University of SaskatchewanThe Provost’s White Paper on Integrated Planning

During the Development Phase of theIntegrated Planning initiative, interviewswere held with faculty and staff involvedin the governance of the University.Included in these discussions were Deans,Department Heads, chairs of Councilcommittees, members of the Board ofGovernors, and all of the senioradministration. While these observers hadpositive things to say about the efforts ofindividuals and units in taking on theplanning and budgeting challenges of avery complex institution, they alsoexpressed some serious concerns aboutthe state of our planning efforts. Thecurrent process was described asmysterious and fragmented. We were toldthat we need more transparency andmore capacity: people need to understandtheir role (and the role of others) and feelthat their work has some obvious payoffsin terms of decisions.

Above all, there was a general sense thatour present planning and budgetingarrangements are diffuse. There are manysources of revenue, many expenditureobjects and an army of units with discreteoperating budgets. Integrated planningwill not change this basic reality, but it isintended to introduce some order andpredictability to its operation. Integrationwill take the following forms:

Integration of planning andbudgeting. In theory at least, planningand budgeting go hand in hand, with theformer driving the latter. However, whenplanning consists of retrenchment—cutbacks and downsizing—it oftenbecomes responsive primarily (if not solely)to budgetary discipline. And whenbudgeting occurs without the discipline ofa plan, the loudest voices, often fromthose in the most advantageous position,expect a privileged hearing. Integratedplanning is intended to privilege the

planning process and allow planning todrive budgeting. We start with what it iswe want to do, submit those aspirationsto rigorous analysis and then decide howwe are going to resource our plans. Therewill be setbacks, years in which we arecutting and not building. But building(although not necessarily expanding)should be our aim and we need a processthat is disciplined by goals and priorities asmuch as by resources. For that reason theIntegrated Planning process willconsciously integrate planning andbudgeting decisions so that we tackle thetwo in concert rather than isolation.

Integration of financial oversight.The Operating Budget of the University ofSaskatchewan is roughly $230 million,made up of the provincial grant andtuition revenue. For most colleges andunits this is the core of their budget; theserevenues pay most college and unitsalaries and non-salary expenses.

However, the Operating Budget by nomeans represents the entire operations ofthe University. There are significant trustand endowment accounts (most of whichare earmarked for particular purposes),large research accounts (which aresimilarly pre-assigned), and a host ofancillary accounts that make up therevenues generated by commercial orquasi-commercial activities. In the last fewyears, these latter funds and activities,taken together, have been larger than theOperating Budget, yet they are seldomconsidered in the same detail or at thesame time as the Operating Budget. TheUniversity of Saskatchewan Act (1995)vests with the Board of Governorsresponsibility for overseeing and directingall matters respecting the management,administration and control of theUniversity’s property, revenues andfinancial affairs. To ensure that the Boardcan carry out its responsibilities and thatmanagement has the information it needsto provide for effective stewardship ofresources, we need to enhance ourreporting and monitoring activities toencompass all operations and allorganizational units of the University. TheFinancial Services Division has begun thetask of providing a comprehensiveoversight of University activities, including

the provision of business plan assistancefor those ancillary operations that requireit. Comprehensive oversight will take timeto achieve, but the Integrated Planningprocess will facilitate the thoroughtreatment of financial risk and opportunitythat the Board requires.

Integration of academic andadministrative planning. Administrativeunits—including Facilities Management,Human Resources, Information andCommunications Technology, and manymore—have developed internal planningprocesses. Similarly, academic units,including most of the colleges and manydepartments, have drafted planningpapers. At the moment we have noprocess that will oblige these variousprocesses and documents (and there aremany of them) to be closely connected toone another. Even though plans in oneunit often have major effects on plans inothers, most operations chart their owncourse without much knowledge of oneanother. Of particular concern is theabsence of strong linkages between thecapital and operating budgets of theUniversity. Integrated planning is intendedto draw these various activities together,not just at the apex of the decision-making structure, but at the level of public

presentation and discussion. Clearly, theUniversity must give its academicaspirations pride of place, butadministrative units must know whatthese are and what their implicationsmight be. By the same token, academicunits need to know what theiradministrative counterparts arecontemplating and to test these plansagainst their own sense of academicpriorities.

Integration of semi-autonomousunits. Like many institutions, theUniversity of Saskatchewan has createdinstitutes, centres and organizations thathave specific mandates and precisemissions. Some of these units are closelyaligned with colleges; others enjoy asignificant measure of autonomy.Although Council and the Board ofGovernors have responsibility for the

The concept of Integrated Planning was introduced at the University of Saskatchewan in 2001. Since

then much has been done to put the critical elements of the process in place. The most visible product

of this effort is the President’s Strategic Directions statement, entitled Renewing the Dream. The

Senate, Council and Board of Governors endorsed this Statement in the spring of 2002. It identifies the

University’s distinguishing features and strategic priorities as well as the environment required to foster

both.

This White Paper is a companion to the President’s Strategic Directions statement. It outlines the basic

elements of a new planning process at the University of Saskatchewan, which is intended to introduce

a strong element of collegiality and openness to the planning and budgeting enterprise. It is geared to

implement the objectives of the Strategic Directions by evaluating and approving college and unit

plans in a multi-year timeframe. I unveiled the key elements of the White Paper in my annual address

to the University community in March 2002. Since then the various topics introduced there have been

the subject of continuous discussion in a number of forums, including the Board of Governors, Deans’

Council and the committees of University Council.

The White Paper represents a summary of decisions taken on these topics. Some parts of the Paper are

more definitive than others; there is still work to do. However, this document represents the

consolidation of input from a variety of sources and is intended to provide direction to those involved

in the planning process over the next five years. It is being shared broadly with the academic

community because the new integrated planning process will involve just about everyone on campus.

Michael AtkinsonProvost and Vice-President AcademicAugust 2002

1. What Is Integrated Planning and Why Are We Doing It?

3

...the Integrated Planning process

will consciously integrate planning

and budgeting decisions so that

we tackle the two in concert

rather than isolation.

2

creation and evolution of these entities, inmany cases we have not established clearlines of authority and responsibility. TheIntegrated Planning process is anopportunity to correct this deficiency. Allunits associated with the University will beincluded in the planning process, either ontheir own or in conjunction with collegesor Vice-Presidential portfolios. In somecases this will involve an examination ofgovernance arrangements to ensure thatauthority is clearly assigned and reportingrelationships appropriately established.Again, this process will take time, but theleaders and members of these unitsshould begin to consider the basis onwhich they will become integrated intothis new process.

Integration of evaluationprocesses. In the mid-90s this University,and most others, began paying closeattention to the twin topics of evaluationand accountability. At the University ofSaskatchewan, the most importantinnovation in this regard has beenSystematic Program Review (SPR), theprocess of reviewing all programs—graduate and undergraduate—by a teamof internal and external reviewers using an

agreed-upon evaluation grid. At the sametime, the need for specific unit reviewshas not disappeared. Reviews of the basicscience departments in the College ofMedicine, the Department of Mathematicsand Statistics, and the Registrar’sOffice/Student Affairs and Services,among others, have been deemed

necessary and useful adjuncts to theprogram review process. Similarly, surveysof students, both current and past, havebeen added to the evaluation arsenal inrecent years. Apart from SPR, which issystematic in more than just name, mostreviews are in direct response to oneimmediate challenge or another.Integrated Planning should allow for amore deliberate approach to reviews andsurveys and it should allow the results tofactor into the overall evaluation process.

