Stanton Glantz, Ph.D. Chair

Meeting of July 17, 2001

PRESENT: Chair S. Glantz, L. Zegans, J. Showstack, D. Bainton, J. Norbeck,

ABSENT: Vice Chair C.A. Hunt, D. Bikle, R. Price, N. Agabian, A. Kahn, S. Barclay

The meeting of the Academic Planning & Budget (APB) Committee was called to order by Chair Glantz on July 17, 2001 at approximately 1:15 p.m. in Room S 318.


Minutes of the June 7th and 19th meetings will be considered at the next meeting.




Update on Restructure Proposal:
Dean Dracup of the School of Nursing, who is hosting the next Dean’s meeting on July 31, 2001, has invited APB Chair Glantz, outgoing Senate Chair L. Pitts and incoming Senate Chair D. Bikle to attend the second half of their meeting to discuss the APB restructure proposal. Chair Glantz is hopeful that this will be a productive meeting in which the Deans will lend their support to the proposed APB role in the budget process. The next step would be communicating with Chancellor Bishop regarding the proposal.

The proposed involvement with long range planning continues to be seen as uncontroversial. Representatives from the Committee will need to meet with Vice Chancellor Bruce Spaulding in order to identify mechanisms for meaningful Senate involvement in long range planning.

Clinical Affairs Committee Interface with APB re: Medical Center Budget:
Chair Glantz would like to have clarified in writing the division of responsibilities between APB and the Clinical Affairs Committee (CAC) with regard to involvement in the Medical Center budget process.

L.Zegan and J. Showstack volunteered to host a meeting with the incoming and outgoing Chairs of the CAC. Their goal is to produce a written agreement on how APB and CAC should interact in relation to Medical Center budget issues in order to avoid a duplication of efforts by the two Committees.

Recommendations Regarding Proposal to Increase School of Nursing:
The Committee reviewed the revised School of Nursing proposal which included a timeline and budget for expanding the size of the Nursing Masters Entry Program. The program expansion is primarily meant to help remedy the statewide nursing shortage by graduating more personnel qualified to be nursing instructors.

J. Norbeck reported that the Committee’s suggestions at the last meeting were helpful in revising the proposal. The Committee felt the revised proposal looked fine and had no additional feedback to provide to the School of Nursing.

5th School Proposal:
Chair Glantz reported that a Representative from the Systemwide Committee on Graduate Affairs commented that the 5th School seemed more like a proposal for an ORU (Organized Research Unit) than a new school. Chair Glantz noted that there were strong arguments both for and against the 5th School proposal and that this issue would figure prominently in the Committee’s agenda next year.

J. Norbeck commented that the official procedure for considering the merits of the 5th School proposal only allows for consideration and official comment by the UCSF Academic Senate after a detailed, in-depth proposal has been written. Consequently, the UCSF Senate risks being relegated to only a "rubber stamp" role. The Committee agreed that divisional Senate input early in a process such as this would be valuable, and the Committee looks forward to considering this issue further in the new academic year.

Process for Selecting Faculty to Move to Mission Bay:
This issue was tabled for discussion at a later date.

Burrill Seed Fund Venture Proposal:
The Committee briefly discussed this proposal and came to a consensus that APB did not possess enough information to make informed recommendations at this time. The Committee expressed great interest in considering this proposal further in the 2001-2002 term.

The Vice Chancellor of Research Affairs, Zach Hall, will be invited to explain this proposal at the next APB meeting in September 2001.

Creation of a Task Force to Review Proposed "Center for Health and Community:
Dr. Nancy Adler has submitted a proposal for a non-ORU Center for Health and Community (CHC) to L. Pitts, Chair of the Academic Senate. Because Senate input is required before the Chancellor can approve a non-ORU center, a streamlined method for Senate deliberation has been implemented by Senate Chair Larry Pitts. Rather than having separate committees produce separate proposal reviews, Chair Pitts has requested a joint review of the proposal’s merits by the relevant committees, with the Committee on Research (COR) taking the lead. The Committee on Research has been asked to appoint a Review Leader and COR, APB, Clinical Affairs, and Graduate Council have been asked to each appoint two committee representatives to this joint task force. Any draft report produced will be reviewed by the separate full committees for additional comments. A single final report will then include Input from all reviewing Committees and will be forwarded to the Senate Chair.

J. Norbeck and J. Showstack volunteered to be the APB representatives on the CHC Task Force.



The meeting was adjourned at 2:10 p.m. The next Committee meeting will be held in room S-318 at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 7, 2001.

Prepared by:
Senate Staff
Christopher Theisen
Senate Analyst

Last Webpage Update: 5/20/13

University of California, San Francisco
San Francisco, CA 94143, (415) 476-9000
The Regents of the University of California