Dear Members of the Edinboro University (EU) Community:

Transcription

1 Dear Members of the Edinboro University (EU) Community: I am writing to share news with you regarding the formation of three working groups (WG s) to engage in discovery and analysis related to the health and status of our university. Preamble: The formation of these WG s should not come as a surprise as I have met personally with almost every academic and non-academic department/group throughout EU to get to know and understand our community from each of your perspectives. To maintain consistency, I have also met the leaders of each of our collective bargaining units, and many, many constituent groups external to campus. In each of these meetings a primary focus of the discussions have been on our need to engage in discovery and analysis of our current conditions. It is also important to me personally to share with each of you that as each of these meetings was held, we clearly recognized and ensured that we honorably met, and continue to meet, our obligations to the bargaining units consistent with the Collective Bargaining Agreements and Law. To be sure, we have much work to do, and it is important to emphasize that we are all in this together as we work collectively as a community to identify and make necessary improvements and enhancements, and now is the time for us to get started in earnest. Getting Started: As we begin our work to position EU for a vibrant, robust, and exciting path forward, each WG will receive a formal charge, a set of questions, and access to a repository of data and information for analysis these materials will be available to all members of our EU community as well. Accordingly, the analyses will proceed in two phases Phase 1: Discovery and analysis, and Phase 2: An analysis of Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, and Threats (SCOT). Following an initial call for volunteers, many people came forward to offer their service for these WG s, and for that I thank each of you. During our conversations about the timing and importance of these WG s, many members of our EU community have come forward with requests that we enhance inclusivity and opportunities to participate in these WG s via our shared governance processes requests that we applaud and are happy to accommodate. With this message, we are sharing news that we will proceed with a fresh start to our WG formation process. Accordingly, we are calling for the formation of a pool of representatives whose membership will be decided within the shared governance structure of our constituents. In order to ensure transparency, integrity, and depth of expertise, the pool of representatives will be elected/appointed consistent with the table provided below. Three WG s then will be formed from the pool of representatives wherein the WG s will have as an even as possible a distribution of representatives from each constituent group. Page 1 of 7

2 Constituent Groups Total # of Constituent Group Leader Representatives APSCUF (Faculty -including Coaches) 3 Michael Bucell University Senate (Faculty) 3 Douglas Puharic AFSCME (Staff) 3 Ross Brumagin SCUPA (Staff) 3 Denita Kelley Non-Represented Managers 2 A public election among this constituent group was held on 11/17/2016. At-Large (Staff) - 1 representative from each 3 Ted Duncan (SPFPA) collective bargaining unit (SPFPA, OPEIU, PSSU) Deb Krizmanich (OPEIU) Eileen Michaels (PSSU) President s Advisory Board 3 President Walker Edinboro University Foundation 3 Steve Rinn Student (Graduate) 3 Rebecca Leonard Student (Undergraduate) 3 Antoinette Jackson Alumni 6 Scott Irlbacher Council of Trustees 3 Dennis Frampton Local Employers 6 President Walker Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) Cadre (Working Group Conveners and Workflow Facilitators Non-participating) 3 Lt. Col. Beckage WG Formation: We are asking that the elected leader for each constituent group provide the names of individuals able and willing to participate in the WG s no later than the close of business on Monday, December 5, The very limited amount of time available for this work to be accomplished must be a significant consideration when volunteering for and selecting representatives for these WG s the primary work effort must begin in earnest, and without delay, immediately upon our return from the holiday break. The elected leaders of each constituent group can submit the names of their representatives to the Office of the President at OfficeofthePresident@edinboro.edu. Page 2 of 7

