Transcript Program Review - PR - Training Fall 2002

University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources COOPERATIVE EXTENSION
Peer Review
Ad Hoc Chair Training
January 18, 2006
Developed by:
Academic Assembly Council Personnel Committee
Agenda








Welcome!
Electronic Review
(no slides)
Program Review
Process
Performance level,
criteria and
expectations
Lunch
Ad Hoc Reports
Logistics
Evaluation
Requesting Help & Additional
Information
If you have any questions, or need
to clarify issues contact:
Carolyn Frazier (510)987-0082,

[email protected]

Do not contact the candidate, CD, RD
or Personnel Committee directly!!
Personnel Committee Members
July 05 - June 06
Fe Moncloa, 4H YD (CC&S) – Chair
Mike De Lasaux, FA (NC&M) – Chair elect
Glenn Nader, FA (CV) – Past Chair
Dennis Pittenger, FA (CC&S)
Rachel Elkins, CD, FA (NC&M)
Jeff Mitchell, Specialist, KAC
Linda Garica, CD, FA (NC&M)
Martha L. López, NFCS (CC&S)
Mario Moratorio, FA (CV)
Teresa Ward, FA (CV)
Role of Personnel Committee



Coordinates academic merit &
promotion process.
A resource for training workshops.
Nominates ad hoc review
committee
Role of Personnel Committee
for ad hoc committee


Chair training
Reviews ad hoc committee reports
for readability, positive comments
and thoroughness in addressing
review criteria.
Ad Hoc Review Committee
Selection Criteria



Composed of at least three academic staff.
When possible, two members are at or
above rank the candidate is seeking.
At least two committee members work in
the discipline of the candidate.
Ad Hoc Review Committee
Selection Criteria



At least one person should be
familiar with candidate’s program.
A committee with ethnicity and
gender balance is sought.
No one may serve as committee
chair two consecutive years.
Ad Hoc Review Committee
Selection Criteria



Supervisors of candidates may not serve
on committee.
Committee members can not be from the
same county as the candidate(s).
Candidates for advancement may not
serve as committee chairs in the same
year. May serve on committees.
Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review
Committee Reports




Intent of ad hoc reports be mentoring in nature
and/or provide constructive comments.
PC reviews all ad hoc committee reports prior to
administrative review.
PC does not approve or disapprove reports.
PC checks for clarity and constructive comments
to candidate.
Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review
Committee Reports


If inappropriate statements are found
in the report, ad hoc committee chairs
will be contacted and asked to modify
them.
not changed then the PC attaches a
disclaimer statement:
Role of PC with Ad Hoc Review
Committee Reports
“It is the intent of the Personnel Committee
that the ad hoc reports be mentoring in
nature and/or provide constructive
comments. The Personnel Committee does
not approve or disapprove ad hoc reports,
but does occasionally suggest some
changes to improve the clarity and the
advice or information that is conveyed.
Personnel Committee members were
unable to obtain the changes to the
contents of this report that they thought
were needed.”
Program Review Process

Promotion is an Advancement
• Assistant to Associate
• Associate to Full Title
• Full Title from Step V to VI

Acceleration
• May be requested for Merit or
Promotion that occurs earlier
than normal.
Program Review Process
Vice President
Appeals
Ad Hoc
Associate Vice President
(final decision)
Senior Administrative Council
Ad Hoc
All Cases
Regional Director Prepares Recommendation
All Cases
CD and SSP Director Prepares Recommendation
All Cases
Promo/Acceleration
Candidate Prepares PR Dossier
Senior Administrative Council
(SAC) Roles


RD completes evaluation of all Merit,
Promotion and Acceleration dossiers
Process used by SAC
PL presents packet and makes
recommendation
RD Adds comments/defends
Discussion by all SAC members
Recommendation made to AVP
Standiford
Program Review Process
Vice President
Appeals
Associate Vice President
(final decision)
Ad Hoc
Definite Appointments & Term Reviews
Ad Hoc Committees

