Transcript Document

NAROPA UNIVERSITY
Strategic Plan
“Deliver Distinction With Excellence”
September 19, 2008
GOAL FOR TODAY
Review Naropa’s strategic plan for approval
Vote to approve the strategic plan
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-1-
WORKFLOW AND TIMELINE
Work Module
1.
Develop a baseline
2.
Review all relevant planning work
underway
3.
Perform student survey
4.
Analyze analogous institutions
5.
Perform financial modeling
6.
Define Naropa’s strategic direction
7.
Develop criteria for assessing Naropa’s
facilities-related decisions
8.
Lay out an action plan
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
(1)
Meet with “Meta”-team
Meet with broader group of key constituents
Meet with Naropa’s board
(1)
(1)
Today
(1) These meetings will be held by phone
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-2-
AGENDA
8:30 – 10:00am
Summary of Naropa’s strategic plan
10:00 – 10:30am
Break / contemplative practice
10:30am – 12:00pm
Review of key targets
12:00 – 1:00pm
Lunch and contemplative practice
1:00 – 5:00pm
Discussion
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
•
Facilities
•
Advancement
•
Additional discussions as necessary
-3-
STRATEGIC PLANNING EFFORTS WERE LAUNCHED TO CHART
THE NEXT STAGE OF NAROPA’S DEVELOPMENT
A Key Element of the Planning Process was its Inclusiveness
Board
Meta team
Action
committees
Stewardship
Senior staff
Broader
community
meetings
2006-2007
Mission
statement
development
Interviews,
focus groups,
facilitated
meetings
2005-2007
Performa HE
Strategic
themes &
goals
Stewardship
Senior staff
Add’l data
gathering &
analysis
Strategic
direction
2007-2008
Wellspring Consulting
Action
committees
Planning-related efforts have been going on for four years, and
there is mounting urgency to move to action
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-4-
A STRATEGIC PLAN DRIVES ALIGNMENT AND ACTION
Mission
Strategic
objectives
Strategic
initiatives
Action
steps
• Who
• What
• When
Performance metrics to
measure activity and results
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-5-
NAROPA’S CURRENT POSITION
Naropa University has key strengths and opportunities to draw upon
•
A unique position in the educational landscape coupled with a strong
heritage
•
Highly dedicated and passionate faculty, staff, and trustees, all
strongly committed to Naropa’s mission
•
A growing interest in contemplative practice in the greater society
However, amidst these strengths and opportunities are clear challenges for
Naropa
•
Naropa requires greater financial stability both as an institution and as
a workplace
•
Compensation is quite low vs. other relevant institutions
•
Faculty are overburdened and increasingly fatigued by their role
•
Staff turnover has been high in recent years which erodes stability
•
Faculty, staff and students express a strong desire for a greater level
of community
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-6-
IN SERVICE OF ITS MISSION(1), NAROPA SEEKS TO FULFILL
SEVERAL ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVES
Provide an intimate educational experience for students with small class sizes and close
relationships between students and teachers
Provide students with skills that will enhance their effectiveness in the broader world
Make a Naropa education accessible to students of all economic means
Compensate faculty and staff at a level comparable to peers at similar institutions
Provide a strong community experience that nurtures and develops all participants
Model a sustainable working and learning environment through its facilities and its
practices
(1) See Mission Statement included in the appendix for reference
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-7-
SUCCESSFUL SMALL-CLASS-SIZE PEERS DIFFER FROM
NAROPA ON AT LEAST ONE OF THREE DIMENSIONS
Higher Tuition, Larger Endowment, and/or Larger Enrollment
2007-08
Undergrad
Tuition ($)
45,000
40,000
Bennington: 13
Hampshire: 16
35,000
Kalamazoo: 17
Lesley: 14
30,000
Higher Tuition
Elon: 22
25,000
Naropa: 14
20,000
Warren Wilson: 14
Larger Endowment
15,000
10,000
Columbia
College: 17
5,000
Numbers behind
school names indicate
average class size
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2005 Endowment / Expenses
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
Bubble size:
Undergraduate enrollment
Larger Enrollment
500
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
5000
-8-
RECAP OF MAY MEETING
Following a meta-team meeting where detailed information and analyses were
shared and discussed, a strategic framework and supporting rationale were
presented
Discussions were oriented around four questions
•
Do you support Naropa’s niche strategy: “Deliver distinction with
excellence?”
•
Do you support the collection of components that define how Naropa
will deliver distinction with excellence?
•
Do you support the measures – as a group – that Naropa will use to
fund its strategic direction?
•
Do you support the summary statement of Naropa’s strategy as
revised through our two day retreat?
At the end of the meeting the assembled group agreed unanimously on the
conceptual framework of the strategic plan with more detailed planning work
to come in the summer
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
-9-
WORK SINCE MAY
Detailed facilities analyses were conducted building on Action Committee F’s work to
•
Assess capacity as aligned with strategic plan growth projections
•
Flesh out the sequencing and financing of new construction as outlined in the
strategic plan
An action plan was developed through many iterations with senior staff and executive
committee trustees to lay out a path to realizing the strategy
•
V12 was sent to you
•
The action plan will continue to be reviewed through progress reports and will
evolve as necessary
Detailed financial projections were created to assess the general feasibility of the plan
•
The snapshot financials shared in May were simply a first cut and did not provide
timing details
•
Many detailed conversations and iterations occurred to estimate the investments
required so that the meta-team and senior staff could be comfortable that the
plan was feasible
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 10 -
THE STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK WAS BUILT AROUND A FEW
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
The view that Naropa needs to be a larger institution without being more
fragmented and that it needs to realize a higher net revenue from its students
and donors
That the above steps are needed to create sustainability for the university, its
faculty, and its staff and that sustainability is critical for Naropa to continue to
fulfill its mission and to expand its impact
Finally, to be able to grow and gain a higher net revenue from donors and
students, Naropa needs to develop and deliver a clearer story of
distinctiveness
This framework has remained essentially the same since May
• Shown on the following pages, italics indicate any changes
since May
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 11 -
DELIVER DISTINCTION WITH EXCELLENCE
Strategic Framework (1 of 4)
Naropa will pursue a strategic position which builds upon and enhances its
distinctiveness
•
Clearly define Naropa’s distinctiveness and what it delivers
•
Find and enroll more students who are truly seeking what Naropa
offers
•
Deliver distinction with excellence
Note: Differences from the May framework are indicated by italics
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 12 -
DELIVER DISTINCTION WITH EXCELLENCE
Strategic Framework (2 of 4)
To deliver distinction with excellence, Naropa will:
•
Create mechanisms to build community
–
Invest to create community on all campuses – including a new student
community and learning center
–
Acquire additional student housing
•
Strengthen the educational experience
–
Clarify and enhance Naropa’s approach to contemplative education
–
Broaden Naropa’s foundational undergraduate curriculum
–
Replace academic facilities at Arapahoe, upgrade academic facilities at
other campuses
–
Expose students to a greater diversity of perspectives and cultures
–
Provide enhanced support for students facing Naropa’s introspective
challenge
–
Be more intentional in preparing graduates to thrive and make a difference
•
Invest in faculty and staff
–
Raise faculty and staff salaries over five years, towards a target of the 50th
percentile of peer institutions
–
Invest in training and development
•
Grow the institution
–
Grow residential enrollment to fill the current capacity of Naropa’s facilities
–
Grow online low residency programs
–
Make major facilities and infrastructure investments to support growth
Note: Differences from the May framework are indicated by italics; “Grow the institution” used to read “Grow the institution in two phases” and the supporting dashpoints
had indicators of order (first, second); The alteration was made to accommodate all of the facilities investments under the third dashpoint and also to include
infrastructure in the third dashpoint to recognize the need to plan for technology investments at Naropa
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 13 -
DELIVER DISTINCTION WITH EXCELLENCE
Strategic Framework (3 of 4)
Pursue a balanced portfolio of measures to make the university financially sustainable:
•
Raise net tuition by a combination of maintaining Naropa’s tuition rate growth just
above inflation, and decreasing the undergraduate discount rate by several
percentage points
•
Increase the average class size by 10% by department or program and,
subsequently, creatively restructure ranked faculty teaching responsibilities in order
to gain a 10% increase
–
Possibilities might include reducing the number of class preparations per
faculty member while increasing the unit value of courses; restructuring the
calendar; or allowing faculty variable course loads over multiple years
•
Restructure extended studies to achieve financial success, better serve the greater
community, and work collaboratively with Advancement to meet the fundraising
goals of the university
•
Use clarity of purpose and specific initiatives defined through Naropa’s strategic
plan to boost net fundraising revenue […]
•
Building on past work, establish a small board/staff/faculty team that will explore
innovative ideas for Naropa’s future – with the goal of enhancing Naropa’s distinction
and delivery of excellence
–
Part of this group’s charter will be to look for strategic alliances with other
institutions to achieve Naropa’s mission
• Financial measures must be reassessed each year to reflect current economic conditions
• The overall strategic plan should undergo a major review and reassessment after 5 years
Note: Differences from the May framework are indicated by italics
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 14 -
DELIVER DISTINCTION WITH EXCELLENCE
Strategic Framework (4 of 4)
