Officer Reports for Sept. 5Th 2014

1

Officer Reports for Sept. 5th 2014

GSA Treasurer’s Report

In an attempt to promote fiscal transparency, facilitate future budgeting, and to establish best practices in terms of the Graduate Student Association’s (GSAs) fiscal solvency, this report is written to inform the Assembly of the logic based approach used to create this year’s budget. In addition to educating the assembly on how projected revenue is estimated, this report will also attempt to provide justification for expected costs. Importantly, it should be noted that the projected revenue has been under estimated, with costs over estimated to ensure that worst case, the GSA remains solvent and at least pays for the services guaranteed to all fee-paying graduate students.

Projected Revenue

Currently the GSA’s only source of revenue is the mandated student fee of $22 per semester. As a result, projected revenue can be estimated for the fiscal year by multiplying the number of enrolled graduate students by the fee. However, initial regression analyses indicated that using previous enrollment data did not provide an accurate enough model to ensure fiscal stability. This is because data was only available for the past 8 years, and because there are numerous variables (i.e., students opting out of the fee, or prematurely leaving their programs) which increased the variability. Additionally, the increase of the mandated GSA fee for part time students has resulted in an extra $20,000 in yearly revenue.

Generally speaking, to estimate revenue, previous administrations have used numbers provided by University Auxiliary Services (UAS) which seem to base our revenue on number of students who will likely be attending SUNY. This is also somewhat inaccurate. As a result, to estimate revenue for the 2014-2015 fiscal year, enrollment records from 2006 to 2014 were examined (see Figure 1).

Based on enrollment data over the past 8 years, several considerations in making the budget are warranted. First, enrollment of graduate students is slowly declining. This indicates that an appropriate budget, at least for the time being, should under estimate the enrolled projections given to us by UAS. Second, as per Table 1, there is a higher rate of enrollment for the fall, relative to the spring. This means that at the very least, a budget should reflect that income will be larger in the fall, than the spring. This is not to say the GSA must use that extra revenue in the fall semester, but rather that when considering what we can and cannot fund, we may need to be cognizant of saving fall generated revenue, to pay spring operating costs.

On average, between the fall and spring terms, we have roughly 4,300 fee paying members per semester (usually 4,400 students in the fall, and 4,200 in the spring). To ensure that revenue is conservatively estimated, we subtracted 200 from this average total (generally speaking, $100 students end up not paying the fee based on the enrollment projections we are given), meaning that we’re estimating 4,100 fee paying students enrolled in the fall and spring semesters. This creates a projected revenue of $180,400. Now that we have a conservative number for estimated revenue, money will be allocated to ensure that all base operating costs can be covered.

1

Base Award Table

Base Award Justification

As noted in the Base Award Table, the majority of funding is directed at covering GSA services and operations. Most amounts are similar to the same budget that was approved last year. Because projected revenue has increased, we were able to expand services by providing printing to more students. In an effort to promote fiscal transparency, we also decomposed lines. For example, last year most expenses were just labeled as “office expenses”. For this year we created separate lines of funding so that the Assembly can see the types of office expenses we use. We also attempted to divide the cost of printing and paper use, so that the Assembly may have a better idea of how much it costs to print, and how much paper is used, so that future administrations will have a better idea of how much money is needed to increase the total number of prints allowed, or how much money can be saved by reducing prints.

Additionally, we also attempted to separate the costs of things such as paper and printing, so that future e-board members can better estimate how much increasing or decreasing printing would cost. The current estimated costs of printing and paper allow us to anticipate increased demand given the down town printer and an influx of student traffic as a result of proactive out reach.

Note that all costs are estimated to be maximums (i.e., whether or not we could pay if every single graduate student used all GSA services). Previous fiscal data suggests that this is not likely to occur, and that some of these lines of funding will likely have leftover money which will be recycled into next year’s surplus.

Based on our under estimate of revenue ($180,400), and our overestimate of costs ($180,020), the GSA will remain solvent (with $380 left over) if ALL students use ALL available services over the year.As per Figure 2, we are spending 47% on services, 45% on operations, and 8% on professional development and advocacy

However, in addition to the estimate revenue, we have carried over a large surplus from the previous fiscal year, in the amount of $92,849. Traditionally, the GSA retains a surplus of roughly $40,000. This last surplus was so high thanks to the fiscal conservative practices employed by my predecessor, Jess Aubrin, who worked hard to ensure that the GSA remained solvent.

