Appendix B: University Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure

Policy Number: 3349-03-195
Effective Date: 06/05/2015
Updated: 09/2021
Reviewed: —
Responsible Department: Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs
Applies To: All Tenured and Tenure Track Faculty

A. Purpose

The Faculty Bylaws concerning Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Tenure Track Faculty (the “Bylaws”) are set forth herein and are designed to cultivate a diverse body of faculty that demonstrates sustained excellence and distinction in scholarship, education, service and clinical care, if appropriate.   To this end, the Bylaws define the nature of Tenure; the faculty who are eligible for appointment and consideration for Promotion and/or Tenure; the process for the comprehensive, fair and orderly consideration of appointments and the granting of Tenure; criteria that are to be applied in making these decisions; and mechanisms for the assurance of due process and good faith resolution of conflicts arising out of the Bylaws.

B. Scope

The Bylaws concerning Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Tenure Track Faculty apply only to Tenure Track and Tenured Faculty.

C. Definitions

1. “Academic Rank”. The University has established in rank order, the ranks of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor (sometimes referred to as full Professor) for faculty in the Tenure Track.  The rank of Instructor is reserved for persons completing customary preparation in a given field, or persons without a terminal degree.  This rank is only available to faculty in the non-Tenure Track.
2. “Candidate”.  A Candidate is an applicant for appointment, Promotion and/or Tenure.
3. “College”. The Term “College” includes all the Colleges organized under the authority of the Northeast Ohio Medical University (“NEOMED” or “the University”).
4. “Curriculum Vitae (CV)”.  The Curriculum Vitae is one of the documents submitted by the Candidate for consideration by Independent External Evaluators.  The CV should include, but does not need to be limited to, information on contributions to the educational program of the University or College(s), research and scholarly accomplishments, service related to the College(s), University or Profession, and professional standing.
5. “Days”.  Days as used in this document are business Days of the University.
6. “Dossier”.  A Dossier is a comprehensive set of documentation prepared and submitted by the Candidate when seeking Promotion and/or Tenure.  This documentation is critical in assessing the Candidate’s achievements and readiness for Promotion and/or Tenure.  The completed Dossier must be signed by the Candidate along with an attestation of veracity and completeness.
7. “Essential Functions”. Duties or principal functional responsibilities of a particular faculty position that are regarded as being crucial to that position. They also include mental and physical qualifications that are required to perform the duties or principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job description.  A faculty member with an impairment caused by a physical or mental disease or disability that substantially limits a major life activity may request accommodations in the performance of these duties and principal functional responsibilities in accordance with the university’s policy on disabilities and accommodations.
8. “Evaluation Year”. The Evaluation Year is the final year of the Probationary Period.
9. “Fitness for Duty Assessment”. A mental or physical health evaluation in which a qualified health professional performs tests and provides feedback about an employee’s mental or physical qualifications that are required to perform the duties or principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job description. A Fitness for Duty Assessment should provide an in-depth analysis of the employee’s core competencies to successfully perform the duties or principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job description.
10. “Independent External Evaluator”. An Independent External Evaluator is an individual who is at “arm’s length” from and is not related to a Candidate or does not have a comparable close relationship; has no substantive financial ties to the Candidate; is not dependent in some way on the Candidate’s services; does not have a close professional relationship with the Candidate (e.g. dissertation advisor); or has not collaborated so extensively with the Candidate that an objective review of the Candidate’s work either is not, or appears not to be possible. An Independent External Evaluator is not employed by and does not have a faculty appointment at the University, its affiliated universities, hospitals and health departments, and is qualified to assess the Candidate’s scholarly achievements and reputation.
11. “Leave of Absence”. A period of time for which a faculty member has been approved to be absent from the workplace and is not completing his/her work-related duties. A Leave of Absence will toll the Probationary Period.
12. “Letter of Offer”. The Letter of Offer is a document initiated by a given College Dean that sets forth certain terms and conditions of the Candidate’s appointment and/or employment but does not constitute a contract.  Any previous experience to be counted toward a faculty member’s Probationary Period may be negotiated prior to appointment and will be delineated in this document.  Any modifications to the document must be in writing and signed by the Dean of the respective College that initiated the appointment, the faculty member’s Department Chair and the affected faculty member.
13. “Notice of Non-reappointment”.  Notice of Non-reappointment is a written notification by the Dean of the respective College to the affected faculty member that the College intends to terminate a faculty member’s appointment at a specified time.  Notice of Non-reappointment will generally be given on or before March 15.  For the first year of service, the last day of service will be June 30 of the calendar year in which the notice is given.  After one or more years of service, the last day of service will be June 30 of the next calendar year.
14. “Probationary Period”.  The Probationary Period is the initial period of a Tenure Track appointment during which a faculty member must demonstrate that he/she is capable of performing at the level of excellence and distinction required to be awarded Tenure. The Probationary Period lasts from the date of the initial Tenure Track appointment to the date of the award of Tenure by the Board of Trustees or Notice of Non-reappointment.
15. “Promotion”.  Promotion is the shift of a faculty member from one Academic Rank to a higher Academic Rank.
16. Recognition of Faculty Distinction. The following titles have been established to recognize outstanding, meritorious or exceptional Tenured or Tenure Track Faculty.
    1. “Distinguished”
       1. The title “Distinguished” is a non-salaried designation of distinction.
       2. The title Distinguished University Professor is the highest honor the University can confer.  It is reserved for faculty members who have made exceptional contributions and extraordinary achievements in the areas of teaching, scholarship and research.
       3. When the title “Distinguished” is conferred, it precedes the faculty member’s Academic Rank.
       4. Recommendations for the award of Distinguished status may originate with the Department Chair, Dean, or the President. If the recommendation originates with the Chair, it must be reviewed by the respective College Dean and if approved forwarded to the President.
       5. The President may forward his/her own recommendation directly to the Board of Trustees for approval.
    2. “Emeritus”. “Emeritus” is a title of distinction that is used to recognize University faculty and senior professional staff who have provided meritorious service to the University and who have terminated full-time service to the College or University. The University recognizes Emeritus faculty and senior professional staff as a continuing valuable resource and as such encourages them to maintain an active ongoing relationship with the University.  The conferral of this title is governed by a separate Board of Trustees Policy and as such, is beyond the scope of these Bylaws.
17. “Tenure”. Tenure is a privilege and not a right.  Tenure is the commitment of a given College of the University to a faculty member for continuous and ongoing faculty appointment. Tenure provides protection against involuntary suspension or termination except for financial exigency, just cause, when a faculty member receives a negative post-tenure review or is so substantially impaired by a physical or mental disease or disability such that the faculty member is unable to fulfill the Essential Functions of the faculty member’s position. Tenure automatically ceases upon the faculty member’s voluntary or involuntary termination, retirement, or death .
18. “Tenure Track Position”.  A Tenure Track Position is a full-time salaried faculty appointment that includes the eligibility to apply for Tenure.  The appointment to a Tenure Track Position is set forth in the Letter of Offer.
19. “Tolling”. Tolling is the suspension of the time period (granted in year-long increments) that comprises a tenure track faculty member’s Probationary Period, for which there is no expectation of productivity.  Tolling of the Probationary Period must be requested by the faculty member and approved by the Department Chair and the Dean of the respective College.  Any such suspension of time will not be counted toward the Probationary Period.

