REVIEWS OF RCM
Ongoing/Operational Reviews
The Central Budget Committee (CBC) is the steward of RCM at UNH. If a significant issue
arises, the Central Budget Committee will address it at that time.
Year Three (Fiscal Year 2003) - Academic Quality Assessment
Re-accreditation
The potential move to RCM was described in the University’s fifth internal report to the
New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). The next phase of re-accreditation
has been ongoing in FY03, and this will be an opportunity to get an independent review of
the early stages of RCM. Although the re-accreditation process will not provide a complete
review of RCM, it may generate feedback on the new system
Year Five – Overall Review
A ten-person RCM Review Committee, chaired by the Provost, will be appointed by the President at the beginning of the fifth year of RCM
(FY05). This committee will engage in an in-depth review of the University’s entire budgeting
system, from both quantitative and qualitative perspectives.
Criteria used to evaluate RCM will include, but not be limited to, trends in academic quality,
student quality, institutional financial health, and faculty and staff morale. It should be noted
that a major challenge in this review will be to determine the extent to which any positive or
negative trends have a causal or coincidental relationship to RCM.
The committee will make recommendations to the President for any necessary changes to the budget
system by the end of the fifth year of RCM.
Goals of Overall Review
1. To evaluate the effects, if any, of RCM on academic quality.
2.
To review the success of RCM in achieving its goals:
a. Decentralized financial authority and accountability.
b. Simplified budget procedures.
c. Improved budget forecasting and planning.
d. Increased central administration focus on strategic matters.
e. Improved institutional flexibility to match resources with program demands.
f. Clearer financial reports to the University community.
g. Fairer management of budget surpluses.
h. Increased incentives for revenue generation.
3. To assess the relationship of resource allocation to unit performance.
4. To recommend changes, as needed, in RCM allocation procedures.
5. To recommend changes, as needed, in the decision-making powers of RCM units.
6.
To recommend changes in the budget process itself, including the role of the Central Budget
Committee, and any corresponding policy changes required.
Overall Review Process
The overall review during the fifth year of RCM will consist of five parts:
1. Quantitative academic quality review;
2. Research and scholarly activity review;
3. Qualitative academic quality review by college;
4. Qualitative general interviews and comments;
5. Quantitative budget review.
1. Quantitative Academic Quality Review
Statistical data and other appropriate data will
be analyzed to determine what effect the budget system has had on the University’s teaching,
research, and service missions. Some of the statistical data to be reviewed are class size,
grades (grade inflation), tenure track faculty to non-tenure track faculty ratios, admission data
(SAT, class rank etc), faculty/student ratios, graduation rate, freshman retention, and student
satisfaction. Trends will not automatically be attributed to RCM.
2. Research and Scholarly Activity Review
This component of the RCM review will examine effects
that RCM has had on our research and scholarly activity. This review will have two components.
One component will be a review of our external research activity based on revenue, mix of research
activity by college, mix of funding sources, number of proposals. The second component is more
subjective and will deal with the level of scholarly activity and unfunded research occurring
within the faculty. A sense of this will be gathered by reviewing the faculty annual reports
and through discussions with Deans and faculty in the general interviews.
3. Qualitative Academic Review by College
Each college will be asked to submit a report that summarizes the effect that RCM has had,
if any, on academic quality.
4. General Interviews and Individual Comments
Interviews with a cross-section of the University community will be conducted, to assess their perceptions of the effectiveness of the RCM system. These interviews will seek the views of the following individuals: The University President; Vice Presidents; and Deans. Also, interviews will be conducted with samples of the following groups: the Instructional Faculty, Research Faculty, PAT/OS/EE staff members, Faculty Senate, Department Chairs, and Service Unit managers. The RCM Review Committee will also provide the opportunity for any individual in the University community to express his or her views about the RCM system.
5. Quantitative Budget Review
The basic data in this review will be budgeted versus actual revenue and expenses over the
first four years of RCM. Fund balance activity will also be analyzed for the same period.
Other relevant data, such as reserve levels, indirect cost recovery, space assignments,
and personnel statistics, will also be reviewed. Trends in these various data will the
main focus of the review.
Review Committee Responsibility
The RCM Review Committee will be responsible for gathering all data, performing the necessary
analyses, and providing a critical evaluation. The Central Administration will be responsible
for providing adequate resources for those tasks. The most difficult task of the review
committee will be determining which events and data trends can be directly attributed to RCM.
Certainly other factors will effect the future of UNH over this time period, and the Review
Committee must use judgment to determine what the actual effect RCM had had at UNH. The
Committee’s final evaluation will be in the form of a written report submitted to the
President. The report will be distributed widely through printed and electronic means of
communications.