A multi-year framework

This kind of integration can be managedonly over a multi-year time frame. Thisobservation applies with particular force tothe integration of planning andbudgeting, but other forms of integrationare best accomplished over several yearsas well. We intend to use a five-yearplanning cycle, the first year of which willbe 2002-03, the final year 2006-07. ThePresident’s Strategic Directions statementwill be revised at the end of five years anda new round of planning will begin. Thescheduling details are contained in Section3 below.

The major advantage to the multi-yearframework is obvious: it allows people tothink about their future over a sensibletime horizon. One-year budgeting andyear-by-year hiring is not conducive to aconsideration of how units can bestachieve their diverse missions. In a one-year framework the focus is on theimmediate and on the individual. Theinterests of the unit as a whole, let alonethe University, are seldom given theattention they deserve. Besides, no oneseriously plans for a single year. If we areto be guided by a sense of our collectivefuture, then we should expect that futureto play out over a number of years as ourfaculty and staff turn over and theprocesses of program review, terminationand initiation unfold.

Budgeting should also be a multi-yeartask. We live in a province whose revenuesources are subject to severe fluctuationand whose commitments are made withappropriate caution as a result. But evenunder these circumstances governmentprovides multi-year contract guidelinesand makes multi-year capitalcommitments. The University needs tomake similar long-term commitments withappropriate provisions for unanticipatedevents. Otherwise, Deans, DepartmentHeads and unit leaders will be obliged toguess at the level of support they canexpect in succeeding years. And whilethere is no such thing as a sure thing inbudgetary exercises, and even the bestplans have to be revised, it makes sense toconsider our collective future over at leasta five-year horizon, one that is longenough to actually create programs,recruit faculty, provide facilities and attractstudents.

A new decision-makingstructure

The President’s Executive Committee(PEC) has determined that the burden ofIntegrated Planning should be sharedbetween two new administrativecommittees and supported by a newIntegrated Planning Office.

The Provost’s Committee onIntegrated Planning (PCIP) is the mainplanning and budgetary body. Under theProvost’s direction it is responsible forproviding the structure for the IntegratedPlanning process (schedules, templates,and decision criteria), identifying theinstitution’s five-year planning parameters,and recommending to the Board ofGovernors on resource levels, bothoperating and capital, for all units over amulti-year time frame. Budgetaryrecommendations will be based on areview of the plans of all academic andadministrative units. In addition, this

Committee will manage the AcademicPriorities Fund (see below) and oversee thepreparation of the Operations Forecastand the annual budget framework.

In addition to the Provost who chairs thecommittee, PCIP is comprised of the Vice-Provost, the Vice-President Research, theVice-President Finance and Resources, andthe Dean of Graduate Studies andResearch.

The Administrative Committee onIntegrated Planning (ACIP) is chargedwith the integration, at the administrativelevel, of planning and budgetaryinitiatives. This Committee is responsiblefor preparing, reviewing, and advisingPCIP on the comprehensive resource plans(capital and operating) that must begenerated to support strategic initiativesthat flow from PEC, the colleges andadministrative units. In addition, ACIP willshare and critique the strategic plans ofadministrative support units to ensuretheir alignment with the StrategicDirections statement and with collegeplans. It will also advise PCIP on thefeasibility of college plans in light of fiscal,infrastructural and policy constraints.

This committee is chaired by the Vice-Provost and is comprised of the AssociateVice-Presidents for Information andCommunications Technology, FacilitiesManagement, Student and EnrolmentServices, Financial Services, and HumanResources. The Research Office will berepresented by a designate of the Vice-President Research, initially one of theResearch Coordinators.

Integrated Planning Office (IPO)Integrated Planning will require focusedanalytical and budgetary support. A newIntegrated Planning Office is beingcreated through a reorganization of theUniversity Studies Group, the transfer ofresources from the Financial ServicesDivision, and the addition of analyticcapacity. This Office will report directly tothe Provost and Vice-President Academic.

4 5

...it makes sense to consider our

collective future over at least a

five year horizon, one that is long

enough to actually create

programs, recruit faculty, provide

facilities and attract students.

Led by the Assistant Provost, IntegratedPlanning and Analysis, this office willconsist of two divisions: InstitutionalAnalysis, which will take on primaryresponsibility for the institutionaldatabase; and Budget Planning, which willbe responsible for the preparation ofmulti-year budgets, the annual budgetframework, financial modeling and themulti-year budget process. In addition, weare introducing the concept of a “virtual”Integrated Planning Office. A number ofIntegrated Planning Associates are beingidentified in the Communications,Financial Services, Facilities Management,Information Technology Services, ResearchServices and Provost’s areas. They willwork closely with the core of the IPO andbe the principal liaison personnel.

For more details on committeeresponsibilities, on the organization of theIPO, and on how these structures willinteract, see www.usask.ca/vpacademic/integrated-planning.

Relationship toUniversity Council

It is imperative that this new decision-making process articulate well with theresponsibilities and work of UniversityCouncil. Council is described in theUniversity of Saskatchewan Act asresponsible for “overseeing and directingthe university’s academic affairs.“ Specificareas of responsibility include academicplanning, programs, and studentnumbers. In these areas, the Council hasthe power “…to authorize the board toprovide for the establishment anddisestablishment of any college, school,department, chair, endowed chair orinstitute…” to “prescribe curricula,programs of instruction and courses ofstudy in colleges, schools, departments…”and to “prescribe and limit the number ofstudents who may be admitted to acollege or program of study.” University

Council has been intimately involved withthe development of the President’sStrategic Directions statement (which itunanimously endorsed at its May 2002meeting) and with the Integrated Planninginitiative, including offering advice onseveral of the critical design elements.

Given the overlapping responsibilities ofCouncil and the President (who is,according to the Act, “responsible forsupervising and directing the academicwork of the university”) it is apparent thatboth need to work together to ensurethat the academic mission of theUniversity is advanced. In the proposedstructure, Council will be involved in thedevelopment of University-level strategicpolicies and plans. It will help developplanning parameters for strategic planninginitiatives, review college/majoradministrative unit plans, and provideadvice on budgetary and physical plans ofunits. In addition, the Provost’s Committeeon Integrated Planning will meet regularlywith the chairs of Council committees toexchange information and coordinateagendas. These meetings will be crucial inensuring the full participation of Counciland the informed decision-making of PCIP.

Finally, Council itself may develop planswhich may have budgetary implicationsand for which it may seek approval.Clearly such plans would require reviewand discussion through the IntegratedPlanning structure, particularly where suchinitiatives have resource implications,either operating or capital, for theUniversity.

Why do all of this?

