Goals to Performance Budget Transition

Performance-based Budgeting Framework for

the Alamo Community Colleges

DRAFT UPDATED 11/9/07

Prepared by Dr. Carlos Ayala, Student Outcomes Assessment and Research (SOAR) Department, in collaboration with Gladys Jacobson, District Budget Office November 2007

2 DRAFT Performance-based Budgeting Framework for the Alamo Community Colleges

“Measuring cost is an integral part of measuring performance” Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

Introduction

The Alamo Community Colleges Board of Trustees and Chancellor have recommended the adoption of performance-based budgeting for enhancing financial management, effectiveness, and accountability at the Alamo Community Colleges. This initiative seeks a budget and performance integration and the alignment of college/division budgets with the District’s strategic plan.

This document provides the concept, benefits, requirements, and challenges behind performance-based budgeting. An implementation timeframe is included.

The content of this document is based on the white paper entitled “Performance Budgeting for Federal Agencies - A Framework” by John Mercer (Appendix).

Performance Budget

A performance budget is an integrated annual performance plan and annual budget that shows the relationship between program funding levels and expected results. It indicates that a goal or a set of goals should be achieved at a given level of spending.

Performance budgets require an understanding of what the end product (i.e., outcomes) will be in order to give a cause-effect indication of how funding will turn into positive results. This is accomplished by showing for each program (budgetary unit) how dollars will fund activities, how these activities will generate certain expected outputs, and what specific outcomes should be the result.

$$$  Activity  Output  Outcome

While an object class (functional category) budget shows what each dollar will be spent on (e.g., salaries, benefits, office supplies, travel, utilities, equipment, etc.), a performance budget shows what each dollar will accomplish (e.g., recruit a number of students, increase persistence by certain level, process a grant application, inspect a facility, review a compliance activity, etc.). Programs should be able to show their budgets in both formats with matching totals.

As variances between plans and actual implementation occur, managers examine the resource inputs and how they relate to outcomes to determine program effectiveness and efficiency.

Performance budgeting implementation will help managers/directors at all ACCD levels enhance their financial management practices, improve dollar spending efficiency and effectiveness in their academic and administrative units, and achieve the strategic plan goals of the Alamo Community Colleges.

3 Goals-to-Budget Transition

Chart 1 depicts the transition from strategic planning to performance budget at the Alamo Community Colleges. The colleges and divisions (e.g., District offices) are responsible for formulating strategies that are aligned with the District’s goals and strategies, as well as for supporting the four strategic drivers (recruitment, retention, completion, and clusters). In addition, they are expected to collaborate with District in preparing performance management balanced scorecards under five perspectives (financial, employee learning and development, internal processes, student and customer, and community), and to follow the Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence.

After strategies, action plans, and tasks are planned, implemented, evaluated, and controlled/corrected, funding is distributed to program activities based on the outputs and outcomes expected in the next period.

Program activities constitute the bridge between goals and budgeted funds through several steps:

1. Every activity conducted by staff is defined within a program. 2. Each activity is measured in units. 3. Every full-time equivalent is converted to the appropriate number of work hours (e.g., 2,080 hours per year) and is linked to a specific activity. 4. Every dollar of operating cost is charged against a specific activity. 5. Every activity is linked to a single output measure (or small set of output measures) in the hierarchy of goals and measures.

Units with high performance effectiveness demonstrate a strong linkage between resources consumed and program outcomes achieved, and can objectively and transparently justify their requests for continued or increased funding.

Budget and Performance Integration Several requirements need to be satisfied in order to integrate performance planning and budget decisions:

1. Performance targets are compatible with funding levels. 2. Planning officials at all levels set out targets to match funding levels for programs. 3. Program managers are held directly accountable for managing to the targets. 4. Reforms in policies and processes (e.g., changing the way support services, capital assets, and employee benefits are budgeted) lead to more accurate information on program costs.

The development of a performance budget is a simultaneous top-down and bottom-up process. Planning officials must articulate program goals and objectives and outline the levels of resources anticipated to support them. These officials should identify outcome measures to determine whether goals are met and resources spent effectively. However, the goals, objectives, resource levels, and outcome measures must be developed with and validated by subordinate managers and staff. This applies a level of realism to the annual performance plan. In addition, by working closely across organizational lines, planners and policy officials may be assured that managers at all levels not only understand the integration between an annual performance plan and a performance budget, but also are committed to its success.

