Get documents about "THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE TO - Board of Trustees - The
Document Sample
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
Board of Trustees
TO: Members of the Boa~d,~~:r~
FROM: Catherine S. MizellM Vt' L/"
General Counsel and Secretary
DATE: October 12, 2010
SUBJECT: Presidential Search Interviews and Fall Meeting of the Board of Trustees
October 20-22,2010
Knoxville, Tennessee
This notebook contains the updated schedule for the presidential search interviews on
October 20 as well as the schedule, agenda, and supporting materials for the 2010 Fall
Meeting of the Board of Trustees on October 21-22.
The Hampton Inn in downtown Knoxville has reservations for you in accordance with your
request.
Please let us know if you need any assistance. I look forward to seeing you soon.
Enclosure
c: Members of the President's Staff (w/enc)
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
PRESIDENTIAL SEARCH INTERVIEWS AND FALL MEETING
October 20-22, 2010
SCHEDULE OF INTERVIEWS AND MEETINGS
Wednesday, October 20
9:30 a.m. Interview Robert McGrath—Search Committee and Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
10:45 a.m. Interview Brian Noland—Search Committee and Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
1:30 p.m. Interview Craig Fitzhugh—Search Committee and Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
2:45 p.m. Interview Jerry Askew—Search Committee and Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
4:00 p.m. Interview Joe DiPietro—Search Committee and Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
5:15 p.m. Presidential Search Committee Meeting to Select Nominee(s) for
Recommendation to the Board of Trustees
Plant Biotech Building, Room 156-157
Thursday, October 21
8:30 a.m. Research, Outreach, and Economic Development
University Center, Shiloh Room
10:30 a.m. Finance and Administration
University Center, Room 223-225
1:15 p.m. Advancement and Public Affairs
University Center, Room 223-225
3:15 p.m. Academic Affairs and Student Success
University Center, Shiloh Room
Friday, October 22
9:00 a.m. Board of Trustees Meeting
Ellington Plant Science Building, Hollingsworth Auditorium
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
RESEARCH, OUTREACH, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
8:30 a.m. EDT Shiloh Room
Thursday University Center
October 21, 2010 Knoxville, Tennessee
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting (behind agenda)
IV. News and Highlights
V. Cherokee Farm Update
VI. Center for Renewable Carbon
VII. Biofuels Initiative/Biomass Innovation Park
VIII. Information Technology Update
IX. Other Business
X. Adjournment
Minutes of the Research, Outreach and Economic Development Committee
The University of Tennessee
Board of Trustees
June 23, 2010
Knoxville, Tennessee
The Research, Outreach and Economic Development Committee of the Board of
Trustees of the University of Tennessee met June 23, 2010, in Room 160 of the Plant
Biotech Building on the UT Agriculture campus in Knoxville.
I. Call to Order
Mr. Don Stansberry, Chair, called the meeting to order at 3 p.m. Mr. Stansberry noted
that although the Committee meeting was being held in a public format it was not a
public meeting. This format recognizes members of the Committee, Trustees, members
of UT's senior staff and invited speakers to make presentations on the Committee's
agenda. No other business will be conducted other than items listed on the previously
distributed materials. Mr. Stansberry asked Dr. David Millhorn, UT Executive Vice
President, to call the roll.
II. Roll Call
Dr. Millhorn called the roll and the following voting members were present:
Mr. Don Stansberry, Chair
Mr. Crawford Gallimore
Ms. Monique Moore Hagler
Mr. Doug Horne
Mr. Jim Murphy
Ms. Betty Ann Tanner
Mr. Sumeet Vaikunth
The following non-voting members were present:
Dr. Dick Gourley
Dr. Karen Johnson
Ms. Sharon Rollins
Dr. Jan Simek
Commissioner Ken Givens, Dr. Richard Rhoda, Mr. Glenn Turner, and Commissioner Tim
Webb were absent from the meeting.
1
Dr. Millhorn declared a quorum present for the meeting.
III. Approval of Minutes of the Last Meeting
Mr. Stansberry asked for any amendments or corrections to the minutes ofthe February
25, 2010 meeting in Martin. There were none. Mr. Stansberry asked for a motion to
approve the minutes. Mr. Gallimore moved the minutes be approved and Ms. Tanner
seconded the motion. No discussion took place. Mr. Stansberry announced the motion
carried.
IV. Research Highlights
Mr. Stansberry recognized Dr. Millhorn to present highlights of the UT research
program.
Dr. Millhorn showed a power-point slide of the new logo for Cherokee Farm. (The logo,
graphics and other information can be seen on the Cherokee Farm website:
http://www.tennessee.edu/system/cherokee.)Dr.Millhorn noted that construction
has begun on the site and EMJ Construction in Chattanooga is the prime contractor for
the infrastructure (roads and utilities) projects. Over the next 12-18 months this work
will transform the site. The first building, for the Joint Institute of Advanced Materials
(JIAM), will be bid in the fall of this year. A more detailed report on Cherokee Farm will
be given at the next ROED Committee meeting.
Dr. Millhorn noted that Dr. Stacey Patterson would be making reports later in the
meeting concerning UT's solar energy and the EPSCoR programs. Dr. Millhorn stated
that he made a presentation in May to the UT Effectiveness and Efficiency for the Future
Committee concerning the status of Information Technology (IT). Efforts are continuing
to reduce the IT budget. In a recent meeting with CIO Scott Studham, Dr. Millhorn was
told that within the last 18 months the central budget has been reduced by over $SM
and that enhanced collaborations between campus IT units and the central IT office are
taking place. Further budget reductions are expected. A more detailed IT presentation
will be made after budgets have been set this fall.
The biofuels program, Dr. Millhorn stated, continues to make good progress. Within the
next 2-3 weeks UT cars will be filled with UT ethanol at the Motor Pool. Jeff Smith
(Deputy for Operations, Oak Ridge National Laboratory) has told Dr. Millhorn that ORNL
is also filling ORNL vehicles with UT fuel.
Dr. Millhorn stated he would use the remainder of his presentation timeframe to discuss
a new endeavor the University, through UT's bioenergy company Genera Energy LLC,
was recently contacted to undertake by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)
regarding potential biofuels production and related opportunities in Afghanistan. A
major challenge for the Pentagon, as reported by The Washington Post, is getting
2
aviation and diesel fuel to U.S. troops in Afghanistan in an economically efficient and
secure fashion. DOD requested UT and Genera officials travel to Afghanistan to look at
the problem of getting biofuels to U.S. air and ground troops. Afghanistan is a land-
locked country and all fuels and supplies must come in through Pakistan or one ofthe
old Soviet Republic nations, creating great risk of ambushes and insurgent attacks.
Approximately 70 percent of U.S. troop casualties in Afghanistan are convoy-related.
Dr. Millhorn and Mr. louis Buck (Genera Energy feedstock commercialization manager)
traveled to Afghanistan the first week in May and spent over a week in meetings and
site visits with DOD and military officials to look at these issues, particularly in light of
President Obama's plan to increase the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. The
Pentagon pays an average of $400 to put a gallon of fuel into a combat vehicle or
aircraft in Afghanistan. This is full-burden cost from port to vehicle or generator. Dr.
Millhorn showed a graph based on 2000-2009 data indicating the direct correlation of
U.S. troop casualties/wounded and fuel consumption in Afghanistan. The graph also
projected these numbers to the year 2014, showing that both the number of casualties
and amounts of fuel consumed will likely double the current statistics. It is critical to
solve the problem of the need to transport fuel from outside Afghanistan under hostile
conditions. Dr. Millhorn and Mr. Buck were asked by DOD to work with the Marine
Corps in Helmand Province, in the southern part of Afghanistan bordering Pakistan and
located not far from the Iranian border, to help solve the fuel problem for locally-
sourced alternative biofuels for electric generators. A related need is to help alleviate
the poverty and opium problems in this area by creating an alternative economic base
to poppy-production. Forty percent ofthe population's income comes from poppy
production and 79 percent of Afghans have no electricity.
Dr. Millhorn noted that that the DOD Task Force consisted of officials from the
Afghanistan Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation and livestock; the U.S. Marine Corps;
members of the Task Force for Business and Stability Operations; a Provincial
Reconstruction Team; Texas A&M; and the University of Tennessee and Genera Energy.
Headquarters for the Task Force in Helmand Province was Camp Leatherneck, a U.S.
Marine Corps base which quarters over 10,000 personnel and manages supplies-
forward operations. It is located in mostly desert country with extremely hot
temperatures (120 degrees when Dr. Millhorn and Mr. Buck were there). Dr. Millhorn
showed graphics of the large number of generators needed to supply electrical needs to
maintain the base.
Most of the traveling done by Dr. Millhorn, Mr. Buck and other Task Force members was
in V-22 Osprey helicopters and the Marines secured their safety throughout the trip. On
one occasion the Osprey sensors picked up hostile activity. Ground travel is extremely
dangerous. Body armor must be worn at all times. Using these modes of transportation
the Task Force was able to obtain a panoramic view of Helmand Province to assess the
issues under review. In one slide Dr. Millhorn pointed out a river held in place by the
Kajaki Dam which was constructed by the Tennessee Valley Authority in 1950-60's era.
The surrounding area is green and fertile. The lack of water and irrigation in Afghanistan
3
is a huge problem. More water access would allow greater agricultural production
which is sorely needed by the country.
Dr. Millhorn showed slides of hand-dug wells called karezes. The vast majority of
Helmand Province is sustained by groundwater brought to the surface by hundreds of
these karez systems. Karez structures are often several thousand feet long with
numerous vertical shafts, similar to U.S. storm sewers with manholes but without
piping, support or modern equipment of any kind. With these systems, wheat and other
crops can be grown. Currently the main crop is poppy. Poppies are grown by over 40
percent of the population and, significantly, 40 percent of the population is drug-
addicted to opium. Electricity is available in only 21 percent of Afghanistan homes and
it is only available intermittently during the day. UT and Genera have been identified to
help introduce new technologies to help with these issues.
Dr. Millhorn showed slides of homes and villages in Helmand Province, most of which
have been bombarded for years, first by the Russians and then by other insurgents.
Despite crude living conditions, roof-top satellites were noted on numerous structures
and solar panels were shown tossed in yards used to generate energy to charge cell
phones and other small devices. Black-market fuel is also used to run small generators.
The contrast of the crude living conditions with the use of the occasional modern device
was striking.
After visiting the area for 8-9 days, the Task Force met with Marine Corps officials to
develop a strategic plan to address the critical issues involved in improving fuel
production-transport and the economic development situation in general. First and
foremost, the success of this plan will directly affect the number of future casualties U.S.
troops will sustain. The Afghan Bioenergy Feasibility Study plan consists of three
segments: 1) a strategic plan to build and demonstrate modular biodiesel conversion
capability for military cooking grease waste and locally-grown oilseed crops and
extruded vegetable Oils, 2) a strategic plan to build and demonstrate modular biomass
gasification conversion capability to generate electricity from existing biomass and then
growing a purpose-grown biomass, and 3) to assess the long-term potential of selected
biomass species to benefit from intercropping/bio-irrigation (roots-source groundwater)
strategies toward productive biomass from non-irrigated lands. More focus is being
placed on the first two strategic plan segments as they are viewed as more likely to
succeed.
Dr. Millhorn commended the Marine Corps leaders, other military officials and U.S.
troops serving in Afghanistan and noted they are doing their jobs in an extremely
professional and capable manner given the situations at hand. Dr. Millhorn and Mr.
Buck received the utmost cooperation and protection during their visit. While in
Afghanistan there were three long meetings with the commanding general--a very rare
occurrence--due to the importance placed on the work of the Task Force. Since Dr.
4
Millhorn and Mr. Buck's return to Tennessee there have been several email exchanges
from Marine leadership concerning the status and aspects of the project.
Dr. Millhorn showed a final slide of lithe faces and future of Afghanistan"-the Afghan
children. These children are far from immune to the hostile conditions of the country.
Dr. Millhorn noted the high honor of being identified and then selected to help with
issues affecting the u.s. presence in and for the Afghanistan country itself. A final
report to DOD is currently being prepared and should be finalized within the next few
weeks. Dr. Millhorn stated that one of the reasons he wanted to see the conditions in
Afghanistan for himself was to make sure safety of UT and Genera employees could be
maintained on-site in Afghanistan. He believes work within the military bases
themselves can be secured for this purpose.
Mr. Stansberry asked for an overview ofthe DOD project operation within the
University and what benefits the project would bring to the University. Dr. Millhorn
noted the initiative initially would be a small-scale business endeavor for UT although it
will bring in DOD funds. The project budget could certainly grow and become a much
larger business opportunity for the University. Primarily in its early stages it will likely
provide intellectual property opportunities and will be seen chiefly as a demonstration
project providing economic development opportunities for Afghanistan. As the Taliban
is moved out of the country, it is imperative to move opportunities into the country to
maintain the economy. Foremost this initiative will be a project to support our
government in helping to save lives and to improve conditions in Afghanistan. Mr.
Stansberry commented on the modular solar panels shown in the slides and Dr. Millhorn
noted that the Task Force had discussed solar energy usage quite often during the trip.
The Marines will be testing use of more modular solar panels, many coming from the
Pulaski, TN plants. Security and investment costs will be key factors in use of large solar
farms in Afghanistan. Mrs. Tanner asked about the timeframe ofthe project. Dr.
Millhorn indicated to the Marines that if a decision is made to pursue biodiesel
technologies, these technologies are now available. The business end of this pursuit will
require more work.
Mr. Stansberry commended Dr. Millhorn for his leadership in the University's
identification and selection by DOD for collaboration on the project. This selection, he
noted, brought distinction to the University and there is also potential for beneficial
future opportunities for the University.
ORNL Update
Dr. Millhorn introduced Mr. Jeff Smith, Deputy of Operations at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL), and noted that the UT-Battelle management contract with DOE was
recently extended for an additional five years. Dr. Millhorn noted that Mr. Smith must
receive a large part of the credit for the extension and that Mr. Smith heads the list of
5
successful lab operations leaders throughout the country. Dr. Millhorn has asked Mr.
Smith to give an overview of what, in Mr. Smith's perspective, has occurred at ORNl
during the ten years' UT-Battelle management and operations of ORNL.
Mr. Smith noted that, in his long-term professional career with Battelle Memorial
Institute (which manages or co-manages six DOE national laboratories: ORNl (with UT),
Brookhaven (with SUNY-Stony Brook), Idaho, lawrence livermore (with UC and
Bechtel), NREl (with MRI), and Pacific Northwest, he believes UT-Battelle management
of ORNl is the best DOE laboratory management partnership team in the nation. Mr.
Smith provided power-point slides illustrating the backgrounds of the University of
Tennessee and Battelle Memorial Institute and their respective strengths in partnering
in ORNl management: UT: an ORNl partner since 1946, state-funded Science Alliance
started in 1982 to build programs with ORNl, shared research and joint appointments,
joint institutes in advanced materials, biological sciences, computational sciences,
neutron sciences and nuclear physics; Battelle Memorial Institute: a 65-year
relationship with DOE, develops and deploys technology worldwide, and manages or co-
manages six DOE national laboratories. Mr. Smith noted that when UT-Battelle began
as ORNl management partners in April 2000, the vast portion of the ORNl campus was
one huge parking lot. At that time the lab was in decline and DOE was in the process of
dividing the management contract at Oak Ridge Reservation by separating management
responsibilities for the facilities into cleanup, weapons and research. In addition, the
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) project was in jeopardy. The community was looking
for more engagement from the lab, and the relationship between local contractor
management and DOE-Oak Ridge Operations was strained. The DOE funding for ORNl
management at this time was approximately $500,000 per year.
The UT-Battelle proposal for ORNl management submitted in 1999, Mr. Smith noted,
had two slides depicting plans for modernizing the lab and improving the infrastructure.
UT-Battelle made the commitment with its visionary leadership at the time to obtain
bipartisan state support to help effect these improvements and to foster weight for a
successful proposal to DOE. A part of the UT-Battelle proposal strategy was to partner
with the State of Tennessee to enhance ORNl capabilities through construction of four
new buildings: the facilities to house the Joint Institute for Neutron Sciences ($8M),
Joint Institute for Biological Sciences ($8M), the Oak Ridge Center for Advanced Studies
(ORCAS, $4M), and the Joint Institute for Computational Sciences ($6M). This type of
state support was critical to the proposal success. Mr. Smith noted that such strategic
support has now been received by two state administrations. Mr. Smith showed a slide
outlining substantial progress and corresponding investments by DOE, the private sector
and the state in updating ORNl's research campus. This kind of collaboration in 1999
was unique to the DOE national laboratory management system and has been
instrumental in transforming the laboratory over the last ten years.
Mr. Smith noted the remarkable physical transformation that ORNl has undergone
during UT-Battelle management. He presented slides showing four segments of the
6
ORNL campus--East, Chestnut Ridge (which houses the SNS facility), West (housing
environmental and biological work sites), and the Central Campus' Science and
Technology Park--and noted the primary operations taking place within each segment.
There is now a vibrant campus environment at ORNL. When UT-Battelle began
managing ORNL in 2000, employee recruitment was virtually stopped in some areas as it
was decided ORNL was doing itself more harm than good in trying to attract new talent
to the Lab when infrastructure conditions were at such low levels. Significant
improvements were made to create the positive campus environment now found at
ORNL. New conference rooms and meeting places, courtyards, a credit union, new
sign age, laboratories, a new cafeteria, fitness center, auditoriums, coffee bars and more
are now available to ORNL employees and visitors. Some ofthis modern infrastructure
transformation was accomplished through reinvestment of the fees UT and Battelle
earn as lab management partners, as DOE prohibits using its direct revenues for such
improvements. This kind of commitment by UT-Battelle has been critical in modernizing
ORNl and in creating the strong partnership that has successfully earned DOE extension
for ORNl management.
The UT-ORNL Joint Institutes have been essential to the ORNL transformation, Mr. Smith
noted. The five Joint Institute (JI) programs have followed the model based on the first
JI, the Joint Institute for Heavy Ion Research initiated in 1982. There have now been
four additional Jls, three of which have been completed: Joint Institute for
Computational Sciences (JICS), Joint Institute for Biological Sciences (JIBS), and the Joint
Institute for Neutron Sciences (JINS). The Joint Institute for Advanced Materials (JIAM)
was initiated in 2007 and the $30M facility will be constructed at the Cherokee Farm
campus. The Jls have been instrumental to the work being done at ORNl and UT and
the shared programs today exceed $200M. Mr. Smith briefly outlined highlights for
each JI. He noted that two acres at ORNL are now devoted to JICS' operations. Dr.
Thomas Zacharia and other ORNL and UT leaders made a commitment in 2001 for JICS
and, along with essential private-sector and state funds, the $10M facility was
completed in 2006. In 2008 the National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded a $65M
grant to UT and ORNL to establish the National Institute for Computational Sciences. In
2009 JICS became the home to Kraken, now the world's most powerful academic
computing system and the first academic supercomputer to reach the petascale. In
2009 Kraken was rated #3 on the Top 500 list of the world's most powerful systems.
Currently there are over 420 active partnerships involved with the use of Kraken. It is
easily the best example ofthe success ofthe ORNl and UT commitments to improve
ORNL infrastructure.
The JIBS $11.8M facility was initiated in 2006, ahead of the original schedule to take
advantage of a Department of Energy (DOE) competition for a large biological sciences
research center. The proposal leveraged $70.5M in state investments in the Tennessee
Biofuels Initiative. In 2007 ORNL was selected to lead one ofthree DOE Bioenergy
Research Centers. Today JIBS is the anchor facility for the multi-institutional BioEnergy
Science Center (BESC), with funding at $135M over five years. Much intellectual
7
property activity (22 invention disclosures at present) is anticipated and is currently
underway, including significant biofuels and bioproducts breakthroughs involving the
conversion of cellulosic materials into ethanol.
The Joint Institute for Neutron Sciences (JINS) is now coming to fruition with
construction of an $8M facility just completed. JINS was begun through a Memorandum
of Understanding between ORNL and UT in 1998, and in 2001 JINS was launched as a
virtual center for outreach and education programs to enhance and support research at
the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) and the High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR). JINS is
the intellectual hub for the neutron science community and serves as home-base for an
extensive visitor program for new research collaborations.
The programs outlined above, crucially supported by state funds Mr. Smith noted, have
made a remarkable impact on ORNL and UT operations. The assumption of risks has
paid off in new capabilities and opportunities. The ORNL annual budget is now at $l.4B.
It is estimated that approximately $100M of research work is now at UT as a result of
the above-described investments and collaborations. In all total, an approximate
$200M swing has occurred in the level of activities taking place now and what was
taking place ten years ago when UT-Battelle began its partnership in the management of
ORNL. There is more work to do, however. Mr. Smith showed a slide which highlighted
the significant number of current and pending improvement projects spanning all
segments of Lab activities. Mr. Smith noted, in particular, plans to construct a new
maintenance facility at the Melton Valley area and the construction of a guest house to
be built within the JINS operations' Chestnut Ridge area of the ORNL campus. Mr. Smith
presented slides showing the West Campus construction of new greenhouses, a
research support facility and a new carbon fiber test facility made possible by a
successful DOE proposal. There are over 30 companies now working with ORNL on the
subject of carbon fiber.
Mr. Smith noted that a clean-up effort on approximately 30 acres within the Central
Campus' Science & Technology Park is taking place to facilitate private industry and Lab
collaborations, similar to the approach of the Cherokee Farm Campus. The first faCility,
constructed by the private sector, is now occupied by Pro2Serv. Once demolition of
several old buildings occurs, there will be 500,000 square feet of space available for the
private sector at ORNL. On the East Campus plans are underway for a new parking
faCility, a Chemical and Materials Science building has been constructed, and new
facilities for a microscopy lab and expansion of the Computing Sciences Building
(housing the supercomputers) are slated for construction.
As Dr. Millhorn had previously indicated, Mr. Smith noted, the UT-Battelle ORNL
management contract was recently extended for five years. This is a clear indication of
the strength of UT-Battelle contract performance. UT-Battelle leadership has been
working on this outcome for the last ten years in delivering nearly all that was promised
for the ORNL management: leadership in the critical areas of science and technology,
8
state-of-the-art facilities in a vibrant campus setting, safe and compliant operations,
strategic investments in the Lab's future, and recognition as a regional resource for
economic development and community service. Mr. Smith noted that DOE is using
ORNL operations and management as a model for its other national laboratories.
UT Trustee Jim Murphy asked Mr. Smith how much area on the West Campus remains
for older buildings to be demolished and then for redevelopment. Mr. Smith replied
that there is an approximate four city-block area (20 acres) in the core of the West
Campus, comprised of the Old Manhattan Project area, targeted for redevelopment.
The clean-up cost is estimated to be $2B. ORNL has been working for the last five years
to move this core area into an initial group of targeted clean-up areas and the current
state administration is backing this arrangement. ARRA funding will be used towards
the clean-up and redevelopment costs, with an approximate 20-30 years' timeline.
Mr. Talbot asked Mr. Smith if he could provide any ideas for the development of the
Cherokee Farm project. Mr. Smith noted he serves on the advisory committee for
Cherokee Farm and he is working with Dr. Millhorn and others in this regard. A
discussion took place concerning ORNL's impact in helping to attract large private
companies to the Cherokee Farm project and to Tennessee. Mr. Smith noted that the
proximity to large research capabilities is a strong attraction for many industries. Dr.
Millhorn noted that UT and ORNL were instrumental in the success in attracting
Volkswagen to Chattanooga. Mr. Smith noted that the carbon fiber market and industry
is the next major push for such initiatives. ORNL has the largest carbon fiber capability
in the world. Mr. Gallimore inquired about applications for carbon fiber. Mr. Smith
noted that this industry is expanding rapidly, particularly with the automotive industry.
Mr. Stansberry asked how this science might impact the future Joint Institute for
Advanced Materials operations at Cherokee Farm. Mr. Smith referred this topic to
others more closely associated with the facility but indicated that he believed there
would be opportunities for such initiatives and especially in regard ofthe solar institute
operations to be positioned at the Cherokee Farm site.
Ms. Moore suggested that a visit be made to the ORNL campus, especially since a visit
has not been made since receipt ofthe NSF UTK supercomputer located at ORNL. She
and others would like to take a first-hand look at many of the programs and operations
highlighted by Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith said the UT Trustee group is welcome any time
they would like to visit ORNL and Dr. Millhorn and he will be pleased to make the visit
arrangements. Any individual visits are also welcome.
Mr. Stansberry thanked Mr. Smith for the excellent report he presented and for the
good work he is doing at ORNL. Mr. Smith received a round of applause from members.
9
V. Annual Report of UT Research Foundation
Dr. Randy Gentry, President and CEO of the University of Tennessee Research
Foundation (UTRF), presented an update of activities over the past six months and
outlined a vision of how the UTRF is evolving with respect to intellectual property and
public-private partnerships. Dr. Gentry gave highlights of UTRF's work at the different
UT campuses including the Tennessee Solar Institute and Solar Farm, Genera Energy,
TNlnvestco, Vol Court and Entrepreneurship Bootcamp, and Tnovation.
In the past, Dr. Gentry stated, UTRF primarily focused on pure technology transfer and
as such operated as a shop that took disclosures from UT's campuses, assessed them
and then chose what to move forward with in terms of licensing and partnerships. The
business side of these public-private partnerships is now being reviewed more
vigorously to generate stronger economic development and self-sustaining results and
then aggressively moving these partnerships to a more rapid commercialization
framework. The Tennessee Solar Institute and Solar Farm initiatives are examples of
the large-scale economic development enterprises being viewed as models to better
study and implement strong public-private partnerships. The UTRF goal is to increase its
bottom line of revenue generation for itself and for the enterprises under the UTRF
umbrella.
Dr. Gentry noted Dr. Stacey Patterson would provide greater detail during her
subsequent presentation on both the Tennessee Solar Institute (TSI) and the Solar Farm
initiatives. He briefly outlined, however, the $62.5M ARRA funded projects that came to
Tennessee from the Department of Energy grant to the Department of Economic and
Community Development (ECD). Of these funds, $2.3M stays with ECD and $60.2M
comes to UT. The key projects in the UT-ECD partnership are the Tennessee Solar
Institute (which will be managed by UT and ORNL and is a $29.2M grant) and the West
Tennessee Solar Farm near Brownsville (a $31M grant). Of the $60.2M, $S8M will flow
into UTRF. These solar project activities are designed to leverage the existing solar value
chain in Tennessee, to support recent solar recruits, and to attract new solar
investments. Dr. Gentry showed graphic conceptionalizations of what the SMW solar
array Solar Farm will look like. UTRF can serve as a strong vehicle for such large-scale
economic development projects and Dr. Gentry said this is the kind of activity UTRF
should be working on with the University and with the State in looking for grant
opportunities.
Dr. Gentry provided graphics of the Genera Energy biofuels plant facility in Vonore and
briefly discussed the TNlnvestco, Vol Court and TN ovation programs. He noted the
TNlnvestco program is a state initiative whereby $120M of future tax credits were made
available to insurance companies that had a net present value worth of at least $84M
which could be used now for capital investments for early-stage company development.
UTRF is a prinCipal in one of these funds: TN Community Ventures. Dr. John Hopkins
(Vice President of the UTRF Multidisciplinary Office in Knoxville) is a participating
10
partner of TN Community Ventures and he believes it will bring approximately $1.5M to
UT for the purpose of investment and moving technologies further into
commercialization. UTRF is actively providing training and informational workshops on
UT's campuses for faculty and staff. There is great interest for entrepreneurial
partnerships and UTRF works to move these ideas into private business. Dr. Gentry
addressed Vol Court and TN ovation as two such initiatives.
Dr. Gentry presented performance metrics graphs showing activities within UTRF over
the past year. The disclosures metric revealed a generally upward trend with a total of
87 disclosures (56 through the Multidisciplinary Office (MOO), 31 at the Health Science
Center Office (HSC). UTRF is showing a growth in the number of its disclosures, whereby
a faculty member or entrepreneur has an idea, has done some preliminary data
assessment and then discloses the intellectual property to UTRF and UTRF attempts to
pursue a patent or license on the property. If UTRF is thought of as an "engine,"
disclosures are the "fuel" for the engine. Trustee Jim Hall inquired about the non-UT
disclosures (3) reported during the last year. Dr. Gentry noted that anyone from the
general public may bring a disclosure to UTRF and UTRF will assist if the idea seems
successful for commercialization.
New staff has been brought in to enhance growing the UTRF. A new licensing agent in
Memphis will begin within the next week or two, and a licensing associate, Dr. Sharon
Ngwenya, and a business manager, Ms. Samantha Jeffers, have been hired at the MOO
in Knoxville. In the licenses metric, Dr. Gentry noted that UTRF generally manages
around 15 licenses a year and in FYlO thus far there are 13 licenses (4 MOO, 9 HSC). The
revenues from the licenses (royalties and external reimbursements) currently are at
$800K for MOO and $507K for HSC. Regarding patent applications for FY10 YTD there
are currently 23 patent applications out of MOO (with 5 international patents) and 18
patent applications from HSC. The number of patent applications is going down, but
this is in large part due to determined UTRF strategy to be more selective in pursuit of
patent applications in order to make the best possible investments. In some cases it
may be the best strategy is not to pursue a patent but to take another direction for a
particular technology.
Dr. Joe DiPietro, Chancellor of Agriculture, asked what UTRF aspirations are for the next
five years. Dr. Gentry noted he plans to visit each UT campus and go through a strategic
planning process in which five-year goals will be identified. Today's presentation is
basically a baseline against which future growth will be assessed. With campus cultures
of increased incentives to award hardworking faculty and researchers, a 50 percent
growth rate within the next five years is not unrealistic. Dr. DiPietro asked what the
procedure would be if UTRF determined a particular technology was found not to be a
good investment. Dr. Gentry noted that the technology would be returned to the
inventor; however, UTRF may elect to assist the inventor in other avenues other than
the pursuit of a patent should this be beneficial for both parties. UTRF is working to
11
improve its assessment of new technologies and the entire decision-making process in
determining what technologies to pursue and in which to invest.
Mr. Stansberry asked if Dr. Gentry believed the two Executive Committees were making
progress and Dr. Gentry noted that in his assessment the Committees seem to be
working very well. Dean Gourley with HSC and Dr. Wayne Davis with MOO have been
working diligently to find the right footing under the reorganization. Mr. Wharton
inquired if the split of funding from UTRF to HSC and MOO seemed fair and equitable.
Dean Gourley concurred that the funding structure seems fair and that the new format
of having the first $5,000 in revenues come to the inventor is beneficial and ensures a
good balance for UTRF payouts back to the campus. It is now a matter of increasing the
volume. Mr. Schledwitz noted that the HSC Office has learned that money is coming
back in a more-timely basis and there doesn't seem to be a bureaucratic delay in
receiving these funds. Mr. Schledwitz expressed appreciation for the work and time
spent by Mr. Stansberry in reorganizing UTRF into a more efficient organization. Mr.
Schledwitz noted it will take time to build the new organization but things appear to be
going in the right direction. Mr. Stansberry noted that Dean Gourley and Dr. Davis are
doing a terrific job in their respective roles.
Dr. Jimmy Cheek, UTK Chancellor, asked Dr. Gentry where UTRF should be on a revenue
stream, i.e., a royalty stream, five years from now. Dr. Gentry noted that there are a
large number differing models and it is difficult to gauge such statistics. From-
disclosure-to-revenue-streams can fall into an 8-10 year timeframe. If there is sufficient
activity within a five-year mark, with investment in the right technologies, there can be
significant revenues. Pharmacy is an area where success can happen quickly, even
overnight. Operational aspects vary greatly among research corporations and
foundations. Initiatives such as the Solar Institute and other large economic
development type projects will give UTRF opportunities to seed-invest at a higher rate
and to aggressively market these technologies to see increased revenue returns in a
shorter amount of time.
Mr. Stansberry noted that UTRF needs faculty to focus in the areas where there is
greater opportunity for success. An example is the Solar Institute, which will provide
opportunities for testing a great range of solar technologies to determine uses and
revenue streams not only for the Solar Institute and Solar Farm but for other endeavors
as well, as Dr. Millhorn is doing with switch grass and biofuels initiatives. Dr. Cheek
noted that the UT-Battelle Board of Governors is also concerned with improving
revenue streams by changing the organizational culture to allow increased productivity
and in maximizing employee capabilities. It's a matter of investing in the right
technologies and then getting a return on that investment. Dr. Gentry noted that UTRF
is directing many of its efforts in aggressively communicating with and in educating
faculty concerning the disclosure and intellectual property processes. UTRF is striving to
have a greater visibility on the campuses in talking with faculty, department heads and
college deans to increase disclosure flows. Dr. Cheek noted this has happened to some
12
extent but the growth goal has to be ever present in this process. Mr. Stansberry
requested Dr. Cheek's help in encouraging disclosures through tenure consideration and
other faculty rewards. Mr. Stansberry believes this is an important part of a
Chancellor's role. Dr. DiPietro noted there is now a better framework in place to
motivate faculty via a substantial return on an invention. Dean Gourley noted that a
factor in stimulating interest has been the investment fund. Expanding this base will
provide greater motivation for faculty and will make the process appropriately
competitive.
Mr. Stansberry stated there is much work yet to be done but he believes UTRF is going
in the right direction for improvement and growth. Mr. Stansberry thanked Dr. Gentry
for his presentation.
VI. Presentation on Volunteer State Solar Initiative
Mr. Stansberry introduced Dr. Stacey Patterson, UT Director of Research Partnerships in
the Office of the Executive Vice President, to present a report on the Volunteer State
Solar Initiative. Dr. Patterson noted the initiative was first announced by Governor
Bredesen during his State ofthe State Address last fall. The Governor stated he wanted
Tennessee to be a leader in all things solar. The funding for the initiative became
available in September 2009 through a Department of Energy grant to the Tennessee
Department of Economic and Community Development (ECD) for the State Energy
Program. The one-time American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds were
granted to ECD to support two separate but related projects: (1) the Tennessee Solar
Institute and the Solar Opportunity Funds and (2) the design and installation of the
utility-scale West Tennessee Solar Farm project near Brownsville. Both projects are
designed to leverage the existing solar base in Tennessee to support recent solar
recruits and to attract new solar investments in the state. The first example of the
success of this program was evidenced in the announcement by Confluence Solar that
the company planned to relocate in Clinton, TN, in large part due to the Volunteer State
Solar Initiative and the programs offered within this initiative.
Dr. Patterson reviewed the funding flow of the initiative, as Dr. Gentry previously
described, to reflect that the DOE grant moved through ECD to the UT system, with
oversight by Dr. Millhorn. UTRF is a subcontractor in the initiative and will administer
two grants programs (Innovation/Installation) and the design and installation of the
SMW Solar Farm in Haywood County. Within the initiative there is a public education
component enabling collaboration opportunities with the UT Institute of Public Service
(IPS) and in particular with the IPS Center for Industrial Services to provide technical
assistance and workforce development opportunities across the state of Tennessee.
Dr. Patterson stated Governor Bredesen's vision for the Tennessee Solar Institute (TSI)
has been influenced by Dr. Millhorn and Drs. Thom Mason and Thomas Zacharia from
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and TSI is now envisioned as a Center of
13
Excellence between UT and ORNL to serve as a centralized hub and catalyst to bring
together TSI leaders and policy-makers at the state and federal government levels.
Initially the ARRA funding will support both the Solar Innovation and Installation Grant
Programs with boots-on-the-ground technical assistance provided by the IPS Center for
Industrial Services and their partnering networks, commercialization assistance to help
this young industry to take major technologies and move them into the marketplace,
and a variety of workforce development opportunities. The ultimate vision is that the
TSI will become a Research Center of Excellence, where leading scientists and engineers
from UT and ORNL can develop cutting-edge/next-generation solar technologies and
solar materials to impact and grow solar industry in Tennessee.
The $14.5M Solar Innovation Grants Program's goal is to encourage the growth of
Tennessee's solar industry by offering competitive awards to provide technical
assistance, facilities and equipment improvements, renewable energy products, process
improvements, technology improvements and workforce development. The Request for
Proposals (RFP) for this program is expected to be released this summer and proposal
applications are open to any Tennessee company which identifies itself (and TSI agrees)
as being in the solar value chain or is seeking to enter the solar value chain.
The Solar Installation Grants Program is funded for $9M with the goal to speed the
deployment of solar energy in Tennessee. When the program was begun there was less
than 1MW of solar power on the TVA grid coming from Tennessee and by the end of this
summer this number will be more than lOMW. The TSI has been fortunate in recruiting
a capable staff and work is progressing rapidly. The Request for Applications (RFA) was
released on June 8, 2010, and applications were accepted for this program beginning
June 21. As of this date (June 23) a total of 58 applications have been received. If all 58
applications were to be approved, almost 5MW of solar power would be available to be
installed on or around businesses in Tennessee. The program is open to for-profit and
not-for-profit 501(3)(C) organizations and is intended to help offset high installation
costs (especially for small companies) of small-scale (ground-out or roof-top) solar
systems funded on a reimbursement-based model. One factor for the good RFA
response is a grant workshop conducted by TSI staff in each of the nine development
districts to inform the public about opportunities available within the program. More
than 250 individuals participated in these workshops across the state.
Within the ARRA funding additional programs will be provided for Industry Assistance
and Workforce Development to develop and manage partnerships to support
commercialization. The solar industry is a relatively new industry now growing and
coming into its own. UT wants TSI to be the hub where everyone in Tennessee with any
solar energy interests will come and learn about the resources available through the TSI
programs. A database of industry resources and contacts will be created and
maintained to facilitate awareness of solar resources. Often Company A in Tennessee
does not know about the existence of Company B in Tennessee and Company A is
actually going out of state for resources when these services could be provided by
14
Company B. With a centralized hub this kind of information is available. Further,
partnering retreats, meetings and seminars will be conducted across the state; on-the-
ground assistance will be provided to industry; industry workforce needs assessments
will be conducted to better target real needs, i.e. more installers or more Ph.D.
expertise working on solar-safe materials; workforce development training
opportunities will be provided; and TSI will coordinate engineers, scientists and
manufacturers in solving specific technical problems and improving cost effectiveness.
The TSI website (http://solar.tennessee.edu) provides RFA information, applications,
and a variety of related information. A toll-free number is also given to contact TSI staff
for additional information if needed. Dr. Patterson introduced Dr. John Sanseverino, TSI
Director of Programs, and Ms. Kim Holbrook, TSI Communications Manager, who
attended the ROED Committee meeting.
Dr. Patterson stated the objectives given by Governor Bredesen for the West Tennessee
Solar Farm were to demonstrate a utility-scale power production project. This would be
at least a 5MW facility, one of the largest in the Southeast, with fixed-mount,
multicrystalline or monocrystalline photovoltaic panels. A 5MW facility will fill an
approximate 20-25 acres of solar panels. Plans are to connect the Solar Farm panels to
the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) grid through a local distributor in Haywood
County. As Governor Bredesen described in his announcement, the Solar Farm is
expected to grow and thus it will reinvest the revenue from its solar power sales back to
itself for array expansion, improvements and education programs. TSI is working closely
with the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TOOT) on Interstate Education and
Welcome Center plans to be co-located with the Solar Farm. The vision for this site is
for it to be a place where anyone, of any age, can come (Solar EPCOTT, Dr. Patterson
says) for a hands-on learning experience to feel they are virtually a part of the Farm in
learning about solar and other alternative energy programs. Potentially, the Farm can
also become a future demonstration site of emerging technologies and materials as they
emerge from UT and ORNl, resulting in faster commercialization of Solar Institute
innovation. Dr. Patterson showed a graphic of the Farm site in Haywood County and
noted the site directly edges Interstate 40 between mile-markers 42 and 45.
A schedule for the Solar Farm project was presented by Dr. Patterson. The RFP was
released earlier this month for the award contract for the design and installation of the
solar array and it is anticipated the contractor will be selected before the end of the
month. After this selection there are several processes to be followed including
National Environmental Protection Act guidelines, as the project is federally funded with
ARRA funds, and with the Department of Energy to make sure those regulations are met
as well. Post-FONSI (Findings Of No Significant Impact) procedures concerning
environmental and other issues must also meet compliance guidelines. It is hoped site
preparation and array installation can begin in September 2010 for a March 2011
completion of the connection with the TVA power grid. TOOT will start construction in
spring 2011 of the Education and Welcome Center, and work is taking place in these
15
collaborations to ensure TOOT construction and the Solar Farm installation project are
in tandem.
Dean Gourley asked Dr. Patterson about the fate of the solar panels should a natural
occurrence take place such as a hailstorm. Dr. Patterson noted that she has also given
thought to tornado disturbances. Damage to the solar panels in such circumstances
would require maintenance and/or reinvestment.
Dr. DiPietro asked about the initiative's education component and, in particular, aspects
concerning curriculum and materials development. Dr. Patterson noted that
recruitment of specific staff to lead in this effort has also taken place. UT Agriculture
and Extension staff will most likely also be utilized. Dr. DiPietro noted the valuable
resources within UTIA/Extension to contribute to the development of this programming.
Dr. Patterson noted she is enthusiastic about utilizing these resources and as well as
other UT colleagues at its campuses across the state, particularly at UT Martin which is
near the Solar Farm. The initiative, Dr. Patterson stated, is clearly going to be a
collaborative effort. The education component development is anticipated to be
finalized by April 2012.
Dr. DiPietro inquired about the initial plan for Genera Energy LLC to manage and
operate the Solar Farm. Dr. Gentry noted that after some review it was decided that the
Solar Farm operation is a better fit within the UT Research Foundation, particularly in
view of the high volume of Genera Energy undertakings at this time and the heavy load
Dr. Kelly Tiller, Genera Energy President and CEO, carries. Mr. Stansberry noted that
UT's performance in the Genera Energy's projects were highly instrumental in UT's
selection for the solar energy initiatives. Dr. Gentry noted that Genera Energy's
experience in the Vonore biorefinery operation and other projects proved UT can work
most successfully in large-scale project partnerships.
Mr. Stansberry thanked Dr. Patterson for her presentation.
VII. EPSCoR Update
Dr. Patterson also reported she was excited to provide an update on the National
Science Foundation (NSF) EPSCoR Research Infrastructure Improvement Program
proposal UT submitted last fall titled "Tennessee's Solar Conversion and Storage Using
Outreach, Research and Education" and known in-house as "TN-Score." EPSCoR is an
1xperimental E.rogram to ~timulate ~ompetitive Research and it is a program that is
open to states who receive less than their fair share of federal funding from a particular
federal agency. For NSF, Tennessee is one of 29 states or jurisdictions which fall under
EPSCoR. EPSCoR opens up programs and opportunities for funding that are not
available to jurisdictions or states above a certain threshold. Although Tennessee has
been EPSCoR-eligible since 2004, the award has been fairly elusive to Tennessee. The
"grand prizes" of NSF EPSCoR are the Research Infrastructure Improvement Programs
16
awards, particularly the Track I proposals. UT put together a team in late summer 09 to
prepare a proposal, believing the time was right in light of the Governor's investments
in other projects at UT and around the state. The proposal was submitted October 19,
2009, and the funding level requested was the full-funding amount of $20M over five
years. The proposal required a cost-share of 20 percent which was provided primarily
by the UT system, the UTK College of Engineering (which stepped up with both cost-
share commitments and significant assistance in proposal development), Vanderbilt
University, the Tennessee Technology Development Corporation, and the UT Research
Foundation.
Dr. Patterson said she is happy to report that after the NSF Committee's External Peer
Review the EPSCoR Office recommended to the NSF Board that Tennessee's award be
funded at the full amount. The NSF Board approved this recommendation and
additionally approved the NSF Director's ability to make the award to Tennessee. The
official award announcement is anticipated within the next month or two and the
Tennessee team is most excited about receiving the NSF EPSCoR award.
TN-Score, Dr. Patterson noted, is a proposal with a statewide scope. During the
proposal development specific barriers were identified in the state which limits the
state's funding potential. One barrier identified was geographical parochialism and the
lack of collaboration. A special theme of the proposal focused on creating a "culture of
collaboration" through a fairly novel mechanism of the creation of network nodes. A
unique aspect of the proposal was the integration of a diverse set of individual
researchers, institutions and organizations. The proposal offered plans for better
development of a well-prepared SCience/Technology/Engineering/Math (STEM)-enabled
workforce and incorporated programs to sustain long-term competitive research across
the state. The basic intent of the EPSCoR proposal, and indeed a requirement of the
proposal and rationale for the state's investment in many of the projects described
within the proposal, is to evidence the development of a solid base support and
platform which will create and contribute to additional funding opportunities and grow
the state's economic development priorities. This intent led to the TN-Score research
theme of alternative energy technologies with an emphasis on solar. The overall
research theme was divided into three thrust areas: (1) Advanced Solar Conversion and
Innovation, led by Drs. Barry Bruce at UTK and Kane Jennings at Vanderbilt; (2)
Components and Devices for Energy Storage and Conversion, led by Dr. Tom
Zawodzinski at UTK (a UT Governor's Chair) and Dr. Cynthia Rice-York at Tennessee Tech
University; and (3) Nanostructures for Enhancing Energy Efficiency, led by Dr. Sandra
Rosenthal at Vanderbilt and Dr. Nate Smith at Middle Tennessee State University.
Dr. Patterson showed a collaboration model diagram developed for the proposal. The
model pairs a lead institution mentor (LIM; generally faculty mentors with well-
established research programs) with a partnering university faculty (PUF; typically
younger university faculty members considered up-and-coming stars). The model
format is for the two paired faculty members to co-mentor graduate and undergraduate
17
students on research projects and to work together with outreach coordinators and a
statewide management team to make a positive impact in the field of research and in
growth ofthe state's economic development base. During the EPSCoR proposal
development, more than 50 faculty members from across the state, representing more
than 10 institutions, collaborated on the proposal. This is, as far as Dr. Patterson is
aware, unprecedented collaboration within the state.
Management of the EPSCoR program will be by the University of Tennessee. Dr.
Millhorn is the Principal Investigator on the award, Dr. Patterson noted. UT will be the
central hub in the work by the state management committee that has representatives
from the Tennessee Board of Regents, UT, Vanderbilt and other prime institutions
within the state. Two of the three research thrusts will be led by UTK faculty (Dr. Bruce
and Dr. Zawodzinski) and more than 14 faculty are named and involved as LlMS (UTK) or
PUFs (UT Space Institute), with opportunities for additional faculty involvement as the
grant matures. There is full support (salaries, tuition, supplies, travel) for 10 five-year
Ph.D. fellowships as well as several undergraduate research opportunities. The grant
also includes funding for large equipment and the overhead to be invested in additional
Ph.D. fellowships to support the new joint energy sciences program.
Statewide programs to be offered (managed from UT) include Research Stimulation
Awards which will be available to new faculty (hired within the past five years) at non-
research institutions with less than $40 federal research funding (this includes basically
all institutions within the state except UTK, Vanderbilt and the University of Memphis).
There is planned support for M.S. students at Tennessee State University and Fisk to
enter into a BRIDGE program whereby students can go straight from Master's degrees
to Ph.D. programs at UTK or Vanderbilt. "Meetings-in-Miniature" will be offered where
students and faculty can experience their peers, showcase their science (new inventions
that can possibly be disclosed to UTRF), and where students can meet their future
faculty mentors and mentors can meet prospective students and possibly recruit them
as well. Grants will be offered for networking and cyberinfrastructure enhancements,
and there is a vast array of K-12 outreach opportunities within the award. Tremendous
industry support within the state has provided commitments for corporate summer
internships for Ph.D. fellows working within the EPSCoR grant program. Summer
research experience will also be offered for undergraduate students or rising freshmen
will also be offered, as well as summer mini-sabbaticals for faculty at two-year
community colleges or four-year primarily undergraduate institutions. These students
will come to UT or Vanderbilt to learn research and/or teaching techniques and then
return to their home institution with a starter grant for implementation of what they
have learned. Summer programs will also be offered for Tennessee high school
teachers. As part of the award outreach program, thrust leaders have agreed to visit
high school classrooms during the grant's duration. A year-long undergraduate training
program will be offered, and the Council for Undergraduate Research has agreed to
provide a three-day workshop to institutions within the state directed at learning how
to start a research program at a primarily undergraduate institution.
18
Dr. Patterson discussed other impacts the EPSCoR award will have for the state. The
award will drive a large statewide research collaboration to build the foundations and
relationships needed to enhance research success. The proposal will build on
Tennessee's strengths, leverage the state's investments, align with recent industry
recruitment successes, and address identified barriers (geographical parochialism,
workforce development needs, etc.). Identified metrics will be monitored to measure
outcomes/successes and make adjustments as they are needed to maximize success for
the program. Dr. Patterson emphasized that the EPSCoR initiative is truly a statewide
program in every aspect and it reaches out to all faculty across the state.
Dr. DiPietro asked about website development for the program. Dr. Patterson noted
this aspect is included in the Year-One budget. Communication will be a key factor in
getting out the word about the many opportunities and programs offered within the
EPSCoR award to the appropriate institutions and individuals.
Dr. Patterson received congratulations and applause for receiving the award on behalf
of the University.
Mr. Stansberry thanked Dr. Patterson for her presentation and commended both Dr.
Millhorn and Dr. Patterson for the success of the EPSCoR proposal. It is a most
important initiative for the University. Mr. Stansberry noted that one ofthe pleasures
of his role as Chair for the Research, Outreach and Economic Development Committee is
learning about the large number of exciting UT projects to choose from to bring before
the Committee. Mr. Stansberry thanked Dr. Millhorn and his staff for the important
work they are doing to advance the image of the University across the state and nation.
VIII. New Business
There was no new business.
IX. Adjournment
Mr. Stansberry thanked members for their participation in the meeting. The meeting
adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
David E. Millhorn, Ph.D.
Executive Vice President
19
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
10:30 a.m. EDT Room 223-225
Thursday University Center
October 21, 2010 Knoxville, Tennessee
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting (behind agenda)
IV. Treasurer’s Report on Endowment Investment Performance—Information
(front pocket of notebook)
V. Treasurer’s Financial Report—Information (front pocket of notebook)
VI. Report on UTC Regional Tuition Discount for Graduate Programs—Information
VII. Approval of UTHSC Pediatric Faculty Practice Plan, Memphis .................... Tab 3
VIII. Approval of FY 2010 Annual Flight Operations Report—Consent ................ Tab 4
IX. FY 2010-11 Operating Budget Update—Information ..................................... Tab 5
X. Approval of FY 2011-12 Operating Budget Appropriations
Request—Consent........................................................................................ Tab 5
XI. Approval of FY 2011-12 Capital Outlay and Capital Maintenance
Projects—Consent ........................................................................................ Tab 6
XII. Approval of FY 2011-12 Revenue/Institutionally Funded
Projects—Consent ........................................................................................ Tab 6
XIII. Approval of UT Martin Master Plan—Consent (back pocket of notebook)
XIV. Approval of Real Property Transactions—Consent ...................................... Tab 7
A. Property Acquisition at 208 S. Dudley Street (UTHSC)
B. Grant of Permanent Easements for Cherokee Farm–Knoxville Utilities Board
(UT Knoxville)
C. Collins Gift Property, 114 Old Fulton Road (UT Martin)
D. Property Acquisition in Hornbeak, Tennessee, from Tennessee Wildlife
Resources Agency (UT Martin)
XV. Other Business
XVI. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
JUNE 23, 2010
The meeting of the Finance and Administration Committee of the Board of
Trustees was held at 12:45 p.m. EDT, Wednesday, June 23,2010 in Room
156/157 of the Plant Biotech Building on the Agriculture Campus in Knoxville.
I. Call to Order - Mr. Robert Talbott, Chair, called the meeting to order,
and made the following introductory remarks:
1. While the public is invited and welcome at all Board meetings, our
meetings are "in the public" but not "public meetings."
