1. Alignment 2. Demand 3. Quality 4. Efficiency 5 ... Service … · AS080 80 Research and Creative Scholarship Flathead Lake Bio Station 17Admin113 Creative Sc Consider for Development

17Admin113AS080 80 Research and Creative Scholarship Flathead Lake Bio Station

Consider for Development and/or ModificationCreative Sc

Average: 6.533 Range: 3.100

1. Alignment 2. Demand 3. Quality 4. Efficiency 5. Opportunity Total

WeightReviewer Score Weight Score Weight Score Weight Score Weight Score Weight

6 1.2 6 1.5 6 1.5 6 0.9 6 0.9 6Reviewer: 1

5 1 4 1 7 1.75 4 0.6 6 0.9 5.25Reviewer: 2

8 1.6 9 2.25 9 2.25 8 1.2 7 1.05 8.35Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT

Reviewer: 1 Score: 6 Weighted Score: 1.2

Fails to address core values.

Unclear how substantial loss of revenue would be to UM.

Does well to show alignment with Strategic Issues.

Historic UM Program.

Only 20 - 25% general funds.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Reviewer: 2 Score: 5 Weighted Score: 1

Unit does not demonstrate explicit alignment with the 4 values the criteria is evaluating.

Unit does not demonstrate essentiality to UM

Unit demonstrates clear alignment with the four strategic issues outlined in UM2020 and explains their

contributions exceptionally.

Unit demonstrates its history of contribution to UM since 1899.

Unit does not use significant general funds, uses primarily grant money.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Unit does not specifically address the Plan’s values of leadership, engagement, sustainability, and

diversity

•The unit provides essential services that contribute to UM's mission (Partnering for Student Success

through field courses, internships and K-12 programs; Education for the Global Century through

sending faculty and students abroad; Dicscovery/Creativity to Serve Montana/World through research

on river management and invasive species; Dynamic Learning Environment through innovative

summer sessions and internrships.)

•Report provides excellent arguments against reduction of resources: 1.) Would adversely effect UM's

ability to achieve R1 status; 2.) UM’s visibility in the Flathead basin would be diminished; 3.) fewer K-

12 students from around the region would benefit; 4.) UM students would have reduced access to field-

based courses and research opportunities

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand

Ranking Category:

Consider for Development and/or Modification: 13

Priority for Substantial Modification: 0

Priority for Devlopment and Growth: 0

Total Count: 13

Page 1 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




-

Moderate internal demand. Exposure for UM to out of state students, some which transfer to UM. #s

not provided.

Strength in external demand. Engagement with K-12 students & non-UM university/college (e.g. SKC,

FVCC) students.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Unit fails to demonstrate external demand or provide measurements of current/anticipated external

demand.

Unit demonstrates internal demand from researchers, the freshwater laboratory, workshops, and

summer courses. Unit provides clear measures of demand over the course of 5 years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


In FY17 there was a slight dip in the number of visiting researchers.

•There is strong internal and external demand (though not consistently increasing). Internal demand:

the program hosts workshops/conferences; states a marked increase in number of participants of one-

day workshops (from 30 participants in FY13 to 172 in FY17; there has been an increase in annual UM

student engagement from 100 (FY14) to 605 (FY16), from a number of departments (BIO, WBIO, FOR,

EVST, GEOG).

•External demand: program reports impressive numbers of visiting researchers, K-12 students,

members of the community and non-UM university/college students (58% of summer students came

from other universities).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


This facility is 90 miles from UM campus. This assessment lacks examples of staff engagement, and

training & development opportunities for staff appears limited.

Strength in quality based on external reviewers and success in attracting high quality Director and two

awarding winning scientists as TT faculty.

Faculty and other leadership engaged with campus and involved in committees.

Strength in quality and productivity in research/creative scholarship. Evidence in funding and

publications.

Strength in quality and productivity in teach/instruction. Evidence in publications and examples.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 2 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




Unit does not adequately demonstrate that it meets the needs of users through internal assessments or

national benchmarks.

Unit demonstrates increasing enrollment in summer classes and high satisfaction for these courses.

Through external comments, unit demonstrates strong service to the Flathead Lake Community.

Unit demonstrates efforts towards professional development through safety training, certifications to

maintain/operate the FLBS Sewage Treatment Plant, and principal investigator trainings.

Unit demonstrates employee engagement through service to UM on graduate committees and search

committees and through an on-campus office.

Unit demonstrates exceptional research activity and provides evidence of these efforts. Examples

include: prestigious awards, published about 32 peer reviewed articles a year over the 5 year review

period, and substantial external grant dollars.

During the review period, FLBS faculty mentored 11 postdoctoral and 14 PhD students in research

fulfilling the teaching/instruction component of their mission

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Report could have provided more details concerning peer-reviewed articles (e.g., how many are co-

authored, how many claim primary co-author, etc.)

•Services exceed user's expectations and published benchmarks:

oReport states program is recognized “as one of the top university-operated field stations in the

world” and supports statement with quotes from 2015 external review.

•High level of personnel development and university engagement:

oVery impressive award-winning research discoveries by graduate students and faculty

oFaculty is engaged with the university and beyond: serve on UM graduate committees (3-5/yr), search

committees (2-3/yr); serve on professional society committees (9-12/yr), NSF review panels (1-2/yr),

editorial boards (1-2/yr) and peer review panels (2-3/yr).

oFLBS faculty mentored 11 postdoctoral and 14 PhD students.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


-

Nice explanation of trends in the last five years with possible reasons for those trends. This unit must

be self-sufficient because of its distance from main campus and because 75% of its funding is from

sources other than general funds.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 3 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




From FY 13-17 unit experienced significant leadership changes which resulted in a decline in auxiliary

revenue and fewer research proposals/grants.

In FY13-17 unit expenses “closely matched” revenue.

Due to its location 90 miles from campus, the unit state that it requires its own maintenance staff, IT

personnel etc. Unit does not identify efforts to improve efficiency in this area.

Unit lists all funding and revenue sources.

Unit received increased general/designated funding FY17.

Unit generates all external revenue except 20-25% of its budget.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Research expenditures declined from FY13-FY16 from $2.6M to $1.1M (but increased in FY17).

•Revenue/allocation has exceeded expenses over the full time period evaluated and there is ongoing

effort to improve efficiency in the unit.

•Breakdown of costs: General (25%, average FY13-17), Research (62%; direct + SPABA), Designated

(9.3%) and Auxiliary (3.6%).

•“During FY13-17, FLBS underwent significant leadership and faculty transition.”

•in FY17 with a new director, research revenues/expenses increased to $1.5M.

•Program is efficient, generates external revenue, and has increased development activities (e.g.,

philanthropic donations have increased from $1200 to $600,000 per year).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


-

Opportunities for growth. Since the transition to a new director and two new faculty members, there

has been an increase in demand. May be too soon to postulate where this trend will go.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Unit does not provide additional innovative ideas to contribute to strategic opportunities.

Unit does not effectively demonstrate restructuring/collaboration efforts that would increase efficiency

and provide cost-savings.

Unit addresses strategic opportunities 1, 3, 4, and 5 appropriately with current efforts.

Unit demonstrates interest in collaboration with various UM schools and programs such as the

division of biological sciences and wildlife biology program.

Unit states that additional resources would generate additional grant revenue, increase research

quality and raise awareness of the FLBS in the Flathead area.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 4 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•Bullet 3 lacks specifics, repeating simply that “with more investment” the unit could make

improvements.

* Unit does not describe active consideration of restructuring.

•Unit demonstrates solid contribution to all 5 opportunities of the the Strategic Vision: (a

“transformational” summer session, internships, intensive mentoring, access to state-of-the-art

facilities, leadership opportunities, attracts visitors from around the world, capstone (“VIP”) projects,

world-class researchers perform at levels exceeding that of most at R1 institutions.

•There is potential for expansion of services and best practices are implemented. Unit is increasing

collaborations with Biological Sciences, College of Forestry and Conservation, the Honors College, the

Law School, and Journalism.

•Unit generates $3-5 for every $1 of state investment.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 5 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin208AS082 82 Research and Creative Scholarship Bur of Bus and Econ Researc





6 1.2 6 1.5 7 1.75 4 0.6 4 0.6 5.65Reviewer: 1

8 1.6 7 1.75 7 1.75 8 1.2 8 1.2 7.5Reviewer: 2

8 1.6 7 1.75 7 1.75 8 1.2 5 0.75 7.05Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


(1) No answer was given on how BBER addresses or enacts the values of sustainability and diversity.

(2) Other than the administration, it’s not clear what other users on campus would be impacted by a

reduction of resources to BBER.

(1) BBER does an effective job addressing the values of leadership and engagement.

(2) The outreach and support of the legislature are important functions.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-NA

-The unit is strongly aligned with the institutional mission as it strives to educate individuals about the

values expressed in the strategic plan.

-Activities of BBER help to paint UM in a positive light.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted.

Program has analyzed Montana’s state and local economies for more than 50 years; is research and

public service branch of the School of Business Administration. Has $3.1M in external funding in last 5

years; noted as one of most successful business research centers in US. Conducts a great deal of

outreach including seminars and daily state-wide business podcasts.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


(1) Most of the work is outwardly focused and there is little demand internal to UM.

