PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK 
FOR A FEASIBILITY AND PLANNING STUDY
OF PROPOSALS FOR THE REDESIGN
OF THE ARIZONA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM

At the June 3, 2004, Special Board meeting, the Regents proposed a model for the redesign of the university system and set July 1, 2004, as deadline for the submission of alternative proposals. The Board also authorized a feasibility and planning study of the proposals and asked for recommendations on the scope and organization of the study to be developed for review at the June 2004 Board meeting. The scope of work for this study can be described in terms of the principles that guide the study, the needs assessment for the redesign, the strategic questions to be answered by the study, and the elements to be included in an implementation plan. 

Guiding principles 

Guiding principles for the feasibility and planning study that might also serve as criteria for evaluating proposals should include the following:

• Access—To provide access to all qualified Arizona students desiring a 4-year public education, and to accommodate the anticipated future growth in demand for higher education.
     
• Affordability—To ensure that a 4-year public education is affordable for all students and their families.
     
• Quality—To provide instruction, research and service at a high level of quality through Arizona’s public universities.
     
• Effectiveness—To raise the educational level of Arizona’s workforce by increasing current enrollment, persistence, and graduation rates for all qualified students.
     
• Efficiency—To provide education that is efficient and cost effective and that operates within the taxation and budgetary capacity of the State of Arizona and its taxpayers, including any inherent fiscal constraints or structural deficits.

Needs Assessment

Based upon these guiding principles, the feasibility study should begin with an assessment of the need for redesigning the university system. Is the current organizational structure of the university system capable of providing affordable access for all qualified Arizona students to high quality university education that is both effective and efficient—or is further development of the system through a redesign needed? This needs assessment should serve to validate the enrollment projections and assumptions regarding a possible future crisis of access and capacity upon which the proposed plan for redesigning the university system is predicated.

Strategic Questions

The feasibility and planning study should be organized to provide answers to a set of strategic questions. In each strategic area, the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal and of modifications or alternative to the proposal that are submitted to the Board should be described. The strategic questions should include the following:

1. Educational Quality—Does the proposal suggest how educational quality can be optimized across all institutions? How does the proposal link the quality of instruction to the differentiation of missions?
      
2. Access to Education—Does the proposal provide affordable access and opportunity for all of Arizona’s citizens, and does it address needs arising from the changing demographics of the state, including:

• The rapid growth of the Latino population
• The special needs of the first-generation college-going population
• The educational needs of rural Arizona, including place-bound populations and Arizona’s Native American tribes

3. Economic Feasibility—Is the proposal for redesigning the university system economically feasible? Will it provide affordable access for all qualified Arizona students to high quality university education that is both cost effective and efficient?
      
4. Economic Development—How does the proposal complement the different economic and workforce development needs and opportunities of Arizona’s various geographical areas and economic regions?
      
5. Organizational Changes—What major organizational, statutory or governance changes would need to be made in the short, intermediate, and long run to implement the proposed reorganization?
      
6. Community College Collaboration—What collaborations between and among Arizona’s university and community college systems and institutions need to be continued or strengthened, including existing and new 2+2 arrangements, articulation agreements and transfer student support systems?
      
7. Efficiencies—What university collaborations, resource sharing, economies of scale and other efficiencies should be explored if the proposed organizational model is adopted?
      
8. Financing—What are the implications of the proposal for investments (expenditures), additional funding requirements, and sources of funding for both operating and capital needs in the short, intermediate, and long run?
      
9. Faculty Resources—What are the benefits and other implications of the proposal for changes in the allocation of faculty resources to undergraduate teaching and to research?

Implementation Plans—Assuming that a redesign proposal is found to be feasible and approved by the Board for purposes of planning, the planning phase of the study should involve a number of steps through which the proposal could be further refined and implementation plans could be developed for Board review and approval.

1. Mission Definition—The proposed mission, scope and role of each entity in the system, especially those of new entities, need to be clarified, with particular attention to the relative emphasis upon teaching, research and public service.
      
2. Management Practices—Assumptions need to be articulated regarding the levels of tuition and financial aid, requirements for admissions by campus and program of resident and out-of-state undergraduate and graduate students, primary service areas, faculty and staff productivity, emphasis on teaching and research, mix of tenured/tenure-track and non-tenure track, delivery of e-education, and student and administrative support services.
      
3. Organizational Structures—The number and nature of colleges, schools, departments, and centers and institutes, together with the administrative lines of command should be outlined.
      
4. Statutory Changes—What statutory changes need to be pursued in order to implement the proposed budgetary and organizational aspects of the proposal?
      
5. Academic Programs—The levels, disciplinary emphasis and mix of courses and programs needs to be specified. Expectations regarding regional accreditation of campuses and national accreditation of programs should be described.
      
6. Campuses and Physical Facilities—Current and future campus location, size, and physical plant should be described.
      
7. Resource Implications—Short-term new personnel, facility and other operating and capital needs should be summarized.
      
8. Funding Mechanisms—The nature and structure of funding streams, including anticipated levels of tuition and financial aid, state funding mechanisms, grant and contract revenue, auxiliary budgets, and anticipated philanthropic revenue should be described.
      
9. Accountability Mechanisms—The implementation plan should include a description of intended indicators of academic and fiscal performance and other returns on state and student investments. These mechanisms should demonstrate how the redesigned system would provide affordable access for all qualified Arizona students to high quality university education that is both effective and efficient.