CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH 2013-14 RESOURCE PLANNING PROCESS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Explanatory Notes …………………………..……………………...……….………...... i Co-Chairs’ Message ….……………………………………………….…….……......... 1 – 7 Membership of Resource Planning Process Task Force..………………..……...…. 8 2013-14 Sources and Uses Plan.……………………….…………………..……..…... 9 – 13 Campus Budget Plans…………………………………………………………………... 14 – 21 Appendix ………………………………..……………………………………….……..... A1 – D6 A. Budget Planning Parameters……... ………………………………….……… A1 – A2 B. Enrollment Data …..………………………………........................................ B1 C. Schedule of Meetings …………………………………………………………. C1 D. Glossary of Terms ……………………………………………………..……… D1 – D6
This report summarizes the 2013-14 Resource Planning Process at the end of the academic year in June 2013. The data and plans contained within are based on information available at this time. The final campus budget plans for 2013-14 may be different than what is contained in this report. However, this plan is being published to document the work done by the 2013-14 RPP Task Force.
Page
Explanatory Notes i
EXPLANATORY NOTES ON CONTENTS OF REPORT
MEMBERSHIP OF THE RESOURCE PLANNING PROCESS (RPP) TASK FORCE RPP is a representative task force of the campus leadership charged with the role of advising the President on matters related to the General Fund budget allocations for the coming fiscal year. The membership is comprised of two non-voting co-chairs, and ten voting members representing faculty, staff and student leadership. A representative of the California Faculty Association (CFA) Local Chapter and a representative of the staff unions are invited to participate as observers, and four individuals are appointed as staff support to the Task Force. SOURCES AND USES PLAN This plan prepared by the Office of Administration and Finance provides the Task Force with the perspective of the University's 2013-14 General Fund budget outlook. The plan is updated as new information becomes available. CAMPUS BUDGET PLANS This section provides a comprehensive summary of CSULB budget plans recommended for the upcoming 2013-14 budget year. APPENDIX BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETERS A summary of the State and System budget information upon which the campus budget planning parameters were based. ENROLLMENT DATA A display of the actual student enrollments for 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 as well as the preliminary enrollment targets for 2013-14 based on Governor’s proposed budget. SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS A schedule of the nine separate occasions on which the Task Force convened. Five working and planning meetings were held from December, 2012 through April, 2013. Three separate open hearings for the operating divisions were conducted in May, 2013 for a total of twenty hours of deliberation. GLOSSARY OF TERMS A collection of definitions of various terms and phrases specific to CSULB and the CSU used in the RPP Task Force report.
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH
Co-Chairs Message 1
To: F. King Alexander, President From: Donald Para, Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
Mary Stephens, Vice President for Administration and Finance Co-chairs, 2013-14 Resource Planning Process (RPP) Task Force
Date: June 24, 2013
Subject: 2013-14 RPP Task Force Budget Recommendations The purpose of this memo is to transmit the budget recommendations of the 2013-14
Resource Planning Process (RPP) Task Force. The final state budget and CSU funding
will not be known until later this summer, but the RPP Task Force believes it is
important to communicate budgetary plans to the campus based on what we currently
know.
In the past decade, CSULB has faced challenging budget circumstances that resulted in
substantial reductions to the resources of our operating divisions. During this time, the
campus prioritized our academic purpose, graduating students with highly-valued
degrees, minimizing the damage to academic quality and continuing to support the
schedule of classes and student progress to degree. Instead of losing ground on
retention and graduation rates, the campus posted the highest graduation rate in
campus history with the graduating class in 2012. Early indicators are that rising
retention will lead to further increases in graduation rates. This is a remarkable
achievement during this challenging period of which the campus can be proud.
As we move forward, we face impending challenges:
• More than ten percent of 2013-14 new resources from the Chancellor’s Office
are being awarded on the basis of competitive proposals.
Co-Chairs Message 2
• We expect technology to continue to drive changes in pedagogy and service
delivery.
• Future performance-based funding expectations being proposed by the governor
will require continued increases in retention and graduation rates and a new
focus on time to degree and four-year graduation rates.
Executive Summary
The Governor’s May Revise Budget contained no changes for the CSU budget from his
January proposal. The following summarizes our understanding of the budget situation:
• The governor’s 2013-14 budget proposal invests new, discretionary General
Fund resources in higher education, reversing a trend of decreased state support
over the past several years.
• The governor’s budget proposal includes $125 million to replace lost revenue
from the student fee rollback in fall 2012. Although this amount is $7 million less
than the estimated lost revenue for the CSU, the impact to CSULB’s budget is
manageable because of our conservative planning.
• The governor’s budget proposal also includes $125.1 million in additional
funding. Some of this new funding is for mandatory cost increases such as
healthcare, a modest compensation pool, and enrollment increases.
• The governor’s budget proposal has also set aside $17.2 million of the $125.1
million in additional funding for technology enhanced learning, student advising
and course redesign to improve access to classes and students’ progress to
degree. This $17.2 million will be competitively allocated to campuses based on
a request for proposal (RFP) process.
• CSULB’s estimated share of the discretionary funds beyond mandatory cost
increases, compensation, and the $17.2 million set-aside is $4.4 million. Of this
$4.4 million, $1 million has been reserved to address campus high priority needs
to be determined by the president and the vice presidents. The remaining $3.4
million has been tentatively allocated to the operating divisions on a pro rata
basis to fund operational requirements.
Co-Chairs Message 3
Campus budget planning by RPP has been completed based on this estimate of $3.4
million, the best estimate that was available during the spring.
Background
After several consecutive years of extremely challenging fiscal circumstances, California
appears to be experiencing some degree of economic and budget recovery. With tough
spending cuts enacted over the past several years and temporary revenues provided by
the passage of Proposition 30, the state budget situation for 2013-14 is favorable. The
governor’s budget proposal reinvests in both K-12 and higher education. The goal is to
provide all students in California with a high quality affordable education so that they all
have the opportunity to succeed professionally.
Current Budget Outlook
Governor Brown recently released his May Revise budget for the coming year. The May
Revise now projects slightly lower state revenues from those projected in the January
budget proposal. Despite this deterioration in state revenues, the May Revise does not
include any changes to the CSU budget for 2013-14.
The May Revise also maintains the governor’s commitment to a multi-year stable
funding plan for higher education. Under this plan, which is not a commitment, the CSU
would receive up to a 20-percent increase in General Fund appropriations over the next
four years (2013-14 through 2016-17). In exchange, the CSU is expected to freeze
resident tuition for that same period to ensure affordability for students and their
families. Additionally, the CSU is expected to achieve the following priorities: improve
graduation rates; increase the number of transfer students from community colleges;
increase the number of degrees completed, particularly by low-income students; and
reduce the cost per degree. The multi-year funding plan increases funding and
strengthens accountability to encourage the CSU to become more affordable and to
maintain quality and access over the long term.
Co-Chairs Message 4
As of this writing, the exact performance expectations tied to the annual funding
increases are still under discussion. The CSU is actively engaged with the governor
and legislative leaders to ensure that an adopted plan has measures and targeted
expectations that are realistic and appropriate to the CSU.
Preliminary Campus Budget Outlook and Planning (Spring Term Planning) While we do not know the final budget for CSULB, we are assuming receipt of some
discretionary funding this coming year. We know the CSU has set aside funding for
specific purposes. This includes traditional mandatory cost increases related to health
benefit costs, energy rate changes, and new space. Funding for a compensation
increase pool is subject to the collective bargaining process. Funding to alleviate
“bottleneck” courses and for student access and success initiatives will be allocated to
campuses based on a competitive process. Beyond these set-asides, CSULB is
expecting to receive about $4.4 million in discretionary funds partly due to an increase
in our enrollment target. Of this $4.4 million, $1 million has been reserved for campus
high priority needs to be determined by the president and vice presidents. The net
amount of $3.4 million in campus discretionary funds was the basis for RPP budget
planning this spring.
