This phase focuses primarily on data regarding needs and may include limited curriculum information to support the review effort.   

Pre-Proposal Development Phase

Faculty or academic units planning to develop a new program must begin with the submission of a Pre-Proposal Intent Form. This form structures the initial administrative review and must be submitted in CourseLeaf CIM. The intent stage is required for: 

• New academic programs (excluding undergraduate minors) 
• The addition or modification of campus location(s) where the program is taught 
• The addition or modification of the modality in which a program is taught 
• The addition of an accelerated track (e.g., 4+1 bachelor’s and master’s pathway) 

The development of the curriculum for a new program in CourseLeaf cannot begin until there is an approved pre-proposal intent. Academic units should not initiate the development of curricula until the intent stage is complete and approval is provided.  

Pre-Proposal Intent Form Review and Approval Process

The submission of a Pre-Proposal Intent Form request triggers an administrative review of financial implications, resource needs, and student demand. Reviews occur at multiple levels: 

• School/College Review – Deans confirm alignment with school/college priorities and available resources. 
• Graduate School Review – For graduate programs, the Dean of The Graduate School reviews for graduate-specific considerations. 
• Provost’s Office Review – Reviews address budget, accreditation alignment, and may include development of a revenue-sharing MOU.

After these reviews, deans and associate deans for academic affairs across schools/colleges, along with relevant staff, are notified of the proposed program. This notification promotes university-wide discussion and collaboration. 

The form is submitted through the CourseLeaf CIM workflow. Guidance is available in the Academic Affairs Governance Documents Library. 

Once approval is provided in Phase 1, faculty may commence with program development and submission. Relevant disciplinary faculty collaborate on the development of the program proposal  and address each of the following:  

• Program Rationale and Goals – Explain the need for the program, its alignment with UConn’s mission and strategic priorities, and evidence of student and workforce demand. 
• Program Learning OutcomesClearly defined, measurable program-level learning objectives that students will achieve upon completion. 
• Curriculum Structure – Outline of required courses, electives, credits, and sequencing. 
• Assessment Plan – Methods for evaluating program-level learning objectives (i.e., program effectiveness). 
• Resource Analysis – Faculty, staff, facilities, technology, and budget required to deliver the program. 
• Impact Statement – Explanation of how the program interacts with existing offerings (duplication, overlap, or enhancement), including programs offered by other units.  
• Catalog Copy – Draft description for the University Catalog that is clear, accessible, and student-focused.  

For multiple disciplinary program that involve two or more schools or colleges 

• Faculty Oversight Committee (FOC) for Multiple Disciplinary Programs or Courses  – List the members and chair of the FOC overseeing curriculum decisions for this program or course. The committee has representatives from all involved units and is responsible for developing, implementing, and updating the program. The Chair acts as a liaison between academic and administrative units and encourages cross-disciplinary faculty collaboration for ongoing program improvement. Refer to the Curriculum (re)Design: Key Consideration and Strategies document for additional information. 

Once consensus is reached about the program components, the information is submitted using the Courseleaf CIM platform to facilitate the review process in the next phase.  

Note: New program approvals must be in place by set deadlines to appear in the catalog for the following academic year. Annual deadlines are posted in the Academic Affairs Governance Documents Library. 

Once all required components are submitted using the CourseLeaf CIM platform, reviews occur as follows: 

• Course Approvals – Any new courses must be approved before or concurrently with the program proposal. 
• Department and School/College Approval – Units conduct internal reviews and approvals. 
• University-Level Approval – Program proposals are reviewed by relevant University-level governance committees to assess the impact of the proposal on University resources, and offerings to mitigate redundancies, duplications, or other unintended consequences.  
• Undergraduate Program Review Committee – Reviews proposals for new and modified undergraduate programs.  
• Executive Committee of the Graduate School – Reviews proposals for new or modified graduate programs.  
• Council of Deans (COD) – The COD is the final approval body for proposed academic programs before they are submitted to the Board of Trustees for formal inclusion as part of UConn’s curriculum .  
• Board of Trustees Approval – The Board of Trustees is the final authority for authorizing all new academic programs at UConn. The proposal presented to the Board highlights the program’s purpose, alignment with UConn’s mission, projected enrollment, resource implications, and compliance with state and accreditation requirements. Approval by the Board is required before the program can move forward to state-level reporting. 
• State Reporting – Once approved by the Board of Trustees, the Provost’s Office reports the new program to the Connecticut Office of Higher Education (OHE). 
• Proposal Review Workflow and Timelines – The specific timing for new program proposals is outlined in the New Program Proposals section of the Curriculum Hub. Approvals must meet catalog deadlines. See the Academic Affairs Governance Documents Library for current deadlines.