Heavily subsidized Duck Athletic program paid $3M for body-bag games

Henry Houston has the report in the Eugene Weekly:

UO spent more than any other Pac-12 college team this year for its nonconference schedule — sometimes scornfully called “body-bag” games because of the mismatch between teams. Bowling Green received $900,000, Portland State received $500,000 and San José State received $1.6 million, according to contracts obtained by Eugene Weekly. …

The high cost was an aberration of scheduling, says Eric Roedl, deputy athletic director at UO.

Originally, the UO was planning on playing Texas A&M instead of San José State, but a clause in that agreement allowed Texas A&M to back out if it left its football conference. In 2011, Texas A&M announced it would leave the Big 12 conference for Southeastern Conference. The university voided its contract with UO in 2016, Roedl says.

Other contracts obtained by EW have a penalty clause if the game is canceled. Texas A&M didn’t have one.

“It was a unique agreement,” Roedl adds. …

Whoops. Sounds like it’s going to be a while before the academic side can stop subsidizing them. I wonder if Roedl is going to hit up ASUO for another increase?

Faculty club is opening tonight, 5-8PM

WHO: The UO Faculty Club is open to all UO faculty—tenure-track faculty, non-tenure-track faculty, library faculty, and OAs tenured in an academic department, as well as people retired from positions in these categories.  Eligible people may bring any guests they like.

WHAT: Cash Bar with beer, wine, liquor and non-alcoholic beverages; complimentary hors d’oeuvres.

WHERE: The Faculty Club meets in a designated room on the ground floor of the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art.  Enter at the museum’s main entrance and turn right; the club room is right off the lobby.

WHEN: Wednesdays & Thursdays 5:00-8:00 pm.  We will meet through the last week of classes in Fall Term (i.e. through November 29); activity will resume in the Winter and Spring terms.

FURTHER INFORMATION: Faculty Club Board Chair James Harper (Dept. of the History of Art and Architecture), harperj@uoregon.edu

UO Senate Agenda for Oct 3


Location: EMU 145 & 146 (Crater Lake rooms)
3:00 – 5:00 P.M.

3:00 P.M.   Call to Order

  • Introductory Remarks; Senate President Bill Harbaugh
  • Remarks; Senate Vice President Elizabeth Skowron
  • Remarks; Provost Banavar
  • Remarks; Bob Guldberg (Knight Campus)

3:40 P.M.  Votes

3:45 P.M.   New Business

Discussion of upcoming policies, discussions and issues for fall quarter

4:45 P.M.    Open Discussion
4:50 P.M.   Reports

  • Status of committee reports and where to find them

4:55 P.M.   Notice(s) of Motion

4:56 P.M.   Other Business

  • Senate Retreat: October 31, 20185:00 P.M.   Adjourn

Good for Dana Altman! Federal prosecutors say Oregon, Creighton basketball programs may have paid recruits

Finally! I for one have been disturbed by the fact that he hasn’t come up in this investigation earlier. Surely a successful recruiter and coach like Dana Altman has figured out a way to pass at least a dribble of the millions UO pays him on to his volunteer “student-athletes”. Surely Oregon isn’t the only school where greedy coaches are able to keep all the NCAA cartel’s profits for themselves!

While the latest report is far from conclusive proof that Altman has been doing the right thing and sharing with his players, the latest news is good. Jeff Manning has the story in the Oregonian here:

Federal prosecutors in the basketball corruption trial that began Monday in New York reportedly told prospective jurors that 12 colleges could come up during the proceedings — the University of Oregon among them.

As first reported by Yahoo Sports, prosecutors wanted to disqualify any potential juror whose allegiance to a school might make them less than impartial. An Oregon-based Adidas executive and two others are accused of paying talented prep players to steer them to certain universities. …

But wait, there’s more. Oregonian reporter James Crepea:

The attorney for Adidas executive Jim Gatto claimed Oregon offered “an astronomical amount of money” in its recruitment of Brian Bowen before he signed with Louisville.

