Versions Compared

Old Version 43

changes.mady.by.user Ann Kelble

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Ann Kelble

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  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.

...

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.

...

  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.

...

Scenarios

Initial Review

Chair or Admin Supervisor Review

Dean’s Review (if applicable)

  1. Not-Admin, Single Department

Initial Review:

  1. BC/EC or similar department-level tenured evaluation committee (min. 3 Fulls)

    1. Produces report; (see Step 4 tab for report details); 

    2. Assigns initial overall rating and area ratings;

    3. Sends to reviewee for comment;

  2. Reviewee reads report. May

    1. request to meet with committee; and/or

    2. provide additional materials or information; and/or

    3. offer a written response that accompanies report; or

    4. notify committee they have no comments to add.

  3. After reviewee step, committee adjusts report as needed and then sends to Chair.

Chair’s Review:

  1. Department Chair reads report (& reviewee input, if applicable):

    1. If does not agree with report and/or ratings, writes a separate statement that includes alternate rating(s) and “clearly articulates the basis for disagreement.”

    2. If does agree with report and ratings, may provide an additional statement (optional);

  2. Chair sends results to reviewee and—via their department manager—to COLA HR for Dean’s Review.

    1. Department manager should complete the top part and first two columns (“Department” and “Chair”) of the COLA CPR Summary Form and include it as the cover page of CPR packet. (See Step 5 tab for submission details.)

Dean’s Review:

  1. COLA Dean reads report & any accompanying statements; 

  2. (Optional) If deems it necessary, can request an Additional Intensive Review (AIR); (see Step 5.5 tab for details)

  3. Determines final overall rating and area ratings; communicates these in writing to reviewee (cc: Chair).

    1. COLA HR will update Summary Form as part of finalizing the CPR.

    2. If reviewee provides written response, after dean’s review, that will be added to the record of review.

  4. Reports results to Provost’s Office

  1. Not-Admin, Joint Appointment

  • If Primary and/or both departments are in COLA, follow this process.

  • If Primary department is in another College or School, follow their procedures.

  • Note: If reviewee’s primary faculty appointment is outside of COLA, then Dean’s Review will occur outside of COLA, and we will be notified of the result.

Initial Review:

  1. Tenured faculty evaluation committee (min. 3 Fulls, representing both departments);

    1. Produces report; (see Step 4 tab for report details); 

    2. Assigns initial overall rating and area ratings;

    3. Sends to reviewee for comment;

  2. Reviewee reads report. May

    1. request to meet with committee; and/or

    2. provide additional materials or information; and/or

    3. offer a written response that accompanies report; or

    4. notify committee they have no comments to add.

  3. After reviewee step, committee adjusts report as needed and then sends to Chairs.

Chair’s Review: Note: Chairs have the option to determine rating jointly or to allow one or other to serve in Chair role.

  1. Department Chair(s) read(s) report (& reviewee input, if applicable):

    1. If does not agree with report and/or ratings, writes a separate statement that includes alternate rating(s) and “clearly articulates the basis for disagreement.”

    2. If does agree with report and ratings, may provide an additional statement (optional);

  2. Chair(s) send(s) results to reviewee and—via their department managers—to COLA HR for Dean’s Review.

    1. Only one department manager should complete the top part and first two columns (“Department” and “Chair”) of the COLA CPR Summary Form and include it as the cover page of CPR packet. (See Step 5 tab for submission details.) But both departments should have all of the documents for their records.

Dean’s Review:

  1. COLA Dean reads report & any accompanying statements; 

  2. (Optional) If deems it necessary, can request an Additional Intensive Review (AIR); (see Step 5.5 tab for details)

  3. Determines final overall rating and area ratings; communicates these in writing to reviewee (cc: Chairs, & Dean of Joint CSU, if applicable).

    1. COLA HR will update Summary Form as part of finalizing the CPR.

    2. If reviewee provides written response, after dean’s review, that will be added to the record of review.

  4. Reports results to Provost’s Office

  1. Admin, Single or Joint Appointment

  • Full-time or part-time Admins (as described in section B “Evaluation Committees”) determine how the committees are formed. This review path applies to full-time Admins, as well as part-time Admins where it is decided the review should occur outside of (but in collaboration with) the department(s).

  • If Joint, refer to the “Not-Admin, Joint” section above, re: more than one CSU.

Initial Review:

  1. Tenured faculty evaluation committee (min. 3 Fulls, including at least one other direct report to Admin Supervisor and at least one representative from reviewee’s academic department(s).)