To jumpstart this strategy, Naropa will utilize, as necessary, $1-2M of cash
from:
•
Proceeds from the sale of Sangha House
•
Unused bond proceeds in place for the Nalanda campus
•
Recent bequests and other segregated funds
Note: Differences from the May framework are indicated by italics
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 15 -
AGENDA
8:30 – 10:00am
Summary of Naropa’s strategic plan
10:00 – 10:30am
Break / contemplative practice
10:30am – 12:00pm
Review of key targets
12:00 – 1:00pm
Lunch and contemplative practice
1:00 – 5:00pm
Discussion
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
•
Facilities
•
Advancement
•
Additional discussions as necessary
- 16 -
REVIEW OF KEY TARGETS
On the next set of pages is an overview of the work conducted since May and
the outcomes of that work
•
There is additional supporting data available for your review in the
appendix on each of these topics
We seek to review all five target areas in the next 90 minutes and use the time
after lunch to return to any topics that require further detail and discussion
•
The priorities for the afternoon discussion will be determined based on
the review of the five areas and the perceived levels of comfort or
question
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 17 -
ENROLLMENT RELATED TARGETS AND BACKGROUND
In May, aspirational enrollment targets were discussed that were based on
industry and analog research – 5% for undergrad, 3% for grad, 15% for online
low residency
Since May, iterations were conducted with senior staff to modify the targets to
remain aspirational but be somewhat closer to what they saw as feasible and
to quantify investments that would be required to achieve that growth
The outcome
•
Growth ramping over 3 – 5 years to targets of 5% for undergrad, 3% for
grad, 10% for online low residency
•
Tuition increases remained the same (6.5%) and the undergraduate
discount rate now ramps down over 5 years to 25%
•
Investments included in new online low residency programs,
admissions and marketing to help spur growth, and academic affairs
to support improvements in Naropa’s offering
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 18 -
FACULTY AND STAFF RELATED TARGETS AND
BACKGROUND
In May, targets for compensation increases were discussed based upon
interviews and additional input received from the community, benchmarking,
and analog interviews emphasizing the need to invest in faculty
In addition, as part of the package of financial levers, two elements of
efficiency which would somewhat increase faculty load were discussed:
increasing class size and increasing teaching responsibilities
Since May, further work has been conducted to flesh out the implementation
of the efficiency elements
The outcome
•
Compensation philosophy has remained constant with core faculty
and staff targeted at the 50th percentile over 5 years and adjunct
faculty increases paralleling overall staff increases which brings them
above the 50th percentile
•
The workload increases have been staggered: the class size increase
being implemented in FY10 and the teaching load increase in FY13
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 19 -
FACILITIES OUTLINE (1 of 2)
In May, the desire and need for facilities were indicated as a student
community and learning center, upgraded academic facilities, and additional
student housing
Since then
•
Detailed facilities analyses were conducted to assess capacity and to
more fully estimate the financial implications of the proposed facilities
•
Discussions were had regarding sequencing of facilities and planning
including a master plan
•
A concern was raised regarding Naropa’s technological infrastructure
and the need to plan better for technology expenses
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 20 -
FACILITIES OUTLINE (2 of 2)
The outcome
•
Three major facilities projects are included in the plan sequenced as
follows: a build-out of the space at Nalanda, a student community and
learning center at Arapahoe, and a new academic building at Arapahoe
•
With these three buildings, the enrollment growth contained in the plan
and for the future are accommodated
•
A merger of the Paramita and Nalanda campuses at Nalanda is
proposed as a hypothesis for master planning work
•
A master plan will be conducted to build upon this work and an
academic enrollment plan is being developed to confirm and flesh out
the details of the new facilities
•
Estimated construction costs – including upfront and ongoing
payments – have been appropriately incorporated into the financial
projections
•
Action steps regarding planning for future technology investments
have been added
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 21 -
ADVANCEMENT RELATED TARGETS
In May, a first-cut model for advancement contribution was used which
indicated an 8% increase over the full $1M base that advancement has
traditionally raised
•
This $1M base included both restricted and unrestricted dollars
Since then, a proposed campaign with investments and more aggressive
targets has been developed with an estimate of what portion of the total funds
(restricted and unrestricted) might be applicable to strategic plan expenses
In meetings with the Budget & Finance committee of the Board, a desire was
expressed to understand the implications on the overall plan if the
aspirational advancement goals were not fully realized
The outcome
•
An aspirational advancement plan with a request for clear
commitments is outlined and one plausible fallback scenario has been
developed to help create boundaries and increase comfort levels
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 22 -
OVERVIEW OF STRATEGIC PLAN FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS
In May, a picture of investments and revenues was provided to give a sense of
plan feasibility at a ballpark level
Since then, a financial projection has been constructed to assess the overall
feasibility of the strategic plan
•
Originally based on FY07 financials, it has been updated to build off of
the recently completed FY09 budget
•
These projections are for the purposes of testing financial feasibility at
a summary level and do not replace the annual budgeting process
The financial projections show a profit and loss statement that balances
including the build-up of monies to cover upfront facilities payments
•
Significant detail on these projections has been shared with the metateam, senior staff, and the budget & finance committee
•
The working projection itself has been shared with Naropa finance
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 23 -
Do you support the strategic plan for Naropa University as laid out in this
document on pages 12 – 16
•
And as informed by data, analysis, and discussions related to the key
targets?
Do you commit as an individual to do your part in furthering the strategic
plan?
AGENDA
8:30 – 10:00am
Summary of Naropa’s strategic plan
10:00 – 10:30am
Break / contemplative practice
10:30am – 12:00pm
Review of key targets
12:00 – 1:00pm
Lunch and contemplative practice
1:00 – 5:00pm
Discussion
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
•
Facilities
•
Advancement
•
Additional discussions as necessary
- 25 -
MOVING FORWARD
Today, the formal strategic planning process draws to a close
•
The strategic plan content along with the financial projections will be
used as a guideline for further planning and budgeting work on an
annual basis
The execution and evolution of the strategic plan will continue forward
•
The budget process will be started earlier than in previous years
–
Additional financial training is being provided to budget team
members
–
Details of the 2010 budget will be developed in light of the
direction laid out by the strategic plan, as well as evolving
realities
•
Many efforts by staff, faculty and trustees, guided by the action plan,
will be made in service of achieving the strategic plan objectives
•
The action plan and progress will be reviewed and continually refined
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 26 -
APPENDIX
Section
Naropa mission statement
Page(s)
28
Summary financials and footnotes
29 – 35
Backup and financial detail for targets
• Enrollment-related targets
• Faculty and staff related targets
• Facilities targets including discussion of accelerated timeline
• Advancement-related targets including jumpstart funds and
discussion of requirements
36 – 39
40 – 44
45 – 53
54 – 66
Action planning and metrics
67 – 77
Additional strategic plan displays
75 – 77
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 27 -
Mission statement
MISSION STATEMENT
Naropa University
Inspired by the rich intellectual and experiential traditions of East and West, Naropa University is
North America's leading institution of contemplative education.
Naropa recognizes the inherent goodness and wisdom of each human being. It educates the
whole person, cultivating academic excellence and contemplative insight in order to infuse
knowledge with wisdom. The University nurtures in its students a lifelong joy in learning, a critical
intellect, the sense of purpose that accompanies compassionate service to the world, and the
openness and equanimity that arise from authentic insight and self-understanding. Ultimately,
Naropa students explore the inner resources needed to engage courageously with a complex and
challenging world, to help transform that world through skill and compassion, and to attain
deeper levels of happiness and meaning in their lives.
Drawing on the vital insights of the world's wisdom traditions, the University is simultaneously
Buddhist-inspired, ecumenical and nonsectarian. Naropa values ethnic and cultural differences
for their essential role in education. It embraces the richness of human diversity with the aim of
fostering a more just and equitable society and an expanded awareness of our common humanity.
A Naropa education—reflecting the interplay of discipline and delight—prepares its graduates
both to meet the world as it is and to change it for the better.
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 28 -
Summary financials
PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT (1 of 2)
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
a. Undergrad(2)
6,839
7,421
8,333
9,445
10,704
11,969
13,383
14,965
16,734
18,712
12%
b. Grad(3)
7,183
7,868
8,609
9,420
10,310
11,286
12,356
13,528
14,814
16,224
9%
c. Low residency
985
1,106
1,243
1,399
1,635
1,912
2,235
2,613
3,055
3,573
15%
(5)
170
184
199
216
234
254
274
297
321
347
8%
150
157
164
171
179
187
195
204
213
223
5%
310
349
420
442
466
488
507
527
548
569
7%
568
593
620
648
677
708
740
773
808
844
5%
241
264
272
280
288
296
305
314
323
333
4%
250
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
260
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
17,943
19,859
22,022
24,494
27,099
29,995
33,221
36,817
40,826
CAGR
Revenue ($K)
1. Tuition, fees, scholarships(1)
(4)
d. Other / misc.
