BOR Minutes: May 18-20, 2005

Others Present: Pam Joehler, Mark Sheehan, President George Dennison, Craig Roloff, Terri Iverson, Chuck Jensen, Commissioner Sheila Stearns, Chancellor Ron Sexton, President Geoff Gamble, Dean Mary Moe, Susan Briggs, Tom McCoy, Bob Duringer, Cathy Swift, President Jane Karas, Rosi Keller, Chancellor Frank Gilmore, Rolf Groseth, Dave Gibson, Alan Peura, Bill Muse, Bob Frazier, Dan Carter, Mark Bruno, Terry Hetrick, Theresa Branch, Chancellor Alex Capdeville, Michael Barber, Mary Ellen Baukol, Laurie Neils, and Kevin Turner

a. ITEM 127-101-R0505 – Inventory and Validation of Fees 2005 – 06 and 2006 – 07; Montana University System Attachment ADDENDUM

Tuition:

Chair Semmens indicated the tuition increase was not 19% as reported in the media. The average annual increase for resident students is $300 per year, or 8.7%, and $781 for non-residents, or 6.2%. President Gamble reported an error in their budget presentation with a double entry for the pay raises. His suggestion was to either lower tuition by $28 per student or set the funds aside for the upcoming increase in natural gas. Pam Joehler said it appears this problem was isolated at the Bozeman campus. It did not occur at UM nor any of its campuses, nor at the campuses associated with MSU. However, MSU-Northern needs to check their documents to confirm they did not do the same thing. Regent Mercer indicated he was pleased with the process used to arrive at the tuition rates, based on what it costs. Consistent with that process, if the calculation was wrong, the $28 should be returned to the students, and if Northern finds the same problem, they should handle it in the same manner. Chair Semmens indicated the system will be faced with a large issue of contracts for natural gas with substantially higher prices than what were budgeted. Based on customary usage, the cost will exceed the budget authority by $385,000 at MSU-Bozeman alone. Bill Muse indicated that UM will see a 3% increase over the original estimate in the campus budget. The Legislature struck the Bill for a contingency pool to cover excessive power costs. MSU-Billings is still negotiating their power contract, but expect to see an increase of $250,000 to $300,000 over the budgeted amount. Regent Mercer stated that to keep truth in budgeting, the Board needs to authorize the campuses to assess a utility surcharge, rather than an increase in tuition. The surcharge must be based on actual needs of each campus, with the proposed charges being submitted to the Board. Chair Semmens noted a benefit of using a surcharge is the chance of more reasonable rates being available at the end of the two-year contracts. Pam Joehler offered an alternative to cover higher utility costs. The Legislature introduced a Bill that addressed the actuarial needs for state retirement funds, requiring employers to increase their contributions to keep the funds sound. The amount that needed to be invested by the University System was $800,000, and that amount was included in the budget. After being tabled in the Finance and Claims Committee the Bill went no further, but the Legislature will take this issue up in December in a special session. How they will deal with the issue is unknown, but staff believes it unlikely the Legislature would make it retroactive to FY06, but would start in FY07. Ms. Joehler suggested the $800,000 be held back from the funds until the Legislature decides what they intend to do. The $800,000 for FY06 might be available for the Board to use for other priorities such as utilities or OCHE staffing issues. Chair Semmens suggested the Board could use about $120,000 per year for the OCHE staffing needs, ($240,000 for the biennium), and be left with $660,000 for utilities. Chancellor Capdeville asked if they were looking at deferring the retirement and doubling it up the following year. Alan Peura indicated the Legislative Council approved a study the other day and is assigning it to the appropriate subcommittee. What they will do is not clear at this point. Regent Mercer did not agree with spending these funds. Since the System does not know what the Legislature will ask, spending the money could possibly mean the need to find it somewhere else. It should be left in reserve. A surcharge for utilities can be tailored to each campus and its needs. The CEOs agreed with the concept of using the surcharge to cover the unbudgeted increase in utility costs. In response to a question from Regent Mercer on whether all the campuses had two year contracts, Chancellor Sexton stated that they are still negotiating and don’t know if they will have a multiyear contract. Chancellor Gilmore believed Tech still had one year left on their contract, but he would verify it. Regent Mercer asked the OCHE staff to work with the campuses to draft the proper language. Chair Semmens said it was necessary to show that this is a pass through cost, and he asked how long it would take the campuses to present their needed surcharge. President Gamble indicated they could make their recommendations by next week. Regent Mercer requested the language for the formula be written into the Board’s directive. Chair Semmens reminded the CEOs that the surcharge must reflect the actual cost of the increase over that budgeted.