    1. Produces report; (see Step 4 tab for report details); 

    2. Assigns initial overall rating and area ratings;

    3. Sends to reviewee for comment;

  2. Reviewee reads report. May

    1. request to meet with committee; and/or

    2. provide additional materials or information; and/or

    3. offer a written response that accompanies report; or

    4. notify committee they have no comments to add.

  3. After reviewee step, committee adjusts report as needed and then sends to Admin Supervisor.

Admin Supervisor’s Review: In nearly all cases, the Admin Supervisor will provide the supervisor (and final) level of review. [If for some reason Admin Supervisor determines review via Chair(s) would be more appropriate, then proceed as in Not-Admin Chair and Dean steps.]

  1. The Admin Supervisor reads initial committee report (& reviewee input, if applicable):

  2. (Optional) If deems it necessary, can request an Additional Intensive Review (AIR); (see Step 5.5 tab for details)

  3. Determines final overall rating and area ratings; communicates these in writing to reviewee (cc: Chair(s), and Dean(s), if Admin Supervisor is not part of COLA, or if reviewee is Joint in another CSU.).

    1. COLA HR will take care of creating and finalizing the COLA CPR Summary Form for the review.

    2. If reviewee provides written response, after Admin Supervisor’s review, that will be added to the record of review.

  4. Results will be reported to the Provost’s Office.

COLA Dean will either be the Admin Supervisor for review or receive the review results from the Admin Supervisor.

  1. Former Admin, Single or Joint Appointment

or

Current, part-time Admin, whose faculty job does not report 100% to COLA Dean

Initial Review:

  1. Tenured faculty evaluation committee (min. 3 Fulls, including direct report to Admin Supervisor, and one or both departments, depending on if joint);

    1. Produces report; (see Step 4 tab for report details); 

    2. Assigns initial overall rating and area ratings;

    3. Sends to reviewee for comment;

  2. Reviewee reads report. May

    1. request to meet with committee; and/or

    2. provide additional materials or information; and/or

    3. offer a written response that accompanies report; or

    4. notify committee they have no comments to add.

  3. After reviewee step, committee adjusts report as needed and then sends to Chair(s) or Admin Supervisor, as applicable.

Chair(s) and/or Admin Supervisor’s review: Depending on the individual circumstances, Chair(s) and Admin Supervisor will determine in advance who will be responsible for the “Supervisor’s” level review.

  1. If Chair(s) are serving as main supervisor, then proceed as in “Not-Admin” single or joint appointment scenario ‘Chair’ and ‘Dean’ steps.

  2. If Admin Supervisor is serving as primary supervisor for review, proceed as in Admin scenario ‘Admin Supervisor’ step.

Summary:

...

back to the top

Step 2.5: What about Deferrals?

...

  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

...

The Guidelines also list optional items for the review.

back to the top

Step 4: Initial Review Conducted

...

Faculty Rank & Type

Required Ratings

Required Context

Additional Requirements

Associate Professor, Not-Admin

  1. Overall rating

    1. Note: Per 5.e.i., justification will be required if overall rating differs from “average ratings” of annual reviews during CPR review period.

  2. Area ratings in

    1. Teaching,

    2. Research,

    3. Mentorship, and

    4. Service

  3. Note: If reviewee receives an “unsatisfactory” rating in any area of specialization, or overall, the supervisor will need to work with EVPP to provide a short-term development plan. (see Guidelines sec. 7 and Unsatisfactory tabsection.)

    1. Reviewee may also request an AIR as result of such a rating. (see Guidelines 5.e.iv. and Step 5.5 tab.)

Sufficient context for ratings given –both holistic and by area: highlighting areas of special achievement or areas where improvement is needed.

Provide comments and/or suggestions re: progress toward promotion to Full. (sec. 5.e.ii.)

  • COLA-specific: Per COLA’s tenured Faculty Workload Policy (FWP)--unless this is the first CPR in rank--if the reviewee is not considered ready to go through promotion review, an FWP action plan or a proposed modified workload will need to be developed. [Formulation of an action plan is adjacent to the CPR but not necessarily responsibility of CPR committee]. (see FWP wiki)

Associate Professor, Admin

  1. Overall rating

    1. Note: Per 5.e.i., justification will be required if overall rating differs from “average ratings” of annual reviews during CPR review period.

