February 15 2000
University of the Pacific
Institutional Priorities Committee
February 15, 2000
Pine Room, Stockton Campus
Attendance: Benedetti, Borlik, Brock, Chambers, Fletcher, Fox, Gilbertson (Chair), KruegerDevine, Stein
Absent: Gluskin, Myers, Oppenheimer
Meeting convened by Chair at 3:00 p.m.
- Minutes of February 8, 2000 meeting were approved as distributed.
- Reports: Provost Phil Gilbertson
- Cost Allocation Model should be discussed at a future meeting.
- The Classroom Utilization report has been completed. Highlights of the report will be made available to committee members.
- IPC needs to give input on University Maintenance Priorities
- Protocol for how to continue maintenance of existing academic facilities is being developed in a task force.
- Committee also discussed a need to maintain other equipment (for ex. office paint/rugs) in order to see whether or not units should be coming to IPC for requests. Provost says those concerns will also be discussed in the task force.
- Future Agenda discussion Items:
- MVP Revision is scheduled for the 1st quarter 2001, which will provide for the use of National Commission Panel Reports. IPC also will need to set some groundwork for the MVP.
- Surveys that were passed out last week should be used to initiate reviews of poorly performing offices. The University may be able to use Institutional Research (IR) in order to make these reviews.
- IPC membership will be considered in the near future.
- First, the new Athletic Director will be a member.
- Staff representation is necessary for the committee.
- The Provost recommends a staff person from IR, in order to utilize the information from that department.
- The committee will also consider recommending to the President a seat for the OICR director.
- Discussion with the Academic Council is on hold. Chris Snell has indicated the council may not be prepared for it, but IPC will do it when possible.
- The question about priority in Facilities Construction was raised. New construction schedules will be balanced in between UOP's bond issues. Facilities not on Pat Cavanaugh's list (for example: COP's new black box theater proposal) need also to be addressed. Also, when facilities change, that affects other facilities, which means there should be a discussion of when one facility needs to immediately follow the creation of another (for example: Hand Hall's new use has disrupted operations in departments currently located there). UOP needs a vision for what facilities should be on the bond issues.
- IPC needs to assess funded initiatives and programs like ELO, Brubeck Institute, Leadership Initiatives, and Technology grants to ensure that these programs are worthwhile endeavors for the University. Consideration should be given as to how long the University expects these programs to develop towards the full potential of their program.
- Committee is interested in Staff Reclassification Program to see if the program is too divisive for the well-being of the University and all of its employees.
- IPC members talked about the oversight function of the committee. No real resolution on this topic was agreed to.
- Faculty Technology Needs grant of $180,000 is still up in the air as to how the money will be allocated.
- The Budget Recommendations Pamphlet has several corrections.
- Pg. 4, Ongoing "518" changed to "503"
- Pg. 7, Question about ELO/CIC and how ELO specifically will benefit.
- Other questions and comments:
- How will problems caused by increases in enrollment be responded to by the University budget?
- How are program review recommendations eventually addressed?
- What happens to funding requests sent to Vice Presidents that are not funded?
- Salary disclosures in the Budget Recommendations. Should we be afraid of making this public?
- A statement has been made in these Recommendations that the working conditions of faculty are truly funding priorities.
- Meeting adjourned at 5:00pm