Return to Main Menu

Faculty Senate meeting: committee reports The Faculty Senate met Feb. 5 and was called to order by Anne O. Kilpatrick, DPA. The next meeting will be held at 7:45 a.m. Tuesday, March 5 in room 107 of the Administration/Library Building. Committee Reports Faculty Affairs Committee:  Subbi P. Mathur (chair) reported that her committee will meet at 10 a.m. on Feb. 11 at the Clinical Sciences Building room 635 D conference room. The committee will discuss the Hand Book Section on tenure and work on ways to strengthen the definition of tenure and link it to suitable salary remuneration. The committee will also discuss details on holding a workshop on tenure for all the faculty members especially, the junior faculty. She urged any senator who is interested to attend the committee meeting. Academic Affairs Committee:  Philippe Arnaud (chair) will convene the meeting at a suitable time and place in the first week of March. This committee is charged with looking at faculty remuneration and the policies governing it. University Affairs Committee:  Mary Mauldin (chair). Besides the gender equity subcommittee under the chairmanship of Kit Simpson, this committee will look at the continuity and communication in the Faculty Senate. For example, several senators serve as senate representatives on universitywide committees, but lose contact with the Senate once they rotate off the Senate service. We need to have a mechanism for these senators to continue reporting to the Faculty Senate until their committee assignments are completed.  Gender Equity Committee:  Kit Simpson (chair) reported that she is in the process of getting her committee together to study gender equity issues in the university and extrapolate it to minority-related issues also. Governance Committee:  Francine R. Margolius (chair) is convening her committee meeting during the first week of March. The tasks facing this committee are the conducting of the Senate Election in May, providing guidelines for the election and finalizing the incorporation of corrections in the Faculty Hand Book. Regarding the latter, the blue-purple version (incorporating all Board of Trustees approved corrections) is completed. Walker Coleman met with Rosalie Crouch to have this version looked at.  Policies and Reports Faculty Contracts Committee Report:  Rich Hernandez (chair; Paul Gold, Jennie Arial, Tara Halsey, Louis Leite, Sally Self, Terry O’Brien and John Bosso, members—Tom Higerd, ex officio) reported through an e-mail (he was out sick) to all the faculty senators that the faculty contract process is continuing to move ahead slowly but surely. He met with the Deans’ Council in January and gave its members a briefing similar to the one he gave at the Faculty Senate Retreat. The recommendations we have made so far were well-received with one exception. There was concern by the provost and several deans that the reference in the contract to mediation could undermine the chair’s authority and ability to negotiate. Also, the Faculty Hand Book does not specify a process for mediation, but only a recognition that it is an option. He believes that there is now an initiative started by Kilpatrick to establish a mediation process. The provost also asked that we include language that addressed compliance with the rules and regulations required for the conduct of research and clinical practice.  The committee’s recommendations have been forwarded to both Frank Draine, our legal counsel (the draft will also be sent to Martha Upshur, our other legal counsel, and Joe Good, MUSC legal counsel. Once we get their feedback, the committee can finalize the language.  He is also meeting with Tom Higerd (ex-officio) on Wednesday to develop ideas for the contract format, which he will then bring to the committee for discussion. Hernandez’s written report was discussed in great detail on the senate floor. Some faculty members from the College of Medicine Clinical Sciences Division, were concerned about the non-competitive clinical practice or other clauses that are now part of the College of Medicine contract for clinical faculty members, since UMA does not have its own faculty contract. A senator explained that Ph.D. researchers also get salaries from different sources including UMA, state and research funding that complicates the writing of the contract. Other faculty members were concerned about the short time that is given for the faculty members (five days) before they have to sign their annual contracts and wished there should be some wording regarding the matter. The members of the Contracts Committee present at the meeting took note of the raised concerns and promised to transmit them to the rest of the committee before finalizing the document. Due to the heterogeneity of the MUSC faculty, it was emphasized time and again, that we do have a crying need for an universal contract that will be applicable for all the faculty  and yet has the flexibility to incorporate the individual tailored job requirements of each faculty member.  