2. Above-Base Resource Request Training
September 4, 2018

3. Above-Base Resource Requests
$300K is allocated this year in the COS budget for Above-Base Resource Requests
BUT, we have large one-time funds available, so Program review requests will be used to ALSO rank other instructional equipment requests!
Review the Rubric before inputting your request – know how your request will be ranked
Rubric is found in the Resource Allocation Manual
Please explain how the action supports a District objective and department/unit outcome in the data field “Why this resource is required for this action”
Don’t just list a District Objective that the request links to – explain in a narrative form how the request links to it
“Sell” the connection to objectives and outcomes!

4. Above-Base Resource Requests
It might be of help to review definitions and examples of categories, found in the Resource Allocation Manual, before checking the respective box in Program Review:
Instructional Equipment
Non-instructional Equipment
Technology
Facilities
Facilities and Technology requests will undergo a feasibility study by the Facilities department and/or Technology Committee
Check with Facilities or Technology department first to see if your request is reasonable and “do-able”!
Include shipping and sales tax – no extra funds will be allocated after award
Budget Committee or VP Admin Services will notify parties if a resource request is deemed not feasible.

5. Above-Base Resource Requests
Other important items to remember:
Remember to attach or include data!
Data can be actual data attached, or can be simple reasoning, e.g., “all other department classrooms have an elmo, except this one”.
Above-Base resource requests will not be extracted if less than $500
Above-Base resource requests may not be funded through this mechanism if too costly – a recommended cap is $40K to $50K – but not enforced
Higher cost requests and needs are captured for other funding possibilities
If your Unit has one action, but multiple resource requests related to that action, please give each request a unique title that describes what is being requested (avoid RR#1, RR#2, or anything generic)

6. Above-Base Resource Requests
Ongoing funding needs cannot be requested through Above-Base resource requests!
If a one-time Above-Base resource request also requires ongoing funding, the source of that funding must be identified in the program review.
Above-Base funds are not for:
replenishing a budget for things already purchased
Regular supplies for which there is a supply budget
Training/tech training/conferences/field trips/speakers
Brochures/videos/marketing/promotional materials

7. Above-Base Resource Requests
Other notes:
Important: If a prior year resource was funded, the Action should be marked as completed.
Also, the resource request itself must be marked inactive (uncheck the “active” box)
This is a separate step from editing the Action as completed or discontinued, etc. It is found by clicking the edit box for the resource request section of TracDat; a subset under the Action
The author must put in an implementation year as current year for Above Base Requests, or resource request will not be extracted for ranking.
This occurs when editing the Action
Implementation year can be the following year for staffing requests

8. Scoring Rubric Criteria 3 2 1
Funding request is linked to District Objectives through its associated action
Demonstrates significant link to District Objectives
Demonstrates moderate link to District Objectives
Demonstrates poor connection to District Objectives
Demonstrates no connection to District Objectives
The action linked to the funding request is related to course/program/ department outcomes.
Demonstrates significant link to multiple course/program/ department outcomes
Demonstrates clear link to a course/program/ department outcome
Demonstrates weak link to course/program/ department outcome
Demonstrates no link to course/program/ department outcome
Resource request is connected to achieving the action
Demonstrates significant need for the achievement of the action
Demonstrates moderate need for the achievement of the action
Demonstrates minimal need for the achievement of the action
Demonstrates no need for the achievement of the action
Data supports the rationale for the action and need for resource request
Data significantly supports rationale for the action and need for resource request
Data moderately supports rationale for the action and need for resource request
Minimal data present with no clear connection to rationale for the action and need for resource request
No connection to rationale for the action or need for resource request
Funding request has been ranked by Service Area
Demonstrates a high ranking in the top quartile by specific Service Area
Demonstrates a ranking in the second quartile by specific Service Area
Demonstrates a ranking in the third quartile by specific Service Area
Demonstrates a ranking in the bottom quartile by specific Service Area

