University of Idaho - I Banner
students walk on University of Idaho campus

Visit U of I

Learn about the many reasons the University of Idaho could be a perfect fit for you. Schedule Your Visit

Parents on campus during orientation

Homecoming Oct. 14 - 21

Join other Vandal families for a week of celebration and Vandal traditions. View Calendar

campus full of students

U of I Retirees Association

UIRA has a membership of nearly 500 from every part of the University. Learn about UIRA

Contact Us

Physical Address:
Administration Building
Room 105
Moscow, ID
83844-3152

Phone: 208-885-6448
Fax: 208-885-6558
provost@uidaho.edu

Mailing Address:
875 Perimeter Dr.
MS 3152
Moscow, ID
83844-3152

Directions

Executive Communications

General Updates

Dear Colleagues,

As the university works through a presidential transition, we find ourselves in an uncertain and challenging environment. It is perhaps more important now than ever to stay focused on doing a few specific things very well rather than getting distracted by things that aren’t our highest priorities. It is also very important to be mindful of how we work together to achieve our goals. We all must be kind to each other, remembering why we are here.

A group of 150 university leaders met last May to discuss moving the university forward and recommended these very things — stay focused on the highest priorities and be kind to one another. We are all on the same team, working toward the same goals, guided by an absolute commitment to the success of our students. We must continue to work together in a respectful way to move the University of Idaho forward, despite the transitional issues we face.

Our focus this year, consistent with our land grant mission, is to serve our current and prospective students so they thrive at the University of Idaho and graduate in a timely fashion. Many would call this focus “student success” but the idea goes beyond quantitative success measures such as retention or graduation rates. Student success means our students are heard and respected and our faculty and staff are actively looking for opportunities to interact and communicate with our students in ways that the students understand, accept and find meaningful. We are certainly doing well in many areas, but we need to be vigilant and willing to accept that there are areas where we need to improve. We have rolled out another round of Vandals Ideas Project funding that will focus on student success at the University of Idaho. This is an important and impactful effort we hope to see grow.

While we are keenly focused on student success, we have other unfinished business to address. My staff and I sent many memos last year speaking to ongoing or new initiatives. We have posted them to the Provost’s web page for your convenience. Many of the activities you’ll find on our website will be slowed down or put on hold this year as we focus elsewhere. We have included a status update and plan for these various projects, realizing that we cannot do everything at once. Some items must remain active given ongoing State Board of Education requirements and expectations (e.g. Program Prioritization refresh and budget/carryforward adjustments due to declining enrollment).

We are rapidly coming to close of the fall semester. I intend to provide more frequent updates via email as a means to augment my communication via weekly faculty senate meetings. As always, please don’t hesitate to send an email to provost@uidaho.edu if you have questions or subjects that you would like me to address.

We have much to accomplish and I am confident we can continue our forward momentum, working together and being mindful of the reason we do what we do every day — to serve our students, the state of Idaho and the world via education, research and outreach.

Best Wishes,
John

John M. Wiencek
Provost and Executive Vice President
Professor of Chemical Engineering
The University of Idaho

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
SUBJECT: Congratulations on a Great Year!
Dear Faculty and Staff,

As we come to the close of the academic year, I wanted to briefly recap some significant accomplishments that have occurred, and point out projects that are still in progress. 

Completed 2017-18 Projects
  1. Market-Based Compensation. We started the year by finalizing our budget priorities with the University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC) and then implementing the program prioritization process developed in the prior year, which generated funding for these priorities. Our highest priorities were salary adjustments to bring all faculty, staff and teaching assistants closer to market wages in their fields. These actions led to a consistent market-based compensation philosophy for the entire campus, which was kick-started by the mid-year raise process. Our regional accrediting body has given us positive feedback about these processes and their implementation and is eager to see continued improvement in their integration and utilization over time. They recognized the challenges associated with processes such as program prioritization but encouraged us to continue to take such necessary steps and to improve the process.
  2. Centralized Advising. In late fall, ongoing discussions and proposals regarding advising, recruiting and student success culminated in a recommendation by my office to move to a more coordinated approach to these efforts. The Vandal Success Coalition was formed and significant work has occurred that provides the needed context and data to inform next steps. The deans and I will meet to formalize these next steps in the coming weeks so that we can move into the next fiscal year with clarity as we align these important activities. 
Projects in Process
  1. Financial Operations Refresh. Due to historically declining enrollment, coupled with a highly decentralized financial structure, the institution’s central reserve fund is nearly depleted. Brian Foisy, vice president for Finance and Administration, is chairing a committee to recommend a modified financial management model which will meet the short-term and long-term goals spelled out in the university’s strategic plan.  These discussions will continue into next year and complement discussions about potential organizational restructuring in finance, technology and other areas to improve efficiency and effectiveness.
  2. Restructuring Academic Units. The provost will convene a group of faculty, staff and students to investigate alternative structures among academic units, with a special focus on the College of Art and Architecture, the College of Science and the College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences. This group will convene next fall and the provost will chair this committee. In preparation for this work, the provost and deans will work over the summer months to more fully develop the charge and approach to engaging the university community.
  3. Program Prioritization – Modifying the Evaluation. The provost has appointed a committee under the leadership of Ali Carr-Chellman, dean of the College of Education, Health and Human Sciences, to follow up on a recommendation from the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC). IPEC recommends that we modify criterion two of the current program prioritization process to replace current narrative-based assessments with refreshed unit-level cascaded plans. Cascaded plans are more localized operational plans (perhaps at the college or mid-unit level) that will enable the successful completion of the university’s strategic plan. The newly formed committee has begun their work; it has suggestions for the entire process, but is focused on criterion two as requested by IPEC.  At present, the team anticipates the use of data as well as explanatory documents accompanying updated cascaded plans to offer context to the data demonstrating the units’ support of the university’s strategic plan. The committee is currently working on the process and specifics of this re-design.
  4. “Great Colleges to Work For” cascaded plan. Under the leadership of Yolanda Bisbee, a workgroup developed a cascaded plan to address areas of concern that we have gleaned from the “Great Colleges to Work For” survey. This plan was shared in draft form earlier this spring. Over the summer months, we will continue to refine the plan and re-engage next fall with a final draft which will include a proposed implementation plan.
In closing, I am impressed with how far we have come and how quickly we have achieved these remarkable results. Our regional accreditors have taken notice and are impressed with the productivity that they are seeing as well. The credit belongs to every one of you. We can rightfully hold our heads high collectively as a campus community for achieving so much. I am very excited about starting up again in fall 2018 on the four projects in process listed above. I believe the last two tasks will be quickly executed but the first two tasks will take more time. 

I hope you all have an enjoyable and refreshing summer.

Best wishes,
John




University Budget

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: Jan. 30, 2019
SUBJECT: Provost Provides Academic Affairs Budget Update

The university is facing a $5 million shortfall in our base budget as a result of the decline in revenue from undergraduate enrollment. Yesterday I presented to Faculty Senate an update on the budget reductions we will make starting July 1, 2019 in the academic affairs unit.