2. The Chair will recognize to speak only members of the committee,
other Trustees, and members of the senior staff.
3. The Committee has a set agenda and prepared materials for that
agenda. No "new business" has been brought to the Chair's
attention prior to the meeting.
4. Lastly, the name of the Trustee making the motion and the second
will be announced to help in the preparation of minutes.
II. Roll Call - Chair Talbott asked Mr. Charles Peccolo, Treasurer and
Chief Investment Officer/Acting Chief Financial Officer to call the roll.
He did so and advised the Chair that a quorum was present.
Present
Robert Talbott, Chair
Charles Anderson, Member
Bill Carroll, Member
John Foy, Member
Jim Murphy, Vice Chair of the Board
Jan Simek, Member
Charles Wharton, Member
Other Trustees Present
Anne Holt Blackburn, Trustee
George Cates, Trustee
Spruell Driver, Trustee
Tyler Forrest, Student Trustee
Crawford Gallimore, Trustee
Monice Moore Hagler, Trustee
Jim Hall, Trustee
Doug Horne, Trustee
Karen Johnson, Faculty Trustee
Andrea Loughry, Trustee
Karl Schledwitz, Trustee
Don Stansberry, Trustee
Betty Ann Tanner, Trustee
Sumeet Sudhir Vaikunth, Student Trustee
Also present was Mr. Charles Peccolo, other members of staff, and
media representatives.
III. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting-Consent Item-Chair Talbott
called for consideration of the last meeting's minutes. Trustee Carroll
moved approval of the minutes of last meeting; seconded by Trustee
Foy and approved unanimously.
IV. Treasurer's Report on Endowment Investment Performance-
Information Item (Exhibit 1)-Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to
present the Endowment Investment Performance Report. Mr. Peccolo
went over the one-page summary of the Consolidated Investment Pool
performance ended March 31, 2010 along with the one, five and-ten
year returns. For that period of time, it was good to be invested in the
capital markets. The Pool had a 3.5% quarterly return and a one-year
return of 32.5%. When this report was given to the UT Foundation,
Inc. Board they were quick to ask why it ended March 31 st rather than
May 31 SLthe answer should be obvious. The market since March 31 st
has been rather difficult. As you know, the nice gains domestic large
cap and international markets had for the first quarter of the year was
diminished and in fact were negative through May 31 st . The
University's portfolio through May is still up over 15%. The Pool is
expected to have a good strong mid-teen return for the year,
depending on the last week and a half of June. Some time ago the
Investment Advisory Committee restructured the portfolio, particularly
after the large run in the public markets and repositioned it to take
some of the volatility out of the portfolio by investing in more long/short
strategies in equity and it has helped the portfolio. The Consolidated
Investment Pool's performance through May 31 is about flat but fiscal
year-to-date it is still up over 15% and will help the portfolio going
forward.
V. Ratification of 2009-10 Quasi-Endowments-Consent Item (Exhibit
2)-Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to continue with the next item.
Mr. Peccolo began by saying in 1995 a Board of Trustees Resolution
authorized the University, with approval by the President and
Treasurer, to establish quasi-endowments throughout the year. The
Board receives an annual report on the names and amounts of such
quasi-endowments from the previous year at the June meeting to
review and ratify.
The attached schedule reflects 6 quasi-endowments that were
established from July 2009 to June 2010 and totaled $1,182,670.86.
2
These are gifts to the University and the donor has not stipulated that
they be held in perpetuity for endowments. It is the University
administration's recommendation that they be treated as such hence
the term quasi-endowment. Four are bequests that came to the
University. The Archeological Research Lab has requested that
University funds be used to establish a quasi-endowment. This is an
action item.
Trustee Wharton moved that the ratification of quasi-endowments
established during FY 2009-2010 be approved; seconded by Trustee
Foy and approved unanimously.
VI. Approval of Establishment of Haslam Torch Investment Fund
(Student Managed) -Consent Item (Exhibit 3)-Chair Talbott noted
that the next item was a consent item for the establishment of the
Haslam Torch Investment Fund. Mr. Peccolo explained that Jim and
Natalie Haslam have pledged a million dollars over three years to
provide a hands-on learning experience for the students of the College
of Business at the Knoxville Campus. It is called the Haslam Torch
Fund. The reason this item is being presented to the Board is because
these are now University funds that have been gifted and will be turned
over to a third party trustee and the students will actually manage
them.
There was a similar fund that was established at UT Chattanooga
approximately 15 years ago and has provided a great learning
experience for the students. The University gets an annual report from
the faculty member at UT Chattanooga that oversees that fund so it
can be recorded on the University's balance sheet and allows the
University to monitor the activities of the fund.
This is an action item acknowledging that the University has received
the money but will turn it over to a third party trustee per the intent of
Jim and Natalie Haslam.
Trustee Anderson moved the approval of the Resolution concerning
the establishment of the James A. Haslam 1/ and Natalie L. Haslam
Endowed Torch Fund, as presented in the meeting materials;
seconded by Trustee Wharton and approved unanimously.
VII. Authorization to File a Petition in Knox County Chancery court to
Modify the Purpose of an Endowment Fund Established for the
Benefit of the School of Architecture and Approval to Use the
Fund to Establish an Endowed Visiting Professorship in the
School of Architecture-Consent Item (Exhibit 4)-Chair Talbott
asked Catherine Mizell, General Counsel and Secretary of the
University to present. Ms. Mizell addressed the Committee and stated
that Dean John McRae of the College of Architecture and Design, with
the concurrence of Chancellor Cheek and President Simek, have
requested the University seek court approval to modify the terms of a
3
gift to the University. An endowment fund that was created for the
benefit of the School of Architecture.
The endowment was created in 1993 pursuant to the terms of the last
will and testament of Blanche McKinny Barber. Mrs. Barber was the
widow of Charles I. Barber who was a prominent architect in Knoxville
and started what is now known as the BarberMcMurry firm. It was
founded in 1915. Mrs. Barber's Will provided that the income of this
endowment would be used to memorialize her husband in two ways; to
build a building or a wing onto a building for the use of the School of
Architecture, and to purchase books for the architectural library. When
Mrs. Barber executed her will in 1977 the School of Architecture did
not have its own building and did not have a library. However, by the
time the endowment was actually funded in 1993 the School of
Architecture had both thus no longer had the need for the things Mrs.
Barber had provided for.
Today, the value of the endowment is approximately $870,000.
Obviously, this amount is far less than would be needed to build a
building or even a wing onto a building and is far more than needed to
purchase books particularly with the added on-line databases. While
the endowment fund sits essentially unused the School of Architecture
has identified a pressing need for an endowed visiting professorship to
attract nationally and internationally renowned professors and
practicing architects who would not only enhance the quality of the
educational experience with the students but would also Significantly
enhance the prestige of the School of Architecture.
The business partners of the BarberMcMurry firm highly endorse this
professorship and have pledged to contribute an additional $250,000
to the fund.
Mrs. Barber did not have any children and the three individuals named
in her will are all now deceased. Tennessee Law recognizes that a
change in circumstances may mean that a donor's stated purpose for
an endowment is no longer needed or feasible resulting in the donor's
charitable purpose being frustrated. We believe that is precisely what
is happened in this case. Mrs. Barber clearly wanted to benefit the
School of Architecture. The purposes she specified were no longer
needed by the time the fund was established.
To establish this change of purpose in the endowment the University
must file an action in Chancery Court and establish that the purposes
of the fund specified by Mrs. Barber are either impracticable,
impossible to achieve or wasteful. The administration requests the
Board to authorize the General Counsel's Office to file the required
court action to modify the purpose of the fund and to approve use of
the fund for the endowed visiting professorship. A formal motion is
indicated in the materials.
4
Chair Talbott asked if there was another step in the process where the
Attorney General is involved. Ms. Mizell stated that technically when
you file the motion you have to give notice to the Attorney General
Office who represents the interest of the charitable gift. My office has
already been working with the Attorney General and he has indicated
to us that he will support our action in this regard and will provide
whatever we need to file it in court.
Chair Talbott stated an important fact that the BarberMcMurry partners
agree and have also pledged to contribute money to the University for
this purpose.
Vice Chair Murphy moved that the General Counsel be authorized to
file a petition in Knox County Chancery Court to modify the terms of
the endowment fund created for the benefit of the School of
Architecture pursuant to the terms of the Last Will and Testament of
Blanche McKinny Barber; and, upon court modification of the purpose
of the fund, approval for the fund to be used to establish an endowed
visiting professorship in the School of Architecture; seconded by
Trustee Foy and approved unanimously.
VIII. Approval of Real Property Transactions-Consent Items-Chair
Talbott informed the Committee that the next item was the Real
Property transactions and each one has to be approved individually.
Mr. Peccolo presented the following:
A. Grant of a Water Line Easement to Glen Hills Utility District
(Greeneville 4-H Center)-Consent item (Exhibit 5)-The first is
a grant of a water line Easement to Glen Hill Utility District which
is baSically the Greeneville 4-H Center. This is an easement to
extend and increase a permanent 4" water line to an 8" water
line along the existing road right-of-way in Greeneville,
Tennessee. The University is not seeking any monetary
consideration in granting this Easement in that the Easement
will increase the water pressure to our facilities for fire safety
improvements.
Trustee Foy moved the approval of the grant of a water line
Easement to Glen Hills Utility District as presented in the
meeting materials; seconded by Trustee Carroll and approved
unanimously.
B. Grant of a Water Line Easement (UTIA, Plateau Research &
Education Center)-Consent item (Exhibit 6)-This item is a
grant of a water line Easement to the City of Crossville with the
Plateau Research and Education Center. In this case the
proposed water line Easement lies along right-of-way of State
Route 70N. The City of Crossville will construct and maintain an
underground water line with the perpetual right to enter from
time-to-time to install, maintain, repair, rebuild, protect, extend,
5
connect to, operating and patrol, as well as the right to tap on
additional lines and/or customers.
In this case, the University will see and receive from the City of
Crossville the fair market value of the proposed Easement.
Trustee Wharton asked if the City of Crossville took on
additional customers are we going to have adequate water for
ourselves. Robbi Stivers, Director of Real Estate Management
stated that it is a water line Easement for the City and is a more
efficient line than previous and it should not cause the University
any loss of water or pressure. Chair Talbott stated that if there
is an issue it would have to be brought back before the Board
anyway.
Trustee Foy moved the approval of the water line Easement and
the temporary construction Easement as presented in the
meeting materials; seconded by Trustee Anderson and
approved unanimously.
C. Acquisition of an Easement by Gift from Bioworks Foundation
(UTHSC, College of Pharmacy)-Consent item (Exhibit 7)-
Lastly, the third item is an acquisition of Easement by gift from
the Bioworks Foundation for the use of the College of
Pharmacy. This is a required Easement regarding property
owned by the Memphis Bioworks Foundation for a nitrogen
storage tank.
The University seeks authorization to accept as a gift the
required interest in the real property at the Memphis campus
south of Madison Avenue and East of the Health Science
Center's Pharmacy. Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo if this item
was to benefit the University and he said yes and there is no
capital outlay required.
Vice Chair Murphy moved the approval of the acquisition of an
Easement as presented in the meeting materials; seconded by
Trustee Wharton and approved unanimously.
IX. Approval of Annual Report of Sale of Gift Property (2009-10)-
Consent item (Exhibit B)-Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to present
the Annual Report of Sale of Gift Property. Mr. Peccolo stated that
there was only one item to report. Gift property by Bill and Donna
Cobble on Downtown West Boulevard was sold to the University to be
used for offices. The property was conveyed into a Trust and the
University was the administrator of that Trust. The University resigned
as the administrator and had a Knoxville firm take over as Trustee of
the Trust so that the University would not be the administrator of the
charitable remainder Trust.
6
The University purchased the property after retaining all the proper
state approvals. The Trust now has the cash to invest to provide the
income stream to the income beneficiaries which are the Cobbles.
Vice Chair Murphy confirmed that the University gets what is left over
after the distributions are made and Mr. Peccolo replied yes.
Trustee Carroll moved approval of the 2009-10 Annual Report of Sale
of Gift Property; seconded by Trustee Anderson and approved
unanimously.
X. Approval of FY 2011 Operating and Capital Plans for Senior
University Administrator Residences-Consent Item (Exhibit 9)-
Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to continue with the FY 2011
Operating and Capital Plans for Senior University Administrator
Residences. Mr. Peccolo began by saying two residences are still
maintained. One in Chattanooga and one in Knoxville. The budget is
attached for the maintenance and operation of these facilities for fiscal
year 2011.
The Chattanooga house requires a budget of $91 ,000 and it is the
same budget that was provided for in fiscal year 2010. The gift funds
are provided by the UC Foundation for the home.
The Knoxville residence is up for sale and that is reflected in the
budget for fiscal year 2011. In fiscal year 2010 the budget was
$50,000 and we have budgeted $25,000 for fiscal year 2011. It is the
best guess of what it will take to maintain that property before it is sold.
Mr. Peccolo mentioned that the $25,000 should have been listed under
general funds as the funding source.
Vice Chair Murphy moved approval of the operating and capital plans
for senior administrator residences as presented in the meeting
materials; seconded by Trustee Anderson and approved unanimously.
XI. Report of Capital Projects Outside the Budget Process-
Information Item (Exhibit 1O)-Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to
continue. Mr. Peccolo began by advising the Committee that this is an
information item. The attached schedule lists the capital projects that
the University is undertaking outside of the budget process pursuant to
the Board's approval of October 2009. The funds represented are
stimulus funds provided the University and are being used for one-time
capital maintenance projects. These projects have been submitted to
the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC) and approved.
The projects are included in the Governor's 2011 Budget and total
$11,965,000.
XII. Review of Fee Changes Requiring President's Approval-
Information Item (Exhibit 11)-Chair Talbott requested Mr. Peccolo to
inform the Committee of the Fee Changes Requiring President's
7
Approval. According to a Board policy on fee approval there are
certain fees the President can approve. The University administration
reports those fees back to the Board once a year. Submitted to you
are miscellaneous course fees that cover lab fees, application and
other student fees. There are 89 special fees that are course specific.
The predominant number is for the Knoxville campus and they have
been presented to the President for approval. These fees are
presented to the Board as information.
XIII. Review of FY 2011 UT Foundation, Inc. Operating Budget-
Information Item (Exhibit 12)-Chair Talbott noted that the items were
moving along smoothly and asked Mr. Peccolo to present the UT
Foundation Operating Budget. Mr. Peccolo noted that the fiscal year
2010 and 2011 budgets were similar but pointed out there was a
budget deficit of $62,100. If that amount is realized it will be funded
from beginning net assets. The particular item that gives rise to this
budgeted shortfall is the absence of unrestricted gifts. Last year the
Foundation anticipated having the Memorandum of Understanding
between the Foundation and the University in place. One of the
initiatives there was for the Foundation to solicit more unrestricted
annual gifts to help with the annual operating budget. It hasn't gotten
quite that far yet so it is being reflected as zero fully anticipating the
launch of new fund raising effort just for the Foundation for operating
costs. Also, the estimated interest income is a conservative estimate
for next year in that the increase level of gift funds that flow through the
UT Foundation allows us to invest it for a time to provide the flow. This
budget was submitted and approved by the UT Foundation Board
yesterday. Trustee Loughry mentioned that the main comment was
the solicitation of unrestricted funds. Chair Talbott asked if the
operating deficits were coming out of the original fund balance that
went into the Foundation and Mr. Peccolo said yes.
XIV. Review of FY 2011 UT Research Foundation Operating Budget-
Information Item (Exhibit 13)-Chair Talbott asked Mr. Peccolo to
present the FY 2011 UT Research Foundation Operating Budget
(UTRF). Mr. Peccolo explained to the Committee that the spreadsheet
sent out to the Board earlier had a small error and that an updated
copy had been handed out. The UTRF budget is $5.3 million and color
coded so that the Committee can identify the dollars that are flowing
through the two funding sources. The first comes from UTRF's
operations (licensing fees received and royalty payments). The figures
in red are those that come from UTRF's revenues. The figures in blue
are a budget line item for the University of Tennessee which has long
provided support for the intellectual property outcome from research
efforts. In this budget $1,591,419 is provided by the University of
Tennessee for support of salaries and operating costs. UTRF supports
legal fees that protect the intellectual properties. This budget is about
13% less than it was last year because UTRF, like everyone else, is
tightening its belt. The budget is broken down into three units; one is
the multidisciplinary organization, the Health Science Center
8
organization and the central office that oversees both of those satellite
locations. This item is presented to the Committee as an information
item. When the Board considers the budget for the entire University
tomorrow it will contain the $1,591,419 for the budgeted University
expenses. Mr. Peccolo asked Trustee Stansberry if he had any
comments because of his active involvement with UTRF. This budget
was presented and approved by the UT Research Foundation Board.
Trustee Stansberry said that in the last UTRF Board meeting there is a
higher level of activity that will be beneficial to the University.
XV. Approval of FY 2011 Distribution of UC Foundation Funds-
Consent item (Exhibit 14)-Chair Talbott informed the Committee that
the next item was the Approval of FY 2011 Distribution of UC
Foundation Funds and that it was an action item. He asked Mr.
Peccolo to present. Mr. Peccolo informed the Committee that it is an
action item. The Board approves the distribution of funds from the
University of Chattanooga Foundation. He noted that this year the
recurring support to the Chattanooga campus is $1,234,455. The
amount non-recurring is $25,000 for a total of $1 ,259,455. It is down
11% from last year, again, reflecting the difficult capital markets over
the past year as to what is available to be distributed. This information
was reviewed and approved by the University of Chattanooga
Foundation Board. This item is an action item.
Trustee Foy moved the approval of the FY 2011 Distribution of UC
Foundation Funds as presented in the meeting materials; seconded by
Trustee Anderson and approved unanimously.
XVI. Approval of President Emeritus Agreements-Consent item
(Exhibit 1S)-Chair Talbott stated that the next item was the Approval
of President Emeritus Agreements. He then asked Dr. Simek to
address the Committee. Dr. Simek stated that the Public Chapter 840
of the Tennessee Public Acts of 2000 authorizes higher education
institutions to enter into one-year agreements with former presidents
for services. The agreement may be renewed from year to year if the
governing board is satisfied with the performance of services.
In the Board materials there are reports from Drs. Boling and Johnson
of the services they performed during fiscal year 2009-2010. Following
their reports are the proposed agreements that require the Board's
approval for fiscal year 2010-2011.
The salaries and all other terms of the agreements for both Dr. Boling
and Dr. Johnson remain unchanged from last year.
Trustee Carroll moved that the President Emeritus Agreements, FY
2011 for Dr. Edward J. Boling and Dr. Joseph E. Johnson be
approved; seconded by Trustee Foy and approved unanimously.
9
XVII. Approval of Amendment of Lease and Transfer Agreement with
University Health System, Inc., and Approval of Fee Owner
Recognition Agreement-Consent item (Exhibit 16)-Chair Talbott
asked Mr. Peccolo to present the Approval of Amendment of Lease
and Transfer Agreement with University Health System, Inc. Mr.
Peccolo began by saying some time ago University Health System,
Inc. (UHS) approached the University about trying to restructure their
balance sheet. UHS wanted to monetize five of the existing medical
office buildings on the medical campus as well as build a sixth one.
There have been ongoing discussions over the past year regarding this
and how it will be structured. We learned at the most recent meeting
that the plan had changed somewhat and UHS wants to address only
the need for the sixth medical office building to provide private practice
offices for the clinical physicians and some office space for the faculty
of the University's Graduate School of Medicine located in Knoxville.
The new building would be approximately 100,000 square feet and
constructed on .88 acres of land. The issue is the developer that has
been selected through competitive means needs a sixty-five year lease
term for the new office building which is twenty-seven years beyond
the current Lease and Transfer Agreement which expires in 2049.
This action item is a request to the Board to authorize the University to
continue these negotiations, develop the documents, get all of the
State of Tennessee required approvals and then return to the
Executive Compensation Committee for final approval.
Currently under discussion is the Lease value of the .88 acres in 2049
and what the cash flow would be for twenty-seven years discounting
that back then to a present value. There is a figure in mind to ask for a
one-time upfront payment to allow this. President Simek, Mr. Talbott,
Ms. Mizell have all been involved so hopefully between us we can
provide any clarity or questions you may have.
Trustee Wharton asked what discounted rate was used and Mr.
Peccolo said for modeling that the number used was 5%.
Vice Chair Murphy address Mr. Peccolo and said as I understand it
basically the University would enter into some kind of arrangement with
the developer that would say that at the end of the current Lease term
you would be able to stay on this property for the full sixty-five years.
Mr. Peccolo answered yes it is a non-disturbance type of arrangement.
Chair Talbott added that it allows UHS to build another 100,000 square
feet building that they need to do.
Dr. Simek then raised an issue that this is going to be an ongoing issue
for the University. As we move further into the Lease term, UHS is
going to be in front with more and more problematic ability to develop
and advance their operations on a Lease that is shrinking. Dr. Simek
added that in his opinion especially as a new President comes in it
10
would be a perfect time to begin a conversation between the
University, Board and UHS to develop plans for the future. A Lease is
in place and no one wants to have to aggravate that at this point but
how that gets extended and what the issues are needs to be thought of
now. There will come a time when UHS will no longer develop
because there is no benefit for them to do so. The University does not
necessarily want that to happen. It is probably time to start having
conversations about the future of this property. Mr. Peccolo added that
was consistent for what was contemplated in the original Lease and
Transfer and calls for the University to sit down with UHS in 2019 to
renegotiate the ongoing relationship. You are correct it is timely.
Trustee Horne commented that he believes what was agreed upon
was a $50 million payout after 20 years. It is now eleven years later
and how much has UHS paid off of the $50 million. Mr. Peccolo
explained that he did not have that schedule and did not know the
information off the top of his head but could certainly get the
information. Mr. Talbott stated UHS paid $25 million upfront and it is a
catch up at the end. UHS has to pay the other $25 million by 2019.
Mr. Horne then asked if the University extends the Lease twenty-seven
years he would like to see it go back to a percent gross on debt. He
explained that he was just throwing that in the hopper. Vice Chair
Murphy explained that this motion doesn't approve an extension of the
Lease. Dr. Simek added that it is time to sit down, look at and
renegotiate the Lease so that in 2019 the University has a we" thought
out, developed, rational solution. Chair Talbott noted that obviously
the University has a reversionary interest in the campus. It is in the
University's best interest to do everything possible to make that
campus more valuable. That is what Dr. Simek is talking about is the
University has an interest, UHS has an interest and how do we make
those interests together better for both parties. That is the plan. This
action is only talking about .88 acres for UHS to build the medical
office building.
Vice Chair Murphy moved that the administration be authorized to
negotiate modification of the 1999 UT/UHS Lease and Transfer
Agreement and any other necessary documents to accommodate the
proposed development and construction of a new medical office
building with a real property footprint of approximately .88 acres,
subject to securing all required State of Tennessee approvals and final
review and approval by the Executive and Compensation Committee;
seconded by Trustee Carro" and approved unanimously.
XVIII. Approval of Pilot Regional Tuition Rate Program for Contiguous
Out-of-State Counties (UTM)-Consent item (Exhibit 17)-Chair
Talbott stated that the next item was the Approval of Pilot Regional
Tuition Rate Program for Contiguous Out-of-State Counties at UT
Martin and asked Drs. Simek and Rakes to present. Dr. Simek told the
Committee that UT Martin requests permission to establish a two-year
pilot regional tuition rate for undergraduate students who meet current
11
admissions standards but reside in three Mississippi counties
contiguous to Tennessee. The proposed rate would include all in-state
charges plus an additional 20 percent out-of-state differential for
eligible students from the following counties: Alcom, Tippah, and
Tishomingo. This is only applicable to the regional center, UT Martin
Selmer.
Vice Chair Murphy informed Dr. Rakes, Chancellor of UT Martin that
he would be asked the same kinds of questions that Chattanooga was
asked when they came before the Board the first time about tuition rate
discounts. Part of this idea is prefaced upon the concept that we have
unused capacity that these students can fill. If we don't have unused
capacity this request does not make any sense financially at all to give
discounts to anyone. He asked Dr. Rakes if that was in fact what is
going on at the Selmer Center. Dr. Rakes said that Vice Chair Murphy
was on target and mentioned that for more than a decade UT Martin
has had a situation similar to this with the nearest Kentucky counties.
Students are not eligible for the regional rate if they participate in
NCAA athletics and there are two of those Students at Selmer. From
the three counties there are roughly 200 high school seniors in the
area that Selmer services. That would double our recruitment in this
area. In the last year, an expansion was completed on the Selmer
Center and added four to five more classrooms. We have also capped
this proposed program at thirty students. They have to remain in good
academic standing to stay there. There is plenty of capacity to
accommodate the extra students and can actually accommodate three
times this many. Vice Chair Murphy said that is part of why these
regional discounted tuition rates are done as pilots so they are looked
at periodically and make sure that those factors are still in place. If you
have capacity that is not being used, the facilities and I assume you
have the faculty and staff that will not require you to go out and hire
new people. Trustee Stansberry asked why the facility was expanded
if there wasn't capacity. Dr. Rakes answered that we didn't have extra
capacity until we expanded it. The idea was to expand it to bring more
students in. Dr. Rakes said that he does not see how these students
are being subsidized if there is room for them without turning any of
our students away and asked if he was missing something. Trustee
Stansberry said he was missing why the Selmer Center was expanded
when there was already enough room. Dr. Rakes said that is the
problem we didn't already have room. We expanded because we were
growing and now can grow even more. The State provided the money
for the expansion and the City and County own the building. We can
handle more business and it makes good sense to me.
Vice Chair Murphy summarized that what the Selmer Center has is
several years of capacity to grow by using this process you are putting
students in those seats from Mississippi as opposed to students from
Tennessee because you don't have them right now. What we are
saying is that works O.k. until you have students from Tennessee
12
needing those seats and then we will then look harder at letting you put
the Mississippi students there at a discounted rate. They would have
to attend at a full rate. Dr. Rakes said that is a fair choice. Currently, it
has not turned out to be an issue with the Kentucky counties.
Chair Talbott asked if Chattanooga is consistent in pricing on this out-
of-state discounted tuition rate with what Selmer is requesting to
charge. Dr. Brown, Chancellor at UT Chattanooga informed the
Committee that UTC put a 25% surcharge on in-state rates. Chair
Talbott asked if that was consistent and Dr. Rakes said within 5%.
Trustee Schledwitz said no is the answer and Chair Talbott asked if we
should be. Dr. Rakes said that UT Martin could live with the 5%
decrease. Dr. Simek said that is a good point and that the University
should be consistent. Trustee Fay said that you don't look at the other
benefits that these campuses are giving to out-of-state students. You
can ask Volkswagen, Alstom and a lot of people in Chattanooga if it is
a good benefit. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve was in
Chattanooga and he was impressed with the fact that we are reaching
across county lines. Granted, it does not give the University a lot more
money but it does create economic development for those areas. You
can't just look at what it is costing the University. It is good that we are
filling seats and it isn't costing our residents but it is an important factor
for economic growth. It was a really important element with
Volkswagen in Chattanooga.
Vice Chair Murphy stated again, I don't have a problem with using that
resource when it is not needed for Tennesseans. When we say we
have to expand because we don't have capacity, at that point, we
should be looking from a financial standpoint who is paying full rate.
The State of Tennessee is paying for the difference of the tuition and
the in-state student's costs and basically the State of Tennessee is
paying for them as well. At some point you have to consider that those
are nice economic development opportunities but I am not sure that it
is something Tennessee is willing to pay for.
Dr. Rakes added that in the current funding formula the State does not
reimburse the University for out-of-state tuition. Vice Chair Murphy
said someone is paying for it. They are not getting educated for free
and it is either being paid out of state appropriations or out of tuition. If
I am an out-of-state tuition student and I am not in one of the preferred
counties I would pay full rate for the cost of my education. The only
people that don't pay full rate right now at UT Martin are those from the
selected counties of Kentucky, this group if they live in the selected
counties of Mississippi are in-state students. We are giving these
people a benefit and understand that there are collateral benefits.
Those are important as a justification why we as Tennesseans should
be doing some of this. We have a limited resource and at some point it
won't make sense for us to be giving that limited resource to people
from other states if we need it. These pilots are o.k. from the
standpoint of doing it while we have that capacity. I am not
13
comfortable with it when we get to the point when there is no longer
capacity and then becomes an issue of can we afford, as a State, to
continue to use our limited resource to benefit people in surrounding
states.
Trustee Stansberry asked if every student from Tennessee is admitted
that academically qualifies. Dr. Rakes replied yes. He added that as
he understands it a Tennessee resident who wants to attend school in
Missouri or Illinois can go at their state rate. What has happened in
other states is the same issue that we are fighting with one hand tied
behind us. It is cost effective not only what we get from it but what the
students get from it. By the way, there are two private schools and a
community college near where the Selmer center is located. Other
states have figured out that this is truly good business. In fact, the
reason Tennessee students are not flooding to Illinois right now is
because it is cheaper to go to school in Tennessee which gets back to
Vice Chair Murphy's point. Vice Chair Murphy said when we get to the
point where we are charging almost the full rate and only getting a
small portion of state money it will become much more sensible to do
these kinds of things because all will be paying the same amount.
Personally, that is the trend we are on. Trustee Schledwitz said
unfortunately a 25% premium is getting close to what the State is
contributing. Vice Chair Murphy replied not yet but is getting there. At
that point, it won't matter if they are in-state or out-of-state students.
Trustee Foy said then you look at graduation rates and we better be
recruiting better stUdents from that standpoint. If you are going to stay
with Tennessee students great but can you get the others to push your
graduation rates up. Vice Chair Murphy said those are all challenges.
From a starting point, the question is where will the money come from?
It might be that what we say is we will give smart students from those
surrounding counties a discount but we won't give it to others.
Trustee Cates asked if Mississippi gave Tennessee residents a price
break. Dr. Rakes replied that he does not know and that they do not
lose that many students to them.
Trustee Hall stated that Tennessee more than any state in the union
has bleeding on all of its borders. It is in the State's best interest not to
be in a situation where it is not competitive in trying to attract students
from the regions to attend our three year universities. It is in the
State's interest and it is a good investment of state dollars to try and
attract these students and keep them in Tennessee. I know that it is
important in repeating what Trustee Foy said that to Volkswagen and
Alstom it doesn't look like Chattanooga, TN doesn't stop at the border.
They have to pull an educated workforce from that region and as a
metropolitan university the UT interest does not stop at the line of
Chattanooga. If you go one mile away from the state line you are in
Georgia. It is a different situation when you live in Chattanooga and
you look at the situation in west Tennessee. The Board of Regents
14
schools provide these benefits and there should be one size fits all in
those situations but I respect the Vice Chair's opinion.
Trustee Talbott said looking at it from a cash standpoint that money
goes to the bottom line. Dr. Rakes said yes and in two years we will
have been successful or not.
Vice Chair Murphy echoed Trustee Hall's point. He said that part of
the reason for his comments is so that Dr. Rakes understands the
same thing that was told to Chattanooga. You are not being treated
differently and giving you less of a challenge than was given to them.
They did a good job when they brought this program to the Board the
first time and justified why it made sense and I voted for it. He then
said that he is o.k. with the Selmer program as long as there is
capacity. It does make sense to fill those seats up until such time as
we need them. We will have to look really hard at where we are at
when you get to the point that you have to add capacity. We might be
at a point where the in-state and out-of-state tuition is so small it
makes sense that they receive the in-state tuition. If the trend keeps
on we will get there pretty soon.
Trustee Blackburn asked Dr. Rakes what he knows about the students
who have been in the Martin programs on the Kentucky line or in
similar types of programs in terms of where these students go when
they get their education. Where is it that they spend their learning and
what state benefits. Dr. Rakes said he does not have the numbers
with him particularly for the Kentucky students. In general, nationally
students have a tendency to stay and work in the state where they get
their education. Those numbers need to be reviewed. They develop
an affinity for where they go to school. Trustee Blackburn asked if
there was any kind of encouragement or incentive to give Tennessee
some of that service rather than taking it somewhere else so that
Tennessee feels it has a return on meeting our goals and aspirations
to produce an educated work force.
Trustee Foy moved approval of a two-year pilot regional tuition rate
program at UT Martin for undergraduates who reside in three
contiguous counties in Mississippi as presented in the meeting
materials; seconded by Trustee Wharton and approved unanimously.
XIX. Approval of Extension of Regional Tuition Rate Program for
Undergraduate Students from Contiguous Out-of-State Counties
(UTC)-Consent item (Exhibit 18)-Chair Talbott asked Dr. Roger
Brown, Chancellor UTC to present the Tuition Rate Program. Dr.
Brown said that Dr. Richard Brown, Vice Chancellor of Finance to give
the Committee a view of the revenue picture on the program that you
allowed UTC to run for three years similar to the one Chancellor Rakes
just received approval to start.
15
Dr. Richard Brown addressed the Committee and Vice Chair and
stated that UTC's story is similar to what has already been presented.
Its mission is to be a metropolitan university but the service area is
regional. The campus sets on the border of north Alabama and north
Georgia. These are growing technical communities and that is why we
recommended this pilot program a couple of years ago.
He then presented the undergraduate level. It was approved by the
Board of Trustees in June 2007. The eligibility is limited to seven
counties in north Georgia and north Alabama. Students must have
earned at least 60 credit hours to receive the discount. This is
important because it was approved for the junior and senior level. All
students had to be admitted in good standing with UTC. Participants
receive 75 percent reduction on out-of-state tuition.
The full out-of-state tuition rate is $8,477 and the discounted tuition
rate is $4,240.25 and is based on full-time enrollment, inclusive of all
fees for that semester.
The numbers were based on a break even analysis and matching the
numbers from spring 2009 to spring 2010. Enrollment for 2009 was
102.59 FTE and the actual revenue generated was $351,371. The
targeted break even revenue was $147,109 and this program had a
gain of $204,262 in year one.
Comparatively speaking in year two spring 2010 this program is
growing again with 122.58 FTE now participating in the program. The
actual program revenue was $449,256 and the targeted break-even
point revenue was $244,330. Again, this program had a gain of
$204,926 in year two.
A total of gain of $409,188 was reached over the two-year pilot period.
As you can see these numbers work and students are coming.
We are trying to recruit the best and the brightest from those particular
communities and the average GPA is 2.98. The average number of
completed hours is 99.43 from these students already so it appears
they will complete their degrees. The number of students requesting
housing is 37. The popular undergraduate majors include Psychology,
Nursing, Engineering, Business and Biology. Bear in mind that
students that come within the program also bring other revenues to the
University campus.
Population projections also drive this as a competitive strategy. The
campus cannot be stagnant and one has to continuously look at what
will position the University as a sustainable type of competiveness.
The growth around Hamilton County in the past 20 years is stagnant
and in fact has lost a little bit of growth but when you look at these
other counties they continue to grow expediently.
16
Again, the pool of students coming from these areas is significant.
Dalton State College provides full in-state rates for Hamilton county
students. Other Universities within these counties have also offered
tuition discounts.
Trustee Wharton asked Vice Chancellor Brown to go back to the
undergraduate revenue slide regarding the gain of $409,188. He
stated that 2009 to 2010 there were 20 students added and some of
the students in the 102 enrollment number from 2009 were in their
senior year. The 20 students added from 2009 to 2010 is slower
growth than in previous years and asked if he was missing something.
Dr. Roger Brown replied that one explanation is that it is the spring
semester and many times a student will choose to start in the fall
instead of the spring cycle. The fall enrollment numbers were
significantly stronger. Trustee Wharton said those numbers would be
helpful in evaluating UTC's success with this program and Chancellor
Brown said that they will make sure and get those numbers to him.
Trustee Talbott said in that regard that he was confused and thought
that the revenue would be incremental revenue but now we are talking
about breakeven. He asked if there were incremental costs because
of these new students. Chancellor Brown explained that the
breakeven was how many students would be needed to generate
enough tuition to replace the % discount that was given. Breakeven
was net new students. He verified that the University's cost did not go
up and Chancellor Brown said that is correct.
Trustee Gallimore asked if the 102 students were already enrolled in
the fall of 2009 and just because we passed that they fell under this
new program. Chancellor Brown said if you had asked us that in the
fall of 2008 some of that would have been true. We are not just
transferring students that were already enrolled now two years into it.
We were doing some aggressive recruiting at this point.
Trustee Stansberry noted that if we are going to evaluate these things
from time-to-time can data be supplied about these students compared
to our other students that stay in Tennessee.
Trustee Johnson asked is this the amount of money that would have
been made if you had collected the entire out-of-state tuition rate. This
is above and beyond what we believed we would have earned in tuition
if we had stayed at the old enrollment levels from those counties.
Trustee Johnson then asked how much money was spent in marketing
to attract these students. Chancellor Brown said that he did not know
the exact amount that was spent but it was very little as the admisSions
office will tell you and he believed the allocation was $20,000 -
$30,000. Vice Chancellor Brown said it was approximately $25,000.
Vice Chair Murphy reiterated that this is what we have been getting
from these areas and with this incentive the target is what you thought
you would be getting. Chancellor Brown said that is absolutely correct
17
in new enrollment. Vice Chair Murphy added and what this shows is
how much in addition to that target you have made. Chancellor Brown
thanked him for clarifying it. Vice Chair Murphy noted that Vice
Chancellor Brown made a note at the end of the presentation that this
is still not adding cost from the standpoint they still will have capacity
primarily due to the limit of who we are allowing to go into the program.
It is not in the first and second years when they are competing with
new admissions it is in the junior and senior years where you have to
have capacity. He asked Vice Chancellor if that was still the case and
he said yes. Chancellor Brown said that the only thing that has
changed in the terms of economic environment is we have these major
employers in our region that are saying we need as many people as
you can train. That brings me back to the last point that I wanted to
make is regarding how many of these people will stay. It is in excess
of 80% of all the people that graduate from our University that stay in
the Chattanooga area. That sounds like that is all the people that are
already living in Chattanooga but that is not true anymore. Per Provost
Oldham and previous reports we are now down to 60% of students
from UTC come from Hamilton County. So, when we say 80% of our
graduates stay around and work and really believe that we are adding
value, income and viability to the Tennessee income.
Trustee Loughry commented that we as a Board do not have a
concept of what capacity issues are out there. That is a metric that we
have not looked at in terms of classroom measurement. We hear
about it but I don't know that we get reports on where there is capacity
and what is being done to fill those capacities. I think that is something
that Academic Affairs might want to look at in our examinations. Chair
Talbott said I think they should and he told Trustee Driver to look into
it. Trustee Driver said that he is pulling together what Vice Chair
Murphy and Trustee Loughry are saying that we do not want
Tennessee students to be disadvantaged by virtue of people coming
from out-of-state. He asked if there was a way of measuring if there is
a preference. Chancellor Brown reiterated Chancellor Rakes comment
that we know of no Tennessee student that has been turned away and
intend for that to continue.
Trustee Schledwitz stated that he has been on the Committee and
capacity is one of those things depending on definition. You can have
class for 7:00 a.m. and not have in the afternoon. You can have
capacity issues with faculty, facilities, dorms and particular subject
matter. It is very difficult to say you have capacity. We have
specifically been saying do you have room or have you added any
faculty. If you check those two boxes you are pretty well there. We
have a lot of capacity for 7:00 a.m. classes on the UTK campus so it is
just your definition of capacity. Trustee Hall said that Trustee
Loughry's suggestion is a good one but once you admit one out-of-
state student you are taking capacity out of the in-state pool. You
might want to lower the GPA, standards and let more Tennesseans in.
We seem to be happy with taking the large amount of money we get
18
from out-of-state tuition and having a certain percentage come in. I
don't know who makes those decisions but if we were arguing that we
wouldn't have any out-of-state students I don't know what percentage
that would be.
Trustee Blackburn said that her perception of this program it is a
shorter term commitment for juniors and seniors. So whoever is
admitted you are not tying up seats for four years and Chancellor
Brown added in our experience it is one year.
President Simek observed where this might get complicated is as we
improve the transfer articulations with our community colleges. It is
precisely those junior and seniors seats that are at issue. We just want
to watch it. He added that he does not have a problem as long as
there is capacity - it should be filled. We do need to be mindful that
we have a mandate from the Legislature to improve the transferability
of students from community colleges to the four-year institutions. That
mandate will play out here as it is put into place. We just need to keep
paying attention. He said I am with Vice Chair Murphy in that we need
to revisit this issue periodically and watch it together. When the
landscape changes we would be able to recognize it and make
changes appropriately.
Dr. Bonnie Yegidis, Vice President of Academic Affairs and Student
Success made a couple of comments to Trustee Loughry's point about
capacity which is appropriate for Academic Affairs and Student
Success. We do look at strategic planning and part of that is how big
do we want the University to be, what is the mix of lower and upper
division students and the mix of in-state and out-of-state students. It is
appropriate at some point for Academic Affairs and Student Success to
bring to that Committee data about capacity with respect to strategic
planning.
Trustee Blackburn asked if the motion was for one or two years and
Ms. Mizell, General Counsel and Secretary said it was for one year.
Trustee Foy moved to extend for 2010-2011 the UTC regional tuition
rate program for undergraduates residing in seven contiguous counties
in Georgia and Alabama; seconded by Trustee Anderson and
approved unanimously.
xx. Report on Two-Year Pilot Regional Tuition Rate Program for
Graduate Students From Contiguous Out-of-State Counties
(UTC)-Information item (Exhibit 18)-Vice Chancellor Brown
continued with his presentation regarding the graduate pilot program.
He thanked the Committee for allowing UTC to pilot a program at the
graduate level. He informed the Committee that the Board approved
the pilot in October of 2010 for spring 2010. Eligibility is limited to the
same seven counties as for the undergraduate program in north
19
Georgia and north Alabama. Participants receive 75% percent
reduction on out-of-state tuition.
There were some challenges going into this program. There was only
two months to market and recruit for this program and it also occurred
on the holiday but we hit the ground running. Despite the short
timeframe there was 27% enrollment growth from the eligible counties
in the first semester. The enrollment is consistent with same-time
results as the undergraduate program and we predict similar results.
The program is approximately half-way to the breakeven point at this
juncture.
The full out-of-state tuition rate is $8,926 and the regional tuition rate is
$4,689.25 based on full-time equivalence.
A male graduate degree earner will add an additional $3.1 million in
aggregate earning capacity over a lifetime. Many of these students
spend money within Tennessee. As you know we are a sales tax
driven state and any time someone crosses that border spending tax
dollars it impacts the state coffers. Increasing graduate enrollment
could generate additional $1.8 million by student expenditures, sales
tax revenue, and additional income contribution per a development
report we have completed.
Some of the strong signs of success is the summer enrollment is
already up in the program and spring and summer numbers are cause
for optimism. Per Phil Oldham, Provost and Vice Chancellor of
Academic Affairs says there are a lot of growth opportunities in
business, engineering, education, criminal justice and English.
Classroom capacity at this point has meant no new instructional costs
for the University.
XXI. Human Resources Report-Information item (Exhibit 19)-Chair
Talbott asked Linda Hendricks, Chief Human Resource Officer to give
her report on Human Resources. CHRO Hendricks stated that she
was pleased to provide a brief update regarding some of the things
being done in Human Resources. She noted that she would focus on
three things; the HR Redesign that went into effect on January 4,
2010, HR Strategic Plan and the resources that are available for
Faculty and Staff in distress.
The HR Redesign is called a Shared Services Model and the intention
is that transactional functions be automated and moved into regional
service centers so that they are streamlined and more consistent in the
delivery. There are still small human resource teams on each of the
campuses and institutes. There are twelve less people in the HR
Redesign statewide. We have economized by moving into regional
service centers. The intention is increased effectiveness, streamlined
delivery of services, automated processes and procedures (there are
still a lot of manual processes), added new HR services that have
20
never been done before, enhanced existing HR services and over time
reduced costs. It is a three tier structure.
Tier 3 is the HR System-wide Administration. Upon my return to UT
there were 22.5 FTE in the system-wide HR office and after a year and
a half of budget cuts that number went to 18 and there are now five
staff members in the system-wide HR office.
Tier 2 - the majority of our HR team is in two regional service centers.
There is an East Regional Service Center that is in Knoxville and
serves the Institute of Agriculture, Institute for Public Service,
University-wide Administration, UT Chattanooga, UT Knoxville and UT
Space Institute. The West Regional Service Center is located in
Memphis and covers Clinical Education, Chattanooga, Family Practice
Clinic, Jackson, Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville, UT Health
Science Center and UT Martin. The decision about which entities went
into which Regional Service Center was first based on geographical
location. Secondly, all the healthcare related entities were grouped
together in the west. Strategic planning from an HR perspective is
different for higher education than healthcare.
Tier 1 is the Human Resources Officers that are located on all of our
campuses and institutes.
There are two features of the HR Redesign that will be highlighted
today. The first one is there is a new HR Web site that has been
created with Hank Dye's group. Meredith LeCroy has worked very
hard with us on the Web site redesign. The purpose is to put all the
information that an employee needs to know in one place. It doesn't
matter where it reports or who does what - the employee just wants to
be able to find the information whether it is payroll, benefits or the
leave schedule for this year. They want to be able to go to one place
where they can find needed information. The intention is to make it
easier for the employee. The first quarter since the redesign there
were rotating pictures at the bottom of the web page that showed the
HR teams, the East and West Regional Service Centers and each of
the campus/institutional teams. The important message that we
wanted employees to know was that we have fewer staff than before
but for the most part the people you know and have worked with for a
long time are still here they just might be in a regional service center
instead of with the system.
For the second quarter there is a series called "The Grass Isn't Always
Greener" being featured. It will consist of stories of UT employees
from campuses and institutes who were at UT, left and came back.
The story is that this is a great place to work. I am one of those
people. I spent fourteen years here, left and came back. We do not
do a good job of branding and letting people know what a great place
this is to work. As we move forward we are going to feature benefits. I
think it is most effective when employees talk about how those benefits
21
have impacted their lives. Employees may have gotten their
undergraduate, graduate or Ph.D. while working at the University.
Since the first of January, there have been 81,000 hits on the Web site.
Our employees from across the state are accessing information on the
Web with the most popular subject being benefits with 53,000 hitting
that screen.
Another important feature of the HR Redesign is the HR Call Center
located in Knoxville. Employees do not care where the employee is
located as long as they get a person that can answer their questions
with accurate information. Our Call Center is located in Knoxville but it
serves state-wide. There were 731 state-wide calls the first week it
was opened. There was not an educated guess as to how many calls
would be received. In the first quarter, the Call Center averaged 76.5
calls per day. This quarter, it is averaging over 100 calls per day
because of the proposed benefit changes. There are a lot of calls
about retirement and healthcare plans. It is a place that you can call
and get a live person who will answer your questions and guide you
through what you need to know. The employee feedback about the
Call Center has been very positive. The Team Leader, the Associate
and the Executive Director that have responsibility for the Call Center
have a total of 80 years of HR experience among the three of them.
We put our most experienced people in the Call Center. We want
employees to get someone knowledgeable. They cannot count the call
as taken care of until they give the employee the needed information or
connected them with the individual that can. If the employee needs to
talk to the healthcare provider, the Call Center will connect them to
make sure the questions are answered. In addition to the Team
Leader and the associate there are seven more that are in rotation in
the Call Center. A total of nine people are answering the phones. To
my knowledge, there have only been two times that there have been
more calls than people to answer them. When that happens, the
employee gets the option of holding until the next associate is available
or the option to leave a voicemail message. The hours for the Call
Center are 8:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. so that the Call Center is open for
business hours for both the east and west end of the state. Vice Chair
Murphy asked if statistics were being tracked like time of call, etc. in
case it gets to the point that so many calls are being received that the
staff isn't capable to manage them. CHRO Hendricks said yes they
have the capability and they are tracking both time of day and month.
Before open enrollment we know that the calls are going to double and
more people will have to be added. The reason for the call is also
tracked and the number one reason they call is deferred
compensation. The number two reason they call is regarding benefit
questions. The percentage that we are able to answer in the Call
Center versus triaging to someone else is also tracked. This is the
third time that I have set-up a Call Center and the mistake that I made
the first time was that I measured success on how long the call was.
The assumption was that the shorter the call the more time there was
22
to take other calls. That is not necessarily true. If the call is handled
too quickly and the employee's question is not answered then the call
was not successful. Sometimes employees do not know what to ask
and it requires some probing to find out what they really want to know.
The measure of a successful call is if the need of the employee was
met at the end of the call. We do track the length of a call but do not
use it as a metric because it can be misleading. Vice Chair Murphy
said the reason he was asking about tracking the length of call for was
for it to be a measurement of how long the average call is and multiply
it by the number of calls to know how many associates you need on
the phones. The worst thing that you can have with a Call Center is to
have to be put on hold and have a long waiting period before your call
is handled. CHRO said that is correct and more associates will be
added if it gets to the pOint where calls are rolling into voicemail.
Trustee Wharton asked if an employee that has been in a hospital
environment or has been discriminated against do they call the Call
Center as a starting point and how do we ensure that those calls have
received the attention that is required? CHRO Hendricks replied that
the Call Center does get some of those calls but usually employees will
call someone they know personally and trust. That is why I am a
strong advocate that a Human Resource Officer needs to be kept on
each campus. They are the human resource leader on their campus,
the employees know and trust them and that is who they usually call.
There are times those types of calls come into the Call Center. The
Call Center employees are trained for the distressed employees. For
example if a call came from UT Chattanooga from a distressed
employee there are two things that occur. CHRO Hendricks places a
call to the Chancellor and coordinates immediately with the Human
Resource Officer on that campus. It is our job to make sure that the
call is handled but we would triage that to the campus closer to the
employee. We get calls from people that have had life changing
events and are very emotional and are afraid that they are going to
forget to do something and need information in making decisions.
They get an associate that walks them through each step. We are
providing service to the employees.
Trustee Driver asked if calls are monitored. CHRO Hendricks said that
when the phone is first answered there is a recording that lets the
employees know that calls will be monitored for customer service. The
Team Leader, Executive Director and I all have the ability to tap into
any call. The reason that we do that from time-to-time is to ensure
consistency and that the associates in the Call Center are giving
accurate information. Other Call Centers have the ability to do an
automated survey at the end of the call. The University's phone
system can't do it but we will have to find another way to get that done.
The three question survey is a quick pulse to see if the caller's needs
were met and if they weren't what could be done better. We invite
them to supply feedback but unless they are really happy or really
upset they are not going to take the time to send an e-mail.
23
I am really proud of what has been accomplished on the first HR
Strategic Plan that the University of Tennessee has ever had. That
plan has now been approved and endorsed by the President,
Chancellors and Institute Vice Presidents. I spent my first year on all
of the campuses so that I could understand what the common needs
were across the state as well as what was unique from campus to
campus and institute to institute. The Strategic Plan comes from
where the University is now and where it is heading. We have
received their support for that plan.
We have launched the University of Tennessee's first Compensation
Advisory Board. The group met on June 22,2010 for the second time.
The Board is chaired by Dr. Joe DiPietro and is made up of fourteen
people state-wide consisting of administrators, faculty members and
staff. The Board is starting with the basics such as what is UT's
compensation philosophy and does it make sense. What should
matter to us and how do we reward employees. How does
performance link to pay and how is it measured. The purpose of the
Compensation Advisory Board is to look at the philosophy, the policies
and develop strategies for total compensation (pay and benefits) for
employees. Part of what we have to do is provide better education and
communication to inform employees of what they do have. We have
thirty-year employees that don't understand their benefits.
