For a better experience, click the Compatibility Mode icon above to turn off Compatibility Mode, which is only for viewing older websites.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Questions & Answers from the 5/17/22 Strategic Plan Community Update

What are the major increases in expenses and or declines in revenue that led to the financial deficit for fiscal year 23?

(Executive Vice President, Treasurer, and COO Helen Bowman): So just so everybody understands, undergrad and grad net tuition revenue, as well as room and board are increasing by about $25 million, as well as revenue from one-time opportunities of approximately $20 million. That said, we are experiencing some decreases in revenue in both undergrad and grad online learning revenue of about $5 million. This is expected, however, as a result of coming out of COVID, particularly experiencing this is the College of Nursing and Health Professions and the School of Education. Two schools, whose enrollments were greatly impacted by the by COVID. Undergrad registration fees are also declining by about $2 million due to graduation of a larger class and with smaller classes coming in during these COVID years. So, from a revenue perspective, we are seeing an increase in revenue, but it's not increasing larger than the expense structure. On the expense side, why all schools, colleges and departments are coming together to help close the budget gap, primarily through temporary expense reduction. This included dependence on designated funds as well, so many of the expenses have been put on designated funds versus operating funds so that's not a longer-term solution that can be maintained. In addition to all these expense reductions on the operating budget there were major investments that required funding so that we could spark future growth. Those investments include investing in the health sciences building, various faculty lines, including seven new faculty lines and filling 54 existing lines which include 39 tenure track and 15 non-tenure track. We're investing in growth areas - one example is CCI we're seeing tremendous growth there. We're providing additional funding for math support for our students, as a result of COVID impact on their math skills, additional funding in enrollment management student services and other student activities to support our current and incoming undergrad and graduate students to ensure that they are graduates versus just students at the university. There are other revenue-generating investments that are needed in institutional advancement, government and community relations to improve the revenue. There’s already fantastic progress in all of those areas, so we want to keep up the momentum. We have a merit of 2% in the budget, but we will likely go back to the board in September to increase that to the 4% to 5% range recognizing the great resignation. We're committed to doing more in that, as well as investments in fringe benefits, and so, when you put that all together, the expenses are growing faster than the revenues and therefore we're working together on one-time opportunities and stop gap measures to balance the budget. I hope that helps.

What is your view of the correct ratio between tenure track and non-tenure track faculty at Drexel and how, when do you plan to reach that ratio?

(Provost Paul Jensen). We've hovered around 50% 10 year tenure track for a number of years, and I think it's important to recognize there's quite a wide range in terms of variation across the schools and colleges, because they have different missions and some schools and colleges need to make more use of adjunct faculty and that type of thing so there's good reasons why there's variation so I don't think of it so much as us having a target, I think part of this is really thinking about how we're going to grow and evolve. And as we grow and evolve in different areas that by itself can start to shift the ratio. I will say that I think there have been two things that have happened and are currently happening that are probably moving us in the direction of a higher percent of 10-year tenure track. One was we lost a number of non-tenure track faculty when the clinical practices closed related to the Hahnemann closure and so that boosted our 10-year tenure track percentage, and then a year ago Helen, John and made the decision with the deans to reinvest funds in hiring particularly assistant professors on the tenure track and so there are a number of schools hiring this year, and that will, I think, move us up a little bit more so in summary it's not so much having a target but it's really understanding how we're evolving and growing.

With the increase in undergraduate numbers and taking into account conservative melt still put us up in numbers, where do we stand on housing students with one less residence hall and stringent housing?

(Don Liberati) Thank you very much for that question. Just to give you a little perspective - each spring we monitor the housing applications very closely, we work very closely with Evelyn and her team to understand the enrollment projections in terms of our planning. As we look towards Fall ‘22 I would share two points: first just to assure everyone, we have plenty of capacity to house our first-year students, which is always our first priority. And second, we really have a strong partnership with ACC and they have excellent assets on our campus so we can work with them to provide options for returning students, if need be, as we approach Fall ‘22. And just a final comment that we are very much looking forward to Kelly Hall opening in Fall of ‘23 and the opportunity that closing Meyers Hall presents for our residential neighborhood.

