ANR Employees
University of California
ANR Employees

ANR Update

Comments sought on proposed policy for Crime Awareness and Campus Security

UC Office of the President invites comments on a proposed new policy for Crime Awareness and Campus Security (Clery Act). The proposed policy can be viewed at http://ucanr.edu/sites/anrstaff/files/271802.pdf.

The Clery Act (otherwise officially known as the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, section 485 of the Higher Education Act, codified at 20 U.S.C. 1092 (f)) is a federal law requiring colleges and universities across the United States that receive Title IV funding to disclose information about particular crimes on and around their campuses and related policies. It is the policy of the University to comply with its obligations under the Clery Act and California law.

In accordance with statutory requirements, the University strives to ensure students, faculty and other academic appointees, and staff employees (the “University Community”), have access to accurate information about crimes committed on and around the campus; as well as, access to University wide security policies and related local campus procedures and a confidential reporting process for victims and witnesses. This policy describes roles and responsibilities for the University Community related to compliance with legal requirements regarding crime reporting, awareness and prevention. 

If you have any questions or if you wish to comment, please contact Robin Sanchez at rgsanchez@ucanr.edu, no later than Nov. 10, 2017. Please indicate “Clery Act Policy” in the subject line.

 

View or leave comments for ANR Leadership at http://ucanr.edu/sites/ANRUpdate/Comments.

This announcement is also posted and archived on the ANR Update pages.

Posted on Friday, October 13, 2017 at 11:09 AM
Tags: policy (13), Robin Sanchez (3)

Nominate a colleague for UC Women’s Initiative for Professional Development

The call for nominations for the UC Women's Initiative for Professional Development has started. This program aims to cultivate a vibrant, professional network of women across the UC system, and is designed for mid-career women, including academics and staff, who demonstrate the potential to advance their careers within UC.

Again this year, ANR will be sponsoring women (academics and staff) to participate in the 2018 program. The program schedule has been modified for 2018 to reduce the time commitment and to provide more timing options, with regional sessions offered in the winter, spring and fall. 

Six regional cohorts (three in the north and three in the south) will be offered.

Each cohort program is comprised of four sessions:

  • First session of each cohort is 1.5 days, remaining sessions will be 1 day each
  • Final session of each cohort program will be a combined north & south capstone event that allows participants to make systemwide connections

The experiential program requires full, active participation; only UC ANR employees who can commit to this will be selected. More details about the expectations and logistics are included on the nomination form.

If you are interested in participating in this program, please talk to your supervisor. Supervisors are asked to send in nominations by close of business October 31. Late or incomplete nominations will not be considered.

Nominations should include name, a brief description of how this program will support the nominee's career development and benefit ANR, and supervisor consent. The program is a collaboration between the UC Systemwide Advisory Committee on the Status of Women and UC Human Resources, and is delivered by CORO, a nonprofit leadership-development organization that has worked with UC for the past decade. UC President Napolitano supports and partially funds the program. ANR will cover registration fees and reimburse travel expenses for those selected.

Last year's program was very successful. Katherine Soule, Valerie Borel, Jan Gonzales, Margaret Lloyd, and Robin Sanchez completed the 2017 program, and shared the benefit of developing leadership skills and a network across the UC system.

If you have questions about the program, please contact Jodi Azulai, the staff representative on the Systemwide Advisory Committee on the Status of Women.

 

View or leave comments for ANR Leadership at http://ucanr.edu/sites/ANRUpdate/Comments.

This announcement is also posted and archived on the ANR Update pages.

 

Posted on Friday, October 13, 2017 at 9:05 AM

Status of UCCE offices in fire-affected counties

Dear Colleagues,

I know we're all concerned about the devastating fires burning around California. I reached out to all of the ANR locations that I knew or thought may be affected by the active fires in California. The greatest impact is in Sonoma and Napa counties and at Sierra Foothill REC. We have heard that all employees are safe – a couple of people remain evacuated and are not yet able to return home to assess any damage. Below is a summary of what we know about some of the ANR locations.

