The Board of
Governors adopted Long-Range Plan 2004-2009 in January 2004. That plan updated the 2002-2007 plan that was
adopted in January 2002. As we begin the
planning process for the next five years, campuses are asked to develop a plan
that is responsive to changes in higher education, in the needs and demographics
of the State of
plan of the University must demonstrate the integration of budget, facilities,
enrollment, and academic mission. In so
doing, campuses must consider the impact of increased enrollment on their
institutions and the potential of distance education to serve the needs of the
activities will need to be integrated into the process this year: the study of
educational needs, both programs and facilities, for economic development in
The Peer Study will be an opportunity for campuses to review their designated peer institutions. Dennis Jones, President of NCHEMS, will lead the review of peer institutions, and he plans to complete the process by the end of April. This study should be integrated with the overall planning process on the campus. Preliminary work has been done toward developing benchmarks for the Strategic Directions and the process will be completed in concert with the planning process for Long-Range Plan 2009-2011. The goal is to establish agreed-upon campus and university-wide benchmarks to measure progress in achieving the Strategic Directions. More information will be forthcoming regarding this project.
II. Long-Range Plan 2006-2011
The next edition of the long-range plan will cover five years, 2006-07 through 2010-2011. The planning process will emphasize comprehensive planning, the links between enrollment planning, academic program planning and facilities planning, expansion budget requests, capital improvement requests, and the policies adopted by the Board of Governors to guide the future of UNC. The preparation of the planning document will be a collaborative process, involving the constituent institutions, the President and her staff, and the Board of Governors.
Each institution, under the direction of the chancellor and with appropriate consultation with administrators, faculty, and the campus Board of Trustees will submit to the President any proposed revisions to its current mission statement, organization, academic program offering, or enrollment plans. The proposed changes should reflect the institution’s long-range or strategic plan as well as its facilities plans and should be informed by any special studies undertaken by the Board or the campus leading up to this process (e.g., MCRs, enrollment planning, tuition policy, student need-based financial aid, facilities studies, salary studies, foreign language study, non-tenure track faculty study, student and alumni surveys, etc.).
Each institution is to append a copy of its current long-range/strategic plan to its long-range planning submission. (See Appendix A for a discussion of strategic planning.)
The President and her staff will also engage in University-wide planning as they identify statewide needs and legislative concerns and review institutional proposals.
A comprehensive planning document, reflecting the recommendations of the president, will be prepared by this office for consideration by the Committee on Educational Planning, Policies and Programs (CEPPP) of the Board of Governors. Over a period of several months, the committee will review these recommendations and discuss issues of significance in higher education as it considers revisions of the strategic directions adopted in Long-Range Plan, 2004-2009. After conducting a workshop to inform the Board and other interested stakeholders of the proposed revision, the committee will recommend to the Board the adoption of the Long-Range Plan, 2006-2011. The president, her staff, and the Board of Governors will collaborate with the other education sectors and partners through such vehicles as the Education Cabinet, the Transfer Advisory Committee, the consultants for the HB 1264 study, the consultant for the Peer Study, and business and industry groups such as the Biotechnology Consortium during the planning process.
The planning schedule has been designed to facilitate articulation between the University’s plan for 2006-2011, its ten-year enrollment plan, its ten-year capital plan, and its expansion budget request for the 2007-09 biennium.
outline provides guidance for institutional submissions due
A. Institutional Mission
Institutions may submit requests for minor changes in language that will improve or clarify their mission statements as they appear in Long-Range Plan 2004-2009.
Institutional missions must reflect the reality of the existing programs and resources and must not be aspirational missions. During the coming months the Committee on Educational Planning, Policies and Programs will be continuing its review of the use of Carnegie Classifications with special attention to the revised classification system expected from Carnegie in the summer of 2005.
The Peer Study, headed by Dennis Jones, will take place during February, March, and April and should be integrated into the review of missions.
NOTE: If you are submitting a request for changes in the mission statement, please submit the current statement clearly marked to show the changes requested.
B. Response to 2004-2009 Board of Governors’ Strategic Directions
The current Long-Range Plan, 2004-2009
lists six strategic directions for the
1. Access: Ensure affordability and access to higher education for all who qualify and embrace a vision of lifelong learning.
Capital Formation: Through high quality and relevant graduate,
professional, and undergraduate programs, develop an educated citizenry that
3. K-16 Education: Continue to propose and support initiatives to serve the needs of the State’s public schools.
4. Creation, Transfer, and Application of Knowledge: Expand the frontiers of knowledge through
scholarship and research and stimulate economic development in
5. Internationalization: Promote an international perspective throughout the University community to prepare citizens to become leaders in a multi-ethnic and global society.
6. Transformation and Change: Use the power of information technology guided by IT strategy and more effective education, administrative, and business practices to enable the University to respond to the competitive global environment of the 21st Century.
