MEMORANDUM
FROM:George M. Philip,
President, University at Albany
SUBJECT: Council on Administrative Review and Evaluation (CARE)
DATE:
February 6, 2012
While unable to attend Monday's University Senate meeting, I want to inform you of my
position and views regarding the proposed charter amendment entitled, the Council on
Administrative Review and Evaluation (CARE).
I do not support, and will not approve, the proposed charter amendment. My reasons
are outlined below.
First, the proposed charter amendment establishes a Council that would evaluate individual
employees (those who have administrative positions), regardless of the terms and
conditions of employment that may be in place across the negotiating units representing
those employees. Equally important, the Council and its evaluation activities are proposed
despite the University Senate not having the authority to undertake the evaluation of
administrative staff. Pursuant to Article X of the Policies of The Board of Trustees, the
faculty of a State-operated institution of State University of New York (in this case, the
University at Albany) has the responsibility "to participate significantly in the initiation,
development and implementation of the educational program." A plain reading of the
faculty's responsibilities cannot reasonably be construed to include the evaluation of
administrative staff in this responsibility.
Second, the University's institutional responsibility to review its effectiveness clearly
resides with the University President. Such authority is vested in the University President
under Article IX of the Policies where the President (as the Chief Administrative Officer) is
authorized to administer the institution and promote its development and effectiveness.
To this end, the President, among other things, is charged with the responsibility to
appoint and supervise members of the professional staff of the University and to assign
them such powers, duties and responsibilities as appropriate for the administration of the
institution; and evaluation is a fundamental component of supervision.
Although the University Senate is not vested with the authority to conduct the evaluation
of the University's administrative staff nor of administrative effectiveness, I will seek and
welcome the University Senate's advice as we address the recommendations in our Middle
States self study to "enhance the processes associated with academic assessment while
increasing efforts towards more systemic and sustained assessment
University Hall, Room 302
1400 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12222
PH: 518-956-8010 FX: 518-956-8022
wW\S'.0111aLly.edll
UNIVERSITYATALBANY
State University of New York
Office of the President
TO:
Susanna Fessler, Chair, University Senate
processes for administrative units." Guided by the comments of the Middle States site
visit team to address this through the implementation of the strategic plan, this work is
already in development, with the past, present, and next Senate chair serving on the
Strategic Plan Implementation Steering Committee. Our work will be conducted in a
manner consistent with the provisions of the Middle States standards. In this regard, it is
important to be clear that the comments of the site visit team affirmed that UAlbany fully
meets the accreditation standards of Institutional Assessment. Their report (which, is
available on the wiki at: https://wiki.albany.edu/display/middlestates/Home) also
provided a number of helpful perspectives on the matter, including a specific statement
about the role of faculty.
In addition, I want to take this opportunity to address several issues raised by the
proposal of a new charter amendment. Whether called bylaws or a charter, the faculty
under the Policies of The Board of Trustees is authorized to prepare and adopt internal
rules governing its conduct which shall contain: "(1) Provisions for committees and their
responsibilities; (2) Procedures for the calling and conduct of faculty meetings and
elections; and (3) Provisions for such other matters of organization and procedure as
may be necessary for the performance of their responsibilities." Recognizing the
University faculty has neither the responsibility nor the authority under the Policies of
the Board to administer the institution or appoint or supervise members of the
professional staff, it cannot merely confer that authority upon itself through the adoption
of provisions of its internal governance documents.
While not all provisions of the internal governance documents require the approval of
the University President, those concerning consultation with the faculty do. Those
requiring the allocation of staff or non-staff resources would also require specific
approval. Furthermore, all actions taken by the faculty under their internal governance
documents are merely advisory upon the President in recognition of the President's
legal authority to administer the institution.
Finally, I believe that it would be in the shared interests of both administration and
faculty to initiate conversations regarding issues such as administrative evaluation at
the earliest possible point. When such issues arise in the future, it would be in our
collective interests to engage in an interactive dialogue at the beginning of the policy
development process as opposed to its middle or end.
I look forward to continuing the discussion regarding these matters in the days and
weeks ahead.