When is our next fundraising campaign?

(David Unruh) The answer is number one that we're always fundraising whether we're in campaign or not. And number two, I would say that we're actively planning for the next campaign, it needs to be anchored by priorities that evolved out of the strategic plan that will inform how we focus our philanthropic acquisition efforts so in rough timing again very rough I would anticipate a public phase of the campaign that could start somewhere in fiscal ‘26 or ‘27 depending on feasibility studies and other sort of internal readiness, but we will certainly continue to fundraise as aggressively as possible, regardless of being in a formal campaign or not.

If Drexel chooses to eliminate or consolidate academic or professional units, as a result of strategic planning when and how will those choices be made public?

(Provost Paul Jensen) So let me divide that question into two - I think it asked about academic and administrative units both. The areas of excellence and opportunity initiative, I described earlier. The final phase of that is asking, as I mentioned, are we structured appropriately to support these areas of excellence and opportunity? And, as I mentioned, that could be both about our portfolio programs but also schools and colleges and are we structured optimally so we're looking to wrap up this this initiative later in the summer so at that point, we would be addressing those questions and those will be things that we're having broad discussions about across the university, obviously, if we're making any changes there in terms of administrative units, you know I would say we're already well underway as Evelyn alluded to, we have major restructuring going on with our enrollment management operations and with university communication so I'd say that is well underway.

Regarding the initial interviews that are being done to focus on the areas of excellence: they are occurring at the school level and focused on student enrollment but ignoring the importance of employee creative strengths and narrowing rigid interpretation of the broad goals. Paul, can you address this?

(Provost Paul Jensen) I think there may be two different things in there, we actually haven't started individual interviews at the college level as part of areas of excellence and opportunity, I think that has been deans and our leadership steering committee at faculty Senate, primarily in the provost office. We have had conversations with schools and colleges that have been about budget. And so those have naturally focused on financials, but it's a good question, and what I do want to say is that, as we're working through areas of excellence and opportunity, we were very clear at the outset, to say that this will not be strictly driven by data, I mean data is incredibly important, but you know it doesn't capture everything, and this is why. We're putting emphasis on interviews on you know open ended survey questions on focus groups, because we know there's a lot, so if you just think about scholarly active scholarly and creative activity, you know we have new metrics and we have funding metrics and that's great data, but we know that misses a lot and that's why these other forms of collecting input are so important, and those are happening, will continue to happen, so I appreciate that question, so we are not taking a narrow view of these things.

There's a lot of frustration about what is contributing to the budget deficit beyond that our expenses are greater than our revenue. Is there any indication, we can get about large ticket items that might be contributing to this, and some of the examples are St Christopher tower contracts, etc.

(Executive Vice President, Treasurer, and COO Helen Bowman) I believe I gave some of the large ticket items that's leading to this with the caveat that, with all of this, we are on a path to close the budget gap with the measures that we're taking, but I do want to add that the university's support of St. Chris is purely a balance sheet item, the support is cash versus an operating budget we do not consolidate St. Chris’ financials with ours, and in fact we actually earn interest on the line that we have towards them, which is a positive add to our P&L. And in total overall Tower has a minimal impact on our budget gap, and it has upheld its commitments to support St. Chris and we expect them to do so through the new ownership so it's really the items of investing for growth, so that we can improve our revenues moving forward and just really the covert impact on enrollment that lasts through you know, a five year period so that would be my reply.

Related to considering beyond student numbers is the need for marketing the curricular and faculty strengths and international reputation and uniqueness, as well as the futuristic strengths of Drexel’s offerings. With Drexel’s current poor marketing, prospective recruits do not know what is unique and the cutting-edge programs we offer. How do you plan to address this?

