MEETING AT PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY

FRIDAY, DEC. 3:

KATHI KETCHESON -- Director of Institutional Research at Portland State University - Points she discussed:

• 1. Quality/quantity conflict in student enrollment: -- working at PSU on an alternative (in terms of time of day) academic schedule but increasing numbers of Freshman/Sophomore students want classes in 9 - 2 core hours
• 2. Rules of the ÎOUS budget processâ still unclear: -- Îcell valuesâ in the OUS budget model still fluctuating
• 3. Assessment of academic (and other) programs will still need to occur: -- formally pulling together of much of what is already going on in academic programs -- NOTE: external pressures to assess are not as successful as internal drives for assessment from within an institution
• 4. Budget model within a campus: -- faculty must understand the internal campus model for Îdividing the fundsâ among academic programs

• 1. Feels that strong faculty governance is a positive value on a campus
• 2. PSU is making a clear statement about its urban campus Înatureâ through the Metropolitan Compactâ with the city of Portland -- This is seen in the new, nearly completed ÎUrban Centerâ facility
• 3. PSU has made a major transformation in the general education core to make it interdisciplinary and urban experience based >>> Faculty Research on this curriculum: Results of this new general education core:
• a. Blurred the boundaries between the university and the community
• b. Tied curriculum to the city: -- Îlet knowledge serve the cityâ
• c. A lot of external funding coming here as PSU strengthens ties to the city and works at a core that has an urban focus -- this has captured the imagination of outside persons and institutions

TOM IMESON - President of the OUS Board [Mr. Imeson is a Vice President at Pacificore] (Note since IFS meeting: he has been elected to another one year term as OUS Board President) Summary of comments made:

• 1. Thanked faculty for their help in relation to the OUS Budget in the 1999 legislative session
• 2. Acknowledged that the OUS budget model is NOT fully funded (about 83% funded) -- OUS (and state government) still needs to look at what it means to fully fund the new budget model
• 3. In the near future OUS needs to look at a few large strategic investment initiatives -- a lot of work to do for OUS on the investment side of the budget
• 4. In the coming year the OUS Board will be working on defining more clearly the new governance model

a. QUESTION: A new university in Bend within 5 years?? Imesonâs reply: a. Îhard time seeing this as realistic in terms of financesâ b. Îwe can help inter-institutional collaboration at the Bend Centerâ

b. Imeson is Îworriedâ at what will be the result on public perception if competition between campuses becomes far more intense through the new budget model

c. QUESTION: What about the reality that undergraduate education costs are greater at the four small campuses for lower division courses? Imeson reply:

a. Îthrough transitional funding the needs of smaller campuses is being recognizedâ

b. Discussion with him raised the issue that perhaps it is not clear how long transitional funding will be maintainedâ

d. PEBB meeting with Governor Kitzhaber: Îa good discussion (including some faculty salary discussion)....the Governor listened carefully to the issues raised by the desire of OUS to separate health insurance contracts from the PEBB systemâNANCY GOLDSCHMIDT -- Policy Analyst for OUS Subject Discussed: PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

1. Demands for Îperformance indicatorsâ are coming from the following: -- Oregon Progress Board -- Oregon Legislature (they want accountability) -- OUS Board (Herb Askenazy pushed this issue and Îwonâ on this issue) -- Accreditation groups are demanding it

2. Purposes:

a. Foster improvement in academic programs and campus operations

b. Enhance OUS Boardâs Îsteering capacityâ -- there is $730,000 for performance incentives (this is based on performance indicators) -- TWO AREAS funded this biennium: ONE: increasing the percentage of Oregon students (from the Îavailable poolâ) attending OUS universities TWO: retention of students enrolled at OUS campuses -- Availability: a. one pool for large universities b. another pool for small universities -- It was hoped that there would be one million dollars available

c. Public information

• 1. General state employees (outside of OUS faculty): -- PEBB has tiered contributions: -- $370 for single employees -- $580 for married employees
• 2. June, 1999: 8% rate increase in insurance contracts -- this is lower than the Îmarketâ -- Îopt outâ for faculty set at 60% of contribution
• 3. Sept., 1999, OUS group began studying options to PEBB system NOTE: Senate Bill 271 allows OUS to operate an separate health insurance contract if cost is equal or less than PEBB
• 4. OUS Îgroupâ must file an Îinitial notice of intentâ to leave the PEBB board by Dec. 31, 1999
• 5. The final decision to do so must be made by March 31, 2000 Faculty Focus Group Report (survey given to faculty during Fall, 1999, term) Major concerns:
• 1. Out-of-area coverage
• 2. Maintain co-pay plans
• 3. 3 to 4 plans + HMO plan
• 4. Preserving coverage more important than current premiums
• 5. Eliminate Îpoint-of-serviceâ plan
• 6. Increase OUS Contributions
• 7. Encourage use of generic drugs
• 8. Maintain retiree coverage
World Wide Coverage an important OUS issue THE ABOVE HAVE ALL BEEN ACCOMPLISHED IN THE OUS INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THE YEAR 2000 In a Nov. 29, 1999, meeting OUS representatives presented the case for a separate health insurance contract system to Governor Kitzhaber and his executive staff.