As Executive Vice President and Provost, it is my responsibility to make difficult choices on things like budget reductions in the units that report to me and I take it very seriously. In making this round of budget reductions I took a strategic approach as opposed to across-the-board budget reductions for all units. A variety of factors influenced these final decisions, including program prioritization data as well as benchmarked cost data from the Delaware Cost Study. These data were used to help us better understand the relative funding levels of our academic units compared to our internal priorities as well as national benchmarks. I also reviewed the current resources available to meet the necessary budget cut targets in a way that would avoid employee layoffs. The resulting final budget reduction plan is available on the provost’s website.

Reducing expenses is never an easy task and I appreciate the collaborative way we have been able to set this plan in motion. It is the right and responsible thing to do in order to position the university for success going forward. I plan to hold an open meeting via Zoom for those of you who would like to have a dialogue about this important issue, ask questions and gain a better understanding of the rationale for these decisions. I will provide more information about this event in the coming weeks.

John Wiencek
Provost and Executive Vice President

provost@uidaho.edu
uidaho.edu/provost

Dear Dean Colleagues,

Again, thank you for your hard work on the charge you were given roughly a month ago as well as the direct and honest discussion last night. I plan to share an update with faculty senate today about the questions of mergers and finances.

Mergers ‐ I will indicate that we are going to abide by one of the recommendations of the Deans, which also reflects emerging conversations on campus. We will seek to engage a campus committee to look at administrative structures at the UI in a way that is inclusive and more informed. This will take a longer time period than originally proposed and I will be working with Deans to suggest how the process might move forward in the coming year. Current thinking is that we would discuss options and have a campus‐wide process that would conclude by the end of this calendar year, roughly 10 months from now. The ideal is to seek to bring programs together that have natural connections in a manner that makes sense for prospective and current students. Any reorganization or merger should position us to better serve our students. The intent is to move this discussion to a more deliberative phase and to remove the financial aspects as a driver for change. Although some Colleges may make sense to merge with others, we are not considering a merger of CNR and CALS given the healthy finances and national reputation of CNR and CALS separately.

Finances – We have an estimated 1‐2% recurring deficit in our budget which must be more accurately measured and rectified over the next 10 months. We will manage the deficit from one time funds for next FY. This approach will give us more time for considering potential mergers or reorganization (if any) as well as a more accurate estimate our revenue for next year. If we can grow revenue by 3‐4% (via fulltime on‐campus undergraduate enrollment growth) in the next year, we may be able to avoid any budget cuts. Either way, we will be able to address this issue from a better vantage point if we discuss and develop plans between now and Dec. 31, 2018.

We need to develop a next steps communication and a process for doing this work. Please let me know if you are interested in volunteering to frame and/or guide this task.

On a separate note, Brian Foisy has started down the path of restructuring our finances going forward. Marc Chopin and Ali Carr‐Chellmann are the Dean representatives on that committee. I will attempt to set aside time as needed to discuss that committee’s work so that we can discuss impacts and provide feedback to the committee.

Please let me know asap if you have comments, edits, thoughts or concerns about the above message. I meet with senate at 3:30 pm today so I need a quick turnaround if you want to give me any feedback.

Best wishes,
John

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
TO: All Units in the Provost Executive Area
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
SUBJECT: Planning for Anticipated Revenue Shortfall
By now, you have received news from President Staben that we have been quite productive this year and have made significant progress in funding university priorities as recommended by the University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC). In particular, the mid-year raises and teaching assistant packages are moving us closer to market norms. This outcome required difficult choices and hard work from all units on campus.
 
While we have made progress, we have some emerging issues that require us to consider adjusting some of our finances. As mentioned by President Staben, our most immediate challenge is an anticipated $2 million to $4 million (1-2 percent) shortfall in General Education revenue (tuition + state appropriations) due to anticipated reductions in both the tuition revenue and state appropriations. Longer term, we must identify a sustainable process to maintain appropriate central reserves and manage funds under the new chart of accounts that will roll out next fiscal year. Thus, we must make some short-term and long-term changes in the management and allocation of financial resources by June 30, 2018. 
 
Under President Staben’s leadership, we have brought challenges such as this one to the larger community so that we can find viable solutions together. Each unit will find ways to accommodate the budget reduction, but I would like to share some experiences of the provost/vice provost areas and map out next steps. 
 
Upon my arrival three years ago, I sensed that the Provost’s Office was not serving faculty and students at the level appropriate for a  premier institution. The “Great Colleges” survey results supported my intuition. I also heard from the faculty and deans about general education positions (mainly faculty lines) in several colleges that were not permanently funded. Instead, these positions were funded each year from a patchwork of sources such as carryforward or other “soft” funding sources. Indeed, this same practice was occurring in the Provost’s Office. The University of Idaho is committed to providing permanent, stable funding for our employees, so we decided changes were necessary.
 
To address these concerns, we pursued a major restructuring in the provost/vice provost areas (including enrollment management, academics, and student affairs). We are on the way to providing the kind of service and centralized support that a land-grant, premier institution demands. We also moved to a shared administrative staff approach. These changes allowed us to redirect significant funding from the provost/vice provost areas to address UBFC requests, such as permanent funds for current positions. To be clear, many of the UBFC investments of the last three years came from budget reductions in the Provost’s administrative areas — budget reductions totaling more than $1 million of permanent base funding, which was transferred from the provost’s administrative areas to the colleges.  
 
As we share updates and ideas on how to reduce costs and improve effectiveness in the colleges, please know that we have been doing this for the last three years in the provost’s administrative areas. The goal is to improve the educational and working environment for everyone on campus and to do so in a sustainable manner. In this regard, we believe it is essential to model the behaviors we hope to inspire.

In order to meet and exceed our strategic plan goals while addressing current financial pressures, all areas reporting to the provost will need to participate in this budget reduction process, a modest 1-2 percent budget cut. I have asked the deans to identify creative and forward-thinking changes to current college-level operations that will help us meet this challenge together. The provost’s administrative areas will also need to develop comparable plans to meet necessary budget reductions in our areas. Very rough, preliminary estimates suggest that there may be increases in quality and effectiveness in several academic colleges if mergers or consolidations are considered. The deans will dig in deeper and assess whether any of these options are reasonable and attractive. I have asked the deans to provide options for further consideration by the broader university community by the end of this month. Their proposals may or may not include college mergers, program mergers or staff reorganization. Given the modest 1-2 percent reduction, we do not anticipate wholesale layoffs or job loss and will utilize attrition and turnover to meet the new budget target over time.
 
Once the deans provide some options for consideration, I will convene a campus-wide committee to assess the options. The committee will be asked to comment on the advantages and disadvantages of each concept as well as provide an overall recommended course of action. The recommendations of the deans and the committee will be advisory to the president and the provost, but will represent a strong voice in this decision-making process. Obviously, additional opportunities for input and discussion will be an important part of any college or program merger.
 