We are coming to the close of a Request for Proposal for a statewide
tracking system. It will serve every campus and institute. There are
three finalists and they are Kenexa Brass Ring, Taleo and People
Admin. All three are excellent applicant tracking systems. The
applicant experience on our Web site is not very good and it would not
entice you to work at the University of Tennessee. The redesign is to
help make applicants feel that UT is the place they want to work. One
way to do that is to let them hear from our employees. There will be
vignettes on the applicant experience for any career area such as
research, teaching, patient care, information technology. The best way
to convey those messages is to take long-term happy employees and
have them tell their stories of why they came to UT and why they are
still here. There will be a great deal of communication about the
benefits of why the University is a great place to work.
For the first time, there is an HR Policy Committee. HR policies are
statewide and are usually written in HR lingo so HR knows what they
need but our managers who try to administer them every day do not
have a clear understanding of the policies, particularly complicated
topics such as FMLA. The team has been put together to go through
those policies to make them concise and clear so that employees know
what they need. We are developing tools to support our managers for
the implementation of the policies. Part of the charge of the HR Policy
Committee is a communications cascade so that we meet with
supervisors and provide training on policies. We make a lot of
24
continuous mistakes because managers are not being prepared and
trained to handle day-to-day management operations.
There will be a statewide healthy campus initiative implemented where
we partner with the American Cancer Society. The University is
looking at their Gold Certification Program which is a five pillar program
and is very tough to achieve. Not many public higher education
institutions have been able to achieve this particular certification. It
has been set as a goal statewide that we are going to make healthy
campuses, cultures and environments and they will be tremendous
benefits to employees.
There are 29 initiatives on the Human Resources: 5-Year Strategic
Plan. There are five key areas; Compensation, HR Technology Plan
and Metrics, Performance Management/Professional Development,
Recruitment, Workforce Strategic Plan and Work Culture
Enhancement.
Before the Go Live in December 2009 I received a call from CUPA
HR's magazine, The Higher Education Workplace. They had heard
about the University's HR Redesign and did a feature article on it. We
have received a great deal of recognition and have been invited to a
number of regional CUPA conferences to talk about it. So far, we have
consulted with Auburn, Alabama and Kentucky who are all looking at
doing a redesign of HR similar to what UT has done. We are proud to
be first in this initiative and able to share what we have learned.
There are three things we have available for all employees on
campuses that are in distress; the Employee Assistance Program
(EAP) through the statewide contract, HR Call Center and the Campus
Police Departments. The HR Call Center team is trained to handle
distressed employees calls. They know when they need to triage to
security, the resource team or to the Employee Assistance Program.
We don't put distressed employees on hold or break the connection.
In any urgent critical matter the first thing to do is call the Police
Department on that campus. They are very well trained and qualified
to handle any situation. There is a pilot program on the Knoxville
campus called 946-CARE and it will be a hotline that will become
available in August. It will be available 24/7 and is for any employee
that is either under stress and needs assistance or has recognized a
change of behavior in another employee. It is an anonymous and
confidential place that employees can call. There is a resource team
that is made up of HR professionals, Equity and Diversity, the
Psychology Department, Employee Assistance Program, the Police
Department and the Provost office that are trained and work together
to deal with those issues. Based on the results of the Knoxville pilot,
there may be a possibility of rolling out the program statewide.
In closing, the University has predominantly been transaction based
and is now trying to move into strategic based. There will always be
25
transactional things that go through Human Resources to be handled
but where HR adds the most value is through proactive strategic
planning. It has not been done before and the new Shared Services
Model allows us to focus our attention that way.
Faculty Trustee Karen Johnson said that many people have contacted
her about the Pharmacy changes and suggested that communication
be sent out statewide about it. CHRO Hendricks said that the changes
regarding health care information comes through Acting CFO
Peccolo's group and they do a good job of getting that information out
to the campus HR managers and the HR Call Center Team as soon as
they have it. Sometimes we get the notice from the state the day
before and the Call Center Team has to be ready to answer questions
the next day. That is a challenge with benefits and it is hard to get
ahead of the curve. Vice President Dye's group has talked about
putting out a publication semi-annually called For Your Benefit that
would give updates and information that employees need to know. In
addition, there would be follow-up open forum sessions on each
campus. There is a lot of work to do in regards to benefits to educate
our employees.
Trustee Wharton asked if CHRO Hendricks is involved with recruitment
of the University's Chairs of Excellence and the President. He asked if
her office makes sure that poliCies are adhered to in those recruiting
processes. CHRO Hendricks replied yes and said that she co-chaired
the Chancellor Search for the UT Health Science Center and is a
resource to the Presidential Search Committee. She said that she will
be very involved with the Knoxville Chairs of Excellence. She noted
that she has a great deal of executive recruitment experience that she
can bring to bear and partly what she is trying to do is to train recruiters
on the campuses that have never recruited before. They have never
been asked to recruit and so they post jobs. We have really talented
people but we need to invest in training. There are times that we use
external search firms and it could be done in-house. That is part of the
plan as well and is included in the HR Strategic Plan.
Trustee Wharton asked if she provides guidance for first line
supervisors on how to discipline and document. He noted that many of
his colleagues at the University say they don't get that kind of training.
CHRO Hendricks stated that the training for that is in the Employee
Relations units that are on each campus and there is much to do there.
She noted that she had talked about the Managers Toolkit on the Web
page earlier. We would like to provide more online resources. We
would like to be able to provide a video on the Web page for a
manager that is getting ready to have a difficult performance
conversation that tells them how to prepare, how to conduct, how to
close and what happens after. You have to support that with training
and people that they can call. More resources need to be made
available to supervisors in real time. The HR managers at the
campuses do a good job but they are lean teams. Many of the
26
campuses have one or two people and the largest one has eight. They
are based on headcount and are small teams trying to serve. There
needs to be more creative ways to train them.
President Simek said that speaking from someone that has been
around the University for 25 years and dealt with Human Resources
the way it was previously practiced it is an entirely a new day. He
thanked CHRO Hendricks for the effort that she has put into making
the University a modern operation. She has done it with very few
people and limited resources. She has gotten terrific buy in from all of
the units that are involved and has found the right structure. Vice
Chair Murphy and I were talking whether it was system or campus and
it doesn't matter. Given our resources and given our goals this is the
best organization to carry out the task at hand. CHRO Hendricks has
been the one that has designed it.
Vice Chair Murphy added that he thinks the strategic planning piece is
critical and the Board needs to be informed after the gaps are
identified. They need to know if there needs to be additional staffing at
the various campuses or if there is technology that needs to be
acquired to accomplish those things. One of the things that has
happened over the years is that staff has felt like they were ignored
and not considered important. From this level we need to ensure that
it is not happening. It is important that we have good and productive
employees that are happy with their jobs. All of those things tie into
what you are trying to achieve through the Strategic Plan. CHRO
Hendricks said the other thing is the University's workforce
demographics, and we know that we have an aging population. We
are looking at where we have serious gaps as we move forward. This
speaks to proactive recruitment but it also speaks to formal succession
planning that we do not currently have.
XXII. Update on UTHSC Faculty Practice Plans-Information item-Chair
Talbott asked Interim Chancellor, Dr. Steven Schwab to update the
Committee on UTHSC Faculty Practice Plans. Interim Chancellor
Schwab thanked the Chairman for being allowed to come before the
Finance and Administration Committee to discuss the reorganization of
the Health Science Center's practice plans. This report will be
abbreviated and an extensive report will be given before the newly
formed Health Science Center's Advisory Committee chaired by Dr.
Ken Brown at the first meeting this summer.
As an overview, the practice plans at UTHSC generate over $220
million in annual revenue. The vast majority of this $220 million goes
to underwriting cost to practice and pay the vast majority of the faculty
salaries. The faculty is paid overwhelmingly by the clinical practice.
At the current time, we oversee a strategy of alignment driven by
national health policy. We are making a series of joint ventures with
27
our participating hospitals because of major changes in national health
policy about billing, collection and education.
This alignment strategy for us has major financial growth and
education advantages. It aligns our practices in market and provides
for the first time major academic payments to UTHSC as a result of the
activities of our faculty. These payments are not linked to the volume
of practice but rather are academic payments that many of our
competitors currently have. These alignments we believe are right for
UTHSC and believe our practices will not look in three years like they
do now.
The first one we hope to get up and running immediately is what is now
being termed as the University of Tennessee Le Bonheur Pediatric
Specialists. This combines all of the University of Tennessee pediatric
specialists from the UT Medical Group with several smaller faculty
groups that exist and forms a joint venture with the Le Bonheur
Children's Hospital. It is now the largest children's hospital in the state
of Tennessee. It is favorable to UTHSC in the sense that it provides us
with regular academic payments, enhanced clinical education
payments, better contracting ability and efficiencies of scale as we
merge our activities with the hospital partner. We are anxious to get
this done as soon as possible because Winter is the contracting
season and will be rewriting all of the contracts for our faculty in terms
of our deals with major providers and are awaiting Comptroller
approval so we can move aggressively with the affiliation agreement
from this new entity.
The University of Tennessee Cancer Group merges currently with one
of our major single specialty practice groups called CTSI with the UT
Medical Group to create an integrated cancer treatment facility. All
cancer specialists regardless of their specialty; cancer surgeons, ENT
surgeons, skin surgeons and medical oncologists are joined together in
a single integrated cancer practice with a major hospital partner. This
joint venture with a major hospital partner is advantageous because
the ancillary services (radiation and x-rays) are dramatically better paid
for on the hospital side than on the physicians practice side. By
creating an integrated joint venture we advantage not only the patients
with an integrated practice in one location but we influence our ability
to contract and collect. Also, this group will make a generous direct
payment, at the time it is formed, to UTHSC independent of the
practice.
An entity was recently formed that most thought wouldn't happen. The
entity is the Tennessee Bone Marrow Transplant Institute. We merged
University of Tennessee, Methodist and Baptist bone marrow
transplant practices into a single entity so we could merge the three
and substantially capture the bone marrow transplant market in
Tennessee. This has major advantages and we are hoping to be able
to take our bone marrow transplant program to the same level as our
28
solid organ transplantation program. For those that don't know,
UTHSC Methodist Solid Organ Transplantation Program is one of the
top 10 in the United Sates in terms of volume.
The University of Tennessee's Primary Care Demonstration Project is
under the direction of Dr. Ken Brown. As you know, there are going to
be huge changes to national healthcare policy and we are hoping we
have the adequate number of healthcare primary physicians, primary
nurses and primary pharmacists in training. We currently do that in a
diSjointed fashion. This demonstration project will allow us to construct
a building and to develop an integrated practice with a hospital partner
that will allow us to serve as a learning practice laboratory right on our
campus. Dr. Ken Brown has done the financials with a third party and
they look favorable and anticipate being ready to go in a short amount
oftime.
The last practice plan that is actively now underway is the UTHSC
Erlanger Practice Plan that consolidates the Erlanger practice at the
UT Chattanooga campus. This plan has been slowed down because
of issues within the Erlanger system and will report on that in detail
when we go before their Subcommittee to look for solutions to get this
back on track.
We are actively in discussions with our large adult specialty practice in
Memphis. There are several suitors and are looking aggressively there
to align strategies in terms of what is in the best interest of the
University of Tennessee. What we know for certain that in three years
UTHSC will not look anything like it looks today. It will be a very
different organization and that will be good financially. We will look
more like the competition. That is where we stand.
Dr. Ken Brown will form the Health Science Center's Advisory
Committee this summer for its inaugural meeting.
XXIII. Other Business-Chair Talbott asked if anyone had any other
business to discuss: none was noted.
XXIV. Adjournment-The meeting was adjourned at approximately 2:45
p.m. EDT.
Charles M. Peccolo
Treasurer and Chief Investment Officer!
Acting Chief Financial Officer
29
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ADVANCEMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
1:15 a.m. EDT Room 223-225
Thursday University Center
October 21, 2010 Knoxville, Tennessee
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting (behind agenda)
IV. Opening Remarks by Committee Chair
V. Update on Federal, State, and Media Relations-Information ....................... Tab 8
VI. Approval of Annual Report to the General Assembly-Consent .................. Tab 9
VII. Campaign for Tennessee Update-Information
VIII. Approval of Revisions to the Policy on Naming Facilities and Other
Assets-Consent ........................................................................................ Tab 10
IX. Foundations Study Committee Report and Recommendations ................... Tab 11
X. Approval of Affiliation and Services Agreement with UT Foundation, Inc.... Tab 11
XI. Other Business
XII. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE ADVANCEMENT AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
June 23,2010
Knoxville, Tennessee
The Advancement and Public Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees of The University of
Tennessee met at 10:30 a.m. on June 23,2010 in room 156-157 of the Plant Biotech Building on
the Ag Campus ofUT Knoxville, Tennessee.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair George Cates called the meeting to order.
II. ROLL CALL
The Chair called the roll of committee members. Those present were:
Mr. George Cates, Chair
Mr. Charles Anderson
Ms. Monice Hagler
Mr. James Murphy
Dr. Jan Simek
Mr. Karl Schledwitz
Mr. Charles Wharton
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF LAST MEETING
The Chair referred the Committee to the minutes from the February 26,2010 meeting of
the committee. A motion to approve the minutes was duly made, seconded and
unanimously approved.
IV. WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS BY COMMITTEE CHAIR
Chair Cates welcomed everyone to the meeting and thanked them for their attendance.
He then commended everyone involved in the completion of the $1 billion campaign.
V. UPDATE ON FEDERAL, STATE, AND MEDIA RELATIONS
Hank Dye, Vice President of Public and Government Relations, started his presentation
by discussing the Federal Relations report in the board notebook. We are working this
summer to develop an expanded strategy to cope with a lot of the new things that are
happening in Washington, D.C. In State Relations news, Hank encouraged the group to
check out the State Relations web page where you can see the end of the legislative
session final report. Hank then introduced Gina Stafford, Assistant Vice President and
Director of Communications, to discuss the Presidential Search Communications. Gina
discussed the process of public notice and releases, internal communication and the
Presidential Search website. Ms. Stafford then discussed the time line and the notices that
th
must go along with all of that. The Presidential Search website goes live on June 28 and
the group received a preview ofthe site.
Ann Holt Blackburn asked if the webcasts would be archived and yes, they will be
archived for future viewing.
VI. RESOLUTION HONORING HENRY NEMCIK
Dr. Simek rendered a Resolution on behalf of the university and the Board of Trustees
honoring Henry Nemcik. Mr. Nemcik has given five years of exemplary service at the
University of Tennessee. During this time, he made changes in how the university does
business. By building upon an already strong foundation, he moved the development and
alumni affairs program forward. Dr. Simek proceeded to read the resolution. Mr.
Nemcik appreciated and thanked Dr. Simek and the Board.
A motion to approve the Resolution was duly made, seconded and unanimously
approved.
VII. REPORT OF THE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Janet McKinley, Vice Chair of the UT Development Council gave an update on the
Council activities. Ms. McKinley is serving with Sylvia Moore, Chair of the Council
along with Kenny Blackburn who is serving as the other Vice Chair.
Over the years the University of Tennessee has been very fortunate to have had an
outstanding volunteer leadership group in the form of the Development Council. Since
1955 over 600 people have served on the council. In order to provide a meaningful way
for former members to remain connected to the University without the full
responsibilities of Council members, a new classification of membership has been
approved and is called the Sustaining Members Program. This new classification will
provide a more effective way for former members to remain engaged and help ensure that
UT does not lose some of its most dedicated volunteers. These members will meet the
active member criteria in terms of giving. Pay $250 annually
Mc. McKinley gave an update on the Development Council campaign giving as follows:
• Current members have contributed over $61 million (6% of campaign total).
• Former members have contributed over $162 million (16% of campaign total).
• Current + former combined account for over $223million (22% of campaign total).
In the spring, the Council went to Memphis for their meeting at the Health Science
Center. Over 40 members were in attendance. Several programs were highlighted.
If you look over the few years, the Council wants to focus on more development, Council
education and council engagement.
VIII. REPORT OF THE UT ALUMNI ASSOCIATION
Mr. Dan Brown is proud to represent the 300,000 alumni as President of the UT Alumni
Association (UTAA). The UTAA is one of the oldest alumni associations in the country.
Over 170 years old. Working with the state legislature has been something the UT AA
has always done and continued to do. The UTAA is a dependent Association. All
funding comes from the UT system (money is not raised outside). You can count on one
hand the number of dependent alumni associations in the United States. The reason this
Association has been able to do this is because of the foresight of past presidents.
The UTAA has never had a written strategic plan. Three to four years ago it was decided
that the UTAA needed to develop a strategic plan. Working with Henry Nemcik, a plan
was developed for the UT AA to implement and had the support from the UT President.
The process began with a Strategic Planning Committee. This Committee included: Dan
Brown who serves as UTAA president, Spruell Driver (former UTAA president) serves
on the Committee as the UT Board of Trustee representative, Linda Davidson serves as a
representative for UTK, Dr. Joe Johnson serves as past UT President. The NAPA Group,
a consulting firm from California was then hired. This firm has worked with numerous
universities including Oregon, Ohio State, and Rutgers. The UT AA came up with their
own questionnaire and used questions that would be used to compare with the other 135
universities represented by NAPA for best practices. The questionnaire was sent out to
approx 165,000 alumni specifically for the campus they attended so the information
received could be combined. It was further expanded with work groups, with the
campuses, and the chancellors. The Committee has written what they feel is a good
strategic plan for the UT AA. The UTAA Board of Governors will meet this Friday and
Saturday and will vote on this Strategic Plan. It is also posted on the website.
The five strategic goals of the plan are:
1. Build and sustain lifetime relationships with alumni.
2. Develop institutional advocacy and new investment to optimize centralized
information management systems.
3. Leverage existing communications resources and collaborations.
4. Realize strong advocacy for the UT system of higher education in Tennessee
through influential legislative relations program.
5. Develop an Association financial model.
Mr. Cates asked what percentage ofUT alumni give. Mr. Brown said that any given year
35% of alums give. One of the things discovered during this strategic plan process is that
those that give a seven-figure gift are more likely to have given at least 10 times in the
past. Mr. Brown stated the UTAA will do two things; make it operational and will
reduce the size of its Board of Governors. That number has not been decided. The terms
will be longer and individuals will be added to the Board based on their talents. The
campuses will be represented.
The key success indicator for the Strategic Plan over the next five years will be:
• Greater alumni involvement in the University and the UTAA
• More engage young alumni
• A larger force of active alumni volunteers
• Increased revenues from affinity programs and partnerships and other self-funding
mechanisms
• Accurate and accessible databases
• Higher levels of alumni financial support to the institution
IX. CAMPAIGN UPDATE
It is with great pride that Henry Nemcik announces that as of today, $1,034,000,000 has
been raised towards The Campaign/or Tennessee. This is the University of Tennessee's
campaign and everyone in this room played a role. Mr. Nemcik is excited about this
campaign being so successful in a five-year period and he knows that Scott Rabenold will
provide great leadership in the future for the next campaign.
Mr. Nemcik reviewed where we were and where we are now. In order to effectuate a
campaign, you have to have some organizational structure. The database has to be
effective and development and alumni affairs has done a variety of things over the years
to ensure this was done. Data collection has been one of the priorities. As a result, when
we do a mailing or anything else, we do it bye-mail when we can. Our addresses are
more accurate, but again, it does not happen in one office. Every development and
alumni person in this room is working every day to make sure your data is up to date so
that when we do some type of mailing or communication, we are more effective.
We have prospect screenings that are done (we have five years worth of prospect
screenings at this point). An example would be if a donor buys a place in Santa Fey,
development staff will know about it.
We have had phenomenal luck with our Database Health Report. Written policies and
procedures have been implemented. Written proposals have been introduced so it is clear
and articulate what we are asking for. Performance metrics are a standard in what
development staff is doing today. It helps manage the staff more effectively. Mr.
Nemcik believes the development and alumni affairs staff is actually the most
comprehensively reviewed group within the University of Tennessee today. Every month
you see our performance. Every month you see the number of visits made by
development officers. We are a very comprehensive and aggressive group in regard to
being productive. That is where the future is today because you cannot spend time with
alumni unless we are trying to be productive to benefit the University.
Then, of course, we have tried to do some return on investment analysis to benchmark
ourselves against other institutions.
Mr. Nemcik showed an example of a travel report from the Health Science Center.
Travel had not been benchmarked before. This is just one of the things we have put into
play. Unless you are traveling 40% of the time as a development officer, you are not
being as effective as you need to be. It is important that the chancellors make sure they
are focusing their development staff on traveling and not internal projects that take them
away from their primary mission of fundraising.
Our trend in e-mail addresses is astounding. This is our database health report. We have
managed to ramp that up over the years and we are very proud of it. However, it is an
everyday working project and we have to keep on top of it.
Campaign planning is essential. We have tremendous volunteer leadership and our
campaign plan is very comprehensive. Each campaign leader has a role and each person
has a job description for that role.
Written campaign plan and campaign publications. Some members of this Board actually
(Charles Wharton was one of the members) help set the campaign counting policy that
was approved early on. That is how we managed the campaign. And obviously, the
campaign launch event which we held when we went live with the campaign. So Mr.
Nemcik thinks the launch event set a new tone at the University for how the University
recognizes people and how to involve people and is sure that will continue.
Mr. Nemcik showed an example of the Campaign Expectancy Report. This actually
surprised him but the blue line (expected) was done five years ago. The purple lines
(actual) are what we achieved. So, the cycle of what was going to happen in the
campaign was forecasted and that is where we are today. Our incentive compensation
program is also predicated on exceeding each one of those benchmarks on an annualized
basis. He is particularly proud of that it shows great planning and it shows with great
focus each year, the whole team comes together to try to achieve those goals and exceed
each one of those.
The Table of Gifts Chart was blank five years ago. The first column shows the
anticipated number of gifts needed to reach $1 billion. The second column is the number
of gifts actually received in those categories. This is something else he is particularly
proud of. It was a good forecast and the generous support of all our alumni is nothing
short of staggering.
This has been a remarkable campaign. It started with the Trustees coming together with
100% participation as it related to making gifts towards this campaign. Without that
momentum and the support from the Board, this never would have been possible. He
appreciates the Board as a leadership group and he has watched it transition from a
passive Board to a more engaged board and it is a wonderful view of the amount of focus
and energy there is from you volunteers
Mr. Nemcik did want to reiterate that there are only 36 universities in the nation who
have completed a $1 billion campaign. There are 22 currently conducting a $1 billion
campaign. So the University of Tennessee is joining an elite group and he appreciates the
opportunity to provide leadership over the last five years.
Henry thanks the Board for his resolution. He thanks the Board, the development and
alumni affairs staff, alumni and friends for everything.
X. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE UC FOUNDATION
Mr. Bob Lyon, Vice Chancellor of University Advancement and UC Foundation Liaison
gave the annual report for the UC Foundation.
Finances
• Since the UC Foundation inception, it has provided $84.9 million to UTC. The
Foundation's total net assets have grown from $6.8 million in 1968 to $96.7
million as of December 31, 2009.
• Total revenues thru February 28,2010, including realized and unrealized gain or
loss on investment totaled over $2 million versus $5.5 million for the same period
last year.
• The Founadtion currently has 38 professorship programs supporting UTC faculty.
• There are 225 different scholarship programs supporting approximately 1,004
students annually. Last yaer, the numbers were 168 programs supporting 825
students.
• Contributions received thru February 28, 2010 for the current fiscal year equal
$1,220,676 versus $3,218,958 for the same period last year, and $1,513,979 for
the year before.
• Foundation giving represents only a portion of total give to UTC. A significant
portion of gifts bypass the Foundation and flow directly to the Univeristy.
Foundation and Univeristy cumulative gifts and pledges for fiscal year 2010 thru
May 9, 2010 total $12,557,151 compared to $12,900,820 for the same period last
year.
Real Estate
• Campus Development Foundation, Inc., a subsidiary of the UF Foundation, owns
Probasco South, a 1645 bed student housing complex. Approximately 50 beds
will be added for FY20 11, converting selected large bedrooms from single to
double occupancy.
o Revenue during the FY2010 is projected at approximately $9.7 million.
o Occupancy for fall 2009 was 100% - spring 2010 was 97%
o Projection for fall 2010 show 100% occupancy and spring 2010 is
estimated at 95%
o Bond and interest payments will be covered int eh current yaer (FY2010)
as well as allocations to the repair and replacement funds and covering of
all operating expenses.
o As of April 30, 2010, all debt service requirements have been met with
current revenue of $9,494,423. no contribution from the UC Foundation
will be required at year-end July 31, 2010
o Based on budget developed by UTC Housing Director and Accounting
Manager, revenue for FY2011 is projected at $9.7 million.
o FY 2011 projections show the project revenue will be adequate to meet
both bond principle and interest payments as well as debt services ratio
during 2011 without further contribution from the Foundation.
o The lawsuit reported last year has been settled
Investment Activity
• Performance of the total portfolio for the trailing year ending December 31, 2009
was a positive 27.1%.
• Solid performance from the fund's long only equity mangers (both domestic and
international) drove performance over the past year.
• The Fund advanced another 3.0% in the first quarter to finish at $87.4 million in
total assets.
Other Items
• The UC Foundation has not received any gifts that would place a financial
liability on the University.
XI. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE UT FOUNDATION
Andrea Loughry, Chair of the UT Foundation, Inc. called the Board's attention to the fact
the Foundation is only nine years old. It is the first time that all of the founding members
will have rotated off of the Board on June 30, 2010. The founding Board members are:
Jim Haslam, Clayton McWhorter, Ben Kimbrough, Senator Lamar Alexander, Eli Fly,
Bill Sansom, Jim Ayers, Senator Howard Baker, Governor Ned McWherter, Bill Stokely.
Jim Ayers, Sharon Pryse and Bill Stokely are rotating off the Board at the end of this
month. The new Board members are:
William "Bill" L. Blankenship a/Sandestin, Florida
Ronald "Ron" L. Turner a/Wayzata, Minnesota
M Steven (Steve) Morris 0/ Franklin, Tennessee
You heard today from Janet McKinley, Dan Brown, and Bob Lyon, how all of our
advocacy groups are interested in working together to face the challenges of the
University of Tennessee and all of higher education given the fact that donor dollars are
going to have to become a much larger part of that formula we have in funding higher
education in East Tennessee. The University really has a challenge. The Foundation is
sort of the vehicle for this, but all of the lay leadership groups are committed to working
together to meet this challenge. Ms. Loughry invites the Advancement and Public
Affairs Committee, as the governing vehicle for our whole enterprise, to look at ways of
establishing more firmly our partnership in terms of dealing with the private dollar
financial piece of this enterprise. We are on the cusp of a culture change and it is
exciting to be a part of that.
Mr. Nemcik reiterated that the Foundation has gone from $20 million to $240 million in
assets in the past five years (current, pledged and trusts).
It is with great honor that Mr. Nemcik announces the recipients of the UT Foundation,
Inc. Board of Directors Award. The Board of Directors Award is a highly prestigious
award which recognizes outstanding achievements by Development and
Alumni Affairs staff in applying creative concepts to improving performance, advancing
fund-raising efforts and promoting a better understanding of the university-wide major
gift fundraising activities and asset management services of the UT Foundation, Inc. The
objective of the Board of Directors Award is to promote, encourage and recognize
employee efforts and provide public recognition for outstanding achievements. Mr.
Nemcik considers each of these friends. This award does come with a $1,000 stipend.
The 2010 recipients are:
Ms. Pat Branam, Associate Vice Chancellor for Development, UTC
Ms. Haylee Marshall, Assistant Director ofAlumni Programs/Chapters, UTAA
Ms. Chandra Harris-McCray, Assistant Director of Development Communications
Mr. David York, Senior IT Technologist, Advancement Services
Haylee Marshall was in attendance. She said it is an honor to have the opportunity to
thank the Foundation Board for this award. Each day, she has the privilege to work for
the University of Tennessee. Not very many people are able to love their job. She gets to
travel, met great alumni who are as passionate and excited about the University as she is.
Therefore, to be told that she is doing a good job means everything. Not only is she able
to love her job, she knows she is on the right career path and that she is doing what she is
supposed to be doing and enjoying it. Being in higher education does not necessarily
have the financial incentives as other industries, so to be able to receive this award with
the financial incentive means so much to her.
Pat Branum was also in attendance. She wanted to say thank you. She is a Tennessee
native who was transplanted to the north for about 40 years. It was a great honor for her
to be able to return to work at UTC and serve the University of Tennessee. Timing is
everything. It was stunning, literally, to receive a letter telling her that she would be
recognized for her performance as a fundraiser at UTC and means the world to her.
XII. APPROVAL OF THE NAMING OF THE UT MARTIN ALUMNI CENTER
On behalf ofthe University of Tennessee at Martin, Dr. Simek asked the Board's
approval to name the Alumni Center located on the UT Martin campus the Nick and
Cathy Dunagan Alumni Center in honor of Dr. and Mrs. Nick Dunagan, both alumni and
Chancellor Emeritus and former first lady of the University of Tennessee at Martin. Dr.
Dunagan began at UT Martin in 1873 as director of development. He also served as
executive vice chancellor, vice chancellor for development and administration and vice
chancellor for student affairs. Dr. Dunagan was named UT Martin's eighth chancellor in
April 2001. This is appropriate recognition of their distinguished service to the
University of Tennessee.
A motion was made, seconded and the Committee unanimously approved.
XIII. APPROVAL OF THE NAMING OF THE CENTER FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP
AND INNOVATION AT UT KNOXVILLE
On behalf of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Dr. Simek asked the Board's
approval to name the Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation in honor of Charlie and
Moll Anderson. The Anderson Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation will develop
student skills, cerate experiential learning opportunities provide mentoring and
experienced staff and successful entrepreneurs and help student build connections for
long term success. The Anderson Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation will propel
regional growth by deVeloping entrepreneurial talent who will create value by starting
businesses or continuing to the success of existing technology driven businesses. Their
recent commitment to The Campaign for Tennessee pushed the campaign over the $1
billion goal. By recognizing their contribution in this way is befitting their generosity
and leadership of the University of Tennessee.
A motion was made, seconded and the Committee unanimously approved.
XIV. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NAMING OF INTERIOR SPACES AND GROUNDS
Mr. Nemcik presented the annual report of interior/grounds spaces named on the campuses/sites
to the Committee. The following is the report as received by each campus/unit:
Campus/Unit Naming of Facility (Interior/Grounds) 2009 - 2010
Institute ofAgriculture College of Veterinary Medicine
Within the John & Ann Tickle Small Animal Hospital
Asian Intensive Care Unit
Nestle-Purina Nutrition Center
Beall Family Rose Garden
UT Chattanooga None to report
UT Knoxville College of Communication & Information
Scripps Convergence Lab
BB&TIMartha S. Wallen Classroom
College of Business - Haslam Business Building
Bridgestone Americas Team Room
Len Berlik Team Room
Crafton Family Terrace
Brian & Heather Foley Classroom
Pilot Conference Room
Rogers Classroom
UT Knoxville Athletics Pratt Pavilion: Chris Lofton Recruiting Lounge
Lindsey Nelson Stadium
Mark E. Smith Equipment Room
The Dungeon Weight Room
The 2001 World Series Team Video Room
Neyland Stadium: Stokely Family Media Center
UT Health Science Center None to report
UT Martin Kelly Murray Investment Management Room
Steven E. Rogers Media Center
Kathleen Elam Multipurpose Room
1. Houston Gordon Museum
Dorotha Norton Classroom
xv. OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Cates stated this is a time of great success but we need to continue to advance. We
have heard about how that will be accomplished. He never wants to miss an opportunity
to say the University must find ways to make a deeper investment in development.
Development is the financial future. Without a robust development effort (we sure have
one that we celebrated today) the University will not move ahead. The University must
find ways to nurture and increase the investment in its development. The numbers are
great, the money spent there really comes home and brings home great rewards but the
University does not invest enough in development relative to the need. This needs to be
done if the University is really going to move forward at an accelerated pace and it is
more critical by the day.
On behalf of the Board, Mr. Cates would once again thank the campaign co-chairs, Jim
and Natalie Haslam, Brenda Lawson, the development and alumni staff, and the
academic leadership whose efforts have driven this campaign to success more than 18
months ahead of schedule. He would like to thank the Board of Trustees, for 100%
participation and the University cannot thank Charlie and Moll Anderson enough for
putting us over the top. We must recognize Clayton McWhorter and Andrea Loughry,
Don Stansberry, John Thornton who led the effort to encourage the Trustees to make the
investment in this campaign. Mr. Cates also thanks the Board of Trustees as leaders of
the University. The Board needs to lead the way in private giving, which we have done
so thanks to each one for having done that and the fun is just beginning. Get ready to
gear up for the next round.
We thank Henry Nemcik for ajob very well done and we look forward to working with
Scott Rabenold and his crew in reaching new heights.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
With no other business stated, the meeting was adjourned.
George E. Cates, Chair
Advancement and Public Affairs Committee
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACADEMIC AFFAIRS AND STUDENT SUCCESS COMMITIEE
3: 15 p.m. EDT Shiloh Room
Thursday University Center
October 21,2010 Knoxville, Tennessee
AGENDA
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting (behind agenda)
IV. Opening Remarks by Committee Chair
v. Approval of Program of Study Leading to the Degree of Ph.D. in
Energy Science and Engineering (UT Knoxville)-Consent ..................... Tab 12
VI. Approval of Additional Signatures on University of Tennessee
Diplomas-Consent. ................................................................................... Tab 13
VII. Approval of Centennial Diploma for UTHSC-Consent .............................. Tab 13
VIII. Report on Academic Program Approvals and Terminations-Information ... Tab 14
IX. Status Report on Universal Transfer Paths in Compliance with the
Complete College Tennessee Act of 201 O-Information ............................. Tab 15
X. Overview of Accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges
and Schools-Information ........................................................................... Tab 16
XI. Other Business
XII. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE ACADEMIC AFFAIRS AND STUDENT SUCCESS COMMITIEE
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
June 24, 2010
Knoxville, Tennessee
The Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee of the Board of Trustees of the
University of Tennessee met at 8:30 a.m. EDT, Thursday, June 24, 2010, in the Plant
Biotech Building on the Institute of Agriculture campus, Knoxville, TN.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mr. Spruell Driver, Chair of the Committee, called the meeting to order and welcomed
everyone to the meeting.
II. ROLL CALL
Dr. Bonnie Yegidis called the roll, and the following voting members were present:
Mr. Spruell Driver
Ms. Anne Holt Blackburn
Mr. John Foy
Dr. Karen Johnson
Mr. James Murphy
Mr. Karl Schledwitz
Ms. Betty Ann Tanner
Mr. Sumeet Viakunth
Dr. Bonnie Yegidis
The following non-voting members were also present:
Mr. Michel Akiki
Dr. Toby Boulet
Mr. Andrew Clark
Mr. Tommy Jervis
Mr. Andrew Morse
Dr. Richard Nollan
Dr. Rich Rhoda
President Jan Simek
Dr. Jenna Wright
Additional Trustees present:
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 1
Mr. Charles Anderson
Mr. George Cates
Mr. Crawford Gallimore
Ms. Monice Hagler
Ms. Andrea Loughry
Mr. Don Stansberry, Jr.
Mr. Robert Talbott
Mr. Charles Wharton
Dr. Yegidis announced a quorum was present.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF LAST MEETING
The Chair called for any corrections or additions to the minutes of the February 26, 2010
meeting. There were none. A motion for approval was made by Trustee Foy, seconded
by Trustee Blackburn, and they were approved.
IV. OPENING REMARKS BY COMMITTEE CHAIR
Chairman Driver made a few opening remarks. While this is a meeting held in the
public, it is a meeting with an agenda. Chairman Driver asked that sidebar
conversations be kept to a minimum, cell phones and other electronic devices be put on
silence mode, and that he will only be recognizing members of the committee, other
trustees, members of the senior staff, and those who are presenting agenda items at
today's meeting.
V. APPROVAL OF ACADEMIC PROGRAM CONSOLICATIONS (UTe)
Dr. Yegidis provided an overview of the proposed program consolidations in
undergraduate degree programs in education at UTe. Consolidation of the BS in
Foreign Language Education, BA in Theatre Education, BS in Secondary Mathematics, BS
in Secondary Natural Sciences, and the BS/BM in Music Education is recommended. Dr.
Yegidis stated that while there are no immediate cost savings anticipated at the
beginning of the consolidation process, it is expected that costs will be reduced over
time through increased curriculum streamlining and faculty attrition. Provost Oldham
provided further information on the proposed consolidations.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Foy, seconded by Trustee Tanner, and
motion was approved unanimously.
VI. APPROVAL OF DNP PROGRAM AT UTC
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 2
Dr. Yegidis provided an overview of the full curriculum proposal for the development of
the Doctorate of Nursing Practice degree at UTe. The new degree program is being
created because the national accrediting body for Colleges of Nursing, the American
Association of Colleges of Nursing has declared the educational preparation of advanced
practice nurses be set at the doctoral level beginning in 2015. The proposal to create a
DNP at UTK is the next item on this agenda as well.
At UTC, the Master of Science in Nursing will phase out completely and be replaced by
the DNP. Existing resources are in place to begin the DNP program in 2010-2011. The
UT campuses (UTe and UTK) participated with one TBR institution, East Tennessee State
University, in a collaborative external review of the three DNP program proposals. The
external consultant's report is part of the curriculum documents and was favorable for
both UTe and UTK.
Discussion on this item included concerns about duplication of degrees in the state and
the extent to which the DNP will be offered online.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Foy, seconded by Trustee Johnson and
approved unanimously.
VII. APPROVAL OF DNP PROGRAM AT UTK
Dr. Yegidis provided information on the proposal for the development of the Doctorate
of Nursing Practice degree at UTK. She explained that there is some interest in
maintaining the MSN in non clinical practice areas at UTK, but phaSing out the MSN for
clinical specialties. Existing resources are in place to begin the DNP program in 2010-
2011.
There being no discussion, Chairman Driver called for a motion. A motion for approval
of the proposal was made by Trustee Blackburn, seconded by Trustee Tanner, and
carried unanimously.
VIII. APPROVAL OF CREATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AT UTK
Dr. Yegidis provided an overview of the proposal to create the Department of Public
Health at UTK. The proprosal will reconstitute the programs in Public Health, an existing
academic unit currently housed within the Department of Nutrition, as a Department of
Public Health effective July 1, 2010. Establishing this department will require no
additional costs at the present time and will bring the programs into better alignment
with accreditation standards.
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 3
Dr. Bob Rider, Dean of the College of Education, Health and Human Sciences, further
discussed that the establishment of the Department of Public Health compliments the
strategic plan of the College of Education, Health and Human Sciences. The College has
reallocated resources so that this is a revenue neutral change. In addition, the
Department of Public Health has the potential to attract outside resources.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Schledwitz, seconded by Trustee Johnson,
and the motion was approved unanimously.
IX. APPROVAL OF REVISED VISION AND MISSION STATEMENT FOR UTIA
Dr. Yegidis presented the revised vision and mission statements for UTIA. In accordance
with The Principles for Accreditation: Foundations for Quality Enhancement as defined
by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, each
institution is mandated to periodically review its Mission Statement to ensure that the
statement is current and comprehensive and serves as an accurate guide for the
institution's operations.
Vice President Joe DiPietro further explained that revision of the mission statement has
had wide input from faculty and staff and is a broader statement than previous versions.
Chairman Driver asked that the third paragraph of the mission statement be revised to
state: "As it pursues all activities in support of its mission, the UT Institute of Agriculture
is committed to civil rights, equal employment opportunity and affirmative action which
contribute to cultural and ethnic diversity."
A motion for approval, pending this change, was made by Trustee Schledwitz, seconded
by Trustee Foy, and approved unanimously.
x. APPROVAL OF A RESOLUTION AFFIRMING COMMITMENT TO THE CONTINUED
SUCCESS OF THE FRANK H. MCCLUNG MUSEUM
Chairman Driver introduced this item and explained that this Board, in accordance with
the standards of the American Association of Museums, is asked to reaffirm support of
the Frank H. McClung Museum at UTK. Dr. Yegidis stated that McClung Museum
provides a rich intellectual and educational resource to students, faculty, and members
of the broader community. The museum and its collections provide over 45,000 visitors
annually with rich archaeological, historical, and cultural information and UTK has
consistently provided financial support to the museum.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Murphy, seconded by Trustee Tanner, and
approved unanimously.
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 4
XI. APPROVAL OF TENURE RECOMMENDATIONS
Chairman Driver introduced the approval of tenure recommendations. Dr. Yegidis
referenced the information on the tenure process at the University of Tennessee as well
as the names of faculty being recommended for tenure.
There being no discussion, Chairman Driver called for a motion. A motion for approval
of the proposal was made by Trustee Schledwitz, seconded by Trustee Murphy, and
carried unanimously.
XII. APPROVAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE LISTING OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
Chairman Driver introduced the approval of the comprehensive list of academic
programs. The Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Student Success
works with THEC to keep an accurate inventory of the academic program offerings at all
UT campuses.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Schledwitz with the concern that the
comprehensive list does not illustrate changes made from year to year. President Simek
noted that a master list of program additions and deletions was inadvertently left out of
the Board materials and will be provided to the Board at a later date. The motion for
approval was seconded by Trustee Murphy, and approved unanimously.
XIII. AUTHORIZATION TO CONFER DEGREES
Chairman Driver stated each year at this time, the UT administration requests that the
Board delegate to the president, chancellors, and other university officials designated by
the president the authority to confer degrees at commencements held at any time
during the academic year.
A motion for approval was made by Trustee Foy, seconded by Trustee Johnson, and
approved unanimously.
XIV. INTRODUCTION TO THE NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
Chairman Driver stated that at the October meeting of the Board, we provided a
comprehensive overview of several different performance measures for our campuses,
including campus and system scorecards, EEF measures, US News and World Report
ran kings, and College Results Online. As a follow up to that overview, Dr. Todd Diacon,
Executive Director for Academic Assessment and Program Support, will introduce the
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 5
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) at this time. UTC will present
information on their use of data from this instrument.
Dr. Diacon provided an overview of NSSE and the valuable information it provides our
undergraduate campuses about student engagement and success. In 2005, THEC
mandated that all UT schools administer NSSE at least twice within a five year period of
time. The survey is given to first year students and to seniors and provides a measure of
the quality and quantity of student interactions with other students, faculty, advisors
and campus administrators. NSSE evaluates the following factors of a student's
experience: level of academic challenge; active and collaborative learning; student
faculty interactions; supportive campus environment; and enriching educational
experiences. Three summary questions ask students about the quality of advising, their
overall impression of their education, and whether or not they would choose the same
school if they had it to do all over again.
Discussion on this item included questions about sample size, response rate, and
reliability of data. Dr. Diacon explained that our campuses have increased the response
rate, which is 20-30%, the average response rate for institutions participating in NSSE.
NSSE collects the data and packages individual campus reports.
Provost Oldham provided a brief overview of UTe's NSSE data and changes that have
been made due to NSSE findings.
xv. UPDATE ON CLOSURE OF THE MSW LOCATION IN MEMPHIS
Provost Martin provided an update on the closure of the MSW location in Memphis.
The UTK and University of Memphis transition team has taken many steps to facilitate
this transition. The transition plan calls for the University of Memphis offering the
MSSW degree effective Fall 2011 and the UTK College of Social Work Memphis location
closing May 2011. This plan ensures that a master's in social work program will be
available to the Memphis community and that there will be no gaps in social work
education in West Tennessee.
Dr. Martin stated that only a small cohort of students will be finishing their course of
studies academic year 2010-11- graduating May 2011. Three faculty located in
Memphis are reassigned to Nashville or Knoxville for the 2010-11 academic year. Dr.
Theora Evans and Mr. Scott Burcham will remain at the Memphis location through May
2011. Dr. Evans has already made arrangements for faculty to teach all of the required
classes in Memphis to ensure on-time graduation. There is no plan to utilize on-line
instruction unless a student makes a request to enroll in an on-line course due to
individual circumstances. The offices and classrooms will remain open and be staffed
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 6
through May 2011. The computer lounge and student lounge will remain intact through
that time and be available to students.
The University of Tennessee College of Social Work will continue its MSSW programs in
Nashville and Knoxville, and its distance education program which spans the state of
Tennessee and surrounding areas. The college is also developing a practice doctorate to
be offered through distance education.
XVI. OTHER BUSINESS
XVII. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Driver adjourned the meeting
Respectfully submitted,
Katherine High
Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success
Academic Affairs and Student Success Committee
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010 Page 7
FALL MEETING
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
9:00 a.m. EDT Hollingsworth Auditorium
Friday Institute of Agriculture
October 22, 2010 Knoxville, Tennessee
ORDER OF BUSINESS
I. Call to Order and Invocation
II. Roll Call
III. Introductions
IV. Approval of Minutes of Last Meeting .............................................................. Tab 1
V. President’s Report
VI. Action Item from Trusteeship Committee
A. Bylaw Amendments Concerning the Chief Internal Auditor ...................... Tab 2
VII. Action Item from Finance and Administration Committee
A. Approval of UTHSC Pediatric Faculty Practice Plan, Memphis ................ Tab 3
VIII. Action Items from Advancement and Public Affairs Committee
A. Foundation Study Committee Report and Recommendations ............... Tab 11
B. Approval of Affiliation and Services Agreement with
UT Foundation, Inc. ................................................................................ Tab 11
IX. Consent Items
A. Approval of FY 2010 Annual Flight Operations Report............................. Tab 4
B. Approval of FY 2011-12 Operating Budget Appropriations Request ........ Tab 5
C. Approval of FY 2011-12 Capital Outlay and Capital Maintenance
Projects ..................................................................................................... Tab 6
D. Approval of FY 2011-12 Revenue/Institutionally Funded Projects............ Tab 6
E. Approval of UT Martin Master Plan ……………….….back pocket of notebook
F. Approval of Real Property Transactions ................................................... Tab 7
1. Property Acquisition, 208 S. Dudley Street (UTHSC)
2. Grant of Permanent Easements for Cherokee Farm-
Knoxville Utilities Board (UT Knoxville)
3. Collins Gift Property, 114 Old Fulton Road (UT Martin)
4. Property Acquisition in Hornbeak, Tennessee, from Tennessee
Wildlife Resources Agency
G. Approval of Annual Report to the General Assembly ............................... Tab 9
H. Approval of Revisions to the Policy on Naming Facilities and other
Assets ..................................................................................................... Tab 10
I. Approval of Program of Study Leading to the Degree of Ph.D. in
Energy Science and Engineering (UT Knoxville) .................................... Tab 12
J. Approval of Additional Signatures on University of Tennessee
Diplomas ................................................................................................. Tab 13
K. Approval of Centennial Diploma for UTHSC........................................... Tab 13
Recess for Annual Board Photograph
X. Election of the President
XI. Other Business
XII. Announcements
November 4, 2010: Audit Committee, Nashville
December 10, 2010: Audit Committee, Nashville
January 21, 2011: Executive and Compensation Committee, Nashville
February 24-25, 2011: Winter Meeting, Chattanooga
All scheduled meetings of the Board and its committees are posted on the Board of
Trustees website: http://bot.tennessee.edu/
XIII. Adjournment
MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
June 24, 2010
The Annual Meeting of the Board of Trustees of The University of Tennessee
was held at 1 :30 p.m. EDT, Thursday, June 24, 2010 in the Hollingsworth
Auditorium, Ellington Plant Science Building, at The University of Tennessee
Institute of Agriculture in Knoxville, Tennessee.
I. CALL TO ORDER AND INVOCATION
The Honorable Phil Bredesen, Governor of the State of Tennessee and Chair of
the Board of Trustees, called the meeting to order. Reverend John Unthank,
campus pastor for the Church of God College Connection, offered the
invocation.
II. ROLL CALL
Secretary Catherine Mizell called the roll, and the following members were
present:
Governor Bredesen
Charles C. Anderson
Anne Holt Blackburn
William Y. Carroll
George E. Cates
Spruell Driver, Jr.
John N. Foy
D. Crawford Gallimore
Monice Moore Hagler
James E. Hall
Douglas A. Horne
Karen C. Johnson
Andrea J. Loughry
James L. Murphy, III
Richard G. Rhoda
Karl A. Schledwitz
Jan F. Simek
Don C. Stansberry
Robert S. Talbott
Page 1, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Betty Ann Tanner
Sumeet S. Vaikunth
Charles E. Wharton
The Secretary announced the presence of a quorum. Commissioner Givens and
Commissioner Webb were unable to attend the meeting. Members of the
administration, faculty, staff, and media were present. The meeting was also
webcast for the convenience of the University community, the general public, and
the media.
III. REMARKS BY THE CHAIR
Governor Bredesen noted that the last Board of Trustees meeting he attended
involved extensive discussions of capital maintenance needs, specifically the
renovation of Glocker Hall, and since then the Tennessee government has directed
over a billion dollars to higher education capital maintenance needs for Tennessee,
and The University of Tennessee received a good share of those funds. He stated
that this is a very critical time for the University, and he wanted to speak with the
Board about important upcoming decisions.
Governor Bredesen stated that as he was making his way to this meeting he
received the press release that the University had successfully achieved its $1
billion goal of the Campaign for Tennessee ahead of schedule. He thanked
everyone who participated in that campaign, and recognized Charlie and Moll
Anderson for contributing the final gift to put the campaign over the top. The
Governor stated that having been briefed on the campaign over the years, he is
aware of the hard work and dedication that went into the success of the campaign
from everyone involved. Discussing budget reductions, he noted that UT is in the
same situation as many universities across the country, with the days of going to
the state legislature for more money being long gone and private fundraising being
more and more important in the future.
Addressing the upcoming presidential search, Governor Bredesen said that
selecting the chief executive officer of the University is at the top of the list of
responsibilities of the Board of Trustees. He urged the Trustees to have an
independent way to ensure truly effective background checks on the candidates.
Governor Bredesen then discussed a strategic vision for the University. He stated
that throughout his service as Governor, he has believed that Tennessee absolutely
needs a first-rate research university because there are so many ways it can
benefit the citizens of Tennessee, including economic development. He stated that
Page 2, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
he believes this goal is well within the reach of the University, but if it is to be
accomplished, the University will need a laser-like focus on the goal, and it will fall
to the Board to keep the rudder straight on this goal. This will mean right sizing
the University, while growing the University, and being selective about what
programs are advanced. He stated that he personally believes the relationship with
ORNL has been an enormous benefit to the University, and the relationship has
taken some significant steps, but the relationship requires constant attention on
the part of the Board and the new President. Governor Bredesen stated that the
new President must have a similar belief in this destiny for the University, which
argues for a particular skill set. To be a great research university, the President
will need to have a functioning and effective relationship with the faculty, and fund
raising will be absolutely critical. Governor Bredesen expressed his belief that
there is a real opportunity now for the University to leap into a leadership position
for Tennessee higher education by offering the state a first-rate research university
that can survive and prosper in the decades ahead. The Trustees and the next
President should focus on making that happen.
The Governor ended his remarks by expressing his appreciation to the Trustees for
their hard work and great stewardship of the University and encouraged them to
building on that for the future.
Governor Bredesen then called on Vice Chair Jim Murphy to chair the remainder of
the meeting. Vice Chair Murphy welcomed Emeriti Presidents Dr. Ed Boling and
Dr. Joe Johnson and introduced Dennis Barden of Witt/Kieffer Executive Search
Firm.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PRIOR MEETINGS
Trustee Driver moved approval of the minutes of the February 26, 2010 meeting
of the Board of Trustees as presented in the meeting materials. Trustee Talbott
seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimously.
V. ADOPTION OF HONORARY RESOLUTIONS
The Vice Chair recognized Trustee Hall to present a Resolution honoring Dr. Verbie
Prevost for her service as Trustee for the past two years (Exhibit 1). Trustee Hall
stated that it was a pleasure to have the opportunity to present this Resolution to
Dr. Prevost, noting that he and his wife have been friends with Dr. Prevost for
some time, knowing her first as a soccer mom prior to knowing her as a Trustee.
