Foundation of the Future Town Hall Meetings Sharon L. Vasquez, Provost Arosha Jayawickrema, VP of Finance and Administration Katherine Black, R.J. McGivney,Harry Workman, and Norm Young: Task Force Co-chairs February 2012

Foundation of the Future Launch Outlined by President Harrison in Fall and Spring Kickoffs and November letter to the campus 1.To review and prioritize all programs – academic and administrative 2.To identify where to focus resources without increasing the overall budget

External Environment Scan Projected University Revenues Increasingly Competitive Environment Long list of “wants” and “needs” Steady State Enrollment Modest Tuition Increases Need to Increase Quality, Reputation and Brand

The Task Forces Academic Programs Membership comprised of faculty only Administrative Programs Membership includes faculty and staff Common Goals for Both Task Forces Develop criteria and design the data and information gathering phase Conduct review of all programs Insure integrity and transparency of the process Two Task Forces

Charge to the Task Forces: Assess programs based on… University-wide impact or importance Clearly demonstrated demand and/or opportunity Greater benefit than cost Decision making will reflect our strategic directions, shared values and mission

Roles and Responsibilities Champions - Support task force co-chairs, remove obstacles to completion, help process stay on track Sharon Vasquez, Provost Arosha Jayawickrema, Vice President, Finance & Admin. Consultant Larry Goldstein – provide expertise and advice Planning Model Framework Adapted by Task Forces from the work of R. Dickeson (Prioritizing Academic Programs and Services, 2010)

Responsibilities of the Task Forces 1)Create operational ground rules and a decision making model 2)Determine the definition of a “program” 3)Develop a comprehensive list of all programs 4)Assist in defining a communications plan 5) Develop the qualitative and quantitative review criteria and “weighting” of each criteria

Responsibilities of the Task Forces, Cont. 6)Develop a format/template for programs reporting 7)Assist program respondents 8)Review the returned reports 9)Assess and make a recommendation on each program  Invest  Maintain  Restructure  Divest/conduct additional review

Task Force Activities (to date) Determined operating guidelines and ground rules Developed the criteria and weighting of each criteria Prepared draft documents for comment In process: Communicate and seek input Manage workflow, complete tasks on schedule and develop recommendations on each program

Academic Criteria/Weighting 1.Importance To The University Of Hartford (14%) 2.External/Internal Demand (24%) 3.Quality (24%) 4.Income/Costs (24%) 5.Opportunity/Barrier Analysis (14%)

Admin. Criteria/Weighting 1.Importance or Impact to the University (20%) 2.External/Internal Demand (20%) 3.Quality (20%) 4.Fiscal Review (20%) 5.Opportunity Analysis (20%)

Projected Timeline: subject to change Town Hall Meetings: Week of January 30 Public Comment Period for Criteria/Weighting: January 30 thru February 5 Review Template Distributed to department chairs/ directors: February 20 Reports returned to Task Force: approx. April 6 Task Force Reports forwarded to administration: July 15

Key Points Regarding the Program Prioritization 1.Importance of program prioritization to the Foundation of the Future 2.Commitment of the Task Forces to be careful, fair, and complete 3.Results of Task Force recommendations to be vetted by administration 4.An action plan to be submitted in the fall to the BOR

Foundation of the Future More information on Foundation of the Future: Follow up: Give comments via Survey Monkey Check your box for Task Force Chairs letter and the survey links

Foundation of the Future Questions and Discussion