Page Comparison

...

Overview

Tenured faculty are required to undergo periodic intensive review via the comprehensive periodic review of tenured faculty (CPR) process no less often than every six years in tenured rank.

This article is intended to help department staff understand the COLA-specific requirements for this process, especially due to the significant procedural changes introduced as of AY2024-25, as well as provide links to policies and related information.

Relevant Definitions:

CPR: The “Comprehensive Periodic Review of Tenured Faculty”, a.k.a. Post-Tenure Review, process; occasionally used to refer to the final evaluative report(s) produced by the process.

BC/EC: Department's faculty governing body: either Budget Council (BC), Extended Budget Council (EBC), or Executive Committee (EC). [see also Governance [https://utexas.atlassian.net/wiki/display/larc/Departmental+Governance+Review]

Department: the person(s) responsible for tracking faculty reviews, administering the review process, and communicating with the Dean’s Office on behalf of an academic department during this process; typically 1 (or 2) senior staff of department, along with Chair.

COLA: the person(s) responsible for communicating on behalf of the Dean’s Office; for this process, this is currently Ann Kelble.

FY: Fiscal Year; Sept. 1 through Aug. 31.

EVPP: Provost Office; specifically/usually Faculty Affairs and/or Academic Personnel Services (APS)

FWP: Liberal Arts Tenured Faculty Workload Policy Review; revised version to go into effect beginning Sept. 1, 2022. (see also FWP page)

Process:

COLA Review Deadline: February 1 (FY of review)

Annual Check (For All Departments)

1. In March, Department reviews records to determine whether or not any of their tenured faculty are due for CPR in upcoming FY. Department emails this information to COLA (cc: cola_hr@austin.utexas.edu) (along with expected P&T reviews or third-year reviews). [see P&T; Mid-Prob].
   1. Note: Even if no faculty appear to be due for review, it is still important to confirm this in writing.
2. COLA checks Department list against college records; confirms or requests more info.
3. No later than March 31, when applicable: Department notifies faculty member(s) due for review in the next FY.

Review Process:

1. By May 31, prior to FY of review, Department provides faculty member copies of department-maintained materials that will be assessed as part of CPR. (see EVPP Guidelines, sec.14, Timetable). Presumably, the Chair and BC/EC will establish the CPR review committee and internal department timeline.
2. Oct. 1 (of review year): deadline for faculty member to submit their updated CV, Faculty Annual Report [for the previous FY], and any other materials they would like included as part of their evaluation.
   1. This is added to whatever the department gathered/shared in May for the review.
3. Hopefully by mid-November, COLA distributes to Department two reports for each faculty member undergoing review. Will distribute via shared UT Box folders established for each department, called "(DEPT) Faculty Reports and Reviews": 
   1. COLA-generated: Summary of CIS (6-Years) Report: a report of the course-instructor survey results from all of the faculty member’s teaching during the CPR review period.
   2. Provost Office-generated, “Committee Report, Masters and Doctoral”: a report of all of the thesis, Master’s report, and dissertation committees on which the faculty member has served.
4. Sometime from October through January, the BC/EC (or delegated committee) will conduct their evaluation and communicate their preliminary results to the faculty member being reviewed. Please note that when the faculty member being reviewed is the Holder of an Endowed Professorship (or Endowed Chair), the committee ought to include whether the faculty member is still eligible of continuing as Holder.  (Please see COLA Endowment Holder Policy). *Beginning in FY22-23: As part of this evaluation report, the BC/EC shall include FWP promotion, workload, and/or action plan details, as required under the COLA Tenured Faculty Workload Policy. See FWP review for full details.
   1. Please carefully read the Guidelines sec. 5 for the correct procedural steps. I will list them here in brief--not to replace the guidelines, but to stress that there is a decent chance that your department is not following all the steps:
      1. Eval committee shares preliminary report with reviewee.
         1. If the initial rating is "Unsatisfactory," we strongly encourage the department/Chair to reach out to the Dean's Office (c/o Ann K) in advance of the Feb. 1 deadline so that the dean(s) might assist with navigating the additional procedural steps required by the process.
      2. Reviewee can request meeting, submit additional materials, and/or write a response.
      3. Eval committee sends everything to Chair for review.
      4. Chair provides EvalComm with their comment(s); if they wish to give the reviewee a different overall rating than the EvalComm, Chair provides separate statement. [Chair can do other stuff too at this step, but…]
      5. By February 1, EvalComm provides reviewee with final evaluation report including final overall ratings category (see Guidelines, sec. 4.a.) , attaching Chair statement (if applicable), and previous written response from reviewee (if applicable).
5. By February 5: Department uploads--to the CPR portal--1 PDF per faculty member being reviewed, containing the following documents:
   1. CPR evaluation report, including FWP review details and/or endowment holder review details, as applicable.
   2. Chair evaluation, if applicable
   3. Faculty written response, if applicable
   4. FWP Action Plan (if applicable)
   5. Faculty CV
   6. Summary of CIS report
   7. Graduate Committee report
6. February 28: COLA submits a report to EVPP of all college CPR results; if Dean wishes to follow-up re: any of the CPRs, will be in touch with department.
   1. Starting FY22, COLA will notify department of FWP action plan approvals or any related follow-up.

