Get documents about "Revenue Generation Committee Report
Document Sample
Revenue
Generation
Plan
Presented to Dr. Ron Turner
Executive Vice President
& Director of Cooperative Extension
Submitted by
Revenue Generation Committee
September 16, 2002
Revised October 8, 2002
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Revenue Generation Committee
Julie Middleton, Chair
John Amos
Van Ayers
David Baker
Al Black
Bob Broz
Nina Chen
Tony DeLong
Charlotte George
Tammy Gillespie
Rhonda Gibler
Wendy Harrington
Tom Henderson
Sandra Hodge
Bud Reber
Tony Rickard
Rebecca Travnichek
Jo Turner
Ex-Officio Members
Jim Ollar
Pat Sobrero
Additional Contributors
Marsha Alexander
Jo Britt-Rankin
Phil Campbell
Don Day
Glen Easter
Bob Miller
2
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Introduction
It is the mission of University Outreach and Extension to improve Missourian’s lives by
addressing their highest priorities through the application of research-based knowledge and
resources. It is our vision that we can improve people’s lives through relevant, lifelong learning.
It is our challenge to carry out our missio n and achieve our vision within a climate of shrinking
resources. Even within this climate, we must be poised to provide a level of excellence in
programming that is recognized in Missouri and across the nation. As we focus on our three
priority program areas of enhancing economic viability, building strong individuals, families and
communities, and creating healthy environments, we must insure that we have the tools
necessary for success. This is possible only if we have adequate funds. Funds are required to
attract, retain and maintain high-performing faculty and staff and to support continuous
improvement in our five critical success factors of learning and achievement, access and quality,
innovation, human resources and stewardship of resources.
However, the University of Missouri System FY02 budget was reduced by $80 million. State
funding for UM’s core budget for FY03 was cut by 10 percent. While campuses have the option
of raising fees and managing enrollment, University Outreach and Extension must seek other
alternatives. With this is mind, on July 18, 2002, Dr. Ron Turner, Executive Vice President and
Director of Cooperative Extension appointed the Revenue Generation Committee to recommend
methods for generating additional revenue to achieve our mission. The committee was asked to
submit a report of concrete actions to be taken to generate revenue and enhance cost recovery by
Sept 16, 2002.
The committee has completed its work. The ideas that have been generated are bold and require
a paradigm shift in thinking about whose responsibility it is to generate revenue. These ideas
will require shifts in policies and procedures and in professional development to build the
capacity of our workforce to generate revenue. This report outlines the process undertaken by
the committee; the principles that guided its work; and the ideas generated in the areas of gifts
and endowments, grants and contract acquisition, cost recovery and strategic partnerships.
Process Undertaken
The Revenue Generatio n Committee engaged in a six- week process that included expansive
research and strategic thinking to develop a set of recommendations that would chart our future
and insure success in the 21st century. At all times, the committee was guided by the mission of
UO/E and its Strategic Direction document, developing and adopting the set of principles below
to serve as philosophical underpinnings to guide the work and to insure that it remained true to
the UO/E mission and to the fundamental principles of our organization. The committee
functioned as a learning organization, with each member continuing to learn from the group.
Technology was used to meet and to learn from other states. The entire committee met weekly,
with subcommittees meeting additional times within each week under the leadership of a chair.
3
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Revenue Generation Committee Guiding Principles
Following are fundamental values that guided the Revenue Generation Committee’s
deliberations:
• Mission-driven programs
Any resource acquired will advance the mission. The issue to be supported must be
identified as a priority for the system/state/county, and the program to be delivered must be
research-based.
• Appropriate sources
Funds generated will be ethically and legally derived and not compromise the integrity of the
organization. Alternative revenue sources should be identified and assessed as to their
appropriateness.
• Appropriate uses
Alternative revenue will be used to sustain, enhance or expand educational outreach and
extension programs.
• Public good versus individual advancement
Funds will promote program activities that have positive societal outcomes.
• Responsibility of all personnel and stakeholders
Resource identification and acquisition to support priority programs is the responsibility of
all personnel, stakeholders and volunteers in the outreach and extension system.
• Efficiency and effectiveness
Attention must be paid to the cost/benefit ratio of programs.
• Accountability
All personnel and stakeholders will receive education and support for acquiring and
managing resources. This includes ongoing, active administrative support, in addition to
training.
