Annual Evaluation Of Deans (Policy 4520)

University Policy 4520

Download a Printable Version of Policy 4520

Effective Date

July 1978

Last Revision Date

March 04, 2022

Responsible Party

Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, (208) 426-1202

Scope and Audience

This policy applies to all Deans in Academic Affairs who report directly to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Additional Authority

Idaho State Board of Education Policy, Section II.F.
University Policy 7530 (Employee Files)

1. Policy Purpose

To provide for the annual evaluation of the performance and effectiveness of academic Deans to ensure that:

All appropriate constituencies have input on the review of Deans in academic units. These constituencies include, but are not limited to, faculty (as defined in Policy 7000) and staff from the college and other related units, academic administrative peers, advisory groups, and partnership boards;
Deans receive constructive recommendations for improving their success in the administration of the college/school; and
An appropriate balance between the rights of the college’s members to have input that is appropriately confidential and access to summary results disseminated in a timely way and the right of the Dean to receive appropriate summary data and the same level of confidentiality normally associated with other related personnel processes at the university.

The Provost will decide whether or not the Dean’s appointment will be renewed upon the completion of either the annual or the three-year evaluation.

2. Policy Statement

The Idaho State Board of Education requires that all employees be evaluated annually. These evaluations are intended to assist in overall assessment of their performance and to provide constructive feedback.

Each Dean in Academic Affairs will be evaluated annually by the Provost and Vice President of Faculty Affairs (hereafter referred to as Provost) and will have an in-depth review every three years. More frequent reviews may be conducted at the discretion of the Provost. The in-depth review may also be waived or delayed for sufficient cause as determined by the Provost and Human Resources. An example of sufficient cause is when a Dean has indicated in writing to the Provost that they plan to retire, resign, or return to a faculty position within a year of a scheduled three-year review. If an in-depth review is waived or delayed, the Provost will inform the faculty and staff of that decision.

3. General Criteria for the Evaluation

a. Deans will be evaluated using a framework that focuses on core competencies, priorities, and focus areas specific to the time frame of the evaluation.

b. In addition to the “general criteria” described below, there may be (and in most cases will be) performance factors unique to a particular college/school or to a particular Dean at a particular time in that college/school’s history. The Provost shall give any additional criteria (see “Focus Areas,” below) to the Dean as soon as possible so the Dean is aware of and can work toward such expectations/criteria.

3.1 Core Competencies

Includes leadership, fiscal and human resource management, fund-raising, open communication, and a set of values that embrace the notion of university citizenry.

3.1.1 Leadership

Develops, communicates, and aligns others around a compelling vision and strategy for the future.
Creates an environment of trust and integrity by modeling the values of candor, openness, inclusiveness, and honesty and consistently acting in a way that is both trustworthy and trusting.
Demonstrates the ability to act in a decisive, urgent, and committed way, when needed, and commits to an agreed course of action, uses innovation, and leverages resources to reach that goal.
Leads the research, scholarly and public engagement activities of their college through successful initiatives and support of innovative activities.
Recognizes when there is a need for change, communicates frequently and candidly during times of change, and demonstrates adaptability when dealing with ambiguous situations.
Demonstrates the ability to build commitment within and across functions and to maintain a broad set of solid relationships in the university and beyond while achieving common goals.
Embraces shared governance, fulfilling the shared responsibility of administrators, faculty, staff, and students to create an environment that is supportive of the university’s mission.
Values continuous learning and fosters a climate for the learning and development of self and others.

3.1.2 Administration

Develops and implements procedures for the smooth operation of the college demonstrated by an ability to plan, organize, establish priorities, and make decisions.
Manages staffing effectively. Recommends, and when delegated, approves recruitment, appointment, promotion, corrective action, and termination of academic personnel.
Contributes to the university’s mission and strategic goals and enhances the excellence of the university.
Facilitates the development of research, performance, and enrichment activities as well as effective mentoring of faculty, administrative faculty, and staff, as appropriate.
Supports participation in all levels of the assessment process.
Ensures compliance with regional and college or program-level accreditation standards, including program assessment, as well as appropriate state regulations, where applicable.

3.1.3 Budget and Use of Resources

Makes budget decisions consistent with college goals.
Maintains fiscal responsibility. Develops strategies, for example, for efficient use of funds and, as appropriate, for generating revenue, striving for financial sustainability.
Works with other colleges and units of the university to design budget-sharing strategies.
Identifies the division’s needs for faculty positions, establishes priorities, and makes recommendations.
Assures proper management of and is responsible for space, facilities, and property for the division.

3.1.4 Building Community

Models professional behavior and respectful treatment of others, especially when addressing differences in opinion or managing a challenging change process.
Provides opportunities for faculty and staff to use their abilities most effectively and productively.
Maintains effective interaction between faculty governance and academic administration with regard to division affairs.
Works with other Deans to maintain communication and cooperation among divisions, to explore possibilities for reciprocal and joint arrangements, and to review matters of common concern.
Maintains open lines of communication.
Involves appropriate stakeholders in decision-making and works to build consensus.
Handles conflict resolution in a fair and consistent manner.

3.2 Priorities

Includes student success, research and innovation, inclusive and global education, academic excellence and faculty and staff success as well as college-specific goals and objectives.

3.2.1 Student Success

Supports a comprehensive array of academic advising and educational services designed to ensure student retention and success.
Coordinates with stakeholders across campus on student recruitment, retention, and graduation rates.
Ensures resolution of student academic concerns.

3.2.2 Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Collaborates on and contributes to the diversity, equity, and inclusion goals of the institution and promotes policies, practices, procedures, and assessments that are inclusive.
Advocates for diverse perspectives and models inclusive behavior, demonstrating self-awareness and the ability to see others’ points of view, valuing diverse experiences and ways of knowing, and adapts communication styles to be effective in a diverse workplace.
Contributes to inclusive workplace relationships and responds to inappropriate and non-inclusive behavior. Negotiates conflict and facilitates discussions with cultural competence and cultural humility.
Shows commitment to continual learning and development within the college related to cultural competency, diversity, inclusion, and understands how social identity shapes the settings in which we work.
Supports collaborative activities to support recruitment and retention of international students, robust international partnerships and globally informed teaching and research programs.

3.2.3 Advancement and Development/External Relations

Develops effective external partnerships that advance the mission of the college.
Works with the University Foundation in establishing fundraising goals and ensuring goals are accomplished.
Serves as an effective liaison with the local, regional, national, and international community and creates a positive image of the college in the local regional, national, and international community.

3.3 Focus Areas

Includes specific strategic initiatives as defined by the Provost and the President and additional expectations/criteria as the Provost deems appropriate.

4. Evaluation Procedures: Annual Review

All Deans who report to the Provost will be evaluated annually before May 1 of each year.

4.1 Material to be Included in the Review

The annual review will be conducted by the Provost. The Provost will include the following information in their evaluation:

a. Dean’s self-evaluation

b. Faculty/staff feedback on Dean’s performance in the past 12 months:

(i.) The survey will focus on the Dean’s demonstration of core competencies and effectiveness in meeting priorities and strategic focus areas (as described in Section 3) through a series of standard questions and will include substantial opportunity for additional written comments and the opportunity to indicate the degree to which the respondent has confidence in the Dean’s continued leadership.

(ii.) The survey will be distributed to faculty/staff with administrative homes in the Dean’s college, regardless of rank and position, as detailed in iv., v., and vi. of this section.

(iii.) Note that comments that harass, threaten, defame, libel, or otherwise fall outside the University Standards of Conduct and/or that evaluate the Dean on criteria not related to the Dean’s administrative performance and/or on a discriminatory basis will be disregarded.

(iv.) For Deans of the academic colleges and the Library, all college faculty and staff will be surveyed.

(v.) For the Dean of the Graduate College,all college staff as well as the graduate program directors and department chairs/heads/directors who have responsibility for graduate programs will be surveyed.

