Campus Journal prints only signed and verified letters
from the UNH community. If you have recently sent an unsigned letter to Campus Journal,
please resubmit it with your name and contact information. All letters should be 500
words or less. Thank you.
I would like to express my disappointment that the Campus Journal no longer covers
news from the staff councils. Over the past year or more I have been increasingly
frustrated getting timely, independent information about these meetings.
When there was a print Journal I felt I was able to keep up with campus developments – not
just staff issues but all the news of campus-wide interest. Now I find myself
clicking between tiny headlines to articles that I can read in the newspaper
or on the Media Services website.
When I think to look at the PAT Council site the minutes are already stale
and sometimes incoherent. And, while I used to read the OS Council articles
with interest, now I hardly ever take the time to look at their website.
In addition, I miss the portability and legibility of the print version, although
I understand the financial imperatives. You could read the print Journal on
the bus or waiting for a meeting to begin. Now, I have to view the online version
at my desk.
I really miss relatively objective, timely news about staff concerns such
as appeared in the print Journal. Please, start covering the meetings of the
staff councils again. Don’t ignore two-thirds of the employee community.
Your Silence Will Not Protect You
To the Editor,
Our colleague, Professor Kathy Miriam, was recently the target
of hate from a student. Written in large letters in a copy of the
course textbook, the unidentified student’s rant begin “I
f-----g hate lesbians . . .” and continued in that vein.
Professor Miriam has always been quite open with her students that
she is a lesbian. Although it is possible that the hateful thoughts
were not intended to be conveyed to Professor Miriam, the textbook
was placed where it was likely that she would find it. It is reasonable
to think that the speech was directed against Professor Miriam.
Professor Miriam handled this with courage and thoughtfulness
in addressing the matter in her classes afterwards; however,
this does not mean that she, her students, and the university
community were not harmed by it. It is frightening to be the
object of such hatred and disgust. It is unjust that anyone should
be the object of such vile homophobia. The injustice is only
compounded when it is directed against someone so dedicated to
her students, and who loves teaching and exploring philosophy
as a vehicle for helping her students find greater freedom and
self-acceptance. We are in the process of discussing these issues
with our students in various venues, but we also wanted to make
our views known to the wider campus community.
We would like our students and other members of the university
to know that we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with members of the
lesbian, gay, and transgendered community against such sentiments,
and will not be intimidated. If your fellow students express
hatred or contempt for other people on the basis of their race,
gender, or gender-orientation—either privately to you or
in public—we hope that you will confront them and let them
know where you stand. We ask you to imagine how you would feel
if you were teaching a course and came across such contemptuous
and menacing language seemingly aimed at you. Furthermore, we
hope that those of you who find yourselves subject to such attacks
will find the courage to speak out against them for, in the words
of Audre Lorde, your silence will not protect you.
The Department of Philosophy
Five Year Review of RCM
Dear Members of the University Community:
Over the past 18 months many of you have participated in a review
of the decentralized budget structure we utilize to manage our
financial resources, a structure better known as Responsibility
Center Management or RCM. The review process, led by Provost and
Executive Vice President Bruce Mallory and former Vice President
for Finance and Administration Candace Corvey, was a very thorough
and open one, providing me with a high level of confidence in the
information that has been presented to assist with my decision.
would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all involved in
You have taken the time out of your regular schedules
to participate in a very important process, one that will help
guide future decisions in achieving the goals outlined in the University’s
As you well know, UNH is a special place, with ambitious goals
and limited resources. Our success is a direct result of having
a clear mission and a focused Academic Plan. This guides our decisions
on resource allocations and priorities. RCM is the appropriate
tool for UNH to help inform our resource allocation decisions;
as with any tool, it must be used wisely. Therefore, the RCM model
used at UNH should employ the following overarching principles
(as stated by the RCM Steering Committee in their report to the
Central Budget Committee http://www.unh.edu/rcm/steeringreport.htm):
It should be as simple as possible to promote easy comprehension
and efficient administration.
