xt7r4x54fv12 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7r4x54fv12/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky 1961044 minutes English University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1961-04-apr4. text Minutes of the University of Kentucky Board of Trustees, 1961-04-apr4. 1961 2011 true xt7r4x54fv12 section xt7r4x54fv12
Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the University
of Kentucky, April 4, 1961.
The Board of Trustees of the University of Kentucky met in the Pres-
ident' s Office on the campus of the University at 10:05 a. m. , EST, Tuesday,
April 4, with the following members present: Robert P. Hobson, Vice
Chairman; W. F. Foster, Clifford Smith, Dr. Ralph J. Angelucci, Floyd
H. Wright, Robert H. Hillenmeyer, Dr. Paul B. Hall. Dr. R. W. Bushart,
Emerson Beauchamp, Dr. H. B. Murray, Dr. Aubrey Brown and Dr. Thomas
D. Clark. Absent: Governor Bert T. Combs, Harper Gatton, J. Stephen
Watkins, Mrs. Paul G. Blazer and Wendell Butler. Also present were
President Frank G. Dickey and Secretary Frank D. Peterson.
A. Meeting Opened.
The meeting of the Board of Trustees was called to order by Mr. Robert
P. Hobson, Vice Chairman. He introduced Rabbi Joseph Rosenbloom who
opened the meeting with prayer.
B. Approval of Minutes.
On motion duly made, seconded and carried, the minutes of the Board
of Trustees of December 13, 1960; and the minutes of the Executive Committee
of January 20, February 17 and March 17, 1961, were approved as published.
C. Issuance and Sale of Revenue Bonds Authorized.
Board member Clifford Smith introduced and caused to be read in full
a proposed Resolution, as follows:
"A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNI-
VERSITY OF KENTUCKY PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC SALE OF
THE $300, 000. 00 ' UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY HOUSING BONDS
OF 1960' AS AUTHORIZED BY A RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY
THE BOARD ON DECEMBER 13, 1960; AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION
OF PROPER NOTICE THEREOF; AND APPROVING THE MATERIAL
TO BE FURNISHED TO INTERESTED BIDDERS UPON REQUEST,
AS TENDERED BY THE VICE PRESIDENT FOR BUSINESS ADMIN-
IST RATION. Of
WHEREAS,at a regular meeting held on December 13, 1960,
the Br d ed a certain resolution authorizing the issuance,
2
sale and delivery of Three Hnndred Thousand Dollars ($300, 000. 00)
"University of Kentucky Housing Bonds of 1960" for the purpose of
financing the construction of a Project consisting of two new build-
ings for housing approximately ninety-six (96) male students,
including dining facilities with necessary appurtenant facilities,
such authorization being in conformity with the Boards s Loan Agree-
ment with Housing and Home Finance Agency of the United States
Government, identi.fied as .HHFA Project CH-KY-39(D), reference
to said Resolution being hereby made for details; and
WHEREAS, funds have been advanced from other sources and
applied to the construction of said Project and the same is nearing
completion so that. it is in order for the Board to proceed at this
time in the offering of said bonds at an advertised, public. competitive
sale in the manner required by law and as particularly set forth in
Section 3 of the aforesaid Resolution, and the same has been recom-
mended to the B(-card bv the Univeersity' s Vice President for Business
Administration; an.d
WHEREAS the Vice President fir Business Administration has
also tendered for apprcval certain instruments proposed to be
furnished to interested bidders upon request, for thie purpose of
providing full information with regard to the bonds, the security
therefor, the terms and conditions upon which purchase bids will
be received, and general information regarding the University, and
said instruments are found to be in order;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNI-
VERSITY OF ENTUCKY HEREBY RESOLVES, ASL FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300, 000. 00)
flunirv=rsiof Kentucky Housing Bonds of 1960",. as authorized by
a Resolution adopted by this Board a.; a. meeting held on December 13,
1960, shall be offered a.1: public sa.le upon thie basis of sealed, com-
petitive bids in accordance with the Board' s Loan Agreement with
Housing and Home Finance Agency of the Uniired States Government,
relating thereto, such bids to be received in the office of the President
of the University until trhe day of , 1961, at the
hour of a which7time. th e bids shall be
opened, cdng-M-ered a acted u~pen by this Board, or by its Executive
Committee if thle Board is not then in session, which Executive
Committee is haerebyfu1j a uorized to take aii action necessary
and appropriate in the consideration of bids, accep"'ance or rejection
of bids, and establisb.ment of interest coupon raites.
