|
Organized Research Units Guidelines
|
|
|
|
Sitemap | Feedback © UC Santa Cruz Terms and Conditions of Use |
CAMPUS GUIDELINES FOR ORGANIZED RESEARCH UNITS Definition and Purpose. Organized Research Units (ORUs) are academic units the University has established to provide a supportive infrastructure for interdisciplinary research complementary to the academic goals of departments of instruction and research. ORUs facilitate multidisciplinary and collaborative research by faculty, non-faculty professional researchers, and post-doctoral scholars and scientists. With core budgetary support from the University, ORUs leverage external funds from governmental agencies, private and corporate foundations, and industry. An ORU may not offer formal courses for credit for students of the University or for the public unless it has been specifically empowered to do so by the President after consultation with the Academic Senate and the appropriate Chancellors. ORUs contribute to graduate training and education through the involvement of students in faculty research and through direct sponsorship of graduate student research. Most ORUs also offer opportunities for undergraduate students to participate in research activities, and by doing so, enrich the undergraduate learning experience at UC. Lines of Responsibility. An Organized Research Unit serving a single campus is responsible to the Chancellor or Chancellor's designee for administration, budget, space, personnel, and scholarship. The Chancellor's designee will be either a Dean or the Vice Chancellor for Research (VCR). Hereafter the designee is termed the responsible administrator and the other party (Dean or VCR) is called the reviewer. When all the research activity lies within one Division, the responsible administrator usually will be the relevant Dean. When the research activity lies in multiple divisions, the EVC will assign the VCR as either the responsible administrator or reviewer, and one of the relevant Deans as the other. Administration, Budgetary Support and Personnel. Each ORU is headed by a Director who is a tenured member of the faculty and who may receive an administrative stipend in addition to the faculty salary, except that a faculty member who already earns such a stipend through another appointment (e.g., as associate dean) shall not receive a second stipend. The Director is aided by a standing Advisory Committee, chaired by a faculty member other than the Director, which meets regularly and participates actively in setting the unit's goals and in critically evaluating its effectiveness on a continuing basis. Specifically, the Advisory Committee provides counsel to the Director on all matters pertaining to the unit, including budgetary matters and personnel. The Chair of the Advisory Committee, and as many other members as practical, should meet with five-year review committees (see below) and otherwise be available for consultation by the five-year review committee during the course of its review. The Advisory Committee is made up predominantly of faculty members, but may include some members from the professional research series and may have some members from outside the University. The Advisory Committee is appointed by the reviewer. The charge to the committee and its functions, membership, and reporting requirements are determined by the appointing officer but should include active participation in the planning and evaluation of the ORU's programs and activities. In recognition of the role played by ORUs in the educational process, provision is made in the campus budget for the unit's core administrative support, Director's stipend, staff salaries, supplies and expenses, equipment and facilities, and general assistance. All permanent positions--professional, technical, administrative, or clerical--may be established and filled, regardless of the availability of funds, only after specific review and authorization of the proposed positions and of the candidates for them in accordance with University policies and procedures. Procedure for Establishment. To establish an ORU, the faculty members concerned submit a proposal stating the proposed unit's goals and objectives. The proposal should describe what value and capabilities will be added by the new unit, and explain why they cannot be achieved within the existing campus structure. It should make clear how the ORU will be greater than the sum of its parts, for example, by fostering new intellectual collaborations, stimulating new sources of funding, furthering innovative and original research, or performing service and outreach to the public. The proposal should also contain the following information: -- Experience of the core faculty in interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research collaborations. -- Research plan for the first year of operation and projections for the five years following. -- Budget estimates for the first year of operation, projections for the five years following, and anticipated sources of funding. -- Names of faculty members who have agreed in writing to participate in the unit's activities. -- Projections of numbers of faculty members and students, professional research appointees, and other personnel for the specified periods. -- Statement about immediate space needs and how they will be met for the first year and realistic projections of future space needs. -- Statement of other resource needs, such as capital equipment and library resources, and how they will be met for the first year, and realistic projections of future resource needs. -- Statement about anticipated benefits of the proposed unit to the teaching programs of the participating faculty members' departments. -- Statement specifying the appropriate administrative unit's commitment of funds, space, and other resources necessary for the successful operation of the proposed ORU. Actual or potential availability of extramural funds shall not serve as the sole basis for proposing, approving, or continuing an ORU. The proposal should also list similar units that exist elsewhere, describe the relation of the proposed unit to similar units at other campuses of the University of California, and describe the contributions to the field that the proposed unit may be anticipated to make that are not made by existing units. The proposal is submitted for review via any Dean directly affected by the proposed unit's personnel, space, and equipment demands to the VCR, who seeks the advice of the appropriate divisional Academic Senate committees. In cases of disagreement about whether to establish an ORU, the VCR consults with the Chair of the Academic Senate, but the Chancellor retains final authority