Meeting Minutes - June 2006
Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University
System of Georgia
Held at 270 Washington St., S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia
June 6 and 7, 2006
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, June 6, and Wednesday, June 7, 2006, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent J. Timothy Shelnut, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 6, 2006. Present on Tuesday, in addition to Chair Shelnut, were Vice Chair Patrick S. Pittard and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., William H. Cleveland, Michael J. Coles, Robert F. Hatcher, Julie Ewing Hunt, Felton Jenkins, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Elridge W. McMillan, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Willis J. Potts, Jr., Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Benjamin J. Tarbutton III, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil.
The Director of Administration and Compliance Policy, Mark Demyanek, gave the Regents and audience a briefing of basic safety information in the event of an emergency.
REMARKS FROM THE CHANCELLOR
Chancellor Davis greeted the Regents and said that he hoped the morning workshop on board governance had been a worthwhile endeavor for them. As he had stated previously, his goal is to work with the Chair to structure these meetings and issues management in ways that respect the Regents' time and help them focus on the larger picture and policy issues that must be addressed. He said that he hoped this morning's session was illuminating and informative and will strengthen the Regents' service to the University System.
The Regents would have a very full agenda over the next two days. They would be discussing a number of issues with long-range policy implications. Specifically, the Chancellor called the Regents' attention to a revised interim capital process as they move toward a longer-term strategic process for facilities needs. The Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, and the Director of Planning, Alan S. Travis, would be briefing the Regents at this meeting. Also, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Planning and Policy Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, would present data on enrollment trends and implications. These two items – facilities and enrollment – should be considered as a single issue for policy and planning purposes, explained Chancellor Davis. Some of the data Dr. Hudson would share regarding enrollment trends would highlight the Board's planning challenges. One point that she would be making is the degree to which University System enrollment is dependent upon the high school graduation rate in Georgia, and the number of Georgians earning a high school diploma depends greatly on the academic preparation throughout K-12. One means of assessing how well students learn is the Criterion-Referenced Competency Tests ("CRCT"). The state has set higher standards for 19 of the 36 tests, and the 2006 test scores indicate two things: 1) students show improvement in the 17 unchanged tests, and 2) on the more rigorous tests, scores reflect the increasing challenge posed by asking students to clear a much higher bar. This is to be expected, the Chancellor said. When the Board of Regents raised admissions requirements in the University System in the mid 1990s, students did not automatically clear the higher bar. Over time, however, they did meet the higher expectations, and today, more students enroll in the System better prepared academically. Whenever expectations are raised, an initial drop in student scores is anticipated, he said, but after students adjust to the higher expectations, then performance improves. The pattern is predictable. So, the Regents applaud the Georgia Department of Education's efforts to increase expectations for K-12 students. The long-term result will be students better prepared to graduate from high school, enroll in college, and, ultimately, earn a degree. The University System will then be able to direct some of the resources presently devoted to learning support to other areas of need.
Chancellor Davis also noted several other items on the Board and Committee agendas. The Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs, William R. Bowes, would report on the Guaranteed Tuition Plan's working group and the resolution of most of the outstanding issues related to the new tuition policy. On Wednesday, President Daniel W. Rahn of the Medical College of Georgia would present an overview of the findings and recommendations from the Health Professions Task Force that the Board appointed in September 2005. The task force would make the case for a System-level approach to meeting the state's needs in the health professions.
Also on Wednesday, the Senior Vice Chancellor for External Activities and Facilities, Thomas E. Daniel, would update the Regents on current and future activities and plans related to the Board's legislative and other funding partnerships. Chancellor Davis stated that these partnerships are crucial as the Regents move forward with fiscal year 2008 budget planning. Finally, the Regents would elect a board Chair and Vice Chair for the upcoming year.
In closing his introductory remarks, the Chancellor expressed his appreciation for Chair Shelnut's leadership during a year of transition and remarked that he had provided excellent leadership during his term.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Tuesday, June 6, 2006, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regent Donald M. Leebern, Jr. had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion properly made and duly seconded, the minutes of the Board of Regents meeting held on May 16 and 17, 2006, were unanimously approved as distributed.
SALUTE TO REPRESENTATIVE BOB SMITH
Chair Shelnut called upon the Chancellor to introduce a special guest at this meeting.
Chancellor Davis said that when his appointment as Chancellor was announced, he heard from many Georgians, but the first legislator who called him was Representative Bob Smith. It was clear from that first phone call that Representative Smith had a deep interest in and passion for the University System of Georgia. It was while sitting in one of his subcommittee hearings that the Chancellor and his staff had the idea for the System's newest nursing initiative. Representative Smith spoke so passionately about the need that exists in Georgia for nurses that the team thought that it was the System's responsibility to meet the very sound challenge he raised. It is clear that Representative Smith wants Georgia to have a university system that ranks at the very top of its peers. But more importantly, he wants – as the Board does – a university system that is responsive, efficient, and dedicated to serving students and producing great graduates. He serves as the chair of the Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee in the Georgia House of Representatives, where he works diligently on behalf of Georgians and their higher education needs. The Representative is keenly aware of those needs as a customer of the University System. Representative Smith is an alumnus of the University of Georgia ("UGA"), and two of his and his wife's, Laura's, children are enrolled in University System institutions. Robert Smith will graduate from the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") this December, and Matthew Smith is a rising junior at UGA who has just been accepted into UGA's prestigious Arch Society. The third and youngest of the Smith family, Shearron, is a rising senior at Oconee County School. While she is unsure of her college plans, Representative Smith says there is no question that she will attend. On behalf of the Board and the University System, the Chancellor said that he appreciates Representative Smith's dedication, commitment, and passion for public higher education. He asked the Regents to join him in welcoming Representative Bob Smith.
Representative Smith thanked the Chancellor and remarked that the Senior Vice Chancellor for External Activities and Facilities, Thomas E. Daniel, does a fabulous job educating the legislature about higher education. He said that his oldest son is majoring in Architecture at GIT, though his younger son is going to UGA, where he and his wife went to college and his daughter plans to go to college. Representative Smith recommended The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century by Thomas L. Friedman and other books to the Regents. He listed a number of concerns and initiatives related to higher education and economic development in the State of Georgia, nationally, and internationally. He applauded the Chancellor and the Regents for their focus on accountability and their efforts to attract economic development opportunities like the federal bio- and agro-defense facility to Georgia. He said that he was very proud of the Governor's legislative budget package. He asked the Regents to get to know their legislators and said that he looked forward to working with them in the next legislative session.
Chair Shelnut thanked Representative Smith for his enthusiastic comments and continued support of the University System of Georgia.
PRESENTATION ON DARTON COLLEGE
Chair Shelnut next called upon President Peter J. Sireno to make a special presentation on Darton College ("DC").
President Sireno greeted the Chancellor and Regents. He noted that DC is the second largest two-year college within the University System of Georgia with an enrollment of almost 5,000 students. DC has grown 63% over the past six years and attributes its growth to a commitment to being responsive to the existing and emerging needs of its students, business industry, and the communities it serves. As the allied health career education center of South Georgia with 12 allied health programs and an Associate Degree in Nursing program, and as a leader in information and instructional technology, DC collaborates with sister institutions and healthcare organizations throughout the state.
President Sireno's remarks focused on DC's involvement in distance education. He noted that DC has always understood the importance of utilizing technology to increase access to the college and to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its administrative efforts. Additionally, and in many ways more importantly, DC uses technology as a tool to improve teaching and learning. Since 1993, the college has aggressively pursued distance learning technologies and external funding to support the development of online courses, video streaming, video conferencing, and the incorporation of technology into its traditional classrooms. President Sireno said that the quality of DC's technology and its technology-based distance learning programs has contributed to its success in securing outside funding.
DC's use of technology and technology-based distance learning has earned us the designation of one of the top ten digital colleges in an urban classification or category in the nation – ranked tenth in 2004 and sixth in 2005 – by the Center for Digital Education in collaboration with The American Association of Community Colleges. DC's distance learning programs have also been recognized by The National Council of Instructional Administrators and the United States Distance Learning Association.
Using the preliminary figures for this summer semester, President Sireno reported that nearly 45% of the classes DC students have selected are in distance learning and off-campus programs and just a little more than 36% of those are online courses. Each semester, at least one-third of DC students take a distance learning class. While DC's enrollment increased by 44% in the last five years, the distance learning classes taken by students have have increased by 475%.
An example of DC responsiveness to the needs of business, industry, and its communities can best be shown by how the college has utilized its distance learning technology to address the state's critical needs in nursing, allied health, and teacher education. Although there is a critical need for nurses across the state and around the country, nowhere does the shortage hit harder than in rural hospitals. In response to requests from community hospitals, DC now operates nursing programs at four locations. The main campus is in Albany with satellite sites located in Americus, Colquitt, and Thomasville. For three years prior to approval of its own nursing program, DC delivered its associate degree registered nursing program to Bainbridge and helped Bainbridge College develop its own program. During those three years, 89 students earned nursing degrees through DC's Bainbridge satellite program. This fall, at the request of President John Black and with the support of an Intellectual Capital Partnership Program ("ICAPP–") grant, DC will start a nursing satellite program at East Georgia College in Swainsboro. All of DC's satellite programs combine video streaming, video conferencing, and online classes with face-to-face instruction as well as clinical instruction in local area healthcare facilities.
Because of DC's strength in nursing and technology, the U.S. Department of Labor awarded the college a $2.48 million workforce development grant to develop the nation's first generic online nursing associate degree program. The Georgia Board of Nursing recently approved the program, which is designed to maximize flexibility for completing the classroom component of the nursing courses and to allow for flexibility in scheduling of clinical assignments.
President Sireno noted that the nursing program at DC was one of the first to begin using PDAs with its nursing students. Instead of carrying a heavy load of reference books to the hospital, students now download all of the information into their PDAs and actually have more up-to-date information than they did with the textbooks. They are also using specialized PDAs called Admin RXs that hospitals and doctors are using to maintain patient medication and treatment records.
DC also offers several of its allied health programs online. In collaboration with sister institutions through its Rural Technology Initiative, DC offers its Medical Laboratory Technology ("MLT"), Histologic Technology, Health Information Management, and Respiratory Care programs in Barnesville, Rome, and Waycross. In collaboration with hospitals, these programs are also offered in Columbus, Americus, Valdosta, and Atlanta.
