Clayton State Policy Committee

University Policy Committee Charter

• Official Charter-signed

Article I: Name and Purpose

Section 1: Name

This body shall be known as the "Clayton State University Policy Committee" (hereinafter referred to as the "University Policy Committee”, “Committee” or “UPC").

Section 2: Purpose

The University Policy Committee (UPC) is a standing committee authorized by the President’s Executive Cabinet to review all university-wide policies that require the President’s signature, have university-wide impact and /or are required by a governing body or requirement. The Committee provides a structured framework for the development, review, revision, repeal and recommendation of policies, procedures, and guidelines pertaining to the operation, governance, and mission of Clayton State University. The Committee shall work collaboratively to ensure the university's policies align with its mission, strategic goals, values, principles and priorities. The UPC works in partnership with individuals; from campus units, committees, leadership, etcetera; who are developing university-wide policies to ensure that proposed policies are needed and are aligned. The committee reviews policy drafts to ensure that they are concise, consistent in format and scope, and accessible. The UPC also seeks campus input prior to recommending a policy for implementation or modification.

Article II: Membership

Section 1: Composition

The Committee shall consist of representatives from various university constituencies, including faculty, staff, students, and administration. The exact composition and number of members from each constituency shall be determined by the Committee governance body, with an emphasis on broad representation and expertise.

Section 2: Chairperson

Option A -the Cabinet or Option B the Committee shall elect an Option A Chairperson or Option B Co-Chairs from its membership, who shall preside over meetings, set the agenda, and represent the Committee as needed.

Section 3: Terms of Service

Members of the Committee shall serve staggered terms, typically of two/three years, to ensure continuity and institutional memory. Members may serve longer if requested by the Chair or direction of the President or designee.

Article III: Meetings

Section 1: Regular Meetings

The Committee shall meet regularly, as scheduled by the Chairperson or Co-Chairs. Meetings shall be conducted according to established procedures and parliamentary rules.

Section 2: Quorum

A quorum for Committee meetings shall be defined as 5 members. Decisions may be made by a simple majority vote of members present.

Section 3: Open Meetings

Meetings of the Committee shall generally be open to the university community, except in cases where confidential matters are discussed.

Article IV: Functions and Responsibilities

Section 1: Policy Development and Review

The primary function of the Committee is to develop and review university policies, procedures, and guidelines. This includes soliciting input from stakeholders, conducting research, and ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Section 2: Recommendations

The Committee shall make recommendations to the appropriate governing bodies, including the President, Cabinet or other relevant university officials, regarding the adoption, amendment, or repeal of policies and procedures.

Section 3: Communication

The Committee shall communicate its activities, decisions, and recommendations to the university community in a transparent and timely manner.

Article V: Amendments

Section 1: Amendment Procedure

This charter may be amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the Committee members present at a regular meeting.

Article VI: Dissolution

Section 1: Dissolution Procedure

In the event that the Committee is dissolved, its functions and responsibilities shall be transferred to an appropriate university body or office designated by the university's governing authorities.

Guidelines and Considerations

The following list of questions should be considered when reviewing existing policies, to ensure that the initial review is conducted thoughtfully and thoroughly:

1. Responsible UniT/Policy Owner.
   Which unit of the university is responsible for this policy and would be viewed as the policy owner?

2. Continued Need For Policy.
   Is the policy still necessary in light of its stated purpose and goals? Would the document function better as procedures or guidelines?

3. Alignment with legal requirements and best practices.
   Is the policy current? Does it align with SACSCOC policy, BOR policy, Georgia regulations, legal requirements and best practices in higher education?

4. Institutional values and objectives.
   Does the policy clearly and effectively communicate University values as well as the general purpose for the policy? Does the policy meet institutional needs?

5.  Effectiveness.
   Does the policy function well as written, or should it be revised (e.g., by drafting it more clearly) in order to improve its effectiveness? How are violations and exceptions handled or treated?

6.  Implementation.
   Is the policy being followed in practice, or is there a need to address and improve policy implementation or adherence?

• Policy Review Guidelines (pdf)

---

Policy Development and Review Considerations

Items to consider as you develop your proposed policy/policy revision:

1. Is this a new policy, policy revision or rescission of an existing policy?
2. Is there sufficient justification for the existence or need for the policy, the revision or rescission?
3. Is the purpose of the policy/policy revision clearly articulated?
4. Are the reasons for the policy adequately explained in the policy? In cases of rescission, the justification needs to be clearly documented.
5. Have you provided links to relevant policies (University, Board of Regents, statutes (state, local, and/or federal), regulations, forms, guidelines, procedures, or other associated documents required for implementation or compliance with this policy? Relevant links should be placed in the Appendices, References and Related Materials section of the policy.
6. Does the proposed policy/policy revision:
   1. Comply with federal and state laws, rules, and regulations?
   2. Comply with Board of Regents Policies?
   3. Comply with existing University policies or bylaws, procedures, regulations, and forms?
   4. Impact other relevant areas? In cases of rescission, the potential impact on other areas and processes must be considered and impacts addressed.
7. Have best practices in this area among other higher education institutions been reviewed and incorporated into this policy?
8. In limited circumstances or rare occasions, could the need for a revision be handled by including or creating a waiver or narrow exceptions?
9. Was the proposed policy/policy revision drafted using the Policy Template?
   1. Has the Policy Template been completed by all involved in the unit process?
10. Is the proposed policy/policy revision drafted using clear and concise language?
11. Does the proposed policy/policy revision accurately state current practices?
12. Is it clear to whom the policy applies?
13. Are terms in the proposed policy/policy revision adequately defined?
    1. Is your use of terminology consistent with related University or BOR policy?
14. Have you checked related University policies to ensure the proposed policy/policy revision is not in conflict with another University policy/guideline/rule?
15. Were stakeholders given an opportunity to provide feedback about the proposed policy/policy revision? (Were modifications made to address legitimate concerns or impacts?)
16. What are the criteria and process to be used to grant exceptions to the policy?
17. What is the desired/required implementation date of the policy?
18. Will adoption of the proposed policy/policy revision require new resources or reassignment of existing resources?
19. What targeted communications and training activities will be needed to build awareness and enable effective implementation of the policy, if applicable?
20. What existing or new mechanism(s) will be used to ensure policy compliance and address violations?
21. How frequently will this policy undergo a comprehensive review? (Policies should be reviewed by the unit at a minimum every (3) three years and confirmed. Many policies require more frequent review and as such, the more frequent interval must be followed. Updates or revisions to the policy should follow the institution’s policy protocol. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES to a law or requirement require a review of the impacted policy as soon as practical and before the effective date of the changed regulation, when feasible.

• Policy Development and Review Consideration (pdf)

Policy Template(s) / Forms

• Policy Template -Final Word Version
• Policy Template Fillable Form (COMING SOON)
• New Policy or Revision Submission Form