Recommendations of the University Planning and Policy Council (UPC) Compact Planning Committee to the
Selective Investment Committee, President and Provost
The compact planning committee (CPC) consisted of seven members of UPC and five members of the Senate
Executive Committee. It read all of the compact materials and met for a daylong meeting during the February break
to evaluate them.
A. Recommendations on the DRAFT UNIVERSITY GOALS AND PRIORITIES
It was the understanding of the Senate Executive Committee that the draft university goals stated in the compact
planning handbook were to be refined by the compact planning process. Because initiatives were to be classified
according to their fit to these goals, that fit may not be an effective means of assessing the appropriateness of the
goals themselves. Thus, the CPC regarded it as appropriate to begin its recommendations with commentary on those
goals as priorities for selective investments.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
9.
CPC applauds goal 1 and its listing as the highest priority for the university.
Enhancing programmatic excellence should include undergraduate as well as graduate program performance.
Further, it is important to explicitly include per capita rankings (publications per faculty, doctoral degrees
granted per faculty, grants per faculty and similar measures) that are more appropriate for small but excellent
programs than rankings with size thresholds.
While CPC strongly endorses increasing the faculty size, it also recognizes that support level staff (not more
administrators) to provide actual services to students are also vital to student satisfaction. However, it is
essential that staff levels are based on documented demonstration of actual student use rates.
Growth should be made in numbers of domestic out-of-state as well as international students. It may be
necessary to provide scholarship/fellowship support for international students to cover out-of-state tuition
differentials, but that might not be necessary for domestic out-of-state students.
CPC would recommend modifying goal (5) slightly to read: "Strengthen University identity and spirit by
developing recreational, intellectual, athletic, alumni and public relations programs."
Community outreach should also embrace public performances, lectures, and arts exhibits.
Goals 7 and 8 together are clearly important to the university
Continued increasing transparency is another important aspect of budget and decision making processes. CPC
applauds accountability but is uncomfortable with the terminology of "deliverables" as dehumanizing when
applied to students.
B. Recommendations on the Rules of Thumb
CPC found the informal "rules of thumb" for evaluating selective investment priorities useful in considering the
compacts and so wishes to comment on them.
1, 2, 5. It is important that "strength" be interpreted primarily with respect to track record in responsiveness to
University goals 1 and 2. Similarly, it is of primary importance that the endpoints and mechanism be aligned
with overall university priorities.
3. Knowledge of "exact" competition may be overstating what is possible.
4. There exist systemic problems that are not amenable to quick fixes. It is important not to exclude efforts of
value in addressing these problems, as long as the potential advance is more than incremental. When applied to
larger university planning, the structure of initiative-driven compact planning process could lead to emphasizing
superficial new initiatives over more prosaic but perhaps more effective strategies.
6, 11, 13. CPC applauds awarding collaboration. It strongly recommends distinguishing between buzzwords
describing potential theoretical collaboration and real proven track records of constructive interaction. It agrees
that true collaboration entails looking beyond the individual unit to the larger university, and that real
collaboration should be beneficial to all units. It also recommends against the practice of artificial
collaboration, in which the only lines that would be offered to a department are specific joint lines. This can
affect university programmatic offerings in bizarre ways, particularly if the department is then denied future
lines as its needs have already been addressed. Thus the committee cautions against arbitrary assignment of
collaborative lines without allowing departments options to follow their (and the university's) priorities.
7. There is some ambiguity in the process between general planning and specific targets of selective investment.
Some of the proposals require more resources than available from the selective investment pool, but ought to be
1
8.
evaluated as potential goals for grants and philanthropy. On the other hand, some units' capital campaign goals
were not included in their compacts, making assessment of university priorities in developing a campaign
difficult.
While need alone is not a persuasive argument, demonstrated need should be an essential criteria for selective
investment, to avoid wasting enabling resources on projects which could move forward without that funding.
Historical inequities and lack of planning have resulted in uneven base funding. Units that have developed
laudable efficiency could be particularly effective in moving the university's reputation forward with small
additional allocations.
C. Process Recommendations
1.
2.
3.
