Skip Navigation

Minutes of February 3, 2012

Attending: Norman Goodman, Deb Dwyer, Paul Bingham, Shamell Forbes, Darren Chase, Stalin Mafla, Jackie Collier, Bill Godfrey, Michael Chiarello, Dave Ferguson (guest), Imin Kao (guest), Smiel Einai, Jim Fabian (guest)

The meeting began at 2:40.


The agenda today will include a presentation by David Ferguson and Imin Kao on the CEAS South Korean undergraduate initiative for the Department of Technology and Society.

There will be a special meeting on the current budget and the proposed new budget model next week, on Friday at our usual time, with Provost Assanis and Mark Maciulaitis. We will receive the presentation for review in advance.

  • ACTION: Read about the Responsibility Centers Management model and be prepared with questions to ask at next week’s meeting.
  • Paul Bingham sent us a document on this last year on this topic. Paul also recommended that we could get further information by googling “responsibility centers management in universities”

Subcommittee reports

Shared Services Subcommittee

  • In her absence, Pam Wolfskill submitted a written report that was sent to all members of CAPRA in advance. In addition, Bill Godfrey, a member of the subcommittee, added the following information:
  • Two members of the subcommittee met with Provost and Nancy Squires
    • There was some concern expressed that a “one size fits all” model is not appropriate for a complex university with a diverse set of programs and needs.
    • The experience at the East Campus is different from that of the West Campus
    • The provost’s position is that the initiative WILL be implemented and what is open for discussion is HOW.
      • It worked at the University of Michigan.
      • Started in engineering and then spread to all units on the campus.
    • Paul Bingham asked if the administration is using the SSC to cut staff.
      • Nancy Squire’s response to this question was that they are not looking to cut staff and, in effect, in some areas there might be an increase in staff.
      • The idea is to improve efficiency.
      • One example of inefficiency that was mentioned is ATCs doing the chair’s job because the chair is not on campus frequently.
      • With respect to how the SSCs initiative is being put into place in HSC, a meeting of the HSC Senate Feb 2, attended by four of the 5 deans in the HSC (all but medicine), made clear that there is no transparency regarding the shared services initiative. In fact, the deans themselves are not kept in the loop.
      • While there are a few initiatives in physiology and registrar, not much else has changed. One report is that things are going well in physiology, pharmacology, and neuroscience. However, there is no agreement on the accuracy of this observation with respect to the Registrar. It is difficult to get adequate answers in a timely fashion in the context of an overwhelmed staff.
  • While we are told about how well the SSC is working in Theatre Arts and Arts, in reality we are also hearing it is not all that rosy.
    • Evaluation of shared service initiatives: There was agreement that their needs to to be an evaluation of the SSCs, and governance should be involved in the process of establishing an appropriate evaluation model and a shared governance committee to oversee the process. ACTION: Norm asked Deb to consult with Denise Snow, President of the HSC Senate about this issue.
  • Discussion about Bain report. Originally, there work was to focus on “back office” functions and not involve the academic sector for shared services. But it is somehow the academic sector also got included in the SSC initiative. Also, we never got a final report from Bain.
  • Health Sciences Center Subcommittee (Michael Chiarello)
  • The issue discussed was the “rebranding” of the Health Sciences Center to “Stony Brook Medicine.”
    • How do we feel about being branded as medicine
      • It was reported that it is NOT well received by many of the faculty.
      • The concern is that medicine does not adequately represent the broad services represented in the health sciences – and that health is a broader term than medicine.
      • There is a need to push for greater clarity over implications and rationale of this “rebranding.”
        • Is there re-organization as a consequence of branding?
        • Financing of changes?
    • ACTION: The subcommittee was asked to follow up on these questions with Dr. Kaushansky.

Satellite Campuses Subcommittee (Jackie Collier)

There was no report necessary on Southampton or Stony Brook Manhattan. However, there will be a presentation later in this meeting about a proposed undergraduate program BS program in Technological Systems Management sponsored by the Department of Technology and Society for the Songdo campus in South Korea.

