|
Click here to view previous portion of the
report
Click here to view next portion of report
Click here to return to the table of
contents
COMPLETE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
BUILDING INTERNAL COMMUNITY SUBCOMMITTEE
Click
here for pdf format
The Meta-analysis of SBU studies and reports since 1987 reflects
certain critical and ongoing concerns that were most recently borne
out in the 2004 SBU Campus Climate Survey. Thematically, two related
fundamental concerns that emerge include a lack of a unifying sense
of community at SBU, and a lack of inclusion and even safety for non-majority
groups. (See Appendix A: “SBU Campus Climate Meta-analysis Matrix”
and Appendix B: “SBU Campus Climate Survey – Noteworthy
Findings”)
Certainly, SBU is not unique in acknowledging the loss of community
in the midst of extraordinary institutional growth. Modern institutionalization
and the tendency towards bureaucratization has been the focus of studies
and theorists, perhaps the most famous of whom was (Weber, 1998).
(Tonnies 1887,2002; Sennett, 1998) Inherent in this process, too often,
is the concurrent growth of dehumanization. Dehumanization can be
considered an extreme concept, not happily associated with SBU and
its operation. However, when operationalized, it takes the form of
workers and administrators engaged in role-related behaviors that
do not foster a sense of belonging and welcoming among students, patients,
staff, and faculty. Concern for individual growth, participation,
equitable representation and safety anchored in a sense of connection
to SBU as a community is too often lost to the presumed focus on the
“bottom line”, the sense of being “out of the loop”
and the disengagement that results.
While clearly not universal or chronic at SBU, the Campus Climate
Taskforce Sub-committees “Building Internal Community”
and “Participation and Empowerment” considered the continued
explicit reflections of alienation and diminished non-majority safety.
The committees also examined those programs and events where community
and the importance of connection and relationship are successful across
SBU. For example, celebrations such as Diversity Day, Homecoming and
Roth Regatta, and programs such as the Undergraduate College Program,
AIM/EOP, and Honors College offer an opportunity for people representing
different groups and departments to share a common purpose, space
and experience and to identify both as part of the group and as part
of one university. However, many of these programs and events attract
mostly students.
The “Building Internal Community” and “Participation
and Empowerment” Sub-committees identified several consistent
and critically important themes in their proposed recommendations.
These were:
1. leadership;
2. the creation of shared, safe and purposeful community space;
3. the establishment of regular and ongoing communication opportunities;
and
4. the establishment of across-the-board representative advisory groups
for all administrators.
In addition, the importance of organizational leadership that demonstrates
strong buy-in to the success of any systemic or culture change initiative
is well established among organizational theorists (Gummer & McCallion,
1995, Kotter, 1996).
| RECOMMENDATION 1 |
| Appoint a Senior Community and Inclusion Administrator
with Responsibility for overseeing, coordinating and integrating
the University’s Community and Inclusion Initiatives |
| Responsible Party: |
President |
| Implementation Date |
May 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Improved coordination and implementation of all the recommendations
set forth by the Campus Climate Task Force. |
| Assessment |
President’s Office to monitor Administrator’s progress.
Biannual Campus Climate Survey measuring progress towards goals
for the University. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 2 |
| Build a Campus Community Center (“the Commons”)
to serve all members of the community on both east and west campuses,
to provide meeting rooms, restaurants, and facilities that would
serve various parts of the community The Community Center would
house a Multicultural Community Center.This initiative would provide
a powerful and vivid symbol of the University’s commitment
to diversity and the inclusion of underrepresented religious,
ethnic and racial groups, as well as LGBTQ members, women, people
with disabilities and their associated campus organizations/centers.
Located centrally, it would be accessible to and serve both sides
of the campus, fostering a more unified sense of the University.
The Community Center would serve undergraduates, graduate students,
staff, faculty, and alumni. With meeting rooms, resource materials
and adept and committed staff, the Community Center would provide
the framework for faculty-staff-student exchanges, social support,
education, community service, promotion of equity and diversity,
and leadership |
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President for Administration |
| Implementation Date |
Planning, design, and identification of source of funds January
2007 – January 2008; construction begins June 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
Serve as a means to bring diverse groups together in one place
and to broadcast a message that Stony Brook University is committed
to educational equity. The Center will also serve as a hub of
building community between diverse groups and between east and
west campus. By bringing together in one place the various community-building
activities on campus, the University would have a hub, which will
foster both planned and incidental interactions. |
| Assessment |
Progress will be monitored by the President’s Office.