Process to Request a Deferral:

1. If a faculty member is scheduled for a post-tenure review and would like to request a deferral of that review to the following year, Department shall first check the CPR Guidelines, sec. 3.c., to see if the request is allowable per the policy guidelines.
2. If the deferral request meets the criteria of the Guidelines, the Department shall forward the written request (can be email) to COLA HR, including whether the Chair supports the request.  (Chair can also forward the request.) Please note that the Department, et. al., shall proceed with the review as scheduled until they receive confirmation that the deferral request has been approved.
3. COLA HR will check with Dean(s) and then forward request to EVPP.
4. EVPP will approve or deny the request, based on the Guidelines, and COLA HR will send this notification to back to Department. Please note that, if approved, the faculty member will need to be reviewed in the following year. (i.e. A second deferral is not permitted under policy.)

...

Reminder: This article is a guide to the process but is not a substitute for the Provost’s Guidelines. An important part of managing and facilitating any major faculty review is to be certain to read the annual Provost’s Guidelines, as there may be changes--sometimes significant ones--from year to year.

...

Relevant Definitions

Admin: For the purposes of this article: a shortened version of the term “Administrator” as defined in the Provost’s CPR Guidelines (sec. 2) “Administrator refers to A&P roles held by tenured faculty including but not limited to department chair, director, associate dean, dean, vice provost, senior vice provost, provost, vice president, president, etc.”

• The Guidelines also specify that for “Admin” (or “Former Admin”) rules to apply, the faculty member must have held the Admin role for at least one academic year (two consecutive long semesters; Fall-Spring, or Spring-Fall) during the CPR review period.

• NOTE: A faculty member who has not been assigned to a WD A&P job for their administrative role would not be considered an Admin for this process.

Administrative (Admin) Supervisor: Per the Guidelines (sec. 2), refers to the supervisor of a faculty member who has served, or is serving, as an Admin.

• NOTE: This may or may not be the faculty member’s direct supervisor. For example: a tenured faculty member could be the director of an academic center, reporting to an associate dean in their Admin role (at 0% time), but their faculty position reports directly to their department chair (at 100% time). In this scenario, the Admin Supervisor would be the Associate Dean.

• In this article, will capitalize and italicize “Admin Supervisor”, to help clarify the reference to a person’s Admin Supervisor role, especially when individual faculty may hold multiple roles.

AIR: Additional Intensive Review; not a standard part of every CPR process but can be triggered by a variety of different mechanisms (see Guidelines sec. 5.e.iv.).

Areas, or Areas of Specialization: For purposes of this article, refers to categories of tenured faculty responsibilities reviewed as part of CPR (Guidelines sec. 5.c.):

• For Not-Admins, each of 4 Areas will need to be reviewed and given a rating:

  • Teaching,

  • Research and creative endeavors,

  • Mentoring,

  • Service, and

  • There is a 5th Area that should be evaluated if it is ever applicable: “patient care, and administration”

    • NOTE: This last area will apply so rarely within COLA that this article will assume it does not generally apply. If/when it does apply, the faculty and/or department involved are responsible for evaluating this area and including it in their reports. 

• For Admins and Former Admins, only the areas which apply (for the review period) need to be reviewed and rated.

  • Examples:

    • Prof. Blue is in her second year serving as department chair and held no Admin position the other years of the CPR review period. We would expect that all 4 areas would be reviewed.

