FS Cms Reports 111908

REPORTS FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON FACULTY SENATE COMMITTEES: November 19, 2008

BFC met and initiated the new Salary Study. We completed the Research Space report below.

UH is adding extensive new facilities for research in the sciences and engineering, and the Faculty Senate's Budget and Facilities Committee (with good cooperation from the administration) has compiled this summary of plans and current status. Some of this content is subject to change with new hires, changes in the administration, funding dynamics, etc.
The major new spaces are SERCC, the Fleming extension, and the new Optometry building. Fleming will also be completely renovated. (Not discussed here, Old Science will become space for the social sciences, Engineering is working on a new building, and S&R 1 is slated for safety-related upgrades.)

1. SERC. The Science and Engineering Research Center has been delayed to the point of public controversy. Those delays are now largely resolved, and SERC will now be continuously under construction until it's finished, on a schedule close to that listed below. Early understandings and expectations should no longer be counted on - years have passed and a new administration is in place. SERC will be devoted to collaborative teams with high productivity of externally-funded research. Occupancy will be assigned in increments of two years to teams producing external research funding of $350/sf, or which at least have a well-developed strategy/plan to be in the top quartile of researchers in their departments and the science and engineering researchers on campus. (10% of UH researchers produce 55% of external funding). Productivity is to be judged as a team, rather than individual investigators, e.g., a computational scientist whose research does not require or generate a great deal of external support could be in SERC as part of a team whose members collectively meet the criteria. Teams falling below the SERC occupancy criteria will be displaced after a two-year transition period. The current SERC occupancy agreement accompanies this status report.

5th floor, Chemistry/molecules (short fume hood chases to the roof). Assignment to SERC is cluster-based, not department-based, but not surprisingly this floor will have a heavy representation from the Department of Chemistry. The West side of this floor should be finished by March 31, 2009. The other side depends on details involving air handlers, and should be done by January 31, 2010.

4th floor, Chemistry/Biology Transition. IMD/Synthetic Biology/Sequencing, with considerable space not yet assigned. This floor should be finished by August 31, 2009. Approximately half of the offices on this floor are temporarily occupied by large research groups who needed additional space to continue their work.

3rd floor, Largely biological sciences. 33-50% allocated to the new Texas International Center for Cell Signaling and Nuclear Receptors, with considerable space left unassigned. There is some temporary occupancy of half of the offices on this floor by energy-related activities, and 5-10% of this floor will be temporarily assigned to an NSF-supported program if the pending proposal is successful.

2nd floor. Primarily set aside for biomedical activities. There is currently some temporary occupancy of offices by Division of Research personnel, but this can be modified on short notice. A few new research centers/groups have temporary offices on this floor, too. Completion of this space will be driven in large part by need for biomedical space.

1st floor, low vibration and cleanroom space. This space is a high priority, and is well advanced. The cleanroom space has been completed, and the west half of the floor is slated for completion by March 1.

2. Fleming will be completely renovated (See consultants' report at http://www.uh.edu/fs/UH%20Renovations %20Fleming%20SR1%20Old%20Science%20%20rcw1.pdf). An extension will be added to Fleming to the northeast, with the initially planned area to be used primarily for teaching labs. There is serious study of adding one or more additional floors to this extension to create additional space for research.

3. Optometry. The UH College of Optometry has developed plans for the Vision Institute. Although the plans are not completely settled, optometry's component of the new build ($30 M, 50,000 sq ft) will include an ambulatory surgery center (including a laser refractive center), classrooms, basic and clinical research facilities, and an alumni educational center (see http://www.opt.uh.edu/vision-institute/ ). In addition, the new building is likely to include an extensive animal care facility that will occupy the top two floors and 1-2 floors for neuro/cognitive research, and classrooms. Due to new opportunities made possible by expansion of the Optometry complex, the Texas institute for Measurement, Evaluation, and Statistics and the developing Complex Systems Supercluster, of which it is a part, will no longer be located in the SERC but will be planned into the new Optometry complex. This project is in the architectural phase, and is expected to be finished in 2-3 years.

DATE: 12th November 2008
TIME: 12:30 PM
LOCATION: Room 220U, M.D. Anderson Library

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Drs. Clarke, Kugler, Manny, Middents, Sansgiry and Subhlok.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Drs. Gao, Haun & Linzer
AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Dr. Chin

ACTION: A motion to accept the minutes from the 10-17-08 FAC meeting was made by Dr. Manny and seconded by Dr. Sansgiry. The motion was unanimously accepted by the committee and the minutes were entered into the record.

AGENDA ITEM #2: College/Departmental Level Technology Upgrade Programs for Faculty

ACTION: Members of the committee reported on the policies and procedures for obtaining a technology upgrade (i.e. new computer) in their specific colleges.

In CLASS, Drs. Middents and Kugler reported that there was not a broad college wide program, rather a “flow-down” model where computers being replaced in student computing facilities/labs were passed on to faculty members requesting a computer upgrade. Dr. Kugler also indicated that individual faculty members in some circumstances were buying their own replacement computers because of a lack of such “trickle down” equipment.

In Optometry, Dr. Manny reported that the primary source for funding of new computers/technology upgrades were research budgets held by the individual faculty member. In addition, in extremis, individual faculty members could ask the Dean for resources to purchase a new computer.

In NSM, Dr. Sublok reported that there were no college-wide or department-based programs for obtaining a technology upgrade for a faculty member.

In Pharmacy, Dr. Sansgiry reported that there was a “flow-down” model where computers being replaced in student computing facilities/labs were passed on to faculty members requesting a computer upgrade.

In Education, Dr. Clarke reported there was a well-defined mechanism for a faculty member to request a technology/computer upgrade. This program, for which a faculty member is eligible for every two years, which includes a computer and software upgrade based on the needs of the faculty member as they relate to teaching and technology utilization in their classes (i.e. on-line class format, hybrid on-line/face-to-face format, virtual classrooms, etc.) and includes a personalized prescription plan developed in conjunction with a COE CITE lab representative.

Dr. Manny made the general point that buying computers on research grant budgets was becoming harder as many funding agencies now view the provision of technology such as computers as part of the services included in overhead/IDC support on a grant and prohibit computer purchases for other than defined project-specific tasks.

Dr. Sansgiry moved that the “the Chair of the FAC will investigate whether there is university-wide policy for providing technology updates to faculty and if so, what resources are made available to this program.” Dr. Kugler seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously accepted by the committee and entered into the record.

ACTION: The committee discussed the varied titles used to describe different faculty positions across the University. The committee suggested that the present four possible designations under tenure-track faculty were appropriate, but that the multiple designations found in the non-tenure track faculty should be revisited. This is an ongoing discussion.

ACTION: The committee reviewed a document on a proposed Junior Faculty Forum that was designed to enhance the role and voice of junior faculty in the shared faculty governance process. After discussion and comment including a unanimous endorsement of the plan, the committee instructed the Chair to forward the document to the Executive Committee for their consideration and action.

The Committee met and discussed the up-coming S&C Conference scheduled for next Fall. The members will assist President-elect Wells in his selection of the topic for the event and its planning. The Committee also decided to study the pros and cons of a Faculty Club on campus and to that end V.P. Carlucci will be meeting with the committee.