Download Best Practices for Centers and Institutes [PDF]

Assessing the Need and Proposed Policy

Faculty members should thoroughly discuss the idea of creating a new center with their dean(s) and other relevant senior administrators at the University. They should be prepared to provide comprehensive documentation, including:

  • Detailed Mission and Goals: Clearly articulate the mission and specific goals of the proposed unit, highlighting what objectives would be achieved that cannot be accomplished within existing structures.
  • Strategic Alignment: Demonstrate how the proposed unit aligns with the strategic direction of the school/college and University.
  • Faculty Leadership: Identify a group of committed faculty members who will provide leadership.
  • Financial Strategy: Include a robust strategy for securing external financial support (e.g., philanthropy, sponsored activities).
  • Positioning: Explain how the unit will position the school/college and University in an emerging field of inquiry.
  • Interdisciplinary Approach: For units involving faculty from multiple schools/colleges, establish an agreed-upon governance model.
  • Internal Support: Confirm the commitment of internal support until external funding is realized.

Once preliminary approval is obtained, faculty can proceed with a full proposal to the dean(s).

NOTE: The structure for interdisciplinary activity should be the minimal structure required to meet its scholarly and/or service objectives. This could include research colloquium, joint research project, establishment of an incubator unit, growing into an externally funded center, and eventually the establishment of a formal division, center, or institute.

Definition of Institutes, Centers, Programs, and Initiatives

An organization located within or alongside the traditional academic hierarchy of a school / college and department, created to pursue a specific intellectual area of inquiry through teaching, research and / or service activities. Centers and institutes typically bring together faculty and often students and can be focused within a discipline or be interdisciplinary, involving faculty from one or more departments, schools / colleges, or multiple units. The organization may be freestanding or within a department or school / college.

Suggested Process for the Formation of Centers or Institutes

Criteria considerations for the proposed unit:

  • Alignment with the Strategic Direction: Ensure the proposed unit aligns with the strategic direction of the School/College/University.
  • Unmet Need: Address a need not already met by existing entities within the School/University.
  • Leadership: Ensure there is a a group of faculty who are ready and able to provide leadership.
  • Funding Strategy: Have a clear strategy for external support, including specific funding levels (philanthropy or sponsored activity).
  • Positioning: Position the School/College/University in an important emerging field of inquiry.
  • Governance Model: Include faculty from more than one School/College and establish a governance model.
  • Internal and External Support: Have a commitment of internal support until external support is achieved.
  • School/College Leadership Support: Secure the support of the School/College leadership of the faculty involved.

Required Documentation:

Establishment of Regentally Approved Centers or Institutes

The establishment of a center or institute by action of the Board of Regents is based on several factors, including budget, size, scope, and implications for the University community. To determine if your center or institute requires the U-M President or the Board of Regents’ approval, please contact the Office of the Provost at [email protected].

Also see the relevant Regents Bylaw, Sec. 6.03. Institutes and Centers (revised April 1995)

  Institutes and Centers may be established on the recommendation of the president:  

Institutes:

    • For conducting teaching research, or service activities. They are accountable to a major unit of the university. 
    • Leadership: Director and executive committee 
    • Appointment: Appointed by the president 
    • Accountability: Responsible to a member of the president’s leadership team

Centers:

    • To  support interdisciplinary research, publication, and training within a school or college 
    • Leadership: Director and executive committee
    • Appointment: Appointed by the president/or other EVP
    • Accountability: Responsible to the dean and executive committee of the relevant school and college

Effective Management of Unit and Annual Reports

Once a unit is created, it is normally approved for a five-year period. The unit’s director holds primary responsibility for management according to the policies and practices of the responsible school, college or other oversight body, in compliance with university rules and policies. Each school/college is responsible for regularly reviewing its units.The general process involves preparing an annual report and undergoing periodic formal reviews. These reviews can be part of the annual budget conference. Although specific criteria and required documentation may differ by school/college, they typically include the following:

