December 2, 1996
Revised January 12, 1997
The mission of the School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science (SFWP) is to solve natural
resource problems in response to the needs of science and industry. Implicit in this statement is
our belief that a major part of the School's mission is to provide graduates with a general university
education as well as knowledge and skills in the historical, ethical, conceptual and practical bases of forestry and wood science so that they can effectively communicate this information to others
and contribute to continued development of the profession.
If we are successful in our educational efforts, each forestry graduate: is qualified to be a professional forest ecosystem scientist/manager, having mastered many of the technical skills of the profession; knows the historical and theoretical bases of the profession; is proficient in oral and written communication; has the desire and capacity to grow with the profession; is prepared for life-long learning, and will become a responsible member of society.
Forestry education at the undergraduate level is different from most other degree programs
because of its emphasis on the profession (management of wildland ecosystems) rather than a
discipline (e.g. -- math, physics, chemical engineering). This distinction is deeply ingrained in the
forestry undergraduate program. The curriculum is interdisciplinary, with the course work
emphasis including biology, ecology, soils, hydrology, mathematics, wildlife management, and
business subjects. We were recently reviewed for continued accreditation by the Society of
American Foresters, our accrediting body, and received very favorable reviews; we were
reaccredited for 5 years, which is the longest term allowed. The SFWP has an advisory committee
which reviews our curriculum, and focuses special attention on proposed changes.
Much of the strength of the program is associated with our efforts to continuously evaluate
the program and revise it when necessary. We significantly revised our undergraduate curriculum
in 1993, which included extensive modification to many components. At this time we
implemented a three-quarter capstone sequence to help students integrate information from a wide
range of classes. We also revised the forestry fall camp, with the revised program first taught in
the fall of 1996. Fall camp is a complete quarter of field-oriented forestry education scheduled for
fall quarter of the sophomore year; our modifications were designed to emphasize a holistic
approach to ecosystem management while retaining a strong emphasis in basic forestry field skills.
Fall camp is conducted entirely off-campus at the Ford Center, a teaching and research
unit of the SFWP with dormitory and housing facilities. The SFWP has a 4500 acre research and
teaching forest adjacent to the Ford Center which is used for field instruction.
We strive to integrate current information technologies into the undergraduate program as
they become available, with students starting the process by being introduced to word processing,
e-mail, and the Internet during their first fall quarter in the program. Our undergraduate forestry
program contains a strong emphasis on field and computer skills.
Opportunities outside of classroom situations are available to facilitate the undergraduate
educational experience. Many of our undergraduate students are employed in the School on
research projects, which provides both financial support and the opportunity to work directly with
faculty and graduate students. We also have a coop program, where students may work for a term
away from the MTU campus. We have been involved in a variety of environmental education
projects where forestry students participated. For example, Project Learning Tree gives students
the opportunity to teach environmental science in the public schools; several of our students were
involved in the development of the Houghton-Portage Township School forest and have worked
with the Headwaters Environmental Station, a private educational institution for primary and
secondary students.
We perceive that the School suffers from two weaknesses related to this goal. First, our
physical facilities are clearly inadequate to support the educational mission of the SFWP (see Goal
7 discussion). Second, the forestry program attracts a large number of transfer students (about
40% of upper division students), both from within MTU and from other institutions. It is
frequently difficult for these students to complete degree requirements in a reasonable time period
because of scheduling problems at the School and University levels. A large number of our
classes require field work, which can realistically only be done fall quarter because of the region's
climate. We have worked very hard to minimize this inconvenience by moving any class that could
possibly be taught without outdoor labs to quarters other than fall quarter. Furthermore, students
often cannot enroll in general education requirements for Humanities, Social Sciences, and
thematic studies because of limited availability of offerings and enrollment caps.
The greatest opportunity associated with this subgoal for the forestry program of the SFWP is the new Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences Degree Program, which is currently nearing final approval. This program will provide an educational option with diverse career opportunities both now and into the future, and is likely to attract a large number of high-quality students.
The undergraduate forestry program has seen dramatic swings in undergraduate enrollment over the past 20 years. At the beginning of that time period, forestry was a very popular major nationwide and our program had over 700 undergraduates. Then, forestry became a much less popular major at the same time the SFWP decided intentionally to reduce enrollments. The result was a drop to only about 40 undergraduates in 1985. Since that time, we have aggressively recruited undergraduate students, and the enrollment has increased to 140 in 1995. Although this is slightly less than our long-term goal, trends in enrollment are positive. Furthermore, our entering students meet high academic standards; this year's entering freshmen class has an average composite ACT score of 23.8.
