September 2018 Directors Meeting

STACEY BRADLEY, JOE SOBIERALSKI,
AND JOSH FLAX
DIVISION DIRECTORS MEETING
SEPTEMBER 18, 2018
Budget Model Redesign

© 2018 HURON CONSULTING GROUP INC. AND AFFILIATES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.2 © 2017 HURON CONSULTING GROUP INC. AND AFFILIATES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Budget Model Redesign
Auxiliary and Support Unit
Meetings
September 2018

© 2018 HURON CONSULTING GROUP INC. AND AFFILIATES. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.3
Agenda
Financial Modelling 4)
The goal of today’s presentation is to:
 Provide background on the budget model redesign initiative
 Review efforts to date
 Provide budget model guiding principles and explain budget model decision points and key components
 Highlight model incentives
 Answer questions

Overview of Project Goals and Objectives
Huron has partnered with USC to develop and prepare for the implementation of an incentive-based budget model
that aligns with the institution’s mission, culture, and strategic priorities through an inclusive and iterative process.
Project Goals and Objectives
1. Build on the Board and Elliott Davis’ recent financial modeling efforts to develop a University budget model
2. Engage stakeholders in a discussion about changes in higher education that are driving the need for a new
USC business model
3. Develop a set of guiding principles and facilitate discussions about potential model adjustments to reflect those
principles
4. Introduce draft budget models to stakeholders through an iterative process to find common ground, and obtain
stakeholder buy-in for an agreed upon model to position USC for implementation
5. Enhance current budget processes, tools, reports, and governance structures to support the operationalization
of the new budget model

Budget Redesign Timeline
Huron has partnered with USC to develop and prepare for the implementation of an incentive-based budget model
that aligns with the institution’s mission, culture, and strategic priorities through an inclusive and iterative process.
2018 2019
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Phase Overview
1. Due Diligence and Visioning Develop a clear understanding and vision through an assessment of current resource allocation practices
2. Financial Modeling Build-out a “pro-forma” model to provide a platform for testing different model alternatives
3. Stakeholder Engagement Address change management through methodical, data-driven stakeholder engagement
4. Infrastructure Development Develop supporting tools, reports, budget processes, and governance to operationalize the new budget model
5. Parallel Process Test a new model to understand outcomes if the new model were implemented
Visioning
Financial Modeling
Stakeholder Engagement
Infrastructure Development
Partnership Year
Budget Model Active

Review of Efforts
Since the beginning of the project, the Provost’s Office, the Budget Office, and Huron have worked closely with the
Steering Committee to support the University’s desire to develop an incentive-based budget model.
Phase Outcomes
Due Diligence and Visioning
 Facilitated kick-off meetings with the project Steering Committee, Elliott Davis, Dean’s
Council, Executive Leadership, and the Board of Trustees
 Performed analysis of current trends in higher ed. and how USC’s business model can
adapt to those changes
 Supported the development of guiding principles for the proposed model
 Assisted in the visioning and creation of the proposed model structure
Financial Modeling
 Facilitated discussions on alternative modeling concepts
 Tested various allocation methodologies and taxation policies to understand impacts
 Developed a prototype budget model based on FY17 actuals as a starting point for future
state discussions
 Assessed costs associated with providing support services across the System
 Currently working to expand the model to include FY18 actuals and FY19 budgeted data
Stakeholder Engagement
 Interviewed 70+ stakeholders to inform budget model development through an iterative
process. These stakeholders include representatives from academic units, auxiliary units,
support units, executive leadership, and all System institutions. As a result of our
conversations, we have incorporated their feedback in the development of model iterations
Infrastructure Development
& Partnership Year
 Currently developing supporting tools, budget processes, reports, and governance
structures to support the operationalization of the new incentive-based budget model

BUDGET MODEL REDESIGN
MODEL OVERVIEW

Steering Committee – Roles and Membership
The University has established a Steering Committee of faculty and staff to provide guidance for this initiative, to
review project status reports, and to validate the opportunities presented.
Name Role
Joan Gabel – Provost, Co-Chair Mary Alexander – Chief of Staff, Assistant Provost
Leslie Brunelli – CFO, Co-Chair Stacey Bradley – AVP, Student Affairs
Peter Brews – Dean, Business Kelly Epting – AVP, Finance
Lacy Ford – Dean, Arts and Sciences Tom Regan – Chair, Faculty Budget Committee
Hossein Haj-Hariri – Dean, Engineering and Computing Jeff Tallant – CFO, Athletics
Cheryl Addy – Associate Provost Brian D’Amico – Shareholder, Elliott Davis
Joe Sobieralski - Columbia Budget Director, Working Group Staff Lead
Steering Committee Charge
 Provide guidance surrounding the development of a new incentive-based budget model
 Monitor and review project progress
 Validate key decisions by providing constructive feedback on budget model developments
 Engage with the campus community, acting as a liaison between the steering committee and various
constituent groups