Fees:

Pam Joehler said she had advised the campuses to prepare justification for any mandatory and discretionary fee increases exceeding 5% or $5 for the Board. She indicated those fees were shown in a separate table. Some of the increases were actually consolidations of multiple fees into one, and were revenue neutral. Ms Joehler noted discrepancies between campuses on super tuition, or program fees and whether they were put into designated funds or current unrestricted funds. She questioned this difference. Although a systemwide study was made five years ago, and the recommendations were adopted by the Board, no policies were forthcoming, and there is no tracking mechanism. Chair Mercer said this relates to the fundamental question of what is meant by “system”. Is this a loose confederation of campuses that share ideas, or lock step campuses with exact policies, the same pay, and textbooks? The Board has not yet come to grips with it. Although there is a need for more uniformity and system-wide agreement on how fees are categorized, it is still critical to preserve independence of the campuses. Regent Semmens said that if the work done five years ago was a good start, then the Board needs to move. For simplicity, he believes it is worth looking at. President Dennison reminded the Board that the study of five years ago was on student fees only, not mandatory fees. He agreed it needs to be clear what fees should be outside tuition. Following discussion on the variations in fees on the different campuses, Chair Mercer indicated the Board needs to set guidelines on what they want from the campuses as soon as possible. Ms. Joehler noted that Dawson Community College had submitted their tuition matrix in the last couple days, and that the students at UM-Missoula voted to increase their recycle fee from $2 to $4.

Regent Mercer moved to recommend APPROVAL of fees as amended

Chair Mercer directed the Committee to begin a dialogue with the community colleges on whether they want to do their tuition and fees on a two-year cycle like the university system. President Karas indicated her Board would be interested. President Hetrick indicated they need to be sensitive to the Dakotas who are on a one-year cycle, as they now offer resident tuition to Montana students.

Regent Mercer moved to recommend to the Board ADOPTION of the Inventory and Validation of Fees and Tuition for all the campuses including the Community Colleges as amended

The motion CARRIED on 3-0 vote.

b. ITEM 127-134-R0505 - Construct New Parking Lot, East Broadway, The University of Montana-Missoula

c. ITEM 127-110-R0505 – FYE04 Negative Fund Balance Update; Montana University System Attachment

d. ITEM 127-125-R0505 - Summary of Internal Audit Findings - Task Force on Fees Attachment

Interim Associate Commissioner Joehler noted this audit was done at the recommendation of the Board to see how things were going following the review of fees by the Task Force. Regent Semmens noted they were not following those recommendations. Ms. Joehler indicated the audit revealed the recommendations were not well known, understood or followed. There were a variety of errors. She believes the way to bring the recommendations of the Task Force to fulfillment would be to direct the Commissioner’s staff to reactivate the task force to implement and answer the recommendations, and perhaps bring that to the Board next fall. It would need to be a system-wide effort. Regent Mercer stated that before trying to reactivate the task force, this issue should be a topic for the summer retreat. Regent Taylor said they set tuition and fees, but she wasn’t sure some fees weren’t actually tuition. Regent Semmens agreed, and indicated there should be a financial analysis with the internal audits, and they should be cyclical. He asked Commissioner Stearns, Pam Joehler and others to consider the best way to approach the issue. He emphasized that the tuition policy and fee policies need to be considered together. President Dennison noted he thought a review by the Commissioner would be fine, but to have another task force would be a waste because things remain the same. He believes the definitions are straightforward, easy to read and understand. Regent Semmens indicated this is a good starting point. Much in the recommendations shouldn’t be controversial, and the intent is not to change revenues, but to make the sources more uniform.

The Committee recommended development of a process to focus on the issue of fee policies in context of tuition and fees and broader issues, and Ms. Joehler will follow-up on specific items in the report.

e. ITEM 127-1007-R0505 – Certificates of Completion for 216-Unit Student Housing complex and network Wiring Project, Series G 2002 and Washington/Grizzly Stadium Expansion, Series H 2003, Facilities Improvement and Refunding Revenue Bonds; The University of Montana-Missoula Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5 Attachment 6 Attachment 7 Attachment 8 Attachment 9 Attachment 10

f. ITEM 127-1008-R0505 – Authorization to Construct New Native American studies Building; The University of Montana-Missoula Proposal

The Committee will recommend Item f. to the Board

g. IITEM 127-124-R0505 - Authorization for OCHE and University of Montana-Missoula to Plan the Financing and Construction of an Office Building to house OCHE and MGSLP