One of the SFWP goals is to increase undergraduate enrollment. There are several strengths which we are using to do this. We have aggressively marketed the forestry program by hiring a recruiter and recruiting high-school students. This has been done primarily by developing and updating a video and other recruiting materials describing the forestry program and distributed them to anyone who expresses an interest or who we think might consider forestry as an option. We have also conducted summer youth camps, including a minority summer youth camp and a summer institute for exceptional students, during recent summers.
The greatest opportunity to increase undergraduate enrollment is clearly the proposed Applied Ecology and Environmental Science degree, which is nearing final approval. This degree program fills a niche that is not filled by other programs either at MTU or in the Midwest region. We believe that there is a large pool of well-qualified students who would be interested in this option. Furthermore, there has been rapid growth in the number of jobs for which this program would prepare students, especially in the private sector.
We have tried to reduce the financial burden for students by providing $500 of work-study assistantship for each freshman or transfer student. We have several endowed scholarships, with 1996-7 academic year awards of $21,508, and are pursuing the opportunity of raising more scholarship funds. Alumni, friends, and corporations have contributed $120,000 over the last two years to this effort. Finally, most of our students who wish to do so are able to work part time during the school year on research projects, with some also working during the summers.
Among our strengths in this area are high levels of retention and job placement. Retention rates have improved over time, with about 80% retention between years for each class (e.g., freshman to sophomore). The three main reasons cited by students who do not return are financial (most common), insufficient academic performance (second most common), and transfer to another program. Job placement for the last two academic years' graduates have been 92% and 88%, with 28% and 24% having been accepted into graduate programs.
We view the level of both gender (29% women) and regional geographic origin in our
undergraduate program as somewhat less than we would like, and consistently try to achieve a
more diverse student body. The proposed Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences
baccalaureate program will provide an opportunity to develop a more diverse student body
because, we believe, this degree will be attractive to a large number of female students.
Furthermore, because of the uniqueness of the degree, we hope to attract students from a broader
geographic region. One weakness that makes it hard to address the diversity issue is the loss by
the School of funding to support its student recruiter several years ago.
Improvements in the appearance of the forestry building interior helps with recruiting, as will the new forestry addition (see Goal 7 discussion).
There are several threats to reaching our goal of increased undergraduate enrollment. There are a large number of forestry programs offered by universities in the Midwest. Furthermore, interest in forestry as a profession has been quite low for the last decade, at least partially because of increased urbanization and confusion about management of forest lands by the public in general.
Emphasis on the professional aspects of forest management encourages a strong feeling of unity among the forestry undergraduates, which develops especially during the fall camp experience of the sophomore year. The cohesiveness of our student body is facilitated by our policy of providing access to the building and facilities using a student ID card on nights and weekends.
A sense of shared goals is also imparted by several professional and extracurricular organizations including the Student Chapter of SAF/Forestry Club, the Student Chapter of the Wildlife Society, the National Forestry Honor Society Xi Sigma Pi, and the local chapter of the Timber Wolf Alliance. The students also produce a yearbook each year which includes a pictorial summary of student life and activities. It is called the Forester, and is the only yearbook currently being produced at MTU. The School publishes two periodic newsletters, one by the staff and one by the students. Since all students have access to e-mail and the world-wide web, much information is distributed electronically. Xi Sigma Pi organizes and facilitates a tutor program, where forestry students help other forestry students in a wide range of classes. The Dean of the School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science (SFWP) meets with student leaders monthly during the school year. An undergraduate student served on the Dean's Evaluation Committee. This Committee directed the process to decide if the Dean should be replaced or reappointed. Furthermore, the process included a comprehensive survey of undergraduate student perceptions of the SFWP performance. An associated weakness is modest participation in these clubs and activities.
The students also have an unusually high exposure to the faculty and staff outside of courses. Students are generally on a first-name basis with both the faculty and staff. There is usually a fall welcome picnic at the Otter River Camp, a SFWP facility used, in part, for social functions of the organizations discussed above. Several social functions/meals targeting the undergraduates are held each year in the forestry building. The staff generally organizes these gatherings, and frequently helps undergraduates with a variety of problems. The School hosts a seminar series concerning international resource management issues.
