CUSP recently released a draft of a new strategic framework for the university. (Fordham Ram Archives)
By Laura Sanicola
Almost one year after Rev. Joseph M. McShane, S.J., president of the university, announced he was creating a new strategic plan for the university, Fordham’s Continuous University Strategic Planning Committee (CUSP) released a draft of a new strategic framework for the university. The draft outlined “strategic priorities” related to Jesuit teaching, utilizing New York City, strategically focused research, global engagement and the creation of a diverse and inclusive community and a strategic institution. The draft was advertised to the Fordham community via a university-wide email. A link to the full document is also available on the my.fordham homepage under University Featured Links.
“If this works, what it will lead to is a stronger Fordham,” Dr. Peter Stace, co-chair of the CUSP committee said at a town hall meeting to review the draft.
To co-chair the intiative created by McShane, the university president appointed several longtime faculty members and administrators.
Stace, along with Dr. Patrick Hornbeck, chair of the theology department, and Dr. Debra McPhee, dean of the Graduate School of Social Service, comprise CUSP’s leaders. The committee began meeting in October to develop the framework.
CUSP is intended to follow Towards 2016, a strategic plan for the university created by McShane in 2006.
Towards 2016 achieved some of its set benchmarks, such as raising Fordham’s population of minority and international students to 30 percent of the student body. However, several others, such as substantially reducing the university’s acceptance rate and maintaining average SAT scores for the accepted student body in the 1350-1400 range, were not reached.
Notably, Towards 2016 set a target to raise the university’s endowment to $2 billion by 2016. The university fell short of that goal as the current endowment is $665 million, approximately 35 percent of the original goal for 2016.
The draft released by CUSP in mid-March lacks the benchmarks that characterized Towards 2016 and is intended to be assessed every five years, not 10. Jonathan Crystal, the associate vice president of academic affairs, said that this allows the university more flexibility in responding to unexpected circumstances.
“The world changes so much in 10 years,” he said. “When Towards 2016 was created, who knew that law school enrollments would fall off the way they have, and that business would become such an attraction for college students?”
At the town hall meeting, which took place on March 30 in the Flom auditorium, the CUSP co-chairs explained the draft in detail to those in attendance. Only two students were at the meeting, which was publicized in a university-wide email.
The draft’s broader aspirations are to “establish Fordham as a highly competitive research institution in strategically defined areas” and “establish Fordham as a thought-leader about the world’s most critical challenges.”
More tangible goals are to add a chief diversity and inclusion officer reporting to the president and to plan and design a new campus center and an interdisciplinary science building on the Rose Hill campus.
Fordham faculty and CUSP co-chairs agreed that the priorities would likely require the university to find sources of revenue other than tuition. Student tuition currently accounts for between 92 and 94 percent of all Fordham’s revenue, according to the Board of Trustees.
“To the extent that our aspirations have to be funded… if all [the plans] come out of tuition, it’s really concerning,” Hornbeck said at the town hall meeting.
Creating a sustainable business model falls under the sixth priority of the draft, an item which some at the town hall meeting argued should be first.
“Item six is something without which the other things are not possible,” Hornbeck said.
Other faculty in attendance voiced concern that the language of the draft was centered on innovation as opposed to cultivating wisdom and knowledge. Still more debated the order of each of the priorities as they were listed in the document, including the separation of teaching and research.
The most highly debated points, however, were how to accomplish a less tuition-based business model and how to increase and better support faculty research and intertwine it with student learning.
The committee members plan to share framework and planning design with Fordham senior leaders, Board of Trustee members, Faculty Senate and selected external stakeholders. After they revise the framework and the continuous planning process draft they will discuss the revised draft with the Board of Trustees at their April Board meeting. The group will submit a final Strategic Framework and planning process in September, when it will be voted on by the trustees.
The Fordham Ram 
If Fordham was not run by a closed minded religious organization and functioned strictly as a university it would be top 40 given location. That said it is run by individuals who do not have the buyers of the degrees interest at heart, rather their first priority is the religious mission that they have sworn to. This cross interest issue will never reconcile, hence we get games and have to play along with mediocre university management and opaqueness. It sits on the fence between pretending to be a real university and a religious institution that crows for attention.
Why do we have to put up with this ? The Board of Trustees are hand picked minions that never challenge the status quo let alone look under the schools hood. This is an exercise in telling us what we already know ! The meat and potatoes of the issue here is that the last strategy did not get it done, so the same people are going to make it work now with flexibility ? Let’s be real, time for new leadership which hopefully will offer some form of spark. Being an eternal optimist only get one so far !
Kathleen,
Yeshiva is much higher ranked than Fordham, it is in the top 50 nationally in US News. Yeshiva’s president just stepped down and yes it is having financial issues. Both universities are pandering to a diminishing market, we all have options for our education beyond our religious upbringing.