President Sireno stated that DC offers the state's only online addictions counseling certificate program. Kennesaw State University's social work undergraduate and graduate students are taking DC's online courses to help qualify them for addiction counseling certification.
One of the unique features of such online programs is their cost-effectiveness, he explained. By DC's collaborating with its sister institutions and hospitals, such programs are offered without incurring the start-up costs, laboratory expenses, learning resource expenses, professional membership fees, and accreditation expenses normally incurred.
As an example of the quality of DC's online coursework, President Sireno reported that last year, one of the graduates of the MLT collaborative with Georgia Highlands College earned the highest score in the nation on the first quarter board certification examination. This was also the highest score in the 30-year history of the DC MLT program.
The third area of critical need DC is addressing with distance learning is teacher education. Although it is a two-year college, because of its strength in technology, three years ago, the Georgia Professional Standards Commission ("PSC") and the Georgia Department of Education ("DOE"), as part of the Title II Georgia Teacher Quality Enhancement Program, asked DC to develop online coursework in mathematics and science to teach to middle grades teachers to help them become certified in math and science. To date, DC faculty have taught over 900 middle grades teachers, and the courses DC developed have been taught to another 2,000 middle grade teachers through its servers by other institutions, school systems, and regional educational service agencies ("RESAs"). Because of its work with the PSC and the DOE, the Southern Regional Education Board ("SREB") contracted with DC to provide online courses for its 16 state online consortium mathematics series designed to prepare teachers in math. President Sireno noted that two other colleges selected by the SREB were Old Dominion University and the University of West Virginia. Earlier this year, the PSC and the DOE again requested that DC develop online coursework in math, science, and language arts for special education teachers in the state.
In addition to addressing the critical need areas in nursing, allied health and teacher education, DC works just as hard to deliver programs that impact smaller geographic areas and in come cases a single company. For example, in partnership with the Cooper Tire and Rubber Company ("Cooper"), DC established an online cohort management degree program designed to maximize success in Cooper's rotating shift environment and to assist in the development of a career ladder within the Albany plant. DC also developed the District 8-2 Public Health website and online professional development courses for the allied health professionals on staff. DC is also assisting the Southwest Georgia Cancer Coalition with its distance learning projects and other technology activities.
President Sireno said that DC currently offers 18 associate degrees programs online; 40 additional degree programs have more than 80% of their courses online. What makes DC's online courses unique is that they are highly interactive, address multiple learning styles, and contain multimedia. DC courses are accessible to low bandwidth dial-up connections, and its student success rates are monitored to ensure students are receiving quality instruction. All DC healthcare programs provide didactic professional coursework online through rich multimedia, interactive courseware, while the clinical placements and laboratory components are taken in the local community. He showed the Regents a brief video clip streamed to the MLT safety technique Web page. This Web page contains some traditional material about glove removal and the importance of the procedure; however, the most effective way to show this is with the small streaming video showing the actual procedure. The video was created using methods that ensure the video will stream at low bandwidth connections ensuring that the most rural citizens can successfully receive the material.
DC continues to seek outside funding for instructional technology and distance learning applications as it works toward putting all of its degree programs online. At the same time, DC's information technology staff is working with emerging technology that can improve teaching and learning.
For the past two years, DC has been working with three-dimensional ("3D") technology applications for its traditional classroom and distance learning courses. President Sireno showed the Regents a slide to give them an idea of how useful it can be in teaching online healthcare courses. The 3D technology provides a greater understanding of the human body and its functions than does any two-dimensional application and is being incorporated into DC's online nursing program using a virtual model of the human body. He invited the Regents to see a more developed 3D concept after this meeting in Room 7004, where DC's information technology staff had set up a 3D model of the human heart.
In closing, President Sireno said that DC has emerged as a leader in distance learning and technology because of faculty and staff that have been willing to embrace technology as a tool for teaching and learning. However, it has taken a dedicated team of information technology professionals and considerable external funding over the last ten years to bring the college to this point.
Seeing that there were no questions for President Sireno, Chair Shelnut thanked him for this very interesting presentation. At approximately 1:50 p.m., Chair Shelnut called for a brief recess so that the Regents might see the 3D demonstration.
PRESENTATION: ENROLLMENT TRENDS AND IMPLICATIONS
At approximately 2:00 p.m., Chair Shelnut reconvened the Board meeting and called upon the Associate Vice Chancellor for Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, to provide important information that would have significant policy implications for the University System of Georgia as the Regents determine its future course.
Dr. Hudson discussed some of the most important factors that affect enrollment in the University System as a preface to the strategic planning efforts that will occur in fiscal year 2007. She showed the Regents a chart that showed how the fairly significant enrollment growth that started in the late 1990s has slowed somewhat, but growth still continues. Continued growth is dependent on many factors. Enrollment is driven by population changes and by where in the state the population grows and declines. It is also driven by the number of Georgia high school graduates, which in turn is determined by both the population and the high school graduation rate. The college-going rate is an important factor in enrollment planning.
Sound enrollment planning depends on the quality of the planning assumptions, explained Dr. Hudson. At this meeting, she shared data on population in Georgia. Demographers are fairly confident that the population projections for Georgia show continued strong growth. She did not present additional data on the college-going rate, she explained, because it appears stable. The University System gets 48% of all high school graduates the year following their high school graduation. The overall college-going rate of Georgia high school graduates is 59%, placing Georgia sixteenth in the nation in college attendance.
Regent Hunt asked for clarification about the percentage of high school graduates that attend college.
Dr. Hudson explained that 48% of all Georgia high school graduates enroll in the University System of Georgia the year following their high school graduation, and 59% attend some form of higher education, either in the System, at private colleges, in the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"), or out of state. Following the population data, Dr. Hudson presented data on the projected number of high school graduates and the high school graduation rate. While she expressed confidence in the population projections, she explained that it is harder to predict the number of high school graduates and the high school graduation rate, and those are key elements of System planning for the future.
Regent Hunt asked whether Georgia enrolls many students from outside Georgia.
Dr. Hudson responded that Georgia enrolls about as many students as it loses to other states.
Regent Hatcher asked whether these statistics included private high school graduates.
Dr. Hudson responded that the statistics include both public and private high school graduates.
Georgia's population grew by 26% between 1990 and 2000, reported Dr. Hudson. Only California, Texas, and Florida added more people than Georgia did. In terms of percentage growth, Georgia was the fastest growing state east of the Rocky Mountains. Georgia grew at twice the rate of the nation. The growth rate between 2000 and 2005 was estimated to be 11%, and again, that was twice the national rate. The rate should be around 6% over the next five years, with growth rates of 5% to 6% every five years through 2030. Dr. Hudson noted that Georgia is a relatively young state. The median age of the population is increasing, but it is lower than all but five other states. This means that the demands for education will be greater in Georgia than the overall population growth reflects, and this is one of the reasons that it is harder to predict the number of high school graduates in Georgia.
Dr. Hudson showed the Regents a map depicting the number of people living in Georgia in 2000 distributed by county. She noted that the size of the population of Georgia by county and by region is very uneven. The largest counties have at least 76,000 citizens. The smallest counties have fewer than 6,000 people each. Between 1990 and 2000, the 20-county Atlanta metropolitan area grew by 39%. Two counties grew by more than 100% – Forsyth and Henry; 39 counties grew by more than 30%; and 8 counties lost population (most in Southwest Georgia). In the last five years, Georgia's growth was even more concentrated in urban areas, primarily around metropolitan Atlanta and in Savannah. Thirteen counties grew at rates at or above 21%; some grew between 11% and 21%; and 34 counties, primarily along Georgia's fall line, lost population between 2000 and 2005. Dr. Hudson said that if enrollment depended on population growth alone, it would be relatively straightforward to determine how many students there would be and from where students are most likely to come. For comparison purposes, she included a table with the Regents' handout that showed the relative size of each institution and institutional growth over the last ten years. She explained that institutional growth depends upon many other factors, such as mission, but institutional size is affected by population growth.
Enrollment planning is more complicated than projecting population, Dr. Hudson said, because it depends on more volatile projections of the number of high school graduates. She showed the Regents a table projecting that the South will increase the number of high school graduates at a higher rate than other regions of the nation. Meanwhile, Georgia is expected to increase the number of high school graduates by around 39%, a growth rate that is almost four times the rate of increase in the nation. This assumes that the current high school graduation rate remains the same. So, the Board must also consider assumptions related to the high school graduation rate. Currently in Georgia, 55% of ninth graders graduate from high school in four years, compared to around 70% in the nation. This rate has changed over time, Dr. Hudson reported. For example, in 1990, the rate was 63%. If Georgia's high school completion rate had been 75% for the last six years, and if nothing else changed, the University System of Georgia enrollment this past fall would have been about 306,000 instead of 253,000. The State Board of Education and State Superintendent Kathy Cox are working hard to increase the high school graduation rate, she said, but a great unknown is how much it will increase and how fast.
Next, Dr. Hudson showed the Regents a graph depicting the projections for high school graduates in Georgia through 2018. Assuming there is no change in the proportion of students graduating from high school, by 2018, there should be over 111,000 high school graduates, compared to about 80,000 this past year. That represents an increase of about 15% over the next five years, and 8% in the next five-year period. Nationally, the 2009 graduating class is projected to be the largest in U.S. history, with graduates from the early wave of the "baby boomlet." In some states, the number of high school graduates will begin to decline following the end of the baby boomlet, but Georgia's numbers will continue to increase after other states begin to decline because it is expected that migration into the state will continue.
In summary, Dr. Hudson stated that the Board of Regents has challenges ahead in planning for University System growth. Georgia's population will likely grow at 5% to 6% every five years until 2030, and it is projected that the University System of Georgia participation rate will stay roughly the same, at about 50%. The number of high school graduates will increase by about 15% over the next five years, or a rate that is about three times the population growth rate. The Regents will have more serious challenges in determining how much the graduation rate from high school will change and how many more students will be prepared for college. In short, the Board will need different views of the University System's future to take these projections into account. Growth is a given, but the projected size of growth is more volatile than in the past. Staff are currently working on updated enrollment projections for the System, and they will provide those to the Board in future months as Chancellor Davis begins the process of updating the strategic plan.