    • Prof. Yellow is in his eighth year as a full-time Associate Dean and has done no teaching or publishing within the past six years. We would expect that Service and probably Mentoring would be reviewed.

AY: Academic Year; August 16->May 15; or August 16-August 15, when including summer terms. Usually expressed as “24-25”, “2024-25”, or “2024-2025” because it is a span of time that bridges two calendar years.

CPR: The process formally labeled “Comprehensive Periodic Review of Tenured Faculty”, a.k.a. Post-Tenure Review.

EVPP: Provost’s Office (The Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost); specifically, Faculty Affairs and/or Academic Personnel Services (APS), the teams within the Provost’s Office who support most faculty HR and review processes.

Former Admin: Refers to someone who is not currently an Admin, but was an Admin for at least one academic year during their CPR review period.

FTE: Full Time Equivalent; 1.0 designates 1 full-time position; typically relates to budgets and funding for positions. When discussing joint faculty appointments, it typically refers to how the overall appointment (1.0) is split between the 2 departments.

• Note: The actual SWH may differ over time within each position, but the FTE established by the joint agreement serves as the maximum hours for either position unless/until the agreement is revised.

• Ex. Faculty member with 50-50 joint appointment (two 0.5FTE jobs) might go on a partial LWOP that only impacts one of the two jobs, bringing the SWH below 20 in one department. But neither department would appoint the faculty member above 20 SWH during the 9-month academic year, as that would change the terms of the joint appointment.

Full: Term used to refer to a tenured Professor; sometimes referred to as a “Full Professor” (as distinct from Assistant or Associate Professors)

FWP: Liberal Arts Tenured Faculty Workload Policy Review; see also FWP page.

Guidelines: For this article, the Provost’s Office document of policies and procedures for CPR; rules established on an annual basis, separate from the HOP, Regents Rules, or other sources of university policy: 24-25 Guidelines

Joint (Appointment):  For this article, when a tenured faculty member’s holds a salaried Associate Professor or Professor job in more than one department concurrently.

• One department will be designated as “Primary,” and the other department will be designated as “Joint.”

• When the two appointments are unequally distributed, e.g., 2/3 and 1/3, the department with the greater FTE is designated as “Primary.”

• In WD, Joint positions are indicated by a (+) sign, but it is not the case that (+) will always indicate a Joint position. Faculty may have sporadic employment or additional jobs (paid or unpaid). When joint-appointed faculty take on 100% Admin jobs, both faculty positions will be marked as “(+)”, so in those cases, you would need to look at the Academic Appointment information to determine which department is primary.

• The most common joint appointment arrangement involves two equal (0.5 FTE; 20 SWH) concurrent appointments; called ’50-50’.

• When the two appointments are equal, either department could be designated as officially “primary,” but when using the term of “primary”, it should accurately reflect the official designation recorded in Workday.

Not-Admin: A faculty member who is not currently an Admin and has not been during the review period.

• Note: Not-Admins are different from Former Admins.

Overall (Rating): the one rating reflecting a holistic view of the faculty member’s performance during the CPR review period; as opposed to Area ratings (see above).

Rating: One of 4 categories required by the Guidelines, Regents Rules, and State of Texas Education Code to evaluate a faculty member’s overall performance and specific contributions within areas of responsibility. There are only 4 allowable ratings categories, and these are defined in the Guidelines (sec. 5.e.i.):

• Exceeds expectations

• Meets expectations

• Does not meet expectations

• Unsatisfactory

  • For each Overall and Area rating, the faculty member can only be placed in one category. E.g., “Meets and exceeds expectations” is not acceptable under the policy.

Report: For purposes of this article, the written evaluation summarizing the results of the CPR and which must include an overall ratings category and ratings for each of the relevant areas of specialization.

Review AY: The academic year in which the actual review occurs. Important to clarify as the identification and notification of CPR reviewees takes place in the year prior to the review AY.

• E.g., Faculty with a review AY of 24-25 will be notified in AY23-24 (Spring term).

Reviewee: The faculty member undergoing CPR.

WD: Workday; the system used by UT for human resources functions related to hiring, compensation, onboarding, timekeeping, and related functions.

...

Process

Step 1: Identification and Notification of Faculty Reviewees

All Completed by March 31.

This step involves figuring out which faculty will undergo a CPR in the upcoming year. The process may be fairly simple, depending on the department and the previous experience of the staff member gathering the list, but the details included here are for the benefit of anyone starting from scratch or who might want to better understand how such lists are compiled.