(vi.) For the Dean of Honors College, all college staff as well as department chairs/heads/directors will be surveyed.

(vii.) The Provost will summarize the survey responses but will not share the raw data with the Dean.

4.2 Institutional Effectiveness Duties

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness will compile the quantitative and qualitative information provided by the faculty and staff. This is to be submitted to the Provost.

4.3 Provost Responsibilities

4.3.1 During the Evaluation Process

a. Inform Faculty and Staff: For both the annual evaluation and the three-year review, the Provost informs the faculty and the staff of the college about the Dean’s evaluation, the evaluation framework and process to be used, and clarifies the Dean’s duties and responsibilities for the evaluation.

b. Discussion of Evaluations with Respective Dean: The Provost will discuss the written evaluation and survey responses with the respective Dean according to the timeline in Section 7. The Dean will have five (5) university business working days from receipt of the report to add a response, should the Dean choose to do so. A response is not required but may be used to provide additional information and/or justification to the written report.

4.3.2 Communicating Outcome to Faculty

The Provost will communicate the reappointment decision to the faculty of the college/school.

5. Evaluation Procedures: Three-Year Review

a. Each Dean will undergo an in-depth review every three years by the Review Committee (see 5.3 below). The review will occur in the fall after the completion of the third year. The purpose of this review is both formative and summative. In the fall of each year, the Provost notifies the Dean(s) who will be undergoing the three-year review.

b. The review will evaluate the progress of the academic Dean, provide the opportunity for faculty and other constituencies to give constructive input, review the individual’s professional contributions and performance as a leader and as an administrator. The Provost will provide feedback to improve the Dean’s performance and, following the review, to determine continuation of the Dean’s appointment.

5.1 Material to be Included in the Review

The three-year review will include the following:

5.1.1 Summary of Expectations and Accomplishments

The following will be sent out to all faculty and staff within the Dean’s college prior to the administration of the survey below and according to the timetable in Section 7.

Written statement of achievements during the past three years, including the goals and objectives that the Dean and the Provost agreed upon in previous years.
A summary of the expectations of the university administration under which the Dean has been operating.

Each Dean will submit the items under Section 5.1.1 to the chair of the Review Committee and the Provost. The chair will then forward and/or organize accordingly.

5.1.2 Faculty/Staff Survey

Faculty/Staff Survey on Dean’s performance over the review period, initiated by the Provost’s Office and facilitated by Institutional Effectiveness.

a. The survey will focus on the Dean’s demonstration of core competencies and effectiveness in meeting priorities and strategic focus areas (as described in Section 3) through a series of standard questions and will include substantial opportunity for additional written comments.

b. The survey will be distributed to faculty/staff with administrative homes in the Dean’s college, regardless of rank and position, as detailed in d, e, and f.

c. Note that comments that harass, threaten, defame, libel, or otherwise fall outside the University Standards of Conduct and/or that evaluate the Dean on criteria not related to the Dean’s administrative performance and/or on a discriminatory basis will be disregarded.

d. For Deans of the academic colleges and the Library, all faculty and staff will be surveyed.

e. For the Dean of the Graduate College, all college staff as well as the graduate program directors and department chairs/heads/directors who have responsibility for graduate programs will be surveyed.

f. For the Dean of Honors College, all college staff as well as all department chairs/heads/directors will be surveyed.

g. The Provost will summarize the survey responses but will not share the raw data with the Dean.

5.1.3 360 Evaluation

a. A 360 Evaluation will be facilitated by Human Resources (in coordination with the survey instrument facilitated by Institutional Effectiveness). One element of the 360 evaluation will include a survey of students within the college with whom the Dean has worked.

b. At any time during the review period, faculty or staff not on the committee may contact the Provost, the chair of the Review Committee, or the president of the Faculty Senate directly with comments relating to the Dean under evaluation. The Review Committee will ensure that the input is not given undue weight or extra weight in their report relative to the other input gathered in Section 5.1.