Annual analysis of utilization of space and survey of groups and
inter-group activities. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate
Surveys will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University
administrative support for non-majority groups and a sense of
belonging and concern experienced by staff and faculty. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 3 |
| Create LGBTQ Resource Center. Establish a new line
within the Wo/men and Gender Resource Center to serve as LGBTQ
counselor and programmer. (see Appendix C) |
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President Student Affairs, Provost |
| Implementation Date |
Begin hiring search - December 2006, Staff hired and Resource
Center programming initiated – June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased sense of belonging and support to groups. Increased
access to sources of information and opportunities to engage diverse
groups in activities on and off campus. |
| Assessment |
Annual analysis of utilization of space and survey of groups
and inter-group activities. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate
Surveys will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University
administrative support for non-majority groups and fostering of
inter-group engagement. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 4 |
| Enhance the UNITI Cultural Center and establish
a new line within the UNITI Cultural Center to provide support,
and to serve as coordinator and programmer. (see Appendix D) |
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President Student Affairs, Provost |
| Implementation Date |
Begin hiring search - December 2006, Staff hired & center
programming initiated – June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased sense of belonging and support to groups. Increased
access to sources of information and opportunities to engage diverse
groups in activities on and off campus. . Promote awareness and
acceptance of differences and help coordinate celebrations across
faculty, student, and staff cohorts. |
| Assessment |
Annual analysis of utilization of space and survey of groups
and inter-group activities. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate
Surveys will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University
administrative support for non-majority groups and fostering of
inter-group engagement. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 5 |
Implement a Two Stage Safe Zone program
Stage One: Safe Zone focused on the LGBTQ community
Stage Two: Safe Zone focused on other marginalized groups
|
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President for Student Affairs, and
Director Wo/Men and Gender Resource Center. |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 - start training. Jan 2007 - start the program
for LGBTQ, Jan. 2007 establish committee charged with designing
a comparable program to be relevant for other groups. Jan. 2008
– start program for other groups |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased empowerment and sense of safety and reduction in fear
experienced by members of the LGBTQ community and members of other
non-majority groups. |
| Assessment |
The Advisory Board of the Wo/Men and Gender Resource Center
and the Campus Climate Steering group will monitor progress. Success
will be measured by data reflected in subsequent Campus Climate
Surveys showing a marked improvement for these groups in sense
of safety, a decrease in both observed and experienced harassment,
and increased sense of support by University administration, and
faculty and staff. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 6 |
| Implement and institutionalize an ongoing series
of Presidential campus-wide town hall meetings - organized around
pertinent themes and simulcast to other parts of campus as well
as Stony Brook Manhattan, and Southampton. |
| Responsible Party |
President |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 - Initiate Town Hall Meeting series |
| Expected outcomes |
360-degree communication. Provide opportunities for campus community
members to express concerns, improve communication in the identifying
and resolving of problems facing the community, and increase community
engagement and community participation. |
| Assessment |
Attendance at town hall meetings. Feedback from community members
that these open discussions provide opportunities to offer comment
and that those items mentioned are adequately addressed. Data
in future campus climate surveys will measure changes in perceptions
of responsiveness. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 7 |
| Create a campus wide calendar similar to that of
the Student Success Book for all employees. This would include
valuable information from departments, policies, resources, and
dates of major events occurring on campus. Discounts with coupons
for Staller, Athletics, and the bookstore for SBU apparel should
be included. (It could be used as part of the kickoff for the
50th year anniversary). Calendar would be made available online. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and AVP for Communications |
| Implementation Date |
January 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased sense of community and school pride. More employees
will attend events and volunteer to help organize such events.
Improved knowledge about Stony Brook. |
| Assessment |
Measure hits online. Increased sense of “being in the
loop” as measured by re-administration of Campus Climate
Survey. Include a survey card in the book and online for feedback.
|
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 8 |
Officially recognize and support existing faculty/staff
groups that promote inclusion and diversity on campus, including
providing a place for them on the University’s website.
Establish institutional mechanism for formally acknowledging and
officially recognizing faculty and staff groups such as:
• Union Universitaria Latinoamericana (UUL)
•
Black Faculty and Staff Association (BFSA)
• Asian
American Faculty and Staff Association(AAFSA)
• LGBT
Faculty and Staff Network (Pride @ SBU)
Providing access to official SBU web pages and email accounts
for faculty staff organizations will send an implicit message
of inclusion. New and potential faculty and staff will have a
simple way through the SBU home page to learn about those support
structures that already are in place. Adequate support for such
groups would also lay the foundation for the more universal symbol
of recognition and support of our diversity. We recommend that
the President charge the Office of Diversity and Affirmative Action
to organize a task force, made up of stakeholders from the various
organizations, to develop guidelines for recognizing and supporting
these groups |
| Responsible Party |
New Senior Community and Inclusion Administrator |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 |
| Expected outcomes |
Flourishing employee groups, an increased sense of community.
Increased enrollment in existing groups on campus; increased understanding,
acceptance, and valuing of differences, and recognition of similarities
within the campus community; promotion of a culture of safety
and inclusion. Presentation to the President of a set of guidelines
for the recognition and support of existing (and future) campus
organizations that promote diversity and inclusion. |
| Assessment |
Survey perceptions of the affiliate organizations in fall 2008.
Annual report of membership and activities to newly hired Senior
Administrator. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate Surveys
will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University administrative
support for non-majority groups. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 9 |
| Re-establish the University Activities Committee
to develop plans for new large-scale campus events that would
involve all sectors of the campus. Some suggestions include: summer
picnic for employees, trips, concerts, art shows, receptions,
get- acquainted activities, sports day, faculty and staff appreciation
day. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources |
| Implementation Date |
May 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased participation of employees at events. An increase
in Stony Brook Pride as measured in subsequent campus climate
surveys. |
| Assessment |
Attendance at events. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 10 |
Departmental establishment of employee “campus
engagement” release time
policy within each VP area, recognizing the variety and range
of work schedules. VPs will encourage participation in campus
events. Each VP will prepare a written statement specific to their
area that explains the policy and encourages participation
|
| Responsible Party |
Vice Presidents |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased employee participation, engagement, and sense of belonging
to campus community. |
| Assessment |
Evaluation by newly hired/appointed senior community and inclusion
administrator. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate Surveys
will evaluate changes in employee engagement and sense of belonging
to campus community. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 11 |
| Establish ongoing orientation advisory group to
re-tool the faculty and staff orientation programs in order to
make new employees feel connected to the campus community, not
only to their departmental units. Advisory Group will be comprised
of faculty and staff to ensure ongoing feedback regarding orientation
effectiveness. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and Employee Assistance
Program |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 |
| Expected outcomes |
Employees feel more a part of Stony Brook University. |
| Assessment |
Follow up survey after employees complete orientation. |
| Assessment Date |
|
BUILDING INTERNAL COMMUNITY
| Co-Chairs: |
Jerrold Stein - Dean of Students
Marylou Stewart – Health Sciences Center/Photography
|
Pam Burris
Physics and Astronomy
Jose Carranza,
Graduate School, international Programs
Maria Jackson,
Human Resource Services
Robbye Kinkade,
School of Health, Technology & Management
Sr. Margaret Ann Landry,
Catholic Campus Ministries |
Joanne Morici,
Communications
Jean Peden,
Undergraduate Colleges
Charles Robbins,
School of Social Welfare
Sabina Sebstian,
Student
Deborah Zelizer,
School of Health Technology and Management
Dini Zimmerman,
Audio Visual Services
|
PARTICIPATION AND EMPOWERMENT
SUBCOMMITTEE
Click
here for pdf format
Organizational theorists have increasingly linked employee empowerment
to increased “proactivity.” Proactivity is defined as
behavior that “is change-oriented, active, problem-solving behavior.