D. Body of the Bylaws

1. Appointments
   1. Appointment to the Faculty is a privilege not a right. An Appointment is the designation of a Candidate for a given Academic Rank, that is based upon the Candidate’s competence in his/her field and the expectation that the Candidate will maintain and increase mastery and creativity in this field.   The Letter of Offer will state the kind of Appointment the Candidate will hold, the conditions under which the Appointment is made and held, and any special considerations that may affect the Appointment.
   2. Appointments to the Tenure Track will be made upon the positive recommendation of a duly constituted Search Committee, the respective College Dean, the University President and final action by the Board of Trustees.
   3. Considerations include, but are not limited to:
      1. Possession of an appropriate terminal academic or professional degree;
      2. Expertise in an appropriate academic field and evidence of dedication to continuing advancement of this field of knowledge;
      3. Ability and dedication as an effective teacher;
      4. Creativity and competence in an appropriate field of research and scholarship; and
      5. Ability to assume responsibility for service to the College, University or profession.
   4. “Appointments with Tenure” are Appointments for senior level faculty (Associate or Full Professor) from comparable institutions where they have had Tenure and a commensurate faculty rank. For these faculty, the Probationary Period is waived and Tenure commences at the time of initial Appointment.   Appointments with Tenure are made only after positive recommendations by the Department Chair, respective College Dean, and consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall forward positive recommendations to the University President for review and approval. The University President shall forward positive recommendations to the Board of Trustees for ratification or approval.
   5. While prior Tenure status and faculty rank at another institution will be considered at the time of initial Appointment, the College Dean in consultation with the University Vice President for Academic Affairs will determine the appropriate faculty rank and the length of any Probationary Period for a faculty member within the guidelines established herein.  The length of the Probationary Period if any, will be set forth in the Letter of Offer.
   6. An Appointment is made with the expectation that it will continue until notice is given and that it may be terminated either upon the retirement or resignation of the faculty member or by the College or University in accordance with the University Bylaws and/or the Faculty Bylaws.
2. Tenure
   1. Basic Principles of Tenure
      1. The conferral of Tenure is a commitment of the resources of a given College within the University. Tenure assists the University and its respective Colleges in attracting and retaining a high quality, and diverse faculty.  The conferral of Tenure necessitates an assessment of University and College needs and resources.  The University will consider documented evidence by the Candidate of his/her professional excellence in teaching, research and scholarly activities, and academic/public/professional/clinical service; and demonstrated professional dedication and outstanding ability necessary to substantiate the potential for future contributions justifying the degree of permanence afforded by the award of Tenure.
      2. Tenure may be awarded only to a full-time, salaried Candidate with a Tenure Track Appointment. Tenure may be awarded at the time of initial appointment or after the successful completion of the Probationary Period.  Except under extraordinary circumstances, any time accrued under Non-Tenure Track Appointments at the University or elsewhere will not count toward the established Probationary Period.  Any exceptions must be approved by the respective Department Chair and Dean and must be noted in the Letter of Offer or an amendment thereto.
      3. Tenure is a privilege not a right.
      4. Tenure shall not be awarded unless, after rigorous review, the Candidate has been found to meet the standards described herein. Attainment of Tenure may not result from inaction, inadvertence or any procedural error on the part of the College or University.
      5. A Candidate for Promotion must first have been awarded Tenure or must seek Tenure at the time he/she seeks Promotion.
      6. If Tenure is not awarded, a Candidate shall be given a Notice of Non-reappointment as defined herein.
   2. Tenure Track. Only faculty appointed to the Tenure Track are eligible to apply for Tenure.  Tenure Track status will be identified in the faculty member’s Letter of Offer.
   3. Terminal Degree. The Candidate must hold an appropriate terminal degree.  Exceptions can be made in particular cases, provided that such exceptions are justified by the Candidate’s Department Chair and approved by the respective College Dean and University President.
   4. Award Must Result from Positive Action. The conferral of Tenure is a positive act by the College and the University.  A faculty member shall not be awarded Tenure by default.  Any failure in procedural matters shall not be sufficient cause for the conferral of Tenure.  If the University or the College makes a procedural error, the error will be corrected, and the procedure will continue without prejudice to the Candidate.
   5. Probationary Period
      1. Typically, the Probationary Period begins at the time an appointment commences and ends on the date of the award of Tenure by the Board of Trustees. In determining eligibility for Tenure and Promotion, initial Appointments commencing on or before October 1 will be counted as a full year. Partial years of appointment will not be used unless so requested in writing by the faculty member.  The Probationary Period will be identified in the Letter of Offer or the amendments thereto.
      2. Upon written request of a faculty member and approval by the Department Chair and the Dean, a faculty member may be allowed to apply for Tenure before the maximum number of years of the Probationary Period. If the faculty member is not awarded Tenure when he/she is reviewed before the maximum number of years provided herein, he/she may re-apply for Tenure once more.  However, he/she may only re-apply in the year when he/she has completed the maximum number of years of the Probationary Period.
      3. Leaves of absence and other reasons approved by the Chair and the Dean for which the Probationary Period has been tolled will not be counted as part of the Probationary Period.
      4. In extenuating circumstances, at the written request of the faculty member and with the concurrence of the respective Department Chair and Dean, extensions of up to no more than three (3) years in total may be given to those probationary faculty who demonstrate a high probability of being awarded Tenure at the end of the extension. The request must be made before May 15 of the Evaluation Year.  Requests for extension and the approval of such extension must be in writing.  Approval of an extension will be considered an amendment of the Letter of Offer.
      5. Faculty who have received an extension of the probationary period can apply for promotion only once during the period of their extension, either during or at the end of the probationary period.  The recommendation of the University Tenure and Promotions Committee, dean, and president has the same standing as recommendations in which the probationary period was not extended.
3. Promotion of Tenure Track Assistant Professor to Associate Professor with Tenure and Promotion of Tenure Track Associate Professor to Full Professor
   1. Candidates will be simultaneously reviewed for Promotion and Tenure.
   2. If Tenure is awarded, then Promotion to the next higher Academic Rank is also granted.
   3. The Probationary Period is generally no more than seven years for Assistant Professors and no more than five years for Associate Professors. A faculty member must submit a written notification of intent to stand for Promotion with Tenure to the respective Department Chair by May 15 of the year specified in the Letter of Offer or amendments thereto.
   4. If notification of intent to stand is not given by the faculty member as required, Notice of Non-reappointment will be issued as specified herein.
   5. Each Candidate for Promotion with Tenure is evaluated individually based upon the achievements described in the Dossier according to the criteria and standards appropriate to the Candidate’s field and any appropriate terms and conditions cited in the Candidate’s Letter of Offer.
   6. In evaluating the Candidate’s performance, the weighting of the evaluation areas may vary. Consideration in weighing will be given to the mission of the University and College, the Department and the demands of the appropriate discipline. Both quality and quantity of the individual’s contribution will be taken into consideration.
   7. In order to achieve Promotion with Tenure, the Candidate must exhibit sustained excellence and distinction in at least one of the two areas of faculty activity; research or teaching. Proficiency is required in all other areas of faculty activity.  Convincing evidence for these must be exhibited in the Candidate’s Tenure and Promotion Dossier and must reflect the weighting of the effort distribution.  See Section (I)(1), “Tenure/Promotion Dossier for Tenure Track Faculty”.
   8. Following an Assistant Professor’s Promotion to Associate Professor and the award of Tenure, there is no requirement for a faculty member to be promoted to a higher rank.
4. Promotion of Tenured Associate Professors to Full Professor
