Review of Core Requirements and Comprehensive Standards 1 thru 5 - Dr. Tomasovic

Dr. Tomasovic provided narratives of Core Requirements 1 thru 5 to the committee and summarized each response.

1.  Core Requirement 1: Documents that the institution is in compliance and indicates that the institution has degree granting authority from the Texas Legislature and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The documentation cites the bachelors degrees offered in the School of Health Sciences; the joint authority with the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston to offer master's and doctoral-level programs in biomedical sciences in the Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences; and describes the letters available from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board authorizing the institution to offer degree programs and tables of accepted programs and courses.

2.  Core Requirement 2: Documents that the institution has a governing board that has specific authority and is an independent policy-making body and not controlled by vested interests. The documentation states that the institution is in compliance and briefly described the Board of Regents and how it meets the Core Requirement.

3.  Core Requirement 3: Documents that the institution has a chief executive officer whose primary responsibility is to the institution and who is not the presiding of the board. Dr. Tomasovic clarified that the board in this context is the Board of Regents. The documentation states that the institution is in compliance. The available documentation includes the position descriptions defining the chief executive officers duties and responsibilities and generic position description of UT System Presidents in the Board of Regents.

4.  Core Requirement 4: Documents that the institution has a clearly defined and published mission statement specific and appropriate to an institution of higher education. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that this was one requirement previously discussed and he resolves that the institution is in compliance. Dr. Tomasovic stated that the mission statement is cited in the documentation and he emphasized that each school had appropriate mission statements which were also provided. The available documentation is a set of publications and websites where the mission statements for the institution and the two schools are published.

5.  Core Requirement 5: Documents that the institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) result in continuing improvement, and (b) demonstrate that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. Dr. Tomasovic documented that the institution is in compliance.

Review of Core Requirements, Faculty Standards - Dr. Janet Price

1.  Dr. Price requested an extension on the GSBS responses. Dr. Price indicated that she extracted information from the GSBS/SACS website and the By Laws to provide justification for the GSBS Policies on Curriculum.

2.  Dr. Price will be meeting with a representative from Faculty Academic Affairs immediately following the meeting concerning Faculty Comprehensive Standards 20 thru 24.

3.  Dr. Price had a concern about Standard 20; the standard consists of six parts, but only two pertain to GSBS. Mr. Caldwell stated that he addressed the items as not applicable. After confirming that the institution had teaching assistants, Dr. Price indicated that she would provide a narrative that describes what GSBS does for teaching assistants.

Review of Comprehensive Standards, Mission - Dr. Tomasovic

Dr. Tomasovic indicated that the documentation provided from the application did not need substantial changes for this response. The text stated that the mission is approved and periodically reviewed every four years by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board per Subchapter 5 in the Coordinating Board's polices for health related institutions. Dr. Tomasovic included language as to how the mission is reviewed prior to the review by the Coordinating Board. The mission is reviewed within the institution, which involves the Faculty Senate and various executive committees within the institution, and finally forwarded to the presidents advisory board for approval prior to being sent to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and the Board of Regents.

Review of Comprehensive Standards, Governance & Administration, 2 & 3, 7 & 8, 11-Tomasovic

1.  Comprehensive Standard 2: Dr. Tomasovic discussed the documentation of Comprehensive Standard 2 which states the governing board of the institution is responsible for the selection and the evaluation of the chief executive officer. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that the documentation of the Regents Rules includes policies on selection of presidents for component institutions. The documentation in the Regents' Rules also states that the evaluation is the primary responsibility of the Executive Vice Chancellor for urgent circumstances the Chancellor can enter into action.

2.  Comprehensive Standard 3: Dr. Tomasovic indicated that Comprehensive Standard 3 deals with legal authority and operating control of the institution and contains multiple parts. Dr. Tomasovic is currently working on the mission portion; the section dealing with fiscal stability has been completed by another member. Dr. Tomasovic is still completing the section dealing with institutional policy related to corporate entities and auxiliary services and foundations.

