�鶹��Ѱ�����

Dear colleagues,

Welcome back to another promising semester in the College of Arts and Sciences. While much is the same, change, like fall, is in the air.

We are taking steps to complete the reorganization of the college. The provost’s��2018 report��on academic reorganization called for the creation of a new structure of divisional leadership in the college, with strong deans for the divisions of arts and humanities, natural sciences and social sciences who can determine budgetary and resource priorities, set academic focus priorities and, in collaboration with the dean of the college, advance the liberal arts imperatives of the college.

This semester, a top priority for college leadership is defining a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology that enables the college and its divisions to be flexible and responsive to the needs of all students, staff and faculty. Since my appointment as interim dean on July 1, the deans of division, Vice Dean Amy Lavens, Assistant Dean Bernadette Stewart and I have collaborated on completing the preliminary steps that will enable us to create this budget framework. Our goal is to complete the budget framework by the end of December.

A second priority is to enhance transparency in decision-making. To that end, I will continue to meet with the Staff Advisory Council, and will meet regularly with the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate and the ASFS budget committee. In addition, please join a college town hall on Sept. 24, 3-5 p.m., via��.

Best wishes for an excellent start to the fall semester, and I look forward to working with you as we take our final steps toward the successful reorganization of the College of Arts and Sciences.

Sincerely,

Daryl Joji Maeda
Interim��Dean

Dear colleagues,

As we have mentioned, college leaders are now working to continue our efforts to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology that will enable the college and its divisions to be flexible and responsive to the needs of all students, staff and faculty. We write to share an update on this work.

As Daryl Maeda, interim dean of the college, mentioned in a recent town hall, we have enlisted the services of the Huron Consulting Group to facilitate the final stages of the resource-allocation philosophy and methodology. Constructing an effective budget model requires difficult decisions about resource allocation, and professional assistance will help the college attain the best result. Leaders in the college and our partners at Huron met this month to agree on the scope and timeline of the project.

Key members of our �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder budget framework team include Deans of Division Irene Blair, Sarah E. Jackson and John-Michael Rivera, Vice Dean Amy Lavens, Assistant Dean Bernadette Stewart and Interim Dean of the College Daryl Maeda. We are assisted by Anna Jensen, senior executive aide to the dean; Rob Stubbs, director of institutional research; and Todd Haggerty, vice chancellor and chief financial officer.��

To ensure collaboration and transparency in the process, we will engage at each step with a budget framework shared governance group composed of representatives from the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate, Staff Advisory Committee, and each divisional council. The representatives’ role will be to meet with the deans and Huron to provide feedback on key decisions within the process and to engage in two-way communication: to convey the process to their constituencies and to provide input/feedback to the deans.

Our goal is to complete the budget framework by the end of December, and during the next nine weeks, Huron will facilitate our efforts to select the best allocation framework and construct a college financial statement with the selected new framework, by providing options and honing our insights. However, as a college we will be the ones making decisions that reflect our priorities.

Our work will be guided by four principles. Our efforts should be:

• Mission-aligned and values-driven
• Clear and transparent
• Flexible and accountable
• Data-driven

As we bring this long-discussed work to fruition, we will provide weekly updates on this web page and, when we’ve made notable progress, via emails to the college. We will also convene college-wide town halls at key moments in the process. In the meantime, please share any observations, opinions or suggestions��by completing this webform.

Thank you, as always, for your help, which is particularly appreciated as we take critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

As we continue our efforts to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions, we write to share an update on this work.

In the past week, the leadership group has continued to meet with the Huron Consulting Group, and those discussions now formally include representation from faculty and staff shared-governance groups. Our colleagues who are representing these constituencies are:

• Tobin Munsat, chair of physics, representing the natural sciences divisional council
• Jennifer Fitzgerald, professor of political science, representing social sciences divisional council
• Rob Rupert, chair of philosophy, representing arts and humanities divisional council
• Brian Cadena, associate professor of economics, representing the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate
• Robyn Ronen, staff member of astrophysical and planetary sciences, representing the Staff Advisory Committee

The representatives’ role is to meet with the deans and Huron to provide feedback on key decisions within the process and to engage in two-way communication: to convey the process to their constituencies and to provide input/feedback to the deans.