1st Cycle
Unless negative
by CD or RD
which triggers
appointment of
Ad Hoc comm.
Can not be
considered for
an acceleration.
2nd Cycle
3rd Cycle
Merit
Promotion
Acceleration
Term Review
only
Promotion &
Term Review
Acceleration &
Term Review
Period since last
salary action
Entire period
in rank
For merit: since
last merit,
For promotion:
since last
promotion
2005-06 Timeline for Merit, Promotion,
and Acceleration Actions
Oct. CD Requests Letters of Evaluation for Promotions.
CD Requests letters for Merit to Full VII and above
Dec. Deadline for Request of Optional Regional Ad hoc
Review
Feb. Completed Package to Supervisor
Feb. CD -> RD -> Academic Personnel Office
Mar. CD and SSP Director -> Evaluation of
Candidate to RD
Timeline Merit/Promotion/Acceleration
Actions (continued)
Mar.
Apr.
Apr.
May
VP
June
By July
RD -> Pkg w/ RD Evaluation to APO
Ad Hoc Committee Report due to APO
Personnel Committee Review and
Evaluation of Ad Hoc Reports
SAC Review All Dossiers and Makes
Recommendations to Assoc
Final Decision Made by AVP
Final Decisions Provided to RDs;
notification letters mailed to Advisors
and County Directors.
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION ADVISOR
SALARY SCALES EFFECTIVE 10/01/05
FISCAL YEAR
Step
Years at
Step
Assistant
Advisor
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
2
2
2
2
2
2
Associate
Advisor
I
II
III
IV
V
Advisor
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
Rank
Annual
Monthly
$
$
$
$
$
$
41,400
43,500
45,600
48,500
51,300
54,100
3,450.00
3,625.00
3,800.00
4,041.67
4,275.00 Overlap step
4,508.33
2
2
2
3
3
$
$
$
$
$
51,400
54,200
56,700
61,000
65,400
4,283.33
4,516.67
4,725.00
5,083.33 Overlap step
5,450.00
3
3
3
3
------
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
61,100
65,500
71,800
78,500
84,700
92,100
101,300
111,500
121,200
5,091.67
5,458.33
5,983.33
6,541.67
7,058.33
7,675.00
8,441.67
9,291.70
10,100.00
MERITS & PROMOTIONS
Prom-Acc
Prom-Norm
Merits-Acc
Merits-Norm
2000
80%(5)
79%(24)
73%(11)
90%(63)
2001
50%(10)
63%(16)
67%(15)
88%(49)
2002
50%(4)
65%(20)
70%(20)
93%(54)
Prom-Acc
Prom-Norm
Merits-Acc
Merits-Norm
2003
25%(4)
80%(20)
89%(9)
90%(78)
2004
100%(3)
78%(23)
75%(8)
91%(56)
2005
42%(12)
76%(17)
67%(12)
93%(41)
Acceleration Statistics
2005
Promotion+Accel.
42% (12)
Promotion+Normal
76% (17)
Merits+Accel.
67% (12)
Merits+Normal
93% (41)
OTHER 2004 ACTIONS

Retroactive 1 year
• 3 merits

Off Scale
• 3 cases
Other 2004 Observations

County Directors similar to other advisor
• 50% of CD promotion accelerations positive
(vs. 42% for other advisors)
• 100% of CD merits positive (vs. 93%)
• 67% of CD actions positive (vs. 78%)


Large number of accelerations (29% of all
cases)
47% negative actions received some
salary increase (overlapping step, normal
merit step, etc.)
Appeals- 2001-2005
Filed
Approved
2001
11
1
2002
3
1
2003
2
1
2005
5
Overall PR Organization
1) Acceleration Statement
2) Position Description
3) Self Statement
4) Extension, Research, and
Creative Activity
5) Professional Competence
6) University and Public
Service
7) Affirmative Action
8) Bibliography
9) Publication examples
(promotions only)
10) Letters of Evaluation
(when required)
11) Appendix
(a) Extension Activities
(b) Other
Acceleration Statement
Greater than normal productivity in all
four criteria for individual’s rank
Exceptional achievement in at least
one criteria.
From the “Blue (E) Book”
An acceleration … is intended to
recognize exemplary efforts beyond
what is normally considered …
Emphasize activities that represent an
unusual or exceptional effort or
contribution beyond what is expected
for your rank…
Activity Must Be:
Above and beyond in all categories
Such as:
Major educational effort
Research break through
Major service component
For CD’s, increased support for
county
Remember
Each case is different
SAC does attempt to equalize across
requests
The “driver” needs to be very clear
Your Evaluation is Based on
Position Description
• All position descriptions that apply to
the period of review must be included.
Self-Statement

Candidate may include:
• programs’ overall goal
• issues addressed
• summary of major results and impacts
• external factors that influenced the
balance of their program
Extending knowledge, research
and creative activity

One page project descriptions
Candidate may include:
 Outline at the beginning of each subsection
 A 1/2 page describing each category with
overall results and impacts
Extending knowledge,
research and creative activity
Format for project descriptions:
1. Project title
2. Collaborators (if applicable)
3. Grant and program support (if applicable)
4. Background, Rationale, Objective(s)
5. Methods
a. Research (if applicable)
b. Extension (if applicable)
6. My role
7. Results
8. Impact
Affirmative Action




