2004 Action Plan - Context
Executive Summary | Context | Priorities | Appendix
The first key feature is the general economic condition that indicates continuing pressure on the state budget. We have been apprised of a 2.5% probable decrease for FY 04 and an additional 5.0% possible decrease for FY 05. While we anticipate significant additional support from the workload portion of the formula for FY 05 budget, if the Legislature approves the requested allocation, most of the increase will be absorbed through reductions in the State portion of the base budget and continuing operations to support the significantly increased number of credit hours. A second key feature is that the University System of Georgia (USG) is implementing a strategic plan that might influence our priorities.
The primary commitment is to support of instructional and strategic research programs that are aligned with Strategic Plan 2000. We will continue our progress in the development of systematic planning and evaluation mechanisms and processes within the institution. The Action Plan is to inform and guide our decisions.
For many years, we have informed allocation of net new revenues through the strategic plan. This year, we are taking a comprehensive look at the total Education & General budget through a process of examination of academic programs and all the activities that support the mission of the university. We will categorize programs, centers, and activities by their quality, centrality, viability, and comparative advantage. We will examine programs, centers, and activities that are less central and/or of low viability to identify potential funds for redirection. In this manner, we will ensure that all activities and programs are aligned with the strategic plan. The processes for determination of Quality, centrality, viability, and comparative advantage of programs, centers, and activities and for Identification of potential areas of focus can be found in Appendices 1 and 2 of this plan.
Decisions will be guided by the following principles:
- For academic units, enrollment trends, program quality, external support, and research productivity should be considered.
- For non-academic cost centers in support areas, reduced support should be given to those areas with higher costs than comparable institutions and to those less effective/efficient or central to the strategic plan. Such areas should develop plans to increase efficiency so that services will not be reduced.
- For auxiliary units where revenues exceed projections, state funds may be shifted away from their support, dependent on auxiliary fund balances.
<< Back to 2004 Action Plan Executive Summary