Gatto’s attorney, Casey Donnelly, made the remark, according to numerous reporters, during her opening statement in his trial, which began in the Southern District of New York on Tuesday. …

President Schill’s “Open Mike” addresses centralization goals

Dear University of Oregon community members,

When I arrived at the University of Oregon in 2015, I heard the same clear and overwhelming message from virtually every constituency I met with: the university needed strong, decisive, and consistent leadership from Johnson Hall. The faculty, staff, and alumni, along with our Board of Trustees, were not satisfied with the UO being known more for athletics and a recent incident involving sexual violence than our academics. These internal concerns were reinforced by an article published in the Chronicle of Higher Education my first year which pointedly bore the headline “An Academic Reputation at Risk.” The message was clear: we needed to focus on building excellence, which included both a greater emphasis on academic research and helping our students learn, graduate, and move on to successful and fulfilling careers—and we needed to do it right away.

After years of changes in our executive leadership and governance, our community was hungry for progress, but a simple question demonstrated the challenges that would need to be overcome in order to move the institution forward in a meaningful way. I had not even unpacked my boxes when I asked how many faculty members would we have in September. As it turns out, at the time no one kept that data in the central administration. To make matters worse, we didn’t have the ability, for a variety of reasons, to get the data in real time from individual academic units. My question and its answer, which encapsulated one of our greatest challenges, were just the first of many illustrations of the extraordinary decentralization of the University of Oregon circa 2015.

I asked more and more questions, and learned that five of our eight schools and colleges were spending more each year than they were taking in. I learned that, although some departments were experiencing significant drops in student demand, they continued hiring more teachers, all without oversight by Johnson Hall. Schools and departments spent millions of dollars on duplicative computer systems that did not speak to each other. Even more worrisome, those duplicative computer systems operated on an antiquated internet backbone that was in danger of collapse and which conveyed data at speeds so slow that it was faster for scientists to drive hard disks in their cars between Eugene and Portland than utilize our networks. For a rich university, this type of wasteful behavior might be a sustainable, albeit indefensible, use of resources. But not at the UO, where state funding regularly ranks among the lowest of its peer group.

We have taken a number of steps over the past three years to address some of those challenges and to make sure that we create a culture of transparency, efficiency, and accountability at the university. For example, we now have current information on faculty members, student credit hours, and faculty workloads down to the departmental level. This information is now available online. We also have developed a centralized and transparent process for determining tenure-related hiring. Rather than having academic departments fill slots each year based on who has retired or left the university, they make recommendations to their deans, who then make recommendations to the provost based on an assessment of overall needs in their schools and colleges. Following a collaborative discussion among all deans and a committee of senior faculty members informed by data on operational and mission metrics, the provost publishes a plan authorizing searches for all to see.

In terms of the budget, we have sought to ameliorate the havoc that changes in student demand and state retirement and health-care costs have had on our academic departments by changing our financial model. Rather than continue the old practice of tuition following student enrollments, with all costs for faculty and administration picked up by the schools and colleges, we created a new system in which we pay for all tenure-related faculty members centrally and make budgetary allocations to schools and colleges for the rest.

We have also taken steps to realign some administrative services. For example, rather than every administrative unit having its own independent communications staff, we have tried to improve collaboration and coordination and achieve economies of scale by moving to an integrated model. We have begun rationalizing IT services throughout the university to achieve better and more reliable service, greater data security, and hopefully some economies of scale. Most recently, we have realigned development staff to better meet the fundraising needs of the university. In the campaign extension, which I announced last week, 45 percent of the fundraising will be done centrally, largely out of the president’s office. At present, however, only 16 percent of the fundraisers report centrally. Obviously, some realignment of resources is necessary for us to be successful in raising money for university-wide priorities such as student advising, need-based scholarships, a new classroom building tentatively dedicated to environmental sustainability, and research initiatives.
When taken together, many of the changes we have made are quite significant, particularly in light of the historically decentralized nature of our university. While all of the practices we adopted exist among many of our peer universities, there is no denying that the results have been jarring for some members of our community. Indeed, some have talked about the “centralization” of authority in a way that suggests a zero-sum game—increased authority in Johnson Hall must necessarily come at the expense of our colleges, schools, and departments. I fundamentally do not see it that way.

