EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES

Present: Alexander, Beck, Bolin, Fech, Flowers, Hoffman, Moeller, Peterson, Rapkin, Shea, Stock

Absent: Alloway, Scholz

Date: Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Location: Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace

Note: These are not verbatim minutes. They are a summary of the discussions at the Executive Committee meeting as corrected by those participating.

______________________________________________________________________

1.0 Call to Order

Beck called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m.

2.0 Vice Chancellor Jackson/Assistant Vice Chancellor Currin

2.1 Child Care

Beck stated that the Senate has been hearing concerns about the length of time it is taking to create the child care facility, the possible costs for using it, and some faculty members originally involved with the committee feel they are no longer included in the discussions.

VC Jackson stated that last fall a request for proposals was issued. She stated that a committee of faculty, staff, and students reviewed the proposals and made recommendations to the administration before the winter break. She pointed out that the campus was invited to meet both vendors and provide feedback to the committee.

VC Jackson stated that Assistant VC Currin is currently spearheading the process of negotiating with one of the vendors. She noted that the process is taking longer than anticipated but this is, in part due to the University wanting more information from the vendor in order to ensure that we have a more workable solution for child care. She pointed out that there are challenges in what we are trying to do and what we can afford.

VC Jackson reported that we are beginning the process of planning the renovation of the north side of the Whittier building. She stated that there is a total of 19,000 square feet but we will use about 75% of this space. Included will be a small parking lot and an outside area for a playground. She stated that hopefully the facility will open in summer 2007.

VC Jackson stated that the committee working on the child care developed a list of criteria for the center including a requirement to have the center eligible for accreditation. She noted that centers are not automatically given accreditation when they open and usually have to apply after 12-18 months.

VC Jackson stated that one of the challenges is in having some kind of flexible schedule for day care which is part of the negotiations. She pointed out that the University is trying to balance out flexibility of hours with the cost. She noted that the current center is open 10 ½ hours a day, from 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. She stated that the goal would be to have the center open later in the evenings, but is financially challenging to do so. She pointed out that most people will use the center for just 9 hours but funding would have to cover 12 or more hours of operation.

VC Jackson stated that negotiations include trying to develop a tiered approach for the cost of using the program. She noted that this sliding scale would be based on family salary. She stated that the center will expand from 100 children to 148 which will give some flexibility with the costs.

VC Jackson stated that there have been some issues regarding drop-in day care. She noted that this would be used for people who need child care on an emergency basis only. She stated that the University and the vendor are trying to find a balance to meet this need while providing a high quality program.

VC Jackson reported that Assistant VC Currin has communicated with the child care committee to let them know negotiations are taking place. She pointed out that she hopes that the negotiations will be finished in four weeks.

Assistant VC Currin stated that one issue is with the Title XX program which helps support low income students and employees. He stated that there are currently 20 people participating in the program and he noted that the preference is to keep these 20 program slots. He stated that with the Title XX program the University is reimbursed from the state for the child care but at a much lower rate than what people pay. He pointed out that this low payment needs to be subsidized by other users and this can have an effect on rates.

Beck asked how the rates are being affected by the University providing the actual facility. VC Jackson noted that this was one of the first things discussed with the provider. She pointed out that having an accredited program and provider has some costs and some of these costs involve getting good people to work at the facility. She noted that the University wants a company who has a limited staff turnover rate. She stated that the current child care program has many student workers and UNL has been discussing with the provider the possibility of continuing to use the students.

Peterson asked how the renovation of the Whittier building is being paid for. VC Jackson stated that it is being paid through a gift to the University.

Hoffman stated that he saw figures on the cost of renovating the building. He asked if the scenario of building a new building was considered. VC Jackson stated that it was considered. She noted that there were challenges with this. She stated that several different sites on campus were considered but none of them worked due to a variety of reasons. She pointed out that in order for the facility to be accredited it must have parking and a playground. She noted that the Whittier building is partially gutted. Peterson asked if there is an asbestos problem with the building. VC Jackson stated that asbestos was removed earlier.

