As set forth in the Administrative Policies and Procedures Concerning Organized Research Units, all MRUs must establish a rationale for continuance at fifteen-year intervals. To begin a fifteen-year review, the MRU director submits a proposal to be reviewed by an ad hoc review committee established by the Vice Provost for Research and drawn from the membership of the Universitywide Council on Research (COR), the University Committee on Research Policy (UCORP), and individual scholars from within and outside the University of California.

The proposal must include specific information related to both the preceding five years as per the guidelines for five-year reviews, a 15-year summary of the operation and accomplishments of the MRU, and a projection of the five years to come if the MRU continues to exist. The following guidelines describe the essential features of the Director's report, and include a checklist of these features to ensure that the report is complete. The body of the Report should not exceed 20 single-spaced pages, not including appendices. Director's Report

The Director's Report is the backbone of a timely and meaningful review. The Director will provide a review of the MRU covering the preceding five years as per the Director's Guidelines for Five-Year Reviews. In addition, the Director should address the following topic areas.

I. Mission. A concise statement detailing any projected changes to the mission of the MRU if it is continued.

II. Budget. For each of the preceding fifteen years, complete budgetary and expenditure data by fund source should be provided. All permanent and temporary funding provided from UC sources should be identified, as well as types and amounts of extramural funding for grants and contracts that are administered by the unit. Extramural funding should be listed as direct cost funding and associated overhead amounts, along with any further detail that will assist the review process. Multi-year awards should be displayed to show the individual fiscal year data. The use of UC-provided funds should be characterized by appropriate categories: administration, staff salaries, supplies and expenses, and grants/awards made by the unit to other UC individuals/entities. Significant detail should be provided to make clear the exact expenditure of funds within these and any other appropriate categories of expenditures. Any comments on the way budgetary constraints may have affected the operation of the MRU should be included here, as well.

III. Evidence of accomplishment. Focusing primarily on the preceding fifteen years, but considering also the lifetime of the MRU, provide evidence that the MRU has been successful in meeting its stated mission and goals. This section may refer to the three Five-Year Director's Reports for details (e.g. lists of publications and activities). Information to be provided should include:

A. Research:

1. Describe the quality and significance of research accomplished and in progress.

2. Indicate the quality of the professional staff as evidenced by awards, honors, and presentations at national and international scholarly conferences.

3. List publications issued by the unit, including reports and reprints under its own covers as well as published material. Literature citations of published work should include title of work, departmental affiliations of co-authors, and journal reference. Significant publications in progress should be included as well as doctoral dissertations of graduate students.

4. Explain why the unit constitutes a unique UC research resource and why the goals and objectives of the unit cannot be accomplished within an existing departmental or other structure.

5. Describe the MRU's recognition beyond UC.

B. Undergraduate and Graduate Education:

1. Describe the degree to which undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral students participate in the unit through assistantships, fellowships, traineeships, or otherwise are involved in the work of the unit, including paid employment and graduate student research activities.

2. What are the direct or indirect contributions of the unit to graduate and undergraduate teaching programs of academic departments of the University?

C. Public service:

1. Provide a concise description of the unit's contributions in the form of lectures, tours, visiting groups, conferences, etc. within the community, state, and nation, as well as services to the University community.

2. If appropriate, outline the interactions of the unit with other similar units or research centers in other institutions. Other services to the community, state, and nation, such as distribution of research information of policy significance and recognition by non-University groups or governmental agencies, should also be described.

3. Has there been direct, tangible impact by the activities of the unit on the public at large?

IV. Administration and governance. The administrative structure and functioning of the unit should be fully described, including campus location and reporting lines. Specifically, has the MRU as it has been constituted for the previous 15 years been successful? Are any changes needed? In addition, the following topics should be addressed:

A. Resources: Provide a 5-year summary of the space, physical facilities, and other resources funded from intramural and extramural sources.

B. Personnel: List the number of full-time academic staff with fractional appointment in academic departments, faculty with part-time appointments in the unit, and state the degree to which they participate in teaching programs of academic departments. List all support staff, and for each, percent FTE and sources of support.

C. Contract and grant administration: To what extent are the grants/contracts of participating or affiliated faculty members administered by the MRU? Does the unit have the staff expertise to assist with the preparation of proposals and award administration? If participating faculty members prefer to have grants/contracts administered through their home departments, are the reasons for this preference known? Conversely, if participants prefer to use the MRU as the unit of record for grants/contracts, what are the reasons for this choice? Are infrastructure services to research projects adequate?

V. Advisory Committee: Describe the unit's advisory and/or governance committee or committees. What are their roles, how often do they meet, and how well do they function? Are any changes needed to the nature of the advisory and/or governance committee or committees?

VI. Problems and needs: Are there constraints which prevent the unit from being maximally effective? For example, if more space is needed, describe the needs of the unit and how they might be better met with additional or new space. Describe other resources that are needed by the unit (e.g. capital equipment). Is administrative compensation adequate? Are staff FTE needed and, if provided, what benefits to the MRU and UC would accrue?

VII Comparison with other units. The report should describe the work of the MRU in comparison with other similar units at UC. It should make clear the unique contributions to the field that the unit makes which distinguish it from the other units. The report should also provide a rationale for the continuation of the unit as a separate entity.

VIII. Projections for next five years. A comprehensive but succinct research and budget plan for the next five years should be presented. It should contain the following elements:

A. Research plan for the next five years.

B. Budget estimates and anticipated sources of funding for the next five years, including intramural and extramural sources.

C. Names of faculty members who have agreed in writing to participate in the unit's activities.

D. Five-year projections of numbers of faculty members and students, professional research appointees, and other personnel.

E. Projections of future space needs and other resource needs such as library and computational resources.

IX. Justification for Continuance. If the Director feels that the MRU should continue to exist, he or she should explain in the report the unique contribution to UC research the unit provides, benefits to the University and community or communities the MRU serves that would be missed if it were to be discontinued, and any other arguments for continuance that are not addressed elsewhere in the report.

X. Annual Reports for the preceding five years should be appended to the Director's Report. (Although some of the information in the Director's Report may also appear in the annual report, the level of detail requested in the Director's Report is greater than that typically contained in annual reports. For the purpose of five-year reviews, therefore, annual reports are not considered equivalent to directors' reports.)

XI. Advisory Committee Letter. A letter should be appended from the chair of the unit's advisory committee or board, stating the committee's opinion of the report.

CHECKLIST FOR DIRECTOR'S REPORT

I. Mission of the Unit

II. Budgetary Information

III. Evidence of Accomplishment

A. Research

B. Undergraduate and Graduate Education

C. Public Service

IV. Administration and Governance

A. Resources

B. Staffing

C. Contract and Grant Administration

V. Advisory Committee

VI. Problems and Needs

VII. Comparison with Other Units

VIII. Projections for Next Five Years

A. Research plan for the succeeding five years.

B. Budget estimates and anticipated sources of funding for the next five years, including both intramural and extramural sources.

C. Names of faculty members who have agreed in writing to participate in the unit's activities.

D. Five-year projections of numbers of faculty members and students, professional research appointees, and other personnel.

E. Projections of future space needs and other resource needs such as library and computational resources.

IX. Justification for Continuance

X. Annual Reports for Preceding Five Years (Appendix)

XI. Advisory Committee Letter (Appendix)