2. Interest income
(6)
3. Extended studies revenue
4. Misc. revenue
(7)
(8)
5. Draw from endowment(9)
6. Budgeted advancement revenue
7. Project revenue for use in FY09
Total revenue
(10)
(11)
16,955
10%
Undergraduate enrollment
448
461
480
504
529
556
583
612
643
675
5%
Graduate enrollment
514
524
540
556
573
590
608
626
645
664
3%
On-line low residency enrollment
Total enrollment
98
103
109
116
127
140
154
169
186
205
9%
1,060
1,089
1,129
1,176
1,229
1,286
1,345
1,408
1,474
1,544
4%
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Underlying these financials is an assumed inflation rate of 4.5%; Footnotes are on subsequent slides; While projections are shown for 10 years, underlying
assumptions should be reviewed every year for economic feasibility and should undergo a major strategic review and reassessment after 5 years
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 29 -
Summary financials
PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT (2 of 2)
Total revenue
Expenses ($K)
8. Personnel
a. Core compensation(12)
b. Adjunct compensation(13)
c. Staff compensation(14)
d. Other personnel expenses(15)
9. Administrative expenses(16)
10. Facilities(17)
11. Other academic expenses(18)
12. Extended studies expenses(19)
13. Allowance for unexpected expenses(20)
Total expenses
Budget Surplus / (Deficit)
14. Addtl. strat. plan net expenses(21)
15. Use of jump-start funds(22)
16. Expected advancement revenue(23)
17. Adjustment for budgeted dev. revenue(24)
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
CAGR
16,955
17,943
19,859
22,022
24,494
27,099
29,995
33,221
36,817
40,826
10%
3,349
1,430
6,434
366
2,284
1,702
765
329
377
3,837
1,449
6,921
392
2,436
1,885
790
349
534
4,240
1,613
7,406
421
2,618
1,962
821
370
574
4,760
1,785
7,924
456
2,823
2,036
855
392
514
5,341
1,886
8,479
495
3,053
2,116
893
416
567
5,918
2,054
8,966
538
3,303
2,202
934
438
614
6,369
2,215
9,370
585
3,574
2,299
978
457
659
6,848
2,392
9,791
636
3,869
2,398
1,026
477
704
7,358
2,589
10,232
692
4,190
2,509
1,077
498
752
7,899
2,807
10,692
753
4,540
2,616
1,134
519
805
10%
8%
6%
8%
8%
5%
4%
5%
17,035
18,593
20,025
21,545
23,245
24,966
26,504
28,141
29,897
31,765
7%
477
1,248
2,132
3,491
5,080
6,920
9,061
(80)
(650)
(166)
(505) (1,120) (1,510) (1,672) (2,356) (2,775) (3,252) (3,664) (4,070) (4,609)
60
669
980
938
1,125
1,500
1,800
2,000
2,000
1,400
688
625
375
(250)
-
Net surplus / (deficit)
162
24
804
605
892
1,357
1,639
2,103
3,474
4,827
18. Balance of funds saved for faciliites at BOY(25)
19. BOY balance plus surplus
20. Up front payments for facilities(26)
162
-
162
187
-
187
991
(980)
11
616
(428)
187
1,079
(832)
247
1,605
(418)
1,186
2,825
(812)
2,013
4,117
-
4,117
7,591
-
7,591
12,418
-
Ending balance
162
187
11
187
247
1,186
2,013
4,117
7,591
12,418
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Underlying these financials is an assumed inflation rate of 4.5%; Footnotes are on subsequent slides; While projections are shown for 10 years, underlying
assumptions should be reviewed every year for economic feasibility and should undergo a major strategic review and reassessment after 5 years
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 30 -
Summary financials
BACKUP FOOTNOTES FOR
SUMMARY OF REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Category includes all program-specific revenue is therefore not the same as “Tuition and Fees, net of
Scholarships” line on Naropa’s audited financials
2) Includes summer and academic year; grows at the rate of undergraduate tuition increases and enrollment
growth
3) Includes summer and academic year; does not include online low-residency grad programs; grows at the rate
of graduate tuition increases and enrollment growth
4) Includes summer and academic year; grows at the rate of graduate tuition increases and online low residency
enrollment growth
5) Includes non-degree tuition, which grows at the rate of tuition growth; includes other miscellaneous fees and
revenues, which primarily grow with inflation
6) Includes interest earned on Naropa’s cash assets; grows at the rate of inflation
7) Includes Extended Studies tuition and miscellaneous other program-specific revenue; FY09 value models
Academic Affairs estimates of overall profitability; revenues in FY10 equal to expenses to simulate a break-even
situation, and revenues exceed expenses thereafter by $50K to simulate a small profit; Investments may need
to be made to launch new programs within Extended Studies – such investments, should they exceed any
surplus generated by existing programs, would need to be offset by focused fundraising (e.g. a grant to
support such a launch)
8) Includes housing income from Snow Lion, as well as earned income from items such as laundry, parking and
copying, and other miscellaneous revenues; primarily grows at the rate of inflation
9) Includes the cash contribution from the endowment, calculated each year by the Finance department as 5% of
the endowment’s average value over the previous three years; assumes no annual contributions to the
endowment are made over and above return on investment;
10) FY09 value reflects budgeted amount; Advancement provided a more detailed series of expenses and targets,
these are included on the next page, as a result, the advancement revenue is not shown here for FY10 onward
11) Project revenue from previous years, assumed as part of Naropa Finance FY09 budget
1)
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 31 -
Summary financials
BACKUP FOOTNOTES FOR
SUMMARY OF EXPENSE PROJECTIONS (1 of 2)
12) Growing at the rate of core compensation increases and enrollment growth; values reflect the net salary
expense after accounting for additional faculty to accommodate growth and for efficiency gains due to
increased class size and teaching load; All years use a 20.7% benefit rate based on FY09 budget
13) Growing at the rate of adjunct compensation increases and enrollment growth; values reflect the net salary
expense after accounting for additional faculty expenses to accommodate growth and for efficiency gains due
to increased class size and teaching load; benefits calculated at 10% of salary expenses; includes honorarium
14) Growing at the rate of staff compensation increases; All years use a 20.7% benefit rate based on FY09 budget;
additional staff positions are included in the additional strategic plan net expenses line (line 14)
15) Includes personnel-related expenses such as travel, meals, and recruiting; grows at the rate of enrollment
growth and inflation
16) Includes general overhead such as IT contracts, insurance, legal fees, etc.; grows at the rate of enrollment
growth and inflation, with a portion growing at a decreased rate in order to realize cost benefits associated with
growth (scale)
17) Includes debt service (cash), landscaping, maintenance, etc.; grows at the rate of enrollment growth and
inflation, with a portion growing at a decreased rate in order to realize cost benefits associated with growth
(scale)
18) Includes work study, field trips, counseling, and other non-personnel program-related expenses; primarily
grows at the rate of enrollment growth and inflation; work study revenue and expenses held constant to reflect
changes in the federal program
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 32 -
Summary financials
BACKUP FOOTNOTES FOR
SUMMARY OF EXPENSE PROJECTIONS (2 of 2)
19) Includes Extended Studies expenses; FY09 value models Academic Affairs estimates of overall profitability;
revenues in FY10 equal to expenses to simulate a break-even situation, and revenues exceed expenses
thereafter by $50K to simulate a small profit;
20) Also known as the “reserve”; FY09 uses actual value in Naropa’s budget; subsequent years grow proportional
to overall budget (including strategic plan expenses)
21) The sum of additional strategic plan expenses; includes ongoing costs of debt service for new facilities but
does not include upfront, one-time payments for facilities; also includes additional Advancement expenses tied
to the Advancement revenue targets on line 16 (footnote 23)
22) Includes the net value of jumpstart funds used toward strategic initiatives; FY09 includes $60K already
approved by Naropa’s Board for use against salary increase commitments
23) Targets provided by the Advancement Department; Assumes that an average of 50% of raised funds will be
applicable to strategic plan expenses (either because they are unrestricted funds or if they are restricted funds,
the restriction is applicable to strategic plan expenses) over the time period of the plan
24) Adjustment to remove budgeted Advancement revenue and incorporate Advancement Department estimates for
total revenue
25) Funds built up to cover facilities upfront, one-time payments; assumes that any surplus shown here will be
accumulated to cover upfront, one-time facilities payments as needed
26) Intended to show the amount (restricted and/or unrestricted) that Naropa will need to raise in order to cover the
down payments of the facilities included in the plan; these amounts are needed in the year shown, but can be
raised over any period of years prior
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 33 -
Summary financials
DETAIL ON STRATEGIC PLAN INVESTMENTS
Corresponding to Line 14 of Summary, Footnotes on Next Page
FY09
Investments ($K)
Programmatic, curricular, staff investments for growth
Additional staff comp. to support plan(1)
89
(2)
Fac. travel expenses to support admissions
8
PR costs - natl. roll-out & acceptance pubs.(3)
Admissions: inquiry qualification(4)
Investment in current program revamp(5)
20
(6)
Low residency program
77
Augmented training and development(7)
56
(8)
Augmented support
50
Brand Marketing study(10)
75
Facilities and infrastructure investments
Facilities master plan(12)
Additional facilities debt service(13)
(9)
Technology, other
40
Advancement related investments
Est. advancement and campaign expenses(14)
56
(11)
Alumni Relations expenses
34
14. Addtl. strategic plan net expenses
505
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
209
8
20
20
21
63
56
150
-
268
9
21
21
22
61
112
250
-
401
9
22
22
99
112
300
-
615
10
23
23
94
140
400
-
907
10
24
24
131
146
418
-
1,222
10
25
25
119
153
437
-
1,564
11
26
26
113
160
456
-
1,934
11
27
27
106
167
477
-
2,413
12
28
28
103
174
498
-
100
42
-
44
47
46
414
48
414
50
624
52
624
54
624
57
624
59
653
50
1,510
562
52
1,672
536
55
2,356
594
57
2,775
524
60
3,252
568
62
3,664
575
65
4,070
599
68
4,609
364
66
1,120
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Source: Naropa senior staff; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 34 -
Summary financials
FOOTNOTES FOR STRATEGIC PLAN INVESTMENTS
(1) Dollars for additional staff support, some positions already identified, others unspecified; see
backup slides for more detail
(2) Investment to support additional admissions activity from the faculty to support growth
(3) Investment in the PR budget for faculty/staff media training, national promotions and events
(4) Additional investment in admissions to support growth
(5) Investment to update and revamp curriculum (e.g. curricular planning, market/comparative school
analysis, faculty stipends, short-term faculty hire or retraining)
(6) Includes such costs as program director, course development costs, costs of accreditation, etc.
(7) Additional funds (beyond what has traditionally been budgeted) to support training and
development for faculty and staff including diversity training and development for faculty
(8) Additional funds (beyond what has traditionally been budgeted) to provide student support
including funds for diversity initiatives and staffing to help increase Naropa’s offerings and
increase retention
(9) Additional funds (beyond what has traditionally been budgeted for IT and facilities) to help support
greater technology academically or administratively and / or to support “curb appeal” efforts,
whichever is deemed more critical or more strategically valuable in a given year
(10) One-time expense to establish Naropa’s marketing position and branding image
(11) Additional funds to build a stronger bridge to Naropa’s alumni including events which connect
alumni to current students
(12) Funds required for outside consultant to formulate a high level facilities master plan; based on a
rough estimate from Art Lidsky of $75-120K
(13) Debt service costs (cash-based) of new facilities; assumes a 20 year loan at 4% (Source: Naropa
Finance); building cost assumptions include 7.5% annual growth in construction costs over the
original estimates which were provided in 2008 dollars
(14) Additional investments in staff and materials to support advancement efforts; current profile
assumes a build-up to a comprehensive campaign, to be adjusted depending on results from
campaign feasibility study
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 35 -
Enrollment targets
GROWTH RATES REPRESENTED BY THE PLAN
Undergraduate Growth
Graduate Growth
Online Low Residency Growth
•
Planned annual enrollment
growth: 5%(1)
•
Planned annual enrollment
growth: 3%(1)
•
Planned annual enrollment
growth: 10%(1)
•
Undergraduate applications
have seen significant growth
in the last several years (25%
increase in the last year)
•
Other similar institutions have
seen strong growth – CIIS at
>14%
•
Growth of overall online
education is substantial
•
Specific actions and funds
are included to add staff for
online instructional
development, perform
targeted market research, and
develop new courses and
programs
•
Specific actions to increase
the attractiveness of Naropa’s
educational experience are
included in the strategic plan
– New or improved facilities
– Broadened curriculum
– Specific efforts at
improving retention
building on work done by
the ad hoc retention
committee
•
3% growth returns grad
enrollment in 2010 to 2007 levels
•
Specific actions to increase the
attractiveness of the educational
experience are included in the
strategic plan
– Build stronger community and
new or improved facilities
– Review and enhance
curriculum over time
In the event that growth does not look feasible in the future for individual
departments, an alternative pathway to achieving similar results could be taken
through merging or eliminating departments, increasing departmental efficiency
through average course size increases, or other means of increasing efficiency
(1) Annual growth is ramped gradually to these rates to reflect the time necessary for the strategic plan actions to gain traction
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 36 -
Enrollment targets
ENROLLMENT TARGET DETAIL
FY09
Enrollment growth rates (%)
Undergrad
Grad
Online low residency
Net enrollment increase by year
Enrollment (#)
Undergrad
Grad
Online low residency
Total residential enrollment
Total enrollment
Tuition assumptions
Undergraduate discount rate (%)
Tuition increase (Undergrad) (%)
Tuition increase (Grad) (%)
Actual undergrad tuition rate ($K)
Actual grad tuition rate / credit ($)
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
0
-1
3
-0.4
3
2
5
2.7
4
3
6
3.7
5
3
6
4.1
5
3
10
4.5
5
3
10
4.6
5
3
10
4.6
5
3
10
4.7
5
3
10
4.7
5
3
10
4.8
448
514
98
962
1,060
461
524
103
986
1,089
480
540
109
1,020
1,129
504
556
116
1,060
1,176
529
573
127
1,102
1,229
556
590
140
1,146
1,286
583
608
154
1,191
1,345
612
626
169
1,239
1,408
643
645
186
1,288
1,474
675
664
205
1,339
1,544
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
29
6.0
6.0
22.0
726
28
6.5
6.5
23.4
773
27
6.5
6.5
24.9
823
26
6.5
6.5
26.6
877
25
6.5
6.5
28.3
934
25
6.5
6.5
30.1
995
25
6.5
6.5
32.1
1059
25
6.5
6.5
34.2
1128
25
6.5
6.5
36.4
1202
25
6.5
6.5
38.7
1280
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Source: Naropa senior staff; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 37 -
Enrollment targets
DETAIL ON LOW RESIDENCY PROGRAM INVESTMENTS
Included in Strategic Plan Investments
Expense
(1)
Needs assessment
FY09
FY10
Online program development costs ($K)
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
45
(2)
Instructional development
(3)
Addition of program directors
Academic course development
Marketing costs
Library / reference materials
NCA site visits
25
26
27
29
30
31
33
34
36
37
7
14
24
14
8
30
26
15
31
9
12
6
6
49
28
23
51
10
13
7
7
53
55
58
26
15
8
Total online development costs
77
99
94
131
119
113
106
103
5
5
63
61
Assumed timing of new program development
Program one
Program two(4)
Program three
(4)
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Needs assessment for all three programs is assumed to occur at one time to save costs by aggregating
Instructional developer is assumed to begin in FY09 to help revamp current online curricula
The program director for program one is budgeted to be hired sometime in FY09 after the completion of the needs assessment
Programs two and three assume that their “Year 1” in which the needs assessment occurs happens in FY09; therefore only three additional years are necessary for
full program development
Note: While these numbers indicate development of a full program, growth in online enrollment could potentially be gained earlier than at the end of each program
development cycle through various means: including offering individual classes or offering multiple classes as a certificate; additionally, if undergraduate online
course development were pursued, it would most likely progress down a path of individual course development (vs. full program development); also, the length of
this cycle of development is driven in large part by the current NCA restrictions which could potentially be lightened or lifted in 09-10
Note: All costs are inflated from assumptions provided on backup slide; for detail on assumptions, see backup slide
Source: Naropa Academic Affairs and Distance Learning; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 38 -
Enrollment targets
ASSUMED LOW RESIDENCY PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
One-time
cost: ‘08
dollars ($K)
Ongoing
cost: ’08
dollars ($K)
10-15
--
--
13
Academic course devt.
• 12 courses per program
• Cost paid to faculty is $2.5K per course
• Devpt. assumed to occur largely in year 2 –
costs allocated as 75% in yr 2, 25% in yr 3
30
--
Instructional development
• 1/2 FTE to prepare content for web delivery
--
25
29
--
Acquisition of library/reference materials
• Required for accreditation application
5
--
NCA site visits
• Only necessary if program requires visit
from NCA
5
--
Expense / Description
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Needs assessment
• Assess need and market for new programs
Program director
• 1/4 FTE for each program, oversees
program development and ongoing
implementation
Marketing costs (one-time costs spread over 3
years)(1)
(1) Marketing assumptions include $13K in year 4; $10K in year 5; and $5.5K in year 6 to continue supporting program through launch
Source: Naropa Academic Affairs and Distance Learning; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 39 -
Faculty / staff targets
DETAIL ON NEW STAFF POSITIONS TO SUPPORT GROWTH
Included in Strategic Plan Investments (Line 14 on Proj. Inc. Statement)
FY09
Marketing staff ($K)
Upgrade of MarCom director to Ass't VP
PR staff member
Community relations
Market research / branding
Academic Affairs staff ($K)
Webmaster ($K)
Admissions staff
New counselor job grade ($K)
Salary adjustments for current staff (%)
Incrsd. counselor intern hrs and op. staff ($K)
Director of operations ($K)
New counselor for additional programs ($K)
FY10
Total new staff compensation ($K)
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
57
63
10
50
48
60
60
66
10
52
50
62
62
69
10
54
52
65
65
72
11
57
54
68
68
75
11
59
57
71
71
78
12
62
59
74
74
82
5
7.0
17
43
38
5
7.0
18
45
39
6
7.0
19
47
41
6
7.0
20
49
43
6
7.0
21
52
45
6
7.0
22
54
47
7
7.0
23
56
49
4
10
569
4
14
833
4
18
1,119
5
23
1,494
8
42
8
44
42
9
46
44
9
48
46
50
52
55
4
7.0
5
7.0
16
5
7.0
17
41
Unspecified new staff (#)(1)
Cumulative unspcfied. new staff (based on FY09) (#)(1)
Salary of unspcfied. new staff ($K)(2)
Total new staff salaries ($K)
Adjustment for partial year in FY09 ($K)(3)
Total new staff benefits ($K)(4)
FY11
-
-
2
2
103
4
6
327
111
74
15
174
223
333
510
752
1,013
1,296
1,603
2,000
36
46
69
105
155
209
268
331
413
89
209
268
401
615
907
1,222
1,564
1,934
2,413
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
(1) Indicates positions for new staff in future plan years to support ongoing growth; these positions are as yet unspecified
(2) Uses the average salary for FY09 ($39.3K); annual increases match the increases of the overall staff salary pool
(3) As the positions targeted for FY09 have not yet been hired, a partial year’s salary has been assumed for FY09
(4) Benefits are assumed at 20.7% based on FY09 budget
Note: New staff positions involved in online low residency program development and in advancement are included in the strategic plan investment lines for those
categories
Source: Naropa finance; Naropa senior staff; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 40 -
Faculty / staff targets
CORE FACULTY COMPENSATION INCREASES IN PLAN
OCCUR CONCURRENTLY OR BEFORE INCREASED LOAD
3
Ranked
Faculty
Compensation
indexed to
FY08
2
1
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18
Class size
increases by ~10%
Core teaching load
increases
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: This curve sets a plan of raising faculty salaries to meet the 50% of peer institutions by FY14. Ranked faculty compensation increases include an inflation
assumption of 4.5% per year. Planned increases should be re-evaluated annually taking into account actual inflation and changes to the national average of
faculty salaries at peer institutions. Actual increases will vary based on these re-evaluations.
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 41 -
Faculty / staff targets
ADJUNCT FACULTY COMPENSATION AND STAFF
COMPENSATION ALSO INCREASE IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN
3
Adjunct
Faculty
Compensation
indexed to
FY08 (1)
2
1
3
Total Staff
Compensation
indexed to
FY08
2
1
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: This sets a plan of raising adjunct and staff salaries to meet or exceed the 50% of peer institutions by FY14; total staff compensation indicates the pool of
funds available for all staff and does not reflect an equal increase for all staff positions as current staff salaries differ in terms of how they compare to the 50th
percentile
Adjunct faculty compensation increases and staff compensation increases include an inflation assumption of 4.5% per year. Planned increases should be reevaluated annually taking into account actual inflation and changes to the national average of faculty salaries at peer institutions. Actual increases will vary
based on these re-evaluations.
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 42 -
Faculty / staff targets
FACULTY ASSUMPTIONS USED IN FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS
Corresponding to Lines 8a. and 8b. of Summary
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
Core faculty
Total salary w/o addtl. positions ($K)
New core faculty (incremental) (#)(1)
Cumulative new core faculty (#)(1)
2,764
-
3,130
1
1
3,459
1
3,822
1
2
4,223
1
3
4,540
2
5
4,744
2
7
4,958
2
9
5,181
2
11
5,414
2
13
8a. Net core compensation ($K)(2)
3,349
3,837
4,240
4,760
5,341
5,918
6,369
6,848
7,358
7,899
Adjunct faculty
Total salary w/o addtl. positions ($K)
Additional adjunct salaries ($K)
Direct savings: class size increase ($K)(3)
Direct savings: tchng load increase ($K)(4)
1,300
-
1,391
23
(97)
-
1,489
81
(104)
-
1,593
141
(111)
-
1,704
219
(119)
(90)
1,802
289
(126)
(98)
1,884
367
(131)
(105)
1,968
458
(137)
(113)
2,057
562
(144)
(122)
2,149
683
(150)
(131)
8b. Net adjunct compensation ($K)(5)
1,430
1,449
1,613
1,785
1,886
2,054
2,215
2,392
2,589
2,807
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
(1) New faculty indicates total growth or the net of new faculty and faculty that have left or retired
(2) Includes benefits
(3) Direct savings are estimated as the adjunct salary associated with a reduction of 117 course credits due to consolidation of sections to realize a 10% increase in
average class size; additional savings are implicit in the need for fewer core faculty going forward
(4) Direct savings are estimated as the equivalent adjunct salary for the 2 credits per core faculty increase; Core faculty assumed at 60 plus the cumulative new core
faculty shown here; additional savings are implicit in the need for fewer faculty going forward; a conservative 70% realization of these savings is modeled
(5) Includes benefits; Adjunct benefits calculated as 10% of salary expenses
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 43 -
Faculty / staff targets
DETAIL ON TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT FUNDS
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
Increased training and development
Diversity - faculty devpt funds
15.0
Other augmented training and devpt funds 41.0
Budgeted training and devpt funds
46.4
Budgeted faculty and staff travel funds
152.7
Total augmented training and devpt
56.0
Total training and devpt w/o travel
102.4
Total training and devpt incl. travel
255.1
15.0
41.0
49.6
163.2
56.0
105.6
268.9
15.0
97.0
53.2
175.1
112.0
165.2
340.3
15.0
97.0
57.5
189.1
112.0
169.5
358.6
15.0
125.0
62.3
204.9
140.0
202.3
407.2
15.7
130.6
67.6
222.4
146.3
213.9
436.3
16.4
136.5
73.4
241.4
152.9
226.3
467.7
17.1
142.6
79.7
262.1
159.8
239.5
501.6
17.9
149.1
86.6
284.7
167.0
253.5
538.2
18.7
155.8
94.1
309.3
174.5
268.5
577.9
Increased support
Diversity programming
Diversity staff position
Other augmented support funds
Total augmented support
20.0
40.0
90.0
150.0
20.0
41.8
188.2
250.0
20.0
43.7
236.3
300.0
45.6
354.4
400.0
47.7
370.3
418.0
49.8
387.0
436.8
52.1
404.4
456.5
54.4
422.6
477.0
56.9
441.6
498.5
50.0
50.0
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 44 -
Facilities targets
THREE MAJOR FACILITIES PROJECTS ARE INCLUDED AS
PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN
Sequenced Over Time (1 – 2 – 3) (1)
1. Build-out of unused
space at Nalanda
2. Community and Learning Center
at Arapahoe
Key benefits:
• Completes the original vision
of Nalanda
• Facilitates community by
providing dedicated space
• Gives arts departments and
other departments relocated
to Nalanda(2) room to grow
Key benefits:
• Is a powerful sign of Naropa’s
progress and direction
• Facilitates community
• Aids recruitment and
retention
• Provides space for support
services and faculty/staff
offices(3)
Sequencing rationale:
• Funds exist and are
earmarked to cover most of
the cost
• It provides swing space for
future construction projects
• It lightens the facilities
burden at Arapahoe, the most
heavily utilized campus
• It can be completed relatively
quickly to generate impact
Sequencing rationale:
• Later timing allows for
several years to raise
dedicated funds
• Meets a felt need – was often
cited during internal
interviews
• May take Naropa some time
to plan and prepare for this
new building
3. New Academic Building at
Arapahoe
Key benefits:
• Increases and improves
academic space and offices
• Will aid recruitment and
retention efforts
Sequencing rationale:
• New classroom space is not
immediately necessary
• Later timing allows several
years to raise dedicated
funds
• Designing the building after
sustained growth allows
better understanding of
future demand
(1) Not including a possible merger of Paramita and Nalanda campuses, which is discussed later in these materials
(2) Recent provisional thinking suggests that Music BA and Traditional Eastern Arts would be likely candidates to move to Nalanda and gain space through the Nalanda
build-out
(3) High level design recommendations currently include cafeteria and gathering space, offices, a new bookstore, etc.
