Members absent: W. Miller, T. Clifton, K. Geisinger, ex officio
Others present: C. Donn, F. Glennon, M. Goodisman, M. MacDonald, M. Miller, E. Ryan
President Mary K. Collins called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM.
I. Approval of the minutes of September 17, 1997
The minutes were approved after the addition of the name M. Goodisman to the list of others present.
II. Opening comments
President Collins announced that she does not choose to vote at Executive Board or Full Senate meetings, unless she has to break a tie. She also announced that the AVP and the Academic Dean are out of town for this meeting.
III. Questions on reports
There were none.
IV. Old Business
A. Proposal on stipends for adjunct faculty
J. Glancy made a motion to move this proposal off the table and A. Vetrano seconded it. J. Glancy told the group that this issue had to come before tonight’s meeting because the motion to table stipulated the date of this meeting. In fact, her group is not yet ready to bring forward any revisions or new information at this juncture. Prof. Glancy moved to table this matter until the November 12 meeting. J. Consler seconded the motion and it passed by a vote of 17 - 0 with one abstention.
V. New Business
A. CAPHE Steering Committee (Glennon)
K. Nash and R. Bucko moved the following resolution.
Whereas the CAPHE steering committee was authorized by the FacultySenate Executive Board to administer the CAPHE grant (September 1996);
Whereas the CAPHE steering committee spent the past year in discussion withfaculty and students on the nature of teaching and its improvement atLe Moyne College;
Whereas those discussions generated a summary report which was distributedto the faculty and which included suggestions and directions to follow(April 1997);
Whereas those directions included reviewing such issues as initiatingfaculty development discussions and opportunities, reviewing studentsevaluations forms and practices, reviewing classroom space developmentand use, and reviewing teacher recognition efforts;
Be it resolved, that the CAPHE Steering Committee be empowered to explorefully these suggestions and directions to propose recommendations to the Faculty Senate Executive Board for review and possible adoption.
The discussion that followed centered on the focus of CAPHE and the path that its recommendations should follow. CAPHE has identified four areas to work on. They are 1) teacher development, 2) classroom space, 3) evaluation, and 4) teacher reward and recognition. The CAPHE steering committee seeks authority and endorsement to work on these matters. Its grant, as written, is flawed by the omission of faculty consultation. It was pointed out that some of these CAPHE issues are within the purview of the Committee on Academic Relations, Policies and Procedures (ARPP), while other matters coming from CAPHE affect Rank and Tenure and the Research and Development committees. The Executive Board, while it does field requests for action, typically refers most issues to committee first. A friendly amendment was offered and accepted that alters the resolution to read as follows.
Be it resolved, that the CAPHE Steering Committee be empowered to explore fully these suggestions and directions to propose recommendations to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee for review and referral to the appropriate committee.
The resolution passed by a vote of 18 - 0 - 0.
B. Research & Development Accounting Procedures Proposal (Attachment C)
B. Blaszak moved and J. Glancy seconded the following resolution. It passed without discussion by a vote of 18 - 0 - 0.
Resolved: The Faculty Senate Executive Board endorses the proposed changes to accounting procedures for grants and stipends as recommended by the Research and Development Committee.
K. Nash moved and N. Ring seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 PM.
Inga H. BarnelloSecretary/TreasurerOctober 23, 1997
Attachments: A - C
The report for the Committee on Academic Relations, Policies,and Procedures is tantamount to what appears in its approved minutes.These minutes have been posted in this folder, on the web page forthe Faculty Senate being maintained by Inga Barnello, and on theSenate's bulletin board in the mailroom.
The Committee's next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, October 22nd, inthe Continuous Learning Conference Room.
Respectfully submitted:Charles J. Kelly
Curriculum Committee Report
The Curriculum Committee continues its weekly meetings. We discuss the CETreport each week, along with conducting our regular business of acting oncourse proposals. We remain hopeful of being able to deliver our responseto the CET report to the Faculty Senate and the AVP by December.The sub-committee on the Physics Dept. is up and running with BernardArogyaswamy as chair. They plan to have their report ready by the end ofthe academic year.
