Approved by Executive Faculty October 2004; amendment approved January 2024
I. Annual Administrative/Management Review
Who receives a review: All faculty members employed by WUSM have an annual administrative/management review.
Elements of the administrative review include:
- a. Review of the faculty member’s progress in their career development, clinical care (as applicable), teaching, scholarly activities, citizenship (e.g., committee or leadership roles, etc.), and professionalism.
- b. Determination of goals and expectations for the subsequent year (e.g., effort allocation, clinical, educational and citizenship activities, planned grant submissions, other scholarly activities).
- c. Assurance that the faculty member understands the administrative policies and procedures and the compensation policy of the department.
Format of the review: A written summary of the review is required. This can be a textual summary or can be done using a standardized form. One or more prototype forms will be made available by the Office of Faculty Promotions & Career Development. This form will include a section designed to help faculty organize their accomplishments, and a section to be completed by the reviewer. After the review, the written departmental review will be signed or electronically acknowledged by the reviewer and the faculty member.
Access to the review document: Faculty members will be given a copy of the signed review summary or form. Faculty also have the right to review copies of past review documents that are kept in a Departmental file. This does not imply a right to review other material that might be in that file.
Who performs the review: Reviews will be performed by the Department Head or a designee, most commonly the Division or Section Chief.
II. Periodic Review
Who receives a review: All regular faculty members employed by Washington University at the Instructor and Assistant Professor levels on all tracks have a periodic review every year (this can coincide with the administrative/management review). This policy does not apply to fellows who are given Instructor level appointments. Periodic reviews will occur in the department(s) in which the faculty member has the primary or dual appointment. Associate Professors have a periodic review at least every two years, and Full Professors have a periodic review at least every three years.
Elements of the review: The key elements of the review are based on the faculty member’s track and rank, and include:
- a. Assurance that the faculty member understands their track (and pathway, as appropriate), rank, and tenure status and the compensation policy of the department.
- b. Assurance that the faculty member and Department Head, or designee, are in agreement about the proper allocation of the faculty member’s effort with respect to investigation, clinical service, teaching, and other service.
- c. Assessment of whether the faculty member’s needs are being met with regard to mentorship, sponsorship, coaching, and other support required for professional productivity.
- d. Advice regarding career development, including acquisition of required skills, society memberships, making appropriate contacts.
- e. Assessment of the faculty member’s clinical, educational, and research program (as applicable).
- f. Assessment of the quantity and quality of patient care activities (for those who have clinical responsibilities).
- g. Assessment of quantity and quality of teaching, mentorship, and sponsorship.
- h. Assessment of administrative and other service or citizenship contributions to the Division and Department, other Departments, the School of Medicine, the faculty member’s academic community and the lay community.
- i. Assessment of the faculty member’s progress towards promotion to the next academic rank (within the guidelines set for the appropriate track). For faculty on the Clinician Track, this includes discussion of the most appropriate Pathway.
- j. Discussion of conflict of interest reporting, compliance, professionalism, mandatory trainings, SAFE reporting expectations, etc.
- k. Agreement on goals until the next scheduled review.
Format of review: A written summary of the review is required. This can be a textual summary or can be done using a standardized form. One or more prototype forms will be made available by the Office of Faculty Promotions & Career Development. This form will include a section designed to help faculty organize their accomplishments and a section to be completed by the reviewer. Departments may elect to use the form, modify it, or not use a form at all. The form will also be made available to all faculty members who may choose to use it individually, even if use is not a departmental requirement. After the review meeting, the written departmental review will be signed by the reviewer and the faculty member.
Access to the review document: Faculty members will be given a copy of the signed review summary or form. They also have the right to review copies of past review documents that are kept in a Departmental file. This does not imply a right to review other material that might be in that file.
Who performs the review: Reviews will be performed by the Department Head or a designee, typically the Division or Section chief.
III. Interim appraisal
Who receives an interim appraisal: Each Assistant Professor on every track will have a formal review with the Department Head or their designee 3-4 years after attaining the rank of Assistant Professor.
Elements of the interim appraisal: This evaluation is typically more detailed than the annual review, but will contain many of the same elements as the Periodic review. This appraisal is designed to evaluate the appropriateness of the faculty member’s academic track and to provide specific feedback to the faculty member about progress towards promotion. For faculty on the Investigator Track, progress towards tenure is assessed. For faculty on the Clinician Track, selection of a professional Pathway is discussed. The Department Head or their designee typically should include senior faculty from within and sometimes outside of the Department in the interim appraisal.
Format of the interim appraisal: A written report of the appraisal will be produced and will be signed by the Department Head, or their designee, and the faculty member.
Access to the interim appraisal document: Faculty members will be given a copy of the signed appraisal document.
Who performs the interim appraisal: Interim appraisals will be performed by the Department Head or designee.
IV. Reporting of Faculty Reviews
Timing: Faculty reviews and interim appraisals may be performed any time throughout the academic year. The only deadline will be June 30 – when the list of annual administrative/management reviews, periodic reviews, and interim appraisals should be forwarded to the Office of Faculty Promotions & Career Development.
Faculty response: Faculty members may respond to the annual administrative/management review, periodic review, or interim appraisal in writing if they are not in agreement with the review or appraisal. The faculty member’s response must be submitted to the Department Head within 90 days after receipt of the written review or appraisal and will be maintained with the faculty member’s file. Additional resources for addressing unresolved conflicts include the Ombuds, Human Resources, or the Medical School Faculty Rights Committee.
Oversight: The Office of Faculty Promotions & Career Development will oversee compliance with the annual administrative/management review, periodic review and interim appraisal process. By June 30 each year, each department will submit to the Office of Faculty Promotions & Career Development a list of all faculty members eligible for annual administrative/management reviews, periodic reviews, and interim appraisals during the past academic year and the dates in which these evaluations took place.
This review policy will be implemented beginning July 1, 2024.