The daunting task of assembling school or college summaries inevitably resulted in the loss of the connotation
of department missions, accomplishments, and goals. CPC strongly recommends that the selective investment
committee read the appendices containing department compacts as well as the final school or college
documents.
As part of that process, many small requests to fund very good ideas were lost in the need to highlight major
thrusts. CPC recommends that 5-10% of the selective investment pool be set aside for distribution to these
small cost/high gain ventures. Since it recognizes that evaluating these is an overwhelming task when added to
the larger investment prioritization, the University Senate would be willing to undertake ranking these smaller
budget items if they are not ranked by the selective investment committee. It felt strongly that units that have
developed habits of economy should be rewarded for not spinning large budgets onto good ideas.
The timing of commitments for allocations was somewhat ambiguous. CPC strongly recommends reserving at
least some part of the second and third year allocations for initiatives submitted in advance of finalizing details
of collaborations and linkages and re-evaluating those initiatives when the details have been worked out.
D. Detailed Commentary
CPC agreed not to rank proposals. Further, it recognized that the time scale for providing input and the membership
of the committee generated some arbitrariness to which proposals generated comment. Thus, it presents the
following comments as examples of similar concerns or acclaim that could have been associated with other
proposals.
1. FEDERATED APPROACH TO INFRASTRUCTURE
CPC applauded ITS' proposed university-wide approach to network services. It would recommend that this be
applied as well to major software purchases such as requested by research and by development. A federated
approach is also recommended for document imaging and manipulation, a recurrent theme of administrative units,
and for the development and maintenance of web sites. Document management might be less expensive if delivered
as a centralized in-house service. Proposed web site development that could be managed centrally include the
athletic department streaming video, school and college sites, and provision of SIRF results on the web. Since web
site development and maintenance is a growing and continuing need, it makes sense to develop in-house expertise.
Some maintenance and even web design tasks could be performed by work-study students and graduate assistants.
The tension between specialization and economy of scale was also apparent in the area of development and study
abroad. While it is essential to have development officers specializing and located in proximity to individual
schools and colleges, it probably does not make sense to have offices separately supported within the colleges. This
is particularly apparent from the high cost of effective software tools for development. Supporting the software and
personnel requests of the development office would require the entire selective initiative budget. Obviously, to the
extent to which the investment is multiplied, development expenditures make sense. However, this office cannot be
built at the expense of the primary mission of the university, and it may not make sense to grow personnel size more
rapidly than can be effectively managed. The committee was also pleased with the general integration of student
services proposed by the Finance and Business Unit, emphasizing service, flexibility, and awareness of changing
needs. However, it did feel that details of the "one stop shopping" concept should include significant university
community input. Two infrastructure problems that emerged in discussion were the continued reduction of
maintenance service staff incommensurate with the increased number of buildings and the perception of exorbitant
pricing in renovations.
2
2. USING EXISTING EXPERTISE
The committee was very favorably impressed by the use of a faculty led student initiative to design the "purple
path." It feels that other initiatives, particularly the branding initiative, ought to consider using existing faculty and
staff expertise and student creativity. Extensive input should be sought from the larger university community. This
would also serve to avoid expensive but marginally useful advice (a past consultant's style book recommending the
exclusive use of "Janson" and "Akzidenz Grotesque" fonts was cited, among others). Further, it is concerned about
contracting out marketing expertise rather than developing it internal to the marketing unit. It had similar
reservations about the expensive redesign of the enrollment management publication family.
3. ATHLETICS/STUDENT SUCCESS
A director of intramural sports is a very good idea and should be supported. This office should be connected with
the office of student success, and activities integrated with other programs such as the Danes after Dark initiative,
which also needs regular staff support. Additional support is also needed in career development services, if for no
other reason than the obvious corollary between employed alumni and alumni giving. Because much of the support
of student resume writing has moved to the writing center in recent years, that center should share in support given
to career services. The committee expressed some concern that the athletic department has apparently not regarded
recreational activities as a fundamental aspect of its mission in recent years. It also recommended the offering of
limited numbers of one-credit recreational athletics courses. CPC was confused by the absence of mention of
previously stated priorities for big facility planning in the athletics compact plan. Finally, it recommended that the
athletics department work with research programs associated with the proposed addiction center to study student
drinking.