(Nadine Ezzat) First I'll say that our faculty our number one strength at Drexel and absolutely marketing the Faculty and their expertise is key to recruiting students to Drexel, so we are working on an integrated marketing communications organization that will take some of that work and really expand it beyond what's happening now really looking at faculty expertise through videos through highlights through being able to get that message out both at a program level, as well as a level of the university so that's absolutely in the works and 100% agree that that faculty are the key to Drexel’s success.

What is the role of the colleges, with the increased initiatives on University-level articulation agreements what changes do you anticipate in college level activities specific to TCE and articulation agreements as a result of this centralization?

(Shivanthi Anandan) Let me take a step back and sort of explain how for the undergraduate side how this happens, right now, at Drexel. I oversee the transfer and any of our memorandums of understanding with outside colleges and schools for transfer articulation in the Provost office, and I work with a team that is also in EMSS so April Torgun, Mike Harrington and Kevin Coleman. And with two transfer advisors who I think are stellar – Megan Strauss Rooney from the College of Arts and Sciences, and Noel Palladino from the College of Engineering, they have incredible experience in doing these things. Currently transfer evaluate credit evaluations are handled at the College level. With the establishment of the EIC and the movement of the transfer evaluation, the transfer process under the EIC that Evelyn just talked about, this is going to be handled more centrally, so the process should be more efficient, more effective and more quick. Where the colleges, I think, have a really important role is twofold: currently, it is the EMSS team that looks for opportunities. Colleges do that too, but it is rather inconsistent across all the colleges. I think we have an opportunity for the colleges to own this as well, and to think about programs that they have that may benefit from having transfer students come in. There are a few boundaries and safeguards that we have to put in, but we are very well versed in putting those safeguards in so that a transfer student comes in, with a plan of how to succeed academically at Drexel and how hopefully we can make that person a part of the Community. So I see that there is increased ability or availability for the for colleges to think through this and I'm hoping that this is like a two way process, it may start at the colleges, it may start at the at the EIC but then eventually we have successful processes that we get together and we create for this. Those transfer students that actually have planned to attend Drexel from a two year college do very, very well so it's a sort of a street legends that our transfer students don't do well. I have it on good authority those two lead transfer advisors that once they plan and they make the transfer into Drexel with all the checks and balances in place, they do really, really well. So this is, I think, a very useful tool for us to consider bringing into Drexel as we move forward. Evelyn I'll pass it to you to add anything to what I've just said.

(Evelyn Thimba) I'll be very quick. The first part of the question regarding articulation agreements, Shivanthi is spot on. We are really working to build. articulation agreements at the institutional level, so EMSS will really be working to build those articulation agreements, so, for example, Drexel and CCP or Drexel and Mercer County College as an institution. We have to work hand in glove with the with the colleges, with faculty, to really make sure that as we're building those program plans, we are ensuring success and transferability for students within Drexel. On the College side, though I see an important role where the colleges will also continue to build articulation agreements at the College level and some at the program level and so there are two really great paths forward here when we're talking about articulation agreements. On the questions of transfer credit evaluation we are a unique and complex place and there is a lot of work that's going to be put in to help us centralize the process of transfer credit evaluation and really our plan is this summer to start with a period of deep discovery on all of the existing practices at the College level so really, we have to work very closely, not just on our team here but working with the advisors and faculty at the College level to understand what practices are currently in place. We plan to begin with a pilot of a couple of colleges we've already identified two and reached out to those so we'll start with those in the Fall of 2022. And, eventually, our goal is to is to complete all of this discovery and move to handling all evaluation centrally by the Fall of 2023 for the entire university. But all that work will really require a lot of collaboration between the enrollment management teams the advising leads and the colleges as well.

Questions & Answers from 6/21/21 Strategic Plan Town Hall

How do you plan to reconcile the commitment to transdisciplinary education, presumably requiring the coordination of multiple units, with the Responsibility Center Management (RCM) budget model, which disincentivizes such efforts?

