Ana səhifə

Crad minutes Monday, February 21, 2005 101 Walter, 3: 00-4: 40 pm

Yüklə 14.24 Kb.
ölçüsü14.24 Kb.
CRAD Minutes

Monday, February 21, 2005

101 Walter, 3:00-4:40 PM
Attendees: Greg Germaine, Bruce Erickson, Sarah Waldemar, Joe Weisenburger, Robert J, Tom Schenk, Marilyn DeLong, Mark Paller, Ann Mayhew, Ed Wink, John Bryson, Dennis Ahlburg, Gary Balas, Alan Ek, Brittany Lloyd, Brenda Start, Bev Durgan, Bert Stromberg, Rosalyn Segal, Scott Martens, Peggy Sundermeyer, Ken Hepburn, Tim Mulcahy

  • March 9th Luncheon to promote culture day-long workshop

  • Small Group Discussion

    • Close out for fixed price hasn’t met – waiting on language issue, then address amount of money transferred to sponsored account

    • ICR- principle to document, start with AHC, postpone until next time

    • Life cycle of Centers-See attached handout

  • Interdisciplinary inter within community

Office of Service and Continuous Improvement**Handout**

  • Depicts office as a 3-prong structure

    • Cultural, operational, and financial transformation

  • Website live mid-January:

  • To understand best practices, share through infrastructure

Question: Primary award? Support research institution measures tied around culture and financial transactions.

Frustration with process: Best model to support, look at product with the manager grants and research portfolio. Key indicator for research in college/institution: what doing to drive improvement

How to participate? Give success stories
eResearch Central**Handout**

  • Close to initial launch

  • Information for IRB and IAACUC continuing reviews will show up on eRC

  • Give feedback after launch

Question: If identified as role on project, will all of the faculty be able to see data on eRC? Yes, if a person is identified in any role they will be able to see information on the project (including the correspondent role on IRB & IACUC studies).

Live now? Launch over March 18th weekend

CRAD Discussion

  • Benefit better with coordination and perspective

    • Continued support and patience

      • Make the research experience better: if you find a better way, do it!

      • ERC plays an important part

        • Community needs to be aware of system and situation

    • To change general perception, invite correction

      • For the past 10 years, OVPR focused on compliance side with split office of Graduate and OVPR into two offices. OVPR is viewed as compliance and has negative baggage.

        • Promote/advocate research, reduce the burdens, advocate at a state/federal level. Currently not well represented in OVPR

  • Initiatives

    • Restore academic presence in OVPR

    • Create academic focus

      • Work with groups like CRAD and Research Committee for Senate for guidance

        • Bring in input to the office

    • View more rules/regulations

  • Long term goal

    • SRC-same info on 20 compliance forms

      • ERC is an example of what we are trying to do

    • Couple of areas at the request of the U President

    • Help identify areas and prioritize areas that need improvement

Next Meeting: Monday, March 21, 2005, 101 Walter Library, 3:00-4:30 PM

Life cycle of centers
Group members:

Gary Balas, Vic Bloomfield, Mark Paller, Tom Schenk, Peggy Sundermeyer

Existing policies:

Creating and Evaluating Interdisciplinary Centers (February, 2003)
Intercollegiate Programs in the Academic Health Center (January, 1998)

Discussion points:

Current policy seems adequate to manage new & existing centers

  • Defines “types” with associated infrastructure and financial support

  • Provides a process for establishing and operating them

  • Prescribes level of review and approval needed to establish and continue

  • Requires recurring internal reporting and review

  • Requires periodic external review (for intercollegiate centers)

External sponsors can require that the name (Center, institute) be used

ICR generated by “centers” is not handled uniformly by colleges
Duplication, or near duplication, of names can be problematic, especially for the public
Centers serve many different purposes and standardization is not essential
Centers should be managed as any departmental or collegiate resource so as not to become administratively or financially cumbersome
Closing centers doesn’t happened with regularity, but is possible using existing policies and procedures
CRAD members with experience in establishing or closing centers are available for consultation

Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur © 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət