Abolishing Categorical Funding May be Problematic
Note: The comments made do not represent the views or opinions of the Undergraduate Student Government.
After six years, the categorical recognition and funding system, used by the USG Finance Committee, was abolished on February 28, 2006. The need to present 10, 20, or at least 30 student members of your membership roster is no longer needed. New groups will be limited to only $500 in the first year. In the year thereafter, groups may request for unlimited funds.
Here's a bit of background. During the Spring 2000 semester, as Vice President of Finance, my committee and I were quite concerned about the increase of funding requests from the larger student groups, fiscal accountability, and the lack of resources to help build up the new and small to mid-sized clubs. One major club had problems with their financial budgeting, resulting in USG picking up the tab. The cultural, ethnic, and religious groups were swallowing a large percentage of the funding budget, and it was quite difficult to decide how many events we can truly fund for each student group. We stood at around 95 student groups (today's number is approaching 130-140).
It was decided that a categorical system was needed to help slow down the large groups, to solidfy the middle groups, and still be able to give new groups a chance to hold a decent few events. We also placed restrictions on how much funds can be requested from the Category I and II groups. III groups are the larger-sized clubs that have been on campus for many years. In the past, we have seen groups requesting quite a lot of funds, but would overestimate their costs or they may decide to cancel their events for different reasons. Other groups would underestimate ticket revenues or materials costs.
Despite these guidelines, the rules did include some measure of flexibility for special one-time funding, or for extra spending for special cases. We wanted to maintain a measure of accountability, a more balanced field between the big and small groups, and to keep improving campus life.
Having categoricals placed some measure of control to help the Finance Committee. It made it easier to know which groups were level I, II, or III. It actually made student group officers and members work themselves to submit the forms on-time and with accurate information (in most cases).
It is unfortunate to see such a system be thrown aside. Going back to the old set-up (in some sort) does not help the current funding situation. With over 130 groups putting hundreds of requests for events and banquets, the Finance Committee will have a hard time deciding who to fund. The categorical set-up gave a semblance of order. Without it, the larger groups will grab a larger share of the funding pie. It now rests on the members of Finance Committee to use their "impartial" judgment but that is always hard to do.
Comments
Posted by: Andrew Witte
Posted on: April 3, 2006 12:06 PM
Why does the USG funding process have to be so complicated? I think it's only fair that my SAF be allocated for the groups I'm interested in. (See Chris's views at the Forum.)