RESOURCE PLANNING

PROCESS

2013-2014

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, LONG BEACH

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.

CO-CHAIRS’ MESSAGE

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

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

2013-14 SOURCES AND USES PLAN

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 -

CAMPUS BUDGET PLANS

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

APPENDIX

CSULB 2013-14

BUDGET PLANNING PARAMETERS

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

ENROLLMENT DATA

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%

SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS

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 OF TERMS

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.