# data[].attributes.body
i don't think we ever had a severance estimate tool? did we all just use last years' assumptions? this seems really not good in a year of trying cut expenses and hirng controls...whatever is the breakdown in the people team getting us that info needs to be rectified

# data[].attributes.body
There were a few bigger items that we had not landed at the start of budgeting (Ignite fees, LEE) that made budgeting challenging for some regions.

# data[].attributes.body
While I understand the shift in having RFEs hold approval calls instead of Jemina was meant to streamline the process, it led to fire drills for those supporting budgeting and led to duplicate effort in some places (for example my RFE had already held 1 round of calls preparing EDs for the Jemina conversation). If we'd reached that decision sooner, we could have planned cohort timelines with that in mind and avoided regions needing to pull drafts together so early in the window.

# data[].attributes.body
There were a few instances where we needed to be more in the loop on updates / communications from IO (corps allocation changes, etc.)

# data[].attributes.body
It could be helpful to have the budget versions ready in Adaptive earlier so we can look at salaries, assumptions, and other data for specific teams and spot any errors sooner. I know the timing of Adaptive's updates is probably a big barrier here though.

# data[].attributes.body
It's nothing new, but we tend to farm out the "Strategy" section of the deck/materials. Not being involved and relying on other teams to do this has NEVER worked in my tenure here. We need to co-own this section with whomever the right parties are and start working on them earlier in the process. Whatever we get is never appropriate/right, given how the budgets are shaping up vs. the narrative, and then it's a mad dash for someone to design materials.

# data[].attributes.headline
FS&R Responsiveness & Continued Progress

# data[].attributes.subject
FS&R Responsiveness & Continued Progress

# data[].attributes.body
No joke, Jonathan & FS&R saved my a** this year. Adding some management & high level reporting & a detailed enterprise CPCM calculator truly saved me from DAYS of trying to update existing files for some of the functional shifts happening in FY23. I am so grateful for the expansion of reporting

# data[].attributes.body
I found the meetings where we went through our budgets with Jeff and got his feedback on what his anticipated questions / pushes would be for each region to be very helpful. I also found it very helpful for Ashton and Melissa to join to give and get context.

# data[].attributes.body
My interpretation (acknowledging I don't have full visibility into all this so likely am missing insights) is that there was not clear alignment among the executive cabinet and ELT re: budgeting expectations. I saw this when it came to reserve drawdown, Cost Per CM, FTE targets, and different ED Managers' approaches.... and saw the way our systems reflected this lack of clarity e.g. our approval rubric didn't include anything about Cost Per CM, priority 1, 2, 3 spending level expectations, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
As the person who was maybe the most hostile toward Slack when TFA first started using it, I have to say how much Slack enables internal team functioning for me during the crazy days of budgeting. I feel like I am able to quickly get help on whatever I need help with in our various slack channels, which is often A LOT OF THINGS on any given day in March / April. I hope I have paid it forward to others when they solicited help. I like that we all are unafraid to ask each other for help / reminders and that there is no such thing as a stupid question among our team.

# data[].attributes.body
Jonathan and Victoria were two of my lifelines during budgeting, in particular via Slack. Their responsiveness and expertise were foundational to my ability to support senior leaders and regional staff during this challenging process.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lab diverged from IO more greatly this year...

# data[].attributes.subject
Lab diverged from IO more greatly this year...

# data[].attributes.body
...which led to the Homeroom resources being more relavent to IO regions than Lab regions. And there was confusion caused to Lab regional staff because of this. Need to try to align with Lab earlier next year to get ahead of this.

# data[].attributes.body
Any additional guidance from the people team (internal or external) would have been helpful to be able to better navigate the many questions around personnel and salary assumptions.

# data[].attributes.body
There still seems to be a disconnect with teams about what is needed and when for people team needs

# data[].attributes.body
I am so used to this by now I have to remember the prior state and how much better this system is - woot woot!

# data[].attributes.body
Curious to see statistics on how much these resources were utilized.

# data[].attributes.body
I was a fully embedded member of the team and aware/in the loop on everything that made my job easier. This is in stark contrast to the other post about Impact Office: RFE. Seems like we are experiencing wildly different approaches that we should try and solve for when the next budgeting season opens to ensure P&A is a valued and included member in the best position to help in all facets of budgeting.

# data[].attributes.body
Given Jeff's first year and the scale at which he had to devote to the new economic model this year felt more isolating and independent that prior years which felt like working on an island without the colleague touchpoints to work or discuss issues and learn from each other. And given less capacity than years past it was hard to advocate for new meetings/help given the fire drill type feel of the whole budgeting season.

# data[].attributes.body
The one stop suite of resources were better than ever with less work required than years past to prep/update due to the work that Allison and team did in years past.

# data[].attributes.body
While the functional allocation processes aren't ideal I felt EDs/CoS were more solutions oriented and willing to work through system limitations than years past. Probably since so much was new this year I don't think a minor inconvenience phased them like it did in years past.

# data[].attributes.body
Thought homeroom worked well again. It is a little cluttered (IMO) with lots of 'clicks' users need to make to navigate from section to section but overall still gets the job done I think.

# data[].attributes.headline
 Disconnection from Impact Office and phase 1 of AP

# data[].attributes.subject
 Disconnection from Impact Office and phase 1 of AP

# data[].attributes.body
I attended the first round of meetings for phase 1 of AP, and it was helpful, but I didn't feel looped in on that process, and it felt more dis-jointed than usual.

# data[].attributes.body
I found that I had a rocky support structure experience with both of my RFE/COSs this year. There was a lack of clarity about exactly what my role was, which was confounded by late breaking info on the new expense model and comms that I wasn't copied on that impacted my regions. So, I eventually was cut out of a lot of the communications to regions which further reduced my ability to be helpful and was a downward spiral.

# data[].attributes.body
centralized weekly email that one person creates continues to be a very helpful resource for all during budgeting

# data[].attributes.body
Personnel functional allocations remain confusing for folks to fill out and matching PIDs to people challenging.

# data[].attributes.body
Reports were available for nearly everything I needed and easy to navigate to.