Minutes
Faculty Senate Meeting
January 18, 2006
Tony Ahrens called the meeting to order at 1:45 p.m.
Present: Professors Ahrens, Becher, Bennett, Burke, Cochran, Durant, Fantie, Gill, Girard,
Belson, Isaac, Jacoby, Loesberg, Mardirosian, Petit, Richardson, Riley, Rosenbloom, Sampson,
Schaeff, Weaver, Dean Mardirosian, and Provost Broder.
Welcome and Introduction, Tony Ahrens
Professor Ahrens started by mentioning that there is no transcription service present and that
Georgia Christou will now be recording the minutes.
Also, Professor Ahrens mentioned that the minutes of the November and December Faculty
Senate meetings are still being revised and will be circulated to the Senators on January 25th.
Report of the President, Neil Kerwin
Budget
• In terms of where the university stands with regard to the budget for the current fiscal year, the
revenue accounts on the one hand and the expenditures at this point, it is about ten days out from
what would be the normal date of the third quarter analysis. Based on the budget numbers, it
appears that the tuition revenue will fall short of the budgeted expectations by about $4½ to $5
million. The number may be a bit inflated because the institute revenues have been climbing
rather steadily over the past ten days. Dr. Kerwin expects that with regard to tuition revenue and
other sources of revenue (i.e., housing revenue, auxiliary income revenue from fund-raising) the
university will be able to close the year in balance through a combination of the tuition reserve
account and less than expected expenditures in other areas. Some of these expenditures include
standard leave savings that each of the units may have due to vacancies in staff and the high
energy cost estimates from last year may provide a bit of a respite if this winter proves to be
milder than last winter. In general the financial condition is sound.
• The university has asked the accounting firm, Protiviti, to do some work which began about 14
months ago and was an effort by the V.P. of Finance & Treasurer to validate business practices
and internal control systems so that they would be compliant with current Sarbanes-Oxley
Standards for the private sector. Protiviti is currently engaged in a comprehensive analysis of the
University’s business practices and internal controls, to map those business practices and
controls, to compare business practices and controls to what are considered best practices in the
industry, and then to validate that in fact the practices as described to Protiviti are in fact the
practices in reality. During the course of this analysis, Protiviti will make whatever
recommendations to the Board of Trustees that they feel appropriate for changes and practices,
and this will establish a baseline set of expectations with regard to audit work which will be
determined not only by this process but also by other decisions made by the Board of Trustees to
determine which offices should be examined. Dr. Kerwin expects to receive an update on the
Protiviti work within the next ten days. Don Meyers will share that report with the Senate.
• The university is in the process of selecting a new external auditor since it has severed its
relationship with KPMG. There have been a number of other auditors offering bids. Some
auditing firms were not interested in our business because they had insufficient staff due to other
demands. But, the university has secured bids form a number of highly regarded companies.
• There have been questions raised about the budget process at the institution. The university has
experimented over the past decade with a variety of approaches to developing budgets. One
significant breakthrough is the process of Two-Year Budgeting, which enables us to look further
beyond a single fiscal year. However, there have been some concerns raised about the adequacy
of budget deliberations particularly with regard to the range of questions that the Instructional
Budget and Benefits Committee of the Senate have felt constrained to discuss. It is perfectly
reasonable for the community to ask questions about the budget, and these concerns should be
aired, addressed, and discussed.
Board of Trustees
• With regard to the ongoing work on governance, the Board of Trustees has a special committee
on governance which consists of five members of the Board. They are actively considering
expanding that membership with more Board members because they anticipate a very extensive
set of consultations with the university community. This committee has been meeting regularly
throughout the holiday season and is expected to post a progress report on their website by next
week. They have decided to work with Martin Michaelson to get advice and counsel from him
on governance matters. Mr. Michaelson is a partner with Hogan & Hartson in DC and is the
former general counsel at Harvard University. He has advised dozens of other universities on
such governance issues and problems. The special committee on governance has been discussing
the possibility of creating a working relationship between at least one member of its committee
and one of the key constituencies on campus to ensure that at least one trustee develops a level of
familiarity and expertise with the issues, concerns, positions, and recommendations that the
major constituencies such as the Faculty Senate and the Deans develop. While the work on
governance may not have an end point by this May, there is an urgent need for expressions of
policy relating to matters of supervision of the President’s Office. The range of issues to be
addressed and resolved will take time and is expected to be on the Board of Trustees’s agendas
for the foreseeable future.
