JPBC Minutes: October 14, 2021

8:30 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams


Voting Members
  • Sondra Aman
    Mike Andriatch
  • Justine Briggs
  • James Cordeiro
  • Frances Dearing
  • Linda Delene
  • Hailey Gardner
  • Kandie Gay
    Daniel Goebel
  • Kristin Hartway
  • Tom Hernandez
  • Cathy Houston-Wilson
  • Jose Maliekal
  • Dave Mihalyov
  • Janet Roy
  • James Spiller
  • Elliot Weininger
  • Katy Wilson
Non-Voting Members
  • Crystal Hallenbeck
  • President Macpherson
  • Jason Morris
  • Darson Rhodes: Co-Chair
  • Karen Riotto
  • Jim Wall: Co-Chair
  • Melissa Wight
  • Monica Brasted
  • Steve Cook
  • Bob Cushman
  • Debra Eggebrecht
  • Jennifer Green
  • Scott Haines
    Mike Harrison
  • Lisa Jones
  • Mehruz Kamal
  • Dana Laird
  • Jennifer Ramsey
  • Craig Ross
  • Rey Sia
  • Taneika Thompson


Voting Members
  • Margaret Lane
  • Mark Stacy

The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m.


Dr. Rhodes made the following announcements:

  • The meeting minutes from the October 7, 2021 meeting are not available yet. They will be shared at our next meeting.
  • The Budget Townhall will be on Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 12:15pm in Ballroom West. There are arrangements being made to record the townhall for those that are not able to make it.
  • The Campus Based Fee Review Committee, a subcommittee of JPBC, is hosting a Fall Student Fee Forum. Per SUNY policy, campuses are required to establish a biannual process where each approved fee is reviewed for continued need, appropriateness of level and ensure that the revenue generated by that fee is used in a manner consistent with the intent of that fee. The forum will be held in Microsoft Teams on November 5, 2021 from 9:00-10:30am. It will also be recorded and posted on a temporary webpage. Outreach plans are being developed to encourage student participation either for the live event or using the fee forum webpage. JPBC members are encouraged to attend either mode of the forum.
  • Ms. Wight has established in the JPBC Teams group an additional file called the “Supplemental Information Folder”. Within this folder are supplemental documents such as the Enterprise Risk Management Risk Register and the enrollment reports. As other items are discovered, they will be placed there.

Five-Year Financial Model Update – presented by Jim Wall, Vice President of Administration and Finance

Mr. Wall presented an update on the Five-Year Financial Model. The following questions and answers occurred:

  • The question was raised regarding what the recommendations are to get the reserves into a better balance. It was stated that capturing open positions is the key and we have seen the benefit so far. The last time we did the analysis 33% of employees are retirement eligible so it is anticipated that there will be a significant number of retirements that will happen in the next two to three years. This will provide us an opportunity to review positions for potential restructuring and finding positions that can be captured.
  • Clarification was requested regarding if the separations are not going to contribute to additional savings because the $6 million gap that was discussed is calculated to include anticipated separations. It was stated that the forecast going forward takes the employee roster and calculates the cost. Giving us a structural deficit of $6 million. If we can capture open positions and retirements through productivity restructuring that will contribute towards closing the $6 million gap. It was added that there were known retirements that were in the planning over the last year, but they have not officially retired but will be very shortly. For several years, we have assumed a certain turnover rate into the budget, but we are no longer factoring that into the calculation.
  • The question was raised regarding if the $6 million gap factors in the TAP gap. It was stated that it is factored in. The TAP gap is a straight reserve replenishment. It does not contribute to our structural deficit.
  • The question was raised regarding if the enrollment projection is assuming the retention rate that has dropped due to COVID or is it assuming a reset to retention and potential recruitment numbers that were not magnified by COVID. It was stated that with the numbers we have a leveling off at 7000 so if we improve retention then it is opportunity for more tuition revenue and it lowers the gap. It was added that the numbers are projected and updated every six months. It is a weighted average based off the last three years.
  • The question was raised regarding if the annual State support is calculated based on enrollment numbers. It was stated that the funding amount has not changed in years and hasn’t fluctuated with enrollment. It was added that years ago it was based on enrollment numbers and the types of programs the students were enrolled in. Ten years ago, when there were budget cuts at the State level, the process that the allocation was built from was broken and the funding number has been flat since then.
  • The question was raised regarding what the turnover rate has been in Academic Affairs particularly related to faculty. It was stated that it would have to be confirmed with Human Resources, but the last numbers reviewed indicated it was around 10%.
  • The question was raised regarding if the 10% turnover rate was higher or lower than other divisions. It was stated that it is lower.
  • The question was raised regarding if the 10% included adjuncts. It was stated that what is included in the calculation would have to be reviewed.
  • The question was raised regarding what our reserve requirement is. It was stated that based on the campus size and spending levels, it is about $17 million.
  • The question was raised if there is a penalty from SUNY for not maintaining the required reserve level. It was stated that if your reserves get too low, then you become a campus in financial crisis and SUNY puts spending constraints on the campus that include needing approve from SUNY to spend funds. It was added that Middle States would be interested if we were on the “watch list”.
  • The question was raised regarding that this update includes an increase of 62 students in the enrollment numbers for 2022-23 and what may be behind this increase. It was stated that it is weighted average, and Undergraduate and Graduate Admissions are aware of things that are coming, and the expectation is we can achieve those numbers going forward.
  • Clarification was requested regarding the slight uptick of high school graduates in the projections, but there have been comments about the decline of high school graduates. It was stated that the projection used in the presentation is from a SUNY presentation.
  • The question was raised regarding the 5-year enrollment projections, what the margin of error is in relation to the numbers and if the model is the correct one to use. It was stated that historically, we have not been very far from our projections. We do track numbers weekly and because we do it so often gives us visibility on the numbers and the ability to tweak the numbers. It was added that the fall forecast was 97% accurate. Also, added is that the model will be adjusted if we receive information that indicates a needed change.
  • The question was raised regarding if our admissions plan includes recruiting adult students for programs other than graduate ones as this could make up some of the gap in the loss of high school graduates. It was stated that departments have been encouraged to review degree completion programs because this will help of get into the market to assist individuals with their degree completion. In the School of Business and Management, Finance and Management is looking at a degree completion to add to the overall Business Administration program.