4. JEWELS OF THE UNIVERSITY "BRAND"
The committee recommends infrastructure repairs for the Art Museum and for PAC and the theatre department and
support for the joint initiative of the Art Museum with the Writers Institute. While the committee recommended
support for programs such as Danes after Dark, it noted that the Art Museum, Performing Arts Center, and Writers
Institute provide after hours intellectual activities for students (as opposed to being primarily alcohol alternatives),
and bring in the larger Albany community. The Writers Institute fellows program was also cited as an exciting idea
and the associated lines in the English department would help alleviate the demand for writing instructors. The
proposed CAS Art house is an intriguing goal, perhaps better suited for the University at Albany Foundation.
Building the political archive of the library is also commensurate with the historical strengths of the university and
brings significant outside visibility. The recent acquisition of death sentence archives ties in well with Criminal
Justice's request for a hub in this area. Both of these could be attractive to external funding. While it liked the basic
idea of the Collaboratorium for honors students, the committee felt the idea and budget needed some reworking. An
area set aside as a lounge with overpriced chairs and laptops when there is crumbling infrastructure all around struck
the committee as too elitist. It also noted that any planned facilities for honors college students should be made
available to students taking honors courses or doing honors scholarly work.
5. GRADUATE SCHOOL AND GRADUATE TEACHING
The committee strongly supported the formation of a Graduate School (partly because it was not associated with a
large expenditure). One member likened it to a wheel strengthening a collection of spokes. It also highly endorsed
the proposal from the Undergraduate Studies Office for CETL training of graduate student teachers, and the
International Student Office request for English language training for foreign students, noting it might be most
effective as a collaborative within a combined CETL/grad school rubric.
6. FRESHMAN AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
The committee noted that better quantification of the existing Project Renaissance satisfaction, graduation and
retention rates, normalized for the quality of incoming students, as well as ongoing instructional and course content
assessment should precede its expansion. The committee expressed skepticism about the value of the proposal from
Enrollment Management of one-credit courses to be taught by professional advisors, noting that any apparent
devaluation of credit bearing courses can appear gimmicky and backfire. On the other hand it applauded the success
of the EOP program, and felt that these services should be made available to a larger cohort of students. It also
favored the proposed integration of study abroad programs and foreign student orientation.
3
7.RESEARCH PRIORITIES
In reviewing the compact from the Division for Research, the committee concurred with its statement that a
university-wide discussion of priorities is overdue. In particular, those priorities must be driven by undergraduate
demand as well as research center priorities. Consideration of research portfolios alone would slight units which
have practiced good citizenship in service, advising and teaching, and serve as a counterincentive. However, in
general the committee agreed with the need to hire to fill the life science building vacancies. It recommended that
areas included in the life sciences designation be broadened to include biology, chemistry, physics, psychology,
sociology, public health, and nanobiology, among others, and that broader inclusion of faculty input including areas
such as forensics, neuroscience, and minority health disparity were needed to have a well integrated program. The
two existing forensics programs themselves need better linkages as well as ties to criminal justice and information
sciences and to proposed programs in forensic psychology and forensic accounting. Another round with more time
to develop those collaborations is needed. In general, the committee agreed with the need to reinvest ICR into
research infrastructure. One area of significant understaffing is the office of technology transfer. Another issue that
requires some discussion is the question of integration of the proposed increase in research title faculty. Skepticism
was generally expressed for any administrative positions, including a life sciences director.
8. HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRATION
The committee cited favorably the computing network and visualization initiative as an example of a proposal with
support from two deans and the CIO. While noting that the detailed nature of the expected research could have been
more specific, it was stated that this could be a high-gain-for-small-investment area. Similarly, the Population
center was supported by both the CAS Dean and the VP Research, is very interdisciplinary and is also well funded,
as is the proposed Addiction center, a collaborative effort between two schools.