It involves efforts to resolve current problems in the search for
improved or new products, services, ideas, procedures or processes”.
(Yoon, 2001 p.196) The concept of empowerment within organizations
often takes different meanings for different scholars, ranging from
a more psychological reference to self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986) to
more structural notions of autonomy (Kanter, 1983), delegation of
power (Tannebaum 1968), and structurally afforded choice (Lawler,
1992).
In order to enable workers to engage proactively with the organization,
the organization must have established structures to facilitate that
engagement through solicited input, feedback and participation in
both advisory and decision-making contexts. Organizations that do
not actively and meaningfully invite these forms of engagement run
the risk that they will not “detect and correct errors”
(Rodriguez, 2004) which overtime can exacerbate (Argyris & Schon,
1978; Rodriguez, 2004).
Petty, McGee and Cavender’s (1984) meta-analysis of studies
that sought to measure the relationship between job satisfaction and
performance, found that there was an “impressive” positive
correlation between overall job satisfaction and job performance.
| RECOMMENDATION 1 |
| Create a Campus-Climate Response Team to represent
all campus constituencies. The committee’s charge is to
identify patterns and individual causes of concern and disempowerment;
patterns should be reported to the steering committee; Individual
causes of concern will be referred to the appropriate party. |
| Responsible Party |
The initial members of the team can be chosen by
the President from members of the Campus-Climate Task Force, but
replacements should be chosen by the constituencies (e.g., GSO,
University Senate). |
| Implementation Date |
January 2007 - Appoint initial team. November 2006 –Team
submits proposed procedures to the Campus Climate Steering Committee. |
| Expected outcomes |
The team will continue the work of the Task Force, by hearing
concerns of members of the campus community, and working to solve
the problems. An effective team will increase the sense of empowerment
in the community and create mechanisms that will prevent future
problems. |
| Assessment |
Biannual Campus Climate Survey results noting progress in perceived
degree of University concern for employees, and University responsiveness. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 2 |
| Establish broadly-based advisory groups for senior
administrators (Deans, VPs, Provost). |
| Responsible Party |
Each administrator forms his or her own advisory
group, which includes individuals from faculty, staff, and both
graduate and undergraduate students who can effectively represent
their particular group’s needs and assets. |
| Implementation Date |
Advisory groups appointed and functioning by December 2006 |
| Expected outcomes |
Because these groups are broadly representative, administrators
will get direct input on the concerns of the campus community,
and feedback about the impact of administrative policies. |
| Assessment |
Biannual Campus Climate Survey with semi-annual reporting noting
progress in perceived representation of various groups’
voices in University decision-making and University responsiveness.
Each administrator’s supervisor, based on input from the
group members and the administrator with whom they meet, should
evaluate the usefulness of these groups. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 3 |
| Establish regularly scheduled VP Town Hall meetings. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice Presidents |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
The Vice Presidents will develop a better sense of the concerns
of their own constituencies. |
| Assessment |
In fall 2007 the President’s office will survey each VP
about the occurrence, design, and usefulness of his/her town hall
meetings. Subsequent Campus Climate Surveys will note progress
in perceived representation of various groups’ voices in
University decision-making and University responsiveness. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 4 |
| Build a Campus Community Center (“the Commons”)
to serve all members of the community on both east and west campuses,
to provide meeting rooms, restaurants, and facilities that would
serve various parts of the community The Community Center would
house a Multicultural Community Center.This initiative would provide
a powerful and vivid symbol of the University’s commitment
to diversity and the inclusion of underrepresented religious,
ethnic and racial groups, as well as LGBTQ members, women, people
with disabilities and their associated campus organizations/centers.
Located centrally, it would be accessible to and serve both sides
of the campus, fostering a more unified sense of the University.
The Community Center would serve undergraduates, graduate students,
staff, faculty, and alumni. With meeting rooms, resource materials
and adept and committed staff, the Community Center would provide
the framework for faculty-staff-student exchanges, social support,
education, community service, promotion of equity and diversity,
and leadership |
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President for Administration |
| Implementation Date |
Planning, design, and identification of source of funds January
2007 – January 2008; construction begins June 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
Serve as a means to bring diverse groups together in one place
and to broadcast a message that Stony Brook University is committed
to educational equity. The Center will also serve as a hub of
building community between diverse groups and between east and
west campus. By bringing together in one place the various community-building
activities on campus, the University would have a hub, which will
foster both planned and incidental interactions. |
| Assessment |
Progress will be monitored by the President’s Office.