General Note: Each academic department is expected to maintain their faculty records and to establish and maintain a method of internally tracking faculty reviews and their requirements. The Dean’s Office also tracks required faculty reviews for COLA faculty, but the number of faculty, departments, and variables involved necessitate that this function be shared at multiple levels to ensure accuracy.

• When: Each AY, before March.

• What: Department needs to determine whether any of their faculty will need to undergo a CPR in the upcoming AY.

• How: If not already in possession of a verified, up-to-date schedule of mandatory faculty reviews, create such a schedule by applying the below series of questions to each department faculty member’s situation.

• Also: COLA HR will reach out to all departments around early March of each year to solicit and confirm the major faculty reviews, including CPRs, scheduled for the upcoming AY, so you will need to be prepared to furnish that information.

• Why: Because faculty undergoing CPR are entitled to “reasonable notice of intent to review…no less six months before the start of the CPR” (sec.5.a.i.), reviewees ought to be notified on or before March 31 prior to the AY of review.

A. Determine who is due for review

If the department does not already have a reliable set of records of their tenured and tenure-track review schedules:

Some additional considerations, once you have your tentative list:

Q: What about endowment appointments?

A: The current process for an initial appointment as the holder of an endowment in our college does not meet the criteria of a “full review” that would reset the CPR schedule.  Endowment renewals are incorporated into the CPR process.

Q: What if the faculty member will be on an approved leave in the AY they are scheduled for CPR?

A: Depends on the answers to these questions:

1. Is the leave for research?

   1. Yes: does not affect the schedule. CPR should proceed as planned.

   2. No: (next)

2. Is this “approved personal leave without pay (part-time or full-time) for medical reasons during the time when the CPR is being conducted”?

   1. Yes: The department chair should send COLA a request for deferral (see Step 2.5) of the faculty member’s CPR to the following AY, once the LWOP (full or part time) has been approved (See LWOP wiki). Once the deferral request is approved by EVPP, the faculty member can be notified of the CPR’s deferral to the following AY. (If the chair is the one needing deferral, department should reach out to COLA.)

   2. No: (next)

3. Is the faculty member continuously using sick leave (part-time or full-time) for at least one full long academic term of the year the CPR is scheduled?

   1. Yes: The department chair should send COLA a request for deferral (see Step 2.5) of the faculty member’s CPR to the following AY. The department is also responsible for ensuring the faculty member’s sick time off and/or FMLA hours are recorded in WD (see Faculty Sick Leave wiki). Once the deferral request is approved by EVPP, the faculty member can be notified of the CPR’s deferral to the following AY. (If the chair is the one needing deferral, department should reach out to COLA.

   2. No: It sounds like the scenario will not impact the schedule for the CPR. If in doubt, check with COLA HR.

Once you have established the faculty review timing and your department’s CPRs have been mapped out, we want to focus on the faculty for whom CPRs are due in the upcoming AY, which leads to

B. Notification

As mentioned in the introduction, departments are responsible for sending written notifications to faculty due for CPRs on or before March 31 prior to the AY in which they will be reviewed.

• Ex.  CPR due in AY24-25: Faculty notification expected to occur on or before March 31, 2024.

back to the top

Step 2: Determining Who Will Conduct the Review

This “step” is more of a series of related checks to help determine both 1) Who will conduct the review, and 2) Which procedures will apply to the review, based on the faculty member’s university appointment(s).

A. Who Will Oversee Review

A closer look at the “Who” of the review will help determine the “How” of the review.

In general, CPRs will be conducted within a faculty member’s department and involve the department chair. Beginning in 24-25, the CPR will route from the department to the dean’s level for review and final ratings. However, there are two other factors that would vary review procedures: Admin roles and joint faculty appointments.

A.1: Admin or Not Admin

At different points along the process, the procedures differ depending whether or not the reviewee holds, or has held, an administrative appointment for at least one academic year during the period of CPR evaluation. (See Definitions)

Some examples of how this could play out, based on the Guidelines:

These are just a few examples, but essentially, you’ll want to check the reviewee’s appointments (faculty jobs in WD) during the review period for the CPR and make sure to identify any Admin roles; i.e., A&P positions held, though not including “Faculty Associate” or “Program Director (Academic).” (See Definitions)

• Note: The reviewee also should help identify any relevant Admin appointments.

