SUBMITTED BY: RECOMMENDATION TO RENEW CHARTER INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE RECOMMENDATION

Transcription

1 SUBMITTED BY: HILARY H. RATNER, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH RECOMMENDATION TO RENEW CHARTER INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Governors renew the charter for the Institute for Information Technology and Culture (WSUCA ) for three years. BACKGROUND The Institute for Informational Technology and Culture (IITC) is an interdisciplinary center that has had some significant successes since its inception as measured by the number of grants obtained, conferences held, graduate students supported, and collaborative research efforts managed. The Center was initiated by Marietta Baba, Ph.D., in Anthropology, and led by Professor Allen Batteau, Ph.D., upon Dr. Baba s departure from the University. Dr. Batteau, also in Anthropology, was named Director in October The Center also draws faculty from throughout the University including the School of Medicine and the Colleges of Engineering and Education. REVIEW The proposal to renew the charter for the Institute for Information Technology and Culture was reviewed by the Center and Institute Advisory Committee-II (CIAC-II). The Policy Committee of the Academic Senate was provided the CIAC-II review and review documents. Both the CIAC-II and the Policy Committee have recommended renewal for three years on a probationary period with the review at the end of the second year, with partial support for the Director and a graduate student at a level not exceeding $55,000 per year. The Review Committee strongly felt that this amount should be sufficient to provide Dr. Batteau an opportunity to address the major concerns raised in this review. The CIAC-II Committee also made the following observations: Dr. Batteau should better advertise the Center to faculty who might be interested in becoming involved in IITC s projects. Faculty from other social science departments (Political Science, Economics, and Sociology) should be solicited for their interests in IITC s projects. The roles of faculty and students currently involved in the Center should be more clearly defined and an organizational chart developed. The relationship between the Center and the Department of Anthropology in terms of service and teaching activities needs to be addressed. The facilities in the Knapp Building are sufficient.

2 The Advisory Boards (both the Governing Board and the Industrial Advisory Board) should meet and reassess the direction of the IITC and a revised mission statement and strategic plan should be developed. The Center needs some clearly defined outcome measures that can reasonably be attained within 3 to 5 years. There should be more evidence of an active role for the Industrial Advisory Board in the Center. There needs to be clear evidence of attempts to procure additional sources of revenue outside of the granting arena. This includes seeking corporate sponsorships from the automotive industry, Intel, or other related industries, as well as endowments and development monies.

3 SUBMITTED BY: HILARY H. RATNER, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH RECOMMENDATION TO RENEW CHARTER CENTER FOR MOLECULAR MEDICINE AND GENETICS RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Governors renew the charter for the Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics (WSUCA ) for a period of four years. BACKGROUND The Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics (CMMG) was chartered by the Board of Governors in 1994 and was last reviewed in The director is Lawrence I. Grossman, Ph.D. The Associate Director at the time of the review was S. Helena Kuivaniemi, M.D., Ph.D. That role is now assigned to Jeff Loeb, M.D. The Center s mission is to enhance research strength in molecular biology and genetics at the university and to extend its interdisciplinary programs to targeted human health research by: Promoting interdisciplinary interactions and collaborations between basic and clinical scientists throughout the University and its affiliated hospitals. Developing focused interest groups and novel approaches to clinical problems to provide new opportunities for external funding of individual and programmatic research and training grants. Developing educational and training programs in molecular medicine and genetics Developing and using medical biotechnology in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of disease, and utilizing this technology transfer to benefit human health. The Center is composed of 27 faculty members, 15 of whom have primary appointments in the Center while the remaining 12 members are jointly appointed in other departments in the School of Medicine. Twenty-nine faculty members are associate members based in other departments/centers. Funding for CMMG is derived principally from external funds, with additional amounts coming from the General Fund, Research Stimulation funds, and donations. These sources total $2.6 million and do not include $3.6 million in external research funding. REVIEW The proposal to renew the charter for the Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics was reviewed by the Center and Institute Advisory Committee-II (CIAC-II). The Policy Committee of the Academic Senate was provided the CIAC-II review and review documents. Both the CIAC-II and the Policy Committee recommended renewal for four years with a review after the third year. The CIAC-II reported that the programs of CMMG have become stabilized and better organized since its last review in 1999; CMMG has made substantial progress towards achieving its goals.

