Appointments & Promotions Guidelines & Requirements (APGAR)

---

Washington University School of Medicine

Appointments & Promotions guidelines and requirements

Approved by Executive Faculty, November 2005

Ratified by WUSM Faculty, December 2005

Amended April 30, 2014

1. PREAMBLE[1]

The position of Washington University School of Medicine as a premier institution depends on the timely and fair consideration of its faculty with respect to appointment and promotion.  This is best achieved by three types of academic appointments which recognize faculty members as being on Investigator, Clinician, or Research Tracks depending on their academic role at the School.  Only faculty on the Investigator Track may be granted tenure.  Appointment and promotion to the Investigator Track is based primarily on independent research contributions, while appointment and promotion to the Clinician Track is based primarily on clinical contributions.  Excellence in teaching is an important consideration for faculty on both the Investigator and Clinician Tracks.  Appointment and promotion to the Research Track is based primarily on contributions in basic,  clinical, or educational research. A high standard of professional integrity, as detailed in the Washington University Code of Conduct, is a criterion for promotion for all faculty.

Selection of the track most appropriate for a faculty member shall be determined by the department head in consultation with the faculty member.  Selection of a track takes place at the time of appointment as Instructor, or a higher rank if that is the faculty member’s initial appointment at WUSM. Transfers between tracks at the Assistant Professor level should be carefully justified, and generally should occur before the end of the fifth year after appointment as Assistant Professor.  No transfer shall occur without the written consent of the faculty member.  Transfer between tracks at the Assistant Professor level and higher requires a recommendation to the Dean by the department head and an ad hoc committee of the Executive Faculty.  Promotion cannot be considered at the same time as a transfer of track.  The transfer must then be approved by the Executive Faculty. Transfers between tracks at the Instructor level can be initiated by the Department Head, with written consent of the faculty member, without review by an ad hoc Executive Faculty Committee.

Each department in the School shall have an organized evaluation procedure whereby the department head or designee meets with each faculty member on a regular basis to discuss his/her progress.  These periodic reviews shall be conducted in accordance with the Faculty Review Policy, which is attached to these Guidelines as Appendix A.  It is essential that the review be carefully and accurately documented by the department head or designee.

In addition to the periodic review, Assistant Professors on all tracks should have an interim appraisal performed 3-4 years after attaining the rank of Assistant Professor.  This schedule may be appropriately adjusted for part-time faculty.  The interim appraisal is typically more detailed than the periodic review, and is designed to provide specific feedback to the faculty member about progress towards promotion and, for the Investigator Track, towards tenure.  The interim appraisal also shall include consideration of the appropriateness of the faculty member’s track designation.  Typically, the department head should include senior faculty from within and sometimes outside of the department in the appraisal.  A written report of the appraisal shall be generated by the department head and signed by the department head and the faculty member.

The process for faculty appointments (for Assistant Professor and above) and promotions shall be in accordance with the Faculty Promotions Policy, attached as Appendix B to these Guidelines.  Faculty members who are not recommended for promotion or do not have their appointments renewed have the right to appeal such decisions in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section VI of these Guidelines.  Policies governing non-renewal of appointments of part-time faculty members who work at least half-time shall be the same as those for full-time faculty members.

In addition to the specific criteria set forth below in these Guidelines, promotions and tenure decisions may involve institutional criteria such as the financial resources and academic needs of the School of Medicine and its departments, programs, and non-departmental divisions.

Although these Guidelines apply generally across the School, their specific application may vary in detail by department.  Each department may elect to further clarify the expectations for each track and rank, as long as such clarifications are consistent with these Guidelines.

1. INITIAL APPOINTMENT TO THE WUSM FACULTY

If an individual has not had a prior faculty appointment at any institution, the initial appointment should typically be at the Instructor or Assistant Professor level.   Whether the initial appointment is as Instructor or Assistant Professor in such cases will depend upon the extent of previous training and the faculty member’s readiness to begin an independent career, as determined by the department head in consultation with the faculty member.  Individuals recruited from faculty positions at other institutions or from other established professional positions may be appointed at any rank, as appropriate after taking into consideration their qualifications and previous rank.