3.  Comprehensive Standard 7: Dr. Tomasovic indicated that he is also still composing documentation for Standards 7 which concerns practices between the policy making functions of the governing board and the responsibility of administration and faculty to administrate and implement policy. Documentation is being extracted from the Regents Rules.

4.  Comprehensive Standard 8: Documents the existence of clearly defined published organizational structure that delineates responsibility for the administration of policies. Dr. Tomasovic indicated he would like feedback from the committee concerning this response. He is considering inclusion of a high level organizational chart and discussion as to the delineation of responsibilities for the administration policies is linked to the job description of each individual.

5.  Comprehensive Standard 11: Documentation that the institution periodically evaluates effectiveness of its administrators including the chief executive officer. Dr. Tomasovic stated that M. D. Anderson staff do not evaluate the chief executive officer, but that responsibility is assumed by the Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs and the Board of Regents. At M. D. Anderson, there is a regular process for one up evaluations by the faculty and all administrators below the level of the president as well as a regular process for the evaluation of administrators by the executives that oversee them. The president evaluates his executive staff. Dr. Tomasovic stated that he will cite the policies in for the evaluation of faculty administrators as well as those for evaluation of other administrators as available documentation.

Review of Comprehensive Standards, Governance & Administration, 4-6,14 - Dr. Greer

1.  Comprehensive Standard 4: Dr. Greer indicated that Comprehensive Standard 4 requested documentation that the board has a policy addressing conflict of interest. The available documentation cites the Rules and Regulations from the UT System Board of Regents.

2.  Comprehensive Standard 5: Documents that the governing board is free from undue influence from political, religious or other external bodies and protects the institution from such influence. Dr. Greer indicated in the documentation that the institution was in compliance. Available documentation is found in the University of Texas System Board of Regents System Policy. Additional documentation included the Texas Government Code Section 572.005, "Determination of Substantial Interest" and the Open Meetings Act.

3.  Comprehensive Standard 6: Documents that the members of the governing board can be dismissed only for cause and by due process. Dr. Greer indicated that all members of the Board of Regents are appointed by the Governors office. The UT Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents did not provide any documentation on due process if the board member had to be dismissed. Dr. Tomasovic referred Dr. Greer to Ms. Francie Fredrick, secretary to the UT Board of Regents, for information concerning policies of dismissal for members of the Board of Regents.

4.  Comprehensive Standard 9: Documents that the institution has qualified administrative and academic officers with the experience, competence, and capacity to lead the institution. Dr. Greer explained that the narrative includes information from MD Anderson's Policies and Procedures about the appointment of the president and the academic leadership. The MD Anderson's Policies and Procedures cites the policies in the the Board of Regents Rules and Regulations. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that job descriptions and resumes for each of the positions, as well as for academic leaders can be made available for documentation.

5.  Comprehensive Standard 10: Documents that the institution defines and publishes policies regarding appointment and employment of faculty and staff. Dr. Greer indicated that she referred to the MD Anderson's Policies and Procedures and documented that the institution is in compliance. Ms. Greer also included some introductory material about the different policies and has the Handbook of Operating Procedures cited. Dr. Tomasovic requested clarity on the source of the Handbook, whether from Lotus Notes or the intranet.

6.  Comprehensive Standard 14: Comprehensive Standard 14 which refers to an institution-related foundation, not controlled by the institution, was turned over to Dr. Tomasovic for discussion. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that there was one foundation (the University Cancer Foundation) and the other was a corporation (M.D. Anderson Services Corporation). Dr. Tomasovic questioned the language in the current standard 14, stating that he thought the standard referred to corporations as well. Dr. Tomasovic expressed that Comprehensive Standard 14 is similar to Comprehensive Standard 3. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that the University Cancer Center Foundation is the avenue by which developmental funds come into the institution. Dr. Tomasovic stated that he would contact Adrian Lang in the Presidents Office or Patrick Mulvey in the Development Office to obtain the bylaws for the University Cancer Foundation.

