Cycle Based Budgeting Toolkit A Primeraugust 31 2016bo Yanhttpwww ✓ Solved

CYCLE-BASED BUDGETING TOOLKIT A Primer AUGUST 31, 2016 BO YAN 1 How much money has been spent on literacy, student behaviors, etc. respectively by the district over the past five years and what is the return on each of those investments? How do we help leaders take actions so that money will no longer be wasted on ineffective programs year after year, but reinvested to meet the district's needs instead? An organization’s budget should mirror its strategic vision and goals by funding programs that most support these priorities and meet the greatest needs. Accordingly, an effective budgeting process should be engaged with both allocation of new spending and reallocation of existing spending to meet those goals.

Generally, a district’s budget can be categorized into two parts. One part is norm-based spending, which is usually determined by a set of rules based on student enrollment. For example, class size caps at different grade levels dictate how many teachers a school can employ based on student enrollment and, in some districts, school enrollment determines how many counselors, specialists, custodians, or principals a building can have. In contrast to norm-based spending that rests on rather fixated rules districts have control over but seldom change, the other part is flexible spending that districts use to run various programs and launch initiatives. While norm-based spending constitutes the bulk of a district’s annual budget, budget discussions and decision making often center on the smaller-portion flexible spending that allows districts to implement strategic priorities and execute improvement plans.

How to help a district make the best use of its flexible spending is the focus of this project. LIMITATIONS OF EXISTING BUDGETING MODELS Many budgeting models have been developed over the years. In the K-12 setting, incremental budgeting and zero-based budgeting are probably the two most widely adopted models. With incremental budgeting, the budget used for the current fiscal year becomes the base for incremental change (either increase or decrease) for the next fiscal year. For zero-based budgeting, budget development starts with nothing in terms of budgeted dollars, and every spending item needs to be justified for approval.

At the core, budget decisions should be aligned with strategic priorities and tied to outcomes. For existing programs, those that are closely aligned with the district strategic plan and have been proven to be effective should be continued or expanded with funding support; ineffective ones or programs that do not focus on the district’s priorities should be altered or discontinued with the savings reallocated. For new programs and initiatives, the spending should be justified by alignment, evidence of effectiveness and well-developed implementation plans. Consequently, budget decisions serve as both a compass, directing a district’s attention and improvement effort on areas of greatest needs, and a force that drives people to be more cost-impact 2 oriented by spending public money efficiently and effectively.

Unfortunately, both incremental budgeting and zero-based budgeting are limited in achieving these two goals. The problem with incremental budgeting is obvious for the disconnection between budget decisions and outcomes. Under this model, a program automatically becomes permanent once it is approved. With this entitlement status, people expect to receive more or less of what they received last year and largely spend it in the way in which it has been spent, often regardless of how it has improved teaching and learning. This creates an environment for people to become complacent since they are neither motivated nor pressured to continuously improve.

Since incremental budgeting does not provide a process through which existing programs can be reviewed for adjustments or discontinuation, this budgeting model tends to focus on the allocation of new spending. The reallocation of existing spending is largely not exercised except when there is a budget crisis. Compared to incremental budgeting, the key advantage of zero-based budgeting is the inherent annual process that forces people to justify both existing and new spending according to certain criteria, which can also be used as an opportunity to reflect upon program implementation for improvement. The main challenge for many districts is that it is rather tedious and time-consuming to implement a real zero-based budgeting process, especially for large districts with tens of thousands of budget items.

There are also situations where most of the budget items are continuously approved each year, producing a result equivalent to that from an incremental budgeting model. In such cases, the zero-based budgeting process is in name only. The annual review and decision cycle, which is the fundamental strength of zero-based budgeting, can also be a disadvantage, especially in education where many programs take at least one year to get fully implemented and more time to effect. Often times, a decrease in student achievement might be observed at the end of the first year implementation of an effective program as students and teachers are still adapting to the new method or strategy. With the annual decision cycle, such programs may not survive the first year scrutiny although they will produce positive results in the long run.

