Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx

Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat
In this lab, you will determine how an invasive species—the
zebra and quagga mussel—affects other species in the
freshwater lake. Use the animation to help you come up with an
answer to the following:
· Why do you see increases and decreases in the invasive
species population?
· What are the implications associated with these alterations to
the ecosystem as a whole?
The Effects of Zebra and Quagga Mussels Introduced into a
Freshwater Lake
As you have learned, population dynamics are caused by the
biotic potential of the population and the effects of
environmental resistance. When there is minimal environmental
resistance impacting a population, it will exhibit a population
explosion. One reason for minimal resistance could be factors
that no longer regulate a population (e.g., predator decline or
resource increases). Another reason for a population explosion
is the introduction of an invasive species. Invasive species are
species foreign to an ecosystem and are not immediately
regulated by the environmental restraints of the particular
ecosystem that they invade. This in turn allows their
populations to grow seemingly uncontrolled and to displace
other indigenous populations. Examples of such an invasive
species into North America are dreissenid mussels, commonly
known as zebra and quagga mussels. Their introduction into the
Great Lakes has caused economic hardship and a reorganization
of the ecosystem. This has led, in part, to pollution-causing
effects that can be linked to an alga known as Cladophora.
Ecosystems are webs of intricately balanced interactions, what
happens when a new species is introduced that uses a
disproportionate share of the ecosystem’s resources?
(Deliverable Length: 1 page)
3 mini lectures to be usedReprise-Budgeting for Public

Managers Lecture
(c) 2007 Joyce S. McKnight
This lecture is a repeat of the one you read in the second
module, but here it has a different intent. In Module 2 it gave
you an overview of the public budgeting process so you could
prepare an initial budget for your target project. By this time in
the course you will have a much more thorough understanding
of the complexities of public budgeting and issues you are
likely to face. Please read this lecture intentionally reflecting
on its content in light of your new learning.
This lecture is adapted from Dropkin and LaRoche (1998) The
Budget Building Book for Non-profits: A Step-by-Step Guide
for Managers and Boards San Francisco: Jossey-Bass (a
division of John Wiley and Sons).
Note: This book is an excellent "how-to" book for a practical
approach to budgeting for non-profit organizations, but it has
relevance to public administration as well. I have summarized
some of the main points here, but those who wish to learn more
about the details of budgeting may wish to purchase it. It is
available from Amazon.com and usually ships within 24 hours.
Review of Chapter One: Why Budgets and Budgeting Are
Important to Non-Profits.
"...in plain language:
· An effective budget is a plan
· For receiving and spending specific amounts of money
· In specific cost categories
· To get specific things done
· Within a set period of time
· With monitoring mechanisms built into the process
or
A budget is a plan for getting and spending money to reach
specific goals by a certain time." (p. 3)The Definition of
Budgets and Budgeting
Four rules are basic to budgets and plans.
Rule 1:A budget is a plan for spending money to reach specific
goals by a certain time.

Rule 2:Any budget or plan is only as good as the time, effort,
and information people put into it. Good budget practices
should foster collaboration and exchange of information among
the budget team participants. [italics mine]
Rule 3:No budget or plan is perfect, since none of us can totally
predict the future.
Rule 4:In order to reach our goals, all budgets and plans must
be monitored and changed as time goes on. (p. 4)The Basic
Nature of Budgets and Budgeting
Some of those in the Public Finance and Budgeting course are
focusing on public organization or non-profit organizations that
contract with one or several levels of government. Public
television would be an example of such a quasi-
public organization while other projects such as a county human
services department are directly funded by the government.
Another example of public finance and budgeting is a county
government itself. Whatever the focus, budgets and budgeting
share similar concepts and processes. (McKnight, 2003)
"Budgeting is thoughtful and deliberate." It involves carefully
setting goals and developing plans, as well as creating a logical
and informed process for allocating resources. (Dropkin and
LaTouche, 1998, p.5) Public agencies in general have stricter
budget guidelines and less flexibility than do private
organizations. Often the basic parameters are set for the public
organization. A good example would be county budgets that are
largely set by entitlements and unfunded mandates. Whether
flexible or tightly controlled, all budgeting should be thoughtful
and deliberate, not just a haphazard process. (McKnight, 2003)
"Budgeting is inclusive." It should bring together the
perspectives and interests of a wide variety of groups. (Dropkin
and LaTouch, 1998, p.5) In the public sector these groups may
include the primary government funding source(s) that often
also have the responsibility for budget monitoring as well as the
other stakeholders common to the non-profit sector such as the
board, clients, management and staff, private donors, and
income sources. Public budgets are usually quite open to the