Initial faculty appointments are made upon the recommendation to the Dean by the relevant department head and, for Assistant Professor and above, by an ad hoc committee of the Executive Faculty (see Appendix B).  Appointments are then considered by the full Executive Faculty.  Appointments can be renewed upon the recommendation of the department head and approval of the Dean.

III.       APPOINTMENT & PROMOTION TO THE INVESTIGATOR TRACK

Faculty members on the Investigator Track are involved in basic biological, biomedical,  clinical, and/or educational investigation, and accomplishment in this realm is the primary basis for promotion on the Investigator Track.

Instructors and Assistant Professors on the Investigator Track will receive one-year renewable appointments.  In the unusual situation in which an Associate Professor is not tenured, he/she will also receive one-year renewable appointments.  Written notice that the appointment of an Investigator Track faculty member in his/her probationary period is not to be renewed shall be given in advance of the expiration of the appointment in accordance with Section IV.B.4 of the Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document.

The tenure probationary period at the School of Medicine is a maximum of ten years and commences upon appointment or promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor.  If the initial appointment as Assistant Professor was at another institution, the number of years counting towards the tenure clock are specified at the time of the appointment to Washington University by completion of a Tenure Status Form co-signed by the Department Head and the faculty member.  This is to be in accordance with Section IV.B.2 of the policy on Academic Freedom, Responsibility and Tenure.  Tenure is customarily granted at the time of promotion to Associate Professor.

Appointment or promotion to a tenured position is initiated by the faculty member’s department head, often with communication from the tenured members of the department.  Recommendations for tenure should be supported by opinions obtained from well-respected, informed colleagues (both within and outside the Washington University community) who can provide a critical and unbiased assessment of the candidate’s contributions.  Recommendations for tenure are made by ad hoc promotions committees which are composed of a minimum of seven members – five Department Heads and two senior faculty members (see Appendix B), with subsequent approval by the Executive Faculty and the Chancellor.  Tenure is ultimately conferred by the Board of Trustees of the University.

Appointment and promotion are based generally upon investigation and scholarly activities, teaching, clinical excellence (where appropriate), and service.  Although all of these activities are considered, excellence in scholarly investigation is the cornerstone of a candidate’s record.   More specific criteria for appointment and promotion to each rank on the Investigator Track are set forth below.

1. Assistant Professor

For faculty starting at the Instructor level, the major criterion for promotion to Assistant Professor on the Investigator Track is demonstration of progress towards development of an independent investigative program.  Participation in teaching and other educational activities should be considered, and clinical activities (where applicable) may also be considered.  Ordinarily, promotion to Assistant Professor will occur within three years of initial appointment as Instructor.  Faculty members whose initial appointment is as Assistant Professor are expected to establish an independent research program in a timely manner.

1. Associate Professor

         Appointments and promotions to Associate Professor on the Investigator Track are based primarily on the original, independent scholarly contributions of the faculty member, and are evaluated by the following criteria (listed in the typical order of importance):

1. Investigation and Other Scholarly Accomplishments

In order to be promoted to Associate Professor on the Investigator Track, a faculty member must be responsible for an outstanding body of original basic biological, biomedical, clinical, or educational research.  Elements of this achievement typically include formulation of original research ideas, setting up the research methodology, recruiting necessary personnel, obtaining funding through peer-reviewed mechanisms, analysis and interpretation of the results, presentation at significant scientific meetings, and publications in high-quality peer-reviewed journals in which the faculty member is typically the first or senior author. The number of publications is considered, but of more importance is the quality of the body of work, as evidenced by the sources of the publication and by the national and international impact of the contributions.  This scholarly recording of the faculty member’s work is the major criterion that establishes academic credibility.  Faculty involved in hypothesis-driven clinical or educational research as well as in fundamental laboratory research may be eligible for promotion to Associate Professor on the Investigator Track.  In cases where a major component of a faculty member’s research accomplishments depend on  collaborations with other investigators, it is essential that the quality and originality of the faculty member’s individual contributions to the design, analysis, and interpretation of the published studies be carefully documented.  These contributions should meet the high standards expected of faculty whose research is not collaborative in nature.  Washington University expects that Associate Professors on the Investigator Track should have sufficient stature to be considered as leaders in their respective research fields by the scientific or medical professional education community when compared to faculty members of similar experience and seniority at other institutions.