While we are grateful to be receiving a funding augmentation, this report would be
remiss not to include a reminder of recent budget reductions imposed on operating
divisions. CSULB operating divisions were collectively assessed budget cuts of $6.8
million in 2012-13 and $9.9 million in 2011-12. Fortunately, we have been utilizing one-
time restoration funds received in fall 2010 from Governor Schwarzenegger to help
mitigate the budget problem. While this one-time restoration funding has allowed for a
“soft landing” from these recent budget cuts, we must be mindful that the use of one-
time resources to mitigate permanent reductions may have masked some of the impact
of the reductions.
Co-Chairs Message 5
Results of Divisional Budget Planning The projected $3.4 million in campus discretionary funds were allocated to the operating
divisions on a pro rata basis. The divisions were asked to develop expenditure plans for
their share of discretionary funds. Divisions were asked to tie expenditure plans to the
Campus Strategic Priorities and Goals. Below is a summary at an aggregate level:
• The divisions have embraced the campus priority “graduate students with highly
valued degrees,” making students our highest priority.
• The majority of discretionary funding will go towards: increasing tenure track
hiring and RSCA funding to strengthen academic programs; expanding student
engagement and innovative instructional methods; improving progress to degree
and graduation rates; providing adequate schedule of classes and support
services; and improving student health and wellness.
• Other divisional priority areas include: refining our new approach to admissions;
supporting innovative technology; conducting a major comprehensive campaign;
and hiring essential staff positions.
Divisional plans are very preliminary and are based on our best estimate of available
campus discretionary resources. Both the amount of campus discretionary funds and
details for the use of these funds by divisions may change by the time we have a final
budget later this summer. Plans may also change depending on how much funding and
for what purpose CSULB receives some of the $17.2 million designated for “bottleneck”
courses and student access and success.
Recommendations of the Resource Planning Task Force
• RPP recommends that the $3.4 million in discretionary funds be allocated to all
campus operating divisions pro rata as prescribed in planning.
• The $1 million of campus discretionary funds reserved for high priority needs
should be allocated as determined by the vice presidents and the president.
Co-Chairs Message 6
• Since this $1 million is considered permanent base funding, any one-time uses of
these funds would be available for allocation the following year.
A summary of divisional budget plans and the proposed allocation of funds for campus
high priority needs are contained in the Campus Budget Plans section of this report.
Enrollment
For 2013-14, the campus funded enrollment target has been established at 27,198
resident FTES, an increase of 323 FTES or 1.2 percent over our 2012-13 target. At this
time, the campus enrollment plans for 2013-14 are based on our resident FTES to come
in approximately 2.0 percent over target for 2013-14. This increased enrollment
contributes positively to our net budget.
Due to our new approach to admissions based on major-specific criteria for all
academic programs, there is slightly more uncertainty about our enrollment
performance. However, because of effective enrollment management, indicators are
that we will be close to projections.
Concluding Thoughts
The Task Force recognizes the utilization of one-time restoration funds from 2010 has
mitigated the impact of budget reductions implemented over the past two years. As the
one-time restoration funds are now depleted, effects of budget reduction actions may be
felt in 2013-14.
Anticipated budget increases by no means fully offset severe reductions we have
experienced. The phrase, “The New Normal,” is being widely used to describe a
situation of reduced but stable funding. This phrase characterizes our expectations for
the coming years. At the same time, the world around us and the needs of our students
continue to shift; we cannot stand still. New initiatives such as technology must be
pursued despite limited resources. The RPP Task Force perceives that the current
Co-Chairs Message 7
moment is a time of significant opportunity to accomplish some campus priorities and
goals with the projected discretionary funding that we have not seen in several years.
The Task Force would like to acknowledge the continued hard work and resolve shown
by the entire university community. CSULB remains a vital, premiere institution of higher
education. This would not be possible without the energy, creativity, dedication and
positive attitude of our faculty, staff and students.
C: Associated Students Officers All CSULB Employees
Membership 8
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH RESOURCE PLANNING PROCESS TASK FORCE
2013-14 MEMBERSHIP NON-VOTING Don Para, Provost and Senior Vice President, Academic Affairs CO-CHAIRS: Mary Stephens, Vice President for Administration and Finance VOTING Carl Fisher, Chair, Faculty Personnel Policies Council MEMBERS:
Keith Freesemann, Chair, Program Assessment and Review Council Chris Brazier, Chair, Curriculum and Educational Policies Council Praveen Soni, Chair, University Resources Council
Daniel O’Connor, Chair, Academic Senate
Sharon Taylor, Representative, Division of Administration and Finance Mary Ann Takemoto, Representative, Division of Student Services Michael Losquadro, Representative, Division of University Relations and
Development
Marshall Thomas, Staff Representative, Academic Senate John Haberstroh, President, Associated Students, Inc.
OBSERVERS: Teri Yamada, Representative, California Faculty Association
STAFF: David Dowell, Vice Provost and Director of Strategic Planning Marianne Hata, Assistant Vice President, Academic Resources, Academic Affairs
Ted Kadowaki, Associate Vice President, Budget and University Services Maggie Wang, Budget Director, Administration and Finance
CHANGESFY 2012-13 AFFECTING 13-14 FY 2013-14
2012-13 Net State Support 121,928,936$
2012-13 Revenues and Reimbursements State University Tuition Fee 178,191,177 Other Receipts 20,275,607 Use of One-Time Reserves 5,196,450 (5,196,450) Total 2012-13 General Fund Budget 325,592,170$
2013-14 BEGINNING BUDGET 320,395,720$
Adjustment to retirement rate 4,211,900 Backfill 2012-13 Tuition Fee Rollback 11,342,300 Mandatory cost increase - health 2,651,000 Mandatory cost increase - energy 373,000 Enrollment growth funding 1,429,000 Other minor adjustments (381,300)
State University Tuition Fee adjustment 1,318,000 Non-Resident Tuition 500,000 Other Receipts adjustment -
TOTAL 2013-14 GENERAL FUND SOURCES 341,839,620$
USES:2012-13 Internal Budget
Division budgets 171,642,353$ University-wide budgets 153,949,817 Total 2012-13 Internal Budget 325,592,170$
Changes to 2012-13 Internal Budget Enrollment increase instructional cost (27,835 - 27,567 FTES * $1,990) 533,320 Make permanent one-time division funding from increased revenues 1,500,000 Make permanent benefit savings to divisions 1,938,945 Revenue sharing agreement with CIE 200,000
CMS Enterprise maintenance cost increase (2 years) 300,000 Set-aside for campus high priority needs 1,000,000
Pro rata allocation to operating divisions 3,439,485 Adjusted 2012-13 General Fund Budget 334,503,920$
2013-14 EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENT CHANGESDirected/Earmarked by System Office
PERS retirement rate change 4,211,900 Health and dental benefits rate changes 2,651,000 Energy rate changes & consumption 373,000 State University Grant (incremental increase) 99,800
TOTAL 2013-14 GENERAL FUND USES 341,839,620
SURPLUS / (DEFICIT) for 2013-14 -$
Sources and Uses 9
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH
SOURCES:
2013-14 BUDGET PLANNINGSOURCES AND USES PLAN
BASED ON ENROLLMENT TARGET OF 27,198 RESIDENT FTES
2012-13 General Fund Budget
Net Budget Plan Changes
Adjustment to Revenues and Reimbursements
Sources and Uses 10
California State University, Long Beach 2013-14 Resource Planning Process
Sources and Uses Plan
Explanatory Notes The 2013-14 Sources and Uses Plan estimates the impact of budget decisions made by the State, by the CSU System Office, and the Long Beach campus on the resource allocations for the upcoming year. The plan is based on the CSU budget included in the Governor’s January Budget Proposal and the May Revision and incorporates planning parameters that have been provided to the campuses by the Chancellor and the CSU April Budget Allocation letter B2013-01 dated April 9, 2013. The plan does not include any changes that could occur with legislative proceedings that take place before the final budget is passed. The following notes provide an explanation of the numbers shown on the plan. Other related notes and recommendations on the budget strategy and selected topics can be found in the sections following this plan.