4 Moreover, its interdisciplinary programs fulfill a niche not met by other departments and centers throughout the University. Letters of strong and enthusiastic support from many clinical science chairs accompany the CMMG report. Stabilization within CMMG has been achieved by the appointment of a permanent director, Dr. Grossman. The establishment of basic science teaching, research, and clinical genetics teams has facilitated development of these areas. CMMG has made significant progress in many areas since it was last reviewed by CIAC in Consolidation of CMMG faculty to the third floor of Scott Hall has improved morale. Empty space appears available for recruitment of several additional faculty members. The review committee suggested that the research focus and enhancement of research strengths be better fleshed out prior to the next review. A timetable along with a strategy about whom to hire needs to be better articulated. This strategic approach should be formulated quickly but not rashly. Moreover, implementation of this strategy should involve consultation with the external advisory board, the Dean of the School of Medicine and/or the Vice President of Research. Recognizing that quality of the faculty is more important than hiring a candidate into a niche, CMMG should aggressively pursue recruitment of funded investigators, when feasible. The renovated space, strong CMMG administrative staff, and adequate financial resources should permit recruitment of outstanding scholars. Likewise, the recruitment of new, high-quality faculty and researchers should be the major priority of the Center, and recruitment packages prepared and offered to candidates in as timely a manner as possible. Faculty who hold 100% FTEs in CMMG must obtain more external support as PIs. Well-defined benchmarks along with a timetable for their implementation must be established by the Director and Associate Directors of CMMG for the faculty. These benchmarks must be discussed with the Faculty. While CMMG has several initiatives in the planning stages, including a mitochondrial disease group, enhancement of a stroke group and a neuroscience training program, the Center should avail itself and become familiar with already existing University strengths in these areas. CMMG should seriously evaluate the likelihood of success of these endeavors, and if the likelihood of their success is low, should direct its energies to more productive, well-established endeavors. These endeavors should enhance department s research portfolios and include assisting and encouraging faculty with primary appointments in the Center to obtain their own independent funding. Finally, since CMMG internally recommends faculty for promotion and tenure, it should develop bylaws that establish appropriate procedures using University guidelines as a foundation.

5 SUBMITTED BY: HILARY H. RATNER, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH RECOMMENDATION TO CHARTER CENTER TO ADVANCE PALLIATIVE-CARE EXCELLENCE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Board of Governors charter the Center to Advance Palliative-Care Excellence (CAPE) for three years with a review after the second year. The proposed charter is attached. BACKGROUND On September 29, 2005, Dr. Robert R. Frank, M.D., then-interim Dean of the School of Medicine, committed $524,559 over a three year period to support the Center. On January 9, 2006, President Reid approved a one-year provisional charter for CAPE. The Center is led by Robert Zalenski, M.D., M.A., Emergency Medicine, and includes personnel from the School of Medicine, College of Nursing, and the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The stated mission of the Center is to improve palliative care through advances in four central domains. The four areas include: Service: To work as an interdisciplinary team to provide palliative care services to improve the experiences of patients, families, and communities who are living with discomfort, illness, and injury Teaching: To prepare health care providers, persons in diverse academic disciplines, and community members through teaching and role modeling excellence in practice Advocacy: To advocate for individuals, families, and communities to control their own life and death experiences in ways that are consistent with their cultures, values, education, and policies. Research: To engage in collaborative, interdisciplinary, and innovative research to develop and extend new knowledge in palliative care. REVIEW The proposal to renew the charter for the Center to Advance Palliative-Care Excellence was reviewed by the Center and Institute Advisory Committee-II (CIAC-II). The Policy Committee of the Academic Senate was provided the CIAC-II review and review documents. The CIAC-II has recommended a charter for four years with the review after the third year. The Policy Committee offered a different recommendation of a one-year charter with a review at the end of the one-year period. The Office of the Vice President for Research strongly believes that one year is an insufficient amount of time to further build on the foundation put in place by the Center s leadership; therefore, OVPR is requesting a compromise between the two recommendations in order to allow implementation of suggestions made by the CIAC-II. OVPR requests a three year charter with a review during the third year.

