ALL S

TAFF

MEETI

NG

GROUP

JULY

15-1

9, 2013

ALT

ER

NA

TI V

ES

FO

R C

GE

TO

AU

GS

BU

RG

MINUTES

Romanus, Susan Regina and Kathy were members of the team.

The discussions of the different scenarios helped us clarify what we as CGE need whether we stay at Augsburg or we decide to transition to another institution. The third slide titled :Considerations for partnering with Augsburg or any other academic or non academic institution attempts to put in writing what the team felt CGE needs in order to move into the future .

Slide #17 discusses if we separate from Augsburg what we would request in terms of property and vehicles and slide #18 details a possible timeline.

I am attaching all slides for staff to see the full discussion .

The purpose of this group is to discuss and rank various alternatives for CGE than at Augsburg College

GOAL

CONSIDERATIONS FOR PARTNERING – AUGSBURG, ACADEMIC OR NON-ACA INSTS E P A R A T E C G E

Control over budget and separate fund or bank account

Mission, vision and strategic plan

Website

Marketing

Staff – hiring, evaluation, etc.

Pedagogy/long track record/best practices in study abroad

International bank accounts – would need to see what was best for US bank account

Separate board or ability to participate in decisions impacting CGE’s work

Find a school of record if not at an academic institution

Fundraising

M E R G E D W / P A R T N E R

Office space

Accounting – accounts payable/receivable, audit

Phone/internet (with ability to answer CGE phones separate)

General liability insurance coverage

Could be a fiscal agent role but may not be best

Payroll and benefits

Legal representation

Ability to accredit our academic programs , if possible

Use of general education travel license to Cuba if at a higher education institution

POSSIBLE SCENARIOS- #1 STAYING WITH AUGSBURG

Summary A new provost has been hired to start August 1, which will become the second in command person at Augsburg. There is currently no funds in the budget to hire a new AVP, International Programs/Executive Director, CGE. In FY14

Benefits Would be in a stronger position that the previous dean vis a vis the Financial VP

Questions and Considerations

Will a new provost see CGE as important to the mission of Augsburg ? Will new provost see CGE only as revenue producing therefore phasing CGE out

given the financial crisis

Discussion/ranking - Move ahead exploring other options without waiting for her- Present our own arguments to her and interpreting our mission and budget rather than

having it filtered (Regina will report directly to her)- Work out a financial model with less liability and risk for Augsburg- Restructure our arrangement with Augsburg (contract team is working on that)- Need to lay out how we approach her month by month and with specific agenda for

each- Research what other models there are with affiliates to Augsburg – how does it work

for them with personnel, budget, autonomy

# 2 –PARTNER WITH A NON-ACADEMIC INSTITUTION

Summary Move to another organization like HECUA, Autonomous University, Global Citizen Network, Amizade that either offers academic programming now or wants to add that component, or WPF with its synergy project. Essential to maintain separate CGE branding, but realign administrative structure with another organization.

Benefits May help overhead costs for them and CGE since do similar work Could assist cross promotion between programs, expanding audiences and program/country

optionsQuestions and Considerations

Would need a school of record for academic programs in order to grant credit Complicated to extract many things from Augsburg – branding, web URL,

properties Could be a long process since they are governed by boards If it wasn’t in the Twin Cities would most likely mean losing most/all US staff Would lose staff tuition benefit Cuba academic license trips (semester and ST) would not be legal without

applying for a different license, so no guarantee on timeline Probably all property and equipment would be sold and support staff would

lose jobs in all sites May be difficult to maintain separate branding in partnership with another organization

Potential Budget Impacts

May lose revenue for all Cuba academic license programs (semester and ST) – not sure how licensing works for non-academic institutions)

Increased US costs for rent, computers, phone/internet, etc. Increased direct program costs since wouldn’t have own houses, vehicles

Discussion/Ranking How do non-academic institutions get licenses for Cuba semesters? Susan researching Many third party providers do this with a variety of institutions. Seems easier than thought.

Fees not clear but one states $250/student. Could we set up a seminary as a school of record to offer credit for cultural immersion for

students from many seminaries.. Could this be a pilot?

#3 – PARTNER WITH ACADEMIC INSTITUTION(S)Summary Move to another college or university

Benefits Could be a better mission fit Would be able to grant credit for academic programs May get more of a base of participants for CGE semester

programs Possibly more travel seminars with professors Would be able to use general education license

Questions and Considerations

Negotiate a transfer of our branding out of Augsburg - Would our branding change?

Could be a long process since they are governed by boards If it wasn’t in the Twin Cities would most likely mean losing

most/all US staff Would property and equipment be sold and support staff lose

jobs in all sites?Potential Budget Impacts

Would need to negotiate up front on what financial expectations they would have

Discussion/Ranking Would need to have a written agreement Can’t do anything until find out how core we are to Augsburg

#4 – EVERYONE FOR THEMSELVES

Summary Each site determine what the best move is for them. For instance, Central America affiliate with a Jesuit University, Namibia affiliate with Clark, Valpo, PLU or another regular feeder. Mexico stay at Augsburg or affiliate with one of the social work consortia schools. ITS Cuba?