  • A brief assessment of the unit’s annual successes and challenges.
  • Fulfilling the unit’s mission for which it was established
  • Current budget details (total GF, Research & Endowment funds), goals and metrics / measures** for the next 2-3 years.
  • Listing center/institute grants and other external funding sources.
  • Reporting current unit space occupancy (square footage).
  • Providing a Center/Institute Organizational Chart.
  • Listing staffing FTE (Direct and Indirect).
  • Detailing Center/Institute Faculty engaged in activities and corresponding departments.
  • Listing of publications, honors/awards by Center/Institute faculty.

**Examples of possible metrics:

  • Funding
    • Total Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR)
    • ICR / Total Grant Expenditures
    • ICR / General Fund (GF) support
    • GF support as Percentage of Total Operational Expenditures
    • Revenue Raised / Administrative Costs
    • Faculty support (Grant and GF)
    • GF Budget
    • Total Space (Square Footage)
    • Infrastructure / Equipment (Invested Capital)
    • Fund Balances
  • Operational Effectiveness
    • Total Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs), Staff FTEs
    • Administrative Structure with Titles
    • Administrative Costs / Total Costs
    • Shared Staff FTEs
    • Faculty Workload
    • Utilization of Space (Time Used / Time Available)
    • Administrative Audit Results
    • Faculty Retention
  • Teaching & Educational Impact (Not all units have a teaching component)
    • Enrollment
    • Student to Faculty Ratio
    • Degrees (Certificates) Awarded
    • Student Credit Hours (SCH) Taught
    • Courses Access or Availability
    • Class Sizes
    • Waitlists
    • Student Advising
    • Student Satisfaction
    • Number of Students Participating in Research
    • Learning Assessments
    • Standard Test Scores
    • Job Placements
    • Graduation Rates
  • Research Effectiveness
    • Grants awarded / Grants submitted
    • Publications per year
    • Faculty teaching load (effort of salary to teaching)
    • “Participation index” based on teaching load
    • Faculty tenure rate
  • Visibility & Impact
    • Mention of unit in media
    • Faculty recruitment
    • Program ranking
    • Number of units participating

Tracking Centers / Institutes / Initiatives

U-M is interested in tracking organizations that are labeled as “institute”, “center”, and “initiative” as well as other identifiers such as “program.” For simplicity, we will refer to them collectively as “centers.” These organizations should be tracked via a financial identifier to compile regular statistics without burdening unit administrators.

Other organizations that do not require a financial identifier should be tracked using a simple inventory, including their name and contact information, to report on the overall scope of such activity at U-M.

The categories below are designed to help group organizations meaningfully. Categories 1 and 2 are those the provost would like to track using a financial identifier. Categories 3 and 4 are those the provost would like to include in our inventory (along with Categories 1 and 2) without requiring a financial identifier. Categories 5 and 6 describe organizations whose existence we will track in our U-M inventory for  completeness. Below are the categories, along with questions to determine whether a given organization fits a particular category.

Category 1: University Center or Institute

Definition: A University Center or Institute is an entity that extends beyond a single unit within the university, focusing on interdisciplinary, interdepartmental, and often inter-institutional collaboration for teaching, research, and service activities.

Criteria:

  • Interdisciplinary Reach: Involves faculty participation from multiple schools or colleges.
  • Central Oversight: Administrative and financial oversight is centrally located, often at the university or provost level
  • Diverse Funding Sources: Receives funding from multiple units within the university and/or external sources.
  • University Mission Alignment: Aligns and supports the strategic goals of the university.
  • Significant Impact: Demonstrates substantial impact on research, education, or service at a broad university level.
  • Governance Structure: Has a governance model approved by university leadership, often reporting to a central administrative unit.

Category 2: School/College Center

Definition: A School/College Center operates within a single school or college, focusing on specific academic or research areas pertinent to that unit’s integrated strategy.