Surplus Award Table

Surplus Award Justification

We propose to assign $41,000 of last year’s $92,849 surplus toward supplemental costs. Like other money, the surplus funds would be fully documented and reported to the Assembly. As previously noted, the GSA generally generates a surplus of $40,000. By allocating $41,000 toward the proposed lines (see the surplus award table above), we will still have a remaining surplus of $52,229.

First, the need for grants is apparent. Numerous graduate students apply for grants, and often, the overall cost of grants exceeds our awards. As a result, we suggesting supplementing this year’s grant budget with an extra $10,000.

In addition to grants, the GSA provides money to recognized graduate student organizations (RGSOs). An analysis of RGSO allocations suggests that the money currently directed at RGSOs is adequate. For example, although just about every RGSO applies for the full amount we are able to award, many RGSOs do not end up spending all of the money awarded. In the spring of 2014, RGSOs spent, on average, 70 cents for every 1 dollar they were given. However, as outreach from the strategic plans is carried out, there is a chance student interest in forming RGSOs could surge. As a result, we are asking for $5,000 to be directed to the RGSO line for additional funding if needed.

The bulk of the allocated surplus ($19,000) is currently awarded to strategic plans. Although these plans vary, additional funding may be needed to carry them out. For example, the Treasurer is requesting $1,500 for their strategic plan. Roughly $1,100 would go toward iClickers for Assembly meetings, with $400 going toward internal research costs (i.e., survey costs for the Needs Assessment). Each officer can address how their money will be used, and will report any use of funding to the Treasurer, who will then in turn rely aggregated information to the Assembly.

The other portion of the surplus ($7,000) within professional development is directed toward NAGPS. This money will be used to send Assembly representatives to important NAGPS functions located in Washington D.C., as well as Missouri. The executive board suggests to the Assembly that investing in the relationship with NAGPS will be a worthy endeavor. This organization is in a unique position to provide data, training, support, and networking geared toward strengthening the Graduate Student Association.

As per Figure 3, our allocated surplus is directed toward services (37%), as well as professional development and advocacy (63%). No surplus has been allocated to operations (0%), as all operation costs are currently covered by our base revenue.

Total awards and amount paid to date (as of 7/26/2014, the most recent ledger provided by UAS), can be viewed in the proceeding table.

1

Cumulative Budget (Base / Surplus / Total) With Expenses

1

Concluding Remarks

The base award ($180,020) with surplus ($41,000) puts us at an estimated award of $221,020 for the fall 2014 academic year. As noted in Figure 4, we are allocating $100,020(45%) toward GSA services, $80,000 (36%) toward operations, and $41,000 (19%) toward professional development and advocacy.

Importantly, as previously noted, costs have been over estimated to anticipate increased student demands. This means that, although we are budgeting for expenses totally $221,020, total expenses are likely to be lower. Additionally, projected revenue based on enrollment has been under estimated, should enrollment significantly drop for the spring semester. As a result, we can say with a great degree of certainty that next year's surplus will be at least $52,229, or $12,229 more than what the GSA usually carries over as a surplus.

Figure 1. Graduate Enrollment Records (fall, 2006 – spring 2014)

Figure 2. Pie chart of allocation of base GSA revenue

Figure 3. Pie chart of allocation of surplus GSA revenue

Figure 4. Pie chart of allocation of total GSA revenue

GSA Summer Budget Addendum

The final report given by my predecessor covered expenses through May 1st, 2014. The following table outlines expenses incurred over the summer.The vast majority of these expenses were from RGSOs who had yet to hand in their final expense requests for their end of the year events (7,958.38), and individuals seeking travel and research grants through the summer (6,252.04). All expenses are in line with the tentative summer budget approved by the assembly at the final meeting of the 2014 academic year.

1

Vice President’s Report – Kat Slye

I still need RGSO Committee volunteers. This committee is a necessity in order to allocate money for the fall semester and the later the committee is created the later RGSOs will get their allocations.
A reminder to review the updated RGSO handbook as things have changed. Contact myself or Caitlin if you have questions.
RGSO Training will be towards the end of September. We will let you know dates, and times as soon as possible. I plan to hold one downtown and one or two sessions in the uptown office.
Please remember that RGSO Presidents and/or Treasurers are required to attend RGSO training.

