University Policies: Academic Affairs | University of Montana-Missoula

University Policies

UM Policies & Procedures Home - >> Academic Affairs >> Establishment and Perioic Review...

Policy Number: 103 (Replaces #100)

Policy: Establishment and Periodic Review of Academic Institutes, Bureaus, Centers, Stations, Labs, and Other Similar Entities

Date Adopted: 11/01

Revision Date: 02/05, 06/08

References:

Approved By: George M. Dennison, President

  1. Scope

This policy governs the establishment and review of academic institutes, bureaus, centers, stations, laboratories, and other similar entities at The University of Montana - Missoula.

    1. Purposes

      Such entities exist to provide instruction, scholarship, or service to the University, State, region, or world by:
      1. Focusing attention on an area of strength and/or addressing a critical issue; or
      2. Facilitating collaborative, multi-disciplinary endeavors to combine resources from several programs or institutions to address issues of common interest.

      Typically, such entities organize scattered or scarce resources in response to identified needs and opportunities to develop new knowledge or serve society.
    2. Titles

      The nomenclature of these entities have evolved informally.

      Institute : A multi-disciplinary entity with responsibility for a variety of independent but related educational, research, and/or creative projects, as opposed to a "program" institute, i.e., an assembly of scholars and students focusing on a unified topic for a limited period of time. An institute subject to this Policy has an indefinite duration.

      Bureau : An entity with primarily service functions which may include applied research focused on service.

      Center : A major entity with a broad portfolio that includes promoting instruction, community service, and research and/or creative activity.

      Station : A legislatively or Regentally established research entity with multi-disciplinary and broad research responsibilities.

      Laboratory : A multi-disciplinary entity focused on one specific research/creative topic.

      Every entity described above and every academic entity which includes one of the following terms - "center," "laboratory," "institute," "station," or "bureau" - in its name, is subject to this Policy.

      For subsequent reference in this Policy, the term "Center" includes all entities described in the preceding sentence.

 

  1. Approval of New Academic Centers
    1. Proposal Format

      A proposal for the creation of a new Center may originate from one or more faculty members, Departments, Deans, the Provost, the President, or a source outside the University. The written proposal must:
      1. Identify the Center's purpose;
      2. State the Center's objectives;
      3. Describe the Center's anticipated activities;
      4. Identify all agencies, organizations, and institutions involved, including advisory council information;
      5. Identify the organization's reporting line within the University;
      6. Describe the relationship to the institutional mission, including the Departments involved, and indicate how the Center will contribute to the academic programs of the University;
      7. Describe any similar programs in Montana and the surrounding region; and
      8. Budget for first five years;
        1. Identify the faculty and staff requirements, including:
          1. The names of current faculty involved with the Center and the percentage of their professional time devoted to the Center;
          2. The need and cost for new faculty during the first five years of the Center's existence, including special qualifications and training; and
          3. The need and cost for support personnel and any other personnel (i.e., graduate assistants);
        2. Identify the Center's library needs, telecommunication and computing needs, other equipment needs, and facility and space needs; and
        3. Identify the sources of funding to support the Center for the first five years of its operations.
    2. Review and Approval Process

      A new proposal initially goes to the Provost who, in turn, shall submit copies to the President, appropriate administrators, and organizations for review and comment, including:
      1. The Dean or Deans of the College and Schools most affected by the proposed Center, other Academic Officers, the Associate Vice President for Information Technology, Dean of Libraries, and others as appropriate in the opinion of the Provost, and
      2. The Faculty Senate through its Chair, who in turn shall distribute it to ECOS and other committees, and approve or disapprove the proposal by a vote of the Senate.

      The Provost shall provide a written rationale for a recommendation of approval or disapproval of the proposed Center to the President, referencing the vote of the Senate.

      The President shall consider all recommendations and provide a written explanation of the decision to the Provost and the Faculty Senate.

      If the President approves, the proposal will go to the Board of Regents for final authorization. (See Montana Board of Regents Policy and Procedure Manual, 208, Institutional Organizations).
    3. Existing Academic Centers

      Centers established prior to the date of this policy become subject to periodic review.
  1. Periodic Review of Centers
    1. Written Report

      Every five years, the Director (or other appropriate lead manager) of every Center will prepare and submit a written report on the current operations of the Center addressing the following items:
      1. Identify the Center's purpose;
      2. State the Center's objectives;
      3. Describe the Center's anticipated activities;
      4. Identify all agencies, organizations, and institutions involved, including advisory council information;
      5. Identify the Center's reporting line within the University;
      6. Describe the relationship to the institutional mission, including the Departments on campus involved and how the Center contributes to the academic programs of the University;
      7. Describe other similar programs in Montana and the surrounding region; and
      8. Budget;
        1. Identify the faculty and staff requirements, including:
          1. The names of current faculty involved with the Center and the percentage of their professional time devoted to the Center;
          2. The need and cost for new faculty over the next five years of the Center's existence, including special qualifications and training; and
          3. The cost for support personnel or other personnel and the anticipated personnel expenditures for the next five years.
        2. Identify the Center's library needs, telecommunication and computing needs, other equipment needs, and facility and space needs, including the anticipated costs to satisfy those needs for the next five years; and
        3. Identify the sources of funding to support the Center currently and the anticipated sources of funding for the next five years.

If no changes have been made in the preceding areas since the creation of the Center or since the Center's most recent report, the report can simply indicate "no change."

  1. Review and Approval Process

    The Center Director (or other appropriate lead manager) shall submit the report to the Provost who, in turn, shall submit copies to the President and the following people and organizations for review and comment:
    1. The Dean or Deans of the College and Schools most affected by the Center, other Academic Officers, the Associate Vice President for Information Technology, Dean of Libraries, and a review team consisting of three faculty not affiliated with the Center and the Graduate Dean, and
    2. The Faculty Senate through its Chair, who in turn shall distribute it to ECOS and other committees, and recommend continuance or discontinuance by a vote of the Senate.
    The Provost shall provide a written recommendation for continuance or discontinuance of the Center to the President, referencing the vote of the Senate.

    The President shall consider all recommendations and provide a written explanation of the final decision to the Provost and the Faculty Senate for implementation.

Policy Procedures