Other evidence of independent investigation and scholarly accomplishment can include senior authorship of textbooks, book chapters, and scholarly reviews acknowledged in the field.  Curriculum development and implementation of novel teaching or assessment methodologies that generally advance educational science also are considered important scholarly activities.  Authorship of “non-traditional” educational materials (such as health agency publications, computer programs, or web-based educational modules) or research materials (such as development of databases and research software) may also be considered.

2. Teaching

Excellence in teaching is an important consideration for promotion to Associate Professor in the Investigator Track. Appropriate activities include but are not limited to leading or participating in didactic courses, mentorship of students and trainees, development of novel materials, and teaching in the clinical arena where applicable.  Teaching activities should be presented for evaluation in an education portfolio as described below in Appendix B and should be supported by:

1. Objective, systematic evaluation by students, residents, and fellows trained by the faculty member.
2. Objective, systematic evaluation by senior faculty within the department and by faculty within other divisions and/or departments in which the candidate has played an active teaching role.

3. Evidence of Regional and National Recognition

Since Associate Professors on the Investigator Track are expected to be leaders in their respective fields, they must have achieved a level of regional and national recognition.  This can include:

1.        Invitation as a speaker or visiting professor at other academic institutions.

1. Invited presentations at regional and national meetings.
2. Membership and positions of leadership in professional societies.
3. Editorial board membership and other editorial review assignments.
4. Consultative positions with various government, certifying, accrediting and private agencies (study sections, foundations, American Cancer Society, etc.). 
5. Service as an organizer of regional, national, or international meetings.

4. Assessment of Clinical Excellence (where applicable)

This can include:

1. Evaluation by senior faculty members in the specialty or subspecialty of the candidate, as well as input from other physicians and/or health professionals and trainees who have interacted with the candidate and can judge his/her abilities.

1. Recognition of unique expertise by superior performance of special consultative services (intensive care units, interventional radiology, etc.).

5. Service to the Medical Center, University and Community

This can include:

1. Administrative roles in medical school, hospital, departmental, program or divisional activities.

1. Service on medical school, hospital, departmental, or divisional committees.

1. Important contribution of service to a basic science research or clinical laboratory program.

1. Professor

Appointment or promotion of a faculty member to a full Professor on the Investigator Track is an honor that requires careful evaluation.  A Professor at Washington University should be nationally recognized for investigative excellence in his/her specialty or subspecialty, as well as for other activities described above.

1. APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION TO THE CLINICIAN TRACK

The Clinician Track provides a mechanism for recognizing and rewarding faculty at WUSM who excel in one or more of the areas of patient care, education,  administrative and research functions that assure the delivery of excellent patient care through current practice and/or by training future clinicians.  Faculty members on the Clinician Track will have professional skills and knowledge necessary for superior clinical efforts and/or educational leadership and will be evaluated on the basis of their individual skills and unique contributions to the University.

Instructors and Assistant Professors on the Clinician Track will receive one-year renewable appointments.  Written notice that an appointment is not to be renewed shall be given to Instructors and Assistant Professors in advance of the expiration of their appointments in accordance with Section IV.B.4 of the Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document.  Associate Professors on the Clinician Track will receive rolling four-year appointments renewable annually.  Written notice that an appointment is not to be renewed shall be given to Associate Professors at least three years in advance of the expiration of their appointments.  Full Professors on the Clinician Track will initially receive rolling five-year appointments renewable annually; after 10 years as a Professor, the faculty member will receive rolling six-year appointments renewable annually.  Written notice that an appointment is not to be renewed shall be given to full Professors holding five-year appointments at least four years in advance of the expiration of their appointments; five years advance written notice is required for full Professors holding six-year appointments.

