Collaborating for Success: Advancing Public Higher Education Through Cooperation. Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan January 2013

Transcription

1 Collaborating for Success: Advancing Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan January 2013

2

3

4

5 Introduction Under PA 201 of 2012, the Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan is required to provide the executive and legislative branches with a year end report on the coordination of purchased goods by the state universities. Because the report has become a valuable tool in providing insight, the Presidents Council has expanded the report to include a wide range of other collaborative arrangements entered into by our universities. Michigan is a unique state in terms of its higher education structure. The public universities are constitutionally autonomous and as such, operate independently of any formal coordinating body. The fact that these institutions are autonomous should not suggest however, that they do not recognize and leverage their collective power to run their operations more efficiently. In this report, we provide a full array of collaborative efforts among the 15 public universities including collaborative efforts with governmental entities, non-profit associations, and communities. Many of these initiatives realize actual cost savings while others are simply a matter of a commitment to generating an educated workforce, creating economic development, and doing what is right based on professional values. Advancing INTRODUCTION This report contains two sections. Section I addresses initiatives that are specifically intended to save money for our universities including collaborative arrangements such as: Michigan Universities Self-Insurance Corporation (MUSIC) Michigan Universities Coalition on Health (MUCH) Merit Network Midwestern Higher Compact (MHEC), and Michigan Delivering Extended Agreements Locally (MiDEAL) Collectively, these efforts save the public universities millions of dollars on property insurance, health care, networking technologies, computer hardware and software purchasing, and a whole range of durable goods. Section II provides brief descriptions of collaborative efforts demonstrating a shared commitment to generating an educated workforce, creating economic development, and enhancing the local communities. It is difficult to capture cost savings among these efforts, but they certainly contribute to the important work PAGE 5

6 Advancing INTRODUCTION undertaken by public higher education in the state to improve individual lives, fill workforce needs, and improve Michigan s economic competitiveness. These initiatives include: Academic Program Review (APR) Michigan Initiative for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (MIIE) Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) Business Leaders for Michigan (BLM) Higher Recruitment Consortium (HERC) Career and College Readiness Michigan Michigan Statewide Longitudinal Data System (MSLDS) Michigan Transfer Network (MTN) Michigan College Access Network (MCAN) Detroit Compact and Wade McCree Scholars Programs Community- Partnerships: Invested in Michigan s Future (CUP: IMF) Japan Center for Michigan Universities Consortium for Michigan Veterans Educators (CMVE) Arts in the House Professor of the Year, and Regional Collaborations In many cases, cost savings may be realized but they are difficult to approximate and are secondary to the overall goal of the programs. For example, HERC allows participating institutions to actively pursue top faculty and research talent and to accommodate possible trailing partners. Without collaboration, either the institutions absorb the cost of hiring the second person or they run the risk of not attracting top candidates. In this case, HERC provides a mechanism to work collectively to hire and place professional couples in a way that maintains a commitment to quality and also more efficiently placing individuals where they can make the strongest contribution. PAGE 6

7 Section I: Collaborative Cost Savings In Section I we present the range of collaborative efforts among the universities specifically intended to save universities money. In each case, we highlight which universities participate in the effort. Our universities differ in terms of mission, size, scope of programs and to the extent research is conducted and as such, the collaborating institutions may depend entirely upon whether the institution will in fact, benefit from participation. For each collaborative agreement discussed in this section, a list of the 15 public universities is provided in the left hand column; participating institutions are identified in bold and dark lettering while non-participating institutions are listed in grey. Advancing SECTION ONE Michigan Universities Self-Insurance Corporation (MUSIC), Michigan Universities Coalition on Health (MUCH), and Midwestern Higher Compact (MHEC) are able to provide actual cost savings. In the case of MiDEAL, actual cost savings figures were not available, but it is assumed that the state contract is as good as or better than any arrangement public institutions can make on their own for a range of goods. PAGE 7

