Unleashing Our Potential: Strategic Direction 2000 through 2005

UCSF School of Pharmacy decisions and activities were guided from 2000 through 2005 by its first strategic plan, which was the first campus strategic plan.

The plan identified the five most critical issues facing the School, posed them in the form of questions, and clearly defined benchmarks in the form of specific goals and objectives for measuring the School's progress. The answers to these questions formed the core direction for the School.

The five questions were:

1. How will we develop and implement new, collaborative research initiatives that address emerging drug-related research questions of critical importance to the public?
2. How will we educate tomorrow's pharmacy researchers and practitioners to be the most proficient, most marketable, and most farsighted leaders in their fields?
3. How will we secure the space and funding required to apply fully our expertise and to create dynamic new programs in the best interest of the public?
4. How can we build a unifying organizational culture that enhances collegiality, promotes diversity and respect, and heralds achievement at all levels?
5. How can we more effectively extend our reach beyond academia to improve the health and well-being of the public and encourage mutually beneficial partnerships?

The plan was a flexible guide and was reviewed and refocused at regular intervals as necessary.

Related plans

• Subsequent strategic plan: Pressing Ahead in New Directions: Strategic Course 2007–2012
• Current strategic plan: Leading Change: Strategic Plan 2015–2020

Jump below to

• Dean’s summary
• Mission
• Profile
  • At a glance
  • Numbers
• The issues
  • Combining forces
  • New leaders
  • Resources
  • Community
  • Reaching out
• Addenda
  • Planning process: Timeline
  • Planning process: Participants
  • Glossary of terms

Dean’s summary

Dear Friends:

There is no more exciting time than now for the School of Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco. Armed as never before with tremendous knowledge in chemistry, biology, technology, and clinical practice, the School has defined where it needs to go and what it needs to make that journey possible. Already, we are developing important new programs in areas such as pharmaco­genomics, which will uncover individual genetic differences in our response to drugs, and integrated health information systems, which will manage, coordinate, and better evaluate the growing expanse of information about the health of individuals and groups.

A decade from now, these and other initiatives will have improved dramatically the effectiveness of drugs against disease.

Twenty years from now, the plans we implement today will lead to a world of drugs tailored to treat individual forms of disease in individual patients. These drugs will have the lowest risks and side effects, and they will challenge diseases that our colleagues in medicine will by then be able to predict and diagnose more precisely.

As we move into the future, the UCSF School of Pharmacy will be a primary force behind a new era of “smart” medicines that subordinate disease and sustain lifelong health. In this future, the School will shape the role of the pharmacist yet again to be that of health promoter, disease prevention specialist, health maintenance and chronic disease manager, and health information analyst.

Welcome to these pages, where I enthusiastically share with you the strategic direction for the UCSF School of Pharmacy for the years 2000 through 2005. We entitle it Unleashing Our Potential because, in the midst of an era of tremendous change, we clearly see the need to break free of our current ways of thinking and working in order to make real what we know is possible in pharmaceutical research, pharmacy clinical care, and professional and graduate education. To this end, this document summarizes the School’s plans to:

• Develop major multidisciplinary research initiatives in the pharmaceutical sciences at the interfaces of chemistry, genomics, computer science, and clinical science—all of which exploit our strengths in these areas;
• Study the best ways for patients and consumers to make informed and safe decisions about increasingly complex regimens of prescription and nonprescription drugs and dietary supplements, and marry what we learn with constantly evolving information technologies and changing ways in which consumers best receive information;
• Grow new, cross-school PhD graduate programs in chemistry and chemical biology, pharmaceutical sciences and pharmaco­genomics, and medical information science that will prepare tomorrow’s new and farsighted leaders in science;
• Continue to assess and redefine the PharmD professional curriculum to ensure that our graduates are superb, innovative, and caring clinical pharmacists who will shape the future of pharmacy through policies, practices, and research that enhance the safe and effective use of drugs;
• Secure the requisite space and funding required to move forward;
• Create a unifying School culture that promotes respect, celebrates differences, and encourages maximum achievement at all levels; and
• Extend our impact beyond academia by learning from, partnering with, and sharing our expertise with key audiences in both the public and private sectors.

While each part of our plan is critical, identifying appropriate, consolidated space and funding to support new programs and attract new talent is paramount, for space and funding are prerequisites to transforming our aspirations into real discoveries, programs, products, and services.

We must take steps now to secure these resources; launch new research and education programs; use technology to maximize our communication and work; maintain the human-to-human contact that sustains the respect we must have for one another and that fosters creativity; increase the diversity among us; and share our expertise with the public. As we do these things, we will have a UCSF School of Pharmacy that continues to anticipate, innovate, and lead.

This is a daunting agenda, but we have a history of taking bold action. Looking back over the 30 years that have spanned my career in pharmacy at UCSF, I see countless examples of how academic courage led to a School widely recognized for its leadership.

One story is especially germane. When I began my studies at UCSF toward a PharmD professional degree, there was no such thing as a health care “team” approach to patient care. Then one day, School of Pharmacy basic science faculty members who were working with members of the School of Medicine clinical faculty proposed the radical idea that pharmacists—working as partners with physicians and nurses—could use their drug therapy expertise to advance rational drug therapy for patients. This idea turned into practice, and the pharmacist emerged from behind the pharmacy counter to the side of the patient’s hospital bed.

That notion of a clinical pharmacist has now become a national standard for professional excellence and patient care.

This document proposes a path for the School’s future that is similarly bold and courageous, and it defines the benchmarks for measuring our success. We will revisit the plan repeatedly during the next five years to assess our progress and alter our course as circumstances dictate. To succeed, we will need the commitment and help of many. I urge you, members of the School’s larger family, UCSF colleagues and administrators, and leaders in business and industry—all of you who advocate excellence in pharmacy—to embrace the School’s plan for the future, make it your own, and work with us to make it a reality.
​

Mary Anne Koda-Kimble, PharmD
Dean
UCSF School of Pharmacy
February 2000

Mission

The School of Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco is dedicated to maximizing human health and well-being. As a public graduate-level institution, the School educates pharmacy professionals and scientists, advances scientific discovery, cares for patients, serves the public, and advocates on the public’s behalf. The School is committed to promoting within its ranks collaboration, diversity of thought, and mutual respect. The School takes seriously its specific responsibilities to:

