May 13, 2007
MEMORANDUM
TO: Frances Dyke, UO Vice President for Finance and Administration
Dave Frohnmayer, UO President
Andrew Marcus, President, University Senate
FROM: Deb Casey on behalf of the Child Care and Family Support Committee
SUBJECT: Year-End Committee Report, covering 2004-2007
The past three years the Committee on Child Care and Family Support has continued to focus on strengthening the services and resources available to UO employees, as well as to encourage approaches that contribute to a work environment that facilitates family and work balance. This report summarizes the most important issues recently addressed by the committee. We also have several recommendations to offer and look forward to your responses.
Compiling information for this report, we are reminded of the important and complex role played by the Child Care and Family Support Committee as it works to effectively address a multitude of needs and issues. Over the past two decades, the committee has figured centrally in the development of varied positive initiatives. We were intricately involved in the development and planning of the Vivian Olum Child Development Center, the creation of the work and family services administrator position, and the promulgation of several family-support policies. Recently, however, our role has been more subdued. The committee’s structure draws together faculty, staff and students with varied expertise, attitudes, and commitments. These varied priorities, as well as the large tasks to be considered, at times make progress slow, underscoring the necessity for clear roles and relationships to accompany a well-defined charge. These are important elements to pursue over the next year, which we intend to begin effectively—a chair in place, initial priorities established by this report, and your response.
Looking back over recent campus developments that support family wellbeing, the Child-Care and Family-Support Committee continues to appreciate the innovation and care shown by various departments that have initiated a number of noteworthy projects—often in conjunction with the committee’s prompting or support. Several deserve particular note:
· the Department of Theater Arts for introducing a ticketing system that offers reduced prices for children
· the Child and Family Center for providing family-oriented workshops for the university community
· the Graduate School for its ongoing commitment to fund a GTF position to serve as a Graduate-Student Family-Issues Advocate
· PARS and the Health Center for developing workshops and programs that recognize the complex needs of student parents
· the UO Administration for supporting collaboration between Public Safety and Work and Family Services to modify the application process for reserved spaces to accommodate parking issues related to family needs
· the Craft Center for its welcoming inclusion of family members in many of its activities and friendly policies toward purchasing memberships
· the Knight Library for revising the process for gaining library cards, offering an inclusive model that simplifies the process for meeting the eligibility criteria, improving access for family members and others in the wider community
· the UO, for its significant commitment of space to lactation rooms (including the McKenzie Parent and Baby Co-op and the PLC Family Resource Room), and recently, the Health Center, which included a lactation room in its remodel
· the UO Administration for recognizing the significant impact of the sale of Westmoreland on student parents and children and including Karen Logvin, UO Family-Services, in a key role offering transitional support with the committee’s encouragement to respect the serious consequences on family wellbeing.
Other areas have received some attention, but need more; we recommend that continued consideration be given these areas when the committee is convened in early October:
Childcare Organizational Structure at UO: Last year, Vice-President Frances Dyke authorized an evaluation of the UO child-care system’s reporting order, retaining a consultant with expertise in early childhood education within higher education systems in order to make recommendations regarding oversight and positioning of its child-care programs. Consultations, which were numerous, included ex-officio members of the committee; updates followed conclusion of the report. We ask that the entire committee be kept apprised of recommended actions and developments.
Committee Composition and Leadership: The lack of an active committee chair has contributed to inefficiency and less focused energy than usual during the past two years. The importance of full membership—including the participation of tenured and tenure-track faculty—is clear, as is the time pressure that constrains many tenure-track faculty from pursuing service interests. Maintaining continuity on the committee also is essential, as is selecting a chair, which tends to be most effective when a faculty member fills that position. As one committee member noted, “One of the biggest challenges for many faculty who participate on university committees is that when juggling multiple responsibilities at the university--such as teaching, research, advising, departmental committee work, and sector administration--university committee participation often seems to get the short end of the stick. This is quite lamentable and I don't think it's due to a lack of interest in the issues addressed. It's simply that there are only so many hours in the day.” When the College of Education’s Early Childhood program was discontinued, important ties were lost to this committee—and motivation for tenured faculty to take leadership roles. This area deserves examination. The most popular suggestion bandied about over the years—that of offering course releases to faculty assuming the responsibilities attached to chairing university committees—may not be possible, but we might approach ways to make the balancing act for faculty more feasible.
We ask that Vice-President Frances Dyke meet with our committee before this year ends, outlining her interests and expectations; we also recommend that next year’s chair be selected from this year’s members. Next fall, the committee could then open by examining where specifically it has been effective, drawing on its relationships with established offices and units, such as the Child Care Directors’ Consortium (which constitutes part of the Committee), and considering how to use staff support such as that offered by Human Resources, and ways to connect with others like the Office for Academic Affairs, GTFF Union, and Center for Study of Women in Society.
Several ongoing projects also deserve priority:
· Information regarding Best Practices: Deans, Directors and Department Heads, who are responsible for adopting successful strategies for family support according to UO Personnel Practices Policy 3.02, were asked, in March 2002, to share their strategies. Responses, supplemented by individual stories gathered through comprehensive outreach, contain both inspiring personal testimonies and exemplary practices. Since that time, additional examples have been collected in a document designed to present ways that faculty and staff successfully juggle family and work responsibilities. A final draft of the collection has been completed and reviewed by Human Resources, with appropriate updates added. Distribution, however, has not occurred. We urge the administration to facilitate full distribution of this resource, The Family-Friendly Practices Collection, relevant to all classifications of UO employees.
