|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveNovember 9, 1988
Minutes COMMISSION ON RESEARCH November 9, 1988 President's Board Room 3:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: L. J. Arnold, F. M. Asche, R. A. Comparin, P. P. Feret, W. L. Flowers (for M. R. Geasler), W. G. Huber, J. Randolph, M. G. Squires, F. W. Stephenson, H. H. Stoevener, E. R. Stout, W. L. Stutzman MEMBERS ABSENT: G. E. Bunce, P. K. Edwards, V. R. Fu, G. R. Hooper, J. C. Lee, D. F. McTaggart, M. Potts INVITED GUESTS: J. L. Eaton, H. T. Hurd 1. ANNOUNCEMENT Candidate interviews for the position of Director, Office of Sponsored Programs and Research Administration have been scheduled through the first week in December. It is expected that a recommendation can be made to the Provost by mid-December. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 14 AND OCTOBER 12, 1988 MEETINGS In concurrent actions, the Minutes of the September 14 and October 12, 1988 meetings of the Commission on Research were approved as distrib- uted. 3. NOMINATION OF TWO COMMISSION FACULTY MEMBERS TO VTIP BOARD The VTIP Board has requested that the Commission nominate two faculty representatives for service on that Board. One of these individuals will be chosen to serve. Peter Feret and Ed Bunce were nominated as possible members to serve on the VTIP Board. 4. PROPOSED REVISION TO APPENDIX E, MANUAL OF PROCEDURES Appendix E in the Office of Sponsored Programs MANUAL OF PROCEDURES was written in 1981 to deal with Retroactive Salary Transfers. It de- scribes the procedures by which retroactive salary transfers can be made. At a later date, Appendix G which has to do with funding ending dates, was developed to address the excessive number of such transfers. Appendix G had a penalty clause wherein if the paperwork was not initi- ated in a timely fashion, the salary involved would be charged to the college's overhead account. If this action was taken, it could only be reversed by concurrent action of the Provost and the Vice President for Finance. In 1988 the penalty clause was removed and approval of transfers was placed with the Office of Sponsored Programs and appropriate officials in the Research and Extension Division. This action was approved by the Commission, apparently without realizing that Appendix E had some of the same procedures for getting retroactive salary transfers ap- proved. Appendix E needs to be changed to bring it into agreement with Appendix G. The suggested change would be in the last paragraph (sen- tence) of the section "Policy", which currently reads "Exceptions to this policy will be evaluated jointly by the offices of the Provost and the Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer on the advice of the Vice Provost for Research and Graduate Studies or the Vice Provost of Extension." MOTION was made and seconded that the last sentence under POLICY in Appendix E: Retroactive Salary Transfers, be changed to read: "Exceptions to this policy will be evaluated by the Office of the Provost." Motion approved. This action takes the Provost and the Executive Vice President and Chief Business Officer out of the signature loop at this point; how- ever, they will remain in the appeal process. 5. FINANCIAL RECORDS SYSTEM (FRS) - Dwight Shelton and Tom Hurd. At the last meeting Mr. Shelton presented a proposed summary sheet that has since been sent out to a sampling of individuals for reaction. Dr. Stephenson reported that he had not received feedback from most of the Engineering faculty who were part of those sampled but expects to have this very shortly to give to Mr. Shelton. Mr. Shelton stated that the report is ready to run and can be run against the October data if the green light is given in a reasonable time. Dr. Stephenson asked whether the balance at the end of the sheet which includes the overhead can be changed to the balance actually available for spending. He finds that this combined balance confused the fac- ulty. Mr. Shelton responded that there are actually two balances given; one being the balance available for expenditure. Mr. Shelton was asked if it would be possible to include the sponsor name on the condensed summary. His response was yes. The problem of lag time in getting the new projects entered on the sys- tem is being worked on. Mr. Hurd reported that the Office of Sponsored Programs is pretty well caught up with the backlog; however, it still takes three days to get a new project fully set up because of 'batch- ing'. Mr. Shelton stated they will try wholeheartedly to streamline the entry process. Mr. Hurd was asked what suggestions the people he had interacted with had made. He responded that most had to do with including payroll data, listing individual sponsor names on the printout, and putting the pennies back in the figures. Several examples of problems with round- ing to whole dollars were given. Mr. Hurd pointed out that whole dollar figures were a real problem for the Post Award Section of the Office of Sponsored Programs because they have to bill the sponsor to the penny. He stated that from the working standpoint, the pennies have to be included in the reports. The Chairman thanked Mr. Shelton and Mr. Hurd and said they would be invited back in a month or two to update the Commission. 6. SELF-STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS - Dennis Hinkle. Dr. Hinkle, Chair of the Self-Study Monitoring Committee, stated that several months ago he spent some time trying to come up with groups of recommendations to be assigned to different individuals, committees and commissions around the campus. He assigned the Research recommen- dations to Gary Hooper, Ernie Stout and also identified some that were maybe more policy oriented that he thought the Commission would be in- terested in. Dr. Hinkle feels the Recommendations can be identified in three groups. The first group is those Recommendations that have already been dealt with; they have either been implemented or else cannot be done. The second group is those that probably cannot be dealt with in their pres- ent form. The third group is those that really need to be addressed over the next two or three years. He explained the Committee's request for a report by December 15th that outlines: o Any misassignments that may have been made. Recommendations they feel they should or should not be working with. o The documentation of any and all of the Recommendations that have been dealt with. In March or April of next year the Self-Study Committee will ask for a list of those Recommendations each assigned group feels cannot be dealt with in their present form. They suggest rewriting the Recommendations into a form that can be dealt with. They will also ask for some prior- ities of those that need to be dealt with and for some guidelines as to when these might be dealt with. An annual report will be prepared by the Self-Study Committee for each of the next three years. The basis of these three reports will be a report submitted to the Southern Association of Colleges five years from now. The Chairman asked for suggestions on how to proceed with this task. In response to a suggestion that a small sub-committee be set up to identify those recommendations that might already have been acted on and figure out where some priorities might be, the Chairman asked Bill Stephenson and Bill Huber to serve with him as a Sub-Committee of three. The Sub-Committee will report back to the Commission in a short time. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m. The next meeting will be December 14, 1988 at 3:30 p.m. in the President's Board Room. ERS: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/1988/November+9++1988.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:24 EDT