Section 2, The Vice President for Business Administration having
tendered certain instrumern.s proposed to be used in connection with
the public a.rcvert~ising of s -ch sale and for providing to interested
bidders :adequate information with. regard thereto, she same having
been prepared under th.e supervision of the Vice President for Business
Administration by Grafton, Ferguson & Fleisc-Iner, Ithe Boardv s bond
counsel, and the same consisti.ng of a "Notice of Sale of Bonds, "t a
"Statement of Terms and Cond..Alons of Bond Salem and an "tOfficial
Statement of th..e Board of ' ruskees of the University of Kentucky, "t
3
and said instruments being found to be in proper order, the same
are hereby approved and are hereby authorized to be used for the
intended purposes. The Secretary of this Board is now authorized
to cause the aforesaid "'Notice of Sale of Bonds"f to be published
as provided in Section 3 of "he aforesaid Resolution of December
13, 1960, by which the issuance of said bonds was authorized.
Section 3. This Resolution shall. be in full force and effect
immediately upon its adoption.
ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
UNIVER YOton ApRI 4,19 6 1.
ATTEST:
h airman
_____________________ ~Board of Trustees
Secretary University of Kentucky
and moved that all rules be suspended, and that said proposed Resolution be
adopted, which motion was seconded by Board Member Robert H. Hillenmeyer,
and said motion having been. duty considered, the Vice Chairman put the question
of the adoption of said Resolution, and the following voted:
Voting "Aye": Dr. Ralph J. Angelucci Mr. Robert Hillenmeyer
Hon. Emerson Beauchamp Mr. Robert P. Hobson
Dr. R. W. Bushart Dr. H. B. Murray
Mr. William F. Foster Mr. Clifford E. Smith
Dr. Paul B. Ha.ll Mr. Floyd H. Wright
Voting "Nay": None.
Whereupon, the Vice Chairman declared the said motion duly carried
and said Resolution duly adop'-ed,
D. Agreenenti with Hercules Powder Company Aproved.
Mr. Peterson submitted Agreement for field test and evaluation between
the Hercules Powder Company and the University of Kentucky, Department of
Entomology, whereby the University will receive $500. 00 to support field testing
and evaluation studies related to the effectiveness of toxaphene sprays and
granules for control of corn and sorghum insects, including corn earworm, corn
borer, webworms and soil insects. Mr. Peterson recommended that the contract
be approved for a period of January 1 to December 31, s1961.
4
Upon mot-on duly made, seconded and carried, the contract was au-
thorized approved and executed.
E. Contract with Merck & Company, Inc., Authorized Approved.
Mr. Peterson stated to the Board that the Executive Committee on Febru-
ary 17, 1961, accepted a gift check in the amount of $Z2500. 00 from Merck, Sharpe
and Dohme Research Laboratory which was treated as a gift but, in reality, is a
purchase of research work to be done. He stated that Merck and Company want
to reserve certain rights and privileges in exchange for setting up this phase of
a study with KM-360. The contract provides that the University (1) will conduct
an investigation and study of anthelmintic MK-360 against internal parasites of
domestic animals in accordance with an outline to be agreed upon by the Experi-
ment Station and Merck and Company; (2) give four months notice to Merck prior
to publishing the results of the research; and (3-) give to Merck a non-exclusive,
unrestricted license to practise the inventions covered by the claims of any
letters patent which may issue on which Merck has borne the expense. A reason-
able royalty is to be paid to the University on net sales.
Mr. Peterson recommended that, since this is a grant for research
work and not a gift to the University, this correction appear in the Minutes of
February 17, 1961, and that this Agreement be approved and authorized executed.
Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the Agreement was
approved and authorized executed on behalf of the University.
F. Agreement with Garda Farms, Dublin, Ohio, Approved.
Mr. Peterson submitted to the Board a Memorandum of Understanding
by the Garda Farms and the University of Kentucky setting forth conditions of
sale of an Aberdeen-Angus bull, U.K. Whitneymere, 118th registration No.
3037930, calved September 12, 1959. He explained that the niversity-had
raised the subject bull and was willing to sell two-thirds interest in it, and the
Garda Farms, Dublin, Ohio, was willing to buy two-thirds interest for
$2, 300. 00. He explained that the Agreement provides that the University retain
a one-third interest in the bull and the right to collect semen. The Garda Farms
will maintain the bull on their farm at no expense to the University. A purchase
option if either party desires to sell is included.