SOURCES 2012-13 General Fund Base Budget Net state support and budgeted revenues and reimbursements detailed in the 2012-13 CSULB Internal Budget Document.
2012-13 Net State Support $121,928,936 Represents portion of the University’s state budget supported by tax revenues.
2012-13 Revenues & Reimbursements
State University Tuition Fee $178,191,177 Represents portion of the University’s budget supported by undergraduate, teacher credential and graduate student tuition fees.
Other Receipts $20,275,607 Represents portion of the University’s budget comprised of fees and miscellaneous reimbursements for services. Examples include student health center fee, application fee, non-resident tuition, transcript fees, etc. Use of One-Time Reserves $ 5,196,450 Represents one-time use of reserve funds in 2012-13 to balance the operating budget and mitigate further budget reductions.
Total 2012-13 General Fund Budget $325,592,170
Sources and Uses 11
Delete: Use of One-Time Reserves <$ 5,196,450> Delete one-time use of reserve funds in 2012-13 to balance the operating budget and mitigate further budget reductions that is no longer available in 2013-14.
Net Budget Plan Changes The net budget plan changes in the campus’s General Fund allocation is based on CSU budget allocations detailed in the CSU system coded memorandum B2013-01 on the 2013-14 Governor’s Budget Allocations. Adjustment to retirement rate $4,211,900
Change in employer-paid contribution rates in order to maintain actuarial soundness of the system and meet defined benefit pension obligations. Backfill 2012-13 Tuition Fee rollback $11,342,300 CSULB’s share of the $125 million General Fund replacement provided to the CSU for foregone revenue due to rolling back student tuition fee rates to 2011-12 rates. Mandatory cost increase – health premiums $2,651,000 Funding to cover the permanent increase in employer-paid health care costs resulting from January 2013 premium increases. Mandatory cost increase – energy $ 373,000 Funding to cover the permanent increase in energy related costs (electricity, water, sewer, natural gas) resulting from usage and rate increases. Enrollment growth funding $1,429,000 Funding to support the increase in resident full-time equivalent students (FTES) of 323 (26,875 to 27,198 FTES). Other minor adjustments <$ 381,300> Minor funding adjustments for state interest assessment and campus tuition fee discounts.
Adjustment to Revenues and Reimbursements State University Tuition Fee increase $1,318,000 This revenue increase projection is contingent on achieving our 2013-14 college year resident enrollment goal of 27,835 FTES, approximately 2.3 percent over target.
Non-Resident Tuition $ 500,000
This revenue increase is due to projected growth in the number of non-resident students from the budgeted enrollment.
Total 2013-14 General Fund Resources $341,839,620
Sources and Uses 12
USES 2012-13 Internal Budget The budgets for operating divisions and university-wide programs as detailed in the 2012-13 Internal Budget document.
Division budgets $171,642,353 Represents budget allocations for all operating divisions.
University-wide budgets $153,949,817 Represents budgets for general, necessary, or unavoidable costs that benefit the entire campus rather than a particular division.
2012-13 Internal Budget $325,592,170 Changes to 2012-13 Internal Budget Enrollment increase instructional cost $ 533,320
Funding provided to Academic Affairs to support instructional costs related to the increase in enrollment. Make permanent one-time funding from increased revenues
$ 1,500,000 Permanent funding provided to all operating divisions from increased revenues from higher enrollments. Make permanent benefit savings to divisions
$ 1,938,945 Permanent funding provided to all operating divisions of benefit cost savings attributable to workforce/salary cost reductions. Revenue sharing agreement with CIE $ 200,000 Funding agreement with the Center for International Education to share incremental revenues resulting from growth in international student enrollments. CMS Enterprise maintenance cost increase $ 300,000 Average increase in maintenance costs (hardware, software, service contracts) over next two fiscal years of Common Management System (CMS), the primary administrative system for Finance, Human Resources, and Student Operations. Set-aside for campus high priority needs $ 1,000,000 Funds reserved to address campus high priority needs to be determined by the President and the Vice Presidents. Pro rata allocations to operating divisions $ 3,439,485 Represents pro rata allocation of discretionary resources to the operating divisions
Sources and Uses 13
in order to fund operational requirements and advance campus strategic priorities and goals.
ADJUSTED 2012-13 GENERAL FUND BUDGET $334,503,920 2013-14 CHANGES IN CAMPUS EXPENDITURE REQUIREMENTS Represents budget changes to division and university-wide allocations. Directed / Earmarked by System Office
PERS retirement rate change $4,211,900 Represents change in employer-paid contribution rates in order to maintain actuarial soundness of the system and meet defined benefit pension obligations.
Health and dental benefits rate changes $2,651,000 Represents permanent increases in employer-paid health and dental care costs due to annual premium increases.
Energy rate changes & consumption $ 373,000 This is the estimated cost of increases in electricity, natural gas, and water/sewer rates. The estimate is based on the campuses’ proportional share of custodial square footage included in the 2012-13 Capital Planning Design and Construction facility database. State University Grant (SUG) $ 99,800 Permanent budget adjustment associated with the financial aid set aside of 33 percent of increased state university tuition fee revenues. This adjustment is a preliminary projection of changes that will occur in campus fiscal year 2013-14 budgeted SUG allocations.
Total 2013-14 General Fund Uses $341,839,620
Surplus / (Deficit) for 2013-14 $ - 0 -
Projected Campus Discretionary Funds 4,439,485$
Campus High Priority Needs (1,000,000)$
Available for Divisions 3,439,485$
PRO RATA DISTRIBUTION TO DIVISIONS
2012-13 Pro RataBase Budget % Distribution
Academic Affairs 118,078,307$ 68.8% 2,366,133$ Admin and Finance 34,333,377$ 20.0% 687,995$ Student Services 10,069,561$ 5.9% 201,781$ University Relations & Devel 4,655,667$ 2.7% 93,293$ Athletics 3,076,909$ 1.8% 61,657$ President's Office 1,428,532$ 0.8% 28,626$
Totals 171,642,353$ 100.0% 3,439,485$
Campus Budget Plans 14
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH2013-14 BUDGET PLANNING
BASED ON GOVERNOR'S JANUARY BUDGET PROPOSAL & C.O. ALLOCATIONS DATED 4-09-13
Campus Budget Plans 15
BASE FUNDING FROM GENERAL FUND:
Veterans Center 220,000$ Staffing, operating expense, and space lease costs for the Veterans Center.
Campus Dispatchers 133,000$ Cost of additional police dispatchers required to properly monitor the network of campussecurity cameras.
Police Officers (Beachside expansion) 188,000$ Cost of additional police officers required to adequately patrol and respond to incidents atthe off-campus housing site Beachside College.
Disabled Student Services 150,000$ Additional resources to Disabled Student Services to adequately support the increasing numbersof students with disabilities and to help offset the increasing cost of specialized services.
AIM Center staffing (ATI) 115,000$ Resources to support the Accessible Instructional Materials (AIM) Center that will provideinstructional materials in an accessible format for students and assist faculty in making theircourse materials more accessible to students with disabilities.
Captioning Services (ATI) 55,000$ Resources to provide just-in-time captioning of selected live events and web delivered media.
Campus Shuttles 139,000$ Additional resources required to support the campus shuttle program as the demand for the shuttles, the number of shuttles and routes, and the operating costs continue to rise.
TOTAL BASE FUNDING 1,000,000$
NOTES:
A top funding priority in FY14-15 will be assuring that adequate dollars are available forthe preparation and equipping of PH1&2 for re-occupancy.
