Campus Resources and Planning Committee

October 22, 2010





Present:           Lowell Rasmussen, Mark Privratsky, Bart Finzel, Carol Marxen, Sydney Sweep,

                        Martin Seggelke, Pam Gades, Andy Sharpe, Sara Haugen, Dave Swenson,

                        Josh Preston, Maddy Maxeiner, Pareena Lawrence, Zak Forde, Margaret

                        Kuchenreuther, Jacquie Johnson, Sandy Olson-Loy



Guests:            Jim Hall, Roger Wareham, Cheryl Contant, Pareena Lawrence






CRPC will not meet on Friday, October 29.  


Agenda for future meetings include:


November 5 -- sports management proposal and an update on enrollment

November 12 – action on sports management proposal; discussion of capital projects, including the green living residentÕs hall proposal

November 19 – discussion of stimulus funded positions


Campus IT Plan


Jim Hall distributed a five-year IT plan and walked through the projects that he has identified.  Each are characterized by the risk and value to UMM and which units on campus will be most impacted. The five-year plan will evolve as time passes.    Since audit compliance has taken precedence in FY 11 projects, Bart asked about the longer term vision of the plan.  Jim said FY11 is consumed by clean up items included in the audit. Once those are finished, we will want to get into longer term strategic initiatives and a more plan-full mode with the hope that the technology support for the campus will be transparent.  At this time, he doesnÕt have one great awesome initiative in mind.   Zak asked if we could anticipate a wireless upgrade.  Jim said the networking telecommunications system is working on a design for the upgrade.  His vision is that students, faculty and staff should feel comfortable and confident about getting a signal anywhere on campus.  Zak asked if there is a long-term vision for website management.  Jim said he is working on the content management concept with Christine Mahoney.


Grants Development


Roger Wareham distributed an overview of the office and a summary of grant activity over the past several years.   Josh asked about UMMÕs total success rate.  Roger said we do pretty well, typically around 60-70%.  He added that indirect costs are commensurate with the spending. Roger also explained that  UMM has an indirect recovery and costs policy officially named Recovered Facilities and Administrative Costs Policy.   These are more commonly known on campus as indirect costs. The policy states that these funds are to be used to provide some support for the Grants Development Office, with remaining funds to be used at the Academic DeanÕs discretion to 1) reimburse units for costs related to the awards generating the indirect costs 2) provide matching funds and 3) provide incentive funds to encourage attempts to receive external funding.  Margaret wondered what has been the disposition of funds that have been generated  for the DeanÕs office.   Cheryl said there is a different financial structure from the way this was previously done.  We typically spend about $50,000 of the indirect costs:$20,000-25,000 for out-of-state travel, $20,000 on matching funds and $10,000 for research/publication costs, since,other than FREF funds, there are no funds to support faculty research.  Roger added that the recovered costs policy, passed by CRPC in 2004, is outdated.  The GrantÕs office and DeanÕs office developed the current policy and need to update it..