On this page:

Faculty Evaluations

Faculty merit evaluations are for the calendar year (Jan. to Dec. 2017), pertaining to all tenure, tenure-track faculty, and rostered instructors (job codes 11xx and 12xx). The actual evaluation of each faculty member should be completed by the unit’s Annual Merit Committee (also known as the Salary Committee), and not by the unit chair. However, the chair may give a recommendation to the committee. By requiring the committee to make the decision, it allows the unit faculty to share in the evaluation process and also guards the chair against claims of biased or unfair evaluations. Performance evaluations are to be based on FRPAs and are the basis for merit increases.

Process

  • Unit Chair/Director or Annual Merit Committee completes the confidential Annual Merit Evaluation: Advice and Comments to provide advice to faculty member(s) regarding their professional performance, which converts to a performance rating to be included on the Faculty Performance Rating Form (a Faculty Performance Rating word document is also available).
  • Unit retains a copy of the Annual Merit Evaluation: Advice and Comments in unit personnel files.
  • Unit Chair/Director or Annual Merit Committee completes the Faculty Performance Rating Form for Jan. to Dec. 2018 and forwards to aspa@colorado.edu via DocuSign.
    • The form must be completed in its entirety including narrative statements in Sections A, B, and C. 
      • Evaluations will not be accepted if the document is not completely filled out and signed.
    • For more tips on completing faculty evaluations, please see the Spring 2019—Faculty Evaluation Overview.
  • Save all faculty evaluation files electronically with the following nomenclature:
    • Faculty_Eval_DEPT_LastName_FirstName_Title_AY18_Rating Level in Numerical Value
      • Example: Faculty_Eval_AAC_Doe_Jane_Associate_Professor_AY18_5
    • The Rating Level in Numerical Value at the end of the example can be found by the following rating scale:
      • Far Exceeds Expectations = 5
      • Exceeds Normal Expectations = 4
      • Meets Normal Expectations = 3
      • Below Expectations = 2
      • Unsatisfactory = 1
  • Log in to MyCUInfo and navigate to the tile for DocuSign.
  • When a new tab opens, select, “New” and then, “Send and Envelope”
  • The goal with submitting evaluations is for a unit to submit most, if not all, evaluation documents in on DocuSign Envelope for processing.
    • Each faculty evaluation must be uploaded as a separate document by selecting “Upload” each time, when all the faculty evaluations are uploaded for the unit, then proceed to the next step.
    • As another option, if faculty evaluations are saved electronically in a folder, select the evaluation files, then drag and drop the files into the open DocuSign envelope—this will upload the files separately.
    • Add the College of Arts and Sciences Human Resources (aspa@colorado.edu) to sign the faculty evaluations.
      • All evaluations will be routed to the Dean for signature by Shelly Hammonds, Sr. HR Manager.
    • Please include a subject to the email and in the title, reference the department.
  • Next, add the “Signature” filed to the Dean’s signature line and the “Date Signed” field if the date is not already filled in to all the faculty evaluations that are uploaded in the envelope. Then, press "send."
  • Unit will receive a copy of all the evaluations with the Dean’s signature once signed. Unit retains a copy of the Faculty Performance Rating document in unit personnel files.
  • Dean's Office records the evaluation score for each individual on the roster—which will be forwarded to the Provost's Office.
  • Dean's Office will forward a copy of the Faculty Performance Rating document to the Office of Faculty Affairs.

Research Faculty Evaluations

The Research Faculty (job codes 13xx) included in the calendar year (Jan. to Dec. 2018) merit evaluation cycle, to be included on the spring merit roster, are only those paid from the continuing general fund budget. Otherwise, they receive their annual evaluation and merit increases in the October merit cycle.

Additional information can be found on the Merit for Research Faculty site and questions can be directed to resfachr@colorado.edu.

Process

  • Unit completes the internal evaluation document, which includes (1) yearly accomplishments, (2) goals for the next review cycle, (3) optional comments sections for both the employee and the supervisor, and (4) signature lines for both the employee and supervisor (sample templates can be found on the Merit for Research Faculty site.
    •  Unit retains a copy of the internal evaluation document in unit personnel files.
  • Unit completes the Research Faculty Summary Evaluation.
  • Unit Chair/Director or Annual Merit Committee completes the public Research Faculty Summary Evaluation for Jan. to Dec. 2018 and forwards to aspa@colorado.edu via DocuSign.
    • The form must be completed in its entirety. 
    • Evaluations will not be accepted if the document is not completely filled out and signed.
  • Unit retains a copy of the Research Faculty Summary Evaluation document in unit personnel files.
  • Dean's Office records the evaluation score for each individual—which will be forwarded to the Provost's Office.
  • Dean's Office will forward a copy of the Research Faculty Summary Evaluation document to the Research and Innovation Office.