for the decision to approve establishment of a new ORU. Establishment of an ORU must carry with it a commitment of space and funding adequate to the mission of the unit. The VCR informs the Vice Provost for Research of the establishment of the ORU. Procedure for Appointing a Director. The Director of an ORU is appointed by the Chancellor or the VCR who will consult with the Committee on Research on am appropriate nomination procedure. The founding Director of an ORU may be specified in the proposal to establish the ORU. When the appointment of a new Director is for an existing unit, the Advisory Committee should be solicited for nominations. Procedure for Five-year Review. Periodic reviews of ORUs are necessary to ensure that the research being conducted under the units' auspices is of the highest possible quality and that campus resources are being allocated wisely and in line with campus priorities. Each ORU should be reviewed at intervals of five years or less by an ad hoc review committee. Reviews should address the ORU's original purpose, present functioning, research accomplishments (such as publications, grants, and new collaborations resulting from research conducted or sponsored by the unit), future plans, and continuing development to meet the needs of the field. The review should assess the adequacy of space and other resources made available to the unit. The review should look to the unit's success in meeting previously established objectives, planned changes in program objectives, and planned steps to achieve new objectives. The review committee should be provided explicit budget information, including amounts and sources of all funds and expenditures, and the committee should assess whether the budget is adequate and appropriate to support the unit's mission. Each ad hoc review committee should consider and make specific recommendations, if appropriate, for improvements in the mission, budget, administration, research focus, space and other resource requirements, and programs and activities of the unit. It should also consider whether the unit should merge with another similar unit, or be disestablished. Initiation and Lead-Time. The VCR should, in consultation with the Committee on Research, assure that five-year reviews are conducted at the proper five-year interval for each unit. It is the responsibility of the reviewer to initiate five-year (quinquennial) reviews for ORUs. Preparation should begin several months in advance for a 5-year review, e.g., January or February for a review in fall or early winter. The Director is notified to begin preparation of a self-study and to convene the ORU's Advisory Committee so that they can submit names of possible members of the review committee. Ad Hoc Committee Appointment. The reviewer appoints the review committee from a slate of nominees after consultation with the Committee on Research. Names should be solicited from the ORU Director and the ORU Advisory Committee. Review committees may have one or more members from another campus or from outside the University. Self-Study. The Director of the ORU will prepare a self-study that will include: -- Annual reports since the last review. -- CVs of participating faculty and researchers. -- Primary scientific achievements of the review period, e.g., important discoveries, publications. -- Professional achievements since the last review (awards, meetings hosted, services performed, administration of scientific societies). -- Scientific and professional objectives of the ORU for the next five years. New resources needed, if any, to achieve these objectives. -- Graduate student degrees awarded in the review period related to ORU objectives (student, year, dissertation title, supervisor, postdoctoral placement). -- Graduate students currently supervised or supported by ORU staff (student, supervisor, quarters of RA support). -- Post-doctoral researchers associated with the ORU during the review period (researcher, research topic, dates of employment, source of funds, supervisor). -- Visitors associated with the ORU during the review period (name, dates, host). -- Publications (including papers submitted and in press) related to the mission and objectives of the ORU during the review period. -- Grants received by ORU researchers during the review period (principal investigator, title, total award, indirect costs). -- Fundraising efforts and consequences during the review period. -- Explicit Budget information including amounts and sources of all funds and expenditures during the review period, e.g., researcher salaries, matching funds, supplies and expense. -- Courses taught at UC Santa Cruz by ORU staff during the review period (department, course number and title, year and quarter). -- Space and staff services used by the ORU, the frequency of use, and the future space needs of the ORU. The Director should show that the total budget is accounted for. If the ORU has multiple scholarly foci, the above information should be provided separately for each focus. The Director will submit the completed self-study to the ORU advisory committee, the divisional Dean, and the VCR for comments, and then transmit the revised document to the review committee prior to their on-site visit. Charge to Review Committee. The charge to the review committee will be developed by the reviewer in consultation with the responsible administrator and relevant Senate committees (Committee on Research, Committee on Planning and Budget, and Graduate Council). The general aim is to insure that the research being conducted is of high quality and that campus resources are being allocated wisely. The ORU is reviewed with regard to its original purpose, present functioning, future plans, and continuing development to meet the needs of the field. The review should examine the unit's success in meeting previously established objectives, planned changes in program objectives, planned steps to achieve new objectives, response to recommendations from the previous review, and adequacy of space and other resources made available to the unit, and the adequacy of the budget to support the unit's mission. The review committee is invited to make specific recommendations, if appropriate, for improvements in the mission, budget, administration, research focus, space and other resource requirements, and programs and activities of the unit. It should also consider whether the ORU should merge with another similar unit or be disestablished. Justification for continuation of an ORU must be documented carefully by the review committee. The review committee will meet with members of the ORU, including faculty and non-faculty researchers, technical staff, chairs of