Moeller stated that one of the concerns that arose in the Chancellor’s Commission on the Status of Women is that students felt strongly that they will be priced out of using the facility. She noted that staff members also have the same concern and some are very happy with the staff that is already in place with child care. She stated that the students and staff members feel that the faculty will be the only ones who can afford the child care services. VC Jackson acknowledged these concerns and stated that UNL is trying to be sensitive by providing some kind of limited version of a sliding scale fee. She noted that we are moving in the direction we are going because recruiting and retaining faculty members is a primary focus of the campus. She pointed out that this is not a faculty/staff issue but an issue for all lower paid employees who want to use child care. Moeller noted that some faculty members want a high level of education at the center because they feel it is not available in Lincoln. She pointed out that the University is trying to satisfy three different populations who want child care.

VC Jackson stated that we are trying to have a child care center that will take in more infants. She noted that infants require the most expensive care and that there is a very limited number of child care facilities in Lincoln that accept infants.

Assistant VC Currin stated that we will probably have child care center that will appeal to most people. He noted that both providers have indicated that they would like to have the existing staff come over to work for them so there is little disruption for the customers. He stated that he checked with universities across the company that use these providers and they verified that the companies did use those people already working in the existing child care program. He pointed out that many of the teachers in UNL’s current child care program have college degrees.

Hoffman asked what the typical costs are for child care in Lincoln. Assistant VC Currin stated that rates can run from $155 - $200 for infants per week and $135 for toddlers. He stated that the child care program will focus on children from 6 weeks to 5 years of age and UNL’s RFP provided for after school care for children up to age 12. He noted that it is not anticipated that there will be much need for after school care because there is a lot going on in Lincoln already in this area.

Alexander stated that it is not clear what the level of quality will be for the program. VC Jackson stated that it will be a quality program that is eligible for accreditation. She noted that several people, including Dean Kostelnik, Michelle Rupiper, Director of UNL’s Ruth Staples Child Care Center, and Professor Buck, evaluated the curriculum offered by the two companies and provided excellent input into the evaluation of the two providers.

2.2 Faculty Access to Classrooms on the Weekends

Beck stated that the Committee met with Chief Yardley to discuss the problem and learned that access to building and rooms is a complex issue. Moeller noted that the Chancellor indicated in the meeting last week that the University is working to alleviate the problems. Moeller stated that the Chancellor explained that the classrooms are not to be opened by the police and that eventually most of the campus will be controlled by card access.

VC Jackson noted that general purpose classrooms, of which there are about 167 on campus, are controlled through Registration and Records and they recently established a process where an instructor can obtain a key to a classroom if it is used during off hours. She stated that Dr. Hawkey, Director of Registration and Records, will notify the police to open the external doors of the building and then it is the responsibility of the instructor to open the classroom door.

VC Jackson reported that there are departmental classrooms that are sometimes used for other events. She noted that it is the department’s responsibility to send a request to the police to have them open the exterior doors but the room will need to be opened by the department.

VC Jackson stated that the campus is moving to card access on exterior doors. She noted that this is being done with new or renovated buildings. She pointed out that it is very expensive to put the card access system into place. The first door on a building costs at least $5000 providing that the door itself does not have to be replaced. Additional doors are a bit cheaper but are still expensive. She noted that buildings with high sensitivity for security purposes are having the card access system installed first.

VC Jackson stated that after the recent problem of 400 students being locked out of a classroom. She pointed out that there are two separate issues of security and access. She noted that some doors are still being propped open with rocks making buildings more accessible, but unsecure. She noted that most classrooms have equipment installed in them and the campus has had equipment stolen.

Peterson noted that Professor Rupnow who was the instructor locked out of the classroom is pleased that there has been acknowledgement about the problem and that the officer involved in the incident sent a letter of apology for the way he acted. Peterson noted that the Committee had no idea how complex an issue this is until they spoke with Chief Yardley. VC Jackson stated that it is a problem and there is not enough staff to deal with all of the requests made to open classrooms. She noted that a better process is needed to deal with the issue.

Moeller asked if the residence halls have card access. VC Jackson stated that they do and when students move out the doors are re-keyed. Peterson noted that the card access to Filley Hall works well.

Hoffman asked how long it will take before all buildings have card access. VC Jackson stated that it will take some time because it can only be done when funds are available.