This new decision-making structure, thesupport needed to make it work, and thevarious planning requirements containedin the rest of this document, may give theimpression of bureaucratic overkill.Whatever happened to the good old days

when you could call up one Vice-Presidentor another or form a delegation andmarch over to the President’s Office? Well,nothing in this new structure will preventanyone from making direct contact andsending personal messages. The Presidentwill continue to have his breakfastmeetings and Vice-Presidents will continueto answer their e-mail and return phonecalls.

But this new planning process willencourage Presidents and Vice-Presidentsto make commitments only in a collegialcontext characterized by a strong measureof due process and due diligence. It willplace a premium on teamwork and onopen and transparent decision making.Work plans will be available on the weband meeting dates and decision dates willbe known in advance.

Integrated Planning is intended to allowus to make difficult decisions in a collegialmanner with evidence appropriatelyassembled. In interviews and discussiongroups over the past year, colleagues haveargued that priorities need to be created,programs consolidated or removed, andcritical mass assembled. IntegratedPlanning cannot guarantee these sorts ofoutcomes, but it can increase theprobability.

Finally, there is the promise of integrationin Integrated Planning. With multiplerevenue sources, multiple capitaldemands, and a changing student andfaculty demographic, it is no longerdesirable (if it ever was) to make one-offdecisions or lavish attention on a selectivesubset of problems. We have to raise ourdecisions to a higher level with clearattention to the long-term interests of theinstitution. The next section of this Paperoutlines the investments in planning thathave to occur if this is going to happen.

At the beginning of a planning cycle, it isnecessary to establish a set of university-wide planning goals. In the case of theUniversity of Saskatchewan these arecontained in Renewing the Dream. ThePresident prepared the initial version ofthis statement and immediately began anextensive consultation process. The versionof Renewing the Dream approved by theUniversity’s governing bodies is theproduct of significant discussion, debateand amendment. While key parts of thisdocument are intended to guide theinstitution far beyond the immediate

planning period, the Strategic Directionsthemselves have been drafted to applywith particular force from 2002 until atleast 2007.

Of course, no single document cancapture in any detail the myriadaspirations of a university like this one. Wehave undertaken, therefore, to create aset of foundational documents that willprovide an opportunity for more completediscussion and more precise direction inareas directly related to the StrategicDirections themselves. These documents,

their status, and anticipated completiondates are summarized in Table One. Thistable also identifies those individuals andoffices that have been assigned leadershipresponsibilities for each document. It isimportant to emphasize that theseresponsibilities will be exercised incooperation with University Council, itscommittees, and other governing bodies.These documents will proceed in stageswith ample opportunity for discussion andamendment.

6 7

TABLE ONEUniversity of Saskatchewan Foundational Documents Responsibility Assignment and Proposed Approval Timeline (as of August 2002)

Foundational Document Assignment Anticipated Date of Completion

Completed

A Framework for Planning Approved by Council February 1998

Standards for Tenure and Promotion Approved by University Review Committee February 2002

Strategic Directions Approved by Governing Bodies May 2002

In Progress

Enrolment Plan Provost/Associate VP Student and Enrolment Fall 2002Services/Dean of Graduate Studies and Research

Campus Core Area Master Plan Associate VP Facilities Management Fall 2002

“Contributing Together” Vice-President Finance and Resources Fall 2002(version two)

Information and Communications Associate VP Information and December 2002Technology Plan Communications Technology

Research Plan Vice-President Research December 2002

Internationalization Plan Provost and Vice-President Academic June 2003

Conceptual Framework for Provost and Vice-President Academic June 2003Aboriginal InitiativesComplement Plan Vice-Provost Fall 2003

Strategic Directions and Foundational Documents: Planning at the University Level2.

Given their close connection with the President’s Strategic Directions statement, it makes sense to briefly review each document as it bears on each of the directions identified there.

Direction 1: Attract and retainoutstanding faculty

There can be no doubt that the quality ofa university’s faculty is the single mostimportant determinant of that institution’slong-term prospects. Hiring the rightfaculty, providing them with the rightfacilities, and supporting their efforts hasbeen a recipe for success followed by alltop-flight institutions.

To help set the context for the attractionand retention of outstanding faculty, theUniversity Review Committee (URC), inconjunction with College ReviewCommittees and faculty members from allparts of the institution, worked for morethan two years on the creation of newStandards for Tenure and Promotion.This foundational document was approvedby URC in February 2002 following agrueling schedule of consultation and aseries of adjustments and amendments.Council approval was obtained inDecember 2001. These new standards willbe implemented following the scheduleoutlined in the Provost’s memorandum ofJuly 8, 2002.

While this document is clearly intended togovern critical career decisions, its impactwill be felt beyond those precisedeliberations. Broadly speaking, these newstandards represent an opportunity tocommunicate, to both potential and well-established colleagues, our expectations ofone another. It is often observed thathiring decisions are the most important

decisions we make; all others aresomewhat anticlimactic. But the Standardsfor Tenure and Promotion will influencethose hiring decisions and other decisionsin a faculty member’s career. It isundoubtedly true that most candidates fortenure ultimately receive it, but thatprocess should be a positive one, basedon achievement and recognition. That willhappen only if expectations are clearlyunderstood and those who meet theseexpectations are the ones who applythem.

Beyond the Standards, we need to planfor a new era of faculty recruitment andretention, one in which there will be farfewer eligible candidates than in previousdecades. Two years ago the Provost’sOffice prepared a Recruitment Guide toassist Deans and Department Heads in thedifficult task of finding suitable candidatesand making compelling offers. That Guideneeds to be refined and situated inside abroader Complement Plan. The size ofour faculty complement relative to thetasks we have been assigned (and haveassigned ourselves) is an abiding concernto all those holding administrative posts incolleges and departments. And whilethere is no evidence that, given the size ofour student body, our faculty complementcompares unfavourably with that of otherinstitutions, it is not clear that we haveallocated faculty positions in a way thatwill enhance our academic preeminence.

The Complement Plan is intended toaddress allocation issues by taking aninclusive approach to our resources. Theteacher-scholar model, described andcelebrated in A Framework for Planningat the University of Saskatchewan,represents in summary form ourexpectations of those holding tenure-trackpositions. These individuals are the corefaculty and are subject to the Standardsfor Tenure and Promotion. There are manyothers, however, without whom we would

be unable to perform our teaching,research and service responsibilities. Theyinclude sessional lecturers, termappointees, research associates, retirees,and an array of adjunct professors, manyof whom serve on graduate advisorycommittees. The Complement Plan willexamine these appointment categoriesand suggest modifications and additionsthat will allow for increased flexibility. Itwill pay particular attention to thosewhose primary concerns and professionalskills lie in one of the following areas:teaching, research, and clinical service. Weneed to be able to make these morespecialized appointments and to ensurethat those who accept them can have fulland productive careers at the University,even if they are not holding tenure-trackpositions.

