3.2.15 Administrator Evaluation

Academic Department Chairpersons

A. Plans and Evaluation Criteria:

Within 180 days of the initial appointment as Chairperson, the newly appointed Chairperson shall submit to the Dean for discussion and approval, an annually renewable Five-Year Vision and Goals Statement. This statement will be developed in consultation with department faculty and staff, others within the university and discipline, and reviewed by department faculty. This statement shall, in clear and measurable terms, convey the following:

• The linkage between anticipated progress in the department and University/College goals statements
• The linkage to similar statements from other departments in the University with which there may be opportunities for interdisciplinary efforts or efficiencies
• The Chairperson’s vision of the department’s future as well as general strategies for achieving the vision
• The relationship between outreach activities and fundraising activities in accordance with University and College goals statements

B. Evaluation:

1. Annual Formative Review - The Chairperson shall be evaluated annually by the Dean who shall use as the primary, but not exclusive, basis for such assessments:
   • Fulfillment of the official roles and responsibilities
   • Progress toward fulfilling the one-year action plans
   • Achievement of personal and professional goals
   • Anonymous input on the Chairperson’s performance provided through a questionnaire given to all department faculty, which will allow for the submission of written comments
   • Effectiveness in working with department faculty, staff, and students
   • Comments from the Chairperson being reviewed, in the form of a self-appraisal
     
     The Dean shall use other sources of information in preparing the annual performance appraisal. For example, the Dean might conduct confidential interviews with or solicit confidential comments from:
     
     
     • Department faculty and staff members
     • Representatives of college or other committees on which the Chairperson has served
     • Students who have participated in department activities such as clubs or organizations in which the Chairperson has played a role
     • Others in the University who can provide informed perspectives on various dimensions of the Chairperson’s efforts or effectiveness
     • Others external to the University such as alumni, individuals from other educational institutions, or individuals with whom the Chairperson might interact by virtue of the department’s mission and the goals for the year
   • The purpose of the annual review is formative; it also provides a comparative basis for the award of merit-based salary increases. The review is an effort to help a Chairperson achieve department goals. In conducting the review, the Dean will demonstrate sensitivity to factors over which the Chairperson may have limited control. Following the review, the Dean will provide the Chairperson with a written summary of the review. Chairpersons may respond in writing to any element of the annual review. The Dean will provide a summary of the annual reviews to the department council or equivalent body in executive session every two to three years.
2. Comprehensive Fifth-Year Reviews: During each fifth year of service and in the last year of service unless deemed unnecessary by the department/school, the Dean shall conduct comprehensive reviews of the Chairperson. The evaluations shall consist of three parts:
   1. The Dean will initiate a comprehensive administrative review of the Chairperson, which will be more expansive and extensive than the annual assessment. A wide range of documents will be considered, as will measurable progress toward stated goals. Further, many faculty members, other campus colleagues, and persons external to the campus, such as alumni, will be interviewed confidentially by the Dean. The purposes of the review are to determine past successes, perceived ability to achieve goals, and to assess the desirability of reappointment. The comprehensive review shall be conducted even if the Chairperson has indicated a desire not to be re-appointed. The information gleaned from this process can be helpful in identifying characteristics sought in the next Chairperson.
   2. The Dean will form a review committee, comprised of three to five faculty members elected from the tenured or tenure-track members of the faculty, and chaired by a tenured individual from outside of the department holding the rank of Professor. This committee will be responsible for conducting a systematic review of the Chairperson’s performance from the perspective of the department faculty. For this review, the Chairperson will be asked to prepare an administrative portfolio detailing the significant activities and accomplishments of his or her tenure as Chairperson. The portfolio should outline his or her goals and objectives for the next five years. The department review committee will also elicit information from department/school faculty on the Chairperson’s performance. A summary of previous evaluations of the Chairperson’s performance shall be provided to the committee. This committee will provide its confidential report to the Dean. The comprehensive review may occur at any time if called for by the President, the Provost, or the Dean.
   3. The Dean will provide a summary of the evaluation to the department council or equivalent body in executive session.
      
      The primary purposes of the comprehensive reviews are to provide a summative assessment of the performance of the Chairperson and to involve the department in a strategic analysis of the long-term goals and objectives of the Chairperson and department. These comprehensive reviews allow for the evaluation of the performance of the Chairperson over the extended time period necessary for assessment of significant administrative accomplishments. The comprehensive review also provides the department with the opportunity for direct participation in articulating the strategic direction of department leadership.

College Deans/Dean of University Libraries

A. Plans and Evaluation Criteria:

Within 180 days of the initial appointment as Dean, the newly appointed Dean shall submit to the Provost for discussion and approval, an annually renewable Five-Year Vision and Goals Statement. This statement will be developed in consultation with academic department chairpersons, college council or equivalent body, college faculty and administrative staff, and others within the University, and reviewed by the college council or equivalent body. This statement shall, in clear and measurable terms, convey the following:

• The linkage between anticipated progress in the College and University goals statements;
• The linkage to similar statements from other Colleges / Milner Library in the University with which there may be opportunities for interdisciplinary efforts or efficiencies;
• The Dean’s vision of the College’s future as well as general strategies for achieving the vision;
• The relationship between outreach activities and fundraising activities in accordance with University and College goals statements.
  