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 45 -
Facilities targets
PROJECTED ENROLLMENT GROWTH CAN BE
ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THIS FACILITIES PLAN
Projected Residential Enrollment and Facilities Capacity
Number
of students
2,500
Complete new
Academic Building(2)
2,000
Complete buildout of Nalanda(1)
Capacity of facilities(3)
1,500
1,000
Residential student
enrollment
projected in the
strategic plan
500
0
FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17
(1) Assuming the addition of 6 usable classrooms with the Nalanda build-out
(2) Assuming the net addition of 3 usable classrooms (some are replaced, for a net of 3 new classrooms) with the Academic Building
(3) Capacity utilization calculations assume a 63% maximum utilization
Note: Capacity values only include the portion of hard-to-schedule rooms that were utilized in Fall 2007; no additional capacity was assumed for those rooms
Note: All capacity figures use Fall 2007 classroom usage figures to calculate a classroom hours per student value, and are altered to incorporate a 10% increase in Naropa’s
class size; therefore the ~1,400 student capacity shown in Fall 2007 includes the 980 students that semester, the ~290 additional students that could be accommodated
in unused space, and ~125 due to the 10% increase in class size (assuming all existing classrooms can hold an additional 10% of students)
Source: Naropa Operations department; Wellspring assumptions and analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 46 -
Facilities targets
IN ADDITION, NAROPA WILL ANALYZE THE POSSIBILITY
OF CONSOLIDATING TO TWO CAMPUSES
There Appears to Be Solid Interest in Such a Move(1)
Merging the Paramita and Nalanda campuses is attractive for a number of reasons
•
A merged campus will increase community and reduce the burden of supporting multiple
campuses
•
The merged campus also creates value by strengthening the graduate community and allows
for some sharing of resources between departments that would now be co-located
•
Selling Paramita frees up immediate cash and, potentially, some debt capacity, to use toward
other buildings
•
Nalanda is well positioned to expand
–
The planned Nalanda build-out will add 12.7K square feet within the existing building
–
About 40K - 50K additional square feet could be built on Nalanda property(2)
Naropa should seek to finalize this decision by February of 2009
•
The Paramita community should be engaged to determine what their physical resource needs
would be in moving to Nalanda and what would be required to execute the move successfully
•
The financial feasibility and implications will need to be examined
A final decision to merge Paramita and Nalanda would require that the facilities sequencing be reevaluated with this additional piece
(1) Based on indications by people on the meta-team and on senior staff
(2) Rough estimate by Operations department; Naropa would need to pursue its plans with the City to ensure this possibility
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 47 -
Facilities targets
INVESTMENTS IN NEW FACILITIES WILL BE SEQUENCED(1)
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
624
624
624
Facilities project
Build-out unused space at Nalanda(2)
Community and Learning Center
Academic Building
12.7K sqft;
12.7K
$1.5M
sqft
(3)
17K sqft; $6.3M
(4)
9K sqft; $4.1M
Costs incl. in financial projections ($K)
Down payments for new facilities(5)
Ongoing additional debt service
Benefits gained
Office space for faculty
Community space
Classroom space
Cafeteria
Larger bookstore
Learning center
Labs for basic science
980
(6)
X
X
X
428
832
418
812
47
414
414
624
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
(1) A merger of Paramita and Nalanda campuses is not shown, as the decision has yet to be made
(2) Overall cost estimate from Operations department, includes architectural, design and contracting fees;
Assuming a 12.7K sqft building, the total cost is $1.6M
(3) Assuming a 17K sqft. building, at $230/sqft, plus 30% for architectural, design and contracting fees
(4) Assuming a 9.5K sqft building, at $230/sqft, plus 30% for architectural, design and contracting fees
Indicates timeframe of
(5) Represents 20% cash downpayment for the community and learning center; 30% for the academic building;
planning and construction
Excess value or equity in existing property: based upon current assessment ~$1.5M excess value is estimated
- of which $820K (55%) is assumed to meet the 30% requirement as indicated by the bank for the Nalanda
build-out and the community and learning center
(6) Cash-based; represents principal, interest and fees (not depreciation)
Note:All facilities costs are calculated to include a 7.5% annual inflation in construction costs; cost estimates and timing based on Operations department estimates; Cost
estimates reflect Naropa’s commitment to sustainable building and LEEDS silver standards
Source: Naropa Operations; Interview with Chuck Lief; Wellspring analysis
- 48 Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Facilities targets
FINANCING STRUCTURE ASSUMED FOR
FACILITIES INVESTMENTS
Used to Make Financial Projections
Nalanda build-out
Community and
Learning Center
Academic Building
Cost of building
estimated in FY08
$1,400K
$5,100K
$2,800
Planned construction
yr.(1)
FY2011
FY2012
FY2014
Cost when built(2)
$1,620K
$6,300K
$4,100K
Proceeds from Nalanda
bond
$980K(3)
--
--
$640K
$6,300K
$4,100K
Down-payment(4)
--
$1,260K
$1,230K
Amount financed
$640K
$5040K
$2,870
Resulting annual debt
service (cash-based)(5)
$47K
$367K
$210K
Subtotal
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Indicates beginning of a roughly 2 year planning, design and building phase; Nalanda build-out assumed to occur in 1 year
Assumes annual construction cost inflation of 7.5% on the base cost of the building at the end of FY08
To approximate modest returns on this money accrued before its use in FY10 an interest rate of 4.5% was used
Equity requirements of bank are 30%; Nalanda build-out and Community & Learning Center leverage excess value in existing property as a portion of the equity
requirements; Community and Learning Center numbers assume a 20% down payment and the Academic Building assumes a 30% down payment
(5) Assuming a 20 year repayment period and a 4% interest rate; principal payments, interests and fees (not depreciation) included in these figures
Note: Naropa will need to perform a more thorough analysis of its debt capacity (in dialogue with the bank) in order determine its eligibility for these loans
Source: Naropa Finance and Facilities, discussions with Chuck Lief; Wellspring analysis
- 49 Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Facilities targets
RECALL THAT THE PROFILES OF INSTITUTIONS EMERGING
SUCCESSFULLY FROM FINANCIAL DISTRESS EMPHASIZED
FACILITY INVESTMENT
The profiles of institutions handling financial distress held an interesting observation –
that those that had emerged successfully all indicated an investment in facilities and
those that failed indicated facilities in disrepair
Northeastern invested in facilities despite the financial crisis because “improving campus
facilities would be the best way to quickly attract new students to the institution”(1)
•
“You can build a building in two years, but you can’t boost up faculty and
programming that quickly. New buildings get immediate results”(1)
Elon evidenced a willingness to take risks
•
“Built, renovated, and leased 27 new buildings” within a decade
•
Took on debt to finance changes
Goddard devoted “a new energy and dedication to revitalizing the campus buildings”
While these observations should not be taken as conclusive, they should be remembered
as facilities sequencing and timing is discussed
•
New facilities can help spur growth and mark a renewal
(1) Chronicle of Higher Education
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 50 -
Facilities targets
THE MASTER PLAN SHOULD BUILD UPON
AND FURTHER EXISTING WORK
Background
Planned to follow the academic enrollment
growth plan
Guidance from Art Lidsky
• Ideally occurs over a school year (start in
Sep, end in May)
• Possible to accomplish it by the end of
this spring semester
– Assumes planner can become familiar
with the information already in hand in
mid-late fall and the enrollment plan is
done by the first of the year
– Assumes a presentation at the May
meeting, sufficient for the board to
act, followed up with written material
during the summer months
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Starting Assumptions
Assumes as givens – items that are essentially
non-negotiable
• Build-out of unused space at Nalanda
• Some facility to accommodate student
and learning center functions
• Significant improvements in academic
facilities at Arapahoe
Assumes the following as starting hypotheses
– items that should be included in analysis
and reasoning provided if not included in final
plan
• Consolidation of Paramita and Nalanda
campuses at Nalanda
• Music and Traditional Eastern Arts as
two departments accommodated in
build-out at Nalanda
- 51 -
Facilities targets
CURRENT FACILITIES TIMELINE OUTLINED IN THE
STRATEGIC PLAN ACTION PLAN AND FINANCIALS
Step
Begin date
End date
1. Academic enrollment
growth plan
Already
begun
Dec 2008 (barebones)
Apr 2009 (full plan)
2. Master plan
Sep 2009
May 2010
3. Nalanda build-out
May 2010
Sep 2011
4. Student community and
learning center(1)
Sep 2011
Sep 2013
5. Academic building(1)
Sep 2013
Sep 2015
6. Consolidation of
campuses
Not yet
planned
Not yet planned
(1) These dates are as currently outlined and final dates would be dependent on the master plan and advancement plans and performance
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 52 -
Facilities targets
ACCELERATED FACILITIES TIMELINE
Step
Begin date
End date
1. Academic enrollment
growth plan
Already
begun
Dec 2008 (barebones)
Apr 2009 (full plan)
2. Master plan
Oct 2008
Jul 2009
3. Nalanda build-out
May 2009
Sep 2010
4. Student community and
learning center
TBD
TBD
5. Academic building
TBD
TBD
6. Consolidation of
campuses
Not yet
planned
Not yet planned
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Sequencing
and timing to