Criteria:

  • Departmental Integration: Activities are limited to the faculty and departments within a single school or college.
  • Strategic Role: Plays a significant role in the school’s or college’s academic strategy.
  • Funding Agreements: Generally has medium or long-term funding agreements within the school/college budget.
  • Leadership Roles: Led by more than one individual over time or concurrently within the school/college.
  • Operational Independence: Manages its own budget and potentially its own administrative space within the school or college.
  • Typical Support: Often supported by the school’s leadership financially and administratively
  • Ongoing Impact: Unit’s activities are vital to the academic mission and would continue even if the center ceased to exist.

Category 3: Sponsored Research Center

Definition: A Sponsored Research Center is primarily funded by external research grants or contracts, focusing on specific research objectives tied to these funding sources. While it primarily receives Sponsored Research funding, it may also receive supplementary cost sharing from non-sponsored sources.

Criteria:

  • External Funding: Operates primarily on sponsored research funding or associated cost-sharing from non-sponsored sources.
  • Funding Dependent: Existence is contingent on the continuation of such external funding.
  • Research Focus: Directed towards specific research goals dictated by grant or contract stipulations.
  • Limited Longevity: Operates for the duration of the grants or contracts received.
  • Reporting Requirements: Required to submit regular reports to funding agencies and comply with their guidelines and oversight.

Category 4: Faculty Member Center

Definition: A Faculty Member Center revolves around the expertise, research, or service program specifically associated with an individual faculty member typically set up as part of recruitment or retention.

Criteria:

  • Personal Association: Directly tied to the work, research, or service program of a specific faculty member.
  • Recruitment/Retention: Often established as part of a recruitment or retention package for a faculty member.
  • Limited Scope: Activities and relevance often limited to the scope of the faculty member’s work or interest.
  • Dependent Continuity: The center’s existence is highly dependent on the faculty member’s continued association with the university.
  • Autonomy in Activities: Operates with high autonomy but often under the faculty member’s department or college

Category 5: Administrative Center

Definition: An Administrative Center focuses on supporting and enhancing teaching and/or research activities without conducting its own independent research.

Criteria:

  • Support Role: Primarily enhances and supports research and teaching activities rather than conducting original research.
  • Non-Research Activity: Faculty involvement is generally in non-research roles or administrative capacities.
  • Non-Faculty Membership: Membership and leadership are mainly administrative, non-faculty personnel.
  • Operational Focus: Enhances operational efficiency within certain academic or service areas.
  • Financial Tracking: Often does not require financial identifiers for research funding but needs operational budget tracking.

Category 6: Agency Center

Definition: An Agency Center is an organization affiliated with the university but primarily operates under the leadership and standards of an external, non-university agency (e.g. Institute of Wildlife Fisheries).

Criteria:

  • External Affiliation: While the Agency Center may have university affiliation, leadership and primary accountability lie with an external non-university body.
  • No University Funding: The Agency Center does not receive funding from the university.
  • Reporting Structures: Often reports to their respective external organizations rather than university leadership.
  • Independent Operations: Operates independently in terms of governance, compliance, and strategic direction

Comprehensive Reviews

It is a best practice to conduct a formal review of each unit approximately every five years. Typically, the Dean’s Office initiates this by contacting the unit director to begin an internal review of the unit. The review committee is comprised of University of Michigan faculty. However, if needed, external reviewers may be included for their expertise or to provide an external perspective on the unit’s reputation. The review committee’s final report is typically advisory to the Dean.

Reviews generally focus on Five Key Objectives:

  1. Mandate Fulfillment: Has the Center / Institute / Program met its original mandate for which it was established? This provides an opportunity to reassess the organization’s direction, goals, strengths, and weaknesses in relation to the School/College’s mission.
  2. Mission Relevance: Is the Center / Institute / Program still relevant to the mission of the School / College?
  3. Financial Stewardship: Has the Center / Institute / Program managed its resources responsibly? This assists in determining the present and future needs for personnel and other resources.
  4. Current Format Evaluation: Should the Center / Institute / Program maintain its current structure, undergo changes, or take a new approach. If changes are needed, what should the future course be?
  5. Leadership Performance: How is the current leadership performing? Reviews provide a mechanism for members of a Center / Institute/ Program to express their views on unit leadership.