  2. Area ratings included for as many of the following areas apply during the review period:

    1. Teaching, and/or

    2. Research, and/or

    3. Mentorship, and

    4. Service

      1. E.g., someone who served as a full-time Admin for the six years of the review period might not have taught an organized course during that time, so a “Teaching” evaluation would not be applicable.

  3. Note: If reviewee receives an “unsatisfactory” rating in any area of specialization, or overall, the supervisor will need to work with EVPP to provide a short-term development plan. (see Guidelines sec. 7 and Unsatisfactory tabsection.)

    1. Reviewee may also request an AIR as result of such a rating. (see Guidelines 5.e.iv. and Step 5.5 tab.)

Sufficient context for ratings given –both holistic and by area: highlighting areas of special achievement or areas where improvement is needed.

  • Note: Report should clarify why particular Area ratings did not apply, if applicable.

Provide comments and/or suggestions re: progress toward promotion to Full. (sec. 5.e.ii.)

  • COLA-specific: Per COLA’s tenured Faculty Workload Policy (FWP)--unless this is the first CPR in rank--if the reviewee is not considered ready to go through promotion review, an FWP action plan or a proposed modified workload will need to be developed. [Formulation of an action plan is adjacent to the CPR but not necessarily responsibility of CPR committee.]. (see FWP wiki)

    • Note: Service as an Admin is known to impact the timeline for promotion readiness, generally speaking; the goal is to both offer a realistic picture of the reviewee’s current progress and to offer constructive advice and/or support in establishing a solid path to promotion, as needed.

Professor, Not-Admin

  1. Overall rating

    1. Note: Per 5.e.i., justification will be required if overall rating differs from “average ratings” of annual reviews during CPR review period.

  2. Area ratings in

    1. Teaching,

    2. Research,

    3. Mentorship, and

    4. Service

  3. Note: If reviewee receives an “unsatisfactory” rating in any area of specialization, or overall, the supervisor will need to work with EVPP to provide a short-term development plan. (see Guidelines sec. 7 and Unsatisfactory tabsection.)

    1. Reviewee may also request an AIR as result of such a rating. (see Guidelines 5.e.iv. and Step 5.5 tab.)

Sufficient context for ratings given –both holistic and by area: highlighting areas of special achievement or areas where improvement is needed.

COLA-Specific:

  • Per COLA’s tenured Faculty Workload Policy (FWP)--if the reviewee is not considered meeting expectations for research-intensive faculty, specific suggestions for improvements, an FWP action plan, or potentially a proposed modified workload will need to be developed. [FWP follow-up is adjacent to the CPR but not necessarily specifically the responsibility of CPR committee, depending on department practices]. (see FWP wiki)

  • If a reviewee is holder of an endowment: Per COLA Endowment Policy, the CPR committee “shall consider whether the endowment holder has upheld the standard of performance consistent with the appointment as an endowment holder and whether the holder should be continued in the endowment or if another action should be taken.”

Professor, Admin

  1. Overall rating

    1. Note: Per 5.e.i., justification will be required if overall rating differs from “average ratings” of annual reviews during CPR review period.

  2. Area ratings included for as many of the following areas apply during the review period:

    1. Teaching, and/or

    2. Research, and/or

    3. Mentorship, and

    4. Service

      1. E.g., someone who served as a full-time Admin for the six years of the review period might not have taught an organized course during that time, so a “Teaching” evaluation would not be applicable.

  3. Note: If reviewee receives an “unsatisfactory” rating in any area of specialization, or overall, the supervisor will need to work with EVPP to provide a short-term development plan. (see Guidelines sec. 7 and Unsatisfactory tabsection.)

    1. Reviewee may also request an AIR as result of such a rating. (see Guidelines 5.e.iv. and Step 5.5 tab.)

Sufficient context for ratings given –both holistic and by area: highlighting areas of special achievement or areas where improvement is needed.

  • Note: Report should clarify why particular Area ratings did not apply, if applicable.

COLA-Specific:

  • Since Admin positions alter a faculty member’s workload upon appointment, typically the FWP review won’t be necessary to comment upon, but the committee can determine whether appropriate, depending on individual situation (see FWP wiki).

  • If a reviewee is holder of an endowment: Per COLA Endowment Policy, the CPR committee “shall consider whether the endowment holder has upheld the standard of performance consistent with the appointment as an endowment holder and whether the holder should be continued in the endowment or if another action should be taken.”

...

  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

...

  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.

...

  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 tabRating)

    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 tab).

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

back to the top

Step 5.5ish: Additional Intensive Review (AIR)

...

  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

...

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’. 

...

  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 

...