be determined
by master plan
and
advancement
plan
- 53 -
Advancement targets
ADVANCEMENT AND JUMPSTART FUND TARGETS
Base Building
Quiet Phase
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12 FY13
Revenues ($K)
Est. advancement and campaign expenses 56.1 363.8 652.8 562.5 535.6
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
593.9 524.3 567.6
FY17
574.7
FY18
599.3
Targeted advancement revenues
Applicable advancement revenue
Endowment assumptions
Endowment contributions ($K)
Return on investment(1) (%)
Endowment value(2) ($K)
5. Draw from Endowment(3) ($K)
Jumpstart funds assumptions
Unused bond proceeds(4) ($K)
(5)
Sale of Sangha House ($K)
15. Use of jumpstart funds ($K)
1,250
938
1,500
1,125
2,000
1,500
3,000
1,800
4,000
2,000
4,000
2,000
3,500
1,400
2,750
688
2,500
625
1,500
375
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
-
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.8
5,433 5,593 5,757 5,927 6,101 6,281 6,465 6,655 6,851 7,053
241
264
272
280
288
296
305
314
323
333
60
60
669
669
980
980
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
(1) Based on the 2006 average return on higher education endowments with total values less than $25M (source: Chronicle of Higher Education)
(2) At the end of given fiscal year; 2007 value provided by Naropa finance; subsequent years calculated by adding additional endowment contributions and return on
investment, and then subtracting 5% of a three-year moving average
(3) 2007 value given by Naropa Finance; subsequent years calculated as 5% of the endowment’s average value over the previous three years
(4) Portion of funds indicated by Naropa’s Board for potential use against strategic plan investments; earmarked for use at Nalanda campus
(5) Portion of funds indicated by Naropa’s Board for potential use against strategic plan investments; standard Board policy has been to use toward capital investments;
however, with Board approval, can be used toward other strategic objectives; FY09 value includes $60K already committed toward salary increases
Source: Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 54 -
Advancement targets
ADVANCEMENT INVESTMENTS AND TARGETS IN STRATEGIC
PLAN ($K) (1 of 3)
Base Building
Quiet Phase
Projected Advancement Investments ($K) FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
I. Staff*
Campaign Manager (ADV)
42.5
44.4
46.4
48.5
Campaign Assistant (ADV)
35.0
36.6
38.2
Philanthropic Adviser (ADV)
55.0
57.5
60.1
62.8
Philanthropic Adviser (ADV)
55.0
57.5
60.1
Events Manager (PRES)
40.0
41.8
43.7
45.6
47.7
Events Coordinator (PRES)
30.0
31.4
32.8
34.2
Alumni Administrative Assistant (ADV)
30.0
31.4
32.8
34.2
Data Manager (ADV)
32.0
33.4
34.9
Subtotal
40.0 199.3 330.3 345.1 360.7
Benefits @ 20%
8.3
41.2
68.2
71.3
74.5
Total Salaries and Benefits
48.3 240.5 398.5 416.4 435.2
II. Professional Fundraising Consulting Fees
Feasibility
Study
Board
Retreat
Training, Campaign
Organizing Committee, Campaign
Campaign
Consultant
Other Consultant
Services (Title III
consultant, Kresge consultant, political
Electronic Screening
Contingency @ 5%
Subtotal
7.5
0.4
7.9
40.0
12.0
2.6
54.6
50.0
26.0
30.0
10.0
5.8
121.8
62.4
29.0
4.6
96.0
42.0
10.0
2.6
54.6
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
FY17
FY18
50.7
39.9
65.6
62.8
49.8
35.8
35.8
36.5
376.9
77.8
454.7
6.4
0.3
6.7
53.0
41.7
68.5
65.6
52.1
37.4
37.4
38.2
393.9
81.4
475.2
55.3
43.6
71.6
68.5
54.4
39.1
39.1
39.9
411.6
85.0
496.6
57.8
45.6
74.8
71.6
56.9
40.8
40.8
41.7
430.1
88.8
518.9
60.4
47.6
78.2
74.8
59.4
42.7
42.7
43.5
449.4
92.8
542.3
-
-
-
-
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Costs are inflated using 4.5% assuming that original Advancement estimates were provided in FY09 dollars
Source: Naropa Advancement Department; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 55 -
Advancement targets
ADVANCEMENT INVESTMENTS AND TARGETS IN STRATEGIC
PLAN ($K) (2 of 3)
Base Building
Quiet Phase
Projected Advancement Investments ($K) FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
III. Campaign Communications**
Case Statement
Management
Fees (marketing firm if
6.1
outsourced)Tools (campaign brochure,
Solicitation
10.0
10.0
photography,
concept
dev., copy,
Awareness
Building
Materials
(building
35.0
renderings,
reproductions,
quietcopy,
phase
Direct
Mail Solicitation
(design,
20.0
content, photography, printing)
Newsletter
Website
Solicitation (redesign of
1.0
1.0
1.0
current site to achieve interactivity and
Campaign CD-Rom
5.0
Telemarketing
Postage
Public Relations
Contingency @ 10% (for items above)
3.7
5.0
Naropa Marketing DVD (optional)
30.0
Subtotal
39.8
86.0
1.0
1.0
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
35.0
4.0
15.0
15.0
3.0
3.0
6.0
81.0
2.0
3.0
0.5
5.5
2.0
3.0
0.3
5.3
FY17
FY18
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Costs are inflated using 4.5% assuming that original Advancement estimates were provided in FY09 dollars
Source: Naropa Advancement Department; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 56 -
Advancement targets
ADVANCEMENT INVESTMENTS AND TARGETS IN STRATEGIC
PLAN (3 of 3)
Quiet Phase
Base Building
Projected Advancement Investments ($K) FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
IV. Campaign Operation
Travel Expenses
10.9
10.5
10.0
(1/2 time
Alumni Survey
Office
and contract)
Materials
Campaign
10.0
Supplies
0.8
1.0
5.0
Postage
1.5
1.0
1.0
Fax/Messenger/Telephone
1.0
1.0
1.0
Meetings
Cultivation/Campaign Events
Donor
0.8
0.8
0.8
phase
Summit, Quite
(NU Strategy
(excluding
and Duplicating
Printing
20.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
direct mail above)
5.2
5.0
4.0
Recognition
Computer Related Expenses
5.0
5.0
5.0
Miscellaneous
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
Contingency @ 5%
2.1
2.3
2.2
1.4
Subtotal
44.8
49.1
46.5
28.9
-
Est. advancement and campaign expenses
Revenues ($K)
Targeted advancement revenues
Applicable advancement revenue
56.1
363.8
652.8
562.5
535.6
Quiet Phase
Base Building
FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
1,250 1,500 2,000 3,000 4,000
938 1,125 1,500 1,800 2,000
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
FY17
FY18
11.4
0.8
7.5
0.5
0.9
20.0
5.5
2.5
2.5
51.5
11.9
0.8
5.0
0.5
15.0
5.7
2.5
2.1
43.5
12.5
0.9
5.2
0.5
20.0
6.0
15.0
2.5
3.1
65.7
13.0
0.9
5.5
0.6
20.0
6.2
2.5
2.5
2.6
53.7
13.6
0.9
5.7
0.6
20.0
6.5
2.5
2.5
2.6
55.0
593.9
524.3
567.6
574.7
599.3
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
4,000 3,500 2,750
688
2,000 1,400
FY17
2,500
625
FY18
1,500
375
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Costs are inflated using 4.5%
Source: Naropa Advancement Department; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 57 -
Advancement targets
SUMMARY OF KEY NEEDS IDENTIFIED BY ADVANCEMENT
OFFICE TO MEET TARGETS
The Board’s giving capability and engagement in fundraising must increase
•
Need the board to commit to and to some degree drive the development and
implementation of plans for increasing its membership’s financial depth, giving
and recruitment capability, and fundraising engagement level
•
Advancement recommends this being spear-headed by 6-8 members of the board
External relations staff investments need to occur within the timeframe envisioned
Naropa will identify discreet fundraising priorities within the next two months and
articulate these priorities in case-statements to be used in fundraising – suggested
priorities are
•
The overall strategic plan – including a summit to engage high potential donors
about the plans and Naropa’s objectives
•
The build-out of the Nalanda campus, ideally including a commitment from the
university as to which departments will be accommodated in the new space
•
Other investments targeted in the strategic plan including professional
development and online program development
•
Scholarships
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 58 -
Advancement targets
OUTLINE OF A FALL-BACK SCENARIO
The baseline strategic plan scenario outlines significant investments and corresponding
returns for advancement
•
Monies to be received from existing anonymous bequest are not explicitly
included in plan but assumed to be used to help advancement hit their targets of
applicable dollars
To provide some boundaries, a fall-back scenario is outlined here
•
Removes advancement targets and investments and assumes $450K as
advancement applicable dollars in FY09 growing at 4.5% / year to reflect inflation
•
Uses the anonymous bequest explicitly as jump start funds
•
To make revenues match expenses, the following changes were made
–
Reduction in “Augmented support for students” in FY 10 and 11
–
20% reduction across all strategic plan investments
–
Change in salary profiles
Increase over 5 years consistent
Slight decrease in first 4 years (0.2-0.3 percentage points decreased),
increase in 5th year
This scenario is not intended to indicate the exact path Naropa should take but to help
provide boundaries or “rails” between which the annual budget will unfold while trying to
realize as much of the aspirational baseline as possible
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 59 -
Advancement targets
ADVANCEMENT REVENUES APPLICABLE TO STRATEGIC
PLAN OR OPERATING BUDGET
Baseline scenario
Base Building
Quiet Phase
FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13
Revenues ($K)
Est. advancement and campaign expenses 56.1 363.8 652.8 562.5 535.6
Public Phase
FY14 FY15 FY16
593.9 524.3 567.6
FY17
574.7
FY18
599.3
Targeted advancement revenues
Applicable advancement revenue
1,250
938
1,500
1,125
2,000
1,500
3,000
1,800
4,000
2,000
4,000
2,000
3,500
1,400
2,750
688
2,500
625
1,500
375
FY09
450
FY10
470
FY11
491
FY12
514
FY13
537
FY14
561
FY15
586
FY16
612
FY17
640
FY18
669
Fall-back scenario
Revenues ($K)
Expected advancement revenue
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Source: Naropa advancement department; Naropa financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 60 -
Advancement targets
JUMP START FUNDS ASSUMED IN EACH SCENARIO
Baseline scenario
Jumpstart funds assumptions
Unused bond proceeds(4) ($K)
FY09
FY10
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
-
-
980
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