Ms. Joehler indicated this item was the result of 18 months of reviewing options. OCHE was ready to issue an RFP to build, and then had a discussion with Helena College of Technology Interim Dean Frazier to decide if through HB 540 this piece of property could best be used for OCHE needs because they could share services with the campus. Rod Sundsted thought it an excellent idea and spoke with Architecture and Engineering and approached this as a combined revenue bond. It appears to President Dennison, Dean Frazier and OCHE that this would be a very cost effective approach. President Dennison indicated they were quite excited about going forward with the planning, and it can work very well. He stated they need authorization to proceed, and also need to negotiate the fee. Further, they need to talk to A&E about using the existing arch to work on both lots to coordinate the parking, etc. Commissioner Stearns indicated it would be $6,000,000 for 28,000 sq. ft. Regent Semmens asked if there was a benefit to the College of Technology beside the rental payment making the debt payment. Dean Frazier said they talked about sharing IT, maintenance, and janitorial, and perhaps a day care center on the campus, as well as transportation and food services. Their thought was that two small areas could help each other.

The Committee will recommend Item g. to the Board

h. ITEM 127-2006-R0505 - Authorization for MSU-Bozeman to Execute an Office Building Lease for Grant Funded Programs; Montana State University-Bozeman Lease Agreement

The Committee will recommend Item h. to the Board

i. ITEM 127-2007-R0505 - Authorization to Negotiate a Utility Easement with the City of Bozeman for Underground Utilities along Fowler Avenue – Extended; Montana State University-Bozeman

The Committee will recommend Item i. to the Board

j. ITEM 127-127-R0505 – Student Health Insurance Program; Montana University System

Item j. was deferred to the September 2005 meeting

k. ITEM 126-106-R0305 – New Policy on Enrollment Reserves; Montana University System

There was discussion on the difficulty for some campuses to contribute to such a fund, and they requested the flexibility to do it as they are able. In a fund with such stringent restrictions, they could be in a position of not being able to pay their bills. There was also some doubt about the ability of campuses to build funds over five or six years.

Chair Semmens moved to AMEND the policy by adding unanticipated and unavoidable, which would cover utilities, but not staffing cost increases.

Regent Mercer believed it should be for any contingency, with an adequate reserve. He indicated the appropriate amount should be determined and put in the fund now. Susan Briggs said she thought this was more an option so the campuses could roll in termination funds, deferred maintenance, or another option. However, if it is a requirement, that will require revenue. Regent Mercer said he believes the contingency needs to be built into the budget because it’s as important as any other expenditure. Bob Duringer suggested the policy as written was more punitive than helpful. He asked if the financial officers could work on it to make it more useful.

Chair Semmens deferred the item to the September 2005 meeting for further work.

l. ITEM 127-123-R0505 – Proposed Revision of Policy 407 - Approval of University System Employee Equity Interest and/or Business Participation; Montana University System Attachment Form

Following a brief discussion, Regent Mercer encouraged the campuses to work with Regents Semmens and Barrett on revising the item before the September 2005 meeting. At that meeting, a full presentation of what is happening in research, and discoveries on the campuses will be provided.

Following a fifteen-minute break, the committee reconvened at 3:20 p.m.

Commissioner Stearns introduced Ms. Cecelia Foxley, a former Commissioner of Higher Education, and currently a consultant.

m. Demonstration by The University of Montana-Missoula of finance data warehouse program, and front-end reports.

Ms. Rosi Keller of The University of Montana-Missoula explained that the program they use for data reports was affordable and had plenty of power for them. It is strictly Banner with an extraction. The front end is an Access program. One is able to drill down to obtain data, create data sheets, and load to Excel. New data uploads every night. At present they only have finance data in the system, and most of payroll. After HR is added the student data will be input. Ray Ford indicated the program was accessed through the web, but not through a browser, and it requires special software on each computer for security. Regent Mercer asked why there was no single warehouse, and no uniform approach in the system. Laurie Neils indicated all the needs were considered when they started the first stage of the system warehouse. The problem was that OCHE had no technical expertise to lead the campuses to a system. The campuses developed the programs to fit their needs. OCHE waited until it became cost effective to join. Although the systems are different between campuses, it does not preclude the Montana University System establishing a warehouse. Ms. Keller indicated the key was getting the data and putting it in the system warehouse. It is all Banner. Regent Mercer asked if the reports would look the same. Ms. Keller replied reports could be designed to suit the needs of the Board. Ray Ford stated that Regent Mercer was asking the right questions. They spent about $30,000, which should be interpreted as a small prototyping cost towards an expanded system. The goal should be organic and system-wide. After getting a feeling for what was useful, their program succeeded beyond their dreams. Ms. Jo Ansel provided a handout on the way their system works at Montana State University-Bozeman. Regent Semmens asked if the two sides of the system were working together for best practices. Ms. Ansel indicated they had discussed cross collaboration, but have not done it. Regent Mercer said there is a difference between the Commissioner having access to two systems, and all using one system. It would look the same everywhere, and would use the same software. He stated he hoped that was the road they would follow. Broader discussion was deferred to the full Board meeting.