Annual analysis of utilization of space and survey of groups and
inter-group activities. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate
Surveys will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University
administrative support for non-majority groups and a sense of
belonging and concern experienced by staff and faculty. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 5 |
Implementation of a Two Stage Safe Zone program
(See same recommendation submitted by Building Internal Community
Subcommittee)
- Stage One: Safe Zone focused on the LGBTQ community
- Stage Two: Safe Zone focused on other marginalized groups.
|
| Responsible Party |
President, Vice President for Student Affairs and
Director of Wo/Men and Gender Resource Center. |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 - start training. Jan 2007 - start the program
for LGBTQ, Jan. 2007 establish committee charged with designing
a comparable program to be relevant for other groups. Jan. 2008
start program for other groups. |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased empowerment and sense of safety and reduction in fear
experienced by members of the LGBTQ community and members of other
non-majority groups. |
| Assessment |
The Advisory Board of the Wo/Men and Gender Resource Center
and the Campus Climate Steering group will monitor progress. Success
will be measured if data reflected in subsequent Campus Climate
Surveys shows a marked improvement for these groups in sense of
safety, a decrease in both observed and experienced harassment
and increased sense of support by University administration, and
faculty and staff. |
| Assessment Date |
|
PARTICIPATION &
EMPOWERMENT
| Co-Chairs: |
Edward Drummond –United University Professions/East
Campus
Nancy Squires – Psychology
|
Andrei Antonenko,
Graduate School Organization
Ora Bouey,
School of Nursing
Robert Holland,
Civil Service Employees Association
Judi Segall,
Ombud's Office
Olufemi Vaughn,
Africana Studies, Graduate School,
Provost Office
Winston Wakefield,
East Campus Physical Plant |
Charles McAteer,
Facilities Engineering
Aryeh Grossman,
Graduate School
Jedan Phillips,
Faculty/Family Medicine
Gina Vanacore,
Residential Programs
Jenny Wang,
student
Teng-fong Wong,
Geosciences
|
HIRING AND EMPLOYMENT
SUBCOMMITTEE
Click
here for pdf format
We have previously cited evidence to suggest that there are positive
outcomes derived from an organization that emphasizes diversity and
inclusion within its faculty and workforce as part of its design and
actions. Most cite the fact that diversity initiatives are most successful
when they are strategically planned, managed, nurtured, monitored,
and evaluated. Further, diversity initiatives must be consistent and
part of the overall mission of the institution rather than simply
a special program that is limited and requires little or no accountability.
Valuing diversity is what institutions and members of a community
do to acknowledge the benefits of their differences and similarities.
They intentionally work to build sustainable relationships among people
and institutions with diverse membership. A community that values
diversity ensures that institutions provide equal treatment and access
to resources and decisions for all community members regardless of
race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, national origin, color,
age, disability, and religion.
In order to value diversity, a community must strengthen its ability
to:
-
Continuously and effectively address racism, sexism,
homophobia, and other forms of oppression;
-
Develop and implement strategies that publicly
recognize the cultural traditions and practices of every major group;
-
Support processes that allow each group to address
their own priorities, while at the same time, help the different
groups find common ground to address shared concerns;
-
Understand the dynamics between a group's characteristics
and issues related to power, privilege, and oppression and know
how to integrate this knowledge into its valuing diversity strategies
(ERASE Racism, 2004)
Stony Brook University is the largest single-site employer in Suffolk
County. Yet, we continue to struggle with the recruitment and retention
issues that impact our diversity as a campus. Numerous reports have
cited the need for a more diverse workforce, especially among faculty
and within higher paying positions on the campus. (see Appendix
A and E) A number of external issues have been cited as contributing
to the problem including a limited pool of available persons within
specific academic disciplines, a lack of affordable housing in the
immediate area, and persons of color receiving “better”
offers at competing schools.
While much discussion has focused on external issues, the internal
issues related to university policies, procedures, and mechanisms
designed to recruit, retain, and monitor the hiring activities continue
to remain problematic. In addition, other factors such as biased attitudes,
environments that are not welcoming or supportive of the cultural
diversity within the workplace, or simply ignoring or bypassing policies
and procedures continue to prevail within many workplace units at
SBU. Segments of the university’s infrastructure that are crucial
to creating diversity in the workplace continue to function in a manner
that minimizes rather than facilitates resolving issues revealed with
the Campus Climate Survey.
The Sub-Committee on Hiring and Employment submits the following
recommendations to address internal policies, procedures, mechanisms
and, to some extent, attitudes that inhibit the recruitment and retention
of a diverse workforce. The subcommittee has identified four broad
areas that need immediate attention:
-
Improve the recruitment and hiring process.
-
Improve the climate within units.
-
Improve employee retention.
-
Provide support for and demand accountability from
managers.
The challenge for the university is to align its diversity goals
with that of the university mission through strategically planned,
managed, and monitored actions that emphasize both accountability
and results. Moreover, it is critically important that every unit
be engaged in the process.
Hiring and employment are the gateways to career opportunities within
the University. Fairness in hiring and employment is probably one
of the most discussed topics and among the most challenging. The hiring
process requires that we align our policies, procedures, and attitudes
to insure that the university has both a high caliber workforce and
one that is diverse. Along with this issues of retention and promotion
are key ingredients to meeting a goal of increasing culturally diversity
amongst the faculty and staff within the University. As recently as
2001, the Presidential Search and Selection Task Force (Appendix E)
made recommendations aimed at streamlining the search process, recruiting
diverse candidates, and insuring that Affirmative Action principles,
policies and procedures were part of all search committees. The 28
recommendations contained in this section build upon the Search and
Selection Task Force Report and further refine and address long standing
issues that impact the hiring and employment process.