It should produce results that are widely perceived as fair
and in keeping with the core values of the institution.
should encourage behaviors on the part of faculty and staff
support the institution’s mission and academic
It should have strong governance and planning mechanisms in
place to ensure that it is wisely used as a tool and does not become
an end in itself.
reviewing the RCM Steering Committee’s recommendations
to the Central Budget Committee (CBC), considering discussions
with the CBC, Faculty Senate and many others, and being mindful
of the above principles, I have come to the following decision:
All recommendations set forth by the RCM Steering Committee will
be implemented as described in their report of recommendations
to the CBC (see the above web site for a full report) with three
Indirect cost recovery will be distributed as follows:
82% to the host unit* of the grant, 5% to the Vice President for
Research and Public Service, and 10% to the Principal Investigator
named on the grant. The decision on how the remaining 3% will
be used will be made by me after a working group, led by Vice
President John Aber, convenes and develops recommendations for
* the default split of the host unit share for faculty who have
a different home unit than the grant host unit will be as follows:
6% home unit/76% host unit for research faculty, 18% home unit/64%
host unit for split funded faculty and 30% home unit/52% host unit
for instructional faculty. As before, these splits may be subject
to negotiation among unit heads in order to address particular
The reason for the modification from the RCM Steering Committee
recommendation is to provide as much of a financial incentive as
possible to the unit that directly engages in the activity.
Assessments will be allocated to units based on all revenue
streams and personnel expenses. The RCM Steering Committee recommendation
excluded sponsored program revenues and personnel expenses from
the allocation base and instead recommended a percentage of indirect
cost recovery allocated to central administration in lieu of the
assessment. This would have the effect of subsidizing low indirect
cost grant activity and removing incentives to review the financial
structure of all grants prior to proposal submission. While we
want to continue to expand our sponsored research activity at UNH,
we need to do it in a way that is mindful of the strategic and
financial impact on the institution as a whole.
UNH Library’s budget will be funded according to
the following percentages: 50% from assessment applied to all RC
units, 25% from all tuition revenues (undergraduate, graduate and
summer) and 25% from state appropriations. This modification achieves
the goal of providing a stable, predictable funding source to the
Library as presented by the RCM Steering Committee while reducing
topic that has arisen in every forum is how the “hold
harmless” allocation will be applied. In order to maintain
continuity for FY07, all units will receive a “hold harmless” allocation
that will leave each unit in a resource neutral position from what
the current structure would have provided on July 1, 2006. My view
of the “hold harmless” allocation is that while it
helped UNH make the transition from our prior budget system in
FY01, the allocations were not strategic. During FY07, I will be
engaging the President’s Cabinet, Central Budget Committee,
individual units and others in a process to remove the hold harmless
allocation for each unit and reallocate those funds in a deliberate
and strategic manner for FY08 and beyond. This approach, I believe,
is a much more thoughtful one than using a formula and one that
will assure that our resources and mission-related goals are aligned
in a timely manner.
timing of the implementation of the allocation formula changes
the RCM Review including the calculation of the FY07 “hold
harmless” allocation will be July 1, 2006 coordinated by
the Office of the Vice President for Finance and Administration.
Your unit financial managers will be receiving that information
soon after the Central Budget Committee meeting on April 4.
are numerous other policy and procedure recommendations presented
in the RCM
Review Committee’s report that will
be addressed over the next two fiscal years. The Central Budget
Committee will be responsible for monitoring progress on responding
to these recommendations and will provide a status report to the
community in FY07 and FY08. Another formal review of RCM will occur
I will conclude by saying that I believe the changes to the RCM
model place us in a better position to help achieve the goals outlined
in our Academic Plan. RCM by itself will not accomplish this. It
will be the management decisions that are made, based on the principles
of shared governance and the tools provided by RCM, that will enable
us to move forward.
For more information on RCM and the RCM Review, please visit www.unh.edu/rcm.
Ann Weaver Hart