Faculty & Staff: Recruitment, Employment, and Retention
May 14, 2002
TO: Dave Frohnmayer, President
FROM: Kenneth F. Lehrman III, Director
RE: Campus Diversity
You have asked that I provide you with relevant data regarding campus efforts to diversify our faculty and staff, particularly racial and ethnic minorities. Attached you will find information that reflects the results of those efforts over the past eight years.
I am happy to report that the data demonstrate continual progress toward our goals of employing a faculty and staff that reflect the availability of qualified ethnic and racial minorities. Unfortunately, I must also report that this progress is gradual and in several areas, most notably African American administrators, we have lost ground. Still, the gains we have made are significant. When compared to peer institutions we fare very well in a number of areas (e.g., the percentage of minority executives). Even in those areas where we do not, I believe we have done very well given our less substantial resources. For example, while we lag behind well funded institutions like the University of Michigan in the percentage of minority faculty, we compare favorably to other institutions like the University of Virginia, the University of Wisconsin and Indiana. Our overall employment statistics also compare favorably to institutions located in geographic areas of greater diversity.
Several factors account for our success, however modest. Most notable is the commitment to diversity demonstrated by a broad cross section of the faculty, staff and administrators with whom I work on a regular basis. I am impressed by their energy and effort in seeking to diversify our applicant pools and their willingness to identify and eliminate traditional barriers to opportunity. Equally impressive is the resources appropriated by the Provost Office Minority Recruitment Program. Since 1995, this program has allocated more than $2 million to enhance the recruitment and retention of minority faculty of U.S. citizenship. The impact of this effort is reflected in the extraordinary success of our tenure track minority faculty applying for tenure.
Although minority faculty have been successful, the overall retention of minority employees remains troublesome. While it can be expected that increases in minority representation in the workforce would be accompanied by statistically proportionate increases in terminations, the percentage of minority employees leaving the university has increased disproportionately. While a number of factors may contribute to any individual decision to terminate employment, we lack good information to explain this phenomenon. To that end I draw your attention to the recommendations I offer at the end of this report. In particular, I believe that it is crucial that we develop an exit interview instrument that will help us understand why minority employees leave the university.
Finally, I offer a note of guarded optimism regarding the future of diversity efforts at the University of Oregon. I am confident that the University is headed in the right direction. Our commitment to diversity is resolute, our energy boundless. Unfortunately, our resources are limited. Until such time as our programs and salaries are funded at a level similar to that of our peer institutions, we can continue to expect only modest gains despite our best faith efforts.
Faculty & Staff:
Recruitment, Employment, and Retention
UO's Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Commitment
It is the strong philosophy and intent of the University of Oregon to provide educational opportunities and to recruit, hire, train, and promote persons in all job titles, without regard to race, color, . . . or any other extraneous consideration not directly or substantively related to merit or performance.
To advance these ends, the university has developed an Affirmative Action Plan with specific results oriented procedures to ensure equal employment and educational opportunity.
Affirmative Action Plan
In order to monitor progress, a regular reporting system is established. Results will be reviewed quarterly by the Director of the Office of Affirmative Action & Equal Opportunity, and will be shared with the appropriate divisions and departments. The university president will review results on an annual basis. This is not merely a preventative and passive commitment. The university intends to implement affirmative action proactively and vigorously.
The 1994 Affirmative Action Plan established statistical employment goals to be reviewed and reestablished on an annual basis, and developed several strategies for increasing gender and racial and ethnic diversity. Institutional progress toward the goals was again reviewed in Spring 2002. The review included assessment of diversity of applicant pools, new hire and termination reports, and progress toward elimination of underutilization in problem areas.
The primary goal of the plan is to achieve increases in the number of women and minority faculty and staff to levels consistent with the availability of qualified women and minorities in the appropriate geographic recruitment areas
Summary of Progress 1994 - 2001
Over the past 7 years, the university has made slow but steady progress toward diversifying its workforce at all levels of employment. This progress reflects the recruitment, hiring, promotion and retention efforts of the university.
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority applicants for employment increased from 8.86% of all applicants in 1993, to 11.63 in 1997, to 13.46% in 2001
- In 1994, the Provost's Office initiated the Underrepresented Minority Recruitment Plan. This plan seeks to encourage academic departments to hire underrepresented minority faculty from current regular searches by providing supplemental funds following a successful recruitment. These funds, in the amount of $90,000 total, will be provided for uses such as developing a more attractive employment package for the minority candidate. In addition, the Provost's Office provides up to 10% of the funds available in any given year to support visiting minority faculty, with a maximum award of $10,000.
- In 1995-96, the Provost's Office allocated $130,000 for minority recruitment.
- For 2001-02, the Provost's Office projects allocations of $418,739.
- Since 1995, the Provost's Office has allocated more than $2,191,526 for minority recruitment.
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority employees in the entire university workforce increased from 8.68% in 1994, to 9.23% in 1997, to 9.89% in 2001;
- The representation of African American employees in the workforce decreased from 1.63% in 1994, to 1.54% in 1997, to 1.45% in 2001;
- The representation of American Indian/Alaska Native employees increased from .67% in 1994, to .99 in 1997, and .99 in 2001;
- The representation of Asian/Pacific American employees increased from 3.83% in 1994, to 3.93% in 1997, to 4.67% in 2001;
- The representation of Hispanic/Latino employees increased from 2.56% in 1994, to 2.77% in 1997, to 2.77% in 2001
- (In 2001, 6 employees self-identified as multi-ethnic.)