Benefits May allow the work to continue in some fashion for each site.

Questions and Considerations

Would probably dissolve CGE as a whole and the Minneapolis office Last case scenario How does the WPF wanting to build a center in Nicaragua with another institution factor

into this? May involve establishing a competitor to CGE Nicaragua.

Discussion/Ranking After discussion this is ranked the lowest, so won’t spend any further time discussing

#5 –INCORPORATE AS A NONPROFIT ORG

Summary CGE incorporate as a separate nonprofit organization

Benefits Could be the decision to give the most autonomy

Questions and Considerations

Time consuming process to incorporate and requires a board, bylaws, etc.

Complicated to extract many things from Augsburg – branding, web URL, properties

Expenses would be more unknown for US costs such as rent, IT, communication, design, etc.

Could also be a hybrid of incorporating separately, but still stay at Augsburg General liability insurance – how expensive would that be and other costs such as audits Monitoring cash flow could be tricky More administrative work especially in Mpls. Cuba programs would only be legal through applying for travel licenses, so no guarantee

on timelineDiscussion/ranking: Would give greater independence but could provide higher risk given the market

conditions

#6 – SITES BECOME INDEPENDENT NGO’S IN PARTNERSHIP WITH CGESummary Each site determine gain legal status in their country, if they don’t

already have it. They would then just work in partnership with CGE rather than being a part of Augsburg. This would mean that they would bill Augsburg for services and CGE would pay them like we do MLK. They would no longer have to submit monthly finance reports to the college or be subject to the college’s hiring policies.

Benefits Each site is already self sustaining, so this would reduce the increased paperwork required by Augsburg.

Questions and Considerations

How would Augsburg handle the transfer of vehicles and houses? Is there a way that international staff could maintain tuition benefits (or

at least those who’ve been on staff previously) Staff from the US working internationally would have to be paid locally

Variations Separate NGO while still affiliated with Augsburg Separate NGO while affiliated with another institution Separate NGO with CGE becoming a separate organization

Discussion/ranking: Why then be connected to Augsburg? What would prevent sites from working directly with sponsors rather than going through

Minneapolis?

- If CGE needs to go elsewhere, which of these is the best option (or some combo of options)?

- Are all of the pro’s and con’s listed for each scenario?

- What could a possible timeline be for a transition?

SOME POSSIBLE QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION

HOW WOULD IT WORK TO SEPARATE FROM AUGSBURG BUT STILL PARTNER WITH THEM?

Similar to current arrangement for Cuba semester program Agreement reached with other institution interested and capable of using

institutional in-country depth to take on responsibility for site staff and programming.

Semester program continues as a joint Augburg-”X” university program, where Augsburg gets set amount for each student recruited by Augsburg.

Augsburg continues its programming, but does not deal with fixed costs or risk “X” university can take advantage of in-country depth to facilitate research, field

work, and new products, as well as short term programming, and CGE brand continues with current semester programs

Mpls staff continue to work on current semester programs, contract relationship with field for working short term programs, and work on developing similar relationships in new countries.

KEY TO SUCCESS OF WIN-WIN: TRANSITION PERIOD AND PLANIf Augsburg helps facilitate a smooth transition for site staff, site staff will be highly

motivated to continue working with Augsburg

Smooth transition will maintain quality of programming and preservation of brand reputation.

CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING OTHER OPTIONSHow do we best continue the mission of CGE that is still valid in today’s context?

How does each scenario impact property (houses and vehicles)?

How can higher education take better advantage of CGE and CGE impact higher ed, including through the development of new products?

How do we best take advantage of talented long-term staff in Minneapolis and in each international site?

How do we interface with Augsburg/or another institution that goes just beyond the financial bottom line?

How do we interface with the other institution?

How does each scenario impact programs and sites?

What could the timeline be for each scenario?

Goals1. Maintain the current level of salaries and benefits (pension, tuition, health insurance, vacation, etc.) for

staff as possible 2. Preservation of as many of the CGE staff as possible3. Accreditation capability for semester and short-term programs4. General liability coverage for program participants5. Need to transition without burning bridges with Augsburg or other sponsors/feeders6. Ability to create a written agreement to articulate the relationship(s) with any institution(s)7. Ensure we can carry out our programs within the legal rubrics of each country in which we work

RANKING

Investigate further

Be more proactive in establishing a win-win relationship with Augsburg

Join another academic institution

Merge with another organization

Middle

Incorporate as a separate nonprofit – only consider in an affiliation with other organization(s) doing similar work – ie, Fair Trade Study abroad

Lower – don’t investigate further now

Everyone for themselves

Sites becoming independent NGO’s in partnership with Augsburg

PROACTIVE REQUESTS TO AUGSBURGSigned agreement

• Establish costs for CGE similar to what’s being done for other primarily externally serving programs at Augsburg (CDC, Urban Debate, Campus Compact, etc.) and practices in the study abroad field

