The group project no one asked for

It was the evening of December 23, 2024. Many policy administrators already turned on their automatic-replies and were preparing for a few days (or a couple weeks) of well-deserved vacation, away from all of those relentless emails and news alerts. It was then, when no one was looking, that H.R.5646 was signed into law. A new email from the Clery Center pinged in inboxes but there was no one there to hear it. If you were one of the lucky policy administrators, someone at your institution gave you a heads up about the bill—now, the Stop Campus Hazing Act (SCHA)--while it was making its way through congressional approvals. Perhaps your institution already assembled a team and was ready to create or revise a new hazing policy. But alas, most policy administrators returned to skeleton offices after a few days off or worse, did not return until mid-January, and waiting in our inboxes was a loud ticking clock – a new regulatory deadline that was less than six months away.

The Dreaded Group Project

Panic

My new year’s resolution had included not taking responsibility for other people’s job duties and SCHA was teeing me up for a failed resolution. Like many policy administrators, I needed to know who was leading the charge on this project.

To nod to Alison Whiting’s Policy Matters post last month, policy administrators are often pulled into drafting teams with varying degrees of direction, engagement, and success. SCHA is complex and meeting the deadline would require more cross-campus collaboration and speed than most policy projects. So, when I returned to the office after two weeks of blissful vacation, I (choosing optimism) looked for a special meeting invite, a notification from being added to a new collaboration folder, or even just an email thread (anything!)... Nothing.

Hope

Alas! I didn’t have to panic for long. The invite, folder notification, and emails started mid-January, and we were off to the races. I can look back at the past few months, now, with the deadline for SCHA just a few days away, and confidently say my new year’s resolution remains intact. From a policy administrator’s perspective, the SCHA project execution was a success at my institution, especially when it came to policy development and revision. Here’s why I think it succeeded.

Team > Group

The People

From the beginning, leadership set the tone. The project was led from the top by two executive leaders. Their commitment and engagement kept the project moving and gave it the gravity it needed to stay on track.

Leadership also ensured that all known stakeholder groups were represented on the project team. Even better, the representatives pulled in were decisionmakers and implementers. This had significant impact when it came to keeping discussions productive and outcomes actionable.

The Plan

A plan was clearly defined from before the very first meeting. Regular project all-team meetings were added to our calendars. At the first meeting, deliverables and assignments were outlined upfront, and the policy approval workflow was used to work backwards to help set deadlines. The project team divided into subcommittees with one focused solely on drafting our Hazing policy’s revision. Having these smaller groups made it easier to make swift decisions and produce materials with clear requests or challenges to discuss when the larger team reconvened. All committee materials were shared and organized in a single collaboration folder. Clear direction and required transparency allowed each team member to go “All in.” (IYKYK)

The Discussions

The entire project team worked efficiently. Within the policy subcommittee, emails received quick responses, assignments and drafts were reviewed prior to our meetings. Each of us knew our particular role in the subcommittee and we leveraged the others’ strengths and expertise to come to a consensus on language. For example, our previous definition of hazing required modifications to meet the new requirements in the SCHA definition. We realized we were drafting an endless list of examples and pinning our conduct office in a corner. What if we said “paddling” but left out “spanking” or “whipping?” Wasn’t it all physical harm? If we categorized our examples, we could make sure the definition endured the constant evolution of hazing practices we see with each new incoming class.

We adopted this approach for the rest of the policy. If we stayed broad, it allowed the student conduct and human resources offices to lean into their established procedures to handle each report on a case-by-case basis. Because these conversations and details were hashed out in smaller meetings, we confidently presented our recommendations to the larger team. With some questions, but very few requests for changes, the policy moved forward. Our small group trusted each other and the project team trusted us.

The Foundation

Any project team can fall into the trap of trying to reinvent the wheel. Sometimes it’s necessary. But with less than six months to pull together a policy, trainings, and update processes, taking advantage of what was already in place helped the project team move quickly. The other subcommittees looked at their processes and resources and saw where they could make tweaks just like the policy subcommittee did. As the group came together, we were able to lean into the expectations of the policy. We asked: Does the policy support the procedures? Does it clearly state the requirements needed to hold people accountable? Can the policy be enforced? Does it provide enough latitude for the breadth of the subject matter? As policy administrators, we ask these questions of our policy owners and writers often. It can seem second nature for us, but when asked aloud to a large project team and confirmation was received, the significance of our policy writing standards stood out.

I must also point out a couple foundational components we were able to leverage that I know some policy administrators could not.

1. Clemson already had a Hazing policy.
2. South Carolina law requires higher education institutions to track and report certain hazing violations.

These allowed project team members to show up prepared for the group discussions and to update their practices, expand services, build webpages, and revise a policy. And then we had our champions in leadership who set their expectations for us all and kept the momentum all the way to the end.

While I would never wish on any policy administrator another “middle-of-the-night-while- everyone’s-asleep legal requirement to comply with in six months" it was an inspiring experience to see colleagues across campus shine in their areas of expertise, collaborate quickly and effectively, and build trust as a group—ultimately becoming a team. This project gives me hope for future ones and ideas to help course correct others.