(Provost Paul Jensen): It's a good question, I would say it is probably not accurate to say that RCM disincentivizes interdisciplinary programs. When you look at the undergraduate level, for instance, the RCM model itself provides an allocation mechanism for colleges that are doing programs together. It is important to note that we do have to make sure that we are not as university creating redundant courses in multiple colleges. That is probably one of the things that is driving the question. We have to be careful about that, but I think that model itself provides a good mechanism for sharing revenue across colleges. In addition to that, we have created the ability for schools and colleges to jointly own a program. That will facilitate the creation of more interdisciplinary programs. And at the graduate level, as we re-imagine the model, we have really simplified the flow of revenue so that it's more direct at the graduate level, which is going to make it much easier for schools and colleges to come together to establish sharing agreements. There are actually a number of aspects that will help us achieve our goals of being more interdisciplinary.

Will a remote work schedule be an option once the University fully re-opens?

(Executive Vice President, Treasurer, and COO Helen Bowman) Drexel has had a flexible work arrangement policy, which includes remote work, since 2013. As we prepare for a post-pandemic return, the leadership team has been engaged in discussion on how best to provide increased flexibility and still ensure the University’s goals are achieved. To assist in this assessment, a pilot group was formed to gather feedback on the benefits and challenges of a hybrid workforce. The pilot will run through spring and summer terms; the experiences and information gathered will assist in determining resolutions to the barriers that have been outlined. While we intend to increase flexible opportunities, we need to work though this change together, balancing the benefits of flexibility with the needs of our on-campus students and colleagues.

To what extent should offices/departments incorporate the Drexel Strategic Plan into their strategic plans or initiatives? And if so, how?
And a related question: Why did we not ask each department to create their own strategic plan and then develop a university-wide strategic plan from the overlapping themes of those individual plans?

(Provost Paul Jensen) All units should be incorporating the university strategic plan into their unit strategic plans. When I think about the process that we went through, we had hundreds and hundreds of faculty and staff involved in the entire planning process. So, when looking at the strategic plans of various schools and colleges in the university plan, there's tremendous overlap. The reason for the overlap is that the planning process was so inclusive from the beginning with all the pre-planning. Many of the ideas from the different units found their way into the university strategic plan. It would've been very difficult to start with a large number of individual strategic plans and then create a unified plan. However our process to some degree sort of simulated that in a more indirect way that enabled us to create a cohesive plan, but included input from many, many perspectives.

(Dr. Kevin Owens) I think you're really right. It would have been really difficult to go the other way. First of all, we probably would have been wrong to think that we would have all been thinking the same thing. And there is an advantage to having different points of view. As a culture, we talked about this in the EPC, we must enhance our culture of basically trying different things and looking for success in different ways. And all of us have different viewpoints on how the university works. And to try to meld everybody together, would have been very difficult. But to give each other the chance to try different things could be a strength.

How was the composition of the committees determined?

(CSO Elisabeth Van Bockstaele) Several months ago, we did an outreach to our community looking for self-nominations or nominations for various Initiative teams. As the core team started putting together the teams, we really drew initially from those lists. We then identified chairs from those lists in discussing what the charge and the goals would be for some of them. We occasionally would reach out to individuals either from the core team or through the Faculty Senate to try to engage our community. Even after the launch of Initiative teams, when gaps were identified, for example, insufficient representation from a particular college or school, we have been very flexible about membership. We are trying to be as intentional and deliberate as possible about committee composition to reflect all colleges and schools, diversity, as I mentioned earlier, and gender balance. This is also an opportunity for us, and I believe President Fry had mentioned this several months ago, to really look to our emerging leaders at Drexel if they have the bandwidth to serve in that capacity to lead efforts. So, we have really looked at this also as development opportunities for our Drexel community to be engaged in leading efforts. Committee composition has been extremely thoughtful and again, is flexible.

Why was it decided the pilot program would be discounted and not just permanently lower the base price?

(Nadine Ezzat) We absolutely should consider lowering the base price as well. This pilot was done in order to have an immediate impact on the fall term, and the base tuition rate was already locked in for the year. But as part of our analysis for the pilot, if we do find that there's increased interest in the programs at the lower price, we will look at decreasing the base price; the discount was just simply a lever that we were able to quickly implement to impact the fall term.