After reciting the Resolution, Trustee Hall moved its adoption. Trustee Foy
seconded the motion, and the Resolution was unanimously adopted. Dr. Prevost
thanked the Board and stated that it has been a great privilege to serve with each
Page 3, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Trustee. She stated that she was grateful for the opportunity to work with the
Board for the betterment of the University.
The Vice Chair then recognized Trustee Foy to present a Resolution honoring Tyler
Forrest for his service as a Trustee for the past two years (Exhibit 2). Trustee Foy
recounted some anecdotes about Tyler shared by this friends and colleagues.
After reciting the Resolution, Trustee Foy moved its adoption. Trustee Hall
seconded the motion, and the Resolution was unanimously adopted. Mr. Forrest
thanked Trustee Foy and stated that it has been a great honor for him to serve the
University as a Student Trustee. He thanked the Governor for appointing him to
the Board and stated that representing the 48,000 students of the University is
one of the highest honors a student can have. Mr. Forrest ended his remarks by
stating that he hopes to return to serve on the Board of Trustees in the future as
Governor of the State of Tennessee.
VI. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR OF THE BOARD
Vice Chair Murphy stated that pursuant to the Bylaws, the Chair and Vice Chair
are elected every two years. He stated that traditionally, the Governor has been
elected to serve ex officio as the Chair of the Board. He commended the Governor
for all he has done for higher education in Tennessee. He stated that this past
winter Tennessee joined the Complete College National Alliance to increase degree
completion, an initiative that is a highlight of a series of higher education
accomplishments under Governor Bredesen. He stated that the University has
benefited greatly from Governor Bredesen's efforts on behalf of higher education.
Trustee Loughry moved the reelection of Governor Bredesen as Chair of the
Board. Trustee Schledwitz seconded the motion, and the motion carried
unanimously.
Vice Chair Murphy stated that traditionally the former Vice Chair recommends the
election of the next Vice Chair, but due to the circumstances of transition this
year, he recognized Trustee Loughry for a motion.
Trustee Loughry moved that Vice Chair Murphy be elected to serve an additional
year as Vice Chair of the Board to provide continuity during the presidential search
and the election of a new Governor. Mr. Stansberry seconded the motion. The
Vice Chair stated that the action required a three fourths vote of the Board and
then called for any discussion.
Trustee Wharton stated that he is in favor of term limits because he believes they
Page 4, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
serve an important purpose. He stated that the Board is fortunate to have a wise
Governor and able Vice Chair, but that may not always be the case and he is
opposed to setting this precedent.
Governor Bredesen stated that he understood Trustee Wharton's comments but
wanted to make it clear that he had asked Vice Chair Murphy to consider
extending his service as Vice Chair several months ago when it was clear that the
University would be searching for and transitioning to a new President at a time
when the state would be electing a new Governor.
Trustee Talbott asked whether a Vice Chair has served an additional year in the
past. Ms. Mizell recalled that Vice Chair William Sansom served for an additional
year during the transition of a new President in 1999-2000.
The Vice Chair then called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried with
Trustee Wharton abstaining.
Vice Chair Murphy stated that he is honored to continue to serve in this capacity,
appreciates the confidence placed in him by the Governor, and looks forward to a
successful presidential search. He added that the Board has a lot of work ahead of
it in the next several months to find just the right person to lead the University to
be a top research university.
VII. PRESIDENT'S ANNUAL REPORT
Welcoming Governor Bredesen to the meeting, Dr. Simek stated that while serving
as acting/interim President he has worked closely with the Governor and his
administration to make higher education better for the people of Tennessee.
Discussing the special legislative session in February, Dr. Simek noted that the
success of that special session changes the mission of the University in many
respects, for example requiring that the University articulate with other institutions
across the state in new ways so that our students can make timely progress
through their education. He stated that we are now focused on outcomes and
what we can do to be responsive to the needs of the people. He stated that he is
proud to have been a part of that process and that he commits the University to
further those ends in as a rapid a time frame as possible.
Dr. Simek noted that the Governor has challenged UT Knoxville to accomplish the
goal of becoming a top-25 public institution of higher education. He stated that
Chancellor Cheek will discuss with the Board exactly what that will entail and how
the campus has begun the process to achieve that goal.
Page 5, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Dr. Simek observed that although we continue to face difficult economic times, as
reflected in the budget passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor,
stimulus funds continue to allow the University to function reasonably well. He
added that we will not come unprepared to the cliff in 2012 because we have
worked very hard to be certain that we will be prepared. He stated that each
Chancellor will report to the Board today and describe specific plans for each
campus as well as the cost cuts and impacts to their campuses. He stated that
the University worked very hard to come to solutions to this problem that position
us well to move into the future. He stated that each campus has tried very hard to
move toward a gentle landing and be mindful of employees and have as little
impact on people as possible. He stated that well over 600 positions will be
eliminated by the time the stimulus funds are gone, but we have allowed for
attrition and retirement and have moved employees around over the past two years
so that in the end, the total impact will be 50-60 people who will lose their jobs.
Dr. Simek stated that we will also need to raise revenues to prepare for 2011 and
2012, and one of the ways that we propose to do this is by increasing tuition on
most campuses by 8.5%. He explained that the increase will mostly offset the
increase in fixed costs. He stated that there will also be some funds that will
provide some flexibility to the campuses to react to needs that arise at the end of
the stimulus funding, such as adding additional sections as courses get
bottlenecked during the school year. He stated that the administration is very
aware of the burden placed on students and families by tuition increases and noted
that by no means does the increase in tuition make up for the budget reductions
we are facing. He argued that even with the increase, the University remains a
very good buy compared to its peers. He explained that with Hope Scholarship
funds taken into account, which approximately 99% of incoming freshman receive,
a freshman would pay approximately $2400 out-of-pocket for the year. He stated
that the University is committed to keeping tuition as low as we can and still
provide the quality education students deserve and expect. He stated that the
incoming freshman class at Knoxville is once again the best class the University
has had with average high school GPA's of 3.8 and ACT's of approximately 28.
He stated that the University must provide a first rate education and cannot draw
down what it is doing or these outstanding students will stop coming. He stated
that he is very proud of the job our institutions and campuses have done to reduce
costs and find innovative ways to save and conserve resources. He reported that
Trustee Horne, Chair of the Effectiveness and Efficiency Committee, has been
very diligent in encouraging cost reductions and it has paid off with important
savings.
Dr. Simek stated that one of the challenges the Board gave him was to streamline
Page 6, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
the system administration. He stated that today there are fewer Vice Presidents,
costs have been reduced by millions of dollars, the system administration is better
defined, and it is an effective operation that plays a critical role to the statewide
mission of our institution. He stated that another challenge he was given was to
lead a review of whether the athletic departments for UTK should report to the
President or to the Chancellor. He stated that last fall he appointed a distinguished
task force that unanimously recommended a change in the reporting line. The
study included a written agreement that governed the aspects of that change
including presidential oversight, budget, accounting provisions, development, and
accommodations for athletic events. He stated that the President of the University
still has the ultimate oversight over intercollegiate athletics for all campuses.
Dr. Simek reported that of the other specific tasks the Board gave to him at their
workshop last August, there are two remaining to be completed. The first is the
determination of how to best structure our diversity program. He stated that there
is a task force working on that with the assistance of a consultant and there will
be a recommendation in October. The second remaining task was addressing
purchasing and capital projects. He stated that Butch Peccolo is heading up our
study of both areas, and he will have a recommendation about reorganizing both.
Dr. Simek stated that he continues to believe the University today is the best that
it has ever been in its history. He stated that he attributes that to the talented
employees who work here and their loyalty, dedication, determination to do more
with less when necessary, and tremendous ability they bring to the practice of
their job. He stated that it is truly an honor for him to lead this great University.
He discussed the success of the recently completed $ 1 billion Campaign for
Tennessee. He noted that those funds are almost always restrictive in how they
can be used, and therefore development does not tend to be a solution to the
problem of how to fund the general operation of the University. Nevertheless,
more and more, it will be a critical part of how we operate into the future as that
efficient top-25 research institution the Governor talked about. He stated that he
looks forward to turning over a more stable University to the new President and
going back to the faculty and help to make the UTK's quest to be a top-25
institution a reality. He introduced Chancellor Jimmy Cheek to share his bold plan
to move UTK to a top-25 institution.
VIII. REPORT ON UT KNOXVILLE QUEST FOR TOP-25 STATUS
Dr. Cheek began by expressing his appreciation to Governor Bredesen for issuing
the challenge to UT Knoxville to become a top-25 university. He reported that as
an immediate response to the Governor's challenge, he put together a task force to
assemble a plan, including a gap analysis comparing UTK against the top-25 target
Page 7, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
institutions. Dr. Cheek explained that UTK will become a top-25 university for two
fundamental reasons: first, it will make UTK a better institution for the students,
and second, it will allow UTK to be a better institution to serve the people of
Tennessee.
Referring to charts included in the meeting materials (Exhibit 3), Dr. Cheek
discussed areas the campus must focus on in seeking to achieve top-25 status. In
undergraduate education, the challenge is to increase freshman retention and
graduation rates. In graduate education, he noted that UTK awarded 209 fewer
PhD degrees than the target group of institutions and would need to increase
PhD's awarded by 80%. He stated that plans already in place for an
interdisciplinary PhD between UTK and ORNL will have a significant impact.
Discussing federal research expenditures and total research expenditures, Dr.
Cheek reported that the gap is in the $100s of millions. Concerning faculty
salaries, he noted that the salary range for top 25 peers is $6,000 to $12,000 and
for the aspirational group the range is approximately $10,000 to $24,000.
Addressing financial resources and infrastructure, he noted that UTK is
approximately $24,000 less than the target group for endowment per student.
Dr. Cheek noted that the Board has been extremely helpful to him in the year and
half he has served as Chancellor, and he will need even more of its help to achieve
this ambitious goal. He stated that the journey will be more important than
achieving the goal, explaining that, if, in two years, he can report progress in the
graduation rate and other areas that will significantly impact our students and the
State of Tennessee, pursuit of this goal will be well justified. He stated that UTK
will pursue this goal with abandon, and with the Board's help, we will be
successful, we will create a better University.
Governor Bredesen asked Dr. Cheek if there is an agreed upon list of metrics for
measuring universities. Dr. Cheek stated that there is no exact list or exact criteria
for top-25 status, but the task force looked at about 74 different metrics and
narrowed it down to these twelve and determined that these are the barometers
we need to be monitoring. Governor Bredesen asked for an example of some of
the metrics that almost made the cut. Dr. Cheek responded that diversity of
faculty and students is a metric the University is working hard on, but is not
included as a top-25 metric. Dean Bruce Bernstein from the College of Arts and
Sciences also provided examples of other metrics that the task force reviewed.
Governor Bredesen stated that when he issued the challenge, he was certainly
very aware that there was no agreed upon check list to score the University and he
Page 8, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
invites the administration over time to reconsider some of those metrics because it
appears there is a significant gap in some cases.
Trustee Stansberry stated that he is greatly concerned about starting on this
journey, which has several measures directly related to resources and yet we are
proposing a tuition increase that basically pays the inflationary increases for fixed
costs. Dr. Cheek responded that as we go down this path and maintain the quality
of education to serve the students, we will need to have discussions about
resources. He stated that he will start discussions with the President after this
meeting about UTK's efficiency and effectiveness task force. He stated that the
task force looked at our academic enterprise and asked how we could become
more academically efficient--how can we control the amount of courses students
drop, control the number of courses students can preregister for and control
whether enough sections are offered for students to graduate on time--all of which
have some financial implications. He stated that he would be speaking to the
Board about those and some possible opportunities that really would not cost the
student more money in the long run.
Governor Bredesen stated that improving education is not necessarily directly
related to increasing costs. He stated that having a really crisp specific strategy
as opposed to a general request for more money will attract more resources.
Dr. Cheek stated that the faculty is the real driver for the University. He stated
that when we compete for assistant professors we have to compete at the market
place levels.
The first three metrics discussed today are the most critical for UTK, the quality of
students coming in, how are we retaining them and how are we graduating them.
Those are the three things that UTK must do better, and he stated, some of that is
resource based but most of that is management.
Trustee Hall complimented Dr. Cheek on his report and stated that he felt that the
University and all its campuses should move together on this challenge. Dr. Simek
stated that the same consultant that assisted UTK with its plan is now meeting
with UTC and UTM. He noted that their target group and aspirational group would
be based on their peers, different from those used for UTK.
Trustee Schledwitz noted that when Dr. Steve Schwab was Dean at UTHSC he
started a similar process for the medical school to be in the top quartile. He stated
that UTHSC is two years into that process and has a road map in place to achieve
its goal. He noted that, unfortunately, like UTK, UTHSC has a long way to go to
get there, but we have made progress.
Page 9, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Trustee Cates commented on Trustee Stansberry's discussion of resources and
stated that our hands are tied in one important respect, our development and
research expenses are essentially the same as they were ten years ago, putting an
ever larger burden on tuition. He suggested that the Board, at the August
workshop, focus on perhaps putting a policy limit on tuition increases to force the
fundamental review of the business model and also force us to focus on how to
fund development officers to fill that ever growing gap.
Trustee Wharton stated that our average development officer here raises $3 million
per person and nationally that average is $2 million per person. He stated that the
fundamental reason for our huge improvement is that we have great staff, but the
problem is that we do not have enough staff. He stated that there is a proposal
being discussed to add 70 more development officers over the next ten years. He
stated that there is not a single development officer in the UT Research Foundation
therefore we have never approached the Gates Foundation to do something with
us in Memphis. He added that our dilemma is that there is a wind up period, and
we will not wind up the development office fast enough to solve the interim
budget shortfall. He stated that what is left is what Trustee Stansberry brought
up, tuition increases. Trustee Wharton stated that we have also gone four years
without a raise to faculty and staff. He stated that everyone who leaves is
replaced by an employee at a higher compensation rate, which brings all kinds of
compression issues. Trustee Wharton stated that he believes tuition increases
must continue to be viewed as a resource for now.
Trustee Stansberry observed that the net tuition for an incoming student, net of
the Hope Scholarship, is approximately $2,500. He stated that we do ourselves a
disservice by saying that we cannot keep raising tuition because that is an
incredible value, and if we are going to maintain quality according to the goals we
are seeking we are going to have to pay for it.
Trustee Cates commented that the business models of all-inclusive, low-cost
online universities are coming. He stated that we can rationalize as we wish, but
for the long term we are going to have to figure out a fundamental way
strategically to fix the budget.
Trustee Talbott noted that a very small percentage of development funds are
allocated to operations. Trustee Wharton stated that donors need to be
encouraged to give unrestricted gifts.
Page 10, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
The Vice Chair thanked Dr. Cheek for his presentation and stated that the Board
looks forward to a further report on this topic.
At this time the Board took a short recess, and Governor Bredesen left the meeting
due to another commitment.
IX. FY 2011 OPERATING BUDGET, STUDENT TUITION AND FEES, AND
COMPENSATION GUIDELINES
The Vice Chair recognized Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer and Acting Chief
Financial Officer, to present the FY 2011 operating budget, student tuition and
fees, and compensation guidelines (Exhibit 4). Mr. Peccolo specifically thanked
members of his staff for their efforts in preparing the budget document and
meeting materials. He began by discussing the total revenues budgeted for 2011,
reporting a projected $118 million increase over probable 2010. He discussed the
components of the increase and noted that the $55 million attributed to other
revenues is predominately restricted funds for the Solar Institute. He discussed
the FY 2011 Unrestricted E&G Revenues Summary noting that there will be a
reduction of approximately $110 million in state appropriations over this past
three-year period. He discussed the specific procedure for the flow of ARRA and
MOE funds through the state appropriations to the University. He discussed the
addition of a non-recurring one-time longevity bonus for employees. He reported
on Unrestricted E&G Expenditures and Transfers for 2011 with a $79.7 million
increase over last year. He stated that expenditures exceed revenues and
approximately $3 to $4 million will come from the University's unrestricted
unallocated fund balance ("rainy day funds") to cover expenditures. He stated that
the remaining amount of the fund will be approximately 3% of our average
expenditures at the end of the fiscal year. The Vice Chair noted that this amount
was 4% three or four years ago and there is not much flexibility to take more out
of the rainy day fund going forward. Mr. Peccolo then presented the state-funded
capital maintenance projects approved for 2011 for each campus.
Mr. Peccolo next discussed the FY 2011 proposed tuition and fee increases. He
stated that the administration is recommending an 8.5% fee increase for most of
the campuses and units. He noted the recommendation for the College of Law
increase is 12%, College of Veterinary Medicine is 5%, and the UTHSC increases
are 10%. Finally, Mr. Peccolo called the Board's attention to the FY 2011
compensation guidelines included in the meeting materials.
The Vice Chair stated that there is a Resolution included in the meeting materials
to approve the FY 2011 Proposed Budget, Recommended Tuition and Fees,
Page 11, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Balanced Budget Modifications, FY 2011 Compensation Guidelines and Reserve for
Contingency.
Trustee Talbott moved approval of the Resolution included in the meeting materials
and attached to these minutes (Exhibit 5). Trustee Loughry seconded the motion.
Trustee Wharton stated that he would like Dr. Cheek to comment on a proposed
increase of 9 % instead of 8.5 %. Trustee Wharton stated that he is concerned by
the excessive deferred maintenance amounts carried by UTK and that this
proposed tuition increase will only add to that problem. He also stated that he
believed it was important to start taking smaller incremental increases to achieve
UTK's quest to be a top-25 university rather than being in a position that requires
a large increase. Dr. Cheek addressed two potential important and necessary uses
for the additional funds that would be generated from a 9% increase and stated
that in his opinion it would be a wise decision.
Trustee Wharton moved to amend the recommended tuition and fees increase to
9% for UTK. Trustees Stansberry seconded the motion.
Trustee Horne discussed the proposed budget for the year, specifically the
revenues with the ARRA and MOE funds that are available for the 2011 year. He
emphasized that raising tuition is not something that the Board or administration
prefers to do. He stated that a tuition increase puts a heavy burden on the
students and their families and that he is not in favor of increasing to 9%.
Trustee Driver discussed the additional burden to students in the Nursing, Business
and Engineering programs that recently added a differential tuition fee per course.
Vice Chair Murphy noted that the per course fee coupled with the 8.5% tuition
increase would result in a significant increase to the student of over 40 %. He
noted that the amount was mostly attributable to the differential tuition fees.
Trustee Driver noted that one component of the differential tuition approved earlier
in the year was a plan to assist students with financial need. Dr. Cheek stated
that students with actual financial need in those differential tuition programs would
be assisted by funds that have been set aside for that purpose.
Trustee Blackburn stated that she remains very concerned that there is a lack of
effective communication to parents and students adequately explaining the
necessity for tuition increases.
Trustee Anderson asked Dr. Simek to comment on whether he would be
supportive of a 9% tuition increase.
Page 12, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Dr. Simek responded that he would support an increase of 9% because of the
significant drop in appropriations over the last three years. He added that the
tuition proposed today still do not come anywhere near the budget reductions over
the past years. He stated that it becomes a question of whether Chancellors will
be able to fill critical holes that open up after the ARRA funds are gone. He stated
that the administration has tried to be very mindful of the students and families
that have to pay these bills. He stated that 8.5% was the lowest increase we
could propose without doing more damage to the University. He stated that 9%
would allow us a little more flexibility.
Dr. Stansberry commented on Chancellor Cheek's report and stated that if we are
seriously going to pursue top-25 status, the University needs more money. He
noted that Dr. Cheek's presentation demonstrated that UT fell below the median
versus its peers for tuition costs. He stated that when a student nets out the
Hope Scholarship, UT is an incredibly good value. He added that he has total
confidence in Dr. Cheek and others to spend the additional money wisely to
improve the quality of what UT offers.
Trustee Foy asked Chancellor Brown and Chancellor Rakes to comment on
increasing tuition at UTC and UTM by 9%. Chancellor Rakes discussed the
approximate amount that would be generated by an additional .5% tuition increase
and critical areas at UTM that he could allocate those funds. Chancellor Brown
stated that the increase would be absolutely needed and would be allocated to
high need instruction areas.
At this time Trustees Johnson, Vaikunth, Hagler, Cates and Rhoda exited the
meeting due to travel arrangements.
In response to a question from Trustee Schledwitz, Dr. Cheek discussed the
approximate amount that a .5% increase would generate for UTK and stated that
the money could provide additional class sections. Trustee Stansberry noted that
an extra $1 4 per student per semester could potentially result in a student
graduating sooner because he or she was able to get the classes needed.
Trustee Wharton withdrew his motion for a 9% tuition increase for UTK and
moved to amend the recommended Tuition and Fees to 9% for each campus for
which an 8.5 % increase was originally proposed. Trustee Stansberry seconded
the motion. The motion carried by majority vote.
Page 13, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
The Vice Chair then called for a vote on Trustee Talbott's motion, seconded by
Trustee Loughry, as amended by Trustee Wharton's motion. The motion carried
by majority vote.
X. REPORT ON PLANNING FOR FY2012 OPERATION BUDGET (POST-ARRA)
Dr. Simek stated that the next presentations will give the Board some specifics,
campus by campus, of how we have undertaken the post-ARRA reductions at each
campus and the effect of those reductions on our operations (Exhibit 6). Dr. Simek
provided a brief overview, presenting state appropriation reductions over the last
three fiscal years, which cumulatively add up to $110 million, or $112 million with
the effect on restricted funds. He stated that state appropriations in absolute
dollars will be significantly reduced from the 2008 level of $505.8 million to $403
million. He then presented the overall plan for reductions for the UT System,
discussing cost reduction efforts in two primary areas, position reduction and cuts
in operation. With respect to position reduction, he stated that there will be nearly
700 fewer positions, and the actual reduction-in-force will be approximately 55
individuals for the cumulative period. He stated that this is the result of a long
hard process of eliminating positions as they become vacant and by moving
employees to critical positions as they become vacant. He discussed cuts in
operations and savings achieved through the EEF efforts. He then discussed
additional net revenues from tuition and other fees and revenues, noting that
tuition revenues reflect increases as well as significant enrollment growth. He
stated that replacement costs will increase and also fixed costs such as electricity,
gas, etc. He stated that for the most part, revenue increases are needed to cover
cost increases, and $18 million will be applied to the reduction in appropriations
for the cumulative period.
Dr. Simek then discussed plans for reduction in the system administration. He
stated that because the system administration could not receive ARRA funds, it
had to account for state appropriation reductions as they occurred. He stated that
in the end, we reduced system administration costs by over $6 million, including
the elimination of 37 positions. He stated that the system administration actually
contributed to more than its share of reductions. He reported that prior to system
administration reorganization and EEF efforts, the system administration had
677.87 FTE's and as of June 2010 only 513.63 FTE's, with additional reductions
possible with the finalization of the OIT reorganization.
Chancellor Brown presented the state appropriation reductions for UTC over the
past three fiscal years. He stated that UTC had $46.0 million of direct state
appropriations in 2008 and $33.5 projected for 2012. He stated that this
Page 14, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
illustrates why the increase in tuition and fees just approved are so critical for
UTC. He stated that he joins the Board in saying that it is a regrettable situation,
and we really hate seeing more of the burden placed on students and students'
families, but there is really no other way to continue to offer the excellent
education expected. He stated that about 72.5 FTE positions have been
eliminated at UTC with most coming from attrition and retirement. Of that
amount, roughly 20 were faculty positions. He stated that $28 million of cost
savings have been achieved at UTC over the past ten years. He stated that he is
so grateful for the capital maintenance for UTC due to the efforts of the Board and
state legislators. He noted that the capital maintenance has allowed UTC to
increase cost savings. He stated that food service, printing, and the bookstore
have all been outsourced as well as 35 % of the work of the physical plant. He
then reviewed the list of unit impacts to UTC and stated that UTC has worked
hard to keep the quality of instruction high and to make it hard for students to
observe the budget reductions in their experience at UTC.
Chancellor Cheek stated that UTK has lost almost $57 million for the cumulative
period, or 27% of direct state appropriations since 2008, and approximately 275
FTE's, including tenure-line faculty. As an example, he stated that the College of
Arts and Sciences lost 39 tenure-line faculty or 9% of its teaching capacity and 35
of its lecturers or 22% of its teaching capacity, and 13.5 academic support staff
positions. He stated that this will have a major impact on undergraduate education
and that the institution's ability to retrain and attract faculty has been
compromised. He noted that employee salaries are also a major issue as we move
into a fourth year without raises for faculty and staff. He also noted that deferred
maintenance at UTK is currently over $200 million and rising.
Chancellor Rakes stated that UTM will have lost roughly $10 million over the three
year period, or approximately a 30% drop in state funding since 2008. He noted
that the campus started planning for this in 2008, and the campus efficiency task
force brought forward 52 recommendations for cost savings, 42 of which have
been implemented. He also noted that adding a summer semester resulted in
increased revenues. He stated that 28 positions will be eliminated, of which eight
are faculty and the remaining 20 are staff positions. He added that in most of
these cases, the campus has been able to reallocate employees to non-eliminated
positions.
Dr. Schwab reported that UTHSC will have reductions of roughly $19.5 million
cumulatively. He explained that professional schools are different, with most
revenues generated from clinical practices, graduate medical education, and
research and lesser amounts from state appropriations and tuition. He stated that
125 FTE positions will be eliminated at UTHSC, the majority of which are vacant
Page 15, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
positions. He stated that there will be additional net revenue of approximately $16
million coming almost exclusively from an expansion of UTHSC professional
programs. Dr. Schwab discussed continued planned investments in Dentistry and
support of the research programs to continuing moving UTHSC forward with
increased revenues. He stated that there may be some reductions-in-force
required, but they will be a small fraction of the RIF's anticipated over a year ago.
The Vice Chair requested that the Trustees receive a copy of the PowerPoint
presentation for each campus.
XI. ACTION ITEM FROM THE TRUSTEESHIP COMMITTEE
The Vice Chair recognized Trustee Loughry, Chair of the Trusteeship Committee,
to report to the Board.
A. Bylaw Amendment Changing Title of Vice President for Agriculture to
Chancellor of The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture
Trustee Loughry stated that the Trusteeship Committee approved a Bylaw
amendment changing the title of Vice President for Agriculture to Chancellor of
The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture at the committee meeting in
May for the purpose of better expressing the role of the leader of the Institute
(Exhibit 7). She referred the Board to the proposed amendment in the meeting
materials.
Trustee Loughry moved approval to amend Article IV, Section 1, Section 2(b), and
Section 3(c) of the Bylaws changing the title of the Vice President for Agriculture
to Chancellor of The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture. Trustee
Stansberry seconded the motion. The Vice Chair called for a roll call vote, and the
motion carried unanimously.
B. Bylaw Amendment Revising Responsibilities of the President with respect
to Intercollegiate Athletics
Trustee Loughry stated that in the fall of 2009, Dr. Simek appointed a broad
based task force on athletic reporting that included Trustees, UTK administration,
system administration, faculty, student athletes, alumni, and the Athletic Directors,
with a charge to consider the appropriate reporting structure and placement for the
Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (Exhibit 8). In May, the Trusteeship
Committee reviewed the proposal of the task force proposal and approved a Bylaw
amendment revising the responsibilities of the President with respect to
Page 16, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
intercollegiate athletics. Trustee Loughry stated that the President will remain
responsible for the general oversight of intercollegiate athletics on each of the
campuses. Trustee Loughry moved approval to amend Article IV, Section
3(a)(2)(viii) of the Bylaws, with the amendment to be effective July 1, 2010, as
presented in the meeting materials. Trustee Talbott seconded the motion. The
Vice Chair called for a roll call vote, and the motion carried unanimously.
Trustee Loughry noted that the articulation agreement between the system and
the campus was provided on the meeting table.
C. Bylaw Amendment to Authorize Extending the Term of Committee and
Committee Chair Appointments
Trustee Loughry began by noting that she personally agrees with Trustee Wharton
that leadership should rotate on a regular basis, but at this time, on advice from
the Governor and in consultation with staff, the Trusteeship Committee
recommends the Board approve the proposed Bylaw amendment to authorize
extending the term of committee and committee chair appointments. She stated
that the Bylaw amendment would allow for an extension of up to one year for
good cause such as the present circumstances (Exhibit 9). Trustee Loughry moved
approval to amend Article III, Section 2(b)(2) of the Bylaws as presented in the
meeting materials. Trustee Carroll seconded the motion.
Trustee Wharton stated that he was concerned with setting a precedent for
leadership being extended beyond the regular term. He stated that he was
concerned that the Bylaw amendment would allow the Vice Chair to propose an
extension at any time he or she deems there to be unusual circumstances. He
asked for a clarification of whether the Bylaw amendment creates an ongoing
option or a one-time exception. Vice Chair read the proposed amendment and
stated that the Board on an affirmative vote could make the determination to
extend a two-year term for up to one year. He stated that the Vice Chair could not
act unilaterally in this regard. Trustee Wharton discussed his concern about the
possibility of not getting votes against the recommendation of a Vice Chair and
stated that he would support the proposed amendment if it expired in a year.
Trustee Wharton proposed an amendment to the proposed Bylaw amendment that
it only be effective through May 31, 2011. The motion to amend the proposed
Bylaw amendment was seconded by Trustee Horne and carried unanimously.
The Vice Chair called for a roll call vote to adopt the proposed Bylaw amendment
to authorize extending the term of committee and committee chair appointments,
as amended, and the motion carried unanimously.
Page 17, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
D. Revised Organizational Chart for the System Administration
Trustee Loughry stated that this organizational chart was requested by the Board
and has been reviewed by the Trusteeship Committee and is recommended for
approval (Exhibit 10). Trustee Loughry moved approval of the revised organization
chart for the system administration as presented in the meeting materials. Trustee
Schledwitz seconded the motion and it carried unanimously.
XII. VICE CHAIR'S RECOMENDATION CONCERNING COMMITTEE AND
COMMITTEE CHAIR APPOINTMENTS
The Vice Chair stated that his recommendation concerning Committee and
Committee Chair appointments is consistent with the Bylaw amendment adopted
at this meeting. Mr. Wharton moved approval of the Vice Chair's recommendation
concerning committee and committee chair appointments. Trustee Talbott
seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
XIII. ACTION ITEMS FROM THE EXECUTIVE AND COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
The Vice Chair stated that the following action items were discussed at prior
meetings of the Executive and Compensation Committee and the committee
recommended their approval.
A. Approval of a Resolution Appointing a Managerial Group for U.S.
Government Contracts (Exhibit 11)
B. Approval of 2011 Regular Meeting Dates (Exhibit 12)
C. President's Recommendation of an Appointment to the Board of Directors of
University Health Systems, Inc. (Exhibit 13).
Trustee Carroll moved approval of the Resolution Appointing a Managerial Group
for U.S. Government Contracts, 2011 Regular Meeting Dates, and the President's
Recommendation of an Appointment to the Board of Directors of University Health
Systems, Inc. as presented at this meeting. Trustee Talbott seconded the motion,
and it carried unanimously.
D. President's Recommendation for Election and Compensation of the
Chancellor of The University of Tennessee Health Science Center
Page 18, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Dr. Simek stated that most of the Trustees were present at the meeting of the
Executive and Compensation Committee when the Committee reviewed and
recommended the approval of the Election and Compensation of Dr. Steven
Schwab as Chancellor of the University of Tennessee Health Science Center
(Exhibit 14). Dr. Simek recommended approval Dr. Schwab's election as
Chancellor of UTHSC with the compensation presented at the meeting. Trustee
Schledwitz moved approval of the election and compensation of the Chancellor of
UTHSC as presented in the meeting materials. Trustee Talbott seconded the
motion, and it carried unanimously.
E. Approval of a Resolution for Election and Compensation of University
Officers
Trustee Stansberry moved approval of the Resolution for Election and
Compensation of University Officers as included in the meeting materials with the
compensation provided during the Committee meeting (Exhibit 15). Trustee
Loughry seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
F. Approval of a Compensation Package for the Next President
The Vice Chair stated that this item was discussed and acted on in the Executive
and Compensation Committee the day before. He asked for a motion to approve
the compensation package for the next President as approved by the Executive and
Compensation Committee (Exhibit 1 6). Trustee Stansberry moved approval of the
Resolution for the compensation package for the next President as included in the
meeting materials. Trustee Wharton seconded the motion, and the Resolution was
adopted unanimously.
XIV. VICE CHAIR'S RECOMMENDATIONS CONERNING THE PRESIDENTIAL
SEARCH
A. Appointment of the Presidential Search Committee and Committee Chair
The Vice Chair referred the Board to a memorandum included in the meeting
materials listing the proposed members of the Presidential Search Committee
and the Committee Chair (Exhibit 17).
Trustee Stansberry moved approval of the appointment of the Presidential
Search Committee and the Committee Chair. Trustee Carroll seconded the
motion, and it carried unanimously.
B. Approval of a Budget for the Presidential Search (Exhibit 18)
Page 19, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
C. Authorization for the Executive and Compensation Committee to Determine,
upon the Recommendation of the Presidential Search Committee, the
Number of Nominees to be Presented to the Board (Exhibit 19)
Mr. Hall moved approval of a budget for the Presidential Search as presented at
the meeting, and authorization for the Executive and Compensation Committee to
determine, upon the recommendation of the Presidential Search Committee, the
number of nominees to be presented to the Board. Mr. Wharton seconded, and
the motion carried unanimously.
XV. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICENCY FOR
THE FUTURE
The Vice Chair recognized Trustee Horne, Chair of the Committee on Effectiveness
and Efficiency for the Future, to report to the Board. Trustee Horne provided a
brief update, noting that the Committee continues to meet every couple of months
at campuses and institutes across the state. He reported that the Committee has
reviewed various areas of the University such as IT, Athletics expenditures, energy
management, and online education. In summary, he stated that the Committee
continues to work hard and is taking a closer look at these functions to be sure
that, first, we are doing the right thing and then to be sure they are being done the
right way.
XVI. REPORT OF THE FOUNDATIONS STUDY COMMITTEE
The Vice Chair recognized Trustee Wharton, Chair of the Foundations Study
Committee, to report to the Board. Trustee Wharton stated that the Committee
has made significant progress and will have its work completed this year. He
briefly updated the Board on the final steps and stated that the UT Foundation
Chair is reviewing the affiliation agreement.
XVII. REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
The Vice Chair recognized Trustee Hall, Chair of the Audit Committee, to report to
the Board. Trustee Hall noted that the minutes from the April 30, 2010 meeting
were included in the materials (Exhibit 20). He stated that there were four items
that he wished to mention briefly. Mr. Bill Myers, CFO for Knoxville Athletics,
provided an overview of the department's financial statements and indicated that
the department generated a surplus of approximately $3 million. He noted that
amount would have been higher except that coaches' buyouts totaling $6.5 million
have to be recorded this year even though they will be paid out over the next
Page 20, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
several years. Trustee Hall then noted that Brian Gard, Director of Special Events,
has been coordinating an update on the campuses emergency management plans.
He found that progress has been made, but more needs to be done. Trustee Hall
reported that both UTC and UTK are hiring full time emergency preparedness
specialists. The campuses are updating their plans and Mr. Gard will continue to
oversee that progress and report back at a future committee meeting. Trustee Hall
stated that Dr. Ken Brown, UTHSC Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief of Staff,
reported that the campus has begun to systematically restructure UT Medical
Group. Trustee Hall noted that the Committee received an update on the Physician
Practice Plans and the oversight is being transferred to the new Health Affairs
Advisory Board from the Audit Committee. Trustee Hall stated that he has
requested that Internal Audit benchmark the duties performed by the University
system offices and have that available in October for the new President.
XVIII. CONSENT ITEMS
The Vice Chair reminded the Trustees that each Trustee is invited to all Board
committee meetings. He noted that each item on the consent agenda was
reviewed fully by the appropriate committee. All items were recommended by the
committees for approval as consent items. He stated that the following two items
that were revised during respective Committee meetings, and the Board will be
acting on them as amended: (1) Item M, Approval of Pilot Regional Tuition Rate
Program for Contiguous Out-of-State Counties (UT Martin)--the Finance and
Administration Committee recommended an increase in the out-of-state differential
rate from 20% to 25%; and (2) Item was item S, Approval of Revised Vision and
Mission Statement for UTIA--the Academic Affairs and Student Success
Committee recommended editorial revisions to the Vision and Mission statement
for the Institute of Agriculture.
The Vice Chair then asked for any requests to remove items from the consent
agenda. There were none. The following items were submitted for approval by
unanimous consent:
A. Approval of a Resolution Honoring Henry Nemcik (Exhibit 21 )
B. Approval of the Naming of the UT Martin Alumni Center (Exhibit 22)
C. Approval of the Naming of the Center for Entrepreneurship and
Innovation at UT Knoxville (Exhibit 23)
D. Ratification of 2009-10 Quasi-Endowments
(Exhibit 24)
Page 21 , Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
E. Approval of Establishment of Haslam Torch Investment Fund (Exhibit 25)
F. Authorization to File a Petition in Knox County Chancery Court to
Modify the Purpose of an Endowment Fund Established for the
Benefit of the School of Architecture and Approval to Use the Fund
To Establish an Endowed Visiting Professorship in the School of
Architecture (Exhibit 26)
G. Approval of Real Property Transactions (Exhibit 27)
1. Grant of a Water Line Easement (UTIA, Greeneville 4-H Center)
2. Grant of a Water Line Easement (UTIA, Plateau Research and
Education Center)
3. Acquisition of an Easement by Gift from Bioworks Foundation
(UTHSC, College of Pharmacy)
H. Approval of Annual Report of Sale of Gift Property (2009-10) (Exhibit 28)
I. Approval of FY 2011 Operating and Capital Plans for Senior University
Administrator Residences
J. Approval of FY 2011 Distribution of UC Foundation Funds (Exhibit 29)
K. Approval of President Emeritus Agreements (Exhibit 30)
L. Approval of Amendment of Lease and Transfer Agreement with
University Health System, Inc., and Approval of Fee Owner Recognition
Agreement (Exhibit 31 )
M. Approval of Pilot Regional Tuition Rate Program for Contiguous
Out-of-State Counties (as amended) (UT Martin)(Exhibit 32)
N. Approval of Extension of Regional Tuition Rate Program for
Undergraduate Students from Contiguous Out-of-State Counties (UTC)
(Exhibit 33)
O. Approval of Academic Program Consolidations at UTC (Exhibit 34)
P. Approval of DNP Program at UTC (Exhibit 35)
Page 22, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
Q. Approval of DNP Program at UTK (Exhibit 36)
R. Approval of Creation of the Department of Public Health at UTK (Exhibit 37)
S. Approval of Revised Vision and Mission Statement for UTIA (as
amended) (Exhibit 38)
T. Approval of a Resolution Affirming Commitment to the Continued
Success of the Frank H. McClung Museum (Exhibit 39)
U. Approval of Tenure Recommendations (Exhibit 40)
V. Approval of Comprehensive Listing of Academic Programs (Exhibit 41)
W. Authorization to Confer Degrees (Exhibit 42)
The Vice Chair asked for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Trustee
Stansberry moved approval of the consent agenda. The motion was duly seconded
by Trustee Loughry and carried unanimously.
XIX. OTHER BUSINESS
The Vice Chair stated that there was no other business brought to his attention.
XX. ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Vice Chair made the following announcements:
First Meeting of Presidential Search Committee, Room 160,
Plant Biotech Building (immediately after full Board meeting)
Joint Meeting of Presidential Search Committee and Search
Advisory Council in Knoxville, 12:00 p.m. EDT, Executive Dining
Room, University Center on June 28, 2010
Summer Workshop at Fall Creek Falls State Park on August 24, 2010
Meeting of the Executive and Compensation Committee on September
10, 2010 in Nashville
Fall Meeting of the Board and its standing Committees on October 21-
22, 2010 in Knoxville
Page 23, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
XXI. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business to come before the Board, Trustee Stansberry moved
adjournment of the meeting. Trustee Carroll seconded the motion, and the motion
carried unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Catherine S. Mizell, Secretary
Page 24, Annual Meeting
Board of Trustees
June 24, 2010
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22,2010
COMMITTEE: Trusteeship
ITEM: Bylaw Amendments Concerning the Chief Internal
Auditor
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Andrea J. Loughry, Chair of Trusteeship
With Mark Paganelli's transfer to a position in the Chief Financial Officer's organization, the
Board must appoint a new Chief Internal Auditor (Executive Director of Audit and Consulting
Services), upon the recommendation of the Audit Committee. To ensure the independence
of this critical position, Trustee Jim Hall, current Chair of the Audit Committee, has
requested that the Bylaws be amended to provide that the Chair of the Audit Committee,
rather than the Chief Financial Officer, is responsible for identifying a candidate for
recommendation to the Audit Committee.
The proposed Bylaw amendments on the following page accomplish this revision, authorize
the Chair of the Audit Committee to make an interim appointment to the position pending
completion of a search, and make two housekeeping revisions.
The proposed amendments were approved by the Trusteeship Committee on September
10, 2010 and are presented for adoption by the full Board.
MOTION:
Move approval of the Bylaw amendments as presented in the meeting materials.
PROPOSED BYLAW AMENDMENTS
CONCERNING CHIEF INTERNAL AUDITOR
Revise Article IV, Section 6, of the Bylaws as shown below:
ARTICLE IV
SECTION 6. (a) The Board of Trustees shall appoint the Chief Internal Auditor for the
University upon the recommendation of the Audit Committee. In the event of a
vacancy, or notice of an impending vacancy in this position, the Chief Pinancial Officer
of the University the Chair of the Audit Committee shall identify and recommend to the
Audit Committee a candidate for the vacant position. Upon concurring with the
recommendation of the Chair, the Audit Committee will recommend the candidate to
the Board of Trustees for appointment. In identifying a candidate for recommendation
to the Audit Committee, the Chair shall comply with all applicable University policies
concerning searches and the appointment process. The Chair of the Audit Committee
may appoint an individual to serve as Chief Internal Auditor on an interim basis
pending completion of a search and the appointment process.
(b) The Board of Trustees reserves to itself the authority to reassign, demote, or dismiss
for cause the Chief Internal Auditor, upon the recommendation of the Audit
Committee.
(c) The Chief Internal Auditor and the staff of the department of internal audit shall
report administratively to the Chief Financial Officer of the University. However, with
respect to all audit activities and findings, the Chief Internal Auditor shall report
directly to the Audit Committee and shall have direct and unrestricted access to the
Chair and other committee members.
(d) Each year, the Chief Internal Auditor shall develop and execute a comprehensive
audit plan to be conducted in accordance with applicable professional auditing
standards. The Chief Internal Auditor shall make a comprehensive report on the
internal audit function to the Board of Trustees through the Audit Committee at the
Annual Meeting. The report will include the annual audit plan, and a review of all
previous year audits completed and in progress, including any follow-up reviews and
any audits that were scheduled but not done, and a list of all audits completed \\rithin
the last three years.
(e) The Chief Internal Auditor shall send a copy of each internal audit report and
follow-up review, upon its completion, to the Audit Committee.
(f) The Chief Internal Auditor shall promptly report any activity that is illegal, or the
legality of which is questioned by the internal audit department (e.g., conflict of
interest, theft), to the Chair of the Audit Committee.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
CAMPUS/UNIT: The University of Tennessee System
ITEM: Annual Flight Operations Report
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer
and Interim Chief Financial Officer
In accordance with the Board-approved policy on University Aircraft, the following Annual
Flight Operations Report is presented for the Board's review and approval.
MOTION:
Move approval of the FY2010 Annual Flight Operations Report as presented in the
meeting materials.
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
FY 2010 UT FLIGHT OPERATIONS REPORT
The FY 2010 University of Tennessee Flight Operations report is presented to the
UT Board of Trustees in accordance with university Fiscal Policy 735, University
Aircraft.
The UT Flight Operations department provides university departments with safe
and reliable flight services using the UT plane and various charter flight operators
as appropriate. In FY2010, the UT plane was flown 309.0 flight hours during 346
separate flights or legs. A total of 251 legs, 73 percent, were flown between
Knoxville and Nashville or UT entities. That percentage of activity is comparable
to prior years. A total of 564 passengers were carried, which involved 218 different
individuals.
Since its acquisition in March, 2008, the UT plane, a 2008 King Air 350, has given
exceptional and reliable service. As we completed FY2010, no scheduled flights
were cancelled due to maintenance deficiencies due in large part to the
conscientious efforts of our on-site mechanic, James Denny.
As we approached the expiration date of the original manufacturer's paint warranty
on the UT plane, numerous deficiencies in the exterior paint were documented.
This culminated in repainting the plane's fuselage and various other parts of the
airframe, predominantly at the vendor's expense. The result was a renewed
exterior appearance with an accompanying additional paint warranty that should
serve the University's interests well in the years ahead.
Personnel changes in the department resulted from the retirement of David Currie,
who gave over 20 years of service to the department. After a nationwide search,
we welcomed James Liddle as a pilot to help continue our services to the
University.
The operating cost of the UT plane is funded from departmental charges and
system support. Departments paid $950 per flight hour during FY2010, which
assists in funding variable operating and routine maintenance costs. The system
IIPaoe
b
funds pilot salaries, benefits and extraordinary maintenance.
The cost of operations was $536,939. This amount is consistent with the annual
flight hour usage of 309.0 hrs. in maintaining the hourly operating cost of $1,738.
Major expenditures include pilot salaries and benefits of $261,578, fuel cost of
$128,443 and $40,123 in maintenance and repairs. The cost of fuel averaged
$462 per flight hour, which is consistent with the last 2 years.
The UT plane continues to operate at a lower per hour cost than charter flight
services and most commercial airline flights. It allows the passengers to make
more efficient use of their time, especially traveling within Tennessee, to reach
locations not served by commercial airlines on flight schedules that the airlines
cannot accommodate. We continue to make every effort to use the UT plane
before making use of charter flight services.
However, those charter flight services are essential to meeting the travel needs of
the University. In FY2010, the University contracted for charter flights valued at
$542,978. The primary departmental user is athletics, especially during the
football recruiting periods. Frequently more than one airplane is required on a
recruiting day. The added capacity offered by the charter flight services meets
that need.
Overall, FY2010 was a successful year for the UT Flight Operations department.
Customer service and increased efficiency continue to be reviewed for
improvement.
21Page
UT Flight Operations (UT Plane)
Operating Costs per Operational Hour
FY 2010-2006
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
Recoveries/Support
Departmental Recoveries $ 201,163 $ 287,170 $ 318,161 $ 321,687 $ 236,000
System Support (1) 175,776 183,565 270,682 172,822 212,625
Athletic Support (2) 160,000 155,000 155,000 151,126 128,500
Total Recoveries/Support $ 536,939 $ 625,735 $ 743,843 $ 645,635 $ 577,125
Expenditures
Salaries & Benefits $ 261,578 $ 312,605 $ 338,615 $ 291,704 $ 270,882
Contract Pilots/Extra Service 19,886 17,950 25,274 10,548 6,400
Fuel 128,443 153,176 201,876 154,996 112,854
Routine Maintenance/Inspections 40,123 33,723 57,757 94,466 82,346
Travel 12,098 11,994 25,278 12,632 16,729
Printing 81
Phone & Postage 4,543 3,906 3,545 3,259 3,198
Pilot Training 13,250 30,700 39,305 23,400 22,400
Supplies 13,290 1,852 9,874 5,252 5,174
Computer Services 804 4,388 4,673 3,995
Office and Hangar Rent 22,590 22,590 22,096 23,033 25,350
Liability Insurance 19,730 19,554 13,007 21,266 23,446
Motor vehicle - Nashville 7,466
Misc Operational Exp 1,410 9,335 2,826 406 4,351
Total Expenditures $ 536,939 $ 625,735 $ 743,843 $ 645,635 $ 577,125
Net Gain/(Loss) $ (0) $ $ $ $
Total Flight Hours 309.0 324.4 431.3 415.0 311.9
Capital Maintenance $ $ $ 55,981
Cost per hour to operate (3) (without
capital maintenance) $ 1,738 $ 1,929 $ 1,725 $ 1,556 $ 1,850
(1) System Support covers salaries, benefits, and capital maintenance/enhancements.
(2) Direct support from Knoxville athletic department.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INFORMATION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
ITEM: FY 2010-11 Operating Budget Update
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
Subsequent to the Board's June meeting, the Tennessee General Assembly revised
various items in the 2010 appropriations bill for FY 2010-2011. Most changes were one-
time adjustments to the non-recurring appropriations and are reflected on the attached
schedule. The proposed 3% employee bonus was eliminated with the funding returned
as maintenance of effort funds, federal stimulus funding (ARRA) was re-characterized as
one-time non-recurring appropriations, and 2010 ARRA monies were carried forward to
2011. The 2011 revised E & G state appropriation increased by $15.1 million due to
these revisions.
.... .. ..
·:~:~:·~>:~~>:;:-:·>~~~~}:«*-,~::::.. '%.~~:;:.::;x::::~~ :>.~'»X>~~~~~:"{:~~~~:~:::::::::::::::::::~::::;.~';:;.'~~~~::»;i::'~-«;:;»:Wh:::--:;:;::"';:::%~;!.,*:P:«-:;:::::::::::::::(:::x;~W~~~",*,':>..~~::x:Y..9h::::~:~~*~,;:~~%~W.·~*:%i:i;~";i:·:::":~:;·~..
"«;:~:i~·:;:~:~~:·:~:~:~:~:~:·;;:-:;:~>:;:.}x~:~*«~:;:;:;x;~,%.,».'»'»~::;::;:::.~~:;~;:;:;:;:;:;:;:::::::;:;:::;:::;:;:::;:;:::;:;:::::::;:::~;:::;:::;:;:.l:;:::;:::;:::;:;:;:::::;:;:::;:;:::::;:;:::;::~::::;:;9.~':'::i.~~~~:~:::}::;;
401K 550 Match Moved from Recurnng 2,838,100
Ehminate 3% Bonus -20.023,800
MOE-Restore Operating funds 19,038,100
FY2011 ARRA Moved to K-12 -58.867..100
Rep~ace FY2011 ARRA with One-time State Non-Recurring Funds 58,475,500
Adjust Estimated FY201 0 ARRA Carryover to Actual 9,879,246
Adjust Estimated Fee Wafvers to Actual -9,900
FY10 ARRA Carryover-Capital Maintenance Moved to Plant Funds 6,613,498
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
ITEM: FY 2011-12 Operating Budget Appropriations Request
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
Each year the University has the opportunity to present a state appropriations budget
request for support of operations for the new budget year. The formula funding
model is used to generate funding recommendations for the Chattanooga, Knoxville
and Martin campuses. As part of the request process, the University is also able to
submit additional programmatic improvement requests for the non-formula units.
A summary of the FY 2012 non-formula operating programmatic improvement
requests submitted to the Tennessee Higher Education Commission (THEC) for
consideration is attached for your review and approval. This request was filed with
THEC in accordance with their budget submittal instructions. Each programmatic
request supports one or more of the University's Strategic Plan initiatives and is
identified in the summary schedule.
The Operating Budget Submittal Guidelines approved by the Board of Trustees in
June 2005 state that the Finance and Administration Committee shall review,
approve, and recommend to the Board of Trustees the programmatic improvement
requests submitted by the administration to THEC for consideration. To meet
THEC's deadlines, the University's request must be submitted to THEC between the
Annual Meeting and the Fall Meeting of the Board of Trustees. However, if the Board
votes to change the University's request at the Fall Meeting, the administration will be
permitted to submit an amended request to THEC for consideration.
MOTION:
Move approval of the University's state appropriations budget request for
support of operations for the new budget year as presented in the meeting
materials.