• Teamwork versus entrepreneurial success
Entrepreneurial success must continue to improve teamwork and interdisciplinary efforts to
cause ever-increasing program impact.
• Fairness in performance appraisal
UO/E will acknowledge that opportunities to acquire additional resources vary.
• Incentives
Incentives will encourage attempts to secure external funding that supports continued
teamwork. Incentives must be appropriate, equitable and consistent with UO/E policies.
• Access
UO/E programs are open to all regardless of ability to pay. UO/E personnel and stakeholders
will make reasonable efforts to ensure access to all.
4
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Subcommittees
Using a workshop method designed to establish priorities, the following subcommittees were
identified:
1. Strategic Partnerships
2. Endowments and Gifts
3. Cost Recovery/Fee-Based Programs
4. Grants and Contracts
Executive Summary
This section provides a brief synopsis of the recommendations suggested by each of the four
subcommittees of the Revenue Generation Committee. Each recommendation is accompanied
by a projection of the funds to be generated and anticipated costs for implementing that
recommendation. A succinct list of action steps provides an overview of what must be done to
ensure success of that idea.
A more detailed summary of these recommendations is found in the “Summary Chart of
Recommendations with Action Steps and Timelines.” This chart is followed by complete reports
from the subcommittees.
The table below provides a summary of total funds to be generated and total associated costs
over a six- year period.
Total Amount To Be Generated
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Cumulative
TOTAL $560,000 $2,120,000 $22,370,000 $26,120,000 $29,870,000 $33,370,000 $114,410,000
Total Costs For Implementation
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Cumulative
TOTAL $308,100 $308,798 $322,694 $337,215 $352,389 $368,247 $1,997,441
5
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Individual Subcommittee Recommendations
Strategic Partnerships
Recommendation 1: Identify a person to take leadership in creating a
strategic partnerships working group. The group is to
scan the environment and assist in identifying
opportunities for UO/E faculty and administrators to
forge new partnerships that generate fees through grants
and contracts, gifts and endowments, and fee-based
programs.
Projected Amount to be Generated: $0
Anticipated Cost of Recommendation: $0
Action Steps:
a. Identify a leadership position and create a strategic partnership(s) working group to:
(1) scan the environment, (2) assist in identifying partnership opportunities and (3)
suggest opportunities to UO/E faculty and administration for new partnerships that
will generate fees, grants and contracts, and resource development in gifts and
endowments. It is suggested that this person be a current employee.
b. Review, update and/or renew existing statewide memorandums of agreement and
understanding with organizations and agencies with an eye toward strengthening and
developing additional partnership opportunities.
c. Identify lead contact(s) within UO/E to proactively nurture existing and new strategic
partnerships with 16 executive departments of Missouri state government. Extend
statewide contacts to regional basis as appropriate.
d. Where appropriate, identify lead contact(s) from within UO/E campus and off-campus
faculty to proactively nurture partnerships with the 14 cabinet-level departments and
agencies and 63 independent agencies and government corporations within the federal
government.
e. Identify specific corporate, trade/commodity organizations and foundations for
partnership. Lead UO/E contacts would work with those partners to develop potential
revenue generation opportunities.
Task of UO/E Leader:
Based on a review of common program interests and outcomes and in keeping with UO/E’s
guiding principles, (a) contact, (b) develop a rapport and (c) subsequently partner with a specific
set of partners through submission of concept papers and/or pre-proposals for their consideration.
Identify those statewide and local foundations that meet the aforementioned criteria, and initiate
written and/or oral contact with them in search of additional appropriate funds. Those
establishing partnerships would work closely with those leading other areas of effort so that
strategic partnerships eventually result in revenue.
6
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Gifts and Endowments
Recommendation 2: Establish a UO/E Office of Endowments and Gifts.
Projected Amount to be Generated: $100 million over the next 6 years
Year 1 ? 0
Year 2 ? 0
Year 3 ? $750,000 corpus by 2005
Year 6 ? $100 million corpus by 2008
Anticipated Cost of Recommendation: $220,000
Action Steps:
a. Hire a director and support staff, and appoint an advisory council.
b. Develop and implement a statewide fund-raising program to provide a
dependable, long-range base of private financial support for continuing
enrichment of UO/E programs.
c. Hire consultants to conduct a case statement and feasibility study.
d. Set appropriate targets for fund raising ($20 million per year) that would assure
UO/E programs the flexibility and capability to meet the wants and needs of
Missourians.
e. Clearly identify major gift and Named Program giving opportunities.
f. Design and use marketing tools.
g. Involve all faculty and staff in the program, clearly identifying major gift
prospects.
