(1) Initiation of a proposal to create, reorganize, or rename an academic unit or units.

(A) This policy applies to the creation or reorganization of units that affect the delivery of academic programs, and to renaming of all academic units. Academic units include but are not limited to colleges, schools, and academic departments. For instance, this policy applies to proposals for the creation of new academic colleges or schools; reorganization of existing academic colleges or departments including the shifting of departments or programs from one college/school/department to another; the partial or complete merger of two or more departments; creation of new departments; dissolution of departments; and changes of college, school and department names.

(2) Principles guiding consultation on the creation, reorganization, or renaming of academic units.

(A) The organization of academic units should support the mission and strategic plan of the university. Although the administration maintains management rights in cases of establishment, modification, or reorganization of programs (CBA Article 3.23), Central Washington University is dedicated to shared governance and recognizes the importance of faculty consultation in academic decision making. Therefore, all proposals should formally solicit and consider the input of the affected faculty and other academic staff.

(B) Proposal initiators should actively solicit feedback from affected faculty, staff, and students in the preliminary planning stages of proposals, and should give these groups notice, information, and time to enable them to evaluate those proposals and make their concerns known.

(C) In extreme cases (e.g., financial exigency as defined in the CBA Article 25 or other financial crisis), the university may decide to reduce or discontinue academic programs. In this eventuality, the Provost should consult with the affected groups to the greatest extent possible following the process outlined in this policy.

(3) Preparing a proposal for consultation on a creation, reorganization, or renaming of an academic unit.

(A) The proposal initiator should work with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Provost to consider the degree of impact of the proposed change and determine the level of detail required in the proposal. The initiator should then complete a proposal template, as applicable, with details about the following items:

1. Description of the recommended change.

2. Rationale for the recommended change.

3. Goals and objectives of the proposed change.

4. Method for evaluating achievement of goals and objectives.

5. Relation of the change to the mission and strategic plan of the university.

6. Impacts on academic programs across the university.

7. Impacts on students, faculty, and staff.

8. Impacts on quality of degree programs, student retention, and graduation rates.

9. Impacts on non-academic units, external constituents, and accreditation.

10. Impacts on shared governance, including tenure/promotion/review processes.

11. Before and after organizational chart for all units affected.

12. Cost/benefit analysis, including financial and non-financial resources.

13. Implementation plan and timeline.

(B) In cases of renaming of academic units, responses to items 3, 9, 10, 11, and 12 may be omitted.

(4) Review process for proposals to create, reorganize, or rename academic units.

(A) The proposal initiator should work with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Provost to establish a review process for consultation on the proposal as outlined in CWUR 2-90-060(4). 

(B) The timeline for review for each level will be no more than one month, ideally with an overall timeline of not more than six months (not including breaks/holidays, or Summer quarter). In cases of significant reorganization and with the approval of both the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and Provost, the timeline at each review level may be extended beyond a month in order to consult appropriately with stakeholders.

(C) Reviewers at each stage will have access to the full proposal, with any modifications, as well as all comments from previous levels of review. Revisions to the proposal may and should occur during the process based on feedback from each level of review. However, attempts should be made to bring any substantive changes back to prior levels for further review. A full record of the review process and feedback (including vote counts and comments about the merits and weaknesses of the proposal) from each level of consultation will be provided to the President and Board of Trustees for final decision-making.

[Responsibility: Provost/VP of ASL; Authority: Cabinet/UPAC; Reviewed/Endorsed by: Cabinet/UPAC; Review/Effective Date: 06/12/2019; 04/26/2023; Approved by: A. James Wohlpart, President]