(1) The impact studies of the UM campuses are an important service to UM.

(2) There is an increasing demand for economic data and studies from users external to UM.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-NA

-While primarily focused on external users, some internal use is measurable with positive results.

-Multiple measures of external demand are in place and results are positive as expressed in the growth

of demand.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 15

Page 6 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




None noted.

BBER has conducted a number of visible and valuable research projects for UM--impact studies and

energy development the most notable of these. External demand for service high--presentations have

more than doubled recently; consistent flow of external funding averaging $15M annually for the last 5

years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


(1) Little comparison with national or industry benchmarks (other than a complaint about salaries).

(1) The increase is publications and projects is a strength.

(2) The service of BBER researchers and staff on boards and committees is a strength.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-NA

-Consistently high satisfaction ratings from stakeholders, as seen in internal surveys.

-The unit has seen an increase in scholarship and its members serve as leaders in their fields.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted.

Unit's researchers and staff serve on a number of boards locally, regionally, and nationally.

Demonstrated increase in research productivity over the last 5 years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


(1) While a claim was made that the General Fund support had declined, the actual decrease has been

minimal when compared to UM’s overall decrease in budget.

(2) Little has been done to increase efficiency and a small decrease in state support has led to some

work not being done (MMIS) and a slower response time to internal requests.

(1) Generating approximately 76% of its revenue from external sources is an efficiency.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-NA

-Partnerships with other groups occur when collaborating will strengthen areas lacking in the needed

resources to achieve a particular goal.

-76% of revenue is externally sourced.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted.

76% of unit's revenue generated from external sources. State funds support unit outreach to the

legislature, state governments, and rural MT communities. Salaries are 30% less than those of national

peers.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY

Page 7 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




(1) No real opportunities for effective collaborations or restructuring.

(2) The rationale for additional resources is weak.

(1) Explained well how BBER makes some contributions to the UM Strategic Vision.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-Administrative efficiency is near working at near maximum levels. Potential costs are involved in

changing the current structure.

-Unit directly addresses many of the strategic opportunities found in the strategic vision.

-Some possible areas of improvement exist where efficiencies can be gained.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Argument for further opportunities could be expanded.

Unit plays a vital role in UM's mission and vision. Only unit in MUS charged with economic analysis.

Reinvestment would provide for return of the Montana Poll (no explanation provided).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 8 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin170AS086 86 Research and Creative Scholarship Natural Resource & Envir Policy





6 1.2 5 1.25 8 2 6 0.9 5 0.75 6.1Reviewer: 1

7 1.4 4 1 6 1.5 6 0.9 6 0.9 5.7Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 7 1.75 8 2 7 1.05 7 1.05 7.25Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


- does not specifically address the Plan's Values and educates student about these values

- briefly explains how their unit aligns with the institutional mission

- the NRCR program is essential to UM because it is unique to North America and it addresses specific

public issues relevant to the environment

- a reduction in resources would limit or eliminate the program

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

clearly a center for integration of many UM disciplines for grad workStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA – Alignment with UM2020 values and unit provides important services that help set UM apart

from other institutions.

•Services are unique to UM, North America, possibly world

•Demonstrates evidence that unit aligns with UM 2020

•Highly interdisciplinary

•As a revenue neutral program, services provided by unit only serve to bolster UM’s creative

scholarship and contribute to institutional mission.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


- does not provide anticipated external and internal demand

- does not explain external and internal demand trends

- provided 3 specific examples of external demand

- demand for the program has been steady and comes from a diverse background of studies

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


not clear how it serves undergrad attraction in face of declining undergrad population.

Is it marketed effectively

strong graduate drawStrengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 12

Page 9 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•NA - There is strong and growing internal and/or external demand for unit services and efforts to

increase collaboration with other units on campus and beyond exist.

•Evidence of internal demand that is consistent if not growing– students earning graduate certificate,

student enrollment in core courses taught by faculty, collaboration in on campus initiatives

•Strong evidence of external demand - The Center is widely recognized as a national “center of

excellence” in natural resources policy and collaborative problem solving. Center staff is regularly

asked by local, state, regional, national, and international leaders to help design and facilitate public

processes to solve natural resource problems.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


- few examples of on campus service

- provided a quote from Faculty Senate essentially recommending that their program continues to

function

- the program meets the needs of its users by providing relevant, issue specific course work

- provided numerous ways in which their staff is engaged in professional development

- provided examples of papers and publications in the past 5 years

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

clearly strongStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•Not aware of any national or industry benchmarks to compare the Center’s performance against

other similar organizations.

•In 2014/2015, ECOS of the Faculty Senate concluded that the Center “offers clear benefits to students,

the University, the State, and the Region.

•CNREP is interdisciplinary in its faculty and in its scope of work - interactive relationship with

twelve or more academic units at UM

•Evidence of scholarly productivity with 25 recent publications

•External review completed by Patrick Field of the Consensus Building Institute (March 5, 2015)

concluded that the Center achieves significant impact on behalf of the University, across the state and

region…Recommendation: The Center for Natural Resources & Environmental Policy should continue

to function at The University of Montana.”

•Center staff is engaged in a variety of professional development activities

•Strong, highly positive qualitative feedback from students.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


- did not provide specific dollar amounts for the last 5 years

- does not compare efficiency efforts with national benchmarks

- provided a general overview of their funds and revenue

- in FY2013 they voluntarily reduced UM's annual investing by 25%

- the NRCR collaborates with several departments and programs on campus

- 75% of funding comes from grants and contracts

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 10 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




n/a

as expectedStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA – Efforts to improve efficiency exist while still offering a return on UM’s investment each year.

•Center provides a 4:1 return on the UM’s investment each year.

•Basic business model is to maintain a small core staff and to create teams of people to deliver services

and complete projects as resources allow. In this respect, the Center is never over-extended and

maintains a sense of nimbleness, flexibility, and adaptability.

•Efforts toward efficiency include in FY 2013, the Center voluntarily reduced UM’s annual investment

by 25% due to university-wide budget constraints.

•Strong evidence of existing collaboration with multiple units and disciplines on campus through

graduate certificate program

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


- given the current mode of operation, they said that it is not clear how they could restructure or

collaborate

- uses answers from Criteria 1, bullet 1 for Criteria 5, bullet 1 answer

- given the current mode of operation, they said that it is not clear how they could restructure or

collaborate

- additional resources would amplify teaching, research and public service activities

- uses answers from Criteria 1, bullet 1 for Criteria 5, bullet 1 answer

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

in line with current regional and national concernsStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•It is not clear how the Center could be restructured or collaborate with other units to improve its

mission and primary functions

•Strong evidence of alignment with and contribution to strategic opportunities

•Opportunity for innovative initiatives given additional funding including reaching off-campus/mid-

career professionals and offering a distance-learning program that would serve a growing

international demand for the program as well as provide additional revenue to the Center and the UM.

•Unit provides unique service to UM

•Evidence that the unit has already undergone efforts to restructure and improve efficiency.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 11 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin45AS087 87 Research and Creative Scholarship CTM





6 1.2 5 1.25 6 1.5 6 0.9 7 1.05 5.9Reviewer: 1

5 1 6 1.5 6 1.5 8 1.2 5 0.75 5.95Reviewer: 2

6 1.2 6 1.5 4 1 7 1.05 9 1.35 6.1Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


N/A

Criteria 1. - Bullet 1.: superb answer

Criteria 1. - Bullet 2.: very good answer

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Diversity and sustainability were asked about (as part of the UM2020 Strategic Plan), but were not

discussed in the response.

The Center for Translational Medicine has the potential to lead to increased research activity at UM (at

all levels--faculty, graduate, and undergraduate).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA

•Provides a coordinating center to expand research into translation medicine.

•This is a new center so all participants are currently employed in other areas on campus.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


N/A

Criteria 2. - Bullet 1.: given this is a proposed center it seems really odd to have to answer these

questions I think. Great answer nonetheless.

Criteria 2. - Bullet 2.: ditto.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


"The CTM will be 100% funded through successful grant applications, industry partners and

licensing/contract revenues." This is both a strength and a weakness. On the weakness side, self-

funded programs may not generate the necessary revenues in the short run to survive in the long run.

The report notes that rapid expansion is anticipated, but gives no basis for this conclusion.

Overconfidence is an issue for many entrepreneurial ventures.

"The CTM will be 100% funded through successful grant applications, industry partners and

licensing/contract revenues." This is both a strength and a weakness. On the strength side, self-funded

programs like this can help UM achieve its strategy while leaving resources available for other areas.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 12

Page 12 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•New center so no metrics for previous demand.

“The CTM is actively engaged in discussions and/or licensing negotiations with multiple corporate

partners (Amgen, GSK, Inimmune, Merck) interested in technology, people and translational projects

developed at UM”

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


N/A

Criteria 3. - Bullet 1.: "This is a proposed new Center " - about all that can be said.