• Educate PharmD professional students as compassionate, innovative, flexible leaders in the pharmaceutical care of individual patients and the community as a whole, clinicians who think independently while working collaboratively and who demonstrate a commitment to the lifelong learning required to remain experts in the safe and optimally effective use of drug products in patients;
• Educate PhD graduate students to understand and apply concepts, work collaboratively, and think beyond the scope of their specific disciplines in order to become accomplished scientists who are experts and leaders in drug discovery and development;
• Recruit and develop effective, dedicated, scholarly teachers who inspire their students to pursue lifelong learning in the health sciences and work in the service of human health;
• Conduct exceptional basic science, translational science, clinical science, health policy, and health services research, which leads to important scientific understandings, innovative drug products, effective clinical practices, and public policies that illuminate knowledge about drug action and advance human health;
• Provide the public and health system with the specialized clinical pharmacy care and information it needs to optimize the therapeutic use of drugs and reduce the risk of adverse drug events;
• Serve the community through public service activities that anticipate and meet the pharmacy information needs of the public, so that individuals can make more informed decisions about their own health;
• Catalyze and clarify new perspectives on pharmacy-related issues within academia, business, industry, health care, and government in order to advance the field of pharmacy for the benefit of the public;
• Teach health care providers about new developments in pharmacy that affect health sciences education, patient care, and the health of our communities;
• Defend the health of the public by sharing evidence-based opinions with policy-makers, health care providers, and health care system and industry leaders; and
• Champion interdisciplinary approaches to pharmacy questions in order to promote new scientific discoveries and to teach and care for the public more effectively and efficiently.

Profile

The energies of the School of Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco are focused on building programs today that will lead to a future where sophisticated and tailored medicines not only subdue disease but sustain lifelong health, and where the pharmacist is not only an expert in pharmaceutical care, but an expert as well in areas ranging from chronic disease management to disease prevention.

To this end, the School’s faculty members are developing new science, clinical, and education initiatives that include a research nexus in pharmaco­genomics, an evidence-based program for consumer information and education on prescription and nonprescription drugs and dietary supplements, three PhD graduate programs, and three PharmD professional program pathways.

Through these and other initiatives, the School’s future contributions to improved health will echo those made in its past—contributions such as the development of a computer-based molecular docking program that calculates how potential drugs might attach to target molecules, the development of structure-based inhibitors of influenza and HIV, the training of PharmD professionals as drug therapy experts and essential members of the clinical health care team, and the growth of pharmaco­kinetics into what is now an essential field of pharmaceutical science.

Regardless of the specific initiative or the era from which it evolved, the energies and resources of the School have been and will remain focused on improving the health of the public through drug-related research, the education of PharmD professionals and PhD scientists, postgraduate education and training, public service, clinical care, and public policy. Indeed, public health has always been paramount, for this School is the only public graduate pharmacy school in the state.

While the School is organized administratively into three departments and an organized research unit, its work cuts across departments and disciplines and increasingly across health sciences schools campuswide.

Because of the quality of its science, the School receives dramatically more research funding from the National Institutes of Health than any other pharmacy school in the nation. U.S. News and World Report ranks the UCSF School of Pharmacy as top in the nation.

The School is one of four professional schools—along with those of dentistry, medicine, and nursing—at UCSF, which is an exclusively graduate-level institution and the only one of the nine University of California campuses devoted solely to the health sciences. UCSF is home to major research enterprises in each school, a graduate division, a medical center, and Langley Porter Psychiatric Institute. The campus is also closely affiliated with San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center and the Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco.

UCSF evolved on 107 acres of donated land above Golden Gate Park, and it now encompasses several major sites in San Francisco. Ground was broken in 1999 for a new 43-acre UCSF research site in San Francisco’s Mission Bay district. Many School of Pharmacy scientists with expertise in the areas of structural and chemical biology and molecular design will be among the first wave of UCSF researchers to relocate to Mission Bay.

At a glance

Dean		Mary Anne Koda-Kimble, PharmD
Departments	Biopharmaceutical Sciences	Kathleen M. Giacomini, PhD, Chair
	Clinical Pharmacy	Michael E. Winter, PharmD, Acting chair Lloyd Young, PharmD, Chair (effective June 2000)
	Pharmaceutical Chemistry	Thomas L. James, PhD, Chair
Basic Science Research Institute	Molecular Design Institute (MDI) (The MDI is an Organized Research Unit (ORU) of the University of California, San Francisco.)	Irwin D. Kuntz, PhD, Director
Select areas of expertise		Bioinformatics Bioorganic chemistry Clinical pharmacy Computational chemistry Drug delivery systems Drug design and delivery Drug information systems Drug metabolism and transport Education and training methodology Gene delivery/therapy Mass spectrometry Molecular targeting Nuclear magnetic resonance Pharmaceutical economics, outcomes, and policy Pharmaceutical technology Pharmaco­genomics and toxicogenomics Pharmaco­kinetics​/​pharmaco­dynamics Pharmacy administration and practice modeling Protein engineering Structural biology Toxicology
Academic programs	Professional program	Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) degree with pathways in: Pharmaceutical care Pharmaceutical policy and management Pharmaceutical science
	Graduate program	Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degrees in: Chemistry and chemical biology (approval pending) Medical information science (approved) Pharmaceutical chemistry (program ending) Pharmaceutical sciences and pharmaco­genomics (approval pending)
Postdoctoral programs	Residencies	Postdoctoral professional residencies in: Ambulatory care Community pharmacy Drug information analysis Hospital pharmacy administration Infectious disease Oncology Pharmacy practice Pediatrics Women’s health
	Postdoctoral fellowships
	Visiting professorships
Continuing education programs
Major research facilities		Computer Graphics Laboratory Confocal Microscopy Facility Magnetic Resonance Laboratory Mass Spectrometry Facility Protein and Nucleic Acid Sequencing Analysis and Oligomer Synthesis Laboratory
Major instructional facilities		Basic Science Instruction Center Thomas A. Oliver Informatics Resource Center
Select established programs		California Poison Control System The Cochrane Collaboration Corporate Scholars Program Drug Information Analysis Service Drug Products Service Laboratory Drug Research Unit Drug Studies Unit Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy Studies International Program in Clinical Pharmacy Education with Tokyo University of Pharmacy and Life Sciences

Numbers

as of January 2000

Faculty	paid	84
	voluntary	627
Students	PharmD	478
	PhD	119
Postdoctoral fellows		84
Postdoctoral residents		22
Postdoctoral visiting professors		2
Staff		277
Academic appointees		62
Alumni	PharmD (includes BS)	5,328
	PhD	446

The issues

This document summarizes how the School of Pharmacy at the University of California, San Francisco will focus its energies over the next five years—and why. The School has identified the five most critical issues it faces and has posed them as questions. Resolution of these issues is addressed through specific goals and objectives. Each objective incorporates concrete action steps and will be implemented by specific individuals within the School.

