The SPG in consultation with the President, and in response to SBOE mandates, identifies new University- wide initiatives and programming efforts requiring institutional commitments. These institutional initiatives become integral components of the annual budget plan, although the Committee found few on campus who understand how the process works in practice, or how the annual budget plan relates to the strategic plan or actual budget allocations. The President directs the budget planning process within the guidelines set by the SBOE and the State Division of Financial Management. The process begins with the deliberations of the SPG and the “analysis of internal budget needs by the institution’s major organizational units,” conducted by “departmental faculty and administrators” and submitted through the Chairs, Deans, and Directors, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and two other Vice Presidents to the President. New program requests from Departments and Colleges must undergo extensive reviews by the Faculty Senate, Council of Deans, University Librarian, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President prior to incorporation into the annual budget plan for SBOE review and approval. Complicating the process even more, funding for the College of Technology flows to the University through a separate appropriation for the six technology schools, and the University accounts for related expenditures separately as well. Finally, the University prepares special budget requests for the Dental Education Program, Family Practice Residency, and the Museum of Natural History. The SBOE considers the requests from the campuses and then aggregates all but the new initiative or program proposals into a single “lump- sum” request to the Legislature for the System, and the State Division of Professional Technical Education submits an integrated request for the five technical schools (page 8). (See Recommendation Number 4.)

Following receipt of an appropriation of a “lump-sum” and any earmarked funds from the Legislature and the Governor, the SBOE allocates funds to the campuses out of the “lump sum” on the basis of “an enrollment workload adjustment formula,” with any new or earmarked funds directed specifically as authorized by the Legislature, and provides guidelines for employee compensation increases. However, the appropriation may or may not include sufficient funds to cover the salary increases. If not, the University must identify the funds from existing budgets or forego the increases, as has happened frequently in recent years. Once again, the lack of understanding among various groups across campus indicates the need for more communication about the way the SBOE divides the “lump sum” among the campuses. Committee members heard reports that the SBOE allocates funds in accordance with hidden agendas, favoring some campuses over others (page 8). (See Recommendation Number 4.)

Graduate programs in the social and behavioral sciences face many challenges as well as opportunities. The faculty members committed to graduate programs find they must take time away from undergraduate education and their own research to support graduate students. Allocations of teaching and research assistants (along with attendant Library resources) reflect historical patterns rather than a comparative analysis of Department needs. Such an analysis will mitigate the perceived inequities in the current allocation process. In addition to research and educational functions, the graduate programs provide needed assistance to Departments in teaching undergraduate courses. Without such support, some undergraduate programs will suffer. The faculty and the Chairs urge the development and implementation of a planning process based upon a vision and plan for the University and the College (page 18). (See Recommendations Number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8.)

Idaho State University functions as one of four senior public institutions of higher education in Idaho governed by the SBOE which has responsibility for all levels of education in the state. The governance system provides for appropriate institutional autonomy within the context of policy direction by the Board, with management flexibility for the campus administration. The SBOE posts its by-laws, rules, policies, and minutes on its website. In addition, the SBOE disseminates broadly its strategic and related plans and performance measures. It remains unclear how these measures affect planning and budgeting (page 58). (See Recommendation Number 4.)