Mr. Peterson recommended that the sale agreement be approved, and
upon motion duly seconded and carried, the sale agreement was approved and
authorized executed.
G. Agreement between Salmon Corporation and University of Kentucky
Approved.
Mr. Peterson submitted a contract agreement between Salmon Corpora-
tion, through the Mereworth Farm, Fayette County, and the University of Kentucky
whereby the University would acquire one-half interest in a registered Hereford
bull, Silver Prince 194th, No. 11077186, with one-half interest being retained
by Salmon Corporation.
5
Under the agreement the University will keep and care for the bull
for a period of not less than three years before it may dispose of its interest
unless the bull is later determined to be sterile or diseased or dies. Each
party shall have equal rights to use the bull artificially or naturally. Mr.
Peterson explained that the purpose behind this purchase is to make it possible
to test whether or not certain bulls can transmit beefiness or meatiness to
other animals and, by having an interest in three or four bulls at the same time,
much progress can be made on the project. He explained that this bull happens
to be a Hereford but the project encompasses meat cattle in general. He also
reported that the University desired to pay $3,500. 00 for one-half interest in
the bull under the above conditions enumerated. He stated that this price
seemed to be in line with those being paid for animals of this blood line, type,
quality and performance record.
Upon motion duly made, seconded and carried, the purchase was
authorized and the contract was approved and authorized executed.
H. 1961-62 Internal Budget Approved.
President Dickey presented the 1961-62 internal budget of the University
of Kentuck''-fo6i 'the five major divisions and related funds, with a recommendation
that the budget be adopted as a basis of maximum expenditures for the year, that
the inclusion of the name of any person in the budget not be considered as a con-
tract of employment and that the Board of Trustees or the Executive Committee
be authorized to make such changes in the budget as may from time to time be
deemed necessary. He stated that the budget had been mailed to members of
the Board of Trustees on March 24 for their study and consideration. The
following statement was included in the budget document:
INTRODUCTION
The 196 1-62 proposed budget of the University of Kentucky is being pre-
sented to the members of the Board of Trustees for their consideration and ap-
proval. This is your personal copy. in compliance with a resolution of the
Board, this budget document is being sent to you prior to the Board meeting for
your consideration. Please study this comprehensive budget document of the
General fund operations for the ensuing year and bring it with you to the Board
meeting on April 4, 1961.
Upon approval bv the Board of Trustees the budget document will be
recorded as an integral part of tae University? s financial system. The necessary
fiscal control will be exercised for the collection and appropriation of income and
the expenditure of departmental appropriations in accordance with the existing fiscal
policies and procedures.
How hisB ud et Was P ret-a red~
The Deans of the various colleges and the Directors of other facets of
the University were asked in ;January of this year to submit to the President their
budget needs for the fiscal year 1961-62 with data to support their request. These
Administrators, after consulting the department heads and supervisors of the
various units, submitted programs and supporting information with total budget
6
request necessary to carry out their existing and envisioned programs. This
Information was studied by the President and his budget committee.
The estimated resources of the University for 1961-62 were ascertained
and a distribution of available funds was made to the various colleges and divi-
sions after each Dean or administrative officer conferred with the President.
A definite sum of money for each program was allotted.
The Dean of each college or Director re-evaluated the program for each
college department and division in the light of the funds available. In each case
a detailed budget was prepared by the head of each department and each Dean,
and submitted to the President for review and final consideration.
Each budget request was checked by the staff for accuracy and compli-
anrc with instructions distributed. Each Dean or Director individually met with
the President and his budget committee, at which time each program was again
evaluated. After individual conferences in which each budget received group
consideration, final presidential recommendation was indicated. The University
budget was then compiled and prepared in its present form, consisting of two
volume s.
Therefore, this General fund budget is a product of three months of
study, preparation, and recommendations involving more than 225 persons re-
sponsible for the major administrative divisions and departments for programs
of the total University.
It should be understood that this is a consolidated General fund budget
for the University and the summary of figures following in these comments refers
to the five major divisions of the University, through which the funds are admin-
istered; towit
1. Colleges and Administration
2. Medical Center
3. Geological Projects (See Exhibit A)
4. Agricultural Experiment Station
5. Agricultural Extension Service
Budgets for Restricted funds are reported in Volume I. These gifts,
grants, research contracts, auxiliary and service enterprises are budgeted sep-
arately and accounted for individually in keeping with the trust, contract and
self-sustaining operation, Separate reports are made to appropriate sources in
compliance with approved agreements. These operations are audited monthly,
semi-annually, and/or annually as required or deemed necessary for proper
accounting and control.