8 Advancing MUSIC Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan Michigan Universities Self-Insurance Corporation (MUSIC) M.U.S.I.C. is proud to recognize its 25th anniversary as one of the premier consortia programs in the United States. M.U.S.I.C. has reached the milestone of returning funds in the form of dividends back to its Members of over $36,000,000! This consortia consists of 11 of the 13 public universities in the State of Michigan. M.U.S.I.C. s continued commitment to loss prevention, claim management and conservative financial management has produced consistent returns on investment to its Members. This has been a joint effort of risk managers, finance managers, and legal officers. This collaboration of a diverse group of professionals is one of M.U.S.I.C. s greatest assets. The M.U.S.I.C. Board, assisted by Marsh of Detroit, accomplishes its day to day operations, and develops both short and long-term goals through its standing committees. All 11 Members participate in some form on the various committees and serve as resources for the corporation. The success of M.U.S.I.C. is primarily due to the work of the individuals from each of the Universities who serve on these committees and the respective institutions who have been very supportive in allowing their staff to be a part of the M.U.S.I.C. program. In short, M.U.S.I.C. is successful due to the blending of expertise and the support provided by its Member Institutions. The time and effort put forth by the Members is more than validated by the return of over $36 million back to the Universities. In addition to the return of dividends, M.U.S.I.C. has saved its Members substantial premium dollars annually while providing manuscripted broad coverages to the universities. Errors and Omissions (E&O) and Commercial General Liability (CGL) the original coverages continue to be the heart of the program. Property coverage was added in 1989 and Automobile Liability and Physical Damage, Foreign Liability, Medical Malpractice, Pollution Liability, Non-Owned Aviation, Cyber Risk and Media Liability have also been added as group purchases since the inception of the program. M.U.S.I.C. continue to review and expand coverages based on its Members evolving exposures. M.U.S.I.C. Members have lower premiums and retentions than what they could obtain in the traditional insurance market. Annually, Marsh Inc., M.U.S.I.C. s Facility Manager, obtains premium and deductible information from their underwriting partners PAGE 8

9 and competitors. The aggregate savings for the most recent policy year were $5.8 million in premium and $1.5 million in retentions. If they were to conservatively estimate the average aggregate savings annually to be $5.8 million in premium and $1.5 million in retentions, the savings would total $145 million in premium and $37.5 million in retentions over the 25 year life of the facility. M.U.S.I.C. is proud of these accomplishments and looks forward to continuing to service its Members for many years to come. M.U.S.I.C. is in the process of developing its Strategic Plan for the next five years. As part of its review M.U.S.I.C. have updated our Mission Statement. Advancing MUSIC Mission Statement The Mission of M.U.S.I.C. is to provide a proactive comprehensive risk management and loss control program to Member Universities. M.U.S.I.C. will identify and provide broad coverage for common exposures in the most cost effective manner. PAGE 9

10 Advancing MUCH Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan Michigan Universities Coalition on Health (MUCH) The Michigan Universities Coalition on Health (MUCH) was established in 1997 as a committee, reporting to the Business Affairs Officers of the Presidents Council State Universities of Michigan. In March 2005, at the urging of the public university Business Affairs Officers, MUCH incorporated as a Michigan non-profit corporation and subsequently received federal tax exempt status under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Twelve Michigan public universities are the founding members of MUCH. Current officers of the organization are Reneè Rivard, Michigan State, President and Chairperson; David Smith, Grand Valley State, Vice Chairperson; Gavin Leach, Northern Michigan, Treasurer; and Lori Hella, Central Michigan, Secretary. Susan Kant is the Executive Director. Mission The purpose of MUCH, Inc. is to further higher education and relieve the burdens of government by operating for the benefit of its members, all of which shall be institutions of higher learning that are Michigan state universities, Michigan community colleges or tax-exempt private colleges or universities providing education in Michigan [and] to gather and share among the members useful information concerning benefit programs for their employees and negotiate advantageous employee benefit services for which Members may individually contract The MUCH, Inc. Model The MUCH model employs a coalition approach whereby employee enrollment is pooled and a self-insured template contract with coalition pricing is negotiated. The agreements with its vendors, claims are not pooled. This approach offers several advantages including: Individual choice Plan design flexibility Coalition savings In the MUCH model, each university maintains and designs its own plan. This may include the provider network, plan copays, deductibles, coinsurance, stop loss protection, and specific benefits covered by the plan. The university is only responsible for the costs associated with claims for its own employees, dependents and retirees as applicable. PAGE 10

11 Savings Group Purchasing group purchasing efforts, MUCH has achieved the following: Lower administrative fees Capped annual increases The agreement provides greater cost savings as more lives are covered and includes provisions for centralized customer service centers, performance guarantees and other cost control features that provide predictability for university members. Since the introduction of the health plan collaborative template contract in 2005, enrollment has increased from a low of 11,101 to 23,324 employees as illustrated in Chart 1 below. Advancing MUCH 25,000 Chart 1 Health Plan Collaborative Purchasing Total Estimated Enrollment 23,324 20,000 19,220 17,630 15,000 11,101 12,564 12,449 11,991 10,000 5, / / / / / / /12 As illustrated in Chart 2 below; during fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 an estimated savings of $1.89 million was achieved through collaborative health plan purchasing. Combining the current savings with an estimated $7.84 million from the previous periods, the participating universities had estimated cumulative savings of $9.74 million since the incorporation of MUCH in $3,500,000 $3,000,000 Chart 2 Health Plan Collaborative Purchasing Total Estimated Savings $3,059,000 $2,500,000 $2,422,010 $2,000,000 $1,890,490 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,175,700 $500,000 $228,900 $524,500 $439, / / / / / / /12 PAGE 11

