A Review of Saint John Fisher Catholic College - Essay Example

Name: Course: Tutor: Date: Managing Resources: A Review of Saint John Fisher Catholic College Introduction Developing a school budget is a complex process. Some authors such as Norton and Kelly have noted that site-school budgeting is more complex then district-level budgeting and that principals need to understand and employ line-item and work-flow budgets (73). This is because the former ensures proper spending while the latter enables on-site alteration in programme decisions. Budgeting is a cooperative effort that involves administrators, instructional staff, departmental heads, service area supervisors, the district business office and classified staff. How resources are distributed will greatly determine the success of a school with respect to performance and its general position in the society. This definitely answers the question asked by Programme for International Student Assessment which is “Are there some school aspects that are more strongly associated with better performance than others?” The same authors also posed the question: “What impact do the policies and arrangement of education structures have on educational results?” (12). Beyond doubt, the manner in which a learning institution spreads its resources will determine how effectively the resources are utilised. There are areas that need to be prioritised and others that need to follow; and how important these areas are and the level of attention they are given determines the general success of various projects. In addition to meeting statutory requirements, a school also has to analyse the degree to which it has achieved existing goals, current and projected needs, as well as enrolment trends that may reflect programmatic changes that impact on developing the school budget. This paper is an attempt to understand resource management in a known learning institution. To facilitate this, Saint John Fisher Catholic College has been selected. The paper focuses on three prime areas: equity, efficiency and value for money. Thus, areas of interest of the paper include evaluating the mission statement of the college, assessing the college’s rational and analysing whether the aforementioned issues: equity, efficiency and value for money are attained in managing the college’s financial resources. The epicentre for this area is the college’s budget. The paper is structured to contain a review of literature on the area of resource management, an application of the information obtained to the management of resources at Saint John Fisher Catholic College, and a discussion of issues arising from the same. Literature review Managing all of a learning institution’s resources poses myriad challenges. The process demands financial awareness, business acumen, planning ability, information technology knowledge and excellent management skills (Blandford 3). This requires that managers be well equipped with information on how to build and manage budgets (incising the application of information technology concepts). Managers also need information on funds allocation and income generating opportunities for their learning institutions. In addition, they need to have practical experience in relating themselves with the respective learning institutions they are in charge of. Most importantly, managers must be able to relate resource management to their institutions’ development plan, and be in a position to establish benchmarks for good practice. Schools or colleges function according to the systems of management put in place. The school context thus relies on how inputs are utilised to manage school processes that include those at the school level as well as the classroom level. How these processes are managed determines the final output (Programme for International Student Assessment 12). The figure below illustrates this relationship. Figure 1: Model of schools function Source: Programme for International Student Assessment (12) The school perspective should be regarded a source of both inputs and limitations. At the same time, the school framework is a generator of the desired school inputs, in the same purview of the goals of schooling. A good exemplar of a school output is the average success on a test in one or many subjects at a particular grade level. A further example, which is more of a realization than an achievement pointer, would be the percentage of students who attain a certificate devoid of any hindrance for instance repeating a given grade. Nevertheless, school or college outputs are not limited to student performance, but can also have a longer term impact on society. School processes are hierarchical (by both classroom and school levels) and sit within the national education structure. A good example of a process that is variable at the school level is the degree of cooperation within the school, or the extent to which the school leadership is instruction oriented (herein referred to as instructional leadership) (Tomlinson 12). Strategic resource management can be viewed from various standpoints. The one that commonly appears in literature