Skip to Page Content

 
 

Faculty Assembly

Guidelines for Externally-Funded Changes to Faculty Work Assignments

October 19, 2004

Purpose. These guidelines are developed to support decision making regarding approval of faculty time commitments to grants or other externally-funded activities (funded by gifts or extended study activities, for example), associated course buyouts, and changes in workload allocation. These guidelines also address the use of salary savings resulting from such course buyouts. A similar set of guidelines were endorsed by EPUS, and then considered by the Faculty Assembly during the 2003-04 AY. This document includes revisions to the earlier guidelines, based on the recommendations received from Faculty Assembly.

It is intended that these guidelines be implemented in each unit as soon as possible, but no later than the Spring 2005 semester.

Primary responsibility for establishing policies regarding grant-funded workload changes rests with the Schools, Colleges, and Library. These guidelines encourage each academic unit to adopt a policy as a part of its formal governance that complies with applicable federal and campus requirements, and meets the basic requirements of these guidelines. In the absence of such a written unit policy on file in the campus Office of Research, these guidelines will serve as the effective policy for the unit until the unit’s policy is developed.

Guidelines.

  1. The guideline is that an externally funded buy-out of faculty effort for teaching a course should be budgeted at least at 10% of the faculty member’s academic-year salary.  It is also noted that faculty effort for service or other research activities may also be bought out, and the level of effort, which was bought out, devoted to the externally funded project. Exceptions will be made automatically when small grants from funding agencies outside or within the university formally designate maximum funding levels for course buyouts at less than the 10% of academic year salary.

      Rationale:  The government and other sponsors require that the university has established policies regarding course buyouts to demonstrate that faculty time funded by externally-funded projects is, in fact, committed to those projects.  While the framework for course buyouts need not be identical across units, they should be well defined and documented.  The use of a 10% minimum is based on recommendations from Faculty Assembly and is consistent with best practices elsewhere. These guidelines will also provide a means for the PI to calculate campus match on projects that fund faculty at a lower rate (as approved by the dean and chair), possibly increasing competitiveness of some proposals. 

  1. Deans have the authority to approve differential workloads for faculty, including, but not limited to, course offloads for an amount less than 10% under special circumstances. These cases will be fully documented in the grant or gift application package and routing forms, and in the case of a grant, this reduced cost will be indicated as a campus match in both the proposal budget and proposal forms (e.g., routing forms, cost match forms).

Rationale:  This provision allows the campus to charge the full proportion of faculty salary on grants where this is possible, while retaining the flexibility to address internal and external circumstances in which full funding for course buyouts is not possible or appropriate. 

Examples.  There are several circumstances in which Deans would normally approve a lower buyout rate for courses, including: (a) providing special support to a non-tenured faculty member’s research development; (b) responding to limitations in policy or documented standard practice associated with the funding agency’s support for faculty time; (c) stimulating research and grant proposals in a particular area; and, (d) assisting a faculty member to enter a new specialty area with a grant application.  

  1. Faculty members may fund a small percentage of their salary as part of an externally-funded project without an associated course buyout.  This would apply, for example, when a faculty member wanted to devote a small percent of his or her time (up to a maximum of around ten percent) to a grant project without a course buyout and as a result reduce their effort in service or other research activities.  The portion of the faculty member’s workload that is funded by an external project could come from the faculty member's effort in teaching, research, and/or service. It should be noted that if this tack is taken the substitution must be negotiated by the Dean / Chair and the faculty AND documented in writing for auditing purposes.

In addition, it should be possible for a faculty member to build up credit towards a course buy out, for example, by funding a small percentage of their salary from several smaller funded projects. And when that total funded buy out reaches the 10% AY salary level, a course buy out may be approved.

Rationale.  In some cases it may be in the Principal Investigator’s interest to commit a small portion of time to a grant without an accompanying course, research or service commitment buyout.  While it is important for the campus to demonstrate reduction in other work assignments when commitments are made to externally-funded projects, this provision allows small time commitments to projects, at the request of the Principal Investigator, without accompanying changes in teaching, research, or service responsibilities.

  1. Unless otherwise documented prior to submission of a grant or gift application, the salary savings resulting from course buyouts should be distributed as follows:

·        Two-thirds of the salary savings, but no less than twice honorarium rate, to remain in the instructional unit.

·        The remainder goes to the College. There is a presumption that these salary savings will remain in the School/College/Library unless a critical situation occurs such that campus wide redistributions across colleges are necessary to sustain current programs. Any redistribution of salary savings away from the School / College / Library must be negotiated.

·        The amount of the salary savings that remains in the Department is a matter for negotiation between the Dean and Chair.  An agreement to modify the provision in the first bullet above should be in writing at the time the grant or gift application is submitted. 

Rationale.  Within the limits of the campus’s need to use temporary salary savings to meet instructional commitments, the intent of this provision is to provide incentives at both the College and Department levels that supplement the incentives in the indirect-cost-return (ICR) policy.  While salary savings may be used in some circumstances to support the additional administrative costs of managing grants, Deans, Chairs, and Principal Investigators are urged to develop organizational structures, such as broadly based centers and interdisciplinary grants management offices, that can provide needed support services using the funds available through direct grant budgets and indirect-cost-return policies.  This is needed to ensure that instructional funds are not unnecessarily used to subsidize externally-funded projects.

To provide incentive for grants to include salary allocations, the results of those saving must accrue to the School / College / Library as they have budgeted for those savings. Obviously, if these are available to the Deans / Chairs, they can be used to offset campus shortfalls. However, the distribution should go back to the campus from the School / College / Library and not simply removed from funds available to the School / College / Library.

  1. Summer salary may be budgeted up to 33 1/3% of the faculty member’s academic year salary. For faculty on academic year appointments, no salary savings will typically be accrued from budgeted summer salary. The 33 1/3% maximum applies to all compensation received from the campus during the summer, so the potential income from grants is reduced when the faculty member is paid for teaching or other activities.  Summer salary under externally sponsored projects is always at the same base rate of pay as the Academic Year salary.

Rationale:  While some agencies allow less summer funding, the campus maximum is set to reflect what those with the most lenient policies will approve. 

These guidelines have been reviewed and endorsed by the Faculty Assembly on (date) based on three understandings:  (a) All colleges will be encouraged to develop written policies regarding course buyouts that provide specific guidance within the college and that reduce the negotiations that might need to occur as grant or gift proposals are submitted.  The Faculty Assembly emphasizes that these policies should be developed through democratic processes associated with faculty governance; (b) these guidelines will be revisited prior to May 31, 2008, with another review by the Faculty Assembly, to ensure that provisions are appropriate under the fiscal conditions that exist at that time; and, (c) a system-wide or campus-wide change in workload policies may require an review before May 31, 2008.