT = 3 - allocated to teaching - PGR = 8 - allocated to research- PGR = 8 - allocated to research - Academic staff = 11 - allocation to- Academic staff = 11 - allocation to T, R & O based on time analysisT, R & O based on time analysis andand Schools weighted by HEFCE multipleSchools weighted by HEFCE multiple Weighting for PC labs:Weighting for PC labs: - UG = 1 - allocated to teaching- UG = 1 - allocated to teaching - PGT = 1.5 - allocated to teaching- PGT = 1.5 - allocated to teaching - PGR = 1 - allocated to research- PGR = 1 - allocated to research
    • 18. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1818 Library cost modelLibrary cost model Actual Library allotment to Schools for booksActual Library allotment to Schools for books (T) and journals (R) allocated direct to(T) and journals (R) allocated direct to SchoolsSchools Weightings for library (excl e-sources):Weightings for library (excl e-sources): - UG = 1 - allocated to teaching- UG = 1 - allocated to teaching - PGT = 1.5 - allocated to teaching- PGT = 1.5 - allocated to teaching - PGR = 1.5 - allocated to research- PGR = 1.5 - allocated to research - Academic staff = 0.7 - allocation to- Academic staff = 0.7 - allocation to T, R & O based on time analysisT, R & O based on time analysis Low staff weighting reflects decliningLow staff weighting reflects declining use of physical resource, increasinguse of physical resource, increasing use of e-sourcesuse of e-sources
    • 19. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 1919 Allocation of museums, archivesAllocation of museums, archives & special collections costs& special collections costs About 10 per cent of usage is byAbout 10 per cent of usage is by members of the Universitymembers of the University Analysis of usage data, combined withAnalysis of usage data, combined with managers knowledge, used to allocatemanagers knowledge, used to allocate costs to Schools and apportion betweencosts to Schools and apportion between Teaching and ResearchTeaching and Research 90 per cent of costs allocated to “Other”90 per cent of costs allocated to “Other”
    • 20. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2020 Matching usage to cost allocationsMatching usage to cost allocations
    • 21. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2121 Impact of new modelImpact of new model Change in allocation to FacultiesChange in allocation to Faculties TeachingTeaching ResearchResearch Arts & HumanitiesArts & Humanities -20%-20% +15%+15% Economic & Social SciencesEconomic & Social Sciences -6%-6% -3%-3% Life SciencesLife Sciences -6%-6% +17%+17% ScienceScience -5%-5% +38%+38% TOTALTOTAL -10%-10% +20%+20% Varies from School to School within FacultiesVaries from School to School within Faculties Comparison of existing & new modelsComparison of existing & new models ExistingExisting NewNew TeachingTeaching 64%64% 58%58% ResearchResearch 25%25% 30%30% OtherOther 11%11% 12%12%
    • 22. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2222 Benefits of the studyBenefits of the study Analysis identified total resource devoted toAnalysis identified total resource devoted to provision of IS in the Universityprovision of IS in the University – c£12m+ v. £8.9m for transparency– c£12m+ v. £8.9m for transparency Has influenced allocation of resources inHas influenced allocation of resources in 2004/05 budget exercise2004/05 budget exercise Identified issues to be addressed inIdentified issues to be addressed in developing IS in the Universitydeveloping IS in the University – Also compared performance with other HEIsAlso compared performance with other HEIs through use of SCONUL and UCISA surveythrough use of SCONUL and UCISA survey datadata Derived detailed IS costs per FTE by SchoolDerived detailed IS costs per FTE by School – can be used for costing research projects– can be used for costing research projects
    • 23. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2323 Average FTE costs by user typeAverage FTE costs by user type 0 100 200 300 400 Taught Students Research Students Staff (T portion) Staff (R portion)
    • 24. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2424 FTE research cost index by SchoolFTE research cost index by School ArtsandCommunicationDesign ContinuingEducation EnglishandAmericanLiterature History Humanities LinguisticsandAppliedLanguageStudies ModernLanguages BusinessSchool Instituteof Education HealthandSocial Care Law Sociology, Politics&International Relations Agriculture, PolicyandDevelopment Animal andMicrobial Sciences AppliedStatistics FoodBiosciences Plant Sciences Psychology Chemistry ConstructionManagement &Engineering HumanandEnvironmental Sciences Mathematics, MeteorologyandPhysics SystemsEngineering Staff PGRStudents
    • 25. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2525 The FutureThe Future Project helped to give a better understandingProject helped to give a better understanding of IS provision and use in the Universityof IS provision and use in the University Future planning being aided by projectFuture planning being aided by project findingsfindings Input into 3 year planning and budget cycleInput into 3 year planning and budget cycle Will need to re-validate the weightings atWill need to re-validate the weightings at intervalsintervals Systems needed to improve collection ofSystems needed to improve collection of usage datausage data
    • 26. UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005UMSLG Summer Residential Meeting - July 2005 2626 Further InformationFurther Information See JCPSG web site section on Costing &See JCPSG web site section on Costing & Pricing – Good Practice for downloads of thePricing – Good Practice for downloads of the Reading case study & a consolidated report:Reading case study & a consolidated report: http://www.jcpsg.ac.uk/costingpricing/practice/index.http://www.jcpsg.ac.uk/costingpricing/practice/index.htmhtm Core slides from this presentation are at:Core slides from this presentation are at: http://www.rdg.ac.uk/foia/downloads.htmhttp://www.rdg.ac.uk/foia/downloads.htm Further detail of this project can be obtainedFurther detail of this project can be obtained by contacting:by contacting: – Information Management and Policy Services,Information Management and Policy Services, Reading University atReading University at imps@reading.ac.ukimps@reading.ac.uk OROR – Roger Jones atRoger Jones at roger.jones@imper.co.ukroger.jones@imper.co.uk
    • 27. Information ServicesInformation Services The JCPSG case studyThe JCPSG case study UMSLGUMSLG Summer Residential MeetingSummer Residential Meeting 7- 8 July 20057- 8 July 2005