7
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Cost Recovery
Recommendation 3: Ask all UO/E programmatic and administrative units to
develop a collaborative fee-generation plan to generate
funds equivalent to 2 percent of the annual salary costs
for the unit.
Projected Amount to be Generated: Minimum of $620,000 per fiscal year
FY03 $310,000 by June 30, 2003
FY04+ $620,000 per year (one -half
remitted in December, one -
half remitted in June)
Anticipated Cost of Recommendation: $12,600
Action Steps:
a. Establish an appropriate standard fee or per-participant-charge for each Named
Program (duty of Cost Recovery Implementation Committee and Program Leaders).
Revenue generated above actual costs (standard fee/per-participant fee to be paid to
UO/E, as well as personnel time, as part of actual costs — See Program Costs and
Revenue Generation Worksheet, Appendix 3-B of Final Report) on Named Programs
to be shared based upon a pro rata distribution of contributions to the program. For
example: 60 percent host unit; 20 percent county, region or campus; 10 percent state
program area (CAFNR, HES, 4-H/Youth, CD, B&I, Other); and 10 percent UO/E.
The set fee and the appropriate percent of profit from Named Programs to be remitted
to UO/E Administrative Management. UO/E Administrative Management to
distribute funds to correct entity — region or campus, program area and UO/E system.
Revenue generated in this fashion is to be used for salaries and programming efforts.
b. For non-Named Programs, faculty use program/service categories as guidelines and
emphasize team programmatic efforts to generate revenue. Using the Cost Recovery
Planning Guide and the Program Costs/Revenue Generation Worksheet (see
appendices), faculty determine a solid breakeven point on all programming efforts.
Personnel time costs to be included as part of actual costs and returned to UO/E
Administrative Management Office at least semiannually for supporting salaries.
c. Encourage use of continuing educations units (CEUs) in all programming efforts. Set
a standard fee of $15 per CEU. Sharing of revenue to occur as follows: $5
originating unit, $5 host unit (county) and $5 UO/E. Revenue generated is to be used
for salaries and building programming efforts.
d. Charge a $10 test administration/proctoring fee for individuals taking independent
study exams through the MU Center for Distance and Independent Study or similar
exams from other universities. Sharing of fee to be $5 to host unit (county) and $5
returned to UO/E.
e. Charge county outreach and extension centers for materials produced by MU
8
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Extension Publications and/or increase the cost of publications (i.e., set fee per
number of pages) to the county. Revenue collected to be used to update and design
new publications that will be obtained from the web (not in paper format). These
funds to be collected directly from county extension offices through billing.
f. Sell various professional development opportunities, trainings and curricula to
organizations and agencies within Missouri and across the nation. For example,
Community Development Academy, facilitator training, small business development
training, Focus on Kids and Money Action Plan. Mass marketing of these
opportunities would be a necessity.
Grants and Contracts
Recommendation 4: Develop an Infrastructure for Obtaining Grants and
Contracts
Projected Amount to be Generated: $11,000,000 with $2,036,000 in indirect
Year 1 ? $500,000 ($92,500 in indirect)
Year 2 ? $1,250,000 ($231,250 in indirect)
Year 3 ? $2,250,000 ($416,250 in indirect)
Year 4 ? $3,000,000 ($555,000 in indirect)
Year 5 ? $4,000,000 ($740,000 in indirect)
Anticipated Cost of Recommendation: $75,500 per year
Action Steps:
a. Establish an infrastructure to include staff, policies and procedures, a web-based
information system, professional development plan and incentives for grant generation
and efforts. Create a network of interested faculty and staff to pursue grant
opportunities. Establish 10 grants and contracts counselors with a clear description of
duties, performance expectations and rewards to oversee the preparation of numerous
proposals per year.
b. Expand the administrative support and tracking of grants and contracts through an
expanded position within the Administrative Management Team (AMT) with specific
responsibility for researching grant opportunities.
c. Appoint a committee to develop a comprehensive website regarding grant
opportunities, grant policies and procedures, and current proposals and awards.
d. Establish a set of training and professional development opportunities to improve
human capital relative to grants and contracts.
e. Establish an implementation committee to define and strengthen the relationship
among campuses, the system and counties as they pursue grants, establishing clear
policies for these efforts.
