Campus Budget
Task Force Formed to Review Reorganization Proposal
-
February 3, 2009
To: The Campus Community
Today, I'm writing to the campus to share information on the ongoing budget crisis, and to outline a process for our campus to move forward.
1) In response to requests at the general meeting of the Faculty Senate last Thursday, I am announcing the formation of a Task Force on Reorganization (TFR) that will deal with issues of reorganization and make recommendations to me and the Provost with regard to reorganization. With this announcement I am explicitly recognizing the faculty desire to have additional deliberative input into the process.
The TFR will be composed of a number of department chairs and faculty members from the current colleges of HFA, NRE, NSM, and SBS. It will deliberate on the proposed actions I am outlining below and provide me with input by March 6. During the past month I have heard that there is considerable sentiment for reinstituting a College of Arts and Sciences that would unite many of the departments in these four colleges. I have serious reservations about the establishment of such a college, but I do think that the idea is worth exploring. I would therefore also charge the task force with exploring the idea of a College of Arts and Sciences, or any other alternate organizational structure that it finds appropriate for the campus. I am asking Jane Fountain to lead this task force and to report its findings to the central administration.
Assuming it works in a timely fashion, I will wait for a report from the TFR before finalizing any structure. I recognize that the TFR may wish to deliberate for a longer period of time about the reintroduction of a College of Arts and Sciences, and I have no date by which it must deliver a recommendation on this matter. I do not see the organization I am proposing as antithetical to the formation of a College of Arts and Sciences. Indeed, I believe in many ways it moves us halfway there.
2) As many of you know, the campus has been contemplating reorganization since we received news of the devastating budget situation in the fall of 2008. The Provost and I have consulted widely with faculty from all affected colleges and received dozens of emails from across the campus. We met several times with deans and held meetings with groups of distinguished faculty members from colleges that may be impacted by change.
I believe that the structures I am proposing make the most sense for the campus at this particular time. They will provide efficiencies in administration, considerable monetary savings, minimal disruption of faculty, programs, and departments, as well as the potential for exciting new collaborations in research and teaching. They will also demonstrate that we are taking the financial crisis seriously and that we are managing the campus effectively. I know that not everyone will agree, but I hope that faculty will put aside their personal preferences and work within the proposed structure toward the goal we all want: moving UMass Amherst into the upper echelon of public research universities in the country.
I propose the elimination of four colleges and their reconstitution as two colleges. The colleges to be eliminated would be the College of Humanities and Fine Arts; the College of Natural Resources and the Environment; the College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics; and the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences. The official names of the newly formed colleges will be left to the faculty in them. I will refer to them for convenience in this memorandum as the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences (CHASS) and the College of Natural Sciences (CNS).
My proposal places the following departments and programs in CHASS: Afro-American Studies; Art; Classics; English; History; Judaic and Near Eastern Studies; Languages, Literatures, and Cultures; Linguistics; Music and Dance; Philosophy; Slavic and East European Studies; Theater; Women’s Studies; Anthropology; Communication; Communication Disorders; Economics; Labor Relations and Research Center; Legal Studies; Political Science; Public Policy and Administration; Social Thought and Political Economy; Sociology; Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning.
My proposal places the following departments in CNS: Environmental Sciences; Food Science; Microbiology; Natural Resources Conservation; Plant, Soil and Insect Sciences; Stockbridge School of Agriculture; Veterinary and Animal Sciences; Psychology; Astronomy; Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; Biology; Chemistry; Computer Science; Geosciences; Mathematics and Statistics; Physics; and Polymer Science and Engineering.
I propose that Resource Economics be included in the School of Management.
In addition I propose that the School of Nursing retain its autonomy and have an associate dean or an executive director from among the current School of Nursing, but that it be administered through the College of Public Health and Health Sciences.
Besides the report of the TFR, I will be soliciting input from the faculty in general about this proposal. The Faculty Senate will also receive this proposal and make a formal recommendation; I have been told that if the Senate receives it now, it can make this recommendation before the end of the term.
The governance of the two new colleges will be left entirely to the administration and faculty of the colleges. While neither the Provost nor I wish to micromanage the new colleges, we suggest as a first step that committees consisting of faculty, staff, and administrators from NRE and NSM for CNS; and committees consisting of faculty, staff, and administrators from HFA and SBS for CHASS should be formed to assist in the transition.
3) At the most recent faculty meeting a number of individuals requested that I provide more concrete information about actual savings. I therefore worked with my office and the Provost’s Office to obtain a fuller view of what savings could be realized by the merger.
In looking at various models, we can see the potential for saving $1.3 million to $1.5 million per year. These estimates are conservative. In addition, at least one current dean has told me that he believes additional savings will accrue over time owing to increased efficiencies. These savings are substantial, especially when we consider the need to invest funds in essential areas of the academic enterprise. Once we move forward with implementation, I will share our thoughts on staffing and cost savings with the new deans and their leadership team.
I cannot be more specific about savings at this time for two reasons. First, I do not want to micromanage the deans who will be appointed to CHASS and CNS or their respective leadership teams. As I have stated above, these colleges must be free to determine their own course of action. Second, I do not want to cause undue panic among individuals working in the current colleges about their jobs. As you may know, I have promised the unions on campus that I will not announce any layoffs until the campus has more information on fees and federal money, both of which will be essential in determining how we move forward this year and next year.
There will be some members of the faculty who will be disappointed by the reorganization I am proposing and even by reorganization in general. I hope, however, that the majority will understand both the necessity for reorganization and the advantages that accrue from the proposed structure.
I wish to thank everyone who has participated in this process to this point for their input. It has helped me considerably in arriving at this proposal.
Chancellor Robert C. Holub
