Faculty Senate Meeting
April 18, 2006
Faculty Assembly Report
Major Points of Faculty Assembly, 04-07-06
John G. Cope, Assembly Delegate
Report by the President, Erskine Bowles (Executive
Session): Highlights of are as
follows:
o
President Bowles
requested, through Betsy Brown and Brenda Killingsworth, information regarding
evidence of faculty who have been lost to other institutions based on salary
issues. His plan is to be able to
generate antidotal evidence when soliciting the legislature for faculty pay
increases. He is also concerned that
current information from exit interviews does not seem to be specific or
helpful in this regard.
o
When asked about
his views on the “student credit hour plan” currently being considered at GA;
he responded that financial/accounting issues were not what were driving the
current interest. “What is currently on
the table is a revenue neutral model”. He indicated that he had recently been
involved in a student discussion group on this topic at Chapel Hill, and that
discussions in general were still on-going, and that no decisions have been
made about moving to this plan at this time.
[Yet it is obvious from this meeting and from discussions with Jeff
Davies (as reviewed below) that this funding model is being seriously examined
across several levels at GA].
o
When asked about
the topic of his upcoming inaugural address, he responded that it would involve
ideas on leadership at the State level under conditions of adversity. He also mentioned the problem of teaching and
nursing shortages that were to be a general theme of his administration, and
that we could all prepare for some “rather controversial proposals in the near
future”.
Report by Jeff Davies (Chief of Staff): Reviewed progress on two fronts; A. 2006-2007 Budget
Priorities as endorsed by the Board of Governors, and B. the current status of
on-going discussions at GA regarding the student credit hour plan.
A. Budget
Proposal to be made to the 2006 Session of the General Assembly (2006-2007 Budget priorities of the Board of
Governors, The University of North Carolina, April 11, 2006 will be
available at: http://uncfacultyassembly.northcarolina.edu/.) Highlights are as follows.
Academic
Salary Increases (5%) $75,506,625
Expanding
Teaching and K-12 Education $20,554,002
Expanding Nursing and Health Care $19,138,871
Enrollment Changes $79,233,129
Specifically, Mr. Davies
mentioned that:
o
Funds being
requested for education have, in part, been based on frank discussions with the
Deans about which programs were working and which that were not working.
o
Nursing and
Education both were allocated 19 and 21 million respectively (see above).
o
The recruiting of
outstanding graduate students was being made a priority across the system $10,475,839 (ECU $722,120)
o
The total
Capital Budget Priority requests were $415,2002,801 (ECU $4,409,600)
o
Idea is that
tuition is charged per actual credit hour
o
This is an old
idea that resurfaced two years ago as a possible means of addressing barriers
and cost inequities associated with distance education. A broadly populated
subgroup was formed and recommended a change to a student credit hour
plan. The plan has also been discussed
with a panel comprised of the 16 Provosts). Thirteen of the provosts endorsed
the plan; two were in disagreement; and one felt that the plan was not relevant
to their facility.
o
The issue that
arises, due to modern technology, is that folks can take classes across a
variety of institutions via on and off campus enrollment, but that the
allocation of tuition and fees is a recurring problem past the 12 hour mark. Full-time enrollment will probably shift to 15
hours. The student credit hour plan
allows flexibility and provides for a more equitable distribution of dollars
across different units.
o
Our motives here
are “pure”, and the goal is to be “financially neutral”.
Based
on a very limited review the Budget Committee offered the following concerns:
o May hinder graduation of those closely watching their
budget,
o Will generate differential needs across AP students
and regular students not arriving with prior credit for courses,
o May force really bright students who were planning to
double major into being more consumer oriented.
Report by Kitty McCollum (AVP for Human Resources and
University Benefits Officer). Changes to the State Health Plan (PPO options),
Optional Retirement Program (ORP), and updates on the Phased Retirement Plan
were discussed.