4 Five criteria for favorably rating a system that integrates budget and performance:

 Planning/evaluation and budget staff work with program managers to create an integrated plan/budget and to monitor and evaluate its implementation.  A streamlined, clear, integrated plan/budget sets forth outcome goals, output targets, and resources requested in context of past results.  Budget accounts, staff, and, specifically, program/activities are aligned to support achieving program targets.  Full budgetary cost is charged to accounts and activities. Cost of outputs and programs is integrated with performance in budget requests and execution.  Organization documents program effectiveness. Analyses show how program outputs and policies affect desired outcomes. Organization systematically applies performance to budget and can demonstrate how program results inform budget decisions.

Table 1 presents various criteria for assessing budget and performance integration.

Performance Budget Implementation Challenges

Implementing a performance-based budgeting system that effectively integrates budget and performance information takes leadership, discipline, and time. The following challenges need to be addressed proactively by the Alamo Community Colleges for the first year of performance budget implementation.

1. Defining activities for each program. The definition of each ACCD operational activity in either broad or narrow terms will depend on the level of detail that is meaningful for managerial and accountability purposes. With a new ACCD performance budget system that links program activities to goals, ACCD managers will need to combine, divide, or redefine some activities. ACCD budget managers will need to clearly define performance measures and integrate them into budget submissions and the management of operations.

2. Identifying the cost of each activity. A performance budget defines all direct and indirect activities required to support a program, and it estimates all activity costs. By tracking the cost and number of units for each activity, output, and outcome, unit cost information can be generated. However, identifying activity costs is complex and time consuming. In addition, standardizing activity costs across units is a challenge and, in many cases, unachievable. ACCD managers will need to use cost accounting to provide reliable and timely information on the full cost of programs, their activities, and outputs. The move to implementation of performance-based budgeting will require cost accounting information and training at the program level.

3. Mapping budget justification to an annual performance plan. Every ACCD manager will need to integrate an annual performance plan with the budget justification. This requires careful planning to ensure that performance information is not lost in the larger budgeting process. A system cross-referencing information from performance budgets, other budget documents, and program activity performance will be necessary.

4. Changing budget structures. Performance budgeting will require a change in the ACCD budget account structure to facilitate program activity identification and linkages to strategic plans and annual plan goals/objectives. Use of the existing six-digit activity code field in Banner Financial to record budget transactions linked to program activities, strategies, goals, and drivers is a first step.

5 5. Encountering resistance. Performance budgeting involves monitoring activity outcomes, managing the budget for results, and the participation of more than the ACCD budget and strategic planning offices. In addition, program managers generally are disinclined to adopt new managing systems and establish new performance agreements. These factors may provoke resistance. To eliminate it, ACCD program managers must learn the benefits of using performance budgets, receive the appropriate training in cost accounting (activity-based costing), and get the necessary support from their committed leaders.

6. Upgrading systems. IT and financial management systems will need to be coordinated and upgraded, as appropriate, to support performance management at the ACCD. Setting goals for program outputs, unit costs, and outcomes in the performance budget amounts to only part of the solution. Providing ACCD managers with a steady stream of timely, accurate, and useful program performance data throughout the year will be critically important.

Other challenges deal with how to reach funding level agreements for specific targets, how to measure intangibles or hard-to-measure outputs/performance, and adopting TracDat and SPM as supporting tools. Despite the challenges, performance budgeting is achievable. ACCD managers will need to develop an understanding of performance budgeting, develop a plan, and get started. These initial efforts will be improved every year. As managers use performance budgets and the supporting information systems to steer their programs, they will demand better and more timely performance data, which will drive further improvements in performance budgeting and institutional effectiveness.

6 Proposed Activities for Performance Budgeting Development

Pilot Months ● The District Budget Office designates the six-digit activity code field in Banner Financial to record budget transactions linked to program activities, strategies, goals, and drivers. ● Each college selects one pilot program and describes its activities. ● One selected college, to start with, allocates full costs to each activity of its pilot program. Under the Goals-to-Budget Transition model (Chart 1), the college inputs a standard action plan using TracDat and monitors it through April of Year 1; all budget transactions related to the pilot program are input in Banner Financial, including the activity code field.

