To: President Glenn Cummings

Provost Jeannine Uzzi

From: Sally Meredith

M.A. Watson

Date: November 16, 2018

RE: Investigation of Unauthorized Pop-Up Course

____________________________________________________________________________

Table of Contents 1
Catalyst for the Investigation 2
Investigation Process 2
Individuals and Entities in the Report 3
Historic Background 3
Grant and Grant Administration 11
Overview
Available Actions
Recognitions
Curriculum Oversight and Governance 12
Overview
Available Actions
Supervision 13
Overview
Available Action
Recognitions
Aggregate Available Actions and Recognitions 14
Appendices
Grant Proposal A
Letter of Support B
NEA Award Letter C
USM - AFUM Contract D
Social Justice Pop Up Courses Overview E
Social Justice Pop Up Guidelines F
Social Justice Pop Up Courses Curriculum Proposal Form G
Social Justice Pop Up Courses Process Flow H
Memo from S. Feiner I
Memo from L. Savage and J. Ziffer J

Page 1 of 14
Catalyst for this Investigation
On Wednesday, October 3, 2018, the University of Southern Maine was notified that a Social
Justice pop-up course, “Engaged Citizenship”, was being advertised to some students as an
opportunity to earn a free university credit by taking a bus to Washington, D.C. and protesting
the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court. It quickly became evident
that the curriculum approval process for pop-up courses had been circumvented and that
students were receiving differentiated marketing for the course.

After responding to the Board of Trustees, the Chancellor, countless parents, the local and
national media, and the students, the President and Provost of the University of Southern Maine
have asked that the following three questions be investigated:

○ What is the status of grant administration for the NEA/MEA grant that was
awarded to AFUM and under which the pop-up courses are being offered?

○ What is the status of the governance and curriculum review process and how
was it able to be circumvented?

○ Who were the staff members involved in the decision making process
surrounding this pop-up course?

Investigation Process
The President and Provost charged M.A. Watson, Associate Vice President of Human
Resources at USM and Sally Meredith, Chief of Staff for Academic Affairs at USM with
conducting the investigation. Together they requested, received, and reviewed nearly 1,000
pages of emails and other documents pertaining to the grant; grant administration; curriculum
approval; institutional governance; employee training and supervision.

The Investigation Team asked that a third party, Mark Schmelz, Chief Human Resources Officer
for the University of Maine System, interview the individuals associated with the grant and the
pop-up course offerings. Those interviews took place October 17, 19, and 22. Further interviews
were scheduled and took place October 25. The notes from the interviews have been
incorporated into this report.

The report comprises recognition of institutional practice that must be reviewed/revised and
available actions that are directly related to NEA grant and the pop-up course.

Page 2 of 14
Individuals, Entities, and Grants Referenced in the Report
● Susan Feiner - retired Professor of Economics and Women & Gender Studies, former
president of USM AFUM Chapter, PI on the Social Justice grant
● Lydia Savage - Professor of Geography/Anthropology, department chair of
Geography/Anthropology, current president of USM AFUM Chapter
● Julie Ziffer - Professor of Physics, co-Principal Investigator on the Social Justice grant
● Gabe Demaine - Social Justice Community Outreach Organizer
● Karin Pires - University Registrar and Director, Registration and Scheduling Services
● Annie Chuprevich - Associate Director, Registration and Scheduling Services
● Joe Medley - Associate Professor of Economics
● Lorrayne Carroll - Associate Professor of English
● Peter Witham - Administrative Specialist of Geography/Anthropology
● Firooza Pavri - Director of the Muskie School of Public Service in the College of
Management and Human Service
● Jo Williams - Dean of the College of Management and Human Service
● Jeannine Uzzi - University Provost
● Glenn Cummings - University President

● CAHS - College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences

● CMHS - College of Management and Human Service
● CSTH - College of Science, Technology, and Health
● RSC - Research Service Center at USM that manages externally funded grants

● NEA - National Education Association

● MEA - Maine Education Association
● AFUM - Associated Faculties of the University of Maine, a member of MEA/NEA
● Grant - a “Great Public Schools” grant awarded by the NEA
● PI - Principal Investigator, or leader of a grant

Historic
In the spring of 2017, four University of Southern Maine faculty members from three Colleges
and academic programs came together to propose a new academic minor in Social Justice. The
minor, administered by the Geography/Anthropology Department in the Muskie School of Public
Service in the College of Management and Human Services was organized by Professors Lydia
Savage (CMHS), Lorrayne Carroll (CAHS), Susan Feiner (CAHS), and Julie Ziffer (CSTH). The
minor was approved by the department of Geography/Anthropology, Dean Jo Williams, and
Provost Jeannine Uzzi.