Direction 2: Increase campus-widecommitment to research,scholarly and artisticwork

Arguably, the most effective step we cantake toward increasing our commitmentto research, scholarly and artistic work isto provide the resources that will liberatefaculty to engage fully in these pursuits.This cannot be accomplished for everyarea of endeavor; in fact, it can beaccomplished only for a handful. We willhave to be strategic. It is vital that aconsensus emerges regarding those areasof research in which the University willcommit sufficient resources to achieverecognition at the national andinternational levels.

Given our stated commitment to theteacher-scholar model (as described in AFramework for Planning), our expectationremains that all tenure-track facultymembers will maintain a research,

scholarly or artistic program. TheUniversity will establish a base level ofsupport for all researchers; for those areasidentified as being of national orinternational standing, the University willestablish a higher level of institutionalsupport. In establishing both the base andthe advanced levels of support, theUniversity will take into account thephysical facilities, technical support,graduate student assistance, directsupport from the research office, and theprecious gift of time.

To guide the University and colleges inidentifying these areas and the resourceand policy requirements to achieve thisStrategic Direction, the Vice-PresidentResearch will take the lead in developing aPlan for Research, Scholarly andArtistic Work for the University ofSaskatchewan. Work on this Plan began inconjunction with the federal government’sCFI and Canada Research Chairsinitiatives. Both initiatives obliged theUniversity to identify priority areas andindicate how investment in these areascould ensure a critical mass of activitysufficient to establish preeminence.However, the resulting plans are limited bythe requirement to conform to thegranting councils’ criteria for investmentin research. The Plan currently beingassembled is based on areas of priorityidentified by the faculty themselves. Theyinclude established areas in which wehave a concentration of faculty andresearch capacity, and emerging areas inwhich we either have these elements innascent form, or where we have uniqueopportunities to build distinctive strength.

Strength in any area of academicendeavor depends on having theappropriate assemblage of information.Increasingly, critical information is availablemore readily, more completely, andsometimes, uniquely in digital form.Faculty members use information and

98

Hiring the right faculty, providing

them with the right facilities, and

supporting their efforts has been a

recipe for success followed by all

top-flight institutions.

communications technology as everydaytools in their work, and libraries arebecoming brokers of information, as wellas repositories of knowledge. In theInformation and CommunicationsTechnology Plan the University willindicate its major projects for the next fiveyears and their connection to the researchand scholarly enterprise. This Plan willoutline the USR-net project and associateddevelopment, as well as specific initiativesgeared to support faculty needs in areasof high-performance computing. Thelatter includes participation in nationalinitiatives—C3.ca, Grid Canada, etc.—andsupport for on-campus researchcomputing clusters.

Direction 3: Establish the Universityof Saskatchewan as amajor presence ingraduate education

The University of Saskatchewan hasambitious plans in the area of graduateeducation, including an increase of more

than 30 percent in graduate enrolment.The background for this initiative, and theimpressive array of requirements that mustbe met to achieve it, are outlined in theEnrolment Plan. This Plan, which hasundergone a number of iterations andbenefited from extensive consultation,calls for not only an increase in numbers,but also a close examination of existingprograms and the allocation of facultyresources. Among other things, the Plan

stipulates, “New resources devoted to anincreased faculty complement should beaimed principally at research programsthat will attract graduate students.” Withrespect to graduate degree programsthemselves, the Enrolment Plan suggeststhat our current programmatic array is notwell suited to achieving a substantialenrolment increase. The Plan also indicatesthat it is virtually certain that the currentfinancial support available to graduatestudents is insufficient to shoulder such anincrease. In partial recognition of thefinancial challenge in this area, the Boardof Governors agreed, in May 2002, todevote an additional $1 million to therecruitment and support of graduatestudents. Next steps, as the EnrolmentPlan indicates, include the building of agraduate student residence geared for theparticular needs of graduate students,including those related to family, and theidentification of additional financial aid forgraduate students.

The Enrolment Plan provides direction inboth the programmatic and financialareas. It also suggests that we plan onincreasing our intake of internationalstudents at the graduate level. A morecomplete treatment of this topic awaitsthe development of theInternationalization Plan. This Plan willidentify both the geographic andprogrammatic areas in which we shouldinvest to help realize our goal ofbecoming a major presence in graduateeducation.

Direction 4: Recruit and retain adiverse and academicallypromising body ofstudents and preparethem for success in theknowledge age

The University of Saskatchewan hasexperienced little difficulty in attracting

students over the past decade. In mostprograms the cutoff for entrance hasincreased and we routinely turn awayhundreds of students because we havereached capacity. Whether the future willresemble the past depends on both thechanging demographic picture and theUniversity’s own strategic decisions.

The Enrolment Plan outlines a set ofobjectives for the overall size of theinstitution and the composition of itsstudent body. Diversity and success aretwo abiding themes. They will require newrecruitment efforts and investment inaccess and achievement programmingwith which we have limited experience. Inaddition, and of particular concern forrealizing the diversity goal, our currentsystem for creating and maintainingquotas will have to undergo a seriousrevision. Expanding out-of-provinceenrolments and opportunities forinternational students will challenge the“Saskatchewan First” policy that currentlyguides admissions decisions in manycolleges. The Enrolment Plan, like all ofthe foundational documents discussed inthis section, depends heavily on decisionsat the college level. But the Plan clearlypoints the institution toward nationalcompetitiveness and that will entailensuring that Saskatchewan studentsmake the University of Saskatchewan theirfirst choice, and that our unique programsand areas of strength be showcased inother provinces and other countries.

Both the Conceptual Framework forAboriginal Programs and theInternationalization Plan will containdetails in the areas of access programmingand support structures for Aboriginal andinternational students. University Councilhas expressed strong concern about theformer, indicating that college plansshould contain specific measures in thisarea. Recent workshops havedemonstrated the advantages of strongprogrammatic initiatives in whichAboriginal students who require specialassistance to succeed are identified and

supported. Such programs already exist inseveral colleges, but they are by no meanssufficient to meet the needs of hundredsof Aboriginal students who attend ourUniversity and then withdraw.International students also require specialassistance, much of which is presentlysupplied by the International StudentOffice. The Internationalization Plan willconsider the appropriateness andadequacy of existing support mechanismsgiven the Enrolment Plan’s announcedintention to increase the number ofinternational students at both graduateand undergraduate levels.

The “Knowledge Age” referred to in thisStrategic Direction implies more than apassing acquaintanceship with the tools ofinformation and communicationstechnology. The Information andCommunications Technology Plandiscusses the facilities and infrastructurecurrently available for student computing,as well as new and expanded services. Thelatter include wireless access technologyand improved services for off-campusstudents. It also outlines the promise andchallenge of a new student informationsystem, as well as the expansion of otheron-line services. Along with the EnrolmentPlan, this Plan also outlines strategies forincreased support for technology-enhanced learning. These include thedevelopment of an array of on-linecourses through the TEL (TechnologyEnhanced Learning) initiative, the ongoingclassroom renovation project, the Library’sproposed Academic Commons, and thecreation of a Centre for DistributedLearning designed to support distributedlearning programs and coursesthroughout the University and to carry outresearch on the topic.