public. The budgeting process, for instance, may include
publication, open hearings and other public forums. This
openness should be welcomed. (McKnight, 2003)
"Budgeting is an ongoing process." Budgeting requires ongoing
monitoring, data gathering, analysis, revised projections, and
assumptions, and consideration of alternatives needed. (Dropkin
and LaTouch, 1998, p.5) This may especially be true of public
budgeting. Public agencies and non-profits relying heavily on
public funding (such as Community Action Agencies) quite
often have difficulties in cash flow. For instance, a delay in the
state or federal budget may lead to a delay of weeks or months
in agency funding. Such difficulties require creative thinking
and alternative resources.Basic Types of Budgeting
Organizational or Operating Budgets
The organizational or operating budget is needed for non-profit
organizations or public sectors with multiple programs or units.
(Dropkin and LaTouche, 1998, p. 6) It is composed of all of the
budgets which comprise the entire organization.
In general, the size and complexity of an organization determine
a pyramid, with each succeeding level representing a
consolidation of several budgeting units called cost centers.
(p.6) In large organizations, there are often four levels. The
lowest level is program and activity budgets, followed by unit
budgets comprised of similar programs and activities, then
department or division budgets, and finally the organization-
wide budget. (p.7)
Operating Budgets for Individual Programs, Units, or Activities
Specific budgets are usually created for individual programs,
units, or activities within the broader organization. Operating
budgets may be created by program managers and negotiated as
part of an overall agency budgeting process which will be
explained briefly later or they may simply be "handed down
from above". Public agencies often have little flexibility at the
program level. Administrators are expected to work creatively
within the guidelines given, often through public mandate. (p.7)
Capital Budgets

"Capital budgets are tools used to help plan and manage capital
projects, those requiring relatively large, one-time expenditures,
like buying or constructing a building and acquiring expensive
equipment...Basically, there are two sorts of capital projects:
capital improvement projects (used to buy, construct, or
extensively renovate physical facilities) and capital equipment
projects (used to acquire expensive equipment for long-term
use)." (p.7) Capital budgets for public agencies often are
separate from ongoing agency budgets and may require bond
issues or long-term borrowing that must be approved by an
elected body. In some instances, major bond-funded borrowings
are entirely handled through agencies or authorities which are
separate and distinct from the primary agency.
Cash Flow Budgets
The information on cash flow budgets from Dropkin and
LaTouche (1998) will be quoted in full because of its
importance to public finance and budgeting.
Stated simply, cash flowis the difference in the amount of actual
cash coming in to an organization from support and
revenue...and the amount of actual cash going out of an
organization in the form of expenses...Unfortunately, cash flow
analysis is often overlooked...
Difficulties in cash flow management often result when income
lags behind expenditures. For example, some non-profits (and
government agencies) are not reimbursed by their funding
sources for services rendered until long after the fact. In order
to provide these services, expenditures for staff, office space,
equipment, supplies, and so forth must often be paid out before
reimbursement is expected to arrive. To deal with this problem,
a non-profit organization (or a public organization, for that
matter) must perform proper cash flow planning.
Cash flow budgets project payments (disbursements) and cash
received (receipts) month by month over the course of the fiscal
year or other period, focusing on the timing of these
transactions. A cash flow budget highlights times when gaps are
likely to occur, with projected disbursements likely exceeding