A weakness of our undergraduate program is that it lacks gender, ethnic, and regional diversity; forestry students, like students from many other majors at MTU, do not interact extensively with students from other majors. A related weakness is that MTU as a whole does not have many activities outside classes which encourage mixing between majors.
There are 15 1/3 tenure track forestry faculty including the Dean, with 9 Professors, 2 Associate Professors, and 4 1/3 Assistant Professors. The forestry faculty of the SFWP all participate in the undergraduate program by teaching classes and advising undergraduate students. Furthermore, all faculty members have strong research programs as shown by per-faculty average number of graduate students (3.3, with 2/3 Ph.D. students), peer-reviewed publications (about 2.25 per faculty member per year), and external research support sustained at about $100,000 each per year. The Cooperative State Research Service (CSRS) conducts periodic reviews of research and graduate programs in forestry and wood science as part of its efforts to maintain and improve scientific quality through merit reviews. Our program was last evaluated in 1993 (CSRS). Our research program received generally high praise for criteria within the SFWP, noting the (v)igorous, highly competent, (and) productive faculty" as a strength.
Because of tenure denial (1), resignations (2), retirements (2), and a new position (1), we have had the opportunity to recruit 6 current faculty members into the program since the last accreditation in 1988. One of the positions is now shared with the Social Sciences Department, with 1/3 of her time allocated to forestry. This has allowed us to redirect our emphasis to adapt to changing trends in renewable resource management, primarily toward more ecologically-based approaches. We have been able to recruit excellent replacement faculty with doctoral degrees from strong programs (for example, the Universities of Michigan, Washington, and Wisconsin, and Ohio State University), partially due to the opportunity provided by the recent surplus of highly qualified potential faculty members in the available pool. Several unique strengths of the SFWP have also helped, including the excellent undergraduate and graduate teaching and research programs, start-up funds, a consistent annual professional development allocation of $2,000 to each faculty member, the relatively low student/faculty ratio (under 10), and a general atmosphere of shared goals, cooperation, and collegiality among the faculty.
Our faculty also benefits from a higher degree of diversity than most forestry academic units, with three women and two minorities in tenured or tenure-track positions. Furthermore, two of the women have received tenure and have taken active leadership roles within the School, the University, and professional organizations at the national level.
Although MTU is often viewed as a regional institution, the graduate programs and faculty research in the forestry program are highly visible nationally and internationally. We have extensive international programs, and six faculty have taken sabbaticals since the last NCA accreditation. Five of these sabbaticals have occurred within the last two years. Our Ph.D. program is one of the largest nationally, with 38 students between Forest Resources and Environmental Science.
Our most critical weakness is a severe shortage of suitable space. This issue is addressed under Goal 7. Other weaknesses include the library, which ranges from clearly inadequate to marginally adequate across the range of disciplines represented in the forestry faculty, and lower salaries than peer institutions, especially for the senior faculty.
Another weakness is the corrosive effect caused by the 1% annual budget cut, which is used as a mechanism for resource reallocation under the current administration. This caused us to replace two retirees during the 1995-6 school year with only 1 1/3 new faculty. Continuation of this policy into the future will place pressure to cut additional positions, which will coincide with the implementation of our new Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences program. To date we have been unsuccessful in the competition for the reallocated resources. At the time of the last NCA accreditation, the visiting team report stressed as an area of concern that "the level of apprehension caused by the expectation of the need to reallocate 3 percent of the departmental budgets annually is corrosive to faculty morale."
Threats include reduced support for academic research, especially at the federal level, and difficulties in recruiting both undergraduate and graduate students. Undergraduate student recruitment is addressed under Goal 1, while graduate recruitment is covered under Goal 3.
Merit salary adjustments are determined by contributions to teaching (including advising), research, and service activities to the University and the profession. The SFWP Charter contains a complete enumeration of the factors considered. The criteria for research staff merit adjustments are also included in the Charter. All academic units at MTU have received the same average salary adjustment in recent years. A uniformly strong unit therefore has the same merit adjustment as units with less uniform strength, or even weak units.