Essential criteria for promotion for faculty members on the Clinician Track are superior clinical skills and recognition, and involvement in the teaching mission of the Medical School.  Faculty are strongly encouraged (but not required) to engage in scholarly activities that contribute to the advancement of medicine or teaching, and will be expected to effectively carry out their administrative responsibilities.  More specific criteria for appointment and promotion to each rank on the Clinician Track are set forth below.

1. Assistant Professor

For faculty starting at the Instructor level, the major criteria for promotion to Assistant Professor on the Clinician Track are competence in carrying out clinical duties, maturation of clinical skills and assumption of increased clinical responsibility.  Educational leadership is an important consideration. Participation in teaching and any scholarly activities in which the faculty member has engaged will also be considered.  Ordinarily, promotion to Assistant Professor will occur within three years of initial appointment as Instructor.  Faculty whose initial appointment is as an Assistant Professor are expected to develop a local and regional reputation for their clinical expertise or educational leadership and to assume teaching responsibilities in a timely manner.

1. Associate Professor

         Appointments and promotions to Associate Professor on the Clinician Track are based upon the following criteria:

1. Assessment of Clinical Excellence

For appointment and promotion to this rank, faculty are expected to be outstanding clinicians in their respective fields, have achieved sufficient reputation that they receive referrals of challenging clinical problems from physicians and/or professional colleagues and other institutions in St. Louis and regionally, and to be competent to provide a level of care or service that is regarded as outstanding in comparison to their peers.  At the time that appointment or promotion is being considered, opinions on clinical performance will be gathered from senior faculty members and other physicians and/or health professionals and trainees who have interacted with the candidate and can judge his/her abilities.  The evaluation of clinical excellence also includes recognition of unique clinical expertise as determined by superior performance of consultative services (intensive care units, interventional radiology, rehabilitation, prevention etc.).

2. Teaching and Education

Excellence in teaching and leadership in education is an important consideration for promotion to Associate Professor on the Clinician Track.  Teaching and leadership in education can take many forms and includes involvement in curriculum and course development, curricular review, innovations in teaching and assessment methodologies, course management, educational program management, teaching of medical students, residents, fellows, and graduate students in a classroom setting as well as one-on-one on the inpatient wards and in outpatient clinics.  Evaluation of teaching and educational activities should be supported by  a teaching portfolio (see Appendix B) and should include the following:

1. Objective, systematic evaluation by students, residents, and fellows trained by the faculty member.
2. Objective, systematic evaluation by faculty within the department and by faculty within other divisions and/or departments in which the candidate has played an active teaching role.

3. Scholarly Activities 

Scholarly activities are not a requirement for appointment or promotion on the Clinician Track but are strongly encouraged, and any scholarly activities in which the faculty member has engaged will be considered towards appointment or promotion.

1. Clinical Research. Clinical research performed should be of high quality, as demonstrated by publications, presentation at national meetings, or other types of recognition on a local, regional or national level.

1. Other scholarly activities Appropriate activities in this regard include but are not limited to publication of scholarly reviews, book chapters, and creation of novel computer programs. Curriculum development and implementation of novel teaching or assessment methodologies that generally advance educational goals also are considered important scholarly activities, particularly if accompanied by assessment and/or dissemination.

4. Evidence of Local, Regional and National Recognition

This can include:

1. Invitation as a speaker or visiting professor at other academic institutions.

1. Invited presentations at regional and national meetings.

1. Membership and positions of leadership in professional societies.
2. Editorial board membership and other editorial review assignments.
3. Consultative positions with various government and private agencies (study sections, foundations, American Cancer Society, etc.). 
4. Service as an organizer of regional, national, or international meetings.

.

5. Service to the Medical Center, University and Community

This can include:

1. Administrative roles in medical school, hospital, departmental, or division activities.

1. Service on medical school, hospital, departmental, or division committees.

1. Important contribution of service to a clinical laboratory program.

1. Professor

Appointment or promotion of a faculty member to a full Professor on the Clinician Track is an honor that requires careful evaluation.  A Professor at Washington University should be nationally recognized for clinical excellence in his/her specialty or subspecialty, as well as for other activities described above.