I want to give a HUGE shout out to everyone on the project team from Clemson University’s division of student affairs, office of access compliance and education, marketing and communications, office of general counsel, division of public safety, and office of university compliance and ethics! Well done, team. Go Tigers!

*Please note: at the time of the original publication of this post, Clemson's revised  Hazing policy is pending president approval and is not yet publicly available. Visit Clemson University's Policies site on June 23rd to read the final version. 

An Untapped Potential

In the past few years, crisis, cultural shifts, and financial woes have led to a rise of complexity in maintaining our policy systems within our institutions. Meeting all the regulations can be challenging, as they are constantly changing. In addition, institutions are feeling the pressure from regulators, internal staff and faculty, and the community at large to maintain the regulations. Challenges faced yesterday are not the challenges we will face tomorrow or next year. Do you have the confidence that your policies could stand up to regulatory scrutiny? Does this mean that we need to become even more resilient and inventive – is there any untapped potential out there?

As policy leaders we have learned that we need systems and processes to get things done. But is that enough? Even the most skilled person today is challenged with the immense workload of continuous changes and updates required for policy management. Even the way we distribute, collect, account for and present changes has undergone enormous change. It is not just a check list and process – we need to manage risk, ensure data security and privacy while balancing access and inclusiveness and external influences – it all seems daunting, and to top it all off, failing to comply with the ever-evolving regulations can lead to costly fines and lawsuits.

We are looking virtually everywhere for indicators of change, racing with time to have key policies, procedures and training completed to be compliant. Today, no one is standing waiting for the next change to come down the hall, which makes it even more important that we work with synergy across the institution.

We must support and arm ourselves with the tools, processes and technology that facilitate clear communication. We need to define the review and reflection process of our policies, cultivate open discussion and dialogue all while engaging with other departments and units about the need for change, seek an understanding of the barriers for everyone and then provide the necessary follow up to make the needed changes for lasting growth and compliance.

In September, I wrote “Don’t wait for a crisis to create an efficient policy management system.” That ‘safety net’ is one great way to engage a team to ensure compliance, a tool that builds structure – whether you are a small scale operation or a larger scaled institution, a system and a plan is critical. A plan gives both leaders and others a path forward and provides the principles needed to navigate change. In December 2022, Michele Gross (University of Minnesota) wrote “The First Element: Meeting at the Intersection of Policy and Compliance” - outlining the first of seven elements of a compliance program and the importance of the system to frame our compliance at our institutions. For those who may not be aware, the seven elements of a legally effective compliance program are:

1. Policies & Procedures
2. Chief Compliance Officer/Compliance Committee
3. Education & Training
4. Reporting
5. Monitoring & Auditing
6. Enforcement
7. Responding To Issues

GRC 20/20 Research, LLC wrote “A Tsunami of Change Overwhelms Compliance,” which states that some institutions have broken processes and insufficient resources to manage compliance. I know that there is not one size fits all -- there can’t be. This is why we must continue to evolve – we should rearrange our priorities when we have too much of anything as Sara Gigeroff (University of New Brunswick) wrote in her blog What’s In Your Closet? (Feb 2023). More importantly she states that communicating, setting boundaries, purging, and revaluating are all key elements in managing our policy framework…and our closets!

There's no time like the present to simplify. Legacy systems are expensive and difficult to use. Manual processing is far too time-consuming and in a hybrid environment its not effective. I say m ake retention simple for users and administrators, so they don’t have to interact with files in a separate, siloed repository or go through cumbersome, manual processes. We must invest in this process for it to be effective. Who can remember five-sheet carbon paper? Now that was cumbersome! We have evolved since carbon paper, but some institutions are still stuck in the dark ages when it comes to making a compliance program a priority.

Who is your untapped potential – identify them and get them on board. This process, more than ever, needs support and buy-in from our leadership and other stakeholders across the institution to be successful (more hands make less work). Beware of analysis paralysis – encourage administrators to work with broad strokes. Show them how proactively setting the boundaries for document lifecycle management, rules for sharing and record management classifications can make work simpler, more consistent and save money. If it was possible to make policies ‘fun’ I would say do that too!

Other areas that untap that potential are field experts like our colleagues at ACUPA . They are an excellent way to leverage all our tools – garner support and encourage others to join in the conversations and become members.

It only takes one incident, one mistake, one error to mark an institution’s reputation and erode trust. In my opinion, our untapped potential may simply be harnessing the power of workplace collaboration and an ability to accelerate the processes to protect our most valuable information.

Public-Private Partnerships in Action

Given that colleges and universities are facing daunting economic challenges, one strategy to raise funds to support educational outcomes is to seek a public-private partnership. Metropolitan State University of Denver (MSU Denver) has faced chronic underfunding from the state of Colorado legislature since its inception in 1965—in part, some argue, due to political bias against the university’s mission as a “College of Opportunity” for those Coloradans and others who might not have access to higher education. As necessity is the mother of invention, underfunding led to some creative solutions.

