Centers at the University of Montana are approved and periodically assessed according to UM Policy 310: Establishment and Periodic Review of Academic Institutes, Bureaus, Centers, Stations, Labs, and Other Similar Entities.

View a list of existing UM Centers

Creating a new center

A new center requires approval from both Faculty Senate and the Board of Regents. Please follow the below directions to prepare and submit a proposal for a new center. Advance planning is needed.

To create a new center:

As soon as a new center is considered, submit a one-paragraph description of the program to the Office of the Provost (

  • It will be added to the Academic Program Plan that is submitted to OCHE and available to other MUS institutions for their comment and information.
  • This list is updated twice a year, in May and December. Proposals not on this list will not be considered by OCHE.

Once the proposal is more developed, complete an Intent to Plan form.

  • Obtain required signature from Dean or Vice President for Research (depending on reporting authority) and submit to the Office of the Provost.
  • Intent to Plan forms will be submitted to OCHE by the Provost and reviewed monthly by all of the Chief Academic Officers in the MUS.
  • Following approval, the Provost's Office will notify proposer that they may proceed to develop a full proposal and if any other campuses in the MUS need to be consulted.
  • Campuses will have up to 18 months for proposal development and campus governance review.

Submit the full proposal with the following forms (with all required signatures) to the Office of the Provost for review (

  1. The Provost will distribute copies to the President, relevant administrators, and the Faculty Senate.
  2. Upon approval of the Provost and the Faculty Senate, the proposal will be submitted to the President.
  3. Upon approva of the Presidentl, the proposal will be sent to the Board of Regents for final authorization.

Center Review Process

Each center is reviewed every five years (per UM Policy 310).

Directions for center review:

  • The report is due to the Office of the Provost Oct 15.
  • Prepare the report based on the guidelines for the Center Review Report.
  • The center director will submit a list of five potential external reviewers ranked by order of preference to the Office of the Provost (due Sept 15).
    • The list of potential reviewers should not include anyone with a real or perceived conflict of interest, for example, former students or close collaborators.
  • The evaluator will be selected/invited by the Associate Provost in consultation with the Center Director.
  • The evaluator will review the center's report and conduct a remote review (via phone, Skype, etc.).
  • The Center Director is responsible for scheduling the remote interviews and providing an agenda to the reviewer.
  • The Office of the Provost does not provide the honorarium. The center director must facilitate the payment of a modest honorarium (typically $250) upon receipt of the report.
  • The interviews should include:
    • Center Director
    • Faculty and staff affiliated with the center
    • Vice President for Research and Creative Scholarship
    • Direct supervisor of the center
    • Associate Provost
    • Others as makes sense for each individual center
  • The Office of the Provost will distribute the Center Review Report and external reviewer's report to the following for review and comment:
    • the President
    • Vice President for Research and Creative Scholarship
    • Faculty Senate, which will distribute to ECOS
    • Dean or Deans of Colleges and Schools most affected by the proposed Center, as well as the Dean of Libraries
    • Chief Information Officer
  • The Executive Committee of the Senate (ECOS) will review the center's report as well as the evaluation provided by the external reviewer.
  • ECOS will recommend continuance or discontinuance of the center and this recommendation will be approved (or rejected) by the Faculty Senate.
  • The recommendation shall be voted on by the Faculty Senate in support of or against continuation of the Center. To avoid conflict of interest, any member of ECOS affiliated with the Center or its primary academic home is prohibited from participating in the preparation of the recommendation.

  • The Provost shall provide a written recommendation to the President for or against continuation of the Center, referencing the vote of the Senate and after consultation with the Center Director.