Criteria 3. - Bullet 2.: Excellent answer

Criteria 3. - Bullet 3.: For a "proposed new Center" the dollars handled is amazing.

Criteria 3. - Bullet 4.: good answer.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


The report states that this is a new center, so benchmarking data is not available. While that may be

true for internal data, it seems hard to believe that something similar has never been done anywhere

else at all. Surely there is data against which the performance of this center can be compared.

The Center for Translational Medicine already has a sizable amount of grants that it manages.

Supporters of this center are all subject to qualifications and unit standards within their own respective

units.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


New Center NA

New Center - NAStrengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


N/A

Criteria 4. - Bullet 1.: "No general funds are used or requested to support the proposed Center." so it

seems odd to be doing prioritization here. Still, great answer.

Criteria 4. - Bullet 2.: okay answer.

Criteria 4. - Bullet 3.: Good answer

Criteria 4. - Bullet 4.: "100% of the unit's expenses are supported by external grant/contract revenue."

Fantastic. We should have more centers like this.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Reliance on grants may become a weakness if we enter into an era where fewer and fewer grants

(especially those from federal agencies) are available.

No general funds are being used for this center--from that perspective, this is a very efficient

undertaking! Self-funding is a strength.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA

•Involves faculty, staff, and students from across campus

Entirely grant funded

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 13 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM



5. OPPORTUNITY


N/A

Criteria 5. - Bullet 1.: Excellent answer

Criteria 5. - Bullet 2.: This is a very interesting center.

Criteria 5. - Bullet 3.: Great answer

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


The report claims that "there are no other units on campus (or within MUS) that provide similar

services to what is proposed for the CTM." This is not entirely true. Some of the function of the CTM

are done elsewhere (for example, grant management). That said, the question asked about

collaboration with other units on campus; even if nobody else does what you do, you can still

collaborate with others.

This entire center appears to be a way to take advantage of some new opportunities.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


NA

•Directly addressed the vision for the university.Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 14 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin158AS088 88 Research and Creative Scholarship O'Connor Ctr

Priority for Substantial ModificationCreative Sc




3 0.6 3 0.75 5 1.25 3 0.45 4 0.6 3.65Reviewer: 1

7 1.4 3 0.75 7 1.75 4 0.6 4 0.6 5.1Reviewer: 2

2 0.4 1 0.25 3 0.75 4 0.6 3 0.45 2.45Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


Mostly externally oriented.

Are activities central to UM mission? Is current level of general funding warranted under current

budgetary conditions?

Place based.

Produce place based knowledge.

High quality publications and holding of by invitation only meetings raises profile and prestige of UM.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•University cutbacks (past 4 years) have impacted ability to provide services and leverage more funds

and can negatively impact mission and programs.

•No data on utilizers of services or satisfaction.

•Addresses UM 2020 in its programming which reflects OCRMW goals.

•Center’s actions toward 2020 evident in public education on the Rocky Mountain West from social,

cultural and economic viewpoints.

•OCRMW programs and employees educate public with daily newsletter, radio show and

presentations, research and contracts with a focus on MT, WY, ID, and Alberta and BC.

•One of largest endowed campus entities at $4.5Million, and $3.1 million in grants and contracts since

1997.

•General fund matches Director salary at 53%, IT at 45% and admin asst. 100% until last year when it

was ended.

•Public Services and technical expertise have been enhanced by endowments and external funding.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 14

Page 15 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




The Center is primarily research focused and still has a budget of 115,782 of general funds dollars.

115,782 No specific mention on how the center impacts students as it relates to the 2020 plan.

Reductions in services would not have a direct impact to students or services that are essential to UM.

O'Connor Center for the Rocky Mountain West is active in research and inquiry of significance to area

communities and the region as a whole, conducting over $3.1 million in externally funded research

and programming just since 1997. The Centers Mountain West News and Mountain West Voices -- tell

the region’s story and narrative vital to public education. The Center has built one of UM’s largest

program endowments ($4.5 million) and annual endowment funding adds to Center research and

public education. Center personnel regularly teach and lecture at UM in several departments, adding

regional content to undergraduate and graduate classes of the University.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


Low level of internal demand. Mention is made of a couple of courses offered by center staff and guest

lectures but lacking specificity.

"Most services committed to external users" is a direct quote from the report.

Services appear to be of high quality and valued by external users.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•No specific survey data presented of user base.

•In the last 5 years (or more), no work products appear to represent regional work outside of Montana,

and appear to be produced primarily low FTE staff.

•Appears that grants and external contract expenditures are low and have reduced to zero in past few

years.

•Internal demand is not primary focus of the Center but does work with University Departments

(especially History and Journalism because of staff with appointments there) as well as guest lectures.

•Center is aware of possibility for more interaction with University areas (see Section5).

•Center makes presentations, develops reports, and has research cited about economic, social and

cultural issues in RMW.

•Reports, books and presentations are reported as high in demand.

•Newsletter (daily) and radio show reported to have base of 5 to 10k users/listeners.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Demand for internal users is low, external demand is much higher as that is the programs focus. 40

percent of the departments budget is general funds dollars.

The Center staff provides guest lectures to UM classes, and have taught classes in the past. The Center

Mountain West News service and its Rockies Today daily news digest are distributed to five to ten

thousand dedicated readers each day and week, including state and federal agency staff, legislators,

and congressmen, representatives of non-profits, news media, and the public in general. Readership

is steadily growing and the Center hopes to reach a point where “crowd-funding” and “membership

funding” is possible.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY

Page 16 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




Lack of extensive robust services to internal users.

Extensive service commitment to external users.

Research and creative scholarship core missions. High quality.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None apparent.

•In 2013-14 ECOS/Provost external assessment with outside reviewer concluded that the Center was

doing well with the level of support from University and endowments.

•Director has served on campus committees (Campus Development, and Capital Campaign in the

past) and consulted with UM and MC on workforce development.

•Service also included to greater Missoula Community (Community Development, etc.).

• Research and creative Scholarship are focus; includes invitation to international conference on

Community Development in Italy. Partial FTE journalism and History staff are continuing to write

valued books earning awards as well as present with regional focus and expertise.

•Although no teaching requirements are associated with OCRMW, education is part of mission and

role for associated staff.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


The author reports that UM has decided to continually fund the center as it is regionally essential. Yet

the program does not appear to have a high level of engagement with the institution.

The O’Connor Center was extensively reviewed by UM faculty and administrators in a regular review

of centers conducted by the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate in 2013-14 and approved for

continued operation. During this ECOS review the UM Provost Office also retained the services of

Professor William Beyers who is regionalist and geography professor at the University of Washington

to review the O’Connor Center and its performance. Beyers is widely respected and stated in his report

on the O’Connor Center that considering the somewhat low level of hard-money financial support by

UM in the Center, it was making important contributions to the state and region in the type of work it

does. During his review he consulted with other similar regional study programs, such as the one at

the University of Nebraska, and deemed the O’Connor Center as being one that operates well and

doing well in its own funding both in endowment and in contracts and grants. His report was

prepared for and at the request of the UM Provost’s Office. Because of the perceived importance of

this type of regional programming, MSU-Bozeman is now developing a program very similar to the

O’Connor Center.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


Requires substantial general funds for services directed primarily at external users.

Substantial endowment and ability to secure grant and contract funding.

Eliminated several positions to focus mission.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 17 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•Loss of shared administrative assistant impacts program efforts.

•This is a lean staff and appears that less and less is happening with goals and objectives as over time.

.

•OCRMW is partially funded by the University (53% of Director salary, 45% of IT salary), 28 to 30k

form Research for remodel costs over the past 5 years, amounting to 1/3 of the annual budget with the

balance funded by endowments.

•Grants and contracts add to the capacity and services provided with Regional Journalism (Newsletter

and Radio) being funded by foundations.

•Endowments are impressive and contribute to Center capabilities and accomplishments.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Our state and other UM funding support is now at low levels, providing some support of the Center

Director position and for our computing coordinator whose work is indispensable for maintaining

programs we now do that are largely web-based and data oriented. Our largest source of state

funding is for the Director and Senior Fellow in Regional Economy position which receives 53%

support from this funding. This position also is the only Center position with a dedicated endowment,

now totaling almost $1.7 million made up entirely of First Interstate Bank stock (the Scott Family

endowed fellow). A condition of the gifting letter by the donor for this endowment was that UM

maintain at least half-time support for the position.

The O’Connor Center worked on ways to reduce some of its administrative costs, including through

the sharing of our administrative associate with UM’s Center for Natural Resource and Environmental

Policy. Accumulated funding cuts ultimately led to the loss of funding entirely for our administrative

position. We shared costs of our Fellow in Regional Journalism (Matthew Frank) with UM Journalism,

where he sometimes teaches as an adjunct. In the past, we shared costs of our Senior Fellow in

Regional History (Bill Farr) with UM’s History Department.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


N/A

Proposes future hiring practices that would increase teaching commitments on campus (50% time).Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Not clear why efforts identified above have not already been pursued especially in this current

climate of limited funds where partial support of faculty lines would be especially beneficial.

•As already identified in UM 2020, Strategic Vision also overlaps with Center interests.