Concurrently, Professors Feiner and Ziffer were drafting a grant application entitled “Social
Justice Education: Promoting Retention, Enhancing Degree Completion and Supporting Early

Page 3 of 14
Career Educators.”1 In the proposal, Professor Feiner was the designated PI and Professor
Ziffer was the designated grant coordinator.2

The submitted grant proposal explicitly references the Social Justice minor3 and that elements
of the grant would support the goals of the minor. There are many facets: the creation of the
[(1)] “Frances Perkins Institute for Social Justice Education at USM”, [(2)] “increasing retention
and graduation rates through social justice education; [(3)] closing racial and socioeconomic
achievement gaps; and [(4)] promoting social/racial justice professional development among
early career PK-12 educators.” The proposal states that “This would be achieved with curricular
interventions - pop-up courses for undergraduates and CEUs for in-service teachers.”4

The proposal details each of the four goals with detailing measurable outcomes; key activities;
member/non-member engagement; and affiliate staff/leadership engagement.5 The language for
“Goal 2: Improve Student Success Through Pop Up Courses and Allied Activities” is informative
as to the scope of the proposed pop-up course program. It proposes a position of an outreach
coordinator with a compensation cost share with the University; that USM-AFUM member will
design and deliver the courses; that the grant pay the student tuition for the pop up courses so
students attend for free, and as such that students may only take one credit worth of pop up
courses; and that the grant pay for the overload rate for the union members teaching these
courses.6 This has not been strictly enforced.

The proposal stated that 25 pop up courses would be offered per year and that each course
would be capped at 20 students. 500 students would be served annually. To allow as many
students as possible to participate, students were restricted to taking up to one free credit
through the grant funded pop up courses.

President Cummings, in a letter of support dated May 31, 2017, stated that the University would
“support staffing and scheduling courses as appropriate over [the] three years [of the grant]” for
an in-kind match of $15,000. The letter goes on to state the support of, “funding the overload
pay for faculty teaching ‘pop up courses’ after the period of NEA funding, so long as the pop up
courses meet their retention/completion goals ($40,000); funding the tuition waiver for up to 500
students per year enrolling in one, one-credit (or two half credit) courses after the period of NEA
funding, so long as the pop up courses meet their retention/completion goals ($148,000).”7

The letter of support does not align with the grant proposal which indicates that USM has
committed “*$90,000 [ ] to support the Perkins Institute’s coordinator and for release time for the

1
Appendix A, p. 1
2
Appendix A, p. 9
3
Appendix A, p. 1
4
Appendix A, p. 1
5
Appendix A, p. 3 - 6
6
Appendix A, p. 3, 4
7
Appendix B

Page 4 of 14
grant coordinator” which is reiterated twice further on in the proposal.8 There has been
considerable internal conversation at the University about the intent attributed to President
Cumming’s letter of support.

It must be noted here that the grant development and submission did not follow either the
University guidelines or established process. The Research Service Center (RSC) handles this
work for the institution and that office was not consulted or made aware of this grant application.
As such, the proposal had not undergone the standard review. Further, because the awardee is
not the University, but rather is AFUM, the University does not collect any indirect funds to offset
the institutional efforts in supporting the activities of the grant.

Throughout the grant proposal Professor Feiner and Professor Savage are identified as the
affiliate leadership team and that Professor Feiner is the “lead on this grant” Professor Ziffer is
recognized as becoming the lead on the project “as it extends past the period of NEA funding.”9
Further, the grant proposal noted Professor Feiner as the “PI.”10 However, the letter of award,
dated August 1, 2017, was to Professor Ziffer.11 It was Professor Feiner who was invited to
speak about the grant at the 2017 Opening Breakfast.