If any of your department’s faculty qualifies as an Admin or Former Admin, you will want to identify the Admin Supervisor for the appointment(s).

To sum up:

1. Look at the reviewee’s appointments during the period under review for the CPR;

   1. If they have or have had an A&P appointment of at least 1 AY (two consecutive long semesters) during the review period meeting the Admin definition, you will need to follow Admin (or Former Admin) procedures.

   2. If they have not had a qualifying Admin appointment, they will follow Not Admin procedures.

2. For any Admins or Former Admins identified, you will need to figure out who their Admin Supervisor(s) were during the time of their appointment;

   1. The Guidelines explain what to do if the Admin Supervisor has changed since the Admin appointment. (see 5.b.2.ii.)

A.2: Joint Appointments

(See Definitions)

Similar to the Admin check, but not the same.

1. Are any of the faculty members due for CPR jointly appointed?

   1. If yes, then, per the Guidelines (sec. 5.b.), both departments will be responsible for the review.

      1. If the joint appointment involves more than one college or school, then both department chairs and both deans are supposed to agree upon the members of the evaluation committee.

      2. After setting up the committee, it is expected that the two chairs will establish how the review will proceed, though it is generally expected that the review will proceed via the “primary” department and college. Both chairs are expected to provide input regarding the “chair” evaluation step.

         1. In cases of 50-50 joint appointments, the chairs are permitted to determine which department will lead the review process and may allow input from the faculty member in determining this.

B. Evaluation Committees

This article does not intend to duplicate everything included within the Guidelines; sec. 5.b. contains full details about peer review committees and their formation. Below, we highlight a few important points:

• The Guidelines specify that CPR committees should include a minimum of three tenured Professors.

• Additional variables:

  • If Joint: Members of committee should include reps from both departments, determined by both chairs (and both deans, if applicable).

  • If Former Admin: Members of committee should be appointed by the current (or former) Admin Supervisor along with the department chair(s).

    • Must include at least one Full from Former Admin’s primary department & at least one Full who is also an Admin reporting to the Admin Supervisor. (There are additional contingencies spelled out in Guidelines (5.b.ii.1&2), as needed, for all of the Admin-related CPRs.)

  • If Current Admin (full-time): Members of committee should be appointed by the Admin Supervisor.

    • Must include at least one Full from Admin’s primary department & at least one Full who is also an Admin reporting to same Admin Supervisor.

  • If Current Admin (part-time): Members of committee should be appointed by the Admin Supervisor along with chair(s).

    • Essentially same as Former Admin, above. 

    • “Part-time” means anything less than 100% paid in the A&P position; e.g., Associate Deans in COLA are full-time (100% paid as Admin), but Department Chairs in COLA are part-time (0% paid as Admin).

C. Path of Review

The information gathered in the previous steps will inform how the CPR will progress through levels of review. Will also lay out basic responsibilities for each level.

Summary:

...

back to the top

Step 2.5: What about Deferrals?

When: As soon as you know that the faculty member scheduled for CPR will meet the deferral request criteria.

The Guidelines section 5.a.ii. specifies that a CPR may only be deferred if one of the following two circumstances applies; (quoting):

• the tenured faculty member is on an approved personal leave without pay (full- or part-time) for medical reasons during the time when the CPR is being conducted,

• the tenured faculty member is continuously using sick time off (full- or part-time) for one whole semester during the academic year when the CPR is being conducted.

How to Request

1. Establish the basis of the deferral request:

   1. The Faculty Sick Leave wiki page lays out a variety of scenarios involving faculty sick leave and/or requesting time off due to medical reasons, including the steps to follow depending on the situation.

      1. Before requesting a CPR deferral on behalf of the faculty member, the department should verify that the situation will meet the eligibility conditions.

      2. COLA HR will verify that the LWOP request is final-approved OR that there is an approved FMLA and/or absence request (or submitted timesheets) in process for sick time off in Workday for the relevant semester before submitting the CPR deferral.

2. If the deferral request meets the criteria of the Guidelines, the Department shall forward the written request (can be email) to COLA HR, including whether the Chair supports the request.  Or, if the faculty member is already on sick leave/FMLA/LWOP, the Chair/department can/should submit the request on behalf of the faculty member.

