We are pleased to respond as requested to comments by the Department of Legislative Services in reference to the University of Maryland, College Park budget.  (Page numbers refer to pages in the DLS document.)

1.  The President should comment on UMCP's efforts to increase research funding. (p. 6)

Currently our FY06 awards for research and development exceed, by approximately 25%, the total dollars awarded by this date in FY05.  We have confirmation that federal funding for the Center for Advanced Study of Language will increase by approximately 35% in FY07.  We are also likely to win a new, multi-million dollar language-related contract in the National Foreign Language Center.  We will continue to exploit our expertise in language and culture as there is significant federal funding available in these areas.

Given that 20% of our federal funding currently comes from the Department of Defense (DoD), our challenge is to expand our funded research in other areas.  We are approaching this challenge in several ways.  To increase our industrial funding, we are in the process of hiring an associate vice president for research with the appropriate experience to facilitate partnerships and funded research opportunities with the commercial sector.  To increase our NIH funding, we are targeting opportunities for partnerships with area medical institutions and biotechnology industries to enable success in applying for large NIH Center grants.  One such teaming effort on proposal development, for a Center for Translational Science (a new program within NIH), is already underway with George Washington University and Children's National Medical Center as partners.  To increase overall research funding, we have developed an incentive program for large, multidisciplinary university research centers to encourage and enable cross-disciplinary research that matches our expertise with research areas for which there is increased federal funding available (i.e., security, energy, President Bush's American Competitiveness Initiative).  Currently we are developing multidisciplinary research initiatives which will bring in new research dollars in energy, environmental prediction, supply chain modernization, quantum science, bioinformatics for pathogen detection, homeland security/terrorism, food safety and security, and nano-biotechnology.

2. The President should discuss why funds for the program [Academy of Leadership] are needed in addition to the UMCP's budget. (p. 11)

The additional $0.5 million grant through MHEC's budget for the Academy of Leadership will help create a new center for public leadership.  The James MacGregor Burns Academy of Leadership will execute, plan, and establish this center as an institute for legislative and executive leadership, similar in scope and nature to the Institute for Politics at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard or the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University.  Private and foundation funds will augment MHEC funding.  This unique program, not primarily a campus based learning initiative, will be focused on training emerging leaders from communities across the state's historically underrepresented groups in public life.  This grant will be a state-wide initiative that is primarily part of the campus' service mission.

3. The President should comment on how UMCP intends to spend the additional general funds and on the increases in unrestricted funds by program. (p. 12)

The increase in current unrestricted fund expenditures (including those funded through the general funds and tuition and fee revenue) is primarily composed of merit and fringes in each of the programs (except scholarships and fellowships) plus the following items:

General funds increased $36.4 million (11.1%) for fiscal 2007.  The planned usage of the funds is as follows:

$9.4 million of programmatic enhancement funds to include:

• Public Health
• Bioengineering
• Public Policy
• Need-based financial aid
• Facilities Renewal
• Information Technology
• Libraries
• Advancement Initiative

The remaining $27.0 million will go to partially fund mandatory expenditure increases. The balance of the mandatory expenditure increases is funded by tuition and fee increases. These mandatory expenditure increases include:

• Merit increases @ 2.5% for faculty and staff
• Fringe benefits on merit increases
• Fuel and utility inflation
• Health insurance and other fringe inflation
• Financial aid
• New facilities
• Costs associated with new enrollments
• Inflation on general operating expenditures
• Academic Revenue Bond debt service
• Construction management fees
• Veterinary Medicine cost commitments per agreement with Virginia Tech
• Board of Regents Audit Initiative

The University of Maryland is helping to address the demand for higher education in the state of Maryland in two ways.  Efficiency efforts on the College Park campus are moving students to graduation in less time.  This allows the University to admit more students without growing the size of enrollment.  In addition programs that use capacity during non-peak times such as spring, winter, and summer terms are being introduced.  All of these strategies can occur without increasing the stress on existing classroom and research space.

The focus of enrollment growth for UM associated with the additional $2.4 million from USM will be on the programs at the Shady Grove Center.  Additional programs will be added and existing programs will be expanded to meet student demand.  This funding will cover expenses related to expansion of programs and the delivery of instruction.  Again, there should be minimal impact on space at the College Park campus.

5.  The President should comment on the steps UMCP will take to reach the required [faculty] workload. (p. 15)

The data referenced in the analyses are for the 2004-2005 academic year.  This is one year earlier than the effective year for the new Board of Regents' faculty workload expectations.  To assure that the Regents' goals for teaching in the 2005-2006 academic years are met, the University developed a web-based management system that allows department chairs, deans, and the Provost to monitor teaching activities by the faculty during the academic year.  Shortfalls can be detected in an on-going manner.  Preliminary reports for the current year indicate that the average number of course-equivalent units will meet or exceed the increased expectations.