5.2 Institutional Effectiveness Duties

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness will compile the quantitative and qualitative information provided by the faculty and staff. This is to be submitted to the Provost and the chair of the Review Committee, who will forward it to all the Review Committee members.

5.3. Review Committee Composition and Responsibilities

a. The Provost will select the review committee members, appoint the chair of the committee, deliver the formal charge to the committee and establish a timeline for the evaluation. The review committee selection process will involve consultation with elected Faculty Senators for the college/school and a faculty council if the college has one.

b. For academic colleges, membership will be made up of:

One to two Chairs or faculty administrators
Three tenured and/or tenure-track faculty members within the college of the Dean under review (depending on size of college)
One Faculty Senator from within the college of the Dean under review (in addition to the above), if applicable
Two non-tenure earning faculty members within the college of the Dean under review
One staff member within the college of the Dean under review
One Community Representative from the Dean’s Advisory Board, if applicable
One Dean from outside the college
One student representative from the college

c. At least one of the committee members must have training or expertise in equitable and inclusive evaluation practices (for example, continued professional development around equity and inclusion, scholarly expertise in equity and inclusion, etc.).

d. For non-academic colleges, membership will be made up of:

One to two Chairs or faculty administrators either from within the college or who work directly with the Dean
At least three faculty members of various ranks who work with the Dean
One Faculty Senator from within the college of the Dean under review (in addition to the above)
At least one staff member within the college of the Dean under review
One Community Representative from the Dean’s Advisory Board, if applicable
One Dean from outside the college
One student representative from the college

e. At least one of the committee members must have training or expertise in equitable and inclusive evaluation practices (for example, continued professional development around equity and inclusion, scholarly expertise in equity and inclusion, etc.).

f. In forming both of the committees above, the Provost may, at their discretion, include committee members from outside the college or outside the university.

g. The committee should represent each academic discipline or department and reflect the diversity of the college/unit to the extent practicable.

h. With the approval of the Provost, the committee membership may be expanded by the addition of representatives from non-faculty groups who are served by the college.

i. At the Review Committee’s mandatory first meeting, members will learn key principles and practices for evaluating the performance of a Dean. Members who do not attend that first meeting may be removed from the committee and may be replaced at the discretion of the Provost.

j. Should a Review Committee member choose to withdraw from committee service at some point, replacement of the Committee member is at the discretion of the Provost. In the event the Provost decides to fill the committee vacancy, the selection process described above will be used. The Provost will consult with the Committee before making any decisions regarding filling a Committee vacancy.

5.3.1 Committee Chair Responsibilities

The committee chair outlines the process of the review to the committee, schedules all meetings, establishes meeting and other committee agendas, monitors progress toward fulfillment of the committee charge and keeps the committee on task. The committee chair will have oversight responsibility for ensuring that the committee report accurately reflects the content of the deliberations and is supported from the feedback received on the Dean under review, and is submitted in a timely fashion.

5.3.2 Review Committee Duties

a. The Review Committee will review all documents, including the Dean’s written summary of accomplishments, a summary of the expectations of the university administration under which the Dean has been operating, the 360 evaluation, and results of surveys compiled by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness (see Section 5.2). The Committee should have access to all relevant documents (i.e., college strategic plan, recent academic program reviews, accreditation reports, benchmark data on faculty productivity, surveys) as determined by the Provost.

b. A key responsibility of the committee is to ensure every effort is made to provide the relevant constituencies the opportunity to provide input and to ensure that the process was followed fairly and impartially.

c. Absolute confidentiality is expected from the committee members concerning all evaluation materials, committee deliberations, and final recommendations. Confidentiality for committee members is a matter of both ethics and policy.

d. The committee’s recommendations are advisory in nature. The final decision resides with the Provost, subject to the approval of the President.