n. ITEM 127-121-R0505 – The Board of Regents directs the Commissioner of Higher Education to proceed toward a University System data warehouse, which includes finance, human resources, student, and financial aid components, and provides executive and management level standard report capabilities. The Board of Regents further directs the campus Presidents to work with the Commissioner to provide the resources, both personnel and financial, that are required to successfully implement the Regents Data Warehouse Information and Report System. The Commissioner is further directed to give a formal report to the Board at each meeting regarding the progress of this effort. Attachment

The Committee adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

Return to Top

DRAFT Minutes

The Academic & Student Affairs Committee

Regent Lynn Hamilton, chair of the Academic & Student Affairs Committee, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. and introduced the other voting members of the committee, Regents French and Barrett. Regent Foster, the fourth member of the committee, joined the group later in the day.

Regent Hamilton noted that this is an open meeting, invited everyone to join the Committee at the table, and asked everyone to feel free to make comments as the agenda proceeds. There is a time at the end of the meeting for public comment on non-agenda items, she said.

Review and Adoption of Agenda.

Regent Barrett moved to adopt the agenda. Motion carried.

Approval of Minutes.

A. From the March 16, 2005 meeting of the Committee.

Regent French moved to approve the minutes. Motion carried.

Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Chief Academic Officers.

A. Action: ITEM 126-2851-R0305 - Approval to Establish a Certificate in Creative Arts Enterprise; Montana State University-Great Falls, College of Technology Cover Summary Proposal Budget

Vern Pedersen gave background on this item, a follow-up to a highly successful workforce development pilot program funded by OCHE. The program includes a business component, a mentoring element and a Montana Heritage strand. Regent Hamilton complimented MSU-GF on their marketing efforts for this program, which is bringing recognition to Central Montana. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

B. Action: ITEM 126-301-R0305: A.A.S. degree in Surgical Technology, Flathead Valley Community College. Request Summary Proposal Budget Attachment

This program was initially approved for a two-year period in response to community needs. Kathy Hughes said that the program has now gone through the national accreditation process. The associate degree, rather than the certificate, is now the preferred norm, so that change was made in this proposal. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

C. Action: ITEM 126-302-R0305: Certificate in Medical Coding, Flathead Valley Community College. Request Summary Proposal

This program was also originally approved on the “fast track” for a two-year period. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

D. Action: ITEM 126-201-R0305: Permission to change the A.A.S. degree in Chemical Dependency Counseling to an A.A. degree in Chemical Dependency Counseling, Dawson Community College. Request Summary Proposal Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Attachment 5

This request is slightly unusual because AA and AS degrees usually don’t carry a designation unless required for accreditation or by statute. The 2003 legislature raised the standards for chemical dependency counseling, as part of a move toward the national standard of a baccalaureate degree. The designation is now required by statute, and Dawson Community College’s proposal has been reviewed and approved by the Two-Year Committee. Regent Hamilton asked if this degree will transfer or articulate into baccalaureate programs; Dawson plans to work on this in the future. Regent Barrett moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

E. Action: ITEM 127-108-R0505 – Revise Policy 303.3 – Program Review; Montana University System Attachment

This revision represents a significant change, giving responsibility for the review process to the campuses and spreading individual program review over a seven-year period, to coincide with accreditation review cycles. All programs that are part of the degree inventory, including options and certificates, are to be included in the review process. The Chief Academic Officers worked on this policy revision for many months and unanimously support it. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

F. Action: ITEM 127-109-R0505 – Academic Program Planning; Montana University System Attachment

This new policy would require campuses to keep the Board of Regents informed regarding their academic program plans over a three year period, and to identify the programs they expect to bring to the Board in the next year. The intent is to encourage collaboration between campuses, and to allow the Regents to plan on a system-wide and long-term basis. The policy also includes a compliance incentive. Regent Barrett supports the compliance incentive, and noted that the academic program planning process will synchronize nicely with the new program review process after the first few years. Regent French wondered whether collaboration would be the responsibility of the Regents, OCHE or the campuses. Regent Hamilton said that this is best done at the campus level, but campuses should be aware that the Board will be paying attention. Regent Barrett moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

Discussion Items.