and much in the policy of discourse in this area is the so-called rational perspective. Rational approaches to resource management are recommended widely by official bodies (Middlewood and Lumby 65; Tomlinson 67). Their use is claimed to be a critical factor in securing the effectiveness of educational organisations (Sewchurran 317). Such approaches view strategic resource management in a number of ways. To start with, there is an emphasis on concepts such as ‘effectiveness’, ‘efficiency’, and value for money. For instance, Ofsted defines the efficient school as one that makes uses good use of all its available resources to achieve the best possible educational outcomes for all pupils and in so doing provides excellent value for money (cited by Middlewood and Lumby 66). Another definition provided by the Further Education Funding Council includes value for money and effectiveness as the key indicators of performance. The application of this terminology, nevertheless, is often times not clear or consistent, and it is therefore important to keep in mind the fairly standard definitions of in the ‘three Es’ provided by the Audit Commission as a) Economy: The buying of a given standard of good or service at the lowest cost; b) Efficiency: The achievement of particular outcomes at the least possible cost; and c) Effectiveness: The matching of results with objectives Arguments for the handing over of resource management duties to colleges and schools emphasise, inter alia the potential for such delegation to augment achievement of the three Es through giving those closest to the needs of the client the power to deploy resources in the most appropriate way. Nevertheless, these potential benefits are not inevitable. They rely on how the tasks of resource management are performed (Middlewood and Lumby 66). This evokes the second dimension of the rational perspective: the emphasis given to clear structures and procedures for resource management. At the heart of the task of management is the commitment to get things done. This does not mean anything being done at any price, but the right things being done well and thriftily. Resources are the means by which the central management function is carried out and also the means by which managers get things done (Strain 15). Resources are a means of support or supply that help school managers in the achievement of goals. The allocation and management or resources – including fiscal, time, material and human – are essential in effective school management and should closely relate to the needs of pupils (Blandford iii; Wagner 20). Effective resource management should be done in consideration of the strategic cycle. By this method, the values and purposes of an organisation are translated into policies, priorities and plans, which thereafter inform the operational cycle and are used in turn to assess the impact of resource decisions (Middlewood and Lumby 66). The strategic cycle involves a needs analysis and assessment of values and purpose, operational cycle, formulation of policies, priorities and plans, an operational cycle and evaluation (Ibid 67). This is shown in figure 2. Figure 2: The resource management cycle Source: Middlewood and Lumby (67). The needs dictated in managing the strategic cycle give rise to the third dimension of the rational approach to resource management, which is the use of analysis to inform the process that is desired for application. This is reflected in part in what can be referred to as ‘radical unit’, which is the ability to think resourcefully and innovatively about the ways in which resources may be deployed in the pursuit of an organisation’s objectives. Radical audit can be achieved in a number of ways such as organisation-wide thinking, zero-base thinking and longer-term thinking. Organisation-wide thinking implies the ability to look at the general pattern of resource deployment in relation to the key objectives, priorities, and challenges as opposed to simply focusing on particular aspects of expenditure on areas of activity (Griffiths 78). Zero-base thinking involves the ability to question all aspects of current expenditure rather than simply focusing on changes at the margin, and considering whether current activities could be better carried out using other ways, or in reality, whether they need to be carried out in the first place (Handy 24). Longer-term thinking is about the ability to view choice not just within the limits and pressures of the yearly budgetary cycle, but in terms of a wider vision of where the organisation should be positioned in three, six or ten years to come, in spite of the uncertainties that surround such considerations (Mintzberg 46). When taken together, the three emphases on three Es, systematic management processes and the use of analysis, provide a strong prescriptive framework for those responsible for the management of resources. Using these ideas, it is important to analyse the status of resource management (such as procurement) experience in schools and colleges in recent years. According to the National Audit Office only a minority of colleges have attempted to measure the value for money of procurement, or used techniques such as benchmarking or setting efficiency targets (27). In addition, some colleges described efficiencies they had made but most had difficulty quantifying them (House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts 6).The details are highlighted below. 