�鶹��Ѱ�����

Dear colleagues,

Welcome back to another promising semester in the College of Arts and Sciences. While much is the same, change, like fall, is in the air.

We are taking steps to complete the reorganization of the college. The provost’s 2018 report on academic reorganization called for the creation of a new structure of divisional leadership in the college, with strong deans for the divisions of arts and humanities, natural sciences and social sciences who can determine budgetary and resource priorities, set academic focus priorities and, in collaboration with the dean of the college, advance the liberal arts imperatives of the college.

This semester, a top priority for college leadership is defining a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology that enables the college and its divisions to be flexible and responsive to the needs of all students, staff and faculty. Since my appointment as interim dean on July 1, the deans of division, Vice Dean Amy Lavens, Assistant Dean Bernadette Stewart and I have collaborated on completing the preliminary steps that will enable us to create this budget framework. Our goal is to complete the budget framework by the end of December.

A second priority is to enhance transparency in decision-making. To that end, I will continue to meet with the Staff Advisory Council, and will meet regularly with the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate and the ASFS budget committee. In addition, please join a college town hall on Sept. 24, 3-5 p.m., via .

Best wishes for an excellent start to the fall semester, and I look forward to working with you as we take our final steps toward the successful reorganization of the College of Arts and Sciences.

Sincerely,

Daryl Joji Maeda
Interim Dean

Dear colleagues,

As we have mentioned, college leaders are now working to continue our efforts to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology that will enable the college and its divisions to be flexible and responsive to the needs of all students, staff and faculty. We write to share an update on this work.

As Daryl Maeda, interim dean of the college, mentioned in a recent town hall, we have enlisted the services of the Huron Consulting Group to facilitate the final stages of the resource-allocation philosophy and methodology. Constructing an effective budget model requires difficult decisions about resource allocation, and professional assistance will help the college attain the best result. Leaders in the college and our partners at Huron met this month to agree on the scope and timeline of the project.

Key members of our �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder budget framework team include Deans of Division Irene Blair, Sarah E. Jackson and John-Michael Rivera, Vice Dean Amy Lavens, Assistant Dean Bernadette Stewart and Interim Dean of the College Daryl Maeda. We are assisted by Anna Jensen, senior executive aide to the dean; Rob Stubbs, director of institutional research; and Todd Haggerty, vice chancellor and chief financial officer. 

To ensure collaboration and transparency in the process, we will engage at each step with a budget framework shared governance group composed of representatives from the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate, Staff Advisory Committee, and each divisional council. The representatives’ role will be to meet with the deans and Huron to provide feedback on key decisions within the process and to engage in two-way communication: to convey the process to their constituencies and to provide input/feedback to the deans.

Our goal is to complete the budget framework by the end of December, and during the next nine weeks, Huron will facilitate our efforts to select the best allocation framework and construct a college financial statement with the selected new framework, by providing options and honing our insights. However, as a college we will be the ones making decisions that reflect our priorities.

Our work will be guided by four principles. Our efforts should be:

• Mission-aligned and values-driven
• Clear and transparent
• Flexible and accountable
• Data-driven

As we bring this long-discussed work to fruition, we will provide weekly updates on this web page and, when we’ve made notable progress, via emails to the college. We will also convene college-wide town halls at key moments in the process. In the meantime, please share any observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform.

Thank you, as always, for your help, which is particularly appreciated as we take critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

As we continue our efforts to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions, we write to share an update on this work.

In the past week, the leadership group has continued to meet with the Huron Consulting Group, and those discussions now formally include representation from faculty and staff shared-governance groups. Our colleagues who are representing these constituencies are:

• Tobin Munsat, chair of physics, representing the natural sciences divisional council
• Jennifer Fitzgerald, professor of political science, representing social sciences divisional council
• Rob Rupert, chair of philosophy, representing arts and humanities divisional council
• Brian Cadena, associate professor of economics, representing the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate
• Robyn Ronen, staff member of astrophysical and planetary sciences, representing the Staff Advisory Committee

The representatives’ role is to meet with the deans and Huron to provide feedback on key decisions within the process and to engage in two-way communication: to convey the process to their constituencies and to provide input/feedback to the deans.

This week, the leadership team and the shared-governance representatives began reviewing and discussing the pros and cons of five budget-allocation framework scenarios. Each scenario varies in the mechanics of how to handle revenue distribution, overhead funding and supplemental funding.