Why is Drexel more expensive than other programs even with the discount – are we better than them in terms of quality?

(Nadine Ezzat) In terms of competitors, we do believe that we have better quality programming than a lot of the competitors that are in our mix. We can justify being the most expensive by a small margin. But it is much harder to justify being double the price of our next closest competitor. If we are at the top or close to the top but still competitive in terms of tuition, we can talk about our quality, our outcomes, et cetera, that make it worth the additional cost to choose Drexel.

Why is there the absence of the word ‘Excellence’; is that no longer an attribute to be sought?

(Provost Paul Jensen) I think in our RCM work in particular, one of the things we've really focused on is that one of the keys to strengthen financial foundation of the university is academic excellence. It is absolutely the key. We've had a lot of conversations about it. Now what we need to do is increase our yield rate for our undergraduate programs, and it is about excellence. We are trying to build that directly into the model by including measures that are correlated with excellent programming so that colleges will focus on excellence as opposed to just focusing on volume. That is critically important.

What progress, if any, has there been with streamlining the program and course approval process?

(Provost Paul Jensen & Dr. Kevin Owens) This is a critically important issue. Kevin and I can say we personally have had tremendous conversations about this. He and I are both committed to getting something very significant done in the coming months. (Kevin) I want to agree. This has been something that has been talked about a lot over the years. The whole thing that has to do with the course submission, and the course approval process. Some people think of it as being the Faculty Senate process. It is a much bigger process than just the Faculty Senate. Paul and I have been in discussions about changing this for quite a while. We have gotten multiple groups of people together in various subgroups to talk about this. We recognize that this is something absolutely that must happen, and it is in progress.

The Graduate Education implementation team was listed as completed; when will the team be posted and is there a deadline for implementation team completion that you are working to?

(CSO Elisabeth Van Bockstaele) The website very recently went live so we are still in the process of populating all of the completed committees. Our efforts now will be to build out the website and populate your questions on our FAQ page.

How is Drexel’s strong history as a university centered on science and technology to be preserved and built upon?

(Provost Paul Jensen) The Strategic Plan mentions areas of focus in health, technology, design and social sciences. These are the topics that emerged from the work of the EPC and build upon the historic strengths of the university. The Provost’s Office is currently working with the schools and colleges to create academic investment plans that will reinforce these areas going forward.

What are the market and cost benefit analyses and ROI analyses planned for doctoral graduate programs within the various implementation teams?

(CSO Elisabeth Van Bockstaele) Graduate students drive the research enterprise at Drexel and really contribute as one factor that is critical to our success as an R1 comprehensive research institution. Drexel has formed a doctoral and specifically PhD student working group whose first goal was to address the heterogeneous stipends across many of the programs and graduate students and to implement a minimum stipend across the university. The question of the value proposition and the importance of the doctoral students in driving revenue, grant revenue into Drexel is an important one that will be addressed by the Graduate Education initiative team.

What are Drexel’s thoughts regarding the idea that faculty, especially tenured and tenure-track faculty, should be central to charting the course to the future because the bulk of all the committees seem non-faculty?

(Provost Paul Jensen) As we work through Strategic Planning and implementation, success absolutely requires involvement from all types of faculty and professional staff and Dr. Elisabeth Van Bockstaele has created an inclusive process. If there are faculty who want to be involved, they can absolutely be involved. The implementation work that Elisabeth is overseeing is running in a parallel, coordinated way with already established initiatives out of the Provost's Office and Faculty Senate, demonstrating that Drexel already has an existing infrastructure for implementation. It is a true partnership with no duplication of effort, but a lot of synergy and sharing of the workload to move things forward.

Is there integration of Drexel’s Building and Capital Planning in Drexel Forward and if not, why not?

(Provost Paul Jensen) There is integration; we are, in fact, refreshing the Capital and Master Plans based on the Strategic Plan.

Does it make sense to have a catalog on an annual cycle rather than as a living document?

