|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveOctober 14, 1987
Minutes COMMISSION ON RESEARCH October 14, 1987 President's Board Room 3:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: L. J. Arnold, F. M. Asche, J. Cairns, Jr., R. A. Comparin, P. K. Edwards, D. B. Hodge, J. C. Lee (for W. G. Huber), D.G.I. Kingston, D. F. McTaggart, C. L. Foy (for G. W. Norton), A. W. Steiss, F. W. Stephenson, L. A. Harris (for R. A. Teekell) MEMBERS ABSENT: V. R. Fu, M. R. Geasler, M. D. Pierson, M. Potts, G. G. Schurig, J. F. Wolfe INVITED GUESTS: G. R. Hooper, C. D. Waring, K. A. Wilkins 1. ANNOUNCEMENTS The Office of Management and Budget has established a computerized "blacklist" of organizations (and people) with which it is considered seriously improper to do business. Universities are expected to moni- tor contacts with these organizations and individuals. A list of Research Scientist appointments was distributed. Greater oversight may be required of contracts that can be interpreted by the Internal Revenue Service as producing "unrelated business in- come." The Commission took action last year to clarify procedures with regards to "residual funds" in fixed price agreements. It appears most likely that initially the IRS will scrutinize large institutions with medical colleges. 2. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 23, 1987 MEETING The Minutes of the September 23, 1987 Meeting of the Commission on Re- search were approved as corrected. 3. COMMITTEE REPORTS a. COMMITTEE ON CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION PROCEDURES Due to the seriousness of the problem, the consensus was that the report should be hand-carried to a designated university official for discussion of the specific issues cited therein. MOTION was made that Dr. Hooper take the Report of the Com- mittee on Construction and Renovation to Minnis Ridenour with a request for a response by the middle of December, 1987. Motion seconded and carried. b. COMMITTEE ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Copies of the SCHEV H-1 Form were distributed. This report summa- rizes the number of patentable and copyrightable intellectual prop- erties during the past year for which University has some proprietary interest. The amount of royalties received during FY 1987 also is recorded. c. FACULTY SALARIES UNDER SPECIAL ASSIGNMENTS The Commission was asked to consider the problem of dealing with faculty salary calculations under special assignments. The most typical assignment is under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA). The members were asked to review a memorandum outlining possible options in preparation for a discussion of this item at the October 28 meeting. 4. FORUM WITH MR. DON MOORE, DIRECTOR OF THE DIVISION OF PURCHASES AND SUPPLY The forum was held on October 7, 1987 to discuss problems concerning the time delays in purchasing research equipment. Members were asked to study the forum minutes prior to the next Commission meeting. Bill Haas will be invited to attend the meeting to comment on some of the points highlighted in these minutes. All items purchased with state or federal funds must conform to state procurement laws. In response to a question raised at the meeting with Don Moore, a memorandum entitled "Equipment Expenditures from Non- Government Sources: FY 1986-87" was distributed to the Commission. Of the total equipment expenditure from the sponsored accounts in 1986-87, 18.64% were from nongovernmental (private) sources, 60% of which were over the $1,200 threshold for which bids are required. Mr. Moore made several comments about the sole source justification as a tool to expedite the purchase of a needed piece of research equip- ment. He stated that faculty familiarity with a piece of equipment or awareness of its reliability--that it worked better than another piece of equipment--should be considered adequate sole source justification. 5. COMPUTER EXPENDITURES Computing expenditures for Research last year amounted to a total of $3.4 million. Approximately $1.7 million was spent for mainframe com- puting. Computing services on standalone equipment totaled $345,000. Hardware and software leases accounted for $284,000 in expenditures. Just under $1 million of research money was spent to acquire computing equipment. The 86-87 figures are very similar to the expenditure pat- terns for 85-86. 6. CORE RESEARCH PROGRAM The Commission was provided with a summary of the issues and concerns relating to Core Research, as reflected in the Self-Study report. The Commission discussed the basis for the Core Research program and the procedures by which projects are selected under this program. The six Subprograms--Agriculture and Forestry Research, Coal and Energy Research, Environmental and Water Resources Research, Industrial and Economic Development Research, Supporting Research, and Veterinary Med- ical Research--have been identified by the University and endorsed by the State (the Governor's Office and the General Assembly). Each year, faculty members are asked to propose specific areas to be incorporated into the Core Research agenda. They also are asked to submit proposals within the areas that the program supports. Proposals are reviewed on two levels: (1) the appropriateness of the proposed research from a scientific point-of-view; and (2) its application to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Proposals are ranked within each College and are then sent to faculty committees for ranking. The committees are organized by Subprograms, and each has a representative from each College. The peer evaluations are brought together and are reviewed at the Research Division. They are discussed with the individual Colleges to examine the impact of these evaluations on the College allocations of positions and dollars. Quite often the College review and the faculty review do not match up. No specific constraints are placed on project budgets, but most faculty understand that Core resources are limited. Faculty are encouraged to lay out a research program for more than one year. But, in effect, we have only been able to award them one year of funding. The feeling was expressed that a determined effort should be made to fund longer-term, higher-quality proposals with clear lines of funding (greater than one year). Lack of communication between some College officials and the faculty was discussed. Many faculty are unaware the proposals are being sought for the Core Research Program until such a short time before the dead- line they are unable to respond with a quality proposal. This year the call will be put out without any dollars. Dr Kingston advocated using the Core Research Program to break down artificial barriers between Colleges. Dr. Hooper indicated that the Commission's concerns will be discussed further and that the Core Research program will be changed this year. The topic of Core Research will also be discussed in a general, philo- sophical sense by the College Administrators for Research. A model has been formulated to be implemented after these discussions. This item will be carried forward as an agenda item and more data will be provided the Commission relative to the disposition of Core funds over the last several years. The Commission should examine the Self- Study recommendations as well as providing inputs to the proposed "model". The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m. The next meeting will be held October 28, 1987 at 3:30 p.m. in the President's Board Room. Owl:mar
VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives
Send questions or comments to:
Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/cor/1987/October+14++1987.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:24 EDT