Guiding Principles
Steering Committee members developed a set of guiding principles, which are summarized below. These
principles have been used to inform decisions on the development of the proposed budget model.
Create a model that seeks to advance the University’s mission as an institution for
excellence and remains flexible enough to adapt to changing priorities over time1
that promote balanced growth by rewarding entrepreneurship, innovation, Feature
incentives and collaboration within and across disciplines2
Develop a highly collaborative and sustainable budgeting process that promotes
transparency and accountability across all units3
Reflect a shared commitment to the fiscal health of the campus ensuring optimal
efficiencies and that institutional priorities can be funded4
Provide a consistent and fair methodology for revenue and cost allocation that is
relatively simple and easy to understand5
Use trusted and reliable data to facilitate strategic decision making and to enable
enhanced forecasting and planning6

Unit Organization
Campus units have been categorized as academic units or support units based upon their impact on revenue
generation and their level of financial self sustainability.
Academic Units Central Support Units
Generally defined by the following characteristics: Generally defined by the following characteristics:
1. Ability to influence revenue generation 1. Less opportunity to influence revenue
2. Receives allocation of central unit costs 2. Provides services and/or support to Revenue Units
3. Accountable for performance, retaining both surpluses and
shortfalls
3. Accountable for operating within an expense budget (net of
any specific direct revenues)
4. Contributes to and may receive distributions from the
Strategic Initiative Fund (“SIF”)
4. Responsible for providing optimum service and may be held
to service-level agreement expectations
Academic Units Include: Central Support Units Include:
College of Arts & Sciences College of Education Academic Affairs Honors College
College of Engineering &
Computing
Darla Moore School of
Business
Academic Access & Degree
Completion Programs
Academic Support & Student
Services
School of Law School of Music Facilities Information Technology
College of Nursing College of Social Work Executive Affairs Research
College of Pharmacy College of Info. and Comm. Enrollment & Scholarships Libraries
College of Hospitality, Retail,
and Sports Management
Arnold School of Public
Health
Central Services &
Administration

As the Auxiliary and Support Units currently operate under a similar funding model,
these decision points largely affect the Academic Units only.
Critical Model Decision Points
Moving to an incentive-based budget model requires many decisions regarding the model’s scope, structure, and
methodology; eight of these decisions prove most critical and will be thoroughly discussed today.
Decision Point Description
1) Unit Organization  Categorize operating units as academic, auxiliary, or central support based on their characteristics
2) General
Undergraduate Tuition
 Allocate 80% to academic units based on instructed credit hours (i.e., College of Instruction)
 Allocate 20% to academic units based on enrolled credit hours (i.e., College of Record)
3) General State
Appropriations
 Allocate 70% to academic units based on enrolled resident credit hours (i.e., College of Record)
 Allocate 30% to academic units based on grants and contracts revenue
4) IDC  Allocate 100% to campus units where IDC is generated
5) Cost Pool Allocation
 Allocate support unit net expenditures (e.g., information technology, libraries, facilities, etc.) using
activity-based metrics (e.g., headcount, square footage, etc.) that best represent the driver of costs
6) Central Funding
Mechanism
 Used to address mission-critical needs and university-wide priorities
 Sourced from a participation fee (tax) and legacy model adjustment
7) Carryforward
 Current carryforward tax policy will continue to be applied moving forward
 No retroactive changes to prior year carryforward amounts

Revenue and Expense Allocation Overview
In general, incentive-based budget models share five common elements related to the flow of revenues and
expenses across the institution.
Element Description
Direct
Revenues
 Typically recognized as revenue by the unit for goods or services provided
Allocation of
General
Revenues
 Models devolve ownership of revenues from central administration to the academic units that generate
them; particularly, general state appropriations, and tuition and fees
Direct
Expenses
 Units have traditionally been accountable for, and actively managed, direct expenses
Allocation of
Indirect
Expenses
(Cost Pool
Allocations)
 Optimal decision-making requires that the full costs of activities be understood; not just the direct costs,
but also the facilities utilized and central services provided
 By understanding how indirect costs are allocated, management can estimate the full marginal costs of
proposed initiatives
 Each academic unit pays for its own direct expenses plus a share of the central support unit expenses
Use of Central
Funding
 The provision of direct resources for strategic initiatives benefits the whole institution
 Allocations from central sources (i.e. “subventions”) to academic units are used to support mission-critical
units with under-funded operating costs
 In part, the use of a central fund addresses the economic problem of the commons