Regent Jennings asked Dr. Hudson whether the graduation rate includes private high schools.
Dr. Hudson replied that the graduation rate did not include private high schools, but the projected numbers did.
Regent Coles noted that the high school graduation rate has dropped from 63% to 48%.
Dr. Hudson agreed but said that it could rebound as dramatically as it has fallen.
Regent Coles said this was shocking considering the Georgia pre-kindergarten program has better prepared students from an earlier age.
Seeing there were no further questions, Chair Shelnut thanked Dr. Hudson for her informative presentation.
COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
Chair Shelnut next convened the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities as a Committee of the Whole and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Vigil, the Chair of the Committee.
Chair Vigil said that at this meeting, the Committee as a Whole would hear an informational item concerning the capital project prioritization process. The June Board meeting has historically been the time when the presidents presented their major capital projects request for Board consideration. However, the Regents have become concerned about the growing backlog of critical projects, and the existing five-year rolling priority list has not progressed as quickly as needed to address the System's strategic needs. Over the past several months, numerous discussions have taken place about the need for a new capital project process. At this meeting, the Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, and the Director of Planning, Alan S. Travis, would present information on this process. The Senior Vice Chancellor for External Activities and Facilities, Thomas E. Daniel, would begin the presentation.
Mr. Daniel explained that last August, Chair Shelnut identified capital projects funding as one of four priorities during his term. Ms. Daniels has led the effort to review current processes and funding mechanisms and bring forward recommendations. In addition, she worked with the Governor and General Assembly to introduce and pass into law a new and additional capital project funding mechanism: the Georgia Higher Education Financing Authority ("GHEFA"). In February 2006, the Board of Regents approved new principles for capital priorities. At this meeting, the Regents would hear about an interim approach for fiscal year 2008 and an outline of the System's long-term approach to capital needs. Mr. Daniel stressed the word interim. Chancellor Davis will be coming back to the Board in August 2006 for approval of the interim plan as part of the fiscal year 2008 budget. One concern expressed regarding the current capital priority process is that there is a sigh of relief from an institution when a project makes it on the list. This suggests to the staff an environment in which making the list has become the goal as opposed to engaging in a constant and ongoing assessment of priorities from a state, System, and institutional level. The University System of Georgia is not well served by a process that seems to suggest that once a project is on the list, System priorities will never change. System capital needs must be considered and identified in the context of a multi-year strategic plan, but on the way to that eventual change, this interim step, respects the current list, yet begins a journey of departure to a more strategic and timely response to state needs. In capital priorities as in many areas, the University System is moving toward an integrated, mission-driven process. If the institutional budgets are truly to be strategy-implementing documents, then missions must, and will, drive budgets. Mr. Daniel then turned the floor over to Mr. Travis.
Mr. Travis thanked the Regents for this opportunity to provide an update on the System capital program. Staff began this process in January 2006 with the introduction of new principles for capital resource allocation, and they continued through the spring with updates on the GHEFA state revenue bond legislation, the State construction manual, and the capital outlay authorized by the General Assembly in this year's session.
During this time, staff have been working hard to develop a strategic, data-driven capital outlay model that will respond more effectively to University System and state needs. Although the staff had made good progress, the new approach was complex and would not be ready for full implementation in time to adopt a fiscal year 2008 budget at the August 2006 Board meeting. For that reason, this presentation was in two parts in reverse chronological order. Mr. Travis would begin with a preview of the new strategic capital model, which represents the long-term future of the University System capital program. Following this, Ms. Daniels would roll out the interim capital funding priorities for the coming fiscal year 2008.
Ms. Travis showed the Regents a photo of a bridge at Armstrong Atlantic State University as a visual metaphor to the topic of this meeting. He explained that the bridge serves not only as a conveyance between two wings of the Science Center, but it also has functional value as a student lounge and study area. Similarly, the staff were using the interim priority recommendations not only as a bridge from the traditional process to the new capital model, but also to add value by combining elements of the traditional process with new strategic ideas and approaches to yield an optimal investment package for the coming fiscal year.
Mr. Travis said that at the core of the new strategic capital model, the essential character of the model is to guide and integrate the planning, funding, finance, and execution of all facilities capital investments strategically in a true multi-year program. Even though the Board currently has a five-year capital budget, it functions effectively as an annual cycle with inherent limitations. The most notable attribute of the new approach is that the General Obligation ("G.O.") Bond funding stream will be allocated to institutions in a strategic model that is based on a planned level of annual G.O. Bond funding that is both consistent and sustainable. This allocation model will incorporate a blended analysis of present conditions and future needs and will be built upon a foundation of hard data enhanced with qualitative assessment. The staff will achieve a comprehensive capital program through the integration of G.O. Bonds with all other capital funding sources as well as the public-private venture and GHEFA finance methods. Although the modeled G.O. Bond funding target is in line with past state budgets, Mr. Travis stressed the need for an "accord" with the System's state funding partners to both accept the concept of the strategic capital model and establish the appropriate level of planned annual capital outlay, including bonds and cash appropriations.
The strategic capital model has a series of key outcomes that Mr. Travis briefly explained. From the outset, a more predictable stream of G.O. Bond funding and allocation will allow staff to attain enhanced levels of planning and execution on projects that are funded fully or partially by G.O. Bonds. Within the model, there will be greater flexibility to plan, budget, and develop all types of capital projects at the right size, the right price, and most importantly, the right time. In short, the model will maximize the strategic value of all capital investment in the University System.
Even though the model promises great benefits, Mr. Travis said the Board will be traveling a two-way street to reach them. He summarized the Regents' responsibilities with four key words. First was commitment to a strategic planning process and product that is far more robust, both at the System level and on campus. Second was investment in enhanced data and analytics for long-term planning and comprehensive decision support. Third was discipline to use funding and financing mechanisms that best leverage state appropriations even though these may not be the most convenient or expedient. Also, discipline is needed to build and work within a true multi-year capital program. Finally, there is a need for accountability with regard to the value and product of capital investment. It will be critical for the Board to demonstrate that each project in its capital program delivers the strategic results that originally justified its prioritization and funding. Mr. Travis then turned the floor over to Ms. Daniels.
Ms. Daniels said that the Regents were welcome to ask questions at this point or hold them for the end of the presentations.
Chair Shelnut asked whether the Board really knows on a year-to-year basis what the University System of Georgia will receive in G.O. Bond funding.
Ms. Daniels said that the University System of Georgia has a legacy of a certain proportion (approximately 25%) of the total bond issue in the state. (The state's total bond issue varies, but has reached approximately $1 billion annually.) So, the Board must try to ensure that its core academic needs are met by this approximately $250 million and to use public-private ventures and the GHEFA funding model to provide the complementary projects. Staff have set some funding targets. The University System of Georgia needs approximately $250 million in G.O. Bond funds, plus $230 million in public-private ventures, $50 million from GHEFA, and $120 million in other cash, which totals $650 million annually, or $6.5 billion by 2020. Staff have begun discussions with elected officials. They will target $250 million in G.O. Bonds based upon the model they are proposing, and they will hold themselves accountable to meeting that target. If they cannot, then they will have to adjust the other funding sources to meet the System's $650 million annual capital needs.
In the months ahead, as staff work with the Chancellor and this Board on the overall strategic plan going forward, they will integrate in an iterative and systemic manner, the strategic capital funding model. In the interim, however, they must take a strong slate of capital projects forward this coming legislative session as part of the Board's August budget request. Ms. Daniels stated that staff recommend funding equipment for the three projects that were funded for construction (without loose equipment) in the 2006 session. This is in accordance with the traditional, tri-part major project funding cycle of 1) design funding in year one, 2) construction funding in year two, and 3) equipment funding in year three. These projects are due for their equipment funding, and staff propose to make those projects whole by requesting equipment for those existing projects.
Next, Ms. Daniels stated that staff recommend construction funding for the first four projects on the existing major capital priority list. These projects are all currently in design, funded by the investment of nearly $5 million in state G.O. Bond funds from the previous session. The total construction cost of these projects is $88.9 million, which includes construction cost escalation reflecting the rapid rise in the cost of construction materials and labor since these project were originally programmed and estimated for construction. She noted that this amount does not include the equipment cost for these projects, which staff will request in the following legislative cycle.
It is at this point that the plan diverges from the traditional capital list to focus on projects meeting critical strategic needs, explained Ms. Daniels. The status and characteristics of each project are different, but the projects are united by the fact that they have maximum consistency with the Regents' new principles for capital allocation. Each presents a solution to a critical System strategic need. On Wednesday, the Regents would hear from President Daniel W. Rahn of the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") about the state's profound healthcare needs as he presents the findings of the Regents' task force on health professions education. It is not a coincidence that two of the System's three strategic priorities address healthcare education issues that cannot be adequately solved without capital investment. The first is the School of Dentistry at MCG. The need for this new facility is well documented and has been presented to the Board before, said Ms. Daniels. The recommended partial design funds will provide a foundation for the institution to build upon as it seeks external funding leverage for this costly and significant project. The second is the Health Sciences Building at Kennesaw State University ("KSU"). This facility will not only help to alleviate KSU's massive space shortages, but it will also allow KSU to "move the needle" rapidly in its efforts to meet the critical demand for nurses in Georgia. During the 2004-2005 academic year, KSU could accept only 224 of the 1,425 qualified applicants for its Bachelor of Science in Nursing program, and in any given semester, KSU only accepts about one of every six qualified applicants. KSU has the program resources and access to clinical space to quickly ramp up its nursing capacity and output with this new facility. This is what staff mean by maximizing the strategic value of the System's capital investment. Ms. Daniels reminded the Regents that KSU has committed to bring private funding, an additional $13 million, to leverage the requested for state funding. The third strategic priority is a new library for Georgia Gwinnett College ("GGC"), recently approved as the System's thirty-fifth institution. Two years ago, the Regents placed an academic facility on the capital priority list to alleviate the crushing space shortages at the former Gwinnett University Center, now the GGC campus. In addition to space shortages, the institution has a new responsibility to establish a full-service library facility to meet Southern Association of Colleges and Schools ("SACS") accreditation requirements. It is a challenge to accomplish accreditation in a timely manner, but this must be done to avoid negative ramifications for students who are reliant on financial aid.