I served as a dean for 11 years at two different universities prior to becoming president of the UO. For good or ill, I always try to view campus decision-making through my current lens as president as well as from the perspective of a dean or faculty member. To be candid, if I were wearing my dean hat, I would have mixed feelings about some of the changes we have made at the UO. I would greatly appreciate that the financial risk for tenure-related faculty members and their benefits has been lifted from my shoulders. I would also be relieved that the revenue of my college or school wasn’t solely determined by the course choices of undergraduate students. And, if my own and my faculty’s priorities aligned with central priorities, I would be delighted to participate in university-wide initiatives. On the other hand, I might not like the fact that the provost could second-guess my budgetary decisions. I would be frustrated that some services I consume would no longer be under my direct control. And, if my school or college’s programs did not align with central academic priorities, then I think I would feel left out or pressured to find ways to align. I also probably would not love being held accountable for a set of metrics that I approved, but perhaps never wanted.

A more robust role for the president and provost in academic matters might also implicate issues of shared governance. One of the great strengths of American higher education is that decision-making authority with respect to academic matters is shared among the faculty, deans, the president, and the provost. This is the way it should be. Curricular decisions, degree requirements, faculty qualifications, tenure decisions, and similar matters should require faculty approval. Similarly, research and creative work are not done by administrators; they are undertaken by academic faculty members and judged through peer review. Many folks outside academia are critical of shared governance and express frustration with the slow pace of change it often fosters. Nevertheless, I remain firm in my belief that this is the best system I know of to promote the creation of knowledge and its transmission to future generations, and I will work hard to make it more effective at the UO.

I am comfortable that the greater role Provost Jayanth Banavar and I are playing in our university is consistent with our joint commitment to shared governance and the appropriate role of faculty members as custodians of the institution’s academic mission. Each major initiative we have undertaken—whether it be the Knight Campus or the Data Science Initiative—as well as possible future initiatives in resilience and the humanities and social sciences have been conceptualized and are governed by our faculty. Before we created the new faculty hiring process and budget allocation process, our ideas were discussed and modified after many meetings involving faculty members, deans, and members of the University Senate. And now that those procedures are in place, every faculty slot the provost approves in the Institutional Hiring Plan has been proposed by the faculty and discussed by deans and faculty members.

Of course, there is no precise formula to determine the appropriate balance of decision-making authority in a university. It is fair to write that our old, extremely decentralized model was harmful to our mission and wasteful of resources. The point of shifting some of the administrative burden to Johnson Hall is to establish the capacity to steer our university toward the goals we mutually agree to pursue and to create more bandwidth for academic leaders to attend to core local unit activities. But we need to be careful that we do not go too far and lose sight of the fact that virtually all of the important work of scholarship and education takes place outside of Johnson Hall by our exceptional faculty members in our schools and colleges. Our deans and department chairs will always play the central role in setting local academic priorities, promoting world-class research, raising funds for these purposes, and serving the educational needs of our students.

As we begin the school year, I am excited about our future. As I meet with presidents and teachers around the nation, I hear them talking about our great faculty achievements, about our research initiatives, and about our students and the education they receive. I no longer hear about an “academic reputation at risk.” As Jayanth and I, along with our deans, lead the university, I commit that we will continue to seek out and listen to the views of all relevant constituencies, including the University Senate and the ASUO. While we might not do what every person or group wants, I also commit that we will be transparent and give reasons to support our actions.

Thank you.
Michael H. Schill, President and Professor of Law

Can the Dean of CoD order faculty to move from PDX to EUG?

Apparently Dean Lindner thinks he can, and Provost Banavar is backing him up. I’m wondering how we can recruit new faculty if they know that their job can be moved from, say, Eugene to Portland without their consent. This does not seem well thought out.

Fortunately for the sake of UO’s future excellence, our faculty union is using some of your union dues to take this to arbitration.