Year 1 ● All colleges and District offices start classifying and describing all their programs (budgetary units), and activities. ● College financial managers get trained on activity-based costing, performance budgeting, and TracDat. ● Performance budgeting and TracDat training continues. ● All four remaining colleges start their performance budgeting pilot programs. ● Pilot programs’ performance and budget allocations per activity are assessed. ● All colleges and District offices complete their classification and description of programs and activities. ● Colleges make their budget submissions/presentations indicating funding levels by functional category and identifying percentage distributions by strategic driver or other priority and by program activity for each category. ● Budgets for pilot programs’ new year are submitted as performance budgets, based on outputs and outcomes from previous year, with matching dollar totals. ● Building from its pilot program, each college selects a few additional programs (base budget or new strategic initiative proposals) and allocates full costs to each program activity. ● Under the Goals-to-Budget Transition model, a standard action plan is input and monitored for one year using TracDat.

Year 2 ● All District offices start the performance budgeting process as colleges did in year 1. ● Additional performance budgeting and TracDat training is conducted as appropriate. ● Pilot programs’ performance budgets are assessed. ● Colleges make both functional category and performance budget submissions/presentations identifying percentage distributions by strategic driver or other priority. ● Building from its pilot programs, each college and District office selects at least 5% of its programs (base budget or new strategic initiative proposals) and allocates full costs to each program activity. ● Under the Goals-to-Budget Transition model (Chart 1), a standardized action plan is input and monitored for one year using TracDat. ● Performance budgets are assessed. 7 Chart 1. Goals to Budget Transition ALAMO COMMUNITY COLLEGES VISION GOALS ACCD KPIs MISSION BENCHMARKS I, II, III, IV, V STRATEGIES BALANCED VALUES SCORECARD

Environmental Scanning, SWOT Analysis

COLLEGE / DIVISION STRATEGIES

DRIVER 1 DRIVER 2 DRIVER 3 DRIVER 4 Other TARGETS RECRUITMENT RETENTION COMPLETION CLUSTERS Strategic New Initiatives Priorities and Strategies

DEPARTMENT ACTION PLANS (Objectives, Outcomes, Metrics) Same Strategies

UNIT / INDIVIDUAL TASKS (Activities, Ownership, Timelines) PERFORMANCE BUDGET Identify: ● Programs and activities EVALUATION AND CONTROL ● Objectives, outputs, and outcomes (Collect, Analyze, Utilize, Follow-up, Remediate, Report) ● Activities linked to long-term goals ● Full cost of activities Goals/drivers addressed? Outcomes reached? Budget variances ● Unit cost of activities reduced? Timelines followed? Benchmark gaps closed? Targets met? ● Costs of achieving objectives and and 8 District Target Team College/Division SPM Banner Chart 2. FOCUS PDCA to Improve Processes and Develop Action Plans