6 The committee recommends the following prior to the next review: CAPE should increase its efforts to secure a more stable funding base through philanthropy and NIH dollars. Given CAPE s strong ties to the College of Nursing, The National Institute of Nursing Research should be tapped as a logical source of support. Pharmaceutical industries, VA and DOD might provide money for CAPE studies of clinical trials of pain management therapies. The hiring of grant writers as proposed by the Advisory Board was questioned by the CIAC, although consultants to review grant applications prior to submission is advisable. The issue of stable funding was a primary concern of the CIAC. Success in procuring funds should be a benchmark when CAPE is reviewed in three years. CAPE should explore the possibility that some of the advocacy and service functions might be covered by Medicare, Medicaid, and other insurers. Another source of funding might be the funeral industry. Grant applications that examine the relative success of different palliative care models might be fundable. End of Life Care is now a requirement for nursing curriculum. CAPE might develop an on-line course on End of Life Care that could be profitable for the center. The budget should reflect the income and expenses associated with each of the four missions of CAPE: service, teaching, research, and advocacy. What are the sources for funds for each activity and what are the costs of providing each activity? CIAC would like the budget clarified. Under each of the four missions, what are the activities and how are they funded? The Director and Associate Directors should approach their respective Deans to negotiate release time for their CAPE activities. A public relations campaign should be launched to attract co-investigators across the WSU campus and community. For example, sociologists, psychologists, and psychiatrists and economists might be recruited to round out the expertise of the current CAPE staff. Basic scientists doing pain research may be interested in participating in CAPE research. Currently, the Center stresses spirituality. To prevent appearances of exclusion of nonspiritual clients, the Center should explicitly indicate its willingness to work within the framework of all values and cultural systems. Is the spirituality approach evidence-based? Does this focus on spirituality fit the research focus of WSU? How does spirituality fit into the missions of service, teaching, and advocacy? The recommendations of the Advisory Board should be carefully considered and implemented as soon as possible. The Advisory Board should develop a strategic plan for CAPE. It would be useful to find a mentor at WSU who leads a CIAC-II center to provide advice on the strategic plan. This plan should include benchmarks to measure the success of the Center. In addition to the internal advisory board, CAPE should develop an external advisory board that consists of nationally known experts outside the DMC and WSU. Community members should be included in this board.

7 CAPE should continue to reach out to additional graduate students across WSU and offer them access to human subjects for doctoral dissertations.

8 Center to Advance Palliative-Care Excellence (CAPE) 1.0 Center to Advance Palliative-Care Excellence 1.1 There shall be a Center to Advance Palliative-Care Excellence whose mission will be to improve the quality of life for patients with chronic fatal illness, particularly near and at the end-of-life. The mission will be achieved with innovative research and demonstration projects, educational conferences and programs, and by catalyzing clinical activity at the bedside of those suffering from fatal illness. In pursuing this mission, CAPE shall seek to obtain and expand external funding support from both private and public sources. CAPE will conduct interdisciplinary research on end-of-life care, with the following areas of focus: symptom management, social support, emotional care and support, and spiritual care and healing at end-of-life. 2.0 Personnel 2.1 CAPE shall be managed by a director appointed by the president or his/her designee and serving at his/her pleasure. The director shall report to the president or his/her designee. 2.2 The staff of the Center shall include, as necessary, research faculty paid fully or in part from institute funds, faculty and staff from university department, research scientists, research associates and assistants, clerical/technical support, and such other personnel as may be needed to carry out the institute's mission. In the case of a participating faculty member holding tenure, or with tenure-track status, his/her tenure or tenure track status shall be in his/her academic unit. 2.3 The primary responsibility of the staff in the Center shall be to conduct clinical research for its agenda of research in end-of-life care, to obtain extramural funding in support of the research, and to develop successful educational and clinical care programs. Staffs paid fully from Center funds are not required to undertake teaching responsibilities but may have the opportunity to direct the research of graduate students or to engage in other teaching activities as may be mutually agreeable to them, the appropriate academic unit, and the director of the institute. Staff may teach specialized courses and workshops from time to time as the need arises.

9 3.0 Governance 3.1 The primary responsibility for the day-to-day operation of the Center shall reside with the Center director and shall also draw upon the advice and counsel of a combined internal and external advisory committee to be composed of deans and faculty from the participating schools and colleges and selected advisors from nonaffiliated institutions. The advisory committee will be appointed by the director after consultation with the president or his/her designee and will meet regularly with the director to give advice on the operation and development of the Center. 3.2 The Center shall have an executive committee to give guidance and direction in setting priorities, in assessing results, and in identifying new opportunities. Those executive committee members will consist of the Director and the Associate Directors of Research, Education, Clinical Program, and Humanities. 4.0 Operating and Financial Procedures 4.1 The Center shall follow all operating, personnel and financial procedures that apply academic units in the university. 4.2 In seeking external funding to support research and other activities, the Center shall conform to the university's standard grant application procedures and to the university research policies. 4.3 The Center shall be governed by standard university budgetary and financial procedures; and it shall annually submit a budget for approval by the president and the Board of Governors in the course of the regular university budget review process. 4.4 The Center shall be periodically audited by the Internal Audit department. It may also be subject to such additional audits, by the state auditor or others, as are periodically conducted in the university or that may be specially conducted in connection with specific funding sources for the institute.

10 5.0 Review 5.1 The Center shall prepare an annual report for the president or his/her designee describing its research accomplishments and community/affiliated institutions as they relate to its mission. 5.2 The Center shall undergo comprehensive reviews in accordance with the existing Statute on Centers and Institutes approved by the Board of Governors.