Many overt and subtle relationships exist among the issues presented here. Common underlying themes in this document are those of space and funding. If the School is to carry out its mission and make important leaps in research, education, patient care, and public service, it must have adequate, contiguous, well-planned space and appropriate funding.

The School approaches the future with aspirations that are clear and concrete and with the understanding that the routes to reaching its goals must necessarily be flexible. The School’s Leadership Group will recommend adjustments to the School’s strategic direction as time, circumstances, and new opportunities dictate. At each of the next five fall faculty meetings, the Leadership Group will report on the School’s progress toward reaching specific goals and on any alterations in plans.

In terms of the deadline dates that appear on the following pages, reference to a given year (“By 2001,” for example) means by January 1 of that year.

A glossary of terms used in this document is provided as an addendum.

Scores of committed people contributed to crafting this roadmap to the School’s future. A diagram of the planning process and a list of the planning participants: see Timeline and Participants.

Combining forces

How will the UCSF School of Pharmacy develop and implement new, collaborative research initiatives that address emerging drug-related research questions of critical importance to the public?

Current situation

By any measure, the UCSF School of Pharmacy is a leader in research. Historically, the School’s faculty members have played prominent roles in defining the fields of clinical pharmacy, pharmaco­kinetics, drug development, biotechnology, and molecular drug design. In the 1970s the School pioneered the field of pharmaco­kinetics. In 1993, the School established the Molecular Design Institute (MDI) to promote and coordinate research and education in the broad area of molecular design, with particular emphasis on the discovery, design, and delivery of unique drugs.

The School is spearheading—with faculty members in schools campuswide—the development of three important new areas of research at UCSF:

• Chemical biology, which involves the study of the molecules engaged in both normal and pathologic biological processes. The goal of this research is to disrupt disease-causing biological processes.
• Pharmaco­genomics, which involves the application of genetics and genomics to the discovery, development, and therapeutic use of drugs. This rapidly growing research field, fueled by advances in the Human Genome Project, will soon prove drug-genotype interactions to be as important to therapeutics as drug-drug interactions.
• Bioinformatics, which involves the collection and organization of information about genes and related biological structures and processes using computational and statistical methods. High-speed, sophisticated ways of accessing, comparing, and applying the overwhelming amount of biological information being generated will yield new ways to effectively prevent, treat, and cure disease.

Members of the School’s faculty are also leading new research initiatives within the areas of pharmaco­kinetics, pharmaco­dynamics, drug delivery, health services, clinical pharmacy, pharmaceutical outcomes, and health and pharmaceutical policy. And they continue to develop enabling technologies, including software, which are used to advance science and drug discovery in hundreds of laboratories worldwide.

It is not surprising that many of the School’s new research plans cut across departments and schools, for this approach to solving scientific problems is deeply rooted in UCSF’s culture. Over the years, UCSF scientists have consistently defied traditional basic science department boundaries and have exploited insights shared across disciplines. These collegial, coordinated explorations have accelerated the speed of scientific discoveries.

The interdisciplinary basic science model is now expanding to include the perspectives of clinical scientists, health care providers, health policy researchers, and educators among all UCSF health sciences schools. Partnerships with business and industry, governmental agencies, and scientific and professional organizations will broaden further the reach of this expanded model of collaboration and will advance and promote the transfer of academic insights into the public domain. A number of what are becoming known as “collaborative centers” at UCSF already are emerging as vanguards of this new, all-encompassing approach.

This model is not only one of intellectual collaboration—it is also one of physical proximity. While programs without walls have existed at UCSF for years due to the lack of space, it is clear that the new and emerging collaborative centers at UCSF require contiguous space. For it is when faculty members physically meet each other in hallways or in coffee rooms that their insights and ideas often collide as well, leading to novel approaches to solving health sciences problems.

Goals and objectives

To unleash its full potential, the UCSF School of Pharmacy faculty must continue to launch and nurture new research and academic initiatives. By assessing the School’s core strengths, applying them in new ways to address emerging issues, and melding them with the rich faculty resources within UCSF, the School is poised to lead the way in successful new research activities from which the public ultimately will benefit. These activities will take various forms, from interdisciplinary programs to expanded, full-scale campuswide collaborative centers encompassing basic science, translational science, clinical science, patient care, education, and public policy.

Essential to the success of these new scientific explorations is the space required to physically bring together a wide range of faculty members and their staffs in laboratories, offices, and seminar rooms. Essential as well is the ongoing requisite funding to recruit and retain faculty; to acquire state-of-the-art research equipment; to hire essential administrative and support staff; and to furnish, maintain, and update laboratory, office, and seminar spaces. The School sees, as well, a growing need to bring to the attention of the broader health sciences community—from academia to industry—the emerging trends and visions of pharmaceutical sciences research, education, and care that will help shape the School’s future.

Goal 1: Establish a fully functioning collaborative research Center for Bioinformatics and Quantitative Biology.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, identify a core group of faculty members for the center; complete a comprehensive center plan proposal, and submit for review and approval.
2. By 2002, secure a campus administrative commitment for a minimum of 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of laboratory space at UCSF Mission Bay to house a bioinformatics and quantitative biology core facility and research space for six to 10 faculty members.
3. By 2002, establish symposia, seminars, and related activities for the center.
4. By 2002, recruit two to five new faculty members in bioinformatics and quantitative biology to be housed at Parnassus until UCSF Mission Bay space becomes available.
5. By 2002, establish state-of-the-art computational facilities.
6. By 2003, attract a minimum of 35 graduate students to work with center faculty members.
7. By 2003, secure a minimum of $5 million to fund ongoing center operations and activities.
8. By 2004, occupy the new space at UCSF Mission Bay.
9. By 2004, complete the recruitment of three to four new faculty members in bioinformatics and quantitative biology.
10. By 2005, review center progress to assess the impact of center research on contemporary problems in biological, chemical, and pharmaceutical sciences.

Goal 2: Establish a fully functioning collaborative research Center for Chemistry and Disease. (This name is not final.)

Objectives:

1. By 2001, fully engage center core faculty members in center planning; complete a comprehensive center plan proposal, and submit for review and approval.
2. By 2001, engage center core faculty members and affiliated faculty members in center-driven research, and sponsor scholarly symposia, seminars, and related activities.
3. By 2003, establish state-of-the-art chemical and structural biology core research laboratories for center personnel that house parallel and combinatorial synthesis technologies, expression array technologies, and analytical facilities.
4. By 2003, attract a minimum of 60 graduate students to the center and provide support for 12 to15 graduate students via a training grant associated with the center.
5. By 2003, secure a minimum of $5 million for the core funding needed to outfit facilities and for ongoing center operations and activities.
6. By 2004, recruit four to five new faculty members in chemical and structural biology.
7. By 2005, review center progress to assess the impact of center research on the use of chemical biology to understand the molecular interactions involved in disease pathology and treatment, and on the application of these findings to the development of effective therapeutics.