V.        APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION TO THE RESEARCH TRACK

Faculty on the Research Track are involved in basic biomedical investigation, clinical, and/or educational investigation and must meet a standard of excellence based upon research accomplishments.  The primary focus of Research Track faculty is to facilitate and support the overall research mission of Washington University, rather than to develop independent programs.  In this capacity, Research Track faculty typically conduct research in collaboration with other investigators or groups of investigators.  They provide the experience, expertise and leadership needed for the efficient running of core laboratories and are frequently responsible for introducing novel and technically demanding research technologies and making them available to a broad range of faculty.

All Research Track faculty will receive one-year renewable appointments.  Written notice that an appointment is not to be renewed shall be given to the faculty member in advance of the expiration of his/her appointment in accordance with Section IV.B.4 of the Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document. Notice of renewal that is different from the default requirements of Section IV.B.4 may be agreed to in writing between a department and a Research Track faculty member.

Excellence in research is the major criterion for appointment and promotion for faculty on the Research Track, although other activities may also be considered.  More specific criteria for appointment and promotion to each rank on the Research Track are set forth below.

1. Assistant Professor

For faculty starting at the Research Instructor level, promotion to Assistant Professor on the Research Track will be based upon success in investigative activities and assumption of greater levels of responsibility.  Ordinarily, promotion to Assistant Professor will occur within three years of initial appointment as Instructor.

B.                 Associate Professor

Appointments and promotions to Associate Professor on the Research Track are based upon the following criteria:

1. Investigation and Scholarly Accomplishments

Research and scholarly accomplishment as determined by:

1. Authorship of original publications in peer reviewed journals. The number of publications is considered; however, of more importance is the quality of the body of work as evidenced by the sources of publication and by the national and international impact on the contributions. This scholarly recording of the investigator’s work is the major criterion that establishes academic credibility. Research Track faculty are expected to have significant intellectual contributions to this work but are not expected to have initiated and lead the research effort.

1. Contributions to programs that have extramural peer-reviewed financial support for basic and/or clinical investigation. Research Track faculty are expected to have made important contributions to successful grant applications, though not necessarily as the Principal Investigator.
2. Other evidence of research and scholarly accomplishments that may be considered include authorship of textbooks, book chapters and scholarly reviews acknowledged in the specialty, as well as authorship of “nontraditional” educational materials (such as health agency publications and computer programs) or research materials (such as development of databases and research software).

2. Evidence of Regional and National Recognition

This can include:

1. Invitation as a speaker or visiting professor at other academic institutions, and invited presentations at meetings.

1. Election to membership and positions of leadership in professional societies.

1. Editorial board memberships and other editorial review assignments.

1. Consultative positions with various government and private agencies (e.g., study sections, foundations, American Cancer Society, etc.).

1. Organizer of regional, national, and international meetings.

3. Administration and Teaching

Administration and teaching (including mentoring) in Medical School, hospital, departmental, divisional, program, or University activities are not obligatory responsibilities for Research Track faculty but can nonetheless be considered as a positive factor in promotion.

 

1. Professor

Appointment or promotion of a faculty member to a full  Professor on the Research Track is an honor that requires careful evaluation.  A Professor at Washington University should be nationally recognized for investigative excellence in his/her specialty or subspecialty, as well as for other activities described above.

1. FACULTY APPEALS MECHANISMS RELATED TO APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION

Faculty members who are not recommended for promotion or do not have their appointments renewed have the right to appeal such decisions.   If not already provided, the faculty member may request a written explanation of the reasons that contributed to the decision.  The faculty member may also request a reconsideration by the decision-making body.  If, after reconsideration, the decision not to promote or renew stands, the faculty member may direct an appeal to a standing review committee of senior faculty which shall be assembled in accordance with Section VI.B.1.e of the Washington University Policy on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure (the “Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document”) and which should include Investigator Track, Clinician Track, Research Track and part-time faculty.  Appeals to the review committee may be made only on the ground that the faculty member has received inadequate or unfair consideration in relation to the School’s relevant procedural standards for evaluation.  The review committee shall not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the appropriate decision-making body.  The review committee shall report its findings to the faculty member and Executive Vice Chancellor and Dean.  If the faculty member is not satisfied with the review committee’s decision, and if the faculty member believes that the decision by either the decision-making body or the review committee violated his/her academic freedom, the faculty member may appeal the decision of the review committee in accordance with Section VII.C of the Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document.  All members of the faculty are entitled to academic freedom, including the due process right of fair procedure, as referred to in Sections I and VII.A of the Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure document.