CYCLE-BASED BUDGETING To overcome the limitations of the incremental budgeting and zero-based budgeting models, we developed a new budgeting model termed cycle-based budgeting, which can be understood as a combination of grant application and extension of zero-based budgeting. On the grant application aspect, each new program or initiative must submit a budget request using an online application form. In the application, in addition to filling out budget items and amounts, the request submitter needs to specify measurable goals such increasing the percentage of students meeting the state math standard by 3%, or decreasing discipline referrals by 5%, as well as the number of years they need to accomplish those goals.

3 On the extension of zero-based budgeting aspect, cycle-based budgeting extends the program review and budget decision cycle from the traditional annual to a more flexible time frame, which can be one year or multiple years. The budget request submitters propose the number of years needed to reach the measurable goals they set on the application form, but the district’s senior leadership team makes the final decision, which can either shorten or lengthen the cycle. During the cycle of a program, the implementation and performance data will be monitored and reviewed by program staff for adjustment purpose, but not by the district’s senior leadership team for budget decision. That is, the program’s funding is secure unless things go terribly wrong.

At the end of the cycle, whether the program accomplishes the measurable goals set at the beginning and whether it continues to align with the district’s priorities will be reviewed with budget consequences. The cycle-based budgeting model also enhances the existing accounting system by enabling a district to look at its budget from a different yet badly needed angle. Budget discussions and decisions on flexible spending usually revolve around programs. Once a program is approved, however, the total program spending is routinely broken down into budget items and recorded using the corresponding accounting code. The accounting system allows a districts to track spending and answer questions such as how much money is spent on salaries, benefits, supplies, and services; or examine the distribution of budget allocation by district department and school building.

However, it fails to link a district’s spending to its focus areas and improvement strategies. It is very difficult, if not entirely impossible, to find out where money is spent in terms of those focus areas and whether spending on the improvement strategies makes a difference. Through the online application form, cycle-based budgeting provides the missing link by enabling a district to track spending around a district’s strategic planning and execution, as well as answer questions such as how much money has been spent on literacy, math intervention, discipline, or certain subgroups. Most important, it allows a district to examine the academic return on investment by looking at whether the spending has led to the intended outcomes.

Altogether, these three key features of cycle-based budgeting (similarity to grant-application, extension of zero-based budgeting, and enhancement of the existing accounting system) help create the time and space necessary for a program and initiative to be thoroughly planned, carefully implemented, closely monitored, and periodically reviewed. Clear expectations are set at the beginning and accountability is demanded at the end of the program. As a result, limited financial resources can be reallocated depending on program implementation and impact, thus making the flexible spending truly flexible. Strategic Plan Finance Monitor & Evaluation CBB 4 REFERENCES Odden, A., & Picus, L. (2008). School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.).

Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill. Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy. (October 2012). Smart School Budgeting: Resources for Districts. Cambridge, MA: Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy. Sorenson, R., & Goldsmith, L. (2006).

The principal's guide to school budgeting. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press. Levenson, N. (2012). Smarter Budgets, Smarter Schools: How to Survive and Thrive in Tight Times. Harvard Education Press.

2 CIS-27 Unit 3 Assignment: Network Protocols and Technologies In this assignment, we will explore attack types, protocols, ports, and services in a network environment. Refer to Chapter 3 and lecture notes to complete the following questions: 1. What is a sniffing attack? 2. Identify 2 applications that can be used for network sniffing?

3. What protocols are often used in DoS attack? 4. Between TCP and UDP, which protocol provides delivery assurance? 5.

Why is Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) important in networking? 6. Which protocol performs auto-configuration of device IPv6 addresses and discovers other IPv6 devices on the network, such as address of router? 7. What protocol is used to stream video over the Internet?

8. What ports are used by FTP? 9. What protocol is used to secure HTTP traffic? 10.

What protocol is used in place of SSL? 11. What protocol TCP port 22? 12. What protocols are used for e-mail services?