2.3 Pepsi Fund

Beck asked for clarification on how the fund works. VC Jackson stated that the fund was established in 1997 when UNL signed pouring rights with Pepsi. She noted that $11 million was set aside in a quasi endowment fund. She pointed out that we are one of the very few universities who received such a lucrative contract but she noted that the fund is not generating as much in interest as it previously did.

VC Jackson stated that two committees were formed to govern the use of the funds, the Pepsi Quasi-Endowment Committee which allocates the net income and/or principal of the fund upon approval of the Chancellor, and the Pepsi-Quasi Endowment Advisory Committee recommends the amount of money that can be spent by the Pepsi Quasi-Endowment Committee.

VC Jackson reported that the money is currently being used to support the Pepsi scholarships, the Pepsi UCARE program and some student events. She noted that the earned interest has not been enough in the last few years to be able to fund other new programs.

VC Jackson reported that the Advisory Committee met last Friday and recommended that an additional $200,000 be set aside for one time use of funds. She pointed out that there are limitations per the quasi-endowment agreement on what the money can be used for. She stated that the opportunity to solicit these funds will be made but the final recommendations will be approved by the Chancellor.

Peterson asked how the Pepsi UCARE program is doing. VC Jackson stated that it has been doing well and that it has garnered a lot of support. She noted that it has been a huge recruiting tool for the University and recently the program was augmented with additional funds. Moeller pointed out that the Pepsi UCARE program is used as a guideline for measuring the undergraduate experience.

Beck asked when the agreement is up for renewal. VC Jackson stated that it will not be until 2009. She stated that the campus could extend the contract, but, the campus will probably go out for other bids. She noted that pouring rights at other universities are being studied to see what they are being offered.

Alexander asked what Pepsi earns from the contract. VC Jackson stated that the University is not privy to that information. She noted that some vending machines on campus can now accept the NCard and she believes this has helped with sales.

3.0 Executive Associate Dean Weissinger

3.1 Proposed Changes to Graduate Remission Programs

Weissinger reported that graduate applications are up by 17% overall and that we have 820 more applications now than at the same time last year. She noted that applications from graduate international students are up 43%. She pointed out that the National Council of Graduate Schools recently issued a report which stated that nationally, graduate applications were up by 11%. Hoffman asked what countries the graduate applications are coming from. Weissinger stated that primarily from India and China. She stated that we are up about 27% in doctoral applications, 25% in masters and 6% in domestic applications.

Weissinger stated that the only area we are down in is in the non-degree seeking applications. She stated that there are currently about 1300 of these graduate students on campus. She pointed out that we are down about 500 of these students from previous years.

Weissinger reported that she believes that some of the reasons for the application increase are due to the work being done in departments to recruit students and the work being done by Michelle Howell, Director of Graduate Recruitment, and her staff in Graduate Studies.

Weissinger stated that about a year ago she, Mike Zeleny, Greg Gunderson, and Mark Chauche were asked to look at remission costs at the graduate level because the campus realized that tuition income was declining while remission costs were increasing. She noted that just cutting remissions is not a simple thing to do, and that the best focus is on increasing net tuition revenue.

Weissinger stated that the committee put together several proposals that addressed net graduate tuition. These were shown to several Deans and chairs and they had concerns about the proposals even after they were revised. She stated that eventually the Senior Administrative Team looked at the proposals and the Chancellor made some preliminary decisions that are designed to increase tuition revenue.

Weissinger stated the Edgren Tuition Fellowships were created which exempted non-resident graduate students, of U.S. citizenry, from paying the full graduate tuition rate. She noted that this program attracts graduate students that are not funded through assistantships. Peterson asked if there is a limit per department that can be given. Weissinger stated that departments can give up to 15 of these scholarships but this is a resource that needs to be managed carefully. Weissinger pointed out that over a period of time the savings could amount to $1000’s for these graduate students but would also mean increased tuition for UNL. Moeller asked when the program was started. Weissinger stated that it started in January 2006. Hoffman asked if the fellowship is for only one year. Weissinger stated that it stays with the student if they remain in their UNL graduate program. She pointed out that the Edgren Fellowships is a good gateway for graduate students because it can often lead into a full assistantship. Hoffman asked if an out of state undergraduate student entering a graduate program can still get the Edgren Fellowship. Weissinger stated that the student must qualify for non-resident tuition.