PPO:
o Health Plan Choices will involve the traditional
Indemnity Plan (Comprehensive Major Medical CMM), and three (Preferred Provider
Options PPO). See http://statehealthplan.state.nc.us/
for details.
o Details of new plans will be available via mailings
on April 28, 2006.
o If you wish to continue with traditional CMM plan a
waiver will need to be signed each year and returned during the annual
enrollment period.
o List of Doctors that are participants of the PPOs is
now available on the State Health Web site at: http://statehealthplan.state.nc.us/PPO/PPO_Overview.html
ORP:
o An ORP Investment Advisory Committee was established
in June 2004 to advise the University Benefits Officer in the development of a
proposed ORP Investment Policy Statement that describes how the UNC Board of
Governors will carry out its fiduciary responsibilities for the program.
o The Advisory Committee, assisted by a national
benefits consulting firm and a university attorney, is made up of employees in
the University of North Carolina who have investments and/or benefits-related
knowledge and/or experience.
o The purpose of the Investment Policy Statement is to
strengthen the ORP in the selection and monitoring of the investment options
under the program and to provide a basis for consistent decision making over
time.
o With the proliferation of investment options and
concerns about fiduciary responsibilities within the investment industry, the
Advisory Committee believes that the Investment Policy Statement will serve as
an effective communication tool for conveying investment goals and priorities
to participants and other key stakeholders.
o The Investment Policy Statement serves as a roadmap
for managing the plan’s investments including roles and responsibilities, asset
classes to be offered, performance objectives and criteria, and definition of
peer groups and benchmarks to be used for each fund alternative.
o In addition to the development of the Investment
Policy Statement, the Advisory Committee conducted a thorough review of the
four ORP vendors including their funds, fees and services and made
recommendations to the University Benefits Officer.
o The Advisory Committee made the following recommendations:
·
Adopt the
proposed Investment Policy Statement as the investment protocol for the UNC
·
Retain the
current ORP vendors--AIG VALIC, Fidelity, Lincoln Life, and TLAA-CREF.
·
Conduct annual
reviews of vendors to ensure that they are continuing to meet the needs of
participants.
·
Implement MG
VALIC’s, Lincoln’s and TIAA-CREF’s new mutual fund platforms that provide a
spectrum of strategically selected investment options.
o Allow each vendor to offer no more than 20 funds in
their respective core fund line up. Note: Each vendor was asked to (1) propose
up to 20 funds to be included in the core fund line up and (2) ensure that each
fund was appropriately categorized in its class, and was among the best in its
class. The Advisory Committee reviewed and approved each vendor’s proposal
based on performance, fees and other factors. This new core fund lineup will
become effective July 1, 2006.
o Conduct quarterly reviews of core funds.
o Designate lifestyle funds (instead of money market
funds) offered by each carrier as the default fund in a situation where a
participant does not make a fund selection. (A lifestyle fund is an investment
that features an asset mix determined by the level of risk and return that is
appropriate for an individual investor. Factors that determine this mix include
an investor’s age, appropriate level of risk, the investment’s purpose and the
length of time until the principal will be withdrawn. Lifestyle funds can
feature conservative, moderate or aggressive growth strategies. Aggressive growth
lifestyle funds are targeted to investors in their late 20s, while conservative
growth lifestyle funds are targeted to investors in their late 50s.)
o Allow an ORP participant to keep ORP money in
“deselected funds” (funds previously available but not approved by the
committee going forward) after June 30, 2006; however, in situations where an
existing fund is not part of the core fund lineup, have each ORP vendor provide
a mapping strategy alternative so that a participant can direct future contributions
and existing balances to an approved fund with a similar objective.
o Prohibit new contributions to deselected funds after
December 31, 2006.
o Provide a six-month window, beginning July 1, 2006,
for ORP participants to reallocate (and map if they choose) their existing
balances and contributions to approved funds that are part of the new core fund
lineup. If no election is made during this period, have vendor direct
contributions to the new default fund.
o The University Benefits Officer must submit these
recommendations to the President and UNC Board of Governors for their approval.
o Upon approval of these recommendations, a number of
targeted communications will be sent to ORP participants through December 2006
to announce these changes, provide information about the implementation
process, and explain how voluntary supplemental retirement plans can be used to
compliment and supplement the ORP.
o Assuming the plan is ultimately approved, following a
decision period from July 1 until December 31, 2006, all ORP folks will be
required to place new allocations into new “Core Funds”.
o Earlier Investment strategies will remain as
allocated
Phased Retirement:
o Phased Retirement should continue as an option.
o The current minimum age of 50 will probably change to
60.
Legislative Update, Mark Fleming (VP State Relations):
Short-session to start back May 9th;
Budget process will start next week;
Highlights for the year are as follows:
o Steven Black will probably still be Speaker, even
with calls for him to step down
o Budget will probably be OK but all else will be
interesting in a short session
o Deadline for Governor’s Budget is May 9th;
Press conference will be May 11, 2006.