For a thoughtful, intelligent post on Knight Campus,

try UO physicist Raghu Parthasarathy’s Eighteenth Elephant blog here. A snippet:

… Think small. Obviously, we should tackle areas that are important, but this in itself isn’t a sufficient criterion. If this adventure is going to have an impact, it needs to select areas in which relatively small-scale effort can pay off. What does “small scale” mean? I can’t remember the exact number, but the Knight Campus will have something like 50 faculty and their associated groups and support staff. This is great, but it’s not a national lab; it’s not even MIT. What’s more, while UO is quite strong in the sciences, it has no engineering departments — no bioengineering, no chemical engineering, etc. (Yes, it’s odd to have a research university with zero engineering in it…) As such it would be foolish to think we’ll make a big splash in many of the obvious grand challenges. We should, therefore, target goals that are important yet tractable, or ideas whose importance is not yet appreciated, so that small steps have a big impact. What could these be? Before getting to that…

Please comment there, not here.

Faculty union’s General Membership Meeting this Th, 5PM

General Membership Meeting

The first General Membership Meeting of the academic year will be this Thursday, September 27, 5-7pm in Gerlinger Lounge.

Avinnash Tiwari, our Politics Committee Chair, will talk through our endorsements, and specifically how they impact us as a University community. There are some tricky, and troubling, propositions he’ll summarize as well as give some brief insight into our candidate endorsements. He will also outline ways for all of us to get involved, including how the politics committee will help advance our shared interests.

Dave Cecil, our Executive Director, will discuss how we can use the 2018-19 academic year to formulate bargaining planks.


Welcome, and remarks from the President
Politics, how to get involved, and our endorsements
Organizing and Membership
Bargaining and Caucuses

Dinner and beverages provided.  Kids welcome.

Pres Schill lays out plans for extended fundraising campaign

Dear University of Oregon community members,

In October 2014, before my arrival on the UO campus, the university announced what was then an audacious goal of raising $2 billion to strengthen this institution in ways never before considered. It has been an honor to work alongside so many of you toward this unprecedented goal. Thanks to the incredible generosity of our alumni and friends, we have reached $1.87 billion and will, at some point over the next year, cross that $2 billion threshold. It has been a massive undertaking that has transformed this campus in amazing ways and created new opportunities for Oregonians. I am deeply grateful to the more than 95,000 donors who have contributed to the campaign.

However, we are already looking ahead. Borrowing a metaphor from our track and field heritage, we intend to sprint through the tape and keep going. As Bill Bowerman once said, “There is no finish line.” In that spirit, I am pleased to announce that the UO will extend our fundraising campaign by adding $1 billion to our goal.

Why are we extending the campaign instead of declaring victory? Simply put, each one of you has helped put the University of Oregon in a position where we enjoy incredible upward, positive momentum. As with all great universities, as we make progress we also see more opportunity. What once seemed unattainable is now within our grasp. Our donors have told us they are ready and willing for even more success. We want to harness this energy and raise the resources that will enable us to be among the very best institutions of higher learning in the nation.

The first focus of this campaign extension is fundraising hundreds of millions of dollars to secure access and success for students of all backgrounds.Over the past several months we engaged in strategic planning with deans, faculty, and other campus stakeholders to identify priorities, pockets of opportunity, and aspirational goals. Those conversations guided the creation of new fundraising targets, each grounded in our mission to be a great research institution that is committed to the success of our students. Here are some examples of what we will be asking our alumni and friends to support:

We will raise millions of dollars in sustaining support for PathwayOregon—a groundbreaking program celebrating its tenth year—that provides free tuition and fees for qualifying Federal Pell Grant-eligible Oregon residents. More than 5,000 students—over half of them first-generation college students and a large percentage of underrepresented students—have benefited from this program in the last decade, and we want to double, perhaps even triple, the PathwayOregon endowment to make it self-sustaining in perpetuity.

We will seek significant new resources for merit-based scholarships such as the Presidential Scholarship program, which awards up to $9,000 per year to high-achieving Oregon students.

To attract the best and brightest young scholars, we will seek additional scholarship support and prioritize reducing the higher differential tuition for the Robert D. Clark Honors College, which is ranked among the top 10 public honors colleges in the country.