Weissinger stated that the policy has been that all graduate assistantships pay tuition at the resident rate. She noted that for state funded assistantships the tuition is a cost to the university’s budget but for external assistantships the external source actually pays the resident tuition. She stated that because of the complexities between the UNL accounting system and the registration system the external funds were never charged for summer tuition for these graduate students. She noted that the differences in the two systems will be worked out so the external funds will be charged for the summer tuition. She stated that she understands this puts an additional burden on the principal investigators but she believes it is only fair that the grants should cover the summer tuition.

Moeller noted that she has a grant which is paying two graduate assistants. She asked if their tuition is being paid from the grant. Weissiner stated that this is correct. Flowers noted that faculty members need to receive communication that they need to include the amount of the summer tuition in their requests for grants. Weissinger stated that this new policy will only affect new grants, not existing ones.

Beck asked how many credit hours a graduate student needs to take in the summer. Weissinger stated that they must take at least one credit hour in the summer session that they are appointed in. She noted that she had long discussions with the Agriculture Research Division advisory group about this. She pointed out that the tuition will typically not be much money - $199.50 per graduate credit hour.

Flowers asked if the state funded assistantships will change. Weissinger stated that they will not for 2006-07. She pointed out that faculty members have always thought of tuition remission as funny money. She noted that they would create a graduate assistantship without thinking about the tuition remission costs that are associated with this position. She stated the tuition costs are real and amount to approximately $13 million in remission for UNL graduate level courses.

Alexander stated that he thought the graduate remission was included in the current 26% charged for research assistantships. Weissinger stated that the rate currently is 32% of the stipend amount for external funding and the percent will need to be higher when the summer tuition is included in the grant request.

Weissinger stated that some proposals have been created relating to the graduate assistant tuition remission with an eye toward reducing the $13 million. She noted that the Chancellor has agreed not to change graduate assistantships remission for 2006-07, but wants more proposals to explore. She stated that she will work with Greg Gunderson, some Deans, and some chairs to see if better proposals can be created. She agreed that the committee could have a Senate representative on it.

Weissinger pointed out that currently departments do not know how much tuition remission money is spent each year. She stated that she believes departments and colleges should be given a graduate remission budget that they will need to monitor. She noted that creating a new graduate assistantship position will need to be reported just as a new employee position needs to be reported. She stated that she hopes that departments can increase the number of tuition paying graduate students to increase tuition revenie, but she suspects that some proposals will have to be made to reduce the graduate remissions.

Flowers noted that his department has benefited a lot from the graduate fellowships that we have, particularly the minority fellowships. He stated that he noticed the Larson fellowships have been cut back significantly as well as some other fellowships. He asked what happened to these. Weissinger stated that during the time when graduate application numbers were down reserve funds were made available to help bring in more and better graduate students. She noted that the amount of the fellowships is now down to more normal levels. She reported that Vice Chancellor Paul has made a strong proposal for a new major fellowship program similar to the size of the Othmer fund and she is hoping that the University Foundation will work on this. She suggested that faculty members should maximize the use of fellowship money that is available at the department and college levels.

Rapkin stated that the discussion so far is largely taking place like UNL is a closed economy but it is actually competing with other universities. He stated that weakening what we now offer will make it more difficult to recruit quality graduate students. He noted that we are already being out priced by other schools. He pointed out that many of the teaching assistants bear a larger burden of the teaching responsibilities on campus. Weissinger agreed and stated that these are the two arguments that she has repeated vigorously to the administration. She stated that she believes that the campus is not in the position to move backwards in any way on graduate stipends and remission. She pointed out that the issue is complicated though because budget cuts are the alternative if we can’t increase tuition revenue.

Alexander stated that a growing issue is that more international graduate students are being attracted to come here but then his college loses them after two years when they go to another institution that they think is more prestigious. He noted that this is a major growing concern for faculty and he wondered whether something can be written into the graduate student’s contract to state that they must repay the institution if they leave before finishing the program. He stated that the same thing is happening in Michigan and they are trying to word their contract to fix the situation. Weissinger stated that it would be difficult to reword the contract and it could hurt recruiting efforts. She noted that part of the problem is that we are competing with a better stratum of graduate schools which puts us in a new market for graduate students. Moeller noted that mentoring is a big factor in recruiting and retaining students, especially international students.

