UCR Policies and Procedures

To Be Deleted

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE

FIVE-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS

FOR SENIOR CAMPUS ADMINISTRATORS

Administrative Guidelines

Senior campus administrators include Vice Chancellors, Vice Provosts, and Deans.  Vice Chancellors and Deans serve at the pleasure of the Chancellor; Vice Provosts serve at the pleasure of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost (EVCP).  A comprehensive review of each senior campus administrator will be conducted no later than the fifth year of service in that position, and at five year intervals thereafter.  At the discretion of the Chancellor or EVCP, reviews may be conducted earlier.  The following guidelines also apply for the review of the EVCP by the Chancellor; in that case, the confidential review committee shall be appointed by and report to the Chancellor.

The five-year review is intended to assess administrative effectiveness, identify accomplishments and challenges, and evaluate progress toward campus and unit goals.  Throughout the review process, the utmost confidentiality shall be maintained.

Composition of Confidential Review Committees

For each five-year review being conducted, a confidential review committee will be appointed to review the performance and accomplishments of the administrator under consideration and report its findings to the Chancellor and EVCP.  The confidential review committee will be composed of at least three and not more than five members of the campus community who have a clear understanding of the role of the administrator and knowledge of the unit for which he or she is responsible.  No committee member shall have a direct or line reporting relationship to the administrator under review.  Committee members will be appointed by the Chancellor/EVCP, who will designate one committee member as chair.  The administrator being evaluated will have the opportunity to provide a list of individuals who would not be appropriate to serve on the confidential review committee.

Charge to Review Committees:

1. To review and evaluate the performance of the senior campus administrator during the prior five-year period, based on the defined criteria for evaluation.
2. To solicit and review input from a spectrum of persons knowledgeable about the quality and effectiveness of the administrator’s performance (including faculty, staff, and, if appropriate, selected students), and to assess and summarize the information in a balanced, thoughtful, and fair manner, while maintaining strict confidentiality.
3. To provide the Chancellor and EVCP with a confidential written report of the findings and conclusions of the committee.
4. To conduct all activities of the review committee in a timely and confidential manner. 

---

Criteria for Evaluation:

While specific responsibilities vary widely, senior campus administrators share a number of general responsibilities regardless of the functional areas overseen.  Based on these general responsibilities, the following evaluation criteria will be considered for all senior campus administrators:

• Contributions toward the overall goals and vision for the University of California Riverside.
• Establishment of clearly defined goals and vision for the unit, in support of the broader campus and university mission, and communication of those goals to both members of the unit and the campus community at large.
• Providing leadership to program heads and/or department chairs to achieve the goals of the unit.
• Recruitment, retention, and development of diverse and high quality staff, administrators, and faculty (as appropriate).
• Stimulation and facilitation of innovative approaches for the achievement of unit goals and objectives and of creative solutions to challenges.
• Efficient management of unit operations, including budget administration, personnel reviews, and other administrative responsibilities.
• Maintenance of effective communications with the unit, campus community, Office of the President, and external constituencies as appropriate.
• Promotion of diversity, inclusiveness, and civility.
• Service as a collegial, collaborative, and contributing member of the campus senior leadership team.
• Leadership in long range planning and development for the unit.
• Support of UCR’s Principles of Community and a positive campus climate.
• Representing the campus with Office of the President and related senior UCOP officers.
• Representing the unit and UCR at community, state, and national levels.
• Building productive partnerships on behalf of the campus.