Ms. Daniels reported that as always, staff are recommending full funding of the System's major repair and renovation ("MRR") needs, which will be approximately $70 million. The difference is that staff will be requesting that half of the total be appropriated in cash rather than G.O. Bonds. She explained that cash is not only both the historic and most appropriate funding method for MRR investments, but also it will create extra bandwidth in the G.O. Bond package to allow the System and its funding partners to meet more long term capital investment needs.
Finally, staff will recommend a slate of minor capital projects to round out the fiscal year 2008 capital program. As they traditionally have, they will provide detailed recommendations on minor project priorities at the August meeting in the full fiscal year 2008 capital budget. So, in August, staff will be recommending $250 million worth of capital investment funded by G.O. Bonds, along with an additional $35 million of MRR funded with cash, for a total state capital outlay of $285 million. Ms. Daniels noted that these totals are for facilities-related capital investments only. Items typically included in the Board's G.O. package, such as the Georgia Public Library System, Georgia Research Alliance equipment, traditional industries, and other pass-through items are not included. She reminded the Regents that this is ultimately only one of the funding mechanisms that will support the System's strategic capital model going forward. If the $250 million G.O. Bond total looks familiar, she said it is not a coincidence; $250 million is the annual target staff have modeled and presented to the Board in recent months for G.O. Bond capital investment to meet the System's capital needs out to 2020. It is aggressive, but staff believe this model is achievable and doable based upon estimated future state G.O. Bond capacity.
Ms. Daniels said that at the August meeting of the Board of Regents, staff will be presenting the full detailed fiscal year 2008 capital budget for consideration, including the recommendations she had previewed at this meeting as well as a targeted slate of minor projects and hopefully the beginnings of a slate of projects for GHEFA funding consideration. She noted that the Regents will have to be flexible on the timeline for GHEFA projects due to the timing of the appointment of the GHEFA board and development of that program. Also, staff will roll out greater detail about the strategic capital model for Board consideration and endorsement. Prior to that, in June and July, staff will be engaging and involving the institutions in discussions of the details of the strategic capital model and how that is ultimately integrated with the System's strategic plan, to which the Chancellor has committed the next several months. As Ms. Daniels prepares for August, she will be communicating with presidents and Regents to make sure everyone understands the drivers and workings of the capital process. In closing, she asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.
Regent Potts asked how big the existing major capital priorities list is in dollars.
Ms. Daniels responded that the existing list totals approximately $800 million, prior to escalation for construction increases.
Chair Shelnut commented that there is no perfect system for handling major capital projects with limited funding but that the new process is far better than the previous process. He said that in the past, presidents would make brief presentations that the Regents would vote to add to the list. The proposed system seemed much better, and he thanked Ms. Daniels and her staff for their work.
Regent Carter said that in the old process, it took approximately five to seven years to construct a project. He asked how long it will take to get a building constructed in the new process.
Ms. Daniels replied that within the three-year planning model, it should take two to three years to construct a building once it has been approved.
Regent Hunt asked what will happen to the current major capital projects list.
Ms. Daniels responded that the needs that generated the existing list have not and will not go away. Those projects will go through the vetting process of the updated principles. Many of them will come forward but with more flexibility to have been updated since they were originally approved, given that some of them have been on the list seven or eight years.
Regent Hunt asked whether some projects would still be on hold seven or eight more years.
Ms. Daniels said that she did not think so. With the new model and the accord of the funding partners, the needs identified in the current list could be met within a five- to six-year planning window. She stressed that although the list will be revisited, the merit of the projects is not being discounted. However, they do need to be prioritized based upon the changing conditions over time. She stressed that the projects on the existing list would not have been presented to the Board in the first place if there was not substance to their need. The list may be reordered somewhat, but overall, the majority of the existing projects will be funded in a shorter time period through the commitment of the funding partners and by bringing more leveraged funds to the table every year. The new process should meet not only these needs, but also needs that have not yet been identified. Ms. Daniels said that staff will be working with the presidents to meet their needs in a way that is more flexible and includes complementary funding to move the construction along more quickly to meet G.O. Bond funding needs in a shorter period of time. Moreover, the new process would accomplish $1.5 billion in G.O. Bond-funded construction in six years, which is almost twice as much as would be done using the old process. The staff will work closely with the institutions in their master planning process and integrating those into a Systemwide perspective to ensure that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in terms of payback to the state.
Regent Jenkins asked how the process of selecting major capital projects will differ from the previous process of having presidents make presentations and Regents voting on them.
Ms. Daniels responded that the Board will be voting on the projects as part of the proposed budget each year, but the project review process would move into a three-year cycle such that every three years, staff will vet the major capital projects and propose a three-year plan. So, the selection of projects would happen on the three-year basis instead of adding to the bottom of a list annually.
Regent Jenkins asked whether the projects would come to the Board for voting as a proposed list instead of the Regents hearing presidents' presentations.
Ms. Daniels replied that is the proposal.
Regent Hatcher asked from where the difference in funding from the current model to the $1.5 billion will come.
Ms. Daniels responded that the combination of G.O. Bond funding, GHEFA funding, and public-private ventures will provide more funding than the current G.O. Bond funding model alone. She noted that the public-private ventures program currently provides about twice as much funding for construction as G.O. Bond funding.
Mr. Travis stated that the $1.5 billion is the actual G.O. Bond fund investment over a six-year period. The increase is the difference between the major projects that exist on the current list and the total of all G.O. Bond-funded projects, including both major and minor projects. The total investment, including GHEFA and public-private ventures funding, is $650 million.
Regent Hatcher asked whether the funding sources are not the same, regardless of how the Board selects capital projects.
Ms. Daniels replied that the Board has access to the same funding sources, but the new process sets goals and ways of meeting them.
Regent Hatcher asked whether the difference is which projects receive which kinds of funding.
Ms. Daniels responded that the proposed process is a response to the last three years of diminished state funding. The Board must present a package of proposed projects to the legislature that is more successful in gaining state funding that also has complementary funding from other sources.
Regent Jenkins asked Ms. Daniels to clarify how the projects will be selected under the new plan.
Ms. Daniels said that currently, the staff use a number of benchmarks, such as enrollment, existing square footage per full-time equivalent student, and course delivery, to ascertain whether an institution has an appropriate amount of space compared to its peers and its programming. Those same benchmarks will be used to make formal recommendations to the Board.
Regent Jenkins asked whether there is any incentive for the institutions to do fundraising to cover part of the construction costs.
Ms. Daniels said that there is and that this has been codified in the actual principles to be adopted.
Chair Shelnut asked whether there were any further questions or comments. Seeing there were none, he thanked Ms. Daniels for this presentation.
Ms. Daniels thanked her staff for their hard work on the proposed new process.
Chair Shelnut noted that the Executive Director of the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, Shelley C. Nickel, was in attendance at this meeting. He also welcomed representatives from the Regents' Public Library Advisory Committee ("RPLAC") and asked the State Librarian, J. Lamar Veatch, to introduce them to the Board.
Dr. Veatch stated that 8 of the 12 members of RPLAC were in attendance at this meeting. They were Kathie Ames from Athens Regional Library System, Diana Ray Tope from Cherokee Regional Library System, Gail Rogers from Cobb County Public Library System, Melody Jenkins from Moultrie-Colquitt County Library, John Szabo from Atlanta-Fulton Public Library System, Steve Schaefer (Chair) from Uncle Remus Regional Library System, Richard Sanders from Hart County Library System, and Alan Kaye from Roddenbery Memorial Library.
Chair Shelnut thanked Dr. Veatch and the RPLAC members for their efforts on behalf of the Georgia Public Library System and said that the Board of Regents looks forward to working with them.
At approximately 2:50 p.m., Chair Shelnut adjourned the Regents into their regular Committee meetings.
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met again on Wednesday, June 8, 2006, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent J. Timothy Shelnut, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Shelnut, were Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., William H. Cleveland, Michael J. Coles, Robert F. Hatcher, Julie Ewing Hunt, Felton Jenkins, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Elridge W. McMillan, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Willis J. Potts, Jr., Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, and Allan Vigil.
Chair Shelnut thanked Regent McMillan for hosting a dinner for the Regents the previous night.
The Director of Administration and Compliance Policy, Mark Demyanek, gave the Regents and audience a briefing of basic safety information in the event of an emergency.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given on Wednesday, June 8, 2006, by Regent Doreen Stiles Poitevint.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Wednesday, June 8, 2006, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regents Donald M. Leebern, Jr. and Benjamin J. Tarbutton III had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day. Vice Chair Patrick S. Pittard would arrive shortly.
INTRODUCTION OF PRESIDENT-ELECT DAVID BRIDGES OF ABRAHAM BALDWIN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE
Chair Shelnut asked the Chancellor to introduce the new President of Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College ("ABAC") to the Board of Regents.
Chancellor Davis said that the Regents are witnessing part of the cycle of change and renewal on the System campuses as they select new leadership. This month, it was his pleasure to introduce Dr. David C. Bridges, who takes up his new responsibilities as President of ABAC later this month. Dr. Bridges' bio had been provided to the Regents, so the Chancellor did not go into all of the details on his background. Dr. Bridges' appointment was especially gratifying, as he represents part of the abundant leadership pool that exists in the University System of Georgia. While the Regents conducted a national search for this important position, in the end, they found the ideal candidate just across the street from the ABAC campus.
Prior to his ABAC appointment, Dr. Bridges was Assistant Dean and head of the Tifton Campus of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences at the University of Georgia ("UGA"). Dr. Bridges is an alumnus of ABAC, where he earned an associate's degree in agricultural science in 1978 before going on to earn his undergraduate and advanced degrees. The son of a farmer and a teacher – the ideal training for his career – he grew up on a farm in Terrell County.
Regent Julie Hunt served as Chair of the Special Regents' Committee for the Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College Presidential Search. Also on this Committee were Regents Jolly and Carter. Mr. William Bowen, Chair and Chief Executive Officer of the Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College Foundation, Inc., chaired the campus-based presidential search and advisory committee. Chancellor Davis thanked everyone involved in the search process for their efforts and the great outcome of the search. He also recognized the service of ABAC's own Tom Call, who has served as the college's Interim President since September, 2004. The Chancellor remarked that Dr. Bridges has done an exemplary job in leading the UGA Tifton campus and he is eager to see the impact Dr. Bridges will have on ABAC. During the last five years, Dr. Bridges and other administrators have developed undergraduate and graduate instruction programs at the Tifton Campus, which is now home to research, teaching, and extension programs. He truly is an ideal fit with ABAC and will bring a level of knowledge, experience, and understanding to the college that will serve the institution and the state well. Chancellor Davis asked the Regents to join him in welcoming President-Elect Bridges.
