Fort Lewis College Faculty Senate

Agenda for meeting of February 2nd, 2017, 12:50-2:10 pm, 130 Noble Hall

I.  Announcements            A. Approval of Shared Governance document

B. Dian Jenkins, webinars from AHEAD (Association of Higher Education and Disabilities)C. Betty Dorr’s announcementD. Election of next year’s Faculty President (in Feb.)

II.  Consent itemsA. Minutes of Jan. 19th, 2016 meeting B. Course approvals (Click here to view the agenda)

III.  Action items and reportsA. Discussion of Noel Levitz’s presentation and Resolution to ensure transparency and

clarity during the Noel Levitz New program review (Blake)1. What format should the proposals use? How much data is expected in each

proposal?2. When will the proposal be due?3. Who will rank these proposals?4. What does this process cost the college?5. How will these proposals be analyzed during the summer? 6. What are the resources that have been dedicated to this process?7. Is there an example of a sample submission faculty can use to help them?

B. 500 level rigor statement (Post Bac and Graduate Academic Standings Committee)

Attachments1. Minutes of Jan 19th, 20172. 500 level rigor statement3. Shared governance documents (2 final versions)4. Resolution to ensure transparency and clarity during the Noel Levitz New program

review5. Resolution to ensure transparency and clarity during the Noel Levitz New program

review6. Dr. Dorr’s announcement

Fort Lewis College Faculty Senate

Minutes for meeting of February 2nd, 2017

Blake David  XBurke Brian  Dichio Michael XClay Paul  XDavis Ginny  XDorr Betty  xFenster Steven  XFrazer Lee  Fry Michael  XFullmer Shawn  XGore Rick  XGreer Kris  Gulliford Andrew  XHolmquist Tony  XLienert Carl  xMangrum William  XMeyer Felicia  XMouzakis Katie  XOliver Astrid  xRiggs Chuck  xSmith Ryan  XSommerville Les  XValdez Michael  XWendland Amy  XWilliams Laurie  X

Guests:

Barbara MorrisDavis DeussenTomasz MaiskiewiczRichard FultonCathy SimbeckSusumu IwasakiMelissa Knight-MaloneySuzie Null

I.  AnnouncementsA. The Shared Governance document previously passed by senate was revised at Cabinet to amend the final paragraph to remove the creation of a formal committee in lieu of a joint responsibility across administration, faculty and students to assess shared governance annually.

B. Dian Jenkins, webinars from AHEAD (Association of Higher Education and Disabilities)Dian requests that a set of faculty volunteer to participate in webinars on the role of technology to increase accessibility. David Blake will forward the list of available webinars to the faculty.

C. Betty Dorr’s announcementInvitation to faculty to participate in a focus group to better understand the issues facing Native American/Native Alaskan students, with an aim to increase retention.

D. Election of next year’s Faculty President (in Feb.)Nominations can be sent to Michael Fry who will then conduct the election later in Feb.

II.  Consent itemsC. Minutes of Jan. 19th, 2016 meeting

a. Approved by consent.D. Course approvals (Click here to view the agenda)

a. Approved by consent

III.  Action items and reportsC. Discussion of Noel Levitz’s presentation and Resolution to ensure transparency and

clarity during the Noel Levitz New program review (Blake)1. Discussion

i. What are the x ‘things’ that have led to the decline at FLC vis a vi other similar institutions? Prospective ideas should be tied to fixing the underlying issues.

ii. Barbara Morris: the idea stage will occur concurrent with an enrollment study. If we wait on the idea stage until the completion of the enrollment study, it will delay the overall process ~6 months.

iii. What are the other opportunities to fix the budget situation beyond enrollment?

1. Fundraising has been discussed as an area that could impact the budget situation.

2. Barbara Morris: enrollment is a major revenue stream. Fundraising can be used to augment programs. Grants can also be used to augment programs. Corporate sponsorships have

not historically been pursued by FLC. This is a historic deficiency that we might be able to develop outside of SW CO.

iv. There is concern about the enrollment numbers that suggest a slight increase in enrollment mid-way through the decade long enrollment slide. Was there a real positive change or was it the result of a change in hour enrollment was calculated?

v. There is a request for an identification of how much has been spent on consultants, whether there was a positive outcome and who was responsible for those decisions. If there was a negative outcome from consulting activities, who will be held accountable?

vi. All topics (not all ideas) should be made available to fac, staff, students, and admin.

vii. Ideas can be anonymous or identifiable

2. What format should the proposals use? How much data is expected in each proposal?

i. Administration is looking for spitball ideas that can then be revised going forward. Ideas should include estimates of costs and benefits. Noel Levits will perform a more detailed feasibility study later on.

ii. All program ideas are welcome, including in-term and summer programs

iii. There is concern about the ability of faculty to accurately estimate costs/benefits

3. When will the proposal be due?4. Who will rank these proposals?

i. VP Council, CC and/or other existing mechanisms on campus5. What does this process cost the college?

i. $150k for Noel Levits6. How will these proposals be analyzed during the summer? 7. What are the resources that have been dedicated to this process?8. Is there an example of a sample submission faculty can use to help them?