The foundationaldocuments

The foundational documents have beendiscussed here under the headings of theStrategic Directions identified in Renewingthe Dream. This discussion has beenselective and illustrative: these documentsclearly affect all of the Directions outlinedand various other aspects of the StrategicDirections statement. One of thesedocuments, Contributing Together, willoutline the specific roles andresponsibilities of the major administrativeunits in maintaining stewardship of thephysical and human resources of theUniversity. This document will highlighthow the major administrative units seetheir role in the planning process and inachieving the Strategic Directions. Note, aswell, that many of the initiativesmentioned in these various foundationaldocuments are expensive. They will haveto be prioritized, coordinated and madeconsistent with college plans. Finally, thisarray of foundational documents is not

intended to be exclusive and definitive. Astime goes on we may wish to dividedocuments up and add new ones.

It is important that all of the documentsidentified here undergo significantdevelopment in 2002-03. As it is, collegesand units will have to hit a moving target,since changes in these documents willaffect their own planning exercise outlinedbelow. Of course, it is easier to hit thattarget if it is moving closer to where youare headed yourself. All members of theUniversity community, but particularlythose in leadership positions—Deans,Department Heads, and Councilcommittees in particular—should obtainthe current draft of these documents,become familiar with their contents andurge appropriate changes before thesedocuments become established Universitypolicy. All of these documents, includingthe most current versions, will be postedat my office’s website over the Fall termwww.usask.ca/vpacademic/integrated-planning.

11

Templates and Timelines: Planningat the College and Unit Level3.

Like most other universities in Canada, theUniversity of Saskatchewan has hadrelatively limited experience withcomprehensive and rigorous planningexercises. Our experience in developingplans that have multi-year timelines, areanticipatory in nature, and are used as thebasis for resource allocation and re-allocation, is rudimentary at best. Themost recent experience dates from 1998when colleges were asked to prepareplans that addressed the significantrecruitment challenges we foresaw overthe period 1998 – 2002. It was clear fromthe uneven character of that exercise thatcolleges would require specific guidance,

not general admonitions, if they were todevelop usable planning documents.

Key planning dimensions

A central element of an anticipatory,multi-year process is the identification of aset of basic assumptions that will guidethe planning process. To some extentrecent Operations Forecast submissions togovernment have provided commentaryon the general context and issues facingthe University, but the development of aset of specific planning dimensionscovering the full range of issues that may

10

New resources devoted to an

increased faculty complement

should be aimed principally at

research programs that will

attract graduate students.

1312

affect the University will require adedicated effort over the coming year.

That process began in June 2002 with aninitial meeting with experts in economicand demographic forecasting. Based onpresentations and discussions at that pointwe have identified some basicassumptions that will inform our planningprocess and the first planning cycle. Theseinclude assumptions regarding operatinggrants from the province, tuition fees,salary settlements, and student demand.

Government Grants. After eightyears of economic growth, Saskatchewanexperienced a recession in 2001 (SaskTrends Monitor, 2002). Given theUniversity’s dependence on the Provincefor its operating and capital budgets, thisdevelopment is not encouraging.Nevertheless, the University did receive,even under these circumstances, a 2.3percent increase in its operating grant in2002-03. Recent assumptions point tomodest growth in the provincial economy(Department of Finance), but there are anumber of outstanding variables,including the impact of the globalenvironment on the provincial economy.We anticipate therefore that for the initialplanning cycle we can expect only modestincreases from the provincial government,in the order of two to three percent onthe operating grant. Receipt of less thanthese amounts will require significantadjustments to college and unit plans, andto core expectations.

Tuition Fees. To fill the gap betweenoperating costs and provincial operatinggrants, universities in Canada have turnedincreasingly to tuition fees as a source ofrevenue. While studies have shown thatincreases in tuition have little impact onenrolment trends, and current taxexemptions for students are greater thanrecent increases in tuition fees, thisupward shift in fees has met withincreasing opposition from student bodiesand the general public who fear that

university-level education is becominglimited to the privileged few. TheUniversity of Saskatchewan has adopted anational norm tuition policy aimed atensuring that the tuition fees we chargeare close to those charged for similarprograms at other, comparable,universities. Given that some provincialjurisdictions have changed their policiesrelated to tuition fees, it is likely thattuition fees will increase at a steady rateand, in selected disciplines, increase at amarked rate. We anticipate an averagegrowth of at least 3 - 5 percent over theplanning period, but some disciplines maysee tuition fee increases at substantiallyhigher levels.

Salary Settlements. The competitionfor high-quality faculty is increasing and isexpected to increase markedly in thecoming decade as universities in Canadaand the world seek to replace the facultywho are retiring. In addition, slickpromotional packages, sizable start-upgrants, and higher starting salaries havebecome commonplace recruitment tools.With the retirement of the baby boomgeneration, and fewer doctoral graduateschoosing to enter academia, thecompetition for new faculty will beintense. Research by the University StudiesGroup reveals that current salaries at theUniversity of Saskatchewan arecompetitive in all but a few disciplines,and when all factors are taken intoaccount (including the cost of living),salaries at the University of Saskatchewancompare very favourably with otheruniversities. Of course we will need to bevigilant to ensure that we maintain ourcompetitive edge, and, in somedisciplines, this will be an exceedinglydifficult challenge. We remain optimisticthat we will maintain salary settlementscompetitive with those universities in ourpeer group. However, settlements out ofline with expectations will requireadjustments to college and unit plans andbudgets.

Student Demand. National trendsindicate a 10 – 25 percent increase inenrolment by 2010, influenced largely bygrowth in the 18 to 24 age cohort. Theprovinces of Ontario, Alberta, and BritishColumbia will likely see the greatestincrease in student demand. WhileSaskatchewan’s population as a wholemay be stable over this period, theAboriginal population is growing both interms of numbers and proportion. Studentdemand is expected to grow in selectedundergraduate disciplines, both in termsof student interest and workplacedemand, and more generally at thegraduate level. Over the short term,student demand is expected to exceedcurrent capacity at the University ofSaskatchewan and other major researchuniversities throughout Canada. For moredetails, consult the Enrolment Planwww.usask.ca/vpacademic/integrated-planning.

The Integrated Planning Office will refineassumptions over the next six months ascollege and unit plans are underdevelopment and it will share theserefinements with the Universitycommunity in time for them to be utilizedin planning activities.

Templates

If we are to make difficult choices fromamong competing alternatives, it is criticalthat we achieve some measure ofcomparability among them and the unitsthat are proposing them. Over the courseof the past several months, in consultationwith Council, the Deans, and others, wehave developed templates for college andmajor administrative unit submissions.They are available at the IntegratedPlanning websitewww.usask.ca/vpacademic/integrated-planning.

These templates anticipate change. Theypresume that colleges and units will beassessing all of their activities, removingsome, and increasing investment in others.Of particular importance is therequirement that all positions (bothacademic and staff) identified in theplanning cycle, including newappointments and positions availablethrough retirements, be costed and rank-ordered in terms of priority.