· Data on child care numbers and needs: The demand for care for infants and young children has refueled the need to collect data on program use, especially parents’ requests and specific care-needs for children under the age of three.
· Funding for child care: Accessibility to affordable care is a problem for lower income employees, students, and new faculty—especially for infant care. We encourage full support of the Endowed Fund for Child Care Assistance for Faculty and Staff and again recommend that it be given priority in the Capital Campaign. We ask that this committee be informed of the status of this proposal by the opening of the new academic year. Sources of funding are seriously needed, as well as policies supportive of broadening parents’ choices.
· Options for child care: We commend ongoing meetings of the UO-affiliated Child Care Directors’ Consortium as a key to solid service and development but recognize that more on-site care (especially for infants) is only part of the solution—and financially a formidable undertaking. We’re delighted that Provost Linda Brady and Vice Provost Russ Tomlin are attentive to UO’s family-friendly practices. This past year, committee members Deb Casey and Karen Logvin worked with a work group convened by Vice-Provost Tomlin to consider supportive approaches and to draft a family-leave policy that would provide consistent responses to teaching-load reductions for faculty who give birth or adopt mid year, a practice that has not been approached uniformly at UO. Now, we urge positive action on the Parental Leave for UO Faculty policy that is being forwarded, along with circulation of the UO FAMILY FRIENDLY PRACTICES Collection, as recommended above, a useful collection sure to facilitate further development of a supportive and flexible work environment at all levels.
· Graduate Student Family Issues: The GTF Grad-Student Family-Issues Advocate continues to make strides developing support for graduate students with families. We support the Graduate School’s continued funding for this position and attention to the needs of graduate students who become new parents, including consideration of policies parallel those that allow extensions of tenure time-clocks for faculty.
· Family access to UO Museums: In 2005, impressed with the grand opening of the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, this committee asked for consideration of changes in admission prices to help ensure family access to this rich campus resource. We’re not surprised that their prompt reply emphasized the need for funding before offering more options for free admissions, but we’re disappointed in the overall lack of evidence that they are being as welcoming as possible to community members—within UO families and the local area.
· PARS use by families: Physical Activity and Recreation Services has taken several positive steps to address concerns we voiced about limited family use of their resources. As a student-driven center, PARS needs this broad appeal! A new staff person who coordinates the Family Recreation Program met with both the committee and the Non-traditional Student Union Advisory Board to brainstorm changes. PARS and the University Health Center have developed programs attentive to the complex needs and responsibilities of student parents; PARS is working with the Non-traditional Student Union to place a student representative on their Advisory Board—another excellent step when it is realized. We encourage continued dialogue focusing on the culture that is created in this space and to identify ways that it can be welcoming to all segments of the student body.
· Staff Tuition Rates for Family: In a pilot program the Oregon University System Board expanded the staff tuition-rate benefit to include family members, which has benefited all constituencies within the institution. We appreciate extension of the reduced-cost benefit to cover a full-time, 12-credit load and recommend that both changes be maintained. Although the benefits of this program are numerous, we know anecdotally that unexamined issues and limitations complicate participation. We ask that the committee be educated as to how to effectively offer input and inspire statewide dialogue about the future of this important benefit.
The Child Care and Family Support Committee has been an engaged and productive group since its inception as a Task Force in 1986. The committee continues to serve an important role drawing together family advocates to speak from one strong, informed position serving all sectors of the UO. This committee’s design and work has always stayed keenly aware of needs across classification, emphasizing the importance of giving priority to attitudes and approaches as well as programs and services. Over the past twenty years, the responsiveness of central administration has been key to our progress in keeping family-well-being connected to the institution’s good health. We thank you for your support and look forward to meetings that will confirm ways to build on our past progress.
Cc: Linda Brady, Provost
Mike Eyster, Interim Vice-President for Student Affairs
Gwen Steigelman, Secretary, UO Senate
Russ Tomlin, Vice-Provost for Academic Affairs
CHILD CARE AND FAMILY SUPPORT COMMITTEE 2006-2007
NAME POSITION DEPARTMENT
Dylan Bragg Faculty Office of Protection of Human Subjects
Lori Brown GTF-Student Work and Family Services
Steven Brown Faculty East Asian Languages
Deb Casey OA Academic Learning Services
Richard Pryor Student Nontraditional & Graduate Student Advocate
Gina Herrmann Faculty Romance Languages
Philip Scher Faculty Anthropology
Linda Zimmer Faculty Architecture
Nate Gulley Student Undergraduate Student
Ashley Sherrick Student Undergraduate Student
EX OFFICIO
NAME POSITION DEPARTMENT
Tami Brown ASUO Contract Co-op Family Center at Spencer View
Candace Cardiff OA Family Housing
Linda King OA Human Resources
Karen Logvin OA Work and Family Services
Dennis Reynolds OA EMU Child Care and Development Centers
Cathy Soutar OA University Planning
Alisa Stull ASUO Contract Co-op Family Center at Spencer View
Jonathan Wei OA Student Life, Non-Traditional Student Program
Marney Weatherly OA Vivian Olum Child Development Center