D. 500 level rigor statement (Post Bac and Graduate Academic Standings Committee)1. Approved, 4 nay

E. Motion to Adjourn1. Approved unanimously

Fort Lewis College Faculty Senate

Minutes for meeting of January 19th, 2017

I.  Announcements            A. Results concerning preference for Faculty Retreat - Weds. August 23rd (57/107 votes)

B. Spring Welcome, Kevin Crockett, Ruffalo Noel Levitz - January 23rd 2017 at the Ballroom in Student Union, 4:30 – 6:00 PM

II.  Consent itemsE. Minutes of Dec. 15th, 2016 meeting F. Course approvals (Click here to view the agenda)

III.  Action items and reportsA. Strategic Planning and the changes within FLC

1. Reaffirming our Mission Statement (Blake)2. Enrollment and Budget update (Blake)

i. FLC enrollment has shrunk as a % of the CO student body from 2000-2014. ~4.01% to ~2.88%

ii. Since 2000, FLC enrollments have steadily decreased.iii. Since 2002, FLC has had its own board, concurrent with the rapid

decline in enrollmentiv. FLC enrollment to date has dropped ~30% since the peak in 2000v. Non budgeted items represent $3.5-4M annually

vi. Q: what are the top x majors across each of the CO schools? What is growing? What is FLC missing? How can we retain students better?

vii. How is FLC holding individuals across campus being held accountable for performance?

viii. At what point will FLC assess the ROI for recent consulting engagements?

ix. Are there faculty involved in assessing the effectiveness of advising under Sandy Gilpin?

x. Does FLC need to re-evaluate systems that impact students, such as the timing of tuition payments that signals to students a lack of importance.

3. Student perspective (Connor Cafferty, ASFLC President)i. The downward trend in the enrollment data is representative of the

downward student experience. What can we do to help out students be happy at FLC and successful at FLC?

ii. FLC is not unified, in that the students are at a cross-road where the faculty and administration are working in opposition.

iii. The silo effect is damaging the integration of campus.iv. FLC has a lot going for it, but we all need to work together.v. Q: is there an underlying reason why students are leaving FLC?

vi. Advising is failing FLC. vii. Per Dr. Burke, retention is approaching success while recruitment is

lagging. They are not the same.viii. Per Mason Shea, the student body is fragmented into small groups that

make it difficult for student to develop an identity e.g. student silos.ix.

B. Off campus Policies (Michele Peterson)1. Per FLC legal counsel, faculty acting in good faith while conducting their jobs

in good faith fall under governmental immunity.2. Concerns about liability may limit student opportunities.

Rigor statement

100 Level: Courses at the 100 level prepare students for academic success by developing foundational knowledge and skills.

200 Level: Courses at the 200 level require students to develop connections between concepts both within their field and between disciplines, expand on ideas central to the discipline, and enrich a student's perspective of the world.

300 Level: Courses at the 300 level expose students to specialized concepts and techniques central to the discipline.  Students apply knowledge and skills previously learned to unfamiliar topics and problems.  Students engage in the craft in a supervised or guided manner.

400 Level:  Courses at the 400 level require students to synthesize advanced knowledge and master skills in the discipline and/or guide students to independent production and engagement in the craft. 

500 Level: Courses at the 500 level require students to synthesize advanced scholarly knowledge and master skills in the discipline at the graduate level with independent production and engagement in the craft or discipline.

600 Level:  Courses at the 600 level require students to study, master, and synthesize advanced scholarly knowledge and theoretical concepts.

700 Level: Courses at the 700 level require students to employ advanced or specialized knowledge and theoretical concepts in scholarly and/or professional settings. 

Policy identification number: Number to come...

File: Governance

Development, Approval, and

Review of Academic and Administrative Policies

Policy summary

This policy provides a framework for the exercise of authority delegated to the President by the Board of Trustees.