12 Pharmacy Benefit Manager Initiatives With the successful implementation of the health plan initiative, MUCH began evaluating a similar process for pharmaceutical benefits. its affiliation with AEPC, MUCH has access to favorable coalition pharmaceutical benefit management (PBM) pricing. The affiliation allows MUCH to collaborate with a leading pharmacy benefit consulting firm that uses its pharmacy expertise and broad-based PBM experience to enhance pharmacy benefit value while reducing costs. Enrollment of MUCH members in the pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) collaborative purchasing has steadily grown. Chart 3 below shows the employee enrollment by year from 2008 through In the coming year, AEPC will be evaluating its current PBM contract through a request for proposal. This may lead to additional MUCH members evaluating the pricing available for PBM services. Chart 3 Pharmacy Benefit Manager Collaborative Purchasing 20,000 Total Estimated Enrollment 15,000 13,851 14,036 19,924 13,984 10,000 5,000 2,208 2,917 4,426 4, / / / /12 Chart 4 below shows the estimated MUCH savings Enrollment that were realized MSU Enrollment through collaboration of Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) group purchasing. In the current year, savings are estimated to be $1,100,600. Cumulative savings since MUCH affiliated with AEPC in early 2008 are roughly $4.715 million for those participating universities. $2,500,000 Chart 4 Pharmacy Benefit Manager Collaborative Purchasing Total Estimated Savings $1,550,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $550,000 $1,000,000 $340,000 $0 $765,800 $500,000 $445,000 2,208 $514,600 $550, / / / /12 *Michigan State Universities (MSU) involvement predates the 2008 MUCH Savings MSU Savings* affiliation between AEPC and MUCH so the MSU savings are shown separately for reporting purposes.

13 Savings Summary It is important to note that MUCH members evaluate the collaborative purchasing opportunities that are available and participate where there is a financial advantage and savings for the institution. $5,000,000 Chart 5 All Collaborative Purchasing Initiatives Total Estimated Savings $4,737,800 $4,000,000 $3,573,600 $3,000,000 $2,991,000 $2,000,000 $1,960,700 $1,000,000 0 $228, /06 $524, /09 $439, / / / / /12 As depicted in Chart 5 above, in total, through collaborative purchasing, of self-funded medical and pharmacy claims processing an estimated $14.4 million has been saved by the MUCH members that participate in the template contracts model. During 2012, MUCH finalized the evaluation of its third-party administration request for proposal and is in the process of completing the contractual agreements. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and CVS Caremark provided valuable information about health plan and pharmacy experience and trends. Mercer enhanced the knowledge and understanding of the current healthcare marketplace. In addition; members shared best practices for wellness, high deductible health plans and discussed the impact that the healthcare claims tax and healthcare reform will have on employers.

14 Advancing Other MUCH Initiatives During 2012, MUCH finalized the evaluation of its third-party administration request for proposal and is in the process of completing the contractual agreements. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and CVS Caremark provided valuable information about health plan and pharmacy experience and trends. Mercer enhanced the knowledge and understanding of the current healthcare marketplace. In addition; members shared best practices for wellness, high deductible health plans and discussed the impact that the healthcare claims tax and healthcare reform will have on employers. MUCH Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan PAGE 14

15 Merit Network Merit Network, Inc., is a nonprofit corporation owned and governed by Michigan's public universities. Merit owns and operates America's longest-running regional research and education network. Merit was created in 1966 by three of Michigan's public universities as a shared resource to help meet their common needs for networking assistance. Since its formation, Merit Network has remained on the leading edge of high-performance networking and provides connectivity and services to research, education, nonprofit, and governmental communities in Michigan and beyond. Merit continues to leverage its experience from managing NSFNet, the precursor to the modern Internet, to catapult Michigan into the forefront of networking technologies. Merit created a statewide fiber network strategy to support research and education in Michigan, and self-funded an initiative to deploy a 10 gigabit per second (Gbps) backbone across the state to provide a flexible, robust architecture to meet the growing needs of its Members. All Merit-member public universities are connected to the network backbone by a Merit managed 10 Gbps fiber-optic connection. Merit receives no legislative dollars from the state of Michigan to support its operations. Stability, consortium pricing and university control are among the main reasons Michigan s universities received high-speed network and Internet access earlier than almost any other state in the nation. In 2010, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration awarded Merit s REACH-3MC (Rural,, Anchor, Community and Heath care - Michigan Middle Mile Collaborative) project two federal grants to build over 2,200 miles of fiber-optic network infrastructure in Michigan. Merit is leading the collaboration that will create vital broadband infrastructure in underserved areas of the state and provide Merit Network connectivity to universities, schools, government, libraries, nonprofits, and other anchor institutions. In the fall of 2011, Merit began hosting and operating the Michigan Cyber Range, the premier cybersecurity learning environment. Like a test track or a firing range, the Michigan Cyber Range enables individuals and organizations to conduct "live fire" exercises, simulations that test the detection and reaction skills of participants in a variety of situations. Merit is partnering with the State of Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Ferris State, and others to provide this invaluable learning environment, which trains students and IT professionals to be better prepared for cyberattacks and how to react to Internet security situations. Advancing MERIT NETWORK Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan Merit s advanced network enables organizations to provide network connectivity and services to the member institutions leveraging economies of scale, otherwise absent from individual institutions. Merit, Michigan public universities have developed their own solutions to today s networking challenges and created the nation s premier research and education network. PAGE 15