The UO has always been a place that supports Dreamers and DACA students, many of whom are in this country and undocumented through no fault of their own, and whom do not qualify for federal aid. While the UO currently provides a track for these students to attend college, we will raise funds to reduce the cost of attendance for these amazing students, who deserve access to the same opportunities as their peers.

We will boost financial support for pipeline programs—such as the Summer Academy to Inspire Learning and Oregon Young Scholars—that demonstrate to young people throughout the state and nation that college education is within their reach.

We will help our students graduate on time and find jobs that will enable them to achieve their dreams. We will raise funds to support the expansion of advising and employment programs in our new Willie and Donald Tykeson Hall, with its emphasis on college and careers.

We will partner with donors to invest in experiential education programs to give undergraduate students hands-on learning and research opportunities that position them to quickly move into the job market.

We also want to build campus resources that optimize the learning experience to ensure that the next generation of UO students have the types of facilities and classrooms that will enable them to discover and grow. Our plan is to seek funds for a new 60,000-square-foot classroom and faculty office building tentatively earmarked for environmental and sustainability programming. In addition, we will raise money to complete the Black Cultural Center, which will break ground this fall, and ensure that we have the resources to support long-term staffing and programming in the new building.

But scholarships, advisors, pipeline programs, and new buildings are meaningless if they are not undergirded by world-class academic programs and faculty. We are fortunate that we have a strong academic foundation across campus. We want to further strengthen research by amassing resources for the Phil and Penny Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact and the new Presidential Science Initiative. This science initiative focuses on improving human life through the science of brains and behavior (neuroscience), chemical building blocks (material science), understanding and extracting knowledge (data science), and health and wellbeing (microbiome science).

We also will work with our faculty in the humanities and social sciences to identify interdisciplinary programs that could make enormous contributions to the state of humanistic knowledge. These efforts will magnify those of our deans to fundraise for faculty support and research facilities within their schools and colleges.
Our deans and campus leaders have worked hard to develop new fundraising priorities and goals in each of their units to take full advantage of the momentum of this campaign extension. I look forward to working with them and their many volunteers in achieving new levels of philanthropic support for their individual programs. As part of this work, we must achieve the goals of this campaign extension using existing resources. Last week, Vice President for Advancement Michael Andreasen unveiled a plan to reorganize development functions so that our limited personnel are assigned to support the areas that require the most effort.
New teams of central fundraisers will focus on access and student success, our classroom building and associated environmental research projects, and science initiatives.

The University of Oregon is at an inflection point. We are bending the arc of progress northward toward new levels of academic and reputational excellence. Extending the campaign by $1 billion is an important way to leverage the creativity, curiosity, talent, and innovation of our faculty, staff, and students across this campus in transformational ways; to send the message that we are bold, independent innovators who will not be defined by our history or preconceived notions of what it means to be a public university. This campaign extension is about engaging our exceptional faculty in further pursuit of academic excellence, providing new ways for our generous alumni, donors, and friends to support this amazing university, and telling the next generation of UO students that we are committed to giving them all the tools they need to be extraordinary.
I am excited to work with all of you to make these dreams a reality.

Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law

HR will pay up to $65K for interim buzzword coordinator

Actually, this job seems to be about union bargaining, though potential applicants will have to wade through a lot of b.s. before they get to that part:

HR Project Manager – Interim

Apply now Job no: 522975
Work type: Officer of Administration
Location: Eugene, OR
Categories: Human Resources, Planning/Project Management

Department: Human Resources
Appointment Type and Duration: Interim (OA), Limited
Salary: $47,000 – $65,000 per year
Compensation Band: OS-OA06-Fiscal Year 2018-2019
FTE: 1.0

Application Review Begins
Immediately, position open until filled.

Special Instructions to Applicants
Please submit a cover letter, resume and 3 professional references.

Department Summary
Human Resources serves the campus community as a strategic partner by building HR processes, systems, and infrastructure to provide streamlined, state-of-the-art services to campus partners, and developing HR expertise to enable HR to advance university goals and the institution’s HR capacity. The person in this position must support diversity and inclusion in every aspect and responsibility associated with the job.

