To: Jack Higginbotham - Associate Vice President for Research
From: Roger Nielsen - Chair, Research Council
RE: Recommendations of the Research Council regarding IWW and CHAR
As per the request of the Research office, and according to the interim procedures
in place for the approval of new Centers and Institutes at Oregon State, the
Research Council was asked to review proposals for the creation of two research
centers. These were: a proposal to rename the Center for Water and Environmental
Sustainability (CWESt) to the Institute for Water and Watersheds (IWW) and a
proposal to create a Center for Healthy Aging Research: Linking Individuals,
Families, and Environments (LIFE). Both of these were parts of provost initiatives
that were approved last fall.
John Bolte presented information about the existing Center for Water and
Environmental Sustainability (CWESt) and the advantages of renaming it to the
Institute for Water and Watersheds (IWW).
 Would provide a vehicle for OSU to be more competitive for funding, our
students to be more competitive for jobs and will provide a framework for a
future proposal for a NSF funded Long Term Hydrologic Observatory.
 Administration at CWESt would be transformed: some projects, like OWRRI
would remain and some non-water related projects would be shifted to more
appropriate areas.
 Create activities at OSU to coordinate programs on water and watersheds
(multicollege, multidepartment).
 IWW is in the process of beginning a search for Director:
o First preliminary meeting this week.
o Hope to have someone on board by December or January.
o Would report directly to the Vice President for Research.
The Research Council felt that this was a solid proposal that would build on existing
strengths, so long as a funding mechanism was adequately delineated. This has yet
to be defined, but, according to the model outlined by John Bolte, will be based on
an increased proportion of IDC on grants obtained above a benchmark level.
Karen Hooker presented information about the creation of the Center for Healthy
Aging Research: Linking Individuals, Families, and Environment (LIFE).
 The new Center is to reflect the increased focus on aging research at OSU,
both within HHS and across the university.
 Oregon’s older population is growing – in the next quarter century Oregon
could be the 4th highest in proportion of older adults in the U.S.
 The Research Council looked at a handout that showed the four research core
areas for the proposed Center. These areas include: Diet, Genes, and Aging;
Bone Health, Exercise and Function in Aging; Psychosocial Factors and
Optimal Aging; and Social and Ethical Issues in Technologies for Healthy
Aging.
 The proposed Center would be reporting directly to the College of Health and
Human Sciences not the Research Office.
Following Dr. Hooker's presentation, there were significant concerns expressed
regarding the proposed reporting structure for the proposed Center for Healthy Aging
Research. The Council appreciates the need to harness the energy of the grassroots
faculty groups that organized the provost initiative. However, the long-term health
of the interdisciplinary programs of the center require that the support structures for
the center receive broader oversight than what is being proposed. The Research
Council recommends that the Center consider a reporting structure that reports
directly to the Research Office from the beginning. Alternatively, we suggest that
the reporting structure needs to be changed before any proposal is made for a
National Institute of Aging Grant, and that the progress of the Center at fostering
interdisciplinary cooperation be a major part of the periodic review process.
The rationale for this opinion is that centers and institutes (with some exceptions)
are granted a mandate to promote interdisciplinary cooperation. The individuals who
manage those units are accountable to us as a university community, regardless of
the extent to which they receive funds from a central source. Otherwise, centers
and institutes can become isolated components within Colleges, defeating their core
mission.
In summary - both the Institute for Water and Watersheds and the Center for
Healthy Aging Research promise to be excellent opportunities for our faculty and, in
the opinion of Research Council, they should be pursued. However, neither has fully
outlined their long-term funding mechanism.
Finally, The Research Council reiterates its long-term position that Centers and
Institutes should be subject to regular, rigorous review by both external and internal
committees, and closed if their function is no longer critical.