• CGE be put in a restricted fund and be allowed to make hiring and spending decisions without exceeding available funds

• Further develop the potential that CGE has within Augsburg to better serve faculty, students and staff

• Develop a model and working relationship that better serves CGE and Augsburg

What’s not working

• We need to better understand their concerns about risk management and liability in relationship to study abroad in general and CGE specifically

• The FY12 CM assessment would add 28% to CGE’s costs, which would price programs out of the market

• No funds available for capital improvements in sites and program development/expansion

• They want financial results from CGE like a business but don’t allow us to operate like a business

CONCERNING ASPECTS OF CGE’S RELATIONSHIP WITH AUGSBURGStaffing

- Were going to lay off a staff person in Minneapolis without consulting CGE leaders and would have impacted a key program area

- Approval still not received for APA temp

Budget

- All Hands Meeting announcement that goal was to increase margins for CGE without our knowledge or input

- Surplus expectation of $217,000 put in for CGE for FY14 budget without CGE’s approval – accomplished by decisions by the college to not rehire staff without CGE’s input

IF WE SEPARATE WHAT CGE WOULD REQUESTProperty

- Nicaragua house – was a donated to CGE so should be given to CGE

- Nica bus/truck – paid for already by CGE budget

- ES van – fully paid for already through CGE budget

- Guatemala van – paid for already by CGE budget

- Mexico houses – paid for already by CGE budget

- Mexico vans – paid for already by CGE budget

- Namibia house – set up a lease agreement with Augsburg – CGE has already fully paid $26,000? For renovation . CGE has already paid $44,446.76 in amortization of the $333,350 original purchase price, leaving $288,904 remaining to be paid

- Namibia vehicles – will be amortized in 2014 so already paid by CGE budget

Endowed scholarship and restricted funds– transfer the principle and spending accounts to CGE

TIMELINE

Within 1 year:

• Get clarity with Augsburg as soon as possible

• Either rework our relationship with Augsburg or move into another scenario in that time frame. Have approval by Jan. 1, 2014 so can feed into budget process.

• Have a different model started with Augsburg or another institution by June 1, 2014

• Would there be short-term costs for a transition where we would need to raise extra funds?

RESOURCES – NONPROFITS

Incorporating as a nonprofit – http://www.minnesotanonprofits.org/nonprofit-resources/start-a-nonprofit

Merging as a nonprofit - http://www.minnesotanonprofits.org/greatermn-summit/greater-minnesota-nonprofit-summit-handouts/13_GMNS_Keynote.pdf

Working with a fiscal agent - http://www.mapfornonprofits.org/vertical/sites/%7B876C4FB8-E997-480F-BF5B-AFAA0F113D9D%7D/uploads/Fiscal_Sponsorship_July_2011.pdf

RESOURCES – SCHOOL OF RECORDGuidelines by the Forum on Education Abroad on using a school of record (SOR) to offer credit for study abroad providers: http

://www.forumea.org/SchoolofRecord.cfmMany third party study abroad are independent organizations and only affiliated with an institution to offer credit. Some examples:- School for Field Studies - Boston U, Autonomous U Mexico semester program - Hampshire College, World Endeavors -

Jacksonville University - Spanish Studies Program - If the student’s college or university requires a transcript from a U.S. degree-granting institution,

this service is provided by the Spanish Studies School of Record, Heidelberg University, in Tiffin, Ohio, for a service fee of $250.

- CET - CET and University of Virginia have cooperated for almost a decade to administer the CET Siena program. In 2011, the two parties redefined their relationship, bringing mutually beneficial cooperation to official partnership. Currently, CET handles all non-academic facets of the Siena program—housing, excursions, roommates, health and safety. CET also manages day-to-day academics: class monitoring, faculty training, student academic needs. The University of Virginia serves as the program’s “academic sponsor.” It provides academic oversight and acts as the “school of record,” administering course registration and transcripts for program participants.

- Amizade - Amizade has an academic partnership with West Virginia University. Through that partnership, Amizade instructors propose academic courses that meet on-campus standards for course approval and are further strengthened through their connections to relevant community organizations, issues, and concerns. All courses and instructors are reviewed by the Amizade Executive Director and, at WVU, the relevant department chair, the relevant dean, the Associate Provost for Academic Affairs, and the Associate Provost for International Academic Engagement. During the six years that Amizade has been partnered with West Virginia University, WVU transcripts that students receive upon course completion have been accepted for transfer credit by Indiana University, The University of Massachusetts, The University of Pennsylvania, The University of Southern California, The University of Texas, and The University of Wisconsin, among scores of other institutions of higher education across the United States. Amizade suggests that each student check with his or her university to confirm whether that university accepts transfer credit from West Virginia University.

- U of M is the SOR for Global Links and Australearn - they have info on their website on how to get them to do that: http://www.umabroad.umn.edu/professionals/intleducators/schoolofrecord.php

- CEA - Univ. of New Haven - http://www.gowithcea.com/educators/global-education/global-campuses/school-of-record.html