(Provost Paul Jensen) The Provost’s Office is working with the catalog office to create a mid-year supplement version that will be more of a living document. This is a complicated issue; the catalog will never truly be a living document; it will always have a bit of an annual nature to it. But Drexel has taken steps to make it more of a living document.

Has Strategic Planning planned to address the decline in enrollment numbers in undergraduate, and specifically graduate, students in some programs like COE?

(Provost Paul Jensen) The Provost’s Office will continue to meet with the College of Engineering (and all the schools and colleges) to discuss enrollment and other important topics. The goal is to define how the Provost’s Office and the schools and colleges can collaborate to address these challenges.

What is the expected output from each of the committees, and what will the process be for actualizing the committee recommendations/decisions?

(CSO Elisabeth Van Bockstaele) Paul has been accompanying me and members of the core team when we meet with various Initiative teams to discuss the strategic plan, to discuss prioritization, review the questions that I referred to earlier in our presentation. We don't want to be prescriptive, but we do have some goals of trying to have what we call ‘quick wins’. These are efforts that could really move the needle to ensure Drexel’s success and are prioritized. Each initiative team outlines three priorities, for example. If they require some consultant work, meaning benchmarking data, we obtain that data for them. In some instances, there will be some investment funds needed for particular programs as we move forward. If there is a strong business case for a particular pilot in which there needs to be an investment, we need to have a transparent and equitable way of submitting those requests through the Initiative teams.

Brief answers to common questions around strategic planning topics.

What is a strategic plan?

We recognize that for some professional staff and faculty, this might be your first involvement in an institution that is executing a strategic planning process. A strategic plan is an organizational strategy and vision document. It provides a roadmap for identifying and achieving key priorities over a period of time. For a comprehensive university such as Drexel, composed of multiple schools and colleges, centers, institutes and partnerships, it also can enable a diverse range of faculty, professional staff and other constituents to follow one compass or “north star” to achieve unified goals. Ideally, a strategic plan is a “living” document that can be adapted and improved upon as conditions change and as challenges and opportunities emerge.

Why is Drexel executing a new strategic plan?

The Drexel 2030 plan was drafted against a backdrop of changing trends in higher education, specifically demographic declines in high school graduates and international students. It was made more urgent by the closure of Hahnemann Hospital and the acquisition of St. Christopher’s Hospital for Children, the pivot to remote instruction during the pandemic, and nationwide calls for racial equity.

The plan provides a blueprint to retain and grow Drexel’s distinctiveness, to best prepare students for continued success in changing and evolving professions, to support high-impact, use-inspired and translational research endeavors that address the most urgent challenges in society, and to ensure overall efficiency and effectiveness.

The Drexel 2030 plan was created to identify primary focus areas where future success is essential: enrollment; efficiency and effectiveness in mission delivery; and new markets and diversification of revenue. The plan, to be implemented during a nine-year period, from 2021 to 2030, will inform priority-setting and decision-making across the University around those priority areas.

How were the strategic priorities and team members selected?

In 2018, Drexel leadership launched the planning process and began assessing goals and structure. In 2019, an Executive Planning Committee (EPC) was created to oversee the process, consisting of twenty additional members of Drexel leadership who intentionally represent a full cross section across academic and administrative areas, including the Faculty Senate.

Drexel 2030 Strategic Plan Timeline [PDF]

Incorporating broad input from across the University, as well as analysis of peer institutions, demographic trends and broader challenges facing society, the EPC identified strategic priorities for the plan, as well as initial members of the implementation team. In 2020, planning was adjusted and expedited in response to the pandemic and increased anti-racism efforts in society, and to incorporate work done by various Drexel task forces on those issues.

What are the key goals of the Drexel 2030 plan?

The plan seeks to maintain and grow Drexel’s success, impact, visibility, reputation and distinctiveness during a time of change and disruption in student demographics, consumer attitudes toward higher education, employer hiring trends and societal challenges that require research-focused and more transdisciplinary solutions. As always, student success will continue to remain Drexel’s central focus.

During the implementation process, each team has been charged with identifying success metrics for its specific area and will continually measure, refine and communicate those results.

