Maryland's Public System of Higher Education

INFORMATION TO ASSIST

IN THE PREPARATION OF A NEW PROGRAM PROPOSAL

USM Review

The BOR Committee on Education Policy reviews all new program proposals and passes its recommendations to the full Board of Regents for final action. The Board of Regents is required to take final action on all program proposals within 60 days of a proposal being received by USM campuses from MHEC. In order to facilitate the 60-day period of review, the Provosts have agreed to submit new program proposals within designated windows of time to ensure timely Board review.

Review of a new program using this short form proposal template is based on two factors as defined by SB 682:

(1) the new program is consistent with the Institution’s adopted mission statement; and

(2) the new program can be implemented within existing program resources of the institution.

It is important to address and show the direct linkage of any new program to the Institution’s mission statement. It is necessary to show that any new program will not be running in a deficit after the five-year period stipulated in the proposal charts. According to SB682, however, the mere submission of a new proposal by an Institution’s President using this short forms indicates the Institution’s commitment to offer the program within existing resources.

MHEC Review

The Maryland Higher Education Commission reviews all new program proposals using this short form proposal template based on three factors as defined by SB 682:

1. the new program is consistent with the Institution’s adopted mission statement;
2. the new program does not represent an unreasonable program duplication which would cause demonstrable harm to other institutions; and
3. the new program is not in violation of the State’s equal educational opportunity obligations under state and federal law.

To receive MHEC approval, it is helpful to address these three factors.

The Office of Academic Affairs is willing to answer any questions and to review proposals before they are sent to MHEC and distributed by MHEC to all Maryland colleges and universities. These voluntary pre-reviews will be handled as expeditiously as possible to avoid any delay in the program receiving approval within the new two-month approval window.

Suggestions for Completing Short Form for Program Proposal

Cover Sheet:

Use the cover sheet as designed. Electronic copies of the entire proposal template can be obtained from this website or by contacting Teri Hollander, Associate Vice Chancellor (301-445-1909), mailto:thollander@usmd.edu)).

Body of Proposal: Do not exceed 5 pages.

A prime element in receiving program approval from the USM Board of Regents and from MHEC is mission consistency of the proposed new program. Quoting relevant sentences from the Institution’s mission state and making a clear argument of how the new program supports the mission facilitates the approval process.

Because MHEC will also be looking at issues related to unreasonable program duplication that would cause demonstrable harm to another institution and to any violation of the State’s equal educational opportunity obligations, it is helpful that this section emphasize the uniqueness of the program and the existence of State need and/or student demand. The remaining information provided in this section typically reflects the following:

*    Educational objectives of the Program

*    Description of program as it would appear in the catalog

*    General requirements for degree

*    Total number of credits and their distribution

*    List of courses by title and number

*    Description of thesis and/or non-thesis option for graduate programs

*    Expected student learning outcomes

*    Demonstrable quality of program faculty

*    Student audience to be served by program and enrollment estimates

*    Impact on student's technology fluency

*    Library requirements

*    Facilities and equipment

Commitment is to requiring no new general funds from the State, but grants, partnerships, and reallocated Institutional funds used to support the program should be explained in narrative form in this section. Confirmation of grants and partnerships via letters or memorandums of understanding helps to support the case for non-tuition revenue sources. Additionally, any special equipment, library, or facilities identified in the expense table might be addressed here as opposed to briefer footnoting in Tables 1 and 2.

Institutions have significant leeway in deciding how to complete this section and Tables 1 and 2, but the extent to which assumptions and decisions affecting resources and expenditures are explicitly delineated is the extent to which questions and concerns are avoided.

Resources and Expenditures

Institutions typically can provide the departments developing programs with references to sources both on and off campus to help in completing the resource and expenditure tables. There are campus-specific definitions of full- and part-time students for research and comprehensive institutions, for example, as well as different projections for how many in-state and out-of-state students and full-time and part-time students might be expected to enroll in a particular new program. Consult with the Dean, Institutional Research Director, or Provost as to the best source of data at the Institution.

Explanatory footnotes for assumptions made in projecting student and faculty FTE and for any special resource or expenditure data noted are encouraged to add clarity and understanding to the proposal.

This figure should, at minimum, cover the deficit shown after identified expenditures are subtracted from identified resources. Balanced budgeting, where resources equal expenditures, meets the expectation of launching a new program with no additional state funding. The mere submission of the program using this form commits the Institution to running the new program within existing resources. Institutions are permitted to show a profit in program offering.

Projected enrollments, based upon the number of full-time and part-time students (including in-state and out-of-state enrollments) will yield FTE enrollment. Estimates are based on two semesters per year. In projecting across the 2-year window, be sure to subtract anticipated numbers of students graduating from the program.

Either current tuition rate or annually projected tuition rates may be used in estimating tuition and fees generated, though the former is preferred by MHEC. It is helpful to footnote which tuition rate (current or projected) is being used. Note, too, any special program fees included in the estimate.

If dollar amounts are included in these categories, identify the source. Additional supporting materials should be included in the proposal and are not counted as part of the 5-page maximum limit.

Table 2: EXPENDITURES

Faculty

MHEC is requesting that only the salary and benefits of new faculty–that is, faculty hired specifically to teach full-time or part-time in the proposed program–be included in the expense table.

Administration and Support Staff

Reflect any new part-time or full-time staff who have been hired to support the new program administration.

Equipment, Library, New or Renovated Space, and Other Expenses

If special expenditures for the new program are anticipated in these categories, a footnote to the table and an explanatory narrative in the body of the proposal are helpful.

See COMAR Title 13B.02.03 for the full set of regulations

For any questions, comments, or assistance, please communicate with:

Teri Hollander
Associate Vice Chancellor
Office of Academic Affairs
Phone: (301)445-1909 Fax: (301)445-1914 thollander@usmd.edu