I suppose most of you got this email from USM, but just in case:
FACULTY, STAFF MEMBERS AT SOUTHERN MISS AWARDED $382,223 THROUGH INCENTIVE PAY PROGRAM
HATTIESBURG -- University of Southern Mississippi President Dr. Shelby Thames issued checks Wednesday to 33 faculty and staff members as part of an incentive program that rewards those who secure and manage contract and grant support. In all, $382,223.07 was distributed through the incentive policy, called Model for Incentive Dollars for Augmenting Salaries. The fundamental goal of MIDAS is to create an incentive base to grow and promote research activities and research enterprise for Southern Miss. Dr. Vivien Carver, a professor in the Center for Community Health who received a check for $18,534.42, said the MIDAS program is a great incentive for faculty to seek grant funding. "In a state where faculty and staff rarely get raises, this is the only way to increase one’s earnings and at the same time generate money for the university," said Carver, who has secured more than $2.5 million in funding during the past six years. "I appreciate Dr. Thames’ and Dr. Angeline Dvorak’s willingness to share some of the funds generated, and it is great to be rewarded for this contribution." MIDAS provides a positive incentive to stimulate research activity that ultimately benefits the university community as a whole, said Dvorak, president of The University of Southern Mississippi Research Foundation. "The university wins, with additional resources to carry out its mission. Every faculty member, staff member and student wins with the increase in revenues that support every aspect of their work and studies. "The MIDAS recipients have contributed to filling the gap between the resources that the university has and the resources that the university needs. Hopefully, additional incentive programs will be developed that will reward and support other aspects of the university," Dvorak said. Available during the fall and spring terms, MIDAS is open to full-time faculty and staff whose base salary is paid from the education and general (E&G) funds. The maximum research supplement is 30 percent of the regular academic salary, based on 100 percent released dollars. To qualify for the supplement, the employee must recover at least 25 percent of his or her salary. Checks distributed to recipients Wednesday were gross amounts, unadjusted for federal and state taxes. Nursing professor Dr. Bonita Reinert, who received a check for $21,395.39, said the MIDAS awards are an "essential component in retaining the experienced researchers at (Southern Miss)." Most researchers, she said, invest far more than 40 hours a week in obtaining and maintaining their funding. "This award comes at a critical time when raises have not been available for several years and funded grants are an increasingly important way to bring money into the university. I definitely appreciate Dr. Dvorak’s efforts in developing and implementing this innovative program," Reinert said. Polymer science professor Dr. Marek Urban, who received $20,847.11, said the program provides an opportunity for the faculty to create and develop a research portfolio attractive to students and to potential sponsors. At the same time, he said, it allows the faculty to be rewarded for their hard work. "In this fiscal climate…it is essential that the legislators understand and appreciate the value each individual faculty member brings to the economic development of the region," Urban said. "Education and scholarship through research, followed by intellectual property development, is the strength of advanced countries and is the strength of Southern Miss."
Marek Urban is the very embodiment of what is wrong at Southern Miss. He is petty, petulant, and definitely non-collegial. How wonderful for him to be rewarded for these amazing qualities!
quote: Originally posted by: in the know "Marek Urban is the very embodiment of what is wrong at Southern Miss. He is petty, petulant, and definitely non-collegial. How wonderful for him to be rewarded for these amazing qualities!"
Your boy Marek Urban got a "mid-year raise" on 3/1/2003 in the amount of $8,001 --- that's 8.7% if your playing along at home. On 1/1/2004 he got another "mid-year raise" totalling some $7,984 --- that's 8.0% if you're counting. In about 10 months his base (9-month) salary travelled from $91,799 to $107,784, for an increase of (drumroll...) 17.4%. Not a bad %-increase for someone over $90,000 to begin with.
Now add his midas check of $21,000, and he'll bring home a cool $128,784 this year. I feel sorry for him --- these last 12 months of the Thames regime must have been unbearable at his house.
From the looks of it, neither Carver or the Nursing Prof mentioned in the release was "lucky enough" to participate in either of the last 2 mid-year raises, despite how successful they were at getting grants. One of two things: either they didn't have cool enough names (e.g., "Marek Urban", etc.) or they aren't in Polymer Science. You tell me>>>>
The Marek story is amazing, especially in light of the fact that in some colleges people were deemed ineligible for raises in 2004 if they got one in 2003. The system was completely inconsistent, and ripe for litigation.
quote: Originally posted by: van dyke "The Marek story is amazing, especially in light of the fact that in some colleges people were deemed ineligible for raises in 2004 if they got one in 2003. The system was completely inconsistent, and ripe for litigation."
Yes, truly amazing. But then you have to understand how very important Marek Urban (http://www.psrc.usm.edu/urba-pre.html) is to the university and especially Shelby Thames. Why Marek is the PI for the largest single grant USM has ever received ($7 million) from the National Science Foundation for his MRSEC project, for goodness sakes! And even more importantly he's building connections in Portugal! (http://www.usm.edu/pr/prnews/may04/portugal04.htm) He's even got Ambassador Palmer on board with USM's new economic development model:
Ambassador Palmer said both universities are "world-class, using private sectors to drive research. That's the perfect way to ensure success."