AA should be described in selfstatement and the four criteria areas
(where relevant)
In the stand alone AA section, efforts
and accomplishments should be
highlighted
Methods used to reach underrepresented clientele
Not exceed two pages
Bibliography
1. Chronological order and serialized
2. Candidates are expected to identify their
activity/role for items during current review
period and to highlight them.
3. Should be divided into peer reviewed & non-peer
reviewed
Peer review means “ subject to possibility of rejection”
4. “In press” publications must include
acceptance letter in an appendix.
Publication examples
For promotions, accelerations and
merits to FT VII to FT IX only
Performance Level for Academic Ranks
Assistant Rank






Entry level
Demonstrate ability to assess needs and set
priorities, plan, organize, implement and
evaluate
Positive AA commitment
Evidence of professional competence and
activity and dedication to continue
professional improvement
All four criteria need NOT BE equally
developed
Emphasis will be on extending knowledge
and applied/creative activity.
Performance Level for Academic RanksAssociate Rank






Reserved for academics who demonstrate significant
potential for a productive career in CE
Must have demonstrated an ability to set program
priorities
Relate and interact well w/ colleagues/clientele
Demonstrated initiative and leadership in total
program development and delivery
Positive AA commitment and effort
Becoming a career staff employee & demonstrate
movement towards balanced program.
Performance Level for Academic RanksFull Rank





Must have developed an excellent program in the
four criteria and AA
Successful in terms of positive contributions to their
discipline, intellectual development, program
growth, depth, clientele and colleague respect, AA
accomplishment and professional improvement
Program results show excellence in education
Should include peer reviewed publications and
county and/or statewide publications for clientele
Expected to have demonstrated long range planning
leadership w/in their program area.
Full Rank, Step VI



Documented evidence of an outstanding
program which shows a balance of
significant and continuous growth in the
four criteria
Within the criteria there must be
demonstrated effort & commitment in AA
Evidence that the candidate’s influence has
continued to grow and that s/he is widely
recognized in his/her specialty.
Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX



Reserved for persons who have made
exceptional contributions to a major program
area, resulting in significant benefits to the
people of CA and contributing favorably to the
prestige of UC and UCCE
Evidence of continuing superior ability,
professional attainment and growth in the
individual’s field
Also demonstrate peer leadership, originality,
and ability to work effectively with others
Continued Full Rank, Step VII, VIII, IX



Advancement to Step IX is reserved for
persons of the highest distinction whose
work has been nationally recognized and
acclaimed
Show strong evidence of a well-balanced
program w/ outstanding performance in all
four criteria areas and AA
Strong evidence of a wide scope of
recognition and highly meritorious service.
Academic Coordinators




They administer academic research or
educational programs that are intended
to serve the general public.
Types of coordinating activities in these
positions are quite diverse
Updated position description including
salary changes are listed in APM-375
found at:
http://www.ucop.edu/acadadv/acadper
s/apm/apm-375.pdf
Review Criteria for Academic
Coordinators





Administrative Performance
Professional competence and Activity
University and Public Service
Affirmative Action
Questions: Contact Carolyn Frazier
County Directors
Performance in Extending Knowledge & Info

Leadership, management, and
organizational skills should include:
• Development, motivation and evaluation of
staff
• Evidence of efforts related to local and regional
issues
• Relationships with Co. government and
agencies
• Activity in cross-discipline or regional programs
County Directors
Performance--Applied Research/Creative
Activity

Accomplishments related to administrative
innovations should include such areas as:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Leadership w/ staff/programs to reach new audiences
Procurement and management of budget resources
Procurement and management of facilities
Techniques of personnel evaluation
Public relation efforts
Creative staffing
Leadership in encouraging applied research in all
subject areas addressed by CE
County Directors
Professional Competence and Activity

There should be evidence of:
• Leadership in professional societies and
groups
• In local boards and advisory groups
• Staff involvement in professional
development
• Also include recognition by colleagues/clientele
for administrative leadership provided
County Directors
University and Public Service

There should be evidence of:
• Activity on Regional and/or Division
Committees and workgroups
• Contributions to county, community, regional,
and statewide activities
County Directors
Affirmative Action

There should be evidence of:
• Efforts of CD and of Staff in reaching
underrepresented clientele
• Outreach programs and of training provided
• Initiating innovative programs which
effectively impact underserved and minority
issues
• Describe staff efforts regarding
parity/compliance.
Term Reviews
An evaluation of a term review PR
dossier is completed to show that the
candidate is performing at a level
appropriate to rank and step and shows
promise for a productive career in
Cooperative Extension.
A negative ad hoc report in the final term
may result in the termination.

