Tech Fee Guidelines

FY25 Student Technology Fee Competitive Awards & Base Allocations

  1. Technology fee funds should:
    1. Support students in meeting the educational goals of their academic or co-curricular programs.
    2. Benefit students in innovative or significant ways. In this context, significance may be understood to imply either impact on a large number of students or a deeper impact on a smaller number of students.
    3. Proposals will be scored using the evaluation rubric.
    4. Be spent by the end of the awarded fiscal year unless other arrangements have been made during the award process. A status report is required at the end of the fiscal year and the complete report is due after the project is finished, if multi-year. A link to the status report form is included on the Tech Fee website and in the award acceptance letter.
  2. Proposals can be submitted by any student, faculty member, staff member, group, or department on the Oxford campus.
  3. Projects may submit requests for continued funding in subsequent years, but will not receive priority in the review process. Subsequent-year proposals must include a measurable assessment of the earlier year’s results.
  4. Proposals submitted by a student or student organization must identify a staff or faculty sponsor willing to accept responsibility for the appropriate use of the funding and for fulfilling all reporting requirements.
  5. Any individual who has not completed reporting requirements for past awards is not eligible for funding until the reporting is complete.
  6. Ongoing operational costs  (e.g., annual maintenance or renewal fees) must be paid from other sources unless a multiple-year award.
  7. Technology refreshes like lab replacements can be part of divisional tech fee allocations or need to be funded from other budgetary funding. The competitive tech fee process should NOT be relied on for technology refreshes.

FAQ: Common Answers for Questions

  • Technology fee revenues may be used for the training of students and, to a lesser extent, staff and faculty.
  • Technology fee revenues may be used to leverage other funds where appropriate.
  • Technology fee revenues may be used, with caution, to pay student wages.
  • Technology fee revenues may be used for furniture or non-technology equipment only when that purpose is required for the success of the technology project proposed.

Office of Strategic Procurement Guidelines

  • Purchases made with Tech Fee funding are subject to all relevant University policies. Compliance reviews will include Procurement, per the Purchasing Handbook, an IT Services technical review, and an accessibility review (in accordance with Miami's Accessible Technology Policy).
  • The Office of Strategic Procurement has asked that individuals involved with preparing proposals, including all software/hardware purchases, consult with Procurement early in the process for contract and vendor management in order to ensure the best pricing and terms and to avoid any potential delays.
  • Proposals may be submitted for Tech Fee review utilizing a single quote for cost estimation and budgeting. Purchase requests upon award will not be processed unless they comply with Section 2.01 or 2.03 of the Purchasing Handbook.
  • Please contact the Office of Strategic Procurement if you have questions.

Criteria Summary for Submitted Proposal Scoring

Six factors of relevance:

  • Overall Impact: Does the project fit within the guidelines for Student Technology Fee expenditures?
  • Significance: Does the proposal impact a large percentage of students or have a deep impact on a smaller number of students?
  • Innovation: Does the proposal seek to advance the use of technology in the service of teaching and learning or to advance the co-curricular goals of the Miami Experience?
  • Approach: Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project?
  • Investigator(s): If a student or student organization submits the proposal, is there a faculty or staff sponsor identified? If the investigator/author of the proposal has received Student Technology Fee funding in the past, have they completed the final report and/or any other required reporting?
  • Support: Have the appropriate stakeholders been involved in the planning to ensure the success of the project? Examples include the Classroom Enhancement Council, Classroom Services, Physical Facilities, IT Services, etc. If there are ongoing costs, has a source for those been identified?

Evaluation Process

Each division will provide two students and two faculty/staff members, of their choosing. Reviewers will be chosen from:
  • Division of Student Life
  • University Libraries
  • College of Arts & Science
  • College of Engineering & Computing
  • Farmer School of Business
  • College of Creative Arts
  • College of Education, Health & Society

These 28 reviewers are appointed by the appropriate divisions. The evaluation session(s) will be held on one, or if necessary, a second consecutive Saturday in conformity with the established timeline. Each proposal will be evaluated by teams of reviewers. Training will be provided at the beginning of these evaluation sessions.

The final results will be evaluated by the IT Policy Committee (ITPC) subcommittee and sent to the ITPC for final approval.

Evaluation Rubric

The rubric will contain the following items which will be weighted with regard to importance.

  • Significance (completed by Committee)
  • Divisional Weight (completed by Division)
  • The goal is clearly stated and has sufficient depth to describe why it can make a difference to Miami students
  • Degree goals would benefit students
  • Implementation has sufficient clarity and depth to believe it can be implemented at Miami
  • There is sufficient explanation to understand how implementation will allow the goal to be achieved
  • The data gathering section contains sufficient details on how the achievement of the goal will be measured. Describes what information will be provided in the final report that tells the University the implementation was completed resulting in the goal being met.
  • The data gathering section contains sufficient details to measure how the goal affects student learning
  • This project is innovative, either by being totally new or new to Miami. While projects do not need to score highly in this category to be awarded, projects that are innovative will get higher rankings.
  • The degree to which it fits with the University's priorities (e.g., student wellness and big data)

Divisional Allocations Guidelines

  • Annual divisional allocations are determined by combining a base allocation of $20K/division with a percentage of the balance calculated using Fall semester enrollment and credit hour data.
  • Divisions are notified of the allocation in November.
  • Deans have full authority to spend the allocations within the guidelines outlined for the competitive awards.
  • Each division receiving a base allocation must submit an annual spending plan to ensure transparency in how the funds are spent.
  • A final report comparing planned to actual spending is required no later than August 1 of the following fiscal year. 
  • This report should call out any/all funding specifically in support of graduate education or student life.