I. IMPROVE THE RECRUITMENT AND HIRING PROCESS
| RECOMMENDATION 1 |
| Ensure that job descriptions throughout the campus
are current, and that requirements for each position reflect skills
necessary for success in today’s work environment, which
may include amendments to Civil Service Regulations. This will
require buy-in form SUNY administration, GOER, Stony Brook Human
Resources, and various bargaining units. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Labor Relations and
Government Relations |
| Implementation Date |
December 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
Better match between job descriptions and actual job responsibilities,
and better job satisfaction. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of new rules/regulations and employee satisfaction
with changes. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 2 |
| Accelerate the hiring process. Implement recommendations
made in 2005 by the Presidential Search and Selection Task Force
(see Appendix E). |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action |
| Implementation Date |
Summer 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Decrease in time from initiation of search to hiring. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of time from initiation of search to hiring, and gathering/
processing feedback from hiring managers. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 3 |
| Simplify Classification and Compensation process
to shorten the time needed for Human Resources to respond to units. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Vice President for
Administration |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Decrease time from hiring managers’ submission of requests
to HR and HR approval of requests. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of turn-around time, and gathering/processing of feedback
from hiring managers. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 4 |
| Simplify the checklist of requirements and engage
greater support of Human Resources and the Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action from the beginning |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Make the EEO process more effective and more efficient. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of time from hiring managers’ submission of requests
to Human Resources and EEO approvals, and gathering/processing
of feedback from hiring managers. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 5 |
| Reduce the mandatory post time from 30 days to 15
days. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and Labor Relations |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Fewer candidates decline; units are better staffed. |
| Assessment |
Track number of declines, and gather/process feedback from hiring
managers; also, monitor effect on goals of diversifying staff
and faculty. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 6 |
| Expand support for units to help diversify the applicant
pool by allocating resources for advertising in major news and
community-based media outlets and support for proven programs
such as the Diversity Fellows and the EARN Programs. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice President for Administration, Chief Operating
Officer University Medical Center. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Improved visibility of SBU openings in communities with high
minority populations. |
| Assessment |
Track number of applications from members of minority groups,
and the sources of information that led to their inquiries. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 7 |
| Recruit from our own diverse student population
and market ourselves to graduates. Create a program to aggressively
recruit student-graduates into entry-level positions with a chance
for advancement. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, with help from AVP
for Communications and Director of Career Center |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007. |
| Expected outcomes |
Increased number of SBU graduates who apply for and attain entry-level
positions. |
| Assessment |
Track changes in applications and hires from SBU graduates |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 8 |
| Expand and strengthen the Trainee Program for recent
graduates coordinated by the Human Resources and the Office of
Diversity and Affirmative Action. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice President for Administration/Chief Operating
Officer University Medical Center |
| Implementation Date |
Summer, 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
SBU hires more recent SBU graduates. |
| Assessment |
Track number of recent SBU graduates hired at SBU. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 9 |
| Create professional administrative temporary (“floater”)
positions. Candidates could be deployed to step in and assist
departments temporarily while a search is being conducted. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice President for Administration, Chief Operating
Officer University Medical Center |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
More effective operation of units while searches are in progress. |
| Assessment |
Feedback from hiring managers and unit employees regarding work
effectiveness and climate in units while searches are in progress. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 10 |
| Establish an internal standing committee aimed at
addressing the inadequacy of salaries and benefits (UUP and CSEA),
similar to the process that was implemented for teaching faculty
in 1999-2000, and promote legislation aimed at improving the SUNY
downstate location differential in meeting the needs of Stony
Brook employees, therefore making SBU a more competitive employer.
|
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Labor Relations and Government Relations |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
More competitive salaries. |
| Assessment |
Determine whether salaries are competitive. Survey hiring committees
for reasons why hiring offers were declined. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 11 |
| Allocate funds to increase recruitment and retention
of faculty and staff, such as mortgage loan programs that address
the needs of faculty and professional staff, increased subsidies
for childcare, housing allowance program, and creation of faculty/staff
housing. |
| Responsible Party |
President, Provost |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
SBU becomes more competitive in hiring professional staff and
faculty |
| Assessment |
Tracking of success in hiring desired candidates and feedback
from hiring managers. Survey hiring committees for reasons why
hiring offers were declined. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 12 |
| Establish an affirmative procedure for assisting
in spousal and domestic partner hires to attract faculty (such
procedures must be consistent with plans to diversify the workforce). |
| Responsible Party |
President, Provost |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
SBU becomes more competitive in hiring faculty. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of success in hiring faculty and feedback from hiring
managers through surveys. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 13 |
| Advocate for improved public transportation with
town, county and state agencies to ensure access to west, east
and south campuses from buses and trains. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Government Relations, Vice President
for Administration |
| Implementation Date |
December 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
SBU hires and retains more diverse staff. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of new hires and satisfaction of employees from diverse
Long Island communities. Measurement of changes in public transportation
utilization by staff and faculty. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 14 |
| Hold vice presidents and high level managers accountable
for concrete and evidence-based Affirmative Action plans that
outline actions aimed at diversifying the workforce. |
| Responsible Party |
President, Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors
of Human Resources, Director of Office of Diversity and Affirmative
Action |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
More aggressive efforts to hire and retain a diverse faculty
and staff. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of applicant pool and other aspects of search and selection,
and measurement of changes in workforce diversity. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 15 |
| Enforce compliance with performance evaluations
and include an evaluation of the steps taken to diversify the
department, and implement a campus policy that will require all
performance evaluations to be conducted annually in the same date
range. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Unit Managers, Director
of Labor Relations |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Better communication between managers and employees regarding
total office functions and the role of individual employees in
those functions. Greater satisfaction for managers and employees. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of completion of performance programs and evaluations.