There was, and continues to be, confusion as to the principal investigator. Professor Feiner was
understood, in her role as USM AFUM president, to have the authority to negotiate with
University regarding a bridge between a grant award to AFUM and the services/activities that
the grant required of the University. Professor Ziffer was understood to be working on the
finances. USM administration and staff who were working to operationalize the award met with
Professors Feiner, Savage, and Ziffer in various groupings (whoever could attend the respective
meeting) in Fall 2017 after the funding was awarded.

Operationalizing the award was a multi-level, multi-meeting process that began in Fall 2017 and
has never ceased. One of the first issues of discussion was the creation of the Frances Perkins
Institute. When notified that Institutes require Board of Trustee approval after an extensive
Intent to Plan and Program Proposal process, Professors Feiner and Savage stated that it was
an initiative, not an institute. Issues such as the course designation, course type, curriculum
approval processes, how many times the course could be repeated, how to enter the course on
MaineStreet so it wouldn’t show in conflict with other courses, how a student could register, how
the tuition would automatically be added to a student’s bill and the manual work to credit each
student’s account all had to be determined. Further, as referenced above, the award was not
made to USM and funds do not flow to the University. As such, USM fronted the waived tuition
and overload compensation while staff and AFUM worked through the technological, process,

8
Appendix A, p. 7
9
Appendix A, p. 3 - 7
10
Appendix A, p. 9
11
Appendix C

Page 5 of 14
and financial logistics. There continued to be confusion as to the difference between AFUM as
the grant recipient and USM as the grant recipient.

To this end, Martha Scott, formerly of the Research Service Center, reached out directly to the
MEA to draft a contract between AFUM and USM to deliver the services that was in the grant
proposal. After several conversations an agreement with budget was signed by Professor
Feiner and Tamara Blair, the Director of USM’s Research Service Center.12

The investigation interviews reflect the nature of trying to implement a grant that had been
funded without preliminary conversations and numerous interviewees stated that the “cart was
put before the horse.”

From the first days of the grant, it was obvious that the process for listing a course in
MaineStreet would be a challenge. Indeed, the first offering was not listed in MaineStreet and
instead a webform was created where students were directed to “register” for the pop-up
course.

The standard process for any new course offering is to go through the curriculum review
process. The process varies by School and College. In the Muskie School of Public Service,
which houses the Geography/Anthropology Department, the department reviews the curriculum,
which is then signed by the Dean and Provost before it is forwarded to the Registrar as an
officially sanctioned course. The Office of the Registrar then enters the course into MaineStreet.

Recognizing that this process would be too time consuming for the ½ credit and 1 credit pop-up
courses that were designed to be responsive to current events, it was determined that these
offerings would be “topics” courses. At the University, within the Registrar’s course numbering
construct, a topics course number exists in perpetuity, but the content of the course may differ
from year to year or even section to section. Topics courses are fairly common, and the
curriculum is determined by the home department. Typically, topics courses appear with other
course offerings when schedules are submitted from academic departments through their chair
to Dean’s Offices for review and approval. In many cases this provides an opportunity for the
topic to be viewed along with other course offerings.

In this case, while Geography/Anthropology was the department housing the Social Justice
Minor and Social Justice courses, it was not the governing body with the ability to approve
Social Justice curriculum. Professors Savage, Feiner, Carroll, and Ziffer were the organizers of
the minor and thus the body to approve any new content for an SOJ topics course. Professor
Ziffer created the website for the Frances Perkins Initiative and the webform for proposing pop
up courses.13

12
Appendix D
13
Appendix G

Page 6 of 14
In addition to working through the logistics of offering the SOJ topics courses, the organizers
were moving forward with the job description and search for the Social Justice Community
Outreach Organizer. The grant partially funded the position, and President Cumming’s letter of
support was silent on the issue. A faculty member in the Economics department, Joe Medley,
made a donation to a restricted fund to support the position. The University also agreed to
financially support the position. After a brief search, Gabe Demaine was hired and started in
January 2018. The formal reporting line is to Professor Savage, yet in the interviews Ms.
Demaine stated that she considered Professors Feiner and Ziffer to be her “bosses” as she
understood them to be the PI and co-PI on the grant.

