Minutes of May 16, 1996 Meeting

	The meeting convened at 2:08 p.m. in room 817 Cathedral of

	UPBC members present were: Thomas Anderson, John Brice, Richard
Colwell, Thomas Detre, Ronald Gardner, Brian Hart, Peter Koehler, James
Maher, Glenn Nelson, Arthur Ramicone,  Michael Stuckart, Philip Wion, and
Judith Zimmerman.  Also present were: Jeffrey Liebmann and Jeffrey
	UPBC members not present were: Jacob Birnberg, Toni Carbo,
Marjorie Carlson, James Cassing, Jerome Cochran, Randy Juhl, Franklin
McCarthy, Keith McDuffie, Jeffrey Romoff, Bruce Williams, and Julius

Report of the Chair

	Maher reported that a draft capital project plan has been prepared
and will soon be shared with the Board of Trustees Property and Facilities
Committee.  After their review of its content, the plan will formally
proceed through normal governance review channels.

Proposal Transferring Department of Communication Science and Disorders

	Detre discussed the rationale behind the proposal to transfer the
Department of Communication Science and Disorders from the Faculty of Arts
and Sciences (FAS) to the School of Health and Rehabilitation Science
(SHRS).  Given the strong relation between speech and communication
disorders and major health problems facing many people and the growing
ties between the Department and other health science activities, the
faculty approached the Dean of FAS with the proposal.  Koehler explained
that the transfer involves approximately 110 undergraduate majors (mostly
juniors and seniors), about 50 graduate students, and 10 faculty.  He
added that the proposal was reviewed and approved by the Planning and
Budgeting Committees of both schools involved.
	Colwell moved that the UPBC endorse the proposal to transfer the
Department of Communication Science and Disorders from FAS to SHRS.
Anderson seconded.  Wion asked whether the proposed transfer would affect
tenure stream faculty in the department.  Detre replied that tenure
criteria, which are greatly determined by the context of the field and the
market for faculty, are based on identified scholarly priorities of the
Department and the School.  Koehler added that the nature of the effort
produced by these faculty will remain heavily research-oriented.  The
motion was approved unanimously.

Planning and Budgeting Activities in the Health Sciences

	Masnick reported that each health science school has submitted an
updated five-year plan and budget, which are now being assembled into a
single document and summary.  He added that a preliminary plan for
allocating funds between schools is being considered.  Masnick stated that
a proposal to discontinue the Clinical Laboratory Science Program in SHRS
has been reviewed and approved by the Health Sciences Planning and
Budgeting Committee and will soon be submitted for final approval.  Detre
added that evolving technology has made the Program expensive in recent
years and that enrollments have declined.
	Maher explained that this proposal was prepared through the
appropriate school-level planning process and that the University should
continue to streamline procedures for making resource allocation decisions
that are consistent with existing plans.  Anderson added that
communicating the criteria for such decisions helps people understand the
urgency of financial circumstances.
	Detre stated that the health science schools are committed to
supporting their own expenditures and that those units that can generate
revenues in excess of their expenditures are expected to support units
that cannot.  Maher noted that discussion of directions, priorities, and
criteria are the important aspect of UPBC review.

Planning and Budgeting Activities in the Provost's Area

	Maher presented information on the context of University planning
and budgeting, including attributes of the University that are unique and,
therefore, challenging when making resource allocation decisions.  From an
institutional standpoint, the University is very different from the
standard Association of American Universities (AAU) peer.  State support
constitutes a relatively low percentage of the University's budget,
requiring higher tuition rates and greater dependence on successful
competition for grants and other contract funds.  Given the small amount
of construction being funded in Pennsylvania, Maher stressed the
importance of the University conducting a capital campaign in the near
	Maher emphasized many strengths of the University, including its
worldwide reputation,  comprehensive curricular offerings, strong graduate
programs, successful history of incorporating the international dimension
into its instruction and research, and a reasonably safe main campus with
all the benefits of a metropolitan location.  Among the under-used
strengths of the University, Maher cited a broad alumni network,
successful graduates, and the variety of undergraduate experiences
available at all five campuses.
	To show the unique situation of the University from a planning and
budgeting perspective, Maher discussed three peer comparison groups,

 	AAU -- generally comprehensive research universities, mostly
lacking any sense of urban mission;
 	National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges
(NASULGC) -- many university systems with flagship campuses located in
rural areas that have an effective record of dealing with state and
federal governments; and
 	Urban 13 -- generally smaller state institutions located in large
cities, where the urban mission is vital.

Maher explained that the University is alone in having a mission that fits
comfortably in each of these groups and that current social, political,
and economic forces favor such institutions.
	As another way of looking at the University's mission, Maher
discussed the various products of the University, including:

-- highly-ranked graduate education and research programs;
-- undergraduate programs that provide top quality academic and research
   opportunities for students, address the needs of urban, nontraditional
   students, and have a huge overall impact on Western Pennsylvania; and
-- broad array of professional training and continuing education
   opportunities that reach into every part of Pennsylvania.

Maher emphasized that planning and budgeting requires the University to
remain aware of each of these missions -- from the traditional higher
education mission of offering teaching, research, and public service, to
awareness of its differing roles among various peer institutions, to
producing graduate education and research, undergraduate education, and
professional training opportunities. 

	The meeting adjourned at 4:08 p.m.