The Advisory Committee On Educational Technology Fees [ACETF] is charged with the responsibility of soliciting, evaluating, recommending, monitoring, and annually assessing allocation of funds collected from the implementation of a student tuition fee surcharge supporting augmented student access to educational technologies on the UWM campus. The following policies and procedures stipulate the procedural processes members of the ACETF will use in discharging the committee’s various obligations. The final authority, and responsibility, for the appropriate expenditure of fee surcharge revenues rests with UWM campus administration. The committee’s role is to initiate and guide the process of decision- making, significantly contribute to decisions, and monitor and report on the consequences of decisions that are implemented. Committee responsibilities are subsumed under two broad categories of action: recommendations on funds allocation, and accountability assessment of dispersed funds. Each category requires separate activity cycles defined by coherent procedures guiding committee actions.
2. Fund Allocation
2.3.1 Proposal format
Proposals should be submitted on the UWM Educational Technology Projects Form A Project Request Form and include the following:
I. Project Description. A clear and complete narrative that describes the type of project and how it will be implemented.
II. Expenditures. A complete budget summary table based on information provided in item IV. Describe equipment requirement, item V. Describe remodeling and installation requirements, and item VI Describe personnel duties.
III. How the project improves student access to technology. Must include specific arguments/evidence on need, urgency, and extent of impact on student body.
IV. Equipment requirements. A description and itemized list of all equipment expenditures.
V. Remodeling and installation requirements. A description of all remodeling and installation needs and an itemized listing of their costs.
VI. Personnel duties. A description of all personnel duties and a basis for their cost calculation.
VII. Needs of students with disabilities. Proposals shall include a written plan explaining how the technology will be made equally accessible to students with disabilities. Proposals for which this consideration may not be applicable will require a statement of justification detailing why the technology will not need to be made equally effective for students with disabilities. The Committee will evaluate both the written plan for intent and the statement of justification for project appropriateness. When the justification is in question, the Committee shall confer with the UWM ADA Coordinator.
VIII. Timetable. A brief timetable that outlines the milestones of the project should include, where appropriate, the time frames for ordering hardware and software, installing hardware and software, and a starting date for the delivery of service to students.
IX. Maintenance/upgrades. This item must include an estimate of the longevity of the project and its impact; identification of the unit assuming responsibility for maintaining oversight authority for the project; and the long-term financial implications and responsibility for the project’s maintenance and upgrades.
X. Project Assessment: All implemented proposals must be assessed to gauge the fidelity of their impact. A standard assessment cycle of up to five (5) years is required of all proposals. Proposals not intended to have impacts of maximum duration must stipulate so in their rationale and be justified with respect to their length of impact. The unit charged with the responsibility of implementing a supported project must submit an annual UWM Educational Technology Projects Form B Project Assessment Report (see Accountability/Assessment section 3, pg. 4).
2.3.2 Multi-year proposals
If funds are being requested for a multi-year project, each item on Form A should include an annual breakdown that clearly identifies the expenditures, project goals, and assessment for each of the proposed project years. Please note that due to the desire to not commit funds beyond the current funding cycle, multi-year projects are less likely to be viewed favorably by the committee.
2.3.3 Requests for continued support of funded projects.
Units requesting funding for continued support of previously funded projects must submit an interim report detailing the current status of the project, why additional funding is being sought, and any other information that will assist the committee in determining if additional funding is warranted.
Members evaluate proposals on four dimensions: compliance with defined appropriateness, technological need, campus impact, and operational efficacy. The committee may decide to conduct preliminary evaluation and assessment ratings of proposals in advance of meeting to deliberate and prioritize proposals. Proposals deemed inappropriate are excluded from consideration. All remaining proposals are ranked according to a majority vote of committee members’ preferences for those proposals.
The Provost/Vice Chancellor will provide to all Deans, Division Heads, and the Student Association a list of the proposals funded. Proposers of non-funded projects will be notified, in writing, that their project will not be funded and the rationale for the decision. Proposers of funded projects will be notified, in writing, that their project has been funded, the stipulations on the use of the funds, the accounting procedures to be followed, and the forms and deadlines for submission of project reports.
I. Project description. A description of the project (indicate if this description is different than the one proposed and why).
II. Expenditures. Completed budget summary table.
A. Project Assessment: Including demonstrable (preferably measured) effects of funded project and explanations for differences in anticipated versus observed outcomes.
B. Purchase orders and/or final accounting ledger. Purchase orders and/or final accounting ledger that provide a detailed accounting of the project expenses.
C. Maintenance/upgrades. An estimate of the longevity of the project and its impact; identification of the unit assuming responsibility for maintaining oversight authority for the project; and the long-term financial implications and responsibility for the project’s maintenance and upgrades. Please note if this description is different than the one proposed and explain why.
The committee receives and reviews all project reports. It may return any report for additional information deemed necessary.
Concurrent with the timing of project reports, the committee receives from UWM administration an annual accounting and budget analysis report that includes a summary of fee revenues and verified project expenditure histories (including notations on problematic activities observed for any project).