Next week, the shared-governance representatives and college leadership are scheduled to undertake a “deep dive” of two or three budget-allocation framework scenarios.

Huron will continue to facilitate our efforts to select the best allocation framework and construct a college financial statement with the selected new framework, by providing options and honing our insights. However, as a college we will be the ones making decisions that reflect our priorities.

Our work will be guided by four principles. Our efforts should be:

• Mission-aligned and values-driven
• Clear and transparent
• Flexible and accountable
• Data-driven

As we’ve mentioned, we will provide weekly updates on this web page and, when we’ve made notable progress, via emails to the college. We will also convene college-wide town halls at key moments in the process. In the meantime, please share any observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform.

Thank you, as always, for your help, which is particularly appreciated as we take critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are sharing an update on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

During Tuesday’s A&S Leadership Meeting, faculty and staff had an informative and carefully reasoned discussion about the values that should drive our decisions about resource allocation. Our colleagues’ contributions to the budget-framework discussion, like that from other feedback we have gotten, provide valuable support to ensure that the decisions we make will have nuance and complexity, even when those decisions are driven by ostensibly clear core values upon which we all agree.

Also this week, we discussed the broad parameters of three framework scenarios, as prepared by Huron Consulting. These scenarios, which we discussed in conceptual terms without specific dollar amounts or percentages, differ in these ways: when the cost of college overhead is accounted for in the algorithm (before or after the distribution of net tuition revenue to divisions), how a “tax rate” for divisions would be structured and varied over time, and what metrics might be used to guide the distribution of supplemental funds.

The shared governance group received the same materials from Huron and had the opportunity to attend office hours with the consultants to discuss the scenarios. Vice Dean Amy Lavens also met with the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate budget committee as it discussed the scenarios.

Next week, we will meet with the shared-governance group to continue analyzing alternatives.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to those who have completed this form or shared your views in other ways.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are sharing an update on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

During Monday’s Budget Framework Shared Governance meeting, faculty and staff representatives weighed the pros and cons of three budget-framework scenarios. In related discussions, some participants said the current budget-allocation system leaves programs that are in high demand without sufficient funding to meet student needs. Others emphasized the need for a budget framework that adequately reflects the college’s core values. Some contended that the guiding metric should be the quality of education that students get.

In subsequent discussion on Thursday, participants in the Budget Framework Team considered these questions:

• Should overhead be contributed “off the top” of net tuition revenue (NTR) or after the distribution of NTR to divisions?
• Should all divisions contribute equally toward supplemental funding, or should these contributions be made only by divisions with net-positive revenue?
• Would allocation of supplemental funds “off the top” of NTR reduce the complexity of decision-making?

The discussion will continue with the Budget Framework Team on Nov. 19 and with the Budget Framework Shared Governance Team on Nov. 25.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to those who have completed this form or shared your views in other ways.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are again updating you on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

As a refresher, the budget framework scenarios we are considering outline different ways to allocate net tuition revenue (NTR) within the college. NTR funds support most of our spending, and they are distinct from plant funds and temporary dollars. Each scenario we have considered includes allocations to the central college administration (also called “overhead”), the three divisions and a supplemental fund.

Central college administration oversees common goods (including advising, college-allocated scholarships, some centers and public-facing programs, and student-facing programs such as Honors, the Residential Academic Programs and the Miramontes Arts and Sciences Program) and shared services (including budget and finance, HR and communications). The supplemental fund is intended to ensure that the college can deliver a high-quality liberal-arts education to all students. Supplemental funding is necessary because not all units can cover their instructional costs under the campus budget model.

This week, we continued conversations with shared governance groups, and on Tuesday, the Budget Framework Team considered the timeline of our work. We will decide on a budget framework in early December 2024. Discussion will continue through January 2025 on the right proportion of revenue to dedicate to central college administration (overhead) costs and supplemental funding for divisions that need support beyond that generated by NTR, and what metrics and values should be considered in defining the supplemental fund and its distribution.

We are eager to provide opportunities for broad input on the budget framework from across the college. To that end, the A&S Leadership Meeting from 3:30-5 p.m. on Dec. 3 will be open to all members of the A&S community who wish to participate. This is the. We will send a reminder before Dec. 3.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform; thank you to the 32 of you who have submitted feedback so far.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are writing to remind you of a college-wide budget meeting this week.