It is assumed that the following Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) needs will be funded with Student Excellence Fee/Technology dollars: Web accessibility coordinator - Someone to lead, train, and support faculty and staff 75,000$ Information campaign - Sensitize campus community to accessibility needs 10,000$ Training institute - Facilitate ongoing training, innovation, and networking 30,000$ Faculty champions - Create ATI specialist/go to person in each department 35,000$
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH2013-14 BUDGET PLANNING
CAMPUS HIGH PRIORITY NEEDS
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
QU
ALIT
Y O
F FA
CULT
Y AN
D ST
AFF
Incr
ease
tenu
re tr
ack
hirin
g to
stre
ngth
en a
cade
mic
pro
gram
s,
whi
le e
nhan
cing
tenu
re d
ensit
y an
d fa
culty
div
ersit
y.Hi
re te
nure
trac
k fa
culty
bey
ond
repl
acem
ent o
f re
tirem
ents
$666
,133
Cont
inue
ess
entia
l sta
ff hi
ring.
Hire
add
ition
al st
aff i
n hi
gh n
eeds
are
as b
eyon
d re
plac
emen
t of r
etire
men
ts$2
40,0
00
STU
DEN
T RE
TEN
TIO
N A
ND
GRA
DUAT
ION
Expa
nd a
ctiv
e le
arni
ng th
at fo
ster
s stu
dent
eng
agem
ent,
incl
udin
g co
llabo
rativ
e le
arni
ng, u
nder
grad
uate
and
gra
duat
e re
sear
ch,
writ
ing
inte
nsiv
e co
urse
s, in
tern
atio
nal s
tudy
, out
-of-c
lass
room
ac
tivity
, and
act
ive
lear
ning
.
Prov
ide
fund
ing
to c
olle
ges t
o lo
wer
cla
ss si
ze in
w
ritin
g in
tens
ive
cour
ses
$300
,000
Expa
nd C
SULB
’s u
se o
f ins
truc
tiona
l met
hods
bas
ed o
n in
nova
tive
tech
nolo
gy.
Hire
inst
ruct
iona
l des
igne
r in
Acad
emic
Te
chno
logy
$75,
000
INFO
RMAT
ION
TEC
HNO
LOG
Y SE
RVIC
ESAg
gres
sivel
y ex
pand
the
use
of te
chno
logy
-bas
ed m
odes
of
inst
ruct
ion
such
as f
lippe
d, h
ybrid
, and
on-
line,
to e
nhan
ce th
e le
arni
ng e
xper
ienc
es o
f our
stud
ents
.
Crea
te a
new
pos
ition
, Dire
ctor
of T
each
ing
and
Lear
ning
Inno
vatio
n$1
10,0
00
Aggr
essiv
ely
expa
nd th
e us
e of
tech
nolo
gy-b
ased
mod
es o
f in
stru
ctio
n su
ch a
s flip
ped,
hyb
rid, a
nd o
n-lin
e, to
enh
ance
the
lear
ning
exp
erie
nces
of o
ur st
uden
ts.
Hire
add
itona
l sta
ff in
ATS
to fr
ee u
p th
e cu
rren
t LM
S di
rect
or to
focu
s on
blen
ded
inst
ruct
ion.
$75,
000
RESE
ARCH
, SCH
OLA
RLY
AND
CREA
TIVE
ACT
IVIT
IES
Supp
ort C
SULB
facu
lty R
SCA,
incl
udin
g un
derg
radu
ate
and
grad
uate
rese
arch
opp
ortu
nitie
s.
Expa
nd R
SCA
oppo
rtun
ities
usin
g a
perf
orm
ance
fu
ndin
g pr
oces
s$4
00,0
00
Incr
ease
ince
ntiv
es fo
r fac
ulty
and
staf
f to
seek
ext
erna
l fun
ding
to
incr
ease
spon
sore
d pr
ogra
m d
olla
r lev
els t
o a
targ
et o
f $50
M
annu
ally
, whi
le m
aint
aini
ng a
n av
erag
e in
dire
ct ra
te a
bove
15%
.
Mov
e RS
CA fu
ndin
g of
f of F
&A
and
use
avai
labl
e F&
A fu
nds t
o co
ntin
ue a
nd e
xpan
d in
cent
ives
to
deve
lop
exte
rnal
fund
ing
$200
,000
FACI
LITI
ES A
ND
SUST
AIN
ABLE
DEV
ELO
PMEN
T
Expa
nd o
ur p
rogr
am o
f exp
erim
enta
l cla
ssro
oms t
o te
st o
ut
inno
vatio
ns in
tech
nolo
gy a
nd d
esig
n w
ith p
artic
ipat
ing
facu
lty.
Build
mor
e hi
gh te
chno
logy
cla
ssro
oms
$300
,000
ACAD
EMIC
AFF
AIRS
TO
TAL
$2,3
66,1
33
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sD
ivis
ion
of
Aca
dem
ic A
ffa
irs
Use
of P
ro R
ata
Divi
sion
Allo
catio
n
Not
es: W
e ar
e as
sum
ing
that
we
may
rece
ive
fund
ing
via
the
syst
emw
ide
com
petit
ion
for c
ours
e re
desig
n an
d st
uden
t su
cces
s effo
rts;
shou
ld th
is ch
ange
, Aca
dem
ic A
ffairs
' prio
ritie
s wou
ld a
lso n
eed
to b
e ad
just
ed.
Campus Budget Plans 16
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
ENRO
LLM
ENT
PLAN
NIN
G A
ND
MAN
AGEM
ENT
Adeq
uate
ly c
oord
inat
e an
d su
ppor
t new
app
roac
h to
adm
issio
ns
base
d on
maj
or-s
peci
fic c
riter
ia w
hich
is c
entr
al to
impr
ovin
g st
uden
t suc
cess
in th
e m
ajor
and
tim
ely
grad
uatio
n.Hi
re a
dditi
onal
key
staf
f in
Enro
llmen
t Ser
vice
s$1
50,0
00
STU
DEN
T RE
TEN
TIO
N A
ND
GRA
DUAT
ION
Use
cur
rent
tech
nolo
gies
to fa
cilit
ate
use
of d
egre
e au
dits
, an
alyt
ical
repo
rtin
g, a
nd su
ppor
ting
advi
sors
and
stud
ents
as t
hey
navi
gate
the
degr
ee.
Hire
add
ition
al st
aff i
n En
rollm
ent S
ervi
ces t
o im
plem
ent E
-Adv
ising
syst
ems
$174
,000
INFO
RMAT
ION
TEC
HNO
LOG
Y SE
RVIC
ESEn
sure
inst
ruct
iona
l tec
hnol
ogy
mee
ts m
inim
um c
ampu
s st
anda
rds a
nd c
an su
ppor
t ins
truc
tiona
l met
hods
incl
udin
g in
nova
tive
tech
nolo
gy.
Incr
ease
wire
less
acc
ess p
oint
s thr
ough
out
cam
pus
$200
,000
Ensu
re in
stru
ctio
nal t
echn
olog
y m
eets
min
imum
cam
pus
stan
dard
s and
can
supp
ort i
nstr
uctio
nal m
etho
ds in
clud
ing
inno
vativ
e te
chno
logy
.
Hire
add
ition
al N
etw
ork
and
Serv
er st
aff t
o ad
equa
tely
supp
ort t
echn
olog
y in
fras
truc
ture
$150
,000
FISC
AL R
ESO
URC
ES A
ND
QU
ALIT
Y IM
PRO
VEM
ENT
Deve
lop
stra
tegi
c pl
ans f
or th
e up
com
ing
perio
d of
redu
ced
but
stab
le b
udge
ts.
Impl
emen
t pro
cess
impr
ovem
ent m
easu
res
thro
ugho
ut th
e di
visio
n. O
ften
, a sm
all
inve
stm
ent i
s req
uire
d be
fore
a la
rge
retu
rn is
re
alize
d.
$14,
000
ADM
INIS
TRAT
ION
AN
D FI
NAN
CE T
OTA
L$6
88,0
00
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sD
ivis
ion
of
Ad
min
istr
ati
on a
nd
Fin
an
ceU
se o
f Pro
Rat
a Di
visi
on A
lloca
tion
Not
es: W
e ar
e as
sum
ing
that
we
may
rece
ive
fund
ing
via
the
syst
emw
ide
com
petit
ion
for c
ours
e re
desig
n an
d st
uden
t suc
cess
ef
fort
s; sh
ould
this
chan
ge, A
dmin
& F
inan
ce p
riorit
ies w
ould
also
nee
d to
be
adju
sted
.
