Guidelines for Review of Redelegated Merits for Federation Actions

MAKE SURE YOU REFERENCE THE APPROPRIATE CHECKLIST AVAILABLE ON THE VICE PROVOST'S WEBPAGE

Recommended Action form

• Pink for all actions that go to JPC (Joint Personnel Cmte) and Dean review
• Includes one-year accelerations, and decelerations
• Things to watch for:
• Rank and Step (does it match eligibility list)
• Titles; need to include all titles and %s
• If an accel or deceleration, is this marked?
• Salaries need to be accurate and listed by both monthly & annual amounts

Departmental Letter

• Peer group - is the date procedures were approved by JPC/Vice Provost referenced? NOTE: Procedures approved by CAP do not apply. Must have JPC/Vice Provost approval.
• Is the required description of the peer group evaluation process included?
• Is the vote reported clearly?
• If there are "no" votes, is the required explanation included?
• Is the first paragraph an accurate reflection of the review (i.e. does it state it is an acceleration, etc.)
• Does the letter accurately state numbers that are listed elsewhere in dossier.
• Number of M.S. and Ph.D. students (if appropriate)
• Number of courses; accurate student evaluation scores (if appropriate)
• Number of publications
• Any red flags in the content?
• Must include an evaluation of AES contributions if there is an AES title.

Disclosure statement:

• Is it signed?
• Is it checked off?
• Does it indicate the candidate was given redacted copies of the extramural letters?
• Date needs to be on or after the date of the departmental letter.

Candidate's Statement

• Does the letter accurately state numbers that are listed elsewhere in dossier.
• Number of extending knowledge related items (if appropriate)
• Number of courses; accurate student evaluation scores (if appropriate)
• Number of publications

Position Description - required

• Must include percents by each major job function. See APM section for the required functions for the series, e.g. research, professional competence, university service

List of Extending Knowledge (Specialists in CE only)

• This will vary candidate by candidate. Insure that it makes logical sense and that the lines are drawn appropriately based on previous actions

List of Extending Knowledge evaluations (Specialists in CE only)

List of student evaluations submitted. (not required unless there is a formal teaching appt)

• Only a list of those included in the supporting documentation should be listed here.
  Should include:
• One complete set of original evaluations from two courses.
• Numerical summaries for all other courses.
• Are the evaluations and summaries included in the supporting documentation?

Teaching and Advising Record (not required unless there is a formal teaching appt)

• Page 1 can be the Instructor Activity Report or can be a list prepared by the department. Either way, the percent of the contribution to each course should be included
• Are the appropriate years indicated by a line excluding courses previously reviewed?
• Numbers are often not reported the same here and in the departmental letter and candidates statement.
• Often faculty attach additional information that is not asked for. It is okay if they include lists of those students who they sat on their qualifying committee, visitors, etc. It is NOT okay to include course syllabi, outlines etc

List of Service Activity

• List should be University, professional and public service.
• Departments can include Outside Professional Activities reports in lieu of professional service on service list

Publication List

• Put in the following order: Contributions to Jointly Authored Pubs, Cat. I, In press, in press letters, Submitted, Cat II, Cat III, Cat IV
• Per the Supplemental Annual Call pub lists include
  • Category I - Refereed and non-refereed journal articles; books and monograph chapters; proceedings chapters (only if refereed)
  • Category II - Compendiums of data; reports, regular distribution items; proceedings chapters (non-refereed); extension teaching materials; video or audio tapes; popular articles; bulletins; leaflets; all publications distributed electronically
  • Category III: Items with limited distribution; progress or annual reports to funding agencies or commissions; comments for commodity group newsletters
  • Category IV: Published abstracts, book reviews, editorials
• Is the line drawn correctly since the last review?
• Refereed publications need to be indicated.
• Need an indicator of those publications being submitted for review.
• If a Proceedings is listed as refereed, is documentation included to substantiate that?
• If an item is listed as in press is there documentation to show that it is accepted without revision? If not, is the publication in galley format?
• All other lists, check for appropriateness of category, and whether the line is drawn correctly.

Grants

• Does the list include grants for the entire review period?
• Can include awards here or on separate page.

Awards

• Can have a separate list or include on grants list

AES Project Reports (required only if hold an AES title)

• Need copies of annual reports since 1994 or since last review, whichever is later.