ANR location status – as of 11 a.m. Tuesday, Oct. 10:

Sonoma UCCE – Office was closed Monday, open on Tuesday. All employees are safe and none have suffered loss. Many have friends or family who lost homes in the fires. They are mobilizing to help in support and recovery (food bank, MG phone tree, reach out to 4-H families, helping with evacuated animals at fairgrounds). UCCE in Sonoma has partnered with CropMobster to help get the word out on fire resources. Anyone can post needs or offer help of any kind at https://sfbay.cropmobster.com/bay-area-fire-resources.

Napa UCCE – Office was closed Monday, partially open on Tuesday, expect to be fully open on Wednesday. All employees are safe. One county staff evacuated, waiting to return to home. One advisor assisting family member who lost a home.

Marin UCCE – Office is open with reduced staff – due to evacuations, road closures, etc. All staff are safe.

Mendocino UCCE – Office is open. All staff are safe, none evacuated, some have family members affected by fires in area.

Lake UCCE – Office is open. All staff are okay, none are evacuated.

Butte UCCE – Office was closed on Monday as a precaution, open on Tuesday. No employees directly affected by fires.

Sutter/Yuba UCCE – Office is open. All staff are safe, none subject to evacuation.

Hopland REC – REC is open as normal, not threatened by current fires (approx. 20 miles away).

Sierra Foothill REC – REC is under a mandatory evacuation order and closed since Monday. There is no immediate threat to the center however due to shifts in the weather and active fire, the evacuation orders may be in place at for some time. Currently the center has no power with no expected time of it coming back on line. Operationally the center has a skeleton staff handling bare necessities such as livestock care. All staff still on site are safe and can evacuate if needed at a moment's notice. Some staff have been evacuated from their homes in the area and have not been able to return yet. 

Orange UCCE/South Coast REC – REC and CE office are open, the location is not threatened by fire. All staff are safe, but an emeritus advisor and family of some staff members are under evacuation orders. 

In many counties, staff know of 4-H or Master Gardener families who have lost homes or suffered damage.

Here are some additional links to resources:

UC fire prevention or recovery resources: http://safety.ucanr.edu/Programs/emergency/EmrgResources/

Nationwide Extension Disaster Education Network (EDEN) resources from various state Cooperative Extension programs: https://eden.lsu.edu/educate/resources (Search for “wildfire”).

 

Brian Oatman
Director, Risk & Safety Services

UC Agriculture & Natural Resources
(530) 750-1264

http://safety.ucanr.edu

 

 

Posted on Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 1:42 PM
Tags: Brian Oatman (1), wildfire (1)

Your input requested for condition changes

Background

As part of the current effort to align our work such that we are best positioned to achieve the 2025 Strategic Vision, a group of UC ANR academics have drafted condition changes that are now in need of your review and feedback.

Condition changes are those long-term outcomes of our work that are the evidence of how our work makes a difference. Condition changes are at a level higher than that of the personal benefit our clientele receive as a result of direct participation in our programs. Rather, the condition change represents environmental, health or economic benefits at a societal level (e.g. improved water quality, improved nutrition and health, increased market opportunities, etc.).

How you can provide feedback

Program Team Leaders, Statewide Program Directors, Institute Directors and Strategic Initiative Leaders have worked together to develop the current list of condition changes. They will be reaching out to you to solicit your input. I would ask that you share your thoughts with those who reach out to you and they will collate all feedback they receive and provide it back through a Collaborative Tools site so that the development team can see the feedback as it is received. In early October, we will assemble all of the feedback and make decisions how to move forward.

Why this is important to you?