   1. Please note that unless the faculty member is already on LWOP and/or using sick time off and/or on approved FMLA, the Department, et. al., shall proceed with the review as scheduled until they receive confirmation that the deferral request has been approved. (Meaning, there’s no reason to suppose that the request will be denied if it meets the specified criteria, but if there is any doubt about eligibility, it is better to plan a contingency.)

3. COLA HR will check with Dean(s) and then forward request to EVPP for final approval.

4. EVPP will approve or deny the request, based on the Guidelines, and COLA HR will send this notification to back to Department.

   1. Please note that, if approved, the faculty member will need to be reviewed in the following year, and they should be notified of that fact once the deferral is approved.

back to the top

Step 3: Reviewee Submits Materials

Due Oct. 1 of Review AY

The Guidelines section 5.d. includes a list of materials expected to form the basis of the CPR. Some of these items would need to come directly from the reviewee, but some will provided by the department.

• Note: The Guidelines state that the CPR must be conducted whether or not the reviewee provides required materials.

Here are the required items listed in the Guidelines (* indicates department should be able to help provide):

• Current CV (Optional: highlighting items from during period of review).

• Summary statement of professional accomplishments across areas of specialization.

• Annual reports (FARs) from each year of CPR period.*

• CIS and CES survey results (including student comments) from all completed semesters of review period.*

• Any peer teaching observations conducted during CPR period.*

• (If applicable) Identify any year during the period of CPR review for which faculty member has a PC flag, personal LWOP for medical reasons, and/or period of continuous sick time off use, but not the reasons for any of these. (5.a.iii.)

• Any other materials required by department or college, including:

  • If an endowment holder, per COLA policy: “The holder or fellow of an endowment shall supply the CPR committee with information addressing how the endowment has been used relative to its criteria outlined in the letter of appointment. Annual letters to the donor describing use of the endowment will be useful for this review.”

  • COLA recommends that the department gather the faculty member’s annual review ratings from the CPR review period as the Guidelines expect the CPR results to be compared to the annual review ratings and justified if different from the ‘average ratings’ (see 5.e.i.).  

The Guidelines also list optional items for the review.

back to the top

Step 4: Initial Review Conducted

Due Feb. 1 of Review AY

• The tenured faculty review committee will evaluate the materials submitted by the reviewee. Section 5.c. of the Guidelines describes expectations for the committee’s evaluation, particularly “review of the faculty member’s potential for continuing excellence based on their professional contributions and the impact of the work that they have accomplished during their CPR review period.”

• The committee is responsible for writing up the results of their evaluation as a report.

• The work of the initial review committee is advisory to the Dean and/or Admin Supervisor (5.e.iii.).

A. Report Requirements

Although the report is typically delivered in narrative form, we are providing here a list of required elements, which will vary by faculty rank and Admin involvement, as well as by individual (see table below). See also Guidelines sec. 5.e.1. & 5.e.ii.

We also include COLA-specific requirements.

REPORT REQUIREMENTS:

B. COLA CPR Summary Form

COLA’s CPR Summary Form will need to be added as a coversheet to the report, beginning with the initial level of review.

About the form:

• The form is an Excel worksheet.

• Other than the spaces to add the reviewee’s Name and EID (plus Notes), each field of the form consists of a drop-down list.

• There should only be one form completed per CPR; additional levels of review will add their ratings recommendations as the review progresses. COLA will take responsibility for replacing the department form with the final version containing all ratings.

• The final ratings will be recorded (at Dean or Admin Supervisor level), and a copy of the form and final report will be sent to the reviewee along with cc: to department(s), et al.

• The form is intended to be self-explanatory, except for the Notes, but—just in case, there are somewhat exhaustive/exhausting Instructions on a separate tab.

C. Sharing Initial Results with Reviewee

1. Per the Guidelines sec. 5.f., the initial committee must share their initial results (report, with ratings), with the reviewee.

2. The reviewee can

   1. Ask to meet with committee; and/or

   2. Provide written comments about report; and/or

   3. Submit additional materials for consideration; or

   4. Acknowledge receipt and inform committee they have nothing to add.

3. Clarification, re: If reviewee submits written comments:

   1. If reviewee provides corrections (to typos or factual errors), then it would be expected that the review committee would correct the mistakes.

   2. If the reviewee provides a statement in response to the review as part of the record, that statement should be appended to the report and accompany it at every subsequent stage of review.

