University Times

The dean of Pitt's School of Medicine has denied an allegation that faculty weren't given the chance to comment on a new, school-wide plan to financially reward researchers who attract external grants.

Arthur S. Levine, who is senior vice chancellor for Health Sciences in addition to being medical dean, told Senate Council on Dec. 4 that medical faculty members had the opportunity to comment during the several months it took to draft the plan, which will go into effect on July 1, 2001.

The plan will offer principal investigators a pay supplement equal to 10 percent of the indirect cost recovery from their grants. The supplement will be capped at $100,000 annually per researcher.

At last month's Faculty Assembly meeting, Michael Pinsky of the anesthesiology department claimed the new plan was drafted without input from faculty or department chairpersons.

University Senate President Nathan Hershey reported on Pinsky's remarks during this week's Council meeting, prompting Levine's response.

"When I came here two years ago," Levine said, "I became aware that [research incentive] plans were implemented variously by our 23 departments, such that more affluent departments gave more generous incentives and less affluent departments gave less generous, or often no, incentives."

This inconsistency encouraged researchers to "jump ship" — switching departments in the hope of earning more incentive money, Levine said.

"My aim was to standardize practices in a way that would be fair to all faculty and departments in the medical school," he said. "I thought this was particularly important given that clinical care is heavily incentivized in the School of Medicine. I felt that it was very important, for academic purposes, for research to be equally incentivized."

The resulting, school-wide incentive plan was developed over several months with input from all of the school's department chairpersons, according to Levine. "They, in turn, had discussions with their faculty members. I do not know whether they discussed it with every faculty member because, as I'm sure you know, not all faculty members come to all meetings.

"But I do know that I myself — in addition to presenting the plan to the executive committee of the medical school — presented it on May 17, 2000, to the [school-wide] faculty meeting."

Only 37 of the school's 1,800 faculty members attended. Given the low attendance (not unusual for a School of Medicine faculty meeting), Levine said he thought it was inappropriate to call for a vote on the plan at that meeting. But Levine said he did solicit comments and criticism. "Hearing none, and in the interest of fairness, I went ahead" with moving the plan forward, he said.

Graduate School of Public Health faculty are considering a proposal for a similar incentive plan in their school, said Senate President Hershey, a public health professor.

In other Senate business:

* Internet access at Pitt — slow and congested in recent months — should improve with the University's recent purchase of an additional 45 megabits of bandwidth and the planned purchase of 30 more megabits in January, reported Susan Sereika, chairperson of the Senate's computer usage committee. Prior to the additions, Pitt's Internet bandwidth was limited to 50 megabits.

Off-campus access to the University's computer network is expected to improve with the upgrade of all 800 Pitt modems by next fall, Sereika told Faculty Assembly. She added that Pitt plans to begin enforcing a two-hour limit on network use during the peak hours of 5 p.m.-midnight, and users may no longer gain multiple access to the network through a single account.

Sereika urged faculty to check the University's technology web site (www.technology.pitt.edu) for the latest Pitt computing news.

* Senate President Hershey said faculty representatives are working with staff from the offices of the Provost and General Counsel on a new, "expedited" faculty grievance process to be offered as an alternative to the current procedure.

The current process starts with informal mediation by the Senate's tenure and academic freedom committee. If that fails, the grievant files a written complaint with the Provost's office. Then comes selection of a grievance panel, followed by an investigation.

The whole process can take a year or longer. By that time, grievants on annual contracts sometimes have left Pitt for other employment, said Hershey. The planned "expedited" process will be offered to grievants as a simpler and quicker option, although the current procedure will be retained for those who prefer it, Hershey said.

* A Senate working group plans to meet Dec. 14 with Jerome L. Rosenberg, Pitt's research integrity officer, to develop a final draft of a revised conflict of interest policy for University personnel.

* Provost James Maher said he is forming a "convocation planning committee" of faculty, staff, students, administrators and trustees to help in planning Pitt's annual commencement and other events to be held in the Petersen Convocation Center, scheduled to open in early winter 2002.

* Faculty, along with staff and student members of the Senate, are invited to speak at a Feb. 15 special plenary session considering the extent to which Pitt is an "open university." Speakers are asked to submit brief summaries of their remarks in advance to the Senate office, 1234 Cathedral of Learning. To date, only eight or nine have been submitted, Hershey reported. If additional speakers don't come forward, the Senate may cancel the meeting.

— Bruce Steele