MINUTES prepared by Lou Gross Approved by Budget Committee on 12/2/02
Members Present: Dewey, Greenberg, Gross (Chair), Hedrick, Reed
Members Absent: Davies, Davis, Lyons (on leave), Mulkey, Nugent,
I. CALL TO ORDER, 3:40pm
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Agenda was modified to include new business to set next semester's
meeting schedule, then approved as distributed.
III. The minutes of the October 14, 2002 Committee meeting were
with minor revisions for spelling and grammar.
1. Gross presented a brief summary of recent Senate activities
IT and Summer SChool. Dewey reported that she was on the new IT
and Greenberg suggested that there should be someone from Education
on the Summer School Task force. A brief discussion of the current
status was held, though there was no formal announcment regarding
details of raises or use of non-recurring funds as yet.
2. Reed gave a summary of the activities of the F&A Task Force.
been implied that UT will have to provide new funds to pay for any
additional research space and this has led the Task Force to
consider a different F&A structure to allow for a Research Facility
Fund to finance new buildings. The latest suggestion is that F&A
be split so that 60% goes to General Fund, 10% to Research Facility
Fund, 25% to the unit generating the F&A (some of which may
the Principal Investigator), and 5% to the PI. This would lead to
reduction of about $2M to the General Fund next year if enacted.
A discussion was held on how the current F&A rate is calculated
3% for building and depreciation, 3.8% for equipment depreciation,
2.3% for interest, 9.4% for operation and maintenance, 1.8% for
library, 24.7% for administration.
There has been no discussion between the F&A Task Force and
anyone involved in developing the new initiative for a Research
V. Old Business.
1. Regarding modifications of current procedures on campus related
to financial matters that would help faculty excel, Gross reported
that in a convesration with Dean Michael Blackwell, the emphasis
of the Streamlining Committee he chairs deals with Human Resources.
Attendees felt there were other areas of fiscal management that
might be looked into in addition to HR. It was suggested that
Dean Blackwell be invited to a committee meeting next semester.
2. Discussion was held about the format for the budgetary process
this year. Some suggestions were that all planning documents should
be posted on the Web, there should be a request for full budgets
simply requests for new funds (based upon a desire of the commitee
see comprehensive details on current allocations of resources),
a detailed look at how Auxiliary Enterprise income is allocated,
a need to discuss the slowness of the budgetary process which
greatly limits the ability of units to plan ahead.
VI. New Business.
1. A brief discussion about the Research Foundation
was held based upon President Shumaker and VP Dwayne McCay's
presentation at the Senate Executive Committee meeting on
November 4. It was not clear who would legally be able to serve
the Foundation Board - Gross would investigate this. The Committee
addressed concerns about the format for the Foundation, but until
more information is made available, any response was not yet
2. Dates for the meetings for next semester were set as:
January 27, February 24, March 10, and April 21 with additional
attendance at budget hearings as necessary.
VII. GOOD OF THE ORDER
VIII. ADJOURNMENT 5:10PM
Note: Attached to this is a comment approved by the Committee by
email ballot and sent to the web site for comments about the Research
Foundation, after documents about the Foundation were posted
on the web.
From: Faculty Senate Budget Committee
Re: UT Research Foundation and it's effect on UTK Budget and Faculty
Date: November 27, 2002
cc: President Shumaker, Vice President McCay, Vice President Crabtree,
Professor Birdwell (Research Council), Professor Combs (Senate President)
Having had a chance to review the draft documents posted on the
we have a wide variety of concerns regarding the impact of this
new endeavor on UTK and the rights and activities of faculty and
staff involved in research. While the draft documents are likely
a necessary step in establishing a Foundation, these legal documents
lack a tremendous amount of detail critical in determining
how such a Foundation will affect faculty. The Senate Executive
Committee was informed that a Business Plan would be posted and
perhaps this will address many of the issues we raise here. We
hope our comments and suggestions will be taken account of in
the development of this Business Plan. Given the lack of detail
in what has been posted to date however, we strongly urge that
action on the implementation of this Foundation be slowed from
that in the Plan of Actions on the web site. In addition we
suggest that the Plan of Actions be modified to state how comments
from the Faculty Senate(s) would be addressed, and how disagreements
about the basic details of the Foundation's establishment would
The web page indicates that all external grant and contract funding
to UT will flow through this Foundation, with all of this controlled
by the Board of Directors. We believe that an important addition
to the documents governing the Foundation pertains to the rights
and responsibilities of those who generated the external funding
(the Principal Investigators). We also urge that considerably
more detail be provided concerning the fiscal management of the
funds which flow through the Foundation. It would be helpful
to make it clear how the Foundation would handle all the
pre- through post- award management of the accounts, whether
this will affect the current responsibilities of unit bookkeepers
at UT, and what the expected fiscal management responsibilities
of the Principal Investigator would be.
We believe that it is critical to include details in the Business
Plan regarding F&A recoveries. There is an enormous impact any
reduction in F&A recoveries would have on operating budgets
if the Foundation were to "tax" F&A (as is allowed
in the draft
documents). We suggest that the Plans explicitly state that the
UTK campus budget shall be held harmless initially, with no
diversion by the Foundation of funds that are currently used
to fund basic operations on campus.
The Draft describes a Board of Directors directly controlled by
President (who appoints/controls directly 14 of the 22 voting members
since the Vice Presidents and Chancellors all report to the President,
and indirectly controls all the members since the Faculty members
are appointed by individuals reporting to the President). Given
it is UT faculty and research staff who actually write the proposals
and carry out the research this Foundation is to support, it would
seem appropriate that faculty representation on the Board be
considerably higher than that of any other group, and that the
faculty chosen to serve on this be selected by the faculty, not
We urge that considerably more details about the operation
of the Foundation and it's impact on budgeting at UT be provided
before further action is expected of the Senate.
The Senate Budget Committee will be happy to meet with appropriate
administrators regarding any aspect of the Foundation. Our
meetings are scheduled for 3:30PM on Dec. 2, Jan. 27, Feb. 24,
March 10, and April 21.
back to top
If you have any questions concerning the UT Faculty Senate, or would
like more information, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To offer suggestions or comments about this web site,
please email the webmaster.