4. Once reviewee had had a chance to read and respond to the report, the report (along with written reviewee response, if applicable,) shall be submitted for the supervisor’s evaluation, as determined in Step 2, C. Path of Review.

back to the top

Step 5: Supervisor’s Review

In general, this step varies depending on whether the supervisor of the CPR is the Chair (or jointly consulting Chairs) or is the Admin Supervisor, as determined earlier. This step involves either A or B, not both.

A. Chair(s) Review

1. The Chair(s) will read the committee’s report and, if applicable, the reviewee comments.

2. They can then:

   1. Agree with the committee eval and not add any input; or

   2. Agree with the committee eval and add a statement (can be brief); or

   3. Disagree with the committee eval on one or more points and add a statement explaining the point(s) of disagreement; or

   4. Request more information before proceeding to either a, b, or c; and/or

   5. Ask the committee to reevaluate one or more areas before proceeding to a, b, or c.

3. After completing their review, the Chair(s) shall record the results of their evaluation on the COLA CPR Form, and the department will submit the whole report to COLA HR—with a copy to the reviewee—by Feb. 28, including (in order):

   1. COLA CPR Summary Form (completed up through Chair(s) review);

   2. Chair statement (if applicable);

   3. Reviewee response to department review (if applicable);

   4. Committee report;

   5. Reviewee CV; and

   6. CIS-CES Summary and Grad Committee reports, if they are still in use.

4. Reviewee is welcome to provide comments to COLA HR to be added to the official CPR report.

B. Admin Supervisor Review

1. The Admin Supervisor will read the initial committee report, and, if applicable, the reviewee comments.

2. If they agree with report:

   1. They would write a brief summary statement agreeing with the committee and adding any specific input or comments of their own, and/or confirm the final ratings categories: Overall, Service, and whichever other area ratings apply.

   2. They would send their final evaluation to the reviewee and to COLA HR.

   3. COLA HR would ensure the COLA Summary Form is updated appropriately, and that the full report is complete and on file, including:

      1. The COLA Summary Form (complete);

      2. The Admin Supervisor statement;

      3. Reviewee response to initial committee review, if applicable;

      4. Reviewee CV; and

      5. CIS-CES Summary and Grad Committee reports, as applicable.

   4. If the reviewee submits additional comments in response, those will be added to the final report.

   5. COLA HR will ensure the results are incorporated into the COLA CPR Results Report, due to EVPP before June 15.

3. If they disagree with report:

   1. Request more information, and/or ask the initial committee to reevaluate one or more areas of their review; OR

      1. Whatever the results of this step, they will eventually need to finalize and communicate the CPR ratings, as in “c” below, or as in step #2 above.

   2. Initiate an additional intensive review (see AIR, Step 5.5.); OR

   3. Provide a separate statement, specifying the parts of the review with which they disagree, and assigning the final ratings categories: Overall, Service, and whichever other area ratings apply.

      1. They would send this final evaluation to the reviewee and to COLA HR.

      2. Proceed as in steps 2.c. through 2.e. above.

back to the top

Step 6: Dean’s Review

(if Step Five = Chair’s Review)

This step will be a lot like the Admin Supervisor review version of Step 5 as it will be the final evaluation step of the CPR.

A. Dean’s Review

1. The Dean will read the department report, CV, and additional statements added by the chair or reviewee, as applicable.

2. If the Dean has sufficient information to complete the CPR, the Dean will assign ratings (overall and areas) and summarize the results, providing additional context, as needed, when the review differs from prior levels. [If not, go to #3.]

   1. The Dean will provide the final summary report to COLA HR, who will update the CPR Coversheet, add the Dean’s report to the other documents comprising the CPR report, and send the results to the reviewee on the Dean’s behalf (cc: Chair(s)).

      1. Any Unsatisfactory ratings will require the reviewee’s direct supervisor, in collaboration with the dean and EVPP Faculty Affairs, to formulate a “short-term development plan” within one month of the delivery of the final review results. (see Unsatisfactory Rating)

   2. In addition, COLA HR will compile the results for the college-wide report to the Provost’s Office.

3. If the Dean does not have sufficient information and/or wants further review:

   1. The Dean can request an additional intensive review (see AIR Step 5.5).

   2. Following the AIR, will complete the review as in #2 above.

back to the top

Step 5.5ish: Additional Intensive Review (AIR)

Deadline for completion: May 31

This step can be triggered by a number of different circumstances, including any of the following (sec.5.e.iv.):

• The dean initiates AIR;

• The Admin Supervisor initiates AIR;

• The reviewee receives an “unsatisfactory” rating on any area of the CPR (or overall) & requests AIR;

• A faculty member who was initially scheduled for CPR in the review year but goes up for promotion to Full and is Not successful (notified in February).