We have important work to do, and we need to do this work as a community. As in the past, we will find solutions that reflect the best thinking and support of our entire university. I will update you once I receive the recommendations from the deans in a few weeks.
Best wishes,

John

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost




Program Prioritization

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: Faculty and Staff in Academic and Student Affairs
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: October 5, 2017
SUBJECT: Reallocation Targets for Each College and Mid-Level in Academic & Student Affairs
Dear Faculty and Staff Colleagues,
 
As promised, I am following up with the final recommendations for reallocation from units reporting to the provost. Consistent with next steps outlined in my last update, the original program prioritization reallocation targets have been assessed against enrollment measures such as student credit hours delivered per faculty, enrollment (majors) per general education budget, and enrollment trends (increase or decrease per year, over the last three years) per general education budget.  
 
The enrollment picture and evaluation is complex and does not provide a simple correction to the current reallocation targets identified by program prioritization. Some metrics would suggest that those with higher teaching loads are also seeing higher reallocation targets. On the other hand, the enrollment trends (most colleges are losing enrollment) are consistent with the college reallocation targets suggested by program prioritization. In summary, the enrollment data do not support modifying the budget reallocation targets set by the program prioritization process. The reallocation targets are summarized in the table below.
 
The reallocations range from 1 to 2.5 percent nominally, with everyone contributing to the final reallocation plan. My direct reports (deans, vice provosts, etc.) will develop a reallocation plan, in consultation with their respective teams, and submit it to me by October 23. I will then finalize the overall plan and forward to President Staben for his consideration on November 1.
 
It is hard to make such difficult decisions, and we have spent hours deliberating on this matter. I appreciate all of your hard work and understanding as we seek to find ways to move our strategic goals forward together. These reallocated funds will come back to us in the form of increased faculty and staff compensation, as well as nationally competitive teaching assistant support. Our No. 1 goal for this year is to substantially grow tuition revenue via enrollment and, thus, minimize the amount of reallocation required in future years.
 
In closing, I want to reiterate my thanks to everyone who has participated in this process, a process that has taken over two years to complete. I am surrounded by loyal and dedicated faculty, staff and students and grateful that you are helping move us to higher levels of excellence.
 
Best wishes
 
John
 
Mid-level Percent of General Education Budget
College of Agricultural & Life Sciences 1.09%
College of Letters, Arts & Social Sciences 2.33%
College of Art & Architecture 2.33%
College of Business & Economics 2.15%
College of Education, Health and Human Sciences 2.23%
College of Engineering 1.15%
College of Law 0.93%
College of Natural Resources 1.27%
College of Science 2.25%
College of Graduate Studies 0.54%
Strategic Enrollment Management 0.93%
General Library 0.52%
Provost/Executive Vice President Area 0.93%
Student Affairs 1.33%
University Outreach - Boise 2.64%
University Outreach - Idaho Falls 1.02%
University Outreach - Northern Idaho 1.03%
Vice Provost for Faculty 1.86%
Vice Provost for Academic Initiatives 1.68%
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: Faculty and Staff in Academic and Student Affairs
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: October 2, 2017
SUBJECT: Update on Academic and Student Affairs Budget Reallocations
Dear Faculty and Staff Colleagues,
 
I am following up on my earlier memo about the reallocation plan for Academic and Student Affairs. I have reviewed your suggestions posted on SLI.DO, and I appreciate the time many of you took to share your perspectives. In addition, I met with my direct reports, including the deans of the colleges, the vice provosts and the dean of students on September 25. Their feedback and your SLI.DO comments have resulted in the recommendations below.
 
Based on the conversations and SLI.DO postings, the guiding principles for our reallocation plan will include the following:
  1. The program prioritization evaluations will remain an important factor in determining reallocation targets. Some members of the team felt that there was significant effort expended to get to this point; therefore, the results need to be honored, given the community-based process that was utilized. Others recognized that the evaluation process has some room for improvement. In particular, the evaluation did not sufficiently recognize a few high enrollment programs, sending an inconsistent message about our strategic goals. 
  2. Consistent with the last statement, both SLI.DO responses and the leadership team recommend additional weight and scrutiny be placed on enrollment metrics such as majors (including pro-rated double majors), student credit hours delivered and enrollment growth. This is consistent with the strategic plan’s waypoint one emphasis on enrollment.
  3. Appropriate care will be taken to normalize any measurements by total teaching FTE (including only those positions funded by general education funds). Normalization will account for the relative productivity of units based on resources available to them.
I will continue to work with the leadership team to look at data (see points 1-3 above) and arrive at final reallocation targets and plans for each area. The goal is to finalize our plans no later than November 1. I will continue to update you at each step of the process.
 
Best wishes

John
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: Faculty and Staff in Academic and Student Affairs
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: September 21, 2017
SUBJECT: Input Requested for Student and Academic Affairs Budget Reallocations
Dear Colleagues,
 
Consistent with the president’s memo of yesterday, we must develop a plan to reallocate $1.268 million from the academic, strategic enrollment management and student affairs area by December 1, 2017. In several areas, we have put a hold on search processes until there is more clarity on the sources of these reallocated funds; thus, it would serve our interest to have our first draft to the president much sooner.  This would allow for more certainty and the ability to get most of these searches underway. Our funds, combined with other VP area reallocations and newly identified internal sources, will underwrite the top University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC) recommended initiatives. As part of those initiatives, our areas will see an additional $1.027 million for salary adjustments and $2.3 million for competitive teaching assistant compensation.
 
I want to assure everyone that this amount of money is not going to disrupt the normal course of work and service in academic and student affairs. This amounts to a 1.49% reallocation of the total $85.3 million base budget in our areas. The Budget Office estimates that there is more than $3 million of long-term vacant positions (vacant in excess of one year) and unallocated base funds within the academic and student affairs areas. Thus, it is my intention to put some reasonable focus on using such funding as part of this reallocation process.
 
Within academic and student affairs, we will develop a set of guiding principles that will help us formulate a reallocation plan. I will be transparent in the process, as is my common practice, but I also will be nuanced in the implementation. Fundamentally, these decisions are fraught with high levels of impact both within any given department but also across the entire university. Thus, I will not be bound by formulas or monolithic criteria in recommending a final reallocation plan that can work for everyone in academic and student affairs.
 
I look forward to hearing from you on what our guiding principles for this reallocation should include.  Let me start this conversation with some ideas. First, contribution toward the strategic plan remains very high on my list and, more specifically, contribution toward enrollment growth and student success. Thus, any reallocation must be designed to maintain and serve our current enrollment, as well as acknowledge and reward trends in enrollment. Second, the fiscal capacity of any given college or area to contribute to a reallocation should be part of our decision-making process. Finally, centrality to mission and scholarly excellence are important considerations as well; although, we have struggled to come to agreement on how best to measure such matters.
 