C. Academic Program Development
During 2000, the academic planning process was revised to provide for more timely requests for planning and implementation. The requirements for academic program planning for this document ask only that institutions confirm what has already been submitted and provide institutional plans for future program development consistent with the new process and deadlines.
1. Academic Program Review
In 1995, 1997, 1999, 2001, and 2003 the Board of Governors conducted a thorough review of all degree programs to identify those of low productivity or low priority or those that were “unnecessarily redundant.” Enclosure #1 outlines that process for 2005 and requests the campus response.
2. Requests for Authorization to Discontinue a Program
Requests to discontinue degree programs, whether identified as a result of the biennial academic program review process or through other institutional procedures, should include a schedule for the proposed discontinuations. (Use Enclosure #2.)
3. Status Report on Recently Established Programs
Institutions with programs authorized by the Board for establishment during the last four years should provide a status report on the progress being made in implementing each program. Enclosure #3 shows the inventory of programs that have been established at your institution during the last one–two years or three–four years. Use Form #3A or Form #3B to report on the status of these programs.
4. Planning New Degree Programs
The new planning process (Policy Manual 400.1.1) asks that institutions inform the Division of Academic Affairs of the intent to plan new undergraduate or master’s programs. Requests to plan new doctoral or first professional programs must be submitted by May 1 or October 1 of each year. Proposals to plan or establish specific new degree programs should be submitted separately from your response to this document.
For this section of the document, provide a brief narrative that describes the academic planning process and the expectations for program development directions over the next five years. Institutions should take this planning opportunity to describe alternative means of meeting new program needs, such as on-line programs, year-around programs, or other distance delivery mechanisms. Where relevant, response to recommendation from the consultants for HB 1264 would be appropriate.
D. Enrollment Goals
The University has worked with the campuses
to develop previous ten-year enrollment plans and enrollment targets. Institutions should review the current
expectations for the campus and, after consultation with the Office of the
President (Academic Planning), submit recommended targets for the period
2005-2015. Enclosure #4(A,B,C)
includes institutional enrollment targets adopted by the Board of Governors in
the enrollment plan for 2002-2012, a more detailed year-by-year plan through
2012, and the revised targets for fall 2005.
The object of this review will be to update this plan for 2005-15, with
targets that include both on-campus and off-campus enrollment and with
additional attention to freshmen and distance learning enrollment. Further instructions and forms for providing
this information will be forthcoming from Academic Planning. Academic Planning and Strategic Development
and Analysis will provide enrollment projection information based on projection
models to support campus planning.
Proposed enrollment targets should be submitted to Academic Planning by
E. Reports on Institutes and Centers
Inter-institutional (Board of Governor’s Approved) Centers
As specified in the UNC
Policy Manual 400.5[R], each update of the UNC Long-Range Plan shall include a
list of all centers and institutes (hereafter, “centers”) of the
Login instructions and specific procedures will be distributed to Center Directors and Chief Academic Officers via email by March 1. The Chief Academic Officers or their designees will have the opportunity to review and approve the inter-institutional center reports for which their institution serves as the administrative unit. Centers experiencing chronic problems in productivity and/or funding should be carefully evaluated by the institution and discontinuation requested as a part of the reporting process.
Additionally, for each inter-institutional center approved for planning by the Board of Governors, the appropriate CAO must provide a brief statement indicating either: 1) the planning request is withdrawn, or 2) reconfirmation is requested, with the estimated date for submission of the request for authorization to establish.
Institutional (Single campus) Centers
Each institution must submit an inventory
of active institutional centers (those administered on a single campus),
including their primary designation (research, public service, instructional)
and a link to their corresponding website, to the UNC Office of the President
F. New Faculty Positions
As enrollment increases at UNC institutions, and new faculty positions are distributed based on these overall enrollment increases, it will become increasingly important that there be a match between new positions and areas of growth. Enclosure #5 indicates the number of new positions awarded to each institution during the previous biennium. Institutions must indicate the use of these positions and are invited to present documentation about the overall enrollment pressures and hiring difficulties in growth areas.
G. Institutional Response to the Minority Presence Plan Revisions
At the January 2001 meeting, the Committee on Educational Planning, Policies, and Programs affirmed the need to update the Minority Presence Plan with a new set of institutional activities and responses, and at the February 2001 meeting, the Board of Governors approved the plan to more fully integrate diversity initiatives into all aspects of institutional planning. In this section, the institution should provide information about how it intends to meet the expectations for diversity in response to the Board of Governors’ directive. We would welcome quantitative data that you could provide to support the results of your initiatives. (Enclosure #6)
H. Organizational Charts
Each institution’s organizational chart, as
it appears in Long-Range Plan 2004-2009, is attached (Enclosure
#7). Each institution should note
any organizational changes (as of
documents should be submitted to the Office of the President (Academic
Discussions will be held with the chancellors, chief academic officers or designated institutional representatives to clarify proposals or to obtain additional information.
review and evaluation of institutional materials, a draft plan for the