Goal 3: Establish a fully functioning collaborative research Center for pharmaco­genomics.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, identify a core group of faculty members for the center; complete a comprehensive center plan proposal, and submit for review and approval.
2. By 2001, secure a campus administrative commitment for a minimum of 20,000 to 30,000 square feet of laboratory space at UCSF Mission Bay to house a pharmaco­genomics core facility and laboratories for six to 10 faculty members.
3. By 2001, establish symposia, seminars, and related activities for the center.
4. By 2002, recruit two new faculty members in pharmaco­genomics to be housed at Parnassus until UCSF Mission Bay space becomes available.
5. By 2002, establish a state-of-the-art pharmaco­genomics core research facility that houses sequencing technologies, expression array technologies, and model organism facilities.
6. By 2002, establish a free-standing UCSF research unit that links academic activities of the center to pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries; this linking research unit will be housed off campus and ultimately will be sited at UCSF Mission Bay as part of the industrial rim development.
7. By 2003, attract a minimum of 35 graduate students to work with center faculty members.
8. By 2003, secure a minimum of $5 million to fund ongoing center operations and activities.
9. By 2004, occupy the new space at UCSF Mission Bay.
10. By 2004, complete the recruitment of three to four new faculty members in pharmaco­genomics.
11. By 2005, review center progress to assess the impact of center research on the therapeutic use of drugs, and on drug discoveries and development.

Goal 4: Establish a fully functioning, evidence-based Center for Responsible Consumer Self Care.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, complete a comprehensive center plan proposal and submit for review and approval.
2. By 2001, identify a center director.
3. By 2002, secure a minimum of $5 million to fund ongoing center operations and activities.
4. By 2002, fully engage center core faculty members and affiliated faculty members in center-driven research, consumer information, education, public outreach, and related activities.
5. By 2003, establish a funded communications vehicle that provides to consumers objective, evidence-based information about prescription and nonprescription drugs and dietary supplements.
6. By 2003, recruit two to three new faculty members who specialize in self care research areas.
7. By 2004, demonstrate the direct and positive impact of center activities on consumer decision-making and public policy.

Goal 5: Consider, develop, and prioritize major School-led research initiatives over the next five years.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, determine the criteria and scope of candidate initiatives.
2. By 2001, determine the School review, approval, and prioritization process for these initiatives.
3. By 2001, identify the amount and location of space and funding and the partnerships needed to allow new initiatives to proceed and succeed.

Goal 6: Serve as a catalyst within the greater health sciences arena for promoting new ways to define and creatively address pharmaceutical policy, pharmacy practice, and pharmacy education.

Objectives:

1. By 2003, establish regular roundtable discussions among academic, business, industry, and government leaders to identify trends and forecasts related to the future of pharmacy-related issues, facilitate the exchange of ideas, and spark future collaborations.
2. By 2004, initiate at least three meaningful educational collaborations among California schools of pharmacy.
3. By 2004, create at least three new multidisciplinary, interschool approaches to teaching primary care subjects to health professional students.
4. By 2004, support at least five community health initiatives led by School of Pharmacy students that bring together students from other disciplines or schools of pharmacy to benefit public health.
5. By 2006, establish two formal, ongoing partnerships with international educational or research institutions that advance pharmacy education, practice, and research worldwide.

New leaders

How will the UCSF School of Pharmacy educate tomorrow’s pharmacy researchers and practitioners to be the most proficient, most marketable, and most farsighted leaders in their fields?

Current situation

Education is the very heart of the UCSF School of Pharmacy. The brightest potential PhD graduate students and PharmD professional students apply to this School, and the School’s expectations of its students are constantly being raised to reflect the demands of tomorrow.

Not surprisingly, the UCSF School of Pharmacy faculty is known for its penchant for forging new directions in education. Many of the School’s innovations have been adopted by academic institutions throughout the world. In 1955, the School was one of the first in the nation to offer the PharmD professional degree. Beginning in the mid-1960s, the professional curriculum was reshaped dramatically to teach pharmacists the specialized clinical skills needed to participate fully in patient care.

In the mid-1990s, tumultuous and fast-paced changes in health care delivery and scientific discovery inspired the faculty to once again redesign the School’s curriculum. Along with unprecedented advances in drug discovery, the rapid spread of managed care in California and throughout the nation presaged new and emerging roles for pharmacists in health services and clinical research, drug policy development, and drug therapy management. In response, the faculty has created a dynamic new PharmD professional curriculum that retains the core elements of its clinical curriculum, while giving students the opportunity to enhance their skills and knowledge in one of three areas of emphasis: pharmaceutical care, pharmaceutical policy and management, or pharmaceutical science. Because of these new pathways, the faculty is further challenged to integrate and coordinate courses, use teaching methods that engage students in active learning, and experiment with new approaches to post-graduate education. That challenge will only grow as advances in science result in ever more complicated drug choices and highly individualized drug regimens.

In science, distinctions among traditional disciplines have become blurred as cellular biology, molecular biology, and genetics have begun to merge with the fields of physical, synthetic, and computational chemistry. Increasingly, pharmaceutical science is demanding knowledge of cellular and molecular biology—as well as genetics and genomics—for optimal drug discovery, drug development, and drug delivery. To help shape and lead this expanded view, the School is now looking beyond the traditional scope of pharmaceutical chemistry toward a new academic mosaic that encompasses all of chemistry and biology, as well as the emerging fields of informatics and genomics.

Repeated success at UCSF has shown that multidepartmental PhD graduate programs are key ingredients for stimulating research across disciplines and across schools. The School of Pharmacy already actively participates in School of Medicine-based graduate programs in biophysics, bioengineering, and biological sciences. The School of Pharmacy faculty has now embarked on a journey to reformulate the School’s single graduate program in pharmaceutical chemistry, which is viewed as the best in the country, into three new multidepartmental graduate programs: one in chemistry and chemical biology, another in pharmaceutical sciences and pharmaco­genomics, and a third in medical information science. This expansion in the graduate program will better prepare young researchers for the dramatic changes under way in science. The graduate program in medical information science has received academic approval. It is anticipated that the graduate programs in chemistry and chemical biology and in pharmaceutical sciences and pharmaco­genomics will soon be approved.

These new programs require space and funding, both of which are inadequate to meet the School’s need for academic growth. The cost of living in the San Francisco Bay Area is another major deterrent to the further development of the School’s professional and graduate programs and, in fact, to all of the School’s programs whose future relies on the recruitment of talented and vigorous new faculty, postdoctoral fellows and residents, and students.