cash on hand (a situation referred to as negative cash flow). As
well, a cash flow budget will show periods when idle cash may
be available for investment referred to as positive cash flow. In
the case of projected cash shortfalls, a complete cash flow
analysis will go one step further by identifying how the
shortfall can be avoided so programs can continue without
interruption.
"Proper cash flow planning requires the preparation of a cash
flow projection, which serves as an early warning device to
keep cash reserves from becoming too low to meet cash needs."
(p. 9)
As mentioned earlier, cash flow issues are particularly difficult
in public agencies and in non-profit organizations depending
heavily on public grants because of the uncertainty of the public
budgeting process and public allocations. Often, for instance, a
new program will be initiated at the federal or state level and an
agency may expect an allocation, but no money will be
allocated, requiring a change in the agency budget. Or there
may be a shortfall in tax revenues during the fiscal year, making
third and fourth quarter allocations smaller than anticipated. Or
there may be an emergency requiring reallocation of funds so
that on-going allocations must be cut. Or, allocations that are
dependent on numbers of clients served may fall short of
projected clientele, causing the next quarter's allocation to be
cut back. All of these can cause major problems for public
budget managers. (McKnight, 2003)
Keep these principles in the "back of your mind" as you prepare
your final project expenditure and income budgets and prepare
to justify them.

Ethical Budget Management
© 2007 Joyce S. McKnight
It is tempting in an essay like this to simply make a list of
prohibited behaviors, but ethics at its heart is a decision-making
process that can be facilitated by intentional organizational
structures.
Living the Two “Golden Rules”
Two of the world’s great religions, Christianity and
Confucianism, developed “golden rules” for ethical behavior.
The Christian version, in King James English, states “Do unto
others as you would have them do unto you.” The Confucian
version is somewhat more pragmatic: “Do not do anything to
others that you would not want them to do to you.” Both
versions of the rule are relevant to ethical budgeting practices.
Imagine yourself as a taxpayer or public official charged with
distributing tax dollars. How would you want your money to be
used? Where would you want it to go? Where do you not want it
to go? What information do you expect in return for your
contributions? The basic ethical budget practices lie in the
answers to these simple questions. Here are some of my own
answers. You may think of others.
As a Taxpayer I want you as a responsible public official or
program administrator to:
See that My Money Goes Where It Is Intended
I want my money to go where it is intended to go. This seems
obvious but has been violated by many government agencies at
all levels. For instance students in our Program Planning and
Evaluation class found that after Hurricane Katrina in
2005 federal emergency management funds were badly
mishandled by FEMA. In fact as of this writing (January 2007)
some emergency trailers are still not in place, the recovery

process is far from complete, and the levies may
be inadequately restored.
Maximize Direct Services
I want you to use my money to do the mission of the
organization. I want you to help people on my behalf. I do not
begrudge you a decent salary (although I do not want it to
be many times my own), nor do I begrudge you the
administrative staff, marketing budget, or equipment necessary
to do your work well or to involve others in the
effort. However, when administrative costs exceed 30% of your
total expenditures, I feel cheated.
Hire Competent, Hard-working Staff
I do not mind if public employees are paid a decent wage or
even if some people are hired as a reward for supporting you as
long as they are well qualified to do the job and work hard. I
do mind “sweetheart” deals in which unqualified owners, board
members, administrators, direct service providers, or their close
friends and relatives are given preference over more highly
qualified candidates. I do mind “make work” positions.
Develop Program Policies, Processes and Procedures that Will
"Do the Job"
I expect you to understand the legislation, regulation, and
program models that will enable your organization to do the
best job possible for society and especially for the people you
serve.
Serve the Common Good, Not Special Interests
I expect you to serve the public, not succumb to pressure from
special interest groups. I especially do not want you to make
"sweetheart deals" with special interest groups. I become
especially nervous or downright irrate when I see you moving
back and forth between the public and private sectors as
opportunities emerge. While I appreciate the fact that you
might have specialized skill in a particular area such as
management of public utilities, it seems unethical to me when
important decision makers simply move back and forth between