Finally, the Student Senate will bring before the Exec. Board a motion togive the student delegate on the Curriculum Comm. a vote. The committeeconducted a preliminary discussion of the issue at its first meeting inSept. At that time, one member was in favor of giving the student delegatea vote, two were opposed, two had reservations, one was silent, and one wasnot present for the discussion. We had scheduled another discussion of theissue for Oct. 16, but tabled it because the President of the StudentSenate informed the committee's chair that he would prefer to have theExec. Board discuss the matter. For what it is worth, the chair of theCurriculum Comm. would like to recommend to the Exec. Board that if theboard deems the Student Senate proposal worthy to pursue, it bring itbefore the full Faculty Senate for a vote, as was done several years agowhen the same request was made. The chair would also like to issue thecaution that giving votes on Faculty Senate committees to non-members ofthe Faculty Senate sets a precedent which may lead to the extension ofvoting privileges to other ex officio and/or non-Faculty Senate members onFaculty Senate committees.
Respectfully submitted on October 6, 1997, B.J. Blaszak, Chair, CurriculumCommittee
Finance report 10/97
1. 96-97 BudgetThe Finance Office reports that the College had a $320,000 deficit for 96-97. However, the Budget approved by the Trustees in April 96 included $914,630 for depreciation, and the actual numbers reported at the end of the year include $1,871,274 for depreciation. The College's auditedfinancial statement reports a net increase in assets of $786,440 (including a $203,057 decrease in unrestricted funds, a $626,100 increase in temporarily restricted funds, and a $363,397 increase in permanently restricted funds).
2. 97-98 BudgetThe budget approved by the Trustees for 97-98 includes a $541,977 operating deficit. (The approved budget includes $1,998,698 for depreciation.) At this point the Finance Office anticipates a $563,255 surplus.
3. The Budget Committee submitted a request to the President to be able to use surplus funds for the restoration of department budgets that have been slashed and frozen over the years and for unfunded capital needs. The President has replied to Tom O'Neil that Vice Presidents may request the funding of some outstanding needs that have not been met, but that there will not be a generalized restoration of department budgets or funding of capital needs. We understand that Vice Presidents will review the unfunded budgetary requests that come under their jurisdiction, but we also encourage academic departments and programs to draw to the attention of the Academic Vice President budgetary requests that have been denied that they believe affect the quality of the overall educational experiences of the students.
Jennifer Glancy, Chair
Research and Development Committee Report for Oct. 22 Meeting (Bill Miller)
1. The Committee has notified those faculty members eligible for sabbatical in 1998-99 that they must apply by December 1, 1997.
2. The fall deadline for applying for R&D grants was October 1. The Committee received 6 proposals. We reviewed these briefly at our October 7 meeting and will reach a final decision at our October 21 meeting.
3. The deadline for applying for a course load reduction for Spring 1998 was October 1. The Committee received 4 applications. We reviewed these in detail at our October 7 meeting. We will forward our recommendations to the Academic Dean on October 15.
4. The Committee finished work on proposed changes to our Policies and Procedures document. We will begin circulating the draft to department and program chairs, the Academic Dean, Senate officers, and AVP for comments. We then plan to submit the document to the Executive Board for approval.
5. The Committee approved the draft of the proposed accounting changes that appears as an agenda item for this meeting.
Proposal from R&D Committee to Change Accounting Procedures for Grants and Stipends
Action Requested. We request that the Executive Board endorse thechanges proposed below. We believe that the changes proposed are withinthe purview of the Research and Development Committee to execute. However, since the changes will have a fairly widespread effect on the faculty, we seek the reassuring endorsement of the Executive Board.
Background. For years, perhaps since the inception of the Research andDevelopment Committee, funds granted by the Committee have been disbursedas follows. Financial Services creates a so-called agency account forthe grantee (if one does not already exist) and the Committee transfers theamount of the grant to this account. The same applies for the awarding ofsummer stipends. The faculty member (grantee) is solely responsible forthe management of the account. (S)he may deposit or withdraw money fromthe account at will, even to the point of overdrawing the account. Untilrecently, withdrawals required no supporting documentation, only thesignature of the account holder. While this system arises from a trulynoble principle--trust in the integrity of the faculty--it has severalshortcomings:
1. Funds have become severely intermingled. Although nominally Researchand Development accounts, the agency accounts have served many otherpurposes. Anecdotal evidence suggests that these accounts (which survivefrom one fiscal year to the next) have even served as a conduit for the(inappropriate!) transfer of departmental funds from one budget year to thenext. Even when there is no intentional misuse, the intermingling of fundsmakes it extremely difficult for our Committee to monitor the use of grantmoney. For instance, our policy for the awarding of grants states thatfunds unused at the end of a project should be returned to the Committee.Under the current system, where the money in R&D accounts may well havecome from other sources, we have no effective way to enforce this policy.There is yet a further problem. Currently, summer stipends are simplytransferred to faculty accounts. The Committee has learned in consultingseveral certified public accountants that summer stipends are taxable income according to IRS guidelines.
