Skip to content

II 1.20 UMCES Policy and Procedures on Annual Faculty Evaluations

Download Policy II 1.20

Recommended by UMCES Administrative Council and Faculty Senate (10/17/91); adopted by President Donald F. Boesch effective 1 November 1991.

  1. General Policy
    This policy implements II—1.20 USM Policy on Evaluation of Performance of Faculty.These evaluations are undertaken in the spirit of affording a periodic opportunity for constructive dialogue leading to continued professional development. The Laboratory Directors play a critically important role in all periodic reviews of faculty members at their respective facilities.

    1. Annual evaluations of all UMCES faculty members shall be conducted each year, with the following exceptions that will substitute for the annual review:
      1. Any scheduled interim review within rank;
      2. Any review for promotion in rank, including a review for promotion and tenure;
      3. Any comprehensive review of a tenured faculty member, as provided for in UMCES Policy II—1.19.
    2. Faculty members on approved leave of absence may request that they not receive an annual review during the year of leave.
    3. All procedures shall conform to the Affirmative Action Policy of the University System of Maryland; the Director of Personnel in Center Operations and the Affirmative Action Officer at each UMCES Laboratory unit may be contacted for the most recent regulations.
  2. Procedures
    1. The Laboratory Directors shall inform each of their faculty members in writing concerning the annual review process and required documentation not later than 31 December of the calendar year upon which the evaluation is to be conducted.
    2. Prior to 1 February of each calendar year, faculty and staff shall submit their annual review dossier to their respective Laboratory Director.
      1. The following documents must be included in this dossier:
        1. complete signed and dated curriculum vitae, updated through the previous calendar year (optional for Faculty Research Assistants);
        2. signed and dated statement summarizing the individual’s most significant activities and progress during the previous calendar year and outlining programs and priorities for the coming year;
        3. for support faculty holding any Research Scientist rank, Research Associates, and Faculty Research Assistants, a written evaluation from the appropriate sponsor or supervisor(s).
    3. A Laboratory Director may request the inclusion of additional information and/or documentation in the annual review dossiers.
      1. These materials may include, but need not be limited to, copies of reprints and technical reports, abstracts of presentations made, and the names of persons familiar with the individual’s professional activity during the previous calendar year.
    4. Written evaluations of Faculty Research Assistants are prepared and submitted by their respective supervisors.
      1. Each Faculty Research Assistant shall meet with his/her supervisor prior to the preparation of such evaluation.
    5. After receiving the annual review dossiers, a Laboratory Director normally shall discuss matters associated with an individual’s research progress and professional development in a private meeting.1. A Laboratory Director may elect to accept the written evaluation of the appropriate supervisor of a Faculty Research Assistant in lieu of such a meeting.
      1. A faculty member may request such a meeting if not invited to do so by the Laboratory Director.
        1. Support faculty may elect to be represented or accompanied by their sponsor or supervisor at such a meeting.
      2. A Laboratory Director may also seek additional information from other professional colleagues concerning a faculty member’s activities and development.
        1. Although this information need not be submitted in writing by the individual(s) contacted, a record of such contact(s) and a summary of the information received shall be added to the annual review dossier.
        2. Excepting that the source(s) shall remain confidential, this information, or summary thereof, shall be available for inspection by the faculty member.
    6. The Laboratory Director shall review all materials and information and establish an opinion as to each faculty member’s professional achievement.
      1. The principal criteria to be evaluated shall be the quality of the individual’s work and appropriateness of efforts relative to the needs and mission of the Laboratory unit, UMCES, and the University System of Maryland.
        1. Laboratory Directors shall also consider the context of past performance, the individual’s ability to address and solve problems defined in previous evaluations, and perceived trends in the faculty member’s professional development.
        2. Service to UMCES, as exhibited by membership on committees or other tasks performed on a Center—wide basis, and similar involvement in USM activities, shall also be considered in this evaluation.
        3. Perceptions of peers outside the UMCES community, as exhibited by invited papers, seminars, activities in professional societies, and other forms of professional recognition shall be viewed as significant in a faculty member’s professional development.
      2. Each Laboratory Director shall employ a method deemed effective in achieving an equitable evaluation of their faculty.
      3. Relative ranking of an individual’s performance shall be summarized using these categories:

        superior, excellent, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory1

        1. An additional category distinguished, is reserved for those few individuals who have shown truly exceptional performance and shall be assigned by the President upon receipt and approval of such recommendation from the appropriate Laboratory Director.
        2. The final ranking, using criteria outlined in section F.3 and any additional criteria established by the Laboratory Director, shall be justified with a qualitative explanation designed to provide information helpful in fostering continued professional development of each faculty member.
      4. An individual and his/her Laboratory Director may elect to discuss the results of the evaluation in a private meeting.

        1 Performance categories adopted by Director T. Malone upon recommendation of the Laboratory Directors, effective 27 February 1989.

      5. The complete evaluation dossier, including the final evaluation and ranking by the Laboratory Director, shall become part of the faculty member’s permanent file at UMCES.
        1. The evaluation dossier may be examined at any time by the faculty member, by the UMCES President, Vice Presidents, and the individual’s Laboratory Director, by other individuals authorized to do so by the UMCES Vice President for Administration, and by members of duly constituted UMCES committees, e.g., the faculty member’s promotion/tenure committee, as part of future professional evaluations
        2. A written record of any examination requiring authorization, identifying the party or parties, date, and purpose, and signed by the Vice President for Administration, shall be added to the evaluation dossier.
  3. Recognition of Faculty Merit
    1. The UMCES Administrative Council shall meet each year and assist the President in establishing Center—wide procedures for recognizing faculty merit earned during the previous calendar year.
      1. The Laboratory Directors shall have discussed available options with their respective faculties prior to this meeting, and faculty recommendations shall be considered in the deliberations of the Administrative Council.
    2. The results of annual evaluation or comprehensive evaluation, as appropriate, shall form the basis of recommendations regarding merit salary increases, if such are authorized by the UM System and the President of UMCES.
      1. Special emphasis will be placed on the recognition of tenured faculty members whose comprehensive review resulted in a performance ranking of excellent, superior, or distinguished.
      2. The President shall allocate to each Laboratory Director a total budgetary amount for specific use in the recognition of faculty merit.
      3. The Laboratory Directors shall develop recommendations regarding the distribution of these funds as salary increments to their respective meritorious faculty.
        1. Salary increments may be awarded on the basis of per cent current salary or as a flat amount, according to Center—wide policy established by the President after receiving the recommendations of the Administrative Council.
    3. Whether or not merit salary increases are authorized, the President of UMCES and the Laboratory Directors shall consider other methods of recognizing faculty excellence.
      1. Examples of such recognition include cash bonuses, additional support for the graduate student(s) working under a faculty member’s auspices, additional technical support, research equipment, and allocation of funds for travel by the faculty member or his/her graduate student(s).
    4. In accordance with agreed—upon procedures for recognizing merit, the Laboratory Directors shall formulate recommendations for their respective faculty members, and submit these, along with the merit evaluations and rankings, to the President of UMCES by 15 April of the year following the calendar year for which the evaluation applies.
      1. The President of UMCES may discuss these recommendations with the Laboratory Directors prior to providing final authorization.
      2. Any final salary increment is subject to appeal to the President of UMCES by the Laboratory Director on behalf of his/her faculty.
      3. Annual salary letters from the Laboratory Directors to their faculty shall explain how the results of merit evaluation were translated into any authorized salary increment and/or other authorized method of merit recognition.