   1. Faculty must be Tenured prior to seeking Promotion to Professor.
   2. Five years in rank is generally the minimum time in rank before which a faculty member may be considered for Promotion to Professor. The Dean may, after consultation with the Department Chair, reduce the time in rank requirement for a faculty member whose outstanding performance would justify the reduction in time prior to consideration for Promotion.
   3. Each Candidate for Promotion is evaluated individually based upon the achievements described in the Dossier (refer to Section (I)(1), “Tenure/Promotion Dossier for Tenure Track Faculty”) according to the criteria and standards appropriate to the Candidate’s field.
   4. Promotions are made after contributions commensurate with the higher rank have been achieved. The Tenure and Promotions Committee will consider any specific exceptions or requirements set forth in the faculty member’s Letter of Offer or any amendments thereto, and the annual written reviews.
   5. A successful Candidate for Promotion to full Professor should be recognized as an authority in their field and be regarded as a national or international expert and leader. Promotion from Associate Professor to full Professor is based upon recognition of the Candidate’s academic maturity; sustained and Distinguished accomplishments in education, scholarship and service; strong University commitment; and distinction in leadership roles in education, scholarship and service at the University.
5. Standards and Documentation for Tenure and Promotion. Standards and documentation for Tenure and Promotion include, but are not limited to:
   1. Research and Scholarly Accomplishments
      1. The Standard
         1. Research and scholarly activities are central to the mission of the University.  Given the complexity of the University and its component Colleges and the great diversity of talent within them, it is imperative that various kinds of academic work be recognized through a broad vision of scholarship.  Scholarship includes, but is not limited to, the scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching.   Scholarship and research may also include participation in clinical trials and commercialization, patent and technology transfer activities.  Participation in clinical trials, commercialization, patent and technology transfer activities are primarily supportive for Promotion decisions and, while they weigh importantly in Tenure decisions, are not solely sufficient for the granting of Tenure. Clinical improvement and innovation activities done in a scholarly manner and acknowledged to be of regional, national or international importance are important indicators of distinction and merit consideration.   Regardless of the type of scholarship, it should possess the quality of excellence, be peer-reviewed and be disseminated in the public domain.
         2. Creative scholarly activity includes both original research resulting from investigative work or other peer reviewed contributions to the professional and scientific literature.  Faculty shall conduct original research and other scholarly activity.  The hallmark of creative scholarly activity lies in the peer reviewed “written” word.  Written work which is not peer reviewed may support a faculty member’s Dossier, but by itself is insufficient evidence of excellence in scholarly activity.  Similarly, oral or poster presentations may support a faculty member’s Dossier but are insufficient evidence of proficiency or excellence in scholarly activity.
         3. Original research is studious inquiry or examination.
         4. Faculty shall conduct research and other creative scholarly activity that clearly demonstrates high quality and conforms to the highest ethical and legal standards.  Quality is stressed over quantity.
         5. Standards and expectations for scholarship may differ from one field to another.  The standards and expectations should be clearly identified for faculty by the Department Chair and during the Advisory Committee consultations and for the Tenure and Promotion Committee in the Advisory Committee’s summative letter.
         6. Clinical innovation and improvement performed in a scholarly fashion and acknowledged to be of regional, national and international importance are additional evidence of readiness for Promotion.
      2. Documentation. There must be evidence that the Candidate is engaged in creative scholarly activity in areas appropriate to their faculty appointment(s), Letter of Offer, and if appropriate, graduate faculty status. Such activities include, but are not limited to:
         1. Scholarly publications.  These include publications in journals, books, chapters, monographs, case reports, literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, abstracts and technical reports.  Publications will be assessed in terms of quality and quantity and the Candidate’s role in the work.  The quality of the publications will be evaluated by criteria such as:  whether the publication was refereed; whether the publication was invited; the metrics that evaluate excellence in a field of science, reputation and circulation of the journal or book or monograph; the scope of the periodical’s audience; the number of citations; originality, creativity and impact on the field; unsolicited independent reviews; or solicited outside professional reviews.
         2. Research support.  This includes financial support generated through grants, contracts and other peer reviewed awards.
         3. Scholarly presentations.  These include, but are not limited to:  lectures, poster presentations or educational displays at professional meetings, colloquia, workshops, seminars and conference presentations.
         4. Research collaborations.  These include, but are not limited to collaborations between departments, Colleges and universities regionally, nationally or internationally.
         5. Research consultations.  These include, but are not limited to, providing consultation in:  study design, data analysis, measurement and evaluation.
         6. Intellectual property development and activities in support of technology transfer and commercialization.   Documentation of the development of new intellectual property including patents, conduct of clinical trials, and commercialization of University intellectual property provide additional positive evidence for Promotion and Tenure decisions.
         7. Documentation of innovative clinical activities supported by scholarly publications, presentations and grant and contract activity; commercialization efforts; clinical trial excellence, and recognition by peers such as fellowship in professional organizations or recognition of clinical acumen, leadership in quality improvement efforts on a large scale and regional, national and international reputation are also important elements for consideration.
   2. Educational Accomplishments
      1. The Standard. Teaching is central to the mission of the University and its component Colleges. A faculty member’s teaching is reflected in part by students’ achievements.  Furthermore, teaching quality is documented by recognition and feedback from students, alumni and peer evaluation. Positive contributions to the learning environment and curriculum may support a faculty member’s record of teaching.  Service on and recognition by national educational bodies are also important aspects of teaching excellence.
      2. Documentation. There must be evidence that the Candidate is engaged in educational activities that are appropriate to their faculty appointment(s), Letter of Offer, and if appropriate, graduate faculty status. Such activities include, but are not limited to:
         1. Course or clerkship director;
         2. Presentation of lectures, seminars and tutorials;
         3. Preparation of syllabi, course and examination materials; remediation;
         4. Academic advising and career guidance;
         5. Obtaining external funding for educational activities.
         6. The faculty member should demonstrate substantial ability: in presenting concepts and information; in teaching problem solving, research and laboratory techniques; developing professional attitudes; evaluating students and conducting remediation, innovative curriculum and teaching initiatives, nationally or internationally prominent educational activities.
         7. The extent and effectiveness of educational accomplishments will be evaluated through review of relevant evidence.  Evidence may include:  student performance on examinations; recognition of excellence in teaching; service on nationally prominent task forces, committees, or study sections; supervisor, peer and student evaluations.
      3. Service Accomplishments
         1. The Standard. Service oriented to the needs of the University, College and the respective Departments, are expected for faculty, regardless of rank and academic appointment.
         2. Documentation
            1. Service activities. Faculty members are expected to be active participants in service activities. Service activities include, but are not limited to:
               1. Membership on committees, boards, councils, etc.;
               2. Professional service activities such as service on research review committees, ad hoc research reviews, editorial board membership, editorship, editorial reviews, etc.;
               3. Service to the community;
               4. Service to governmental bodies on biomedical, public health, and community health topics.
            2. Planning, organizing and implementing service projects.
            3. Service support.  This includes support for service activities generated through grants, contracts and other sources.