This week, the leadership team and the shared-governance representatives began reviewing and discussing the pros and cons of five budget-allocation framework scenarios. Each scenario varies in the mechanics of how to handle revenue distribution, overhead funding and supplemental funding.

Next week, the shared-governance representatives and college leadership are scheduled to undertake a “deep dive” of two or three budget-allocation framework scenarios.

Huron will continue to facilitate our efforts to select the best allocation framework and construct a college financial statement with the selected new framework, by providing options and honing our insights. However, as a college we will be the ones making decisions that reflect our priorities.

Our work will be guided by four principles. Our efforts should be:

• Mission-aligned and values-driven
• Clear and transparent
• Flexible and accountable
• Data-driven

As we’ve mentioned, we will provide weekly updates on��this web page and, when we’ve made notable progress, via emails to the college. We will also convene college-wide town halls at key moments in the process. In the meantime, please share any observations, opinions or suggestions��by completing this webform.

Thank you, as always, for your help, which is particularly appreciated as we take critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are sharing an update on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

During Tuesday’s A&S Leadership Meeting, faculty and staff had an informative and carefully reasoned discussion about the values that should drive our decisions about resource allocation. Our colleagues’ contributions to the budget-framework discussion, like that from other feedback we have gotten, provide valuable support to ensure that the decisions we make will have nuance and complexity, even when those decisions are driven by ostensibly clear core values upon which we all agree.

Also this week, we discussed the broad parameters of three framework scenarios, as prepared by Huron Consulting. These scenarios, which we discussed in conceptual terms without specific dollar amounts or percentages, differ in these ways: when the cost of college overhead is accounted for in the algorithm (before or after the distribution of net tuition revenue to divisions), how a “tax rate” for divisions would be structured and varied over time, and what metrics might be used to guide the distribution of supplemental funds.

The shared governance group received the same materials from Huron and had the opportunity to attend office hours with the consultants to discuss the scenarios. Vice Dean Amy Lavens also met with the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate budget committee as it discussed the scenarios.

Next week, we will meet with the shared-governance group to continue analyzing alternatives.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to those who have completed this form or shared your views in other ways.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are sharing an update on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

During Monday’s Budget Framework Shared Governance meeting, faculty and staff representatives weighed the pros and cons of three budget-framework scenarios. In related discussions, some participants said the current budget-allocation system leaves programs that are in high demand without sufficient funding to meet student needs. Others emphasized the need for a budget framework that adequately reflects the college’s core values. Some contended that the guiding metric should be the quality of education that students get.

In subsequent discussion on Thursday, participants in the Budget Framework Team considered these questions:

• Should overhead be contributed “off the top” of net tuition revenue (NTR) or after the distribution of NTR to divisions?
• Should all divisions contribute equally toward supplemental funding, or should these contributions be made only by divisions with net-positive revenue?
• Would allocation of supplemental funds “off the top” of NTR reduce the complexity of decision-making?

The discussion will continue with the Budget Framework Team on Nov. 19 and with the Budget Framework Shared Governance Team on Nov. 25.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to those who have completed this form or shared your views in other ways.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are again updating you on our work to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

As a refresher, the budget framework scenarios we are considering outline different ways to allocate net tuition revenue (NTR) within the college. NTR funds support most of our spending, and they are distinct from plant funds and temporary dollars. Each scenario we have considered includes allocations to the central college administration (also called “overhead”), the three divisions and a supplemental fund.

Central college administration oversees common goods (including advising, college-allocated scholarships, some centers and public-facing programs, and student-facing programs such as Honors, the Residential Academic Programs and the Miramontes Arts and Sciences Program) and shared services (including budget and finance, HR and communications). The supplemental fund is intended to ensure that the college can deliver a high-quality liberal-arts education to all students. Supplemental funding is necessary because not all units can cover their instructional costs under the campus budget model.

This week, we continued conversations with shared governance groups, and on Tuesday, the Budget Framework Team considered the timeline of our work. We will decide on a budget framework in early December 2024. Discussion will continue through January 2025 on the right proportion of revenue to dedicate to central college administration (overhead) costs and supplemental funding for divisions that need support beyond that generated by NTR, and what metrics and values should be considered in defining the supplemental fund and its distribution.