working for providers and working for regulatory agencies. I
also feel nervous if you are an elected official who may be
directly or indirectly benefiting in your private financial life
through your public service.
Keep Accurate, Honest, “Transparent” Records
I expect you to keep records that are easy to follow, conform to
government regulations, and clearly show that your organization
is operating legitimately.
Willingly Let the "Sunshine In"
Most states have laws requiring that public meetings be open to
the general public and to the media. I realize that you may feel
the need for preliminary planning to make sure that frank
discussions can be held and that "half-baked" ideas are not
spread by the media as public policy. I also realize that
personnel issues are private and that "trial-by-media" can have
devastating affects on employees, public officials, and their
families. However, I appreciate openness and candor in public
decision making forums. I appreciate being able to speak at an
appropriate time, an appropriate place with appropriate
guidelines to assure that all voices are heard but that meetings
do not disintegrate into chaos.
I appreciate it when you make private tax and other financial
records available to public scrutiny and when you do not try to
hide possible benefits from your position through rewarding
your relatives, friends, or present/former employers with
lucrative contracts.
I appreciate it when required public meetings to discuss pending
legislation, government initiatives, or proposed regulations
affecting my well-being are held at times and in places where I
can attend. I do not appreciate it when all public meetings are
during regular working hours when I am unable to attend, in
remote places, at difficult times of the year such as near the
holidays, and/or with such short timelines before needed
implementation that I know it will be impossible for my
suggestions to be implemented. In such instances, I feel that
the public meetings are pro forma and meet the letter but not the

spirit of the law. I feel that you have betrayed my trust.
Demonstrating Ethical Practice
In a world where it sometimes seems that truly ethical practices
are rare, it is important not only to be ethical but to be able to
demonstrate ethical practice. Therefore, your financial and
other management practices should be transparent to all of
your constituents and should provide convincing evidence of the
integrity of your organization.
Respected Board of Directors and Organizational Leadership
Members advisory groups and appointed committees should
have impeccable reputations for honesty and hard work.
Moreover, they should have no hint of personal agendas and
certainly should receive neither direct nor indirect financial
gain from their participation.
Clear Accounting Structures
This was mentioned in the lecture on budget management
practices, but bears repeating. Accounting structures should be
clear, up-to-date, and follow accepted practices. Multiple
accounts should be managed according to contractual or
regulatory requirements and should also be cross-referenced for
easy tracking. Mandatory reports should be clear, detailed, and
honest.
Clear Reports
Reports required by regulatory agencies on program outcomes
and services rendered should be kept in timely ways. They
should be accurate, regularly updated, and easily accessible
both to regulators and to the general public.
Internal Checks and Balances
There should be no temptation for anyone to misappropriate
funds. Therefore, no single person should be given
responsibility for financial processes. For instance, two people
should account for money raised even for something as simple
as a bake sale. Receipts should be required for all purchases
reimbursed by the organization. Receipts should be given for

all donations (whether cash or in-kind) as well as for money
received as “fees for service”. Whenever possible, payments
and donations should be by check or credit card, not cash. Only
a few persons should be approved to accept cash payments. All
cash received should be immediately placed in a locked area
until it can be safely deposited. Periodic internal audits should
be conducted and available to the governing board and
regulatory agencies.
External Accountability
Annual or bi-annual external audits should be conducted.
Budget reporting requirements of funding agencies should be
followed scrupulously. A yearly budget report should be
published and made generally available.
Summary
Ethics in budget management is a matter of the practical
application of the Golden Rule, transparent record keeping and
honest. Do no evil. Make sure that others see no evil where
none exists by keeping good records.
Reprise: Roles in Budgeting
This, too, is a reprise of a mini-lecture found in the second
module. It is not placed here in error. You are to read the
material in light of what you have now learned in the course and

