UNCW Institutional Risk Management Tier I Response Planning

1. UNCWInstitutional Risk ManagementTier I Response Planning Spring 2013

2. Presentation Overview • Response Plan Process • Tier 1 High Risk Response Plans • Response Plan Summary

3. Presentation OverviewTier 1 Response Plans • High Risk • Continuity of Operations • Human Capital Management • Regulatory Intervention • Volatility of Essential Resources • Campus Health & Safety • Med High Risk • Research Support • Risk Management Integration • Diverse Revenues* • Participant Programs • Infrastructure *Diverse Revenues has been consolidated with Essential Resources • Today’sPresentation • Continuity of Operations • Human Capital Management • Regulatory Intervention • Volatility of Essential Resources • Campus Health & Safety • Research Support

4. High Risk Level Summary Risk Area 1. Volatility of Essential Resources 2. Regulatory Intervention 3. Human Capital Management 4. Campus Health and Safety 5. Continuity of Operations 6. Research Support? Impact Serious Serious Serious Severe Severe Serious Likelihood Almost Certain Almost Certain Likely Possible Possible Likely

5. Response Plan Process • Assigned Leads. Workgroups comprised of SME’s • One key risk. Example: Loss of Specialized Facilities • Use Risk Statement and KRI guidance • Describe Mitigations In Place or Initiated • Develop Next Steps to reduce residual risk • Senior Leaders offered feedback on Response Plans • Implement Action Steps and Continuous Measurement

6. Continuity of Operations Challenges Related To Post-Disaster Financial and Space Management Key Risk: Loss of Specialized Facilities

7. Continuity of Operations • Objective: Provide state of the art research and instructional facilities that attract world class faculty, staff and students to UNCW and provide for the continuation of these services in the face of emergency situations and events. • Risk Statement: Loss of specialized research and instructional space in Dobo Hall could occur from a myriad of natural, man-made or intentional events – resulting in potentially enormous reputational and financial losses, faculty flight and loss of research relating to our core teaching and research missions. • Indicator(s): The post-disaster vulnerability of specialized research and instructional space as measured by related utilization and financial impacts and degree to which replacement space is available, the number of related class seats per year, the square footage of specialized space, research dollars per building and specialized building contents value.

8. Continuity of Operations Supporting Data • Utilization and Financial Impacts • 100 fume hoods and 3 biosafety cabinets • Limits of insurance versus value and risks (contents insured for $4.3 million) • Limited animal facilities • 80% of Dobo space is specialized • 17,800 Students potentially affected by loss of specialized space (AY12-13) • Interruption of use of specialized instructional /research 2010-2012 • 2 power outages • 0 days of campus evacuation • Several other significant infrastructure outages (sewer, water, IT, HVAC)

9. Continuity of Operations Mitigations • Current • Inspections • Backup generators and data backup • Building maintenance – cooling tower, fume hoods, controls • Relationships with off campus partners and other universities • FEMA approved mitigation plan • Security layers (UPD, Locks, Door Access) • Safety and emergency response training and drills • In Process • Redundant chiller • Connection to Regional Energy Plant • COOP initiative for academic departments

10. Continuity of Operations Exit Strategy • Proposed Next Steps • Ensure the completion of laboratory or departmental specific COOP plans • Integration of unit-specific plans into larger COOP plans, incorporating all stakeholder input • Aggressive preventative building and system maintenance • Expand focus from research/instructional to all specialized facilities (e.g., hardened facilities and facilities with high value contents) • Expected Outcome(s) • Having robust data-driven contingency priorities in place for specialized space before an adverse event occurs can result in a smoother and lower cost recovery and a reduction in lost awards, number of students directly affected, enrollment impact and time to effect facility restoration.

11. Human Capital Management Challenges Related To Human Capital and Talent Management Key Risk: Inability to Deliver Effective and Efficient Institutional Performance

12. Human Capital Management • Objective: • Contribute to the institution’s success by attracting and retaining the high quality talent required to ensure achievement of the university’s strategic goals and meet operational needs.  • Risk Statement: • Effective and efficient institutional performance may be constrained by the inability to consistently attract and engage a qualified and skilled workforce. • Indicators: Human capital-related vulnerability as measured by productivity, performance ratings, employee satisfaction, turnover and retirement rates and recruitment and retention of qualified employees

13. Human Capital Management • Key Mitigations • Monitoring workforce trends to identify potential risks • Employee Engagement Survey • Enhanced New Employee “On-Boarding” program • Reinstatement of competency-based supervisory training (professional development position reinstated .8 FTE) • Next Steps • Improve and expand analysis of workforce trends, turnover causality and potential impact. • Further refine talent management strategy, including but not limited to diversity, engagement, collaboration and efficiency.

