Public Service and Outreach Planning Commission
Workplan
March 22, 1999
Rebecca D. Kneedler, Planning Commission Chair
This is an interim update about accomplishments and workplans for the University of
Virginia Planning Commission on Public Service and Outreach. The Commission has 20 members
that include faculty, staff, and students representing the primary dimensions of health
and medicine, business and economic development, government, and education. In addition, a
group of ad hoc members have been included to work on various aspects of the
commission’s charge. For the most current membership listing of both groups, please
see our web site at:
http://www.virginia.edu/virginia2020/public/public-staff1.htm
This update is organized around the six elements of the Framework for Information Based
Planning as requested. These written notes are brief; I will be happy to elaborate on any
of them at our meeting next week or by email.
Definition of Scope. After reading the three documents available on our web site
(Cronin and Sjogren Report, 1991 Faculty Senate Report, and Kneedler Remarks from December
1998), the members of the Commission discussed the scope of our planning including
terminology, definitions, values and magnitude. At this stage, we have agreement on using
the terminology, "public service" (rejecting the term, "engagement"
and qualifying the term, "outreach"). We have reasonable consensus for a working
definition to be the following phrased in two ways: (1) The application of University of
Virginia-based expertise to issues of concern to the greater community, and (2) Harnessing
and directing the intellectual resources of the University of Virginia to promote and
enhance the economic, intellectual, social, and physical well being of the Commonwealth of
Virginia and beyond.
We will be recognizing and showcasing the significant voluntary public service that our
University students and staff contribute. This will not be a primary focus of this
commission; however, it will be noted that the University of Virginia is second to none in
the percentage of participation in this arena of voluntary service by our students and
staff.
Identification of Aspiration Group. We devoted much of our March 10 meeting to a
discussion of benchmarks and aspiration groups. The commission members are already at a
remarkably sophisticated level of understanding of these issues led by the work of Joe
Cronin, Jane Sjogren, and Ben Boggs, and based on their substantial background in this
area. After much discussion (both real and electronic), we appear to be moving toward the
identification of eight or so benchmarks. We are not looking for who is the best in the
generic area of "public service," but rather who is the best in specific
policies and structures relating to metrics such as distance education or state government
relations. We anticipate the identification of approximately 4 from our peer group
listings including private and public (such as the SCHEV salary peers and AAU peers), 2
land grant universities, and 2 from non-university institutions. Identification of
Preliminary Aspiration Group completed May 1, 1999.
Metrics of Aspiration Group. We are already examining the characteristics of a group of
Universities that have emerged from various criteria (Duke, Michigan, Michigan State,
Wisconsin, Berkeley, Harvard, Penn State, Vanderbilt, UNC-Chapel Hill). Again, the
commission recognizes that these may not be institutions that excel in the broad umbrella
of public service as much as they excel in a particular aspect of public service, such as
access or communication. Metrics of the Aspiration Group completed September 1, 1999.
Metrics of the University of Virginia. We are simultaneously collecting the information
needed in this element at the same time we are examining elements 2 and 3. Part of this is
driven by our commission’s immediate push to know more about the University of
Virginia’s current status in public service and part of this is the timely hiring of
a coordinator for public service programs in Gene Block’s office, Laura Hawthorne.
Laura, in close consultation with this commission, is creating an electronic database of
service programs using a variety of techniques including inventories and publications
already available throughout the university community. As a result of the restructuring of
Gene Block’s office and the expansion of his responsibilities to include public
service, a University clearinghouse for the dissemination of this information can now be
created. Metrics of the University of Virginia completed September 1, 1999.
Gap and Opportunity Analysis. The commission members in their expertise groups of
education, health and medicine, business and economic development, and government will
study the analyses of the aspiration groups and UVA. In addition, they will create focus
groups and make site visits in their areas, drawing on additional university people who
are active in the specific area. An example of this is a visit to Richmond to meet with
legislators and state officials to hear their views on the current role UVA can and should
be playing in serving the needs of the Commonwealth. Gap analysis completed February,
2000.
Strategies for Improvement. Recommendations for concrete steps that can be taken will
emerge throughout this process as we work with the following University of Virginia groups
– Development, Technology, Alumni, Staff, Faculty, and Students. Three stages of
recommendations are projected: (1) Preliminary, June, 1999; (2) Interim, January, 2000;
and (3) Final, June, 2000.
|