The graduate program of the forestry portion of the SFWP has grown rapidly since the last NCA accreditation, and is one of our greatest strengths. In their recent external review of our research and graduate programs (see Goal 2 discussion), the CSRS (1993) cited as a strength that "(t)he graduate education program has moved forward rapidly in view of its brief history in SFWP."
The SFWP Ph.D. program was approved in 1987, and has grown very rapidly to 38 students in 1996. This is one of the largest Forest Resources and Environmental Science Ph.D. programs in the nation, and is more than twice the long-term enrollment goal of 16 set when the program was implemented.
Our MS graduate program enrollment had decreased somewhat, from 22 in 1988 to 13 in 1995, primarily because of the high emphasis on the Ph.D. program. However, MS enrollment has increased to 27 for the fall quarter of 1996. One reason for this increase is that during the fall of 1996 we initiated a new program for MS students in cooperation with the Peace Corps. The program allows students without a forestry background to pursue a masters degree while gaining the skills required to serve in the Peace Corps as a forester. The students are enrolled in classes for one year, enter the Peace Corps for two years, then return to MTU to finish their degree. This is the only cooperative forestry - Peace Corps program in the nation which targets students without a forestry baccalaureate, and has attracted 6 students in the first year.
Nearly all of the graduate students in the SFWP are supported by research assistantships, a strength resulting from the high level of soft-money research funds secured by the faculty. However, an associated weakness is the fact that the SFWP receives no teaching assistantships.
The diversity represented in our graduate program is a distinct strength, and results from several factors. There are many different disciplines represented on the faculty, which are also evident in the graduate student body; a large proportion of the graduate students have degrees from other universities; and a significant portion of the graduate population is from other countries.
A graduate student served on the Committee to Evaluate the Dean, which was part of the process to either reappoint or replace the Dean. The process included a comprehensive survey of graduate students to evaluate their perception of our performance.
The primary weakness associated with the graduate program is the critical lack of appropriate space discussed under Goal 7. This affects both the teaching and the research components of graduate education. Office space is particularly poor for graduate students. The proposed addition to the forestry building provides an opportunity in this area.
The primary threat is reduced federal spending for sponsored research. Another threat is the possible difficulty in attracting potential graduate students because of the relative obscurity of MTU as a graduate institution and the short period during which the SFWP has had a Ph.D. program; the high-quality and state-of-the-art research programs of the forestry faculty and the successful placement of recent Ph.D. recipients in universities (e.g., Washington State University, the Universities of Idaho, Arkansas, and Maine) are a strength which has largely mitigated this threat.
The forestry faculty of the SFWP is unusual at MTU in that all of the faculty members have active and productive research programs. The faculty exhibited a broad range in research participation at the time of the last NCA review, primarily because of the historical emphasis on undergraduate programs. Retirements, combined with strong motivation by the Dean to become involved in research, are responsible for the transition to uniformly strong research involvement.
Strengths that have and continue to help our research program originate primarily from our strong faculty and staff. We have individuals from a variety of disciplines and backgrounds, which allows extensive collaboration and interdisciplinary research both within the SFWP and with other units at MTU, and with investigators at other institutions and agencies both nationally and internationally. Our faculty have all been cited in the scientific citation index, with several also receiving MTU (three faculty members have received the MTU outstanding researcher award) or national awards for research. Our faculty has been successful in attracting external support averaging about $100,000 annually per faculty member, much of which supports our graduate programs. Much of this funding has come from prestigious external sources such as NSF and the USDA Competitive Grants Program.
Other strengths that help promote and support our research programs are our location in a prime area for ecological research, an annual professional-development allocation sufficient to support travel to one professional meeting, faculty participation in the sabbatical leave program with six sabbaticals since 1990, and a modest fund to support visits and lectures by outside scholars. The current environmental initiative at MTU provides an opportunity to further capitalize on our geographic location.
Weaknesses of MTU that limit the achievement of our research mission involve the limited diversity of educational programs at MTU and the critical space problems addressed under Goal 7. Most educational programs in forestry that contain a strong research emphasis are at either research-oriented universities (e.g., Yale and the University of Michigan) or land grant universities, which routinely have strong graduate programs in the agriculture school, a range of diverse and well-funded supporting programs in organismal biology, and a business school with strong graduate programs; MTU has none of these. This weakness was also identified in a recent external review of our research programs (CSRS 1993). Although there are many good people to work with in other units at MTU, the lack of strong programs across this wide range of disciplines is especially limiting to forestry research because of the many disciplines involved.