Policy Owner

President

Approval Date

New date

Effective Date

New date

Search Terms

development, approval, review, academic, administrative, policy, on, policies, p, d, bot, president 

Scheduled for Review

New date

Commitment to Principles of Shared Governance

Fort Lewis College is committed to the principles of shared governance set forward by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in 1996. We believe in the collective decision making process and the representation of key constituency groups. Shared governance requires that all stakeholders (administration, faculty, staff, and students) be allowed meaningful participation in issues that impact them and includes the ability to co-create, co-interpret, and co-enforce policies on a regular basis.

As academic matters are foremost in the operation of the college, we affirm the following statement endorsed by the AAUP, the American Council of Education (ACE) and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB).

The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.

We acknowledge that the Board of Trustees is charged with the general supervision of the college and

the exclusive control and direction of all funds and appropriations to the college, unless otherwise provided by law. We acknowledge that the Board of Trustees is ultimately responsible for all legal decision making related to operations of the college under Colorado State Law and as outlined in the FLC Mission Statement and that this responsibility is delegated to the campus administration. With regard to the administration, we affirm they have the primary responsibility to organize the operations of the college in line with state and national regulatory bodies.

There is a delicate balance between participation in planning, the decision making process, and administrative accountability, especially in those areas where the faculty has primary responsibility. It is the responsibility of the administration making decisions to clearly communicate the decisions and the reasons behind the decisions to all impacted parties.

We are committed to the principle of shared governance whereby the different perspectives of all stakeholders are valued and will be heard. Shared governance requires that all stakeholders participate in discussion of issues impacting them. As adequate communication, trust and transparency are critical to informed participation, information that forms the basis for decisions should be shared among the parties involved and there should be adequate time for consideration and response.

We affirm that shared governance is a dynamic process and that the faculty, students, and administration will jointly assess the procedures and policies periodically.

Affirmed Faculty Senate xxxx

Affirmed Associated Students of Fort Lewis College xxxx

Affirmed President Thomas xxxx

Policy Statement 1.2.3.4.5.6.7. Development

 

A. Academic and administrative policies authorize or constrain actions for reasons that include, but are not limited to, compliance with laws and regulations, advancement of the institution’s mission and core values, implementation of directives from the Board of Trustees, fulfillment of requirements of bond covenants, improvement of the quality and effectiveness of the academic operation, fulfillment of requirements of the regional

accrediting agency, mitigation of risk, improvement of accountability, and/or achievement of operational efficiencies. 

B. Any employee may propose the development of an academic or administrative policy. 

C. The policy development process must include the senior administrator (either a vice president or the President) with operational responsibility relevant to the policy proposal and relevant campus stakeholders.

1.1.1.   For academic policy proposals, relevant campus stakeholders include, but are not limited to, the

Faculty Senate, Council of Chairs, Council of Deans, and the administrative staff identified in the “Responsibilities” section.  If students are identified in the “Responsibilities” section, the Associated Students of Fort Lewis College is a relevant campus stakeholder. 

2. For administrative policy proposals, relevant campus stakeholders include, but are not limited to, the Council of Vice Presidents, the President’s Cabinet, and the administrative staff identified in the “Responsibilities” section.  If students are identified in the “Responsibilities” section, the Associated Students of Fort Lewis College is a relevant campus stakeholder. 

D. The Board of Trustees, the President or a vice president may request a legal opinion from the college attorney at any point in the policy development process. 

  2. Approval

  A. Policy proposals are subject to the following approval process:

1.1.1. For academic policy proposals initiated by faculty, approvals by the Faculty Senate, Provost, and

President are required. 

2. For academic policy proposals initiated by administration, approval by the President, after consultation with the Provost and Faculty Senate, is required. 

3. For administrative policy proposals, approval by the President, after consultation with the vice president with operational responsibility relevant to the policy proposal, is required.    

B. The Board of Trustees may review policies and procedures adopted by the President and revise or repeal them as it deems necessary.  

3. Posting   

A. All approved academic and administrative policies will be posted on the college policy website in a standard format.

 

4. Notification  

  A. The individuals responsible for following a policy must be notified when the policy has been posted.  When those individuals include current students, the faculty and student services staff must also be notified.

 

5. Review

A. Academic and administrative policies will be reviewed at least every five years. 

B. The senior administrator (vice president or President) with operational responsibility relevant to the policy is responsible for initiating the review. 

C. The policy review process must meet the requirements outlined in policy statement 1c.  

D. Revisions or deletions of policies must meet the requirements outlined in policy statement 2a and are subject to the requirements of policy statement 2b. 

