All staff meeting group july 15-19, 2013

1. All staff meeting groupjuly 15-19, 2013 Alternatives for cge to augsburg

2. minutes • Romanus, Susan Regina and Kathy were members of the team. • The discussions of the different scenarios helped us clarify what we as CGE need whether we stay at Augsburg or we decide to transition to another institution. The third slide titled :Considerations for partnering with Augsburg or any other academic or non academic institution attempts to put in writing what the team felt CGE needs in order to move into the future . • Slide #17 discusses if we separate from Augsburg what we would request in terms of property and vehicles and slide #18 details a possible timeline. • I am attaching all slides for staff to see the full discussion .

3. goal • The purpose of this group is to discuss and rank various alternatives for CGE than at Augsburg College

4. Considerations for partnering – Augsburg, academic or non-acainst Separate cge Merged w/PARTNER Office space Accounting – accounts payable/receivable, audit Phone/internet (with ability to answer CGE phones separate) General liability insurance coverage Could be a fiscal agent role but may not be best Payroll and benefits Legal representation Ability to accredit our academic programs , if possible Use of general education travel license to Cuba if at a higher education institution • Control over budget and separate fund or bank account • Mission, vision and strategic plan • Website • Marketing • Staff – hiring, evaluation, etc. • Pedagogy/long track record/best practices in study abroad • International bank accounts – would need to see what was best for US bank account • Separate board or ability to participate in decisions impacting CGE’s work • Find a school of record if not at an academic institution • Fundraising

5. Possible Scenarios- #1 staying with augsburg

6. # 2 –partner with a non-academic institution

7. #3 – partner with academic institution(s)

8. #4 – Everyone for themselves

9. #5 –incorporate as a nonprofit org

10. #6 – sites become independent ngo’s in partnership with cge

11. Some possible questions for Discussion • If CGE needs to go elsewhere, which of these is the best option (or some combo of options)? • Are all of the pro’s and con’s listed for each scenario? • What could a possible timeline be for a transition?

12. How would it work to separate from augsburg but still partner with them? • Similar to current arrangement for Cuba semester program • Agreement reached with other institution interested and capable of using institutional in-country depth to take on responsibility for site staff and programming. • Semester program continues as a joint Augburg-”X” university program, where Augsburg gets set amount for each student recruited by Augsburg. • Augsburg continues its programming, but does not deal with fixed costs or risk • “X” university can take advantage of in-country depth to facilitate research, field work, and new products, as well as short term programming, and CGE brand continues with current semester programs • Mpls staff continue to work on current semester programs, contract relationship with field for working short term programs, and work on developing similar relationships in new countries.

13. Key to success of win-win: Transition period and plan • If Augsburg helps facilitate a smooth transition for site staff, site staff will be highly motivated to continue working with Augsburg • Smooth transition will maintain quality of programming and preservation of brand reputation.

14. Criteria for assessing other options • How do we best continue the mission of CGE that is still valid in today’s context? • How does each scenario impact property (houses and vehicles)? • How can higher education take better advantage of CGE and CGE impact higher ed, including through the development of new products? • How do we best take advantage of talented long-term staff in Minneapolis and in each international site? • How do we interface with Augsburg/or another institution that goes just beyond the financial bottom line? • How do we interface with the other institution? • How does each scenario impact programs and sites? • What could the timeline be for each scenario? • Goals • Maintain the current level of salaries and benefits (pension, tuition, health insurance, vacation, etc.) for staff as possible • Preservation of as many of the CGE staff as possible • Accreditation capability for semester and short-term programs • General liability coverage for program participants • Need to transition without burning bridges with Augsburg or other sponsors/feeders • Ability to create a written agreement to articulate the relationship(s) with any institution(s) • Ensure we can carry out our programs within the legal rubrics of each country in which we work

15. ranking • Investigate further • Be more proactive in establishing a win-win relationship with Augsburg • Join another academic institution • Merge with another organization • Middle • Incorporate as a separate nonprofit – only consider in an affiliation with other organization(s) doing similar work – ie, Fair Trade Study abroad • Lower – don’t investigate further now • Everyone for themselves • Sites becoming independent NGO’s in partnership with Augsburg

16. Proactive requests to augsburg • Signed agreement • Establish costs for CGE similar to what’s being done for other primarily externally serving programs at Augsburg (CDC, Urban Debate, Campus Compact, etc.) and practices in the study abroad field • CGE be put in a restricted fund and be allowed to make hiring and spending decisions without exceeding available funds • Further develop the potential that CGE has within Augsburg to better serve faculty, students and staff • Develop a model and working relationship that better serves CGE and Augsburg • What’s not working • We need to better understand their concerns about risk management and liability in relationship to study abroad in general and CGE specifically • The FY12 CM assessment would add 28% to CGE’s costs, which would price programs out of the market • No funds available for capital improvements in sites and program development/expansion • They want financial results from CGE like a business but don’t allow us to operate like a business