•Opportunities exist and are desired for split positions in other academic areas with shared funding

from the center’s endowments as well as engagement with more students.

•Current endowments are especially promising for regional history academic line share.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 18 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




To grow the Center it must increase its endowment. UM funding accentuate this and helps leverage

up potential impacts from any added endowment and grant funding. It is very difficult to operate

centers like the O’Connor Center without at least some “hard money” funding by the University.

Centers that are strictly soft money funded are not likely to be sustained.

The O’Connor Center could cooperate with other Centers or departments in employing a full-time

administrative associate, with about 30% of their time focused on our needs and the rest on the needs

of others. The Center hopes to cooperate with UM History in eventually replacing our Senior Fellow

in Regional History position, hopefully adding someone who can teach half-time in UM History with

western history classes that would complement teaching done by History’s Hammond Chair in

Western History. UM History’s graduate students have largely been ones interested in studying

western history and this programming needs to be revived and upgraded.

The Center hopes to collaborate with other UM departments in its senior staff hirings with split

appointments where some of their time and expense is allocated to Center work and the other to

teaching and department roles. This was done in the past with Center Senior Fellow in Regional

History William Farr who taught in UM History and we hope to do this in the future when we re-fill

this position. In the future all Center senior fellow positions will be held by persons with full academic

credentials who would be available for some teaching assignments in UM departments (like history,

geography, journalism, environmental studies, etc.). This would provide UM departments additional

personnel for filling out key teaching roles, with some of these personnel costs borne by the Center

with endowment funding.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 19 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin28AS089 89 Research and Creative Scholarship Mt Coop Wildlife Research





8 1.6 8 2 7 1.75 8 1.2 8 1.2 7.75Reviewer: 1

6 1.2 6 1.5 9 2.25 8 1.2 8 1.2 7.35Reviewer: 2

8 1.6 8 2 9 2.25 7 1.05 6 0.9 7.8Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


N/A

•Indicates core collaboration with WBIO and DBS (“third leg of the stool”) are essential to UM and

recognition of research to date

•Alignment through leadership, diversity, collaboration, student engagement and outcome priorities,

and research

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Unsure how this unit is essential to the WBIO major on campus. They contribute, but from the answer

one cannot to tell how they are essential

•Leadership through oversight committee and research, committees, mentoring

•Engaged with federal agencies

•Sustainability of wildlife populations

•Diversity through international relations and collaborations and international recruitment and

recruitment of historically under-represented groups

•High level scientists and research

•Reduction in resources would negate contributions from this group to WBIO

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted - although I wrestled with the rubric language regarding "essential services" - I believe it is.

Provides leadership for UM's #1 ranked Wildlife Biology Program

Essential to the Wildlife Biology program where it constitutes the third “leg of the stool” of the

interdepartmental program along with the Franke College of Forestry and Conservation and the

Division of Biological Sciences

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


N/A

•Internal demand is measured by research productivity, education of graduate students, research and

training opportunities for undergraduates and administration of research grants and contracts

•External demand is measured by research projects and technical services requested by external

organizations

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 13

Page 20 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•It is unclear if the 6 courses are taught yearly or if there were 6 total courses taught since 2012

•Demands are stable, but will not be able to increase (because of workload) without additional

personnel

•No new ideas for collaboration other than increased persons

•67 years of collaboration

•Demand is in research, teaching, training, grant funding

•Stable trend in high number of publications

•Increasing demand from graduate numbers

•Manage a large number of accounts

•Teach 6 courses

•Stable trend in external funding, with high yield and IDCs generated

•Technical support for state and federal agencies – determination of wildlife populations and diseases

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Currently operate at maximum capacity

The program has been incredibly successful in supporting graduate students producing impactful

research and supporting other campus units

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


•Unit scientist professional development engagement extensive in a given year, Accounting Associate

Mgr not as much

•Scientific Achievement Award and yearly external reviews

•Large # of peer-reviewed journal articles

•Teaching instruction – cooperative agreement has one graduate level course per year, mentoring

covers larger %

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


N/A

•Awarded the Scientific Achievement Award, top in the nation in science and service

•National and local awards for research from scientific societies

•Exceeding standards for USGS, which is one of the most productive scientific organizations

•Professional development occurs on campus and externally for all unit personnel

•78-peer reviewed articles from 2 scientists in the past 5 years and their h-index is above 40 (indicating

outstanding scientific impact)

•15 MS and PhD students are mentored annually by these two scientists. These students are actively

involved in the research, publications, and presentations

•All graduates have gone on to further degree, work as faculty or gain employment with federal

agencies and have won numerous awards

•Faculty teach 1 graduate course/year

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted

This is too obvious! Outstanding research outputStrengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY

Page 21 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•Not weakness, just indicating comments regarding more support needed for programs to expand

grants and new research as maxed out with current levels, need additional scientists

•Research/Grant based funding 94%, expenses based on grant and distribution based on that so

aligning with requirements

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Revenue is limited by the personnel to manage the program and are currently at a ceiling

•No further opportunities to address efficiency were provided

•Revenues and expenditures have remained stable

•The whole program is supported by 3 individuals

•External revenue comprises ~94% of funding

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted

Revenues and expenditures appear balanced.

Produce substantial research output from small FTE

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


•Not a weakness, but structural changes within this program would be bound by contractual

agreement with the USGS and UM

•MTCWRU runs parallel to Strategic VisionStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•Collaboration between UM and government agencies that requires agreement by all parties

•Partner with Place – 67 year collaboration

•Innovation, diversity of cultures, collaboration

•Changing the unique collaboration or defunding it would impact the 81-year research model the

USGS uses and would have negative impacts on UM research capacity

•Currently at maximum capacity for productivity of the program. Additional resources would allow

for more USGS scientists to increase the number of projects and people

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Operating at capacity

Currently operating at capacity additional resources (scientists) could allow expansion, but would

require new agreements between UM, USGS, MT Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP), the US Fish and

Wildlife Service (USGS), and the Wildlife Management Institute (WMI).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 22 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin122AS091 91 Research and Creative Scholarship ACCELERATE MT





8 1.6 8 2 8 2 8 1.2 8 1.2 8Reviewer: 1

7 1.4 7 1.75 8 2 6 0.9 7 1.05 7.1Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 7 1.75 5 1.25 1 0.15 8 1.2 5.75Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


•NA – Strong alignment to UM2020 values and unit provides essential, innovative services and

collaborations that benefit not only campus, but also greater scholarly/creative and economic

community.

•Services are essential to UM, Missoula, and Montana.

•Demonstrates strong evidence that unit addresses and enacts UM2020’s values of leadership,

engagement, sustainability, and diversity.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

* Mission aligns strongly with all four vision points

* Created to fulfill need in the MUS strategic plan

* Provides important services for the state as well as UM

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Accelerate addresses UM2020 well.

•Accelerate directly impacts economic development as well as supports workforce development.

Without these programs both would suffer decreases.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


•NA – Strong evidence of growth trends among all users.

•Evidence of growth trends in demand from internal and external users.

•Collaboration is inherent in the growth of this unit’s demand, and is also addressed in response.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


* Would like to see quantitative metrics to support claims

* Growing internal and external demand

* User supported and endorsed

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 16

Page 23 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•None seen.

•Internal demand for services is seen from students, faculty and staff for facilitating connections with

industry and as a bridge to the business community. Measured by increased use and referral.

•External demand demonstrated through use by state and regional entities.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


•Internal assessment information lacked information regarding year(s) of data collection, number of

users, etc.

•Evidence of internal assessments with reported results indicating quality of service - Launchpad

4.8/5, PTAC 4.8/5, SBDC 9.1/10 and positive qualitative feedback.

•Strong demonstration of engagement through leadership and involvement on campus, in the

community, state, and nation.

•National distinction – Kaufmann Foundation ranking as the #1 state in the nation for startup activity

per capita for four years in a row.

•Code School’s job placement rate of over 90% is exceptional compared to national averages.

•UM is one of just 20 Universities selected globally by the Blackstone Charitable Foundation to host

Blackstone LaunchPads.

•First World Trade Center ever affiliated with a university, a model now being adopted by other

WTCs.

•Innovative service model which engages students in experiential learning and offers an important

opportunity for UM students to work collaboratively with students from around the globe on projects

directly impacting Montana businesses.

•Services exceed user’s expectations and published benchmarks.

•High level of personnel development and university engagement.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

* User feedback shows a high rate of satisfaction and the nessesety many users feel the unit is.

* Widely respected in the field as a trusted knowledge base

* Highly collaborative

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Anecdotal comments offered – quantitative benchmarks not provided.

•Rankings were offered for Montana’s entrepreneurial effort (#1 state in nation for startup activity per

capita) – Accelerate programs’ contributions were not presented.

•Leaders of organizations comprising Accelerate are engaged on campus as well as in the community.

•MonTEC has all available space taken with startups.

•Montana Code School has a 90% job placement rate.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY

Page 24 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•NA – Efforts to improve efficiency exist, and strong efforts/strategy in place to continue to function

efficiently.