We are eager to provide opportunities for broad input on the budget framework from across the college. To that end, the A&S Leadership Meeting from 3:30-5 p.m. on Dec. 3 will be open to all members of the A&S community who wish to participate. This is the. We will send a reminder before Dec. 3.

We continue to provide weekly updates on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform; thank you to the 32 of you who have submitted feedback so far.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We are writing to remind you of a college-wide budget meeting this week.

During the week of Nov. 25, we continued conversations with shared-governance representatives, who shared their perspectives on budget-framework scenarios and a wide range of long-term budget questions. Because we want to provide another opportunity for broad input on the budget framework from across the college, the A&S Leadership Meeting from 3:30-5 p.m. Tuesday, Dec. 3, will be open to all members of the A&S community who wish to participate. This is the.

We continue to provide weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform; thank you to all who have submitted feedback so far.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We continue working to define a resource-allocation philosophy and methodology for the college and its divisions.

This week, we held a college-wide town-hall meeting to discuss our progress so far on this initiative, the timeline for next steps, the issues we face as we grapple with how to determine funding for central college administration and shared services (also called overhead) and supplemental funding for divisions. We appreciate that a substantial number of you attended and offered thoughtful comments and questions. You may view the slideshow shown during the town hall at this link.

As we’ve noted previously, the college’s four deans (with input from and consultation with many others) will choose a budget framework this month. The leadership team is discussing two framework options that do not differ monetarily; they differ in when overhead and supplemental funds are collected. In one scenario, net tuition revenue (NTR) flows first to the divisions, which then fund overhead via a flat percentage; the divisions also set aside supplemental funds under a yet-to-be-determined formula. In the other scenario, overhead and supplemental funding are subtracted from NTR before it flows to the divisions.

Some of the 60 people who’ve completed the online budget-feedback form have advocated one scenario or the other. Among the opinions expressed are:

• “Overhead (should) be contributed off the top of net tuition revenue (NTR), and all divisions should contribute equally toward supplemental funding.”
• Overhead should be contributed “after distribution—more transparency about origin of contributions.”
• “Distributions that do not follow student credit hours—centralized costs and supplemental funds—must be taken off the top of the revenue total, before monies are distributed to divisions or departments. If money goes first to divisions and then back to the collective, it will be viewed as a ‘tax’ on revenues individual units have ‘earned’ on their own.”
• “Overall strategy should begin with allocations going first to divisions, for transparency, then overhead should be applied to the divisions. Overhead should be divided by essential direct operation overhead (deans’ staff, core staff etc.) and indirect (programs such as DEI etc.) and funded in order of direct, then indirect until overhead costs would put divisions in a situation where supplemental funds are needed.”
• “I would recommend moving away from the use of the word ‘overhead.’ To me personally, overhead is often seen as unnecessary and something that can and should be cut. However, the central college administration is critical to the work of the college….”

Many of those who’ve commented via the webform have raised points that pertain to how supplemental funding should be calculated and allocated. We will again review those comments in January and February, when we determine the principles and rules for collecting and distributing the supplemental funds. Our aim is to begin implementing the model by March.

In the next two months, as we discuss the size and funding mechanisms for overhead and supplemental funds, we will bear in mind the value of a liberal-arts education and the changes, both recent and future, in our student body. During our town-hall meeting this week, faculty and staff clearly expressed this view and espoused these values.

We continue to provide weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on this web page and via emails to the college. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

As we wrap up the semester and approach the holiday break, we want to extend our warmest wishes for the traditions you observe and the rest and rejuvenation you deserve.

One of our primary goals for the college this semester was to choose a budget allocation framework for budgeting among the three divisions, college administration (shared services and activities) and a supplemental-funding pool.

We, the college’s four deans, have chosen a budget framework, with input from and consultation with shared governance groups as well as those of you who participated through our meetings, town halls and web form. Our choice was between two framework options that do not differ monetarily; they differ in this respect: the point at which overhead and supplemental funds are collected.

In one scenario, net tuition revenue (NTR) flows first to the three divisions, which then fund college administration and a supplemental pool. In the second scenario, college administration and supplemental funding are subtracted from NTR before it flows to the divisions. In both scenarios, the amounts and/or percentages will be determined at a future date.