Grants Report – Kim Berg

The Fall Grants Application window will be closing September 1. While there are just a handful of applications currently, as has been typical in past semesters, I suspect several more students will be applying in the next week. In addition, remaining summer awardees are finishing and submitting their reimbursement packets.

The Fall 2014 application process has remained the same as the updated procedure, introduced during Fall 2013 and moved to MyInvolvement in Spring 2014. However, I will be developing a survey for the Graduate Student Body in the coming months, in an effort to further reform the grants applications and procedures in order to best serve the UAlbany grad students. Therefore, I will keep the Assembly updated as this progresses and ask that, when the time comes, you notify your constituents and ask for their participation in the survey. As one of the most widely used programs sponsored by the GSA, more feedback will enable us to continually update and offer a more productive and valuable program. Therefore, participation in the survey is critical to provide necessary feedback for the ultimate betterment of the grants program.

In addition, the Grants Chair and Treasurer will be looking into new allocation models that will complement feedback from the Graduate Student Body, in order that grant funds are most appropriately awarded and distributed. We also aim to create a more competitive program, offering larger awards for particularly strong applications. More about these new models will be discussed at future assembly meetings throughout the academic year.

Programming Chair Report – Hanna Pageau

- A Orientation for all graduate students was held, the numbers for Wednesday were very good and Thurday/Friday's numbers are pending and will be wholly reported on during the Assembly meeting.

- The next event is a joint effort for a speaker with Sustainability.

- The next wholly GSA event will be a mixer for RGSO e-boards and representatives to help everyone get to know each other, foster networking and bonding opportunities, and allow everyone a chance to meet the e-board.

MCAA Report – Amani Edwards

Nothing Reported

President’s Report – Caitlin Janiszewski

Resignations: Unfortunately, we received the resignation of the elected MCAA chair in the first week of June. As some of you know I have become far too accustomed to resignations so I have had to be prepared at all times to find replacements for just about any position. Once I was informed of Brittany’s resignation, I reached out to Amani Edwards who accepted and has worked as our acting MCAA chair since. We also lost our Lead Senator this summer. Ryan Gregoire did great work, helping me review applications for Senators and Senate Council reps, and making a critical contribution to our strategic plan. Regrettably, Ryan’s employment situation made it impossible for him to attend Senate meetings. Ryan recommended and I agreed that Klil Neori was the best choice for an acting Lead Senator. Klil has done a fantastic job picking up right where Ryan left off. His great work is reflected in his report.

Office: We spent most of the summer dealing with installation of new circuits and then internet. It was a very frustrating process but we were able to open the offices on time. We have two new offices in Campus Center 307 & 308, which we will remain in for the foreseeable future due to the Campus Center expansion project. We are working on improving the aesthetics of the offices to make it a welcoming place.

We also hired and trained new staff. We received 130 applicants and hired 4 office managers, one of which is also our IT consultant.

Bylaws: The GSA E-Board worked very hard to complete and send a new proposed set of bylaws to the bylaws committee by July 1st. We feel that the new bylaws incorporate the spirit of what the bylaws committee originally proposed, but we hope that our contributions worked to reduce redundancies, simplify, and clarify important elements.

Strategic Plans: Following the bylaws, the GSA E-Board worked on a strategic plan which includes an advocacy vision statement, prepared by the President, a professional development vision statement prepared by the Vice President, and an approval message from the MCAA Chair. In addition to these vision statements there is a list of goals which accompany this vision. The much longer appendix includes the officer agendas which support the strategic plan. These agendas lay out the steps we will take to achieve these goals and work towards our vision.

SUNY SA: The SUNY Student Assembly has already taken proactive steps to get input from the UAlbany community. They held a town hall meeting at the beginning of August during which they fielded questions and engaged us about some of the goals we are proposing on our strategic plan. Particularly the Equity and Inclusion chair is supporting us on our Ban the Box Campaign which is outlined in the strategic plan. I have been in regular communication with our SUNY SA caucus rep Ana Lubitz. She has informed me that the fall conference for SUNY SA is scheduled for October 17th-19th at RIT Inn / Convention Center. If anyone has any questions or concerns which should be brought to the attention of our state-wide governance body please bring it to my attention and I will forward it to our caucus rep or the appropriate SUNY SA director.