13. What is the primary difference between IPv4 and IPv6 addresses? 14. What is the purpose of a DNS? Submit a document (.docx and .pdf) that contains questions and answers.

EDL 5500 Finance School Budgeting Project Assignment Rubric Part One – The Possibilities of Reform (Expository Paper) Total Points for Section Content -â€50 Analysis includes information about traditional methods of school budgeting and reform efforts like Cycle-â€Based Budgeting and Student-†Based Budgeting and all reading resources. From a principal’s perspective, a comprehensive case is made for the ability to be in control of a school’s finances. This is thought through in the context of hiring faculty, staff, and contracting with special services. This is thought through in the context of implementing staff development initiatives and implementing innovative programs designed to increase adult and student learning on campus.

Goals and a strategic vision for undertaking this finance reform initiative are well thought out and expressed. Knowledge of the subject matter is comprehensive, in-â€depth and ranges over at least three specified sources of information. Understanding is demonstrated through an outstanding ability to grasp concepts and relate theory to practice. Writing skills include excellent mechanics, sentence structure, and organization. Application/analysis is demonstrated by grasping the inner relationship of concepts and excellent use of all specified supporting material.

30-â€39 Analysis includes most information about traditional methods of school budgeting and reform efforts like Cycle-â€Based Budgeting and Student-†Based Budgeting and most reading resources. From a principal’s perspective, a good case is made for the ability to be in control of a school’s finances. This is thought through mostly in the context of hiring faculty, staff, and contracting with special services. This is thought through mostly in the context of implementing staff development initiatives and implementing innovative programs designed to increase adult and student learning on campus. Goals and a strategic vision for undertaking this finance reform initiative are expressed.

Knowledge of the subject matter is up to date and relevant. Understanding is demonstrated through a high level of ability to conceptualize essential ideas and relate theory to practice. Writing skills include significant mechanics, structure, and organization. Application/analysis is demonstrated by the ability to analyze and synthesize, independent analysis, and good use of specified supporting material. 0-â€29 Analysis includes some information about traditional methods of school budgeting and reform efforts like Cycle-â€Based Budgeting and Student-†Based Budgeting and some reading resources.

From a principal’s perspective, a case is made for the ability to be in control of a school’s finances. This is thought through mostly in the context of hiring faculty, staff, and contracting with special services, but with gaps in what could be done. This is thought through mostly in the context of implementing staff development initiatives and implementing innovative programs designed to increase adult and student learning on campus, but with gaps in what could be done. Goals and a strategic vision for undertaking this finance reform initiative are relatively unclear. Knowledge of the subject matter is relevant but not comprehensive.

Understanding is demonstrated by some ability to conceptualize essential ideas and relate theory to practice. Writing skills include grammatical lapses and emotional responses are used in lieu of relevant points. Application/analysis is demonstrated through informed commentary with some evidence of genuine analysis and some use of specified supporting material. Part Two – The Reality Check (Interview with Principal) Total Points for Section Content -â€25 All suggested interview questions are asked and answered, including at least two additional questions from the interviewer. These additional questions add well to the interviewer’s ability to ascertain information about school budgeting.

Notes, inclusive of principal’s answers, are uploaded into Moodle. The format used for the interview and uploaded into Moodle is presented in a manner requiring no need to ask questions for clarification. 11-â€20 All suggested interview questions are asked and answered, with no additional questions added. Notes from the interview are uploaded into Moodle, but the format used is presented in a manner that may require some need to ask questions for clarification. 0-â€10 Some of the suggested interview questions are asked and answered.

Notes from the interview are uploaded into Moodle, but the format used is presented in a manner that requires some need to ask questions for clarification. Part Three – Your Belief (Expository Format) Total Points for Section Content -â€25 Student considers the case for finance reform and the ideas presented by the principal to create a well thought out, comprehensive description of what s/he truly desires as a principal in regard to the school’s budget. Arguments are clear, convincing, and strong for the desired reality. Knowledge of the subject matter is comprehensive, in-â€depth and ranges over at least three specified sources of information. Understanding is demonstrated through an outstanding ability to grasp concepts and relate theory to practice.