Goals and objectives

To succeed, the UCSF School of Pharmacy’s academic programs must remain as dynamic as pharmacy itself. The School must implement the curricular innovations it has designed to date, systematically evaluate their outcomes, and modify their approaches. At the same time, it must constantly prepare PharmD professionals and PhD scientists to become tomorrow’s new leaders in their fields. The development of new academic programs requires intellectual foresight, and it demands resources. New and expanded education programs require additional, exceptional faculty members. Yet such new talent can be recruited only if the School successfully addresses the cost of living in the Bay Area, especially the cost of housing, and has the funds to support the salaries and start-up costs of new faculty members and the space for them to carry out high-caliber research and teaching.

Goal 1: Continue to refine and implement a PharmD professional curriculum…

…that prepares students for the ever-changing field of clinical pharmacy.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, determine the final requisite competencies for the core PharmD curriculum, as well as for each of the three PharmD pathways.
2. By 2002, determine the final curriculum for each PharmD pathway, and design and implement the courses included in each of those pathways.
3. By 2003, fully integrate the content of all courses within the core PharmD curriculum and within the curriculum of each of the three pathways by establishing ongoing, formal methods by which faculty members exchange course content, learning objectives for each course, teaching methods applied in each course, and student assessments of course effectiveness.

Goal 2: Implement high-caliber PhD graduate programs…

…in which students benefit from the research strengths of the School and examine problems from multidisciplinary perspectives.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, receive approval for and implement a new graduate program in chemistry and chemical biology with emphasis on education in synthetic chemistry, computational chemistry, structural biology, and molecular and cellular biology in the context of investigating important biological questions.
2. By 2001, receive approval for and implement a new graduate program in pharmaceutical sciences and pharmaco­genomics with an emphasis on molecular pharmacology, drug discovery, drug delivery and development, pharmaco­genomics, and toxicogenomics.
3. By 2002, recruit a minimum of five new faculty members to enable a subsequent increase in student enrollment to 40 for an expanded graduate program in medical information science.

Goal 3: Teach courses using practices, methods, and technologies that enhance student learning.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, implement programs to improve how the faculty and students use technology for teaching and learning across distances.
2. By 2003, adapt all courses to one or more innovative teaching methods.
3. By 2006, have in place a fully functioning School program that promotes and rewards the art and science of teaching.

Goal 4: Evaluate the PharmD professional curriculum and PhD graduate program courses of study…

…to ensure that they are effective in preparing highly skilled future clinicians and scientists to become leaders in their fields.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, institute an annual comprehensive curriculum assessment program that reviews how and what PharmD students are learning.
2. By 2003, begin to conduct, every two years, outcome assessment surveys of the School’s graduates to provide feedback to the Educational Policy Committee and the Leadership Group.
3. By 2004, initiate an employer-based review system for determining the strengths and weaknesses of the School’s PharmD and PhD graduates.

Goal 5: Create continuing education programs…

…that give seasoned professionals the new skills they need to master changes in science, therapeutics, health delivery, management, and policy.

Objective:

1. By 2004, ensure that 50 percent of all individuals who complete the School’s continuing education courses apply new skills.

Goal 6: Increase the number of PharmD professional students trained in basic science, clinical, and health services research.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, revitalize and implement a streamlined joint PharmD/PhD program in pharmaceutical sciences that attracts five to eight students per year.
2. By 2003, establish a postdoctoral fellowship in which PharmD professionals can obtain research training in pharmaceutical or health services research.
3. By 2003, develop a more formal relationship with colleagues in other UCSF schools to create a training program that prepares PharmD professional students to conduct high-quality clinical research.

Goal 7: Find practical solutions to the cost-of-living barriers…

…to attracting talented new faculty members, postdoctoral fellows and residents, and students to the School.

Objective:

1. By 2002, participate in a campuswide task force whose goals are to evaluate cost-of-living barriers to recruitment and propose reasonable and effective solutions to the campus.

Resources

How will the UCSF School of Pharmacy secure the space and funding it requires to fully apply its expertise and to create dynamic new programs in the best interest of public health?

Current situation

As with the University of California in general, the UCSF School of Pharmacy is state-assisted, rather than fully state-funded. Of the School’s approximately $43 million fiscal year 1999 budget:

• 21 percent came from the state;
• 27 percent came from federal contracts and grants;
• 20 percent derived from professional fees and services;
• 15 percent came from special funding for the California Poison Control System;
• 8 percent was received from nonfederal contracts and grants;
• 5 percent was donated through private gifts; and
• the remaining 4 percent came from indirect cost recovery funds, clinical trials, and professional student fee revenue.

The School’s state budget allocation is calculated by ratios of a set number of students per individual faculty member. These ratios vary by academic program. In the case of the School of Pharmacy PharmD professional program, that ratio is 11 PharmD professional students to one faculty member. While this ratio might have been appropriate in the 1950s, when large lecture and laboratory classes were the norm, today’s teacher-intensive, clinical experience-driven curriculum dictates that there be far fewer students per faculty member. Due to this unfavorable ratio, the state budget allocation for the PharmD professional program falls far short of the School’s actual cost for instruction of PharmD students. The School’s resources are stretched thin as it strives to sustain its highly successful clinical approach to pharmacy education with a desperately inadequate number of faculty members per student. The faculty is at a breaking point. It can stretch no more. Decreases in projected funding from the sources described below will result in a budget deficit by 2001.

In accordance with University of California Regental policy, the School instituted a PharmD professional student fee, beginning with the class entering in the fall of 1996. The approved plan, upon which the School’s budget projections were made, called for gradual fee increases per student per class over four years. Ultimately, each student in each class would pay $5,000 per year. The fee increases were unexpectedly frozen at $3,000 by the state in 1998. The School, which ramped up its faculty recruitment efforts based upon the implementation of a full-fee schedule, now is canceling recruitment plans and trimming a budget that already is minimal at best.

The state budget cuts of the 1990s also have weakened the School’s funding position. Those cuts have not yet been restored. The state’s overall allocation falls far short of the cost of instruction.

The School has supplemented the instruction budget with revenue from a service contract with UCSF Medical Center. These funds help to pay for faculty salaries. However, these funds are now at risk due to UCSF Medical Center budget cuts.

Federal contract and grant funding, which is a significant portion of the School’s budget, is unlikely to increase unless resources are found to recruit new faculty members, develop new research programs, and significantly expand research space. The same is true for nonfederal contract and grant funding.

