Expedited administrative review — next steps

April 7, 2021

Tori Tragis

— by Dan White, chancellor

Last Friday, I sent a message to the UAF community regarding the expedited administrative management review report. Over the weekend, I received a number of questions and concerns about the report and the process that I want to address. 

A primary concern originated from the fact that not all colleges or units were represented on the Expedited Administrative Management Review Committee. At the same time, one area of focus in the committee’s report that received significant attention was the structure, efficiency and effectiveness of CRCD. Because none of the eight members of the committee were from CRCD, this drew additional concern about the significance of the comments in this area. No committee can include representatives of all areas of the university. There should be no doubt, however, that as we strive to achieve our strategic goal of global leadership in Alaska Native and Indigenous studies, we remain committed to the mission of our rural campuses, their role in our university,  and the leadership of the vice chancellor for rural, community and Native education.

Outside of two non-voting administrative appointees, the members were selected by your governance leaders. In my March 25 Friday Focus, I wrote about the shared responsibility of shared governance. As I wrote then, this requires a deep and demonstrated commitment and the belief that, working together, we more effectively meet our goals. It also requires participation in shared governance and attention to the many roles that are played by Faculty Senate, Staff Council and the Associated Students of UAF (including selecting membership for committees).

A word on the process of expedited administrative management review: The process began with a request by the Governance Coordinating Committee (a committee composed of governance leadership) for another year of expedited administrative review. I agreed to this review as a parallel process to the expedited academic review.

To enable the process, I asked all of UAF’s  administrators to write evaluations of their positions and structures for the committee’s review. The report is now open to public comment before I make decisions based on their recommendations. As I mentioned on Friday, I will accept some recommendations, likely modify some and not proceed with others. But first I want to hear from you. The original timeline was delayed by 10 days at the request of the committee for extra writing time. As such, the public comment period will now be open until April 16. The comment form can be accessed here. I look forward to your feedback.

Thank you.