Weissinger reported that the State Department is doing a better job of processing visas. She noted that students in Asia are starting to realize that alternative schools in other countries are not as good as the institutions in the U.S. She stated that national recruiting efforts are encouraging and her office is working on recruiting non degree students as well.

Moeller pointed out that it can be very difficult to get non degree students registered. She stated that it can take months to get them registered with the University. Weissinger stated that this is very surprising to her because they should be able to do this within 24 hours or so. [Weissinger followed up with data that showed that in the last three terms, 59% of non-degree applicants who requested immediate admission were admitted within 48 hours, 95% were admitted within one week and only 5% took more than one week. Admission delays were due to the applicant not completing the on-line application fully, or not paying the required fee.]

4.0 Announcements

Due to the lateness of time, Beck stated that she would send the Committee an email about the announcements.

5.0 Approval of 3/22/06 Minutes

Moeller moved and Flowers seconded approval of the minutes.

6.0 Unfinished Business

6.1 Motion on Senate Restructuring

Beck stated that there are two separate issues with the restructuring. One is the change of name and the other is removing the administrators as non-voting members. She pointed out that the Deans are fine with not being members of the Senate. She noted that the sister campuses are all called Faculty Senates. She stated that since most of the administrators are not coming to the meetings it would be a good opportunity to make the changes.

Griffin distributed the proposed revisions to the Senate Bylaws on restructuring the Senate. She pointed out that changing the name of the Senate would result in changes to many things including, but not limited, to all Senate documents, publications on campus, university websites, building signs, etc. Moeller suggested that the issue be postponed so the Committee can examine all of the effects of the changes. Beck explained that the issue has been discussed for several months and that bringing the motion forward at the April 4 meeting still gives three weeks to consider it further and the option of voting on it this year or not.

The Committee voted to bring the motion to the Senate at the April 4^th meeting.

6.2 Motion on Merging of Commencement, Honors Convocations, and Honorary Degrees Committee

Beck stated that she met with Associate to the Chancellor Howe to discuss the concerns he has on the revised syllabus. She noted that Howe suggested that the students should not be members of the committee because there has been no participation from them for several years. She stated that she will discuss this with ASUN. She noted that the Chancellor’s designee has been added to the membership for the Honorary Degrees subcommittee because that person is responsible for the functioning of the committee.

Hoffman pointed out that he has received several responses from members of the Committee on Committees with some questions. He noted that the Committee on Committees has not seen this latest version. He asked that Beck send this to him so he can send it to the Committee for their input.

Moeller suggested that the motion to revise the committee not be presented at the April 4^th meeting until all parties involved have had a chance to review the revisions. Griffin pointed out that there is no rush to make the changes and the Committee on Committees has not even had a chance to vote on the revisions. She suggested that all of the members of the Commencement Committee, Honors Convocation Committee and the Honorary Degrees Committee should be given the opportunity to review the proposed revisions to see if any further corrections are needed.

Beck stated that she wants the Committee to consider reinstating the Human Rights Committee because there have been a number of cases in the past in which reports and actions by the Human Rights Committee provided information that has kept the university out of the court. She stated that in years past the committee did reports on rapes on campus and did a gender equity study in the 1970’s regarding staff compensation. She stated that she thinks it is worth considering having this committee again because they could look at domestic partner benefits, for example.

Beck stated that she also wants the Committee to consider reinstating the Budget Committee so it can provide information on the budget to the Senate. She stated that the Budget Committee could get reports on how the Programs of Excellence money is being used and where money is saved when colleges are merged, as examples of information that would empower the Senate to make informed evaluations. She pointed out that the Senate should know what happens to the resources.

Beck stated that she thinks the Past President should rotate onto the Committee on Committees (as the designee of the President) so there is continuity in reviewing committees. Hoffman stated that he thought this was a good idea because the Past President might have ideas on who can serve on committees.

The meeting was adjourned at 5:11 p.m. The next meeting of the Executive Committee will be on Wednesday, April 5th at 3:00 pm. The meeting will be held in the Academic Senate Office, 420 University Terrace. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator and Pat Shea, Secretary.