  Once approved by the Provost, the Five-Year Vision and Goals Statement shall form the basis for College planning and action in all realms, including academic program development, student progress, personnel planning and development, and space and budget planning.
  
  After the Provost has approved the Five-Year Vision and Goals Statement, the Dean shall submit to the Provost for discussion and approval a one-year action plan of College goals and implementation steps for achieving the Five-Year Vision and Goals Statement. Additionally, the Dean shall include personal and professional goals for development.

B. Evaluation:

1. Annual Formative Review - The Dean shall be evaluated annually by the Provost who shall use as the primary, but not exclusive, basis for such assessments:
   • Fulfillment of the official roles and responsibilities
   • Progress toward fulfilling the one-year action plans
   • Achievement of personal and professional goals
   • Anonymous input on the Dean’s performance provided through a questionnaire given to all college faculty, (appropriate administrative professional, and civil service employees are included for the Dean of University Libraries), which will allow for the submission of written comments
   • Effectiveness in working with college faculty, staff, and students;
   • Comments from the Dean being reviewed, in the form of a self-appraisal
   • Comments from members of the college council or other faculty and staff within the college who functionally have interacted with the Dean on projects or activities included in the plans
   • Comments from one or more recently appointed Chairpersons or other administrators to gather information on how the Dean is helping these individuals with their professional development
     
     The Provost shall use other sources of information in preparing the annual performance appraisal. For example, the Provost might conduct confidential interviews with or solicit signed confidential comments from:
     • students who have participated in College activities such as clubs or organizations in which the Dean has played a role;
     • others in the University who can provide informed perspectives on various dimensions of the Dean’s efforts or effectiveness;
     • others external to the University such as alumni, individuals from other educational institutions, or representatives of the business or government sectors with whom the Dean might interact by virtue of the College’s mission and the goals for the year.
   • The purpose of the annual review is formative; it also provides a comparative basis for the award of merit-based salary increases. The review is an effort to help a Dean achieve College goals in a dynamic environment. Following the review, the Provost will provide the Dean with a written summary of the annual review. Deans may respond in writing to any element of the annual review. The Provost will provide a summary of the annual evaluations to the college council or equivalent body in executive session every two to three years.
2. Comprehensive Fifth-Year Review - During each fifth year of service and in the last year of service unless deemed unnecessary by the faculty of the college, the Provost shall conduct a comprehensive review of the Dean. The evaluation shall consist of two parts:
   1. The Provost will initiate a comprehensive administrative review of the Dean, which will be more expansive and extensive than the annual assessment. A wide range of documents will be considered, as will measurable progress toward stated goals. Further, many faculty members, other campus colleagues, and persons external to the campus, such as alumni, will be interviewed confidentially by the Provost. The purposes of the review are to determine past successes, perceived ability to achieve goals, and to assess the desirability of reappointment. The comprehensive review shall be conducted even if the Dean has indicated a desire not to be re-appointed. The information gleaned from this process can be helpful in identifying characteristics sought in the next Dean.
   2. The Provost will appoint a review committee, comprised of five to nine faculty members elected from the tenured, or tenure-track faculty members, and chaired by a tenured faculty member from outside of the College holding the rank of Professor. This committee will be responsible for conducting a systematic review of the Dean’s performance from the perspective of the College’s faculty. For this review, the Dean will be asked to prepare an administrative portfolio, detailing the significant activities and accomplishments during the Dean’s tenure and outlining the goals and objectives for the next five years. This committee will also elicit information from college faculty and staff on the Dean’s performance. A summary of previous evaluations of the Dean’s performance shall be provided to the committee. This committee will provide its confidential report to the Provost. The comprehensive review may occur at any time if called for by the President or the Provost.
3. The Provost will provide a summary of the evaluation to the college council or equivalent body in executive session.
4. The primary purpose of the confidential comprehensive reviews is to provide a summative assessment of the performance of the Dean. Unlike the annual review, this review allows for the evaluation of the performance of the Dean over an extended time period necessary for assessment of significant administrative accomplishments. The fifth-year comprehensive review also provides the College with the opportunity for participation in articulating the strategic direction of College leadership.

Vice Presidents

A. Nature of Appointment/Scope of Responsibilities:

The Vice Presidents of the University are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the President. Each Vice President has two major responsibilities. First, the Vice Presidents are responsible for implementing Board Policies and University Procedures, and achieving approved goals for their respective Divisions. Second, each Vice President is a member of the President’s staff. In this sphere, responsibilities include advising the President on matters specific to the well-being and progress of each Division and on University-wide issues such as policy development. Each Vice President also is a member of a team of colleagues and must work effectively and collaboratively.

B. Evaluation:

1. Each Vice President shall be evaluated no less than annually by the President. This evaluation may include a survey involving the university community. The results of these surveys shall be forwarded to the Executive Committee. The President shall assess the performance of each Vice President in the following areas of responsibility:
   • Ability and effectiveness in administering and providing leadership to his/her respective Division;
   • Effectiveness in meeting approved division and personal goals and objectives for the review period;
   • Effectiveness and contributions towards achieving institutional and Presidential goals for the review period;
   • Quality of advice and counsel given the President;
   • Effectiveness in working as part of the President’s staff, especially with other Vice Presidents and members of the President’s staff;
   • Other situational or time-specific factors.
     