Procedures

1. The review shall be conducted under the general direction of the Chancellor/EVCP, who will attend the first meeting of the confidential review committee to discuss the charge and process, as well as their expectations for conducting a serious, meaningful, and confidential review.
2. The committee will work under the direction of its chair.
3. All committee members will sign a statement of confidentiality (see Appendix A).
4. All communications to and from the committee will be handled through the campus Senior Leadership Compensation Group (SLCG) Coordinator.  He or she will be responsible for coordination and oversight of the process and for maintaining strict confidentiality throughout.  The SLCG Coordinator will provide assistance in arranging meetings, providing space to review confidential letters, gathering additional information as necessary, and assisting with the report, if requested.
5. Prior to the onset of each review, the senior campus administrator will be asked to provide a statement of achievements and challenges during the period under consideration, and a list of potential references, both internal and external, who should may be solicited for comment.  (See Appendix B.)  This statement will be made available to the confidential review committee.  Also provided will be a copy of the administrator%u2019s current position description.  Further information from the administrator may be solicited through the SLCG Coordinator, should the committee deem it necessary.
6. At the beginning of each review, confidential letters will be solicited from internal and external references.  Names will be drawn from lists generated by the administrator, members of the review committee, and the Chancellor/EVCP.  A sample solicitation letter is provided in Appendix C.  Each letter must contain a statement of confidentiality, as approved by the Office of General Counsel.  The letters of evaluation will be considered in development of the committee’s report to the Chancellor/EVCP. 
7. The review process shall be conducted in a timely manner, normally within 12 weeks from the time letters are solicited.  The review will commence in the 5th year at the start of the winter quarter, and will be concluded no later than the end of spring quarter.  A suggested timeline is shown in Appendix D.
8. The report of the committee, along with letters of evaluation, will be submitted to the Chancellor/EVCP.  The review committee may ask to meet with the Chancellor/EVCP at any point in the process.
9. The confidential report forms the basis of a discussion between the Chancellor/EVCP and the senior campus administrator under review.  At his or her request, the administrator may be provided with a redacted copy of the letters of evaluation. 
10. Responsibility for final action on the personnel review for Deans and Vice Chancellors rests solely with the Chancellor; for Vice Provosts the decision rests with the EVCP.

Consultation Process

The confidential review committee will ensure broad consultation.  Constituencies may include members of relevant Academic Senate Committees, faculty, deans, chairs, staff, and students of UC Riverside; appropriate administrators within the UC system; and other pertinent groups, both internal and external.  All UCR Academic Senate members shall be invited to write letters for the review of the Executive Vice Chancellor/Provost; all Academic Senate members and relevant non-Senate academics of an academic unit shall be invited to comment on the review of its dean.

Reviewers should be asked the capacity in which they interacted with the administrator, the extent and frequency of that interaction, and the length of time they have interacted.  Reviewers shall also be asked to respond specifically to the criteria for evaluation, using illustrative examples whenever possible.  In all cases, solicitation letters must permit a reasonable time for response.  If desired, the confidential review committee may provide suggested questions (see Appendix E) to reviewers.  The SLCG Coordinator will record the number of letters solicited and responses received.  Unsolicited letters will be recorded, categorized, and provided to the review committee along with solicited letters.  Anonymous letters will not be considered.

---

APPENDIX A

STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY

5-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS

I understand and respect the need to maintain confidentiality in personnel procedures, including my participation in this 5 year review process.  I agree that I will not breach established rules governing confidentiality by disclosing to those without a legally authorized need to know information that I have provided pursuant to the rules governing confidentiality in personnel procedures.

___________________________________	_____________________________
Signed	Date

---

APPENDIX B

SAMPLE LETTER TO SENIOR CAMPUS ADMINISTRATOR

REQUESTING SELF-ASSESSMENT

Dear ____________:

As we discussed, I will appoint a confidential committee to conduct the customary five-year review of your performance as _______________________.  The purpose of the review is to provide evaluative information to you, to assist you in modifying ways of doing business, and to provide accountability for the area you oversee.  In connection with this review, I ask that you provide a self-assessment, including organizational charts, long-range plans, and other information you feel would be helpful to the committee.  Please include a discussion of your efforts related to diversity.  These documents will assist the confidential review committee, the Chancellor, and me.