In the Spring 2018 semester the pop-up courses continued, with the Registrar providing
continued guidance to Ms. Demaine for the information that would be required to list a course,
and the technological limitations of MaineStreet. The Social Justice organizers developed a
workflow for the SOJ Topics pop-up curriculum approval.14 Proposals would be made via a
webform that was sent automatically to Professor Ziffer. She and Professor Feiner would
approve the course or return it for revision. After approval, Professor Ziffer would notify Ms.
Demaine who would then draft the course listing. Ms. Demaine would provide the course listing
to the Office of the Registrar. The Provost stated in her interview that she had reviewed the
process and was satisfied with it, thus meeting a University governance criteria, that the Provost
sign off on the curriculum review process.

The process didn’t recognize that an approver should recuse herself if she were the course
proposer, nor did it recognized that Professor Feiner was retiring at the end of the semester.
Professors Savage and Ziffer did discuss this issue and it was determined between them that
Professor Feiner could no longer approve curriculum once her retirement was finalized.
Likewise, as she would no longer be an AFUM member, she could no longer offer pop-up
courses. According to Professor Savage and Ziffer’s respective interviews, it is unlikely this
information was ever conveyed to Ms. Demaine. According to her interview, Ms. Demaine was
aware of Professor Feiner’s retirement, but not the change in status as related to course
approval or the ability to be faculty of record on a pop-up course.

Numerous pop-up courses were proposed for the Fall 2018 semester and Professor Ziffer, in
keeping with the established work flow, forwarded a notice of approval to Ms. Demaine. There is
no email record of Ms. Demaine ever receiving a curriculum approval notice from Professor
Feiner.

In late September 2018, a local activist group chartered a bus to Washington, D.C., around the
time of the U.S. Supreme Court appointment confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
On Wednesday, September 26, 2018, Professor Feiner forwarded a bus registration flier to Ms.

14
Appendix H

Page 7 of 14
Demaine. That evening, Ms. Demaine forwarded the text of the flier, along with added language
including “Earn a free course credit, Travel to Washington D.C. to Protest Kavanaugh’s
confirmation to Supreme Court” and “USM students earn 1 course credit for attending protest
upon return contact to meet w/ Prof. Feiner” asking the that email be forwarded to the Women
and Gender students and faculty, as well as others. Professor Feiner approved the language
that same evening.

The next day, Thursday, September 27, 2018, Ms. Demaine, recognizing that USM students
had self-registered for the bus, stated that she was going to go to the bus send off, and hand
out fliers to the USM students stating that they could earn one free credit from USM and to
contact Professor Feiner upon return. She sought confirmation from Professor Feiner that she
was still willing to give the credit for the experience. It must be noted that after-the-fact credits
are run through he office of Prior Learning Assessment. Here, no course had been proposed,
approved, or entered into MaineStreet. There were no learning outcomes and no syllabus.
Instead there was the concept that attending the protest should earn one free USM credit.

On Monday, October 1, 2018, Ms. Demaine emailed Professor Feiner a course listing entitled
“Direct Action in DC” and indicated that she would forward the course listing to the “Registrar
pending [Professor Feiner’s] approval.” The course listing does not reference protesting, but
does include the Google Doc URL for students to register for the bus ride portion of the course.

Later that afternoon Ms. Demaine forwarded the listing to the Registrar stating “I have just sent
this to Susan Feiner to review so if you can hold off on posting till she approves that would be
appreciated.” Professor Feiner subsequently approves the language, yet at some point over the
next hour the name of the course changes from “Direct Action in DC” to “Engaged Citizenship”
and Ms. Demaine forward an updated course listing to the Office of the Registrar. Karin Pires,
the Registrar, was traveling to a conference during this time.

There is no evidence that Professor Ziffer, the individual authorized to approve pop-up courses,
was even aware of this course.