9.ACADEMIC UNITS
A few general impressions emerged from the bulk of documents. First, because CAS provides the majority of
general education courses, supporting undergraduate programs in other units without providing shared support to
CAS is apt to decrease student satisfaction and graduation rates. This is particularly true of units that have limited
track record for general education courses counting outside their specialty. Secondly, even within CAS, there has
been disproportionate faculty attrition in core and social science departments. This is a concern that requires
addressing even beyond the scope of compact planning. Better articulation with professional schools is desirable,
but that does not obviate the primary need for more faculty lines in these areas. A third impression was that the time
scale of compact planning, and the funneling of plans through the deans, might have served as an impediment to
collaborative planning, particularly across schools or colleges. In the future, separating selective investments from
compact planning so that departments from large and small units could compete on equal footing, or providing an
additional period for departments to interact after the colleges' plans are drafted, might be beneficial.
10. CAS
The short time allotted to bring a large group of compacts into one resulted in a document that was occasionally
difficult to read. For example, the single requested hire in African Diaspora is mentioned multiple times, while
other departments with fairly compelling proposals received no mention. However, the committee agreed that the
related globalization major could be attractive to students. In common with many other proposals, the proposal
would require multiple levels of governance and state approval. The committee recommends beginning as a faculty
initiated major, perhaps in collaboration with Rockefeller College. The journalism major recently approved by
governance started as such a faculty-initiated major. At the time of the proposal, UPC was assured there were
adequate existing resources for the major. Once again, as for several proposed initiatives, creation of a separate
department would require governance review. Several other CAS initiatives have already been endorsed in this
document. Another that was felt to be highly responsive to student demand was the language center. However, the
committee expressed some concern that the languages represented should reflect documented undergraduate student
demand. There was also some concern expressed with respect to the CHATS proposal. Some aspects were very
interesting, but the committee questioned whether the center involved input from actual technosciences and whether
the proposed benefits would exceed those of, for example, joint symposia. Similarly, the committee was unsure
whether the case had been made for the CAT (arts, not thin films) infrastructure compared to other university needs.
However, the committee felt that the art history hires would address an area of significant undergraduate demand.
In another area, CPC would have liked to see more justification that three faculty hires in philosophy could actually
bring applied ethics from third rank to first.
4
11.PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES
CNSE has historically expressed an intention to grow in the area of nanobiology. In addition to being an expanding
field for research, this could lend itself to further collaboration with units such as biology and public health.
Questions were raised as to whether the scale of the budget requests might be excessive. CNSE has also requested a
large funding allocation to begin an undergraduate program. This would be beneficial in increasing collaboration
with CAS faculty as curriculum are articulated, and, resource issues aside, was generally supported. For this and all
of the professional school undergraduate expansion proposals, it was noted that additional resources to CAS should
be considered to provide adequate support, in this case potentially for CAS courses in calculus, biology, general
physics, quantum mechanics, chemistry, and general education. It was noted that there had been governance
discussions explicitly bypassed as CNSE was a graduate-only program when bylaws agreements were made last
year and reviewed in Fall '05. Time may be required for CNSE to propose revision of its bylaws in areas of
undergraduate education. In order to provide time to work out curriculum and articulation details without delaying
students, it was suggested that this program could be proposed as a faculty initiated interdisciplinary major. CNSE
might be able to conserve resources if it employed efficiencies such as collaborations and shared senior/graduate
courses as are used by many other units.
Similarly, it was questioned whether CCI could accomplish its two-year-old curriculum development project
without course buyouts. Course buyouts could then be used instead of separate funding for chair and program
director. CPC did not know whether adequate justification had been made that the computer/human interaction
proposal from CCI was sufficiently innovative, but felt that its interdisciplinary visualization proposal was exciting.
CPC was generally supportive of the undergraduate proposals from Rockefeller, Criminal Justice, and Public Health,
which, like the CNSE program, would be expected to help recruitment and retention of high quality students.
Again, in some cases it felt that the budget requests were arguably somewhat inflated with respect to the limited
total funding available and that details of support to affected units needed to be addressed. The Criminal Justice
program, for example, involves specific course work in sociology. The Business School's request for return of
differential tuition is outside the scope of selective investment. The proposal from the School of Education for
admission of freshman into the five-year minor/master's program is interesting. Care would have to be taken in
advertising and advising, as combined major/minor programs would be difficult to articulate with the education
minor, and degree programs such as art, music, business, or accounting might not naturally lead to certification in
like sounding areas.
5