The University of Tennessee
FY 2012 NON-FORMULA IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS
Total Total
Request Campus/Unit TOTAL
RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Space Institute
Femtosecond Laser Amplifier $ 385,000
Ultra-sensitive Diagnostics in Applied Physics $ 320,000
Consortium for Materials for Space Technology $ 176,200 $ 881,200
Agricultural Experiment Station
Bioenergy - Center for Renewable Carbon $ 921,025
Exotic Plant Pest Initiative $ 721,000
Biometrics $ 307,850 $ 1,949,875
Institute for Public Service
Law Enforcement Innovation Center $ 564,914
Center for Industrial Services $ 262,500 $ 827,414
RESEARCH AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT $ 3,658,489
STUDENT SUCCESS AND STUDENT ACCESS
Health Science Center
Academic Facilities Rejuvenation $ 5,000,000
Faculty Start-up and Recruitment $ 5,000,000
Information Technology Infrastructure $ 2,000,000 $ 12,000,000
MTAS
Student Interns in Municipal Government $ 48,693 $ 48,693
STUDENT SUCCESS AND STUDENT ACCESS $ 12,048,693
COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND GLOBALIZATION
Institute for Public Service
Center for Effective Leadership $ 145,000 145,000
MTAS
Staff Compensation $ 56,702
Training Consultants (2) $ 228,805
Police Consultant $ 123,035 408,542
CTAS
Staff Compensation $ 70,049
Legal Consultant $ 110,280
Energy Consultant $ 117,280 $ 297,609
COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND GLOBALIZATION $ 851,151
OTHER INITIATIVES
Extension
Starting Salary, Compression and Equity Issues $ 3,407,020 $ 3,407,020
Veterinary Medicine
Merit and Equity $ 2,275,000
Research and Hospital Equipment $ 3,205,061
New faculty and staff positions in critical areas $ 2,943,720
State Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory $ 2,141,353
Animal Assisted Reading Program for Elementary Schools $ 212,172 $ 10,777,306
Institute for Public Service
Staff Compensation $ 53,160 $ 53,160
OTHER INITIATIVES $ 14,237,486
TOTAL NON·FORMULA IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS $ 30,795,819 $ 30,795,819 $ 30,795,819
Copy of FY 2012 list of Requested Improvements.xls, 10/5/2010
The University of Tennessee
FY 2012 NON-FORMULA IMPROVEMENT REQUESTS SUMMARY
TOTAL UNIVERSITY: $30,795,819
Essential to the University of Tennessee accomplishing its goals and objectives is full funding of the
formula. Such resources would position the University to carry out its strategic plan, ensure support
of research and other programs, and help the University improve employee salaries. The University
recognizes the State’s current economic dilemma in relation to this request.
SPACE INSTITUTE: $881,200
Priorities Addressed: Research, Student Access, Student Success
1. Femtosecond Laser Amplifier $ 385,000
In order to maintain national competitiveness in Laser Applications at the Center for Laser
Applications (CLA), significant investment is needed in laser equipment and diagnostics to
keep up with advancements in femtosecond laser phenomena. We are currently working
with equipment that can be found in museums that highlight past advances in laser
technology. CLA has published unique papers on femtosecond machining in Optics Express
(3.3 impact factor). However, we are limited by our ability to characterize and manipulate
the temporal and spectral nature of femtosecond laser pulses. These limitations stand in the
way of further advancements and innovations in this emerging field.
2. Ultra-sensitive Diagnostics in Applied Physics $ 320,000
There is a need for ultra-sensitive spectroscopy / microscopy diagnostic tools and modeling
capabilities for multi-disciplinary experimental research. The equipment would support
activities at UTSI and UTK and would also be available for doctoral research and STEM
outreach programs. The addition of a coherent light source would also augment
collaborative work with Sandia National Labs, Oak Ridge National Labs, New Mexico State
University, Denver University, University of Nebraska, Auburn University, and researchers
in France, Russia, Hungary, and Austria. With this equipment we would be able to do
immediate research in laser-induced spectroscopy, and would be better able to attract
external funding.
3. Consortium for Materials for Space Technology $ 176,200
UTSI is developing its Materials Program but neglecting to develop materials for space
technology, which would directly align with its mission. In particular materials to provide
energy in space via solar and battery power is desirable. In order to initiate this program a
full time postdoctoral associate would be required and a half time research professor along
with funding for materials. This moderate funding would be sufficient to obtain results to
take the program to a level to attract federal funding and create a consortium for materials in
middle Tennessee.
Page 1 of 8
HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER: $12,000,000
Priorities Addressed: Student Success, Student Access, Research and Economic Development
1. Academic Facilities Rejuvenation and Rehabilitation $ 5,000,000
Classrooms and research laboratories need to be enhanced with innovations that will make
them more conducive to learning. Student’s familiarity and comfort with similar
environments that they will likely experience when they enter the workforce will lead to
more productive healthcare providers. Requested funding provides $1,500,000 for
classroom enhancements; $1,250,000 for technology innovations; and $2,250,000 for
research lab enhancements.
2. Faculty Start-up and Recruitment $ 5,000,000
The University of Tennessee Health Science Center continues to rebuild and revitalize its
ranks with new faculty - both senior researchers and those just starting their careers.
However, the HSC is not alone and competition for top notch faculty requires significant
start-up funding to allow researchers to hire research assistants and buy equipment in order
to establish their labs and achieve new funding. These funds will allow the HSC to attract
the very best faculty to conduct research and teach our students.
3. Information Technology Infrastructure $ 2,000,000
The University of Tennessee Health Science Center requests funding to support the
centralization and enhancement of the information technology infrastructure. Requested
funding provides $750,000 for ongoing network/wiring upgrades; and, $1,250,000 for the
implementation of the IT assessment, which may include hiring some staff and the initial
funding for a computer "refresh" program.
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION: $1,949,875
Priorities Addressed: Research
1. Bio-energy – Center for Renewable Carbon $ 921,025
The State of Tennessee has taken an aggressive leadership role in creating a bio-energy
industry in the state. The opening of the Genera Energy pilot/research bio-refinery and the
recent establishment of the Center for Renewable Carbon places the state at the forefront in
developing a sustainable industry to supplant significant amounts of imported oil, create
local economic vitality and diminish environmental impacts of petroleum usage.
This request seeks to maximize the potential of the bioenergy research laboratory with new
faculty members to fill the skill sets missing in the current team. Funding will provide five
new faculty (process economist, chemical engineer, lignin chemist, biochemist, and chemical
biologist), one research associate, and two graduate research assistants.
2. Exotic Plant Pest Initiative $ 721,000
Exotic (non-native) pests represent a serious and growing threat to not only forest and crop
producers but also tourism and commerce in the State. The proposed Exotic Plant Pest
Initiative would consolidate the numerous tasks of limiting the growth and spread of new and
existing populations in Tennessee and the nation. Working with state and federal agencies,
Page 2 of 8
the Experiment Station intends to develop cooperative programs to attack existing species
and develop technology for preventing the successful establishment of future invaders.
Requested funding provides a specialized facility, three faculty positions, a facility manager,
and two research associates.
3. Biometrics $ 307,850
The hallmark of agricultural research has been accurate, real world observations, leading to
reliable cause and effect relationships. These characteristics will prove valuable in
development of complex models to simulate environmental effects. This proposal is for two
faculty and associated research support to utilize computational science in the modeling of
complex environmental phenomenon associated with global climate change.
AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE: $3,407,020
Priorities Addressed: Staff Compensation
1. Starting Salary, Compression and Equity Issues $ 3,407,020
According to a recent survey of Southern Region Personnel Officers, Extension agent
starting salaries are ranked at the bottom of their southern region contemporaries. Tennessee
is currently $1,500 below bachelors and $2,500 below master’s starting salaries.
In addition, according to the USDA Survey of Salaries, effective December 31, 2009,
Tennessee ranks last in average salaries for current agents among southern region states. The
requested funding will support the recruitment of highly competent agents and help retain
existing agents. In recent years, more than half of the professional employees who left the
organization have done so for higher paying positions in industry, other colleges, or state
agencies.
Tennessee is also behind most other southern region state in rewarding first line supervisors
(county directors) for administrative duties they are assigned to beyond their programming
responsibilities. The administrative portion of a county directors’ salary is $2,500 per year.
This amount has not changed since 1999 and does not take into account the size of the
county staff, budget, or programs. A plan has been prepared to pay county directors an
administrative supplement that is more in line with a level of responsibility that would vary
from $2,200 to $5,500 annually.
Requested funds:
• $613,800 - bring current employees to minimum salary
• $2,660,013 - address salary compression for professional employees
• $111,110 - address salary compression for agent administrative supplement
• $22,097 - bring support staff to new schedule minimums
COLLEGE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE: $10,777,306
Page 3 of 8
Priorities Addressed: Student Access, Research, Community Outreach, and Economic Development
1. Merit and Equity $ 2,275,000
It has been four years since the college has been able to address equity issues and provide
merit increases for top performing faculty and staff. We would like an increase in our
recurring funds equal to 5% of our salary budget to use to reward our top performers. In
addition, we request $975,000 in each of the next 3 years so that we can begin to address
equity increases that have accumulated.
Requested Funds:
• $1,300,000 – College Merit Pool (Recurring)
• $975,000 – College Equity Pool (Recurring addition for each of the next
three years)
2. Research and Hospital Equipment $ 3,205,061
The College has been unable to keep our research and hospital equipment up-to-date
given the practice of using clinic revenues and student tuition and fees to fill in the state
appropriations decline over the years. The life expectancy of our hospital equipment
varies from 5-7 years and our equipment inventory is currently $20 million. We are
requesting $3.2 million in recurring funds to address ongoing aging equipment needs
each year.
Requested funds:
• Replace Research Equipment $1,317,561
• Replace Hospital Services Equipment $1,887,500
3. Increase in Base Operating Funds – Faculty and Staff $ 2,943,720
Requests funding to hire 10 faculty and 30 support staff to fill critical clinical teaching,
business, and general operating function responsibilities within the college and hospital. The
patient care and teaching workload responsibilities are excessive leading to 60-80 hour work
weeks for faculty.
4. State Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory $ 2,141,351
Recurring funding is requested to expand coverage in the state from one central
laboratory in Nashville to include a full service laboratory in Eastern Tennessee located
at the College of Veterinary Medicine.
For the past 4 years a renewable state contract has allowed us to provide limited necropsy
services to local producers. This service has been very well received by livestock owners
and practitioners, with the clear message that such state supported services must continue
and expand in order to improve herd health, limit infectious disease outbreaks, and
effectively diagnose biologically hazardous agents (e.g., foot and mouth disease, avian
influenza, anthrax, etc.) that represent both public health threats and potentially huge
economic losses to Tennessee agriculture and attendant services.
This initiative would be designed to integrate veterinary diagnostics, population
medicine, and farm animal medicine into comprehensive services that attain excellence in
Page 4 of 8
education, research, outreach, and professional practice. Veterinary diagnostics will
provide essential services to veterinarians, producers, and animal owners in Tennessee
and throughout the nation.
The veterinary diagnostic laboratory will also serve as the medical interface between
public health, population medicine, and animal production. Farm animal medical
services will provide producers comprehensive care that will help ensure their economic
well-being.
Collectively, diagnostic services, farm animal services, and population medicine will be
integrated into one comprehensive program addressing food safety, public health,
emerging infectious diseases, bioterrorism detection, production medicine, and
production economics - services that will enhance animal and human health.
5. Animal Assisted Reading Program for Elementary Schools $ 212,172
Funding is requested to expand our animal assisted reading program HABIT (Human Animal
Bond in Tennessee) statewide. These programs have been shown to help students with
reading difficulties. During the last school year the HABIT Ruff Reading Program assisted
18 public elementary schools, 40 classrooms, and served over 600 students in regular
classrooms and approximately 130 special education or specials students each week. The
objectives are to build confidence, self esteem, and reading skills of students by having an
accepting dog “audience.”
INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SERVICE $1,025,574
Priorities Addressed: Research, Community Outreach, Economic Development, and Staff
Compensation
1. Staff Compensation $ 53,160
Attracting and retaining exceptional employees is the single most critical factor in our ability
to serve Tennesseans well. The Institute for Public Service has made significant progress in
bringing staff compensation closer to average market salaries over the last decade. IPS has
used reallocations to make this progress without additional funding. An additional $53,160
in recurring funds would help IPS bring all staff salaries in line with the market.
2. Law Enforcement Innovation Center $ 564,914
The Institute for Public Service created the LEIC in 1997 and since that time major programs
have been developed to support the law enforcement’s specialized training needs in
Tennessee and the nation. The LEIC is home to the National Forensic Academy, the South
Eastern Command and Leadership Academy (SECLA), Homeland Security Programs and
the National Cybercrime Academy. In its 10 year history, LEIC has trained over 20,000
participants in 46 states; however, over half have been trained in Tennessee. While
classroom and hands-on training is important in specialized fields, the LEIC is moving to
supplement training with on-line, interactive training via the internet and web services. This
expands LEIC's capability to reach many more in Tennessee and the nation. Current funding
comes from federal grants, tuition and private gifts. The LEIC is now fully utilizing a newly
renovated facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee that increases its capacity to reach more
participants in person and electronically.
Page 5 of 8
Requested funds:
• $564,914 – 4.0 FTE (Executive Director, Training Specialist, Training
coordinator, Administrative Support)
3. Center for Industrial Services $262,500
UT Center for Industrial Services (CIS) seeks funding to more fully meet manufacturer
needs, fulfill its strategic plan and address key findings of the Manufacturing Future in
Tennessee (MFIT) study. The CIS strategic plan calls for CIS to help Tennessee
manufactures adopt technology to develop and enhance products and improve processes.
CIS will use requested funding to fund a technology deployment consultant, based in Oak
Ridge, to help manufacturing customer’s access technology resources at Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Y-12 National Security Complex and the University of Tennessee.
CIS also requests funding for a Manufacturing Information Coordinator to develop and
maintain an information portal for Tennessee manufactures. The portal will provide a
gateway for manufacturers to access information on federal, state and local resources.
Together, the technology deployment consultant and manufacturing information
coordinator strengthen CIS' ability to strengthen Tennessee's existing industry.
Requested funds:
• $262,500 – Technology Deployment Consultant, Manufacturing Information
Consultant
4. Center for Effective Leadership $ 145,000
IPS has developed a successful leadership development program for state and local
government officials with very limited funding. By combining funds from grants and
contracts, fee revenues, private donations, and internal reallocations, IPS has set the
foundation for a center that will provide the best leadership and management programming
for government officials across the Southeast. This approach to combined programming will
strengthen the overall program while also ensuring administrative efficiency.
Requested funds:
• $145,000 – Trainers, facilitators, rooms w/AV etc, curriculum development,
travel, other operating
MUNICIPAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SERVICE $457,235
Priorities Addressed: Community Outreach and Staff Compensation
1. Staff Compensation $ 56,702
Attracting and retaining exceptional employees is the single most critical factor in our ability
to serve Tennesseans well. MTAS has made significant progress in bringing staff
compensation closer to average market salaries over the last decade, but compensation
continues to lag behind local government salaries where MTAS recruits. An additional
$56,702 in recurring funds would help MTAS bring all staff salaries in line with the market.
Page 6 of 8
2. Training Consulting $ 228,805
Since integrating training services into direct city consulting provided by MTAS, the
programs provided and demanded by customers has grown exponentially. In addition, cities
of all sizes are requesting customized courses, more advanced coursework, and with the
growth of state-mandated certifications, more assistance in obtaining initial and ongoing
professional development. The funding request is for 2 full-time training consultants.
3. Police Consulting $ 123,035
This consultant would be stationed in either Nashville or Jackson and would provide police
consulting to the cities in the western half of the State. This would enhance and strengthen
police consulting services for all of the State since we are currently providing those services
on a ratio of around 300 cities to 1 police consultant.
4. Student Interns in Municipal Government $ 48,693
This funding will help support a tiered intern program that places students and graduates in
cities for direct service and experience, places students and graduates in MTAS offices for
support and experience, and supports independent study opportunities for graduate students.
Internships will include those fully funded by this program, independent study (unpaid)
research programs, and direct service with cities funded in partnership with participating
municipalities. The funding request is for 10 part-time student interns.
COUNTY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE SERVICE: $297,609
Priorities Addressed: Community Outreach and Staff Compensation
1. Staff Compensation $ 70,049
Attracting and retaining exceptional employees is the single most critical factor in our ability
to serve Tennesseans well. CTAS has made significant progress in bringing staff
compensation closer to average market salaries over the last decade, but compensation
continues to lag behind local government salaries where CTAS recruits. An additional
$98,048 in recurring funds would help CTAS bring all staff salaries in line with the market.
2. Legal Consultant $ 110,280
Due to demand, the position is needed on a permanent basis. CTAS legal consultants:
(1) respond to approximately 2,500 requests each year,
(2) provide oral and written legal opinions,
(3) prepare and update 12 major CTAS publications
(4) monitor and report on all legislation affecting county governments
(5) develop and update materials for on-line training courses, and
(6) develop and teach classroom courses for the County Officials Certificate
Training Programs (COCTP).
3. Energy Consultant $ 117,280
CTAS does not have an energy consultant to serve all 95 counties. It is no surprise that
energy costs have become a critical concern for local governments. Increasing prices are
affecting county budgets and services to Tennesseans in every community. CTAS has been
Page 7 of 8
successful in helping some counties cope with rising energy costs, but has hardly scratched
the surface when it comes to the needs in all 95 counties. It is hard to overestimate the
potential economic impact of helping local governments reduce energy costs. It serves the
citizens of Tennessee by keeping essential services like education, public safety, and
economic development activities viable while holding taxes in line. The funding request is
for 1 energy consultant.
Page 8 of 8
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
ITEM: FY 2011-2012 Capital Outlay & Capital Maintenance
Projects
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
In accordance with the Tennessee Higher Education Commission and State
Department of Finance and Administration guidelines, the administration has
developed the Capital Outlay and Capital Maintenance Funding Requests for FY
2011-12 and subsequent years.
The five-year schedule for Capital Outlay reflects $665,100,000 in recommended
Capital Outlay Projects. The five-year schedule for Capital Maintenance reflects
$175,680,000 in recommended Capital Maintenance Projects.
The administration seeks approval of these requests and authorization to enter into
contracts for design and construction within available funds. Upon approval by the
Board of Trustees, the administration will submit the Capital Budget to state
government.
MOTION:
Move approval of the Capital Outlay and Capital Maintenance Funding
Requests for FY 2011-12 and subsequent years as presented in the meeting
materials.
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CAPITAL OUTLAY PRIORITIES
STATE APPROPRIATIONS
Priority Projects FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16
1 UTK - Strong Hall Addition & Renovation $52,500,000
2 UTK - Academic Building I (Melrose Site) 55,000,000
3 UTHSC - Humphreys GEB Annex 21,100,000
4 UTK/UTHSC - Audiology & Speech Pathology & Psy. Clinic 31,000,000
TOTAL $159,600,000
5 UTK - Jessie Harris Bldg. Addition-Ph. I $31,400,000
6 UTIA - Ellington Hall Renovation 27,500,000
7 UTC - Fine Arts/Lupton Building Renovation 31,500,000
8 UTK - Academic Building II (Stokely Site) 80,000,000
TOTAL $170,400,000
9 UTK - Earth & Planetary Sciences Bldg. Renov.& Addition $ 41,000,000
10 UTSI - Aviation Systems Facility 12,900,000
11 UTM - Fine Arts Renovation & Addition-Ph. II 11,800,000
12 UTIA - McCord Hall Renovation 15,200,000
13 UTHSC - Coleman Building Renovations 25,000,000
TOTAL $ 105,900,000
14 UTC - Lab Sciences Building $ 59,500,000
15 UTM - Classroom Building 44,600,000
16 UTC- Health Sciences Building 49,100,000
TOTAL $ 153,200,000
17 UTK - College of Nursing Renovation & Addition $ 36,300,000
18 UTHSC - Mooney Building Renovations 7,500,000
19 UTM - Joseph E. Johnson EPS Addition & Renovation 32,200,000
TOTAL $ 76,000,000
GRAND TOTAL $665,100,000
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CAPITAL MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES
STATE APPROPRIATIONS
I __ ~~ -+~~~~ _~~-'~X~El~<:!~~~Uild_irl~JI'l1J?i()Vement~_~r--~_ 3,j~il~90o~~~-=_~==~1 ~~=~ ~=-=J-~-~~~-~~~=~-~~f
_~~-lQT~~~~~:~~!~§.:~~enIS-~=_· .• _=.~~-.~~--11i~:~~t-~---~-==i~~:-~=--t-------.-=~j==--~~~=~--~
t~~-~i~~~ ~-~~i~i~~,:~~P~~~;~~~~~~~~'~~~'~-~-'--~-""--~_j
-~-~~-- .. ~~.-~~.~-.~.-~.-.".----.-~-.---.----- ...- - - - . - - -
___ J,~~o,~ooL_. ___. __~L~~~____ I ' -.. ~--~-~.~~
8 '-~~--~.-+-~-~--.---~~.--+ ----.--~ .. ... ~ ..-~+--.--....- .. --~·-+---~--~~-----·I
_ ~~ .-Greenhouse ._~ ____ ~~ ___ ~_ .. ~~ _.. _____ _
I - Student Center Improvements
I~_~ ~-=--fro~.k BUildirl.g S~~te;'s I~p~~~~~ents_~~~~=-~= -~--T~---1~950'00o~1
L .. --.-~.---.~---- .. ~-----~-t$ 3~~~~OO~+~_~ ___ ~_~ __ +~~_.. ___._ .. +_ . ___ ._~.__..l._._~_.~ _ _ _ .. _ _ .
_
I-----.---r-- ' - '
- Science -.-... ----~--.----~----.--
- ....
& Engineering Bldg Systems Impr-Ph I -···---..~-·t ------.--+-~- ..':--' -~t-- -~· ..
..~_~._+_._.. ~_Greenhous~mpE.()\I~_men._t_s.~_N os_._1~6. .2_5 an_.d.____ _____ .
.. __ .... .. __.. 160._2.
TM - Steam Line ""~-"-"-~-~-"'~""~'~'~-'--'--
___ ~. ____~. ~~~_~al~tY~::>~~l!rityJ.rnprovell1ents .. ___ _
- HVAC Contr()I~~y_~~e.Il1~P..basel ___ ~
_ IA .. Clyde Austin 4-H Center Improvements
_ '---r'---~-~~'- ~- -'-~'~-'-"'-'-.-- ..- - -"---"'-~-"
/----- ~._.~ '
+____. __ __ ...c..__ ..
~_+____~--.- ~
.-
.. Elevator Improvements .. Phase III
----~.-- .~~;- ;~.-~ ~-'-'-~"""--- ----'--~- -~-'-.-. . . t '-'~
~--"--"-+~-~~~~;~:~:~il~~il~~ ~"J~~v:~:::;'eni~-~----'--~--T-'----' ---.-.--i-.-~--:-.''':''::::..'~~-::=-+--.-.--
F-;~=]~~j~~~~~J!~~~~~~-~T--=-~---t~m~ I ~ ~=-t-'
~6_LlLTrv1-=~lement HVAC&EI~ctric~lJme~()vel"l1~_I'l~_- Phase I _____~I~--~--2~340,OOOI~----=-~~--=-~J-~--- ~--~.- ~ . ..
.____ .. ~~_ \TOIAL __ ~_~__ _~_~ ~~~~22~~~~~ ___ ~ __ .______ +
-=ji~~~ ~
~gOTAL FY
:!::: ·----j~-1- 9110.0oii[
15-16~ .~- ----~---~...
$29.
I' .""I·.U"-U.U"U -.. ---~-~--~-..~-.-I
GRAND TOTAL
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22,2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
ITEM: FY 2011·2012 Revenue/Institutionally Funded Projects
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
The administration has developed the revenue-funded projects listed on the attached
summary for inclusion in the FY 2011-2012 State of Tennessee Budget Document.
Identified projects total $213,645,000. Although, no State funds are requested,
legislative approval of the projects is necessary. The administration seeks approval of
these projects prior to submitting them to the Tennessee Higher Education Commission
to begin the legislative approval process. The administration also seeks authorization to
enter into contracts for design and construction for these projects within available funds.
The administration also seeks authorization to enter into contracts for design and
construction associated with revenue/institutionally funded projects subsequently
identified during the fiscal year. Any such projects will be approved by the President
and reported to the Board of Trustees at its next regularly scheduled meeting.
MOTION:
Move approval of the Revenue/Institutionally Funded Projects for FY 2011·2012 as
presented in the meeting materials.
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
PROPOSED REVENUE FUNDED PROJECTS
FY 2011·2012
213,645000
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22,2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
CAMPUS/UNIT: UT Health Science Center
ITEM: Property Acquisition - 208 S. Dudley Street
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
The University of Tennessee seeks approval to acquire approximately 1.01 +/-acres
located at 208 S. Dudley Street in Memphis, Tennessee. The property is located on the
southeastern outside edge of the UT Health Science Center campus. It is improved with
a one-story 32,681 +/- square foot warehouse that contains approximately 15,000 +/-
square feet of office/retail space and was constructed in approximately 1951. Attached
is a map reflecting the location of the property.
The proposed property will replace warehouse/records storage space displaced by major
renovations to the Mooney Library and the demolishment of the Beale building.
Acquiring the property is in lieu of building new space. The property is one block outside
of the UT Health Science Center's Campus Master Plan.
The University requests approval to acquire the property located at 208 S. Dudley Street
in Memphis, Tennessee at a purchase price that is equal to or less than the appraised
value.
Additionally, the University seeks authorization to revise the University's land acquisition
plan to include this property. Upon approval by the Board of Trustees, the University will
seek all required State approvals.
MOTION:
Move approval to acquire the property located at 208 S. Dudley Street in Memphis,
Tennessee, at a price equal to or less than the appraised value and to revise the
University's land acquisition plan to include this property.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22,2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
CAMPUS/UNIT: UT Knoxville
ITEM: Grant of Permanent Easements for Cherokee Farm -
Knoxville Utilities Board (KUB)
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
The University of Tennessee and Knoxville Utilities Board (KUB) propose several
Permanent Utility Easements across the Cherokee Farm site located in Knoxville,
Tennessee, and KUB thereby seeks authorization for access and utilities, ingress and
egress, over, under, and across the property for the purpose of repairing and servicing
utilities.
The proposed Permanent Easements are variable in width, length and shape. The
Easements are necessary to construct and maintain the infrastructure and
improvements for the development of Cherokee Farm. Said utilities shall primarily
consist of electricity, water, sewer and gas.
The University requests approval of the Easements described above that contains
approximately 809, 932 +/- square feet or 18.59 +/- acres.
The University will seek all required State approvals.
MOTION:
Move approval of the grant of Easements to Knoxville Utilities Board (KUB) for
the Cherokee Farm site as presented in the meeting materials.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
CAMPUS/UNIT: UT Martin
ITEM: Collins Gift Property Located at 114 Old Fulton Road
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
The University of Tennessee seeks approval to accept as a gift from Walter and Susan
Benson Collins approximately 0.44 +/- acres located at 114 Old Fulton Road in Martin,
Tennessee.
Programmatically the property will be used as a ropes course and ROTC obstacles
course. The property is a vacant lot that is contiguous to the east of UT Martin's
agriculture property. In addition, it is located just outside of the UT Martin Campus
Master Plan.
The University requests authorization to accept the gift property described above.
Additionally, the University seeks authorization to revise the University's land acquisition
plan to include this property. Upon approval by the Board of Trustees, the University will
seek all required State approvals.
MOTION:
Move approval to accept a gift of real property from Walter and Susan Benson
Collins located at 114 Old Fulton Road and to revise the University land
acquisition plan to include this property.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Finance and Administration
CAMPUS/UNIT: UT Martin
ITEM: Property Acquisition in Hornbeak, Tennessee,
fromTennessee Wildlife Resources Agency
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles M. Peccolo, Treasurer, Chief Investment Officer and
Interim Chief Financial Officer
The University of Tennessee seeks approval to acquire approximately twenty (20) acres
from Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA), located in Hornbeak, Tennessee.
The property is improved with a building that was formerly used as a hunting lodge. The
building, consisting of approximately 3,492 square feet, was constructed in 1958 and is
comprised of ten (10) lodging units, one (1) laundry room and two (2) exterior restrooms.
Additionally, the location of the property is adjacent to Reelfoot Lake and is
approximately thirty-six (36) miles from the UT Martin Campus.
The property will be used programmatically as a teaching center, for rese"arch and
student field trips. Educational conferences and summer courses can be taught at the
property utilizing the property's woods and ecosystem. The Tennessee Wildlife
Resources Agency shall retain the property's water frontage.
TWRA proposes to convey the property to the University at no cost. The conveyance is
subject to a reversionary clause that requires the property to be returned to TWRA
should the University abandon it.
The University requests authorization to acquire the property described above. Upon
approval by the Board of Trustees, the University will seek all required State approvals.
MOTION:
Move approval to acquire twenty (20) acres in Hornbeak, Tennessee, from
Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency at no cost but with a right of reversion to
TWRA if the University abandons the property.
THE UN IVERS ITYofTENNESSEE
Office of Federal Relations
P.O. Box 15145
Washingtor, DC 20003-0145
(240) 271-8305
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 21,2010
To: Mr. Hank Dye
Vice President of Public and Government Relations
From: Kurt W. Schlieter
Associate Vice President and Director of Federal Relations
Subject: Update on Congressional Activity
General Overview: Congress left Washington earlier than scheduled to campaign ahead of the
November election. The Congress failed to pass a budget this year and as the new fiscal year
began on October 1, none of the appropriations had cleared the chambers. The House and
Senate, however, passed a Continuing Resolution to keep the government funded at roughly their
current levels until December 3. They will have to return before that date to consider what is
likely to be an Omnibus Appropriations measure combining the 12 appropriations bills.
A number of items have been postponed until after the elections, including debate on whether to
extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, including an extension of the expired estate tax, as well as an
alternative minimum tax "patch." Conference of the defense bills and continued debate on other
measures, such as food safety legislation, a strategic arms reduction treaty, and the remaining
appropriations bills will not occur until a lame-duck session in November and December.
Also among the issues that may come up in the lame-duck session is action on the DREAM Act.
This measure would provide certain children of illegal immigrants who graduate from US high
schools the opportunity to earn citizenship if they complete two years in the military or two years
at a four year higher education institution. Among the many provisions of the bill, the DREAM
Act would allow states to decide on their own how to determine eligibility and residency for in-
state tuition purposes. Before Congress recessed for the year, the measure was included in the
Senate's fiscal year 2011 defense authorization but the bill failed to pass on a procedural vote.
The chance of addressing many of these issues very much depends on the outcome of the
elections in November.
Appropriations: There is widespread disagreement between parties and the two chambers about
earmark reform. Several members of the Tennessee delegation did not submit any requests this
year, meaning they did not submit UT requests. However, even in this uncertain environment,
we have been successful in a number of areas, including $500,000 for the LEIC; $500,000 for
UTIA's Bioenergy Production; $l.25 million for UTIA's Hemlock Wooly Adelgid; and, $1
million for UTK's Partnership for Emerging Energy Technologies. Importantly, we continue to
focus on building relationships with key federal agency personnel and public policy makers so
that federal funding for key programs can continue uninterrupted.
1
THE UNIVERSITYofTENNESSEE
KNOXVILLE, CHATTANOOGA, MARTIN, TULLAHOMA, MEMPHIS
FEDERAL RELATIONS
STRATEGY UPDATE 2010-2011
DRAFT
August, 2010
Federal Strategy Update for 2010-2011
Situation Analysis
In recent years, the University's focus in Washington has been more directed toward the state's
Congressional delegation and appropriations, while still maintaining a reasonable level of
activity with agency personnel, public policymakers, and associations.
As economic factors worsen and congressional earmarks continue to incur disfavor, higher
education faces increasing federal funding challenges. It is now more critical than ever that the
University aggressively assert the value of its best faculty and most significant programs not only
to Congress, but to the Executive Branch, agencies and higher education associations so that they
can continue to be sustained.
Recognizing the need for this shift, we have begun to build on our relationships through
expanded proactive outreach, advocacy and support for UT's funding priorities.
Strategic Considerations:
1. Increase the University's involvement and presence in the Association of Public and Land-
grant Universities (APLU), (formerly NASULGC) to enhance support for increased funding
for major research accounts like NSF and NIH that directly benefit significant numbers of
our faculty and programs.
o Tactics
• A more involved presence on various APLU budget and appropriations
subcommittees.
• Focus on supporting shared interests of APLU and UT in funding such
core research activities as: BiomasslBiofuels, Environment/Climate,
Materials Science, Medical and Healthcare.
• Collaboration with other universities to position science, technology,
engineering and math initiatives with the associations and agencIes as
robust means of stimulating university education.
• Support a broad array of programs and agency-sponsored projects,
particularly with the Department of Energy (DOE).
• Build on our significant success with the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and continue to drive USDAIDOE-sponsored
initiatives to fund signature programs such as UT Biofuels Initiative.
• Seek similar long-term funding opportunities within DOD and other
federal departments as the College of Business and Air Force have
developed.
• Additional federal direct and indirect investment that APLU involvement
can help facilitate, include areas of: defense research, homeland security,
energy, agriculture, transportation, health, environment, and science and
technology across federal departments.
• Increased federal financial aid for students, study abroad efforts.
2
• Identify the top two dozen research accounts beyond NSF that fund UT
faculty research.
o Work with designated campus research staff to identify top faculty.
• Work through the delegation and APLU to increase funding in smaller
research accounts where faculty already has distinct, strategic advantages.
2. Expanding UT's outreach beyond APLU and maximize UT association membership
using our strategic research agenda as a guide to working through each of the academic
and professional associations the University supports on behalf of faculty researchers.
o Tactics
• Many UT molecular scientists are members of the American Chemical
Society. Others are members of Council for Advancement and Support of
Education or the Association of American Medical Colleges. Conduct an
inventory of those memberships and determine faculty members who have
interest and willingness to become actively involved.
• Develop agenda, guidelines and communications necessary to engage
faculty within those groups.
• Continue to highlight UT's signature programs in Biofuels, Material
Science, EnvironmenUClimate and healthcare research.
• Seek additional opportunities for collaboration with other universities,
other public policy meetings and discussion possibilities. Develop a
listing and profile of other universities with potential for collaboration.
• Raise awareness and exposure of UT experts with the associations and as a
result, UT likely has additional opportunities to testify before Congress
and speak at association events.
• Continue to support and promote efforts of UT faculty and staff testimony
before Congressional committees.
• Work with associations and groups with shared interests such as the
campaign to reauthorize the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR)
and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs.
3. Maximizing campus exposure to federal agencies will prove more important than ever in
this new environment. That makes contact with UT's researchers all the more critical.
o Tactics
• Special attention should be paid to learning where funding is available,
matching the appropriate researcher to it, and convincing agency
leadership of the need for funding support.
• Example: Continue to lead efforts to grow the National Nuclear
Security Agency's Integrated University Program within NNSA
and with the delegation.
• Develop a listing of the top dozen agencies providing funding in UT's
areas of interest. Determine existing contacts.
• Example: Continue to develop with Knoxville Office of Research
UT contacts within the federal agencies.
• Working with each campus on core programs and develop key
relationships throughout federal agencies, particularly at the Department
3
of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Transportation, and the Environmental
Protection Agency.
• Use aggressive outreach and marketing techniques to bring top UT faculty
and researchers to the key decision-makers throughout the federal
agencIes.
• Working with appropriate research leadership on each campus, a regular
schedule should be coordinated whereby the UT plane is utilized to bring
researchers to Washington on a regular basis to make pre-arranged calls
on the agencies where opportunities are identified. The UT federal
relations office, in concert with outside consultants, will assist in the
identification and arrangement process.
• The Intergovernmental Personnel Mobility Act (IPA) program provides
for temporary assignment of personnel in state and local governments, and
colleges and universities at a federal agency. Faculty are assigned to an
agency as a Program Manager for a specified time and return to campus
with valuable experience, knowledge and contacts. While in DC, these
faculty can help policy makers understand how UT's strategic research
agenda specifically fits the agency's mission. The University should
identify prospective participants from among its faculties and develop a
program to encourage participation.
• Continue to secure federal program funding and contract opportunities
leading to more university led research, resulting in spun-out companies
through the UT Research Foundation.
• Subsequently assist those small businesses in securing purchase
contracts or additional R&D funding, including DOD Small
Business Innovative Research (SBIR) funding.
4. Seek ways to grow partnership with Oak Ridge National Laboratory and other natural
partners, such as the Memphis Bioworks Foundation, St. Jude Children's Research
Hospital, and The Med (The Regional Medical Center at Memphis).
o Tactics
• Take a more proactive, assertive role with Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, including working closely through our management
relationship to maximize support for the University's specific interests.
• Support ORNL's priorities with the delegation and the agencies.
• Align strategies to point where UT and ORNL naturally talk about joint
UT -ORNL programs.
• Leverage the unique ORNL relationship to secure new strategic federal
funding partnerships.
• Develop original opportunities of federal support for both UT and
ORNL in areas that ORNL may not be able to easily access.
• Federal relations meets regularly with ORNL and UT-Battelle leadership
to discuss opportunities.
• ORNL and UT leadership meet with delegation together on shared
priorities.
4
• UT has significant knowledge and experience in DOE mission critical
fields. Work with ORNL on strategic DOE initiatives that provide
federal funding support to both institutions.
• Position UT to develop funding priorities alongside ORNL.
• Continue to work with delegation to support The Med and its activities.
5. Seek opportunities to maximize utilization of the Howard Baker Center for Public Policy
in developing relationships and unique standing.
o Tactics
• Develop a list of policy concerns and considerations on a broad national
level and match these with opportunities to engage with the Baker Center.
• Example: Help shape the policy landscape to make Biofuels
industry viable and prosperous.
• Example: Help shape national/global nuclear security enterprise
through policy, law, and diplomatic engagement; education;
science and technology; operational and intelligence capabilities;
and, real world applications.
• Work with Baker Center leadership to determine contacts, priorities and
schedules.
• Seek opportunities whereby the Baker Center can host and participate in
sponsorship of policy exploration relative to UT's key areas of strength
and interest at the national level.
6. Continue working to enhance engagement of chancellors, faculty, staff and trustees in the
University'S federal relations efforts.
o Tactics
• Increased interactivity and engagement.
• More frequent UT federal relations director visits to campuses.
• Member and staff field trips / campus tours.
• UT leadership, faculty, researcher trips / visits with members /
agencies in DC.
• Providing opportunities for campuses to host workshops,
seminars and panels aimed at federal agencies.
• Coordinate with the UT alumni office to support DC area
programs for legislative involvement.
• Provide on-going support for campus sponsored internship
programs in DC.
• Federal relations director available for regular meetings in the
district and state offices of the delegation joined by appropriate
campus personnel.
• Increased communications activity.
• Periodic updates on legislative activity that has occurred or is
on the horizon via email, phone calls, meetings, reports.
• Periodic conference call with designated groups for strategy
discussions and updates.
5
• Maximize distribution and follow up regarding information on
recently announced funding opportunities.
• Enhanced interactivity of government relations website,
including an upgrading of the federal relations section and
regularly posted information. The goal is to make the website
an important resource for our constituents.
• Facilitate positioning to seize opportunities as they arise for
longer range planning for items like the Federal Highway
Reauthorization bill, which happens only every five years.
7. Strongly support and adhere to the policy of a single point of contact for all legislative
matters.
o Tactics
• The System Vice President for Public and government relations has
overall responsibility for all legislative strategy and activity. The director
of federal relations, with offices in DC, handles the day to day operational
aspects of that responsibility. It is critical that all campus efforts, contacts
and activities be overseen and coordinated within these two offices.
• Continue to advocate and advise delegation and staff on potential harmful
legislation, as well as beneficial measures.
• Federal relations will continue to advocate the ongoing work with
delegation on legislation beyond appropriations, for example, Higher
Education Act, America COMPETES, Patent Reform, Student Loan
legislation, Defense Authorization, ARPA-E Authorization, Energy
Independence and Security Act, NASA Reauthorization, Justice
Department Programs Reauthorization, and Surface Transportation
Reauthorization.
• There will be consistent opportunity for input and interaction in strategy
and activity determinations for all campuses.
6
mE UNIVERSITYofTENNESSEE
"r
KNOXVILLE, CHATTANOOGA, MARTIN, TuLLAHOMA, MEMPHIS
OFFICE OF STATE RELATIONS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Hank Dye
Vice President for Public and Government Relations
FROM: Anthony Haynes
Associate Vice President and Director of State Relations
DATE: October 1, 2010
SUBJECT: Summary of Key State Relations Activities for the Period july 1 - October 1, 2010
Meetings with the Tennessee Hearing Society
Since July, in response to UTHSC leadership, I have been meeting with the legislative representative for the
Tennessee Hearing Society in efforts to reach consensus on removing the statutory prohibition for the sale of
hearing aid devices by public university speech pathology programs. Our goal is to forge a closer, productive
relationship with the organization that results in removal of the prohibition. Enabling the sale of these devices
to the public would help the financial stability of the academic and practice programs.
UT Foundation Legislative Briefings
During recent months, the Office of State Relations (OSR) identified, organized, and helped execute a series of
briefings across the state with selected state legislators and officials on the proposed changes to The
University of Tennessee Foundation. The briefings were conducted by Interim President Jan Simek, Acting Vice
President for Development and Alumni Affairs Scott Rabenold, and Vice President for Public and Government
Relations Hank Dye. The proposal was well received. We are now working with the General Counsel to
develop language for required legislation and will continue to work toward legislative action in the upcoming
session-including securing bill sponsors.
President's Annual Campus Visits
During late August and early September, President Simek conducted statewide campus visits, which included
luncheon meetings with community leaders, elected officials, and key campus supporters. Each year, OSR
supports this part of the President's campus visits by providing outreach with state and local elected officials.
Lottery Stabilization Task Force
The inaugural meeting of the Lottery Stabilization Task Force (LSTF) was held on August 16 to hear background
testimony regarding the pending financial shortfall facing the HOPE Lottery Scholarship Program. The joint
House and Senate committee was chaired by Senate Speaker Pro Tempore Jamie Woodson as well as the
House and Senate Education Committee Chairs, Representative Harry Brooks and Senator Dolores Gresham.
The panel heard testimony regarding revenue and expenditure projections for the coming years by the
Tennessee student Assistance Corporation (TSAC), the Tennessee Education Lottery Corporation (TELS), and
UT's Center for Business and Economic Research. The consensus numbers support a projected 1 to 2 percent
growth in annual revenues and similarly minimal growth in expenditures due to only slight increases in
participation. In the months leading up to the meeting, projections for the lottery shortfall had escalated to
nearly $120 million by the 2013-14 fiscal year; however, TSAC softened those projections, with annual
shortfalls ranging between $20 and $30 million. rather than the compounded shortfall previously expected.
226 Capitol Boulevard, Sllite 212· Nashville, TN 37219 • Phone: 615-741-8220 • Fax: 615-242-6536
Page 2
There was substantive discussion regarding the status of the lottery "reserve" account for the scholarship
program. Two years ago, legislation was passed that set aside the $350 million-plus reserve as a dedicated
investment. The annual interest derived from the account was then incorporated, meaning spent, into the
available revenue to fund additional scholarship opportunities. Debate revolved around whether to spend
down the sizable reserve to offset the shortfalls in the short term or to further protect the reserve in order to
continue drawing down the interest as available recurring funds for scholarships.
Tennessee Higher Education Commission Executive Director (THEe) Rich Rhoda,UT President Jan Simek, and
Tennessee Board of Regents (TBR) Chancellor Charles Manning provided testimony to the panel regarding
possible programmatic changes within the lottery. Their comments centered on the benefit to the higher
education landscape that the lottery program represents. The general tenor of the discussion seemed to focus
more on the immediate possibilities that might enhance the objectives outlined in the recent Complete College
Tennessee Act (CCTA) passed by the legislature in January. Two such options include: (1) reverting the length
of scholarship eligibility back to 120 semester hours and away from the current five-year policy and (2)
modifying the availability of lottery dollars to allow students stipends for summer coursework. Both scenarios
were well received despite the fact that no actual dollar savings will be derived from implementing them. All
Task Force members agreed on the need for the committee to meet again soon and annually thereafter. No
formal recommendations were posed or adopted by the group.
Joint Government Operations Subcommittee on Education
THEC, TBR, and UT representatives appeared before the Joint Government Operations Subcommittee on
Education on August 18. The Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Bo Watson, heard updates on efforts to
develop fuUy articulable degree programs and coursework that are transferable between Tennessee's 13
community colleges and 9 public universities. Eleven (11) degree programs will complete the process during
the current academic year, and an additional 27 programs will be added by August 2011. According to UT and
TBR, the process involves the combined efforts offaculty and staff from each ofthe institutions and further
evaluation and approval from the respective governing boards of the two higher education systems.
Education and Finance. Ways, and Means Committees - Complete College Tennessee Act Update
Tennessee's public higher education stakeholders were called before the Education and the Finance, Ways,
and Means Committees in August and September to provide statutory updates on the implementation of the
Complete College Tennessee Act. The presentations centered on two elements within the Act: the revised
funding model for higher education and the administrative consolidation of community colleges within the TBR
System. Historically, Tennessee, like most of the country, has utilized an enrollment-based funding model that
incentivized growth as a means to increase institutional funding. With the passage of CCTA, THEe was
required to develop and implement a revised funding model based more upon a range of weighted
performance outcomes rather than just enrollment increases. The new model will emphasize the mission
differentiation of each public postsecondary institution in Tennessee and develop a weighted system of
performance objectives for each one. Some of the outcomes stressed are: institutional graduation rates,
degrees awarded, persistence to graduation rates, and amount of funded research. The model will be phased
in over time to allow a similarly phased-out "hold harmless" approach to annual funding.
Questions arose during the presentation to the Senate Finance, Ways, and Means Committee regarding
possible issues with the process THEC utilized to revise the funding formula. Most of the questions centered
on changes to the revised formula that occurred between the last official meeting of the Formula Review
Committee on July 12 and the final released version on July 29. Several legislators proposed that THEC had
made unauthorized "tweaks" to the formula during that period that unfairly impacted several institutions,
particularly Middle Tennessee State University. The "tweak" in question refers to THEe's use of the
Page 3
Carnegie Classifications to differentiate among the institutions based upon core missions. This determination
became the basis for the variable weights applied to the range of performance outcomes that make up the
formula for THEC's funding recommendation. Given the questions surrounding the use of Carnegie
Classifications, the Committee instructed THEC to hold additional meetings with the Formula Review
Committee to further evaluate the new funding model, pending further hearings to be held in October.
New Legislative/policy Staff for Health Sciences
On September 15, Ms. Brandy Bivens began her position as Associate Director for Health Sciences, Public
Policy, and Regulatory Affairs in the UT Office of State Relations. Ms. Bivens comes to UT from the firm of
Baker Donelson, where she was employed for seven years, representing a number of health-related clients,
including Methodist Hospital, a key partner of the UT Health Science Center (UTHSC). Bivens will represent
UTHSC in the areas of state and federal government affairs, working in Memphis, Nashville, and Washington,
DC. On September 29, UT's Government Relations team met with UTHSC Chancellor Steve Schwab and
Executive Vice Chancellor Ken Brown to discuss campus priorities in capital needs, public health/residency
program enterprises, and research, as related to legislative outreach and advocacy.
Office of State Relations Campus Visits
Each fall, OSR staff make dedicated campus visits to the Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin, and Memphis
campuses for the sole purpose of identifying the needs and challenges facing each UT campus and institute.
During the visits, OSR staff members meet with the campus chancellor, academic and budget officers, faculty
senate leadership, and other groups, as deemed appropriate. These visits also provide an opportunity for
campus-based officials to ask questions regarding the political process and to learn more about the factors
leading to certain legislative outcomes. To date, we have made visits to the Knoxville, Chattanooga, and
Memphis campuses.
Southeastern Conference (SEC) Government Affairs Officials Meeting
Lou Hanemann and I will attend the annual meeting of SEC Government Affairs Officials held on the Louisiana
State University Campus in Baton Rouge from October 3-6.
UT Col/ege of Medicine Alumni Weekend Health Care Panel
On October 15, the UT Health Science Center will host the 2010 College of Medicine Alumni Weekend. One of
the planned activities is a panel discussion on the Affordable Care Act. The Office of State Relations was
requested to provide assistance in the organization and execution of the discussion. Panelists for the forum
are US Congressman and UTHSC graduate Phil Roe; Calvin Anderson of Blue Cross/Blue Shield ofTennessee;
Steve Burkett, President and CEO of UT Medical Group; Reginald Coopwood, CEO of Memphis Medical Center
(The MED); and Meri Armour, CEO of LeBonheur Children's Hospital. Dr. Mike Caudle, head of the Howard
Baker Center's health policy efforts, will provide an overview of the Act. I will moderate the event.
Introduction of New UT President
The OSR staff is reviewing considerations and options for proper introduction of the newly appointed
President to various legislators and elected officials and audiences. Most of the overall legislative outreach
effort will be channeled through the post-appointment statewide tour planned for the week of October 25.
THE UN IVERS ITYotTENN ESSEE
KNOXVILLE, CHATTANOOGA, MARTIN, TULLAHOMA, MSMPHIS
COMMUNICATION PLAN
INTRODUCTION OF NEW PRESIDENT
Revised: September 29,2010
Prepared by
Office of Public and Government Relations
SITUATION
The University of Tennessee Board of Trustees is expected to appoint the next president of the
University System on Oct. 22, 2010. Following is a communication plan for introducing the new
president to internal and external audiences on Oct. 22 and during a statewide tour.
TARGET AUDIENCES
Internal Audiences: External Audiences:
• Faculty, Staff • Media
• Trustees • Legislature, Governor
• Donors • Community, Business leaders
• Alumni • Government organizations
• Private partners • General public
• Students, Parents
KEY MESSAGES
• The University of Tennessee has appointed the 24th president of the University of
Tennessee System.
• New president's qualifications, background, etc.
• The Board of Trustees and the Presidential Search Committee were committed to finding
a new leader to work with the five campuses and two statewide institutes as well as
communities throughout the state to continue serving Tennessee as the leading institution
of higher education. Search was extensive, inclusive and totally open.
• President will be touring the state following the appointment to meet with faculty, staff
and student audiences at each of the University's campuses and institutes as well as
legislative, donor, alumni and community leadership.
• Overview ofthe president's vision/plans for the future ofthe University, its statewide
mission and how each campus and institute plays an integral role in achieving those
goals .
•
COMMUNICATION
Phase I - Announce appointment of president on Oct. 22, Anticipated between 9 and 11 :45 a.m.
1. Web Package
a. The webcast of the full board meeting will be accessible from the University
homepage and employees, students and alumni will be encouraged to watch.
b. The University homepage will feature a special announcement image or landing page
directing viewers to the president's site announcing the appointment.
c. The president's website will be updated simultaneously as will the presidential search
website and a link will be available on the president's site.
d. Campus websites will feature the same visual and link to the president'S site
following the announcement.
2. Employee Communications - Broadcast E-mails
a. An e-mail from Interim President Jan Simek will be sent following the announcement
to employees system-wide.
3. Legislative, Donor and Alumni Communications - Broadcast E-maiis
a. E-mails from Interim President Simek will be sent following the announcement to the
legislative delegation as well as donor and alumni databases system-wide.
2
4. Student Communications - Broadcast E-mails
a. An e-mail from Interim President Simek will be sent following the announcement to
students system-wide.
5. Media Relations (Spokespersons - New president, Simek, Murphy)
a. Press releases and media advisories will be produced and distributed to appropriate
media outlets, including the student media on all campuses announcing the
appointment.
b. An introductory media event is anticipated for Oct. 22 to introduce the new president
and hislher spouse. Depending upon availability, this event either will be conducted
in person or via teleconference.
c. Op-eds / Letters to the editor will be considered regarding the appointment.
