Human Resources Policies

VII-5.20(B)

REVIEW OF CHIEF ACADEMIC/ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS OF THE UNIVERSITY

Human Resources


Responsible VP/AVP

Roger J. Ward, EdD, JD, MPA


Policy Statement

I. Purpose and Applicability

The major purposes of the review of chief academic and administrative officers (CAAO) are to enhance leadership effectiveness and provide accountability in ensuring fidelity to the university’s vision, mission, and values. Other purposes of the review are to promote a climate of cooperation among faculty and staff and their respective CAAOs; maximize effectiveness of the school/unit’s execution of its responsibilities; and provide input for performance assessment, continuous improvement, and compensation and employment decisions.

The deans of the professional schools of dentistry, law, medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and social work and the university’s vice presidents are covered by this policy. In all cases the president of the university is the supervisor and is ultimately responsible for the review. The president may delegate responsibility for review of a vice president to either the Chief Academic and Research Officer/Senior Vice President or the Chief Operations Officer/Senior Vice President. The Office of the Chief Accountability Officer shall manage and support the reviews to ensure consistency across all schools and units.

Types of Review

Two types of review – formative and summative -- shall be used to assess leadership performance of deans and vice presidents.

1. Formative Review

The primary purpose of the formative review is developmental. It shall be a one-time occurrence typically carried out late in the third year in office.

A formative review shall consist of the following:

(a) The performance criteria shall be those delineated below in Section II.

(b) A self-assessment of performance written by the CAAO, including measurable goals or objectives, will be submitted to the president.

(c) An evaluation instrument to provide the CAAO with constructive feedback on performance and to aid in improving leadership and administrative skills.

(d) The instrument shall seek feedback from all affected constituencies, such as direct reports, faculty, staff, peers, students, and others external to the university, as appropriate.

The formative review shall culminate with a summary dialog between the CAAO and the president and a written summary report to the CAAO identifying strengths and opportunities for improvement, including a plan of action for performance improvement.

2. Summative Review

The summative review of deans and vice presidents shall occur at least every six years, beginning three years after the one-time formative review. The President may accelerate the schedule for summative review.

The purpose of the summative review is to provide input for establishing future performance goals and expectations and for making compensation and employment decisions.

The summative review shall consist of the following

a) The performance criteria shall be those delineated below in Section II.

b) A self-assessment of performance written by the CAAO, including measurable goals or objectives will be submitted to the president.

c) An evaluation instrument to solicit feedback from all affected constituencies, such as direct reports, faculty, staff, peers, students, and others external to the university.

d) The president will review the self-assessment and performance report with the CAAO to produce a summary report and a performance improvement plan.

e) The summative review shall culminate with a written summary report to the CAAO. With the CAAO’s concurrence, elements of the summary report may be shared with the respective academic or administrative unit.

II. Leadership and Administrative Skills Performance Criteria

The following criteria shall guide the assessment of CAAOs in both formative and summative reviews. In addition, the CAAO and the president may also agree upon additional, more specialized criteria and items targeting a school or unit’s particular functions or a CAAO’s unique duties.

Criteria for demonstrating academic and administrative leadership for deans could include, but are not limited to:

1. School leadership

i. Establishing a vision and mission for the school

ii. Developing a strategic plan and direction

iii. Aligning the school’s vision, mission, and planning with resource allocation

iv. Aligning the school’s vision, mission, and planning with the University’s strategic plan

2. Achievement of academic excellence as measured by accreditation outcomes, appropriate rankings, national reputation, and faculty and student quality;

3. Effective faculty recruitment, retention, development, and promotion;

4. Recruiting and retaining the best-qualified staff and supporting their on-going development;

5. Ensuring a school environment characterized by respect, openness, and fairness;

6. Ensuring consistent and timely school cooperation and compliance with all university reporting and other administrative/business requirements, policies and procedures;

7. Soundness of fiscal management;

8. Ensuring the school supports the university’s commitments to affirmative action and diversity in employment, and diversity in enrollment;

9. Success in non-state resource development, including external grants and contracts, and private gifts;

10. Success of the research/scholarship enterprise;

11. Strength of external relations, including effective relationships with state leadership relative to the School’s discipline;

12. Success of academic collaborations with other UM schools, USM institutions, and higher education institutions outside USM;

13. Commitment to serving the public good through well articulated community outreach and engagement efforts;

14. Commitment to shared governance;

15. Achievements in interprofessional educational and research;

16. Contribution to the effectiveness of the university’s executive leadership team.

Criteria for demonstrating academic and administrative leadership for vice presidents could include, but are not limited to:

1. Developing and specifying goals, objectives and key indicators to align with the university’s strategic plan;

2. Implementing unit plans and strategies for achieving goals and objectives;

3. Aligning the unit’s goals and objectives with resource allocation;

4. Promoting regular, evidence-based evaluations of unit performance;

5. Soundness of fiscal management;

6. Ensuring a unit environment characterized by respect, openness, and fairness;

7. Ensuring consistent and timely unit compliance with all university reporting and other administrative/business requirements, policies and procedures;

8. Recruiting and retaining the best-qualified individuals and supporting their on-going development;

9. Ensuring the unit supports the university’s commitments to affirmative action and diversity in employment;

10. Ensuring the unit works effectively, cooperatively and collaboratively with UMB Schools, other UMB administrative units, USM institutions, USM administration, and other external entities in pursuit of USM and university goals;

11. Contributing to the effectiveness of the university’s executive leadership team.

Nothing in this policy shall prohibit the President from conducting annual evaluations of the CAAOs as part of the University’s routine professional development program or from providing merit increments to CAAO salaries in years when the CAAOs are not reviewed under this policy.

Fill out my online form.