E. Structure and Function of Tenure Advisory Committee

1. Purpose. The purpose of the Tenure Advisory Committee is to establish a structure for progressive, comprehensive assessment and consistent guidance for a probationary faculty member.   The Tenure Advisory Committee would provide probationary faculty with a sound understanding of all criteria and standards, a realistic evaluation of the faculty member’s progress toward achieving necessary performance benchmarks and assist the faculty member by making recommendations concerning academic and professional development during the Probationary Period.  This Committee is advisory to the faculty member and to the respective Department Chair.
2. Composition
   1. A Tenure Advisory Committee will be appointed for each probationary faculty member. Depending on the number of Tenured Faculty and the academic disciplines of the faculty within a given College or Department, the respective Dean may appoint a single College Advisory Committee for all probationary Tenure Track Faculty or the Dean may delegate this authority to a Department Chair who may construct more discipline specific Tenure Advisory Committees for each individual faculty member in a given department.
   2. The Advisory Committee will be composed of at least three Tenured Faculty of the University who are knowledgeable of the Tenure process, criteria and standards. The Tenure Advisory Committee may include Tenured Faculty from outside the probationary faculty member’s department but may not include the faculty member’s Department Chair.
3. Meetings
   1. The Tenure Advisory Committee will meet at least annually with the probationary faculty member. To the extent possible, meetings should occur in time to allow for input into the annual review of the faculty member’s performance by the Department Chair.
   2. The Tenure Advisory Committee will be chaired by a member selected by the Dean or the Department Chair as appropriate.
4. Reports
   1. The probationary faculty member shall submit a progressively updated Tenure Dossier to his or her Tenure Advisory Committee Chair at least 2 weeks in advance of the meeting with the Committee. The Dossier should, to the extent appropriate, mirror the format of the “Tenure/Promotion Dossier for Tenure Track Faculty” outlined in Section (I)(1). The Dossier will be reviewed with the faculty member at the time of the Advisory Committee meeting to help the probationary faculty member gain a better understanding of all of the criteria and standards and to assist the faculty member to more comprehensively and uniformly submit information to the Tenure and Promotion Committee.
   2. The Tenure Advisory Committee Chair will provide an annual written report to the Department Chair which will include an assessment of the faculty member’s progress toward Tenure. The Committee Chair will keep a record of all the reports submitted to the Chair.
   3. The Department Chair will consider the Tenure Advisory Committee Report when conducting the annual performance review of the faculty member, and when formulating his/her letter of recommendation at the time of Tenure review.
   4. The Committee Chair shall submit a summative report to both the Candidate’s Department Chair and the University Tenure and Promotion Committee, which will set forth the Committee’s assessment of the Candidate’s readiness to stand for Tenure in sufficient time to allow for the Chair to include this information in his or her recommendation.