During the week of Nov. 25, we continued conversations with shared-governance representatives, who shared their perspectives on budget-framework scenarios and a wide range of long-term budget questions. Because we want to provide another opportunity for broad input on the budget framework from across the college, the A&S Leadership Meeting from 3:30-5 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 3, will be open to all members of the A&S community who wish to participate. This is the.

We continue to provide weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform; thank you to all who have submitted feedback so far.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We continue working to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

This week, we held a college-wide town-hall meeting to discuss our progress so far on this initiative, the timeline for next steps, the issues we face as we grapple with how to determine funding for central college administration and shared services (also called overhead) and supplemental funding for divisions. We appreciate that a substantial number of you attended and offered thoughtful comments and questions. You may view the slideshow shown during the town hall at this link.

As we’ve noted previously, the college’s four deans (with input from and consultation with many others) will choose a budget framework this month. The leadership team is discussing two framework options that do not differ monetarily; they differ in when overhead and supplemental funds are collected. In one scenario, net tuition revenue (NTR) flows first to the divisions, which then fund overhead via a flat percentage; the divisions also set aside supplemental funds under a yet-to-be-determined formula. In the other scenario, overhead and supplemental funding are subtracted from NTR before it flows to the divisions.

Some of the 60 people who’ve completed the online budget-feedback form have advocated one scenario or the other. Among the opinions expressed are:

• “Overhead (should) be contributed off the top of net tuition revenue (NTR), and all divisions should contribute equally toward supplemental funding.”
• Overhead should be contributed “after distribution—more transparency about origin of contributions.”
• “Distributions that do not follow student credit hours—centralized costs and supplemental funds—must be taken off the top of the revenue total, before monies are distributed to divisions or departments. If money goes first to divisions and then back to the collective, it will be viewed as a ‘tax’ on revenues individual units have ‘earned’ on their own.”
• “Overall strategy should begin with allocations going first to divisions, for transparency, then overhead should be applied to the divisions. Overhead should be divided by essential direct operation overhead (deans’ staff, core staff etc.) and indirect (programs such as DEI etc.) and funded in order of direct, then indirect until overhead costs would put divisions in a situation where supplemental funds are needed.”
• “I would recommend moving away from the use of the word ‘overhead.’ To me personally, overhead is often seen as unnecessary and something that can and should be cut. However, the central college administration is critical to the work of the college….”

Many of those who’ve commented via the webform have raised points that pertain to how supplemental funding should be calculated and allocated. We will again review those comments in January and February, when we determine the principles and rules for collecting and distributing the supplemental funds. Our aim is to begin implementing the model by March.

In the next two months, as we discuss the size and funding mechanisms for overhead and supplemental funds, we will bear in mind the value of a liberal-arts education and the changes, both recent and future, in our student body. During our town-hall meeting this week, faculty and staff clearly expressed this view and espoused these values.

We continue to provide weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

As we wrap up the semester and approach the holiday break, we want to extend our warmest wishes for the traditions you observe and the rest and rejuvenation you deserve.

One of our primary goals for the college this semester was to choose a budget allocation framework for budgeting among the three divisions, college administration (shared services and activities) and a supplemental-funding pool.

We, the college’s four deans, have chosen a budget framework, with input from and consultation with shared governance groups as well as those of you who participated through our meetings, town halls and web form. Our choice was between two framework options that do not differ monetarily; they differ in this respect: the point at which overhead and supplemental funds are collected.

In one scenario, net tuition revenue (NTR) flows first to the three divisions, which then fund college administration and a supplemental pool. In the second scenario, college administration and supplemental funding are subtracted from NTR before it flows to the divisions. In both scenarios, the amounts and/or percentages will be determined at a future date.

This week, the deans selected the second scenario for the budget framework because it conveys our conception of a college united around the liberal arts with empowered divisions. To ensure transparency, the college will share the calculations that underlie divisional investments in college administration and supplemental funds. We believe that prioritizing the liberal arts mission that unites us, as represented in the scenario we have chosen, combined with sharing information that allows for divisions and college members to understand investments, best enables us to meet the priorities raised by all.

You may read a fuller explanation of the background, college engagement, the two framework options and next steps at this link.

In the next two months, as we discuss the size of college administration and supplemental funds, we will bear in mind the value of a liberal-arts education and the changes, both recent and future, in our student body. During our town-hall meeting last week, faculty and staff clearly expressed this view and espoused these values.

We have been providing weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on this web page and via emails to the college. Next semester, we will resume a regular cadence of communication. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College