9
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
f. Establish incentives associated with grant activities: Set aside 5 percent of the
recovered facilities and administration (F&A), and establish an application process for
disseminating the pool for faculty incentives, such as funding professional
development or promoting other grant opportunities.
10
Revenue Generation Plan Executive Summary Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Projected Revenue And Anticipated Costs
FY03 FY04 Total FY05 Total FY06 Total FY07 Total FY08 Total Cumulative
Total Total
Dollars raised
Strategic Partnerships $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Gifts & Endowments $0 $750,000 $20,250,000 $23,500,000 $26,500,000 $29,000,000 $100,000,000
Cost Recovery $310,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $3,410,000.
Fee-Based Programs
Grants & Contracts $250,000 $750,000 $1,500,000 $2,000,000 $2,750,000 $3,750,000 $11,000,000
Total $560,000 $2,120,000 $22,370,000 $26,120,000 $29,870,000 $33,370,000 $114,410,000
FY03 FY04 Total FY05 Total FY06 Total FY07 Total FY08 Total Cumulative
Total Total
Dollars available to
support UO/E core funding
Strategic Partnerships $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Gifts & Endowments $0 $0 $37,500 $1,050,000 $2,225,000 $3,550,000 $6,862,500
Cost Recovery Fee- $310,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $620,000 $3,410,000
Based Program
Grants & Contracts $125,000 $375,000 $750,000 $1,000,000 $1,375,000 $1,875,000 $5,500,000
Total $435,000 $995,000 $1,407,500 $2,670,000 $4,220,000 $6,045,000 $15,772,500
FY03 FY04 Total FY05 Total FY06 Total FY07 Total FY08 Total Cumulative
Total Total
Cost of Implementation
Strategic Partnerships $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Gifts & Endowments $220,000 $229,900 $240,246 $251,057 $262,354 $274,160 $1,477,716
Cost Recovery $12,600 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,600
Fee-Based Program
Grants & Contracts $75,500 $78,898 $82,448 $86,158 $90,035 $94,087 $507,125
Total $308,100 $308,798 $322,694 $337,215 $352,389 $368,247 $1,997,441
11
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Summary Charts Of Recommendations
With Action Steps And Timelines
Recommendation 1 Identify an internal person to take leadership in creating
a strategic partne rships working group that will scan
the environment and assist in identifying opportunities
for UO/E faculty and administrators to forge new
partnerships that generate fees through grants and
contracts, gifts and endowments, and fee-based
programs.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (by June 30, 2004) cannot be computed
Long-term cannot be computed
Anticipated Costs $0
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Approve/Reject/Amend Executive Vice President ?
Subcommittee.
Name Leadership and Office of Executive Vice Within 60 Days of Step 1
Members of Working President
Group.
Review, update and/or Working Group No Later than March 1,
renew existing statewide 2003
Memorandums of
Agreement and
Understanding with
organizations and agencies
with an eye toward
developing additional
partnership opportunities
Appoint lead contact(s) Working Group March 1, 2003
within UO/E, as listed in
Appendix A, to proactively
nurture existing and new
strategic partnerships with
16 executive departments of
Missouri state government.
Extend statewide contacts
to regional basis as
appropriate.
12
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Where appropriate, identify Working Group March 1, 2003
lead contact(s) from within
UO/E campus and off-
campus faculty to
proactively nurture
partnerships with
Federal cabinet level
departments, agencies and
government corporations.
See Appendix B.
Identify specific corporate, Working Group March 1, 2003
trade/commodity
organizations and develop
partnerships.
Develop a rapport, and (C) Working Group March 1, 2003
subsequently partner with a
specific set of national
private foundations through
submission of concept
papers and/or pre-proposals
for their consideration.
Identify those statewide and
local foundations that meet
the aforementioned criteria,
and initiate written and/or
oral contact with them in
search of additional
appropriate partnerships.
Semiannual Review of Working Group Sept. 1, 2003
Action Plan
Semiannual Review of Working Group Sept. 1, 2003
Action Plan
13
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 2 Establish a UO/E Endowment and Gifts Program to
raise $100 million during the next five years.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (by June 30, 2004) $750,000
Long-term $100,000,000
Anticipated Costs $220,000
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Visit with Phil Campbell, Dr. Turner and appropriate September 2002
UMR and other campus staff
endowment directors.
