|ISU Home | A to Z Listing of Web Sites | Search|
Part 4. Personnel Policies
Section IV. Performance/Evaluation/Termination
A. Performance Evaluation (Nonfaculty) (Updated 5/02)
1. Nonclassified Nonfaculty Employees
All nonclassified nonfaculty employees must be evaluated annually the purposes of which are to identify areas of strength and weakness, to improve employee work performance, and to provide a basis on which the University may make decisions concerning retention, promotion, merit salary increases and service ratings. Any written recommendations that result from a performance evaluation must be signed by the appropriate supervisor with a copy provided to the employee and a copy placed in the official personnel file of the employee. All deans, vice presidents and other faculty occupying administrative positions will be evaluated as if nonclassified.
2. Classified Employees
Evaluation of classified employees will be as provided for in Title 67, Chapter 53, Idaho Code, and rules of the Idaho Division of Human Resources and Personnel Commission.
The purpose of evaluation is to provide an objective evaluation by the immediate supervisor of an employee’s performance in comparison with established work standards for the position and to identify an employee’s strengths and weaknesses and where improvement is necessary. All ratings shall be discussed with the affected employee who shall be allowed the opportunity to submit written comments regarding the rating.
Performance evaluations shall be used in connection with promotions, demotions, retentions, separations, and used as the affirmative certification for merit increases and for certifying a probationary employee to permanent status.
All classified employees shall be evaluated after one thousand forty (1,040) hours of credited state service from the date of initial appointment or promotion and after each two thousand eighty (2,080) hours of credited state service thereafter.
3. Evaluation of Chairpersons
a. Annual Evaluation
All chairpersons shall be evaluated annually. The procedures for evaluation are:
(1) Prior to April 1 of each year, the dean shall conduct an evaluation of the chairperson which shall include the opportunity for each faculty member in the department to evaluate the chairperson. The faculty member should support his/her evaluation with constructive comments. Each department shall develop its own form of evaluation of the chairperson which may include the following:
(a) Effectiveness in representing the faculty, communicating with the faculty and administration of the college;
(b) Effectiveness in dealing with faculty problems and student problems.
(c) Effectiveness in establishing rapport with the dean and other departments. The dean shall initiate this procedure by informing faculty of the opportunity to evaluate the chairperson.
(2) Upon completion of the evaluation process, the dean shall inform the chairperson, in writing, of the result of the evaluation. The dean shall prepare a summary of the faculty evaluations and the original evidence submitted shall be placed in the chairperson’s closed file in order to preserve the confidentiality of the evaluations and the anonymity of the participants. The entire evaluation process should be completed before April 1.
b. Periodic Performance Review
(1) If during an annual evaluation, or at any other time, the performance of the chairperson is questioned in writing by one-third of the members of the voting faculty of the department, but no less than two (2), the dean must decide whether a full and complete review should be conducted based upon the criteria as set forth in 3.a.(1). The performance review may be conducted by the dean, his designee, or a review committee selected by the dean to conduct the review. A report of the review shall be forwarded to the Academic Vice President and the President and shall be made available to the faculty of the affected department. The dean shall take appropriate action based upon the performance review, which may include removal of the chair prior to the end of an appointment.
(2) Any decision of the dean to retain or replace a chairperson should be made in keeping with the best interests of departmental harmony and productivity consistent with the principle that the chairperson should be a person who is mutually acceptable to the dean and to the voting faculty of the department.