Q: Resource Requests* (Fall 2017)

*Answer Every Year

Indicate your priorities for resource allocation. Put your projects in order of priority via the CurricUNET program review module: Resource Requests.

REFERENCE MATERIALS AND GUIDANCE:

  • Facilities – Many facilities requests do *not* need to go through program review. In particular, maintenance services are provided for the ongoing operation and repair of facilities and systems. Use the work order system to request preventive maintenance and reactive repairs valued at less than $15,000. Maintenance services covered by work orders include: custodial services, grounds maintenance, and building and infrastructure systems maintenance including electrical, lighting, HVAC (heating, ventilation, air conditioning), plumbing, building envelopes (roofs, exterior walls, windows), walls/floors/ceilings, doors and locks, fire alarms/sprinklers, fire suppression, clocks, exterior walkways/courtyards/parking lots, fencing and gates, stadium bleachers, and elevators. Use Program Review/Annual Planning Resource Requests for any maintenance request not fitting the above criteria, and all requests for new/changed facilities. Make sure to provide site information including campus, center or location; building designation, room number and/or description; or grounds area designation and/or description.
  • Equipment (not IT) – If requested equipment requires assistance from Buildings & Grounds, e.g., requires a new power source or wiring, requires water or sanitary sewer connection, requires removal of waste gas or air, or requires connection to the fire alarm system, please clearly indicate so in the Request Overview section, making sure to include site information.
  • Information Technology (IT) – Similarly, many technology requests do *not* need to go through program review. For faculty computers (replacements or for new faculty) and replacement of department networked printers, email helpdesk@ccsf.edu. Use Program Review/Annual Planning Resource Requests to ask for upgrades to computers in computer labs, as well as other software/hardware needs. 
  • FPAC -- If making a full-time faculty position request, be sure to address discipline-level data. Also address additional elements such as full-time to part-time headcount, full-time to part-time FTEF, program size (single person department, overall FTEF etc), outside accreditation requirements, state and federal requirements, and part-time pool availability.

DEPENDENCIES are where you will link resource requests that depend on each other (example: computer lab and lab tech manager). Use judiciously. Link resources as dependent on one or more others ONLY if they truly are, or else you unnecessarily complicate the evaluation of your resource requests. (CurricUNET Resource Dependencies screenshots and explanations.)

ASSESSMENT REPORT LINKS are where you will link your resource requests to assessment reports submitted over the previous year. (CurricUNET Links to Assessment Reports screenshots and explanations.)

 

Criteria For Ranking Resource Requests

Want to make your requests as strong as possible? Review your request and ask these questions:

·         Have you linked to the most appropriate college plans?

·         Have you clearly addressed the details needed for your particular resource type (for example, if asking for a technology item, have you followed the link above to see exactly what details we need to best consider the request?)

 

SCORING CRITERIA FOR RESOURCE REQUESTS    Click here for PDF version.

The following guidelines are used for scoring and ranking resource requests. Review these to get an idea of where your resource request will sit relative to others.

 

IMPERATIVE CRITERIA

Imperative Criteria are used to flag requests that supersede other evaluative criteria.

1.     Health and Safety: Indicate whether there is a strong health and safety component to the Request, such that failing to fulfill the request will cause/retain a significant hazard.

2.     Mandates: Indicate whether the request is necessary to meet a local, state, or federal regulation, or a requirement of a specific program accreditation.

 

EVALUATIVE CRITERIA AND SCORING

 

Scores

Criteria

 

0

(N/A)

1

(Minimal)

2

(Moderate)

3

(High)

4

(Exceptional)

Links to Board Priorities, Approved College Plans, Accreditation Requirements, and Program Outcomes

Are the links between the request and the priorities, planning goals, outcomes, and standards identified and strong? How directly and essentially is the request linked? How many links?

there is no reasonable way to claim the request is linked to any specific items.

one or a few links can be identified, but relationship to the request is distant or weak. 

one or a few links identified, relationship is somewhat clear but not strong. 

 

one or more links identified, relationship is clear and strong: or, the number of moderate linkages is so high that the request is of broad-based value. 

The request has a direct and essential relationship to the identified links, or multiple high linkages.

Rationale for request supported by data and clear plan for evaluation after implementation

Did you full describe the kind of data and to what degree the justification for the Request is supported by quantitative or qualitative information, from internal and/or external sources? Is the proposed Request designed to be continually evaluated for effectiveness?

no qualitative or quantitative data/measures provided. 

 

 little or weak supporting data/outcomes provided. 

 

quantity of supporting data/outcomes is good but content is weak, or very limited strong data/outcomes provided. 

quantity and quality of supporting data/outcomes are solid and reasonably thorough. 

 

extraordinary and very in-depth supporting data/very well-defined and complete evaluative measures and outcomes.

Extent of benefit

Who and how many individuals/groups benefit from the request? Did you include real numbers based on available data? Did you include kinds of people, groups, units? Did you pay attention to cross-group benefits, as well as the directness of the benefit?

no qualitative or quantitative data/measures provided. 

little or weak supporting data/outcomes provided. 

quantity of supporting data/outcomes is good but content is weak, or very limited strong data/outcomes provided. 

quantity and quality of supporting data/outcomes are solid and reasonably thorough. 

 

extraordinary and very in-depth supporting data/very well-defined and complete evaluative measures and outcomes.

Operational necessity

To what degree do local or institutional operations depend on the request? What is the immediacy of the need?

not necessary to continuing operations. 

request supports continuing operations indirectly and/or is not necessary in the near future.

useful for continuing or enhancing current operations; not an immediate need 

Important for current operations and/or time-sensitive. 

if unfunded, there will be a major disruption of existing operations and services in the current year.