Phase II - Introduce president to internal and external audiences
1. Campus Tour
a. A campus tour will be conducted following the appointment to introduce the president
and hislher spouse to faculty, staff and student audiences. Members of the local
media will be invited. Inclusion of area alumni, donors and legislators will be
considered. Interactions will be mostly social, in-depth question and answer sessions
will come later. Photos and video will be taken during tours and incorporated in
January Alumnus and on the web.
• (Invitations for these events will be e-mailed and express mailed. Lists are being
compiled now and campus planning will begin soon.)
2. Additional Legislative Engagement
a. Depending upon availability, an appearance will be arranged at the Legislative
Tailgate reception prior to the UT / Alabama game on Oct. 23. Followed by presence
in University Skybox Suites for game.
3
TIMELINE
Date Decision / Action Communication
Oct. 4 Conference call with communication counterparts.
Send timeline with pieces requiring their help.
Oct. 6 Review of candidates by Search Advisory Council -Public notice Sept. 29
and submission of comments to Presidential Search -Press release after mtg.
Committee summarizing # of candidates, etc.
not listing names. Have release
ready Oct. I in case list is leaked
Oct. 7 Selection by Presidential Search Committee of -Public notice Sept. 29
candidates to be interviewed and approval and -Press release (naming candidates
initiation of background checking process to be interviewed)
-Internal broadcast recapping and
promoting web casts from Murphy
-Web posting
-Internal publication
announcements?
-Targeted campus
communication?
Oct. 8 Web promo for webcasts (come down Oct. 14);
Post candidate CV s and mugs online
Oct. 12-13 Candidate interviews by Presidential Search -Public notice Oct. 5
Committee; Search Advisory Council to participate; -Press release & internal memo
Interactive webcast available - public submitting -Press wrangling in Shiloh Room;
rating forms; Candidate interviews by president's set up backdrop
direct reports and sharing of comments with the -Public webcasts
Presidential Search Committee -Internal campus publication
announcements prior
Oct. 13 or Development of advisory comments concerning
14 interviews by the Search Advisory Council to be
shared with the Presidential Search Committee
Oct. 15 Final mock of e-mail and printed invitations ready;
E-mail address loaded into Constant Contact
Oct. 19 Web promo for BOT webcast (come down Oct. 25)
Oct. 20 Candidates return and interviews continue with -Public notice Oct. 13
Presidential Search Committee and trustees; -Press release & internal memo
Selection of nominee/s for recommendation by the -Press wrangling in Shiloh Room;
Presidential Search Committee to the Board of set up backdrop
Trustees; Candidates leave town; Possible Search
Committee meeting to deliberate?
Oct. 22 -Election of new president by the Board of Trustees -Public notice Oct. 15
(Anticipate announcement before noon) -Public webcast; teleconference
-Introductory media event; Either in-person or for media event
teleconference depending upon availability - e-mail -Press availability/wrangling
invitations if early evening oQtion -Press release (include alumni,
-Depending upon dates - Possibility of needing students, donors)
invitations for campus tour events to be express -Web package launch (landing
mailed and e-mailed following announcement page, pres search site, pres site)
-Broadcast e-mails (include
alumni, students, donors, partners)
-Targeted campus comm.
4
Oct. 23 Legislative tailgate (Possibility of presidential
attendance depending upon availability)
Campus tour (Potential schedules on following -Press release & internal
pages) -Web updates
-Possible editorial board visits
-F acuity, staff, student
introductions
-Possible legislative, alumni and
donor introductions
5
Introductory Media Event - Oct. 22
Assuming schedules allow, an introductory media event will be held on Oct. 22 to introduce the new
president and hislher spouse. News media will have Q&A opportunity. (Full Board meets from 9-
I 1:45 a.m.; Noon luncheon)
Option 1 - In-person Media Event (New president is on campus or is available to come to campus)
Timing
• Late afternoon/early evening reception - 4-6 p.m.
Location
• Welcome Center or Hollingsworth Auditorium
Invitees
• Statewide media invited to participate via teleconference
• Board members and system/campus administration as well as statewide faculty, staff, student,
legislative, donor, alumni and community leaders
• Webcast for public viewing
Invitation
• E-mailed invitation sent upon announcement
Program
• Remarks and introduction by Search Chair and Board Vice Chair Jim Murphy
• Remarks by new president
• Media Q&A
• Reception
Option 2 - Teleconference Media Event (New president is not on campus and is not available to
come to campus)
Timing
• Immediately following lunch - 1:30-2 p.m.
Location
• Hollingsworth Auditorium
Invitees
• Statewide media
• Board members and system/campus administration that are present
Notice to Media
• E-mailed notice sent upon announcement
Program
• Remarks and introduction by Search Chair and Board Vice Chair Jim Murphy
• Remarks by new president
• Media Q&A
Media Needs (For either option)
• Mult box, teleconference capability, riser, UT backdrop, media parking
6
Tour Example 1: 4-Day Statewide Tour (All locations with receptions, but dates flexible)
Day 1 UT Martin
• 7:30-9 a.m. - Breakfast reception with administration, area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
• 11 :30-1 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff, students and local media
UT Health Science Center
• 3:30-5 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff, students and local media
• 5:30-7 p.m. - Reception with administration and area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
Day 2 UT Space Institute
• 8-9:30 a.m. - Breakfast reception hosted by Chancellor Cheek to include
administration, faculty, staff and students as well as area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
Nashville
• 11-1 p.m. - Lunch at Ellington Agricultural Center to include Farm Bureau
guests and area staff from the Institute of Agriculture and the Institute for
Public Service and the Colleges of Pharmacy and Social Work. Local media to
attend
• 1:30-5 p.m. - Informal legislative visits
• 5:30-7 p.m. - Reception with area donors, alumni, community and legislative
leaders
Day 3 Kingsport
• 11 :30-1 p.m. -Reception with local media, area donors, alumni, community and
legislative leaders
UT Knoxville
• 3 :30-5 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff, students and local media
• 5 :30-7 p.m. - Reception with administration and area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
Day 4 UT Institute of Agriculture
• 8-9:30 a.m. - Coffee reception with faculty, staff and students
ORNL
• 10:30-Noon - ORNL tour
• Noon-l p.m. - ORNL lunch
UT Chattanooga
• 3:30-5 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff, students and local media
• 5 :30-7 p.m. - Reception with administration and area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
7
Tour Example 2: 2-day Statewide Tour (All locations, quick stops)
Day 1 UT Chattanooga
• 7 :30-9 a.m. - Coffee with faculty, staff and students as well as area donors, alumni,
community and legislative leaders
UT Space Institute
• 10-11 a.m. -Meeting hosted by Chancellor Cheek to include faculty, staff and
students
Nashville
• Noon-l :30 p.m. - Lunch at Ellington Agricultural Center to include Farm Bureau
guests and area staff from the Institute of Agriculture and the Institute for Public
Service and the Colleges of Pharmacy and Social Work
UT Martin
• 3-4 p.m. - Meeting with faculty, staff and students
UT Health Science Center
• 5:30-7 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students as well as area donors,
alumni, community and legislative leaders
Day 2 Kingsport
• 7:30-8:30 a.m. - Coffee with area donors, alumni, community and legislative
leaders
UT Institute of Agriculture
• 10-11 a.m. - Meeting with faculty, staff and students
ORNL
• Noon-3:30 p.m. - ORNL lunch and tour
UT Knoxville
• 4:30-6 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students as well as area donors,
alumni, community and legislative leaders
Tour Example 3: 2-Day Abbreviated Statewide Tour (Campuses only, quick stops)
Day 1 UT Space Institute
• 8-9:30 a.m. - Coffee with faculty, staff and students
UT Martin
• 11 :30-1 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students
UT Health Science Center
• 3 :30-5 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students
Day 2 UT Chattanooga
• 8-9:30 a.m. - Coffee with faculty, staff and students
UT Institute of Agriculture
• 11 :30-1 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students
UT Knoxville
• 3:30-5 p.m. - Reception with faculty, staff and students
8
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
ANNUAL REPORT
of the PRESIDENT
2009-2010
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE INSTITUTE
FOR PUBLIC SERVICE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE SPACE INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
CHATTANOOGA • UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MARTIN • UNIVERSITY OF
FROM THE PRESIDENT
Many times during this interim presidency, I have talked fondly about how I look forward to
returning full time to teaching and my research. This is the best way I can express my optimism
for the future of the University of Tennessee. And we all greatly anticipate the next era of
leadership with a new president.
Even though we still face tough economic challenges, the University of Tennessee continues to
carry out its statewide mission, impacting the lives of thousands of Tennesseans every day through
its education, outreach and research.
Support for the University of Tennessee has never been better. This year, we reached our goal of
Even though we raising $1 billion in private money through the Campaign for Tennessee, 18 months ahead of
still face tough schedule. Fewer than 30 colleges and universities in the country have successfully completed a $1
billion campaign.
economic
challenges, the This is a profound statement by our alumni, faculty, staff and friends of the appreciation and
University of importance of UT's unparalleled educational opportunities, top-notch faculty and cutting-edge
Tennessee research enterprises.
continues to carry
And we are striving to be better. Gov. Phil Bredesen has challenged UT Knoxville to become one
out its statewide
of the top 25 public institutions in the nation, and we will accomplish that goal. We are working on
mission, setting similarly challenging goals for our campuses at Chattanooga and Martin among their peers.
impacting the The Complete College Act signed into law this year sets new benchmarks for higher education in
lives of thousands Tennessee for graduation rates. It is not enough to enroll students; we must see them through
of Tennesseans completion of their degrees. This is better for both the individual and for the economy of our state.
every day
The University impacts the lives of Tennessee residents across the entire state. The Center for
through its Business and Economic Research in Knoxville calculates that UT, including all of its campuses
education, and institutes statewide, brings at least $2.5 billion annually in income to the state of Tennessee
outreach and and supports more than 53,600 jobs. While these are impressive numbers, we know the overall
research. impact of our educational, research and outreach efforts that stretch across all 95 counties is
immeasurable.
Jan Simek
The University has embarked on nding solutions to some of the world's greatest challenges. Our
Interim President
state is quickly becoming a leader in alternative energy research, and UT is one reason why.
Earlier this year, we marked the opening of one of the world's rst demonstration-scale cellulosic
ethanol plants in Vonore. In August, the governor announced the National Science Foundation's
awarding of a $20 million grant to a consortium of Tennessee colleges and universities, led by UT,
for energy-related research. UT is helping implement the governor's Volunteer State Solar
Initiative through the start-up of the Tennessee Solar Institute. In addition, construction has
begun at Cherokee Farm, a new innovation campus in Knoxville that will be home to the Joint
Institute for Advanced Materials and other research facilities. Both the solar institute and
Cherokee Farm are joint ventures between UT and Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
As the University welcomes a new president, we will
experience the end of stimulus funding that has buoyed
us the last two years while state appropriations have
sharply declined. UT is prepared for this enormous
drop-off, and we are continuing to become even leaner
wherever we can, including top administrative levels,
without affecting our quality.
The University of Tennessee enjoys a wonderful history
of many achievements as the state's land-grant
university, and we look forward to continuing to serve
the state as Tennessee's most comprehensive public Interim President Jan Simek
institution of higher education. addresses UT Martin
FINANCIALS
Sources of Current Funds for the Year Ended June 30, 2010
Federal and Local activities such as; housing, dining halls, Federal and Local Appropriations 1.1%
Appropriations book-stores, parking and UT Knoxville Other 6.6%
$19,557,284.18 athletics. Independent
Operations
Appropriations received in support of Tuition and Fees 3.6%
the University's land-grant missions, $404,492,792.21
used primarily by the Agriculture Revenues collected from students;
Experiment Station and Tennessee includes resident enrollment fees,
Extension. Gifts, Grants, Auxiliary
program and service fees, extension and Contracts Enterprises
enrollment fees and other fees. 29.6% 10.2%
Other
$124,697,667.23 State Appropriations
Revenues generated from sources not $516,305,504.70
included in other classi cations, such as Legislative appropriations from the Tuition and Fees
sales and services by University Tennessee General Assembly for 21.5%
departments and investment income. current operations of the University. State
Independent Operations Gifts, Grants, and Contracts
Appropriations
27.4%
$68,097,572.96 $556,972,170.55
Revenue collected from the UT Revenues from federal and non-federal
Medical Center in Knoxville and the granting entities and gifts restricted for
Methodist Hospital in Memphis for speci c purposes, primarily for
leased employees. sponsored research and training
Auxiliary Enterprises
activities. Total: $1,883,139,123.05
$193,016,131.22
Revenues from operations of auxiliary
Uses of Current Funds for the Year Ended June 30, 2010
Long Term Debt & Other relations, development activities, and Instruction
Transfers alumni relations. $530,487,274.46
$106,002,555.94 Academic Support Includes all expenditures, including faculty and
Mandatory transfers for debt service staff salaries incurred in connection with
$122,912,760.72 instruction programs for credit and non-credit
and other transfers.
Expenditures for libraries, computing courses.
Student Services support, and academic administration.
$79,291,733.89 Auxiliary Enterprises Long Term Debt & Student Services 4.3%
Expenditures for student services, $132,091,535.71
Other Transfers 5.8%
including admissions, registrar, student
activities, counseling, career guidance, Activities that furnish goods and Independent
student aid administration, and health services to students, faculty and staff. Operations
services. Includes mandatory transfers for debt 3.7%
service.
Independent Operations
Public Service Physical
$68,097,572.96 Instruction Plant 5.6%
$128,580,176.50 28.9%
Expenditures for leased employees for
the UT Medical Center in Knoxville Expenditures for non-instructional Institutional
and Methodist Hospital in Memphis. programs bene cial to individuals and Support 5.7%
groups external to the University.
Academic
Physical Plant Support
Student Aid 6.7%
$103,490,676.17
$210,221,366.77 Research Auxiliary
Expenditures for the operation and 13.6% Enterprises
maintenance of physical plant Scholarships and fellowships awarded 7.2%
including utilities and service related to to students. Student Public
grounds and facilities. Research
Aid
11.5%
Service
7.0%
Institutional Support $248,046,615.43
$103,937,697.10 Direct expenditures for sponsored
Expenditures for executive research activities funded from federal,
management, nancial operations, state, local, and private sources. Total: $1,833,159,965.65
personnel services, security, public
FINANCIALS
Investments Benefiting the University
Total funds invested to bene t UT increased by $59 million during scal year 2010, evidencing the robust rebound in the capital
markets during the rst half of the scal year that was somewhat muted during the second half as uncertainty prevailed and market
volatility returned. Private support from alumni and friends enhanced the capital market performance, resulting in the almost 9
percent growth of these invested funds after distributions to support University programs during the scal year. The graph below
depicts the growth of these funds over the past decade growing by $44 million after distributions and experiencing two multiple-year
bear markets since 2000.
The market value of these funds totaling $768 million at June 30 is comprised of four distinct components: University endowments
($541 million), Life Income Trusts ($40 million), University of Chattanooga Foundation ($88 million), and the Tennessee Chairs of
Excellence ($99 million).
The majority of University endowments ($531 million) are administered as part of the University’s Consolidated Investment Pool
that was created in 1954 to provide the advantages of a well-diversi ed investment portfolio to all participating endowments
regardless of size. Reported June 30, 2010 investment returns for the pooled endowments totaled +13.3 percent and +2.6 percent for
the one- and 10-year periods respectively. Income distributed from the pooled endowments for the year totaled $33.4 million, a
decrease of about $800,000 over the previous scal year. This amount was in accordance with the spending plan articulated as ve
percent of a three-year moving average market value measured every Dec. 31. The long-term goal of the pooled endowment
investment program is to provide a sustainable and increasing level of support for the University programs while preserving the real
purchasing power of the endowments for the future in perpetuity.
The Tennessee Chairs of Excellence and the University of Chattanooga Foundation are managed outside the University. The Chairs
of Excellence, managed by the treasurer of the state of Tennessee, provided $3.5 million during the year to support chair programs at
all UT campuses. The University of Chattanooga Foundation, managed by its foundation board, provided $6.9 million for programs
at UT Chattanooga.
Total Funds (1 = $1,000,000)
1,000
57
900 53
127
57 114
800
112 119
51 40
700 111
56 50 42 88
104
54 106
109 50 48 104 87
600 99
95 104
93 97 93
500 119 102
105
95 99
400
300
200 440 421 400 396 460 509 592 708 661 485 541
100
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
UT Endowments Chairs of Excellence UC Foundation Life Income Trusts
FALL ENROLLMENT 2006-2010 (HEADCOUNT)
UT CHATTANOOGA
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010* 5-Year Chg
Non-degree Seeking 163 207 173 184 88
Freshman 2,237 2,582 2,662 2,842 2,598
Sophomore 1,702 1,859 2,006 2,206 2,406
Junior 1,351 1,404 1,485 1,634 1,719
Senior 2,091 2,142 2,079 2,173 2,418
Total Undergraduate 7,544 8,194 8,405 9,039 9,229 22.3%
Masters/Special 1,261 1,228 1,234 1,298 1,335
Doctoral 118 136 168 189 217
Total Grad/Professional 1,379 1,364 1,402 1,487 1,552 12.5%
GRAND TOTALS 8,923 9,558 9,807 10,526 10,781 20.8%
UT KNOXVILLE
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010* 5-Year Chg
Non-degree Seeking 321 368 339 333 251
Freshman 5,948 5,893 5,919 5,123 5,437
Sophomore 4,613 4,615 4,649 4,729 4,419
Junior 4,256 4,681 4,574 4,733 4,832
Senior 5,297 5,575 5,994 6,088 6,369
Total Undergraduate 20,435 21,132 21,475 21,006 21,308 4.3%
Masters/Special 3,499 3,478 3,524 3,354 3,321
Doctoral 1,639 1,733 1,785 1,782 1,911
Law 449 460 464 468 485
Veterinary Medicine 276 274 296 322 336
Total Grad/Professional 5,863 5,945 6,069 5,926 6,053 3.2%
GRAND TOTALS 26,298 27,077 27,544 26,932 27,361 4.0%
UT MARTIN
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010* 5-Year Chg
Non-degree Seeking 703 888 1,035 1,108 1,159
Freshman 1,929 2,068 2,173 2,208 2,104
Sophomore 1,073 1,109 1,262 1,386 1,470
Junior 1,106 1,067 1,102 1,254 1,362
Senior 1,504 1,583 1,551 1,626 1,850
Total Undergraduate 6,315 6,715 7,123 7,582 7,945 25.8%
Masters/Special 573 456 451 514 522
Total Grad/Professional 573 456 451 514 522 -8.9%
GRAND TOTALS 6,888 7,171 7,574 8,096 8,467 22.9%
*The 14th Day Enrollment Counts for 2010 are all preliminary.
FALL ENROLLMENT 2006-2010 (HEADCOUNT)
UT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010* 5-Year Chg
Junior 136 154 165 146 48
Senior 48 82 77 30 37
Total Undergraduate 184 236 242 176 85 -53.8%
Masters/Special 276 345 328 486 167
Masters - Professional 321
Doctoral 423 470 442 510 213
Medical Professionals 1,542 1,604 1,659 1,665 2,009
Total Grad/Professional 2,241 2,419 2,429 2,661 2,710 20.9%
GRAND TOTALS 2,425 2,655 2,671 2,837 2,795 15.3%
UT SPACE INSTITUTE
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 5-Year Chg
Non-degree Seeking 1
Junior 2
Senior 1 1 1 4
Total Undergraduate 1 2 1 2 4 300.0%
Masters/Special 167 193 173 157 130
Doctoral 33 36 51 53 59
Total Grad/Professional 200 229 224 210 189 -5.5%
GRAND TOTALS 201 231 225 212 193 -4.0%
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE (SYSTEM)
Student Level Fall 2006 Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 5-Year Chg
Non-degree Seeking 1,187 1,464 1,547 1,625 1,498
Freshman 10,114 10,543 10,754 10,173 10,139
Sophomore 7,388 7,583 7,917 8,321 8,295
Junior 6,849 7,306 7,326 7,769 7,961
Senior 8,941 9,383 9,702 9,917 10,678
Total Undergraduate 34,479 36,279 37,246 37,805 38,571 11.9%
Masters/Special 5,776 5,700 5,710 5,809 5,475
Masters - Professional 321
Doctoral 2,213 2,375 2,446 2,534 2,400
Law 449 460 464 468 485
Veterinary Medicine 276 274 296 322 336
Medical Professionals 1,542 1,604 1,659 1,665 2,009
Total Grad/Professional 10,256 10,413 10,575 10,798 11,026 7.5%
GRAND TOTALS 44,735 46,692 47,821 48,603 49,597 10.9%
* The 14th Day Enrollment Counts for 2010 are all preliminary.
** A restructuring of student levels has occurred for the Health Science Center. The masters level students are now divided between professional
masters and non-professional masters programs. Certain doctoral programs were also moved to the medical professionals category (Ex: Doctor
of Nursing Practice, Doctor of Audiology).
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Advancement and Public Affairs
CAMPUS/UNIT: All
ITEM: Revisions to the Policy on Naming Facilities and Other
Assets
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Scott Rabenold, Interim Vice President for Development
and Alumni Affairs
The administration proposes the revisions shown on the attached copy of the Policy on
Naming Facilities and Other Assets.
The proposed revisions are housekeeping in nature except for the addition of a new
section 7 authorizing the Chancellors to remove an individual's name from a facility at
the request of the namesake.
MOTION:
Move approval of the revisions to the Policy on Naming Facilities and Other
Assets as presented in the meeting materials.
POLICY ON THE NAMING OF FACILITIES AND OTHER ASSETS
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
Adopted by the Board of Trustees on February 22,2001
Last Revised on February 27,2009
Proposed Revision
Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish principles and guidelines governing the
naming of facilities, academic components (such as schools, colleges,
departments, and programs), and other Significant assets of the University so
that the names of these important assets are carefully deployed for the long term
as assets of the University, its student, and the people of Tennessee.
Principles
Upon the recommendation of the President, the Board of Trustees shall approve
the naming of facilities and other significant assets of the University. No current
employee of the University, and no individual who has been an employee of the
University within the previous three years, shall be eligible for consideration. In
its sole discretion, the Board of Trustees may change any name adopted under
this policy upon finding a significant change in circumstances.
Guidelines for Naming Facilities
The following more specific guidelines shall govern the naming of facilities for
individuals, corporations or foundations:
1. It is appropriate to express the esteem and appreciation the University feels
for an individual who has brought honor to the institution by personal
accomplishments or for an individual, corporation, or foundation that has made a
substantial monetary contribution to the University or for the benefit of the
University.
2. In the absence of a substantial monetary contribution, nominations for an
individual should reflect an association with either the history of the University or
the nation or with the advancement of knowledge and learning that will remain
memorable long beyond the lifetime of those who propose the name.
Nominations whose claims are parochial, of recent date and untested by the
passage of time, or based on personal enthusiasm should be avoided. Historical
perspective should be exercised before proposing names. No current employee
of the University, and no individual who has been an employee of the University
within the previous three years, shall be proposed for a naming in his or her
honor.
3. The names of University facilities with specialized functions that are unlikely to
change (such as athletic facilities, libraries, and medical buildings) should include
terms descriptive of their functions.
4. Named buildingsfacilities should be carried through the useful life of the
buildingfacility. If demolished, there is no obligation to rename the replacement
buildingfacility, although the Board of Trustees may choose to do so. When
possible, the Chancellor/Vice President of the campuslinstitute will inform a
family member or other appropriate representative of the former namesake about
a decision to demolish or change the use of a facility. If deemed appropriate in
the sole discretion of the ChanceliorNice President, the former namesake may
be recognized with a plaque in the new or renovated facility.
5. When an appropriate portion of the funds for construction of a facility is given
or secured by an individual, the President may recommend that the assetfacility
be named for that individual or other appropriate person he or she recommends if
the naming is otherwise consistent with these guidelines. To be eligible for
naming under this provision, the funds must be assured by outright gift or other
irrevocable method of gift. If a donor fails to fulfill a pledge or other obligation
upon which a naming is based, the ChanceliorNice President for of the
campus/institute has authority to remove the individual's name from a building or
etRef-facility after providing notice to the President of the University and the
Board of Trustees.
6. The President will consult with appropriate representatives of the faculty, the
office of development and alumni affairs, and individual Board members, as
appropriate, before making naming recommendations to the Board of Trustees.
7. At the request of a namesake, the Chancellor of the campuslinstitute has
authority to remove an individual's name from a facility after providing notice to
the President of the University and the Board of Trustees.
1§.. The Chancellors and the Vice President for Agriculture are authorized to
name rooms, laboratory spaces, and areas on the grounds of a campus/unit
upon the recommendation of the appropriate academic officer or the office of
development. The President will be notified of these namings as they occur.
The Chancellors and the Vice President for Agriculture will provide an annual
report to the Board of Trustees of the interior/grounds spaces named on the
campuses/units.
2
Other Significant Assets
The guidelines outlined above for the naming of facilities shall be generally
applicable to the naming of other significant assets. However, specific guidelines
to govern the naming of colleges, schools, departments and programs shall be
developed and submitted to the Board of Trustees for approval. The President
shall recommend the naming of colleges, schools, departments and programs to
the Board of Trustees for approval.
Exceptions
In its sole discretion, the Board of Trustees may make an exception to the
principles and guidelines stated in this policy by duly adopted motion at any
regular or called meeting of the Board.
3
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22,2010
COMMITTEE: Advancement and Public Affairs
CAMPUS/UNIT: All
ITEM: Foundations Study Committee Report and
Recommendations
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles E. Wharton, Chair, Foundations Study Committee
The report and recommendations of the Foundations Study Committee appear in the
following memorandum dated August 23, 2010 from Committee Chair Charles Wharton
(preceded by a supporting memorandum dated October 1, 2010 from Advancement and
Public Affairs Committee Chair George Cates).
MOTION:
Move approval of the following based on the report and recommendations of the
Foundations Study Committee:
1. Transition to an interdependent foundation with a goal of increasing annual
fundraising by at least $100 million by 2020 while keeping the University's
investment in development consistent;
2. Grow the investment into the development program without increasing the
University's direct support, which should result in direct support by the
University providing less than 45 percent of the total development program
budget by 2020;
3. Subject to legislative approval, lease certain UT development and alumni
employees to UT Foundation, Inc. to perform development and alumni
services for the University;
4. Revise the University's affiliation agreement with UT Foundation, Inc.,
ensuring transparency and internal controls and providing for but limiting
the capability to establish other affiliated fundraising foundations;
5. Authorize funding the operation of UT Foundation, Inc. by means of the
following:
a. Contract-for-services payments from the University for development
and alumni services performed by UT Foundation, Inc., with
University funding comprised of existing current fund support and
an administrative fee calculated at 1% (100 basis points) of the
University's endowment market value annually each June 30;
b. All short-term investment interest income from gifts for twelve
months; and
c. A percentage of UT Foundation, Inc. unrestricted gifts, as approved
by the University President annually.
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
Board of Trustees
October 1, 2010
MEMORANDUM
TO: Advancement and Public Affairs Committee
Charles Anderson
Monice Hagler
Karl Schledwitz
Charles Wharton
Jim Murphy, ex officio
Jan Simek, ex officio
FROM: George E. Cates, Chair
Advancement and Public Affairs Committee
At our upcoming Board committee meeting (Thursday, October 21, 1: 15 PM), there will be one
item of the highest importance to come before us: the proposal, recently unanimously approved
by the Foundations Study Committee and the UT Foundation Board of Directors and forwarded
to us for action, to reorganize the current UT Foundation into an interdependent foundation that
will receive all gifts for the benefit ofDY's students and faculty, as well as the funding source
for the development and alumni programs across all UT campuses.
You are well aware of this opportunity, it having been before us for the past 18 months or so.
Charles Wharton and his fine committee have worked it very effectively through administrative
and political channels for the past several years. They are to be thanked and commended for a
truly outstanding job, a very substantial commitment of their time and resources.
A descriptive summary, titled the Foundations Study Committee Report, is attached, providing
ample detail (but should you have questions, let me know or contact Charles Wharton or Scott
Rabenold directly). Transparency and flexibility will be further assured, and the big operational
change will be topermit our foundation to hire 60 additional development staff (from 74 to 134
over next five years). Each Dr development officer produces on average above $2,500,000
annually - Significantly better than the peer group - and the payback on this investment is
prodigious. To quote Charlie, "we have fallen way behind the curve" (about 50% on key metrics)
versus our peers, who average -110 development officers.
Approval of the interdependent foundation will accelerate raising much needed money for the
university, helping to offset the steady slide in state funding. Based on conservative estimates
provided by the university, the transition to an interdependent foundation is expected to result in
an additional annual $80,000,000 - $100,000,000 of gift commitments to UT - over and above
historical normal giving - within five years of approval. The E&G funding is projected to remain
constant at approximately $16 million annually, and future staff growth will be funded by the
foundation.
Page 2
Advancement & Public Affairs Committee
October 1, 2010
This proposed plan also includes transitioningtheUTAA and its sister teams on each campus
into the foundation·as well. It is important tb:at we keep tb:ese two organizations working
together for tb:e benefit oiUT.
I urge your study and approval of this proposal. Our committee and tb:e full Board will be asked
to authorize the University President to enter into the proposed affiliation agreement (attachment
II ofthe Foundations Study Committee Report) pending there are no substantive changes
between now and the targeted implementation date of July 1, 2011.
If we approve as anticipated, we will forward to the full Board for action at the October meeting.
Following Board approval, the Tennessee Legislature must approve two pieces oflegislation,
and we anticipate that to occur not later than springtime of next year. Any further delay in
approval of the interdependent foundation thus costs us around $33 million per board meeting
($100 million of probable additional money divided by three board meetings per year).
Thanks for your part in keeping this critically important matter moving forward. While we have
otb:er important objectives (e.g., encouraging a substantial increase in unrestricted gifts), notb:ing
is more important for strategic success than implementation of the interdependent UT
Foundation and its future allied affiliates.
Attachments
cc: Anne Holt Blackburn Douglas Home Surneet Vaikunth
J.A.M. Boulet Karen Johnson Scott Rabenold
William Carroll Andrea Loughry Lofton Stuart
Spruell Driver Carey Smith Hank Dye
John Foy Don Stansberry Catherine Mizell
Crawford Gallimore Robert Talbott
James Hall Betty Ann Tanner
August 23,2010
MEMORANDUM
TO: The UT Board of Trustees
FROM: Charles Wharton
RE: The Case for an Interdependent Foundation
In the fall of 2008, an ad hoc committee consisting of Jim Hall, Doug Home, Karl Schledwitz,
and Don Stansberry was established by the Board of Trustees to review the effectiveness of the
University's Foundation. The review was appropriate in that the Foundation has had limited
funding and limited fund raising results and the State has had increasingly limited educational
resources, a situation not unique to Tennessee. As a Trustee, past Chairman of the Development
Council, Vice Chair of the University's $1 billion campaign, Chair of the Institute of
Agriculture's $75 million campaign, a voluntary fundraiser for the University for the past twenty
years and as a donor, I was asked to Chair this committee.
As a side note, I began this work with a deep-seated bias and skepticism about and against
foundations in general. This bias was founded on a generally held view that much of what a
foundation might do might be done without the benefit of daylight and that sufficient controls to
prevent abusive use of funds could not be established. Further, I had concerns that the
Foundation might try to influence or drive University policy. Despite those concerns, I was
keenly aware that the current fundraising model, while not broken, was insufficient to meet the
fundraising requirements that most certainly have occurred.
BACKGROUND
The current UT Foundation, established in 2001, is a captive, dependent Foundation. That is, all
of its administrative support comes from the University out of Educational and General (E&G)
funds which are the University's funds for educating students. It has a self-perpetuating Board
of Directors, provided that at least two members must be selected from the system Board of
Trustees. The President and CEO of the Foundation is the University Vice President for
Development and Alumni Affairs; however, de facto, the President of the University is
effectively able to impose his will on issues if he so chooses.
The existing Foundation started with $400,000 in assets and it currently has $246 million as of
the end of June 2010.
APPROACH
The Foundations Study Committee undertook to become generally informed about foundations,
best practices for foundations, and their pitfalls and advantages. To do this, we identified five
public universities with successful programs which have significant similarities to UT and who
were willing to meet with us and share information. The University of Florida, the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the University of Virginia, the University of Texas at Austin, and
Texas A&M University were visited. We are indebted to these colleagues for their hospitality,
time and information.
FINDINGS
Our findings include the following:
• Foundations should not drive purpose or priorities of the University
• We are late to the party. The decrease in public educational funding is a national
problem and competition for private giving will only increase. Historically (and
currently), our University has had exceptional relations with both legislators and
governors and, over the years, we were able to meet our needs with public funding and
the significant University development effort. Other universities, operating under
different circumstances, established their foundations much earlier - in some cases over
30 years earlier
• The current organization is not sufficient to meet our current or future needs. At the
beginning of this study and during the current campaign, UT averaged sixty development
officers, each raising on average $3 million per year. The national average is $2 million
per year per development officer. With respect to our peer comparison groups,
2
development staffs range from 60 at Texas A&M (in this case planned to go to 120) to
150 at Virginia (see Attachment I). Our peer group averaged 110 development officers
• We do not have enough development officers. Sixty additional officers would enable us,
over time, to raise at least another $100 million per year and we could begin to focus
more on unrestricted gifts, endowed chairs and other areas where funding has been
limited
• With current and pending reductions of E&G funds, the University cannot take increasing
amounts of declining funds to further invest in development. Each college, department,
and unit of each campus is dealing with severe funding cuts including all of the
development offices. We are eating our seed com
• The foundations with the highest investment returns had a full-time Chief Investment
Officer or an investment firm to oversee the endowment fund
• The number of foundations within anyone system should be limited
• The operations of university foundations should maximize transparency and internal
controls
DRAFT PROPOSAL
After concluding its fact finding work, the Committee formulated a draft proposal. It
contemplated:
• The foundation should fund the proposed growth the of the development program for
the benefit of the University. Accordingly, the university's investment will remain
constant, but will be a declining percentage of total development expenditures and the
university will receive the increased impact ofthe expanded development staff
• The increased costs associated with growing the development operation should be
funded outside of state funding
• We would transition to an Interdependent Foundation
• The funding method for the new foundation would be selected from the Association
of Governing Boards' (AGB) array of suggested options
• Over the next five years, sixty new development officers would be added
3
• Endowment distributions to the university will be reduced from 5% to 4.5% to offset
an increase in the endowment management/administrative fee from 50 basis points to
100 basis points
• A new structure should be developed so that based on a rigorous, need-based review,
other "shadow" foundations could be established under the new Foundation's
umbrella. Any shadow foundation should be considered in a manner that ensures
there would be no duplication of administrative staff or costs. Shadow foundations
will enhance fundraising opportunities and will have the same accountability and
transparency requirement
• The Affiliation Agreement between the Foundation and the University should be
revised to maximize transparency and internal controls
• This new Foundation should not drive the purpose, policy or priorities of the
University
• A minimum of two University Trustees should continue to serve on its Board of
Directors. Consideration should be given to adding one chancellor and one dean,
selected by the UT President, as non-voting members
• The Foundation should be organized in a manner that allows the UT Foundation
Board of Directors to provide fiduciary oversight but also ensures, at the end of the
day, the President and the Board of Trustees of the University has ultimate control of
the Foundation
PROCESS
Over the course of the last twenty months, the Vice President for Development and Alumni
Affairs and the Committee Chair met at least three times and, in some instances more, with each
Chancellor, and their respective Vice Chancellors for Development and Vice Chancellors for
Finance, as well as every Dean at every campus that chose to attend the meetings (over 90%). In
addition, meetings were held with the Interim President, Senate Faculty Representatives, the
Constitutional Officers for the State of Tennessee, the State Auditor, a few legislators, members
of the Development Council and the Alumni Association. The Vice President for Development
and Alumni Affairs developed a draft Affiliation Agreement that is acceptable to both the State
and the University. The Attorney General has advised the University with respect to adhering to
4
the spirit and the intent of applicable law. Every Chancellor has provided the committee with
invaluable feedback and their suggestions have been incorporated.
PROPOSAL FOR AN INTERDEPENDENT FOUNDAnON
The Foundations Study Committee, the Interim President, the Chancellors of each campus, the
Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs, the past and the current chairs of the UT
Foundation, the chair of the Development Council and the president of the Alumni Association
are unanimous in recommending to the State of Tennessee and its legislators, the Board of
Trustees, the faculty, students and staff, that we adopt the following:
• Move to an Interdependent Foundation with a goal of increasing annual fundraising by at
least $100 million by 2020 while keeping the university's investment in development
consistent
• Grow the investment into the development program without increasing the university's
direct support. Using this strategy, we will see the direct support by the university
provide less than 45 percent of the total development program budget by 2020 (l00
percent today)
• Lease current UT development employees to the Foundation (requires legislative
approval)
• Finalize the Affiliation Agreement. Ensure transparency and internal controls by an
outside independent review. Provide and limit the capability to establish "shadow"
foundations
• Fund Foundation operation as follows (Attachment II includes the proposed Affiliation
Agreement and a pro forma):
I. Contract fees from the University for development responsibilities
2. 50 basis points are currently taken from the endowment earnings to manage the
Foundation. An additional 50 basis points would be taken under the proposal for a
total of 100 points.
3. All short-term investment interest income from gifts for twelve months
4. A percentage ofUT Foundation unrestricted gifts
5
The Foundations Study Committee was created to review how the University might maximize
fundraising and to review the current effectiveness of the existing Foundation. The Affiliation
Agreement summarizes the ten year financial and transition plan. It has been developed by
Interim President, the Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs, campus Chancellors,
the UT CFO & Treasurer, the Chief of Staff and the Foundations Study Committee. A proposed
organizational chart is included as Attachment III.
The Committee has drawn on the experience and practices of five highly regarded peer
institutions to propose a significantly improved fundraising approach. We are late to the game,
but the men and women who collectively created this proposal are unanimous in their belief that,
practically, it is the best approach and the one that will most likely enable us to cope with the
ever increasing need for private funding. As ambitious as this plan is, it cannot replace public
funding, only supplement it.
The University can no longer postpone this transition. Public funding to the University of
Tennessee campuses decreased $20,514,000 in 2009, $65,601,200 in 2010 and $24,156,000 in
2011 - totaling $110,271,200 over three years. Moving to an interdependent foundation is the
most important financial step the University can make in 2010.
******
An issue outside of this Committee's charter cannot be overlooked. Under the
present organizational structure at The University of Tennessee, the Development Office
and Alumni Affairs are joined at the hip. The virtue of this approach cannot be
overstated - instead of competing organizations, as at other universities with competing
goals and fund raising, we have this integrated organization that moves in near lockstep
to achieve the University's goals. It is essential to keep both Development and Alumni
Affairs under one organization. It is the strong recommendation from this Committee
that Alumni Affairs either be a part of the Foundation or remains under the Vice
6
President for Development and Alumni Affairs. Alumni Affairs also requires a different
funding model to increase its effectiveness.
For the Committee:
Charles E. Wharton
Attachment I - Comparisons of Peer University Development Programs
Attachment II - Proposed Affiliation Agreement and a pro forma
Attachment III - Organizational Chart
7
Foundation Study Committee Attachment I
Comparison Sheet
Universi~ of
Universi~ of University of Universitll of University of Tennessee
Comj2arision Points Florida North Carolina Virginia Texas TexasA&M Sllstem
Does the staff raise funds from within the university or
though a foundation? Foundation Foundation Foundation University Foundation University
Is the development staff employed by the university or the
foundation? Foundation Foundation Foundation University Foundation University
82 (with plan 60 (with plan
to increase by to double to
How many development officers does the university have? 77 137 110 40) 120) 46
How many foundations does the university have? 1 12 27 4 3 2
No (alumni
Are there foundations for each or some of the colleges? No Yes Yes Yes and athletics) No
What type of foundation does the university have?
(Independent, Interdependent, or Dependent) Interdependent Interdependent Interdependent Independent Independent Dependent
Does the foundation use AGB recommended funding
sources? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No
How is the foundation funded?
Small percentage
I
of the system
Unrestricted gifts Yes Yes Yes No Yes budget
Small percentage
of the system I
Endowment management fee Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes budget
Small percentage
of the system
Interest income on cash balances Yes Yes Yes No Yes budget
Administrative fee on gifts Yes Yes Yes No Yes No
Institutional support Yes Yes NA Yes Yes Yes - majority
What is the total annual budget for development and
alumni affairs? $33M $28M $35M $22M $20M $17M
FY08 CAE Giving Totals $206M $292M $270M $280M $207M $106M
What is the size of the current campaign goal? $1.5B $2B $3B $3B $1B $1B
What is the size of the total endowment? $1.25B $2.3B $4.5B $2.5B $1B $870M
Does an Investment Company oversee endowment
investments? Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Number of Graduate & Undergraduate Students 35,000 26,000 21,000 50,000 47,000 42,000
Overall University Budget Provided By State Appropriations 22.0% 22.0% 8.2% 18.3% 25.0% 30.2%
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Affiliation and Services Agreement
between
The University of Tennessee
and
The University of Tennessee Foundation, Inc.
This Affiliation and Services Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Agreement"), entered into as
of the ___ day of _ _ _ _, 2011, by and between The University of Tennessee
(hereinafter referred to as "University") and The University of Tennessee Foundation, Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as "Foundation"):
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the University is a public institution of higher education chartered in 1794 by the
General Assembly of the State of Tennessee as a body politic and corporate with enumerated
powers and all rights, privileges and powers usually conferred upon universities; and
WHEREAS, the General Assembly ofthe State of Tennessee has expressly authorized and
empowered the Board of Trustees of the University to take such steps, to enter into such
agreements, and to do whatever it may deem necessary for the establishment of foundations in
support of the University; and
WHEREAS, the Foundation was organized and incorporated in the state of Tennessee in 2000 as
a nonprofit public benefit corporation formed exclusively for charitable, scientific, literary, and
educational purposes within the meaning of section 501 (c )(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, and specifically for the exclusive purpose of benefiting the educational,
research, and public service missions of the University; and
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees of the University and the Board of Directors ofthe
Foundation agree that the Foundation can provide an invaluable service to the University by
maximizing private gifts to the University by sharpening the focus on the University's
fundraising efforts, enhancing outreach and services available to alumni, providing a mechanism
to increase the development and alumni operation (staffing, activities, and other initiatives); and
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees, University President, Chancellors, Deans, and the
Foundation Board of Directors agree that a collaborative effort of shared commitment to private
gift fundraising and decision making between the University and the Foundation is paramount to
successfully reaching the desired outcomes of increasing private gift fundraising; and overall
alumni engagement; and
WHEREAS, the University and the Foundation believe it is in the best interest of the University
for private gift fundraising to be coordinated through the Foundation to increase efficiency and
effectiveness and to expand the current sources of support for the University system, and
therefore the University desires to engage the services of the Foundation in accordance to the
terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, because of the close association of the Foundation with the University, it is prudent
and beneficial to have a clear statement, agreed upon by the parties, ofthe responsibilities,
authority, and the relationship of the University and the Foundation and to agree on the standards
and procedures for accounting for and aUditing of accounts of the Foundation, while at the same
time preserving the private and independent status of the Foundation;
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, mutual covenants, and agreements
contained herein, the parties agree as follows:
2
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
ARTICLE I
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FOUNDATION AND THE
UNIVERSITY
1. The Foundation is a separately incorporated nonprofit organization that exists to receive,
hold, invest, and administer private gifts and other private resources solely for the benefit
of the University.
2. By its approval of this Agreement, the Board of Trustees of the University designates the
Foundation to receive all private gifts for support of the University made on or after the
effective date of enabling legislation enacted by the Tennessee General Assembly, except
any gift for which the donor has specifically directed in writing that the gift be received
and held by the University.
3. The Foundation President, in partnership with an Advisory Foundation Committee
consisting of the University President, the campus Chancellors or their designees, the
Chair of the Foundation Board of Directors, and the Executive Director of the UT
Alumni Association will prepare an annual plan that shall include but not be limited to
Foundation programs, initiatives, and staffing growth and changes that will be presented
to the Foundation Board of Directors for approval.
4. The Foundation President and the campus Chancellors will jointly manage the campus
Vice Chancellors for Development with dual direct reporting lines. Development related
goal setting and performance reviews of Vice Chancellors for Development shall be
initiated by the President of the Foundation annually and conducted jointly with the
Chancellors. Appendix C further outlines this dual management responsibility.
5. The Foundation and the University agree that accountability and public trust are
paramount to the success of the Foundation and its mission to support the University.
3
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
6. The Foundation reserves all rights and powers granted to it under the charter and bylaws,
under the Tennessee law of non-profit entities and under the federal law of tax-exempt
entities that are not specifically limited or abridged by this Agreement.
7. The Foundation and the University acknowledge that each is an independent entity and
agree that neither will be liable, nor held out by the other as liable, for any of the other's
contracts, torts, or other acts or omissions, or those of the other's trustees, directors,
officers, members, staff or activity participants.
8. The parties are independent contractors. Nothing in this Agreement is intended, or shall
be construed, to create any association, joint venture, agency relationship or partnership
between the parties or to impose any such obligation or liability upon either party.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give either party any right, power or
authority to enter into any agreement, OJ act as an agent or representative of, or otherwise
bind, the other party.
9. Debts, liabilities, and other obligations of the Foundation shall not constitute debts,
liabilities or obligations of the State of Tennessee or the University and shall be payable
only from unrestricted assets of the Foundation. Neither the University nor the State
shall have any legal or other obligation to finance the deficits of the Foundation.
Effective on the date of this Agreement, neither the State nor the University shall have
any legal, financial or other responsibility or liability for the operation of the Foundation
except as expressly agreed to by the University in this Agreement.
10. Debts, liabilities, and other obligations of the University shall not constitute debts,
liabilities or obligations of the Foundation and shall be payable only from assets of the
University. The Foundation shall have no legal or other obligation to finance the deficits
of the University.
11. The Foundation shall indemnify, hold harmless, and, at the University'S request, defend
the University, the State of Tennessee, and their agents, trustees, officers, employees, and
4
AFFILIA nON AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
successors against any claims, damages, losses, or costs to third parties in any way
arising out of, attributable to, or in connection with any act or omission of the Foundation
and its agents, directors, officers, employees, leased University employees, and
successors. The Foundation shall maintain the insurance coverage specified in Appendix
D at all times, and the University shall be named as an additional insured. The
Foundation shall provide the University's Chief Financial Officer with a Certificate of
Insurance evidencing compliance with the insurance requirements.
12. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to waive or abrogate
in any way the sovereign immunity of the State of Tennessee or the University, or any
official, officer, or employee of the State or University or to deprive any official, officer,
or employee of the State or University of any other immunity to which the official,
officer, or employee is otherwise entitled under state law. The University's liability for
any claims, damages, losses, or costs to the Foundation and to third parties shall be
subject to the terms, limits, and conditions of the Tennessee Claims Commissions Act,
Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 9-8-301 et seq.
ARTICLE II
FOUNDATION COMMITMENT TO UNIVERSITY SERVICE
The mission of the Foundation is to support the University's educational, research, and public
service activities by soliciting, receiving, and administering private funds to support programs
beyond the scope of the University's Education and General budget, and specifically does not
include making or influencing University policy, procedures, or management/operational
decisions.
1. Organizational Structure
a. The University's Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs shall serve
as President and chief executive officer of the Foundation and shall report directly
to both the University President and the Foundation Board of Directors. In
5
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
accordance with the University's bylaws, the Vice President for Development and
Alumni Affairs shall be elected by the University's Board of Trustees upon the
recommendation of the University President and shall serve at the pleasure of the
Board of Trustees. Accordingly, the authority to hire, terminate, and set the
compensation of the President and chief executive officer of the Foundation lies
ultimately with the University's Board of Trustees.
b. The Foundation Board of Directors shall include the following University
members:
1. two appointed members of the University Board of Trustees, who shall be
designated by the Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees and serve as voting
members of the Foundation Board of Directors;
11. one University of Tennessee Alumni Association (UT AA) representative, who
shall serve as a voting member of the Foundation Board of Directors and be
appointed through the Foundation nominations process from a pool of
candidates identified by the UTAA Executive Committee and the UTAA
Executive Director;
iii. President of the University, who shall serve ex officio and as a non-voting
member of the Foundation Board of Directors; and
IV. One Chancellor and one Dean designated by the University President and
rotated among the campuses, both of whom shall serve ex officio and as non-
voting members of the Foundation Board of Directors.
2. Private Gift Fundraising
The Foundation shall:
a. Be responsible for conducting on behalf of the University, as specifically
requested by the President of the University, the overall development and alumni
programs, such as planning and coordinating capital campaigns and initiatives,
6
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
planning and implementing a variety of programs and services to all alumni
(collectively, the "Programs"), in close cooperation with the University,
campuses, and colleges, for the purpose of securing financial support for the
benefit of the University and strengthening alumni engagement with the
institution.
b. Solicit, receive and manage private gifts for the benefit of the University. If a
donor expressly requests in writing, by a gift agreement or otherwise, that a
private gift be received and held by the University rather than the Foundation, the
Foundation will deposit the funds into the University bank account, and the
appropriate University account in the accounting system will be credited with the
gift.
c. Transfer spent gift funds to the University once each year on June 30.
d. Receive and manage such grants from state or federal agencies as the University
President and the Foundation Board of Directors may agree to accept.
e. Provide additional fund raising options for the University by receiving private
gifts for the benefit of the University including those that because of unacceptable
risks or other business reasons, the University could not accept (for example,
encumbered real property, a going business, leveraged endowments, partnerships,
and gift annuities). While under no obligation to accept such gifts or to undertake
such ventures, prior to accepting such gifts, the Foundation will discuss any such
opportunities with the President of the University and the Chancellor of the
involved campus, who shall in tum consult the University's Chief Financial
Officer and the University's General Counsel. The Foundation shall not accept
gifts that create a direct or indirect financial liability for the University (for
example, accepting a gift that requires the assuming of another's debt) without the
prior written approval of the President of the University, which shall be given
only after consultation with the University's Chief Financial Officer and the
7
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
University's General Counsel and only after receiving the written concurrence of
the Vice Chair of the University's Board of Trustees.
f. Engage, as may be specifically approved in advance by the Foundation Board of
Directors, in real estate development, entrepreneurial ventures, and other revenue-
producing activities for the benefit of the University that are more appropriately
conducted by a private organization, subject to the University President's veto
power as provided in Article IV, Section 6, and further subject to providing prior
written notice of any real estate development to the State Building Commission
and compliance with the terms of Article II, Section 4.h. ofthis Agreement if
applicable.
g. Advise donors that restrictive terms and conditions imposed on the University's
use of gifts must be approved by the University prior to the Foundation's
acceptance of such gifts.
h. Notify all designated University beneficiaries of gifts and contributions to the
Foundation for their benefit, including the terms of any restrictions on such gifts,
and make available regular reports of fund balances and expenditures.
l. Provide all necessary receipts and acknowledgements, as required by the Internal
Revenue Code, for all private gifts for the benefit of the University, including
gifts that will be held by the University.