consciously apply your learning to the development of your
final expenditure and income budgets and their justification.
This mini-lecture continues the review of budgeting from
Dropkin and LaTouche (1998) The Budget Building Book for
Non-profits: A Step-by-Step Guide for Managers and Boards.
San Francisco: Jossey-BassThe Role of Governing Bodies in
Budget Creation
This lecture looks primarily at public budgeting and finance at
the local or county level and provides some insights into
budgeting in non-profit organizations that depend on
government financing.
Public agency budgets in federal and state are part of the
executive branch of government and are part of the broader
political functions of rule making, rule application, and rule
adjudication. (Hyman, McKnight, and Higdon, 2003, p. 72)
Public agencies are managed at various levels. Some are
federally based and linked to cabinet departments and other
direct federal agencies. Some are state-based and linked directly
to various executive departments of state government. However,
most public agencies are managed at the multi-county, county,
school district, or municipal levels. Many of these government
agencies are guided by committees of elected or appointed
officials. Others have advisory boards made up of people from
the community who provide guidance to administrators. Not-
for-profit organizations, on the other hand, are guided by boards
of directors.
Advisory bodies of both public agencies and not-for-profits
have similar functions in the budgeting process but private,
non-profit boards have direct decision-making authority while
public committees and advisory boards only provide input to
elected bodies or regulatory agencies.
The following list of roles are applicable for both public
agencies:Budget Preparation Team
In public agencies authority for budget development is
delegated to those with specific positions. These positions are
generally defined by regulations from the agency or branch of

government granted jurisdiction over implementation of the
enabling legislation. The person or team delegated the task
of budget development and monitoring should:
1. Develop and review the mission statements of all
relevant levels of the organization.
2. Create a statement of strategic program and service priorities
to guide resource and allocation decisions during the budgeting
process.
3. Review (or establish) internal budget policies of the agency
such as requirements for a balanced budget and policies for the
use of cash reserves.
4. Review budgeting, accounting, and financial reporting
requirements of the regulatory agency or agencies with
jurisdiction.
5. Assure that the budget development, implementation,
monitoring, and reporting process being used complies to both
internal and external policies.
6. Facilitate a systematic and timely process choosing one of the
four approaches to budgeting that is most suitable to the project
and agency culture.
7. Develop a budget plan that takes into account personnel
needs, program requirements, future plans, and contingencies.
8. Create a written budget proposal suitable for sharing with key
decision makers.
9. Formally reviews and approves the budget or, in the case of a
public budget, may present it to a public decision making body.
10. Regularly reviews financial and narrative reports on budget
implementation and planning for any needed corrective action
including comparison against external or competitive
benchmarks. (Dropkin and LaTouche, 1998, p. 11)
11. Hold budget information sessions including public
hearings for clients, staff, or for government funding sources
such as the federal, state, or county legislature or city
county.The Chief Executive Officer's, Executive Director's or
Agency Administrator's Role
The chief executive officer plays a sustained role in the budget

process, usually being responsible for:
1. Arranging and staffing the budget preparation team.
2. Preparing options and recommendations to guide budget
development.
3. Ensuring that the budgeting schedule is met.
4. Reviewing draft budgets and making resource allocation
decisions.
5. Presenting the recommended budget to the board, elected
officials, or to the general public, explaining its provisions and
possible consequences, and answering questions. (p.11)
Once the budget is approved, the chief executive officer is
responsible for working with the chief financial officer to
implement it, which involves
1. Communicating the approved budget to management and line
staff so that they can clearly understand it.
2. Regular financial monitoring to compare actual income and
expenses to those budgeted.
3. Reviewing financial reports to correct negative deviations
from the budget and determining what caused the variance.
4. Communicating the results of financial monitoring to the
board or public authority and seeking approval for fiscal or
program changes. (p.12)
Sometimes the chief executive officer and the chief financial
officer are the same person. In large organizations, they are
played by different people. The roles of the chief financial
officer are as follows:
1. Creates a budget development calendar and ensures that
deadlines are met and/or makes sure that deadlines set by
government funding sources are met.
2. Communicates budgeting policies and procedures to
management and line staff.
3. Establishes the format for draft budgets.
4. Develops income and expense forecasts based on reviews of
external economic and competitive trends, and/or probable
government funding levels as applicable.
5. Collaborates in setting expense and income targets in line