Conflict of Interest and Outside Activities Policies Report:  Kathryn Meier (chair, MUSC Conflict of Interest Resolution Committee and the former Faculty Senate member representative to the MUSC Consultancy Task Group) commented on the drafts of two major and important policies, namely:  (1) Faculty Conflict of Interest Policy and  (2) Faculty Outside Activities Policy developed by the Task Group and are being presented to the Faculty Senate for its approval. The members of this task group were: Valerie West (chair), John Heffner, Dan Sneed, Pat Arford, Don Wiest, Kay Meier (FS), Ken Roozen, Tom McIlwain, Deborah Carson (FS), Mike Schmidt, Dan Knapp (FS) and Kathryn Magruder. The committee met for approximately one year to complete the following charges:  Review university and college polices regarding faculty “professional/outside activities as related to “conflicts of commitment” or “conflicts of interest” Recommend changes if appropriate  Recommend procedures for enforcement of policies  a. Outcomes, Faculty Activities Policy; (9.4 and 9.6 Faculty Handbook) Based on similar policies at other institutions, including SC universities Philosophical introduction with rationale for faculty involvement in activities  Definition of conflict of commitment  Delineation of categories of activities: MUSC Contractual activities—professional activities covered in contract and practice plan; Outside professional activities—outside university auspices but related to faculty member’s duties; Outside employment—not related to duties, not encouraged Emphasis on annual contract and importance of accurate, negotiated documented, and signed contracts that include desired professional activities— preference for channeling funding through the university  Process for approval and reporting of activities, resolving disputes between chairs and faculty, roles of faculty and chairs defined.  College level polices and procedures called for in compliance with university policies as specified.  b. Conflict of Interest Policy: final draft is online. Defines conflict of interest; Broadens scope to non-research applications; Process and procedures identified; Connected to faculty activities policy; and Calls for disclosure of all activities for potential conflict of interest  Accomplishments of the Task Force: 1) Developed a new Faculty Activities Policy that addresses “conflict of commitment.” 2) Revised and expanded the Conflict of Interest policy. Key Features: 1) Faculty Activities Policy: Definition of conflict of commitment; Delineation of categories of activities; Use of annual contract to define expectations; Process for approval, reporting, and dispute resolution; and Flexibility for variations between colleges 2) Conflict of Interest Policy: Broadens scope to include non-research activities; Updated description of process for reporting and review; Integrated with the Faculty Activities Policy; New procedure for annual disclosure of all activities that may present conflicts of interest/commitment. Besides these two documents, she also reviewed the document that she uses while resolving issues of conflict of interest in her universitywide committee. The form is appended at the end of the present minutes. Kathryn Meier emphasized the importance of these documents being approved by the Faculty Senate to provide guidelines for faculty members while planning their professional activities. Anne Kilpatrick recommended that we poll the senators through e-mail and approve/amend the documents. Subbi P. Mathur will e-mail the senators regarding this matter. Chair’s Report: Anne Osborne Kilpatrick 1. Faculty Hand Book and drafts of policies have been sent to both the faculty legal counsel for review during last week. Anne Kilpatrick expressed her disappointment in not hearing from either Frank Draine or Martha Upshur in spite of her efforts to reach them.  She asked the senate to help her and the executive committee in finding a proper replacement. Barry Hainer, in charge of the legal counsel fees, made a motion allowing the executive committee to choose a replacement with a friendly amendment from Subbi Mathur that we shall first make every attempt to make sure that both legal counsel will fulfil their duties with the speed that we require. The motion, with the friendly amendment, was unanimously approved. We have so far collected $9,675 in our legal counsel account.  An important post-meeting update: Kilpatrick was able to contact Draine who is reviewing the policies we discussed this morning. He had a crisis that took him out of town last week, but we will be able to stay in better touch in the future. He is going to prepare a report on the faculty activities and conflict of interest policies within the next week to 10 days, and also has comments on the contract task force report. He believes there are some serious concerns regarding the two former policies and as soon as we receive his report, we shall convene a meeting to discuss them and future steps.  2. MUSC Hearing Committee appointment of new members. The following senators have been recommended to the provost to be members of the MUSC Hearing Committee: Subbi Mathur, College of Medicine; Andrea White, College of Health Professions; Francine Margolius, College of Nursing; Richard Albenesius, College of Dental Medicine; Deborah Carson, College of Pharmacy; and Mary Mauldin, Library Sciences  3. New charges to the committees: Anne Kilpatrick has asked the University Affairs committee (Mary Mauldin appointed as the chair) to work on continuity and communication. Note: Faculty Affairs and Academic Affairs committees received charges at the January meeting  4. Status of Arts and Digital Imaging Report and Post tenure review document: The Arts and Digital Imaging Review Report (chair: Carlos Salinas; senate members Subbi Mathur and Janice Hundley) was approved by the Deans’ Council and the Deans’ Council recommended that the Arts and Digital Imaging Department be placed as an academic support department under the purview of the provost and that a task force be appointed to further review the recommendations presented by the senate that can be found in the January meeting minutes. Carlos Salinas and Subbi Mathur will serve on this task force to help the process. The post-tenure review document was unanimously approved by the President’s Council during its Jan. 23 meeting. Philip