Goal Group 4 Update and Budget Prioritization Requests – presented by Dave Mihalyov, Vice President of University Relations

Mr. Mihalyov presented an update on Goal Group 3. The following questions and answers occurred:

  • The question was raised regarding the Employee Success Center and if it would include enhanced support services and mental health counseling or would it be Human Resources and CELT combined. In addition, has the space in Dailey been considered for the center as it already has a computer lab. It was stated that Dailey and Drake have been mentioned as a possible location, but the goal group is in the early stages of the review/planning of the center. There is a level of anonymity that employees would want for counseling and a large success center may not allow that. The center would have a lot of the Human Resources responsibilities in one place. It was added that in the development of the center we want to have a good comprehensive onboarding for new faculty and staff, making sure we are connecting with employees on a regular basis, reviewing training and development needs, focusing on mentoring, succession planning and partnering with CELT. Conversations have already occurred with Dr. Cochran and she is very excited with this possibility. We also want to look at the lifecycle of the employee on campus and what can be done to make this campus a great place to work.
  • The question was raised regarding our turnover rate of 10% dropping to around 6.5% during the pandemic and what is the typical turnover rate in higher education institutions. It was stated that historically the average turnover rate at higher education institutions has been 14% but that figure is from a couple of years ago. We may see a different average going forward due to the pandemic. It was added that our turnover rate the year before was 10% and 10.6% the year before that.
  • The question was raised regarding that 88% of our budget is personnel and where we stood compared to other SUNY schools. It was stated that the national average is 70% of the budget is personnel, but there are a lot of variables in that equation. It was added that as far as the SUNY information, the data would be obtained voluntarily, and we may not be able to get an accurate picture of the comparison. The 88% is a high percentage because it does not give the ability to shift to new levels of budgeting as easily as if you had a smaller percentage based on individuals.
  • Clarification was requested regarding the budget prioritization request for a training manager. It was stated that we used to have a training manager about 10 years ago. As much as BizLibrary is helpful for the training videos, you receive a higher level of training by having a person be able to do in-person trainings and go to departments for various needs. In addition, it would be an effective use of a classroom in the Employee Success Center. In addition, every year this position comes up as a need. It was added that Human Resources is getting more and more requests for trainings. In addition, many responses in exit interviews center around the need for more training like supervision or professional development. People are not necessarily engaged watching a training video, but they would be in an in-person training. We need to look at how to engage the employee not just retain them.

Other Items from the Committee

  • The question was raised regarding where to find the link to register for the Corporate Challenge. It was stated that there is information on the Daily Eagle and Mr. Andriatch shared the registration link.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:19 a.m.