Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Mandate from Policy B2.0:

The Resource Allocation and Budget Committee shall be the faculty committee in all matters pertaining to university budget and finances. It shall also submit to the Academic Senate for review and approval academic priorities related to external academic funding. The Committee shall be responsible for presenting an analysis of the budget and other financial matters to the Senate for its review, and the Executive Committee shall forward that review in writing, as adopted by the Senate, to the President and to the Institute Council. The Committee shall serve as liaison for the Senate with the Vice President of Finance and Administration and with other appropriate administrators and administrative policy bodies of the university. The Committee shall consist of eight tenured faculty members, each elected by his or her collegial faculty, one member of the educational development faculty elected by that group, three members at large elected by the Academic Senate, and the Vice President of Finance and Administration or his or her delegate (ex officio, voting).

Carryover Charges for AY2018 -

  1. RABC 3: Build a 3-5 member steering committee, who will make a recommendation of the duties and composition of an Ad Hoc Committee to address the 50th percentile, overload and benchmarking for faculty compensation. The steering committee should provide a well-defined scope for the AD Hoc committee and suggest the number of members and what groups should be represented (administration, faculty) in the Ad Hoc Committee.  ASEC agreed on 8/30/18 that the RABC and RSC may need to work in conjunction moving forward.

  2. Draft an Activity-Based Budgeting model, first forming a task force consisting of RIT stakeholders and outside experts. The task force shall be charged with developing the parameters and weightings for an appropriate allocation formula. Furthermore, we recommend that two sets of weightings be developed by the task force—a current set that results in minimal change to current allocations, and a future set that will represent where we want to be and will be phased in gradually. The transition to the new model should happen over a period of 2-3 years.   (On May 10, 2018, the motion was made: The Senate commends the work done by the RABC on the budget model, and charges the RABC for AY 2018-19 to return with a specific ABB model for the Senate’s consideration. Seconded. No objections. APPROVED by Unanimous Consent.)

New Charges for AY2018 -

  1. RABC should investigate and estimate the expected financial implications of waiving undergraduate tuition for course credit for undergraduate research at a level higher than first semester of research for a professor.  The rationale is based on several experiences from a faculty member when students had to max out their credits for various reasons (i.e. changing majors, having transferred, wishing to repeat classes), but still wished to conduct research leading to publications or providing experience for job applications or graduate school admissions.  Their work fully deserved credits, but they could not afford the extra tuition required.   If a student is in the honors program, this tuition is waived - so it is clear that this has a protocol.  The problem is with those students who are productive students, yet for whatever reason did not gain entry to honors.  it is often the case where some of the best researchers in the lab are not the highest performing students in class-work, so this could be a further consideration.  There could be restrictions on the tuition waiver for credits based on maintaining a certain gpa (for example a 3.0, or 3.2).  There could be a restriction that this must be at least the second or third semester of research and a caveat where the mentor has certified that this is not just an introductory semester (what we call shadowing) in his or her lab.   There could be a restriction that research in summers does not qualify.  The rationale is further centered in the high impact of undergraduate research on the scholarship aspect of Science and Technology at RIT.   This research serves not only the student but advances the professor's success and the success of the school or center they are in.  It is becoming clear that undergraduate research is a hallmark of RIT's excellence.  Such a policy could even be used as an advertising aspect to draw in a prospective student who might be interested in research "on the bench" as part of his or her education.   It would advantage grant applications such as the NIH R-15 AREA grants, for which a detailed description of undergraduate research at RIT is required, and is a section of which the reviewers take particular note.  ASEC agreed on 8/30/18 that the AAC and RABC may need to work in conjunction moving forward.

  2. Propose policies or guidelines for overhead sharing to remove barriers to interdisciplinary work and incentivize interdisciplinary work across colleges. Background: When externally sponsored interdisciplinary research projects cross organization boundaries, disagreement on how to split of overhead return between deans and colleges can become an impediment. Practices vary across the colleges making it more difficult for faculty to get credit for interdisciplinary sponsored research.