I would like to invite all of you to submit or to vote on other key guiding principles that should be considered in the reallocation process. Votes and feedback should be submitted through a tool called Sli.do, available at https://app.sli.do/event/7r0wijzh/ask. Although limited in the amount of characters (300) to state your idea, this tool allows for voting – both up and down — on these ideas as well as providing a feedback to perhaps improve or adjust an idea. Please take a few minutes to share your ideas under the “Questions” tab and to vote on ideas being suggested by others. We will accept this input through September 29, 2017. If you have questions about how to use Sli.do, please call Peggy Lynd or Lodi Price and they will be happy to assist you.
 
I will start the reallocation plan development with the deans, vice provosts and other direct reports within the next week. We will focus on narrowing the guiding principles and airing ideas and/or concerns. After getting input from the Sli.do poll, my staff will prepare related data and implications for additional discussion among the deans, vice provosts and other direct reports. After these two rounds of discussion, I will work with the team to finalize specific targets for each college, vice provost and student affairs area. I believe we can finish this work by mid-October.
 
Once we finalize reallocation plans across the entire university, the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC) will turn its attention toward continued improvement in the evaluation process supporting program prioritization. My sense of IPEC discussions to date indicate that the primary issue is criterion two — contribution toward strategic plan. A recurring question from many of you is, “how do I improve; what do I focus on?” given that the evaluation process needs improving. I am confident that if you focus on achieving the goals and targets spelled out in your cascaded plans, then you will fare well on criteria two during the next round of evaluations, scheduled for roughly two years from now. Specific modifications to criterion two will be the subject of additional university discussion this year, but my sense is that the evaluation of the contribution to the strategic plan is likely to flow from the cascaded plans that are already in place.
 
In closing, I truly believe we are at a pivotal moment for the University of Idaho. We are choosing to shape our own future by setting priorities, developing plans together and executing on those plans even when it is difficult to do so. These are all trademarks of excellence. I hope you can join me in taking pride in giving well-deserved salary and compensation adjustments to our faculty, staff and teaching assistants in the coming months.
 
Best wishes,
John
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the President
president@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/president
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: Chuck Staben, President
DATE: September 20, 2017
SUBJECT: Thank You for Participating in Program Prioritization Process

Thank you for participating in the Program Prioritization process and for attending the open forums regarding Program Prioritization last week. As I listened to each concern and comment, I was grateful for the open environment we have at UI and the transparent nature of the process - led by more than 50 staff and faculty members and engaging hundreds. Although our process was not perfect, it has provided useful information.  We will use the rankings to identify reallocations we must make for progress.

One difficulty with rankings is that such a process can leave people feeling undervalued. Although the ranking process caused us to order programs in some fashion, each member of the Vandal family is valued and appreciated. Program prioritization, particularly in the absence of new net revenue, is necessary to position ourselves to meet the lofty goals of our strategic plan – a plan developed by all of us to serve all of us. We are investing in UI to make it an even better place to work for our faculty and staff while we continue to serve Idaho as its higher education leader.

Rankings are never easy. With the rankings done, we quantified reallocations and we are now moving together to fund our two highest budget priorities: market-based compensation and teaching assistantships. All of you deserve to be paid equitably for the hard work you do every day for our university. The executive leadership team and I are committed to making this a reality.

I have asked each vice president to submit a reallocation plan for my consideration by December 1, 2017.  This will allow sufficient time to finalize the plans by January 1, 2018.  The reallocations will inform the budget setting process and fiscal year 2018-19 baseline budgets.  

I encourage you to continue engaging in the process and to feel ownership in it as we strive to make the University of Idaho the best institution possible. 

Go Vandals! 

 

*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost & Executive Vice President
DATE: September 7, 2017
SUBJECT: Results of the Program Prioritization Process
On behalf of the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC), I am writing to confirm our university goals as shaped by our strategic plan, and to explain how the result of the program prioritization process is helping to propel these goals into action.
 
As you may recall, the University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC) recommended two highest priority projects for this fiscal year:
  1. Market-based compensation for faculty and staff, and
  2. Fully-funded, competitive teaching assistantships (TAs).
These two priorities reflect the priorities of strategic plan Waypoint One (Goals 3 and 4); namely, growing student enrollment via retention and improving the workplace environment. With the help of the program prioritization process, we have identified $4 million, which will allow us to make significant headway toward funding these two priorities.
 
The graphic below shows the sources of these investment funds. Half of the funds ($2 million) will come from reallocation targets identified through the program prioritization process. The other half of the funds will come from other sources, including tuition revenue and strategic reallocation of centrally managed funds. The total $4 million of investment funds will fully fund the TA request and partially address the market-based compensation request.
To make progress toward market-based compensation for UI employees, this year we will implement mid-year raises. And to fund the TA compensation priority, College of Graduate Studies Dean Jerry McMurtry will work with the academic deans and the Graduate Council to address our funding of TA appointments so that we remain nationally competitive. Teaching assistants are an important component of meeting our enrollment and research goals stated in the strategic plan and, much like faculty and staff, their compensation has fallen out of step with the market.
 
As you may remember, through the program prioritization process, each program received a relative ranking that was translated into a normalized score. You can find the program prioritization results on the provost’s webpage. IPEC has decided not to place programs into quintiles as originally planned. Instead, we recommended, and President Staben approved, modification of the reallocation methodology. Rather than a rigid position control methodology to recover salary dollars via position control, each vice president and the President’s Office (which also includes University Communications and Marketing, Athletics, the Office of Equity and Diversity, etc.) will contribute funds, or reallocate funds, as illustrated in the chart above. The reallocation targets are directly linked to the normalized scores of Banner departments in a given executive’s area.  Executive-level officers will work with their respective teams to develop a reallocation plan, which will be approved by President Staben. Approved reallocation plans will be effective in FY19 (starting on July 1, 2018) so units have a year to plan for changes.
 
The current estimated impact for each executive area of responsibility (including both budget reductions and budget increases) is shown below. Please note that the estimated reallocation and market-based compensation amounts have been rounded, and may change to reflect additional data and input.
Executive Level   Total Gen Ed Salary Budget Sources   Market-Based Compensation (Mid-Year)  Competitive TA Compensation   Net Resource Flow
President   $6,762,717 $(222,000)   $76,000 $ -   $(146,000)
Provost (Academic & Student Affairs)   $68,393,631 $(1,268,000)   $1,027,000 $2,300,000   $2,059,000
VP Advancement   $1,542,883 $(41,000)   $41,000 $ -   $ -
VP Research & Economic Dev.   $1,049,507 $(6,000)   $63,000 $ -   $57,000
VP Finance   $3,548,321 $(88,000)   $97,000 $ -   $9,000
VP Infrastructure   $11,827,637 $(375,000)   $396,000 $ -   $21,000
Other Internal Sources   $ - $(2,000,000)   $ - $ -   $(2,000,000)
Total   $93,124,696 $(4,000,000)   $1,700,000 $2,300,000   $ -
The current base salary budget is in the first column and the reallocation amount is in the second column (parenthesis represent budget reductions). New resources added back to each executive area of responsibility are in the third and fourth columns. The last column shows the difference between resources added and resources subtracted via reallocation. 
 
As we finalize this process, IPEC will host two open forums to present and summarize the program prioritization process and answer questions. These open forums will be held on Monday, September 11, 2017, in the Vandal Ballroom, with connections statewide. See the statewide viewing locations here. The first forum will be held from 8:30-10 a.m. and the second forum will be held 10:30 a.m. to noon. 

Thanks to all of you for your hard work and effort — both in your daily contributions as well as in this important process. Though the process has been arduous, we are excited to be able to achieve our university community’s strategic goals.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost &
Executive Vice President

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost & Executive Vice President
DATE: Sept. 6, 2017
SUBJECT: Program Prioritization Town Hall Sessions Sept. 11
As noted in a communication from President Chuck Staben on August 22, detailed information about program prioritization will be distributed later this week. In anticipation of that release, the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC) has scheduled two town hall meetings for Monday, September 11, to respond to questions and provide clarification about the process and next steps.
 
The first session will focus on academic departments; the second will focus on non-academic programs, including student and faculty support; centrally provided services; and research, outreach and Extension units. All employees are welcome to attend either session. The sessions will be live-streamed to our statewide centers.
  • Session 1 (academic departments): 8:30-10 a.m. Pacific time, Monday, Sept. 11, Vandal Ballroom, Pitman Center
  • Session 2 (non-academic departments): 10:30 a.m. to noon Pacific time, Monday, Sept. 11, Vandal Ballroom, Pitman Center
Streaming locations:
  • Boise Water Center: Room 248 (Session 1) and Room 162 (Session 2)
  • Boise Law and Justice Center:  Room 307
  • Coeur d’Alene: Room 213
  • Idaho Falls: Room TAB 320
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the President
president@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/president
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: Chuck Staben, President
DATE: Aug. 22, 2017
SUBJECT: Program Prioritization Update
When classes ended last spring, there were several big projects pending or in motion, including State Board of Education required program prioritization. Program prioritization is a process that helps us to efficiently reallocate funds to high priority projects in support of our strategic goals. 

The university has many priorities, but the most critical are funding for market-based compensation adjustments for staff and faculty and competitive compensation including tuition/fee waivers for teaching assistants. Funds identified by the program prioritization process will be reallocated to fund these two priorities.

The UI community provided input into the program prioritization process, which helped inform how we would evaluate and score every UI Banner department. Departments were evaluated using a mixture of quantitative data, financial data and surveys. The data have been analyzed and we will share the department scores in early September. We are planning open forums shortly thereafter to share information and help you understand the results and next steps. 

The Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee, the vice presidents, the deans and I have reviewed the department scores and other data. We are now evaluating options for linking these scores to reallocations.  Reallocation is not easy; but we know reallocated funds will return to units in the form of increased wages and support for teaching assistants, our highest priorities.

Each of us has a distinct leadership role at the University of Idaho and together our partnership will help UI rise to even higher levels of excellence. Thank you for working with us as we continue to improve our university. Additional information about program prioritization and the funding of our priorities will be shared in the coming weeks.

I thank Provost Wiencek, the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee and all who participated in this important process.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: May 25, 2017
SUBJECT: Update on Program Prioritization Evaluation Progress

I am glad to report we are making good progress toward completing the evaluation component of our Program Prioritization initiative. After incorporating UI-wide feedback, we have collectively agreed to use three criteria to evaluate departments:

  1. Essentiality to the University of Idaho’s mission
  2. Contribution to the University of Idaho’s strategic plan
  3. Institutional financial investment in Banner departments

In my last update, I shared the tools developed by the Institutional Planning Effectiveness Committee (IPEC) and the workgroups to assess Banner departments on criteria #1 and #3. At that time, the workgroups and IPEC were still working on tools and measurement weights for criterion #2. I want to thank the workgroups and IPEC for completing these remaining tasks last week.

The criterion #2 evaluation tools for each Banner department subgroup (Academic, Student/Faculty Services, Research Centers/Extension/Community Outreach, Centrally Provided Services) can be found here. Each of these tools will require you to provide a narrative description of your contribution to the strategic plan and your Banner department will receive a request to provide this narrative description soon.

Initial weights for the three evaluation criteria will be assigned to eliminate any bias related to unit size. The workgroups have agreed to the methodology that will be used to set these weights, which will be documented in a final process development report expected in late summer.

IPEC and the workgroups acknowledge this process has extended beyond the spring semester, contrary to our planned goal and timeline. However, gathering university community feedback and making the necessary and substantial revisions was more important than being on schedule. We acknowledge the process unfolded piecemeal and may have caused some confusion about what was needed in the criterion #1 contextual statements. We will consider some last minute revisions to the contextual statements recently provided for criterion #1 if absolutely necessary, provided you contact us immediately. We plan to launch this evaluation tool on June 1, so we need any requested changes done in the next few days. If you have questions about whether you should make such changes, feel free to contact Lodi Price (lodi@uidaho.edu) or Peggy Lynd (plynd@uidaho.edu).

Please remember this process will be monitored annually. We will adjust for unintended or unanticipated outcomes. Thank you again for your support and participation in this critical process. We will become stronger and better together!

*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President, IPEC Chair
Marla Kraut, Chair, Academic Banner Department Workgroup
Jeff Dodge, Chair, Support Banner Department Workgroup
DATE: April 10, 2017
SUBJECT: Revised Program Prioritization Framework
The Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC) and the two Program Prioritization workgroups are recommending a revised evaluation framework in response to input provided by University of Idaho faculty and staff through a recent feedback survey. The revised evaluation framework has three key elements, which will be used to evaluate all Banner departments. This revised approach also aligns our Program Prioritization and strategic planning efforts. The three elements are:
  1. Impact and essentiality to the University of Idaho’s mission
  2. Contribution to the University of Idaho strategic plan
  3. Institutional investment
The first element, impact and essentiality to the University of Idaho’s mission, was included in both workgroups' evaluation criteria. To ensure more consistency across all department types, this particular assessment tool will be jointly developed by the two workgroups and applied uniformly to all Banner departments at the university.

The second element, contribution to the strategic plan, will be assessed using focused tools specific to each of four key functional areas of the university:
  1. Academic Banner departments
  2. Student/Faculty service Banner departments
  3. Research centers/Extension/Community engagement Banner departments
  4. Centrally provided service Banner departments
These tools are being developed by the two workgroups and will incorporate specific feedback received from the recent survey. Given the expanded scope of work, the workgroups will augment current committee members as needed to ensure we have sufficient depth of knowledge in each of these key functional areas represented. Workgroups plan to complete their work by the end of April. This refined toolset will allow for more customized and relevant evaluation as suggested by the UI community feedback we received.

The third element, institutional investment, will measure the relative resources available to a Banner department so the contribution to the strategic plan element is appropriately scaled to the level of resources available to the Banner department. In this element, the highest ranked programs will have minimal or no institutional investment (i.e. General Education funding) thus mitigating any bias based on size. This element will be weighted appropriately to prevent bias against either small or large Banner departments as measured by their General Education funding levels. As in element one above, this element will be applied uniformly to all Banner departments at the university.

In closing, IPEC and the workgroups have addressed most of the concerns raised by our community in the revised framework. We have more details to iron out and some concerns may remain, but we are confident that we have made significant and meaningful improvements based on your feedback. Once again, thank you for participating in the feedback process. 

I am extremely grateful to the workgroups for their continued hard work and investment in this process.  We anticipate finalizing the assessment tools by the end of April and forwarding them to President Chuck Staben for approval in early May. Once finalized, I will provide another update to the university community.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost & Executive Vice President
provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: March 27, 2017
SUBJECT: Revisions to Program Prioritization Evaluation Process and Criteria 
Thank you for providing input on the initial program prioritization draft evaluation criteria. Your feedback is very important to the process and we are making significant changes to the criteria based on that feedback. I want to thank the workgroups for their hard work in producing the initial criteria and their continued investment in doing this process well. A spreadsheet including all the feedback we received on the criteria is available on the Provost’s Office website. A brief synopsis of the feedback and a reminder of next steps is below.

108 departments, 121 individual faculty and 54 individual staff completed the feedback tool. In addition, our office directly received several longer narrative emails and feedback. The detailed position control guidelines were not posted in a timely way on the provost’s website, so there were many questions asked that are addressed in that document. Nonetheless, it is clear that some substantial changes in the approach and the criteria are recommended by our community.

Based on these comments and suggestions, revisions to the program prioritization process and outcomes should be adopted to ensure that the result will:
  1. Align well with the strategic plan, using the same language and metrics. There was particular concern that research productivity was not properly measured or weighted in the initial draft criteria.
  2. Allow more refinement so experts in a given area do the evaluation (especially for the non-academic units).
  3. Account for or mitigate bias related to unit size.
  4. Allow more nuanced evaluation that involves human wisdom and judgement. Avoid metrics and measures that treat units as “one size fits all.”
  5. Have a balanced mix of quantitative and qualitative measures and make sure that mix is consistent across all units (i.e. do not have many quantitative metrics for academics and none for other units).
The Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC) will discuss ideas to address these concerns in the coming days. As discussed in earlier communications, IPEC will forward feedback to the workgroups with suggested changes. Given the feedback, it is clear the proposed changes will be substantial.

Based on typical employee turnover and the proposed position control policy, we estimate 3-4 percent of general education funds will be redirected to the University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC) for use in funding high priorities. With those funds, we will make substantial headway on important institutional priorities, such as market-based compensation and in-state tuition waivers for teaching assistants. In addition, if we grow enrollment by 500 full-time undergraduate students, we will be able to adjust the position control policy so that less money is subject to reallocation. If we get an additional 1,000 undergraduate students (1,500 total above current enrollment), we will have the latitude to stop all mandatory reallocation based on quintiles if we so choose. For now, these reallocated funds will be our means to feed innovation and growth at the University of Idaho as we launch our strategic plan. Once enrollment picks up, we will be able to adjust the policy as we reap more revenue from new enrollments.

In closing, let me say again that we do not have the option of refusing to conduct program prioritization. This is a State Board of Education policy requirement that must be implemented in a sustainable and systemic way by the end of this fiscal year. We have complete latitude to design and adjust the process in ways that work best for our great institution, which is what we are doing now. We will have a process in place this summer and it will launch on July 1, 2017. It may not be perfect, but we can adjust the process each year based on our experience and understanding of the impact on the institution.

Thank you again for your participation in this important process. More information will be provided as we move through the next steps.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost and Executive Vice President
provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: March 8, 2017
SUBJECT: Position Control Guidelines
Thank you to everyone who has provided feedback on the program prioritization process. I appreciate your input, feedback and ideas to help make this process effective and valuable as we work toward the ambitious goals we have set in the Strategic Plan.

The website for program prioritization has information to guide the process. But, the Position Control Guidelines, a vital piece to this guidance, were omitted during the website creation. The mistake has been corrected and you can now find this helpful document among the others on the site. We apologize for the mistake. 

Please review this document as it provides much of the detail of reallocation of salaries based on prioritization. 

Thank you for your support as we compile your feedback and apply it to the process. If you have questions or need additional guidance, please contact Lodi Price at lodi@uidaho.edu.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost & Executive Vice President
DATE: February 14, 2017
SUBJECT: Feedback on Draft Program Prioritization Evaluation Criteria
As many of you are aware, a few years ago the Idaho State Board of Education required all four-year colleges and universities in the state to develop and implement a program prioritization process. Last year, the board implemented a new policy that requires all four-year colleges and universities to embed program prioritization into the annual budgeting and program review processes, and to provide annual progress reports. For this reason, the university is developing a refreshed program prioritization process in order to:
  1. Fulfill the board’s mandate in a manageable and sustainable way, and
  2. Better use our resources to achieve the goals of the university’s strategic plan, which aims to grow and evolve the university further toward the next level of excellence. 
To ensure this critical work is done effectively, UI Faculty Senate, Staff Council and ASUI nominated a group of Vandals to serve on the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee (IPEC), which is charged with many tasks, including implementing a refreshed program prioritization process consistent with the State Board of Education’s policy. IPEC and two working groups of frontline faculty and staff — one for academic units, one for support units — have developed draft criteria we will use to evaluate and rank academic and support units.  
 

We Need Your Input

In order to help our university community understand program prioritization and provide feedback on the draft evaluation criteria, we created an informational video presentation and support materials which are available at www.uidaho.edu/program-prioritization. Please watch the video, review the support materials and provide feedback by Wednesday, March 8. 
 

How to Provide Input

IPEC asks each department head to call an all-department meeting and watch the video together as a team. After each department has watched the video, the department should discuss the draft criteria and offer feedback and suggestions for modification. Using notes taken at that department meeting, the department head will provide feedback using the survey created for this purpose (there are support materials available on the website to help guide these discussions). The survey results will be used to improve and revise the criteria if necessary. Individuals may fill out the same survey instrument if they would like.

Once the feedback is collected, IPEC will review it and forward any suggested modifications to the working groups. The working groups will meet in mid-March to finalize their recommendations for the president. The goal is to have final criteria approved by President Staben by early April. At that point, the Institutional Effectiveness and Accreditation Office will develop data and survey instruments and conduct the program prioritization process. The new process will be implemented on July 1, 2017. 