A. Additional Intensive Review

1. Depending on the review path of the CPR, either the Admin Supervisor or Dean is responsible for appointing the AIR committee by April 15.

   1. If Admin Supervisor: they will follow the same guidelines as when appointing the initial review committee (see process Step 2, C.3 and C.4.).

   2. If Dean: they will follow the same committee selection rules determined in Step 2, C. Path of Review, based on the reviewee’s appointment(s).

2. Once appointed, the AIR committee may request additional materials or information from the reviewee.

3. The AIR Committee drafts their report--including overall rating and applicable area ratings--and sends to reviewee.

4. Reviewee does not have to take action at this point, but they can

   1. Request to meet with AIR Committee,

   2. Submit additional material for review, or

   3. Provide written comments to accompany the report.

5. After reviewee has had a chance to look at AIR report and provide any feedback and/or written comments, the AIR committee will finalize their report and submit it to Dean or Admin Supervisor, as appropriate.

6. Dean will finalize the CPR as in Step 6, A.2.; Admin Supervisor will finalize the CPR as in Step 5, B. above.

back to the top

Step 7: Reporting to the Provost’s Office

Due: June 15

The college is required to report the results of all CPRs of its faculty after the reviews have been completed.

1. As mentioned in Step 6.A.2.b., COLA HR will compile all CPR review results from the year for submission to EVPP.

2. If any of the reviews involve “Unsatisfactory” ratings in any category, COLA HR will help coordinate among the reviewee’s direct supervisor, department staff, dean, and/or Faculty Affairs regarding the formulation--and submission--of the “short-term development plan” (see Unsatisfactory Rating tab).

   1. These short-term plans will need to be drafted and submitted to EVPP (via COLA) by Aug. 15.

   2. COLA will also need to collect status reports for any CPR development plans in effect from the prior academic year, to be submitted to EVPP by Aug. 1.

Unsatisfactory Rating

Per section 7 of the Guidelines, a rating of “unsatisfactory” for any CPR rating (overall or area) requires that the faculty’s direct supervisor work with the provost to formulate a ‘short-term development plan’. 

Process

1. CPR final ratings and report(s) are communicated to the faculty member (cc: supervisor) with one (or more) unsatisfactory ratings; supervisor has one month from this date to draft a development plan.

   1. Note: It is very likely that, following the path of review, the faculty member will have received the unsatisfactory rating(s) during earlier stages of review, and thus, the supervisor would benefit from preparing a draft plan in advance of the final rating(s).

   2. The requirements of the plan are listed in the Guidelines, section 7.b. The Chair/Supervisor will need to work with the Provost’s Office on putting together a reasonable plan (per the Guidelines), but the COLA Dean’s Office is also here to assist and facilitate this process.

2. Once the supervisor has finalized the short-term development plan (in collaboration with EVPP and COLA), they shall send it to the faculty member and cc: the department manager. They should also send this to Ann K. on behalf of COLA (and can do so via bcc: or by forwarding the email). Ann will share with Dean.

3. COLA will submit the copy of the development plan to the Provost’s Office before the deadline of August 15.

4. Once the plan has been communicated, it is up to the supervisor and any other individual named in the plan for this purpose (see Guidelines 7.b.) to monitor the faculty member’s progress during the following academic year (fall and spring) and provide a status report (which goals were met, which weren’t, etc.) to the dean (c/o COLA HR) after the Spring term, but before Aug. 1 of that AY, per the Guidelines.

   1. COLA will share with Provost’s Office by the deadline.

   2. Presumably, if the plan isn’t progressing well, the Chair/Supervisor should be in touch with the Dean and Provost about any additional steps that may be needed, prior to turning in the status report.

back to the top

...

Related Policies

HOP 2-2150: Comprehensive Periodic Evaluation of Tenured Faculty 

Provost Guidelines 

COLA Tenured Faculty Workload Policy (revised 2021)

...