President-Elect Bridges thanked the Chancellor and the Board for the privilege and the honor, as well as the confidence they have shown in selecting him as the tenth President of ABAC. He said that he is even more honored that he is the first President who is also an alumnus of the institution. His wife is also an alumna. He thanked Regents Hunt, Jolly, and Carter, as well as the campus search committee, for their support. He said that he could not be happier than to return to his alma mater and that he already has good plans for the institution. He also thanked President Michael F. Adams for the pleasure and privilege of serving UGA's College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
TRIBUTE TO RANDALL THURSBY, RETIRING VICE CHANCELLOR FOR INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER
Chancellor Davis recognized the Vice Chancellor for Information and Instructional Technology and Chief Information Officer, Randall A. Thursby, who was retiring after 35 years of service to the University System of Georgia. Mr. Thursby had a reception in May at the 191 Club, another event last week in Athens, and more accolades at this meeting. The Chancellor said that Mr. Thursby will be sorely missed by many people in the University System of Georgia. As the Board saluted Mr. Thursby at this meeting, a slide show of photos covering his tenure in the System played in the background.
Since September 2000, Randall has served with distinction as the Vice Chancellor for Information and Instructional Technology. He has grown up in the System with technology and has guided the System along what can be a difficult path in terms of assessing technology trends and designing systems that not only meet current needs, but also are ready to accommodate future growth. Mr. Thursby has watched this University System grow and adapt. He has been one of the principal architects of that growth in the technology arena. As he retires, Mr. Thursby leaves a dynamic Office of Information and Instructional Technology ("OIIT") staff, the majority of whom are housed in a state-of-the-art facility in Athens that Mr. Thursby guided from design to construction. He oversees a budget of $50 million that touches the daily lives and work of every single employee and student in the System, as well as a significant number of Georgians as they access resources such as Georgia Library Learning Online ("GALILEO"). Mr. Thursby has done this while commuting from his home in Cochran, where he and his wife, Debra, have raised three children: Michelle, Daniel, and Melissa.
Chancellor Davis said that one of the things he has noticed about the University System as he has made his travels is the wealth of talent that exists. Mr. Thursby is a good example. He is a native Georgian hailing from Regent Poitevint's home in Bainbridge. He attended Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College ("ABAC") and is an alumnus of Augusta College, now Augusta State University ("AUSU"). That is where Mr. Thursby began his career in information technology, and he never looked back. He worked at AUSU and then moved in the 1980s to the University of Georgia ("UGA"), where he helped to create the organization that later became the Office of Information Technology, which became OIIT. Under his leadership, the System has been the beneficiary of such developments as GALILEO, the state's electronic library; Georgia Interconnected Libraries ("GIL"), the library automation system; PeachNet, the first internet protocol-based network in Georgia; the BANNER student information system; and PeopleSoft. He was instrumental in the early days of the development of both the student information reporting system ("SIRS") and the curriculum inventory report ("CIR"), and more recently in the evolution and transformation of those early data collections to the University System's data warehouse. He also has overseen the fiber project, which will take the System to the next communications level. We presently have 26 campuses connected on the fiber network. As a planner, he guided the initial development and later updates of technology strategic plans for the System.
Chancellor Davis said that Mr. Thursby will also be missed because of his great sensitivity to people. People are the lifeblood of this System, and he has a well-deserved reputation for his ability to connect with, mentor, guide, and lead people. He understands how important it is to nurture staff and help individuals grow and develop in their responsibilities. In May, Regent Tucker said, "If you are leading and no one is following, then you're just out for a walk." Mr. Thursby has never been just out for a walk; behind him have been many, many individuals, eager to work and who share his tremendous passion for this System and the people that make things happen. The Chancellor said that he and Mr. Thursby share a common trait in that they we do not really like retirement. Chancellor Davis said that he gave it a week before realizing he likes working. Mr. Thursby is immediately beginning work to help another university system untangle a technology issue. The Chancellor noted that the other system called Mr. Thursby, which is a testament to his national reputation for technology planning and problem solving. He asked Mr. Thursby to join him at the podium. On behalf of the Board of Regents, Chancellor Davis presented Mr. Thursby with a certificate of appreciation for his years of service with the University System.
Mr. Thursby thanked the Chancellor and the Regents. He said that it was a wonderful 35 years in the University System of Georgia. For a first-generation college student coming from Bainbridge, he said it means a lot. He enjoyed his college years at ABAC and AUSU, and his work at UGA and in the University System Office. He thanked Regent Coles, who was the first Chair of the Committee on Information and Instructional Technology, and Regent Carter, the current Chair. He also thanked Regent Jennings, Vice Chair of the Committee. He also thanked the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Information Technology, Thomas L. Maier, and the staff of OIIT for their hard work and support.
Chair Shelnut thanked Mr. Thursby for his service to the University System of Georgia and wished him well.
PRESENTATION: TASK FORCE ON HEALTH PROFESSIONS EDUCATION
Chair Shelnut introduced President Daniel W. Rahn of the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG"), who would discuss the recommendations about the University System's role and strategic direction for health professions education. President Rahn headed the task force on health professions education, which the Board of Regents appointed in September 2005. At this meeting, he would update the Board on the work of the task force thus far.
President Rahn greeted the Regents and the Chancellor and thanked them for the opportunity to provide them with an overview of the recommendations resulting as a work of this task force. He reiterated that the Board had appointed the task force in September 2005 and noted that he had given the Regents a progress report in January 2006. The task force focused on the health workforce shortages that currently exist in the State of Georgia and projected future demand for health professionals across all disciplines. The task force was charged to identify programmatic strengths and educational gaps and to develop recommendations for the System's role and strategic direction for health professions education. He noted that the full report of the task force had been distributed to the Regents. The full report outlines in substantial detail the issues, including population projections by region, health economics, profession-specific projections, and recommendations. The issues are very complex, he said, and there are no silver bullet solutions. The System will need multiple strategies and will need to capitalize on the diversity of its institutions, its geographic dispersion, and its unified governance.
The task force was comprised of 13 members, as follows:
- Dr. Linda Bleicken, Georgia Southern University
- President Frank Brown, Columbus State University
- Dr. Joan Darden, Darton College
- Dr. Barry Eckert, Armstrong Atlantic State University
- Dr. Barry Goldstein, Medical College of Georgia
- Kay Hampton, Coastal Georgia Community College
- Dr. Susan Kelley, Georgia State University
- Dr. Louis Levy, Valdosta State University
- Dr. Arnett Mace, University of Georgia
- Dr. Berlethia Pitts, Fort Valley State University
- Don Snell, MCG Health, Inc.
- Michael F. Vollmer, JD, DTAE
The liaison for the University System Office was the Vice Chancellor for Academic, Student, and Faculty Affairs, Frank A. Butler. The principle investigators were Dr. Valerie Hepburn, Associate Professor and Assistant Director of the Institute of Public Health at Georgia State University ("GSU"), Dr. Libby V. Morris, Professor and Graduate Coordinator in the Institute of Higher Education at the University of Georgia ("UGA").
In a recent survey by the United Health Foundation in association with the American Association of Public Health, the State of Georgia presently ranks forty-third in the nation in a broad array of measures of health and wellbeing, including premature death rates, infant mortality rates, infectious disease rates, risk factors, and health insurance coverage. Some of these are public policy issues or behavioral issues that are not directly affected by the provision of direct health services, explained President Rahn. Nevertheless, the state lags in health indices across a very broad array. Moreover, the state has received poor grades in emergency care and trauma services due to workforce shortages. Shortages decrease access, increase costs, and negatively impact patient safety and wellbeing.
President Rahn stated that the health workforce also has a significant impact on Georgia's economy: The healthcare industry is the fourth leading employer in Georgia, and eight of the fastest growing professions are in the health field. The health professions with significant shortages that the task force specifically focused on were nursing, clinical behavioral health professions, pharmacy, dentistry, allied health (including therapeutic and diagnostic services), medicine, and graduate medical education. He noted that the task force focused far less on dentistry because the University System of Georgia has only one dental school and the Board has already addressed its immediate strategy on this matter. The future of graduate medical education is statutorily enhanced on the public side of the Georgia Board for Physician Workforce, and the task force endorsed those recommendations. So, President Rahn would focus primarily on the other fields. Using nursing as an example, he reported that the Georgia Department of Labor predicts a shortage of 20,000 additional registered nurses ("RNs") by 2012 on top of the existing shortage of 9,000. The University System of Georgia last year graduated 1,900 students eligible to take the RN exam and the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE") graduated 140 RN candidates last year. However, as many as 4,000 qualified students may have been turned away from nursing programs last year. President Rahn noted that the data are inadequate to determine the exact number of qualified applicants that public higher education cannot serve, but the gist is that there are excess qualified applicants. Also, the task force did not consider private higher education. He added that the full report includes similar analyses of the other health professions. Over the last five years, the University System of Georgia has focused on nursing and has made very substantial gains, rapidly increasing enrollment and graduation numbers. However, these numbers still fall significantly short of meeting workforce needs. At the same time, the System has put its own future at risk because of a decline in the number of graduates with the qualifications to be nursing faculty. In order to expand capacity, the System must have more faculty. In 2001, the System graduated approximately 1,300 students eligible to take the RN exam, which increased almost 50% to 1,900 by 2005. This is a very successful response to a statewide need, said President Rahn. However, to meet the projected need, public higher education needs to graduate approximately 3,000 students per year. The System and DTAE need another 50% increase to meet the projected need. So, the System has made substantial gains, but not adequate to meet anticipated shortages.
President Rahn next discussed clinical behavioral health needs. Georgia ranks virtually last in the nation in supply of clinical mental health professionals per population. The state needs an additional 850 psychologists and 700 clinical social workers by 2012. Last year, the University System of Georgia graduated 39 clinical psychologists and less than 100 clinical social workers. He noted that approximately 200 qualified applicants had to be turned away due to program limitations. In the field of pharmacy, the projections are that an additional 2,100 pharmacists are needed by 2012. UGA, which has the only public pharmacy school, is able to enroll and graduate approximately 130 pharmacists per year, but another 100 qualified applicants have to be turned away.