Chair/Director Evaluations

Criteria

Evaluations for Chairs/Directors should be conducted in the same manner as all faculty within the Unit with the inclusion of a personal narrative written by the Chair/Director. The personal narrative is considered a confidential document and is not forwarded to the Office of Faculty Affairs. The typical Chair/Director workload formula is 20 percent research, 20 percent teaching, and 60 percent service, unless otherwise stated in offer letter.

Questions pertaining to performance evaluations for Chairs/Directors should be directed to the Divisional Dean.

Each Chair/Director is evaluated in the major areas of personnel, budget, unit leadership and other responsibilities. It is suggested that Chairs/Directors address the questions outlined below when preparing their personal narrative.

Personnel:

  • Are policies known and followed? Does the Chair/Director check the policies? Does the Chair/Director ask for help/advice when appropriate?
  • Do personnel cases come in on time? Are folders complete? Has attention been paid over time to establishing "multiple measures of teaching"? Have any/all issues with the case been addressed at the primary unit level?
  • Are issues with faculty, staff, and students addressed adequately/correctly at the unit level? Does the Chair/Director look for "win-win" solutions if possible?
  • Are there faculty complaints and grievances coming out of the unit that suggest problems in management or communication within the unit?
  • Are recruitment and hiring activities well managed?
  • Are department policies laid out and followed?
  • What's the size and complexity of the workload?

Budget:

  • Are policies known and followed?
  • Does the Chair keep track of the overall budget and are they aware of problems/issues? Do they work effectively with the budget office to respond to inquiries and solve problems?
  • Is the department in deficit or not? On a yearly basis? Do they have deficit reduction plans if they have a deficit? Does the Chair take responsibility for dealing with faculty members who chronically overspend?
  • Does the department interact effectively with their Financial Service Center? Is relevant information communicated in a timely manner?
  • Is the Leaves and Replacements database used correctly?
  • What is the size and complexity of the budget?

Unit Leadership:

  • Does the department function well as a unit?
  • Do faculty generally feel that they have a say in departmental decision and in planning?
  • Does the department have a "vision" of their future?
  • Does the Chair/Director interact well with cognate units and neighboring units on common issues?

Other (Administrative, Outreach, Communication, Fundraising):

  • Does the Chair give a "heads up" to the Dean's office when needed?
  • Does the Chair do an effective job of representing the department to the college? The campus? The outside community?
  • Does the Chair respond to requests form the Dean's office in a timely manner?
  • Does the Chair demonstrate common sense when dealing with issues?
  • Any other relevant activities that should be considered?

50/50 Rule

Individuals are included on the dean's list relative to the period for which they are being evaluated. All merit evaluations are for the calendar year (Jan. to Dec. 2017). Therefore, if a faculty member became Chair/Dean in Jan. 2018, the individual would not be on the dean's list this spring as that individual did not perform service for the dean's office during the 2017 calendar year. In this example, the individual's line and their stipend line would go on the department’s roster. The previous or outgoing Chair/Director would be on the dean's list.

If the individual became a Chair/Director during the middle of 2017, then that implies there was both an "outgoing" and "incoming" Chair/Director performing service during 2017. In this example, the "outgoing" Chair/Director salary and stipend will be split 50 percent on the dean's list and 50 percent on the department roster. The "incoming" Chair/Director salary and stipend will also be split 50 percent on the dean's list and 50 percent on the unit's roster.

This means that both the "outgoing" or former chair/Director need to submit a department evaluation for that period along with a personal narrative such that the deans have appropriate materials in which to evaluate both individuals performance during 2017.

Process

  • Chair/Director submits personal narrative of accomplishments to unit along with Faculty Report of Professional Activities (FRPA) and any other customer reports for unit evaluation.
  • Unit evaluates Chair/Director according to its unit criteria, using the formula of 20 percent research, 20 percent teaching and 60 percent service.
  • Unit forwards the following to aspa@colorado.edu via DocuSign:
    • Faculty Performance Rating Form (a Faculty Performance Rating word document is also available) for Jan. to Dec. 2018.
      • The Chair/Director should sign on the "Faculty Member's Signature" line.
      • A representative from the unit's Annual Merit Evaluation Committee (also known as the Salary Committee) should sign on the "Chair's Signature" line.
    • Personal Narrative of Chair/Director.
    • Supporting criteria documents pertaining to the evaluation rating.
  • Unit retains copies of the above documents in unit personnel files.
  • Dean's Office records the evaluation score for each individual—which will be forwarded to the Provost's Office.
  • Dean's Office will forward a copy of the Faculty Performance Rating document to the Office of Faculty Affairs.