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority administrators in executive positions increased from 7.14% in 1994, to 9.66 in 1997, to 15.15% in 2001
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority tenure-track instructional faculty increased from 8.14% in 1994, to 9.90% in 1997, to 11.46% in 2001:
- The representation of African American tenure-track instructional faculty increased from .93% in 1994, to 1.50% in 1997, to 1.57% in 2001;
- The representation of American Indian/Alaska Native tenure-track instructional faculty increased from .47% in 1994, to .75% in 1997, and decreased to .63% in 2001;
- The representation of Asian/Pacific American tenure-track instructional faculty increased from 4.38% in 1994, to 4.95% in 1997, to 6.13% in 2001;
- The representation of Hispanic/Latino tenure-track instructional faculty increased from 2.35% in 1994, to 2.70% in 1997 to 2.98% in 2001.
- (In 2001,1 tenure-track faculty member self-identified as multi-ethnic)
Officers of Administration
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority officers of administration decreased from 11.08% in 1994, to 10.82% in 1997, and increased to 11.18% in 2001;
- The representation of African American Officers of Administration decreased from 3.77% in 1994, to 2.79% in 1997, to 1.87% in 2001;
- The representation of American Indian/Alaska Native Officers of Administration increased from .94% in 1994, to 1.40% in1997, to 2.02% in 2001;
- The representation of Asian/Pacific American Officers of Administration increased from 3.54% in 1994, to 3.66% in 1997, to 3.89% in 2001;
- The representation of Hispanic/Latino Officers of Administration increased from 2.83% in 1994, to 2.97% in 1997, to 3.27% in 2001.
- (In 2001, 1 officer of administration self-identified as multi-ethnic)
Between 1994 and 2001:
- The representation of minority employees in the classified service increased from 7.85% in 1994, to 9.15% in 1997, to 9.48 in 2001;
- The representation of African American classified staff decreased from 1.65% in 1994, to 1.58% in 1997, and increased to 1.84% in 2001;
- The representation of American Indian/Alaska Native classified staff increased from .90% in 1994, to 1.23% in 1997, and decreased to 1.20% in 2001;
- The representation of Asian/Pacific American classified staff increased from 2.62 in 1994, to 3.25% in 1997, and increased to 3.51% in 2001;
- The representation of Hispanic/Latino classified staff increased from 2.69% in 1994, to 3.08% in 1997, and decreased to 2.79 % in 2001.
- (In 2001, 1 classified employee self-identified as multi-ethnic)
- In 1994, 419 employees who self-identified race or ethnicity terminated employment with the university. Of these, 39 (9.30%) were employees of color (8 African American; 8 American Indian/Alaska Native; 15 Asian/Pacific American; 8 Hispanic/Latino). In 2001, 543 employees who self identified race or ethnicity terminated employment with the university. Of these, 76 (13.99%)were employees of color (12 African American; 12 American Indian/Alaska Native; 29 Asian/Pacific American; 23 Hispanic/Latino)
- Since 1994, 198 faculty members were considered for tenure, and 184 (92.92%) were successful. In this same period, 22 of these cases involved minority faculty, and 21 (95.45%) were successful.
|Academic Year||Total Cases||Yes||No||Minority Cases||Yes||No|
Comparitave Table: Minorities as a percent of total
|Total Employees||Tenure Tenure-track Facuolty||Administrators||Executive|
|Penn State University||7.71%||12.37%||7.07%||5.79%|
|Univ. of Colorado||16.64%||12.33%||23.99%||17.64%|
|Univ. of Indiana||9.29%||12.31%||6.70%||7.92%|
|Univ. of Michigan||N/A||17.94%||N/A||N/A|
|Univ. of Oregon||9.89%||10.39%||11.18%||15.15%|
|Univ. of Virginia||19.22%||10.14%||N/A||7.84%|
|Univ. of Washington||12.92%||13.84%||13.84%||N/A|
|Univ. of Wisconsin||7.55%||10.15%||8.25%||10.34%|
- The university establish as one of its highest priorities to retain as well as increase the numbers of minority faculty and staff. Consistent with the recommendations in Floyd Report, the Office of Affirmative Action & Equal Opportunity, working with the Office of Human Resources should develop and implement an exit interview instrument and procedure in order to better understand the exact causes and influences that induce minority employees to separate from the university. These results should be presented in executive summary and used to feed back into faculty and staff recruitment and retention efforts.
- Enhance existing minority mentor programs to include all levels of employees. While new minority faculty have access to mentoring opportunities, officers of administration and classified staff do not have structured mentoring programs.
- Publish annual Diversity Report Card in Oregon Daily Emerald that evaluates and assesses the efforts of individual schools and colleges and major administrative units with regard to recruitment, hiring and retention.
- The Office of Affirmative Action & Equal Opportunity should conduct a yearly public forum that reports on the achievement of numerical goals for underutilized job groups. Currently, this information is available only in hard copy and on line.