College of Geosciences
Center / Institute Review Procedures
Texas A&M University policies require that university centers /institutes be reviewed every five years unless otherwise stated in the approval documents. Accountability of these facilities rests with the specific unit director. The director is responsible for the day to day management as prescribed by the dean or other university official identified in the approved proposal for the creation of the facility. The College of Geosciences consists of six Board of Regent or University approved facilities that provides a conduit by which a critical mass of intellectual capability, disciplinary expertise, financial resources, and physical assets can be brought together to achieve the educational and research mission of the College. These include:
· Berg-Hughes Center for Petroleum and Sedimentary Systems
· Center for Atmospheric Chemistry and the Environment
· Center for Geochemical and Environmental Research
· Center for Geospatial Science and Applied Technology
· Center for Tectonophysics
· Texas Center for Climate studies
Review Strategy
The review of College of Geoscience centers / institutes is to ensure that the specific units are fulfilling its purpose in accordance with approval documents. Reviews are to ensure that these units are managed effectively and making sufficient progress towards goals and objectives in accordance with the approved proposals. Furthermore, it is to ensure that if the activities under its current leadership, organizational structure and funding levels are making sufficient progress to specific goals and objectives and the activities remain aligned with that of the college and university. Reviews are also required to ensure compliance with TAMU policy. Review criteria will include the following.
Research – The significance of completed and on-going research: significant trends within the disciplines represented in the facility and their relationship to current research specialties, the value added and capabilities that have been brought to the departments, college, and university, the productivity of participants, evidence of prominence, interdisciplinary work, and the importance of visiting scholars. Specific review topics include the following:
· Sponsors proposal awards: Quality and quantity of grants and contracts. Is the center generating external support?
· Publications: Quality and quantity of referred journal articles, conference papers, and books.
· Conferences, workshops and short courses: Quality and quantity of conferences and workshops organized, short courses taught, and presentations or keynote lectures.
· Partnership activities and opportunities: Efforts towards technological development, and commercialization, academic or industrial partnerships developed, interactions with other departments.
· Capabilities obtained: New facilities, equipment or capacities.
· Patents, licenses, disclosures: Patents and Patent disclosures, Technology commercialization and commercialization revenues.
· Multidisciplinary activities: Number of participants, disciplines, and collaborations.
Academics – Contributions made toward graduate and undergraduate research training, impact on existing academic programs and units, and benefits to the teaching programs of the participating faculty member. Specific review topics include the following:
· Educational activities and opportunities: Contributions to the academic mission of the departments/college.
· Curriculum development: Contributions to the departments/College curriculum.
· Student supported: Number of students financially supported by center.
· Research training: Number of students engaged in center activities as part of degree program or classwork. Contributions to high impact student experiences.
Management and Finance – Effectiveness of the overall management and leadership as it pertains to clear articulation of a vision and the implementation of a strategic plan to meet the overall mission. Specific review topics include the following:
· Effective leadership: Clearly articulated vision, communicative, organization.
· Effective financial control and oversight: Appropriate financial management and oversight including completion of a financial plan
· Compliance with policy and procedures: Compliance with University, College, and Departmental policies and procedures.
· Effective management of staff and students: Appropriate training and supervision.
· Productive use of facilities and instruments: Percent of time facilities and instruments are operational, in use. Data management and accessibility.
· Development and implementation of a strategic plan to meet center mission: Defined annual goals, implementations strategy, and assessment of progress to attain goals.
Other - Comment on facility contributions to the public and the community beyond TAMU, awards and service to the state and others. Specific review topics include the following:
· Awards and recognition: Quality and quantity of individual and center awards.
· Constituencies served: Services on State, National, and International level committees.
· Public service and outreach: Activities that engage the public or K-12 programs.
Problems and needs – Comment on specific areas for improvement and/or enhancements. Include discussion of possible future opportunities.
Justification for continuation – Provide justification as to why this unit should continue to operate.
The requirement for review will be defined by the schedule below with notification provided by the executive associate dean to the facilities director. A self-evaluation created by the director and staff will be completed that provides the general accomplishments since the previous review related to the review elements identified above. A committee will be charged by the dean or delegate. The committee completes a review of all documents submitted as part of the self-evaluate summary. Interviews could be included, if appropriate. The review should be completed no later than the end of October of the review year with copies of the evaluations going to the facility director, affiliated department head and dean or delegate. The director provides a written response of the evaluation no later than 30 days following receipt of the assessment.
Timeline
Center (affiliated Department) Director Review Years
Berg-Hughes Center for Petroleum and Sedimentary Systems (G&G) C. Dengo (2017, 2022)
Center for Atmospheric Chemistry and the Environment (ATMO) D. Collins (2018, 2023)
Center for Geochemical and Environmental Research (OCEAN) T. Knap (2019, 2024)
Center for Geospatial Science and Applied Technology (GEOG) M Bishop (2017, 2022)
Center for Tectonophysics (G&G) F. Chester (2017, 2022)
Texas Center for Climate studies (ATMO) R. Saravanan (2018. 2023)
Last updated 24 March 2016