7.  Comprehensive Standard 15: Comprehensive Standard 15 requests documentation that substantiates that the institution's policies are clear concerning ownership of materials, compensation, copyright issues, and the use of revenue derived from the creation and production of all intellectual property: This applies to students, faculty and staff. Ms. Greer indicated that the Board of Regents Rules of Regulations, Part II, Chapter 12 addresses all those issues. Dr. Tomasovic expressed that there is also language in the Handbook of Operating Procedures addressing these issues. Mr. Caldwell added that the policy regarding intellectual properties is also published in the School of Health Sciences Catalog and the School of Health Sciences Handbook.

Educational Programs

Dr. Weiner, GSBS, and Mr. Shaun Caldwell, SHS, provided written narratives and a verbal summary for Comprehensive Standards within the section of Educational Programs.

1.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 9: The Institution provides appropriate academic support services.

Mr. Caldwell verified that he was responding to the SHS area. Mr. Caldwell stated that the institution is in compliance with providing appropriate academic support services. The narrative provided documented the availability of classrooms and laboratories for basic and clinically research, and lecture rooms throughout the Texas Medical Center. Mr. Caldwell added additional text in the narrative regarding Cooperative Agreements with Baylor, Rice, Texas Women's, and the University of Houston which enables students to take courses and use facilities as will. Mr. Caldwell addressed the library facilities, but only provided a summary because it was previously being completed in another section. In regard to computing, the students have access to a vast array of resources available as a result of cooperative agreements; computer facilities in GSBS; and access to computers at their work location. Mr. Caldwell indicated that the available documentation consisted of websites.

2.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 14. The institution's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting objectives of its programs, and ensures that students have access to and training in the use of technology.

Mr. Caldwell stated that he began the narrative with a very bold statement that he believed to be true (The University of Texas Health Science Center is second to none in its use of the most advanced technology available as part of its educational mission). Mr. Caldwell indicated that the institution has a Health Informatics Education Center; extraordinary technology accessible to students; highly integrated information infrastructure which allows students to have their own accounts and webpages; digital signatures for security; and brief details about the computing and digital I.D. as well as other technologies available to students. Mr. Caldwell indicated that the available documentation was computing page for UT Health Science Center and the computing page for GSBS.

3.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 28 The institution publishes a clear and appropriate statement of student rights and responsibilities and disseminates the statement to the campus community.

Mr. Caldwell stated that the institution is in compliance. Mr. Caldwell indicated that the narrative included a summary of HOOP (Handbook of Operating Procedures) for the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. The system requires each component to maintain a HOOP which is where all of the rules governing the students are located. Mr. Caldwell stated that the students' rights and responsibilities are also covered under section 6 of the HOOP and provided a URL within the narrative. The policies are also summarized in the GSBS Catalog which is now officially located on the website. A URL was also provided in the narrative. Dr. Tomasovic suggested that there be additional text added that indicates that there are corresponding HOOP policies because the policies for the system may slightly vary.

4.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 5 The institution has adequate procedures for addressing written student complaints and is responsible for demonstrating that it follows those procedures when resolving student complaints.

Mr. Caldwell indicated that the institution is in compliance. The only determinate that he could suggest that would serve as a demonstration that the institution is following these procedures would be to publish documents that informed students that the institution was following procedures for addressing student complaints. Mr. Caldwell also indicated that the narrative documented that HOOP dictates the rights of the students. Mr. Caldwell also spoke with Risk Management at UT regarding which rules are to be followed for students that are also employees. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that one way to demonstrate would be to provide data that there were specific complaints from students in the last year and indicate that the institution followed the policy in dealing with the situation. Mr. Caldwell concurred.

Educational Programs - Dr. Ahearn

Dr. Ahearn provided written narratives and a verbal summary for Educational Programs.

1.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 3: Dr. Ahearn indicated that the institution is in compliance with Standard 3 which states the institution publishes admission polices consistent with the institutions mission.

