The following checklist is provided to facilitate communication between the University Policy Committee (UPC) and the policy owner. As you develop your draft policy, this checklist is intended to elicit:

  • the University’s need for the proposed policy,
  • evidence that risk or value is sufficient to warrant the dedication of resources needed for policy development and management, and
  • evidence that the purpose and goal of the proposed policy is best accomplished by creating a new or revising an existing policy.

You may choose to address some of these issues as you complete the Policy Template. Please note that these issues may be addressed by the Committee when the policy is presented.

Items to consider as you develop your policy

  • Is the need or purpose of the policy clearly articulated?
  • Are the factors driving the need for the policy clearly defined?
  • Has the nature and extent of any risk associated with the continuing absence of this policy been determined?
  • Are the relevant risk factors are identified (such as legal, behavioral, financial, health and safety, reputational, management and operations)?
  • By what date must this policy be implemented? (if applicable)
  • Does the proposed policy or bylaw:
    • Comply with federal and state laws, rules and regulations?
    • Comply with Board of Regents’ (BOR) policies and UNLV Bylaws?
    • Comply with Presidential delegations of authority?
    • Impact existing policies or bylaws, procedures, forms (BOR, Senate)?
    • Impact other relevant areas?
  • To what extent will the policy affect University employees or students (e.g., approximate number of employees or specific categories of employee groups)?
  • To what extent will the policy affect other university constituencies (e.g., alumni, vendors, visitors to the campus, etc.)?
  • Are there any financial or other resource implications (human resource, technology, operations, etc.) of implementing this policy (e.g., cost savings, start-up costs, new systems or software, maintenance, training/education, enforcement)?
  • Where will the costs or savings be directed?
  • Have best practices in this area among other higher education institutions been reviewed and incorporated into this policy?
  • Has the potential need for manager discretion or flexibility in implementation of the policy been addressed?
  • Have the criteria and process used to grant exceptions to the policy, been identified, if applicable?
  • What targeted communications and training activities will be needed to build awareness and enable effective implementation of the policy, if applicable?
  • Have new or existing mechanisms/processes that ensure policy compliance been identified?
  • Have new or existing methods to measure compliance and policy effectiveness been identified?
  • Has the need for consequences for not abiding by the policy been considered for inclusion?
  • With what frequency will this policy undergo a comprehensive review (e.g., typically one to three years, depending on the level of risk.)?