6.  The President should comment on the progress of the two task forces that were formed to address the conditional status and what UMCP is doing to ensure a return to full accreditation status. (p. 21)

Two task forces, the Logistical Assessment Team and the College of Education Assessment Committee, have been established to address the issues that resulted in the granting of conditional accreditation by NCATE and to work toward the goal of full accreditation of our teacher education programs.  Following are highlights of accomplishments to date and near term plans.

• The outcome assessment system used for teacher education programs has been revised to meet both NCATE and Middle States accreditation standards.
• An internal review of the system was completed after the revision and additional changes were made as a result of the internal review.
• Major improvements have already been made and the system is in operation.
• On February 24, the revised system will be presented to an informal review group, including representatives from the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), campus representatives, and a consultant with extensive NCATE review experience.  The group will be asked to evaluate the system for compliance with NCATE standards and suggest needed improvements, which will then be made.
• On June 26-29, the College of Education will host a mock NCATE site visit, including representatives from MSDE and consultants with current experience on NCATE review teams.  The Provost will attend the exit interview with the mock site visit team, which will determine what, if any, improvements are needed before an actual site visit is scheduled with NCATE and MSDE.

7.  The President should comment on the necessity of creating a combined School of Public Health and what fiscal impact this will have on the State. (p. 22)

The greatest benefit of working long-term to create a collaborative School of Public Health between UMCP and UMB is based on the current state of the discipline.  Until recently, public health practice has been built on the strength of clinicians who turn their attention to population based health problems.  That strength is core to what the program at UMB contributes to the public health mission.  More recently, public health has focused as well on the behavioral and social determinants of the health of populations—the principal strength found in the current graduate program in public health, and the behavioral and social sciences strengths at UMCP.  Combining both the clinical and related expertise at UMB with the comprehensive behavioral, social, and policy strengths at UMCP will have the following specific benefits:

• Will allow the State to aggregate the significant and complementary assets across the two institutions;
• With the benefit of foresight and up-front planning it will allow the State to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, resources, and assets;
• Will provide an appropriate single point of access to the State's public health infrastructure by both the public and private sectors;
• Will provide a more significant and comprehensive opportunity for collaborations with potential private sector partners;
• Will provide a greater diversity of faculty and facilities, and enhance the State's competitiveness for extramural funding;
• Will produce a broader base of unduplicated courses for students in their training, and provide opportunities for greater depth in specific areas of specialization;
• Will provide a strategic alliance for cutting edge research in both clinical and behavioral sciences; and
• Will afford both campuses access to a broader base of thought, theory, and practice as they approach significant public health problems in the State of Maryland.

Economic Impact on the State.  There are about 450,000 people employed in salaried positions in public health in the United States, with an additional 2,850,000 who volunteer their services.  Nationally, it has been estimated that 80% of public health workers lack specific public health training, and only 22% of chief executives of local health departments have graduate degrees in public health.  Data from the American Public Health Association indicate that 50% of the federal public health workforce and 25% of the state public health workforce will retire in the next five years.  The UMCP/UMB combined School of Public Health will ensure adequate training in anticipation of jobs for the public health workforce in Maryland.

The combined School of Public Health will also serve a rapidly aging Maryland citizenry.  Nearly 80 million baby boomers are approaching age 65 at a time when nearly 15% of GDP is spent on health related expenditures—often associated with this aging process.  Maryland is faced with growing costs in all State programs that serve the elderly.  The new combined School of Public Health can analyze and project these needs and work collaboratively with the State to assure that adequate service options are available for all Maryland citizens.  In addition, the new School of Public Health will work closely with the state to assure the availability of expanded opportunities in the areas of health promotion, fitness, lifelong learning, and meaningful engagement for all Marylanders. 

In addition to these, the economic impact includes the following:

• A combined school with broader and deeper resources will allow us to compete more effectively for research funding, including nearly $50 million dollars in annual federal set asides to Schools of Public Health;
• Appropriate advance planning and collaboration reduces the likelihood of duplicative spending to each of the individual universities;
• A combined school will bring both clinical and behavioral / social science / policy perspectives to a more efficient and comprehensive approach to dealing with homeland security and natural disaster issues;
• The combined School of Public Health will save faculty costs while increasing the breadth and depth of programs available to students;
• The combined SPH will create a built-in opportunity for the rapid translation of basic science to clinical outreach.