The University has effectively organized its human, financial, and physical resources to enable faculty and research staff to deliver high- quality research, and it has succeeded in attracting significantly more research funding since 1988. The Office of Research and the Graduate School (hereafter referred to as Office of Research) is efficiently linked to central administration, academic departments, and research institutes. Although, the administrative structure may not be optimal for attracting research funding, we are rapidly approaching our goals for federally funded research, and we continue to provide new incentives and information to assist researchers in securing sponsored research grants and contracts.

Administrative Structure

Responsibility for developing goals and strategic plans to enhance and strengthen research programs, as well as for administering research programs, rests with the Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School, who reports to the Executive Vice President and Provost. The title of Vice Provost was added in 1991. Since this chapter focuses on research, we will refer to the senior administrator as the Vice Provost for Research. As noted in Chapter 7, this administrator was judged an effective and highly qualified administrator by the Consultant Report [2.8F].

As shown in Figure 17, below, Research Services, Intellectual Properties, and five Research Institutes and Centers all report to the Vice Provost for Research. Only the Institute of Materials Processing and Keweenaw Research Center are not included within an academic unit; other institutes and centers are interdisciplinary units that involve faculty and research staff from various units.

FIGURE 17. Organizational Structure for the Office of Research and the Graduate School.

Vice Provost for Research and Dean of the Graduate School

Administrative Associate (Ofc. of Management, Budgeting, Fellowships, Assistantships)

Research Institutes and Centers

Director, Institute of Materials Processing

Director, Institute of Wood Research*

Director, Keweenaw Research Center

Director, Lake Superior Ecosystem Research

Director, Phytotechnology Research Center

Graduate School

Assistant to the Dean (Degree Audit and Certification)

Coordinator, Graduate Admissions

Specialized Clerk (Graduate Admissions, Fellowships, Assistantships)

Research Services

Director, Research Services (Grant and Contract Administration)

Senior Secretary

Administrator, Sponsored Programs (Non-government Grants and Contracts)

Grants Administrator (Government Grants and Contracts)

Office Assistant (Government Grants and Contracts)

Intellectual Properties

Manager, Intellectual Property Administration (Patents, Licensing, Trademarks)

Senior Clerk

* also reports to the Dean of the School of Forestry and Wood Products

In 1996, a Research Task Force recommended reorganization of research administration [5.1B]. However, its recommendations for creating a new organizational structure for research were not accepted by the University Senate. This will be discussed in more detail below, under "Continuous Improvement."

The University supports several mechanisms to create effective links and information flows between central administration and individual departments. The Vice Provost is advised by the Research Advisory Council (comprised of College and School Deans and Institute Directors), the University Senate Committee on Research Policy, and the Coordinator of the Conflict of Interest Policy. The Consultant Report noted that Deans and Directors expressed a strong desire for the Vice Provost to play a stronger role in support of research.

Active research requires effective support functions. To improve administrative efficiency, Research Services and Intellectual Properties moved to the Office of Research in 1988 and 1992, respectively. Research Accounting, however, remains outside the Office of Research and reports to Accounting Services. Support services provided by the eight staff of Research Services and Intellectual Properties were judged by the Consultant Report as excellent and well-coordinated with Accounting Services. Proposal and award tracking systems were converted in 1994 to be more comprehensive and efficient in data handling and retrieval. Research proposals initiated by faculty have increased dramatically, and are often processed close to submission dates, yet every proposal processed by Research Services has been submitted on time since 1988—a record to be proud of and evidence that the streamlining of proposal-processing procedures yielded efficiencies.

The same cannot be said of Research Accounting. Changes in accounting practices and software and personnel turnover have contributed to less than effective performance, and researchers often maintain their own accounting system to track research expenditures.