9. Notes from prior high-scoring requests
Resource Requested & Outcome Name
Resource Requested & Outcome Name comes from your PR “Action” and to achieve your “Action” you need a resource. It should be clear what your action is and why the resource will help you achieve your action.
Rationale with Supporting Data
Your “Action” is most often a result of identifying an improvement that is needed in your Unit. The Unit has collected, discussed, and analyzed data related to the identified need. The Unit should clearly and concisely make the case for needing the resource by connecting it to the data. It is necessary to make this understandable to a colleague from an outside Unit so that they can also draw the conclusion that the data supports the need for a resource to achieve the improvement.
- This is best done in the resource request section titled “Why this resource is required for this action”

10. Notes from prior high-scoring requests
Final Cost Estimated for consideration
This amount should be a set number that includes all associated costs (tax, shipping, installation, facility modifications to store/house new resource, etc.)
Funding request is linked to District Objective(s) through its associated action [significant (3), moderate (2), poor (1), or none (0)]
Tying a resource request to a District Objective is necessary to be scored in this section. The Unit should make the linkage clear in “Rationale” for your resource request – don’t just click the appropriate check-box to identify the District Objective link.
The action linked to the funding request is related to course/program/ department outcomes [significant (3), moderate (2), poor (1), or none (0)]
Tying a resource request to a program/course/service area outcome is necessary to be scored in this section. The Unit should make the linkage clear in “Rationale” for your resource request

11. Notes from prior high-scoring requests
Resource request is connected to achieving the action [significant (3), moderate (2), poor (1), or none (0)]
Remember that there is a difference between your “Action” and your “Resource Request”. Make the case for your request clear to a colleague from a Unit outside of your own.
Data support the rationale for the action and need for resource request [significantly (3), moderately (2), minimally (1), or not at all (0)]
You need to include data in your rationale. Data can come from a variety of sources. Some examples: PLO/SLO/SAO assessments, student surveys, quality and satisfaction feedback, job demand in the area, etc.
Funding request has been ranked by Service area (1st quartile = 3, 2nd quartile = 2, 3rd quartile = 1, 4th quartile = 0)
This column is decided by your Service Area, so your Unit’s resource request needs to be ranked as a high priority by your Service Area in order to receive a high score for this criteria.

12. Thoughts from Budget Committee members re: Ranking
It seems that the difference between a good, better, and best written resource request is:  that it makes a case for an action that will lead to an improvement that is connected to an identified District Objective, and additionally to a PLO/SLO/SAO
of which a resource is needed to accomplish this action, all of which has been clearly articulated through the inclusion of data to support the request. 
The problem is not what is written, it's what is missing, confused, confounded, inconsistent, or not clear to a reader from an outside Unit.  
PR writers should be scoring themselves based on the rubric and then what is "missing" from their request will become more clear to them.

13. Examples of highest ranked requests
For , the following three requests were the highest ranked. Please look them up on Research website, or see handout for more info:
District Police – Action: Create Inventory of New Videx Keys ($5,000)
Engineering – Action: Calibration of Tensile Test Extensometer ($1,000)
Facilities – Action: Restroom Maintenance (ADA Accessible upgrade for Alta Peak Restroom) ($45,000)

14. Program Review Audit form and Above-Base Resource Requests
The Program Review committee performs audits of various PR’s each year. Some items that the audit form asks:
Does the Unit evaluate its outcomes cycle of assessment (rather than simply provide a description of the cycle)?
Are the Unit’s Actions able to be completed in one year?
Are the Unit’s Actions specific?
Are the Unit’s Actions measurable?
Is the rationale for each of the Unit’s actions clearly connected to the Unit's strengths, needs and/or challenges?
Do resource requests clearly support the Action(s) that they are linked to?
Overall, does the Unit appropriately use data and data analysis to support its claims and/or conclusions?

16. Above Base Resource Request Training
Thank you for coming