1.1.1 Policy on Handbook of Operating Procedures

A. Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to establish the procedures for submitting recommendations to the President for amending The University of Texas at Tyler Handbook of Operating Procedures (HOP), including obtaining input from faculty, staff and student governance bodies that may be affected by changes in policies and procedures.

B. Persons Affected

This policy applies to administrators, faculty, staff and students of the University.

C. Definitions

  1. Division Head (DH). President, or his or her designee, or Vice President, or his or her designee, who is responsible for the programmatic, functional or administrative areas addressed by the policy and procedure.
  2. HOP Coordinator. The Provost or a designee from the Office of the Provost who is responsible for formatting, tracking and organization of Handbook of Operating Procedures and to ensure institutional compliance with this policy.
  3. Employees. Includes faculty and staff (full-time and part-time), direct-wage and work-study.
  4. HOP Committee. The committee appointed by the President to review and make recommendations regarding the HOP to the President. The committee includes the President, Vice Presidents, Faculty Senate President, University Staff Advisory Council President Chair, Student Government Association President, six Faculty Representatives (selected by the Faculty Senate) and others who will be identified, as needed, by the HOP Committee that oversees all policies proposed and in the Handbook of Operating Procedures.
  5. Non-substantive Change. A change that does not change the essential principle(s), scope or application of the policy in some way.
    Non-substantive changes such as edits, which are not intended to change the meaning of the policy but are necessary for correctness, accuracy, organization, consistency, and usefulness including the format (margins, indents, bullets, etc), fonts (Arial, caps, bold), punctuation, spelling, paragraph and outline numbering, pagination, hypertext links, and reference citations, do not need to be approved nor sent to The University of Texas System for review and approval.
  6. Senior Reviewer (SR). The person who has the most knowledge or expertise about the content of the policy.
  7. Stakeholders. Groups that have knowledge of and are most impacted by a proposed policy or a policy under review.
  8. Substantive Changes. A change that changes the essential principle(s), scope or application of the policy in some way.

D. Policy and Procedures

  1. The HOP will be the official repository of policies established for the governance of the University. The rules and regulations constituting the HOP must not conflict with any rule or regulation in the Regents’ Rules and Regulations. Any HOP rule or regulation that is in conflict with any rule or regulation in the Regents’ Rules and Regulations is null and void and has no effect.
  2. The HOP will be written such that it does not add administrative burden to compliance and that it provides the proper degree of autonomy and integration to each division. To ensure that the HOP provides the proper degree of autonomy and integration, the following guidelines should be considered when drafting or amending policies in the HOP:
    1. The policy should help ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations, promote operational efficiencies, enhance the mission or reduce institutional risks.
    2. The policy should establish a governing principle that has University-wide application.
    3. The policy should communicate an important governing principle rather than specifying operational detail.
    4. The policy should avoid dictating policy or procedure that could be better determined by a division within the University.
  3. The President of the University has the authority and responsibility to prepare and submit, to the appropriate Executive Vice Chancellor and the Vice Chancellor and General Counsel for approval, the rules and regulations constituting the HOP. The President has designated the Provost's Office as the University office responsible for coordination of policy development and review. The development and review process will include an opportunity for faculty, staff and student governance bodies to provide advisory input regarding proposed changes to policies that may impact the respective groups.
  4. Each policy in the HOP shall have the following subsections:
    1. Purpose
    2. Persons Affected
    3. Definitions
    4. Policy
    5. Responsibilities
    6. Procedures; and
    7. Review.
  5. Each policy in the HOP shall be placed within one of the six sections of the HOP:
    1. Section 1: General Policies and Procedures
    2. Section 2: Authority, Delegation and Administration
    3. Section 3: Faculty and Academic Policies
    4. Section 4: Business, Fiscal and Facility Policies
    5. Section 5: Student and Student Life Policies
    6. Section 6: University Advancement
  6. Each policy in the HOP shall be reviewed within the review timeline scheduled on the policy.

E. Responsibilities

  1. The President is responsible for approving and submitting amendments to the policies and procedures constituting the HOP to the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and the Office of General Counsel.
  2. The Division Head (DH) is responsible for:
    1. approving the submission of new policies or revisions to existing policies to be sent to the HOP Committee for further review;
    2. identifying the Senior Reviewer for each policy and procedure for which the division has responsibility;
    3. reviewing and approving revisions recommended by the Office of General Counsel and the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs; and
    4. ensuring that policies in which he or she is the DH are reviewed within the review cycle listed on the policy.
  3. The HOP Committee is responsible for:
    1. identifying the DH for each policy;
    2. approving the SR for each policy;
    3. identifying and appointing Stakeholders for each policy;
    4. setting a review timeline for each policy;
    5. identifying relevant Regents’ Rules and making them available for the Senior Reviewer;
    6. approving submission of proposed policies and substantive revisions to existing policies for review by Stakeholders; and
    7. approving submission of proposed policies and policies with substantive and non-substantive revisions to the President.
  4. The HOP Coordinator is responsible for:
    1. tracking proposed and existing policies in the HOP;
    2. notifying the Division Head, the Senior Reviewer and the HOP Committee when policies are due for review;
    3. notifying the University when a proposed or existing policy is under review and who the Stakeholders are for that policy;
    4. calling periodic meetings of the HOP Committee;
    5. assigning section numbers to new policies;
    6. reviewing policies for consistency and compliance;
    7. advising Senior Reviewers and Stakeholders as necessary;
    8. preparing policies that have been approved by the HOP Committee for submission to the President;
    9. presenting policies that have been approved by the President to President’s Council;
    10. being the liaison between the University and UT System concerning policies in the HOP; and
    11. notifying the University community of revisions to the HOP.
  5. The Senior Reviewer is responsible for:
    1. distributing the policy draft and convening the Stakeholders, if necessary;
    2. obtaining acknowledgement of receipt, receiving advisory input from Stakeholders listed on the policy, incorporating input as the SR deems appropriate for submission to the DH;
    3. acknowledging that the Stakeholders have reviewed the final version to be submitted to the HOP Committee;
    4. submitting revisions to an existing policy to the Division Head;
    5. justifying the need for a proposed policy or revision to an existing policy to the HOP Committee;
    6. presenting the policy draft to President’s Cabinet if necessary; and
    7. ensuring that policies are reviewed within the review timeline scheduled by the HOP Committee in compliance with Regents’ Rules Series 20201, Section 4.9.
  6. Stakeholders are responsible for:
    1. reviewing and responding to requests for review of policy drafts within the timeline designated by the Senior Reviewer; and
    2. submitting advisor input regarding policies.
  7. The President’s Office is responsible for:
    1. Approving policies for the University and obtaining appropriate UT System approvals;
    2. Notifying the HOP Coordinator of correspondence and/or status of policies at UT System;
    3. Uploading policies to Web HOP; and
    4. Archiving the HOP annually.