Campus Budget Plans 17
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
STU
DEN
T RE
TEN
TIO
N A
ND
GRA
DUAT
ION
Impr
ove
stud
ent h
ealth
and
wel
lnes
s.
Hire
add
ition
al st
aff s
uppo
rt in
Cou
nsel
ing
&
Psyc
holo
gica
l Ser
vice
s to
mee
t the
crit
ical
de
man
d of
incr
easin
g st
uden
t men
tal h
ealth
pr
oble
ms,
resp
ond
to c
risis
situa
tions
, and
co
nsul
t with
facu
lty a
nd st
aff o
n ur
gent
stud
ent
situa
tions
.
Supp
ort s
tude
nt a
cces
s and
div
ersit
y
Hire
add
ition
al st
aff s
uppo
rt in
Out
reac
h an
d Sc
hool
Rel
atio
ns to
ass
ist w
ith p
rogr
ams s
uch
as
the
Long
Bea
ch C
olle
ge P
rom
ise, o
utre
ach
to
unde
r ser
ved
com
mun
ities
, enr
ollm
ent y
ield
ac
tiviti
es, a
nd sc
hool
visi
ts in
targ
et
com
mun
ities
.
Expa
nd su
ppor
t for
stud
ent e
ngag
emen
t
Incr
ease
staf
f sup
port
in th
e St
uden
t Res
ourc
e Ce
nter
s, C
lub
Spor
ts a
nd R
ecre
atio
n, a
nd th
e Ce
nter
for S
chol
arsh
ip In
form
atio
n. R
etai
n st
uden
t ass
istan
ts to
cre
ate
a pe
er e
duca
tion
cam
paig
n w
ith o
ur A
lcoh
ol, T
obac
co a
nd O
ther
Dr
ugs C
omm
ittee
.
STU
DEN
T SE
RVIC
ES T
OTA
L$2
01,7
81
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sD
ivis
ion
of
Stu
den
t Se
rvic
esU
se o
f Pro
Rat
a D
ivis
ion
Allo
catio
n
Campus Budget Plans 18
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
EXTE
RNAL
SU
PPO
RT A
ND
COM
MU
NIT
Y RE
LATI
ON
S
Cond
uct a
maj
or c
ompr
ehen
sive
cam
paig
n
Reta
in a
n ou
tsid
e ag
ency
to d
evel
op b
rand
ing,
cu
lmin
atin
g in
the
crea
tion
of a
pub
lishe
d ca
sed
stat
emen
t, an
ess
entia
l and
pow
erfu
l co
mm
unic
atio
ns to
ol th
at w
ill in
form
eve
ry
aspe
ct o
f mes
sagi
ng a
nd d
esig
n fo
r the
ca
mpa
ign.
$93,
293
UN
IVER
SITY
REL
ATIO
NS
AND
DEVE
LOPM
ENT
TOTA
L$9
3,29
3
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sD
ivis
ion
of
Un
iver
sity
Rel
ati
ons
an
d D
evel
opm
ent
Use
of P
ro R
ata
Divi
sion
Allo
catio
n
Campus Budget Plans 19
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
STU
DEN
T RE
TEN
TIO
N A
ND
GRA
DUAT
ION
Prom
ote
stud
ent s
ucce
ss p
rogr
ams a
nd in
itiat
ives
. Ra
ise
grad
uatio
n ra
tes a
nd p
rogr
ess t
o de
gree
.
Incr
ease
fina
ncia
l sup
port
to th
e Bi
cker
staf
f Ac
adem
ic C
ente
r for
Stu
dent
-Ath
lete
Aca
dem
ic
Serv
ices
, the
prim
ary
acad
emic
adv
ising
uni
t for
th
e at
hlet
ics p
rogr
am
$30,
000
INFO
RMAT
ION
TEC
HNO
LOG
Y SE
RVIC
ES
Refr
esh
com
pute
r tec
hnol
ogy
and
enha
nce
the
use
of se
lf-se
rvic
e te
chno
logy
.
Switc
h tic
ketin
g se
rvic
es to
a n
ew v
endo
r tha
t w
ill re
sult
in b
ette
r ser
vice
to o
ur st
uden
ts, t
icke
t ho
lder
s, a
nd d
onor
s$3
1,65
7
ATHL
ETIC
S TO
TAL
$61,
657
Campus Budget Plans 20
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sA
thle
tics
Use
of P
ro R
ata
Divi
sion
Allo
catio
n
Prio
rity
and
Goa
lsPr
opos
ed p
roje
ctAm
ount
STU
DEN
T RE
TEN
TIO
N A
ND
GRA
DUAT
ION
Cont
inue
to su
ppor
t stu
dent
succ
ess p
rogr
ams a
nd in
itiat
ives
.Su
ppor
t var
ious
stud
ent s
ucce
ss p
rogr
ams a
nd
oppo
rtun
ities
for s
tude
nt e
ngag
emen
t in
cam
pus,
com
mun
ity, a
nd n
atio
nal i
nitia
tives
. $1
1,50
0
INFO
RMAT
ION
TEC
HNO
LOG
Y SE
RVIC
ES
Refr
esh
and
upda
te c
ompu
ter t
echn
olog
y.
Purc
hase
har
dwar
e an
d im
plem
ent s
oftw
are
prog
ram
s to
faci
litat
e an
d en
hanc
e O
ffice
's ab
ility
to su
ppor
t str
ateg
ic in
itiat
ives
acr
oss
divi
sions
.
$8,6
26
QU
ALIT
Y O
F FA
CULT
Y AN
D ST
AFF
Enha
nce
trai
ning
and
dev
elop
men
t opp
ortu
nitie
s for
staf
f.Li
ft re
stric
tion
on p
rofe
ssio
nal d
evel
opm
ent
trai
ning
to su
ppor
t key
cam
pus s
trat
egic
in
itiat
ives
.$8
,500
OFF
ICE
OF
THE
PRES
IDEN
T TO
TAL
$28,
626
2013
-14
Reso
urce
Pla
nnin
g Pr
oces
sO
ffic
e of
th
e P
resi
den
tU
se o
f Pro
Rat
a Di
visi
on A
lloca
tion
Campus Budget Plans 21
Budget Planning Parameters A1
SUMMARY OF GOVERNOR’S 2013-14 BUDGET PROPOSAL The 2013-14 Governor’s Budget Proposal was released 1/10/13 and it included some positive support for higher education. Here is an excerpt from the budget summary document: The Budget chooses to invest new, discretionary General Fund resources in higher education because the Administration believes that maintaining a quality, affordable system is critical to the future of the state. The Budget aims to enhance the quality of California’s higher education institutions by making them more affordable, decreasing time to completion, improving overall completion rates in all higher education segments, and improving the transfer rate of Community college students to four-year colleges and universities. Here is a summary of the 2013-14 Governor’s Budget Proposal for the CSU:
1. Confirmation that the $125 million fee buyout allocation is included in the proposal. 2. An additional $125.1 million (about 5% increase) to implement reforms that will make
available the courses students need and help them progress through college efficiently, using technology to deliver quality education to greater numbers of students in high-demand courses, improving course management and planning, using faculty more effectively, and increasing use of summer sessions. No longer enrollment-based funding approach.
3. Change in statute allowing CSU to negotiate higher employee contributions to healthcare. (100/90 reduced to 80/80)
4. State continues to fund retirement contributions based on 2012-13 employees. If CSU adds employees or increases wages, CSU will be responsible for associated costs.
5. Lease debt service and other adjustments totaling $19 million. This is really just an “in-and-out”.
6. Bond debt service transfer to General Fund of $198 million. This is also an “in-and-out”. However, future capital outlay funds and debt service costs become sole responsibility of the CSU.
