Is the process still on schedule?
Yes. Informational Sessions have been held for faculty and staff, and the Academic and Support Task Forces have been named. The membership lists of both Task Forces can be found under the Working Groups link. The general timeline can be found on the Timeline link to the left or by going to: https://www.nmu.edu/sra/timeline
The Provost's Message, posted 3/13/17 on Campus Connect, stated that "currently there are 4 programs departments have recommended to phase out which have been on the suspension list for 4 years." What are the 4 programs?
This is actually more of a suggestion than a question, but I think it would make more sense to refer to this website as the STRATEGIC RESOURCE ALLOCATION (SRA) home page vs. the PLANNING FOR DISTINCTION (PFD) home page. The reason for this is because in many of the conversations and forums that we've had about this topic, very rarely is it referred to as the PFD program. It's referred to as the SRA program. So to maintain consistency and eliminate confusion as to what project we are actually talking about at any given time, I think the website name and the program should go hand and hand and be called the same thing. I personally am on one of the task forces and even I myself have a hard time remembering that we have to go to the "Planning for Distinction" site to look at current events, questions etc...
The Provost update on July 17 says "Programs that will undergo review have been identified and are listed on the SRA website. I cannot find a list of the programs on the SRA website.
To find the most up to date list of programs that will be reviewed please go to the Resources page. Listed on this page under "Documents" there is an Excel file for the Academic programs and the Service/Support programs. Each file lists programs overall and by department. If you have any issues opening these files, please contact Beth Roberts at email@example.com.
The first line of the timeline says that co-champions were appointed. Didn't you mean to write co-chairs? Or in the age of Trump is everybody a champion?
In Connect, the Provost said that SRA selected 4 programs for review. [I take it that these are different from the 4 departments themselves recommended be dropped] The Provost said that they are listed on the SRA site. Where?
The Connect statement about the 4 programs was referring to 4 programs have been recommended to phase out and have been on the suspension list for 4 years. These programs are listed under the FAQ area here.
The SRA process will still be reviewing all university programs as part of this process. The programs - both academic and service/support - that are being reviewed as part of the SRA process are listed on the Resources page under the "Documents" heading.
Why are programs that are 100% grant-funded and only bring money into the University being identified for review under SRW?
Although external grants may not be directly funded by the University, these programs still utilize University resources. Any grant program that we have on campus still utilizes the work of a faculty/staff grant administrator(s), the space used on campus, and any associated experiences offered to students through the grant. The SRA process will not be aiming to negatively review anything; the process is designed to assess whether the resources that are allocated to each program - in the form of labor, space, and monies - are providing a benefit to the University at large. If not, it will be evaluated (based on the template) whether more or less resources should be allocated to it (ie, another administrator or more space, or conversely less space). The grant fund totals themselves, because they are external, will not be reassigned or otherwise changed.
"May 2018--University community reviews reports and provides comments." Even if this ambitious timeline is achieved--will the task forces actually have complete reports, ready for public consumption, in May?--I think it would be inappropriate to seek community input at that late date. By May, nearly all students will be away, as will many faculty. I understand that there is some pressure to have something ready for the Board of Trustees this summer, but it would be much better to give all members of the campus community time to process these reports, and then hold town halls in the early fall semester.
The co-chairs of each task force anticipate completing the SRA process sometime this May. The reports and recommendations from the process will be posted on the SRA website at which time comments and further input will be possible for a minimum of two weeks. Electronic access to the reports and the ability to comment is available to the campus community regardless of whether someone is on campus or not.
"Are the co-chairs of the task forces being consulted before answers to these questions are posted? All four of them agreed that "completing the SRA process" is possible sometime in May? Completing the entire process?"
The provost, Kerri Schuiling and CFO, Gavin Leach meet biweekly with the co-chairs of both task forces. Updates therefore are based on information from those meetings. The 'completed in May' referred to the task forces having their work, which includes the assessments and assigning programs to quintiles and final recommendations, being done in late May. As of this week, that date has been moved back by 60 days for the Academic Task Force. The revised completion of the Academic Task Force's work is now Friday July 13th at 5pm. This changed schedule gives the members of the Academic TF more time to complete their work as they have more reports to review.
The Support Task Force has completed their work. No recommendations are put forth until both of the task forces have completed their work. At that time the reports, templates and recommendations will be posted on the SRA website.