 

VII. AMENDMENTS TO THE GUIDELINES

Amendment of these Guidelines requires approval by the Executive Faculty (in accordance with its bylaws) and by the Faculty Council, (in accordance with its Constitution and bylaws).  Voting by the Faculty Council shall be conducted by a process to be agreed upon by the Dean and the ECFC and can be carried out by secure electronic communication, regular mail, or a scheduled meeting of the Faculty Council. Adequate notice of at least 21 days must be provided for a scheduled meeting; for a vote by secure electronic communication or regular mail, the voting period must extend for at least 21 days after notification to the Faculty Council.   Amendment of the Appendices to these Guidelines requires consultation with the ECFC and approval of the Executive Faculty.

Appendix A.  Faculty Review Process

Approved by Executive Faculty October 6, 2004 [amended 2 November, 2005]

1. Periodic Review

Who receives a review:   All long-term faculty members employed by Washington University at the Instructor and Assistant Professor levels on all tracks have an annual review. This policy does not apply to fellows who are given instructor level appointments.  These reviews will occur in the department(s) in which the faculty member has the primary or dual appointment.  Associate Professors have a review at least every two years, and Full Professors have a 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 include:

• Assuring that the faculty member understands his/her track, rank, and tenure status and the compensation policy of the department.
• Assuring that the faculty member and Department Head are in agreement about the proper allocation of the faculty member’s effort with respect to investigation, clinical service, teaching, and other service.
• Assessment of whether the faculty member’s needs are being met with regard to mentoring and other elements required for professional productivity.
• Advice regarding career development, including acquisition of required skills, society memberships, making appropriate contacts.
• Assessment of the faculty member’s research program (especially for those faculty members on the Investigator Track).
• Assessment of the quantity and quality of clinical activities (especially for those faculty members on the Clinician Track).
• Assessment of quantity and quality of teaching. This may include many ways of contributing to the teaching mission of the School of Medicine.
• Assessment of administrative and other service contributions to the Department, other Departments, the School of Medicine, the faculty member’s academic community and the lay community.
• Assessment of the faculty member’s progress towards promotion to the next academic rank (within the guidelines set for the appropriate track).
• 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 Affairs.  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, the written departmental review will be signed by the reviewer.

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.  The right to access documents from past reviews applies only from the time of implementation of this policy forward. 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.

1. Interim appraisal

Who receives an interim appraisal: Each Assistant Professor on all tracks will have a formal review with the Department Head 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 annual review.  This appraisal is designed to provide specific feedback to the faculty member about progress towards promotion and, for faculty on the Investigator Track, towards tenure. The interim appraisal must also include consideration of the appropriateness of the faculty member’s academic track.  The Department Head typically should include senior faculty from within and sometimes outside of the Department in this appraisal.

Format of the interim appraisal:  A written report of the appraisal will be produced and will be signed by the Department Head 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.

III.  Periodic Reviews and Interim Appraisals

Timing:  Faculty periodic reviews and interim appraisals may be performed any time throughout the academic year.  The only deadline will be June 30 when the list of periodic reviews and interim appraisals should be forwarded to the Office of Faculty Affairs.

Faculty response: Faculty members may respond to the 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.

Conflict resolution:  Multiple options exist for resolution of conflicts regarding periodic reviews and interim appraisals.  If a review has been carried out by an individual other than the Department Head, the first opportunity for resolution is through the Department Head.  If that process is unsuccessful, or if the Department Head performed the review or appraisal, the faculty member may submit a written complaint, specifying in detail the grounds for the complaint, to the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs within six months of the review or appraisal.  The Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs will then conduct a non-adversarial mediation that will typically involve communication with the reviewer and the Department Head.  If conflict persists in spite of such efforts at mediation, the faculty member may pursue a formal grievance through the Medical School Faculty Rights Committee.

