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
Announcements
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..