16 Advancing MHEC Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan Midwestern Higher Compact (MHEC) The Midwestern Higher Compact (MHEC) was established in The Compact s charge is to promote interstate cooperation and resource sharing in postsecondary education. MHEC s member states are: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio and Wisconsin. The Michigan Commissioners are: State Senator Tonya Schuitmaker; State Representative Robert Genetski II; Eileen Weiser, Member of the State Board of ; President David Eisler, Ferris State ; and President Conway Jeffress, Schoolcraft College. Michael Flanagan, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Michigan Department of ; President Edward Blews, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities of Michigan (AICUM); and Michael Boulus, Presidents Council State Universities of Michigan (PCSUM), serve as Commissioner-Alternates. The work of the Compact is financed largely through member state obligations, cost savings initiatives and foundation grants. A small, full-time staff located in Minneapolis administers MHEC's daily operations, programming, and policy-research activities. The Compact s three core functions are: cost-savings, student access, and policy research. MHEC offers a range of cost-saving strategies for member states and the public universities are among the participating institutions. Those programs and estimated cost savings for are provided below (also see Appendix for cost saving charts). All of the public universities, with the exception of the of Michigan, Ann Arbor and the of Michigan, Flint, participated in one or more of these cost savings programs this past year. MHEC provides cost saving strategies in three primary areas computer hardware, software, and master property and the total estimated cost savings to Michigan was $4,667,392. These programs are available to a variety of institutions in Michigan from the public universities and community colleges to the private universities, K-12 education, and in some cases even other nonprofit organizations in the state. Where possible, we will highlight the cost savings associated with the public universities. PAGE 16 Michigan saves the second most of any of the twelve states using MHEC programs (second only to Illinois). Michigan s total savings for was $8,019,096 (including the student exchange program not listed below).

17 Computer Hardware Program Savings: $3,611,873 MHEC has hardware purchasing agreements established with Dell, Fujitsu, Oracle (formerly Sun), Systemax/Global Gov Ed/Comp USA and Xerox. MHEC also has entered into agreements with Alcatel- Lucent, Enterasys and Juniper for data and voice networking equipment. In , Michigan public universities purchased more than $9.14 million of equipment through MHEC purchasing agreements for an estimated savings of $825,165. More than half of the savings realized by Michigan in terms of computer purchasing was realized by K-12 school districts. Software Program Savings: $256,827 MHEC has established agreements for the licensing or procurement of eiq Networks, Novell, Oracle and VMware products and services. Currently, six of our public universities utilize the Novell licensing agreement through MHEC, which guarantees participating institutions the lowest discount available through Novell regardless of the size of the institution. Typically, the lowest discount of 46% is only available to institutions larger than 100,000 FTE students. The participating public universities saved approximately $103,185 in software licensing fees through this agreement. Another $17,413 was saved by the public universities through utilization of other MHEC software agreements. Master Property Program Savings Savings: $798,693 The Master Property Program (MPP) has brought property insurance benefits to institutions of higher education since The program was established to broaden property coverage, reduce program costs and encourage improved asset protection strategies for colleges and universities in the Midwestern Higher Compact s (MHEC) twelve member states. Currently, higher education institutions in Illinois, Indiana Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri and Nebraska participate in the program. In addition, collaboration with the Western Interstate Commission for Higher (WICHE) in June 2004 opened up the program to institutions in the West. With this, institutions from Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Utah Washington and Wyoming have joined the Master Property Program. MHEC has a similar arrangement in place with the New England Board of Higher (NEBHE) region thereby enabling institutions in Maine and Massachusetts to also participate in MPP. The program insures Total Insurable Values (TIV) in excess of $83 billion with over 145 campuses participating in the program, comparable in size to a Fortune 500 company. Currently, 10 public universities in Michigan participate in the Master Property Program, accounting for more than $798,000 in savings between savings on premiums and dividends paid back to the institutions. Advancing MHEC PAGE 17 JANUARY 210