7. #5 and #6 above can make it appear that the year-over-year increase is much larger. The true, meaningful increase figure is really $250 million (#1 and #2 above).
8. Intent to further increase CSU funding in 2014-15 by 5 percent and by 4 percent in each of the subsequent two years. In return, expectation that current tuition and fee levels will be maintained over the next four years.
9. Cap on number of units students can take while receiving state subsidy. First two years of proposal, cap is at 150 percent of standard units (180 units). In later years, cap is at 125 percent of standard units (150 units).
• No specific indication yet how the additional $125 million will be utilized or allocated.
• Early indication – funds are not for restoration but for efficiency and access • Chancellor will be seeking advice/ideas from Presidents
Projected Campus Discretionary Funds 4,439,485$
Campus High Priority Needs (1,000,000)$
Available for Divisions 3,439,485$
PRO RATA DISTRIBUTION TO DIVISIONS
2012-13 Pro RataBase Budget % Distribution
Academic Affairs 118,078,307$ 68.8% 2,366,133$ Admin and Finance 34,333,377$ 20.0% 687,995$ Student Services 10,069,561$ 5.9% 201,781$ University Relations & Devel 4,655,667$ 2.7% 93,293$ Athletics 3,076,909$ 1.8% 61,657$ President's Office 1,428,532$ 0.8% 28,626$
Totals 171,642,353$ 100.0% 3,439,485$
Budget Planning Parameters A2
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH2013-14 BUDGET PLANNING
BASED ON GOVERNOR'S JANUARY BUDGET PROPOSAL & C.O. ALLOCATIONS DATED 4-09-13
FTES
BY
CO
LLEG
ES A
ND
INST
RU
CTI
ON
AL
AR
EAS
% O
F%
OF
TOTA
LSU
MMER
FALL
SPRI
NGTO
TAL
TOTA
LTO
TAL
SUMM
ERFA
LLSP
RING
TOTA
LTO
TAL
TOTA
L
4,288
04,7
85
4,9
33
4,8
59.00
17
%4,9
45
19
5,207
4,975
5,109
.88
18%
5,067
2,290
02,1
38
2,1
21
2,1
30
8%
2,165
52,1
26
2,1
29
2,1
33
8%
2,171
1,674
231,5
47
1,4
16
1,5
04
5%
1,354
191,4
31
1,2
87
1,3
78
5%
1,283
1,795
01,8
95
1,9
07
1,9
01
7%
1,969
02,0
00
1,9
49
1,9
75
7%
1,969
3,041
03,1
04
2,7
99
2,9
52
10
%3,0
02
0
3,023
2,792
2,908
10%
2,882
4,179
04,5
08
4,1
13
4,3
11
15
%4,4
03
0
4,566
3,970
4,268
15%
4,294
10,70
9
0
10,95
5
9,7
60
10
,358
37%
10,52
4
0
11,06
7
9,692
10,38
0
37
%10
,301
140
0
165
10
3
134
0%
143
0
170
115
143
1%
141
28,11
6
23
29,09
7
27
,152
28,14
7
10
0%28
,503
4329
,590
26
,909
28
,293
100%
28,10
7
26,87
5
(1
)26
,875
(2)
27,19
8
(3
)
Not
es:
*In
clud
es E
duca
tiona
l Opp
ortu
nitie
s P
rogr
am (E
OP
), A
cade
mic
Affa
irs (V
PA
A),
and
Ath
letic
s D
epar
tmen
t.
(1)
(2)
(3)
% O
F TO
TAL
PROJ
ECTE
D20
11-1
2
Enrollment Data B1
Cam
pus R
esid
ent T
arge
t
Tot
al, C
olleg
es/In
stru
ctio
n
Eng
inee
ring
The
Arts
Nat
ural
Scien
ces &
Mat
h
Bus
ines
s Adm
inist
ratio
n
Lib
eral
Arts
Edu
catio
n / E
DSS
Resid
ent a
nd N
R ta
rget
Hea
lth &
Hum
an S
ervic
es
COLL
EGE/
DIVI
SION
15% 8% 6% 6% 11%
18% 8% 5% 7% 10%
7% 11%
17% 8% 5%
ACTU
ALPR
OJEC
TED
2011
-12
2013
-14 % O
F TO
TAL
PROJ
ECTE
D20
12-1
3 % O
F TO
TAL
ACTU
AL20
12-1
3
100%
100%
Oth
er U
nive
rsity
Pro
gram
s*
15%
38% 0%
15%
37% 1%
Cam
pus
enro
llmen
t tar
gets
incl
ude
resi
dent
and
non
-res
iden
t stu
dent
s ba
sed
on th
e G
over
nor's
Bud
get.
Cam
pus
is fu
nded
for g
row
th in
resi
dent
stu
dent
s on
ly.
In 2
011-
12, i
n re
spon
se to
sta
te b
udge
t def
icit,
th
e C
hanc
ello
r's O
ffice
ann
ounc
ed p
lans
to re
duce
sys
tem
wid
e en
rollm
ent i
f cut
s to
the
CS
U b
ecom
es
larg
er.
CS
ULB
's fu
nded
targ
et is
26,
875
resi
dent
FTE
S, w
hich
is a
slig
ht in
crea
se o
f 578
resi
dent
FTE
S
from
201
0-11
.
Cam
pus
enro
llmen
t tar
gets
incl
ude
resi
dent
and
non
-res
iden
t stu
dent
s ba
sed
on th
e G
over
nor's
Bud
get.
Cam
pus
is fu
nded
for g
row
th in
resi
dent
stu
dent
s on
ly.
In 2
012-
13, i
n re
spon
se to
sta
te b
udge
t def
icit,
th
e C
hanc
ello
r's O
ffice
ann
ounc
ed p
lans
to re
duce
sys
tem
wid
e en
rollm
ent i
f cut
s to
the
CS
U b
ecom
es
larg
er.
CS
ULB
's p
lann
ing
targ
et is
sam
e as
201
1-12
, at 2
6,87
5 re
side
nt F
TES
.
Cam
pus
enro
llmen
t tar
gets
incl
ude
resi
dent
and
non
-res
iden
t stu
dent
s ba
sed
on th
e G
over
nor's
Bud
get.
Cam
pus
is fu
nded
for g
row
th in
resi
dent
stu
dent
s on
ly.
For 2
013-
14, a
ccor
ding
to th
e m
ost r
ecen
t in
form
atio
n fro
m th
e C
hanc
ello
r's O
ffice
cam
puse
s w
ill b
e al
low
ed to
be
as m
uch
as fi
ve p
erce
nt (5
%)
over
targ
et.
CS
ULB
's p
lann
ing
targ
et is
27,
198
resi
dent
FTE
S, w
hich
is a
slig
ht in
crea
se o
f 323
ove
r 20
12-1
3.