•In addition to designated funds, Accelerate has generated approximately $1,000,000 in grant income

over the past five years.

•Unit has maintained stable expense budgets paired with increasing revenues

•Intentional strategy to increase further revenue generation.

•Local and statewide initiatives resulting in break even or revenue generation resulting in impact

beyond UM’s investment.

•Efforts to improve efficiency already in place - collaborates to achieve efficiency in resource

utilization, sharing supplies, space, student help, even rides to and from collaborative events.

•Combined total of all Accelerate FTEs is 60% lower than the average combined total of industry

peers.

•Guiding principles for Accelerate unit/programs include bootstrapping, entrepreneurship, and

achieving maximum impact with minimum resources.

•Generated in excess of one million dollars in grant related support over the past five years,

representing 62% of Accelerate's expenses during the same time period.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

* Balanced expense/revenue from year to year

* Accelerate strives to achieve maximum impact with minimal resources

* Continues to build on already strong outside support

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•The report did not always answer questions directly on this unit.

•A combination of grant funds, general funds, research indirect income, and multiple other sources

support the Unit.

•Shared plans and resources for admin/operational tasks have allowed these to be delegated to

students.

•General funds supported a portion of expenses through FY15. Since then, Accelerate has been 100%

self-supporting.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


•Further options for restricting not provided, but the unit already did so in 2016 as a result of internal

restructuring and efficiency analysis

•Strong evidence of alignment with and contribution to strategic opportunities, particularly Partner

with Place and SO5-Foster Knowledge Creation and Innovation

•In addition, these areas of SV align with MUS Goal #2: Workforce & Economic Development and

Accelerate’s programs.

•Restructuring in an effort to be more efficient occurred in 2016.

•Excellent opportunities to use additional resources to expand programming and innovation and

collaborate with other units and stakeholders.

•Unit plays an important role in executing the vision of higher education as described in UM Strategic

Vision.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 25 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




n/a

* Unique opportunity to engage students and MT businesses

* Have participated in active restructuring to meet office and client demands

* Serve as a model for other Universities

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Strategic opportunities were identified for future development.

•Newly developing collaborations can be expanded. Cost-saving measures in place since 2016 have

increased efficiency.

•The collection of programs in Accelerate provides the University with connections to the business

world.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 26 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin153AS092 92 Research and Creative Scholarship Graduate School





7 1.4 4 1 4 1 7 1.05 4 0.6 5.05Reviewer: 1

4 0.8 4 1 5 1.25 7 1.05 3 0.45 4.55Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 7 1.75 5 1.25 6 0.9 3 0.45 5.75Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


•Unit does not address Leadership or Engagement, though surely a graduate school should promote

them.

•Unit provides an essential service to UM graduate programs: admissions, processing TA/RA

contracts, implementing academic policy, adjudicating student problems and complaints, recruiting

activities (centralizing communication is also a central function).

•Unit somewhat contributes to UM’s mission: 1.) promotes interdisciplinarity through both its

Master’s and Doctorate of Interdisciplinary Studies, through administering the Materials Science

doctoral program, and supporting other interdisciplinary programs; 2.) supports diversity initiatives,

primarily through grants.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-The unit's mission addresses the value of diversity, but does not create a direct link to the other values

of UM2020, nor does it address the education of others regarding these values.

-The unit plays an integral role in the enrollment of graduates students at UM. Reductions to this unit

would directly impact the services provided to these students.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Specific enactment of leadership, engagement, and sustainability not addressed

•Support diversity initiatives, primarily through grants to historically under represented populations

•Essential service through administrative duties for all graduate students; admissions, TA/RA

contracts, academic policy and adjudication

•Centralized communication for program and graduate students

•Cuts would decrease service to faculty and staff and graduate students, recruiting through Grad

Expo would also decrease and grad student associations

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 14

Page 27 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•Report provides little information regarding external demand, writing that “this service is difficult to

measure.” It seems that the number of “applications” (provided above in strengths and in bullet one in

the report) should explain the external demand and the number of enrolled students (not provided)

would explain the internal demand?

•Unit does not fully address efforts to increase collaboration with other units.

•Unit demonstrates strong internal demand for unit services: serves students, faculty, and staff in

numerous programs across campus (number of programs has been consistent and number of

applications has been “fairly consistent”: 2479 in 2012, 2068 in 2014, 2255 in 2017.)

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-There is not a tool in place to measure the external demand on the unit.

-Enrollment tends to be consistent. Where decreases occur, there is a logical explanation to address it.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Internal demand is stable due to changes in program utilizing services. External demand is expected

to grow

•No specific collaborations to increase demand were mentioned

•Internal demand is faculty, staff and graduate students

•Admission application numbers have been consistent and admission support will stay consistent

•Graduate school will need tech support and training for new admission system

•External users are potential graduate students and is expected to grow with new recruitment efforts

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


•Answers could be fleshed out more.

oConcerning Bullet One, for example: does “being available” to students somehow exceed the need of

of the unit’s primary users?

oConcerning Bullet Two, for example, of the five employees, how many are involved in engagement?

Does the list of engagement/service above pertain mostly to one or two heavily engaged members or

does it reflect lighter involvement across the board?

•Unit “strives to provide the best possible service to both its internal and external users” (including

both group and one-on-one training, improvements in communication, availability to students, timely

response to student questions)

•Unit describes good level of employee engagement and service: Staff Senate, UM Discrimination

Grievance Committee, MUS Wellness Champions, Graduate Council, Griz Central Management Team,

Campus Wellness Coalition, APASP, Cabinet, Budget, Budget allocation model, Assessment and

accreditation, Strategic planning, Urcc , Forward125, Indigenous Mentoring Program.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-No internal assessment or national comparison is made.

-Employees of the unit are actively involved in service to the campus.Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 28 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•No benchmarks or comparisons to peer institutions were made

•Numbers of departments that use the graduate school or that completed the self-study were not

provided

•Professional development outlined had only occurred on the UM campus and no state or national

professional development was addressed

•A self-study indicated that departments did not know what the graduate school functions were, and

since that time efforts to increase awareness have improved

•Staff is always available to answer inquiries and email responses occur within a day

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


•While report is very detailed in terms of the list of revenue and expenses, it could have “explained”

the numbers more. The author had room to do so, with 150 words remaining in Bullet 2.

•Author could also have been more forthcoming in Bullet 4. Entire answer is: “The Graduate School

generates external revenue through admission and graduation application fees. This revenue is not

used to support expenses.”

•The unit has made some effort at improving efficiency.

•The unit has a designated account (funded by admission and graduation application fees) in addition

to its two general state-funded fund accounts (the general operating account and the TA stipend

account).

•Expenses have decreased because of a personnel loss.

•In FY16 the VPR also took on the position of Graduate Dean.

•Revenue has increased due to an approved $20 graduation processing fee.

•Report shows that, “nationally, graduate schools are staffed at a much higher rate”.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-Revenue increases can be attributed to new fees assessed of students.

-Revenue has increased while expenses have decreased.

-Staffing FTE is below that of national rates.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•In some years the expenses outnumber the revenue for Restricted funds

•Revenue generated by graduate school is not used to support expenses. It is not stated where the

revenue goes.

•Salary was saved by leaving a classified staff position unfilled

•Revenue increased because of implementing a processing fee for graduate applications, paid for by

students

•Because of the changes in Provost’s and VPR there are large salary savings in this unit

•Technology changes and implementations have made the processes more efficient

•Their self-study demonstrated that nationally graduate schools are staffed at higher rates

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY

Page 29 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




*Report does not demonstrate potential for collaboration or restructuring of the unit, as it does not

provide answers to Bullets 2 and 3.

•There is some potential for expansion of services.

•The unit contributes to the UM Strategic Vision:

oReport discusses Engaging Students Where they Are: 1.) suggesting giving more [presumably

financial] support to the Graduate and Professional Student Association (for travel grants and

workshops); 2.) working with H&S to provide annual TA training.

oReport also discusses Fostering Knowledge Creation

•Focus on recruitment and retention

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


-Unit does not provide options for restructuring.

-Unit does not explain the potential for use of additional resources.

-Unit actively supports the strategic opportunities outlined in the UM Vision.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•No restructure or innovative collaboration ideas

•No ways to generate revenue or explanation of use of additional resources

•They would like to support student associations more

•Working with H&S to provide TA training

•Foster Knowledge and Creation – develop the number and quality of completers in programs

•Diversity by inclusive excellences and international recruitment

•Engage Students where they are – flexible job schedules, and build a more robust support network

•Increase retention and shorten time-to-degree

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 30 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin138AS093 93 Research and Creative Scholarship UM Press





3 0.6 3 0.75 3 0.75 2 0.3 2 0.3 2.7Reviewer: 1

7 1.4 4 1 5 1.25 6 0.9 6 0.9 5.45Reviewer: 2

5 1 3 0.75 6 1.5 5 0.75 7 1.05 5.05Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


- If the claim is true that UM Press is needed to share important research and cultural work, the

funding source should be coming from ORSP and should be increasing. However, the funding

support and trend have been declining.

