Executive Summary

The National Council of University Research Administrators (NCURA) would like to commend Bowling Green State University (BGSU) for undertaking an open and comprehensive review of the research administration infrastructure. The strong support for administrative efficiencies and accountability is evident with the decision of institutional leadership and the community to engage in a process that allows all members to participate and contribute. 

The NCURA Peer Review Program is premised on the belief that it is a critical part of this review process to include experienced research administrators who have significant careers and are engaged nationally. This external validation allows BGSU to incorporate best practices and models into their final action plans.

BGSU was established over 120 years ago as a teacher-training institution. Today, it is a Doctoral High Research University as recognized by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. When research is embraced as a strategic focus, many historical and cultural norms of the institution are challenged and attention must be given to organizational structures, resources, and personnel required to successfully support the research agenda.

Evolution of a Predominately Undergraduate Institution (PUI) to an Emerging Research Institution (ERI) 

An institution’s organizational structure is a prime tool of communication to constituencies and must reflect how strategic priorities are realized. The following discussion provides generic context for consideration as BGSU positions for the future.

The evolution of a teacher-training college to an ERI is a process that often occurs somewhat organically. As more academic areas are developed and instructors hired, the associated offices required for administration are put in place, such as admissions, registrar, human resources, and controller, and an authority to oversee such functions is established, as noted in the organizational charts below (for illustrative purposes only). 

As an institution continues to grow and alumni cultivated, other administrative functions are developed that support the institutional mission, such as communications and advancement, and the authorities are elevated to vice presidential levels to more accurately reflect their priority in the growing hierarchy.

Professors strive for excellence and an integral part of teaching is curiosity. As academic scholarship increases, faculty consider seeking external sources of funding.

When efforts are successful, it becomes readily apparent that such activity will require additional administrative structures – first to support, later to encourage, and always to protect the health and integrity of the institution.

Part of that integrity is fiscal oversight to ensure funds awarded to the university are received/disbursed appropriately; fortunately, institutions at this stage of evolution already have a function in place to manage incoming and outgoing monies under the VP for Finance. Because sponsored funds are issued via budget authority rather than actual dollars, institutions must ensure funds are spent appropriately so that accurate invoices to the sponsor will result in full reimbursement (post-award), often referred to as grant accounting. 

However, grantsmanship success quickly identifies an administrative gap on the front end: Because proposals are awarded to an institution, not an individual, they must accurately represent institutional commitments. Thus, an administrative review must be performed prior to the submission for sponsored funds and note institutional approval (pre-award). At this point in the evolution, an office and authority to oversee research is created. Sponsored activity is perceived as an offshoot of the academic mission and the authority is typically established at the dean level under the provost.

The organizational structure above can successfully accommodate the administration of research and creative activities for some time. However, when an institution begins to think strategically about elevating research and sponsored activity to an institutional priority and an integral part of its identity, mission, and institutional culture, it must reflect that shift in its organizational structure. The authority is raised to the level of a vice president with responsibility for the research administration, sponsored programs, and all related areas of development and oversight.

Some institutions leave the Vice President for Research (VPR) under the Provost; others make it a direct report to the president, as is represented above. There is neither a right nor wrong approach. The challenge is a shift in thought and action that recognizes research as an integral part of the institutional mission, not a byproduct.