     In preparing the evaluation, the President will provide each Vice President with the opportunity to offer a self-appraisal. Additionally, the President should seek constructive assessments that can help each Vice President be more effective. It shall be the responsibility of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate to administer a period of commentary (open to all members of the university community at regular intervals) on the job performance of the Vice Presidents. The Secretary of the Senate shall be responsible for ensuring that the period of commentary occurs annually or at regular intervals no less than every three years, and shall report the findings in raw form to the President and the voting members of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate in executive session.
     
     Thus the President shall seek comments from those with whom each Vice President interacts on a regular basis, e.g., other members of the President’s staff, Deans, Associate Vice Presidents, University committees, and student governmental organizations. The President may also request a survey involving the university community at large.

C. Special Conditions for Evaluating the Vice President and Provost:

While the Vice President and Provost is one of four vice presidents, the position of Chief Academic Officer carries with it special expectations, obligations, and responsibilities to the faculty and students of the University. Therefore, in addition to the above procedures for all Vice Presidents, the following shall apply to the evaluation of the Vice President and Provost:

1. Annual Review: In addition to the criteria listed in Section III. B., the President shall conduct confidential interviews with or solicit signed confidential comments from:
   • Members of the academic community who have interacted regularly with the Provost on projects or activities and who can provide informed perspectives on various dimensions of the Provost’s efforts or effectiveness (e.g. chairpersons of senate committees, members of the executive committee of the senate, representatives of the A/P and Civil Service councils, representative of the Student Government Association);
   • Representatives of the Deans Group, the Provost’s Advisory Council or other committees on which the Provost serves or that the Provost convenes.
     
     The President shall use other sources of information in preparing the annual performance appraisal. For example the President might conduct confidential interviews with or solicit signed confidential statements from:
     • Others external to the University such as alumni, other educational institutions, or representatives of the business or government sectors with whom the Provost must interact by virtue of the nature of the position’s responsibilities;
     • One or more newly hired subordinate administrators to gather information on how the Provost is helping these individuals with their professional development;
     • Student leaders who have interacted with the Provost on projects or shared activities;
     • Representatives from various employee groups such as the Administrative/Professional Council and the Civil Service Council.
   • The purpose of the annual review is formative; it also provides a comparative basis for the award of merit-based salary increases. The review is an effort to help the Vice President and Provost achieve University goals, and to understand how he or she is perceived by various constituencies.
     
     Following the review, the President will provide the Provost with a written summary of the review.
2. Comprehensive Third-Year Review - During each third year of service as Vice President and Provost, the President shall conduct a comprehensive review of the Vice President and Provost. The evaluation shall consist of two parts:
   1. The President will initiate a comprehensive administrative review of the Vice President and Provost. The comprehensive review will be more expansive and extensive than the annual assessment. A wide range of documents will be considered, as will measurable progress toward stated goals. Further, many faculty members, other campus colleagues, and persons external to the campus will be confidentially interviewed by the President or representative. This shall be done to determine past successes or perceived ability to achieve goals, and to assess the desirability of a reappointment and the likelihood of further success and progress were another term to be offered and accepted.
   2. Every third year, as part of the comprehensive review, all members of the university community will be given an opportunity to provide input on the Provost’s performance by way of an anonymous questionnaire that will allow for the submission of written comments. At the President's request, this may be completed annually.
      
      The primary purpose of the confidential third-year review is to provide a summative assessment of the performance of the Vice President and Provost. Unlike the annual review, this review allows for the evaluation of the performance of the Vice President and Provost over an extended time period necessary for assessment of significant administrative accomplishments. The president will provide an overview of the means by which the Vice President and Provost has been evaluated and the results of the evaluation to the executive committee of the senate in executive session.

Commentary on the President

It shall be the annual responsibility of the Administrative Affairs Committee of the Academic Senate to administer a period of commentary (open to all members of the university community) on the job performance of the President. The Committee shall report its findings in summary form including survey data and collated comments to the President, the voting members of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate in executive session, and to the Board of Trustees. It is customary that attendance at this meeting be limited to the President, the Board of Trustees, and the voting members of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate. This summary shall be forwarded by March 1 of each year. (Academic Senate: 04/29/1998)

Questionnaires

All college councils or equivalent bodies are charged with developing questions appropriate for their Dean and Department Chairperson reviews. These questionnaires will be submitted for approval to the Chairperson’s Council, Dean’s Council, Provost, President, and the Administrative Affairs committee of the Academic Senate. The approved questionnaires will be provided to the Academic Senate as information items. Proposals to update questionnaires may be initiated at anytime by any of the above listed individuals or groups.

Schedule

By September 30 of each year, the Deans, Provost, and President will provide to the Academic Senate a list of those who are to have a formative evaluation and those who are to have a summative evaluation. They will also provide a schedule by which the various portions of the evaluation will be finished.