Feedback from managers and employees regarding the performance
evaluation process solicited through surveys. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 16 |
| Establish mechanisms for employees within units
or divisions to provide ongoing feedback on favorable and unfavorable
aspects of the work environment, such as a hotline or on-line
suggestion box. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action, and Employee Assistance Program |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Greater engagement between manager and employees in promoting
favorable aspects and resolving unfavorable aspects of the work
environment. |
| Assessment |
Tracking of feedback from managers and employees regarding the
effectiveness of the process solicited through surveys. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 17 |
| Without compromising confidentiality, make summaries
available of current themes of employee concerns from EAP, Ombuds,
ODAA and Union offices. Hold managers accountable for addressing
the issues raised. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Office of Diversity and Affirmative
Action, Employee Assistance Program, and Labor Relations; Union
Presidents, Unit Managers. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Greater resolution of employee concerns. |
| Assessment |
Gather and process feedback from employees regarding the resolution
of concerns. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 18 |
| Establish a standard process for all areas of campus
for exit interviews (including transfers), and provide aggregate
information to Campus Climate Task Force Co-chairs and to units
in such a manner as to protect confidentiality but identify problem
areas. Require results on how this information is being used to
improve the work environment. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Decrease in the number of employees who leave for unfavorable
reasons. |
| Assessment |
Summary of exit interviews; data published on the number of
employees who elect to leave for unfavorable reasons. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 19 |
| Establish regular informal Labor/Management meetings
to encourage positive and proactive dialogue between union leaders
and areas such as Human Resources, Labor Relations, Office of
Diversity and Affirmative Action, Employee Assistance Program,
the Unions, and the Ombuds Office. |
| Responsible Party |
President |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Address potential issues before they become significant problems,
and better serve the needs of employees. |
| Assessment |
Feedback on issues addressed through the dialogue. Annual report
to Campus Climate Co-chairs regarding issues raised and attendance
at meetings as measured by surveying managers and employees regarding
newly instituted positive practices. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 20 |
| Establish incentives program to reward managers
and units for effective practices improving the climate for employees. |
| Responsible Party |
President, Provost, Vice Presidents, Deans. |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Better integration of campus climate issues into the reward
system. |
| Assessment |
Evidence of effective practices and rewards for those practices. |
| Assessment Date |
|
III. IMPROVE EMPLOYEE RETENTION
| RECOMMENDATION 21 |
| Identify, examine, and address the problems and
issues that are barriers to retaining members of underrepresented
groups within units / divisions. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action, Managers of Units. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
greater retention of underrepresented groups. |
| Assessment |
Maintain within units / divisions annual data on retention of
underrepresented groups. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 22 |
| Expand opportunities for promotions (both within
unions and between unions - e.g., CSEA to UUP) and make employees
aware of such opportunities. Utilize previous committee’s
work on career ladders, and reconvene the committee. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Presidents of United
University Professions and Civil Service Employees Association |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Employees are more pleased with career growth. |
| Assessment |
Gather and process feedback from employees on career growth. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 23 |
| Develop new incentives for rewarding employees for
excellent performance. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Employees feel that their work is valued. |
| Assessment |
Gather and process feedback from employees regarding incentives/rewards. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 24 |
| Conduct analysis of salaries in the context of the
high cost of living on Long Island to ensure that Stony Brook
is competitive on a national and regional basis. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, Deans, Vice Presidents |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
More successful recruitment and retention of faculty and staff. |
| Assessment |
Retention data and processing of exit interviews to be published
and available to the campus. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 25 |
| Create a central reference information center that
could serve as a Stony Brook employee “concierge,”
- perhaps web-based FAQ (similar to the Social Security Office)
- and a phone-based info line that anyone could call to get information
and referrals about anything at SBU. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, AVP for Communications,
Chief Information Officers |
| Implementation Date |
December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Employees who are more informed about resources at SBU. |
| Assessment |
Feedback from employees on the effectiveness of communication
as it relates to resources at SBU. |
| Assessment Date |
|
IV. PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR AND DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY
FROM MANAGERS
| RECOMMENDATION 26 |
| Human Resources and the Office of Diversity and
Affirmative Action should regularly solicit information from managers
regarding their needs and respond to such needs. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources and Office of Diversity
and Affirmative Action. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Managers provide more effective leadership on hiring and employment.