6. Archiving

A. Policy development, approval, and review documentation will be archived on the college policy website. 

B. Policies approved for revision or deletion will be archived prior to the posting of any changes on the college policy website.

Reason for PolicyThe “Commitment to Principles of Shared Governance” statement and the policy statement provide a framework for the exercise of authority delegated to the President by the Board of Trustees in Section 4.4.6 in the Board of Trustees Manual of Policies and Procedures.

 

Responsibilities1. For following policy:  Employees.2. For enforcement of policy:  President.3. For oversight of policy: President.4. For notification:  President’s Office.

5. For documentation of policy development and approval process:  President’s Office.6. For procedures implementing the policy:  President’s Office.7. For assessment of effectiveness of shared governance: Faculty Senate, Associated Students of

Fort Lewis College, and President

DefinitionsAcademic policy :  Authorizations for or constraints on actions specific to the academic operation, including, but not limited to, academic standards for admission, continuation, and degree completion, academic student conduct, assessment of learning, curriculum development,  instruction, and research, but not including personnel policies and not including directives only relevant to a specific school, department, program, or committee. Administrative policy :  Authorizations for or constraints on actions specific to the administrative operation, including, but not limited to, accounting, budgeting, finance, information technology, facilities, marketing, non-academic student conduct, purchasing, records, and safety, but not including personnel policies and not including directives only relevant to a specific administrative office or committee.

 

Cross-Referenced Policies Board of Trustees Policy and Procedure Manual  (http://www.fortlewis.edu/bot/Home.aspx)

Revision HistoryPolicy approved June 25, 2014.Policy revised to add Faculty Senate to Policy Statement 2.A.ii., August 8, 2014.Policy revised xxxx to add “Commitment to Principles of Shared Governance” statement.

Appendix Decision Matrix

Policy identification number: Number to come

File: Academic Policies > Curriculum Policies

Policy title

Curriculum Oversight

Policy summary

This policy operationalizes the principle of shared governance of the curriculum.

Policy Owner

Provost and Vice President for    Academic Affairs

Approval Date

New date

Effective Date

New date

Search Terms

curriculum, oversight, governance,    provost, academic affairs, c, pvpaa

Scheduled for Review

New date

Commitment to Principles of Shared Governance

Fort Lewis College is committed to the principles of shared governance set forward by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in 1966. We believe in the collective decision making process and the representation of key constituency groups. Shared governance requires that all stakeholders (administration, faculty, staff, and students) be allowed meaningful participation in issues that impact them and includes the ability to co-create, co-interpret, and co-enforce policies on a regular basis.

As academic matters are foremost in the operation of the college, we affirm the following statement endorsed by the AAUP, the American Council of Education (ACE), and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB).

The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process.

We acknowledge that the Board of Trustees is charged with the general supervision of the college and the exclusive control and direction of all funds and appropriations to the college, unless otherwise provided by law. We acknowledge that the Board of Trustees is ultimately responsible for all legal decision making related to operations of the college under Colorado State Law and as outlined in the FLC Mission Statement and that this responsibility is delegated to the campus administration. With regard to the administration, we affirm they have the primary responsibility to organize the operations of the college in line with state and national regulatory bodies.

There is a delicate balance between participation and planning, the decision making process, and administrative accountability especially in those areas where the faculty has primary responsibility. It is the responsibility of the administration making decisions to clearly communicate the decisions and the reasons behind the decisions to all impacted parties.

We are committed to the principle of shared governance whereby the different perspectives of all stakeholders are valued and will be heard. Shared governance requires that all stakeholders participate in discussion of issues impacting them. As adequate communication, trust and transparency are critical to informed participation, information that forms the basis for decisions should be shared among the parties involved and there should be adequate time for consideration and response.

We affirm that shared governance is a dynamic process and faculty, students, and administration will jointly assess the procedures and policies annually.

Affirmed Faculty Senate, xxx

Affirmed Associated Students of Fort Lewis College, xxx

Affirmed President Dene Thomas, xxx

Policy Statement1. The faculty, the academic administration, the President, the Board of Trustees, and the Colorado

Commission on Higher Education share responsibility for the oversight of the curriculum. 

1. The faculty and academic administration must participate substantially in the oversight of the curriculum.

1. The faculty's oversight tasks are determination of the curriculum's academic substance, rigor, disciplinary currency, relevance for internal and external constituencies, and like matters.