F. Structure and Function of the University Tenure and Promotions Committee

1. Standing Committee of the University. The University Tenure and Promotions Committee (UTPC) is a standing committee of the University.  The rules of the University standing committees (per Appendix G) will apply unless superseded herein.
2. Composition and Chair
   1. Voting membership includes:
      1. Nine (9) tenured faculty members appointed by the President; there shall be no more than two (2) members at the Associate Professor rank and no faculty at the Assistant Professor rank or below. There will be no Department Chairs on the Committee.
      2. A diversity of members representing the breadth of departments and faculty with at least one (1) from each department with tenure track faculty, and with at least two (2) from each College which grants tenure.
   2. Officers
      1. The Chair shall be a tenured professor elected by a majority vote of the UTPC.  The Chair is a voting member of the Committee who will abstain from voting unless the votes of the other committee members are tied.
      2. A Vice Chair shall be a tenured professor elected by a majority vote of the UTPC. The Vice Chair plays the same role as any other member of the Committee if the Chair of the Committee is chairing the meeting. If the chair is absent at a meeting, the Vice Chair assumes the responsibilities of the Chair, including not voting unless the votes of the other committee members are tied.
3. Conflict of Interest – Criteria. Any member of the UTPC must disclose all real and/or perceived conflict of interest of any of its members to the Committee.  A Committee member has a conflict of interest if he/she:
   1. Is related to the person who is evaluated or has a close comparable relationship.
   2. Has a substantial financial interest in any evaluated activities by the person who is evaluated, both personal and professional.
   3. Within the past three (3) years, has collaborated with or has been in a close mentoring relationship with the person who is evaluated, or is dependent in some way on the candidate’s services.
   4. Within the past three (3) years, has played a major professional role as part of a funded research project with the person who is evaluated.
   5. Is preparing to enter into a relationship that would be defined as a conflict in accordance with the above guidelines.
4. Conflict of Interest – Tenure Advisory Committee
   1. No conflict of interest is presumed to exist if the UTPC member is currently part of the TAC for the candidate, however, if the UTCP member is 1) the Chair of the TAC and, 2) the single author of a final TAC report, he/she will recuse themself from a formal vote on the candidate in the UTPC.
   2. No conflict of interest is presumed to exist if the UTPC member is currently part of the TAC for the candidate, however, if the UTCP member is 1) the Chair of the TAC and, 2) the single author of a final TAC report, he/she will recuse themself from a formal vote on the candidate in the UTPC.
5. Conflict of Interest – Evaluation Procedure. The UTPC shall evaluate a member’s declared or perceived conflict of interest to determine if the conflict is substantial enough to exclude him/her from discussion and/or voting on a pending tenure case.  This evaluation shall include:
   1. Examination of the factors that surround the potential conflict;
   2. In the presence of the affected member and with their participation, discussion of these factors;
   3. In the absence of the affected member, discussion of these factors and related circumstances and a vote on whether the affected member can:
      1. Contribute to the discussion of the pending tenure case; and
      2. Vote on the pending tenure case.
6. Criteria for Candidate Review and Voting
   1. Each candidate for tenure and/or promotion will be reviewed by no fewer than five (5) voting members.
   2. The Chair, with the concurrence of the Committee, may appoint an ad hoc member or members who meet(s) the criteria for voting membership to review and vote on candidates in order to meet the minimum number of members.
   3. When the Committee is considering a candidate for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, Associate Professors who are committee members will discuss and vote.
   4. When the Committee is considering a candidate for promotion to Professor, Associate Professors on the Committee may participate in the discussion but will not vote.
7. Confidentiality
   1. In order to assure that Candidates for Promotion and Tenure receive a thorough and fair review of their qualifications and accomplishments, Tenure and Promotion Committee materials and deliberations must be accorded the highest degree of confidentiality.
   2. Committee members agree:
      1. To accept the responsibility to protect the integrity of the Tenure and Promotion process for all Candidates.
      2. That Tenure and Promotion materials are crucial to the consideration of Candidate’s Tenure and that it is necessary to maintain the highest degree of confidentiality for these materials.  Specifically, members agree to:
         1. Not discuss any information about Candidates except in Tenure and Promotion meetings.
         2. Be fair; accurate and honest in the management of information germane to the review process.
         3. Guard against inaccuracies, carelessness, bias, and distortion made by either emphasis or omission of information.
         4. Strive to treat issues impartially and handle controversial subjects dispassionately.
         5. If requested, provide accurate and complete reports on Candidates to the respective College Dean, President or University Counsel.
   3. A breach of this confidentiality will be considered a serious violation of the Faculty Code of Conduct.
8. Responsibilities
   1. The Tenure and Promotions Committee reviews and evaluates the credentials of applicants for Tenure or Promotion.
   2. Evaluation. The Tenure and Promotions Committee may:
      1. Interview appropriate individuals and/or;
      2. Request additional information from further outside references; and/or
      3. Request any additional information pertinent to its evaluation.
9. Recommendations. The Tenure and Promotions Committee recommendation shall be one supported by the majority of members.  The Chair of the Committee will generally abstain from voting except in the case of a tie.
   1. The Tenure and Promotions Committee, after its evaluation, may recommend to award or deny Tenure and Promotion to an Assistant Professor; recommend to award or deny Tenure and/or Promotion to an Associate Professor; and recommend to award or deny Tenure to a full Professor and will forward its recommendation to the respective College Dean.
   2. The Dean will review the Candidate’s Dossier and the recommendation of the Tenure and Promotions Committee and formulate his/her own recommendation.  The Dean will forward the Tenure and Promotion Committee’s recommendation along with his/her own recommendation to the President, the Candidate and the Candidate’s Department Chair.
   3. In the case of a negative recommendation by the Dean, the Dean will notify the Candidate of the right to appeal as set forth herein.
10. Appeal by the Candidate
    1. By December 1, the Candidate must notify the Dean and the President in writing of his/her intent to appeal or the right is waived. The appeal will be scheduled in December.
    2. The President may hear the appeal him/herself or may appoint a three- member Appeal Committee of Tenured Faculty from the Ad Hoc Appeal Pool (see Section K of this Appendix) to consider the matter. If appointed, the Committee will elect its own Chair and will decide by majority vote to recommend upholding of the recommendation of the University Tenure and Promotions Committee and/or the Dean.
    3. The Appeal Committee review should be concluded within thirty (30) days from the date the Committee is charged by the President.
    4. Recommendation by the President
       1. The President shall review the recommendation from the Tenure and Promotions Committee, the Department Chair, the Dean and the Appeal Committee, if appropriate.
       2. By February 1, the President will notify the Candidate and the Department Chair and Dean in writing of his/her recommendation.
       3. By February 1, the President if he/she concurs will transmit all positive recommendations for the award of Tenure and/or Promotion to the Board of Trustees for consideration at their next scheduled meeting.
       4. Following Board of Trustee approval, the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Candidate, Department Chair and Dean will be notified.
       5. The Department Chair is responsible for notifying Human Resources and Accounting of any changes in status.