F. Procedures

  1. Proposed Non-Faculty Policies
    1. A university office proposing a new policy will draft the policy in correct HOP format and prepare a statement of background and rationale for the new policy. The draft and supporting documents will be submitted through the appropriate dean, director or administrative head up to the Division Head (DH), or his or her designee, for policy development.
    2. Upon approval of the DH, the DH identifies the Senior Reviewer (SR).
    3. The DH, assisted by the SR as needed, presents justification for the proposed policy to the HOP Committee.
    4. Upon approval of the proposed policy draft by the HOP Committee, the HOP Committee would then:
      1. affirm the DH's selection of the SR;
      2. identify and appoint Stakeholders; and
      3. set a timeline for completion of review.
    5. The HOP Coordinator:
      1. begins tracking; and
      2. assigns a section number.
    6. The SR distributes the proposed policy draft to the Stakeholders, and if necessary, convenes a meeting to review the proposed policy draft. The SR will consult with the HOP Coordinator for consistency and compliance.
    7. The SR obtains acknowledgement of receipt from the Stakeholders on the proposed policy draft and the timeline for returning the policy to the SR with advisory input. Advisory input from the Stakeholders returned timely will be provided to the DH for consideration. After the SR has incorporated input, as deemed appropriate, the SR resubmits the proposed policy draft to the DH for approval and resubmission to the HOP Committee.
    8. The HOP Committee reviews the proposed policy draft. Once a majority of the HOP Committee supports the proposed policy draft, the proposed policy draft will be sent through the HOP Executive Committee to the President for approval.
    9. After approval of the proposed policy draft by the President, the HOP Coordinator will submit the proposed policy draft to the President’s Cabinet as an information item.
    10. A policy draft that is approved by the President is submitted to the Office of General Counsel and copied to the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
    11. The Office of General Counsel notifies the President’s Office of the attorney who has been assigned to review the policy draft and the President’s Office notifies the HOP Coordinator.
    12. The Office of General Counsel either recommends:
      1. denial of the policy draft; or
      2. approval of the policy draft, with or without revisions, to the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, who then notifies the President.
    13. The President notifies the HOP Coordinator.
      1. If the UT System has recommended revisions, the HOP Coordinator notifies the DH for approval. The DH may decide that the policy draft needs to go back to the HOP Committee.
      2. If the UT System does not recommend any revisions, the HOP Coordinator or the Coordinator's designee uploads the policy to the Web HOP and the policy becomes official.
    14. The HOP Coordinator notifies the University community of the new policy.
  2. Substantive Revisions to Existing Non-Faculty Policies
    1. A substantive revision is submitted through the appropriate administrative chain up to the Division Head (DH), or his or her designee, for policy development.
    2. The SR will consult with the DH on proposed revision.
    3. Upon approval of the DH, the SR distributes the policy draft to the Stakeholders, and if necessary, convenes a meeting to review substantive revisions. The SR will consult with the HOP Coordinator for consistency and compliance.
    4. The SR obtains acknowledgement of receipt from the Stakeholders on the proposed policy draft and the timeline for returning the policy to the SR with advisory input. Advisory input from the Stakeholders returned timely will be provided to the DH for consideration. After the SR has incorporated input, as deemed appropriate, the SR resubmits the proposed policy draft to the DH for approval and resubmission to the HOP Committee.
    5. Procedures continue with Subsection F.1.h-n above.
  3. Policies that Affect Faculty
    New policies and revisions to existing policies that affect faculty shall follow the same procedures in F.1 and F.2 above and must also include review by Faculty Senate and the Council of Academic Deans.
  4. Policies with No Significant Change
    Proposed changes that are not significant do not need to be approved in accordance with this policy or reviewed by the Executive Vice Chancellor or Vice Chancellor and General Counsel. The HOP Coordinator shall determine whether the change is significant.

G. Review

The Divisional Head for this policy is the President and this policy shall be reviewed every five years or sooner, if necessary, by the following Stakeholders:

  1. HOP Coordinator
  2. Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
  3. Vice President for Administration
  4. Vice President for Student Affairs
  5. Vice President for University Advancement
  6. Vice President for Technology
  7. Vice President for Research and Technology Transfer
  8. Faculty Senate President
  9. University Staff Advisory Council Chair
  10. Student Government Association President

DATE AMENDED:  04/13/2011

REVIEWED:  AY 2014-15