60
60
669
669
980
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
60
420
480
669
170
839
170
170
-
-
-
-
-
-
(5)
Sale of Sangha House ($K)
15. Use of jumpstart funds ($K)
FY11
Fall-back scenario
Jumpstart funds assumptions
Unused bond proceeds(4) ($K)
(5)
Sale of Sangha House ($K)
Anonymous bequest funds
15. Use of jumpstart funds ($K)
980
170
1,150
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Footnotes in previous sections
Source: Naropa advancement department; Naropa financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 61 -
Advancement targets
STRATEGIC PLAN INVESTMENTS ASSUMED IN BASELINE
SCENARIO
FY09
Investments ($K)
Programmatic, curricular, staff investments for growth
Additional staff comp. to support plan(1)
89
(2)
Fac. travel expenses to support admissions
8
PR costs - natl. roll-out & acceptance pubs.(3)
Admissions: inquiry qualification(4)
Investment in current program revamp(5)
20
(6)
Low residency program
77
Augmented training and development(7)
56
(8)
Augmented support
50
Brand Marketing study(10)
75
Facilities and infrastructure investments
Facilities master plan(12)
Additional facilities debt service(13)
(9)
Technology, other
40
Advancement related investments
Est. advancement and campaign expenses(14)
56
(11)
Alumni Relations expenses
34
14. Addtl. strategic plan net expenses
505
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
209
8
20
20
21
63
56
150
-
268
9
21
21
22
61
112
250
-
401
9
22
22
99
112
300
-
615
10
23
23
94
140
400
-
907
10
24
24
131
146
418
-
1,222
10
25
25
119
153
437
-
1,564
11
26
26
113
160
456
-
1,934
11
27
27
106
167
477
-
2,413
12
28
28
103
174
498
-
100
42
-
44
47
46
414
48
414
50
624
52
624
54
624
57
624
59
653
50
1,510
562
52
1,672
536
55
2,356
594
57
2,775
524
60
3,252
568
62
3,664
575
65
4,070
599
68
4,609
364
66
1,120
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Footnotes in previous sections
Source: Naropa finance and senior staff; Naropa financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 62 -
Advancement targets
STRATEGIC PLAN INVESTMENTS
ASSUMED IN FALLBACK SCENARIO
Investments ($K)
Programmatic, curricular, staff investments for growth
Additional staff comp. to support plan(1)
89
(2)
Fac. travel expenses to support admissions
8
PR costs - natl. roll-out & acceptance pubs.(3)
Admissions: inquiry qualification(4)
Investment in current program revamp(5)
20
(6)
Low residency program
77
Augmented training and development(7)
56
Augmented support(8)
50
Brand Marketing study(10)
75
Facilities and infrastructure investments
Facilities master plan(12)
Additional facilities debt service(13)
Technology, other(9)
40
Advancement related investments
Est. advancement and campaign expenses(14)
Alumni Relations expenses(11)
34
Decrease of 20% on above expenses
(90)
14. Addtl. strategic plan net expenses
359
209
8
20
20
21
63
56
100
-
268
9
21
21
22
61
112
200
-
401
9
22
22
99
112
300
-
614
10
23
23
94
140
400
-
905
10
24
24
131
146
418
-
1,219
10
25
25
119
153
437
-
1,560
11
26
26
113
160
456
-
1,929
11
27
27
106
167
477
-
2,405
12
28
28
103
174
498
-
100
42
-
-
414
48
414
50
624
52
624
54
624
57
624
59
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
55
(364)
1,456
57
(436)
1,744
60
(545)
2,180
62
(619)
2,474
65
(698)
2,792
68
(800)
3,202
66
(141)
565
47
46
44
50
(161)
646
52
(222)
888
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Footnotes in previous sections
Source: Naropa finance and senior staff; Naropa financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 63 -
Advancement targets
FINANCING STRUCTURE ASSUMED FOR FACILITIES
INVESTMENTS IN EACH SCENARIO
Baseline scenario
Fallback scenario
Cost when built(1)
$6,300K
$6,300K
Down-payment(2)
$1,260K
$900K
Amount financed
$5040K
$5400K
Resulting annual debt
service (cash-based)(3)
$367K
$393K
55%
79%
% of excess value
leveraged(4)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Assumes annual construction cost inflation of 7.5% on the base cost of the building at the end of FY08
Baseline scenario and fallback scenario assume a 20% down payment
Assuming a 20 year repayment period and a 4% interest rate; principal payments, interests and fees (not depreciation) included in these figures
Assumes excess value as estimated in summer of 2008 of $1.5M and that $190K of that value is used to cover down payment for the Nalanda build out (this
would be a down payment to cover the amount of funding necessary after the $980K bond proceeds are used)
Note: Naropa will need to perform a more thorough analysis of its debt capacity (in dialogue with the bank) in order determine its eligibility for these loans
Source: Naropa Finance and Facilities, discussions with Chuck Lief; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 64 -
Advancement targets
PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT
FOR FALLBACK SCENARIO (1 of 2)
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
a. Undergrad(2)
6,839
7,421
8,333
9,445
10,704
11,969
13,383
14,965
16,734
18,712
12%
b. Grad(3)
7,183
7,868
8,609
9,420
10,310
11,286
12,356
13,528
14,814
16,224
9%
c. Low residency
985
1,106
1,243
1,399
1,635
1,912
2,235
2,613
3,055
3,573
15%
(5)
170
184
199
216
234
254
274
297
321
347
8%
150
157
164
171
179
187
195
204
213
223
5%
310
348
419
440
463
487
506
525
546
568
7%
568
593
620
648
677
708
740
773
808
844
5%
241
264
272
280
288
296
305
314
323
333
4%
250
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
260
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
17,942
19,858
22,020
24,490
27,097
29,994
33,220
36,815
40,824
CAGR
Revenue ($K)
1. Tuition, fees, scholarships(1)
(4)
d. Other / misc.
2. Interest income
(6)
3. Extended studies revenue
4. Misc. revenue
(7)
(8)
5. Draw from endowment(9)
6. Budgeted advancement revenue
7. Project revenue for use in FY09
Total revenue
(10)
(11)
16,955
10%
Undergraduate enrollment
448
461
480
504
529
556
583
612
643
675
5%
Graduate enrollment
514
524
540
556
573
590
608
626
645
664
3%
On-line low residency enrollment
Total enrollment
98
103
109
116
127
140
154
169
186
205
9%
1,060
1,089
1,129
1,176
1,229
1,286
1,345
1,408
1,474
1,544
4%
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Underlying these financials is an assumed inflation rate of 4.5%; Footnotes are on subsequent slides; While projections are shown for 10 years, underlying
assumptions should be reviewed every year for economic feasibility and should undergo a major strategic review and reassessment after 5 years
Note: Footnotes in previous sections
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 65 -
Advancement targets
PROJECTED INCOME STATEMENT
FOR FALLBACK SCENARIO (2 of 2)
Total revenue
Expenses ($K)
8. Personnel
a. Core compensation(12)
b. Adjunct compensation(13)
c. Staff compensation(14)
d. Other personnel expenses(15)
9. Administrative expenses(16)
10. Facilities(17)
11. Other academic expenses(18)
12. Extended studies expenses(19)
13. Allowance for unexpected expenses(20)
Total expenses
FY09
FY10
FY11
FY12
FY13
FY14
FY15
FY16
FY17
FY18
CAGR
16,955
17,942
19,858
22,020
24,490
27,097
29,994
33,220
36,815
40,824
10%
3,349
1,430
6,434
366
2,284
1,702
765
329
377
3,829
1,445
6,902
392
2,436
1,885
790
348
521
4,221
1,604
7,364
421
2,618
1,962
821
369
553
4,727
1,770
7,857
456
2,823
2,036
855
390
493
5,293
1,865
8,384
495
3,053
2,116
893
413
542
5,920
2,045
8,929
538
3,303
2,202
934
437
590
6,370
2,206
9,331
585
3,574
2,299
978
456
633
6,850
2,383
9,751
636
3,869
2,398
1,026
475
676
7,359
2,578
10,189
692
4,190
2,509
1,077
496
722
7,901
2,795
10,648
753
4,540
2,616
1,134
518
772
10%
8%
6%
8%
8%
5%
4%
5%
17,035
18,547
19,933
21,409
23,054
24,896
26,431
28,062
29,814
31,676
7%
611
1,436
2,201
3,563
5,158
7,002
9,148
(80)
(605)
(75)
(359)
480
450
(250)
(565)
839
470
-
(646)
1,150
491
-
241
140
921
407
517
1,018
1,969
3,296
4,850
6,616
18. Balance of funds saved for faciliites at BOY(25) 241
19. BOY balance plus surplus
20. Up front payments for facilities(26)
-
241
381
-
381
1,301
(980)
321
728
(428)
300
817
(832)
(15)
1,004
(418)
586
2,555
(812)
1,743
5,039
-
5,039
9,889
-
9,889
16,504
-
241
381
321
300
(15)
586
1,743
5,039
9,889
16,504
Budget Surplus / (Deficit)
14. Addtl. strat. plan net expenses(21)
15. Use of jump-start funds(22)
16. Expected advancement revenue(23)
17. Adjustment for budgeted dev. revenue(24)
Net surplus / (deficit)
Ending balance
(888) (1,456) (1,744) (2,180) (2,474) (2,792) (3,202)
170
669
640
612
586
561
537
514
-
These numbers are financial projections for the strategic plan and not budgeted commitments
Note: Underlying these financials is an assumed inflation rate of 4.5%; Footnotes are on subsequent slides; While projections are shown for 10 years, underlying
assumptions should be reviewed every year for economic feasibility and should undergo a major strategic review and reassessment after 5 years
Note: Footnotes in previous sections
Source: Naropa Finance; Naropa Financial model v36; Wellspring analysis
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 66 -
Action plan & metrics
ACTION PLAN OVERVIEW INDICATING
INVESTMENTS OF TIME AND EFFORT
Strategic objectives
FY
09
FY
10
FY
11
FY
12
FY
13
FY
14
FY
15
FY
16
FY
17
FY
18
Clearly define Naropa’s distinctiveness and
what it delivers (8 action steps)
Find and enroll more students who are truly
seeking what Naropa offers (5 action steps)(1)
Deliver distinction with excellence:
•
Create mechanisms to build
community (6 action steps)
•
Strengthen the educational
experience (45+ action steps)
•
Invest in faculty and staff (12 action
steps)
•
Grow the institution in two
phases(30+ action steps)
Pursue a balanced portfolio of measures to
make the university financially sustainable
(30+ action steps)
Time duration of initial action steps
On-going work(2)
(1) Additional steps for “Find and enroll more students…” are under “Grow the institution in two phases”; Facilities action steps associated with building community and
strengthening the educational experience are consolidated under the objective “Grow the institution in two phases”
(2) On-going work includes further reviews and improvements
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 67 -
Action plan & metrics
SAMPLE ACTION PLAN PAGE
Step
III.