• One of the critical issues the Board is dealing with is the reconstitution of the Board itself. The
Board stands at 20 members, including Dr. Kerwin, who serves ex efficio. A matter that has been
actively discussed is to what capacity the university President sits on the Board. The statutory
minimum for the Board is 25 members, so there are at least 5 or 6 additional member
appointments needed. Dr. Kerwin feels personally that the Board will be well served with a
membership somewhat larger, about 30 members because of the nature of the responsibilities and
the intensity of the work. The Chair of the Trusteeship Committee is Tom Gottschalk who also
serves as the Vice Chair of the Board. The Trusteeship Committee will meet in February to
discuss a set of candidates who have already been presented. This matter will also take some
time toward completion – it is an extended process. It constitutes a massive obligation for a
volunteer Board to be dealing with both this and the governance issues simultaneously.
• The Board has delivered to the U.S. Senate a candid and responsive reply authored by Tom
Gottschalk and Gary Abramson on behalf of the entire Board. There has been no formal response
from the U.S. Senate yet.
• The February Board meeting is scheduled for mid-month and Dr. Kerwin expects that the
meeting will be dominated by issues of governance and trusteeship. There is also additional work
to be done.
• There has been no change in the plans for launching a search for a President of the university.
The plan is to launch the search sometime in June.
Fund Raising
The report that Dr. Kerwin received from Abbey Silberman, Director of Development, is that the
campaign stands at $116 million on a $200 million goal. Nothing with regard to the priorities of
this campaign has changed, nor is it going to. The two major capital requirements have not been
finished yet. The university has made commitments for a new building for the School of
International Service and for the School of Communication. Moreover, the university has
brought in a firm, Marts and Lundy, to assist in the analysis of major donor opportunities for
these two projects. It is important to be very clear where the fundraising efforts need to focus
over the next twelve months in order to make the kind of statements about the importance and
feasibility of these two projects. The modest amount of assistance from these firms will allow the
university to determine from the prospect of donor lists which in particular Dr. Kerwin and the
Deans will need to spend time with in order to convince them that these projects are worthy of
their help. Of course, there are other important items on the campaign, but it is vital to the future
of the university to complete these projects first.
Fiscal Year
With regard to the fiscal year, the cash payments are up over last year due in large part to
payments on some very substantial pledges. The number of donors is up 2% from this time last
year. There is a question as to whether this can be sustained to close the year. The alumni giving
is almost exactly even from last year. Will the pace with which alumni have been giving persist?
The faculty and staff giving have been down slightly. The giving from parents is okay. Giving
from the School of Colleges is variable.
Visits
From all of the visits that Dr. Kerwin makes people often ask how the university is doing
academically. Almost everyone asks a question about the faculty and what they are doing. Most
people understand that what has happened with the episode of former President Ladner does not
reflect the faculty and their effectiveness. Time will tell if the actions that have been taken will
satisfy them. The alumni have a huge appreciation of the university and how it has helped their
careers.
Open Discussion
President Kerwin offered his congratulations to everyone involved with the Ann Ferren Teaching
Conference. Professor Burke asked Dr. Kerwin if there is any information about the Senate’s
schedule for hearings. Dr. Kerwin responded by saying that no information has come back to
him. Professor Jacoby mentioned to Dr. Kerwin that many faculty members have tried to contact
Board members and they have not had any response. Dr. Kerwin suggested that the faculty
members should always send any communication through Mark Huey of the President’s office to
ensure that it does indeed go to the Board member. Professor Cochran expressed his concern
about when the Board will get some of these vital issues behind it. Dr. Kerwin responded that the
Board does feel the urgency to complete vital matters. Professor Burke asked if there is a link
between the end of the governance issues and the beginning of the new president search. Dr.
Kerwin answered by saying that to the extent that a new president would want to know certain
important things such as, who the Board of Trustees is and what their values are, there is a link.
Report of the Provost, Ivy Broder
Interim Provost Broder expressed her congratulations to John Richardson and his staff at the
Center for Teaching Excellence for putting together an outstanding Ann Ferran Teaching
Conference. There were close to 300 people in attendance, almost triple the number of attendees
historically. The timing, the venue, and the program itself all contributed to this high turnout.