G. Annual Performance Evaluation (APE)

1. The performance of tenure track faculty will be evaluated annually by the Department Chair.  An APE is a process that will include a dialogue between the Department Chair and the faculty member concerning the faculty member’s job description, annual goals, and performance during the evaluation period. The APE will be an opportunity for constructive feedback to the faculty member about performance and career/faculty development. The APE includes an evaluation of the following faculty performance categories:
   1. Teaching
   2. Research and Scholarship; and
   3. Service, including Leadership and/or Administration if applicable.
2. During an annual APE meeting between the faculty member and Department Chair, the faculty member’s job description will be consulted to establish annual performance goals and percent efforts for each of the performance categories for the upcoming performance year and documented in the APE form. Input from sources external to the department that may have bearing on the faculty member’s performance may be considered (e.g., supervising authority in the COGS or teaching authorities within the college). These goals and percent efforts may be revised as needed through the performance year and documented. Any changes to the job description will only occur if there are major or over-reaching changes in job-related duties and must be documented in the Office of Human Resources.
3. Faculty will be evaluated in each established performance category based on the following rating scale. Faculty will be rated on a 1.00 (min/low) – 5.00 (max/high) scale with 2 decimal place for each performance category.
   1. 4.00 – 5.00 = Outstanding Performance: performance consistently and significantly above standards in virtually all areas; far exceeds normal expectations; outstanding achievements and contributions plus outside recognition of effort.
   2. 3.00 – 3.99 = Exceeds Performance Expectations:  performance generally well above standards in many important aspects; frequently exceeds normal expectations.
   3. 2.00 – 2.99 = Meets Performance Expectations: performance fully meets standards in all important aspects; a good contributor.
   4. 1.00 – 1.99 = Below Performance Expectations: performance below standards in a number of areas; improvement needed to achieve functional performance level.
4. A percent of effort will be established for each of the faculty performance categories.
   1. Teaching – The teaching workload calculation involves hours spent with learners modified by workload weighting (based on the complexity of teaching) and whether teaching is new or particularly innovative. Workload weighting and credit for new/innovative teaching is determined by the Department Chair in consultation with the faculty member. The teaching workload for a faculty member will be determined by the Department Chair after consultation with the respective associate dean for education or educational supervisor within the COGS.
   2. Research and Scholarship – Research and scholarship expectations (e.g., status as a PI, number and quality of publications, presentations, grant applications, and grants awarded, etc.) are established annually by the Department Chair and the faculty member at the beginning of the performance year. These expectations are framed in a balanced perspective knowing the peaks and valleys associated with academics and research.  Expectations are titrated to a faculty member’s percent of effort in research.  One size does not fit all. The research and scholarship calculation involves an analysis of the outcomes of the faculty member’s research activity and percent effort by the Department Chair.
   3. Service – Faculty members are expected to have at least one NEOMED academic service activity (e.g., active membership on a NEOMED committee, advising a student organization, director of a research focus area, core research facility director, etc.) and to have at least one activity in public/professional service (e.g., active involvement in state/national organizations related to health care or professional development, editorial board and/or reviewer for scientific publications and granting agencies, support of community organizations improving health, health care, and health professions education, etc.) as agreed upon by the Department Chair and the faculty member. Service responsibilities may be adjusted annually by the Department Chair, in consultation with the faculty member, in accordance with the faculty member’s rank and workload in teaching and research. Tenured faculty may be required to assume a higher percent of service effort.
5. An overall score between 1.00 and 5.00 will be calculated based upon the weightings and ratings of each performance category determined by the Department Chair.
   1. Faculty members must have an overall score that meets, exceeds, or is rated at outstanding performance to meet overall performance expectations for the performance year.
   2. During the probationary period, faculty members:
      1. will meet at least with the Tenure Advisory Committee as stated in Section (E)(3)(a) of this Appendix.
      2. whose overall score meets, exceeds, or is rated at outstanding performance will continue to be evaluated annually through the APE process.
      3. whose overall score is below performance expectations shall be required to meet with their Department Chair to develop a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) to address specific improvement strategies, identify resources for faculty development, and establish performance expectations for the upcoming performance year.
         1. If a probationary faculty member is unable to meet performance expectations, the faculty member may receive a Notice of Non-Reappointment from the Dean after consultation with the Department Chair.
   3. Tenured faculty members:
      1. whose overall score meets, exceeds, or is rated at outstanding performance will continue to be evaluated annually through the APE process.
      2. whose overall score is below performance expectations shall meet with the Department Chair to develop a PIP to address specific improvement strategies, identify resources for faculty development, and establish performance expectations for the upcoming performance year.
      3. whose overall score is below performance expectations in three (3) out of four (4) successive performance years will be reviewed using the procedures for comprehensive post-tenure review (Section H).
6. Performance may be reviewed mid-year or at other intervals at the discretion of the Department Chair.

H. Procedures for Comprehensive Post-Tenure Review

1. The post-tenure review process is not a disciplinary process and is not subject to the procedures set forth in Appendix D of these Bylaws.
2. A comprehensive post-tenure review shall be initiated upon the recommendation of the Department Chair and approved by the respective Dean.
3. Review Materials
   1. The faculty member under review shall submit a current Curriculum Vitae, a listing of all courses taught over the previous six (6) years, a summary statement of professional and scholarly activities and accomplishments, annual performance and teaching evaluations, faculty improvement leave reports, a summary of significant administrative accomplishments, and other materials deemed appropriate by the faculty member. Failure to submit materials for review constitutes a waiver of the right to do so.
   2. The Department Chair of the faculty member under review shall submit the Letter of Offer, job description, APE forms (including teaching evaluations for the previous six (6) years), and PIPs.
   3. The Committee will consider the prior six (6) years of faculty performance with focused attention on the three (3) out of four (4) years that triggered the initiation of a post-tenure review.
4. Review Process
   1. The VPAA is the responsible party for administering the review and appeal processes.
      1. A designee is appointed by the President if the VPAA and the Dean are one in the same.
      2. The Office of Faculty Affairs provides administrative support for the review process. The Office of General Counsel provides consultation as necessary.
   2. The review shall be conducted by a sub-committee of the UTPC (PTR C) comprised of three (3) to five (5) tenured faculty at or above the rank of the faculty member under review from among its membership. At least one member must be included from the college of the faculty member under review.
      1. The faculty member under review has the right to object to the appointment of a given University Tenure and Promotion Committee (UTPC) member to the Post-Tenure Review Committee (PTRC) due to a real or perceived conflict of interest.  The faculty member will share the nature of the conflict with the UTPC chair.  If the conflict of interest is with the chair of the UTPC, the vice chair of the UTPC will preside over discussion of the conflict. The membership of the UTPC shall evaluate the declared or perceived conflict of interest to determine if the conflict is substantial enough to exclude the member from the Post-Tenure Review Committee.
      2. The faculty member under review has the right, but is not obligated, to meet with the sub-committee. If the faculty member chooses not to meet with the sub-committee, the right is waived.
      3. The sub-committee shall review and consider the materials provided by the faculty member and Department Chair. To complete its review, the sub-committee may solicit materials and interview individuals who may provide information relevant to the review.
   3. The sub-committee shall render a final written report of its findings, materials reviewed, and interview summaries within sixty (60) business days of its formation.
      1. The report shall support a positive or negative finding of whether a faculty member has met performance expectations.
      2. Copies of the final report shall be submitted to the faculty member under review, Department Chair, Dean or Dean’s designee, Office of Faculty Affairs, and the VPAA.
   4. If a positive final report concludes that the faculty member has met the performance expectations during the period under review, the Department Chair, in consultation with the faculty member under review and the Dean, will determine the re-entry point into the APE cycle for the upcoming performance year. The Department Chair will meet with the faculty member to develop a plan to support and promote the success of the faculty member in the following performance year.
      1. If the faculty member does not meet performance expectations in the performance year following a positive post tenure review, the Dean, in consultation with the Department Chair, will determine if the faculty member will be required to undergo another post-tenure review.
   5. If a negative final report concludes that the faculty member did not meet performance expectations during the period under review, the Dean, in consultation with the Department Chair, may revise the terms and conditions of the faculty member’s appointment, including revocation of tenure, or issue a Letter of Non-reappointment including the condition and timing of the faculty member’s termination.
   6. If the faculty member accepts the decision of the Dean, the matter is concluded.
5. Appeal Process
   1. If the faculty member disputes the findings of the PTR Committee, they may submit a written appeal to the VPAA within ten (10) business days of receipt of the decision of the Dean which outlines their rationale for the appeal.
   2. The VPAA will appoint a PTR appeal committee within ten (10) business days after receipt of the appeal consisting of three (3) tenured faculty members at or above the rank of the faculty member under review, from the membership of the Ad Hoc Appeal Pool (Per Section L of this Appendix).
   3. Findings of the PTR appeal committee will be based on all materials made available to the original PTR Committee and any other materials determined to be relevant by the PTR appeal committee.
   4. The PTR appeal committee will render a written report to the Office of Faculty Affairs within thirty (30) business days of appointment. The Office of Faculty Affairs will forward the report to the VPAA. The VPAA will forward the report to the Dean and Department Chair. The written report will either support or not support the findings of the original PTR Committee and provide a written justification to support their findings.
   5. If the report of the PTR appeal committee does not support the findings of the original PTR Committee and finds that the faculty member has met performance expectations during the period under review, the Department Chair, in consultation with the faculty member under review and the Dean, will determine the re-entry point into the APE cycle for the upcoming performance year. The Department Chair will meet with the faculty member to develop a plan to support and promote the success of the faculty member in the following performance year.
      1. If the faculty member does not meet performance expectations in the performance year following a positive post tenure review, the Dean, in consultation with the Department Chair, will determine if the faculty member will be required to undergo another post-tenure review.
   6. If a negative final report concludes that the faculty member did not meet performance expectations during the period under review, the Dean, in consultation with the Department Chair, may revise the terms and conditions of the faculty member’s appointment, including revocation of tenure, or issue a Letter of Non-reappointment including the condition and timing of the faculty member’s termination.
6. The Office of Faculty Affairs will serve as the repository for all documents pertaining to faculty performance and post-tenure review.