On Tuesday, October 2, 2018, Ms. Demaine again reached out to the Registrar who was out of
the office. Ms. Demaine then forwarded the information to Annie Chuprevich, the Assistant
Director of Registration Services. She, in turn, was able to contact the Registrar to walk through
the mechanics of listing a pop-up course on MaineStreet. Nothing in this portion of the process
was unusual. Ms. Demaine was the individual who had historically forwarded the pop-up listings
to the Office of the Registrar. The course description did not include the language about
protesting. The Google Doc URL was not reviewed because it could not be included on the
MaineStreet course file and wouldn’t be distributed to students. Further, it is not unusual for a
retired faculty member to teach a section/course and the Office of the Registrar does not usually
see the contract for teaching during the Fall or Spring semester. In short, there was nothing that
would have notified the Office of the Registrar that this course offering was not as it appeared.

Page 8 of 14
Once Ms. Chuprevich notified Ms. Demaine that the course was live on MaineStreet, Ms.
Demaine sent out two different versions of marketing materials. One included the protest
language and went to one department asking for it to be distributed, the other version did not
include protest language and was sent to the “S-List” student email distribution list, the Dean of
Students Rodney Mondor, and Peter Witham, the Geography/Anthropology Administrative
Specialist to distribute.

On Wednesday, October 3, 2018, USM became aware of the differentiated marketing and
quickly realized that the course had not gone through the approval process and that two
individuals had organized and listed the course. The faculty member of record was not hired by
the institution to offer the course and had no institutional authority to approve the course or
deliver the offering.

Media quickly picked up the story, and the President and Provost responded to the media while
getting the basic information about the course. The Provost instructed Ms. Chuprevich to
remove the course from MaineStreet; no students had registered for the course. Professor Ziffer
took down the Frances Perkins Initiative website. The President and Provost determined that
the grant activities should be suspended until an investigation could be completed.

On Friday, October 5, 2018, Professor Feiner was notified that she would not be teaching at the
University until further notice. Ms. Demaine was notified that she would be on administrative
leave until the investigation was complete and the President and Provost made a determination
as to the appropriate actions. Professor Savage was notified that her direct report was on
administrative leave and that the grant activity was suspended until further notice.

At that time the investigation was launched.

On October 11, 2018, Professor Feiner forwarded a memo15 indicating that the course offering
was entirely her idea and responsibility; unfortunately this is not supported by the emails and the
interviews.

On October 23, 2018, Professors Savage and Ziffer forwarded a memo16 with recommendations
for University operations and also specific to offering the pop up courses. Many of the
recommendations for the pop up courses should be implemented if pop up courses continue to
be offered.

There is irony that one of the recommendations suggests working through an office that has not
existed at USM for nearly five years (Office of Sponsored Programs). The operation that

15
Appendix I
16
Appendix J

Page 9 of 14
replaced OSP is the office that the grant proposal should have tracked through in the first place,
the Research Service Center. Again, though, the RSC is not responsible for a grant that was
awarded to a third party entity - AFUM.

Page 10 of 14
Grant and Grant Administration:

Overview
The proposal and grant award letter indicates that USM was to recognize $293,000 in net new
tuition over three years. Operationally, the University has salary and benefits expense of
$130,000 over the same period of time for Professor Ziffer’s course release and USM portion of
Ms. Demaine’s position not covered by the Medley gift. The net financial benefit was anticipated
at $163,000 over three years.

To date: 18 “pop-up” courses have been offered with 207 students enrolled. Several of those
students took multiple pop-up courses. As such, the unique headcount for the pop-up courses is
156 students. The gross tuition revenue generated is $27,900 and USM expenses are $18,600.
The net tuition dollars generated for USM from these 18 courses has been $8,300. At the same
time, the grant has paid each faculty $2,000 per credit, $1,000 per ½ credit overload rate to
deliver the 18 courses.

While the grant is between the NEA/MEA and AFUM, it is of note that there are several areas
where the administration is not living up to the grant proposal. The Frances Perkins Institute will
not be created. Any dues-paying union member at USM can offer a pop-up course, instead of
just AFUM members. Students have not been limited to one free credit. While this investigation
did not delve into the PK-12 educator CEUs there was no evidence that those are being offered.

Lastly, because the grant is between NEA/MEA and AFUM, there are limited available actions
for USM and the actions all relate to the contract signed between the Research Service Center
and the President of USM AFUM.