Cost Pool Allocations
USC’s support units have been grouped into eleven cost pools; net expenditures will be allocated to academic
units based on specific activity-level metrics.
Cost Pool Illustrative Support Units
FY17 Net
Expenses
Allocation
Metric
Central Services &
Administration
Admin & Finance, Finance, Business Affairs, Human Resources, $66.2MM Total Employee FTE
Facilities Facility Services, Utilities, Facilities Operating Projects $48.9MM Net Assignable Sqft
Enrollment & Scholarships Enrollment Management, Scholarships, Trio Programs $28.7MM UG Student FTE
Information Technology University Technology Services, OneCarolina $20.8MM Total HC
Libraries University Libraries $18.0MM
Student FTE + Faculty
FTE
Academic Affairs Faculty Senate, Provost, Graduate School, International Programs $17.8MM
Student FTE + Tenure-
Track FTE
Research Office of Research/Research Administration $5.0MM1
Sponsored Revenue
Academic Access & Degree
Completion Programs
On Your Time, Palmetto College Administration, Distributed Learning $3.9MM UG Student FTE
Executive Affairs Board of Trustees, President, Legal Affairs, Economic Engagement $3.1MM
Total Direct Exp. (Less
Transfers)
Academic Support & Student
Services
University 101, Residential Learning Centers, Student Affairs – Admin,
Academic Support Services
$2.3MM Student FTE
Honors College Honors College $1.4MM UG Student FTE
1 – One time revenue items amounting to $4.2MM were removed to be more reflective of future years

Central Funding Characteristics
Within incentive-based models, universities typically allocate dollars to support two central funding mechanisms,
each with distinct roles.
Central pools must be sufficient in size to allow institutional goals to be funded
and ensure that mission-critical activities are subsidized appropriately.
Subvention Pool Strategic Initiative Fund
Definition
 A centrally-held pool of revenues to address
mission-critical needs, the nature of which, are not
self-funding
 A centrally-held pool of revenues to address
university-wide priorities and revenue growth
strategies
Rationale
 Sum of the parts is not optimal for the whole; USC
needs the ability to act as one entity to achieve
University-wide goals
 In part, the use of the central fund addresses the
economic problem of the commons
Illustrative
Uses
 Ensure appropriate subsidies to meet major
institutional goals
 Address compliance and regulatory issues as they
arise
 Provide start-up funding for high priority academic
programs
 Underwrite new initiatives which do not naturally
fall under one unit’s care
Funding
Formula
 Various funding models are used across
institutions, each with pros and cons
 Various funding models are used across
institutions, each with pros and cons

Budget Model Governance
Illustrative Governance Information Flow:
Decision Makers
Determine final budget
decisions
Advisory Committees
Makes recommendations to
decision makers
Operational Support Teams:
Performs data collection and
analysis to inform decisions
1 2 3
 Manage annual refresh of model
inputs (e.g., credit hours, square
feet, etc.)
 Manage the development of financial
forecasts and operating assumptions
for scenario planning
 Collect feedback on updates to the
model and address concerns on
service delivery, space
management, and academic quality
 Can include both existing
committees (e.g. curriculum
committee) and model-specific
committees (e.g., support unit
allocations committee)
 Hold final decision authority related
to model inputs and resource
allocations
 Often is the President with input
from the Provost and VPFA
Budget model governance is intended to clarify roles and responsibilities for facilitating the budget process,
including information collection, advisory input, and decision authority.
A strong governance structure will ensure that broad, cross-functional input is collected in the
allocation process; it will not, however, ensure consensus among stakeholders.