One highlight was when several scholar teachers of the year spoke about their teaching
philosophies and the anxieties they feel before entering the classroom.
Enrollment for Spring ‘06
For new undergraduates, enrollment is right on target with budget. There are 77 new full-time
freshman students and 94 full-time transfer students. These numbers reflect targeted
expectations.
The returning students are at 94% of the targeted budget figure and are expected to be exactly on
target. That says something very positive about retention and that this category is holding firm.
The study abroad numbers are over budget by just a few students.
The law school is consistently over budget, as they have consistently strong enrollment.
The major category in terms of weakness at the university is the Washington Semester Program.
The enrollment is down by about 100 students from its budgeted target and it will be over $1
million in shortfall. There tends to be an enrollment cycle, and although there was expected to be
a lower enrollment, it was not expected to be such a dramatic drop.
The graduate enrollment is also weaker than expected, at about 5% short of budget.
Most of the gap in the budget will be in the College of Art and Sciences and the Kogod School of
Business.
Enrollment for Fall ‘06
There were 411 total applications for early decision, compared to 408 last year. The application
quality was very slightly down, about 10 points in SAT scores total and .04 in GPA.
There were almost the same number of admits, although down slightly, with 237 early decision
as opposed to 251 last year. The numbers of admits may have been slightly lower in order to
keep the quality the same. The admit quality SAT score is 1217 compared to 1214 last year and
the GPA 3.34 compared to 3.35 last year. It was very important to keep the quality the same
level. The applications for the upcoming fall semester are up and applications for new freshmen
are up by 11% and transfer applications are up by 1%. The university is not willing to make any
compromises on the early decisions given that the numbers for the fall semester are up at this
point.
Masters applications are down about 10%.
The College of Arts and Sciences and School of Public Affairs are about even, while other
schools are softer.
PhD applications are down by 11%, but SIS is missing from this number.
Open Discussion
Professor Loesburg asked about the progress of the proposal for the course load reductions for
assistant professors. Provost Broder will bring this issue up at the next Provost Council meeting.
However, she sees this as a matter of logistics and in thinking about how to manage this issue. It
may be better handled by not increasing the adjunct professor rate but rather with the use of
temporary faculty. Professor Schaeff mentioned her concern about evaluating for tenure with
regard to this issue. Provost Broder responded by saying that this issue has not been thought out
yet, but there are several options. Professor Rosenbloom followed by asking what is the full
course load for the junior faculty. Provost Broder will update the Senate after she gets more
information from the Schools and Colleges about the status of the criteria for variable loads in
the units where they are implemented and how the discussion goes with the Provost Council
about the four course loads.
Update on Governance Issues, Tony Ahrens
The Faculty Senate’s Committee on Governance has added four new members and the complete
list of members is: Anthony Ahrens, Stephen Silvia, George Arnold, Barlow Burke, John
Douglass, Eileen Findlay, Clarence Lusane, Michael Sampson, Rita Simon, Myra Sklarew, and
Richard Stack. The committee had its first meeting prior to the holidays and Professors Steve
Silvia and Tony Ahrens were chosen co-chairs. At the meeting some of the topics discussed
were: improved Board of Trustee oversight of the university executive, enhanced accountability
and linkage of Board of Trustee members to university constituency, Board size, Board selection
processes, criteria for Board membership, and greater transparency and oversight for university
finances. Several members have met with Marty Michaelson, the consultant to the board’s
governance committee. It is anticipated that the Committee will be soliciting the opinion of the
faculty. Professors Silvia and Ahrens asked for an extension of the report until the March
meeting. The extension was unanimously approved.
Professor of the Practice
Discussion will be deferred until the next meeting. Professor Bennett is working on a proposal
which should be circulated next Wednesday and he will be asking for any input from the faculty.
Report of the Chair
Professor Ahrens encouraged the Senators to contact Georgia Christou for any assistance related
to the Faculty Senate and its committees. The Faculty Senate has been offered a new space in the
Sports Annex. This new location is preferable because the McKinley office is isolated and has
heat/air conditioning issues. Also, the School of Communication is expected to move into the
McKinley building in the near future.
Don Meyers, Vice President of Finance & Treasury, is unable to attend the February 1st meeting.
He has agreed to attend the March 1st meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 3.20 p.m.