Strategic Planning, Responsibility Centers Management, and Faculty Resources Subcommittee (Paul Bingham)

  • The subcommittee met with Provost Assanis.
  • It learned enough to ask questions for the meeting next week with Provost Assanis and Mark Maciulaitis.
  • The Provost was asked whether the RCMs would correspond to departments. He indicated that it would need to be broader than departments. In essence, this model would, essentially, be a return to the subdivision of CAS into some form of “divisions”/RCMs.
  • Responsible Management began in private industry to promote competition and it not clear that that would be an appropriate goal for a collegial institution like a university. The subcommittee pointed out that this could create perverse incentives in an academic environment.
  • Provost Assanis discussed an interesting plan that would call for proposals from faculty for constellation hires.

Presentation of South Korean Proposal by Iman Kao and David Ferguson

Last year, there was a proposal for an undergraduate program at the Songdo campus in South Korea that involved academic departments from both CAS and CEAS but the University Senate opposed this initiative on a number of grounds. By end of last year the Dean of engineering began to revise the proposal to more narrowly define the program and to meet the objections posed by the University Senate. Imin Kao and David Ferguson are here to request a recommendation for approval of the revised proposal.

Iman Kao:

  • Discussed how the new proposal, which involves only one academic department addressed the concerns raised last year.
  • In response to the concern over potential liability if initiative fails, SUNY formed an LLC that the program will operate under and which shields SUNY and Stony Brook from any financial liability that might occur if the program is terminated.
  • The president of SUNY Korea, Dr. Kim, graduated from US PhD program and is well connected.
  • Some questions that were raised:
    • Consider the impact of faculty moving to S. Korea from Stony Brook
      • Response: faculty will either go when not scheduled to teach, or will be bought out sufficiently to replace lost effort (reimbursement not at adjunct rate, but salary replacement)
      • Library resources must be addressed, though Iman the costs will not be borne by Stony Brook
      • Students from this program will spend two semester at Stony Brook, which will allow them to complete most of their lower division DEC requirements
      • However, the potential over-crowding in DEC courses from these visiting students could be an issue. However, gains from out-of-state tuition being charged to these students should go toward funding extra sections of the DECs. CAPRA will insist that all the funds that derive from this out-of-state tuition should be used in the academic sector to enhance the educational mission
    • Finances:
      • CAPRA would like a summary of expected revenue/surplus in the steady state
        • Investment in first year is expected to be $935,322
        • In black by 5th year, the initial commitment of Stony Brook to this initiative
        • S. Korea is committed to funding faculty and housing but will not invest more knowing we keep gains that are in the $1million range from year 5 on.
        • S. Korea has the initiative to invest in the faculty and give us the profits because they are buying a quality American education in technology management.
    • This proposal is, essentially, a pilot for possible expansion should it prove successful
      • This pilot will allow Stony Brook to work out any “bugs” in such an initiative and learn how to make this a win-win for both parties
      • Helps visibility of Stony Brook – good for marketing
    • Other comments:
      • Concern over an LLC handing out a degree
        • But we would not approve it without the insurance against liabilities
        • Stony Brook still controls the academic nature of the initiative
        • But there is concern over long term where we may lose control and it could become a Korean initiative without our input, but with our name
        • We can always stop granting degrees
    • CAPRA appreciates the fact that the Dean and relevant faculty of CEAS took our comments from the last proposal seriously.
    • In general, the members of CAPRA were supportive of this initiative.
    • ACTION: Norm will draft a recommendation for the approval by CAPRA and then forwarding to the University Senate Executive Committee on this proposal. This recommendation will include the fact that tuition money derived from the visiting students goes toward academics rather than to the general campus budget, and that the reimbursed funds from S. Korea for faculty replacement goes to the relevant departments.
  • The meeting was adjourned at 4pm
Login to Edit