9 Table 1. Meeting Criteria for Budget and Performance Integration

Does Not Meet Criteria Partially Meets Criteria Meets All Criteria

o Senior managers do not have a regular o Senior managers meet at least o Senior managers meet at least quarterly process for considering financial and quarterly to examine reports that to examine reports that integrate financial performance information when making integrate financial and performance and performance information that covers decisions regarding the management of information that covers some of the all major responsibilities of the programs; major responsibilities of the Department. This information is used to Department. The reports are used to make decisions regarding the Strategic plans contain too many goals o make decisions regarding the management of programs; and objectives to provide a clear and management of programs. focused statement of priorities. o Strategic plans contain a limited number Performance measures included in o Strategic plans contain a limited of outcome-oriented goals and objectives. annual budget and performance number of outcome-oriented goals and Annual budget and performance documents do not meet the standards of objectives. Annual budget and documents incorporate all measures the Program Assessment Rating Tool performance documents incorporate identified in the PART and focus on the (PART), a method for assessing the all measures identified in the PART information used in the senior performance of program activities (see process. management report described in the first Appendix); criterion; o Performance appraisal plans for SES o Performance appraisal plans do not link and managers link to mission, goals o Performance appraisal plans for at least to mission, goals and outcomes, and outcomes, effectively differentiate 60% of positions link to mission, goals effectively differentiate between various between various levels of and outcomes, effectively differentiate levels of performance, or provide performance, and provide between various levels of performance, consequences based on performance; consequences based on performance. and provide consequences based on performance; o Does not have a systematic way to o The full cost of achieving performance estimate the full cost of achieving goals is accurately (+/- 10%) reported o Reports the full cost of achieving performance goals reported in budget in budget and performance performance goals accurately (+/ - 10%) and performance documents; documents. in budget and performance documents and can accurately estimate the marginal Less than 50% of programs rated by the At least 50% of programs rated by the o o cost (+/- 10%) of changing performance PART have at least one efficiency PART have at least one efficiency goals; measure; or measure. o Has at least one efficiency measure for all PART ratings are not consistently used to PART ratings are used to justify o o programs; and justify funding requests and management funding requests and management actions. More than 50% of programs actions. No more than 50% of o Uses PART evaluations to direct program receive a Results Not Demonstrated programs receive a Results Not improvements and PART ratings are used rating for more than two years in a row. Demonstrated rating for more than two consistently to justify funding requests years in a row. and management actions. Less than 10% of programs receive a Results Not Demonstrated rating for more than two years in a row.

Adapted from GPRA and Performance Management (http://www.john-mercer.com/pma-stds5.htm)

10 Appendix

11 About John Mercer

With over 20 years of experience in improving governmental performance and accountability, John Mercer is an internationally-recognized expert in strategic planning, performance budgeting, and comprehensive performance management.

His services include assistance to federal agencies in complying with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), the President's Management Agenda and OMB's Program Assessment Rating Tool. His clients have included agencies at the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Energy, Homeland Security, Interior, Labor, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs. He is the creator of the CASCADE™ Performance Budgeting System for government agencies.

Mr. Mercer has been referred to by key members of Congress and many government officials as "the Father of GPRA" for having proposed, initiated and led the development of the Government Performance and Results Act while serving as Counsel to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee.

Mr. Mercer previously served as Mayor and Councilmember in Sunnyvale, CA, whose internationally famous performance management and budget system was used by him as the inspiration for the Government Performance and Results Act. The White House Office of Management and Budget has stated that Sunnyvale’s system “stands out as the single best example of a comprehensive approach to performance measurement that we have found in the United States. . . One underlying reason for the success in Sunnyvale is the fact that every program manager uses the system to plan, manage, and assess progress on a day- to-day basis.” In the President's Budget for FY 2003, Sunnyvale's system of performance budgeting was cited as being internationally recognized for its effectiveness.

12 Program Assessment Rating Tool

Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) is a diagnostic tool used by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for evaluating Federal program effectiveness. PART’s purposes are to inform and improve plans and reports, to establish a meaningful systematic link between performance and budget decisions, and to improve program performance.

The basic PART instrument is composed of 25 questions divided into four sections, each with specific weights: (1) Program Purpose and Design, 20%; (2) Strategic Planning, 10%; (3) Program Management, 20%; and (4) Program Results and Accountability, 50%. Programs are awarded points based on the answer to each question. This is used to assign overall ratings of effectiveness (Effective, Moderately Effective, Adequate, Ineffective, and Results Not Demonstrated).

Each question in the first three sections of the PART is answered in a Yes/No format. Questions in section 4 may be answered as Yes, Large Extent, Small Extent or No. The PART requires from programs a high level of evidence to justify a Yes response (i.e., a program must show it is achieving its purpose and that it is well managed).

PART’s scores are divided into ranges and converted into qualitative ratings (Effective, Moderately Effective, Adequate, and Ineffective). Regardless of the overall score, however, an effectiveness rating of Results Not Demonstrated (RND) is given if the program does not have agreed-upon performance or if the measures lack baselines and performance data.

When a PART is completed for a program, along with each answer there is a brief explanation that includes a description of the relevant evidence substantiating the answer. The questions within each section are given equal weight, unless the evaluator decides to alter their weight to emphasize certain key factors of importance to the program.

After assessment and rating of programs covering about 20% of the federal budget, OMB published the results in the President’s FY 2004 Budget. The President’s Budget for FY 2006 included specific assessments and overall effectiveness ratings for 607 federal programs that have been evaluated by OMB through use of the PART. After three annual rounds of PART assessments, federal programs comprising approximately 60% of all federal programs have now been evaluated in that manner. The President’s Budget for FY 2006 showed a significant correlation between program effectiveness ratings and proposed funding levels. OMB’s plan is to bring 100% coverage to federal programs within 5 years.

13 Definitions Action Plan A plan that covers each program activity set forth in a unit’s budget. It supports the strategic plan; establishes performance goals or objectives to define the level of performance to be achieved by a program activity; expresses such goals in an objective, quantifiable, and measurable form; briefly describes the operational processes, skills, technology, resources, and timeframe required to meet the performance goals; identifies ownership and levels of responsibility; establishes performance indicators to be used in measuring or assessing the relevant outputs, service levels, and outcomes of each program activity; provides a basis for comparing actual program results with the established performance goals; and describes the means to be used to verify and validate measured values. FOCUS PDCA is a useful tool for developing and improving action plans.

Activity See “Program Activity.”

Benchmark Representation of best practices and performance for similar activities within the organization or compared to peer organizations. Benchmarking helps the organization understand the current dimensions of performance excellence.

Completion Strategic driver encompassing all programs, services, and activities related to attainment (graduation with degrees and certificates), student transfer to other institutions, and student/customer acceptance in or return to the workplace. Key performance indicators related to completion include program completion, graduation, and transfer.

Clusters Harvard Business School Professor Michael Porter defines an industry cluster as “a geographic concentration of competing and cooperating companies, suppliers, service providers, and associated institutions.” At the Alamo Community Colleges, clusters represent a strategic driver involving all activities related to workforce development. It captures the non-credit side of the ACCD, and it highlights the relationship of a variety of activities that support economic development. Industry clusters make sense in the economic development world. In the education sector, however, clusters underscore the need for programs, services, and activities that go beyond providing graduates to satisfy the current needs of expanding industries. Clusters aggregate the academic and non- academic, as well as the workforce-related credit and non-credit programs and services of the Alamo Community Colleges. Key performance indicators related to clusters include workforce program effectiveness, workforce training, and workforce success.

Driver A measurable strategic priority area. The Alamo Community Colleges drivers include recruitment, retention, completion, and clusters.

Evaluation and Control In an organization, strategy implementation calls for strategy evaluation and control. Strategy evaluation examines the underlying basis of the strategy, compares actual results with expected results, and takes corrective actions to address performance gaps. Evaluation and control consists of the following steps: (1) Define parameters to be measured, (2) Define target values for those parameters, (3) Perform measurements, (4) Compared measured results to the pre-defined standard, and (5) Make necessary changes.

14 Functional Category Functional categories are part of a budget function classification system. A budget based on a budget function classification system provides a comprehensive means to capture activity and budgetary resources according to mission (need) area. For example, the Federal Budget considers the following ten functional categories for spending: Social Security, National Defense, Medicare, Income Security, Health, Net Interest, Education- Training-Employment-Social Services, Transportation, Veterans Benefits and Services, and Other. The ACCD uses eight functional categories: Instruction, Public Service, Academic Support, Student Services, Institutional Support, Operation and Maintenance of Plant, Scholarships/Exemptions, and Auxiliary.

Goal A formulated purpose or aim that an organization intends to achieve (e.g., “Increase success rates in developmental math courses,” “Conduct community service activities that contribute to student growth and support community needs,” “Restructure the Biology Study Center with improved tutoring, study space, and study cohorts.”) A strategic goal is a broad statement describing how to reach the organizational vision, answering the question “how will we know when we’ve arrived?”

KPI A Key Performance Indicator is a group of high-level financial or non-financial metrics/measures used to quantify goals/objectives/priorities and reflect strategic performance in areas deemed critical to success.

Mission A statement of purpose, answering the question “what is our primary purpose?”

Object Class Budget A budget that uses an object classification system to array financial data emphasizing the goods, services, or items purchased and how they are delivered. The Federal Budget, for example, includes the following five major object classes: Personal Compensation and Benefits (“Personnel”), Contractual Services and Supplies, Acquisition of Assets, Grants and Fixed Charges, and Other.