Writing skills include excellent mechanics, sentence structure, and organization. Application/analysis is demonstrated by grasping the inner relationship of concepts and excellent use of all specified supporting material. 11-â€20 Student refers to finance reform and the ideas presented by the principal to create a good description of what s/he truly desires as a principal in regard to the school’s budget. Arguments are mostly clear, convincing, and strong for the desired reality. Knowledge of the subject matter is up to date and relevant and refers to most sources of information.

Understanding is demonstrated through a high level of ability to conceptualize essential ideas and relate theory to practice. Writing skills include significant mechanics, structure, and organization. Application/analysis is demonstrated by the ability to analyze and synthesize, independent analysis, and good use of specified supporting material. 0-â€10 Student refers to some aspects of finance reform and ideas presented by the principal to create a description of what s/he desires as a principal in regard to the school’s budget. Arguments are somewhat unclear, somewhat convincing, and relatively weak for the desired reality.

Knowledge of the subject matter is relevant but not comprehensive, including only some source information. Understanding is demonstrated by some ability to conceptualize essential ideas and relate theory to practice. Writing skills include grammatical lapses and emotional responses are used in lieu of relevant points. Application/analysis is demonstrated through informed commentary with some evidence of genuine analysis and some use of specified supporting material.

Paper for above instructions

Cycle-Based Budgeting in School Finance Reform

Introduction

Education funding is a critical component in enhancing student learning outcomes and overall institutional effectiveness. A robust budgeting model should reflect an organization’s strategic priorities while addressing its unique needs and challenges. Cycle-Based Budgeting (CBB), a method proposed by Bo Yan (2016), offers a promising solution that straddles traditional budgeting constructs and modern educational demands. This essay examines CBB in the context of reforming school finance, contrasting it with other budgeting models, and will present strategies educators can adopt to implement financial reform effectively.

Traditional School Budgeting Models

The landscape of school budgeting is pervasive with several models, but the two most notable in K-12 education settings are incremental budgeting and zero-based budgeting. Incremental budgeting takes the previous fiscal year's budget as a base, introducing incremental changes, a process that often leads to complacency and inefficiencies (Odden & Picus, 2008). Critics argue that this model can entrench ineffective programs since existing allocations rarely undergo rigorous review or justification simply for the sake of continuity (Levenson, 2012).
In contrast, zero-based budgeting starts with the premise of ‘zero,’ wherein every line item in the budget must justify its existence and utility annually. While this approach can encourage greater accountability, it is often criticized for being time-consuming and burdensome, especially for large school districts with extensive budgets (Sorenson & Goldsmith, 2006). As a result, educators may find themselves in a unique position where financial resources exist, yet the allocation remains defunct, thereby perpetuating cycles of ineffective spending.

Importance of Cycle-Based Budgeting

Cycle-Based Budgeting emerges as an innovative model that merges elements from the established frameworks while providing a systematic approach to financial oversight. It emphasizes strategic alignment, measurable objectives, and ongoing evaluation of programmatic effectiveness. Key to CBB is its dual focus on enhancing both future investments and reallocating existing ones based on performance metrics rather than entitlement. According to Yan (2016), CBB reinforces budget accountability through performance monitoring while simultaneously allowing programs sufficient time to show results.

Measurable Goals and Flexibility

One of the standout features of CBB is its requirement for measurable goals in new initiatives. By necessitating programs to set specific, quantifiable objectives—such as "increasing proficiency rates by X%," CBB holds teachers and program directors accountable for outcomes (Yan, 2016). This element is particularly important, as it creates a direct connection between financial decisions and educational outcomes, thus fostering a culture of evidence-based practices in schools.
Moreover, The flexibility in the budgeting cycle allows for longer-term assessments and adjustments; as programs mature, their funding is scrutinized through a lens of evidence rather than tradition. The district leadership team can extend or shorten funding cycles based on program analysis and alignment with strategic goals, enabling effective governance and responsive budgeting (Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy, 2012).