The final list of condition changes will be coded into the new Project Board (UC ANR program information system that will be replacing DANRS-X and integrated with the merit and promotion process for UC ANR academics. We will be asking academics to assign a percentage of time you spend working towards the condition changes. This will replace assigning your FTE to the federal Knowledge Areas. In addition, you will be tagging condition changes to your work when you write your outcome/impact narratives. You will be able to tag multiple condition changes to a single narrative provided you have quantitative evidence of the effected condition change.

How will this information be used?

The condition changes will be used in multiple ways. First, the condition changes and aggregated effort associated with each condition change will be used to determine if we have sufficient capacity working towards the changes needed to achieve our 2025 Strategic Vision. This will help guide future investments by UC ANR and help you, as an individual, identify priorities for directing your own effort. Second, the outcome/impact narratives that are tagged to specific condition changes will provide us the evidence needed to share all of your good work with supporters. The condition changes will serve as a sorting mechanism for the outcomes/impact narratives. The narratives themselves provide quantitative evidence of your outcomes including how they contribute to condition change indicators, as well as frame the work (what was done, where, why, who were the partners, etc.). Because of the intended uses of the information, it is important that we have a complete set of condition changes that represent the work we need to do to achieve our vision.

Why the rush?

The new Project Board is on track for roll out in March. In order to have the condition changes be part of Project Board and not a separate, additional reporting request, we need to have them coded in the system. The development team has indicated that they need the information in early October. Therefore, we are requesting that all Program Team Leaders provide their collective feedback (1 document per Program Team) by October 1. We will review the feedback, draw up a revised list of condition changes, and have that turned around to the Project Board team quickly.

What happens after the feedback is provided?

We will continue to talk about condition changes and condition change indicators throughout the fall and into spring. We are planning to offer training in the winter and spring to address condition changes, condition change indicators and how they tie to Public Value Statements that are currently in draft form. The Public Value Statements will be reviewed and modified yet this fall. If you have interest in being part of a small-ish group that will review and revise the Public Value Statements, please let me know via email. Note that condition change indicators and public value statements will not be part of the reporting in Project Board or any other form; only condition changes will be reported against in Project Board.

Tips to consider

  • Condition changes must be measurable; condition change indicators are the metrics used to quantify the magnitude of change in a condition
  • Condition changes should not be audience-specific but rather apply to any/all of our audiences as appropriate
  • While I am an incurable ‘lumper' it is best to be a ‘splitter' when it comes to condition changes because it provides greater clarity as to what the evidence that support change really is and will allow for improved aggregation of your impact stories making it easier to share your work with others (easier to find, easier to understand and convey appropriately).
  • Having more, rather than fewer, condition changes in Project Board will not cause you to have to report the same thing in multiple locations – the coding is planned to provide opportunity to use multiple tags for the same report.

Attached is a generic logic model used for reporting to USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture.

Regards,

Wendy Powers
Associate Vice President

View or leave comments for ANR Leadership at http://ucanr.edu/sites/ANRUpdate/Comments.

This announcement is also posted and archived on the ANR Update pages.

 

Generic Logic Model for NIFA Reporting
Generic Logic Model for NIFA Reporting

Posted on Monday, September 25, 2017 at 8:25 AM

CUCSA reviews post-retirement health update changes

Colleagues,

As your delegates to the Council of UC Staff Assemblies (CUCSA), we would like to share information on an issue that was addressed at our September meeting in San Diego last week. The issue concerns post-retirement health benefits and potential changes that have not been widely shared. CUCSA chair Lina Layiktez provided the summary below and links for more information.

What is the change to post-retirement health benefits that is being proposed?
The proposed action item for the July 2017 Regents meeting was to remove the 70 percent floor on the UC contribution to retiree health benefits and place a cap of 3 percent on year-over-year increases to UC costs. This is a policy change to offset the accounting rule changes required in "GASB 75." GASB 75 requires that the full actuarial value of other postemployment benefits (OPEB) be included on the systemwide balance sheet. This means that UC will have a perceived “new” liability of $21 billion, which would affect the system's overall credit rating. A hit to the UC's credit rating has obvious impacts to financing for the university.