Position Summary
The HR Project Manager is responsible for the coordination, launch, and facilitation of a variety of new and existing projects and strategic initiatives within the Office of Human Resources. The Project Manager will perform the necessary research, estimation of effort and resources, development and maintenance of project plans, process management, project documentation, monitoring of project deliverables and timelines, engagement of subject matter experts and stakeholders, and assessment to ensure projects meet their objectives within established budgetary and time constraints. The Project Manager will coordinate multiple and complex projects, define project scope, goals and deliverables in consultation with the project sponsor(s) and/or HR leadership, and facilitate project teams to accomplish stated objectives.

The Project Manager works closely and collaboratively with members of the HR leadership team, colleagues within HR, and stakeholders across campus. The person in the position handles and is involved in sensitive and confidential issues, and is responsible for fostering positive relationships both internal and external to Human Resources. This position assists and acts in a confidential capacity to the CHRO and administrative staff who formulate, and effectuate management policies during collective bargaining as defined in ORS 243.650, retrieving and organizing strategic information in response to union proposals during collective bargaining.

This position is a 12-month benefits-eligible position with the possibility of extension depending on financial resources and operational need.

Minimum Requirements
• Bachelors’ degree;
• Two years of project management/support experience involving multiple stakeholders and complex project deliverables;
• Four years of relevant work experience in project management involving multiple stakeholders and complex project deliverables.

Professional Competencies
• Proven project management, time management, and organizational skills, with the ability to manage details and maintain all elements of multiple and complex projects within firm schedules.
• Demonstrated attention to detail in maintenance of complex, frequently changing plans, documents, communications, etc.
• Excellent communication skills: communicate effectively with individuals and with groups, in-person and via phone and written correspondence; the ability to vary writing and speaking style to fit the purpose of the communication and adapt to audience and circumstances.
• Strong analytical and critical thinking skills and ability to analyze, summarize, and effectively present data and information to various campus stakeholders.
• Expertise in working effectively and collaboratively with people of diverse backgrounds and cultures.
• Track record of adaptability and comfort with ambiguity.
• Ability to manage stressful situations with tact and diplomacy and to use sound judgment and initiative, particularly as it relates to handling sensitive and/or confidential information.
• Proficient with Microsoft Office applications and project management tools.

Preferred Qualifications
• Demonstrated understanding of multiple methods of project management.
• Project management experience in a higher education environment and/or in a Human Resources department.
• Understanding of human resources best practices, rules and regulations, familiarity with emerging issues in human resources.
• Understanding of an institution of higher education and related organizational structures, policies and procedures; emerging issues in higher education; and familiarity with relevant rules, policies and laws.

FLSA Exempt: Yes

All offers of employment are contingent upon successful completion of a background inquiry.

The University of Oregon is proud to offer a robust benefits package to eligible employees, including health insurance, retirement plans and paid time off. For more information about benefits, visit http://hr.uoregon.edu/careers/about-benefits.

The University of Oregon is an equal opportunity, affirmative action institution committed to cultural diversity and compliance with the ADA. The University encourages all qualified individuals to apply, and does not discriminate on the basis of any protected status, including veteran and disability status. The University is committed to providing reasonable accommodations to applicants and employees with disabilities. To request an accommodation in connection with the application process, please contact us at uocareers@uoregon.edu or 541-346-5112.

UO prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national or ethnic origin, age, religion, marital status, disability, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in all programs, activities and employment practices as required by Title IX, other applicable laws, and policies. Retaliation is prohibited by UO policy. Questions may be referred to the Title IX Coordinator, Office of Civil Rights Compliance, or to the Office for Civil Rights. Contact information, related policies, and complaint procedures are listed on the statement of non-discrimination.

In compliance with federal law, the University of Oregon prepares an annual report on campus security and fire safety programs and services. The Annual Campus Security and Fire Safety Report is available online at http://police.uoregon.edu/annual-report.

Advertised: Pacific Daylight Time
Applications close: