1. Academic Affairs Budget FY18 Areas of Emphasis
Alan Lacy
Office of the Provost

2. Fiscal Management Teamwork
Unit Fiscal Agents and Lead Staff
College Administrators and Lead Staff
AVP for FM and Staff
Provost
Division of Finance and Planning
President and his Cabinet
Board of Trustees

3. My Invaluable Staff

4. Overview Agency Accounts Strategic Budgeted Carryover
Tenure Track Searches
Provost Enhancement Funding
NTT Funding – Proposed Changes

5. Agency Account Management
Indirects
Sales and public service
Materials fees
Student fees – mostly Student Affairs and Athletic
Field trips and foreign studies

6. Excess Funds Test (Policy 7.6.1)
The Comptroller's Office recommends that Budget Officers (fiscal agents) monitor their Agency account balances carefully to avoid any excess funds problems.
A general rule for the Budget Officer to follow is to carry over an unencumbered balance no larger than the amount equal to the account's highest month of expenditures.

7. Agency Account (con.) Intended to be money in – money out.
ISU has excess agency funds problem.
Doubled from FY16 to FY17
More scrutiny on use of agency accounts
Fiscal management training sessions are upcoming.
Sweeping excess funds in the future is a possibility.
Goal is to lower excess agency funds.

8. Strategic Budgeted Carryover
FY12 to FY13 $ 4,662,747
FY13 to FY14 $ 8,931,358
FY14 to FY15 $13,476,965
FY15 to FY16 $15,946,969
FY16 to FY17 $18,061,181
FY17 to FY18 $16,290,872 (est.)
FY18 to FY19 $12,000,000 target

9. SBC Emphasis Make SBC requests as specific as possible.
SBC should be for one-time expenses, not ongoing costs.
SBC should not be used as a saving account.
SBC must be used in designated FY.
S in SBC is for strategic. Plan ahead.
Asking Colleges to scrutinize all requests before submission to Provost.

10. Tenure Track Searches FY17 search/FY18 hire scorecard
Authorized 50 new positions and 7 reauthorized positions
48 successful searches
9 failed searches
FY18 search/FY19 hire authorizations
48 new positions
5 reauthorized positions

11. Tenure Track Hires FY13 56 authorized/48 hired 86%
Start early. Finish early. Try to complete searches by March 1.

12. Provost Enhancements FY18 Provost Enhancements
$3,027,893 – AIF-SBC
$673,154 – Provost budget
TBD Start-up funds for FY19 hires to be spend in FY18
FY19 Provost Enhancements – All requests will be made in regular budget process.

13. NTT Funding Sources NTT permanent funds in dept/college
NTT temporary funds in dept/college
NTT temporary funds from Provost IC
IC allocations for last five years
FY14 $4,682,790
FY15 $4,372,495
FY16 $4,454,945
FY17 $5,278,982
FY18 $6,311,065
How are full-time and part-time NTT faculty being funded?

14. Fall 2016 NTT Analysis Full-time NTT
100 FTE % were funded from permanent sources.
93 FTE % were funded from temporary sources.
$4,251,604 paid 55% Perm/45% Temp
Part-time NTT
36 FTE % were funded by permanent sources.
78.25 FTE % were funded by temporary sources.
$2,064,877 paid 31% Perm/69% Temp

15. NTT Funding Concept
Recommendation: Create a more efficient and flexible NTT funding system to better serve ISU in the future. Suggested Model: Centralize funding for NTT similar to AIF for TT.

16. Changes to NTT Funding
Funding for some current temporary positions is moved from AIF to NTT buckets permanently.
NTT buckets become part of centralized NTT fund similar to AIF.
When vacated, permanently funded NTT positions need approval for replacement.

17. Advantages
Similar funding system for both TT and NTT faculty will create efficiencies.
Can request permanent funding for NTT position.
Can request to convert vacant NTT to TT and vice versa as deemed desirable.
Departments/schools move closer to optimal ratio of TT to NTT faculty.

18. Advantages (con.)
More stability and certainty for annual funding of NTT faculty.
Annual IC requests are greatly reduced and return to original purpose of funding short-term replacement positions.
NTT instruction and funding sources more easily analyzed.
Ability to quickly adjust to enrollment shifts and new initiatives.

19. Disadvantages
NTT bucket would no longer be fully controlled by department/school.
NTT replacement would need approval – no longer automatic.
Replacement of NTT faculty would be slower than current decentralized system.

20. Next Steps
Meet with stakeholders to assess level of support. Are we going to pursue this?
If there is appropriate support:
Determine if there are collective bargaining consequences.
Determine preferred ratio of TT to NTT by department/school.
Work with AFMAC to develop a timely process for making NTT requests.
Determine timeline for implementation.

21. More Discussion to Come…

22. FY18 Fiscal Management Areas of Emphasis
Understand expectations and manage agency accounts appropriately.
Return to original purpose of SBC and make appropriate requests.
Focus on tenure track searches. Follow best practices and start early. Strive for >90% successful searches.
Strategically leverage Provost Enhancement opportunities.
Determine feasibility of revising NTT funding model.

23. Moving Forward – Stay Steady
Make short term and long term strategic decisions that benefit students.
Deal with uncertainty, minimize angst.
Advocate for your unit, but see the greater whole.
Communication is critical.
Most Important Fiscal Strategy
Recruit, recruit, recruit!
Retain, retain, retain!

24. Keep ‘Em Smiling!

25. Any Questions?