with strategic plans for programs or units.
6. Evaluates draft budgets from programs or unit managers for
accuracy, reasonableness, applicable guidelines, and anticipated
resources.
7. Discusses draft budgets with the CEO and other managers as
needed.
8. Writes up all recommendations for reducing, increasing, or
reallocating requested resources.
9. Usually prepares the budget document once the CEO's budget
decision is made and may help present it to the board or to the
public budgetary authority. (p. 12)
After the budget is approved, the CFO often is responsible for
implementing financial monitoring, preparing and analyzing
budgeted versus actual income and expense reports for
management, board, regulatory, or public use and overseeing
any corrections needed. (p.12)Program, Unit, Activity, or
Department Manager's Role
The mid-level manager has primary responsibility for budget
management and may also have a major responsibility in budget
development.
In a rather open budget setting where new revenues can be
generated, organizations often ask that department heads
develop their own budgets based on their prior experiences
(budget history), projected needs, and future plans. Each
departmental budget includes both numerical projections and a
budget narrative giving a rationale for expenditures. Frequently,
the department head is asked to meet with the decision makers
to discuss the budget and to advocate for its acceptance. These
budget negotiating sessions can involve extensive negotiation
both preceding and during the formal budget hearing process
making budget decisions a "political" process no matter where
they occur in organizational systems.
Ironically, this process tends to result in initial overestimates of
departmental needs as most managers feel that their initial
budget request will inevitably be cut. To use an automobile
analogy, it was recommended to me as a beginning manager that

I present a "Cadillac" budget to the CEO and Board, have a
"Chevrolet" budget in the wings that would be satisfactory, and
have a "junker" budget hidden in the drawer that represents the
minimum with which they can function.
In this way, budgets from throughout the organization are
presented to a central decision-making body. In large
organizations this body is often comprised of the chief
executive officer, the chief financial officer, persons at the
vice-presidential level and board members or elected/appointed
government officials. This budget team sets the overall budget
based on the organization's mission and realistic estimates of
available funding. (McKnight, 2003)
The process outlined above is common in public organizations
where there is flexibility in the budgeting process and the
opportunity to increase revenues. Often, however, in difficult
financial times there is little flexibility. The challenge at the
departmental level becomes finding ways to do more with less
and to cut costs as much as possible with as little sacrifice to
services as can be managed. Departmental heads may also be
asked to contribute suggestions to such cost cutting.
In still other organizations, funding is determined above the
organizational level and departmental budgets are allocated
without significant input from departmental managers.
Whatever the budget planning process used, once the
organizational budget is approved, the departmental budget is
sent from the budget decision makers to the department head
who has the responsibility for informing their staff about any
operational or budgetary changes, reviewing regular financial
reports, monitoring income and expenses, and helping develop
and implement corrective action plans for their specific areas of
responsibility. (Dropkin and LaRouche, 1998, p. 13)Other
Possible Participants in the Budgetary Process
· Clerical support staff to prepare various documents and
materials throughout the budgeting process and to understand
what is expected in terms of tasks, formats, workloads, and
schedules.

· Consultants and outside specialists such as independent
auditors and accountants, architects, engineers, bond counsel,
and specialists in program areas (as well as grant makers and
regulatory agencies).
· Selected clients and volunteers.
· Individuals working in an information systems department
(p.13).
· Representatives of regulatory agencies.
· Representatives of grant agencies who often provide
surprisingly helpful information on actual (as opposed to
written) grant requirements.
The strongest budgets are those that have the most people
involved in their creation and, therefore, also have the most
agreement. Unfortunately, they are also the most time
consuming.Reprise: Four Approaches to Budgeting
This is a reprise of the lecture in Module 2. It is presented here
so that you can choose an appropriate approach to your final
budget project based on what you have now learned about
budgeting, budget processes, and the complexities of the
environment of public administration.
These approaches to non-profit and public budgeting are taken
from Dropkin and LaTouche (1998) The Budget Building Book
for Nonprofits: A Step-by-Step Guide for Managers and Boards
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
It should be noted that public administration differs from non-
profit or for-profit management in that all budgeting must be
done in light of the requirements of any and all regulatory
agencies having jurisdiction. Your choice of budgeting process
will, therefore, be based on legal/regulatory requirements as
well as the culture and past practices of your organization and
your own preferences as a manager.1. Setting Annual
Organizational Goals Based on Desired Outcomes and
Performance Measures
This strategy begins with the program mission and goals and
works from there to the budget. This seems especially appealing
because the money follows the need rather than vice versa.