I. Performance of Essential Functions

1. The Fitness for Duty Assessment is not a disciplinary process and is not subject to the procedures set forth in Appendix D of these Bylaws.
2. Faculty members must perform the Essential Functions of their position as set forth in their job description, Letter of Offer, and any amendments thereto. If the faculty member’s inability to perform those Essential Functions is the result of a documented disability, it is the responsibility of the faculty member to request reasonable accommodations as set forth in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
3. If a faculty member, in the judgement of the Department Chair, is not performing the Essential Functions of their position, the Department Chair will consult with the Director of the Office of Human Resources. The annual performance evaluation (APE) will be suspended until it is determined by the Department Chair, in consultation with the Office of Human Resources, that the faculty member is or is not fit for duty.
4. The Director of Human Resources shall consult with the General Counsel to determine if the faculty member should undergo a Fitness for Duty Assessment. The Fitness for Duty Assessment will be conducted by an appropriate healthcare professional.
5. Following the Fitness for Duty Assessment, the faculty member will engage in an iterative process with the Office of Human Resources to determine the nature and extent of reasonable accommodations following the guidelines established by the ADA and amendments thereto.
6. If the faculty member is able to perform the Essential Functions of their position as set forth in the job description by employing reasonable accommodations, the faculty member will re-enter the annual performance evaluation process, as determined by the Department Chair, in consultation with the Dean.
7. If it is determined that a faculty member is unable to perform the Essential Functions of their position as set forth in the job description despite the provision of reasonable accommodations, tenure may be revoked and/or their employment may be terminated.
8. The Office of General Counsel will serve as the repository for all documents pertaining to a Fitness for Duty Assessment.

J. Required Dossier Template for Tenure and/or Promotion Review

The Dossier template may be amended as necessary by the UTPC to provide for appropriate criteria for Tenure and Promotion.

1. Tenure/Promotion Dossier for Tenure Track Faculty. The Dossier must be complete at the time of submission. It is the responsibility of the faculty Candidate to present sufficient evidence of the scope and quality of his/her involvement in the curriculum, his/her scholarship, and his/her service. For section (d) “Contributions to the Educational Programs of the University”, Candidates should designate each activity as related to the professional programs (i.e., medicine or pharmacy) or graduate programs (i.e., Ph.D., master’s or graduate certificate) or another program. The Dossier shall include the following:
   1. Cover page – page 1 of the dossier (see sample at the end of this Section).
      1. Full name.
      2. Current department.
      3. Current rank.
   2. Table of Contents – page 2 of the dossier (see sample at the end of this Section).  All pages of the Dossier must be numbered.  All sections must be referenced by page number in the table of contents.
   3. Dossier Narrative.  Write approximately two (2) pages for each of the three (3) evaluation areas describing how you have developed as an academician in each area.
   4. Contributions to the Educational Program of the University.
      1. List all lecture, seminar and tutorials in which you were involved. Specify course name, dates taught, sponsoring institution, role in the activity and whether the activity was at the professional program (i.e., medicine or pharmacy), graduate program (i.e., Ph.D., master’s or graduate certificate) or other programs. List all activities separately specifying the graduate degree program or certificate.
      2. Document your involvement in the preparation of syllabus, course and examination materials. Specify the course name, sponsoring institution and your role in the activity. List all activities separately specifying the graduate degree program or certificate.
      3. Describe your involvement in remediation.  (Do not use student names.)
      4. Describe the extent of your academic advising. List any graduate students you have advised and their current status (degree candidate or recipient, recipients of awards, other special recognition). List graduate level activity separately specifying the graduate degree program or certificate.
      5. Describe any career guidance activities. (Do not use student names.) List all activities separately specifying the graduate degree program or certificate.
      6. List all external funding you have ever received for educational activities; include funding from years at the University and funding from years before coming to the University. Include source, title, period and amount of award. List any grant proposals currently pending.
   5. Research and Scholarly Accomplishments
      1. Describe in two pages or less your active interests in research and other forms of scholarship. Include collaborations with other faculty (NEOMED and other institutions), postdoctoral associates, and graduate or medical students.
      2. List all publications and other scholarly output.  Separate them into the categories (e.g., journals, books, chapters, monographs, case reports, literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, technical reports, and abstracts. Note whether the publication was refereed, invited or otherwise outstanding.  Provide evidence of the quality of publications as previously indicated in Appendix B – University Faculty Bylaw Appointment, Promotion and Tenure.  Provide up to five publications that are significant and representative of your scholarly activities.  (Attach copies to back of Dossier.)
      3. List all your lectures, invited addresses, poster presentations or educational displays at professional meetings, colloquia, workshops, seminars and conference presentations.
      4. List all your professional consultations in study design, data analysis, measurement and evaluation.
      5. List any support generated through grants, contracts and other sources.  List the source, title, period and amount of award.  You may also list priority scores/percentile rankings of any proposals approved but not funded.  List any grant proposals currently pending.
      6. List all intellectual property development and activities in support of technology transfer and commercialization. Documentation of the development of new intellectual property including patents, the conduct of clinical trials, and commercialization of University intellectual property provide additional positive evidence for Promotion and Tenure decisions.
   6. Service Related to the University
      1. List memberships on NEOMED/consortium committees, boards, councils, etc. List other service to NEOMED.
      2. List professional service activities such as service on research review committees, ad hoc research reviews, editorial board membership, editorship, editorial reviews, etc.
      3. Document service to the community on biomedical topics.
      4. Document service to governmental bodies on biomedical topics.
      5. Describe your role in planning, organizing and implementing service projects.
      6. List support for service activities generated through grants, contracts and other sources.  Include the source, title, period and amount of award.  You may also list priority scores of approved but not funded proposals.  List any grant proposals currently pending.
   7. Professional Standing
      1. List all degrees earned.  List the complete name and address of the institution granting the degree and dates of attendance.
      2. List all professional licenses or certificates.
      3. List all honorary degrees.  List the complete name and address of the institution granting the degree and dates of attendance.
      4. List all fellowships and post-doctoral experiences.  List the complete name and address of the institution where you worked, your supervisor(s) name(s) and the dates of your appointment.
      5. List all honors and awards.
      6. List all offices held in professional societies.
      7. List all invited memberships in honorary societies.
   8. You may provide other information or materials that support your application.
   9. Attestation.  This statement must appear as the final entry of the Dossier (before copies of your publications).