President Rahn discussed the key findings of the task force report. Workforce shortages are broad and deep, and demand is forecast to grow significantly. Georgia is growing, aging, and becoming more diverse, all factors which drive increased demand for health services and professionals. The University System and DTAE are responsible for educating the vast majority of Georgia health professionals. Current System and DTAE programs are operating at capacity. Additional qualified students could be served if public higher education could expand capacity. Faculty, facility, and financial constraints are limiting academic production. Moreover, competition with clinical employers is hampering faculty recruitment. So, as the shortages become deeper, the ability of the graduates to command higher salaries in the clinical setting competes with higher education's ability to convince them to pursue additional training to become faculty. Moreover, better data are needed for planning and outcome measurement.
Next, President Rahn turned to the recommendations of the task force. He noted that there were 18 specific recommendations, including many subrecommendations. The recommendations fall into three general categories. The first category is System-level coordination. There are many successful efforts on many campuses, but coordination and accountability for health professions education should reside at the system level. Second, there needs to be a statewide strategic approach to the development, retention, and advancement of faculty. Third, there are many opportunities for integrated curriculum development and technology-enhanced educational delivery.
In the area of System-level coordination, the task force recommended that coordination and accountability for health professions education should reside at the system level. Planning and accountability should be both at the state level and responsive to local needs. Goals should be promoting innovation, streamlining planning, supporting coordination, avoiding duplication, monitoring outcomes, and rewarding performance. Finally, comprehensive, reliable data are needed to drive decisions and promote accountability.
President Rahn said that there are unique issues associated with health professions faculty. One of the main limitations nationally in the ability to produce needed health professions is the limited number of faculty. There needs to be a System-level strategic approach to develop policies related to faculty recruitment and retention in the health fields. Because faculty shortages are limiting educational capacity, a host of strategies must be considered to increase the number and diversity of qualified faculty. Efforts need to occur at the System level to protect quality and viability of all programs, which could be jeopardized if programs compete for a limited pool of faculty candidates. Particular attention should be given to educating, developing, and retaining health faculty.
The task force recommend that the System take a coordinated approach to assessing and promoting updated and integrated curricula and enhanced technology to deliver education. Because of the defined competencies that are associated with becoming eligible for certification or licensure in the health professions, President Rahn said these types of professional programs are particularly well suited to distance learning and technology-enhanced delivery. He said the System should establish an ongoing, rigorous process of curricular revision and enhancement to promote institutional collaboration and integrate new knowledge. Technology-based education should be used to expand offerings and clinical practice locations. Program linkages and nontraditional approaches should be nurtured. The System has a clear mandate, but it is only one of many partners who must work together to address the shortages. Institutions should work with licensing boards, businesses, K-12 systems, community leaders, and consumers on marketing health professions education, recruiting more diverse students, creating stronger linkages with middle and secondary education, and student financing options.
In summary, President Rahn said that the public's health is at risk and is dependent upon an adequate health professions workforce. Current and projected shortages are structural and cannot be addressed through short-term fixes. Current strategies are falling short of meeting current and projected demand. The University System of Georgia is positioned to provide leadership in addressing Georgia's health professions workforce needs if decisive, sustained, coordinated action is taken. In closing, he asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.
Vice Chair Pittard said that if the University System is not producing enough health professionals, then the State of Georgia must be supplying its health professions workforce shortages from outside the state. He also expressed concern about the state's ability to retain the health professionals that the System does produce and suggested scholarship or loan forgiveness programs. Third, he wondered whether the System could simply buy a strip mall and convert it into a health sciences educational facility and whether it would be able to hire enough faculty if it did so.
President Rahn responded to these concerns one at a time. First, with regard to the issue of outsourcing, he said that Georgia is indeed a net importer of health professionals, as is the nation. However, current shortages are still not being met. Most healthcare organizations are operating with current vacancy rates of 5% to 10% or more. In some areas, vacancy rates are as high as 20%. So, outsourcing is not satisfactorily meeting demand. He stressed that this is a national issue that must be dealt with domestically. The idea of using scholarship and loan forgiveness programs might also assist in meeting faculty needs. There are options to consider in not only encouraging health professionals to stay in the state, but also to pursue faculty positions. With regard to the strip mall approach, President Rahn noted that there are accreditation requirements. Moreover, the facility constraints of the issue are not as critical as faculty numbers and clinical placements, neither of which is addressed through facilities. He noted that the clinical issue can in part be addressed by leveraging distance learning technologies.
Vice Chair Pittard added that the timetable for building new facilities is incredibly long.
President Rahn stated that the System does not need policy or statutory changes. There are many things the System can do, but it will take resources and dedicated, sustained focus over an extended period of time.
Chair Shelnut asked what happens to the qualified applicants who are turned away due to program size constraints. He wondered whether they go to other states or into other fields of study.
President Rahn responded that the System can only track the students that actually enter the programs.
Chair Shelnut said it is a shame that there are qualified students being turned away when there are such workforce shortages in these healthcare fields.
President Rahn agreed and said this is why the System must focus its efforts on expanding health education capacity using a multitude of strategies.
Regent Jennings asked whether there is a method of communicating across the University System when there are health education programs that have vacancies to be filled.
President Rahn responded that there is probably not and this is why there needs to be a System-level focus so that they System can address this issue with a unified voice with the accrediting and licensure agencies. He noted that those organizations that are responsible for the certification and licensure of individually practicing health professionals and those that are responsible for accrediting heath education programs focus on quality assurance. They are not concerned with increasing the numbers of health professionals. So, there must be a balance of increased production of health professionals and quality health education.
Chair Shelnut asked what is the most critical reason qualified program applicants are turned away.
President Rahn said it is a combination of faculty, facility, and clinical experience limitations. He reiterated that there is no silver bullet to fix this problem.
Vice Chair Pittard said that even if the System could attract and retain more faculty, it must still have the facilities space for the programs.
President Rahn responded that there are faculty vacancies that these programs are unable to fill in spite of having facilities space. Program accreditation requires certain student-faculty ratios, and a lot of the education happens in clinical settings.
Regent Tucker said that he serves on the board of a not-for-profit health system that has workforce shortages. He asked whether such systems would offer opportunities to educate health professionals in their facilities so that they provide the faculty in exchange to having access to the graduates.
President Rahn replied that there were many hospital-based programs in the past. However, the professions have mostly moved away from those programs mainly because of issues of educational quality. System institutions need to partner with healthcare organizations to determine whether there are interested qualified professionals on their staffs who can serve as faculty. Some of this goes on, but there probably are opportunities to expand these efforts.
Chair Shelnut asked whether the Board of Regents would be hearing future updates from this task force.
President Rahn responded that the task force has completed its charge to develop these recommendations.
Vice Chair Pittard said there are natural tactics that come from these recommendations. He said it is important that this task force remain engaged.
President Rahn agreed and said that everyone on the task force feels that they have proposed recommended strategies so that the System can move into an implementation phase.
Chair Shelnut thanked President Rahn and the task force for the excellent work they did on this report and said the Regents look forward to their continued help. He then asked the staff for an update on the Associate Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, William H. Wallace.
The Senior Vice Chancellor for Support Services, Corlis Cummings, reported that Mr. Wallace had recovered from his surgery and would return to work in six to eight weeks.
At approximately 10:00 a.m., Chair Shelnut called for a brief recess. At approximately 10:15 a.m., he reconvened the Board meeting in its regular session and called for Committee reports.
COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
The Committee on Academic Affairs met on Tuesday, June 6, 2006, at approximately 3:00 p.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair William H. Cleveland, Vice Chair Doreen Stiles Poitevint, and Regents James R. Jolly and Willis J. Potts, Jr. Chair Cleveland reported to the Board that the Committee had reviewed 16 items, 14 of which required action. Included in Item 12, 444 regular faculty appointments were reviewed and recommended for approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
1. Revision of The Policy Manual, Section 403.02, Classification of Students for Tuition Purposes
Approved: The Board approved the revision of The Policy Manual, Section 403.02, Classification of Students for Tuition Purposes, effective fall semester 2007.
Background: In 2005, then Georgia Student Finance Commission ("GSFC") Director Shelley C. Nickel requested that the Board of Regents, the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"), and GSFC enter into negotiations to align residency and waiver policies within the State of Georgia. The Vice Chancellor for Academic, Faculty, and Student Affairs, Frank A. Butler, convened a committee of representatives from around the University System to review and revise Regents' residency policy and fee waiver provisions.
Rationale: These revisions align Board of Regents policies with the residency policies of the other state agencies.
Understandings: The proposed revision of Section 403.02 constitutes a significant change to the previous policy. Please note that the proposed policy highlighted below will replace the existing policy in its entirety.
Previous Policy
403.02 CLASSIFICATION OF STUDENTS FOR TUITION PURPOSES
- (1) If a person is 18 years of age or older, he or she may register as an in-state student only upon showing that he or she has been a legal resident of Georgia for a period of at least 12 months immediately preceding the date of registration. Exceptions:
- A student whose parent, spouse, or court-appointed guardian is a legal resident of the State of Georgia may register as a resident, providing the parent, spouse, or guardian can provide proof of legal residency in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the date of registration.
- A student who previously held residency status in the State of Georgia but moved from the state then returned to the state in 12 or fewer months.
- Students who are transferred to Georgia by an employer are not subject to the durational residency requirement.
(2) No emancipated minor or other person 18 years of age or older shall be deemed to have gained or acquired in-state status for tuition purposes while attending any educational institution in this state, in the absence of a clear demonstration that he or she has in fact established legal residence in this state.
- A student whose parent, spouse, or court-appointed guardian is a legal resident of the State of Georgia may register as a resident, providing the parent, spouse, or guardian can provide proof of legal residency in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the date of registration.
- If a parent or legal guardian of a student changes his or her legal residence to another state following a period of legal residence in Georgia, the student may retain his or her classification as an in-state student as long as he or she remains continuously enrolled in the University System of Georgia, regardless of the status of his or her parent or legal guardian.
- In the event that a legal resident of Georgia is appointed by a court as guardian of a nonresident minor, such minor will be permitted to register as an in-state student providing, the guardian can provide proof that he or she has been a resident of Georgia for the period of 12 months immediately preceding the date of the court appointment.
- Aliens shall be classified as nonresident students, provided, however, that an alien who is living in this country under an immigration document permitting indefinite or permanent residence shall have the same privilege of qualifying for in-state tuition as a citizen of the United States.
Revised Policy
403.02 CLASSIFICATION OF STUDENTS FOR TUITION PURPOSES
- United States Citizens
-
-
An independent student who has established and maintained a domicile in
the State of Georgia for a period of at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term shall be classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes.
It is presumed that no student shall have gained or acquired in-state classification while attending any postsecondary educational institution in this state without clear evidence of having established domicile in Georgia for purposes other than attending a postsecondary educational institution in this state.
- A dependent student shall be classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes if either i) the dependent student's parent has established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term and the student has graduated from a Georgia high school or ii) the dependent student's parent has established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term and the parent claimed the student as a dependent on the parent's most recent federal income tax return.
- A dependent student shall be classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes if a U.S. court-appointed legal guardian has established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term, provided that appointment was not made to avoid payment of out-of-state tuition and the U.S. court-appointed legal guardian can provide clear evidence of having established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia for a period of at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term.
-
An independent student who has established and maintained a domicile in
the State of Georgia for a period of at least 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the first day of classes for the term shall be classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes.
-
-
If an independent student classified as "in-state" relocates temporarily but
returns to the State of Georgia within 12 months, the student shall be
entitled to retain in-state tuition classification.
- If the parent or U.S. court-appointed legal guardian of a dependent student currently classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes establishes domicile outside of Georgia after having established and maintained domicile in the State of Georgia, the student may retain in-state tuition classification as long as the student remains continuously enrolled in a public postsecondary educational institution in the state, regardless of the domicile of the parent or U.S. court-appointed legal guardian.
-
If an independent student classified as "in-state" relocates temporarily but
returns to the State of Georgia within 12 months, the student shall be
entitled to retain in-state tuition classification.
-
- Noncitizens
Noncitizens initially shall not be classified as "in-state" for tuition purposes unless there is evidence to warrant consideration of in-state classification. Lawful permanent residents, refugees, asylees, or other eligible noncitizens as defined by federal Title IV regulations may be extended the same consideration as citizens of the United States in determining whether they qualify for in-state classification. International students who reside in the United States under nonimmigrant status conditioned at least in part upon intent not to abandon a foreign domicile are not eligible for in-state classification.
A glossary defining the terms in the tuition classification policy can be found in the University System of Georgia Board of Regents Tuition Classification Guidelines Manual.
2. Assumption of Academic Responsibilities on the Blakely Site (Formerly Part of Albany Technical College in Early County), Bainbridge College
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Thomas A. Wilkerson that Bainbridge College ("BC") be authorized to assume academic responsibilities for the Blakely site that was formerly part of Albany Technical College in Early County, effective June 7, 2006.
Understandings: At this Board meeting, the Committee on Real Estate and Facilities recommended the acquisition of real property located at 40 Harold Ragan Drive in Blakely, Georgia, for BC. (See page 70.) The legal details involved with this acquisition of real property will be handled by the Office of the Attorney General.
Abstract: The Blakely site, located in Early County, has been provided as a gift to BC from Albany Technical College and the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"). In addition to assuming responsibility for the physical location, BC has pledged to hire faculty as appropriate, develop institutional operations, and provide select associate-degree programs and technical certificates of credit at the location. Academic programs to be offered at the site will be recommended for Board approval. The Blakely site, originally established in 1998, enrolls approximately 200 students who seek to complete certificates of credit. Below is a list of existing technical certificates that BC will offer on the Blakely site:
One-Year Certificates:
- Forest Technology
- Early Childhood Care and Education
- Criminal Justice Technology
- Electrical/Electronics Maintenance
- Industrial Maintenance
- Medical Office Technology
- Business Office Technology
- Computer Information Systems
- Applied Marketing and Management
Certificates of Less Than One Year:
- Certified Customer Service Specialist
- Certified Manufacturing Specialist
- Certified Nurse Assisting
- Office Accounting
- Low-Voltage Security Technician
Transfer of the site and operational responsibilities will become effective July 1, 2006. In essence, DTAE will transfer to BC the funding it now provides to Albany Technical College for the Blakely site. Below is an abbreviated list of the responsibilities that will be transferred from Albany Technical College to BC:
- BC will assume full responsibility and authority for the governance and administration of the Blakely site and its faculty, staff, and instructional programs.
- BC will receive approximately $1,012,348 for personnel, operation, and maintenance of the site for fiscal year 2007.
- BC will receive approximately $1,012,348 in future fiscal years through normal DTAE budgeting procedures.
- The Albany Technical College Foundation, Inc. will transfer funds to the Bainbridge College Foundation, Inc. for the Blakely site.
- Albany Technical College will transfer student government funds to BC for the Blakely site.
- Faculty and staff currently employed at the Blakely site will be employed by BC as of July 1, 2006, in accordance with the classified personnel policies of the Board of Regents.
- Students at the Blakely site will have access to the library services of BC.
- The BC bookstore will be responsible for ordering textbooks for all courses at the Blakely site. Textbooks will be sold at the Blakely site.
- Students enrolled at the Blakely site will follow the tuition and fee schedules established for all students at Bainbridge College as approved by the Board of Regents.
3. Establishment of the Associate of Applied Science in Forest Technology in Bainbridge and on the Blakely Site, Bainbridge College
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Thomas A. Wilkerson that Bainbridge College ("BC") be authorized to establish an Associate of Applied Science in Forest Technology on the Blakely site, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: The Associate of Applied Science in Forest Technology degree will support BC's mission as an institution that has a Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE") Division of Technical Studies. A certificate in Forest Technology is currently one of the programs in place at Albany Technical College's Blakely site. The Associate of Applied Science in Forest Technology will prepare individuals for employment within the forest industry, including the Georgia Forestry Commission and related land-owning entities such as utilities, hunting plantations, and timber investment management organizations. Graduates will be placed in land management, wood procurement, wildland fire-fighting positions, and surveying positions.
Need: The Associate of Applied Science in Forest Technology degree program addresses local employment demands in the forestry industry by training individuals to manage Georgia's forestlands. Institutional administrators anticipate that the program will lead to an increased enrollment of students from surrounding communities.
Objectives: Graduates of the program will be able to conduct prescribed burning and wildfire control, understand basic forestry economics, use forest measurement tools accurately, understand multiple-use forestry and best management practices, engage in reliable tree identification, and use knowledge of surveying techniques and land description.
Curriculum: The program will incorporate 74 semester hours of study, including general education courses and newly developed forest technology courses. New courses developed for the program are patterned after DTAE curriculum standards for forest technology in that all required content from DTAE is incorporated. The curriculum emphasizes forest management, land and timber measurements, and surveying with an emphasis on aerial photography and global positioning systems. The program will be housed within the Division of Technical Studies. The program requires a waiver to degree-credit-hour length.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 20, 25, and 30 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through new and existing courses and faculty. Concomitant with the assumption of academic and operational responsibilities of the Blakely site, budget resources of approximately $1 million dollars will be transferred to BC from Albany Technical College on July 1, 2006. Funds will continue to be transferred through normal budgeting processes in future years from DTAE to BC. President Wilkerson has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
4. Establishment of a Doctor of Psychology in Individual, Organizational, and Community Transformation, University of West Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Beheruz N. Sethna that the University of West Georgia ("UWG") be authorized to establish a Doctor of Psychology in Individual, Organizational, and Community Transformation, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: An emerging trend in the discipline of psychology is to produce graduates with applied, but not clinical, skills. Following this trend, UWG proposes to offer an applied Doctor of Psychology ("Psy.D.") in Individual, Organizational, and Community Transformation. The program builds upon the established master's program in Humanistic Psychology. The proposed program uses humanistic approaches and qualitative methodologies to emphasize values, self-awareness, and mind-body integrated care. The program incorporates recent innovations in qualitative methods from critical psychology, participatory action, and transformative research. These new traditions focus on the individual and focus on the relationship between psychological factors and the community. Research and application are merged together in the approach adopted by the program.
The following five thematic areas define the program:
- Analysis of problem-solving at the individual, family, organizational, and community levels
- Collaborative research skills
- Community building: holistic approaches
- Program evaluation and accountability
- Mind-body integrated care
Graduates will be required to complete three practica and an internship, and the program will conclude with a field-research-based dissertation. The proposed program will equip graduates for a variety of careers in such settings as community development, wellness and holistic health, psycho-educational facilitation, organizational transformation, personal and executive coaching, consultancies in program evaluation, and policy development.
Need: Although the employment need for licensed clinical psychologists is growing modestly, the need for applied psychologists in a variety of nonacademic settings continues to grow (e.g. health psychology, program evaluation, and disaster response). Rural areas are particularly underserved. The subspecialties that are addressed in the program are: 1) mind-body research, 2) organizational psychology, 3) program evaluation, 4) community building/community psychology, and 5) qualitative research and evaluation in a variety of organizational and community settings.
There is a growing need for highly trained professionals who can evaluate program effectiveness in both the nonprofit and for-profit sectors. Program graduates can work with nonprofits such as The Annie E. Casey Foundation in the area of community building, with the Centers for Disease Control in integrated care approaches, and in other community and organizational settings where interventions are tied to ongoing research, collaborative methods, and evaluation and accountability strategies.
Objectives: The proposed program is designed to prepare psychologists for developing interventions adequate to respond to changing community needs and evolving modes of intervention, evaluation, and research. The program addresses the relationship of psychological factors to the broader community context. The program is grounded in applied research as it relates to interventions at the individual, community, and organizational levels.