Key person
accountable
Key additional
involvement
Completion
date (EOM)
Create mechanisms to build community
a.
Invest to create community on all three campuses:
Build a new student community and learning center
on Arapahoe campus and additional community
opportunities at the Paramita and Nalanda campuses
i.
Pursue programmatic opportunities to build
community
1.
Develop a plan or structure for enhancing
community - consider establishing a
community-building representative or chair
on each campus or utilizing an action
committee
Tom Coburn
Sr. Staff
Oct 08
2.
Establish guidelines, boundaries, and
decision-making processes for these
representatives or committee to work within
Tom Coburn
Sr. Staff
Oct 08
3.
Develop programs to enhance community
on each campus as well as across the three
campuses
Community
reps or action
committee
chair
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Feb 09 and
ongoing
- 68 -
Action plan & metrics
SUCCESS REQUIRES CONCERTED EFFORT
FROM THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY
Faculty
Staff
Engage actively in strategic plan
objectives of “Create
mechanisms to build
community” and “Strengthen the
educational experience”
Engage actively in strategic plan
objectives that impact your role
Actively support growth through
assistance in recruiting and
retaining students
Actively support growth and
efficiency
Trustees
Engage actively in fundraising
Participate in recruiting new
trustees and students
Participate actively through
Board committees in relevant
strategic objectives
• See following slides for detail
Seek ways to create efficiencies
Members of faculty, staff, and Trustees will all participate in the strategic objective on innovation:
• “Building on past work, establish a small board/staff/faculty team that will explore innovative
ideas for Naropa’s future – with the goal of enhancing Naropa’s distinction and delivery of
excellence”
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 69 -
Action plan & metrics
BOARD COMMITTEES WILL HAVE OVERSIGHT
OF ACTION PLAN SECTIONS AS SHOWN (1 of 2)
Senior Staff will Report to Board Committees on Progress
Strategic Objectives (paraphrased to fit)
Action
Plan
Section
Clearly define Naropa’s distinctiveness and
what it delivers
I
Find and enroll more students who are truly
seeking what Naropa offers
II
Deliver distinction with excellence:
• Create mechanisms to build community
• Strengthen the educational experience
• Invest in faculty and staff
• Grow the institution in two phases
Pursue a balanced portfolio of measures to
make the university financially sustainable
• Raise net tuition
• Increase the average class size by 10%
and restructure ranked faculty teaching
responsibilities in order to gain a 10%
increase
• Restructure extended studies
• Boost net fundraising revenue
• Establish a small board/staff/faculty
team that will explore innovative ideas
for Naropa’s future
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII and
IX
X
XI
XII
Board Committees
Budget &
Finance
Development
Enrollment Academic
Outreach
Mgmt
Affairs
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
- 70 -
Action plan & metrics
BOARD COMMITTEES WILL HAVE OVERSIGHT
OF ACTION PLAN SECTIONS AS SHOWN (2 of 2)
Senior Staff will Report to Board Committees on Progress
Strategic Objectives (paraphrased to fit)
Action
Plan
Section
Clearly define Naropa’s distinctiveness and what it
delivers
I
Find and enroll more students who are truly seeking
what Naropa offers
II
Deliver distinction with excellence:
• Create mechanisms to build community
• Strengthen the educational experience
• Invest in faculty and staff
• Grow the institution in two phases
Pursue a balanced portfolio of measures to make the
university financially sustainable
• Raise net tuition
• Increase the average class size by 10% and
restructure ranked faculty teaching
responsibilities in order to gain a 10% increase
• Restructure extended studies
• Boost net fundraising revenue
• Establish a small board/staff/faculty team that
will explore innovative ideas for Naropa’s
future
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
III
IV
V
VI
Board Committees
Student
Journey
Endowment
Campus
Planning
Vision &
Planning
X
X
X
X
X
X
VII
VIII and
IX
X
XI
XII
X
X
- 71 -
Action plan & metrics
METRICS SUPPORT EACH
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE (1 of 2)
Strategic Objective
Metrics
Clearly define Naropa’s distinctiveness and what it
delivers
Use research tools such as focus groups and
surveys to assess improvement(1)
Find and enroll more students who are truly seeking
what Naropa offers
Same metrics as “Grow the institution” below
Deliver distinction with excellence:
• Create mechanisms to build community
• Strengthen the educational experience
Use research tools such as focus groups and
surveys to assess improvement(1)
•
Invest in faculty and staff
Use annual benchmarking to assess progress
against salary targets
•
Grow the institution
Growth numbers, broken down by undergrad, grad,
online low residency and further broken down by
department
• Enrollment
• Applications
• Retention rate
(1) Constituencies that should be researched are students (undergraduate, graduate, online low residency), staff, faculty (core and adjunct); alumni and prospective
students should also be researched although the mechanisms and frequency might vary from the previous groups; Topics that should be assessed include: the clarity
of Naropa’s distinctiveness and the clarity of what skills graduates should have, the current impression of the sense of community, and the clarity of the contemplative
approach
- 72 Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Action plan & metrics
METRICS SUPPORT EACH
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE (2 of 2)
Strategic Objective
Pursue a balanced portfolio of measures to make the
university financially sustainable
• Raise net tuition
Metric
Net tuition revenue, broken down by undergrad,
grad, and online low residency
•
Increase the average class size by 10% and
restructure ranked faculty teaching
responsibilities in order to gain a 10% increase
Average class size
• Broken down by undergrad, grad, online low
residency
• Further broken down by department
•
Restructure extended studies
Extended studies measures
• Net surplus/deficit from Extended Studies
• Number of unique Boulder community
members impacted
• Overall contribution to advancement ($ and/or
number of new supporters introduced)
•
Boost net fundraising revenue
Dollars raised
• Unrestricted
• Restricted for strategic plan purposes
•
Establish a small board/staff/faculty team that
will explore innovative ideas for Naropa’s
future
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Results of the team’s work
• Presentation of innovative ideas to the Board
• Ultimate adoption of innovative ideas
generated by the team
- 73 -
Action plan & metrics
REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE STRATEGIC PLAN
What is reviewed
•
Who is involved
When the review occurs
Action plan progress and
key metrics
Deeper review of one third
of action plan at each
meeting (agenda to be
established in advance)
•
•
Senior staff
Key faculty
Once every other month
during a senior staff
meeting
Operational review
•
Detailed board
oversight and
review
•
Progress on relevant
sections of action plan
and relevant metrics
•
•
Board committees
Representative staff
Frequency determined
by frequency of Board
committee meetings
•
Higher level review of
progress on the strategic
plan and performance on
key metrics
•
•
Board
University President
and senior staff, as
appropriate
Three times a year, at
board meetings
Overall board level
review
Not only should all of the strategic plan goals and actions be
reviewed through this process, but all other actions and
decisions taken by the university should also be reviewed with
the strategic plan goals in mind
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 74 -
Additional displays
KEY CHANGES EXPECTED (1 of 2)
As a Result of Naropa’s Strategic Plan
From…
To…
Somewhat ad hoc development and
implementation of contemplative education
• A lack of coherence between different
approaches used at the University
• No shared definition of the skill sets
Naropa’s students should gain
An intentional and coordinated approach to
contemplative education, including
• A delineation of various approaches
and how they interrelate
• A defined set of skills and knowledge
that graduates receive
Limited investment in staff and faculty,
reflected in
• Very low faculty compensation
• High staff turnover
• Limited training and development
opportunities
Stronger investment in staff and faculty
through compensation and training
A physical layout of three campuses that
poses barriers to Naropa’s sense of
community
Potentially two campuses with practices and
facilities that foster a stronger sense of
community among Naropa’s students and
faculty
Long term review of unified campus
feasibility
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 75 -
Additional displays
KEY CHANGES EXPECTED (2 of 2)
As a Result of Naropa’s Strategic Plan
From…
Virtually no growth in enrollment over the
last several years
To…
Growth in existing programs
• Moderate residential enrollment growth
Addition of online low residency programs in
high market growth areas to spur strong
online low residency growth
A fragmented department structure created
in part as a result of past growth or
attempts at growth
Reduction in departmental fragmentation,
particularly where size or growth potential is
not high
An Extended Studies arm that has been
unprofitable and spread thin
Revamped Extended Studies with increased
programmatic focus and positive financial
contribution
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
- 76 -
Additional displays
NAROPA’S COMMUNITY WILL BE ENHANCED
Through Several Aspects of This Strategy
Design and construction
of new facilities
•
•
•
•
Use of programmatic
approaches
•
The process of strategic
planning itself
•
•
•
Naropa Strategic Plan 19Sep08 v12
Community spaces are explicitly addressed in the build-out of Nalanda
as well as the construction of a Community & Learning Center at
Arapahoe
The potential merger of Paramita and Nalanda would significantly
enhance the interactions between the departments on those two
campuses
The inclusion of more faculty office space can increase the campus
presence of faculty and encourage greater interaction
In the design of the buildings themselves, community interaction can
be emphasized
Adjustments to campus schedules will be evaluated to facilitate greater
community
Efforts will be spurred on each individual campus to envision and enact
specific activities that foster community
Community engagement has been increased throughout the strategic
planning process as different facets of the community were brought
together through focus groups, meetings, and action committees
The focus provided as a result of strategic planning can often increase
a sense of common purpose and community – with everyone pulling in
the same direction
- 77 -