Privitera (chair) and Subbi P. Mathur (member, post-tenure review committee; Jerry Webb the other committee member was unable to attend the meeting) were present at the council meeting as the members of the committee that worked on this important document. The document is now sent to the Board of Trustees for its approval before becoming part of the Faculty Hand Book. The revised document provides recourse for faculty who are not performing up to the expected level of satisfaction by placing the responsibility of providing a supportive environment for the tenured faculty on the chair and the college. The important revision is that the tenured faculty members who score above satisfactory in their post-tenure review will receive a raise in base pay, supported by the provost’s office in the first year and continued by the department or college. 5. Deferred Compensation and Life Insurance Policies (457K): Around 128 MUSC faculty members own these policies that have both the deferred compensation and life insurance components. After the disallowance of these combined policies as tax deferred compensation programs by the Internal Revenue Service, MUSC has decided that it will not do payroll deductions for investing in these policies. Kilpatrick and Francine Margolius met with John Sutusky and Susan Haskill to discuss the plight of the 128 faculty members who will be encumbered by this change of policy. They were told that these faculty members should call Sandy Sanders (authorized by the MUSC to deal with this matter) of the American Pensions Inc. at 884-3912. Kilpatrick urged all the senators to e-mail their electorate unit to advise them regarding this grave matter.  Financial Report by Dr. Jerry Reves, dean, College of Medicine: Reves presented a brief synopsis of the financial challenges facing him as the dean of the College of Medicine. In 1998, the College of Medicine had a net balance of $30 million  that was reduced to $15 million in the next year and by the year 2001 was down to 0.1 million (See table below) College of Medicine financial history MUSC Accounts July 1998— $30 M; July 1999— $15 M; July 2000—$2.5 M; July 2001—$0.7 M; October 2001—$ 0.1 M Now, the College of Medicine is in the red. Where did all this money go? Resource investments Increased quality and size of faculty and departments; creation and support of interdisciplinary programs; and renovation of clinical and research space to attract  Root of the problems 1. MUSC expenditures by clinical departments without transfer of backup UMA dollars, all at a time that the Balanced Budget Act forced losses on the MUSC Hospital Administration and reduced Medical University Hospital Administration transfers of > $20 millions per year to College of Medicine.  2. University Medical Associates (UMA), originally started to benefit the medical school, but eventually lost about 60 million dollars in following the national trend of purchasing primary care facilities in Charleston and surrounding areas. The UMA was unable to keep up with its obligations to the medical school and gradually has fallen way behind in fulfilling its financial obligations.  3. College of Medicine operated with a common checking account for all the departments. Balances in one department were used to cover overdrafts in other departments or entities in college. Net effect of overall deficit spending is the depletion of cash reserves  4. Up until 1997, hospital was spending 20 to 30 millions per year to academically support College of Medicine that came from Medicare benefits. With the passing of the Balanced Budget Act, the College of Medicine lost this revenue.  5. Also, the UMA was cited by Federal authorities for violation of filing patients’ reports and had to spend to the tune of 30 million dollars to settle the case outside court.  6.The one bad thing is that the accounting practices in the College of Medicine consider both UMA and College of Medicine as common owners, with the result that the UMA could deplete our College of Medicine financial resources.  Proposed solution 1. Reves has formed a Financial Review Committee comprising of the chairs of different departments and the financial vice president and other important financial administrators.  2. He has instituted a freeze of funds policy for all surplus spending in all departments of the College of Medicine. Essential college spending continues, and non-essential is suspended.  3. Creation of separate departmental accounts.  4. Departmental deficit spending must develop a plan to end it—active dean’s office oversight in place.  5. Clear and open communication of College of Medicine finances.  6. All these challenges test individual and collective leadership.  Reves pleaded that we seek solutions and not scapegoats and that this is the time of resolve not panic. He projects that using these prudent steps, we shall overcome this financial hardship by the end of 2003. Questions from the floor focused mainly on the flaws of financial policies in the various departments and colleges. Reves agreed that there must be an uniformity in financial policies through the whole university. The senators thanked Reves for addressing the Faculty Senate on this important matter. Outside Activities Disclosure Form (Used by the MUSC conflict of Interest Resolution Committee, chaired by Kathryn Meier, Ph.D.) The purpose of this form is to disclose outside professional activities that could potentially result in conflicts of interest or commitment. This disclosure is intended to be proactive and will not necessarily require further action.  The disclosure form can be found at the Faculty Senate Web site http://www.musc.edu/facsen/subbi/Feb2002%20min.htm.