REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

CENTERS REVIEW

February 18, 2010

Three issues regarding centers were identified during the 2009-10 academic year. President Dooley requested that two conditions be added to the centers review process when he approved Faculty Senate Bill #09-10--16. The first was that the Council for Research consult with the Provost before bringing a recommendation for continuation of a center to the Senate, and the second that some mechanism be established for recommending the dissolution of a continuing center between scheduled four-year reviews. In addition, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee agreed that the language of the UNIVERSITY MANUAL should be clarified with regard to review of those centers that the Council for Research believed are not their purview – “non research” centers. The following changes to the UNIVERSITY MANUAL are proposed to address these issues. Following are the FSEC’s recommendations for modifying the UNIVERSITY MANUAL. These include minor editorial changes (Changes are highlighted).

8.85.14 The coordinating and review committee shall insure that all departments, colleges, or other units directly involved or affected by a proposal for a new program, including the Joint Educational Policy Committee and the Council of Deans, are informed of the proposal and are given time to comment or otherwise respond. Unless otherwise sanctioned by a special act of the Faculty Senate, the coordinating and review committee shall allow at least thirty (30) and no more than forty-five (45) calendar days for responses after public notification.

8.85.17 Normally, the Curricular Affairs Committee, the Graduate Council, and the Council for Research shall serve as the coordinating and review committee respectively for proposals for new undergraduate degree programs, for new professional programs, for new graduate degree programs, and for new centers, including partnerships, bureaus and institutes. If questions arise as to the appropriate committee to serve as the coordinating and review committee for a proposal for a new program or center, the Faculty Senate Executive Committee shall determine which committee has responsibility. The Executive Committee may establish or recommend establishing a special committee to serve as the coordinating and review committee for a proposal.

8.90.30 Review of Research Centers. Once granted continuing status, research centers, including institutes, bureaus, and partnerships, shall be reviewed every four years by the Council for Research who shall submit recommendations, including recommendations for further continuation or dissolution, to the Faculty Senate based on overall program quality, research, outreach, or educational contributions, financial support of student involvement, interdepartmental or intercollege involvement, and continued external funding, as appropriate for the mission and goals of the center. The Council for Research shall consult with the Office of the Provost prior to presenting to the Senate a recommendation for continuation or dissolution.

8.90.31 Review of Other Centers. The four-year review of Centers determined not Research Centers by the Council for Research shall be reviewed by an appropriate committee as designated by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee. This Committee may be either a standing or an ad hoc committee depending on factors identified by the Executive Committee. This committee will follow the review procedures outlined in 8.90.30.

8.90.32 A Research Center granted continuing authorization may be recommended for dissolution by the President or the Provost, if after a period of approximately 18 months that Center is unable, despite efforts and proposal submissions, to continue its external funding for that period of time. The same procedure shall be followed in instances where centers are not determined to be Research Centers. See 8.90.31.