3 The WG timeline is as follows: Names submitted to Office of the President December 5, 2016 for WG Formation Compile Questions for WG s November/December 2016 First Meeting to Charge WG s December 15, 2016 Distribute WG questions and supply data December 16, 2016 immediately following contract ratification Identify a vendor for external validation December 2016/January 2017 WG s provide discovery and analysis results February 7, 2017 to the President Phase I Town-hall meeting to share WG discovery February 16, 2017 and analysis results WG s conduct a SCOT Analysis February 7 February 28, 2017 External validation of discovery and analysis February 2017 provided to the President WG s provide SCOT analysis results to the February 28,2017 President -- Phase II Town-hall meeting to share results of the March 22, 2017 external validation and SCOT analysis results Objectives and Goals of our Work Effort: Our objective in conducting discovery and analysis and a SCOT analysis is to provide a frank and objective assessment of our university. Our intent in the design and execution of our efforts is to be broadly inclusive, transparent, and engaging with all of our constituent groups. Our goal in conducting discovery and analysis and a SCOT analysis is to ensure all members of our university community, internal and external to the campus, clearly understand our financial position and SCOT preceding the development of strategy and plans to enhance our efficacy and effectiveness relative to our charter as a public, regional, comprehensive university. Relevant Questions: 1. What is the purpose of the Working Groups (WG s)? The purpose of the working groups is to gain perspective and understanding of the financial and academic health of EU. 2. Why are we starting these WG s now? While we initiated efforts to form and charge these work groups in September, three factors combined to delay our start until now: A.) Our community asked for individual meetings with the President before beginning the work of these WG s, B.) The University had an unprecedented run up to, occurrence of, and restarting operations following a strike, and 3.) It was prudent to wait until the ratification of all collective bargaining agreements so as not to risk what may have been perceived as an unfair labor practice. Page 3 of 7

4 3. Am I required to participate in a WG? No. To be sure, however, it is in everyone s best interests to be informed with correct and validated information as we position the University for future health and sustainability. 4. How do I volunteer to serve on a WG? Contact the elected leader of your constituent group as soon as possible each constituent group leader was identified earlier in this document. 5. Why is a fresh start needed for the WG s? The initial results of our call for participation in the WG s yielded many volunteers, however, the initial volunteers were not representative of all the constituent groups throughout the University. 6. Why are there three WG s if everyone is looking at the same data and information? We need as broadly participative and inclusive a structure as possible to gain different perspectives from, and to facilitate the education and understanding of, our community as a whole. 7. How was the composition of the WG s determined? The composition of the WG s was based on ensuring that representatives of each major constituent group were included. It is important to remember that as a public University, we have constituent groups external to the University which, as taxpayers of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, have statutory relevance and a vested interest in the health and future of the University. 8. Who will lead each of the WG s? Impartial and objective leadership of the WG s is important. Also, managing the WG s given the short amount of time available will be equally important, particularly considering that we will just be returning from the holiday break and beginning a new semester. Members of our ROTC Cadre (senior military personnel) are particularly well-suited to leading these WG s, managing tasks and communications, remaining impartial and objective, interfacing with external constituents, and yet knowing our community and many aspects of university operations. For these reasons, one representative from our ROTC Cadre will lead each WG. The WG leaders will be the liaisons between the WG and the President and these WG leaders will be tasked with ensuring that the work is completed as needed and that the scope of work does not increase. 9. How often will the WG s meet? Each WG will determine its own task assignments and schedule. It is anticipated that each WG will work with sub-committees and come together for perhaps three meetings to collate and discuss results. It is important to remember that the time available for the WG s is very limited. Phase 1 of the work (discovery and analysis) will have only approximately three weeks immediately followed by a report-out and town-hall meeting, and Phase 2 of the work (SCOT Analysis) will also only have approximately three weeks to be completed. Page 4 of 7