departments most closely associated with ORU activities, and students where relevant. The review committee will hold an exit interview with the ORU Director, the appropriate Dean, the VCR, and a representative from the Committee on Research. Destination of the Review. The review committee's report is provided to the Director for comment. The report is reviewed by the responsible administrator and appropriate Academic Senate committees and a decision concerning continuation of the unit and needed changes is made by the reviewer upon consideration of the ad hoc and Senate committees' recommendations. The reviewer communicates the results of the review to the Executive Vice Chancellor and the Chancellor. The disestablishment of an ORU requires approval of the Chancellor. The Chancellor forwards the report to the President of the University. To permit the Vice Provost for Research to maintain an accurate portfolio of UC organized research, the Chancellor or the VCR, should transmit an annual report to the Vice Provost for Research listing campus ORU establishments and disestablishments and a summary of five-year reviews of ORUs. Procedure for Disestablishment. The recommendation for disestablishing an ORU may follow a five-year review of the unit or other process of review established by the VCR. After such campus review the Chancellor approves the request for disestablishment and the VCR informs the Vice Provost for Research of the action. Phase-out Period. The phase-out period for an ORU which is to be disestablished should be sufficient to permit an orderly termination or transfer of contractual obligations. Normally, the phase-out period should be at most one full year after the end of the academic year in which the decision is made to disestablish the unit. Procedure for Name Change. The director of the ORU prepares a proposal describing the rationale for requesting a new name for the unit. The request for a new name usually reflects new directions in the interdisciplinary research sponsored by the unit, the expansion or addition of new knowledge or fields of research to the unit's mission, or the institutionalization of new methodologies of study. After review by the Senate and appropriate campus administrators, the Chancellor approves the name change of the ORU and the VCR informs the Vice Provost for Research of the action. Review of Directors. The effectiveness of each Director is reviewed near the end of an initial five-year term, or earlier, as appropriate; when possible, the Director is reviewed as part of the unit's quinquennial review. If the unit is to be continued, the decision whether to continue the appointment of the Director is made by the Chancellor or the VCR. Directorships of ORUs are limited to ten years of continuous tenure in all but extraordinary circumstances. Annual Report. At the end of each academic year, each ORU should submit a report to the appropriate dean and the VCR. The Chair of the Advisory Committee should be consulted in the preparation of the report. The report should contain the following: -- Names of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers directly contributing to the unit who (a) are on the unit's payroll, (b) participate--through assistantships, fellowships, or traineeships, or are otherwise involved in the unit's work. -- Names of faculty members actively engaged in the unit's research or its supervision. -- Extent of student and faculty participation from other campuses or universities. -- Numbers and FTE of professional, technical, administrative, and clerical personnel employed. -- List of publications issued by the unit, including books, journal articles, and reports and reprints issued under its own covers, showing author, title, press run, and production costs. -- Sources and amounts (on an annual basis) of all support funds, including income from the sale of publications and from other services. -- Expenditures from all sources of support funds, distinguishing use of funds for administrative support, direct research, and other specified uses. -- Description and amount of space currently occupied. -- Any other information deemed relevant to the evaluation of a unit's effectiveness, including updated five-yearprojections of plans and resource requirements where feasible. Life Span. All ORUs must establish a rationale for continuance, in terms of scholarly or scientific merit and campus priorities, at fifteen year intervals. The first such fifteen-year (sunset) review for all units established prior to 1981 will take place between July 1, 1996 and June 30, 2001, but may extend beyond 2001 if necessary. Campuses have the flexibility of carrying out fifteen-year reviews at the same time as, and in place of, regularly scheduled five-year reviews or at other times established by the Chancellor or Chancellor's designee, in consultation with the Academic Senate. For example, campuses may choose to carry out simultaneous or collective fifteen-year reviews of all ORUs in the same broad disciplinary area. To begin a fifteen-year review, an ORU should develop a formal proposal for continued ORU status, support funds, and space in the context of current campus and University needs and resources. The proposal should state a persuasive rationale for the unit's continuation and should include all of the information required of proposals for ORU establishment (see Section 7). In addition, the proposal should describe the ORU's achievements over the past 15 years, the contributions the ORU has made to research, graduate and undergraduate education and public service, and the consequences if the ORU were not continued. The proposal and submitting unit are reviewed by an ad hoc fifteen-year review committee established by the Chancellor or the VCR after consultation with appropriate divisional Academic Senate committees. It is recommended that at least one member from outside the campus sit on the Fifteen-Year Review Committee. The report of the Fifteen-Year Review Committee is reviewed by appropriate campus senate committees and administrative officials. Approval for disestablishment of the ORU is made by the Chancellor. The Chancellor informs the Vice Provost for Research of the action Exceptions. All exceptions to the above policies and procedures must be approved by the President. This document is based on Administrative Policies and Procedures Concerning Organized Research Units, with deletions and additions appropriate to UC Santa Cruz: http://www.ucop.edu/research/policyFrame.html January 27, 2003, revised April 25, 25, 2005 Office for Research University of California, Santa Cruz TABLE 1 FOR INFORMATION ONLY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||