A. Regent Mercer’s request for information on “fast track programs” in the Montana University System.

Information regarding early degree completion was assembled at the request of Regent Mercer. Roger noted that the “time to degree” programs have not been very successful, except on the UM-Missoula campus. Students often use the time to degree programs, such as “Four Bear”, to gain entry into high demand classes in the first year or two, only to drop out of the program before completing their degree. Regent French raised a question regarding dual enrollment limitations, and she will discuss this further with Arlene Parisot so that Arlene can take it to the Dual Enrollment Task Force of the P-20 Committee.

Announcements.

A. Level I memorandum.

MSU-Billings asked to remove Item 127-2702+R0505 from the Level I approvals.

Roger pointed out that the Board of Nursing formally authorized the joint Board of Nursing/Board of Regents review and approval process for nursing program changes at its April meeting. The Regents approved the new process at their May 2004 meeting.

Regent Hamilton asked if the large number of programs MSU-Northern put on moratorium were reviewed using the old or the new program review process. Cheri Jimeno said they used the old process, but that the result would be the same under the new one.

Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Topics of Concern to Both Academic & STUDENT Affairs Officers.

A. Action: ITEM 126-105-R0305: Minimum Course Grades. Attachment

Roger explained the three options for a minimum course grade policy that were included in the Board packet. He clarified that this policy will apply to all students, not just transfer students. Although including all students exceeds the recommendation of the transfer audit, creating separate categories of students for grading purposes was deemed inappropriate. Inherent in all of the policies is recognition that the entire system will go to plus/minus grading.

During the discussion regarding plus/minus grading it was noted that some professors will elect not to use plus/minus grades. Although this may seem unfair to students, faculty must be free to set their own standards and grade as they choose. UM-Missoula and MSU-Bozeman currently use plus/minus grading, but round differently. This results in different GPAs for students receiving identical grades on the two campuses, illuminating the need for a system-wide numerical standard for each grade. The numerical standard will not affect an instructor’s ability to structure grades for individual courses, but relates only to how the letter grade is reflected numerically on the transcript.

Dave Dooley stated that the ability of individual programs to establish higher minimum grade standards (included in some versions of the policy) is vital, especially in terms of accreditation. He strongly urged including optional higher standards in the final policy, while recognizing the importance of ensuring that students are aware of those higher standards if they have been adopted.

Discussion turned to the value of the “D” grade—if it should be acceptable as a minimum for various types of coursework, the potential for grade inflation if the C- becomes the minimum standard, whether or not students who receive a D are prepared for the next level of coursework in a series, and if two-year programs should have a different standard to accommodate the circumstances of non-traditional students. Regent Hamilton advocated for setting meaningful standards while providing the support systems students need to succeed (e.g. tutoring, childcare). It was also noted that this policy does not abrogate faculty’s ability to make discretionary decisions allowing individual students to demonstrate competency in ways other than grade performance. Roger clarified that faculty may waive or substitute a course normally required for a degree, but any course used to fulfill graduation requirements must meet the minimum grade standard. A course that is not used to complete a degree requirement does not have to meet the standard.

Roger distributed a fourth alternative of the policy, which combines some of the features of the other proposed policies. Regent Barrett asked for discussion regarding changing 1 (c) from a minimum of C- to a D-, since programs would be free to set a higher standard in this version of the policy. Some thought this would give more flexibility in enabling students to move through a program. Others said it would make the transfer situation even worse, because students would be unprepared to meet the higher standards that many programs would choose to set. Regent Barrett moved to recommend alternative four to the full Board, including a system-wide standard for grades in part three. Motion carried.

Implementation of the minimum grade policy is proposed for Fall 2005, and will apply only to new or readmitted students, not to continuing students. However, plus/minus grading will begin in the Fall for all students. It was recognized that existing students may see a change in their GPA when the uniform numerical standard is set due to the current rounding variations between the Missoula and Bozeman campuses. No Banner problems are foreseen in implementing plus/minus grading. Campuses will be asked to notify students of the minimum grade policy through catalog inserts and information on their websites. Regent Barrett moved to recommend implementation in Fall 2005. Motion carried.