This week, the deans selected the second scenario for the budget framework because it conveys our conception of a college united around the liberal arts with empowered divisions. To ensure transparency, the college will share the calculations that underlie divisional investments in college administration and supplemental funds. We believe that prioritizing the liberal arts mission that unites us, as represented in the scenario we have chosen, combined with sharing information that allows for divisions and college members to understand investments, best enables us to meet the priorities raised by all.

��

You may read a fuller explanation of the background, college engagement, the two framework options and next steps at��this link.

In the next two months, as we discuss the size of college administration and supplemental funds, we will bear in mind the value of a liberal-arts education and the changes, both recent and future, in our student body. During our town-hall meeting last week, faculty and staff clearly expressed this view and espoused these values.

We have been providing weekly updates (and previous progress reports) on��this web page and via emails to the college. Next semester, we will resume a regular cadence of communication. In the meantime, please share any budget-framework observations, opinions or suggestions��by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

��

Dear colleagues,

As we begin the spring semester, we write with an update on the budgetary discussions and decisions scheduled for the coming weeks.

Last semester, we chose a budget allocation framework for budgeting among the three divisions, college administration (shared services and activities) and a supplemental-funding pool. In the chosen framework, the cost of college administration and supplemental funding are subtracted from net tuition revenue (NTR) before it flows to the divisions.��

As we mentioned last fall, the percentages that determine the amount of college administration and supplemental contributions and the principles that will govern the�� distribution of the supplemental pool have yet to be determined. This is the work we are undertaking now.

Last week, the deans met with shared-governance representatives, who were invited to collect feedback on metrics, priorities and fiscal sustainability that will lead us to a funding model that supports our comprehensive research and teaching mission. Our colleagues in shared governance will meet with us again on Jan. 27 to discuss the feedback they received. If you have not already done so, please share your views with your shared-governance representatives.

In the coming weeks, as we discuss the size of college administration and supplemental funds, we will bear in mind the value of a liberal-arts education and the changes, both recent and anticipated, in our student body.

We have been providing weekly updates and progress reports on��this web page and via emails to the college. As we resume regular communication on our work, please share any budget observations, opinions or suggestions��by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We write to share the latest update on the budgetary discussions now underway.

As we mentioned last fall, we have yet to determine the percentages that guide the amount of college administration and supplemental contributions and to agree on the principles that will govern the distribution of the supplemental pool.

This week, the deans met with shared-governance representatives, who reported their colleagues’ preferences for metrics, priorities and fiscal sustainability that will be the foundation of a funding model that supports our comprehensive research and teaching mission.

As a reminder, the representatives include��Tobin Munsat of the��Natural Sciences Divisional Council,��Jennifer Fitzgerald of the Social Sciences Divisional Council,��Rob Rupert of the Arts and Humanities Divisional Council,��Brian Cadena of the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate and��Robyn Ronen of the Staff Advisory Committee. Among the principles the representatives shared are:

• The quality of the student educational experience must be a paramount consideration of any supplemental decision.
• Faculty and staff share a commitment to a high-quality liberal arts education, and lower-division courses are a key part of that endeavor.
• A supplemental strategy could incorporate 'guardrails' that provide both an upper and lower limit on the amount of supplementation that a division would receive or contribute.

The interim dean noted that the supplemental-pool calculation will not be “purely algorithmic.” With that in mind, the next phase of the discussion involves meeting with department chairs and others to discuss the current state of supplemental funding and to consider critical questions:

• Should the supplement be larger, the same size or smaller than it currently is?
• By what degree should the supplemental funding change from its current state?

Participants also discussed the need to make a gradual transition from current-state funding to the desired future state. If you have not already done so, please share your views with your shared-governance representatives.

We have been providing regular updates and progress reports on��this web page and via emails to the college. As we continue our work, please share any budget observations, opinions or suggestions��by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College

Dear colleagues,

We write again to share a progress report on our budgetary work.