The University of Kentucky Athletic Association, The Kentucky Research
Foundation, and the Thomas Poe Cooper Foundation are separate corporations.
The funds of these corporations are not included in this budget, except as they
may be transferred to the University as grants. Each Corporation is managed
by a separate Board of Directors.
7
I General Fund Budget
The University of Kentucky General Fund Budget provides for the cur-
rent operation and maintenance of the Division of Colleges and Administration,
Medical Center, Geological Projects, Agricultural Experiment Station, and
Agricultural Extension Service. The Exhibit A sets forth a comparison of the
General Fund statement of estimated income and expenditures for the fiscal
years 1960-61 and 1961-62, This comparison is made by major budget unit
and reflects the estimated income by source, anticipated expenditures by func-
tion, and an analysis of the expenditures by object.
The estimated income for 1961-62 is $21, 264, 084. This is an increase
of $3,667,949 over the estimated income for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1961.
An analysis of the increase in income by source for each major budget unit is
as follows:
Gene-ral Fund Budget Units 1961-62
Colleges Agr. Agr.
Total and Medical Geolog. Exper. Exten.
Source- Increase Adminis. Center Projects Station Service
Student Fees
Comm. of
Kentucky
Fed. Govt.
Sales and
Services
G rant s
Total Increase
$ 76,870 $ 32,300 $ 44,570 $ $ $
3,486,999 1,274,899 1,531,700 300,000 147,400 233,000
2,555 2, 555
74,800 49,800 25,000
26,725 26, 725
$3,667,949 $1, 336,479 $1, 626, 070 $ 300,000 $ 172,400 $ 233,000
The increase in income from Student Fees is based upon an expected rise
in student enrollment on-campus and off-campus. This increase in income will be
realized on-campus from the nine Colleges and Graduate School. The off-campus
increase in student fees is expected from the rise in enrollment within the five
existing centers (Ashland, Fort Knox, Northern, Northwest, and Southeast). Also
additional increases in income are anticipated from evening and extension classes
and home study. Pages 2 and 3 reflect a more detailed analysis as to the various
sources of income for the major budget units for the fiscal years 1960.6l and
19 61-62.
The state appropriation increase in income represents the amount recom-
mended by the Governor and appropriated by the State Legislature for the second
year of the current biennium budget request, except for the $247,699 shown on
page 2 as a receivable-debt service costs for the Consolidated Educational
Buildings Bond Issue. The University of Kentucky and the State Department of
Finance have agreed to include this amount in the coming biennium budget request.
The increase in grants from the Federal Government will be made
through the Smith-Hughes and related Acts. These funds are used in the College
of Education for the Vocational Education Programs.
8
The estimated increase from Sales and Services is from educational
departments and Medical Center Hospital, farm sales, public services, and
regulatory sales and services. The sources are detailed within each division
on page 3.
The proposed expenditure for the 1961-62 fiscal year is $21, 263,477.
This is an increase of $3,617,027 over the estimated expenditure for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1961.
An analysis of the increase in expenditures by function for each major
budget unit is as follows:
Function-
Gen. Admin
Offices
Stud. Services
Staff Welfare
Gen. Institut.
Services
Instruc. & Dept
Research
Organized
Research
Public Serv.
Libraries
Operation &
Maint. of
Phys. Plant
Equip. & Bldgs.
Alt. & Improve-
ment of Bldgs
Service Enter-
prises
Hospital
Operation of
Farms &z Sub.
stations
Debt Serv. Cost
Debt Service
Reserve
General Fund Budget Units 1961-62
Total Colleges Agric. Agric.
Increase & Admin- Medical Geolog. ExRer. Exten.
(Decrease) istration Center Projects Station Service
$ 9 3, 352 $
74, 130
25, 381
31, 335 $
37,980
15, 000
328, 591 326, 301
64,890 $
36, 150
17,450
$ 3,907 $ (6,780)
1,439 (8,508)
2, 29 0
1, 086, 677 43 0, 661 656, 016
129, 006
587,444
61, 821
7, 845
Z3, 075
5 0,950
339,398 144,000
( 50, 000) (50, 000)
(9 1, 200)
31 , 375
661, 748
25 2514
19 ., 000
8,471
121, 161
300, 000 16, 281
2, 200
193,200
248, 088
200
2, 198
(50, 000) (41, 200)
4, 320
19 1, 000
27, 05 5
661, 748
25, 214
123, 090 123, 090
Total Expendi-
ture Increase $3, 617, 027 $1,
285, 557 $1, 626, 070 $ 300, 000
An analysis of the increase shown above reflects the total increase in costs
of programs and activities of an exact or similar classification of service. These
totals include the costs for personal services, current operating expenses, pur-
chases of equipment, and payment of interest expense and retirement of bonds.
