IX. Accelerated Systemwide Review Schedule for any Action

Any unit may request that the UCOP initiate a system-level review simultaneously with a campus (UCSF) review. Such a request is most likely to occur when very rapid action is needed—for example, to institute budget reductions that might be achieved through reconstitution. In the case of a systemwide review, campus and systemwide representatives of the Senate and administration agree on the schedule, materials, distribution procedures, and problem resolution processes. The usual campus and systemwide review and approval processes are carried out simultaneously. If the campus proposal begins to diverge markedly from the proposal under systemwide review, the systemwide review can be suspended. Final systemwide approvals may be given after the campus approves the proposal and it is verified that the approved campus proposal is consistent with that reviewed systemwide.

Details of the Process

  1. The campus administration, Divisional Chair, Academic Council Chair, and Provost initiate a discussion to agree upon a schedule for concurrent campus, Divisional Senate, systemwide Senate, and UCOP reviews. This negotiation may also concern the materials to be included in the review package (normally, the same proposal that is circulating for review on campus); procedures for distributing proposals; and a preliminary plan for how to resolve potential roadblocks to a faster conclusion of reviews.
  2. Upon sending notice of the proposed academic program or academic unit action(s) to the Provost, the Chancellor also sends review materials to the reviewers, as agreed to in step 1.
  3. The Senate review committees that would ordinarily review the proposed action and any other committees the Academic Council Chair designates convey questions regarding the proposal directly to the campus for response, copying other reviewing committees and the Provost.
  4. The Chair of the systemwide committee that would ordinarily be the lead Senate committee for the proposed action (e.g., the CCGA Chair for a school that would offer graduate degree programs, the UCORP Chair for an MRU) is responsible for coordinating the systemwide committees participating in the accelerated review. As necessary, this Chair convenes the Chairs of the other systemwide Senate committees participating in the review. The Chair of the Divisional Senate may also be included in these discussions.
  5. The systemwide Senate committees make their final recommendations only after the Divisional Senate and campus administration have opined on the proposal. If the proposal undergoes significant change in the course of campus/Divisional review, the systemwide Senate may suspend further review until the fully revised proposal is available and near campus agreement.
  6. The Senate review committees report their comments, final recommendations, and any required approvals to the Academic Council Chair. If CCGA would ordinarily act on behalf of the Senate with regard to all or part of the proposed action (e.g., a graduate program), then its decision is also final in an accelerated review. If there is not concurrence on other actions among the reviewing committees, the Academic Council serves as arbiter. If any part of the proposal requires Assembly action, the Academic Council Chair makes appropriate arrangements. The Council Chair reports the Senate comments and recommendations to the Provost.
  7. The Provost reviews the Senate materials, resolves any issues arising from the reviews with the campus, and makes a recommendation to the President who, depending on the proposed action(s), approves, approves implementation, or recommends to the Regents approval of the action(s).
  8. If Regental action is required, the President recommends approval to the Regents.
  9. Upon Regental action, the Provost informs the Chancellor of that action, copying others involved in the process.
UCSF Compendium | Table of Contents