J. Within budgetary constraints, coordinate with University related volunteer groups
as specified by the President of the University.
k. Provide the services for fundraising and alumni activities such as prospect
research, marketing, donor stewardship, property management, database
management, accounting and disbursements, etc.
l. Work where appropriate with the designated offices of the University to arrange
press conferences, releases, and radio and television communications to
8
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
acknowledge significant gifts and coordinate with chancellors, deans, department
heads and other staff or faculty as required.
m. Maintain records concerning gifts and contributions to the Foundation and the
University (unless the donor has requested that the gift or contribution be received
and held by the University).
n. Provide the services of trained development and alumni professionals to
campuses, colleges, units, departmental offices or programs of the University
(hereinafter "Unit" or "Units"), as appropriate. The addition or reduction of
development and alumni professionals will be approved by the Advisory
Foundation Committee and in consideration of the Foundation's budget and need,
based upon analysis of the Unit's potential for private gift fundraising success as
well as needed growth in alumni outreach.
o. Coordinate with each campus Student Financial Aid and Honors Program the
management and recognition of awards and other established scholarship
programs.
p. Coordinate any University-wide recognition of major donors and deferred gift
donors through the formal stewardship programs established by the University
and advising/coordinating with Unit-based stewardship activities.
q. Provide for timely reimbursement of expenses or payment of vouchers approved
in accordance with Foundation policy approved by the University.
r. Develop and manage operating policy and procedures including donor
coordination.
s. Perform such other duties as the University President may reasonably request as
necessary or desirable to effectively conduct the Programs. In consultation with
the Foundation and subject to approval by the Foundation Board, the University
may contract for development services beyond the Foundation's budgetary
capacity for needs or special projects benefiting the University and which the
9
AFFILIA nON AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 20 10
Foundation is best suited to provide in accordance with its specialized knowledge
and experience. If such additional services are needed on a one-time basis, the
University and the Foundation shall enter into a separate contract for the
additional services. If such additional services are needed on an ongoing basis, an
amendment to this Agreement shall be executed in accordance with the provisions
of Article VII.
t. Coordinate fundraising and other activities with other fundraising foundations
established within the UT system, provided that the University does not make any
contract or commitment with any other individual, corporation, association, or
partnership concerning such activities without first notifying the Foundation. The
Foundation shall provide the donor coordination, support services such as
research, receipting and fund management in the current and future anticipated
model regardless of the number offoundations established. The Foundation will
be the central fundraising foundation and provide all support services to any
fundraising foundation deemed affiliated by the Board of Trustees.
3. Foundation Asset Management and Fiduciary Responsibilities
The Foundation Board of Directors is responsible for the control and management of all
assets ofthe Foundation.
a. The Foundation shall have the authority to create an Investment Committee
comprised of members of the Foundation Board of Directors, UT Investment
Officer and the President of the University, or the President's designee.
b. The Foundation shall establish or cause to be established asset-allocation,
disbursement, and spending policies that adhere to applicable federal and state
laws, including the Uniform Prudent Investor Act and the Uniform Prudent
Management of Institutional Funds Act.
10
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
c. The Foundation shall have the authority to assess normal fees associated with the
collection and disbursement of gifts and gift income as approved by the President
of the University. Additional funding to enable a growth in private gift support
for the University will be accomplished using any or all of the following revenue
sources: annual unrestricted funds given to the Foundation, endowment
administration fee, investment earning fee from Foundation daily cash
management program, accruing and using interest earnings on cash gifts to the
Foundation prior to transfer to the University, marketing programs, assessing fees
for services, and/or imposing gift administrative fees to support its operations
from any sources outlined by the University or in the Association of Governing
Boards list attached as Appendix B. All revenue sources will be agreed upon in
writing between the President of the Foundation and the University President and
approved by the Foundation Board of Directors. The Foundation shall disclose
any assessment of fees or taxes to donors.
d. The Foundation is responsible for the performance and oversight of all aspects of
its operations based on a comprehensive set of bylaws and policies that clearly
address the Board of Director's fiduciary responsibilities.
4. Foundation Administration
a. Subject to enactment of enabling legislation, the Foundation and the University
may enter into a separate Employee Services Agreement (ESA) for the lease of
certain University development and alumni employees to the Foundation. The
ESA may provide that development and alumni employees hired after the
effective date of the ESA shall be hired as University employees and then leased
to the Foundation. Alternatively, the ESA may provide that development and
alumni employees hired after the effective date of the ESA shall be hired as
Foundation employees. The ESA shall set forth the agreement of the University
and the Foundation concerning compensation policies and other human resource
policies applicable to leased University employees. The ESA shall recognize that
the compensation of the Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs,
11
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
who also shall serve as President of the Foundation, must be approved by the
University Board of Trustees upon the recommendation of the University
President, as required by the University bylaws. The ESA shall also provide that
the Foundation President and the respective Chancellor shall agree on the salary
of the Vice Chancellor for Development.
b. The Foundation will have the authority to hire employees of the
Foundation and otherwise develop its own human resource infrastructure and
compensation policies to accomplish the mission of the Foundation.
c. The Foundation Board shall set compensation standards, including salary ranges
and fringe benefits, for any development and alumni professionals or other staff
hired as employees of the Foundation.
d. The Foundation shall maintain art office that will serve as the legal address of the
Foundation and the place where Foundation records will be held. The Foundation
shall be responsible for all costs associated with this office, including but not
limited to the cost of personnel, office space, parking, computers and other office
equipment, information technology services, and telephone services. As of the
date of this Agreement, the Foundation office space, located at 600 Henley Street,
Suite #100, is leased from the University. The Foundation is not obligated to
lease space from the University.
e. The Foundation shall have its own legal counsel and shall be responsible for all
costs for Foundation legal services.
f. The Foundation shall establish record retention, operating, finance, and human
resource policies and maintain copies of plans, budgets, and other records
developed in connection with the performance of its obligations according to
those policies.
12
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
g. The Foundation shall establish procurement policies and submit such policies to
the President of the University for written approval. The procurement policies
shall include the prohibition against using the Foundation to avoid or circumvent
University procurement policies. The procurement policies shall be filed with the
State Comptroller of the Treasury. The Foundation shall provide access to data
and records to the appropriate University officials in accordance with applicable
laws, Foundation policies and guidelines, and University policies and guidelines.
The Foundation shall provide the University with its annual report and other
infonnation that may be publicly released. The Foundation's financial statements
will be treated as a component unit of the University's audited financial
statements in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(GAAP) and thereby subject to all GAAP reporting requirements. The
Foundation will strive for transparency and strong internal controls.
h. The Foundation will abide by the statutory provisions over real property provided
in TCA 4-15-102 and include approval by the State Building Commission of any
acquisition of or improvements to real property for which the intent exists to
transfer ownership to the University. The University shall obtain approval of the
State Building Commission for any improvement to University real property
using Foundation funds. The University shall report to the State Building
Commission prior to acting on any planned acquisitions of or improvements to
real property. The University shall obtain approval from the State Building
Commission prior to acceptance of any real property gift/conveyance by the
Foundation, if the Foundation anticipates the University will contribute to the
property's upkeep, payment of debt, or other financial obligation or use.
I. The Foundation shall establish and enforce policies to protect the confidentiality
of donors and alumni and their records to the fullest extent allowable under the
laws of the State of Tennessee.
13
AFFILIA nON AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
J. The Foundation shall establish, adhere to, and periodically assess its gift
management and acceptance policies.
k. Under no circumstance shall any of the net earnings or assets of the Foundation
inure to or be distributed to the benefit of its Board of Directors, officers, or other
private persons except that the Foundation shall be authorized and empowered to
pay reasonable compensation for services rendered and make payments and
distributions in furtherance of the overall purpose of the Foundation.
ARTICLE III
UNIVERSITY COMMITMENT TO THE FOUNDATION
The University supports the growth of the Foundation to maximize private gift support to the
University. In consideration of the services provided by the Foundation to the University, the
University shall provide the following in support of the Foundation:
1. University Commitment
a. The University recognizes the need to increase its private gift fundraising and
alumni outreach and encourages the growth of development and alumni staff and
operations by using all revenue sources available and as agreed upon in writing
between the President ofthe Foundation and the President of the University and
approved by the Foundation Board of Directors.
b. The President of the University, as well as the campus chancellors, academic
deans, and other key university personnel shall commit to supporting private gift
fundraising and alumni outreach including, but not limited to:
I. communicating university and unit priorities and long
range plans to the Foundation;
ll. participating in solicitations of major gift prospects,
14
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
Ill. communicating development and alumni goal activities to
their assigned unit professionals;
IV. participating in search committees for new development
and alumni professionals for their unit; and
v. participating in joint performance reviews of their assigned
development and alumni professionals.
vi. participating in key alumni programs/events.
c. The University will maintain policies and controls for the use of gift funds
transferred from the Foundation to the University in accordance with donor
restrictions.
d. To the extent allowed by applicable law, regulations, and policies, the University
will provide both Foundation and leased University employees with identification
cards for access to the following University privileges or benefits at the same cost
as they are available to University employees: parking, athletic ticket benefits
and events, libraries, and recreation and fitness programs and facilities.
2. Compensation for Services by the Foundation. In consideration of the Foundation's
services described in this Agreement, the University will provide the following
compensation to the Foundation:
a. Direct Support. The University will make payments to the Foundation in the
amounts shown as University Direct Support in the Projected Foundation Budget
set forth in Appendix A (which also includes other revenue sources consistent
with those identified by the Association of Governing Boards and listed in
Appendix B). The University will remit the University Direct Support payments
to the Foundation no later than the tenth (lOth) day of each month.
The University commits to continuing to make the University Direct Support
payments outlined in the agreed upon Projected Foundation Budget set forth in
15
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Appendix A, subject to the University's right under Article VII to terminate this
Agreement at the end of any fiscal year if sufficient funds are not available to
carry out the University's obligations under the Agreement. Changes to the
University Direct Support payments will be reviewed every two years and must
be approved by the Advisory Foundation Committee prior to submission for
approval by the Foundation Board of Directors and the University Board of
Trustees. Predictable revenue sources to support development budgets can help
minimize the distraction and loss of focus towards securing private gifts for the
benefit of the University.
Notwithstanding the above provision for review of the University Direct Support
payments every two years, the Projected Foundation Budget set forth in Appendix
A may be amended at any time by agreement of the parties in accordance with the
provisions of Article VII, Section 3.
b. Endowment Assessment. Except when circumstances require or warrant separate
investment, University endowment funds and Foundation endowment funds are
co-mingled and invested in the Consolidated Investment Pool. An administrative
fee is assessed on the Consolidated Investment Pool for accounting and
development services. In consideration of the Foundation's services under this
Agreement, the University will pay the Foundation the net administrative fee (net
of direct University investment expenses) assessed on the University and
Foundation funds invested in the Consolidated Investment Pool. The
administrative fee as of the date of execution of this Agreement is 100 basis
points of the previous fiscal year-end market value of the Consolidated
Investment Pool. The Endowment Assessment amounts shown in the Projected
Foundation Budget set forth in Appendix A represent projections of the amount of
the total administrative fee assessed on the Consolidated Investment Pool.
c. In-Kind Support.
16
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
I. The University will provide appropriate offices in University buildings for
all development and alumni staff, whether they are leased University
employees or employees of the Foundation, and will also provide
furniture, office supplies, computers and other necessary office equipment,
information technology services, telephone services (but not including
cellular phones, personal digital assistants, or similar mobile devices),
utilities, and clerical staff as necessary and appropriate.
11. The University will be responsible to provide and maintain the alumni
donor data base (ANDI). This includes licensing for data base and related
software and hardware, upgrades, electronic screening, imaging software
and IT development and report writing. In addition the University shall be
responsible for planning a budget, and periodically evaluating new or
improved data bases or social networking, constituency management
systems, or other such hardware or software systems as necessary for the
Foundation to meet the University's needs. If future circumstances
require that the Foundation assume responsibility for the alumni donor
system, licenses and infrastructure, this Agreement will be amended in
accordance with the provisions of Article VII with consideration of any
necessary revision of the agreed upon Projected Foundation Budget set out
in Appendix A.
3. Confidential Records. The University acknowledges that under Tennessee Code
Annotated 49-7-140, personally identifiable records and information concerning gifts
received by both the University and the Foundation are protected against disclosure.
ARTICLE IV
ENSURING UNIVERSITY COORDINATION AND TRANSPARENCY
1. The Foundation will operate in a transparent manner to ensure there is public trust.
17
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
a. Minutes of open Foundation Board meetings will be available at its website.
b. The Foundation will create an annual report (electronic or written).
c. The Foundation will annually present a report to the University Board of Trustees.
d. The Foundation will file an IRS 990 report and meet all applicable requirements.
e. All full board meetings of the Foundation will be open to the public except for
executive sessions that shall include but not be limited to the following matters:
litigation; audits or investigations; human resource issues; gift acceptance
deliberations; board training; governance; donor strategy sessions; and security
measures.
2. The Foundation Board of Directors shall maintain an audit committee as a standing
committee of the Board.
3. The Foundation shall engage an independent certified public accounting firm annually to
conduct an audit of the Foundation's financial and operational records and shall provide
the University and the Comptroller of the Treasury with a copy of the annual audited
financial statements (including management letters). The Foundation shall cQordinate its
annual audit to allow for the results to be included in the University's annual report. In
addition, the Foundation shall provide such other reports, schedules, and records as may
be reasonably requested by the University. All annual reports and all books of accounts
and financial records (including revenues and expenditures) of the Foundation shall be
subject to audit by the Comptroller of the Treasury or his designee.
4. The management ofthe Foundation will perform regular, documented assessments of the
Foundation's risk offraud, waste, and abuse. The management of the Foundation will
establish and implement a system of internal controls that adequately mitigates those
risks and ensures compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Management of
the Foundation will submit the risk assessment and the documented mitigating controls to
the audit committee for review and approval.
5. Pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 49-7-107(c), the Foundation has adopted a code
of ethics and shall maintain such a code at all times. The code of ethics shall require full
18
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 20 I 0
disclosure of all conflicts and potential conflicts of interest, the definition of which shall
be consistent with Tennessee Code Annotated § 12-4-101, that any member of the
Foundation Board of Directors may have in his or her role as a member of the Foundation
Board of Directors. The code shall also include provisions prohibiting any director,
officer, or staff member of the Foundation from accepting or giving any gift or gratuity
that is offered, or reasonably appears to be offered, because of the individual's position
with the Foundation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, the
Foundation Board of Directors may remove any appointed member for a material
violation of the code of ethics in accordance with the provisions of Tennessee Code
Annotated § 49-7-107(d).
6. Upon finding that a real estate development, entrepreneurial venture, or other revenue
producing activity the Foundation proposes to undertake is not in the best interest ofthe
University, the President of the University shall have power to veto the proposed activity.
7. The Foundation shall not pay any compensation, directly or indirectly, to the President of
the University or any other University employee; provided, however, that this provision
shall not be construed to prohibit the Foundation's lease of University development and
alumni employees pursuant to a duly authorized and executed Employee Services
Agreement; nor shall this provision be construed to prohibit the transfer of funds from the
Foundation to the University for professorships, chairs, and similar programmatic
support.
8. All Foundation disbursements on behalf of the University will be reasonable business
expenses that support the University, are consistent with donor intent, and do not conflict
with applicable law, regulations and policies. Foundation disbursements shall be subject
to University review and audit by the Comptroller of the Treasury or internal auditor of
the University.
9. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to permit the purchase of goods and
services on behalf of any University unit with the expectation of reimbursement from that
unit. Goods and services may be purchased by the Foundation as a gift for the University
subject to the normal review and approval for gift acceptance. However, neither the
19
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
University nor the Foundation sha1l use the Foundation as a means to procure goods and
services in circumvention of University purchasing policies.
ARTICLE V
FOUNDATION'S USE OF UNIVERSITY NAME, SEAL AND LOGO
I. Consistent with its exclusive purpose to support the educational, research, and public
service missions of the University, the Foundation is granted permission to use the
University's name, nicknames, and logos for the duration of this Agreement in
furtherance of the Foundation's purpose. The President of the University reserves the
right to object to any particular use by the Foundation, and in the event of such an
objection, the Foundation shall cease and desist the use and cooperate with the University
to achieve an acceptable use.
2. Upon prior written approval by the President of the University, the Foundation may
authorize others to use the University's name, nicknames, and logos as long as the use is
in furtherance of the Foundation's purpose and is for a defined period of time not
exceeding the term of this Agreement. The University reserves the right to object to any
particular use by the third party, and in the event of such objection, the Foundation shall
cause the third party to cease and desist the use and cooperate with the University to
achieve an acceptable use.
3. All correspondence, solicitations, activities and advertisements concerning the
Foundation shall be clearly discernible as being from the Foundation and not the
University.
ARTICLE VI
MISCELLANEOUS TERMS
I. Notices. Any notice, request, demand, or other communication permitted to be given
hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be duly given when personally
20
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
delivered to an officer of the Foundation or the University, as the case may be, or when
deposited in the United States mails, by certified or registered mail, return receipt
requested, postage prepaid, at the respective addressees of the Foundation and the
University as shown below, or to such other address as either party shall designate by
written notice to the other:
As to the University: President
The University of Tennessee
800 Andy Holt Tower
Knoxville, Tennessee 37996
With a copy to: General Counsel and Secretary
The University of Tennessee
719 Andy Holt Tower
Knoxville, Tennessee 37996
As to the Foundation: TBD
With a copy to: TBD
2. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be assigned,
transferred, or conveyed in whole or in part.
3. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be construed, interpreted, and the rights and
duties ofthe parties determined in accordance with the laws of the State of Tennessee.
ARTICLE VII
TERM, TERMINATION, AND AMENDMENT
OF THE AGREEMENT
21
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
1. The initial term of this Agreement shall be for a period beginning on the date hereof and
ending on June 30, 2015, and shall continue thereafter from year to year; provided that as
required by state law, the University may terminate this Agreement at the end of any
fiscal year if sufficient funds are not available to carry out the University's obligations
under the Agreement. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time for any
reason upon one hundred eighty (180) days prior written notice to the other party.
Notwithstanding the foregoing notice provision, either party may terminate this
Agreement in the event the other party defaults in the performance of its obligations and
fails to cure the default within sixty (60) days after receiving written notice of the
default..
2. In the event of termination of this Agreement:
a. In the absence of any further agreement between the parties, the relationship
between the parties will be governed by their prior Memorandum of Agreement
dated December 1, 2005.
b. The parties anticipate, but recognize that there is no obligation, that the University
will absorb the Foundation's development staff.
3. It is anticipated that periodic amendments will have to be made to this Agreement, and
both parties agree to the process outlined below:
a. Budget Amendments. The Projected Foundation Budget set forth in Appendix A
may be amended from time to time to reflect changes (increases or decreases) in
the University's investment into its alumni and development programs as deemed
necessary by the parties. Examples may include requesting additional
development and alumni services from the Foundation or jointly funding new
development and alumni staff members. Budget amendments under $250,000
shall be executed by the University President, after review and approval by the
University Chief Financial Officer, and by the Foundation President and reported
22
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
annually to the University Board of Trustees, the Foundation Board of Directors,
and the Comptroller of the State of Tennessee. Budget amendments of $250,000
or more shall be processed in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.b.
below concerning all other amendments to this Agreement.
b. All Other Amendments.
I. The Board of Directors of the Foundation or the President of the
University may in writing request an amendment of the Agreement. The
parties will negotiate the requested amendment and develop appropriate
language.
11. In a joint letter to the Comptroller of the State of Tennessee, both parties
will articulate the reason for the proposed amendment and seek approval
from the Comptroller of the State of Tennessee.
lll. Once the Comptroller has approved the amendment, it will be submitted to
the University Board of Trustees and the Foundation Board of Directors
for approval. After approval by the two boards, and after any required
state government reviews and/or approvals, the amendment will be
executed by duly authorized representatives of the parties.
ARTICLE VIII
DISSOLUTION OF FOUNDATION
In the event of permanent dissolution and liquidation of the Foundation, the Foundation Board of
Directors shall cause the assets of the Foundation to be applied and distributed in accordance
with its non-profit Charter, including distributions to the University or its successor. The
University will honor to the extent possible any donor restrictions on assets held by the
Foundation, including, but not limited to, retaining endowment funds as permanent endowments
23
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
for the purposes specified by the donor. If a donor agreement limits or precludes any portion of
the Foundation's assets from matriculating to the University, the Foundation Board of Directors
shall make all available effort to effectuate the transfer of such assets to the University. Prior to
the permanent dissolution or liquidation of the Foundation, a complete accounting of the
Foundation will be attested to by the Foundation's independent accounting firm.
ARTICLE IX
EFFECT OF AGREEMENT
1. This Agreement shall not be effective until approved by the University Board of Trustees
and the Foundation Board of Directors and thereafter executed by their respective
authorized officers.
2. This Agreement shall supersede all previous agreements between the University and the
Foundation.
3. A waiver by either party of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement in any
instance shall notbe deemed or construed to be a waiver of such term or condition for the
future, or any subsequent breach thereofl or of any other term and condition of this
Agreement.
4. If any provisions ofthis Agreement shall, for any reasons, be held violation of any
applicable law, and so much of said Agreement is held to be unenforceable, then the
invalidity of such specific provision shall not be held to invalidate any other provision,
which shall remain in full force and effect.
5. The headings of the several Sections herein are inserted for convenience of reference
only and are not intended to be a part of or to affect the meaning or interpretation of this
Agreement.
24
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21, 2010
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly
authorized officers as the day and date first above written.
Vice Chair, Board of Trustees Chair, Board of Directors
The University of Tennessee The University of Tennessee Foundation, Inc.
President Chief Executive
The University of Tennessee The University of Tennessee Foundation, Inc.
25
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Appendix A
Projected Foundation Budget
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Revenues:
Development
University Direct Support $ 12,265,249 $ 12,265,249 $ 12,265,249 $ 12,265,249 $ 12,265,249
Endowment Assessment 5,620,000 5,988,600 6,398,258 6,850,206 7,345,712
UTF Interest Earnings 700,000 1,400,000 2,172,000 3,667,000 3,895,000
UTF Annual Unrestricted Gifts 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 250,000
Total Development Revenues $ 18,685,249 $ 19,803,849 $ 21,035,507 $ 23,032,455 $ 23,755,961
Alumni Affairs
University Direct Support $ 4,197,507 $ 4,197,507 $ 4,197,507 $ 4,197,507 $ 4,197,507
Marketing 100,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
Endowment Income 277,000 277,000 277,000 277,000 277,000
Fund for the Future 650,000 919,000 1,155,000 1,393,000 1,638,000
Total Alumni Affairs Revenues $ 5,224,507 $ 5,493,507 $ 5,779,507 $ 6,067,507 $ 6,362,507
Total Development and Alumni Affairs Revenues $ 23,909,756 $ 25,297,356 $ 26,815,014 $ 29,099,962 $ 30,118,468
Expenditures
Development
Salaries and Benefits $ 11,999,917 $ 12,299,915 $ 12,607,413 $ 12,922,598 $ 13,245,663
Operating 3,262,150 3,343,704 3,427,296 3,512,979 3,600,803
Additional Staffing
Salaries and Benefits 1,200,000 2,430,000 3,690,750 4,983,019 6,307,594
26
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Operating Costs 150,000 303,750 461,344 622,877 788,449
Total Development Expenditures $ 16,612,067 $ 18,377.369 $ 20,186,803 $ 22,041,473 $ 23,942,510
Alumni Affairs
Salaries and Benefits $ 2,959,897 $ 3,033,894 $ 3,109,741 $ 3,187,485 $ 3,267,172
Operating 2,027,548 2,095,112 2,165,515 2,238,777 2,314,922
Additional Staffing
Salaries and Benefits 120,000 243,000 369,075 498,302 630,759
Operating Costs 10,000 20,250 30,756 41,525 52,563
Total Alumni Affairs Expenditures $ 5,117,445 $ 5,392,256 $ 5,675,087 $ 5,966,089 $ 6,265,416
Total Development and Alumni Affairs Expenditures $ 21,729,512 $ 23,769,625 $ 25,861,890 $ 28,007,562 $ 30,207,926
Annual Difference $ 2,180,244 $ 1,527,731 $ 953,124 $ 1,092,400 $ 89,458)
Number of Development Officers 74 86 98 110 122 134
Average Gift Totals $171 M $ 189M $207 M $ 225M $243M $261 M
27
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Appendix B
Association of Governing Boards
Recommended Guidelines for Revenue Sources
College and university respondents in the survey reported using a total of
20 sources of revenue to fund their fund-raising budgets.
Here are the sources and the number of foundations (institutions) that reported using each:
Unrestricted gifts 28
Endowment management fees 25
Income on daily cash balances 19
Employees on institutional payroll 17
Administrative fees assessed on new gifts 12
Alumni funds 11
State and institutional funds budgeted for
fund-raising operations 7
Contract for services 6
In-kind from the institution 6
Academic unit charge backs 5
Endowment designated for fund-raising 3
Real estate sales 1
Real estate leases 1
Unrestricted endowment 1
Special events 1
Designated gifts 1
Endowment growth 1
Foundation reserves 1
Overhead added for specific projects 1
Entrepreneurial projects 1
Unstated 4
The five sources that appear to have the greatest capacity for providing significant increases in fund-
raising budgets are:
• Institutional support - a category that includes several sources: state and/or institutional
funds, contracted services, employees on institutional payroll, in-kind institutional
support (usually space and various services), and school, college, departmental or project
charge-backs;
o Unrestricted gifts;
o Endowment management fees;
o Income on daily cash balances; and
o Fees assessed on gifts.
28
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Appendix C
Joint Management Responsibilities
with respect to
Vice Chancellors for Development
As provided in Article 1, Section 4, the Foundation President and the campus Chancellors will
jointly manage the Vice Chancellors for Development. It is the responsibility of the Foundation
President to initiate the goal setting, annual performance reviews, and compensation adjustments
jointly with the campus Chancellors as outlined below. The procedure for other joint
management responsibilities is also outlined below.
Procedure for Goal Setting of Vice Chancellors:
1. The Foundation President will establish uniform performance metrics (visits,
solicitations, dollars raised, etc.) for all Vice Chancellors.
2. The Foundation President and Chancellor will agree upon campaign goals and annual
goals in non-campaign years.
3. The Foundation President and Chancellor may agree to other goals and include them in
the annual performance letter such as critical success factors.
Procedure for Annual Performance Reviews of Vice Chancellors:
1. The Foundation President and Chancellor will review the Vice Chancellor's development
and alumni related performance for the past year.
2. The Foundation President will then draft the performance review letter with input from
the Chancellor.
3. This letter will be signed by both the Foundation President and the Chancellor and
delivered to the Vice Chancellor in advance of a joint meeting with the Vice Chancellor.
Procedure for Compensation Increases for Vice Chancellors:
1. Upon completion of the annual performance review process, the Foundation President
will send any proposed increase in the Vice Chancellor's compensation to the Chancellor
for review.
2. The Foundation President and Chancellor will meet to discuss the Vice Chancellor's
compensation and agree upon any increase.
29
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
Procedure for Recruiting and Selecting Vice Chancellors:
The Foundation President will coordinate the recruiting and search for all new Vice Chancellors,
including advertising the position, coordinating background checks, and scheduling interviews.
I. The Foundation President and Chancellor shall agree upon a final candidate pool to
interview.
2. The Foundation President and Chancellor will agree upon the appointment and
compensation of the new Vice Chancellor.
Procedure for Terminating Vice Chancellors:
A decision to terminate the Vice Chancellor shall be made jointly by the Foundation President
and the Chancellor in compliance with applicable human resources policies and procedures as
articulated in the Employee Services Agreement and the Foundation's human resources
handbook.
30
AFFILIATION AND SERVICES AGREEMENT - September 21,2010
AppendixD
Foundation's Duty to Maintain Insurance
In accordance with the provisions of Article I of this Agreement, the Foundation shall
maintain the following insurance coverage at all times and shall provide a Certificate of
Insurance evidencing compliance with these requirements to the University's Chief
Financial Officer:
Commercial General Liability Insurance Each Occurrence $1,000,000
Damage to Rented Premises 100,000
Med Exp (anyone person) 5,000
Personal & Adv Injury 1,000,000
General Aggregate 2,000,000
Products - Comp/Op Agg 2,000,000
ExcessIU mbrella Liability Aggregate 10,000,000
Directors & Officers 5,000,000
EPLI 5,000,000
31
UT Foundation, Inc.
Organizational Chart
President, University of UT Foundation, Inc.
Board of Directors
Tennessee
I
I
President, UTFI
Vice President for Development & Alumni Affairs
Chancellor Vice Chancellor
-
UTK UTK
-
Chancellor Vice Chancellor
- -
UTHSC UTHSC
- Chancellor
UTC
Vice Chancellor
UTC
-
- Chancellor Vice Chancellor -
UTM UTM
'-----
Chancellor Vice Chancellor 1-
Agriculture Agriculture
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 22, 2010
COMMITTEE: Advancement and Public Affairs
CAMPUS/UNIT: All
ITEM: Affiliation and Services Agreement with UT Foundation.
Inc.
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Charles E. Wharton, Chair, Foundations Study Committee
The Affiliation and Services Agreement recommended by the Foundations Study
Committee is included as an attachment to the Report and Recommendations of the
Foundations Study Committee. A few key provisions are highlighted below, but
Trustees are urged to review the entire Agreement carefully.
Subject to enactment of enabling legislation, the Agreement designates UT Foundation,
Inc. (UTF) "to receive all private gifts for support of the University ... except any gift for
which the donor has specifically directed in writing that the gift be received and held by
the University" (page 3).
The Agreement provides for both development and alumni services for the University to
be provided by UTF. As compensation for these services, the University will provide
UTF with the Direct Support, Endowment Assessment, and In-Kind Support described
on pages 15-17 of the Agreement and shown in the Projected Foundation Budget on
pages 26-27.
The Agreement provides for UTF to perform development and alumni services for the
University by leasing certain development and alumni employees from the University,
subject to enactment of enabling legislation (pages 11-12 of the Agreement). The
leasing of employees would be accomplished through an Employee Services
Agreement, which would be presented to the Board or the Executive and Compensation
Committee for approval prior to execution.
The Agreement provides for the Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs to
serve as president and chief executive officer of UTF and to report directly to both the
University President and the Foundation Board of Directors (pages 5-6). The
Agreement also provides for the campus Vice Chancellors for Development to report
directly to both the campus Chancellors and the Foundation President (Vice President
for Development and Alumni Affairs) (page 3 and Appendix C).
MOTION:
Move approval of the Affiliation and Services Agreement with UT Foundation, Inc.
as presented in the meeting materials and that:
1. the President be authorized to execute the Affiliation and Services
Agreement with UT Foundation, Inc. after enactment of required enabling
legislation and after all required or appropriate state government reviews
and approvals;
2. the President, after consulting with the Chief Financial Officer and the
General Counsel, be authorized to approve any revisions to the Affiliation
and Services Agreement necessary to satisfy state government reviews
and approvals; and
3. the administration be authorized to negotiate an Employee Services
Agreement with UT Foundation, Inc. for the lease of certain development
and alumni employees and that the President be authorized to execute the
Employee Services Agreement after enactment of required enabling
legislation, after approval by the Board of Trustees or the Executive and
Compensation Committee, and after all required or appropriate state
government reviews and approvals.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
CAMPUS/UNIT: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
ITEM: Proposal for a Program of Study Leading to the Degree of
Ph.D. in Energy Science and Engineering
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success
In compliance with the Complete College Tennessee Act of 2010, UT Knoxville has
developed a new curriculum and degree program in Energy Science and Engineering
(ESE). This interdisciplinary program is being developed jointly between UT Knoxville and
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the proposed degree leverages energy-
related capabilities at both institutions. Most of the graduate students in the ESE program
will perform research for their dissertations at ORNL in groups focused on the energy
challenges of our time; approximately twenty-five percent of the ESE students will work in
research groups on the UT Knoxville campus. All students will take courses at UT
Knoxville, most of which already exist in various departments in the six tracks of energy-
related research. Some new courses are proposed, primarily to form a core curriculum to
be taken by all students in the degree program. It is anticipated that 20 to 40 new Ph.D.
students will be recruited and enrolled each year. Faculty will be recruited on a part-time
basis from existing researchers at ORNL and faculty at UT Knoxville; no new faculty lines
are being proposed.
The Energy Science and Engineering program will be housed in the Center for
Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education (CIRE). The center is a joint entity of
UT Knoxville and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and reports administratively to the
Chancellor of UT Knoxville.
This proposal has gone through all campus and system-level reviews and is presented
with the full support of Chancellor Cheek and Interim President Simek. Upon approval by
the Board of Trustees, the ESE proposal will be submitted to THEC for approval in
November.
MOTION:
Move approval of the proposal to offer the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Energy
Science and Engineering at The University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
ESE PROPOSAL
I. Proposal for the Initiation of a Doctor of Philosophy of Energy Science and
Engineering Program
Submitted by
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education
A NEW PROGRAM LEADING TO THE DEGREE OF:
Doctor of Philosophy Energy Science and Engineering
Title of degree as on diploma Title of major
ESE
CIP/THEC Code Formal degree abbreviation
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree designation on student's transcript
August 2011
Proposed starting date
1
ESE PROPOSAL
II. ABSTRACT
Institution: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Division/Department: Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education
Program leading to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Energy Science and Engineering
Proposed startup date: August 2011
Number of anticipated students: 20 - 40 new doctoral students recruited and enrolled per year
Total credit hours required for degree: 72
New courses proposed:
ESE 502 Registration For Use of Facilities (1-15)
Required for the student not otherwise registered during any semester when student uses
university facilities and/or faculty time before degree is completed.
Grading Restriction: Satisfactory/No Credit grading only.
Repeatability: May be repeated.
Credit Restriction: May not be used toward degree requirements.
Registration Restriction: Minimum student level - graduate.
ESE 511 Introduction to Energy Science and Technology I (3) Topics include: Energy
basics, history of energy and society, current and future supply and demand, political and
environmental aspects of energy production, energy technologies (fossil fuels, biomass,
nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, solar, wind, geothermal), energy conversion, storage,
transportation, and distribution, energy efficiency, and innovation.
ESE 512 Introduction to Energy Science and Technology II (3) Topics include: Energy
basics, history of energy and society, current and future supply and demand, political and
environmental aspects of energy production, energy technologies (fossil fuels, biomass,
nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, solar, wind, geothermal), energy conversion, storage,
transportation, and distribution, energy efficiency, and innovation.
ESE 593 Independent Study (1-3)
Repeatability: May be repeated. Maximum 9 hours.
Credit Restriction: Only 6 hours may be applied toward degree requirements.
ESE 599 Seminar (1)
Grading Restriction: Satisfactory/No Credit grading only.
Repeatability: May be repeated. Maximum 15 hours.
Credit Restriction: Only 3 hours may be applied toward degree requirements.
2
ESE PROPOSAL
ESE 600 Doctoral Research and Dissertation (3-15)
Grading Restriction: PINP grading only.
Repeatability: May be repeated.
ESE 597 Special Topics (1-3)
Repeatability: May be repeated. Maximum 9 hours.
ESE 697 Special Topics (1-3)
Repeatability: May be repeated. Maximum 9 hours.
Rationale: A new interdisciplinary doctoral degree in Energy Science and Engineering (ESE)
is proposed, to educate students in energy-related fields that are increasing in importance to
the state and the country. Faculty formed from current researchers at the University of
Tennessee Knoxville and Oak Ridge National Laboratory provide research opportunities in
various fields relating to the scientific and engineering challenges in energy supply and
usage, including impacts on the environment and climate. A few new courses are proposed at
the 500 level and one at the 600 level, while existing 500 and 600 courses in various
departments are utilized to provide the course component of the PhD, different depending on
the specific area of specialization of the ESE student. This is a program that was initiated by
Governor Bredesen and funded by the State Legislature. This degree will be administered by
the newly created Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education (CIRE),
which is has been established by University of Tennessee, Knoxville and Oak Ridge National
Laboratory.
3
ESE PROPOSAL
Ill. Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education (eIRE)
In January 2010 the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee passed legislation
authorizing The University of Tennessee to establish an academic unit of The University of
Tennessee, Knoxville (UTK) for interdisciplinary research and graduate education in
collaboration with Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). This academic unit, known as
the Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education (CIRE), will bring together
extensive and complementary resources at UTK and ORNL to increase science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) academic and research activities of national
significance focused on energy-related science and engineering. CIRE will enhance
collaborations between UTK and ORNL, increase the number of STEM graduate students,
advance multi-disciplinary research in energy-related science and engineering, and accelerate
the translation of research results into beneficial technologies.
CIRE has developed and proposes to offer one of the first interdisciplinary PhD programs in
energy science and engineering. This new degree will provide breadth while preserving the
depth and rigor of a PhD program. Topical areas have been chosen to align with unique
ORNL capabilities and programs. The Energy Science and Engineering (ESE) PhD will be
complemented by a concentration in ESE for students who prefer pursuing doctoral studies
through existing programs. Both the ESE degree and concentration will include an emphasis
on entrepreneurship and innovation, including opportunities for interested students to
develop and implement business plans with the UTK business school.
CIRE is led by a Director appointed jointly by the UTK Chancellor and the ORNL
Laboratory Director. Lee Riedinger, Professor of Physics, was appointed to this position
effective September 1, 2010. A Board of Directors composed of senior officials at UTK and
ORNL oversees the operation of CIRE. An external advisory board will provide independent
advice and strengthen relationships with industry and other universities. CIRE faculty will
be drawn from UTK and ORNL, with common eligibility criteria and appointment processes.
CIRE faculty will mentor graduate students, develop and teach courses, develop and submit
research and other funding proposals, and serve on CIRE committees including Curriculum,
Graduate Coordinating, and Credentials committees.
CIRE graduate students will join interdisciplinary research teams at ORNL that will expose
them to large-scale, problem-oriented research and development, foster their ability to work
across disciplinary boundaries, encourage them to approach research problems from new
directions, and strengthen their ability to work in teams. Students will be encouraged to
develop their research in the context of potential solutions to important national problems,
and will be given the tools and support to follow an entrepreneurial path consistent with their
interests.
4
ESE PROPOSAL
CIRE is being initiated with startup funds from the State of Tennessee. Competitively
selected students will be supported jointly by UTK and ORNL, with UTK supporting
students primarily during coursework, and ORNL supporting students during research.
Additional research support and other funding will be actively sought from federal and
industry sponsors. Financial projections demonstrate sustainability for at least five years with
reasonable levels of additional external funding required thereafter.
The Case for CIRE
A new model for graduate education: CIRE will combine the educational resources of a
comprehensive research university and the research capabilities of a major national
laboratory to provide expanded opportunities for graduate students in energy-related sciences
and engineering, fostering multidisciplinary research, large-scale problem-oriented research
projects, and innovation and entrepreneurship.
Expanding the graduate campus: CIRE will expand the graduate research campus ofUTK to
include ORNL, greatly increasing research opportunities and capacity.
Leveraging research capabilities: CIRE will leverage ORNL staff, facilities, and research
programs to increase substantially the number of mentors and graduate students while
contributing to ORNL research programs.
A Vision for the Center
Multidisciplinary: CIRE will offer graduate students opportunities to engage in
multidisciplinary research in energy-related sciences and engineering, while preserving the
rigor and depth of a PhD program.
Entrepreneurial: CIRE will incorporate entrepreneurial experiences, including partnership
opportunities with the UTK business school in developing and implementing business plans
to accelerate the deployment of new technologies.
Transformational: CIRE will be transformational in engaging graduate students in
multidisciplinary projects, large-scale problem-oriented research programs, and science-to-
applications research opportunities, enabling scientific breakthroughs and innovative
solutions to energy-related challenges.
Mission
By combining the resources of a comprehensive research university and a major national
laboratory, CIRE will provide expanded opportunities for graduate students in energy-related
sciences and engineering, fostering scholarship and innovation, advancing multidisciplinary
research, and accelerating development and deployment of new technologies.
5
ESE PROPOSAL
IV. PhD program
A graduate program is proposed to be offered leading to the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
degree in Energy Science and Engineering (ESE). This interdisciplinary degree is a
collaborative effort supported by selected faculty in the College of Arts and Sciences, the
College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, and the College of Engineering, in
addition to research staff of Oak Ridge National Laboratory. These research and educational
leaders are appointed as faculty members of the Center for Interdisciplinary Research and
Graduate Education (CIRE). Members of the CIRE faculty determine the curriculum and
serve as the primary resource for the teaching, research, and mentoring of the students
admitted to the program. The CIRE Graduate Education Committee makes decisions on
admissions, transfer, evaluation, and continuation of graduate students in the program.
Admission Requirements:
In order to be admitted to the PhD program in Energy Science and Engineering, student
applicants must fulfill the general admission criteria for the Graduate School ofthe
University of Tennessee Knoxville. In addition, the student must have a Bachelor of Science
degree in either engineering or a scientific field (physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics,
computational science, etc.), or the equivalent. Students with other undergraduate degrees
may also be admitted on a case-by-case basis by the CIRE Graduate Coordinating
Committee. Dependent on the student's background, additional coursework may be required
to satisfy co- and prerequisites.
A minimum of72 hours is required beyond the bachelor's degree, exclusive of credit for an
MS thesis, and completion of the core requirements, as outlined in the section on Course
Requirements. Of this number, a minimum of24 and up to 36 hours of600 Doctoral
Research and Dissertation and six hours of 600-level coursework at UTK will be required.
No later than one year after entering the program, each student must take a qualifying
examination. A student must pass the qualifying examination to proceed in the PhD program.
No later than the end of the second year following entrance into the PhD program, each
student must take and pass a comprehensive examination that includes presentation and
approval of the proposed dissertation research. After passing the comprehensive exam, the
student should submit the Admission to Candidacy Application to the Graduate School.
Admission to candidacy indicates that the student has demonstrated the ability to do
acceptable work in the area of study and has made satisfactory progress toward the degree.
This action usually connotes that all prerequisites to admission have been completed and the
program of study/research has been approved (see details in a later section).
After completion of the dissertation, prior to graduation, each student must pass a dissertation
defense examination administered by the student's doctoral committee.
6
ESE PROPOSAL
Course Requirements
Of the 72 hours required for the program, 36 hours of coursework is required beyond the BS
degree. Ofthese, the following 30 hours of coursework or their equivalent must be
completed at a minimum, including the Core Curriculum, a Knowledge Breadth Curriculum,
a Knowledge Specialization Curriculum, and Seminar Series, as summarized below.
A. Core Curriculum (6 credits)
ESE 511 and ESE 512 Introduction to Energy Science and Technology (3,3 credits); (Lead
instructor plus guest lecturers): Topics include: energy basics; history of energy and society;
current and future supply and demand; political and environmental aspects of energy
production; energy technologies (fossil fuels, biomass, nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, solar,
wind, geothermal); energy conversion, storage, transportation, and distribution; energy
efficiency; and innovation.
B. Knowledge Breadth Curriculum (6 credits): select two courses from the threefollowing
areas
1. Political, social, legal, ethical and security issues related to energy (3-4 courses, each 3
credits)
2. Entrepreneurship, leadership, and management (3-4 courses, each 3 credits).
3. Environmental and climate sciences related to energy (3-4 courses, each 3 credits)
C. Knowledge Specialization Curriculum (15 credits)
Choose five courses from participating departments as defined in the CIRE Graduate Student
Handbook and listed in section VI of this document.
1. Nuclear energy
2. Bioenergy and biofuels
3. Renewable energy
4. Energy conversion and storage
5. Distributed energy and grid management
6. Environmental and climate sciences related to energy
D. ESE 599 Seminar (3 credits; 1 +1 +1)
Topical seminars in the focus areas ofCIRE.
Faculty Committee
Advisor/Major Professor
Each graduate student must have an advisor/major professor. This professor advises the
student about course selection, supervises the student's research, and facilitates
communication within the degree program and/or student's major department, to other
departments, and with the Graduate School relative to requirements. A temporary advisor
may be assigned to direct the entering student's work during the period in which the student
is becoming acquainted with the institutions and determining the focus of research interests.
Once the major professor is determined, the major professor and the student together select a
7
ESE PROPOSAL
doctoral committee. The student is expected to maintain close consultation with the major
professor and other members of the graduate committee with regard to progress in the
program.
Doctoral Committee
The major professor directs the student's dissertation research and chairs the doctoral
committee. The student and major professor identify a doctoral committee composed of at
least four faculty members holding the rank of assistant professor or above, three of whom,
including the chair, must be approved by the Graduate Council to direct doctoral research. At
least one member must be outside the CIRE faculty. Committee members should be chosen
to insure multidisciplinary breadth. The Center Director has oversight responsibility to
insure the multidisciplinary nature of the committee. A doctoral student, in collaboration
with the major professor, should begin to form the doctoral committee during the fIrst year of
study. Once formed, the doctoral committee, by request of the major professor, will meet
annually, at the minimum, with the student to insure timely progress toward the degree.
Admission to Candidacy
Admission to candidacy indicates that the student has demonstrated ability to do acceptable
graduate work and that satisfactory progress has been made toward the degree. This action
usually connotes that all prerequisites to admission have been completed and a program of
study has been approved.
A student may be admitted to candidacy for the doctoral degree after passing the
comprehensive examination and maintaining at least a B average in all graduate coursework.
Each student is responsible for fIling the Admission to Candidacy form, which lists all
graduate courses to be used for the degree, including courses taken at the University of
Tennessee or at other institutions prior to admission to the doctoral program. The Admission
to Candidacy form is signed by the doctoral committee.
Graduate Student Examinations
This section provides a description of the graduate student examination requirements for the
PhD degree program. Three examinations are required as part of the doctoral program:
qualifying examination, comprehensive examination, and defense of dissertation
examination.
Qualifying Examination
The qualifying examination is developed, administered, and graded by the faculty (or
designated subset of the faculty) of the PhD program under the coordination of the eIRE
Director and tests the student's general knowledge related to the course requirements. In
case of failure, the candidate may appeal to retake the examination through the eIRE
Graduate Education Committee within 30 days of notifIcation of the result. Ifthe appeal is
granted, the student must retake the examination at the next offering. The result of the
second examination is final.
8
ESE PROPOSAL
Comprehensive Examination
Timing. The Comprehensive Examination must be taken no later than the end of the second
year following entrance into the PhD program and prior to admission to candidacy. The
timing is late enough in a student's academic program to permit most of hislher graduate
course work to be covered on the examination, and early enough to permit modification of
the student's program based on the results of the exam.
Prerequisites for the exam. Two requirements must be satisfied before a student takes the
Comprehensive Examination.
1. A written Dissertation Proposal, approved by the major professor, must be submitted
to each member of the student's Doctoral Committee two weeks prior to the
examination.
2. Each member of the student's Doctoral committee must agree that the student is ready
to take the Comprehensive Exam. In order to satisfy each member of the committee
that he/she is ready for the exam, the student may be required to perform
satisfactorily on either written or oral tests as prescribed by the committee member.
The committee member will communicate to the maj or professor when they are
satisfied that the student is ready to take the Comprehensive Exam.
The Comprehensive Examination will consist of two parts:
1. A one-day to two-day open book written examination will be given at an agreed upon
date. This exam will be composed by the members of the Doctoral Committee at the
request of the student's major professor, and the exam will be administered by the
major professor.
2. Approximately three to six weeks after the written examination, the student will be
required to defend hislher dissertation research proposal to the committee. An oral
examination will be given. In addition, the student may be further examined in an
oral examination on subject matter similar to that covered on the written exam.
Once the Comprehensive Examination is passed, the student should file for and be admitted
to candidacy. At the discretion of the Doctoral Committee, supplemental reexaminations for
the Comprehensive Examination and/or proposed dissertation research may be required. In
case of failure, the candidate may not apply for reexamination until the following semester.
The result of the second examination is final.
Defense ofDissertation Examination
A doctoral candidate must pass an oral examination on the dissertation. The dissertation, in
the form approved by the major professor, must be distributed to the committee at least two
weeks before the examination. The examination must be scheduled through the Office of the
University Registrar at least one week prior to the examination and must be conducted in
university-approved facilities. The examination is announced publicly and is open to all
students and faculty members. The defense of dissertation will be administered by all
9
ESE PROPOSAL
members of the doctoral committee after completion of the dissertation and all course
requirements. This examination must be passed at least two weeks before the date of
submission and acceptance of the dissertation by Graduate Student Services. The major
professor must submit the results of the defense by the dissertation deadline.
V. Appointment of eIRE faculty
Eligibility
All ORNL research staff members and UTK Faculty who fulfill the following criteria are
eligible to apply for membership to the eIRE faculty.
• Their appointment will substantially benefit eIRE and eIRE's mission.
• They have a strong record of research and leadership accomplishments in eIRE's
mission areas.
• They are willing to commit the required resources (time, student support, expertise,
etc.) to the ESE program or other eIRE projects.
High professional standards will be applied in appointing eIRE faculty. Membership of the
eIRE faculty is time limited but renewable. The initial appointment is made for three years
and renewal appointments are made for five years.
Responsibilities of CIRE faculty
• They should be actively engaged in eIRE activities, which include mentoring,
recruiting, teaching, course development, and committee service.
• They should commit to supervising and supporting at least one graduate student at
any given time, ensuring timely completion of the PhD.
• They should provide descriptions of research opportunities, dissertation topics, and
shorter research projects available in their groups on an annual basis. eIRE will
provide a Doctoral Research Clearing House web site describing the research of all
eIRE faculty as well as a current list of research groups with doctoral research
opportunities.
eIRE faculty who are not fulfilling these requirements will in general not have their
appointment renewed, and can in severe cases be terminated as eIRE faculty prior to the end
of their term.
Academic titles of CIRE faculty
eIRE faculty with ORNL as their home institution will hold one of the following three UTK
titles of Joint Faculty: Joint Professor, Joint Associate Professor, or Joint Assistant Professor.
eIRE Faculty with UTK as their home institution will also hold an ORNL title (examples are
Research Associate, Senior Research Associate, etc.). The initial title is determined at the
time of the first appointment following the process for appointment of eIRE faculty
described below. eIRE faculty can request promotions at the time of renewal. Promotion of
eIRE faculty requires a vote by the eIRE faculty, recommendation of the eIRE Director, and
approval of the Provost. In cases where a faculty member has an appointment within eIRE
and within another degree program, the eIRE director will coordinate any change in title
10
ESE PROPOSAL
with the other degree program(s). The criteria for the use of the Joint Faculty titles within
eIRE are given below.
eIRE Joint Faculty Professors are expected to
1. hold the doctorate or other terminal degree of the discipline, or present equivalent
training and experience appropriate to the particular appointment,
2. be accomplished teachers or mentors of graduate students,
3. have achieved and then maintain a nationally recognized record in disciplinary
research, scholarship, and/or creative activity,
4. have achieved and then maintain a record of significant institutional, disciplinary,
and/or professional service,
5. serve as mentors to junior colleagues,
6. have normally served as an associate professor for at least five years,
7. have shown beyond doubt that they work well with colleagues, staff, and students in
performing their professional responsibilities.
eIRE Joint Faculty Associate Professors are expected to
1. hold a doctorate or other terminal degree of the discipline, or to present equivalent
training and experience as appropriate to the particular appointment,
2. be good teachers or mentors of graduate students.
3. have achieved and then maintain a recognized record in disciplinary research,
scholarship, and/or creative activity,
4. have achieved and then maintain a record of institutional, disciplinary, and/or
professional service,
5. have normally served as an assistant professor for at least five years,
6. have demonstrated that they work well with colleagues, staff, and students in
performing their professional responsibilities.
eIRE Joint Assistant Professors are expected to
1. hold a doctorate or other terminal degree of the discipline, or to present equivalent
training and experience as appropriate to the particular appointment,
2. show promise as teachers or mentors of graduate students,
3. show promise of developing a program in disciplinary research, scholarship, and/or
creative activity that is gaining external recognition,
4. have a developing record of institutional, disciplinary, and/or professional service,
5. show evidence that they work well with colleagues, staff, and students in performing
their professional responsibilities.
11
ESE PROPOSAL
eIRE faculty appointment process
Requests for initial and renewal appointment as CIRE faculty are submitted to CIRE's
Director.
ORNL applicants who do not currently have a base appointment within an existing
UTK degree-granting unit should submit their application through the division
director, who will then forward the application to the CIRE Director.
Faculty applicants whose base faculty appointment is with an existing UTK degree
granting unit should submit their application through the department head, who will
then forward the application to the CIRE Director.