As you know, we have yet to determine the percentages that guide the amount of college administration and supplemental contributions and to agree on the principles that will govern the distribution of the supplemental pool.��

Last week, the deans again met with shared-governance representatives, along with Vice Dean Amy Lavens and Assistant Dean Bernadette Stewart. The representatives include Tobin Munsat of the Natural Sciences Divisional Council, Jennifer Fitzgerald of the Social Sciences Divisional Council, Yumi Roth of the Arts and Humanities Divisional Council, Brian Cadena of the Arts and Sciences Faculty Senate (ASFS) and Robyn Ronen of the Staff Advisory Committee (SAC).��

The goal of these meetings is to obtain the full breadth of preferences for metrics, priorities and fiscal sustainability that will be the foundation of a funding model that supports our comprehensive research and teaching mission. We continue to emphasize that decisions about supplemental pool will not be “purely algorithmic.” The discussion focused on the current state of supplemental funding and on critical questions:��

• Should the supplement be larger, the same size or smaller than it currently is?
• By what degree should the supplemental funding change from its current state?

The discussion revealed a variety of differing perspectives:

• No strong consensus had emerged from SAC, with perspectives varying by division.
• Similarly, ASFS budget committee discussions had revealed differences of opinion along divisional lines. No one argued for increasing the supplement. On the contrary, natural sciences and social sciences members argued that budgets to divisions should align more closely with net tuition revenue (NTR), which would imply a reduction in the overall rate of supplementation.
• The divisional consensus from arts and humanities was that supplementation should remain at current levels.
• The report from the NSCI budget committee began with the statement that the principle of supporting a broad liberal arts education requires enabling each division to provide meaningful learning experiences to all students, and that current revenues do not make that possible. Metrics such as student-to-faculty ratio, majors-to-faculty ratio and SCH-to-faculty ratio diverge dramatically across divisions and have skewed over time. Rebalancing divisional distributions of revenue would allow narrowing gaps, though NSCI acknowledges that they would continue to exist. The NSCI proposal envisioned reducing the current supplementation rate from 8.78% to 5%, with the critical requirement that any division seeing reductions should be buffered by a ramp-down period lasting five to six years (consistent with normal retirement/resignation rates).
• Social-sciences discussions also revealed differences of opinion, with a poll of divisional council members showing the following with regard to changes in the supplement: significantly lower (favored by 25%), slightly lower (25%), no change (33.3%), and significantly higher (16.7%). SSCI also recommended that staff workloads should be considered, as well as the ability to offer high-impact practices such as research opportunities for students (student-to-faculty ratio would be a possible metric). The idea of guardrails limiting both contributions and distributions resonated strongly with the divisional council.

The group briefly discussed a proposal to implement the budget model by providing immediate access to increased revenue to divisions whose allocations grow, combined with a scheduled ramp-down over multiple years for divisions whose allocations decrease. This would be enabled by using central college temporary funds to backfill divisional decreases. The group expressed general support for this idea.


Interim Dean Maeda suggested that the next discussion with shared-governance leaders focus in part on the percentage of funds that go toward central administration. That figure is now 11%. Maeda asked the shared-governance reps what information would be helpful for them to know about college administration in evaluating this number.

We will have a budget town hall to field questions and hear your thoughts on Wednesday, Feb. 19, from 1-2 p.m. at the Zoom link below:����


Meeting ID: 945 5971 1688

We continue to give progress reports on this web page and via emails to the college. As we continue our work, please share any budget observations, opinions or suggestions by completing this webform. Thank you to all who have already submitted feedback.

And thank you, as always, for your help, which we deeply appreciate as we take these critical steps to ensure the long-term success of our college and its three divisions.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair, Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda, Interim Dean of the College

Dear colleagues and students,

Please join us for a college budget town hall, an opportunity to ask questions and share observations about the college’s continuing work to refine its budget. In recent months, members of the college have discussed metrics, priorities and principles of fiscal sustainability that will yield a funding model that best supports our comprehensive research and teaching mission.

The budget town hall will be Wednesday, Feb. 19, from 1-2 p.m. at the Zoom link below:

Meeting ID: 945 5971 1688

To review progress reports on budget work so far, please visit the��college budget framework webpage.

Thank you for joining us, and thank you for all that you do for �鶹��Ѱ�����Boulder.

Sincerely,

Irene Blair,��Dean of Natural Sciences
Sarah E. Jackson, Dean of Social Sciences
John-Michael Rivera, Dean of Arts and Humanities
Daryl Joji Maeda,��Interim��Dean of the College