2. The administration's oversight tasks are determination of the curriculum's alignment with the institution's mission, strategic plan, academic policies, and availability of instructional resources, impact on students, compliance with statute and policy, fulfillment of accrediting agencies' requirements, and like matters.

2. The President must approve the addition of, name changes of, expansions of, consolidations of, and deletions of degree programs leading to a baccalaureate or master's degree.

3. The Board of Trustees must approve the addition of, name changes of, expansions of, consolidations of, and deletions of degree programs leading to a baccalaureate or master's degree.

4. The Colorado Commission on Higher Education must approve of the addition of, name changes of, expansions of, consolidations of, and deletions of degree programs leading to a baccalaureate or master's degree.

5. The Higher Learning commission must be notified upon the creation or deletion of a major.  The commission requires prior approval with the additional of academic program(s) at a degree or credential level not previously included in the institution's accreditation and/or the addition of academic programs that require allocation of substantial financial investment or resources.

2. Members of the faculty and the administration may initiate proposals to modify the curriculum for reasons related to their oversight tasks.

3. The Faculty Senate and the Provost may mutually agree to exempt from review minor curriculum modifications.

4. The Registrar will provide to the Faculty Senate and the Provost an impact study for each proposal to modify the curriculum.

5. The Faculty Senate must review and approve all non-exempted curriculum modification proposals initiated by faculty and must review all curriculum modification proposals initiated by administration.

6. The Provost must review and approve all non-exempted curriculum modification proposals initiated by faculty or administration.   These proposals will be forwarded for review and approval by the President only as specified in policy statement 1B.

7. The Faculty Senate and the Provost must inform each other and the Registrar in a timely manner of their timetables and procedures for the review of and approval of curriculum proposals for the next Catalog of Courses.

8. In the event that the Provost disagrees with the Faculty Senate on a curricular proposal, the Provost must provide a rationale for the dissent in writing.  Prior to final action by the Provost, a meeting must be held with the Faculty Senate to attempt to mediate and resolve the disagreement.  In the event the disagreement still remains, the President will serve as final arbitrator.

 

Reason for PolicyThis policy operationalizes the principle of shared governance of the curriculum.

ResponsibilitiesResponsible for following policy:   Faculty, Faculty Senate, department chairs, deans, and Registrar's Office.

Responsible for enforcement of policy:  Provost.

Responsible for oversight of policy:   Provost.

Responsible for posting and campus notification:  Policy Librarian.

Responsible for procedures:  Faculty Senate President, Provost, and Registrar.

8. Responsible for assessment of effectiveness of shared governance: Faculty Senate, Associated Students of Fort Lewis College, and President

DefinitionsCurriculum : The courses of instruction, the general education program, the degree programs leading to a baccalaureate or master's degree, and ancillary baccalaureate and post-baccalaureate credentials, including minors, certificates, and licensing preparation programs that are presented in the Catalog of Courses and identified on the academic transcript.

Curriculum modifications : The addition of, revision of, and deletion of curriculum.

Impact study: A determination of the effects of a curriculum modification proposal on students under current catalogs still in effect, other curriculum, incoming transfer students, and other purposes as requested by the Faculty Senate or the Provost.

Cross-Referenced PoliciesBoard of Trustees Policy and Procedure Manual

Colorado Commission on Higher Education Policy Section I, Part B:  Policy and Procedure for the Approval of New Academic Programs in State-Supported Institutions of Higher Education in Colorado

Colorado Commission on Higher Education Policy Section 1, Part G:  Policy and Procedure for the Discontinuance of Academic Degrees with Low Program Demand

Higher Learning Commission Institutional Change Policy INST.F.20.040

Revision HistoryThis policy was revised to include the statement “Commitment to Principles of Shared Governance” on xxxxx.

Resolution to ensure transparency and clarity during the Noel Levitz New

program review

DRAFT January 29, 2017

Whereas at the Spring Welcome it was announced to the faculty, students and staff of Fort Lewis College that Ruffalo Noel Levitz will have a competitive call for proposals to create new programs to develop strategies to increase enrollment, recruitment, and retention at Fort Lewis College,

And whereas it is unclear who will be reviewing and evaluating these applications and what the evaluation process will entail in terms of selection criteria,

And whereas it is unclear who is eligible to submit an application,

And whereas it is unclear what the financial resources are that are being allocated.