In order for faculty to apply for grants and contracts, they need timely information about opportunities. The Research Services staff publishes a monthly newsletter, transmitted by e-mail and on the WWW, which identifies upcoming proposal-submission deadlines for numerous agencies (e.g., National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research) and non-profit foundations. It also maintains a small resource library and is available to assist faculty and researchers in obtaining information about existing or new programs and initiatives. The Consultant Report recommended that the Office of Research add a staff position to support faculty outreach and dissemination of information on grants and contracts opportunities.

Financial Resources

FIGURE 18. Sponsored Research Expenditures

Source: Research Accounting

Research expenditures doubled from $11.3 million in 1988/89 to $20.9 in 1995/96 (see Table 13). The College of Engineering accounted for 50% of the expenditures, the College of Sciences and Arts 13%, the School of Forestry and Wood Products 15%, and research institutes 22%.

TABLE 13. Sponsored Research Expenditures, by Departments, Colleges, and Schools.

Benchmark comparison data available for 1993/94 showed that we were fourth in total research expenditures as a percentage of total expenditures and fifth in absolute dollars of total expenditures among our seven benchmark institutions (see Table 14 and Figure 19). While most institutions showed research expenditures declining or relatively flat as a percentage of total expenditures, Michigan Tech’s grew from 17.9% to 22.8%. This attests to our growing strength in sponsored research.

TABLE 14. Total Research Expenditures—1993/94.

FIGURE 19. Percentage of Total Research Expenditures

Source: IPEDS Finance Surveys (Current Fund)

Physical Resources

Research also depends on adequate equipment, library resources, and computing. The Century II Endowment Equipment Fund provides a modest endowment to provide matching funds for use in equipment acquisition. The amount of funding has varied from $13,000 to $33,000 per year over the last eight years, a small amount which nonetheless contributes to the development of the University’s research capability. While computing is adequate, the Library is often not adequate for research (see Chapter 10).

Faculty Incentives

1. a portion of the research-grant overhead captured by the college/school Deans, Department Chairs, and principal investigators (PI);
2. graduate-fellowship funding tied to research grants;
3. the REF (Research Excellence Fund);
4. grant and contract cost share; and
5. Faculty Scholarship Grants.

As research grant dollars increase, so does the amount that academic units can capture from overhead and for graduate students, which strengthens the links between research and quality graduate education. A total of 25.3% of the overhead funds are returned to departments (12%), colleges and schools (7.3%), and PIs (6%) to be used to support research and scholarship, equipment, and travel to conferences by faculty or graduate students. Returned overhead to academic departments increased by 59% from $341,000 in 1988/89 to $541,000 in 1995/96. The number of doctoral students who received external funding through graduate research assistantship and fellowships has also increased significantly. Graduate fellowships have grown from 65 in 1989/90 to 94 in 1996/97. Portions of the fellowship dollars have been tied to research grants, which provides added incentive for including graduate research assistantships in grant budgets.

A third incentive to faculty and research staff productivity in research is the Michigan REF. A State program, REF is used by the University to competitively fund specific one-year exploratory projects and to provide three-year start-up funds for new, longer-term programs. The University also contributes support for these projects through cost-sharing, the allocation of graduate fellowships, and other supplemental funding. Priority is given to projects and programs which support the development of PhD programs on campus, involve investigators from more than one academic unit and are interdisciplinary, and are likely to attract continuing support or contribute to economic development within the State. The amount awarded varies annually, usually around $1.3 million. From 1992–94, over half of REF funds were awarded to cross-departmental projects which involved multiple researchers.

An additional incentive for researchers to apply for grants and contracts was the University’s decision to allocate $300,000 for cost-share beginning in 1993. The pool was increased to $400,000 in 1996/97. In 1995, the Vice Provost for Research established a $70,000 Faculty Scholarship Grant fund (formerly called the Faculty Development Fund) to support scholarly activities typically not funded by sponsored research or REF funds. These grants were made to individuals, rather than project groups. This program revives a creativity grant program, the suspension of which in the 1980s left a gap in providing seed money for research and non-sponsored scholarly activities.

NEXT