15%
37% 0% 100%
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH 2013-14 RESOURCE PLANNING PROCESS
SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS
PREPARATION Thursday, December 6, 2012 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM BH 302 Friday, February 8, 2013 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM BH 302 Thursday, March 28, 2013 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM BH 302 Thursday, April 11, 2013 9:00 AM – 11:30 AM BH 302 Friday, April 19, 2013 2:00 PM – 4:00 PM BH 302
DIVISION HEARINGS
Thursday, May 9, 2013 9 AM – NOON
University Relations and Development Student Services Admin and Finance
Friday, May 10, 2013 2:00 – 4:00 PM
Athletics Academic Affairs President’s Office
Tuesday, May 14, 2013 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM
ATI Presentation
REVIEW Tuesday, May 21, 2013 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM BH 302
Schedule of Meetings C1
Glossary D1
California State University, Long Beach Resource Planning Process
Glossary of Terms
This glossary is provided to explain various terms and phrases specific to the CSU that are used in this Resource Planning Process document, and/or to provide references to websites where additional information or explanations may be found. The State of California’s glossary of budget terms is an additional reference (link below). However, some terms used therein may not be common jargon or applicable to the CSU. http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/BUD_DOCS/glossary.pdf Academic Year (AY) For semester campuses, an academic year includes the fall and spring semesters. The college year includes summer, fall, and spring semesters. Academic Year Full-Time Equivalent Students (AY-FTES) The number of academic year full time equivalent students (FTES) at a semester campus is calculated by adding the student credit hours for the fall and spring semesters and dividing by 24 for graduate students and by 30 for all other students. It is the average enrollment over two semesters based on a full time equivalency of 12 credit hours per semester for graduate students and 15 credit hours per semester for all other students. Base Budget Base budget is a term used to distinguish the fixed amount of general fund resources allocated to the campus as compared to other variable, or non-recurring resources, also referred to as non-base budget. The amount of each campus’ general fund base budget allocation is reestablished each year as authorized by the CSU Board of Trustees in the Final Budget memo. The CSU Budget Office issues this memo when the Governor signs the Final Budget. In addition, the campus is responsible for reestablishing a base budget for its variable revenues that are collected in the general fund, by setting a minimum amount that it expects to collect. The President establishes annual changes to the university’s base budget after review of recommendations from the Resource Planning Process Task Force. The resources available for operating divisions during the annual Resource Allocation process in the fall are comprised of the state general fund allocation and campus revenue, such as State University Tuition Fees, non-resident tuition, application fees, etc. Additional information may be found at: http://www.calstate.edu/Budget/ http://daf.csulb.edu/offices/univ_svcs/budget/docs/index.html Campus Physical Capacity Campus physical capacity (CPC) is defined as the academic year FTES (or college year FTES) that can be accommodated by the capacity space currently available on a campus. CPC may be equal to or less than the enrollment ceiling approved for a campus. Capacity of campus facilities is usually expressed in terms of student stations, annual FTE student capacity, or office space. Capacity is calculated using the appropriate utilization measures and space standards approved by the state. A campus cannot request capital outlay funding that will add physical space if the project will result in exceeding the campus’ physical capacity as published in its approved physical master plan. As of Fall, 2012, CSULB had a campus physical capacity of 25,369 (lecture and lab only) Academic Year FTES. Additional information may be found at: http://www.calstate.edu/CPDC/SUAM/Appendices/App_B-Restructure_Campus_Capacities.pdf http://www.calstate.edu/cpdc/Facilities_Planning/Space_Mgmt/Reports/Campus_Cap/2012/ http://www.calstate.edu/CPDC/suam/SUAM9045-9050.pdf See Campus Physical Master Plan
Glossary D2
Campus Physical Master Plan The campus master plan describes the physical facilities approved for planning, design and construction on land owned by the Trustees as part of a CSU campus. Once initially approved, the Trustees must approve all additions to the campus physical master plan. The campus physical master plan also includes the enrollment ceiling approved for the campus based upon the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the site. The Board of Trustees requires that every campus have a physical master plan, showing existing and anticipated facilities necessary to accommodate specified levels of enrollment, in accordance with approved education policies and objectives. Each campus master plan reflects the ultimate physical requirements of academic programs and auxiliary activities. A related element, adopted by the Board, separate from the physical master plan, is the campus enrollment ceiling that specifies the maximum FTE for each campus at build-out. The Campus Master Plan was approved to increase campus facilities capacity to 31,000 FTES when additional future funding becomes available. Additional information may be found at: http://www.calstate.edu/CPDC/suam/SUAM9007-9014.pdf http://daf.csulb.edu/offices/ppfm/master_plan/index.html http://daf.csulb.edu/offices/univ_svcs/institutionalresearch/ep_reports/index.html Campus Temporary Resources Year-end balances held in university-wide programs are made available as a university contingency reserve to address deterioration in the budget or other emergencies that may arise. Any unspent amount at the end of a fiscal year will carry forward to address the next year’s budget needs. These funds are of a one-time, non-recurring nature and are attributable to savings from a variety of programs including benefits, compensation, utilities and general reserves. Carryover Savings The university is allowed to retain its unspent general fund budget balance at the close of the fiscal year. We refer to these balances that roll forward to the next fiscal year as carryover savings. Also referred to as division or university-wide reserves, carryover savings are published in the Internal Budget Document and are labeled as Division Carryover Savings. Due to the Revenue Management Program (see RMP), the Chancellor’s Office has established a maximum threshold amount that a campus can roll forward to the next fiscal year. If a campus exceeds this threshold, a usage plan must be developed and submitted to the Chancellor’s Office. Additional information can be found at: http://daf.csulb.edu/offices/univ_svcs/budget/docs/ http://www.calstate.edu/BF/rmp/ Common Financial System (CFS) In an effort to increase administrative efficiency systemwide, the CSU has created a Common Financial System (CFS), which is available to all campuses and auxiliary organizations. Incorporating campus financial systems into a single database reduces incompatibilities between campuses and minimizes the time and effort spent maintaining disparate systems. Common Management System (CMS) The mission of the Common Management Systems (CMS) is to provide efficient, effective and high quality service to the students, faculty and staff of the 23-campus California State University System (CSU) and the Office of the Chancellor. Utilizing a best practices approach, CMS supports human resources, financials and student services administration functions with a common suite of Oracle Enterprise applications in a shared data center, with a supported data warehouse infrastructure. Additional information can be found at: http://www.csulb.edu/divisions/af/cms/ http://cms.calstate.edu/ Compensation To recognize the salary increase commitments of the CSU collective bargaining agreements and CSU’s Management Personnel Plan, the Resources and Requirements plan projects the amount of incremental cost of negotiated salary increases that go into effect during a given fiscal year. Division Reserves Same as Carryover Savings
Glossary D3
Enrollment Target The enrollment target is the total number of full-time equivalent students that a campus receives base budget funding for during a college year. The Board of Trustees will establish enrollment targets during the budget process with the intent to publicize campus enrollment targets ten months prior to the beginning of the academic year.
2012/13 FTES Target 2013/14 FTES Target
Bakersfield 6,978 7,192 Channel Islands 3,264 3,381 Chico 14,730 14,898 Dominguez Hills 9,512 9,710 East Bay 12,304 12,557 Fresno 17,974 18,179 Fullerton 27,677 28,014 Humboldt 7,216 7,350 Long Beach 27,920 28,223 Los Angeles 16,890 17,018 Maritime Academy 1,053 1,135 Monterey Bay 4,572 4,703 Northridge 26,752 27,228 Pomona 17,670 17,885 Sacramento 21,968 22,229 San Bernardino 14,384 14,720 San Diego 27,566 27,988 San Francisco 24,374 24,620 San Jose 22,276 22,540 San Luis Obispo 17,035 17,489 San Marcos 7,527 7,873 Sonoma 7,523 7,601 Stanislaus 6,837 7,009 344,001 349,542 Information about the CSU enrollment management policy can be found at: http://www.calstate.edu/acadres/docs/CSU_Enroll_Mngment_Policy_Practices.pdf EO-1000 Ensure that costs incurred by the CSU Operating Fund for services, products, and facilities provided to other CSU funds and to Auxiliary Organizations are properly and consistently recovered with cash and/or a documented exchange of value. Allowable direct costs incurred by the CSU Operating Fund shall be allocated and recovered based on actual costs incurred. Allowable and allocable indirect costs shall be allocated and recovered according to a cost allocation plan that utilizes a documented and consistent methodology including identification of indirect costs and a basis for allocation. Final Budget Final Budget refers to the final enacted state budget and CSU allocations. Differentiated from the preliminary budget that is developed after the Governor’s Budget and May Revision and the Legislative Budget Recommendations received by the Governor in June. See Governor’s Budget General Fund The General Fund has existed since the beginning of the state as a political entity. It is the government's major source of funds used for most of its activities. Under this fund, various special accounts are created and reserved for particular activities. Chapter 942/77 provides for the treatment of these accounts as other governmental funds for Accounting and Budgeting purposes effective July 1, 1978.