- Furthermore, the UM Press has not been able to create any significant revenue with these

publications suggesting that what is being published is not getting traction.

- Any further cuts would be the elimination of UM Press.

- The narrative suggests that the UM Press is a primary channel to let broader Montana and alum

community aware of UM top research. There is no clear data to support such a claim.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None of any significance.

•UM Press directly aligns with UM’s mission and the 4 values as stated in the UM2020 Strategic Plan.

•UM Press is the only university press in the state of Montana. A reduction in its already scant

resources to this unit would eliminate it completely. It would, “diminish one vital way in which

people connect to the University’s mission.”

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Not a particularly resilient entity if any reduction in funds results in collapse.

Good alignment with the values of the 2020 strategic plan, specific university with emphasis on

engagement. Any reduction in funds would result in collapse of UM Press.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


- The narrative outlines hopes, intentions and book stocks but track record does not look promising

especially if the press has no advertising and marketing funds.

- Author notes UM Press books are getting more attention and notice but again, no empirical data for

these assessments.

- Based on the narrative, the UM Press appears to have worked with some faculty and organizations,

especially MMAC.

- Some plans are in place to better market and track books but the challenge is that there is no budget

for marketing and sales effort.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 15

Page 31 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•UMP currently has no way of tracking the number of books purchased. There is

•I know that UMP is fairly small, but it would have been helpful to see some comparison with other

university presses of similar sizes. I can see much opportunity with UMP and I think that such a

comparison would be useful to see how it can expand to meet the university’s mission.

•The report gives information on the value of existing book stock (about $110,000 retail prices) at

UMP’s distributor as well as stock held on campus. This unit is under-resourced and is now focusing

what little it has on selling current books rather than producing new ones.

•Internal demand includes book collaborations with MMAC, book projects by UM faculty, and books

purchased by the UM community. There have been 7 books co-sponsored by MMAC, 10 books written

or edited by UM faculty in the last 13 years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


No clear data or clear presentation of evidence of or trends in external demand.

About 23 books published in last 13 years. Large number of students served by this program annually

(~650). Only three years of data too short for a trend, but numbers look strong. Meeting state

expectations for support of this campus program. Some good ideas for increasing external demand.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


- With .1 FTE, it is not clear how with such limited human resources that these ambitious marketing,

operational and community outreach plans outlined in the narrative will be accomplished.

- With its limited resources, the ability of UM Press to move forward on some publication are notable.

- Efforts are made to provide students internship programs and training with other units across

campus (e.g., Mansfield Library)

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•No comparison to similarly sized university presses; evidence of other assessments (book reviews)

are mentioned, but I’d have appreciated seeing some quotes from these reviews or numbers of positive

reviews.

•UMP is establishing a better online presence through social media and will monitor engagement with

its primary users through web traffic.

•Outgoing and current director of UMP participate in UM committees and community boards of local

cultural organizations.

•UMP has worked with interns since AY 2016-17 as part of a collaboration with the Mansfield Library.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


No budget for professional development, so no professional development

For a low cost enterprise, the Press is doing a good job of meeting regional needs. Several actions in

place to improve visibility and increase number of people publishing with UW Press. Good

description of role in scholarship and teaching.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY

Page 32 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




- However, low sales and limited philanthropic support have not made the UM Press operation

profitable.

- There are no clear revenue projections of current projects. Plus, it is not clear what is the determinant

of whether these books should be produced. If not profitable or will draw interest, why are they

printing them. Who is the audience?

- Fundraising and external funding will be the source of funding projects, but not clear what are the

expectation for success.

- Retirement of previous director has reduced costs to UM Press.

- UM Press has made effort to collaborate with other outlets to help distribution such as Facts and

Fiction, but not clear whether these efforts are sufficient to make it sustainable.

- Some prospects for increased revenue with six printed books, but again not sure what the projected

revenue will be made and whether sufficient.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None of any significance.

•Report satisfactorily identifies funds that contribute to this unit.

•Salaries have been cut to less than 1/5th during the last 5 years. Current director is a .1 FTE receiving

$7,500 per year. Revenue has fluctuated over the last 5 years, but UMP made $8,063 in FY17. UMP

anticipates increased revenue in FY18 due to 6 books currently in production.

•Now that the staff has been reduced to .1 FTE (a course buyout for current director), projects are now

dependent on collaborations with other campus entities such as MMAC and the Mansfield Library as

well as off-campus entities such as MSU-Billings, Fact & Fiction, and the Montana Broadcaster’s

association.

•100% of revenues are now going directly towards book production due to budget cuts.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Little revenue generation annually, declining book production budget.

Low cost to University, yet benefit of having a University press. Most of cost is just in the salary of the

director. Increasing number of books published per year in last five years. Anticipated increase in

revenue in 2018 with six books in production.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


- It is not clear why UM Press needs to be the publisher of what they consider as important works from

UM. If these books or research are not made credible as great works by outside peer review, would it

be advisable for UM to internally produce these works?

- The author outlines ambitious plans for conferences, creating new book series around UM strong

programs, and creating prizes, but all these efforts require significant financial and human resources to

accomplish when it currently cannot achieve self-sustainability and profitability.

- Rather than publishing these important UM research work internally, would it not be more cost

effective to allow major publishers to produce the work and UM spends its resources showcasing these

works recognized by major reputable publishers?

-

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 33 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•None of any significance

•UMP contributes directly to strategic opportunities 3 and 5.

•UMP is collaborating with Printing and Graphics to lower printing and design costs. They are

working with the Graduate School to use their subscription to Submittable.com to raise the profile of

UMP to potential authors at no extra cost. They are also working with a private donor and the

Creative Writing Program to fund a prize in poetry.

•UMP would use extra resources in the following ways: 1. Broaden the audience for UM research, 2.

Invest in the production of digital books.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


No specific weaknesses

Good alignment with two of the strategic vision objectives, particular fit with disseminating creative

scholarship, helping improve research outreach and visibility for the University and on partnering

with place. Looking into collaborations that reduce costs and improve production and developing an

online submission system to streamline processing. Additional resources would improve ability to

serve the campus community and aid in increasing visibility and outreach. These efforts would also

increase revenue.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 34 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin163AS094 94 Research and Creative Scholarship Research Administration

Consider for Development and/or ModificationResearch




7 1.4 4 1 5 1.25 6 0.9 4 0.6 5.15Reviewer: 1

7 1.4 6 1.5 7 1.75 8 1.2 8 1.2 7.05Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 5 1.25 6 1.5 7 1.05 7 1.05 6.25Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


1) fails to address the strategic values of leadership, engagement, sustainability, and diversity in its

response.

1) unit aligns closely with the strategic opportunity of “Discovery and Creativity to Serve Montana and

the World” in the 2020 plan, as demonstrated by its outreach efforts, and connections to federal

agencies.

2) explains its essentiality by connecting to our mission as a comprehensive research institution, and by

connecting to federal relations.

3) explains that a reduction of resources would hinder the institution’s ability to retain its research

focus, as well as a decrease in federal funds and less influence in federal initiatives. (7)

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Reliant on federal and state funding of research which is managed through this office. Reductions have

a snowball effect on our ability to fund initiatives through this office.

•Part of the underlying infrastructure for the campus Research. Used by all constituencies engaged in

research.

•Any further reduction is a serious safety concern for all on campus, and would also effect service.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA – Alignment with UM2020 values and unit provides essential services.

•Services are essential to UM and its efforts to maintain status as a comprehensive research institution.

•Demonstrates evidence that unit aligns with the “Discovery and Creativity to Serve Montana and the

World” strategic opportunity in UM 2020 as well as leadership and engagement.

•Collaboration with APLU and COGR facilitates and increases the amount of federal dollars flowing

to the University through legislative initiatives.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 14

Page 35 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




1) relationship between metrics and internal unit demand is unclear and under-quantified in the report.

2) no measures of how external demand is measured are provided, nor are the claims quantified

1) measures internal demand using the number of requests received from campus units to be included

in the federal initiatives packet, and through the number of inquiries regarding potential legislation.

(Have remained stable over the past few years).

2) unit’s external demand stems from members of the Montana federal delegation, which has been

increasing over the past few years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Congressional allocation limits the number of initiatives.

more opportunities for working with state legislative delegation.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Specific data is not provided for past 5 years and anticipated years.

•Internal demand is measured in terms of the number of viable initiatives, which have been fairly

consistent at five to eight.

•Demand for services is symbiotic between external and internal users.

•External demand comes from members of the Montana federal delegation or their representatives

and have increased due to a closer working relationship.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


1) does not explain (specifically to Research Administration) how well it meets the needs of its primary

users, nor how that is measured; instead it focuses on which initiatives were completed.

1) extensively details its highly regulated relationship with the National Council of University

Research Administrators (NCURA), and used their recommendations to implement new changes in

2012.

2) heavily involved in campus service commitments (such as APASP, IT Senate, and Grad Council) as

well as professional development opportunities such as NCURA.

3) unit does not have its own research mission, but is imperative to supporting the research mission of

many other units, and details the number of proposals submitted, award dollars received, total

expenditures, and the number of exhibitions/performances/publications by year

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Nothing in place to assess the quality/productivity of creative scholarship performance/exhibitions.