With the odd exception, it is anticipatedthat most colleges, departments, andunits will be asking for more resources.Needless to say, only a few such requestscan be accommodated. So, what will thevarious committees that review andcomment on these plans be looking for? Itis difficult to anticipate all of the criteriathat will be used by all of the committees,but it is possible to indicate those criteriathat will be at the core of evaluationsperformed by the Provost’s Committee onIntegrated Planning.

Alignment with Renewing the Dream and the Foundational Documents Renewing the Dream signals our intentionto make significant progress in fourspecific areas over the course of this firstplanning cycle. Opportunities are providedwithin the template for college andadministrative unit plans to discuss theseStrategic Directions in some detail.Familiarity with the contents of thefoundational documents and alignmentwith their content will be a clearadvantage. We will be looking forconcrete, innovative ideas with thepotential for making significant impact onthe Strategic Directions over the course ofthe planning cycle. But colleges and unitsshould confine their programmaticinitiatives to one or two strong ideas. Along list of alternatives is unlikely toattract much support.

Quality and Critical Mass Just as alignment will be a criticaldeterminant in the approval of college

and unit plans, so too will be the qualityof the initiatives advanced. Through thisIntegrated Planning initiative we mustbuild critical mass in selected areas ofexisting/emerging strength. It makes littlesense to add to an already extensive arrayof program and service offerings withoutengaging in a dialogue about which ofour existing programs and services shouldbe maintained, enhanced or eliminated.To do this will require Deans, Directorsand Unit Heads to take a hard look athow existing resources are deployed, toestablish priorities, and to move existingresources to those priorities. A criticaldeterminant in the planning cycle will bethe willingness of units to reassign existinginternal resources to the unit’s and theUniversity’s stated priorities. This will meanthat colleges will need to describe howtheir current activities meet or exceednational or international standards (suchas those described in the SystematicProgram Review process) andadministrative units will need to identifybenchmarks against which performancecan be measured. In addition, colleges willneed to consider how they can work withother colleges/units, through innovativecollaborative projects, to provide greaterimpact than can be achieved in individualunits.

Cost EffectivenessCollege and unit plans will need todemonstrate that existing activities andproposed initiatives represent the mosteffective use of resources in advancing aspecific goal. Arguing that an activity orprogram is valuable or important is not, inand of itself, an argument for retaining it,let alone committing additional resources.An argument must be made, usingcomparative data, performance indicators,benchmarks or evidence of demand, thatof the alternatives available the onerecommended represents an optimal useof resources. Colleges and units that areable to generate their own resources orrealize substantial savings will beadvantaged in a process of competitionfor scarce resources.

Timelines

Upon receipt of this White Paper collegesand major administrative units shouldinitiate their planning process for the firstplanning cycle: 2002-03 to 2006-07. Plansshould be prepared over the course of thenext 12 to 14 months and submitted tothe Provost’s Office beginning in May2003. Opportunities have been built intothe planning cycle to hear proposals fromcolleges and major administrative units, aswell as from the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Offices, as plans aredeveloped and refined. Critical dates areas follows:

Town Hall Meetings. InOctober/November 2002, in April/May2003, and in October 2003, community-wide meetings will be held to hearpresentations from colleges, majoradministrative units, and Vice-Presidentialoffices on selected initiatives to befeatured in their plans, including initiativeswhich might affect a broader cross-sectionof the University. A schedule for thesepresentations, tentatively identified as“Town Hall Meetings”, will be preparedand published by the Integrated Planning

Office by late September 2002. Thesemeetings will provide a forum for thegeneral campus community to hear aboutinitiatives under active consideration. Theywill also provide an opportunity for earlycommentary/reaction to these initiativesby a broad cross-section of the campuscommunity. All colleges and unitspresenting plans to the Provost’sCommittee are expected to participate inthis process, and there will be

We will be looking for concrete,

innovative ideas with the potential

for making significant impact on

the Strategic Directions over the

course of the planning cycle.

opportunities for further refinement andadjustment once presentations have beenmade and comments received.

Plan Submission. Colleges will beexpected to submit their plans to theProvost’s Office first, beginning in May2003. Following an initial review by theProvost’s Office, plans will be submitted tothe University Council committees and tothe Administrative Committee onIntegrated Planning. Each Dean will beinvited to meet with the Provost’sCommittee on Integrated Planning todiscuss their plan and initiatives containedwithin it.

Review Process. When the PCIPdetermines that the plan is ready forconsideration and decision, it will preparerecommendations to the Board ofGovernors on budgetary matters and tothe Council for “in principle” approval.Academic initiatives contained withinplans will need to go through the normalapproval processes, but we anticipate thatthese reviews will be informed by thediscussions at the two earlier stages andby the plans themselves. Followingbudgetary approval of college and unitplans, PCIP will communicate results tothe campus community. Administrativeunits and centers/institutes submittingindividual plans will be expected to followthe same process but their plans will besubmitted to the Provost’s Officebeginning in October 2003.

To achieve our purpose will require us towork together within this relatively shorttimeframe. It will mean that the Councilcommittees will need to find space in theiractivities for the planning processinitiatives and it will mean that theadministrative committees will need towork hard to meet timelines. A moredetailed set of timelines, which includeannual and cyclical milestones, will befound at www.usask.ca/vpacademic/integrated-planning.

Outcomes for theplanning cycle

While it is difficult to predict all possibleoutcomes for the first planning cycle, weanticipate that college and unit plans willbe approved beginning in the fall of 2003(see approval process described above).Approval will come only after plans havebeen confirmed and resources adjustedaccordingly. Resources may be committedat current levels, at lower levels, or athigher levels (see Academic Priorities Fundbelow). The level at which resources canbe committed will obviously depend onthe criteria outlined above and thechanging environment. A word on thatchanging environment is in order.

Shocks. The Board of Governorsmaintains a contingency reserve to guardagainst unforeseen developments. Thisreserve is available on a one-time basisand is large enough to buffer againstmost serious unforeseen events orcircumstances. It is not, however, gearedto account for major economic downturnsor changes in legislation that impose newand on-going requirements onuniversities. These latter are by no meansunknown; in fact, they appear to beincreasing at a rate that suggests we needto be more thorough in incorporatingthem into our unit and University levelplans. Should these unforeseen, butunavoidable, costs be imposed on us,again PCIP will recommend adjustments toapproved plans.

Shortfalls. The Province ofSaskatchewan has an open economy thatregisters with force changes ininternational supply and demand. In theevent that assumptions regarding thegrowth of the economy, the size of theprovincial grant, salary settlements, thestability of enrolments, and other criticalvariables, are not met and resources arediminished, PCIP will recommendadjustments to the approved plans ofcolleges and units. These may involve

reduced non-salary budgets,postponements in hiring or permanentchanges in resource levels.

Preparing for Integrated Planning

The first year of this planning cycle, 2002-03, is a transition year. We cannot stopthe institution while we reshape its future,but we cannot proceed as if the planningexercise is an entirely separate and remoteendeavor involving other people but notus. Somehow we must find a way toincorporate planning into our regular lives,something we are admonished to do bycountless books and seminars on thetopic. As we build this more robustprocess, however, we confront twoimmediate challenges.