Usage of this fund varies in accordance with legislative authorizations and governing statutes. Except for various constitutional and statutory authorizations without further legislative action, the General Fund is appropriated on a yearly basis. Income to the fund
Glossary D4
varies in accordance with the governing statutes. A detailed listing is contained in the Governor's Budget and the Controller's Annual Report. Additional information may be found at: http://www.dof.ca.gov/fisa/bag/DofGlossFrm.HTM General Fund Allocation The amount of each campus’ State General Fund Budget allocation is established each year as authorized by the CSU Board of Trustees in the Final Budget Memo. The CSU Budget Office issues this memo when the Governor signs the Final Budget. See also Base Budget Governor’s Budget (January) The State Constitution requires that the Governor submit a budget to the Legislature by January 10. It provides for a balanced budget in that, if the proposed expenditures for the budget year exceed estimated revenues, the Governor is required to recommend the sources for the additional funding. The budget process for California defies a simple concise definition. It is a process rather than a product. It is not the development of the Governor's Budget, the Legislature's enactment of a budget, or the executive branch's administration of the budget. Rather, it is the combination of all of these phases with all the ramifications and influences of political interactions, relationships with federal and local governments, public input, natural events, legal issues, the economy, initiatives and legislation, etc. Although the size and complexity of California and the dynamics of the process make it difficult to establish and maintain an orderly process, these very reasons necessitate an orderly formalized process. By constitutional requirement, the Governor's Budget must be accompanied by a Budget Bill itemizing recommended expenditures that shall be introduced in each house of the Legislature. The Constitution also requires that the Legislature pass the bill by June 15. It is not uncommon for the Legislature to miss this deadline. The following web references summarize the major steps and procedures of California's budget process: http://www.dof.ca.gov/budget/ http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/BUD_DOCS/budenact.pdf Health Benefits To recognize the costs required to cover health benefit costs for employees who are compensated from general fund accounts, the Resources and Requirements plan projects the incremental amount of funding necessary to cover the cost of employer-paid benefits that will go into effect in a given fiscal year. Health care benefit rate increases are determined by the number of CSU employee participants and the difference between the old and new employer-paid contribution rates. Mandatory Costs A typical cost of doing business that is unavoidable is referred to as mandatory. These costs normally include negotiated compensation increases, benefit costs, energy and utility cost increases, insurance premiums, worker’s compensation, contributions to the CSU risk pool, and maintenance costs of new building space. May Revision The May Revision is an annual update to the Governor’s Budget containing a revised estimate of General Fund revenues for the current and ensuing fiscal years, any proposals to adjust expenditures to reflect updated revenue estimates, and all proposed adjustments to Proposition 98, presented by the Department of Finance to the Legislature by May 14 of each year. 2013-2014 May Revision of Governor’s Budget related to Higher Education is contained in the attached: http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2013-14/pdf/Revised/BudgetSummary/HigherEducation.pdf Non-base Budget Allocations Non-base budget is a term to distinguish one-time temporary resources which are not added to base budgets. Carryover savings are a type of non-base budget allocation. Non-resident Tuition (NRT) The additional fee assessed to students who do not meet the State of California residency requirement. Students need to meet particular requirements to pay in-state tuition (SUF), which is significantly lower than out-of-state tuition (NRT). The requirements are listed in the link below.
Glossary D5
If students are without lawful immigration status, they must also file an affidavit with a CSU campus stating that they have filed an application with the INS to legalize their immigration status or that they will do so as soon as they are eligible. The attached link identifies current residency requirements: Visit the campus website at: http://www.csulb.edu/depts/enrollment/admissions/residency.html http://www.csulb.edu/depts/enrollment/registration/fees_basics.html One-Time, Temporary Resources See Non-base Budget Allocations PERS Retirement Rate Change CalPERS uses contributions from the employer, the employee, and income from investments to pay for employee retirement benefits. Employee and employer contributions are a percentage of applicable employee compensation. The employer contribution is set annually by CalPERS based on annual actuarial valuations. The employee contribution is 5% of salary for Miscellaneous Tier 1 members and 8% for some Peace Officer/Firefighter members (Public Safety Management and Firefighters only) less an exclusion allowance for coordination with Social Security. For eligible CSU Public Safety (R08) employee Peace Officer/Firefighter members, the CSU currently pays for both the employer and employee contributions. CSU Contribution Rates for CalPERS Retirement Coverage – Fiscal Year 2013/14 Effective July 1, 2013 the CSU retirement contribution rates for employees covered by the following CalPERS member Categories are as follows:
Member Category CSU Employee Group 2013/14 Employer Rate State Police Officer/Firefighter Unit 8 38.495%*
State Police Officer/Firefighter MPP Directors & Lieutenants 30.495%
State Miscellaneous Tier 1 All Other CSU Employees 21.121% *Includes 8% employee contributions rate paid by CSU Revenue Management Program (RMP) The Governor’s Budget enacted RMP in 2006-2007. The CSU has re-engineered substantial financial and reporting changes for cash flows and modified the accounting procedures for all campuses. The new RMP initiative has reduced our dependency on the State of California for fiscal tasks, increased working efficiencies and reduced delays to the year-end closing process. The CSU has new responsibilities to monitor and manage the cash flows and any potential earnings that may arise from fee collections to support campus operations. Ongoing changes as a result of new directives and best methods approach along with campus standardization of activities will continue to be issued to enhance financial operations. Additional information may be found at: http://www.calstate.edu/BF/rmp/rmp_home.shtml State University Tuition Fee State University Tuition Fee is the amount a resident student pays to attend the California State University. The tuition fee for a full time student is shown below. Tuition Fees for Academic Year 2012-13 were rolled back to Academic Year 2011-12 rates due to the passage of Proposition 30 in November, 2012.
Academic
Year
Under-
graduate
Graduate Teacher
Credential
Graduate
2012-13 $5,472 $6,348 $6,738 2011-12 $5,472 $6,348 $6,738 2010-11 $4,440 $5,154 $5,472 2009-10 $4,026 $4,674 $4,962 2008-09 $3,048 $3,540 $3,756 2007-08 $2,772 $3,216 $3,414
In addition, all students pay campus fees that vary campus-by-campus and average $1,140 system-wide (see link below). http://www.calstate.edu/budget/fybudget/2013-2014/documentation/14-mandatory-fees-table.shtml At CSULB, the mandatory student fees total $768 for academic year 2012-13. Note that certain courses may charge other special fees that are not included in this amount.
Glossary D6
Non-resident students pay the State University Tuition Fee, non-resident fee and campus fees. The following chronology gives the full-time (and part-time) undergraduate resident CSU SUF fee (including the total when campus fees are included). Academic Year Full-time (part-time) Average Total Fees
Systemwide Tuition Fees 2012-13 $5,472 ($3,174) $6,612 2011-12 $5,472 ($3,174) $6,519 2010-11 $4,335 ($2,514) $5,285 2009-10 $4,026 ($2,334) $4,893 2008-09 $3,048 ($1,770) $3,849 2007-08 $2,772 ($1,608) $3,521
Tuition Fee Discounts (also known as State University Grants (SUG)) The Tuition Fee Discount Program was established by the State of California under the Budget Act of 1982, Chapter 326. Its creation was consistent with legislative intent and recommendations contained in the Report of the Chancellor's Task Force on a New Student Fee and Financial Aid Program (December, 1981). The Tuition Fee Discount program is budgeted in the General Fund. The amount of Tuition Fee Discount funds is increased annually by one-third of the marginal cost revenue estimated for enrollment growth, or one-third of the revenue attributable to a Tuition Fee rate change. Campuses receive an allocation based on enrollment targets and student need. Additional information may be found at: http://www.csulb.edu/depts/enrollment/financial_aid/ http://www.calstate.edu/AR/fa_programs.shtml University Wide Budgets Resources that are held centrally to cover mandatory costs that benefit the entire campus and/or campus reserves are referred to as “University Wide.” These funds are administered by various division managers who have fiduciary responsibility and accountability for the budget. Any unspent balances at year-end are returned and made available to the entire campus.