•Research and creative scholarship have increased in both dollars to research and number of

exhibitions/performances and publications

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 36 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




•Recommendations from 2011 NCURA peer review that were implemented are not described.

•No industry benchmarks exist for Federal Relations.

•NCURA peer review in 2011 examining all components of the research enterprise. The final report

was submitted in 2012 and several recommendations were implemented.

•The number of initiatives within the “packet” that receive legislative language and funding are

internally tracked each year. FY17 included in report.

•National initiatives were consistent in funding or improved.

•Strong evidence of engagement, both institutionally and professionally.

•Evidence of productivity in award volume, publications, and performance/showings.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


1) general fund revenue falls below expenses for all but the most recent two years.

2) explains that the Research Administration office is unable to generate external revenue, though it

does note that other Office of Research and Creative Scholarship areas do generate revenue for UM.

1) designated fund revenue always exceeds expenditures over the past five fiscal years.

2) experienced increasing revenue over the past five years, and as such has added three critical new

positions.

3) notes the unprecedented growth and success it has experienced over the past five years, and

explains that it has focused on improving efficiency by adding new multi-purpose positions and

collaborating with other institutions throughout the Montana University System.

4) explains that the Research Administration office is unable to generate external revenue, though it

does note that other Office of Research and Creative Scholarship areas do generate revenue for UM

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


NA

Good collaborations across the MUS System.

Use of outside funds is highly regulated but can show a return on investment to the entire research

enterprise on campus.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•NA – Efforts to improve efficiency exist, and addition of positions were based on audit

recommendations in order to improve efficiency and ensure compliance.

•ORSP receives payment for services already rendered.

•Additional of core facility manager position created as a result of an Internal Audit recommendation

regarding institutional recharge facilities. This position works closely with the 14 research-related

instrumentation facilities to ensure usage is appropriately tracked and documented, and that both

usage and billing meet federal regulations.

•A large decrease in expenses has occurred due to the change UM’s federal partner agency (SMI) in

Washington, DC.

•Efforts to collaborate on campus and within MUS system.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY

Page 37 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




1) does not provide any specific recommendations for improving efficiency and collaboration.

2) notes that additional investment could result in an U.S. Agency of International Development

liaison position, but notes that additional resources would not likely increase UM’s success or outreach

in federal relations at this time. (4)

1) demonstrates a strong connection to “Foster Knowledge Creation and Innovation” through its

function to provide strategic direction to grow “research and creative enterprise.”

2) demonstrates a strong connection to the new strategic vision’s goal to become an R1 designated

institution, and “catalyzing economic development” through its projects with various state and federal

agencies and personnel.

3) notes that additional investment could result in an U.S. Agency of International Development

liaison position, but notes that additional resources would not likely increase UM’s success or outreach

in federal relations at this time. (4)

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Would like concrete ideas that directly benefit campus constituencies outside of the research

enterprise, perhaps?

•Gives a good indication of how they fit in the strategic vision.

•An honest answer that additional resources would be better spent elsewhere if they became available.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Further options for restructuring are not provided

•Strong evidence of alignment with and contribution to strategic opportunities, particularly “Foster

Knowledge Creation and Innovation.”

•Other than current efforts to work with Montana Tech and MSU on several federal initiatives, as well

as via subawards funded by competitive grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements, there are no

other units that provide similar research administration services.

•Already employs cost effective method of increasing research and creative activity.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 38 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin35AS095 95 Research and Creative Scholarship Research Compliance





8 1.6 1 0.25 8 2 8 1.2 8 1.2 6.25Reviewer: 1

6 1.2 8 2 7 1.75 7 1.05 6 0.9 6.9Reviewer: 2

9 1.8 6 1.5 9 2.25 9 1.35 9 1.35 8.25Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


N/A

•Addresses leadership, engagement, sustainability, and diversity of UM 2020

•Research Compliance is essential for federally sponsored research funding – including student loans

and grant funding of higher education institutions.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Diversity and Sustainability efforts appear to be less developed than the other two areas.

Support for Leadership and Engagement within the UM2020 plan both seem very strong.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted.

The Office of Research Compliance, including Animal Care (ORC) department is essential to UM and

is a requirement for the Institution to continue to receive its federal grant funding. Any reduction to

the FTE employees working in the ORC administrative unit would render the University unable to

meet federally-mandated compliance requirements. Non-compliance on the part of the University

would prevent the University from receiving any federal funding – including both federal student

loans and grant funding . The author listed out several ways the ORC is meeting the objectives in the

2020 plan

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


N/A

•Internal demand is faculty and student research as well as oversight committees serving multiple

departments and University of Montana campuses.

•External review services now, charged fee for process.

•Federally funded programs demand certain processes, Research Compliance meets the internal and

external demands

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 14

Page 39 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




One potential, albeit minor, weakness is that this unit focuses only on compliance. Is it possible to

move beyond compliance, to a point where this unit adds direct scholarly value to projects?

The bullet points under "Criteria 2, bullet 1" appear to show a very strong internal demand. (Not

particularly surprising for a research-active university.)

Making IACUC and IRB services available externally (for a fee) is a strength of this unit.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


No discussion of the anticipated future demands or if the demand has been steady. Demands are

basically set by the federal government and UM must adhere before research dollars are excepted.

The majority of the ORC activity is focused on internal users; faculty and student. However, the

IACUC and IRB oversight committees have recently made external review services available to

external researchers at a competitive rate.

Demand for the ORC is measured in terms of the number of research protocols reviewed per year.

Metrics were provided.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


N/A

•Regional comparison to 10 institutions, UM has less FTE with the same size operation

•Fully staffed Laboratory Animal resource animal facility

•High engagement in professional development across the unit

•Educational tools to educate campus – faculty, staff, and students

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


"Anecdotal evidence suggests that turnaround times at other similar institutions are typically 3-5 times

longer than those at UM." I hope that this is because our Research Compliance folks are awesome and

hardworking. But given the critical nature of these reviews, I have to ask whether this quick

turnaround time indicates the possibility that the reviews aren't as thorough or rigorous as at other

institutions. Are any corners being cut? (Again, I hope this isn't the case! I'm just noting the possibility

as a potential weakness.)

Training/teaching provided by Research Compliance appears to be all in-person. Could some of this be

done via webcasts or interactive software?

Quick turnaround times on proposals is a strength, but may also have a potential downside (see

"weaknesses" below).

The efforts made at professional development are especially impressive.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 40 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




None noted.

The UM ORC operates at a bare bones level when compared to a survey of 10 northwest regional state

institutions of a similar size to UM. The average FTE in Research Compliance at those 10 institutions

is 12.6 compared to 9.8 at UM (22% fewer human resources). However, even with significant

understaffing, the UM ORC provides exemplary service to its users. The Institutional Review Board

(IRB) has consistently provided a 3.0 to 3.5 day turnaround on protocols submitted to it for review; the

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) and Institutional.The Biosafety Committee

(IBC) consistently provide 5-10 day turnaround time on protocols provided to those committees for

review. Anecdotal evidence suggests that turnaround times at other similar institutions are typically 3-

5 times longer than those at UM. Evidence of professional development and teaching were provided.

The RC department does not conduct research.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


N/A

•Collaboration with legal, Curry Health Center, Research & Creative Scholarship, St. Patrick’s Hospital

•Description of funds, changes to FTE and General Fund support in the last year.

•Resourceful in charging external users rate to utilize services and facilities

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


The decrease in general funds available for Research Compliance could be a weakness in this area

(though not one that the Research Compliance unit has any particular control over).

Collaborations with other units on campus (ORSP, Legal, Curry) and off campus (St. Patrick's

Hospital) are helpful.

Offering research compliance services externally has the potential to be a good thing for UM.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted. The RC is attempting to general it's own revenue through external compliance audits as

time allows. In FY16 the RC lost of its general funds and is entirely covered by indirect costs by the

Vice President for Research.

The reduction in funding in the last five years has resulted in the elimination of a full-time institutional

veterinarian and the LAR Director position. UM currently operates with a half-time institutional

veterinarian position, and the LAR Director responsibilities were shifted to the LAR Facility Manager

and the IACUC Manager.

Following are a few notes regarding the finances:

In FY14 the IRB position (1.0 FTE) moved from classified staff to contract professional

In FY17 the compliance position was funded at .50 FTE as contract professional

In FY17 the veterinarian position was added as contract professional at .50 FTE.

After FY16 there were no longer any general funds available to support this program.

A substantial increase in the number of animals being housed at Ft. Missoula is adding new challenges

for the LAR staff, including maintenance of facilities not on campus, drive times, transportation of

animals, cages, and equipment.

Revenue is generated by services performed by the LAR and is supplemented, by the VPR, from the

return of grant indirect costs (IDC’s).

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 41 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM



5. OPPORTUNITY


N/A

•Engagement with the Strategic Vision – focusing on openness, impact, partnership, and

innovation/creativity

•Research wide enterprise tool is expensive at first, but long term would be excellent management tool

and save on resources

•Centralized Compliance Office could be help

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


Efforts related to Openness appear less strong than other areas (of the Strategic Vision).