5.3.3 Review Process and Deliverables

5.3.3A Draft Report

The Review Committee will write a draft report for the Provost, which summarizes strengths, weaknesses, and issues of substance which need to be addressed. Survey comments unrelated to the professional responsibilities of the Dean should not be considered by the Review Committee, but instead referred to the Provost for inquiry at his or her discretion and/or as required by University policy. The committee should take into consideration particular situations and contexts that were present when the Dean began his/her appointment as well as the potential for positive college development under the Dean’s leadership.

A template for the evaluation report is provided below:

a. Overview: summarizes key findings of the review.

b. Summary of review process: outlines the activities of the committee (e.g., meetings, dates, and key actions) and sources of data in the review (e.g., Dean’s performance report and 360 evaluation).

c. Summary of data and key findings: summarizes themes that emerged in the evaluation data and process – including:

Accomplishments and strengths: highlights key accomplishments and strengths of the Dean.
Shortcomings and weaknesses: highlights shortcomings and weaknesses that should be addressed.
Opportunities and challenges: highlights key challenges and opportunities for the College and the Dean over the next three-year period.

d. Conclusion: overall assessment and impression of the committee. The committee is responsible for making a recommendation regarding continuation of the Dean in their role. The final decision, however, will be made by the Provost.

e. Appendices: survey instruments and raw data, open-ended comments, other materials.

5.3.3B Distribution of Draft Report

A draft copy of this report will be provided to the Dean along with a copy of the final composite of the quantitative survey results and of written comments. The Appendices will not be included in the draft report that is shared with the Dean. At this point, the Dean will have an opportunity to respond to the committee in writing to clarify misconceptions and provide further relevant information within five (5) business days of receipt of the draft report.

5.3.3C Final Report

After giving due consideration to any responses from the Dean and making any changes to the draft report, the Review Committee will produce a final copy of the report for the Provost with an overall recommendation for appointment or non-reappointment and will forward any response from the Dean to the Provost on or before the date stated in Section 7.

5.3.3D Signatures

The final report shall be signed by all committee members including the chair, allowing for special provisions for missing signatures when a committee member is unavailable to sign.

5.3.3E Minority Report

In the case that there is disagreement among committee members, the minority may choose to submit a minority report. This report and its content shall be disclosed to all committee members, including the chair. The minority report will appear in full in an Appendix.

5.3.3F Votes

A separate letter from the committee to the Provost will contain the number of votes of the Review Committee members for or against recommending the reappointment of the Dean. No identification of any individual votes will be included.

6. Provost’s Responsibilities

6.1 During the Evaluation Process

6.1.1 Inform Faculty and Staff

a. For both the annual evaluation and the three-year review, the Provost informs the faculty and the staff of the college about the Dean’s evaluation, the evaluation framework and process to be used, and clarifies the Dean’s duties and responsibilities for the evaluation.

b. The Provost seeks advice about any college-specific issues that are relevant to the evaluation of the Dean.

6.1.2 Convene the Review Committee

For the three-year review, the Provost or designee convenes the committee for the initial meeting to present the committee with its charge, discusses the review process and expected timeline, provides information regarding materials, responds to questions from the committee and informs the committee of relevant university policies.

6.1.3 Meet with the Committee at the End of the Review Process

The Provost will meet with the full committee at the end of the review process and before the report is finalized.

6.1.4 Make Final Decision on Reappointment

The Provost, using the committee report as advisory in nature, makes a decision to renew or discontinue appointment of the Dean under review. The Provost discusses the decision with the Dean.

If the Dean is to be reappointed, the Provost discusses expectations of the Dean’s leadership moving forward.
If the decision is not to reappoint the Dean, then an acting Dean may be appointed at the discretion of the Provost until a search for a new Dean has been successfully completed.

6.2 Discussion of Evaluations with Respective Dean

The Provost will discuss the written report from the Review Committee as well as the 360 evaluation and survey responses with the respective Dean according to the timeline in Section 7. The Dean will have five (5) university business working days from receipt of the report to add a response, should the Dean choose to do so. A response is not required but may be used to provide additional information and/or justification to the written report.

6.3 Communicating the Outcome to Faculty