SAMPLE SAMPLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
UCR CAMPUS PLANNING CENTER
FY 02/03 OPERATING PLAN AND BUDGET
Accomplishments Since our Last Planning & Budget Presentation
(March 2001)
Over the last twelve months our crew of six has completed the planning for the west campus, completed Phase I of the CADD system implementation, partnered with Computing and Physical Plant to update the campus infrastructure plan, partnered with transportation services on a campus traffic plan and a long range parking capacity plan, and prepared and secured corporate approval on fifteen Project Planning Guides and nine Detail Project Plans (that will triple campus building square footage).
Significant Programmatic Changes
We are working closely with corporate planning to redesign the review and approval process for campus planning efforts, with the goal that authority (and accountability) will reside primarily at the campus level. The decentralization should reduce the time and effort spent on building corporate understanding and enthusiasm for campus projects, and allow us to shorten the timeframe for project approval (and ultimately bring on new capacity faster…a critical need for our growing campus).
This year we also propose to improve our space planning services by bringing on board an office space designer (on a contract basis), and streamlining the space committee review and approval process.
Workforce Planning: Workload and Staffing Projections
As shown in our Workload and Staffing Trends graph on page xx, we are projecting that the tremendous increase in request for services that we’ve handled over the last two years will now level out, and for 02/03 and 03/04 planning services demand should remain relatively constant.
We are seeing an expectation on the part of our customers that we will do the bulk of the work in putting together plans – shifting us from a guide/advisor role to more of a hands-on plan developer. Thus the scope of our services broadens, and it takes more hours on our part to complete a plan. This is reflected in the ratio of planners to plans changing over the last three years from 1:10 to 1:8. However, with the leveling out of workload increases, and the decentralization of plan approval to the campuses, we anticipate we’ll be able to meet workload with existing staff levels until FY 04/05.
Workforce Planning: Organizational Design, Staffing, Development
We’re proposing a change to our org design with formalizing a space planning unit (see proposed organization chart on page xx). This is in response to several comments made in our customer satisfaction surveys. We’re going to shift one of our senior planners’ focus to this area, and couple that with the contract office space designer.
Our department MSO is joyfully retiring July 1, 2002. She has worked out a deal with the Administrative Service Center where we will contract with them for budget, accounting, and human resources services at a net savings of $10k/year for the department.
With the introduction of the CADD system, we will be allocating about 3% of each person’s time (^60 hours each and about $25k in training fees) to take advanced CADD workshops at the campus extension center. (See page xx for a summary of our future training and development plans by employee.)
Employee retention continues to be a success story for us. Except for the MSO’s retirement, we’ve had no turnover in the last three years. And the results from our employee climate survey indicate that our crew are very satisfied with their working environment.
Looking at compensation planning, we did a thorough compensation review as part of this year’s goals, and implemented three equity increases on 9/1/01 to bring about parity with other positions on campus. We think those measures should carry us through this next fiscal year – no further reviews are anticipated over the next 12 months.
Looking at succession planning, we find that it might be difficult to keep the business running smoothly should something happen to the programmer analyst who is running the CADD system. So we have begun working with the campus computing group to change to a contract where they manage this employee and the system, and ensure continuity of service should turnover occur.
Customer Satisfaction and Business Performance Assessment Results
Our customer satisfaction measurements results continue to improve significantly as we have broadened our role from guide/advisor to hands-on developer of planning documents (see the more detailed discussion on page xx).
Our process measurement results are also improving. The percentage of submitted plans approved by corporate and funded has increased from 65% to 90% over the last three years. It’s difficult of course to pinpoint the cause, but we believe it’s a reflection of many things – our relationship with corporate is improving, slightly more funding is available, and the quality of our plans has improved. The average time to plan completion measurement is decreasing from 5 months to 4 months, reflecting our efforts to streamline the planning process.
Overall Financial Position
Our $1.5m/yr in operating costs over the last 3 years have been rising in tandem with CPI increases (averaging 2.5% a year), and with the campus providing funding to cover salary increases, we’ve been able to live within our budget, and carry forward small amounts annually. As of 6/30/02, we’re projecting a $30,000 balance at year end, which we have allocated for an upgrade on a CADD system server, and replacement of five four-year-old PC’s.
Over the next two fiscal years, we hope to again live within our budget. But in 03/04, we’re forecasting a funding need of $80k for an additional planner.
All in all, our operations are healthy, we’re improving service, and customers are becoming increasingly satisfied…life is good.
Liz Harvey
Director
Appendix 3, page 1