We will assess and adjust the program prioritization process annually to ensure it is effectively helping the university thrive and excel.

Thank you for taking the time to participate in this important process and for providing your input. This is an important initiative — one that will help us to promote institutional excellence by directing resources to high priority needs, framed within the strategic plan — and we need your partnership to ensure it is effective.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Staff Council
staffcouncil@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/staffcouncil
TO: University of Idaho Staff
FROM: Greg Fizzell, Staff Council Chair
DATE: October 26, 2016
SUBJECT: Staff Volunteers Needed to Serve on Program Prioritization Subcommittee
This fall, the University of Idaho is embarking on a program prioritization process under the guidance of Provost and Executive Vice President John Wiencek.
 
As part of this effort, UI Staff Council has been asked to recruit 20 staff members to participate on two subcommittees: One will focus on academic programs and the other on non-academic units.
 
Both exempt and non-exempt staff members from units on and off campus are encouraged to participate. Those wishing to serve must be available for a one-day session on Thursday, Nov. 17 (academic programs) or Friday, Nov. 18 (non-academic units). If there is sufficient need, these two groups might re-convene to address feedback from Provost’s Council and the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee. Travel sponsorships will be available for participants from non-Moscow sites. Video conference/phone will also be available for those unable to travel.
 
If you are interested in participating in one of these subcommittees, please email Marty Lunt, Staff Council Secretary, at martyl@uidaho.edu no later than Friday, Nov. 4, 2016. Please indicate whether you prefer to join the academic programs or the non-academic units group, or if you have no preference.
 
Thank you for being willing to serve our university and represent your fellow staff members.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

 
 
University of Idaho
Office of the President
president@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/president
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: Chuck Staben, President
DATE: October 10, 2016
SUBJECT: Appointments to the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness Committee
 

I am grateful to UI Faculty Senate, Staff Council and ASUI for nominating a group of Vandals to serve on the Institutional Planning and Effectiveness committee (IPEC). The IPEC will be comprised of:
  • Cruz Botello, President, ASUI (or designee as needed)
  • Elizabeth Brandt, Faculty Senate Chair and Professor of Law (interim appointment)
  • Dan Ewart, Vice President for Infrastructure
  • Brian Foisy, Vice President for Finance
  • Mary Kay McFadden, Vice President for Advancement
  • Janet Nelson, Vice President for Research and Economic Development
  • Jodie Nicotra, Associate Chair, Associate Professor, English Department
  • Janice Todish, Administration and Fiscal Operations Director, CLASS
  • John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President (Chair)
The IPEC will begin its work immediately and will likely establish subcommittees or working groups to help accomplish the tasks before the committee which include the following:
  1. By February 2017, provide recommendations to incentivize enrollment growth.
  2. Identify opportunities to gain efficiencies and effectiveness by consolidating key UI services such as information technology, development, finance, human resources, student advising, communications and marketing, research support (pre-award and post-award) and some facilities management functions by February 2017.
  3. Successfully launch the new strategic plan by coordinating and aligning unit/college Cascaded Plans.
  4. Advise and consult with the University Budget and Finance Committee (UBFC) to ensure the UBFC’s recommendations are consistent with the strategic plan.
  5. Implement a refreshed program prioritization process that is consistent with the State Board of Education’s new policy.
  6. Continue to explore opportunities to include a portion of unexpended year-end funds in the UBFC process.
Please join me in offering support, advice and constructive feedback to this committee as they begin their important work.
 
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*
 
 
 

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

 
 
University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: John M. Wiencek, Provost & Executive Vice President
DATE: October 29, 2015
SUBJECT: Update on Program Prioritization
 

As many of you know, a few years ago, the Idaho State Board of Education mandated each higher education institution develop and implement a program prioritization process. The board is now looking for the process to be embedded into the budget, strategic planning and program review processes in the state’s four-year institutions. Our goal is to embed the prioritization process into these other processes in such a way that it is manageable and sustainable.
 
UI's response to the board’s mandate was a program prioritization process we called Focus for the Future, or FFF. At the request of Faculty Senate leadership, I provided an overview of the FFF process from my perspective as a relative newcomer to the University of Idaho at the most recent Faculty Senate meeting. The PowerPoint slides from that presentation are available here. I took the liberty of suggesting improvements to the process as well as summarized current board and legislative expectations.
 
In summary, we have more work to do, but we also have learned quite a bit from the FFF process. I want to express thanks to Interim President Don Burnett and Interim Provost/EVP Katherine Aiken for envisioning the process and successfully completing a difficult task in a short time frame while faced with significant uncertainty.
 
The subsequent conversation within Faculty Senate about FFF was direct and productive, and, in general, Faculty Senate was in agreement that we have learned a great deal from the process, which will inform and improve the next version of program prioritization. The members were appreciative of the transparency of the overview and are willing to move toward an improved methodology. 
 
Having secured the general agreement of Faculty Senate, I will constitute a committee in the near future that will seek to improve the program prioritization process and embed the process in our budget, strategic planning and program review processes. I look forward to attaining the best of ourselves and of our great University of Idaho.
 
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*
 
 
 




Market-Based Compensation

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

TO: University of Idaho Faculty
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
SUBJECT: Additional Clarification on Faculty CEC Process
In the past two years, the University of Idaho faculty and staff have developed a new compensation philosophy in collaboration with Human Resources and the Provost’s office. The details of the new market-based compensation philosophy were developed by two separate taskforce groups comprised mainly of staff and faculty — one for staff compensation and the other for faculty compensation. Although there are differences in the details of longevity tables, the core principles of the compensation philosophy, as well as the new nomenclature, are similar.

With the recently enacted Spring CEC process, we have had two pay adjustments this past fiscal year to help move our employee compensation closer to the market averages. I would like to point you to some documents that might help demystify how your salary adjustments were calculated: This new compensation system has many components and allows for adjustments for four different reasons:
  1. “Fixing the floor” is an effort to get all faculty meeting expectations at or above 80 percent of target
  2. “Moving towards 100 percent of target” is an effort to move all people below target closer to 100 percent of target
  3. “Keeping up with CUPA” is the annual adjustment due to market salary increases to maintain a person at their current target percentage
  4. “Performance” is annual adjustments due to superior performance within a given unit.
We have considered all of these adjustments over the last year. This new system allowed us to keep up with 98.6 percent of the increase in market rates for all faculty, give increases to 98 percent of faculty, and ensures that over 99 percent of faculty will be paid at least 80 percent of their target salaries in the coming fiscal year.

If you have questions or concerns about your salary adjustment for this year, please study the links above and meet with your supervisor for more detailed explanation. If they are unable to provide clear information, feel free to move your questions up to the college administration level.