A major threat is the recent reduction in available research funding, especially at the federal level. An additional threat specific to forestry education is the rapid change in public expectations for resource management; we believe we have positioned ourselves well by our increased emphasis on ecological approaches, but there is always risk when situations change rapidly.
The forestry component of the SFWP has two distinct groups within the staff. One group
is supported by general fund resources, and supports the administrative and technical needs of the
School. This group includes the office and support staff (e.g., training specialist, advancement
officer) of the Dean. The computer systems administrator is paid from lab fees and research
contracts, while the Ford Center staff are paid from Center revenues. The other category
of staff is research personnel, who are primarily supported by external research grants.
One strength of the forestry component of the SFWP is our excellent staff, who do their
jobs well; this has produced a comfortable work situation where turnover has generally been very
low. Other strengths include generally good working relationships and open communication with
the administration and faculty; inclusion in the self-governance of the School by attendance and full
voting rights on nearly all issues at faculty and staff meetings; close and positive interactions with
both undergraduate and graduate students; the opportunity for flexibility in both job duties and
work schedules; some expenses and time are provided for professional training and seminars; the
opportunity to take MTU classes without tuition; good technical support for office equipment
questions and problems; and recently purchased office furniture and equipment, which the
involved staff helped choose.
Weaknesses associated with this goal include a feeling of concern about job security. This occurs because the last retrenchment at MTU resulted in the elimination of 62 staff positions, while tenure-track faculty were protected. Although none of the on-campus staff of the forestry portion of the SFWP were included, several positions were eliminated in the Institute of Wood Research and the Ford Center. Another concern is a feeling that little appreciation is shown for their efforts.
Opportunities include the possibility of additional resources for training and professional development, opportunities to become more directly involved in the educational and research missions of the School, and the new building, which will relieve congestion problems that directly and indirectly affect the staff.
One threat is the reduced funding available at the federal level, which may result in job loss for soft-money staff members.
The SFWP has developed many strengths in this area since the last NCA accreditation. We began operation of a new computer lab for use by undergraduate and graduate students during fall quarter of 1995. We have 28 personal computers (PCS) and 5 Sun Sparc stations in the lab, all of which are networked. This facility is paid for by student lab fees. The PCS are used for nearly every class taught in forestry, with applications ranging from word processing and spreadsheets to specialized scientific software, while the Suns are used in one undergraduate class (Remote Sensing) and several graduate classes. The PCS and Suns are both used for graduate research. We offer our own computer class, which satisfies the University's general education requirement in computing. This facility provides access by our students to the world-wide web and e-mail; web pages are used in several classes to transfer information to students. The SFWP also maintains a web site. A smaller computer facility is maintained at the Ford Center for teaching fall camp programs.
The lab is maintained by a full-time systems administrator, with some duties assigned to two student assistants. Oversight of these facilities rests with an elected Computer Committee, which sets policy and budgets, and a Director of Computing, who implements policy, administers the budget, and supervises the systems administrator.
A weakness is the lack of a policy and resources to support updating of faculty computer equipment. MTU provided a small amount this year to the School to support faculty computing ($343 per tenure-track faculty member). The computer committee has split this allocation into personal allocations of $250 per faculty member and a general pool to support purchases that will benefit the School at large. There is uncertainty about whether this program will continue, or if these funds can be carried over and accumulated for major purchases such as a new PC. Start-up funds for new faculty generally provide a new computer, but upgrading or replacement of computers is generally done using soft money or our annual professional development fund. While the increased capability of new computers is an opportunity, the cost of keeping at the state of-the-art in data and information processing is a distinct threat because it places serious demands on already-stretched budgets. All Faculty and most staff currently have computers with network access, but some of the equipment is badly outdated.
A distinct strength of the SFWP is a state-of-the-art remote sensing-geographic information systems (GIS) computer lab. It has been funded primarily by research contracts, with some equipment purchased by start-up funds. The lab is maintained and supervised by a GIS analyst, also paid from soft money. This computer facility is used by many graduate students from other units on campus, and is a critical component to the MTU Initiative on the Environment.