B. Action: ITEM 127-102-R0505: Policy 301.10, Montana University System General Education Core Attachment

There was concern regarding the language in the Block Transfer Procedure (procedure one). It will be modified to refer to only lower level courses. Regent Hamilton said the other question regarding block transfer relates to A.A.S. degrees, but this policy does not apply to A.A.S. degrees. Regent Barrett moved to forward this item as amended to the full Board. Motion carried.

Celia Winkler, chair of the UM-Missoula Faculty Senate, initiated a discussion of the composition of the General Education Council (procedure six). She and Warren Jones, chair of the MSU-Bozeman Faculty Senate, urged revision of the policy to require faculty senate representation from each campus on the General Education Council. Roger pointed out that the General Education Council will oversee the MUS Core, which belongs to the system, not to the campuses. He also cautioned against the Regents forfeiting the prerogative to determine membership of a standing committee of the Regents. Following additional discussion, the motion carried again as previously amended.

C. Action: ITEM 127-103-R0505 – Policy 301.12 - Undergraduate Degree Requirements; Associate Degrees and Certificates of Applied Science Attachment

Roger expressed concern that this policy revision, while clarifying policy on two-year degrees, doesn’t satisfy all of the expectations of the performance audit. Credit totals, general education requirements and transferability of coursework are issues yet to be addressed. The Two-Year Education Committee will assume responsibility for continued work on those issues. Regent Barrett, recognizing this as an initial step, moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

E. Action: ITEM 127-114-R0505 – BAS Degrees; Montana University System Attachment

Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

F. Action: ITEM 127-104-R0505 – Transfer of cumulative GPA; Montana University System Attachment

There were significant and disparate opinions regarding this policy, and so two versions were presented in the Board packet. One version requires that all students’ transcripts show a cumulative GPA, and the other allows each student to decide if they want it to appear on their transcript. Regent French said that a majority of students would be negatively impacted by the “all or none” option, so the students would not support it. Discussion included the limitations of the Banner system in implementing the choice option; and the differences in how campuses use the cumulative GPA to make admission decisions, award scholarships and determine graduation honors. Regent Barrett asked if this issue was important enough to students to make system-wide changes. Allen Yarnell replied that statistically it’s not a problem for a significant number of students. Regent Barrett moved to recommend that the Board decline to adopt a policy regarding the overall GPA. Motion carried. The Committee also recommended establishing a workgroup to develop a standardized format for recording transfer classes, credits and grades; and to standardize policies and procedures relating to use of the cumulative GPA in making admission and scholarship decisions.

G. Action: ITEM 127-105-R0505 – LPN Nursing Programs; Montana University System Attachment

Roger prepared an extensive narrative to accompany this item, trying to include all of the benefits and limitations of the proposal. The proposal has the endorsement of all of the LPN programs, some albeit reluctantly. The workgroup that developed the proposal included LPN and RN program managers with input from Board of Nursing members. The Board of Nursing is cautiously supportive of the plan, but will need to see actual program proposals before giving final approval.

This proposal accomplishes the objectives identified by the Board and the transfer audit to standardize the type of credential and number of credits, and to develop common pre-nursing and nursing courses. Susan Patton asked if the new curriculum will require master-prepared faculty, and Roger replied that the Board of Nursing will be looking at those requirements.

Regent Barrett was impressed with the buy-in from such a wide range of constituencies, and moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

H. Action: ITEM 127-107-R0505 – Single Admissions File; Montana University System Attachment

This policy is limited to current students of the MUS who wish to transfer or to take classes at more than one campus in the same semester. New students must still create a separate application for every campus to which they apply for admission. Suggestions were made for changes to the Request for Transmittal form. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

I. Action: ITEM 127-112-R0505 – Common appeal process for transfer evaluations; Office Commissioner of Higher Education Attachment

This formalizes the process currently used by many campuses, and has been endorsed by the Chief Academic Officers. Regent Barrett moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

J. Action: ITEM 127-115-R0505 – Policy 301.5.1- Amendment to System of Controls; Montana University System Attachment

OCHE staff attorney Cathy Swift worked with Roger to address the concerns the Regents had with the policy adopted in March. It expands the policy to include transfer students from outside the MUS, but requires them to provide more information to assist in making transfer of credit decisions. Section four, compliance, excludes automatic entitlement if deadlines are not met, and was added on the advice of Ms. Swift. An editorial change was suggested in the first sentence. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

K. Action: ITEM 127-113-R0505 – Policy 301.1 - Admission requirements; in-state undergraduates Adjustment of SAT Scores; Montana University System Attachment

After consultation with campus representatives, it was decided that a proportional shift was the best way to accommodate the new SAT scoring. SAT scores are just one of several alternatives that satisfy admission requirements to the four-year campuses. Regent Barrett moved to forward this item to the full Board. Motion carried.