SENATORS PRESENT: Robert Brandon (EOU), Ron Cease (PSU), Jack Cooper (PSU), Bill Danley (SOU), Carroll DeKock (OSU), Elaine Deutschman (OIT), Ira Galvan (WOU), Jeff Johnson (EOU), Marion Schrock (WOU), Maureen Sevigny (OIT), Paul Simonds (UO), Ann Tedards (UO), Gary Tiedeman (OSU), Antonio Torres (OSU), Dennis Trune (OHSU), Robert Turner (WOU -- new incoming IFS rep.), Una Beth Westfall (OHSU), Craig Wollner (PSU), Kemble Yates (SOU)

1. JACK COOPER (PRESIDENT OF IFS) -- REPORT ON OCTOBER, 1999, BOARD RETREAT -- Pres. Cooperâs report to Board emphasized the need to temper entrepreneurial spirit with academic control -- University Presidentâs Council has two strong wishes: a. less control from OUS Board b. more individual campus autonomy Comments/discussion by IFS:

• a. Role of faculty member on Board discussed -- concerns about what Îvoiceâ Dr. Geraldine Richmond (faculty representative) will have on the Board -- IFS urged to stay in contact with the process of re-appointing of a faculty member to the Board during this coming early summer, 2000 -- it was suggested that perhaps Îquietâ conversation with the governorâs office ahead of appointment process would be appropriate
• b. IFS senators strongly endorsed the idea of a joint meeting of IFS/AOF/AAUP and the OSA student organization prior to the next legislative session -- perhaps this should occur prior to Nov. 2000 legislative elections
• c. Several senators strongly suggested a meeting with Chancellor Cox in the near future to talk about the next legislative session and OUS strategy relative to faculty salaries

• 1. OUS would need legislative action to give it Îself-insureâ power if OUS pulls out of PEBB
• 2. A thorny issue has come up where private institutionâs Continuing Education programs are coming into conflict with higher education. They can challenge the Îpowerâ of a public university to offer Continuing Ed. Îprogramsâ (in essence have Îvetoâ power over a program) which the private institutions have or want. However, public universities cannot challenge privates institutions in the same way. This is currently an unresolved issue.

A motion was made (and seconded) to support the Oregon State University motion separating faculty health benefits from PEBB control..

MOTION:
Whereas, the creation of a unified Public Employment Benefits Board (PEBB) has altered the faculty benefits offered as compensation for service to OUS faculty; and
Whereas, The planning of benefit packages under PEBB has largely ignored the frequently expressed critical needs of the faculty of the OUS system and
Whereas, The current PEBB benefit system contains a structure of subsidies that discriminates against faculty-preferred benefit options (as revealed in PEBB surveys); and
Whereas, The PEBB administered benefits represent a substantial reduction in benefits and an increase in cost for most faculty; and
Whereas, OUS faculty as a group represent a relatively low cost pool of beneficiaries; and
Whereas, The originating legislation (SB 271) said the System ã....may elect, at the discretion of the State Board of Higher Education, to provide alternative benefits plans to its employees, should the same level of benefits be available at a lower cost...ä; therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate of the Oregon University System approve a petition to request that the Board of the Oregon University System work with due haste to develop and implement a plan to separate faculty health care benefits from PEBB control by developing a system of benefits governance that is more responsive to faculty concerns and more cost effective in meeting faculty health care needs.
THIS MOTION WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY AT THE DEC. 4, 1999, IFS SESSION. 

There was extensive discussion of the current IFS constitution and by-laws. Out of this discussion the Sub-Committee (Sens. Robert Brandon, Jeff Johnson, and Paul Simond) will revise the current document and bring it back to IFS on the following schedule

• 1. A formal draft of the constitution and by-laws will be brought to the Feb., 2000, meeting for discussion
• 2. Formal approval of a revised constitution and by-laws shall occur at the April, 2000, meeting. a specific recommendation:
• a. recommended that the immediate past President of IFS continue for 1 year as a member of IFS

The following individuals were nominated and elected to the leadership of IFS for the year 2000:

• Gary Tiedeman (OSU) - President
• Ann Tedards (UO) - Vice President
• Paul Simonds (UO) - IFS Representative to the OUS Academic Council
• Robert Brandon (EOU) - Secretary

• Feb. 4 and 5: Oregon State University
• April 7 and 8: University of Oregon
• June 2 and 3: Southern Oregon University
• October 6 and 7: Oregon Institute of Technology
• December 1 and 2: Oregon Health Sciences University

---

Fellow IFS Senators:

This edition of the Dec., 1999, IFS minutes concludes my service to IFS as the Secretary for 1999. I wish all of you the very best as the IFS continues into the year 2000. I have come to deeply respect the wisdom and dedication of all of you to the OUS System and its faculty. I was honored to serve you in this capacity. Marion Schrock Western Oregon University