And whereas new program applications are due at the end of April,

And whereas the Strategic Planning Committee has created a transparent and all inclusive mechanism to create our new mission and core values,

And whereas President Dene Thomas has stated that our strategic plan will be a “transparent, inclusive, and open process,”

Therefore, because new programs and student enrollment are vital to our strategic plan and the future of Fort Lewis College,

Be it hereby resolved by the Faculty Senate that the administration create a clear and public application process that includes information concerning application eligibility, evaluation criteria for each proposal, accurate dates for final submission, the evaluation period and final approval dates, the application and submission information including format and page limitations, and a proposal submission sample, and a detailed overview of the process to be followed. by no later than Friday, February 16, 2017.

A focus group designed to investigate faculty views on factors that influence Native American/Native Alaskan student retention is being conducted as a component of a broader investigation. We are using focus groups to explore issues related to Native American/Native Alaskan academic success and retention at Fort Lewis College. We have completed collecting views from freshmen and senior level students and parents of currently enrolled students on the experiences and needs of Native students. We would like to hear faculty views on the challenges and strengths of Native students; in your experience, what works and what doesn’t work in the classroom? Our intention is to improve the quality of the classroom experience or to at least better understand what is happening across classrooms.

The faculty focus group is scheduled for Thursday February 9,1:00-2:15pm (college hour) If you are interested in participating please contact one of us:Megan Wrona, Ph. D., Psychology department, mcwrona@fortlewis.edu Natasha Tidwell, Ph. D., Psychology department, ndtidwell@fortlewis.edu Sue Kraus, Ph. D., Psychology department, Kraus_S@fortlewis.edu Betty Dorr, Ph. D., Psychology department, dorr_b@fortlewis.edu

Call for Strategic Planning Ideas

Fort Lewis College is looking for your ideas. As we head into strategic planning for the future, securing the enrollment and fiscal stability of the institution is a priority. Enrolling new students will become increasingly competitive nationwide. Ideas for how Fort Lewis College can remain competitive for new students, as well as better retain the students who are already here, are being solicited.

What kind of ideas are being sought?At this point, there are very few guidelines for ideas that can be submitted. It could be a new program, service or initiative, or it could be an enhancement to something that already exists at FLC. It could be academic, co-curricular or extra-curricular in nature, meaning it could be an idea for anything from a new major to a new athletic team, or improvements to a campus organization or facility, to name just a few possibilities. It may be something that Fort Lewis College does or has done before, or it could be something entirely new.

Are there requirements the ideas must meet?The only requirement for ideas to be submitted is that they must have a realistic chance to increase FLC’s enrollment by 35-70+ (minimum of 35) students within four years of the idea’s start date. That could be new students or an increase in retention of existing students. The expense of the idea should also be estimated as much as possible, but expense will be researched more deeply in future strategic planning steps.

How do I figure out my idea’s enrollment impact?At this point, we only ask for an educated estimate of your idea’s enrollment impact. Ideas for how to reach that estimate include looking at similar programs at other schools to see their enrollment, checking employment forecasts to see if a particular job sector is growing or shrinking, even conducting surveys on your own to gauge interest. Please share the method for obtaining your estimate.

What happens after I submit my idea?The deadline to submit your idea is Tuesday, February 28, 2017. Once all the ideas have been submitted, enrollment management experts at Ruffalo Noel Levitz will assist in researching each idea. The goal will be to find data to support the enrollment estimates (35-70+ students in four years) and estimate the idea’s financial impacts.

Those ideas that meet the enrollment estimates and that will provide a significant positive financial impact will then be given to teams that may be comprised of faculty, staff and students to further consider and formulate business plans around the ideas. These business plans will be brought forward in fall 2017 for possible inclusion in Fort Lewis College’s next strategic plan.

How do I submit my idea?Fill out the form below and email it to strategicplanning@fortlewis.edu.

Strategic Planning Idea Submission Form

1. Provide a 2-3 sentence description of your idea.

2. Estimate the enrollment impact of your idea (an enrollment increase of 35-70+ students within four years). Provide a brief justification of your estimate, including your sources for your estimate.

3. Describe the target market (locations, populations, audiences, etc.) for your idea?

4. Is your idea Market Penetration, Market Development, Program Development or Diversification?

Market Penetration – ideas dealing with markets that Fort Lewis College already interacts with through programs, services, and initiatives that already exist at FLC.

Market Development – ideas dealing with attracting new markets to the College for programs, services, and initiatives that already exist at Fort Lewis College.

Program Development – ideas dealing with markets that Fort Lewis College already interacts with, but are reached by new programs, services, and initiatives that don’t currently exist at FLC.

Diversification – ideas dealing with attracting new markets to the College through new programs, services, and initiatives that don’t currently exist at FLC.