The “new” GASB 75 requirement definition is subject to interpretation, since it was already a liability that was disclosed in previous year's financials. The value of this liability under current assumptions/retiree rules is approximately $21 billion. The current assumptions are being driven by the number of retirees in the system plus the number of potential retirees (active staff and faculty) and how much it would cost the system in health-care costs should the current employees retire today.

What does this all mean?
By removing the floor and capping UC's costs, the university effectively transfers rising health-care premiums to retirees. The assumed rate of health-care cost increase is 7 percent. Over the course of 20 years this would flip the proportion that UC pays to ~30 percent and the retiree to ~70 percent. The 70 percent floor was designed to provide some stability to retiree health-care costs.

What do we see happening?
Many UC employees choose to retire after calculating their retirement income. This is necessary because, except for Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA), there is no way for retirees to increase their income from the university. So when out-of-pocket health-care costs go up for retirees, this eats into their living expenses. There are already retirees and survivors of retirees who have to choose between health-care costs and food. To suddenly remove the 70% floor exacerbates this problem.

What can you do?
The campus staff assemblies are collecting feedback locally and sharing this up to the Council of UC Staff Assemblies (CUCSA), who will be coordinating a response to the UC President and/or Board of Regents. We are also working on a list of questions that include queries, such as what OPEB would look like if it grandparented current employees and implemented the changes to future retirees? What does this mean for retention of employees with 10 to 20 years of service?

The most powerful and helpful thing for us now is to hear about your personal concerns and how this impacts you. Would no OPEB mean you are less likely to retire from the UC system and take a job elsewhere for more money now? Will you have to postpone your retirement if, in retirement, you will have to pay a greater portion of your OPEB than you had planned for under the current plan?

Share your questions and stories with us on the UC ANR Staff Assembly website.

What's next?
Fortunately, the July agenda was revised and this item was moved to the November meeting agenda. Moving the item to November will allow for more consultation and discussion. It is unknown what approach the UC Office of the President (OP) will take to solicit feedback and engage in discussion. But as that information becomes available, we will make sure to share it broadly. We are hopeful that CUCSA (and therefore a voice of staff) will be included in the discussions and that OP will convene a task force representing all parties that will be affected by the proposed changes. Stay tuned.

Click here for the original July Regents Meeting Agenda Item (F7), which was then revised to remove the discussion on the 70 percent floor.

The immediate past chair of the systemwide Academic Senate, Jim Chalfant, has already written a letter to the President on this issue. You can read it online here: http://senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/reports/JC-JN-Retiree-Health.pdf.

We can work collectively to inform and educate staff on this important matter. We are stronger together and the more voices that participate, the louder the message will be to those making the decisions that affect all of us.

UC ANR human resources director John Fox also said one important point that isn't addressed in the CUCSA summary is Medicare coverage. “When a UC retiree enrolls in Medicare, the monthly medical premium costs are significantly reduced (both for the retiree and for UC). Much of the future liability that UC is trying to control (and the risk of high monthly costs for the retirees) is during the time between retirement from UC and the start of Medicare eligibility (typically age 65).”

If you would like to share your stories or post a comment on this proposed change, please fill out the form on the UC ANR Staff Assembly website. We will share comments and stories from UC ANR with CUCSA leadership, who will compile it with information from other campuses to share with the UC President and UC Regents.

Sincerely,

Jeannette Warnert, UC ANR senior delegate to CUCSA

LeChé McGill, UC ANR junior delegate to CUCSA

View or leave comments for ANR Leadership at http://ucanr.edu/sites/ANRUpdate/Comments.

This announcement is also posted and archived on the ANR Update pages.

 

 

Posted on Thursday, September 14, 2017 at 3:34 PM

Next 5 stories | Last story

 
E-mail
 
Webmaster Email: jewarnert@ucanr.edu