Oversight:  The Office of Faculty Affairs will oversee compliance with the periodic review and interim appraisal process.  By June 30 each year, each department will submit to the OFA a list of all faculty members eligible for periodic reviews or interim appraisals during the past academic year and the dates or months in which these evaluations took place.  The Dean will report annually at the September meeting of the Executive Faculty and the ECFC regarding compliance by each department.

This review policy will be implemented beginning October 6, 2004.

Appendix B.  Appointment and Promotion Process

Approved by Executive Faculty, September, 2000, [amended 2 November, 2005]

1. Appointments and promotions at Washington University School of Medicine are initiated by the Department Head (see footnote 1 of the APGAR document). Appointments at the Instructor level are made upon the recommendation to the Dean by the relevant Department Head.  Appointments and promotions at the level of Assistant Professor and higher involve the processes detailed below.

2. A Departmental/Divisional Appointments and Promotions Committee may or may not exist within Department/Division that consists of senior faculty members. This Committee may then serve to review dossier, and make a formal recommendation to the Department Head.

3. Department Head requests that the Dean appoint an ad hoc Appointments and Promotions Committee.

4. Submission of a Dossier is required for all appointments and promotions. Presentation of the Dossier to the Washington University Board of Trustees is required for all promotions that involve a tenure decision.

Information to be included in Dossier*:

Curriculum Vitae

Letter from Department Head recommending promotion and/or tenure, summarizing the rationale and/or case for promotion

Supporting letters from sources outside the University as appropriate

Reprints of selected publications

Optional, but encouraged, is a “portfolio”, assembled by the faculty member and focused on elaboration of the faculty member’s activities which are not traditionally found within the Washington University formatted CV.  These might include, for example, development of methods to improve quality and efficiency of clinical care, development of clinical guidelines and care paths, curriculum development, didactic teaching sessions, etc.

*Specific documentation may vary dependent upon faculty track and rank, and should be concordant with criteria set forth in WUSM Appointments and Promotions Guidelines and Requirements.

For the outside reviewers, faculty should prepare packets of work to be considered, including an updated curriculum vitae and a statement of one’s clinical and/or research directions, to be forwarded with the Department Head’s letter asking for letters of evaluation.  It is essential that the outside reviewers have available copies of the candidates’ work to facilitate their evaluation of his/her academic contributions.  Because national recognition of the candidates scholarly contributions is one of the essential criteria for promotion to associate professor, it is important that the Department Head select outside reviewers who understand the academic /scholarly contributions of the candidate and who will ably communicate their evaluation to the promotions committee.

5. An Appointments and Promotions Committee is formed that includes a minimum of seven members:

Faculty member in Clinical Department:

3 Clinical Department Heads (excluding the Department Head of proposed candidate)

2 Basic Science Department Heads

2 senior faculty members

Faculty member in Basic Science Department:

2 Clinical Department Heads

3 Basic Science Department Heads (excluding the Department Head of proposed candidate)

2 senior faculty members

6. Recommendation of the Appointments and Promotions Committee presented to Executive Faculty

7. Approval of appointment or promotion by the Executive Faculty.

No further action is required for Clinician Track faculty or for Investigator Track faculty where a tenure decision is not being considered.

8. Executive Faculty recommendation for Investigator Track faculty member where the granting of tenure is being considered is forwarded to Chancellor for review

9. Promotion with tenure conferred by Board of Trustees.

[1] These Guidelines apply to faculty members in all departments, programs, and non-departmental divisions of the School of Medicine, with the exception of voluntary faculty. Faculty having a primary or dual appointment in a program or non-departmental division must have a secondary or dual appointment in a Medical School department, and that department head shall chair the appointments and promotions committees for said faculty. In all other respects, provisions in these Guidelines and its appendices pertaining to departments and department heads also apply to programs and non-departmental divisions and to their respective directors.