17. Concerning aspects of cge’s relationship with augsburg • Staffing • Were going to lay off a staff person in Minneapolis without consulting CGE leaders and would have impacted a key program area • Approval still not received for APA temp • Budget • All Hands Meeting announcement that goal was to increase margins for CGE without our knowledge or input • Surplus expectation of $217,000 put in for CGE for FY14 budget without CGE’s approval – accomplished by decisions by the college to not rehire staff without CGE’s input

18. If we separate what cge would request • Property • Nicaragua house – was a donated to CGE so should be given to CGE • Nica bus/truck – paid for already by CGE budget • ES van – fully paid for already through CGE budget • Guatemala van – paid for already by CGE budget • Mexico houses – paid for already by CGE budget • Mexico vans – paid for already by CGE budget • Namibia house – set up a lease agreement with Augsburg – CGE has already fully paid $26,000? For renovation . CGE has already paid $44,446.76 in amortization of the $333,350 original purchase price, leaving $288,904 remaining to be paid • Namibia vehicles – will be amortized in 2014 so already paid by CGE budget • Endowed scholarship and restricted funds– transfer the principle and spending accounts to CGE

19. timeline • Within 1 year: • Get clarity with Augsburg as soon as possible • Either rework our relationship with Augsburg or move into another scenario in that time frame. Have approval by Jan. 1, 2014 so can feed into budget process. • Have a different model started with Augsburg or another institution by June 1, 2014 • Would there be short-term costs for a transition where we would need to raise extra funds?

20. Resources – nonprofits • Incorporating as a nonprofit – http://www.minnesotanonprofits.org/nonprofit-resources/start-a-nonprofit • Merging as a nonprofit - http://www.minnesotanonprofits.org/greatermn-summit/greater-minnesota-nonprofit-summit-handouts/13_GMNS_Keynote.pdf • Working with a fiscal agent - http://www.mapfornonprofits.org/vertical/sites/%7B876C4FB8-E997-480F-BF5B-AFAA0F113D9D%7D/uploads/Fiscal_Sponsorship_July_2011.pdf

21. Resources – school of record • Guidelines by the Forum on Education Abroad on using a school of record (SOR) to offer credit for study abroad providers: http://www.forumea.org/SchoolofRecord.cfm • Many third party study abroad are independent organizations and only affiliated with an institution to offer credit. • Some examples: • - School for Field Studies - Boston U, Autonomous U Mexico semester program - Hampshire College, World Endeavors - Jacksonville University • - Spanish Studies Program - If the student’s college or university requires a transcript from a U.S. degree-granting institution, this service is provided by the Spanish Studies School of Record, Heidelberg University, in Tiffin, Ohio, for a service fee of $250. • - CET - CET and University of Virginia have cooperated for almost a decade to administer the CET Siena program. In 2011, the two parties redefined their relationship, bringing mutually beneficial cooperation to official partnership. Currently, CET handles all non-academic facets of the Siena program—housing, excursions, roommates, health and safety. CET also manages day-to-day academics: class monitoring, faculty training, student academic needs. The University of Virginia serves as the program’s “academic sponsor.” It provides academic oversight and acts as the “school of record,” administering course registration and transcripts for program participants. • - Amizade - Amizade has an academic partnership with West Virginia University. Through that partnership, Amizade instructors propose academic courses that meet on-campus standards for course approval and are further strengthened through their connections to relevant community organizations, issues, and concerns. All courses and instructors are reviewed by the Amizade Executive Director and, at WVU, the relevant department chair, the relevant dean, the Associate Provost for Academic Affairs, and the Associate Provost for International Academic Engagement. During the six years that Amizade has been partnered with West Virginia University, WVU transcripts that students receive upon course completion have been accepted for transfer credit by Indiana University, The University of Massachusetts, The University of Pennsylvania, The University of Southern California, The University of Texas, and The University of Wisconsin, among scores of other institutions of higher education across the United States. Amizade suggests that each student check with his or her university to confirm whether that university accepts transfer credit from West Virginia University. • - U of M is the SOR for Global Links and Australearn - they have info on their website on how to get them to do that: http://www.umabroad.umn.edu/professionals/intleducators/schoolofrecord.php • - CEA - Univ. of New Haven - http://www.gowithcea.com/educators/global-education/global-campuses/school-of-record.html