2.  Educational Programs, Comprehensive Standard 5: Dr. Ahearn indicated the the academic policies required in Comprehensive Standard 5 (The institution publishes academic polices that adhere to principles of good academic practice) are disseminated to students, faculty and other interested parties through publications that accurately represent the programs and services of the institution. The policies primarily reside in the SHS catalog and the handbook.

3.  Comprehensive Standard 6: Mr. Ahearn indicated for Standard 6 (The institution employs sound and acceptable practices for determining the amount and level of credit awarded for courses, regardless of format or mode of delivery); refers back to the substantive degree requests submitted to the Coordinating Board and the catalog. Mr. Ahearn will provide a page number to access documentation pending an update of the SHS catalog website document to include page numbers.

4.  Comprehensive Standard 8: Dr Ahearn indicated for Standard 8 (The institution awards academic credit for course work taken on a non-credit basis only where there is documentation that the non-credit course work is equivalent to a designated credit experience) is covered in the catalog.

5.  Comprehensive Standard 9: Dr. Ahearn indicated that the documentation for Standard 9 (The institution provides appropriate academic support services) is found in the catalog and the handbook. Mr. Ahearn stated that after reviewing Dr. Weiner's documentation for GSBS he would add more documentation for the School of Health Sciences.

6.  Comprehensive Standard 10: Mr. Ahearn indicated that the documentation for Standard 10 (The institution defines and publishes general education and major program requirements for all its programs. These requirements conform to commonly accepted standards and practices for undergraduate programs as well as graduate and post-baccalaureate professional degree programs) refers to the School of Health Sciences handbook and catalog. Specific references will be provided once the document includes page number in the SHS handbook and the catalog.

Comprehensive Standards 12 and 20 - Mr. Caldwell

Mr. Caldwell provided written narratives and a verbal summary for Educational Programs. (Additional standards are still being completed)

1.  Comprehensive Standard 12: Mr. Caldwell indicated that he had spent a great deal of time reviewing standard 12 (The institution places primary responsibility for the content, quality and effectiveness of its curriculum with its faculty); but he did not find much that was actually published to prove that the responsibility was primarily with the faculty, therefore Mr. Caldwell developed policies and procedures that will be discussed and adopted in the program directors meeting. The policy outlines what the process would be for making curriculum changes and additions and verifies that the faculty has primary responsibility for ensuring the content, quality and effectiveness. Mr. Caldwell indicated that supporting documentation was provided at the end of the narrative to include the School of Health Sciences Polices and Procedures Manual; however; Mr. Caldwell felt that that was erroneous and the documentation should be place in Volume II of the institutions policy and procedures. Dr. Tomasovic indicated that the documentation may be in Volume 10. Dr. Tomasovic also suggested Mr. Caldwell look into what is written up by the graduate school curriculum committee.

2.  Comprehensive Standard 20: Mr. Caldwell indicated that for Standard 20 (The institution employs competent faculty members qualified to accomplish the mission and goals of the institution); the institution is in compliance. The institution has a full dedicated policy for the appointment of faculty members to the School of Health Sciences. Mr. Caldwell indicated the documentation was cited in MDACC's Volume II (faculty policies and procedures).

Financial & Physical Resources - Ms. Hemphill

Ms. Hemphill provided a verbal update for Financial and Physical Resources.

1.  Ms. Hemphill indicated that Core Requirement 11 was on the ERA website. The requirement may require some changes. Ms. Hemphill also indicated that the audit contract has been extended for fiscal year 2003 and should be completed prior to the SACS report being published.

2.  Ms. Hemphill indicated that documentation is still being drafted for Core Requirement 13. Ms. Hemphill will meet with the Development Office.

3.  Ms. Hemphill indicated that she did not think Core Requirement 14 was applicable to her area since the development foundation is controlled by MD Anderson.

J. Financial & Physical Resources - Mr. Gage

Mr. Gage informed the committee that some of the information pertaining to Requirement 5, the Facility Master Plan, is currently being revised. He did not know if the revision would be completed prior to the SACS report being published.