The library is a distinct weakness, especially for graduate and faculty research programs. It ranges from marginally sufficient to clearly deficient over the range of disciplines in the forestry portion of the SFWP. We do receive a modest annual allocation of $4800 from the library for new acquisitions, but cannot apply that to new journals because of the required ongoing commitment of funds. The number of forestry journals which the library gets was reduced in the last decade, and subsequent new funds have not even returned the library to previous levels for our program. One associated strength for the SFWP is a targeted endowment which provides funds to purchase forestry books for the library; an associated weakness is that these funds have been redirected by the library to cover journal subscription costs in recent years.
The most critical weakness for the forestry program across all goals is a severe shortage of suitable space. As reported by the visiting team during the last NCA accreditation:
Our current facility was built to support an undergraduate program, and the transition to active faculty research programs and an extensive graduate program have made it clearly insufficient. There is a deficit of suitable laboratory space even after many teaching areas have been converted to labs. We have provided temporary relief from the space problem by securing the use of two houses near the School and purchasing three trailers to provide research (primarily graduate student offices) and teaching spaces; these areas are inadequate for all of the intended uses. Unfortunately, the only net increase in space since the last NCA accreditation has been in these temporary buildings. An opportunity for the SFWP is a planned addition to the forestry building to address the space shortage, with associated threats including final approval of the state's 75% contribution for construction costs and the requirement to raise the additional 25% from sources other than the state or MTU. An associated strength is the addition of an advancement officer to motivate and facilitate fund raising.
Classroom space is a critical concern, especially for the undergraduate program. Although classrooms are controlled and allocated centrally at MTU, the forestry building is physically separated from the main campus; this makes it very desirable to have our classes held in the building. Conversion of space to research and computer labs have left only one traditional teaching classroom in the building. One of the trailers has a large lecture room, but poor and noisy climate control and a shortage of blackboard space make it a difficult room in which to teach or learn. The proposed addition is an opportunity to correct this problem.
Since the last NCA accreditation in 1988, there has been extensive remodeling of the forestry building to improve its appearance, especially in common areas. Hardwood floors were refinished, areas were repainted and carpeted, and original artwork (wood panel carvings and paintings) have been contributed to the School from a variety of sources. The School now provides a very positive initial impression to visitors, and is a more pleasant place to work, learn, and teach. This is a distinct strength of the School. Extensive remodeling has also converted the use and improved the utility of some areas (e.g., computer lab, remote sensing-GIS lab, plant biotechnology labs, and greenhouse). Unfortunately, the only increase in square footage since the last NCA accreditation is in the temporary buildings.
Another strength is the Ford Center (FFC). The Center provides dormitory and conference center facilities, and is used for our fall camp and many other activities. Associated equipment such as trucks and pickups are also available for teaching and research uses. This facility is located in Alberta, about 42 miles south of the main campus. There are also several residences in Alberta under the control of the SFWP. An adjacent research forest with 4500 acres is managed by the SFWP, with the primary goal being to support the teaching and research missions of the School.
We do have a coordinator to assure compliance with OSHA/biohazard procedures.
Our greatest strength in this area is the high per-capita research funding from sources external to MTU associated with faculty research programs. The per-capita annual average has been sustained at about $100,000 per year since the last NCA accreditation. Clearly, the main purpose of these funds is the development of the research program of the faculty and staff members securing the funds. Much of the faculty research activity and travel would be impossible without external grants. These funds support essentially the entire graduate program and have paid for much equipment and facility renovation. These improvements also enhance the undergraduate education programs.
The opportunity provided by the proposed addition to the SFWP has provided a focus for fund raising by the School, with the recent partial funding of an advancement position within the SFWP being a strength. Other strengths are that the School has had an advisory board for several years, and has recently initiated an honor academy of individual alumni and persons who have contributed to making the SFWP an excellent institution. We have several endowed scholarships, and are aggressively trying to secure additional scholarship funding (see Goal 1, Subgoal 2 discussion).
A weakness of the School is that our historically strong ties with alumni and industry have not resulted in more direct financial support to the School.
Another weakness is associated with the 1% annual reduction in unit budgets at MTU to provide a pool for reallocation by the upper administration. To date, this process has forced a reduction of 2/3 of a faculty position, while the School has been unsuccessful in capturing any of the reallocation funds.
The accelerating competition for private and government resources is a threat to the School,
especially as government support for external research is reduced.