Dropkin and LaTouche suggest that top managers consult with
program staff before any initial draft budgets are developed.
Top managers usually begin by asking program managers, staff
members, and sometimes volunteers and/or clients to develop
outcome goals and performance measures for the organization
as a whole and for each component program or department.
Goal setting is a technical skill that is covered in depth in such
courses as Program Planning and Evaluation, but it will be
covered briefly here.
Outcome goals and performance measures are linked in a
process also called planning and evaluation. They may be
charted as follows in an example from a Community Action
Program.
Outcome Goals
Performance Measures
Increase the number of weatherized owner-occupied homes from
350 to 475 over a 12-month period.
The actual number of housing units weatherized.
Reduce the average per unit per month heating cost of
weatherized homes by 5%.
Actual reductions in monthly heating costs based on a
comparison of heating bills for the same month of the year
before and after the services were provided.
Develop and implement a model employment skills training
program by June 1 of the next fiscal year.
Implementation of the program by the specified date.
Provide training in the next 12 months to 250 low income,
unemployed persons to improve their chances of job placement.
Number of clients enrolled in and completing training.

Place at least 65% of the target population in full-time jobs
within two months of completing training.
Number of clients employed after two months of training.
From Dropkin and LaTouche, 1998
Outcome goals and assessment measures such as these are the
backbone of planning and evaluating with budgeting a
component part of the planning, implementation, and evaluation
process.
Once these outcome goals and performance measures are set,
project managers can estimate the financial resources needed to
achieve these desired ends.
In McKnight's opinion the process of setting outcome goals and
performance measures should not simply be a top down process.
Over the years, she has found it helpful to begin any planning
process by informally discussing goals and performance
measures with a wide variety of people including project
managers, staff members, clients, and volunteers, reading
widely in the literature and exploring benchmark programs in
other organizations. This ongoing research in a continuous
process and provides a solid base for proposing outcome goals
and performance measures.
At an appropriate time in the yearly planning and budgeting
process, the chief executive officer begin an intentional
planning cycle using the following model adopted from Dropkin
and LaTouche (1998, p.22) with additions from McKnight
(2003):
1. Develop a rough draft of initial ideas for the coming years
outcome goals based on the ongoing input described above.
2. Circulate to appropriate staff members.
3. Elicit feedback from staff through as many channels as
possible including e-mail, individual discussions, and focus
groups.
4. Revise outcome goals and performance measures based on

feedback.
5. Circulate to staff for a last revision.
6. Develop into a formal plan for decision makers.
7. Share plan with outside decision makers such as the board of
directors or public decision making body.
8. Obtain decision makers' approval for outcome goals and
performance measures.
9. Include the year's board approved goals in the package used
by applicable department heads for developing draft budgets.
10. Department, program, or unit heads direct their budgeting to
attaining organizational goals and make sure their draft budgets
include a brief narrative addressing how continuing activities,
new initiatives, and/or proposed budgetary changes contribute
to the organization's goals for the coming year.
11. The top management and decision makers use the narrative
explanations and, in some cases, personal budget presentations
to help assess the merits and contributions of each program,
unit, or department to overall organizational goals for the
coming year.2. Setting Annual Income and Expense Targets
from the Top Down
"Under this top-down budget development strategy, top
management first sets expense and income targets for the
coming year for the organization as a whole and for each
individual unit. In this way the units know in advance the
income that is available as well as any income they are expected
to generate. Each unit can then develop a draft budget based on
the income and expense targets." (Dropkin and LaTouche, 1998,
p. 23).
This form of budgeting is particularly common in the public
sector.
Dropkin and LaTouche (1998) suggest the following model for
income and expense targeting that can be used in either the
public or the nonprofit sector.
1. Top management forms a working group.
2. The working group creates:
· a. Reasonably reliable projections of unavoidable (that is,

