1 / 21

Budget Overview Workshop

Budget Overview Workshop. September 21, 2009. 2% Scenario Adopted Budget. 2% Cuts. Workload Measures. SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C). Base Revenues.

rosine
Download Presentation

Budget Overview Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Budget Overview Workshop September 21, 2009

  2. 2% Scenario Adopted Budget

  3. 2% Cuts

  4. Workload Measures SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  5. Base Revenues SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  6. Growth SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  7. Total Computational Revenue(Sum of Inflation Adjustment, Basic Allocation & Restoration, Growth, Other Revenues Adjustment, and Stability Adjustment) SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  8. District Revenue Source SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  9. Other Allowances and Total Apportionments SOURCE: California Community Colleges 2008-09 Second Principal Apportionment (Exhibit C)

  10. Categorical Programs2009-10 Preliminary Allocation(This allocations are based on the percentage of the 2008-09 budget indicated in the % column unless otherwise specified)

  11. Areas of Flexibility

  12. 2009-10 Preliminary Allocation for Matriculation

  13. 2009-10 FTES Targets • We are projecting being funded up to only 19,100 FTES for 2009-10. • Our 2008-09 FTES was 20,300 resident FTES, we were funded for 19,800. • That is a reduction of 1,200 FTES over what we served in 2008-09

  14. 2009-10 FTES Targets

  15. 2008-2009 Fall Comparisons

  16. FTES • College Productivity Targets have been set at:

  17. Productivity – How does it add up?

  18. Per Campus as of Fall 2007 • If: • Alameda is 18% of district enrollment • Berkeley in 18% • Laney is 43% and • Merritt is 21% • Then for each 1 point decrease of FTEF/FTES the additional cost or savings per college is the percentage of $1,500,000 • Alameda $270,000 • Berkeley $270,000 • Laney $645,000 • Merritt $315,000 So when Merritt operates at 14.5 vs. 17.5 it cost $1 million more to produce the same FTES at Berkeley

  19. Questions?

More Related