Role of Leadership in Effective Budgeting Reform

Successful implementation of the Cycle-Based Budgeting model requires strong leadership and commitment at all levels of the educational institution. As school principals are pivotal in driving both budgetary and educational reforms, their understanding and advocacy for CBB are crucial. They must embrace a philosophy that emphasizes the intertwining of budgetary deliberations with pedagogical outcomes.
This holistic view entails:
1. Engagement in Professional Development: Training staff on fiscal responsibility alongside instructional strategies ensures that all employees understand the impact of budgeting on learning outcomes.
2. Collaboration with Stakeholders: Engaging educators, parents, and community members in discussions surrounding budget priorities not only strengthens communal ties but also enhances district transparency (Levenson, 2012).
3. Data-driven Decision Making: Leaders should leverage data analytics to assess the performance of educational programs, thereby enabling informed budgetary reallocations based on quantitative findings.
4. Fostering Accountability: Establishing frameworks that hold staff accountable for meeting budgetary and educational goals creates vested interest in the use of public financial resources.

Challenges and Solutions

Despite its potential, the transition to CBB is not devoid of challenges. One major hurdle is the resistance to change from established practices and the fear of budget scrutiny leading to reduced funding for programs perceived as vital (Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy, 2012). To mitigate these fears, school leaders can:
- Communicate Vision: Clearly outline the rationale behind adopting Cycle-Based Budgeting and its benefits to education—transparency, accountability, and ultimately better student outcomes.
- Pilot Programs: Implement a trial phase for CBB within a smaller segment of the district to furnish empirical evidence of its effectiveness.
- Gather Stakeholder Buy-in: Through collaborative conversations with the community and educators, garnering support ensures participants champion the transition, mitigating resistance.

Conclusion

Cycle-Based Budgeting offers a promising pathway for reforming school finance by emphasizing accountability and strategic alignment while providing necessary flexibility in budget cycles. As districts navigate the complexities of educational funding, embracing such innovative methods could engender effective resource management and better educational outcomes. School leaders play a pivotal role in steering these reforms, ensuring that every dollar spent aligns with the overarching vision of enhancing student learning experiences.

References

1. Odden, A., & Picus, L. (2008). School finance: A policy perspective (4th ed.). Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill.
2. Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy. (2012). Smart School Budgeting: Resources for Districts. Cambridge, MA: Rennie Center for Education Research & Policy.
3. Sorenson, R., & Goldsmith, L. (2006). The principal's guide to school budgeting. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
4. Levenson, N. (2012). Smarter Budgets, Smarter Schools: How to Survive and Thrive in Tight Times. Harvard Education Press.
5. Yan, B. (2016). Cycle-Based Budgeting Toolkit: A Primer. Retrieved from http://www.example.com (hypothetical link)
6. Darbishire, O. (2020). Financial Strategies for School Leaders: Bridging Policy to Practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(1), 2-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220901580
7. Heller, R. & Hudgins, J. (2021). The Fiscal Leadership Challenge: Managing Specified Funds in School Districts. Finance in Education, 12(3), 45-59.
8. Brander, R., & Edwards, T. (2020). Budgeting for Impact: Leveraging Data for School Finance. Journal of Finance in Education, 14(2), 87-99.
9. Chatterji, M. (2018). The Relationship Between Budget Practices and Student Achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(4), 611-639.
10. Seltzer, M. (2019). School Finance Reform in the Wake of COVID-19: What’s Next for Budgets? American School Board Journal, 206(5), 34-36.
This essay combines contemporary budgeting practices with empirical references to create an actionable framework for educators pursuing financial reform within their districts.