45 percent of colleges attempted to measure the value for money of procurement methods. 32 percent of colleges benchmarked their procurement with that of similar bodies. 22 percent of colleges had targets for efficiency savings. 30 colleges reported having made significant savings using consortia, but only 10 could quantify them. Source: National Audit Office 2005-2006 [adapted from National Audit Office (27)] What the information above implies is that most colleges do not clearly follow the procedures for determining the value for money, and do not adhere to other principles such as effectiveness and efficiency when dealing with money. This forms the background of the current research with reference to Saint John Fisher Catholic College. It means that learning institutions need to realise the significance of the three Es by employing budgeting procedures such as zero-based budgeting and activity-based budgeting. Allocation of resources at Saint John Fisher Catholic College The school improvement priorities for Saint John Fisher Catholic College for the period between 2008 and 2009 are summarised as shown in table 1. Table 1: Activities of 2007 - 2008 Priority Main action Intended outcome Time scale 1. Further implementation of pathway for learning needs of all pupils are appropriately addressed and that each student achieves their potential; to prepare the school for full involvement in the 14-19 diplomas; fully implement a shortened KS3; and develop the range of curriculum options opens to pupils at KS4 and beyond. Lesson planning based on information/data on most able, different categories of learner, more evident in schemes of work. Increased departmental discussion and planning for shortened KS3 and early GCSE identified groups and individuals. Built in booster sessions for identified at risk groups Departmental action plans to include targets, systems for monitoring and intervention for individuals and groups and curricular target setting. All staff to make use of data in Assessment Manager to set targets, monitor progress and devise intervention strategies as appropriate. Monitoring and evaluating of T & L of external courses, enhanced liaison with regard to progress and achievement. Offer the first 4 diploma lines at level 2. Detailed planning for further level 2 and level 3 diploma. Groups/individuals to complete KS4 early where appropriate. Access to early AS etc for a range of pupils. Additional numeracy /literacy support at KS3 to ensure full access to appropriate KS4 curriculum and level 2 attainment. Pathways to relate to types of learners – not ability groupings. Detailed systems in place to identify achievement of specific groups e.g.  Pupils with EAL  L4 at KS2  FSM etc and to target and monitor the impact of additional support on these groups. All staff able to interpret data effectively and plan appropriate teaching strategies to raise achievement for all pupils and impact particularly on those at risk of underachievement. School confident of quality of externally provided courses. St John Fisher pupils able to access the full range of KS4 curriculum offer in the district. St John Fisher staff active in diploma delivery. Small scale trials were done in the year 2007/08 and 2008/09 2007 onwards (first begun September 2006) More begun in September 2007 and are becoming more refined. Clear evidence emerged within departments by summer 2008. Beginning 2007. In place September 2008. Monitoring ongoing. September 2009 September 2010 onwards 2. Further to implement the specialist school dimension of St John Fisher as a humanities school with a distinctive Catholic identity. Relevant departments and individuals to draw up detailed programmes to address the range of provision identified in the Specialist bid with  Partner primary schools  Local community groups  Parents with EAL  Parishes  Local businesses. Develop, stock and staff a library/learning resource centre. Provision of a variety of community actions to promote understanding and awareness of gospel values. Training in values issues being accessed by at least one local business or community group. Engagement of parents in EAL provision. Curriculum links KS2-KS3 embedded into planning and schemes of work across all appropriate subjects. Enhanced provision for research and reference, thus supporting independent learning. A developing culture of study/homework/research activities among pupils at all key stages. September 2008 – December 2009 2008 - 2010 3. Continued emphasis on development of middle leaders across the school. Second and third cohorts to complete LftM. Individuals involved to have increased capacity for self review and strategic thinking. Schemes of work, departmental plans, and financial bids will specify how resources and process of teaching and learning will affect individual achievement. Evaluation of plans etc will identify specific improvements. 