18 Advancing MHEC Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan New Health Benefits Initiatives MHEC was awarded a three-year, $800,000 grant from Lumina Foundation for to work with institutional and industry experts to research, develop, and implement, among other things, health care cost savings programs. MHEC developed two different committees one for student health benefits, and one for employee health benefits to explore current market conditions and opportunities, gathering relevant information and data, and analyzing the data for cost savings program possibilities. As a result of these efforts, MHEC was able to create two new program offerings, a Pharmacy Benefit Management (PBM) cost savings contract and MHECare, a Midwest student health collaborative. Lumina generously agreed to extend the original grant an additional two years to ensure a successful launch of MHECare. MHECare: A Midwest Student Health Collaborative MHECare was created in response to rising student health care costs. The member states needed a sustainable solution, and MHECare is part of that answer. MHECare was launched in fall 2012, offering potential cost-saving opportunities for colleges and universities as well as their students. One of the goals of MHECare is to help member universities save on student health insurance program costs. MHEC s purchasing power and resource sharing allow MHECare to have some unique advantages. MHECare offers the MHEC member institutions three key advantages: Provides an administrative structure that ensures MHECare s long-term viability, Stays current on the Affordable Care Act and health care reform issues, and Ensures competitive rates. MHECare, institutions with less than 300 students enrolled in their student health insurance plan will be able to choose from two plan options - a low preferred provider organization (PPO) plan and a high PPO plan. All plans will be compliant with federal and state laws. A third option, the customizable PPO plan, is only available for colleges and universities who have 300 or more students enrolled in their current plan. PAGE 18

19 In collaboration with the program administrator, Mercer, an independent consulting firm, MHEC and its Student Health Benefits Advisory Committee (SHBAC) developed the plan design and selected UnitedHealthcare StudentResources (UHCSR), a national health care carrier, to underwrite the program through a competitive bid process. UHCSR specializes in student health insurance plans, has a large national network of providers, offers web-based enrollment and support tools, and quotes competitive rates. Pharmacy Benefit Management (PBM) MHEC awarded National CooperativeRx a competitive bid to help higher education institutions in the compact s member states with their pharmacy benefit costs. Advancing MHEC As universities, colleges, community colleges and technical schools continue to face increasing costs in employee health care, National CooperativeRx can help control prescription drug costs. National CooperativeRx administers a program to provide Pharmacy Benefit Management (PBM) services through a contract with CVS Caremark. Savings can be achieved by institutions that choose to "carve out their pharmacy benefits. To carve out your pharmacy drug plan means to create a drug plan independent of your medical care plan, with potential for greater plan management, flexibility, cost control and more. MHEC, National CooperativeRx can help. Institutions can take advantage of this prescription drug management offering without having to conduct a separate RFP. Complete report is available at pdfs/finalmi0506.pdf. See Tables 1 and 2 in the Appendix for more detail. PAGE 19 JANUARY 210

20 Advancing MIDEAL Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Lake Superior State Michigan State Michigan Technological Northern Michigan Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan Michigan Delivering Extended Agreements Locally (MiDEAL) MiDEAL allows Michigan local units of government to benefit from the State s negotiating and purchasing power by permitting them to purchase from the State s contracts at the same terms, conditions, and prices as State government. Higher education can benefit not only from the reduced cost of goods and services, but also from indirect savings related to writing specifications, researching industries, processing invitations to bid, recruiting a diverse pool of potential suppliers, and making awards. The MiDEAL program is authorized by Michigan legislation and has been in existence since These purchasing agreements have been made available to public universities and have been used extensively by our institutions. Universities are always looking for opportunities to work more closely with the State and amongst themselves toward a com mon goal of reducing costs for operations. For example, universities have contributed valuable feedback to the State regarding an upcoming telecom contract solicitation. In addition, universities have participated in development core meetings and requirements analysis regarding the State s new E-procurement initiative. Universities will be able to take advantage of the State s E-procurement contact and will be following the project closely as it is implemented in All of Michigan s public universities participate in MiDEAL. Some universities also participate in the State s energy purchasing cooperative program, which includes purchases for natural gas. It is difficult to put a specific dollar amount on the captured savings given the number of contracts available through MiDEAL. According to the Michigan Department of Technology, Management & Budget Procurement office, participants can realize both time and cost savings (up to 25%) by using the State of Michigan s contracts. PAGE 20