To help us tailor this review to your role as ____________, please identify constituencies or individuals who should be consulted in the review process, and forward this information to the Senior Leadership Compensation Group Coordinator no later than [date].  These might include other administrators on and off campus, members of the faculty, counterparts at other campuses or universities, or representatives from the community.  If there are one or two questions concerning major administrative issues or other matters relating to the future of your unit that you would like to be included in the call for comments, please let me know.

In addition, you also have the opportunity to provide the names of any individuals who would not be appropriate for service as members of the confidential review team that will oversee your five-year review.

I would appreciate receiving your self-assessment by [date].  Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Chancellor/

Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

---

APPENDIX C

SAMPLE SOLICITATION LETTER

5-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS

Dear ________________:

It is the policy of the University of California to conduct a performance review of senior administrators, including deans, vice chancellors, and vice provosts, every five years.  I am writing on behalf of a confidential committee that will review the accomplishments of _________________, who has served as [title] since [date].

The committee would appreciate your thoughts and comments about _______________’s

leadership and management of [name of unit].  Your reviews about his/her performance will form an important part of the review.  Your letter will be held in strict confidence, in conformity with the University’s statement concerning confidentiality of letters of evaluation (copy attached).

It would be helpful if you could address the following areas in your comments:

1. What strengths and weaknesses have you observed in _______________________’s performance over the last five years?  Please comment on his/her leadership, vision, and skills.
2. What suggestions do you have for improvement, and what advice would you give for addressing the challenges facing the unit?
3. What are your views on new directions [name of the unit] should take in the next five years?  How do you think __________________ might most effectively lead the unit in these new directions?

If you have any questions about this request, please feel free to contact the Senior Leadership Compensation Group Coordinator, ________________, at 951-827-XXXX.  I hope to receive your response by [date].  Thank you in advance for your response.  We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Chancellor

Enclosure

---

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA POLICY ON THE

CONFIDENTIALITY OF OUTSIDE LETTERS OF EVALUATION

The University of California will keep your name and institutional affiliation confidential.  When an administrator requests to see letters in his or her file, pursuant to state law and University policy, the full text of the body of your letter will be provided to the candidate.  However, any identifying information on the letterhead and within your signature block will be removed.  In order to keep your identity confidential, you may want to avoid putting information in the body of your letter that would identify you.  If you wish, you may provide a brief factual statement regarding your relationship to the faculty member as a separate attachment to your letter which we will not disclose to the candidate.

In those rare instances where a court or government agency seeks to compel the disclosure of the source of a confidential evaluation in University of California academic personnel files, it is the University practice to protect the identity of authors of letters of evaluation to the fullest extent allowable under law.  The judicially mandated disclosure of the identity of confidential evaluations has been extremely rare at the University of California.

---

APPENDIX D

SUGGESTED TIMELINE FOR 5-YEAR REVIEW PROCESS

Timeline		Action
Day 1		Chancellor/EVCP notifies senior campus administrator that he/she is eligible for a 5-year review.
Week 1		Chancellor/EVCP sends the administrator a letter requesting a self-assessment and other documentation, including a list of constituencies to be consulted for evaluation purposes.
Week 1		Chancellor appoints confidential review committee, including selection of one individual to serve as chair, and defines its charge.  Membership is not made known to the Senate, nor to the administrator under review.
Week 2		Members of confidential review committee sign confidentiality statements.
Week 3		Chancellor/EVCP meets with the review committee to discuss the process.
Week 4		The Chancellor solicits letters of evaluation from various groups and individuals, drawing from names identified by the review committee and Chancellor or EVCP.
Weeks 7-8		Committee members read all comments received.
Week 9		Committee members will meet to discuss the evaluative materials and their recommendations to the Chancellor and EVCP.
Week 10		The confidential review committee prepares its report, addressed to the Chancellor but submitted it to the EVCP.
Week 11		EVCP discusses the review with the Chancellor, and makes a final recommendation to the Chancellor, who makes the final decision on the administrator's continued appointment.
Week 12		The Chancellor meets with the administrator to convey the results of the review.  In the case of Vice Provosts, the EVCP conducts this meeting.