Objective An intended student learning, activity, or program outcome stated in measurable terms. A statement of what is to be accomplished to achieve a goal. For example, “Offer in Fall 2008 a new 4-hour developmental Math course with a 3-hour lecture and a 1-hour lab,” “To offer at least one specialized training course per semester per department for the English and Math faculty members in order to increase teaching effectiveness and student success.”

Outputs The products and services or immediate results delivered by a program. For example, in measuring the performance of a job-training program, an output measure could be the number or percentage of program participants who completed the training. In the academic world, an output measure could be the number of students who complete and get a final grade in a course.

Outcomes Specific statements derived from the objectives. Observable, measurable results or evidence of the educational experience or administrative activity. For example, in measuring the performance of a job-training program, while an output measure could be the number or percentage of program participants who completed the training, an

15 outcome measure could be the number or percentage of program participants employed one year after the training. In the academic world, outcomes are simple and clear statements about what students will know, think, or be able to do after the completion of a course or academic intervention (e.g., “Demonstrate understanding of xyz principles,” “Be able to analyze data and solve problems,” “Use lab equipment appropriately”). A high-level outcome such as “The student writing will be judged to be of high quality by qualified readers” may have supporting lower-level outcomes such as “Students will be able to write grammatically correct sentences” and “Students will be able to write well developed and unified paragraphs.” Course learning outcomes statements are not statements about what the course or instructor will achieve, nor are they descriptions of what the course will be about. Instruments to measure course learning outcomes include pre/post tests, skill demonstrations, capstone courses/projects, internships, portfolios, standardized exams, and licensure, certification, or professional exams. The measurement of specific outcomes contributes to the evaluation of objectives and the sustainability of performance budgets.

Program A budgetary unit including a set of activities directed toward a common purpose or goal. A program may be any organizational aim, project, function, or policy that has an identifiable set of objectives. A program delivers products and services (outputs) or the results of those products and services (outcomes). Program cost information may be generated by tracking the cost of each program activity. An approach is to use the organization budget accounts to identify programs, and the program’s outcome and output objectives to identify the program activities. The budget structure may not always clearly define all programs (i.e., “program activities” in the budget are not always the activities that are managed as a program in practice). A program may also be a collection of programs or activities that are managed as one entity or that has a clear set of goals. When various programs (e.g., grant programs) contribute to a common goal and are interdependent, it makes sense to review them as a whole than separately. The same entity may manage multiple grants using different decision- making approaches, but it is the combination of those grants that contributes to the same goal. Some examples of programs include Adult Employment and Training Activities, Pell Grants/Student Financial Aid, Educational and Cultural Exchanges, Facilities, Institutional Research Office, Counseling Department, Department of English, Developmental English, and Gatekeeper English.

Program Activity A specific academic or administrative mission, function, activity, service, project, or process listed in a unit’s program and financing schedule. Program activities can be major categories of responsibilities within a program, department, or unit. Program activities provide a meaningful representation of the operations financed by a specific program budget account. A program performance budget defines all activities, direct and indirect, required by a program for support, in addition to estimating activity costs. An approach is to use the organization budget accounts to identify programs, and the program’s outcome and output objectives to identify the program activities. The following are examples of program activities with identified outputs: increase the number of enrolled dual credit students by 5% from the 2005-2006 result, conduct 60 student orientations in FY 2007, provide training to 50% of the department’s faculty in FY 2007.

Performance Budget A performance budget informs about resource allocation decisions based on a performance-based management and budgeting system. It is an integrated annual performance plan and annual budget that shows the relationship between program funding levels and expected results. It indicates that a goal or a set of goals should be

16 achieved at a given level of spending. Performance budgets are not just based on performance; they also require an understanding of what the end products (i.e., outcomes) should be in order to give a cause-effect indication of how funding will turn into positive results. This is accomplished by showing for each program how dollars will fund tasks and activities, how these activities are expected to generate certain outputs, and what outcomes should be the result. While an object class budget shows what each dollar will be spent on (e.g., salaries, benefits, office supplies, travel, utilities, equipment, etc.), the performance budget shows what each dollar will accomplish (e.g., recruit a number of students, process a grant application, inspect a worksite, review a compliance activity, etc.). Programs, however, should be able to show their budgets in both formats with matching totals.