Curriculum: The proposed program's curriculum will cover recent and traditional approaches to human consciousness as well as social/community contexts and development. Students will be required to take three praxis-based internships wherein they apply their knowledge and skills to a particular social setting or specific human concern. Using innovative research methods and their theoretical understanding, the internship and related courses will foster the students' integration of the knowledge base of psychology. A dissertation that is research and field-based will be required to complete the program. The program requires a minimum of 60 semester hours beyond the master's degree.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 10, 11, and 12 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing faculty. New courses will be developed. UWG has not requested additional System funds to support the program. Additional support will be sought through external grants and foundations. President Sethna has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. This is an application-oriented program, and the success of graduates in obtaining employment in fields related to the program objectives is a central measure of the program's effectiveness. This program will be assessed after five years based upon viability, productivity, and quality. An additional outside review may be requested at that time. It is expected that the program will gain accreditation by the American Psychological Association under the category "emerging trends" within five years and/or establish the conditions for licensure for its graduates, or the program will be subject to elimination by action of the Board at that time.
5. Establishment of a Master of Science in Nursing, Clayton State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Thomas K. Harden that Clayton State University ("CLSU") be authorized to establish a Master of Science in Nursing, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: CLSU proposed to establish a Master of Science in Nursing degree. This degree will prepare advanced practice nurses. Since year 2000, the Department of Nursing has received over $2 million in federal and state grants, including two Division of Nursing Bureau of Health Professions grants. CLSU offers a Bachelor of Science in Nursing. During fall 2005, the baccalaureate nursing program received a full ten-year re-accreditation by the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing.
Need: Georgia's shortage of graduate-prepared nurses is acute in that approximately 2,300 nurses are currently needed with master's or doctoral degrees. Based upon Nursing Economics' report of recruitment and retention strategies, estimates for master's and doctoral-prepared nurses indicate that an additional 500,000 graduate prepared nurses will be needed nationally by year 2020. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reports that only 10.6% of registered nurses in Georgia hold a master's or doctoral degree, compared to 13% nationally. Over 80% of CLSU's nursing graduates remain in Georgia to practice. With the need for advanced practice nurses clear, CLSU seeks to build upon its undergraduate nursing program and prepare graduate nurses capable of advanced practice.
Objectives: The two major objectives of the proposed program are to provide additional graduate education in nursing to help meet the need for advanced practice nurses in Georgia and to provide educational opportunities to the citizens and businesses of the southern crescent.
Curriculum: The proposed program requires completion of 36 to 38 semester hours. Students will select a concentration of either nursing education or nursing leadership in addition to core courses required to complete the degree. Required core courses include content related to nursing theory, physical assessment, pharmacology, pathophysiology, health policy, health promotion and illness prevention, advanced nursing science, and research. The education concentration focuses on the principles of education, teaching strategies, and evaluation of learning and curriculum development within a clinical context. The courses in the leadership concentration focus on advanced principles of leadership, financial management, systems analysis, and resource management.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 7, 14, and 21 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through new courses and existing faculty. President Harden has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
6. Establishment of a Bachelor of Science in Construction Engineering, Southern Polytechnic State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Lisa A. Rossbacher that Southern Polytechnic State University ("SPSU") be authorized to establish a Bachelor of Science in Construction Engineering, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: SPSU sought to offer a Bachelor of Science in Construction Engineering. The interdisciplinary program will meet industry needs in applying environmental and ethical management principles as they affect engineering decisions and design. The program will enable students to sit for professional engineering registration in the State of Georgia and prepare graduates for advanced studies in construction engineering. Construction engineering combines training in basic engineering principles with skills in the areas of planning and managing construction projects and resources, including selection and oversight of specialty trade contractors. The program's broad-based approach is tailored to develop professionals who will be able to move between the technical and managerial aspects of construction projects and to serve in key leadership positions within the construction industry.
Need: The program will satisfy a need expressed by the engineering and construction industries, the Georgia Department of Transportation, the Georgia Section of the American Society of Civil Engineering, the Georgia Highway Contractors Association, and the Georgia Underground Utilities Contractors Association. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, "employment of construction managers is projected to increase 9 to 17% when compared to all occupations through year 2014." Employment opportunities are projected to arise from job growth, increased levels of construction activity, the complexity of construction projects, enhanced technology, the replacement of various infrastructures, and the expansion of laws setting standards for building and construction materials, worker safety, energy efficiency, and environmental protection.
Objectives: Construction Engineering graduates will have strengths in engineering design and analysis directly applicable to construction practice and processes. In addition, graduates will be capable of pursuing graduate education and obtaining professional registration across the country. Graduates may seek voluntary certification through the American Institute of Constructors and the Construction Management Association of America. Requirements combine written examinations with verification of education and professional experience. Outcomes associated with the program include graduates who will be able to design a construction engineering system using standard design methods, apply and interpret appropriate software to develop construction engineering solutions, and design and conduct experiments for application in construction engineering designs and solutions.
Curriculum: The 128-semester-hour program will be housed in SPSU's School of Architecture, Civil Engineering Technology, and Construction. The curriculum requires a waiver to degree-credit-hour length parallel to exceptions made for other engineering and engineering technology programs in the University System. Some existing courses will be modified to meet the requirements of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ("ABET") and to provide enhanced learning opportunities for students. The program includes, but is not limited to, such courses as Highway Design, Structural Steel Design, Reinforced Concrete Design, Surveying, Building Techniques and Methods, Fluid Mechanics, Construction Estimating, Site Planning, Construction Project Management, and Construction Safety.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 40, 80, and 120 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing courses and faculty. Laboratories to be used in the program already exist and have the capacity to handle increased enrollments that the new major is expected to generate. The program is supported by firms and professional organizations within the community. President Rossbacher has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
7. Establishment of the Existing Master of Science in Computer Science as an External Degree Online, Georgia Southwestern State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael L. Hanes that Georgia Southwestern State University ("GSSU") be authorized to establish the existing Master of Science in Computer Science as an external degree offered online, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: GSSU proposed to offer its existing Master of Science in Computer Science at a distance in an online delivery format. GSSU attracts many students from southwestern counties in Georgia. It is anticipated that the program will attract applicants from nearby baccalaureate degree-granting institutions in computer science and will attract individuals who seek an advanced degree in order to teach in this discipline. Currently, GSSU offers an online graduate certificate program that has attracted student interest for expanded educational opportunities. Another goal of this program is to provide instructors from two-year and technical colleges the opportunity to gain 18 hours of graduate course work in their teaching field, thereby satisfying a Southern Association of Colleges and Schools ("SACS") requirement for teaching.
Delivery and Curriculum: All requirements for admission to the online program and the basic curriculum will be the same as those for the approved, on-campus degree program. Each student will have access to an advisor, and an orientation will be developed for students matriculating at a distance. Contemporary software development tools, a virtual lab, and a network of testing centers will be used to support the program.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 12, 18, and 24 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing courses and faculty. President Hanes has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
8. Establishment of the Existing Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences with a Major in Consumer Economics as an External Degree in Griffin, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establish the existing Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences with a major in Consumer Economics as an external degree in Griffin, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: UGA sought to offer the existing Bachelor of Science in Family and Consumer Sciences with a major in Consumer Economics on its external site in Griffin. The Griffin site, also known as the Georgia Experiment Station, is one of the research arms of UGA's College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. The major in Consumer Economics is currently offered on the institution's home campus in Athens. The major in Consumer Economics prepares students to understand how consumers make choices in a changing economy. The program elaborates on how fraud and deception, products of varying quality, and inadequate information affect consumer decisions. Course work for the major includes economics, as well as applied consumer economics, consumer policy, and financial management.
Delivery and Curriculum: The admission requirements and curriculum for the program at the Griffin site will be the same as the existing major in Consumer Economics offered on the Athens campus. All criteria for electives will be equivalent at both locations. A program coordinator exclusive to Consumer Economics on the Griffin site will be hired to provide students with specific recruiting, academic mentoring, and career guidance. Students will receive program-specific advising. The program will be managed as an extended program from the Department of Housing and Consumer Economics located in the College of Family and Consumer Sciences in Athens.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 10, 20, and 30 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing courses and faculty. President Adams has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
9. Establishment of the Existing Master of Education with a Major in Mathematics as an External Degree in Griffin, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establish the existing Master of Education with a major in Mathematics as an external degree in Griffin, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: UGA sought to offer its Master of Education with a major in Mathematics on its external site in Griffin. The Griffin site, also known as the Georgia Experiment Station, is one of the research arms of UGA's College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. The master's level major in Mathematics is currently offered on the institution's home campus in Athens. The eight school superintendents in the Griffin Regional Education Service Agency area have indicated the need for degree programs to provide elementary school teachers with enhanced mathematics content and pedagogical knowledge.
Delivery and Curriculum: The admission requirements and curriculum for the program at the Griffin site will be the same as the existing major in Mathematics offered on the Athens campus. Each student will have a faculty advisor. The Master of Education with a major in Mathematics will consist of courses in the following areas: foundations of mathematics education, mathematics education curriculum, mathematics education teaching/learning, mathematics content, mathematics education research, mentoring and supervising student teachers, and field experiences. A degree program assistant will support the program. No more than six hours of credit may be transferred into the program.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 18, 18, and 18 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing courses and faculty. President Adams has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The degree program is subject to review by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission and the National Council for Accreditation in Teacher Education. The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
10. Establishment of the Existing Specialist in Education with a Major in Mathematics as an External Degree in Griffin, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establish the existing Specialist in Education with a major in Mathematics as an external degree in Griffin, effective June 7, 2006.
Abstract: UGA sought to offer its Specialist in Education with a major in Mathematics on its external site in Griffin. The Griffin site, also known as the Georgia Experiment Station, is one of the research arms of UGA's College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. The Specialist in Education ("Ed.S.") major in Mathematics is currently offered on the institution's home campus in Athens.
Delivery and Curriculum: The admission requirements and curriculum for the program at the Griffin site will be the same as the existing major in Mathematics offered on the Athens campus. Each student will have a faculty advisor. The Specialist in Education with a major in Mathematics program consists of at least nine courses, an applied project, and two units of seminar at the graduate level beyond the master's degree and the T-5 certificate in mathematics. Students have the option of completing a course to prepare for National Board Certification. A degree program assistant will support the program. No more than six hours of credit may be transferred into the program.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 7, 7, and 7 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program will be supported through existing courses and faculty. President Adams has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The degree program is subject to review by the Georgia Professional Standards Commission and the National Council for Accreditation in Teacher Education. The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive reviews.
11. Establishment of the Existing Bachelor of Science in Agriculture with a Major in Agribusiness as an External Degree in Griffin, University of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establi