(New) Model Incentives for Academic Units
Area of Incentive Description
Undergraduate Tuition
 Incentivizes grown in both courses instructed (in major and outside of major) as well as growth in
number of majors (e.g. new programs). [This can also influence portion of state appropriations
allocated based on resident enrollment.]
Graduate Tuition
 Incentivizes maximizing the number of graduate majors in a discipline (graduate tuition revenue is
retained 100% by college of record.) [This can also influence portion of state appropriations
allocated based on resident enrollment.]
Summer Revenue
 No significant change to allocation of summer enrollment revenue. Still retained by each college.
Incentives still apply.
IDC/Research Activity
 IDC retained 100% by unit that generates the IDC. (Rather than historical split, the costs of
operations like research office, SAM, etc. are captured in allocated central support unit costs.)
 Research activity (grants and contract revenue) is also incentivized as it influences the allocation of
state appropriation to each college
Collaboration
 Incentivizes teaching and research innovation across disciplines that enhance generate additional
tuition and research/IDC funding while enhancing the student experience.
Cost Management/
Efficiency
 Minimizing costs in light of new revenue activity allows for redeployment of funds and accumulation
of reserves for strategic purposes (Note: this is also a major incentive for support units)
While Academic Units are the main target of these incentives, auxiliaries and support units are key partners that will be looked
upon to assist the colleges in achieving their goals to take advantage of the model incentives.

550 W Van Buren St #1700, Chicago IL, 60607
(312) 583-8700
www.huronconsultinggroup.com

KAREN PETTUS
SEPTEMBER 18, 2018
Web Accessibility

Web Accessibility in the Information Age
Karen Pettus
Disability Resource Center

IN THE AGE OF INFORMATION, IGNORANCE IS A
CHOICE. OR IS IT?

WHAT HAPPENS IN AN INTERNET MINUTE? HANG ONE
SECOND TAKES ON A NEW MEANING
http://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-
minute-2018/
http://www.visualcapitalist.com/internet-minute-2018/

PREVALENCE OF DISABILITY AMONG NON-
INSTITUTIONALIZED PEOPLE OF ALL AGES IN THE
UNITED STATES IN 2016*
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Any Disability Visual Hearing Ambulatory Cognitive Self-care Independent
Living
Type of Disability
Type of Disability

PREVALENCE OF DISABILITY AMONG UNIVERSITY OF
SOUTH CAROLINA-COLUMBIA STUDENTS 2018*
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Any Disability Visual Hearing Ambulatory Cognitive Psychological Health Ind. Living
(CL)
Type of Disability
Type of Disability

OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS RESOLUTION AGREEMENTS
Definition of Accessible
• The opportunity to acquire the same information
• Engage in the same interactions
• Enjoy the same services as a person without a disability
• Equally effective
• Equally integrated manner
• Substantially equivalent ease of use
Fully, Equally, and Independently

ADA: WHAT IT
INCLUDES AKA WHAT
AFFECTS YOU
https://uwm.edu/adaaac/wp-content/uploads/sites/374/2016/08/2016-Roadmap.pdf

BENEFITS
EVERYONE
https://uwm.edu/adaaac/wp-content/uploads/sites/374/2016/08/2016-Roadmap.pdf

CAPTIONING YOUR OWN VIDEO FOR FREE
Free Online Tools
• http://amara.org/
• http://dotsub.com/
• http://subtitlehorse.com/
• The process for each tool is basically the same. The end product is a
plain text caption file that can be used as you need.
From http://www.washington.edu/accessibility/videos/free-captioning/

WEB CONTENT ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES
WCAG 2.0 AND 2.1
• Goal of providing a single shared standard for web content accessibility
that meets the needs of individuals, organizations, and governments
internationally
• Web “content” generally refers to the information in a web page or web
application, including:
• natural information such as text, images, and sounds
• code or markup that defines structure, presentation, etc.
• http://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/

BLACKBOARD ENHANCEMENT PROJECT
CREATES ALTERNATIVE FORMATS
Types of files that will convert:
Word > PPT > PDF > Images

GIVES TIPS ON HOW TO FIX ISSUES

ACCESSIBILITY RESOURCES
On our web page
• https://sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/student_disability_resource_ce
nter/for_faculty_and_staff/index.php
• Web Accessibility Initiative
• http://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/

WORKSHOPS AVAILABLE
• Monday 9/24 - 2:00-4:30 pm
• Tuesday 9/25 - 2:00-4:00 pm
• Thursday 9/27 – 2:00-4:30 pm
Location 308 Byrnes Building
Contact Dow Hammond to RSVP
• hammond@mailbox.sc.edu
803-777-6142

ARE YOU A DIGITAL CITIZEN?
• Parents want what is best for their
student
• Students want full participation
• Educators want to prepare successful
citizens in today’s society
• Everyone has different needs that can be
addressed
• A shared responsibility

STACEY BRADLEY
SEPTEMBER 18, 2018
Closing Remarks

September 2018 Directors Meeting

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to September 2018 Directors Meeting

Similar to September 2018 Directors Meeting (20)

More from University of South Carolina Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support

More from University of South Carolina Division of Student Affairs and Academic Support (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

September 2018 Directors Meeting