For example, when I managed MSU Denver’s curriculum process, I was approached by a faculty member who asked me to help her and other faculty in the engineering, aerospace science, math, and computer science fields to develop an interdisciplinary degree program in advanced manufacturing. The program would be used to attract talented students who could go on to become part of Colorado’s aerospace workforce. The program also would help attract investor dollars to build much-needed classroom and lab spaces. While the advancement team was looking for a one-time donation to fund construction of a new, state-of-the-art building, no takers stepped up. So administration got creative and proposed a lease opportunity. MSU Denver and York Space Systems became partners, and the 142,000-square-foot building opened in 2017.

York now rents the top floor of the four-floor building as an office and workspace to build satellites. Students in the advanced manufacturing, aerospace, and engineering programs gain skills working for a high-tech company without having to juggle a long commute from class. The internship and scholarship programs serve as an ongoing investment in human capital for York and provide a continual source of revenue for MSU Denver to support student learning. The reciprocal nature of the relationship brings ongoing benefits to both partners. While identifying the right fit was a challenge, the benefits far outweigh the effort.

I took a moment to enjoy the fruits of my labor when I recently got a call from my colleague in the advanced manufacturing program saying, “York wants to know—what’s our animal policy?” I was pleased to hear that, in addition to building satellites, they are integrating themselves into our community with a Bring-Your-Pets-to-Work Day.

Getting the Most Out of ACUPA Forums and Blogs

To satisfy your desire for a blog post describing some of the features of our website, my next few posts will address a bit of what is offered at acupa.org.

Blogs and forums have the same purpose, to promote communication between members and share information. However, the order and structure of communication is different between the two. They also differ in how you are notified that someone has posted to a forum or blog.

Forums

Forums are threaded ongoing discussions. Any member in good standing can begin a new topic in a forum, or post a comment in any forum discussion. By default, the latest post displays at the top of the list within a forum. Replies within a forum topic are sorted chronologically, so the most recent reply always appears at the bottom. Forums allow for internal quoting and the member’s profile photo is displayed in their forum posts.

The best way to stay on top of discussions in the forums is to subscribe to those that interest you. You can subscribe to get instant updates in your email anytime a forum has a new post. Or, you can subscribe to the digest, which will email you no more than once per day when a forum has a new post. To learn how to set up your forum subscriptions, hover over the “Forums” option in the top navigation and click on “Forums: How-to” from the drop-down menu.

Blogs

Blogs are always organized so that the latest post is at the top of the page, regardless of the addition of comments. Blogs do not pull member profile pictures, but do link to the posting member’s profile. The site-wide blog, to which all members are subscribed, is called Policy Matters. You receive an email notice whenever a new blog is posted. If you would also like an email notice about any comments made on the post, follow these steps from the Policy Matters screen: 1) Click on “Manage Subscriptions,” 2) Click on the speech bubble icon so that it turns green.

Currently, only members of the Blog Committee can post to Policy Matters, but if you would like to write a blog post, the committee would be happy to publish it for you on the Policy Matters blog. If you are interested, please contact Jessica Teets at teets@purdue.edu. 

How Centralized Policies Affect Productivity

I work at a community college that, like many of its peer institutions, is experiencing declining funding and, at the same time, escalating regulatory mandates. I recently had the opportunity to speak with our executive director of diversity and equity, Affirmative Action/Title IX officer about her challenges with regulatory requirements and how the establishment of a policy office and a centralized policy library aided her productivity.

Like many of us on campus, the executive director wears many hats, with the assistance of one shared staff member. Here at the college, she administers all programs related to diversity, equity, Affirmative Action, and Title IX, and is responsible for the review and investigation of complaints regarding discrimination, sexual harassment, dating and domestic violence, stalking, Title IX, and workplace issues. During our talk, the executive director noted that budgetary constraints and Title IX were her current challenges. Nearly half of her allotted budget, despite collaboration with other departments to share costs, goes toward campus-wide mandated training initiatives; in her opinion, considering today’s social environment, more training is needed above and beyond the required levels. In addition, a big chunk of her time is spent staying current on national news and the changing federal policy environment. Continual monitoring is necessary to remain ahead of the curve in managing risk, where missteps could be financially catastrophic to a small public institution. As an example, the executive director mentioned that what has been keeping her awake at night is a Proposed Title IX Regulation, released on November 16 for 60 days of public comment. This proposal came after the Department of Education’s decision in September 2017 to rescind prior guidance from 2011 and 2014, leaving in place the 2001 Guidance. These changes have left the college’s published policy in limbo for now, but it will require considerable revision in the not-too-distant future. It is still too early to do a deep dive into the work of revision and procedural considerations until the proposed regulation is finalized.  

Over my college’s 50-plus-year history, published policy has been a hit-or-miss affair, and what policy existed was more likely to be held in a multitude of forms scattered across departments. Since the 2013 creation of the college’s centralized policy office and policy library, the executive director claims to have experienced an increase in her office’s productivity. As she mentioned many times during our conversation, policy in her wheelhouse is always changing, which requires timely updates. She indicated that the services the policy office offers save her time by providing best-practice research, help with writing and editing during the development or revision stage, and shepherding the policy draft through review/approval processes; this allows her more time for implementing budget-friendly staff training and professional development strategies.