Changes made this year in the process to allocate funds to
student groups on campus have generated largely positive reviews
from councilmembers.
The Undergraduate Students Association Council voted Sept. 27 to
allocate over $57,000 from the Student Organization Operational
Fund to 122 student groups for their fall-quarter budgets.
Operational budgets are limited to expenses such as officer
stipends, supplies, advertising, travel and registration for
retreats and conferences. Programming funds are allocated
separately.
This round of allocations was the first from the new quarterly
fund, under a different system than in previous years.
This year 123 groups applied for funding, and only one group was
denied an allocation, because their representatives neglected to
appear for their hearing.
“It was very unbiased, as far as I can tell,” said
General Representative Brian Neesby.
Twelve groups denied funding last year did receive an allocation
from the Operational Fund for fall 2005, including the Ballroom
Dance Club, Hermanos Unidos, the Lebanese Social Club, and the
Robotics Project.
However, the minimum criteria used in the evaluation process
have not changed, said Budget Review Director Diem Tran.
Allocation amounts were determined proportionally by a series of
equations, and groups received a percentage of the funds they
requested based upon scores they received for their proposal and
their hearing before the Budget Review Committee.
Last year, when operational funds were allocated from an annual
fund known as Base Budget, the points groups received for their
hearing and application did not directly affect the amount of
funding they ultimately received, and a total of 42 groups were
denied funding.
Both student groups and members of the council have questioned
the fairness of the old system, as well as the subjectivity of the
hearing and application scores.
“Having an established formula instead of what they had
before, which was more of a bracket-type thing, is better ““
so they’re moving in the right direction,” Neesby
said.
In previous years, the point system was used only as a rough
guideline to help the Budget Review Committee allocate funds.
At the time, Budget Review Committee members said that groups
denied Base Budget funding for the 2004-2005 academic year did not
meet the minimum criteria stated in Undergraduate Students
Association bylaws.
Also, budget requests in previous years had caps for each type
of expense, whereas this year’s council created an overall
request cap of $4,317, which they said represented a reasonable
request total, including each applicable line item, but allowed
more flexibility between student groups with different funding
needs.
While councilmembers and student groups who had complaints about
the old Base Budget process generally say the new equation for the
Student Organization Operational Fund is a definite improvement,
some say there is still more that can be done to make the process
more fair and more accountable.
Neesby voted against the allocations because he disagreed with
the way the $4,317 request cap skewed the allocation ““ groups
who request more end up receiving more funds than groups who try to
keep their expenses down. Three other councilmembers abstained.
The only place subjectivity of individual Budget Review
Committee members still has the potential to come into play is in
the scoring.
The Budget Review Committee has had several methods in place for
years to ensure the process remains objective, and to keep scoring
uniform.
Scoring is kept consistent across committee members and
organizations by means of a rubric. Budget Review Committee members
practice using the rubric before they begin the actual budget
hearings to ensure that they are all scoring the same way, Tran
said.
Also, scoring is closely examined within committee deliberations
for any group whose scores ranged over more than ten points, she
said.
The creation of the Operational Fund is only the latest change
made to student group funding processes.
“We’ve been making changes to the funding process
for quite a few years now,” said President Jenny Wood.
Last year was the first time that all student groups, including
those formerly ineligible because of their religious or political
nature, were allowed to apply.
The impetus for the new equation-based funding system was the
dramatic increases in the number of groups applying, Wood said.
In spring, the council decided it was time to reform the entire
process by having organizations apply quarterly, which also allows
the council to evaluate funding more often and ensure that groups
are spending their money as efficiently as possible, she said.