The Need for Assistance inCreating College/Unit Plans. Collegesand major administrative units can expectto call upon the Integrated Planning Office(IPO), through the Assistant Provost,Integrated Planning and Analysis, toobtain assistance in the development oftheir plans. Specifically, the IntegratedPlanning Office will provide general adviceon the completion of plans and meet withunits and individuals assignedresponsibility for their development. TheIPO will direct colleges and units toappropriate on-campus resources availableto assist in development of strategic plansand in selected components of thoseplans. These include the financial analystsin the Financial Services Division who willbe available to assist colleges/units inputting together the resource componentof their plans, and strategic planningresources available in Human Resources.

The Need to ManageAppointments in 2002-03. As weprepare for this initiative, it is importantthat the University proceed with decisionsin 2002-03 only if they fit with the long-term plans of departments, colleges,

administrative units and/or the Universityas a whole. In the future, all permanentpositions will have to be presented anddefended on an institution-wide basis; thecurrent relatively automatic sign-off onreplacement positions will not continueunder Integrated Planning. At themoment, the University has a significantnumber of positions currently advertisedor pending approval for advertisement(i.e., arising out of retirements orresignations). Making permanentappointments at this time could prove tobe highly problematic, in that suchdecisions privilege departments with avacancy in 2002-03 over those with avacancy in 2003-04 or beyond. It makesno sense to “freeze” hiring in acompetitive environment, but it alsomakes no sense to proceed with business-as-usual either.

PCIP has decided to proceed withfaculty and staff hiring during the2002-03 academic year on thefollowing basis:

1. Any positions that have been subject toa University-wide priority setting orevaluation process will proceed withoutinterruption. These include:

• Priority Determination Processappointments that are still pending.

• Canada Research Chairs appointmentsor positions associated with CanadaResearch Chairs.

• Appointments in Computer Science,Nursing, Medicine, Veterinary Medicineand Physical Therapy that are supportedby provincial access funding.

• Canadian Light Source related positions.

• Any other permanent faculty positionsthat can demonstrate that they havebeen subject to a comprehensive collegeand University-wide evaluation andapproval process.

1514

2. All probationary, permanent, seasonalstaff and term appointments fundedfrom the operating budget must beapproved at the Vice-President orAssociate Vice-President levels (asappropriate). For staff in colleges,approval must be made at the decanallevel.

3. Colleges will continue to be providedwith the replacement value of full-timevacant faculty positions for 2002-03.They can use these funds to secureterm or sessional teaching assistance orfor other appropriate academicactivities within the department/college,including specialized teaching orresearch activity, additional start-upgrants for new faculty, or sponsorshipof a conference, workshop or lectureseries.

4. All other unforeseen opportunities thatarise over the course of the next 12 –18 months will require specialpermission from the Provost’s Office topursue. Appointments arising fromthese opportunities will be limited innumber and authorized only where acompelling case can be made to theProvost.

5. Faculty positions with a July 1, 2004starting date will be approved throughthe Integrated Planning process.Requests for positions that have beenreceived positively through the initialreview stages (i.e. before final approvalof college plans) will be authorized foradvertising on a “subject to budgetaryapproval” basis in the summer of 2003.Final approval for hiring will come as aresult of approval of college plans.

The priorities we have identified in theStrategic Directions are ambitious; theywill require an equally ambitiouscommitment to securing the resourcesnecessary to achieve them and using ourexisting resources effectively. The trends inpublic funding indicate that large-scalegovernment reinvestment in post-secondary education is unlikely, and wewill therefore need to be creative inidentifying ways to support our priorities.The Provost’s Academic Agendapresentation outlined some preliminarymeasures meant to initiate a discussion onpossible sources of funding for thispurpose. No item on the list of “CriticalDesign Elements” provoked morecomment than the creation of anAcademic Priorities Fund. The idea thatthis Fund might have multiple sources,including existing base budgetcontributions from colleges and units, wasa source of significant debate.

Since that initial presentation, Deans’Council and the Budget Committee,among others, have discussed the creationof the Fund and made some alternativeproposals. Outlined below is thearrangement that enjoys the greatestsupport. It is the version that we will putin place beginning in 2002-03, with aphase-in that lasts for the entire initialplanning cycle.

Academic Priorities Fund

This will be a Fund managed by theProvost’s Office under the direction of theProvost’s Committee on Integrated

Planning. It will be used to resource thecollege and unit plans and the University-wide priorities identified as part of theplanning process. The Fund will be createdthrough a combination of funding sourcesincluding, but not limited to, thefollowing:

1. Three million dollars from theSaskatchewan Universities FundingMechanism (SUFM). The Board ofGovernors has approved arecommendation from the President onthe use of these funds for this purposeand funds have been set aside, startingin 2002-03.

2. A portion (to be determined) of anyfuture operating grant increases fromthe Provincial Government starting in2003-04. This assumes, of course, thatthere will, in fact, be increases in basebudget funding from the province.

3. A portion (to be determined) of futuretuition fee increases starting in 2003-04. We do not anticipate thatsignificant funds will be provided fromthis source because most of ourprograms are at the national normtuition fee levels currently. We do,however, anticipate the recruitment andretention of more international studentsand a portion of those tuition fees willbe linked to this Fund.

4. A portion (to be determined) generatedfrom investment income over andabove expectations (assuming suchincome actually exists).

The Academic Priorities Fund is intendedto permit us to make fundamentalchanges, many of which will occur withincolleges and units, and to redistributeresources to activities most closely alignedwith the University’s stated goals. Weanticipate that in the process manycolleges will consolidate programs,eliminate others, and request support tostrengthen those that remain. With certaincritical exceptions, the Academic PrioritiesFund will be used to create much neededcritical mass, not to spawn a new set ofunder-resourced fledgling programs.Although some changes will involve newprograms, Integrated Planning has moreto do with new ideas than with newprograms.

Please note that items 2 – 4 above involvereducing the funds available to carry onthe regular business of the institution. Thisregular business includes the paying ofsalary increases, the absorption ofoperating costs of new buildings, and the

management of the “shocks” mentionedabove. It will be critical to build a Fundthat is large enough to steer change, butnot so large as to cripple the institution’scapacity to carry on its regular business.

Resource and InfrastructureImplications4.

1716

With certain critical exceptions, the

Academic Priorities Fund should be

used to create much needed

critical mass, not to spawn a new

set of under-resourced fledgling

programs. Although some changes

will involve new programs,

Integrated Planning has more to

do with new ideas and pressing

demands than with new programs.

For these reasons, and given that we havelittle experience with funding our ownpriorities, at the outset it will be importantto take a cautious approach to thedistribution of funds from the AcademicPriorities Fund. Resources will be availableon the following basis:

1. One-Time-Only (OTO) Funding. Aportion of the Fund will be set aside tofund selected projects, innovative ideas,and programs on a one-time-only basis.This will give us an opportunity tomaintain flexibility by supportingspecific endeavours or discrete projects.It will also give us an opportunity toevaluate our investments prior toconsidering further funding support.