Ineffective practices are addressed. |
| Assessment |
Feedback from managers regarding support from Human Resources
and Office for Diversity and Affirmative Action. Feedback from
employees regarding managers’ handling of the work environment. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 27 |
| Make efforts and results in diversifying the workforce
a critical part of the evaluation of managers. |
| Responsible Party |
Primary Oversight -- President, Provost; Secondary
Oversight -- Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors of Human Resources
and Office of Diversity and Affirmative Action; Managers of Units. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Greater diversity in the SBU workforce. |
| Assessment |
Maintain and publish data on diversity in applicant pool, diversity
in hires, and diversity in who is retained. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 28 |
| Reward managers and units that are making substantial
progress in enhancing the diversity of the work environment. |
| Responsible Party |
Primary Oversight -- President, Provost; Secondary
Oversight -- Deans, Managers of Units. |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Greater diversity in the SBU workforce. |
| Assessment |
Feedback regarding the level of engagement of managers on diversity
efforts. Publish data on diversity in the SBU workplace. |
| Assessment Date |
|
HIRING & EMPLOYMENT
| Co-Chairs |
David Ferguson - Engineering
Marianna Savoca – Career Center |
Maureen Burns,
Dental School
Mary Catalano,
Hospital Operating Room
Russell Day,
Long Island State Veterans Home
Ellen Driscoll,
Studend Health Services
Robert Haig,
Central Services
Joanna Harris,
Disability Support Services
Hector Jimenez
Marine Sciences Research Center |
Elizabeth McCoy,
Labor Relations
John Schmidt,
United University Professions/West Campus
Fred Sganga,
Long Island State Veterans Home
Estella Shivers,
Hospital Public Relations/Media Relations
Carlos Speight,
Civil Services Employees Association
Pamela Thompson,
College of Arts & Sciences |
BUILDING EXTERNAL COMMUNITY
SUBCOMMITTEE
Click
here for pdf format
“Colleges and Universities are open systems, in constant
interaction with the external environment in the exchange of finite
resources.” (AAC&U, 2005)
The Building External Community Subcommittee undertook an assessment
of University programs, services and external community engagement,
including the perceptions of the off-campus communities regarding
the University. A committee comprising internal and external members
of the community with extensive backgrounds in supporting diversity
initiatives and programs between the campus and the community were
assembled.
The process used by the subcommittee in conducting this review was
similar to that utilized by some institutions, and included visits
from external community members who were either members of the President’s
Multicultural Advisory Board or Community Advocates.
The Committee had extensive discussions regarding the need for environmental
change in higher education in response to the ongoing transformations
in the political, social, and economic communities. The Committee
concluded that the University was at a crossroad as it attempts to
expand and shift from a self-referenced environment to an expanded
view that includes increased faculty, staff, student, and community
interaction.
At present, multiple individuals and departments are responsible
for community engagement. We believe that both the University and
its community partners would benefit from an integrated approach,
especially one that has the promotion of diversity and inclusion as
one of its guiding principles. An additional consequence of this process
is that communication encompass 360 degrees. For example, the University
would advertise Stony Brook programs to diverse communities, while
concurrently informing the campus community of external community
activities - including the membership of community – based advisory
boards and their meeting dates and other community resources - via
a “Community Connection” section on the University’s
website. The President’s Multicultural Advisory Boards would
have a more active advisory role on issues related to the University’s
external activities. In this way, the University can give full consideration
to the scope of needs presented by the diverse external community
when the University makes strategic decisions that will affect these
communities.
The recommendations listed in this section are based on the concept
of community engagement, which is defined by the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching as “the collaboration between
institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local,
regional/ state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange
of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity,”
and on The Principles Of Community Engagement developed by the CDC/ATSDR
Committee On Community Engagement available on-line at http://www.cdc.gov/phppo/pce/.
| RECOMMENDATION 1 |
| Develop an administrative structure for directing
and coordinating community outreach. We recommend that the President
create this organizational structure, which might take the form
of an administrative officer at the VP level, or a structured
coalition of divisional heads. |
| Responsible Party |
President |
| Implementation Date |
May 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Creation of an administrative entity that is responsible for
the coordination of all community outreach, and partnership programs,
leading to a more efficient and strategically focused program
of community engagement. Greater knowledge of potential links
and synergies between different employees’ involvement in
community activities. Greater awareness of external community-sponsored
events among the campus community. Increased participation of
Multicultural Advisory Groups in helping the University to accomplish
strategic planning, resulting in more inclusive outcomes. |
| Assessment |
Periodic reports to the President and to the campus community
regarding progress. Input from the various stakeholders in the
process. Providing links to community events on the University’s
website. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 2 |
| Utilize available employee information fields in
PeopleSoft to capture employees’ community activities in
which they are engaged as individuals, or as representatives of
the University. |
| Responsible Party |
Administrative entity described in recommendation
one |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Improved coordination in initiating outreach activities. More
efficient collaborative grant application processes, better response
to community requests for speakers and experts. |
| Assessment |
Increase in the number of collaborative community outreach activities.
Decreased time needed to assemble human resources for grant-writing
projects. Increase in community utilization of faculty and staff
expertise. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 3 |
| University Human Resources and Enrollment Management
should work with community groups who could assist in the development
of strategies and activities geared to attract diverse prospective
students and employees. |
| Responsible Party |
Directors of Human Resources, and Associate Provost
for Enrollment Management |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
More inclusive and effective recruitment of potential employees
and potential students to applicant pools. |
| Assessment |
Annual report on which newly implemented strategies and activities
were the direct results of input received from diverse community
groups. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 4 |
| Add a reference about the importance of the external
community to the University’s mission statement. |
| Responsible Party |
President |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
The value of building external community will be affirmed as
a core value for Stony Brook. |
| Assessment |
A revised University mission statement containing reference
to the importance of building community with the world beyond
the campus. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 5 |
| Every Vice President should assign a senior administrator
in his/her area to serve as the coordinator of that VP area’s
external relations. In this way, focus is placed on the importance
of external relations, and there will be a person who is aware
of all the externally-related activities taking place within the
respective division. This person will communicate with the person
or coalition--described in Recommendation 1 above, helping to
coordinate community outreach. When appropriate, he/she will utilize
representatives of external community groups to assist the University
in making decisions. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice Presidents |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Better information sharing about external outreach efforts and
an infrastructure that better supports the building of external
community. Better-informed decisions on matters that impact the
external community. |
| Assessment |
Documented use of external community group representatives to
assist in strategic decision making regarding policies and practices
within the VP area. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 6 |
| The University should increase its efforts to provide
assistance to communities that are in need of research, program
evaluation, and assistance on community issues. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice President for Research, Provost, Executive
Dean of the Health Sciences Center |
| Implementation Date |
Implemented by December 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Add measured change in the perception by external communities
comprised primarily of underrepresented groups that Stony Brook
has brought its research and expertise to bear on helping them
to find solutions to their greatest needs. |
| Assessment |
Documentation of research assistance provided; documentation
of program evaluation assistance provided; annual survey of how
Stony Brook is perceived by the communities that received this
manner of assistance. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 7 |
| External community members should be made aware
that the Ombuds Office is available to assist in handling complaints
or concerns related to the business, operations or services of
the University. |
| Responsible Party |
President |
| Implementation Date |
June 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Greater utilization of the Ombuds Office by external community
members. Enhanced identification of systemic problems at the University
that impact the external community negatively, and improved operational
procedures. |
| Assessment |
Ombuds Office annual report statistics. Ombuds Advisory Committee
review of Ombuds Office visitor evaluations |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 8 |
| The University should provide training to staff
representatives on how to be good spokespersons and/or ambassadors
for the University. |
| Responsible Party |
Vice President for Advancement |
| Implementation Date |
May 2007 |
| Expected outcomes |
Improved quality of presentations about Stony Brook to the external
community by employees in a variety of settings. Presenting a
consistent voice regarding the University’s image and basic
message to the public. |
| Assessment |
Survey of audiences regarding presentations about Stony Brook.