Overall, as primary areas of focus, Drexel seeks to continue to pursue and grow: 1) enrollment success; 2) efficiency and effectiveness in mission delivery; and 3) new markets and diversification of revenue.

To achieve those goals across academic and administrative units, under each of the three primary areas of focus, 12 initiative teams will specifically examine and provide recommendations regarding student success and retention; graduate education; marketing and external communications; internal communications and digital infrastructure; research administration; pricing and financial aid; operations; housing and facilities; program and curricular innovation; undergraduate online teaching and learning; continuing education and lifelong learning; and partnerships. (The video included in this section above elaborates on how teams in those areas will be structured.)

Drexel’s commitment to diversity, access and inclusion will be thoroughly considered and represented in all components of the plan.

Who is leading the implementation process?

Members of the Executive Planning Committee (EPC), identified in question three above, are responsible for the plan. In December 2020, Elisabeth Van Bockstaele, one of the EPC members, was named Drexel’s chief strategy officer to manage implementation of the plan.

Multiple teams of faculty, professional staff and administrators are working together to begin executing the plan, ensuring representation and incorporating input from all areas of the University. Our implementation approach is structured to foster cross-collaboration, idea sharing and integration of knowledge, while maintaining agility and flexibility. Connecting related initiatives together, team chairs will collaborate to ensure alignment and integration for each of the key focus areas.

A core team will manage overall implementation, overseeing three teams with primary areas of focus: 1) enrollment success; 2) efficiency and effectiveness in mission delivery; and 3) new markets and diversification of revenue. For each of those focus areas, twelve teams will examine and deliver recommendations in more refined initiative areas. (The video included in this section above elaborates on how teams in those areas will be structured.)

How will updates and changes regarding the plan be communicated to the Drexel community?

Frequent, broad and open communication is vital to the success of the implementation efforts. This website, which will be updated regularly, is part of that process. On June [TK], 2021, Drexel invites the University community to the first of a series of Town Hall discussions focusing on implementation, where leaders of the Drexel 2030 plan will share updates. All Drexel faculty and professional staff are welcome and encouraged to attend this virtual session.

Updates will also be communicated through traditional Drexel channels to members of the University community, including emails and stories published in DrexelNOW, Drexel Magazine and other vehicles.

In addition to consulting with direct supervisors, members of the Drexel community are also encouraged to make comments and ask questions by emailing: Drexel2030@drexel.edu.

How will this plan be different than previous ones executed by Drexel?

The most recent plan, Transforming the Modern Urban University, was initiated in 2012 and evaluated, updated and refreshed beginning in 2015. In addition to identifying goals for and investments in student recruitment and success, teaching and research, that plan introduced and expanded aspirations including innovation districts and civic engagement.

The Drexel 2030 plan will evaluate and build upon objectives that were introduced and strengthened during the previous plan. The new plan also explicitly establishes racial justice, diversity and inclusion as key measures of success across the University. Prior to the historic movements of 2020, Drexel already was focused on diversity and inclusion in its planning, however the work of the University’s Anti-Racism Task Force has been broadening the scope of those efforts. Additionally, Drexel’s dedication to sustainability will be considered to ensure a responsible and continued stewardship of resources.

Are outside consultants working on the plan?

Drexel is committed to a strategic plan implementation process that is dynamic and transformative, with potential for broad input that draws on expertise from within and outside of the University. To that end, as it has for other initiatives, Drexel may engage consultants and advisors to obtain an objective, third-party perspective on specific implementation activities.

At every stage, Drexel will retain full control of implementing the strategic plan.

How can I help?

We ask that everyone in the Drexel community become and remain engaged with the Drexel 2030 plan. The easiest way is to attend Town Hall sessions and keep up with Drexel communications regarding the plan, including emails, DrexelNOW and Drexel Magazine stories and other communications. Use the link below to share your comments, ideas and questions. If you would like to be considered for a volunteer role on an initiative team, speak with a supervisor or contact us at the link below.

Thank you for all that you do for Drexel University.