This new system will serve us well over time. It’s a new and novel approach. We are all learning about how it works and how we can improve it, but I feel we have already addressed many long-term inequities. We will provide a summary report to the taskforce groups next year and we will continue to improve upon our work.
Best Wishes,
John

provost@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost

UI Vice President for Finance Brian Foisy and Human Resources Executive Director Wes Matthews will present an update on market-based compensation and the upcoming mid-year salary adjustment applicable for staff members at 2:30 p.m. Friday, Oct. 6 in the International Ballroom of the Pitman Center, as well as statewide via Zoom. All staff and supervisors are encouraged to attend.

The presentation will be recorded and available online following the meeting.

To join the Zoom meeting from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android, click here: https://uidaho.zoom.us/j/125879265 

Or iPhone one-tap :

    US: +14086380968,,125879265#  or +16468769923,,125879265#

Or Telephone:

    Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):

        US: +1 408 638 0968  or +1 646 876 9923

    Meeting ID: 125 879 265

    International numbers available: https://uidaho.zoom.us/zoomconference?m=3xZZEzkiBnbnh443jg37346LoEgVnnjE

 

Or an H.323/SIP room system:

    H.323: 

        162.255.37.11 (US West)

        162.255.36.11 (US East)

        221.122.88.195 (China)

        115.114.131.7 (India)

        213.19.144.110 (EMEA)

        202.177.207.158 (Australia)

        209.9.211.110 (Hong Kong)

        64.211.144.160 (Brazil)

    Meeting ID: 125 879 265

 

    SIP: 125879265@zoomcrc.com

*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: Aug. 23, 2017
SUBJECT: Compensation Assessment via Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) Code Assignments
On May 25, we sent an initial communication out to UI faculty about market-based compensation and data needed to implement this new compensation process.

Average market salaries for faculty are available from two nationally recognized databases. To assign an appropriate target salary for a faculty member, we need to know the faculty rank, years in rank and the academic discipline as defined by a CIP (Classification of Instructional Program) code. We have spent quite a bit of time this summer advancing the project, and have received dean and department chair preliminary recommendations.

Now that our faculty are back from summer research and other activities, we are eager to have faculty select the CIP code that reflects the work that they do within their academic home. These recommendations will be documented as part of this process, along with the department chair and dean’s recommendations. The final CIP code utilized for the new compensation process will be completed later this fall following guidelines discussed in earlier memos.  

Given the constraints on the CIP codes (i.e. they need to be in our inventory of approved CIPs), as well as new faculty data uploads, we have opted to delay collecting this information until September 2017. We will be using a Qualtrics survey instrument customized to each faculty member’s listed academic home to automate the data collection at that time. No later than Wednesday, September 14, tenured and tenure-track faculty will receive an email with a unique link to a Qualtrics survey. Within the survey tool, each faculty member will have the ability to read the titles and CIP descriptions available to them and select the one that most closely matches their work. We anticipate allowing about 10 days for faculty to complete this work.
 
Please feel free to forward questions or concerns to Lodi Price in my office (lodi@uidaho.edu).
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Division of Finance
debbiee@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/finance
TO: University of Idaho Faculty and Staff
FROM: Brian Foisy, Vice President for Finance
Wes Matthews, Executive Director, Human Resources
DATE: August 14, 2017
SUBJECT: Fair Labor Standards Act Update
This memo provides an update on the most recent developments from the Department of Labor regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the decision of the university to institute a locally determined salary threshold for exempt status.

The FLSA is the federal law that created the standard for overtime eligibility. It also created the standard by which employers could make positions exempt from overtime eligibility. The criteria for the exemption are based on the characteristics of the position (commonly referred to as the “duties test”) and a minimum salary that must be paid to employees in exempt positions (commonly referred to as the “salary test”).

Last year, the Department of Labor (DOL) announced an update to the salary test from $455 per week to $913 per week. Based on our established payroll calendar for the year, UI transitioned to the new test before the deadline of Dec. 1, 2016. In the week following our implementation, and just days before the deadline, a federal district court granted a preliminary injunction blocking the new salary test from taking effect. In its ruling, the district court concluded that the DOL did not have the statutory authority to establish a salary test. Following the injunction, the DOL filed a notice of appeal.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is set to consider the DOL appeal in October. But under the Trump administration, the DOL has already abandoned the proposed standard of $913 per week. Instead, the DOL will engage in a rulemaking process to determine what the proper salary level should be. However, the DOL continues to argue on appeal that it has the statutory authority to establish a salary test, contrary to the conclusion of the district court. We anticipate that no new salary test will be forthcoming until this legal challenge is resolved.

Throughout this process, we have adhered to the proposed standard of $913 per week. But with DOL action to abandon the proposed standard, we will be introducing an institutional salary test that exceeds the current federal standard of $455 per week. Effective August 27, 2017, the salary test for exempt positions at UI will now be $720 per week. This generally equates to $18 per hour or $37,440 per year (full-time equivalency must be considered as well). Exempt positions must continue to meet the duties test.  This standard will be reviewed annually for potential adjustments.

We will be reviewing the positions that became eligible for overtime pay last November. Based on a review of duties and the new institutional salary test, some of these positions may return to exempt status.  Supervisors of affected employees will be contacted by Human Resources. Please direct questions or comments to the HR Office at 208-885-3638.
*|LIST:DESCRIPTION|*
 
Update Preferences | Unsubscribe
 
Our mailing address is:
*|HTML:LIST_ADDRESS_HTML|*


*|MC:SUBJECT|*

University of Idaho
Office of the Provost
& Executive Vice President

provostevpwiencek@uidaho.edu
www.uidaho.edu/provost
TO: University of Idaho Faculty
FROM: John Wiencek, Provost and Executive Vice President
DATE: May 25, 2017
SUBJECT: Compensation Assessment via Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) Code Assignments

As you likely know, President Staben committed to raising employee salaries to market-competitive levels by 2025. It has been a busy year defining exactly what this means, determining how we will measure and implement appropriate market-rate salaries and assessing which factors to consider in assigning the appropriate salary for each employee.

The staff compensation task force (created by Faculty Senate) worked with Human Resources to develop such a compensation philosophy for staff. The faculty compensation task force (also created by Faculty Senate) has done likewise for faculty. Guiding principles developed by the faculty compensation task force — and presented to the Faculty Senate — will drive this process (you can download that document here). We are now ready to implement this faculty compensation system. However, we need to collect some information from faculty, department chairs and deans in order to proceed. Note that these guidelines apply to full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty only. We continue to work on appropriate guidelines for other faculty types, such as clinical, research, Extension, library and instructional faculty.

The faculty compensation task force has agreed to use the CUPA-HR database as the primary reference for faculty salaries, with the Oklahoma State University (OSU) database as a secondary source. Salaries will be benchmarked against all R1/R2/R3 institutions, accounting for faculty rank and academic discipline. Academic rank is recorded in our Banner administrative system. We also have information on the academic discipline of each faculty member, which will be reviewed over the summer months.

Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) codes are nationally recognized academic program types. The CUPA-HR and OSU databases use CIP codes to provide facul