L. Action: ITEM 127-128-R0505 – Math Proficiencies; Montana University System

This math proficiency statement was developed by math faculty from around the state. Dave Dooley requested a change to the language in item one to reflect the MSU-Bozeman path to demonstrating proficiency. The change will be prepared for presentation at the full Board meeting. Copies of a color-coded chart were distributed showing how the math courses in two-year programs will fulfill the math proficiency requirement, and the chart will soon be available on the web.

Discussion turned to use of the exemption pool. Roger clarified that there are two different exemption pools. Campuses can make exemptions to the college prep requirements (not to exceed 5%), and there is also a 15% exemption pool for students with special talents, minorities and others who demonstrate special needs. The Student Affairs Officers are in favor of using the 15% pool to admit students that don’t meet the math proficiency standard, while the Math Proficiency Committee opposes using the exemptions in this way. The Math Proficiency Committee also advocated strongly for a minimum grade of C, not C-, to demonstrate proficiency. Regent Foster asked about the connection between the proficiency standard and the degree a student might be pursuing (e.g., art)—just how difficult is the math standard? Jan Clinard said that the threshold would be a course below “Math for Liberal Arts.” Regent Hamilton asked that a report on the success of students admitted under the exemption pool be prepared in the future. She also commented that admission policies should be systematically reviewed to eliminate obsolete language and to determine their effectiveness. Regent French moved to forward this item to the full Board with the addition of new language to include the MSU-Bozeman path to proficiency, and including the statement allowing use of the 15% exemption pool for students who do not meet the math proficiency standard. Motion carried.

M. Discussion of a preliminary assessment plan for the new Transfer Audit policies.

Jim Rimpau said that once the transfer policies are adopted by the Board, his group will be able to see the policies as an entire package and develop an integrated assessment proposal for the September meeting.

Portion of the Meeting Devoted to Chief Student Affairs Officers.

A. Discussion Items:

1. Follow-up on the priority security issues

The Student Affairs Officers on each campus prioritized their top three security needs and identified those that are currently unfunded. Several campuses provided additional information for the needs and cost analysis. UM-Helena hopes that their priority items one and three will be included in new building funds. Item two was originally in their budget request for this year, but was eventually removed. MSU-Northern will need additional funding for item one, residence hall sprinklers. MSU-Great Falls will try to incorporate their unfunded projects into their operating budget. MSU-Bozeman will be able to fund item two, higher police salaries, if enrollment is higher than anticipated. Item three, AED defibrillator equipment, is still being discussed by an MSU-Bozeman committee and no consensus has been reached yet on the need for such equipment at several campus locations. The Budget Committee of the Board of Regents will now be asked to look at the unfunded items, with the hope of making them a high priority in the long-range building plans.

Other business.

Dean John Cech welcomed everyone to the MSU-Billings COT and issued an invitation to a reception beginning at 5:30.

Jan Clinard offered her appreciation to all of the campuses that hosted the recent writing proficiency tests. She has the results for those who are interested.

Public Comment.

There was no public comment.

Close: Review assignments.

There will be new language for four of the items to be brought to the full Board on Thursday.

The meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.

Submitted by Cathy Doyle

Return to Top

Staff and Compensation Committee

Committee Members Present: Chairman John Mercer, Regent Mark Semmens, and Regent Steve Barrett

Also Present: Commissioner Sheila Stearns, OCHE Staff Member Kathy Crego

The committee convened at approximately 5:10 p.m.

1. Minutes of the January 19, 2005, meeting were unanimously approved.

2. The attached summary was distributed to the committee, explaining the issues resulting in the need for the consideration of new and revised salary policies (i.e. Compensation Philosophy (item 2.a. on committee agenda); Policy on Salary Increases – ITEM 126-109-R0305; Criteria for Board of Regents Contract – ITEM 126-108-R0305 (policy 711.2); and Employment Instruments; Professional and Administrative Employees – ITEM 127-126-R0505 (Policy 711.1).

Based on feedback from campuses, MSU-Bozeman is the only campus opposed to adoption of the policies at this time.

President Gamble stated his continuing dissatisfaction with the proposed policies; however, he did acknowledge that many of the campus’ concerns were addressed in various revisions of the proposed policies. President Gamble also indicated that Committee members received copies of Bozeman’s concerns summarized by Leslie Taylor, Bozeman legal counsel.