Visit with one or more of Dr. Turner and designated To be determined by Dr.
the following consultants: staff Turner
Marts & Lundy,
Grenzebach & Glier,
Ketchum, Inc.
Make decision to establish Dr. Turner To be determined by Dr.
an Endowment and Gifts Turner
Program.
Appropriate funds to open a Dr. Turner October 2002
UO/E Endowment Office.
Appoint a search Director of HR and Dr. November and December
committee. Identify and Turner 2002
hire director.
Appoint Advisory Council. Director of UO/E Nov. 1, 2002
Endowments and Gifts and
Dr. Turner
Hire necessary staff to Director of UO/E 2003 as needed
operate office. Endowment and Gifts
14
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Interview consultants, Dr. Turner Jan. 1, 2003
develop a work plan and
contract with a consultant to
develop the case statement
and perform the feasibility
study.
Open UO/E Endowment Director of UO/E Feb. 1, 2003
and Gifts Office. Endowments and Gifts and
Dr. Turner
Develop case statement, Director of UO/E May 2003
complete feasibility study Endowment and Gifts
and marketing tools.
Activate Giving Program. Director of UO/E July 2003
Endowment and Gifts and
Advisory Council
Implement communication Director of UO/E August 2003
plan. Endowment and Gifts and
Advisory Council
Collect names of potential Director of UO/E September 2003 and
donors. Endowment and Gifts and ongoing
all paid employees
Raise $750,000 for the UO/E Endowment and Gifts April 2004
corpus. Office and all employees
Raise $100 million. UO/E Endowment and Gifts April 2008
Office and all employees
15
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 3 Ask all UO/E programmatic and administrative units to
develop a collaborative fee-generation plan to generate
funds equivalent to 2 percent of the annual salary costs
for the unit.
Specific Strategies for Generating Revenue
The Cost Recovery Implementation Committee would work with Program Leaders to
establish an appropriate standard fee or per-participant-charge for each Named Program.
Revenue generated above actual costs (standard fee/per-participant fee would be paid to
UO/E, as well as personnel time, as part of actual costs — See Program Costs and
Revenue Generation Worksheet, Appendix 3-B of Final Report) for Named Programs
would be shared based upon a pro rata distribution of contributions to the program. For
example: 60 percent host unit (county); 20 percent county, region or campus; 10 percent
state program area (CAFNR, HES, 4-H/Youth, CD, B&I, Other); and 10 percent UO/E.
The set fee and the appropriate percent of profit from Named Programs would be
remitted to UO/E Administrative Management Office. Administrative Management
would distribute funds to correct entity — region or campus, program area and UO/E
system. Revenue generated would be used for salary dollars and building programming
efforts.
For determining costs of non-named programs, faculty would use program/service
categories as guidelines and emphasize team programmatic efforts to generate revenue.
Using the Cost Recovery Planning Guide and the Program Costs/Revenue Generation
Worksheet, faculty would determine a solid breakeven point on all programming efforts.
Personnel time costs would be included as part of actual costs and would be used to
support salaries.
Encourage use of Continuing Educations Units (CEUs) in all programming efforts. Set a
standard fee of $15 per CEU. Sharing of revenue to occur as follows: $5 originating unit
(ETCS handles paperwork), $5 host unit (county), and $5 UO/E. Revenue generated
would be used to support salaries and programming efforts.
Charge a $10 test administration/proctoring fee for individuals taking exams through
independent study at the MU Center for Distance and Independent Study or similar
exams from other universities. Sharing of fee would be $5 to host unit (county) and $5
returned to UO/E.
Charge county extension centers for materials produced by MU Publications Office
and/or increase the cost of publications (i.e., set fee per number of pages) to the county.
Revenue collected by the publications office to be used to update and design new
publications that would be obtained from the web (not in paper format). These funds
would be collected directly from county extension offices through billing.
Sell various professional development opportunities, trainings and curricula to
organizations and agencies within Missouri and across the nation. Examples include
16
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Community Development Academy, facilitator training, small business development
training, Focus on Kids and Money Action Plan. Mass marketing of these opportunities
would be a necessity.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Minimum of $620,000 per fiscal year
FY03 $310,000 by June 30, 2003
FY04+ $620,000 per year (one- half remitted in December,
one-half remitted in June)
Anticipated Cost: $12,500
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Provide feedback on Dr. Turner Oct. 1, 2002
recommendations.