21 Section II: Collaborative Efforts to Promote and Improve Quality Universities are catalysts for economic growth in Michigan, but in order to do so, they must maintain a commitment to high quality education and research. As such, the public universities participate in a number of collaborative opportunities including: Academic Program Review (APR) a cooperative review process for all proposed new academic programs, significant modifications or programmatic changes Michigan Initiative for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (MIIE) a consortium to leverage university assets to contribute to Michigan s economic growth and diversification, and to enhance technology transfer activities Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) MEDC established the Technology Acceleration and Commercialization (UTAC) program through the 21st Century Jobs Fund. Business Leaders for Michigan (BLM) BLM partnered with the Presidents Council to analyze and advocate for funding through accountability. Higher Recruitment Consortium a collaborative to share information and resources to attract and retain talented faculty and staff Career and College Readiness Michigan Michigan Department of is leading the efforts to implement the Common Core State Standards and the appropriate assessments Michigan Statewide Longitudinal Data System (MSLDS) a State of Michigan initiative Michigan Transfer Network (MTN) and Other Transfer Initiatives a coordinated effort to establish a centralized course transfer equivalency system and to assist students transferring between community colleges and universities Michigan College Access Network (MCAN) a network of public and private institutions, state government, K-12 education, and local communities and foundations working together to increase college participation and completion rates Detroit Compact & Wade McCree Scholars Program a program offering scholarships to Detroit Public School students Community- Partnerships: Invested in Michigan s Future a collaborative effort of the universities to promote their efforts across the state Japan Center for Michigan Universities a collaboration to provide Japanese and English language and cultural programming and professionally-focused programs in Japan Consortium for Michigan Veteran Educators (CMVE) a state-wide consortium of the public universities and community colleges with the goal of sharing information and best practices to better serve our student veterans Art in the Legislature a program to recognize student artwork by displaying their work in the House office buildings Professor of the Year Award a program recognizing outstanding faculty contributions to undergraduate instruction Regional s institutions partner with organizations and consortiums within their particular region to ensure cost savings Advancing SECTION TWO While cost savings is possible and even likely among many of these initiatives, they serve a very different purpose with a common end to better serve the state and its residents. PAGE 21

22 Academic Program Review (APR) Advancing APR Public higher education s role is to provide high quality education programs and to make education accessible to the citizens of Michigan. To fulfill this role the public universities of Michigan have developed a cooperative review process for all proposed new or modified academic programs. The Presidents Council delegates review of academic programs to the Academic Affairs Officers Committee which meets four times a year to review new, modified, or phase out academic programs. In presenting a proposal for a new program or modification of an existing program, institutions are expected to address the consistency of the program with the institution s mission and future directions, need of the program, adequacy of resources, and academic quality. Institutional Mission and Future Direction Each institution bringing forth a new or modified program is expected to address how the program is aligned with the institution s mission and plans for the future. Need With respect to the need for the proposed program, questions such as the following are examined: What is the rationale for the proposed program? Will the program serve a specified purpose in the local community, a particular region, the state as a whole or within a particular field? Are there similar programs offered by other institutions? If so, how does the proposed program differ? Will the new program provide access to underserved constituencies? Resources Faculty, information resources (e.g., library) and facilities are recognized as being essential for quality academic programs. Recognition is also given to the availability and source of funds to provide adequate support for the proposed new program. How will the resources allocated to a new initiative impact funding for existing programs, and will the proposed program represent an effective and efficient use of institutional resources? Quality While each institution attends to the issue of quality control in the development of academic programs, the Academic Affairs Officers Committee systematically reviews proposals noting in particular curricular design, faculty qualifications, plans for outcomes assessment and support services. The objective is to assure that new programs are not only needed and can be adequately supported, but that high standards will prevail in all such academic endeavors. PAGE 22 All of the above criteria and considerations apply to both undergraduate and graduate programs. In May of each year, the Presidents Council assembles a report of all new degree programs approved and all programs discontinued at the universities over the course of the previous year and reports them to the Michigan Legislature pursuant to section 290(3) of the FY13 Higher Appropriations Act.

23 Michigan Initiative for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (MIIE) Michigan Initiative for Innovation & Entrepreneurship (MIIE) is a consortium of Michigan s 15 state universities, leveraging university and private foundation assets to contribute to Michigan s economic growth and diversification. From 2008 through 2011, MIIE raised $4.5 million from the C.S. Mott, New Economy Initiative and the Dow Foundations. Current funding ($2.4 million) is through the Michigan Economic Development Corporation s Technology Acceleration and Commercialization program, part of the 21st Century Jobs Fund. MIIE makes awards to university-based projects, helping speed commercialization of university-owned intellectual property, to grow university-industry partnerships, and to foster a culture of entrepreneurial risk-taking on all 15 public Michigan campuses. Advancing MIIE MIIE builds on the success of the Michigan Universities Commercialization Initiative (MUCI), which awarded more than $7.73 million of university funds from 2001 to 2008 to help pay for concept testing, prototype development, business plan development and other key steps needed to bring a project to a position where private sector investors will step in to fund the project. Quick facts: 6 award cycles $5.5 million awarded to 107 projects RFPs planned for April and October 2013 Proposal review by university technology transfer professionals and representatives from the Venture Capital, industry and economic development communities MIIE is focused on two areas. The Technology Commercialization Fund supports commercialization projects to help launch university spin-off companies or to de-risk technologies making them more likely to be licensed by existing companies. 11 start-ups companies have or are developing out of MIIE-funded technologies. The Talent, Innovation & Entrepreneurship Fund support collaborations, pilot projects, capacity building, experiential learning opportunities such as internship programs and business plan competitions. Some examples include: Technology Commercialization Assistance (UM) assesses company capacities, links companies with technologies at our state s universities, and actively participates in the development of those technologies into actionable commercial market opportunities. This is now a statewide PAGE 23

24 Advancing MIIE program supported by MEDC funding. Michigan Green Technology Entrepreneurship Academy Green TEA (GVSU and Oakland), an innovative, intensive 5-day course designed for science and engineering faculty, post-docs, and PhD students who want to learn to commercialize their research, prepare for a career in the clean tech industry, or take the fist steps towards launching a start-up company. Product Commercialization & Manufacturing Center (LSSU) leverages the university's regionally unique factory automation, robotics and machining capabilities, and enables entrepreneurs and businesses to participate in the manufacturing process. Artisan Distiller Business Accelerator (MSU) provides a commercial license and venue so entrepreneurs can develop and market their spirits in order to attract the required investment for construction of their own facility. PAGE 24

25 Collaborations with Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) Michigan s universities and the Michigan Economic Development Corporation have established a number of key joint programs aimed at attracting talent, encouraging entrepreneurism and commercializing research. Those programs reached new levels in Corporate Relations Network Six public universities and the Research Corridor are partnering with the private sector to connect business relationship offices at the universities. The network will support university projects that work with companies, provide university interns to companies, develop a database of faculty expertise, provide university library resources to small companies, and convene innovation sessions where university experts meet with companies to help solve company problems. Advancing MEDC Universities involved are Michigan State, Michigan Technological, of Michigan Ann Arbor, of Michigan-Dearborn, Wayne State, and Western Michigan. Tech Transfer Talent Network The goal of the tech transfer talent network is to accelerate the transfer of technology through programs that focus on enhancing talent and building better relations with private businesses. The network will create a database of experts who can assist with tech transfer projects, a Mentor-in-Residence program that embeds experienced entrepreneurs in tech transfer operations to help assess new opportunities, a Tech Transfer Fellows program where graduate student fellows assist in technology assessment and market analysis of tech transfer opportunities, a Post-Doc Fellowship program where post docs and grad students work on research projects that are on the start-up or licensing path, and activities to help recruit and engage new talent to these opportunities PAGE 25

26 Advancing MEDC Participating schools at this time are Grand Valley State, Michigan State, Michigan Technological, of Michigan, Wayne State, and Western Michigan. They will join with Automation Alley in launching the network. Michigan Initiative for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (MIIE) MIIE combines university research projects through support from Michigan foundations and state resources to help move research into commercial operation and increase access to entrepreneurial programs for students and others. Technical Assistance Program Initiated by the of Michigan and administered through state SmartZones at Michigan Technological and Central Michigan, the Technical Assistance Program connects manufacturers looking to diversify into technology products manufacturing. TAP also works with university technologies to help them match with a manufacturer who can produce their product. Michigan Translational Research Acceleration and Commercialization (MTRAC) MEDC is planning to allocate up to $6 million over the next three years to universities that do cutting edge research and translate this research into innovative companies that have potential for high-growth and job retention. The goal is to fill gaps in other state programs linking research and business. MSU Bioeconomy Institute This Holland facility is receiving $2.5 million through Lakeshore Advantage. The Bioeconomy Institute provides chemical pilot plant scale-up production opportunities for entrepreneurs and businesses, and conducts sponsored research and testing for both for-profit and not-for-profit entities of all sizes. Battery research MEDC has made a $5 Million commitment toward battery research primarily for infrastructure at the of Michigan, working with the Argonne National Laboratory. PAGE 26

