III Periodic Review of Centers (Academic Policy 100.o)
    
Senate Recommendation

The University of Montana Rural Institute:  Center for Excellence in Disability Education, Research, and Service

 

A. Written Report Summary:

1.   Purpose:  The Rural Institute utilizes interdisciplinary approaches to provide education, research and service in areas related to disability.  Our authority for federal funding and designated activities are mandated by the Developmental Disabilities Act Amendments.  As part of the requirements for this federal law, the Rural Institute has a formal charter with The University of Montana.
Mission Statement –To enhance the independence, productivity, integration, and inclusion of individuals and their families and to improve the quality of life for people with severe disabilities, especially those individuals living in Montana and other rural areas of the country.

2.   Objectives:   The Rural Institute has seven major goals with multiple objectives and activities detailed in the report.  The goals are: Interdisciplinary Education, Research and Evaluation, Community Services and Supports, Dissemination, Constituency Involvement and Diversity, Leveraging, and administration.
                                                  

3.   Activities:   Major activities include education, research, and service.  Numerous detailed examples are provided in the report.  Many are available at: http://ruralinstitute.umt.edu/projects.asp

4.   Other organizations involved:  There are numerous collaborating organizations, including multiple universities, state departments, and service providers.
 

5.   Reporting line: The Executive Director, Timm Vogelsberg, reports directly to the Vice President for Research.

 

6.   Relationships with academic units:  The Rural Institute has a series of state/federal funding sources which support research faculty teaching through various schools, colleges, and settings.  In a typical semester the Rural Institute will generate 40-60 FTE for various Departments.

7.   Similar programs: There is at least one University Center for Excellence in Disability Education, Research, and Service in each state.  There are other state/university level centers which engage in similar activities but none in Montana.  MSU-Billings has the Montana Center on Disabilities, but they do not have the same entrepreneurial teaching or research orientation.

 8.   Budget:
a.  1. Current faculty and percentage of time: 12 research faculty 
         Current staff: 63 classified and/or letter of appointments
     2. Need and cost for new faculty (next five years):
     3. Need for other personnel:  Administrative and technology support are always a challenge in a soft money grant funded organization.   
                                                     
b. Use and anticipated needs (next five years) of University Resources:  
        1. Library: frequent use for literature and research information.
        2. Technology/equipment: Grant funding supports purchases and current infrastructure.
        3. Facility and space: Due to the lack of available space on campus and the Rural Institute’s low priority for space, the Institute is currently renting off campus space.  The University provides 12,500 square feet of office, classroom, and clinical space.   
        
c. Source of Funding (Provide figures for the last fiscal year):     

Grants + Income

$7,753,338

100%

 

 

 

    Anticipated source of funding for the next five years:
Grants, income accounts, and general fund.  The charter states that during FY 2002-2007 The University of Montana will actively support the continuation of existing agreements and programs within the Rural Institute and the implementation of several emphases; which includes continued state funding for development in an amount that averages approximately 35% of all indirect funds generated by Institute grants and contracts.  Note the University of Montana waives all indirect costs associated with the Administration for Developmental Disabilities Core Funding as the University’s cost sharing-contribution.

 

B. Review and Approval Process
 
2.  The Faculty Senate through its Chair, ECOS, and Committees as appropriate shall recommend continuance or discontinuance by vote.

Review in terms of Scope as stated in academic policy 100.0
To provide instruction, scholarship, or service to the University, state 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.

                       

Review in terms of the University’s mission.

§          Comments:   None          

§          Does ECOS/Faculty Senate consider this center controversial?

No, the relationship appears clearly defined and all funding is generated from grants and income accounts.

§          Is the relationship with academic units beneficial?

Yes.  40-60 FTE are generated each year in the areas of Education, Sociology, Social Work, Psychology, Physical Therapy, Health and Human Performance, Computer Science and the COT from this center.

§          Is the program revenue neutral or does it consume more resources than it generates? If so, is the use of University resources justified? 

The Center uses very little space on campus, renting space for itself off campus, and funds the 12 research faculty and 63 staff members through grants and income accounts.

§          Is the entity making progress toward objectives?

Yes

Recommendation:    CONTINUE