Term Reviews


PRs for individuals up for second and
third term reviews will consist of a PR
covering the present review period,
together with copies of PRs from the
previous review period(s).
If either of these term reviews is
concurrent with a promotion action, the
promotion dossier covers the entire
period in present rank so no other dossier
will be submitted.
Periods of Review




Term review: 2 years
Merit at Assistant and Associate levels: 2
years
Merit at Full Title Levels: 3 years
Accelerated Merit: Since end of
evaluation period resulting in the
last salary action
Periods of Review



Promotion to Associate Rank: Entire
career
Promotion to Full Title: Since promotion to
Associate rank
Promotion to Full Title VI: Entire career for
Self-statement, Since promotion to Full
Title for the four Academic criteria
and Affirmative Action
Periods of Review



Acceleration Statement : Since end of
evaluation period resulting in the last
salary action.
Bibliography: Chronological for entire
career, with period since end of
evaluation period resulting in the last
salary action highlighted.
Extension Activities Appendix:Since end
of evaluation period resulting in the
last salary action.
Evaluating the PR



Base your report on the PR document not
on what you think you know about the
candidate’s program!!
Position description is basis for evaluation
Use your best judgement and professional
opinion - give the same careful
consideration that you would want your PR
dossier to receive.
Evaluating the PR

Your role is to evaluate the content of the
document, not the format.
For ex. Several items in the PR have
page limitations, you do not evaluate
on conformance.
Confidentiality



Keep all communications among your
committee and Oakland confidential!
Use discretion with fax or e-mail-confidentiality can be easily compromised.
Telephone communications are best.
Writing Effective
Ad hoc Reports
Suggested Format & Approach




Offer objective mentoring along with a
recommendation.
State candidate’s strengths and areas that
need improvement for future advancement
Criticism should be constructive
Statements & evaluative comments must
support recommendation
Do’s and Don’ts
Do’s
Don’t s
Spell candidate’s name
correctly.
Write a report that
is more than 2
pages
Spell check.
Be consistent with rank
and step that candidate is
seeking.
Write a meaningful and
substantive report on the
quality of candidate’s
program.
Criticize the PR
without providing
constructive
feedback
Don’t nit pick
Committee Logistics and
Procedures

Timeline
Deadline for report to be in Oakland: April 5th
Schedule committee meetings or
teleconference calls during March
Provide enough time to:
Schedule (calendars are crowded)
Meet (one day depending on number of
candidates & travel time)
Write report and upload it On line

Meeting venues
Chair determines meeting or telephone
conference call format.
Select sites that are convenient for all
travel members, BUT discrete and
secure.
Avoid sites where other ANR employees
will congregate or be encountered.
Avoid sites near candidates’ locations.
Committee Business
Discuss/develop comments on candidate’s
program
Always review with Position Description in mind
Keep notes, check with members to ensure
accuracy of interpretation of group’s thoughts and
assessment
Develop consensus and outline committee report
Draft document with key findings and
recommendations spelled out
If consensus is not possible, minority report may
be submitted
Minority reports
A committee member who does not agree with
evaluation of candidate’s review has the right to
file a minority report.
Minority report must:
•Be a stand alone analysis of the candidate’s program
•Review the critical points of disagreement
•Support the alternative view presented
•Be submitted in Hard copy in 2006
Special Actions
In rare cases where a candidate’s program &
performance are considered “exemplary”, the Ad Hoc
committee can recommend SAC take special action to
reward the individual.
•Special Actions include off-scale & retroactive salary
increases, etc.
•Recommendations for Special Action should:
- Provide specific documentation showing why a
special action is warranted
- Not specify what special action should be taken
Committee Sign-off
On Line
To protect confidentiality by reducing
exposure of documents
Travel claims
For confidentiality, inform committee that claims are
made directly to ANR, Oakland
Provide instructions, forms and contacts to
committee members
Lessons learned from past
Ad hoc Committees that strayed from
their assignment
Do not:




Blame CD or anyone else for not reviewing
PR
Review based on personality or personal
knowledge of candidate
Repeat what candidate has done back to
them (need to mention strengths and
areas of improvement)
Wait too long to meet as a committee and
develop report
What if?



The project descriptions go longer
than a page?
The PR document needs editing,
spell check, etc.?
A candidate presents incorrect
information or it is grossly
exaggerated?
Any questions?
Requesting Help & Additional
Information
If you have any questions, or need
to clarify issues contact:
Carolyn Frazier (510)987-0082

[email protected]

Do not contact the candidate, CD, RD
or Personnel Committee directly!!