Sunsetting / Closing / Discontinuance of a Center

General standards for consideration:

  • The center cannot sustain itself financially, either through external or internal funds.
  • The scholarly quality of work performed by the center falls below U-M norms.
  • The original interdisciplinary nature of the center has disappeared, perhaps because it has been absorbed into a mainstream discipline.
  • The center is unable to attract new faculty, students, or dedicated leadership.

Manifestations of Sunsetting:

  • Transfer: Move the center intact to a new home within a school or college, if its interests align completely within a single school or college.
  • Resource Redistribution: Distribute center resources and transfer some or all to other units.
  • Spin-off: Transform into an entity separate from the University.
  • Liquidation: Reallocate resources and return assets to the original stakeholders.

Sunsetting Process and Procedures:
The closure of a center may require significant administrative effort and should follow the procedures outlined in the center’s founding document regarding the redirection, redistribution, or disposal of resources and assets (e.g. lines, equipment, space, funding, staff, etc.).

  • Completion of remaining grant / contract obligations.
  • Provision of bridging support for students appointed to the center.
  • Determination of IT transition plans for the website, databases, servers, and IRB/clinical patient secure data (HIPAA-compliant).
  • Allocation of bridging or other transition funds for displaced staff.
  • Assistance in placement, relocation or outsource activities for affected staff.
  • Coverage of tenure obligations to academic faculty partially appointed to the center.
  • Decommissioning of facilities, especially specialized laboratories.
  • Transfer of facilities and space back to original stakeholders.


Sunsetting Process by Category:

Category 1 (University Center or Institute):

  • Strategic Importance: Conduct an in-depth analysis of the center’s alignment with university-wide strategic goals before initiating sunsetting.
  • Financial Dependencies: Evaluate external funding sources and explore opportunities to redistribute resources within the university.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Engage extensively with multiple schools/colleges, faculty, and other stakeholders to manage transitions smoothly and minimize impact.

Category 2 (School/College Center):

  • Strategic Importance: Assess how sunsetting aligns with the strategic objectives of the particular school or college.
  • Financial Dependencies: Ensure internal funding commitments are reassigned effectively within the school or college.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Communicate and coordinate closely with the involved departments and faculty to support affected programs or initiatives.

Category 3 (Sponsored Research Center):

  • Strategic Importance: Consider how discontinuance will affect ongoing research commitments and obligations.
  • Financial Dependencies: Focus on winding down external grants and contracts, ensuring compliance with sponsor requirements.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Collaborate with funding agencies and research partners to handle obligations and redistribute resources.

Category 4 (Faculty Member Center):

  • Strategic Importance: Evaluate the center’s alignment with the faculty member’s ongoing work or potential reassignment within the university.
  • Financial Dependencies: Resolve any funding linked specifically to the faculty member’s projects.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Work closely with the faculty member and their department to facilitate a smooth transition.

Category 5 (Administrative Center):

  • Strategic Importance: Assess the role of the center in supporting broader university operations and determine alternative support mechanisms if needed.
  • Financial Dependencies: Analyze operational budgets and reassign resources efficiently.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Coordinate with administrative staff and related departments to ensure continuity of supported functions.

Category 6 (Agency Center):

  • Strategic Importance: Review the partnership’s value and its alignment with university goals.
  • Financial Dependencies: Address any financial commitments or shared resources between the university and the external organization.
  • Stakeholder Engagement: Communicate with the external agency and define clear guidelines for winding down joint initiatives or responsibilities.

Helping Each Other and Sharing Best Practices

If you have additional best practices that you would like to share with the broader University community, please email [email protected].

March 2025