The School is critically short of space. The unfulfilled promise of research space at Laurel Heights has left School scientists woefully cramped. School of Pharmacy scientists continue to receive research funding comparable to that received by their campus peers, yet they work in two-thirds of the laboratory space held by those same peers. Many faculty members do not have individual offices in which to concentrate on their work and prepare to teach, and there is no space for the additional faculty members needed to develop new curricula and programs. PhD graduate and PharmD professional students do not have adequate space from which to launch public service programs or in which they can congregate informally for intellectual discussions or debates.

Furthermore, existing School space is scattered, which makes it difficult for people to personally identify with the School as a whole. While some programs function well on the physical frontier of the campus or in isolated locations across San Francisco, others—such as emerging collaborative centers—suffer greatly if isolated.

Private giving has not increased steadily over the past several years, and it will not do so in the future without a carefully crafted, aggressively implemented development plan for private support. Furthermore, recruitment of new faculty members will be a challenge, and seasoned members of the faculty will not remain at UCSF—regardless of the School’s excellence—without space in which to work or the funding necessary to expand the limits of discovery, clinical care, and education.

Goals and objectives

The resource picture for the UCSF School of Pharmacy is bleak. Space and funding shortages are at crisis points, and the extent to which these crises are resolved will dictate the School’s future. Over the decades, the academic and clinical programs of the School have been increasingly under-funded. The School has been forced to creatively juggle its budgets and its approaches to supporting its academic and clinical programs in order to ensure their viability. The full research potential of the School’s scientists is stymied by the simple lack of room. To maintain the status quo, let alone unleash the School’s full potential, the School must secure adequate space and adequate ongoing funding to excel in its mission.

Goal 1: Increase and consolidate the School’s space and modernize the existing physical infrastructure.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, secure a campus commitment of 120,000 assignable square feet of space—the majority of which is new construction—on the Parnassus campus under the control of the School of Pharmacy to help recoup space lost at Laurel Heights and to help accommodate growth since the Laurel Heights expansion was first planned.
2. By 2001, secure a campus commitment for appropriate space in building 24C at UCSF Mission Bay for the new collaborative research Center for pharmaco­genomics. (See Combining Forces, Goal 3.)
3. By 2002, secure a campus commitment for appropriate space at UCSF Mission Bay for the new collaborative research Center for Bioinformatics and Quantitative Biology. (See Combining Forces, Goal 1.)
4. By 2002, create an interim, consolidated School of Pharmacy administrative and cultural hub on the first-floor corridor of the Clinical Sciences Building.
5. By 2003, replace and upgrade 50 percent of the School’s shared instrument facilities.
6. By 2005, renovate 20 percent of all laboratory and office space.
7. By 2005, complete the physical reunion of as much current, noncontiguous School space on Parnassus as possible, including administrative and office space, laboratory space, teaching space, and space for professional and graduate student use.

Goal 2: Increase the permanent allocation of state funds from the University of California Office of the President.

Objectives:

1. By 2005, restore state funding from the general fund to inflation-adjusted 1992 figures.
2. By 2005, obtain additional funding, equivalent to a 3.5:1 student-faculty ratio, for the PharmD professional program.
3. By 2005, obtain state funds for an additional eight clinical pharmacy residents.

Goal 3: Increase extramural contracts and individual grants, center and program project grants, and training grants.

Objectives:

1. By 2004, increase total dollar amounts of individual contracts and grants by a minimum of 10 percent.
2. By 2004, obtain at least two more School-led center or program project grants.
3. By 2004, obtain at least one additional graduate student training grant.

Goal 4: Increase revenue-generating professional fee and service activities…

…that are consistent with, and supportive of, the School’s priorities.

Objective:

1. By 2003, initiate professional fee and service activities, which are based within the School, to double the dollar amounts of fiscal year 1999.

Goal 5: Increase private support from individuals, corporations, and foundations…

…for the School’s new and ongoing fundraising priorities.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, identify, qualify, and actively cultivate each year a minimum of five new donor prospects who have both the capacity and inclination to give $1 million or more to the School.
2. By 2006, increase the total current funds raised from private support by 20 percent per year beginning in the year 2000, and increase the total endowment funds raised from private support to $60 million during the same five-year time span.
3. By 2006, achieve the following participation rates of giving to the School: 100 percent faculty giving rate, 40 percent alumni giving rate, and 100 percent student giving rate.

Goal 6: Provide an infrastructure that will anticipate and meet the administrative needs of a rapidly growing and developing School.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, increase the number of administrative staff members in the School, based upon the results of a comprehensive assessment of need.
2. By 2003, implement Schoolwide systems to simplify and streamline administrative work.
3. By 2003, have in place a fully functioning, coordinated information technology support unit that anticipates and meets the computer-related and associated needs of the School.

Community

How can the UCSF School of Pharmacy build a unifying organizational culture that enhances collegiality, promotes diversity and respect, and heralds achievement at all levels?

Current situation

Keeping all members of the UCSF School of Pharmacy family interconnected in a meaningful way is a complex, but important challenge. The School is a community that includes faculty members and academic appointees, administrative and research staffs, PharmD professional students, PhD graduate students, clinical pharmacy residents, postdoctoral fellows, and alumni. While each of these groups has an affinity to a discrete School unit—most often a research laboratory, clinical practice site, or department—each group may be more or less out of touch with the School as a whole and unfamiliar with its mission. Two obstacles to widespread esprit de corps within the School are fragmentation of interests and the physical fragmentation caused by inadequate and scattered space.

Numerous factors have exacerbated a lack of cohesion among members of the faculty in particular. While most faculty members teach PharmD professional students, their research interests are disparate. The need for each individual faculty member to communicate outside of his or her own circle has not been a high priority because the School has not effectively expressed and embraced a common purpose, shared a common body of knowledge about the School, or actively engaged the School’s extended family as a whole in planning together for the future.

Woefully inadequate space has fractured the School in visible and invisible ways. The dashed hope of Laurel Heights as a nexus for School of Pharmacy people and programs left the School without a physical or cultural pivot point. There is now no space that can be pointed to as “the School of Pharmacy.” People within the School are dispersed throughout the Parnassus campus, Laurel Heights, Oyster Point, UCSF Mount Zion Medical Center, San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center, and a number of off-campus rental spaces. People are dispersed as well in satellite pharmacy practice sites located in San Diego, Los Angeles, and Sacramento. The eagerly anticipated expansion at UCSF Mission Bay will further spread many of the School’s basic science faculty members and academic appointees, staff members, PhD graduate students and postdoctoral fellows to yet another site.

While the work and expertise of the School’s family are indeed diverse, the School is not diverse by other measures. For example, too few female faculty members hold tenure-track positions in the department of pharmaceutical chemistry. Too few faculty members—male and female—are Hispanic, black/African-American, or American Indian. Hispanics, blacks/African-Americans, American Indians, whites, and males are under-represented in the PharmD student body. The problem is compounded by the fact that the pools from which the School recruits its faculty, students, and staff do not themselves reflect the diversity of the general population. The School and the University leadership are therefore challenged to use extraordinary measures to ensure that the applicant pools from which the School selects its students and recruits its faculty members, academic appointees, and staff members are as qualified and diverse as possible.

Goals and objectives

It is the people within the UCSF School of Pharmacy who animate and carry out the School’s mission of discovery, clinical care, education, and public service. These are people who pose and test hypotheses, make discoveries, teach professional and graduate students, care for patients, administer programs, file documents, answer phones, arrange meetings, deliver mail, and track budgets. In order for these people to unleash their full potential, the School must do everything it can to put into place the social and physical prerequisites for success. The School must herald diversity. The School must help underrepresented minorities become more competitive within the School’s applicant pools. The School must nurture the individual within the context of a broadly articulated and shared purpose and vision for the future. The School must practice collegiality and interdepartmental cooperation and appreciation within its ranks. The School must have the funding necessary for the continual professional development and training of its faculty members and academic appointees, its staff members, students, and administrators. And the School must provide the contiguous physical spaces in which its scientists, clinicians, students, and staff can excel in their work.

Goal 1: Create a culture within the School that is characterized by cooperation and mutual respect…

…where everyone within the School shares a common body of knowledge about the School, its mission, its plans, and the roles that each of them play in the School’s success.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, institute at least one School town hall meeting per year in which details about the School’s mission, organization, history, accomplishments, and future plans is shared.
2. By 2002, establish regular venues for Schoolwide intellectual and social exchange.
3. By 2003, have in place information networks that regularly update everyone within the School about School news and that provide forums for those same people to express their opinions, ideas, and concerns.

Goal 2: Create an identifiable and prominent physical presence for the School…

…that serves as an interdepartmental crossroads for the School’s family and as a physical symbol of the School to others within and outside the UCSF community.

Objective:

1. See Resources, Goal 1.

Goal 3: Champion diversity within the School in all possible ways.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, implement initiatives intended to address and resolve current inequities in diversity and to improve the competitiveness of underrepresented minorities within the School’s applicant pools.
2. By 2004, double the current fraction of underrepresented groups in the applicant pools for the PharmD professional, PhD graduate, and clinical residency programs.
3. By 2006, ensure that the diversity of the School’s PharmD professional students and PhD graduate students reflects the diversity of associated applicant pools statewide and nationwide.
4. By 2006, ensure that the diversity of the School’s faculty reflects the diversity of associated applicant pools statewide and nationwide.
5. By 2006, ensure that the diversity of the School’s staff more closely reflects the diversity of the qualified applicant pool within the San Francisco Bay Area.

Goal 4: Establish meaningful two-way School communications…

…with alumni, volunteer faculty members, parents, and friends.

Objectives:

1. By 2002, establish a routine mechanism for preparing and distributing information about the School to alumni and for receiving their comments, questions, and concerns.
2. By 2003, establish a routine mechanism for preparing and distributing information about the School to volunteer faculty members and for receiving their comments, questions, and concerns.
3. By 2003, implement an annual homecoming event attended by a majority of alumni, students, parents, and paid and volunteer faculty members.

Reaching out

How can the UCSF School of Pharmacy extend its reach beyond academia to improve more effectively the health and well-being of the public and to encourage mutually beneficial partnerships?

Current situation

For the UCSF School of Pharmacy to flourish, it must maintain its competitive edge and influence in an environment where budgets are tighter, the need for program support is greater, competition for donor dollars is keener, and the recruitment and retention of the world’s most eminent faculty members are more challenging than ever. And for the School of Pharmacy to best serve the public, it must involve itself with the public it serves. It must also share the benefit of its combined expertise and leadership with influential groups, from professional organizations to public policy committees.

Although the concept of marketing has not been widely embraced by academicians, more and more leaders of higher education across the nation are realizing that the prosperity of their institutions is increasingly tied to it. It simply is not good enough to presume that the School’s audiences understand that its intellectual capital, educational programs, research, and public service initiatives have value, add value, and are invaluable to improved public health and well-being.

To date, the School has been disorganized and disconnected in its efforts to engage a broader audience and communicate a purpose and vision. There has been no evidence-based understanding of how others view the School and no plan to increase visibility of the School and its mission beyond academia.

In reality, School of Pharmacy faculty members and academic appointees, administrative and research staffs, PharmD professional students, PhD graduate students, clinical pharmacy residents, postdoctoral fellows, and alumni are engaged each day in marketing the School. Whenever a department chair meets with a prospective donor or funding agency, whenever a member of the faculty presents his or her research or testifies before a governmental body, whenever a student participates in a community health fair, whenever an alumnus recommends the School to a prospective student, whenever a volunteer introduces the dean to a business leader who might become important to the School’s future—marketing is in play.

These unwitting marketing activities can no longer meet the needs of the School, nor help to answer the questions posed in this document.

One key factor in discovery, education, cultural cohesion, and resource procurement is the ability of the School to effectively bring about voluntary exchanges among target audiences that move the School forward. The purpose of marketing the School is to do just that.

Goals and objectives

While holding fast to its roots in the academic arena, the UCSF School of Pharmacy understands the need to be both nimble and savvy in the marketplace arena if it is to influence its constituents to act—to apply to the PharmD professional, PhD graduate, and postgraduate programs, to fund people and programs, to support legislation, to form partnerships—in ways that help the School reach its full potential. In order to help foster new ideas for collaborations with others on campus, it is clear that the full depth and breadth of the School’s expertise and potential must be made known within UCSF as well. To help achieve its own success, the School must create organized, integrated, and comprehensive marketing efforts designed to promote its mission and help meet the challenges outlined in this document. To be most effective, these plans should integrate closely with and benefit from UCSF campuswide marketing initiatives. Focused marketing efforts will require the investment of precious School discretionary funds, which are in very short supply.

Goal 1: Increase the visibility of the School among defined internal and external audiences…

…in order to further the School’s mission and its strategic directions.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, develop and implement a comprehensive, targeted marketing communications plan for the School in support of the School’s strategic directions.
2. By 2001, establish a regular means of sharing information about School activities, advances, and plans with the UCSF Office of Public Affairs.

Goal 2: Increase the depth and breadth of the School’s influence…

…in professional and public policy-related forums.

Objectives:

1. By 2001, develop and implement a comprehensive external relations plan for the School targeted at the professional and public policy arenas.
2. By 2001, establish a regular means of sharing information about pharmacy- and health-related public policy issues with the UCSF Office of Community and Governmental Relations.

Goal 3: Develop and institute a comprehensive, aggressive recruitment plan…

…to attract the nation’s brightest, most articulate, creative, and diverse applicants to its PharmD professional, PhD graduate, and postdoctoral programs.

Objectives:

1. By 2003, increase by 25 percent the number of exceptionally qualified PharmD, PhD, and postdoctoral applicants to the School.
2. See Community, Goal 3.

Addenda

Planning process: Timeline

Who	Does this	When
Dean	Studied — School’s Potential and Possible Futures	October 1998 – April 1999
Board of Overseers	Scanned — Changing Environment of Pharmacy	April 1999
Leadership Group	Revised — Mission Statement	Spring – Winter 1999
Leadership Group	Set — Planning Process	May 1999
Paid Faculty, Staff, Administrators	Assessed — School’s Current Situation	May 1999
School Retreat Attendees	Determined — Critical Issues Facing School	May 1999
Expanded Leadership Group	Created — 1st Strategic Direction Draft with Issues, Situations, Goals	May – July 1999
School Retreat Attendees	Reviewed — 1st Draft	July 1999
Expanded Leadership Group	Revised — 2nd Draft with Objectives	August – September 1999
School Retreat Attendees	Reviewed — 2nd Draft	October 1999
Leadership Group	Revised — 3rd Draft with Mission, Planning Process	October 1999
Board of Overseers, Alumni Board of Directors, Select School Volunteer Faculty, Administrators, Staff, Student Leaders, Select Campus Administrative Units	Reviewed — 3rd Draft	October – December 1999
Leadership Group	Revised — 4th Draft with Supporting Copy	December 1999
Campus Leaders	Reviewed — 4th Draft	February 2000
Leadership Group	Revised and Finalized — 5th Draft	February 2000
Dean	Distributed — Final Document	March 2000
Leadership Group	Implemented and Continually Assessed — Final Document	2000 through 2005

While five major drafts of this document were circulated for review, many more versions of the copy were considered by the Leadership Group between major draft reviews.

Planning process: Participants

UCSF School of Pharmacy Board of Overseers

• Bruce Bodaken
• James D. Cope
• Joseph Criscione
• David J. Fong, PharmD
• Richard D. Johnson, PharmD, PhD
• Robert C. Johnson
• Nancy U. Kamei, PharmD
• John W. Kozarich, PhD
• Russell Kwok, PhD
• Gary Mangiofico
• Ernest Mario, PhD
• Richard Penna, PharmD
• George Scangos, PhD
• Marilyn Standifer Shreve, RPh
• Catherine A. Sohn, PharmD
• Alice E. Till, PhD, Chair
• Raymond J. Townsend, PharmD
• Geraldine Vayson, PharmD
• Donna Walker

UCSF School of Pharmacy Leadership Group

Who	Title	Representing
Robert L. Day, PharmD	Associate Dean	School of Pharmacy
Kathleen M. Giacomini, PhD	Chair	Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy
Angela M. Hawkins	Associate Dean	Administration, School of Pharmacy
Thomas L. James, PhD	Chair	Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, School of Pharmacy
Mary Anne Koda-Kimble, PharmD	Dean	School of Pharmacy
Irwin D. Kuntz, PhD	Director	Molecular Design Institute, UCSF Organized Research Unit School of Pharmacy
Susan M. Levings	Assistant Dean	Planning and Communications, School of Pharmacy
Michael E. Winter, PharmD	Acting Chair	Department of Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy

UCSF School of Pharmacy retreat attendees

• Paid faculty
• School administrators and academic appointees
• Select volunteer UCSF School of Pharmacy faculty members, staff members, students, alumni, friends, members of the Board of Overseers, and staff from the UCSF offices of public affairs and development and alumni relations

UCSF School of Pharmacy Expanded Leadership Group

Leadership Group plus the following at various points in the planning process:

Who	Title	Representing
Lisa A. Bero, PhD	Chair	Faculty Council, School of Pharmacy
Christopher Cullander, PhD	Assistant Dean	Student and Curricular Affairs, School of Pharmacy
Margaret M. Kaplan	Executive Assistant to the Dean	School of Pharmacy
Peter A. Kollman, PhD	Associate Dean	Academic Affairs, School of Pharmacy
Lorie G. Rice, MPH	Associate Dean	External Relations, School of Pharmacy

UCSF School of Pharmacy Alumni Board of Directors

• Dennis Adair, PharmD, PhD

• Vince Angell, BS

• Steve Bacon, PharmD

• Bret Brodowy, PharmD

• Wayzell Fuller, PharmD

• Robert Gibson, PharmD

• Toby Herfindal, PharmD

• Joseph Hirschmann, PharmD

• Nelson Kobayashi, PharmD

• Winston Lee, PharmD

• Louise Lu, Student Representative

• Kejia Min, Student Representative

• Christopher Oliva, PharmD

• William Peterson, BS

• Cooky Quandt, PharmD

• Rick Satitpunwaycha, Student Representative

• Denise Takahashi, PharmD

• Geraldine Vayson, PharmD, President

• John Young, BS

UCSF School of Pharmacy student leaders

• PharmD professional students

  • Deborah Anderson

  • Jason Belk

  • Christian Choi

  • Tim Cutler

  • Louise Lu

  • Conan MacDougall

  • Keija Min

  • Katie Nguyen

  • Katherine Ramos

  • Rick Satitpunwaycha

  • Tonya Tran

  • Denise Wong

• PhD graduate students

  • Elizabeth Bennett

  • James Buckman

  • Lara Mangravite

  • Michael Oakley

  • Carolina Reyes

Select UCSF campus administrative units

• Academic Affairs
• Administration and Finance
• Campus Planning
• Community and Governmental Relations
• Development and Alumni Relations
• Public Affairs
• Research

UCSF campus leaders

Who	Title	Representing
Cliff Attkisson, Jr., PhD	Associate Vice Chancellor	Student Academic Affairs, UCSF
	Dean	Graduate Division
Dorothy F. Bainton, MD	Vice Chancellor	Academic Affairs, UCSF
Steve J. Barclay	Vice Chancellor	Administration and Finance, UCSF
Charles N. Bertolami, DDS, DMedSc	Dean	School of Dentistry
J. Michael Bishop, MD	Chancellor	UCSF
Haile T. Debas, MD	Vice Chancellor	Medical Affairs, UCSF
	Dean	School of Medicine
Kathleen A. Dracup, RN, FNP, DNSc, FAAN	Dean (effective March 2000)	School of Nursing
Zach W. Hall, PhD	Vice Chancellor	Research, UCSF
Bruce W. Spaulding	Vice Chancellor	University Advancement and Planning, UCSF