Community feedback about speakers. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 9 |
| Create a Community Resource and Advocacy Initiative
to provide educational and administrative support to faculty and
staff who are engaged in community outreach. The Center would
provide training and support to faculty or staff who are engaged
in the community, strengthen the processes for acknowledging and
rewarding individuals for their contributions to the community,
and develop programs that enhance the University’s role
in the community. Such programs might include the development
of ‘community think tanks’ that use the intellectual
property and resources of the University to help in community
relations, community health education programs, community friendly
websites, etc. |
| Responsible Party |
Administrative entity described in recommendation
one. |
| Implementation Date |
September 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
Faculty and staff oriented and trained in community outreach
skills, how to plan coordinate, and implement community-based
programs, and increased engagement of the community by the University. |
| Assessment |
Numbers of persons trained; number of persons recognized; evaluation
of programs, fall 2008 survey of the community engaged regarding
their perceptions. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 10 |
| Create a Council for School/Community Partnerships
to create and enhance outreach to the K-12 school community, with
an emphasis on high need/low resource school districts. Drawing
on the expertise of educational leaders on campus and in the community
and building on programs like WISE and the School of Medicine
High School Program, Project HOPE, the Council would develop initiatives
to prepare students from underrepresented groups for successful
entry into programs of higher education. The Council will can
coordinate and record the different programs that exist on campus
now, and assist in data collection and marketing the strengths
of our commitment to students at all levels. The University should
increase mentorship opportunities for K-12 students that would
enable cross cultural activities among faculty, staff and students. |
| Responsible Party |
Administrative entity described in recommendation
one, in collaboration with Dean of Admissions and Directors of
community Relations |
| Implementation Date |
September 2008 |
| Expected outcomes |
Closer partnerships with local school districts, increased numbers
of qualified undergraduate student applicants from underrepresented
communities. |
| Assessment |
Fall 2009 Program evaluations and reports; application and enrollment
statistics for underrepresented communities. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 11 |
Officially recognize and support existing faculty/staff
groups that promote inclusion and diversity on campus, including
providing a place for them on the University’s website.
Establish institutional mechanism for formally acknowledging and
officially recognizing faculty and staff groups such as:
• Union Universitaria Latinoamericana (UUL)
• Black Faculty and Staff Association (BFSA)
• Asian American Faculty and Staff Association(AAFSA)
• LGBT Faculty and Staff Network (Pride @ SBU)
Providing access to official SBU web pages and email accounts
for faculty staff organizations will send an implicit message
of inclusion. New and potential faculty and staff will have a
simple way through the SBU home page to learn about those support
structures that already are in place. Adequate support for such
groups would also lay the foundation for the more universal symbol
of recognition and support of our diversity. We recommend that
the President charge the Office of Diversity and Affirmative Action
to organize a task force, made up of stakeholders from the various
organizations, to develop guidelines for recognizing and supporting
these groups
|
| Responsible Party |
New Senior Community and Inclusion Administrator |
| Implementation Date |
December 2006 |
| Expected outcomes |
Flourishing employee groups, an increased sense of community.
Increased enrollment in existing groups on campus; increased understanding,
acceptance, and valuing of differences, and recognition of similarities
within the campus community; promotion of a culture of safety
and inclusion. Presentation to the President of a set of guidelines
for the recognition and support of existing (and future) campus
organizations that promote diversity and inclusion. |
| Assessment |
Survey perceptions of the affiliate organizations in fall 2008.
Annual report of membership and activities to newly hired Senior
Administrator. Subsequent data in future Campus Climate Surveys
will evaluate improvement in perceptions of University administrative
support for non-majority groups. |
| Assessment Date |
|
| RECOMMENDATION 12 |
Develop recruitment and retention programs to
diversify the faculty and staff at all levels. Recommended strategies
include the following:
- Hold deans, chairs and directors accountable for their hiring
decisions.
- Support strategic faculty hires in selected departments
over the next five years to increase diversity and equity,
especially in departments where there are currently no faculty
of color or women faculty.
- Collaborate with the county and state to increase affordable
housing opportunities, create relocation assistance, and mortgage
relief programs for faculty and staff.
- Develop peer networks and other retention strategies to
maintain a diverse faculty and workforce.
- With their permission, publish a list of employees’
community involvements to show
| |