$172,400
$ 233,000
9
In addition to the above analysis by function, included on the following
page is a schedule showing the expenditure increase over the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1961 for each of the major budget units by object or nature of expenditure.
General Fund Budget Units 1961-62
Object
Personal
Se rvic e s
Ope rating
Expense s
Equipment
& Improve.
Debt Servirce
Total
Increase
(Decrease)
Uollege s
& Admin-
istration
Medical
Center
Agric.
Geolog. Exper.
Projects Station
Agric.
Exten.
Service
$2,701,094 $ 698,705 $1,544,556 $ 400 $ 174,188 $ 283,245
683, 287 307, 888 80, 224 203, 090 42, 730 (49 ,645)
(81,444) (35,126) 1,290 (2,490) (44, 518) (600)
315,090 314,090
Total Expendi-
ture Increase$3,617, 027 $1,285, 557 $1,626,070 $ 300,000
$ 172,400 $ 233,000
The increase in personal services of $2, 701, 094 was used primarily for
salary adjustments of the University personnel presently employed, with the excep-
tion of the Medical Center, where the use was for salary adjustment and depart-
mental staff expansion. A limited amount was appropriated for additional personnel
in the Division of Colleges, Agricultural Experiment Station and Agricultural Exten-
sion Service for expansion and new services.
An analysis of the proposed mean annual salaries by rank for 1961-62
are shown as follows:
Division of Colleges and Experiment
Station
As sociate
Professor Professor
$11,358 $ 8,186
Assistant
Professor Instructor
$ 7,833 $ 6,633
Medical Center:
Dentistry
Medicine
Nursing
15,500 14,000
18, 096 15,029
8,792
Agricultural Extension Service:
County Agent
Home Demonstration Agent
Agent
r74
6, 250
12, 000
12, 612
6, 842
Associate Assistant
5,761
5,325
9, 078
6,150
10
The mean salaries in Land Grant Institutions in the United States for
1960-61, not including professional schools, were Professor $11,590, Associate
Professor $8,90O, Assistant Professor $7,500 and Instructor $5,700. The
increments for 1961-62 throughout Land Grant Institutions in the United States
will further raise these averages.
Current operating expenses increased in the amount of $683, 287, and
will provide for departmental expansion, new services, and the mounting cost
of utilities, materials and supplies, and interest expense.
II. Auxiliarx Enteurises
Estimated income from the operation of residence halls for the fiscal
year 1961-62 totals $835,696.
Appropriations for the operation and debt service charges total
$831,437. The unappropriated income balance is a reserve for future debt
service charges and vacancy losses.
Total Pe rsonal
Appropriations Services
Operating Debt
Expenses Service
Residence Halls
Men' s Residence Halls
Women' s Residence Halls
Women' s Residence Halls-
Commissary
Total
$ 368,553 $ 58,977 $109,510 $200,066
324,514 90,764 123,750 110,000
138,370 55,200 83, 170
$ 83 1, 437 $204,941 $316, 430 $ 3 10, 066
Additional detail pertaining to the residence halls will be found in the
summaries on pages 3 and 5 with income and expenditures by each dormitory
on pages 126 through 135.
III. Plant Fund
The $1,516,077 needed to meet the 1961-62 bond indebtedness obligation
is shown below:
Funds Provided From
Student Fees
General Stores
Auxiliary Enterprises
Restricted Fund Transfers
Rental Income
Total
Amount
$ 680, 387. 00
23, 503. 00
310, 066. 00
288,889.00
213, 232. 00
$1, 516,077. 00
I 1, 5 1
11
The detail of the appropriation request to meet the 1961-62 bond
commitments is as follows:
Particulars Amount
Retirement of Bond T 0
Interest on Bonds Out-
standing 69 2, 608. 15
Trustee Fees (bank
charges) 2,546.63
Sinking Fund Reserve 262,422.22
Total $1, 516, 077. 00
IV. Restricted Funds
The Board of Trustees has authorized the establishment of various funds
classified as Restricted or Trust Funds (Kentucky Revised Statutes 41. 290).
The Board directed that these ~9private funds and contributions" be
retained and deposited in a local bank. Budgets are included herein for most of
these monies.