Appoint four individuals to Dr. Turner Oct. 1, 2002
the Cost Recovery
Implementation Committee;
select a committee chair.
Discuss revenue generation Revenue Generation Task Oct. 15, 2002
strategies at program issues Force
meetings via ITV with Cost Recovery
campus and field faculty, as Implementation Committee
well as administration. Dr. Turner
Finalize revenue generation Cost Recovery Nov. 1, 2002
calculation worksheets and Implementation Committee
remittance form. Program Leaders
Eileen Bennett & Sandy
Stegall
UO/E Administrative
Management
Prepare the calculation Cost Recovery Nov. 15, 2002
worksheets, etc. for online Implementation Committee
capabilities; begin designing UO/E Administrative
the website for tracking and Management
reporting remitted revenue. Kate Akers
17
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Develop a hands-on training Cost Recovery Nov. 30, 2002
for using planning guide, Implementation Committee
calculation worksheets, and RITs
remittance form in ETCS
electronic and hard copy
format.
Hold regional and campus Cost Recovery Dec. 17, 2002
training sessions on using Implementation Committee
planning guide, calculation Program Leaders
worksheets and remittance RITS
form.
Begin using all worksheets UO/E Faculty 1-1-03
for Revenue Generation. Regional Directors
Remit funds. Department Chairs
Program Leaders
Complete design of UO/E Administrative June 1, 2003
Revenue Generation Management
website for tracking and Kate Akers
reporting remitted dollars,
viewable from Staff
Resources link on
http://outreach.missouri.edu.
Appoint committee to Dr. Turner July 1, 2003
investigate promotion and Dr. Julie Middleton
marketing of UO/E
professional development
opportunities, curricula and
conferences to Missouri
organizations and agencies,
as well as nationwide.
18
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 4 Form a Budget Advisory Committee (separate from the
Revenue Generation Task Force) to serve as a “reality
check” for Administrative Management. The group
would be comprised of field faculty (one per region),
MECCLC and campus representatives. The group
would check accuracy and understanding of UO/E
budget information (campus, field, system) and
communicate with UO/E faculty and staff, extension
councils and stakeholders the importance of revenue
generation.
Projected Amount to be Generated $0
Anticipated Costs $8,000
Action Steps By Whom Date
Submit revenue generation RG Task Force Sept. 16, 2002
report to Dr. Turner
Provide feedback on Dr. Turner Oct. 1, 2002
recommendations.
Select Budget Advisory Dr. Turner Oct. 1, 2002
Committee (BAC) and acting
committee chair.
Develop communication plan BAC Chair Oct. 1, 2002
for regional, campus, council UO/E Administrative
and stakeholder meetings. Management
Complete communication BAC Nov. 1, 2002
plan; begin dialogue across UO/E Administrative
state. Use ITV to inform Management
faculty and staff on regularly
scheduled faculty meetings
with BAC members
available at ITV sites to
answer questions and note
concerns.
19
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Action Steps By Whom Date
Use major marketing/media BAC Jan. 1, 2003
techniques to communicate to UO/E Administrative
stakeholders. Management
UO/E Extension
Communications
Recommendation 5 Expand the current pre -award position within UO/E
administrative ma nagement to add responsibility for
tracking potential funding opportunities and alerting
program leaders to those opportunities. Maintain a
database of faculty interests and activities in project
work, and maintain the UO/E grants website.
Project Amount to be Generated
Short-term (first year) $200,000
Long-term (by fifth year) $3,250,000
Anticipated Costs $35,000
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Write a job description to reflect the change in Assistant Director of 30 days from
role for the pre-award position. Administrative Management approval
Adjust job description of currently vacant Assistant Director of 30 days from
administrative assistant position to include non- Administrative Management approval
grant duties currently performed in the pre-award
area.
Evaluate abilities and desire to alter duties of Assistant Director of 60 days from
current staff member in pre-award position to Administrative Management approval
carry out the tasks required of the redefined
position.
Post whichever position will need to be filled by Assistant Director of 60 days from
an outside candidate. Administrative Management approval
Hire new staff member. Assistant Director of 90 days from
Administrative Management approval
20
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 6 Set aside 5 percent of additional recovered facilities and
administration (F&A) beyond FY02 baseline to provide
a pool of funds to be used for incentives for faculty.
