Author: Christopher Sanchez
At first glance the ASOC funding algorithm looks like a complex homework assignment for Multivariable Calculus, filled with intricate functions and separated by rows of arbitrary numbers, figures and percentages. For someone with little experience in advanced mathematics, trying to make sense of the algorithm is like reading a foreign language. ASOC Campus Wide Senator Teddy Zou (sophomore), however, it reads perfectly.
In his residence hall room, Zou demonstrated on his laptop computer how Senate allocates funds to student clubs. He did this by coming up with a hypothetical funding request. As he typed various numbers into the algorithm, he explained how the algorithm suggests an exact percentage to fund a specific event.
The amount is based on several determinants, including the event’s estimated attendance, whether the event is on-campus, whether it is a cultural or community event, whether it is open to the entire campus and whether it is co-sponsored. The more categories the event fits, the more funding it will receive. An event expecting a high attendance also receives more funding. Because Zou typed that only ten students would be attending the hypothetical event, the calculator suggested zero dollars.
The algorithm is the ASOC’s “funding calculator,” designed by Junior Class Senator Jimmy Gillan (junior) at the beginning of the fall semester 2006 and is used to allocate the student government’s annual budget of $49,500.
Since the algorithm’s implementation, the Senate has dealt with various obstacles that required Gillan and other Senators to revise and tweak the funding process. With just three weeks left in the school year, many students are wondering whether the algorithm is the best method of allocation.
Search for a New Funding Process
The push to reform the Senate funding process came from students who felt the former method of allocation was subjective and arbitrary. Gillan, who designed the algorithm to create a more fair and unbiased system, said the funding process has improved significantly since last year.
“The ultimate goal of the algorithm was to create a more equitable and fair system that distributes funds efficiently so that the only level of human error in the funding system comes from interpreting events,” Gillan said.
Campus-Wide Senator Amy Laslett (junior), who served as co-chair of the ASOC’s Finance and Public Relations Committee last year, called the former method of funding “tedious” and said this year’s co-chairs, Zou and Gillan, have much more time to interact with club leaders.
“This algorithm is a blessing compared to last year’s,” Laslett said. “Last year’s was based on percentages that were handed down to us from the previous years. It was the funding co-chair’s sole decision whether to increase or decrease the amount funded.”
During the 2005-06 academic year, the allocation of funds was based on categorical percentages that restricted any single club from receiving over 50 percent of the amount requested for their event. However, Zou said, this restricted many groups from receiving sufficient funds even if their request was relatively low. For example, clubs performing off-campus community service projects usually only requested enough money to pay for gas. Due to the percentage rule, clubs were sometimes allotted as little as $7.
“The funding was based on arbitrary percentages,” Gillan said. “There was no logic to it and it was very subjective. It was whatever the person in charge of funding wanted. I suggested, ‘why don’t we have sliding scale percentage?'”
Gillan became the chief architect in the creation of the new funding process in the fall and began dedicating five to six hours per week for three months perfecting the new method of allocation. With the help of ASOC President Matt Kuzio (senior), he proposed that the Senate fund clubs use an algebraic function decreasing at a decreasing rate.
“If you have a linear relationship between the amount requested and percent funded then it doesn’t work because there’ll be a point in which people receive zero funding,” Gillan said. “The more money you request, the smaller percentage you get, but the change in the percentage is less than the change in the amount in the funding requested.”
After the adoption of the new algorithm, the Senate agreed upon several determining categories in order to give preference to certain events. For instance, an on-campus event would receive a higher percentage than for the same amount requested by an off-campus event. Additionally, if an event requests under $25, it is fully funded.
Zou now meets with club leaders requesting funding every Friday to explain the process and to clarify any misconceptions about the algorithm. Last year, Zou said, Senators rarely met with those who were requesting funding.
“The funding this year is more in line with the mission statement of Occidental,” Sophomore Class Senator Patrick McCredie said. “You get a slight boost if it’s on campus, if it’s an educational event, or cultural, or co-sponsored. Those are the things that not only promote diversity of school but also promote collaboration between clubs.”
Obstacles Facing the Algorithm
As co-chairs, Zou and Gillan are in charge of overseeing that funds are allocated at appropriate levels. Together Zou and Gillan have worked during the academic year to maintain what they believe to be a fair and unbiased allocation of ASOC funds using the new algorithm.
With just three weeks left in the school year and $4,500 left in the ASOC budget, everything appears to be on track. However, some worry that past problems with the algorithm have yet to be fixed.
Difficulties arose when the Black Student Alliance requested a significant amount of money in Nov. 2006 to help fund Exploration of Blackness Series, two weeks of events that addressed contemporary issues within the Black community. After the algorithm suggested an amount too small for the BSA to fund Blackness Week, the Senate decided to override the algorithm.
They voted to fund BSA at the full amount requested. As a result the ASOC marginally exceeded its first semester spending mark by allocating over 45 percent of the year’s budget in the first semester, forcing the branch to dip into this semester’s fund.
“We decided to fund [BSA] on a discretional level, whereas in other cases we’ve been more hesitant to do so,” McCredie said. “Although we funded them above what the algorithm suggested, they had proven to us that they had exhausted all other funding processes on campus.”
McCredie described it as a point of confusion for the Senate, while the algorithm was still in its initial stages. Gillan and other Senators decided to reassess the algorithm by making minor alterations to different parameters and variables within the algorithm. Senators realized that the algorithm did not work well in deciding how much to fund large events that might not fit within the determining categories of the function.Zou decided to create a spreadsheet that recorded some of the largest and most expensive events along with their estimated costs. Zou said this helped ASOC appropriate funds more efficiently to larger events.
“The algorithm works pretty well on the individual basis,” Zou said. “It doesn’t take into account how much money we have left or how many more events are coming up. To make sure we don’t run out of money, we have a whole-semester spread sheet, which includes events that cost more than $500.”
Although next year’s ASOC Senate is free to choose its own system of allocation, current Senators are hoping the new ASOC will use the algorithm despite its minor limitations. McCredie mentioned executing an education campaign at the beginning of fall semester about the algorithm to clear up any confusion. The Senate also hopes to create a reserve fund for major events so that clubs know the exact level of funding they will receive.
“Our goal is to institutionalize it as a c
omputer program,” Gillan said. “I will serve a liaison for the first few weeks for the funding co-chairs next year. But our goal is to keep it a part of the Senate. It’s a unique and better funding system than an arbitrary percentage system based on the funding co-chairs’ discretion because it keeps us on budget and keeps things equitable and fair.”
This article has been archived, for more requests please contact us via the support system.