Orbis Cascade Alliance

“The council at large elects members to the board of directors from among their membership. The council consists of the director of the member institution library. It is the person who has voting privileges on behalf of their institution and, in the case of dissolution, the institution (not the library director) would share in the remaining assets.”

“The council at large elects members to the board of directors from among their membership. The council consists of the director of the member institution library.”

“The board of directors, the primary governing body, has delegated authority to the entire council for decisions such as adopting an operating budget.”

“Upon completion of the form, the business manager presents it to the executive director. After discussion and review, including any corrections or changes, it is then presented to the treasurer who may also wish to share it with the finance committee. After discussion, review and corrections or changes, the treasurer may present it to the entire board.”

“Membership is institutional in nature so, as representatives of their institution, each council member is required to meet the conflict of interest requirements at their individual institutions.”

“Recruitment and initial salary package: the alliance's goal is to recruit a high-level of leadership within the limits of available resources. The executive director is responsible for the administrative/operations decisions regarding the executive office, but also plays a strategic and visible role within the academic library community. The requirements of the position are expansive, and the market competition for these leadership positions is often intense. The board will negotiate and determine the initial compensation package which will include annual salary, retirement and health care contributions, and relocation expenses if appropriate. Any significant benefits with long-term financial implications, beyond the standard health and retirement agreements, will be discussed and approved by the board first. Salary increases: salary increases are determined by the board on an annual basis. Contributing factors include (1) cola based on industry standards and informed by the practices of member libraries. (2) merit based on exceeding expectations set forth in goals. The amount of merit increase is informed by industry standards and the practices of member libraries. (3) equity based on data for similar positions as gathered by the international coalition of library consortia, association for collaborative leadership, or similar groups. Salary determinations are forwarded the board chair to the dean of libraries, university of oregon, which serves as human resources host. The board will work with uo to resolve any questions of practice or policy that may arise. Compensation review: frequency: at least every 5 years. The irs form 990 requires nonprofit boards to engage in an executive director compensation comparison process. This process should include "a review of and approval by independent persons, comparability data, and contemporaneous substantiation of the deliberation and decision." regular compensation reviews can be conducted by the finance committee or board. Comparable data is compensation data from "similarly qualified," "functionally comparable, and similarly situated nonprofits (in the same or a nearby geographic area, of similar budget size, and in a similar or the same sub-sector). Periodically, the board should obtain compensation surveys or studies from outside compensation consultants.”

“Documents are currently available on our website. The public will find the mission statement, list of members, location of members, articles of incorporation, bylaws, membership memorandum of understanding (mou), resolutions, policies, membership application, criteria, expectations, obligations; council minutes, and board minutes.”

“Due to an administrative/clerical error the draft return was transmitted to the internal revenue service. The form 990 that was submitted was not yet complete, however, we are not able to identify in detail which line items changed from draft/originally filed version to the amended version. The amended return is the best reflection of the organization and its activities for the year ended june 30, 2015.”