CUSP stands for Center of University’s Stupid Practices ! It is pretty clear Fordham has missed the boat and is standing on the dock trying to decide what to do now ! The old maxim of ” those that fail to plan simply plan to fail” applies. They are not teaching in the concentrations where the job demand is, students want a paying job upon graduation. I am a parent and I do not want my son unemployed at grad. Father McShane is a lost cause at this stage and is hanging on too long. He had some clarity at first and was buoyed by a huge demographic of kids entering college years, that is over. Time for real leadership and not a Jesuit, without paying customers they do not have a university and this customer is piping up. Liberal arts will always be around and can be a mix, however asking someone to pay 43k and be taught by an adjunct or Jesuit please give me a break. Fordham needs to get new glasses and see it operates in a very expensive world, in my opinion Father McShane could care less and to effect change others have to voice their concerns.
When there is a problem at Fordham they have a task force which usually is to appease and make it look like they are taking action, it usually fades away or some innocuous findings spill out. CUSP is just that, albeit geared towards the desired strategy they already have in their head. I mean it is chaired by someone from theology, at any other university that would be viewed as ridiculous but this is Fordham. A real move would be a new lay president like what Georgetown has, one only has to look at the strides universities like Temple, Boston U etc have made in the same time frame without sliding back. Fordham has lost all it’s momentum as reflected in rankings ! Fordham’s worst $ nightmare would be if a developer started building college dorms nearby in the Bronx, that would kill serious on campus revenue. Fordham needs the aura of danger outside to maintain order and more importantly to fleece students and their parents by getting a dorm room.
Cusp is just much to do about nothing, they just want everything to stay the same and the world to stop turning !
These people live in a bubble and it is time they looked at the outside world ! There is no students on this CUSP nor is feedback allowed other than a town hall. CUSP is really what Fordham is now, an over the top religious institution that cares little about those that pay the freight or the value of their degree. Science at a community college is way better than Fordham as are many areas. There is a multitude of disciplines Fordham should be in, why have urban studies when it could develop a planning school, architecture, engineering, fashion in NYC, public affairs ? Everything now has to have a Jesuit stamp on it, frankly I did not go to Fordham to be indoctrinated or owned by them. Father McShane broadcasts like N Korea about how great the Jesuits are.
Accountability and transparency within the administration at Fordham is frightening, there is a blanket intimidation and class structure, students, faculty and admin are afraid to speak. I realized early on that Rose Hill was just a big high school, sort of post Fordham Prep and it is geared toward being owned, foreign students mock it. The gates serve two purposes, one to keep the outside world out and secondly to mentally round us in like sheep to be preached to, both are mental barriers. Fordham’s New York’s Jesuit University is so limiting, it turns off quality applicants and stamps us as being owned by them. I did not go to university to be used as disciple to go forth and do good deeds, rather I went to get a degree and job full stop. I honestly would give my left arm to get my money back and go to NYU, there it is just about the education and they deliver a world class brand. Fordham is unknown outside of the Jesuit world, they are happy about this and that is all they care about. Father McShane’s world is so limited and I do not want to be a part of it anymore.
To put together a committee, whereby a theology head says our endowment lost a ton of money in 2008, that is why it is so low given the fundraising efforts is typical Fordham. They expect us to believe them and their excuses for not realizing Fordham’s potential. Well the market rallied big time after 2008 and that portfolio should have drastically rebounded, just another line to be expected from Fordham ! Also, one would think McShane might have included other departments and schools in the CUSP or even outsiders, but that could rebound on his own self absorbed strategy. Honestly McShane has turned Fordham into a big seminary of sorts, each school is to be indoctrinated and should incorporate Jesuit principles into it’s program (this is becoming obvious). He is a sociopath IMHO and it is time someone outed the guy as being mini Taliban light. We want what a real university should give, a good education without all the broadcasting of social concerns, we are old enough to make our own decisions thank you. I am Catholic and did not attend Fordham because of it, frankly I expected more than a deceitful and poorly run university that is expensive for no reason ! Rose Hill and Lincoln Center should not be divisive but structured, that said I do not want Rose Hill indoctrination filtering into my classes and program it is my money.
Greg and Kathleen are basically spot on.
Fordham is so behind in the sciences and technology realm that it is an afterthought now, plus no facilities worth merit. Economics is not even ranked, nor any science program. One could write a book about deficiencies at Fordham, however they just shoot the messenger ! Fordham has completely missed New York’s technology boom, even Manhattan University has an engineering program. Fordham at a minimum should have a strong computer science department combined with software engineering. It is all about a Rose Hill, undergrad liberal arts college experience and drinking at Mugsy’s bar while paying a ton for dorm life, Fordham lives in the past. Also too much money has been used on athletics as opposed to academics !
Lunacy continues at Fordham and so do budget shortfalls. Leaving the future of the university to social ideologue neophytes from theology and social work speaks volumes to the ineptness of overall direction ! More vagueness and kicking the can down the road. Reality is the university has no money and cannot get donors, they are stuck as a liberal arts religious institutional brand. Donors want to donate to decent institutions with direction. Fordham now is the Catholic Yeshiva of NYC, Yeshiva also has financial issues. Fordham is stuck with it’s primary revenue source being tuition at 95%, it is also lacks the academic strengths the marketplace is demanding. Fordham faces a diminishing market and revenue stream if it does not pivot away from it’s money losing strategy. Students want a job at graduation not to become volunteers in Nicaragua or work at a soup kitchen ! The Jesuits need to back off and respect the paying customers.