Recruitment Strategic driver involving all student recruitment/enrollment activities. Key performance indicators related to recruitment include partnership expansion, community relationship, market penetration, student enrollment, and financial access. Retention Strategic driver involving all student retention, persistence, or re-enrollment activities. Key performance indicators related to retention include program/service assessment, student engagement, standardized curricula, process efficiency, student progress, and Achieving the Dream progress.

SPM SAS Strategic Performance Management is a Web-based application for designing, building, and managing scorecards, dashboards and diagrams, including strategy maps. SPM provides an interactive and collaborative environment to help communicate organizational goals and strategies, monitor performance against targets, and identify opportunities for improvement. This allows organizations to spot problems and opportunities quickly and understand performance with one glance. SPM allows organizations to align, monitor, and measure the execution of key initiatives that serve strategies and performance goals.

Strategy A description or plan of how the organization will achieve its goals. The approach, rule, or guideline an organization takes to achieve the mission, goals, or objectives in order to survive and succeed. A strategy can cover the organization as a whole or it can relate to primary matters in key functional areas.

Target A numerical point or range representing a desired level of performance measure or quantitative goal. A target may be a projection based on comparative data (benchmarks).

Task Specific, individually assigned activity within an action plan.

TracDat TracDat is a Sungard SCT Web-based database application for program assessment and strategic planning. All ACCD employees can access TracDat via PALS. By documenting action plans and providing easy access to supporting data, TracDat supports a culture of evidence and helps increase efficiency, effectiveness, transparency, and accountability. Using TracDat, programs and unit plans can be linked to the strategic plan and the budget process, resulting in wiser allocation and utilization of budget funds based on program/unit progress and success.

17 Values Behaviors representing the “how” of the mission. They are basic precepts about what is important to the organization.

Vision Statement A clear and compelling description of a desired future state (i.e., “where do we want to go?”). A vision paints a picture of ideal future outcomes.

WHAT TO MEASURE KPI MEASURE EXAMPLE

INPUT Resources (faculty, staff, technology, materials, etc.) used to teach remedial Math courses. PROCESS Number of students taking remedial Math courses per year. OUTPUT % of students who completed remedial Math courses. OUTCOME % of students who enrolled in college Algebra after completing their remedial Math courses.

18 Linking Planning and Budgeting While strategic planning is about intended direction, priorities, and the future, budgeting is about resource-allocation decisions to conduct daily activities. While the work of strategic planners influence budgets, the work of budgeters determine the success of strategies. Organizations must be prepared to link the future to the present. A number of questions need to be answered to understand if the link is in place:

Is your strategic plan Is your budget ready for Are you ready for linking ready to be linked? linking? budgets to plans? 1. Is the plan broad enough to 1. Can you produce reports 1. Is the leadership team willing to encompass all aspects of the structured to show the resources make choices and ratify ideas? institution? spent on plan initiatives? 2. Does the plan spell out what 2. Can you produce reports that 2. Can anything, once started, be ‘success” would look like in enough show revenue improvements from stopped? (Is there a culture of detail to allow measurement of various initiatives? assessment? Is there courage?) progress? 3. Does the plan suggest what 3. Can you generate cost/benefit 3. Has learning been activities are the most critical for analysis for any strategic institutionalized? moving the institution toward recommendation? success? 4. Does the plan suggest what 4. Do all budget proposals within the 4. Has your organization found a way activities are necessary, but not budget process require justification in to generate the face-to-face critical, for moving the institution terms of plan principles, initiatives, communications of meetings without toward success? and priorities? the productivity-killing time demands and the logistical constraints of real meetings? 5. Does the plan suggest what 5. Is everything on the table? (Can activities are not necessary, but not we consider outsourcing, retraining, critical, for moving the institution new student markets, new toward success? technologies for learning and administration, or any other taboo area?) 6. Does the plan list values and ethics that describe initiatives and behaviors that will be shunned and not given support? 7. Does the plan describe methods of searching for opportunities in ways that allow for new budgets? 8. Is the planning process efficient and dynamic enough to regularly feed new ideas into the budgeting process?