All applications will be reviewed by the CIRE Faculty Credentials Committee. The
Credentials Committee will provide a briefwritten recommendation concerning the
decision of membership application and the proposed appointment level to the
Director.
If a positive recommendation is made by the Credentials Committee, the application
is brought to the CIRE faculty for discussion and recommendation, which will require
a simple majority of the votes with a quorum of at least half the faculty required. The
recommendation of the Credentials Committee and of the current faculty are
considered by the CIRE director in forming hislher recommendation, and all three, as
well as the appointment level, are forwarded to the Provost for approval by the
university.
The appointment request is required to contain the following elements:
A current curriculum vita describing all the professional accomplishments of
the applicant.
Full education history
Full employment history
Refereed publications
Invited and contributed talks
External research funding record
Teaching experience
Student supervision experience
Awards and recognition
A brief description (one page or less) of the reason( s) for the request and how
the applicant fulfills the eligibility criteria.
For the initial appointment a letter of nomination from a current CIRE faculty
member or a unit leader at UTK or ORNL.
The CIRE Director will be responsible for an annual evaluation of all CIRE faculty,
shared with appropriate UTK department heads and ORNL division directors.
Initially the CIRE Board of Directors (appointed by the Chancellor and the
Laboratory Director) will serve as the interim Credentials Committee for the purpose
of approving the initial CIRE faculty.
12
ESE PROPOSAL
Approval to Direct Doctoral Dissertations
All CIRE faculty members, prior to serving as major professors of PhD students,
must be approved by the UTK Graduate Council to direct doctoral dissertations.
All CIRE faculty members, who do not already have this approval and have no prior
experience in supervising doctoral thesis research, can initially request a one-time
approval or approval to co-direct doctoral dissertations with an approved faculty
member.
VI. Speciality areas and courses
Almost all courses needed for each of the six speciality areas of the ESE degree exist in
various departments. This section lists these courses by department. As discussed above,
these courses are needed for the minimum of 15 credit hours for the Know ledge
Specialization Curriculum.
A. Nuclear Energy
Fundamentals (9 credits)
Reactor Design and Modeling emphasis:
NE 511, Transport Processes in Nuclear Engineering
NE 571, Reactor Theory and Design
NE 572, Nuclear Systems Design
NE 583, Radiation Transport Methods
NE 598, Nuclear Engineering practice
ME 587, Dynamic Modeling and Simulation
ECE 575, High Performance Computer Modeling and Visualization
Fuel Cycle Emphasis:
Chern 511, Analytical Separations
Chern 512, Electroanalytic Chemistry
ESE INE5xx, Reactor Fuel Modeling and Design
ESE /Chem 5xx, Radiochemistry and Actinide Process Engineering
Structural Materials Emphasis:
ME 559, Advanced Mechanics of Materials I
MSE 511, Fundamentals of Materials Science and Engineering I
MSE 512, Fundamentals of Materials Science and Engineering II
MSE 515, Physical Metallurgy - Diffusion and Phase Transformations
MSE 516, Mechanical Metallurgy
MSE 525, Welding Metallurgy
MSE 532, Metallurgy of Deformation and Fracture
Instrument and Controls Emphasis:
NE 579, Advanced Monitoring and Diagnostic Techniques
NE 521, Nuclear Systems Dynamics and Control
ECE 505, Digital Signal Processing I
ECE 506, Digital Signal Processing II
ECE 551, Digital System Design I
ECE 552, Digital System Design II
Advanced (6 credits)
Reactor Design and Modeling emphasis:
NE 611, Selected Topics in Reactor Theory
NE 640, Nuclear Cross Section Modeling
NE 697 Special Topics in Nuclear Engineering
13
ESE PROPOSAL
Fuel Cycle Emphasis:
Chern 610, Selected Topics in Analytical Chemistry
Chern 670, Selected Topics in Physical Chemistry
Structural Materials Emphasis:
ME 659, Advanced Mechanics of Materials II
MSE 610, Structure and Dynamics of Materials
MSE 611, Phase Transform and Simulations at Small Length Scales
MSE 650, Mechanical Behavior of Solids at Elevated Temperatures
MSE 674, Materials Physics
MSE 675, Advanced Structural Analysis
Instrument and Control Emphasis:
NE 653, Theory of Information Processing
ECE 631, Advanced Topics in Electronic Instrumentation I
ECE 632, Advanced Topics in Electronic Instrumentation II
NE 697 Special Topics in Nuclear Engineering
Nuclear Physics:
PHYS 621 Nuclear Physics I
PHYS 622 Nuclear Physics
PHYS 642 Advanced Topics in Modem Physics
B. Energy Conversion and Storage
Fundamentals (9 credits)
CBE 547, Transport Phenomena
CBE 531, Thermodynamics
MABE 521 Thermodynamics 1
MABE 522 Thermodynamics 2
MABE 559 Advanced Mechanics of Materials I
MABE 587 Dynamic Modeling and Simulation
CBE 532, Statistical Mechanics
CBE 506, Engineering Analysis
Math 511 Methods in applied mathematics I
Math 512 Methods in applied mathematics II
CBE/CHEM 5XX Applied Electrochemistry
ECE 575 High Performance Computer Modeling and Visualization
MABE 527&528 Thermal Systems Analysis 1& II
CBE/CHEM 5XX Solid-state ion conductors
MSE 540 Basic Polymer Chemistry
CHEM 570 Quantum Chemistry and Spectroscopy
CHEM 553 Spectropic Characterization of Organic Compounds
MSE 543 Basic Polymer Physics
PHYS 521 Quantum Mechanics I
PHYS 522 Quantum Mechanics II
PHYS 551 Statistical Mechanics
PHYS 555 Solid State Physics
Advanced (6 credits)
CBE 633 Multi scale Materials Modeling
CBE 631 Advanced Topics in Statistical Thermodynamics
MSE 672 Introduction to Transmission EM and Electron Diffraction
MSE 611 Fundamentals of Thermodynamics, Phase Transformation, and Material
Simulation at Small Length Scales
MSE 666 Nanoindentation and Small-scale Contact Mechanics
MSE 673 Introduction to Scanned Probe Microscopies
MABE 656 Advanced Mechanics of Materials II
14
ESE PROPOSAL
ESE/CBE 6xx Energy conversion systems
ESE/CBEIMSE/CHEM 6xx Advanced Materials for Energy conversion and Storage
CBE 691 Advanced Topics in Chemical Engineering
MSE 676 Advanced Topics in Materials Science and Engineering
CHEM 690 Selected topics in Polymer Chemistry; Polymers for Renewable Energy
CHEM 691 Selected Topics in Thermal Analysis of Polymeric
PHYS 671 Advanced Solid State Physics I
PHYS 672 Advanced Solid State Physics II
C. Bioenergy and Biofuels
Fundamentals (9 credits)
Biology emphasis:
PISc 605 (1) Plant Genomics Journal Club: Bioenergy and Biofuels Literature
PISc 465/5xx (2) Bioenergy Crop Ecology
BCMB 522 (3) Advanced Plant Physiology I
BCMB 523 (3) Advanced Plant Physiology II
BCMB 512 (3) Advanced Molecular Biology
PISc 561 (3) Statistics for Biological Research
PISc 571 (3) Design and Analysis of Biological Research
PISc 545 (3) Advanced Plant Biotechnology
PISc 5xx (3) Biotechnology and Genomics ofBiofuels
PISc 4751575 (3) Professional Issues in Bioenergy
BCMB 401 - Biochemistry-Molecular Biology I
BCMB 402 - Biochemistry-Molecular Biology II
BCMB 515 - Experimental Techniques I
CBE 576 - Applied Microbiology and Bioengineering
ENSC 586 - Green Engineering
BCMB 512 - Advanced Molecular Biology
ENVE 576 - Applied Microbiology and Bioengineering
MICR 410 - Microbial Physiology
MICR 411 - Microbial Genetics
MICR 601 - Journal Club in Microbial Physiology
MICR 605 - Journal Club in Microbial Genetics
MICR 609 - Journal Club in Microbial Genomics
MICR 680 - Foundations in Microbiology
ESS 516 - Soil Biology and Biochemistry
ESS 554 - Environmental Soil Biology
PLSC 532 - Environmental Plant Ecophysiology
EPP 550 - Molecular Epidemiology
EPP 612 - Soil Borne Plant Pathogens
EPP 613 - Fungal Epidemiology and Disease Control
EPP 615 - Physiology of Plant Disease
Chemistry and Materials emphasis:
CHEM 510 - Analytical Spectrometry
CHEM 511, Analytical Separations
CHEM 512, Electroanalytic Chemistry
ENSC 586 - Green Engineering
ME 559 - Advanced Mechanics of Materials I
MSE 511, Fundamentals of Materials Science and Engineering I
MSE 512, Fundamentals of Materials Science and Engineering II
CHEM 550 - Structure and Reactivity in Organic Chemistry
CHEM 551 - Organic Reactions
CHEM 552 -Applications of Organic Reactions
CHEM 590 - Polymer Chemistry
15
ESE PROPOSAL
CHEM 594 - Organic Chemistry of Polymers
MSE 540 - Basic Polymer Chemistry
MSE 543 - Basic Polymer Physics
MSE 472 - Fundamental Principles of Composite Materials
MABE 526 - Mechanics of Composite Materials
Forestry FORS 521 - Composite Materials from Renewable Resources
STAT 572 - Applied Regression Analysis
MSE 552 - Laboratory Methods in Polymer Engineering
MSE 572 - X-Ray Diffraction
ENSC 551 - Finite Element Analysis
ENSC 539 - Continuum Mechanics
Advanced (6 credits)
PISc 65x Advanced Plant Breeding and Genetics
PISc 6xx Advanced Bioenergy Journal Club
FWF 6xx Life Cycle Analysis for Bioenergy
FWF 6xx Cellulose
Chern 610, Selected Topics in Analytical Chemistry
Chern 670, Selected Topics in Physical Chemistry
ME 659, Advanced Mechanics of Materials II
MSE 610, Structure and Dynamics of Materials
MSE 674, Materials Physics
MSE 675, Advanced Structural Analysis
CBEIMSE/CHEM 6xx Advanced Materials for Energy conversion and Storage
CBE 631 Advanced Topics in Statistical Thermodynamics
CBE 6xx Energy Conversion Systems
EPP 643 - DNA Analysis
D. Renewable Energy - Solar, Wind, Hydro, Geothermal
Fundamentals (9 credits)
CE/GeoI485, Principles of Hydrogeology (?)
GEOL 501, Fractal Models in Earth Sciences
AE 513, Experimental Methods in Fluid Mechanics
CBE 547, Transport Phenomena
CBE 531, Thermodynamics
MABE 521 Thermodynamics 1
MABE 522 Thennodynamics 2
MABE 559 Advanced Mechanics of Materials I
MABE 584 - Turbomachinery Systems I
MABE 587 Dynamic Modeling and Simulation
ENVE 535 Applied Ground Water Hydrology
CBE 532, Statistical Mechanics
CBE 506, Engineering Analysis
Math 511 Methods in applied mathematics I
Math 512 Methods in applied mathematics II
CHEM 512 Electroanalytical Chemistry
CBE/CHEM 5XX Applied Electrochemistry
ECE 525 Alternative Energy Sources
ECE 575 High Performance Computer Modeling and Visualization
MABE 541 & 542 Fluid Mechanics I & II
CHEM 570 Quantum Chemistry and Spectroscopy
CHEM 572 Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
CHEM 573 Chemical Kinetics and Transport
PHYS 531 Classical Mechanics
16
ESE PROPOSAL
PHYS 551 Statistical Mechanics
Advanced (6 credits)
CBE 633 Multi scale Materials Modeling
CBE 631 Advanced Topics in Statistical Thennodynamics
CBE 652 Sustainable Energy Production
MSE 672 Introduction to Transmission EM and Electron Diffraction
MSE 611 Fundamentals of Thennodynamics, Phase Transformation, and Material
Simulation at Small Length Scales
AE 681 Advanced Viscous Flow Theory
MSE 644 Opto-electronic Processes in Polymeric Materials
MABE 656 Advanced Mechanics of Materials II
ESEI CBE 6xx Energy Conversion Systems
ESE/CBEIMSE/CHEM 6xx Advanced Materials for Renewable Energy
CBE 691 Advanced Topics in Chemical Engineering
MSE 676 Advanced Topics in Materials Science and Engineering
CHEM 610 Selected Topics in Analytical Chemistry - Electrochemistry
CHEM 690 Selected Topics in Polymer Chemistry - Polymers for Renewable Energy
PHYS 671 Advanced Solid State Physics I
PHYS 621 Advanced Solid State Physics II
E. Environmental and Climate Sciences related to Energy
Fundamentals (9 credits)
Earth System Modeling Emphasis
EV 562 Three Dimensional Climate Modeling
EV 577 Air Pollution Climatology
MATH578 Numerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations
Carbon Cycle and Sustainable Energy Environments Emphasis
ESE 5xx Land-Atmosphere-Ocean-Ice biogeochemical processes
ESE 5xx Carbon management science, policy, and economics
Data Integration and Climate Informatics Emphasis
EV 561 Climate and Environmental Infonnatics
Geog 517 Geographic Infonnation Management and Processing
Geol 525 Data Analysis
ESE 5xx Data management, uncertainty, dissemination, and integration
Climate Impacts and Consequences Emphasis
Geog 512 Environmental Modeling and Geospatial Analysis
EV 521Climate Impacts on Water Resources
EV 574 Air Pollution Engineering and Control
Advanced (6 credits)
Earth System Modeling Emphasis
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Global Hydrology
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Land Ecosystem Modeling
Carbon Cycle and Sustainable Energy Environments Emphasis
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Environmental
management for carbon sequestration
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Environment, Energy and
Sustainability
Geol 660 Advanced Environmental Geochemistry
Micro 670 Global Medicine and Emerging Infectious Disease
Micro 670 Microbial Ecology
Micro 670 Advanced Topics in Environmental Microbiology
17
ESE PROPOSAL
Data Integration and Climate Informatics Emphasis
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Model Uncertainty and
Climate Extremes
CS 691 Visualization and Analysis of Large Datasets
Climate Impacts and Consequences Emphasis
EV 672 Air Pollution Dispersion Modeling
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Regional Air Quality Impacts
of Climate Change
EV/CE 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Transportation and
Climate Change
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Ecological Consequences of
Climate Change
EV 691 Special Topic on Environmental Engineering: Energy and Climate Policy
F. Distributed Energy/Grid Management
Fundamentals (9 credits)
ECE 507 Application of Linear Algebra in Engineering Systems
ECE 511 Linear Systems Theory
ECE 512 Multivariable Linear Control System Design
ECE 521 Power Systems Analysis I
ECE 522 Power Systems Analysis II
ECE 523 Power Electronics and Drives
ECE 525 Alternative Energy Sources
ECE 553 Computer Networks
ECE 571 Pattern Recognition
ECE 575 High Performance Computer Modeling and Visualization
CS 541 Database Management Systems
CS 581 Algorithms
PHYS 573 Numerical Methods in Physics
Advanced (6 credits)
ECE 613 Nonlinear Systems Theory
ECE 615 Control of Electric Machines
ECE 617 Special Topics in Systems Theory I
ECE 621 Computational Methods for Power System Analysis
ECE 622 Power System Economics
ECE 623 Advanced Power Electronics and Drives
ECE 625 Utility Applications of Power Electronics
CS 670 Advanced Topics in Scientific Computing
18
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
CAMPUS/INSTITUTE: All
ITEM: Additional Signatures on University of Tennessee
Diplomas
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic
Affairs and Student Success
Upon the unanimous recommendation of the Chancellors and the approval of the
President and the Secretary, the Board of Trustees is requested to approve adding two
additional signatures to the diplomas students receive upon graduation. Addition of the
Chancellor and Dean signatures provides recognition of the important contributions of the
campus or institute in providing the academic training of the graduate. The request is
supported by practices at other universities as summarized in the attached materials.
MOTION:
Move approval of the modified diploma as presented in the meeting materials.
Review of Diploma Signatories
At Other Universities
University of Tennessee
• Secretary of University
• President of Tennessee System
University of Florida
• Governor
• UF President
• Chair of BOT
• Dean of College
University of Georgia
• Registrar
• President of UGA
• Dean of School
• Chancellor of Georgia System
UNC Chapel Hill
• Chair of BOG
• President of UNC
• Chair of BOT
• Chancellor
• Dean of College
NC State
• Chair of BOG
• President of NC system
• Chair of BOT
• Chancellor
• Dean of College
U of California, Berkeley
• Governor
• President of University
• Chancellor
• Dean of School
• Last signatory differs by college; can be the Provost, Dean or Director
University of Alabama
• President
• Dean
Washington University
• Chancellor
• Dean
• Chairman of Board
• Secretary of Board
Duke University
• President
• Chairman of Board
• Dean
• Secretary
Vanderbilt University
• Chancellor
• Chairman of Board
• Dean
Louisiana State University
• Chancellor
• Chairman of Board
.~~ 1
.~: 4J~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ '1
~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 1~ i
fa
E
~ ~ ~ Iii ~ ~ ,~
o·
-c.. ~ ~ .. e &~l ~~
~ fit .~ '0") ~ ~
0-
C.· .....!;! "
I-
::J;
..... 1
c:
...
...
Q)
:::s
u eJ ~.~ ~l
~ . ~ .~~
~1~ ~
1~· ~
lhe Trustees
of
The University of Tennessee
on the recommendation of the Faculty and by and through the
President and Chancellor have conferred on
Courtney Lee Sample
the degree of
Master of Science
Honors
Chancellor Honors Program
with all Rights, Privileges and Honors thereunto appertaining.
In witness whereof this diploma is granted with the Seal of the
University and the signatures of the President,
Chancellor, Dean, and Secretary hereunto affixed.
Given at - - - in the State of Tennessee this _____ day of ____ ,
two thousand and ___ , the two hundred and ______ year of the University.
Secretary of The University of Tennessee President of The University of Tennessee
Dean, College of _______ _ Chancellor, (Campus / Institute)
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
ACTION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
CAMPUS; UT Health Science Center
ITEM: Centennial Diploma for UTHSC
RECOMMENDATION: Approval
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success
The University of Tennessee Health Science Center is celebrating its centennial in 2011
and wishes to award degrees with a diploma signifying this special event. The diploma
design features a banner across the top announcing the Centennial of the Health Science
Center. This proposal has been approved by the campus and the Secretary.
MOTION:
Move approval for UTHSC to commission a special Centennial diploma for May 2011
commencement.
< I 1911 - Centennial of the Health Science Center - 2011
The Trustees
of
The University of Tennessee
on the recommendation of the Faculty and by and through the
President and Chancellor have conferred on
Courtney Lee Sample
the degree of
Master of Science
Honors
Chancellor Honors Program
with all Rights, Privileges and Honors thereunto appertaining.
In witness whereof this diploma is granted with the Seal of the
University and the signatures of the President,
Chancellor, Dean, and Secretary hereunto affixed.
Given at ________ in the State of Tennessee this ______ day of ____ ,
two thousand and , the two hundred and year of the University.
Secretary of The University of Tennessee President of The University of Tennessee
Dean, College of ________ Chancellor, (Campus I Institute)
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INFORMATION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
CAMPUS/I NSTITUTE: All
ITEM: Report on Academic Program Approvals and Terminations
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success
Each June since 1982, the Office of Academic Affairs has provided to the Board of Trustees
for information a list of all academic programs that have been approved or terminated.
All new academic programs are approved by the Board of Trustees as they are developed
and the Board is given information on the purpose of the program, justification of the need
of the program, expected number of graduates, and fiscal implications, if any.
Until recently, academic terminations were decided at the campus level as most
terminations occurred because accreditation issues required it, student demand for the
program decreased, or the discipline changed.
Two years ago, as the University began to plan for severe budget reductions, program
terminations, consolidations and reorganizations were brought before the Board of
Trustees. For the Academic Year 09-10, the terminations at UTe were approved by the
Board in June 2010. The comprehensive listing of academic programs was approved by
the Board at the June 2010 meeting as well.
This summary report was inadvertently omitted from the materials presented to the Board of
Trustees at the June 2010 meeting and is presented at this time for the Board's information.
The University of Tennessee System
Academic Program Terminations & Inactivations
June 1980 -June 2010
UT at Chattanooga
Program Action Date
BS with a Major in Office Administration Terminate 10/83
Certificate in Office Administration Terminate 10/83
BS with a major in Health & Physical Education Terminate 2/84
,
BA with a major in Social Work Terminate 6/85
BS with a major in Early Childhood & Elementary Education Terminate 6/91
BA with a major in American Studies Terminate 6/96
MPT in Physical Therapy Terminate 6/02
BOT in Occupational Therapy Terminate 6/03
BS with a major in Medical Technology Terminate 6/08
BS with a major in Human Ecology Terminate 6/08
BS with a major in Foreign Language Education K-12 Terminate 6/10
BS with a major in Theatre Education Terminate 6/10
BS with a major in Secondary Mathematics Terminate 6/10
BS with a major in Secondary Natural Sciences Terminate 6/10
BS/BM with a major in Music Education Terminate 6/10
Total Terminations/Inactivations: 15
UT Knoxville
Program Action Date
2 year Certificate in Office Administration Terminate 1/81
MS with a major in Radiation Biology Terminate 6/81
PhD with a major in Radiation Biology Terminate 6/81
MS with a major in Economics Terminate 6/82
MACT with a major in Economics Terminate 6/82
MACT with a major in History Terminate 6/82
BSHE with a major in Interior Design & Housing Terminate 2/83
MACT with a major in Chemistry Terminate 2/83
MACT with a major in Biology Terminate 2/83
BSBA with a major in Office Administration Terminate 2/83
BSBA with a major in Business Education Terminate 2/83
MS with a major in Distributive Education Terminate 6/83
MA with a major in Art Terminate 6/83
MACT with a major in Physics Terminate 6/83
p. 1 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
MACT with a major in Sociology Terminate 6/83
BSBA with a major in Banking Terminate 6/83
BSBA with a major in Insurance Terminate 6/83
BSBA with a major in Real Estate & Urban Development Terminate 6/83
BAHE with a major in Interior Design and Housing Terminate 2/83
MS with a major in Engineering Administration Terminate 10/83
MACT with a major in English Terminate 6/84
MACT with a major in Business Education Terminate 6/84
PhD with a major in Health Education Terminate 6/84
MACT with a major in German Terminate 10/84
Certificate in Asian Studies Terminate 10/84
DBA in Business Administration Terminate 6/85
MA with a major in Mathematics Terminate 9/85
BSHE Coordinated UG program in Dietetics Terminate 10/86
PhD with a major in Spanish Terminate 10/86
PhD with a major in German languages and literature Terminate 10/86
ME with a major in Mechanical Engineering Terminate 1/87
ME with a major in Aerospace Engineering Terminate 1/87
ME with a major in Industrial Engineering Terminate 1/87
BSEd with a major in Elementary Physical Education (K-8) Terminate 1/87
BSEd with a major in Secondary Physical Education (7-12) Terminate 1/87
MA with a major in Speech & Theatre Terminate 6/87
ME with a major in Nuclear Engineering Terminate 6/87
BSAg with a major in Agricultural Mechanization Terminate 9/88
MS with a major in Adult Education Terminate 6/89
MS with a major in Business Education Terminate 6/89
MS with a major in Industrial Education Terminate 6/89
BSED with a major in Dance Terminate 6/89
ME with a major in Civil Engineering Terminate 9/89
ME with a major in Electrical Engineering Terminate 9/89
MS with a major in Food Science Terminate 10/90
BSEd with a major in Elementary Education Terminate 6/91
MS with a major in Music Education Terminate 6/92
MA with a major in Music Terminate 6/93
MS with a major in Art Education Terminate 6/93
MS with a major in Food Service & Food lodging Administration Terminate 6/96
EdD with a major in Health Education Terminate 6/96
MS with a major in Human Ecology Terminate 6/96
EdD with a major in Human Resource Development Terminate 6/96
MS with a major in Interior Design Terminate 6/96
EdS with a major in Safety Education and Service Terminate 6/96
EdS with a major in Vocational Education and Service Terminate 6/96
p. 2 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
MS with a major in Interior Design Terminate 6/97
MS with a major in Human Ecology Terminate 6/97
MS with a major in Food Service & Lodging Administration Terminate 6/97
EdD with a major in Health Education Terminate 6/97
EdD with a major in Human Resource Development Terminate 6/97
BS with a major in Biochemistry Terminate 6/98
MS with a major in Zoology Terminate 6/98
MS with a major in Rehabilitation Counseling Terminate 6/98
PhD with a major in Agriculture Economics Terminate 6/01
BSEd with a major in Business/Marketing Education Terminate 6/01
PhD with a major in Biomedical Sciences Terminate 3/03
BSHE with a major in Business/Marketing Education Terminate 3/03
BSHE with a major in Child Development Terminate 6/03
BSEd with a major in Human Services Terminate 6/03
MS with a major in Botany Terminate 6/05
PhD with a major in Botany Terminate 6/05
BSHE with a major in Community Health Education Terminate 6/05
MS with a major in Health Promotion & Health Education Terminate 6/05
BSBA with a major in Business Studies Terminate 6/06
PhD with a major in Industrial Organizational Psychology Terminate 6/08
BA with a major in Audiology Terminate 10/08
BA with a major in Speech Pathology Terminate 10/08
MA with a major in Speech Pathology Terminate 10/08
MSP with a major in Planning Terminate 6/09
MS with a major in Safety Education, Instructional Technology, Terminate 6/09
Health & Cultural Studies
Total Terminations/Inactivations: 81
UT at Martin
Program Action Date
BSN with a major in Nursing Terminate 6/80
BSBA with a major in Business - Foreign Studies Terminate 10/83
Master of Accountancy with a major in Accounting Inactivate 2/84
BSCJ with a major in Criminal Justice (external) Terminate 6/84
BSBA with a major in Health Service management Inactivate 10/84
BSBA with a major in Business Education Terminate 1/85
MBA with a major in Business Administration Inactivate 6/85
BSAg with a major in Agriculture Education Terminate 6/85
BSHE with a major in Home Economics Education Terminate 6/87
BSBA with a major in Health Services Management Terminate 6/89
p. 3 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
BSED with a major in Early Childhood Education Terminate 6/91
AAN with a major in Nursing Terminate 2/90
MSEd with a major in Educational Psychology & Guidance Inactivate 6/92
MSEd with a major in Educational Administration & Inactivate 6/92
Supervision
BSEd with a major in Secondary Physics Terminate 6/94
BA with a major in Biology Terminate 6/95
BSEd with a major in Art Education Terminate 6/96
BS in Public Administration with a major in Public Terminate 6/97
Administration
BSEd with a major in Secondary German Terminate 6/98
BS with a major in Music Terminate 6/01
BA with a major in Economics Terminate 3/03
BS with a major in Economics Terminate 3/03
Master of Accountancy (MAc) Terminate 6/06
BS with a major in Health Sciences Terminate 6/09
Total Terminations/Inactivations: 24
UT Health Science Center
Program Action Date
1 year Certificate for Nurse Practitioners Terminate 10/80
BS with a major in Radiation Technology Terminate 1/81
Certificate in Microbiology Terminate 6/82
BS with a major in Pharmacy Terminate 10/83
Certificate in Clinical Immunohematology Terminate 6/89
MS with a major in Drug & Material Toxicology Terminate 6/89
PhD with a major in Drug & Material Toxicology Terminate 6/89
PhD with a major in Health Science Administration Inactivate 2/94
BA with a major in Biology Terminate 6/95
MS with a major in Medicinal Chemistry Terminate 6/96
MS with a major in Pharmaceutics Terminate 6/96
BS in Nursing with a major in Nursing Inactivate 6/97
BS in Public Administration with a major in Public Terminate 6/97
Administration
BSPT with a major in Physical Therapy Terminate 6/98
MPT with a major in Physical Therapy Terminate 6/01
BOT with a major in Occupational Therapy Terminate 10/03
BS with a major in Health Informatics Terminate 6/09
Total Terminations/Inactivations: 17
p. 4 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
The University of Tennessee System
Academic Program Approvals and Reactivations
June 1980 -June 2010
UT at Chattanooga
Program Action Date
MS with a major in Computer Science Approval 2/81
BSW with a major in Social Work Approval 9/81
MA with a major in English Approval 5/83
MPA with a major in Public Administration Approval 7/85
MS with a major in Engineering Management Approval 8/89
BS with a major in Physical Therapy Approval 10/89
MSN with a major in Nursing Approval 8/90
MAcc with a major in Accounting Approval 8/92
BS with a major in Legal Assistant Studies Approval 9/94
MS with a major in Environmental Science Approval 7/96
BSOT with a major in Occupational Therapy Approval 11/96
MS with a major in Athletic Training Approval 7/97
EdS with a major in Advanced Educational Practice, Approval 7/98
Concentration in Educ Tech
OPT Physical Therapy Approval 10/02
PhD with a major in Computational Engineering Approval 10/03
EdD with a major in Learning & Leadership Approval 6/04
,
MS Electrical Engineering with a major in Electrical Approval 3/06
Engineering
MS Mechanical Engineering with a major in Mechanical Approval 3/06
Engineering
MS with a major in Athletic Training Approval 10/08
MS with a major in Mathematics Approval 2/09
BSCE with a major in Civil Engineering Approval 6/09
BSChE with a major in Chemical Engineering Approval 6/09
ONP with a major in Nursing Practice Approval 6/10
Total Approvals/Reactivations: 23
UT Knoxville
Program Action Date
BSID with a major in Interior Design Approval 7/80
BS with a major in Hotel & Restaurant Administration Approval 7/80
PhD with a major in Food Technology & Science Approval 5/81
MS with a major in Life Sciences Approval 9/81
p. 5 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
PhD with a major in Life Sciences Approval 9/81
BS with a major in Biochemistry Approval 3/84
BFA with a major in Graphic Design/Illustration Approval 9/84
PhD with a major in Computer Science Approval 1/86
PhD with a major in Modern Foreign Languages Approval 7/86
BA with a major in Speech Approval 4/87
BA with a major in Theatre Approval 4/87
PhD with a major in Nursing (joint with Memphis) Approval 7/88
MArch with a major in Architecture Approval 8/92
BSCPE Computer Engineering Approval 10/99
PhD with a major in Natural Resources Approval 4/01
AuD with a major in Audiology Approval 6/01
PhD with a major in Industrial Engineering Approval 3/04
MS with a major in Computer Engineering Approval 6/04
PhD with a major in Computer Engineering Approval 6/04
MS with a major in Reliability & Maintenance Engineering Approval 6/06
MALA with a major in Landscape Architecture Approval 6/08
MLA with a major in Landscape Architecture Approval 6/08
MSLA with a major in Landscape Architecture Approval 6/08
BSAg with a major in Natural Resources & Environmental Approval 10/08
Economics
DNP with a major in Nursing Practice Approval 6/10
Total Approvals/Reactivations: 25
UT at Martin
Program Action Date
BSSW with a major in Social Work Approval 2/81
BSN with a major in Nursing Approval 7/99
Master of Accountancy with a major in Accounting Reactivation 2/88
Master of Business Administration Reactivation 2/88
BSEd with a major in Art Education Approval 5/89
BFA with a major in Fine and Performing Arts Approval 8/89
BA with a major in International Studies Approval 8/92
BA with a major in Philosophy Approval 11/92
MSEd with a major in Counseling (formerly titled Reactivate 6/94
Educational Psychology & Guidance)
BSE with a major in Enginerring Approval 7/96
MSAOM with a major in Ag Operations Management Approval 10/00
Total Approvals/Reactivations: 11
p. 6 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
UT Health Science Center
Program Action Date
PhD with a major in Health Sciences Administration Approval 11/87
PhD with a major in Nursing (joint with Knoxville) Approval 7/88
MSPT with a major in Physical Therapy Approval 2/90
Dual Pharm D and PhD Approval 6/91
PhD with a major in Health Science Administration Reactivate 2/95
MS with a major in Biomedical Engineering (joint with Approval 7/96
University of Memphis)
PhD with a major in Biomedical Engineering (joint with Approval 7/96
University of Memphis)
MS with a major in Epidemiology Approval 7/97
DNSc with a major in Nursing Approval 7/98
MSCLS with a major in Clinical Laboratory Sciences Approval 7/98
ScDPT with a major in Physical Therapy Approval 10/02
DPT with a major in Physical Therapy Approval 3/03
MOT with a major in Occupational Therapy Approval 10/03
BSN with a major in Nursing Reactivate 10/03
MSHIIM with a major in Health Informatics & Information Approval 10/05
Management
MSCP with a major in Cytopathology Practice Approval 10/05
MS with a major in Speech-Language Pathology Approval 10/08
AuD with a major in Audiology Approval 10/08
PhD with a major in Speech and Hearing Science Approval 10/08
Total Approvals/Reactivations: 19
p. 7 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
ACADEMIC PROGRAM SUMMARY
Campus # of Programs Terminated/Inactivated # of Programs Approved/Reactivated
UTe 15 23
UTK 81 25
UTM 24 11
UTHse 17 19
Total 137 78
p. 8 Terminations/Approvals List updated 9/28/2010
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INFORMATION ITEM
DATE: October 21,2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
ITEM: Status Report on Universal Transfer Paths in Compliance
with the Complete College Tennessee Act of 2010
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success
To accomplish the legislative mandate requiring development of university track programs
that are universally transferable from any public community college to any public university
in Tennessee, TBR and the UT System identified thirty-eight academic programs in which
transfer students were most likely to enroll.
Following is a status report on the development of the universal paths.
STATUS REPORT
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS AS MANDATED BY
THE COMPLETE COLLEGE TENNESSEE ACT OF 2010
To accomplish the legislative mandate requiring development of university track
programs that are universally transferable from any public community college to any
public university in Tennessee, TBR and the UT System, using data from THEC,
identified thirty-eight academic programs in which transfer students were most likely to
enroll.
The two systems established a formal Articulation Council and began work this summer
on developing common curricula in these thirty-eight identified areas. Task forces,
consisting of TBR community college and university faculty, have met throughout the
summer and will continue to meet throughout the spring of 2011 to develop common
curricula for each discipline. Coordination is handled jointly by TBR and UT.
Following is the list of disciplines for which consensus curricula have been established:
1. Biology Completed in 2010
2. Business Administration Completed in 2009 under PC 863
3. Chemistry Completed in 2010
4. Electrical Engineering Completed in 2010
5. English Completed in 2010
6. History Completed in 2010
7. Mechanical Engineering Completed in 2010
8. Pre-nursing Completed in 2010
9. Psychology Completed in 2009 under PC 863
10. Sociology Completed in 2010
11. Social Work Completed in 2010
Curricula for the remaining disciplines will be established throughout the 2010-2011
academic year:
12. Accounting
13.Agriculture
14.Art
15. Business Education
16. Civil Engineering
17. Computer Science
18. Criminal Justice
19. Economics
20. Entrepreneurship
21. Foreign Language
22. General Studies
23. Geography
24. Health and Physical Education
25. Homeland Security
26. Industrial Management
27. Information Systems
28. Mass Communications
29. Mathematics
30. Music
31. Physics
32. Political Science
33. Pre-dental
34. Pre-medical
35. Pre-optometry
36. Pre-pharmacy
37. Pre-veterinary medicine
38. Speech and Theatre
Following approval by the appropriate academic subcouncils and faculty senates, the
new curricula will be in place and effective by fall 2011.
Dissemination of the Consensus Curricula
1. Transfer websites will be displayed on each institution's homepage.
2. Registrars from all institutions will ensure transcripts signify the consensus
curricula (or sub-sets of the curricula) have been completed to facilitate the
transfer process.
3. Advisors and admissions personnel will be trained to become familiar with the
consensus curricula.
4. Transfer information will be updated annually, in conjunction with the process of
updating course catalogs.
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Biology A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
BIO 1110 & 1120 General Biology I & II
Mathematics 4 Hours
MATH 1910 Calculus I
General Education Total 42 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
MATH 1920 Calculus 11* or MATH 1530 Probability/Statistics 3-4 Hours
CHEM 1110, 1120 General Chemistry I & II 8 Hours
CHEM 2010, 2020 Organic Chemistry** 8 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19-20 Hours
TOTAL 61-62 Hours
*At UT Knoxville, the math course must be Calculus II
**At UT Knoxville, this sequence must be Organic Chemistry I and either a course in cell biology with
laboratory or genetics with laboratory.
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Business Administration A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
English Composition 6 Hours
Communication 3 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences
Economics I & II 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1630
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Accounting I and II 6 Hours
MATH 1530* Introduction to Probability and Statistics 3 Hours
MATH 1830 Calculus 3 Hours
Computer Applications 3 Hours
Electives (guided) 4 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
*Students who plan to transfer to UT Knoxville must complete MATH 2050, Calculus-based Probability
and Statistics.
(This universal articulation has already been approved per PC 863.)
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Chemistry A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
CHEM 1110, 1120 General Chemistry I & II
Mathematics 4 Hours
Math 1910 Calculus I
General Education Total 42 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
MATH 1920 Calculus II 4 Hours
CHEM 2010 & 2020 Organic Chemistry I & II 8 Hours
PHYS 2110 & 2120 Calculus Based Physics I & II 8 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 20 Hours
TOTAL 62 Hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Electrical Engineering A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 hours
History 6 hours
Natural Sciences
PHYS 2110,2120 Calculus-based Physics I & II 8 hours
Mathematics
MATH 1910 Calculus I 4 hours
General Education Total 42 hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
CHEM 1110 General Chemistry 4 hours
MATH 1920, 2110 Calculus I & II 8 hours
MATH 2010 Linear Algebra 3 hours
MATH 2120 Differential Equations 3 hours
Programming (C++) 3 hours
Circuits I (with lab) 4 hours
Area of Emphasis Total 25 hours*
TOTAL 67 hours
*Students are encouraged to take two courses, Circuits II and Digital Design, before transferring to a
university.
Courses in engineering technology do not fulfill any of the requirements for the Area of Emphasis in
Electrical Engineering.
Although it is possible to complete the B.S. Degree in Electrical Engineering in four semesters after
earning the associate's degree, students typically need five or six semesters to complete requirements.
Total semester hours required for the A.S. Degree are 67.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: English A.A. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
SOcial/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
English 6 Hours
Two from the following:
ENGL 2110 Survey of Amer. Lit I
ENGL 2120 Survey of Amer . Lit II
ENGL 2130 Survey of Amer. Lit
ENGL 2210 Survey of British Lit I
ENGL 2220 Survey of British Lit II
ENGL 2230 Survey of British Lit
ENGL 2310 Survey of World Lit I
ENGL 2320 Survey of World Lit II
ENGL 2330 Survey of World Lit
ENGL 2410 Survey of Lit of Western World I
ENGL 2420 Survey of Lit of Western World II
ENGL 2430 Survey of Lit of Western World
Foreign Language: Two-year Sequence in the same foreign language (6 hours at the beginning level and
six hours at the intermediate level) or demonstrated competency at the intermediate level.
12 Hours
General Electives 1 Hour
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
Effective Fall, 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: History A.A. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
HIST 2010 & 2020 (Survey of Amer. History I & II) 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
History 6 Hours
Complete one of the following sequences:
HIST 1010, 1020 Survey of Western Civ. I & II
HIST 1110, 1120 Survey of World Civ. I & II
HIST 1210, 1220 Survey of World History I & II
History Elective 3 Hours
Foreign Language (One-year Sequence) 6 Hours
General Electives 4 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
**Additionallnformation Regarding Foreign Language
Requirements for a Bachelor of Arts Degree at universities include demonstrated competency in foreign
language at the intermediate level. Community college students are encouraged to attain intermediate-
level competency in foreign language before transferring.
Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may be found on the
transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University of Tennessee
System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language requirements
at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: History A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 hours
History
HIST 2010, 2020 Survey of American History 1&11 6 hours
Natural Sciences 8 hours
Mathematics 3 hours
General Education Total 41 hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
History
Complete one of the following two-course sequences: 6 hours
HIST 1010, 1020 Survey of Western Civilization 1&11
HIST 1110, 1120 Survey of World Civilization 1&11
HIST 1210, 1220 Survey of World History 1&11
Elective in History 3 hours
General Electives 10 hours
Area of Emphasis Total 19 hours
TOTAL 60 hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall, 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Mechanical Engineering A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
PHYS 2110, 2120 Calculus-based Physics I & II
Mathematics 4 Hours
MATH 1910 Calculus I
General Education Total 42 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
MATH 1920 Calculus II 4 Hours
MATH 2110 Calculus III 4 Hours
MATH 2010 Linear Algebra 3 Hours
MATH 2120 Differential Equations 3 Hours
CHEM 1110 General Chemistry I 4 Hours
Statics 3 Hours
Particles and Rigid Bodies 3 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 24 Hours
TOTAL 66 Hours
Additional Information
Students are strongly encouraged to complete a course in Mechanics of Materials, also known as
Strength of Materials, before transferring to a university.
Courses in engineering technology do not fulfill any of the requirements for the Area of Emphasis in
Mechanical Engineering.
Although it is possible to complete the B.S. Degree in Mechanical Engineering in four semesters after
earning the associate's degree, students typically need five or six semesters to complete requirements.
Effective Fall, 2011
"
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COllEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Pre-Nursing
Because of the varying entry points for acceptance/entrance into baccalaureate nursing programs and
the different structures of nursing curricula, community college students who wish to transfer to
university programs are advised to follow a freshman-year curriculum, as prescribed below, applicable
to all university nursing majors.* By completing this one-year plan of studies and then transferring
before the sophomore year to a university, community college students will be on par with prospective
nursing students who began the freshman year at a public university in Tennessee. Community-college
students who pursue this plan will then be eligible at the earliest opportunity to compete for acceptance
to a four-year nursing program leading to the award of a Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) degree.
Please note that the completion of the pre-nursing community-college curriculum and the subsequent
courses taken at a university do not guarantee acceptance into a baccalaureate nursing
program. Nursing is a highly selective major, and only the most highly qualified students are
admitted.** The specific requirements for admission to university nursing programs may be found in
the catalogs ofthe various universities.
Freshman Year Curriculum
ENGl 1010, 1020 English Composition I & II 6 Hours
Fundamentals of Speech 3 Hours
General Psychology 3 Hours
Introduction to Sociology 3 Hours
BIOl 2010, 2020 Anatomy and Physiology I & II 8 Hours
MATH 1530 Probability and Statistics 3 Hours
History 6 Hours
Total 32 Hours***
*The University of Tennessee, Knoxville does not accept transfer students. Nursing students are
admitted in the freshman year at UTK.
**Community college students may also pursue various RN to BSN programs as a means of attaining the
BSN degree. These programs assume the completion of the Associate of Applied Science degree with a
major in nursing, certification as a Registered Nurse, and fulfillment of other criteria. Information
concerning these programs is available in university catalogs.
***Students who plan to attend the University of Tennessee, Chattanooga and the University of
Tennessee, Martin are strongly encouraged to complete BIOl 2230 (Microbiology) and CHEM 1110
(General Chemistry I) before transferring to these institutions.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Psychology A.A. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences
BIOL 1110, 1120 8 Hours
Mathematics
MATH 1110 (College Algebra) or Higher
3 Hours
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to General Psychology 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Introduction to Probability & Statistics 3 Hours
Psychology 6 Hours
Two of the Following:
Psychology of Adjustment
Life Span Psychology
PSY Social Psychology
Foreign Language (One year sequence in a single language) 6 Hours
General Electives 1 Hour
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
Requirements for a Bachelor of Arts Degree at universities include demonstrated competency in foreign
language at the intermediate level. Community college students are encouraged to attain intermediate-
level competency in foreign language before transferring.
Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may be found on the
transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University of Tennessee
System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language requirements
at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011 (This universal articulation has already been approved per PC 863.)
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Psychology A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
BIOL 1110, 1120
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1110 (College Algebra or Higher)
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to General Psychology 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Introduction to Probability & Statistics 3 Hours
Two of the Following 6 Hours
Psychology of Adjustment
Life Span Psychology
Social Psychology
General Electives 7 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
(This universal articulation has already been approved per PC 863.)
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Social Work A.A. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
Introduction to Sociology
General Psychology
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
BIOL 1010, 1020 or BIOL 1110, 1120
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Introduction to Probability & Statistics
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to Social Work 3 Hours
Social Work Elective or Social Problems 3 Hours
Economics 3 Hours
American Government (Political Science) 3 Hours
Foreign Language (One year sequence) 6 Hours
Electives 1 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
Requirements for a Bachelor of Arts Degree at universities include demonstrated competency in foreign
language at the intermediate level. Community college students are encouraged to attain intermediate-
level competency in foreign language before transferring.
Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may be found on the
transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University of Tennessee
System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language requirements
at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Social Work A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences
Introduction to Sociology 3 Hours
General Psychology 3 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences
BIOl 1010, 1020 or BIOl 1110, 1120 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Introduction to Probability & Statistics
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to Social Work 3 Hours
Social Work Elective or Social Problems 3 Hours
Economics 3 Hours
American Government (Political Science) 3 Hours
Electives 7 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
Additional Information Regarding Foreign language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Sociology A.A. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Probability and Statistics
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to Sociology 3 Hours
Social Problems 3 Hours
Sociology Elective* 3 Hours
Foreign Language (One year sequence) 6 Hours
General Electives 4 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
*Universities will determine whether the sociology elective course counts toward requirements ofthe
sociology major or as elective credit applied to the requirements of the baccalaureate degree.
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
Requirements for a Bachelor of Arts Degree at universities include demonstrated competency in foreign
language at the intermediate level. Community college students are encouraged to attain intermediate-
level competency in foreign language before transferring.
Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may be found on the
transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University of Tennessee
System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language requirements
at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall, 2011
UNIVERSAL TRANSFER PATHS
TBR COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO
UT AND TBR FOUR YEAR UNIVERSITIES
Community College Area of Emphasis: Sociology A.S. Degree
General Education Requirements
Communication 9 Hours
Humanities and/or Fine Arts 9 Hours
Social/Behavioral Sciences 6 Hours
History 6 Hours
Natural Sciences 8 Hours
Mathematics 3 Hours
MATH 1530 Probability and Statistics
General Education Total 41 Hours
Area of Emphasis Requirements
Introduction to Sociology 3 Hours
Social Problems 3 Hours
Sociology Elective* 3 Hours
General Electives 10 Hours
Area of Emphasis total 19 Hours
TOTAL 60 Hours
*Universities will determine whether the sociology elective course counts toward requirements of the
sociology major or as elective credit applied to the requirements of the baccalaureate degree.
Additional Information Regarding Foreign Language
At some universities, foreign language may be required in certain programs that lead to the Bachelor of
Science Degree. Complete information regarding foreign language requirements at each university may
be found on the transfer and articulation websites of the Tennessee Board of Regents and the University
of Tennessee System. Community college students are encouraged to be familiar with foreign language
requirements at the universities and, if applicable, complete the requirements before transferring.
Effective Fall 2011
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE
INFORMATION ITEM
DATE: October 21, 2010
COMMITTEE: Academic Affairs and Student Success
ITEM: Overview of Accreditation by the Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools
PRESENTED BY: Katherine N. High, Interim Vice President for Academic Affairs
and Student Success, and Mary Albrecht, Associate Vice
Chancellor, UT Knoxville
The following presentation provides an overview of accreditation by the Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS). It provides information relating to why the
University undergoes accreditation, the regional accreditation boards that focus on
institutional accreditation (not program accreditation, such as business, education, forestry,
nursing, law, medicine, social work, and veterinary medicine), the values of accreditation,
and a brief description of the 1O-year accreditation cycle.
Southern Association of
Colleges and Schools (SACS)
Accreditation:
An Overview
Prepared by Dr. Mary Albrecht, Associate Vice
Chancellor and Dr. Katie High, Interim Vice President
for Academic Affairs and Student Success
*Why accreditation?
Ell Financial Aid - Schools that are
accredited by agencies recognized by
the U.S. Secretary of Education are
eligible to offer federal financial aid
and to receive federal research grants.
* From Brain Track. 2010. U.S. Accreditation Agencies - An Overview> Regional Accreditation
Agencies. Viewed at http://vvww.braintrack.com/college-accreditation-articles/articles/regional-
accrediting-aoencies, accessed 23 September 201 O.
1
*Whyaccreditation?
Credit Transfers - Regionally
accredited schools will often accept
transfer credits from other regionally
accredited schools whereas credits
earned at schools without regional
accreditation will not usually be
accepted.
* From BrainTrack. 2010. U.S. Accreditation Agencies - An Overview> Regional Accreditation
Agencies. Viewed at http://www.braintrack.comlcollege-accredilation-articies/articles/regional-
accrediting-agencies, accessed 23 September 2010.
*Why accreditation?
• Respected - Many employers respect
an education received at a regionally
accredited school more highly than one
that is from a school without regional
accreditation. Many states often
require that individuals who sit for
state licensure in various professions
have graduated from a regionaily
accredited institution and/or programs
* From BrainTrack. 2010. U.S. Accreditation Agencies - An Overview> Regional Accreditation
Agencies. Viewed at hltp:l/www.braintrack.comlcoliege-accreditalion-articleslarticles/regional-
accrediting-agencies, accessed 23 September 2010.
2
*Why accreditation?
High Quality - Students are assured
that their education is of a high-
quality.
11 Graduate School - Students who
want to attend a regionally accredited
graduate school will need to have
earned their bachelor's degree from a
regionally accredited school.
• From BrainTrack. 2010. U.S. Accreditation Agencies - An Overview> Regional Accreditation
Agencies. Viewed at http://www.braintrack.com/college-accreditation-articleslarticles!regional-
accrediting-agencies, accessed 23 September 201 O.
3
U.S. Accreditation and Recognition
are Grounded in Certain Values*
iii That higher education institutions have primary
responsibility for academic quality: They are the
leaders and the primary sources of authority in
academic matters.
'" That institutional mission is central to all
judgments of academic quality.
* From Eaton, J.S. 2008. Accreditation and Recognition in the United States. Council for Higher
Education Accreditation. Viewed at http://www.chea.org/pdf/Accreditation and
Recognition PP SeptOS.pdf on 22 September 201 0
U.S. Accreditation and Recognition
are Grounded in Certain Values*
., That institutional autonomy is essential to
sustaining and enhancing academic quality.
III That our higher education enterprise - and our
sOciety- thrives on decentralization and diversity
of institutional purpose and mission.
'" That academic freedom flourishes only in an
environment of academic leadership of institutions .
• From Eaton, J.S. 2008. Accreditation and Recognition in the United States. Council for Higher
Education Accreditation. Viewed at htlp:lfwww.chea.orgipdf/Accreditation and
Recognition PP Septo8.pdf on 22 September 2010
4
Accreditation is about quality
assurance and quality improvement
• Prepare "full compliance certification" document per SACS guidelines
.Off-site peer review
• On-site peer review
• Respond to any negative findings
• Prepare "mini-compliance certification" document per SACS guidelines
• Off-site peer review
• Prepare "full compliance certification" document per SACs guidelines
• Off-site peer review
• On-site peer visit
• Respond to any negative findings
5
Compliance Certification
Document is a Self-Study
• 12 Core Requirements that relate to the
organization and function of the
university.
• 14 Comprehensive Standards that relate
to institutional mission, governance, and
effectiveness; programs; resources;
institutional responsibility for Commission
Policies.
• 7 Federal Requirements relating to
compliance with federal rules,
regulations, and laws.
Web Resources about
Accreditation
us Department of Education
fI
http://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/index.html
fI Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools, CommisSion on Colleges
http://www.sacscoc.org/index.asp
~ BrainTrack: College and University Directory
http://www.braintrack.com/college-accreditation-
artides/a rti des/reg iona I-accred iti ng-agencies
6