“I hereby submit this Dossier to the University Tenure and Promotions Committee as evidence in support of my candidacy for Tenure. I attest that the information provided herein is true and accurate to the best of my ability.  I further certify that this Dossier was complete when submitted and contains ___ pages.”

Signature

Date

K. Procedures for Processing Appointments, Promotions, and Tenure

1. Initial Appointment
   1. When recommended by the Dean of a given College, the President may approve the creation of a Tenure Track Position.
   2. Where appropriate, when a Tenure Track Position has been authorized, the respective Department Chair will propose a Search Committee to the Dean.
   3. The Search Committee after comprehensive review of the candidates shall forward its recommendation for Appointment to the respective Department Chair.  The Department Chair will forward his/her recommendation to the Dean along with the recommendation of the Search Committee.
   4. Appointments, which have been approved by the Dean, shall be forwarded to the President. If the President concurs, the recommendations will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees for final approval or ratification.
2. Tenure and/or Promotion. The Candidate’s rights include the right to:
   1. A full, impartial and confidential review of his/her credentials;
   2. Receive a copy of the Tenure and Promotions Committee’s report and the recommendation of the Dean; and
   3. Appeal to the President a recommendation of the Dean to deny Promotion or Tenure.
   4. Notification for Eligibility to Stand for Tenure and/or Promotion
      1. Notification. The Department Chair will confer in May with faculty who will or must stand for Tenure and/or Promotion consideration in the calendar year.
      2. Intent to Stand for Tenure or Promotion
         1. The process of review for Tenure and/or Promotion will begin on May 15 of the year specified in the Candidate’s Letter of Offer or amendments thereto.
         2. By May 15, a Candidate for Tenure and/or Promotion shall notify the Department Chair in writing of the intent to stand for Tenure and/or Promotion.
      3. Process of Evaluation for Tenure and/or Promotion
         1. Independent External Evaluators
            1. By May 15, the Candidate must submit a list of at least 3 suggested Independent External Evaluators to the Department Chair.
            2. By June 1, a list of at least five Independent External Evaluators will be identified by the candidate’s Department Chair and transmitted by the Chair to the Candidate. This list may or may not include Independent External Evaluators from the Candidate’s list.
            3. Within 5 working Days, Candidates have the right to review the list of Independent External Evaluators and provide, in writing, reasons why any of the proposed evaluators should not be contacted.
            4. The Department Chair, in consultation with the Dean, will determine whether the Candidates challenge to an Independent External Evaluator will be upheld, and whether any Independent External Evaluator should be removed from the list and replaced with another Independent External Evaluator.
            5. If an Independent External Evaluator is removed from the list, another may be added and the same right of the Candidate to challenge will apply.
            6. By June 15, this process shall be completed.
         2. Preparation of Materials for Independent External Evaluators
            1. By May 15, the Candidate will submit to the Department Chair an unalterable electronic file (e.g., PDF with a security setting) containing his/her Curriculum Vitae and an unalterable electronic (e.g., PDF) file of up to five sample publications, which the Candidate deems to be significant and representative of his/her work, for external review. The Candidate will also include a two page or less narrative summary providing a synthesis of the importance of his/her work.
            2. Each Candidate will be asked to sign a waiver of access form for all Independent External Evaluations.
            3. The Department Chair will transmit the unalterable electronic file by June 15 to the Independent External Evaluators. The Department Chair should request confirmation from the Independent External Evaluator verifying receipt.
            4. Evaluation letters must be returned to the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs by August 15.
      4. Transmission of Completed Dossier
         1. By August 15, the Candidate shall submit a complete and unalterable electronic (e.g. PDF with a security setting) Dossier to his/her Department Chair. The original Dossier must be reviewed for its veracity and completeness and attested to, signed by the Candidate
         2. By September 15, the Department Chair will transmit to the Tenure and Promotions Committee Chair via the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs a letter of evaluation, Candidate’s Dossier and Curriculum Vitae in an unalterable electronic file (e.g. PDF with a security setting). A copy of the Candidate’s initial Letter of Offer shall be provided to the Committee by the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
         3. By the end of the first full week in November, the Tenure and Promotions Committee Chair will forward in writing the Committee’s recommendation and reasons therefore to the respective Dean.
         4. The Dean may, in his/her discretion, seek confidential advice and counsel to further inform him/her prior to rendering a final recommendation to the President.
         5. On or about November 21, the Dean will notify the Candidate, the Department Chair and the President in writing of the following and will provide a copy of:
            1. The Tenure and Promotions Committee’s recommendation,
            2. The respective Dean’s recommendation and the reasons therefore; and,
            3. Notification of the right to appeal a negative recommendation by the Dean to the President.

L. Ad Hoc Appeal Pool

Section (F)(10)(b) of this Appendix requires the President to hear an appeal or to appoint a three-member Appeal Committee of Tenured Faculty to consider the matter.

1. Procedure to Appoint Ad Hoc Appeal Pool. To ensure the availability of qualified faculty to review an appeal, the President will appoint of pool of:
   1. Six (6) NEOMED tenured faculty members, of which no more than two (2) should be at the Associate Professor rank; and,
   2. Two (2) non-NEOMED faculty members who hold tenure at their respective institutions.
2. Members
   1. Members of this pool may be activated to serve on the Appeal Committee of Tenured Faculty, but no more than one (1) non-NEOMED faculty member from this pool is to be appointed to the Appeal Committee.
   2. Any member of the pool who is appointed to hear the appeal will adhere to the same conflict of interest guidelines as set forth in Section (F)(3) of this Appendix.
   3. Any member of the pool will use the same criteria and rigor for review of the appeal as those used by the UTPC.

Download the Policy*