2. Annual Funding with Conditions. Aportion of the Fund will be set aside forannual allocation to units withreporting conditions and potential foradditional annual funding. These fundswould be used primarily for activitieswhich are anticipated to span morethan one year but which will berequired to report on outcomes prior toobtaining additional funding.

3. Cycle Funding. A portion of the Fundwill be set aside to fund initiatives forthe length of the planning cycle. Oneof the big issues we currently grapplewith is our inability to move resourcesfrom one initiative to another. Thisfunding arrangement will provide uswith an opportunity to assessperformance prior to committingresources permanently to initiatives thatmay have a short life span.

4. Ongoing Funding. A portion of theFund will be set aside to fund long-term commitments, usually in the formof faculty positions or initiatives arisingout of University-wide planningactivities, aimed directly at supportingthe University’s stated priorities.

5. Administrative Units FundingEnvelope. A portion of the Fund willbe available to fund measures aimed atincreasing the University’s publicaccountability.

Specific details on the Academic PrioritiesFund will be shared with the Universitycommunity as the college and unit plansare developed and as the review andapproval process is initiated.

Implications for capitalplanning, physicalinfrastructure and space

Setting our sights on increasing ourresearch capacity, growing ourundergraduate and graduate programsselectively, and providing an improvedstudent experience will require us toconsider how we currently deploy ourphysical assets in support of theUniversity’s academic mission. Integratedplanning, as described elsewhere in thisdocument, means the bringing togetherof resources, operating and capital, andother resources, to support our statedpriorities. We have traditionally focusedalmost exclusively on the operating fund.To achieve true integration, we will needto bring our capital budgets, particularlyour major capital budget allocation, in linewith the priorities assigned as a result ofplan approvals.

The President’s Strategic Directionsstatement identifies enriching theresources and physical environment of thecampus as one of the supportingconditions for achieving our goals. TheUniversity of Saskatchewan was created asone of the finest, most inspirationalcampuses in Canada and we must workhard to preserve the built legacy we haveinherited from our predecessors. ButRenewing the Dream also indicates that asetting for scholarly excellence must also

include viewing facilities and infrastructure– such as up-to-date classrooms andlaboratories, effective and innovativeinformation technology, and a majorresearch library – as keys to our futuresuccess.

In the past few years, we have committedto a classroom upgrading project that isnow beginning to meet student andfaculty expectations. But we have majorchallenges on this front. According torecent audits, our deferred maintenancebacklog is now approaching $150 million,slightly above the national norm. At thesame time, our annual cyclical renewaland replacement requirements are $13 –15 million per year (we currently receiveno funding for this from the Province) andcurrent operating deficiencies areapproximately $3 million per year. Clearlyfunding to ensure that we protect theUniversity’s built infrastructure, currentlyestimated as a $1 billion public asset,must be obtained. The President’sStrategic Directions statement has pointedus toward increasing our commitment toresearch. This will have major implicationsfor the infrastructure support, bothhuman and physical, that will be requiredto achieve our goals. College andadministrative unit plans will need to pointout potential areas for synergy anddevelopment.

Finally, in our move towards multi-yearplanning, we will need to think morecreatively and with more forethoughtabout our space needs, includingpossibilities for capital projects and majorbuilding projects that ensure we meet ouraspirations. We will need to draw on thegeneral community for advice aboutwhere our priorities should be and we willneed to develop opportunities fordiscussion of projects and conceptualplans well in advance of current timeframes. Most important, we will need tomatch our institutional priorities toapproved priorities identified through thecollege and unit planning process.

We need to be able to assess the progressthat we have made against our statedgoals and to identify areas forimprovement. At the University ofSaskatchewan we already have someexperience with evaluation processes.Council approved the Systematic ProgramReview process in 1999 as one tool forevaluating program quality. We regularlysubject many of our programs toaccreditation reviews, and we oftenrequire reviews of administrative unitsbased on perceived problems and selectedissues.

With the advent of Integrated Planning,we need to move our evaluation tools to adifferent plane and ask whether theUniversity is achieving its stated goals. TheBoard of Governors, in particular, is veryinterested in learning about progress overthe course of the planning cycle, as wellas evaluating this cycle against futurecycles. We outline below somepossibilities.

Performance Measures. Mostuniversities view performance measureswith suspicion and recent publicationsexpress a healthy skepticism when itcomes to adopting a business-likeapproach to assessing academic activities.Nevertheless, the general public,politicians, students, concerned parentsand alumni are demanding that wedemonstrate that our efforts producecontinuous improvement. To do this willrequire that we develop a set of measuresor indicators of success, which weregularly refer to and which highlightprogress over the course of this, andsubsequent, planning cycles.

The college and unit planning templatesrequire that a set of performancemeasures be developed that are suitableto the precise mission of these units. Overthe course of the next year, the IntegratedPlanning Office will develop, in collaboration with Council, Deans andothers, a set of baseline performancemeasures highlighting our existingactivities. We will begin to apply thesemeasures as we evaluate plans andproposals from colleges and units. Inaddition, the Integrated Planning Officewill develop a set of performanceindicators by which we can compare oursuccess at the University or institutionallevel. Global measures should payattention to those that have been adoptedat the college and unit levels.

Benchmarking. It makes sense thatas we develop performance measures toevaluate our success over the planningperiod, we also identify a set ofuniversities by which we measure ourprogress at the institutional level. We areall painfully familiar with the most publicassessment of our success – the annualMaclean’s report on universities. This is acrude comparator, which has beensubjected to much scrutiny over the pastdecade or so as it has developed. In ouropinion we need to identify a number ofuniversities, perhaps a handful or more inCanada and abroad, which offer the widevariety of programs that we provide, andagainst which we can compare ourselves.These need not necessarily be the sameuniversities for all activities. For example,given our diverse program offerings inAboriginal education, it makes sense forus to compare ourselves with a set of

universities with similar activities. Thesewould not necessarily be the Maclean’s“medical – doctoral” universities. Similarly,the University of Saskatchewan wasestablished, in the spirit of land grantinstitutions, with a significant communityservice mandate. We should considercomparing our progress in this regardagainst other, similar, universities. Over thecourse of the coming year, we will needto determine which universities bestrepresent our “peers” and developmeasures by which we should compareourselves to them.

Evaluation5.

1918

...the general public, politicians,

students, concerned parents

and alumni are demanding that

we demonstrate that our

efforts produce continuous

improvements.

The University is at a

fundamental stage in its

development. Our current

processes have served us

well, but they are not

equipped for the new

environment in which we

find ourselves. We need to

do our academic business

differently, more openly and

with much more concern for

the overall priorities of the

institution.

The President has challenged

us to renew the dream of our

founders. Integrated Planning

is a key part of that initiative,

but it is merely the means.

Renewing the dream means

learning more about our

history and understanding

what our founders hoped to

create in the University of

Saskatchewan. Renewing the

dream means adapting our

founders’ vision to the

conditions of a new century

and taking the decisions

required to ensure the future.

20