barebones estimates) of expenses and desirable or hoped for
expense increases for the organization as a whole; and
· b. A projection of income fairly certain to be received and
one of income likely to be received, again for the entire
organization.
3. The working group summarizes the fiscal position of the
organization as a whole for the next year based on the working
group's expense and income projections as a basis.
4. The working group recommends expense and income targets
for all programs, units, and activities based on estimated
resources and expenses.
5. Top management reviews the working groups' assumptions,
calculations, and targets, makes changes as appropriate, and
submits them to decision makers. (Having the board or other
decision makers approve income and expense targets can help
avoid potential conflict among managers.)
6. Top management clearly communicates board approved
income and expense targets to managers and unit heads in the
package of information on developing draft budgets. (p. 24)3.
Requesting Draft Budgets from Program or Unit Heads that
Show Priorities
This strategy calls for each unit head to prepare three draft
budgets for the coming year based on a range of percentage
variations determined by top management and the board. There
are three steps:
· Step 1Top management decides what the percentage of
variation should be between the three total draft budgets, for
instance, (a) unchanged from this year's total, (b) 3 percent
higher, (c) 3 percent lower (or whatever percentage amount is
chosen).
· Step 2 Each unit head prepares the three draft budgets to
reflect the unit's priorities and includes a brief summary within
each draft budget of the likely impact the specific changes will
have on the unit's operations.
· Step 3Top management and the decision makers adjust each
unit's draft budget up or down, depending on the most up-to-

date understanding of the coming year's income and expenses,
and informed by each unit's perspective on change". (Dropkin
and LaTouche, 1998, p. 23)4. Zero-based Budgeting
Zero based budgeting was quite radical when it was first
invented in the 1960's and is still usually used when programs
are asked to make major changes.
Zero based budgeting or ZBB has no built-in assumptions or
automatically included items. It seeks to answer the question "If
this product (activity or unit) were not here today, would we
start it?" (Drucker, P. 1964 Managing for Results,
HarperCollins in Dropkin and LaTouche, 1998, p. 25)
Specific questions addressed in ZBB include
1. Should a given program, activity, or position be continued, or
would other activities be more important or appropriate?
2. If the program, activity or position is justified, should it
continue operating in the same manner or should it be modified?
3. If modified, how will it be modified, when, and by whom?
4. How much should the organization spend on the program,
activity, or position being studied?
In order to answer the above questions for the organization as a
whole, every unit should be asked to do the following:
1. Identify the major functions or activities it performs.
2. Answer the four questions above as they pertain to the
operating unit.
3. Create alternatives or options based on the answers to the
questions.
4. Project anticipated revenues and costs related to each option
or alternative. (p.26)
5. Make recommendations to upper management on how to
proceed.
Exploring and answering these questions can lead management
to:
1. Abandon the specific unit, program, or activity, perhaps in
favor of other options thought to be more effective.
2. Change, strengthen, simplify, redirect, reorganize, outsource,
or otherwise change the existing effort.

3. Make no change. (p.26)
Zero-based budgeting can be a good choice when an
organization or unit of government has been running for a long
time and is perhaps based on old assumptions. However, it can
be very difficult and painful as Dropkin and LaTouche suggest.
1. ZBB must have dependable, detailed cost information
available from the accounting system (which is not always
possible).
2. ZBB often feels very threatening to both managers and staff,
since it involves evaluating, making comparisons, and deciding
on desired changes (at least desired from a management
perspective).
3. ZBB requires fairly detailed planning. Dropkin and LaTouche
recommend that it be piloted rather than introduced to a whole
organization. (p. 24)
The choice of budgeting strategy depends on the organization,
its stage of development and environmental realities.
Many public administrators facilitate an internal process
focusing on the mission, outcome objectives, organizational
values, and practices of the agency, department, or government
body and then adapt those processes to the requirements of
regulatory agencies as needed. This proactive approach is
probably preferred over a reactive one. It assures that the
agency mission is accomplished and reduces stress because it
gives a sense of some control over chaos.

Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx

Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx

Similar to Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx (20)

More from smile790243

More from smile790243 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Lab to identify an invasive species effect on non-native habitat.docx