14. Regulatory Intervention Compliance Challenges In an Inherently Decentralized Environment Key Risk: Non-Compliance due to Regulation Proliferation

15. Regulatory Intervention • Objective: Mitigating regulatory compliance risk in an inherently decentralized environment • Risk Statement: Deficiencies in compliance-related institution-wide coordination, standards, support or accountability could lead to adverse findings or verdicts and severe reputational and/or financial liability. • Indicator: The degree to which there exists a proliferation of federal and state regulations with an increased interest in oversight and enforcement (i.e., export controls, research regulation, ADA, Department of Education, NCAA)

16. Regulatory Intervention • Key Mitigations: • Periodic internal and external audits • Online training to augment current compliance training in this resource challenged environment • Next Steps: • Fund and hire a compliance coordinator • Finalize campus coordinated compliance policy • Finalize compliance calendar/matrix and web portal • Inventory of compliance programs and FTE’s with a majority of job responsibilities including compliance • Quarterly summits with designated responsible program compliance officers

17. Campus Health and Safety Challenges Related To An Open Campus Environment Key Risk: Clery Act Non-Compliance

18. Campus Health and Safety • Objective: To maintain compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act (Clery act) and associated regulations • Risk Statement: Clery Act noncompliance could occur due to the diffuse nature of required elements and the concentration of compliance responsibility in one area – resulting in potential fines, unmitigated risk to safety and negative impact to the institution’s reputation • Indicators: Institutional vulnerability of non-compliance and associated financial and reputational losses as measured by court rulings, DOE enforcement trends, UNCW program diversification trends (or growth in areas with potential to have associated reportable events), the concentration of current compliance efforts and the degree to which reporting responsibilities are formalized

19. Campus Health and SafetyClery Act Noncompliance : Exit Strategy • Key Mitigations: • Communication tools (UNCW Alert, Conference Bridge, CDT, University/Dept. Policies) • Safety/security training in New Employee Orientation • 2009 Campus Crime Reporting Review conducted by UNCW Internal Audit • Self-audit of crime stats YTD 2013 • Staff Resources • Student Affairs Case Manager (2009) • University Police Crime Analyst • Next Steps: • Determine appropriate ownership for Clery compliance (such as a Clery Compliance Committee related to IRM or the Chancellor’s Council on Safety and Security) • Funding source and training objectives for functional training exercises • Identify in-roads for enhancing awareness of resources and ownership among faculty and staff

20. Volatility of Essential Resources Challenges Related To Slow Economic Recovery Key Risk: Changing Resources to Support Institution Mission and Goals

21. Volatility of Essential Resources • Objective: Ensuring that adequate resources are available for financial support of the institution’s mission and goals • Risk Statement: Further budget reductions and reallocation of resources could occur due to declining appropriations and the inability to offset the cost by increasing student tuition and fees – potentially resulting in an inability to ensure the availability of adequate resources to support the institution’s mission and goals. • Indicator(s): Vulnerability of resource availability as measured by budget and appropriations trends

22. Volatility of Essential Resources • Key Mitigations: • Monitoring GA and Legislative Discussions • Modeling impact of Federal Sequestration • Supporting innovation in the creation of new revenue sources • Enhanced management processes and business analytics tools • Enrollment Goal Setting to support resource needs generation • Cost Allocation Model to inform decisions on resource allocation and reallocation • Initiated development of Early Warning Business Analytics tools • Next Steps: • Evolving business analytics and predictive modeling • Implement Unified Budget Model proposal • Complete sensitivity analysis on grant awards and the associated impact on indirect cost pool

23. Research Support Ensuring Adequate Support for Institutional Research Key Risk: Research Compliance Failures

24. Research Support • Objective: Compliance with federal, state, university and sponsor requirements • Risk Statement: Compliance failures can result from investigator and/or institutional negligence or misconduct resulting in eligibility restrictions for sponsors, repayment, fines and disruption of research activity and programs • Indicator(s): Audit findings, inspection reports, adverse events, allegations of scientific/research misconduct

25. Research Support • Key Mitigations: • Consolidated research compliance programs under single umbrella (Office of Research Services) • Increased use of videoconference training programs • Monthly “problem solving and compliance” sessions with ORS and other unit heads • Next Steps: • Increased use of RAMSeS to reduce compliance risk (implementation of human subjects research, animal research, and financial conflict of interest modules) • Increase outreach and training programs • Further analysis and treatment of: fluctuating availability of and mix of research opportunities, funding model variability and viability, and intellectual property management. Re-evaluate risk level.

26. Response Plan Summary Risk Area 1. Volatility of Essential Resources 2. Regulatory Intervention 3. Human Capital Management 4. Campus Health and Safety 5. Continuity of Operations 6. Research Support? Impact Serious Serious Serious Severe Severe Serious Likelihood Almost Certain Almost Certain Likely Possible Possible Likely • Mitigations • 1. Evolve business analytics and modeling of key funding streams • 2. Better coordinate regulatory compliance with possible compliance coordinator hire • 3. Further analyze trends and further refine talent management strategies • 4. Ensure Clery Compliance with improved coordination of emergency notification requirements and exercises • 5. Assess plans and insurance for all specialized facilities and integrate unit plans with institutional plans • 6. Further utilize technology to ensure research compliance; in addition, analyze funding availability and intellectual property management; subsequently, re-evaluate risk level