Five MSU-Bozeman employees offered testimony indicating their concerns with the proposed policies. Primary focus was on proposed revisions to current policy 711.2. All employees stated their concern with adverse impact on recruitment and retention if positions currently on Regents Contract become classified positions when vacated. Campus representatives also discussed the campus culture relative to perceptions that employees on Regents Contracts are “professional” employees as opposed to employees who are classified staff members.

There is general consistency among all other campuses relative to the types of employees issued Regents Contracts. Most other campuses have a small number of positions that would be impacted by the proposed revisions to policy 711.2; however MSU-Bozeman has an estimated 87 positions that could be impacted when the positions become vacant.

In order to allow time for further discussion, the committee members agreed to recommend to the Board that action on the referenced items be delayed until the September 2005 Board meeting. At the request of Chairman Mercer, Kathy Crego agreed to continue her involvement in addressing the policy issues until the policies are approved by the Board.

3. The adoption of a policy to permanently establish a methodology by which the salaries of the Commissioner, Presidents, other campus Chief Executive Officers, and possibly Executive Officers was discussed. The provisions of 2-16-405, M.C.A. were considered as an option. This statute establishes the formula by which the Governor’s salary is determined, as well as the salaries of other elected officials of the executive branch of state government.

Chairman Mercer proposed that this method be considered to determine the appropriate salary of the two Presidents. The Commissioner’s salary would then be set at 5 percent above the presidents’; chancellors set at 85 percent of the presidents’; and deans of the Great Falls and Helena Colleges of Technology set at 75 percent. Chairman Mercer further proposed that such increases become effective July 1, 2006.

This approach to setting the salaries of senior administrators would present a permanent solution to the periodic discussion of appropriate salary levels, and would provide a sound, logical basis for the public to understand why and how such salary levels are established.

System and campus administrators were asked by the committee to consider the concept; and the committee and Board will consider approval of this approach at the September 2005 Board meeting.

4. Format and reportable items on the Consent Agenda Staff Items were discussed in an attempt to: a) improve the usefulness of the report for the Regents; b) decrease the burden on campuses relative to the current format; and c) include items that are both statutorily required for Regents’ approval and other items of importance.

Representatives from three campuses (Missoula, Bozeman, and Billings) will help develop an improved report. The proposed report format will be used at the September 2005 Board meeting.

5. The Commissioner offered a proposal to develop a 5-year strategic plan for the Montana University System – 5-year strategic plan - ITEM 127-122-R0505 - Approval of Proposal to develop a 5-year strategic plan for the Montana University System. Committee members agreed with the importance of developing a five-year strategic plan

Guidance offered by committee members and President Dennison included:

· Maintaining focus on a strategic plan, rather than a list of objectives or attempts to resolve specific problems;

· Using models available from SHEEO or other sources;

· Including presidents and other key stakeholders in the process; however, not to include too many individuals that will result in a loss of focus;

· Ensuring the process is relevant and results in a useable end product; and utilizing time involved effectively.

Commissioner Stearns proposed a timeline:

· Completion of a preliminary product, with involvement of relevant individuals, prior to July 2005 Board retreat;

· Board participates in process in July 2005;

· Strategic plan completed January 2006 Board retreat, with approach at March 2006 Board meeting.

The committee endorsed the proposed process and timelines.

6. OCHE Operational Priority Issues - ITEM 127-133-RO505 – Board of Regents/Office Commissioner of Higher Education Operational Priority Issues Details presented by Commissioner Stearns. The Commissioner and senior OCHE staff identified priority operational staffing needs as specified in referenced item. These priorities follow the priority need for continuation of the Associate Commissioner for Economic Development and Outreach and the associated administrative associate position.

Funding is unavailable for all proposed priorities. Committee members endorsed the priorities and recommend that the Board approve authorization for the Commissioner to proceed with the priorities within current budget availability. The issue will be revisited after the State Legislature convenes in December to determine if additional budget flexibility is available at that time. Additionally, Vice President Duringer from UM-Missoula, offered to assist the Commissioner’s staff in reviewing better investment alternatives that may result in increased budget flexibility.

7. Recommendation on laptops for the Regents - Regent Barrett encouraged and the committee members agreed to recommend to the Board approval of the purchase of laptop computers for all Regents. The laptops will be assigned to Regents during their term of service. One-time-only money is available during the current fiscal year for the purchases. The purchase is intended to improve the efficiency of Regents’ access to Board information.

8. Kathy Crego gave an updat