These funds would support additional professional
development opportunities for staff and promote further
work toward other grants and contracts. Individuals
eligible to apply for these funds would have been
involved in grant activities in the prior year. A
maximum of $1,000 would be available per person per
year for professional development activities and $5,000
per proposal for seed money toward other grant
opportunities.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (first year) $0
Long-term (five years) $1,500,000
Anticipated Costs
Short-term Year One $32,500 (in lost use of F&A for general operations)
year one
Long-term Years two, three, four and five - $220,000,
potentially
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Establish an advisory EVP’s office Within 30 days of approval
committee to distribute of recommendation.
incentive funds.
Establish policies and Grant incentive committee Within 3 months of
procedures to govern use of committee’s establishment.
funds.
Accept first applications for Grant incentive committee April 2003
use of funds. – staff members
21
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 7 Evaluate UO/E’s current capacity for training faculty
and staff on specific areas related to grants and
contracts. Develop modular training so that individuals
at all levels of understanding could take advantage of
content specific training (e.g. finding grants, managing
grants). Develop BlackBoard courses to allow for web-
based training. Provide 24:7, “just-in-time” training to
best serve UO/E faculty in pursuit of grants.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (first year) $0
Long-term (by the fifth year) $1,500,000
Anticipated Costs $5,000
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Establish team to develop UO/E Professional 30 days from approval
training modules. Development Office.
Suggest trainings that Grants training team. 60 days from formation of
should be developed in team.
BlackBoard format and
trainings that should be
made available in the
professional development
schedule for face-to- face or
ITV presentation.
Develop training modules. Grants training team. 6 months from approval of
particular modules by
Professional Development
Office.
22
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 8 Develop a comprehensive website regarding grant
opportunities, grant policy and procedures, current
proposals and awards, and training opportunities. Ask
an implementation committee to work on site content.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (in first year) $100,000
Long-term (first five years) $1,500,000
Anticipated Costs $3,000
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Appoint committee EVP’s office – secretary to Within 30 days of approval
members (including variety committee will be pre- of recommendation
of campus and field faculty) award staff from AMT.
to determine base content
for website.
Examine example websites Grants website committee Work completed within 90
and outline the basic days.
content needed for the site.
Develop policies and AMT staff members – Each policy and procedure
procedures. depending on the content of to be completed within 30
the policy. days of the committee’s
request for the policy.
Maintain website on an Pre-award AMT staff Ongoing
ongoing basis with member with assistance
recommendations for from UO/E
improvements accepted Communications and MIS
from any user of the site. staff.
23
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 9 Strengthen and define the relationship among campus,
system and county grant-writing activities. Set policies
to clarify when grants should be filed through campus,
system or county.
Projected Amount to be Generated
May not cause a direct increase in revenue but will
save time spent by faculty and staff in determining
which processes they should use. Clearer processes
may result in more proposals completed.
Anticipated Costs $0
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Review current Administrative officers at Immediately
campus/system relationship the system and campus
with regard to pursuing levels of UO/E.
grant opportunities.
Set clear policies and UO/E Administrative Within 90 days
practices on how funding Management with input
for staff effort can be from staff at the campus
collected at the county and county levels.
level.
Inform faculty and staff of UO/E Administrative Within 120 days
grant policies. Management Team.
24
Revenue Generation Plan Revised Oct. 8, 2002
Recommendation 10 Designate a network of faculty with responsibility for
pursuing grant opportunities in relevant subject areas.
Designate a minimum of 10 individuals as Grants and
Contracts Counselors (GCC) with a clear description of
duties and performance expectations. Designate the
number of proposals GCCs are to pursue each year, and
relieve them of other facets of their positions. Current
specialists could apply for this role as a percentage of
their appointment with approval of the Regional
Director and county council and communication with
appropriate Program Leader. As incentive, GCCs could
receive up to a designated maximum stipend a year,
dependent on their successful generation of grant funds.
Projected Amount to be Generated
Short-term (first year) $200,000
Long-term (by fifth year) $3,250,000
Anticipated Costs $0
Action Steps By Whom Timeline
Establish a working group EVP’s Office 30 days from approval
(including several field and
campus faculty, an RD and
a program leader).to
determine the best methods
for determining GCC
designations.
Determine duties and Grants network working Within 60 days of formation
incentives for GCCs. group. of group.
Request GCC applications. Grants network working Within 60 days of formation
group. of group.
Provide orientation and Grants network working Within 60 days of selection.
training as appropriate. group.
25
Related docs