2. The Committee has no way to prevent the overdrawing of accounts.Currently there are several R&D accounts that are overdrawn. One, with asignificant negative balance, belongs to a former faculty member who hasleft Le Moyne. Ultimately, the Committee must use part of its funds (thatcould otherwise be used to support new projects) to cover theseoverexpenditures. This totally circumvents the careful procedure theCommittee uses in awarding grants.
3. The Committee has no way to check whether funds are actually used asintended. An applicant for an R&D grant is required to submit a detailedbudget as part of the application. Our policy states that the grantee mustoperate within the line items of that budget. This policy is currentlyunenforceable.
4. The Committee cannot provide careful accounting for the funds itdisburses. The Committee is responsible for the disbursement of asignificant amount of money. We believe that this subjects us to a highstandard of accountability for how we dispose of the funds in our account.At present, it is impossible for us to maintain accurate records of how themoney we disburse is actually used. We find this a serious breach of ourresponsibility and want keenly to rectify the situation.
Proposed Changes--The New System. Here is the system that we propose toadopt. We have consulted with Financial Services and have receivedassurances that this new system can easily be implemented.
1. The amount of each grant awarded will be transferred, under thegrantee s name, to an individual sub account of the Committee’s account.To withdraw money from the account, the grantee must present documentationand a request form signed by the chair of the Committee (or otherdesignated member of the Committee). Before signing the request form, thechair of the Committee (or designee) will check the account records toensure that the withdrawal is consistent with the proposed budget approvedby the Committee. (S)he will also keep copies of the documentation andupdate the Committee’s account records. (This process is thus very similarto that for withdrawing money from departmental accounts.)
2. A grantee must operate within the line items of the budget approvedby the Committee. Any budgeting change requires Committee approval. TheCommittee will entertain and periodically review requests for budgetchanges.
3. Each applicant for a grant is required to provide a terminationdate for the grant. The account of a grant recipient will be closed on thetermination date, unexpended funds reverting to the Committee’s mainaccount. As with budget changes, the Committee will periodically reviewrequests for extensions. Ordinarily, the Committee expects grants to havea maximum life of two years.
4. An award for incidental expenses (a so-called E-Z formreimbursement ) will be disbursed as a check to the recipient. The chairof the Committee will submit a standard check request form to FinancialServices and keep appropriate documentation and records for these expenses.
5. Summer stipends, once awarded, will be processed through thepayroll office.
Proposed Changes--The Transition.
We propose to institute the new system as follows. (As with the above changes, we have verified with Financial Services that there are no technical obstacles to what we propose.)
1. All new grants, stipends, and incidental reimbursements will beawarded according to the new system.
2. All currently existing research accounts will be closed on May15, 1998, the balances remaining on that date being transferred to the mainR&D account.
3. Until May 15, 1998, holders of existing research accounts may usetheir research accounts as in the past.
4. Faculty members who have research accounts containing money notawarded by the Committee and who have a legitimate need to keep this moneyin a College account may open a separate account (through financialservices) and transfer the money to this new account.
5. For faculty members who anticipate having unexpended R&D grantmoney on May 15, 1998, the following apply:
A. If the project for which the grant was awarded will be complete by May 15, 1998, then the faculty member need do nothing; the unexpended money will automatically be returned to the R&D coffers.
B. If the project for which the grant was awarded will not be complete by May 15, 1998, then the faculty member must consult with the chair of the Committee to set up a new account according to the new system of accounting. In setting up the new account, the chair of the Committee and the faculty member will agree to a termination date for the project and a budget for the remaining funds. This agreement will be based as closely as possible on the original grant proposal.
Final Comments. The changes proposed here are the result of deliberationswithin the Committee that have occurred over the past year and haveinvolved consultation with the Academic Dean, former AVP Ed Ryan, and AlanKenyon of Financial Services.
Page maintained by Inga H. Barnello, email@example.com. Created: 10/10/97 Updated: 10/23/97