2007 – 2008 Cohort 2 2009 – 2010 Cohort 3 Ongoing More recent and current activities Since 2009, the school has been involved in further enhancement of pupil support systems to enable appropriate care with focus on early intervention as a preferable rather than reaction. This involves incorporating existing good practice of multi-agency working into a more formal structure by reviewing the existing pupil support structures. The aim of this strategy is to sustain an outstanding level of care, support and guidance for all pupils. Another point is to further develop opportunities for Pupil Voice and for the incorporation of concepts of SEAL. The main action revolves around curriculum and guidance leaders who develop a range of opportunities for pupils to discuss and contribute to development as learners. The intended outcome is that learners will be informed of all the key stages involved appropriately and be aware of the school activities and priorities. Saint John Fisher Catholic College also has a programme that involves close involvement with Staffordshire vision for BSF to secure the place of St. John Fisher as a provider of catholic education in the North West Staffordshire area and Newcastle. This involves discussion with county officers and local schools, liaison with diocesan officers, and attendance at planning events. The outcome of this is that the plan used is coherent as to meet the needs of the local people in the long term. Further activities include setting the school in track for successful reassessment of FMSIS and extending the existing good practice in relation to safeguarding and ensuring safe recruitment. Governors in the finance committee are involved in overseeing review and action, and also supervise the ongoing training requirements of the governing body and staff. The anticipated outcomes of this include successful continued capacity for strategic planning and creation of a substantial pool of well trained practitioners. Analysis Saint John Fisher Catholic College seems to have adopted a zero-based budgeting system. This implies that the budget needs to be built from scratch every year, identifying each activity or position that needs to be funded (Maddox 224, Rivero and Jan 370). In zero-based budget system the organisation is required o identify its major activities, determine their criticality to the organisation’s mission, and describe the activity at several possible levels of funding, as well as the corollaries of not funding the activity. As it can be noted from the description of activities in the table and the current activities, there are a number of planned projects that are not reflected in the 2010 budget (see appendix). This means that each of the new activities is included in the institution’s budget as a new project rather than a continuation of preceding years’ activities. There are some advantages of zero-based budgeting. First is that an organisation can eliminate processes or forms that are not effective during the year, and second, it is easier to discover better ways of management since budgets are not pegged on previous years’ details (Rasmussen, Eichorn and Barak 134). The downsides of zero-based budgeting include the fact that the process is time consuming, and that many assumptions are made, which if are incorrect lead to poor performance (Rasmussen, Eichorn and Barak 134; Dropkin, Jim & La Touche 76). Saint John Fisher Catholic College could also try activity-based budgeting as a means plan the utilisation of its resources. This method flows backwards by using past figures to estimate future expenditures. For example, given that the college spent £2,683,444.43 on teaching costs in 2010, it can use this figure plus estimated inflation to approximate the teaching cost in 2011. The advantage of activity based budgeting is that it can be used to truly reflect the organisation’s future costs (Cokins 286). This type of budgeting is also known to enhance identification of needs and identifies budgeting slack. It is also possible to link costs of outputs with staff performance, and the method encourages balanced participation of staff in setting the budget (Smith 224). Nevertheless, the downside of activity-based budgeting occurs when wrong estimates of previous years are used. Conclusion Saint John Fisher Catholic College needs to employ budgeting techniques that reflect the value for money, effectiveness, efficiency and economy. Although the current approach of zero-based budgeting seems appropriate, it has the limitation of not reflecting previous years’ activities. This means that new activities may be included in the budgeting without knowledge of their impact. Activity-based budgeting is more applicable for the college as it is based on translating past and current expenditures into future estimates. With this, the college will be able to eliminate the possibility of having unnecessary or unevaluated projects in its budget. Works Cited Blandford, Sonia. Resource Management in Schools: Effective and Practical Strategies for the Self-Managing School. London: Prentice Hall, 1997. Cokins, Gary. Activity-Based Cost Management: An Executive's Guide. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2001. Dropkin, Murray, Halpin, Jim & La Touche, Bill. The Budget-Building Book for Nonprofits: A Step-By-Step Guide for Managers and Boards (2nd edition). New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2007. Griffiths, A. Wall, S. Applied Economics (5th edition). Harlow: London, 1993. Handy, C. Understanding Organizations. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1995. House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts. Improving Procurement in Further Education Colleges in England: Forty-First Report of Session 2006-07, Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence. London: The Stationery Office, 2007. Knight, B. Financial Management for Schools: The Thinking Managers Guide. London: Heinemann, 1993. Maddox, David C. Budgeting for Not-For-Profit Organizations. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1999. Middlewood, David and Lumby, Jacky. Strategic Management in Schools and Colleges. London: SAGE, 1998. Mintzberg, H. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Management. London: Prentice Hall, 1994. National Audit Office. Improving Procurement in Further Education Colleges in England London: The Stationery Office, 2006. Norton, M. Scott and Kelly, Larry K. Resource Allocation: Managing Money and People. London: Eye on Education, 1997. Programme for International Student Assessment. School factors related to quality and equity: results from PISA 2000. London: OECD Publishing, 2005. Rasmussen, Nils; Eichorn, Christopher J. and Barak, Corey S. Process Improvement for Effective Budgeting and Financial Reporting New York: Wiley and Sons, 2003. Rivero, Edilberto J. Rodríguez and Emblemsvåg, Jan "Activity-based life-cycle costing in long-range planning", Review of Accounting and Finance, 2007. Vol. 6 Iss: 4, pp.370 – 390. Sewchurran, Kosheek. “Toward an approach to create self-organizing and reflexive information systems project practitioners.” International Journal of Managing Projects in Business. Vol. 1 No. 3, 2008. pp. 316-333. Smith, Julia A. Handbook of Management Accounting (edition 4). London: Elsevier, 2007. Strain, Michael. “Resource Management in Schools: Some Conceptual and Practical Considerations. In Ernie Cave and Cyril Wilkinson. Local Management of Schools: Some Practical Issues. London: Routledge, 1990. Tomlinson, S. “The consequences of competition” in Education in a Postwelfare Society. Buckingham: Open University Press, 2001. Wagner, L. Readings in Applied Micro-Economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981. Appendix Saint John Fisher Catholic College Budget 2010 Cost elements Budget Actual Committed Assigned Available * Teaching Costs 2,693,514.00 2,683,444.43 2,683,444.43 10,069.57 * Supply Teaching Costs 15,750.00 6,132.45 6,132.45 9,617.55 * Teaching Assistants 253,060.00 247,833.98 247,833.98 5,226.02 * Ancillary Staff Costs 1,524.60 1,524.60 1,524.60- * Technicians Staff Costs 119,828.00 121,916.01 121,916.01 2,088.01- * Total Domestic Staff Costs 1,840.00 1,210.37 1,210.37 629.63 * Exam Invigilator Costs 20,000.00 20,145.43 20,145.43 145.43- * Librarian Staff Costs 30,265.00 25,920.88 25,920.88 4,344.12 * Total Caretaking Staff Cos 73,730.00 74,278.73 74,278.73 548.73- * Admin & Clerical Costs 255,918.00 250,169.04 250,169.04 5,748.96 * Catering Staff Costs 5.41 5.41 5.41- * Supervis, Family Supp, Med 35,820.00 31,854.94 31,854.94 3,965.06 * Indirect Employee Costs 15,500.00 12,995.19 12,995.19 2,504.81 * Insurance Costs 25,210.00 25,197.89 25,197.89 12.11 * Building Maintenance and I 46,330.00 17,460.96 17,460.96 28,869.04 * Grounds Maintenance 9,620.00 10,903.74 10,903.74 1,283.74- * Cleaning Maintenance 86,270.00 87,673.07 87,673.07 1,403.07- * Water and Sewage 13,400.00 13,769.84 13,769.84 369.84- * Energy Costs 50,970.00 57,839.99 57,839.99 6,869.99- * Rent and Rates 15,820.00 15,174.75 15,174.75 645.25 * Vehicle Costs 9,510.00 8,049.87 8,049.87 1,460.13 * Learning Resources 328,212.00 182,070.17 182,070.17 146,141.83 * ICT Learning Resources 56,912.00 67,385.41 67,385.41 10,473.41- * Examination Fees 90,000.00 90,703.84 90,703.84 703.84- * Administrative Supplies 64,129.00 36,028.83 36,028.83 28,100.17 * Catering 25,770.00 24,121.36 24,121.36 1,648.64 * Music Services 17,750.00 16,594.26 16,594.26 1,155.74 * Swimming Service 5,100.00 5,807.66 5,807.66 707.66- * Curriculum Professional Se 27,740.00 27,933.00 27,933.00 193.00- * Devolved Library Service 7,500.00 3,760.00 3,760.00 3,740.00 * Bought in Other Services 22,814.00 25,660.78 25,660.78 2,846.78- * Training Fees 34,710.00 16,467.56 16,467.56 18,242.44 * Contingency 44,118.00 44,118.00 ** Working School Budget 4,497,110.00 4,210,034.44 4,210,034.44 287,075.56 * Use of Revenue balances (o ** Funding Adjustments to Bud * Harnessing Technology 22,800.00 9,050.00 9,050.00 13,750.00 ** Earmarked Funding 22,800.00 9,050.00 9,050.00 13,750.00 *** Total 4,519,910.00 4,219,084.44 4,219,084.44 300,825.56 Read More