5 10. Will the University community see the WG s charge? Yes. The WG s charge can be accessed via the President s web-page for the University community and WG participants external to EU at: Will the University community see questions to be answered by each WG? Yes. The WG s questions can be accessed via the President s web-page following the ratification of all our collective bargaining agreements. The WG questions will be available for the University community and WG participants external to EU at: Will the data and information initially provided to the WG s via an online repository be available to the University community? Yes. The initial data and information can be accessed via the President s web-page for the University community and WG participants external to EU at: What types of data and information will be available to the WG s? Audited financial statements, EU and PASSHE financial reports, enrollment and retention data, data associated with the expedited academic program review, and EU performance data and information will be provided to our WG s and University community. 14. Will the WG s be required to analyze only the data and information they are provided via the President s web-page? No. The data and information provided to the WG s is a starting point in the analysis. Since we are using audited data, the integrity of the data has been validated, however, members of the WG s are invited to seek any additional validated and audited data they wish to consider such data may be obtained or correlated with data provided directly from the Office of the Chancellor. WG s will be provided with office contact information to support the analysis. 15. How will each of the WG s present their findings to the president? Once the WG s complete Phase 1 (discovery and analysis) each group will provide its findings to the President, then a meeting with the president will be scheduled, if necessary, to address inconsistencies in results, then a town-hall meeting will be scheduled for the University-wide community to discuss findings. Following the completion of Phase 1, the same process will be initiated for Phase 2 (SCOT analysis). 16. How will the findings of the WGs be presented to the campus community? Two (2) town-hall meetings will be held -- one at the conclusion of Phase 1 (discovery and analysis), and one at the conclusion of Phase 2 (SCOT analysis and results of the external validation). Page 5 of 7

6 17. What happens if there is not agreement or consensus in the analysis results among the WG s? It is expected that there will be non-statistically-significant differences among the analysis results. As a University community, we will work to address any errors in fact in a timely manner without delay before seeking external validation. 18. What happens if there is not agreement or consensus in the analysis results from any non-wg constituents who wish to conduct an analysis on their own? The same response that was provided to question 17 applies here as well. However, there is an important additional consideration. In order to maintain the efficacy and timeliness of the work effort, we will have limited ability to address disputed data or facts from non-wg constituents who may be conducting parallel analyses. Acknowledging that we will publically address factual errors or disputes with data prior to our town-hall meeting, we will conduct the town-hall meeting considering only the analysis results of the officially elected WG s which are representative of the University community as a whole. We will then address any disagreement or lack of consensus among non-wg constituent analysis results while the external validation and SCOT analysis are being completed. 19. What happens if there is not agreement in analysis results obtained from the external validation process? The goal of this analysis is to obtain objective, valid, and timely data and information about the health and sustainability of EU. If as a result of the external validation we learn that we did not access or interpret data and information correctly, and if the external validation produces source references for their finding, we will adjust our understanding(s) accordingly. 20. Who will provide external validation/how will they be chosen? A nationally reputable analysis firm will be chosen to conduct the external validation. While an analysis firm has not yet been selected, we continue to solicit recommendations from the University community for candidate firms. Our criteria in selecting an analysis firm will be based on integrity, objectivity, experience, and skill/expertise preference will be given to selecting a firm removed from Pennsylvania, PASSHE, and EU. We will also need to balance criteria such as cost and availability within our timeframe when selecting a firm to conduct the external validation. 21. What is a Strengths, Challenges, Opportunities, and Threats (SCOT) analysis? A SCOT analysis is a scan of the internal and external environment of our university. The SCOT process is used to analyze a broad range of data and information about our University and our environment. 22. What is the difference between the discovery and analysis and the SCOT analysis? Each WG will present a set of facts obtained during an analysis of data and information (discovery and analysis). The SCOT analysis will then leverage the results of discovery and analysis to reflect on our strengths and challenges, and also consider potential impacts from the external environment on the University. Page 6 of 7

7 23. Why is time so short for this analysis? Many of the enhancements we are likely to consider and/or implement take between two and three years to complete and require intermediate deadlines within the coming weeks and months we simply must begin now in earnest in order to position the University for a future of strength and sustainability. 24. What happens after the WG s complete their work? We will then be in a position to discuss as a community of the whole strategy and interventions from which to build upon in the immediate future. Since our work together began in July, 2016 our primary goal has been identifying that point just over the horizon toward which we can all steer to enhance the University while achieving sustainability -- and now is the time to begin moving forward on our path to success. I am confident that there is a path forward, and that we will identify the steps we need to take as a result of our working together. Page 7 of 7