After the adoption of this budget, the acceptance of additional funds by
the Board of Trustees, during the fiscal year 1961-62, is considered authoriza-
tion for spending funds in accordance with the terms of acceptance.
President Dickey made the following supplemental statement to the
Board:
In the section under the title of "'How This Budget Was
Prepared" we have tried to indicate to you the care that has
gone into the preparation of this budget, the number of people
that have been involved in various ways in preparing this detailed
budget. I think it is worthy of note that a budget is not a one,
two or three-man job, but as is indicated here, the study, prepara-
tion, and recommendations involve more than 225 persons who are
responsible for the major administrative divisions, departments,
and the various programs of the University. . . .
The summaries are contained in the introductory statement
indicating the increases by function and also by source of income;
then indicating the major budget increases by object and nature of
expenditure and finally a summary of the proposed mean salaries
by rank for the 1961-62 year, I would like to comment just
briefly on that particular point because we have for some time been
"singing the bluesvl about the rank we have with other states. We
are exceedingly proud that these increases for the year in which
we now find ourselves and the year of this proposed budget bring us
to the levels that are comparable and even slightly above, in some
instances, the national average for comparable institutions. That
includes the land-grant institutions and the state universities.
12
Obviously if you pick te e oza r twelv irhstitu-ons and compare them
with our institution you can do almost anyhinig you want to. You
could pick out the ten lowest paying and we would appear exceeding-
ly well off, You could pick out the ten institutions that pay the
highest salaries and we are bel ow those salaries, n terms of a
nation-wide picture we are now at the mean salary level in comparison
with these institutions for 19960-61, We are proud of this gain in
salary levels.
There i s one other thing 'hathe . . would like to comment upon
briefly that is not contained in this inttrductory material, Some
of you may have wondered about increases which have appeared to
be abnormally large as compared with otherss, and in order to explain
this I need to give you just a little bit of background information,
In the self-study of the Uni-v7,ersity completed 'last. year the following
statement was made with reference to the practice of adding incentive
pay for contract research, The quote is I The University should
study its growing program of contract research in terms of its
effect on teaching efficiency. In particular it should re-examine
its position with respect to incentive pay". Th1'en after we had
completed the self-study, the visiting cormmittee, which reviewed the
University' s self-appraisal, made this statement: "It is important
that the atmosphere of the Unniversity campus be one in which intel-
lectual curiosity and the will to know what is happening at the
boundaries of knowledge prevaiils One of the criticisms which has
come to the attention of the com mittee from se;. lraJ sources is that
many members of the facu"ttv of the Uni.versity of Kentucky consider
research study as a kind of ext-racurricular activity for which they
have no responsibility. Teaching is, on. the who.e, well and com-
petently done, but there does no' seem to be the general awareness
for the responsibility for research ch i3-.ievement. The administration
should be commended for making av-ailable funds for the support of
faculty research projecths T'Iese funds, though modest in amount,
have been effective in stimule.':ing interest in reseanrch. and encouraging
the efforts of those who h'ave o rigina.l investigations under way.
There appears to be gener7.1 anproval of Abe Research Foundation and
the methods it is using to encourage rreseu-rcr-h activities, Adequate
coordination exists between thee Research Fou-zdatlon and the Graduate
School to enhance the effec iveness of bt: ogencies and research
planning. There a7re, owe,,er, some aspec:ts of "he research
program which need reexamination an.r.d thcough.vul ap'praisa0l, One
of these is the policy of Permitting fact'fy members wh(O obtain
research gxants to receive some comnensaticn beyond their academic
salaries from the grant fuinds,
The unfortunr..te implic-.tions of such practices are obvious.
Our own faculty commit:ee and the Southern Association visiting
committee recommend thot the research incentive,- pay policy be
changed, effecive Suty I, ;96t, . . .An amounr: equivalent to approx-
imately the av^rers.ge of irncervive pay over the Iast four years has
been added to the base salary of Chose professors who a;re affected
by this change in cortract research policy. Tbais increase will be a
permanent increase to the base salary of those individuals and will,
not be dependent. upon 'the cor.:inu--!tion of -artric-wl~ar research projects.
It is not intended th: suc.h. researcj ucreases will, take the place
of any merit increases whic1 might be possible this yeor, .
13
Th.e change in policy certainly should not reduce the amount
of contract research undertaken at the University of Kentucky. In
fact, it is felt that an increase will follow. . . Persons beginning
the research increase system this July will come up for review
for upward increase from year to year. . . It is our hope that this
program will mate