This unit's efforts in the areas of Innovation and Creativity, Impact, and Partnership appear strong.

The suggestion to invest in a research enterprise-wide management tool has the potential to improve

efficiency and effectiveness of Research Compliance.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


None noted.

The creation of a centralized Compliance Office that addressed all federal regulatory compliance

requirements (and not just research compliance requirements), the Research Compliance Office would

logically be a part of that centralized office. Efficiencies would be gained from effective compliance

programs campus-wide that would lead to reduced federal fines for non-compliance, and streamlined

administrative support services.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 42 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin132AS097 97 Research and Creative Scholarship Environment Health and Risk Mgmt





5 1 6 1.5 5 1.25 5 0.75 5 0.75 5.25Reviewer: 1

6 1.2 8 2 8 2 7 1.05 8 1.2 7.45Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 8 2 6 1.5 5 0.75 6 0.9 6.55Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


Departments not engaging with hazardous materials receive no training about env health, e.g.

ergonomics.

Strong on leadership (on env health); sustainability (recycles and otherwise treats hazardous

materials); and engagement.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•Diversity was not addressed.

•The unit aligns well with UM 2020. Many of its services are necessary to the smooth functioning of

UM.

•Loss of resources would impede the ability of EHRM to fulfill many of its missions

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


- Author does clear job to outline what is the EHRM role but no data on empirical impact of its services.

- EHRM functions as leading advocate to promote safety and risk management on campus.

-EHRM provides training, active awareness education, and consultation on best practices to address

risks, environmental sustainability and safety processes to various groups and programs across

campus.

- Important to help UM campus follows important regulatory requirements.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


None

Increased lab space has necessitated increased work in examining safety and health practicesStrengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Internal demand is up because of additional lab and research space on campus requiring more

compliance inspections. This is due to increases in research awards and insurable properties. Health

professions programming increases have increased the need for risk management resources.

•External demand is demonstrated through cooperation and coordination of services with city, county

and state entities. Increases in emergency preparedness and cyber security risks have resulted in

upward trends in demand.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 14

Page 43 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




- None apparent

- Narrative outlines with empirical examples of the growing demands for EHRM risk and safety

management as UM research initiatives expand.

- Highlights the growing outside organization engaging EHRM over the last five years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY


Would have liked to have seen a tally of accidents/injuries over time to show effectiveness of work.

Have increased trainings significantly, with special attention to driving.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Data indicate that ERHM provides similar required services with fewer personnel than other regional

institutions of similar size.

•Staff provide service on campus and state committees, and maintain appropriate training and licenses

for themselves, in addition to providing training for campus personnel.

•EHRM provides safety and risk management support to the campus research enterprise, providing

greatly increased number and topics of training sessions especially in the past two years.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


- Although faced with numerous tasks, it has only 4 employees whereas places like MSU has up to 11

employees serving in these services.

- EHRM provide list of numerous roles and responsibilities of the organization for four year institution

of UM size.

- EHRM is increasingly faced with increasing demands despite small staff, but maintain high level of

engagement, productivity and training for UM campus.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


Reduced FTE does mean that the division has lower ability to be more proactive with regard to env.

health. The new programs they've initiated have saved money, but does that mean that the money-

hunt has edged out other, equally important services?

Enhanced record keeping. Loss of 1 FTE did not precipitate a net loss of services rendered.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Loss of personnel through retirement and resignation without full replacement resulted in a net loss

of 1 FTE in the period. These losses resulted in cross training of personnel to maintain required

services.

•Collaboration with Internal Audit and Legal Counsel to create an Ad Hoc compliance committee

serves the function provided by separate personnel on other campuses.

•The Workers’ Compensation Safety Smart program has brought external revenue. Good practices

also result in a discounted premium for the university insurance bill.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 44 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




- none apparent

- EHRM efficiency has grown with retirement of key personnel but no immediate replacement.

- Employees are cross trained to function in different areas of work. EHRM is collaborating with other

departments (e.g. legal counsel, UM Police) to form various ad hoc committees to compensate for the

lack of human resources to address gaps.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY


Like all depts, suffers from inadequate funds.

Adding a 1/2 time admin and a technology position will increase efficiency.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


•None seen.

•Continuing current collaborations and expanding new opportunities identified in the response.

•Because of the unit’s central role in compliance with state and federal regulations requiring

specialized expertise, restructuring would likely result in a lack of compliance and negatively impact

the university.

•Adding individuals with specific expertise would allow the unit to expand its services. This

expansion could result in cost savings – revenue generation is less likely

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


- None apparent.

- The EHRM is not a revenue generating organization but an organization that promotes cost savings

by avoiding errors and violations. EHRM expanded role can further ensure accidents and violations

are avoided.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 45 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

17Admin160AS098 98 Research and Creative Scholarship Office of Sponsored Programs





7 1.4 6 1.5 5 1.25 3 0.45 5 0.75 5.35Reviewer: 1

9 1.8 9 2.25 9 2.25 9 1.35 9 1.35 9Reviewer: 2

7 1.4 6 1.5 5 1.25 5 0.75 5 0.75 5.65Reviewer: 3

1. ALIGNMENT


Overall, the report was written in a vague format. Due to this vagueness, the it was difficult to score

and to make recommendations. For example, Bullet 2 is vague. For the reviewers to understand the

importance of your service, please explain more beyond stating there is a threat of audit and penalties.

The stewardship of sponsored research throughout its lifecycle is essential to research in our university.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

This unit plays a critical role in helping UM achieve the mission. Research is a pillar of the university.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


N/A

Good explanation of alignment (although not in the answer format asked for).

Seems essential to have a regulatory office for research/grant activity to ensure compliance.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

2. Demand


Poorly explain how internal and external demand is driven. It is unclear which constituencies your

service provides value to.

Increasing amounts of awards received over time.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

Demands are increasing. This unit meets critical demands from both internal and external users.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


More detailed information regarding national standards and peer institutions would have provided

more context.

Steady growth in proposals submitted, awards received, and expenditures.Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3. QUALITY

Ranking Category:




Total Count: 13

Page 46 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




Don't provide the results of the NCURA Peer Review in 2011. Only state "a number of

recommendations were implemented." What were the recommendations? What was implemented and

what still needs improvement? For employee development state 3 have earned CRA certificate,

however, you have 17 employees. Why only 3? Also, state amount of awarded funds, but do not

provide details on number of submissions each year.

The use of internal and external audits as well as reference to external standards. They have invested

in continuing education for employees and PI training sessions for faculty and staff. The increasing

amount of awards indicates a high level of quality in stewardship.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

Clear and consistent indicators of quality are offered by the unit. This unit has regulatory/legal

demands that it meets, and also helps to ensure UM as a whole meets regulatory/legal demands. Very

thorough and detailed description of quality.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


N/A

Audited annually by both internal and state entities to ensure compliance and provide a check &

balance.

Staff participate in on-campus activities and professional organizations and conferences.

Offer PI training every year.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4. EFFICIENCY


As a reviewer, this section was confusing. You needed to explain the difference between Designated

Funds and General Funds and how they are used. Also, Designated Fund expenditures exceeded

revenue for every year except 2017. Why? This is not addressed. You do not address or explain the

increasing number of staff. How do you justify 20.3 FTE in FY 16 to 27.4 FTE in FY 17?

Access to resources through Assistant Vice President's service as a peer reviewer for NCURA.Strengths:

Weaknesses:


This is not a weakness but one notes that staff increases are mandated as workload increases; however,

as workload increases, so to does revenue.

This unit is highly efficient, and has implement impressive strategies to maintain operations within

budgetary constraints.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


N/A

Unit receives F&A reimbursement to offset operating costs.

Unit has undertaken several initiatives to streamline processes, i.e more online processes, collaboration

with IT Central regarding UM Box, Docusign, and Alfresco.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5. OPPORTUNITY

Page 47 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM




Do not align well with other strategic opportunities such as reinventing the curriculum. Disconcerting

that the example for re-engineering effort for efficiency is from 1991, that is over two decades ago. Do

not recommend ways to be more efficient with the services provided by departmental research

administrators. It is not clear why efficiencies cannot be gained. What do these people do more

effectively than your office? The recommendation to use investment to fund more of these

departmental research administrators is not innovative, and you have not explained the performance

gains possible. What can you do to free up P.I. time more?

Services support fostering knowledge creation in strategic opportunities. It is clear that externally

funded research is essential to UM's mission.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


n/a

This unit aligns well with the Strategic Vision -- in fact, it is essential. The unit is responsive and

innovative in ideas for expansion, and include how to be more supportive of other units on campus.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:


No potential to restructure.

Closely aligned with Strategic Vision Opportunity 5, peripherally with Opportunity 4.Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Page 48 of 4813-Nov-17 4:39 PM

Documents

1. Alignment 2. Demand 3. Quality 4. Efficiency 5 ... Service … · AS080 80 Research and Creative Scholarship Flathead Lake Bio Station 17Admin113 Creative Sc Consider for Development