Nothing like making connections with other world-class universities. Give that man a raise...heck, give him a couple of raises! And don't worry about how he tramples on other faculty, staff, and students...just keep the money rolling in, Marek.
quote: Originally posted by: educator "Irony http://www.primaryresources.co.uk/english/kingmidas.htm"
Midas's greed for gold is only part of his story.
Midas choses Pan over Apollo in a music contest, despite Apollo's clear superiority as a performer.
Apollo declares that Midas is unfit to have human ears and gives him the ears of an ass (i.e. donkey). To hide his shame, Midas wrapped his ears in a turban. But his barber learned of the deformity. To keep from bursting with the secret, he whispered it into a hole out in a field. But secrets always come out, and the grass and reeds whispered in the breeze: "Midas has asses ears."
The whole Midas story is a fable about greed and arrogance. To develop an acronym around "Midas" shows the utter ignorance of the author. These are tales we learned as children, mostly from Daulaire's _Greek Myths_.
Midas choses Pan over Apollo in a music contest, despite Apollo's clear superiority as a performer.
Apollo declares that Midas is unfit to have human ears and gives him the ears of an ass (i.e. donkey). To hide his shame, Midas wrapped his ears in a turban. But his barber learned of the deformity. To keep from bursting with the secret, he whispered it into a hole out in a field. But secrets always come out, and the grass and reeds whispered in the breeze: "Midas has asses ears."
The whole Midas story is a fable about greed and arrogance. To develop an acronym around "Midas" shows the utter ignorance of the author. These are tales we learned as children, mostly from Daulaire's _Greek Myths_.
"
Oh, and having said the above, I actually think the incentive structure is a good idea.
i don't know whether the question about Stringer was meant in jest or in seriousness. all i know is that the article said that the developer of "Wombat" did not get a check although he got grant money. (and I know people in COST who probably cheered)
quote: Originally posted by: stinky cheese man "i don't know whether the question about Stringer was meant in jest or in seriousness. all i know is that the article said that the developer of "Wombat" did not get a check although he got grant money. (and I know people in COST who probably cheered)"
The posting was with dead seriousness. But perhaps I don't understand the criteria. Why should one bringing in extramural funds to support a very important project in English be denied the additional compensation? Is it not available to persons in the humanities?
i didn't mean to offend, but i think you have to reach a certain level of external funding, probably per year, in order to get an incentive check. i got the memo, but given my research isn't funded, did a "file 13." wombat's grant must not have risen to that level. if stringer's grant did, he should get a check.
quote: Originally posted by: stinky cheese man "i didn't mean to offend, but i think you have to reach a certain level of external funding, probably per year, in order to get an incentive check. i got the memo, but given my research isn't funded, did a "file 13." wombat's grant must not have risen to that level. if stringer's grant did, he should get a check. "
No offense at all. That's why I admitted that I might not understand the criterion. Evidently I did not understand it.
quote: Originally posted by: stinky cheese man "i think you have to reach a certain level of external funding, probably per year, in order to get an incentive check.
I think I understand it now, stinky cheese man: It sound much like giving tax breaks only to the rich.
quote: Originally posted by: Grey Poupon "I think I understand it now, stinky cheese man: It sound much like giving tax breaks only to the rich. "
What is going on is a faculty /staff member must obtain a grant the buys out their released time during the academic year. Summer salaries do not count and that is what most grants pay.
You can only benefit if you get at least 25% of your time bought. Then a certain perentage of the money used to hire your cheaper replacement is returned to you as a bonus. I believe for a 100% buy out a faculty member can receive 30% of their salary as a bonus.
i figure if someone can get externally funded money they ought to be rewarded. i don't know if MIDAS is the right way, but it doesn't impact me. if i don't like it, i ought to go out and try to get my research funded. getting one's research funded is not an easy task, so i can't complain.
I think the key requirement is that the grant cover a substantial proportion ( 25% or more ?) of your regular salary to buy out some part of your teaching load. The more teaching you buy out of, the more money you get. As a practical matter, this has to be limited to a relatively small number of people. Taking it to the logical extreme, if everybody bought out 100% of their time, there would be no faculty in the classroom. The other problem is that if the number of people doing that sort of thing does not increase substantially, you could have lots of money going out for a net loss. There's probably some sort of cross over point where it becomes profitable for the university.
Most faculty who get funded can't qualify for the bonus plan because most gov. agencies only pay for summer salary. In addition, they usually require the instution to match their funding in some way. The unoiversity still get "overhead" but not the big bucks from an academic year buy out.
quote: Originally posted by: Otherside ". . . a certain perentage of the money used to hire your cheaper replacement is returned to you as a bonus.
Faculty have "bought out" their AY salary for many years at USM and elsewhere. In such instances, didn't those funds previously go back to the dean or the VP for Research in order to "seed" new or ongoing projects? I know that was the case when Dr. Yarbrough was VP for research. Are you saying that the difference now is that the funds saved by hiring a cheaper replacement go directly to the faculty member? In the past, those funds could, and did, go back to augment the PI's research efforts - but not to fatten the PI's personal bank account.