27 Business Leaders for Michigan (BLM) In 2012, the Presidents Council partnered with the Business Leaders for Michigan, calling for the state to invest more in higher education and to begin digging deeper into the measures and outcomes our public universities generate. Our two groups will continue to work together in shaping Michigan s higher education marketplace through strategic investment, and providing greater understanding of the value public universities provide. To learn more about BLM, visit Advancing BLM PAGE 27

28 Advancing HERC Higher Recruitment Consortium (HERC) Established in 2007, MI-HERC is a collaborative response by a number of Michigan colleges and universities to the many challenges of academic recruitment and retention in the state. Its mission is to advance the efforts of its member institutions to recruit and retain outstanding and diverse faculty, administrators and staff through shared resources and technology, and to provide assistance to dual career couples, an increasingly important factor in higher education recruitment and retention. MI-HERC continues to provide cost-efficient ways to help its member institutions stay abreast of cutting edge practices in recruitment and retention, provides greater national exposure for their job opportunities, and continually works to find ways to target the most talented and diverse faculty and staff candidates and promote the higher education sector in Michigan. The consortium is funded by membership fees which are set on a sliding scale tied to student enrollment to ensure affordability for all Michigan colleges and universities. The MI-HERC website, is the most comprehensive higher education employment website in Michigan. It features a searchable database of all open faculty and staff job positions at each member of its 27 member institutions. The central location for job postings at so many Michigan colleges and universities, a dual career search function that allows spouses and partners to conduct simultaneous linked searches for positions within a commutable distance to each other, and the links to comprehensive resources for relocating to Michigan and demonstrating the cultural and environmental amenities of Michigan living makes it particularly attractive to jobseekers. PAGE 28 The total number of job postings has risen to 1,645 as of early January 2013, double the number during the lowest point in the recent recession and exceeding the average of 1,400 postings in early Website traffic in 2012 increased over the previous year with a 49% increase in total job views and a 36% increase in unique job views. Since MI-HERC s goal is to attract the most talented and diverse candidates to its institutions, the demographics of its jobseekers are extremely important. Registered jobseeker survey results for 2012 show that 57% hold a master s, doctoral, or professional degree and 28% hold a bachelor s degree. 32% are from historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups and 69% are female, demonstrating that MI-HERC continues to meet its jobseeker outreach goal.

29 Professional development activities for member institutions this year included a three-hour workshop entitled A Roadmap to Faculty Diversity, by Dr. Sonel Shropshire, president of The Academic Network and a recognized expert on methods of creating effective diversity strategies for academic institutions. Dr. Shropshire outlined how to establish feeder programs with Minority-Serving Institutions as a strategy for enhanced minority faculty recruitment. Webinars for member institutions in 2012 included: Models of Dual-Career Support in Academia: A Roundtable Discussion, by the Dual Career Program Directors at three major universities. From Camouflage to Campus: An overview on the Value of Recruiting Veterans into Higher, by a veteran who is a former HR business consultant for a Global Fortune 500 consulting firm and the founder of The Value of a Veteran. Advancing HERC MI-HERC continued efforts to build jobseeker loyalty and attract new jobseekers by co-sponsoring and producing webinars specifically tailored to the academic jobseeker. Jobseeker webinars in 2012 included: The Campus Visit: Interviewing for Faculty Positions, by a noted career consultant and trainer. Insider Tips for Finding a Job Outside Academia, by the author of So What Are You Going to Do With That?: Finding Work Outside of Academia and frequent contributor of career articles for the Chronicle of Higher Ask the Experts: Answers to Your Toughest Academic Job Search Questions, by the Directors of Graduate Career Services at two major universities. High-quality recordings of all the webinars are accessible on demand by members and jobseekers via the MI-HERC website. A comprehensive membership survey conducted in 2012 showed that in addition to the unlimited job postings and professional development activities provided by MI-HERC, the national diversity outreach and partnerships with academic, professional and disciplinary associations and with graduate student and postdoctoral organizations supported by member fees are among the most highly rated membership benefits. 66% rated the discounts on higher education products and services provided by HERC as extremely important or important. 87% of respondents rated the overall importance of HERC membership to their institution as extremely important or important. PAGE 29

30 Advancing HERC MI-HERC is unmatched as a collaborative partnership to advance Michigan s higher education sector. It provides enhanced regional and national exposure for employment opportunities at member institutions, and brings cutting edge practices for building diversity, assisting dual career partners, and recruiting and retaining talent at our institutions. Theodore H. Curry II, Associate Provost and Associate Vice President for Academic Human Resources, Michigan State MI-HERC Public 4-Year Member Institutions as of December 2012 Central Michigan Eastern Michigan Ferris State Grand Valley State Michigan State Oakland Saginaw Valley State of Michigan - Ann Arbor of Michigan - Dearborn of Michigan - Flint Wayne State Western Michigan PAGE 30