Available Actions
● Let the contract continue to operate as it currently does.
● Revise the contract, negotiating in stronger USM oversight.
● Request that NEA/MEA assign a new principal investigator
● Cancel the contract, which would negate need for the Social Justice Community
Outreach Organizer position and would change the financial calculations
● Determine whether USM can increase one-credit offerings that are responsive to current
events, although not for free and not paid at the same rate as the grant.

Recognition
● Grant applications requiring Presidential level support should be presented by the
appropriate Vice President.

Page 11 of 14
Governance:

Overview
Curriculum is purview of faculty. Each college has a unique curriculum approval process.
However, integrity of the curriculum is the responsibility of everyone in Academic Affairs. Here,
no proposal was submitted, no learning outcomes were established, no syllabus was proposed.
Because there was no fail-safe on the established process, it was able to slip through.

Available Actions
● Strengthen curriculum review and approval across the University
● Require all curriculum to have Dean approval, regardless if it is interdisciplinary
● Change approval process for topics courses
● Require that individual proposing curriculum is not in position to approve it
● Curriculum that does not come directly from the Provost Office must cc the Provost and
the Dean of the respective College and have at least an adequate period of time before
it goes live.
● Further revise what must be submitted for consideration when a new course or topic is
proposed

Page 12 of 14
Supervision:

Overview
The grant proposal included a position for a Social Justice Community Outreach Organizer. The
grant award did not cover the entire salary, and the endorsement letter from the President did
not include this funding. A faculty member in the Economics Department, Joe Medley, gave
money to a restricted fund to contribute to a portion of the salary of this position and ultimately
the President’s Office agreed to fund the rest of the position and the fringe.

Ms. Demaine reports to Professor Savage, yet states that she considered Professor Feiner and
Professor Ziffer to be her bosses. Peter Witham stated that he considered Ms. Demaine part of
the Geography/Anthropology Department. Individuals that Ms. Demaine emailed directly
considered her enough of an authority figure that they did as she asked as a matter of course.

Professor Savage failed to inform Ms. Demaine of the decision re: who had authority for
approval. When asked about training, Ms. Demaine indicated that she self-trained by setting out
to meet with people and speaking directly with the Registrar while Professor Savage indicated
that Ms. Demaine was trained by Professors Savage, Feiner, Ziffer and others.

As with grant implementation and curricular and course details, training and supervision
processes were not sufficiently structured in this model. Specific hierarchies and decision
making approval were not well-established and authority, roles and responsibilities were at best
confusing and multiple parties relied on assumption.

Available Actions
● If the contract continues, establish new reporting structure for Social Justice Community
Outreach Organizer
● If the contract continues, review job description for Social Justice Community Outreach
Organizer and revise as necessary

Recognition
● Retired faculty email addresses stay active and need to be managed
● Retired faculty member has been notified that cannot teach at USM until further notice;
other UMS institutions are also enforcing this action

Page 13 of 14
Aggregate Available Actions and Recognitions

Grant and Grant Administration:

Available Actions
○ Let the contract continue to operate as it currently does.
○ Revise the contract, negotiating in stronger USM oversight.
○ Request that NEA/MEA assign a new principal investigator
○ Cancel the contract, which would negate need for the Social Justice Community
Outreach Organizer position and would change the financial calculations
○ Determine whether USM can increase one-credit offerings that are responsive to
current events, although not for free and not paid at the same rate as the grant.

Recognition
○ Grant applications requiring Presidential level support should be presented by
the appropriate vice President.

Governance:
Available Actions
○ Strengthen curriculum review and approval across the University
○ Require all curriculum to have Dean approval, regardless if it is interdisciplinary
○ Change approval process for topics courses
○ Require that individual proposing curriculum is not in position to approve it
○ Curriculum that does not come direct from the Provost Office must cc the Provost
and the Dean of the respective College and have at least an adequate period of
time before it goes live.
○ Further revise what must be submitted for consideration when a new course or
topics is proposed

Supervision:
Available Actions
○ If the contract continues, establish new reporting structure for Social Justice
Community Outreach Organizer
○ If the contract continues, review job description for Social Justice Community
Outreach Organizer and revise as necessary

Recognitions
○ Retired faculty email addresses stay active and need to be managed
○ Retired faculty member has been notified that cannot teach at USM until further
notice; other UMS institutions are also enforcing this action

Page 14 of 14